Municipal Environmental Research EPA-6OQ 2 80-032
Laboratory MaK:h 1980
Cincinnati OH 45268
ertt
&EPA
Wastewater
Stabilization Lagoon
Intermittent Sand
Filter Systems
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further deve10pment and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine senes are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment. and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technicallnforma-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-80-032
March 1980
WASTEWATER STABILIZATION LAGOON--INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER SYSTEMS
by
J. S.
Russell, E. J. Middlebrooks, and J.
Utah Water Research Laboratory
Utah State University
Logan, Utah 84322
H. Reynolds
Grant No. R804592
Project Officer
Ronald F. Lewis
Wastewater Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. and approved for publica-
tion. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of increasing
public and government concern about the dangers of pollution to the health
and welfare of the American people. The complexity of the environment and the
interplay between its components require a concentrated and integrated attack
on the problem.
Research and development is that necessary first step in problem solu-
tion and it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and search-
ing for solutions. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory develops
new and improved technology and systems for the prevention, treatment, and
management of wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges
from municipal and community sources, for the preservation and treatment of
public drinking and community sources, for the preservation and treatment of
public drinking water supplies, and to minimize the adverse economic, social,
health, and aesthetic effects of pollution. This publication is one of the
products of that research; a most vital communications link between the re-
searcher and the user community.
As part of these activities, this report was prepared to make avail-
able to the sanitary engineering community the results of field tests of
existing lagoon-intermittent sand filter systems designed for the removal
of algae, bacteria, and chemical components from lagoon effluent.
Francis T. Mayo, Director
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
Intermittent sand filtration has been demonstrated on a laboratory
and pilot scale to be a technical and economical method for upgrading waste-
water lagoon effluent to satisfy stringent discharge standards. However,
very little intermittent sand filtration full scale performance information
is available. This study evaluated the performance of three prototype lagoon-
intermittent sand filtration systems for three 30 consecutive day periods
during different seasons throughout a sixteen month period. The systems were
located at Mt. Shasta, California; Moriarty, New Mexico; and Ailey, Georgia.
Twenty-four different parameters were monitored on 24-hour composite samples.
In addition, information concerning design criteria employed, operation and
maintenance procedures, and costs was collected and evaluated for each system.
The results of the study indicated that, although operation and main-
tenance requirements are relatively small, overall lagoon-intermittent sand
filtration performance is affected by operator skill and experience. Actual
manpower requirements at the three sites ranged from 0.14 to 2.0 man-years and
were related to the size and complexity of the individual system. The mean
lagoon influent, lagoon effluent, intermittent sand filter effluent, and
chlorinated effluent biochemical oxygen demand (BODS), suspended solids,
geometric mean fecal coliform concentrations, and pH value ranges by tour for
each facility are summarized below.
The 1972 Federal Secondary Treatment Discharge Standards were satisfied
by all three systems with the exception that 85 percent removal of the influent
suspended solids concentration was not accomplished during two of the nine
sampling periods. It was determined that the intermittent sand filters
were necessary for each system to satisfy the required discharge standards.
Annual capital costs for the three systems ranged from $0.02 to $0.05
per cubic meter of filtrate while annual operating costs ranged from <$0.01
to $0.02 per cubic meter of filtrate. Design and cost data for 13 addi-
tional lagoon-intermittent sand filtration systems is also presented. The
results clearly indicate that intermittent sand fi1tration is a viable low
cost method for upgrading wastewater lagoon effluent.
The results of the study were used to develop design criteria
intermittent sand filter system. In addition, these criteria were
to design a typical intermittent sand filter.
for an
employed
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Grant Number R804s92 by Utah
State University under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. This report covers a period from October 23, 1976, to May 22, 1979,
and work was completed as of July 15, 1979.
iv
-------
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE OF LAGOON-INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER SYSTEMS
Location Tour Lagoon Lagoon F 11 ter Chlorination Removal
and # Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent %
Parameter mg/i mg/i mg/~ mg/i
Mt. Shasta, California
BODs 1 110 26 21 14 87
2 121 19 4 3 98
3 110 20 7 4 96
SS 1 85 37 26 21 75
2 86 69 13 13 85
3 73 33 11 11 85
FCa 1 O. 65x106 720 53 <1 99.99
2 3.38x106 20 2 1 99.99
3 0.37x106 179 37 5 99.99
pHb 1 6.7-7.6 7.4-9.0 6.0-7.0 5.7-7.0 -
2 6. 5- 7 . 0 8.7-9.7 6.7-7.7 6.4-7.3 -
3 6.8-7.0 7.5-9.3 6.6-7.5 6.3-7.3 -
Moriarty, N.M.
BODs 1 133 35 37 20 85
2 135 22 24 10 93
3 177 32 38 21 88
SS 1 174 83 68 23 87
2 128 89 91 15 88
3 155 71 72 8 95
FCa 1 3.97x106 27 2 8 99.99
2 6.70x106 782 51 91 99.99
3 2.03x106 62 1 2 99.99
pHb 1 7.7-8.2 8.5-9.4 8.3-9.3 7.5-8.5 -
2 7.9-8.2 8.7-9.1 8.5-9.1 7.9-8.3 -
3 7.9-8.5 8.1-9.2 8.7-9.2 7.7-8.2 -
Ailey, Georgia
BODs 1 63 11 4 3 95
2 76 20 5 4 95
3 63 34 14 10 84
SS 1 116 31 14 13 89
2 148 48 11 8 95
3 65 49 19 17 74
FCa 1 O. 58x106 8 3 1 99.99
2 5.19x106 9 1 <1 99.99
3 0.75x106 149 21 <1 99.99
pHb 1 6.9-7.6 7.6-10.1 6.5-7.1 6.3-6.8 -
2 7.3-7.8 9.1-9.9 6.4-7.6 7.0-7.4 -
3 6.5-7.7 7.7-9.3 6.6-7.7 6.5-7.2 -
aExpressed in number of organisms per 100 mi.
bExpressed in pH units.
v
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword
Abstract
Figures
Tables.
List of Abbreviations.
Acknowledgments.
1. Introduction
Nature of the Problem.
Objectives
Conclusions
Recommendations
Literature Review
Introduction.
History
Intermittent Sand Filtration to Upgrade Lagoon
Effluent.
Summary
5. Methods and Procedures.
Facility Selection.
Facility Location and Description.
Sampling and Analysis.
6. Results and Discussion.
General
Operation and Maintenance (0 & M) at Mt. Shasta,
California
Operation and Maintenance (0 & M) at Moriarty,
New Mexico
Operation and Maintenance (0 & M) at Ailey. Georgia.
Summary of 0 & M at the Three Sites
Observed Intermittent Sand Filter System Run Times
Performance of Systems
7. Comparison of Performance with Federal Standards
General
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Suspended Solids
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
pH Value
Summary
8. Statistical Comparisons
General
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)
Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand (SBOD5)
Hi
iv
ix
2.
3.
4.
xix
xxii
xxiv
1
1
1
3
7
8
8
8
9
18
19
19
19
27
31
31
31
41
47
51
54
58
185
185
185
187
189
189
189
192
192
192
193
vii
-------
CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Suspended Solids.
Volatile Suspended Solids.
Fecal Coliform
9. Existing or Planned Intermittent Sand Filters Used to
Upgrade Lagoon Effluent.
General Description.
Operation and Maintenance.
Related Operational and Maintenance Information
Summary.
10. Intermittent Sand Filter Design, Construction and
Operation
General.
Construction
Operation of Intermittent Sand Filters
Literature Cited.
Appendix A: Data (Daily and Averages) for All Parameters
Measured at All Sampling Points for the Three
Wastewater Treatment Systems
Appendix B: Comparison of Performance of Slow Sand Filter
Operation with Intermittent Sand Filter
Operation.
Appendix C: Typical Design of an Intermittent Sand Filter.
194
195
196
199
199
215
215
215
219
219
219
223
225
228
303
323
viii
-------
Number
FIGURES
Page
1
Organization of series intermittent sand filter study.
14
2
Mount Shasta, Ca., water pollution control facility process
flow diagram
22
3
Moriarty, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram.
24
4
Ailey, Ga., sewage treatment plant process flow diagram
26
5
Sampling station details
30
6
Operational scheme during parallel operation of slow and
intermittent sand filters.
39
7
Arrangement of adapted plug to facilitate sample
collection.
40
8
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
(BODS) and time in days for the three tours at each of
the four sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta
water pollution control facility
61
9
The relationship observed between total biochemical and
biochemical oxygen demand with the nitrification inhibitor
allyl-thiourea for those days during the three tours when
simultaneous analyses were performed to monitor the Mount
Shasta water pollution control facility
63
10
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of
the four sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta
water pollution control facility
65
11
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and soluble biochemical oxygen demand with the
nitrification inhibitor allyl-thiourea for those days
during the three tours when simultaneous analyses were
performed to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility.
66
ix
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Page
12
The relationship observed between suspended solids and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility
67
13
The relationship observed between volatile suspended solids and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility
70
14
The relationship observed between fecal coliform bacteria and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility
71
15
The relationship observed between in situ pH and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility
73
16
The relationship observed between in situ temperature and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water
pollution control facility
74
17
The relationship observed between in situ dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water
pollution control facility
75
18
The relationship observed between chemical oxygen demand and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water
pollution control facility
77
19
The relationship observed between soluble chemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of
the four sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta
water pollution control facility
79
20
The relationship observed between alkalinity and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facili ty
80
x
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Page
21
The relationship observed between total phosphorus and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility
82
22
The relationship observed between total kjeldahl nitrogen and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility
84
23
The relationship observed between ammonia and time in days for
the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facili ty
85
24
The relationship observed between organic nitrogen and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility
87
25
The relationship observed between nitrite and time in days for
the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility
88
26
The relationship observed between nitrate and time in days for
the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility
89
27
The relationship observed between the combined values of nitrite
and nitrate and time in days for the three tours at each of
the four sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta
water pollution control facility
90
28
The relationship observed between total number of algae cells
and time in days for the three tours at the three sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility
92
29
The relationship observed between average daily flowrate and
time in days for the three tours at the two sampling points
used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility (1 MGD = 3,785 m3/day)
97
xi
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
30
The relationship observed between composite pH and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facili ty .
31
The relationship observed between composite dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water
pollution control facility.
32
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility
33
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and biochemical oxygen demand with nitrification inhibitor
for those days during the three tours when simultaneous
analysis was performed to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility
34
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of the
four sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty waste-
water treatment facility
35
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical
demand and soluble biochemical oxygen demand with
nitrification inhibitor for those days during the
tours when simultaneous analysis was performed to
the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility
three
monitor
oxygen
36
The relationship observed between suspended solids and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treat-
ment facility
37
The relationship observed between volatile suspended solids
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility
38
The relationship observed between fecal
time in days for the three tours at
sampling points used to monitor the
treatment facility
coliform bacteria and
each of the four
Moriarty wastewater
xii
Page
99
. 100
. 106
. 107
. 109
. 110
. III
. 113
. 114
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Page
39
The relationship observed between in situ pH and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
facility
116
40
The relationship observed between in situ temperature and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
f acili ty
117
41
The relationship observed between in situ dissolved oxygen and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
facility
118
42
The relationship observed between chemical oxygen demand and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility.
120
43
The relationship observed between soluble chemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of
the four sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty
wastewater treatment facility
121
44
The relationship observed between alkalinity and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
facility
123
45
The relationship observed between total
in days for the three tours at each
points used to monitor the Moriarty
facility
phosphorus and time
of the four sampling
wastewater treatment
125
46
The relationship observed between total
time in days for the three tours at
sampling points used to monitor the
treatment facility.
127
kjeldahl nitrogen and
each of the four
Moriarty wastewater
47
The relationship observed between ammonia and time in days for
the three tours at each of the four sampling points used to
monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility
128
48
The relationship observed between organic nitrogen and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
facili ty
129
xiii
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
49
The relationship observed between nitrite and time in days for
the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
50
The observed inhibitory affects on the nitrite and nitrate
concentrations in the filter effluent during tour #2 at
Moriarty, N.M., caused by the chlorination of the waste-
water prior to application to the intermittent sand
filters . .
51
The relationship observed between nitrate and time in days for
the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
52
The relationship observed between the combined values of
nitrite and nitrate and time in days for the three tours
at each of the four sampling points used to monitor the
Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
S3
The relationship observed between total
in days for the three tours at each
points used to monitor the Moriarty
facility.
algal genera and time
of the four sampling
wastewater treatment
54
The relationship observed between average daily flowrate and
time in days for the three tours at each of the two
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility (1 MGD = 3,785 m3/d) .
5S
The relationship observed between composite pH and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
facili ty .
S6
The relationship observed between composite dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility
S7
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant
xiv
Page
. 130
. 131
. 132
. 133
. 137
. 142
. 144
. 14S
. 148
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
58
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and biochemical oxygen demand with nitrification inhibitor
for those days during the three tours when simultaneous
analysis was performed to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant
59
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of
the four sampling points used to monitor the Ailey
sewage treatment plant
60
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical
demand and soluble biochemical oxygen demand with
nitrification inhibitor for those days during the
tours when simultaneous analysis was performed to
monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant
61
oxygen
three
The relationship observed between suspended solids and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant.
62
The relationship observed between volatile suspended solids
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant
63
The relationship observed between fecal coliform bacteria
and time in days for the three tours at each of the
four sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage
treatment plant
64
The relationship observed between in situ pH and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant
The relationship observed between in situ temperature and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant
65
66
The relationship observed between in situ dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the
four sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage
trea tment plant
xv
Page
. 150
. 151
. 153
. 154
. 156
157
. 159
. 160
. 161
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Page
67
The relationship observed between chemical oxygen demand and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant.
163
68
The relationship observed between soluble chemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of
the four sampling points used to monitor the Ailey
sewage treatment plant.
164
69
The relationship observed between alkalinity and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant
165
70
The relationship observed between total phosphorus and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant
167
71
The relationship observed between total kjeldahl nitrogen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the
four sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage
treatment plant
169
72
The relationship observed between ammonia and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant
170
73
The relationship observed between organic nitrogen and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant
171
74
The relationship observed between the combined values of
nitrite and nitrate and time in days for the three tours
at each of the four sampling points used to monitor the
Ailey sewage treatment plant.
172
75
The relationship observed between nitrite and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant
173
76
The relationship observed between nitrate and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant
174
xvi
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Page
77
The relationship observed between total algal cells and time in
days for the three tours at each of the three sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant
178
78
The relationship observed between average daily flow and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant
182
79
The relationship observed between composite pH and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant
183
80
The relationship observed between composite dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant
184
81
Covello, CA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
Tomales, CA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
203
202
82
83
Cimarron, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
204
84
Cuba, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
205
85
Portales, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
206
86
Roy. N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
207
87
Adel, GA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
208
88
Cummings, GA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
209
89
Garden City Nursing Home, Douglas County, GA., wastewater
treatment facility process flow diagram.
210
xvii
-------
Number
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Page
90
Turner Junior High School, Douglas County, GA., wastewater
treatment facility process flow diagram
. 211
91
Shellman, GA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
. 212
92
Stone Mountain Memorial Park, GA., wastewater treatment
facility process flow diagram.
. 213
93
Huntington, UT., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram
. 214
94
Photographs of filter sand removal devices used at Stayton
and Salem, Oregon.
. 217
xviii
-------
Number
TABLES
1
Intermittent sand filtration studies performed at Utah
State University
2
Class "c" stream standards for the State of Utah (Utah State
Board of Health, 1974, water quality standards)
3
National secondary treatment standards (Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, 1972, PL 92-500) .
4
Facility design criteria
5
Table of sampling periods (tour) dates
6
Sampling location and description
7
Staffing estimate work sheet (City of Mt. Shasta, 0 & M
manual, Table VI-C-3) .
8
Summary of the Moriarty filter cleaning operation requirements
for eight square filter sections totaling 0.27 hectare.
9
Summary of intermittent sand filter operation
10
Summary of lagoon operation
11
Summary of reported maintenance.
12
Summary of observed filter run times
13
Summary of results obtained at the Mt. Shasta, California,
wastewater treatment system
14
Summary of mean concentrations of nitrogen forms at Mt. Shasta,
California
15
Nitrogen mass balance for Mt. Shasta, California
16
Mt. Shasta #2 lagoon effluent
16
Mt. Shasta #3 filter effluent
xix
Page
. 10
.11
. 15
. 20
. 28
. 29
. 35
. 47
. 52
. 53
. 55
. 56
. 59
. 83
. 91
. 93
. 94
-------
Number
TABLES (CONTINUED)
Page
16
Mt. Shasta #4 chlorinated filter effluent.
95
17
Mean algal concentrations, cells/mI.
96
18
Comparative summary of the parallel operation of intermittent
sand filters and slow sand filters at Mt. Shasta during
tour #2 .
101
19
Summary of results obtained at the Moriarty, New Mexico,
wastewater treatment system
104
20
Summary of mean concentrations of nitrogen forms at
Moriarty, N.M.
126
21
136
Nitrogen mass balance for Moriarty, New Mexico
22
Moriarty #2 lagoon effluent
138
22
Moriarty #3 chlorinated lagoon effluent
139
22
Moriarty #4 filter effluent
140
23
Mean algal concentrations, cells/mI.
141
24
Summary of results obtained at the Ailey, Georgia, waste-
water treatment system.
146
25
In situ dissolved oxygen concentration, mg/l .
158
26
Summary of mean concentrations of nitrogen forms at
Ailey, Georgia
168
27
Nitrogen mass balance for Ailey, Georgia
177
28
Ailey #2 lagoon effluent
179
28
Ailey #3 filter effluent
180
28
Ailey #4 chlorinated filter effluent
181
29
Mean algal concentrations, cells/ml
182
30
Summary of tour means for BODS
186
31
Summary of tour means for suspended solids
188
32
Summary of fecal coliform geometric mean populations
190
xx
-------
Number
TABLES (CONTINUED)
Page
33
Summary of range of effluent pH values
. 190
34
Comparison of mean BOD5 (mg/l) concentrations using Duncan's
multiple range test
. 193
35
Comparison of mean SBOD5 (mg/l) concentrations
. 194
36
Comparison of mean suspended solids concentrations using
Duncan's multiple range test
. 195
37
Comparison of mean volatile suspended solids concentrations
using Duncan's multiple range test
. 196
38
Comparison of mean fecal coliform concentrations using Duncan's
multiple range test
. 197
39
Summary of existing and/or planned intermittent sand filters
used to upgrade lagoon effluent
. 200
40
Summary of design criteria and costs for existing and proposed
intermittent sand filters used to upgrade lagoon
effluent.
. 201
41
Summary of operating and maintenance experiences for the
slow sand filters at Stayton and Salem, Oregon
. 216
42
Summary of intermittent sand filter design criteria.
. 220
xxi
-------
Alk. =
BODS =
BODS wIN.!. =
CO =
CA. =
cells/ml =
cm
COD
$/m3
e.s.
F.C.
ft
GA.
ha.
hr.
i.e.
in.
I-DO
I-pH
kIn
m
MG
MGAD
MGD
mg/l
rrW 1 as Caco3 =
mg N /1 =
mg P /1 =
m3/d
m3/ha.d
m3/min
m3/sec
rom =
Mt. Shasta =
N.A. =
NHrN =
N .M. =
N02-N
N03-N
N.S.
o & M
Org-N
S02
SBODS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
=
Al kalini ty
Five Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Five Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand with Nitrification Inhibitor
Degrees Celsius
California
Algae Cells Per Milliliter
Centimeter
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Dollars Per Cubic Meter of Water
Effective Size
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Feet
Georgia
Hectare
Hour
id est
Inch
In situ Dissolved Oxygen Concentration
In situ Hydrogen Ion Concentration
Kilometer
Meter
Million Gallons
Million Gallons Per Acre Per Day
Million Gallons Per Day
Milligrams Per Liter
Milligrams Per Liter Expressed in CaC03 Equivalents
Milligrams of Nitrogen Per Liter
Milligrams of Phosphorus Per Liter
Cubic Meters Per Day
Cubic Meters Per Hectare Per Day
Cubic Meters Per Minute
Cubic Meters Per Second
Millimeters
Mount Shasta
Not Available
Ammonia Expressed as Nitrogen
New Mexico
Nitrite Expressed in Nitrogen Equivalents
Nitrate Expressed in Nitrogen Equivalents
No Sample
Operation and Maintenance
Organic Nitrogen Expressed in Nitrogen Equivalents
Sulfur Dioxide
Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand
xxii
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
-------
SBODS wIN. I. II: Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand
SCOD II: Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand
sp. = Generic Species
SS = Suspended Solids
TKN = Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
TP '"' Total Phosphorus
U.C. II: Uniformity Coefficient
UT. - Utah
UWRL = Utah Water Research Laboratory
VSS II: Volatile Suspended Solids
W. '"' Watts
wks = Weeks
xxiii
with Nitrification Inhibitor
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The cooperation and assistance of the Ailey Georgia; Moriarty, New
Mexico; and Mount Shasta, California, management and operating personnel
is greatly appreciated. The wastewater treatment plant personnel were very
cooperative and contributed significantly to the success of this project. We
wish to express our appreciation to Messrs. L.C. Williams of Ailey, Georgia;
Richard W. Bradfute of Moriarty, New Mexico; and Richard V. York and Joseph
Lombardi of Mount Shasta, California. Many state agencies and consulting
engineering firms were very helpful in locating planned or existing 1agoon-
intermittent sand filter systems and we gratefully acknowledge their assistance.
A special acknowledgment goes to Kathleen L. Russell for working diligently and
providing moral support during all the stages of this project. Mr. Peter A.
Cowan and the back-up personnel at the Utah Water Research Laboratory (UWRL)
also are greatly appreciated for providing supplies when needed and for con-
ducting the analyses on samples shipped to the Utah Water Research Laboratory.
xxiv
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
NATURE OF THE PROBLEM
The waste stabilization pond is one of the oldest wastewater treatment
systems and is still being used in over 3000 communities in the United States.
Ninety percent of these communities have populations of 10,000 or less
(Caldwell, Parker and Uhte, 1973). This treatment system is used mainly in
small municipalities because of the need for a large area of land. The attrac-
tive characteristics of the system are the requirement for few operating
personnel and the low economic impact.
The development of intermittent sand filters to polish lagoon effluent in
order to meet stringent discharge requirements has been proven to be feasible
in laboratory-scale and pilot experiments (Marshall and Middlebrooks, 1974;
Reynolds et al., 1974; Harris et al., 1975; Hill et al., 1976; Bishop et al.,
1976; Messinger et al., 1976; Tupyi et al., 1977).
Intermittent sand filters have been shown to be as economical and tech-
nically simple as lagoons to operate. Many communities with existing waste-
water stabilization ponds plan to add or have already added intermittent
sand filters to meet present or future discharge requirements.
OBJECTIVES
The general objective of this study is to evaluate the performance
and the operational and maintenance characteristics of intermittent sand
filtration of wastewater stabilization pond effluent.
To fulfill the general objective, the following specific objectives
were undertaken:
1)
Select three existing intermittent sand
senting various regions and climates of
mance evaluation.
filter facilities repre-
the country for perfor-
2)
Document the parameters and procedures employed in the design and
construction of the facilities selected for study.
3)
Collect operational and performance data for three 30 consecutive
day periods at the three selected sites.
1
-------
4)
Evaluate and compare the operational and performance data collected
from the selected sites with results of previous intermittent sand
filtration studies.
5)
Develop a typical intermittent sand filter design based on the
results of the study.
6)
Develop an economic analysis for the typical intermittent sand
filter system developed.
7)
Develop a set of guidelines for effective operation of intermittent
sand filter systems.
2
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions are based on an evaluation of three lagoon-
intermittent sand filter systems designed to remove algal cells from lagoon
effluents.
1.
The Ailey, Georgia, wastewater
maintenance. Operation of the
raking only three times during
sand was removed.
treatment plant required the least
intermittent sand filters required
one year of operation and no filter
2.
The Moriarty, New Mexico, wastewater treatment facility exhibited
an acceptable level of maintenance, primarily consisting of numerous
rakings and one cleaning of the filters in one year of operation.
3.
The City of Mt. Shasta water pollution
the greatest maintenance requirements.
the lack of operational experience.
control facility demonstrated
This was primarily caused by
4.
The best intermittent sand filter system design is a simple system
which provides a minimum of opportunities for malfunctions and
operational variations. The Ailey, Georgia, facility best exem-
plified this type of system.
5.
The simplest design with automatic operation still requ1res ma1n-
tenance to ensure trouble-free service.
6.
Providing rest periods between filter loadings appears to extend
the length of the filter run.
7.
Lower hydraulic loading rates promote longer filter run times.
8.
Slow sand filter operations produced results similar to those ob-
tained with intermittent sand filters but short filter run times were
observed with the slow sand filter operation.
9.
In locations where periods of heavy precipitation occur, control
of the hydraulic loading rate to the filters is necessary to prevent
the shortening of the filter run time.
10.
In arid climates with wind blown soil, filters should be monitored
and kept clean of wind blown soil accumulations of the filter sur-
face.
3
-------
11.
In locations where the local water supply has high alkalinity and
hardness, th~ p:ecipitat~on ~f calcium carbonate caused by the
photosynthet1c 1nduced r1se 1n pH can shorten filter run times.
12.
Vegetation removal from the filter surface is an important segment
of an intermittent sand filter maintenance program.
13.
The use of large road maintenance and building equipment to clean
large intermittent sand filters can lead to excessive removal of
filter media. Cleaning equipment should be specified that will
provide accurate sand removal.
14.
Using a custom built
of large filters can
media.
filter cleaning device, the efficient cleaning
be accomplished with a minimal loss in filter
15.
Smaller filters can be effectively cleaned by manual methods or
with the aid of mechanical equipment such as small tractors equipped
with a blade and loader.
16.
Distribution systems for the intermittent sand filters should not
be complex and should be designed to easily accommodate mechanical
equipment in the maintenance of the filters.
17.
Filter run times exceeded four months under normal operation at
the Ailey, Georgia, facility.
18.
The wastewater stabilization ponds with intermittent sand filters
produced a mean effluent concentration of biochemical oxygen demand
(BODS) as follows: Mt. Shasta, 14 mg/l or less; Moriarty, 21 mg/l
or less; and Ailey, 10 mg/l or less.
19.
The three intermittent sand filter facilities evaluated in
removed 85 percent of the biochemical oxygen demand (BODS)
sampling periods.
this study
8 of the 9
20.
The three intermittent sand filter facilities removed 85 percent of
the influent suspended solids concentrations 7 of the 9 sampling
periods. The mean effluent suspended solids concentrations were:
Mt. Shasta, 21 mg/l or less; Moriarty, 23 mg/l or less; and Ailey, 17
mg/l or less.
21.
Without chlorination the geometric mean
centrations were less than 91 organisms
sampling periods.
effluent fecal coliform con-
per 100 ml during all of the
22.
The pH values for the filter effluents ranged between 6.0 and 7.7 at
Mt. Shasta, 7.5 and 8.5 at Moriarty, and 6.4 and 7.7 at Ailey.
23.
The effective sizes of the filter media used at the three study
sites were 0.20, 0.25, and 0.37 mm. Effective sand size did not
4
-------
have a significant effect on the filter run length or effluent
quality.
~.
The performance of the Ailey, Georgia, wastewater treatment plant
was consistently better than the other systems studied.
2S.
Significantly poorer performance occurred only during periods
associated with operational problems.
26.
Heavy chlorination of the filter effluent produced a statistically
significant reduction in BODS, SBODS and nitrogen concentrations at
the Mt. Shasta and Ailey facilities.
27.
Chlorination of the wastewater prior to application to the inter-
mittent sand filters at the Moriarty, New Mexico, facility inhibited
the biological activity in the filters and resulted in little BODS
removal and minimal oxidation of nitrogen compounds within the
filters.
28.
The removal mechanisms in intermittent sand filters responsible for
BODS and nitrogen compounds are a combination of physical and bio-
logical proce~ses.
29.
The primary removal mechanism for suspended solids is the physical
filtering properties of the filter media.
30.
The reduction of fecal coliform bacteria by the intermittent sand
filters ranged from 8S-9S percent. The filter effluent concentra-
tions were always less than 100 organisms/lOO mI.
31.
The removal of chemical oxygen
filters is less effective than
demand (BODS).
demand (COD) in intermittent sand
the removal of biochemical oxygen
32.
The Moriarty, New Mexico, facility experienced the largest reduction
of alkalinity through the filters. This reduction was probably
related to the precipitation of calcium carbonate induced by
the change in pH due to the photosynthetic action of the algae.
33.
Total phosphorus removal by the intermittent sand filters was
minimal at the three sites.
34.
Intermittent sand filters are an excellent device for producing
a nitrified effluent. The degree of nitrification is related to
the hydraulic loading rate and the filter influent nitrogen concen-
tration.
3S.
During 8
provided
tion.
of the 9 sampling periods, the intermittent sand filters
greater than 90 percent removal of the total algal popula-
S
-------
36.
Annual capital costs for all existing or planned (16 systems)
intermittent sand filtration facilities to upgrade lagoon effluent
ranged from $0.01 to $0.11 per m3 of filtrate. Annual capital
costs for the Ailey, Moriarty, and Mt. Shasta filters were $0.015,
$0.03, $0.05 per m3 of filtrate, respectively.
37.
Annual operation and maintenance costs for the three sites monitor-
ed during this study ranged from $0.005 to $0.01 per m3 of
filtrate.
~.
The total annual cost for upgrading lagoon effluent to meet the
1972 federal secondary treatment discharge standards ranged from
$0.04 to $0.06 per m3 of filtrate for the three systems studied.
~.
The use of mechanical devices for cleaning intermittent sand fil-
ters will permit larger filters and prolong filter service life.
6
-------
SECTION 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.
Conduct a continuing evaluation of the filter run times
existing lagoon-intermittent sand filter systems. Such
be conducted by correspondence with plant operators.
observed at
a study could
2.
Emphasize the importance and need for proper operation and maintenance
of lagoon-intermittent sand filter systems. Although one of the most
cost effective systems available to small communities, the system should
not be advocated on the basis of requiring essentially no operation
and maintenance.
3.
Require that operator training be provided before transferring respon-
sibility to the owner. The need for intelligent decisions, concern
for the environment, and individual pride in operation performance must
be stressed in a training program.
4.
Encourage state regulator agencies or state educational systems to
provide training in the basic laboratory skills for operators of small
wastewater treatment facilities.
7
-------
SECTION 4
LITERATURE REVIEW
INTRODUCTION
Wastewater stabilization ponds or lagoons have been in use for many
centuries, but the intermittent sand filter is a relative newcomer in the
area of wastewater treatment. These two processes have found a new appli-
cation in a complementary combination to produce high quality wastewater
treatment.
There have been six lengthy and detailed literature reviews discussing
the history, theory, design, operation, performance, modeling, and economics
of intermittent sand, slow sand, rapid sand, and other media filtration
of potable water and wastewater (Marshall and Middlebrooks, 1974; Harris
et al., 1975; Hill et al., 1976; Bishop et al., 1976; Messinger et al.,
1976; Tupyi et al., 1977). These previous literature reviews provides
interesting background and basic knowledge in understanding the intermittent
sand filtration process used to upgrade lagoon effluents. This literature
review presents a brief history of intermittent sand filtration of wastewater
and concise presentation of the previous studies performed at Utah State
University concerning intermittent sand filtration to upgrade lagoon ef-
fluents.
HISTORY
Intermittent sand filtration, first used as a sole wastewater treatment
process, was probably a variation of the slow sand filtration process used
for culinary water treatment as far back as 1828 (Daniels, 1945). In the
1870's intermittent sand filters were used in England when wastewater was
applied to a tract of land at a rate of 5616 cubic meters per hectare per
day (m3/ha.d) and later reduced to 1498 m3/ha.d by acquisition of more fil-
ter area (Pincince and McKee, 1968). From this early beginning, time and
experience dictated several changes in design and operation, such as the
application of settled sewage which resulted in better effluent quality
and longer filter runs.
The Lawrence Research Station, Lawrence, Massachusetts, began studies
of intermittent sand filters in 1887 to develop the best design and opera-
tional parameters. The resulting success encouraged the spread of inter-
mittent sand filtration through the country as a sewage treatment process
(Massachusetts Board of Health, 1912).
8
-------
A renewed interest in intermittent sand filtration was initiated at
the University of Florida when the post World War II population boom created
the need for an economical treatment process suitable for the geographical
location and the high ground water level in Florida. The study at the
University of Florida utilized eight 0.69 m2 pilot filters to treat settled
sewage in an attempt to improve the performance and operation of the inter-
mittent sand filtration process. Until the recent studies at Utah State
University, the majority of literature and practical knowledge of inter-
mittent sand filtration was developed at the University of Florida (Calaway
et al., 1952; Furman et al., 1955; Grantham et al., 1949).
Population growth throughout the country, mainly in the metropolitan
areas, concentrated the wastewater problems, leading to sophisticated treat-
ment processes that required less area and more monitoring and manpower. The
intermittent filtration process slowly disappeared due to the increased volume
of wastewater requiring treatment and the lack of available land (Marshall and
Middlebrooks, 1974).
INTERMITTENT SAND FILTRATION TO UPGRADE
LAGOON EFFLUENT
Upgrading lagoon effluents has become a necessary task for the many
communities that use lagoons for wastewater treatment since the passage
of PL 92-500 in 1972. Middlebrooks et al. (1974) found that of the avail~ble
techniques to upgrade lagoon effluent, the intermittent sand filter offered
the best economical results.
Since that time, six research projects evaluating intermittent sand
filtration and variations of the process have been completed at Utah State
University. Table 1 is a summary of the experimental design criteria and
the resulting performance for the best overall performing effective size
filter sand (i.e. 0.17 rom (millimeter», in relation to the other experi-
mental parameters and four common performance variables (i.e. suspended
solids, volatile suspended solids, five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BODS),
and estimated costs).
Single Stage pilot Scale and Laboratory
Scale Intermittent Sand Filters
Marshall and Middlebrooks (1974) evaluated laboratory and pilot scale
intermittent sand filtration of facultative lagoon effluent as a possible
means of upgrading the effluent quality to meet stringent effluent stan-
dards. The performance of the process was compared to the State of Utah
Class "c" Water Quality Standards (Table 2).
Of specific interest was the ability of the intermittent sand filt~r
to remove high algae concentrations common to lagoon effluents during the
warmer months of lagoon operation. Effluent from the Logan City wastewater
stabilization ponds was used in both the laboratory and pilot scale phases
of this research.
9
-------
TABLE 1.
INTERMITTENT SAND FILTRATION STUDIES PERFORMED AT UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
......
o
,,"-=J.
Intermittent labora tory Series Dairy Waste Effective Size and
Sand Fi1 t,.tion Scale - Pilot Prototype Study Intermittent lagoon Study Aerated lagoon Study loadi ng Study
Studies Study Harne 1 975 Study Biehop 1977 uF~; 1977
Author & Date Marshall 1974 Hill 1976 MfJuingel' 1976
Experi menta 1 Des; 9n
lagoon Type Facultative Facu1 tathe Facultative Anaerobi c Aerated & Facultative Facultative
Sand - le.s. II1II) 0.17 0.35 0.72 0.17 0.17 0.40 0.72 0.17 0.40 0.17 0.40 0.17 0.31 0.40 0.68
- U.C. ) 5.8 3.8 2.6 9.74 6.2 1. 95 2.1 N.A. N.A. 9.73 4.78 9.7 6.5 5.5 5.1
loading Rates laboratory Field Fi 1 ters Phase I Phase 1 Facultative 0.17 Filter
(MGAD)" 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.25 0.5 1.0 , 0.2 0.4
Field Filters Phase I I - IV Phase I I Aerated , Other Fil ters
0.1 thru O.g See Referent'! 0.1 0.35 0.5 0.5 1.0 11.0 1.5 2.0 3.0
Par_ters SS VSS BOD SS VSS BOD COD pH DO Total P SS VSS BOD pH SS VSS BOD SS VSS BOD pH ~ SS VSS BOD
Evaluated list See Reference O-PO. NH,-N NO,-N NO,-N TeII1p DO Temp Temp Temp BOD See Reference
Results for the Best Overall Performing 0.17 II1II Effective Size Sand Filters
loading Rates" (IIGAD) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.1 0.35 0.5 0.25 0.5 1.0 0.2 0.4
Suspended Solids Facultative Aerated
Average Appl ied l119/t 13.7 13.7 13.7 30.3 30.1 34.0 2-3.9 28.5 24.3 32.4 32.4 32.4 353 208 194 70.7 197 108 158 68.7 23.0 20.8
Average Effl uent 1119/ t 3.96 4.BO 6.05 3.5 2.9 5.9 4.7 5.1 3.7 8.6 7.8 6.4 45.5 46.5 45.1 10.1 15.6 11.8 52.5 32.9 2.7 3.5
Percent Remova 1 71 65 56 88 90 83 80 82 85 74 76 80 87 78 77 86 92 89 67 52 88 83
Volatile Suspended Solids
Average Applied rng/t 9.16 9.16 9.16 23.0 22.5 25.9 15.2 21. 5 18.6 21.9 21.9 21.9 264 162 175 38.8 155 83.0 71.1 36.6 17.8 18.5
Average Eff1 uent 1119/ t 1. 99 2.14 3.48 1.3 3.4 3.1 1.2 2.5 1.6 3.3 3.2 3.3 28.1 35.3 35.7 6.5 11.9 8.8 13.2 11.3 1.0 2.3
Percent Removal 78 77 75 94 85 88 92 88 91 85 85 85 89 78 80 83 92 89 81 69 95 88
Bioch...ica1 OXYgen Deaoand
Average Applied mg/t 6.3 6.3 6.3 19.5 20.6 25.6 2.8 13.5 6.1 10.7 10.7 10.7 123 108 107 20.2 71.4 34.0 34.4 19.6 10.9 11.5
Average E fl uent 1119/ t 1.2 1.3 2.0 1.9 2.5 4.2 1.8 2.6 2.2 1.8 2.0 2.3 19.5 43.7 67.6 6.6 9.4 13.0 5.1 11. 7 1.1 2.6
Percen t Renova1 82 lID 69 90 88 84 36 81 64 83 82 79 84 60 37 67 87 62 85 40 90 77
Es~i..ted Cost of $47 per M.G. F. $33 per M.G. Filtrate II Design Flow $44 per M.G.F. $5.40 - $8.48 $49 per M.G. Filtrate II Desi9n $236/M.G.F.
Fil trate with IIL.R.-0.3 MGAD 0.5 M.G. Day loading Rate 0.6 M.G. IIO.F. - 0.5 MGD Per Cow Year Flow 0.5 M.G. Day l.R. 0.25 H.G. II L.R. . 0.2 MGAD
Federal Assistance $33 per M.G.F. Acre Day L.R. - 1.5 MGAO II 8 Ga 1 /Cow/Oay Acre Day (usin9 aerated lagoons) $70/H. G. F. II
(0.17 II1II LS.) IIL.R.-0.8 HGAO Three Filter Series L. R. . 0.4 MGAO
O.F. - 1.0 MGO O. F. . 1.0 MGO
"I MGAO . 1 ..illion gallons per acre per day = 9359.9 m'/h.d
SS . suspended solids
VSS . volatile suspended solids
800 . biochemical oxygen demand
DO = d i s so lved oxygen
Total P . total phosphorus
O-FO. . orthophosphate phosphorus
NH,-N . amania nitrogen
NO,-N . nitrate nitrogen
MG . mi 11 IOn gall ons
HGD . mi 11 ion ga 11 ons per day
MGF . mi 11 ion ~a11ons of filtrate
NO,-N . nitrate o'ygen
Temp . temperature
e.s.
U.C.
l.R.
O.F.
H.G.
H.G.F.
. effective size
= uniformity coefficient
. hydraul ic loading rate
= desi9n flow rate
. million gallons
. million gallons of filtrate
-------
TABLE 2.
CLASS "c" STREAM STANDARDS FOR THE STATE OF UTAH (UTAH STATE
BOARD OF HEALTH, 1974, WATER QUALITY STANDARDS)
Parameter Concentration or Unit
pH 6.5 - 8.5
Total Coliform, Monthly Arithmetic 5,0001100 mt
Mean
Fecal Coliform, Monthly Arithmetic 2,000/100 mt
Mean
BOD 5' Monthly Arithmetic Mean 5 mg/t
Dissolved Oxygen 5.5 mg/t
Chemical and Radiological PHS Drinking Water Standards
The laboratory scale study (Phase I) was completed using nine 15 cm
diameter x 1.85 m plexiglass cylinders. The nine columns were divided into
three columns for each effective size sand. Three hydraulic loading rates
were used (see Table 1). Each column had 0.71 m of sand with three 7.6 cm
layers of graded underdrain gravel.
The field pilot scale study (Phase II) was performed using nine 1.2 m x
1.2 m x 1.8 m high fiberglass reinforced plywood filters. Each filter had
0.76 m of the appropriate size sand and three 10.2 cm layers of underdrain
gravel. Six of the nine filters contained 0.17 mm effective size (e.s.) sand
and three contained 0.72 mm e.s. sand.
Effluents from both laboratory and pilot scale filters were monitored
for suspended solids, volatile suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demand,
ammonia-N, nitrite-N, nitrate-N, pH, orthophosphate-P, total unfiltered
phosphorus, total coliform, temperature, and algae counts. Algal bioassays
were also conducted.
Within the range of hydraulic loading rates evaluated, the variation
in hydraulic loading rate was found to have a minimal effect on the effluent
quality. Filter run time was decreased with increased loading rates.
The effective size of the sand was found to be the most important
criterion in governing the solids removal performance. The 0.17 rom e.s.
sand size produced the best overall effluent, with better oxidation of
nitrogen compounds, algal concentrations, suspended solids removal, and
BODS removal (Table 1).
11
-------
The sand size was found to be directly related to the filter run time,
with the 0.17 mm e.s. sand producing the lowest run times in relation to
a common loading rate. The conclusion was that intermittent sand filtration
could produce an effluent consistent with the State of Utah Class "c"
standards.
A cost analysis of the construction and operation of the process pro-
duced an estimated range of $26 to $145 per million gallons of filtrate
($0.00687 to $0.0385 per m3). Table 1 reports the costs with federal
as sistance.
Single Stage Prototype Intermittent Sand Filters
The feasibility of using prototype 0.17 mm effective size (e.s.) inter-
mittent sand filters to upgrade lagoon effluent was evaluated by Reynolds
et al. (1974). The experimental facility was constructed at the Logan City
wastewater stabilization ponds. Harris et al. (1975) evaluated the per-
formance characteristics and seasonal operation of the facility for a period
of one year.
The six full scale prototype filters (7.6 m x 11.0 m) consisted of com-
pacted earthen banks with plastic liners and PVC piping. Each of the six
filters had the appropriate layers of underdrain gravel with 0.91 m of
0.17 mm effective size (e.s.) sand. Hydraulic loading rates employed and
the parameters evaluated are listed in Table 1. During winter operation,
various types of modifications to control ice formed on the filter surface
were evaluated. These modifications included furrowing, staking and con-
tinuous flooding (constant head). All modifications were found to produce
satisfactory results.
The effluent in general was found to be capable of meeting stringent
water quality standards. The filters exhibited excellent oxidation of
nitrogen compounds but produced negligible phosphorus reduction. It was
found that the effluent quality was independent of influent quality, but
increased hydraulic loading rates tended to slightly decrease the effluent
quality. As the temperature decreased, the effluent quality was effectively
decreased, but decreased temperature presented no particular operational
problems. The flooded mode of operation created anaerobic conditions within
the filter which resulted in a decrease in effluent quality and a shorter
filter run time.
The length of filter run time was found to be greatly affected by the
time of day the filters were loaded and calcium carbonate precipitation. An
experiment performed by Reynolds et al. (1974) indicated that loading during
daylight hours would increase algae concentrations in the water standing
on the filters and suggested that dosing after dark would eliminate the
increase in solids due to photosynthesis. Calcium carbonate precipitation
occurred when the water remained on the surface of the filters and algae
growth increased the pH of the water. As the pH increased, carbonate ions
precipitated when the solubility product of the carbonate was exceeded at
high pH values. This precipitation creates a cementation of the sand sur-
face and decreases filter run time.
12
-------
The filter run length was related to the suspended solids concentration
and the hydraulic loading rates. It was determined that hydraulic loading
rates between 3744 and 5616 m3/ha.d would be the optimum economical loading
rates for 0.17 mID sand filters. The average lengths of filter runs for
the 1872, 3744 and 5616 m3/ha.d loading rates were 64, 33, and 18 days,
respectively.
A cost analysis of construction of the prototype filters produced a cost
range of $33 to $70 per million gallons of filtrate ($0.0087 to $0.0185 per
m3) with federal assistance (Table 1). Without federal assistance the cost
of construction was estimated to range between $66 and $140 per million gal-
lons of filtrate ($0.0174 to $0.037 per m3).
Series Field pilot and Laboratory Scale
Intermittent Sand Filters
The success of the single stage intermittent sand filters could only be
improved by increasing the length of filter run. Hill et al. (1976) evalu-
ated the feasibility of using series pilot scale and laboratory scale inter-
mittent sand filters to upgrade lagoon effluent. The quality of effluent
and the effectiveness of increasing the filter run time was compared to
previous results obtained with single stage intermittent sand filters
(Reynolds et al., 1974; Harris et al., 1975).
The study was conducted in four phases, each using facultative lagoon
effluent from the Logan City wastewater stabilization ponds. The four
phases consisted of two categories: field pilot scale and laboratory scale
studies.
The major portion of the study was performed on the field pilot scale
system which consisted of the nine 1.2 m x 1.2 m x 1.8 m high fiberglass
reinforced plywood filter units used by Marshall and Middlebrooks (1974).
The filter units were rearranged and prepared for series operation. The
resulting arrangement was three independent series operations with the sand
sizes in the three filters decreasing from 0.72 to 0.40 to 0.17 mID as the
water passed through the system.
The laboratory study utilized one series system with the same 0.76 m
sand depth and 0.30 m of layered gravel underdrain as the pilot scale sys-
tem. The sand and gravel were placed in 15 em diameter PVC cylinders with
a 0.30 m length of clear plexiglass cylinder arranged for sand surface
observation.
As shown in Figure 1, Phase I of the study utilized hydraulic loading
rates of 4680, 9360, 14,040 m3/ha.d on the three 3-filter series systems.
Phase II was the laboratory scale study performed at the Utah Water Re-
search Laboratory. The loading rate was initially started at 112,319 m3/ha.d
but due to plugging was reduced to 74,879 m3/ha.d then to 37.440 m3/ha.d.
Phase III went back to the field pilot scale filters using a decreasing
loading scheme on two of the three series systems as shown in Figure 1. Phase
13
-------
Phase I
4,680 m3/ha.d
t
9.360 m3/ha.d
.
14,040 m3/ha.d
.
.
.
.
4,680 m3/ha.d 9360 m3/ha.d 14.040 ~~Lh_a_._d----
-----------------------------------------------------------
Phase I II
28,080 m3/ha.d~~
waste ~
28,080 m3/ha.d
37,440 m3/ha.d
74,879 m3/ha.d
t
I I
-y
37,440 m3/ha.d
56,159 m3/ha.d
.
14.040 m'/ha.d--~
14,040 m3/ha.d
18,720 m3/ha.d
-~
18,720 m 3/ha . d
~
14,040 m3/ha.d
~
18,720 m3/ha.d
e.s. = effective size
Figure 1. Organization of series intermittent sand filter study.
14
-------
IV was an equal loading operation using two of the series systems with much
higher loading rates (28,080 m3/ha.d and 38,440 m3/ha.d) than were used in
Phase I.
It was concluded that, when operated and loaded properly, series inter-
mittent sand filtration could consistently produce a high quality effluent
sufficient to meet more stringent discharge requirements than the State of
Utah "c" Standards (Table 2). The series intermittent sand filters were able
to treat higher hydraulic loading than the single stage filters with compar-
able results. The pilot scale series filters obtained run times of 130 days
or greater for the 4680-14,040 m3/ha.d (Phase I) loading rates (Table 1).
An economic analysis of the series intermittent sand filtration of lagoon
effluent produced an estimated cost range of $39 to $44 per million gallons of
filtrate ($0.0103 to $0.0116 per m3) with federal assistance. Without federal
assistance construction costs were estimated to range from S78 to $89 per mil-
lion gallons of filtrate ($0.0206 to SO.0235 per m3).
Single Stage Laboratory Scale Intermittent Sand Filtration
of Anaerobic Lagoon Effluent (Dairy Parlor Wastewater
Lagoon)
Messinger et al.
lagoon followed by an
water. The PL 92-500
as a desired effluent
(1976) studied the feasibility of using an anaerobic
intermittent sand filter to treat dairy parlor waste-
Federal Secondary Treatment Standards were chosen
quality (Table 3).
The study was performed using a laboratory scale system consisting of
a 2.04 m3 fiberglass reinforced plywood tank as the lagoon and six 15
cm diameter x 2.18 m high plexiglass and PVC cylinders used for the filters.
Three of the cylinders were filled with 0.91 m of each of the two effective
size sands and 23_cm of underdrain gravel (Table 1).
TABLE 3.
NATIONAL SECONDARY TREATMENT ST&~DARDS (FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION
CONTROL ACT, 1972, PL 92-500)
pH
6.0 to 9.0
Suspended Solids (SS)a
30 mg/1-30 day average or 45 mg/1-7 day average
BOD a
5
30 mg/1-30 day average or 45 mg/1-7 day average
Fecal Coliform
200/100 ml-30 day geometric mean or 400/100 ml-
7 day geometric mean
aTreatment must also remove 85 percent of influent SS and BOD5'
15
-------
The study consisted of two phases, the first of which used loading
rates of 4680, 9360, 14,040 m3/ha.d. Due to the poor results of Phase
I, the loading rates were reduced to 936, 3276, 4680 m3'ha.d for Phase
II of the study. Even the lower loading rates did not provide the desired
effluent quality. The removal efficiency of the filters remained relatively
high, but the high organic loading rates led to rather high concentrations
in the effluent (Table 1). The results indicated that the use of the 0.17
mm effective size sand and low loading rates «4680 m3/ha.d) provided
the best filter effluent quality when using strong anaerobic lagoon effluent.
A long period of time (3 to 4 weeks) was required for a filter to recover
after being heavily loaded and becoming anaerobic. It was concluded that
using an anaerobic lagoon effluent with intermittent sand filters would not
produce an effluent quality that would satisfy the PL 92-500 discharge
req ui reme nt s.
An economic analysis was performed for an eighty cow farm and the
costs ranged from $5.40 to $8.48 per cow per year.
Single Stage Pilot Scale Intermittent Sand Filtration
of Aerated Lagoon Effluent
Previous studies had not evaluated the use of intermittent sand filters
to upgrade aerated lagoon effluent. Bishop et al. (1977) evaluated the
performance of pilot scale intermittent sand filtration systems when treat-
ing aerated lagoon and facultative pond effluent (Table 1).
The aerated lagoons and adjacent facultative pond were part of a system
treating wastewater from a milk processing plant. The evaluation included
filter effluent quality when both the aerated lagoon and facultative pond
effluents were applied to the filters. Four 1.2 m x 1.2 m x 2.4 m high
pilot scale filters were constructed of fiberglass reinforced plywood. Two
filters, each containing 0.91 m of the appropriate size sand and 0.30 m
of layered gravel underdrain received varying hydraulic loading rates.
The filter effluent quality was affected by the effective sand size
(e.s.) with the 0.17 rom e.s. sand producing the best quality effluent.
Once again the run time of the filter was related to the effective size of
the sand, with the 0.17 rom e.s. sand producing the shorter run time for
common suspended solids and hydraulic loading rates. Increased hydraulic
loading rates resulted in a decrease in BODS removal and filter run time
but did not affect the suspended solids or volatile suspended solids removals.
A comparison of the aerated lagoon filtrate and the facultative pond filtrate
showed that better removal was obtained when filtering facultative pond ef-
fluent. Intermittent sand filtration of effluent from an aerated lagoon with
a facultative pond using a 0.17 rom effective size sand produced an effluent
meeting present and future State of Utah discharge requirements at an esti-
mated cost of $49 per million gallons of filtrate ($0.0129 per m3) with
federal assistance (Table 1). Construction costs without federal assistance
was estimated to be $147 per million gallons of filtrate ($0.0389 per m3).
16
-------
Effective Sand Size and Filter Loading Study of
Intermittent Sand Filtration of Lagoon Effluent
Previous studies have proven the ability of 0.17 rom effective size
(e.s.) intermittent sand filtration to upgrade lagoon effluents to meet
present and future requirements with proper design and operation. The main
handicap of this system is the length of service and the labor required to
reactivate the filters. In an effort to establish new design and opera-
tional criteria to minimize this liability, a study was completed evaluating
the effects of varying effective sand sizes and loading rates on the quality
of effluent (Tupyi et al, 1977). The effect of both hydraulic loading rates
and application rates were evaluated with various effective size sands. The
application rate is defined as the period of time required to apply the re-
quired volume of wastewater to the filter.
Six 11.0 m x 7.6 m prototype, vinyl lined, earthen banked, inter-
mittent sand filters were used (Reynolds et al., 1974; Harris et al., 1975).
The filter sand effective sizes were 0.17 rom, 0.31 mm, 0.40 rom and 0.68 rom.
Filter effluents were monitored for the following parameters: SS, VSS,
BODS, COD, NH3-N, N02-N, N03-N, TKN, total P, ortho-P04, alkalinity, DO,
temperature, total and fecal coliforms, and algae counts. One major dif-
ference from the previous studies was the evaluation of the effects of vary-
ing the application rates of wastewater to the surface of the filter. Ap-
plication rates of 0.008 m3/sec and 0.048 m3/sec were utilized on the
three largest effective size sand filters. An application rate of 0.048
m3/sec was used exclusively on the 0.17 rom e.s. filters.
As previously reported, the 0.17 rom e.s. size sand filter at both hy-
draulic loading rates (1872 and 3744 m3/ha.d) produced an effluent which
satisfied the State of Utah Class "c" BODS and suspended solids standards
(Table 2). The 0.40 rom e.s. filter receiving a hydraulic loading rate of
9360 m3/ha.d and an application rate of 0.008 m3/sec also produced an
effluent which satisfied the suspended solids and BODS requirements of
Class "c" standards. In both cases, total and fecal coliform concentrations
in the effluent did not meet the Class "c" standards even though 95 percent
and greater removals were obtained with the filters.
Hydraulic loading rate was again found to have little effect on the
overall quality of the effluent. The smaller effective sand size produced
a more highly nitrified effluent, better coliform removal, greater algae
removal and an overall superior quality effluent. The lower application
rates appear to have a profound effect on the effluent quality as illus-
trated by the performance of the 0.40 mm e.s. sand filter. Longer filter
runs were also related to lower application rates along with a higher nitri-
fied effluent. The 0.17 rom e.s. sand filter receiving a hydraulic loading
rate of 1872 m3/ha.d operated 100 days or more before cl~aning was re-
qui red.
The estimated total construction cost per million gallons of filtrate for
the 0.17 rom e.s. size filter ranged from $45 to $236 (Table 1) ($0.0119' to
$0.0624 per m3). Without federal assistance the construction costs were
17
-------
estimated to be $95 to $503 per million gallons of filtrate ($0.0251 to $0.133
per m3).
SUMMARY
With proper design and operation, intermittent sand filtration is an
economical process to upgrade wastewater stabilization lagoon effluent to
meet present and future discharge requirements. Throughout the studies the
effective sand sizes and hydraulic loading rates have been common variables.
The effective sand size has been found to be the most important variable
relative to quality of effluent and the ability of the process to meet ef-
fluent requirements. Hydraulic loading rate does not have a great effect
on the effluent quality but does play an important role in the economics
of filter run time. Lengthening the filter run time requires either a de-
crease in loading rate which in turn creates a larger initial construction
cost along with increased maintenance costs, or a sacrifice in the quality
of effluent. Neither variation guarantees any consistent run time because
lagoon effluent quality can fluctuate greatly during the year and can in-
crease or decrease the filter run time.
In relation to the more sophisticated treatment processes available
to small municipalities, the intermittent sand filter following a waste-
water stabilization lagoon offers an effective treatment process at a lower
cost.
18
-------
SECTION 5
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
FACILITY SELECTION
Three new existing intermittent sand filters used to upgrade wastewater
stabilization ponds were selected to represent various regions and climates
of the country. The range of design flows, availability of laboratory facil-
ities, and design criteria were of equal importance in the selection. The
location and description of the three facilities selected are presented in
Table 4. More detailed descriptions of the communities and wastewater treat-
ment facilities are presented below.
FACILITY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
City of Mount Shasta, California
Water Pollution Control Facility--
The City of Mount Shasta is located in Northern California approximately
387 km north of Sacramento on Interstate Highway 5. The city is situated on
the mountainous southwest slope of Mount Shasta at an elevation of approxi-
mately 1005 m above mean sea level. The primary economic activity is logging
and the community has a population of 2517 (1970 census) with an estimated
growth to 3000 by 1984. The area has a mild climate for a mountain region
with an annual mean precipitation of 89 em and average monthly temperatures
ranging from -4oC to 29.50C.
The Water Pollution Control Facility is located 3.5 km southwest of the
downtown area along the Sacramento River gorge. The facility was placed in
operation in the Fall of 1976. The average dry weather design flowrate is
2650 m3/d and the average wet weather flow is 4542 m3/d.
The lagoon system consists of four aerated lagoons (Figure 2), two 3.05
m deep primary lagoons and two 0.91 m deep secondary lagoons. The total sur-
face area of the lagoons is 3.2 hectares with a volume of 54,207 m3. The
lagoons were constructed of compacted earth dikes without an impermeable liner
or slope stabilization. The aerated lagoons provide a retention time of 20.5
days at a flow rate of 2658 m3/d and 12.0 days at 4542 m3/d. Aeration is
supplied by a Hinde Engineering Systeml using four 7457 w blowers. A
IHinde Engineering Co., Highland Park, Illinois.
19
-------
Facil ity
Design Flow Rate
Lagoons
Number/type/size/depth/capacity
Primary
Secondary
Total retention time
N
a
Fi lters
Number/area Of each filter
Design loading rate
Media
Sand
Effective size (mm)
Uniformity coefficient
Depth
Underdra i n
Layer depth/gravel size
Available freeboard
Dosing system
Distribution system
Disinfection
Type
Contact time
Other Doints of Interest
aConversion to SI units
1 MGD = 3785 m3/d
1.0 MGAD = 9.360 m3/ha'd
1 MG = 3785 m3
1 acre = 0.405 hectare
1 ft = 0.30 m
1 inch = 2.54 cm
TABLE 4.
FACILITY DESIGN CRITERIAa
Mount Shasta Water Pollution
Control Facility
Dry weather 0.7 MGD
Wet weather 1.2 MGD
2/aerated/l.4 acres/10 ft/3.2 MG
2/aerated/4.2 & 3.4/5 ft/3.4 & 2.8 MG
12 days to 20.5 days
3/1.0 acre (6/0.5 ~cre)
0.7 MGAD
0.37
5.1
24 inches
18 in./coarse. 4 in./medium
3 in./fine, 3 in./coarse sand
24 inches
Time controlled butterfly valves
18 inch diameter manifolds with
sixteen concrete splash pads
Gas chlorinators
63 minutes
Summer discharge is pumped to a drain
field above the city
Moriarty, N.M. Wastewater
Treatment Facility
0.4 MGD maximum
0.2 MGD normal
2 derated/0.4 acre/10 ft/l.O MG
2/facultative/l.2 acres/3 ft/l.l MG
10 days to 20 days
8/0.082 acre
0.6 MGAD
0.20
4.1
24 inches
4 in./pea gravel. 4 in./~' inches
remaining depth of l~ inches gravel
18 inches
Automatic siphon (25,000 gal)
Six redwood distribution troughs
(replaced with gravel splash pads)
Tab 1 et type
Variable with flow
Disinfection is accomplished prior
to application to the filters
Ailey. Georgia Sewage Treatment
Plant
0.080 MGD
1/facultative/5.5 acres/3.5 ft/4.8
1/facultative/0.75 acre/3.0 ft/0.8
70 days
2/0.14 acre
0.4 MGAD -
0.50
4.0
30 inches
3 in./coarse sand. 3 in./pea gravel,
3 in./medium. coarse
18 inches
Float actuated valves (18.000 gal)
3-6 inch diameter lateral plastic
perforated pipes
Gas chlorinators
One hour
Use of two lift stations are required
within the facility because of flat
topography
-------
facultative ballast lagoon with a volume of 20,933 m3 along with a large
dosing basin with a volume of 5,224 m3 provide adequate detention capacity
for constant discharge through the intermittent sand filters.
Three 0.405 hectare filters are divided into six 0.202 hectare sections
(101.2 m x 19.2 m) and each of the two 0.202 hectare sections are loaded from
one large distribution manifold system with concrete splash pads on the
filter surface. A design hydraulic loading rate of 6552 m3/ha.d was used
to size the filters. The filters are surrounded by earthen banks with a
1.42 m concrete block wall constructed around the periphery of the filters
to retain the water and prevent sloughing of the earthen banks onto the
filter surface. Filter material for the 1.32 m of media consists of 45 cm
of coarse gravel, 10.2 cm of medium gravel, 7.6 cm of fine gravel, 7.6 cm
of coarse sand, and 61 cm of washed concrete sand. The effective sand size
1S 0.37 mm with a uniformity coefficient of 5.1.
Disinfection is accomplished with a gas chlorinator2 and a ~ontact
chamber with a 63 minute detention time at a flow rate of 2650 m /d. A
sulfonator is used to dechlorinate before discharge to meet the State of
California discharge requirements.
An unusual characteristic of the facility is that during summer op-
eration, plant effluent is pumped a distance of two miles to a drain field
above the city to prevent pollution of the Sacramento River during the low
flow period. This component of the system is shown as the water reclamation
system in Figure 2.
Normal operation of the intermittent sand filters consists of one day
loading and two days rest while the remaining filters are loaded. The filter
selected to be loaded receives two equal applications daily. When plugging
occurs, the remaining filters are loaded alternately until cleaning is com-
pleted. To prevent surges in the chlorine contact tank, the filtrate is
held in the filter underdrain below the sand level and released at a regu-
lated flow rate.
Operation and maintenance duties are performed by two full time op-
erators and one part-time operator as back up, along with city maintenance
crews for heavy work such as filter cleaning operations.
Moriarty Wastewater Treatment Facility, Moriarty, New Mexico
Moriarty, New Mexico, is located on the high plains approximately 54.7
kilometers east of Albuquerque, New Mexico, on Interstate Highway 40 at an
elevation of 1890 m above mean sea level. The primary industry is services
(gasoline, food, lodging) for the interstate, with agriculture as a second-
ary activity. The population of 1200 (1970 census) which is expected to
2Series V-800, Wallace & Tiernan Co., Belleville, N.J.
21
-------
5
5
17
17
6
6
8 9 10 II I
10 I
,,---------@-- --_J)
OPERATIONS
BUILDING
15
10
LEGEND
I BAR RACK
2 COMMINUTER
3 BYPASS BAR RACK
4 INFLUENT PARSHALL FLUME
5 PRIMARY AERATED LAGOONS
6 SECONDARY AERATED LAGOONS
7 LAGOON SYSTEM PARSHALL FWME
8 BALLAST LAGOON
A LAGOON INFLUENT SAMPLING
POINT
B LAGOON EFFLUENT SAMPLING
POINT
9 DOSING BASIN
10 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
II CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
12 EFFLUENT PARSHALL FLUME
13 RIVER DISCHARGE LINE
14 OUTFALL PUMP STATION
15 CHLORINATOR I SULFONATOR
16 AERATION BLOWERS
17 WATER RECLAMATION SYSTEM
C FILTER EFFLUENT SAMPLING
POINT
D CHLORINATED FILTER EFFLUENT
POINT
Figure 2.
Mount Shasta, Ca., water pollution control facility process
flow diagram.
22
-------
increase to 2000 by 1985, live in a semi-arid high altitude climate with an
average annual rainfall of 20.3 cm and a mean yearly temperature of l30C.
The wastewater treatment facility
near an on-off ramp for Interstate 40.
effluent in late Spring of 1977.
is located at the east side of town
The facility began discharging
The design flow rate of 757 m3/d was used to size the two parallel
aerated primary and facultative secondary lagoon systems to achieve a design
retention time of 10 days for each system with a maximum capacity of 1514 m3
with both systems receiving maximum flow (Figure 3). Because of the climate
and altitude an extremely high rate of evaporation (50 percent or greater)
was anticipated in the design flow and the resulting hydraulic loading
applied to the filters.
The lagoon system consists of four compacted earthen dike lagoons with
concrete aprons surrounding the interior lagoon walls for bank stabilization
and weed control. The two primary aerated lagoons are 3 m in depth with
0.91 m of freeboard and each having a water surface area 40.8 m x 40.8 m or
0.17 ha. Each primary lagoon contains a volume of 3785 m3. Each aerated
lagoon is equipped with a 7457 w mechanical aerator3 with timing control
devices to regulate aeration. The two facultative polishing ponds are
0.91 m deep with 0.61 m of freeboard, a surface area of 0.49 ha each, and a
volume of 4163.9 m3. Secondary lagoon effluent is collected and directed
to a combination chlorine contact chamber and dosing basin, 13.6 m x 9.1 m x
1.2 m deep, equipped with a dosing siphon for automatic dosing of the fil-
ters. The effective dosing depth of 0.76 m and a volume of 94.6 m3 is dis-
charged per dose to the filters. The dosing cycle is relatively slow,
requiring at least an hour to drain the basin because of the small differ-
ential in elevation. After the initial lift provided by the raw influent
screw pumps, flow through the entire system is by gravity.
Disinfection is accomplished with a combination of four chlorinators4
(tablet type) located at the inlet to the dosing basin. Chlorination of the
wastewater is accomplished prior to application to the filters.
The intermittent sand filters consist of eight 18.3 m x 18.3 m concrete
basins with four filters located on each side of a common distribution mani-
fold with manual valves and a common collecting drain line beneath the dis-
tribution line. Distribution onto the filters is accomplished by discharging
effluent from the dosing siphon into a six-outlet manifold with discharges
into six redwood distribution troughs. The redwood troughs were later re-
moved because of poor performance and replaced with gravel splash pads. The
filter profile consists of 0.61 m of 0.20 mm effective size sand with a uni-
formity coefficient of 4.1, 10.2 cm of 0.64 cm pea gravel, 10.2 cm of 1.9 cm
gravel and the remaining portion of the underdrain system is filled with 3.8
cm rock.
3Aqua Aerobic Systems, Inc., Rockford, Illinois.
4Sanuril Model 100, Electrode Corporation, Chardon, Ohio.
23
-------
II
10 10
10 10 7
10 10 5
10 10
5
LEGEND
I INFLUENT LIFT PUMP
2 CONTROL BUILDING
3 INFLUENT PARSHALL FLUME
4 COMMINUTER
5 PRIMARY AERATED LAGOONS
6 FLOW SPLITTER
7 SECONDARY FACULTATIVE LAGOONS
8 TABLET CHLORINATOR
9 DOSING BASIN WITH AUTOMATIC SYPHON
A LAGOON INFLUENT SAMPLING POINT
B LAGOON EFFLUENT SAMPLING POINT
7
3 4
2
A
10 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
II DISCHARGE OUTFALL LINE
o MANUAL VALVES
C CHLORINATED LAGOON EFFLUENT
SAMPlI NG POINT
o FILTER EFFLUENT SAMPLING POINT
Figure 3.
Moriarty, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram.
24
-------
Normal operation consist3 of automatic loading of the filters with
the dosing siphon, and the frequency of dosing varies with the flow rate.
The dosing volume 94.6 of m3 is distributed over two of the eight filters.
At the design flow rate of 378 m3/d (with a 50 percent evaporation rate).
the hydraulic loading rate on the filters is 5616 m3/ha.d. When plugging
occurs the next two filters are put into operation and so on, leaving ade-
quate time for filter cleaning and recycling.
Manpower requirements are minimal due to automatic operation. Four
inspection visits are conducted daily and chlorine residual in the effluent
and flow rate are monitored by a part-time employee also involved in other
city duties. Maintenance work is done by other city employees.
City of Ailey, Georgia, Sewage Treatment Plant
The City of Ailey, Georgia, is located in southeast Georgia on the
heavily forested coastal plain, about 136 km west of Savannah on U.S.
Highway 280. At an elevation of 51.8 m above mean sea level, the predomi-
nantly lumber oriented community of 400 people enjoy a mild but wet climate,
with an average yearly rainfall of 122 cm and an average annual temperature
of 19.5oC.
The sewage treatment plant is located approximately 2 km northwest
of downtown Ailey on Bear Creek (Figure 4). The plant was put into operation
in the Fall of 1976.
The average design flow rate is 303 m3/d. The lagoon system consists
of two 1.07 m deep primary facultative oxidation ponds and one 1.07 m deep
facultative polishing pond. The lagoons are constructed of compacted earthen
dikes with concrete aprons around the inside for bank stabilization and weed
control. The primary lagoons have a total water surface area of 2.2 hectares
and a volume of 18,170 m3. The secondary lagoon has a water surface area
of 0.30 ha with a normal capacity of 3028 m3. Together the lagoons provide
70 days of retention time for the design flow rate of 303 m3/d. A flow
splitter located between the primary and secondary lagoons provides a means
to recirculate the primary lagoon effluent for better treatment when nec-
essary. A concrete dosing basin of 8.5 m x 8.5 m x 1.5 m deep adds 68.1 m3
of lagoon effluent per dosing to the filters automatically. The design hy-
draulic loading rate for the filters is 3744 m3/ha.d.
The two 33.5 m x 16.7 m filters constructed of concrete with 45 cm of
freeboard are located side by side and have separate dosing manifolds con-
nected to three perforated lateral~ 15 cm in diameter distributing the water
over the surface of the filter sand. During normal operation, electronic
floats in the dosing basin activate two separate valves alternately to dose
the filters. The alternate dosing enables the filters to rest a period of
time depending on the discharge rate before being dosed again. The filter
profile consists of 76.2 cm of 0.50 mm effective size sand with a uniformity
coefficient of less than 4.0, 7.6 cm of coarse sand, 7.6 cm of pea gravel,
7.6 cm of medium gravel, and coarse gravel covering the underdrain system.
25
-------
r-----
/
/
14/
I
N
0\
LEGEND
I INFLUENT MAIN LINE
2 LIFT STATION :# I
3 FORCED MAIN
4 OXIDATION POND
5 FLOW SPLITTER
A LAGOON INFLUENT
SAMPLING POINT
B LAGOON EFFLUENT
SAMPLING POINT
6 LIFT STATION :# 2
7 POLISHING POND
II IN-STREAM PARSHALL FLUME
12 SEWER RETURN LINE
8 DOSING BASIN
9 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
13 CONTROL BUILDING
14 CONTACT CHAMBER DRAIN
10 CHLORINE CONTACT CHAMBER
C FILTER EFFLUENT SAMPLING
POINT
LINE
D CHLORINATED FILTER
EFFLUENT SAMPLING POINT
Figure 4. Ailey, Ga., sewage treatment plant process flow diagram.
-------
Disinfection is accomplished with a gas chlorinatorS and two parallel
3.9 m x 1.2 m x 2.1 m deep, over and under baffled contact chambers. The
plant effluent is discharged over a 600V-notch weir connected to a flow
totalizer6 and recorder to measure the discharge rate. A Parshall flume
located in Bear Creek is used to measure the flow rate in the creek. The
discharge permit requires that the plant discharge not exceed the flow rate
in the creek.
Two pumping stations lift wastewater to required levels S1nce the topo-
graphy is relatively flat.
Manpower requirements are minimal and consist of one daily inspection
during the week with flow and chlorine residual monitoring and periodic an-
alysis of suspended solids, BODS, and fecal coliform for monthly reports.
When physical labor is required for cleaning filters and grounds maintenance,
the city maintenance crew provides the manpower.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
Because of the wide geographical distribution of the lagoon-filter
sites, it was necessary to use a mobile laboratory to provide adequate
equipment and supplies for the nine sampling periods. A heavy duty pickup
truck with a camper shell for storage and a 9.75 m self-contained travel
trailer were used for equipment storage space while on the road. The trailer
was used as housing for the sampling crew when working at a site. Laboratory
equipment sufficient for the field analyses was carried from site to site
to ensure a common base for all field analyses. The laboratory facilities at
each of the systems being evaluated were used to house the field laboratory,
and all analyses requiring immediate attention were conducted in the field.
Each of the three sites were monitored for three 30-consecutive-day-
sampling periods during different seasons of the year, totaling 270 sampling
days. Table 5 shows the duration of the sampling periods at each site.
Four sampling points were selected at each site to collect 24-hour composite
samples. Lagoon influent, lagoon effluent (also filter influent), filter
effluent, and chlorinated effluent samples were collected at each site. The
location of the sampling equipment at each of the sites is shown on Figures
2-4. The locations are identified with capital letters, with IAI represent-
ing the lagoon influent sampling station, IBI the lagoon effluent, etc.
Four automatic samplers7 in conjunction with four 0.11 m3 recreational
vehicle refrigerators8 housed in 1.2 m x 0.91 m x 1.5 m high protective
sSeries V-800 Wallace Tiernan chlorinator.
6Sparling type 261, Envirotech, Salt Lake City, Utah.
7ISCO Model 1580 Automatic Wastewater Sampler, Lincoln, Nebraska.
8Dometic Model RM4 Recreation Vehicle Refrigerator, Sweden.
27
-------
plywood buildings were used to collect the samples.
sectional view of the sampling apparatus.
Figure 5 shows a cross
All analyses were performed according to the 14th Edition of Standard
Methods (APHA, 1975). Table 6 presents a summary of the location of sam-
pling points, the analyses conducted and the type of samples collected.
Field laboratory limitations made it necessary to return preserved samples
to the Utah Water Research Laboratory (UWRL) for certain analyses. Param-
eters measured at the UWRL are identified in Table 6. Samples shipped to
the UWRL were preserved according to Standard Methods (APHA, 1975) and were
shipped daily by U.S. priority Class Mail to ensure receipt and analysis in
Utah within a week from the sampling date.
In addition to the analyses p~rformed on the wastewater, a record of
operational and maintenance requirements were recorded daily by the research
team and the facility operator.
TABLE 5.
TABLE OF SAMPLING PERIODS (TOUR) DATES
Location From To Season Visit #
Mt. Shasta, Ca. 1/22/77 2/20/77 Winter 1
Ai 1 ey, Ga. 3/19/77 4/17/77 Spring 1
Moriarty, N.M. 5/19/77 6/17/77 Summer 1
Mt. Shasta, Ca. 7/11/77 8/20/77 Summer 2
Ailey. Ga. 9/16/77 10/14/77 Fall 2
Moriarty, N.M. 11 /14/77 12/13/77 Fall 2
Ailey, Ga. 1/04/78 2/02/78 Winter 3
Moriarty. N.M. 2/14/78 3/15/78 Winter 3
Mt. Shasta, Ca. 4/14/78 4/28/78 Spring 3
28
-------
TABLE 6.
SAMPLING LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
-
Sample Location Sample Type
Parameter
Lagoon Lagoon Fil ter After Grab Composite
Influent Effluent Eff1 uent Chlorination Sample Sample Ins itu
Wastewater Flow
Da i 1y total x x
Mi nimum x
Maximum x
pH x x x y x
Temperature x x x x
Dissolved Oxygen x x x x x x
A 1 ka 1 i n ity x x x x
To ta 1 BODsa x x x x x
Soluble BODsa x x x x x
Suspended Solids
Total x x x x x
Volatile x x x x x
Fecal Co1 iforms x x x x x
Total coob x x x x x
Soluble CODb x x x x x
Total Phosphorusb x y y x x
TKNb x x x x x
. b
NH 3 - N x x x x X
N02 - Nb x x x x y
N03 - Nb x x x x x
Algae CountsC x x x x
aTwice during each 30-day sampling period BODs analyses were performed with and
without nitrification inhibitor in the bottle. All other samples were analyzed
without the use of nitrification inhibitors. Allyl-thiourea was used as the
inhibitor (Young, 1973).
bSamp1es shipped to UWRL for ana1ysls.
CA1gae counts were conducted once every six days of sampling.
preserved and returned to UWRL for counting.
