United States Center for Environmental Research
Environmental Protection Information
Agency Cincinnati OH 45268
905R79119
October 1979
vEPA QECHNOLOGY
DRANSFER
The Bridge Between
Research and Use
ERIC NOW CERI
The EPA acronym ERIC (Environmental Research Information Center) is also a
copyrighted name for a DHEW organizational unit. To avoid confusion, we have
changed our name to Center for Environmental Research Information (CERI).
Requests for Technology Transfer material should be sent to: US EPA, Center for
Environmental Research Information, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Design Manual for Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Featured at 1979 WPCF Conference
The Technology Transfer revised "Process Design Manual for Sludge Treatment and
Disposal" is being distributed at the 52nd Annual Conference and Exhibition of the
Water Pollution Control Federation (WPCF) in Houston, Texas.
This edition of the sludge manual is a completely updated and greatly expanded
version of the manual published in 1974. Many new sections are included which
discuss sludge production, disinfection, heat drying, transportation, storage,
sidestreams from solids treatment processes, instrumentation and utilization. This
revision is an Office of Research and Development effort conducted by the Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory and the Center for Environmental Research
Information. The information compiled in the manual is intended to assist munici-
palities in meeting the solids treatment and disposal requirements as mandated
in the 1977 Clean Water Act as amended, Public Law 95-217.
This year's WPCF Conference attendance is estimated at over 12,000, the largest
ever. Forty-five technical program sessions and three preconference workshops have
been scheduled. Display space spanning over 84,000 square feet is set aside for
products and exhibits of more than 300 manufacturing firms and support organizations.
Several EPA organizations have pooled resources to form an EPA referral and display
area. The EPA exhibits feature (1) the Center for Environmental Research Information
(formerly ERIC), (2) Water Quality Management (Clean Lakes, 404 and 208
Programs), (3) National Training and Operational Technology Center, (4) Municipal
Construction and Operation and Maintenance, (5) Effluent Guidelines and (6)
Facilities Requirements Division. Key individuals will be available at each exhibit to
discuss EPA policy and answer questions. We invite you to visit the EPA displays,
meet CERI personnel at Booth 2300, and pick up a copy of the Sludge Treatment and
Disposal Design Manual. To order this Manual (#1011) return the order form at the
back of this Newsletter.
-------
Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly
Owned Treatment Works
Pilot Study Summary
Introduction
The United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has initiated a program to study the occurrence
and fate of 129 selected toxic organic and inorganic
pollutants (priority pollutants) by means of a sampling
program at 40 Publicly OwnedTreatment Works(POTW's).
The major goals of the program are to characterize the
impact of toxic pollutants on the POTW treatment process
and to study the effects of secondary treatment on priority
pollutants. The data obtained from this study may impact
the pretreatment regulations for indirect dischargers.
The first phase of the program was a pilot study of two
POTW's to determine the optimum field methodologies to
be used throughout the program and to develop prelim-
inary conclusions regarding the incidence, impact and fate
of priority pollutants in POTW's which will be
substantiated as the sampling progresses through the 40
plants. Also examined in this study were the overall
removal of priority pollutants in POTW influents, the
concentration of priority pollutants in sludge and the
formation of chlorinated hydrocarbons during chlorine
disinfection.
The determination of optimum field methodologies
included selecting parameters of interest and establishing
technical procedures for sampling. This involved (1) deter-
mining sampling points which best characterize informa-
tion regarding fate of priority pollutants, (2) establishing
sampling frequency for obtaining the most representative
picture of wastewater fluctuations, and (3) developing
analytical protocol for samples to assure that consistent
and accurate results are obtained throughout the study.
The Study
The two POTW's sampled (A & B) for the program are
conventional activated sludge plants but differ signifi-
cantly in size, percent industrial flow, age, operation,
sludge conditioning methodology and capacity utilized.
Plant A has an average daily flow of 96 to 108 mgd, 30
percent of which is industrial waste, primarily from major
industries including pharmaceutical manufacture, petro-
chemicals, plating operations, automotive foundries,
coking operations and food processing plartfs. Sludge
conditioning methods include primary sludge thickening
by gravity thickeners, secondary by Dissolved Air Flotation
(DAF), vacuum filtration and incineration.
The flow to Plant B is primarily residential with an average
daily flow of 8 to 10 mgd, 2 percent of which is from
industries: gram elevators, oil andfuelterminals, machine
tool and metal working companies and box and insulation
companies. Plant B sludge is combined from holding tanks
with thickened (via DAF) waste activated sludge. This
combined sludge passes to conditioning facilities and to
vacuum filtration. The filtercake is incinerated and the
decant is recycled to the sludge operation.
The wastewater treatment train at each plant is nearly
identical, consisting of grit chambers, pre-aeration,
primary settling, aeration, secondary settling and chlorin-
ation. At both POTW's, the sampling points for the study
were chosen to best represent the wastewater at particu-
lar stages of treatment. The sampling scheme for both
plants was nearly identical, and included sampling points
for the influent, the effluent before chlorination, the final
effluent, each of the various sludge conditions and the tap
water. At Plant A, however, the primary and secondary
sludge, the floatables, combined sludge and the vacuum
filtrate were sampled, while at Plant B only the combined
and secondary (before and after DAF) sludge were
sampled.
Sampling spanned one week at each plant—with an
additional week of sampling influent only at Plant A.
Sampling consisted of 7-day, 24-hour composites and
grab samples. Automatic samplers were used wherever
continuous flow existed. As an aid for comparison of plant
data, identical sampling techniques and EPA sampling
protocols1 were followed.
Results
Examination of the data collected from Plants A and B can
be summarized as follows. The more industrial Plant A
influent contained a higher incidence of priority pollutants
than Plant B influent. In total, 52 organic priority pollutants
were found in the Plant A influent (1 8 over detection limits)
and only 33 in the Plant B raw wastewater (5 over
detection limits) Seven of the nine metallic priority pollu-
tants detected in the influents to both plants had higher
concentrations in the Plant A influent.
In Plant A, the metallic priority pollutants present in detec-
table amounts were removed reasonably well. Antimony,
arsenic, beryllium, selenium and thallium were never
found above detection limits in influent or effluent
samples. Chromium and copper were reduced to lessthan
50 fJg/\ (90 and 86 percent removal, respectively).
Cadmium, nickel and zinc were removed somewhat less
effectively, averaging 59 to 65 percent. Lead and silver
were removed to below detection limits. Also, eight of nine
organic priority pollutants detected in Plant A influent,
with an average concentration of over 10^rg/l, were
reduced by a minimum of 50 percent (benzene, 1,1,1-
trichloroethylene, chloroform, ethylbenzene, bis(2-ethyl-
'Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the
Analysis of Pollutants To be published in the
Federal Register Proposed Amendments to
40 CFR Part 136
-------
hexyl) phthalate, tetrachloroethylene, toluene and
trichloroethylene). Only phenol was not effectively
removed Metals at Plant B were found at relatively low
concentrations. As in Plant A, antimony, arsenic, beryl-
lium, selenium and thallium were not measured above
detection limits in either the influent or effluent. Cadmium
and silver were both reduced from several micrograms per
liter to below detection limits. Cadmium, copper and zinc
were reduced effectively, between 69 and 81 percent.
Lead and nickel were removed less effectively. Organic
priority pollutants at Plant B occurred at such low concen-
trations that removal data were not meaningful.
Most of the metals at Plant A were present at high concen-
trations in both the primary and secondary sludge.
Cadmium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc were each found
in primary sludge at concentrations over 100 times greater
than in the influent. Chromium and cyanide were found in
the primary sludge at 30 to 50 times the influent concen-
tration. Antimony, arsenic, and beryllium, which were
never measured above detection limits in the influent,
were all measured in the primary sludge. Several organic
priority pollutants detected at very low concentrations in
the influent accumulated in the primary or secondary
sludge. Among these were acenaphthene (0 to 1 fjg/\
average in the influent and 169 fjg/l in the primary
sludge), 1,2-benzanthracene (<1 and 479), 3,4-benzo-
fluoranthene (not detected and 675), fluorene (<3 and
313) and pyrene (<3 and 757). Plant B data indicated the
same general trends for metals as in Plant A. Chromium,
copper, lead, nickel and zinc were found in the combined
sludge at approximately 100 times their concentrations in
the influent. Arsenic, cadmium, cyanide, mercury and
silver also accumulated in the sludge, but occurred at
overall lower levels. Antimony, beryllium, selenium and
thallium, which were never measured above detection
limits in the influent were all found at concentrations
below 50^cg/l in the sludge. Several of the organic priority
pollutants which were present at very low concentrations
in influent also were more concentrated in the sludge.
They included aery Ion itrile( not detected in the influent and
41 jutg/\ m the combined sludge), dichlorobromomethane
(0-1 and 74) and3,4-benzofluoranthene(notdetectedand
43)
Mass balances were analyzed at each plant to compare the
concentrations entering (influent) and leaving (effluent
and sludge) the POTW. The metallic priority pollutants at
Plant A balanced moderately well. Most of the metals
accumulated in the sludge The concentrations of
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, silver and zinc
in the sludge were each 2 to 15 times the amounts in the
final effluent. However, copper, lead and zinc balanced
poorly. Arsenic was detected in Plant A's sludge (4 Ib/day)
but was not measured above the detection limit in the
influent. Some organic priority pollutants balanced poorly,
perhaps due to the release of volatile substances to the
atmosphere, a removal mechanism termed air stripping.
However, concentrations of other organic pollutants
which are less volatile, were found concentrated in the
sludge. Accumulation of pollutants in the sludge at Plant B
was less pronounced than at Plant A due to the lower
concentrations of priority pollutants in the influent. A few
metals accumulated to a relatively small degree in the
sludge (chromium, copper, lead and zinc) and all of these
were found in greater quantity in the combined sludge
than in- the final effluent There were insufficient data
upon which to draw conclusions regarding the organic
priority pollutant removal mechanisms or concentrations
in sludges at Plant B
Samples from the chlorine contact chambers and
receiving streams were analyzed for the possible
formation of chlorinated hydrocarbons. Results from
sampling and analysis show that formation of chlorinated
hydrocarbons does occur.
Sampling frequency experiments showed that influent
metallic priority pollutant concentrations at Plant A
increased during the week and dipped during the
weekends and that high concentrations were also
observed during the 8:00 a m. to 4'00 p.m. work-day
period. This variation was not evident in Plant B's system.
Organic pollutant concentrations were too low to show
significant trends
The initial phase of study for the program has now been
completed and results from this two-plant investigation
have been published (EPA-440/1-79-300) and are
available at the Water Pollution Control Federation Con-
ference through the Effluent Guidelines Division, booth
2300, and from the Center for Environmental Research
Information
New Seminar Series: Sludge
Treatment and Disposal
The Cincinnati-based Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory and Center for Environmental Research
Information are planning a Technology Transfer design
seminar series on sludge -treatment and disposal. If
sufficient interest is expressed, the series would begin in
early or mid 1980 The proposed series would focus on the
effect of the 1 977 Clean Water Act as amended and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act on the design of
sludge treatment and disposal facilities. The seminars
would be based on the newly revised Process Design
Manual on Sludge Treatment and Disposal (see story on
page 1). A small registration fee may be required. If you are
interested m this proposed seminar series, contact
Dr James E. Smith, USEPA—CERI, Cincinnati, Ohio
45268, (513) 684-7394.
-------
Publication Update:
Municipal Wastewater Alternatives
The brochure, "Environmental Pollution Control Alterna-
tives. Municipal Wastewater," has been updated and
reprinted. Originally written in 1976, the brochure
describes alternatives for treating municipal wastewaters,
including primary and secondary treatment (such as
trickling filters and activated sludge), disinfection,
advanced treatment (such as carbon adsorption and
nitrogen control), flow equalization and sludge treatment
and disposal methods (such as conditioning and thicken-
ing) Figures pertaining to energy requirements and costs
for the various alternatives are significantly updated To
receive a copy of the revised brochure (#5012) return the
order form at the back of this Newsletter.
Trickling Filter
Sludge Drying Bed
Activated Sludge Aeration Tank
Aerated Lagoon
-------
New Capsule Report: Bahco FGD and
Particulate Removal System
A new Technology Transfer capsule report, "Bahco Flue
Gas Desulfunzation and Particulate Removal Systems,"
describes a Research — Cottrell/Bahco scrubber module
for S02 and particulate emission control, at the central
heat plant of Rickenbacker Air Force Base near Columbus,
Ohio. The capsule report describes flue gasdesulfunzation
technology using anyfuel, including high sulfuroilorcoal.
Fuel is burned in conventional equipment in a manner both
cost effective and environmentally acceptable. The
capsule report (#2022) can be ordered by returning the
form at the back of this Newsletter
The Bahco System at Rickenbacker Air
Force Base
ew Environmental Assessment
leport on Short-Term Testing
A copy of this report (#9003) can be ordered by returning
the order form at the back of this Newsletter
ie Center for Environmental Research Information has
jblished the first of a new series of Technology Transfer
iports on "Environmental Assessment." This series is
)mewhat different from other Technology Transfer publi-
itions in that the topics, rather than focusing on control
chnology or environmental engineering, will deal with
sues involving toxic substances and their effects on
jman health and the environment. Since much of the
jency's effort and resources are now directed to regula-
ig the release of toxic chemicals into the environment,
e "Assessment" series was developed to provide a
eans for collecting and disseminating the information
/olving from this effort. These reports are in tended for an
jdience whose chief concern is protection of'human
ealth
ie first report in the series is entitled, "Short-Term Tests
ir Carcinogens, Mutagens and Other Genotoxic Agents."
lort-term tests are techniques developed to serve as
pid and relatively inexpensive predictors of a chemical's
Dtential to alter genetic material. The report describes the
ay in which short-term tests contribute to toxic material
fects assessment. The scientific basis for and techniques
;ed in the tests, as well as current applications and
isearch activities are also described.
SHORT-TERM TESTING IN SUPPORT OF VARIOUS EPA PROGRAMS
-------
New Design Seminars for Small
Wastewater Treatment Systems
To date, five Technology Transfer Seminars on "Waste-
water Treatment Facilities for Small Commumties"have
been presented in 1979: Phoenix, Arizona, July 17-19;
Portland, Oregon, July 31 - August 2; Omaha, Nebraska,
August 14-16; Indianapolis, Indiana, August 28-30; and
New Orleans, Louisiana, September 18-20.
Nationwide, in years past, a total of 20 seminars have been
presented on this topic; however, the five 1979 seminars
included two new technical sessions: "Management of
On-site and Alternative Wastewater Systems," and "Plan-
ning Wastewater Management Facilities for Small
Communities." The management session, presented by
Peter Ciotoli and Kenneth Wiswall of Roy F. Weston, Inc.,
West Chester, Pennsylvania, included discussions of
management needs, functions and dimensions (various
types of institutional approaches which can be utilized).
Actual case studies were used to illustrate the manage-
ment session These studies, which involved extended
field trips by planners and engineers, evaluated actu
administrative and operational practices utilized in sever
communities and states. Among the case studu
discussed are Fairfax County, Virginia; Lake Mead
Pennsylvania; Otter Tail County, Minnesota; Stinsc
Beach, California; and the State of Maryland.
The planning session, presented by James Hudso
Patricia Deese and Robert McMahon of Urban Systert
Research and Engineering, Inc., Cambridge, Massachi
setts, and James Lake and Robert Williams of the Nation
Association of Conservation Districts, Washington, D.C
included information designed to aid engineers and tr
small communities they serve in applying and evaluatir
various methods for wastewater management. Th
information is intended to impact the early steps in tr
plannmg process, particularly the preapplication ar
facility planning (step 1) stages of the construction gran
program. Major topics addressed at the seminar wer
institutional and regulatory setting; the application pn
cess; development of a community profile; technic
problem identification and generation and evaluation
systems for the community as a whole.
New Capsule Report: Participate
Control by Fabric Filtration on Coal-
Fired Industrial Boilers
Conversion of oil- and gas- to coal-fired boilers and the
promulgation of more stringent particulate emission
regulations, have sparked a renewed interest in the use of
fabric filtration for boiler particulate control. A new
capsule report, describing theory, applications, perfor-
mance and economics of fabric filtration, is available. To
order this report (#2021) return the form at the backof this
Newsletter.
"Stacks, baghouse and duct system at
typical coal-fired boiler plant"
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer
(Check appropriate boxes)
^OCESS DESIGN MANUALS
osphorus Removal (April 1976) . . 1001 D
rbon Adsorption (Oct 1973) . . 1002D
ispended Solids Removal (Jan 1975) .. .lOOSD
igrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants (Oct 1974) . 1 004 D
ilfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems (Oct 1974) . .. 1005 D
rogen Control (Oct 1975) . 1007D
nd Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct 1977) . . . . ... 1008 D
astewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered Small
Communities (Oct 1977) 1009 D
jmcipal Sludge Landfills (Oct 1978) 1010 D
Jdge Treatment and Disposal (Oct 1979) 101lD
ECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
cycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants by Two Stage Precipitation 2001 D
lor Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by Lime Addition ... . 2002 D
llution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill .... 2003 D
st Progress Report Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 D
llution Abatement in a Brewing Facility ... 2006 D
le Gas Desulfunzation and Sulfunc Acid Production via
Magnesia Scrubbing ... . ... . 2007 D
cond Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008 D
sgnesium Carbonate Process for Water Treatment ... .. 2009 D
ird Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility ... .. .2010G
st Progress Report Wellman-Lord S02 Recovery Process — Flue
Gas Desulfunzation Plant . . .. .. 2011 D
^irl Device for Regulating and Treating Combined
Sewer Overflows .. ... . 2012 D
brie Filter Particulate Control on Coal-Fired Utility Boilers
Nucla, CO and Sunbury.PA 2013D
st Progress Report Static Pile Composting of Wastewater Sludge . 2014 D
icient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows at Dawson, MN . ... 201 5 C
>uble Alkali Flue Gas Desulfunzation System Applied at the
General Motors Parma, OH Facility 201 6 D
'Covery of Spent Sulfunc Acid from Steel Pickling Operations ... . 201 7 EH
urth Progress Report Forced-Oxidation Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 201 8 D
mtrol of Acidic Air Pollutants by Coated Baghouses 2020 Q
rticulate Control by Fabric Filtration on Coal-Fired Industrial Boilers. 2021 D
hco Flue Gas Desulfunzation and Particulate Removal System 2022 L~H
JDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
igrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols )
igrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols ) ..
igrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols ) .. .
'grading Textile Operations to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols )
loosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for Pollution Control
Systems ... ...
3sion and Sediment Control — Surface Mining in the
eastern U S (2 Vols )
llution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable Industry (3 Vols ) . .
3001 D
3002 D
.. 3003 D
3004 D
. 3005 D
3006 D
3007 D
Choosing Optimum Management Strategies
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and Coating of
Metal Products (3 Vols )
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons ... . .
Status of Oxygen/Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment
Nitrification and Denitrification Facilities
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants—Case Histories
Flow Equalization
Wastewater Filtration
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration .
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents (3 Vols )
Alternatives for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems (3 Vols )
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (2 Vols )
Benefit Analysis for Combined Sewer Overflow Control
BROCHURES
Logging Roads and Water Quality
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives Municipal Wastewater
Forest Harvesting and Waler Quality
Irrigated Agriculture and Water Quality Management
Forest Chemicals and Water Quality
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives Economics of Wastewater
Alternatives for the Electroplating Industry
HANDBOOKS
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973)
Industrial Guide for Air Pollution Control (June 1978)
Continuous Air Pollution Source Monitoring Systems (June 1979)
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
3008 D
3009 D
Pulp and Paper Industry Part 1 'Air (Oct
Textile Processing Industry (Oct 1978)
SUMMARY REPORTS
1976)
4001 D
4003 D
4004 D
4005 D
4006 D
4007 D
4008 D
. 4009 D
401OD
4011 D
401 2 D
. 401 3D
5011 D
5012D
501 3D
5014D
501 5 G
501 6 D
6002 D
6004 D
6005 D
7001 D
7002 D
Sulfur Oxides Control Technology Series FGD Wellman-Lord Process 8001 d
Control Technology for the Metal-Finishing Industry Series Evaporators 8002 I I
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Environmental Considerations of Energy -- Conserving Industrial
Process Changes . . . 9001 L~H
Environmental Sampling of Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process 9002 d
Short-Term Tests for Carcinogens. Mutagens and Other Genotoxic
Agents . 9003 D
ATTENTION PUBLICATION USERS
Due to the increasing costs of printing and mailing, it has become necessary to institute positive management controls over distribution of Technology Transfer
publications Although these publications will be distributed on a no-cost basis, any request for more than five documents total, or for more than one copy of a single
document must be accompanied by written justification, preferably on organization letterhead In the event your order cannot be filled as requested, you will be
contacted and so advised
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? YesD NoD
*Name —
Employer.
Street
City, State, Zip Code_
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct
• Publication listed for the first time
Note Forward to CERI, Technology Transfer, U S Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects of the
Technology .Transfer Program, contact the EPA Regional Technology Transfer Committee
Chairman in your region
REGION CHAIRMAN
1 Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N H , Vt , Mass , R I , Conn )
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(NY.NJ.PR.VI)
Albert Montague Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa , WVa, Md, Del, DC, Va )
Asa B Foster, Jr Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N E
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881 -4450
(N C , S C , Ky , Tenn , Ga , Ala , Miss ,
Fla )
REGION CHAIRMAN
Mildred Smith
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First National Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 767-2697
(Texas, Okla , Ark , La , N Mex )
Charles M Hajmian Environmental Protection Agency
324 East 11th Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
816 374-2921
(Kansas, Nebr, Iowa, Mo )
10
Elmer Chenault
Fred Hoffman
John Osborn
Clifford Risley
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 886-4625
(Mich , Wis , Minn , III , Ind , Ohio)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
303 837-2277
(Colo , Mont, Wyo , Utah, N D , S D )
Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
415 556-6925
(Calif, Ariz , Nev , Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash , Ore , Idaho, Alaska)
USEPA - OR&D
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
513-684-7394 - 7398 (Inc.)
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
r^
>
ad
537
EPA 335 V_
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300
LOU TILLE LIBRN
EPA
230 S DEAKBURN b
CHICAGO IL 60604
0260681
-------
United States Environmental Research
Environmental Protection Information Center
Agency Cincinnati OH 45268
July 1979
-/EPA DECHNOLOGY
QRANSFER
The Bridge Between
Research and Use
Summary of
National Operational and Maintenance
Cause and Effect Survey
Francis L. Evans III
Urban Systems Management Section
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, USEPA
Cincinnati, Ohio
Significant potential exists for improving the performance of biological treatment
systems simply and inexpensively by upgrading operation and maintenance
programs, improving attention to management and administrative requirements, and
by making low-cost correction of design deficiencies.
These are the results of the first large-scale effort in this country to identify and
quantify specific cause and effect relationships in problems of performance,
operation, and maintenance of biological wastewater treatment plants A three and
one-half year study was conducted nationwide to collect and analyze data from a
statistically significant number of operating plants. The purpose of the study was to
identify deficiencies which caused poor plant performance; to weigh and rank, in
order of severity of impact, the causative factors of poor performance at each facility,
and to demonstrate on a limited basis the improvement in plant performance that can
be achieved without major capital improvement when all limiting factors are
corrected.
Selection Criteria
Plants were selected for study based on sequential screening and selection
procedures. EPA regional offices and state regulatory agencies assisted in initial
selection of plants by compiling a list of potential study sites. Plants not meeting one
or more of the following general screening criteria were eliminated from the selection
process:
1. The plant must incorporate some variation of suspended growth, fixed film, or
aerated lagoon biological treatment.
C" f~* CT f > f ••-;- r\
'"V-v.-'S' " ,,\-J 2. The plant should not be severely hydraulically or organically overloaded, nor
have obvious identifiable structural or component deficiencies.
w 3. The plants should range in size up to 10 mgd and all major units should be
operating.
4 No enforcement action should be underway or pending against the munici-
pality or authority involved
A total of 287 site visits were made to collect more detailed data than the original
screening information in order to select those plants at which comprehensive
evaluations would be conducted. These initial site visits required one-half to one full
day at each facility to evaluate such things as process flow sheets; influent and
effluent wastewater characteristics; condition of equipment, and discharge permit
criteria. Also, the plant superintendent and operating personnel were questioned
regarding problems they saw as interfering with plant operations.
-------
One hundred and eighty-four facilities were eliminated for
various reasons at this stage of the study; thus, 103
facilities remained as best suited for comprehensive
evaluation. The purpose of the comprehensive evaluation
was to examine, in detail, the system and unit process
performance and to evaluate existing operation, mainten-
ance, and administrative practices. Each plant evaluation
involved a team of professional engineers and plant opera-
ting personnel and required three to five days of on-site
field work. In all, 70 potential problem areas were
addressed at each facility.
In order to quantify and report the deficiencies and
problems at plant sites, both individuallyandcollectively, a
plant evaluation summary was developed, consisting of a
weighing scale and a ranking table. The scale wasdevised
to rank the 70 different factors that could limit plant
performance. For each factor identified at a facility, the
extent to which it adversely impacted plant performance
was quantified according to the weighing scale points as
defined in Table 1. The factors affecting plant performance
were then ranked in decreasing order of severity.
TABLE 1. WEIGHING SCALE
ADVERSE IMPACT
USED TO QUANTIFY
Weighing Effect of Specific Factor on
Scale Plant Performance
0 No significant effect on plant performance
1 Minor effect on plant performance
2 Minimum indirect effect on plant performance
on continuous basis or major direct effect
on plant performance on a periodic basis
3 Major direct effect on plant performance
Major Causes of Poor Plant
Performance
Based on the results of the comprehensive surveys, the 10
highest ranking causes of poor plant performance result
from inadequate plant operation and plant design
deficiencies. The highest-ranking factor (#1) was
inadequate operator application of concepts and testing to
process control. This, coupled with the fourth-ranked
factor, inadequate understanding of wastewater
treatment, indicates that for various reasons operators
were not applying the proper concepts of operation to
process control These reasons are attributable to
inadequate or incorrect sampling and testing procedures
for process control (Factor #2), improper technical
guidance (Factor #5), ineffective O&M manual instruction
(Factor #9), and significant design deficiencies (Factors
#3, 6, 7, 8, and 10), all of which prevent an operator from
controlling and "tuning" his treatment system to varying
influent hydraulic and pollutant loading characteristics.
The 10 major causes of poor plant performance are
described as follows:
1. Operator Application of Concepts and Testing to
Process Control—This factor was ranked as the
most severe deficiency and leading cause of poor
performance at 23 facilities and was a high-rankec
factor at a total of 89 out of the 103 plants evaluated.
It occurs when a trained operator in a satisfactorily
designed plant permits less than optimum
performance. This factor was ranked when incorrec
control adjustment or incorrect control test interpre-
tation occurred, or when the use of existing inade-
quate design features continued when seemingly
obvious operations alternatives or minor plant modi-
fications could have been implemented to improve
performance. The lack of testing and control were no
necessarily the result of inadequate training 01
comprehension in these areas, but simply the lack o
or inability to apply learned techniques.
2. Process Control Testing Procedures—Inadequate
process control testing involves the absence 01
wrong type of sampling or testing for process
monitoring and operational control. This deficiency
leads to making inappropriate decisions. Standarc
unit process tests such as mixed liquor suspendec
solids, mixed liquor dissolved oxygen, mixed liquoi
settleable solids, and return sludge suspended solidj
for activated sludge processes were seldom or nevei
conducted. Also, important operating parameters
such as sludge volume index, F:M ratio and mean eel
retention time in suspended growth systems oi
recirculation rates in trickling filter plants were
usually not determined. This factor adversely
impacted performance at 67 of the 103 plants
evaluated.
3. Infiltration/Inflow—The results of this widespreac
problem are manifested by severe fluctuations ir
flow rates, periods of severe hydraulic overloading
and dilution of the influent wastewater so that botr
suspended and fixed biological systems are loaded tc
less than optimal values. The extreme result is the
"washout" of suspended growth systems as a resul
of the loss of solids from the final clarification stage
during high flow periods. This factor was ranked firs
at 56 of the 103 plants evaluated.
4. Inadequate Understanding of Wastewatei
Treatment—This factor is distinguished from Factoi
#1 in that it is defined as a deficiency in the level o
-------
knowledge that individual staffs at various
facilities exhibit concerning wastewater treatment
fundamentals. On occasion, an operator's primary
concern is simply to keep the equipment functional
rather than to learn how the equipment relatestothe
processes and their control. This factor adversely
affected performance at 50 plants and was the
leading cause of poor performance at nine facilities.
5. Technical Guidance—Improper technical guidance
includes misinformation from authoritative sources
including design engineers, state and federal regula-
tory agency personnel, equipment suppliers,
operator training staff and other plant operators. At
any one plant, improper technical guidance was
observed to come from more than one source. This
factor was ranked as the most severe deficiency at
seven plants, and was an adverse factor at 47
facilities.
6. Sludge Wasting Capability—This factor was ranked
as the leading cause of poor performance at nine
facilities and was a factor at 43 plants studied. This
factor includes inadequate sludge handling facilities
and the inability to measure and control the volume of
waste sludge. Either one or both of these conditions
was noted as having a major impact on performance
at several plants.
7. Process Controllability—The lack of controllability
was evident in the inability to adequately measure
and control flow streams such as return sludge flow
and trickling filter recirculation rates. While
measurement and control of return activated sludge
flow were the most frequent reasons for rating this
factor, process controllability was not a major cause
of poor performance. It prevented an operator from
"tuning" his treatment system to the varying
demands which were placed on it by hydraulic and
organic loading fluctuations. This factor occurred at
55 plants and was the leading factor at three
facilities.
8. Process Flexibility—Lack of flexibility refers to the
unavailability of valves, piping and other appurten-
ances required to operate in various modes or to
include or exclude existing processes as necessary to
optimize performance. Poor flexibility precludes the
ability to operate an activated sludge plant in the
contact stabilization, step loading or conventional
modes and the ability to bypass polishing ponds or
other downstream processes to discharge high qual-
ity secondary clarifier effluent. Either the lack of, or
inadequate, process flexibility was noted as the lead-
ing cause of poor performance at three plants and
was a factor at 37 facilities.
9. Ineffective O&M Manual Instruction—This situa-
tion, existing at 40 plants, was judged serious
although the adverse effect was moderate. The poor
quality of most plants' O&M manuals undoubtedly
has contributed to operators' general lack of under-
standing of the importance of process control andthe
inability to practice it, but a competent staff could use
other available information sources.
10. Aerator Design—Deficiencies in aerator design were
the major cause of poor performance at six facilities
and were less significant factors at an additional 21
plants. Deficiencies were noted in the type, size,
shape, capacity, and location of the unit and were of
such a nature as to hinder adequate treatment of the
waste flow and loading and stable operation.
In addition to the top 10 causes of poor plant performance
as described above, the 70 potential problem areas were
weighed and ranked for all plants studied. Table 2 lists the
factors in decreasing order of severity of impact on
performance. For each factor the area of design, operation,
maintenance, or administration is identified. Also shown
is the number of times that a factor was ranked Number 1;
i.e., the number of times the factor was the leading cause
of poor performance; and also the number of plants at
which the factor had a "minor" or more serious adverse
impact on plant performance. In some cases, plant evalua-
tions did not include every factor being evaluated for
potential adverse impact These factors are marked in the
table by an asterisk. However, all factors were noted as
having an adverse impact either when the factor was
present and a deficiency or an adverse effect was observed
or when the factor was not present and an adverse effect
resulted from its absence. As noted on the table, opera-
tional problems and design deficiencies comprise the top
16 leading causes of poor plant performance.
TABLE 2. COLLECTIVE RANKING OF FACTORS LIMITING PLANT PERFORMANCE
Factor Area
1
Operation
2 Operation
3 Design
4 Operation
Limiting Factor
No of Times
Description
Operator Application of Concepts & Testing
to Process Control
Process Control Testing
Infiltration/Inflow
Sewage Treatment Understanding
Factor was
ranked #1
24
0
9
9
Factor was
noted
89
67
56
50
-------
4
TABLE 2. cont'd
Limiting Factor
Factor Area Description
5 Operation Technical Guidance
6 Design Sludge Wasting & Return Capability
7 Design Secondary Process Controllability
8 Design Secondary Process Flexibility
9 Operation O&M Manual Inadequacy!*)
10 Design Aerator
11 Design Sludge Treatment!*)
12 Design Industrial Loading
13 Operation Staff Training
14 Design Secondary Clarifier
15 Operation Performance Monitoring
16 Design Ultimate Sludge Disposal
17 Administration Plant Administration, Familiarity with Needs
18 Design Disinfection!*)
19 Administration Plant Staff - Number
20 Design Plant Hydraulic Loading
21 Administration Plant Staff - Plant Coverage
22 Maintenance Spare Parts Inventory
23 Design Laboratory Space & Equipment
24 Design Return Process Stream
25 Operation Equipment Malfunction
26 Maintenance Lack of Preventive Maintenance Program
27 Design Alternative Power Source
28 Design Organic Loading
29 Maintenance General Housekeeping
30 Maintenance Maintenance Scheduling & Recording
31 Administration Administration Policies
32 Administration Plant Staff Productivity
33 Administration Insufficient Funding
34 Maintenance Manpower
35 Design Preliminary Unit Design!*)
36 Administration Staff Motivation
37 Administration Working Conditions
38 Design Alarm Systems
39 Maintenance Critical Parts Procurement
40 Design Flow Proportioning to Units
41 Operation Staff Aptitude
42 Design Inoperability Due to Weather
43 Administration Staff Supervision
44 Design Primary Units(*)
45 Maintenance Equipment Age
46 Operation O&M Manual - Use by Operators)*)
47 Administration Salary
48 Design Lack of Standby Units for Key Equipment
49 Design Lack of Unit By-Pass
50 Maintenance Technical Guidance - Emergencies
51 Maintenance Availability of Preventive Maintenance Ref.
52 Design Flow Backup
53 Operation Staff - Level of Education
54 Design Toxic Loading
55 Design Submerged Weirs
56 Design Plant Location
57 Operation Staff Level of Certification
58 Operation Staff - Insufficient Time on Job
59 Maintenance Staff Expertise - Emergencies
60 Design Seasonal Variation Loading
61 Administration Unnecessary Expenditures
62 Design Process Automation for Control
63 Administration Personnel Turnover
No of Times
Factor was
ranked #1
7
9
3
3
0
6
3
4
0
3
0
1
2
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
7
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
Factor was
noted
47
43
55
37
40
27
36
27
31
26
31
30
21
20
22
18
26
23
30
18
17
20
24
13
17
19
15
17
16
14
20
19
18
19
14
12
13
12
13
9
14
12
12
9
12
10
10
7
9
8
6
6
8
7
9
7
7
6
4
-------
TABLE 2. cont'd
Limiting Factor
Factor Area Description
64 Operation Shift Staff Adequacy
65 Design Unit Accessibility
66 Design Process Accessibility for Sampling
67 Design Process Automation for Monitoring
68 Design Equipment Accessibility for Maintenance
69 Administration Bond Indebtedness
70 Design AWT Units(*)
No. of Times
Factor was
ranked #1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Factor was
noted
3
3
4
2
2
0
0
*Not included in every plant evaluated
Program for Improving Plant
Performance
In a critical evaluation of the data, it is important to note
that at each treatment facility, a combination of factors
limiting performance was always observed and that a
single cause of poor performance at any one facility was
never observed. Because there is an interrelationship
between performance limiting factors and corrective
programs, and because most existing correction programs
focus on single problems only, a new approach which
addresses all problems at a single facility is proposed as a
more effective approach in improving existing plant
performance. This approach is called a Composite
Correction Program (CCP). The purpose of the CCP is to
eliminate all the performance limiting factors at a plant
through the implementation of the correction
recommendations that are made in the comprehensive
evaluation report. The CCP was successfully
demonstrated at several facilities on a limited scale. When
the program was implemented at the Havre, Montana
Wastewater Treatment Plant, a significant improvement in
plant effluent quality resulted and permit standards could
be met consistently. At the Havre plant, the effluent quality
for six months prior to implementation of the CCP averaged
31 mg/lforBOD5and30mg/lforTSS. Both BODsandTSS
concentrations averaged less than 10 mg/l for an eight-
month period following initiation of the CCP and develop-
ment of desired activated sludge characteristics. The
plant's BODs loading increased by 27%, yet BODs dis-
charged to the receiving stream decreased by 68%.
At other facilities where the CCP technical assistance
approach was used, improved performance resulted from
changes in plant operations or minor changes m plant de-
sign features. The improvement in effluent quality that
was achieved is shown in Table 3
TABLE 3. COLLECTIVE RANKING OF FACTORS LIMITING PLANT PERFORMANCE
Facility
Havre, MT
Marshfield. MO
St Charles, MO
Mississippi R
Plant
Akron, IA
Belton, MO
Flow
MGD
1 36
048
3 12
013
084
Effluent Quality
BOD5(mg/l)
Before CCP
31
75
9
72
23
After CCP
10
8
5
21
10
The significance and impact of a CCP approach to
optimizing plant performance are indicated by improved
effluent quality at the Havre facility and by the potential
improvements which could be realized if such a program
were implemented at all the facilities at which compre-
hensive evaluations were performed. Of the 103 facilities
evaluated only 37 plants (36%) were meeting their
respective NPDES standards consistently or most of the
Effluent Quality
TSS (mg I)
Before CCP
30
150
2
143
34
After CCP
8
5
2
8
15
Major Impact
Improved Performance
Improved Performance
Increased Process Stability
Improved Performance
Improved Performance
and Decreased Costs of
Sludge Handling
time. However, if as a result of the evaluations, the recom-
mendations were implemented, an additional 51
treatment plants could consistently meet NPDES
standards, and 88 plants (86%) would achieve optimal
levels of performance beyond which further improvement
in effluent quality would not be possible without upgrading
the existing facilities.
-------
Conclusions and Recommendations
The following conclusions and specific recommendations
are made as a result of this study:
1. Since operator training programs and manuals are
ineffective aids and have minimal impact on insuring
proper plant operation, all federal and state training
programs and literature should be redeveloped to re-
late theoretical consideration to practical operational
situations and present solutions to specific on-site
problems as they arise. Manuals must reflect the
input of the plant operations staff and should be easy
to follow so they will be used on a day-to-day basis.
2. At the facilities planning and design stages, plant
design, operability, and flexibility should be subject to
a specific design and O&M review as a grant-funding
requirement. Such a review would serve to:
a. Emphasize the need for adequate sludge handling
in small plants and design, operation and manage-
ment of existing facilities at large plants.
b. Insure proper design of secondary clarifiers to
eliminate short circuiting and insure uniform
velocity gradients in the sludge blanket.
c. Implement more rational design requirements for
fixed-film biological reactors.
d. Allow and encourage separate treatment of an-
aerobic digester supernatant or require increased
wastewater treatment process unit sizes to ade-
quately receive and treat this recycle flow.
e. Encourage plant flexibility which would allow by-
passing of ponds following mechanical plants and
flexibility to operate activated sludge plants in
various modes.
f. Emphasize good controllability of return activated
sludge flows.
3. In order to assure that process control is practiced at
treatment facilities, the following action should be
taken.
a. Improve training for private and governmental
persons disseminating operations technical assis-
tance. Training must include guided in-plant pro-
cess control experience at various wastewater
treatment facilities to develop capabilities for
proper application of wastewater treatment con-
cepts to process control. Plant design engineers
should be trained in plant operations and process
control.
b. Provide more comprehensive and understandabli
process control information to operators by desig
engineers and technical assistance sources. Sue
information should be included in theplantopera
tion and maintenance manual, which in tun
should reference other manuals provided throug.
state and federal government for augmentatior
and clarification of theory as necessary.
c. Hold persons who disseminate operations techni
cal guidance accountable for their recommenda
tions. As a minimum, follow-up phone calls o
plant visits should be used to determine if recom
mendations given were correct and still apply.
4. Studies to determine the sources of plant perform
ance problems should be comprehensive in orde
that subtle as well as obvious factors which limi
performance are identified. The performance poten
tial of an existing plant should be verified by con
ducting a comprehensive evaluation to identify al
factors limiting performance. Plant administrator:
should be informed of the CCP approach to improving
plant performance as an alternative to constructior
of major plant modifications.
5. Federal and state regulatory efforts should b*
directed toward enforcement and accountability
specifically to:
a. Expand enforcement of NPDES permitstoencour
age optimum performance from existing facilities
b. Require that CCP's be implemented prior to or ir
conjunction with construction of new or modifiec
facilities to insure that existing facilities' capabil
ities are examined and optimized before unneedec
construction is begun.
6. Budgeting for operation and maintenance o
wastewater treatment facilities must become more
organized and needs-sensitive. Higher priority foi
wastewater treatment in the municipal budget mus
be established.
Publications and Presentations
Resulting from National O&M Cause
and Effect Survey
— "Evaluation of Operation and Maintenance Factors
Limiting Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plan
Performance," Pres. Rocky Mountain Water Pollutior
Control Association, Albuquerque, New Mexico,
October 25, 1977.
-------
Hegg, B.A., Rakness, K.L, and Schultz, J.R.; "Evalua-
tion of Operation and Maintenance Factors Limiting
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant Performance,"
JWPCF, 50:3, 419-426, March 1978.
"Evaluation of Operation and Maintenance Factors
Limiting Municipal Wastewater Plant Performance—
Phase II," Pres. 51st Conference WPCF, Anaheim,
California, October 1978.
"Operational Factors Affecting Performance of Bio-
logical Treatment Plants," Pres. 51st Annual
Conference WPCF, Anaheim, California, October 1978.
"Evaluation of Operation and Maintenance Factors
Limiting Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant Per-
formance," EPA-600/2-79-034, June 1979.
"Evaluation of Operation and Maintenance Factors
Limiting Biological Wastewater Treatment Plant Per-
formance," EPA-600/2-79-078, July 1979.
"A Demonstrated Approach for Improving Performance
and Reliability of Biological Wastewater Treatment
Plants," EPA-600/2-79-035, June 1979.
"Evaluation of Design, Operation, Maintenance and
Administrative Factors Limiting Treatment Plant Per-
formance—Phase II," Draft Final Report, May 1979.
"Evaluation of Operation Maintenance Factors Limit-
ing Biological Treatment Plant Performance—
Phase II," Draft Final Report, June 1979
New Seminar Series: Innovative and
Alternative Technology Assessment
The Environmental Research Information Center and the
Water Research Division of the Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory are jointly sponsoring a series of
Technology Transfer seminars designed to aid in the
implementation of EPA's new Innovative and Alternative
Technology (I/A) Program.
This program was established by Congress as a
modification of the EPA Construction Grants Program to
allow communities to obtain more than 75% federal grant
money for construction of wastewatertreatmentfacilities.
Provisions of the program include:
— 85% grants for the construction of innovative or
alternative municipal treatment plants instead of
the normal 75% grants.
— The above grant increase (75% to 85%) will be paid
out of a special fund set aside from each state's
allocation each year that can only be used for I/A
technology. This set-aside fund is 2% for the first
two years (FY 79 and 80) and 3% for the last year
(FY81).
— Each year 1/2% of the special set-asidefund must be
used for innovative technology.
— If a new I/A technology fails to meet design goals
during the first two years of operation, another
grant may be awarded for 100% of the costs of
replacing the failed system. This means the
local government and the taxpayers will not have
to pay for new technologies that do not work.
Nine, two-day seminars have been scheduled during the
period August through December 1 979 to acquaint engi-
neers and facilities planning personnel with the technical
information necessary to fulfill the program requirements.
Attendance is limited to 200 participants at each seminar.
Seminar sites and dates are listed on page 14 of this
Newsletter. If you are interested in attending one of these
seminars contact1
Liz Holzer
JACA Corporation
550 Pinetown Road
Fort Washington, PA 19034
(215)643-5466
Land Treatment Seminars
The Environmental Research Information Center, in
cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, pre-
sented five Technology Transfer seminars in June on the
"Design of Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Ef-
fluents."
These seminars were held in Des Plaines, Illinois, Atlanta,
Georgia; Boston, Massachusetts, Phoenix, Arizona; and
Boise, Idaho. Subjects discussed included land treatment
systems; slow rate, high rate, and overland flow; health
aspects; management and monitoring options; develop-
ment of public relations programs; design examples for
each treatment-mode, and selected case histories. EPA's
revised policy and guidance for evaluation of land treat-
ment alternatives (PRM 79-3) in the Construction Grants
program was also covered
-------
8
Continuous Source Monitoring
Handbook Featured at 1979 APCA
Meeting
The newest Technology Transfer handbook, "Continuous
Air Pollution Source Monitoring Systems," was distri-
buted for the first time at the 72nd Annual Air Pollution
Control Association Meeting and Exhibition, held June 26-
28 at the Cincinnati Convention Center.
EPA was represented at the meeting by the Environmental
Research Information Center and the Industrial Environ-
mental Research Laboratories (Cincinnati, Ohio and
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina) who combined
efforts this year to provide information to attendees about
EPA programs and to discuss the handbook. Approximate-
ly 2000 copies of the new publication were distributed.
The Source Monitoring handbook provides the detailed
information necessary to develop a continuous emissions
monitoring program at a stationary source facility. It also
covers continuous monitoring requirements established
by the federal government, general guidelines to aid in
meeting these requirements, details for selecting monitor-
ing instrumentation, and methods for using monitoring
data and systems to improve and optimize source process
operations. The manual can be obtained by returning the
order form at the back of this Newsletter (#6005).
Continuous Air
Pollution Source
Monitoring
Systems
Symposium Announcement:
River Basin Water Planning and
Management
The Environmental Research Information Center is help-
ing to coordinate a joint USA/USSR symposium on "River
Basin Water Quality Planning and Management," which
will be held in the Sheraton-Commander Hotel,Cambridge,
Massachusetts, October 22-24 The U.S. participation in
the symposium is sponsored by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Water Planning Division, and Region 1,
as part of an on-going effort by both countries to promote
the exchange of scientific information and, in this case, to
better understand the water planning and management
activities of each The USSR will be represented by the
research scientists of the All-Union Scientific Research
Institute for Water Protection (VNIIVO), an equivalent
agency to EPA with broad responsibilities for the planning,
research and design of water pollution control systems
and strategies
The mam focus of the symposium will be to comparatively
study the water protection planning methods and ap-
proaches of both countries, stressing the technological,
regulatory and institutional constraints. The U.S. special-
ists will prepare a river basin water protection plan for a
segment of the Severski-Donet River in the Ukraine
Republic, applying U.S. laws, regulations and technologies.
The Soviet specialists will prepare a similar water plan for
a segment of the Connecticut River in Massachusetts,
based on Soviet constraints and planning approaches.
Each group of representatives will present seven papers
which will include discussions on present and future
water quality goals; regulations; agencies involved in
water pollution control planning and management; deci-
sion-making processes, including considerations of treat-
ment technologies; water quality modeling; and cost/
benefit optimization.
Also of interest to symposim participants will be discus-
sions by the Soviets of some of their treatment technol-
ogies and pollution abatement/management methods
which are not generally applied in the United States.
Attendance at this symposium is open to anyone who is
interested For further information, contact:
Ms Sharon Moore
Water Qujlity Branch
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
(617) 223-5130
-------
9
ERIC Initiates New Publication:
Summary Report
A Technology Transfer summary report series of publica-
tions has been initiated by the Environmental Research
Information Center for the purpose of aggregating infor-
mation regarding particular environmental pollution
problems. Subareas of a subject or "problem" will be ad-
dressed in individual reports, presenting a comprehensive,
yet concise compilation of information on a particular
topic.
Two report series have now been initiated with the recent
publication of summary reports: "Sulfur Oxides Control
Technology: Flue Gas Desulfurization, The Wellman-Lord
Process" and "Control Technology for the Metal-Finishing
Industry: Evaporators."
The Wellman-Lord Process report and future reports in
this Sulfur Oxide Series, such as lime/limestone and
magnesium oxide FGD processes, are funded by the
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory; Research
Triangle Park and explain methods for controlling sulfur
dioxide emissions. The Wellman-Lord report describes
design and environmental considerations, present status,
raw material and utility requirements, costs, and installa-
tion space required for the process. This report can be
ordered by checking the appropriate box (#8001) on the
order form on the back of this Newsletter.
The Evaporators report and future reports in the Metal-
Finishing Series, such as reverse osmosis and ion
exchange, are funded by the Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory in Cincinnati. This initial report
describes the technical and economic advantages, opera-
ting costs, and cost-savings benefits for evaporators used
in electroplating processes. To order the Evaporators
report, check the appropriate box (#8002) on the back of
this Newsletter.
Summary Report
Sulfur Oxides Control
Technology Series:
Flue Gas Desulfurization
Wellman-Lord
Process
Summary Report
Control Technology
for the
Metal Finishing Industry
-------
10
Additional Small Flows Seminars to
be Conducted
Five Technology Transfer seminars on "Wastewater
Treatment Facilities for Small Communities" will be con-
ducted this year. These seminars will be held in Phoenix,
Arizona, July 17-19, 1979; Portland, Oregon, July 31-
August 2, 1979; Omaha, Nebraska, August 14-16, 1979;
Indianapolis, Indiana, August 28-30, 1979; and New
Orleans, Louisiana, September 18-20, 1979. Although
seminars on this subject have previously been conducted,
this year's seminars will feature two new four-hour
sessions: "Management of On-Site Systems" and
"Methodology for Alternatives Analysis." These sessions
will be particularly helpful for those preparing facility plans
and/or developing an on-site management program.
Individuals wishing to attend the Phoenix, Portland,
Omaha, or New Orleans seminars should write to:
USEPA
c/o Enviro Control, Inc.
P.O. Box 828
Rockville, MD 20851
Those wishing to attend the Indianapolis seminar should
write to:
USEPA
Attn: Marti Velasco, Water Division
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
Workshop on the Use of Nonpoint
Source Pollution Assessment Models
The Environmental Research Information Center, in
cooperation with the Environmental Research Laboratory
in Athens, Georgia, presented a second workshop on the
use of models for the assessment of soluble and sus-
pended pollutants from agricultural and rural lands held
May 1-3, 1979 in Chicago, Illinois.
The Agricultural Runoff Management (ARM) and the Non-
point Source (NPS) models for determmg pollutant loads in
surface water runoff were discussed. The NPS model is
designed for continuous simulation of pollutants in sur-
face water runoff from five different land use categories.
The ARM model is designed to simulate the continuous
runoff of pesticides, sediments and nutrients from rowcrop
agricultural lands.
The workshop presented the structure and orgamzaton of
the models, input description and preparation require-
ments such as the algorithm and parameter processes for
hydrology, sediment, nutrients, pesticides, and land use
categories. In addition, parameter estimation and calibra-
tion of the models were discussed.
EPA Research Reports, EPA-600/3-78-080 and EPA-
600/3-77-065, describing the use of these models, are
available on a limited basis through:
Technical Information Operations Staff
USEPA
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Technical information and assistance on use of these
models is available through:
Environmental Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
College Station Road
Athens, GA 30605
Second Workshop on Water Quality
Screening Methodology
The Environmental Research Information Center and the
Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, Georgia, are
sponsoring a three-day workshop on water quality assess-
ment techniques for estimating pollutant levels from point
and nonpoint sources and for evaluating their effect on
water quality in streams and reservoirs. The workshop, to
be held in Chicago, Illinois, November 7-9, 1979 is in-
tended for engineers and planners who are involved in
evaluating surface water quality in Section 208 nondesig-
nated areas.
The workshop will present techniques that are included in
the manual, "Water Quality Assessment: A Screening
Method for Nondesignated 208 Areas" (EPA-600/9-77-
023), which was developed under contract by the Office of
Research and Development's Athens laboratory. This
screening method involves several simplified techniques
and, in most cases, can be accomplished with the assis-
tance of a desk-top calculator. The methodology is intend-
ed to be used with little external or collected input; instead,
tables, figures, and appendices of the manual provide
much of the working data.
If you are interested in attending this workshop, contact
Orville Macomber, Environmental Research Information
Center, (513) 684-7394
The manual is available on a limited basis from:
Technical Information Operations Staff
USEPA
Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
New Environmental Pollution Control
Alternatives Publication for
Electroplating Industry
The Environmental Research Information Center has
published a new Technology Transfer Environmental
Pollution Control Alternatives brochure entitled, "Eco-
nomics of Wastewater Treatment Alternatives for the
Electroplating Industry."
This brochure, funded by the Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory (Metals and Inorganic Chemicals
Branch) in Cincinnati, Ohio, addresses the economics of
various techniques for meeting water pollution control
requirements as a guide for minimizing costs. Operating
and investment costs of conventional wastewater treat-
ment systems are compared with alternative treatment
technologies, manufacturing process changes and pollu-
tion control device modifications that may offer cost
savings.
The Alternatives series of publications is directed to the
reader with technical and managerial responsibilities in
local, state or federal government and private industry who
is involved in finding solutionstoenvironmental problems.
To order, check the appropriate box (#501 6) on the order
form at the back of this Newsletter.
Environmental Pollution
Control Alternatives:
Economics of
Wastewater Treatment
Alternatives for the
Electroplating Industry
Seminar Series Ends—Air Pollution
Equipment
The Technology Transfer seminar series on "Oper-
ation and Maintenance of Air Pollution Equipment for
Particulate Control" was completed in June. The
three seminars held in Atlanta, Georgia; Arlington,
Virgina, and San Francisco, California drew a com-
bined total of over 500 participants, comprised
primarily of persons who are either responsible for
equipment performance or who operate the hard-
ware.
This series was presented by the Environmental
Research Information Center and was co-sponsored
by Pollution Engineering, a major international
environmental magazine.
The seminars provided discussions on guidelines and
practical solutions to equipment problems by repre-
sentatives of control systems manufacturers and
engineers from various industries where these
systems are used
Four speakers from O&M Seminar in San Francisco: (upper left,
clockwise) Heinz Engelbrecht, Richard McRanie, Robert Bump,
Robert Wright.
-------
12
New Seminar Publication: Benefit
Analysis for Combined Sewer
Overflow Control
A new publication has been developed from the Technol-
ogy Transfer seminar series "Combined Sewer Overflow
Assessment and Control Procedures," which was pre-
sented in 1 978. This publication is intended for the use of
elected officials of municipalities, their technical staff
members and consultants, and state and federal govern-
ment employees who have review and approval authority
for combined sewer overflow (CSO). The information in
this publication will be of help to any municipality in pro-
viding guidance to avoid numerous and costly pitfalls and
to take full advantage of opportunities for assistance in
planning and implementing a combined sewer overflow
control program.
This publication includes sections on legislation and regu-
lations relating to CSO projects, objectives for planning,
methods for relating pollutant sources to beneficial uses,
engineering alternatives and costs for controlling CSO's,
and case studies that present methods used for assess-
ment.
This publication can be obtained by checking'the appro-
priate box (#4013) on the order form at the back of this
Newsletter.
Seminar Publication
Benefit Analysis for
Combined Sewer
Overflow Control
Symposium on Wastewater
Aerosols and Disease
The Health Effects Research Laboratory in Cincinnati,
Ohio is sponsoring a symposium on the transmission of
disease agents by aerosols from wastewater treatment
facilities. This symposium will be held September 18-21 at
Stouffer's Cincinnati Towers Hotel in Cincinnati. Scien-
tists, engineers, physicians and federal, state and local
health officials will review information on aerosol contam-
inants and their effects on exposed populations. The
symposium will conclude with a panel discussion assess-
ing the problems and alternative solutions, as identified,
and define continuing research needs in the context of
regulatory and enforcement needs.
For information concerning the workshop, contact Doug
Williams, Environmental Research Information Center,
(513) 684-7394.
To register to attend the workshop, contact:
Virginia Hathaway
JACA Corporation
550 Pinetown Road
Fort Washington, PA 19034
(215) 643-5466
Proceedings of National Conference
on Lake Restoration
The "Proceedings of the National Conference on Lakd
Restoration," held August 22-24, 1978 in Minneapolis!
Minnesota, have been published and can be ordered.
conference was jointly sponsored by the Minnesota Pollu]
tion Control Agency and EPA's Office of Water Planning
and Standards along with the Environmental Research
Information Center. Over 450 people representing 3J
states and a wide range of disciplines were in attendance|
The Proceedings include 34 conference presentations or
topics such as federal, state and local programs assessinc
lake restoration problems, alternative solutions, in-lake
treatment methods, and state-of-the-art research
To obtain a copy of the Proceedings or information regard]
mg EPA's lake restoration program contact:
Robert Johnson (WH-585)
U S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
-------
'3
Slew Capsule Report: Control of
Acidic Air Pollutants by
boated Baghouse
Emissions from the aluminum, glass, phosphate, fertilizer,
and sulfuric acid industries and from waste incineration
nave exhaust gas characteristics unique to their sources.
However, they also share several common problems,
ncludmg combined paniculate, corrosive acid vapor, and
acid mist emissions This Technology Transfer Capsule
Report presents an approach to alleviate these problems
hrough the use of dry scrubbing to neutralize and capture
he acids, followed by removal of particulates and captured
acids in a baghouse filter. To receive a copy, check the
appropriate box (#2020) on the order form at the back of
his Newsletter.
Control of
Acidic Air Pollutants by
Coated Baqhouses
Hydrocarbon Seminar Series is
Successful
Over 700 participants attended three Technology Transfer
seminars on "Volatile Organic Compound Control in the
Surface Coating Industries." This series was sponsored by
the Environmental Research Information Center, the Air
Pollution Control Association, the Association of Finishing
Processors, and the National Paint and Coatings Associa-
tion, in an effort to acquaint participants with new regula-
tions requiring the reduction of volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions. The seminar presentations included
explanation of these regulations and descriptions of low-
solvent coating technology with respect to the VOC
emission limits, add-on air pollution control equipment
capabilities and engineering changes, and plant survey
and enforcement information.
-------
14
Environmental Research Information Center
1979 Seminar Schedule
Technology Transfer Scheduled Events
In order to keep you more aware of future Technology Transfer activities
(particularly seminars), the following schedule is included. Should you
desire more details on any of the activities listed, contact the appropriate
Technology Transfer Regional Chairman listed in this newsletter.
Subject
Innovative and Alternative
Technology (I/A)
I/A
I/A
I/A
I/A
I/A
I/A
I/A
I/A
Small Flows
Small Flows
Small Flows
Water Quality Screening
Workshop
Date
August 6-7, 1979
August 9-10, 1979
August 27-28, 1979
September 10-11, 1979
September 20-21, 1979
September 27-28, 1979
October 22-23, 1979
December 3-4, 1979
December 6-7, 1979
August 14-16, 1979
August 28-30, 1979
September 18-20, 1979
November 7-9, 1979
Region/Location
4 Atlanta
1
10
5
2
7
3
8
9
7
5
6
5
Boston
Seattle
Chicago
New York
Kansas City
Philadelphia
Denver
Los Angeles
Omaha
Indianapolis
New Orleans
Chicago
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
(Check appropriate boxas)
3ROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct 1973) 1002 D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan 1975) 1003 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants (Oct 1974). ... 1004 D
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems (Oct 1974) . . . 1005 D
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct 1974) 1006D
Nitrogen Control (Oct 1975) 1007 D
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct 1977) . 1008 D
Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered Small Communities
(Oct 1977). ... 1009 D
Municipal Sludge Landfills (Oct 1978) . . .... 1010 D
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants by Two Stage Precipitation 2001 CD
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by Lime Addition 2002 CD
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 D
First Progress Report Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 D
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility . . 2006 CD
Flue Gas Desulfunzation and Sulfunc Acid Production via
Magnesia Scrubbing . . 2007 D
Second Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility . . 2008 D
Magnesium Carbonate Process for Water Treatment 2009 D
Third Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at
the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility . . 2010 D
First Progress Report Wellman-Lord SO2 Recovery Process — Flue
Gas Desulfunzation Plant . 2011 D
Swirl Device for Regulating and Treating Combined
Sewer Overflows 2012 D
Fabric Filter Particulate Control on Coal-Fired Utility Boilers
Nucla, CO and Sunbury, PA 2013 D
First Progress Report Static Pile Composting of Wastewater Sludge 2014 CD
Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows at Dawson, MN 2015 CD
Double Alkali Flue Gas Desulfunzation System Applied at the
General Motors Parma, OH Facility 2016 D
Recovery of Spent Sulfunc Acid from Steel Pickling Operations 2017 I I
Fourth Progress Report Forced-Oxidation Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2018 D
Control of Acidic Air Pollutants by Coated Baghouses 2020 CD
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols ) 3001 CD
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols ) 3002 CD
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols ) 3003 D
Upgrading Textile Operations to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols ) 3004 D
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for Pollution Control
Systems . 3005 D
Erosion and Sediment Control — Surface Mining in the
Eastern U S (2 Vols ) . 3006 D
Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable Industry (3 Vols ) 3007 D
Choosing Optimum Management Strategies . . 3008 D
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and Coating of
Metal Products (3 Vols ) . . . 3009 D
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons . 4001 D
Physical-Chemical Wastewater Treatment Plant Design 4002 D
Status of Oxygen/Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment 4003 D
Nitrification and Denitrification Facilities . 4004 CD
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants — Case Histories 4005 CD
Flow Equalization . . 4006 D
Wastewater Filtration . 4007 CD
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008 D
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration . 4009 CD
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents (3 Vols ) 4010 CD
Alternatives for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems (3 Vols ) 401 1 CD
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (2 Vols ) 4012 CD
Benefit Analysis for Combined Sewer Overflow Control 401 3 CD
BROCHURES
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives Municipal Wastewater 5012 D
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality 5013 G
Irrigated Agriculture and Water Quality Management 5014 LJ
Forest Chemicals and Water Quality 5015 EH
• Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives Economics of Wastewater
Alternatives for the Electroplating Industry 5016 LJ
HANDBOOKS
.Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 CD
Industrial Guide for Air Pollution Control (June 1978) 6004 D
• Continuous Air Pollution Source Monitoring Systems (June 1979) 6005 CD
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry Parti Air (Oct 1976) 7001 D
Textile Processing Industry (Oct 1978)) 7002 D
SUMMARY REPORTS
• Sulfur Oxides Control Technology Series FGD Wellman-Lord Process 8001 CD
• Control Technology for the Metal-Finishing Industry Series Evaporators 8002 CD
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Environmental Considerations of Energy -- Conserving Industrial
Process Changes 9001 CD
Environmental Sampling of Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process 9002 D
ATTENTION PUBLICATION USERS
Due to the increasing costs of printing and mailing, it has become necessary to institute positive management controls over distribution of Technology Transfer
publications Although these publications will be distributed on a no-cost basis, any request for more than five documents total, or for more than one copy of a
single document must be accompanied by written justification, preferably on organization letterhead In the event your order cannot be filled as requested you
will be contacted and so advised
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes D No D
"Name
Employer
Street
City, State, Zip Code
"It is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct
• Publication listed for the first time
Note Foreward to ERIC, Technology Transfer, U S Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects of the
Technology Transfer Program, contact the EPA Regional Technology Transfer Committee
Chairman m your region
REGION CHAIRMAN
Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N H , Vt , Mass , R I , Conn ]
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(NY.NJ.PR.VI)
Albert Montague Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa , W Va , Md , Del , D C , Va )
Asa B Foster, Jr Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N E
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-4450
(N C , S C , Ky , Tenn , Ga , Ala , Miss ,
Fla )
Clifford Risley Environmental Protection Agency
230 S Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-4625
(Mich , Wis , Minn , III , Ind , Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
Mildred Smith
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First National Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 767-2697
(Texas, Okla , Ark , La , N Mex )
7 Charles M Hajiman Environmental Protection Agency
324 East 11th Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
816 374-2921
(Kansas, Nebr, Iowa, Mo )
8 Elmer Chenault Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
303 837-2277
(Colo , Mont, Wyo , Utah, N D , S D )
9 Fred Hoffman Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
415 556-6925
(Calif , Ariz , Nev , Hawaii)
10 John Osborn Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash , Ore , Idaho, Alaska)
USEPA OR8.D
Environmental Research Information Center
26 W St Clair Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513 684 7394—7398 (Inc.)
ftUS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1979-657-060/5326
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research Information
Center
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and r~ _
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
^m_
"Tp
^^m
U.S. MAIL
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300
LO!
EPA
23r
Cf
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Information Center
Cincinnati OH 45268
March 1979
EPA
Q
tjj 3
^ i I;
~ Q
7 S
DECHNOLOGY
BRANSFER
The Bridge Between
Research and Use
Successful 1978 WPCF Conference
The Water Pollution Control Federation held its 51st annual conference
October 1-6, 1978, at the Convention Center in Anaheim, California. Almost
10,000 participants attended the 42 technical sessions, pre-conference work-
shops and exhibition. The display area featured exhibits from industry, profes-
sional groups, and for the ninth consecutive year, the Environmental Protection
Agency.
This year, seven EPA programs combined forces to produce a single exhibit.
Qualified agency personnel met and talked with conference attendees and dis-
tributed literature pertinent to each EPA program represented. The seven
programs participating in this effort were:
(1) Environmental Research Information Center
(2) Effluent Guidelines
(3) Solid Waste
(4) Construction Grants
(5) Manpower and Training
(6) 208 Planning
(7) Operations and Maintenance
ERIC'S Technology Transfer personnel distributed about 3000 copies of a pro-
cess design manual entitled, "Municipal Sludge Landfills." The new manual
provides comprehensive, up-to-date information to assist with planning, design
and operation of a landfill receiving municipal wastewater treatment plant
sludge.
The manual (#1010) can be ordered by returning the order form at the back of
this newsletter.
(L to R) Norm Kulujian. USEPA, ERIC; Clifford Risley, Region V, USEPA. Technology Transfer
Chairman; and Douglas Costle, Administrator, USEPA, at the WPCF Conference.
-------
Workshop on the Use of Nonpoint
Source Pollution Assessment Models
A four-day workshop on the use of models for the assess-
ment of soluble and suspended pollutants from agricul-
tural and rural lands was held in Atlanta, Georgia, on
October 23-27, 1978. The models discussed were the
Agricultural Runoff Management (ARM) and the Nonpoint
Source (NPS) models described in EPA research reports
EPA-600/3-78-080 and EPA-600/3-77-065. These
models were developed under contract by the Office of
Research and Development's Environmental Research
Laboratory located in Athens, Georgia.
The NPS model is designed for continuous simulation of
pollutants in surface water runoff from five different land
use categories. The ARM model is designed to simulate the
continuous runoff of pesticides, sediments and nutrier
from rowcrop agricultural lands.
The workshop discussed the structure and organization
the models, input description and preparation require-
ments such as the algorithm and parameter processes f
hydrology, sediment, nutrients, pesticides and land usi
categories. In addition, parameter estimation andcalibr
tion of the models was discussed.
Work groups were formed to apply the models to actu
situations by utilizing case studies. Parameters were
selected and simulation runs were made on a computer
test the sensitivity of the models and to determine poll
tant loads.
A second workshop is being planned for Chicago durir
the first week in May 1979. If you are interested in atter
ing this workshop, contact Orville Macomber, Environ
mental Research Information Center, (513) 684-7394.
Hydrocarbon Seminar Series to be
Held This Spring
The Environmental Research Information Center will hold
three seminars to assist surface coaters in complying with
new regulations for reducing volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions. Many states have been required by the
1977 Clean Air Act Amendments to revise their state
implementation plans (SIPs) for controlling VOCs in order
to attain the ozone air quality standard. These require sur-
face coaters to utilize reasonably available control tech-
nology (RACT), though in some states, notably California,
surface coaters are required to achieve controls that are
more stringent than RACT.
These seminars will present the technologies capable of
meeting or exceeding the emission limits associated with
RACT for surface coating industries. The Los Angeles
seminar will also specify technologies capable of meeting
the more stringent regulations of the California air pollu-
tion control districts.
The seminars are free and you may obtain a registration
form by contacting Norm Kulujian, Environmental
Research Information Center, (513) 684-7394. The dates
for the seminars are:
• Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, March 29-30, 1979
• Chicago, Illinois, April 25-26, 1979
• Los Angeles, California, May 10-11, 1979
The material presented will explain the regulations,
describe low-solvent coating technology with respect t
the VOC emission limits, cover add-on air pollution cont
equipment capabilities and engineering changes, and
present plant survey data and information which will
assist in compliance with regulations.
Three important aspects of the presented material are
— The environmental regulations will be ex-
plained with respect to different coating
systems.
— Descriptions of low-solvent coating technolo
and air pollution control equipment will quic
focus in on their specific capabilities and limit
tions for meeting industry-specific RACT or
California emission limits.
— Small informal groups will be established f
discussing compliance techniques for surfa
coating industry RACT or California require
ments.
The speakers at each seminar are experts in their fiel
and have experience in surface coating industries. The
will be ample time for interaction between industry an
government speakers.
These seminars are being co-sponsored by the Societ
of Manufacturing Engineer's Association of Finishing
Processors, the National Paint and Coatings Associati
and the Air Pollution Control Association.
Two of the three Technology Transfer Handbooks,
Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories and Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes are no longer available from the
Environmental Research Information Center. These
manuals are now available from: Shirley Graden,
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH 45268.
-------
orkshop on Water Quality Screening
ethodology for Nondesignated
38 Areas
our-day workshop presenting water quality assessment
;hniques for estimating pollutant loads from point and
npoint sources and evaluating their effect on water
ality in streams, reservoirs and estuaries was held in
iw Orleans, Louisiana, on November 27 through Decem-
r 1, 1978. The workshop was designed to utilize the
jnual, "Water Quality Assessment: A Screening Method
• Nondesignated 208 Areas" (EPA-600/9-77-023),
lich was developed under contract by the Office of
search and Development's Environmental Research
boratory in Athens, Georgia.
is screening method is a simplified technique and in
ost cases can be accomplished with the assistance of a
sktop calculator. The methodology is intended to be used
th little external or collected input; instead, tables.
figures, and appendices of the manual provide much of the
working data.
The workshop was divided into four one-day sessions with
participants attending all sessions. The topics discussed
were: (1) assessment of pollutant loading from point and
nonpoint sources; (2) stream analysis for temperature,
BOD, DO, TSS, coliforms, nutrients and conservative
materials; (3) impoundment analysis for thermal stratifica-
tion, sediment accumulation, phosphorus budget, eutro-
phication potential and hypolimnion DO; (4) estuarine
analysis for classification, temperature, BOD, DO, turbid-
ity, sediment accumulation and conservative materials.
A limited quantity of the manual used in this workshop is
available. It can be secured by writing to:
USEPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
College Station Koaa
Athens, Georgia 30605
ew EPA Manual Available:
icrobiological Methods for
onitoring the Environment —
ater and Wastes
e first EPA manual on microbiology is now available.
ited by R. H. Bordner and J. A. Winter of the Environ-
mtal Monitoring and Support Laboratory (EMSL),
icinnati and P. Scarpino of the University of Cincinnati,
s manual is intended for use by the supervisor or analyst
10 may be a professional microbiologist, technician,
emist, engineer or plant operator. It provides uniform
Id and laboratory methods recommended for use by
alysts of waters and wastewaters in research, monitor-
3, standard setting and enforcement activities. The
jthods are described in detailed stepwise form for the
nch worker.
)is manual covers coliform, fecal coliform, fecal
reptococci, Salmonella, actinomycetes and Standard
ate Count organisms with the necessary support
ictions on sampling, equipment, media, basic microbio-
}ical techniques, safety, and quality assurance.
ngle copies are available on request from the Quality
isurance Branch, EMSL-Cincinnati, USEPA, Cincinnati,
H 45268.
Microbiological
Methods for Monitoring
the Environment
-------
Air Pollution Equipment Operation and
Maintenance Seminars
This new seminar series will provide guidelines and
suggest solutions to commonly encountered problems in
air pollution equipment operation and maintenance.
The seminar is designed to provide an effective inter-
change between the expert speakers and an audience of
environmental managers and engineers in industry,
industrial and utility plant personnel, equipment opera-
tors, air pollution consultants, and environmental agency
personnel. Seminar sites and dates are listed below:
• Atlanta, Georgia — April 10-12, 1979
• Arlington, Virginia — May 14-16, 1979
• San Francisco, California — May 30-June 1,1979
Morning sessions will be conducted by nationally recog-
nized experts affiliated with leading equipment manufac-
turing companies. These speakers have extensive field
experience in the design and operation of air pollution
hardware.
Case histories discussing O&M aspects will be presentee
in the afternoon sessions by knowledgeable technical
personnel in industries employing baghouses, electro-
static precipitators, and scrubbers. The final portion of
each day will be allotted to a panel discussion with all
speakers from that day present to answer questions askec
by the attendees.
If you are interested in attending one of these seminars
contact:
Norm Kulujian, Project Officer
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Phone: (513)684-7394
or
Frank Cross P.E., P.A.
Attn: Frank L. Cross, Jr., President
2713 Timberlake Drive
Orlando, FL 32806
Phone: (304) 857-0926
Seminar Publication Revised
"Choosing Optimum Financial
Strategies"
Originally published in June 1976, the industrial publica-
tion entitled, "Choosing Optimum Financial Strategies for
Pollution Control Systems" has now been revised and is
ready for distribution.
This publication is intended to alert decision makers tothe
availability of and qualifications for some of the financing
incentives from federal, state, and local governments, and
to demonstrate that it is well worth spending time analyz-
ing the special methods of financing pollution control
expenditures and the available tax treatments. Obtaining
optimum financial and tax benefits could save a company
tens of thousands of dollars over the life of the equipment.
Included is a discussion of the tax and financing positions
of three hypothetical firms with different management
goals, but with similar capital expenditures for pollution
control. A separate financial analysis is presented specifi-
cally for firms which have a choice of wastewater treated
onsite or by a municipality.
For a copy of this publication (#3005), see the order form at
the back of this newsletter.
