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

-------