Samples were
29
-------
SAMPLING STATION DETAILS
(Not to Scale)
Vent Hood
3 II II
1.9 em (4" ) Plywood, 2.54 em (I ) Foam Insul.
Automatic Sampler
Control Unit
I II
I. 2 7 em (2" ) O. D. I 0.4 8 em
3 II .
(16 ) I.D. Tygon Tubing
!
o
Q.
o
~
a..
Refrigerator
(propane operated)
Figure 5.
Sampling station details.
30
-------
SECTION 6
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
GENERAL
Operation and maintenance records collected during the three visits
at each site consist of observed procedures and the design or suggested mode
of operation and maintenance. The major operational variances and the op-
erator's reasons for the variances are presented. The chemical and bio-
logical parameters measured at each site are discussed on an individual
basis. General trends are shown by plotting the parameter versus time for
each of the three tours, and statistical comparisons are made to determine
if differences between the tours and sites exist. comparisons of the three
systems are based on parameters used to establish state and federal regu-
lations, i.e., removal and effluent concentrations of Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BODS), and Suspended Solids (SS), Effluent Dissolved Oxygen con-
centration, and the pH value of the effluent.
The design of a typical intermittent sand filter system is based on
the results of previous studies performed at Utah State University and the
observations made during this study of actual applications of the basic
system. Operation and maintenance requirements for the typical system are
based on actual operating experiences observed during this study. Economic
analyses are based on construction data from existing or planned inter-
mittent sand filters in the continential United States.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (0 & M) AT MT.
SHASTA, CALIFORNIA
Design 0 & M
Overall Facility 0 & M--
The operation and maintenance (0 & M) of the aerated lagoon-intermit-
tent sand filter system at Mt. Shasta is more complicated than the 0 & M
at the other two sites because of the additional components of the system.
The screen-comminutor, disinfection system, pumping system discharge to the
subsurface water reclamation site (leach field), the Sacramento River out-
fall, and the aeration system, complicate the operation and maintenance.
Screening and comminution of the raw sewage is a continuous operation
and twice daily cleaning of the bar screen to prevent blockage, and occa-
sional lubrication of the comminutor is recommended.
31
-------
Disinfection of the effluent is automatic after the initial start-up
when monitoring of chlorine residuals and frequent adjustments are re-
quired. When a malfunction occurs, the system should be operated manually
until repair or adjustments can be made. During summer operating conditions
the effluent is discharged to a subsurface water reclamation site and dis-
infection is not required. As a precaution, however, the effluent is dis-
infected and sulfonated to remove the chlorine residual and prevent harmful
effects on natural bacterial activity in the ground above and around the
leach field. During winter operations, the discharge standards require dis-
infection with a maximum residual of 0.01 mg/l chlorine in the discharged
water. Although not required by the discharge permit, the chlorinator and
sulfonator are used throughout the year. The only unusual maintenance re-
quirement for the chlorine contact basin is to remove accumulated solids.
Because of the surges in the solids concentrations in the effluent immedi-
ately after introducing wastewater to the chlorine contact basin, it may be
necessary to clean the basin more frequently. Both effluent discharge op-
tions described above are automatic and require little or no input by the
operator. Normal summer operation requires that the effluent be pumped
(automatic pumping station with two pumps) to the subsurface water reclama-
tion site where it is automatically distributed over a leaching field. After
an initial adjustment to evenly distribute the effluent over the leaching
field, only an occasional adjustment is necessary to ensure proper opera-
tion. These adjustments consist of alternating the lead pump in service
in the pump station and alternating discharge of effluent between the two
leaching fields. The decision to switch to the other leaching field is to
be based on information obtained by periodically inspecting the piezometers
and test wells located throughout the system.
During the winter effluent is dishcarged by gravity directly into the
Sacramento River. The outfall structure is to be inspected monthly and up-
stream and downstream river samples are to be analyzed for DO concentrations
and pH values. Maintenance at the subsurface water reclamation site should
consist primarily of brush removal around distribution boxes and test wells,
and removal of blockages that may occur in the leach field pipes. This
activity should require minimal time.
System 0 & M--
The lagoon system consists of four aerated lagoons with a surface area
of eight acres and a capacity of 54,207 m3 plus a ballast lagoon with a
capacity of 20,820 m3. The system is designed to produce an effluent
treatable with the intermittent sand filters even in the event of a total
failure of the aeration system. Aeration was provided to overcome the odor
problems experienced in facultative lagoons during the spring and fall and
to reduce the surface area required during the winter months.
During the summer the four aerated lagoons plus the ballast lagoon and
dosing basin are used in series. The two primary aerated lagoons are oper-
ated at equal depths by alternating the discharge of raw wastewater into the
two lagoons and by connecting the two lagoons with an overflow pipe. The
alternate discharge of wastewater also prevents unequal sludge buildup in
32
-------
either lagoon. Effluent from the primary lagoons is collected in level
control outlets enabling the operator to vary the lagoon water level. The
water level in the two secondary lagoons is controlled with a valve located
between the secondary and the ballast lagoon. Wastewater then flows from
the ballast lagoon into the filter dosing basin at a rate dependent upon the
discharge rate from the ballast lagoons. During the summer the lagoons are
operated at "low level" or the water surface is 0.61 m below the top of the
dike. Operating at the lower water level provides emergency storage, and
during the warm months a higher biological ac!ivity is experienced and the
low flow rates result in an increase in hydraulic residence time. Because
of these factors, during the summer the lagoon system should produce an ef-
fluent quality equivalent or superior to the winter effluent quality even
with a reduction in the volume of the lagoons.
A fixed volume of treated wastewater is discharged from the lagoon
system each time that the intermittent sand filters are loaded. Discharge
from the dosing basin is controlled with an electrically activated butterfly
valve that is timer actuated. The water level in the dosing basin is lower
by approximately 15 cm below the high water level with each dosing.
Only the four aerated lagoons are used during the winter and the water
surface is maintained at the "high lagoon level" or 0.41 m from the top
of the dike. The ballast lagoon and dosing basin are drained and used
for emergency storage. The high lagoon level operation increases the volume
of wastewater being aerated and extends the mean hydraulic residence to
compensate for the decrease in efficiency due to low winter temperatures.
Maintenance of the lagoon system is relatively simple and is one of
the major assets of lagoon systems. Although simple, inadequate attention
can lead to problems. Exercising care in the following five areas of
maintenance will prevent operational problems and extend the design service
life of the system: scum control, weed control, odor control, mosquito
control, and dike maintenance.
Three of the
to provide air to
scheduled so that
four available 7457 watt blowers are operated continuously
the four aerated lagoons. Operation of the blowers is
each of the blowers is taken out of service periodically.
Each of the two major components of the aeration system require in-
dividual maintenance. Lubrication, inspection of alignment and intake air
filter cleaning will assure good blower performance. The air distribution
subsystem can become clogged from airborne particles and a crystalline de-
posit at the air-water interface causes progressive plugging of the diffuser
ports. When the pressure in the lines exceeds 62,055 N/m2, or even before
it reaches this limit, an application of RCl gas at each of the eighteen
cleaning ports is recommended to di"ssolve the deposits. Even if there is no
increase in pressure, the diffuser tubes should be cleaned with RCl at least
every three months.
Intermittent Sand Filters 0 & M--
The purpose of the intermittent sand filters is to protect the subsur-
face water reclamation site from solid deposits which could cause substantial
33
-------
damange and. limit the service life. The filters are normally operated during
the recreat10na1 season (May 1 - Oct 31) at which time the effluent is dis-
charged to the subsurface water reclamation site. The filters can also be
used during the winter if the lagoon effluent does not meet the discharge
permit requirements of 30 mg/1 of both BODS and suspended solids.
Operation of the filters is based on using the underdrain system as
a reservoir (946 m3) of filtered water than can be released at a controlled
rate to sustain a reasonably constant flow, preventing unnecessary surges
in the disinfection system. However, it is important to keep the reservoir
level below the bottom of the filter sand (at least 0.152 m below) to enable
the sand to dry out and provide air to the organisms for biological digestion
of the deposited organics. Deposits on the surface and those that penetrated
the surface can be actively digested during the period between dosings
when operated properly.
A tentative mode of operation suggested by the design engineer required
that each filter receive two equal hydraulic loadings within a 24 hour
period, and then the filter would not be loaded again until the filter had
rested for two consecutive days. Electronic timers with automatic valves are
available to operate the filters in sequence automatically. It was antici-
pated that various sequencing modes would be used during the first year of
operation and the experience would lead to a satisfactory operational mode.
Maintenance of the filters consists of removing the solids that have
accumulated on the surface of the filter media. The time between c1eanings
is dependent on quantity and quality of the water treated. Cleaning pro-
cedures suggested in the 0 & M manual recommended removal of the top 5.0 cm
of media in work areas of 5.48 - 6.10 m in diameter. Due to the size of the
filters, mechanical assistance under the supervision of the engineer could be
used. Using a removal rate of 5.0 cm per cleaning and a minimum media
operating depth of 51 cm, sand would have to be added every other cleaning.
Replacement sand must meet the specifications used to select the original
sand.
Other areas of filter maintenance are weed
filter surface and earthen retaining dikes, and
underdrains if plugging occurs.
and rodent control on the
back flushing the filter
Personnel Requirements--
The estimation of the manpower requirements reported in the 0 & M
manual was made in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency
"Estimating Staffing for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facilities" dated
March 1974 (EPA, 1974).
six major categories of work were selected, and the estimated time
required in each category are presented in Table 7.
It was estimated that
facility. The facility is
of California and requires
2.4 man-years would be adequate to operate the
classified as a Class II plant by the State
an operator with a Grade II Certificate. A
34
-------
description of the manpower requirements on a weekday/weekend and nighttime
operation basis is presented in the following paragraphs.
Weekday operation was to be carried out by the full time Grade II
operator with a second operator with either Grade II, Grade I, or Operator-
in-Training rating available for "two-man" operations. Weekend s taf fing
required a daily visit by a Grade II operator to make necessary inspections
and adjustments. Nighttime monitoring of plant operation is accomplished
with a telemetry system that warns the Mt. Shasta police station of a pro-
blem. When the alarm sounds at the police station, the Grade II operator on
call is notified.
The 0 & M manual recommended that the City of Mt. Shasta employ two
Grade II operators and at least two Grade I operators, or Operators-in-
Training, for back-up personnel. The only full-time employee was to be
one of the Grade II operators.
Observed 0 & M
Overall Faci~ity 0 & M--
The following observations were made during the first year and one
half of operation after construction of the Mt. Shasta facility. Many items
that are cited are the result of construction and design errors, equipment
failure, operation errors due to lack of experience, and accidents.
TABLE 7.
STAFFING ESTIMATE WORK SHEET (CITY OF Mr. SHASTA, 0 & M MANUAL,
TABLE VI-C-3)
Staffing Suggestion Total Hours per Year Number of Men*
Operation 1000 .7
Maintenance 802 .5
Supervision 550 .4
Clerical 73 . 1
Laboratory 378 .3 /
Yardwork 550 .4
- -
Totals 3353 2.4
*Assumes 1500 hours per year per man.
35
-------
References to
the facility. For
section.
tour #1, 2, and 3 represent the three visits made to
the dates of the tours refer to the Methods and Procedures
The bar screen and comminutor operated without major incident except
for once in the winter of 1978 when heavy rainfall caused an overflow of
the headworks resulting in some erosion. In order to prevent a reoccurrence
of the erosion, an asphaltic concrete collection basin and overflow pipe
connected to one of the primary lagoons was constructed.
Although the disinfection system was designed to be fully automatic,
during tours #1 and #2, it was troubled with several failures which in
turn led to manual operations with adjustments and readjustments. Most of
these failures were related to the loss of prime for the four sampling pumps
designed to provide continuous sampling for the automatic chlorine residual
analyzer and the S02 analyzer used in conjunction with the chlorination
device. Prior to tour #3, the sampling pumps were relocated in a concrete
vault adjacent to the chlorine contact basin and below the water level
thus preventing loss of prime on the sampling pumps. A change in sampling
location in the chlorine contact basin was also made to improve the sensi-
tivity of the analyzers. These changes along with others mentioned later
were responsible for a sampling period of only 15 days for tour #3. The
chlorine contact basin was cleaned during the period of two weeks that the
reconstruction of the chlorine system was taking place. During tour #3, the
disinfection system operated without failure or problems, indicating the
problem had been solved.
Tour #l--During tour #1 effluent was discharged directly to the Sac-
ramento River outfall, and the system operated without incident for the full
thirty day sampling period. The intermittent sand filters were being oper-
ated during this tour.
Tour #2--The subsurface water reclamation site was used during tour
#2 and tour #3. At the beginning of tour #2, an accidental flooding of the
pumping station occurred during an attempt to start up the system, but
no major damage was suffered. Investigation revealed that small rocks,
apparently in the outfall line, had held a valve open thus causing the
flood as the contents of the two miles of outfall pipe drained into the pump
station. After partial dismantling and drying of the pump station, the oil
was changed in the two electric motors and the system was operational. The
operator decided for safety purposes that a second manual valve be installed
that would prevent a repeat of this type of accident. Thus, tour #2 was
extended an additional 10 days awaiting the arrival of the valve and its
installation. During the remainder of the summer operations, the pump
station suffered several breakdowns, numerous blown gaskets and the complete
rebuilding of one of the pumps was necessary.
Tour #3--The pump station was totally disma~tled at the beginning of Tour
#3 for replacement of parts and blown gaskets. Only one pump could be put
back into operation, and it worked during the remainder of the sample period.
Operation and maintenance at the subsurface water reclamation site were
negligible during the two sample periods (Tour #2 and #3) when it was used.
36
-------
Lagoon System 0 & M--
Tour #l--Upon arrival for the first sample period the lagoon system was
in normal winter operation using the four aerated lagoons in series with
the ballast lagoon and dosing basin idle, but not totally drained. The
aeration system had caused various problems ranging from blower failure
to excessively high pressure due to plugged diffuser lines. A Hinde Engin-
eering representative and Contri Construction workers arrived during the
first week to repunch holes into the aeration lines to reduce the pressure.
Lowering the water level in each lagoon was required to gain access to the
diffusion lines for the reperforation process. The lowering process de-
creased the lagoon efficiency greatly during the reperforation process.
While lowering the water level in lagoon #1 to accept the draw-off from
lagoon #2, the bottom drain line broke due to water hammer when the valve
accidently closed too rapidly. To avoid immediate dike erosion, the contents
of lagoon #1 were drained into lagoon #4 including some sludge from the
bottom of lagoon #1. Lagoon #1 was then out of service for the remaining
sixteen days of sampling. Five days before the end of tour #1, lagoon
#4 was drained to provide access to the broken drain from lagoon #1. The
resulting operational mode for the lagoons consisted of aerated lagoon #2
discharging to aerated lagoon #3 and the effluent from #3 passing to the
ballast lagoon.
Additional maintenance observed during tour #1 consisted of the gas
treatment of the aeration system prior to the arrival of the Hinde Engineer-
ing representative.
Tour #2--During tour #2 the lagoons were in normal summer operational
mode, using all four aerated lagoons with the ballast lagoon and dosing
basin in series. The lagoon system was essentially trouble-free but prior to
the arrival of the research team, the operation of the filters at high
loading rates would draw the lagoons down to low levels. The lagoons would
then refill without discharge while the filters drained and were cleaned or
raked. This cycle required two to three weeks to complete. The results of
this type of operation along with the erratic withdrawal rates from the
lagoon system used during the parallel operation of the filters caused
variations in the lagoon performance.
Lagoon maintenance during tour #2 consisted of cutting the grass around
the entire operation.
Tour #3--Prior to this sampling period, heavy rains had damaged the
dikes of lagoons #1 and #2, and this led to a failure in the lagoon #1
dike wall where the broken pipe had been repaired after tour #1. Because of
the failure in the dike the aeration systems in lagoons #3 and #4 were not
operated and lagoon #4 was not in service during the entire sampling period.
The operational mode during tour #3 consisted of aerated lagoons #1 and #2
in series with lagoon #3 and the ballast lagoon. Hydraulic control during
all three tours was always at the discretion of the operator who many
times would adjust the flow at various points in the system and never record
the changes.
37
-------
Intermittent Sand Filters 0 & M--
Tour #l--Operation of the filters had been terminated one week prior
to the beginning of sampling period #1 to allow the lagoons to refill after
being drained to inspect the aeration lines. During the week of inactivity,
there had been snow and rain and extremely cold temperatures. On the first
day of operation the filters were 90 percent covered with snow and ice. It
was apparent that the filters were frozen when the ice remained attached to
the media surface during the dosing cycle, water levels receded slower
than normal, and the effluent suspended solids were greater than that of the
applied water. Closer inspection revealed that the top 3.81 cm of media
of all three filters were frozen even after the snow and ice melted away.
The only remedy was to let the warming daily temperatures thaw the filters.
The operational mode was set up by the operator with the intention of
supplying a constant flowrate to the disinfection system.
Intermittent sand filters No.1 and 2 were in operation simultaneously,
with each filter receiving water twice daily and the sequencing was set
to provide four daily doses, alternating from Filter No.1 to Filter No.
2 and then back again to Filter No.1.
Each filter received twelve hours of rest between loadings. With the
filters frozen, this type of operation resulted in flooding of the filters
and filter influent infiltrating between the filter side walls and frozen sand
filter bed (i.e., short circuiting). This operational mode was continued
through the entire first sampling period. Dosing of the filters was stopped
for a 24-hour period during which lagoon #4 received the discharge from lagoon
#1 through the broken 11 bottom drain. This was done to prevent high concen-
trations of solids from being applied to the filters.
There was no observed maintenance performed on the filters during this
tour.
Tour #2--Upon returning to Mt. Shasta, it was observed that on the
average 20.3-25.4 cm of sand had been removed in two cleaning operations
with no replacement of the sand. Heavy equipment such as a road grader,
front-end loader and dump trucks were used in the first crude attempt to clean
the filters. The second cleaning was reportedly much more refined. The
unfortunate result was that the media depth was less than the 50.8 cm minimum
in some locations.
Operation of the filters during the second sampling period started out as
a slow sand filter under direction of the operator for purposes of obtaining a
better organic mat on the filter surface, better effluent quality, and a
continuous high discharge rate to use the pumping station more efficiently by
minimizing on-off type of operation. The slow sand filter operation consisted
of allowing the lagoons to fill to the "lagoon high level" without any daily
discharge. Once the lagoons were filled, the filter loading sequence was set
for dosing five minutes every two hours on a single filter. this loading
schedule provided a constant head ranging from 0.30 m in the beginning, to 0.6
m at the top of the concrete block wall when the head on the filter indicated
38
-------
slow passage of water. The passage of water through the filter usually began
to slow down during the second day of operation. Discharge rates during this
operation were in the range of 3028-3785 m3/d. This operation was continued
until the lagoons reached "lagoon low level" or the filter was plugged. After
about two weeks of this type of operation, the operator indicated the filter
would plug.
Short filter run time along with the long period of time required for the
filters to drain and dry to enable cleaning operations to commence was the
main problem with this type of operation. The use of a relatively large
constant head above the filters also caused deeper penetration of organic
material into the filter media requiring more than normal sand removal during
cleanings. This practice also resulted in a progressive shortening of each
run time because of the greater penetration of the solids.
Four filter sections each approximately 0.2 hectare in size were operated
in parallel with one operating as a slow sand filter and the remaining three
operating as an intermittent sand filter. The intermittent sand filter
systems received two equal doses of 473 m3 daily. The intermittent sand
filters received two days of rest after each day of loading. The operational
scheme is shown in Figure 6.
The intermittent
of 4680 m3/ha.d. The
earlier only with the
for five minutes at a
sand filters were loaded at a hydraulic loading rate
slow filter loading sequence was the same as described
water applied to one half of a filter every four hours
loading rate of 9360 m3/ha.d.
Separation of the effluents in a common collection manifold was accom-
plished by installing four 0.305 m diameter plugs adapted with flow restric-
tion and separation devices in the filter section drain line as shown in
Figure 7.
Plu ged
ISF ISF
1 2
Loaded Loaded
on on
Days Days
1 & 4 2&5
Slow
Sand
Fi 1 ter
ISF
3
Loaded
on
Days
3 & 6
PARALLEL SYSTEM LAYOUT
ISF = Intermittent Sand Filter
+++
WEST
Figure 6.
Operational scheme during parallel operation of slow and inter-
mittent sand filters.
39
-------
Sampler Intake
Man hol e
Collection Manifold
Adapted
Plug
Underdrain
Outlet
7.6 em
Dia. Plastic Pipe
wi elbow
Figure 7.
Arrangement of adapted plug to facilitate sample collection.
The flow restriction was used to prevent surges in the disinfection
system and provided a constant flow rate from the two filter systems.
Five days after the
eously put into service,
approximately 7571 m3 of
slow and intermittent sand filters were simultan-
the slow sand filter was plugged and had filtered
wastewater.
The intermittent sand filters provided good service throughout the
30-day sample period with only slight evidence of plugging in low areas
and areas closest to the distribution splash pads where puddles formed.
Although the intermittent sand filters were loaded every third day and at
lower loading rate than the slow filters, each 0.202 hectare filter treated
over 7571 m3 during the 30-day sampling period without any maintenance, and
it appeared that maintenance would not be required in the near future.
A second run of the slow sand filter system resulted in five days
of service, again treating approximately 7571 m3 of wastewater.
Maintenance on the previously plugged slow filter and the other plugged
filter was accomplished using a utility tractor and a landscape rake six
feet in width. The rake penetrated the sand surface to a depth of 6.4
cm. One hour was required to rake a section. One tractor operator and one
man adjusting the depth of the rake were required. This was the only main-
tenance observed during tour #2.
40
-------
Tour #3--At the conclusion of the filter operation in the Fall of
1977, the filters were scarified with a roto-tiller type mixer down to
a depth of 20.3 cm below the surface without any surface cleaning or sand
removal. During the period of rest an above-normal rain and snow fall
left the filter surface very loose, and when walking on the sand surface a
foot impression 7.6 to 15.2 em in depth was made.
The filter loading sequence was initially set-up to load a filter
with four one-hour doses daily with two days to rest before reloading.
This operational mode was similar to that suggested by the design engineer
except for the number of loadings, which resulted in overflowing of the
filters and flooding the entire filter system. Water in the underdrain
manholes was at the level of the water on the surface of the filters. The
water level was 0.61 m above the surface of the sand. During this period of
overloading the effluent discharge rate from the system was approximately
4164 m3/d. The reason given by the operator for this overloading was to
reduce the level of water in the lagoons to provide some emergency holding
capacity. After draining the filters, a normal loading time of 10-15 minutes
was used instead of the loading time of one hour used during the overloading
period. A loading period of 10-15 minutes continued through the remainder of
the sampling period.
Twelve days after the start-up with the loosened sand and high hydraulic
loading rate, one of the three filters plugged. The cause of such a rela-
tively short operating period could be attributed to the lack of cleaning
prior to the scarifying, which mixed the surface organic concentration
throughout the top 20-25 cm of sand. Also the loose condition of the filter
surface would increase the depth of penetration of solids into the filter
media.
Beyond the maintenance performed at the end of the filter operation
in 1977, no other maintenance was observed during the third sample period.
A major modification of the automatic dosing valves was performed
to prevent flooding of the electrical components by putting a 1.52 m exten-
sion on the valves, thus placing the electronics above ground.
Personnel Requirements--
During the first two sample periods, operation and maintenance was
carried out by one full time Grade II operator with the assistance of the
back-up Grade II operator whenever it was required. Prior to the third
tour the city provided a full time operator in training to assist the full
time operator in addition to the back-up Grade II operator.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (0 & M) AT MORIARTY, NEW MEXICO
Design 0 & M
Overall Facility 0 & M--
The operation of the Moriarty facility was designed
after the initial start-up with minor changes to be made
periodic variations in the influent characteristics.
to be automatic
to accommodate
41
-------
Flat topography dictated the use of a lift station at the entrance of the
plant consisting of two screw pumps each with a maximum capacity of 1514
m3/d. Both pumps are equipped with an automatic lubrication device. The
control system was designed to allow alternations between each pump as the
lead pump with the remaining pump as the back-up unit. This alternation must
be monitored by the operator to ensure equal operation time for each pump.
Routine lubrication inspection and washing of the screw pumps is necessary to
prevent failure and unpleasant odors. After the initial pumping of the raw
sewage, gravity supplies the remaining energy to move the water through the
system.
Screening and comminution equipment requires daily cleaning and inspec-
tion. If a malfunction or power failure occurs in the comminutor, the waste-
water is directed to the bar screen by-pass.
Disinfection is accomplished with four tablet type chlorinators. Opera-
tion of the chlorinators is on a trial and error basis, dependent on discharge
f10wrate and chlorine demand of the discharged water. Each chlorinator will
hold up to four columns of chlorine tablets, and three different discharge
weirs provide numerous combinations to control the chlorine residual. The 0 &
M manual recommends that chlorine residual and fecal coliform tests be per-
formed after every trial and error sequence and that the results be recorded
for future reference. Contact time is provided in the combination dosing
basin and chlorine contact chamber.
After determining the most economical chlorine
chlorine tablet addition, chlorinator cleaning, and
chlorine residual is required.
residual, only periodic
a routine check on the
Lagoon System 0 & M--
The lagoon system consists of two aerated lagoons and two polishing
ponds with each of the lagoons having a capacity of 3785 m3.
Normal operation of the two aerated lagoons as described in the 0 & M
manual suggests series operation to provide a hydraulic residence time of ten
days at a design flow of 757 m3/d. A flow splitter box at the entrance to
the aerated lagoons enables the operator to choose the order in which the
lagoons operate in series to prevent excessive sludge build up in either
lagoon. Another option is to operate the two aerated lagoons in parallel.
The operating depth in both aerated lagoons is 3.05 m. The option to vary
the depth does not exist.
Aeration of each lagoon is accomplished with a ten horsepower mechanical
mixer in each basin. The aerators are controlled by timers with multiple
variations of 15 minute aeration intervals. The aerators are designed to
provide adequate gas transfer to the lagoons to sustain a minimum of 2.0
mg/1 dissolved oxygen (DO). To achieve the desired economic minimum of 2.0
mg/1 DO, a trial and error approach is recommended in the 0 & M manual to
determine the number of 15-minute cycles necessary. The manual also recom-
mends that a written record of the laboratory analyses and corresponding
timer settings be maintained for future reference. Variations in aeration
requirements wi11 result from seasonal changes in sewage characteristics
caused by the summer tourist season or school being in session.
42
-------
Maintenance of the aerated lagoons primarily consists of lubricating the
aerators and removing floating debris and scum. The aerated lagoon effluent
is collected in a flow splitter box that has two options for operation. The
first and normal operational mode requires the equal distribution of the
series aerated lagoon effluent to the two polishing ponds. The second cor-
responds to the possible future use of the two aerated lagoons as parallel
systems in which case the two polishing ponds would receive separate dis-
charges from the two aerated lagoons creating two parallel systems.
The constant operating depth for the polishing ponds is 0.91 m and
the 3785 m3 capacity at this depth provides ten additional days of de-
tention when operated in series. Concrete aprons are provided on the in-
terior of all lagoon dikes making the maintenance requirements minimal.
The only anticipated maintenance on the dikes is the repair of cracks in
the concrete.
Intermittent Sand Filters 0 & M--
The polishing pond effluent passes through the chlorinators and ac-
cumulates in the combination chlorine contact chamber and dosing basin.
The contact basin is equipped with an automatic dosing siphon that delivers
the accumulated volume of 94.6 m3 to the filters.
As described above the intermittent sand filters are loaded automatically
and the rate of application of wastewater fluctuates with the discharge from
the lagoon system. Normal operation at design flow of 757 m3/d would
provide eight doses per day to four of the eight 18.3 m x 18.3 m square filter
units at a hydraulic loading rate of 5,651 m3/ha.d. Winter operation
requires bypassing the filters if freezing of the filters occurs.
Replication of filters was provided so that the first set of filters
could be taken out of service and dried, raked or cleaned. Switching fil-
ters is done manually using the valves located in the distribution system.
Filter effluent is piped to a dry stream bed, a short distance from the fil-
ters where it evaporates and seeps into the ground. Raking of the surface to
a depth of 2.5 to 5.0 cm loosens the accumulated solids, and an occasional
raking of the surface of intermittent sand filters prolongs the filter run.
Personnel Requirements--
Annual manpower requirements for the operation and maintenance of the
Moriarty wastewater treatment facility was estimated to be about one man year.
One Class II certified operator was recommended with support from other city
personnel, including one helper as the back-up operator. Both men were to be
familiar with the operation and maintenance of all components in the facility.
The operator was to be responsible for all records and supervision of opera-
tion and maintenance.
Observed 0 & M
Overall Facility 0
The automatic
observed for three
normal operational
& M--
operation of the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility
sampling periods with no major problem occurring in the
mode. Preliminary adjustments to the system had been
was
43
-------
completed prior to the first sampling period, and only monitoring and mainte-
nance was required during the initial tour.
Observed maintenance requirements for the overall system consisted of
routine facility inspections and lubrication of the aerators. Good house-
keeping activities included routine washing of the screw pumps and comminuter,
along with weed control around the grounds. The disinfection system required
daily monitoring of the chlorine and the chlorine residual in the effluent
from the contact basin.
Lagoon System 0 & M--
The switching of the order of application of wastewater to the aerated
lagoons in series was arbitrarily chosen by the operator with no apparent
schedule. Aerator sequencing was initially set for one 15-minute aeration
interval for every hour in each of the lagoons. There was no change in
aeration sequencing observed during the three tours. Although changes
may have been initiated between the sampling periods, information regarding
the changes was not available.
Several times during the three sampling periods, a growth of Daphnia ~.
was observed. During these periods, lagoon performance decreased as the
Daphnia sp. population flourished. These periods of Daphnia sp. growth
usually only lasted 2 to 3 days, but the lagoon performance did not recover
for about one week after the decline in population.
Lagoon system maintenance primarily consisted of weed control around
the outside of the lagoon dike. The inside dikes were covered with concrete
aprons and were essentially maintenance free. An unexpected maintenance
requirement was the cleaning of calcium carbonate crystalline formations from
.. the polishing pond outlets. The formation of calcium carbonate crystals
caused by the high hardness and alkalinity of the local water supply and the
alkaline environment of the lagoons would progressively plug the 15.2 cm
diameter outlet pipes.
Intermittent Sand Filters 0 & M--
Tour #l--Prior to the beginning of the first sampling period, the dosing
siphon had been leaking and the volume of each dose would vary. The cause of
the malfunction was unknown. A constant volume of wastewater was discharged
only after the operator cleaned the entire dosing basin and dismantled and
cleaned the dosing siphon. Unfortunately, this cleaning did not take place
until four days prior to the end of Tour #1.
Although the dosing siphon was not operating properly, the hydraulic
loading rate was not affected because it is dependent upon the total volume
of wastewater applied to the filter. The only effect was the reduction
in rest time between dosings.
Operation of the filters was set up to use two filters at a time supply-
ing 0.067 hectare of surface area. The intended operation required the two
filters in operation to remain in use until they became plugged at which time
another set would be put into service, and so on, until all eight filters were
used. This provided adequate time to clean the plugged filters and return
them to service.
44
-------
Application of an average daily flow of 151 m3/d resulted in an
operating hydraulic loading rate of 2246 m3/ha.d. Loading would be inter-
mittent depending on the dosing siphon cycle which at 151 m3/d would be
less than twice a day for the normal 94.6 m3 dose. With the dosing siphon
malfunction, it was dosing approximately three times a day.
The two initial filters were in operation for about two months before
plugging. Plugging occurred two days after the start of sampling period
#1. The operator switched to the next set of filters which operated for 26
continuous days before plugging. The flow was then directed to the next set
of filters that provided service for only five days before plugging.
The decreasing period of time between filter pluggings on these new fil-
ters was primarily caused by two factors. The first and probably most impor-
tant was the wind blown local soil that accumulated on the surface of the
filters. The soil contains a high percentage of clay, and when exposed
to the wastewater, the clay would expand and partially plug the filters.
Depending upon the amount of wind blown soil present, the run time would
decrease accordingly.
The second factor was calcium carbonate precipitation on the filter sur-
face. Calcium carbonate precipitation was attributable to the total hardness
of greater than 500 mg/l as CaC03 and the alkalinity of greater than 400
mg/l as CaC03 reacting with the chlorine compounds and the influence of the
high pH values frequently observed in the lagoon effluents. Within an hour
after dosing, patches of white colored precipitate could be observed on the
filter surface. As the rate of filtration decreased, more precipitant would
be formed because of the growth of algae in the water standing on the surface
of the filters. A white cement-like crust was observed on the dry filter
surface, and it was highly impermeable when water was applied.
Observed maintenance to the filter system during sampling period #1
consisted of cleaning the dosing basin and dosing siphon. This maintenance
required two man-hours. Also, one filter section was raked requiring one
man-hour.
Tours #2 and #3--Upon arrival at the Moriarty facility for the second
sampling period, the eight filters were plugged and the filter system was
being bypassed. Between tour #1 and tour #2, the filter system had been
plagued with repeated plugging resulting from the two factors cited during
tour #1 (i.e.: wind blow soil and calcium carbonate precipitation).
The operator had raked all but one filter section at least once with
no apparent improvement in filter ~ervice life. Cleaning operations were
apparently restricted to areas where green algal concentrations were located.
The abundance of operational problems had caused a discouraged attitude
toward refurbishing the filter system.
After cleaning all eight filters, a new operational mode was put into
effect. Two filters were in operation simultaneously as before, except
the filters were loaded for one day then left idle for three days while the
remaining six filters were dosed once daily. The effect of this operational
45
-------
change was to divide the hydraulic loading rate by four to produce an average
hydraulic loading rate of 749 m3/ha.d. This operational mode provided
more time for the filters to drain. Rest periods between doses have been
shown to extend the operating period between cleanings. In addition to the
new mode of operation of the filters, disinfected effluent was applied to
only two of the four filter groups for the duration of the second sampling
period. Disinfection was eliminated to evaluate the need for chlorination to
produce satisfactory effluent fecal coliform concentrations and to evaluate
the effects of pre-chlorination on filter performance.
Since the dosing siphon cycle is dependent on the flow rate, the opera-
tor alternated the applications of wastewater to the filters by manually
adjusting valves after two dosings on a filter. The filters were loaded with
approximately 189 m3 of wastewater each day. This operatioaal mode was
continued throughout tours #2 and #3. It was anticipated that this opera-
tional mode would continue until an increase in flow dictated an operational
change.
Maintenance to the filter system prior to the major cleaning operation
was estimated to be seven man-hours for raking the seven filters. Before
cleaning the filters with a small tractor equipped with a blade, the redwood
distribution channels were removed. It was decided to replace the distribu-
tion channels with gravel splash pads because of the poor performance of the
channels and to facilitate mechanical cleaning operations in the future. A
11,185 watt, two cylinder diesel tractor equipped with a hydraulic operated,
front mounted, one-sixth cubic yard (0.22 m3) bucket loader and rear mounted
landscape scraper was rented at $60 a day plus tax. An itemized listing of
the man-hours and machine hours required to clean the filters is shown in
Table 8.
Maintenance to the filters, following the major cleaning, was performed
using a homemade three foot wide filter rake requiring two people to pull
it around the filters. During the time between the major cleaning and the
end of sampling period #3, the operator and co-operator raked six of the
eight filters. The raking operation requires approximately one half hour for
each filter section.
Personnel Requirements--
The operator was also the director of public works for the City of
Moriarty. He made four daily inspection visits to the wastewater treatment
facility requiring 10-15 minutes each visit. The co-operator on occasion made
the inspection visits in the absence of the operator. The only observed
laboratory work was the monitoring of the chlorine residual. Most operational
and maintenance work was performed by the operator with the help of other city
personnel when required.
46
-------
TABLE 8.
SUMMARY OF THE MORIARTY FILTER CLEANING OPERATION REQUIREMENTS FOR
EIGHT SQUARE FILTER SECTIONS TOTALING 0.27 HECTARE
Activity Manhours Machine Hours
Distribution channel removal 8 (2 people) 4
Filter scraping and sand removal 12 12
Floating sand surface 4 4
Manual cleaning of filter edges 4 -
Obtaining gravel from 5 (2 loads, a -
Albuquerque, N.M. 4.4 tons)
Placement of gravel splash pads 4 -
- -
Total hours 37 20 (3 days rental)
al ton = 907 kilograms.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (0 & M) AT AILEY, GEORGIA
Design 0 & M
Overall Facility--
One of the main elements of the design of this system was the ease of
operation and maintenance. After the initial start-up, the entire system was
designed to be free of operational requirements except for minor seasonal
changes. Winter operational variations include recirculation of effluent from
the oxidation pond to improve the performance during the cold months. Summer
operational variations include the option to restrict discharge of effluent to
the receiving stream when the flow in the stream is inadequate to prove the
dilution specified in the discharge permit. Design storage capacity in the
lagoons is adequate to provide approximately 33 days of retention without
discharge.
Operation of the disinfection system is fully automatic after the initial
adjustments. The system is electronically interconnected to a discharge flow-
rate measuring device that automatically controls chlorine release for dis-
infection of the discharged water. Daily monitoring of the chlorine residual
is recommended in the 0 & M manual to check operation of the disinfection
system.
Maintenance of the system requires occasional weed removal and
of the chlorine contact chamber, along with periodic inspectioh and
ment of empty chlorine gas tanks.
inspection
replace-
47
-------
Lagoon System 0 & M--
The lagoon system consists of a two-cell 2.2 hectare oxidation
a flow splitter at the discharge and a 0.30 hectare polishing pond.
both of those lagoons are operated at a depth of 1.1 m.
pond with
Normally
The topography of the system necessitated the use of lift stations at
the influent and effluent of the oxidation pond. These lift stations are
completely automatic and only require periodic lubrication and cleaning
of the automatic controls.
The 2.2 hectare oxidation pond has a baffle wall constructed at the two
thirds point between the influent and effluent to prevent short circuiting, to
retain the majority of the settleable solids in the first two thirds, and to
prevent scum and grease from reaching the multi-level outlet structure. The
multi-level outlet structure enables the operator to select the best level of
withdrawal from the lagoon.
The flow splitter located at the discharge end of the oxidation pond
allows the operator to recirculate the oxidation pond effluent when the
treatment efficiency is decreased by either low temperatures or increased
flowrates caused by heavy precipitation during the winter season. Oper-
ation of the flow splitter is at the discretion of the operator and is
to be employed to improve performance of the system.
Variations from the normal operating depth in the polishing pond are
used to retain effluent, and the depth can be increased to 1.5 m. It is
recommended that discharge at the end of a storage period be care'fully
monitored to prevent over-loading of the filters and the disinfection system.
The multi-level outlet structure from the polishing pond provides the option
to withdraw water from various lagoon depths to obtain optimum effluent
quality for application to the intermittent sand filters.
Maintenance of the lagoon system is greatly reduced by the construction
of the concrete aprons completely surrounding both lagoons. Routine inspec-
tion of the apron and other lagoon structures to locate and immediatly repair
damage is recommended to prolong the life of the system. The apron reduces
the problem of aquatic weeds and grass encroachment in the lagoons. Cutting
the grass to improve the appearance and the control of aquatic weeds within
the pond should be practiced on a rountine basis. The apron also reduces the
problem of insect control by eliminating the growth of grass and weeds in the
shallow waters.
Scum control is to be accomplished by mixing the water with a small boat
equipped with an outboard motor. If scum does not disappear in a few days, a
skimming operation should be undertaken.
It is recommended that sludge deposits in the main section of the oxida-
tion pond be removed approximately every five years by either pumping or
dredging. Those deposits should be disposed of properly in landfills or
other methods to protect public health and safety.
48
-------
Intermittent Sand Filters 0 & M--
Operation of the intermittent sand filters is automatically controlled
by the discharge flow rate from the polishing pond. Polishing pond effluent
flows into a dosing basin that collects and distributes approximately 68
m3 to the intermittent sand filters each time it fills. Electronic floats
connected to a control system with two electric valves alternate loadings
automatically between the two sand filters. The number of dosings per day
is dependent upon the discharge from the lagoon system. The design hydraulic
loading rate of 3744 m3/ha.d is applied to the filters in six dosings
per day or a total of 416 m3/d. Normal design flow rates of 303 m3/d
would produce a hydraulic loading rate of 2808 m3/ha.d with 4.5 doses per
day. Manual manipulation of the dosing cycle is possible in the event of
power failure or an operational emergency.
The volume of water is distributed to the sand surface through the
distribution manifold by gravity. Once applied to the filter the water
passes to the underdrains system and then through a flow control ballcentric
plug valve to the disinfection system. The filtered water is temporarily
stored in the filter underdrain while it is released into the disinfection
system at a controlled rate of 0.68 m3/min to provide a mean hydraulic
residence time of 30 minutes.
The requirement that the discharge rate not exceed a one to one ratio
with the flow in the receiving stream can also be regulated using the throt-
tling valve in conjunction with the discharge flowmeter and the Parshall
flume installed in the stream bed.
Maintenance to the dosing basin consists of occasional lubrication of
the electrically operated valves and the removal of floating debris from
the surface of the water.
Recommended filter maintenance consists of observing the condition of
the distribution system, the concrete retaining walls and the cleaning of
the filters.
Weekly inspection of the surface condition of the sand and observation
of the time required for the water to drain through the sand indicate when
the filters require raking or cleaning. Inspection and removal of plant
growth on the sand surface is equally important. The relatively small sur-
face area of the filters and the fixed distribution system require that raking
and cleaning procedures be manual.
Personnel Requirements--
Operation of the sewage treatment system and managerial responsibility
lies with the Utilities Superintendent/Plant Operator. Aside from operations
and routine maintenance, the supervision of the work force sufficient to
handle the more physically demanding maintenance jobs is also his respon-
sibility. An automatic alarm and warning system informs the operator or
other responsible personnel by telephone of failure or stoppage of the
two pumping stations. Essentially 24-hour monitoring of the facility is
provided by the electronic warning system.
49
-------
Observed 0 & M
Overall Facility 0 & M--
Tour #l--Overall system operation during the first sampling period
was observed as being as described in the operation and maintenance manual.
All systems were under full automatic operation. The lagoon system was
at normal operating depth of 1.1 m with no recirculation during the entire
30 days of sampling.
The dry spring produced a progressively decreasing flow through the
treatment plant. Loading on the filters ranged from over 416 m3/d in the
beginning to 151 m3/d near the end of the sampling period. As a result of
the decrease in flow. the hydraulic loading rate on the filters was auto-
matically decreased.
Operation and maintenance of the Ailey sewage treatment plant during
the first tour was at a minimum. Observed maintenance during this period
involved raking of areas of the filters exhibiting wet green patches of
algal growths. Releveling of the filter surface was required to eliminate
original unequal distribution of the sand and scouring caused by the water
distribution system. These activities required four man-hours to complete.
Tour #2--During the second sampling period. the system was not in the
normal operating mode. The primary variation was caused by a failure in an
underground electric line between the control building and the floats in the
dosing basin. a week prior to the sampling period. All parts of the system
were operating automatically except the dosing of the filters. The flow rate
during this sampling period averaged 114 m3/d. Therefore. one manual dose
daily plus some overflow was adequate to process the lagoon discharge. After
the first 12 days of sampling. the electricians repaired the malfunction and
the dosing operation was returned to automatic operation.
Operation of the oxidation pond had been changed so that approximately
one-half the discharge was being recirculated in an attempt to control the
algal population and the algal mat on the surface of the oxidation pond. The
operating depth for both lagoons was still at the normal operating depth of
1.1 m.
Maintenance performed on the system between tour #1 and tour #2 consisted
of removing Bermuda grass from the surface of the filters twice. requiring 20
man-hours; mowing the grass on the facility grounds twice. requiring 28 man-
hours; and raking one of the sand filters to eliminate ponding on the surface.
requiring four man-hours. During the second sampling period. the only mainte-
nance observed was the repair of the electrical failure.
Tour #3--The wet winter season produced high discharge rates from the
treatment system ranging from 227 m3/d to 568 m3/d. High discharge rates
affected the entire system. and it was necessary to increase the polishing
pond level to decrease the loading on the intermittent sand filters. The water
surface elevation in the polishing pond was increased gradually in two 2.54 cm
increments as specified in the operation and maintenance manual.
50
-------
During tour #3, loading of "the filters was at a much higher rate than
experienced before, and a continuous discharge from the filter underdrains
was present. The throttling valve in the filter effluent line was respon-
sible for the continuous discharge. Although the wet weather produced
high flowrates in the system, automatic operation with a small modification
in the polishing pond water level provided trouble-free service.
There was no observed maintenance performed or required during the
third tour. Because of the high hydraulic loadings on the filters, it
was necessary to rake the filter surfaces at the conclusion of the third
sampling period.
Personnel Requirements--
The Utilities Superintendent/Plant Operator is the principal individual
involved in the operation and maintenance of the facility. The system
is inspected once each day except on weekends by the operator, and he deter-
mines the chlorine residual in the effluent and inspects the flow rate
recorder in addition to a general inspection of the facility. This routine
requires approximately one half hour each day.
SUMMARY OF 0 & M AT THE THREE SITES
A common objective in the design and operation of the three sites was to
produce an effective means of treatment with a minimum of operation and main-
tenance. All three facilities were designed with automatic operation as the
main objective excluding the initial start-up and beginning operating experi-
ences that would eventually support the automatic operating mode. The amount
of experience required varies with the complexity of the system. Tables 9 and
10 present a summary of the operating modes for normal operation, operational
variations, and observed operations during the three sampling periods at each
site for lagoon system operation and intermittent sand filter operation.
Observed operations at the Mt. Shasta facility were the most varied of
the three sites. During each sampling period, different operations were
either imposed by the operator or by a failure in part of the system. The
primary variation was in the operation of the intermittent sand filters.
Hydraulic loading rates could be varied at the Mt. Shasta facility and this
was the most frequent variation observed. This system is the largest and most
complex of the three sampling sites, and it was designed to operate automati-
cally. The automatic operation is dependent upon establishing a basic opera-
tional mode as described in the 0 & M manual and making slight adjustments to
the system to accommodate the most frequent changes, such as flowrate. Many
problems occurred at the Mt. Shasta facility, but problems occur at all treat-
ment systems. The best recourse is to solve the problem using common sense
and maintaining the basic operating mode. This approach was not followed at
Mt. Shasta. Constant changing and experimentation was common and led to
frustration and inevitably failure.
The observed operations at the Moriarty, N.M., facility conformed with
the design automatic operating mode, excluding the dosing siphon malfunction.
Although the operation of the filters was a slight variation from the design
51
-------
Operation Category
Filter System
Normal Operation
Operational
Variations
Tour #1
~
N
Tour #2
Tour #3
Comments
TABLE 9.
SUMMARY OF INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER OPERATION
Mt. Shasta, California
Water Pollution Control Facility
Normal operation (May 1 to Oct 31)
Timer controlled automatic dosing.
Hydraulic loading rate variable.
Filter cycling--l day load and
2 days rest.
Filters to be used in the winter
only when the lagoon effluent
doesn't meet discharge require-
ments.
Simultaneous use of two filters
with 4 doses per day per filter
providing 6 hours rest between
doses. Problems: frozen
filters, high hydraulic loading.
Parallel systems, slow sand and
intermittent sand filter operation.
Problems: excessive sand re-
moval during cleaning.
Four daily doses per filter,
filter cycling 1 day load and
2 days rest. Problems:
excessive loading, poor filter
condition due to mixing of top
20-25 cm of sand.
20-25 cm of sand removed in two
cleanings. Filter loading to
provide constant flow to
disinfection system.
Moriarty, New Mexico
Wastewater Treatment Facility
Automatic dosing of four filters
with dosing siphon. Hydraulic
loading rates dependent on dis-
charge rate from lagoon system,
disinfection prior to filtration.
During extremely cold weather
when filter freezing can occur
filters should be bypassed.
Dosing siphon malfunction resulted
in unequal dosing cycles. Use of
two filters simultaneously.
Problems: short run time.
Dosing siphon functioning properly.
Manual alternating of two filters
simultaneously resulting in reduction
of loading rate.
Same as Tour #2, using all eight
filter sections provides one day
loaded and three days rest for
each filter group.
Problems: short service life due to
wind blown soil layer, calcium
carbonate precipitation.
Ailey, Georgia
Sewage Treatment Plant
Automatic alternate dosing
of the two filters.
Hydraulic loading rate is
dependent on lagoon
discharge rate.
During dry weather, filter
operation is restricted to
ratio of 1 to 1 relative
to discharge rate and
stream flowrate.
Normal operation.
Malfunction in automatic
dosing device resulted in
manual dosing part of the
tour. Normal operation
resumed upon repair.
Normal operation.
Problems: high loading
rates.
System performed without
major incident.
-------
Operational Category
Lagoon System
Normal Operation
Operational
Variations
\Jl
VJ
Tour #1
Tour #2
Tour #3
Comments
TABLE 10.
SUMMARY OF LAGOON OPERATION
Mt. Shasta, California
Water Pollution Control Facility
Summer operation. Aerated lagoons
in series with ballast lagoon,
operating at "lagoon high level,
energency storage up to "lagoon
high level".
Winter operation. Aerated lagoons
in series with ballast lagoon
drained, operating at "lagoon high
level", storage in ballast lagoon.
Aerated lagoons in series,
operating at "lagoon high
level", ballast lagoon inactive.
Problems: Aeration system
Aerated lagoons in series with
ballast lagoon, operating at
"lagoon high level".
Problems: none.
Aerated lagoons in series with
ballast lagoon, operating at
"lagoon low level".
Problems: aeration and lagoon
#4 out of service.
Aeration system source of
problems, lagoon level changes
by operator.
Moriarty, New Mexico
Wastewater Treatment Facility
Op~ration of aerated lagoons in
series, polishing ponds in parallel.
Aerators set to provide minimum of
2.0 mg/~ DO.
Future operation of aerated lagoons
and polishing ponds in two parallel
systems. Aerators set for
2.0 mg/~ DO.
Aerated lagoons in series,
polishing ponds in parallel,
Aerators set to operate for
15 minutes every hour.
Same as Tour #1
Same as Tour #1.
Problems: calcium carbonate
crystalization in polishing pond
outlet pipe causes plugging.
Ailey, Georgia
Sewage Treatment Plant
Normal operation:
lagoons at normal
operating depth of
1.1 m, no recirculation
of oxidation pond
effl uent.
Dry weather operation:
polishing pond depth
increased for storage,
oxidation pond not
recirculated.
Normal operating depth
in both lagoons with no
recirculation of the
oxidation pond effluent.
Normal operating depths
in both lagoons with re-
circulation of one-half
of the oxidation pond
effluent.
Increased depth in
polishing pond,
oxidation pond at.normal
depth with no re-
circulation.
During tour #3 wet weather
necessitates the storage of
some water to prevent the
overloading of the filters.
-------
operation, it was justified by the small flow rate the facility was handling.
The variations implemented prior to the sampling period during tour 12 im-
proved the performance and required more daily manual input into the system,
but the overall manpower requirements were not affected. Excluding the loss
of automatic operation, little impact on the system was observed and the
hydraulic loading rate on the filter system was reduced and the service
life of the filters extended.
The Ailey system was operated within the design operating mode with great
success. The only variations that were observed were oxidation pond recir-
culation and an increase in the polishing pond operating level. Both varia-
tions were within the guidelin~s described in the 0 & M manual. This system
exemplifies the need for simplicity in design and the resulting ease of
operation.
Maintenance requirements for the three sampling sites were basically
the same, except for the increase in requirements for the Mt. Shasta fac-
ility due to its more complex nature and larger size. Each of the sampling
sites used the same basic processes that require common routine maintenance
to provide a normal design service life.
Table 11 presents a summary of the reported maintenance requirements
for each of the three sample sites for a period of approximately one year.
The Moriarty, N.M., and Ailey, Ga., portions are the most complete and
representative requirements of maintenance for a lagoon and intermittent
sand filter operation. The Mt. Shasta facility was seemingly plagued with
problems either induced or accidentally caused by the operator. These
problems many times resulted in extensive repairs and in some cases complete
overhaul of portions of the system, such as the repairing of the drain
line from lagoon 11 after tour #1. The aeration system also was a source
of many problems observed at the facility. Constant operational changes
and problems in conjunction with the extensive maintenance activities have
distorted the reported maintenance requirements for the Mt. Shasta facility.
The design of the Mt. Shasta facility also could have been improved
and many of the problems may not have developed. For example, a lower
hydraulic loading rate and a greater initial depth of filter sand would
have simplified the operation, prolonged filter run times, and extended the
period of operation before the sand was replaced.
OBSERVED INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER SYSTEM RUN TIMES
A summary of the observed intermittent sand filter run times or the
period of time between cleaning operations or the rejuvenation (raking)
process, is presented in Table 12 for the three tours at each site.
The Mt. Shasta sand filters did not provide a good service life between
cleanings as a direct result of the poor operation of the filters during the
period covered by the three tours. High hydraulic loading rates (slow sand
filter operation) and poor maintenance techniques such as scarifying the
filter surface without cleaning the sand surface are examples of the causes
54
-------
TABLE 11.
SUMMARY OF REPORTED MAINTENANCE
V1
V1
Job Description Mount Shasta Moriarty Ailey
WPCF WWTF STP
Dai ly operation (1.0 hr) x 7 days (1.0 hr) x 7 days (0.5 hr) x 5 days
and maintenance x 52 wks = 365 x 52 wks = 365 x 52 wks = 130
(daily monitoring)
Filter cleaning 54a 28a None
Filter raking 12 raking a 13 22
16 mi xing a
Filter weed contr-ol N.A. None 26
Mi sce 11 aneous N.A. 11 None
maintenance
Grounds maintenance 42 8 28
Total reported 489 man-hours 425 man-hours 206 man-hours
man-hours
Design estimated manpower 2.4 man-yearb 1 man-yearb 1 man-yearb
requi rements
Actual reported 2.0 man-yearsC 0.28 man-yearC 0.14 man-yearC
manpower input
aMan-hours with mechanical assistance.
bAssuming 1500 man-hours = 1 man-year
cConsidering extra assistance for filter cleaning and weekend monitoring
-------
TABLE 12.
Mount Shasta Facility
TOUR #1
(1-22-77 to 2/20/77)
Oischarge Range 473-4485 m'/d
Prior to tour #1 the use of the filters
was limited to operational checkouts.
The filters experienced short-circuiting
due to freezing and the resulting washing
out of the fines provided a passageway
for the water with no observed p1ugaing.
V1
0\
TOUR N2
(7-8-77 to 8-20-77)
Oischarge Range 473-1885 m'/d
20 cm - 25 cm of sand was removed in two
c1eanings prior to tour #2. Tour #2
started with one filter section plugged
and no record of previous filter run
times. The two slow sand filter run
durations were 5 days each. The inter-
mi ttent sand fi 1 ters provi ded' 30 days
of service with no signs of plugging.
TOUR #3
(4-14-78 to 4-28-78)
Discharge Range 1184-4349 m'/d
At the end of the filter operation season
of 1977 the filters were scarified down
to a depth of 25 cm with no record of
c1eanings or run times. One filter
operated for 13 days during tour #3
before plugging. The remaining filters
exhibited signs of plugging.
COMMENTS
No record of the filter usage or
cleaning dates were available.
SUMMARY OF OBSERVED FILTER RUN TIMES
- -
,=-:0.---= ~ -=-=-"- ~~ = =-..~.= =---=-=-=-=--
--
Moriarty Facility
(5-19-77 to 6-17-77)
Discharge Range 110-163 m'/d
Prior to tour #1 the first set of two
filters had operated for approximately
two months. During tour #1 the second
set of filters provided 26 days of ser-
vice. At the conclusion of tour #1 the
third filter set provided only 5 days
of service.
(11-14-77 to 12-13-77)
Discharge Range 189 m'/d
Between tour #1 and tour #2 the use of
the filters was dependent upon which
filters were dry with no scheduled use or
record of rakings. Prior to tour #2 the
filters were cleaned by the Utah State
University research team and provided
service through tour #2 (>30 days)
(2-13-78 to 3-15-78)
Discharge Ranqe 189 m'/d
The filters operated continuously between
tour #2 and tour #3 and through tour #3
(>4 months) with only two rakings after
the tour #2 cleaning operation. The time
between rakings and the filter condition
prior to raking was not available.
Available records of filter use are in-
complete for an accurate filter run time
presentation.
--
--
-=--====-o-o-===--~ ----
Ailey Faci 1 ity
(3-19-77 to 4-17-77)
Discharge Range 124-488 m'/d
Prior to tour #1 the intermittent sand
filters had operated for 4 to 6 months
before being raked during tour #1.
(9-15-77 to 10-14-77)
Discharge Range 45-189 m'/d
In the time between tour #1 and tour #2
the filters operated for 4 months
before being raked. The filters
continued to provide service through
tour #3.
(1-3-78 to 2-2-78)
Discharge Range 223-564 m'/d
As a result of a malfunction during
tour #2 one of the filters received
the dosing basin overflow. This. in
addition to the heavy hydraulic
10~~ing of tour #3. resulted in that
filter being raked after 5 months
of use. The other filter operated
7 months before requiring raking.
This system promised the most con-
sistent run time and effluent quality
with no filter sand removed,
-------
that induced the short filter run times. The filters did, however; demon-
strate the ability to provide good run times when operated as intermittent
sand filters under the prescribed 0 & M procedures. Operation under the 0 & M
guidelines during tour #2 resulted in 30 days continuous service with no signs
that filter maintenance would be required.
In the beginning of operations at the Moriarty facility the first set
of intermittent sand filters provided two months of service before plugging.
The filter run time for the succeeding filters demonstrated a progressive
decrease from 2 months to 26 days for the second set and 5 days for the third
set. This decrease in service life for the previously unused filters was
caused by the wind blown clay-type topsoil deposits on the filter surfaces
and calcium carbonate precipitation.
The filters were cleaned by the Utah State University research team
previous to the second sampling period. Following the cleaning operation,
a new mode of operation was initiated as described previously. Under the
new mode of operation, the filters provided 30 days of operation with no
required maintenance. The filters continued to provide service during the
time between tour #2 and tour #3, and also throughout tour #3 totaling more
than 4 months of operation after being cleaned. During this 4-month period
the filters were reportedly raked two times as part of a routine filter
maintenance procedure. Records of filter conditions prior to raking or the
time between the rakings were not available. At the conclusion of tour #3
the filters did not show signs of plugging.
The operation of the Ailey facility intermittent sand filters provided
the best and most accurate filter run time performance data of the three
sites studied. The filters demonstrated an ability to operate from 4 to 7
months without maintenance being required. Even at the times that the raking
was observed by the visiting research team, the filters were not plugged but
only had some puddling in the low spots. The diligent operational monitoring
of the Ailey system by the operator in conjunction with the operational design
loading rate is responsible for the longevity of the filter service life. It
is important to note that the Ailey filters did not require removal of the
surface sand during the one year study period.
Summary of Filter Run Times for the
Three Selected Sites
With proper operation and design, the intermittent sand filters can
provide 4 to 6 months of maintenance-free operation. Findings of this
study agree with the conclusions presented by Tupyi et a1. (1977) in that
high hydraulic loading rates produce undesirable short filter runs. This
sand filter operating at a hydraulic loading rate of 9360 m3/ha.d during
the Mt. Shasta tour #2 and the concurrent intermittent sand filter operation
at 4680 m3/ha.d providing more than 30 days of service treating the
same volume of water.
Another important observation related to this example is the need for the
filters to drain completely and be able to take in air for the biological
57
-------
degradation of the deposited organic material. A greater rest period between
dosings enables better biodegradation of the filtered material and thus in-
creases the filter service life.
PERFORMANCE OF SYSTEMS
General
Parameters measured at each sampling site are first discussed and illus-
trated graphically for each location. Discontinuous plots indicate a missing
data point. All data are summarized in Appendix A in Tables A-I through A-74.
Mt. Shasta, California
Sampling Points--
Sampling point number one was located at the facility headworks, between
the comminuter and Parshall flume. Raw sewage was sampled at this point prior
to entering the lagoon system. Figure 2 shows the location of the sampling
stations.
The lagoon system effluent was sampled at the Parshall flume leading to
the dosing basin and eventually to the intermittent sand filters. During
tour 13 because lagoon 14 was out of service, the sample was obtained direct-
ly from the dosing basin. Sampling point number two was used to monitor
lagoon performance or the quality of influent to the intermittent sand filters.
Filter effluent was collected as sample point number three. The effluent
from the intermittent sand filters was obtained at the collection manhole for
the filter underdrain system prior to disinfection. During tour #2 when
intermittent and slow sand filters were operated in parallel operation, sample
number three was obtained at separate filter section outlets as illustrated in
Figure 6. Parallel operation of the filters produced two samples at sampling
point number three and each sample was evaluated separately. Slow sand filter
performance is presented in a later section.
Chlorinated filter effluent was collected at the catch basin between the
disinfection system and the outfall system. This sampling station was desig-
nated number 4.
Summary of Results--
A summary of the results for the Mt. Shasta wastewater treatment plant is
presented in Table 13. Results are presented by tour and sampling point, and
the percentage removals obtained with each component of the system are also
presented in Table 13. Each of the parameters measured is discussed by sam-
pling point locations in the following sections.
Total Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)--
Mean total BODS concentrations for all sampling points and tours at Mt.
Shasta are presented in Table 13. The daily fluctuations of the total BODS
are presented in Figure 8.
S8
-------
TABLE 13. SUMMARY OF RESULTS OBTAINED AT THE MT. SHASTA, CALIFORNIA, WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
V1
\D
Lagoon Influent lagoon Effluent Filter Effluent Chlorinated Overa 11
Tour Samp1 ing Point Sampling Point #2 Sampling Point #3 Filter Effluent Removal
Parameter Number #1 SamD1ina Point #4
Concentration Concentration Removal Concentration Removal Concentration Removal %
mg/1 mg/1 % mg/1 % mg/1 %
Total 1 110 26 76 21 19 14 33 87
BODs 2 121 19 84 4 79 3 25 98
3 110 20 82 7 65 4 43 96
Soluble 1 36 9 75 5 44 8 - 78
BODs 2 47 6 87 3 50 3 - 94
3 38 5 87 4 - 3 25 92
Suspended 1 85 37 56 26 30 21 19 75
Solids 2 86 69 20 13 81 13 - 85
3 73 33 55 11 67 11 - 85
Volatile 1 74 29 61 23 21 17 26 77
Suspended 2 74 47 36 7 85 6 14 92
Solids 3 56 21 63 5 76 4 20 93
~
Fecala 1 0.65 x 106 720 99.89 53 92.64 <1 99.99 99.99
Co 1 iform 2 3.38 x 106 20 99.99 2.4 88.00 1.3 45.83 99.99
3 0.37 x 106 179 99.95 37 79.33 5 86.49 99.99
pHb 1 7.1 8.3 - 6.4 - 6.3 - -
In Situ (6.7 - 7.6) p.4 - 9.0) (6.0 - 7.0) (5.7 - 7.0)
2 6.7 9.3 - 7.0 - 6.7 - -
(6.5 - 7.0) (8.7-9.7) (6.7 - 7.7) (6.4 - 7.3)
3 6.9 8.5 - 7.1 6.8 - -
(6.8 - 7.0) (7.5 - 9.3) - (6.6 - 7.5) - (6.3 - 7.3)
continued
-------
a-
o
.
Lagoon Influent Lagoon Effluent Filter Effluent Chlorinated Overall
Sampl ing Point Filter Effluent Removal
Tour Sampling Point #2 Sampling Point #3 Sampling Point #4
Parameter Number #1
Concentration Concentration Removal Concentration Removal Concentration Removal %
109/1 mg/1 % mg/1 % mg/1 %
Tempe r- 1 9.7 5.8 - 5.7 - 5.1 - -
atureC 2 21.3 24.4 - 23.8 - 24.3 - -
In Situ 3 10.8 11.0 - 10.7 - 11.3 - -
Dissolved 1 5.5 14.0 - 4.5 - 3.2 - -
Oxygen 2 3.0 11.4 - 6.1 - 6.3 - -
In Situ 3 6.9 10.9 - 6.1 - 7.5 - -
Total 1 181 94 48 64 32 54 16 70
COD 2 268 124 54 129 - 101 22 62
3 323 67 79 52 22 30 42 91
Soluble 1 61 37 39 21 43 24 - 61
COD 2 215 115 47 123 - 92 25 57
3 246 54 78 40 26 23 43 91
A 1 ka 1 in ity 1 86 79 8 57 28 47 18 45
2 110 73 .34 42 42 37 12 66
3 83 71 14 55 23 40 27 52
Total 1 4.05 3.40 16 3.01 11 2.81 66 31
Phosphorus 2 5.87 5.07 14 3.80 25 3.15 17 46
3 3.63 2.53 30 1. 90 25 1. 70 11 53
Flowd 1 0.572 - - - - 0.530 - 7
Rate 2 0.566 - - - - 0.265 - 53
3 0.905 - - - 0.694 - 23
TABLE 13
CONTINUED
aExpressed in organisms/100 m~.
cExpressed in °C.
bExpressed as geometric mean in pH units (range of values).
dExpressed in million gallons/day.
-------
0-
~
...
+ Ttl.R NJ. L I 1.~.77 TO 2-211-77)
X 1tl.Rff.1. 217-11-771'08-211-711
. Ttl.R f(). I "'-1'-78 TO 't-CB-18 I
..
i IS.
)(
d t.
c:i
ai
.
.
a is
TlI£INCAYS
SAMf'LING POINT NO. I
'Hi
311
iIi
..
..
.5
.
+ 1U.It fa. 1 ( l-i!1i!-71 10 2-..771
X 1tU' fO. 2 (7-U.77 10 8-i!8-71)
. I11IIIG. a 1.'I.."no .,,,.>8,
..
~.
\ +
Oa
c:i
ai
..
~
.
.
I.
a is
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
'Hi
15
311
iIi
..
5
58
----
+ TO.A N). t ( l-i!i!-71 ro 2.a1-71 I
x Ttl.R N). 2 I 7-\1-77 TO 8-28-771
'" Ttl.R NJ. a I '-1"'-78 TO '-28-181
..
~311
~
02111
c:i
ai
..
e
..
2111 i5
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO 2
iIi
311
.5
311
+ 1tl.R N). 1 11-22-71 rn 2-28-71)
)( TO..R N).. 2 I 7-11-71 TO 8-a-")
.111111(). 31.-'..>8 TO H!B'>81
i5
2111
~
~ 15
c:i
c:i
ai I.
\ +
.e
2111 2S
TlI£ ~N CAYS
SAM P LI N G POI NT NO 4
15
311
iIi
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand (BODS)
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility.
Figure 8.
..
'Hi
..
'Hi
-------
Sampling point #l--The variation in the influent BODS concentration with
time is shown in Figure 8. Mean BODS concentrations of 100 mg/l, 121 mg/l,
and 110 mg/l were measured during the three visits to the Mt. Shasta facility
(Table 13). These low values are probably a result of infiltration into the
collection system. The raw wastewater BODS concentrations remained rela-
tively constant throughout the year, and the same general fluctuations were
observed during all three visits.
Sampling point 12--Even with the multiple operational variations encoun-
tered, the lagoon system produced consistently good BODS removals. The most
erratic fluctuations were caused by the operational variations made to facili-
tate the repair of the aeration system and related problems resulting during
tour #3. A tour #3 mean BODS concentration of 20 mg/l was obtained (Table
13). The other two tours (11 and #2) produced mean BODS concentrations of
26 and 19 mg/l, respectively.
Sampling point #3--A comparison of the BODS data collected at sampling
point #2 with data collected at sampling point #3 for the first tour indicates
that BODS removal was minimal, and on some days the BODS concentration in
the filter effluent was higher than that applied to the filter (Figure 8).
For example, on the 2Sth sampling day the wastewater applied to the filter
contained a BODS concentration of 28 mg/l and the filter effluent contained
3S mg/l. As described previously, tour #1 was troubled with frozen filters
and abnormally high loading rates. Both problems contributed to the poor
performance characterized by the mean applied BODS concentration of 26 mg/l
and the mean filtered water BODS of 21 mg/l, resulting in an overall filter
removal rate for tour 11 of 19 percent.
During tours #2 and #3 the filters consistently produced high quality
effluents, and the mean BODS concentrations were 4 and 7 mg/l, respectively
(Table 13). Individual concentrations ranged from 2 to 10 mg/l. As illus-
trated in Figure 8, the BODS concentrations varied little from day to day.
The BODS removals by the filters for the last two sampling periods were 79
and 6S percent, respectively. This high filter efficiency shows the impact
that correcting operational deficiencies has on effluent quality.
Sampling point #4--BODS concentrations and variations in the samples
collected at point #4 were essentially the same as those collected at sampling
point #3 (Figure 8). The only exception was the observed decrease in BODS
concentration in the disinfected sample during tour #1 when the filter ef-
fluent concentrations were relatively high prior to chlorination. An addi-
tional 33 percent of the BODS was removed by disinfection resulting in a
mean of 14 mg/l and a range of 7 to 24 mg/l. This additional removal of BODS
was probably attributable to settling of solids in the chlorine contact tank.
Significant differences between the BODS concentrations in the filter ef-
fluent and the chlorinated filter effluent were not found during tours 12 and
13 when the suspended solids concentrations in the filter effluents were SO
percent or less of that measured during tour 11.
Total Biochemical Oxygen Demand with Nitrification Inhibitor--
Figure 9 shows the results of BODS measurements with the nitrification
inhibitor allyl-thiourea added (Young, 1973). Only the BODS concentrations
62
-------
-
I>S
fill
alai
c!
III
..
>S
III
.
0-
\J.)
------ -
~ l
..
w/crRCLES W/OH.I
W/Q CIRCLEC) WIN.!
IDENTICAL vALUES. -
+ TtI..A PC. 1 f I ;!R.77 11) j!-a-T1)
)( TO.A fIC. i! (7-11-77 1tI 8-C11-171
. TO.A t(). a I '-."-78 TO '-aB.78 I
W/CIRClES WID N.I
'1110 \:IRCLf.S W/N.L
IDENTICAL VALUES .-
+ 111.A N). , ( l-C!e-17 ro 2-.-771
)( 1U..ft toO. i! (7-11-77 11) '-CII-")
" TtI.ft tel. a ("-1'-78 TO ,-a-18)
.
.
~,.
~
+
~
~
~
\!I
)(
a
c!
III
all
"
"
"
+
~
.
.
)(
)(
+
..
..
'IS
ill ai
TlI'E IN ems
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
ill
36
5
ill ai
TlI'EIl'lems
SAMPLING POINT NO. I
iIIi
'IIi
15
.
6
18
15
ill
..
..
ill
wtCIRClES W/ON I.
WID CIRCLES W/N.I
IDENTICAL vALUE S -
+ 1tlIt Nl. I ( I ~ce-77 TO (!-CII-711
)( ~ tCI. i! (1-11-77 TO I-Cl-n)
. 1U..ft Nl. 3 I "-.'-78 Tn '-CB-18 I
\!Ii
'II/CIRCLES: WID N.I
WID CIRClES:W/N...
IDENTICAL VAlUES: -
+ 111.A PC). 1 { l-iR-" 10 i-a."»
)( 1tI.R fO. i! (7-11.77 11) .".77)
. 111ft PC). a ( 't-llt-18 ro 't-i!B-78)
$
+
ill
~. --$
a
c!
III
..
)(
~
.
. --lit
.
. , .. " . ai . as .. 'IIi
TlI'E IN ems
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
$
+
~
Ii ..
--\I
a
ci
iii..
-Qt
--.
--lit
11
all is
TlI'EII'IIJ'tYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
.5
31
as
..
'IIi
Figure 9.
The relationship observed between total biochemical and biochemical
oxygen demand with the nitrification inhibitor allyl-thiourea for
those days during the three tours when simultaneous analyses were
performed to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility.
-------
in the raw wastewater were affected by the nitrification inhibitor and this
effect was not consistent. The mean raw wastewater BODS concentrations mea-
sured with and without inhibitor (112 and 126 mg/l, respectively) did not dif-
fer statistically at the 1 percent level of significance.
Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand--
Mean soluble BODS concentrations for all four sampling points and three
tours are summarized in Table 13. Daily fluctuations in the soluble BODS
concentrations are presented in Figure 10.
Sampling point #l--Soluble BODS concentrations in the raw wastewater
are shown in Figure 10. The raw wastewater soluble BODS constituted ap-
proximately 3S percent of the raw wastewater total BODS. The percentage
soluble BODS ranged between 33 and 39 percent for the three tours.
Sampling point #2--The only major deviation in the soluble BODS concen-
trations in the lagoon effluent occurred during tour #1. During this period
the mean concentration of soluble BODS was 9 mg/l with a range of 3-lS mg/l
(Figure 10). The variance was related to the multiple operational variations
mentioned earlier.
During tours #2 and #3, the soluble BODS concentrations in the lagoon
effluent were relatively consistent. This consistency was attributable
to minimal operational changes during these two tours.
Sampling point #3--As discussed in the section on total BODS, occa-
sionally during tour #1, the soluble BODS in the filter effluent was greater
than the soluble BODS in the applied water (Figure 10). Such an event
occurred on day five when the soluble filtered BODS concentration in the
filter effluent was 14 mg/l and the lagoon effluent contained only 10 mg/l.
This condition was caused by the frozen filters during tour #1. Short cir-
cuiting and flushing of solids from the filter media were observed. Excluding
the deviation in tour #1, the soluble BODS varied very little during tours
#2 and #3.
Sampling point #4--The variations discussed for sampling point #3 are
also applicable to sampling point #4.
Soluble BODS with Nitrification Inhibitor--
The addition of nitrification inhibitor to the soluble BODS tests
produced only a slight difference between soluble BODS and soluble BODS
with nitrification inhibitor. The largest decrease in soluble BODS when
using the inhibitor was observed at concentrations greater than 30 mg/l
(Figure 11), but these diffrences were not statistically significant at the
1 percent level. This is the same as observed when using the inhibitor in
total BODS evaluations.
Suspended Solids--
Mean suspended solids concentrations
at Mt. Shasta are presented in Table 13.
1n Figure 12.
for all sampling points and tours
Daily concentrations are presented
64
-------
O!II
0\
VI
IS
~
~
ci 1.
d
iii
~ S
8
181
15
+ Ta..A NJ. 1 ( 1 ~iIi!-77 TO j!-aII-77 I
)( 1'O.AP(). i!17-11-77ma-CII-77)
.. R1A NJ. a I "'-'''-78 TO "-28-78)
~ I.
!i
x
d >S
d
iii
'81
Ii!
is
.
Ie
IS
.. 5
TII'£INCAYS
~AM~LING POINT NO.1
..
iIi
..
>S
+ 1U N:L 1 ( ,""-71 TO ~"'.77)
)( 1'CI.A N:L i! ('-11-7110 '''77)
. 1'CUt N:L a ("-1'-1110 "-iI.,.)
+
+
18
.. ..
TII'£ IN CAYS
!'AMf-LING POINT NO.3
IS
..
...
..
>S
Figure 10.
..
+ TtJ..R NJ. 1 ( 1.-aco-77 10 i-a-77 J
>< TO.R NJ. 2 (7-11-77 TO l-al-77)
.. TtI.R NJ. 3 ("-1"-18 TO't-al-78J
.s
~
~
ci I.
d
iii
!ii s
/ +
.
Ie
all ..
TII'£ IN [fIYS
!'AMf-LiNG POINT NO.2
IS
..
...
..
>S
all
+ 1tI..R N). 1 (.-at-" ~771
)( 1tI..R fQ. i! (7-11-77 to 8-211-71)
. Ta...AtCl. a("-l~-.nn
IS
~
!!
ci ..
d
.,;
Ii! S
Ie
IS
.. is
TII'£IN[fIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
'"
]Ii
..
>S
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility.
-------
.
.,CIRCLES .'0 N I
W/O','R<..,~<: WINt
'fNfICAI ,AlliES -
. TtIJt fC). I j 1 ..n Tt) i-a-T7
It TtIJt It). ~ I 7-U-77 TO I-CII-17.
. Tt1R frO. i C "-."-18 TO It 211-''81
1
i"j
~&8
ci " .
c:i..
III Gt
...i e
o -.
II)
.
Qt
J
'IS
~'11
~J
..
..
I
..
. ,
,
,
II
I I
.. '"
TII£ IN Dm>
SAMPLING POINT NO. I
I~
"
I
.
I'
a
0\
0\
W/ClitClES' '1110 N.I.