Choosing Optimum
Rnancial Strategies
Pollution Control
Systems
-------
oint Municipal and Industrial
leminar Series on the Pretreatment
f Industrial Wastes
en seminars on pretreatment of industrial wastes have
een completed. Since the last newsletter, seminars were
eld in Denver, Colorado, November 1-2, 1978; Boston,
lassachusetts, November 14-15, 1978; Seattle,
/ashington, December 5-6, 1978, and San Francisco,
alifornia, December 7-8, 1978. Attendance was excel-
mt at each, going as high as 523 in Boston.
ince implementation of the pretreatment regulations
squires close cooperation between industry and munici-
palities, representatives from both groups have comprised
the audience for this series. The seminars contained two
joint sessions to allow interaction between the two parties
as well as a split session specifically formulated to present
information unique to the industrial or municipal repre-
sentative. Some of the topics presented were:
— Effluent Guidelines and Pretreatment
Requirements
— Construction Grant Requirements
— Addressing the 65 Priority Pollutants
— Establishing a Cost Effective Sludge Program
— Minimizing Cost by Good Financial
Management
— Establishing a Pretreatment Program
Capsule Report: Fourth Progress
eport—Forced-Oxidation Test Results
t the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility
his is the fourth in a series of capsule reports describing a
rogram conducted by the Office of Research and Develop-
lent's Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
esearch Triangle Park, North Carolina (lERL-RTP)to test
rototype lime and limestone wet-scrubbing systems for
jmoval of sulfur dioxide and particulate matter (fly ash)
om coal-fired boiler flue gases. This report discusses the
jsults of testing a forced-oxidation process designed to
onvert calcium sulfite wastes, produced from lime and
mestone wet-scrubbing systems, to material suitable for
ndfill.
he use of flue gas desulfurization systems produces a
/aste sludge containing calcium sulfite, calcium sulfate,
nd collected fly ash. Calcium sulfite presents a serious
isposal problem because of the difficulty of dewatering.
hree processes have been considered to alleviate this
roblem: (1) commercial fixation with additives, (2) blend-
ig sulfite sludge with fly ash, and (3) forced oxidation of
le calcium sulfite to a more tractable calcium sulfate
jypsum). The forced oxidation procedure was chosen for
jsting because of its anticipated economic advantages
nd because it produces a waste sludge which is easily de-
watered to greater than 80 percent solids.
he tests are being conducted at the Tennessee Valley
iuthority (TVA) coal-fired Shawnee Power Station near
'aducah, Kentucky. Bechtel National, Inc. of San
rancisco is the major contractor and test director and
VA is the constructor and facility operator.
FORCED
OXCATDN
TEST RESULTS
AT THE
FFA ALKALI
SO9JBBING
TGTFACILiP
FCEOF
RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT
•TOTOTYPE
DrMONSTRATCN
F-rillTY
b request the capsule report (#2018), use the order form
t the back of this newsletter.
-------
ERIC Awards New Mailing Contract
Until recently, requests for Technology Transfer news-
letters and publications were forwarded to a mailing
contractor who processed and distributed these materials
from the Washington, D.C., area. As of December 1978, a
firm in Cincinnati, Ohio, has been performing these
services.
The firm's ability to provide service has enabled them to
acquire over 500 major accounts in the greater Cincinnati
area, as well as function on national and international
levels.
ERIC patrons who have had difficulty with our mailing
services in the past can be assured of improved service in
thefuture. . .nowafour-tosix-weekturnaroundtimecan
be expected from date of request to delivery of materials.
Also, a new mailing label will appear on all packages
received from ERIC. The label will designate: (1) contents
within the package, (2) partial shipments, one asterisk, and
(3) publications now available only from the National
Technical Information Service, two asterisks.
The ERIC staff appreciates your patience and cont.nued
interest in our services.
Seminar Series Ends — Sludge
Treatment and Disposal
The last two in the series of Technology Transfer Municipal
Design Seminars on Sludge Treatment and Disposal were
held November 15-16, 1978, in Dallas, and December
12-13, 1978, in Chicago. The combined attendance ex-
ceeded 4.RQ participants.
Completion of these two seminars brings to an end three
years'work, and ten seminars, bythe Technology Transfer
Environmental Control Systems Staff and the seminar
speakers. The series, which began in April 1977, has been
continually updated to include the latest information on
design data and research results for treatment and dis-
posal processes. Over 3,000 consulting engineers, muni-
cipal design engineers and government pollution control
officials participated in the series. A municipal seminar
publication has been developed and is available through
ERIC. To order copies of this two-volume publication
(#4012), use the attached order form.
New Environmental Pollution Control
Manual for Textile Processing Industry
A new pollution control manual for the textile industry is
available from the Environmental Research Information
Center (ERIC). This manual will assist process design
engineers, consultants and engineering companies active
in the design or upgrading of textile waste treatment facil-
ities. Although the manual includes chapters discussing
air emissions, the major emphasis is on the wastewater
effluent problem. The manual is a detailed design guide
discussing control alternatives and design, survey tech-
niques and monitoring systems. Agency regulations and
policy are not covered.
Lockwood Greene Engineers, Inc., of Atlanta, prepared
this manual under contract to ERIC. Coordination and
technical review was carried out by the Environmental
Sciences Technology Committee of the American Associa-
tion of Textile Chemists and Colorists. The manual (#7002)
can be ordered by filling out the request form at the back of
this newsletter.
Environmental
Pollution
Control
Textile
Prcxt'ssirxj
Industry
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Notice — If you placed an order for Technology Transfer materials and have not received the material by March 30, 1979,
please resubmit your request on this form. In the future, you can expect to. receive Technology Transfer material within four
to six weeks of the date of request. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct 1973) 1002 D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan 1975) 1003 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants (Oct 1974) 1004 CD
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems (Oct 1974) 1005 D
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct 1974) 1006 D
Nitrogen Control (Oct 1975) 1007 D
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct 1977) 1008 CD
Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered Small Communities
(Oct 1977) 1009 D
Municipal Sludge Landfills (Oct 1978) 1010 D
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants by Two Stage Precipitation 2001 CD
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by Lime Addition 2002 CD
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 CD
First Progress Report Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 CD
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006 CD
Flue Gas Desulfunzation and Sulfunc Acid Production via
Magnesia Scrubbing 2007 CD
Second Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008 CD
Magnesium Carbonate Process for Water Treatment 2009 CD
Third Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at
the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2010 CD
First Progress Report Wellman-Lord SO2 Recovery Process — Flue
Gas Desulfunzation Plant 2011 CD
Swirl Device for Regulating and Treating Combined
Sewer Overflows 2012 CD
Fabric Filter Paniculate Control on Coal-Fired Utility Boilers
Nucla, CO and Sunbury, PA 2013 CD
First Progress Report Static Pile Composting of Wastewater Sludge 2014 CD
Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows at Dawson, MN 2015 CD
Double Alkali Flue Gas Desulfunzation System Applied at the
General Motors Parma, OH Facility 2016 CD
Recovery of Spent Sulfunc Acid from Steel Pickling Operations 2017 CD
• Fourth Progress Report Forced-Oxidation Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2018 CD
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols )... .3001 CD
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002 CD
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols ) 3003 CD
Upgrading Textile Operations to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols ) 3004 CD
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for Pollution Control
Systems 3005 CD
Erosion and Sediment Control — Surface Mining in the
Eastern U.S. (2 Vols.) ........................................... 3006 D
Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable Industry (3 Vols.) ...... 3007 CD
Choosing Optimum Management Strategies .......................... 3008 CD
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and Coating of
Metal Products (3 Vols ) ......................................... 3009 D
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons ................................................. 4001 D
Physical-Chemical Wastewater Treatment Plant Design ............... 4002 CD
Status of Oxygen/Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment ............ 4003 D
Nitrification and Denitrification Facilities ............................. 4O04 CD
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants — Case Histories ____ 4005 C
Flow Equalization [[[ 4006
Wastewater Filtration ............................................... 4007 C
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal ................................. 4008
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration .......................... 4009 C
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents (3 Vols.) ........... 4010 C
Alternatives for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems (3 Vols ) ....... 401 1 CD
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (2 Vols.) .............................. 4012 CD
BROCHURES
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives. Municipal Wastewater . . .5012 CD
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality ................................. 501 3 CD
Irrigated Agriculture and Water Quality Management ................. 5014 CD
Forest Chemicals and Water Quality ................................. 5015D
HANDBOOKS
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1 973) ............................. 6002 CD
Industrial Guide for Air Pollution Control (June 1978) ................. 6004 D
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry — Part I/Air (Oct. 1976) ..................... 7001 CD
• Textile Processing Industry (Oct. 1 978)) .............................. 7002 CD
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Environmental Considerations of Energy — Conserving Industrial
Process Changes 9001 I
Environmental Sampling of Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process 9OO2 I
ATTENTION PUBLICATION USERS
Due to the increasing costs of printing and mailing, it has become necessary to institute positive management controls over distribution of Technology Transfer
publications Although these publications will be distributed on a no-cost basis, any request for more than five documents total, or for more than one copy of a
single document must be accompanied by written justification, preferably on organization letterhead In the event your order cannot be filled as requested, you
will be contacted and so advised
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes D No Q
•Name
Employer
Street
City, State, Zip Code .
"It is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct.
• Publication listed for the first time.
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects of the
Technology Transfer Program, contact the EPA Regional Technology Transfer Committee
Chairman in your region
REGION CHAIRMAN
1 Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt, Mass , R I, Conn )
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(NY,NJ,PR,VI)
Albert Montague Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W.Va , Md , Del, D C , Va.)
Asa B Foster, Jr Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-4450
(N C , S C , Ky , Tenn., Ga , Ala., Miss ,
Fla.)
Clifford Risley Environmental Protection Agency
230 S Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 886-4625
(Mich , Wis , Minn , III, Ind, Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
Mildred Smith
7 Robert Markey
Elmer Chenault
Fred Hoffman
10 John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First National Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 767-2697
(Texas, Okla , Ark , La., N Mex )
Environmental Protection Agency
324 East 11th Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-2921
(Kansas, Nebr, Iowa, Mo )
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
303 837-2277
(Colo , Mont., Wyo, Utah, N.D , S D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
415 556-6925
(Calif, Ariz , Nev , Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash , Ore , Idaho, Alaska)
USEPA - OR&D
Environmental Research Information Center
26 W. St. Clair Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513 684-7394—7398 (Inc.)
•-US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OfFICE 1979-657-060/1605
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research Information
Center
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300
LOU
260690
CHICAGO 1L
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Information Center
Cincinnati OH 45268
October 1978
EPA
QECHNOLOGY
QRANSFER
The Bridge Between
Research and Use
Design Manual for Municipal
Sludge Landfills Featured at
1978 WPCF Conference
The newest Technology Transfer Design
Manual — Municipal Sludge Landfills — will
be made available for the first time at the
51st Annual Conference and Exhibition of
the Water Pollution Control Federation in
Anaheim, California, October 1 through 6,
1978. This year's Technical Conference
promises to be the largest ever, coming on
the heels of last year's successful 50th
Anniversary Conference. About 10,000
persons representing all phases of the Water
Pollution Control Field will be attending the
42 technical program sessions and three
pre-conference workshops, while over 300
manufacturing firms and support organiza-
tions will participate in the exhibition. Paul
DeFalco, Jr., Regional Administrator for EPA,
Region 9, will take part in the official open-
ing session of the convention on Monday,
October 2nd. The Regional Technology Transfer Chairman for Region 9 is Fred Hoffman.
Paul DeFalco, Jr., Regional Administrator for
EPA, Region 9.
As in last year's WPCF Convention, several EPA programs will participate in one major EPA
exhibit (Booth No. 127). Those programs involved are; (1) Environmental Research Informa-
tion Center, (2) Effluent Guidelines, (3) Solid Waste, (4) Construction Grants, (5) Manpower
and Training, (6) 208 Planning, and (7) Operations and Maintenance. Each program will have
key individuals available at the exhibit to personally answer questions, discuss EPA policy,
itc. We invite you to visit the EPA Booth to obtain your copy of the Municipal Sludge
3 i"*^C(_|J» t» I V t— Lpjlandfills Design Manual and meet ERIC personnel.
EH 13 1979
RONMEN1AL PKUTECTION AGEN
L,po— TPinN V
Those unable to attend the WPCF Conference can obtain the Municipal Sludge Landfills Manual
by checking the appropriate box (#1010) on the order form in the back of this Newsletter.
Jon C. Dyer (left). Environmental Technology
Consultants, addresses the Municipal Attendees
at a recent Pretreatment Seminar on local
pretreatment program requirements. The story
on the Pretreatment Seminars is inside the front
cover.
-------
Technology Transfer Continues
Joint Municipal and Industrial Seminar
Series on Pretreatment of
Industrial Wastes
Five seminars on pretreatment of industrial wastes have
been conducted since the last Technology Transfer
Newsletter. Attendance has been good at each seminar,
falling within a range from 375 to 425 attendees. These
seminars were held in Atlanta, Georgia, June 27-28, 1978;
Dallas, Texas, July 12-13, 1978; New York, New York,
August 8-9, 1978; Chicago, Illinois, August 30-31, 1978;
and Kansas City, Missouri, September 13-14, 1978.
Since implementation of the pretreatment regulations
requires close cooperation between industry and munici-
palities, representatives from both groups comprise the
audience. The seminars contain two joint sessions to allow
interaction between the two parties as well as a split
session specifically formulated to present information
unique to the industrial or municipal representative. The
seminars also offer the attendees the most up-to-date
handout materials to supplement the seminar presenta-
tions. Some of the topics included in the presentation are:
— Effluent Guidelines and the Pretreatment Requirements
— Construction Grant Requirements
— Industrial Waste Surveys
— Variances
— Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
— Sources of Financial Assistance
— Sludge Disposal Alternatives
Four additional seminars on pretreatment of industrial
wastes are scheduled for Regions 1, 8, 9, and 10. Please
consult the Environmental Research Information Center's
seminar schedule at the back of this Newsletter for
specific times and locations.
If you are interested in attending any of these seminars,
contact Dr. Jim Smith of this office or your appropriate
Regional Technology Transfer Chairman, also listed at the
back of this Newsletter.
Albert Montague, EPA Region 3, Technology Transfer
Committee Chairman, addresses the audience at the Philadelph
Pretreatment Seminar.
Stephen Heare, EPA Office of Analysis and Evaluation, speaking
on U.S. EPA Pretreatment Strategy.
-------
ieminars on Combined Sewer
)verflow Assessment and Control
procedures
schnology Transfer has recently completed three
jminars on Combined Sewer Overflow Assessment and
jntrol Procedures. An additional two seminars are
jing planned for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on
lovember 1-2, 1978 and Kansas City, Missouri, on
lovember 7-8, 1978.
ie first seminars were held in Hartford, Connecticut,
|lay 18-19; Seattle, Washington, June 28-29; and
licago, Illinois, July 25-26, 1978. Attendance at the
|iree seminars was approximately 670 people. They were
asigned to present EPA policy for funding combined
r overflow (CSO) projects and the techniques and
jatment systems that are available for assessment and
jntrol of CSO discharges. Simplified techniques that
an easily be used by the engineering profession were
iphasized. Subject areas included.
Evaluating costs and benefits of CSO control
Analyzing the existing collection system
Estimating the quantity and quality of CSO
CSO treatment methods and sludges generated as a
result of CSO control
5. Case studies on CSO assessment
For more information concerning these seminars contact
your Regional Technology Transfer Chairman listed in
the back of this Newsletter.
Roy Ellerman, EPA Region 10, Water Division addressing the
audience at the Seattle Seminar on Combined Sewer Overflow
Assessment and Control Procedures.
flyron Tiemens, EPA Office of Water Program Operations,
Washington DC, presenting EPA funding policy at the Hartford
leminar on Combined Sewer Overflow Assessment and Control
Irocedures.
Hartford Seminar on CSO Assessment and Control Procedures.
-------
Air Pollution Seminars
Scheduled for Early 1979
Two of the most important concerns in the air pollution
field are: (1) operation and maintenance of control systems
and (2) control alternatives for hydrocarbon emissions.
ERIC is presently planning seminars to cover each of
these topics next spring.
The Operation and Maintenance Seminars are tentatively
planned for Atlanta, San Francisco, and Washington, DC.
Experts from manufacturing companies and industry will
discuss 0 & M procedures for baghouses, electrostatic
precipitators, and scrubbers.
Hydrocarbon emissions can be categorized by industry as
follows: surface treatment, gasoline handling, and manu-
facturing operations. This seminar series will concentrate
on the surface treatment companies, such as metallic
degreasing and coating operations, and nonmetallic
processes emitting hydrocarbons. The latter is represented
by paper coating, textile, and graphic arts processes.
Prospective conference sites are Chicago, Philadelphia,
and Los Angeles.
New Seminar Publication:
"Sludge Treatment and Disposal"
A new publication has been developed for the Technology
Transfer Seminar Series on Design of Sludge Treatment
and Disposal Systems. It is printed and is now available
for distribution. This two-volume document includes
sections on the stabilization of sludge by lime addition,
anaerobic digestion and aerobic digestion, the thermal
conditioning of sludge, and the thickening and dewatering
of sludges. Other sections discuss the incineration and
starved-air combustion of sludge, composting, land utiliza-
tion, and the landfilling of sludges. Design criteria,
performance data and design examples are included for
each process discussed.
Sludge Treatment
and Disposal
Sludge Treatment
•»•»••••••«•»«
Principal contributors to this document included Drs.
J.B. Farrell and J.A. Ryan, U.S. EPA-MERL, Cincinnati,
Ohio; R.F. Noland and J.D. Edwards of Burgess and Niple,
Columbus, Ohio; N.A. Mignone of Envirex, Waukesha,
Wisconsin; Dr. G.M. Wesner of Culp/Wesner/Culp in
Santa Ana, California, J.R. Harrison, Consulting Engineer
from Hockessin, Delaware; R.B. Sieger from Brown and
Caldwell in Walnut Creek, California; Dr. L.E. Sommers,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana; C.E. Pound,
Metcalf and Eddy Engineers, Palo Alto, California;
Dr. R.J. Lofty of SCS Engineers in Long Beach, California;
and J.J. Walsh of SCS Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
This publication can be obtained by checking the
appropriate box (#4012) on the order form in the back of
this Newsletter.
Sludge Treatment
and Disposal
•' Sludge Disposal
*****««**•••••*•*«••«•-
*•»*•»•••••*•*••••••••• *s—s • • •
^<*^^**********^» *•••••*•••*••
-------
RIC Publishes Industrial Guide for
jr Pollution Control
iis handbook is intended for plant managers, engineers,
id other industrial personnel responsible for plant com-
iance with air pollution regulations. It is to serve as a set
guidelines and is oriented to those small and inter-
ediate sized companies that do not have an environmental
>ntrol staff. Achieving and maintaining compliance with
r pollution regulations requires expertise that is beyond
e usual range of skills and experience of industrial plant
jrsonnel. The handbook, therefore, presents criteria for
valuation of outside firms or consultants who offer
lecialized environmental services.
le handbook was introduced at the Air Pollution Control
jsociation Exhibition in Houston, Texas, June 28-30,
378. Over 2000 copies of the handbook were distributed
the meeting.
ie Air Pollution Control Handbook emphasizes three
ajor phases: achieving compliance, demonstrating com-
lance, and maintaining compliance. Specific subjects
elude techniques for conducting a plant emission survey,
summary of air pollution regulations, concepts of
nission testing and monitoring, and a guide to mamtain-
g compliance status.
lis handbook is (# 6004) on the order form at the back
this Newsletter.
industrial Gutd*
for Air Pollution
Contra*
Capsule Report: Recovery of
pent Sulfuric Acid from
teel Pickling Operations
Dproximately 100 million tons of steel are produced
^ery year in the United States. During manufacturing,
ormg, and shipping, the steel develops a surface coating
oxidized iron which must be removed before the steel
in be processed further. The scale can be removed by a
cklmg process, where the steel is immersed in an acid
)th which dissolves the scale and some of the iron. The
eation of spent pickle liquor creates a pollution problem
r the manufacturer. Treatment alternatives include
icovery of the acid, neutralization of the spent acid prior
discharging, or contract disposal. This Capsule Report
•ovides small manufacturers using sulfuric acid pickling
ith the technical and economic information necessary to
jlect the treatment technologies best suited for their
cilities. If you want a copy, check box (#201 7) on the
•der form.
-------
National Conference on
Water Conservation and Municipal
Wastewater Flow Reduction
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is sponsoring a
conference on November 28-29, 1978, at Ramada-The
O'Hare Inn (Chicago O'Hare Airport) entitled: National
Conference on Water Conservation and Municipal Waste-
water Flow Reduction.
Conference attendance is limited to 500 people, and no
registration fee is required. Technical areas covered during
the two day meeting will include:
— Water & Wastewater Management Issues
— Regulations Affecting Water Supply, Wastewater and
their Treatment
— Water and Wastewater Conservation Technology
— Public Participation/Education in Water Conservation
— Case Studies of Water Conservation and Waste Flow
Reduction Projects
National leaders will speak on Water Conservation policy
at the Federal and State levels, and scientists and water
resource managers will present current technology in
water conservation and its economic and social impact.
Case studies will be presented to illustrate water conserva-
tion programs.
This conference is one form of Agency response to help
implement the President's national water policy, in which a
cornerstone element is attention to conservation of water.
Growing Congressional interest in the topic is shared with
heightened attention on the parts of many States, regions
and local areas facing problems of water quantity, or water
quality, or excessive hydraulic loads on wastewater treat-
ment systems, under circumstances of rapidly rising
construction and operational costs for potable water
systems and for wastewater treatment processes alike.
Persons interested in attending or wanting additional
information should write:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERIC
Cincinnati OH 45268
Attn: Greg Brown
513/684-7394
New Process Design Manual:
Municipal Sludge Landfills
The Process Design Manual for Municipal Sludge Landfills
is the result of a joint effort between the EPA Office of
Solid Waste and ERIC. Prime contractor for the manual
was SCS Engineers of Reston, Virginia. This manual
provides guidance for the planning, design and operation
of a landfill receiving municipal wastewater treatment plant
sludge. Major alternative sludge landfilling methods are
identified and described. Guidance is given on the selec-
tion of the landfilling method which is best suited for a
given combination of sludge characteristics and site
conditions. For each landfilling method, the following
features are addressed: public participation program, site
selection, design, operation, monitoring, completed site,
management, and costs. Design examples and case
studies are given a strong emphasis.
The manual is available upon request from ERIC. To order,
check box (#1010) on the order form at the back of the
Newsletter.
-------
Workshops on Use of Nonpoint Source
Pollution Assessment Models
Workshops will be presented on the use of models for
environmental planning in the areas of agricultural and
.generalized nonpoint source runoff, and on screening
methodology for state-wide or large basins.
The Workshop on use of Agricultural Runoff (ARM) and
Slonpoint Source (NPS) Models for Planning and Best
Management Practice Analysis will be held in Atlanta,
3eorgia, on October 23-27, 1978. It is intended for individ-
jals who perform modeling to determine water quality for
•ural drainage basins. Enrollment at the five day workshop
will be limited to accommodate the actual computer
terminal) applications approach planned. The workshop
will include:
. Model organization and operation
I. Parameter estimation
J. Calibration process and testing/verification
. Application using real watershed data
The Workshop on State-wide Screening Methodology, to
be held in New Orleans, Louisiana, October 30 through
November 3, 1978, is intended for engineers and planners
who are involved in evaluating surface water quality in
Section 208 nondesignated areas. The manual, "Water
Quality Assessment: A Screening Method for Nondesig-
nated 208 Areas" (EPA-600/9-77-023) will be utilized
throughout the workshop. The five day workshop will be
divided into lecture and problem solving periods and will
cover; (1) analytical methods for assessment of rivers,
impoundments, and estuaries, and (2) evaluation of point
and nonpoint sources of pollution. The analyses are
designed to be performed with the assistance of a desk
top calculator and a minimal amount of data input.
These two workshops will be offered again in the Spring
of 1979 with probable locations in the midwest and north-
east. For more information concerning these workshops
contact:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERIC
Cincinnati OH 45268
Attn: Orville Macomber
Phone 513/684-7394
Double Alkali Flue Gas Desulfurization
Capsule Report Available
n 1974, General Motors and the EPA Industrial Environ-
nental Research Laboratory in Research Triangle Park,
vlorth Carolina, began a cooperative program to evaluate
he sulfur dioxide removal system at the GM Chevrolet
3lant in Parma, Ohio. The test program is summarized in a
lew ERIC Capsule Report.
"he double alkali process is a nonregenerable system
:apable of high S02 removal efficiencies and excellent
lewatering properties of the alkali waste. The GM Parma
acility has demonstrated a consistent 90 percent SO2
emoval capability. The construction cost was 3.2 million
iollars in 1975. Scrubbers are installed on each of the
ixisting four boilers with a total generating capacity of
20,000 pounds of steam per hour. This report is (#2016)
>n the order form.
-------
Design Seminars for Small
Wastewater Treatment Systems
Two additional seminars for the design of wastewater
treatment systems for individual homes and small com-
munities have been held since March. These seminars
were held in East Brunswick, New Jersey, June 21-22,
1978, and Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 6-7, 1978.
Fifteen of these seminars, with a total attendance of
approximately 4,000 have been given since March 1977. If
you have been unable to attend any of these seminars, a
3-volume seminar publication is available upon request.
Check box (#4011) on the order form to obtain your copy.
Technology Transfer Holds an
Additional Municipal Design Seminar
on Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Technology Transfer has recently completed its fourth
seminar on Sludge Treatment and Disposal for 1978.
The first seminar was held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
March 30-31, 1978; the second in Portland, Oregon, May
3-4, 1978, and the third in Los Angeles, California,
May 10-12, 1978. Each seminar had approximately 200 or
more attendees and featured in-depth design examples and
up-to-date handout material to supplement the seminar
presentations. The Los Angeles seminar included a field trip
to the Los Angeles County Sanitation District's Joint Plant
Solids Processing Facility and Pilot Study.
The last seminar was held in Kansas City, Missouri, June
14-15, 1978. The 200 attendees at the Sheraton-Royal
Hotel heard the latest design information on new tech-
nologies such as dewatering by continuous belt filter
presses or combusting in a co-pyrolysis (starved air
combustion) system.
New Technology Transfer
Publication Available
A brochure entitled "Irrigated Agriculture and
Water Quality Management" is now available from Tech-
nology Transfer. Through the use of photographs and
graphic displays, the brochure outlines pollution problems
that result from irrigation and discusses surface run-off
and subsurface flows, and presents solutions that are
available for controlling pollution from these sources. Also
discussed are methods of farm water management that
can be used to reduce irrigation water use and the
problems of their implementation such as: legal problems
of water rights, economic costs of controls and the social
goals such as institutional measures that need to be
accommodated.
You may obtain this brochure by checking the appropriate
box (#5014) on the order form located at the back of the
Newsletter.
IRRIGATED
AGRICULTURE
AND
WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT
-------
"Forest Chemicals and Water Quality"
Brochure Available
A brochure entitled "Forest Chemicals and
i/Vater Quality" prepared by EPA Region 10 is now available
rom Technology Transfer. Best management practices
hat protect the environment and increase the yield of our
:orests are presented in this document. Topics discussed
n this brochure are applications of chemicals by both
aerial and ground methods, environmental concerns over
oxic and nutrient enriching chemicals, natural influences
such as rainfall and soil characteristics, on applications of
:hemicals, factors affecting the degree of a chemical
mpact, and chemical, environmental, operational, techni-
:al and managerial considerations affecting the application
)f chemicals to our forests.
I'QU may obtain this publication by checking the appropri-
jte box (#5015) on the order form at the back of the
Newsletter.
Environmental Research Information Center
1978 Seminar Schedule
Technology Transfer Scheduled Events
In order to keep you more aware of future Technology Transfer activities
(particularly seminars), the following schedule is included. Should you
desire more details on any of the activities listed, contact the appropriate
Technology Transfer Regional Chairman listed in this newsletter.
Subject
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Combined Sewer Overflows
Combined Sewer Overflows
Date
November 1-2, 1978
November 14-15, 1978
December 5-6, 1978
December, 1978
November 1-2, 1978
November 7-8, 1978
Region/Location
8 Denver
1 Boston
10 Seattle
9 San Francisco
3 Philadelphia
7 Kansas City
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact the EPA Regional Technology Transfer
Committee Chairman in your region.
REGION CHAIRMAN
1 Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th 81 Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-4450
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-2200
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
6 Mildred Smith
John Coakley
Elmer Chenault
Fred Hoffman
10
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First International Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 767-2697
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-2277
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.,
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94105
415 556-6925
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
Environmental Research Information Center
ERIC
(Robert Crowe)
(Cal Lawrence)
U.S EPA - OR&D
ERIC
26 West St. Clair
Cincinnati OH 45268
(513) 684-7394 — 7398 (Inc )
Environmental
Assessment Staff
(Clarence Clemons)(0rville Macomber)
(Doug Williams)(EdTabri)
Environmental Control
Systems Staff
(Jim Smith) (Denis Lussier)
(Norm Kulujian)
Technical Information
Operations Staff
(Gilbert Gighotti)
Land Use Management
208 Land Use Planning
Non-point Sources
Monitoring Measurement and
Quality Assurance
Monitoring
Analytical Methods
Quality Control
Remote Sensing
Health and Ecological Effects
Municipal
Wastewater
Potable Water Supply
Solid Wastes
Industrial
Wastewater
Air
Toxic and Hazardous Materials
Energy Aspects
Research Reports Production
Special Research Reports
Technology Transfer Production
Newsletter Production
Report Distribution and Coordination
Conference and Symposia Coordination
Requests Coordination
Mailing Lists Coordination
Graphic Arts and Visual Aid Support
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
ROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
hosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001
arbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002
uspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003
ipgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants (Oct. 1974) . . .1004
ulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems (Oct. 1974) 1005
ludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006
itrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007
and Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct. 1977). ...... .1008
'astewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered Small Communities
(Oct. 1977) 1009
unicipal Sludge Landfills (Oct. 1978) 1010
ECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
ecycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants by Two Stage Precipitation .2001
olor Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by Lime Addition . . .2002
Dilution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003
irst Progress Report: Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2004
ry Caustic Peeling of Clingstone Peaches 2005
Dilution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006
lue Gas Desulfurization and Sulfuric Acid Production Via
Magnesia Scrubbing 2007
jcond Progress Report: Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008
agnesium Carbonate Process for Water Treatment 2009
hird Progress Report: Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results
at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2010
irst Progress Report: Wellman-Lord SO2 Recovery Process — Flue
Gas Desulfurization Plant 2011
Nirl Device for Regulating and Treating Combined
Sewer Overflows 2012
abric Filter Paniculate Control on Coal-Fired Utility Boilers:
l\lucla,CO.andSunbury,PA 2013
rst Progress Report: Static Pile Composting of Wastewater
Sludge 2014
ficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows at
Dawson, Minn 2015
ouble Alkali Flue Gas Desulfurization System Applied at the
General Motors Parma, Ohio Facility 2016
ecovery of Spent Sulfuric Acid from Steel Pickling Operations. .2017
VIDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
ograding Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001
agrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002
^grading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) " 3003
^grading Textile Operations to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for Pollution
Control Systems 3005 LJ
Erosion and Sediment Control — Surface Mining in the
Eastern U.S. (2 Vols.) 3006 D
Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable Industry (3 Vols.13007 LJ
Choosing Optimum Management Strageties 3008 LJ
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and Coating of
Metal Products (3 Vols.) 3009 LJ
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons 4001 LJ
Physical-Chemical Wastewater Treatment Plant Design 4002 LJ
Status of Oxygen/Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment 4003 LJ
Nitrification and Denitrification Facilities 4004 LJ
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants —
Case Histories 4005 LJ
Flow Equalization 4006 LJ
Wastewater Filtration 4007 LJ
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008 LJ
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration 4009 LJ
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents (3 Vols.). . . .4010 LJ
Alternatives for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems 4011 LJ
•Sludge Treatment and Disposal (2 Vols.) 4012 LJ
BROCHURES
Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011 LJ
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives:
Municipal Wastewater 5012 LJ
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality 5013 LJ
Irrigated Agriculture and Water Quality Management 5014 LJ
Forest Chemicals and Water Quality 5015 LJ
HANDBOOKS
Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories (1972) 6001 U
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 LJ
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (1974) 6003 LJ
•Industrial Guide for Air Pollution Control (June 1978) 6004 LJ
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry - Part 1/Air (Oct. 1976) 7001 LJ
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Environmental Considerations of Energy — Conserving Industrial
Process Changes 9001 LJ
Environmental Sampling of Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process . . . .9002 LJ
ATTENTION PUBLICATION USERS
Due to the increasing costs of printing and mailing, it has become necessary to institute positive management controls
over distribution of Technology Transfer publications. Although these publications will still be distributed on a no-cost
basis, any request for more than five documents total, or for more than one copy of a single document must be accom-
panied by written justification, preferably on organization letterhead. In the event your order cannot be filled as requested,
you will be contacted and so advised.
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes Q No
•Name
Employer
Street
City
State.
Zip.
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct.
1 Publication listed for the first time.
Note- Forward to ERIC, Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
Postage and
UNITED STATES Fees Paul
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY En
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Protection
Agency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER EPA 335
CINCINNATI. OHIO 45268
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $3OO
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Information Center
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
June 1978
EPA
DECHNOLOGY
ORANSFER
The Bridge Between
Research and Use
Pretreatment Seminars Underway
The first in a series of Technology Transfer Seminars on pretreatment requirements for
for industries discharging to municipal treatment systems was held in Philadelphia,
May 24-25, 1978. These seminars are designed to provide attendees the latest regula-
tory information relating to pretreatment and the major items to be considered in
establishing a pretreatment program.
Since implementation of the pretreatment regulations requires very close cooperation
between industry and municipalities, representatives from both comprise the audience.
The seminar contains two joint sessions to allow interaction between the two parties as
well as separate sessions specifically formulated to present information only for the
industrial or municipal representative. Some of the topics presented at the seminar are
1. Industrial waste surveys
2. User changes
3 Variances
4. Monitoring and reporting requirements
5. Sources of financial assistance '
6. Sludge disposal alternatives
Attendance is limited to 300 at each seminar to encourage attendee participation Scheduling
of future pretreatment seminars is indicated at the back of this newsletter.
JUN 1 2 13/
-------
Design Seminar for
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Three seminars for the design of wastewater treatment
systems for small communities have been held since January.
These seminars were held in Columbus, Ohio, January
10-11, 1978; San Juan, Puerto Rico, February 1-3, 1978;
and Boise, Idaho, March 14-15, 1978.
The San Juan Seminar also included sessions on Sludge
Treatment and Disposal to accommodate special needs in the
area. These sessions were presented by Ronald Sieger,
Brown & Caldwell Engineers; Jack Harrison, Wilmington,
Delaware; Nicholas Mignone, Envirex; and Eliot Epstein, I
Department of Agriculture.
Two additional seminars for small wastewater treatment
systems are scheduled They are:
June 21-22 — East Brunswick, New Jersey
Sept. 6-7 — Minneapolis, Minnesota
If you are interested in attending either one of these semi
nars, please contact either Clifford Risley or Robert Olson
the address and phone number listed towards the back of
this newsletter.
Technology Transfer
Workshop Planned
A workshop on the use of models for Environmental Planning
in the areas of agricultural run-off, generalized non-point
source, and screening methodology for statewide or large
basins.
Two separate 5-day intensive training courses are being
planned for the late summer or early fall of 1978. They are
for engineers and other technical personnel from both the
public and private sectors engaged in "hands-on" analysis of
non-point source pollution problems and 208 planning.
Use of the EPA Agricultural Run-off Management (ARM) and
Non-point Source (NPS) models. Enrollment will be limited to
accommodate the actual computer (terminal) applications
approach planned. Probable location for the first workshof
in this subject area will either be Atlanta or Chicago.
Use of simplified water quality screening methodology for
large basin planning. The technique to be utilized will be
based upon the EPA Manual "Water Quality Assessment:
Screening Method for Nondesignated 208 Areas". Non-
computer calculational techniques, including those for noi
point sources, rivers, lakes and estuaries will be highlight
Attendance will be limited at these workshops, therefore,
early expressions of interest and requests for additional d
tails are encouraged. Contact Orville Macomber of the ER
staff in Cincinnati at (513) 684-7394
Asphalt and Forest Products
Seminar Series Completed
Two series of industrial seminars have been completed
recently. The fourth and final asphalt industry seminar,
sponsored by EPA, the National Asphalt Pavement Associa-
tion and the Air Pollution Control Association was held in
Cincinnati on March 1 and 2, 1978. Approximately two
hundred engineers, asphalt owners and operators ranging
from Canada to Puerto Rico were in attendance. The seminar
contained a combination of regulatory and technical informa-
tion on air, water, solid waste, and noise subjects. Process
and control system technology were discussed for conven-
tional, drum mix, and recycle plants.
The second forest products seminar in Portland, Oregon, on
April 4-6, 1978, attracted nearly 400 participants from
industry, control agencies, and consulting firms. Among the
subjects discussed were non-point source programs, air
pollution regulations and control technology, and water
quality standards with specific examples of source control.
Seminar publications are being developed for the two
industries. They will be available before the end of the year.
Cincinnati Asphalt Conference, March 1978
-------
\lternatives for
Small Wastewater
"reatment Systems
k new publication developed for the Technology Transfer
eminar Series for Design of Small Wastewater Treatment
ystems is now available. This 3-volume document in-
udes sections on Pressure Sewers, Vacuum Sewers, On-
ite Disposal, Septage Treatment and Disposal, and Cost/
ffectiveness Analysis. Design information, cost data, and
ase-histones are included for each of these subjects
.uthors of this document are James F. Kreissl, U.S. EPA-
1ERL, Cincinnati, Ohio; Joseph Rezek and Ivan Cooper of
ezek, Henry, Meisenheimier & Gende, Libertyville, Illinois;
/illiam Boyle, Richard Otis, James Converse, and Jerry
yler of the University of Wisconsin at Madison; and Jerrold
royan. Brown & Caldwell, Eugene, Oregon.
ou may obtain this publication by checking the appropriate
ox (#4011) on the order form in the back of the newsletter.
for
Small Wastewater
Treatment Systems
Alternatives for
Small Wastewater
Treatment Systems
Alternatives for
Small Wastewater
Treatment Systems
-------
New Technology Transfer
Publication Available
A full color brochure entitled "Irrigated Agriculture and Water
Quality Management" is now available from Technology
Transfer. Through the use of photographs and graphic dis-
plays, the brochure outlines pollution problems that result
from irrigation and discusses surface run-off and subsurface
flows, and presents solutions that are available for controlling
pollution from these sources. Also discussed are methods
farm water management that can be used to reduce irriga
tion water use and the problems of their implementation
such as: legal problems of water rights, economic costs of
controls and the social goals such as institutional measure
that need to be accommodated.
You may obtain this brochure by checking the appropriate
box (#5014) on the order form located on the back of the
newsletter.
First Capsule Reports in
Municipal Area Published
The first three Technology Transfer Capsule Reports dealing
with municipal pollution control technology have been
printed and are now available. They are:
SWIRL Device for Regulating and Treating Combined Sewer
Overflows (#2012) — This Capsule Report describes the
results of a full-scale prototype SWIRL unit that controlled
real overflows in Syracuse, N.Y., and discusses other areas
of application.
First Progress Report on Static Pile Composting of Waste-
water Sludge (#2014) — Static pile composting and its
application in the municipalities of Bangor, Maine, and
Durham, New Hampshire are described.
Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows at Dawson,
Minnesota (#2015) — The Dawson project demonstrated
that small plants can provide consistent nitrification and
highly reliable and efficient removal of BOD and SS.
You may obtain these publication by checking the appropriate
boxes on the order form on the back of this newsletter.
•JU
•Ui'S'J
-------
3reat Lakes Operation and
Maintenance Workshop
•leld Recently
i summary of three annual EPA surveys of municipal waste-
/ater treatment facilities indicated that 48% of the facilities
leet their design objectives and the secondary treatment
bjective of 30 mg/l for both BOD and suspended solids
oncentrations. Identification of the reasons for, and potential
/ays to improve, this level of plant performance was the
ubject of a workshop in Chicago on March 15-17, 1978. The
ireat Lakes Workshop: Improving Operation and Mainten-
nce of Municipal Treatment Plants was jointly sponsored by
le Great Lakes National Program Office of EPA Region V,
nd the Review Board of the Canada/Ontario Agreement on
ireat Lakes Water Quality.
ixty invitees, representing disciplines or with responsibilities
ssential for the proper operation of treatment facilities,
tended. Constituencies represented included design engi-
eers, equipment manufacturers, plant operators and
lanagers, municipal decision makers, State/Provincial and
ederal regulatory authorities, and public sector interests.
ivited papers on relevant topics, including results of a 3Y2
jar U.S. National 0 & M Cause and Effect Survey, were
resented in the first session. The attendees assembled in
rorking groups during the remaining two days, identified the
lost significant problems and proposed alternative solutions.
ultiple problem statements were synthesized into the
(Mowing major areas of deficiency.
- Public awareness and support of proper operations and
maintenance.
- Adequacy of 0 & M budget levels.
- Number and technical capability of operators, equipment
representatives and regulatory review authorities.
- Maintenance plans.
- Regulatory relating to permit requirements and equipment
selection procedures.
- Design considerations related to operational and mainten-
ance reliability.
- Accountability among the constituents with regard to
long-term operability.
ie 0 & M "problem" includes a spectrum of subissues
hich vary in severity and applicability among wastewater
eatment facilities. A remedial program must, therefore,
elude some plant-specific components in addition to
jproaches having general applicability. This complexity was
icognized and addressed in the solutions proposed by the
orkshop participants. Many alternative solutions were dis-
jssed with the following preferred solutions identified.
- Federally fund, on a one-time basis, operation and
maintenance improvement grants. The purpose of these
grants would be to independently establish a comprehen-
sive correction program including preparation of an
0 & M manual, cost-accounting procedures, preventative
maintenance plans, staffing recommendations, and speci-
fic training requirements emphasizing on-site training.
• Require mandatory operator certification.
— Incorporate independent review of facility designs in
terms of operational and maintenance and reliability
considerations.
— Incorporate in future wage negotiations incentive pay
schedules for operators based on permit compliance
monitoring.
— Publicize locally the cost-effectiveness of 0 & M expendi-
tures in improving water quality.
— Provide greater emphasis in equipment specification and
procurement processes to insure, even at higher initial
capital cost, more reliable equipment.
— Redirect research emphasis from new process develop-
ment to operations and maintenance considerations of
existing technology.
Proceedings of the Workshop will be available through the
Great Lakes National Program Office, EPA, Region V.
Technology Transfer Continues
Municipal Design Seminar Series on
Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Technology Transfer has recently completed its third of five
planned seminars on Sludge Treatment and Disposal for
1978.
The first seminar was held in Philadelphia, PA, March 30-31,
1978, and was attended by over 300 people. This seminar
was redesigned from those conducted in 1977 and featured
in-depth design examples and the most up-to-date handout
material to supplement the seminar presentations. The new
seminar format provided for better information exchange
and participation by the attendee.
The second seminar in Portland, Oregon, May 3-4, 1978,
was designed for the region and addressed problems that are
encountered by local consultants and municipalities.
The Los Angeles Seminar was expanded to three days and
featured a field trip by participants to the Los Angeles
Sanitation District Joint Plant Solids Processing Facility and
Pilot Study. Also included in the seminar were presentations
by local engineers to discuss regional developments in sludge
treatment and disposal.
It is hoped that by tailoring these seminars to apply to a
specific region, a more effective information dissemination
can occur.
For more information concerning these seminars contact
your Regional Technology Transfer Chairman listed in the
back of this newsletter.
-------
Capsule Report for Utility Fabric
Filter Baghouses Now Available
EPA's Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory in
Research Triangle Park, N.C. has funded projects to analyze
the performance of two of the first coal-fired power plants
located at Nucla, Colorado and Sunbury, Pennsylvania, and
equipped with fabric filters.
The Nucla fabric filtration facility was designed to control
the entire paniculate load from the three stoker-fired
boilers of the 39 Mw facility. The installation has been able
to meet the Colorado air pollution regulations with ease.
The Sunbury baghouse replaced an electrostatic precipitator
collection system which was unable to meet the particulate
control efficiency specified in state regulations. The replace-
ment bag system has met the Pennsylvania regulations
since its initial operation in 1973.
The capsule report summarizes performance and cost data
for the two facilities. This report can be obtained by check-
ing the appropriate box (#2013) on the order form in the
back of the newsletter.
National Conference on
Lake Restoration Scheduled for
Minneapolis
On August 22-24, in Minneapolis, a National Conference
sponsored by the U.S. EPA's Office of Water Quality
Standards and the Environmental Research Information
Center will be held to address how local and state govern-
ments can best conduct programs for restoring lakes.
The conference is designed to enhance the effectiveness of
the Federal Water Pollution Act, Section 314, which provides
federal grants to municipal and state governments to restore
publically-owned freshwater lakes. Representatives of
municipal and state government agencies working on pollu-
tion control and recognized experts on lakes will be attending.
During the Conference, specialists from government research
organizations and academic institutions will present informa-
tion needed to prepare a comprehensive lake restoration
plan. Speakers will discuss how to transfer experimental or
theoretical knowledge into practical applications to meet
Federal Water Quality Goals by 1983. Methods by which
local authorities can protect lakes will be presented and
successful state restoration programs conducted in
Minnesota, Florida, South Dakota, and Vermont will be
explored. Federal experts will present an overview of govern-
mental grant programs for pollution control. Small waste-
water treatment systems as well as point and non-point
sources will be discussed with emphasis on achieving water
quality standards. Methods of assessing lake restoration
problems and in-lake treatments will also be examined.
As a special conference feature, experts will examine state-
of-the-art restoration. Presentations will include Biological
Management of Lakes and Methods of Evaluating the Effec
tiveness of Restoration Techniques.
The Conference, which is being coordinated by Battelle,
Columbus, will be held August 22-24, Tuesday through
Thursday, at the Sheraton Ritz Hotel, Minneapolis, Minnesc
Additional information may be obtained from Susan Arm-
strong, Battelle Laboratories, 505 King Avenue, Columbus,
Ohio 43201 (telephone 614-424-7769).
"Forest Chemicals and Water Quality
Brochure Available
A full color brochure entitled "Forest Chemicals and Watei
Quality" prepared by EPA Region X is now available from
Technology Transfer. Best management practices that prot
the environment and increase the yield of our forests are
presented in this document. Topics discussed in this bro-
chure are applications of chemicals by both aerial and groi
methods, environmental concerns over toxic and nutrient
enriching chemicals, natural influences such as rainfall an
soil characteristics, on applications of chemicals, factors
affecting the degree of a chemical impact, and chemical,
environmental, operational, technical and managerial con-
siderations affecting the application of chemicals to our
forests.
You may obtain this publication by checking the appropriat
box (#5015) on the order form on the back of the newslett
-------
Conference on Improving
lanagement Practices for
rrigated Agriculture
lechnology Transfer, EPA Region IX and the Water Resources
tenter-Cooperative Extension Service of the University of
lalifornia sponsored a conference held at the University of
lalifornia in Davis, California on April 3 and 4, 1978.
Ihe conference presented the latest tools and concepts that
lave been developed through research and demonstration
projects for implementing programs of improved management
practices for irrigated agriculture. These programs are
directed at increasing crop yields and improving water
quality. In addition, presentations were made on the progress
achieved in implementation of control solutions by various
irrigation and water management groups. Available assist-
ance for implementing agriculture programs related to water
management was also discussed
ERIC Plans Exhibit for Annual
APCA Convention in Houston
The Environmental Research Information Center will display
an exhibit at the annual Air Pollution Control Association
meeting and exhibition on June 27-29, 1978, at the Albert
Thomas Convention Center in Houston, Texas This is the first
year that ERIC has participated in the meeting. The latest
Technology Transfer literature will be available, including a
capsule report summarizing the EPA flue gas desulfurization
test program of the double alkali process at the General
Motors facility in Parma, Ohio. We invite you to visit the EPA
Exhibit, Booth No. 310. Since the report is still being printed
at this time, our readers will be able to obtain the capsule
report through the next newsletter.
-------
-------
-------
EPA Publications Get a Facelift
As you have probably already noticed, this newsletter is the
first in Technology Transfer's line of publications to adopt the
new EPA graphic standards
The EPA is undertaking a program to enhance its visual
image and provide the public with quick and easy identifiers
of its different program areas and their appropriate
publications.
The following are specific program area, color and graphic
identifiers:
Noise Noise Yellow
Toxic Substances Toxic Red
Radiation Radiation Red
Technology Transfer Technology Purple
Air Air, EPA Blue
Research &
Development R&D, EPA Green
Pesticides
Solid Waste
Pesticides Green
Solid Waste Brown
In the coming year, those of you who use EPA publication:
notice the gradual compliance by the different programs at
eventually all EPA publications will become easily identifia
by color and graphic design.
Technology Transfer will be using the new standards with
new publications and as reprints are made of existing pub
cations, they will take on the new look described above. Tl
most notable change will occur in the Process Design
Manuals which have become affectionately known as the
"EPA Blue Books" by many of the engineers and scientists
who utilize them in day to day work. They will adopt the n
standard in appearance and will from now on be purple ar
white in color rather than the traditional blue.
It is hoped that these rather small changes will help you t<
better use the information developed through all of EPA's
programs.
Water
Water, Blue
Seminar on Combined Sewer
Overflow Assessment and
Control Procedures
Technology Transfer and EPA Region I sponsored a seminar
held at the Howard Johnson Convention Center near Hartford,
Connecticut on May 18 and 19, 1978.
The seminar was designed to present EPA policy for funding
combined sewer overflow (CSO) projects, and the techniques
and treatment systems that are available for assessment
and control of stormwater discharges. Simplified techniques
that can easily be used by the engineering profession wen
emphasized. Subject areas included: 1) identifying objectiv
and benefits from CSO controls, 2) analyzing the existing
collection system, 3) estimating the quantity and quality of
combined sewer discharges, 4) CSO treatment methods ai
sludges generated as a result of combined sewer discharg
control.
Additional seminars in this series are scheduled for Seattl
Washington on June 28 and 29 and Chicago, Illinois on
July 26 and 27, 1978.
National Conference on
Livestock Waste Management
The Environmental Research Information Center cosponsor-
ed this conference with: USEPA Robert S. Kerr Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Ohio State University, and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture. The conference was held
in Columbus, Ohio on May 23 and 24, 1978.
The conference presented state-of-the-art information
developed through research and development grants and
demonstration projects on assessment, treatment and
disposal of animal wastes.
Topics covered were the impact of grazing on soil and
vegetation and the resultant water quality effects from
these activities; description and economic analysis of each
of the common waste management systems for small-scale
confined animal production facilities; and animal waste
utilization on crop and pastureland including quantity and
characteristics of animal wastes, loading rates for various
crops and soil conditions, and pollutant loads from surfac
run-off and groundwater leaching.
A workshop for identifying future research needs in the
areas of animal waste pollution assessment and control,
and animal waste as a resource for energy and nutrients
followed the conference.
-------
Bourses Offered
roubleshooting O & M Problems
vo five-day short courses on Troubleshooting 0 & M
oblems at Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facilities will
i held on August 14-18, 1978 in Cincinnati, Ohio and on
jptember 18-22, 1978 in Denver, Colorado. These courses
e sponsored by the Environmental Resources Training
jnter, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville and the
S Environmental Protection Agency. Each course is an
ensive five-day workshop on identification and solution
0 & M related problems which affect the performance
id efficiency of treatment works. A systematic procedure
r evaluating treatment works, for identifying 0 & M re-
ed problems, and probable causes, for developing alterna-
re solutions, and for selecting and implementing the
eferred solution will be presented. The course will be
taught as a workshop and uses comprehensive case his-
tories of problem situations. All treatment processes are
covered with primary emphasis placed upon biological
treatment systems and solids handling/disposal All in-
structors are experienced in plant operations and in
troubleshooting.
The course is designed for consulting engineers and plant
operations specialists who are responsible for plant start-
up, 0 & M manual preparation, treatment system evaluation
and in-plant technical assistance to retainer clients. Treat-
ment System managers, supervisors and senior operations
personnel will benefit from the course.
Registration fee for the course is $200. Registration is
limited to 32 trainees per location. For additional informa-
tion contact Dr. James 0. Bryant, Jr., Director, Environ-
mental Resources Training Center, Southern Illinois
University, Campus Box 75, Edwardsville, IL 62026.
Memoriam
February, William Bishop, Technology Transfer's Regional
lairman and Team Leader of Research and Development in
•gion IX, passed away. Bill was a graduate of Case Institute
Technology in Cleveland, Ohio where he received a B.S. in
/il Engineering ('54), an M.S. in Sanitary Engineering ('57)
d a Ph.D. in Sanitary Engineering ('62). He worked for
gineermg Science from 1962 to 1967 at which time he
;nt to work for the Federal Water Quality Administration
/VQA). A licensed professional engineer in both California
d Ohio, Bill became Technology Transfer's Regional Chair-
in in January 1975. The engineering and scientific
mmunity is always in need of quality professionals like
I Bishop. Those who worked closely with him will miss his
raordinary warmth, dedication, intelligence, and integrity.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
1978 SEMINAR SCHEDULE
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SCHEDULED EVENTS
In order to keep you more aware of future Technology Transfer activities
(particularly seminars), the following schedule is included. Should you
desire more details on any of the activities listed, contact the appropriate
Technology Transfer Regional Chairman listed in the previous section of
this newsletter.
SUBJECT
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment
DATE
June 27-28, 1978
July 12-13, 1978
August 8-9, 1978
August 30-31, 1978
September 13-14, 1978
October 18-19, 1978
November 1-2, 1978
December 5-6, 1978
REGION/LOCATION
IV Atlanta
VI Dallas
II New York
V Chicago
VII Kansas City
I Boston
VIM Denver
X Seattle
Sludge Treatment & Disposal
June 14-15, 1978
VII Kansas City
Small Wastewater Flows
Small Wastewater Flows
June 21-22, 1978
September 6-7, 1978
II New Jersey
V Minnesota
Combined Sewer Overflows
Combined Sewer Overflows
June 28-29, 1978
July 25-26, 1978
X Seattle
V Chicago
National Conf.—-Lake Restoration August 22-24, 1978
V Minneapolis
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or anv other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact the EPA Regional Technology Transfer
Committee Chairman in your region.
REGION CHAIRMAN
Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
III
IV
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 2232226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J , P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th Si Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-4450
(N C., S.C , Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-2200
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI Mildred Smith
VII John Coakley
VIII Elmer Chenault
IX
Fred Hoffman
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First International Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 749-3971
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94105
415 556-6925
(Calif., Ariz., Mev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
208 Land Use Planning
Non-point Sources
MONITORING, MEASUREMENT AND
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Monitoring
Analytical Methods
Quality Control
Remote Sensing
HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
MUNICIPAL
Waste water
Potable Water Supply
Solid Wastes
INDUSTRIAL
Wastewater
Air
Toxic and Hazardous Materials
Energy Aspects
U S EPA - OR&D
I
MENTAL
ENT STAFF
(Orville Macomber)
ns) (Ed Tabn)
ERIC
(Robert Crowe)
(Cat Lawrence)
ERIC
26 West S
Cincinnati
(513) 684-
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
SYSTEMS STAFF
(Jim Smith) (Denis Lussier)
(Norm Kulujian)
I
TECHNICAL IN
OPERATIC
(Gilbert C
Research Reports Production
Special Research Reports
Technology Transfer Production
Newsletter Production
Report Distribution and Coordination
Conference and Symposia Coordination
Requests Coordination
Mailing Lists Coordination
Graphic Arts and Visual Aid Support
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PUBLICATIONS
A-U.S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1978-757-140/6820 Region No. 5-11
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002 D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003 U
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants (Oct. 1974) . . .1004 D
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems (Oct. 1974) 1005 LJ
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006 D
Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007 U
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct. 1977) 1008 U
Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered Small Communities
(Oct. 1977) 1009 U
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants by Two Stage Precipitation 2001 LJ
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by Lime Addition . . .2002 U
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 LJ
First Progress Report: Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 D
Dry Caustic Peeling of Clingstone Peaches 2005 I—I
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006 U
Flue Gas Desulfunzation and Sulfunc Acid Production Via
Magnesia Scrubbing 2007 U
Second Progress Report1 Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008 D
Magnesium Carbonate Process for Water Treatment 2009 D
Third Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results
at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2010 D
First Progress Report- Wellman-Lord SO2 Recovery Process — Flue
Gas Desulfunzation Plant 2011 D
Swirl Device for Regulating and Treating Combined
Sewer Overflows 2012 D
Fabric Filter Particulate Control on Coal-Fired Utility Boilers:
Nucla.CO. and Sunbury, PA 2013 D
First Progress Report: Static Pile Composting of Wastewater
Sludge 2014 D
Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows at
Dawson, Minn 2015 D
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001 D
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002 D
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003 D
Upgrading Textile Operations to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004 D
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for Pollution
Control Systems 3005 LJ
Erosion and Sediment Control — Surface Mining in the
Eastern U.S 3006 U
Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable Industry (3 Vols.)3007 LJ
Choosing Optimum Management Strategies 3008 LJ
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and Coating of
Metal Products (3 Vols.) 3009 LJ
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons 4001 LJ
Physical-Chemical Wastewater Treatment Plant Design 4002 LJ
Status of Oxygen/Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment . . . .4003 U
Nitrification and Dentrification Facilities 4004 LJ
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants —
Case Histories 4005 U
Flow Equalization 4006 LJ
Wastewater Filtration 4007 LJ
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008 LJ
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration 4009 LJ
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents (3 Vols ). . . .4010 LJ
Alternatives for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems 4011 LJ
BROCHURES
Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011 LJ
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives.
Municipal Wastewater 5012 LJ
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality . 5013 LJ
"Irrigated Agriculture and Water Quality Management 5014 D
"Forest Chemicals and Water Quality 5015 d
HANDBOOKS
Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories (1972) 6001 D
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 D
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (1974) 6003 D
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry - Part 1/Air 7001 D
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Environmental Considerations of Energy — Conserving Industrial
Process Changes 9001 LJ
Environmental Sampling of Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process . . 9002 LJ
ATTENTION PUBLICATION USERS
Due to the increasing costs of printing and mailing, it has become necessary to institute positive management controls
over distribution of Technology Transfer publications. Although these publications will still be distributed on a no-cost
basis, any request for more than five documents total, or for more than one copy of a single document must be accom-
panied by written justification, preferably on organization letterhead. In the event your order cannot be filled as requested,
you will be contacted and so advised.
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes LJ No D
*Name
Employer.
Street
City.
.State.
-Zip.
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct.
"Publication listed for the first time.
Note: Forward to ERIC, Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO G-35
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $3OO
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
-------
NVIRONMENTAL liJESEARCH ^INFORMATION L3ENTER
DECHNOLOGY
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
JANUARY 1978
50th ANNUAL-WPCF CONFERENCE,
PHILADELPHIA
The Water Pollution Control Federation
celebrated its 50th year October 2-7, 1977 at the
Philadelphia Civic Center in Philadelphia, PA with
the largest conference ever, attracting almost
10,000 attendees, assembled to sit in on the
numerous technical sessions and visit the display
area well represented by industry, professionals
and for the eighth straight year the Environmental
Protection Agency.
This year, six programs within EPA combined
efforts in forming a single exhibit for distributing
publications and giving the attendees a central-
ized area for meeting EPA personnel for informa-
tion exchange. The six programs staffing the
exhibit were: the Environmental Research
Information Center (ERIC); Operation and
Maintenance; Manpower Planning and Training;
Effluent Guidelines; Construction Grants; and
208 Water Quality Management.
Each of thesix programs offered publications
and written material for distribution and supplied
qualified personnel to answer questions fielded
by the attendees according to the program area.
For this year's WPCF conference, ERIC's
Technology Transfer program featured the latest
Process Design Manual (number eight in the
series) on "Land Treatment of Municipal Waste-
water." This manual is designed to give the user
the most comprehensive design information on
the subject of land treatment compiled under one
cover to date. ERIC representatives distributed
over 3800 manuals to the attendees during the
week long conference
A highlight for this year's WPCF exhibit area
was a visit by the EPA Administrator, Douglas
Costle, and Thomas Jorling, EPA Assistant
Administrator for Water and Hazardous Materials,
who visited many of the exhibits and talked with
various attendees.
Because of the number of EPA publications
involved in this year's exhibit, many were not
immediately available at the conclusion of the
conference, however, each can be obtained by
contacting the appropriate programs listed in
this article.
(left to right) Robert E. Crowe, Director, U.S. EPA, ERIC;
Dorothy Williams, U.S. EPA, ERIC; and Douglas Costle,
Administrator, U.S. EPA, during the recent WPCF conference
in Philadelphia.
(left to right) Dr. James E. Smith Jr., U.S. EPA, ERIC; Richard
S. Engelbrecht, WPCF, President-Elect; John T. Rhett, U.S.
EPA, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water Programs
Operations; Carmen Guarino, Philadelphia Water Department
and Douglas Costle, U.S. EPA Administrator discuss the 1977
WPCF on the exhibit floor.
(left to right) Richard S. Engelbrecht, WPCF President-Elect;
Carmen Guarino; Phila. Water Dept. and Thomas Jorling,
U.S. EPA, at the EPA referral room which attracted many of
the conference attendees.
LOOK ON PAGE 11 FOR IMPORTANT MESSAGE
-------
CAPSULE REPORT FOR UTILITY FABRIC
FILTER BAGHOUSES NOW AVAILABLE
EPA's Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory in Research Triangle Park, N.C. has
funded projects to analyze the performance of
two of the first coal-fired powerplants equipped
with fabric filters, located at Nucla, Colorado and
Sunbury, Pennsylvania.
The Nucla fabric filtration facility was de-
signed to control the entire particulate load from
thethree stoker-fired boilers of the 39 Mw facility.
The installation has been able to meet the
Colorado air pollution regulations with ease.
The Sunbury baghouse replaced an electro-
static precipitator collection system which was
unable to meet the particulate control efficiency
required by state regulations. The replacement
bag system has metthe Pennsylvania regulations
since its initial operation in 1973.
The capsule report summarizes performance
and cost data for the two facilities. This report can
be obtained by checking the appropriate box
(#2013) on the order form in the back of the
newsletter.
SECOND POLLUTION CONTROL SEMINAR
SCHEDULED FOR THE PRIMARY FOREST
PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
The second seminar discussing the primary
forest products industry will be held in Portland,
Oregon, April 4-6, 1978 at the Sheraton-Lloyd
Center. This seminar will focus on environmental
problems and solutions for the primary wood
products industry in the Pacific Northwest. This
includes sawmills, veneer and plywood mills,
hardboard mills, and all timber operations. Major
topic areas include non-point source, air, and
water sessions.
The Forest Products Research Society is
co-ordinating the meeting with the Environmental
Research Information Center. For further
information and a registration form, contact
Ms. Connie Walling, FPRS, 2801 Marshall Court,
Madison, Wisconsin 53705, telephone no. (608)
231-1361.
"ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING OF THE
PARAHO OIL SHALE RETORT PROCESS"
Featured at the 36th Exposition of
Chemical Industries
The Environmental Research Information
Center's Technology Transfer Program partici-
pated in the 36th Exposition of Chemical
Industries held at McCormick Place, Chicago,
Illinois, December 5th - 8th.
The second in the series of Executive Briefing
reports entitled, "Environmental Sampling of the
Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process at Anvil Points,"
was made available for the first time at the Chem
Show. This executive briefing (a joint effort of
ERIC and the Fuels Technology Branch of the
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory —
Cincinnati), presents a project, which now has
been completed at the U.S. ERDA Anvil Points
Experimental Station, at an estimated cost of 7.5
million to the 17 members of the Paraho Oil Shale
Demonstration, Inc. The Paraho Process is one of
several under serious consideration for oil
extraction on a commercial basis.
This executive briefing report can be obtained
by checking the appropriate box (#9002) on the
order form in the back of this newsletter
NEW SEMINAR HANDOUT: "STATUS OF
OXYGEN-ACTIVATED SLUDGE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT"
The Technology Transfer seminar publica-
tion entitled "Oxyen-Activated Sludge Waste-
water Treatment Systems," first published in
1973, has been replaced by a new publication on
the subject: "Status of Oxygen-Activated Sludge
Wastewater Treatment." This new document
(prepared by Richard C. Brenner, U.S. EPA,
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory)
1) provides an updated status report on the
number and type of oxygen-activated sludge
-------
facilities in operation, under construction, and
being designed; 2) describes in detail the latest
EPA supported oxygenation research and
demonstration project, an evaluation of the RAD
version of the open reactor system being carried
out atthe Metropolitan Denver, Colorado Sewage
Treatment Plant; and 3) summarizes design,
operating, and performance information for
several on-line oxygen wastewater treatment
systems.
This publication can be obtained by checking
the appropriate box (#4003) on the order form on
the back of the newsletter.
Status of
'Activated Sludge
Treatment
£W Technology "fensfe* Seminar PuttcatR»
REGIONAL IRRIGATION WATER QUALITY
CONTROL CONFERENCE
Technology Transfer, EPA Region X and the
Idaho, Oregon and Washington state water
quality agencies sponsored a conference held in
Boise, Idaho on December 8 and 9, 1977 and
devoted to water quality control for irrigated
agriculture.
The conference presented the latest tools
and concepts that have been developed through
research and demonstration projects managed
by the EPA Robert S. Kerr Laboratory, Ada,
Oklahoma. These were designed to implement
programs of irrigation return flow water quality
management.
Conference attendees were from irrigation
districts, agriculture extension service offices,
conservation districts, and state and federal
agencies dealing with agriculture and water pol-
lution control. The audience also included 208
planners, agriculturalists, and personnel from
water management agencies Presentations were
made in the subject areas of sediment, nutrient,
pesticide and salinity pollution control from irri-
gation return flows, in addition to progress made
in implementing the procedures developed. The
goal of the conference was to assist in imple-
menting 208 planning programs which modify
irrigation practices to improve water quality.
NEW PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL
LAND TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATERS
The Process Design Manual for Land Treat-
ment of Municipal Wastewater (a joint effort of
EPA, Army Corps of Engineers, and Dept. of
Agriculture) is available through Technology
Transfer. This manual presents a rational proce-
dure for the design of land treatment systems.
Flow rate, rapid infiltration, and overland flow
processes for the treatment of municipal waste-
waters are given emphasis. The basic unit opera-
tions and unit processes are discussed in detail,
and the design concepts and criteria are present-
ed The manual includes design exam pies as well
as actual case study descriptions of operational
systems. Information on planning and field
investigations is presented along with the process
design criteria for both large and small scale
systems.
This manual was introduced at the October
WPCF conference in Philadelphia and those
unable to obtain a copy then can do so by
checking the appropriate box (#1008) on the
order form in the back of this newsletter.
-------
NEW PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL:
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
FOR SEWERED SMALL COMMUNITIES
A new Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual presenting information for the planning,
design and operation of present and future waste-
water treatment facilities for sewered small
communities is now available.
The manual addresses such topics as flow
equalization, package plants, treatment ponds,
nutrient removal, and sludge handling, with
specific emphasis on application at small plants
(less than 1 mgd). There are also chapters on
Operation and Maintenance and Cost Effectiveness.
Prepared by Camp, Dresser & McKee, this
manual can be obtained by checking the approp-
riate box (#1009) on the order form in the back of
this newsletter.
FIRST CAPSULE REPORTS
IN MUNICIPAL AREA PUBLISHED
The first three Technology Transfer Capsule
Reports dealing with municipal pollution control
technology have been printed and are now avail-
able. They are.
• Swirl Device for Regulating and Treating
Combined Sewer Overflows (#2012) - This
Capsule Report describes the results of a full-
scale prototype SWIRL unit that controlled
real overflows in Syracuse, N.Y., and discusses
other areas of application.
• First Progress Report on Static Pile Compost-
ing of Wastewater Sludge (#2014) - Static pile
composting and its application to the munici-
palities of Bangor, Maine, and Durham,
New Hampshire are described.
• Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows
at Dawson, Minnesota (#2015) - The Dawson
project demonstrated that small plants can
provide highly reliable and efficient removal
of BOD and SS, and consistent nitrification.
These publications can be obtained by
checking the appropriate boxes on the order form
in the back of this newsletter. Additional Capsule
Reports in the municipal area are being prepared
and their availability will be announced in this
newsletter.
NEW SEMINAR PUBLICATION:
"ALTERNATIVES FOR SMALL
WASTEWATER SYSTEM"
A new publication developed for the
Technology Transfer Seminar Series for Design
of Small Wastewater Treatment Systems has
been printed and is nowavailablefordistribution.
This 3-volume document includes sections on
Pressure Sewers, Vacuum Sewers, On-Site
Disposal, Septage Treatment and Disposal, and
Cost/Effectiveness Analysis. Design information,
cost data, and case-history material are included
for each of these subject areas.
-------
Authors of this document are James F. Kreissl,
U S. EPA-MERL, Cincinnati, Ohio; Joseph Rezek
and Ivan Cooper of Rezek, Henry, Meisenheimier
& Gende, Libertyville, Illinois; William Boyle,
Richard Otis, James Converse, and Jerry Tyler,
University of Wisconsin-Madison; and Jerrold
Troyan, Brown & Caldwell, Eugene, Oregon.
This publication can be obtained by checking
the appropriate box (#4011) on the order form in
the back of the newsletter.
HAWAII CONFERENCE ON 208 WATER
QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING
On October 18 and 19, 1977 in Honolulu,
Hawaii, Technology Transfer, EPA Region IX and
the Hawaii Department of Health sponsored a
conference on Section 208 Water Quality
Management Planning.
The purpose of this two day conference was
to bring to the Pacific Islands information and
data that are both necessary and useful in the
preparation and implementation of a Section 208
planning program. Attending were representa-
tives from Hawaii, Guam and Mariana Islands
Trust Territory 208 agencies, Federal, state and
local government, consulting firms, industry and
agriculture, and 208 advisory committees. A total
of 22 speakers gave presentations on regulatory
and institutional considerations, control of
nonpoint sources of pollution from construction
and agricultural operations, assessment and
control of urban stormwater runoff, and water
conservation and residue management. The
conference was followed by a one day workshop
devoted to urban stormwater runoff. The work-
shop provided the opportunity for indepth
discussions of monitoring, assessment, evalua-
tion and selection of control alternatives.
James Thompson, Chief
Pacific Islands Branch, U.S. EPA Region IX
Registration Desk
I \
Dr. James S. Kumaga, Deputy Director for Environmental
Programs, Hawaii Dept. of Health
Pacific Ball Room, Ilikai Hotel
-------
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CONTINUES
MUNICIPAL DESIGN SEMINAR SERIES ON
SLUDGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL
Four seminars were held on sludge treatment
and disposal during 1977 in Newark, New Jersey;
Salt Lake City, Utah; Atlanta, Georgia and
Boston, Massachusetts respectively. They were
very well attended and many new regional
requests were received. Plans have been made to
have five sludge seminars during 1978, and a
schedule appears below.
Schedule
March 30 & 31, 1978
April 20 & 21, 1978
May 3 & 4, 1978
June 14 & 15, 1978
July 12 & 13, 1978
Philadelphia, Pa.
Los Angeles, California
Portland, Oregon
Kansas City, Mo.
Dallas, Texas
The basic program will be similar to that
described in the June 1977 Technology Transfer
Newsletter. Some changes, however, have been
necessitated. The seminar handout will contain a
greater body of knowledge, which will comefrom
a more detailed review of the literature, company
files and site visits to acquire first hand perform-
ance, cost and energy data. Where possible
European and Japanese developments will be
included. The handout material will haveadetailed
and worked out design example for each of the
various processing steps. Presentations will
emphasize and almost exclusively include the
development of the design example.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ANNOUNCES
SEMINARS ON MUNICIPAL PRETREATMENT
GUIDELINES FOR INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENTS
The exact format and content of these
seminars are presently in preparation The pre-
treatment seminars are geared for consulting
engineers, municipal design engineers and
federal and state pollution control officials
concerned with pollution control and abatement.
In addition, industrial pollution control officials
will also find the content of the seminars most
helpful. It is anticipated that the seminars will be
two days in length with one day dealing with the
municipal side and the other with industrial
concerns. Some of the subjects covered in the
seminar that are of concern to municipalities are:
a. Developing an inventory of industrial and
commercial wastes being introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works;
b. Determining removals of pollutants in the
publicly owned treatment works;
c. Designing a monitoring enforcement
program;
d. Determining thetreatment workstoleranceto
pollutants which interfere with its operation;
e. Obtaining the technical information neces-
sary to support development of an industrial
waste ordinance;
f Obtaining equipment necessary to monitor
industrial wastes; and
g. Constructing facilities necessary to monitor
industrial wastes.
Subjects covered of interest to industrial
attendees include:
a Determining user charges and industrial cost
recovery,
b. Choosing financial assistance;
c Selecting the most cost effective pretreat-
ment technologies
All ten regions will be impacted by this
seminar series and the first two are listed below:
April 5-6
April 26-27
Boston, Massachusetts
Dallas, Texas
NEW ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
PUBLICATION AVAILABLE
A new ERIC-Technology Transfer document
in the Environmental Monitoring series entitled,
"Sampling of Water and Wastewater," has been
published
This document describes the state-of-the art
of commercially available and custom built auto-
matic liquid samplers, with recommended
sampling procedures for the field to be used by
persons engaged in water quality surveys as a
guide to achieve uniformity and quality control in
water monitoring programs.
The document will be distributed by ERICon
a limited basis. However, it will be availabletothe
public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service.
WORKSHOP ON MICROBIAL DEGRADATION
OF POLLUTANTS IN MARINE ENVIRONMENTS
A workshop will be held in Gulf Breeze,
Florida from April 10 through 14 to provide a
comprehensive review of concepts on microbial
degradation processes with application tothefate
of organic pollutants in marine environments.
Emphasis will be placed on the recalcitrance of
certain chemical structures as identified in the
laboratory with pure cultures of bacteria and
fungi, review of established laboratory degradation
processes for aquatic environments including
parameter measurements, and information review
-------
of laboratory models used to study microbial
degradation processes. One of the major objec-
tives of this symposium will be to help clarify and
consolidate concepts of biodegradation by
providing direction to future research as well as
presenting a base of information which industry
and government can use in the development and
regulation of chemicals.
This workshop will be jointly sponsored by
EPA's Environmental Research Information
Center, Office of Pesticide programs and the
Environmental Research Laboratory at Gulf
Breeze, Florida. If interested in attending this
workshop contact Doug Williams of the E R.I C
staff in Cincinnati at (513) 684-7394.
POLLUTION IMAGINEERING CONFERENCE
The EPA and the U.S. Department of
Commerce co-sponsored a two day conference
in San Francisco, Dec. 1-2attheSheraton Palace.
The conference, co-ordinated through the
Environmental Research Information Center,
emphasized industry's examples of integrating
pollution control into corporate management
philosophy. It represented a new era of co-opera-
tion between government and industry to
conserve natural resources and develop cleaner,
more cost effective industrial processes
Highlights of the conference included an
address by Douglas Costle, EPA administrator
and Anne Wesler, DOC Deputy undersecretary.
Major contributors to the conference in-
cluded Paul DeFalco Jr, EPA Region IX Admin-
istrator, Leonard Saari, DOC Region X Secretarial
Representative; Allen Haile, DOC Region IX
Secretarial Representative and Donald Dubois,
EPA Region X Administrator.
