EPA-R2-73-226
MAY 1973 Environmental Protection Technology Series
Marine Sanitation System Demonstration
isssz)
% *
Office of Research and Monitoring
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and
Monitoring, Environmental Protection Agency, have
been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further
development and application of environmental
technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology
transfer and a maximum interface in related
fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
<*. Environmental Monitoring
5. Soci©economic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY series. This series
describes research performed to develop and
demonstrate instrumentation, equipment and
methodology to repair or prevent environmental
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.
-------
EPA-R2-73-226,
May 1973
MARINE SANITATION SYSTEM DEMONSTRATION
by
Edmund L. Kaminsky
William P. Roberts
John C. Volk, Jr.
Delaware River and Bay Authority
New Castle, Delaware
Project #15020 GYM
Project Officer:
William J. Librizzi, Jr.
Edison Water Quality Research Laboratory, NERC
Edison, New Jersey 08817
Prepared For:
Office of Research and Monitoring
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
Price $1.25 domestic postpaid or $1 QPO Bookstore
-------
EPA Review Notice
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental
Protection Agency and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the. Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommenda-
tion for use.
11
-------
ABSTRACT
A "flow-through" physical-chemical marine sanitation
system capable of providing a high degree of secondary
treatment was successfully demonstrated in the
laboratory and on board the Delaware River and Bay
Authority's Cape May-Lewes Ferry. Effluent performance
goals of suspended solids and BOD,- less than 50 mg/1
and coliform bacteria count less than 240 MPN/100 ml
were met. Following promulgation of the Environmental
Protection Agency's "No Discharge" standard, the system
(without the addition of any treatment processes)
was also tested in a recycle mode by recycling the
treated effluent for toilet flushing purposes. On
the first recycle day, the suspended solids and BOD5
remained at the "flow-through" levels. With each
succeeding day the suspended solids increased only
slightly, but the BOD5 increased to values ranging
between 140 and 400 mg/1. Coliform bacteria count
was less than 10 MPN/100 ml. The color of the recycled
water changed from clear to a gray milky appearance.
A noticeable ammonia odor appeared on the second day.
Ammonia nitrogen levels were in the 50-460 mg/1 range.
The ammonia can be removed by air stripping, ion exchange, or
breakpoint chlorination, and the increased 6005 levels
can be reduced by chemical oxidation.
ill
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 3
III Introduction 4
IV System Description 6
V System Design and Installation 10
VI System Performance 18
Prototype System Tests and
Performance 18
Ship System Tests and
Performance 37
Operational Check-Out Tests 39
Maintenance & Operational
Experience 44
Test, Sampling, & Analysis
Procedures 45
Results of Overboard Dis-
charge Mode Tests 46
Results of Recycle Mode
Tests 51
Solids Collection & Disposal 66
Initial & Operating Costs 67
VII Evaluation of Capabilities and
Applications 69
VIII Acknowledgements 72
IX References 74
X Appendices 75
v
-------
FIGURES
>aqe
1 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM, MARLAND MARINE SANI-
TATION SYSTEM ABOARD THE CAPE MAY-LEWES
FERRY (EPA PROJECT #15020 GYM) 7
2 SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL AND STORAGE
COMPONENTS OF CAPE MAY-LEWES FERRY SYSTEM 15
3 CARBON COLUMN AND POST-CHLORINATION COM-
PONENTS OF CAPE MAY-LEWES FERRY SYSTEM 16
4 SYSTEM ARRANGEMENT ABOARD THE CAPE MAY-
LEWES FERRY 17
5 CLARIFICATION TESTS ON COMMINUTED SEWAGE
WESTFALIA SAMN-205 CENTRIFUGE 19
6 SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE, PROTOTYPE SYSTEM,
ON FRESH RAW SEWAGE WITH NO CHEMICAL
ADDITIVES, AT A FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS
PER MINUTE 24
7 SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE, PROTOTYPE SYSTEM,
ON FRESH RAW SEWAGE WITH NO CHEMICAL ADDI-
TIVES, AT A FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER
MINUTE 25
8 SHIPBOARD CARBON COLUMN ARRANGEMENT AND
RETENTION TIMES 29
9 RELATION BETWEEN DRY SOLIDS WEIGHT, DAILY
FLOW, AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS 35
10 RELATION BETWEEN SLUDGE VOLUME, SLUDGE
DENSITY, AND DRY SOLIDS WEIGHT 36
11 SHIP SYSTEM TEST SCHEDULE 3Q
12 4,000 GPD SYSTEM INSTALLED ABOARD S. S. MOBIL
ARCTIC.