"110 CIRCLES' WlN.L
IDENTICAL vALUES --
---l
.. 11UI1G. I ( HR-77 11) '_771
)( 11UI1G. 1 ( 7-11-77 11) 1-18-771
. 11UI1G. .1I~-"-"1I) ~"-'"
- .
~'
a
c:i~
III
....i
0
II)
I
.-t... I
1 ,
-8
~ .
ci.
ci
8i ,
...i
o ,
II)
..-
-.
""
..- T'T'" y-,... --r-- I .
" . '"
rll'E IN Dm>
SAMPLING POINT NO 3
,.
II
....., '~'~~~~"-1
. a .. 'IS
Figure 11.
.. ,
---.-
.;. '('h'C ~::r. W/ON
... ,R\.. t... "" ""
I'..'" l AI -/ALUES -
.,. roJII N). . I-a-" TO ~.a.711
1( nJ,JI fC). ~ 7-U-71 TO 8-CII-77
. rrutJrO. . ...,...18 TO~hi!8-.
-III
"
..
8
)(
<11)
-.
)(
T-rT ~~"T""""""r""T....-,' 'T1'~~"-~T"'''T'''_T~'''''
6 II ~ . ~ . ~ ~
TlI'E IN Dm>
- ----- --
11
*ICtRCLES: W/O N.I.
'1110 CIRCLES' ./N.I
IDENTICAL VALUES: --
'IIi
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
..
+ ftIIt N). t I 1-.-77 ro 2-CII-77 1 1
)( TtUlICI.I(7-11-7711)1-.-771
. 11UI ~~. ~~~,,-.. ~ ~~C8-= - -
I
I
I
: 1.,
. ,
,
--..
,8
11
.
-.
-8
~~~J
a .. 'IS
1
I 1)11
. '"
TlI'E IN Dm>
SAMPUNG POINT NO 4
,
15
I
.
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen demand and soluble
biochemical oxygen demand with the nitrification inhibitor allyl-thiourea for
those days during the three tours when simultaneous analyses were performed to
monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
i!III
;&;
-
1>'Ii
i18
_&ai
ui
en ..
>'Ii
18
a;
.
+ TtLR IG. 1 C 1-i2-T7 1t) 2-"-17)
)C 1tUt N1. C! (7.11-17 10 8..a-17~
.. 11J.A fCL a 1"-1\-79 10 "-a-78)
Ii!Ii
,.
>'Ii
~
.91
en
ui
a;
.
.
I.
ill a;
TIl£lNrAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
15
..
~
..
"
18
0\
......
..
~
ui
ui-
+ 11J.A JC. 1 Il-i!I!-17 TO 2"i11-77)
)( 1tUt tC1. 217-11-77 TO 8-151-17)
.. TU.R fC).. a (It-.....,. TO t-"-18)
.
.
111
"
ill a;
TII£ IN rAYS
"AMt'LlNG POINT NO.3
..
~
..
Figure 12.
+ TtLR fa. 111-12-17 TO 2.-171
)( Ta.R NJ. l (7-11-77 TO 8-.-171
.. N). a {.-1"-18 TO ..-a-,.
,
111
"
- is
TII£ IN rAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
..
~
..
"
>'Ii
+ 1\UI1CI. 1 ( '-iR->7 111 Z.">7,
)( nut PC. 217-11-77 to 1."'77i
" 1\UI1CI. ill 0- ".,. 111 0-..'"
18
~
ui
uia;
.
111
"
. a;
TII£IN[J\YS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
..
35
..
"
The relationship observed between suspended solids and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility.
-------
Sampling Point #l--Suspended solids concentrations in the raw wastewater
for the three tours varied greatly from day to day and individual values
ranged from 24 mg/l to 206 mg/l (Figure 12). However, the mean concentrations
for each tour were relatively consistent: tour #1,85 mg/l; tour #2,86 mg/l;
and tour #3, 73 mg/l (Table 13). These relatively low mean concentrations were
probably due to infiltration into the collection system.
Sampling Point #2--Tours #1 and #3 produced more consistent and lower
suspended solids concentrations than observed during tour #2. The means for
the three tours were 37 mg/l (tour #1), 69 mg/l (tour #2), and 33 mg/l (tour
#3). Extreme variations in suspended solids concentrations were observed
during tour #1 reflecting the operating problems discussed earlier (Figure
12).
The large variations and the mean suspended solids concentrations
of 69 mg/l observed during tour #2 is nearly twice the value obtained dur-
ing the other tours. This increase is attributable to the higher growth
rates for algae during the summer.
Sampling Point #3--During tour #1, as discussed previously, the fil-
ters were allowed to freeze, and the problems led to occasional BODS
concentrations in the filter effluent greater than that in the applied
water. An occasional increase was also observed with the suspended solids.
On the second sampling day during tour #1 the wastewater applied to the
filter contained 15 mg/l of suspended solids and the effluent contained
17 mg/l (Figure 12). The mean of 26 mg/l with a range of 3 to 43 mg/l for
tour #1 illustrates the extreme fluctuations in the suspended solids con-
centrations during this sampling period (Table 13).
Large day to day fluctuations in the suspended solids concentrations
were also observed during tour #2, but the highest percentage removal of the
suspended solids by the filters (- 81 percent) was observed at Mt. Shasta.
The mean filter effluent suspended solids concentrations during tour #2 was
13 mg/l (Table 13). Although the first sample collected during tour #3 con-
tained a high concentration of suspended solids, the effluent concentrations
dropped below 20 mg/l and remained low. The mean suspended solids concentra-
tion for tour #3 at Mt. Shasta was the lowest of the three sampling periods
with a value of 11 mg/l.
Sampling Point #4--The fluctuations occurring at sampling point #3 were
also evident in the samples collected at sampling point #4. The high effluent
suspended solids concentrations observed during tour #1 were reduced as the
chlorinated effluent passed through the disinfection system. The settling of
dead organisms in the contact basin accounted for this reduction in suspended
solids. This settling effect was not as obvious during the second two sam-
pling periods because of the decrease in the suspended solids concentrations
in the filter effluent. Increases in the suspended solids in the chlorinated
effluent were observed when the disinfection system had been idle for a period
of time. The increase was caused by the increased velocity of flow scouring
the settled solids. An example of such a disturbance occurred on the first
sampling day of tour #3 when the disinfection system had been out of service
for several days, the suspended solids concentrations in the filter effluent
was increased from 49 to 61 mg/l.
68
-------
Volatile Suspended Solids--
The mean volatile suspended solids concentrations for all sampling points
and tours at Mt. Shasta are presented in Table 13; Daily fluctuations are
shown in Figure 13.
Sampling point #l--Although values fluctuated widely on a day to day
basis, the mean volatile suspended solids concentrations for the raw waste-
water during the first two tours were 74 mg/l. A mean value of 56 mg/l was
measured during tour #3 reflecting the increased influent flow rates caused by
heavy rainfall during the Spring.
Sampling point #2--The mean volatile suspended solids concentrations
during tours #1 and #3 were 29 mg/l and 21 mg/l, respectively; whereas,
the mean concentration during tour #2 was 47 mg/l. The increase in vola-
tile suspended solids during tour #2 reflects the increased algal activity
in the summertime (Table 13 and Figure 13).
Sampling point #3--Tour #1 exhibited the most variation in daily volatile
suspended solids concentrations with a range of 2 to 42 mg/l and a mean of 23
mg/l. The applied mean volatile suspended solids concentration was 29 mg/l or
only 10 percent of the volatile suspended solids were removed during the
period of operation with the frozen filter. The fluctuation in the concentra-
tion of volatile suspended solids in the intermittent sand filter effluent
during the second and third sampling periods were minimal, and the respective
means were 7 and 5 mg/l. The best removal rate was observed during tour #2
when 85 percent of the volatile suspended solids were removed by the inter-
mittent sand filter operation.
Sampling point #4--As shown in Figure 13, the volatile suspended solids
concentrations in the chlorinated effluent followed essentially the same
pattern observed for sampling point #3. The volatile suspended solids concen-
trations were also decreased by the settling of algal cells in the chlorine
contact chamber. The volatile suspended solids concentrations in the chlori-
nated effluent were consistently lower than those observed in the filter
effluent.
Fecal Coliform--
Geometric mean fecal coliform concentrations for all sampling points and
tours at Mt. Shasta are shown in Table 13. The daily concentrations are
presented in Figure 14.
Sampling point #l--Seasonal effects are distinguishable between the
sampling periods. The first tour during the Winter provided a range of 65,000
to 4,300,000 organisms/lOO ml and a geometric mean of 650,000 organisms/lOO
mI. During tour #2 in the Summer, "the range was 1,200,000 to 7,300,000
organisms/lOO ml and a mean of 3,380,000 organisms/lOO mI. Tour #3 provided
the samples containing the low concentrations that were caused by the cooler
Spring temperatures and principally the dilution of the wastewater by high
flow rates. Concentrations ranged from 135,000 to 900,000 organisms/lOO ml
with a geometric mean of 374,000 organisms/lOO mI.
. Sampling point #2--The fecal coliform concentrations in the lagoon
effluent were less than 5,000 organisms/lOO ml 94 percent of the time.
The
69
-------
""
+----
,.
,.
+ ttIJII N;L . I 1..-77 ro i-.-n I
)C ttUltJlC). iIT-Il-" 108-..771
. n:IJItlC. JI't-IIIt'18M',.-"
+ 1UJIII NJ. 111-.-77 ro lil8.T71
)( n:utflO. '1'-1.1'''' 101,.""1
. 1UJIIIN). Jt"1.'" TOIIt-..,.
,...
'"
- ,.
~
,
oC .
~
- '"
.,;
.,;
..
:>
vi
.,;
,; '"
...
.
"
..
. .
T [1£ III IJn'S
!'-AMh ING POINT NO.1
iii
-
.
..
...
I.
to
I ,
- ...
TlP'£ IN ffiYS
~--""""~""T'"".
.. ... ..
...
SAIooII'LING POINT NO 2
.
.....,
0 .
..
~..
Ii'
ui
ui-
,;
..
.
.
..
+ nil' IC1. 11,..-17 10 1-.-771
)( ftIJt teL ~ I '-11-77 1'0."-17'
. nut JIC). J 1"-"-18 YO '-.-111'
+ nut IlL I I ,".-77 'IU i .-771
)( "'" lID. il '...-77 10 8-.-771
........ JI't-I't-18101it-a'''1
..
~
..
1
i!8 is
TI~ III ffiYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
I~
-
~.
.,;
ui
,,;
~
..
.. '"
TlP'£ III ffiYS
SAIooIPl,NCi POINT NO.3
.5
..
...
..
...
.
.
Figure 13.
The relationship observed between volatile suspended solids
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water
pollution control facility.
-------
-
- 1781
...... ~,-
-
ih
~128
~~
~ ..
~-
~ i!&II
.
.
II
i
£ .
~ 6
~
::;
..J
X .
... ~ PIJ. 1 11-;!R-77 TO 2-"-77)
)( 1tiJ' fC).. 2' 17-11-71 Tt8 8-28-77)
. 1UIt fC). 31"-."'18 TO ,-a-78)
i-
£!iBIB
'"
~-
8
~-
~
8-
5 ,-
I::'
~
8 l
5
I::' .
6
I.
ill 25
TiI'£ 1111 IJIYS
SAMPLI N G POINT NO.1
15
,.
310
..
>6
... 1tl.R fC). 1 I 1",.77 10 2-"-77)
X TtIJI Ie). i! (7-11-77 TO l-a-77)
. ttUt N).. it ("-1"-1110 ,-a-18.
i .
~
~ .
8
~ ..
8
~ ill
I.
ill 25
Tilt:: [III IJIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
16
..
310
..
>6
-
---------
... TO.JI N;). 1 It-a? 71 Tn 2'd! 711
X TO...R N).. 2' t 7-11-77 TO 8 ill," I
9' ~ N). ;)1.-."-78 TO 'h!8.7'B1
e
,.
16
ill 25
TIlt:: [IIILflYS
"AMI'LINO POINT NO 2
,.
,.
**","","'''''''''')0(. ~ .
iI6 .. ....
+
+ 1tI..R PI). I I 1-i!Il-71 10 2-.-77 )
)( 1UJt P(). 2' ( 7-11-77 TO 8-.-77)
. 1tUt PO. 3 I "-."-1'8 YO't-a-"1)
'._------- --- - --
~
.
I
ill C5
TIlt:: [III CAYS
"AMf'lIIllG POINT NO.4
.
I.
IS
The relationship observed between fecal coliform bacteria and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility.
Figure 14.
'\c
~~~.. rr rr \..
,.
:Ii
..
....
-------
large fluctuation during the middle of tour #1 at both sampling points 12 and
#3 shows the effect of draining primary lagoon #1 into lagoon #4 when the bot-
tom drain broke. A large quantity of sludge was discharged into lagoon #4.
The lowest and most consistent fecal coliform concentrations for sampling
points #2 and #3 were observed during tour #2 when operation of the system was
almost as prescribed in the operation and maintenance manual.
Sampling point #3--Excluding the week of high concentrations observed
during tour #1, the fecal coliform population in the filtered effluent was
below 120 organisms/lOO ml during all three sampling periods.
Sampling point #4--Chlorinated filter effluent for the three sampling
periods contained less than 1 fecal coliform per 100 ml in 71 percent of the
samples collected. The maximum concentration of fecal coliform observed in
the chlorinated effluent was 79 organisms/lOO mI.
During tour #1 the fecal coliform concentrations were less than 1
organism/lOO ml in all samples except for two days when the concentrations
were 1 organism/lOO ml and 79 organisms/lOO mI. The chlorination system had
malfunctioned on these two days. Occasional fecal coliform organisms were
detected during tour #2, but the samples never exceeded 11 organisms/lOO mI.
During tour #3 changes made in the disinfection system resulted in less ef-
fective disinfection as shown in Figure 14. The geometric mean fecal coliform
concentration during tour #3 was 5 organisms/lOO ml and ranged from 0 to 20
organisms/lOO mI.
In Situ pH, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen--
Mean in situ pH values, temperatures, and dissolved oxygen concentrations
for all sampling locations and tours at Mt. Shasta are presented in Table 13.
Daily fluctuations are presented in Figures 15, 16 and 17, respectively.
Sampling point #l--The mean temperature of the raw wastewater differed
only by 1.1 C during tours 11 and #3, and the means were 9.7 and 10.8 C,
respectively (Table 13). Temperatures measured during tour #2 (Summer) ranged
between 20 and 26 C, and the mean value was 24.4 C. The dissolved oxygen
concentrations were fairly consistent during tours #1 and #3 and the respec-
tive means were 5.5 mg/l and 6.9 mg/l (Table 13 and Figure 17). Dissolved
oxygen levels fluctuated greatly during tour #2 and the mean concentration of
3.0 mg/l reflects the higher temperatures and increased bacterial activity
during the Summer.
Sampling points #2, #3, #4--The pH values at each sampling location indi-
cate different trends for each sampling period (Figure 15). At sampling point
#2 during tour #1 the most erratic results were obtained, and the pH values
ranged from 7.4 to 9.1. The higher pH values observed during tour #2 reflect
increased algal activity in the lagoon system. The pH values for tour #3
ranged from 7.5 to 9.3. A constant decrease in pH was observed during this
sampling period indicating a change in biological population in the lagoon
system.
Seasonal ambient temperature variations are reflected in the water
temperatures measured at sampling points #2, 13, and #4 (Figure 16). The
72
-------
...
I.'
...
if
~ 7.1i
i
7.'
I.,
I.,
.
---- ---
--~
---- -
+ TO..R..,;).ll,.~.17m~i!8nl
)Ie TCJ.R fC). i! 17-aa-71 m 8-a-77 1
. 10Jt JC:I. i n-lt-78 TO '-iII-'"
..,....,.... I"
. . .
TlI£ IN IJIYS
'-T~r
.
II
II
..
..
:. "~I'I I,.. G POINT NO.1
I.'
+ 1tUII fG. 111...77 It) 1"-17.
)("",to. ""U.771t)1.8.77.
. TGII tG. . I ,.\t." 10 ".,781
...
......
W
...
if
~ 7.'
it
7.'
.....
...
~~.
. . II II . . .
TlI£ IN IJIYS
-.A M t'Li NO POINT NO.3
..
...
. . . I r-,--" ~""-""T'"
.. ..
I~.~
--- ------->----
- ---_._-- -- ----
uu~
t 11.1.,. ttJ. I tic'? OJ !U c' re "'1
)( 1lJ.,tt !\fJ. ~ 4 , 11 I' IU Ij ~'" ,. I
'I' 11t.J.t JIfJ. j I It ''I '11 11J" ~ Ibl
...
~ . I~J~..../A....'\,/)()(..-~\
'" )('1( >
-------
.
------- --
- -- - -
.
+ -- ICL I I ,..." tQ 1'.-" I
Ie _fCI. "7 ..,71 108,.,71,
. ItUttCL Irt-'t."IQ't-8''''
.
u
-.
~ "
if
i..
1
1 II II . . . . .. "'
T If£ IN IJWI
!>AM"LING POINT NO.1
.
+ _fCI. 111".71111'-'"
Ie - fCI. .1"\1'" 1111_'"
. " - fCI. ,,,.\'t.,. III'.''''
~
~
.
u
-.
i.8 ~
~
i..
,
1
1 8 .. II . . . . .. "'
TlI1E IN IJWI
~AM"LINO POINT NO,3
..
.
.. nuuO,ltla17lOii8171
x ro.Jt N). ? t 7 II 77 '" I .-171
. ro.Jt N). .. C It I' ,. ro. ill,'"
..
~-~j\
u
-.
~"
F!
~II
~~ V-- ~
1
...
. . . I . . . .~-r-rT,~rT r"'Tr-r r yo ,-, T"
. .. . .. ..
TJI£ IN lAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
II
II
..
- ~- ---- ---~
.
+ nut N). , I ,...". YO ....".
Ie - fCI. """'71 III "..71,
. nut N). Ilt-'.,,. ro ....181
..
Ie
u
-.
~II
~
ill
~ .r----
~
. --~I.'" ,
8 , II
.,.. ...--..--t. ,.
., . .
HI1E IN lAYS
!>AM"LING POINT NO,4
. , .. -r-, r,.,....- f. r"-'T-r...
. .. ..
~
The relationship observed between 1n situ temperature And
timl' in days for the three tours at each of th(> four sampl1ng
point!> used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility.
Figurl' 16.
-------
.. i!8
+ 'n:LR fCL 1 , .;a~77 10 ~771
)C nut fCL ~ ( 7.11-77 10 '''''771
. 11:Ut teL ~ ."-'''-18 10 .......781
.
~ ~\6
. ~
0 0
0 0
;:! . ;:!
! -..
~
. 5
. 5 .. 15 .. . .. . t8 '" .
TIPEIl'lems
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
.. Ii
+ 1aIt fCL 1 I ,...." 10 2"-17)
)( 1tI.A N:I. 1'17-11-77 10 '''''771
. - ICI. a 1.-'.-" 111 ......,
...., .. "
VI
~ . ~ .
o . 0 6
o ci
;:! ;:!
! . ! .
+ 1t1R N). 1 I . ;8-77 1Q 2""-77)
)( 1tJ.I' N:I. i! 17'11-77 TO '-iII-")
. 1Q.fI fCL a I" '''-71 11:) "".181
5
..
.. .
TIPE IN ems
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
15
it
.
t8
'"
+ 1tJ.II 'G. 1 II-ie-77 11) 2-arl-77 1
)( TtI..A fC). i (7-11-77 to e-C!e.17 I
. 1UIf NL a 1"'1"'-11 TO't.a'lIl
.
.
..
i!8 .
TIPE IN ems
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
15
..
.
t8
'"
.
II
i!8 is
111'£ IN ems
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
15
31
...
..
'Ii;
Figure 17.
The relationship observed between in situ dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water
pollution control facility.
-------
respective mean water temperatures measured during tours #1. #2. and #3 were
5.5 C. 24.2 C and 11.0 C.
The dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations measured in the lagoon effluent
(sampling point #2) fluctuated greatly during the three tours and ranged from 8
to 18 mg/l. This wide range of DO concentrations is related to the degree of
algal activity in the lagoons. The lowest mean filter effluent DO concentra-
tion was measured during tour #1. This low DO concentration is attributable
to the poor condition of the filters discussed previously in the operation and
maintenance section.
Chemical Oxygen Demand--
Mean chemical oxygen demand concentrations
tours at Mt. Shasta are summarized in Table 13.
presented in Figure 18.
for all sampling points and
Daily fluctuations are
Sampling point #l--Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) concentrations mea-
sured during tour #1 ranged between 78 and 275 mg/l with a sampling period
mean of 181 mg/l (Figure 18 and Table 13). During tour #2 a greater fluctua-
tion was observed with a range of 53 mg/l to 444 mg/l and a mean of 268 mg/l.
COD values for tour #3 remained relatively ~onstant within a range of 286
to 355 mg/l. and the mean value was 323 mg/l. . Although BOD5 and SS mean
concentrations in the raw wastewater did not fluctuate greatly between the
three sampling periods. the data presented in Figure 18 show that a pro-
gressive increase in the mean chemical oxygen demand occurred. This gradual
increase in COD concentration is caused by compounds apparently not measured
by the BOD test. It is likely that the increase is caused by the runoff from
the streets carrying more refractory materials not attacked by the culture
used in the BOD test.
Sampling point #2--Lagoon system effluent COD concentrations varied
from 64 to 145 mg/l with a mean of 94 mg/l during tour #1.
During the second sampling period. a threefold increase in COD was
experienced from the eleventh sampling day until the end of the 40-day
sampling period. This increase occurred on the day that the parallel filter
systems were put into operation. The ballast lagoons were taken out of
series with the aerated lagoons. and the lagoon effluent quality decreased.
A similar increase was not noted for any other parameter. The COD concen-
tration in the lagoon effluent during tour #2 ranged from 30 to 175 mg/l with
a mean of 124 mg/l. COD removal by the lagoon system during tour #2 was 54
percent.
The mean lagoon effluent COD during tour #3 was 66 mg/l with a range
of 61 to 74 mg/l. Tour #3 exhibited the lowest COD effluent values of
the three tours.
Sampling point #3--The filter effluent COD values for tours #1 and
#3 ~ere very similar with respective means of 64 and 52 mg/l; however.
dur~ng tour #1 the COD concentration flucturated more than during tour #3.
The COD concentration in the filter effluent during tour #1 reached a maximum
of 101 mg/l and during tour #3 reached a maximum of 63 mg/1. During tours
76
-------
-
+ TWt Pf3. ~~-77 ;-i!.-..-77I -1
>< TO..A PC). 2! 11-11-77 TO 8-i!IIII-77)
.. Ta..R P(). a (tt-l"-78 10 '-a&-78
-
'1&11
x
-
~-
~-
~..
o
u-
1111
,.
&II
,e IS .. ... .. ... .. '5
TlI£:INIJIYS
S/l~PlING POINT NO. I
.. '11;
+ 1tUt N:L 1 ( l-i2-77 1'0 2"'-77)
>c 1UIt fCL i ('-11-77 10 .,.17)
.. .. 1tUt fCL ~ r "'-1"-78 113 ..-a-78} ,&II
......
......
... 'is
~.. ~..
!f! ~
c18 C 11;
C ci
U U &II
.
'" i5
\II
. C .. IS . .. .. ... .. '5
TlI£: IN IJIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
Figure 18.
"'"
----
...,
+ TtI..A N). 1 (1.-71 TtI i!-aI-.17)
>< TO..Af
-------
#1 and #3, the minimum concentration was 41 mg/l.
termittent sand filter system during tours 11 and
22 percent, repsectively (Figure 18).
COD removal by the in-
#3 were 32 percent and
COD concentrations in the intermittent sand filter effluents during
tour '2 were high with a range of III to 148 mg/l and a mean of 129 mg/l.
Sampling point #4--The COD concentrations measured at sampling point
#4 during the three tours reflect the same trends observed at sampling
point 13. The average reduction in COD caused by chlorination was 25 per-
cent. This reduction is probably attributable to the solids settling in the
chlorine contact tank.
Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand--
General--As shown in Figure 19, the soluble COD concentrations varied
essentially the same as that observed for the total COD. The general trends
that were discussed for the total COD are very similar. The percent of
the total COD that was soluble remained constant during each tour at the
different sampling points. But considerable variation in the percentage
of soluble COD was observed for the three tours. The percent of total COD
represented by soluble COD during tour #1, tour #2, and tour 13 was 37.
90, and 78 percent, respectively. These differences are probably related to
seasonal variations in the efficiency of the system and the seasonal in-
creases in the COD concentration in the raw wastewater.
Alkalinity--
Hean alkalinity concentrations for
Ht. Shasta are summarized in Table 13.
Figure 20.
all sampling points and tours at
Daily fluctuations are presented in
Sampling point Il--Alkalinity concentrations for tour #1 and 13 were
similar with means of 86 and 83 mg/l as CaC03 , respectively. The mean
concentration for tour #2 was 110 mg/l as CaC03 which was induced by
warm temperatures and increased bacterial activity.
Sampling point #2--Alkalinity concentrations at sampling point 12 were
similar for all three tours with means of 79 (tour #1), 73 (tour #2), and 71
(tour #3) mg/l as CaC03.
samfling point #3--Hean alkalinity concentrations in the filter effluent
were 57 tour #1). 42 (tour #2), and 55 (tour #3) mg/l as CaC03. Significant
reductions in alkalinity resulted as the lagoon effluent passed through the
filter with the highest percentage (42 percent) loss occurring during the sum-
mer (tour #2). This higher loss during the summer is probably caused by the
additional growth of the algae after the water was applied to the filter.
Sampling point #4--An additional 18 percent reduction in alkalinity was
observed as the wastewater passed through the disinfection system. This
reduction in alkalinity was related to the injection of sulfur dioxide as a
dechlorinating agent which lowered the pH value from approximately 7.2 to 6.5.
78
-------
1
1
5
II
. is
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
..
.s
as
.-
1"
~1&11
!i!
-Iai
c
clll
u
~ "
&II
is
1
+ 'IUJt PG. 1 ( ,"-77 10 a...-".
)( 1tUt JG.. i! I '-11-77 10 ."'-77)
. 111R to. i 1,.,"-78 ro .....PI
-
...
+ 1tUt to. 1 ( 1-i!!il.-77 1'0 iH!8.77)
)( YtI.R to. i! I 7.11-71 11) 1.a-7n
. 1DJIt NL a 1"-'''.78 10 '-"-18
1.
)(
~
...
~-
i.
c-
o
u.
~III
.
\Ii
.
is
II
. is
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
"
.
is
..
.s
I.
III
-...J
\0 1"
~..
f
- I.
C
o .
u
~ .
..
.
1
1
.&11
+ TOJt PG. 1 ( 1 ~-77 11) 2"'-77.
)C 1QJt to. 2 (7-U-77 10 1---771
. TOJt to. a 1'-"'78 10 ..-a-18J
+ 1tUt N). 1 ( ,"'.77 10 j!-8."77 ,
)( 1UII1CI. ~ (1-'1-1'7 111 '-.-11'
. nut to. i 1"-".18 10 "-a-78 1
Iai
f.
c "
o
u
~ &II
is
1
II
. is
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
15
.
is
..
.s
5
II
.
TlI£IN~YS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
.5
.
is
..
'IS
Figure 19.
The relationship observed between soluble chemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of the
four sampling points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water
pollution control facility.
-------
..
--- -..------
----
- --,
..
+ 1'QIt PO. ,1..-71 10 2-al-77 , l
)( 1tUtfCL 217-U.1'7101---77)
. 1QJtfrO. ~("'1,,-"11)"'i!8'781
+ 'nIIt ICL 1 , ..-77 'to i"'-77 I
)( 1tUIfCL "7-11-7710''''-7'11
. nut ItG.. a 1'.'''-78 TO ....11.
~~
iii
~ I.
~
~
5 ~
"
~~
iii
~ I.
~
~
5 ~
~/Y
.
. , .. " . . . . .. "
TIP£: IN CJII'S
SAMPLING POINT NO. I
..
+ 1aJt ICL a ( '''''77 10 '''17)
)( 1U.It fG. I ('-U-77 10 ''''771
. 1'QIt ICL a (.-..-" 10 .....,,»
00
0 ~ IS
II!
i.
~
; .
.
. .. " . . . . .. "
TIP£: IN CJII'S
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
.
.. " . . - . .. "
TIP£: IN CJII'S
S/lMPLING POINT NO.2
.
+ nut frG. I 1,---77 10 l-a-77 1
)( 1O.ItJrG. i(7'U-77 ml-a-711
8 . 1UII1CJ. ) "-"-18 ro ....ae-1I1
~.. )(
III 8
<:!.
~
~..
~
;-
Ii
.
I.
, .. " . '" - " .. "
TlP£:INIJ'IYS
SAMPLlN.O POINT NO.4
Figure 20.
The relationship observed between alkalinity and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
Total Phosphorus--
Mean total phosphorus concentrations for
Mt. Shasta are summarized in Table 13. Daily
phorus concentrations are shown in Figure 21.
all sampling points and tours at
variations in the total phos-
Phosphorus removal measured at the four sampling points was consistent
except during tour #2 when seasonal changes in influent concentrations and
algal activity affected the phosphorus concentration (Figure 21). Total phos-
phorus removal through the entire facility varied with the season of the year,
and removals were 31, 46, and 53 percent for tours #1, #2, and #3, respective-
ly. Phosphorus removal in the lagoon system was not affected by the season of
the year as expected. The highest percentage reduction in total phosphorus in
the lagoons occurred when the water temperature was approximately 11 C. It is
possible that an algae bloom occurred during tour #3 (April) and consumed or
precipitated much of the phosphorus; however, the suspended solids concentra-
tions were the lowest during tour #3.
Nitrogen Forms--
General--Five nitrogen forms were monitored and the mean concentrations
over the three tours for the Mt. Shasta system are shown in Table 14. The
variations with time for the five parameters plus a plot of inorganic nitrogen
(N02-N + N03-N) for the three tours are shown in Figures 22-27. A discus-
sion of the major variations is presented by nitrogen form in the following
paragraphs.
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen--The total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) concentra-
tions in the raw wastewater were basically the same during all three tours
(Figure 22). Mean concentrations for the three tours ranged from 14.4 to 16.3
mg Nil as shown in Table 14. The 83 percent removal in the overall system
during tour #3 was attributable to high chlorine dosages being applied.
Filter effluent TKN concentrations remained essentially constant ex-
cept for the last 12 days of tour #1 when a steady decline in the effluent
concentrations developed. The lagoon effluent being applied to the filters
also experienced a decline in TKN concentration but fluctuated more than
the concentration in the filter effluent. The reduction in organic loading
to the filters and the increase in filter effluent temperature of approximate-
ly 50C probably accounted for the improved quality of the effluent (Marshall
and Middlebrooks, 1974).
Ammonia nitrogen--Ammonia nitrogen conversion was much higher during
tours #2 and #3 than during tour #1 when temperatures were much lower (Figures
16 and 23). During tours #2 and #3 the filter effluent ammonia nitrogen
concentrations did not exceed 1 mg Nil. After the first 15 days of operation
during tour #1, the filter effluent ammonia nitrogen concentrations began to
decline rapidly and remained below 1 mg Nil for the last five days of sam-
pling. This rapid declinge in ammonia nitrogen concentration and the decline
in TKN discussed above are possibly explained by an increase in water tempera-
ture from 4 to 10 C (EPA, 1975).
Organic nitrogen--During the warmer weather (tours #2) the organic
nitrogen concentration in the lagoon effluent increased above that detected
81
-------
.8 T -- ---- - + f't1..RNL 11-I-a-T1TOi-al-T1I
)( 1'tI.ItNL ~17-1I-T1 'f01-"771
..
------
+ 1OJII! NL I I l-ifR-71 TO i-a-77 J
X TtJ..A PC. Z t 7-11-77 TtI 1."-771
9' TtUt N:I- i 1"-1"-" Tn" a.7I1
~
...
!e
~ I
!e
~~
~+-/~
~
'"
a: .
~
~
8
1. 1S .. .. .. a; .. 'IS
TlP£ IN ~
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
+ 1OJII! IG. 11."'.71 10 i-iII-7'1)
)( 1tUII to. z (7-U-" 10 .-iII.")
I . 1'II.R N). I (,-.It-,. 1'0 It...,.)
00
N
I
~
0.
.
!e
&ii
~,
.
. I 1. II .. i!S .. a; .. 'Ifi
TlP£ IN ~
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
1. 15 .. .. .. .. .. 'Ifi
TlP£ IN ~
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
I
+ nut to. 111..-7T 1'0 2-iII-771
)( 1tIJt tC). 211-11-77 T1) '-"-771
. 1tIJIt to. 111it-11t-,. TO It..-181
-.
~
0.
! .
a:
~,
0-
.
. 5 1. 15 .. .. .. a; .. ..
TlP£IN~
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
Figure 21.
The relationship observed between total phosphorus and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility.
-------
TABLE 14. SUMMARY OF MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF NITROGEN FORMS AT MT. SHASTA, CALIFORNIA
00
w
Lagoon Lagoon F i 1 te r Chlorinated
Nitrogen Tour # Influent Effluent Effluent Filter Effluent Overall
Fonn Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration Removal
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l %
TKNa Tour #1 14.4 10.8 5.7 5.8 60
Tour #2 16.3 11.1 8.6 5.7 65
Tour #3 16.3 11.5 8.5 2.8 83
b T ou r # 1 10.59 7.55 3.95 3.91 63
NH3-N
Tour #2 13.0 4.09 0.41 0.26 98
Tour #3 7.2 4.4 0.38 0.36 95
Org- NC Tour #1 3.9 3.3 2.0 1.9 51
Tour #2 3.4 7.1 8.2 5.4 -59
Tour #3 9. 1 7.1 8.1 2.4 74
d Tour #1 0.069 0.041 0.035 0.013
N02-N -
Tour #2 0.301 1. 35 0.07 0.03 -
Tour #3 0.081 0.083 0.125 0.014 -
e Tour #1 0.21 0.56 5.0 5.0
N03-N -
Tour #2 0.29 1.20 4.0 4.5 -
Tour #3 0.40 0.43 3.51 3.45 -
~TKN = total Kjeldahl nitrogen
NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen
COrg-N = organic nitrogen
d
eN02-N = nitrite nitrogen
N03-N = nitrate nitrogen
-------
15
00
.po
..
~
-
~ 5
..
"',
-,
+ TO...R N). I I 1 i?;C T7 TO 2 ze. T7 .
)( T~P<). 2t7.1111 roe CII 171
T TO...FI "I). 3 (It 1'+ lfI TO It ea 78 \
+ TO.It P(). 1 I l-iE-" TO i-a-TT)
)( TO.R N). il 7-11-17 TO B-a-77 I
.. 1t1II r<:I. a ('t-l"-18 11) ..-a-"')
..
~
~'"
~
)(
~
I.
~ ,.
I.
.. ;s
TlI'£ IN IJWS
SAI\IPLING POINT NO.1
..
'15
,.
IS
2JI is
TlI'£IN[)\YS
ill
>&
..
'15
..
>&
IS
SAI\IPLING POINT NO.2
..
+ 10.lIl N). 1 C 1-i!J!.77 TO ~---71)
X 1tLR PC. l t '-11-77 TO .-iII.")
.. TU.R PC. ;I (It-tt-" 10 ..-a-1I1
+ 1t1.R PC. I ( 1-lR-71 TO 2-al-" I
)( 1t1ItPG. 2C7-Ll-711t18-al-71)
.. 10.11 fC). 3 I "-1"'-11 11) '-a-7I1
12
I.
~ :
~
.
.
...............
>& ..
.
.
'15
2JI is
TlI'£ IN IJWS
S/lI\IPLING POINT NO.4
ill
15
I.
>&
..
'15
2JI ;s
TlI'£ IN IJWS
"AMI-liNG POINT NO.3
ill
I.
.5
5
Figure 22.
The relationship observed between total kjeldahl nitrogen and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution
control facility.
-------
...
ill
z
i.5
~
- '8
I 5
8
8
+ TtI.A NJ. 1 I I.CIi!-77 TO cH!II-77)
>< TURN:!. 2(7-11-77 me-C!II-771
... 1tI.A NJ. 31 ("'-1"-18 ro "-28-781
"
5 .8 15 ill ... i8I a5 .. ....
TlI'E IN CJ'IYS
SAMPLING POINT NO. I
7.5
+ nut N). 1 ( 1"'-77 m 2-i!8-77)
)( 1tIJt NJ. C! (7.11-77 TO 8-211-77)
. 1tIJt N). 3 ('-1"-18 n:J '~-1I)
..8
z
i -.5
...J
,
~
-- 3.11
1.,5
8.8
'8 .5 ill .. i8I a5 .. ....
TlI'EINCJ'IYS
SAMPliNG POINT NO.3
7
00 .
VI
z
i-
~
- a
I.
8
8
Figure 23.
IS
-----
+ TO..A P\I). I I 1.t!S:?77 ro 2"i!II.77 \
)( ~ 1"0.217'11-77 TO Q-aD.77!
., TU..R t(). )t't I"'-~ '"'O't C'e.7'Q1
~ iii
~
I
, I
...J
~
a:
i 5
I.
,
..
~ ~~~~ ~,
.... ....
,~-T'"
i!II 2S
TII'EINCJ'IYS
SAMPLING POIN.T "0.2
,
..
,
'"
+ TO.It PC).. 1 I 1-il2-" TO 2-"-77)
)( 1tI.R PC).. 217-11-77 1tI 8-iII-71)
" TtI.A NJ. 3 ('t-I"-" 1tI .H!8-7IU
II
i!II ...
TII'E IN CJ'IYS
SAMPliNG POINT NO.4
"
i8I
..
'"
....
The relationship observed between ammonia and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
in the raw wastewater (Figure 24). Organic nitrogen concentrations in the
filter effluent were approximately equal to the concentrations in the lagoon
effluent applied to the filters (Table 13 and Figure 24). This indicates
that the filter effluent contains organisms that have passed the filter or
were scoured from the media. Because the intermittent sand filter is a
fixed film biological reactor, the sloughing of organisms was expected,
and it is known that some organisms pass through the filter (Marshall and
Middlebrooks, 1974). The higher concentrations of organic nitrogen in
the effluents again conform with the periods of higher water temperatures.
Nitrite nitrogen--Significant concentrations of nitrite nitrogen
(N02-N) were observed in the Mt. Shasta system only during tours 12 and
#3 when the temperatures were relatively warm (Figure 25). Nitrite nitrogen
is a transitory oxidation product and is unstable. Therefore, the only
significance that can be attached to high concentration of nitrite is that
a significant rate of nitrification was occurring or experimental error
occurred.
Nitrate nitrogen--A significant amount of nitrification occurred
throughout the entire Mt. Shasta system as shown in Figure 26 and Table 14.
Nitrate nitrogen (N03-N) production was greater in the intermittent sand
filter than in the other components of the system during all three tours.
The intermittent sand filter has been shown to be an effective nitrification
system in many evaluations. Even when loading the filters at hydraulic
loading rates greater than 9,353 m3/ha.d during tour #3 at Mt. Shasta,
nitrification was significant (Table 13 and Figure 26). A plot of the in-
organic nitrogen (N02-N + N03-N) concentrations are shown in Figure 27.
Nitrogen mass balance--A mass balance of the nitrogen forms shown in
Table 15 indicates that nitrogen losses in the lagoon system were higher at
the cooler water temperatures during tours 11 and #3. However, nitrogen re-
moval by the overall system was higher during the warmer sampling periods
(tours #2 and #3), but still the highest removal by the total system occurred
at a mild water temperature of approximately 11 C (tour #3). During tour #2
when water temperatures were the greatest and the growth of algae was high, it
is likely that nitrogen fixation was occurring.
Very little nitrogen was removed by the intermittent sand filter system,
but significant nitrate nitrogen production occurred during all three tours
as the lagoon effluent passed through the filter. Most of the increase in
nitrate nitrogen was a result of oxidizing the ammonia nitrogen. The propor-
tion of the ammonia nitrogen in the lagoon effluent oxidized by the inter-
mittent sand filter was influenced by the water temperature or season of the
year. When the water temperature was approximately 10 C or greater, ammonia
nitrogen reductions in the filter exceeded 90 percent. During the coldest
tour (tour #1) when the mean water temperature was approximately 6 C, ammonia
nitrogen removals by the intermittent sand filter averaged 48 percent.
Algal Concentrations--
The total number of algae cells/ml measured at sampling points #2,
#3, and #4 are presented in Figure 28. A tabulation of the algal genera
identified at each sampling point is presented in Table 16. The predominant
algal genera varied with the season of the year.
86
-------
16
00 12
-....J
~ 8
~
::i 6
g
.
.
"
12
~ .
~
::i 8
g
.
.
+ TtIJI PrO. . 11..;Jfl-71lt) z'-i!lJ-17J
)( 1tUt N). 02 17-n-17 Tn I-CB-77)
. Ta.Jt tfJ. a 1"-1"-7'8 11) "-5-18)
)(
\8
ill i!Ii
TlI'EINDWS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
16
..
<1&
..
06
+ TtIJI N). . Il-iS!-77 TO 2-iII-17)
X nut Nl. 02 C 7-11-77 11) 8"".77)
. ~ N). a I "'-1"-78 to ..-a.18)
"
ill i!Ii
TlI'EINDWS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
'6
III
<1&
..
06
Figure 24.
16
Ie
~ 9
~
::i 6
g
a
.
.
------
---- -- - -~
+ 1tUt fC). ~ I 1-12-77 ro 2-i11-77 I
)( Ta.Jt frC). 217-11-77 TO 8-i11-77J
. TtIJI N). a I "-1"'-1& 11) It.i!I-78J
I
6
ill i!Ii
Tll'ElNrAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
<1&
\8
16
..
..
06
Ie
+ TtIJI NJ. 1 I 1-22-77 'It) 2-.-77)
>c: TtlJlfO. 217-U-71 tOe-al-71)
. TO..AtCl. 31..-.'-71110".28-79)
,.
- .
z
~
!2 8
::i
g ~
,.
16
ill i!Ii
TlI'E IN DWS
SA !II PLI N C5 POINT NO.4
..
36
'!
-------
1.1
+ TO.I' fC). 1 I l-fR-'" TO ~...771
)( TtUt NJ. lIT-It-" TO I-a-" I
. TtUt JrC). J I It '''-18 TO ...a-7I1
1.1
...... I.'
~
~ 1.7
Z I.ft
~ I.'
f'< "
UJ I.It
....
~ I.>
Z
.."
1.\
1.1
II
i8 ""
TlI'£IIIICFiYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
..
..
..
..
..
..II;
I."
+ 1tIJ' fCL 1 I 1-.-77 TO 2-.-77)
)( 1UIt fiG. 11'1'11-77 10 '''-171
. TO.It JC1. J 1't-ll!t-711 TO "-.-7111
00
00
....
- ....
~ ....
~
~ ...
~ ...
~ ...
~ ....
Z
1.11
1.15
I..
II
i8 ..
TlI'£ 1111 CFiYS
SAMPL'NC POINT NO.3
.,
..
..
..
..
Figure 25.
"., r
""1
~ .., ~
'!' j
~
..... 1.1
.. TO.It "'D. 1 I I lit-" TO c' i!8 T1!
)( Tt1It P
-------
'.1
I..
...
- ...
~
~ ..'
Z 1.6
~ ..&
t!! ...
! ...
Z
..l
...
...
.
+ TO...A N). 1 I t-i!2-77 TO 2-2IIJ-77 I
X 11J.AN). 2(7-n-77TDe-C!8-771
.,. TU.R NJ. a (tt-t...-7Q TO It-ce-18)
1&
ex>
\0 .l
~ 9
Z
~
- &
~
Z .
o
x
& .0 .& ill 05 .. is .. "
TI~ IN CFlYS
SA~PLlNG POINT NO. I
-------
"
\0
0
..
~ .
~
~ .
~
- II
I
~ 1.1
~ ...
e I.'
~ ...
I.'
-- ------- ~
- - - - -
I.'
... faJtJrG. III ~17 Ytli'.nl
)Ie nut JrG. CO t 7 LI-77 ro 1-. 711
. f1JJt N). II I It 1't " TO" a-1I1
I.'
...
"I
T r, , "1 T .
I .
..
II
SA"'''LING POINT NO.1
----
+ 1QJI JG. I I 1-.-77 1'0 '..-771
)( _lei. r "'11,77111".,77'
. _lei. "0,,,,,, 111".''''
,. ,.
.
r,. r..,....,.... I""""
~ ~ . III .
TlP'E IN IJIYS
',A"'''I 'HC POINT NO !I
III
..
..
Figure 27.
...1
...
-- -. -----l
.. IUI' N). I I . 1Il-T1 10 I ..n I
)Ie ftUtJC). 117 11.17 mi..''''
. 1QJt1C. 11'-1'-78 ro,...'"
I
I
I
'.1
- iI.'
~U
zU
~ l.1
~ I.'
-- 1.1
..,
1.1
"""T" .- r'
,
,rr-tT"-"lT,.. rrr-Try-'
. A
TlP'E IN rAYS
~A"PLINO POINT NO 2
r ... r r '
.
I .- .- I r T .
'"
I
~
"
A
-- -----
----- ---------- -- ---.-
.. 1QJt JC). I 11..-77 m ,...771
)( 1O.It N:I. 1(7-".,., 1'01.8711
. 'ftlJIN). 31,.It.,.m,..-,..
.
~"
Z
~II
~
- ,
I
~..--r-rT"rr-T""'T ,-~ ...-r---r-r- r~' . I
. ~ . a - .
TlP'E IN rAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
I
,
TIt(' relationship observed betwt.>{'n the combined values of
nitrite and nitrate and time in days for the thre(> tours at
each of the four sampling points used to monitor the Mount
Shnsta water pollution cont rol faci1 ity.
. , . . . . ~
.. ..
,.. .
..
..
-------
TABLE 15. NITROGEN MASS BALANCE FOR MT. SHASTA, CALIFORNIA
\0
......
Mean Values for Three Sampling Periods Overa 11
Tour Number and mg Nil Reduction
Sample Location %
N~ -N Org-N NOz-N N03-N Total-N
Tour #1 (Jan. 22-Feb. 20)
Lagoon Influent 10.59 3.9 0.069 0.21 14.8 -
Lagoon Effluent 7.55 3.3 0.041 0.56 11.5 22
Filter Effluent 3.95 2.0 0.035 5.0 11.0 26
Chlorinated Filter Effluent 3.91 1.9 0.013 5.0 10.8 27
Tour #2 (July ll-Aug. 20)
Lagoon Influent 13.0 3.4 0.301 0.29 17.0 -
Lagoon Effluent 4.09 7. 1 1. 35 1. 20 13.7 19
Filter Effluent 0.41 8.2 0.07 4.0 12.7 25
Chlorinated Filter Effluent 0.26 5.4 0.03 4.5 10.2 40
Tour #3 (April 14-April 28)
Lagoon Influent 7.2 9.1 0.081 0.40 16.8 -
Lagoon Effluent 4.4 7. 1 0.083 0.43 12.0 29
Filter Effluent 0.38 8.1 0.125 3.51 12. 1 28
Chlorinated Filter Effluent 0.36 2.4 0.014 3.45 6.2 63
-------
-
\C
N 1-
)C
{..
cJ
!/-
~
III
U
~-
4
~
~ ,.
~
f! 9
.
+ TOJt N). I I l-iII-17 ro 1-..771
)C nut JICL. . I '-&1-17 YO ,,"171
. nut NL 11\-.\.11 TO t-8-1I'
+
+
+
+
9
~ ..-fTT-,.--..-.y..r-~~~""'-"-'T''''''''~r~''' ...- '.' ,.-.,
5 ~ ~ . 5 . . ~
TlI'£ IN IJM>
SAIIIIPLINO POINT NO.:5
"
,.
.-
;; -
f.' 118
Sti -
~ ..
~ ..
~ -
~-
~
4 I.
~
><
9
+ fU.I'~. I 11 lit-" m ~ CII"I
)( fO.IIi JrC). i 11-11-77 10.. .,171
)( . ~ fIC. .. I' I' " 1"0. ""'1
><
><
><
><
><
><
.
.
......... rf' f' r-.
~-r~~.....--.-----r~.....--.-----r~"'--~""'T~'Y-"'-r--r--..
. , II I' ill a - 5
TlI'£ IN IJM>
!>AMf'LINc. POINT NO 2
-
-- - ---------
I..
;;
t-
9
j-
~
~-
4
'"
~
4 ,.
~
~
~
"i
+ 10.lIl fIG. I I L-ile-77 to ."..77)
)( 1QJt fIG. if 7-U-17 m 8 08-771
.10.lIl NJ. ~ 1.-1"'- to ...-18)
..
..
..
.
~~ '}-.-. .........~, . ..... ~......... ~ , ......~. , ,.,...- ~--.-.-
~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ w
TlP£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO 4
.
Figure 2B.
The n'latioI1ship observed between tota I numher
days for the three tours at the three sampling
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
'"
of algae cells and time in
points used to monitor the
-------
TABLE 16. MT. SHASTA 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT
\0
I.N
Tour #1 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 1/31/77 2/6/77 2/12/77 2/18/77
Saenedesmu8 sp., ce11s/m1 1 5 , 680 392 MS 3,920
Diatyosphaerium sp., ce11s/m1 466,481 331,240 MS 403,760
Ankistrodesmus sp., ce11s/m1 3,920 5,880 MS 7,840
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 486,081 337,512 MS 415,520
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 7/16/77 7/20/77 7/25/77 7/30/77 8/4/77 8/9/77 8/14/77 8/19/77
Pediastrum sp., ce11s/m1 415,225 553,634 553,634 692,042 830,451 553,635 484,430 415,225
ClostePium sp., ce11s/m1 769 384 - - - - - -
Sahroederia sp., ce11s/m1 384 - 1 ,153 3,076 7,689 1,538 384 308
Saenedesmus sp., ce11s/m1 1,922 11,534 - - 769 7,689 19,223 26,913
Chlamydomonas sp., ce11s/m1 - 769 7,689 11 ,534 23,068 3,845 1,538 1 , 153
Diatom (Pennate),ce11s/m1 - - - - - - - -
Miaraatinium sp., ce11s/m1 - - - 3,845 11 , 5 34 3,845 15,379 23,068
Diatyosphaerium sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - - - - 7,689
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 418,301 566,321 562,477 710,497 873,511 570,551 520,954 474,356
Tour #3 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 4/14/78 4/20/78 4/26/78
DiatyosphaePium sp. , cell s/m1 53,312 56,448 178,752
Diatoms
Stephanodisaus sp., ce11s/m1 9,408 6,272 43,904
AstePionelZa sp., ce11s/m1 - - 25,088
Saenedesmus sp., ce11s/m1 50,176 14,112 28,224
Closterium sp., ce11s/m1 3,136 3, 1 36 12,544
Ankistrodesmus sp., ce11s/m1 3,136 1,568 6,272
Chlamydomonas sp., ce11s/m1 12,544 4,704 6,272
SahPoe de Pi a sp., ce11s/m1 9,408 1,568 3, 1 36
MiarQatinium sp., ce11s/m1 15,680 7,840 25,088
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 156,800 95,648 329,280
MS = missing sample.
-------
TABLE 16. HT. SHASTA 113 FILTER EFFLUENT
\D
~
Tour #1 Samp1 i ng Dates
Algal Genera 1/31/77 2/6/77 2/12/77 2/18/77
SaenedesmuB sp., cel1s/ml 15,680 7,840 3,920 11 ,760
Di,atyosphaerium sp., ce11s/m1 427,280 450,800 392,000 309,680
Ankistpodesmus sp., ce11s/m1 1,960 3,920 1,960 3,920
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 444,920 462,560 397,880 325,360
Tour N2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 7/16/77 7/20/77 7/25/77 7/30/77 8/4/77 8/4/77 8/14/77 8/14/77
PediastPUm sp. , cell s/m1 4,212 10,530 1,404 - - - - -
CZosterium sp., ce11s/m1 - 78 - - - - - -
Sahl'oederia sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - - - - 74
SaenedesmuB sp., ce11s/m1 702 - - - - - - -
Chlamydomonas sp., ce11s/m1 - 74 234 312 156 94 164 153
Diatom {Pennate}, ce11s/m1 - - 78 - - 156 - -
MiaPaatinium sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - - - 148 -
Di,atuosphaerium SD.. cells/m1 - - - - - - - 1,560
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 4,914 10,682 1,716 312 156 250 312 1,787
Tour #3 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 4/14/78 4/20/78 4/26/78
Di,atyosphaerium sp., ce11s/m1 10,819 11,290 19,757
Di a toms
StephanodisC!U8 sp. , cell s/m1 1,725 627 4,704
AsterioneZZa sp., ce11s/m1 - - -
SaenedesmuB sp., ce11s/m1 - - -
CZosterium sp., ce11s/m1 1,098 941 2,822
AnkistrodesmuB sp., ce11s/m1 627 627 941
ChLamydomonas sp., ce11s/m1 627 1,568 1,568
Sahl'oederia sp., ce11s/m1 157 941 2,509
Mi,aPaatinium sp., ce11s/m1 - - 3,763
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 15,053 1 5,994 36,064
-------
TABLE 16. MT. SHASTA 114 CHLORINATED FILTER EFFLUENT
\0
VI
Tour #1 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 1/31/77 2/6/77 2/12/77 2/18/77
Scenedesmu8 sp., ce11s/m1 342 7,840 1,960 392
Dictyosphaenwn sp., cell s/m1 384,160 446,880 380,240 388,080
Ankistrodesmu8 sp., ce11s/m1 7,840 7,840 3,920 392
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 392,392 452,550 386,120 388,864
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 7/16/77 7/20/77 7/25/77 7/30/77 8/4/77 8/4/77 8/14/77 8/14/77
Pediastrwn sp., ce11s/m1 2,808 11,232 - - - - - 321
Clostenwn sp., ce11s/m1 - 70 - - - - - -
Schroedena sp., ce11s/m1 78 55 62 - 86 62 78 -
Scenedesmus sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - - - - -
Chlamydomonas sp., ce11s/m1 - - 78 234 78 70 78 -
Diatom (Pennate), ce11s/m1 - - - - - - - -
Micractiniwn sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - - 101 156 -
Dictyosphaenwn sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - - - - 779
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 2,886 11 ,357 140 234 164 234 312 1 , 1 00
Tour #3 Sampling Da tes
Algal Genera 4/14/78 4/20/78 4/26/78
Dictyosphaenwn sp. , cell s/m1 1 ,725 314 14,112
Diatoms:
Stephanodiscus sp., ce11s/m1 3,763 941 3,763
Astenonella sp., ce11s/m1 - - 314
Scenedesmus sp., ce11s/m1 157 1,882 4,077
Cwsteriwn sp., cells/m1 1 , 254 627 3, 1 36
Ankistrodesmus sp., ce11s/m1 941 627 1 ,254
Chlamydomonas sp., ce11s/m1 784 1,254 3,450
SchPoedena sp., ce11s/m1 627 314 314
Micractinium sp., ce11s/m1 - - 5,018
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 9,251 5,958 35,437
-------
Table 17 presents a summary of the mean algal concentrations at the
three sampling points for the three tours. A significant seasonal change
in total algal concentrations in the lagoon system effluent can be observed
with the largest concentration in the Summer (tour #2).
The intermittent sand filters did not effectively remove algal cells
during tour #1. Although the removal was negligible during tour #1, Figure
28 indicates that there was a slight tendency to remove cells as time pro-
gressed. This failure to remove algal cells is again related to the frozen
filters and shows that the lagoon effluent was bypassing the filter.
Algal cell removal during the last two tours was excellent and during
tour #2 when the system was operated as specified, 99.6 percent of the algae
applied were removed.
Flow Rate--
Figure 29 shows the flow rates measured at the facility influent And
effluent sampling points (#1 and #4).
Influent flow rates for tours #1 and #2 did not fluctuate widely and the
tour flow rates were 2,165 and 2,142 m3/d, respectively. There was a
significant increase in flow rate during tour #3 because of the wet Winter and
Spring. During tour #3 the mean influent flow rate was 3444 m3/d. The
erratic discharge rates occurring during sampling periods #1 and #3 reflect
the variations in the operating procedure used with the filters. During tour
#2 the discharge flow rate was relatively consistent because of the operation
of the filters to control the volume discharged. The mean effluent flow rates
for tours #1, #2, and #3 were 2006, 1022, and 2650 m3/d, respectively.
Because of the variations in the methods of operating the Ht. Shasta
facility, it is not possible to calculate the loss of water as the waste-
water passed through the system. During tour #1 the operator adjusted
TABLE 17.
MEAN ALGAL CONCENTRATIONS, CELLS/ml
Sampling Location Tour #1 Tour #2 Tour #3
Lagoon Effluent 413,000 587,000 194,000
Filter Effluent 408,000 2,520 22,400
Chlorinated Filter 405,000 2,050 16,900
Effluent
Percent Removal 1.3 99.6 88.5
96
-------
\.58
1.< TO..-Nl. i!(7-1l-17109--a11-71}
. TtUt PC). a (it-l't-18 1t) 't-i!8-18 I
...5
~ \..
~ 8.15
~
18.58
8.<5
8..
\8
all <5
TIt£ IN rnys
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
'I<;
15
...
..
..
Figure 29.
The relationship observed between average daily flowrate and time in
the three tours at the two sampling points used to monitor the Mount
water pollution control facility (1 MGD = 3,785 m3/day).
days for
Shasta
-------
the discharge from the system to match the influent flow rate; therefore,
the water levels in the lagoon system were constantly fluctuating.
During tour #2 the filters were modified to operate one half of a
filter as a slow sand filter and the loading rates on both the slow and
intermittent sand filters were held constant. This resulted in a much
lower volume of water being discharged and water was stored in the lagoons
during this tour.
The mean discharge flow rate of 2,627 m3/d during tour #3 resulted
from a wide fluctuation in discharge flow rates ranging from 1185 to 4349 m3/d.
The fluctuations were a result of operational variations made by the oper-
ator for various experimental arrangements.
24-Hour Composite Sample pH and Dissolved Oxygen--
The 24-hour composite samples collected at all four sampling stations
were monitored for pH and dissolved oxygen. The results are shown in
Figures 30 and 31. The variations in pH values and dissolved concentrations
followed closely the in situ measurements but with less fluctuation.
Parallel Slow and Intermittent Sand Filtration--
General--As described in the observed 0 & M paragraphs, during tour
#2 at Mt. Shasta one half of a filter was converted to operate as a slow
sand filter to compare the performance with the intermittent sand filter
operation. The results of this experiment are summarized in Table 18.
The variation of the various parameters with time for both types of filters
are presented in Figures B-1 through B-20 located in Appendix B.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD~)--Figure B-1 and Table 18 show
the variations in the BODS concentrations with time for the slow sand
filter operated in parallel with the intermittent sand filters during tour
#2. The mean BODS concentrations in the slow sand filter effluent was 3
mg/l, and the individual data points ranged from 1 mg/l to 7 mg/l. BODS
removals in the two parallel systems were comparable. The intermittent sand
filter mean effluent BODS concentration was 4 mg/l, and the mean influent
BODS concentration to both types of filters was 19 mg/l.
The parallel slow sand filter produced a comparable mean soluble BODS
concentration to that produced by the intermittent sand filters as shown in
Table 18 and Figure B-2. The mean soluble BODS concentration for the
slow and intermittent filters was 3 mg/l with a range of 1 to 6 mg/l for the
slow and 2 to 7 mg/l for the intermittent sand filter.
Suspended solids--The suspended solids performance with the parallel
slow sand filter and comparable data for the intermittent sand filters
are shown in Figure B-3. The mean suspended solids concentration of 15 mg/l
was slightly higher than the mean of 13 mg/l observed for the intermittent
sand filter; however, the diffference is not statistically significant
(S percent level).
Volatile suspended solids--The results of the parallel slow sand filter
operation and comparative data for the intermittent sand filters are shown
98
-------
III .. all ... ill :Ii ... 'Hi
Tlt'E IN CAYS
SAMI'LING POINT NO.1
111.& a.&
+ 1UA tG. 1 ( l-i2.71 ro 2-211-77)
X TaIt N). 211-11-77 10 ."""'1
II.S .. nut N:L a ("-1"-78 10 't-a.18 I
\D
\D a.& 7.S
a.S
if if
~ a.& ~ 7.-
~ 7.S ~
7.& 6.S
"S
..& ..&
1& IS all '" ill :Ii ... 'Hi &
Tlt'E IN CAYS
SAMt>UNO POINT NO.3
8.&
-- ~
- - -----l
+ TO..A t«). 1 ( 14!ie-7T 10 2.211-71')
X 1tI..A NJ. 2 C 7-11-77 TO 8-211-77)
. 1t1.A NJ. 3' "-1"-78 TO It-a-78)
8.S
8.&
if
x
~ 7.6
~ 7.&
8.S
..&
UUt
+ 1t1It Pel. 1 ( ..-71 TO 2-211-77 I
X T1J..R tel. 2 (7-U-77 TO 8-211-771
'I' TtIJt N1. a ("-1"1'8 TO ..-a-78)
"S
..&
if
~ 8.6
~ 8.&
7.6
7.&
1&
all ...
Tlt'EINCAYS
SA~PLING POINT NO.2
'Hi
..
ill
:Ii
...
+ 1UIt N). 1 ( ..a-77 ro iN.-77)
)( 1U.A N:I. 2 [7-11-77 10 B-a-7T I
.. 1Q..R N:I. a ["-."-18 10 ,-iIfI-nu
III
all ...
Tlt'EINCAYS
SAMI'LING POINT NO.4
IS
ill
:Ii
...
'Hi
The relationship observed between composite pH and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Mount Shasta water pollution control
facility.
Figure 30.
-------
II
i!It
+ TO...R P«>. I ( J-;Jl-77 TO 2-iJl-77 I
X TO..RNJ. 217-11-771t)Q-CII-77)
, 1"('J.Il N:I. 3 t "-}"-79 ro "-26-781
<
Ie
-------
......
a
......
TABLE 18.
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF THE PARALLEL OPERATION OF INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
AND SLOW SAND FILTERS AT MT. SHASTA DURING TOUR #2
Influent to Filters Intermittent Sand Filter Slow Sand Filter
Parameter Range Mean S. Dev. Range Mean S. Dev. Range Mean S. Dev.
BODs(mg/R.) 9 - 31 19 6 2 - 7 4 1 1 - 7 3 1
Sol. BODs(mg/R.) 3 - 8 5 2 2 - 7 3 1 1 - 6 3 1
S.S. (mg/R.) 47 - 99 71 13 1 - 35 13 9 4 - 28 15 7
V.S.S. (mg/R.) 22 - 71 48 12 1 - 22 7 6 1 - 20 8 5
Fecal Col. <1 -145 24 0.6140L 1 - 17 2 0.4466L 2 - 3~ 4 0.5169L
(organisms/100 mR.)
In situ pH (pH) 9.0 - 9.7 - - 6.7 - 7.7 - - 7.2 - 8.2 - -
In situ Temp. (CO) 23 - 25.5 24 0.7 22 - 27 23.8 1.3 23 - 26 24.6 0.9
In situ D.O. (mg/R.) 9.0 - 13.5 11.6 1.2 5.1 - 6.9 6.1 0.4 1.9- 6.5 5.1 1.3
COD (mg/R.) 30 -175 120 52 111 -148 129 10 25 -132 94 37-
Sol. COD (mg/R.) 16 -172 112 57 101 -142 123 9 11 -132 88 40
Alkal. as CaC03 (mg/R.) 65 - 96 72 7 18 - 59 42 9 32 - 73 55 9
Total P (mg-P/R.) 4.52- 6.25 5.3 0.5 0.97- 5.44 3.8 1.0 1.65- 4.78 3.44 0.8
TKN mg-N/R. 9.2 - 12.9 11.4 1.2 6.4 - 11.1 8.6 1.5 6.9 - 10.6 9.2 1.0
NH3 mg-N/R. 0.5 - 7.41 3.37 1.89 0.01- 1. 32 0.41 0.35 0.01- 1.5 0.49 0.47
Org-N mg-N/R. 3.1 - 11.3 8.0 2.2 5.9 - 10.8 8.2 1.5 6.9 - 1.5 8.7 1.1
N02-N mg-N/R. 0.56- 2.06 1. 55 0.40 0.01- 0.19 0.07 0.05 0.01- 0.73 0.09 0.18
N03-N mg-N/R. 0.69- 2.32 1.43 0.53 2.6 - 10.6 4.0 1.06 1.4 - 4.9 2.8 1.2
L = LoglO
S. Dev. = Standard Deviation
-------
in Figure B-4. The mean volatile suspended solids concentration in the
slow sand filter effluent was 8 mg/l with a range of 1 to 20 mg/l, and the
intermittent sand filter mean concentration was 7 mg/l with a range of 1 to
22 mg/l. The performance of the two systems did not differ statistically at
the 5 percent level of significance.
Fecal coliform--The parallel slow sand filter effluent contained a
geometric mean fecal coliform concentration of 4 organisms/100 ml with a
range of 2 to 33 organisms/100 ml. The fecal coliform removal with the
intermittent sand filter was slightly better than the removal with the
slow sand filter, but not statistically (5 percent level) different. The
results obtained with both types of filter systems are shown in Figure B-5
and Table 18.
In situ pH, temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO)--Figures B-6 through
B-8 show the variations with time of the pH value, temperature and DO con-
centrations in the slow and intermittent sand filter effluents. Basically
there was little difference between the two types of effluents.
Other quality parameters--Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), alkalinity,
total phosphorus, TKN, ammonia-N, organic-N, nitrite-N, and nitrate-N con-
centrations were also measured in the effluents from both types of filters
and the results are presented in Table 18 and in Figures B-9 through B-18.
The pH values and DO concentrations in the two types of filter effluent
composite samples are shown in Figure B-19 and B-20. Insignificant dif-
ferences were observed when comparing the two types of effluents (5 percent
level).
Summary--Based upon earlier experiences (Harris et al., 1977) it is
unlikely that the quality of the effluents would have remained the same over
an extended period of operation. The slow sand filter would be expected
to produce less nitrification and contain less DO; however, in this brief
comparison (two separate comparisons of <2 weeks each) both effluents were
essentially of equal quality.
Moriarty, New Mexico
Sampling Points--
Sampling point #1 was located at the influent screw pump wet well.
This sample provided monitoring of the raw wastewater prior to entering the
treatment facility. The location of the sampling stations is shown in
Figure 3. The second sampling location was at the common collection outlet
to the two polishing ponds.
Location of the third sampling point was at the combination dosing
basin and chlorine contact chamber. The sample was obtained at the diagon-
ally opposite corner from the chlorinator discharge point. Sampling point
#3 provided chlorinated lagoon effluent prior to the application of the
effluent to the intermittent sand filters.
Sampling point #4 was located at the manhole at the end of the filter
underdrain system prior to discharge into the dry stream. Because the
102
-------
filters were dosed automatically
switch was installed to activate
underdrain and to inactivate the
by the dosing siphon, an electronic sensing
the sampler whenever water flowed in the
sampler when the filters were drained.
Summary of Results--
A summary of the results for the Moriarty wastewater treatment system is
presented in Table 19. Results are presented by tour and sampling point, and
the percentage removals obtained with each component of the system are also
presented. Each of the parameters measured is discussed by sampling point
locations in the following sections.
Total Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5)--
Mean total BOD5 concentrations for all sampling points
Moriarty are presented in Table 19. The daily fluctuations
are presented in Figure 32.
and tours at
of the total BOD5
Sampling point #l--During tours #1 and #2 mean concentrations were
essentially the same at 133 and 135 mg/l, and during tour #3 an increase in
mean BOD5 to 177 mg/l was experienced. The variation in BOD5 concentra-
tion with time is shown in Figure 32.
Sampling point #2--Performance of the lagoon system was consistent during
each tour with tours #1 and #3 having similar means of 35 and 32 mg/l. Some
fluctuations in BOD5 concentrations were experienced during tours #1 and #3.
Tour #1 fluctuations were caused by two Daphnia blooms in the lagoon system.
Tour #3 fluctuations were apparently related to seasonal changes in the lagoon
system. Tour #2 BOD5 values remained consistent and resulted in a mean
concentration of 22 mg/l.
Sampling point #3--Chlorinated lagoon effluent was collected at sam-
pling point #3, and the results show the same characteristics as were dis-
cussed for sampling point #2. A slight increase in BOD5 concentrations
occurred and is probably related to the location of the sample intake near
the bottom of the dosing basin. This arrangement may have resulted in
the collection of carbonaceous material from the basin bottom settlings
(Figure 32).
Sampling point #4--During tours #1 and #3 the filter effluent quality
fluctuated with the variations in lagoon effluent quality as mentioned for
sampling points #2 and #3. The mean BOD5 concentrations for tours #1 and #3
were 20 and 21 mg/l. The most consistent and lowest mean BOD5 concentration
(10 mg/l) of the three sampling periods was measured during tour #2. The
increase in performance can be related to a combination filter cleaning,
changes in operational mode and the consistent and relatively lower applied
BOD5 concentration.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) with nitrification inhibitors--
Figure 33 presents the BOD5 concentrations measured with and without
nitrification inhibitor for the three tours. BOD5 measurements with
inhibitor were performed only on two samples during the first'two tours and
only on one sample the third tour due to inadequate incubator space caused by
103
-------
TABLE 19. SUMMARY OF RESULTS OBTAINED AT THE MORIARTY, NEW MEXICO, WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
....
o
~
Lagoon Influent Lagoon Effluent Filter Effluent Chlorinated Overall
Tour Samp1 ing Point Sampling Point #2 Sampling Point #3 Fil ter Eff1 uent Removal
Pa rameter Number #l SamD1ina Point #4
Concentration Concentration Removal Concentration Removal Concentration Removal %
mg/1 mg/1 % mg/1 % mg/1 %
Total 1 133 35 74 37 - 20 46 85
BODs 2 135 22 84 24 - 10 58 93
3 177 32 82 38 - 21 45 88
Soluble 1 81 25 69 31 - 21 32 74
BODs 2 58 9 84 11 - 9 18 84
3 82 18 78 26 - 17 35 79
Suspended 1 174 83 52 68 18 23 74 87
Solids 2 128 89 30 91 - 15 84 88
3 155 71 54 72 - 8 89 95
Volatile 1 136 65 52 51 22 15 71 90
Suspended 2 94 70 26 71 - 7 90 93
Solids 3 124 58 53 56 3 5 91 96
Feca1Q 1 3.97 x 106 27 99.99 1.8 93.33 8 - 99.99
Coliform 2 6.70 x 106 782 99.99 51 93.48 91 - 99.99
3 2.03 x 106 62 99.99 1.3 97.90 2.3 - 99.99
PHb 1 7.9 8.9 - 8.8 - 8.0 - -
In Situ (7.7 - 8.2) (8.5 - 9.4) (8.3 - 9.3) (7.5 - 8.5)
2 8.0 8.9 8.8 8.1 - -
(7.9 - 8.2) (8.7 - 9.1) (8.5 - 9.1) (7.9 - 8.3)
3 8.2 8.9 - 8.9 - 7.9 - -
(7.9 - 8.5) (8.1 - 9.2) (8.7 - 9.2) (7.7 - 8.2)
continued
-------
TABLE 19. CONTINUED
Lagoon Influent Lagoon Effluent Filter Effluent Chlorinated Overa 11
Tour Sampl ing Point Sampling Point #2 Sampling Point #3 Filter Effluent Removal
Parameter Number #l Sampling Point #4
Concentration Concentration Removal Concentration Removal Concentration Removal %
mg/R. mg/R. % mg/R. % mg/R. %
Temper- 1 21. 5 20.4 - 20.4 - 20.3 - -
atureC 2 12.3 8.0 - 7.6 - 8.3 - -
In Situ 3 14.2 8.1 - 8.3 - 8.1 - -
Dissolved 1 0.7 7.5 - 6.0 - 6.3 - -
Oxygen 2 3.2 12.0 - 11. 7 - 9.4 - -
In Situ 3 1.4 13.3 - 12.8 - 9.1 - -
Total 1 369 144 61 143 1 93 35 75
COD 2 269 64 76 37 42 20 46 93
3 276 45 84 29 36 17 41 94
Soluble 1 167 109 35 110 - 78 29 53
COD 2 216 56 74 28 50 13 54 94
3 209 35 83 21 40 11 48 95
A 1 ka 1 in ity 1 428 257 40 265 - 246 7 43
2 429 277 35 279 - 236 15 45
3 451 344 24 348 - 297 15 34
Total 1 8.81 2.59 71 2.75 - 1. 94 29 78
Phosphorus 2 10.23 4.61 55 4.40 5 2.65 40 74
3 11. 97 4.88 59 4.91 - 3.82 22 68
Flowd 1 0.035 - - 0.038 - - - -
Rate 2 0.092 - - 0.050 - - - 46
3 0.100 - - 0.050 - - - 50
.....
o
V1
aExpressed in organisms/100 mR..
cExpressed in aC.
bExpressed as geometric mean in pH units (range of values).
dExpressed in million gallons/day.
-------
-
-
-
<-
Ii
0-
o
iii ,.
..
.
8
+ 1U.ItML. "S-18-771Q8.J,7.T1)
)( 1QIIII1CL 1'11-,"-77 11:8 12.11.771
. 1U.It NL i (l-l".lI1U ...111
15
TII£ IN am;
SAMt'LING POINT NO.1
.
.
.
..
..
-
0 ..
0\
j ~
o .
o
iii
.
8
8
+ _lei. ........ .8-17-'"
)( -lei. "11-"-". 11-"'"
., _lei. .....-.. III .1Ii.'"
.
.
iii
Tl'£ IN am;
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
.
,
..
Figure 32.
.iII
..
+ TtUII fC). 1 t 5-11-71 to &-1'-77 I
)( TtLIII N). i 111-1,-77 to 11-11-171
. 1UIt fC). Ill-I' -11 11) J-l&.1I'
.
- ~
~ .
o
d "
ai
.
iii
8
8
"
TII£IHDm>
SAMt'LING POINT NO.2
.
'"
.
II
IS
+ - lei. . "-II-" ."17-" I
X - lei. . '11-'.-" III .....",
., -.... ........ III ......,
.
jc
~.
o
iii
"
8
8
,
"
Tl'£ IN ems
SAMPLING POINTNO.4
II
.
.
.
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility.
-------
- --_. '--- -.---.- i!2S -- - ----- -----
./CIRCLES W/O ".1 + m..R N). 1 15-19-17 TO 6-11-771 W/CIRCLI:.!;, W/O~.I + ~ fQ. 1 C 6-19-77 ro rid"")
.'0 r.IACLES W/N.t )( ItLR '0. ~ ( 11-."-77 10 l.i!-la-77I '1110 l:IRCU.S WIN I X ItLR fG.. C! C 11-.,-17 ro lC!-ra-17I
IDENTICAL VALUES' .- . 1tUI fC). 3 (i!-.It-78 10 3-16-18) .. IDENTICAL vALUES - . ItLR to. 3 I C!-.'.78 to 41-15-781
""
,. 1>5
~.. ~ ~ISI
~ II?
+ . liS
d a
9 ~I.
dliS X
iii .
a >5
..
.. Et
III X "
+ 9 I i
~ is , , . , I ' ~-
. S .. IS i!8 is .. 8 S 18 IS i!8 is ..
TIlE IN aws TIt£: IN aws
SAMPLING POINT NO.1 SAMPLING POINT NO.2
15 . i!8 /.,.
W/CIRCLES. .,0 NJ. + -10. II S-W.77 111 8-17-77, W/CtRClE$:W/O N.I. + 'RIll fC). 1 (6-18-77 11) 8-17.771
.. W/O CIRCLES' W/N.L X -10. i 111-1.-77 111 1i-li-77' W/O CIRClES-W/N.I ZZ X _10. i 111-1.-77 111 li-li-77,
IDENTICAL vALUES: - 9 _10. i I i-I.-" 111 i-IS-", IDENTICAL vALuES. - 9 _10. a 1 i-I.-" 111 a-IS.'"
~ .
0
....... ---a
-. ilS
i.
+
III a
~. 0 +~
Et
0 ~ iii 18
iii. .
~ 9
. + x
Qt
. 9 ax
x ~
. .. "
8 S . C5 .. 8 S .. iii . is .
TIt£:INaws Tit£: IN aws
SAMPLING POINT NO.3 SAMPLING POINT NO.4
Figure 33.