QUARTERLY REPORT AVAILABLE ON
FLUE GAS DESULFURIZATION
EPA has sought to enhance the reliability and
effectiveness of flue gas desulfurization (FGD)
technology by sponsoring and conducting pro-
grams for the research, development, and
demonstration of FGD. The comprehensive
involvement of EPA in these programs has made
evident the need for systematic, timely mechan-
isms for communicating FGD results to industry.
The need for a quarterly report summarizing
recent progress in FGD technologies was identi-
fied; and thus, the FGD Quarterly Report was born.
The FGD Quarterly Report has four major
objectives: (1) to disseminate information con-
cerning EPA sponsored and conducted research,
development, and demonstration projects; (2) to
provide updates of on-going contracts; (3) to pro-
vide the interested reader with sources of more
detailed data; and (4) to report the final results of
various studies.
To receive a free subscription to the FGD
Quarterly Report send your request to: J. David
Mobley MD-61, Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory-RTP, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711.
DESIGN SEMINARS FOR
SMALL WASTEWATER TREATMENT
SYSTEMS CONTINUED
As a result of the response to last year's
series, five additional Technology Transfer Design
Seminars for Small Wastewater Treatment Sys-
tems have been scheduled for FY1978. Dates and
locations for these seminars are:
Dates
January 10-11
February 1-3
March 7-8
June 7-8
September 13-14
Region/City
V - Columbus, OH
II - San Juan, PR
X - Boise, ID
II - Princeton, NJ
V - Minneapolis, MN
Please contact the appropriate Regional
Technology Transfer Committee Chairman listed
in the back of the newsletter for details regarding
registration at these seminars.
-------
-------
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
1978 SEMINAR SCHEDULE
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SCHEDULED EVENTS
In order to keep you more aware of future Technology Transfer activities
(particularly seminars), the following schedule is included. Should you
desire more details on any of the activities listed, contact the appropriate
Technology Transfer Regional Chairman listed in the previous section of
this newsletter.
SUBJECT DATE
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems Jan. 10-11
Asphalt Industry Jan. 12-13
Asphalt Industry Jan. 26-27
Small Wastewater Treatment/Sludge Feb. 1, 2, 3
Treatment & Disposal
Asphalt Industry Mar. 1-2
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems Mar. 7-8
Sludge Treatment & Disposal Mar. 30-31
Forest Industry Apr. 4-5
Pretreatment Apr. 5-6
Concepts in Microbial Degradation Apr. 12-14
National Conference
Sludge Treatment & Disposal Apr. 20-21
Pretreatment Apr. 26-27
REGION/LOCATION
V - Holiday Inn/Across from Ohio State
University, Columbus, Ohio
IV - Holiday Inn Airport, Tampa, Florida
IX - Hyatt Regency, Phoenix, Arizona
II - San Juan, Puerto Rico
V - Stouffers Cincinnati Towers
Cincinnati, Ohio
X - Boise, Idaho
III - Philadelphia, Pa.
X - Sheraton-Lloyd Center
Portland, Oregon
I - Boston, Massachusetts
IV - Pensacola, Florida
IX - Los Angeles, California
VI - Dallas, Texas
-------
m <*
SSSZ
ATTENTION
ECHNOLOGY TRANSFER READERS
•FOLD HERE-
In accordance with Government Printing and Binding Regulations which state that:
All departments shall make necessary revisions in their mailing lists at least once each
year in order to eliminate waste in Government funds caused by publications being
improperly addressed or mailed to persons no longer desiring them. This method of
revision shall require that persons receiving publications indicate that they wish to
continue receiving the publication. Failure to reply to a mailing list revision request shall
require the elimination of the addressee from the mailing list unless it is necessary in the
conduct of official business to continue mailing publications to the addressee. It is the
judgment of the Joint Committee on Printing that the use of titles on mailing lists in lieu of
names will reduce the cost of list maintenance.
Technology Transfer is attempting to update the current mailing list. Your response to this
request is mandatory if you wish to continue receiving the T.T. Newsletter.
•FOLD HERE-
I would like to D receive the
Technology Transfer Newsletter
SSZ 2B
Name and/or Title
A
Organization
Street
City State
as
-------
After Removing This Page,
1 Fill Out Form
2 Fold and Staple or
Tape Shut
RETURN ADDRESS
PLACE
STAMP
HERE
Ms. Vickie Herzner
U.S. EPA-ERIC
26 W. St. Clair St.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on Items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below.
REGION CHAIRMAN
I Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
Albert Montague
IV
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W Va., Md., Del , D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404881-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss , Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-2200
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI
Mildred Smith
VII John Coakley
VIII Elmer Chenault
IX
William Bishop
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First International Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 749-3971
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1 735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94105
415 556-6925
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
US EPA - OR&D
ERIC
26 West St Clair
Cincinnati. Ohio 45268
(513) 684-7391 — 7398 (Inc )
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT STAFF
(Clarence demons) (Orville Macomber)
(Doug Williams) (Ed Tabn)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
SYSTEMS STAFF
(Jim Smith) (Denis Lussier)
(Guy Nelson) (Norm Kulujian)
TECHNICAL INFORMATION
OPERATIONS STAFF
(Gilbert Gighotti)
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
208 Land Use Planning
Non-point Sources
MONITORING. MEASUREMENT AND
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Monitoring
Analytical Methods
Quality Control
Remote Sensing
HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
MUNICIPAL
Wastewater
Potable Water Supply
Solid Waste
INDUSTRIAL
Wastewater
Air
Toxic and Hazardous Materials
Energy Aspects
Research Reports Production
Special Research Reports
Technology Transfer Production
Newsletter Production
Report Distribution and Coordination
Conference and Symposia Coordination
Requests Coordination
Mailing Lists Coordination
Graphic Arts and Visual Aid Support
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PUBLICATIONS
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorous Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973). 1002 D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants
(Oct. 1974) 1004 D
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems
(Oct. 1974) 1005 LJ
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006 D <
Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007 D
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater
(Oct. 1977) 1008 D
Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered
Small Communities (Oct. 1977) 1009 Dv
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001 LJ
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by
Lime Addition 2002 D
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 D
First Interim Report on EPA Alkali SO2
Scrubbing Test Facility :•,••• -2004 D
Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches -f-f. . . .2005 D
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility ~/r-'. . . .2006 L-1
S02 Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid Production Via
Magnesia Scrubbing 2007 LJ
Second Interim Report on EPA Alkali Scrubbing
Test Facility 2008 D
Magnesium Carbonate Process for Water
Treatment 2009 D
Third Interim Report on EPA Alkali Scrubbing
Test Facility 2010 D
First Progress Report Wellman-Lord Flue Gas
Desulfurization 2011 D
SWIRL Device for Regulating and Treating
Combined Sewer Overflows 2012 D
•Fabric Filter Particulate Controls on Coal-Fired
Utility Boilers: Nucla, CO. and Sunbury, PA. . .2013 D
First Progress Report on Static Pile Composting
of Wastewater Sludge 2014 D
Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal
Flows at Dawson, Minn 2015 LJ
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001 D
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) -•'/. . . . .3002 LJ
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003 LJ
Upgrading Textile Operations to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) .''.-: 3004 D
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for
Pollution Control Investments •. . . . .3005 LJ
Erosion and Sediment Control from Surface
Mining (2 Vols.) ". .' 3006 D
Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable
Industry (3 Vols.) 3007 LD
Choosing Optimum Management Strategies .... .3008 LJ-
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and
Coating of Metal Products (2 Vols.) 3009 LJ
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
-r -i
Upgrading Lagoons 4001 LJ
Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002 LH
•Status of Oxygen/Activated Sludge _. I
Wastewater Treatment 4003 •»
Nitrification/Dentrification 4004 LJ
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment '
Facilities-Case Histories 4005 LJ
Flow Equalization 4006 LJ
Wastewater Filtration . .4007 O1
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal ! : . . .4008 LJ
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration 4009 LJ
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater ~.
Effluents (3 Vols.) 4010 LJ
•Alternatives for Small Wastewater Systems
(3 Vols.) 4011 LJ
BROCHURES
Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011 LJ
Municipal Wastewater Alternatives 7v . . . .5012 LH
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality 5013 LJ
HANDBOOKS
Analytical Quality Control in Water and
Wastewater Laboratories (1972) 6001 LJ
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 LJ
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes (1974) 6003 D
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry — Part 1/Air 7001 LJ
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Industrial Energy Conservation Measures ../... .9001 LJ
•Environmental Sampling of Paraho Oil LJ
Shale Retort Process 9002 D
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes LJ No LJ
"Name
Employer.
Street.
City-
.State.
.Zip.
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct.
•Publication listed for the first time
Note: Forward to ERIC, Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
AU.S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1977—757-140/6607
-------
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Environmental Research Information Center
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, S3OO
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
THIRD CLASS BLK RT
s
\
ADDRESS LABEL
-------
NVIRONMENTAL
ESEARCH UNFORMATION LSENTER
ECHIMOLOGY
RANSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
SEZ
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OCTOBER 1377
LAND TREATMENT MANUAL TO BE
FEATURED AT 1977 WPCF CONFERENCE
ERIC is once again participating in the Annual
Conference and Exhibition of the Water Pollution
Control Federation. This year's conference -
WPCF's 50th - is being held in Philadelphia,
October 2-7, 1977. The Regional Administrator for
EPA Region III is Jack J. Schramm and the
Regional Technology Transfer chairman is
Albert Montague.
For this year's meeting, six EPA programs
concerned with wastewater pollution control have
worked together to develop one major EPA
exhibit. These programs are: ERIC, Effluent
Guidelines, 208 Planning, Construction Grants,
Municipal Operations, and Training. In addition
to the exhibit, a referral room has been set up to
handle distribution of publications from each of the
programs. Personnel from each of the programs
will be available at the exhibit and in the referral
room to answer questions, discuss EPA policy, etc.
The Process Design Manual for Land Treat-
ment of Municipal Wastewater (a joint effort of
EPA, Army Corps of Engineers, and Dept. of
Agriculture) will be made available for the first
time at the WPCF Conference. This manual
presents a rational procedure for the design of
land treatment systems. Flow rate, rapid infiltra-
tion, and overland flow processes for the
treatment of municipal wastewaters are given
emphasis. The basic unit operations and unit
processes are discussed in detail, and the design
concepts and criteria are presented. The manual
includes design examples as well as actual case
study descriptions of operational systems.
Information on planning and field investigations
is presented along with the process design criteria
for both large and small scale systems.
We invite you to visit the EPA exhibit (Booth
No. 953) and Referral Room (Booth No. 1304).
ERIC'S exhibit at last year's WP
in Minneapolis, Minn.
Annual Conference held
ERA'S RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT R§£ORT
IN WASTEWATER DISINFECTION
Introduction
The program for disinfection is directed
toward development of methodology for destruc-
tion of pathogens that is safe from the standpoint
of public health and is environmentally acceptable.
Documentation of results in the form of symposia,
regional seminars, technical publications, and a
Design Manual will be delivered. The effort is
being directed primarily to municipal design
engineers to allow them to make rational decisions
regarding selection and design of disinfection
processes. Present practice has been to duplicate
old designs because a familiar data base of
experience existed.
Both in-house pilot and extramural field scale
evaluations are being utilized to improve dis-
infection technology. Studies concern chlorine,
chlorine dioxide, dechlormation, ozone, and
ultraviolet light. Emphasis is being placed on
contacting efficiency, chemical utilization, capital
and operating costs, and efficiency. In order to
guage environmental acceptability, toxicity and
chemical side product formation are being
investigated.
Objectives
The primary objective of the Wastewater
Disinfection Program is to protect the public
-------
health from the spread of disease by controlling
the point-source discharge of pathogenic micro-
organisms and viruses. This objective is
achievable. Pursuant to that goal, the disinfect ion
processes to be developed must not be inherently
toxic to the receiving water flora and fauna.
Furthermore, formation of by-products potentially
toxigenic to man must be minimized.
The Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory (MERL) Wastewater Disinfection
Program, under the direction of Mr. Albert D.
Venosa, is organized to investigate all aspects
explicit and implicit in the above-stated objective.
Optimization of the chlorination process and
development of cost-effective alternatives are
being pursued vigorously. Direct quantification
of the effect of the various disinfection processes
on pathogenic microorganisms and naturally
occuring viruses is being carried out. Someof the
volatile and non-volatile organic constituents of
wastewater effluents which have been disinfected
by various means are being evaluated, to provide
an initial assessment of the potential human
toxigenicity of each disinfection system.
State of Art
Regulation Changed
On July 26, 1976, the EPA officially deleted
the fecal coliform standard from the Secondary
Treatment Information Regulation (40 CFR 133)
defining secondary treatment as mandated in
Public Law 92-500. Reliance on the site-specific
water quality standards of each State to set
disinfection requirements for municipal waste-
water treatment plants shall now be the practice.
Thus, disinfection will still be required by State
regulation, but no uniform Federal requirement
has to be achieved.
Chlorine
Chlorination is practiced widely, buttoo often
the practices are careless, wasteful, and inadequate.
Recently, chlorine has been identified as being
toxic to certain aquatic fish species at very low
concentrations. Furthermore, chlorine has been
implicated as a major contributing factor to the
formation of compounds potentially carcinogenic
to man. Nevertheless, it is a cost-effective
disinfectant, and fairly precise methods of
continuous feedback control are available. The
most pressing need in chlorine development
technology is engineering optimization. Rapid
mixing of the chlorine and improved design of
contact chambers to provide long contact times
are essential for achieving the desired bacterio-
logical effects and minimum residual discharge.
This need is being addressed in a project
funded jointly by EPA and the State of California.
An idealized chlorine mixing and contacting
system is being constructed and atrailor-mounted
bioassay laboratory is being prepared for use in
evaluating the disinfection efficiency and reduc-
tion in toxicity emission from such an idealized
system compared with full-scale chlorination
facilities at several California treatment plants.
Information obtained will be used to develop a
manual of design and practice for wastewater
chlorination systems.
An EPA-funded project with Utah State
University was recently completed. This project
was designed to evaluate the amenability of
algae-laden lagoon effluent to chlorine disinfec-
tion. Extensive data were gathered and statistically
analyzed, and a mathematical computer-based
model was developed to aid consulting engineers
in designing wastewater chlorination systems.
The model, called Chlor I, incorporates as the
most significant factors influencing disinfection
efficiency the following parameters: coliform
density, chlorine residual, contacttime, tempera-
ture, sulfide, total chemical oxygen demand, and
suspended solids.
Dechlorination
Dechlorination with sulfur dioxide, which is
practiced mostly in the State of California, has
been shown to eliminate the toxic effects of
residual chlorine to aquatic species. Methods are
available to control sulfur dioxide dosage with
fluctuations in chlorine residual. Reliability and
operation and maintenance (O&M) costs need to
be determined. A potential drawback with sulfur
dioxide dechlorination is that if dosage control is
not precise, an excess amount may cause a
depression in pH and dissolved oxygen. In the
latter case, reaeration would be necessary, result-
ing in an increase in disinfection cost.
A study is underway with the Los Angeles
County Sanitation District to evaluate efficiency
and reliability of sulfur dioxide dechlorination at
one or more California treatment plants currently
utilizing the process. Parameters to be investi-
gated include total and fecal coliform densities at
the outfall and downstream from the discharge,
dosage requirements, chlorine residual before
SO2 injection, pH and dissolved oxygen before
and after SO2 injection, and reaeration require-
ments. The method of feed forward control,
requiring two continuous residual chlorine
analyzers, will be thoroughly evaluated for
reliability.
Ozone
Ozone appears to be the most promising
alternative to chlorine. Several full-scale waste-
water ozonation facilities are in the design stages,
under construction, or already on-line in the U.S.
Ozone is non-toxic to aquatic organisms, is a
good virucide, and contributes to high dissolved
oxygen levels in the treated effluent. Its major
drawback is the relatively high cost of generation.
Furthermore, because of the short half-life of
ozone in aqueous solution and its extremely low
partial pressure, gas-liquid contacting must be
-------
efficient. Thus, there is a pressing need to improve
the economics of ozone generation and to
develop design guidelines for efficient gas-
liquid contacting.
In response to these needs, several projects
are underway. At the Upper Thompson Sanitation
District, Estes Park, Colorado, the cost-
effectiveness of ozone generated from air, using a
water-cooled, corona-discharge ozone genera-
tion system, is being investigated on a full-scale,
tertiary treatment plant effluent. The ozone
contractor is a covered, sparged diffuser chamber,
baffled to provide over-and-under serpentine flow
hydraulics. At the Mahoning County Sanitation
District, Youngstown, Ohio, the cost-effectiveness
of ozone generated from pure oxygen, using an
air-cooled, corona-discharge ozone generation
system, is being investigated in like manner. The
contactor is a positive pressure injection system.
Results from these two projects will provide the
necessary comparative cost-effectiveness inform-
ation to aid design engineers in choosing the best
means of wastewater disinfection suitable for
specific needs.
At EPA's Environmental Research Center,
Cincinnati, Ohio, an in-house study is being
conducted to optimize contacting of ozone with
wastewater. Several generic-type contactors are
being evaluated in parallel for disinfection
efficiency and optimum ozone utilization. Para-
meters being investigated include total fecal
conforms, fecal streptococci, Salmonella spp.,
physical-chemical characterization parameters
(COD, TSS, turbidity, Fe, Mn, pH, temperature,
etc.), ozone concentrations in the gas streams
and in the liquid, electrical power levels, and
various liquid/gas flow ratios. A comprehensive
design manual will result at the completion of the
experimental phase of work.
The popularity of ozone in the U.S. is on the
upswing. Several treatment plants utilizing ozone
for disinfection are being started up this year in
addition to those mentioned above. They include:
Springfield, Missouri; Potomac Heights, Maryland;
and Santa Clara, California; Woodlands, Texas
and Indiantown, Florida are already in operation.
Concord, North Carolina, Murphreesboro,
Tennessee, and Pensacola, Florida are under
construction, and at least 12 more plants are
known to be in the design stages.
Ultraviolet Light
Ultraviolet light is another promising alterna-
tive to chlorine. Ultraviolet has been demonstrated
to be feasible under certain conditions, but
reliability is hampered by wastewater quality and
inadequate design. Because UV is not itself a
chemical agent, there is no lasting, toxic residual
imparted to the treated effluent. However, certain
chemical compounds may be altered by UV
radiation, resulting in a possible source of
chemical contamination. Most UV units available
on the market are designed for treating potable
water. It is only recently that equipment manu-
facturers have focused their attention on waste-
water applications.
In recently completed project with the City of
Dallas, Texas, ultraviolet transmissability of the
wastewater was shown to increase with nitrifica-
tion. Since a nitrified effluent will contain lower
levels of solubleorganic compounds which would
absorb UV, improved UV light transmission would
result in such an effluent and consequently better
disinfection would be achieved. Indeed, a direct
correlation was found between mean logcoliform
reduction and percent transmittance at fixed
operational conditions. An inverse relationship
was found between mean log coliform reduction
and wastewater flow rate, indicating, as expected,
that if the intensity is fixed, better disinfection will
occur at longer detention times.
These and other effects will be studied and
quantified in greater detail in a project recently
funded at the University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill. Two generic type ultraviolet units will
be compared under identical conditions to
provide much needed design information. The
thin film, high UV intensity, short detention time
concept will be compared with the thicker water
wall, lower intensity, longer detention time
concept. In addition, the effects of filtration and
cleaning frequency will be intensively evaluated,
as well as UV intensity monitoring to establish
proper dosage criteria. The sensitivity of polio-
virus to ultraviolet exposure will be compared
with that of coliform bacteria.
A full-scale demonstration project on ultra-
violet disinfection was recently funded at the
Northwest Bergen County Sewer Authority,
Waldwick, New Jersey. A 30,000 m3/day (8 mgd)
prototype ultraviolet system will be tested on a
full-scale conventional activated sludge effluent
to obtain cost-effectiveness data on UV disinfec-
tion. Reliability of achieving the desired coliform
reduction, maintenance requirements, and
electrical power needs are the key factors under
investigation. This project and the Chapel Hill
project are both scheduled for completion by
early 1979. Interim reports will be made available
as progress ensues.
Chlorine Dioxide
Chlorine dioxide (C102) technology for
wastewater treatment is in its infancy. Like ozone,
C102 must be generated on site, and the methods
available are energy intensive. An advantage of
C102 is the fact that formation of halogenated
organic compounds does not take place to any
appreciable extent. Safety and handling precau-
tions are at least as great as the precautions
with chlorine.
A project is being funded at Stanford
University to evaluatethefeasibility of wastewater
disinfection with chlorine dioxide. A survey of the
experience with the use of C102 in water treatment
practice in Europe and the U.S., and an evaluation
-------
of the applicability of that experience to waste-
water disinfection are planned. Existing
manufacturing processes and the potential for
scale-down will be evaluated. A design concept
for a reactor system will be formulated and tested
in the laboratory. Effects of C102 on production
of chlorinated organic compounds will also be
tested. Completion of this project is scheduled
for mid-1979.
Other Research Projects Funded by EPA
As stated earlier, one of the objectives of the
MERL Wastewater Disinfection Program is to
minimize the spread of communicable disease in
the environment while at the same time mini-
mizing the formation of by-products potentially
toxigenic to man. Thus, when considering
alternatives to chlorine, the effects of such
alternatives on viruses and on chemical reactions
in the wastewater must be assessed. Two projects
are underway to evaluate these effects.
An Interagency Agreement with the Energy
Research and Development Administration
(ERDA), utilizing personnel at the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, has been funded in which
assessment of the formation of non-volatile
organic compounds in wastewater exposed to
chlorine, ultraviolet light, and ozone will be made.
Furthermore, the mutagenicity of the non-volatile
organic constituents and their disinfection
reaction products will be assessed using bacteria
and mammalian test species. Project duration is
18 months.
The other study is a grant with the
Carborundum Company to determine whether
chlorine, ozone, and ultraviolet light are effective
under actual operating conditions in achieving
natural virus inactivation in secondary and
advanced wastewater treatment plant effluents.
Two Aquella™ virus concentrators are being
used to process all samples in the field. Con-
comitant runs will be made during each operating
day: one sampling prior to disinfection and the
other subsequent to disinfection. Project duration
will be approximately 1.5 years.
Thus, the MERL Wastewater Disinfection
Program is actively and earnestly pursuing all
aspects of the field. A wastewater disinfection
symposium is planned in late Fiscal Year 1978 to
present the findings from most of the projects
mentioned above. There will, in addition, be
numerous interim and final reports appearing in
the upcoming months as more and more dataare
gathered, analyzed, and evaluated. The objectives
stated at the beginning of this report will be
achieved and a safer environment will be ensured.
Recent Results from In-House
Ozone Contactors Disinfection Study
Recently, the first phase of the in-house
ozone contactor study was completed. A packed
column, which is serving as the base unit to which
all other contactors will be compared, was
evaluated in parallel with ajet scrubber. The latter
is an atomizer-type contactor manufactured by
R. P. Industries under the trade name Dynactor.
The research was performed at MERL's experi-
mental activated sludge pilot plant located in
Cincinnati, Ohio.
The characteristics of the secondary effluent
prior to ozonation during the study period are
summarized in Table 1.
Table 1.
CHARACTERISTICS OF PILOT PLANT
EFFLUENT PRIOR TO OZONE TREATMENT
Parameter
Temperature, °C
TCOD
SCOD
TOC
TSS
Turb, JTU
TKN
NH4+-N
Organic-N
Mean*
mg/1
14
76
65
20
6
11 3
160
86
7 4
Range
mg/1
13 -
41 -
34 -
8-
2 -
1 6 -
65 -
36 -
2 2 -
14
106
105
30
11
40
27
14 1
305
*24 Data Points
Testing was performed according to a pre-
determined factorial arrangement, called a
"split-split-plot design." Secondary effluent was
pumped to each ozone contactor at a rate of
75l/min, while ozone gas, generated from air at a
constant concentration of approximately 10 mg
ozone/I air, was fed to both contactors at various
gas flow rates. Dosage was determined by
multiplying the concentration of ozone in the inlet
gas by the ratio of the gas to liquid flow rates. Four
different pre-selected dosage levels were used,
and grab samples of ozonated wastewater from
both contactors were taken for bacteriological
and chemical analysis. Both contactors received
the same dosage at any given time, but the order
in which the four dosage levels were applied in
any given experiment was randomized. Each
entire experiment was considered a "whole plot"
and was replicated on six different days (Rj). The
"split-plot" consisted of the four dosage levels (Dj)
within a replicate experiment, andthe"split-split-
plot" consisted of the two contactors (C|<) com-
pared at each dosage level within each replicate
experiment. The basis of comparison was disin-
fection efficiency, defined as total and fecal
coliform log reduction (log No/N, where No = total
or fecal coliform MPN before ozonation, and
N = total or fecal coliform MPN after ozonation),
because achievement of target coliform standards
(i.e., 1000 total coliforms/100 ml or 200 fecal
coliforms/100 ml) does not account for the initial
number of coliforms present in the wastewater
prior to ozonation.
Data analyses were facilitated by an IBM 370
computer, using a standard Biomed Package
program BMD 02V (Analysis of Variance for
Factorial Design). In each analysis of variance
-------
(ANOVA) there were three "main affects" (i.e.,
C|<, Dj , and Rj ) "under investigation, and two
interaction effects" (i.e. RjCk, and DjC(<). The
contactor main effect (C|<) tested the difference in
total or fecal coliform log reduction (TCLR or
FCLR) between the two contactors. The dose
main effect (Dj) tested the effect of ozone dosage
on the performance of both contactors. The repli-
cation main effect (Rj) tested the effect of different
days on the performance of both contactors.
Since the only variable which changed from day
to day was wastewater quality, Rj actually tested
the effect of wastewater quality on contactor
performance. The contactor-dosage interaction
effect (D|<) = 0.05], the effect
under examination is significant. The various
F-statistics were computed as follows: (1) Dose
Source of Degrees of Sums of
Variation Freedom Squares
Contactors (Ck)
Doses (Dj )
Replicates (R,)
CkDj
CkR,
R,D,
R|D,Ck
Total
1
3
5
3
5
15
15
47
16697
19141
17920
1 203
0788
12067
3543
71.359
Mean
Squares
16697
6380
3584
0401
0 158
0804
0236
f F
-------
the performance of both contactors (replication
main effect). The ANOVA in Table 3 revealed that
there was no significant interaction between
contactor performance and dosage (CkDj). This
means that the slopes of the regression equations
in Figure 1 are not significantly different. Thus,
not only did the packed column outperform the
jet scrubber with respect to TCLR, but also that
difference was constant at each dosage level
studied.
Figure 5-1
LOG TOTAL COLIFORM REDUCTION AS A
FUNCTION OF OZONE DOSE IN THE
PACKED COLUMN AND JET SCRUBBER
O-O Packed Column
TCLR = 0 14D + 058
O 6
o
LU c.
tr 3
D D Jet Scrubber
TCLR =010 D— 009
5 10—15
OZONE DOSE, mg/l
20
The data from Table 2 were subjected to linear
regression analyses to determine which factors in
the wastewater contributed to the variation in the
total coliform reduction data at each dosage level.
Correlations between TCLR and each wastewater
quality variable at each dosage level in the packed
column are summarized in Table 4.
Table 4.
CORRELATION OF TOTAL COLIFORM LOG
REDUCTION IN THE PACKED COLUMN AT
DIFFERENT OZONE DOSAGE LEVELS WITH
WASTEWATER QUALITY VARIABLES
Correlation Coefficients (r)*
03 Dose, mg/1
Variable
TCOD
SCOD
TOC
TSS
TKN
TURB
NH4— N
ORG-N
49
-0963
-0.958
-0900
-0.832
0765
-0105
0.869
0381
97
-0843
-0.910
-0.676
0.102
0438
0.031
0718
0 132
13 1
-0979
-0970
-0939
-0.294
0.162
-0111
0.817
-0078
195
0215
0 143
0 185
0640
-0.875
-0 711
-0247
-0884
*6 replicate data points used to derive each r-value
Any correlation coefficient (r-value) in Table 4
greater than 0.73 indicates TCLR is positively
affected by the wastewaterquality variable, while
an r-value less than -0.73 indicates TCLR is
adversely affected by the variable.
The data in Table 4 indicate that total chemical
oxygen demand (TCOD), soluble chemical oxygen
demand (SCOD), and total organic carbon (TOC)
significantly and adversely affected disinfection
efficiency in the packed column at ozone dosage
levels ranging from 4.9 to 13.1 mg/1. At 19.5 mg/1
TCLR was no longer affected by changes in
TCOD, SCOD, or TOC. Conversely, total Kjeldahl
nitrogen (TKN) and organic nitrogen did not
significantly affect disinfection efficiency in the
packed column until the ozone dosage was 19.5
mg/1. These observations suggest that disinfec-
tion efficiency in the packed column was not mass
transfer limited, because the magnitude of the
TCLR at each dosage level was dependent on the
concentration of organic material present in
the wastewater.
Results from the jet scrubber were similar,
except that no significant correlations between
TCLR and TCOD, SCOD, TOC, TKN ororganic-N
were found at the lowest dosage (4.9 mg/1) or the
highest dosage (19.5 mg/1). The reason for the
lack of correlation at the low dosage level was
that very little disinfection occured anyway.
Disinfection at the highest dosage level may have
been mass transfer limited.
The two ozone contactors were also evaluated
from an ozone utilization standpoint, but space
limitation preclude a detailed discussion in this
bulletin. A final report will be published shorlty,
describing the findings from this study in a com-
prehensive manner. The investigation will now
focus attention on other generic type contactors,
so that eventually design guidelines for ozone
contacting devices can be published to aid
consulting engineers in designing the most cost-
effective ozonation system that present tech-
nology will permit.
ASPHALT INDUSTRY SEMINAR
SERIES SCHEDULED
ERIC has subcontracted JACA Corp. to
conduct a series of seminars discussing the
environmental problems in the asphalt industry.
The seminars will be held in early 1978; tenative
sites are Phoenix, Arizona, Salt Lake City, Utah,
Tampa, Florida, and Cincinnati, Ohio. The con-
ferences will be co-sponsored by EPA, NAPA
(National Asphalt Pavement Association) and
APCA (Air Pollution Control Association).
There are over 1500 automated, stationary,
and portable hot mix asphalt plants in the country,
with an average of 3.5 employees per plant. This
series of seminars will be especially beneficial to
the smaller plant owner or operator needing
assistance with air and water pollution re-
quirements.
-------
ERRATA SHEET FOR"MANUAL OF TREATMENT
TECHNIQUES FOR MEETING INTERIM
PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS"
With the pending implementation of the
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, the
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory's
Water Supply Research Division published a
booklet entitled "Manual of Treatment Techniques
for Meeting the Interim Primary Drinking Water
Regulations," EPA-600/8-77-005 in May 1977. An
errata sheet for this booklet has been prepared
and is available. Persons who obtained the treat-
ment manual at the 1977 AWWA Annual Conven-
tion or at one of the Technology Transfer
Seminars on Designing and Upgrading Drinking
Water Treatment Systems may wish to obtain the
errata sheet. Requests should be directed to the
Water Supply Research Division, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, USEPA,
26 West St. Glair Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
Iowa State University, all of whom contributed to
the preparation of the original version.
This revised publication can be obtained by
checking the appropriate box (#4007) on the order
form in the back of this newsletter.
"WASTEWATER FILTRATION"
SEMINAR HANDOUT REVISED
The Technology Transfer seminar publica-
tion entitled "Wastewater Filtration," originally
published in July 1974, has been revised and is
available upon request. The revision includes an
update on Filter Design Considerations and results
from pilot scale testing. Also included is a
summary of performance data for wastewater
filtration.
This publication was revised by John L.
Cleasby, E. Robert Baumann, and Anson Marston,
THE PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF
COAL MINING RECLAMATION AND
POLLUTION CONTROL
Over 180 mining representatives attended a
2-day seminar, "The Practical Aspects of Coal
Mining Pollution Control," held in Zanesville, Ohio
on July 19 and 20, 1977. The seminar was co-
sponsored by U.S. EPA—Cincinnati, the Co-
operative Extension Service—Ohio State University,
Ohio Department of Natural Resources—Division
of Reclamation and Division of Soil and Water
Districts, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency,
Ohio Federation of Soil and Water Districts, Ohio
Mining and Reclamation Association, and U.S.
Department of Agriculture—Soil Conservation
Service.
The seminar was designed for the partici-
pants and attendees to exchange and share
information on current practices for defining and
controlling coal mining pollution. The topics
presented included information on the working
role of the involved organizations, Pre-planning
considerations, Techniques and Practices for
Sedimentation and Erosion Control During
Mining and After Extraction—Reclamation. This
seminar was the second in the series of Coal
Mining Pollution Control seminars.
-------
DESIGN SEMINARS FOR
SMALL WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS
Technology Transfer conducted the last
scheduled Design Seminar on Small Wastewater
Treatment Systems for FY 1977 in Syracuse,
New York, September 7-8, 1977
This seminar series has been one of
Technology Transfer's most successful and will
have been presented in all ten geographical
regions, including Seattle, Philadelphia,
Kansas City, Concord, San Francisco, Denver,
Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, and finally Syracuse
Contributing to the success of this seminar
series by their timely and pertinent presentations
were Gordon Gulp and H. H Benjes, Clean Water
Consultants; Richard Otis, William Boyle, Jerry
Tyler, and James Converse, University of
Wisconsin; Joseph Rezek and Ivan Cooper,
Rezek, Henry, Meisenheimer and Gende; Joseph
Middlebrooks and James Reynolds, Utah State
University; Jerry Troyan, Brown and Caldwell;
William Bowne, Douglas County, Oregon, and
James Kreissl, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Material presented at these seminars is
currently being edited for bulk publication and
distribution. Notice of availability of these
documents will appear in this newsletter.
1
f
Gary Plews, State of Washington, speaking at Seattle Design
Seminar for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems.
Keith Dearth, EPA Office of Water Programs Operations,
Washington, D.C. addressing the attendees at the Seattle
Design Seminar for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems.
James F. Kreissl, U.S. EPA, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, during Technical Session on
Alternative Collection Systems at Design Seminar for Small
Wastewater Treatment Systems.
FIRST CAPSULE REPORTS
IN MUNICIPAL AREA PUBLISHED
The first three Technology Transfer Capsule
Reports dealing with municipal pollution control
technology have been printed and are now avail-
able. They are:
• Swirl Device for Regulating and Treating
Combined Sewer Overflows (#2012) - This
Capsule Report describes the results of a
full-scale prototype SWIRL unit that con-
trolled real overflows in Syracuse, N.Y ,
and discusses other areas of application.
• First Progress Report on Static Pile Compost-
ing of Wastewater Sludge (#2014) - Static pile
composting and its application to the munici-
palities of Bangor, Maine, and Durham,
New Hampshire are described
• Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows
at Dawson, Minnesota (#2015)-The Dawson
project demonstrated that small plants can
provide highly reliable and efficient removal of
BOD and SS, and consistent nitrification.
These publications can be obtained by
checking the appropriate boxes on the orderform
in the back of this newsletter. Additional Capsule
Reports in the municipal area are being prepared
and their availability will be announced in this
newsletter
INDUSTRIAL INITIATIVES CONFERENCE
Methods for reducing industrial pollution
and achieving substantial cost benefits at the
same time was the focus of a top-level govern-
ment/industry conference in Boston, June 8th
and 9th, at the Boston Park Hotel. It was patterned
after the very successful Chicago conference in
January.
-------
This unique conference brought together
members of Congress, executives from leading
corporations and top federal, state and local
government officials to discuss a variety of new
and important pollution control issues and tech-
nologies
An audience of 250 were at the workshops
covering specifictechmcal approaches, including
the key elements of selecting and managing a
pollution abatement program The conference
was sponsored by Region I and ERIC, in coopera-
tion with the U S Department of Commerce, state
manufacturing associations and Chambers of
Commerce from Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode
Island, Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut
EPA Administrator Douglas Costle addresses the Boston
EPA/DOC Conference audience.
Sid Caller, DOC Deputy Assistant Sec'y discusses incentives
to improving industrial pollution control.
Jack Bays of Coors points out resource recovery methods in
the brewing industry.
EPA's OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
RESEARCH PROGRAM IS
GAINING MOMENTUM
The Operation and Maintenance Program
within the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory in Cincinnati has made significant
progress in accomplishing its overall objectives
of demonstrating methods, processes and pro-
cedures for improved operaion and maintenance
of municipal wastewater treatment plants during
the past two years
One of the major objectives of this program is
to identify, evaluate, quantify and document
factors contributing to poor municipal treatment
plant performance This effort is being accom-
plished by a three and one-half year, two-phase
National O&M cause and effect survey concen-
trating on plants located in the eastern and
western sections of the United States. The two-
years first phase of this project has recently been
completed whereby 180 half-day to one-day plant
site visits and 60 three- to five-day comprehensive
plant evaluations were completed by two con-
tractors. Phase I survey results have identified
and quantified the impact of over sixty different
factors affecting plant performance. These factors
were grouped into four major categories (admin-
istration, maintenance, design and operation) and
were evaluated using a ranking and weighting
table developed as a part of this project. Adverse
factors at all facilities evaluated were ranked in
order of frequency and severity of occurrence
The highest ranking factor identified was "operator
application of concepts and testing to process
control."
Based on observations noted during the first
phase effort, recommendations were made in the
areas of technical assistance, train ing,incentives,
staffing, and enforcement with respect to an over-
all approach to improve plant operation and
maintenance. Final reports describing the first
-------
phase results will be published by November 1977
and will be available from:
U.S. EPA
Urban Systems Management Section
26 W. St. Clair
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Other areas of O&M program emphasis
include demonstrating the cost and effectiveness
of flow equalization, initiation of a four-year
reliability engineering and analysis program
consisting of biological, mechanical component,
physical/chemical process and overall system
reliability; demonstration of low-cost improved
operating efficiency of groups of small municipal
treatment plants through implementation of
centralized management concepts, and establish-
ment of a centralized computerized data base for
storage, analysis and retrieval of field verified
O&M cost, performance and reliability data.
Flow equalization research will culminate
this year with the development and publication of
a comprehensive flow equalization manual of
practice that presents the cost and effectiveness
of flow equalization based on the results of three
EPA demonstration projects, one in-house pilot
investigation and field operating experience from
fifty full-scale flow equalization facilities.
Furture high priority activities of the O&M
program will include examination of the cost
benefits of novel materials and methods of con-
struction, analysis of energy utilization of
municipal treatment facilities, investigation of the
O&M cost of sludge management alternatives,
and O&M cost of land application systems.
NEW PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL:
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
FOR SEWERED SMALL COMMUNITIES
A new Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual presenting information for the planning,
design and operation of present and future waste-
water treatment facilities for sewered small
communities is now available.
The manual addresses such topics as flow
equalization, package plants, treatment ponds,
nutrient removal, and sludge handling, with
specific emphasis on application at small plants
(less than 1 mgd). There are also chapters on
Operation and Maintenance and Cost Effectiveness.
Prepared by Camp, Dresser & McKee, this
manual can be obtained by checking the approp-
riate box (#1009} on the order form in the back of
this newsletter.
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN
I Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
Ill
IV
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New, York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W.Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-2200
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI
Mildred Smith
VII John Coakley
VIII Elmer Chenault
IX
William Bishop
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First International Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 749-3971
Texas, Okla., Arl., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.,
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-6925
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Transfer Chairman. (See above)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
• Richardson, Texas Project—Title: "Somebody around here
must be doing something good." (15 min.)
• Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
• Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif.—Title:
"The Water Plan." (28'A min.)
The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min.)
"Breakthrough at Clear Lake" (28 min.)
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002 D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants
(Oct. 1974) 1004 D
SuIfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems
(Oct. 1974) 1005 D
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006 D
Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007 D
1 Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater 1008 L~H
Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered
Small Communities 1009 D
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001 D
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by
Lime Addition 2002 D
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 D
First Interim Report on EPA Alkali S02
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 D
Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005 D
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006 LJ
SOg Scrubbing and Su Ifuric Acid Production Via
Magnesia Scrubbing 2007 D
Second Interim Report on EPA Alkali Scrubbing
Test Facility 2008 D
Magnesium Carbonate Process for Water
Treatment 2009 D
Third Interim Report on EPA Alkali Scrubbing
Test Facility 2010 D
First Progress Report Wellman-Lord Flue Gas
Desulfurization 2011 D
•SWIRL Device for Regulating and Treating
Combined Sewer Overflows 2012 D
' First Progress Report on Static Pile Composting
of Wastewater Sludge 2014 D
' Effluent Treatment of Small Municipal
Flows at Dawson, Minn 2015 LJ
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce L~H
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001 D
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002 D
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003 D
Upgrading Textile Operations to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for
Pollution Control Investments 3005
Erosion and Sediment Control from Surface
Mining (2 Vols.) 3006
Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable
Industry (3 Vols.) 3007
Choosing Optimum Management Strategies 3008
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and
Coating of Metal Products (2 Vols.) 3009
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons 4001
Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
Nitrification/Dentrification 4004
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005
Flow Equalization 4006
Wastewater Filtration 4007
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration 4009
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater
Effluents (3 Vols.) 4010
BROCHURES
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011 D
Municipal Wastewater Alternatives 5012 D
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality 5013 D
HANDBOOKS
Analytical Quality Control in Water and
Wastewater Laboratories (1972) 6001 D
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 D
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes (1974) 6003 D
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry - Part I/Air 7001 D
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Industrial Energy Conservation Measures 9001 L~H
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes LJ No LJ
*Name.
Employer,
Street
City.
.State.
.Zip.
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct
•Publication listed for the first time.
Note: Forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-f U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1977-757-056/6500 Region No. 5-11
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC
EPA-335
ADDRESS LABEL
-------
NVIRONMENTAL LiJESEARCH ^INFORMATION LSENTER
ECHNOLOGY
The Bridge Between Research and Use
sssz
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
JUNE 1377
NATIONAL CONFERENCES ON 208
PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Technology Transfer and the Water Plan-
ning Division of the Office of Water and
Hazardous Materials, Washington, D.C., co-
sponsored three National Conferences on
Section 208 Planning and Implementation
at Reston, Virginia, March 15-17, at Denver,
Colorado, April 19-21 and at St. Louis, Mis-
souri, May 24-26 of this year.
The objective of the conferences was to
bring together in one meeting the various
aspects of the 208 Areawide Water Quality
Management Planning as required by Sec-
tion 208 of PL 92-500. They were structured
to show the interrelationship of the technical
assessment and control procedures for pol-
lutants with the institutional process that is
so necessary to achieve implementation of
the 208 plan.
The conference at the Sheraton Inn,
Reston, Virginia (a suburb of Washington,
John A. Green, Regional Administrator, Region 8, Denver,
CO, at Denver 208 conference.
D.C.), was 3 days in length with an attend-
ance of over 700—the largest audience ever
to attend a Technology Transfer seminar. A
breakdown of the registration showed repre-
sentatives from the following groups:
Consulting firms
State and local 208 agencies
State governments
Federal agencies
Local governments
Universities (students and staff)
Citizens organizations
Private industry
Trade organizations
Elected officials
172
157
107
84
69
47
31
29
18
3
Walter S. Groszyk, Deputy Director, Water Planning Division,
U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, at Reston 208 conference.
A total of 65 speakers made presentations
over the 3-day period, from: state and local
208 agencies; state water pollution control,
agriculture, mining, and highway agencies;
county conservation districts; state elected
officials; congressional committees; conser-
vation groups; consulting firms; universities;
and federal agencies.
The first day of each conference was a
general session that discussed regulatory
management and institutional considera-
tions relating to 208 planning and case
studies by 208 agencies. The second day
-------
consisted of four concurrent sessions (re-
peated on the third day) that presented tech-
nical assessment and control procedures for
non-point-source pollutants found in urban
stormwater; agriculture, silviculture, mining,
and construction activities; solid waste and
liquid waste sludge disposal; and septic tank
discharges.
Connie Brown, Principal Planner, Knoxville-Knox Co., Metro
Planning Comm., Knoxville, TN, at Reston 208 conference.
Walter Peechatka, Director, Bureau of Soil Conservation,
State of Pennsylvania, at Reston 208 conference.
CURREIMTSTATUS OF RESEARCH IN AUTOMATION
OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES
During the last 15 years industry has
demonstrated that automation of chemical
processes is cost-effective and improves
product quality. Automation of wastewater
treatment and collection systems also
promises improved performance at lower
costs. Furthermore, with proper use of exist-
ing resources, automation can also save
energy. For some unit operations requiring
relatively short response times, such as auto-
mated dissolved oxygen (DO) control in-acti-
vated sludge systems, cost and energy sav-
ings and performance improvements have
already been demonstrated. Many waste-
water treatment processes have such long
response times that manual control is very
effective. But, even here, automation may be
beneficial because it does provide continuous
control and, therefore, assures the reliability
of the system.
The current status of automated control of
wastewater treatment is described in this re-
port, along with the research that has been
sponsored by the U.S. EPA. The report also
includes a discussion on direct digital con-
trol, and closes by discussing the research
needs and problem areas.
Status of Automatic Control Applications
EPA supported a survey to evaluate the use
of automatic control equipment at 50 waste-
water treatment systems. Only those treat-
ment facilities that were believed to have
some degree of automation were selected for
the survey.
The present use of specific types of sensors
was evaluated by considering the distribution
of all types of sensors in all 50 plants, as
shown in Figure 1. Every plant surveyed had
a device for monitoring flow. Indeed, 30 per-
cent of all the instruments in all the plants
were used for flow measurement (Figure 1).
Automatic analyzers were the next highest
category, probably because of the wide
variety of parameters measured, including
turbidity, conductivity, pH, DO, chlorine
residual, and organics. The section labeled
miscellaneous analyzers in Figure 1 includes
devices for measurement of rotational speed,
weight, position, and so forth.
The instrument performance observed
during the survey was summarized accord-
ing to the criteria of unsatisfactory (aban-
doned equipment), fair (performance con-
-------
FIGURE 1. Observed distribution of process instruments in
wastewater treatment plants.
sidered marginal or excessive maintenance
is required), and satisfactory (see Figure 2).
Except for such devices as the bubbler-type
level detectors, Venturis, and temperature
gauges, most instruments had a performance
record 31 percent less than satisfactory. The
survey also found that the reported reliability
of the instruments is not uniform, and instru-
ments manufactured by the same manufac-
turer and of identical model were abandoned
at some locations but were satisfactory at
other locations. One probable cause for this
anomaly is that the quality and quantity of
maintenance varied at different plant sites.
Control of the hydraulics and chemical dos-
age using analog methods were the principal
control techniques observed being used by
the survey teams.
The performance of the automatic control
system was to a large degree determined by
the performance of the measuring devices.
Simple equipment such as bubbler-type level
detectors performed well and were integrated
successfully into automatic control systems.
Except in the case of computers, as the con-
trol scheme or the sensor required became
more complicated, the number of poor expe-
riences increased. (See Figure 3.) One im-
portant finding of the survey was that
approximately 31 percent of the instruments
or automatic control loops were abandoned.
The most widespread process and, thus,
the one receiving the most attention is acti-
vated sludge. Air supply is best controlled by
using DO as the controlling parameter. If
properly applied, DO control will show a cost
and energy saving, and in many cases will
improve the performance of the plant. Food-
to-microorganism (F/M) control in general
still requires further research. The details of
EPA research on DO and F/M control are dis-
cussed later in this report. In general, instan-
taneous F/M control has no apparent advan-
tage over DO control, with the possible
exception of its application in step-feed sys-
tems, such as were demonstrated by the EPA
at Hillsboro, Oregon. A related control
strategy is the control of the sludge retention
time (SRT), which appears to offer no diffi-
culties and is easy to implement.
Another approach to the control of the
aerator is a system that has been demon-
strated by Brouzes, in France. The system
wastes activated sludge on the basis of the air
demand. Althouyii the system has not been
tested in the United States, it is being used
in France.
Very few process control strategies are
being used in sludge conditioning and de-
watering because of a lack of understanding
of the basic nature of the processes used.
This area will be a major target for EPA re-
search and development in the near future.
Most of the controls used are to protect and
control the machinery. For both the incinera-
tor and the anaerobic digester, temperature
controls are well-established technology.
Because of the similarity of the physical-
chemical processes to those currently used
in some parts of the chemical industry, auto-
matic control systems are relatively easy to
implement. Because of the short response
times, breakpoint chlorination requires tight
control. Systems for complete on-line con-
trol without some flow or load equalization
have not yet been developed.
Automatic control technology for both
chlorine disinfection and stormwater treat-
ment and detention centers is well estab-
lished, and control systems are usually avail-
able from the equipment manufacturer.
EPA Research
Effectiveness of Automation for Biological
Treatment. The primary question that EPA
research has sought to answer is how effec-
tive is automation? The technique usually
suggested for such an evaluation is the com-
parison of plant performance under auto-
matic control with that under manual opera-
tion. However, the standards for manual
operation vary according to the idiosyncrasy
of each plant and of each operator. It is
necessary, therefore, that the manual opera-
tion be well defined and rigidly enforced.
Two long-term studies that partially meet
these requirements were carried out at
Renton, Washington, and Palo Alto, California.
The Renton plant was operated for about a
year (March 1970 to April 1971) under man-
ual control while an automatic DO control
system was being installed in a new aerator.
The following year, the plant was operated
-------
Number
of cases
Measuring devices
Percent of cases
30 40 50 60
70 80 90 100
Transmitting rain gauges
Rotational speed
Residual chlorine
Venturis, orifices, nuzzles
Bubbler-type level detectors
Weirs and plumes
Differential pressure level detectors
Membrane DO probe
Sampling systems
All other level detectors
Magnetic flowmeters
Other flowmeters
pH and oxidation-reduction potential
Nuclear radiation density
Other analytical analyzers
Legend
Unsatisfactory
q Marginal
Satisfactory
FIGURE 2. Performance summary of measuring devices in wastewater treatment facilities.
successfully with automatic DO control.
Data were collected for comparative purposes
during the months of October, November,
and December for the years 1970 and 1971.
The operators and plant management had an
excellent attitude toward automation. Also,
the manual control policy, which consisted
of manual DO measurements and air flow
adjustments twice per shift, was well defined
and expertly carried out.
It is unlikely that the sewage would be
identical for both time periods. In fact, the
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) loading
to the plant was 50 percent higher during the
period of automated operation. In spite of
this increase, the performance of the plant
improved. The effluent BOD decreased from
a geometric mean of 11.1 ppm, obtained
during manual operation, to a mean of 3.9
ppm for automatic operation. Figure 4 shows
the effluent BOD data plotted on logarithmic
probability paper to obtain a frequency dis-
tribution of measurements. The slope of the
lines reflects the degree of reliability. For
example, in Figure 4, the reduced slope of
the automatic control line indicates that
automation resulted in less variation of
effluent BOD.
Further analysis indicated that the sludge
characteristics may also have been affected
by automatic DO control. The frequency dis-
tribution of the sludge volume index (SVI) is
-------
Control strategy
Number
of cases
Percent of class
40 50 60
70
80
90 100
Automatic scum removal
Automatic data acquisition
Legend
Unsatisfactory
Marginal
Satisfactory
FIGURE 3. Summary of automatic control performances in wastewater treatment facilities.
shown in Figure 5. The arithmetic mean for
the SVI with manual control was 332. This
mean was reduced to 86 with automatic con-
trol. The difference in the slopes of the two
lines is more marked than for the effluent
BOD comparison, indicating a greater ad-
vantage for automatic control in maintaining
an acceptable SVI.
During the semiautomatic operation at
Palo Alto, the computer calculated the DO set-
points using data obtained from DO probes,
and then the operators made the appropriate
99.99
100r r
99 9080
2010
0.01
Manual control
60
40
0)
I 20
o
Q
O
CD
1
0.01 1 1020 8090 99 99.99
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS EQUAL TO OR
LESS THAN STATED CLASS MEAN
FIGURE 4. Comparison of automatic vs. manual operation
using BOO in the effluent.
Automatic control
99.99 99
1,000
600
400
200
5 100
" 60
40
20
10
90 80
20 10
Automatic Control
0.01
0.01 1 10 20 80 90 99 99.99
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS EQUAL TO
OR LESS THAN STATED CLASS MEAN
FIGURE 5. Comparison of automatic vs. manual using SVI.
-------
corrections. Manual operation consists of
manual measurements and adjustments
twice per shift. When the semiautomatic
operation was compared to manual opera-
tion (Figure 6), an improvement in effluent
suspended solids was noted. In addition, a
13-percent performance improvement as
measured by effluent total organic carbon
(TOG) and an 11-percent reduction in air use
was observed. The latter calculates to a sav-
ing of $5,380 per year for a 25-mgd plant,
based on 1974 dollars.
The other control strategies that were eval-
uated at Palo Alto concentrated on F/M.
Several techniques, such as TOC, chemical
oxygen demand (COD), and oxygen uptake,
were considered for measuring the food.
However, suitable automatic TOC and COD
analyzers were not available for on-line con-
trol during the Palo Alto experiments. There-
fore, only two F/M control strategies could
be evaluated. These were feedback respirom-
etry FR control using an on-line respirometer,
and DO return activated sludge (RAS) con-
trol. In both cases the DO was controlled as
described earlier, and, because the results
were similar, only the DO/RAS control loop
will be described.
For DO/RAS control, the aeration tank is
used as a respirometer. The rate of air de-
mand is assumed to be proportional to the
BOD input, and the return sludge is adjusted
to maintain the desired F/M ratio. It was found
at Palo Alto that DO/RAS and FR control are
technically feasible control strategies; how-
ever, when comparing the results to those
obtained when only DO control was used, the
plant showed no performance improvement
in terms of effluent quality or cost savings.
These results do not mean that F/M control
is not desirable. A recent study at Hillsboro,
Oregon, indicated that when a plant is sub-
jected to severe shock loads F/M control will
100
£E60
3Z"
co 040
LU
LL LU
LL 0
oo
o co
LU
CO
Manual I
Automatic DO control
I I
I I I I I
I I
0.2 1 10 20 80 90
CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY, %
99 99.8
maintain effluent standards. Another factor
that has not been evaluated is the effect of
F/M control in maintaining, over a long
period, desirable bacterial types in the acti-
vated sludge systems.
Tests at 12 activated sludge treatment
plants (including Renton and Palo Alto)
showed that in 9 cases automatic DO control
provided substantial savings in aeration
energy usage over manual DO control. Only
nine cases were considered to have had the
necessary criteria for a comparison of auto-
matic to manual operation, and of these nine
cases substantial improvements in BOD
removal efficiency were observed at only two
plants. In the case of sludge sedimentation,
four plants were observed to have significant
improvements, with the remainder showing
little improvement. These data are summar-
ized in Table 1.
Table 1
SUMMARY OF AUTOMATED DO
CONTROL PERFORMANCE
Parameter
Air supplied per unit quantity of
BOD removed
Air supplied per unit volume of
influent
BOD removed per blower
kilowatt-hour
BOD removal efficiency
Improvement in sludge volume
index
Percent Number
improve- of
ment plants
21.9
11.6
32.1
13.8
108.6
9
9
5
2
4
FIGURE 6. Palo Alto comparisons of automatic vs. manual
for secondary effluent suspended solids.
The results do indicate that DO control is a
valuable control loop that should be explored
further. The ease and simplicity of installing
and maintaining a DO loop is more than com-
pensated for by the cost saving and perform-
ance improvements.
Automation of Physical-Chemical Treat-
ment. Compared to biological treatment, the
technology for physical-chemical treatment
is better understood. But because of the lack
of full-scale, fully automated, physical-
chemical treatment plants, the EPA research
was conducted at the Blue Plains pilot plant.
The processes at the pilot plant consisted of
lime precipitation with intermediate recar-
bonation, dual media filtration, breakpoint
chlorination, and granular carbon adsorption.
Every process had some degree of auto-
mation, but only the four alternative control
strategies for lime-feed control and filtration
and the control strategies for breakpoint
chlorination will be described.
-------
The four alternative strategies studied for
lime-feed control were conductivity ratio,
flow proportional, pH plus flow proportional,
and alkalinity plus flow proportional.
The conductivity-ratio control scheme
involves measuring conductivity in the pri-
mary reaction zone and in the influent waste-
water. The ratio of these measurements
generates a control signal for the lime-feed
valve. For flow-proportional control, the
influent flow rate is measured, and this signal
is transmitted directly to the control valve.
For pH plus flow-proportional control, the pH
is measured in the primary reaction zone,
and this signal is used to adjust the signal
generated from the flow-proportional loop.
For alkalinity plus flow-proportional control,
a sample is pumped from the clarified zone of
the clarifier through a porous rock filter to an
automatic titrator. The resulting alkalinity
signal is transmitted to the multiplying trans-
mitter in a flow-proportioning control system
for final adjustment of lime addition.
The results of a 7-day test run are shown in
Table 2.
Table 2
PERCENTAGE DEVIATION FROM
TARGET DURING 7-DAY TEST RUN
Ranges of
deviation
from target
Control scheme alkalinity. %
Conductivity-ratio +16 to-20
Flow-proportional +15 to-15
pH plus flow-proportional +10 to~10*
Proportional +10 to-15**
Alkalinity plus flow-proportional +7.5 to -7.5
*First 2 days.
**Entire 7-day test period.
Conductivity-ratio control was found to be
the least accurate, but it would be a good
backup control system because it is depend-
able and the equipment requires little main-
tenance. The flow-proportional control
system was very sensitive to any change in
lime-slurry concentration and depended
heavily on the accuracy of the flow measure-
ment device. After 7 days of operation, the pH
electrodes were coated with a calcium car-
bonate scale approximately 1/16 inch thick.
This coating was removed in 2 percent hydro-
chloric acid and the electrode regained its
initial response characteristics. By schedul-
ing electrode cleaning every 2 days, pH con-
trol will work satisfactorily. Placement of the
pH probe in a separate rapid-mix tank re-
duces the maintenance requirements associ-
ated with placement in the primary reaction
zone of a single-unit clarification system.
Although alkalinity plus flow-proportional
control produced the closest alkalinity con-
trol of all the systems studied, the equipment
malfunctioned repeatedly because of filter
clogging. The inability to filter high solids
concentrations efficiently required reloca-
tion of the sample point from the reaction
zone to the clarified zone. This change re-
sulted in a 2-hour lag in the response time,
which caused large swings in process ef-
fluent quality when the lime-slurry concen-
tration changed. Until the solids handling
problem for alkalinity plus flow-proportional
control is solved, the recommended control
system is pH plus flow-proportional, with
conductivity-ratio control as a backup.
Operation of the dual-media gravity filters
was contro|led with four alternative back-
wash initiation and control schemes. Alarm
schemes used to initiate backwash had time-
delay circuits to prevent accidental or
momentary events from triggering the back-
wash cycle prematurely. The four models
used were headless, high level (influent
level), programed time interval, and manual.
The headless sensor initiates the backwash
cycle when the available head decreases to a
preset minimum value. When the level tends
to change, the high level indicator opens an
effluent control valve so that a constant level
is maintained. When the control valve is 100
percent open, backwash is initiated. The pro-
gramed time interval controller will initiate
backwash at the expiration of a preselected
number of operating hours. The operator
may override any of the above controls at any
time with the manual mode.
The effluent from clarification was distrib-
uted equally to the operating filters by a
mechanical splitter box. As a filter was isolated
for backwash, the flow to that filter was re-
distributed to the remaining operating filters.
If the headless alarm was used and if the filter
backwash occurred at peak flow rates, the re-
distribution caused the already stressed
operating filters to be overstressed. The final
result was a chain reaction resulting in the
need to backwash all available filters in a
relatively short time, which increased the
requirements for backwash-water pumps
and storage capacity.
The programed time interval controller
was used to schedule filter backwashing at
different hours during periods of low flow.
This approach reduced backwash-water
pumping and storage requirements, and it
eliminated oyerstressing of the system. The
headless indicator was then used as a backup
-------
alarm to prevent flooding when system up-
sets caused increased solids loading and
shorter filter runs than the programed time
interval. The high level alarm was connected
to an audiovisual alarm and was used to indi-
cate equipment failure. This system has pro-
vided peak operating efficiency at the lowest
possible operating cost.
Breakpoint Chlorination
The control scheme developed to control
breakpoint Chlorination employs a feed-
forward signal proportional to the mass of
influent ammonia and a feedback signal
based on the free residual chlorine concen-
tration error. The feedforward signal is de-
rived from the concentration of ammonia in
the influent, the influent flow rate, and a pre-
selected weight ratio of chlorine to ammonia.
If digital control of the system were practiced,
this feedforward signal would be adjusted by
the amount of chlorine used for pH control
during prechlorination. The control loop for
alkali addition (NaOH) is derived from a feed-
forward signal based on the chlorine dose
used and a feedback signal based on the pH
error. The on-stream analysis of ammonia by
a colorimetric analyzer, both before and after
breakpoint Chlorination, has been accurate
and dependable. Free residual chlorine is
also measured continuously by a colori-
metric analyzer. Preliminary operating expe-
rience has been favorable.
Digital Control
Only a few plants have used digital loops in
this country as indicated in the EPA survey;
most use analog control. Except at the EPA
pilot plant and at Palo Alto, where digital
process control systems were studied, the
digital control applications have been re-
stricted chiefly to hydraulic regulation of
collection systems or of the flows at the treat-
ment plant, and to DO control in the activated
sludge process. The San Jose plant is atypi-
cal example of this direct digital operation
Many plants are constructing or planning
installation of digital process control sys-
tems, as for example, the planned physical-
chemical plant at Garland, Texas, the Metro
Plant in St. Paul, Minnesota, and the recently
completed plant at Contra Costa, California.
But at present the integrated digital process
control approach has not been adequately
developed. For large plants, control with a
digital computer is the most economic
technique.
Another approach to the use of the com-
puter is demonstrated by Los Angeles
County Sanitation District. Here, five waste-
water treatment plants are semiautomatically
controlled by a centrally located computer.
The operators of each of these plants key in
their data to the central computer using a
terminal. The computer analyzes and stores
the data and also calculates operational set-
points for the plants. This information is then
teletyped to the operator who manually ad-
justs the plant.
Research Needs and Problem Areas
To initiate a coordinated attack on instru-
mentation and automation problems in this
field, a workshop entitled "Research Needs
for Automation of Wastewater Treatment
Systems" was held in Clemson, South
Carolina, in September 1974. This workshop,
sponsored by EPA in cooperation with
Clemson University, provided an opportunity
for workers in this area to discuss their re-
search problems and needs.
The workshop found that the general prob-
lem areas were the lack of adequate field
experience, quantitative understanding of
wastewater systems, and required sensors.
In other words, the problems are a lack of
sensors and of fundamental knowledge
about the treatment processes. These prob-
lems were stated in almost every session. To
resolve these problems, the needed research
should include demonstrations of automated
process control,development of mathemati-
cal models and algorithms, and evaluation of
sensors. The workshop also indicated a need
for an information clearinghouse, including
the international exchange of data; and pro-
jected a new philosophy of wastewater reno-
vation as opposed to processing wastewater
to minimum quality requirements. The cost-
effective application of instrumentation and
automation to wastewater management sys-
tems will be a key to implementing this
philosophy.
This feature article on automation of wastewater treatment
was prepared by Joseph F. Roesler, Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
DESIGN SEMINARS FOR SMALL
WATERWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS
Five Technology Transfer design seminars
for small waterwaste treatment systems have
been presented since March. These seminars
were held in Seattle, Washington, March 7-9,
in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March 30-31;
in Kansas City, Missouri, April 26-28, in Con-
cord, New Hampshire, May 4-5; and in San
Francisco, California, May 24-26.
Key presentations at these seminars were
given by Gordon Gulp and H.H. Benjes,
Clean Water Consultants; Richard Otis,
William Boyle, Jerry Tyler, and James
-------
Converse, University of Wisconsin; Joseph
Rezek and Ivan Cooper, Rezek, Henry,
Meisenheimer and Gende; Joseph Middle-
brooks and James Reynolds, Utah State Uni-
versity; Jerry Troyan, Brown & Caldwell;
William Bowne, Douglas County, Oregon;
and James Kreissl, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati,
Ohio.
Future seminars in this series will be held in
Denver, Atlanta, Dallas, New York, and
Chicago.
COAL MINING POLLUTION CONTROL
Over 140 mining representatives attended
a 1-day seminar, "The Practical Aspects of
Coal Mining Pollution Control," held in
Hazard, Kentucky, on March 8, 1977. The
seminar was sponsored by EPA, Hazard
Community College, and the National Coal
Association. The seminar provided mining
operators the opportunity to meet with EPA
officials from Region IV and the Cincinnati
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory.
The seminar was designed for the partici-
pants and attendees to exchange and share
information on current practices for defining
and controlling coal mining pollution. The
topics presented included information on
EPA regulations and procedures, 208 plan-
ning, sediment and erosion control, and
sampling procedures. The seminar format
will be repeated in Zanesville, Ohio on July
19 and 20 (see Technology Transfer Sched-
uled Events).
George Harlow, U.S. EPA Region IV, answers questions from
the audience at the Hazard, KY, Mining Pollution Control
Seminar.
Participants on the morning panel discussion at the Hazard, KY, seminar are (left to right) Asa Foster, John Martin, George Harlow,
John Marlar (all of U.S. EPA) and Charles Peters of Kentucky's Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection.
-------
METAL FABRICATING SEMINARS
AND SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Over 600 industrial representatives at-
tended four 2-day Technology Transfer
seminars, "Upgrading Metal Machining, Fab-
ricating, and Coating Operations to Reduce
Pollution." The seminars, held in Boston,
Chicago, Anaheim, and Dallas, attracted
industrial decision makers who are responsi-
ble for selecting, purchasing, designing, or
operating pollution control equipment. The
seminars' technical sessions emphasized
proven and available practical solutions for
the control of air and water pollutants; the
reduction of wasteloads; and the treatment,
disposal, or recovery of waste products and
heat. The seminars were sponsored by EPA,
EPA, the Society of Manufacturing Engi-
neers (SME), and the Association of Finish-
ing Processes of SME.
The information presented in the technical
sessions is available in three volumes of the
seminar publication, "Controlling Pollution
from the Manufacturing and Coating of Metal
Products." These volumes may be obtained
by checking the appropriate box (#3004) on
the order form in the back of this newsletter.
Attendees hear discussions on air and water pollution control
technology at the Metal Fabricating Seminar in Boston, Feb-
ruary 22-23, 1977.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SEMINARS
ON POTABLE WATER TREATMENT
Technology Transfer's first regional semi-
nars on "Designing and Upgrading Drinking
Water Treatment Systems" were held on the
dates and in the locations shown below in
Regions VI, X, and III, respectively.
April 20-21, 1977
May 25-26, 1977
June 1-2, 1977
New Orleans, Louisiana
Portland, Oregon
Reston, Virginia
(Washington, D.C.)
Attendance at the seminars, in general,
exceeded 250 individuals, including repre-
Dr. Gary Logsdon, U.S. EPA, MERL, addressing the New
Orleans Water Treatment Seminar.
sentatives of consulting firms, utilities, equip-
ment manufacturers, and state and federal
regulatory personnel. Each attendee re-
ceived copies of pertinent legislation, the
"Manual of Treatment Techniques for Meet-
ing the Interim Primary Drinking Water Regu-
lations," and handouts on the "Application of
Treatment Technology."
This water treatment seminar is new, is 2
days in length, and covers the following
R. Rhodes Trussell, of J. M. Montgomery Consulting Engi-
neers, spoke about the application of treatment technology at
the Technology Transfer Water Treatment Seminar in New
Orleans.
-------
areas: The Safe Drinking Water Act, chemical
treatment, ion exchange and reverse osmo-
sis, filtration, organics in drinking water, tri-
halomethanes and general organics control,
and the application of treatment technology.
Key presentations were made by Dr. Joseph
A. Cotruuo and Thomas Hushower, of U.S.
EPA, Washington, D.C.; Dr. J. Edward Singley
of Water and Air Research, Inc., Gainesville,
Florida; Dr. Rhodes Trussel of J. M. Mont-
gomery Engineers, Pasadena, California;
Joseph L. Rizzo and Ken Janecek of Calgon
Corporation in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;
and Drs. Gary S. Logsdon and Thomas Love
of Municipal Environmental Research Labo-
ratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Future seminars on water treatment are
planned, and detailed information on these
can be obtained from the appropriate Tech-
nology Transfer regional chairman listed in
the back of this newsletter or by calling the
Environmental Research Information Center
at (513) 684-7394.
EIGHTH NATIONAL FOOD
WASTE SYMPOSIUM
The eighth EPA National Symposium on
Food Processing Wastes was held in Seattle,
Washington, March 30-April 1,1977. The 250
attendees received information on Tech-
nology Transfer activities, EPA guidelines,
and pollution control demonstrations con-
ducted during the past year. This annual
symposium series is cosppnsored by several
food processing associations, including the
Food Processors Institute, the National Can-
ners Association, and the Northwest Food
Processors Association.
HANDBOOK "ANALYTICAL QUALITY
CONTROL IN WATER AND WASTEWATER
LABORATORIES" BEING UPDATED
The EPA Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory is updating the Tech-
nology Transfer handbook entitled "Analyti-
cal Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories." Five new chapters are being
added to the 1972 edition, and copies should
be ready for distribution in early 1978.
MANAGEMENT SEMINAR PUBLICATION
A new seminar publication, "Choosing
Optimum Management Strategies," is avail-
able. The publication delineates the options
to be considered in making and carrying out
a capital expenditure decision on an invest-
ment in pollution control equipment. Some
of the options discussed cover topics such as
interpreting laws and regulations, dealing
with consultants and attorneys, and interact-
ing with regulatory agencies. Also, the im-
portant aspects of buying and installing the
needed equipment are presented. These as-
pects include management timing, Turnkey
vs. Company Integration, design develop-
ment procurement package formation, bid
evaluation, and acceptance testing.
This publication is designed to comple-
ment an already well accepted publication,
"Choosing Optimum Financial Strategies."
Both publications are directed to personnel
who have some supervisory, management, or
financial responsibilities for interest in plant
pollution control measures. These publica-
tions can be obtained by checking the appro-
priate boxes (#3005 for Financial and #3008
for Management) on the order form in the
back of this newsletter.
Jim Boydston (standing) opens up the eighth National Food
Waste symposium in Seattle, March 30-April 1, 1977. Seated left
to right on the speaker's stand are Jeff Denit and Guy Nelson of
U.S. EPA.
FOREST PRODUCTS SEMINAR
A seminar will be held in Dallas, Texas, on
September 28 and 29, 1977, to provide a com-
prehensive review of environmental topics in
the primary wood products industry. Heavy
emphasis will be placed on silviculture and
forest management techniques as well as
case histories of specific processes and
operations. The papers will be directed to-
ward engineers and environmental managers
in the forest products industry, state and
local agencies, and consulting firms.
The Forest Products Research Society and
tipn (FGD) facility. The FGD demonstration
jointly developing the seminar. Future semi-
nars may be held in EPA Regions I and X. If
interested in attending the seminar, contact
the ERIC staff in Cincinnati for more
information.
-------
-------
-------
"UPGRADING EXISTING WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANTS" SEMINAR
HANDOUT REVISED
The Technology Transfer seminar publi-
cation entitled "Upgrading Existing Waste-
water Treatment Plants," originally published
in August 1973, has been revised and is avail-
able upon request. This revision includes five
new case histories on wastewater treatment
plant upgrading: Stockton, Sacramento,
Palo Alto, and San Jose-Santa Clara, in Cali-
fornia, and Rentpn, Washington. Two of the
four case histories included in the original
version have been deleted.
This publication was revised by Warren
Uhte and Richard Stenquist of Brown and
Caldwell. The original version was prepared
by David Walrath of Hazen and Sawyer.
This revised publication can be obtained
by checking the appropriate box (#4005) on
the order form in the back of this newsletter.
INDUSTRIAL INITIATIVES CONFERENCE
A unique conference series, "Industry
Takes the Initiative," was started with a kick-
off conference in Chicago, Illinois, January
17-18, 1977. High ranking congressional,
corporate, and federal/state officials partici-
pated in it. The first day provided the 380
decision makers and policy planners attend-
ing with information regarding process
changes to reduce pollution and save money.
The second day addressed specific technical
achievements that companies have made in
this area. In addition to EPA, the cosponsors
of the conference were the Department of
Commerce, the state chambers of commerce,
and manufacturing associations in Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin,
and Ohio. Also included were the following
corporations: Commonwealth Edison, Eli
Lilly, Hydroscience, Republic Steel Corpora-
tion, Dow Chemical, 3M Corporation, and St.
Regis Paper Company. Conference high-
lights were presentations by Russel Train
and Elliot Richardson. As part of the continu-
ing series, future conferences are planned in
Boston and Dallas (see Technology Transfer
Scheduled Events).
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER HOLDS
MUNICIPAL DESIGN SEMINARS ON
SLUDGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL
Three Technology Transfer design semi-
nars on sludge treatment and disposal have
been held thus far in 1977.
The first in this seminar series was held in
Newark, New Jersey, April 13-14, and was at-
tended by approximately 250 professionals.
The next sludge seminar was held in Salt
Lake City, Utah, May 2-3, and attracted 200
interested participants from the region.
The third seminar was held in Atlanta,
Georgia, May 11-12, with attendance in
excess of 250 interested participants con-
cerned with pollution control and abatement.
Glad win Hill (standing). New York Times National Environ-
mental Correspondent, beginning the first panel discussion at the
Chicago Industrial Initiatives Conference. Panelists seated left to
right are Joe Ling (3M Corporation), representative James Florio
(D-NJ), and Paul Brands (U.S. EPA).
Bruce Weddle (U.S. EPA, OSWMP) addresses the audience at
the Newark Sludge seminar.
-------
The fourth sludge seminar will be held
September 13-14, 1977, in Boston, Massa-
chusetts. This schedule is a change from the
dates given in previous announcements.
Each seminar featured sessions on "Inno-
vative Sludge Processing Technology," deal-
ing with lime stabilization and dewatering
processes that produce high-solids sludge
cakes; "Conversion and Product Recovery
Systems," which discussed composting, utili-
zation of gas from anaerobic digestion, and
coincineration or copyrolysis of sludge and
solid wastes; and "Land Applicaton of Sludge
for Agricultural Use," dealing with this sub-
ject quite extensively in two 3-4-hour discus-
sion sessions.
The list of speakers at each of the seminars
includes: Richard Noland and Jim Edwards,
Burgess and Niple Engineers; Jack Harrison,
Consultant; Dave Sussman, U.S. EPA, Office
of Solid Waste Management Programs
(OSWMP); Mack Wesner, Culp/Wesner/Culp;
Ron Sieger, Brown and Caldwell; Bob
Landreth, U.S. EPA, Municipal Environmen-
tal Research Laboratory (MERL); Bruce
Weddle, U.S. EPA, OSWMP;Ken Dotson and
Dr. Jim Ryan, U.S. EPA, MERL; Dr. Lee
Sommers, Consulting Agronomist; and Dr.