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and biochemical oxygen demand with nitrification inhibitor
for those days during the three tours when simultaneous
analysis was performed to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility.
-------
the failure of one unit.
inhibition was observed,
cant (1 percent level).
In general at BODS concentrations above 30 mg/l,
but the differences were not statistically signifi-
Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)--
Mean soluble BODS concentrations for all four sampling points and three
tours are summarized in Table 19. Daily fluctuations in the soluble BODS
concentrations are presented in Figure 34.
Sampling point #l--Soluble BODS concentrations fluctuated greatly,
and the fluctuations were similar to those observed for the total BODS
variations (Figure 34). The mean values for tours #1 and #3 were 81 and 82
mg/l, and the mean value for tour #2 was the lowest at S8 mg/l-(Table 19).
Sampling points #2 and #3--Fluctuations in soluble BODS during tours #1
and #3 for both sampling points #2 and #3 reflect the same causes as mentioned
for total BODS. The best performance by the lagoon system for the three
tours was observed during tour #2 (Figure 34).
An increase in soluble BODS similar to that observed for the total
BODS was observed at sampling point #3. The reason for the increase
may be related to the location of the sampling inlet as mentioned above.
is also possible that the increase was caused by the chlorination of the
algae laden lagoon effluent resulting in lysing of cells (Johnson et al.,
1978 and Echelberger et al., 1971).
It
Sampling point #4--The filter effluent mean soluble BODS concentrations
were 21 (tour #1), 9 (tour #2), and 17 (tour #3) mg/l. Soluble BODS removals
by the intermittent sand filters were temperature related, and the lowest re-
duction of 18 percent occurred during the Winter (tour #2). However, the ef-
fluent quality was the highest at this time with a mean soluble BODS concen-
tration of 9 mg/l (Table 19).
Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)
with Nitrification Inhibitors--
The nitrification inhibitor allyl-thiourea did not significantly (1
percent level) affect the soluble BODS values during the three tours (Figure
3S). The concentrations were generally below 40 mg/l, but the concentrations
greater than 100 mg/l were not affected. This lack of effect on the soluble
BODS may be attributable to the more rapid oxidation of soluble BOD.
Suspended Solids--
Mean suspended solids concentrations for all
at Moriarty are presented in Table 19. The daily
Figure 36.
sampling points and tours
variations are shown in
Sampling point #l--Suspended solids concentrations in the raw waste-
water were fairly consistent, but some outstanding fluctuations were observed
(Figure 36). These fluctuations were probably related to periodic discharges
of one of the six lift stations in the Moriarty collection system resulting
in a "slug" of solids being discharged when the pump was repaired. The lowest
108
-------
181
~
0
\0 .
~ .
d
d
ai ..
~
.
.
-
---- ---
-- -- --
+ 1tlIt N:i. 1 16-19-17 TO 6 17-171
)C 1t'Ut to. 2 ( 11-1"-17 TO 12-~3.771
. 1tlIt fC). 3 (2-."-78 ro a.Ui.181
I.
~
dl8l
o
ai
~ .
.
\5
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
..
2Ii
"
31
+ nut NL 1 (I.." 10 8"17-77)
)( nJII NI. llll.I'." 10 "'1i-'"
. nJII NI. <11<1.1'." It) <1.15.'"
\5
TlI£ IN CAYS
~AtM-liNG POINT NO.3
II
.
...
.
Figure 34.
III
+ 1tI..ANJ. 1 16-1B.77 TOS.IT-nl
)( TC1.A "11. ~ III-llt-17 TO 12-103-171
" TtJ..A tfJ. it ~'1"-7B TO 3-1&-18)
III
~...
sr
ciao
ci
ai
sr'
II
\5
TI"£INIJ'IYS
",AMPLING POINT NO.2
I.
..
...
..
.
..
+ nut PI). , -1..1.8..17 10 1-17-71)
)( nut PC). 2111-1'-77 TO 12-li-")
. nJIIlCI.
-------
~-
a
o
.8
~ .
'8
.,.,/CIRei (5 NIl,,",
"II/v CUICU: "i wIN I
IDl~TIr.&L "'.lUt.'J -
,.
'"
+ ftIIt NL . 15-'." 10 8-17-77'
K 1DJt to. '.11-'''-77 10 1l-ta.",
. 1QIt.... a "-'''-18 10 a'IS-1I1
,
~..
.
.
.
,
d
08
.
.J.
o
."
"
.
II
I
.
i-
d.
o
.
~.
."
.
./CIRCLES' -IO'U.
WIO CI"CLES..'",.
IDENTICAL VALurS ......
..
.
IS
TlI£ IN IJWS
I .
.
.
.:.
SAMPLING POINT NO. I
.-
....
o
+ 1QJIt.... IIC-""'''''..I7-"'
II 1aII!Go a In.'''''' 111 .a.,..""
" 1aII!Go It ...-.. 111 8-......
+ ftUIt tG. . fS-'.-17 1U .'17-'"
II 1aII!Go a.,...,.", 111 .a-la'''''
" _!Go a. a-,,-.. 111 a-tS.'"
,
+
.
--
i
.
"
a
d
..
.J
o
."
..
I
)(
..
.
.
.
.
Figure 35.
I .
,.
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPliNG POINT NO.3
I
.
,
.
,
..
8
---. ------.---
... I'tl.It Jr(). . 15-11.17 m 6 ,'-77,
)( n:ut N). 2111-''''77 ro li.tj.171
. TO..RfG. ill-I' 18 TO a.IEi''I1
'II1'u.,rl[SW/uNI
1110' I~( I t",'W/NI
IlItlllrl('AI VAl vES -
.
..
-.
..
..
.
.
r- . --. . .
.
I ,-Y-"-~-""""""
.. ,.
TlI£INCAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
8
W/l-INCI £$ 'II/v t.l1
""v CIRCLk. S WIN l
IOl NTiCAl vAL ut. 5 -
.
.
.
II
~
..
.~-"--""--r-
..
.
I . .
.
,
.
"
)(
.
.
I
.
,
,.
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
,
..
.
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and soluble biochemical oxygen demand with nitrifica-
tion inhibitor for those days during the three tours when
simultaneous analysis was performed to monitor the Moriarty
wastewater treatment facility.
I
.
,
..
-------
-
-
-
...
...
--
~-
-.
iii
1Ii-
.111
..
III
.
.
...
-
.....
..... -
.....
-
1'5
i-
. ..
CII
iii..
..
III
15
.
+ 1U.R Nl. L (~-I.77 10 ti- aT -77'
)( 1U.R 11). 2 ( 11-'''-77 10 12-13-77.
. 1U.R NJ. 3 (2-1"-1'811) 3-16-78)
5
..
iii
Tll£lNrAYS
III
15
III
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
+ 11IJIt teL ,11-""1'01-17-77.
Ie -oa. 1111-"-71' ftllI-"7I"
. -oa. 111-.t->8 ftI ~1Ii->8)
-.
~..
...
ui '5
5
iii
Ti/£ IN IJ!YS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
..
III
iii
.
Figure 36.
..
CSII
..
-< u.
~
ui
u) ..
..
.
+ ttLA to. 1 11-19.77 TO 6-17-771
)( Tt1.R fC). II It -11t-77 10 tl-U-77I
. 1U.R fCL. a Il-."18 11) 3-16-181
..
.5
Tll£lNrAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
III
as
8 ftI 1-1S->8'
1'5
-
.
15
.
..
.5
TlI£ IN rAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
III
iIi
-------
mean concentration of 128 mg/l was observed during tour #2t but
wide fluctuationst there was little difference in the suspended
trations measured during the three tours.
excluding the
solids concen-
Sampling points #2 and #3--The lagoon effluent suspended solids con-
centrations were fairly consistent except for the periods during tour #1
when the Daphnia blooms occurred as mentioned above (Figure 36). The
suspended solids concentrations in the chlorinated lagoon effluent were
similar to those in the lagoon effluentt but with a slight decrease in
concentration. The decline was related to the location of the sampler intake
which would be below the highest algae concentrations most of the time.
Sampling point #4--An increase in suspended solids removal with time can
be seen in the progressive decrease in the mean concentrations of effluent
solids from 23 mg/l (tour #1) to 15 mg/l (tour #2) to 8 mg/l (tour #3). There
was little difference in the concentrations of solids added to the filters;
thereforet the difference is probably attributable to better removal of the
type solids produced in the lagoon during the cold months.
Volatile Suspended Solids (VSS)--
The mean volatile suspended solids concentrations for all sampling
points and tours at Moriarty are shown in Table 19. Daily variations in
the volatile suspended solids concentrations are shown in Figure 37.
Sampling point #l--The infrequent discharges by the pumping stations
accounted for the surges in VSS concentrations in the raw wastewater.
Sampling points #2 and #3--The high value of 227 mg/l observed during
tour #1 at day 12 reflects the high Daphnia population. The suspended solids
on day 12 were 96 per~ent volatile matter. Although sampling point #3 portrays
more fluctuation than observed at sampling point #2t the overall mean is
essentially the same (Table 19).
Sampling point #4--The volatile suspended solids during the three tours
were consistent with only slight variations attributable to the Daphnia blooms.
Fecal Coliform--
Geometric mean fecal coliform
tours at Moriarty are presented in
shown in Figure 38.
concentrations for all sampling points and
Table 19. The daily concentrations are
Sampling point #l--The influent fecal coliform populations for the
three tours indicate seasonal variations (Figure 38). The greatest fluctua-
tions were experienced during tour #1 and the reasons for the fluctuations
were the operational problems caused by the recent completion of the facility
and the fact that many of the lift stations only pumped out every four or five
days. Also tour #1 occurred at the beginning of Summer and the increased
temperatures caused an increase in bacterial activity. The mean for tour #1
was 3t972tOOO organisms/lOO mI.
Fecal coliform concentrations'during tours #2 and #3 varied little
throughout the entire sampling periods with respective means of 6t717tOOO and
2t032tOOO organisms/100 mI.
112
-------
-
-
..
~-
.,;
.,;-
,;
..
.
.
+ IUIt KI. ,( S-U!!-" 10 6-17-17,
)( 1tLR IG. 2 (11-1"-17 10 12-13-771
. 11J..R tG. 3 (2-."-18 TO 3-15-781
II
'5
TII£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
ill
;s
..
...
t-'
t-' ..
I..U
...
~ ..
.,;
.,; &I
,;
;5
.
.
+ 1Q.R lID. 1 (1-18-77 11) 1-17-71'
)( -!Go '111"'.1'7111"'1.1'7'
. nuo!Go 111-10'" 111 .\5'''1
5
\5
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
II
..
.
..
...
---- --
+ ~~. ~ 19-17 -'"0 tH7~ -l
)( 1'0..- N). It I 11-1\-17 ro t2'1~-77 I
. ~ N). 3' ~-1"'78 m 3-1&-18)
..
- ,..
~
!r
.1.
(/)
.,;
,;
&I
'5
TIl£lNffiYS
!'AMh.ING POINT NO.2
II
..
.
..
..
\8
>5
~
.,; &I
.,;
,;
.
.
.
+ TCJ.R PC). 1 C S-18-77 TO $-17-77.
)( 1tUt fCL i! I 11-,,,-77 11) ~-IJ.771
. 1tUt IC). i I Z-,"-79 TO a-15-78"
5
15
TII£ IN CAYS
SAMPliNG POINT NO.4
11
ill
;s
..
The relationship observed between volatile suspended solids
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility.
Figure 37.
-------
......
......
.c-
_ill
i
'ill
t:)
~"
~
j
! .1
+ TOJItfC). 115-11-771t1i-.7-771
)( 'ftUI~ 21 11-11It-77 TO 12-li-171
. TOJIt frO. 111-1'-11 10 a-I"")
~
~ 5
~ .
II
"
Tlt'E IN CAYS
~AMt'LiNO POINT NO.1
ill
.
.
,.
i
~-
~
~
-.
8
~
+ ftUt N).. 1 (5..1-77 10 8-17-771
X nut IlL. i I U.'''-77 YO 12-.."1
. IQllIO. 31 Z.,.... I\) 3."...,
-
.
/
II
iii
Tlt'E IN CAYi
!>AMPLING POINT NO.3
.
ill
.
Figure 38.
-
--- ---- ---- - - ----
~----- -----
i-
~
~ ,.
+ nJ..P N). I ('-11-17 TO 6-17.771
)( ~N). if 11-1'-1711) 12-li-77 ,
. T1J..R N). 1 li-I'-1II TO J-.'.",
~,-
~
8
~ .-
...
"
'5
Tlt'E IN CAYS
:.AMt'LINO POINT NO.2
ill
is
III
,-
-
+ TO..R PO. I 15-18-77 TO &:-17-17 I
)( 1O.It fC). i C 11-.".77 'R) 12'-11-771
. 1UII1O. 3IZ'I""1II 3,15,,,,
i-
~-
~-
--
~-
~-
~:
.
.
II
15
Tlt'E IN CAYS
SAMt'LiNO POINT NO.4
..
.
..
The relationship observed between fecal coliform bacteria and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
facility.
-------
Sampling point #2--During the first and third sampling period, low
fecal coliform concentrations were observed in the lagoon system effluent
and the means were 27 and 62 organisms/lOa ml, respectively (Figure 38).
The fecal coliform populations in the lagoon effluent during these two
tours varied little and 99.999 percent removal of the fecal coliform bacteria
was observed.
During tour #2 in the late Fall, a relatively large fecal
population in the lagoon effluent (200-2,000 organisms/lOa ml)
without any evident cause. The lagoon system still provided a
reduction in the fecal coliform bacteria.
coliform
fluctuated
99.99 percent
Sampling point #3--The chlorination system effectively removed the
fecal coliform becteria when in operation (Figure 38). During tours #1 and
#3 continuous chlorination of the lagoon effluent was practiced, and the
geometric mean concentration was <2 organisms/lOa ml for the two periods and
the range of individual values was <1 to 64 organisms/lOa mI. For 16 days of
the 30-day sampling period of tour #1, the fecal coliform concentration was
<1 organism/lOa ml, and during tour #3 there were 24 days with a count of <1
organism/lOa mI.
Periodic fluctuations during tour #2 were caused by the experimentation
to determine the effects of chlorination of the wastewater prior to applica-
tion to the sand filters. Other than the increased concentration of fecal
coliform in the water applied to the filters when chlorination was stopped,
little difference was observed in filter performance or in filter service
life.
Sampling point #4--The intermittent sand filter effluent fecal coli-
form concentrations were higher than the concentration in the applied water
over 50 percent of the 90 sampling days during the three tours (Figure 38).
The cause for this apparent regrowth of fecal coliform in the underdrain
system is unknown; however, regrowth is not uncommon in most natural systems.
The large concentrations at the end of tour #1 coincide with an occurrence of
a Daphnia bloom, but it is unlikely that this affected the regrowth of
fecal coliform bacteria.
In Situ pH, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen--
Mean in situ pH values, temperatures, and dissolved oxygen concentra-
tions for all sampling locations and tours at Moriarty are presented in Table
19. The daily values for the pH values, temperatures, and dissolved oxygen
concentrations are plotted versus time in Figures 39, 40, and 41.
Sampling point #l--The pH value of the raw wastewater remained consis-
tent with a range of 7.7 to 8.5 for the individual values (Figure 39).
Temperature followed a seasonal variation dependent
year (Figure 40). During the first tour in late Spring,
was 2l.50C. The second two tours were during the colder
temperatures were l2.30C for tour #2 and l4.2oC for tour
on the time of
the mean temperature
seasons and mean
#3.
As discussed earlier, many of the lift stations in the collection
system only pumped periodically and the wastewater was generally devoid of
115
-------
II.'
---
--- -;-YO.II~'~'~71 rol-.,-" I
.I( fO.ItfrC). 2111-.11.77 TO Il-IJ-n, I
. TtLR N). ) 12....11 11:1 J-,S''''
"I
...
if
~ 1.1
!
...
'.1
'0'
.
I
II
TI/£ IN IJWS
SI\"'PLINO POINT NO.1
II
..
CIi
..
IL.
....
....
0\
...
if
i2 ...
!
...
...
.
+ 1IUIoa. 111'1,.771Q ,..,.".
)C 1IUIoa. . III'''''' 1Q IZ-li'" I
. _oa. I 11....>1 1Q 1....>1.
..
TI/£ IN IJWS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
II
.
.
..
.
Figure 39.
,...
+ JtlII JrrC. I 18-11-77 ro S..'.771
)( TtLR JoC). 21 11-1"-77 ro li!'I~.771
... Tt1It N). J C l-l't-18 10 J-IS-"I
"-'1
~'\
if
~ ...
!
'.1
...
..-,-. . ~
as
..
II
TlP'E IN IRfS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
I'
..
L'
+ 1QIt N). I 11-'1'77 10 8.,7-77.
)C 1IUIoa. 1111'''''' 10 lZ'II.77,
. nUllO. ."''''>1 10 .''''>1'
L' +
+ , )C \0v
if AA )C
i2 L' +
! \ .......
1.1;
'.'
II
'I
TI/£ IN IJWS
SAMPLINCI POINT NO.4
.
.
..
The relationship observed between in situ pH and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
-------
.
.....
..... i5
"
~'"
u
i"
~
i18
5
.
...
OIl
+ ~ NJ. 1 (&-19-77 10 &'-17-77)
)( 1tUt NJ. 2111.1"'-17 T1J 12-13-77)
., ~ NJ. a 12-1"-78 Tn 3-15-78)
os
U
-i!II
~ '5
2
~18
.
.5
TII'EINIFtYS
SA"'PLING POINT NO.1
;s
OIl
..
i!II
+ 1QJI teL. 1 11-11-77 10 8-17-77)
)( ftUI t& I C U'l~'77 1tIli-li--77)
. 1\UO ICI. i' I-It-" 1Q i-\5-'"
.5
TlI'E IN IJ'IYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
..
i!II
.,.
\.
Figure 40.
'"
3iI
+ T1J..fI toO. 1 (6-t9-77 TO 6,-11-711
X ~ NJ. 21 U-l...-77 TO 12-1i-771
.. ~ "IJ. a (2-1\-19 Tt) i-16-181
i!6
u
-...
~~
;vV
~ 15
2
~ ,.
.5
TlI'EINIFtYS
"AMPLING POINT NO.2
all
I
a;
..
.8
'"
+ Ta..R PC). 1 15-&11-77 10 &-.'-77)
)( 1'OJt NJ. a I 11-'11--17 10 li-li-17)
. 1tJJI' N3. a (a-l'-" 10 a-Is-")
os
+
./
+
+
-'"
u
+
+
~ \5
2
- ..
~
/
~~
J\7
)(
)(
.......
.5
TlI'E IN 1Ft~
S""'PLINO POINT NO.4
I
.,.
..
\.
all
The relationship observed between in situ temperature and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four s~mpling
points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
fad Ii ty.
-------
+ TtIIt lID. 1 I '-~77 11) 1-17-771
)( 1'tI.I' fiG. l' 11.1..r.- 10 1&1'-1:1.77)
. 1'tI.I'1ID. :I 12-"-18 10 i--15.'"
.
~
O'
c:i
~
iii
=,
1
1
IS
TlI£ IN IJIYS
S'AMPLING POINT NO.1
..
.
.
.
.
....
....
CO
.
i
d8
d
i
!.
S
1
+ 1QII1G. "1-18-77 1111-"'-77'
Ie 1QII1G. .. \1-"" 111 ..18-771
. _IG. ., ....1tI1II..-ItI,
.
TM: IN IJIYS
SAMPLINO POINT NO.3
.
.
.
S
.
is
_._- --
- --- --
+ TtJJt frC1. I 1'.18.77 11) 1-17-77)
)( TtJJt frC1. llll-IIIt-77 11) 1i!-I:I-71'1
. TtJJt IC). a Il."-18 TO )-15.'"
.
-<
!i1S
o
ci
~1I
~
5
IS
TlI£ 1"1 IJIYS
"AM':-lINU POINT NO.2
&
.
11
.
.
+ nut fA &. s...." YO 8-17.77'
Ie 1QII1G. . I \1....77 IQ \Z.II.77,
. 1QII1G. 1I.-,.-ItIIQ .-,S-ItI,
j. ~
d ~ + +
c:i
~
- .
:I
Ie
r-
,~
+
+
\
+
+
1
1
II
.
Tll£ IN IJIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
.
.
.
The relationship observed between in situ dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility.
Figure 41.
-------
dissolved
Figure 41
#1.
oxygen. This characteristic of the influent is illustrated in
by the dissolved oxygen fluctuations observed at sampling point
Sampling points #2 and #3--Chlorination did not affect the pH value,
temperature or dissolved oxygen concentration. in the in situ samples.
Therefore, the graphs of the parameters at the two sampling points are very
similar and can be discussed as three sets of data (Figures 39, 40 and 41).
The temperatures for the last three sampling points were consistent
within each sampling period. The highest mean temperature of 20.4 C was
measured during tour #1 in late Spring. Mean temperatures during tours #2
and #3 were the same at 8oC. Tours #2 and #3 represent the coldest periods
of the year.
The dissolved oxygen concentrations in the lagoon effluent were rela-
tively consistent for tours #2 and #3 with respective means of 12.0 and 13.3
mg/l. During tour #1 more drastic variations in dissolved oxygen concentra-
tions were observed, and these variations were induced by the Daphnia blooms
consuming the algal populations. Chlorination produced a slight decrease in
the dissolved oxygen in the lagoon effluent.
Sampling point #4--The in situ monitoring of this sampling point
was dependent upon being around when the filters were dosed. Sometimes this
was late evening or early morning; thus, the reason for the missing data
on Figures 39. 40 and 41. The pH value and dissolved oxygen concentrations
in the lagoon effluent were reduced slightly after passing through the
intermittent sand filters.
Chemical Oxygen
Chemical Oxygen
Mean total
sampling points
Demand (COD) and Soluble
Demand (SCOD)--
and soluble chemical oxygen demand concentrations
and tours at Moriarty are presented in Table 19.
for all
Both COD and SCaD follow essentially the same general trends. Both
parameters will be discussed in one section by sampling points. The varia-
tions in total and soluble COD with time during the three tours are shown
in Figures 42 and 43, respectively.
Sampling point #l--The first sampling period exhibits the most fluctua-
tion and the tour mean was 369 mg/l (Figure 42). The second and third tour
mean values were much more consistent with similar respective means of 269 and
276 mg/l.
The soluble component of total COD was significantly different (5
percent level) between the first and the last two tours (Figures 42 and 43).
During tour #3, 45 percent of the total COD was in the form of soluble COD;
whereas, tours #2 and #3 were 80 percent and 76 percent, respectively.
Sampling points #2 and #3--The higher influent concentrations for tour
#1 are reflected in the lagoon system effluent COD and soluble COD (Figures
, '42 and 43). During tour 11 the lagoon system removed 61 percent of the total
119
-------
-
.1
1
-
..
~-
..
c
d
u.
-
-
,.
-
.....
N -
0
...
..
i"
d"
d
u ..
.
. .
.
. .
.
II
TlP£ IN ~
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
.
.
.
II
+ null JG. , 11-'." 'to e.".".
Ie _III. ,.......77111 ......",
. _l1li. . ......,. 111 "".,.,
II
TlI£IN~
SAMPlINQ POINT NO.a
.
..
.
II
....
-
(Q.A fr(). tt ,..n fU 8-1' n
" ft1J' frC). ~ II tilt Tf fa 11'UI'"
9' ~ NJ. ~ I i lit ,. 10 ~'I'.78'
,'"
/\~ /" I
~'V . v'~l
~-~~:~
~ ,.
~
! ,'"
ci
d ,.
u
'"
.
II
"
TlP£ IN ~
-;I\M,,( INO POINT NO.2
..
'"
.
II
..
--- ----
-----
+ nut 1«8. , 15-'1.77 10 8.,7.77'
)( nut It). 1111-"-7710 .1-Ia'171
. - JC). . ......,. 111 ..11.'"
..
i
v
d
ci
u .
.
II
TlI£ IN ~
SAMfJLlNG POINT NO.4
II
..
..
.
The relationship observt>d bl'tw~l'n chemical oxyv,en demand and
time in days fur the thn't> tours At each of thl' four samplin~
puints used to moni tor till' ~1or1 flrty wastewnU'r t n'atment
facUity.
F i gu rt" 4 2 .
-------
-
-
i-
d-
d
..:
.,.
iii
18
.
.
----- -------
.
.
.
5
.5
TillE IN (RIS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
..
-
- '"
N
- ..
i..
d18
d
oJ ..
~ .
.
.
.
+ _OIl. . '5'1'-77111"".77'
~ ==::: :: ~~~: ~ .~..~:'':'
"
TillE IN IJMi
';AMF'lING POINT NO.3
.
.
.
5
..
171> I
----
.--
T rtJ.Ji1Cl. ~ f6 18-77 fOG-I' 77.
)( TfJ..Rrr(). f?11I-l't71f1),i-aa71'
. ~ fC}. i 12-l't-19 ro a-16.7&1
'511
~ li!Ii
~
~/
cl I-
a
u
'11;
sj
&II
i!Ii
.
"
TillE IN Dm>
5AMPLING POINT NO.2
.
II
..
..
i"
d" -y
d
U
'&11
iii
.
.
+ nut JC).. L 11-18a77 10 1-17-77)
X tQJI N). Ie 11-1,.77 TO 12'11-77)
. _ICI. I Ii-.t." 1111....,..
t5
TillE IN Dm>
SAMPLING 'POINT NO.4
II
.
.
.
The relationship observed betwt:'en soluble chemic;}l oxygen
demand and time in days for the thrt:'e tours at each of the
four sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater
treatment facility.
Figure 43.
-------
COD with a mean concentration of 144 mg/l, and 35 percent of the soluble
component was removed and the mean SCOD concentration was 109 mg/l. Chlor-
ination of the lagoon effluent did not change the COD or SCOD concentrations
during tour 11. The removal efficiency of the lagoon syst~ was signifi-
cantly better for the last two tours. During tour #2 the removal of both
total and soluble COD was 75 percent and during tour #3, 83 percent of both
was removed.
COD and SCOD were reduced considerably in the chlorinated samples
during tours #2 and 13. Since chlorination was not practiced constantly
during tour #2 and the apparent reduction was consistent throughout the
sampling period, it is unlikely that the reduction was caused by the chlo-
rine. The location of the sampler intake near the bottom of the contact basin
may be the cause of the variation in the concentrations of SCOD at the two
sampling stations, but it is unlikely that the reduction in SCOD without
chlorination was caused by the location of the sampler inlet.
samplint point #4--High concentrations of COD and SCOD observed
during tour 1 were not reduced to the low levels observed in the filter
effluent during the other two tours. Operational problems with the filters
occurred during tour 11 and this may have contributed to the poorer filter
performance. Thirty five percent of the COD was removed during tour #1
and the mean filter effluent concentration was 93 mg/l. The SCOD comprised
84 percent of the total COD.
Mean COD and SCOD concentrations in the applied water for tours #2 and
13 were less than tour 11, and the total COD removal was 69 percent and 62
percent, respectively. with mean effluent concentrations of 20 mg/l and 17
mg/l. The SCOD in the effluent was 65 percent of the total COD. The overall
increase in removal was attributed to the application of a lower hydraulic
loading rate for the second two tours, and the high applied concentrations
and troublesome operations during tour #1.
Alkalinity--
Mean alkalinity concentrations for all sampling points and tours at
Moriarty are summarized in Table 19. The daily variations in alkalinity con-
centrations are shown in Figure 44.
Sampling point #l--The raw wastewater alkalinity did not vary signifi-
cantly throughout the three tours.
Sampling points #2 and #3--The graphs for these two sampling points are
essentially the same since chlorination did not significantly affect the
alkalinity (Figure 44). The alkalinity concentrations in the lagoon effluent
were highest during tours #2 and #3. This increase was probably related to
the decrease in algal activity during the colder seasons represented by the
last two tours and the high algal activity during the first tour.
Sampling point #4--The small reduction in alkalinity can be attributed to
algal activity while the water was on the filter surface raising the pH value
to a level adequate to precipitate a portion of the salts in solution.
122
-------
- 5l1li
+ 11J.R to. 1 (S.m." IQ 'H7-17)
X nJ..R Pf3. C! ( 11-.,,-77 TO 12-13-771
. tIUIl«). 3 1 ~'1"1II 10 3.15.111> -
SEll
~- ~..
II! II!:BI
~- ~-
-
~ ~i!911
;: ;a8
191
... ,.
6 I. 16 .. a; 311
TlI'EINCfffS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
- -
..... + ~ PC). 1(5-"1710 8-17-77'
N )( 1UII1«). Z 111'1..17 10 lZ'Ii-171
\.N . 1UII1Q, 3 IZ,"',. 10 i-IS'>II' ..
..
m. . ~.
.
II! Ie.
~- ~
--
~ ~
~- ;:
~-
,. 1.
. 6 ,. 16 .. . iI8
TlI'EINCfffS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
+ 1'O.R N). 1 15-19-77 TO 6-17-77)
)( TO..RN3. 2111-1"-7710 12-13-771
.. 1'C1R N). 3 ( 2-."-78 TO 3-1S.")
15
TlI'E IN CfffS
SAMPLtNC POINT NO.2
ill
311
a;
,.
+ 1'O.R IC). 115-18-77 TO 6-17-77J
)( nut N3. 2 (11-1.-7111) la-li-77)
. tIUIlQ, 3 I z.".,. 10 3,16,111,
1.
15
TlI'E IN CfffS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
..
a;
311
Figure 44.
The relationship observed between alkalinity and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used'
to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
-------
Total Phosphorus--
Mean total phosphorus concentrations for all sampling stations and tours
at Moriarty are summarized in Table 19. Daily variations in total phosphorus
concentrations are presented in Figure 45.
Sampling point #l--The wastewater total phosphorus concentrations in-
creased slightly with each tour (Figure 45). Except for tour #1 the values
remained relatively constant throughout each tour. The mean wastewater flow
rate was lowest during tour #1 when total phosphorus concentrations were
lowest; therefore, the difference cannot be attributed to dilution. Tourist
and trucker services are the principal activity in Moriarty. Tour #1 was
conducted during the early part of the tourist season and tours #2 and #3 were
carried out during slack seasons, and consequently little explanation can be
offered for the differences in concentration.
Sampling points #2 and #3--The chlorination of the lagoon effluent did
not significantly affect the total phosphorus level; thus, sampling points #2
and #3 were similar and can be discussed as one (Figure 45). The best removal
was observed during tour #1, and tours #2 and #3 exhibited the most consistent
effluent phosphorus concentrations. The greatest removals during tour #1 can
be attributed to the more active algal growth during tour #1 resulting in high
pH values in the lagoon effluent aiding in the precipitation of phosphorus
compounds and the degradation of phosphorus containing compounds.
Sampling point #4--The removal of total phosphorus by the filters is
relative to the condition of the filter media and the concentrations being
applied. Total phosphorus concentrations during tour #1 fluctuated as dif-
ferent filter sections were placed in service. Total phosphorus removal
during tour #2 was the best with 40 percent removal. This occurred after the
major cleaning of the filters. The highest loading of total phosphorus to the
filters was observed during tour #3 and the percent removal was low. However,
the total reduction in phosphorus was approximately equal to the reduction
observed during tours #1 and #2.
Nitrogen Forms--
General--Five nitrogen forms were monitored and the mean concentration
over the three tours for the Moriarty system are shown in Table 20. The
variations with time for the five parameters plus a plot of inorganic nitro-
gen (N02-N + N03-N) for the three tours are shown in Figures 46 through
49 and Figures 51 and 52. A discussion of the major variations is presented
by nitrogen form in the following paragraphs.
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen--The total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) concentra-
tions in the raw wastewater were essentially equal during tours #1 and
#2. During tour #3 the TKN concentrations were double those measured earlier.
The concentrations of TKN were very high and are probably related to the
life style of the local population and the discharge of relatively large
volumes of restaurant wastes. Raw wastewater mean TKN concentrations for the
three tours were 44, 46 and 89 mg Nil. The best percent removal of TKN and
the best quality effluent in terms of TKN occurred during tour #2 during cold
weather in mid November to mid December.
124
-------
""
+ TU.A NJ. 1 (5-19-77 1t) 6-17-771
X 1tI..R NJ. 2111-1"-77 10 12-13-771
. Ttl.A HJ. :3 I 2-1"'78 TO 3-15-78}
16
~ 12
~
..: 8
$
a
~
8
8
.
..
TIf'£ IN CAYS
SAMfllI KG POINT NO.1
18
""
2S
31!1
8
......
N
\J1
8 "
"
~8
IL
~.
..:
~3
b
~2
+ TtUa ~ 1« 6-19-77 11) 6:.17.771
)( TtUI N1. 2 ( 11-1".77 TO L2-1i-77)
. TtUa N:L a 1 2-1"-79 1tI 3-15-78)
.
..
TlI'£ IN CAYS
SAIWIPLING POINT NO.3
31!1
I.
a
2S
Figure 45.
7.5
+ 1tl.A to. 115-19-77 ro 6-.7-77)
)( Tt1It NJ. 2 I 11-1",-77 ro '2-13-771
. 1tl.A N:L :3 (2-1"'78 rn i-15-781
6..
~ '.5
1£
c{ 3.111
~
~
a
~
1.5
...
"
TlI'£ IN (fWS
SAIoIPLING POINT NO.2
I.
CII
2S
31!1
... 1O..A N1. 1 (5-18-77 TO 6-17-77)
)( 1tI..A tCl. 2 (11-1"'77 1'0 t2-1i-77I
" 1tIII PC. i' 2....78 10 i.l!i.78.
~Ii
'"
!.
..:
~3
~
a
~l
.
I
i!Ii
J
"
TlI'£INIJ1YS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
,.
CII
31!1
The relationship observed between total phosphorus and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the ~oriarty wastewater treatment
fad 1i ty.
-------
TABLE 20. SUMMARY OF MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF NITROGEN FORMS AT MORIARTY, N.M.
-
N
0\
Lagoon Lagoon Chlorinated Filter
Influent Effluent Lagoon Effluent Effluent Overall
Parameter Tour # Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration Removal
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l %
TKNa Tour #1 44 15.5 15.3 9.5 78
Tour #2 46 18.8 17.2 2.8 94
Tour #3 89 32 29 24 73
b Tour #1 38 7.02 7.67 5.34 86
NH 3- N
Tour #2 42 15.9 15.5 1. 14 97
Tour #3 34 25 25 21 38
Org-NC Tour #1 9 7.3 7.6 4.4 51
Tour #2 4 2.9 1.7 1.6 60
Tour #3 54 7 5 4 93
d Tour #1 0.031 0.252 0.058 1.27
N02-N -
Tour #2 0.101 0.064 0.065 1. 58 -
Tour #3 0.032 0.161 0.164 2.13 -
e Tour #1 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.15
N03-N -
Tour #2 0.07 0.13 0.12 3.2 -
Tour #3 0.04 0.12 0.13 8.94 -
~TKN = total Kje1dah1 nitrogen
NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen
COrg-N = organic nitrogen
dN02-N = nitrite nitrogen
eN03-N = nitrate nitrogen
-------
I2S
I.
~ 75
-
~
~
2S
8
5111
+ ~ Nl. 1 (5-19-7710 6-17-77)
X tU.R Nl. 2111-1"-77 10 12-13-77)
" ~ N). 3 (2-."-78 10 3-15-781
+ tt:UI N). 1 (5-19-77 ro 6-17-77)
)( Tt1.R NJ. 2111-1'-77 10 12-13-771
. tU.R N). 3 (2-.\-7911) 3-15-18)
Oil
.8
-31
~
~
-i!III
~
&
1&
Tll'£lNrfIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
18
ill
2S
111
5
15
TlI'£ IN rfIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
I"
ill
2S
111
~
..... ..
N
-..J
is
31
~
~iS
~.
1&
II
&
8
+ 10.11 N3. 111;-19-77 10 6-17-771
)( 1tIJt N). 21 11-."-7110 ~13-77)
. 1l1li N3. 3' ~-I~-18 10 3-1&-181
as
31
2S
Zi!8
~I& \
~
.8
+ tU.R PC. 1 (5-19-77 10 6-17-77 I
X tU.R Nl. 2' ( 11-.".77 11) 12-13-711
. 1l1li N3. 3' ~-.~-18 10 3-1&-181
18
1&
TlI'£ IN CfWS
i!8
is
31
1&
TlI'£ IN rfIYS
SA",PlING POINT NO.4
II
ill
2S
111
<;AM~LING POINT NO.3
Figure 46.
The relationship observed between total kjeldahl nitrogen and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment
facility.
-------
..
18
----
-----
l
+ 1tIJt fC). 1 15-.1-17 TtJ '-17.77)
)( 1tIJIIIiJIG. ill1-.It'7710 li-Ia-771
.. 1UJi' JrC). J ( i-I'-7I 10 jiH'-7t81
.. TtUtNJ. I 16-19-17 TtJIIii-L7-17i
)( 1tIJIIIi NJ. i 111-1"'77 TO li-liI-"
.. 1'CJ..A frC). ill 2-.'-18 ro i!-I&-7I1
.
..
z
~ .
z
~.
~
!i!
-ill
i..
...J
~
- ..
I ill
..
TlI'£ IN ems
SAMPLoNCI POINT NO.1
..
ill
..
.
..
TlI'£INrFlY1;
~AMPLIN() POINT NO.2
I.
ill
..
.
18
-
N
00 ..
z
~.
~
,
-.
I~
.
.
+ 1QIIt ICL I ('-~77 10 5-17-77.
)( 1QJII fCL i (U'I,'-77 10 J.i.d-71.
. ftUt NiL J (~I"~ 10 i-&5-18-
..
.
_iJi
Z
i.
~
!.. \
I..
+ 1UIt fiC1. .. 1'-18-77 ro C-LT-77)
)C 1OJ' JIG. a ( 11-."'-77 10 1l.~-17'
.. 1UIt fIlL a (2-."1'810 a-iS-7I1
5
.5
TlI'£ IN ems
SAII'PLING POINT NO.3
~
.
..
.
.5
Tilt> IN ems
SAII'PLING POINT NO.4
1.
ill
..
.
Figure 47.
The relationship observed between ammonia and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
-------
'"
15
+ TO..RNl. 1 (S.19-17TOG-17-17)
)( TO..R N1. ~ ( 11-1"-17 TO 12-1a-771
.. ~ NJ. a t2-1'h'9 TO Ct-1S-7'QJ
611
12
~'IS
~
~
~ s
~
~
z
-------
...
~- ----- -- -
.- -_. -l
+ 1tJ.II!fC). I "-I8-771QS-17-771
)( 1tJ.II! JICL it ( 11-1".77 10 li-aJ!-77\
. 1tLfII JCJ. lli-''t-7I11J 1-1"111
..~
...
~
:z
~ '.'I4i
~ ...
~
...
...
.... ....
~
Z
.."
:z
~ '.'I4i
...
.... ....
~
Z
1.1'
"
Tlr£ IN IRfS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
OIl
01;
OIl
II
....
.... ..5
Vo)
0
~ ....
t
:z
~U
~ ....
'"
....
Z
...
...
.
"'5
....
"'5
....
~ e.5
!i! e.'
~ a..,S
~u
; i.1i
~ a...
Z 1.5
I.'
"5
...
.
+ 1UIII to. . 15--1.8-17 10 fi~17.77)
)( tall to. i! I U-."-77 10 a,i-IJ-77'
9 .,... ) C ~1"-" 10 a.arNJ
01;
..
"
Tlr£ IN IRfS
SA~PLING POINT NO.3
OIl
5
..
...
1
+ ra.It frC). t I ,.~.-77 TO Iii-" rTj
)( Tt:IJt frC). it t ~ 1" ~..-77 'It) 12-1)-77 I
.. 1Q.I'1'C). 1 12-1"'''' lO)-U.'181
..~
...
.5
Tlr£[N[JI~
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
..
..
II
OIl
+ 1QJIt JrQ. 1 (1i.~77 1Q fi.1,7-77 ~
)( 1tU' fCL it ( U-,,,-77 10 Li-~.771
.. 1tIJII1'G. a I iI-,t-PI TO 1-15-18)
5
15
Tlr£IN[JI~
SAMt>LlNO POINT NO.4
..
..
OIl
..
Figure 49.
The relationship observed between nitrite and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
-------
6.5
6.0 ~ NITRITE (N02-N)
o NITRATE (N03-N)
5.5 181 PERIODS OF NONCHLORINATION
5.0
4.5
- 4.0
"
Z 3.5
I
0' 3.0
E
- 2.5
....
~
....
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
TIME IN DAYS
Figure 50.
The observed inhibitory affects on the nitrite and nitrate
concentrations in the filter effluent during tour #2 at
Moriarty, N.M., caused by the chlorination of the wastewater
prior to application to the intermittent sand filters.
-------
I. ill
LiS
~ La
IE
z
~ 1..6
I!! 1.11
~
Z
LIIi
La
8..
~
\.;.) Lilli
N
i I... .
z
. LIS
~
.
i LII
0-
Z
LIIi
+
..a
,
'8
.s
TlI'£ IN IRIS
~A~PLING POINT NO.1
.. 'JUIII '«). I 15-19-17 Tt'IIIH7-17 J
)( TtI..A N). 2 f 11-1".17 ro ~C!'-li-171
. TtJ.JtP(). ~C2'1","Tt'li'U;-"1
a
is
.
+ tUIt Nl. 1(5-.1-77 TtlI;-17-77)
)( 1QJiII fG.. 2« 11-1"-77 10 ~-li.771
. 1QJit JCl. i (2-1".11 10 i-I'-")
+
'"
.......
11
IS
TlI'£ IN IRIS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
Figure 51.
a
;s
ill
8. ill
-----
-1
+ ~ 'f). I (6-18-77 ro 6'17-171 ,
)( TtJ.Jt "11. 2111".'-17 1'0 12-.)-77\
. TtJ.Jt frO. a (2-."-78 TtI )-16-7111
L;S
~ O.CI!!
IE
z
~ 1.16
'"
~ 8..,
~
Z
LIIi
+-+
+-+
+
+
La
.8
.s
TlI'£ IN IRIS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
a
is
..
ill
+ ttUI NL 1 15-1.1'711:11-17.771
)( 1tI.A N).. 2« 11-."-17 10 !.i-li-77)
. 1111"C. il ~-I'-" 10 i-IS-".
iIIi
~i18
IE
z
~IS
I!! .8
~
Z
8
s
.8
IS
TlI'£INIRIS
SAMFliNG POINT NO.4
a
is
..
The relationship observed between nitrate and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
-------
1.2 I..
+ TtJ..R t(). 1 (5-19-77 ro 6-17-771
X Tt1.R NJ. 2111-1\-77 rn 12-13-771
.. Tt1.R N). 3 12-1\--18 11) 3-15-181
I.. ...
~ ... <:! ...
~
zU Z 1!I.3
~ ~
. ... . 8.2
~ ~
"2 ..1
+
... ...
. , I. " .. i!S ..
TII"E IN CfIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
.., ;£
+ TOIt N:L I I '-1.9-71 TO &H7-17)
)( TOJI.o. 2 I 11-1~-77 10 12-13-771
. 1QII to. i 12-."-19 10 a-lS-78J 3IJ
..... ..,
\J.J
\J.J _25
~... <:!
~..
.
ZI.3 Z
~ . ~ I.
. L2
~ ~..
LI .
L8
. , .. 16 .. i!S " .
TII"E IN CfIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.:5
J
I.
I.
TII"E IN CfIYS
..
i!S
3111
::iAMPLING POINT NO.2
+ TtLR tCl. I 15-19-77 TO EH7-77)
)( TtLR Nl. 2 ( 11-."-77 'It) 12-13-771
. ~ tfJ. 3 (2-."-18 11) 3-15-781
Ai
I.
TlI"EINCAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
I.
..
i!S
311
Figure 52-
The relationship observed between the combined values of
nitrite and nitrate and time in days for the three tours at
each of the four sampling points used to monitor the Moriarty
wastewater treatment facility-
-------
Chlorination of the lagoon effluent before applying the effluent to
the filter reduced the TKN concentrations less than 10 percent. The reduc-
tion is a direct function of the chlorine dosage and the low removals only
indicate a relatively low dosage of chlorine.
Filter effluent TKN concentrations remained essentially constant during
each tour, but the filter effluent concentrations were influenced by the
concentrations of TKN in the lagoon effluent. The exceptionally high TKN
concentrations applied to the filter did not appear to affect the performance
with regard to other parameters.
Ammonia nitrogen--Tour mean ammonia-N concentrations in the raw wastewater
were very high with means of 38, 42, and 32 mg NIl, respectively. The con-
sistency of the ammonia-N concentrations in the influent are shown in Figure
47. The wastewater was exceptionally high in ammonia-N concentration when
compared with a "typical" domestic wastewater which contains approximately
15-20 mgll (Metcalf and Eddy. 1972). Although the ammonia-N concentrations
were very consistent during a tour, a significant increase was observed as
sampling progressed. Influent concentrations were essentially equal during
all three tours. The increase in ammonia-N concentration in the lagoon and
filter effluents can be attributed to seasonal variations in the large in-
creases in ammonia-N in the raw wastewater during tour #3, and the performance
of the system.
Organic nitrogen--The organic-N concentrations in the raw wastewater
during tours #1 and #2 were relatively low and the mean values were 9 and
4 mg NIl, respectively (Figure 48). A large increase in organic-N was
observed during tour 13 and the mean concentration was 54 mg NIl. The
possible explanation for this large increase during tour 13 was that more
connections were made and a stronger wastewater reached the system.
The lagoon effluent mean concentration of organic-N fluctuated greatly
for each tour (Figure 48). Organic nitrogen removal by the lagoon system
was minimal for the first two tours. During tour #3 an 87 percent reduction
in organic nitrogen concentration was measured. Although chlorination did not
significantly affect the concentrations of organic-N, an extreme high point
occurred during the peak of the Daphnia bloom. An unexplained peak also
occurred in the filter effluent sample collected on the 29th sampling day.
The intermittent sand filters did not produce any significant reductions
in the organic-N content of the lagoon effluent except during tour #1.
Nitrite nitrogen--The nitrite-N concentrations measured at the Moriarty
system are presented in Figure 49. Nitrite-N concentrations in the raw waste-
water were very low. Only a slight increase in nitrite-N was observed in
the lagoon system effluent. The nitrite-N values for each tour were almost
constant except for a slight increase near the end of tour #1. The chlorina-
tion of the lagoon effluent slightly decreased the nitrite-N mean concentra-
tion of 1.66 mg NIl for the filter effluent during tour #2. The nitrification
process in the filters appeared to fluctuate on a day-to-day basis. The fluc-
tuations during tour #2 were caused by the experUDent to determine the effect
of chlorination on filter performance. An examination of the fecal coliform
134
-------
and the nitrite-N plots reveals a relationship between nitrification in the
filter and the application of chlorine to the lagoon effluent. The chlorina-
tion of the wastewater prior to application to the intermittent sand filters
caused an inhibition of the nitrification process as shown in Figure 50.
Nitrate nitrogen--Nitrate-N concentrations in the raw wastewater
were low as shown in Figure 51. The lagoon system produced only a small
change in the nitrate-N concentrations and little change was caused by the
chlorination of the lagoon effluent.
Upon passing the lagoon effluent through the intermittent sand filters,
significant nitrification was obtained during tours #2 and #3 with resultant
mean concentrations of 3.2 and 8.9 mg N/l. Tour #1 operation did not provide
significant nitrification past the nitrite-N stage. Tour #1 was conducted
during the early stages of operation and warm weather, and it is possible that
the filters had not matured, but it is more likely that the chlorine dose was
high enough to inhibit growth in the filter. The inhibition of nitrification
by the addition of chlorine to the effluent prior to application on the
filters is shown in Figure 50.
Figure 52
and nitrate-N)
the individual
shows a plot of inorganic
concentrations. The same
plots are applicable.
nitr~gen (sum of the nitrite-N
trends and observations applied to
Nitrogen mass balance--A mass balance of the nitrogen forms shown
in Table 21 indicates nitrogen losses of 76 (tour #1), 84 (tour #2), and 59
(tour #3) percent through the entire Moriarty system. The plant effluents
contained high concentrations of nitrogen that were approximately equal to the
concentrations in a "normal" domestic raw wastewater (Metcalf and Eddy. 1972).
Possible reasons for the high nitrogen concentration were discussed above.
More nitrogen removal would be possible if a carbon source were available. In
a case such as Moriarty, it is unlikely that additional nitrogen removal is
justified, but the possibility for improved removal does exist if conditions
change.
The majority of the nitrogen removal occurred in the lagoon system with
69 (tour #1). 59 (tour #2), and 64 (tour #3) percent reduction. Chlorination
practices could be modified to improve nitrogen removal but little removal
was observed with the present chlorination practices. The intermittent sand
filters removed only 9 (tour #1), 22 (tour #2), and 0 (tour #3) percent of
the nitrogen in the chlorinated lagoon effluent. Conversion of ammonia-N to
other nitrogen forms is high in an intermittent sand filter, but total nitro-
gen removal is relatively low because of the aerobic nature of the system.
Algal Concentrations--
The total number of algae cells/mlmeasured at the three sampling points
(#2, #3, #4) are presented in Figure 53. The generic breakdown of the algal
counts are presented in Table 22. The predominant genera varied with the time
of year but large concentrations of Franceia sp. appeared during all three
tours. This genera was found only at Moriarty.
135
-------
TABLE 21. NITROGEN MASS BALANCE FOR MORIARTY, NEW MEXICO
....
~
0\
Mean Values for Three Sampling Periods Overall
Tour Number and mg/l Reduction
Sample Location %
NH3-N Org-N N02-N N03-N Total-N
Tour #1 (May 19-June 17)
Lagoon Influent 38 9 0.031 0.03 47 -
Lagoon Effluent 7.02 7.3 0.252 0.02 14.6 69
Chlorinated Lagoon Effluent 7.67 7.6 0.058 0.08 15.4 67
Filter Effluent 5.34 4.4 1.27 0.15 11.2 76
Tour #2 (Nov. 14-Dec. 13)
Lagoon Influent 42 4 0.101 0.07 46 -
Lagoon Effluent 15.9 2.9 0.064 0.13 19.0 59
Chlorinated Lagoon Effluent 15.5 1.7 0.065 0.12 17.4 62
Filter Effluent 1. 14 1.6 1. 58 3.2 7.5 84
Tour #3 (Feb. 14-Mar. 15)
Lagoon Influent 34 54 0.032 0.04 88 -
Lagoon Effluent 25 7 0.161 0.12 32 64
Chlorinated Lagoon Effluent 25 5 O. 164 0.13 30 66
Filter Effluent 21 4 2.13 8.94 36 59
-------
I"""
!ilISill
2!
~1i!SII
~1-
iii .
..J
..J """
11.1
U
..J
c( SIll
9
c(
..J i!iI
r!
~
.
5
+ 1tI.It PC). 115.19-77 rn 6-17-77)
)( 1U.fI N). i! 111-1,,-77 Tn li!-l~-77)
. 1tI.A N). a I 2-1"-79 10 i-lS-7'U
)(
)(
)(
.
+
.
+
+
, 15 i!II
II
TIf'£ IN [JWS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
)(
.
)(
+
I
i!5
..
1118 -
+ 1tU8 fG.. I (li-"77lO "11'-77'
X 1tIJII N1. 2111-1"-77 10 tC!-13-1n
.118 . 1OJI1O. 3 (~lt->II1O 3-15->11) II
~ g x i IEII
VJ
'-oJ ~... ~
~- x x ~
x . ~..
!J 718 . ..J
..J 11.1
11.1 U
U . ..J
..J - c(
c( + 9 IiII
9 . + c(
c(
- . + ..J
..J ~
~ + g
g . .
. 5 II 15 i!II i!5 ..
TIf'£ IN [JWS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
Figure 53.
The relationship observed between total algal
the three tours at each of the three sampling
Moriarty wastewater treatment facility.
+ 1U If). 1 ("~l9-17 10 C-I7-77)
)( 11J.II1G. t! f 11-1"~77 10 1.2-1i-77)
. 1tU8 ICL a (2-1".11 1tI i-15-1IJ
~
.
+
+
.
+
.
.
"
)( ~
v
"
+
..
..
~
15
TIf'£ IN [JWS
SAMt'LING POINT NO.4
II
a;
cells and time in days for
points used to monitor the
-------
TABLE 22. MORIARTY #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT
.....
\J.)
00
Tour #1 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 5/27/77 5/29/77 6/2/77 6/7 /77 6/12/77 6/17/77
Saenedesmu8 sp., cells/ml 1 ,922 1,019 9,722 46, 136 42,291 215,302
Franaeia sp., cells/ml 361,400 1,254 22,266 123,030 30,757 38,447
Gryptomonas sp., cells/ml - - - 99,962 176,855 15,379
Ankistrodesmus sp., cells/ml 961 - - - - -
Aatinastrum sp., cells/ml 353,711 2,666 1,254 30,757 - 3,845
Diatom (Navicula sp.), - 78 - 961 - -
cell s/ml
Total Algae, cells/ml 717 ,994 4,939 33,242 300,846 249,904 272,972
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 11/25/77 11/29/77 12/3/77 12/7/77 12/12/77
Saenedesmu8 sp., ce11s/ml 75,264 50,176 106,624 112,896 131,712
Franaeia sp., cells/ml 1,072,512 934,528 1,135,232 1,204,224 721,280
Gryptomonas sp., cells/ml 6,272 6,272 6,272 12,544 18,816
Ankistrodesmu8 s~., cells/ml 6,272 6,272 6,272 6,272 12,544
Aatinastrum sp., cells/ml - 56,448 56,448 - -
Total Algae, cells/ml 1,160,320 1,053,696 1,310,848 1,335,936 884,352
Tour #3 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 2/18/78 2/23/78 2/28/78 3/5/78 3/10/78 3/15/78
Saenedesmu8 sp., cells/ml 18,816 56,448 43,904 SM - SM
Franaeia sp., cells/ml 771,456 388,864 840,448 SM 1,128,960 SM
Cryptamonas sp., cells/ml 75,264 28,224 37,632 SM 37,632 SM
Ankistrodesmu8 sp., cells/ml - 3, 1 36 - SM - SM
OsaiZZatoria (filament), - - - SM - SM
cells/ml
Total Algal Genera, cells/ml 865,536 476,672 921,984 SM 1,166,592 SM
SM = Sample missing.
-------
TABLE 22. MORIARTY 113 CHLORINATED LAGOON EFFLUENT
.....
W
\0
Tour #1 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 5/27/77 5/29/77 6/2/77 6/7/77 6/12/77 6/17 /77
Saenedesmus spo, ce11s/m1 384 6,272 13, 171 11 9 :. 185 23,068 92,272
Franaeia spo, ce11s/m1 161,477 - 21,638 99,962 61,515 769
Cryptomonas sp., ce11s/ml - - 5,958 84.583 119 , 185 38,447
Ankistrodesmus sp., cells/ml 384 157 - - - -
Aatinastrum spo, cells/m1 296,040 2,352 941 38,447 30,757 384
Diatom (Naviaula sp.), - 157 157 - - 38
cel1s/m1
Total Algae, cells/ml 458,286 9 , 1 29 41,866 342,177 234,525 131,911
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 11/25/77 11/29/77 12/3/77 12/7/77 12/12/77
Saenedesmus spo, cel1s/ml 50,176 31,360 116,032 75,264 87,808
Franaeia sp., cells/m1 997,248 715,008 733,824 909,440 1,160,320
Gryptomonas sp., cells/ml -. 100,352 31,360 6,272 25,088
Ankistrodesmus sp., ce11s/ml - 25,088 6,272 18,816 -
Aatinastrum sp., cells/m1 1 2, 544 37,632 31,360 6,272 37,632
Total Algae, cells/ml 1,059,968 909,440 918,848 1,016,064 1,310,848
Tour #3 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 2/18/78 2/23/78 2/28/78 3/5/78 3/10/78 3/15/78
Saenedesmus sp., cells/ml 56,448 17,248 43,904 62,720 3 , 1 36 3, 1 36
Franaeia spo, cells/ml 332,416 186,592 727,552 846,720 577 ,024 715,008
Cryptomonas spo, cells/ml - - 6,272 - 21,952 6,272
Ankistrodesmus spo, cells/ml - - - 6,272 - -
Osaillatoria (filament), - - - - 3, 1 36 -
cells/ml
Total Algae, cells/ml 388,864 203,840 777 ,728 915,712 605,248 724,416
-------
TABLE 22. MORIARTY #4 FILTER EFFLUENT
-
.r:-
o
Tour #1 Samp 1 i ng Da tes
Algal Genera 5/27/77 5/29/77 6/2/77 6/7/77 6/12/77 6117/77
Scenedesmus sp., ce11s/m1 - - 11 ,534 - - -
Franceia sp., ce11s/m1 - - 23,068 - - -
Cryptomonas sp., ce11s/m1 - - 7,689 3,845 3,845 1,922
Ankistrodesmus sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - - -
Actinastrum sp., ce11s/m1 42,291 49,981 19,223 38 961 961
Diatom (Navicula sp.), - - - - - -
cell s/m1
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 42,291 49,981 61,515 3,883 4,806 2,884
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 11/25/77 11/29/77 12/3/77 1 2/7/77 12/12/77
Scenedesmus sp., ce11s/m1 314 - - 157 -
Franceia sp., cel1s/m1 2,195 2,038 5,958 3,920 3, 1 36
Cryptomonas sp., ce11s/m1 - - - - -
Ankistrodesmus sp., cells/ml - - - - -
Actinastrum sp., ce11s/m1 627 1 ,568 2,352 1,098 314
Total Algae, ce11s/ml 3,136 3,606 8,310 5,174 3,450
Tour #3 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 2118/78 2/23/78 2/28/78 3/5/78 311 0/78 3115/78
ScenedesmU8 sp., ce11s/ml 1 ,254 314 - 1,254 - 627
Franaeia sp., ce11s/m1 91 ,571 14,112 43,904 24,461 8,154 25,402
Cryptomonas sp., ce11s/m1 - - 1,254 - - -
Ankistrodesmus sp., ce11s/m1 - 941 - - - -
Osdillatoria (filament), - - - - - -
ce11s/m1
Total Algae, ce11s/m1 92,826 15,366 45, 158 25,715 8, 154 26,029
-------
The algae removal by the intermittent sand filters and the chlorination
process are shown in Table 23. Removal by chlorination was attributable
to the killing of the algae and then sedimentation of the dead cells in
the chlorine contact tank. The majority of the algae were removed by the
filters.
The first tour removal of only 90 percent was related to the operational
problems mentioned earlier.
Flow Rate--
Flow rate was measured at the lagoon influent and at the combination
contact/dosing basin. The lagoon influent flow rate was measured continu-
ously for tours #2 and #3, but flow rates were measured only a few days
at the end of tour #1 and these data were later found to be inaccurate.
The influent flow rate during tours #2 and #3 were very consistent, and the
mean values were 348 and 379 m3/d, respectively. These data are presented
in Figure 54.
Flow rate measurements of the lagoon discharge and filter application
rates were obtained by two methods at the combination contact/dosing basin.
During tour #1 a calibrated bucket was used to obtain a lagoon discharge
rate in terms of cubic meters per day. Periodic flow measurements over a
24-hour period were made to identify any daily flow trends, but none were
detected. The periodic measurements coupled with a malfunction of the
dosing siphon makes these data less desirable than continuous flow monitor-
ing, but this was the best system available without major revisions in the
system.
Tours #2 and #3 flow rates were obtained with a stripchart recording of
the number of dosing cycles that occurred during a 24-hour day. The proper
TABLE 23.
MEAN ALGAL CONCENTRATIONS, CELLS/ml
Sample Location Tour #1 Tour #2 Tour #3
Lagoon Effluent 263,316 1,149,030 857,696
Chlorinated Lagoon Effluent 202,982 1,043,033 602,634
Filter Effluent 27,560 34,150 34,541
Percent Removal 90 97 96
141
-------
...
"IS
~
-
~ ....
I..a
...
.
+ 1tJ.It fC). 1 (lidS-77 10 6-17-77)
)( 1tIJt IC). i 11(-1"77 10 12-li-17I
9 nut N). a 12-1't-1ItD a-lS-""
IS
TII'E IN rA'1'3
5AMI'UNG POINT NO.1
..
at
is
.
......
.-
~
N
+ 1OJt'CL 115-,"'77108-17-771
)( 1Q.JI1G, ZIIl-,.-77 111 1i-'iI-77'
. 1Q.JI1G, II
-------
operation of the dosing siphon with a volume of 95 cubic meters per
vided accurate flow rate data. During both tours the dosing system
two discharges per day and applied 189 m3/d to the filters.
dose pro-
averaged
24-Hour Composite Sample pH
and Dissolved Oxygen--
A graphical presentation of the pH values and dissolved oxygen con-
centrations for each 24-hour composite sample are presented in Figures
55 and 56. These data were collected to verify the absence of unusual data
in the in situ sampling program and to establish the general condition of
the samples collected. Results were similar to the in situ data.
Ailey Georgia
Sampling Points--
The raw sewage was obtained at the influent lift station wet well prlor
to being pumped into the aerated lagoon. This was designated sampling
point #1 and raw wastewater was sampled at this point during tours #1 and
#3. During tour #2 recirculation from the facultative settling pond was
mixed with the raw wastewater and pumped into the aerated lagoon. Thus,
the raw wastewater influent during tour #2 was diluted by the recirculated
effluent (see Figure 4 for the location of the sampling stations).
Effluent from the lagoon system was sampled from the dosing basin prior
to application to the intermittent sand filters and this site was identi-
fied as sampling point #2. To provide constant monitoring the sample intake
was located near the bottom of the dosing basin.
Intermittent sand filter effluent was sampled at the outfall control
valve manhole prior to the chlorination system (sampling point #3). The
chlorinated filter effluent was obtained at sampling point #4 located at
the effluent of the chlorine contact basin between the flow meter weir
and the outfall line.
Summary of Results--
A summary of the results for the Ailey wastewater treatment facility is
presented in Table 24. Results are presented by tour and sampling point, and
the percentage removals obtained with each component of the system are also
presented in Table 24. Each of the parameters measured is discussed by sam-
pling point locations in the following sections.
Total Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODs)--
Mean total BODS concentrations for all
Ailey are presented in Table 24. ~he daily
cent rations are shown in Figure 57.
sampling stations and tours at
variations in the total BODS con-
Sampling Point #l--Although Figure 57 displays a moderate amount of
fluctuation, all tour mean BODS concentration were very close. The highest
mean concentration of 76 mg/l occurred during the second tour (Table 24). The
BODS in the raw wastewater entering the Ailey system was low and apparently
there was a considerable amount of infiltration into the sewer system. The
"influence of infiltration can be found in the wide fluctuations in the flow
143
-------
1'" j
--~-
,''"
+ Tt1Jt JIO. 1 15-19-77 10 6-17.771
)( Tt1Jt JIO. 2 (11-1"-7710 12-13-771
. Tt1Jt JIO. 3 (2-1"-18 10 i-15-18.
+ 1UIt PC). 1 {'-11.77 113 '-17-77'
>c 1UIt fCI. ~ (11-1"-77 10 ~-la-771
. 1UIt frO. J' ii!-I"-78 TO )-1'-781
L5
1.5
LI
if
I!! L5
~ ""
l
~ ..8
!
1.5
7.5
7.1
1.1
I
"
TII£ IN CRYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
.1
a
a;
..
"
TII£INCRIS
SAM PLI N G POINT NO.2
'"
..
i5
..
.1
ill
i5
'''"
"5
..I
l
... L5
I ...
7.5
7.1
I
+ TOJiII frO.. , (5~LI~77 1Q liH.7-77I
)C 1QIt fICL ~ I 11-,"-77 1'0 If-La-"-
. 1UIt IiIL a I ~-1"-78 10 ~-15-78-
'''"
I-'
~
~
..,
l
~ L'
I .
L'
...
+ !OJ' fCL 1 11i-~77 10 5-17-77-
)C 1QJIt 8C).. . C 11-1"-77 1U ~.a-.771
. 1U 8C).. a 1'-1"-78 10 31-1.5-78)
II
TII£ IN IJWS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
ill
5
"
TIlE IN CRYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
..
ill
ill;
..
Figure 55.
The relationship observed between composite pH and time in
days for the three tours at each of the four sampling points
used to monitor the Moriarty wastewater treatment facility-
-------
..
......
~
VI - "
~ . .
c:!.8
0
I!!
! '
8
- -.-- --
- -+ 1O..R ~ 1 (6-'19-77 10 G~;.;;;j
: ::;::. ~: ~~~~~~ 1t)1TJ3~21S-~-:e"i1 I
. I
_8
~5
00
o
!:3
~l
.5
TIP'E IN rAYS
SAMt>UNG POINT NO.1
.8
..
;s
OIl
+ 1UJt fO. 1 (&-"7710 6-17-77J
)( 1O.It fG.. i! (11-."-71 10 ~.1a-171
. 1tUt fO. a {C!-."-781TJ 3-16-781
IS
TIP'E IN rAYS
SAMt>UNG POINT NO.3
..
II
;s
OIl
~- -- --1
l' ~ NJ. 1 I 5- ~9'77 TO 6-17-77 I
X 1t1.A NJ. i!: 111-."'-'71 10 12-13-771
911:1.RN:I.3'?-.Jt.78Tt13-t5781
I
d 18
o
I!!
~ 5
5
15
TII"E IN [fWS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
i!III
OIl
;s
18
.5
+ 11J.A Nl. 1 (6-19-71 ro 6-I7-tTl
x 1tUO 10. l , 11-10-17 10 ..!-I3.17'
. 1tUO 10. 3' l-.0-191O 3-1S-19 1
~ 18
o
o
I!!
! 5
.5
TII"E IN rAYS
SAMPLiNG POINT NO.4
18
..
;s
ae
The relationship observed between composite dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the ~oriarty wastewater
treatment facility.
Figure 56.
-------
TABLE 24. SUMMARY OF RESULTS OBTAINED AT THE AILEY, GEORGIA, WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
....
~
0\
Lagoon Influent Lagoon Effluent Filter Effluent Chlorinated Overall
Tour s.amp1 ing Point Sampling Point 12 Sampling Point 13 Filter Effluent Removal
Parameter Numer #1 SamD1ing Point 14
Concentration Concentration Removal Concentration Removal Concentration Removal %
mg/R. mg/R. % mg/R. % mg/R. %
TOTAL 1 63 11 83 4 64 3 25 95
BODs 2 76 20 74 5 75 4 20 95
3 63 34 46 14 59 10 29 84
Soluble 1 15 8 47 5 38 5 - 67
BODs 2 19 7 63 5 29 4 20 79
3 18 14 22 8 43 7 13 61
Suspended 1 116 31 73 14 55 13 7 89
Solids 2 148 48 68 11 77 8 27 95
3 65 49 25 19 61 17 11 74
Volatile 1 84 18 79 7 61 6 14 93
Suspended 2 125 39 69 6 85 4 33 97
Solids 3 52 39 25 10 74 9 10 83
Feca1Q 1 0.58 x 106 8 99.99 3 68.75 1 60.00 99.99
Coliform 2 5.19 x 106 9 99.99 1 84.44 <1 28.57 99.99
3 0.75 x 106 149 99.98 21 85.91 <1 95.23 99.99
PHb 1 7.3 8.7 - 6.8 - 6.5 - -
In Situ (6.9 - 7.6) (7.6 - 10.1) (6.5 - 7.1) (6.3 - 6.8)
2 7.5 9.5 - 7.3 - 7.2 - -
(7.3 - 7.8) (9.1 - 9.9) - (6.4 - 7.6) - (7.0 -7.4) - -
3 7.0 8.6 - 7.1 6.8
(6.5 - 7.7) (7.7 - 9.3) - (6.6 - 7.7) (6.5 - 7.2)
continued
-------
TABLE 24. CONTINUED
Lagoon Influent Lagoon Effluent Filter Effluent Chlorinated Overall
Tour £amp1 ing Point Sampling Point #2 Sampling Point #3 Filter Effluent Removal
Parameter Numer #1 Sampling Point #4
Concentration Concentration Removal Concentration Removal Concentration Removal %
mg/1 mg/1 % mg/1 % mg/1 %
Temper- 1 16.9 19.9 - 19.2 - 19.7 - -
atureO 2 25.1 26.1 - 25.6 - 25.5 - -
In Situ 3 12.3 9.5 - 10.8 - 10.5 - -
Dissolved 1 6.3 8.4 - 7.1 - 6.6 - -
Oxygen 2 5.5 9.8 - 5.3 - 7.2 - -
In Situ 3 8.4 12.4 - 9.7 - 9.8 - -
Total 1 111 67 40 28 50 28 - 75
COD 2 161 57 65 33 42 23 30 86
3 203 49 76 35 29 24 31 88
Soluble 1 26 38 - 21 45 22 - 15
COD 2 80 43 46 20 53 10 50 88
3 139 43 69 27 37 16 41 88
A 1 ka 1 i n ity 1 62 49 21 42 14 38 10 39
2 139 105 24 96 9 88 8 37
3 77 99 - 91 - 81 11 -
Total 1 3.15 1.42 55 1.29 9 1.20 7 62
Phosphorus 2 7.82 3.84 51 3.10 60 2.60 16 67
3 3.90 4.03 - 3.61 7 3.56 1 9
Flowd 1 - - - - - 0.077 - -
Rate 2 - - - - - 0.029 - -
3 - - - - - 0.105 - -
......
~
"
aExpressed in organisms/100 m~.
°Expressed in cC.
bExpressed as geometric mean in pH units (range of values).
dExpressed in million gallons/day.
-------
..
.....
~ i!5
00
-
~~
d
d
iii"
-
---
----- -
+ ra...A N:). 1 C j-1,-77 TO It I' 77,
)( TO.-" NJ. i! I 9-1fiO-T7 TtI 18-1;'-77!
. TtI.A tf). J I t-"-18 T'O '\!-i-78 I
...
~
~ ..
ci
ci
ai
..
II
..
TIf'E IN CI'IYS
..
..
i!5
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
+ TtLR PC). I I a-19-" 10 "~17'77)
)( TtUt JC). Z ('~15.77 10 "1..77)
. 1tIJIt JO. I (.-4.,. 10 2-2-"1
.
.
~
TlI£ IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
38
..
-
i!5
Figure 57.
..
-- - -
--
+ ~ 1<1. ~ I J 19-17 TO" 11 171
)( TtIJ' N). i 'I.Ui~'7'7 TO 1'-~'t.771
. TO.I'N::I.111-'t'78Tt1i!~-11I1
..
...
~
~..
ci
ci
ai-
..
..
TIf'EINCI'IYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
..
i!5
..
..
-
----
+ TtLR fIC. 1 1;-11.77 10 "'-(7-7'71
)( TtLR fCL Z 11-18-77 10 18-1;'-7'71
. TtLR rG. a 11~.18 10 2-j!-78 1
~
~..
d
ci
iii
~
.s
TlI£INCAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
I
-
38
,
is
..
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant.
-------
rates entering the plant. Flow rates varied from a low mean of 110 m3/d
during a dry period to a high mean of S64 m3/d during a wet season, or a
five fold increase in flow rate.
Sampling Point #2--The BODS mean concentrations for the three tours
progressively increased in the lagoon effluent (Figure S7). The best ef-
fluent BODS mean value of 11 mg/l was observed during tour #1. During
the second sampling period the mean BODS was 20 mg/l and the mean was
34 mg/l during the third tour. These variations are related to the season-
al changes in the efficiency of the system caused by the major changes
in flow rates and rainfall. These changes are shown in Figure S7 where
during tour #3 a decrease in flow rate was followed by a decrease in BODS
in the lagoon effluent.
Sampling Point #3--During the first two tours mean BODS concentrations
of less than or equal to S mg/l were observed. Although tour #3 experienced
heavy hydraulic loadings plus higher applied BODS concentrations, the
filters still performed approximately the same as the first two tours on the
basis of percent BODS removed. However, the mean effluent concentration was
highest during tour #3 at a concentration of 14 mg/l.
Sampling Point #4--Little reduction in BODS was observed following
chlorination of the filter effluent. Percent reductions varied from 20 during
tour #2 to 29 during tour #3. This reduction in BODS can be attributed
to the oxidation of carbonaceous materials by the chlorination process or
settling of solids in the chlorine contact tank.
Total Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)
with Nitrification Inhibitor--
An evaluation of the amount of BODS attributable to the nitrifica-
tion stage for each sampling point for each tour is shown in Figure S8.
The nitrification inhibitor did produce generally lower BODS values for
the lagoon influent and effluent than normal BODS evaluations, but the
differences were not statistically significant (1 percent level). Since the
BODS concentrations in the filter effluents were generally less than 20
mg/l, no significant differences (1 percent level) were observed at these
concentrations when inhibitor was added.
Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)--
Mean soluble BODS concentrations for all four sampling locations and
three tours at Ailey are presented in Table 24. Daily variations in soluble
BODS concentrations are presented in Figure S9.
Sampling Point #l--The soluble BODS (SBODS)
stant in the raw wastewater throughout the three
#1), 19 (tour #2), and 18 (tour #3) mg/l.
remained fairly con-
tours with means of lS (tour
Sampling Point #2--The removal of SBODS by the lagoon system during
tours #1 and #2 were about equal with respective means of 8 mg/l and 7
mg/l (Table 24). During the last tour when high effluent concentrations
of total BODS were observed, the SBODS effluent concentration increased
to 14 mg/l.
149
-------
1&1
~...
Q
o
.
w/eUtCLIS: W/ON I
W/O eU'tLES. ./N.L
'O£NTICAL YALUU -
.
+ 1tUt IG.. . f 3-'1-77 10 t-17-77 1
)( 1aIt fG. Z (t-18-77 10 ".".77)
. 1U.It PI). i (1~." 10 Z*!-"J
x
. .
+
. e
. e
+ '
X
~.
o
~.
....
VI
o
i.
Q
ci.
ID
1
1
I
,
IS
TIf"E IN IJM>
SMFUNG POINT NO.1
..
.
.
.
.
./ClIlCUI> _II.L
.10 c.cu.. ww.L
'IIII"C"," YAL.UI.. -
+ -... 11.__...tr4r.
X -... 1'.__"_'
. -... 1'1___'
.
.
.
.
i
.
c:i.
q
ID
.
I -8
.
X
-8
.
1
I
Figure 58.
.
.
TDE DI CIII'I
SMlPLUl8 POINT NO.1
.
.
.
.
""CIRCLES: W/O ~ I
""0 CIRCLES: ./N.I.
IDENTICAL vALUES: ~
+ ..... teL ..1.18-17 10 It-g-".)
X -... 11.18-77 111 11-"-77'
. "to. a 11+18 1D "",.t
.
..
('J
.
11
8
8 . x
X .
.
+
1
II
.
11
IS
TIf"E IN IJM>
IAMPUNG POINT NO.2
.
.
.
.
.'C'"CUI' .IOIU
./0 CI"~[SI.'au
.."TICAL VALUESI--
+ 1l1li... 1 I...", .0-17"'"
X 1l1li... II....",. .......",.
. -... 111"'-". ..."'.
.
.
.
-8
.
Xe-
8
-8
-e
II
II
..
.
.
.
II
TIP£ IN CJmI
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
.
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and biochemical oxygen demand with nitrification inhibitor
for those days during the three tours when simultaneous
analysis was performed to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant.
-------
.
..
<
\2.
ci
ci
ap.
~
..
.
.
+ TtI.II ft). 1 I a-Il-n Tn "'-11-77)
)C TtI.II PrO. 2 (9-16-17 1'0 .1-11t-77I
. nut ft). a ( .""-78 TO 2-2-181
I
, 18 16 i!8 i!S ,.
TlI'E IN IJIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
IS
+ 1UIt: to. 111-." 1'D "-17-")
)C 1tUI1G. e '8-"-77 111 ",~77)
- . 1tUI1G. 111+" 111 IT'"~
V1
-
<18
II!
ci
ci
ai
. ,
iii
4
. I .. 16 . 16 .
TII'E IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
Figure 59.
..
i!S
+ 1tUI1G. " 1-18-77 10 .-17-77)
)C 11III1G. 1 18-"-77 10 18.,..771
. 11111 N). 1 I ,..-" 10 1+" 1
-------
Sampling Point #3--The SBODS results for the filter effluent were very
erratic with a general tendency to indicate more oxygen demand than the total
BODS. This tendency is related to the reliability of low biochemical
oxygen demand analysis and the algae in the lagoon effluent.
Sampling Point #4--The chlorination of the filter effluent did not
produce a significant change in the SBODS.
Soluble Biochemical Oxygen Demand (SBODS)
with Nitrification Inhibitor--
Figure 60 presents the results of SBODS analyses with nitrification
inhibitor (allyl-thiourea) for the samples collected at the four sampling
points. The analyses with nitrification inhibitor did not significantly (1
percent level) affect the SBODS results.
Suspended Solids--
Mean suspended solids concentrations for all sampling points and tours
at Ailey are summarized in Table 24. The variation of suspended solids con-
centrations with time are shown in Figure 61.
Sampling Point #l--Variations in the influent suspended solids concen-
trations were the result of seasonal differences principally related to rain-
fall. During tour #1 the mean influent suspended solids concentration was 116
mg/l which is a lower concentration when compared with a "typical" domestic
wastewater (Metcalf and Eddy. 1972) (Figure 61). The mean concentration of
148 mg/l during tour #2 reflects the recirculation of algal laden lagoon
effluent. The mean of 6S mg/l for tour #3 illustrates the dilution factor
during the rainy season.
Sampling Point #2--The lagoon effluent
remained fairly consistent during the three
which was 31 mg/l (Figure 61 and Table 24).
suspended solids concentration
tours except for the tour #1 mean
Sampling Point #3--The filtered lagoon effluent exhibited some extreme
fluctuations in suspended solids concentrations during the three tours and the
reasons for the fluctuations are unknown (Figure 61). A four-day cycle can be
observed to take place specifically during tours #1 and #3 when the solids
would be low for three days and then a one day sharp increase. Sometimes the
concentration would increase by a factor of four. The same cycle can be seen
in the chlorinated effluent suspended solids graph but not at sampling points
#1 or #2. The volatile suspended solids for the filter effluent does not
demonstrate this four-day cycle which indicates the increase is from an
inorganic source.
The tour means for the filter effluent were fairly consistent with the
tour #3 mean of 19 mg/l being the highest, due to high flow rates (Table 24).
Sampling Point 14--The small reductions in suspended solids in the
chlorinated effluents was probably attributable to settling of solids in the
chlorine contact basin.
152
-------
III CII
W/CIRCLU, W/O N.I. + nut fCL ,( 3-19-17 TO "-17.77) WI CIRCLES 1"-;,0 N.I, + 1QJt NL 1 (a-18-17 TO "'-17-77)
"'10 CIRCLES- W/IIJ. )( 1tLfI N). 2 f 8-11i-17 TO 18-'''-77) W/O CIRCLES: .'H.I. )( 1tUt PG. 2 ( I-UI-''7' 10 18-1"'-77 J
IDENTICAL VALUES' - . 1tUt tG. a ( 1""-78 10 2-2-11) IDENTICAL VALUES: - . 'ItI.R N). a ('''''-1110 2-2-18)
.. .
~ :15 .
.
- .
.
C --$ $
C Q\8
d . m
ai. -i +
.....i 0 QD -8
CI)
0 -, .
U) --$ --$ 5 )(
.
II
' .. .
. 5 15 . ... . . 5 \8 15 . 5 .
TIlE IN !fI'I'S TIP£ IN IJ'IVS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1 SAMPLING POINT NO.2
. 12
W/ClRCLlS- WIGN.L + 1l1li ICI. 113-1.77 10 ~-U'-77' W/CIRCLES I W/O H.t. + TUIIICI. 113-18-77 10 ~-17-771
...... W/OCIRCLU-W/II.L )( 1l1li ICI. e 1.18-77 10 ""-77' "'10 CIACLES,wIH.l )( TUIIICI. e 18'16-77 10 1'-lt-77,
. 1l1li ICI. 111+'" 10 !;!-"', . TUIIICI. 3 11~-18 10 e-I-18)
VI IOCNTICAL VALUE.- - . IDENTICAL VALUES: -
\..oJ
- . -8 . ~ 8 .
-
. (I +
a ~ $ -8
ci 6
ai' C
-i ci -$
0 -8 -8+ ai -Gt -Gt
'"
I . .....i a
0
CI)
. ,
. 5 II . . . . . 6 II 16 .. is 311
TD£ IN IJ'MI T~ IN IRfS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3 SAMPLING POINT NO.4
Figure 60.
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and soluble biochemical oxygen demand with nitrifica-
tion inhibitor for those days during the three tours when
simultaneous analysis was performed to monitor the Ailey
sewage treatment plant.
-------
-
+ TtUt.... 1 I ,,~17 10 "-17.17 J
)C 1tUt fCt. 11."-77 nll."-1'7)
. Ta.II N1. a 11-'-7111) Z.i-lI)
-
..
~-
!i!
.,;
.,;-
I.
.
.
..
..
~
TlP£ IN CfIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
.
..
.
..... .
VI
~
..
i08
en
en-
..
.
.
+ _III. .. ..... 111...17.'"
X _III. .1..." 111 .....".
. _III. 11.4.1111112+1111
.5
TlI£INCfIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
-
i!Ii
.
5
..
2511
-
- I.
~
.1.
II>
.,;
.
.
+ TtUt IC). 1 I a-l.77 1'0,-,7-771
)( 1tUt IC). 2' 11-11-77 TO 111-.,-77'
.. TtUt IC). :) I .....18 TO 2-i!-18)
.5
TlI£ IN CfIYS
SAMHING POINT NO.2
.
i!Ii
.
..
.
.
..
i08
en
en-
..
.
+ 1U.It IiG. 1 (."7710 ..",.".
)C 'RUIN). Z ( ."-77 10 ..,t.".
. _111.11.4-1111111-1.111.
15
TlI£ IN IJIYS
~AMi>lING POINT NO.4
-
i5
.
5
..
Figure 61.
The relationship observed between suspended solids and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
Volatile Suspended Solids--
The mean volatile suspended solids concentrations for all sampling points
and tours at Ailey are presented in Table 24. Daily variations in the vola-
tile suspended solids concentrations are shown in Figure 62.
Sampling Point #l--Variations in the volatile suspended solids con-
centrations were essentially identical to the variations in the suspended
solids concentrations at sampling point #1 (Figure 62). The percentage of
volatile matter in the suspended solids was constant; therefore, the similar
trends were expected.
The mean volatile suspended solids concentrations
each tour and the following tour means were observed:
tour #2 - 125 mg/l and tour #3 -'52 mg/l.
fluctuated between
tour #1 - 84 mg/l,
Sampling Point #2--During tours #2 and #3 the mean volatile suspended
solids concentrations were 39 mg/l, and during tour #1 the mean was 18 mg/l
(Table 24). Removal of volatile suspended solids by the lagoons exceeded 69
percent except during tour #3 when the removal was 25 percent. The small
reduction was primarily due to the low concentration of volatile suspended
solids in the raw wastewater caused by the large rainfalls that occurred
during tour #3.
Sampling Point #3--The volatile suspended solids concentrations ex-
hibited moderate to high fluctuations in the filter effluent; however, the
mean concentrations were only 7 (tour #1), 6 (tour #2), and 10 (tour #3).
Sampling Point #4--The reduction in volatile suspended solids in the
chlorination process is probably attributable to settling of solids in the
contact tank.
Fecal Coliform--
Geometric mean fecal coliform concentrations for all
and tours at Ailey are summarized in Table 24. The daily
presented in Figure 63.
sampling points
variations are
Sampling Point #l--Fecal coliform populations in the lagoon effluent
were consistent during sampling periods #1 and #3 with geometric means of
585,000 and 748,000 organisms/lOa ml, respectively (Figure 63). During
the second sampling period much larger influent fecal coliform concentrations
were observed, and it is thought that this increase was due to the warm
temperatures of that season. A geometric mean of 5,188,000 organisms/lOa
ml was calculated for the second tour.
Sampling Point 12--Fecal coliform populations in the lagoon effluent
were consistently low during the first two sampling periods with means
of 8 and 9 organisms/lOO ml (Table 24). With the increased flow rates
during tour 13 the detention time was reduced and a significant increase in
effluent fecal coliform occurred with a mean of 149 organisms/lOa mI. Even
with the increase during tour 13, the lagoon system provided an excellent
reduction in the fecal coliform bacteria.
155
-------
: j "
i!III \
\
+ TtIJt "I). 1 I ~-1"" fU '-11-11)
)( TtUt N). i I 9 Ui-71 TO ,1'1,..17 I
. TtUt MI. a 1,"-711 TO i-i-7II)
~-
Ii
u) 158
,,;
->
I.
S8
.
is
.
.
5
.5
TlI'£INIJ'tYS
SAMf'LING POINT NO.1
""
..
.
......
VI
0' .
..
~-
vi
vi-
,,:
..
.
.
+ 1U fa. . 111.'." 10 "-L1~77'
)C 1QIt tG. I I .18-P7' 10 .. '''-17'
. - IG. ., ....-.. 111 .-....
'5
TlI'£INIJ'tYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
""
i5
-
5
..
-
+ T1J..A K). 'I .i-19-71 10 '-11-171
)( TtJ.It 1«). i ( 9- 16-71 TtI 111-1,-17\
. 1O.R NJ. 111,'.78 m 2-2-781
1111
~ ,.
Ii
,,;
,,;
.,; S8
15
TlI'£ IN IJ'tYS
<;AMI'LING POINT NO.2
""
i5
.
..
.
III
..
~.
,,;
,,;""
.,;
..
.
.
+ 1tUt N). I 11-18-71 11) "-17-17'
)c TOIl NL 218-1&-77 10 '.-."-77)
. _IG. ., ''''-''111 ~~.'"
""
is
.
.5
TlI'£INIJ'tYS
SA~PLlNG POINT NO.4
..
The relationship observed between volatile suspended solids
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant.
Figure 62.
-------
- Il
i
- 'I
~
~ 8
~
~ 8
;:
~ .
~ l
~ I
I
+ TO.R~ 1 (3-19-1710"-17-171
)( TO.A N). 219-16-77 1011-1"-77)
. TO..R N). 3 I 1-1--78 10 2-2-78 J
i !113
::::
UJ
w
~!113
8
~-
8
cri!IIJ
u
~
i!IIJ
~ - .75
VI ~ .Em
"
"
[1)
~.O5 )(
- ..
~ 75
~ Em
~ cs
I
11 .6 i!I CS ill
TII'E IN IRIS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
+ TOR Nl. 1 (3-19-17 10 "-17-77)
)( 'R1R N:L 2 I 9-16-77 10 1.1"-711
. T11R N). a 11~-79 TO 2-2-78)
~
"
aJl
~
-
~
-,
8
5
~
+ +
II 15 ill 05 ill
TII'E IN (HIS
SIIMPLING POINT NO.3
Figure 63.
,...,
+ TO..R 1'0. 1 (3-19-17 ro '+-17-171
x TCl.R I'().. 2 ( 9-IIS-17 TO 111-1"'-77 I
" TO..R to. 3 (t-'t-]S 1U 2-2-78)
.5
TII'EINCFlYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
II
ill
05
ill
+ 11J.I' PO. 1 (]-19-77 rn "'-17-771
x 1t1.R fC). 2 ( 9-16-11 TO IItH't-17)
. TO.A Nl. 3 (1-"-78 TO 2-2-781
+
.......
+ 9
)(
)(
II
15
TlI'EINCFlYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
ill
os
..
The relationship observed between fecal coliform bacteria and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
Sampling Point 13--Intermittent sand filtration reduced the fecal
coliform counts during the first sampling period by 75 percent. During
the second tour a 78 percent reduction was obtained, and the third tour
produced an 89 percent reduction in coliform populations. The low counts
in the filter influent probably influenced the removal during tours #1
and 12.
Sampling Point 14--The chlorination of the filter effluent controlled
most of the fecal coliform during the three sampling periods. Of the ninety
sampling days, on only seven days were fecal coliform detected and the maximum
count was 2 organisms/lOa mI.
In Situ pH, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen--
Mean in situ pH values, temperatures, and dissolved
for all sampling points and tours at Ailey are presented
fluctuations are shown in Figures 64, 65, and 66.
oxygen concentrations
in Table 24. Daily
In situ pH at the four sampling stations were consistent during each
tour (Figure 64). Variations in pH value during each of the tours appear
to be seasonally oriented. The most variation in the pH value was ob-
served on the first tour at sampling point 12'(lagoon effluent) when an
apparent seasonal lagoon overturn occurred.
The in situ temperature graphs for the four sampling locations follow
the same general trend and are nearly identical as shown in Figure 65.
This general trend held for the relative consistency in all three tours, and
the mean temperatures were: tour #1 - 18.9 C, tour 12 - 25.6 C and tour
#3 - 10.8 C.
In situ dissolved oxygen also appeared to vary with the season of
the year as illustrated by the differences between the tour means at each
sampling location in Table 25 and Figure 66. The raw influent was a fresh
TABLE 25.
IN SITU DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATION, mg/l
Sampling Tour #1 Tour #2 Tour #3
Lagoon Influent 6.3 5.5 8.4
Lagoon Effluent 8.4 9.8 12.4
Fi lter Effluent 7.1 5.3 9.7
Chlorinated Lagoon Effluent 6.6 7.2 .9.8
158
-------
.~ I.' or
... nutfG. , .-18-11 ro"'.1T.71,
X nut IlL 2 18-15-17 10 "1"-17 I
. nut fCI. iI' 1""-'11 ro 2-2-781
"5
"I
iI
i? '.5
Ii!
- 1.1
"5
"I
I
IS
TlI'E IN [AYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
.
18
.
IS
5
1.1
-
VI ..5
\0
"I
if
~ 1.5
!
1.1
"5
"I
I
+ nut fCL 1 (a.I.8.77 10 ...17.77-
Ie 11IJI1CI. e ( .18-11 10 18-1..11'
. 11IJI1CI. a , 1-4-11 10 e~-1I)
..
a&
.
15
TlI'E IN [AYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
5
II
\l..
1105
11.1
"'5
it
~ ...1
~ 8.5
9.1
1.5
1.1
I
... nut N). 1 t 3-19.17 TO It ,7 n)
)( ~ N). ~ (1-16.77 10 11-1"-77:
. TtJ.II to. a I a -".18 ro ~-~'7I1
..
IS
IS
Tll'ElNtftYS
SAMPLJNG POINT NO.2
18
1.1
1.5
"I
1.5
if
~ 1.1
~ 8.5
S.I
5.5
5.1
I
+ 1tIJIi NL 1 (1-18-77 10 tt.i7-'"
)( 'RUt fCL 2 (8-18-17 10 111-1".171
. lUJt N). a ( 1"-18 10 2-2-78'
5
15
TlI'£: iN tftYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
18
a&
i!II
OIl
Figure 64.
The relationship observed between in situ pH and
for the three tours at each of the four sampling
to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
time in days
points used
-------
35
..
+ nut tC). 1 (3-11-1'7 10 ".17-7'71
)( ttLIt fC). i ('-18-77 10 "..".71 I
. nut fC). 3 (''''-11 TO i!-2-1I1
i5
U
-ill
~ 15
~
~..
.
15
TlI'E IN IAI'S
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
~
18
ill
i5
.
-
0\ 38
o
i5
u
-ill
~~
~
i..
5
.
.
+ TO.R N). 1 (3-18-77 11) "-17-771
X 1U.II1G. II "",17 10 18.,..17'
. 1U.II1G. II 1-4.>8 IOl-l->8'
i5
38
..
TlI'EINIAI'S
SAMPLING: POINT NO.3
38
5
..
Figure 65.
'"
-------
.~-------
..
+ TtJ.A 'CI. 11 JI-I9-17 T1) '-1'.17)
)( T1JJt N). 2' (9-"-77 Tn '1-1"771
. TUII JrO. 11 1.'-71 YO 2-2-711
i5
u
-ill
~..
2-
~ 1.
.
15
TlI'E IN IJ!I'S
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
..
i5
..
..
.
38
+ 1O.It fG. I 141-1.77 TO "'-17-771
X ~ PO. 211-11-77 11) '8-,"-7'71
. ttUt H). a ( t -It-" 10 2-2-78)
i5
U
-ill
~ 15
~
~..
5
15
TlI'EINIJ!I'S
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
..
ill
38
The relationship observed between in situ temperature and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
~
0-
~
I
-------
wastewater with a mean dissolved oxygen concentration of 6.7 mg/l. The
increase in the overall mean to 10.2 mg/l in the lagoon effluent indicates
an algal activity in the lagoon system.
The distribution of the lagoon effluent
a decrease in dissolved oxygen to 7.4 mg/l.
the oxygen in the filter. The chlorination
effluent dissolved oxygen level.
onto the filters resulted in
This reflected the uptake of
system did not affect the filter
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and Soluble
Chemical Oxygen Demand (SCOD)--
Mean total and soluble chemical oxygen demand concentrations for all
sampling points and tours at Ailey are presented in Table 24. The daily
variations in total and soluble COD concentrations are presented in Figures
67 and 68.
Variations in COD and SCaD were basically the same and will be discussed
together.
Sampling Point Il--The lagoon influent COD concentrations increased
between each tour resulting in a progressive increase in the tour mean values
as follows: tour 11 - 111 mg/l. tour 12 - 161 mg/l and tour 13 - 203 mg/l
(Table 24).
Along with the overall increase in
percentage of the total COD represented
tour 11 to 68 percent during tour 13.
COD. increase in SCaD occurred. The
by SCaD went up from 23 percent during
Sampling Point 12--The lagoon system effluent COD
more consistent during the three tours than the lagoon
moderate fluctuations can be observed in the total COD
was relatively consistent.
concentrations were
influent. Although
(Figure 67). the SCaD
Sampling Point 13--Although Figure 67 shows mild fluctuations. the tour
means were very consistent.
The SCaD fluctuated more than the total COD.
Sampling Point 14--Reductions in COD and SCaD by chlorination may have
occurred. but it is more likely that the reduction was due to settling in the
contact tank.
Alkalinity--
Mean alkalinity concentrations for all sampling
are summarized in Table 24. The daily variations in
are shown in Figure 69.
points and tours at Ailey
alkalinity concentrations
Sampling Point Il--The alkalinity of the raw wastewater was essentially
the same during tours 11 and 13 with respective means of 62 and 77 mg/l
as CaC03 and a range of individual values of 46 to 130 mg/l as CaC03
(Figure 69).
162
-------
-
-
-
-
~-
..
o
ci
0 ..
..
.
.
.
+ 1tI.A rt). . 13-19-77 rn "-17-17)
)( TtI.R N). 2 I 9-16-77 TO '1-1"-77)
.. ftUI N). ~ ( t ,"-18 TO 2-2-7'8)
i!8
15
.
'6
Tlt£ IN !:fIYS
SAMt>I:.ING POINT NO.1
II
~
"
~ .
'" .
~
116
.
i:
-36
c!.
o
0.
.
16
II
6
.
.
+ 1U N). 11 a-I.." 10 ....17.",
X 1UII1CI. 2 C ."-77 111 11-"-77'
. 1UII1CI. 11'''-'' 1111+'"
36
.
'6
Tlt£INCfIYS
~AM"'LING POINT NO.3
.
II
Figure 67.
.15
..
~
~ 7Ii
-
ci
ci
0
.
15
.
- ----+ -;; -;;;-.- t ~.t9-71 10 "-17.17) l
)( 11JJt rt). 2 (9':.77 TO 1.:77~
'" 1tIJt N). a ( 1-"'78 11) 2-2-781
I
i!8
15
.
'6
Tlt£IN!:fIYS
~AM"'LING ~OINT NO.2
II
.
+ TO..A 'f). t (3-18-17 11) "'-17-77)
X nut N). 2 (9-16-77 1'0 .8-,"-771
. lUJIlCI. 3 I '''-78 111 2-2,111 I
..
~3I
ci
ci
o
ill
II
16
Tlt£ IN CfIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
.1
ail
is
ill
The relationship observed between chemical oxygen demand and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
51
----- - -----
--~ ---.,
+ TtUI N). 1 I J-,I-77 TO ,.-,7-77.
X TtUI N). 111-11-77 TO .1."'"1
. TtUI tC). J« 1-'-78 TO '-2-711
'is
----
- -- -- -- -
+ 1QJIIfrC. IIJ"I-77TQ,,-"-771
)( 1tUt JrC). 2 I 1-11-77 TO .1-,"'-771
. 1tI.It fiiC. iI (I'"'' Ttli-i!.7I)
..
,.
.
~
12 1S
~ ,.
is
d
d
cJ ,.
ci
ci
U .
~
~
.
"
HI£: IN CRI'S
SAMPLING POINT NO. I
I.
..
os
..
"
HI£INCflYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
,.
..
II>
.
.
....
0\
~ ..
~.
d
d
u.
~
..
.
.
+ 1U.III N). , I a.,." IQ "~11.".
)( 1UJi8' fCL 218-'1-77 10 "1tt-17.
. ftUt IiO. II .-4." 10 1-1'-18.
+ 1QJt to. 111-'1-77 TQ "-11-771
)( 1QJIt fC). 21.18-77 11) ..,It-77)
. 10.11: tG.. a ( '-4'1110 2-2-71)
..
..
~
IJ!.
ci
ci
u.
Ii!
.
I
"
HI£: IN CRI'S
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
..
..
5
.
"
HI£: IN CRI'S
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
..
..
ill
.
Figure 68.
The relationship observed between soluble chemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the three tours at each of the
four sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant.
-------
21!1! .511
+ TCI.A NJ. 1 (3-19-77 TO "'-17-771
X T1J..A N:). 2 (9-16-77 ro 18-1'1--771
9 TIJ..R NJ. :3 I 1-"'-18 TO 2-2-78)
125
~ 1511 t~
!e !e
~1~ ~ 15
~
-
~ ~
; ; 511
511
25
8 .8 15 all 25 ...
T II''E IN ffiYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
'1;11 ,a;
-
0" + TO.A N). 1 (a-1.9-17 10 "-17-77)
\J1 Ii5 X TtI.R PC). 2 ( 8-18-77 10 18-1"'-77)
. 1tI.R 'f). i (1-"-18 10 2-2-18)
~- ~..
!e !e
~ >Ii ~ >Ii
- -
~ ~
; . g
~ 18
i!5
8 is
5 .. .5 all 25 ...
Tlt'E IN ffiYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
Figure 69.
+ TCI.A N). 1« 3-19-77 ro "t-ll-77)
)( TO.It NJ. 219-16-77 ro IS-llt-77I
9 TCI.A NJ. 311-"t-78 TO 2-2-79)
.5
Tlt'EINffiYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
18
all
25
...
+ TtI.R N:1. 1 (3-19-77 10 "-11-771
X 1U.R N). 2' (9-1Ii~-T7 ro 18-1"'-171
. TO.R NJ. 3 ( 1-'1--18 10 2-2-78)
.8
"
Tlt'EINffiY1>
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
all
is
...
The relationship observed between alkalinity and
for the three tours at each of the four sampling
to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
time in days
points used
-------
The values for tour #2 represent an increase in alkalinity caused by the
recirculation of oxidation pond effluent.
Sampling Point #2--The
tour #1 and tours 12 and #3
ly. Similar variations were
lowest mean of 49 mgll as CaC03 occurred during
had means of 105 and 99 mgll as CaC03, respective-
observed in the influent alkalinity concentrations.
Sampling Points #3 and #4--Only
as the wastewater passed through the
Figure 69.
slight reductions in alkalinity occurred
filter. These variations are shown in
Total Phosphorus--
Mean total phosphorus concentrations for all sampling
Ailey are summarized in Table 24. Daily variations in the
concentrations are shown in Figure 70.
points and tours at
total phosphorus
Sampling Point #l--Tours #1 and 13 concentrations were very similar with
tour mean concentrations ranging between 3 and 4 mg pI 1. During tour #2
the total phosphorus influent concentrations exceeded the other tour means
by a factor of two. The mean concentration for tour #2 was 7.8 mg pI 1.
This change is related to the seasonal low flows and the recirculation of
the oxidation pond effluent.
Sampling Point #2--Tour #1 displayed the lowest mean of 1.42 mg pIl, and
tours #2 and #3 had similar means of about 4.0 mg p/l. The difference in
lagoon effluent phosphorus is seemingly related to the seasonal variations in
the lagoon influent.
Sampling
cates another
Figure 70 for
fluent due to
Points #3 and #4--The chlorination of the filtered water indi-
slight reduction in total phosphorus. The characteristics in
sampling points #3 and #4 are very similar to the lagoon ef-
the slight removals at the last two sampling locations.
Nitrogen Forms--
General--Five nitrogen forms were monitored and the mean concentra-
tions over the three tours for the Ailey system are shown in Table 26.
The variations with time for the five parameters plus a plot of inorganic
nitrogen (N02-N + N03-N) for the three tours are shown in Figures
71-76. A discussion of the major variations is presented by nitrogen form
in the following paragraphs.
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen--The total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) concentra-
tions in the raw wastewater fluctuated widely at tUnes during tours #1
and #2 but remained essentially constant during tour #3 (Figure 71). The
wide fluctuations and general increases in concentrations at the beginning
of tour #2 and near the end of tour #1 are probably related to flow rate
variations caused by infiltration into the sewer system. Mean concentrations
for each tour and sampling station are shown in Table 26.
With the exception of tour #2, the lagoon effluent TKN concentrations
were essentially stable. The TKN concentrations in the lagoon effluent
'during tour #1 were less than one half the concentrations during tours
166
-------
6.6
~ ...1
0"1
...... '.6
- '.1
~ a.5
~a.e
a: c!.s
rr
~ i!.1
1.5
1.1
8.5
15
~II
~
Q.
!r
"
~ 6
~
I,
I
+ ~ PC). ~ (-a-19-" -~~.~
)( TtJ.R I'C). 2 (9-16-17 10 18-1"'-77' [
.. TtI.R 1fJ. a 11-"-18 10 2-2-]9) !
I
II
15
TlI'E IN ()'IYS
SAMPLING, POINT NO.1
CIII
os
..
+ TtJ.R PO. 1 (a-t9-77 10 "-17-171
)( ~ PO. 2 ( 9--16-17 ro .8-.,*,-17 I
. TUII ffJ. a I I-"-~ 10 2-c-'9)
Figure 70.
.8
15
TlI'E IN ()'IYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
all
os
..
"]---
,
+ TO.A I'(L t (i-19-" It) "-17.77)
)( 1tI.R fC). 2 t 9-16-77 10 .8-1"'-17)
.. ltI.R I'C). a I 1"'-19 ro 2-2-78)
~S
Q.
~.
e>:
rr a
>-
a
>-2
II
IS
TlI'E IN ()'IYS
. SA"'PlING POINT NO.2
CIII
os
..
..S
"I
+ TO.A N). 1 (i-IS-" TO "-17-17)
X TO.A PO. 2 I 9-16-17 10 .8-1..-17)
.. ltI.R PO. a I 1-It-71I TO 2-2-" I
'.5
- '.1
~ a.s
~ a.1
n.: 2.5
~
a 2.B
>-
I.S
1.1
8.S
..
IS
TlI'EINrAYS
::,AMPlING POINT NO.4
CIII
os
alii
The relationship observed between total phosphorus and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
TABLE 26. SUMMARY OF MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF NITROGEN FORMS AT AILEY, GEORGIA
....
(3\
co
Lagoon Lagoon Filter Chlorinated Overall
Nitrogen Tour # Influent Effluent Effluent Filter Effluent Removal
Form Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration %
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
TKNa Tour #1 12. 1 2.8 1.2 1.2 90
Tour #2 15.8 8.8 4.8 2.6 84
Tour #3 14.7 10.4 6.3 2.8 81
b Tour #1 5.26 0.438 0.048 0.030 99
NH3-N
Tour #2 7.37 0.047 0.087 0.044 99
Tour #3 3.86 1.49 1.07 0.86 78
Org-NC Tour #1 6.8 2.4 1.2 1.1 84
Tour #2 8.4 8.8 4.8 2.6 69
Tour #3 10.9 8.9 5.3 1.9 83
d Tour #1 0.402 0.034 0.011 0.004
N02-N -
Tour #2 0.902 0.009 0.069 0.014 -
Tour #3 0.133 0.42 0.138 0.013 -
e Tour #1 1. 78 0.21 1.93 1.96
N03-N -
Tour #2 1. 59 0.01 3.06 2.28 -
Tour #3 1.44 0.24 2.10 2.19 -
~TKN = total Kjeldahl nitrogen
NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen
COrg-N = organic nitrogen
d
eN02-N = nitrite nitrogen
N03-N = nitrate nitrogen
-------
\8
-
C'
1.0
- 8
Z
~
- .
~
""
is
-i!I!I
Z
~
1£
- ,6
~
\8
8
+ Ta.R N). 1 (3-19-77 1tI '-17-17)
X TO..R re. 2 (9-16-77 TO U!I-t't-T7)
.. TO..R N)" :a I 1-19--7'8 TO 2-2-781
18
15
TIt'E IN [fWS
is
i!I!I
all
SAM PLI NG POINT NO.1
+ 1t1.A NL I (i-t9-TT 1'0 "-17.17)
)( 1t1.A NJ. 2 [9-)6-77 1tJ 111-."-17)
. 1t1.A N). a (1"'-19 10 2-2-78)
16
TI t'E IN [J'IYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
i!I!I
is
.8
all
Figure 71.
'"
----
1
+ TtJ..R N). 1 {3-19-77 ro "-11-771
x 1U.R NJ. 2 { 9-16-77 TO liI-I'-17}
" TO..R rc. 3 {1-'-7'9 ro 2-2-781
'5
~
~ .8
1£
~
.5
TIt'EINCAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
'8
i!I!I
is
all
+ TO..R NJ. 1 (3-19-77 TO "'-11-711
X m..R N). 2 I 9--16-77 TO 1I!1-l1t--77)
. TC1.R N). a I 1-'-79 TO 2-2-78)
~
~a
1£
~ 2
I.
.5
TIt'E IN [J'IYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
i!I!I
2S
..
The relationship observed between total kjeldahl nitrogen and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
15
+ TQJt JIG. I I a-..17 10 ,..'.771
)( 'RIJ8 JG. i I 1-.8-77 TQ '8-1't-771
. JtUII III). a 11,'-18 10 i-i-1I)
Z .1
i
~
!i
a:
t 5
I
5 II 15 .. iIIi ..
TlI'E 1I'I!JmO
SAMPLlNQ POINT NO.1
a.a a.a
+ !OJ'tO. . ...." 10 ".17-" J iL'S
iL'S )C 1a.III teL . .."'77 1a ".'-77 J
..... .. 10.lIl .. a. .....,. 1U ....,..
..... La La
o
i.. i..
zLa z ~..
i I.'S i I.'S
~ I.a ~ ...
~ I.. ~ ...
a: II:
I'.a I'.a
"'S "'S
... ...
... ...
..a ..a
I 5 II 15 . . .
TlI'E 1I'I!JmO
SAMPLlNQ POINT NO.3
Figure 72.
'01
----- __'0 -..,
.. Tt)JIt JrO. . 1)-'1-17 TO "'.'-771
X 1'I1It N),. 211-11.7110 '1-,,-77'
. Tt)JIt N). 11 ."" ,. 1Q~~.181
3.5
""
z
iM
~ Z.I
!i
r::
..5
""
.5
TlI'E 11'1 !JmO
SAMPLlNQ POINT NO.2
iIIi
..
'"
ill
+ 1UJt fII). 11 a-I.77 TO '-17-77) I
)( 1QIt ICt.. i '1-15-77 10 '1-."77'
.. 1QJII fII). :a 1 1-'t-1I 10 i-~'''1
5
iIIi
ill
15
TlI'E 11'1 !JmO
SAMf'LINO POINT NO.4
II
.
The relationship observed between ammonia and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
&
ill
~ 15
~
'i
:i ..
~
6
.
.
+ ~ I'CL 1 I i-ta-T7 TO 't~17-77}
>c Tt1A PC. i! la-ua-n to .8-1",-17)
. lQ..Ft I'CL a (1-"-78 TO i!-i!-781
6 " 16 ill & .. .
TII'£ IN CFIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.1
0;.'
+ 1U.A PC. 1 C i-I." 10 ....7-17)
)( 1'O.A PO. i! ...6-77 10 ,.,"-77) t.6
. 1UI' IG. a« ''''-78 10 H.78)
t.1
a.6
~u
~
'i 2.6
;i 02.'
~ 1.5
1.1
..5
"I
6 .. 16 ill a; ..
TII'£INCFIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
..
..... 1
"-J
..... 8
:z 8
~
'i 6
::i .
~ iI
e
.
.
Figure 73.
ill
+ TO...R to. 1 t .1-18-17 10 '-17-77)
)( 1O..A ICL i! I 9-16-77 10 .8-."-77 I
. ~ PC. a ( 1-"19 10 o2-i!-191
15
~
~
'i..
::i
~ 5
.5
TII'£ IN CFIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
--~:J
is ..
..
ill
+ 1tIJII~. 1 (a-)S-17 ro "-17-17)
)( TO..A NJ. i! ( 9-16-17 m 18-."-17)
. 'R1.A fC). a ( t -'-18 ro i!-i!-7'81
..
15
TII'£ IN CFIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
ill
is
ill
The relationship observed between organic nitrogen and time
in days for the three tours at each of the four sampling
points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
.e
+ Tt1Jt PO. I I a-tS-17 1'0 't- (7-771
)( 1tJ.A PO. i 19-11-77 TO .8-1..-17)
. TtUI PO. a I I ~'1II TO 2.2.18,
- 7
<
Ii .
z ,
~ .
~ .
- .
to
TlI'£ IN CAYS
SAMt>lING POINT NO.1
..
..
..
..
to-
.....,
N
+ ltUtfrO. I (~,.771Ot~17-771
)( nut frO. lC..77 10 ..."-771
. 'RUt frO. a I ."'-1110 ~~"I
~a
::'
,
~t
. II
~.
..
'5
TlI'£ IN CAYS
SAMt>LING POINT NO.3
..
..
..
Figure 74.
...
+ TtlR PC. I I i-19-17 TO '-11.77)
X TtlR PO. 219-16-77 TO IB-I"-")
. 11J..R PO. a I 1-1It.1W TO 2.2-1'8)
e."
< ...
Ii
z .."
~
. ....
~
..IS
...
IS
TlI'£ IN CAYS
"AMI'LING POINT NO.2
.e
..
os
...
6.a
..,
..a
t.a
~ t.1
- ~.
zU
~ a.a
. i!I8
~ '.1
1.1
I.,
"I
I
+ TU.A PO. I I i-I." 101t-17-77)
)( TtUt PO. 2 '.'8-71 10 ..,"'-77)
. TUJt f«). a ( ."'-71 TO 2-2-7'81
,
..
..
TlI'£ IN CAYS
SAM"PLfNG POINT NO.4
..
5
...
The relationship observed between the combined values of
nitrite and nitrate and time in days for the three tours at
each of the four sampling points used to monitor the Ailey
sewage treatment plant.
-------
".s
...
..... ~.,
~
!i!u
z
'"
~ \.,
~
~ I..
2
..,
...
.
....
....
-
--..J "'IS
v.J
- ....
~ ....
i
~ La
~ ....
~ Lill
~ LUi
2
..,.
....
....
.
1- TO..A I'fl. 1 a-19-T7 TO ,. ~7.771
)( T1J..P PO. C! (9-111;-77 TtJ 111-1'-77 I
9' TO..A PCI. :3 ' 1-"-78 ro 2-2-791
\.
"
Tlt'E IN ffiYS
SAMf-liNG POINT NO.1
..
..
..
+ 111.A firC).. I I a-I." TO "-17-17)
)C 11JJ' I'C).. 218.16-77 TO 1.1,.-77'
. 1tIJt fCL .. 11"""-18 TO C!-~-18)
"
Tlt'EINffiYS
~AMh ING POINT NO.3
..
..
..
..
Figure 75.
..,.
.....
+ TU.P PC). 1 I a-tS-" ro "-17.771
)( TUf' NJ. ,219-16-77 ro IID-tlt-77)
9' TO..P PC). a 11-"-79 TO 2-,2-791
..OIl
.... IUV
-'
....
~ IUIS
Z
~ 8.5
~
- ....
~
~ ILIIiI
Z "II!
...,
....
,
,.
"
Tlt'EINffiYS
..
..
..
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
....
+ TtI.R fI(J. 1 I a-19-77 11J "-17-17)
)( 1U.R PCJ. .2 I 9-16-77 11:1 18-1'-77)
.. TtI.R foIJ. a 11.'-18 TO CO-,2-71U
....
..J ....
~
Z
Wu;
....
...... L18
~
2
....
....
1.
"
TIt'E IN ffiYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
..
..
..
The relationship observed between nitrite and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
...
+ 1QIt fG. a II"." 10 'to i7~" I
)( 1tUt fG. 2 (1.&8"" 1tI ".".771
. nut ~ 111<4-'810 1-2-".
..'"
.
i- ~...
!i
z z
~o ~..'15
r in
_2 Z
Z
.."
...
.1 " . . .. .
TlI'£ IN lAYS
SAI\!PLING POINT NO.1
.
.... + 1'OIt fG. I ( ..." 1'0.-17-77 I
...... )( nut JIG. . (..." 10 ".t.." I
~ . 1O.I'IG. 11''''''''101'''''''.
i f
z z
, 0 ' iI
~ ~
t i2
Z Z
.
I I
I I .1 " .. . .. .
TlI'£ IN lAYS
SAMPLINO POINT NO.3
Figure 76.
--
.. nIII JCt. 1\ :1-18-17 10 It .,.77',
'IC 1'OIt lID. e t 8-1,-17 TO .8-..-".)
. 1'OIt IG. I (1-'-" 1'0 1'-'-'"
I
"
TlI'£ IN lAYS
SAI\!PLING POINT NO.2
.
5
..
"
... !WI"" I I iI-'.'" IQ 0'''-'''' 1
)( 1tIJ' fQ.. i! I ....." 'ft) .....-17 1
. 1tUt II). Ie ''''-18 1'01,2,,".
II
"
TlI'£ IN lAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
.
is
..
The relationship observed between nitrate and time in days
for the three tours at each of the four sampling points used
to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
#2 and #3. The TKN in the lagoon effluent during tour #1 was not affected
by the rapid increase in influent concentration experienced near the end
of the tour, but during tour #2 the lagoon effluent TKN concentration
fluctuated indicating some influence by the higher concentrations of TKN
in the influent to the lagoon.
TKN concentrations in the filter effluent and the chlorinated filter
effluent followed the same trends observed for the lagoon effluent. TKN
removal by the filters ranged from 39 to 57 percent and similar reductions
were observed in the chlorinated filter effluent except during tour #1
when no change in mean TKN concentrations between the filtered and chlorin-
ated filtered effluent was observed.
Ammonia Nitrogen--Mean ammonia-N concentrations in the lagoon in-
fluent were 5.5 mg Nil with a range of individual values from 2.55 to 11.65
mg Nil (Figure 72). During tours #1 and #3 only raw wastewater was added to
the lagoons, but during tour #2 recirculation of lagoon effluent was prac-
ticed. The highest mean ammo~ia-N concentrations occurred during tour #2
when the flow rate was not diluted with infiltration.
The only significant change in ammonia-N concentrations took place in
the lagoon system as shown in Figure 72 and Table 23.
The
sampling
from the
decline in ammonia-N removal shown in Figure 72 for tour #3 at
point #2 was caused by the decrease in detention time resulting
high flow rates.
Organic Nitrogen--The tour means for the influent wastewater indicate
that the organic nitrogen concentrations were increasing with each sampling
period (Figure 73 and Table 26). The increase did not appear to be related
to temperature changes, and perhaps there were new connections to the sewer
containing high organic-N concentrations.
During tour #1 the best organic-N removal was obtained in the lagoon
system with no statistically significant change by filtration or chlorina-
tion. During tours #2 and #3 the exact opposite of tour #1 was observed.
Again, this difference cannot be explained by seasonal variations in tem-
perature. Other seasonal variations may have contributed but specifics are
not available to identify the factors.
Nitrite-N--The influent nitrite-N concentrations were <1 mgll during
tours #1 and #3 but tour #2 showed some concentrations of nitrite-N in
the lagoon influent as high as 8 mg/l. The probable cause for the high
values during tour #2 could be the recirculation of the oxidation pond
effluent. From Figure 74 and Table 26 it can be seen that the nitrite-N
concentrations changed little as the wastewater passed through the system.
Nitrate-N--The intermittent sand filters provided good nitrification.
During tour #2 with low flowrates and hydraulic loadings, the highest mean
nitrate-N concentration of 3.06 mg Nil was observed in the filter effluent.
The chlorination of the filtered water produced no significant changes in the
effluent nitrate-N concentrations (Figure 75).
175
-------
Figure 76 is a plot of the inorganic nitrogen (sum of the N02-N and
N03-N) concentrations at the four sampling stations. The same trends
observed for the two constituents separately apply to the sums.
Nitrogen Mass Balance--Table 27 presents a mass balance performed on the
Ailey system for all sampling stations and tours. Total nitrogen was reduced
by 69 percent or more in the total system with the lagoons accounting for a
significant percent of the reduction during all three tours: 78 (tour
II), 51 (tour 12), and 32 (tour 13) percent. Little nitrogen was removed
by the filters, but considerable conversion of the ammonia-N occurred in the
filters.
Algal Concentrations--
The total number of algae cells/ml measured at sampling points 12, #3
and #4 are presented in Figure 77. The algal genera identified each sampling
day at each sampling location are presented in Table 28. The predominant
algal genera varied with the season of the year.
Table 29 presents a summary of the mean algal concentrations at the
three sampling points for the three tours. The highest algae concentra-
tions in the lagoon and filter effluents occurred during the period with
the greatest sunlight and highest temperatures.
Flow Rate--
The only source
tabulation device at
(sampling point 14).
of flow data was the continuous flow recorder and
the discharge end of the chlorine contact chamber
Sampling period II occurred at the end of the Spring, and the flow rate
went from the high of 488 m3/d in the beginning to the low of 125 m3/d at the
end with a mean of 291 m3/d (Figure 78). The second tour was at the beginning
of Fall and abnormally dry weather was experienced in the area. A relatively
consistent flow rate was observed and the mean was 110 m3/d. The third tour
was during the rainy Winter months, and the mean flow rate was 397 m3/d with
a range of 223 m3/d to 564 m3/d. The overall mean discharge rate was 265
m3/d for the three tours.
24-Hour Composite Sample pH and
Dissolved Oxygen--
The 24-hour composite samples collected at all four sampling stations
were monitored for pH and dissolved oxygen. The results are presented in
Figures 79 and 80. The variations in pH value and dissolved oxygen concen-
trations reflect the same variations observed in the in situ samples.
176
-------
TABLE 27. NITROGEN MASS BALANCE FOR AILEY, GEORGIA
.....
'-I
'-I
Mean Values for Three Sampling Periods Overa 11
Tour Number and mg N/1 Reduction
Sample Location NH3-N Org-N N02-N N03-N Tota1-N %
Tour #1 (Mar. 19-Apri1 17)
Lagoon Influent 5.26 6.8 0.402 1. 78 14.2 -
Lagoon Effluent 0.438 2.4 0.034 0.21 3.1 78
Filter Effluent 0.048 1.2 0.011 1.93 3.2 77
Chlorinated Filter Effluent 0.030 1.1 0.004 1. 96 3.1 78
Tour #2 (Sept. 15-0ct. 14)
Lagoon Influent 7.37 8.4 0.902 1. 59 18.3 -
Lagoon Effluent 0.047 8.8 0.009 0.01 8.9 51
Filter Effluent 0.087 4.8 0.069 3.06 8.0 56
Chlorinated Filter Effluent 0.044 2.6 0.014 2.28 4.9 73
Tour #3 (Jan. 4-Feb. 2)
Lagoon Influent 3.86 10.9 0.133 1.44 16.3 -
Lagoon Effluent 1.49 8.9 0.42 0.24 11. 1 32
Filter Effluent 1.07 5.3 o. 1 38 2.10 8.6 47
Chlorinated Filter Effluent 0.86 1.9 0.013 2.19 5.0 69
-------
'18
II ,-
- -
><
~-
..
~ -
~
-' -
III
U -
-'
c -
9
c -
-'
i! 18
o
.... .
.
_.~ 1tUt IlL 111~1'-17 10 t-17-17I --1
)( TtUt ICL ~ ...5-17 TO ...t.171 I
. nut IG. i I."',,, 10 ~-~-"I
)( I
j
I
" +
)(
)(
+
+
+
+
5
15
Tilt:: IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.2
II
..
is
.
- -
+ YOJIIG. I (...7710 t-g-17)
I. )( t1UIlCI. ~ '."77 111 18-'.-77 I .-
. t1UIlG. J ( '-4-18 111 H-181
...... >< ~J8
......
oo ~.. Ie ~-
i + )( ~-
~. III
-' )( ,, ~..
rl. '"
.... ~.
~ C
)( + ~.
C. C
~ + + -'..
m .
. S T
. . 15 .. . . .
Tilt:: IN CAYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
+ T1Ut IG. 1 11-"'" 1'0 "-1'-17.
JC 'ftIIt IlL a f .""7710 18--.t-171
. TtUt tlD.. a ( '''-18 1U a~-lIl
)(
+
"
+ )(
)(
)(
+
+ +
5 II 15 . . .
TI/£ IN CAYS
SAMPLI N G POINT NO.4
Figure 77.
The relationship observed between total algal cells and time in days
for the three tours at each of the three sampling points used to
monitor the Ailey sewage treatment plant.
-------
TABLE 28. AILEY #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT
I--'
......
\0
Tour #1 Samp 1 i ng Da tes
A 1 gal Genera 3/22/77 3/28/77 4/3/77 4/9/77 4/15/77
EugZena sp., cells/ml - - - - -
Sphaerocystis sp., cells/ml 65,229 30, 1 06 20,000 - 43,890
SaenedesmuB sp., cells/ml 26,342 36,378 332,500 155,001 45,150
TraaheZomonas sp., cells/ml 53,939 26,342 24,500 1 0, 164 1,254
Ceratium sp., cells/ml 1,254 - - - -
Diatom, cells, ml 1,543 2,509 - 7,623 -
ChZoreZZa sp., cells/ml - 45,158 41,520 5,082 3,762
Gryptomonas sp., cells/ml - - - - 5,016
Total Algae, cells/ml 148, 307 140,493 418,520 177,870 99,072
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 9/19/77 9/24/77 9/29/77 10/5/77 10/9/77 10/14/77
Ankistrodesmus sp., ce11s/ml 15,680 28,224 15,680 28,224 43,904 6,272
Diatom, cells/ml 15,680 6,272 - - - -
OsaiUatoria (filament) cells/ml 62 ,720 18,816 28,224 43,904 20,384 12,544
sphaeroaystis sp., cells/ml 56,448 128,576 216,384 620,928 94,080 12,544
ChZoreZZa sp., cells/ml 43,904 65,856 122,304 197,568 457,856 580 , 160
SaenedesmuB sp., cells/ml - - 25,088 21,952 18,816 -
Total Algae, cells/ml 194,432 247,744 407,680 912,576 635,040 611 ,520
Tour #3 Frozen Samples
-------
TABLE 28. AILEY #3 FILTER EFFLUENT
....
00
o
Tour #1 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 3/22/77 3/28/77 4/3/77 4/9/77 4/15/77
EugZena sp., cells/ml MS 314 - - -
Sphaerocystis sp., cells/ml MS 2,509 314 314 6,272
Scenedesmus sp., cells/ml MS 12,230 4,396 7,065 4,077
TracheZomonas sp., cells/ml MS 11 ,917 1 ,570 - -
Ceratium sp., cells/ml MS - - 157 -
Diatoms, cel1s/ml MS 314 - 314 -
ChZoreZZa sp., cells/ml MS 5,331 1 ,256 157 1,254
cryptomonas sp., cells/ml MS - - - 314
Total Algae, cells/ml MS 32,615 7,536 8,007 11,917
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 9/19/77 9/24/77 9/29177 10/5/77 10/9/77 10/14/77
Ankis trodesmus s p., cells/ml 196 3,450 1,882 941 627 784
Diatom, cells/ml 784 941 314 - - 2,352
OsciZZatoria (filament), 784 627 941 627 - 196
ce 11 s/ml
Sphaerocystis sp., cells/ml 8,624 22,893 14,426 2, 195 8,467 10,780
ChZoreZZa sp., cells/ml 3,136 1 5,035 13,171 21,325 1 3,798 15,484
Sce~edesmus sp., cells/ml - - 1,568 314 2, 195 -
Total Algae, cells/ml 13,524 42,963 32,301 25,402 25,088 29,596
Tour #3 Frozen Samples
MS = missing sample.
-------
TABLE 28. AILEY #4 CHLORINATED FILTER EFFLUENT
-
00
-
Tour #1 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 3/22/77 3/28/77 4/3/77 4/9/77 4/15/77
Euglena sp., cells/ml - - - - -
Sphaerocystis sp., cells/ml 22,579 5,018 157 - 4,077
Saenedesmus sp., cells/ml 31,360 13,171 3,611 5,809 3 , 1 40
Traahelomonas sp., cells/ml 1 ,568 12,230 942 - -
Ceratium sp., cells/ml - - - - -
Diatom, cells/ml - 314 - 157 -
Chlorella sp., cells/ml - 3 , 1 40 314 157 1,568
Cryptomonas sp., cells/ml - - - - 314
Total Algae, ce 11 s/ml 55,507 33,873 5,024 6,123 9,099
Tour #2 Sampling Dates
Algal Genera 9/19/77 9/24/77 9/29/77 10/5/77 10/9/77 10/14/77
Ankistrodesmus sp., cells/ml 1 , 882 3, 1 36 1,882 3,763 941 941
Diatom, cells/ml 314 1 ,256 627 314 235 314
Osaillatoria (filament), 2,195 1 ,882 941 2,195 1,176 627
ce11s/ml
Sphaerocystis sp., cells/ml 8,467 4,390 9,722 25,715 9,643 1,568
Chlorella sp., cells/ml 1,254 12,544 17,875 34, 182 32,693 34 , 182
Saenedesmus sp., cells/ml - 1,254 1,254 941 470 -
Total Algae, ce 11 s/ml 14,112 24,461 32,301 67,11 0 45,158 37,632
Tour #3 Frozen Samples
-------
Figure 78.
TABLE 29.
MEAN ALGAL CONCENTRATIONS, CELLS/ml
Sample Location Tour #1 Tour #2 Tour #3
Lagoon Effluent 197,000 501, 000
Filter Effluent 15,000 28,000 Frozen
Chlorinated Effluent 21,900 36,800
Percent Removal 88.8 92.7
L8
+ 11III1C1. .1...'" IIIt-I7.""
Ie 11III1C1. , ( 1-"-" 111 18-.t-".,
. 11III1C1. I ( ''''-18 111 ,-.-,.-
Lili
,
~L18
IL.
L.
.
,
..
15
TII£ IN IJWS
.
.
.
SAIoII'LING POINT NO.4
1 MGD = 3785 m3/d
The relationship observed between average daily flow and
time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treat-
ment plant.
182
-------
9.a
9.&
La
if
~ 7.1i
t.a
9.&
'.a
a
to Ta.A fC). 1 (a-IB-77 TtI "'17.771
)( TO..A P«1. 2 I 9-16-71 TO 18-1"-71 \
.. 1'0.1' fICL a 11-'-19 1t) i!-i!-'1t.
la
1&
TIt'E IN CJIYS
SAf
-------
., ,
1
~----
--,
.. TtJ.A rQ. I I ~-t'-77 Tt:I '-17.7'71
)( TtJ..A NJ. i 11-.6-17 TO '8-1,-77)
. TtI.It'l). :a I J-"'" TO i-i-"I
- "
~
~
ci .
ci
~
~ ,
U
.
"
TII'£ [~ [JIYS
SA~PLING POINT NO.1
II
os
..
"
- ..
00
~ Ii
~:
~..
o
~ 9
~ .
7
,
.
. TOJIt PO. I (a-t.77 11) ,-.7-711
X 1UJI1C). 2 I .18-77 TO ..."-171
. tIUIlCI. i "...-~ to N.'"
,
.5
TII'£ [III [JIYS
SAMPLING POINT NO.3
..
.
os
..
IS
"
"
~..
!..
~ .8
o
~ 9
! .
7
.
- ~------ -
-----
.. TIJ..A frC)., I I a-19-77 TO '-17.171
X TQ.IfP(). 219-16-77 10 18-1"771
. TtJ.It tC. a c I ".19 TO 2-2-78'
as
IS
TII'£ [III [JIYS
SA~PLING POINT NO.2
i!8
..
..
IS
..
+ T1J.R N). I (3-18-77 ro '-11-771
)C TtIJI PO. Z (9-16-77 1t) .8-1'-771
. 1U.Jt PO. J I .-4-78 Tn 2-2'11 J
..
i .Z
- ..
d II
ei
~ 9
! :
5
I.
15
TI~[IIICJIYS
.
as
..
SAMPLING POINT NO.4
The relationship observed between composite dissolved oxygen
and time in days for the three tours at each of the four
sampling points used to monitor the Ailey sewage treatment
plant.
Figure 80.
-------
SECTION 7
COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE WITH
FEDERAL STANDARDS
GENERAL
The performances of the three systems are compared with the 1972 Federal
Secondary Treatment Standards shown in Table 3. Each of the systems was
analyzed as to its ability to meet the federal discharge requirements.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Table 30 presents a summary of the mean five day biochemical oxygen
demand (BODS) concentrations measured during each tour at the three sites.
Influent and effluent concentrations and removal efficiencies for the lagoon
system, intermittent sand filters and the overall facility are presented.
The lagoon systems at the three sites provided similar BODS removal
efficiencies considering seasonal variations with the exceptions of the
Ailey, Georgia, facility during the third sampling period. The climatic
conditions at Ailey, Georgia, during certain periods of the year result in
high precipitation rates, and the lagoon system is sometimes hydraulically
overloaded. This resulted in a significant decrease in efficiency during
this period.
The efficiency of the intermittent sand filtration of the lagoon effluent
varied significantly between the three facilities and even between the tours
at each site. During the high hydraulic loadings of tour #3, a slight de-
crease in BODS removal by the filters was observed.
The highest filter removal of BODS was observed at Mt. Shasta during
tour #2, when the filters were operated strictly according to the design
engineer's recommended operating procedure. In contrast, the poorest BODS
removal at Mt. Shasta was observed during the first tour when the operation
of the system was varied.
In five of the nine sampling periods, the removal exceeded 93 percent.
All of the facilities demonstrated an ability to meet the federal secondary
discharge requirements for BODS (30 mg/l). The only marginal situation
existed at the Ailey, Georgia, facility during tour #3 when the 30-day BODS
removal was 84 percent in relation to the requirements of 8S percent removal.
185
-------
TABLE 30. SUMMARY OF TOUR MEANS FOR BODS
.....
00
0\
5 Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand, mg/l
Sampling Tour # Lagoon System Intermittent Sand Filters Overall Facil itya
Site
Influent Effluent % Infl uent Effluent % Influent Effluent %
Removal Removal Removal
Mt. Shasta, Tour #1 110 26 76 26 21 19 110 14 87
Ca 1 Horni a Tour #2 121 19 84 19 4 80 121 3 98
Tour #3 110 20 82 20 7 65 110 4 96
Mori arty, Tour #1 133 35 74 35 20 43 133 20 85
New Mexico Tour #2 135 22 84 22 10 54 135 10 93
Tour #3 177 32 82 32 21 34 177 21 88
Ailey, Tour #1 63 11 83 11 4 64 63 3 95
Georgia Tour #2 76 20 74 20 5 75 76 4 95
Tour #3 63 34 46 34 14 59 63 10 84
aChlorinated effluent.
-------
The 30-day means for the three sites ranged from 3 to 21 mg/l with a range of
84 to 98 percent removal. The 7-day means never exceeded the 45 mg/l maximum
concentration.
Intermittent sand filtration played a significant role in the ability
of the three treatment facilities to meet the BODS discharge require-
ments. The most significant result of intermittent sand filtration was
observed at the Moriarty, New Mexico, facility when the lagoon discharge
30-day mean BODS concentrations were greater than 30 mg/l two out of the
three sampling periods. Lagoon effluent at the Mt. Shasta facility pro-
vided the 30-day. 30 mg/l and 7-day 45 mg/l means but could not produce
a 30-day 85 percent removal. Without the intermittent sand filters, none
of the three sites during the three sampling periods could meet the federal
discharge requirements for BODS.
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
A summary of the mean suspended solids concentrations for the three
facilities is presented in Table 31. The suspended solids removal for the
two major subsystems of each system are included for comparative purposes.
The removal of suspended
fairly consistent between the
variations easily identified.
of 20 percent produced by the
algal growth) to a high of 73
(low algal growth).
solids by the lagoon system appears to be
three sites with some significant seasonal
The range of removal varied from the low
Mt. Shasta facility during tour #2 (summer
percent at the Ailey facility during tour #1
The intermittent sand filtration of the lagoon effluent would be ex-
pected to provide the most significant reduction of suspended solids and it
did with effluent suspended solids means ranging from 11 mg/l to 26 mg/l.
The removals were consistently above 50 percent with five out of the nine
sampling periods above 75 percent. The exception was the first tour at the
Mt. Shasta facility when only 30 percent removal of suspended solids was
observed. This low removal was attributable to the frozen filters which
created short circuiting allowing the suspended solids to pass around the
filter media.
The Moriarty filters consistently produced the highest removals of
greater than or equal to 80 percent during all three tours with a maximum
of 89 percent during the last tour. This high suspended solids removal
is related to the filter media effective size of 0.20 mm, the lowest of
the three sites. The progressive increase in removal efficiency displayed
by the Moriarty filters reflects the build-up of filtered material on the
filter surface.
The overall removal of suspended solids by the three facilities was
about 86 percent with a range of 74 percent to 95 percent, and a range of
mean discharge suspended solids concentrations of 8 to 21 mg/l. The first
sampling period at the Mt. Shasta facility produced only a 75 percent reduc-
tion in suspended solids which was due to frozen filters. During tour #3 at
187
-------
TABLE 31. SUMMARY OF TOUR MEANS FOR SUSPENDED SOLIDS
....
00
00
Suspended Solids Concentration, mg/l
Sampling Tour # Lagoon System Filter System Overall Facilitya
Site
Influent Effluent % Influent Effluent % Influent Effluent %
Removal Removal Removal
Mt. Shasta, Tour #1 85 37 56 37 26 30 85 21 75
California Tour #2 86 69 20 69 13 81 86 13 85
Tour #3 73 33 55 33 11 67 73 11 85
Moriarty, Tour #1 174 83 52 83 17 80 174 17 90
New Mexico Tour #2 128 89 30 89 15 83 128 15 88
Tour #3 155 71 54 71 8 89 155 8 95
Ail ey, Tour #1 116 31 73 31 14 55 116 13 89
Georgi a Tour #2 148 48 68 48 11 77 148 8 95
Tour #3 65 49 25 49 19 61 65 17 74
aChlorinated effluent.
-------
the Ailey. Georgia, facility a 74 percent reduction of influent suspended
solids was observed and this was caused by the heavy seasonal precipitation.
were
mg/l
A review of Table 31 shows again that the
necessary in all nine sampling periods to
or less of suspended solids.
intermittent sand filters
produce an effluent with 30
FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA
Table 32 presents the fecal coliform bacteria mean populations for the
lagoon effluent, the filter effluent, and the chlorinated effluent. In the
case of the Moriarty facility where chlorination is practiced prior to apply-
ing wastewater to the filter, the numbers listed in Table 32 under the reading
"chlorinated effluent" are for chlorinated lagoon effluent instead of chlori-
nated filter effluent as at the other two sites.
The high mean fecal coliform concentrations in the Moriarty lagoon ef-
fluent during tour #2 were caused by the experimentation to determine the
effect on filter performance of pre-chlorination. Chlorination was practiced
intermittently during this period of operation. The disinfection systems at
the Mt. Shasta, California, and Ailey, Georgia, facilities provided excellent
removal of fecal coli forms.
The intermittent sand filter effluents at the Mt. Shasta, California;
Moriarty. New Mexico; and Ailey. Georgia, facilities contained a mean fecal
coliform concentration of less than 100 organisms/lOO ml without chlorination
for all nine tours.
pH VALUE
The presentation in Table 33 of the ranges of effluent of in situ pH
values for each tour at the three sites illustrates the ability of the three
facilities to meet the 1972 federal discharge requirement that pH values range
between 6.0 and 9.0. Of the 266 sampling days during the nine sampling
periods, there were only three days when the effluent pH dropped below 6.0.
The first two days occurred during tour #1 at Mt. Shasta, California, when the
effluent pH value dropped to S.9 and S.7. This shift is most probably the
result of over chlorination. The third day with a pH value below the require-
ment was the first day of tour #1 at Ailey, Georgia, and this was most likely
an erroneous reading.
SUMMARY
All three systems satisfied the 1972 Federal Secondary Treatment Dis-
charge Standards for biochemical oxygen demand (BODS), except the Ailey,
Georgia, facility during tour #3 when the 30 day BODS removal was only 84
percent instead of the required 8S percent removal. The 30 day mean effluent
BODS concentrations for all three systems ranged from 3 to 21 mg/l with a
189
-------
TABLE 32.
SUMMARY OF FECAL COLIFORM GEOMETRIC MEAN POPULATIONS
Fecal Coliform Concentrations, counts/100 ml
Sample Site Tour # Lagoon Fil ter Chlorinated
Effluent Effluent Effluent
Mt. Shasta, Tour #1 721 53 <1
Ca 1 itorni a Tour #2 20 2 <1
Tour #3 179 37 5
Mori arty, Tour #1 27 8 2a
New Mexico Tour #2 781 91 51 a
Tour #3 62 2
-------
two of the nine sampling periods. The 30 day mean effluent suspended solids
concentrations for all three systems ranged from 8 to 21 mg/l, and the 7
day mean effluent suspended solids effluent concentrations for all three
systems never exceeded the 45 mg/l maximum concentration requirement.
All three systems satisfied the 1972 Federal Secondary Treatment Dis-
charge Standard for fecal coliform bacteria throughout the entire study.
At no time did the 30 day geometric mean effluent fecal coliform concen-
tration of the three systems exceed 200 organisms/lOO ml, or the 7 day
geometric mean effluent fecal coliform concentration of the three systems
exceed 400 organisms/lOO mI. Although all three sites practiced effluent
chlorination, the effluent fecal coliform standard was met by the inter-
mittent sand filter prior to final effluent disinfection with chlorine.
Of the 256 sampling days during the nine sampling periods, there were
only three days in which the effluent pH of the three systems did not satisfy
the 1972 Secondary Treatment Discharge Standard (effluent pH range between
6.0 and 9.0). Two of these three measurements were probably a result of
over chlorination and the third measurement was most likely an analytical
error.
The 1972 Federal Secondary Treatment Discharge Standards were satisfied
by all three systems, except that the 85 percent removal of the influent
suspended solids concentration was not accomplished during two of the nine
sampling periods.
191
-------
SECTION 8
STATISTICAL COMPARISONS
GENERAL
A statistical analysis of the intermittent sand filter effluent tour
mean values of the parameters used to compare the overall performance of
the three sampling sites was performed. The Duncan Multiple Range Test
(Duncan, 19S5) with a modification for means with unequal replications
developed by Kramer (19S6) was used to compare the tour means for significant
differences at the 9S percent confidence level. Biochemical oxygen demand
(BODS), soluble biochemical oxygen demand (SBODS), suspended solids (SS),
volatile suspended solids (VSS), and fecal coliform bacteria mean concentra-
tions were compared. The results of the analyses are presented in the fol-
lowing paragraphs.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BODS)
The results of the statistical analysis of the mean BODS concentrations
in the intermittent sand filter effluents are presented in Table 34. The mean
BODS concentrations for the Mt. Shasta facility during tours #2 and #3 and the
Ailey facility mean values for tours #1 and #2 were not significantly dif-
ferent at the 9S percent confidence level. This group represents the best
performance under proper operational techniques for both of the systems.
Although ranked near the upper end of the lower concentration group,
the effluent concentration during tour #2 at Moriarty represents the best
performance by the Moriarty system in terms of BODS reduction. Also during
tour #2 the applied BODS concentrations were the lowest for the three tours
at Moriarty. Isolation of the Ailey tour #3 mean BODS concentration and its
statistical difference from the other two Ailey means is caused by the reduc-
tion in removal efficiency due to hydraulic overloading of the system.
The last group with the three highest tour means contains data collected
during Mt. Shasta tour #1 and Moriarty tours #1 and #3. The high mean for
Mt. Shasta tour #1 was the result of the frozen filter problem described
earlier. Poor BODS removal during tours #1 and #3 at Moriarty can be
attributed to the relatively high applied BODS values and the inhibition of
bacterial activity in the filters caused by pre-chlorination of lagoon ef-
fluent prior to application to the intermittent sand filters.
192
-------
TABLE 34.
COMPARISON OF MEAN BODS (mg/l) CONCENTRATIONS USING DUNCAN'S
MULTIPLE RANGE TESTa
Treatment MS2 Al A2 MS3 M2 A3 Ml MSI M3
Mean BODs 3.6 4.2 4.9 5.9 9.4 14.4 19.3 19.8 21.1
mg/l
No. of
Samples 29 30 30 15 30 30 30 30 30
CODE:
MS-l
MS-2
MS-3
M-l
M-2
M-3
A-I
A-2
A-3
Mt. Shasta - Tour #1
Mt. Shasta - Tour #2
Mt. Shasta - Tour #3
Moriarty - Tour #1
Moriarty - Tour #2
Moriarty - Tour #3
Ailey - Tour #1
Ailey - Tour #2
Ailey - Tour #3
aMeans underlined with a common line are not significantly different
(95% level).
SOLUBLE BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (SBODS)
The results of the statistical analysis of the mean SBODS concentra-
tions in the intermittent sand filter effluents are presented in Table 35.
At the lower concentrations of the ranked means the soluble biochemical
oxygen demand for the Mt. Shasta facility and the Ailey facility, except for
tour #3 at Ailey, do not vary significantly at the 95 percent confidence
level. The exclusion of Ailey tour #3 again reflects the hydraulic overload
experienced during that period of monitoring.
Moriarty filter effluent SBODS tour mean concentrations were signi-
ficantly different from the other two filter effluents. The difference was
the pre-chlorination of the applied wastewater which inhibited SBOD removal.
SBODS represents that portion of total BODS that cannot be physically
193
-------
TABLE 35.
COMPARISON OF MEAN SBOD5 (mg/l) CONCENTRATIONSa
Treatment MSI MS3 A2 Al MSI M2 A3 M3 Ml
Mean SBODs 3.1 3.5 4.2 4.7 4.7 6.9 8.3 17.0 20.5
mg/1
No. of 30 30 30 30 30
Samp1 es 29 15 30 30
CODE: MS-l Mt. Shasta - Tour #1
MS-2 Mt. Shasta - Tour #2
MS-3 Mt. Shasta - Tour #3
M-l Moriarty - Tour #1
M-2 Moriarty - Tour #2
M-3 Moriarty - Tour #3
A-I Ailey - Tour #1
A-2 Ail ey - Tour #2
A-3 Ailey - Tour #3
aMeans underlined with a common line are not significantly different
(95% level).
removed; thus, reduction of SBOD5 must be achieved by biological activity
in the filter media. The evidence in support of inhibition is reflected in
the significantly different tour means for Moriarty at the higher concentra-
tions of the ranked means.
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
Table 36 presents the statistical analysis of the mean suspended solids
concentrations in the intermittent sand filter effluents. The first six
tour means did not differ statistically at the 95 percent confidence level.
These six tour means represent two tours at each of the three sites evaluated.
The excluded three means do not differ (95 percent); however, there is some
overlap with the six non-differing means with the total exclusion of only the
highest concentration. The excluded tour means represent the poorest per-
formance at each site. The Ailey tour #3 perfdrmance has been associated
194
-------
TABLE 36.
COMPARISON OF MEAN SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS USING DUNCAN'S
MULTIPLE RANGE TESTa
Treatment M3 A2 MS3 MS2 Al M2 A3 Ml MSI
Mean SS 8.4 10.0 10.9 12.9 14.4 14.6 18.9 22.3 25.9
mgll
No. of
Samples 30 30 15 29 30 30 30 30 30
CODE:
MS-l
MS-2
MS-3
M-l
M-2
M-3
A-I
A-2
A-3
Mt. Shasta - Tour #1
Mt. Shasta - Tour #2
Mt. Shasta - Tour #3
Moriarty - Tour #1
Moriarty - Tour #2
Moriarty - Tour #3
Ailey - Tour #1
Ailey - Tour #2
Ailey - Tour #3
aMeans underlined with a common line are not significantly different
(95% leven.
with the high hydraulic loading during that period. The Mt. Shasta tour #1
performance reflects the frozen filters, and the Moriarty tour #1 high
mean value reflects the poor initial operation and the relatively high
applied suspended solids concentrations.
VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS
The statistical analysis of the mean volatile suspended solids concen-
trations is presented in Table 37. Seven tour means were found not to be
statistically different at the 95 percent confidence level. Of the nine
tours only Moriarty tour #1 and Mt. Shasta tour #1 were statistically dif-
ferent. The reasons for the differences are essentially the same as were
discussed for the suspended solids.
195
-------
TABLE 37.
COMPARISON OF MEAN VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS USING
DUNCAN'S MULTIPLE RANGE TESTa
Treatment M3 MS3 A2 MS2 Al M2 A3 Ml MSI
Mean VSS 5.0 5.3 5.8 6.1 6.8 7.1 10.3 14.1 22.8
mgll
No. of
Samples 30 15 30 29 30 30 30 30 30
CODE: MS-I Mt. Shasta - Tour #l
MS-2 Mt. Shasta - Tour #2
MS-3 Mt. Shasta - Tour #3
M-I Moriarty - Tour #l
M-2 Moriarty - Tour #2
M-3 Moriarty - Tour #3
A-I Ailey - Tour #l
A-2 Ailey - Tour #2
A-3 Ail ey - Tour #3
aMeans underlined with a common line are not significantly different
(95%1 eve 1) .
FECAL COLIFORM
Table 38 presents the statistical analysis of the tour geometric mean
fecal coliform concentrations for the intermittent sand filter effluents.
The tour means for the Ailey and Mt. Shasta facilities represent intermittent
sand filter effluent prior to chlorination. The Moriarty tour means are
for filter effluent, but with the applied wastewater chlorinated. The
chlorination of the applied water effectively disinfected the lagoon effluent
and the water reaching the filters was nearly bacteria free. The cause
of the fecal coliform in the filter effluent was previously discussed and
is unknown.
Because of the aftergrowth, one of the Moriarty tour mean fecal coli-
form concentrations was the highest observed followed by the first and
third tour means for Mt. Shasta and the third tour at Ailey. The high
values for Ailey tour 13 and Mt. Shasta tour #3 reflect the decrease in
fecal coliform removal because of high hydraulic loading rates during
196
-------
TABLE 38.
COMPARISON OF MEAN FECAL COLIFORM CONCENTRATIONS USING DUNCAN'S
MULTIPLE RANGE TESTa
Treatment A2 M3 MS2 Al Ml A3 MS3 MSI M2
Geometric 1 2 2 2 8 21 37 55 91
Mean
No. of 30 30 29 30 30 30 15 30 30
Samples
Fecal
Coliform
Concen-
tration
Ca1ories/
100 m1
CODE: MS-l Mt. Shasta - Tour #1
MS-2 Mt. Shasta - Tour #2
MS-3 Mt. Shasta - Tour #3
M-l Moriarty - Tour #1
M-2 Moriarty - Tour #2
M-3 Moriarty - Tour #3
A-I Ailey - Tour #1
A-2 Ailey - Tour #2
A-3 Ailey - Tour #3
aMean underlined with a common line are not significantly different
(95% level).
these periods. High fecal coliform concentrations during tour #1 at Mt.
Shasta were related to the frozen filters.
The first four ranked tour means do not vary statistically within
the 95 percent confidence level. Ailey tours #1 and #2 represent the most
consistent fecal coliform removal. Moriarty tour #3 low fecal coliform
bacterial populations reflect filter maturity and operational stability.
The inclusion of Mt. Shasta tour #2 reprsents the ability of the system
to produce good fecal coliform reductions when operated properly.
197
-------
Summary of Statistical Analysis
In review of the statistical analysis of the parameters it is easily
observed that the effluent quality of the intermittent sand filter is not
statistically different for the majority of the sampling periods at each
location. The excluded tours (statistically different) consistently included
one tour from each facility (Mt. Shasta tour II, Moriarty tour II, and Ailey
tour 13). All three tours can be identified with specific operational
problems. The identification and correction of these operational problems
has been discussed in detail in the previous sections. It can be safely
concluded that the intermittent sand filters can provide a consistently
high quality effluent when designed and operated properly.
198
-------
SECTION 9
EXISTING OR PLANNED INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
USED TO UPGRADE LAGOON EFFLUENT
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Table 39 presents a summary of the locations where intermittent sand
filters are being used or constructed to upgrade lagoon system effluents.
Table 39 also provides a tabulation of the basic design information, names
of the consultants or designers, and the year when the facility was put
into service. This summary is not a complete tabulation of intermittent
sand filters used to polish lagoon effluents, but a collection of the facili-
ties that have been in operation or are near completion of the construction
phase. These facilities are located in the same states as the three sites
studied with an additional one in Utah. This collection reflects the accept-
ance of intermittent sand filters as a means of upgrading lagoon effluent
primarily in the areas where the filters have been put into use in recent
years. Although many other filters have been proposed in other states, the
conservative nature of state regulatory agencies has resulted in the elimina-
tion of many filter systems at various stages of design.
A tabulation of the design criteria and the economic analyses for
the systems listed in Table 39 is presented in Table 40.
Capital cost estimates for the systems were derived from bid summary
sheets or information provided by the design engineer or contractor. The
cost per 3.8 m3 (1 MGD) of filtrate was calculated from annual costs based
on a 7 percent interest rate and a 20-year service life (Kurtz, 1959).
Annual operating and maintenance costs for the three sites visited during the
study were calculated using the observed maintenance and operating costs
(including energy consumption) incurred over the period of the study.
Figures 81 through 93 are flow diagrams for the facilities listed
in Tables 39 and 40 except for the three facilities monitored during this
study. Diagrams for these three systems are presented in Figures 2 through 4.
The description of the facilities provided by the combination of schematics
and design criteria tables should be adequate to interpret differences between
the systems.
199
-------
TABLE 39.
SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND/OR PLANNED INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
USED TO UPGRADE LAGOON EFFLUENT
Location
Consultant or Designer
Barrett & Associates, Inc.,
Los Altos, California
City of Mt. Shasta, W.A. Gelonek & Affiliates, Inc.,
California Redding, California
Covello, California
Completion Date
Fall 1977
Fall 1976
Tomales, California Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc Spring 1978
Walnut Creek, California
Cimarron, New
Mexico
Cuba, New Mexico
Moriarty, New
Mexico
Ralph E. Vail Consulting Engineer,
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Molzen-Corbin & Associates,
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Molzen-Corbin & Associates,
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Portales, New Mexico Ralph E. Vail Consulting Engineer,
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Roy, New Mexico
Adel, Georgia
Ailey, Georgi a
Cummings, Georgia
Douglas County,
Georgia (school)
Douglas County,
Georgia (Nursing
Home)
Shellman, Georgia
Stone Mountain,
Georgia
Huntington, Utah
Ralph R. Vail Consulting Engineer,
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Thomas & Hurron Engineering Co.,
Savannah, Georgia
McCrary Engineering Corp.,
Atlanta, Georgia
Southern Engineering,
Atlanta, Georgia
State of Georgia
Tribble & Richardson, Inc.,
Macon, Georgia
Tribble & Richardson, Inc.,
Macon, Georgia
Robert and Company Associates
Atlanta, Georgia
Valley Engineering, Logan, Utah
200
Fall 1975
Winter 1976
Spring 1976
Winter 1976
--1976
Fall 1978
Winter 1976
Summer 1978
Summer 1976
1978
1979
Winter 1976
Winter 1976
~ ."..
-
-------
N
a
......
TABLE 40.