Ron Lofy, SCS Engineers.
Information concerning this seminar series
can be obtained by contacting your Tech-
nology Transfer regional chairman listed in
the back of this newsletter, or by contacting
Dr. James E. Smith, Jr., of ERIC-Technology
Transfer at (513) 684-7394 in Cincinnati, OH.
PREPARATION OF FUELS AND
FEEDSTOCKS WORKSHOP
U.S. EPA's Technology Transfer and
Municipal Environmental Research Labora-
tory (MERL) sponsored a Workshop on the
Preparation of Fuels and Feedstocks for
Wastes-as-Fuel, February 8-10, 1977, in New
Orleans, Louisiana. The workshop, projected
to be the first of a series, had about 50 partici-
pants, representing expertise in resource
recovery from the Office of Research and
Development and the Office of Solid Waste
(OSW), U.S. EPA; the Bureau of Mines; the
Energy Research and Development Adminis-
tration; the military; the Ministry of Environ-
ment, Ontario; municipal engineers; research
organizations; architect/engineers; and pri-
vate firms engaged in resource recovery.
The workshop had an open format, allow-
ing for free interchange of ideas among
workshop members. There were five ses-
sions, each with a moderator. John Burckle,
MERL, convened the Workshop.
RECOVERY 1
*W* A
Dr. Lee Sommers, Consulting Agronomist, discussing Land
Application, Rates and Techniques at the Newark seminar.
The final morning of the Workshop was devoted to a visit to
Recovery I, a resource recovery facility being developed by
NCRR, the City of New Orleans, and Waste Management, Inc.
Session 1 dealt with system process de-
sign, with Dr. Albert J. Klee, MERL, as
moderator. A strong theme of the session
was the lack of information available to sys-
tem designers, and the need for more re-
search. Workshop members expressed a
desire for more communication between
manufacturers and users of systems. Mate-
rials handling, scale-up, and fuel specifica-
tions were discussed.
The topic of Session 2 was selection of
equipment. Four areas were discussed:
materials handling, size reduction, separa-
tion, and process control. Stephan Lingle,
OSW, moderated.
Dr. Harvey Alter, National Center for Re-
source Recovery (NCRR), conducted Ses-
sion 3 on technical obstacles. Again the need
for more information was stressed. An
interesting feature of the session came when
members voted on their preferences for high
-------
priority and low priority research needs. The
results will be published in the Proceedings.
Session 4, moderated by John Burckle,
dealt with approaches to research, develop-
ment, and demonstration programs. Scale-
up and sampling were primary concerns.
Several speakers then summarized their pilot
plant operations, including Dr. Alter; Roger
DeCesare, Bureau of Mines; Dr. George
Trezak, University of California; Steve Hurley,
U.S. Navy; and G. C. Chisamore, Ontario.
David Berg, Office of Energy, Minerals,
and Industry (OEMI), summarized the Work-
shop in Session 5. He noted the lack of data
impeding near-term implementation and
long-term development.
EPA HOLDS NATIONAL CONFERENCE
ON LESS COSTLY WASTEWATER
TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR
SMALL COMMUNITIES
A national conference aimed at dissemi-
nating information on less costly wastewater
treatment systems for small communities
was held on April 12-14, 1977, in Reston,
Virginia. This EPA conference was cospon-
sored by Technology Transfer, the Office of
Water Program Operations, and the Munici-
pal Environment Research Laboratory.
Sound and economical alternatives to con-
ventional centralized wastewater collection
and treatment systems for small communi-
ties were the focus of this 21/2-day conference.
State-of-the-art case histories were pre-
sented for the provision, operation, and
maintenance of adequate and economical
wastewater treatment facilities for small
communities.
Discussions included present government
policy on wastewater facilities, and descrip-
tions of major types of conveyance and treat-
ment systems and their comparative costs.
Examples were provided of successful and
cost-effective installations that meet environ-
mental requirements. Alternative organiza-
tions for maintaining and operating small
facilities were also discussed.
The Honorable Jennings Randolph, Chair-
man, Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works, was the conference's keynote
speaker. Douglas M. Costle, newly appointed
EPA Administrator, welcomed the assembled
municipal officials, state health and water
pollution officials, consulting engineers, edu-
cators in sanitary and environmental engi-
neering, and representatives from environ-
mental and public interest groups. Other
speakers included Marilyn Klein, Council on
Environmental Quality, and John Rhett, EPA
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water
Program Operations.
Proceedings from this conference will be
published in the near future. Announcement
of proceedings availability will be made in
this newsletter.
The Honorable Jennings Randolph.
Lawrence Waldorf addresses the audience at the National
Small Flows Conference in Reston, Virginia.
WELLMAN-LORD FLUE GAS
DESULFURIZATION CAPSULE
REPORT AVAILABLE
This capsule report describes initial results
from a joint program being conducted by
Northern Indiana Public Service Company
(NIPSCO) and EPA to demonstrate the sulfur
dioxide removal capabilities of the Wellman-
Lord/Allied Chemical flue gas desulfuriza-
tion (F6D) facility. The FGD demonstration
plant is retrofitted to the Unit No. 11 coal-
fired boiler at NIPSCO's Dean H. Mitchell
Station in Gary, Indiana. The FGD plant con-
sists of the Davy Powergas Inc. proprietary
design Wellman-Lord SO2 Recovery Process,
-------
Davy's Purge Treatment Unit, together with
Allied Chemical Corporation's SO2 reduc-
tion process.
This capsule report summarizes the opera-
tional progress on the Wellman-Lord SO2
Recovery portionof the FGDfacility.Afterthe
Acceptance Test has been performed, an-
other capsule report will summarize the final
results of the program.
The Wellman-Lord process is a regenera-
tion process where a sodium sulfite solution
absorbs and chemically reacts with the sulfur
dioxide to form sodium sulfite, sodium bisul-
fite, and sodium sulfate. Sulfur dioxide is
separated from the solution and reacted with
natural gas to form elemental sulfur. The
spent solution is treated and returned to the
feed system.
The report has been jointly prepared by the
Environmental Research Information Center
and the Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory (IERL). For further information
on the Wellman-Lord and other FGD pro-
grams, contact the IERL facility in Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, (919) 549-8411.
"UPGRADING LAGOONS" SEMINAR
HANDOUT REVISED
The Technology Transfer seminar publica-
tion entitled "Upgrading Lagoons," originally
published in August 1973, has been revised
and is available upon request. This revision
includes two new case histories on upgrad-
ing lagoons: the Antelope Valley Tertiary
Treatment Plant in Lancaster, California, and
the Richfield Springs, New York, Treatment
Plant. One of the three case histories included
in the original version has been deleted and
the other two have been updated.
This publication was revised by Brown and
Caldwell Consulting Engineers, Walnut
Creek, California. Brown and Caldwell also
prepared the original version.
This revised publication can be obtained
by checking the appropriate box (#4001) on
the order form in the back of this newsletter.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE PROCESSING
SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
A new seminar publication, "Pollution
Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable Proc-
essing Industry," is available in three volumes.
The publications cover the technical infor-
mation presented at the five fruit and vege-
table processing seminars held across the
country in 1976. The topics covered include
basics of pollution control, case histories, in-
plant process changes, and wastewater
treatment. The Food Processors Institute,
National Canners Association, and CH2M-
Hill assisted in its preparation. The seminar
publication can be obtained by checking the
appropriate box (#3007) on the order form in
the back of this newsletter.
NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PUBLICATION SERIES:
EXECUTIVE BRIEFING
The first publication in a new Technology
Transfer series designed for high level indus-
trial decision makers is now available for dis-
tribution. The purpose of this new series
(executive briefings) is to highlight important
environmental research activities, including
broad environmental assessments, pollution
control technology demonstrations, and other
important environmental considerations.
The first executive briefing, "Industrial
Energy Conservation Measures," outlines
the environmental impacts of current and
proposed practices by industry to conserve
energy. This publication can be obtained by
checking the appropriate box (#9001) on the
order form in the back of this newsletter.
executive briefing
environmental considerations of energy-conserving industrial process changes
Industrial Energy Conservation
Executive Briefing
-------
\
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
^ <£ CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
June 1977
Dear Reader:
First of all I would like to congratulate each of you for your
continued interest in environmental pollution control and at the same
time thank you for your constant support and interest in the Environmental
Research Information Center's (ERIC) Technology Transfer Program.
Since the early days of the Environmental Protection Agency,
Technology Transfer has made every attempt to bridge the information gap
between you, the technology user, and research development, by dissemi-
nating the most up-to-date information on pollution control technologies
through pulication distribution and conducting seminars and workshops.
Most recently Technology Transfer has combined efforts and resources
with the Technical Information Staff to form the Environmental Research
Information Center. This organization of personnel and information will
enhance the transfer of technology and information from every facet of
environmental research and development.
Looking over this issue of the Technology Transfer Fact Sheet and
even the last one you may have noticed some changes and additions.
Perhaps the most pertinent being the addition of a complete listing of
Technology Transfer's Scheduled Events for the near future. It is our
hope that this will help you plan ahead and enable you to participate in
Technology Transfer's seminar series whenever possible.
Lately the requests for Technology Transfer publications has been
overwhelming. Many of the publications being requested are currently
out of stock and are in the process of being reprinted. All publications
listed on the order form in the back of this newsletter are currently in
print and can be ordered by marking the appropriate boxes. Your orders
will be filled and forwarded to you as soon as possible.
Sincerely yours,
>bert E. Crowe, Director, ERIC
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN
I Lester Button
III
IV
Robert Olson
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I,, Conn.;
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI Mildred Smith
VII JohnCoakley
VIII Elmer Chenault
IX William Bishop
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First International Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214- 749-3971
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-6925
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Clifford Risley Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-2200
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
John Osborn Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Transfer Chairman. (See above)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
Richardson, Texas Project—Title: "Somebody around here
must be doing something good." (15 min.)
Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif .—Title:
"The Water Plan." (28'/2 min.)
• The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min.)
• "Breakthrough at Clear Lake" (28 min.)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
(Orville Macomber)
(Doug Williams)
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
208 Land Use Planning
Non-point Sources
MONITORING, MEASUREMENT AND
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Monitoring
Analytical Methods
Quality Control
Remote Sensing
HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
\
NMENTAL
ENT STAFF
iber) (Ed Tabri)
3)
ERIC
(Robert Crowe)
(Cal Lawrence)
U.S. E
ERIC
26 We
Cincin
(5131
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
SYSTEMS STAFF
(Jim Smith) (Denis Lussier)
(Guy Nelson) (Norm Kulujian)
1
TECHNICAL Ih
OPERATIC
(Gilbert C
MUNICIPAL
Wastewater
Potable Water Supply
INDUSTRIAL
Wastewater
Air
Toxic and Hazardous Materials
Energy Aspects
U.S. EPA -OR&D
ERIC
26 West St. Clair
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
(5131 684-7391 -7398 (Inc.)
Research Reports Production
Special Research Reports
Technology Transfer Production
Newsletter Production
Report Distribution and Coordination
Conference and Symposia Coordination
Requests Coordination
Mailing Lists Coordination
Graphic Arts and Visual Aid Support
-------
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SCHEDULED EVENTS
In order to keep you more aware of future Technology
Transfer activities (particularly seminars), the following
schedule is included. Should you desire more details on any
of the activities listed, contact the appropriate Technology
Transfer Regional Chairman listed in the previous section of
this newsletter.
SUBJECT
Scheduled Municipal Seminars
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Tentative Municipal Seminars
Water Treatment
Scheduled Industrial Seminars
Coal Mining
Wood Products
Industrial Initiatives
Tentative Industrial Seminars
Coal Mining
Remote Sensing
Metal Fabricating
Pretreatment
DATE
July 12-14, 1977
July 27-29, 1977
August 1977
August 1977
September 1977
September 12-14, 1977
October 26-27
July 19,20, 1977
September 28, 29, 1977
September 7, 8, 1977
Summer 1977
Summer 1977
Fall 1977
Fall 1977
REGION/CITY
VIM Denver, CO
IV Atlanta, GA
V Chicago, IL
VI Dallas, TX
II Syracuse, NY
I Boston, MA
I Boston, MA
V Zanesville, OH
VI Dallas, TX
VI Dallas, TX
V Indianapolis, IN
IX Las Vegas, NV
V Chicago, IL
IV Atlanta, GA
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTER
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PUBLICATIONS
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002 Q
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants
(Oct. 1974) 1004 D
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems (Oct.
1974) 1005 FJ
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006 Q
Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007 rj
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001 Q
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by
Lime Addition 2002 D
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 Q
First Interim Report on EPA Alkali S02
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 D
Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005 D
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006 D
S02 Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid Production Via
Magnesia Scrubbing 2007 D
Second Interim Report on EPA Alkali Scrubbing
Test Facility 2008 D
Magnesium Carbonate Process for Water
Treatment 2009 D
•Third Interim Report on EPA Alkali Scrubbing
Test Facility 2010 D
•First Progress Report Wellman-Lord Flue Gas
Desulfurization 2011 D
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons 4001
Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005
Flow Equalization 4006
Wastewater Filtration 4007
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration 4009
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents
(SVols.) 4010
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
BROCHURES
Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011 D
Municipal Wastewater Alternatives 5012 D
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality 5013 Q
HANDBOOKS
Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories (1972) 6001 D
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 D
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and
Wastes (1974) 6003 D
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry - Part I/Air 7001 D
.9001
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce .Industrial Energy Conservation Measures
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001 D
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002 Q
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003 D
Upgrading Textile Operations to Reduce
Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004 D
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for
Pollution Control Investments 3005 [U
Erosion and Sediment Control from Surface
Mining (2 Vols.) 3006 D
•Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable
Industry (3 Vols.) 3007 D
•Choosing Optimum Management Strategies 3008 f~|
•Controlling Pollution From the Manufacturing and
Coating of Metal Products (2 Vols.) 3009 D
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes D No
*Name.
Employer.
Street.
City
.State.
-Zip.
"It is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct.
•Publication listed for the first time.
Note: Forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
•
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC'
EPA-335
60604-TILL9-115203
MS. LOU TILLEY
ENV PROT AGENCY REGION V
LIBRARY 14TH FL
230 S DEARBORN ST
CHICAGO* IL 60604
-------
ECHNOLOGY
RAN
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
JANUARY 1977
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
RELOCATES TO
PERMANENT OFFICES
EPA Technology Transfer Program has relo-
cated to new office space in the Environmental
Research Center Bldg., Cincinnati, Ohio. This
move does not involve a change in the mailing
address for Technology Transfer, but telephone
numbers for Technology Transfer's staff have
changed as follows:
Director, Technology Transfer
Municipal Technology Transfer
Industrial Technology Transfer (Water)
Industrial Technology Transfer (Air)
Land Use Planning j
Non Point Source }
Analytical Quality Control I
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Environmental Re-
search Center, 26 W. St. Clair Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Robert E. Crowe 513-684-7391
James E. Smith 513-684-7394
Guy R. Nelson 513-684-7395
Norm Kulujian 513-684-7396
Orville Macomber 513-684-7397
WPCF CONFERENCE
The new Technology Transfer document
"Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives:
Municipal Wastewater" was featured at Tech-
nology Transfer's exhibit area at the 1976
Shown at the WPCF Conference are: (I to r) Lester.
Edelman, Counsel, Water Resources Subcommittee, House
Public Works Committee; Bob Crowe, Director, Technology
Transfer; John Quarles, Deputy Administrator, U.S. EPA.
Water Pollution Control Federation Conference
held October 3-8, 1976 in Minneapolis, Minne-
sota. This year's WPCF meeting had a total
registration of over 8,600 and approximately
5,000 copies of the new Municipal Wastewater
Alternatives publication were distributed at no
charge. A copy of this publication (#5012) can
be ordered by using the request sheet at the
back of this newsletter. A highlight at the
Technology Transfer exhibit was the visit of
EPA Deputy Administrator, Mr. John Quarles,
following his participation in one of the tech-
nical sessions.
NCA/BCR CONFERENCE
The Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory's Resource Extraction and Handling
Division (REHD) and Technology Transfer parti-
cipated in the NCA/BCR Coal Conference, held
October 19-21, 1976 at the Kentucky Exposi-
tion Center in Louisville. This conference ad-
dressed the emerging era of coal dominance as
an energy resource, including the responsibility
of upgrading coal extraction and usage both
environmentally and economically. At the con-
ference Exhibit Hall, REHD and Technology
Transfer jointly provided the newest industrial
-------
R. B. Scott received the
S. A. Bra ley Award at the
NCA/BCR Conference.
seminar publication "Erosion and Sediment
Control/Surface Mining in The Eastern U.S."
The 3,000 conference attendees watched as R.B.
(Bob) Scott received the S. A. Braley Award for
his outstanding research work in acid mine
drainage. Bob is head of the EPA's acid mine
drainage field station in Crown, West Virginia.
The Braley award speaks highly for Bob Scott's
achievements, because only five others have
been recipients of the award since its inception
in 1966.
Carl E. Bagge (I), President of the National Coal As-
sociation, and Otes Bennett, Jr., President of The North
American Coal Corporation, stopped by the EPA Exhibit at
the NCA/BCR Conference in Louisville.
THIRD NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
INDIVIDUAL ONSITE WASTEWATER
SYSTEMS
The Third National Conference on Individual
Onsite Wastewater Systems, co-sponsored by
Technology Transfer and the National Sanita-
tion Foundation, was held November 16-18,
1976 in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Mr. Jerome H.
Svore, EPA Region VII Administrator, chaired
the opening session, which included a keynote
address by the chief of staff to the Honorable
Jennings Randolph, Chairman of the Senate
Public Works Committee. Topics covered in the
technical sessions included Treatment Systems
Required for Surface Discharge of Onsite Waste-
water; Septage Disposal in Wastewater Treat-
ment Facilities; Management Guidelines for Con-
ventional and Alternative Onsite Systems; and
Onsite Wastewater Facilities for Small Commun-
ities and Subdivisions. Conference proceedings
will be available shortly; contact Dr. N.
McClelland, National Sanitation Foundation,
NSF Building, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 for
information on obtaining the proceedings.
PLANNING ALTERNATIVES FOR
MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEMS
A conference on "Planning Alternatives for
Municipal Water Systems," co-sponsored by
Holcomb Research Institute of Butler University
and Technology Transfer was held in French
Lick, Indiana on October 10-14. Approximately
100 individuals from a wide spectrum of back-
grounds participated in the conference. Among
these were representatives from the President's
Council on Environmental Quality, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, officials from several
major cities, and administrators and planners
from water utilities both large and small. Topics
discussed included Planning for Regional Urban
Water Quality; Technical Feasibility of
Achieving Water Quality Standards; Potable
Water Reuse Planning — U. S. Experience; and
Environmental Considerations in Water Quality.
Key speakers at the conference were Martin
Lang, New York City Parks Department; Steve
Hanke, Environmental Engineering, Johns
Hopkins University; Leroy Reuter, Lt. Col.
MCS, U. S. Army Biomedical Research and
Development Laboratory; Francis T. Mayo,
Director, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U. S. EPA; and Daniel Okun,
Environmental Engineering, University of North
Carolina.
TRACE METAL
REMOVAL BY
WASTEWATER
TREATMENT
Introduction
Metals are a natural part of the earth's crust;
they can be found in measurable quantities in
practically every living and inanimate substance
in the world. Metals constitute about 5 percent
of the earth's rocks and are sufficiently soluble
to have been distributed, over the millennia, into
every part of the environment. Because of this
-------
ubiquitous distribution, all living things have
acquired (by evolution) a tolerance for metals
body burden. Indeed, all living things require
certain metals for their well-being. Unfortun-
ately, the borderline between a natural tolerance
level for a metal in a species and a hazardous
level may not be very wide. A typical biological
response curve would show an increasingly
beneficial effect with increasing concentrations
up to a certain optimum level. Beyond this level,
there is a tolerance region beyond which bene-
fits decrease, injurious effects begin, and, finally,
a lethal dose is reached. Certain metals (mercury
and cadmium for example) serve no useful
physiological function and become toxic to the
organism at low concentrations.
Man's activities have upset the natural dis-
tribution of metals in the environment, and this
fact alone is the basis of concern. The increase in
the use of metals of all kinds has averaged about
50 percent during the 20 years from 1948 to
1968. The burning of fuel for energy disperses
enormous quantities of metals into the environ-
ment.
The goal of wastewater treatment, therefore,
is not to reduce trace metals to zero but rather
to reduce concentrations to ambient levels and
to dispose of the concentrates (sludges) such
that redispersion does not recur. The objectives
of this discussion are to show that metals are, in
fact, present in wastewater, that current biolo-
gical treatment processes are only partially
effective in removing most metals, and, finally,
that processes are available to obtain even
greater removals. Discussion will be limited to
six or seven of the more important metals.
Trace Metals in Wastewater
There have been several surveys of metals
concentration in influent wastewater. The re-
sults of a recent survey of some 100 plants in
Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey are
shown in Table 1. The median values show that
concentrations of the 7 metals are low, ranging
Table 1
MULTIPLANT INFLUENT METALS SURVEY
(CONNECTICUT-NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY)1
Median Exceeded by highest 5%
Metal mg/1 mg/1
Cadmium <0.02 0.04
Chromium <0.05 0.45
Copper 0.10 0.85
Mercury 0.0013 0.0088
Nickel <0.10 0.50
Lead <0.20 0.20
Zinc 0.18 1.14
Based on 100-400 analyses for each metal.
from 0.0013 mg/1 for mercury to < 0.20 mg/1
for lead. Five percent of the samples had metal
concentrations some 2-9 times higher in concen-
tration.
The concentrations of metals that one can
find in any survey can range over several orders
of magnitude as illustrated in Table 2, largely
due to industrial discharges. Cadmium concen-
trations ranged from < 0.008 mg/1 to as much
as 0.142 mg/1 and zinc from as little as 0.03
mg/1 to as much as 8.31 mg/1. Comparison with
recommended drinking water standards shows
that in most cases the concentration of metals in
influent wastewater is less than drinking water
requirements, although clearly the higher con-
centrations exceed the drinking water standards.
The comparison is made only to provide a point
of reference. Comparison is also made with
quality criteria for aquatic life to indicate the
very much lower concentrations required for
some of the metals. The plant effluent concen-
tration to protect aquatic life will, of course,
depend on the dilution available at the point of
discharge.
Table 2
RANGE OF CONCENTRATION OF METALS IN WASTEWATER1
Metal
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Mercury
Nickel
Lead
Zinc
Cone range
mg/1
<0.008-0.142
<0.020-0.700
<0.020-3.36
<0.0002-0.044
<0.0020-880
<0.050-1.27
<0.030-8.31
Recommended
drinking
water stds
mg/1
0.01
0.05
1.0
0.002
No std.
0.05
5.0
Quality criteria
for aquatic life
mg/1
0.0004
0.30
0.1 x96hrLC50
0.00005
0.10
0.01 x 96 hr LC50
0.01 x 96 hr LC5Q
Results of a recent survey of plants in Michigan.
-------
Metal Removal by Biological Treatment
Biological treatment reduces metal concen-
trations by widely varying and largely unpre-
dictable amounts. The range of percentage
removal obtainable by biological treatment is
shown in Table 3. Bearing in mind that if the
metals concentrations coming into a waste treat-
ment plant are already low, then the variable
and sometimes low percent removals obtained
may be acceptable, particularly when adequate
dilution is available at the point of discharge.
These percent removals, however, would not be
adequate to handle those wastewaters that con-
tain the higher influent concentrations.
Table 3
REMOVAL OF METALS BY
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
Metal
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Mercury
Nickel
Lead
Zinc
Removal
percent
20-45
40-80
0-70
20-75
15-40
50-90
35-80
Metals cannot be destroyed. When a treat-
ment plant removes metals from the liquid flow,
they are concentrated in the much smaller flow
of sludge. This is illustrated in Table 4. In the
sludge, the metals concentration can, indeed,
become quite large, ranging from 6.6 mg
mercury/kg dry sludge to 2780 mg zinc/kg dry
sludge. Obviously, care must be taken on how
the sludge is disposed. The much higher concen-
trations require that precautions be taken that
the metals not be redispersed into the environ-
Table 4
METALS IN DIGESTED SLUDGE-
33 PLANTS3
Metal
Median Value
mg/kg"
Cadmium 31
Chromium 1100
Copper 1230
Mercury 6.6
Nickel 410
Lead 830
Zinc 2780
aPlant sizes ranging from 0.1 mgd to 150 mgd.
bDry Sludge Basis
ment via the atmosphere during incineration,
through leaching into the groundwater from
landfills, or through uptake by plants after
sludge spreading on land.
Metal Removal by Physical-Chemical Processes
Improved removal of metals over that shown
by biological treatment can be obtained by
physical-chemical systems. These systems were
used to investigate the removal of 22 metals in a
study by the Wastewater Research Division of
EPA at Cincinnati, Ohio. In this study, indivi-
dual metals and combinations of metals were
added to the raw wastewater, and removals
obtained in the various unit processes were
determined. The 0.25 1/sec (4 gpm) pilot plant
system consisted of chemical clarification by a
variety of chemicals including lime at varying
pH's, alum and iron salts, dual media filtration,
and activated carbon. Two carbon contactors
were used: one (designated "old carbon") had
been in operation for about a year and was in
need of regeneration; the other was designated
as "new carbon." All waste flows such as
chemical sludges and filter backwashes were
measured and sampled in order to obtain a
materials balance, which served to locate other-
wise undetected sources of error.
Typical results for removal of cadmium are
shown in Figure 1. Clarification was obtained by
ferric sulfate at pH 6 and by lime at pH ~10 and
at ~11.5. Coagulation and filtration resulted in
> 94 percent removal of cadmium in all three
clarification systems. Activated carbon adsorp-
tion removed an additional increment resulting
IRON-
LOW.
LIME
HIGH
LIME'
Settled
Filtered
New
Carbon
Old
.Carbon
Settled
Filtered
New
Carbon
Old
.Carbon
Settled
Filtered
New
Carbon
Old
- Carbon
0 20 40 60 70 80 90
2 REMOVAL (percent)
FIGURE 1. Removal of cadmium".
100
-------
in a cumulative removal of about 99 percent ot
the cadmium. Both the exhausted (old carbon)
and fresh (new carbon) contactors were equally
effective in removing an increment of cadmium.
The behavior of the various metals in the
treatment system varied with each metal. For
example, hexavalent chromium is shown in
Figure 2. Poor removals were obtained during
chemical precipitation largely because of the
substantial solubility of the chromium VI com-
pounds. Activated carbon, however, was very
effective and resulted in overall removals in
excess of 95 percent. The removal of chromium
VI may be the result of adsorption but more
likely is due to reduction of the soluble hexa-
valent chromium to the highly insoluble triva-
lent chromium which is precipitated in the
contactor.
IRON-
Settled
Filtered
New
Carbon
Old
.Carbon
LOW
LIME
HIGH
LIME
Settled
Filtered
New
Carbon
Old
. Carbon
Settled
Filtered
New
Carbon
Old
.Carbon
0 20 40 60 70 80 90
2 REMOVAL (percent)
FIGURE 2. Removal of chromium
100
Mercury, about which there has been con-
siderable concern, is well removed by physical-
chemical treatment. An initial concentration of
50-60 ptg/1 was reduced to < 1 M9/1 providing an
overall removal of > 98 percent.
This research, as well as the work done by
others, has demonstrated that a physical-
chemical system is a most effective series of
processes for removal of metals. A summary of
removals obtained on 22 metals by differing
chemical pretreatments is shown in Tables 5, 6,
and 7. Coagulation with one or another of the
coagulants followed by activated carbon ob-
tained removals exceeding 95 percent for most
of the metals, including the toxic metals beryl-
lium, arsenic, mercury, and cadmium. Some
deficiencies in removal were exhibited for sev-
eral metals. Thus, molybdenum is poorly re-
moved by lime but better removal is obtained
with ferric salts. Similarly, nickel and manganese
are poorly removed by iron salts or alum but
readily removed by lime. The right choice of
clarification chemical or combinations of chemi-
cals will remove, to a high degree, all of the
listed metals. It is not unusual, for example, to
use small dosages of ferric salts to improve
clarification when using lime.
Plants discharging to water quality limited
streams face some difficulties in meeting the
stringent requirements for aquatic life shown in
Table 2, particularly when minimum dilution
water is available in the stream and especially
when influent metals concentrations are high.
For example, even the high percent removal of
99.6 obtained for cadmium in Table 5 would
not be adequate to meet aquatic requirements of
0.0004 mg cadmium/1 unless a dilution of 1-50
were available in the stream. Alternative
methods (such as source control) would be
required in those instances where high influent
concentrations of metals are experienced and
where low residuals are imposed by stream
standards. This is true for other metals (Tables 5
and 6) where high percent removals result in
substantial residuals when the influent concen-
tration is as high as 5 mg/1. Generally, however,
influent concentrations are low and most
aquatic life requirements can be obtained.
Table 5
REMOVAL OF METALS BY
LIME PRECIPITATION-ACTIVATED CARBON
Metal
Silver
Beryllium
Bismuth
Cobalt
Mercury
Molybdenum
Antimony
Selenium
Selenium
Tin
Titanium
Thallium
Vanadium
Manganese
Nickel
Zinc
Copper
Cadmium
Barium
Lead
Chromium
Arsenic
Mercury
*5% removal based
Initial
concentration
mg/1
0.5
0.1
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.06
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
0.5
on sludge analysis.
Removal
percent
98.
99.5
96.
95.
91.
#
52.
95.
67.
92.
95.3
72.
91.
98.2
99.5
76.
90.
99.6
81.
99.4
98.2
84.
92.
Residual
metal
10
1
24
25
45
288
25
20
40
24
140
45
90
25
1200
500
20
950
30
90
800
40
-------
Table 6
REMOVAL OF METALS BY
FERRIC CHLORIDE-ACTIVATED CARBON
Initial Residual
Metal concentration Removal metal
mg/1 percent jug/1
Silver 0.5 99.1 5
Beryllium 0.1 98.9 1
Bismuth 0.5 96.2 9
Cobalt 0.5 30. 350
Mercury 0.05 99. 1
Molybdenum 0.6 80. 120
Antimony 0.5 72. 140
Selenium 0.1 80. 20
Selenium 0.05 75. 13
Tin 0.5 98.5 8
Titanium 0.5 90. 50
Thallium 0.6 45. 330
Vanadium 0.5 97.8 11
Manganese 5.0 17. 4150
Nickel 5.0 37. 3150
7inr R H QA ^OO
C.I ML. U.U *3*r. OUU
Copper 5.0 96. 200
Cadmium 5.0 98.6 70
Barium 5.0 95.6 220
Lead 5.0 99.1 45
Chromium 5.0 99.3 35
Arsenic 5.0 97.1 145
Mercury 0.5 98. 10
Table 7
1 CIUIC t
REMOVAL OF METALS BY
ALUM-ACTIVATED CARBON
Initial Residual
Metal concentration Removal metal
mg/1 percent M9/1
Silver 0.6 99.2 5
Beryllium 0.1 98.9 1
Bismuth 0.6 96.9 19
Cobalt 0.8 56. 352
Mercury 0.06 98.3 1
Molybdenum 0.6 10. 540
Antimony 0.6 71. 174
Selenium 0.5 56. 220
Tin 0.6 94. 36
Titanium 0.6 95.8 25
Thallium 0.6 39. 366
Vanadium 0.5 95.4 23
Manganese 0.7 33. 469
Nickel 0.9 37. 567
Zinc 2.5 28. 1800
Copper 0.7 98.3 12
Cadmium 0.7 55.5 312
Barium 0.5 92. 40
Lead 0.6 96.6 20
Chromium (Cr3+) 0.7 99.3 5
Chromium (Cr6+) 0.7 97.4 18
Activated carbon in the physical-chemical
system performs an important function in the
overall removal of metals in the system. As
Figures 1 and 2 show, activated carbon can, in
some instances, provide the additional removal
required to yield low residuals in the effluent.
The reasons for removal are not known but are
probably due to a combination of mechanisms
including adsorption, reaction with organics at
the carbon surface, filtration of previously
precipitated metals, and precipitation with,
sulfide. Whatever the reasons, the metals are
associated with the carbon and are not removed
during backwashing. During the organic loading
cycle, carbon can assimilate substantial con-
centrations of metals which become part of the
ash content of the carbon after regeneration.
Removal of Metals by AWT System
There has been interest in using wastewater as
a source of potable water — after treatment,
naturally, to remove as much as technically
possible of all pollutants. The treatment system
that appears capable of achieving this degree of
treatment is a combination of biological and
physical-chemical processes. As a category of
pollutants, toxic metals have been of some
concern.
Table 8 shows some results of a several years'
study at Dallas, Texas. Typically, the incoming
concentrations for the metals listed are low,
consistent with the ranges of metals in waste-
water shown in Table 1. The activated sludge
process reduces these concentrations by 21-69
percent (Table 8). Activated sludge is followed
by lime precipitation (at pH 11.5) and by
filtration and activated carbon which extract a
further increment of metals. The cumulative
removals range from 39-96 percent, finally
producing the residuals shown in the last
column. What appears to be an inconsistency in
Table 8
REMOVAL OF METALS-DALLAS
TERTIARY PLANT
Removal (percent)
Influent Activated Sludge + Effluent
Metal mg/1 sludge Tertiary1 mg/1
Cadmium 0.013 39 39 0.008
Chromium 0.215 57 96 0.009
Copper 0.092 33 56 0.041
Mercury 0.00051 69 86 0.00007
Nickel 0.073 21 74 0.019
Lead 0.095 56 53 0.045
Zinc 0.320 65 91 0.029
1 Lime (pH 11.5), filtration, activated carbon
-------
the percent removals obtained in the tertiary
and those obtained in a physical-chemical
system treating raw sewage is actually due to the
much lower concentrations of metals entering
the tertiary system. In the latter, the numerical
value of the residual becomes sensitive to the
degree of suspended solids removal and to
solubility product relationships. Additional
removal, if necessary, would require modifi-
cations to the process. In terms of metals, this
processed wastewater fully qualifies as drinking
water: cadmium is 8 jug/1, requirement is 10;
chromium is 9 M9/1/ requirement is 50; mercury
is 0.07 M9/1, requirement is 2.
Discussion
Despite the substantial amount of work done
on removal of metals in wastewater treatment,
this brief review reveals that much has yet to be
learned about how to control the dispersion of
metals into the environment. The overwhelming
majority of treatment plants in this country
consist of some form of biological treatment —
activated sludge, trickling filters, and lagoons. As
was shown, removal of metals by these processes
is variable and unpredictable. To make these
processes more effective for metals removal,
more information must be obtained on the
effects of process variables such as the ratio of
oxygen to BOD, sludge age, mean cell residence
time, etc. Little is known, for example, of the
effect on metals of adding a coagulant to
activated sludge for phosphorus control. The
problem of disposal of sludge, which contains
orders of magnitude with higher concentrations
of metals than effluents, remains an area for
more research.
It is not certain that the low concentrations
of metals produced by physical-chemical treat-
ment are adequate to protect the aquatic envi-
ronment. While drinking water standards for
metals can be achieved, it is known that concen-
trations lower by as much as an order of
magnitude may be required for aquatic life
where biomagnification and adsorption on
sediments present special problems.
Only a continuing program of research can
provide the information needed for the solution
to these problems.
The feature article on trace water removal was prepared by
Jesse M. Cohen, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
REMOTE SENSING WORKSHOP PLANNED
Technology Transfer and the EPA Environ-
mental Monitoring and Support Laboratory have
scheduled a Remote Sensing Workshop for the
spring of 1977. The purpose of the workshop is
to bring experts in this field together to prepare
a new Technology Transfer publication. This
document will inform and educate regulatory
agency personnel about remote sensing tech-
niques that are used to detect and identify
pollutants for surveillance and enforcement.
Approximately 25 specialists will be invited to
participate in this 3-day workshop.
SPECIALTY FOOD SEMINAR
A Technology Transfer Specialty Food Waste
Management Seminar was held January 9-12,
1977 at Atlanta's Peachtree Plaza Hotel. The
seminar was tailored by a combined
EPA/industry committee to specifically address
the control of pollution in four food manu-
facturing areas: dressings and sauces; preserves;
processed apples; and vinegars. The agenda
covered effluent guidelines, wastewater treat-
ment (primary, secondary, tertiary), pre-
treatment, financial/management strategies, and
case histories.
Over 150 industrial representatives attended
the seminar and participated in dialogues on
subjects such as sampling techniques, plant
housekeeping, cost recovery methods, and
pollution control management alternatives.
NEW INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER PUBLICATION AVAILABLE-
THIRD PROGRESS REPORT ON TVA
SHAWNEE LIME/LIMESTONE FGD
DEMONSTRATION FACILITY
This is the third in a series of capsule reports
describing a program conducted by the EPA to
test prototype lime and limestone wet-scrubbing
systems for removing sulfur dioxide (S02) and
particulate matter (fly ash) from coal-fired
boiler flue gases. The program, sponsored by the
Utilities and Industrial Power Division of the
EPA Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, is being conducted in a test facility
which is integrated into the flue gas ductwork of
a coal-fired boiler at the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA) Shawnee Power Station,
Paducah, Kentucky. Bechtel Corporation of San
Francisco is the major contractor and test
director, and TVA is the constructor and facility
operator. This report describes initial results of
an advanced program of lime and limestone tests
(with and without the addition of magnesium
oxide), conducted from January 1975 to April
1976. Two earlier capsule reports described the
results from the inception of testing in May
1972 until January 1975.
This third capsule report describes limestone
utilization tests conducted on two scrubber
systems. These tests were designed to sub-
stantiate a TVA economic study which showed
-------
that the economics of limestone scrubbing could
be improved by increasing limestone utilization
(moles SC>2 absorbed/mole Ca added). Increased
limestone utilization not only reduces limestone
feed requirements but also reduces waste sludge
production. Tests were conducted to correlate
alkali utilization with scrubber inlet liquor pH,
effluent hold tank residence time, and hold tank
configuration.
Removal of the entrained mist from the
scrubbed flue gas without fouling the mist
eliminator system is one of the key factors in
successful scrubber operation. Early in the
testing program, more difficulty was exper-
ienced in keeping the mist eliminator clean on
the Turbulent Contact Absorber (TCA) in
limestone service than on the spray tower in
lime service. This difficulty was initially at-
tributed to differences in scrubber design, which
might have caused a finer mist in the TCA. Later
it was found that the mist eliminator was much
easier to keep clean at a high alkali utilization
(above about 85 percent) than at lower utili-
zation. Lime systems operate at an inherently
high utilization; limestone systems can operate
over a range of utilization.
A 7-week variable load (cycling gas rate) test
series with lime was conducted on the
venturi/spray tower system from August to
October 1975. These tests were designed to
evaluate the ability of the scrubber system to
handle the variable gas rate and composition
resulting from a daily boiler load cycle.
From February to April 1976, lime and
limestone factorial tests were performed at the
test facility. Approximately 250 runs were made
to determine the effects of several scrubber
variables on percent SC-2 removal by the venturi
(only), the spray tower (operated with minimum
flow to the venturi section), and the TCA
scrubber.
This third capsule report can be ordered by
filling out the form on the last sheet of this
newsletter (#2010).
EPA WATER PLANNING DIVISION AND
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER TO SPONSOR
THREE REGIONAL 208 CONFERENCES
Technology Transfer and the Water Planning
Division of the Office of Water and Hazardous
Materials will co-sponsor a series of three re-
gional conferences on Section 208 Management
and Implementation. The conferences will dis-
seminate the latest information and technology
pertinent to Section 208 of the Water Pollution
Control Act and Amendments of 1972 (PL
92-500). Slated to focus on solutions to prob-
lems identified in three distinct geographical
areas of the country, conferences will be held in
Reston, Virginia on March 15-17,1977; Denver,
Colorado on April 19-21, 1977; and St. Louis,
Missouri on May 23-25, 1977.
Section 208 of PL 92-500 requires that state
and area water quality management agencies
develop and implement plans to control and
abate water pollution from all sources, point and
non-point, within a designated 208-study region
or area. Point sources of pollution include
municipal and industrial liquid and solid wastes.
Non-point sources include agriculture, silvi-
culture, mining, construction, salt water intru-
sion, and residue disposal. Section 208 further
provides that alternative methods for attaining
pollution control solutions must be considered.
The 208 Conferences are designed to present,
in a period of 3 days, up-to-the-minute institu-
tional, regulatory, technical and economic in-
formation to those currently involved in the
studies and those who will be involved in future
208 programs. The Institutional/Regulatory
Workshops will discuss EPA guidance and reg-
ulatory policy; federal/state/local relationships;
and plan implementation and management, in
addition to other areas. Technical Workshops are
designed to give program guidance and im-
plementation in the various point and non-point
areas along with technical assessment and con-
trol techniques (including alternatives). Hand-
books and manuals on these techniques will also
be distributed. Areas covered will be urban
runoff; agriculture; silviculture; construction;
mining; estimating industrial pollution loads;
liquid waste sludge; and solid waste disposal.
It is expected that a person attending the
-------
conference will learn EPA policy and guidance
in the 208 program. He will learn state-of-the-art
techniques in assessment and control of point
and non-point sources of pollution. Experts
from EPA, the academic world, state and local
government, and industry will present useful,
practical information, stressing best management
practices and costs. Four to six concurrent
sessions are planned to minimize the amount of
time required for presentation of the informa-
tion. Most technical sessions will be presented at
two different times, allowing for participation in
a greater number of sessions.
While maintaining a similar format, the final
agenda presented at each conference will be
modified to focus on solutions to problems that
have been identified as important within each
geographical region. Therefore, it will be nec-
essary to attend only the nearest regional con-
ference.
MANUAL RE "METHODS FOR CHEMICAL
ANALYSIS OF WATER AND WASTES"
BEING UPDATED
The EPA Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory is updating the manual
entitled "Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes" and it should be ready for
distribution by Technology Transfer in De-
cember 1977. Copies now being distributed are
reprints of the 1974 manual and the former
errata sheet is now reflected in the body of the
text. Copies can be obtained by using the order
form at the back of this newsletter.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MUNICIPAL
DESIGN SEMINARS ON SMALL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS
A new Technology Transfer seminar series has
been developed to cover the design of small
wastewater treatment community systems of
less than 1 MGD and individual home or on-site
wastewater treatment devices. The program will
feature three, 4-hour concurrent sessions dealing
with on-site systems, residuals management and
alternative collection systems, and community
treatment systems. The seminar will be initiated
with a 4-hour general session featuring presen-
tations by the regional administrator, regional
and national Technology Transfer personnel,
and by experts from the Office of Water
Program Operations, and state agencies. The
final 4-hour general session will present the
methodology for making an alternative analysis
of potential treatment systems for a community.
Speakers for the technical sessions will in-
clude Professors William Boyle and R. J. Otis,
University of Wisconsin; Ivan Cooper and Joseph
Rezek of Rezek, Henry, Meisenheimer and
Gende, Libertyville, Illinois; Jim Kreissel, U. S.
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio; Gordon Gulp, Clean
Water Consultants, El Dorado Hills, California;
E. Joe Middlebrooks, Middlebrooks and As-
sociates, Logan, Utah; and Jerrold J. Troyan,
Brown and Caldwell, Eugene, Oregon.
Below are listed six scheduled locations and
dates for the seminars. It is anticipated that the
seminar will eventually be held in all 10 regions.
If interested in attending one of these seminars,
contact your regional TT Chairman for ad-
ditional information. His name, address, and
phone number appear in the back of this
newsletter.
Date
March 8-10, 1977
March 29-31, 1977
April 26-28, 1977
May 4-6, 1977
May 17-19,1977
June 7-9, 1977
Location of Seminar
Portland, Ore.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Kansas City, Mo.
Boston, Mass.
San Francisco, Calif.
Denver, Colo.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SEMINAR ON
GUIDANCE FOR IDENTIFYING AND
ASSESSING POLLUTION FROM MINING
AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
The third Technology Transfer Seminar on
Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500)
was held in Atlanta, Georgia on November 4-5,
1976. Approximately 100 public officials,
individuals from planning agencies, conservation
groups, mining and construction industries, and
state and federal governments attended the
seminar.
Jack E. Ravan, Region
IV Administrator, address-
ing audience at Technology
Transfer's 208 Seminar in
Atlanta, Ga.
Purpose of the seminar was to present an
approach to 208 planning for non-point sources
of pollution and to discuss the specific needs in
construction and mining activities. In the con-
-------
struction area, presentations were given on
assessing the problem and determining the
solutions; Federal Highway Program regulations
including monitoring and implementation; costs
and incentives; and the State of North Carolina's
program to regulate pollution from construction
activities—organization, resources, costs, im-
plementation, monitoring and results.
In the mining area, presentations included
identification/assessment alternatives and a
recommended approach to planning and im-
plementation of controls; improving the effec-
tiveness of state mining regulatory control pro-
grams in Kentucky; a case history on phosphate
mining controls in Florida; and non-point source
problems as seen by a miner.
The second day consisted of a workshop in
which dialogue with seminar participants was
held to discuss what was being done by federal,
state, and local agencies and industries in con-
trolling, monitoring, and regulating non-point
sources of pollution from construction and
mining activities.
Key presentations were made by James W.
Crooks and Gene McNeill, U.S. EPA, Region IV,
Atlanta; O. M. Stump, FHWA, Region IV,
Atlanta; Harlan Britt, DNR, State of North
Carolina; William S. Forester, DNR, State of
Kentucky; Tim Stewart, DER, State of Florida;
C. Christopher of Hagy, Sutherland, Asbill and
Brennan, Atlanta; and David Green, Robert
Thronson and Dan Deely, U. S. EPA, Water
Planning Division, Washington, D.C.
For details about future seminars on this
subject, contact the appropriate Technology
Transfer Chairman listed in the back of this
newsletter.
METAL FABRICATING SEMINAR
Over 120 industrial representatives attended a
2-day Technology Transfer seminar, "Upgrading
Metal Machining, Fabricating and Coating
Operations to Reduce Pollution." The seminar,
held November 30-December 1 in Philadelphia,
Pa., attracted industrial decision-makers who
are responsible for selecting, purchasing, de-
signing, or operating pollution control equip-
ment. The seminar's technical sessions em-
phasized proven and available practical solutions
for the control of air and water pollutants; the
reduction of wasteloads; and the treatment,
disposal, or recovery of waste products and heat.
The seminar will also be held in Boston,
Massachusetts, February 23-24, 1977. In
addition, because of its popularity, plans are
being made to conduct it in Dallas and Chicago
in the spring. For details on these future
seminars, contact the appropriate Technology
Transfer Chairman listed in the back of this
newsletter.
"FOREST HARVESTING AND WATER
QUALITY"-SECOND TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER BROCHURE ON FOREST
PRACTICES IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST
A new Technology Transfer publication,
"Forest Harvesting and Water Quality," pre-
pared by EPA's Region X, highlights forest
harvest activities which can cause environmental
damage and suggests some management practices
aimed at preventing or minimizing adverse
impacts on surface waters. The forest and its
harvestable timber is a valuable resource. In the
Pacific Northwest alone, there are some 64.8
million acres classified as commercial forest.
Proper management of this resource carries
responsibilities for protection of the forest
environment. Improper harvest practices can be
destructive not only to the immediate harvest
area but to countless miles of streams. This
publication can be obtained by checking off the
appropriate box (#5013) on the order form in
the back of this newsletter.
WORKSHOP-OZONE/CHLORINE DIOXIDE
A workshop on "Ozone/Chlorine Dioxide
Oxidation Products of Organic Materials," co-
sponsored by the International Ozone Institute
and Technology Transfer was held November
16-19 in Cincinnati. Over 300 scientists, en-
gineers, regulatory personnel, and academics
from around the world attended the workshop.
During the 3-day workshop, over 25 papers
dealing with the chemistry and toxicology of
various organic materials were given. Topics of
some of the papers were as follows: Ozone as a
Disinfectant of Water; Reactions of Ozone in
Aqueous Systems; Methods for Evaluating the
Mutagenic Activity of Ozonated Chemicals;
Wolfgang Kuhn of the Universitat Karlsruhe, Federal
Republic of Germany, addressing the audience at the IOI
Workshop.
-------
Identification of End Products Resulting from
Ozonation of Compounds Commonly Found in
Water; and Use of Chlorine Dioxide in Water and
Wastewater Treatment.
Key speakers during the workshop included
Victor Kimm, Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Water Supply, U.S. EPA; Phillip Harteman,
Ph.D., INSERM, Nancy, France; Wolfgang
Kuhn, Universitat Karlsruhe, Federal Republic
of Germany; and James M. Symons, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA.
Proceedings from this workshop can be
obtained from the International Ozone Institute,
Skytop Complex, Merrill Lane, Syracuse, New
York 13210.
Jack Mills of Dow Chemical Co. and Walter J. Blogoslawski,
National Marine Fisheries Service, during one of the Tech-
nical Sessions at the IOI Workshop.
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on Items appearing In this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN
Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
III
IV
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F, Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass,, R.I,, Conn.!
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md,, Del,, D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI Mildred Smith
VII JohnCoakley
VIII Elmer Chenault
IX William Bishop
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First International Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214- 749-3971
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo,, Utah, N,D.
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-6925
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Clifford Risley Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-2200
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
John Osborn Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Transfer Chairman. (See above)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
• R ichardson, Texas Project—Title: "Somebody around here
must be doing something good." (15 min.)
• Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
• Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif .—Title:
"The Water Plan." (28'/2 min.)
• The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min.)
• "Breakthrough at Clear Lake" (28 min.)
-------
Technology Transfer Scheduled Events
In order to keep you more aware of future Technology Transfer activities
(particularly seminars), the following schedule is included. Should you desire
more details on any of the activities listed, contact the appropriate Technology
Transfer Regional Chairman listed in the previous section of this newsletter.
SUBJECT
Scheduled Industrial Seminars
Specialty Foods
Metal Fabricating
Metal Fabricating
Tentative Industrial Seminars
Metal Fabricating
Metal Fabricating
Wood Products
Wood Products
Wood Products
Scheduled Municipal Seminars
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Small Wastewater Treatment Systems
Scheduled "208 Planning" Seminars
208 Management and Implementation
Tentative "208 Planning" Seminars
208 Management and Implementation
208 Management and Implementation
DATE
January 9-12, 1977
February 23-24, 1977
March 23,24, 1977
April 1977
April 1977
Summer 1977
Summer 1977
Summer 1977
March 8-1 0,1977
March 29-31, 1977
April 26-28, 1977
May 4-6, 1977
May 17-19, 1977
June 7-9, 1977
March 15-17, 1977
April 19-21, 1977
May 23-25, 1977
IV
I
V
VI
IX
VIII
VI
IX
X
III
VII
1
IX
VIII
III
VIII
VII
REGION/CITY
Atlanta, Ga.
Boston, Mass.
Chicago, III.
Dallas, Tex.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Denver, Colo.
Texarkana, Tex.
Redding, Calif.
Seattle, Wash.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Kansas City, Mo.
Boston, Mass.
San Francisco, Calif.
Denver, Colo.
Reston, Va.
Denver, Colo.
St. Louis, Mo.
. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: W&-757-056/5W Region No. 5-11
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002 D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Plants (Oct. 1974) 1004 D
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems
(Oct. 1974) 1005 D
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006 Q
Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007 Q
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001 Q
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002 D
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 Q
First Interim Report on EPA Alkail SO2
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 O
Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005 Q
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006 Q
SO2 Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid
Production Via Magnesia Scrubbing 2007 Q
Second I nterim Report on EPA
Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008 [J
Magnesium Carbonate Process for
Water Treatment 2009 Q
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001 D
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002 D
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003 D
Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004 D
Choosing the Optimum Financial
Strategies for Pollution Control Investments . . .3005 D
Erosion and Sediment Control from
Surface Mining (2 Vols.) 3006 D
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons 4001 Q
Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002 D
Nitrification/Denitrification 4004 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities-Case Histories 4005 D
Flow Equalization 4006 CD
Wastewater Filtration 4007 D
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008 D
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge
Incineration 4009 CH
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater
Effluents (3 Vols.) 4010 D
BROCHURES
Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011 D
Municipal Wastewater Alternatives 5012 D
Forest Harvesting and
Water Quality .5013 D
HANDBOOKS
Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories (1972) 6001 Q
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 D
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes (1974) 6003 Q
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry - Part I/Air 7001 Q
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added' Yes
No
CH
*Name.
Employer.
Street
City _
State
Zip
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct.
Note. Forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268,
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
ADDRESS LABEL
60604-TILLE-034792
6C60,
-------
ECHNOLOGY
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SEPTEMBER 1S76
INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS SHOW
Technology Transfer is participating as an
exhibitor at the Internal Public Works Con-
gress and Equipment Show being held Septem-
ber 25-30, 1976 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The theme of the Technology Transfer
Exhibit being displayed at the International
Public Works Show is the new publication
"Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives:
Municipal Wastewater", which will be avail-
able free of charge at the Technology Transfer
booth.
Host region for this year's meeting is EPA's
Region IX. Mr. Paul DeFalco serves as Regional
Administrator of Region IX, with responsibil-
ity for environmental protection activities in
Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Guam,
American Samoa, and the Pacific Islands Trust
Territories.
George R. Alexander, Jr.
Region V Administrator
'•V . ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
CONTROL ALTERNATIVES:
RECEIVE*
Paul DeFalco. Jr.
Region IX Administrator
WPCFCONFERENCE
For the sixth consecutive year, EPA Tech-
nology Transfer is participating in the Annual
Conference of the Water Pollution Control
Federation. This year's meeting - the 49th
Annual WPCF Conference - is being held in
Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 3-8, 1976.
Technology Transfer will have a booth in the
exhibit area of the WPCF Conference at which
the newly printed "Environmental Pollution
Control Alternatives: Municipal Wastewater"
will be available.
Host region for this year's meeting is EPA's
Region V, which also hosted the 1973 WPCF
Annual Conference. George R. Alexander, the
Regional Administrator, will be on hand at the
opening of the Conference, which annually
attracts thousands of the nation's top pollution
control experts.
ALTERNATIVES FOR MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SUBJECT
OF NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PUBLICATION
"Environmental Pollution Control Alterna-
tives: Municipal Wastewater" is the title of the
newest semi-technical Technology Transfer
publication. This full-color publication presents,
in one place, all the available alternative tech-
-------
nologies involved in the treatment of municipal
wastewater. Among the technologies covered
in this document are physical-chemical treat-
ment, nitrogen control and removal techniques,
phosphorus removal techniques, oxygen aera-
tion, carbon adsorption, sludge handling and dis-
posal technology, land treatment, and flow
equalization. For each technology, information
on treatment efficiency, power requirements,
operation and maintenance considerations,
costs, land requirements, and actual installa-
tions is presented.
This publication will be available for the first
time at the Technology Transfer booths at the
International Public Works Congress and Equip-
ment Show, September 25-30, 1976, in Las
Vegas, Nevada and at the 49th Annual Confer-
ence of the Water Pollution Control Federa-
tion, OctobenS-S, 1976, in Minneapolis, Minne-
sota. Copies can also be obtained by using the
order form at the back of this newsletter.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER NATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON NITROGEN CONTROL
Technology Transfer's first national con-
ference was on the subject of nitrogen control
and was held July 27-29, 1976 in Chicago,
Illinois. Unlike previous seminars, which were
offered on a regional basis, this conference
drew attendees from all EPA Regions. Interest
in nitrogen control continues to be high, with
attendance at this conference exceeding 300
consulting engineers, state and federal regulatory
personnel, and municipal engineers.
Each attendee received the Technology
Transfer Process Design Manual for Nitrogen
Control and supplementary handouts covering
additional nitrogen control case histories. The
conference also featured a field trip to a nitro-
gen control facility operated by the Metropoli-
tan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago.
Key presentations were made by: Gordon
Gulp, Clean Water Consultants, El Dorado,
California; Donald Ehreth, U.S. EPA, Washing-
ton, D.C.; Dr. Cecil Lue-Hing, Alan Obayashi,
T.B.S. Prakasam, and David Zenz, Metropolitan
Sanitary District of Greater Chicago; Dr. Denny
Parker and Richard Stone, Brown and Caldwell
Consulting Engineers, Walnut Creek, California;
B.W. Ryan, Harris County Water Control and
Improvement District #50, Seabrook, Texas;
Dr. Clair N. Sawyer, Sun City, Arizona; and
Thomas Wilson, Greeley and Hansen, Chicago,
Illinois.
Future seminars on nitrogen control are
planned and detailed information on these can
be obtained from the appropriate Technology
Transfer Regional Chairman listed in the back of
this newsletter.
PETROLEUM FACILITIES AS POTENTIAL
SOURCES OF POLLUTION IN
SOUTHWEST KANSAS
The Environmental Photographic Interpreta-
tion Center (EPIC), an associate laboratory of
EPA's National Environmental Research Center
in Las Vegas and under the guidance of the
Assistant Administrator for Research and Devel-
opment, has recently completed a pilot study to
determine the location of oil production and
storage facilities in four southwestern! counties
of Kansas. The study was initiated upon the
request of EPA's Region VII Surveillance and
Analysis Division and was intended to support
the Region's "Spill Prevention" activities under
Section 311 of the Water Pollution Control
Act.
The purpose of this study was to survey late
date overhead imagery for the location of oil
storage tanks, oil spills, and associated spill
prevention characteristics and making this data
more easily recognizable to field inspection
teams. The project area which encompasses
2,706 square miles includes the counties of
Grant, Morton, Stanton and Stevens of the state
of Kansas. Underlying this area is a large pro-
ducing gas field. In addition to the numerous
existing gas wells found throughout the project
area, oil pumping operations are taking place in
order to extract a grade of crude which can pres-
ently compete in today's higher priced oil
market. Many of these operations are considered
to be wildcat operations, which tend to ignore
pollution protection requirements.
The photographic analysis was extracted from
late 1974, high altitude, high resolution, black
and white aerial photography. In conjunction
with the utilization of this high resolution aerial
photographs, 1973, U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, ASCS photography (Example A) was
used to accumulate baseline data.
In order to provide a beneficial product that
could be used and plus save the field inspection
teams valuable time and money, it was decided
that the format for this study would be the
presentation of a series of annotated overlays
keyed to 1:24,000 topographic maps (Example
B). Where topographic maps of this scale were
nonexistent, county road maps were utilized.
Although these county road maps did not pro-
vide terrain relief, they did furnish drainage
features, roads, railroads, and built-up areas
for necessary locational purposes. Forty-four
annotated overlays of this vast area were com-
piled in approximately six weeks for use.
Resulting from this study the following
observations were made:
1. Through the use of high altitude, high
resolution imagery this program demon-
-------
EXAMPLE A
EXAMPLE B
The analysis for this study was derived from a high altitude/high resolution
Photographic System. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, ASCS imagery such as the
above was used as a collateral source. Area to the right of dashed line is
shown as actual ground coverage on Example B.
strates the feasibility of detection and
location of actual or potential oil-asso-
ciated pollution sources.
2. Demonstrates a definite aid to field inves-
tigation teams in expediting their field
operations and in so doing reduces man-
hours and costs for such investigations.
Region VII has commented upon this pro-
gram by stating: "This approach for pollution
abatement certainly has promise for large scat-
tered production fields. The savings in travel
time and man-hours could be shortened signifi-
cantly during the SPCC inspection trips."
THIRD NATIONAL
WATEREUSE CONFERENCE
The Third National WateReuse Conference
was held in Cincinnati, Ohio, June 27-30,1976.
The Conference, jointly sponsored by the
American Institute of Chemical Engineers
(AlChE) and Technology Transfer, had the
theme of "Symbiosis as a Means of Abatement
for Multi-Media Pollution." Ninety topics and
papers were presented at the gathering — each
emphasizing pollution control via cooperation
-------
The above illustrates a typical crude oil storage facility. This type of tank
"battery" usually serves three to six wells. The tank to the left seperates
the water from the oil. The two tanks in the center are for crude storage.
.: * 4i r. ^
'Sludge Pits" are sometimes associated with oil field storage facilities.
-------
Lawrence K. Cecil, AICHE. opens the Third National
Watereuse Conference.
among industrial, municipal, and/or agricultural
interests.
This conference is part of a continuing series
which centers around the technical and econom-
ical factors of approaching the goal of zero dis-
charge of aqueous wastes by water reuse. Copies
of the conference proceedings are available
through AlChE, 345 East 47th Street, New
York, N.Y. 10017.
TWO INDUSTRIAL SEMINARS SCHEDULED
To industrial seminars, entitled "Upgrading
Metal Fabricating, Assembly, and Coating Oper-
ations to Reduce Pollution," are scheduled for
this winter. The first seminar is to be held in
Philadelphia during November; the second is
planned for Boston in January. Each of the two-
day seminars stresses the engineering and eco-
nomic considerations of multi-media pollution
control. Presentations are being prepared by
EPA officials, consultants, and industrial repre-
sentatives. A round table discussion at the end
of the second day will conclude each seminar.
The seminar dates and locations will be selected
after receiving recommendations from the
trade associations.
NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PUBLICATION FOR AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL IN THE PULP AND
PAPER INDUSTRY
A comprehensive document covering all
aspects of air pollution control in the pulp and
paper industry has been prepared by EKONO,
Inc. for Technology Transfer and is now avail-
able for distribution.
This publication, directed towards the process
and design engineer, describes types, quantities,
and sources of emissions, presents the latest
Helen Fenske, representing EPA Administrator Russell
Train, discusses past and future challenges to EPA at
Watereuse Conference.
control device alternatives, and estimates costs
for implementing the air pollution control
systems. Emphasis is placed on explanation of
chemical and physical processes which generate
emission in specific unit operations so that the
advantages and disadvantages of both internal
and external process control methods can be
understood. Actual field installations have
provided the basis for the majority of design
data.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
are currently being proposed for air emissions in
the pulp and paper industry. This new Tech-
environmental
pollution
xiontrol
PULP/M)
INDUSTRY
mi
TECHNOLOGY TBANSflR
-------
nology Transfer publication enables plant
personnel to evaluate the best control tech-
nology for their specific application.
To order your copy of this publication, use
the order form at the back of this newsletter.
SIGNIFICANCE OF
NON-POINT SOURCE
POLLUTION
The importance of non-point source (NPS)
pollution can readily be appreciated by compar-
ing it with point sources of pollution. Examples
of point and non-point sources of potential
pollution follow:
Non-Point Sources
Agriculture
Cropping practices
Livestock production
Manure Disposal
Silviculture
Mine Pollution
Hydrologic Modifications
Construction Pollution
Saltwater Intrusion
Irrigation Return Flows
Land Disposal of Wastes
Subsurface Injection
Urban Runoff
Land Treatment Processes
Effluent Disposal
On-Site Disposal
(Septic Tanks)
Point Sources
Municipal Sewerage Systems
Industrial Wastes
Ninety-seven percent of the nation's area is
rural in nature and essentially all of it is a poten-
tial source of non-point source pollution to
some degree. Sediment is the greatest contribu-
tor to non-pofnt pollution. It is estimated that
some 3 billion tons of sediment per year run off
the land into streams. Of this amount, approxi-
mately 25% originates from agricultural lands.
However, together with the sediment, 3 million
tons of nitrogen, 4.5 million tons of phos-
phorus, and 45 million tons of potassium also
run off.
In comparison, a sewered population of 160
million people with a sewage contricution of
100 gpcd, and nitrate and phosphate concen-
trations in the secondary sewage treatment
plant effluent of approximately 25 ppm and
12 ppm, respectively, contributes approximately
125,000 tons/yr of nitrogen and 25,000 tons/yr
of phosphorus. These are orders of magnitude
less than the contributions from sediment
runoff alone.
It is estimated that approximately 7.5 million
tons of sludge is produced annually from the
treatment of municipal wastes. This will increase
to about 11 million tons by 1985.
The total quantity of sludges generated
nationally from the treatment of industrial
wastewater is estimated to have been approxi-
mately 23 million tons per year in 1971. By
virture of the implementation by industry of
the treatment requirements of PL 92-500, this
value is expected to increase by more than 60
percent to 38 million tons by 1977, and to
approximately 47 million tons by 1983. The
breakdown by industry is illustrated in Table 1.
Table 1
NATIONAL GENERATION OF WASTEWATER
SLUDGE FROM THE MAJOR INDUSTRIAL
SECTORS (in 1Q6tons)
1971 1977 1983
Inorganic
Iron and Steel
Pulp and Paper
Meat Products
Petroleum Refining
Textiles
Organic
Plastics & Synthetics
Fruits& Vegetables
Electroplating
A further comparison between various sources
of sludges is illustrated in Figure 1.
Another comparition is between BOD dis-
charges to streams from municipal wastes and
animal feedlots. Figure 2 illustrates the contri-
butions of each. Municipal contributions will
decrease dramatically due to the construction
of sewage treatment plants. The confined animal
feeding industry is also implementing pollution
control techniques to minimize rampant runoff
into streams. It is assumed, therefore, that
relative discharges to streams will approximate
those of the municipalities. If only 0.5% to 1%
of the animal waste products are involved in
runoff to streams, the BOD loads are similar
to those from municipalities. Obviously the
significance of this source of pollution will vary
from basin to basin as well as from different
parts of the country. However, this source is
only one of the potential non-point sources as
has been noted. Add the other non-point sources
and it is rapidly realized that non-point sources
will become the major source of pollution.
17.07
3.47
1.08
0.42
0.69
0.19
0.21
0.14
0.05
0.04
26.02
6.85
2.24
0.92
0.85
0.52
0.41
0.24
0.07
0.07
32.00
8.03
3.41
1.09
1.02
0.74
0.48
0.32
0.11
0.07
-------
1OOOCL
INDUSTRIAL
WASTEWATER
SLUDGE 35
MUNICIPAL'
SEWAGE 7.5'
WATER PLANT SLUDGE 2.5
MINING 1783
FIGURE 1. Estimated Annual production rates for
different types of Solid and Semisolid Wastes (1970-
1974) (Dry Weight in Million Tons per Year)
.8 8000
6000
00
05
2 4000
ta
CD
05
2000
Q
D
FEEDLOT
5% Runoff Level
Total
Municipal
Load
FEEDLOT
1% Runoff Level
0 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
YEAR
FIGURE 2. Comparison of BOD Discharge to Streams from
Municpalities and Animal Feedlots.
A comparison of urban runoff with munici-
pal wastewaters is shown in Table 3. According
to this table, surface runoff has approximately
the same characteristics as secondary plant dis-
charges. However, this data is based upon aver-
age runoff considerations during a storm. Other
data indicate that almost all of the mass runoff
occurs during the first 10 minutes of a storm. In
this regard mass loadings would be more repre-
sentative of actual stormwater contributions
such as was found for Roanoke, Virginia (Figure
3).
The magnitude and importance of urban
runoff is further emphasized by considering the
impact of pollutants in the air that are deposited
during precipitation events. Rainout is not too
often considered as a source of pollution; how-
ever, Figures 4 and 5 indicate otherwise.
Construction and urbanization develop about
1,000,000 acres per year. Although construc-
tion-related activities are relatively simply con-
trolled and impact, at most, 4% as much land as
crop agriculture, the soil-disturbing activity not
only generates sediment at a much greater rate
than crop agriculture but poses a potential
serious threat to water quality in many areas.
Surface mining has to date disturbed more
than 3,000,000 acres of land and an equal
amount has been dedicated to the storage of
mineral wastes from mining activities. Surface
mining at present continues to affect about
350,000 acres of land annually. In the Northern
Appalachia coal fields alone, mine drainage
results in a discharge of more than 1,100,000
tons of acidity per day to the surface and
ground water in addition to high annual sedi-
ment loads.
What has been the effect of the aforemention-
ed and other non-point source discharges on
water quality? Up to now, only subjective
national estimates have been made by EPA
Regional Offices and states. In 1972, the
Table 3
COMPARISON OF URBAN RUNOFF WITH MUNICIPAL WASTEWATERS
Type
Untreated municipal
Treated municipal
Primary effluent
Secondary effluent
Combined sewage
Surface runoff
BOD5,
mg/1
200
135
25
115
30
SS,
mg/1
200
80
15
410
630
Total conforms,
MPN/100 ml
5 x 107
2 x 107
1 x 103
5 x 106
4x 105
Total nitrogen,
mg/1 as N
40
35
30
11
3
Total phosphorus,
mg/1 as P
10
8
5
4
1
-------
TREATMENT PLANT
EFFLUENT
7,570 LB.
TREATMENT PLANT
BYPASS
14,810 LB.
SANITARY SEWER
OVERFLOWS
8,790 LB.
FIGURE 3. Mass Comparison of Storm Runoff with Mun
Municipal Wastewater for Roanoke. Virginia (Discharge
to Roanoke River).
Regional Offices estimated that approximately
35% of the Nation's waterways had water
quality standards violations and that approxi-
mately 40% of these problems were attribu-
table to non-point sources. More recently,
states have estimated that discharges from these
sources have resulted in water quality degrada-
tion and in-stream ecological damage in every
state in the Nation. Approximately 15% of the
Nation's waters are failing to meet water qual-
ity standards due to non-point sources and an-
other 35% are equally degraded by a combina-
tion of discharges from point and non-point
sources.
Examples of the approaches to be followed
in coping with the non-point source problem
include: site practices to reduce unnecessary
erosion which not only creates sediment prob-
lems in the streams, but also diminishes the
productivity of the land; reclamation of strip-
mined areas to allow a reasonable use of the land
in the post-mined phase and at the same time
prevent entry of acids, dissolved minerals,
and sediments into the waters; reasonable use
of agricultural chemicals; and improved land
development practices in connection with new
.3 kg/ha/yr
1.5 kg/ha/yr
2.0 kg/ha/y^'
2.5 kg/ha/yr
3.0 kg/ha/yrs
3.5 kg/ha/yr\
1.0 kg/ha/yr
1.5 kg/ha/yr
FIGURE 4. Nitrogen (NH4-N and NO3-N) in precipitation.
-------
5.50
FIGURE 5. Predicated pH of precipitation over the Eastern
United States. 1965-1966.
subdivisions and housing projects. EPA's respon-
sibility in the non-point source management
effort will be to provide guidance to the states
for initiating planning and implementation of
non-point source management in order that the
1983 water quality goals of PL 92-500 may be
reached.
The basic elements of the non-point source
planning and management process in the pre-
ceding areas will generally be the following:
1. In States where little or no evaluation of
non-point source problems has been accom-
plished, an initial assessment of the nature and
extent of non-point sources carried out through
the existing State water quality management
process will be a necessary first step. States
that have already completed this step and have
begun to implement an NPS program will want
to periodically reassess the nature of existing
non-point sources and monitor to determine
the success of control programs. States propose
planning, and ultimately, management pro-
grams through their existing State Water Quality
Management process and Section 106 program
stragety.
2. Once a problem assessment has been com-
pleted, and NPS categories and subcategories
have been established, priorities should be set
among the NPS categories. It is expected that
priorities will vary considerably from state to
state depending on the nature of the NPS prob-
lems, the progress individual States may have
already achieved in certain areas, and available
resources. A State may choose to deal with one
category at a time or several simultaneously.
In any case, the State sets highest priority on
those categories where most water quality im-
provement can be accomplished immediately
and selects to do those first, adding additional
categories as rapidly as resources permit.
3. Once priorities have been established, the
State drafts the definition of a significant non-
point source for those NPS categories receiving
consideration and proceeds to develop inven-
tories of all significant sources within those
categories.
4. The state then defines its own BMP's for
the selected NOS categories and develops
regulatory programs to implement the BMP's.
Where necessary, a state will define its BMP's
and BMP compliance schedules through new
legislation and accompanying regulations.
5. In the planning and implementation of
NPS management program, whether in desig-
nated or nondesignated areas, existing state,
local, and Federal institutions may be utilized
to monitor streams and to provide technical
assistance in the field. In those cases in which a
State delegates actual planning, implementation,
or enforcement responsibility to other state or
local agencies, the State will be responsible for
the effectiveness and coordination of such
arrangements, as well as the consistency of the
management plans prepared within the state.
Successful implementation of the NPS pro-
gram will require effective integration of the ex-
pertise and resources of other Federal agencies,
including the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.
Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Manage-
ment, Department of Transportation and
Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment.
THIRD NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
INDIVIDUAL ONSITE WASTEWATER
SYSTEMS
Technology Trasnfer is co-sponsoring, with
the National Sanitation Foundation, the Third
National Conference on Individual Onsite
Wastewater Systems. This year's conference
is being held November 16, 17 and 18, 1976 in
Ann Arbor, Michigan. The purpose of this series
of annual conferences is to present a compre-
hensive state-of-the-art review of the efficiency
of individual onsite wastewater systems, and
develop recommendations for related current
and future research activities.
-------
Additional information on this year's confer-
ence can be obtained from Dr. Nina McClelland,
National Sanitation Foundation, NSF Building,
Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105 (Telephone 313-
769-8010).
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SEMINARS ON
GUIDANCE FOR IDENTIFYING AND
ASSESSING POLLUTION FROM
AGRICULTURE AND SILVICULTURE
SOURCES
The first two in a series of Technology Trans-
fer Seminars to assist statewide and areawide
water quality management agencies in comply-
ing with Section 208 of the Federal Water Pol-
lution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(PL 92-500) were recently held. The first semi-
nar was held in Atlanta, Georgia, June 14-15;
the second in Framingham, Mass., June 21-22,
1976. Approximately 130 public officials, and
individuals from planning agencies, conserva-
tion groups, and agriculture and silviculture
groups attended each seminar.
The intention of these seminars is to present
draft guidance for identifying and assessing the
extent of agriculturally and silviculturally
related non-point sources of pollution to those
parties most directly involved in the 208
process.
Essential to the development of meaningful
final guidance was the feedback received from
the seminar attendees both as regards the
clearness and usefulness of the draft guidance
and the identification of particular problems
which involved in the 208 process have encoun-
tered. In order to facilitate this interchange of
ideas, each seminar was divided into a discussion
related to the proposed guidance system, con-
sisting of formal presentations, question and
Lester Suit ion. Technology Transfer Chairman, Region I,
welcoming attendies to Framingham, Mass. "208 Seminar"
Darwin Wright, EPA-Washington, D.C., addressing
audience at Technology Transfer "208 Seminar" in
Framingham. Mass.
answer periods, and workshops. Each attendee
received a kit of information which was des-
cribed in the formal sessions and used in the
workshops. The major portion of each seminar
addressed the particular problems identified by
the attendees relating to non-point source
identification and assessment.