SUMMARY OF DESIGN CRITERIA AND COSTS FOR EXISTING AND PROPOSED INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
USED TO UPGRADE LAGOON EFFLUENT
- -
Annual Costs
Des i gn Criteri a $/m3 of Filtrate
Location
Design Type 0n~ Lagoon Fi 1 ters Hydraulic Effective Uniformity Depth of Type of
Flow Lagoon Retention #/Size Loading Size of Coefficient Sand Loading 3 Fi lter F i lte r Filter Year of
Time Rate Sand
m'/d Davs #/ha m'/h'd Capita 1 D&M Total Cost
rrm m
Covello, Ca. 303 F 49 4/D.05 4680 0.6-0.7 N.A. 0.61 Pump & 0.11 - - -
Valves
Mt. Shasta, Ca. 2650£ A 20£ 3/0.4 6548 0.37 5.1 0.61 Auto. 0.05 0.01 0.06 1976
Valve
Tomales, Ca. 144 A 29 2/0.013 5425 0.15-0.30 1.5-2.5 0.91 Pump 0.07 - - -
------------------------------ ------- ------- --------- ------- --------- --------- ----------- -------- --------- -------- ------ ------ ---------
Cimarron, N.M. 568 F 55 2/0.04 7483 N.A. N.A. 0.61 SS - - - -
Cuba, N.M. 530 A&F 20 4/0.02 5616 N.A. N.A. 0.61 Inverted 0.05* - - -
Siphon
Moriarty, N.M. 757 A&F 20 8/0.03 5616 0.2 4.1 0.61 Inverted 0.03 0.01 0.04 1976
Siphon
Porta 11 es, N.M. 7571 A&F 20 3/0.40 18720 0.4 3.2 0.76 SS - - - -
ROY, N.M. 212 F 60 2/0.03 7015 0.4 3.2 0.61 SS 0.01 - - -
------------------------------ ------- ------- -- -- -- -- - -- ----- --------- --------- ---------- -------- --------- -------- ------ ------ ---------
Adel, Ga. 4164 A 30 2/0.40 4680 0.25 3.4 1.22 Auto. 0.02 - - -
Pump &
Valves
Ail ey, Ga 303 F 70 2/0.06 3744 0.25 3.3 0.76 Auto. 0.05 0.00 0.06 1976
Valve
Currmings, Ga 757 A&F 36 4/0.06 2806 0.25-0.80 <4 0.68 Pump & 0.03 - - 1978
Siphons
Douglas Co., Ga. (schoo 1) 49 F 5 2/0.008 2806 0.30 3.67 0.76 Inverted - - - -
Siphon
Douglas Co., Ga. (nursing home) 129 F 45 2/0.013 4680 0.35-0.75 <3.5 0.76 Inverted 0.04 - - -
Siphon
Shellman, Ga. 568 F 55 4/0.032 4680 0.35-0.75 <3.5 0.91 Inverted 0.01 - - -
Siphon
Stone Mountain, Ga. 76 F 1 1/0.081 1430 0.45-0.55 !1.5 0.76 Pump & - 0.03 - -
Siphon
------------------------------- ------- ------- --------- ------- --------- --------- ----------- -------- --------- -------- ------ ------ ---------
Huntington, Ut. 1136 F 214 3/0.27 1872 0.2 -0.25 <3 1.22 Manua 1 0.05 - - -
valves
3A = Aerated Lagoons
£ = Dry Weather Flow
SS = Slow Sand Filter
F = Facultative Lagoons
*25% of total capital.
-------
7
N
o
N
5
7
10
~
UJ
UJ
.0:
:0
)"0
.. . ex:
/. \~
~
N
6
LEGEND
1 I RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 INFLUENT PUMP STATION
3 CONTROL BUILDING
4 COMMINUTER
5 PRIMARY LAGOON
6 SECONDARY LAGOON
7 HOLDING PONDS
8 EFFLUENT PUMP STATION
9 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
10 16 II DIA. CHLORINE CONTACT PIPE
Figure 81.
Covello, CA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram.
-------
@
2
N
o
CJ.)
Figure 82.
7
N~
@
LEGEN D
I RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 LAGOON
3 AERATORS
4 EFFLUENT PUMP STATION
5 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
6 CONTROL BUILDING
7 EFFLUENT DISCHARGE LINE
Tomales, CA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram.
-------
FRENCH
i 4
N
3
N
0
~
LEGEND
I RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 INFLUENT FLUME AND DISTRIBUTION BOX
3 PARALLEL INLET LINE
4 LAGOONS
Figure 83.
LAKE
4
5 SERIES TRANSFER BOX
6 COLLECTION BOX
7 SLOW SAND FILTERS
8 EFFLUENT PARSHALL FLUME
Cimarron, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process
flow diagram.
-------
3
LEGEND
r I RAW INFLUENT
2 INFLUENT PUMP STATION
7 3 INFLUENT FORCE MAIN
N 4 FLOW SPLITTER BOX
N
0 5 AERATED LAGOONS
VI
"10 6 FLOW SPLITTER BOX
7 POLISHING PONDS
8 DOSING AND CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
7 9 INTERMITTENT SANDS FILTERS
10 EFFLUENT DISCHARGE LINE
Figure 84. Cuba, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow diagram.
-------
5 5 LEGEND
RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 INFLUENT LIFT STATION
3 CONTROL BUILDING
4 AERATED LAGOONS
5 5 5 POLISHING PONDS
N
0 8 6 SLOW SAND FILTERS
0\
1 CHLORINATION BUILDING
8 EFFLUENT DISCHARGE LINE
4 4
Figure 85.
Portales, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process
flow diagram.
-------
N
o
....,
3
3
LEGEND
RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 INFLUENT DISTRIBUTION BOX
:3 LAGOONS
4 EFFLUENT COLLECTION BOX
5 SLOW SAND FILTERS
6 EFFLUENT OUTLET STRUCTURE
Figure 86.
Roy, N.M., wastewater treatment facility process flow diagram.
-------
3
2
3
N
O 2
00
~
2
t
N
6
6
(5)
"'-. .JIll":
.. ~ ~
8~A.. ...L~
~ #'of ~ . ----'v ~ ~
LEGEND
I RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 LAGOON
3 FLOATING BARRIERS
4 EFFLUENT PUMP STATION
5 CONTROL BUILDING
6 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
7 CHLORINE CONTACT CHAMBER
8 CHLORINATION BUILDING
9 EFFLUENT ~RSHALL FLUME
. Figure 87. Adel, GA., wastewater treatment facility process flow diagram.
-------
LEGEND
RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 INFLUENT PUMP STATION
3 AERATION BASIN
4 LABORATORY BUILDING
5 POLISHING POND 5
~
6 EFFLUENT PUMP STATION
7 EFFLUENT FORCE MAINS
N N
0
\0
8 DOSING BASIN W/SYPHONS
9 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
10 CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN .
. .
r"-. I r'
II RECEIVING STREAM : -......./
.
9 .
.
\
9 9
Figure 88.
Cummings, GA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram.
-------
2.
LEGEND
I RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 LAGOON
3 BARRIERS
4 CHLORINATION UNIT
N
-
o
Figure 89.
2.
"3
'3
\
2.
~
-
5 DOSING BASIN WI SYPON
6 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
7 CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
8 CASCADE
Garden City Nursing Home, Douglas County, GA., wastewater
treatment facility process flow diagram.
-------
N
~
~
LEGEND
I RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 INLET BOX
3 PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT
4 POLISHING POND
5 DOSING BASIN W/SYPHONS
6 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
7 CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
8 EFFLUENT DISCHARGE LINE
8
Figure 90.
Turner Junior High School, Douglas County, GA., wastewater
treatment facility process flow diagram.
-------
N
I-'
N
5
3
4
Figure 91.
i
N
LEGEND
I RAW INFLUENT LINE
2 INFLUENT PUMP STATION
:3 INFLUENT FORCE MAIN
4 PRIMARY LAGOON
5 SECONDARY LAGOON
6 FLOW SPLITTER
7 DOSING BASIN W/SYPHON
8 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
9 CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
10 CASCADE
II LABORATORY
12 EFFLUENT DISCHARGE LINE
Shellman, GA., wastewater treatment facility process flow
diagram.
-------
6
4
:3
N
~
W
LEGEND
I
2
3
4
5
6
RAW INFLUENT LINE
INFLUENT JUNCTION BOX
PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANTS
CHLORINE DETENTION BOX
HYPO-CHLORINATION BUILDING
POLISHING POND
10
10
8
9
7 EFFLUENT PUMP STATION
8 EFFLUENT FORCE MAIN
9 DOSING BASIN W/SYPHONS
10 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
II EFFLUENT DISCHARGE LINE
Figure 92.
Stone Mountain Memorial Park, GA., wastewater treatment
facility process flow diagram.
II
I
N
-------
t 3
N POND :# I
3
3 3
N
......
.t>-
LEGEND
INFLUENT LINE
2 PARSHALL FLUME
3 3
3 LAGOONS
4 MANUAL DOSING VALVES
5 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
6 OUTFA L L LINE
Figure 93. Huntington, UT., wastewater treatment facility process flow diagram.
-------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
The operation and maintenance data for existing intermittent sand fil-
ters used to upgrade lagoon effluent was restricted to the three systems
evaluated during this study and the system located at Stone Mountain, Georgia.
Additional operating and maintenance data beyond that obtained at the three
sites during this study were not obtained because the other facilities were
not operating or did not maintain adequate records for analysis. Requests
were made for operating facilities to maintain records, but what was provided
was inadequate. Also the lack of any maintenance or operation made an analy-
sis impossible.
RELATED OPERATIONAL AND MAINTENANCE INFORMATION
Two cities in western Oregon use slow sand filtration of river water
to produce the municipal water supply with wells for backup. The maintenance
of the slow sand filter is essentially the same as that used for intermittent
sand filters. Only the nature of the filtered material differs, with the
slow sand filter removing primarily inorganic matter and the intermittent
sand filters removing organic matter.
Because of the similarity in the maintenance of the two systems and
the unique approach used by these two cities to minimize maintenance costs
and prolong the filter service life, operating experiences and manpower
requirements were obtained. Also this information applies to large sand
filters that might use mechanical cleaning devices.
Table 41 presents the information regarding the operating and mainten-
ance requirements for the slow sand filter systems at Stayton and Salem,
Oregon.
SUMMARY
Annual capital costs for the intermittent sand filters ranged from
$0.01 to $0.11 per m3 of filtrate. Some of the higher costs reflect the
use of pumps to load the filters, but variations between areas of the country
and local sand costs are also reflected. The annual cost of the filters
represented from 7 to 38 percent of the total annual cost for the complete
lagoon-filter systems. The average was less than 25 percent.
The operation and maintenance costs for the three selected sites demon-
strated the relatively small cost for the treatment provided by the inter-
mittent sand filters. The Moriarty and Mt. Shasta facilities both .operated
for $0.01 per m3 of filtrate, and the Ailey, Georgia, system cost the least
to operate at $0.005 per m3 of filtrate because of the long filter run times
and the low labor costs in the southeastern section of the USA.
Total annual costs for the three filters evaluated in this study ranged
from $0.04 to $0.06 per m3 of filtrate. These costs are well below the
costs of other alternate lagoon upgrading techniques. The variations in
215
-------
SUMMARY OF OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE EXPERIENCES FOR THE SLOW
SAND FILTERS AT STAYTON AND SALEM, OREGON
Location
TABLE 41.
Topic
Number of Filters
Individual Filter Size
Des i gn Capac ity
per Filter
Design Hydraulic
Loading
Normal Hydraulic
Loading
Depth of Sand
Average Number of
Cleaningsfyr
Amount of Sand Removedf
Cleaning
Time Requirements for
Cleaning a Filter
Equipment Used
Coounents
Salem, Oregon
2
2.02 hectare
189,250 m3fday
93,688 m3fha-d
Winter - 37.475
m3fha.d
Summer - 112,425
m3 fha.d
0.91 m
2
O. 6 to 1. 2 cm
Stayton, Oregon
2
0.4 hectare
9462 m3fday
23,655 m3fha-d
Winter - N.A.
Summer - 18,718 m3fha.d
0.91 m
5
o . 6 to 1. 2 cm
4-6 hours (1 person) 2 days (2 persons)
Self-Propelled
Cleaning Unit*
Cleaning of the fil-
ters normally takes
place in the Spring
when high turbidity
is prevalent.
Tractor Pulled Cleaning
Unit*
1 truck
1 scarifier
1 floating device
Cleaning takes p1ace
normally every 2-2~
months and every 6 weeks
during peak flow
(Summer)
*Filter cleaning device was first built by the Salem operator from a
grain combine. The Stayton version is a self-propelled copy with
different disposal techniques (see Figure 94).
216
-------
: ~,~"w.t.,~. . .
H"'''': '~.... ,"
~. ,,~,. .:.. ,
~~-~ " ~ ~...l.. .
...~ j" - ~. ....
"- ",...:r . 'i '7"'. t': _.~
'.,. 01'( '~/, . '. . ,. '. "~. ~~~. '.,. '_f .' '. ~.. ,......'~
, .~.....- M". .... ..
. -. ..... ~ . ......_-.. ... -.-* -..-.. .. ---.
Self-Propelled Unit at Stayton,
Oregon
Cleaning Operation at Salem, Oregon
-,
J "
.~
Close Up of Cleaning Operation at
Salem, Oregon
Front View of Scraping Device at
Salem, Oregon
Figure 94.
Photographs of filter sand removal devices used at Stayton
and Salem, Oregon.
217
-------
design criteria and flow schemes demonstrate the flexibility available to
incorporate the intermittent sand filters into the design of lagoon systems.
The filter cleaning device used at the Salem, Oregon, water treatment
facility could be applied with intermittent sand filters treating wastewater
from larger communities without losing the advantages of low cost. The
low capital costs associated with the device plus the ability to remove
only 0.6 cm of media per cleaning can extend the service life of a filter
considerably. and considerable savings could be realized over a period
of operation.
218
-------
SECTION 10
INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION
AND OPERATION
GENERAL
Based upon the results of measurements made at three existing lagoon-
intermittent sand filter facilities and the results of the previous studies
at Utah State University, a recommended design for an intermittent sand
filter has been developed. The ability of the typical design to satisfac-
torily meet the 1972 federal secondary treatment standards was considered
when establishing the design criteria. Recommended design criteria are
summarized in Table 42. These criteria are used in the typical design cal-
culations presented in Appendix C.
The specific construction and operation of the typical intermittent
sand filters are representative of northern Utah with reference to options
that may be more suitable to individual and regional requirements.
Two intermittent sand filters at anyone facility is a minimum re-
quirement in order to provide an alternate filter during drying and clean-
ing operations. The second filter also serves as a back-up unit to provide
additional capacity during possible high discharge periods. For additional
flexibility in the wastewater facility the provision of four intermittent
sand filters is advised.
CONSTRUCTION
Retaining Structure and Filter Bed
The most desirable topographic and locational configuration would allow
for gravity flow from the lagoon system through the intermittent sand filters
and disinfection system. A minimum head of 2.5 meters (bottom of underdrain
to top of freeboard) would be required for gravity flow through the filters.
If this minimum is not available, pumping would be required.
Metcalf and Eddy (1935) and Steel (1960) suggested that intermittent sand
filters not exceed one acre but be large enough to accommodate mechanical
equipment in maintenance operations. The observation of slow sand filter
operations and successful and economical mechanical cleaning methods at the
Salem, Oregon, Municipal Water Supply indicates that the one acre size limit
is flexible.
219
-------
TABLE 42.
SUMMARY OF INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER DESIGN CRITERIA
Design Topic
Hydraulic Loading Rate
Filter Size & Number
Filter Shape
Depth of Filter Media
Size of Filter Media
and Underdrain Media
Filter Containment
Influent Distribution
Underdrain System
Maintenance
Considerations
Maintenance Required
Cleaning Frequency
Method of Cleaning
Typical Description
Equal to or less than 4680 m3/ha.d using two or more
equal dosings per day.
Area of individual fil-
Minimum of two filter units.
ters ~ 0.405 ha.
Dependent upon site plan and topography with
rectangular shape desirable to improve distribution
of wastewater.
Large gravel-minimum cover of 10.2 cm (leveledh medi-
um gravel - 10.2 cm, pea gravel - 10.2 cm, filter
sand - 61 to 91 cm.
Large gravel (avg. dia. = 3.3 cm) medium gravel (avg.
dia. = 1.9 cm) pea gravel (avg. dia. = 0.6 cm) sand
(0.17 rom to 0.30 mm, e.s., U.C. < 10).
Compacted earthen bank or reinforced concrete (free
board L 45 cm).
Dosing basin with siphon or electrically actuated
valves with timer control and piping to gravel splash
pads. Splash pad gravel should be 3.8 to 7.5 cm in
diameter and surface area and depth should be 1 m2
and 0.3 m, respectively.
Network of clay tile or perforated PVC pipe at a slope
of 0.025 percent serve as laterals. Pipes are placed
in sloped ditches and attached to larger drain mani-
folds. Minimum lateral size is 15 cm in diameter and
manifold should be adequate to transport design flow-
rate at a velocity of 0.91 to 1.22 m/sec when flowing
full. Maximum spacing of laterals is 4.5 m.
Grass encroachment, rodent activity. serviceability,
access to filter by cleaning devices.
Removal of vegetation on filter surface. Raking and
cleaning of top layer (2-5 cm) of filter sand when
plugged.
Dependent on hydraulic loading rate and the suspended
solids concentration in the applied water (1 month to
> 1 year).'
Raking maximizes the efficiency of the cleaning by
fully utilizing the top layer of sand. Manual or
mechanical equipment cleaning can be used.
220
-------
Although rectangular shapes are most commonly used for convenience and
ease of distribution system design, minimal scouring of the filter surface is
one of the principal design considerations. This can be accomplished by
providing several distribution outlets along the long side of a rectangle.
Containment of the filter media and the applied water can be achieved by
either compacted earthen embankments with concrete or other types of retain-
ment of the embankments and reinforced concrete walls. Methods available to
line lagoons or filters are discussed at great length by Kays (1977) and
Middlebrooks et al. (1978b). Sufficient compaction (85-95 percent) of an
impervious material will provide a stable structure to eliminate infiltration
and exfiltration of water and erosion can be controlled by various soil
stabilization techniques. Aside from the use of concrete and asphaltic con-
crete, the availability of soil amendments and even synthetic liners have
proven to be effective along with combinations of the options.
The embankments should be wide enough to handle a maintenance vehicle,
and an access ramp into the filters should be provided if mechanical equip-
ment is to be used in maintenance of the filters. A width of 2.4 m (eight
feet) is the minimum for the top of embankments and ramps. The interior
slope of the embankment should be between 3:1 and 6:1 with the options of
bank stabilization previously discussed used for erosion and vegetation
control. If exterior slopes are required, a slope not exceeding 3:1 should
be used and a less expensive soil stabilization measure used such as grass or
some type of vegetation. In extreme situations a slope of 2:1 can be used
but must be protected against erosion and traffic.
The use of concrete retaining structures have been used successfully.
In some cases construction is simpler and easy access to the filters for
maintenance purposes can be provided by reinforced concrete retaining walls.
Another advantage is the elimination of soil stabilization requirements and
vegetation encroachment into the filter media.
Filter Underdrain System
Collection of the filtered water is achieved by a network of a main
collection line(s) with lateral collection pipes spaced approximately 4.6
m (15 feet) on centers with all pipes at a slight grade of 0.025 percent
to provide a flowrate of 0.91 m/sec (3 ft/s) to 1.2 m/sec (4 ft/s). The
collection pipe system should be either clay tile or PVC perforated pipe.
The sloping pipe network should be laid out in ditches with gentle slopes
to provide adequate drainage for all sections of the filter.
Depending upon the local soil conditions, the use of a synthetic liner in
the filter bottom to prevent exfiltration and infiltration may be necessary.
Filter Media
The supporting medium starts with washed large gravel, broken stone
or blast furnace slag with a maximum diameter of 3.3 cm (1.5 inch) carefully
221
-------
placed around the underdrain network up to 10.2 cm (4 inches) above the
highest pipe in the collection system. The surface of this first layer
should be level to provide a base for the remaining media layers so that
uniform media depths will be obtained. The next layer of rock should be
made of stone with a maximum diameter of 1.9 cm and a depth of 10.2 cm.
The last or top layer should consist of 0.6 cm maximum diameter rock also
10.2 cm deep.
With a properly designed underdrain a relatively unrestricted flow
into the collection system is obtained. This reservoir can be utilized
to control effluent discharge rates provided the water level does not reach
the sand layer. In cold climates it is Unperative that water levels be
maintained well below the surface of the sand to avoid freezing.
To obtain the best overall performance, a sand with an effective size
of approximately 0.2 mm should be used. The economics of available sand
have to be considered in the design, and the trade offs of using a sand
source of less desirable characteristics but with easier access should be
evaluated. An effective size of 0.35 mm should not be exceeded.
The depth of the sand media should be at least 61 cm to provide adequate
performance with the ability to withstand two cleaning operations (assuming
5.1 cm layer removal per cleaning operation) prior to reaching the minimum
of 51 cm for effective treatment. The option of initially placing up to 91
cm of sand media is again a trade off in relation to the additional construc-
tion cost to handle the extra sand depths along with the extra sand cost and
the cost of more frequent replacement operations. In general it is more
desirable to use initial sand depths of 91 cm.
Influent Distribution System
The obvious first choice to deliver the influent to the filter surface
is with gravity flow. Automatic operation is another important consideration
and is commonly accomplished with flow activated valves, dosing siphons or
tUner controlled valves. Using fully automatic dosing systems is highly
recommended and has the positive effect of preventing overloading of the
filters.
It is suggested that a dosing siphon or electronic actuated valve be
used in conjunction with a dosing basin and distribution network. The dosing
siphon with proper bypass pipes and valves is generally the most economical
automatic dosing system, but electronic float actuated valves with manual
override mechanisms are also very effective. These two types of dosing
devices require minimal elevation differentials between lagoon water level
and filter surface. If an insufficient. elevation differential exists, the
use of pumps will be necessary.
A simple gravel splash pad at each pipe outlet is adequate for dis-
tribution systems with small head differentials. Scouring can occur if
exit velocities are too great, but. scouring can be controlled by using an
energy dissipation ring or wall as part of the discharge structure. The
222
-------
overall distribution system should not be complex. The use of complex dis-
tribution devices should be kept to a minimum to enhance flexibility and
minimize maintenance difficulties.
OPERATION OF INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS
Hydraulic Loading Rate
The design hydraulic loading rates used at the three sites evaluated
in this study varied from 3742 m3/ha.d to 6548 m3/ha.d. All three
systems demonstrated the ability to meet the 1972 federal secondary dis-
charge standards regardless of hydraulic loading rates. Previous studies
(Marshall and Middlebrooks, 1974; Harris et al., 1975; Reynolds et al.,
1974) performed at Utah State University showed that hydraulic loading rates
slightly affected the efficiency of the filters. Hydraulic loading rates
equal to or less than 4680 m3/ha.d were preferred principally because of
the longer periods of time between cleanings.
A loading sequence using two equal dosings a day per filter to be
delivered by an automatic dosing device is recommended. Using the available
filters on an alternating basis with rest periods between doses effectively
reduces the hydraulic loading rate. This can be accomplished using elec-
tronic timers to control the application of wastewater to the filters.
Under this operating scheme, the controlling factor becomes the lagoon
system discharge flow rate. The lagoon system flow rate can be controlled
to avoid major fluctuations from seasonal and climatic variations at a
particular site. The option of including a lagoon level controlling device
ensures control of the lagoon effluent flow rate which in turn will control
filter loading rates for those periods of high flow rates.
Maintenance
The filter media and the filtered matter provide an excellent environ-
ment for weeds and grass to grow. Weed control during the growing season
is achieved by complete weed removal using manual labor or with mechanical
raking devices. The best method of weed control is continuous monitoring
and removal of early growth.
Winter operations are basically the same as the summer except that
cleaning of the filters during the winter is far more difficult. The cold
season should be started with clean filters and in most instances the filters
will operate through the cold weather without a cleaning being required.
The system must be designed to prevent the accumulation of water in the
filter underdrain to a depth near the media surface where freezing can
occur.
When a filter is observed to be plugged or approaching plugged con-
ditions, it is necessary to rejuvenate the filter surface. Two approaches
223
-------
are available. The first method consists of raking the media surface and
breaking the surface mat of filtered matter. Raking makes the cleaning
process more economical by obtaining optimum use of the media surface prior
to removal. Raking can be accomplished manually with a garden rake or with a
tractor and a landscape rake. A maximum of two rakings before cleaning is
recommended.
When the raking process no longer rejuvenates the filter surface due
to the accumulation of the filtered matter in the top layer of the media,
removal of the solids laden layer is necessary. The removal process can
be performed manually or with mechanical devices. A four-wheel drive garden
size tractor equipped with a hydraulically operated scraper, bucket loading
device and either flotation type tires or dual rear tires work well.
The spent filter sand disposal or reuse is largely dependent on the
local availability of the filter sand. When sand costs are high, the
removed sand should be stockpiled, washed and recycled. Storage of the sand
in layers approximately 30 em in depth and washing with 20 or more cm of
clean water has successfully refurbished used sand on an experimental basis
(Elliot et al., 1976). Consideration of this approach appears particularly
attractive in wet climates. It is also possible that filter effluent could
be used to clean the sand by this technique. Investigations should be
conducted to evaluate these alternatives after the system is placed in
operation.
224
-------
LITERATURE CITED
American Public Health Association. 1975. Standard methods of examination
of water and waste water. 13th Ed. New York. 874 p.
Bishop, Richard P. 1976. Upgrading aerated lagoon effluent with intermit-
tent sand filters. M.S. Thesis. Utah State University. Logan, Utah.
123 p.
Calaway. W. T., W. R. Carroll, and S. K. Long. 1952. Heterotrophic bacteria
encountered in intermittent sand filtration of sewage. Sewage and
Industrial Wastes Journal 24(5):642-653.
Caldwell, D. H., D. S. Parker, and W. R. Uhte. 1973. Upgrading lagoons.
Environmental Protection Agency Technology Transfer Seminar Publication.
Daniels, Francis E. 1945. Operation of intermittent sand filters.
Works Journal 17(5):1001-1006.
Sewage
Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests.
I/Volume, p. 1-42.
Biometrics.
Echelberger, W. F. et al. 1971. Disinfection of algal laden waters. Journal
Sanitary Engineering Division, Proceedings American Society of civil
Engineers. 97, SAS, 721.
Elliot, J. T. D. S. Filip and J. H. Reynolds. 1976. Disposal alternatives
for intermittent sand filter scrapings utilization and sand recovery.
UWRL PRJER033 -1. 54 p.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Estimating staffing for municipal
wastewater facilities. GPO # EP2.8W28l3. 88 p.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. Process design manual for nitrogen
control. Technology Transfer, Cincinnati, Ohio. EPA Publication 1007.
Furman, Thomas de Saussure, Wilson T. Calaway, and George R. Grantham. 1955.
Intermittent sand filters--multiple loadings. Sewage and Industrial
Wastes Journal 27(3):261-276.
Grantham, G. R., D. L. Emerson, and E. K. Henry. 1949. Intermittent sand
filter studies. Sewage and Industrial Wastes Journal 21(6): 1002-1015.
225
-------
Harris, S. E., J. H. Reynolds, D. W. Hill, D.S. Filip, and E. J. Middlebrooks.
1975. Intermittent sand filtration for upgrading waste stabilization
pond effluents. Presented at 48th Water Pollution Control Federation
Conference, Miami, Florida (October 5-10, 1975). 49 p.
Hill, David W., J. H. Reynolds, D. S. Filip, and E. J. Middlebrooks. 1976.
Series intermittent sand filtration of waste water lagoon effluents.
PRWR153-l, Utah Water Research Laboratory, Utah State University,
Logan, Utah. 172 p.
Johnson, B. A. et ale 1978. Mathematical model for the disinfection of waste
stabilization lagoon. Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation,
August 1978. p. 2002-2015.
Kays, W. B. 1977. Construction of linings for reservoirs, tanks and pollu-
tion control facilities. John Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y.
Kramer, C. Y. 1956.
September 1956.
Means with unequal numbers of replications.
p. 307-310.
Biometrics.
Kurtz, Max. 1959.
examinations.
Engineering economics for professional engineers'
McGraw-Hill Book Company. Inc., New York, N.Y. 261 p.
Marshall, Gary R., and E. J. Middlebrooks. 1974. Intermittent sand filtra-
tion to upgrade existing waste water treatment facilities. PRJEW
115-2, Utah Water Research Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan,
Utah. 80 p.
Massachusetts Board of Health. 1912. The condition of an intermittent sand
filter for sewage after twenty-three years of operation. Engineering and
Contracting 37:271.
Messinger, Steven S. 1976.
for treatment of dairy
sity, Logan, Utah. 79
Anaerobic lagoon-intermittent sand filter system
parlor wastes. M.S. Thesis. Utah State Univer-
p.
Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. 1972. Wastewater engineering.
pany. New York, N.Y. 782 p.
McGraw-Hill Book Com-
Metcalf, L., and H. p. Eddy. 1935. American Sewage Practice. Vol. III:
Disposal of sewage. Second Edition. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.
New York, N.Y.
Middlebrooks, E. J.
cal problems.
1976. Statistical calculations--how to solve statisti-
Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Middlebrooks, E. J., N. B. Jones, J. H. Reynolds, M. F. Torpy, and R. P.
Bishop. 1978a. Lagoon information source book. Ann Arbor Science
Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Middlebrooks, E. J., C. D. Perman,- and I. S. Dunn.
stabilization lagoon linings. U.S. Army Cold
Engineering Laboratory. Nahover, N.H.
1978b. Wastewater
Regions Research and
226
-------
Middlebrooks, E. J., Donald B. Porcella, Robert A. Gearheart, Gary R.
Marshall, James H. Reynolds, and William Grenney. 1974. Evaluation
of techniques for algae removal from waste water stabilization ponds.
PRJEWl15-l, Utah Water Research Laboratory, Utah State University,
Logan, Utah. 20 p.
92nd Congress. 1972. Public Law 92-500. Office of Public Affairs.
Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. 89 p.
U.s.
pincince, Albert B., and Jack E. McKee. 1968. Oxygen relationships in
intermittent sand filtration. Journal of the Proceedings of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, Sanitary Engineering Division
94(SA6):1093-lll9.
Reynolds, J. H., S. E. Harris, D.
brooks. 1974. Intermittent
fluents--Preliminary Report.
tory, Utah State University,
W. Hill, D. S. Filip, and E. J. Middle-
sand filtration to upgrade lagoon ef-
PRWG159-l. Utah Water Research Labora-
Logan, Utah.
Sawyer, C. N., and P. L. McCarty. 1967. Chemistry for sanitary eng1neers,
Second Edition. McGraw-Hill Book Company. New York, N.Y. 518 p.
Snedecor, G. W., and W. G. Cochran.
Edition.
1967.
Statistical methods.
Sixth
Steel, E. W. 1960. Water supply and sewerage, Fourth Edition.
Hill Book Company, Inc. New York, N.Y.
McGraw-
Tupyi, Basil, D. S. Filip, J. H. Reynolds, and E. J. Middlebrooks. 1977.
Separation of algal cells from waste water lagoon effluents, Volume
II: Effects of sand size on the performance of intermittent sand
filters--draft. Utah Water Research Laboratory, Utah State University,
Logan, Utah. 173 p.
Utah State Board of Health. 1974. Water quality standards.
Control Committee. Salt Lake City. Utah.
Water Pollution
Young, J. C. 1973. Chemical methods for nitrogen control.
Pollution Control Federation, April 1973. p. 637-646.
Journal of Water
227
-------
APPENDIX A
DATA (DAILY AND AVERAGES) FOR ALL PARAMETERS MEASURED
AT ALL SAMPLING POINTS FOR THE THREE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT SYSTEMS
NOTES
(field) refers to analyses performed at the sites
by the field crew.
(UWRL)
refers to analyses performed on preserved
samples shipped by "priority mail" to
the Utah Water Research Laboratory.
Mt. Shasta Tour III Tables A-I through A-8
Mt. Shasta Tour 112 Tables A-9 through A-18
Mt. Shasta Tour 113 Tables A-19 through A-26
Moriarity Tour III Tables A-27 through A-34
Moriarity Tour 112 Tables A-35 through A-42
Moriarity Tour 113 Tables A-43 through A-50
Ailey Tour III Tables A-51 through A-58
Ailey Tour 112 Tables A-59 through A-66
Ailey Tour 113 Tables A-67 through A-74
228
-------
TABLE A-I. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA. 111 LAGOON Ii~FLUENT (FIELD)
D.O. D.O. pH Temperature Daily Total
Alk Fecal Composite pH.
1977 SS VSS mg/I as Total Soluble Coliform Sample ComposIte In Situ In Situ In Situ Flow
Date mg/I mg/I CaC03 BOD BOD Colonies/lOO ml mg/I Sample mg/I o[ mgd
Jan. 22 53 49 85 87 29 2.5 x 106 5.8 7.7 7.1 7.6 8.5 0.605
23 74 64 82 103 31a 4.3 x 105 5.1 7.1 6.8 7.1 9.5 0.589
24 71 36 87 188 40a 2.8 x 105 5.4 7.2 6.1 7.2 9.0 0.580
25 80 76 82 132 36a 5 x 105 4.9 6.7 5.8 6.8 10.0 0.552
26 72 62 83 106 36a 5 x 105 5.8 7.3 5.6 7.1 9.0 0.528
27 90 67 89 93 35 3.6 x 106 6.4 6.9 5.8 7.0 9.0 0.532
28 89 69 83 101 38 9 x 105 b 5.9 7.0 5.4 7.1 10.0 0.5 58
29 76 66 79 110 34 4.4 x 105 6.2 7.1 6.6 7.0 9.0 0.580
30 81 79 89 101 32 4.3 x 106 5.0 7.1 5.9 7.1 9.0 0.566
31" 97 84 101 144 47 7.5 x 104 N.S. N.S. 5.1 7.2 10.0 0.572
Feb. 1 63 53 89 124 48 1.7 x 105 4.8 7.1 5.6 7.2 9.5 0.550
2 117 96 83 146/98 43/39 8.3 x 105 5.3 7.1 5.8 7.0 9.5 0.576
3 105 87 91 114 35a 2 x 106 4.5 7.2 5.5 7.1 9.0 0.556
4 75 71 86 94 48a 8 x 105 4.5 7.0 5.1 7.2 9.5 0.550
N 5 58 44 86 80 34 1.9 x 106 5.1 7.1 6.3 7.0 9.0 0.566
N 6 85 83 82 80 28 3.75 x 105 4.1 7.0 4.9 7.1 9.8 0.564
\0
7 150 139 85 138 43a 3.1 x 105 4.8 7.1 5.1 7.0 10.0 0.571
8 N.S. N.S. N.S N.S. N.S. 2.1 x 105 N.S. N.S. 5.8 6.7 11.0 0.756
9 43 38 78 142a 35 1.2 x 105 5.5 6.9 6.1 7.0 10.0 0.645
10 60 51 80 96 27 1.5 x 105 5.3 7.0 5.4 6.9 10.0 0.593
11 71 62 81 71 30 3.8 x 106 4.7 6.9 5.0 7.0 9.5 0.603
12 63 59 86 87/54 35/26 9.5 x 105 4.6 6.8 5.0 7.0 10.0 0.589
13 84 75 86 81 42a 8 x 105 4.9 7.1 5.1 7.3" 11.0 0.573
14 79 77 89 140d 36d 1.15xl06 4.0 7.4 4.5 7.2 9.5 0.568
15 68 60 86 109 47a 1.6 x 106 5.5 7.3 5.2 7.2 10.0 0.553
16 121 105 94 2.55 x 106 4.0 7.3 4.6 7.2 10.0 0.543
17 95 80 93 123d 32d 1.95 x 105 4.4 7.3 5.0 7.2 11.0 0.501
IS 1/8 117 94 85d 18d 1.2 x 106 3.9 7.3 4.5 7.2 10.5 0.521
19 118 114 94 6.5 x 104 3.9 7.3 4.0 7..3 10.0 0.566
20 106 96 92 88 31 1.85 x 106 2.6 7.3 5.5 7.3 10.0 0.544
Mean 85 74 86 110/76 36/32 5.8130 L 4.9 7.1 5.5 7.1 9.7 0.572
Stan. Dev. 24 24 6 27/31 7/9 0.5115 L 0.8 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.045
N.S. - No \J1l1plc ('Pocket pH metcr malfunctlun. pH from now on t:.tkcn U"'Int! laboratory rH mcter
JOut"ildc the 40-70',7, limit. /- nODS/BODS with nltrificatlun inillbltur.
hOuI\lde the 20-80 coluny hmlt L = Lo!! 10
!..'Not a 24 ilL l'UmpO"ittc.
d>90'/' depictIOn (dIlution water prublem).
-------
TABLE A-2. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg PII mg NIl mgNIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg Nil
mg/l mg/l
Jan. 22 182 49 3.41 14.1 9.07 5.0 0.22 0.045 0.18
23 235 57 3.58 12.5 9.17 3.3 0.23 0.046 0.18
24 275 51 4.03 12.1 11.53 0.6 0.21 0.046 0.16
25 204 58 4.02 11.6 8.57 3.0 0.22 0.050 0.17
26 189 53 3.53 13.3 8.33 5.0 0.35 0.057 0.29
27 182 59 3.97 17.9 9.08 8.8 0.91 0.058 0.86
28 78 59 4.27 17.0 10.54 6.5 0.24 0.048 0.20
29 241 70 3.75 13.3 10.58 2.7 0.23 0.153 0.08
30 108 74 4.76 16.6 10.21 6.4 0.18 0.062 0.12
31 1381 70 5.541 20.91 12.98 7.9 0.19 0.064 0.13
Feb. 1 188 70 4.67 17.8 12.56 5.2 0.23 0.049 0.19
2 150 63 4.12 16.5 12.07 4.4 0.19 0.054 0.14
3 169 66 3.76 18.2 11.88 6.3 0.32 0.090 0.23
4 169 59 3.80 14.7 9.38 5.3 0.56 0.072 0.49
5 116 66 3.70 14.8 12.67 2.1 0.17 0.062 0.11
6 207 66 4.37 15.9 11.95 3.9 0.15 0.054 0.10
7 123 63 4.11 13.4 10.08 3.3 0.28 0.065 0.17
8 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.s. N.S. N.S. N.S.
9 82 36 2.49 10.6 8.75 1.8 0.17 0.066 0.11
10 203 44 2.91 12.1 9.64 2.5 0.40 0.062 0.34
11 187 48 4.25 11.3 9.30 2.0 0.39 0.032 0.36
12 117b 52b 3.60b 11.8b 10.15b 1.6b 0.29b 0.093b 0.20b
13 175b 79b 3.67b 12.1 b 9.82b 2.3b 0.02b O.012b O.Olb
14 230 52 4.43 12.7 10.00 2.7 0.21 0.083 0.14
15 184 64 4.24 13.2 10.11 3.1 0.24 0.060 0.18
16 249 64 4.14 16.1 12.19 3.9 0.18 0.071 0.12
17 218 79 4.21 14.0 10.70 3.3 0.20 0.077 0.13
18 243 68 4.63 17.2 12.30 4.9 0.56 0.143 0.42
19 199 70 5.08 15.0 11.59 3.4 0.18 0.119 0.06
20 203 64 4.53 14.0 11.85 2.2 0.22 0:105 0.12
Mean 181 61 4.05 14.4 10.59 3.9 0.27 0.069 0.21
Stan. Dev. 50 10 0.61 2.6 1.38 1.9 0.17 0.031 0.16
N.S. . No sample.
arotal sample oontained piper, not 124 hr. oomposite.
b Arrived three weeks late.
230
-------
1977
Date
N
IJ,)
....
Jan. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Feb. I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Mean
Stan. Oev.
SS
mg/I
24
15
29
35
19
33
23
39
29
33
14
57
80
N.S.
45
25
35
N.S.
45
8
52
41
49
36
52
56
50
36
40
33
37
15
TABLE A-3.
VSS
mg/I
21
12
19
32
18
15
6
29
27
28
14
37
6
N.S.
32
23
33
N.S.
44
7
43
39
47
35
48
50
43
36
40
32
29
13
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk
mg/I as
CaC03
87
82
83
82
80
88
84
83
84
80
N.S.
83
85
N.S.
84
83
82
N.S
79
78
78
67
77
74
75
75
70
69
70
69
79
6
N.S . No sample
aOulside the 20-80 colony 111011
bvutslde the 40-70'h 111011
CNot 24 hr
d> 90'h depletion (dIlution water problem)
Total
BOD
Suluble
BOD
Fecal D.O. .
C r~ CompuSIte
u I unn Sample
Colomes/I 00 ml /1
mg
pH Temperature
Cumpusite Compuslte
Sample Sample
°c
D.O.
In Silu
mg/I
pH
In Situ
Temperature
In Situ
°c
21
19
33
26
24
2:!
19
20
24
39
2J\.
28/30
17
N.S
27
23
28
N.S
38
30
28
30/27
19
25d
28
28
26/29
6/2
7
7
9
10
10
II
10
9
10
14h
N S.
817
b
N.S
13
8
9
N.S.
13h
10
15
13/13
8
29d
20d
3
9/10
3/4
120
131
172
270
",
8
460
359
905,1
890"
1100"
> 2000"
> 2000"
5300
NS.
4 x 10'
1 95 x 10'
7000
5.1 x 10'
9250
2000
1250
800
375
275
400
320
180
175
205
245
2.8580 L
0.9127 L
12.8
11.6
12.8
1 1.2
11.8
12.2
126
14.3
12.5
1"S
NS
12.4
12.0
N.S.
124
I ~.2
10 I
NS.
11.6
11.6
116
II .1
110
II -~
11.9
110
12.2
10 X
114
II 3
11.8
08
8.2
7.9
79
7A
7.8
7b
7.7
XI
8 I
N.5.
N.S.
7.7
7.X
N.S
7 5
7.7
7.5
N.S
7.6
79
7 ')
8.1
X4
X6
X 5
8.4
X6
X 5
8.3
85
8.0
0.4
1.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
4.0
5.5
5.0
N.S.
N.S.
6.0
4.5
N.S
6.0
4.0
3.0
N.S.
40
3.5
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.0
5.0
3 5
5.0
5.0
38
1.3
13.7
12.8
14.6
12.5
13.7
134
Ib.4'
16.6
14.6
I b.4
16.0
14 b
N.S.
N S.
155
14.0
N.S.
11.7
12.0
13.1
1.12
13.0
128
1.1.8
138
14.6
139
NS.
1.16
134
14.0
I 3
,
S.lInplt: IJkCIl Irom H.Jk.l\' Pund
fpod.c! pH meter n1Jlfunl:tlon. rH from now un IJkt.'n U'In,l.! IJbuTJ.ttlT} pH me(er
3d
4d
/. BODS/BODS "lIh n""t-.catlon onhlbllor
L = lO~IO
8.3
8.1
8.2
76
8.1
8.0
8.3'
8.4
8.4
8.7
8.1
8.0
N.S.
N.S.
8.0
8.0
N.S.
7.4
81
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.8'
9.0
8.8
8.8
8.8
N.S
8.7
8.8
8.3
0.4
3.5
2.0
3.0
2.0
2.5
2.0
6.0c
6.0
6.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
N.S.
N.S.
6.0
6.5
N.S.
8.0
6.0
7.0
7.0
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
8.5
8.0
N.S.
8.0
8.5
5.8
2.2
-------
TABLE A-4. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, Mr. SHASTA, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN N~-N OrgN (NO.+NOJ-N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg Pll mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil
mg/l mg/l
Jan. 22 89 37 3.17 12.1 9.17 2.9 0.51 0.023 0.49
23 93 38 3.58 12.0 9.12 2.9 0.57 0.023 0.54
24 64 41 3.50 12.8 9.17 3.6 0.57 0.023 0.54
25 104 38 3.45 10.4 7.06 3.3 0.60 0.022 0.58
26 93 42 3.63 11.2 7.94 3.3 0.55 0.024 0.53
27 70 40 3.64 12.9 8.63 4.3 0.61 0.023 0.59
28 72 40 3.54 14.2 8.88 5.3 0.61 0.033 0.58
29 73 37 3.58 13.1 9.67 3.4 0.74 0.030 0.71
30 76 37 3.67 13.0 8.18 4.8 0.72 0.027 0.70
31 83 37 3.40 12.5 7.73 4.8 0.70 0.030 0.67
Feb. 1 75 39 3.43 11.1 10.04 l.l 0.59 0.031 0.56
2 72 38 3.45 12.0 9.59 2.4 0.60 0.029 0.57
3 78 43 3.37 13.4 8.21 5.2 0.72 0.034 0.69
4 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
5 87 31 3.38 12.0 9.28 2.7 0.52 0.030 0.49
6 80 31 3.32 11.6 10.21 1.4 0.59 0.027 0.57
7 81 36 3.77 10.2 8.38 1.8 0.56 0.027 0.54
8 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
9 88 32 3.35 11.5 6.67 4.8 0.48 0.029 0.45
10 Il2 67 3.52 8.3 7.00 1.3 0.40 0.027 0.36
11 108 34 3.39 8.4 6.22 2.2 0.35 0.010 0.34
12 96a 37a 3.4la 1O.2a 5.93a 4.3a 0.43a 0.045a 0.39a
13 81a 44a 2.67a 1O.7a 5.30a 5.4a 0.39a 0.051a 0.35a
14 Il9 32 3.42 12.7 5.89 6.8 0.56 0.045 0.52
15 102 20 3.38 8.3 5.85 2.5 0.52 0.054 0.47
16 139 23 3.39 8.2 6.22 2.0 0.59 0.077 0.51
17 143 35 3.49 8.2 5.33 2.9 0.97 0.071 0.90
18 122 38 2.78 8.4 4.96 3.4 0.84 0.109 0.73
19 106 40 3.22 6.8 5.63 1.2 0.67 0.052 0.62
20 Il6 37 3.18 7.6 5.26 2.3 0.80 0.134 0.67
Mean 94 37 3.40 10.8 7.55 3.3 0.60 0.041 0.56
Stan. Dev. 21 8 0.24 2.1 1.68 1.5 0.14 0.028 0.13
N.S. . No sample.
a Arrived three weeks late.
232
-------
TABLE A-5.
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (FIELD)
1977
Date
SS
mg/I
VSS
mg/I
Alk
mg/I as
CaC03
Total
BOD
Soluble
BOD
Fecal D.O. .
C n Composltc
01 orm Sample
Cololllcs/IOO ml /1
mg
pH
Composite
Sample
D.O.
In Situ
mg/I
pH
In Situ
Temperature
In Situ
°c
N
W
VJ
Jan. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Feb. I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Mean
Stan. Dev.
7
17
]8
23
4
30
16
42
17
26
10
32
3
8
33
25
32
24
35
24
35
25
43
24
42
42
43
43
32
21
26
12
7
]3
I-7
22
3
12
6
33
16
25
10
29
2
4
26
23
31
23
32
22
30
24
40
23
4]
38
40
42
31
20
23
12
71
69
70
67
65
74
71
68
68
66
63
65
67
71
67
61
58
54
50
48
49
50
45
43
39
43
43
37
35
43
57
12
22
22
29
24
2 ]
12
17
22
21
18
21
19/19
17
]9
23b
18b
21b
24b
22b
25b
25b
25b/24b
22b
17e
35e
ne
12e
20
21/21
5/3
8
5
g
10
14
7
6
7
6
6
6
3b/3h
3
8
3
3
3
6
5
3
3
3/3
3
10"
14
II
8
24
23
47
46
50
68
69
240"
>200"
565
160
1630
841
250
430
360
50
70
33
10
42
33
17
13
24
5"
6"
1.7220 L
0.6633 L
9.6
8.6
9.4
7.8
8.5
8.4
8.4
9.3
8.0
8.3
X.3
7.7
6.8
6.2
8.3
7.2
6.7
7.7
6.6
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.4
6.7
6.3
6.0
6.6
6.2
6.4
6.5
7.4
I.]
7.2
7.1
7.0
6.5
6.7
6.5
6.9
7.1
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.8
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.7
0.2
7.1
5.6
5.9
5.1
5.4
5.4
4.7
5.5
5.6
5.7
6.8
5.1
4.1
2.5
7.0
5.4
3.7
4.7
4.5
4.3
4.5
3.4
1.8
3.6
3.6
2.4
3.5
2.]
3.8
3.0
4.5
1.4
7.0
6.8
6.8
6.3
6.6
6.4
6.6
6.7
6.5
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.3
6.3
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.0
6.1
6.4d
6.6
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.2
6.4
6.4
6.4
0.2
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
4.5
3.0
3.5
4.5
3.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.0
5.0
5.0
7.0
7.5
8.0
7.5
9.0
8.5
10.0
9.0
9.0
10.0
9.5
5.7
2.5
"Ou tside the 20-80 colony lim it.
bOutsidc the 40-70% limit.
e> 90'1f. dcplclion (dilution water problem).
Ie
2
5/3
3/0
dpockct pH mctcr m"lfunction. pH from now on t"ken using laboratory pH mcter.
/ - BODS/80DS with nitrification inhibitor.
L = Log,o
-------
TABLE A-6. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
Total Soluble T ota! P TKN NH 3-N Org N (N03+N0:a>-N N02 -N N03-N
1977 COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mgP/1 mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg N/l mgN/l
Jan. 22 64 22 3.12 9.1 6.39 2.7 2.6 0.012 2.6
23 64 17 3.28 8.1 6.48 1.6 3.0 0.016 2.9
24 68 23 3.30 8.1 6.39 1.7 3.3 0.01 8 3.3
25 57 32 3.27 7.7 5.08 2.6 3.0 0.016 3.0
26 71 26 3.43 6.0 5.12 0.9 2.6 0.017 2.5
27 55 26 3.21 10.1 5.88 4.2 3.0 0.021 3.0
28 54 23 3.19 10.1 5.21 4.9 3.0 0.022 3.0
29 59 21 3.25 7.1 5.50 1.6 4.0 0.023 4.0
30 56 22 3.27 9.3 5.58 3.7 3.7 0.026 3.7
31 54 25 3.18 8.8 5.41 3.4 4.1 0.025 4.1
Feb. 1 53 25 3.25 8.5 6.12 2.4 4.4 0.026 4.3
2 53 21 3.01 8.4 5.83 2.6 3.4 0.024 3.4
3 53 23 3.01 8.8 5.17 3.6 3.4 0.022 3.4
4 49 23 2.94 7.5 5.17 2.3 3.2 0.022 3.1
5 64 14 2.87 7.2 5.81 1.4 6.0 0.073 5.9
6 43 10 2.76 6.2 4.58 1.6 6.3 0.035 6.3
7 44 10 2.63 6.2 3.83 2.4 2.9 0.018 2.9
8 42 12 2.53 6.2 3.33 2.9 2.8 0.018 2.8
9 43 11 2.63 4.7 3.42 1.3 2.8 0.019 2.8
10 67 63 298 4.4 3.44 1.0 7.4 0.042 7.4
II 67 18 3.20 3.5 3.00 0.5 7.8 0.048 7.8
12 541 181 2.611 5.31 2.221 3.11 7.01 0.0551 7.01
13 561 181 3.271 5.51 1.851 3.71 7.41 0.0511 7.41
14 81 15 3.11 2.7 1.70 1.0 7.5 0.045 7.5
15 96 27 3.09 1.8 1.56 0.2 8.0 0.083 7.9
16 101 18 3.07 2.4 1.26 1.1 6.5 0.050 6.5
17 92 16 3.22 1.4 0.93 0.5 7.7 0.058 7.6
18 88 20 2.61 1.1 0.82 0.3 8.5 0.060 8.4
19 83 24 2.58 1.3 0.82 0.5 7.6 0.062 7.5
20 78 18 2.45 1.0 0.70 0.3 7.4 0.054 7.4
Mean 64 21 3.01 5.9 3.95 2.0 5.0 0.035 5.0
Stan. Dev. 16 9 0.28 2.9 2.00 1.3 2.1 0.020 2.1
IArrived three weeks late.
234
-------
1977
Date
N
W
VI
Jan. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Feb. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Mean
Stan. DeV.
SS
mg/l
13
5
23
27
3
21
17
36
15
22
7
55
4
4
32
15
30
16
30
14
28
21
31
6
36
22
36
29
25
10
21
12
TABLE A- 7 .
VSS
mg/l
4
4
11
23
2
7
5
28
13
20
7
30
3
3
23
14
29
14
29
13
23
20
30
6
32
20
31
28
25
9
17
10
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #4 CHLORINATED EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk
mg/l as
CaC03
62
60
59
56
57
56
63
58
58
55
55
54
57
64
60
51
47
43
40
39
39
38
35
33
22
30
35
15
35
37
47
13
aOutside the 40-70% limit.
b> 90% depletion (dilution water problem).
/ . BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibitor.
Total
BOD
14
13
20
15
7
11
10
14
13
II
15
14/14
14a
12
13
9
13
16
16a
18
18a
18/17
19b
8b
24a
15b
9b
II
14/15
4/2
Soluble
BOD
9
8
10
8
8a
5
5
6
8
6
9
7/7
8
9a
12a
6
6
lIa
9a
7
9a
8/9
lOa
3b
15
5
8/8
3/1
F I D.O.
eca C .
C Ii" omposlte
o lorm S Ie
Colonies/IOO ml :~
5b
Ib
<1
-------
TABLE A-8. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #4 CHLORINATED EFFLUENT (UWRL)
Total Soluble Total P TKN N~-N Org N (NO)+N02)-N N02.N NO) -N
1977 COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg Pil mg Nil mgN/1 mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil
Jan. 22 57 27 2.97 7.8 5.83 2.0 2.4 0.008 2.4
23 59 31 3.14 7.8 5.93 1.9 2.6 0.008 2.6
24 57 20 3.25 8.5 6.16 2.3 2.9 0.008 2.9
25 61 28 3.13 6.9 5.12 1.8 3.0 0.007 3.0
26 57 28 3.30 5.2 5.04 0.2 2.7 0.008 2.7
27 51 27 3.18 8.7 5.71 3.0 2.7 0.009 2.7
28 50 26 3.12 9.2 5.58 3.6 3.0 0.009 3.0
29 52 24 3.10 9.3 5.25 4.0 3.5 0.009 3.5
30 54 26 3.05 9.3 5.17 4.1 3.5 0.010 3.5
31 32 24 3.05 8.0 5.41 2.6 3.7 0.013 3.7
Feb. 1 50 24 2.89 8.4 5.79 2.6 3.9 0.009 3.9
2 49 35 2.95 7.9 3.93 4.0 3.3 0.015 3.3
3 53 43 2.96 7.8 4.79 3.0 3.3 0.010 3.3
4 45 22 2.62 6.3 5.04 1.3 3.2 0.013 3.2
5 45 16 2.65 7.5 4.62 2.9 4.9 0.016 4.9
6 36 13 2.52 5.5 5.47 <0.1 5.4 0.013 5.4
7 35 13 2.43 5.2 4.21 1.0 3.1 0.010 3.1
8 35 14 2.34 5.4 4.17 1.2 3.1 0.012 3.1
9 33 16 2.52 5.0 3.46 1.5 2.9 0.013 2.9
10 50 29 2.78 3.6 2.92 0.7 7.0 0.013 7.0
11 54 18 2.84 6.0 2.44 3.5 7.9 0.069 7.8
12 49a 18a 2.47a 4.8a 2.67a 2.1a 9.0a 0.012a 9.0&
13 52a 29& 2.45a 4.6& 1.82& 2.8& 9.6& 0.013& 9.6&
14 67 18 2.81 2.6 2.48 0.1 7.7 0.005 7.7
15 81 31 2.76 2.9 2.52 0.4 9.1 0.016 9.1
16 76 25 2.87 3.8 2.15 1.6 5.6 0.008 5.6
17 72 25 2.92 2.2 1.70 0.5 7.2 0.008 7.2
18 73 24 2.45 1.3 0.63 0.7 6.6 0.019 6.6
19 71 30 2.45 1.6 0.78 0.8 8.7 0.022 8.7
20 69 22 2.38 1.2 0.67 0.5 9.1 0.007 9.1
Mean 54 24 2.81 5.8 3.91 1.9 5.0 0.013 5.0
Stan. Dev. 13 7 0.29 0.3 1.74 1.3 2.5 0.011 2.5
&Arrived three weeks late.
236
-------
TABLE A-9. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, 111 LAGOON INFL VENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. Temperature Dally
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble Composite pH Total
Date mg/l mg/l mg/I as BOD BOD Coliform Sample Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ Flow
CaC03 Colonies/IOO ml mg/l Sample mg/l "C mgd
July 11 122 110 117 124 39 1.6 x 10" 2.7 7.5 0.5 6.6 26.0 0.667
12 64 54 116 106 44 2.95 x 10" 3.1 6.6 0.8 6.6 22.0 0.644
13 112 97 107 110 44 2.9 x 106 4.1 7.6 2.8 6.7 19.5 0.656
14 132 121 112 148 49 2.9 x 10" 3.8 7.9 4.3 7.0 19.5 0.645
15 45 33 109 87 57 3.7 x 10" 3.8 7.7 2.9 6.7 21.0 0.585
16 97 85 110 110 41 2.55x 10" 3.0 7.0 4.4 6.8 22.0 0.625
17 44 42 106 118 49 1.75 x 10" 2.9 7.9 3.3 6.6 21.0
18 78 71 107 130 46 4.6 x 106 2.8 7.2 2.6 6.6 22.5 0.614
19 108 83 105 73 46 TNC 3.4 7.2 2.4 6.8 20.0 0.697
20 142 123 110 173 41 7.3 x 10" 3.6 7.2 4.0 6.6 20.0 0.633
21 78 46 106 125 32 2.3 x 10" 3.1 7.3 2.1 6.7 20.0
22 86 68 105 87 45 1.8 x 106 3.4 7.3 3.3 6.7 20.0
23 101 70 109 83 45 1.25 x 10" 3.4 7.5 3.5 6.7 22.0 0.659
24 73 61 118 72 44 2.7 x 10" 2.8 7.4 4.8 7.0 20.0 0.627
25 63 54 110 92 32 5.9 x 10" 2.8 7.4 2.2 6.7 21.0 0.628
26 50 39 109 80 40 3.15 x 10" 2.9 7.2 2.5 6.8 23.5 0.598
27 138 114 110 133 51 1.2 x 10" 2.4 7.2 3.0 6.8 22.0 0.601
28 47 39 110 127 38 3.05 x 10" 2.2 7.3 2.8 6.7 23.0 0.587
29 125 116 110 124/114 39/42 3.0 x 10" 2.8 7.2 3.1 6.8 21.0 0.597
30 45 41 109 92 47 2.55 x 10" 2.5 7.2 3.1 6.6 21.5 0.583
31 51 41 109 129 52 4.5 x 10" 1.0 7.2 4.1 6.8 22.0 0.600
Aug. I 39 31 114 91 53 1.6 x 106 1.9 7.2 4.5 6.8 22.5 0.578
2 37 34 111 79 42 1.55 x 10" 1.1 7.3 3.6 6.8 21.5 0.609
3 67 59 III 113 47 2.2 x 10" 1.6 7.1 4.3 6.9 22.0 0.574
4 54 41 108 133 41 1.65 x 10" 2.0 7.1 4.4 6.8 21.5 0.613
5 130 119 102 110/141 48/45 2.0 x 10" 2.4 7.1 1.6 6.8 21.5 t 0.450
6 152 137 107 133 50 5.6 x 10" 2.0 7.2 2.7 6.8 20.0
7 116 88 107 140 47 2.3 x 10" 2.6 7.2 3.5 6.8 20.0
8 160 143 100 143 48 1.4 x 10" 2.3 7.2 4.0 6.8 20.0
9 103 89 104 136 44 3.3 x 10" 1.8 7.2 0.3 6.8 20.0 to.450
10 46 38 99 123 50 1.55 x 10" 2.5 7.2 2.8 6.8 21.0 to.450
11 90 72 104 218 53 2.8 x ](f 1.5 7.1 3.2 6.8 21.5 to.450
12 66 56 110 110 46 4.1 x 1(/ 1.7 7.2 2.0 6.,5 21.0 0.561
13 121 99 119 133 47 3.15 x 10" 1.3 7.2 3.6 6.8 21.5 0.530
14 90 80 118 165 36 2.1 x 1(/ 2.0 7.0 2.8 7.0 20.5 0.466
15 38 32 124 148 63 2.8 x 10" 1.5 7.2 3.4 6.8 21.5 0.500
16 111 99 115 190 53 1.5 x H/ .1.4 7.2 1.7 6.8 22.0 0.466
17 66 64 114 140 42 3.45 x 10" 2.1 7.1 2.0 6.7 21.0 0.460
18 107 94 105 160 56 3.4 x H/ 3.0 7.0 3.6 6.8 21.5 0.475
19 15 12 N.S. N.S. N.s. 3.2 x](f N.S. N.S. 2.8 6.7 23.5 0.480
20 133 131 117 153 93 2.85 x 10" 3.1 7.1 3.2 6.8 21.0 0.448
Mean 86 74 110 121/127 47/43 6.5290 L 2.5 7.3 3.0 6.7 21.3 0.566
Stan. Dev. 37 34 5 32/19 10/2 1.0190 L 0.8 0.2 1.1 0.1 1.3 0.077
N.S. - No sample.
TNC - 100 numerous to count.
/- BODS/BOD 6 with nitrification inhJbilor.
L= LOSlo
237
-------
TABLE A-IO. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (NO, +N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mg N/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg N/l
mg/l mg/l
July 11 197 53 7.14 18.8 17.5 1.3 0.25 0.000 0.25
12 168 47 6.01 16.8 15.0 1.8 0.25 0.010 0.24
13 160 74 5.67 17.0 15.8 1.2 0.25 0.015 0.24
14 193 62 6.65 15.4 14.9 0.5 0.30 0.025 0.28
15 213 70 5.44 14.9 14.6 0.3 0.30 0.010 0.29
16 179 47 5.36 15.1 13.7 1.4 0.35 0.040 0.31
17 192 92 4.89 15.8 13.3 2.5 0.35 0.025 0.32
18 53 40 5.68 12.9 12.8 0.1 0.35 0.045 0.30
19 100 62 5.61 16.2 13.7 2.5 0.45 0.055 0.40
20 299 245 6.52 15.4 9.7 5.7 0.40 0.060 0.34
21 280 196 5.11 14.1 9.0 5.1 0.35 0.085 0.26
22 239 227 6.07 13.4 9.8 3.6 0.15 0.000 0.15
23 286 208 6.31 13.7 9.8 3.9 0.35 0.110 0.24
24 350 284 5.75 14.1 10.7 3.4 0.45 0.130 0.32
25 306 235 5.42 15.3 8.6 6.7 0.45 0.155 0.30
26 237 177 6.29 17.2 15.1 2.1 0.80
27 195 139 6.97 17.0 14.6 2.4 0.20 0.025 0.18
28 288 226 5.30 17.0 14.2 2.8 1.05 0.85 0.20
29 250 243 5.92 14.1 13.7 0.4 1.15 0.93 0.22
30 140 118 5.30 15.0 14.3 0.7 0.55 0.31 0.24
31 179 140 5.47 14.1 13.0 1.1 1.10 0.95 0.15
Aug. 1 286 281 16.8 12.7 4.1 0.60 0.42 0.18
2 303 268 5.22 15.8 12.4 3.4 0.60 0.42 0.18
3 268 250 5.93 15.0 12.1 2.9 0.60 0.40 0.20
4 222 186 5.22 15.5 12.7 2.8 0.60 0.38 0.22
5 329 328 6.54 16.9 12.4 4.5 0.45 0.10 0.35
6 288 283 6.23 16.7 12.9 3.8 0.90 0.47 0.43
7 345 327 4.98 16.5 12.1 4.4 1.00 0.52 0.48
8 319 303 5.22 16.7 13.4 3.3 0.85 0.44 0.41
9 347 328 3.75 17.5 12.8 4.7 0.75 0.50 0.25
10 312 301 5.25 16.9 11.7 5.2 0.75 0.44 0.31
11 303 273 5.62 16.7 12.3 4.4 0.65 0.32 0.33
12 343 340 6.31 18.1 9.5 8.6 0.60 0.32 0.28
13 379 371 7.01 18.2 14.3 3.9 0.65 0.38 0.27
14 444 407 5.95 17.5 13.2 4.3 0.75 0.41 0.34
15 293 274 6.50 17.9 12.1 5.8
16 289 264 6.50 19.6 11.7 7.9 0.75 0.36 0.39
17 377 361 5.98 19.5 14.7 4.8 0.75 0.40 0.35
18 354 343 6.45 18.3 15.1 3.2 0.85 0.38 0.47
19 N.S. N.S. 6.54 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
20 413 409 6.66 19.1 16.3 2.8 0.90 0.36 0.54
Mean 268 215 5.87 16.3 13.0 3.4 0.56 0.301 0.29
Stan. Dev. 85 107 0.69 1.7 2.0 2.0 0.27 0.254 0.09
N.S. - No sample.
238
-------
TABLE A-II. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. D.O. Temperature
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble Com' pH pH
Date mgJl mgJl mg/l as BOD BOD Colifonn posate Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ
Sample Sam Ie
CaCO. Coloniesl100 ml mgJl P mgJl "C
July II 25 16 III 13 7 13 8.5 8.5 9.3 8.7 26.5
12 18 16 III 9 5 7 7.2 8.4 9.5 8.7 21.0
13 38 23 103 9 5 23 9.0 8.8 11.3 8.8 23.0
14 46 38 101 9 4 II 9.8 8.7 12.2 9.0 23.5
15 59 43 99 13 6 II 9.2 8.8 11.3 9.1 25.0
16 65 44 96 9 3 25 9.5 8.8 133 9.0 25.0
17 66 51 81 15 4 8 9.3 8.8 12.6 9.2 24.0
18 60 38 84 14 4 21 9.1 9.2 11.8 9.1 25.0
19 79 52 77 14 5
-------
TABLE A-12. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02"N N03"N
1977 COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg P/l mgN/l mg NIl mg N/l mgN/l mg NIl mg NIl
July 11 39 25 4.51 12.7 12.0 0.7 0.50 0.17 0.33
12 49 21 4.53 11.8 11.1 0.7 0.60 0.56 0.04
13 38 29 4.53 12.0 10.3 1.7 0.75 0.32 0.43
14 43 20 4.42 10.5 9.81 0.7 0.85 0.36 0.49
15 44 18 4.55 10.7 9.54 1.2 0.95 0.010 0.94
16 49 16 4.53 10.4 7.36 3.1 1.25 0.56 0.69
17 45 36 4.71 11.3 7.41 3.9 1.60 0.84 0.76
18 37 25 4.84 11.9 6.14 5.8 1.85 1.06 0.79
19 30 26 4.68 12.9 5.73 7.2 2.05 1.12 0.93
20 62 41 4.95 12.9 2.54 10.4 2.40 1.34 1.06
21 45 33 5.13 10.6 2.65 8.0 2.20
22 135 131 5.13 10.9 2.31 8.6 2.30 1.52 1.48
23 129 117 5.34 11.3 2.63 8.7 2.55 1.62 0.93
24 124 120 5.13 11.7 2.31 9.4 2.65 1.78 0.87
25 128 122 5.73 12.8 1.50 11.3 3.30 1.76 1.54
26 131 125 5.50 11.0 4.81 6.2 3.40 1.88 1.52
27 126 117 5.06 9.9 4.23 5.7 3.20 1.76 1.44
28 131 125 5.20 10.4 0.50 9.9 4.00
29 126 118 5.19 7.1 3.30 3.8 3.20 1.78 1.42
30 127 117 5.20 10.4 3.00 7.4 3.20 1.72 1.48
31 122 119 5.12 9.0 3.00 6.0 2.80 1.66 1.14
Aug. 1 167 162 11.1 2.91 8.2 3.00 1.74 1.26
2 169 167 5.19 10.4 2.65 7.8 1.40 0.60 0.80
3 170 168 5.22 11.2 2.41 8.8 3.20 1.84 1.36
4 161 160 5.30 12.9 2.34 10.6 1.40 0.72 0.68
5 164 145 4.86 11.8 4.02 7.8 3.20 1.82 1.38
6 157 149 5.12 11.3 4.14 7.2 0.80 0.12 0.68
7 170 166 4.36 10.9 2.95 8.0 1.40 0.64 0.76
8 165 160 4.24 10.6 4.31 6.3 3.40 1.80 1.60
9 153 150 4.30 12.7 1.96 10.8 3.15 1.70 1.45
10 160 154 4.11 10.6 1.90 8.7 3.05 2.00 1.05
11 152 144 4.31 9.8 2.34 7.5 3.20 1.86 1.34
12 166 162 5.65 9.9 2.63 7.3 3.15 1.94 1.21
13 165 156 5.63 9.2 1.71 7.5 3.20 2.06 1.14
14 157 150 5.73 9.8 2.06 7.8 3.60 1.82 1.78
15 175 171 5.50 10.6 2.24 8.4 3.40 1.56 1.84
16 172 167 6.11 12.9 3.42 9.5 3.55 1.92 1.63
17 169 168 5.48 14.1 2.81 11.3 3.70 1.52 2.18
18 168 167 5.60 11.8 2.71 9.1 3.75 1.62 2.13
19 174 171 6.00 10.6 2.63 8.0 3.85 1.74 2.11
20 173 172 6.25 11.9 3.05 8.9 4.20 1.88 2.32
Mean 124 115 5.07 11.1 4.09 7.1 2.57 1.35 1.20
Stan. Dev. 52 57 0.54 1.3 2.84 2.9 1.07 0.62 0.53
240
-------
TABLE A- 13 . SUMMARY DATA SHEET, Mr. SHASTA, 113 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER
EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk D.O. D.O. Temperalure
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble Fecal Composite pH . pH
Date mg/l mg/l mg/l as BOD BOD Coliform I Composite In Silu In Situ In S,tu
CaC03 Colonies/IOO ml Sam~ e Sample mg/l .C
mg
July II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 3 I 18 6 5.4
-------
Table A-14. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #3 INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER
EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03 +N02}N N02"N N03"N
Date COD COD mgP/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg N/l
mg/l mg/l
July 23 111 101 0.97 10.6 0.16 10.4 0.13
24 115 114 1.63 11.1 0.25 10.8 0.13
25 114 110 1.84 10.6 <0.01 10.6 10.6 0.03 10.6
26 122 117 4.84 6.7 0.74 6.0 6.4 0.18 6.2
27 118 113 4.74 6.4 0.33 6.1 4.4 0.05 4.3
28 124 118 4.81 6.8 0.14 6.7 4.6 0.19 4.4
29 118 111 4.81 6.4 0.50 5.9 4.2 0.12 4.1
30 122 116 4.50 8.2 0.43 7.8 5.7 0.10 5.6
31 116 110 4.11 6.6 0.14 6.5 3.8 0.09 3.7
Aug. 1 132 128 5.44 9.1 0.82 8.3 3.6 0.03 3.6
2 128 120 2.94 8.4 0.51 7.9 4.6 0.10 4.5
3 132 127 3.07 8.5 0.29 8.2 4.5 0.09 4.4
4 138 135 3.71 9.1 0.21 8.9 4.6 0.06 4.5
5 134 123 2.85 10.4 0.38 10.0 4.3 0.06 4.2
6 129 117 5.14 10.4 0.50 9.9 3.3 0.02 3.3
7 135 125 3.50 10.2 0.46 9.7 4.6 0.04 4.6
8 142 126 3.35 8.6 0.88 7.7 4.0 0.04 4.0
9 140 133 3.54 10.5 0.21 10.3 2.6 0.04 2.6
10 142 142 3.40 8.8 0.13 8.7 2.8 0.03 2.8
11 138 132 3.44 7.3 <0.01 7.3 3.3 0.05 3.2
12 148 135 4.62 7.4 0.33 7.1 2.8 0.06 2.7
13 133 127 4.40 7.6 0.13 7.5 2.9 0.03 2.9
14 133 126 4.29 8.1 <0.01 8.1 3.1 0.04 3.1
15 136 126 3.82 7.3 1.31 6.0 3.4 0.02 3.4
16 138 132 4.32 7.7 0.91 6.8 3.0 0.01 3.0
17 130 121 3.36 9.7 0.41 9.3 3.3 0.03 3.3
18 121 118 4.35 10.4 0.32 10.1 3.2 0.07 3.1
19 134 133 4.12 9.0 1.32 7.7 2.6 0.03 2.6
20 133 131 4.17 8.8 0.09 8.7 3.5 0.02 3.5
Mean 129 123 3.80 8.6 0.41 8.2 4.1 0.07 4.0
Stan. Dev. 10 9 1.05 1.5 0.35 1.5 1.6 0.05 1.6
242
-------
TABLE A-IS. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, 113 SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
(FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. pH Temperature
1977 SS VSS m81l u Total Soluble Coliform Composite Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ
Date mBll mBll CaC03 BOD BOD Co1C11ies/100 m1 Sample Sample mgll "C
mBll
July 11
12
13
14
15
16 23 6 73 3 2 15 5.9 7.7 2.6 7.3 26.0
17
18 5 1 64 4 4 17 4.60 8.1 1.90 7.8 24.0
19 14 10 54 5 5 <1 6.0 8.0 23 7.4 24.5
20 18 4 46 4 4 TNC 8.2 8.2 4.6 7.7 25.0
21 20 6 54 3 2 31 5.0 8.1 24.5
22 9 9 57 2 2 9 8.0 8.0 6.5 7.4 26.0
23 8 2 63 7 6 3 7.7 7.9 5.5 8.2 25.0
24 28 20 47 3 3 33 7.7 7.9 5.7 8.1 25.0
2S 23 17 32 2 2 TNC 8.4 7.7 5.9 7.8 24.0
26 I3 3 52 2 2 4 8.1 7.7 4.6 7.3 23.5
27 24 8 55 2 2 <1 7.9 7.5 5.5 7.5 25.0
28 14 12 60 2 2 <1 8.5 7.3 5.9 7.3 25.0
29
30
31
Aug. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 9 4 54 4 3 3 7.7 7.5 6.4 7.3 25.5
14 11 3 59 2 2 13 7.7 7.5 5.9 7.4 24.0
15 12 0 57 5 5 3 8.1 7.4 6.4 7.7 23.5
16 22 14 52 1 1 5 7.5 7.3 6.0 7.5 25.0
17 4 2 52 2 2 9 7.4 7.3 5.6 7.5 23.5
18 13 10 51 4 4 3 9.2 7.3 5.2 73 23.0
19 15 12 56 2 2 5 7.2 7.1 5.1 7.2 26.0
20 7 5 67 3 2 4 7.6 7.3 5.2 7.5 24.5
Mean 15 8 55 3/0 3/0 0.5809 L 7.5 7.6 5.1 7.6 24.6
Stlll.DeV. 7 5 9 1/0 I/O 0.5169 L 1.0 0.3 1.3 0.3 0.9
L = LoclO
TNC - Too numerOUl to count.