Key presentations were made by: Harold
Bernard, Environmental Quality Systems, Inc.,
Rockville, Md.; David Green and Robert Singer,
U.S. EPA; Gordon Mellencamp, Chattanooga
Area Regional Council of Governments; and
Darwin Wright and Lee Mulkey, U.S. EPA Office
of Research and Development, Washington,
and Athens, Georgia, respectively.
For details about future seminars on this sub-
ject, contact the appropriate Technology Trans-
fer Chairman listed in the back of this news-
letter.
CONFERENCE ON "PLANNING
ALTERNATIVES FOR MUNICIPAL
WATER SYSTEMS'
Technology Transfer, in collaboration with
the Holcomb Research Institute, Butler Univer-
sity, is co-sponsoring this conference, which is to
be held October 10-14, 1976, at the French Lick
Sheraton Hotel in French Lick, Indiana.
-------
The conference is intended to bring together
professionals with a broad range of backgrounds
and responsibilities to discuss technological and
policy issues in planning of municipal water
systems. Invited speakers of national reputation,
including Francis T. Mayo, Director, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA,
Dr. Beatrice Willard, Co-Chairperson, Council on
Environmental Quality, and Lawrence K. Cecil,
AlChE, will make presentations on the follow-
ing:
*** Water Planning
*** Water Quality
*** Water Quantity
*** Management Alternatives
Pricing
Publicity
Improved Efficiency
Reuse
*** Public Acceptance of Alternatives
Although technical matters will necessarily be
discussed, the conference is intended to promote
the exchange of ideas among various disciplines,
including law, economics, environmental and
chemical engineering, planning and public
administration.
For further information, write or telephone:
David Holtz
Assistant Director
Holcomb Research Institute
Butler University
Indianapolis, IN 46208
317-283-9421
NEW INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR
PUBLICATION AVAILABLE
The latest industrial seminar publication, pre-
pared by JACA Corp. and entitled '"Choosing
the Optimum Financial Strategies for Pollution
Control Investments," has been printed and is
now available for distribution.
This publication is intended to alert decision
makers to the availability of and qualifications
for some of the financing incentives from
federal, state, and local governments, and to
demonstrate that it is well worth spending time
analyzing the special methods of financing pollu-
tion control expenditures and the available tax
treatments. Obtaining optimum financial and
tax benefits could save a company tens of
thousands of dollars over the life of the equip-
ment.
This publication shows the businessman the
type of financial analysis that should be ac-
corded any type of pollution control expendi-
ture in an effort to substantially reduce funds
expended and to smooth out what could de-
velop into a cash flow trauma. It also contains a
discussion of the tax and financing positions of
three hypothetical firms with different manage-
ment goals but with similar capital expenditures
for pollution control.
A separate financial analysis is presented
specifically for firms which have a choice of
wastewater treated onsite or by a municipality.
For your copy of this publication use the
order form at the back of this newsletter.
Choosing Optimum
Financial Strategies
Pollution Control Systems
EFA Technology Tansfer Seminar Publication
NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SEMINAR
PUBLICATION ON EROSION AND
SEDIMENT CONTROL FROM
SURFACE MINING
A new Technology Transfer publication,
entitled "Erosion and Sediment Control from
Surface Mining in the Eastern United States,"
will be distributed for the first time at the
"NCA/BCR Coal Conference and Expo III"
meeting being held October 19-21, 1976 in
Louisville, Kentucky. An anticipated 3500
persons representing government, academia,
and industry are expected to attend this
meeting.
This new publication presents an evaluation
of the effectiveness of sediment ponds in reduc-
ing suspended solids in the runoff from surface
mining activities. Nine selected sedimentation
ponds in the three eastern coal-mining States
of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Kentucky
were sampled under two different operating
-------
conditions, a baseline and rainfall event. Their
theoretical and actual efficiencies of removal of
suspended solids were computed and compared.
This publication can also be obtained by using
the order form at the back of this newsletter.
WORKSHOP ON "CHLORINE DIOXIDE/OZONE
OXIDATION PRODUCTS OF ORGANIC
MATERIALS"
Technology Transfer, in cooperation with
EPA's Office of Water Supply and the Interna-
tional Ozone Institute, is co-sponsoring a work-
shop on the subject of chlorine dioxide/ozone
oxidation products or organic materials. This
workshop will be held at the Stouffer's Cincin-
nati Towers, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 17-19,
1976.
The workshop will bring together those work-
ing in the field to discuss the current state-of-
the-art and to determine what is known and
what is not known about this subject. The ob-
jectives are to ascertain what work has been
done, what work is being done, by whom and
where, what compounds are being sought and/or
studied, what analytical methods are being
used and what toxicological studies are being
made.
Current interest in the use of chlorine dioxide
as a means of reducing formation of halome-
thanes in water, leads us to include a session on
this oxidant material, which is being used today,
sometimes in conjunction with ozone and acti-
vated carbon.
Presentations will be made by speakers of
national and international reputation, including:
Victor Kimm and Dr. James Symons, U.S.
EPA; Yves Richard and Dr. Harteman, France;
and Dr. E. Gilbert, W. Kuhn, and Dr. H. Sont-
heimer, Karlsbruke, Germany. After the presen-
tations have been made, a round table, open
discussion will be held to define current infor-
mation gaps.
For more information, contact either D.
J.A. Cotruvo, U.S. EPA, Office of Water Supply,
Washington, D.C. (202-755-2884) or Dr. Rip
Rice, International Ozone Institute, Washington,
D.C. (202-296-8375).
coordinate activities and provide assistance and
technological support to the agency's 208
program. £-; ^ .
Directed by Mr. John M. Smith, this task
force acts as liaison between EPA's OALWU
research program and the operating programs
responsible for implementing Section 208 of
PL 92-500. The immediate efforts of the task
force are devoted to summarizing and accel-
erating the delivery of pertinent research results
to the designated 208 agencies and related user
communities.
The task force has recently conducted a two-
month intensive survey of 208 planning needs
which included site visits or telephone interviews
with 25 designated 208 agencies, discussions
and meetings with EPA Regional 208 coordina-
tors, 208 contractors, and other Agency person-
nel. An interim needs survey report summarizing
the findings of the survey has been completed.
As a result of this survey, along with a com-
plete review of the OALWU related research
programs, the task force has undertaken the
preparation of an "Areawide Assessment Pro-
cedures Manual" (AAPM) which will provide the
most critically needed technological guidance
for areawide planners in a readily usable form.
The AAPM will contain seven chapters including
data base inventory and problem identification,
procedures for urban and non-urban pollutant
source and load assessment, analysis of stream
impacts, and evaluation and selection of control
alternatives. In addition to this information, the
AAPM will also contain eight separate appen-
dices including a model applicability summary,
land use data collection and analysis, monitoring
requirements, best management practices, and a
major appendix summarizing structural cost
information and methods of analysis. The
AAPM will be published in three separate vol-
umes, each being in a ring binder. Portions of
the first two volumes will have been published
by August 13 and the third volume will be
published by December 15, 1976.
EPA FORMS URBAN PLANNING
TASK FORCE
EPA's Office of Research and Development
has recently formed a six-member Urban Plan-
ning Task Force within its Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory in Cincinnati.
The primary responsibility of these technical
specialists is to provide a focal point within
EPA's Office of Air, Land and Water Use to
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN
I Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
Albert Montague
IV
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass , R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va1., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
(N.C , S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn St,
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-8880
(Mich., W is., Minn,, III., Ind,, Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI
VII
Mildred Smith
John Coakley
VIII Elmer Chenault
IX William Bishop
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street, Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75201
214749-1885
(Texas, Okla,, Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.)
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-6925
(Calif., Ariz., Nev,, Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore,, Idaho, Alaska)
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Transfer Chairman. (See above)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
VIDEOTAPES
Richardson, Texas Project—Title: "Somebody around here
must be doing something good." (15 min.)
Phosphorus Removal (5 mm.)
Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif .—Title:
"The Water Plan." <281/z mm.)
The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min,)
"Breakthrough at Clear Lake" (28 mm.)
• Carbon Adsorption. (40 min,)
• Upgrading Activated Sludge Treatment Plants,
(40 mm.)
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001 D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002 D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003 d
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Plants (Oct. 1974) 1004 D
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems
(Oct. 1974) 1005 D
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006 D
Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007 G
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001 Q
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002 Q
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003 Q
First Interim Report on EPA Alkail SO2
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004 [J
Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005 Q
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006 Q
SOj Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid
Production Via Magnesia Scrubbing 2007 fj
Second I nterim Report on EPA
Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008 D
Magnesium Carbonate Process for
Water Treatment 2009 Q
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poulty Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001 G
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002 D
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003 D
Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004 D
Choosing the Optimum Financial
Strategies for Pollution Control Investments . . .3005 Q
Erosion and Sediment Control from
Surface Mining 3006 D
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons 4001 D
Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002 D
Nitrification/Denitrification 4004 D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005 D
Flow Equalization 4006 D
Wastewater Filtration 4007 D
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008 C]
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge
Incineration 4009 D
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater
Effluents (3 Vols.) 4010 D
BROCHURES
Seattle, Washington METRO 5007 D
Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008 D
Indian Creek Reservoir 5009 D
Richardson,Texas 5010 D
Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011 D
Municipal Wasterwater Alternatives 5012 Q
HANDBOOKS
Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories (1972) 6001 D
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) 6002 D
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes (Rev. 1976) 6003 D
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL
Pulp and Paper Industry - Part I/Air 7001 D
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes d No
*Name.
Employer.
Street .
City _
State
Zip
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct.
Note: Forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1976-675-659/51(91 Region No. 5-H
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
6U6C.6-TlLLt-035016
1 -4 wACKrR OR
CAC/', IL 63606
-------
ECHNOLOGY
RANSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
5322
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
MAY 1976
NEW MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATION-
"LAND TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER EFFLUENTS"
Anew Technology Transfer municipal seminar
publication has been printed and is now
available for distribution. The publication, en-
titled "Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater
Effluents," consists of three separate volumes:
Design Factors I, Design Factors II, and Case
Histories. The information included in this
publication was developed for the Technology
Transfer Seminar Series on Land Treatment by
Metcalf and Eddy Engineers, Palo Alto, Cali-
fornia; CH2M/Hill, Denver, Colorado; Gulp,
Wesner, and Gulp, El Dorado Hills, California;
and Michigan State University.
For your copy of this publication, use the
order form at the back of this Newsletter.
Land Treatment
of Municipal Wastewater
Effluents
"LOGGING ROADS AND WATER QUALITY"
LATEST TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
BROCHURE
A brochure discussing practices of minimizing
water quality impact due to logging road activity
is now available from Technology Transfer. This
publication was prepared by EPA's Region X,
Seattle, Washington, and addresses good and bad
management practices pertaining to logging
roads. There are over 250,000 miles of logging
-------
roads just in the Pacific Northwest and an
additional 12,000 miles per year of these roads
are being constructed or reconstructed.
This publication can be obtained by checking
off the appropriate box on the order form in the
back of this Newsletter.
WATER REUSE CONFERENCE
Technology Transfer, in cooperation with the
American Institute of Chemical Engineers, is
cosponsoring the Third National Conference on
Complete Water Reuse to be held June 27-30,
1976, at the Netherland Hilton Hotel in Cincin-
nati, Ohio. The theme of this year's Conference
is: "Symbiosis as a Means of Abatement for
Multi-Media Pollution."
Symbiosis is the association of two or more
dissimilar entities when such an association is
mutually beneficial. An example of a simplistic
symbiotic approach would be the use of a
process wastewater effluent, either with or
without treatment, as the influent to another
wastewater-producing process. In this situation,
the symbiotic approach would reduce the total
process raw water demand and the possible
requirement to treat two process wastewater
effluents. The economics of control could be
greatly modified by this approach.
For further details on paper write or tele-
phone:
Lawrence K. Cecil
Consulting Chemical Engineer
418 Lincoln Building
44 Main Street, Champaign, IL 61820
217-356-8258
REVISED PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL
DESIGN MANUAL AVAILABLE
The Technology Transfer Process Design Man-
ual for Phosphorus Removal, originally prepared
by Black and Veatch Consulting Engineers and
published in October 1971, has been revised and
is now available.
This revision was prepared in order to incor-
porate information on newly developed and
demonstrated techniques and to include subse-
quent experience gained and data produced on
those methods covered in the initial edition of
this manual. In addition, a description of an
EPA computer model for evaluating 22 alterna-
tive phosphorus removal strategies is included as
an appendix to the manual. This model reports
to the user the total cost of a selected strategy
for removing phosphorus. The contractor used
in completing this revision was Shimek, Roming,
Jacobs and Finklea of Dallas, Texas.
If you have already requested the revised
edition of this manual, it will automatically be
forwarded to you. If you have not so requested,
and desire a copy, please use the order form
opposite this page.
NEW INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR
PUBLICATION AVAILABLE
The latest industrial seminar publication, pre-
pared by JACA Corp. and entitled "Choosing
the Optimum Financial Strategy for Pollution
Control Investments," has been printed and is
now available for distribution.
This publication is intended to alert decision
makers to the availability of and qualifications
for some of the financing incentives from
federal, state, and local governments, and to
demonstrate that it is well worth spending time
analyzing the special methods of financing pollu-
tion control expenditures and the available tax
treatments. Obtaining optimum financial and
tax benefits could save a company tens of
thousands of dollars over the life of the equip-
ment.
This publication shows the businessman the
type of financial analysis that should be ac-
corded any type of pollution control expendi-
ture in an effort to substantially reduce funds
expended and to smooth out what could de-
velop into a cash flow trauma. It also contains a
discussion of the tax and financing positions of
three hypothetical firms with different manage-
ment goals but with similar capital expenditures
for pollution control.
A separate financial analysis is presented
specifically for firms which have a choice of
wastewater treated onsite or by a municipality.
For your copy of this publication use the
order form opposite this page.
PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL FOR
SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL
(January 1975 Edition)
The following change should be made in
the Process Design Manual for Suspended
Solids Removal:
• Table 5-2, page 5-15. The second
reaction should read: AI2(S04)3 +
3Na2CO3 + 3H20 -» 2AI(OH)3 I +
3Na2S04 +3C02t
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
IH Phosphorus Removal (April 1976) 1001
D Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002
D Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Plants (Oct. 1974) 1004
D Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems
(Oct. 1974) 1005
D Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006
D Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
U Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001
D Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002
D Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003
n First Interim Report on EPA Alkali SO,
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004
D Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005
LJ Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006
D SO, Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid
Production Via Magnesia Scrubbing 2007
D Second Interim Report on EPA
Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008
D Magnesium Carbonate Process for
Water Treatment 2009
HANDBOOKS
D Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories 6001
D Monitoring Industrial Wastewater 6002
D Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes 6003
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
D Upgrading Lagoons 4001
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
D Oxygen Activated Sludge 4003
D Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005
D Flow Equalization 4006
D Wastewater Filtration 4007
D Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
D Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge
Incineration 4009
D Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater
Effluents (3 Vols.) 4010
BROCHURES
D Seattle, Washington METRO 5007
D Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008
D Indian Creek Reservoir 5009
D Richardson, Texas 5010
D Logging Roads and Water Quality 5011
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
CD Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001
D Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002
CD Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003
D Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004
CD Choosing the Optimum Financial
Strategy for Pollution Control Investments 3005
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes D No D
Name.
Employer.
Street .
City
State.
Note: Forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
ij US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1976-657-644/0039
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
60604-TILLE-034792
LOU TILLEY
EPA REGION V
230 S DEARBORN
ROOM 1455A
CHICAGO* IL 60604
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
-------
ECHNOL
RAN
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
JANUARY 1S7G
RELOCATION OF OFFICE OF
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
November 3' 1975, the EPA Technology
Transfer Program was physically relocated
from Washington, D.C., to Cincinnati, Ohio.
This relocation involves no changes in the
functions or responsibilities of the program, and
all Technology Transfer activities (seminars,
publications, etc.) will continue as in the past.
All correspondence directed to Technology
Transfer should be forwarded to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Technology Transfer
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Individuals on the Technology Transfer staff can
be reached at 513-684-4404.
An up-to-date request sheet for Technology
Transfer publications is attached for your con-
venience. Note that six semitechnical brochures
(No. 5001 through 5006) have been deleted
from this request sheet. A new publication has
been developed to replace all of these six
documents and will be available very shortly.
Information contained in this one publication
will be the latest available on all viable alterna-
tive wastewater treatment systems. As with the
six publications being replaced, this publication
is intended for use by other than design-oriented
personnel and is also written in a semitechnical
tone. Those of you who have requested any one
of publications 5001-5006 will automatically
receive the new publication when it becomes
available.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
-U TTLLrY
P* V'GI'' '•' V
30 S PI-;'P ?rc \i
ifv 1.4.5 5 A
r \ G ^
60604
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
D Phosphorus Removal (Oct. 1971) 1001
D Carbon Adsorption (Oct. 1973) 1002
D Suspended Solids Removal (Jan. 1975) 1003
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Plants (Oct. 1974) 1004
D Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems
(Oct. 1974) 1005
D Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1974) 1006
D Nitrogen Control (Oct. 1975) 1007
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
D Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001
D Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002
D Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003
D First Interim Report on EPA Alkali SO,
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004
D Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005
D PoHution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006
D SO. Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid
Production Via Magnesia Scrubbing 2007
CD Second Interim Report on EPA
Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008
D Magnesium Carbonate Process for
Water Treatment 2009
HANDBOOKS
D Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories 6001
D Monitoring Industrial Wastewater 6002
D Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes 6003
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
D Upgrading Lagoons 4001
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
D Oxygen Activated Sludge 4003
D Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005
D Flow Equalization 4006
D Wastewater Filtration 4007
D Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
D Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge
Incineration 4009
BROCHURES
D Seattle, Washington METRO 5007
C] Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008
D Indian Creek Reservoir 500S
D Richardson, Texas 5010
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
D Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001
G Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002
D Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003
D Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.} 3004
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yes D No D
Name.
Employer.
Street.
City_
State.
Note: Forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
-------
ECHNOLOGY
RAN
The Bridge Between Research and Use
Jse R E C E
IVED
5SEZ
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEN
2 Q 1973
JULY 1,1973
INFILTRATION/INFLOW SEMINARS
Technology Transfer recently completed a sem-
inar series covering the subject of excessive
infiltration/inflow in sewer systems. The seminars
addressed the EPA Regulations and Guidelines
and covered in depth an acceptable method for
an analysis and survey of the collection system
that will meet the EPA requirements. Seminars
were held in each Region with total attendance
approaching 3,000. Seminar locations were St.
Charles, III.; Dallas, Texas; Atlanta, Ga.; Phila-
delphia, Penna.; Seattle, Wash.; San Francisco,
Calif.; Kansas City, Mo.; New York, N.Y.; Denver,
Colo.; and Boston, Mass. Feature presentations
were made by Leland Gottstein and Robert Pfef-
ferle of American Consulting Services, Min-
neapolis, Minn., and John Smith, National En-
vironmental Research Center, EPA, Cincinnati,
Ohio. Presentations on EPA Regulations and
Guidelines were conducted by Charles Swanson,
Charles Sutfin, and Haig Farmer of the Office of
Air and Water Programs, EPA, Washington, D.C.
Sessions presented included: Impact of New
Water Bill on the Construction Grants Program,
Effects of Infiltration on Treatment Efficiencies,
EPA Regulations and Guidelines, the Infiltration/
Inflow Analysis and the Sewer System Evalua-
tion Survey.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC
ON AGENCV . . .. . .... .
gse seminars should facilitate
a more coordinated flow of construction grants
projects with the regulations in effect.
MUNICIPALDESIGN SEMINARS
The Technology Transfer Program has con-
ducted two additional municipal design seminars
since March, 1973, bringing the total number of
municipal design seminars conducted to 21. The
most recent seminars presented were in St.
Charles, (Chicago) Illinois, March 26 and Atlanta,
Georgia, May 8-10.
The St. Charles Seminar was a one-day ses-
sion on Storm and Combined Sewers held in
conjunction with the Region V, Infiltration/Inflow
Seminar. Francis T. Mayo, Regional Administra-
tor, Region V, gave the opening welcome to the
consulting engineers, regulatory personnel and
other professionals in attendance.
The Storm and Combined Sewer Session in-
cluded presentations on introduction and state-
of-the-art; regulators; microstraining and disin-
fection; screening, dissolved air flotation; and
three case histories—Detroit, Michigan; Keno-
sha, Wisconsin; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
The Atlanta Seminar included sessions on
physical-chemical treatment, upgrading existing
wastewater treatment facilities, and nitrogen con-
Leland Gottstein, President, American Consulting Services
at Infiltration/Inflow Seminar.
Cliff Risley—Region V Technology Transfer Chairman
speaking at seminar.
-------
trol. Mr. Asa B. Foster, Jr., Director, Categorical
Programs Division—EPA, Region IV, gave the
opening welcome to the 100-plus consultants and
regulatory personnel in attendance. The Federal
Water Pollution Control Act—Amendments of
1972, was discussed by Andrew Robert Greene,
Assistant Regional Counsel, EPA, Region IV.
Feature presentations at the above design
seminars were given by Dr. Clair Sawyer; Dr.
Denny Parker, Brown and Caldwell, Consulting
Engineers; Dr. Richard Woodward, Camp, Dres-
ser & McKee, Consulting Engineers; Richard Sul-
livan, American Public Works Association; and
Mr. Robert Skrenener, Detroit, Michigan. EPA
personnel participating in the seminars included
Mr. Edwin Barth, Mr. Jesse Cohen, and Mr. John
Smith from the National Environmental Research
Center in Cincinnati; and Mr. Frank Condon from
the Office of Research and Monitoring in Wash-
ington, D.C.
TECHNOLOGYTRANSFER
SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Technology Transfer will distribute selected
Seminar Publications at the 1973 Water Pollution
Control Federation Conference in Cleveland,
Ohio, on September 30-October 5, 1973. The pub-
lications will be featured in the EPA Technology
Transfer Exhibit for the WPCF Conference. The
specific publications are Nitrification & Denitrifi-
cation Facilities, Physical-Chemical Wastewater
Treatment Plant Design, Upgrading Lagoons, De-
sign Criteria and Operating Experience for High
Purity Oxygen Systems, and Upgrading Existing
Wastewater Treatment Facilities—Case Histories.
These publications have been used extensively
in the Technology Transfer Design Seminar Series
and will be the first issues in the Municipal De-
sign Seminar Publication Series.
Publications from the Technology Transfer in-
dustrial seminars series are now available for the
Poultry Processing and Metal Finishing Industries.
These publications include "In-Process Pollution
Abatement", "Pretreatment of Poultry Processing
Wastes", and "Waste Treatment" for poultry proc-
esses and "In-Process Pollution Abatement" and
"Waste Treatment" for metal finishers. These pub-
lications can be ordered by checking the appropri-
ate box in the Request Form at the end of this
newsletter.
MANUAL FOR DESIGN OF WASTEWATER
TREATMENT FACILITIES FOR SMALL
MUNICIPALITIES
Technology Transfer has recently contracted
for preparation of a Manual for Design of Waste-
water Treatment Facilities for Small Municipali-
ties. Completion is expected by mid-1974.
This Manual will generally include information
required for the design of new wastewater treat-
ment facilities of two million gallons per day and
under. Major emphasis will be on the design of
treatment plants for municipalities with popula-
tions of 10,000 or less which would normally cor-
respond to design capacities of one million gal-
lons per day and under. The Design Manual will
include the necessary criteria, parameters, and
other information required to design: 1) small
treatment facilities that will meet secondary
treatment requirements consistently without
overly sophisticated operation and maintenance,
and 2) small treatment facilities that will provide
advanced wastewater treatment such as high
degrees of removal of BOD, COD, nutrients,
solids and other pollutants.
UPDATING OF PROCESS DESIGN
MANUALS
Revisions to the four original Technology
Transfer Process Design Manuals (Sus-
pended Solids Removal, Carbon Adsorption,
Phosphorus Removal, and Upgrading Exist-
ing Wastewater Treatment Plants) are ap-
proaching completion and will be available
in the very near future.
The purpose of revising these manuals—
originally issued in October 1971—was to
incorporate information on newly developed
and demonstrated techniques and to in-
clude any subsequent experience gained
and data produced on those methods
covered in the initial edition of the manuals.
For those individuals who have the orig-
inal manuals and have not yet requested
the manual revisions, it is essential this be
done as soon as possible. This can be ac-
complished by either forwarding the request
card contained in the back of each manual,
or by sending a letter to Technology Trans-
fer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
NEW TECHNOLOGYTRANSFER PROCESS
DESIGN MANUAL FOR SLUDGE
HANDLING AND DISPOSAL
A contract for the development of a Tech-
nology Transfer Design Manual for Sludge
Handling and Disposal has been awarded to
Black, Crow and Eidsness of Gainesville, Florida.
Scheduled completion of this manual is mid-
1974.
Detailed information, including design criteria
and cost estimates, will be included for all feas-
ible alternative designs for the various sludge
handling, processing, and disposal processes.
Information, criteria, estimates, and case his-
tories will be included for both new and existing
wastewater treatment facilities and the "how-to"
design aspects will receive major emphasis.
-------
CONTROL OF POLLUTION
FROM METAL FINISHING
FACILITIES*
Metal finishing operations involve a variety of
processes for improving or conditioning surfaces.
These include cleaning, pickling, annealing, case
hardening, polishing, immersion plating, elec-
troplating, phosphating, anodizing, and others.
These processes generally change the surface of
a product to improve corrosion resistance, im-
part greater hardness, increase wear resistance,
improve the aesthetic appearance, or change the
electrical conductivity of the surface.
Five types of pollutants are commonly as-
sociated with metal finishing operations. These
are cyanides, metals, organics, dissolved solids,
and extremes in alkalinity or acidity. Nearly all
of these pollutants are potentially toxic or haz-
ardous to living organisms at the strengths used
in metal finishing operations.
SOURCES OF WASTE
The sources of waste from metal finishing facil-
ities include normal process effluents from
cleaning and de-scaling operations, pickling
operations, plating operations, rinsing opera-
tions, and air scrubbing operations. These wastes
are discharged on either a batch or continuous
basis as well as accidental discharges of process
solutions.
Cleaning and De-Scaling Operations
To obtain a good quality finish in a metal
processing operation, whether it be an organic,
metallic, or a chemical coating, it is imperative
that the surface of the workpiece be completely
free from oils, greases, rust, or other oxide films.
This requires that cleaning operations be per-
formed prior to chemical processing. Often, it is
necessary to initially subject the workpieces to
a mechanical operation, such as tumbling, blast
cleaning, polishing, or buffing, prior to the chem-
ical processing steps. These mechanical opera-
tions can produce an effluent which contains
high levels of suspended solids.
Cleaning and de-scaling solutions remove oil,
grease, scale, and surface metal film and hold
the removed material without depositing it back
on the workpieces being processed. The cleaners
employed are usually alkali phosphates and rela-
tively high concentrations of wetting agents to
provide fast and complete oil, grease, and soil
removal. In time, the effectiveness of these
cleaning and de-scaling agents diminishes until
*Extracted from publications prepared for the Technology
Transfer Seminar Series "Upgrading Metal Finishing
Facilities to Reduce Pollution". For your copy of the
complete publications, fill in the form at the end of this
newsletter.
the solution must either be dumped as a batch
discharge or continuously bled. The solvents
used for degreasing, such as the nonflammable
chlorinated hydrocarbons or the flammable sol-
vents (kerosene), can form emulsions in water
or a floating film which not only detracts from
the appearance of the water but also presents
danger to living organisms. In addition, these
organic contaminants may be inflammable or
liberate toxic gases which would also prohibit
their discharge to a storm or sanitary sewer sys-
tem. The biochemical oxygen demand in the
effluent may be sufficiently high to require bio-
logical treatment.
Pickling Operations
In the pickling operation the wastes are dis-
charged in the rinsing process or in the dump-
ing of spent processing solution. The pickling
solutions are usually strong acids. The acids are
consumed by the dissolution of oxides and
metals. The acid must then be replenished and
metal ion content of the effluent from pickling
may be high in copper, zinc, nickel, cadmium,
iron or other heavy metals which are toxic to
most living organisms and may have deleterious
effects at low concentrations. In addition, ex-
posure to acid water will cause damage to
masonry and iron structures. Alkaline pickling
solutions are used primarily for etching alum-
inum and zinc. These solutions are generally
highly caustic and must be neutralized with acid
or spent-acid-pickling solutions.
Plating Operations
Effluents from many of the alkaline plating
solutions contain complex metal cyanides. Of the
non-cyanide processing solutions the primary
toxic constituent is the heavy metal ion. Chro-
mium-containing chemicals are used in many
plating solutions as well as etching, anodizing,
electropolishing, and chromating solutions. The
chromium ion content of many of these process-
ing solutions is quite high and, consequently, the
rinse effluents following processing are high in
chromium ion whch is toxic even in dilute con-
centrations.
Rinsing Operations
Metal finishing requires large quantities of
water to wash away the chemical film on the
work surface. This rinsing minimizes the poten-
tial for formation of insoluble metal salts on the
workpieces (which would preclude good adhe-
sion at subsequent processing steps) and
reduces the contamination of one process solu-
tion caused by the carryover of impurities or
chemicals from a previous process. The rinse
water effluent will carry dissolved solids result-
ing from the dragout (the solution carried out
of the process tank during withdrawal of the
workpiece) from numerous processes which con-
-------
tain alkali cleaners, acids, pickling solutions and
others. While the total dissolved salt concentra-
tion in the water may not have increased ap-
preciably, the effluent carries the various metal
salts, cleaning compounds, and possibly a small
quantity of the oils and greases originally re-
moved by the cleaners from the work surface.
Air Scrubbing Operations
Metal finishing operations create in general
two types of air emissions: gaseous contami-
nants and entrained liquid. The gaseous contam-
inants are commonly HCI, HF and N02. En-
trained liquid particles are released from plating
baths due to air agitation, drippage, and mech-
anical agitation of the bath. The particles are
generally 10 microns in size or larger. In order
to remove these contaminants from the air, wet
scrubbers are generally utilized. The scrubber
water effluent will contain much of the soluble
gas released from the process tanks and 99 per-
cent or more of the entrained liquids from the
process baths.
Accidental Discharges
Process solutions, containing concentrated
toxic materials, accidently discharged in large
volume to a stream or a sewer system could
result in catastrophic damage to living organisms
in the stream or a biological upset of the sewage
treatment plant. For this reason, the potential
hazard connected with accidental discharges of
process solutions is significant.
In-Process Pollution Control
Before any decision is made regarding selec-
tion of waste treatment equipment, an intensive
in-process effort must be made to minimize the
quantities of pollutants and water discharged.
A plant survey should begin with the prepara-
tion of an accurate site plan to identify the loca-
tion of all influent and effluent lines from the
plant site, space available for future pollution
control equipment, and the influence the site
topography might have on drainage and future
construction.
Next, information on the plant layout and
operating characteristics should be studied.
Special attention should be given to location of
equipment within the processing cycles, the
production rates for each cycle, the location of
accessory equipment, plant electrical capacity,
steam availability, head space and support
column locations. Also, data on the volume of
the tanks within each cycle, the quantities of
chemicals used, the quantity of rinse water used,
the volume of dragout, and the frequency of
spent-process-solution discharges should be re-
corded at normal production levels.
Once the base-line data on plant operations
has been collected, steps should be taken to
reduce chemical wastes through the minimizing
of chemical process substitution or through
lowering process solution concentrations. Sub-
stitution of low-concentration solutions for
those of high concentration can be ac-
complished in many instances with no com-
promise to product quality and with con-
siderable reduction in waste loading to the
treatment system. For example, low cyanide
solutions can account for a reduction of up
to 90 percent in the usage of cyanide. Tighter
process control is generally required when these
baths replace conventional cyanide processes. In
conjunction with this reduction in cyanide, the
use of chelates may be eliminated, thus minimiz-
ing the problem of removal of zinc from the
waste stream. Other substitutions that can be
made include non-phosphate cleaners, non-
chromium dips in conversion coatings and
anodizing, non-cyanide stripping solutions, non-
chromium bactericides for cooling water, and
non-cyanide gold and copper processes.
Most processes offer a range of concentrations
in which they may be operated successfully. The
industry has traditionally selected the midpoint
in these ranges as the operating concentration.
With effluent standards and cost savings in mind,
serious consideration should be applied to
operating the process solutions at their mini-
mum concentration limits. As an example, a
standard nickel plating solution has the follow-
ing composition limits:
OPERATING
RANGE CONCENTRATION
40to50oz/gal 4Soz/gal
8to12oz/gal 10oz/gal
6.0 to 6.5 oz/gal 6.3 oz/gal
At the above operating concentrations, a typi-
cal small plating shop running an average of 12
hours per day and 250 days per year would ex-
perience an annual loss of nickel salts (due to
dragout) of approximately 8500 pounds nickel
sulfate and 1900 pounds nickel chloride (based
on the processing of 600 square feet/hour and a
conservative dragout rate of 1.5 gallon/1000
square feet). Had the minimum concentrations
been used for the year, the resultant saving in
nickel chloride would have amounted to $800. If
this shop applied the same thinking to the other
process solutions in the plating line, a major im-
provement in operating costs is readily obtainable.
Not considered in the improvement is the poten-
tial cost savings in effluent treatment. All metal
finishing operations merit this type of assessment.
Reduction of solution concentration will require
closer process control, however.
The losses of chemicals from a process tank
can be reduced by minimizing the dragout. The
major factors which influence the dragout are
the velocity of the withdrawal of the workpieces,
the geometry of the workpieces, the positioning
of the pieces on the rack or fixture, the drainage
time allowed over the process tank, the viscosity
CHEMICAL
nickel sulfate (NiSO.-6H20)
nickel chloride (NiCI2-6H20)
boric acid (H,BOj)
-------
and density of the process solution, and the
temperature of the solution. Optimum conditions
should be created in each of these areas to
minimize dragout. Some examples of steps that
may be effective in reducing dragout include
slowing down the rate of withdrawal, increasing
drainage time over the process tank, operating
the bath at as high a temperature as possible,
utilizing salts that will yield a high-density, low
viscosity process solution.
Rinsing represents the most frequently used
process in metal finishing. It is by far the largest
consumer of water and has been often given
little or no consideration as to cost or pollution
problems. In plants where there has been little
attention to rinse flow rates, water conservation
studies have repeatedly shown that each rinse
tank flow may usually be reduced by 50 percent
without impairment of rinsing quality. In order
to determine the minimum water requirements
for rinsing, the rinse water flow must be reduced
gradually until the residual chemical film in the
rinse water, because of its concentration and
thickness, begins to cause deterioration in the
quality of the workpiece or the quality of the
finish in succeeding processes. Once these
minimum flow rates have been established, flow
restrictor valves which provide for flows slightly
above the minimum levels should be installed.
For example, an average plant whose total flow
rate is 100 gpm can save approximately 50 gpm.
Based on 3000 operating hours per year and a
water charge of $0.25/1000 gallons, an annual
saving of over $2000 is achieved. The same
reduction in water usage will cut the capital
costs of a waste treatment system in half. For
the average plant that saving can amount to
$40,000.
Further and equally dramatic reductions in
water consumption are achievable through the
use of mechanical devices and equipment rear-
rangements such as counterflow multiple tank
rinsing. In counterflow rinsing, used water exit-
ing the first tank becomes feed water for the
second, and, after being used again, feeds the
third tank as shown in Figure 1.
The advantage of counterflow rinsing is in the
repeated exposure of the workpieces to the
water, the increase in dwell time, permitting
more diffusion to occur, and the ability to bring
the majority of the water passing through into
more intimate contact with the work. The results
in water saving are significant. For example, if
a dragout of 1 gph in a given case required a
1000 to 1 dilution in order to produce acceptable
work, 1000 gallons of rinse water per hour would
be required in a single rinse tank; in a double
counterflow rinse system, 30-35 gph are required,
and in a triple counterflow rinse system, 8-12
gph are needed. The disadvantage is that the
work requires two or three processing steps in-
stead of one, and more equipment and space is
normally required. If multiple counterflow rinsing
is designed into prospective automatic metal fin-
ishing equipment, the initial disadvantages are
increased capital expense and space require-
ments. The ultimate advantage, however, lies not
only in the enormous drop in water costs, but
also in a sharp reduction in the cost of the sup-
porting waste treatment system.
Multiple tank rinsing, shown in Figure 2, is
merely a battery of single rinses, each with its
own feed waters. The principles are generally the
same as in the counterflow rinsing system above,
although the total reduction in water consump-
tion will not be as great as with the counterflow
system.
Spray rinsing is another method of effectively
rinsing workpieces to reduce carryover of con-
taminants with minimum water usage. Two
categories of spray rinsing may be used. The
first, impact spraying, uses both impact and dif-
fusion to remove contaminant films. It uses little
water compared to immersion rinsing and may
be used in some cases as a recovery rinse by
pumping the collected spray volume into the
previous process tank. Impact spraying is inef-
fective, however, when the workpieces have
areas inaccessible to the spray nozzles.
The second method, rinse and spray, employs
immersion rinsing followed by a spray, opera-
tional only when the work is withdrawn from the
rinse tank. It is advantageous in removing stub-
born films by impact and permits lower water
flows in the main body of the rinse tank. These
two spray methods are shown in Figure 3.
Work Movement
Incoming
Water
Outgoing Water =i
Figure 1. Triple Counterflow Rinse
-------
Work Movement
-Incoming
Water
Outgoing Water
Figure 2. Multiple Tank Rinsing
/
Impact Spray
_ Incoming
Water
Outgoing Water
Figure 3. Spray Rinsing
WASTE TREATMENT
The three most commonly used methods of
waste treatment are chemical conversion, precip-
itation and solids separation, and ion exchange.
Chemical Conversion
The chemical conversion method of treatment
is widely used in the destruction of cyanide, the
reduction of hexavalent chromium and in the
conversion of soluble heavy metals to heavy
metal hydroxides.
Cyanide is typically treated by adding caustic
until the pH reaches 11.5 and then adding
chlorine or sodium hypochlorite. This treatment
converts the cyanide into cyanate. The cyanate
can be further broken down into nitrogen and
carbon dioxide by adjusting the pH to 7.5 to 8.0
and further addition of chlorine or sodium hypo-
chlorite. Another method of cyanide treatment is
the Kastone process developed by the DuPont
Company. In this process the solution pH is
adjusted to 10.0 to 11.5. The solution is heated
to 120 to 130°F and hydrogen peroxide and for-
malin are added. This process is applicable to
the treatment of sodium, potassium, zinc and
cadmium cyanide only.
Hexavalent chromium is commonly treated by
the addition of acid to reduce the pH to 3.0 or
less and the addition of sodium metabisulfite,
sodium bisulfite, ferrous sulfate, or sulfur dioxide
gas. The above treatment reduces the hexavalent
chromium to the trivalent state. The pH is then
increased prior to separation of the solids pre-
cipitate.
Precipitation and Solids Separation
Metal salts are commonly removed from waste
streams by adjusting the pH to the neutral range
(pH 7.0 to 8.5) where many of these metal salts
will become insoluble. Each metal salt has a
specific pH at which its solubility is lowest.
Therefore, to achieve optimum removal of each
of the metal salts present, the waste streams
should be segregated and individually treated.
-------
This treatment of segregated waste streams
provides the additional advantage of yielding a
sludge which is high in concentration of each
process metal. This concentrated sludge is much
less costly to process for recovery of metals.
When the waste streams are not segregated the
best pH for the most complete separation will be
the pH that will provide for the removal of the
most toxic metals present. The sludge resulting
from precipitation of metals from waste streams
that are not segregated is relatively difficult and
costly to process for metals recovery. The
optimum pH levels for precipitation of metals at
various concentrations are shown in Figure 4. In
addition to natural precipitation of metal hydrox-
ides, coagulants such as ferric sulfate, ferric
chloride, or aluminum sulfate are used in the
ranges of 100 to 300 milligrams per liter. The ef-
fectiveness of various concentrations of ferric
sulfate on turbidity is shown in Figure 5.
100
pH Units 234567891011 12
Figure 4. Precipitation of Metal Salts vs. pH
Settling Time - Min.
Figure 5. Coagulations and Settling Time vs.
Concentration of Coagulant
Ion Exchange
Ion exchange is a method for concentrating
the chemical contaminants from rinse waters so
that they can be more economically treated or
recovered. Basically, ion exchange removes an ion
from the solution to be treated by exchanging it
with a less harmful ion from the ion exchange
resin. The process is cyclic. The solution being
treated passes through the exchanger until the
resin is exhausted. The resin is then regenerated
to its original state by contact with a relatively
strong solution of the ion originally on the resin.
At this higher concentration the resin will pick up
this ion and give up the ion originally recovered
from the rinse water to the regenerating solu-
tion. The regenerating solution then becomes a
relatively concentrated solution of the contam-
inant originally in the rinse water. This con-
centrated solution can be more easily treated or
recovered. The original rinse solution being
treated is now de-ionized water which can be
reused in the process. The recovery of metals
and process solutions for reuse through ion ex-
change and evaporation is discussed in a fol-
lowing section of this article.
From a mechanical point of view, there are two
types of ion exchange systems in use: Fixed Bed,
Moving Bed.
Fixed bed exchanger systems usually consist
of at least two exchangers containing a fixed
charge of resin. An exchanger is taken out of
service as it nears exhaustion and put into the
regeneration cycle. The solution being treated
is switched to a resin bed which still has ex-
change capacity.
The moving bed exchanger, shown in Figure
6, enables resin rinsing, regeneration, and make
up to be conducted in one exchanger which
operates continuously on the solution side. Since
each resin slug has less time in the exchange
zone before backwash and regeneration than its
fixed bed counterpart, it is less likely to become
fouled. Moving bed exchangers usually find their
application in the larger installations.
When an ion-exchange installation is used for
the purification of rinse water effluent from sev-
eral processes, the reclamation of the process
chemicals contained in the backwash water
usually cannot be returned to the original
process from which they originated. In an in-
stallation of this type, the main function of the
ion-exchange installation is to avoid waste treat-
ment of large volumes of rinse water effluent
backwashing since all the chemicals that require
treatment become available in a far more con-
centrated form. Where the process waste
streams have been segregated the function of
the ion exchanger is to return nearly all the rinse
water to the process for repeated usage and allow
a simplified waste treatment with regard to the
volume of the total waste to be treated. The
chemical and maintenance cost of the ion-ex-
-------
Backwash
Water
"In"
Conductivity
Probe
Resin
Regen-
erant
"In"
Regeneration
Column
Resin
Regenerant
and
Backwash
Waste "Out"
Resin Reservoir
operating limits on the quality of the chemical
rinse solution.
Hydraulic
Pulse for
Resin
Movement
Pulsing Chamber
Process
Pump
r
_T
-^_^
Settlement
Tank
Displaced Water
to Sewer
« Sludge Removal
Figure 7. Controlled Recirculation
RECOVERY OF PROCESS SOLUTIONS
AND METALS
The systems most commonly considered for
recovery of process solution and metal are ion
exchange, evaporative recovery, and reverse
osmosis.
Ion Exchange
Ion exchange systems combined with evapora-
tion have potentially wide applicability for the
recovery of metal or the regeneration of process
solutions as well as for the treatment uses
discussed earlier. For example, when rinse
waters from chromium plating are passed
through a cation exchange column, the system
may serve the function of recovering the valu-
able chromium chemicals by removing the im-
purities such as trivalent chromium, copper,
zinc, nickel, and iron, in the cation exchange
column, the backwash waters from which would
otherwise go to waste treatment. An evaporation
system allows further concentration of valuable
chemicals and reuse of the rinse waters.
Ion exchange systems can also be used for the
maintenance of process solution quality. Alum-
inum can be removed from a chromic acid
anodizing bath, avoiding the necessity of periodic
disposal of the bath. Chromic acid, as a strong
oxidizer, will deteriorate the resin to some ex-
tent and, therefore, concentrated chromic acid
solutions should first be diluted with water be-
fore regeneration through an ion exchanger is
attempted.
Moving bed ion exchangers have been suc-
cessfully utilized for process solution recovery
such as bright dip solutions used for aluminum
-------
which require resins to be able to accept high-
strength oxidizing acids and have removal rates
of large quantity of aluminum, maintaining the
process solution at the optimum aluminum con-
centration.
Evaporative Recovery
There are basically two types of evaporative
recovery systems commonly in use: the vacuum
evaporator and the atmospheric evaporator. A
vacuum evaporator operates at sub-atmospheric
pressures, thus enabling evaporation to take
place at temperatures in the range of 130 to
190°F. At these temperatures the oxidative break-
down of cyanide compounds is reduced. An at-
mospheric evaporator operates at atmospheric
pressure and the normal boiling temperature of
the solution being processed. These types of
evaporators can be utilized in either open or
closed loop processing cycles.
The open loop cycle is adaptable for partial
recovery of plating chemicals on those plating
installations where there is an insufficient num-
ber of countercurrent rinse tanks. A small portion
of the chemical dragout that accumulates in the
final rinse tank is not circulated to the evapora-
tor for concentration. The circulation loop
through the evaporator is opened by creating
another flow path for the chemical dragout. This
small fraction of dragout solution not returned
to the evaporator can be treated by an ap-
propriate chemical method before disposal.
The closed loop system is an effective way to
recover cyanide, metal cyanides, chromium and
other metal-containing chemicals from plating
operations so that chemical treatment of rinse
Plating
Solution
Concen-
trate^
Plating Tank
Water Rinse
Holding Tank
water is eliminated or minimized. This technique
can be economically applied only to processing
lines using countercurrent rinsing. In a typical
system, Figure 8, a single-effect evaporator con-
centrates flow from the rinse water holding tank.
The concentrated rinse solution is returned to
the plating bath and the distilled water is re-
turned to the final rinse tank.
In the closed loop system, no external rinse
water is added for makeup except that required
by atmospheric evaporation. The only chemicals
added to the plating bath are those required for
replacing what is actually deposited on parts and
any spillage or accidental losses. The system is
designed to recover 100 percent of the plating
chemicals normally lost in dragout for reuse in
the plating cycle.
Reverse Osmosis
Functionally, the reverse osmosis applications
in metal finishing are very similar to the op-
portunities available by evaporation. Theoreti-
cally, reverse osmosis aims to apply high pres-
sure to a suitable thin membrane, overcoming
the osmotic pressure, passing water through the
membrane which at the same time rejects the
salt molecules and thereby separates a relatively
salt-free water stream and a salt solution at a
higher concentration than the original input was.
Rinse waters from a specific process can thereby
be treated, the water product returned for rins-
ing, and the concentrates, possibly after further
concentration by evaporation, returned to the
process. Suitable membrane materials for cya-
nide and chromium type rinse water reconcentra-
tion are not yet commercially available.
Distillate
Holding
Tank
>-^ *
Rinse
-v *
Rinse
•^
Rinse
Cooling Water "Out"
Condenser
Concentrate
Return Pump
Distillate
Steam
Condensate
Figure 8. Evaporative Recovery—"Closed Loop"
-------
POLLUTION CONTROLSEMINAR FOR
THE DAIRY INDUSTRY
Technology Transfer held its first industrial
seminar for the Dairy Industry, entitled "Upgrad-
ing Dairy Production Facilities to Control Pol-
lution", in Madison, Wisconsin, on March 20 and
21, 1973. The program included in-depth cover-
age of the new water pollution control legisla-
tion as well as presentations on EPA enforce-
ment policy by Linda Huff of the EPA Region V,
National Discharge Elimination Program and on
the State of Wisconsin's regulatory program by
Thomas G. Frangos, Administrator of the Wiscon-
sin Department of Natural Resources.
Three technical sessions were held covering
in-plant management, waste treatment, and a
session on whey. The in-plant session, conducted
by Robert R. Zall of Cornell University, specific-
ally covered waste characterization, waste meas-
urement and monitoring, economic alternatives
of waste reduction solutions, process variation
to reduce waste, recovery and salvage of waste
products, recycling of fluids, instrumentation,
cleaning and sanitizing solutions, and reduction
of product loss through operation and mainte-
nance.
The session on waste treatment, presented by
Kenneth Watson of Kraftco Corporation, George
Muck of Dean Foods, Dr. William Boyle and Dr.
L. B. Polkowski of Polkowski, Boyle and As-
sociates, and Paul F. Hickman of the Spring-
field, Missouri, Department of Sanitary Services,
covered treatment alternatives available for dis-
charge of wastes to municipal treatment plants
and to waterways. The discussion included the
relative advantages of joint treatment of dairy
wastes in municipal wastewater treatment
plants, waste treatment alternatives, and case
studies of actual pollution abatement efforts by
dairy production facilities.
The session on whey consisted of a panel
discussion of the recovery, utilization, and dis-
posal of whey. The discussion covered current
practice and new technology applicable to the
utilization of whey.
A special luncheon featured a presentation by
Fred J. Greiner, Chairman of the Dairy Industry
Committee on Industry and Government Rela-
tions.
The final general session included a presenta-
tion by Charles Marshall of J. A. Commins and
Associates, an industrial management consult-
ant, on the optimization of financial strategy for
pollution control investments. The discussion
covered tax advantages, depreciation of equip-
ment, government and private sources of financ-
ing available, and the economics of joint treat-
ment with a municipality versus privately fi-
nanced treatment facilities.
Also included in this session was a presenta-
tion by Kenneth Dostal of the EPA Pacific North-
west Water Laboratory, covering the status of
the EPA Demonstration Grant Program.
This seminar is scheduled to be repeated on
the East Coast (Region III) in August 1973.
FIFTH TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR HELD IN KANSAS
CITY, MISSOURI FOR MEAT PACKING
INDUSTRY
The fifth EPA Technology Transfer Industrial
Seminar for FY 1973, "Upgrading Meat Packing
Facilities to Reduce Pollution" was given to 160
engineers and managers from the Meat Packing
Industry in Kansas City, Missouri on March 7, 8,
1973.
EPA Regional Director Jerome Svore and John
Dunning of the National Independent Meat Pack-
ers welcomed the attendees. Pretreatment re-
quirements and surcharges were discussed by
Richard Frank and Permit requirements were
discussed by Garry Stigall both of Region VII.
Two technology sessions were presented. The
first session on "In-Plant Modifications and Pre-
treatment" was by A. J. Steffen of Purdue Uni-
versity. The second session on Waste Treatment
Systems was given by Jim and Paula Wells of
Bell, Galyardt & Wells.
A special evening panel session was held on
Odor Control. Donald Dencker of Oscar Mayer
and Kenneth Ries of Armour joined Al Steffen
and Jim Wells to form the panel.
The final general session included a presenta-
tion on "Optimum Strategies for Financing Pol-
lution Control Investments" by Charles Marshall
of J. A. Commins and Associates, and a talk on
Effective Government-Industry relationships by
Donald Mackenzie of the American Meat Insti-
tute.
EPA Technology Transfer Chairman for Region
VII is Lewis Young.
METAL FINISHING SEMINAR
The third in the series of industrial seminars
on "Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to
Reduce Pollution" was held in Portland, Oregon
on May 16-17. Approximately 140 metal finishers
and government officials attended the seminar.
The technical sessions included a presentation
on In-Process Pollution Abatement by Alan Olsen
of Oxy-Metal Finishing and Edward Hanf of Ceil-
cote, Inc. and a presentation on Metal Finishing
Waste Treatment by Dr. Leslie Lancy and Robert
Rice of Lancy Laboratories. In the general ses-
sions Dr. William Brungs of the EPA National
Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota,
gave a stimulating talk on the Effect of Heavy
Metal Discharges on the Aquatic Environment
and James Commins of J. A. Commins and As-
sociates gave a presentation on Choosing the
Optimum Financial Strategy. A status report on
the EPA demonstration grants involving metal
-------
finishing plants was given by Dr. Herbert Shov-
ronak of EPA's Edison Laboratory.
EPATECHNOLOGYTRANSFER CAPSULE
REPORT #2 AVAILABLE
EPA Technology Transfer Capsule Report
Number 2 "Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition" is now being dis-
tributed. This capsule report describes an EPA
Industrial Demonstration Grant with the Inter-
state Paper Corporation at Riceboro, Georgia.
Lime treatment, clarification, holding in a
quiescent biological pond, and final aeration
were used to reduce color from the Interstate
unbleached kraft mill from 1200 APHA units to
125. BOD was reduced from 41 Ibs/ton pulp (330
ppm) to 0.6 Ib/ton pulp (5 ppm). Calcium was
removed in the final effluent by natural recar-
bonation in the quiescent lagoon.
The capsule report lists the performance and
economics of the system.
For your copy of this Capsule Report use the
order blank at the back of this newsletter.
COLOR
REMOVAL FROM
KRAFT PULPIMO
EFFLUENT BY
LIMB ADDITION
EPATECHNOLOGYTRANSFER CAPSULE
REPORT #3 AVAILABLE
EPA Technology Transfer Capsule Report Num-
ber 3 "Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill"
is now available for distribution. The capsule re-
port describes the EPA Industrial Demonstration
Grant with the Volco Brass and Copper Company
at Kenilworth, New Jersey.
The new system demonstrated that water con-
sumption could be reduced by 90% (from 200,000
gallons per day to 20,000 gallons per day) by em-
ploying integrated chemical rinsing and water re-
use. The sulfuric acid pickle was regenerated and
high purity metallic copper recovered by contin-
uous electrolysis, eliminating the dumping of
spent pickle liquor. Hydrogen peroxide was proven
to be an improved secondary pickle and the chro-
mates and fluorides previously used were elimi-
nated.
The system has resulted in a $14,000 annual
savings in the manufacturing operation as well as
striking reductions in waste discharges. Details of
the system performance and economics are high-
lighted in the capsule report.
For your copy of this Capsule Report use the
order blank at the back of this newsletter.
EPA/AIChE WATER REUSE CONFERENCE
HELD IN WASHINGTON APRIL 24-27
475 Engineers, Scientists and Environmental-
ists attended a four day national conference on
complete reuse of industry water, jointly spon-
sored by EPA Technology Transfer and the
American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
Water reuse in industry was examined from
the point of view of technology, economics, ad-
ministration, and legal procedures. Environmen-
talists and lawyers as well as engineers and
scientists participated in the program.
The keynote address by Michele Metrinko,
special assistant to the EPA Administrator,
stressed the point that the time for detailed
solutions to pollution problems has arrived. Ms.
Metrinko stressed the necessity of joint efforts
between industry, environmentalists and regula-
tory agencies to arrive at optimum pollution con-
trol requirements which will protect the environ-
ment but not cause economic and environmental
disasters by forcing unworkable technology into
application.
Technical sessions covered topics related to
water reuse for a range of industries, including
chemicals, power, petroleum refining, pulp and
paper and metals production. A special session
was held on the new water pollution control law
which featured a discussion by J. R. Quarles Jr.,
EPA Assistant Administrator for Enforcement.
The economics session discussed impacts on ex-
ports, economic benefits to citizens, the cost to
industry, and the philosophy of treating water as
a borrowed commodity.
Proceedings from this conference will be avail-
able from the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers, 345 East 47 Street, New York, New
York 10017.
-------
Michele B. Metrinko shown here with AlChE's Executive
Secretary, F. J. Van Antwerpen, gave the keynote address
at the EPA/AIChE Conference.
EPA RESEARCH HIGHLIGHT
Air-Polluted Water
EPA's Western Fish Toxicology Station, located
in Corvallis, Oregon, a field station of the Na-
tional Water Quality Laboratory in Duluth, Min-
nesota, devotes a majority of its research effort
to a water pollution problem called "air super-
saturation".
Why are water pollution scientists so con-
cerned about air pollution? Simple. The un-
wanted air, no matter how pure or how dirty, is
dissolved in otherwise habitable water and can
do great harm to aquatic life, especially fish.
Thus, it is not an air pollutant in the most strict
sense of the word, but rather a water pollutant.
Dr. Gerald Bouck, Chief of WFTS, states,
"Water can be supersaturated to some minute
degree by even a small amount of turbulence,
however, such as huge volumes of water plung-
ing over large waterfalls or over the spillways of
giant dams, or thermal pollution, that causes
lethal levels of supersaturation."
It is appropriate that WFTS is located in
Oregon, for the Northwest's mighty Columbia
River just 80 miles to the north is highly super-
saturated during the late spring and early sum-
mer, primarily as the result of nine major flood-
control and hydroelectric dams.
As water plunges into basins below the dams,
increased pressure forces gases from the air into
solution in the water. As fish and other aquatic
animals take in this unnaturally-high amount of
gas pressure through normal respiratory proc-
esses, small bubbles are formed in the blood-
stream, under the skin, and in the fins. External
bubbles are easily seen with the naked eye.
The affliction is called "gas bubble disease."
Because the Columbia is a major migration
route for the hundreds of thousands of Pacific
salmon moving each year to and from spawning
grounds in countless smaller tributaries, several
species of this commercially-important fish are
the main subjects of air supersaturation and gas
bubble disease research at WFTS.
The Columbia River supplies about 65 percent
of the commercial and sport-caught salmon
landed off the coast of Oregon and Washington,
which in turn generates tourist traffic twice that
of Yellowstone National Park. The combined
economic impact of salmon in the Northwest is
estimated to be approximately $130 million an-
nually. The loss of salmon means damage both
to the environment and to the region's economy.
Air supersaturation, through gas bubble dis-
ease, causes the premature death of significant
numbers of salmon each year.
During the spring runoff period, the Columbia
River is supersaturated from the Pacific Ocean
upstream for hundreds of miles, but the concen-
tration is greatest in pools immediately below
the spillways of dams. Most species of the adult
salmon remain in these pools for many hours, or
even days, before finding the fish ladders that
will enable them to migrate upstream. Thus, any
delay in their migration may cause great damage
via gas bubble disease.
Since some of the migrating salmon must pass
all nine dams to return to their spawning ground,
those that go the farthest are likely to suffer
heaviest casualties from gas bubble disease.
Gas bubble disease is similar to "the bends"
or decompression sickness, suffered by skin div-
ers. Small bubbles of gas form in the circulatory
-------
system of the fish, blocking the flow of blood and
causing weakness and a variety of other physical
ailments.
The tiny bubbles can cause severe eye damage
by clogging blood vessels, which may then lead
to protruding eyeballs and blindness. The vision
impairment prevents natural reproduction via
behavioral problems and infectious disease.
Typically, death is caused by massive block-
age of blood vessels. In advanced stages, the
heart chambers of the fish become "air locked"
by frothy bubbles.
Currently, research related to this problem is
being conducted at WFTS using 2,000-gallon
tanks and water supersaturated up to 130 percent
with different species of fish and under varying
environmental conditions. The results and future
plans of this research can be obtained by con-
tacting Dr. Bouck at the Western Fish Toxicology
Station, 200 S. W. 35th Street, Corvallis, Oregon
97330.
WFTS conducts research with all life stages of
fish. The adult salmon, some of them up to four
feet long and weighing more than 35 pounds, are
trapped by WFTS staff members on fish ladders
at dams along the Columbia River.
The laboratory obtains most of its juvenile
salmon through artificial spawning. Roe are col-
lected from the adult females, fertilized, and
hatched in incubators.
As research progresses, WFTS hopes to reach
the point of being able to release experimentally-
stressed salmon into the nearby Willamette
River, so that the overall adequacy of water pol-
lution restrictions can be tested more naturally
and adequately.
Roe from a "ripe" female Chinook salmon will provide a
new generation of test animals for WFTS research.
The field station also conducts research on the
effects of heavy metals and other pollutants on
salmon and trout.
While much of the air supersaturation in the
Northwest is caused by the spillage of flood
water, dams in other parts of the country cause
supersaturation by deliberately injecting air into
the turbines for re-aeration or for reducing me-
chanical problems. Thermal pollution is still an-
other manmade cause of supersaturation.
According to Dr. Bouck, the cost of correcting
supersaturation on the Columbia River alone
could be quite high. The total cost could run
between 50 million and a billion dollars, depend-
ing on the standards adopted, and on the super-
saturation standard.
NEW AUDIO/VISUAL MATERIAL
UNDERPRODUCTION
Technology Transfer has recently contracted
for the production of two 28-minute 16mm docu-
mentary-type motion pictures depicting the suc-
cessful application and implementation of new
technology.
The first of these films will present the develop-
opment and current implementation of the water
quality management plan for the Alameda Creek
Watershed in suburban San Francisco. This par-
ticular plan involves: a) upgrading two waste-
water treatment facilities to "advanced waste
treatment", including nutrient removal, produc-
ing an effluent suitable for reuse; b) conveyance
of the reclaimed wastewater to a reservoir to be
constructed; c) development of associated rec-
reational facilities at the reservoir; and d) po-
tential recycling of reclaimed wastewater. The
cooperative efforts of the Alameda County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District, the City
of Livermore, the City of Pleasanton, and the
Valley Community Services District played a
major role in development of the plan.
The second film will document the successes
of the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
(METRO) in the area of environmental protec-
tion and enhancement. New wastewater treat-
ment technology applied by Seattle METRO in-
clude the areas of sludge dewatering, phospho-
rus removal, and computerized treatment and
disposal methods. METRO now serves 11 cities,
18 sewer districts, and one private agency—or
a total of 900,000 people in a 300 square mile
area. Again, this is an example of how new tech-
nology can be applied through inter-jurisdic-
tional cooperation.
Each of these films is scheduled for comple-
tion by the end of calendar year 1973.
-------
SULFIDE CONTROL MANUAL
IN PRINT
The Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual for Sulfide Control in Sanitary
Sewerage Systems, prepared by Pomeroy,
Johnston and Bailey of Pasadena, Califor-
nia, is currently being printed and will soon
be available for distribution. This Manual
includes information for all feasible alterna-
tive designs that can be used to control
sulfides and minimize their effects in both
new and existing sewerage systems.
Specific topics covered include: Charac-
teristics and Properties of Hydrogen Sulfide;
Occurrence and Effects of Sulfide in
Sewers; Investigation in Existing Systems;
Control of Sulfide in Existing Systems; and
Design of Sewer Systems to Prevent Sulfide
Problems. Case histories, examples, and
cost estimates are presented to substan-
tiate the "how-to" approach of this manual.
Individuals interested in obtaining, at no
charge, a copy of the Sulfide Control Man-
ual should fill out the appropriate form in
the back of this publication and forward it
to Technology Transfer, U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
"HANDBOOK FOR MONITORING
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER"TO BE
AVAILABLE IN AUGUST
The first of the EPA Technology Transfer
Industrial Manuals will be available in
August of 1973. The "Handbook for Monitor-
ing Industrial Wastewater" provides tech-
nical information for manufacturers estab-
lishing a wastewater monitoring program.
As is the case with all Technology Transfer
publications the Handbook is offered as
helpful guidance only and is not regulatory.
Major chapters in the Handbook are:
Program Planning
Parameters to be Measured
Analytical Considerations
Sampling
Flow Measurement
Data Analysis
Automatic Monitoring
The Continuing Program
Special Considerations for Municipal
Systems
Training of Technicians
Safety
The manual is written with basic informa-
tion for managers in the beginning of each
chapter with the more detailed technical
information in the latter sections. Special
emphasis is placed on minimizing the costs
of monitoring and avoiding common pit-
falls.
For your copy of this handbook mail the
form on the last page of this newsletter to
Technology Transfer.
handbook
MONITORING
INDUSTRIAL
WASTBA/ATER
NOTICE: The new Technology Transfer telephone number is (703) 557-7700.
GOViRNMtNT PRINTING OFMCI 1973—546-312/149
-------
Where To Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any
other aspects of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA
Regional Technology Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN ADDRESS
I Lester Sutton Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-7210
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
II Rocco Ricci Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212 264-8958
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Ill Kenneth Suter Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9875
(Pa., W.Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
IV Asa B. Foster, Jr. Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
V Clifford Risley Environmental Protection Agency
1 N. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312 353-5756
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
VI Richard Hill Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street, Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75201
214 749-1461
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
VII Lewis Young Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-2725
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
VIII Russell Fitch Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-3849
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D., S.D.)
IX Frank Covington Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-0218
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
X John Osborn Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
REQUESTS FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
D Phosphorus Removal
G Carbon Adsorption
G Suspended Solids Removal
G Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
G Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage
Systems
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
G Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants
G Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition
G Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR
PUBLICATIONS
G Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution
D Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution
BROCHURES
D Physical-Chemical Treatment
G Phosphorus Removal
G Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
G Carbon Adsorption
D Oxygen Aeration
G Nitrogen Control
G Seattle, Washington METRO
G Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe
G Indian Creek Reservoir
G Richardson, Texas
HANDBOOKS
G Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories
G Monitoring Industrial Wastewater
Please contact me regarding the loan of the following audio/visual material. (Check appropriate boxes)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
Q Richardson, Texas, Project—Title
"Somebody around here must be doing
something good." (15 min.)
G Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
VIDEOTAPES
G Carbon Adsorption (40 min.)
G Upgrading Activated Sludge Treatment
Plants (40 min.)
Is your name on our mailing list to receive this Newsletter? G D
Do you want to be added to this mailing list? G D
Yes No
Name
Street
City_
State.
Note: Tear this sheet out and forward to Technology Transfer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C.
20460
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
ADDRESS LABEL
-------
SEZ
TECHNOLOGY
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
The Impact of Research, Development
and Demonstration
The feature article of this issue deals with the use of new
technology in municipal wastewater treatment. The
article indicates a dramatic increase in the use of new
technology within the past two years. A great deal of the
increase is due directly or indirectly to the EPA
Technology Transfer effort. Most of the technology
involved in the Technology Transfer Program has
evolved from the research, development and demonstra-
tion programs of the EPA Office of Research and
Monitoring headed by Dr. Stanley M. Greenfield. The
support and direction by Dr. Greenfield have been the
key factors in the success of the Technology Transfer
effort and have insured that the end products of the
EPA research and demonstration programs are trans-
mitted to potential users in a timely and effective
manner.
Several months ago the Technology Transfer Program
was redirected by Dr. Greenfield, from a municipal
wastewater treatment orientation to a more compre-
hensive approach to environmental pollution control
including air, water, and solid wastes. The results of this
re-orientation are now starting to become apparent,
particularly in the industrial activities such as the recent
seminars.
First Technical Capsule Report Published
The first in a continuing series of Technical Capsule
Reports has been completed and is now available.
Purpose of these documents is to provide the technical
manager of a manufacturing plant with the essential
information resulting from EPA Industrial Demonstra-
tion Projects. The Capsule Reports are so structured that
the key technical and economic information is briefly,
yet accurately, presented and can be readily understood
in one reading.
"Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants by Two-
State Precipitation" is the title of the first Technical
Capsule Report. Results of an EPA Demonstration Grant
with the American Enka Company are presented and
discussed. In this grant, a process for precipitating a
dense sludge of high zinc assay was proven. The zinc in
the sludge was recovered and recycled to the rayon
manufacturing plant with no ill effects on the rayon
Dr. Stanley M. Greenfield, Assistant Administrator for Research and Monitoring, speaking at a Technology Transfer Design Seminar.
-------
yarn. Not only can this process have immediate applica-
tion in other viscose rayon manufacturing plants, but it
could be applied to any waste stream containing soluble
zinc in a form which can be precipitated by lime or
caustic addition.
A copy of this Technical Capsule Report can be
obtained by filling out the form in the back of this
publication and forwarding it to your local Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman.
Municipal Design Seminars
The Technology Transfer design seminar program spon-
sored four seminars since October 1972, bringing the
total number of municipal design seminars conducted
since the program was initiated to 19. The most recent
seminars presented were in Denver, Colorado, October
31, November 1-2; Anaheim, California, November
13-14; Chicago, Illinois, November 28-30; and Boston,
Mass., December 5-6.
The Denver Seminar included sessions on physical-
chemical treatment, upgrading existing wastewater treat-
ment facilities, and phosphorus removal. Mr. John A.
Green, Regional Administrator, Region VIM, gave the
opening welcome to the consulting engineers and regula-
tory personnel in attendance.
The Anaheim Seminar covered the technical consider-
ations for sludge handling and disposal. This was the
initial Technology Transfer seminar in this area and was
well-received. A highlight of the seminar was the
presentations on the Sludge Handling and Disposal
research program of the Los Angeles County Sanitation
Districts by Mr. Walter E. Garrison, Assistant Chief
Engineer and Assistant General Manager, and Dr. Ray-
mond F. Rodgrique, Project Engineer.
John A. Green, Regional Administrator, Region VIII, addressing
the general session at Denver municipal design seminar.
John R. Harrison of Black, Crow & Eidsness, Inc. presenting a
portion of the technical session in Anaheim.
Francis T. Mayo, Regional Administrator, Region V, at Chicago
design seminar.
-------
John M. Smith during Upgrading session in Chicago seminar.
Technical sessions on upgrading existing wastewater
treatment facilities, nitrogen control, and phosphorus
removal were included in the Chicago Seminar. The
general session covered aspects of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. Mr. Albert
C. Printz, Director, Office of Permit Programs, EPA,
Washington, D.C., made this presentation to the
120-plus consulting engineers and regulatory personnel
in attendance from the Great Lakes area. Mr. Charles
Swanson, Office of Air and Water Programs, EPA,
Washington, D.C., discussed Technical Bulletins and
Design Guidelines in light of the new legislation. Francis
T. Mayo, Regional Administrator, Region V, spoke on
"New Thrusts in Great Lakes Water Pollution Control."
The Boston Seminar also covered sludge handling and
disposal. Dr. Clifford V. Smith, Deputy Regional Admin-
istrator, Region I, welcomed the attendees to the
seminar.
Feature presentations at the above design seminars
were given by Brown and Caldwell Consulting Engineers,
San Francisco, Calif.; Black, Crow & Eidsness, Inc.,
Wilmington, Del., Hazen and Sawyer Engineers, New
York, N.Y.; Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Boston, Mass.;
CH2M/Hill, Reston, Va.; and Shimek, Roming, Jacobs &
Finklea, Dallas, Texas. Assistance from the EPA
National Environmental Research Center in Cincinnati,
Ohio was provided by Jesse Cohen, Ed Barth, Joseph
Farrell, John Smith, James Smith, and Irwin Kugelman.
WWEMA Conference and Exposition
Technology Transfer has been invited to participate on
the program and provide an exhibit for the Water and
Wastewater Equipment Manufacturers Association
(WWEMA) "Conference and Exposition on Industrial
Water and Pollution" to be held in Chicago, Illinois,
March 14-16, 1973. Both the presentation and exhibit
will highlight the status and future activities of Tech-
nology Transfer's industrial program. The exhibit will
also be the focal point for the distribution of Technical
Capsule Reports and technical handouts from the
industrial seminar series.
The WWEMA Conference is entirely industrially
oriented and will feature an extensive technical program
which includes case histories, roundtable discussions.
and presentations on new treatment equipment as well
as the equipment exposition. For additional informa-
tion, contact Robert C. Hughes, WWEMA, 744 Broad
Street, Newark, N.J. 07102.
Southern Textile Exposition
The 27th Southern Textile Exposition (held in Green-
ville, S.C., October 16-20, 1972) was attended by
30,000 executives, engineers, scientists, and buyers
connected with the textile industry throughout the
Asa B. Foster, Jr., EPA Region IV.
world. EPA participation in this exposition-the largest
in the textile industry-included the Technology Trans-
fer exhibit previously used at the WPCF annual confer-
ence in Atlanta. Asa B. Foster, Jr., Categorical Programs
Chief, Region IV, coordinated the entire EPA effort at
the Southern Textile Exposition.
Infiltration-Inflow Seminars
Technology Transfer is in the final planning stages of
developing a seminar series covering the subject of
excessive infiltration/inflow in sewer systems. The semi-
nar series is in answer to a direct request from the Office
of Water Programs to impact the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972. The Act states that
the Administrator shall not approve any grants after July
1, 1973, for treatment works unless the applicant shows
to the satisfaction of the Administrator that each sewer
system discharging into such treatment works is not
subject to excessive infiltration/inflow. Seminars will be
held in each region and will clarify the regulations and
guidelines as related to excessive infiltration/inflow and
go into survey and analysis procedures and infiltration
control techniques.
-------
Use of New Technology in Municipal
Wastewater Treatment
Until recently, the accepted methods of municipal
wastewater treatment were primary or secondary treat-
ment basically consisting of sedimentation and/or bio-
logical treatment. Biological processes usually consisted
of trickling filtration and activated sludge or the various
modifications of the activated sludge process, such as
contact stabilization, extended aeration, and step aera-
tion. Oxidation ponds or lagoons also were and are
widely used, particularly in the midwestern areas of the
United States. A summary of municipal wastewater
treatment facilities in the United States in 1968, taken
from the Federal Water Quality Administration's Munici-
pal Inventory, is shown in the accompanying table. It
should be noted that only ten "tertiary" or advanced
wastewater treatment facilities were included in the
inventory just fo'ur yeSrs'ago. '
During the past two years, however, the adoption of
new or advanced municipal wastewater treatment tech-
nology has accelerated at a dramatic rate. It is difficult
to precisely determine the causes for the rapidly
spreading acceptance of new technology. While a major
amount of new treatment designs may be attributed
directly or indirectly to the efforts of the Technology
Transfer Program, it is undoubtedly true that other
factors have also played a role. These include more
stringent water quality standards and requirements,
increased social awareness of environmental problems,
institutional changes in State and municipal regulatory
agencies and the efforts of professional engineering
organizations. Some of the major advanced wastewater
treatment processes and techniques now rapidly finding
their way into municipal treatment plant designs are
presented and briefly discussed below.
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Systems
1968
Treatment System
Primary Treatment
Intermediate Treatment
Secondary Treatment
Trickling Filters
Activated Sludge
Oxidation Ponds
Tertiary Treatment
Total
Number
of Plants
2,384
75
3,786
2,110
3,457
10
11,822
Estimated
Population
Served
36,947,000
5,858,000
28,419,000
41,264,000
6,123,000
325,000
118,936,000
November 1972
Number
of Plants
2,725
64
3,471
2,991
4,488
445
14,184
Estimated
Population
Served
46,972,000
5,864,000
28,512,000
47,100,000
7,334,000
2,800,000
138,582,000
Pure Oxygen Activated Sludge
Historically, the oxygen required in the activated sludge
treatment process has been provided by the introduction
of atmospheric air into the treatment system. Oxygen
gas, however, possesses certain characteristics which can
make its use, in lieu of atmospheric air, advantageous.
One of these is the high partial pressure of pure
oxygen-approximately 4.7 times that of oxygen in air.
This allows for the maintenance of a greater reservoir of
dissolved oxygen in that portion of the treatment systehi
needing it.
The basic concept of using pure oxygen rather than
air in the activated sludge process originated more than
twenty years ago. It has been just recently, however,
that oxygen aeration has become economically feasible
due to technological advances in oxygen production and
gas contacting equipment. In 1968, an EPA funded
research project at Batavia, New York, conducted by the
Linde Division of Union Carbide Corporation, success-
fully demonstrated the use of pure oxygen in a full-scale
application. Since that time additional research pilot and
full-scale operation have confirmed that the successful
use of pure oxygen represents a major advance in
wastewater treatment technology. A summary of some
Oxygen Process Flow Sheet
of the advantages of high purity oxygen treatment
systems includes:
1. Highly mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS)
concentrations
2. Low detention periods
3. Low quantities of excess biological sludge
-------
4. Improved sludge settling characteristics
5. Reduced power requiem ems'
6. High dissolved oxygen levels in all stages
7. Low waste gas volume
Oxygen aeration is equally applicable to the up-
grading of existing overloaded secondary treatment
facilities as it is to new plant design and construction.
Several applications include:
1. Upgrading of existing overloaded activated sludge
plants by conversion from air aeration to oxygen
aeration.
2. Upgrading of existing trickling filter plants by
adding oxygen aeration as a second stage biological
step in the treatment system.
3. New plant construction, both with and without
primary sedimentation.
The use of high purity oxygen has spread, and
continues to spread, very rapidly throughout the coun-
try. Additional companies are entering the field with
proprietary equipment and variations of the basic
oxygen process. Currently, there are approximately 40
treatment plants with a total design capacity of approxi-
mately 1,500 mgd under design, construction or
operation. A partial listing of wastewater treatment
facilities that are now under design, construction, or
operation utilizing oxygen aeration follows:
Design Flow
Location (MGD)
Detroit, Michigan
Middlesex County, N. J.
East Bay MUD, Calif.
Louisville, Ky.
Miami, Fla.
Hollywood, Fla.
Danville, Va.
Euclid, Ohio
Newtown Creek, N.Y.C.
Decatur, III.
Fayetteville, N. C.
Salem, Oregon
New Rochelle, N. Y.
Fairfax County, Va.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Speedway, Ind.
Morganton, N. C.
Deer Park, Texas
Baltimore, Md.
300
120
120
105
55
36
24
22
20
18
16
16
14
12
10
10
8
6
5
Phosphorus Removal
The technology for phosphorus removal from waste-
water is now well established and spreading rapidly in
those areas of the country faced with eutrophication
problems. The number of municipalities that are either
currently removing phosphorus, or planning removal in
the near future, is now so lengthy and growing so rapidly
that it is impractical to attempt to list them. There are,
however, approximately 150 treatment facilities that are
in these categories at the present time with the vast
majority located in the Great Lakes area.
Chemicals For Phosphorus Removal
Ferric Chloride
Ferric Sulfate
Ferrous Chloride
Ferrous Sulfate
Alum
Sodium Aluminate
Steel Mill Pickling Liquor
Lime
FeCI3
Fe2(S04)3
FeCI2
FeSO4
AI2(S04)3
NaAI02
FeCI2 + FeSO4
Ca(OH)2
Effective phosphorus removal is accomplished pri-
marily by chemical precipitation. Phosphorus forms
insoluble precipitates with a number of chemicals;
however lime, salts of iron and salts of aluminum are the
chemicals that are currently economically feasible for
use. The precipitation of phosphorus must be followed
by liquid solids separation. Fortunately, this can be
accomplished relatively simply and economically in
existing conventional biological treatment plants. A
major side benefit to chemical precipitation and removal
of phosphorus is the coagulation and removal of
additional organic solids with a resultant increase in the
BOD and suspended solids removal efficiency of the
treatment plant. Total phosphorus in the effluent can
now typically be reduced to 1 mg/1 or less. One of the
prime factors in the rapid acceptance of phosphorus
removal by chemical precipitation is the relatively low
initial capital cost and the ease of equipment installa-
tion. Basic equipment required consists primarily of
chemical storage tanks, polymer storage tanks (where
needed) and chemical pump and feed lines. Chemical
precipitation for phosphorus removal is now becoming
so widely accepted and used that it will soon be
considered as part of the "conventional" state-of-the-art
and no longer considered as a type of advanced
wastewater treatment.
Nitrogen Removal
Nitrogen is being identified as the controlling nutrient in
eutrophication in some areas of the country. The
removal of nitrogen is therefore becoming an increas-
ingly important area of wastewater treatment tech-
nology. There are currently four principal methods of
nitrogen removal:
Biological Denitrification: A three-stage biological sys-
tem has been developed under the EPA research program
-------
Modifications of
The Denitrif ication Process
I. Open Tank Denitrif ication
(Activated Sludge Type Culture)
II. Column Denitrif icalion
(Fine Media]
III. Column Denitrif ication
(Coarse Media)
to remove nitrogen. The first stage is a high rate, short
aeration time (about 2 hours), biological reactor for
organic carbon oxidation, and hydrolysis of organic
nitrogen to ammonia. The second stage provides about 3
hours of detention and achieves essentially complete
nitrification. The third stage is for denitrification of
nitrate to nitrogen gas. An organic source must be added
to the third stage to force the denitrification reaction to
take place. Methanol has thus far been found to be the
most effective source since it is relatively inexpensive,
reacts rapidly, and provides only a minimum of energy
for growth of new organisms. The theoretical require-
ment is 1.9 mg methanol per mg of nitrate-N. In
practice, a dose of about 3 mg methanol to 1 mg
nitrate-N is required to compensate for synthesis and the
demand exerted by dissolved oxygen remaining in the
wastewater after the nitrification stage. Biological nitrifi-
cation/denitrification is now being designed for large
capacity treatment plants at the Blue Plains treatment
plant in Washington, D.C. (309 mgd) and the Salt Creek
Treatment Plant in Chicago (30 mgd).
Breakpoint Chlorination: When chlorine is added to a
wastewater containing ammonia nitrogen, the ammonia
reacts with the hypochlorous acid formed to produce
chloramines. The addition of chlorine, up to the
breakpoint, results in conversion to and subsequent
release of nitrogen gas. The chlorine breakpoint occurs
as a ration of approximately eight to ten parts of
chlorine to one part of ammonia-N. Data from EPA
research projects indicates that ammonia-N concen-
tration in the effluent can be reduced to 0.1 mg/1 if
adequate mixing, dosing, and pH control is maintained.
Two potential adverse effects of breakpoint chlorination
are high chlorine residuals and mineralization in the
form of chlorides. The high chlorine residuals may be
overcome by installation of carbon contactors prior to
discharge to the receiving waters. The receiving stream,
however, must be capable of accepting the additional
mineralization without adverse effects on proposed
water usage.
Ammonia Stripping: Ammonia nitrogen may be re-
moved from wastewater by raising the pH above 11,
generally with lime used for phosphorus removal, and
stripping out the ammonia with air. The classic applica-
tion of ammonia stripping is the now well known
experience at Lake Tahoe, California. The Tahoe strip-
ping tower is 50 feet high, with forced ventilation, and
packed with treated hemlock slats with 1-1/2 inch
vertical and 2 inch horizontal spacing. Initial perform-
Ammonia stripping tower at Lake Tahoe, California.
ance in the tower was good, removing about 90 percent
of the ammonia in warm weather; however, long term
operational problems have become evident. Freezing
occurs during cold weather which reduces the utility of
the process in those areas having prolonged periods of
sub-freezing weather during the winter season. Calcium
carbonate scaling has also proven to be a maintenance
problem at the Tahoe plant.
Selective Ion Exchange: The relatively recent discovery
that a naturally occurring zeolite, clinoptilolite, had ion
exchange properties favoring the exchange of am-
monium over most other cations, makes ion exchange
appear to have significant promise as being economically
feasible for ammonium removal from wastewater. EPA
research projects indicate that ion-exchange columns
may be operated for approximately 24 to 30 hours
before regeneration of the resin is required. Regenera-
tion may be accomplished by a solution of lime and
-------
sodium chloride. Current research also indicates that
ammonia-N removal to leyels of. less than 0.5 mg/1 are
technically feasible. Resin volume requirements are in
the range of 0.1 to 1.0 Ibs. of ammonia-N per cubic foot
of resin. The Occoquan Sewage Authority treatment
plant in Fairfax County, Virginia, with an initial plant
design capacity of 22.5 mgd (with expansion to 45 mgd
planned within the next decade) is currently being
designed with the use of clinoptilolite for nitrogen
removal.
Physical-Chemical Treatment with
Granular Activated Carbon
Physical-chemical treatment of wastewater has now
become a major viable alternative to conventional
biological treatment processes. There are presently more
than 20 municipalities in the United States that are
planning the use of physical-chemical treatment. A
partial listing of some of these plants follows:
Location
Niagara Falls, N.Y.
Cleveland, Ohio
Garland, Texas
Occoquan, Fairfax County, Va.
Alexandria, Va.
Upper Montgomery County, Md.
Fitchburg, Mass.
Orange County, Calif.
Rocky River, Ohio
Cortland, N. Y.
South Lake Tahoe, Calif.
Owosso, Mich.
Port Jefferson, N. Y.
Piscataway, Md.
Leetsdale, Penna.
Colorado Springs, Colo.
Leroy, N. Y.
Design Flow
(MGD)
60
50
30
22.5
21
20
15
15
10
10
7.5
6
5
5
5
2.0
1.5
There is some confusion as to what treatment
processes the term physical-chemical (P-C) treatment
includes. Physical-chemical treatment processes include
chemical clarification, filtration, and activated carbon
adsorption. P-C treatment may follow biological treat-
ment processes, such as used at Lake Tahoe, or may be
"independent" physical-chemical treatment which util-
izes the P-C components only, without biological treat-
ment. Chemical clarification of raw sewage will consist-
ently provide 65 to 75 percent removal of organic
material. Chemicals such as alum, lime or iron salts used
^or chemical clarification will also provide high degrees
of phosphorus removal. Chemical clarification may be
accomplished in a series of steps including mixing,
flocculation and sedimentation. These steps may be
combined in proprietary single units commonly desig-
nated as solids-contact clarifiers.
Carbon adsorption, which is the major new process
involved in physical-chemical treatment of wastewater,
provides removal of colloidal and dissolved organics
which cannot be removed by clarification or filtration.
The adsorption process consists of passing the treated
wastewater through carbon contactors, or beds of
granular activated carbon. Carbon contactors may be of
either the upflow or downflow types. Downflow col-
umns provide a degree of filtration in addition to
adsorption and have been operated at flow rates ranging
from 2 to 8 gpm/ft2. Periodic backwashing of downflow
columns is required as the pressure loss increases due to
suspended solids accumulating in the carbon bed. Car-
bon beds, or contactors, may be operated in the upflow
mode as packed beds at low hydraulic loadings (less than
2 gpm/sq ft), as partially expanded beds at higher
hydraulic loadings (4-7 gpm/sq ft), or packed against the
top of the contactor at much higher hydraulic loading
rates. Typical commercial granular carbon sizes used are
8x30 and 12x40 mesh.
As organics from the wastewater are adsorbed by the
granular activated carbon, the carbon eventually requires
regeneration in order to be reused. It is this regeneration
and reuse of granular carbon that makes it economically
feasible for wastewater treatment. Exhausted granular
carbon is hydraulically transported in a water slurry,
dewatered, and regenerated thermally by heating to
1500°F -1700°F in a multiple-hearth furnace where the
adsorbed impurities are volatilized and released in
gaseous form. Carbon losses usually vary from 5 to 10
percent per regeneration cycle.
Filtration may be required prior to activated carbon
adsorption in order to reduce the clogging rate of the
carbon pores. The use of filtration, usually of the
mixed-media type, also enables the use of packed upflow
carbon beds as well as the packed downflow types, and
will normally result in a more efficient removal of solids
than carbon alone, with a resultant higher quality of
effluent. When upflow expanded bed carbon contactors
are used, filtration units may be used downstream of the
carbon columns to remove the floe which is flushed
from the carbon. Polymers may be fed to the filter
influent to be used as coagulant aids.
Some of the advantages of physical-chemical treat-
ment are:
1. Less area requirement 1/2 to 1/4
2. Lower sensitivity to diurnal variation
3. Not affected by toxic substances
4. Potential for significant heavy metal removal
5. Superior removal of 'P' compounds
6. Greater flexibility in design and operation
7. Superior organic removal
-------
.Typical costs for a 10 mgd P-C treatment plant are
shown in the following table:
Costs for Physical-Chemical Treatment (10 MGD)
Step
Total Cost
(Cents per 1000 gals.)
Preliminary Treatment 0.8
Lime Coagulation & Recalcination 10.1
Filtration 3.6
Activated Carbon Adsorption 12.9
Disinfection 0.9
Total Plant Cost 28.3
Note: Total cost includes capital costs, operating and mainte-
nance costs, & amortization.
Up to the present time, the use of physical-chemical
treatment for municipalities has been considered eco-
nomically feasible for plant sizes greater than 3-5 mgd
due to the cost of carbon regenerating systems. How-
ever, a major commercial carbon supplier has recently
introduced the concept of centralized regional regenera-
tion plants which will eliminate a major capital cost for
smaller facilities and could result in even more wide-
spread use of physical-chemical treatment.
Suspended Solids Removal
New technology is also rapidly being adopted for
upgrading the removal of suspended solids from con-
ventional wastewater treatment systems. Gravity sedi-
mentation is no longer providing adequate liquid-solids
separation for many municipalities. Major advances in
suspended solids removal include chemical clarification,
deep-bed filtration, and microscreening.
Chemical Clarification. Chemical clarification for sus-
pended solids removal has been discussed in some detail
above, under the section on phosphorus removal. As
noted previously, chemical clarification is now becoming
standard practice in many parts of the country. Chem-
ical clarification is the most feasible method for colloid
removal. Chemical coagulation and clarification may be
accomplished in either primary, secondary, or tertiary
clarification units. The use of chemicals can often
provide a municipality with the incremental BOD and
suspended solids removal efficiency, necessary to meet
water quality requirements, without major new addi-
tions to the treatment facility.
Deep-Bed Filtration. Filtration of secondary effluent
provides a positive, reliable method of suspended solids
Typical Performance of Chemical Clarification
ORGANIC REMOVAL 60-80%
SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL 90-98%
PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL 80-95%
removal. Deep-bed filters using two or more types of
media provide a substantial inbrease in filter depth over
single media type units. "Mixed" or tri-media filters,
such as those used at Lake Tahoe, generally consist of
layers of anthracite coal, sand, and garnet. The lower
specific gravity (1.6) coal is on top and higher specific
gravity (4) garnet is on the bottom to prevent excessive
mixing of the media materials during backwashing. Filter
depths are 24 to 30 inches with effective size gradations
of about 1.0 mm at the top to about 0.15 mm at the
bottom. Filters are operated at flow rates ranging from
5-10 gpm/sq ft. Mixed media deep-bed filters provide an
excellent method of effluent quality assurance by
removal of virtually all of the suspended solids and by
high degrees of removal of turbidity and phosphorus.
Microscreening installation in Chicago, Illinois.
Microscreening. Microscreens are surface filtration de-
vices that are finding increasing use for polishing effluent
from secondary biological treatment plants. The micro-
screen units consist of rotating drums with specially
woven corrosion-resistant fabric mounted on the periph-
ery. Influent enters the drum along the axis and flows
radially outward through the fabric. The filtration or
screening efficiency depends primarily on the fabric size
and the character of the solids being removed. Micro-
screen units are available with variable drum speeds and
backwash pressures to accommodate variations in flow
and solids loading. Microscreens are washed continu-
ously requiring approximately 5 percent of the filter
throughput for this operation. Data from current instal-
lations indicate removal of 50 to 80 percent of the
biological solids in secondary effluent using screen sizes
from 23 to 35 microns.
The treatment processes and systems described above
represent major advances in wastewater treatment
technology and are, in most cases, being used, or ready
for use in full-scale applications. Many other treatment
processes are being developed under the EPA research
and demonstration program including: the use of pow-
dered carbon in physical-chemical treatment; the use of
ozonation for oxidation of organics and disinfection;
and the use of ion exchange and reverse osmosis for
removal of dissolved inorganics. As the development of
these and other new wastewater treatment processes
progresses, we may expect to find the near-future
inventory of municipal treatment processes expanding
even more rapidly and more diversely than it has within
the past three years.
-------
Technology Transfer Co-Sponsors
National Conference on Complete
Water Reuse in Industry
Technology Transfer has joined with the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers (AlChE) in sponsoring a
National Conference on Complete Water Reuse in
Industry, to be held in Washington, D.C., April 24-26,
1973. The conference will be organized into 21 sessions
with approximately 70 papers to be presented covering
most of the major industrial sources of pollution.
Participation will be provided for industry, government
and civic organizations, and environmentalists.
AlChE Annual Meeting
The 56th Annual Meeting of the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers (AlChE), held in New York City,
November 26-30, 1972, included participation by Tech-
nology Transfer. The Technology Transfer presentation
centered on the then newly-initiated industrial program,
which impacts air, water, and solid waste control and
treatment technology.
Analytical Quality Control Handbook
Receives Second Printing
A second printing of the Technology Transfer Handbook
for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories has recently been completed. The initial
printing of 14,000 copies was exhausted in less than
three months and an additional 10,000 copies was
ordered in late October of last year. These additional
copies are now available for distribution.
Pollution Control 73
Technology Transfer participated in the conference
entitled "Pollution Control '73" sponsored by Chemical
Engineering Magazine and held in New York City,
December 12-14, 1972. The conference highlighted new
legislative requirements, regulatory standards, technolog-
ical alternatives available to control or treat effluents,
and transfer of technology.
Industrial Waste Seminars
A major portion of Technology Transfer's industrial
program is the industrial waste seminar series. These
seminars are being used to disseminate technical in-
formation to specific industries concerning the control
and treatment of air, water, and solid wastes. A typical
seminar agenda includes such topics as legislative and
regulatory requirements, effluent sampling techniques,
in-plant modifications to reduce pollution, technology
available for pretreatment prior to discharge of wastes to
municipal systems, treatment and control technology for
discharges to waterways, by-product recovery, air pollu-
tion control, and solid waste disposal.
Edward Willoughby, G iff els Associates, Inc., discussing treat-
ment of poultry processing wastes at Atlanta seminar.
The seminars that have been held to date include
"Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution" (Atlanta, Ga., September 1972), and "Up-
grading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce Pollution"
(New York, N.Y., December 1972). The favorable
response to both seminars has resulted in the repeating
of each; the former in Little Rock, Arkansas, January
16-18, and the latter in Philadelphia, Pa., January 30-31.
Two new seminars are now being presented. A
seminar on "Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to
Reduce Pollution" will be held in Kansas City, Mo., in
March and a seminar on "Upgrading Dairy Facilities to
Reduce Pollution" will be held in EPA Region I the
same month.
Technology Transfer to Participate
in APWA Workshops
Members of the Technology Transfer staff will partici-
pate in the American Public Works Association (APWA)
workshop series on sewerage and urban drainage sys-
tems. This series, aimed at Public Works Directors, starts
in February and will be conducted in such cities as San
Francisco, Oklahoma City, Cincinnati, Philadelphia,
Chicago, New Orleans, and Los Angeles. The Technology
Transfer staff members will serve as instructors for
portions of these sessions and will also provide instruc-
tional materials. A key focus of the two-day sessions will
be on upgrading existing wastewater treatment facilities.
These workshops are being conducted under the
direction of Mr. Richard Sullivan of APWA. Additional
information may be obtained from the APWA Education
.Foundation, 1313 East 60th Street, Chicago, Illi-
nois 60637.
Design Manuals Receive Third Printing
Once again several Regional Offices have depleted their
supply of the four Technology Transfer Process Design
Manuals. As a result, a rush reprinting to satisfy the
backlog of requests until the revised versions of the
manuals become available later this year has just been
completed. The number of copies of each manual in
circulation after this printing now totals nearly 20,000.
Second Videotape Available
A videotape covering the topic of Upgrading Activated
Sludge Treatment Plants is now available for loan from
Technology Transfer on an availability basis. The tape is
approximately 40 minutes in length and is composed of
three segments: pre-plant considerations; in-plant proc-
ess modifications; and effluent polishing. Requests for
loan of this tape-the second produced by Technology
-------
Transfer to date-may be made by completing the last
page of this newsletter and forwarding it to your
regional Technology Transfer committee chairman.
About This Publication
Recently there have been several inquiries as to whether
this publication receives distribution monthly, quarterly,
etc. Apparently some individuals feel they may have
been inadvertently missed in a mailing. An attempt is
made to publish this information document approxi-
mately once a quarter, but a rigid time frame is not,
established. We feel it is more important that the
material presented be1 accurate, timely, and useful than it
is to publish this document exactly every three months.
This is why a period of more than three months may
elapse between issues, and has several times in the past.
As a matter of further information. Technology
Transfer has distributed more than 600,000 copies of its
various publications in the last year and a half. Included
in this total are over 400,000 copies of process and
project brochures; approximately 100,000 copies of
technical manuals and handbooks; and nearly 100,000
copies of this publication, which now has a mailing list
of about 20,000.
Where To Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects of the Technology Transfer Program,
contact your appropriate EPA Regional Technology Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION
I
CHAIRMAN
Lester Sutton
Rocco Ricci
III
IV
Kenneth Suter
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
V
Clifford Risley
VI
Richard Hill
VII
Lewis Young
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal
Building, Rm. 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617-223-7210
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I.,
Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212-264-8958
(N.Y., N.J.,P.R.,V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Wai nut
Philadelphia, Pa. 19106
215-597-9875
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree St., N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404-526-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1 N. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312-353-5756
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind.,
Ohio)
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street
Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75201
214-749-1461
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816-374-2725
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
-------
REGION
VIII
IX
CHAIRMAN
Russell Fitch
Frank Covington
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303-837-3849
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.,
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415-556-0218
(Calif., Nev., Ariz., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206-442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
Request For Technology Transfer Material
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS BROCHURES
D Phosphorus Removal
D Carbon Adsorption
D Suspended Solids Removal
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
HANDBOOK
D Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories
D Physical-Chemical Treatment
D Phosphorus Removal
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
[H Seattle, Washington METRO
D Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe
D Indian Creek Reservoir
D Carbon Adsorption
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORT
D Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon
Plants
Please contact me regarding the loan of the following audio/visual material. (Check appropriate boxes)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
D Richardson, Texas, Project—Title
"Somebody around here must be
doing something good." (15min.)
D Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
VIDEOTAPES
D Carbon Adsorption (40 min.)
D Upgrading Activated Sludge Treatment
Plants (40 min.)
Is your name on our mailing list to receive this Newsletter?
Do you want to be added to this mailing list?
D D
D D
Yes No
Name.
Street
City.
State
.Zip.
Note: Tear this sheet out and forward to the appropriate Regional Technology Transfer Committee Chairman.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
UL&NU
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
ADDRESS LABEL
-------
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
May 15
1972
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WPCF PRESIDENT PARTICIPATES IN
NEW YORK DESIGN SEMINAR
Joseph F. Lagnese, President, Water Pollution
Control Federation, participated in the Tech-
nology Transfer Design Seminar held in New
York City February 29 and March 1-2, 1972.
Mr. Lagnese opened the general discussion
session on March 2 with a presentation on the
cooperative efforts of the Federation and the
Technology Transfer Program. He stated
".. .. there is no question that EPA Technology
Transfer, by their special efforts, has achieved a
position of respect and prestige with the Federa-
tion officially and I am sure with most of our
members." Mr. Lagnese further stated: "Possibly
even more significant and encouraging than the
improved rapport between EPA and professional
organizations is that the Federal program, by
example of the Technology Transfer effort,
Joseph F. Lagnese, President, Water Pollution Control Federa-
tion, addressing participants in New York Design Seminar.
demonstrates a more serious consideration to
the essential role of engineering in the achieve-
ment of national water pollution control
objectives."
One of the points discussed by Mr. Lagnese
was that a conflict between the Technology
Transfer Process Design Manuals and the WPCF
Manuals of Practice does not exist as the
respective areas of interest differ. He pointed
out that: 1] whereas the MOP's are limited to
well-established practices of rather long-term
use, the Design Manuals on the other hand relate
to process design in areas where research and
demonstration has been more recent; and 2] the
continued cooperation and coordination
between WPCF and Technology Transfer would
minimize the potential for overlap, redundancy,
and conflict in the future.
The importance of this cooperation between
the Federation and Technology Transfer was the
main theme of Mr. Lagnese's presentation.
". . . . no other program in EPA or the water
pollution control agencies preceding EPA, to my
recollection, has had a better record in this
regard" he concluded.
ANALYTICAL QUALITY CONTROL
HANDBOOK
Initial distribution
of the Handbook for
Analytical Quality
Control in Water and
Wastewater Labora-
tories will take place at
the 92nd annual meet-
ing of the American
Water Works Associa-
tion to be held in Chi-
cago, Illinois, June 4-9,
1972. The Handbook
can be obtained at no cost at EPA's Technology
Transfer exhibit; it will also be available free of
handbook
for
ANALYOJ.
QUALITY
CONTROL
N WATER
AND
WASTEWATER
LABORATORIES
-------
charge through the regional Technology Transfer
committees listed in the back of this publi-
cation.
The quality control handbook was prepared
for Technology Transfer by the EPA Analytical
Quality Control Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Personnel from both programs will be available
at the AWWA meeting to discuss the handbook
in more detail, as well as the functions of the
AQC Laboratory. Presented below is a summary
of the responsibilities and mission of the AQC
Laboratory.
The AQC Laboratory (Dwight G. Ballinger,
Director) is part of the National Environmental
Research Center in Cincinnati. Its Mission is the
development of physical, biological, and micro-
biological methods for the field and laboratory
analysis of water, wastewater, and sediment
samples. Additional responsibilities include the
evaluation of method reliability and the estab-
lishment of quality control techniques for EPA
laboratories.
The Laboratory has a staff of 54 scientists
and technicians and an in-house budget of more
than $1 million annually. The Laboratory Staff
monitors an additional one-half million dollars
in contracts and grants related to methods
development. Methods research involves im-
provements in automated colorimetric proce-
dures, investigations of the usefulness of specific
ion electrodes, improved methods for pesticides,
and the development of techniques for GC-mass
spectral identifications. Oil identification tech-
niques based upon infrared and gas chromatog-
raphy have also been developed by the Labora-
tory. Additional investigations include improved
methods for heavy metals in water and wastes;
the Laboratory has provided EPA methods for
mercury in water, sediments, and fish, in
response to the current crisis involving that
element.
Biological field and laboratory methods are
also being investigated with particular emphasis
on the selection and evaluation of sampling
devices, the preparation of detailed identifi-
cation guides for micro- and macroorganisms
collected in biological surveys, and procedures
for the determination of biomass as a pollution
indicator. The microbiological staff is engaged in
studies of sample preservation, improved tech-
niques for coliform, fecal coliform, and fecal
strep organisms, and the development of
methods for the identification and enumeration
of enteric pathogens.
In support of the research, a special staff
conducts evaluation of EPA methods to deter-
mine the applicability, precision, and accuracy,
by means of interlaboratory studies. Studies
have been completed or are being conducted for
nutrient parameters, oxygen demand measure-
ments, pesticides in water, heavy metals, and
chlorophyll. Methods evaluation reports are pre-
pared and distributed to EPA laboratories and
other interested groups. The Laboratory also
provides a unique service in the form of standard
reference samples for water quality and waste
analyses. These reference samples, based upon
groupings of analytical parameters, are available
from the Laboratory at no cost and may be used
in the evaluation of individual laboratory tech-
niques, analysts' performance, or in the investi-
gation of new instrumental measurement
systems.
The AQC Laboratory is responsible for the
development of continuous monitoring instru-
ments for use by EPA and other Government
agencies. This development includes new sensor
systems, computer interfacing with water qual-
ity monitoring instruments, improvement in
intake design, and a recent development, the use
of a satellite for data transmission.
Major accomplishments of the AQC Labora-
tory are measured in terms of publications. In
1971, the Laboratory distributed more than
10,000 copies of "Methods for Chemical Analy-
sis of Water and Wastes." A recent publication
of the laboratory is "Methods for Organic
Pesticides in Water and Wastewater." In the
summer of 1972, the Laboratory will publish
"Methods for Collection and Analysis of Bio-
logical Field Samples," which is a cooperative
effort among the principal biologists in EPA. In
addition to publication of methods manuals, the
Laboratory also publishes the quarterly AQC
Newsletter, which goes out to many laboratories
inside and outside the Government and offers a
communication device relating to matters of
quality control and methods development. The
current mailing list for the newsletter numbers
more than 5,000.
Among the more interesting challenges in
methods development are methods for organo-
phosphorus pesticides, the use of NMR for
organic pollutant identifications, instrumenta-
tion far the continuous monitoring of industrial
waste effluents, the development of biometric
procedures, and improvements in the identifi-
cation of oil slicks for enforcement purposes.
-------
SECOND PRINTING OF DESIGN
MANUALS COMPLETED
Technology Transfer has finally received the
second printing of the Process Design Manuals
initially released last October. Those individuals
who have previously requested the manuals
should be receiving them shortly; others inter-
ested in obtaining the manuals may do so by
completing the last page of this fact sheet and
forwarding it to the appropriate Regional Tech-
nology Transfer Committee Chairman. We
express our regrets for the delay involved in
distributing these manuals and our thanks to all
those who have patiently awaited their receipt.
DESIGN SEMINARS
The Technology Transfer design seminar
program sponsored three seminars since January,
1972, bringing the total number of seminars
conducted since the program was initiated to
twelve. The most recent seminars were presented
in Anaheim, California, January 5 and 6; New
York, New York, February 29, March 1, and 2;
and Anchorage, Alaska, March 28 and 29, 1972.
The Anaheim Seminar included sessions on
physical-chemical treatment, nitrogen control,
and suspended solids removal. Mr. John D.
Parkhurst, Vice-President, Water Pollution
Control Federation, discussed the EPA Tech-
nology Transfer Program with regard to the
Federation as part of the opening half-day
session.
A Seminar was held in New York City during
February 29, March 1 and 2,1972. The program
included technical sessions on physical-chemical
treatment, nitrogen control, and oxygen aera-
tion. Gerald M. Hansler, Regional Administrator,
Region II, gave the opening welcome to the
120-plus consulting engineers and state regula-
tory personnel in attendance. The oxygen aera-
tion session was introduced into the Technology
Transfer Program at this seminar and was well
received. A highlight of the seminar was a group
tour on March 2 to the Newtown Creek Waste-
water Treatment Plant where oxygen aeration is
being applied to 20 MGD of wastewater.
Gerald M. Hausler, Regional Administrator,. Region II, EPA,
welcoming the participants in New York.
John D. Parkhurst, Vice President, Water Pollution Control
Federation, discussing the Technology Transfer Program in
Anaheim.
PSA (Pressure Swing Adsorption) Oxygen generating unit for 20
mgd oxygen aeration treatment train at Newtown Creek, N.Y.
treatment plant.
-------
Mr. Joseph F. Lagnese, President, Water Pollu-
tion Control Federation, opened the general
discussion session March 2, 1972 (see article on
first page).
The Anchorage Seminar included sessions on
physical-chemical treatment and cold climate
biological waste treatment. A feature of the cold
climate biological waste treatment session was a
presentation by Mr. Jack Grainge of the Cana-
dian Environmental Protection Service. This
session, as with the oxygen aeration session in
New York, was included for the first time in the
design seminar program.
Feature presentations at the above seminars
were given by Swindell-Dressier Company, Pitts-
burgh, Penna.; Metcalf & Eddy Engineers,
Boston, Mass.; Shimek, Roming, Jacobs, &
Finklea, Dallas, Texas; CH2M/Hill, Corvallis,
Oregon; and EKONO, Seattle, Wash., with assist-
ance from Jesse M. Cohen, Edwin F. Barth,
Sidney A. Hannah, Joseph B. Farrell, and John
M. Smith of the EPA National Environmental
Research Center in Cincinnati, Ohio.
NEW TECHNOLOGY IN USE FOR
INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION CONTROL
Following are several examples of the full-
scale implementation of new or innovative tech-
niques for the control of industrial sources of
pollution. These cases are representatives of
what can be accomplished in the way of
improved industrial pollution control through
the use of presently available technology. More
specific information on these projects can be
obtained from the Technology Transfer Chair-
man in the region where the project is located.
AMERICAN ENKA CORP. "Zinc Precipitation
and Recovery from Viscose Rayon Wastewater."
— Region IV
American Enka, in an EPA Demonstration
Project, has won a Finalist Award from the
Sports Foundation, Inc. The award, given for
achievement in the fight against water pollution,
is for a full-scale system for the precipitation
and recovery of zinc from the waste stream of
their Enka, North Carolina, rayon plant.
In the rayon industry, the zinc originates
from the zinc sulfate component of the acid
spinning bath, and is carried into the waste
stream through yarn washing and filter back-
View of complete wastewater treating facilities at Enka plant,
Enka, North Carolina. The large circular tank in the lower
middle section represents activated sludge plant, for treatment
only of domestic wastes. Zinc recovery system handling process
waste water is directly above and slightly to the left of activated
sludge plant.
washes. Previously used technology added
enough lime to raise the pH to 10.0-11.0, which
resulted in a contaminated sludge of low zinc
assay. However, the American Enka installation
utilizes a new technology in which the waste
stream is neutralized with lime to a pH of 6.0, at
which point zinc just begins to precipitate. The
waste stream is then clarified and the clear
solution contracted with a circulating dense
slurry of zinc hydroxide precipitate. The pH is
raised to 10.0 with sodium hydroxide. The
resultant dense sludge settles easily and is 5-7%
zinc hydroxide. It is dissolved with acid and
reused.
Two thousand pounds of zinc are recovered
daily at American Enka at a value of 13.5-14.0
cents/lb. This zinc recovery pays for the cost of
the treatment plus a partial amortization of
capital expenditures. Approximately 50 million
Ibs. of zinc sulfate are used annually by the
rayon industry. Since the only route for zinc to
leave the spinning process is via a waste stream,
this amount of zinc has previously been lost to
the environment. EPA Project Officer is
Edmond Lomasney of Region IV.
VOLVO BRASS AND COPPER CO. "Treat-
ment, Recovery and Reuse of Copper Wire Mill
Pickling Wastes" - Region II
The Kenilworth, New Jersey, copper wire
plant of the Volvo Brass and Copper Company,
-------
has made an order-of-magnitude reduction in
water usage, eliminated chromium, ammonium
and fluoride ion discharges, eliminate dumpings
of pickling baths, and is recovering copper
normally lost in the waste effluent. This EPA
Demonstration Project is an excellent sample of
how a combination of process improvements can
economically make major reductions in plant
waste loads. Water usage of the pickling system
was reduced from 150gpm to 10gpm by the
use of a chemical rinse solution to neutralize
dragout acid from the pickling bath. The neu-
tralized chemicals from the chemical rinse treat-
ment are then removed by a recycled water
rinse. An electrolytic system has been installed
to remove copper from the main pickling solu-
tion, recovering the copper and regenerating the
pickling solution. The third key step is the
substitution of hydrogen peroxide as the oxi-
dizing agent in the bright pickle solution, elimi-
nating chromate, fluoride, and ammonium ions
as pollutants. The recovery of the copper plus
the elimination of operating problems associated
with the use of dischromate as an oxidizing
agent has resulted in a reduced operating cost,
including amortization of the new installation.
EPA project officer is John Ciancia of the
Edison Water Research Division, Cincinnati
NERC.
AMERICAN OIL CO. "Final Purification of
Aerated Lagoon Effluent by Chemical Coagula-
tion—Mixed Media Filtration — Region III
An EPA Demonstration Project involving the
American Oil Company has been awarded first
place in an Environmental Merits Award Pro-
gram sponsored by Petroleum Engineer maga-
zine. The award is for the installation of a
mixed-media filtration system for the aerated
lagoon effluent at Amoco's Yorktown, Virginia
refinery. The filter consists of a concrete tank
containing layered anthracite coal, silica sand,
and ilemenite. Alum is added to the waste
stream pipeline prior to the filter. 1400 gpm of
waste water is being treated. EPA Project Officer
is Leon Meyers of the Robert S. Kerr Research
Center, Ada, Oklahoma.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PARTICIPATES
IN CITY MANAGERS' MEETINGS
Technology Transfer participated in the
spring meeting of the City Managers' Depart-
ment League of California Cities in Coronado,
California March 9, 1972 and in the Northwest
City Managers' Conference in Glenedon Beach,
Oregon, March 11. At these meetings. Tech-
nology Transfer participated in workshops con-
ducted by Public Technology Inc. aimed at
assisting the cities in identifying their needs.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER EXHIBITS
The Technology Transfer display booths are
available for appropriate conferences and meet-
ings on a request basis. Requests should be made
to the Regional Technology Transfer Chairmen
(last page of this fact sheet may be used for this
purpose). The following is a firm schedule of
meetings at which one or more of the exhibits
has been or will be displayed.
April 19-21 - National Pollution Control
Conference & Exposition
Houston, Texas
Exhibit: Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
May 10-12 — New Jersey Water Pollution
Central Association .Conference
Attauta City, New Jersey
Exhibit: Physical-Chemical Treatment
May 14-19 — American Industrial
Hygiene Conference
San Francisco, California
Exhibit: Phosphorus Removal
June 4-9 - American Water Works
Association
92nd Annual Conference
Chicago, Illinois
Exhibit: Analytical Quality Control
July 24-26 - 2nd Urban
Technology Conference
San Francisco, California
Exhibit: Phosphorus Removal
Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
Physical-Chemical Treatment
Analytical Quality Control
Sept. 11-14 — International Water
Supply Congress
Rockeffer Center, New York
-------
Exhibit: Treating Wastewater
Oct. 8-13 - Water Pollution Control
Federation
45th Annual Conference
Atlanta, Georgia
Exhibit: (Under Construction at Present)
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
AVAILABLE
Listed on the last page of this fact sheet is a
current tabulation of available Technology
Transfer publications, audio/visual material, and
exhibits. By completing this page and forward-
ing it to the appropriate Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman, your request(s)
will be filled.
UPGRADING EXISTING TREATMENT
PLANTS
The effective transfer of new and/or improved
pollution control alternatives is the primary goal
of the Technology Transfer Program, and one of
the highest priorities of the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Incorporation of these tech-
nologies in newly designed or constructed facili-
ties is a major step towards solving the pollution
problems facing the country today. However, a
total solution involves the incorporation of these
technologies in existing pollution control facili-
ties.
In the area of domestic sewage far too many
of the approximately 12,000 existing sewage
treatment plants perform inadequately for one
or more of the following reasons: 1) improper
plant operation; b) inadequate plant design;
c) changes in wastewater flow or characteristics;
and d) changes in treatment requirements. Tech-
nology is available today to effectively upgrade
such facilities to acceptable treatment levels.
Detailed discussion of upgrading alternates is
contained in the Technology Transfer Process
Design Manual for Upgrading Existing Waste-
water Treatment Plants, issued October, 1971,
and available from the Technology Transfer
Program (see last page of this publication). A
discussion of the basic technologies involved in
upgrading existing sewage treatment plants is
presented below.
Since the primary clarifier performance signif-
icantly affects the overall effluent quality of
existing treatment plants, and since clarification
is the most economical way to remove sus-
pended and colloidal pollutants, every effort
should be made to improve the primary clarifi-
cation process before additional facilities are
considered.
The technique of adding chemicals to the
primary clarifier is an effective upgrading proce-
dure for a secondary plant. The chemicals
commonly used in wastewater treatment are the
salts of iron and aluminum lime, and synthetic
organic polyelectrolytes. The iron (ferrous and
ferric) and aluminum salts (sodium aluminate or
alum) react with the alkalinity and soluble
orthophosphate in wastewater to form precipi-
tates of the respective metallic hydroxides or
phosphates. In addition, they destabilize the
colloidal particles that would otherwise remain
in suspension. These precipitates, along with the
destabilized colloids, flocculate and settle
readily in a clarifier.
An example of the effect of polyelectrolyte
addition (used either alone or in combination
with inorganic coagulants) on primary clarifier
performance is that, for several plants, the
average values of suspended solids and BOD
removals were increased from 38 percent and 31
percent to 65 percent and 47 percent, respec-
tively. This indicates that the proper selection
and application of polyelectrolytes and chemi-
cals to raw wastewater can significantly improve
primary clarifier performance.
Alum, iron, or polyelectrolyte addition, either
in the primary or secondary treatment process,
can be used advantageously to improve the
overall performance of the treatment system,
including phosphorus removal. Lime addition
may not be feasible for upgrading activated
sludge secondary clarifiers because of the poten-
tial adverse effect of recirculated lime sludge on
mixed liquor microbial characteristics. Lime
addition to primary clarifiers may be used, if
consideration is given to controlling the pH
within acceptable limits for the subsequent
processes, and to changes in sludge character-
istics and handling requirements. Tube settlers
have been used in primary and secondary clari-
fiers to improve performance as well as to
increase throughput in existing clarifiers. The
results of several studies indicate that the over-
flow rates in primary clarifiers can be increased
to 5,000 gpd/sq. ft. while producing the same
quality effluent as the control unit without the
settlers. Tube settlers enhance the ability to
capture settleable solids at high overflow rates
-------
because the depth of settling has been reduced
to a few inches in the tube. It should be realized
that tube settlers do not improve the efficiency
of primary clarifiers that are already achieving
very high (40-60 percent) removals of suspended
solids. Moreover, tube settlers will neither
remove colloidal solids that remain in suspension
nor induce additional coagulation to effect
added particle removal.
The use of effluent polishing of secondary
effluent is a relatively new idea which is receiv-
ing increasing attention as a practical and eco-
nomical method of upgrading to obtain in-
creased organic and suspended solids removal
from existing treatment facilities. It appears to
be particularly applicable in those cases (and
there are many) where it is necessary to increase
efficiency by an overall amount of 10 to 20
percent in order to meet water quality
requirements.
Four unit processes should be considered for
effluent polishing: 1) polishing lagoons;
2) microstraining; 3) filtration,, including mixed,
multi-media, and moving-bed filters; and 4) acti-
vated carbon adsorption.
Polishing lagoons offer an opportunity for
increased organic and solids removal at a mini-
mum cost. There are two types of polishing
lagoons which can be used, aerobic and faculta-
tive. Aerobic lagoons are generally subdivided
into two groups: 1) shallow lagoons, with depths
in the range of 2.5 to 4.0 feet; and 2) deep
lagoons, with aeration devices included to insure
maintenance of aerobic conditions. Facultative
lagoons are characterized by two distinct zones-
aerobic and anaerobic. Hydraulic and organic
loadings are such that the dissolved oxygen in
the lower section of the lagoon is depleted but
an aerobic layer is maintained near the surface.
Microstraining has application in effluent
polishing chiefly as a method of removing
additional suspended solids (and their associated
BOD) from wastewater treatment plant
effluents. The microstrainer consists of a rota-
ting drum with a peripheral screen. Influent
wastewater enters the drum internally and passes
radially outward through the screen, with depo-
sition of solids on the inner surface of the drum
screen. At the top of the drum pressure jets
remove the deposited solids. The backwash
water is then collected and returned to the head
of the plant. The screens employed in micro-
strainers have extremely small openings and are
made from a variety of metals and plastics.
Individual manufacturers have specific designs
and sizes for the particular needs of any poten-
tial installation.
One of the advantages of using a microstrainer
is its low head requirement. It is, therefore,
advantageous to transfer secondary effluent,
without pumping, to a tertiary microstraining
installation in order to minimize the shear
forced imparted to the fragile biological floe.
Head loss through the microstraining unit, in-
cluding inlet and outlet structures is about 12 to
18 inches. Across the screen, a 6-inch limit is
usually imposed at peak flows. Head losses in
excess of this value are prevented by bypass
weirs. Head loss build-up is reduced by increas-
ing the rate of drum rotation and by increasing
the pressure and flow of the backwashing jets.
These adjustments can be made manually or
automatically.
Microstrainer installations using 23-micron
fabric exhibited average solids removals ranging
from 57 to 89 percent while the 35-micron
fabric exhibited removals of 55 to 73 percent. In
practice, the coarses 35-micron fabric is gener-
ally used for the removal of coarse solids.
Historically, sand filtration has not been an
efficient method of polishing secondary treat-
ment plant effluent because of low application
rates, high head losses, and the need for frequent
backwashing. This is largely because the normal
backwashing of a sand filter results in a size-
graded filter with the finest grains in the upper
layers. The resulting stratification removes the
bulk of the suspended matter in the upper levels,
with a consequent inefficient use of the remain-
ing depth of the filter.
However, developments in mixed, multi-
media, and deep-bed coarse-media filters have
necessitated a re-evaluation of the role of filtra-
tion in effluent polishing. In general, these
modifications permit deeper penetration of the
media by the suspended and colloidal contain-
ments; thus, there is a more effective utilization
of the filer depth as compared to conventional
sand filters. The increased utilization of filter
depth is somewhat offset by the fact that
increased backwashing rates and larger quantities
of washwater are required to backwash the
media properly.
In addition to coarse, mixed, and multi-media
filters, a new filtering technique known as a
moving-bed filter (MBF) has been developed.
The unit is basically a sand filter, but as the
filter surface becomes clogged, the filtering
-------
medium is moved forward by means of a
hydraulically-actuated mechanical diaphragm.
The clogged filter surface is removed mechani-
cally or by gravity, to the extent that a fresh and
clean filtering surface is exposed to the incoming
chemically treated liquid. The unit is thus a
form of countercurrent extraction device which
has the capability of functioning on a contin-
uous basis and does not have to be taken off
stream for cleaning or backwashing.
The limitations of conventional biological
treatment processes in regard to reliable achieve-
ment of a high degree of organic removal
(particularly of certain compounds which are
refractory to biodegradation), along with in-
creasingly strict water quality standards, empha-
size the need for a supplementary organic
removal process. Thus, activated carbon is
presently being used to provide tertiary treat-
ment of biologically treated effluents.
Locations where activated carbon has been
used successfully to provide tertiary treatment
include: Lake Tahoe, Pomona, and Nassau
County. Application at these places clearly
indicates the ability of activated carbon to
produce effluents with very low levels of
organics. At Lake Tahoe, the secondary effluent
is treated with lime followed by clarification and
mixed-media filtration prior to treatment with
the activated carbon; at Pomona, secondary
effluent is treated directly in activated carbon
columns; in Nassau County, secondary effluent
is alum-clarified prior to treatment in activated
carbon columns.
There are at least four methods available for
the post-aeration of a wastewater treatment
plant's effluent. These are: 1) diffused aeration;
2) mechanical aeration; 3) cascade aeration; and
4) U-tube aeration. Most of these devices were
initially developed for water treatment and are
now being used in the wastewater treatment
field.
Of all the types of post-aeration methods, it is
likely that mechanical aeration and U-tube
aeration will find extensive application in the
future. Mechanical aerators are generally
grouped in two broad categories: turbine types
and pump types. In all types, oxygen transfer
occurs through a vortexing action and/or from
the interfacial exposure of large volumes of
liquid sprayed over the surface. To avoid inter-
ference between units, aerator manufacturers
recommend a minimum basin size of 15 to 50
feet square and a minimum depth of 5 to 8 feet,
depending on the horsepower of the aerator.
The U-tube aerator consists of two basic
components: a conduit to provide a vertical
U-shaped flow path and a device for entraining
air into the stream flow in the down leg of the
conduit. The entrainment device is one of two
types: 1) aspirator; or 2) compressor and dif-
fuser. In either case, the entrained air is carried
along the down leg of the tube because the
water velocity exceeds the buoyant rising veloc-
ity of the air bubbles. Various design considera-
tions include air-to-water ratio, tube cross-
sectional area, and depth. The maximum
air-to-water ratio practicable is a function of the
velocity through the system. At velocities of
approximately 4 fps, 20 percent air-to-water
injection requirements for plants of 5 mgd or
less should be less than 5 feet. If sufficient head
is not available, the flow may be pumped
through the U-tube.
-------
WHERE TO GET FURTHER INFORMATION
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects of the Technology
Transfer Program, contact your appropriate EPA Regional Technology Transfer Committee Chairman
from the list below:
REGION
CHAIRMAN
Lester Sutton
II
Rocco Ricci
Warren L. Carter
IV
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
V
Clifford Risely
VI
George Putnicki
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal
Building, Rm. 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617-223-7210
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass.,
R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
201-548-3441
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut
Philadelphia, Pa. 19106
215-597-9410
(Pa.,W. Va., Md., Del.,D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree St., N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404-526-5784
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga.,
Ala., Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1 N. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312-353-5756
(Mich.,Wis., Minn., II!., Ind.,
Ohio)
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street
Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75201
214-749-3842
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
-------
REGION
VII
VIM
IX
X
CHAIRMAN
Lynn Harrington
Stan Smith
Irving Terzich
John E. Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816-374-2725
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Suite 900
303-837-3961
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah,
N.D., S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415-556-7554
(Calif., Nev., Ariz., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
12006th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206-442-1266
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
Please send me the following publications at no charge and add my name to your mailing list for future
Technology Transfer publications. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
D Phosphorus Removal
D Carbon Adsorption
D Suspended Solids Removal
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
BROCHURES
D Physical-Chemical Treatment
D Phosphorus Removal
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
D Seattle, Washington METRO
D Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe
D Indian Creek Reservoir
HANDBOOK
D Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories
Please contact me regarding the loan of the following audio/visual material. (Check appropriate boxes)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
D Richardson, Texas, Project — Title
"Somebody around here must be
doing something good." (15 Min.)
D Phosphorus Removal (5 Min.)
VIDEOTAPE
D Carbon Adsorption (40 Min.)
Please forward information on the availability of the following Technology Transfer exhibits. (Check
appropriate boxes)
EXHIBITS
D Technology Transfer
D Phosphorus Removal
D Physical-Chemical Treatment
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
D Analytical Quality Control
Name
Street
City_
State
Zip
U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1972 —721 -396 (662)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEN
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
ADDRESS LABEL
-------
TECHNOLJ
TRANSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
DESIGN MANUALS TO BE AVAILABLE
AT WPCFCONFERENCE
Four design manuals describing the tech-
nology used for phosphorus removal, suspended
solids removal, activated carbon adsorption, and
for upgrading existing municipal wastewater
treatment plants will be available to the at-
tendees of the Water Pollution Control Federa-
tion's annual conference to be held in San
Francisco, Calif., Oct. 3 to Oct. 8, 1971. The
design manuals were developed through con-
tracts with various consulting engineering firms,
with considerable technical input from the staff
of the Environmental Protection Agency's
Cincinnati Advanced Waste Treatment Research
Laboratory. Contractors for the design manuals
were:
Black & Veatch — Phosphorus Removal
Burns & Roe — Suspended Solids Removal
Swindell-Dressier - Activated Carbon Adsorption
Roy F. Weston — Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
The design manuals can be obtained at no
cost at EPA's Technology Transfer exhibit
center in Brooks Hall of the Civic Auditorium.
Covers of Design Manuals
FHCffHCRLS
RBvO/M
SUSPB^I
SOUDS
REMCM
The exhibit will feature specially built displays
of flow diagrams illustrating Physical-Chemical
Treatment, Phosphorus Removal, and Upgrading
Existing Wastewater Plants. Additional displays
on Storm and Combined Sewers, and Federal-
State programs will also be part of EPA's
Technology Transfer exhibit.
These design manuals provide detailed infor-
mation on new treatment processes and techni-
ques, along with their associated costs. Informa-
tion is included on manpower requirements; case
histories of municipalities using these new
processes are also cited. It is felt that if engineers
utilize the recommendations contained in these
manuals when designing new or upgrading exist-
ing waste treatment facilities, a major impact
can be made on improving the quality of
wastewater treatment. In addition, the manuals
will provide guidance to engineers so that they
will be able to advise municipalities on the best
methods to meet present and future water
quality standards.
For those engineers who are unable to attend
the WPCF annual conference, the design
manuals will be available free of charge through
the Technology Transfer committee located in
their region. The names and addresses of the
regional committee chairmen are listed at the
end of this fact sheet.
CARBON
/^CSORPflON
UPGRADING
BONG
WSIEWAfK
R/NIS
-------
Additional design manuals on physical-
chemical treatment, nitrogen removal, and sewer
system corrosion control are planned for 1972
as part of a continuing series to transfer new
technology as soon as it becomes available. All
the design manuals will be constantly updated as
appropriate.
DESIGN SEMINAR PROGRAM CONTINUES
The Technology Transfer design seminar
program continued its tour through Charlottes-
ville, Va., on June 8 and 9, and Dallas, Tex., on
July 27 and 28, 1971. These seminars, planned
to transfer new research findings to consultant,
State, and local design engineers, included a first
half-day session covering the EPA construction
grants program and Federal Guidelines for
Design, Operation, and Maintenance of Waste-
water Treatment Facilities. Attendees were then
divided into three groups, with each group
participating in a separate technology subject
area that had been selected to answer the
specific needs of the region. The attendees
received detailed half-day sessions on each
specific subject. Each session included a brief
summary of the specific problem and a technical
discussion by a leading authority in the field,
followed by a case history of a municipality
using this new technology.
The Charlottesville, Va., seminar included
sessions on phosphorus removal, nitrogen
removal, and the use of activated carbon for
Working session at Dallas Seminar being addressed by Dr. Irwin
Kugelman from EPA's Advanced Waste Treatment Laboratory
increased organics removal. Feature presenta-
tions were given by Mr. James Laughlin of
Shrimek, Roming, Jacobs & Finklea, consulting
Russell Gulp addressing session on media filtration and carbon
adsorption
Albert C. Trakowski, Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Program Review, Office of Research Si Monitoring, being
introduced as speaker at Dallas Seminar luncheon
engineers on phosphorus removal; Dr. Clair
Sawyer of Metcalf & Eddy, consulting engineers
on nitrogen removal; and Mr. C. Donald Wood
of Swindell-Dressier Co., on the use of activated
carbon for increased organics removal. In addi-
tion, each session included a presentation
summarizing the specific problem presented by a
representative from EPA's Cincinnati Advanced
-------
Waste Treatment Research Laboratory. Case
histories of municipalities using this new tech-
nology were also presented. The examples cited
were: Rocky River, Ohio,for activated carbon;
the District of Columbia for nitrogen removal;
and Piscataway, Md.,for phosphorus removal.
The Dallas seminar followed the same general
pattern for these meetings, with technology
presented on phosphorus removal, nitrogen
removal, and media filtration and carbon treat-
ment. The sessions included presentations from
the following consulting engineers: Metcalf &
Eddy; Shimek, Roming, Jacobs & Finklea; and
Forest & Cotton. A highlight of the session on
media filtration and carbon treatment was the
presentation by Mr. Russell Gulp, South Lake
Tahoe, Calif.
VIDEO TAPES NOW AVAILABLE AT
EPA REGIONS
The Technology Transfer Program is pre-
paring an entire series of video tapes on waste-
water treatment process systems and techniques.
Each tape is presented by a leading authority in
that particular field. The first of this series,
which is now available, features Arthur Masse,
Chief of the Municipal Pollution Research
Program of the Advanced Waste Treatment
Research Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio. Mr.
Masse presents a technical discussion on acti-
vated carbon adsorption. Other video tapes are
being prepared and will feature such subjects as
phosphorus removal, upgrading existing treat-
ment plants, oxygen aeration, and nitrogen
removal.
EPA TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER BOOTHS TO
BE A FEATURE AT ST. LOUIS
The Annual Environmental meeting of the
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) will
show the latest technology developments in the
wastewater field with the EPA display booths.
This show will essentially be the same as the one
being introduced by EPA at the Water Pollution
Control Federation annual meeting in San
Francisco. Attendees of the ASCE meeting will
have the opportunity to sign up for the new
design manuals.
FROM THE REGIONS - NEW TECHNOLOGY
IN USE
Following are several brief reports submitted
by EPA's regional offices describing a few of the
successful projects which have been supported
by the Research and Monitoring Program of the
Environmental Protection Agency, or which
have been implemented as a result of new
technology developed and demonstrated by
EPA's Research Program. Specific information
concerning individual projects may be obtained
from the Technology Transfer committee in the
region where the project is located.
METRO SEATTLE, WASH. "Park Development
With Wet Digested Sludge" - Region X
Ultimate disposal of digested sludge is one of
the more difficult problems associated with
wastewater treatment. In July 1968, the
community of Seattle embarked on a program
to investigate and demonstrate the feasibility of
utilizing digested wet wastewater sludge as a
landfill material. The following requirements
were established for the sludge: it must have
proper settling characteristics; be capable of
reducing its high water content; exhibit no
undesirable interactions with underlying soil
layers; and possess acceptable structural charac-
teristics. This four-year study has examined all
the above requirements and found that the
digested wet wastewater sludge could provide
adequate landfill material. METRO began actual
fill operations this summer as a means of
developing an urban recreational park land by
filling an intertidal test area. This project is
scheduled for completion in July 1972.
METROPOLITAN SANITARY DISTRICT OF
GREATER CHICAGO. "Hanover Tertiary Plant
Studies" — Region IV
In 1965, the Board of Directors of the
District decided to devote one of their sewage
treatment facilities to developing advanced
waste treatment techniques for application to
pollution control requirements throughout the
District. The Hanover Plant was selected for this
purpose. A 1-million-gallon-per-day (mgd)
microstrainer system was placed in operation in
parallel with a 1 mgd rapid sand filter system to
evaluate effluent pollution procedures. The
effluent biochemical oxygen demand of an
average of 17.5 milligrams per liter (mg/l) has
been reduced to an average of 3 mg/l while
suspended solids have been reduced from 12
mg/l to 5 mg/l.
The microstrainer occupies about 1/20th the
space of a rapid sand filter plant and costs about
-------
1/10th as much. The microstrainer has been
found to be highly reliable and provides low
operating costs.
While this microstrainer is believed to be the
first of its size and type in this country
providing tertiary treatment, it will soon be
joined by a larger unit now under construction
by the District at their Northside Plant. The new
system will have 15 mgd capacity.
CITY OF MARLBOROUGH, MASS. "Use of
Metal Salts for Phosphorus Removal" - Region I
The City of Marlborough, Mass., is currently
having final plans and specifications prepared for
a two-stage activated sludge wastewater treat-
ment facility with a design capacity of 5.5 mgd.
Phosphorus is to be removed by the addition of
a metal salt to the effluent of the first-stage
aeration tanks. This plant will replace an existing
high-rate trickling filter plant which discharges
its effluent to a string of several small ponds and
brooks before discharging into the main water
course. The use of existing trickling filters for
such treatment was eliminated because of odor
problems, adverse effects of cold weather, and
the need to maintain the quality of the effluent
as high as possible. Metcalf & Eddy Engineers,
Inc., of Boston are designing the facilities.
Results of preliminary studies on this facility
along with Metcalf & Eddy's experience on
phosphorus removal were presented at the
Technology Transfer Design Seminar held in
Boston on May 26 and 27, 1971.
ROY WESTON, INC., "Design, Construction
and Operation of a Transportable Advanced
Waste Treatment Facility" - Region III
Through a contract with Roy Weston, Inc., a
relocatable wastewater treatment facility that is
designed to handle 75,000 gallons of wastewater
per day has been constructed and erected in
Fairfax County, Va. The purpose of this facility
is to provide an interim treatment system for
new subdivisions until the subdivision can tie
into the centralized treatment system. The unit
will then be relocated at another developing
subdivision so that homebuilding will not be
delayed because of inadequate waste treatment
systems. The treatment scheme utilizes flow
equilization, ferric chloride addition to primary
clarifiers for phosphorus removal, aeration,
biological denitrification, multimedia filtration,
and chlorination. The goals of this facility are to
achieve the proposed Potomac River effluent
standards for 1976, which are:
Biochemical Oxygen Demand —
0.04 lb/1,000 gal/day
Phosphorus - 0.0017 lb/1,000 gal/day
Nitrogen - 0.008 lb/1,000 gal/day
Start-up operations began this summer. Plans
are for the County of Fairfax to take over plant
operation in the fall of 1971. After operating
the plant for one year, and if funds are available,
it is planned to relocate the treatment facility
within Fairfax County.
YOUR LOCAL REGIONAL TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER COMMITTEEMEN ARE LISTED
ON THE NEXT TWO PAGES
-------
WHERE TO GET FURTHER INFORMATION
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects of the
Technology Transfer Program, contact your appropriate EPA Regional Technology Transfer
Committee Chairman from the list below:
Region
Chairman
States Covered
and Addresses
Lester Sutton
Rocco Ricci
Warren L. Carter
IV
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
V
Clarence Laskowski
VI
George Putnicki
VII
John R. Burgeson
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass.,
R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Boston, Mass. 02203
617-223-7210
(N.Y., N.J.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, N.Y. 10017
212-264-2525
(Pa., W.Va., Me., Va., Del.)
Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 12900
Philadelphia, Pa. 19108
215-597-9151
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga.,
Ala., Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree St., N.E.
Atlanta, Ga. 30309
404-526-5784
(Mich., Wis., Minn. III.,
Ind., Ohio)
Environmental Protection Agency
33 East Congress Pkwy.
Chicago, III. 60605
312-353-1056
(Tex., Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1114 Commerce Street
Dallas, Texas 75202
214-749-1821
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
911 Walnut Street
Kansas City, Mo. 64106
816-374-5616
-------
VIM Chris Timm (Mont., Wyo., N.Dak., S.Dak.,
Colo., Utah)
Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Office Bldg.
19th and Stout Streets
Denver, Colo. 80202
303-233-2336
IX John Merrell (Calif., Nev., Ariz.)
Environmental Protection Agency
760 Market Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
415-556-5876
X John F. Osborn (Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
Environmental Protection Agency
Pittock Block
921 S.W. Washington Street
Portland, Ore. 97205
503-226-3914
GPO 918-183
-------
July I
1971
TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA BOOTH ON THE MOVE
The EPA Technology Transfer Display Booth
is on the road again. Leaving Washington the end
of May, it made quite an impression at the
American Chemical Society Regional meeting at
the University of Cincinnati, Ohio, from June 6
through the 8th. From here it is scheduled for
the Ohio State Fair in Columbus, Ohio, where it
will be displayed as part of the Ohio Department
of Natural Resources. The fair, one of the
country's largest, is held during the latter part of
August. Below is a black and white photo of the
attractive moving color lighted booth. This
display available upon request, subject to prior
booking.
MORE BOOTHS ON THE WAY
The Technology Transfer Program of the EPA
is having a series of three new large displays
constructed, illustrating modern technology as
applied to new or existing wastewater treatment
plants. Among the subjects to be covered are:
Physical-Chemical treatment; Phosphorus
Removal; and Upgrading Existing Plants. Pre-
miere will be at WPCF Annual Conference in
October at San Francisco.
DESIGN SEMINARS HIGHLY REGARDED
Critiques of this series indicate all attending
found the sessions very helpful. Technology
Transfer design seminars for wastewater treat-
ment facilities were conducted, during the
second quarter of the year in Cleveland, Ohio,
and Boston, Mass.
These were the second and third seminars
respectively, in a series that will be presented by
the Environmental Protection Agency Tech-
nology Transfer Program during the coming
three years. The seminars were oriented towards
State, municipal, and consulting engineers
involved in design of wastewater treatment
facilities. Each of the seminars included a
half-day general session covering the EPA con-
struction grants program and the Federal Guide-
lines for Design, Operation and Maintenance of
Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The attendees
were then divided into three groups with each
group attending three half-day sessions, each
covering a separate technology subject area.
The Cleveland seminar (April 22-23} included
sessions on phosphorus removal, activated
carbon adsorption, and nitrogen rempval. The
basic presentations at each session were given by
-------
prominent qualified consulting engineers: phos-
phorus removal by Mr. James Laughlin of
Shimek, Homing, Jacobs & Finklea; activated
carbon adsorption by Dr. Joseph Skelly of
Swindell-Dressier; and nitrogen removal by Dr.
Claire Sawyer of Metcalf & Eddy. Each session
also included a presentation by a representative
of the EPA Advanced Waste Treatment Research
Laboratory in Cincinnati, and an analysis of a
specific project incorporating the subject tech-
nology. The projects analyzed were Grand
Rapids, Michigan, for phosphorus removal,
Rocky River, Ohio, for activated carbon, and
the District of Columbia for nitrogen removal.
The Boston seminar (May 26-27) used the
same general format as described for Cleveland.
The three technology subject areas were phos-
phorus removal, upgrading existing treatment
plants, and combined sewer overflows. Basic
Metropolitan District Commission, Storm Detention
and Chlorination.
presentations were by representatives from Roy
F. Weston and Metcalf & Eddy with additional
information once again presented by representa-
tives from EPA. The combined sewer overflow
regulation and infiltration control by Mr.
Richard Sullivan of the American Public Works
Association, and a field trip to the combined
sewer overflow detention and chlorination
station near the Boston University Bridge an
EPA demonstration grant project. The BU
Bridge project, with a capacity of 233 mgd, was
an impressive example of new technology being
applied on a practical full-scale basis. Future
seminars will also include visits to operating
projects whenever possible.
A fourth seminar will be conducted June 8-9
in Charlottesville, Virginia. Details of the
Charlottesville sessions plus others held during
the coming three months will be included in the
next newsletter. (A sample program follows on
page 3.)
Dr. Clair N. Sawyer of Metcalf & Eddy
at the Statler Building, Boston, Massachusetts.
Combined Sewers Workshop.
-------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 1971
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
Technology Transfer Program
DESIGN SEMINAR
for
Waste Water
Treatment Facilities
MAY 26-27, 1971
PARKER HOUSE
60 SCHOOL STREET
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
8:00 - 9:00 AM
REGISTRATION
9:00 AM
WELCOME
Lester M. Klashman, Regional Director
Environmental Protection Agency
9:05 AM
EPA's TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PROGRAM
Herbert R. Pahren, Deputy Regional Director
Environmental Protection Agency
9:20 AM
THE FEDERAL-STATE EFFORT.
NEW TECHNIQUES TO MEET WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS
Thomas C. McMahon, Director
Massachusetts Division of Water Pollution
Control
9:40 AM
COFFEE BREAK
10:00 AM
EPA's CONSTRUCTION GRANTS PROGRAM
Federal Design Guidelines; Regulations and
Policies
Lester A. Sutton, Director
Facilities Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
11:30 AM
ASSIGNMENT OF GROUPS FOR WORKSHOP
SESSIONS
Groups A, B and C
11:45 AM
LUNCH
1:00 - 5:00 PM
WORKSHOPS
6:00 PM
RECEPTION (Ladies Welcome)
7:00 PM
DINNER
(Ladies Welcome)
SPEAKER: Joseph B. Hanlon, Vice Pres-
ident
Camp, Dresser & McKee
Consulting Engineers
THURSDAY, MAY 27, 1971
8:30 AM - 12:15 PM 12:15 PM - 1:15 PM
WORKSHOPS LUNCH
1:15 PM - 5:00 PM
WORKSHOPS
-------
WORKSHOPS SCHEDULE
WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 1971 PM
THURSDAY, MAY 27, 1971 (AM) (PM)
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS
HAWTHORNE ROOM
GROUP A
GROUP B
GROUP C
Wednesday PM
Thursday AM
Thursday PM
1:00 PM - (8:30 AM) - (1:15 PM)
CURRENT STATUS ON CONTROL AND TREAT-
MENT OF STORM AND COMBINED SEWER
OVERFLOWS.
Edmund J. Struzeski, Chief
Storm and Combined Sewer Overflows Section
Edison Water Quality Laboratory
Environmental Protection Agency
Edison, New Jersey
1:25 PM - (8:55 AM) - (1:40 PM)
OVERFLOW REGULATORS - INFILTRATION
CONTROL.
Richard H. Sullivan, Assistant Executive
Director
American Public Works Association
Chicago, Illinois
2:25 PM - (9:55 AM) - (2:40 PM)
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT COMMISSION
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW DETENTION
AND CHLORINATION STATION.
K. Peter Devenis, Vice President
Charles A. Maguire & Associates Inc.
Boston, Massachusetts
2:45 PM - 5:00 PM
(10:15 AM - 12:15 PM) - (3:00 PM - 5:00 PM)
FIELD TRIP TO MDC STATION
Francis T. Bergin, Chief Engineer
Boston, Massachusetts
UPGRADING OF EXISTING
WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANTS
ROOM 164-166
GROUP A Thursday AM
GROUP B Thursday PM
GROUP C Wednesday PM
1:00 PM - (8:30 AM) - (1:15 PM)
INTRODUCTION
John M. Smith
Advanced Waste Treatment Research
Laboratory
Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio
1:20 PM - (8:50 AM) - (1:35 PM)
STATE OF THE ART
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
West Chester, Pennsylvania
3:10 PM - (10:40 AM) - (3:25 PM)
COFFEE BREAK
3:25 PM - (10:55 AM) - (3:40 PM)
UPGRADING OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANTS
Alfred W. West
Field Investigations Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio
4:15 PM - (11:45 AM) - (4:30 PM)
DISCUSSION
-------
PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL
ROOM 160-162
GROUP A Thursday PM
GROUP B Wednesday PM
GROUP C Thursday PM
1:00 PM - (8:30 AM) - (1:15 PM)
STATE OF THE ART
Clair N. Sawyer, Vice-President and
Director of Research
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.
Boston, Massachusetts
2:00 PM - (9:30 AM) - (2:15 PM)
GENERAL INFORMATION ON PHOSPHORUS
REMOVAL
Advanced Waste Treatment Research
Laboratory
Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio
2:45 PM - (10:15 AM) - (3:00 PM)
COFFEE BREAK
3:00 PM - (10:30 AM) - (3:15 PM)
THE MARLBOROUGH WASTE WATER
TREATMENT PLANT
David A. Duncan, Vice President
Frank C. Sampson, Project Engineer
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.
Boston, Massachusetts
4:15 PM - (11:45 AM) - (4:30 PM)
DISCUSSION
PHYSICAL
CHEMICAL TREATMENT
As water quality standards become more
stringent, cities and communities across the
country are being faced with the problem of
upgrading existing wastewater treatment facili-
ties, and some are having to decide whether to
build additional facilities or completely new
facilities. To arrive at a responsible decision,
based on practical technology and the eco-
nomics involved, decision makers, planners and
engineers must look at all available new tech-
nology and possibilities of alternate solutions to
the problem.
It has become apparent that conventional
biological treatment systems do not provide the
best solution to all wastewater problems, espe-
cially when more stringent water quality stan-
dards continue to be applied. One of the new
technologies is the independent PHYSICAL-
CHEMICAL TREATMENT PROCESS. This
process is an alternate to conventional biological
treatment that is particularly attractive when
high levels of treatment, including phosphorus
and other nutrient removal is required and
land area is limited. The physical-chemical
process does not utilize bacteria, but rather
chemicals are used to facilitate removal of most
of the nutrients and solids. In this process,
following clarification in the physical-chemical
treatment sequence, granular carbon and multi-
media filtration are used to remove colloidal and
dissolved materials through adsorption and fil-
tration. A typical flow diagram of an indepen-
dent physical-chemical (IPC) treatment system is
shown. However, unit process making up this
IPC can be utilized in existing plants.
Components of the P-C treatment system
includes:
Pre-Treatment—Preliminary screening and set-
tling of floating debris, sand, grit, and other
large particles.
Clarification—This unit process is known as
coagulation-sedimentation. In this process alum,
lime or ferric salts and in some cases poly-
-------
FIGURE 1
TYPICAL FLOW DIAGRAM, PHYSICAL CHEMICAL TREATMENT
Figure 1
••
Screenings
Grit
\
i
Sludge
System
\
Multi-media
Filter
1 Sludge Thickening!
X
Backwash waste
ncineration 1
Ash
Carbon Disinfection
Adsorption Effluent
* * *
Carbon
Regeneration
electrolytes are added to the sewage as it comes
from the pre-treatment unit. The sewage passes
through a flash mix system into a flocculation
zone where the chemicals cause the smaller
particles to floe together into masses that settle
easily. The clarifier may be of either horizontal
flow or up flow design.
Filtration—This unit process consists of passing
the treated sewage through beds of sand, or
multimedia such as sand and anthracite coal for
complete removal of the suspended solids.
This unit process can be ahead of, or behind the
adsorption unit according to design and treat-
ment objectives.
Adsorption—This unit process removes the col-
loidal organic and some of the dissolved organic
solids which cannot be removed by the clarifica-
tion and filtration stages. The adsorption process
consists of passing the treated wastewater
through a bed of activated carbon granules.
When the partially treated wastewater comes
into contact with the carbon, the organics attach
themselves to the surface of the carbon granules
and thus are removed from the stream. After a
period of time, the carbon becomes laden with
organics and must be regenerated to again
become active and remove the organics. Regen-
eration consists of burning off the adsorbed
sewage organic carbon under controlled condi-
tions without seriously altering the basic acti-
vated carbon granules.
Disinfection—This unit process is utilized to
destroy pathogenic organisms and normally
employs chlorine with a contact chamber to
provide detention time for adequate removal.
The treatment performance of various sewage
treatment systems is shown in Table 1. It can be
seen that the physical-chemical methods removal
are better than conventional methods of treat-
ment, for removal of both organics and phos-
phorus.
TABLE 1
Treatment Performance
Sewage Treatment Systems
Removal Efficiency
Process Train
Biological
Biological-Chemical
Physical-Chemical
Organics
85-95
85-95
95-99
Phosphorus
25-40
35-90
85-99
COSTS
Physical-chemical treatment undoubtedly
costs more than conventional treatment but the
systems cannot be compared directly, as one
provides a level of treatment that the other
cannot match. The chart in Figure 2 below
shows the approximate national average costs,
including plant amortization and operation and
maintenance for typical physical-chemical treat-
ment plants. The graph in Figure 2 is a general
guide and is subject to considerable variation
due to geographic locations, labor rates, and site
conditions.
-------
FIGURE 2
25 60 75
PLANT SIZE (MILLION GALLONS PER DAY)
The approximate capital and Operation and
Maintenance costs for a 50 million gallon per
day physical-chemical treatment plant are shown
in Table 2.
The 50 mgd physical-chemical treatment
plant example presented in Table 2 is based on a
lime process, but utilization of other coagulants,
such as ferric salts, alum and other aluminum
salts should also be considered. In some cases,
the other coagulants may be preferred over lime.
The foregoing has assumed new construction,
or an existing plant that may easily be converted
to independent physical-chemical treatment.
The use of any or all of the unit processes in
conjunction with existing biological secondary
treatment plants (tertiary treatment) certainly
should be considered as an alternate when plant
upgrading becomes necessary and a biological
treatment plant exists.
P-C is Ready Now!
Technology for design, construction and
operation of physical-chemical treatment plants
that will provide high quality effluents is con-
sidered to be well developed and ready for
widespread application. The following table is a
partial list of full-scale and pilot plants now
being planned, designed, constructed, or in
operation.
Location IPC Size (MGD)
Niagara Falls, New York 60
Garland, Texas 30
Fitchburg, Mass. 15
Rocky River, Ohio 10
Cleveland, Ohio 50
Cortland, New York 10
Owasso, Michigan 6
Paine sville, Ohio 5
7.5
25
2
2
5
5
Tertiary
South Lake Tahoe, Calif.