243
-------
TABLE A-16. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #3 SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
(UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH)oN OrgN (NO) +NO:z}N NO:z-N NO).N
Date COD COD mg P/l mg N/l mg Nil mgN/l mg Nil mg Nil mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
July 16 39 11 3.00 8.5 0.62 7.9 4.9 0.00 4.9
18 44 40 2.74 8.9 1.23 7.7 3.7 0.01 3.7
19 36 30 3.42 10.6 0.71 9.9 2.1 0.01 2.1
20 25 17 3.15 9.9 0.95 9.0 4.3 0.73 3.6
21 30 16 2.43 8.7 0.83 7.9 4.0 0.01 4.0
22 123 115 2.99 9.4 1.15 8.2 4.1 0.01 4.1
. 23 104 100 1.65 10.1 <0.01 10.1 0.23
24 99 93 3.05 10.5 <0.01 10.5 3.6 0.40 3.2
25 100 92 2.14 10.1 <0.01 10.1 3.3 0.01 3.3
26 118 111 4.78 10.5 1.50 9.0 3.4 0.04 3.4
27 105 95 4.66 9.7 0.08 9.6 2.8 0.02 2.8
28 118 114 4.58 9.8 <0.01 9.8 2.1 0.02 2.1
Aug. 13 106 102 3.34 6.9 <0.01 6.9 4.9 0.04 4.9
14 95 92 3.42 7.4 0.29 7.1 2.3 0.03 2.3
15 124 116 3.82 8.1 0.48 7.6 1.6 0.01 1.6
16 121 118 3.65 8.3 0.91 7.4 1.4 0.01 1.4
17 122 116 3.85 9.0 0.23 8.8 1.5 0.02 1.5
18 114 111 3.77 9.8 0.55 9.2 1.7 0.02 1.7
19 132 132 4.14 8.8 0.27 8.5 1.5 0.01 1.5
20 132 132 4.14 8.4 <0.01 8.4 1.4 0.01 1.4
Mean 94 88 3.44 9.2 0.49 8.7 2.9 0.09 2.8
Stan. Dev. 37 40 0.83 1.0 0.47 1.1 1.2 0.18 1.2
244
-------
TABLE A-17. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, 114 CHLORINATED FILTER
EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. Temperature Daily
1977 SS VSS mglIas Total Soluble Coliform CampOlite Composite In Situ pH In Situ Total
Date mgII mg/l CaC03 BOD BOD Colonies/IOO ml Sample Sample mgII In Situ .C Flow
mgII mgd
July II
12
13
14
15
16 22 5 68
-------
TABLE A-lB. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #4 CHLORINATED FILTER
EFFLUENT (UWRL)
Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
1977 COD COD mgN/l mg NIl mg N/l
Date mg/l mg/l mg P/l mg NIl mg N/l mg N/l
July 16 36 12 2.58 6.8 1.02 5.8 5.8 0.00 5.8
18 46 20 2.73 8.6 0.47 8.1 4.1 0,01 4.1
19 46 36 3.02 8.5 0.38 8.1 2.2 0.01 2.2
20 19 15 3.00 8.0 0.09 7.9 4.1 0.02 4.1
21 33 14 2.40 6.9 0.57 6.3 3.7 0.00 3.7
22 102 85 1.79 7.7 <0.01 7.7 9.2 0.00 9.2
23 80 75 1.60 8.1 <0.01 8.1 17.5 0.50 17.0
24 83 77 2.08 8.6 <0.01 8.6 9.5 0.00 9.5
25 77 56 2.06 8.3 <0.01 8.3 7.0 0.00 7.0
26 107 103 3.40 2.7 1.50 1.2 5.6 0.01 5.6
27 103 99 3.66 2.9 0.20 2.7 4.8 0.01 4.8
28 103 103 3.70 3.0 0.46 2.5 4.2 0.02 4.2
29 110 103 4.11 3.6 0.25 3.3 4.2 0.02 4.2
30 112 102 3.88 3.9 0.04 3.9 5.4 0.02 5.4
31 108 102 3.07 2.9 0.37 2.5 4.0 0.03 4.0
Aug. 1 124 120 3.35 6.0 <0.01 6.0 3.8 0.02 3.8
2 124 118 2.57 4.1 <0.01 4.1 4.3 0.03 4.3
3 128 124 2.48 3.9 <0.01 3.9 4.4 0.04 4.4
4 134 126 3.58 4.8 <0.01 4.8 4.8 0.02 4.8
5 118 104 2.66 8.S 0.29 8.2 3.8 0.01 3.8
6 117 100 2.63 7.7 0.42 7.3 3.7 0.01 3.7
7 117 104 3.12 5.2 0.38 4.8 3.4 0.01 3.4
8 120 109 3.26 6.3 0.75 5.5 3.4 0.01 3.4
9 124 120 3.26 6.6 0.42 6.2 2.5 0.01 2.5
10 116 113 3.16 6.3 <0.01 6.3 2.5 0.02 2.5
11 124 124 3.27 4.9 <0.01 4.9 2.9 0.01 2.9
12 117 107 4.12 4.0 <0.01 4.0 2.7 0.01 2.7
13 103 98 3.62 4.1 0.17 3.9 3.9 0.01 3.9
14 101 95 3.50 4.3 <0.01 4.3 2.7 0.01 2.7
15 116 109 3.84 6.3 0.26 6.0 2.4 0.01 2.4
16 123 115 3.89 5.0 0.23 4.8 2.4 0.00 2.4
17 105 103 3.47 5.8 0.09 5.7 1.9 0.01 1.9
18 103 99 4.07 6.7 0.18 6.5 2.6 0.01 2.6
19 120 117 3.67 4.8 0.36 4.4 2.4 0.01 2.4
20 122 120 3.62 4.2 0.09 4.1 4.3 0.01 4.3
Mean 101 92 3.15 5.7 0.26 5.4 4.5 0.03 4.5
Stan. Dev. 30 34 0.67 0.2 0.32 2.0 2.9 0.09 2.8
246
-------
TABLE A-19. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #1 LAGOON INFLUENT (FIELD)
1978 A1k Fecal D.O. pH D.O. Temperature Daily
SS VSS Total Soluble pH
mg/l as Coliform Composite Composite In Situ In Situ Total
Date mg/l mg/l BOD BOD Sample In Situ Flow
CaC03 Colonies/IOO ml mg/l Sample mg/l °c mgd
Apr. 14 206 109 103 89 31 4.8 x 105 9.5 7.5 6.8 7.0 10.0 0.790
15 73 65 90 99 33 1.6 x 105 8.4 6.9 8.0 6.9 8.0 1.180
16 24 21 89 74 35 1.35 x 105 9.3 7.3 7.7 6.9 9.0 1.080
17 27 25 79 89 39 1.35 x 105 8.4 7.1 7.3 6.9 10.0 0.957
18 88 73 78 112 37 8.85 x 105 7.8 7.1 7.0 6.8 10.5 0.887
N 19 131 106 78 45 39 2.7 x 105 7.8 7.3 7.1 6.9 10.0 0.932
~ 20 70 63 76 92 40 9.0 x 105 8.3 7.1 7.2 6.9 11.0 0.854
-..J 162 43 3.8 x 105 7.9 7.3 6.9 6.9 11.5 0.813
21 91 73 77
22 47 42 78 131 43 3.8 x 105 7.3 7.1 6.9 7.0 12.0 0.806
23 38 34 81 153 47 4.25 x 105 6.5 7.2 5.8 6.9 11.5 0.775
24 49 37 84 161/155 34/34 4.5 x 105 6.8 7.0 6.7 6.8 10.5 0.877
25 91 78 79 117 30 5.9 x 105 6.7 7.0 6.3 6.8 11.0 0.946
26 54 40 79 4.55 x 105 7.5 6.9 6.8 6.9 11.5 0.938
27 55 51 81 6.15 x 105 6.5 7.2 6.6 6.9 13.0 0.874
28 50 24 85 2.9 x 105 5.7 7.0 6.1 6.9 13.0 0.868
Mean 73 56 83 110/155 38/34 5.5730 L 7.6 7.1 6.9 6.9 10.8 0.905
Stan. Dev. 46 28 7 36/0 5/0 0.2618 L 1.1 0.2 0.6 0.8 1.4 0.109
/ - BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibitor.
L = Logl0
-------
TABLE A-20. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, III LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
1978 COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l
Apr. 14 349 263 3.28 17.3 13.8 3.5 0.74 0.073 0.67
15 318 283 3.26 16.3 8.5 7.8 0.59 0.064 0.53
16 338 268 2.62 16.2 4.5 11.7 0.59 0.036 0.55
17 344 281 2.87 17.9 6:0 11.9 0.56 0.040 0.52
18 301 252 3.97 18.3 6.9 11.4 0.57 0.057 0.51
19 325 228 4.00 17.3 6.1 11.2 0.73 0.055 0.68
20 324 237 3.47 16.7 5.7 11.0 0.50 0.041 0.46
21 331 233 4.35 16.6 7.1 9.5 0.04 0.Ql8 0.02
22 322 206 3.88 16.2 7.1 9.1 0.50 0.265 0.24
23 329 258 3.71 15.8 6.0 9.8 0.40 0.194 0.21
24 305 247 4.76 14.8 7.6 7.2 0.38 0.055 0.32
25 286 215 3.62 14.2 5.6 8.6 0.43 0.045 0.38
26 307 238 3.47 15.6 7.1 8.5 0.43 0.044 0.39
27 313 254 3.50 16.6 6.8 9.8 0.38 0.042 0.34
28 355 230 3.76 14.6 8.7 5.9 0.38 0.188 0.19
Mean 323 246 3.63 16.3 7.2 9.1 0.48 0.081 0.40
Stan. Dev. 19 23 0.54 1.2 2.1 2.3 0.17 0.073 0.19
248
-------
TABLE A-21.
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
1978
Date
SS
mg/l
vss
mg/l
Alk
mg/l as
CaC03
Total
BOD
Soluble
BOD
F I D.O.
eca C .t
C lif ompoSl e
o onn Sam Ie
Colonies/l00 ml P/l
mg
pH
Com posi te
Sample
D.O.
In Situ
mg/l
pH
In Situ
Temperature
In Situ
DC
N
l:-
\0
Apr. 14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Mean
Stan. Dev.
70
34
40
32
32
33
35
42
36
36
22
28
22
22
11
33
13
16
26
27
28
24
28
25
31
35
28
10
16
9
13
4
21
9
73
72
69
72
68
72
69
70
71
70
71
69
70
71
75
71
2
24
19
22
25
16
18
21
21
22
19
18/16
15
20/16
3/0
7
6
5
5
6
7
58
6
6
58
38/38
58
5/3
I/O
1730
130
1520
4225
100
250
110
705
100
26
42
TNC
560
270
130
2.2520 L
0.8765 L
12.1
11.4
12.4
11.6
11.7
11.4
12.0
12.0
11.5
10.8
11.4
9.8
9.6
8.5
8.3
11.0
1.3
9.0
8.9
8.7
8.7
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.1
8.0
7.8
7.6
7.1
7.3
8.2
0.6
12.4
11.7
11.9
11.3
10.8
11.9
11.0
13.2
11.4
10.4
12.4
9.6
9.3
8.3
8.3
10.9
1.5
9.3
9.1
8.9
8.8
8.7
8.7
8.6
8.8
8.7
8.5
8.3
8.3
8.0
7.9
7.5
8.5
0.5
10.0
5.0
8.0
10.0
11.0
10.0
10.0
12.0
12.0
13.0
11.0
12.0
12.0
15.0
13.5
11.0
2.4
80utslde the 4()" 70% limit.
TNC - Too numerous to count.
/- BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibitor.
L = Loglo
-------
'""''I'!j -,00::
TABLE A-22. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH]-N OrgN (NO] +N02}N N02-N NO] oN
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mg NIl mgN/l mgN/l mg N/l
mg/l mg/l
Apr. 14 67 62 2.21 11.6 4.2 7.4 0.80 0.092 0.71
15 62 47 2.29 13.1 3.5 9.6 0.93 0.093 0.84
16 69 57 2.33 12.3 4.2 8.1 0.62 0.083 0.54
17 64 55 2.19 11.4 3.8 7.6 0.52 0.077 0.44
18 62 48 2.62 11.8 5.0 6.8 0.51 0.D77 0.43
19 64 52 2.50 11.4 4.7 6.7 0.46 0.071 0.39
20 62 44 2.53 10.8 4.8 6.0 0.48 0.D75 0.40
21 70 60 2.66 11.5 5.6 5.9 0.43 0.075 0.36
22 69 53 2.59 12.5 4.3 8.2 0.43 0.079 0.35
23 68 53 2.62 11.7 4.3 7.4 0.44 0.083 0.36
24 70 55 2.54 11.3 4.1 7.2 0.45 0.080 0.37
25 68 58 2.66 9.5 3.8 5.7 0.43 0.084 0.35
26 70 50 2.65 12.7 4.1 8.6 0.42 0.085 0.34
27 61 48 2.82 10.6 4.7 5.9 0.43 0.091 0.34
28 74 64 2.78 10.6 4.6 6.0 0.38 0.100 0.28
Mean 67 54 2.53 11.5 4.4 7.1 0.52 0.083 0.43
Stan. Dev. 4 6 0.19 0.9 0.5 1.2 0.15 0.008 0.15
250
-------
TABLE A-23. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #3 FILTER EFFlUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. Temperature
1978 SS VSS Total Soluble Composite pH
Date mg/l mg/l mg/l as BOD BOD Colif onn Sample Composite In Sit u In Situ In Situ
CaC03 Coionies./IOO ml mg/l Sample mg/l DC
Apr. 14 49 13 64 cf 7 65 9.4 7.3 7.7 7.5 10.0
15 9 2 60 8a 4 83 9.9 7.1 9.2 7.2 7.0
16 18 10 49 ~ 4 117 10.6 6.8 9.4 7.1 7.0
17 11 10 46 5a 5 36 9.0 6.9 6.8 7.3 10.0
18 15 9 52 8a 4 104 8.6 7.0 5.4 7.3 10.0
19 7 2 43 8 7 52 9.1 7.0 4.6 7.3 10.0
20 10 4 54 10 6 62 7.2 7.1 3.0 7.3 10.0
N 21 10 9 52 8 4a 40 6.6 7.0 4.4 7.2 11.0
VI
I-" 22 6 3 60 8 31 18 6.8 7.0 4.0 7.5 11.0
23 4 2 63 9 5 54 6.5 7.0 4.4 7.1 12.0
24 4 3 54 41/21 2a/3a 36 7.5 6.8 4.6 7.1 11.0
25 10 7 60 5a 2a 10 8.1 7.0 6.1 7.1 12.0
26 4 3 54 12 9.4 6.7 7.9 6.9 11.5
27 3 1 56 22 8.7 6.9 7.3 6.7 13.5
28 4 1 53 14 8.4 6.7 7.1 6.6 14.0
Mean 11 5 55 7/2 4/3 1.5730 L 8.4 7.0 6.1 7.1 10.7
Stan. Dev. 11 4 6 2/0 2/0 0.3405 L 1.2 0.2 2.0 0.3 1.9
/ - BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibitor.
-Outside the 40-70% limit.
L = Loglo
-------
"'Ii!' ~..:'
TABLE A-24. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble TotalP TKN NH]-N Org N (NO] +N02}N N02-N NO]-N
COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l
Apr. 14 54 47 2.06 8.3 0.04 8.3 3.15 0.070 3.08
15 52 41 2.06 9.1 0.15 9.0 2.85 0.075 2.78
16 47 39 1.79 9.4 0.23 9.2 2.45 0.030 2.42
17 51 44 2.05 8.5 0.18 8.3 2.60 0.065 2.54
18 49 39 2.07 7.7 0.30 7.4 2.80 0.120 2.68
19 44 34 1.75 7.8 0.11 7.7 2.80 0.075 2.72
20 41 37 2.07 7.5 0.74 6.8 2.65 0.24 2.41
21 63 50 1.93 8.8 0.55 8.2 2.38 0.17 2.21
22 60 40 1.93 9.2 0.87 8.3 2.40 0.25 2.15
23 58 38 1.94 8.2 1.18 7.0 2.85 0.24 2.61
24 53 39 1.82 7.6 0.51 7.1 5.55 0.08 5.47
25 59 48 1.69 7.7 0.40 7.3 7.80 0.32 7.48
26 45 40 1.75 11.3 0.22 11.1 6.35 0.07 6.28
27 51 35 1.75 9.9 0.14 9.8 6.05 0.05 6.00
28 51 36 1.88 7.0 0.04 7.0 1.90 0.023 1.88
Mean 52 40 1.90 8.5 0.38 8.1 3.6 0.125 3.51
Stan. Dev. 6 5 0.14 1.1 0.33 1.3 1.8 0.094 1.82
252
-------
TABLE A-25.
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #4 CHLORINATED FILTER
EFFLUENT (FIELD)
1978
Date
N
VI
W
Apr. 14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Mean
Stan. Dev.
SS
mg/I
61
12
II
6
13
10
9
5
3
5
4
8
1
4
5
11
14
VSS
mg/I
14
6
7
4
7
3
2
o
2
2
2
4
I
2
3
4
3
Alk
mgf1 as
CaC03
39
33
35
30
36
33
38
37
44
50
40
46
47
45
42
40
6
Total
BOD
68
58
48
38
68
38
5
38
38
38
28/28
58
4/2
I/O
Soluble
BOD
6
48
28
38
38
311
38
28
38
38
28/28
38
3/2
1/0
F I D.O. H
eca ,p
Coliform ComposIte Composite
Colonies/IOO ml s:;;:e Sample
20 9.5 6.9
9 10.4 6.6
5 10.7 6.4
4 10.0 6.8
11 9.4 7.0
12 9.7 6.7
9 8~ 69
9 8~ 6~
9 8.7 6.9
4 8.8 6.9
11 9.1 7.0
< 1 9.2 6.9
1.0 10.4 6.7
< 1 9.7 6.9
<1 9~ 69
0.6789 L 9.5 6.8
0.4605 L 0.7 0.2
D.O. H Temperature
In Situ Ip S't In Situ
mg/l n I u 0c
8.7
9.3
9.6
7.3
6.9
6.4
6.6
6.3
6.3
5.6
6.5
8.0
8.6
8.3
7.6
7.5
1.2
6.9
6.9
6.8
7.0
6.7
7.3
6.7
6.7
7.0
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.6
6.5
6.3
6.8
0.2
11.0
9.0
8.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
12.0
12.0
12.0
]2.0
13.0
]2.0
14.0
15.0
] 1.3
1.9
Daily
Total
Flow
mgd
0.313
0.374
0.526
0.774
1.005
1.038
].149
0.893
0.705
0.678
0.887
0.335
0.584
0.564
0.580
0.694
0.26]
/ - BODS/BODS wilh nl1rlt1catlon Inhlbl1or.
80ulJilde Ihe 40-70% Umll,
L . LOIlIO
-------
TABLE A-26. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MT. SHASTA, #4 CHLORINATED FILTER
EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble TotalP TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}-N N02-N N03.N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Apr. 14 30 22 1.54 3.2 0.13 3.1 3.45 0.010 3.44
15 21 18 1.54 2.9 0.21 2.7 2.35 0.010 2.34
16 26 24 1.54 3.0 0.11 2.9 2.60 0.005 2.60
17 29 26 1.64 2.9 0.15 2.8 2.45 0.005 2.44
18 26 22 1.93 2.9 0.29 2.6 2.60 0.020 2.58
19 24 21 1.62 2.8 0.08 2.7 3.30 0.020 3.28
20 24 16 1.82 2.5 0.69 1.8 2.65 0.025 2.62
21 43 27 1.84 2.8 0.53 2.3 2.44 0.004 2.44
22 36 27 1.82 2.7 0.84 1.9 2.26 0.008 2.25
23 39 23 1.79 2.6 1.18 1.4 2.85 0.020 2.83
24 31 25 1.71 2.8 0.53 2.3 5.20 0.010 5.19
25 33 27 1.65 2.9 0.36 2.5 7.40 0.020 7.38
26 28 27 1.60 2.7 0.22 2.5 3.95 0.040 3.91
27 32 24 1.69 2.2 0.06 2.1 6.60 0.010 6.59
28 30 21 1.76 2.8 0.05 2.8 1.88 0.008 1.87
Mean 30 23 1.70 2.8 0.36 2.4 3.47 0.014 3.45
Stan. Dev. 6 3 0.12 0.2 0.33 0.5 1.66 0.010 1.65
254
-------
TABLE A-27.
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (FIELD)
1977
Date
N
VI
VI
May 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
June I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
Mean
Stan. Dev.
SS
m:;/l
162
183
216
170
134
148
82
228
141
142
148
106
158
160
468
140
188
142
128
118
178
138
264
202
172
148
186
222
208
142
174
68
VSS
mg/l
128
152
167
128
III
112
62
192
94
74
134
88
122
130
434
102
148
116
92
102
136
108
218
166
128
108
150
190
178
18
136
70
Alk
mg/l as
CaC03
Total
BOD
404
421
424
409
424
438
432
433
429
422
431
416
413
417
443
437
437
441
442
433
425
428
407
441
443
440
444
439
432
407
428
12
62
102a
132a
106
96a
136
165
106
129a
86
105/79
95
168
182
244a
128
137
192
125
89
110/134
92
IOla
113
163
230a
167
] lOa
]86
]36
133/107
43/39
Fecal D.O.. pH
Soluble Colifonn CompoSIte Composite
BOD Colonies/loo ml sam/lPle Sample
mg
46
72
62
108a
73
82
86
69
85a
34
79/74
66
89a
]20a
124a
64a
126a
1l2a
67a
89
] 14/110
59
5 I
61
93
139a
78
43a
70
57
8]/92
27/25
3.95 X 106
4.15 x 106
9.65 x 106
4.1 X 106
4.35 X 106
3.35 X 106
3.25 X 106
3.85 X 106
1.45 X 106
20 X 106
8.05 X 106
3.75 X 106
4 X 106
6.85 X 106
5 x 10'
8.25 X 106
8.2 X 106
8.2 X 106
8.35 X 106
17.5x106
7 X 106
10 X ]06
21 X 106
] 7 X ]06
11.5xl06
12 X 106
10.5 X ]06
14 X 106
9.5 X 106
17.5 x 106
6.5990 L
0.1242 L
1.7
2.0
1.8
2.0
0.9
3.6
2.5
3.3
2.7
2.7
1.8
0.8
2.3
1.3
1.7
1.2
2.4
2.0
1.4
0.5
0.7
I.I
0.7
0.6
1.5
1.6
0.7
0.5
0.5
1.6
1.6
O.!!
7.9
7.9
8.1
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.]
8.]
8.1
8.]
8.1
8.2
8.1
8.]
8.0
7.9
7.9
8.1
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.9
8.1
8.1
0.1
D.O.
In Situ
mg/I
1.5
0.8
0.8
0.3
0.1
0.7
2.2
2.2
1.2
1.2
2.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.]
1.8
0.3
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
1.0
0.3
0.7
0.7
pH
In Situ
8.0
7.7
7.9
7.8
7.8
8.2
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
8.0
8.1
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.9
0.1
Temperature
In Situ
°c
13.0
17.5
18.0
18.0
20.0
19.0
17.0
18.0
21.0
22.5
22.5
23.0
21.0
21.0
22.0
26.0
21.5
24.5
20.0
21.0
23.0
24.0
22.5
22.0
24.5
23.0
24.5
26.0
26.0
23.0
21.5
3.0
Daily
Total
Flow
mgd
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
I.F.
0.046.
0.035.
0.031.
0.032.
0.035.
0.031.
0.040.
0.035
0.004
.Outside 40-10% depletion range.
/- 80D5/80D5 with nitrification inhIbitor.
I.F. - Inoper.tive now meter
Log = Log 10
'Uncalibr.ted now meter
-------
TABLE A-28. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #1 LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3 -N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02"N N03-N
Date COD COD mgP/l mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl
mg/l mg/l
May 19 310 149 7.86 40 40 0 0.04 0.024 0.02
20 361 138 4.10 42 42 0 0.026
21 501 142 4.82 46 40 6 0.022
22 321 152 4.06 42 37 5 0.040
23 371 152 4.40 46 43 3 0.033
24 364 185 4.10 43 46 0 0.02 0.027 0.00
25 292 181 4.06 42 48 0 0.02 0.027 0.00
26 353 174 4.03 49 45 4 0.02 0.028 0.00
27 368 170 7.95 49 36 13 0.02 0.029 0.00
28 343 152 8.61 42 43 0 0.03 0.027 0.00
29 321 192 8.69 41 40 1 0.04 0.041 0.00
30 285 109 7.48 40 41 0 0.02 0.024 0.00
31 310 174 8.89 38 42 0 0.03 0.033 0.00
June 1 490 152 9.14 35 31 4 0.10 0.046 0.05
2 427 213 9.67 42 41 1 0.03 0.046 0.00
3 358 179 10.89 45 36 9 0.02 0.029 0.00
4 555 184 14.21 44 34 10 0.02 0.027 0.00
5 395 182 10.62 38 35 3 0.03 0.035 0.00
6 343 162 10.17 42 36 6 0.02 0.028 0.00
7 284 124 8.97 44 30 14 0.02 0.035 0.00
8 362 163 11.40 42 24 18 0.00 0.027 0.00
9 339 163 9.75 46 29 17 0.03 0.031 0.00
10 517 137 11.84 53 34 19 0.01 0.024 0.00
11 300 172 11.43 52 39 13 0.02 0.024 0.00
12 225 179 50 38 12 0.04 0.025 0.02
13 354 162 10.48 40 31 9 0.03 0.025 0.00
14 409 240 11.43 42 36 6 0.04 0.036 0.00
15 456 172 11.20 54 37 17 0.02 0.033 0.00
16 416 153 12.55 50 36 14 0.02 0.036 0.00
17 338 213 12.75 50 36 14 0.03 0.032 0.00
Mean 369 167 8.81 44 38 9 0.03 0.031 0.03
Stan. Dev. 75 27 3.04 5 5 6 0.02 0.064 0.02
256
-------
TABLE A-29. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
AIk D.O. D.O. Temperature
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble Fecal Com osite pH. pH
Date mg/I mg/l mg/I as BOD BOD ColIform S p I Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ
CaC03 Colonies/loo ml amiI e Sample mg/I °c
nlg
May 19 93 70 248 25 10 5 9.4 9.1 11.3 9.3 13.0
20 64 59 223 25 14a I 11.8 9.2 11.7 9.2 17.5
21 55 34 218 25 15a 31 9.9 9.2 11.2 9.3 15.0
22 56 50 210 25 16 4 9.6 9.2 10.0 9.3 16.0
23 42 36 195 21 12 6 10.2 9.3 11.3 9.4 18.0
24 73 62 202 37 17 8 9.6 9.2 9.3 9.3 18.5
25 42 36 191 29 26 13 8.3 9.1 8.8 9.3 15.0
26 50 48 188 29 21 II 8.7 9.1 8.7 9.3 17.0
27 48 21 201 49a 30a 10 8.7 9.1 8.2 9.3 18.5
28 47 26 208 19 12 13 8.4 9.1 6.8 9.1 18.0
29 227 219 224 67a/186 42a/42a 21 3.9 8.9 3.1 8.9 21.5
30 146 142 239 86a 39a 2 2.0 8.4 1.3 8.8 21.5
N 31 42 36 249 37 28a 4 4.4 8.7 2.7 8.8 20.5
\J'I June I 34 33 258 67a 29a 42 5.7 8.6 3.4 8.6 20.0
......
2 50 39 267 38a 31a 25 6.3 8.6 5.2 8.5 22.5
3 40 29 270 18 16 14 6.5 8.6 5.7 8.6 23.0
4 43 42 266 21 27a 63 8.3 8.7 8.6 8.7 21.0
5 53 42 282 36 273 63 9.5 8.9 10.6 8.9 23.0
6 73 51 282 27a 16a 3 9.9 9.1 10.5 9.1 20.0
7 164 136 278 14 21 56 7.6 9.1 9.3 9.3 21.0
8 92 75 269 28/26 36/35 84 8.6 9.1 9.0 9.1 23.0
9 86 66 298 26 52 100 8.1 8.8 8.6 8.9 23.5
10 94 79 267 20a 19 132 9.4 8.5 8.3 8.7 22.0
II 150 118 295 43 14 144 5.7 8.7 3.8 8.9 22.5
12 142 108 296 76a 26 238 4.5 8.5 6.5 8.7 23.5
13 122 102 291 62a 40a 120 5.7 8.6 6.0 8.7 23.0
14 88 70 307 25 34 190 6.4 8.7 5:7 8.7 23.0
15 90 56 322 30a 21a 150 6.3 8.5 6.4 8.5 24.0
16 80 58 317 30 23 316 6.5 8.3 6.9 8.5 25.0
17 112 14 338 26 22 282 7.4 8.5 6.9 8.5 23.0
Mean 83 65 257 35/106 25/39 I .4340 L 7.6 8.8 7.5 8.9 20.4
Stan. Dev. 46 44 43 18/113 10/5 0.7006 L 2.2 0.3 2.8 0.3 3.1
.Out.ide 40.70'; depletlun ran~e.
/. IIODS/IJODS with nItrofic'.llOn mhlbltur.
L = Lo~ 10
-------
TABLE A-30. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil
mg/l mg/l
May 19 142 97 1.35 13.1 7.10 6.0 0.03 0.043 0.00
20 144 97 0.80 13.7 5.63 8.1 0.044
21 151 93 0.85 14.4 5.31 9.1 0.051
22 143 92 0.77 14.1 5.20 8.9 0.056
23 131 93 0.79 14.1 6.13 8.0 0.03 0.068 0.00
24 135 106 0.80 14.2 5.46 8.7 0.07 0.073 0.00
25 188 109 0.89 13.7 4.79 8.9 0.05 0.077 0.00
26 171 114 0.90 9.1 5.50 3.6 0.06 0.078 0.00
27 149 111 1.55 14.7 5.29 9.4 0.06 0.068 0.00
28 132 115 1.65 13.8 6.29 7.5 0.11 0.092 0.02
29 180 118 1.94 38 7.29 3.1 0.11 0.092 0.02
30 148 138 2.93 32 8.76 2.3 0.09 0.108 0.00
31 140 123 3.18 14.6 8.10 6.5 0.09 0.089 0.00
June 1 155 115 2.39 15.3 8.64 6.7 0.09 0.070 0.02
2 134 113 2.96 15.7 8.72 7.0 0.10 0.084 0.02
3 89 64 2.78 15.9 9.21 6.7 0.13 0.126 0.00
4 139 104 2.88 15.4 8.88 6.5 0.17 0.167 0.00
5 141 123 2.84 15.3 8.14 7.2 0.27 0.26 0.01
6 155 114 3.12 13.9 6.99 6.9 0.32 0.32 0.00
7 151 84 2.95 14.4 6.33 8.1 0.33 0.35 0.00
8 148 109 14.0 5.78 8.2 0.33 0.37 0.00
9 147 107 3.45 16.2 5.66 10.6 0.37 0.45 0.00
10 157 116 4.18 17.4 7.34 10.1 0.40 0.47 0.00
11 149 121 14.6 6.09 8.5 0.44 0.49 0.00
12 140 127 5.03 14.1 6.21 7.9 0.44 0.52 0.00
13 140 121 4.62 17.2 8.83 8.4 0.38 0.53 0.00
14 135 111 4.39 13.1 7.98 5.1 0.38 0.64 0.00
15 135 132 4.60 16.5 8.07 8.4 0.29 0.59 0.00
16 149 109 3.81 14.1 8.30 5.8 0.30 0.61 0.00
17 93 88 4.12 15.8 8.39 7.4 0.37 0.57 0.00
Mean 144 109 2.59 15.5 7.02 7.3 0.22 0.252 0.02
Stan. Dev. 19 15 1.38 6.1 1.39 1.9 0.15 0.214 0.01
258
-------
TABLE A-31. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #3 CHLORINATED LAGOON
EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk 0.0. 0.0. Tcmperaturc Daily
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble F~cal Composite pH. pH Tol,1I
Date mg/l mg/l mg/l as BOD BOO Colifoml S I Composite In Situ In Situ 111 Situ Flow
CaC03 Colonies/l00 ml :;x e Sample mg/I °c r
IIIgd
May 19 80 ' 53 261 27 12
-------
TABLE A-32. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #3 CHLORINATED LAGOON
EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mgP/l mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
May 19 136 102 1.41 13.1 6.24 6.9 0.10 0.035 0.06
20 144 102 1.00 14.0 5.55 8.4 0.04 0.038 0.00
21 140 99 0.85 13.4 5.24 8.2 0.05 0.056 0.00
22 140 104 1.07 18.1 5.12 13.0 0.05 0.051 0.00
23 142 108 0.80 13.3 6.25 7.0 0.08 0.073 0.Ql
24 145 115 0.90 13.1 5.55 7.5 0.08 0.079 0.00
25 175 131 1.04 14.4 4.88 9.5 0.10 0.079 0.02
26 150 122 1.00 12.2 5.37 6.8 0.08 0.081 0.00
27 156 116 1.65 13.0 4.88 8.1 0.10 0.073 0.03
28 125 124 1.89 13.9 5.95 7.9 0.11 0.091 0.02
29 181 129 1.94 17.2 6.33 10.9 0.09 0.092 0.00
30 115 81 3.38 39 12.8 26 0.03 0.027 0.00
31 106 94 3.54 24 13.4 11 0.02 0.035 0.00
June 1 198 141 3.00 21 12.9 8 0.07 0.021 0.05
2 150 133 2.63 18.9 10.3 8.6 0.04 0.054 0.00
3 147 74 2.71 17.4 9.83 7.6 0.11 0.053 0.06
4 153 123 2.77 16.8 8.97 7.8 0.11 0.059 0.05
5 150 91 2.77 15.5 8.68 6.8 0.09 0.060 0.03
6 148 122 2.93 14.7 7.30 7.4 0.09 0.089 0.00
7 147 110 3.18 13.2 8.12 5.1 0.08 0.083 0.00
8 142 120 3.23 9.9 6.25 3.6 0.08 0.098 0.00
9 136 120 3.34 13.4 6.21 7.2 0.11 0.113 0.00
10 162 132 3.91 14.4 6.48 7.9 0.05 0.060 0.00
11 150 140 4.44 12.9 7.34 5.6 0.20 0.035 0.16
12 147 117 4.80 11.4 8.28 3.1 0.19 0.042 0.15
13 131 89 5.22 12.8 6.88 5.9 0.20 0.039 0.16
14 130 62 4.47 12.9 11.2 1.7 0.14 0.033 0.11
15 126 124 4.61 12.9 7.98 4.9 0.14 0.035 0.10
16 140 85 3.96 12.1 7.75 4.4 0.13 0.032 0.10
17 85 78 4.07 10.3 8.12 2.2 0.16 0.035 0.12
Mean 143 110 2.75 15.3 7.67 7.6 0.10 0.058 0.08
Stan. Dev. 21 21 1.35 5.4 2.43 4.3 0.05 0.025 0.05
260
-------
TABLE A- 33. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 114 FILTER EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. I'll D.O. TCIII(>crallllt.
1977 SS VSS mg/I as Total Soluhle Coliform Composite Composite In Situ (>11 In Sitll
mg/I mg/I CaC03 BOD BOD Colonies/iOO ml Sample Sample m~/I In SIIII "('
mg/I
May 19h 14 I 249 10 7 I 7.3 7.9 7.H 7.H U.O
20 15 12 241 19a Iia 10 7.9 R.I 6.6 7.5 1 (,.S
21 5 3 221 17a Iia 3 8.1 8.1 no now
22 II 4 201 12a Ii' 19 R.I H.5 no now
23 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S N.S. N.S. N.S.
24 16 4 128 19a 23a 5/IJODS wllh nilnlkalllll1 If1luhllllf
N.S. . No .".lIl1pk.
IN.' ('. Too nllll1l'rou~ 10 nHlnl.
I = I.II).! 10
-------
TABLE A-34. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #4 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03 +N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
May 19a 74 68 3.23 13.1 14.7 0.0 2.79 2.11 0.68
20 78 66 1.81 14.4 10.8 3.6 2.32 2.33 0.00
21 55 52 1.47 12.5 10.0 2.5 2.42 2.22 0.20
22 75 71 0.64 8.3 5.67 2.6 0.33 0.260 0.07
23 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
24 92 85 0.44 4.2 1.63 2.6 0.18 0.101 0.08
25 92 84 0.54 4.1 0.50 3.6 0.18 0.093 0.09
26 89 74 0.55 6.9 1.69 5.2 0.17 0.088 0.08
27 117 103 0.94 7.6 0.99 6.6 0.18 0.088 0.09
28 75 51 1.06 8.5 1.00 7.5 0.25 0.216 0.03
29 98 96 1.70 8.3 3.86 4.4 1.11 1.16 0.00
30 126 III 1.40 8.6 2.52 6.1 0.30 0.268 0.03
31 132 110 1.57 8.6 2.67 5.9 0.42 0.470 0.00
June 1 129 108 1.99 9.9 3.34 6.6 0.47 0.450 0.02
2 108 95 2.15 8.5 4.01 4.5 0.560
3 92 84 2.29 8.1 4.63 3.5 0.560
4 96 81 2.10 13.6 5.95 7.6 1.02
5 68 44 2.10 10.1 6.57 3.5 1.28 1.36 0.00
6 91 87 2.22 11.1 6.99 4.1 0.77 0.870 0.00
7 88 85 1.94 11.2 8.83 2.4 0.68 0.740 0.00
8 96 80 1.91 11.7 9.88 1.8 1.00 1.24 0.00
9 86 85 1.94 10.9 10.0 0.9 2.20 2.35 0.00
10 87 47 1.82 12.0 6.95 5.0 3.19
11 87 83 1.93 11.8 7.42 4.4 2.13 2.09 0.04
12 84 77 2.78 8.5 7.81 0.7 2.29 2.16 0.13
13 120 66 2.50 8.4 4.69 3.7 1.99 2.19 0.00
14 90 67 2.81 8.7 3.90 4.8 2.67 2.20 0.47
15 95 80 5.85 9.1 2.11 7.0 1.76 2.11 0.00
16 101 62 2.29 8.6 1.65 7.0 1.54 2.14 0.00
17 84 74 2.22 8.9 4.17 4.7 1.57 2.26 0.00
Mean 93 78 1.94 9.5 5.34 4.4 1.24 1.272 0.15
Stan. Dev. 18 18 1.03 2.4 3.54 1.9 0.91 0.940 0.19
N.S. - No ample.
aArrived three weeks lale.
262
-------
TABLE A-35. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Soluble F~cal D.O. D.O. Temperature Daily
1977 SS VSS Total Composite C pH "t pH Total
Date mg/I mg/I mg/I as BOD BOD Cohfonn S 1 omposl e In Situ 1/1 Situ 111 Situ Flow
CaC03 amp e mg/I °c
Colonies/lOO ml II Sample mgd
mg
Nov. 14 145 107 464 180 74 10.15 x 106 4.9 8.2 2.5 8.1 14.0
15 160 124 461 131 83 10.25 x 106 5.3 8.1 3.4 7.9 14.5 0.091
16 120 102 466 168 81 9.15 x 106 0.7 8.3 1.3 8.0 14.0 0.089
17 122 90 457 321 62 8.65 x J'66 0.9 8.2 2.1 8.1 15.0 0.083
18 86 68 432 81 43 7.8 x 106 5.0 8.3 4.1 8.1 15.0 0.086
19 188 152 473 136 62 5.85 x 106 0.8 8.3 4.4 8.1 14.0 0.083
20 166 112 451 104 77 6.1 x 106 0.8 8.1 3.7 8.1 11.0 0.086
21 142 102 449 121 63 6.3 x 106 5.6 8.2 4.5 8.1 13.0 0.090
22 70 64 428 110 45 7.2 x 106 1.0 8.1 0.5 8.1 10.5 0.093
23 148 114 463 98 57 7.15 x 106 1.9 8.1 4.5 8.0 11.0 0.091
24 116 102 438 153 100 5.85 x 106 3.0 8.2 3.3 8.0 13.5 0.093
25 120 98 442 103 52 6.25 x 106 1.5 8.1 0.5 8.1 13.5 0.080
N 26 178 124 453 127 86 5.40 x 106 0.8 8.2 3.9 8.0 15.0 0.086
0\ 27 114 104 447 120 III 4.8 x 106 1.5 8.1 0.3 8.0 13.0 0.087
\..oJ 28 210 184 425 155/158 33/35 4.5 x 106 2.7 8.1 4.0 8.2 0.097
8.0
29 110 94 467 117 49 9.1 x 106 3.8 8.2 6.0 8.1 7.5 0.085
30 156 136 425 141 55 9.6 x 106 2.0 8.1 3.2 8.0 11.0 0.093
Dec. I 124 74 407 290 45 5.35 x 106 4.1 8.1 6.0 8.1 8.0 0.100
2 196 102 400 104 25 5.1 x 106 5.1 8.3 4.3 8.0 11.5 0.102
3 78 60 382 199 40 5.75 x 106 1.4 8.1 5.1 8.1 12.0 0.092
4 144 84 423 207 75 6.65 x 106 1.1 8.2 2.7 7.9 12.0 0.097
5 120 90 389 149/125 81/61 6.55 x 106 2.5 8.3 3.0 8.1 11.0 0.101
6 92 72 382 94 63 7.4 x 106 8.2 8.1 12.0 0.090
7 90 64 414 101 32 6.3 x 106 4.3 8.3 1.7 8.0 15.0 0.097
8 82 10 409 89 26 7.4 x 106 2.6 8.1 0.0 7.9 13.0 0.098
9 134 72 407 74 29 6.25 x 106 2.5 8.3 0.0 8.0 12.5 0.096
10 112 26 414 79 33 6.20 x 106 4.5 8.3 3.3 7.9 10.0 0.099
11 32 24 418 69 120 5.7 x 106 5.8 8.3 3.5 7.9 13.0 0.092
12 132 126 388 90 43 6.85 x 106 5.2 8.2 1.7 8.1 12.0 0.107
13 150 58 398 6.65 x 106 5.1 8.2 3.4 8.0 15.0 0.097
Mean 128 94 429 135/141 58/48 6.8270 L 3.0 8.2 3.2 8.0 12.3 0.092
SIan" Dev. 39 41 28 51J/25 26/18 0.0937 L 1.8 0.1 1.6 0.1 2.1 0.006
/- BODS/BODS with nitnfi,alion inhibitor.
L ; Lo!, 10
-------
TABLE A-36. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3"N OrgN (N03 +N02}N N02 -N N03"N
Date COD COD mg PII mgN/l mg N/l mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg N/l
mg/l mg/l
Nov. 14 245 189 10.93 50 36 14 0.03 0.005 0.03
15 251 197 10.90 66 63 3 0.02 0.004 0.02
16 261 219 11.34 53 50 3 0.04 0.006 0.03
17 207 173 10.29 46 37 9 0.05 0.010 0.04
18 157 87 9.10 43 35 8 0.05 0.008 0.04
19 189 115 10.74 43 41 2 0.07 0.007 0.06
20 223 179 10.42 40 37 3 0.05 0.005 0.05
21 259 179 10.38 53 51 2 0.07 0.006 0.06
22 247 205 9.87 43 35 8 0.08 0.019 0.06
23 267 217 11.06 43 41 2 0.08 0.014 0.07
24 197 115 9.62 41 39 2 0.10 0.025 0.08
25 268 211 8.62 38 32 6 0.10 0.033 0.07
26 303 240 10.38 44 40 4 0.08 0.026 0.05
27 281 225 9.65 42 35 7 0.06 0.009 0.05
28 328 262 10.83 48 47 1 0.16 0.071 0.09
29 293 238 9.23 37 32 5 0.07 0.008 0.06
30 272 201 8.91 49 47 2 0.03 0.020 0.Q1
Dec. 1 350 300 9.71 38 32 6 0.10 0.058 0.04
2 330 267 10.29 37 34 3 0.59 0.46 0.13
3 342 275 10.14 55 52 3 0.26 0.174 0.09
4 348 305 10.43 56 54 2 0.09 0.046 0.04
5 296 251 12.53 45 41 4 0.21 0.130 0.08
6 305 257 10.26 72 70 2 0.18 0.114 0.07
7 311 280 10.12 45 41 4 0.25 0.162 0.09
8 315 265 9.68 76 72 4 0.35 0.25 0.10
9 292 223 9.62 38 36 2 0.29 0.194 0.10
10 263 221 10.54 36 35 1 0.40 0.28 0.12
11 223 182 10.64 32 30 2 0.76 0.54 0.22
12 238 207 10.92 30 27 3 0.43. 0.35 0.08
13 221 194 9.81 45 42 3 0.02 0.004 0.02
Mean 269 216 10.23 46 42 4 0.17 0.101 0.07
Stan. Dev. 49 52 0.79 11 11 3 0.18 0.144 0.04
264
-------
TABLE A-37. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. pH Temperature
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble
Date mg/I mg/I mg/I as BOD BOD Coliform Com posi te Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ
CaCO) Colonies/IOO ml Sample Sample mg/I °c
mg/l
Nov. 14 71 57 274 25 10 200 11.4 8.9 10.5 8.9 10.0
15 78 57 273 19 15 213 10.8 8.9 10.5 8.7 10.0
16 72 60 271 20 12 286 8.8 8.8 11.3 8.7 9.5
17 65 52 290 17 9 197 11.2 8.9 12.1 8.8 8.0
18 78 60 290 22 8 578 12.0 8.9 13.2 8.8 10.5
19 85 77 263 22 II 800 11.0 8.9 10.5 8.8 10.0
20 116 101 300 15 4 880 9.9 8.7 12.4 8.7 9.5
21 84 61 270 23 6 1030 10.6 8.8 11.8 8.7 8.0
22 79 64 279 17 15 1160 11.2 8.7 11.0 8.7 9.0
23 97 77 275 16 6 1040 11.5 8.7 11.6 9.0 8.0
24 80 71 267 22 810 II.l 8.7 12.7 9.0 7.0
25 90 69 262 20 7 250 11.3 8.7 13.0 9.0 7.0
26 94 71 273 21 7 300 10.2 8.8 11.0 9.0 9.5
N 27 100 85 260 21 6 250 10.2 8.5 12.0 9.0 10.0
0\
I.n 28 100 78 267 18/ II 7 5/6 560 11.0 8.8 11.5 9.1 9.0
29 88 77 263 30 10 390 11.2 8.7 13.6 9.1 7.0
30 91 84 261 23 680 10.2 8.7 13.0 9.0 6.5
Dec. I 87 75 257 23 9 1180 11.7 8.9 12.9 8.9 7.0
2 81 77 268 21 7 1620 10.2 8.7 11.5 8.8 3.5
3 80 66 269 40 5 1690 10.1 8.7 11.4 8.9 6.5
4 100 81 270 24 17 1930 9.5 8.7 10.4 8.7 7.5
5 98 79 279 25/29 10/9 1810 9.5 8.6 10.3 8.9 8.5
6 94 77 283 41 13 1380 8.6 8.9 7.5
7 96 82 285 21 8 ]400 8.9 8.7 14.4 8.9 8.0
8 100 64 285 ]7 4 2030 8.6 8.7 13.4 8.9 7.0
9 98 63 290 18 6 2000 9.5 8.7 14.4. 8.9 7.0
10 110 26 313 18 7 2030 12.2 8.7 10.7 8.9 7.0
II 113 109 288 20 8 1380 ] 2.4 8.7 ] 2.3 8.8 6.5
12 46 42 296 ]6 8 1020 10.7 8.7 12.0 8.8 8.0
13 101 65 296 900 10.5 8.6 11.2 8.7 7.5
Mean 89 70 277 22/38 9/8 2.8930 L 10.6 8.7 12.0 8.9 8.0
Stan. Dev. 15 16 14 6/13 3/2 0.3384 L 1.0 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.5
/. BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibitor.
L = Loglo
-------
TABLE A-38. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg PII mg NIl mg Nfl mg Nfl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl
mg/l mg/l
Nov. 14 68 60 4.19 18.6 11.0 7.6 0.12 0.048 0.07
15 59 53 4.32 21.9 18.7 3.2 0.14 0.050 0.09
16 62 53 4.21 14.6 11.9 2.7 0.16 0.052 0.11
17 62 58 4.18 16.9 12.5 4.4 0.18 0.052 0.13
18 59 50 4.18 17.4 15.8 1.6 0.16 0.045 0.12
19 57 53 4.27 15.3 13.8 1.5 0.23 0.056 0.17
20 65 58 4.59 17.1 15.6 1.5 0.17 0.060 0.11
21 61 55 4.37 13.9 11.6 2.3 0.17 0.058 0.11
22 58 53 4.18 18.1 15.6 2.5 0.18 0.059 0.12
23 62 58 4.35 16.6 14.2 2.4 0.19 0.062 0.13
24 60 53 4.34 16.9 14.7 2.2 0.19 0.065 0.13
25 65 53 3.82 15.6 13.2 2.4 0.18 0.068 0.11
26 68 55 4.15 18.9 16.5 2.4 0.18 0.067 0.11
27 70 62 4.09 16.1 14.2 1.9 0.20 0.070 0.13
28 67 59 4.33 19.2 17.5 1.7 0.21 0.071 0.14
29 69 61 4.07 16.1 14.2 1.9 0.20 0.066 0.13
30 60 50 4.28 19.6 17.5 2.1 0.16 0.067 0.09
Dec. 1 71 63 4.25 19.3 16.0 3.3 0.18 0.070 0.11
2 67 61 4.33 21.4 19.7 1.7 0.20 0.077 0.12
3 70 61 4.97 13.3 11.6 1.7 0.21 0.076 0.13
4 71 60 5.13 16.4 14.6 1.8 0.22 0.075 0.14
5 69 58 5.35 13.9 11.6 2.3 0.22 0.078 0.14
6 71 61 5.33 19.6 17.5 2.1 0.23 0.080 0.15
7 69 50 5.42 18.4 15.2 3.2 0.27 0.083 0.19
8 69 52 5.74 26 22.4 4.0 0.25 0.087 0.16
9 76 62 5.63 16.3 14.4 1.9 0.24 0.083 0.16
10 63 61 5.13 24 19.9 4.0 0.23 0.081 0.15
11 61 55 5.26 26 20.2 6.0 0.26 0.084 0.18
12 53 47 5.08 29 22.3 7.0 0.24 0.089 0.15
13 45 43 4.83 27 22.8 4.0 0.22 0.077 0.14
Mean 64 56 4.61 18.8 15.9 2.9 0.20 0.064 0.13
Stan. Dev. 6 5 0.54 4.1 3.4 1.6 0.04 0.016 0.03
266
-------
TABLE A-39. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #3 CHLORINATED LAGOON
EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk D.O. D.O. Temperature Daily
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble Fecal . pH pH Total
mg/I as . Composite . !n Situ In Situ
Date mg/l mg/I BOD BOD Cohfoml S I Composite In Sit u Flow
CaC03 Colonies/I ()() ml am~le Sample 'ng/I .C mgdt
mg
Nov. 14 74 61 273 33 8
-------
TABLE A-40. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #3 CHLORINATED LAGOON
EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3"N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03"N
Date COD COD mg P/l mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mgN/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Nov. 14 36 21 3.94 18.8 13.3 5.5 0.09 0.042 0.05
15 35 21 4.43 16.3 11.6 4.7 0.13 0.056 0.07
16 36 24 4.16 14.3 12.1 2.2 0.17 0.060 0.11
17 35 26 4.22 13.8 12.1 1.7 0.13 0.050 0.08
18 33 25 4.30 12.6 10.5 2.1 0.13 0.045 0.09
19 29 23 4.11 13.6 11.8 1.8 0.17 0.059 0.11
20 29 25 4.37 14.2 12.1 2.1 0.17 0.059 0.11
21 30 25 4.42 15.9 14.5 1.4 0.17 0.058 0.11
22 34 30 4.19 13.4 12.3 1.1 0.18 0.059 0.12
23 31 26 4.29 14.6 14.3 0.3 0.19 0.063 0.13
24 32 29 4.46 15.1 14.4 0.7 0.20 0.066 0.13
25 43 30 4.07 15.0 14.0 1.0 0.18 0.065 0.11
26 42 40 4.33 15.6 14.5 1.1 0.18 0.069 0.11
27 45 40 4.28 14.1 12.9 1.2 0.20 0.073 0.13
28 39 30 4.20 15.2 14.8 0.4 0.21 0.074 0.14
29 39 23 4.09 13.8 12.6 1.2 0.20 0.070 0.13
30 42 36 4.25 16.1 15.4 0.7 0.17 0.071 0.10
Dec. 1 42 30 4.46 15.9 14.4 1.5 0.16 0.065 0.10
2 41 29 4.71 17.1 16.0 1.1 0.19 0.059 0.13
3 44 32 4.89 16.3 14.8 1.5 0.20 0.073 0.13
4 38 29 4.92 21.3 19.7 1.6 0.20 0.072 0.13
5 44 34 4.98 17.2 15.6 1.6 0.22 0.077 0.14
6 43 30 4.48 22.1 20.3 1.8 0.22 0.076 0.14
7 44 36 3.13 20.2 18.9 1.3 0.23 0.078 0.15
8 37 22 5.31 22.1 19.7 2.4 0.23 0.078 0.15
9 41 32 5.61 26 24.3 2.0 0.24 0.080 0.16
10 36 22 4.21 21.2 18.9 2.3 0.25 0.083 0.17
11 25 24 4.53 19.9 19.1 0.8 0.24 0.080 0.16
12 22 22 4.66 23 21.2 2.0 0.22 0.079 0.14
13 35 34 4.02 20.6 19.1 1.5 0.23 0.078 0.15
Mean 37 28 4.40 17.2 15.5 1.7 0.19 0.065 0.12
Stan. Dev. 6 5 0.45 3.5 3.5 1.1 0.04 0.012 0.03
268
-------
TABLE A-41. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 114 FILTER EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. Temperature
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble pH
mg/I as BOD Colifonn Composite Composite In Situ In Sit II
Date mg/I mgfI CaCO] BOD Colonies/IOO ml Sample Sample mg/I In Situ °C
mg/I
Nov. 14 15 II 223 14 I 8.3 8.3 N.S. N.S. N.S.
15 16 4 242 12
-------
TABLE A-42. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #4 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N0J-N NO 2-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg PII mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Nov. 14 14 9 2.50 2.9 0.28 2.6 3.6 0.18 3.4
15 16 9 2.75 3.2 0.32 2.9 2.2 0.36 1.8
16 23 14 2.80 3.4 0.35 3.1 2.0 0.62 1.4
17 19 15 2.26 2.9 0.46 2.4 3.6 1.3 2.3
18 23 11 1.94 2.9 0.61 2.3 5.0 2.0 3.0
19 15 11 2.05 3.4 0.48 2.9 3.9 0.79 3.1
20 16 11 2.82 2.6 0.58 2.0 10.6 2.4 8.2
21 15 9 2.48 3.1 0.51 2.6 7.6 2.5 5.1
22 18 11 2.02 2.7 0.48 2.2 4.9 1.6 3.3
23 19 6 2.62 2.1 0.70 1.4 7.3 1.8 5.5
24 16 9 2.56 2.8 1.10 1.7 6.2 2.0 4.2
25 27 15 1.94 2.2 1.08 1.1 2.6 1.2 1.4
26 23 16 2.09 3.1 0.91 2.2 2.9 0.80 2.1
27 24 15 2.54 2.5 1.31 1.2 7.4 2.8 4.6
28 20 16 2.54 2.1 1.25 0.9 5.6 2.0 3.6
29 20 11 2.20 2.3 1.71 0.6 2.4 0.90 1.5
30 17 9 2.26 2.9 1.31 1.6 3.1 2.0 1.1
Dec. 1 20 11 2.49 2.1 1.00 1.1 7.7 3.5 4.2
2 25 19 2.63 3.0 1.56 1.4 5.9 2.1 3.8
3 31 27 2.74 2.1 0.11 2.0 2.1 0.90 1.2
4 19 15 2.82 2.4 0.11 2.3 3.1 0.75 2.3
5 24 15 3.11 3.2 0.16 3.0 8.0 2.4 5.6
6 24 15 3.24 1.9 0.34 1.6 7.0 2.4 4.6
7 24 12 3.13 2.1 1.33 0.8 3.3 1.2 2.1
8 14 7 3.16 1.6 0.25 1.3 4.0 1.4 2.6
9 23 13 3.25 1.4 0.15 1.2 8.2 3.7 4.5
10 17 15 3.24 2.8 2.75 0.1 7.8 2.0 5.8
11 12 8 3.29 4.9 4.69 0.2 2.5 0.75 1.8
12 17 16 3.14 4.6 4.38 0.2 1.3 0.36 0.9
13 19 15 2.81 4.3 3.94 0.4 2.9 0.82 2.1
Mean 20 13 2.65 2.8 1.14 1.6 4.8 1.58 3.2
Stan. Dev. 4 4 0.42 0.8 1.24 0.9 2.4 0.91 1.7
270
-------
TABLE A-43. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, III LAGOON INFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk D.O. D.O. TClllpcralurc Daily
1978 SS VSS Total Solllhic h~;11 . . I'll I'll Total
mg/l as . (,"npmlle . III Silll III Sitll
Date mg/l mg/l BOD BOD (oillolln S I (ollll)(,slle III Silll Flow
CaC03 (' I . 1100 I allll'c S I IlIg/l or
o 'lilies III II ,011111' c IIIgd
rug
Feb. 14 134 114 486 121 61 4.95 x 10" 1.5 X.~ 1.6 8.2 10.0 0.093
IS ]64 144 492 171 84 3.96 x 10" 3.9 8.3 3.0 X.I 11.0 0.097
16 179 139 439 135 67 3.5 x 10" 1.6 IU 1.6 8.1 12.0 0.100
17 178 136 511 212 93 3.65 x 10" 1.0 X.I 2.0 8.1 !.l.0 0.087
18 202 176 501 198 92 3.4 x 10" 3.4 8.2 0.5 8.0 8.0 0.097
19 110 94 43] 197 100 3.15 x 10" 3.9 8.2 3.2 8.1 12.0 0.096
20 84 73 433 157 J08" 3.95 x 10. 2.6 8.3 1.9 8.1 15.0 0.101
2] 162 128 456 ]84 76 .1.2 x 10. 2.4 8.~ 0.5 8.0 17.0 0.100
22 202 118 464 135 90 4.05 x 10" 0.8 8.3 1.5 8.1 16.0 0.100
23 112 95 442 155 90 4.4 x 10. 1.7 8.3 0.1 fI.1 16.0 0.090
24 186 74 472 254 85 3.8 x 10" 1.9 8.2 1.3 8.1 14.0 0.102
25 346 316 452 284 63 3.15 x 10. 3.3 8.3 0.2 7.9 16.0 0.101
26 ]54 166 470 164 72 2.7 x 10" 0.6 8.1 1.3 8.1 17.0 0.089
27 184 148 437 198 71 N.S. 0.5 8.1 1.8 8.1 14.0 0.111
N 28 194 164 429 129 68 3.3 x 10. 0.6 8.3 1.5 8.0 17.0 0.091
.....
- Mar. I 140 130 464 151 74 2.9 x 10" 0.7 8.~ 2.9 8.1 14.0 0.104
2 142 118 471 170/129 57/64 4.05 x 10. 0.6 8.3 0.8 8.1 17.0 0.095
3 100 92 464 149" 77 2.8 x 10. 0.8 8.1 0.7 8.1 15.0 0.108
4 162 130 424 201 59 2.05 x 10. 2.6 8.3 0.4 8.1 16.0 0.084
5 1]8 ]06 430 129 88 2.2 x J05 0.6 8.1 1.1 8.1 16.0 0.105
6 162 140 449 290" 78 2.7 x 10. 0.8 8.1 0.4 8.2 16.0 0.112
7 120 60 444 135 70" 2.45 x 10. 0.6 8.3 0.5 8.1 16.0 0.094
8 88 48 449 173 72" I .85 x 10. 1.0 8.3 1.8 8.3 16.0 0.098
9 96 52 440 208 ISO" 2.8 x 10" 0.4 8.1 1.9 8.3 15.0 0.107
10 258 218 440 161 83" 2.45 x 10. 0.8 8.3 1.7 8.3 12.0 0.114
II 59 30 408 131 115 4.2 x 10. 1.6 8.3 0.5 8.2 14.0 0.088
12 134 112 424 261" 86 5.2 x 10" 2.0 8.3 2.6 8.3 12.0 0.105
13 94 80 455 106 73" 3.35 x 10. 3.1 8.4 1.5 8.4 12.0 0.120
14 140 124 452 136 57 10.2 x 10. 2.0 8.3 1.0 11.5 14.0 0.117
15 248 190 420 200 91" 4.2 x 10" 4.9 8.5 1.8 8.5 12.0 0.104
Mean 155 124 451 177/129 82/64 6.3080 L 1.7 8.2 1.4 11.2 14.2 0.100
Stan. Dcv. 59 56 24 48/0 19/0 1.2000 L 1.2 0.1 0.8 0.1 2..l OJJ09
...tOUI\JC..lc 40-70'1, bmll.
1- IIOD5/IIOD5 wllh "1I""L"lIo" onhihllor.
" . \;0 \..1m pie
1 = Lo).! 1(,
-------
TABLE A-44. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3 -N OrgN (No" +N02)-N N02 -N N03-N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg N/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Feb. 14 305 213 13.15 92 35 57 0.01 0.005 0.00
15 310 186 15.24 92 40 52 0.04 0.032 0.01
16 295 196 13.45 88 36 52 0.06 0.020 0.04
17 259 195 14.53 90 39 51 om 0.005 0.00
18 313 207 13.61 89 38 51 0.01 0.005 0.00
19 293 219 14.68 91 34 57 0.01 0.006 0.00
20 265 195 12.78 89 33 56 0.04 0.014 0.03
21 267 230 12.28 89 36 53 0.04 0.006 0.03
22 310 236 11.67 87 39 48 0.05 0.005 0.04
23 305 244 12.28 91 40 51 0.06 0.004 0.06
24 273 236 11.97 89 36 53 0.02 0.004 0.02
25 299 228 13.79 88 34 54 0.02 0.004 0.02
26 275 230 12.74 88 37 51 0.03 0.005 0.02
27 263 226 13.51 89 35 54 0.04 0.005 0.04
28 292 236 12.28 87 35 52 0.06 0.006 0.05
Mar. 1 240 221 12.19 92 38 54 0.04 0.005 0.04
2 282 219 11.54 88 33 55 0.06 0.006 0.05
3 270 229 10.65 90 30 60 0.07 0.006 0.06
4 254 195 11.54 89 33 56 0.07 0.005 0.06
5 268 198 10.77 86 26 60 0.07 0.005 0.06
6 262 189 11.73 91 34 57 0.13 0.094 0.04
7 264 193 8.49 91 29 62 0.01 0.003 0.01
8 294 222 9.60 75 33 42 0.02 0.004 0.02
9 268 187 8.68 85 29 56 0.03 0.004 0.03
10 272 181 11.23 91 35 56 0.09 0.041 0.05
11 252 192 7.91 88 31 57 0.57 0.45 0.12
12 226 181 8.65 90 30 60 0.27 0.20 0.07
13 289 216 11. 78 83 33 so 0.02 0.006 0.01
14 267 172 12.06 91 33 58 0.03 0.006 0.02
15 277 202 14.31 88 27 61 0.04 0.006 0.03
Mean 276 209 11.97 89 34 54 0.07 0.032 0.04
Stan. Dev. 22 20 1.89 3 4 4 0.11 0.088 0.02
272
-------
TABLE A-4S. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. I'll /).0. ./ "111('" "'11'"
19711 SS VSS 1111(/1 as Tolal Soluhle Coliforl1l COl1lposile ('OI1lPOSllc III Silll 1''' III SIIII
Dale 1111(/1 1111(/1 CaCO] BOD nOD Colonies/I 00 1111 Sal1lple Sample 1111:/1 III Situ "('
011(/1
Feh. 14 R] 7] 382 21" 9 180 13.1 8.7 14.6 8.9 2.5
15 77 76 388 34 13 45 14.7 8.6 15.1 R.R 4.0
16 112 61 336 II!" 10 130 13.4 11.7 16.2 8.1 3.5
17 7] 58 370 19" 9 80 12.5 8.7 17.0 9.0 5.0
III 69 50 383 14" II 42 15.9 8.8 16.5 8.9 ].0
19 61 50 358 21 13 96 15.3 11.7 18.R 8.9 4.5
20 66 53 349 22" II 100 13.9 8.5 16.2 11.7 7.0
21 70 47 ]45 21 II 12 14.2 R.7 13.6 8.9 9.0
22 55 15 348 16" 13 711 14.3 8.7 12.11 R.9 10.0
23 40 25 341 13" 13 82 14.9 8.8 12.5 11.11 11.0
24 67 38 331 41 20 112 11.5 8.6 13.0 8.8 H.O
25 69 62 357 19 13 7R 11.3 8.7 13.1 R.7 9.0
26 57 52 342 28 16 74 to.R R.7 12.9 R.7 11.0
N 27 72 63 338 24 20. N.S. 10.7 R.7 15.6 11.7 7.0
...., 28 77 68 340 25 13 70 10.2 R.7 12.7 8.7 10.0
I".)
Mar. I 77 71 329 24 17" 180 9.0 R.6 11.0 R.9 9.0
2 77 70 34R 43/32" 15/15 166 9..1 8.6 11.0 9.0 9.0
.1 76 62 348 31 22" 100 11.4 R.7 12.0 R.9 10.0
4 90 76 334 42 I] 48 II.H 8.R 11.1 9.0 11.0
5 90 7R 332 25 14 86 11.1 R.R 10.R 9.0 10.0
6 84 77 326 > 76" 24 56 10.2 8.9 12.1 9.1 11.0
7 80 58 .1.l7 23 II 42 10.9 8.9 14.5 9.0 11.0
II 15 10 331 > R2" 26 20 11.0 8.9 1.l.0 9.1 10.0
9 7.1 59 349 ]0 > 40" 42 11.2 8.7 12.0 9.1 12.0
10 III 99 324 > 77" ]2" 62 10..1 R.9 II.R 9.1 7.0
II 62 50 323 .16 17" 64 11.1 R.9 14.2 9.2 10.0
12 110 55 333 42 16 R4 9.0 R.9 12.4 9.0 H.O
I.l 72 65 320 23 ]6" 112 H.R 8.5 10.9 9.1 8.0
14 60 55 341 .l.l I.l" 106 R.(, H.II 11.0 9.1 H.O
15 76 65 ]42 26 .15" R2 10.5 11.9 11.4 9.1 6.0
Me.1II 71 5H ]44 ]2/32 I fI./ 15 1.7940 l. 11.7 R.7 13.3 H.9 R.I
51,111. Dcv. 17 19 17 1 R/O R/O 0.4219 I 21 0.1 2.1 0.2 2.7
"Ouh'UC 40.70'f, IIlInl.
1.1101>511101>5 willi 1111,,11<'''''1>11 1111>11>111"
N.S.. No "'lI1pl,',
L = l,o~IO
-------
TABLE A-46. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3.N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02.N N03"N
Date COD COD mgP/1 mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Feb. 14 39 29 5.99 29 27 2 0.25 0.135 0.11
15 41 33 5.80 31 27 4 0.23 0.135 0.10
16 39 26 5.74 30 26 4 0.31 0.140 0.17
17 40 25 5.77 28 26 2 0.28 0.140 0.14
18 45 37 5.22 34 26 8 0.27 0.140 0.13
19 43 36 5.39 33 26 7 0.27 0.135 0.14
20 41 33 5.53 29 26 3 0.28 0.140 0.14
21 37 30 5.21 35 30 5 0.24 0.135 0.10
22 41 35 4.79 36 28 8 0.27 0.125 0.14
23 45 30 4.45 36 29 7 0.29 0.120 0.17
24 42 33 5.21 35 28 7 0.23 0.125 0.10
25 45 40 5.21 36 26 10 0.24 0.130 0.11
26 41 30 5.37 35 35 0 0.25 0.140 0.11
27 48 37 5.21 35 29 6 0.26 0.140 0.12
28 43 30 5.97 36 28 8 0.26 0.150 0.11
Mar. 1 34 29 4.69 32 21 11 0.30 0.155 0.14
2 49 42 4.92 32 25 7 0.28 0.170 0.11
3 49 45 4.97 30 22 8 0.27 0.165 0.10
4 48 45 4.92 32 21 11 0.27 0.160 0.11
5 49 43 4.85 32 24 8 0.28 0.155 0.12
6 50 43 4.92 32 24 8 0.28 0.160 0.12
7 40 33 3.80 32 25 7 0.26 0.160 0.10
8 41 32 3.66 32 25 7 0.28 0.175 0.10
9 50 39 3.49 31 22 9 0.30 0.190 0.11
10 55 45 3.63 32 23 9 0.31 0.200 0.11
11 53 37 3.62 31 24 7 0.32 0.205 0.12
12 54 32 3.65 32 21 11 0.33 0.220 0.11
13 39 37 4.66 31 22 9 0.31 0.220 0.09
14 48 39 4.88 32 25 7 0.37 0.235 0.14
15 58 38 4.97 32 24 8 0.36 0.225 0.14
Mean 45 35 4.88 32 25 7 0.28 0.161 0.12
Stan. Dev. 6 6 0.74 2 3 2 0.03 0.033 0.02
274
-------
TABLE A-47. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #3 CHLORINATED LAGOON
EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk D.O. D.O. Temperature Daily
1978 SS VSS Total Solublc Fccal Com ositc pH. pH Total
Date mg/I mg/I mg/I as BOD BOD Coliform S p I Composite [n Situ In Situ In Situ Flow
. amp e mg/I 0c
CaC03 Colonlcs/IOO ml /1 Sam pic mgdt
mg
Feb. 14 75 68 375 21 12 25a 803 15 <1 10.6 8.7 12.2 9.0 10.0 0.050
4 81 69 342 >8d' 26 403 3 10.5 8.9 11.0 9.1 12.0 0.050
10 113 99 342 >69" 343 <1 9.7 9.0 11.8 9.1 8.0 0.050
1] 72 69 323 38 > 4]3 <] 9.3 8.9 11.4 9.2 10.0 0.050
[2 90 72 344 38 > 828 <] 9.] 8.9 ]2.0 9.1 8.0 0.050
]3 69 7 349 69a > 753 <1 9.3 8.9 ] 1.0 9.1 9.0 0.050
]4 64 53 362 33 23 1 9.3 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.0 0.050
15 97 80 330 31 29 60 9.8 8.9 12.2 9.] 7.0 0.050
Mean 72 56 348 38/29 26/21 0.1085 L 11.1 8.8 12.8 8.9 8.3 0.050
Stan. Dev. 16 22 ]6 18/0 16/0 0.3531 L 1.5 0.1 2.1 0.1 0.3 0
.Outside the 40-70% hnul. L = Log,o
/- BOD5/BOD5 with nitnfication mhibitor. tnow obtained by counting do"".
N.S. - No sample.
-------
TABLE A-48. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #3 CHLORINATED LAGOON
EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg P /l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg Nil mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Feb. 14 29 21 5.80 28 27 1 0.26 0.140 0.12
15 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
16 23 16 5.65 29 24 5 0.33 0.150 0.18
17 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
18 39 25 5.16 29 26 3 0.30 0.150 0.15
19 35 25 5.26 29 26 3 0.31 0.150 0.16
20 29 19 5.53 26 26 0 0.29 0.145 0.14
21 24 18 5.37 31 30 1 0.26 0.145 0.12
22 26 18 4.89 29 27 2 0.29 0.140 0.15
23 23 15 4.42 32 31 1 0.32 0.135 0.18
24 22 17 6.11 29 23 6 0.23 0.130 0.10
25 26 18 5.39 29 26 3 0.25 0.140 0.11
26 24 18 5.36 31 30 1 0.26 0.145 0.12
27 26 18 5.45 29 28 1 0.27 0.145 0.12
28 25 18 5.51 35 33 2 0.27 0.150 0.12
Mar. 1 18 16 5.25 29 23 6 0.28 0.150 0.13
2 27 24 5.12 28 24 4 0.28 0.155 0.12
3 26 20 5.00 28 20 8 0.28 0.165 0.12
4 23 18 4.86 29 23 6 0.28 0.160 0.12
5 20 11 4.72 30 24 6 0.29 0.160 0.13
6 30 18 4.99 29 25 4 0.33 0.165 0.16
7 32 28 3.77 29 20 9 0.28 0.165 0.12
8 34 27 3.55 30 21 9 0.30 0.180 0.12
9 39 29 3.46 30 19 11 0.31 0.190 0.12
10 36 29 4.08 31 21 10 0.32 0.200 0.12
11 39 24 3.49 30 25 5 0.31 0.195 0.12
12 37 24 3.80 29 24 5 0.32 0.205 0.12
13 28 15 4.78 29 23 6 0.30 0.215 0.08
14 38 29 4.88 30 23 7 0.33 0.215 0.12
15 31 17 5.92 29 24 5 0.35 0.215 0.14
Mean 29 21 4.91 29 25 5 0.29 0.164 0.13
Stan. Dev. 6 5 0.75 2 3 3 0.03 0.026 0.02
N.S. - No sample.
276
-------
TABLE A-49. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, #4 FILTER EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk D.O. pH D.O. Tempera ture
1978 SS VSS Total Soluble Fecal Composite pH
Date mg/I mg/I mg/I as BOD BOD Coliform Sample Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ
CaC03 Colonies/IOO ml mg/I Sample mg/I
Feb. 14 9 8 298 63 8 203 21 9.4 8.3 9.4 7.8 9.0
Mar. I 4 2 294 > 223 1801 3 8.9 8.3 No Flow
2 3 I 310 > 22/93 16/11 16 8.8 8.1 No Flow
3 6 5 300 > 213 1501 213 163 2 9.1 8.1 8.3 7.8 11.0
5 8 6 308 203 173 2 8.8 8.3 No Flow
6 9 6 278 > 403 303 363 133 423 163 3 8.9 8.4 8.6 7.9 10.0
9 8 2 286 > 403 63 4 8.7 8.4 8.9 7.7 12.0
10 26 8 270 > 393 343 <1 8.6 8.2 8.8 7.9 8.0
11 5 4 253 > 403 >423 1 8.5 8.4 8.2 8.1 10.0
12 11 5 321 30 83 5 8.8 8.4 No Flow
13 9 6 288 > 393 37 8 8.5 8.4 No Flow
14 7 6 268 20 513 1 8.6 8.4 No Flow
15 9 5 267 27 21 4 9.2 8.3 No Flow
Mean 8 5 297 21/9 17/11 0.3663 9.3 8.3 9.1 7.9 8.1
Stan.Oev. 5 3 21 12/0 11/0 0.4054 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 3.1
30utside the 40- 70% limit.
/ - BODS/BODS with nitrific3tion inhibitor.
-------
TABLE A-50. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, MORIARTY, 114 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3.N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02.N N~-N
Date COD COD mgN{l mgN{l mgN{l mgN{l mgN{l
mg{l mg/l mg P{l mgN{l
Feb. 14 17 12 4.62 24 20 4 15.3 4.4 109
15 17 15 4.20 22 21 1 2.50 0.67 1.83
16 15 8 4.33 23 23 0 4.10 1.20 2.90
17 8 4 4.54 22 22 1 1.80 0.60 1.20
18 17 15 4.29 23 19 4 8.45 1.98 6.47
19 18 15 4.54 22 19 3 4.50 1.08 3.42
20 17 8 4.39 26 24 2 1.35 0.35 1.00
21 18 9 4.29 24 23 1 6.10 1.10 5.00
22 19 9 4.26 26 25 1 6.35 0.465 5.88
23 16 8 3.41 23 20 3 8.45 1.50 6.95
24 16 8 4.39 22 22 0 1.85 0.255 1.60
25 17 8 4.06 26 24 2 6.55 2.22 4.33
26 16 8 4.06 23 21 2 13.0 2.15 10.8
27 17 9 4.00 24 23 1 14.0 4.2 9.8
28 15 8 3.99 26 23 3 7.35 2.42 4.93
Mar. 1 16 10 3.59 25 24 1 17.8 4.0 13.8
2 18 13 3.77 24 21 3 19.0 3.4 15.6
3 20 12 3.62 22 22 0 6.65 1.35 5.30
4 18 12 3.77 23 22 1 6.25 2.02 4.23
5 10 8 3.59 25 23 2 5.65 1.70 3.95
6 24 16 3.77 25 17 8 16.8 1.92 14.9
7 17 14 2.89 23 21 2 15.5 2.80 12.7
8 14 8 3.18 24 24 0 7.25 1.90 5.35
9 16 10 2.88 28 26 2 16.0 3.2 12.8
10 24 16 3.32 24 17 7 26.2 4.2 22.0
11 20 14 3.18 24 18 6 14.5 2.35 12.2
12 20 10 3.03 28 26 2 4.30 0.92 3.38
13 15 9 3.38 25 21 4 21.0 3.6 17.4
14 13 8 3.55 25 9.4 16 27.0 2.25 24.8
15 18 13 3.70 25 16 9 26.5 3.7 22.8
Mean 17 11 3.82 24 21 4 11.07 2.130 8.94
Stan. Dev. 3 3 0.51 2 3 3 7.67 1.245 6.n
278
-------
Table A-51.
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #1 LAGOON INFLUENT (FIELD)
1977
Date
SS
mg/I
VSS
mg/I
Alk
mg/I as
CaC03
Total
BOD
Soluble
BOD
Fecal D.O. . pH
Coliform ComposIte Composite
Colonies/! 00 ml Sample Sample
mg/I
D.O.
In Situ
mg/I
pH
In Situ
Temperature
In Situ
°c
N
.......
\0
Mar. 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Apr. I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
Mean
Stan. Dev.
471
81
67
58
107
82
83
68
61
71
112
106
19
82
81
45
N.S.
105
210
86
51
68
44
129
127
322
175
122
172
168
116
91
313
58
48
50
70
61
52
49
57
67
110
76
16
1
35
40
N.S.
94
121
67
31
55
8
95
93
270
113
117
138
127
84
68
47
49
49
51
47
48
47
46
49
51
55
49
55
53
50
49
N.S.
67
64
63
66
73
74
66
85
76
86
92
94
98
62
16
aOutside 40-70'if depletion range.
1- BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibitor.
L = Loglo
96
69
56
72
78
71
22a
52a
303
44a
47a
49a
48
37
29
44/34
N.S.