Piscataway, Maryland
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Santee, Calif.
Hobbs, New Mexico
Hatfield Township, Perm.
Large Scale
Pilot Facilities
Blue Plains, Wash. D.C.
Salt Lake City, Utah, EIMCO
Rocky River, Ohio
NIAGARA FALLS, N.Y.: The design for a new
61.9 MGD physical-chemical treatment plant for
this municipality is progressing on schedule.
According to the Consulting Engineers on the
Process
Pre-Treatment
Lime Coagulation &
Recalcination
Filtration
Carbon Adsorption
Disinfection
Total
TABLE 2
Physical-Chemical 50
MGD System Estimated Costs**
Capital
Millions of $
$ 412,000
6,200,000
1,850,000
9,350,000
280,000
18,092,000
Amortization
4/1000 gal
0.15
4.20
0.75
4.20
0.14
9.45
Operation &
Maintenance
0.29
2.70
1.26
5.60
0.37
10.22
Total
0.44
2.02
6.90
9.80
0.51
19.67
**Based on November, 1970 Costs
-------
project, Camp, Dresser & McKee of Boston, this
type of treatment was selected by Niagara Falls
because of the large concentrations of industrial
wastes found in the city's wastewater streams to
the treatment plant. The wastes were of such
nature and toxicity that it would have been
impossible to treat in the conventional biological
system.
ROCKY RIVER, OHIO: The current status of
the Rocky River Wastewater Plant, Cuyahoga
County, Ohio, is that plans and specifications
have been revised and are now ready for a public
hearing. The city is presently negotiating with
the State of Ohio for additional funds. The
project is ready to go out for bids.
The new plant will demonstrate physical-
chemical treatment at a scale 10 MGD. Conven-
tional biological activated sludge treatment will
not be used. Polymer flocculants will be used for
chemical clarification; phosphate removal will be
effected by use of various coagulants and coagu-
lant aids. The primary clarified effluent will be
passed through columns of activated carbon for
filtration of suspended solids and adsorption of
organic pollutants.
GARLAND, TEXAS: Typical of many other
cities throughout the country today, Garland is
faced with the necessity of expanding it's
wastewater treatment facilities. It is necessary to
expand the plant to a hydraulic capacity of 30
million gallons per day and to provide treatment
capabilities for reducing both the BOD and
suspended solids to a concentration of less than
10 mg/l.
To meet these objectives the physical-chemical
treatment process has been selected. The City of
Garland was influenced further toward adoption
of this type of treatment because the plant
would only require about 30% of the land
required by conventional treatment plants and
would provide superior treatment as well. As a
result of the superior effluent available from the
new plant the community anticipates that the
effluent will be utilized by industry.
TUALATIN, OREGON: The City of Tualatin is
situated on a small tributary of the Willamette
River and water quality requirements are under-
standably high. To meet these requirements, the
city of Tualatin decided to provide tertiary
treatment in a rather unconventional manner. An
aerated lagoon provides biological secondary
treatment and it is followed by a tertiary system
that incorporates flocculation, settling basin,
filtration and chlorination. The tertiary system
is operated during the critical six months of low
stream flow, and secondary treatment is pro-
vided for the remainder of the year. Alum is be-
ing used as a coagulant.
PAINESVILLE, OHIO: The community has
industrial waste contributions including
effluents from oil additive and chemical pro-
ducers that result in a combined waste that is
difficult to treat biologically. The new 5 mgd
plant will utilize chemical coagulation and
clarification, coarse sand filtration, granular car-
bon adsorption and regeneration, and chlorina-
tion. The city is presently negotiating for
additional funds and is ready to go out for bids.
-------
WHERE TO GET FURTHER INFORMATION
In order to get details on items appearing in
this publication, or any other aspects of the
Technology Transfer Program, contact your
appropriate EPA Regional Technology Transfer
Committee Chairman from the list below:
Region
Chairman
States Covered
and Addresses
Lester Sutton
Rocco Ricci
Warren L. Carter
IV
Asa G. Foster
(Maine, N. Hampshire, Vermont,
Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Boston, Mass. 02203
617-223-7210
(N.Y., N.J.)
Environmental Protection Agency
22 Federal Plaza
New York, N.Y. 10017
201-548-3441
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Va., Delaware)
Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 12900
Philadelphia, Pa. 19108
703-296-1275
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree St., N.E.
Atlanta, Ga. 30309
404-526-5784
V
Clarence Laskowski
VI
George Putnicki
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind.,
Ohio)
Environmental Protection Agency
33 East Congress Pkwy.
Chicago, III. 60605
312-353-1056
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1114 Commerce Street
Dallas, Texas 75202
214-749-1821
-------
Region
Chairman
States Covered
and Addresses
VII
John R. Burgeson
VIII
Chris Timm
IX
John Merrell
X
John F. Osborn
(Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
911 Walnut Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
816-374-5593
(Mont., Wyo., N. Dak., S. Dak.,
Colo., Utah)
Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Office Bldg.
19th and Stout Streets
Denver, Colorado 80202
303-233-2336
(Calif., Nev., Ariz.)
Environmental Protection Agency
760 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94102
415-556-5876
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
Environmental Protection Agency
Pittock Block
921 S.W. Washington Street
Portland, Oregon 97205
503-226-3914
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • 1971 O - 438-054
-------
&*-..'
-------
-------
Vol. 1 No. 1
March 1971
1'ho Bi id;',i'Htjtv.'ft'i) lv'"-,t\\!('h ;>nd (Js^
AOEHCY « WATT-H: O.UA'- '""/ Of"F5
THE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER NEWSLETTER
This is the first issue of the Technology Transfer Newsletter.
The early issues of the Newsletter are now planned for internal
EPA circulation to familiarize appropriate personnel with the
Technology Transfer Program. Later issues will be widely circu-
lated outside of the EPA organization. The plan at this time is
to feature one aspect of advanced technology per issue to have
maximum impact. Additional features, such as summarized fact
sheets, and brief highlights of current water pollution control
technology will be added. Input and suggestions from all Regions
are encouraged.
-------
WHAT IS TECIINOLOGY TRANSFER?
In the past, there has been a gap between the development and technical
demonstration of our agency's research, development and demonstration
results, and their actual acceptance and implementation. . The goal of
Technology Transfer is to bridge this gap. The initial effort will be
to transfer advances in technology demonstrated by successful research
demonstration projects into the current generation of waste treatment
facilities. Our first goal will be to have the maximum impact upon
the President's multi-billion dollar program for construction of
treatment facilities, including combined sewage, in order to meet pre-
sent Water Quality Standards by 1976.
Detailed plans are being formulated for the technology transfer program.
Following is a summary of some of our tentative plans:
1. A series of technical seminar/workshops will be conducted
which will be orientated toward municipal, State, and private consulting
engineers emphasizing the practical application of new technology, i.e.,
design criteria and parameters, capital and operating costs, results of
research demonstrations, experience, and problems. One seminar is
tentatively planned for each region in 1971.
2. A series of administrative seminar/workshops will be held which
will be oriented toward administrative decision-makers in the water
pollution control field (e.g., directors of,publie works, heads of
municipal and State water pollution control agencies, city council
members, etc.). These workshops will be aimed at convincing responsible
administrators that new technology is available for full scale
application and can be effectively and efficiently used to meet water
quality standards. Both the technical and administrative seminar/workshops
will be slanted toward the specific technology needs of each region.
3. Design manuals on suspended solids removal, activated carbon
adsorption, phosphorus removal, and upgrading of secondary treatment
will be completed in 1971 and incorporated into seminar/workshops.
4. Technical bulletins will be issued to supplement the Federal
Design Guidelines published in October 1970. Successful Research and
Development demonstration grant projects, located throughout the
country, will be exploited to show actual implementation of advanced
technology and transfer the experience gained at these projects.
5. A campaign will be initiated to reach conservation groups and
the general public.
-------
The Technology Transfer Program planning and Implementation will be
basically administered by a Headquarters Working Committee, and
Regional Working Committees, comprised of representatives from R&D,
Facilities Construction and Operations, Manpower Training, and
Public Affairs. The Regional Working Committees will insure that
the program will meet their specific regional needs. In addition, an
advisory board has been appointed to review the program and assist in
the overall direction.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ACTION GROUPS
The technology transfer action groups have been selected and members are
available for obtaining information on the program. The committees are
as follows:
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ADVISORY BOARD
Robert E. Crowe - (Exec. Sec.), HQ WQO
John M. Rademacher, Interim Regional Coordinator, Region VII
Francis Mayo, Interim Regional Coordinator, Region V
Paul DeFalco, Interim Regional Coordinator, Region IX
Frank Middleton, Dir., Advanced Waste Treatment Research Lab.
Thomas J. Charlton, HQ WQO
Ralph Palange, HQ WQO, Facilities Const. & Oprs.
HEADQUARTERS WORKING COMMITTEE
Robert Madancy - (Chairman), Research and Development
Denis Lussier - Facilities Const. & Cpers.
Kenneth Hay - Manpower Training
Arthur Daitch - Public Affairs•
Patrick Tobin - Research and Development
REGIONAL WORKING COMMITTEES
Middle Atlantic
Warren L. Carter - (Chairman)s Facilities Const. & Oprs.
Ray Thacker - Research and Development
Charles F. Kauffman - Manpower Training
James D. Bowyer - Public Affairs
Great Lakes
Clarence Laskowski - (Chairman), Facilities Const. & Oprs.
Clifford Risley - Research and Development
Chester Shura - Manpower Training
Frank Corrado - Public Affairs
Pacific Northwest
John E. Osborn - (Chairman), Facilities Const. & Oprs.
John Barich - Research and Development
Herbert Simison, Public Affairs
-------
Ohio Basin
Gilbert Gigllotti - (Chairman), Public Affairs
Robert L. Peder - Research and Development
William H. Hormberg - Facilities Const. & Oprs.
Harold Jeter - Manpower Training
Keith 0. Schwab - Tech. Programs
Missouri Basin
John R. Burgeson - (Chairman), Facilities Const. & Cprs.
Otmar 0. Olson - Research and Development
John L. Coakley - Manpower Training
Randall S. Jessee - Public Affairs
Southeast
Asa G. Foster - (Chairman), Facilities Const. & Oprs.
Edmond Lomasney - Research and Development
Robert Roth - Manpower Training
Charles Pou - Public Affairs
South Central
George Putnicki - (Chairman), Research and Development
Dick Smith - Facilities Const. & Oprs.
Arthur Gurley - Manpower Training
Eddie Lee - Public Affairs
Pacific Southwest
Richard O'Connell - (Chairman)
Vern W. Tenney
Irving M. Terrich
Louis W. Jefferson
Northeast
Lester Sutton - (Chairman), Facilities Const. & Oprs.
Edgar L. Bernard, Manpower Training
Hend Gorchev - Research and Development
Guy St. Andre - Facilities Const. & Oprs.
Kenneth Grotty, Public Affairs
-------
PHOSPHORUS
Phosphorus is considered by many'investigators to be the key nutrient
in breaking the eutrophication cycle, however, conventional secondary
plants are not efficient in phosphorus removal. Phosphorus enters a
plant in the highest oxidized form. But, no common biological systems
reduce phosphorus; therefore, it cannot be liberated in a gaseous form
as nitrogen, carbon, and sulfur are.
If we are to reliably remove phosphorus from wastewaters on a sustained
basis, we must choose chemical or chemical-biological methods. Strict
chemical methods precipitate phosphorus either in the primary settler
or in a tertiary clarifier. The chemical-biological method employs
direct chemical dosing to the aerator of an activated sludge plant.
The chemically-bound precipitated phosphorus is removed with the sludge
and is not resolubilized during sludge disposal unless the pH is
substantially lowered. Effluent phosphorus concentrations of 1-2 mg/1
as P can be regularly achieved if the precipitation is accomplished in
the primary or secondary portions of the plant. Tertiary lime clari-
fication followed by filtration can lower the concentration to less
than 0.5 mg/1.
Phosphorus can be removed by chemical treatment of raw sewage, mineral
addition to the aerator in the activated sludge process, and tertiary
clarification. Careful study of each design problem is required to
determine treatment location and choice of chemicals. Iron coagulants,
aluminum coagulants, and lime are commonly utilized. Iron coagulants
are ferrous chloride, commercial or waste pickle liquor, and ferric
chloride. Aluminum is added in the form of alum or sodium aluminate.
Lime treatment involves use of single-stage or two-stage systems.
Factors affecting choice of chemicals are influent phosphorus level,
effluent discharge standard, wastewater characteristics such as
alkalinity, plant size, chemical costs including transportation, sludge
handling facilities, ultimate sludge disposal alternatives, and other
processes utilized.
Phosphorus can be removed from raw sewage by the addition of iron,
lime, and polymers. Iron salts such as ferrous chloride are used at
dosages from 1 to 2.5 mg of iron per mg of soluble phosphate.
Chemical costs are about 1.5
-------
R&D studies on phosphorus removal in the primary are listed below:
Flow
mgd Chemical
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 110 Pickle Liquor
Grand Rapids, Mich. 4 5 Iron
Benton Harbor, Mich. 10 Iron
Mentor, Ohio 4 Pickle Liquor
Lake Odessa, Mich. 1 Iron
Grayling, Mich. ' 1 Iron
Texas City, Texas 1 Iron
By mineral addition to the aerator, phosphorus concentration in
activated sludge process influent can be reduced from 10 to 2 mg/1
or less by adding 1 to 2 parts of aluminum for each part of phosphorus.
Chemical costs are about 3<£/1000 gal. for sodium aluminate. Costs
including amortization of chemical feeders and maintenance are ^4 to
5
-------
PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL
PARTIAL LIST OF FULL-SCALE PLANTS
^eatment in Primary
Detroit, Michigan
Rochester, New York
lay City, Michigan
x^ky River, Ohio
veland, Ohio
so, Michigan
tsville, Ohio
Held Township, Pa.
Vfy<- Michigan
Michigan
Mineral.
on to Aerator
Seattle , ig
Pomo^3-' /jton
Xenia, °"^a*
^anassas ,
Texas City,,
v nf Se>.
TreatT(ent^oi___
Flow
mgd Chemical
600 Iron
100 Lime
12 Iron
10 Iron
10 Iron
6 Lime
5 Iron
5 Lime
4 Lime
14 Iron
30 Iron
20 Iron & Alum
2 Alum & Sod. Al.
1 Alum
1 Alum & Sod. Al.
1 Iron & Alum
^ Lake Tahcfluent
South ^ Har:y
SlorS^r^. 7.5 Lime
Coio1-0- Ca3j.fornic 5 Lung
Safitee , rnexas
TT*"\ TjSLps 9
*•"• '^ v Texa^
2 Lime
2 . Iron & Alum
e
New Mexico 5
, rf ^, P^
Status
Design
Const.
Const.
Bids Taken
Design
Design
Design
Design
Const.
Design
Design
Design
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
On-Stream
Const.
Const.
On-Stream
* Short term
studies
-------
-------
-------
-------
For additional information on the Technology Transfer Program or for
additional details on the feature subject, write:
Technology Transfer
Environmental Protection Agency
Water Quality Office
Washington, D. C. 202^12
-------
ECHNOLOGY
RAIMSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OCTOBER 1375
NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER DESIGN
MANUAL FOR NITROGEN CONTROL TO BE
INTRODUCED AT WPCF CONFERENCE
CD A Technology Transfer will participate in
*• r n the 48th Annual Conference of the Water
Pollution Control Federation being held October
5-10, 1975 in Miami Beach, Florida. This will be
the fifth consecutive year that Technology
Transfer has participated in the WPCF Annual
Conference with a major exhibit and new
publication.
The new Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual for Nitrogen Control will be introduced
and distributed at the WPCF Miami Beach
meeting. The new nitrogen manual, which will
be the latest in the familiar blue binder series,
covers all aspects of nitrification and nitrogen
removal. The manual was prepared by Brown
and Caldwell Consulting Engineers under the
direction of Dr. Denny Parker with the
physical-chemical sections by Gordon Gulp of
Gulp, Wesner, and Gulp. The manual manuscript
was also extensively reviewed by Dr. Clair
Sawyer and Dr. Perry McCarty as well as
members of EPA's research and Technology
Transfer staffs.
The manual is comprehensive in nature and
includes the following major categories:
Nitrogenous Materials in the Environ-
ment and the Need for Control in
Wastewater Effluents
Process Chemistry and Biochemistry of
Nitrification and Denitrification
Biological Nitrification
Biological Denitrification
Breakpoint Chlorination
Selective In-Exchange for Ammonium
Removal
Air Stripping for Nitrogen Removal
Total System Design
Host region for this year's conference will be
EPA's Region IV. Jack E. Ravan, the Regional
Administrator, will be present for the confer-
ence, as will Asa Foster, Chairman of the Region
IV Technology Transfer Committee. It is ex-
pected that the WPCF Conference this year will
draw a record attendance of the nation's top
pollution experts.
SECOND NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
INDIVIDUAL ONSITE WASTEWATER
SYSTEMS
Technology Transfer, in conjunction with the
National Sanitation Foundation, is co-
sponsoring the Second National Conference on
Individual Onsite Wastewater Systems to be held
November 5, 6, and 7, 1975 in Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
Refer to inside last page of this publication for
complete listing of current Technology Transfer
publications.
-------
The purpose of this Conference is to present a
comprehensive state-of-the-art review of the
efficiency of individual onsite wastewater sys-
tems, and develop recommendations for related
current and future research activities. Topics to
be discussed include: Impact of Onsite Systems
on Land Development; Newer Methods of On-
site Treatment and Disposal; Effects of Effluents
on Groundwater; and Design Standards for
Individual Onsite Wastewater Systems. The Key-
note Address will be given by Mr. Joe G. Moore,
Program Director, National Commission on
Water Quality, Washington, D.C.
Additional information on this year's confer-
ence can be obtained from Dr. Nina McClelland,
National Sanitation Foundation, P.O. Box 1468,
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106.
NEW MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATION-
"AIR POLLUTION ASPECTS OF SLUDGE
INCINERATION"
A new Technology Transfer municipal semi-
nar publication has been published and is now
available for distribution. The publication, en-
titled "Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incinera-
tion," is partially extracted from the Tech-
nology Transfer Process Design Manual for
Sludge Treatment and Disposal and additional
case histories have been included. This publica-
tion discusses particulate matter, metals, gaseous
pollutants, and organics and case histories on
Air Pollution
Aspects of
Sludge Incineration
EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication
Livermore, Calif., and Palo Alto, Calif.
, For your copy of this publication, use the
order blank at the back of this newsletter.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER LAND
TREATMENT SEMINAR SERIES
Four additional Technology Transfer design
seminars on "Land Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater Effluents" have been concluded in
various areas of the country since May 1975.
These were presented in Portland, Oregon, May
28-29; New York, N.Y., June 3-4; Denver, Colo.,
Sept. 4-5; and Kansas City, Mo., Sept. 9-10,
1975. Interest is continuing to be extremely
high in this seminar series with attendance at the
seminars varying from 250 to 350 engineers,
state and federal regulatory personnel, and
municipal engineers.
Key presentations have been given by Charles
Pound, Metcalf & Eddy, Palo Alto, Calif.;
Morgan Powell, CH2 M Hill, Denver, Colo.;
Frank D'ltri, Michigan State University, Lansing,
Michigan; Y. A. Demirjian, Muskegon County,
Michigan; and Gordon Gulp, Culp/Wesner/Culp,
El Dorado Hills, California.
Future Seminars in the land treatment series
are scheduled as follows:
Region Location
III Philadelphia, Pa.
V Chicago, III.
VI Albuquerque, N.f
I Boston, Mass.
Date
Oct. 23-24, 1975
Nov. 5-6, 1975
Nov. 11-12, 1975
Nov. 24-25, 1975
For additional details contact the appropriate
Technology Transfer Regional Chairman, as
listed in the back of this newsletter.
jDr. Beatrice Willard, Member of the Council on Environmental
Quality in the Office of the President, addressing the Plenary
Session at the Second National Conference on Complete
WateReuse that was held May 4-8, 1975, in Chicago.
-------
Various shots of participants and speakers at Land Treatment Seminars.
-------
SEMINARS ON POLLUTION ABATEMENT IN
THE FRUIT & VEGETABLE INDUSTRY
Technology Transfer, in association with the
Food Processing Institute, will be conducting
five Fruit & Vegetable Seminars this Fiscal Year.
Present plans are to hold the first of the
Seminars, scheduled for December, in Atlanta.
This will be followed by Seminars in Portland,
Oregon; Stockton, California; Chicago, Illinois;
and Syracuse, New York, all to be held in the
early spring.
The Seminar series will be directed towards
plant engineers, managers and owners of fruit
and vegetable processing facilities who have the
responsibility of selecting pollution control
systems.
Emphasis will be placed on information con-
cerning proven control measures which are
currently available to fruit and vegetable proc-
essors. The relative advantages, operating charac-
teristics, and cost information on control
methods will be presented where possible. The
presentation will be supported with material on
case studies when applicable.
Prior to the Treatment and In-Plant Technol-
ogy Sessions, the latest environmental legislation
will be discussed by the appropriate regulatory
personnel. Following these technical sessions, an
informative discussion on selecting the Optimum
Financial Strategy for Pollution Control invest-
ment will be presented. This session has had a
positive response in past seminars. A panel
discussion, made up of program participants,
will be held before adjourning.
LAND TREATMENT
OF MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER
EFFLUENTS
(l-r) Walton Farr, Director, Dept. of Water, City of Dayton,
Ohio; Dr. A. P. Black, Black, Crow and Eidsness; and Nicholas
Lailas, Technology Transfer, at Technology Transfer exhibit at
95th AWWA Conference, Minneapolis, Minn., June 8-13, 1975.
I. GENERAL
Land application of municipal wastewater
effluents is now a viable alternative for munici-
pal wastewater treatment. The Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
requires that land treatment be given full and
adequate consideration in the 201 Facilities
Plans for all projects awarded after June 30,
1974.
The Technology Transfer Design Seminar
Series was developed to provide federal, state,
and municipal engineers and the consulting
engineering profession with the latest design
information and case histories to properly design
information and case histories to properly design
and evaluate land treatment as a treatment
alternative.*
II. INTRODUCTION
Land application of municipal wastewaters or
treated effluents entails the use of plants, soil
surfaces and the soil martix for removal of
certain wastewater constituents. Land applica-
tion systems may be used not only for treat-
ment, but also for a combination of water reuse
and disposal, with the renovated water either
discharged to the groundwater or collected for
discharge to surface waters.
Table 1 is a representative list of the possible
design considerations that may apply to most
land application systems. A wide range of design
possibilities exist due to specific site character-
istics, climate, treatment requirements, and
project objectives.
Because land application by nature must be
site specific, and because a wide range of design
possibilities is available, the designer must rely
on a comprehensive understanding of the prin-
ciples involved, site evaluation by specialists, and
his own ingenuity. A multidisciplinary approach
to planning land application systems is neces-
sary, encompassing fields such as (1) environ-
mental engineering, (2) hydrology, (3) soil
science, (4) agriculture, (5) geology, and (6) land
use planning.
'Portions of this article extracted from the Technology
Transfer Design Seminar series on Land Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater Effluents. Material from this series will be available
through our order form within the next few months.
-------
Table 1. General Design Considerations
Waste water
characteristics
Flow volume
Constituent
load
Climate
Precipitation
Evapotrans-
pi ration
Temperature
Growing
season
Occurrence
and depth of
frozen ground
Storage
requirements
Wind velocity
and direction
Geology
Groundwater
Seasonal
depth
Quality
Points of
discharge
Bedrock
Tvoe
i y \j^
Depth
Permeability
Soils
Type
Gradation
Infiltration/
permeability
Type and quantity
of clay
Cation exchange
capacity
Phosphorus adsorp-
tion potential
Heavy metal adsorp-
tion potential
pH
Organic matter
Plant cower
Indigenous
to region
Nutrient
removal
capability
Toxicity
levels
Moisture
and shade
tolerance
Marketability
Topography
Slope
Aspect of
slope
Erosion
hazard
Crop and farm
management
Application
Method
Type of
equipment
Application
rate
Types of
drainage
III. METHODS OF LAND APPLICATION
The three basic methods of land application
are irrigation, infiltration-percolation, and over-
land flow. Each method can produce renovated
water of different quality, can be adapted to
different site conditions and can satisfy different
overall objectives.
A. Irrigation is the predominant land applica-
tion method in use today. It involves the
application of effluent to the land for treatment
and for meeting the growth needs of plants.
Treatment is accomplished by physical, chemical
and biological means as the effluent seeps into
the soil. Application is either by sprinkling or by
surface techniques such as ridge and furrow or
border strip flooding. Figure 1 schematically
depicts the irrigation methods.
B. Infiltration-percolation is a method that
applies the effluent to the soil at higher rates by
spreading it in basins or by sprinkling. Treat-
ment occurs as the water passes through the soil
matrix. System objectives can include (1)
groundwater recharge, (2) natural treatment
followed by pumped withdrawal or underdrains
for recovery, or (3) natural treatment with
renovated water moving vertically and laterally
in the soil and recharging a surface water-
course. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the
infiltration-percolation method.
C. Overland flow is essentially a biological
treatment process in which wastewater is applied
SPRAY OR
SURFACE
APPLICATION
ROOT ZONE
SUBSOIL
EVAPORATION
SLOPE
VARIABLE
-DEEP
PERCOLATION
Figure 1.—Irrigation Method.
-------
EVAPORATION
•INFILTRATION
SPRAY OR SURFACE
APPLICATION
PERCOLATION THROUGH i
UNSATURATED ZONE
ZONE OF AERATION
: AND TREATMENT
OLD WATER TABLE
Figure 2.—Infiltration-Percolation Method.
over the upper reaches of sloped terraces and
allowed to flow across the vegetated surface to
runoff collection ditches. Renovation is accom-
plished by physical, chemical, and biological
means as the wastewater flows in a thin sheet
down the relatively impervious slope.
Overland flow can be used as a secondary
treatment process where discharge of a nitrified
effluent low in BOD is acceptable or as an
advanced wastewater treatment process. The
latter will allow higher rates of application (5
in./wk. or more), depending on the degree of
advanced wastewater treatment required. Where
a surface discharge is prohibited, runoff can be
recycled or applied to the land in irrigation or
infiltration-percolation systems. Figure 3 depicts
the overland flow method.
IV. DESIGN FACTORS
A brief discussion of the essential design
factors that must be considered to properly
evaluate and design an effective and viable land
treatment facility follows.
A. Preapplication Treatment — Treatment of
wastewater prior to land application may be
necessary for a variety of reasons, including C\)
maintaining a reliable distribution system, (2)
allowing storage or wastewater without nuisance
conditions, (3) maintaining high infiltration
rates into the soil, or allowing the irrigation of
crops that will be used for human consumption.
B. Land Suitability — A checklist of character-
istics to be evaluated for land suitability should
contain the following general items: (1) location
EVAPORATION
SPRAY APPLICATION
GRASS AND VEGETATIVE LITTER
SLOPE 2-4° —*^:^':vl:-:T$:"{-l*'
RUNOFF
COLLECTION
Figure 3.—Overland Flow Method.
-------
with respect to point of wastewater collection/
treatment facilities, (2) compatibility of planned
objectives with overall land use plan, (3) proxim-
ity to surface waters, and (4) number and size of
available land parcels.
C. Selection of the Land Application Method
— Selection of the appropriate land application
method requires matching the management of
objectives and wastewater characteristics to the
characteristics of potential sites, expected treat-
ment efficiencies, and land requirements. Cri-
teria for climate, topography, soil geology,
hydrology, and vegetation vary with the type of
land application method. Site evaluation is
essential to the selection process.
D. Distribution Techniques — As many as 20
distribution techniques for water are available
for engineered wastewater effluent applications.
Many of the techniques developed in the irriga-
tion industry have not yet been applied to
wastewater. The most common techniques by
application method follow.
1. Irrigation — Distribution techniques for
irrigation can be classified into three main
groups: fixed sprinkling systems, moving sprin-
kling systems, and surface application systems.
a. Fixed Sprinkling Systems, often called
solid set systems, may be either on the ground
surface or buried. Both types usually consist of
impact sprinklers on risers that are spaced along
lateral pipelines. These systems are adaptable to
a wide variety of terrains and may be used for
irrigation of either cultivated land or woodlands.
Above-ground systems normally use portable
aluminum pipe, which has the advantage of a
relatively low capital cost. Several disadvantages
of surface aluminum pipe are that: (1) it is easily
damaged, (2) it has a short expected life due to
corrosions, and (3) it must be moved during
cultivation and harvesting operations.
Plastic or asbestos cement pipe is most
often used for buried systems. Laterals may be
buried as deep as 1.5 feet and amin pipelines,
2.5 to 3 feet below the surface. Buried systems
generally have the greatest capital cost of any of
the irrigation systems. On the other hand, they
are probably the most dependable, and they are
well suited to automatic control.
Sprinkler spacings, application rates, nozzle
sizes and pressures, control systems, risers, and
drain valves are the major design parameters in
fixed sprinkling systems. General practice is as
follows:
Sprinkler spacing — may vary from 40 to
60 feet to 100 by 100 feet and may be
rectangular, square, or triangular. Typical spac-
ings are 60 by 80 feet and 80 by 100 feet.
Application rate — may range from 0.10
to 1 in./hr or more with 0.16 to 0.25 in./hr being
typical. Application rate is calculated using
equation (1).
Application _ 96.3Q (gpm per sprinkler)
rate, in./hr Area (sq ft covered)
(1)
Sample calculation: Determine the application
rate for a spacing of 80 by 80 feet and a
discharge per sprinkler head of 15 gpm.
Qfi *3 M R\
Application rate = (30) 80 = °'23 in"/hr
Nozzles — Generally vary in size of open-
ing from 0.25 inch to 1 inch. The discharge per
nozzle can vary from 4 to 100 gpm, with a range
from 8 to 25 gpm being typical. Discharge
pressures can vary from 30 to 100 psi, with 50
to 60 psi being typical. Single-nozzle sprinklers
are preferred because of lesser clogging tenden-
cies and larger spray diameters.
Control systems — May be automatic,
semiautomatic or manual. Automatic systems
are the most popular for land application
systems. Automatic valves may either hydrauli-
cally or electrically operated.
Risers — May be galvanized pipe or PVC
of sufficient height to clear the crop, usually 3
to 4 feet for grass. The riser should be adequate-
ly staked because impact sprinklers cause vibra-
tions that must be dampened.
Drain valves — Should be located at low
points in line with gravel pits to allow water to
drain away and prevent in-line freezing.
b. Moving sprinkling systems include (1)
center pivots, (2) side roll wheel move, (3)
rotating boom, and (4) winch-propelled sprin-
kling machines. The center pivot system is gener-
ally the most widely used for wastewater irriga-
tion and is the only system discussed here.
General practice with respect to sizes, propul-
sion, pressures, and topography is as follows:
Sizes — Center pivot systems consist of
lateral that may be 600 to 1,400 feet long,
which is suspended by wheel supports and
rotates about a point. Areas of 35 to 135 acres
can be irrigated per unit.
Propulsion — Either by means of hy-
draulic or electric drive. One rotation may take
from 8 hours to as much as 1 week.
Pressures - Usually 50 to 60 psi at the
nozzle which may require 80 to 90 psi at the
pivot. Standard sprinkler nozzles or spray heads
directed downward can be used.
Topography — Can be adapted to rolling
terrain up to 15 to 20 percent.
c. Surface application systems can be
grouped into ridge and furrow, and border strip
flooding irrigation. Ridge and furrow irrigation
is accomplished by gravity flow of effluent
through furrows from which it seeps into the
ground. General practice is as follows:
Topography — Can be used on relatively
flat land (less than 1 percent) with furrows
-------
running down the slope, or on moderately
sloped land with furrows running along the
contour.
Dimensions — Furrow lengths usually
range from 600 to 1,400 feet. Furrows are
usually spaced between 30 and 40 inches apart,
depending on the crop.
Application — Usually by gated alumi-
num pipe. Short runs of pipe (80 to 100 feet)
are preferred to minimize pipe diameter and
headloss to provide maximum flexibility. Sur-
face standpipes are used to provide 3 to 4 feet of
head necessary for even distribution.
Border strip irrigation consists of low,
paralled soil ridges constructed in the direction
of slope. The major design variable for surface
flooding using border strips include strip dimen-
sions, method of distribution, and application
rates. General practice is as follows:
Strip dimensions — Vary with type of
crop, type of soil, and slope. Border widths may
range from 20 to 100 feet; 40 to 60 foot widths
are the most common. Slopes may range from
0.2 to 0.4 percent. The steeper slopes are
required for relatively permeable souls. Strip
length may vary from 600 to 1,400 feet.
Method of distribution - May generally
be by means of either concrete-lined ditch with
slide gates at the head of each strip, under-
ground pipe with risers and alfalfa valves, or
gated aluminum pipe.
Application rates — At the head of each
strip, will vary primarily with soil type and may
range from 10 to 20 gpm per foot width of strip
for clay to 50 to 70 gpm per foot width of strip
for sand. The period of application for each strip
will vary with strip length and slope.
2. Infiltration-percolation — Intermittent
flooding in basins is the most common distribu-
tion method, although high-rate spraying (more
than 4 in./wk) may also be used. With flooding
basins, the major design variables include appli-
cation rate, basin size, height of dikes, and
maintenance of basin surfaces.
3. Overland flow — Sprinkling is the most
common technique in the United States; how-
ever, surface flooding may be practicable for
effluents relatively low in suspended solids.
V. CLIMATIC FACTORS AND STORAGE
An evaluation of climatic factors, such as
precipitation, evaportranspiration, and tempera-
ture, is important primarily for the determina-
tion of the (1) water balance, (2) length of the
growing season, (3) number of days when the
system cannot be operated, and (4) the storage
capacity requirement. Another important func-
tion of climatic factors is stormwater runoff
control.
A computer program, which relates many of
these factors has recently become available
through the National Climatic Center, in Ashe-
ville, North Carolina. It utilizes basic daily
climatic data for a given weather station, for a
given period of years, and identifies which days
are unfavorable for application. The total
storage capacity required each year can be
calculated by adding one day's flow to storage
each unfavorable day. Storage is then reduced
Table 2. Sample Printout of Climatic Data Program
Temperature, deg F Snow
depth. Precipitation, Favorable Unfavorable Storage,
Year Month Day Maximum Minimum Mean in. in. day day3 days
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
42
34
33
19
31
46
48
49
20
44
28
17
7
6
11
30
32
19
9
28
35
26
20
13
21
38
40
34
15
36
3
2
2
2
T
—
—
-
—
.01
.45
—
—
—
.95
.05
—
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
2
3
4
5
4.5b
4
5
4.5
aDefinition of unfavorable day:
Mean temperature < 32 deg F
Precipitation > 0.50 in.
Snow depth > 1 in.
"Drawdown rate from storage on favorable days is0.5 X daily flow; i.e., on favorable days the amount actually applied to the field is
the average daily flow plus an extra 50% from storage.
-------
by some fraction of a day's flow (based on the
actual drawdown rate) for each favorable day.
The maximum storage capacity is then identified
for each year. A simplified sample printout for a
portion of a month is shown in Table 2.
VI. SURFACE RUNOFF CONTROL
Requirements for control of surface runoff
resulting from both applied effluent and storm-
water depend mainly on the expected quality of
the runoff—for which few data exist. Considera-
tions relating to surface runoff control are
mentioned here for both irrigation and overland
flow systems. Infiltration-percolation are not
included because in almost all cases these sys-
tems are designed so that no runoff is allowed.
A. Irrigation Systems — Surface runoff control
considerations for systems can be divided into
(1) trailwater return, (2) storm runoff, and (3)
system protection.
B. Overland Flow Systems — Significantly,
more extensive runoff control features are nor-
mally required for overland flow than for
irrigation systems, because overland flow sys-
tems are designed principally for runoff of
applied effluent rather than percolation.
Typically, 40 to 80 percent of the applied
effluent runs off. The remainder is lost to
percolation and evapotranspiration. In most
cases, the runoff is collected in ditches at the toe
of each terrace and then conveyed by open
channel or gravity pipe to a discharge point
where it is monitored, and in some cases,
disinfected. Discharge may be to surface waters,
to reuse facilities, or sometimes to additional
treatment facilities such as infiltration-
percolation.
VII. PUBLIC HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS
Public health aspects are related to (1) the
pathogenic bacteria and viruses present in mu-
nicipal wastewater and their possible transmission
to higher biological forms including man, (2)
chemicals that may reach the groundwater and
pose dangers to health if ingested, (3) crop
quality when irrigated with wastewater efflu-
ents, and (4) the propagation of insects that
could be vectors in disease transmission.
The survival of pathogenic bacteria and
viruses in sprayed aerosol droplets, on and in the
soil, and the effects on workers has received
considerable attention. It is important to realize
that any connection between pathogens applied
to land with wastewater and the contraction of
disease in animals or man would require a long
and complex path of epidemiological events.
Nevertheless, concern exists, and precautions
should be taken in dealing with the possible
transmission of pathogens.
VIII. MONITORING
As with any wastewater treatment facility, a
comprehensive monitoring program will be re-
quired to ensure that environmental degradation
is not occurring. Some monitoring requirements
are similar to those required for conventional
systems. One example of this is the monitoring
of water quality at various stages in the process
prior to application. Other monitoring require-
ments are generally unique to land application
systems and these are the only ones mentioned
here. They are presented in three categories:
A. Renovated Water — The monitoring of reno-
vated water may be required for either ground-
water or recovered water, or both. Recovered
water may include runoff from overland flow or
water from recovery wells or underdrains.
1. Groundwater — Water quality parameters
that should be analyzed in the groundwater
include (1) those normally required for drinking
water supplies, (2) those that may be required
for state or local agencies, or (3) those necessary
for system control.
2. Recovered Water — Monitoring require-
ments for recovered water will depend on the
disposition of that water. If the water is to be
discharged, the parameters to be analyzed must
include those required by NPDES permit. If the
water is to be reused, analysis of additional
parameters may be required by cognizant public
health agencies. Monitoring of the flowrate of
recovered water may be important for system
control and may also be required as a result of
water rights considerations.
B. Vegetation — When vegetation is grown as a
part of the treatment system, monitoring may
be required for the purpose of optimizing
growth and yield. Conventional farm manage-
ment techniques would generally apply; how-
ever, in many cases, special factors must be
considered because of the normally higher hy-
draulic loading rates.
For some systems, a more detailed vegetation
monitoring program may be required in which
the uptake of certain elements is analyzed. This
analysis would generally be required only in
cases where potentially toxic constituents are
present in the wastewater in abnormally high
concentrations.
C. Soils - In almost all cases, the application of
wastewater to the land will result in some
changes in the characteristics of the soil. Conse-
quently, some sort of soil monitoring program
will be necessary for most systems with at least
annual sampling recommended. Characteristics
that commonly of interest include:
1. Salinity
2. Levels of various elements
3. pH
4. Cation exchange capacity
-------
PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL FOR
SULFIDE CONTROL IN SANITARY
SEWERAGE SYSTEMS
The following changes should be made in
the Process Design Manual for Sulfide
control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems:
• Page 5-2: First equation should read
as follows:
ua =
Page 5-4, first equation and page 5-8,
both equations: The coefficient
shown as 17 X 10~6 should be 17 X
1CT5. The answer to the problem, as
shown on page 5-8, 16 cfm, is correct.
PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL FOR
SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL
(January 1975 Edition)
The following change should be made in
the Process Design Manual for Suspended
Solids Removal:
• Figure 10-9, page 10-15: Delete the
"100" on the right-hand scale for
Operation and Maintenance Costs.
This number "10" should appear on
the right-hand scale directly opposite
the "1000" on the left-hand scale.
Similarly, "100" should appear on the
right-hand scale directly opposite the
"10,000" on the left-hand scale.
REGION CHAIRMAN
Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
III
IV
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below.
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peach tree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn St.
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-8880
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI
Mildred Smith
VII John Coakley
VIII Elmer Chenault
IX
William Bishop
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1 600 Patterson Street, Suite 1 1 00
Dallas, Texas 75201
214 749-1885
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.,
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 941 1 1
415 556-4806
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Oie., Idaho, Alaska)
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Technology Transfer Chairman. (See above)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound) VIDEOTAPES
Richardson Texas Project—Title: "Somebody around here
must be doing something good." (15 min.)
Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif.—Title:
"The Water Plan." (28% min.)
The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min.)
• Carbon Adsorption. (40 min.)
• Upgrading Activated Sludge Treatment Plants.
(40 min.)
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
D Phosphorus Removal ........................ 1001
D Carbon Adsorption .......................... 1002
D Suspended Solids Removal .................... 1003
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants ............................ 1004
D Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems ..... 1005
D Sludge Treatment and Disposal ................. 1006
*D Nitrogen Control ............................ 1007
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
D Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants .......... 2001
CD Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition .................... 2002
D Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill ........ 2003
D First Interim Report on EPA Alkali SO2
Scrubbing Test Facility ....................... 2004
D Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches ................. 2005
D Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility ........ 2006
D SO2 Scrubbing and Sulfunc Acid
Production Via Magnesia Scrubbing ............. 2007
D Second Interim Report on EPA
Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility .................. 2008
D Magnesium Carbonate Process for
Water Treatment ............................ 2009
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
D Upgrading Lagoons 4001
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
D Oxygen Activated Sludge 4003
D Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
CH Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005
D Flow Equalization 4006
D Wastewater Filtration 4007
D Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
D Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge
Incineration 4009
BROCHURES
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 5001
D Phosphorus Removal 5002
O Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 5003
D Carbon Adsorption 5004
CD Oxygen Aeration 5005
D Nitrogen Control 5006
D Seattle, Washington METRO 5007
D Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008
D Indian Creek Reservoir 5009
D Richardson, Texas 5010
d Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) .................. 3001
D Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) .................. 3002
D Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) .................. 3003
D Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) .................. 3004
HANDBOOKS
D Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories 6001
D Monitoring Industrial Wastewater 6002
D Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes 6003
'Publication listed for first time
If you are not currently on the mailing list for this Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added?
Yes D No D
If you no longer wish to receive this fact sheet, check this box D
Name.
Employer,
Street
City
State .
Zip-
Note: Tear this sheet out and forward to Technology Transfer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
U.S.MAIL
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
I 3J TULcV
jr p 4, I' «'-J I J '4
EL
IL
-------
RECEIVED
ECHNOLOGY
RANSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
MAY 1975
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORT ON FLUE
GAS DESULFURIZATION AND SULFURIC
ACID PRODUCTION VIA MAGNESIA
SCRUBBING
A technical Capsule Report covering the two-
year operation of a large prototype sulfur
dioxide recovery plant based upon magnesia
slurry scrubbing is presently being printed and
will be available for distribution at the APCA
'75 Exhibition, June 15-19, in Boston, Mass.
This prototype program was jointly funded by
EPA and Boston Edison Company. The S02
absorption plant was installed at Boston Edi-
son's Mystic Station in Everett, Massachusetts,
and the regeneration facility at Essex Chemical's
Rumford, Rhode Island, sulfuric acid plant.
The Capsule Report describes both process
operations at Boston Edison and Essex Chemi-
cal; the problems encountered during the test
FUEGS
OFSUFUWOM
AxDSlfiJC
K5M.
program, as well as the solutions to these
problems; the economics of MgO scrubbing,
MgO regeneration, and sulfuric acid production;
and areas of application for this process.
During the operational period, the system
demonstrated its ability to regenerate and reuse
magnesium oxide. Over five thousand tons of
commercial grade sulfuric acid were produced
from magnesium sulfite and the scrubbing sys-
tem demonstrated a consistent ability to achieve
S02 removal efficiencies in excess of 90 percent
using regenerated magnesium oxide. During the
last four month period of the recovery system's
operation, the monthly availabilities were 87%,
81%, 57% and 80%. The lowest reported value
was due to the lack of MgO for SO2 removal,
caused by problems in the sulfuric acid plant
and an intentional emptying of the MgO silos
during a controlled test.
For your copy of this Capsule Report, use the
order blank at the back of this newsletter.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER LAND
TREATMENT SEMINAR SERIES
Technology Transfer recently completed the
first two of a series of design seminars on "Land
Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents".
The first two seminars were held in Atlanta,
Georgia—April 23-24, and San Francisco,
California—May 7-8, 1975. This seminar series is
aimed at providing federal, state and municipal
engineers and the consulting engineering profes-
sion with the latest design information to
properly design and evaluate land treatment as a
viable treatment alternative.
Russell E. Train, USEPA Administrator, ini-
tiated the seminar series and presented the
introduction and purpose to the 330 plus
attendees at the Atlanta Seminar.
Interest has been extremely high at both
seminars due to the timeliness of this subject
area. The latest design factors and cost compari-
Refer to inside last page of this publication for
complete listing of current Technology Transfer
publications.
-------
sons are covered in detail. Case histories are
presented on successful projects and the up-to-
date status of the Muskegon, Michigan, EPA
demonstration project is discussed. Seminars for
the other EPA Regions are being planned and
detailed information may be obtained from
contacting the respective Regional Technology
Transfer Chairmen. Following is a general out-
line of the seminar format:
• EPA's APPROACH TO LAND TREAT-
MENT AND COST EFFECTIVENESS
• DESIGN FACTORS
Introduction & Pretreatment
Overland Flow
I rrigation
(Nutrient/Water Utilization)
I nf iltration-Percolation
Site Selection
Storage
(Total Water Balance)
Land Availability
Distribution Techniques
Public Health Considerations
Monitoring (Need)
Land Use
Climate, Topography
Surface Runoff Control
Hydraulic Loading
Nutrient Loading
Soil
Water Rights
Crop Selection
(Forest Application-Hardwood/
Softwood)
Heavy Metals
Farming Management
Underdrain Systems
Groundwater Conditions
Monitoring (Location)
• REVIEW OF SIGNIFICANT LAND
TREATMENT PROJECTS
• Overview & EPA-APWA Report
• MISC. CASE HISTORIES
• Penn State
• Mich. State
• Melbourne
• Phoenix
• Tallahassee
• MUSKEGON, MICHIGAN, PROJECT
• COST OF
SYSTEMS
LAND APPLICATION
Presentations at the seminars have been given
by Bill Whittington, Office of Water Program
Operations (OWPO), EPA, Washington, D.C.;
Charles Pound, Metcalf & Eddy, Palo Alto,
Calif.; Morgan Powell, CH2M/Hill, Denver, Colo;
Belford Seabrook, OWPO, EPA, Washington,
D.C.; Frank D'ltri, Michigan State University,
Lansing, Michigan; Y. A. Demirjian, Deputy
Director of Public Works, Muskegon County,
Michigan; and Gordon Gulp, Clean Water
Consultants, Eldorado Hills, Calif.
95TH AWWA CONFERENCE
Technology Transfer will provide a manned
exhibit for the 95th Annual American Water
Works Association Conference in Minneapolis,
Minnesota, June 8-13, 1975. Over five thousand
private and municipal water utility personnel are
expected to attend the meeting, which is being
held at the Minneapolis Convention Hall.
The theme of the exhibit will be a Technical
Capsule Report on "Magnesium Carbonate—A
Recycled Coagulant for Water Treatment",
which will be initially distributed at the
Conference.
MONITORING SEMINARS
Technology Transfer held six more Monitor-
ing Industrial Wastewater seminars for industry.
Each of these seminars was well attended by
plant managers and engineers. Dates and loca-
tions of the Monitoring seminars were:
January 9, 1975
February 18, 1975
February 19, 1975
March 11, 1975
March 13, 1975
March 20, 1975
Washington, D.C.
Kansas City, Missouri
Denver, Colorado
Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma
Houston, Texas
Chicago, Illinois
• EXAMPLE COMPARISON OF LAND
TREATMENT AND AWT
Mr. John Quarles, Deputy Administrator of
EPA gave the welcome address at the Washing-
ton seminar. Mr. Quarles emphasized the devel-
opment of a practical approach to monitoring as
it relates to permit conditions. He also stressed
the need for a cooperative effort by the Federal
Government, the states, and the discharger to
meet their respective monitoring responsibilities
under PL 92-500.
The morning session of these seminars cov-
ered EPA regulatory policy with regard to the
monitoring requirements of PL 92-500. States
within respective EPA regional offices presented
their relationships to the Federal Program with
regard to monitoring policies and requirements.
-------
Mr. John Quarles, EPA Deputy Administrator, at the Washing-
ton, D.C. Monitoring Seminar.
The afternoon sessions offered technical
guidance for implementing a monitoring pro-
gram. Gerry Shell of AWARE, Inc. concentrated
on an overview of Monitoring Industrial Waste-
water. Dr. Phillip Shelley of Hydrospace-
Challenger discussed Sampling. The session on
Flow Measurement was presented by Vic Jelen
of the EPA Cincinnati Field Investigation
Center. The session on Analytical Quality Con-
trol was prepared by Robert Booth of the EPA
Cincinnati Methods Development and Quality
Assurance Research Laboratory. The final ses-
sion on In-Process Monitoring was presented by
Walter Zabban of Chester Engineers.
MUNICIPAL DESIGN SEMINARS
One additional Technology Transfer muni-
cipal design seminar has been conducted since
the January, 1975, newsletter was published. A
special cold climate treatment seminar was held
in Anchorage, Alaska on April 9-10, 1975.
The Anchorage Seminar included technical
sessions on cold climate biological treatment and
physical-chemical treatment. Ernst Mueller,
Commissioner of the Department of Environ-
mental Conservation for the State of Alaska,
opened the seminar attended by approximately
135 consultants and regulatory personnel. Tech-
nical presentations during the two-day seminar
were given by Lee Reid, Borough of Anchorage;
Jack Grainge, Environmental Protection Service,
Environment Canada; Gene Suhr, CH2M/Hill;
Jack Cleasby, Iowa State University; Gordon
Gulp, Clean Water Consultants; Joe Rizzo,
Calgon Corporation; and Randy Bayliss, State of
Alaska. EPA speakers were Jack Coutts and Jim
Westrick.
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORT ON
LIME/LIMESTONE WET-SCRUBBING
A technical Capsule Report covering progress
at the EPA alkali test facility at the TVA
Shawnee Power Station is presently being
printed and will be available for distribution at
the APCA '75 Exhibition, June 15-19, in
Boston, Massachusetts. The Capsule Report is
the 2nd in a series on the Shawnee project, with
each new capsule report being prepared when
significant test data have been developed.
The Shawnee test facility consists of three
parallel scrubber systems: (1) aventuri followed
by a spray tower; (2) a Turbulent Contact
Absorber (TCA); and (3) a Marble-Bed Ab-
sorber. Each system is capable of treating
approximately 10 Mw equivalent (30,000 acfm
UMEIIMESONE US EPA
,-_. WET-SCRUBBNP OP1GEOF
!-» TES-RESJDS SARCHAN,-
"T" DEVHOPME.V
-------
@ 300° F) of flue gas containing 1800-4000
ppm sulfur dioxide and 2 to 5 grains/scf of
particulates.
The limestone and lime reliability testing at
the Shawnee facility has shown that scrubber
internals can be kept relatively free of scale if
the sulfate (gypsum) saturation of the scrubber
slurry is kept below about 135 percent.
For your copy of this Capsule Report, use the
order blank at the back of this newsletter.
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORT ON
MAGNESIUM CARBONATE-
A RECYCLED COAGULANT
FOR WATER TREATMENT
A technical Capsule Report describing a new
magnesium recycle coagulation system for water
treatment is presently being printed, and will be
available for distribution at the 95th Annual
Conference of the American Water Works Asso-
ciation (AWWA) in Minneapolis, Minnesota,
June 8-13. The system is based on a combina-
tion of water softening and conventional coagu-
lation techniques which can be applied to all
types of water.
The process development began in 1957 at the
Dayton, Ohio, water treatment plant where a
hard, clear, high magnesium water is softened by
a lime-soda process. The cities of Melbourne,
Florida, and Montgomery, Alabama, have also
provided additional support to the development
of the magnesium carbonate coagulation system.
Approximately 1 million tons per year of dry
solids are produced from an estimated 3,600
water treatment plants practicing coagulation
throughout the country. Of these, less than 5
percent receive treatment of any kind before
return to the water course. Wastes from water
treatment plants are today recognized as a
significant pollution problem. The new process
offers an alternative approach to chemical sludge
handling as well as providing for reuse of the
chemicals.
For your copy of this Capsule Report, use the
order blank at the back of this newsletter.
PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL
FOR SLUDGE TREATMENT & DISPOSAL
The following changes should be made in
the Process Design Manual for Sludge
Treatment and Disposal:
• Figure 8-4, page 8-9: BTU rating
should read-1,000 BTU/CF
• Figure 9-2, page 9-11: Curves were
based on a sludge concentration after
thickening to 3-1/2% solids.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER/AICHE
CO-SPONSOR THE 2ND NATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON COMPLETE WATER
REUSE (WATER'S INTERFACE
WITH ENERGY, AIR AND SOLIDS)
Technology Transfer and the American Insti-
tute of Chemical Engineers jointly sponsored the
2nd National Conference on Complete Water
Reuse, held at the Palmer House, May 4-8, 1975,
in Chicago, Illinois.
The Conference brought together govern-
ment, industry, management, and environmental
personnel to consider and evaluate the meaning
and potential for complete water reuse systems
to fulfill the objective of Public Law 92-500 for
Zero Discharge of Pollutants, and Water's Inter-
face with Energy, Air and Solids.
Session topics included: Land Disposal of
Wastewaters and Sludges; Technology Transfer
in Water Reuse; Energy; and Air/Water
Interface.
APCA '75 MEETING AND EXHIBITION
Technology Transfer will exhibit recent air-
related publications at the 68th Annual Air
Pollution Control Association Meeting and Ex-
hibition, to be held June 15-19, 1975, in
Boston, Massachusetts. Technical sessions will be
conducted at the Sheraton Boston, which is
directly connected to the John B. Hynes Civic
Auditorium exhibit hall.
The Conference will bring together govern-
ment, industry, management, air pollution
equipment manufacturers, and environmental
personnel to learn about the latest technical
developments in air pollution effects, measure-
ment and control.
f!
Participants at Technology Transfer Textile Seminar held in
Boston on January 15-16, 1975. In front row (l-r) Mr. Luis
Dicntl Subias of Empresa National Adaro, Spam; Mr. Fernando
Troyano Lobaton of Spain's Ministry of Public Works; and Mr.
Jaime Ruiz Rodriguez of Spain's Ministry of Industry.
-------
EPA's OFFICE OF
ENERGY RESEARCH
The Office of Energy Research (OER) of
EPA's Office of Research and Development is a
new office operating within a highly dynamic
environment. Not only is the OER responsible
for the design, planning and strategic manage-
ment of a $130-million FY 75 research and
development program, but it is doing so within
an interagency context which is quite unique.
Dr. Stephen J. Gage, Acting Director of OER
and formerly of CEO, and his staff of eight
professionals have designed a R&D program
based upon two major interagency working
group reports. These reports—Health and Ecol-
ogical Effects of Energy Use and Environmental
Control Technology for Energy Systems-
embody the recommendations of more than a
dozen federal agencies, offices and laboratories.
In developing these recommendations into a
balanced energy/environment R&D program, the
OER has had to work in close coordination with
the EPA research centers and laboratories for
the portion of the work to be performed by
EPA, and with other federal agencies for those
projects which they will be implementing.
In order to assure the success of this massive
and complex planning exercise, the OER evolved
an entirely new and highly simplified planning
system. The guiding philosophy behind this new
planning system is that the proper role for OER
in headquarters is one of strategic planning,
information integration and transfer, and pro-
gram and resource balancing. This more limited
role requires the delegation of the responsibility
for detailed program implementation and man-
agement to the field and to those management
individuals closest to the research efforts. Im-
plementation of this philosophy required a new
set of operating procedures.
The first step in the implementation of the
energy/environment R&D program involved the
identification of key outputs necessary for an
effective program. These outputs range from
"initiate demonstration of regenerable sulfur-
producing flue-gas desulfurization system" to
"produce users manual on cold climate shoreline
protection and restoration". They all have two
things in common, however. First, they are
discrete, identifiable, tangible units, and second,
they are all essential parts of a balanced energy/
environment R&D program.
Once these necessary outputs have been iden-
tified, short descriptions are sent to the appro-
priate EPA operation or other agency. This
other organization reviews the output descrip-
tion and, within the time and resources allotted,
provides OER with an accomplishment plan
designed to provide the necessary outputs. This
process yields several benefits. First, it assures
that both OER and field research manager
understand what is required. Second, it involves
a high level of interaction among all parties
involved in a particular research area, thus
establishing linkages for future research coordi-
nation and information transfer. Third, it re-
duces to an absolute minimum the amount of
paperwork involved.
The program itself is being planned on a five
year basis with approximately $130 million
programmed for expenditures in FY 75. The
purpose of the program is the development of a
sound scientific and technical basis for ensuring
(1) adequate protection of human health, wel-
fare, ecosystem and social goals; (2) environ-
mental protection necessary to facilitate the use
of energy supplies, with particular emphasis on
domestic fuels; (3) implementation of energy
system initiatives without delays caused by
inadequate and insufficient environmental
impact data; (4) development of appropriate
cost-effective control technologies for emerging
energy systems; and (5) assessment of environ-
mental implications of energy conservation
measures in order to maximize the energy
savings and minimize the associated impacts.
The EPA energy-related environmental re-
search and development program is divided
functionally into three activities: (1) the Proc-
esses and Effects program to determine the
environmental effects (and hence the control
requirements) associated with energy extraction,
transmission, conversion and use, (2) the En-
vironmental Control Technology Program to
identify, develop and demonstrate necessary
control techniques based on the source effluent
and ambient pollutant control requirements
specified in (1), and (3) the Policy Implementa-
tion Research Program to evaluate the environ-
mental, economic and social consequences of
alternative control strategies for energy systems
as input to EPA policy formulation. Each of
these three programs is addressed in more detail
below.
The energy-related processes and effects re-
search program is composed of three general
subactivities: pollutant identification, measure-
ment and monitoring; health effects; and fresh-
water, marine and atmospheric/terrestrial ecol-
ogical processes and effects. The program is
designed to determine the environmental effects
associated with energy extraction, transmission,
conversion and use so that measures can be
taken in a timely manner to protect human
health, the ecosystem and social goals. Identifi-
cation of the pollutants released by energy-
related industrial operations and determination
-------
of their impact on the human and natural
environment will define the environmental con-
trol requirements for the pollution operations.
The environmental control technology pro-
gram is divided into four general subactivities:
extraction and beneficiation, fossil fuel com-
bustion, synthetic fuels, and advanced systems
and conservation. The program is designed to
identify, develop and demonstrate cost-effective
control techniques for energy extraction, trans-
mission, conversion and use. The program neces-
sarily involves assessment of the pollution poten-
tial of source effluent streams and the
technological processes producing those pollut-
ants as well as research and development on
control devices and process modifications to
reduce the impacts of the pollutants on ambient
conditions. The thrust of the program is to
provide adequate environmental protection as
the Nation moves toward expanding use of
domestic fuels.
The policy and implementation research pro-
gram objective is to provide the information
necessary to develop comprehensive environ-
mental protection standards for energy produc-
tion activities while attempting to balance the
environmental and economic costs. The com-
prehensive evaluation of environmental, eco-
nomic and social consequences of energy alter-
natives is intended for use as a basis for EPA
policy formulation.
EPA's CONTROL
SYSTEMS
LABORATORY
As a part of EPA's Office of Research and
Development, the Control Systems Laboratory
(CSL), based in Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, has unique, wide-ranging responsibility
in stationary source air pollution control and
energy-related programs. CSL, under its director,
Dr. John K. Burchard, is currently funding
approximately 300 projects encompassing a
broad range of research, development and
demonstration programs interrelated by a
common objective. The work of CSL is geared
to answer the challenge of Section 101.(b)(2) of
the Clean Air Act "to initiate and accelerate a
national research and development program to
achieve the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion." Over the last decade, CSL has established
a comprehensive program to determine air pollu-
tion sources, assess the environmental impact of
identified pollutants, and accelerate the develop-
ment and commercial application of air pollu-
tion control processes.
Many of the technologies which show promise
as solutions to environment/energy problems
originated in CSL. In such diverse areas as flue
gas cleaning, clean fuels, combustion modifica-
tion, pollution control for metallurgical and
chemical processes, and particle cleanup, Con-
trol Systems Laboratory has taken the develop-
mental initiative through co-sponsorship of
major research, development, and demonstration
(RD&D) projects, contractual studies, and in-
house efforts.
Subdivided programmatically, CSL consists of
four Branches: Gas Cleaning and Metallurgical
Processes, Clean Fuels and Energy, Particulate
and Chemical Processes, and Engineering Analy-
sis. The Engineering Analysis Branch provides
the staff function of program monitoring and
evaluation support, including project evalua-
tions, program reviews, and industrial processes
catalog development.
The three line branches are engaged in a wide
spectrum of control systems development work,
ranging from small-scale experimental research
to full-scale prototype demonstration and
evaluation.
The Gas Cleaning and Metallurgical Processes
Branch is developing and demonstrating flue gas
cleaning for fossil fuel-fired electric utility
power plants and industrial boilers, and pollu-
tion control systems for metallurgical processes
such as in the iron and steel, and smelting
industries.
Environmental assessment, pollution control
for fuel conversion systems, development of
Research Project—Magnesia Slurry Scrubbing System for SO,
Removal at Boston Edison.
-------
combustion modification techniques for nitro-
gen oxides control, and physical and chemical
fuel cleaning are the responsibilities of the Clean
Fuels and Energy Branch.
The Particulate and Chemical Processes
Branch is concerned with control of pollutants
from chemical processes, development and
demonstration of fine particulate control, im-
provement of conventional particulate control
equipment, and evaluation and development of
measurement, sampling, and analysis techniques
and equipment
• FLUE GAS DESULFURIZATION
To date, about 80 percent of CSL's total
expenditures have been related to control of
sulfur oxides (SOX) emissions from fuel com-
bustion and have been concentrated in flue gas
desulfurization (FGD). The efforts of CSL have
accelerated the development of FGD so that it is
now in the process of commercialization in this
country. Over 100 flue gas desulfurization sys-
tems are currently in operation, under construc-
tion, or planned.
CSL has been deeply involved in develop-
ment/demonstration of the following flue gas
desulfurization processes. (See table at bottom
of this page.)
An advanced FGD process producing elemen-
tal sulfur as the major system by-product and a
double alkali FGD system are new full-scale
development/demonstration projects currently
being planned.
In addition CSL has projects underway to
improve FGD performance and reliability, and
to evaluate and broaden the scope of FGD
applications. These projects include determining
chemical and physical properties of throwaway
sludge, development/demonstration of environ-
mentally acceptable disposal technology, the
evaluation of technologies and markets for
sludge utilization, purge reduction/elimination
studies, evaluation of reductant gas technologies
for by-product sulfur production, studies in
overall FGD economics and applicability of
FGD to non-utility combustion sources, and
studies on the marketability of abatement sulfur
and sulfuric acid from utility power plants.
• CLEAN FUELS
A second alternative to control SOX emissions
is to remove the sulfur from fuel prior to
combustion. CSL has developed and improved
methods to physically clean coal of sulfur and
ash, thus reducing the fuel's potential to pollute.
This program is continuing, with emphasis
placed on improving available means of coal
cleaning, and evaluating and sponsoring novel
techniques of physical pollutant removal. The
2-stage froth-flotation technique for separating
pyrite from very fine coal will be demonstrated.
A coal cleaning manual is being prepared which
will aid in implementation of this technology.
Methods are also being developed with CSL's
assistance to chemically clean sulfur from coal.
This project has been demonstrated successfully
at the laboratory scale and a pilot scale opera-
tion is currently under negotiation. Other
methods of pre-combustion cleaning of fuels are
being investigated to determine their potential
for control of sulfur, nitrogen, hazardous ele-
ments and compounds, and particulates. One of
these methods removes vanadium and nickel
from high metals, high sulfur residual oils,
yielding a low polluting fuel oil.
Process
Wet Lime/Limestone
Scrubbing
Wet Lime Scrubbing
Magnesium Oxide
Scrubbing
Magnesium Oxide
Scrubbing
Catalytic Oxidation
Wellman-Lord/Allied
Double Alkali
Waste/By-Product
Throwaway Sludge
Throwaway Sludge
98% Sulfuric Acid
98% Sulfuric Acid
98% Sulfuric Acid
>99% Elemental Sulfur
Throwaway Sludge
Application
30 Mw (prototype)
coal-fired utility
40 Mw (full-scale)
oil-fired utility
1 55 Mw (full-scale)
oil-fired utility
100 Mw (full-scale)
coal-fired utility
100 Mw (full-scale)
coal-fired utility
1 15 Mw (full-scale)
coal-fired utility
30 Mw (full-scale)
coal-fired industrial
SO 2
Removal
Efficiency
75-90%
60-80%
85-90%
85-90%
85-90%
90-95%
85-95%
-------
Pollutant levels in dirty fuels (coal and oil)
can be decreased by fuel conversion processes
such as gasification or liquefaction. These proc-
esses remove potential pollutants from the raw
fuel to provide clean synthetic fuels. In order to
ensure that these systems do not simply transfer
the environmental problems from the fuel usage
to fuel processing, a significant effort is under-
way to environmentally assess the entire sys-
tems. The assessment is resulting in the identifi-
cation of more environmentally sound and
economic systems and is supplying input to
environmental control technology development.
The converted fuels could be utilized in many
ways. One promising method uses the fuel in
combined cycle power generation. CSL has
performed studies in the past and is currently
performing studies on the best integrated com-
bined cycle approach for achieving both environ-
mentally sound and economic total systems. In
conjunction with this study, CSL is co-
sponsoring the development of a high tempera-
ture fuel gas desulfurization system which could
be utilized as one step of the total system.
There is a potential for developing nonpollut-
ing fuels from wastes. A full-scale system which
utilizes municipal waste as a fuel source is being
demonstrated under CSL leadership. As with
other fuel usage systems, an important aspect is
to ensure that the system is environmentally
sound.
• COMBUSTION MODIFICATION
Absorption of sulfur during combustion is
another approach being studied by CSL to
reduce sulfur oxides emissions. Since 1967, this
Laboratory has been actively developing
fluidized-bed combustion for coal, and fluidized-
bed gasification/desulfurization of residual oil as
a means of economical pollution control in
steam and power generation. Study of the
environmental control potential of the fluidized-
bed coal combustion process has advanced to
the stage where a 630 kW (equivalent) pilot
plant, capable of being operated at up to 10 atm
pressure, has been built. Bench scale testing of
the fluidized-bed coal combustion process has
demonstrated 90-95 percent S02 removal allow
sorbent addition rates, and up to 80 percent
reduction of NOX emissions. Cost estimates
indicate a potential power cost savings for new
fluidized-bed boiler plants of 10-15 percent
compared to new conventional pulverized-coal
boilers with flue gas desulfurization. The en-
vironmental potential of the Chemically Active
Fluid Bed process for gasifying and desulfurizing
heavy fuel oil has been demonstrated in a CSL
co-sponsored pilot-scale program. The pilot test-
ing of the process has accomplished impressive
reduction of sulfur, vanadium, nickel, sodium,
and nitrogen oxides emissions. Economic studies
indicate that the process appears to have viable
commercial potential. The design of a larger,
demonstration scale project is now underway.
Combustion modification techniques are
being developed as control methods for nitrogen
oxides and other pollutants from existing and
new conventional stationary combustion
sources, and recent studies indicate that this
technological approach is the primary near-term
method of controlling NOX emissions from the
combustion of fossil fuels. CSL supported and
directed efforts have shown that promising
combustion modification techniques include
combustion with low excess air, staged combus-
tion, recirculation of flue gas in the fuel/air
mixture, and burner/combustor systems rede-
sign. The major emphasis to date has been on
combustion control for the electric utility in-
dustry since this industry ranks first among the
stationary sources as a contributor of NOX
emissions and a major user of fossil fuels.
Industrial, commercial and residential combus-
tion sources have also been subjects for signifi-
cant R&D because of their fuel usage and the
potential impact of area source emissions.
Field testing of state-of-the-art combustion
modification for residential and commercial
heating systems, industrial boilers, and utility
boilers is well advanced, and the results are the
basis for design and user manuals to inform and
guide manufacturers and operators in the appli-
cation of the technology. Pilot demonstrations
of staged combustion and other techniques for
coal-fired utility boilers (firing both Eastern and
Western coals) at field sites are underway.
Reports of these investigations will provide
practical operating information on the effects of
the control techniques on NOX and other
emissions and on unit performance. Similar
studies are planned and are being initiated for
other major combustion source categories in an
effort to provide maximum stationary source
technology for NOX control.
• POLLUTION CONTROL FOR METAL-
LURGICAL AND CHEMICAL
PROCESSES
Control Systems Laboratory is also develop-
ing, evaluating, and improving air pollution
control systems for metallurgical industries. Be-
cause of the different nature of each industry
and different technical and economic constraints
confronting it, programs to develop air pollution
control technology have been tailored to each
industry. The most significant advances to date
have been in the control of emissions from
coking operations. A full-scale demonstration by
CSL in the development of coke oven charging
control methods has led to the commercial
installation of smokeless coke charging systems
-------
by several coke producers. Other promising
demonstration programs in coke pushing and
quenching are nearing completion. Novel coke
oven door sealing techniques are now being
evaluated and will be tested on operating ovens
in the next fiscal year.
Another metallurgical process for which CSL
is developing control techniques is the charging
of basic oxygen furnaces. This development
program, being conducted on a 1 ton pilot
furnace, is concentrated on process modifica-
tions, including development of a prototype
emission collection system and a gas cleaning
system that will allow emissions to be collected.
Recirculation of sinter plant effluent gases is'
being studied as a means to control the large
quantities of particles, hydrocarbons, and other
gaseous emissions which are currently being
emitted from these plants. CSL co-sponsorship
has assisted in the development of a windbox gas
recirculation system which is being installed on a
commercial sinter plant. This process appears to
be a viable solution to the sinter plant emission
problem, with initial results indicating signifi-
cant reduction of both plant emissions and
system energy requirements.
Evaluation and/or developmental control
process work is also being conducted for the iron
foundry cupola, secondary aluminum smelters,
ferro-alloy furnaces, and primary copper, lead,
and zinc smelters.
The control of emissions from chemical and
petroleum processes is also being studied by
CSL. Steam stripping for the control of sulfur
oxides from petroleum catalytic cracker regener-
ators has been tested favorably in a laboratory
program. Available alternatives to control sulfur
emissions from refineries and determination of
the economic impact of various levels of control
on the petroleum industry are currently being
studied. Efforts to control atmospheric emis-
sions from nitric and sulfuric acid plants are
presently concentrated on treatment of tailgases
from these industries. Demonstration programs
are currently underway to evaluate the effi-
ciency of a promising process for cleanup of
these gases. Control of hydrocarbons is being
tested for solvent evaporation operations, ethyl-
ene dichloride manufacture, and other station-
ary sources.
• PARTICLE CONTROL
Much progress has been made in recent years
to control particulate matter emissions. Systems
currently used for particulate removal (i.e.,
scrubbers, electrostatic precipitators, and fabric
filter particle collectors) are receiving continued
development and improvement through research
conducted by Control Systems Laboratory. This
CSL program has led to the development of a
new class of scrubber systems. Called the Flux
Force/Condensation scrubber, this system is
currently being tested at the pilot scale demon-
stration stage. The control of fine particulate
(less than 3 microns) is receiving high priority
because these particles persist in the atmosphere,
comprise a variety of known toxic substances,
and are a major contributor to atmospheric haze
and visibility problems. Activities include evalua-
tion of dust conditioning techniques, modifica-
tion of charging sections and collecting elec-
trodes for electrostatic precipitators, and
evaluation of special operating techniques and
filter fabrics to extend the capability of bag-
houses. In addition, novel concepts of particu-
late collection are being evaluated for per-
formance and cost.
Nearly 70 contractors, grantees and consult-
ants are currently working with CSL to develop
particulate control technology as rapidly as
possible. A systems study of conventional elec-
trostatic precipitators (ESPs) has been published
in an ESP Handbook, and a systems study of
wet ESPs is scheduled for completion this year.
Other documents which have been prepared in
this area under CSL direction include a wet
scrubber handbook and a fabric filter handbook.
A handbook documenting a systems study of
wet scrubber entrainment separators is in
preparation.
• AUXILIARY PROGRAMS
CSL has efforts underway to acquire source
assessment data relating the characteristics of
hazardous, toxic and other pollutant emissions
to their probable impact on receptors in order to
define control technology development needs.
The sources include industrial and utility com-
bustion sources, non-combustion industrial
processes, and open-burning sources. A listing of
source priorities has been established and
sources have been selected for which initial
Source Assessment Documents are now being
developed. These documents will consider the
environmental impact of identified pollutants
and present information necessary to allow
decisions to be made by CSL personnel as to
control development needs for the source types
under consideration.
Evaluation and development of sampling and
analytical procedures supports assessment of
problem areas, evaluation of control technolo-
gies and the development of advanced control
technologies. CSL is involved in detailing cur-
rently available techniques and developing new
methods for sampling, measurement and analy-
sis. The overall program area is balanced be-
tween process stream measurement and analysis,
and specialized air pollution emission measure-
ments. Several handbooks have been completed
detailing manual methods for sampling and
-------
analyzing gaseous pollutants, reviewing instru-
mental methods for measuring gases, and review
methods for determination of particulate mass
and size. In the area of particle measurement
systems, a stack sampler which increases ac-
curacy, minimizes sampling time, and is espe-
cially applicable to gas streams with low grain
loadings was commercially packaged under con-
tract. Studies are being implemented to develop
an even higher volumetric rate sampler in sup-
port of the development of very high efficiency
control devices.
A significant auxiliary program within the
Laboratory is concerned with disseminating the
large volume of information generated by its
research, development and demonstration proj-
ects. For about 7 years, CSL has sponsored
symposia, conferences, briefings, etc. in key
areas such as flue gas desulfurization, clean fuels,
particulate control, and combustion modifica-
tion techniques for SOX control and for NOX
control. About 25 such information exchanges
have taken place and a number are planned
within the near future. CSL personnel publish
about 60 papers per year for presentation in
EPA sponsored and co-sponsored symposia,
technical and industrial association symposia,
and institutional symposia. In addition, as in-
dicated throughout this article, CSL RD&D has
led to the publication of numerous (nearly 90 in
1974) handbooks, manuals, and technical re-
ports which are available to potential users of
the technologies.