71
58
49
49
66/73
50
53
137a
>50
84
87
175
59
63/53
31/28
22
20
15
23
14
20
7a
21
10
9a
7a
12
II
14
11
13/13
N.S.
11
12
14
203
12/12
12
15a
15
15
>17
20
17
22
15/13
5/1
260,000
410.000
530,000
260,000
1 ,350,000
77 5,000
425,000
700,000
325,000
2,200.000
1,350.000
1,550.000
205.000
615.000
615,000
475,000
1.500.000
400,000
390.000
450.000
1.100,000
105,000
700,000
450,000
850,000
500,000
210,000
850,000
1,400,000
1,000,000
5.7670 L
0.3058 L
6.9
7.6
6.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.2
8.1
7.6
7.7
6.5
7.0
6.2
6.1
6.4
5.2
NS.
3.8
6.8
7.0
6.2
5.4
6.1
5.5
5.4
7.5
5.7
5.5
5.2
4.7
6.6
1.2
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.2
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.3
6.9
6.9
7.1
7.1
6.8
7.0
N.S.
7.2
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.4
7.0
7.3
7.4
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.1
0.2
6.9
7.4
6.7
7.4
7.6
7.5
7.6
7.2
6.9
6.2
6.5
6.4
6.6
6.2
6.4
6.1
4.7
6.5
6.6
6.7
5.8
5.7
5.8
4.9
6.3
5.6
5.4
5.2
5.1
4.2
6.3
0.9
6.9
6.9
7.0
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.1
7.4
7.3
7.3
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.2
7.4
7.4
7.6
7.4
7.6
7.4
7.4
7.3
0.2
17.5
16.0
13.5
14.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
17.5
18.0
17.5
18.0
16.0
18.5
20.5
20.0
17.0
16.0
16.0
17.0
16.0
17.5
18.0
18.0
19.0
18.0
18.0
]8.0
20.0
16.9
1.9
-------
TABLE A-52. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, HI" LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH 3-N OrgN (N03+N0J-N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg PII mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mgN/I
mgfl mg/I
Mar. 19 46 20 2.62 7.6 3.65 4.0 2.68 0.328 2.37
20 61 17 3.52 8.0 3.77 4.2 2.60 0.325 2.29
21 79 9 2.29 9.2 5.66 3.5 2.44 0.278 2.18
22 69 31 3.03 8.7 4.33 4.4 2.29 0.271 2.03
23 108 21 2.33 10.6 2.82 7.8 2.77 0.032 2.74
24 74 25 2.74 8.7 3.93 4.8 2.93 0.083 2.85
25 60 25 2.92 7.4 3.12 4.3 2.73 0.245 2.50
26 61 26 2.37 6.8 2.55 4.2 2.81 0.210 2.61
27 78 25 2.57 9.1 4.15 4.9 2.66 0.208 2.46
28 66 22 2.57 11.2 5.21 6.0 1.04 0.257 0.80
29 95 26 3.38 11.0 4.10 6.9 2.60 0.620 2.01
30 90 22 2.65 10.7 5.11 5.6 1.28 0.638 0.67
31 40 23 2.03 7.3 3.54 3.8 1.08 0.704 0.41
Apr. 1 126 26 2.17 10.1 4.74 5.4 1.14 0.604 0.57
2 99 22 2.12 10.0 3.29 6.7 2.31 0.606 1.73
3 99 21 2.55 9.7 4.82 4.9 2.00 0.584 1.44
4 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
5 130 26 3.32 12.6 5.19 7.4 1.77 0.509 1.29
6 154 25 2.81 14.3 4.77 9.5 2.54 0.599 1.97
7 116 26 2.92 12.2 6.11 6.1 2.48 0.639 1.87
8 81 26 2.47 10.6 5.28 5.3 2.65 0.601 2.08
9 98 28 3.77 11.4 7.10 4.3 2.16 0.542 1.65
10 60 34 3.26 10.4 7.35 3.0 1.06 0.381 0.70
11 109 27 2.85 15.4 7.35 8.0 2.36 0.542 1.85
12 168 33 5.15 16.6 6.44 10.2 1.90 0.413 1.51
13 371 28 4.71 25.0 5.91 19.1 2.67 0.668 2.04
14 216 34 4.28 19.5 7.89 11.6 1.73 0.155 1.58
15 149 38 4.36 17.8 7.81 10.0 2.00 0.217 1.79
16 156 38 4.34 18.7 8.16 10.5 2.06 0.207 1.86
17 162 40 5.18 19.7 8.51 11.2 1.82 0.189 1.64
Mean III 26 3.15 12.1 5.26 6.8 2.16 0.402 1.78
Stan. Dev. 65 7 0.91 4.5 1.72 3.4 0.58 0.202 0.66
280
-------
TABLE A-53. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 1/2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. pH Temperature
1977 SS VSS mg/I as Total Soluble Coliform Composite Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ
Date mg/I mg/I CaC03 BOD BOD Colonies/100 ml Sample Sample mg/I °c
mg/l
Mar. 19 240 22 46 18 8 10 7.9 8.4 7.1 8.5 20.0
20 22 17 47 17 8 18 8.1 8.0 6.6 8.0 19.5
21 29 25 50 16 7 25 7.7 7.9 6.1 7.7 19.0
22 13 9 49 14 7 67 8.3 7.5 7.1 7.6 17.5
23 24 8 48 II 5 82 9.1 7.3 8.2 7.6 16.5
24 18 I 49 16 6 30 9.4 7.6 8.9 8.0 16.0
25 46 19 47 73 4 32 9.7 8.2 9.8 8.4 17.0
26 34 21 46 15 9 50 9.7 8.7 10.4 8.8 17.0
27 35 20 49 103 5 55 10.1 9.3 11.0 9.2 17.0
28 34 31 51 103 5 65 9.7 9.5 11.2 9.8 19.0
29 64 36 55 13 7 I 9.5 9.2 12.0 9.8 19.5
30 92 19 49 14 7 I 10.0 9.7 12.4 10.1 20.5
N 31 II 3 55 12 7 2 8.9 9.7 9.5 9.8 21.5
00 Apr. I 8 1 53 8 9 56 8.1 9.3 7.3 9.5 21.0
..... 2 54 12 50 8 7 57 8.2 9.3 7.8 9.4 21.5
3 27 22 49 12/10 11/11 38 7.9 8.9 8.1 9.4 22.0
4 32 25 45 10 6 36 7.6 9.3 7.8 9.5 23.0
5 36 25 48 9 6 5 6.8 9.0 7.2 9.2 22.0
6 30 24 49 7 5 7 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.2 19.0
7 19 18 46 II 63 15" 5 7.3 7.4 6.& 7.8 21.0
15 18 14 49 4" II" 6 7.4 7.3 7.0 7.7 22.0
16 37 22 49 53 7 2 7.3 7.4 7.2 7.8 22.0
17 30 27 49 4" 7 3 7.7 7.5 8.2 8.3 23.0
Mean 31 18 49 1I/12 8/9 0.9090 L 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.7 19.9
Stan. Dev. 18 9 2 4/3 3/2 0.7052 L 1.0 0.9 1.7 0.8 2.0
30utside 40-70% range.
/ - BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibllor.
L = Loglo
-------
TABLE A-54. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN N~.N OrgN (N03+NO:z}N N~.N NOrN
COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg Pil mgN/l mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil mg Nil
Mar. 19 64 31 2.28 3.8 1.11 2.7 0.63 0.065 0.57
20 64 30 2.22 3.5 2.19 1.3 0.61 0.068 0.55
21 60 32 2.22 3.5 2.06 1.4 0.56 0.071 0.49
22 66 42 2.12 3.2 2.12 l.l 0.52 0.067 0.46
23 64 40 1.81 4.0 0.89 3.1 0.59 0.064 0.53
24 67 41 1.74 3.4 1.81 1.6 0.54 0.068 0.48
25 79 45 1.81 3.1 0.98 2.1 0.50 0.070 0.43
26 80 54 1.70 3.1 0.47 2.6 0.47 0.081 0.39
27 85 44 1.45 3.0 0.08 2.9 0.40 0.069 0.33
28 83 44 1.68 2.9 0.14 2.8 0.19 0.061 0.13
29 80 44 1.65 3.3 <0.010 3.3 0.38 0.056 0.33
30 84 46 1.37 4.0 0.045 4.0 0.47 0.050 0.42
31 76 51 1.07 3.4 0.064 3.3 0.22 0.045 0.18
Apr. 1 80 43 1.04 3.8 0.025 3.8 0.13 0.038 0.10
2 78 47 1.05 3.1 <0.010 3.1 0.07 0.042 0.03
3 81 51 1.19 3.3 0.058 3.2 0.11 0.001 O.ll
4 85 48 1.14 1.6 0.060 1.5 0.07 0.003 0.07
5 80 40 1.26 3.0 <0.010 3.0 0.04 0.042 <0.01
6 71 39 1.26 2.6 <0.010 2.6 0.03 0.001 0.03
7 18 25 1.10 2.5 0.020 2.5 0.02 <0.00 1 0.02
8 78 36 1.11 2.6 0.062 2.5 0.06 0.001 0.06
9 73 36 1.23 2.5 0.052 2.4 0.07 0.006 0.07
10 58 34 1.07 2.2 0.082 2.1 0.04 <0.001 0.04
II 42 26 1.05 1.8 0.057 1.7 0.06 0.003 0.06
12 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
13 48 32 1.07 1.5 0.1l6 1.4 0.06 0.004 0.06
14 42 32 1.05 1.5 0.057 1.4 <0.01 <0.001 <0.01
15 38 30 1.30 1.6 0.053 1.5 0.01 0.005 <0.01
16 37 30 1.07 1.7 0.034 1.7 <0.01 0.002 <0.01
17 35 18 1.05 1.3 0.034 1.3 <0.01 0.002 <0.01
Mean 67 38 1.42 2.8 0.438 2.4 0.24 0.034 0.21
Stan. Dev. 16 9 0.41 0.8 0.720 0.9 0.23 0.031 0.21
282
-------
TABLE A-55. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 113 FILTER EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk hcal D.O. pit D.O. pH Temperature
1977 SS VSS mgil as Total Soluble ('olitlHm C"mIHIslte ('omj1l'Site III Situ In Situ In Situ
Date mg/I mg/I ('aC03 BOD BOD Colonies/lOO ml Sample Sample Illg/I 0('
mg/I
Mar. 19 24 24 39 7 3 4 X.~ 6.7 6.8 6.5 18.5
20 8 I 41 5 3 4 8.4 6.X 6.9 6.7 20.0
21 15 14 42 6 3 4 7.9 7.0 6.0 6.5 17.0
22 1 8a 8a > 8" 9" 2 8.3 7.0 6.9 6.7 21.0
15 8 4 44 3 > 9"
-------
TABLE A-56.
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N0J-N N02-N N <>S.N
Date COD COD mgP/l mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl
mg/l mg/l
Mar. 19 20 9 2.90 1.4 0.546 0.9 3.9 0.029 3.9
20 17 2 1.68 1.2 0.053 1.1 2.8 0.027 2.8
21 15 6 3.07 1.4 0.079 1.3 2.8 0.038 2.8
22 30 22 1.60 0.7 0.042 0.7 2.01 0.007 2.00
23 30 23 1.38 1.1 0.013 1.1 2.30 0.020 2.28
24 30 30 1.38 1.3 0.025 1.3 2.66 0.068 2.60
25 37 28 1.39 1.4 0.026 1.4 2.17 0.019 2.15
26 37 26 1.39 1.2 0.069 1.1 2.17 0.001 2.17
27 37 30 1.41 1.0 0.016 1.0 1.94 0.008 1.93
28 37 25 1.52 1.5 0.043 1.5 2.22 0.006 2.21
29 36 26 1.36 1.7 0.010 1.7 1.72 0.009 1.71
30 34 22 1.14 1.9 <0.010 1.9 1.70 0.01l 1.69
31 31 21 1.01 1.9 0.067 1.8 1.78 0.006 1.77
Apr. 1 26 22 0.89 1.6 0.021 1.6 1.08 0.014 1.07
2 32 26 0.87 1.9 0.042 1.9 1.12 0.006 1.11
3 32 28 0.96 1.5 <0.010 1.5 1.17 0.014 1.16
4 32 27 1.11 l.l 0.028 1.1 1.66 0.004 1.66
5 27 22 0.99 1.4 <0.010 1.4 1.83 0.008 1.82
6 24 22 0.99 1.0 <0.010 1.0 1.33 <0.001 1.33
7 25 22 0.92 1.2 0.030 1.2 1.21 <0.001 1.21
8 35 20 1.5 <0.010 1.5 1.66 <0.001 1.66
9 32 20 1.08 1.1 0.116 1.1 1.70 0.011 1.69
10 26 18 0.93 1.0 0.015 1.0 1.88 0.004 1.88
II 16 12 0.98 1.0 O.oI7 1.0 2.46 0.002 2.46
12 22 20 1.07 1.1 <0.010 1.1 1.66 0.007 1.65
13 27 20 1.04 0.9 <0.010 0.9 1.64 0.003 1.64
14 21 20 1.05 0.9 0.050 0.8 1.68 0.003 1.68
15 30 22 1.05 09 0.031 0.9 2.04 0.005 2.04
16 26 22 1.11 0.7 0.015 0.7 1.80 0.004 1.80
17 16 10 1.13 0.9 0.016 0.9 2.04 0.002 2.04
Mean 28 21 1.29 1.2 0.048 1.2 1.94 0.011 1.93
Stan. Dev. 7 7 0.52 0.3 0.097 0.3 0.59 0.014 0.59
284
-------
TABLE A-57. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 114 CHLORINATED EFFLUENT (FIELD)
D.O.
1977 SS VSS Alk Total Soluble Fecal Composite pH D.O. pH Temperature Daily Total
[}dte mg/I mg/I mg/I as BOD BOD Coliform Sample Composite 111 Situ In Situ III Silu '.Iow
CaC03 Colonies/IOO ml mg/I S,unple mg/I "(' II1gLl
Mar. 19 21 21 34 3 2 9" 8" 8" 9" 9"
-------
TABLE A-58. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #4 CHLORINATION EFFLUENT
(UWRL)
Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02"N N~-N
1977 COD COD mg P/I mg NIl mgN/I mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl mg NIl
Date mg/l mg/I
Mar. 19 17 11 2.90 1.4 0.013 1.4 2.5 0.002 2.5
20 16 5 1.70 1.0 0.086 0.9 2.6 0.003 2.6
21 21 8 1.68 1.0 0.015 1.0 2.4 <0.00 I 2.4
22 31 24 1.57 0.5 0.038 0.5 1.99 0.002 1.99
23 35 35 1.38 1.7 0.019 1.7 2.72 <0.001 2.72
24 33 33 1.39 1.3 0.067 1.2 2.16 <0.001 2.16
25 37 26 1.39 1.5 0.055 1.4 2.12 0.003 2.12
26 43 31 1.39 1.0 0.011 1.0 2.16 0.003 2.16
27 39 29 1.45 1.0 0.069 0.9 1.79 0.002 1.79
28 35 25 1.30 1.5 <0.010 1.5 2.29 <0.00 I 2.29
29 35 26 1.35 1.5 0.016 1.5 1.57 0.003 1.57
30 37 27 1.14 1.6 <0.010 1.6 2.21 0.015 2.20
31 35 26 0.99 1.8 <0.010 1.8 1.36 0.014 1.35
Apr. 1 28 25 0.86 1.5 0.046 1.5 1.11 0.011 1.10
2 33 26 0.77 1.3 0.038 1.3 1.53 0.005 1.53
3 32 30 0.95 1.1 0.016 1.1 2.57 0.004 2.57
4 33 29 1.08 1.0 <0.010 1.0 1.78 <0.001 1.78
5 24 22 1.02 2.1 0.018 2.1 2.14 <0.001 2.14
6 24 20 0.91 1.4 <0.010 1.4 1.75 0.012 1.74
7 24 19 0.92 0.8 0.028 0.8 1.39 <0.001 1.39
8 26 24 0.92 0.8 <0.010 0.8 2.10 <0.001 2.10
9 36 23 1.08 1.1 0.167 1.1 1.71 0.011 1.70
10 22 19 0.93 1.2 <0.010 1.2 1.90 0.003 1.90
11 15 12 0.90 0.9 0.01 7 0.9 2.47 0.003 2.47
12 22 22 0.98 1.0 0.014 1.0 1.70 0.013 1.69
13 22 22 0.96 0.7 <0.010 0.7 1.86 <0.001 1.86
14 21 20 0.98 0.7 0.024 0.7 1.64 <0.001 1.64
IS 32 22 1.08 0.7 0.031 0.7 1.82 0.003 1.82
16 24 20 0.98 0.7 0.016 0.7 1.82 0.002 1.82
17 IS 7 0.98 0.8 0.01 5 0.8 1.77 0.003 1.77
Mean 28 22 1.20 1.2 0.030 1.1 1.96 0.004 1.96
Stan. Dev. 8 7 0.41 0.4 0.033 0.4 0.40 0.004 0.40
286
-------
TABLE A-59. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 111 LAGOON INFL VENT (FIELD)
AIk D.O. D.O. Temperature
1977 SS VSS Total Soluble F~cal Composite pH. pH
Date mg/l mg/l mg/l as BOD BOD Coliform S 1 Composite In Si tu In Situ In Situ
CaC03 Colonies/IOO ml :~ e Sample mg/I °c
Sept. 15 148 131 139 82 19 7 x 106 6.4 7.7 5.7 7.8 28.0
16 1I5 102 146 73 23 3 x 106 5.1 7.7 5.7 7.6 27.0
17 172 131 136 80 21 10.3 x 106 7.5 7.7 3.2 7.5 26.5
18 76 74 136 61 19 3.85 x 106 7.1 7.7 5.6 7.5 29.0
19 129 109 144 61 17 4.85 x 106 7.7 7.8 5.5 7.5 27.0
20 134 94 141 96 24 3.5 x 106 6.6 7.8 4.4 7.5 28.0
21 72 67 144 56 13 5.25 x 106 5.6 7.7 4.4 7.5 27.5
22 160 142 144 87 19 4.45 x 106 7.8 7.9 6.7 7.6 27.0
23 131 III 146 60 14 5.4 x 106 7.3 7.9 5.6 7.6 27.0
24 106 90 141 57 21 4.9 x 106 7.4 7.8 4.5 7.5 26.0
25 188 160 136 85 23 4.15 x 106 8.0 7.8 4.9 7.5 27.5
26 97 86 148 71 20 4.75 x 106 7.0 7.7 5.2 7.5 26.5
IV 27 120 87 144 47/27 14/14 5.45 x 106 6.3 7.7 4.3 7.6 27.0
00 28 138 113 134 44 16 4.35 x 106 6.3 7.7 6.9 7.7 25.0
'-I
29 101 95 135 52 18 5.15x 106 6.9 7.7 6.7 7.8 26.0
30 107 85 137 67 20 5.9 x 106 6.6 7.7 5.8 7.6 27.0
Oct. 1 107 86 140 66 21 8.1 x 106 6.2 7.7 4.5 7.5 28.0
2 178 152 140 93 4.75 x 106 6.4 7.8 4.2 7.4 26.0
3 147 138 144 101 16 2.8 x 106 9.6 7.8 7.4 7.7 26.0
4 126 122 157 90 24 4.15 x 106 7.3 7.8 5.9 7.6 22.0
5 167 151 165 81/98 22/21 5.45 x 106 6.9 7.7 5.6 7.6 22.5
6 168 141 139 51 17 6.5 x 106 7.3 7.8 6.6 7.6 23.5
7 350 293 133 138 35 6.9 x 106 8.9 7.7 5.2 7.5 23.0
8 216 168 137 68 19 6.75 x 106 6.8 7.6 4.5 7.5 24.0
9 153 129 131 71 18 7.2x106 8.0 7.7 5.3 7.5 24.0
10 152 123 134 80 15 5.3 x 106 8.3 7.7 6.0 7.6 22.0
11 190 159 126 98 16 4.15 x 106 7.8 7.7 6.2 7.5 23.5
12 135 128 129 76 15 7.3 x 106 8.4 7.6 5.8 7.4 21.5
13 203 143 126 91 23 4.5 x 106 8.7 7.6 6.1 7.5 18.5
14 158 149 126 89 15 6.05 x 106 9.0 7.6 7.3 7.3 16.0
Mean 148 125 139 76/63 19/18 6.7150 L 7.3 7.7 5.5 7.5 25.1
Stan. Dev. 52 42 9 20/50 4/5 0.1250 L 1.0 0.1 1.0 0.1 3.0
/. BODS/BODS with nitrification inhibitor.
L = LoglO
-------
TABLE A-60. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N Org N (N03 +N02}N N02-N N03-N
1977 COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg Pll mgN/l mg NIl mg NIl mgN/l mg NIl mgN/l
Sept. 15 180 98 7.41 23.2 8.47 14.7 0.24 0.110 0.13
16 285 89 8.90 14.3 7.92 6.4 0.18 0.072 0.11
17 217 104 8.27 21.9 6.86 15.0 0.22 0.074 0.15
18 156 75 5.57 22.9 6.69 16.2 0.24 0.082 0.16
19 207 111 7.35 23.9 8.06 15.8 0.28 0.128 0.15
20 189 64 7.59 18.1 7.85 10.2 0.34 0.142 0.20
21 318 83 6.78 12.8 7.46 5.3 0.30 0.132 0.17
22 265 77 7.03 13.4 7.83 5.6 0.56 0.38 0.18
23 275 87 7.63 13.1 8.42 4.7 0.70 0.50 0.20
24 180 67 7.50 18.1 7.40 10.7 0.82 0.54 0.28
25 137 26 7.59 16.4 7.65 8.8 1.78 1.24 0.54
26 155 32 7.67 18.9 5.70 13.2 1.44 0.89 0.55
27 91 44 6.85 15.5 8.47 7.0 1.60 1.06 0.54
28 95 60 7.71 14.1 6.32 7.8 1.50 0.77 0.73
29 153 103 6.51 14.6 6.45 8.2 1.86 1.08 0.78
30 136 94 7.36 14.2 6.93 7.3 1.70 0.86 0.84
Oct. 1 111 66 8.93 15.2 6.89 8.3 1.94 0.92 1.02
2 152 114 7.65 15.7 7.81 7.9 3.24 1.28 1.96
3 116 95 8.08 14.6 9.65 5.0 4.4 1.64 2.8
4 132 89 8.76 15.3 9.52 5.8 2.30 0.81 1.49
5 117 108 9.62 13.4 11.64 1.8 4.8 1.78 3.0
6 121 110 7.47 13.5 8.02 5.5 4.4 1.46 2.9
7 147 102 10.31 13.7 6.70 6.0 8.2 2.91 5.3
8 108 65 7.77 14.0 6.75 7.2 5.3 1.58 3.7
9 102 69 7.80 13.6 6.15 7.4 5.4 1.26 4.1
10 112 83 8.36 14.3 7.09 7.2 6.0 1.58 4.4
11 148 94 8.24 13.9 5.35 8.6 3.7 1.27 2.4
12 133 63 8.24 13.6 5.89 7.7 4.0 0.96 3.0
13 141 73 7.30 14.1 6.27 7.8 3.9 0.87 3.0
14 144 69 8.24 13.6 4.94 8.7 3.7 0.69 3.0
Mean 161 80 7.82 15.8 7.37 8.4 2.50 0.902 1.59
Stan. Dev. 59 23 0.92 3.2 1.38 3.5 2.13 0.650 1.55
288
-------
1977
Date
N
co
\0
Sept. 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Oct. I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
Mean
Stan. Dev.
SS
mg/I
42
31
30
21
52
41
42
49
50
37
63
41
56
66
53
51
52
41
63
49
30
56
63
53
45
55
5 I
50
73
34
48
12
TABLE A-61.
VSS
mg/I
32
29
27
20
42
36
36
45
47
35
45
33
39
54
46
39
33
38
61
46
27
44
52
12
29
51
41
42
65
29
39
II
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk
mg/l as
CaC03
97
97
100
106
104
98
100
99
100
103
101
100
100
101
105
101
106
95
III
109
113
105
108
110
107
116
113
117
112
III
105
6
Total
BOD
12
12
13
13
18
19
17
20
20
25
19
18
22/16
20
19
19
23
23
28
29
26/21
14
22
16
16
21
20
34
27
]8
20/]9
5/4
Soluble
BOD
Fecal D.O.. pH
. Composite .
Coliform S I Composite
Colonies/lOO ml ~~~ e Sample
6
6
6
7
7
7
6
7
6
7
6
5
7/5
6
7
7
6
7
7
7
7/7
6
7
6
6
7
7
7
7
]6
7/6
2/1
TNTC
150
20
6
4
9
II
5
]]
7
]4
] 7
5
5
5
34
13
I]
20
9
5
7
]2
9
10
4
6
6
7
7
0.9427 L
0.3652 L
7.5
7.8
7.3
6.6
8.1
9.2
8.4
9.4
9.9
9.3
8.8
9.0
8.8
8.3
8.5
9.]
7.9
7.]
8.9
8.8
8.8
8.2
7.8
7.5
7.9
7.3
7.9
8.0
9.0
9.5
8.4
0.8
8.7
8.8
8.2
8.0
8.5
8.]
9.2
9.3
9.2
9.3
9.2
9.2
9.3
8.9
8.]
9.2
9.]
9.0
8.8
8.6
8.8
8.8
8.7
8.7
8.4
8.4
8.5
8.3
8.4
8.4
8.7
0.4
D.O.
In Situ
mg/I
7.5
8.0
10.3
9.8
9.8
]0.4
9.3
10.2
]1.3
] 1.5
8.4
8.4
9.4
8.5
7.7
9.5
10.0
7.2
9.5
10.2
10.5
8.7
] 1.2
] 1.4
10.1
]1.1
IJ .7
10.7
10.1
12.6
9.8
1.3
pH
In Situ
9.4
9.3
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.9
9.8
9.6
9.8
9.9
9.8
9.4
9.6
9.7
9.5
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.3
9.4
9.4
9.3
9.4
9.3
9.1
9.1
9.2
9.5
0.2
Temperature
In Situ
°c
29.0
27.0
29.0
28.0
29.0
30.5
30.0
29.0
29.0
28.0
30.0
28.0
29.5
27.0
28.0
27.0
28.0
28.0
25.0
22.5
24.0
24.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
22.5
23.0
21.0
18.0
]6.0
26.1
3.6
T NTC - Too n umcrou\ to l'uun t.
/ . BODS/BODS with nltrllllJtH,n mtllblt(Jr.
l ; l"e 10
-------
TABLE A-62. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 112 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3.N OrgN (NO:, +N02}N NOa.N N03-N
Date COD COD mgP/l mgN/l mg N/l mgN/l mg N/l mgN/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Sept. 1 5 54 31 2.67 3.5 0.026 3.5 0.04 0.007 0.03
16 90 61 2.95 12.8 0.016 12.8 0.02 0.001 0.02
17 63 40 3.54 3.2 0.101 3.1 0.06 0.003 0.06
18 60 37 4.06 2.7 0.024 2.7 0.06 0.007 0.05
19 51 24 3.77 8.3 0.193 8.1 0.07 0.011 0.06
20 49 18 3.18 5.6 0.018 5.6 0.06 0.009 0.05
21 82 58 3.71 8.6 0.072 8.5 0.06 0.008 0.05
22 86 74 3.02 10.2 0.022 10.2 0.07 0.008 0.06
23 89 76 2.92 9.4 0.033 9.4 0.07 0.008 0.06
24 59 24 3.58 14.1 0.050 14.0 0.08 0.006 0.07
25 66 39 3.34 12.3 0.038 12.3 0.05 0.005 0.04
26 64 45 3.00 12.9 0.017 12.9 0.12 0.008 0.11
27 61 42 2.88 10.6 0.096 10.5 0.09 0.008 0.08
28 50 46 3.27 8.9 0.046 8.9 0.10 0.004 0.10
29 54 50 3.77 9.5 0.045 9.5 0.10 0.005 0.10
30 49 39 3.78 9.7 0.070 9.7 0.13 0.019 0.11
Oct. 1 48 39 3.54 9.2 0.056 9.2 0.11 0.004 0.11
2 52 42 3.81 9.9 0.023 9.9 0.14 0.009 0.13
3 48 38 4.30 10.2 0.060 10.1 0.08 0.016 0.06
4 41 32 4.31 9.7 0.042 9.7 0.08 0.011 0.07
5 52 48 4.16 7.9 0.072 7.8 0.08 0.013 0.07
6 50 46 3.95 8.1 0.044 8.1 0.08 0.009 0.07
7 53 45 4.04 7.6 <0.010 7.6 0.09 0.010 0.08
8 49 44 3.98 7.9 0.038 7.9 0.10 0.013 0.09
9 51 46 4.35 8.6 0.047 8.6 0.11 0.012 0.10
10 43 38 5.01 8.6 0.013 8.6 0.12 0.014 O.ll
11 49 41 5.01 8.8 0.041 8.8 0.06 0.008 0.05
12 48 40 5.53 9.2 0.062 9.1 0.04 0.008 0.03
13 43 35 5.04 8.9 0.026 8.9 0.04 0.009 0.03
14 45 37 4.84 8.5 <0.010 8.5 0.06 0.009 0.05
Mean 57 43 3.84 8.8 0.047 8.8 0.08 0.009 0.07
Stan. Dev. 14 13 0.73 2.6 0.036 2.6 0.03 0.004 0.03
290
-------
TABLE A-63. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (FIELD)
D.O. D.O. Temperature
1977 SS VSS Alk Total Soluble Fecal Composite pH pH
Date mg/I mg/I mg/I as BOD BOD Coliform Sample Composite In Situ In Situ In Situ
CaC03 CoIonies/IOO ml mg/I Sample mg/I °c
Sept. IS 24 19 88 7 7 TNTC 8.6 7.7 6.6 7.5 28.0
16 2 2 87 5 6 TNTC 7.2 7.3 4.0 6.4 27.0
17 10 8 96 6 6 120 6.6 6.9 4.4 6.7 27.0
18 2 2 I I I 5 5
-------
TABLE A-64. S UMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3"N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02"N N03"N
1977 COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg Pll mgN/l mg Nil mg Nil mgN/l mg N/l mgN/l
Sept. 15 36 13 2.76 3.3 0.065 3.2 3.36 0.156 3.20
16 39 22 2.66 4.1 0.040 4.1 3.48 0.210 3.27
17 46 23 1.95 2.1 0.185 1.9 3.14 0.098 3.04
18 50 19 1.73 2.0 <0.010 2.0 2.42 0.093 1.53
19 43 12 2.07 3.6 <0.010 3.6 2.20 0.081 2.12
20 32 8 2.77 3.8 0.023 3.8 1.87 0.055 1.81
21 36 23 2.66 3.3 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
22 47 29 2.54 3.1 0.063 3.0 1.24 0.043 1.20
23 46 24 2.61 2.9 0.138 2.8 1.48 0.052 1.43
24 31 8 2.71 2.8 0.173 2.6 1.92 0.049 1.87
25 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
26 18 7 2.76 4.1 0.08 4.0 6.75 0.124 6.63
27 24 9 2.81 3.9 0.35 3.6 3.78 0.128 3.65
28 38 33 2.71 5.6 0.024 5.6 4.04 0.069 3.97
29 35 32 3.05 6.1 0.010 6.1 2.94 0.044 2.94
30 34 27 2.95 5.5 0.036 5.5 2.14 0.041 2.10
Oct. 1 35 30 2.96 5.8 0.035 5.8 2.02 0.041 1.98
2 33 17 2.85 6.2 0.080 6.1 2.54 0.056 2.48
3 38 14 3.16 6.2 0.028 6.2 2.48 0.041 2.44
4 30 15 3.40 7.3 0.106 7.2 2.56 0.037 2.52
5 34 29 3.52 5.9 0.077 5.8 2.96 0.048 2.91
6 28 24 3.71 5.9 0.169 5.7 3.42 0.070 3.35
7 34 30 3.54 5.5 0.123 5.4 2.90 0.064 2.84
8 22 15 3.66 5.7 0.119 5.6 4.6 0.065 4.5
9 22 15 3.70 6.4 0.151 6.2 4.8 0.059 4.7
10 29 17 3.71 6.4 0.092 6.3 4.7 0.060 4.6
11 30 21 4.18 5.7 0.046 5.7 4.5 0.046 4.5
12 24 17 4.18 5.8 0.142 5.7 3.9 0.051 3.8
13 25 21 4.30 5.4 0.017 5.4 3.4 0.024 3.4
14 29 12 4.25 5.0 0.042 5.0 2.9 0.019 2.9
Mean 33 20 3.10 4.8 0.087 4.8 3.16 0.069 3.06
Stan. Dev. 8 8 0.68 1.5 0.075 1.5 1.20 0.042 1.21
N .S. - No sample.
292
-------
TABLE A-65.
SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #4 CHLORINATED EFFLUENT (FIELD)
1977
Date
SS
mg/I
VSS
mg/l
Alk
mg/I as
CaC03
Total
BOD
Fecal
Soluble Coliform
BOD Colonies/IOO ml
D.O.
Composite
Sample
mg/I
pH
Composite
Sample
D.O.
In Situ
mg/I
pH
In Situ
Temperature
10 Situ
°c
Daily
Flow
mgd
N
\0
Vo)
Sept. 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Oct. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
Mean
Stan. Dev.
25
1
I
1
10
7
13
10
3
2
19
2
6
13
10
7
6
8
8
2
2
17
10
8
II
7
10
3
21
8
8
6
13
1
1
1
5
4
5
8
2
2
1
1
1
8
9
I
I
6
7
1
I
5
3
2
8
5
4
I
17
6
4
4
81
80
78
88
88
81
84
86
85
85
87
80
81
82
80
90
92
89
98
92
99
97
90
87
89
89
90
93
96
96
88
6
4
4
5
5
6
5
4
5
4
4
4
3
4/4
3
5
4
5
5
5
3
4/5
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
4
4
4/5
1/1
5
6
4
7
6
7
4
5
4
4
5
4
4/4
5
4
3
4
6
5
4
4/4
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
4/4
1/0
-------
TABLE A-66. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #4 CHLORINATED EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1977 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mg Nil mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Sept. 15 28 13 1.87 1.1 0.086 1.0 2.92 0.026 2.89
16 31 7 2.51 2.8 0.027 2.8 3.56 0.016 3.54
17 41 18 2.74 1.3 0.081 1.2 1.90 0.012 1.89
18 38 12 2.89 0.4 0.042 0.4 0.95 0.013 0.94
19 27 2 3.08 1.5 0.017 1.5 1.52 0.044 1.48
20 23 6 2.67 0.5 0.022 0.5 1.63 0.020 1.61
21 25 3 2.51 2.2 0.022 2.2 1.42 0.008 1.41
22 28 10 2.19 1.3 0.023 1.3 1.61 0.013 1.60
23 29 19 2.24 2.0 0.023 2.0 1.69 o.ot 5 1.67
24 24 7 2.23 2.4 0.063 2.3 1.75 0.021 1.73
25 26 3 2.09 3.4 0.024 3.4 1.66 0.009 1.65
26 17 2 2.40 2.3 0.081 2.2 3.80 0.007 3.79
27 11 3 2.07 3.0 0.33 2.7 3.50 0.007 3.49
28 23 16 2.38 3.2 0.017 3.2 1.59 O.ot5 1.58
29 22 11 2.77 2.7 0.016 2.7 2.64 0.006 2.63
30 19 13 2.76 2.5 0.080 2.4 2.18 0.010 2.17
Oct. I 18 10 2.58 3.2 0.064 3.1 1.98 0.030 1.95
2 15 9 2.75 2.6 <0.010 2.6 2.42 0.056 2.36
3 14 8 2.92 3.2 <0.010 3.2 2.14 0.021 2.12
4 18 9 2.73 3.4 0.033 3.4 1.97 0.003 1.97
5 21 12 2.10 3.2 0.023 3.2 2.28 0.004 2.28
6 24 16 2.71 3.0 0.019 3.0 2.54 0.007 2.53
7 15 10 2.23 3.0 0.016 3.0 1.91 0.006 1.90
8 18 14 2.75 3.0 0.019 3.0 2.94 O.otl 2.93
9 19 14 2.70 3.4 0.023 3.4 2.88 0.010 2.87
10 18 15 2.65 3.6 0.061 3.5 2.70 0.005 2.69
11 22 12 3.02 3.4 0.032 3.4 3.5 0.008 3.5
12 21 6 2.82 3.2 0.021 3.2 2.7 0.005 2.7
13 21 9 3.48 3.6 0.014 3.6 2.9 0.007 2.9
14 20 8 3.31 3.2 <0.010 3.2 1.73 0.010 1.72
Mean 23 10 2.60 2.6 0.044 2.6 2.30 0.014 2.28
Stan. Dev. 7 5 0.38 0.9 0.059 0.9 0.73 0.012 0.73
294
-------
TABLE A-67. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (FIELD)
AJk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. Temperature
1978 SS VSS mg/I as Total Soluble Coli fo nn Composite Composite In Situ pH In Situ
Date mg/I mg/I CaC03 BOD BOD Colonies/lOO ml Sample Sample mg/l In Situ 0c
mg/I
Jan. 4 83 46 118 79 23 3.5 x 10s 9.2 7.5 9.1 7.7 15.0
5 59 38 110 112 31 3.0 x 10s 8.3 7.3 8.4 7.3 15.0
6 64 60 130 81 24 2.5 x 10s 8.6 7.5 8.5 7.3 15.0
7 23 15 108 46 ]9 3.Ox 10s 8.6 7.3 6.9 7.] 17.0
8 93 90 112 148 33 9.0 x 10s 8.1 7.5 6.4 7.1 16.5
9 124 112 97 1]5 18 1.05 x 106 8.2 7.3 8.7 7.] 10.0
10 56 49 87 78 17 6.0 x 10s 10.4 7.3 9.] 7.1 10.0
II 122 58 86 75 ] 7 5.5 x 10s 9.3 7.3 8.3 7.2 12.5
]2 66 46 101 94 24 6.0 x 10s 8.7 7.2 7.] 6.9 ]2.0
13 ]46 142 92 77 14 9.5 x 10s 8.5 7.3 8.4 6.6 10.5
14 1489 1446 67 80 14 I. I 5 x 106 8.2 7.2 7.0 6.7 6.0
15 481 457 67 98 12 1.4 x ]06 8.9 7.2 8.3 6.9 12.0
16 434 412 69 83/6 3b /14 1.35 x 106 8.1 7.2 7.1 6.9 ]4.0
N 17 58 39 73 69 16 1.3 x 106 7.9 7.5 7.3 6.8 ]6.0
\0 18 79 71 71 55 14 1.45 x 106 8.5 7.2 7.9 6.9 14.0
VI 19 92 90 72 59 ]4 1.5 x 106 8.8 6.7 9.5 7.0 10.0
20 28 12 67 39b ]7 9.0 x IOs 9.7 7.1 9.5 6.9 10.0
21 45 34 64 44 13 1.0 x 106 10.0 7.0 7.9 6.5 12.0
22 20 2 64 33b /36b 13/] Ib 1.5 x 106 9.9 7.1 8.5 6.7 12.5
23 43 36 63 34b 13 ] .15 x 106 9.6 7.3 8.5 6.7 13.5
24 53 40 61 39 16 8.0 x 10s 8.1 7.1 8.1 6.7 15.0
25 66 64 59 44 26 6.5 x IOs 8.1 7.3 8.1 6.9 17.0
26 46 43 63 43 26 6.5 x IOs 10.4 7.3 9.7 6.7 10.0
27 65 59 59 32b 17 6.5 x IOs ] 1.0 7.] 9.6 7.0 10.5
28 22 17 57 31b 17 6.0 x IOs 10.5 7.5 10.0 7.1 10.0
29 45 22 56 29b 23 5.5 x IOs ] 1.0 7.] 9.3 6.9 9.0
30 32 18 57 30b lib 6.5 x 10s 10.5 7.] 9.0 6.9 11.0
31 40 26 58 25b I] 9.0 x 105 9.6 7.0 8.7 6.8 ]2.0
Feb. I 74 59 57 40 12 6.5 x 105 9.0 7.0 7.9 7.1 11.0
2 36 28 57 72 ]1 4.5 x 105 9.8 7.] 9.8 7.4 9.0
Mean 65 52 77 63/49 18/13 5.8740 L 9.2 7.2 8.4 7.0 ]2.3
Stan. Dev. 35 36 22 31/19 6/2 0.2183 L 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.3 2.7
hOuI,"k Ihe 20-80 wlony 1111111
/ - ROOS/BODS '\lth I1Itrilkation inhibItor.
l = Lo~ 10
-------
TABLE A-68. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 111 LAGOON INFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03 +N02}N N02 -N N03-N
Date COD COD mgP/l mgN/l mg N/l mg N/l mg N/l mg N/l mgN/l
mg/l mg/l
Jan. 4 180 113 9.59 13.9 5.33 8.6 0.38 0.069 0.31
5 213 153 11.14 14.2 4.09 10.1 0.44 0.072 0.37
6 217 150 11.21 14.6 6.78 7.8 0.43 0.081 0.35
7 195 149 9.12 14.5 4.26 10.2 0.51 0.080 0.43
8 185 143 9.92 14.4 5.87 8.5 0.33 0.067 0.26
9 163 124 3.71 13.9 3.17 10.7 0.81 0.112 0.70
10 235 148 3.40 14.1 3.99 10.1 1.06 0.132 0.93
11 191 120 3.27 15.1 2.49 12.6 0.98 0.124 0.86
12 132 110 4.25 14.2 3.39 10.8 0.95 0.130 0.82
13 151 124 2.95 15.2 4.24 11.0 1.20 0.150 1.05
14 180 149 2.73 14.7 3.04 11.7 1.74 0.178 1.56
15 129 104 2.10 15.1 3.26 11.8 1.81 0.188 1.62
16 215 125 2.43 13.9 6.39 7.5 1.75 0.188 1.56
17 201 145 2.26 14.6 5.59 9.0 1.59 0.186 1.40
18 252 157 2.33 14.8 5.55 9.3 1.55 0.188 1.36
19 234 193 2.95 14.6 4.33 10.3 1.55 0.152 1.40
20 225 177 2.66 14.7 3.11 11.4 1.89 0.122 1.77
21 226 147 2.66 13.6 2.52 11.1 2.36 0.148 2.21
22 219 153 2.13 14.8 2.94 11.9 2.36 0.154 2.21
23 205 112 2.28 15.1 4.12 11.0 2.28 0.158 2.12
24 179 145 2.08 14.6 3.54 11.1 2.12 0.170 1.95
25 244 179 2.41 14.8 4.00 10.8 1.84 0.158 1.68
26 219 143 2.83 15.5 3.04 12.5 1.66 0.106 1.55
27 213 124 2.47 15.1 2.70 12.4 1.95 0.108 1.84
28 207 149 2.63 15.5 2.75 12.8 1.84 0.114 1.73
29 219 137 2.31 15.6 4.46 11,.1 1.84 0.112 1.73
30 239 175 2.19 15.3 2.26 13.0 1.95 0.122 2.83
31 215 126 2.16 15.2 2.62 12.6 2.30 0.136 2.16
Feb. 1 205 110 2.41 15.4 2.94 12.5 2.34 0.150 2.19
2 204 95 2.38 14.9 3.06 11.8 2.30 0.138 2.16
Mean 203 139 3.90 14.7 3.86 10.9 1.54 0.133 1.44
Stan. Dev. 30 24 2.93 0.5 1.23 1.5 0.67 0.037 0.69
296
-------
TABLE A-69. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. TemperatLore
1978 SS VSS Total Soluble Composite pH
Date mg/I mg/I mg/I as BOD BOD Coliform Sample Composite In Situ In Situ In Si tu
CaC03 Colonies/IOO ml mg/I Sample mg/I °C
Jan. 4 47 20 116 > 42a 17a 20 12.7 9.0 14.1 9.0 12.0
5 61 49 III > 423 143 65 12.4 9.3 13.7 9.3 12.0
6 68 65 105 > 44a 14a 55 12.0 9.0 13.3 9.2 12.0
7 108 85 108 > 41a 163 35 11.6 9.1 11.9 8.3 14.0
8 31 19 105 36a 133 38 10.4 9.1 10.5 8.9 15.0
9 51 44 100 48 19 75 11.3 8.6 12.0 9.0 8.0
10 44 31 101 45 15 100 12.6 8.5 13.3 8.7 7.0
II 67 49 100 46 17 75 12.2 8.9 13.0 9.3 9.0
12 36 28 101 43 16 175 12.8 8.9 13.0 8.9 7.0
13 41 34 106 40 14 295 12.6 8.7 12.6 8.9 8.0
14 72 51 101 47 15 355 12.1 8.4 12.9 8.7 4.0
15 115 99 104 46 15 493 12.8 8.4 13.0 8.9 7.0
16 194 182 106 38/42 13/14 445 12.4 8.4 13.0 8.9 8.0
N 17 42 33 101 42 16 350 11.9 8.2 12.2 8.7 11.0
\0
...... 18 47 31 100 39 17 315 11.2 7.7 12.4 8.9 11.5
19 31 29 106 35 19 370 11.3 8.0 11.8 8.3 8.0
20 24 22 101 36 16 500 11.2 7.7 11.6 8.0 7.5
21 35 26 99 2g8 15 750 11.6 7.7 11.8 8.1 9.0
22 30 24 99 213/37 15/16 560 11.0 7.7 11.6 7.9 9.0
23 29 26 96 22a 14 100 11.4 7.7 11.7 8.0 10.0
24 33 23 95 25a 13 70 10.7 7.6 10.3 8.0 13.0
25 28 26 91 21a 12 140 9.5 7.7 9.1 7.7 16.0
26 12 8 89 22a 10 110 11.4 7.5 11.9 7.9 9.0
27 38 33 91 343 J(i' 140 12.4 7.7 12.5 8.3 9.0
28 27 26 88 23 II 130 12.3 7.8 13.3 8.4 8.5
29 32 12 88 24 22 360 12.8 7.7 13.8 8.5 7.0
30 38 18 87 27 a 220 12.8 8.1
9 13.3 8.8 7.5
31 31 17 88 20 lOa 110 12.6 7.6 12.3 8.7 9.5
Feb. 1 52 43 86 lsa a 60 12.2 8.3
9 12.4 8.9 9.0
2 16 11 89 203 103 60 12.5 8.4 12.4 8.9 7.5
Mean 49 39 99 34/40 14/15 2.1720 L 11.9 8.2 12.4 8.6 9.5
Stan. Dev. 36 34 8 10/4 3/1 0.4164 L 0.8 0.6 1.1 0.5 2.7
30utside the 40-70% limit.
/ - 8005/8005 with nitrification inhibitor.
L = Loglo
-------
TABLE A-70. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #2 LAGOON EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3-N OrgN (N03+N02}N N02-N NC>:,.N
COD COD
Date mg/l mg/l mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg N/l mgN/l mg N/l
Jan. 4 44 40 4.45 9.1 0.174 8.9 0.13 0.023 0.11
5 47 43 4.60 9.3 0.157 9.1 0.17 0.023 0.15
6 45 40 4.33 9.9 0.250 9.7 0.07 0.021 0.05
7 49 45 4.28 9.5 0980 8.5 0.07 0.024 0.05
8 47 40 4.36 9.6 0.116 9.5 0.08 0.023 0.06
9 43 34 4.17 9.0 0.231 8.8 0.10 0.024 0.08
10 51 46 4.51 10.1 0.271 9.8 0.13 0.025 0.10
11 51 42 4.40 10.7 0.810 9.9 0.16 0.028 0.13
12 49 45 4.41 10.4 0.830 9.6 0.17 0.029 0.14
13 46 42 4.32 10.1 0.970 9.1 0.17 0.029 0.14
14 48 41 4.35 11.3 1.400 9.9 0.18 0.030 0.15
15 45 41 4.41 11.2 1.28 9.9 0.20 0.029 0.17
16 52 45 4.21 10.3 1.57 8.7 0.23 0.031 0.20
17 51 47 4.20 10.7 1.55 9.2 0.26 0.032 0.23
18 49 41 4.13 10.6 1.56 9.0 0.29 0.034 0.26
19 49 47 3.98 10.7 1.62 9.1 0:31 0.036 0.27
20 55 41 4.02 9.9 1.59 8.3 0.33 0.037 0.29
21 47 36 3.97 9.7 2.16 7.5 0.37 0.043 0.33
22 52 42 4.02 10.6 2.22 8.4 0.39 0.052 0.34
23 53 39 4.11 10.6 2.74 7.9 0.31 0.060 0.25
24 47 37 4.11 10.7 2.50 8.2 0.36 0.071 0.29
25 52 40 4.05 10.3 2.53 7.8 0.35 0.070 0.28
26 47 42 3.76 9.9 2.62 7.3 0.35 0.065 0.28
27 52 44 3.79 10.1 2.68 7.4 0.41 0.064 0.35
28 47 39 3.72 10.5 2.48 8.0 0.41 0.061 0.35
29 49 47 3.63 12.0 2.37 9.6 0.42 0.058 0.36
30 52 41 3.27 11.1 2.02 9.1 0.46 0.059 0.40
31 53 42 3.21 10.7 1.74 9.0 0.52 0.065 0.46
Feb. 1 48 40 3.00 11.3 1.66 9.6 0.56 0.062 0.50
2 48 37 3.19 11.1 1.58 9.5 0.61 0.063 0.55
Mean 49 43 4.03 10.4 1.49 8.9 0.29 0.042 0.24
Stan. Dev. 3 9 0.42 0.7 0.85 0.8 0.15 0.018 0.13
298
-------
TABLE A- 71. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (FIELD)
Alk Fecal D.O. pH D.O. Temperature
1978 SS VSS Total Soluble Composite pH
mg/I as BOD Coliform Composite In Situ In Situ
Date mg/l mg/l CaC03 BOD Colonies/I 00 ml Sample Sample mg/l In Situ .C
mg/I
Jan. 4 26 3 103 >178 II 3 11.8 7.1 10.8 7.5 14.0
5 32 15 99 148 7 2 10.6 7.3 8.9 7.7 15.5
6 44 42 118 158 8 7 10.7 7.3 8.9 7.5 12.0
7 42 24 100 138 8
-------
TABLE A- 72. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #3 FILTER EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978 Total Soluble Total P TKN NH3 -N OrgN (N03 +N02}N N02-N N03-N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mgN/l mg N/l mg N/l
mg/l mg/l
Jan. 4 27 23 4.02 5.2 0.183 5.0 1.60 0.050 1.55
5 25 22 3.83 5.0 0.292 4.7 1.55 0.060 1.49
6 24 21 3.83 5.4 0.188 5.2 1.90 0.065 1.84
7 39 34 3.85 5.6 0.215 5.4 2.15 0.010 2.14
8 43 36 3.85 6.2 0.193 6.0 2.70 0.010 2.69
9 27 23 3.67 5.3 0.355 4.9 1.84 0.074 1.77
10 28 25 3.83 6.0 0.266 5.7 1.80 0.061 1.74
11 32 25 3.83 6.3 0.74 5.6 1.72 0.076 1.64
12 28 22 3.86 5.9 0.36 5.5 1.64 0.080 1.56
13 28 23 3.76 6.3 0.66 5.6 1.31 0.070 1.24
14 39 32 3.87 6.7 0.75 5.9 1.24 0.071 1.17
15 32 25 3.98 6.7 1.18 5.5 1.28 0.070 1.21
16 39 26 3.85 6.1 1.44 4.7 1.39 0.086 1.30
11 36 28 3.73 6.2 1.23 5.0 1.88 0.170 1.71
18 41 32 3.77 6.0 1.43 4.6 2.75 0.190 2.56
19 44 30 3.56 7.2 1.25 5.9 2.75 0.185 2.56
20 43 29 3.41 6.1 1.32 4.8 1.70 0.150 1.55
21 33 28 3.70 5.0 1.63 3.4 1.97 0.180 1.79
22 33 26 3.66 5.5 1.82 3.7 1.97 0.185 1.78
23 39 26 3.69 6.8 2.06 4.7 1.84 0.205 1.64
24 32 25 3.95 7.2 2.45 4.7 2.16 0.300 1.86
25 33 30 3.69 6.3 1.89 4.4 3.55 0.275 3.27
26 36 25 3.48 7.1 1.56 5.5 4.25 0.335 3.91
27 37 28 3.56 6.9 1.50 6.4 3.65 0.235 3.41
28 34 28 3.30 7.1 1.48 5.6 2.95 0.185 2.76
29 36 30 2.85 7.3 1.32 6.0 2.95 0.165 2.79
30 42 24 2.98 7.2 1.04 6.2 2.70 0.160 2.54
31 41 23 3.00 6.7 1.13 5.6 2.75 0.150 2.60
Feb. 1 32 26 3.00 7.4 1.14 6.3 2.75 0.145 2.60
2 28 25 2.89 7.1 0.99 6.1 2.45 0.145 2.30
Mean 35 27 3.61 6.3 1.07 5.3 2.24 0.138 2.10
Stan. Dev. 6 4 0.34 0.7 0.62 0.7 0.75 0.082 0.70
300
-------
TABLE A-73. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, 114 CHLORINATED EFFLUENT (FIELD)
1978 SS VSS Alk Total Soluble Fecal D.O. pH D.O. \ Temperature Daily
Composite pH Total
Date mg/l mg/I mg/l as BOD BOD Coliform Com posite In Situ In Situ In Situ
CaC03 Colonies/loo ml Sample Sample mg/l .C Flow
mg/l mgd
Jan. 4 26 9 102 13 8
-------
TABLE A-74. SUMMARY DATA SHEET, AILEY, #4 CHLORINATED EFFLUENT (UWRL)
1978' Total Soluble Total P TKN NH, -N OrgN (NO, +N02)-N N02-N No,-N
Date COD COD mg P/l mgN/I mgN/I mgN/I mg N/l mg N/l mgN/I
mg/l mg/l
Jan. 4 23 20 4.02 2.6 0.113 2.5 1.45 0.005 1.45
5 22 18 3.54 2.5 0.102 2.4 1.50 0.005 1.50
6 20 14 3.54 2.5 0.066 2.4 1.85 0.010 1.84
7 23 18 3.64 2.7 0.097 2.6 1.95 0.010 194
8 31 24 3.60 2.2 0.107 2.1 2.65 0.015 2.64
9 23 19 3.60 3.0 0.082 2.9 1.85 0.003 1.85
10 21 16 3.83 3.1 0.092 3.0 1.74 0.003 1.74
11 20 14 3.54 2.9 0.229 2.7 1.63 0.005 1.62
12 21 15 3.65 2.7 0.224 2.5 1.56 0.006 1.55
13 19 14 3.67 3.2 0.266 29 1.29 0.005 1.28
14 19 14 3.83 2.9 0.74 2.2 1.21 0.005 1.20
15 20 16 3.97 2.9 0.86 2.0 1.23 0.006 1.22
16 26 17 3.77 2.7 1.21 1.5 1.34 0.009 1.33
17 25 21 3.77 2.5 1.23 1.3 1.78 0.056 1.72
18 33 17 3.75 2.8 1.38 1.4 2.75 0.145 2.60
19 41 18 3.54 3.1 1.10 2.0 2.65 0.008 2.64
20 32 15 3.44 2.1 1.27 0.8 1.70 0.006 1.69
21 27 18 3.49 2.2 1.48 0.7 1.93 0.008 1.92
22 26 16 3.52 2.6 1.85 0.7 1.90 0.008 1.89
23 15 21 3.67 3.1 1.98 1.1 1.82 0.006 1.81
24 22 12 3.72 2.9 1.82 1.1 3.75 0.012 2.74
25 17 15 3.84 2.5 1.62 0.9 3.65 0.006 3.64
26 18 13 3.63 3.6 1.43 2.2 4.45 0.013 4.44
27 25 15 3.51 2.7 1.41 1.3 3.50 0.004 3.50
28 23 15 3.45 2.9 1.36 1.5 2.90 0.003 2.90
29 25 15 3.63 2.8 1.43 1.4 2.85 0.003 2.85
30 30 15 3.00 2.5 1.15 1.3 2.70 0.006 2.69
31 24 17 2.92 2.9 0.37 2.5 2.65 0.005 2.64
Feb. 1 20 16 2.89 2.8 0.40 2.4 2.55 0.003 2.55
2 23 13 2.86 3.8 0.45 3.3 2.35 0.003 2.35
Mean 24 16 3.56 2.8 0.86 1.9 2.24 0.013 2.19
Stan. Dev. 5 3 0.29 0.4 0.64 0.8 0.83 0.027 0.78
302
-------
APPENDIX B
COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE OF SLOW SAND FILTER OPERATION WITH INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER OPERATION
1111
9
e
7
-
...J 6
"-
~ S
-
\,oJ .
0 0 ...
\,oJ .
a
.
(D a
2
1
8
8
x: SLOW SAND FilTER EFFLUENT
(i: INTERMITTENT SAND FilTER EFFLUENT
x
s
18
Figure B-1.
+ 1'C1A N). 1 ( 1-22-77 10 2-211-77)
X 1'C1A N). 2 ( 7-11-77 10 8-211-77)
" 1'C1A N). a ( "'-1"'-78 10 "'-28-18)
NO SAMPLING
16
21!1 cs
TI~ IN CAYS
~
as
'K!I
'K;
The relationship observed between biochemical oxygen demand
and time in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
sand filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
.....
~
~
-
. ...
a
.
a
.
m
~
o
~
.
~2
9
s
II!!
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
+ 'TUA NJ. 1 ( 1-212-77 TO 2-20-77)
)( ~ NJ. 2 ( 7-11-77 TO 9-20-77)
" ~ NJ. a ( "'-1"'-19 TO "'-29-19)
)(
NO SAMPLING
II!!
6
16
20 2S
THE IN CFlYS
ill!!
ati!I
as
It-II!I
...s
The relationship observed between soluble biochemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the parallel operation of
intermittent sand filters and slow sand filters during tour
No.2 at the Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
Figure B-2.
-------
Ite
alii
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
- )(
~2B
~
......
.,0) .
0 en
VI .
en
lei
III
III
6
Figure B-3.
1111
16
+ 1tlR t«). 1 ( 1-22-77 TO 2-2rlI-77)
)( 1tlR t«). 2 ( 7-11-77 TO Q-21Z1-77)
W 1tlR t«). ~ ( it-lit-iPS TO 1t-2Q-iPS)
NO SAMPLING
all 26
TH£ IN rnvs
all!
The relationship observed between suspended solids
in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at
Shasta water pollution control facility.
35
ItIZI
ItS
and time
sand
the Mount
-------
. -
~
~
~
w
o
0\
.
en
. llZ1
en
.
>
3ZI
28
IZI
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~: INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
x
+ TO..R t(). 1 ( 1-2i;!-77 10 2-28-77)
X TO..R t(). 2 ( 7-11-77 10 8-28-77)
" TO..R t(). 3 ( "'-1"'-78 10 "'-28-78)
NO SAMPLING
IZI
&-
1.1
IS
CIi!I as
Tnt:: IN ffiYS
3ZI
as
ItS
It-IZI
The relationship observed between volatile suspended solids
and time in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
sand filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
Figure B-4.
-------
5EI
-
i~
-
ffi
-
~30
8
-
~2I
IL.
w -
0 8
"
~ 10
~
0
o
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
s
Figure B-5.
+ TC1R N). 1 ( 1-;£-77 TO 2-Cil-77)
X TC1R N). 2 ( 7-11-77 TO 8-21-77)
" TC1R N). a ( "'-1"'-78 TO It-CB-78)
X
X
X
NO SAMPLING
10
15
em as
TIf"E IN rnys
am
36
'to
ItS
The relationship observed between fecal coliform bacteria
and time in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
sand filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
~
i
~
2 8.~
-
~
-
9.0
8.6
7.6
1.~
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
aD:tNTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ I VALUES BELOW 7.0 .
a
6
Figure B-6.
)(
1/lJ
+ TM P(). 1 ( 1-22-17 TO a.2flJ-17)
)( TM P(). a ( 1-11-17 TO 8-2flJ-17)
W T~ P(). 3 ('+-1"'-78 TO '+-2e-78)
NO SAMPLING
16
2I!J CS
T If"E IN DAYS
3IlJ
as
If.€!
If.S
The relationship observed between in situ pH and time in
day. for the parallel operation of intermittent sand filters
and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the Mount Shasta
water pollution control facility.
-------
_is
u
-
""
o
\D
.
~
~
-211
~
-
.
l'
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
II
,
Figure B-7.
+ TO..A NJ. 1 ( l-rR-77 TO 2-211-77)
X TO.A NJ. 2 ( 7-11-77 TO 9-211-77)
" TO.A NJ. 3 ( "'-1"'-78 TO "'-28-78)
X
NO SAMPLING
111
l'
211 a;
TIre: IN ~YS
311
3&
ItII
ItS
The relationship observed between in situ temperature and
time in days for the parallel operation of intermittent sand
filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the Mount
Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
6
-
~
~
-
. ...
a
.
o
~
w -
... ~
o
-2
8
IZI
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
x
IZI
S
Figure B-8.
+ ~ PC). 1 ( 1-212-17 TO 2-2IiI-17)
X ~ N). 2 ( 1-11-17 TO 8-2IiI-17)
. ~ N). 3 ( "'-1"'-18 TO -CQ-18 )
NO SAMPLING
11Z1
2IiI 2S
TIt£ IN rnvs
is
am
as
't-IZI
ItS
The relationship observed between in situ dissolved oxygen
and ttme in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
sand filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
-
~
~ 11111
-
IN
.-
.-
.
o
.
a
.1S
u
11S
1511J
125
5I1J
25
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~; INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
+ 1t1R t-I). 1 ( 1-22-77 TO 2-20-77)
X TCLR t-I). 2 ( 7-11-77 TO a-2m-77)
w T~ t(). 3 ( 't-IIt-78 TO 't-213-78)
NO SAMPLING
x
111
5;
1121
15
2m 2S
TIfoE IN (fWS
aI2I
as
It£!
ItS
Figure B-9.
The relationship observed between chemical oxygen demand and
time in days for the parallel operation of intermittent sand
filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the Mount
Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
1611
X: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT + 1t1A t«).
(I: INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT )( 1t1A t«).
12'
- NO SAMPLING
~1.
~
-
. 16
c
.
0
.
"'" u
~ &II
N .
~
2'
)(
II
II , 111 1; 211 is 311 CI; 'ttI ...
T It'£ IN [)=IYS
Figure B-I0.
The relationship observed between soluble chemical oxygen
demand and time in days for the parallel operation of
intermittent sand filters and slow sand filters during tour
No.2 at the Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
100
9I2J
-
g sa
~ 716
~ 6I2J
~
'-'
w ~ sa
'"'"
w -
Z
-
~ IH1I
~
rt
3f2I
2fZI
S
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
S
Figure B-ll.
+ 11U NO. 1 ( 1-2i-77 1'0 2-21/1-77)
X 1'tlA NJ. 2 ( 7-11-77 1'0 8-21-77)
" 1'tlA NJ. 3 ( "'-1"'-78 1'0 "'-29-78)
X
NO SAMPUNG
10
IS
2Ii!I 2S
T H£ IN DAYS
aB
35
'to
ItS
The relationship observed between alkalinity and time in
days for the parallel operation of intermittent sand
filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
-It
~
Q.:
~a
-
1M
....
~
.
Q.:
~2
6
5
1
m
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
(i: INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
+ TCJ..A t(). 1 ( l-'i!!2,-77 TO i!-i!ll-77)
X TCJ..A t(). 2 ( 7-11-77 TO 8-C!II-77)
. 1UA t(). a ( It-llt-18 TO 1t-28-18)
NO SAMPLING
~
X
m
5
1m
15
2IlJ 2S
Tlr-E IN [];(s
3!1
as
8KlJ
ItS
Figure B-12.
The relationship observed between total phosphorus and time
in days for the parallel operation of intermittent sand
filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
1'"
12
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
llZ1
- X
Z 8
,
~ 6
.....
IN ~
~
VI
...
2
e
ICI
+ Ta.R t(). 1 ( 1-2e-17 TO 2-21Z1-17)
X TtJ..R t(). 2 ( 7-11-17 TO 8-21Z1-17)
W Ta.R t(). 3 ( "'-1"'-78 TO "'-28-78)
NO SAMPLING
6
ua
16
2IZI 2S
TIfoE IN CAYS
3IZI
36
'to
ItS
Figure B-13.
The relationship observed between total kjeldahl nitrogen
and time in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
sand filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
2.111
1.1i
1.&11
-
z
I
~ 1.26
...J
" I..
~
-
~ a::: 1II.1i
.... -
0\ i
11.&11
III..
III..
III
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~: INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
+ ~ NJ. 1 ( 1-22-17 TO 2-211-17)
X ~ NJ. 2 (7-11-17 TO 8-211-17)
W ~ NJ. 3 ( '1--1'1--78 TO '1--28-78)
NO SAMPLING
)(
6
1111
16
211 i15
TIr£ IN ffiYS
all
~
'tfJ
It6
Fiaure B-14.
The relationship observed between ammonia and time in day.
for the parallel operation of intermittent sand filter. and
slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the Mount Shaata
water pollution control facility.
-------
16./ZI
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~: INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
12.5
-
Z
I
~
~ 1/Z1./ZI
-
.
w Z
....
..... .
~ )(
7.5
5./ZI
/ZI
5
Figure B-15.
+ 1t1A N). 1 ( 1-'i!2.-77 TO 2-211-77)
)( 1t1A N). 2 ( 7-11-77 TO 8-211-77)
V 1t1A N). a ( "'-1"'-78 TO "'-28-18)
NO SAMPLING
l/Z1
15
ell C!S
T If"E IN I:FtYS
3ZJ
3S
ItIZI
ItS
The relationship observed between organic nitrogen
in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
and time
sand
the
-------
~
....
00
Ill. am
11.15
11.111
11.66
11.611
~ II.S;
~ Ill. QD
z 1I.1t6
I
(\J II. ....
~ II.~
-
I.LJ II. ill
~
~ 11.5
= 11.211
z
II. 16
11.111
11.15
11.111
+ TCLR NJ. 1 ( 1-22-17 TO 2-211-17)
X TCLR N). 2 ( 7-11-17 TO 8-211-17)
17 TCLR N). a ( '1--1"'-78 TO -78)
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~: INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
NO SAMPLING
III
ill
~
6
111
16
211 i5
Tlr£ IN CFtYS
Figure B-16.
The relationship observed between nitrite and time in days
for the parallel operation of intermittent sand filters and
slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the Mount Sh..t.
water pollution control facility.
....
't6
-------
7.5
x: SLOW SAND FilTER EFFLUENT
(i: INTERMITTENT SAND FilTER EFFLUENT
+ 1't).R NJ. 1 ( 1-22-77 10 2-20-77)
X 1'CJ.A NJ. 2 ( 7-11-77 10 8-20-77)
V 1'CJ.A NJ. a ( "'-1"'-19 10 "'-28-79)
-
~ 5.121 X
~
Z
I
~ \ NO SAMPLING
'-'
w W
.- I- 2.5
\0 ~
-
z
121.121
o
5
1121
15
20 2S
TH£ IN [JWS
~
$
'to
't5
Figure B-17.
The relationship observed between nitrate and time in days
for the parallel operation of intermittent sand filters and
slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the Mount Shasta
water pollution control facility.
-------
7.S
X: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~ INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
+ TU..R~. 1 ( 1-~-77 TO 2-20-77)
X TU..R ~. 2 ( 7-11-77 TO 8-20-77)
" TU..R~. 3 ( "-1"-78 TO "-28-78)
-
~ S.B X
~
-
-
z NO SAMPLING
I
~
UJ . 2.S
N
0 ~
-
B.B
e
1B
Ite
ItS
a!I 2S
TIt1:: IN [fWS
5
15
ai!J
3S
Figure B-18.
The relationship observed between nitrite and nitrate and
time in days for the parallel operation of intermittent
sand filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
9.11
8.5
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
(i) INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
+ ~ N). 1 ( 1-22-77 1tJ 2-211-77)
X 1U.A N). 2 ( 7-11-77 1tJ 8-211-77)
V 1U.A N). a (1"-1"'-7'8 1tJ "'-29-7'8)
:t: V
Q.:
~ 8.11
-
I.tJ ~ X
N
....
7.5
7.11
eI
. I;
Figure B-19.
NO SAMPLING
lei
15
CII 2S
T1r£ IN [fWS
ail
~
'tfJ
itS
The relationship observed between composite pH and time in
days for the parallel operation of intermittent sand
filters and slow sand filters during tour No.2 at the
Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
12
x: SLOW SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
~; INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER EFFLUENT
+ TO..R tID. 1 ( l-'i!i!-77 TO 2-~-77)
X TO..R N;). 2 (7-11-77 TO 8-~-77)
" TO..R tID. 3 ( "'-1't--78 TO "'-28-78)
121
-
~
~
'-' ~
.
a 8
.
o
~
I..J -
N ~ 6
N NO SAMPLING
X
...
21
5
121
15
221 2S
TIf"E IN [fWS
3!J
as
It0
ItS
Figure B-20.
The relationship observed between composite dissolved
oxygen and time in days for the parallel operation of
intermittent sand filters and slow sand filters during tour
No.2 at the Mount Shasta water pollution control facility.
-------
APPENDIX C
TYPICAL DESIGN OF AN INTERMITTENT SAND FILTER
Known Parameters
Design Flowrate = (100,000 GPO) 378 m3/d
Assumptions
1) Designed to minimize 0 & M
2) Gravity flow
3) Topography and location satisfactory
4) Adequate land available at reasonable cost
5) Filter sand is locally available
6) Filters are considered plugged when at the time
of dosing the water from the previous dose has
not dropped below the filter surface
Loading Rates and Number of Filters Required
Hydraulic loading rate = 2806 m3/ha'd (0.30 MGAD)
Minimum number of filters = 2
Area of Filters = design flow = 378 m3/d = 0 135 hectare (0.33 acre)
HLR 2806 m3/ha. d .
Area of each filter unit should be 0.135 ha. Use 2 filters
Area required/filter = 0.135 ha = 1,350 m2
Dimensions of Filters
Area = L x W
using rectangular dimensions and letting L = 2W
Area = 2W2
W = .; area/2
W = .; 1,350/2 = 26.0 m
L = 2W = 2(26.0) = 52.0 m
Construct two filters 26.0 m x 52.0 m (85.3 ft x 170.6 ft)
side by side as shown in Figure C-l.
323
-------
PLAN
VIEW
ALTERNATING
DOSING
SIPHONS
A
15 em PERFORATED LATERALS
a 0.025 PERCENT SLOPE
SPACED 4.6m (15ft)
LATERALS
20 em COLLECTION
MANIFOLD
INFLUENT
EFFLUENT
0.7m . 0.7m GRAVEL
SPLASH PADS
A
SECTIONAL
VIEW A-A
UNDERORAIN MEDIA
GROUND
LEVEl
REINFORCED CONCRETE WALL
PLASTIC
HYDRAULIC
FLOW
CHART
INFLUENT
ELEV. 100 m
OVERFLOW PIPE
INVERTED
SIPHONS
96.2m
Figure C-l.
Typical intermittent sand filter design.
324
-------
Influent Distribution System
Intermittent Filter Loading System
Assumptions
1) Use a dosing basin with gravity feed to the filters.
2) Loading sequence will deliver one half the daily
flowrate to each filter unit per day in two equal
doses.
3) Loading system will consist of two electrically activated
valves that are operated alternately by a simple
electronic control system triggered by a float switch
or two alternating dosing siphons.
4. Pipe sizes are selected to avoid clogging and to make
cleaning convenient. Hydraulics do not control.
Dosing Basin Size
Use two equal dosings per day per filter. Provides option
of operating filters in parallel or individually.
Design Flow Rate = 378 m3/d
Flow to Each Filter Unit = 378.m3/d = 189 m3/d
2 f,lters
189 m3/d
Volume applied in two equal doses per filter unit per day = 2 dosing/day
Dosing Basin Volume = 94.5 m3/d
Use a square shape and a water depth of 0.92 m (3 ft) to
minimize velocity in distri.bution system. Use 0.3 m (1 ft)
free board and install overflow pipe. Total depth = 1.22 m
(4 ft).
Area = volume = 94.5 m3 = 102.7 m2
depth 0.92 m
Width = 1102.7 m2 = 10.2 m
Dosing Basin Size = 10.2 m square x 1.22 m deep
Distribution manifold from the two valves leading to the
individual filters would be 20 cm dia. pipe. Each of the
outlets from the manifold will serve 6.1 m of the long
side of the filter unit. The manifold outlets will dis-
charge onto splash pads constructed of large gravel (7.5 cm
to 3.8 cm avg. dia.) placed in a 0.7 m square configuration
at each outlet opening.
325
-------
Filter Containment and Filter Underdrain (see Figure 95)-
Use a reinforced concrete retaining structure or a 20 mil
plastic liner to prevent infiltration and exfiltration
to adjacent ground water.
Slopes of filter bottom are dependent on drain pipe con-
figuration using 0.025 percent slope with lateral collection
lines 4.6 m on center.
Utilization of 15 cm diameter perforated PVC pipe as collecting
laterals and 20 cm diameter collection manifolds will provide
adequate hydraulic capacity and ease of maintenance.
Minimum Freeboard required
Filter unit surface area = 1,350 m2
Volume of water per dose = 94.5 m3
Depth @ plugged condition with no immediate outflow
volume 94.5 m3
Depth = area = 1,350 mZ = 0.07 m
Minimum freeboard required to accommodate wastewater when
filter is plugged at time of application of the dose is
0.07 meters. However, with infrequent inspection by an
operator it is recommended that a safety factor be
specified and the value of 0.3 meters mentioned above
be used.
326
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
,. REPORT NO. 12. 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
EPA-600/2-80-032
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE
WASTEWATER STABILIZATION LAGOON--INTERMITTENT SAND March 1980 (Issuing Date)
FILTER SYSTEMS 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S) J. S. Russell, E. J. Middlebrooks, 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
and J. H. Reynolds
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
Utah Water Research Laboratory 35BlC, D.U. B-124, Task D-l/3l
Utah State University 11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
Logan, Utah 84322 R804592
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory--Cin., OH Final 10/76-7/79
Office of Research and Development 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA/600/l4
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Project Officer: Ronald F. Lewis (513) 684-7644
16. ABSTRACT The performance of three prototype lagoon-intermittent sand filtration sys-
tems were evaluated for three 30 consecutive day periods during different seasons
throughout a sixteen month period. Twenty-four different parameters were monitored on
24-hour composite samples. Design criteria, operation and maintenance procedures, and
costs were collected and evaluated for each system.
Operation and maintenance requirements were relatively small, but overall lagoon-
intermittent sand filtration performance was affected by operator skill and experience.
Actual manpower requirements at the three sites ranged from 0.14 to 2.0 man-years and
were related to the size and complexity of the individual system. The 1972 Federal
Secondary Treatment Discharge Standards were satisfied by all three systems with the
exception that 85 percent removal of the influent suspended solids concentration was
not accomplished during two of the nine sampling periods. The intermittent sand filters
were necessary for each. system to satisfy the discharge standards.
Annual capital costs for the three systems ranged from $0.02 to $0.05 per cubic meter
of filtrate while annual operating costs ranged from <$0.01 to $0.02 per cubic meter of
filtrate. Design and cost data for 13 additional lagoon-intermittent sand filtration
systems is also presented. The results clearly indicate that intermittent sand filtra-
tion is a viable low cost method for upgrading wastewater lagoon effluent.
The results of the study were used to develop design criteria for an intermittent
sand filter system, and a design for a typical intermittent sand filter is presented.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANAL YSIS
Ia. DESCRIPTORS b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
lWastewater Intermittent sand filters 13B
ILagoon (ponds)
Effluents
IAlgae
Separation
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO. OF PAGES
Unclassified 351
Release to Public 20. SECURITY CLASS (This page) 22. PRICE
Unclassified
EPA Form 2220-1 (A.... 4-77)
327
o uS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OfFICf 1980-657-146/5643
-------
United Stales
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research Information
Center
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA-335
Official Business
Penally for Private
Use, S300
Special Fourth-Class Rate
Book
Please make all necessary changes on the above label,
detach or copy, and return to the address in the upper
left-hand corner
If you do not wish to receive these reports CHECK HERE D.
detach, or copy this cover, and return to the address in the
upper fefl-hand corner
EPA-600/2-80-032
------- |