A report containing titles, etc. of contract,
grant, in-house (including symposia proceed-
ings), and interagency reports covering air pollu-
tion RD&D work sponsored by CSL and other
EPA organizations is prepared semi-annually and
includes instructions for obtaining the docu-
ments. Additionally, CSL prepares a monthly
report of abstracts representing CSL reports
which have been issued but not yet included in
the overall EPA report of air pollution technical
publications. These documents are made avail-
able to interested parties. CSL is currently
formulating a program to intensify efforts to
disseminate, to industry and regulatory agencies,
technical and economic information derived
from its RD&D programs in order to accelerate
commercial application of control technology.
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION
CHAIRMAN
III
IV
Lester Button
Robert Olson
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
21S 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn St.
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-8880
(Mich., Wis., Minn., Ml., Ind., Ohio)
REGION
CHAIRMAN
VI Mildred Smith
VII John Coakley
VIII Russell Fitch
IX William Bishop
X John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street, Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75201
214 749-1885
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-3849—837-3691
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.,
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-4806
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Technology Transfer Chairman. (See above)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
• Richardson Texas Project—Title: "Somebody around here
must be doing something good." (15 min.)
• Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
• Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif.—Title:
"The Water Plan." (28'/2 min.)
• The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min.)
VIDEOTAPES
• Carbon Adsorption. (40 min.)
• Upgrading Activated Sludge Treatment Plants.
(40 min.)
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
D Phosphorus Removal 1001
D Carbon Adsorption 1002
D Suspended Solids Removal 1003
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 1004
D Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems 1005
D Sludge Treatment and Disposal 1006
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
D Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001
D Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002
D Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003
D First Interim Report on EPA Alkali SO2
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004
D Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005
D Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006
*D SO, Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid
Production Via Magnesia Scrubbing 2007
*D Second Interim Report on EPA
Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008
*D Magnesium Carbonate Process for
Water Treatment 2009
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
D Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.l 3001
EH Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002
CH Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003
L] Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
D Upgrading Lagoons 4001
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
D Oxygen Activated Sludge 4003
D Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities-Case Histories 4005
D Flow Equalization 4006
D Wastewater Filtration , . . .4007
D Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
BROCHURES
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 5001
D Phosphorus Removal 5002
O Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 5003
D Carbon Adsorption 5004
D Oxygen Aeration 5005
D Nitrogen Control 5006
D Seattle, Washington METRO 5007
D Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008
D Indian Creek Reservoir 5009
D Richardson, Texas 5010
HANDBOOKS
D Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories 6001
D Monitoring Industrial Wastewater 6002
D Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes 6003
'Publication listed for first time
If you are not currently on the mailing list for this Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added?
Yes D No D
If you no longer wish to receive this fact sheet, check this box D
Name.
Employer.
Street
City
State.
Zip.
Note: Tear this sheet out and forward to Technology Transfer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC
EPA-335
iru TILLEY
LIBRARY RtGIQN V
i N waCKT DP
It
60606
-------
ECHNOLOGY
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
JANUARY, 1975
U^
1 1 i»m3
TECHNOLOGY TRANSF
From left to right: John Green, USEPA Region VIII Administrator; Robert E. Crowe, Director of Technology
Transfer, Washington, D. C.; Russell E. Train, USEPA, Administrator, Washington, D. C.; and James Smith,
USEPA, NERC, Cincinnati, at the Water Pollution Control Federation Conference, Denver, Colorado.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SLUDGE
MANUAL INTRODUCED AT DENVER
The new Technology Transfer Process De-
sign Manual for Sludge Treatment and Dis-
posal was introduced this past October in Denver
at the 47th Annual Conference of the Water Pollu-
tion Control Federation. The manual was dis-
tributed at the Technology Transfer exhibit area
to more than 5,000 engineers, scientists, and
other professionals attending the conference.
The manual was enthusiastically received at the
conference and several thousand additional re-
quests for copies have been received through the
mail indicating again the need for comprehensive
manuals of this type. A copy of the manual may
be ordered by using the request form at the
rear of this publication.
A highlight at the Technology Transfer exhibit
was the visit of EPA Administrator, Mr. Russell
Train, following his address to the conferees on
October 9.
Refer to inside last page of this publication for
complete listing of current Technology Transfer
publications.
-------
EPA CHEMICAL METHODS MANUAL
AVAILABLE
A revision of the 1971 "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes" is now available
for general distribution. This official EPA meth-
ods manual contains procedures for the chemical
measurements required under Sec. 304(g) of PL
92-500 for use in the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). A number of new
methods are also included in the 1974 revision.
When possible, precision and accuracy data ob-
tained through interlaboratory studies are pro-
vided as part of the methods writeups. In
addition, a new table of recommended sample
preservation techniques and holding times are
included in the introductory material of the
manual.
This methods manual represents the joint
efforts of the senior chemists of the EPA Methods
Development and Quality Assurance Research
Laboratory (MDQARL) working in close coopera-
tion with other scientsts from E.P.A., state and
municipal governments, and key representatives
from private industry. Copies may be obtained on
request to the Office of Technology Transfer,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
METHODS FCR
CHEMCAL ANALYSIS
CF WATER
AND WASTES
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
ON UPGRADING TEXTILE OPERATIONS
TO REDUCE POLLUTION NOW AVAILABLE
A two-part publication covering In-Process
Modification and Pretreatment and Waste Treat-
ment is now available. These publications follow
others developed from the seminar program
where technical sessions were given covering
the above topics. Previous publications were on
Reducing Pollution in the Metal Finishing Indus-
try, the poultry industry and the meatpacking in-
dustry.
The publications are particularly oriented to-
ward owners, managers, superintendents, and
engineering and operating staffs of textile manu-
facturing facilities. The seminars and the publi-
cations are intended to inform the small industry
of the varied in-plant process modifications and
control alternatives available to meet environ-
mental standards. Addressing these topics should
help the facility formulate their control alterna-
tives prior to detailed design considerations.
To order these publications, use the order
form at the rear of this publication.
Wastewater
Treatment
Systems
In-Plarrt !
Control of
Pollution
METAL FINISHING SEMINAR
The seventh in a series of Technology Transfer
seminars on "Upgrading Metal Finishing Facili-
ties to Reduce Pollution" was held in Atlanta,
Georgia, on the 20th & 21st of November.
The first session of the seminar featured a
welcome address by Jack E. Ravan, Regional
Administrator of EPA Region IV. and James
Voytko of the American Electroplaters Society.
Following these addresses, George Harlow, Chief,
Water Enforcement Branch, discussed the EPA
Permit Program and how it impacts the metal
finishing industry, and Quentin H. Pickering of
the EPA Newtown Fish Toxicology Station gave
a presentation on the effects of Heavy Metals on
the Aquatic Environment.
The first major technical session covering In
Process Pollution Abatement was presented by
Alan E. Olsen of Oxy Metal Finishing and Ed Hanf
of the Culcote Company. This session covered
in-plant water reduction, waste load reduction,
spill prevention and control, and air emission
control.
-------
Mr. Gordon Gulp, President of Clean Water Consultants, addresses audience at Municipal Design Seminar.
The session on Waste Treatment Systems was
presented by Dr. Leslie E. Lancy and Fred Stew-
ard of Lancy Laboratories. This session included
a review of the proven waste treatment alterna-
tives as well as a presentation by Dr. Lancy on
Liquid-Solid Separation, Solids Concentration and
Sludge Disposal.
The final session featured a presentation on
Optimum Financial Strategy by Charles R. Mar-
shall of J. A. Commins and Associates and a
review of the EPA Demonstration Grant Program
by John Ciancia of the Edison Water Quality
Laboratory. In this session John Ciancia covered
the status of emerging technology for treatment
of metal finishing wastes.
MUNICIPAL DESIGN SEMINARS
Four additional Technology Transfer municipal
design seminars have been conducted in various
areas of the country since the October 1, 1974,
newsletter was published. These were presented
in Dallas, Texas-November 5-6; Denver, Colo-
rado-November 12-13; Chicago, Illinois-Novem-
ber 14-15; and Boise, Idaho-November 19-20.
The Dallas, Texas, seminar included technical
sessions on sludge treatment and disposal, up-
grading lagoons, and oxygen aeration. The sludge
treatment session was given for the first time in
Region VI and was very well received with a good
question/answer session following the technical
presentations.
The Denver, Colorado, seminar and the Chicago,
Illinois, seminar were conducted during the
same week and both covered sludge treatment
and disposal and nitrogen control. These two
seminars were the first in the Technology Trans-
fer series to feature both sludge treatment and
nitrogen control together in two one-day sessions.
The Boise, Idaho, seminar included technical
sessions on upgrading existing wastewater treat-
ment plants, physical-chemical treatment, and
upgrading lagoons. The first day was devoted en-
tirely to upgrading of existing trickling filter plants
and activated sludge plants. A presentation of
wastewater filtration was also included. Several
case histories were discussed in detail.
Key presentations at the above seminars were
given by Gordon Gulp, Clean Water Consultants;
Denny Parker and Warren Uhte, Brown and Cald-
well; Gene Suhr, CH,M/Hill; Ariel Thomas, Met-
calf & Eddy; Curt McDowell, Air Products; Jim
Laughlin, Shimek, Roming, Jacobs & Finklea;
Bob Baumann, Iowa State University; Joe Rizzo,
Calgon; Joe Middlebrooks and Jim Reynolds,
Utah State University; and Clair Sawyer. EPA
participants included Jim Smith, Ed Barth, Don
Ehreth, Dick Brenner, Jim Westrick, and Jon
Dyer.
MONITORING SEMINARS
Technology Transfer held five more seminars
for industry on Monitoring Industrial Wastewater.
Each of these seminars was attended by 300
plant managers and engineers. Dates and loca-
tions of the Monitoring seminars were:
October 1, 1974-Concord, New Hampshire
October 3, 1974-New York City, N. Y.
November 12, 1974-Atlanta, Georgia
December 10, 1974-Portland, Oregon
December 12, 1974-San Francisco, Calif.
The morning session of these seminars cov-
ered EPA regulatory policy with regard to the
-------
monitoring requirements of PL 92-500. States
within respective EPA regional offices presented
their relationships to the Federal Program with
regard to monitoring policies and requirements.
The afternoon sessions offered technical guid-
ance for implementing a monitoring program. Dr.
Wesley Eckenfelder of Vanderbilt University and
AWARE, Inc. concentrated on an overview of
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater. Dr. Phillip
Shelley of Hydrospace-Challenger discussed
Sampling The session on Flow Measurement was
presented by Vic Jelen of the EPA Cincinnati
Field Investigation Center. The session on Ana-
lytical Quality Control was prepared by Robert
Booth of the EPA Cincinnati Methods Develop-
ment and Quality Assurance Research Labora-
tory. The final session on In-Process Monitoring
was presented by Walter Zabban of Chester En-
gineers.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER/AICHE CO-
SPONSOR THE 2ND NATIONAL CON-
FERENCE ON COMPLETE WATER REUSE
(WATER'S INTERFACE WITH ENERGY, AIR
AND SOLIDS)
Technology Transfer and the American Insti-
tute of Chemical Engineers will jointly sponsor
their 2nd National Conference on Complete Water
Reuse to be held at the Palmer House, May 4-8,
1975, in Chicago, Illinois.
The Conference will bring together govern-
ment, industry, management, and environmental
personnel to consider and evaluate the meaning
and potential for complete water reuse systems
to fulfill the objective of Public Law 92-500 for
Zero Discharge of Pollutants, and Water's Inter-
face with Energy, Air and Solids.
POLLUTION CONTROL SEMINAR FOR THE
TEXTILE INDUSTRY
Technology Transfer held its second industrial
seminar for the Textile Industry entitled "Up-
grading Textile Operations to Reduce Pollution"
in Boston, Massachusetts, on January 15 & 16,
1975.
Opening remarks were made by John A. S. Mc-
Glennon, Regional Administrator, Region I, and
John A. Stewart of the Northern Textile Associa-
tion.
The first general session of the seminar cov-
ered EPA regulatory policy, the effects of textile
mill discharges on the aquatic environment and
the basics of pollution control.
Three technical sessions were given covering
in-plant control of pollution, pretreatment of tex-
tile wastes, and waste treatment systems. The
session on in-plant control was prepared by the
Institute of Textile Technology with the assistance
of technical experts from industry. The session
on treatment systems was prepared by Metcalf
and Eddy, Inc., with the participation of Dr. Clair
Sawyer, Dr. Ronald Sharpin, and Mr. Donald
Hager.
The final session included financial strategies
for pollution control investments presented by
Charles Marshall of J. A. Commins & Associates,
the EPA Demonstration Grant Program for the
Textile Industry presented by Thomas Sargent of
the EPA Laboratory at Athens, Georgia, and a
key-note address on effective government-indus-
try relationships by Wallace Storey of the Amer-
ican Textile Manufacturers Institute.
METHODS DEVELOPMENT
AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
RESEARCH LABORATORY
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
CENTER, CINCINNATI, OHIO
The EPA laboratory in Cincinnati is responsible
for the development, selection, and evaluation of
Measurements being taken at Spectrophotometer at
Methods Development and Quality Assurance Research
Laboratory.
methods for the analysis of water and wastewater
and the development of quality control systems
for evaluating and maintaining the reliability of
laboratory data. Agency test procedures for the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System,
the monitoring of water quality, and the identifi-
cation and measurement of toxic pollutants are
the special responsibilities of the laboratory
staff. Because of EPA concern for data used in
decision making and regulatory actions, an ac-
tive program of quality assurance has been
initiated throughout the Agency laboratories.
Other laboratories providing results on waste
discharges and water quality are also within the
scope of the quality assurance program.
-------
Five branches compose the laboratory organi-
zation. These are:
• Physical and Chemical Methods
• Biological Methods
• Instrumentation Development
• Radiochemistry and Nuclear Engineering
• Quality Assurance and Laboratory Evalua-
tion
The Physical and Chemical Methods Branch
has sections for Inorganic, Organic, and Ad-
vanced Instrumental Analyses. The Inorganic
laboratory group is responsible for research
leading to improved techniques for mineral, nu-
trient, and heavy metal constituents in water and
wastewaters. Emphasis is on rapid instrumental
approaches including automated analysis, specific
ion electrodes, and combustion procedures for
organic carbon and trace metals. The current
demand for reliable methods for waste monitoring
at the low concentrations consistent with ade-
quate treatment is a special challenge for this
section.
Organic methods research involves procedures
for a wide variety of industrial organic chemicals
in effluents, including known and potentially
carcinogenic materials. Reliable methods for new
pesticides and herbicides, for the identification
of spilled oil in rivers, lakes, and estuaries, and
the characterization and measurement of trace
organics in water supplies are urgently needed.
Precise determinations and unambiguous identi-
fications are required for regulatory actions by the
Agency.
The Advanced Instrumentation Section deals
with the application of sophisticated systems for
laboratory analysis. Instruments which at present
may be available only to relatively large labora-
tories can become routine equipment through
application studies and systems design. An ex-
ample of this is the gas chromatograph/mass spec-
trometer, which has become a standard tool in
EPA for organic identifications. The Advanced
Instrumentation Section develops and expands
these types of instruments, providing method-
ology to other laboratories of the Agency. The
Section is also involved in the development of a
computerized system for laboratory automation
which will form the basis for more rapid, reliable
sample processing, analysis, and data handling in
EPA regional laboratories.
In the area of natural sciences, the Biological
Methods Branch, through its Virology, Micro-
biology, and Aquatic Biology Sections, seeks to
improve procedures for the collection, enumera-
tion, and identification of micro and macro orga-
nisms in water supplies, ambient waters, and
municipal wastes. The importance of viruses as
health hazards to humans requires ability to
rapidly isolate and quantify these organisms in
a variety of environmental media. Present meth-
ods are tedious and time consuming and the
Virology Section is committed to the development
of improved and standarized laboratory proce-
dures which will permit rapid assessment of
hazard. These procedures must be capable of
isolating a few microorganisms in large quanti-
ties of water, because of the likelihood of disease
transmission by relatively low numbers of viruses.
Effluent standards and water quality criteria
include limitations on the number of "indicator"
organisms (total and fecal coliforms) which may
be present. The Microbiological Section is re-
sponsible for improved techniques for the enu-
meration of these organisms, as well as patho-
gens such as salmonella. The emphasis is on
rapid procedures which can be used in labora-
tories with limited technical personnel. The
development of quality assurance techniques to
assure reliable microbiological data is also the
concern of this section.
The Aquatic Biology Section develops and
evaluates methods for use by Agency biologists
in field and laboratory studies carried out to
detect violations of water quality standards,
evaluate the trophic status of surface waters,
determine long-term trends in surface water
quality, and measure the toxicity of specific pollu-
tants or effluents to individual species or com-
munities of aquatic organisms. The methodology
developed by this section includes: sample col-
lection, sample processing and counting, identi-
fication of aquatic organisms; biomass deter-
minations; measurement of metabolic rates;
measurement of toxicity, bioaccumulation and
biomagnification of pollutants; and biological
data processing and evaluation.
The Instrumentation Development Branch is
responsible for the research on new monitoring
instrumentation for water and wastes and for the
evaluation of commercially available effluent
monitoring equipment. Emphasis is placed on
instruments which will measure one or more
constituents of the waste on a continuous basis
and record the data for later analysis or transmit
the information to a central station. The relia-
bility of the equipment is evaluated under envi-
ronmental stress in the testing laboratory, then
installed in an actual monitoring mode for fur-
ther examination. The ultimate objective is to
guide the Agency in the selection of its own
monitoring instruments and to determine the
usefulness of data submitted by a discharger
when similar equipment is used. Through the
testing of a variety of instruments the most
desirable design and operation can be identified,
leading to detailed specifications and guidelines
for future equipment procurement and utilization.
In its evaluation program, the measurement
principle, the sensor design, the internal elec-
tronic configuration, and the data processing and
transmission capabilities are assessed. The
Branch has the facilities and staff to examine
each component individually and collectively and
to identify the strengths and weaknesses of in-
-------
strument design ad operation. Evaluation reports
are prepared and published on each instrument
tested.
Because of the increasing use of nuclear re-
actors for power generation, methods for the
assessment of environmental impact of reactor
operations and waste handling are necessary.
The Radiochemistry and Nuclear Engineering
Branch is charged with selecting, developing and
demonstrating analytical methods for radionu-
clides in a variety of environmental media. The
staff of the Branch studies the transport of
radionuclides in the vicinity of reactors and
makes field studies to define the impact of pro-
posed new nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel
processing facilities. Procedures for the accurate
measurement of the amount and types of radio-
nuclides in plant effluents are developed and
standardized by the Branch. Technical assistance
is provided to other elements of EPA in the
assessment of radioactivity levels in the envi-
ronment.
A variety of activities related to improving and
monitoring the quality of laboratory data are
carried out by the Quality Assurance and Labora-
tory Evaluation Branch of MDQARL Inter-
laboratory studies leading to the validation of
Agency test procedures for water quality and
waste constituents are conducted. These studies,
utilizing many laboratories from the public and
private sectors, provide data on the precision,
accuracy, and dependability of approved methods
and assist in the interpretation of monitoring
data. Reports of these studies provide information
to both analysts and decision makers and help
to identify needed improvement in laboratory
methodology.
The Branch develops intralaboratory quality
control procedures to assure the reliability of
analyses and data handling and provides check
samples for the evaluation of analyst perform-
ance. A series of quality control samples are
distributed by the Branch to laboratories engaged
in water and waste analysis. These samples,
available without charge, enable the laboratory
to measure its performance against known pollu-
tant levels and to highlight problem areas in
analytical methods, equipment, or techniques.
Through both inhouse and extramural projects,
the Quality Assurance and Laboratory Evaluation
Branch develops systems for the evaluation of
laboratories, including inspection forms, test
protocols, check sample performance evaluations,
and approval mechanisms. These systems, used
to measure laboratory capabilities at the Federal,
state, and local level, assist in establishing the
reliability of environmental data banks. As pres-
ently conceived, these programs may lead to the
approval of specific laboratories for environmental
measurements required by current EPA regula-
tory activities.
The present staff of the MDQAR Laboratory
numbers 90, of which 52 are professional scien-
tists and engineers. At the present time the staff
is in three separate buildings in Cincinnati, with
the laboratory headquarters at 1014 Broadway.
When the new National Environmental Research
Center building is completed in October, the
laboratory will be consolidated into the new and
improved physical facility.
The MDQAR Laboratory has an increasing his-
tory. It was established in 1957 as the central
laboratory for the National Water Quality Network
of the U.S. Public Health Service. With the for-
mation of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration as the parent organization, and
the transfer of surveillance responsibilities to
regional offices, the laboratory assumed its pres-
ent role as a research component under the title
of Analytical Quality Control Laboratory. In Sep-
tember 1973, the present MDQARL was formed,
as part of the National Environmental Research
Center-Cincinnati, incorporating the old AQCL
with virology and radiochemistry elements from
other Cincinnati organizations.
Throughout its history MDQARL has made sig-
nificant contributions to the science of water
and waste methodology. Among these are the
apolication of the carbon absorption systems
for monitoring organics, methods for chlorinated
hydrocarbon pesticides, automated colorimetric
analyses, use of the emission spectrograph for
multielement measurements, procedures for the
identification of oil, methods for the determina-
tion of mercury, the application of gas chroma-
tography/mass spectrometer (GC/MS) to organic
identification, the development of artificial sub-
strates for the collection of aquatic organisms,
the preparation and publication of taxonomic
keys for organism identification, methods for the
isolation and identification of viruses and patho-
gens in water, the publication of specifications
for integrated water quality monitoring instru-
ments and data transmission systems, and the
conduct of definitive studies of the precision and
accuracy of analytical methods.
Current research activities include improved
methods for cyanide, phenols, pesticides, and
other toxic pollutants, development of new
techniques for GC/MS, quantitative detection
of viruses, rapid methods for pathogens and
indicator organisms, new and improved tech-
niques for biological investigations, evaluation
of effluent monitoring systems, measurement of
gaseous radionuclides in the vicinity of nuclear
facilities, validation of Agency methods for chemi-
cal and biological measurements, and the devel-
opment of new check samples for a variety of
laboratory programs.
In order to maintain awareness of standardiza-
tion activities by other groups, the laboratory
staff participates in the preparation of Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste-
water, Committees D-19, D-22, E-2, and E-36 of
-------
ASTM, the International Standards Organization,
and the World Health Organization.
A wide variety of publications, described in a
brochure, are available from the laboratory.
Among these are "Methods for Chemical Analysis
of Water and Wastes" (described in another
article in this Newsletter), "Biological Field and
Laboratory Methods," "Methods for Organic Pes-
ticides in Water and Wastewater," "Handbook
for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Waste-
water Laboratories," and a series of reports on
method validation studies. The laboratory pub-
lishes and distributes its own newsletter, called
"Analytical Quality Control." These publications
and further information on laboratory activities
may be obtained by writing to: Director, Methods
Development and Quality Assurance Research,
Laboratory, National Environmental Research
Center, EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PORTS
From left to right: Mrs. Pat Zweig, USEPA, Region IV; Mr. Asa Foster, USEPA, Region IV,
Technology Transfer Chairman; and Mrs. Dianne Kilmer, USEPA, Region IV, Public .Affairs
Office, participate in the International Textile Exposition (ITEX 74) in Greenville, South Carolina.
Where To Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., VaO
Asa B. Foster, it. Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
(N.C , S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga, Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
REGION CHAIRMAN
I Lester Sutton
II Robert Olson
III Albert Montague
IV
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI Mildred Smith
VII John Coakley
VIII Russell Fitch
IX William Bishop
John Osborn
V Clifford Risley
Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn St.
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-5756
(Mich., Wis, Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street, Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75201
214 749-1461
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-3849—837-3691
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D., S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-4806
(Calif, Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
n Phosphorus Removal 1001
D Carbon Adsorption 1002
D Suspended Solids Removal 1003
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 1004
D Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems 1005
D Sludge Treatment and Disposal 1006
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
D Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001
D Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002
D Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003
D First Interim Report on EPA Alkali S0=
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004
n Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005
Q Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
D Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001
D Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002
D Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003
D Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols) 3004
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
n Upgrading Lagoons 4001
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
D Oxygen Activated Sludge 4003
O Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005
D Flow Equalization 4006
D Wastewater Filtration 4007
D Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
BROCHURES
D Physical-Chemical Treatment 5001
D Phosphorus Removal 5002
n Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 5003
D Carbon Adsorption 5004
D Oxygen Aeration 5005
D Nitrogen Control 5006
D Seattle, Washington METRO 5007
D Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008
H Indian Creek Reservoir 5009
n Richardson, Texas 5010
HANDBOOKS
D Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories 6001
G Monitoring Industrial Wastewater 6002
*D Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water 6003
* Publication listed for first time
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Technology Transfer Chairman. (See listing)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound) VIDEOTAPES
• Richardson Texas Project—Title: "Somebody around
here must be doing something good." (15 min.)
• Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
• Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif.—
Title: "The Water Plan." (28% min.)
• The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min.)
• Carbon Adsorption. (40 min.)
• Upgrading Activated Sludge Treatment Plants.
(40 min.)
If you are not currently on the mailing list for this Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added?
Yes D No n
If you no longer wish to receive this fact sheet, check this box n
Name
Employer
Street
City
. Title
State
Phone
Zip
Note: Tear this sheet out and forward to Technology Transfer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C.
20460
-------
Detach this request sheet and mail in envelope to
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER; RD 677
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC
EPA-335
LOU TILLEY
fcPA RLGION V
23U S UEARBOHN
K-JOM i't55A
CHICAGO
IL
-------
x/f
ECHNOLOGY
RAIMSFER
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OCTOBER 1,1374
NEW SLUDGE TREATMENT AND
DISPOSAL DESIGN MANUAL TO BE
FEATURED AT WPCF CONFERENCE
The EPA Technology Transfer Program will once
again participate in the annual conference of the
Water Pollution Control Federation being held this
year in Denver, Colorado, in October.
The new Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual for Sludge Treatment and Disposal will be
introduced and distributed at the Denver meeting.
There will be no charge for this new "blue book."
The new sludge manual will be comprehensive in
scope and include such topics as physical and
chemical properties, thickening, stabilization,
conditioning, dewatering, reduction, final disposal
processes, and case studies. New chemical sludges
and oxygen sludges will be covered in addition to the
various types of equipment required to perform the
basic processes. All new processes and equipment
will be included as well as cost data and all
applicable data and information from the EPA
research and demonstration program.
Host region for this years conference will be EPA's
Region VIII. John A. Green, the Regional
Administrator, will be on hand at the opening of the
conference, which annually attracts thousands of
the nations top pollution experts.
On October 3,1971, John A. Green was appointed
as the first Regional Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, Rocky Mountain-
Prairie Region, by EPA National Administrator,
William D. Ruckelshaus.
As Regional Administrator, Green is the highest
level federal official concerned with protecting the
environment in the states of Colorado, Utah,
Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South
Dakota. He is responsible not only for the agency's
leadership in environmental management, but, also,
for planning and integrating important strategies
and priorities in the six-state region. Green directs
the development and administration of a coherent,
unified approach to the interrelated problems of air
and water pollution, pesticides, radiation, solid
waste and noise.
Immediately prior to being appointed Regional
Administrator, Green served as senior staff advisor
John Green, EPA, Region VIII, Administrator.
to the EPA Assistant Administrator for Categorical
Programs in Washington, D.C. Green was
responsible for guiding the program's control of a
wide variety of environmental contaminants,
including pesticides, radiation, and solid waste.
Green has also served as Director of Management,
Federal Water Quality Administration in Arlington,
Virginia. As Director, Green supervised special
studies aimed at improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of the nation's "Clean Water" program
as well as overseeing the development of a
long-range strategy for the attainment, nationally, of
the Federal Water Quality Standards.
-------
Choosing the
Optimum Financial
Strategy
SULFIDE CONTROL MANUAL AVAILABLE
The Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual for Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage
Systems, prepared by Pomeroy, Johnston, and
Bailey of Pasadena, California, is currently being
distributed. This Manual includes information for all
feasible alternative designs that can be used to
control sulfides and minimize their effects in both
new and existing sewerage systems.
Specific topics covered include: Characteristics
and Properties of Hydrogen Sulfide; Occurrence
and Effects of Sulfide in Sewers; Investigation in
Existing Systems; and Design of Sewer Systems to
Prevent Sulfide Problems. Case histories, examples,
and cost estimates are presented to substantiate
the "how-to" approach of this manual.
Individuals interested in obtaining, at no charge, a
copy of the Sulfide Control Manual should fill out the
appropriate form in the back of this publication and
forward it to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
ON UPGRADING MEAT PACKING TO
REDUCE POLLUTION NOW AVAILABLE
A three part publication covering In-Process
Modification and Pretreatment, Waste Treatment,
and Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategy is
now available. These publications follow others
developed from the seminar program where
technical sessions were given covering the above
topics. Previous publications were on Reducing
Pollution in the Metal Finishing Industry and the
Poultry Industry.
The publications are particularly oriented toward
owners, managers, superintendents, and engineer-
ing and operating staffs of meat packing facilities.
The seminars and the publications are intended to
inform the small industry of the varied in-plant
process modifications and control alternatives
available to meet environmental standards.
Addressing these topics should help the facility
formulate their control alternatives prior to detailed
design considerations.
To order these publications, use the order form at
the rear of this publication.
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORT ON
POLLUTION ABATEMENT IN A BREWING
FACILITY NOW AVAILABLE
A technical capsule report on the
pollution abatement program progress Adolph
Coors brewing facility at Golden, Colorado is now
available.
The report spotlights the achievement made by
Coors in waste reduction, water reuse, and
by-product recovery and utilization. The report
shows the significant savings that can be realized
through a well planned and well executed
environmental control and resource conservation
program. Through these efforts Coors has realized a
savings of more than $1,500,000 in treatment plant
capital costs and a savings of nearly $1,500,000 per
year in treatment plant operating costs. The success
of the Coors environmental control program is due,
to a great extent, to the strong support given by
William K. Coors and his management staff.
The process design improvements and in plant
-------
Physical-Chemical
Nitrogen Removal
Vteaowaterfwtmert
Row
Equalization
changes made by Coors to reuse water, reduce waste
loads and recover by-products are directly
applicable to other breweries as well as other food
processing industries.
To order your copy of this capsule report, use the
order blank on the back page.
NEW MUNICIPAL SEMINAR
PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE
Three new Technology Transfer municipal
seminar publications have been published and are
now available for distribution. These publications
include material developed for the design seminar
program and have been used throughout the
country. The new seminar publications, which may
be ordered by using the request form at the rear of
this newsletter, include the following:
"Flow Equalization" by Metcalf & Eddy Engineers
(Stanley Elkerton, primary author). This publication
includes determination of equalization require-
ments, design and construction procedures,
equalization impact on other treatment compo-
nents, costs, and four selected case histories.
"Wastewater Filtration" by John Cleasby and
Robert Baumann. This publication includes most
aspects of filter design including filter
configurations, methods of flow control, backwash-
ing requirements, headloss development, and
selection of filtration rates.
"Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal" by Gulp,
Wesner, and Culp (Gordon Gulp primary author).
Included in this publication are design
considerations for the three feasible physical-chem-
ical methods of nitrogen removal, i.e. selective ion
exchange, ammonia stripping, and break point
chlorination. Chapters include information on
typical design criteria, pilot testing, case histories,
costs, and basic comparison of the three processes.
MUNICIPAL DESIGN SEMINARS
Five additional Technology Transfer municipal
design seminars have been conducted in various
areas of the country since publication of the last
newsletter. These were presented in Newark, New
Jersey, March 13-15; San Juan, Puerto Rico, April
8-10; Orlando, Florida, May 7-9; Seattle,
Washington, May 21-22, and Boston, Massachusetts,
September 10-11.
The Newark, N.J. seminar included technical
sessions on nitrogen control, upgrading existing
wastewater treatment plants, and combined sewer
overflows. The nitrogen control session was
especially well received with Dr. Clair Sawyer
covering biological nitrification and denitnfication
and Mr. Gordon Culp covering physical-chemical
nitrogen removal. They were assisted by Mr. Don
Ehreth of the EPA Office of R&D.
The San Juan, P.R. seminar included technical
sessions on sludge treatment and disposal and
upgrading existing trickling filter plants. In addition
to the technical session, a general first day session
covered the EPA municipal construction program,
construction design guidelines and EPA regional
grants program and procedures. EPA speakers at
this session included Mr. Harold Cahill and Mr.
Charles Sutfin of the Office of Water Programs
Operations, and Mr. Rocco Ricci of EPA Region I.
This seminar was held with the cooperation of the
-------
Attendees of the Orlando, Florida, Seminar.
Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board and the
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority.
The Orlando, Fla. seminar included sessions on
oxygen aeration, nitrogen control and upgrading
existing treatment facilities. The opening morning
general session included discussions of user
charges, construction guidelines, and municipal
permits.
The Seattle, Wash, seminar featured two full day
sessions on sludge treatment and disposal and
infiltration/inflow control. The sludge session
featured three of the key individuals involved in
preparation of the forthcoming Technology Transfer
sludge design manual (see story on 1st page); Dr.
Jim Smith of the EPA National Environmental
Research Center, Cincinnati; Mr. Jack Harrison of
Black, Crow, and Eidness Engrs; and Mr. Gordon
Gulp of CWC Consultants.
The Boston, Mass, seminar featured the first full
day nitrogen control session conducted at a T.T.
seminar with presentations by Dr. Clair Sawyer, Dr.
Denny Parker, Gordon Gulp, Don Ehreth and Ed
Barth. Technical sessions were also conducted on
physical-chemical treatment and phosphorus
removal.
Key presentations by other speakers at the above
seminars were given by Dr. Denny Parker and
Warren Uhte, Brown and Caldwell; Dr. Bob
Baumann and Dr. Jack Cleasby, Iowa State
University; Charles Hansen, Envirex; James
Laughlin, Shimek, Roming, Jacobs & Finklea; Ariel
Thomas, Metcalf & Eddy; Curt McDowell, Air
Products; Mike Miller, Union Carbide; Bob Pfefferle
and Tom Clark, American Consulting Service; and
Jon Dyer, Ed Barth, Dick Field and Jesse Cohen
from the EPA R&D staff.
SEMINAR SERIES POLLUTION
ABATEMENT IN METAL FINISHING
FACILITIES
The sixth in a series of Technology
Transfer seminars on "Upgrading Metal Finishing
Facilities to Reduce Pollution" was held in Chicago,
Illinois on May 7-8, 1974.
The first session of the seminar featured a
welcome address by Francis T. Mayo, Administrator
for EPA's Region V, and an address by Simon P. Gary
of the American Electroplaters Society on the impact
of the Water Pollution Control Act on the plating
industry. Following these addresses, Quentm H.
Pickering of the EPA Newtown Fish Toxicology
Station gave a presentation on the effects of Heavy
Metals on the Aquatic Environment.
The first major technical sessions covering In
Process Pollution Abatement was presented by Alan
E. Olsen of Oxy Metal Finishing and Ed Hanf of the
Culcote Company. This session covered in-plant
water reduction, waste load reduction, spill
prevention and control, and air emission control.
The sessions on Waste Treatment Systems was
presented by Dr. Leslie E. Lancy and Fred Steward
of Lancy Laboratories. This session included a
review of the proven waste treatment alternatives
as well as a presentation by Dr. Lancy on
Liquid-Solid Separation Solids Concentration and
Sludge Disposal.
The final session featured a presentation on
Optimum Financial Strategy by Charles R. Marshall
of J. A. Commins and Associates and a review of the
EPA Demonstration Grant Program by John Ciancia
of the Edison Water Quality Laboratory. In this
-------
session John Ciancia covered the status of emerging
technology for treatment of metal finishing wastes.
POLLUTION CONTROL SEMINAR
FOR THE SEAFOOD INDUSTRY
Technology Transfer in cooperation with the
National Fisheries Institute and the National
Canners Association held its first two seminars for
the seafood processing industry entitled "Up-
grading Seafood Processing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution" inNew Orleans,La.on May 5-6,1974, and
in Seattle, Washington on April 2-3, 1974.
The seminars featured addresses by Roy Martin of
the National Fisheries Institute and Allen
Katsuyama of the National Canners Association.
The emphasis for the two-day seminars was on the
sessions concerning In-Plant Control of Wastes and
Waste Treatment Systems. The session on In-Plant
Control featured Dr. George Piggott of the
University of Washington's Institute for Food
Science. The session on waste treatment featured
Michael Soderquist of Environmental Associates,
Inc. The treatment session included informative
presentations on the latest progress in waste
treatment demonstration projects, presented by
Fred G. Claggett of Canada's Envrionmental
Protection Service, A. Frank Mauldin of Dorminique,
Szabo and Associates, and Irwin F. Snyder of
Carborundum Envrionmental Systems, Inc.
The seafood processing industry was represented
by Roy Martin of the National Fisheries Institute in
his talk on Future Considerations of Seafood
Technology, and by Allen Katsuyama of the National
Canners Association in his talk on Effective
Government-Industry Relationships to Control
Pollution.
The final session of the seminars featured
presentations on Optimum Financing Strategy by
Charles R. Marshall of J. A. Commins and
Associates, and a discussion on the EPA
Demonstration Grant Program by Kenneth Dostal
and Harold Thompson of the EPA Waste Treatment
Research Program in Corvallis, Oregon.
MONITORING AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
CONTROL SEMINARS
Technology Transfer held its first
seminars for industry on Monitoring Industrial
Wastewater and Toxic Substances Control in
Atlanta, Georgia on April 18 and 19, 1974.
The Monitoring Seminar, attended by 300 plant
managers, featured a welcome address by John C.
White, EPA Deputy Regional Administrator.
The morning session of the seminar covered EPA
regulatory policy with regard to the monitoring
requirements of PL 92-500. Florida, Kentucky,
Audience at Technology Transfer Monitoring Seminar held in Atlanta, Georgia.
-------
Asa Foster, Technology Transfer Chairman for Region IV,
addresses Monitoring Seminar in Atlanta. Seated from left to
right are. Wesley Eckenfelder, of Aware, Inc, and Walter Zabban,
of Chester Engineers.
Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Tennessee presented the states' relationship to
the Federal Program.
The afternoon session offered technical guidance
for implementing a monitoring program. Dr. Wesley
Eckenfelder of Vanderbilt University and AWARE,
Inc. concentrated on an overview of Monitoring
Industrial Wastewater. Dr. Phillip Shelly of
Hydrospace-Challenger discussed Sampling. The
session on Flow Measurement was presented by Vic
Jelen of the EPA Cincinnati Field Investigation
Center. The session on Analytical Quality Control
was prepared by Robert Booth of the EPA Cincinnati
Methods Development and Quality Assurance
Research Laboratory. The final session on
In-Process Monitoring was presented by Walter
Zabban of Chester Engineers.
The Toxic Substances Control seminar was
presented on the following day. The first session was
devoted to presenting an overview of the Toxic
Substances Provisions of PL 92-500 and EPA's
regulatory policy toward Toxic Substances.
The final morning session was a presentation on
how permits are processed for toxic substance
discharges.
The second session was designed to present to
the participants of the seminar a comprehensive
discussion on Guidance for Implementing a Control
Program. Charles Sercu of Dow Chemical Company
began this session with a talk on Industry's
Responsibilities in Toxic Pollutant Effluent
Standards. Donald A. Baehl of Union Carbide
Corporation prepared the session on Minimizing
Toxics in Effluents by Process Design and In-Plant
Operating Practices. The next presentation was by
Don Hager of Calgon Corporation who discussed
Activated Carbon Adsorption of Aldrin, Diedrin,
Charles Sercu of Dow Chemical addresses Atlanta Technology
Transfer Seminar on Toxic Substances Control.
Endrin, PCB's, DDT and Toxaphene. The session on
the Control of Cadmium and Cyanide was prepared
by Alan E. Olsen of OXY Metal Finishing.
Control of Benzidene was the subject of the next
session by Thomas Kopp of EPA's Office of Toxic
Substances.
Dr. Lloyd Falk of DuPont Corporation completed
the seminar with a presentation on Dispersion
Techniques.
NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
MOTION PICTURE AVAILABLE-
"THE SEATTLE METRO STORY"
Another motion picture is now available
through the Technology Transfer Program. The 28
minute, 16 mm color sound film depicts the
development of Seattle, Washington METRO
interceptor system and treatment facilities and their
role in abating pollution of Puget Sound and Lake
Washington. The film features the phosphorus
removal facilities at the Rentin treatment plant;
computer control of combined flow overflows in the
interceptor system; use of sludge from the plant
centrifuges as landfill; and development and
formation of the n/IETRO itself. The film was made
possible by the cooperation and efforts of the
Seattle METRO staff and the EPA Region X staff in
Seattle.
Requests for loan of this film, and other
Technology Transfer films listed on the request form
at the rear of this newsletter, may be made to the
appropriate Technology Transfer Regional Chair-
man also listed at the rear of this publication.
-------
Left to right: Dennis Cannon, Paul Minor and Jim Truettof the
Technology Transfer Staff participating in the WWEMA Confer-
ence
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PARTICIPATES
IN WWEMA CONFERENCE
AND EXPOSITION
Technology Transfer participated in the
Waste Water Equipment Manufacturers Association
(WWEMA) annual meeting in Detroit on April 1-4,
1974, with a presentation of Technology
Development by Paul Minor and an exhibit featuring
the industrial seminar publications for the meat
packing, metal finishing and poultry industries, the
industrial technical capsule reports and the
Handbook on Monitoring Industrial Wastewater.
FUTURE MONITORING SEMINARS
A Monitoring Industrial Wastewater
Seminar was held on April 18,1974, in Atlanta.
See article on page 5 of this Newsletter. This
seminar was an overwhelming success as
measured by the attendance, and feedback
obtained since the seminar. Technology
Transfer is planning to present 10 additional
Monitoring seminars - one in each EPA Region -
during this fiscal year. Final dates dnd locations
have not yet been finalized. If you are interested
in attending one of these seminars, contact your
Regional Technology Transfer Chairman listed
in this Fact Sheet.
TEXTILE SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
FEATURED AT THE INTERNATIONAL
TEXTILE EXPOSITION
Technology Transfer will provide an
exhibit at the International Textile Exposition
(ITEX) in Greenville, South Carolina on October
21-25,1974. The exhibit will feature the distribution
of a two part publication series on "Upgrading
Textile Operations to Reduce Pollution" which were
developed for the Technology Transfer seminar for
the textile industry. The publications cover "In-Plant
Control of Pollution" and "Wastewater Treatment
Systems". Volume one on In-Plant Control was
prepared under the direction of the Institute of
Textile Technology by experts within the Textile
industry. Volume two on waste treatment was
prepared by Metcalf & Eddy Inc., consulting
engineers.
Asa B. Foster Jr., Technology Transfer Chairman
for EPA Region IV in Atlanta and several Regional
representatives will participate in the ITEX
exhibition.
For your copy of these publications, use the order
form on the back of this newsletter.
FLOW EQUALIZATION*
GENERAL
The primary objective of flow-equalization
basins for municipal wastewater plants is simply to
dampen the diurnal flow variation, and thus achieve
a constant or nearly constant flow rate through the
downstream treatment processes. A desirable
secondary objective is to dampen the concentration
and mass flow of wastewater constituents by
blending the wastewater in the equalization basin.
This results in a more uniform loading of organics,
nutrients, and other suspended and dissolved
constituents to subsequent processes.
Through achieving these objectives, flow
equalization can significantly improve the
performance of an existing treatment facility, and is
a useful upgrading technique. In the case of new
plant design, flow equalization can reduce the
required size of downstream facilities.
Variations Of Flow Equalization
Equalization of municipal wastewater flows may
be divided into three broad categories:
•Equalization of dry weather flows
•Equalization of wet weather flows from separate
sanitary sewers
•Equalization of combined storm and sanitary
wastewater
This discussion is primarily concerned with
equalization of dry weather flows. This procedure
*Extracted from "Flow Equalization"prepared for
the EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication
Series. Use the form at the rear of this newsletter for
a copy of the complete publication.
-------
provides a technique for achieving normal operation
of a treatment plant under near ideal loading
conditions. Its relatively low cost makes it attractive
for upgrading an overloaded plant.
Although the use of influent sewers for
equalization should not be ignored, the most
positive and effective means to maximize the
benefits possible with equalization is through the
use of specially designed equalization basins. These
basins should normally be located near the head end
of the treatment works, preferably downstream of
pretreatment facilities and mixing must be provided
to keep the basins aerobic and prevent solids
deposition.
It is sometimes desirable to locate the
equalization basin at strategic locations within the
collection system. This offers the added advantage
of economically relieving trunk sewer overload
during peak flow periods.1 However, it does result in
the need for a pumping facility and therefore is best
located where a need for pumping already exists.
Equalization basins may be desired as either
in-line or side-line units. In the in-line design all the
flow passes through the equalization basin. This
results in significant concentration and mass flow
damping. In the side-line design only that amount of
flow above the daily average is diverted through the
equalization basin. This scheme minimizes pumping
requirements at the expense of less effective
concentration damping.
For new construction and for upgrading large
plants, it is desirable to construct compartmental-
ized or multiple basins. This feature will allow the
flexibility to dewater a portion of the facility for
maintenance or equipment repair while still
providing some flow equalization. Where a basin is
designed for storage and equalization of wet
weather flows, compartmentalized tanks will allow
the utilization of a portion of the basin for dry
weather flow equalization.
Single basin installations may be used for
upgrading small plants, but must have the provision
to be dewatered while maintaining complete
treatment. This will require a bypass line around the
basin to allow the downstream portion of the plant
to operate unequalized when the flow equalization
facility is out of service.
Impact On Primary Settling
The most beneficial impact on primary settling is
the reduction of peak, overflow rates resulting in
improved performance and a more uniform primary
effluent quality. Flow equalization permits the sizing
of new clarifiers based on equalized flow rates
rather than peak rates. In an existing primary
clarifier that is hydraulically overloaded during
periods of peak diurnal flow, equalization can reduce
the maximum overflow rate to an acceptable level. A
constant influent feed rate also avoids hydraulic
disruptions in the clarifier created by sudden flow
changes, especially those caused by additional
wastewater lift pumps suddenly coming on line.
LaGregaand Keenan2 investigated the effect of
flow equalization at the 1.8 mgd Newark, N.J.,
Wastewater Treatment Plant. An existing aeration
tank was temporarily converted to an equalization
basin. They compared the performance of primary
settling under marginal operating conditions, with
and without equalization. The results are show in
Table 1.
It has been demonstrated3'4 that preaeration can
significantly improve primary settling. Roe3
concluded that preaeration perflocculates sus-
pended solids (SS) thereby improving their settling
characteristics. Indications are that this benefit may
be realized by aerated equalization basins. This
benefit may be diminished when the equalized flow
is centrifugally pumped to the primary clarifier due
to the shearing of the floe.
Impact On Biological Treatment
Table • Effect of flow equalization on primary settling, Newark, N.Y.
Item
Primary influent SS, mg/l
Primary effluent SS, mg/l
SS removal in primaries, percent ...
Normal flow
136.7
105.4
23
Equalized flow
128
68
47
Note -Average flow slightly higher in unequalized portion of study.
As contrasted to primary treatment or other
mainly physical processes where concentration
damping is of minor benefit, biological treatment
performance can benefit significantly from both
concentration damping and flow smoothing.
Concentration damping can protect biological
processes from upset or failure from shock loading.
of toxic or treatment inhibiting side-line basins for
biological treatment applications.
Improvement effluent quality due to stabilized
mass loading of BOD on biological systems treating
normal domestic wastes has not been adequately
demonstrated to date. It is expected that the effect
will be significant where diurnal fluctuations in
organic mass loadings are extreme. This situation
may arise at a wastewater treatment plant receiving
a high-strength industrial flow of short duration.
Damping of flow and mass loading will also improve
aeration tank performance where aeration
equipment is marginal or inadequate in satisfying
peak diurnal-loading oxygen demands.5
The optimum pH for bacterial growth lies between
6.5 and 7.5. In-line flow equalization can provide an
effective means for maintaining a stabilized pH
within this range.
Flow smoothing can be expected to improve final
settling even more so than primary settling. In the
activated-sludge process, flow equalization has the
added benefit of stabilizing the solids loading on the
final clarifier. This has two ramifications:
• The mixed-liquor suspended solids (MLSS)
concentration can be incareased thereby
decreasing the food-to-mass ratio (F/M) and
increasing the solids retention time (SRT). This
may result in an increased level of nitrification,
and a decrease in biological sludge production. It
may also improve the performance of a system
-------
operating at an excessively high daily peak F/M.
•Diurnal fluctuations in the sludge blanket level
will be reduced. This reduces the potential for
solids being drawn over the weir by the higher
velocities in the zone of the effluent weirs.
Miscellaneous Benefits
In chemical coagulation and precipitation systems
using iron aluminum salts, the quantity of chemical
coagulant required as proportional to the mass of
material to be precipitated. Damping of mass
loadings with in-line equalization will improve
chemical feed control and process reliability, and
many reduce instrumentation complexity and costs.
Flow smoothing will reduce the surface area
required and enhance the performance of tertiary
filters. A constant feed rate will lead to more uniform
solids loadings and filtration cycles.
The equalization basin provides an excellent point
of return for recycled concentrated waste streams
such as digester supernatent, sludge-dewatering
filtrated, and polishing-filter backwash.
Some biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
reduction is likely to occur in an aerated
equalization basin. A 10-to-20-percent reduction
has been suggested for an in-line basin equalizing
raw wastewater. However, the degree of reduction
will depend upon the detention time in the basin, the
aeration provided, wastewater temperature, and
other factors. For an existing treatment plant, a
simple series of oxygen uptake studies on a
representative sample of wastewater can determine
the BOD reduction that will occur.
Roe3 observed that preaeration may improve the
treatability of raw wastewater by creating a positive
oxidation-reduction potential, thereby reducing the
degree of oxidation required in subsequent stages of
treatment.
Determination Of Equalization Requirements
The design of an equalization basin requires the
evaluation and selections of a number of features as
follows:
•In-line versus side-line basins
• Basin volume
• Degree of compartmentalization
• Type of construction-earthen, concrete, or steel
•Aeration and mixing equipment
• Pumping and control concept
• Location in treatment system
The design decisions must be based on the nature
and extent of the treatment processes used, the
benefits desired, and local site conditions and
constraints.
It may not be necessary to equalize the entire
influent flow where high flow or concentration
variations can be attributed to one source, such as
an industry. In these cases the desired benefits can
be achieved by simply equalizing the industrial flow.
This can be accomplished through construction of
an equalization basin at the industrial site or
through in-house industrial process modifications to
effect and equalized wastewater discharge.
Determination Of Required Volume
i
it 3
BOO mast loading
P«>k jver»9* = 1 97
Peak minimum - 14 59
Figure 1. Raw Wastewater (low and BOD variation before equalization.
Two methods are available for computing
equalization volume requirements. One procedure
is based on the characteristic diurnal flow pattern.
In this case, the function of the basin is to store flows
in excess of the average daily flow and to discharge
them at times when the flow is less than the
average. The required volume can be determined
graphically through the construction of a
hydrograph. The second procedure is based upon
the mass loading pattern of a particular constituent
This method computes the volume required to
dampen mass loading variations to within a preset
acceptable range.6'7
Since the prime objective of flow equalization in
wastewater treatment is to equalize flow, the
determination of equalization volume should be
based on the hydrograph. Once the volume has been
determined for flow smoothing, the effect on
concentration and mass load damping can be
estimated. The required volumes for side-line and
in-line basins will be identical. The hydrograph
procedure is discussed below.
The first step in design involves the establishment
of a diurnal flow pattern. Whenever possible, this
should be based upon actual plant data. It is
important to note that the diurnal pattern will vary
from day to day, especially from weekday to
weekend, and also from month to month. The
pattern selected must yield a large enough basin
design to effectively equalize any reasonable dry
weather diurnal flow. Figure 1 depicts a typical
diurnal flow pattern. The average flow rate is 4,3
mgd. For purpose of this example, the average flow
is used as the desired flow rate out of the
equalization basin. The diurnal peak and minimum
flow rate for this example are 1.7 and 0.45 times the
average, respectively.
The next step involves the actual construction of
the hydrograph. The hydrograph for this example is
shown on figure 2. The inflow mass diagram is
plotted first. To do this, the hourly diurnal flows are
converted to equivalent hourly volumes, and
accumulated over the 24-hour day. A line is then
drawn from the origin to the end point on the
inflow-mass diagram. The slope of this line actually
represents the average flow for the day.
Enough tank volume must be provided to
accumulate flows above the equalized flow rate. This
normally requires a volume equivalent to 10 to 20
percent of the average daily dry weather to the
-------
average flow are shown as lines A and B on figure 2.
The required volume is represented by the vertical
distance between these two lines. In this illustration,
the required volume for equalization is 740,000
gallons, which represents approximately 17 percent
of the average daily flow.
TIME OF DAY
Figure 2. Hydiogtaph (or typical diurnal flow.
The actual equalization-basin volume must be
greater than that obtained with the hydrograph for
several reasons, including
Continuous operation of aeration and mixing
equipment will not allow complete drawdown.
• Volume must be provided to accommodate
anticipated concentrated plant recycle streams.
• Some contingency should be provided for
unforeseen changes in diurnal flow.
The final volume selected should include adequate
consideration of the conditions listed above and will
also depend on the basin geometry. For the example
presented herein, a basin volume of approximately 1
million gallons is adequate.
References
1C. N. Click,"The Feasibility of Flow Smoothing
Stations in Municipal Sewage System," USEPA
Project No. 11010 FDI, Contract No. 14-12-935, Aug.
1972.
2M. D. LaGrega and J. D. Keenan, "Effects of
Equalizing Sewage Flow," presented at 45th Annual
Conference of the Water Pollution Control
Federation, Atlanta, Ga., Oct. 1972.
3F. C. Roe, "Preaeration and Air Flocculation,"
Sewage Works J, 23, No. 2. 127-140, 1951.
4H. F. Seifel and E. R. Baumann, "Effect of
Preaeration on the Primary Treatment of Sewage,:
J. Water Pollut. Cont. Fed, 33 No. 4, 339-355, 1961.
5A. G. Boon and D. R. Burgess, "Effects of Diurnal
Variations in Flow of Settled Sewage on the
Performance of High Rate Activated-Sludge Plants,"
Water Pollution Cont., 493-522, 1972.
6 P. R. Bradley and J. Y. Oldshue, "The Role of
Mixing in Equalization," presented at 45th Annual
Conference of the Water Pollution Control
Federation, Atlanta, Ga., Oct. 1972.
7A. T. Wallace, "Analysis of Equalization Basins,"
J. Sanit. Eng. Div., ASCE, SA6, 1161-1171, 1968.
Where To Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of th« Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology Trans-
fer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN
I Lester Sutton
II Robert Olson
III Albert Montague
IV Asa B. Foster, Jr.
V Clifford Risley
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston. Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
[Maine, N.H., VI., Mass.. R.I, Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York. New York 10017
212 264-1867
[N.Y., N.J.. P.R., V.I.]
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
[Pa., WVa., Md., Del.. D.C.. Va.]
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
[N.C., S.C.. Ky, Tenn., Ga.. Ala., Miss.. Fla.]
Environmental Protection Agency
1 N. Wacker Drive
Chicago. Illinois 60606
312 353-5756
[Mich.. Wis., Minn., III., Ind.. Ohio)
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI Mildred Smith
VII John Coakley
VIII Russell Fitch
IX Frank Covington
X John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street. Suite 1100
Dallas. Texas 75201
214 749-1461
[Texas, Okla.. Ark., La., N. Men.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
[Kansas, Nebr., Iowa. Mo.]
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver. Colorado 80203
303 837-3849-837-3691
[Colo., Mont. Wyo., Utah, N D., S.D.]
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-0218
[Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle. Washington 98101
206 442-1296
[Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska]
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes) The publications Listed on this form are the only ones
available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
G Phosphorus Removal 1001
D Carbon Adsorption 1002
O Suspended Solids Removal 1003
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 1004
G Sulfide Control in Sanitary
Sewerage Systems 1005
* Q Sludge Treatment
and Disposal 1006
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Q Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon
Plants 2001
G Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002
G Pollution Abatement in a Copper
Wire Mill 2003
Q First Interim Report on EPA Alkali SO2
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004
G Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005
* G Pollution Abatement in a
Brewing Facility 2006
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
G Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3001
G Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002
G Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003
* O Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
G Upgrading Lagoons 4001
G Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
G Oxygen Activated Sludge 4003
G Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
G Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Facilities-Case Histories 4005
* G Flow Equalization 4006
« Q Wastewater Filtration 4007
* D Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
BROCHURES
Q Physical-Chemical Treatment 5001
G Phosphorus Removal 5002
G Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 5003
G Carbon Adsorption 5004
Q Oxygen Aeration 5005
Q Nitrogen Control 5006
G Seattle, Washington METRO 5007
G Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008
G Indian Creek Reservoir 5009
G Richardson, Texas 5010
HANDBOOKS
G Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories 6001
G Monitoring Industrial Wastewater 6002
* Publications listed for first time
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Technology Transfer Chairman. (See listing)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound) VIDEOTAPES
Richardson Texas Project - Title:
"Somebody around here must be doing something good." (15 min.)
Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif. — Title:
"The Water Plan" (281/4 min.)
The Seattle METRO Story (28 min.)
Carbon Adsorption (40 min.)
Upgrading Activated Sludge
Treatment Plants (40 min.)
If you are not currently on the mailing list for this Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? DYES QNO
Name
Employer.
Street
Title
Phone
City
State,
Zip.
NOTE: Tear this sheet out and forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICIAL BUSINESS POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
LOU TILLEY
LIBRARY REGION V
I N WACKE* DR
CHICAGO IL 60606
AD
-------
ftU
IOLOGY
RAN
H
The Bridge Between Research and Use
SSSZ
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL. PROTECTION AGENCY
OCTOBER 1, 1373
WPCF CONFERENCE
For the third consecutive year, EPA Technology
Transfer is participating in the annual Water
Pollution Control Federation Conference, with
this year's WPCF meeting—the 46th annual—
being held in Cleveland, Ohio, September 30-
October 5, 1973.
The theme of the newly designed and con-
structed exhibit being displayed at the WPCF
Conference is the Technology Transfer Seminar
Program. As you may be aware, more than 30
seminars have been conducted throughout the
country by Technology Transfer to present de-
tailed information on the latest pollution control
technologies and practices. Subject areas of the
Municipal Seminars for wastewater treatment
facilities are oriented to the specific needs of the
geographical region in which they are held. The
Industrial Seminars are aimed at making the
small manufacturer aware of the alternative
proven technologies available to him by address-
ing the air, water, and solids pollution problems
of that industry.
Technology Transfer has also chosen this
year's WPCF Conference to introduce the first
five municipal wastewater treatment publications
in its new series of Seminar Publications. These
five publications are explained in some detail
further on in this newsletter and will be available
free of charge at the exhibit. The first five in-
dustrial pollution control publications in this
series will be displayed at the exhibit and may
be ordered there.
Host region for this year's conference will be
EPA's Midwest Region V. Francis T. Mayo, the
Regional Administrator, will be on hand at the
opening of the Conference, which annually at-
tracts thousands of the nation's top pollution
experts.
Region V will have a special exhibit in the con-
vention area and the Region V film "Get To-
gether" will be included in a special WPCF film
program.
Mr. Mayo has been administrator for Region V
since early 1970. He's a Commissioner to the Great
Lakes Basin Commission and serves as Chairman
of the U.S. Section of the Great Lakes Water
Quality Board, which advises the International
Francis T. Mayo
Region V
Administrator
Joint Commission on Great Lakes water quality
problems.
Well known among environmentalists, business
and community leaders in the Midwest, Mayo
has one of the toughest jobs in EPA—he con-
tends with a highly urban and industrial-
ized region where 44 million people and one
quarter of the region's manufacturing is located.
The Region has an endless diversity of sophisti-
cated industrial air and water pollution prob-
lems combined with agricultural problems within
a vacation and water recreational area.
Mr. Mayo's Technology Transfer Committee,
therefore, must continually deal with a wide
range of issues and has in past months con-
ducted seminars covering technical areas on
meatpacking, dairy processing, upgrading exist-
ing wastewater treatment plants, nitrogen con-
trol, phosphorus removal, infiltration studies and
combined sewers. Planned for the future are
seminars on sludge handling and disposal and
metal finishing. Also in the works are films for
small and medium industrial dischargers looking
for new ways of controlling pollution.
SECOND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR FOR MEAT
PACKING INDUSTRY HELD IN
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
The Office of Technology Transfer held its sec-
ond seminar for about 100 engineers and man-
agers from the Meat Packing Industry entitled,
-------
"Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce
Pollution," in Chicago, Illinois, on June 12 and
13, 1973.
The program featured addresses on Effective
Government-Industry Relations by Francis T.
Mayo, Administrator of EPA Region V, and Donald
S. MacKenzie, of the American Meat Institute.
The requirements of the new water pollution con-
trol legislation were presented by John Kirkwood
of the Regional Office. William M. Sonnett of the
Office of Permit Programs, Washington, D.C.,
gave a presentation on the National Discharge
Elimination Program.
Two technical sessions were presented. The
first session on "In-Plant Modifications and Pre-
treatment" was by A. J. Steffan of Purdue Uni-
versity. The second session on Waste Treatment
systems was given by Jim and Paula Wells of
Bell, Galyardt & Wells.
A special evening panel session was held on
Odor Control. Donald Dencker of Oscar Mayer,
Kenneth Ries of Armour, and William Prokop of
the National Renderer's Association joined Al
Steffan and Jim Wells to form the panel.
The final general session included a presenta-
tion on "Optimum Strategies for Financing Pollu-
tion Control Investments" by Charles Marshall of
J. A. Cummins and Associates, and a presenta-
tion on the EPA Industrial Demonstration Grant
Program by Jack Witherow of the National Envi-
ronmental Research Center in Corvallis, Oregon.
Also Larry Cherry of the Small Business Admin-
istration presented information on SBA programs
which are applicable to meat packers.
POLLUTION CONTROL SEMINAR FOR
THE DAIRY INDUSTRY
Technology Transfer held its second indus-
trial seminar for the Dairy Industry, entitled "Up-
grading Dairy Production Facilities to Reduce
Pollution," in Philadelphia, on August 21 and 22,
1973.
The program featured a welcome address by
Daniel J. Snyder, III, Regional EPA Administrator
and a special presentation by Fred J. Greiner,
Chairman of the Dairy Industry Committee,
speaking on Dairy Industry Environmental Re-
sponsibilities.
The program included presentations on EPA
enforcement policy and the National Discharge
Elimination Program.
Three technical sessions were held covering
in-plant management, waste treatment, and whey
disposal and recovery. The in-plant session, con-
ducted by Dr. W. James Harper, of the Ohio State
University, covering dairy waste characterization,
in-plant reduction of water and wastes, and costs
of in-plant control.
The session on waste treatment, presented by
Kenneth Watson of Kraftco Corporation, George
Muck of Dean Foods, Dr. William Boyle and Dr.
L B. Polkowski of Polkowski, Boyle and Associ-
ates, and Paul F. Hickman of Hood and Rich
Architects & Engineers, covered treatment alter-
natives available for discharge of wastes to mu-
nicipal treatment plants and to waterways. The
discussion included the relative advantages of
joint treatment of dairy wastes in municipal
wastewater treatment plants, waste treatment
alternatives, and case studies of actual pollution
abatement efforts by dairy production facilities.
The session on whey consisted of a panel dis-
cussion of the recovery, utilization, and disposal
of whey. The discussion covered current practice
and new technology applicable to the utilization
of whey.
UPDATING OF PROCESS DESIGN
MANUALS
Revisions to the four original Technology
Transfer Process Design Manuals (Sus-
pended Solids Removal, Carbon Adsorption,
Phosphorus Removal, and Upgrading Exist-
ing Wastewater Treatment Plants) are ap-
proaching completion and will be available
in the very near future.
The purpose of revising these manuals—
originally issued in October 1971—was to
incorporate information on newly developed
and demonstrated techniques and to in-
clude any subsequent experience gained
and data produced on those methods cov-
ered in the initial edition of the manuals.
For those individuals who have the orig-
inal manuals and have not yet requested the
manual revisions, it is essential this be
done as soon as possible. This can be ac-
complished by either forwarding the request
card contained in the back of each manual,
or by sending a brief letter to Technology
Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
The final general session included a presenta-
tion by James Cummins of J. A. Cummins and
Associates, an industrial management consultant,
on the optimization of financial strategy for
pollution control investments. The discussion
covered tax advantages, depreciation of equip-
ment, government and private sources of financ-
ing available, and the economics of joint treat-
ment with a municipality versus privately
financed treatment facilities.
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORT ON
DRY CAUSTIC PEELING OF PEACHES
NOW AVAILABLE
A technical capsule report covering an EPA
Demonstration Project with the DelMonte Cor-
poration for the dry caustic peeling of peaches is
now available.
Peeling is the largest single source of waste
from fruit processing. In conventional caustic
peeling, the peel is pre-softened by contact with
-------
/SiK?i€?«&;s?"^
^^fejl^^W.
Mtfanr! ^,e «andba''Je<>o,o^ ?"£ P^am
Ae
^ •--.> "ll-'aAis
-------
. Ne\N ^orkl
-«3-SSs*
';•«,, *»«
'^5^
m-
•o\-
;;^^'2x-,
^^
£><
in
'V
***
01 -_^ tanKs. ——•"
6
^"u/v •/ ;,° '"'* *•
'-•M^r
>c>
&'&&*Z**.
^ *«*>*
re"n.
'' Qa.
'' *la
- %
"v>
.•,atebo^es^
,oa
-------
North Carolina; Livermore, California; New York,
N.Y. and upgrading an existing trickling filter
plant by the addition of activated sludge ahead
of the filters.
• "Physical-Chemical Wastewater Treatment
Plant Design" by CH2M/Hill. This publication in-
cludes sections on preliminary data collection,
selection of coagulants, carbon adsorption, proc-
ess design, and physical-chemical treatment of
small waste flows. Also included are design proj-
ect descriptions on Niagara Falls, N.Y. and Fitch-
burg, Massachusetts by Camp, Dresser & McKee,
Inc.
• "Upgrading Lagoons" by Brown and Cald-
well, Consulting Engineers. This publication in-
cludes sections on lagoons in waste treatment,
techniques for upgrading lagoons and examples
of upgrading ponds at Sunnyvale, California; Los
Banos, California; and Stockton, California.
• "Oxygen Activated Sludge Wastewater Treat-
ment Systems—Design Criteria and Operating
Experience" by Union Carbide Corporation and
Metcalf and Eddy, Engineers. This publication
includes sections on Unox-system description,
operating data and experience, process design,
process safety, economic considerations, and
specifications for final settling tanks and oxy-
genation tanks.
REQUESTS FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
n Phosphorus Removal
D Carbon Adsorption
n Suspended Solids Removal
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
D Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage
Systems
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
D Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants
G Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition
D Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill
D First Interim Report on EPA Alkali S02
Scrubbing Test Facility
D Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
G Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.)
D Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.)
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
G Upgrading Lagoons
D Physical-Chemical Treatment
G Oxygen Activated Sludge
D Nitrification/Denitrification
G Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Facilities—Case Histories
BROCHURES
D Physical-Chemical Treatment
D Phosphorus Removal
G Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants
G Carbon Adsorption
n Oxygen Aeration
(U Nitrogen Control
G Seattle, Washington METRO
G Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe
G Indian Creek Reservoir
G Richardson, Texas
HANDBOOKS
G Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories
G Monitoring Industrial Wastewater
Please contact me regarding the loan of the following audio/visual material. (Check appropriate boxes)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound)
G Richardson, Texas, Project—Title
"Somebody around here must be doing
something good." (15 min.)
G Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
G Water Quality Management, Alameda
Creek, Calif.—Title
"The Water Plan" (28»/2 min.)
VIDEOTAPES
G Carbon Adsorption (40 min.)
G Upgrading Activated Sludge
Treatment Plants (40 min.)
Is your name on our mailing list to receive this Newsletter?
Do you want to be added to this mailing list?
Name
n n
n n
Yes No
Street
City
State
Zip
Note: Tear this sheet out and forward to Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
SULFIDE CONTROL MANUAL IN PRINT
The Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual for Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage
Systems, prepared by Pomeroy, Johnston and
Bailey of Pasadena, California, is currently being
printed and will soon be available for distribu-
tion. This Manual includes information for all
feasible alternative designs that can be used to
control sulfides and minimize their effects in
both new and existing sewerage systems.
Specific topics covered include: Characteris-
tics and Properties of Hydrogen Sulfide; Occur-
rence and Effects of Sulfide in Sewers; Investi-
gation in Existing Systems; Control of Sulfide in
Existing Systems; and Design of Sewer Systems
to Prevent Sulfide Problems. Case histories, ex-
amples, and cost estimates are presented to sub-
stantiate the "how-to" approach of this manual.
Individuals interested in obtaining, at no
charge, a copy of the Sulfide Control Manual
should fill out the appropriate form in the back
of this publication and forward it to Technology
Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
. ...
SBvWGE
.- ,
U3SZ-
"HANDBOOK FOR MONITORING
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER" NOW
AVAILABLE
The first of the EPA Technology Transfer In-
dustrial manuals is now available. The "Hand-
book for Monitoring Industrial Wastewater" pro-
vides technical information for manufacturers
establishing a wastewater monitoring program.
As is the case with all Technology Transfer pub-
lications the Handbook is offered as helpful
guidance only and is not regulatory.
Major chapters in the Handbook are:
Program Planning
Parameters to be Measured
Analytical Considerations
Sampling
Flow Measurement
Data Analysis
Automatic Monitoring
The Continuing Program
Special Considerations for Municipal
Systems
Training of Technicians
Safety
The manual is written with basic information
for managers in the beginning of each chapter
with the more detailed technical information in
the latter sections. Special emphasis is placed
on minimizing the costs of monitoring and avoid-
ing common pitfalls.
For your copy of this handbook mail the form
on the last page of this newsletter to Technology
Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
handbook
(VDNITO^NG
INDUSTRIAL
WASTEWATER
-------
dilute sodium hydroxide and removed from the
peach by high pressure water sprays. Dry caustic
peeling uses mechanical contact to remove the
softened peel, with only a small final water rinse.
Dry caustic peeling was commercially proven for
potato processing, but softer fruit such as
peaches required additional development.
The project demonstrated the reduction of
water usage from 850 gallons per ton of peaches
to 90 gallons per ton. The peel was recovered as
a pumpable slurry. Total organic and suspended
solids loading in the final wastewater was re-
duced by 60 percent. Peach quality was equal
to that of conventionally peeled peaches.
For your copy of this capsule report which in-
cludes cost and performance data, use the order-
ing blank at the end of this newsletter.
WORK UNDERWAY ON INDUSTRIAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
The Office of Technology Transfer has initiated
work on the preparation of two manuals for the
control of air, water and solid waste pollution for
the Pulp and Paper and the Power Generation
Industries. The manuals will contain design in-
formation on available technology presented in
a form that can be used by industry engineers
and managers, and consultants in the designing
and upgrading and designing of facilities to con-
trol pollution.
The pulp and paper manual will cover design
considerations for in-plant control techniques
and waste treatment technology for wood prep-
aration, kraft, soda, and acid sulfite pulping op-
erations, de-inking, paper manufacturing, waste
paperboard production and building products
manufacturing. Ekono Consulting Engineers,
Seattle, Washington, has been selected as the
contractor for the preparation of this manual.
The power manual will cover design considera-
tions for in-plant control techniques and treat-
ment technology for the control of air emissions,
chemical wastewater discharges, thermal pollu-
tion control, solid waste separation, utilization
and disposal, and air, water and solid waste
monitoring for fossil full-fired generating sta-
tions. Radian Corporation of Austin, Texas, has
been selected as the contractor for the prepara-
tion of this manual.
Both the pulp and paper, and the power man-
uals should be available for distribution by June,
1974.
NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
MOTION PICTURE AVAILABLE
Technology Transfer now has available for loan
a third motion picture depicting the successful
implementation of new technology. Entitled "The
Water Plan," this 28-minute 16mm film was pro-
duced for Technology Transfer by Production
House, Inc., of San Francisco, California.
The film presents the development and current
implementation of the water quality management
plan for the Alameda Creek Watershed in sub-
urban San Francisco. This particular plan in-
volves: a) upgrading two wastewater treatment
facilities to "advanced waste treatment", includ-
ing nutrient removal, producing an effluent suit-
able for reuse; b) conveyance of the reclaimed
wastewater to a reservoir to be constructed; c)
development of associated recreational facilities
at the reservoir; and d) potential recycling of re-
claimed wastewater. The cooperative efforts of
the Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District, the City of Livermore, the
City of Pleasanton, and the Valley Community
Services District played a major role in develop-
ment of the plan.
Requests for loan of this, and other Technology
Transfer films, can be made by forwarding the
form in the back of this newsletter.
MUNICIPAL DESIGN SEMINARS
The Technology Transfer Program has con-
ducted one additional municipal design seminar
since June, 1973, bringing the total number con-
ducted since the program was conceived to
22. The most recent seminar presented was in
Shreveport, La., August 21-23.
The Shreveport Seminar included sessions on
physical-chemical treatment, upgrading existing
wastewater treatment facilities, and nitrogen con-
trol. Feature presentations were given by Gordon
Culp, Gulp, Wesner & Culp/Clean Water Consult-
ants; Clair Sawyer, Consulting Engineer; and
David Walrath, Hazen and Sawyer. EPA personnel
participating in the seminar were Jesse Cohen,
Ed Barth, and John Smith from the National En-
vironmental Research Center in Cincinnati, Ohio.
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
The first five in a series of seminar publica-
tions are being featured and distributed at the
Technology Transfer Exhibit this week during the
WPCF Conference. These publications include
the basic information included in the handout
materials used at the Technology Transfer mu-
nicipal design seminars. If desired, these publi-
cations may also be obtained by using the order
form in the back of this newsletter.
The set consists of the following publications:
• "Nitrification & Denitrification Facilities
Wastewater Treatment" by Metcalf & Eddy, Engi-
neers. This publication includes sections on the
factors affecting nitrification kinetics, design cri-
tera of nitrification systems, and denitrification
by suspended growth systems.
• "Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Plants—Case Histories" by Hazen and Sawyer.
This publication includes sections on upgrading
through biological process modifications, solids
retention time, and case histories on Greensboro,
-------
Where To Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology Trans-
fer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN ADDRESS
I Lester Sutton Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
II Rocco Ricci Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212 264-2513
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Ill Kenneth Suter Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9268
(Pa., W.Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
IV Asa B. Foster, Jr. Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala., Miss., Fla.)
VI
VII
VIM
IX
Clifford Risley
Jocelyn G. Kempe
Lewis A. Young
Russell Fitch
Frank Covington
John Osborn
Environmental Protection Agency
1 N. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312 353-5756
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street, Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75201
214 749-1238
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N.Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-2725
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa., Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-3849—837-3691
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D., S.D.
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-0218
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC'
EPA-335
THIRD CLASS BULK RATE
ADDRESS LABEL
------- |