71
VI
-------
FIGURES continued
PAGE
Al-1 WASTEWATER PLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 1 87
Al-2 WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 2 88
Al-3 WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 3 89
Al-4 WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 4 90
Al-5 WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 5 91
Al-6 WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 6 92
Al-7 WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 7 93
Al-8 WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE, CAPE
MAY-LEWES FERRY, TRIP NO. 8 94
VII
-------
TABLES
NO. PAGE
1 Prototype System, Major Component List 11
2 Shipboard System, Major Component List 12
3 Results of Analysis of Preliminary
Sample of Sewage from Cape May-Lewes
Ferry 21
4 Summary of Performance, Prototype System
on Fresh Domestic Sewage with no Chemical
Additives, at a flow rate of 5 gallons
per minute 23
5 Per Cent Reductions of Suspended Solids
and BOD5 Prototype System 27
6 Carbon Column Comparison, Pilot and
Vessel 28
7 Summary of Performance, Land Based Tests
on Ship System, Fresh Domestic Sewage with
no Chemical Additives at a Flow Rate of 5
gallons per minute 31
8 Summary of Disinfection Tests, Land Based
Tests on Prototype and Ship Systems 32
9 Prototype System, Sludge Densities 34
10 List of Shipboard Test Runs, Passenger
Loadings, and Test Flows 40
11 Summary of Performance, Shipboard Over-
board Discharge Mode Tests, Sea Water
Flushing, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Two Carbon Columns 47
Vlll
-------
TABLES continued
NO. PAGE
12 Summary of Performance, Shipboard Over-
board Discharge Mode Tests, Sea Water
Flushing, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Four Carbon Columns 48
13 Summary of Performance, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Two Carbon Columns 52
14 COD Data for Single Run, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Two Carbon Columns 53
15 Disinfection Data, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute. Two Carbon Columns 54
16 Summary of Performance, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Chlorination and Potassium Per-
manganate Treatment, Four Carbon Columns 56
17 Summary of Performance, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per minute,
Increased Chlorine Dosage, Four Carbon
Columns 58
18 Summary of Performance, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Carbon Columns Backwashed Over-
board, Four Carbon Columns 59
19 EPA Grab Sample Data, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Carbon Columns Backwashed Over-
board, Four Carbon Columns 61
20 Summary of Performance, Shipboard Recycle
Mode Tests, Flow Rate of 5 gallons per
minute, Effects of Changing Two of Four
Carbon Columns 62
-------
TABLES continued
NO.
PAGE
21 Shipboard Recycle Mode Tests, Flow Rate of
5 gallons per minute, Nitrogen Levels in
Post-chlorinated Effluent 63
22 Disinfection Data, Shipboard Recycle Mode
Tests, Flow Rate at 5 gallons per minute,
Four Carbon Columns 65
23 Initial and Operating Cost Data 68
Al-1 Measured Cumulative Flows at Sanitary Pump
and Fresh Water Pump, Cape May-Lewes Ferry,
June 11, 1971 80
Al-2 Measured and Predicted Flows Per Trip, Cape
May-Lewes Ferry, June 11, 1971 85
Al-3 Number of Passengers Per Trip, Peak Passen-
ger Day in 1970 (August 15, 1970) 86
A2-1 Prototype System, Suspended Solids Levels
(mg/1), Flow Rate of 5 gallons per minute 98
A4-1 Performance Data, Aquatair Biological Waste-
water Treatment Plant, Moose Lodge, Kings-
port, Tennessee 104
A4-2 Performance Data, Aquatair Biological Waste-
water Treatment Plant, Alexandria Township
School, Everettstown, New Jersey 105
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
A physical-chemical marine sanitation system capable of
providing a high level of secondary treatment was demon-
strated in the laboratory and aboard the Delaware River
and Bay Authority's Cape May-Lewes Ferry. The results
of the tests showed the following:
1. Laboratory tests with fresh domestic sewage demonstrated
that the system met the performance goal of producing
an effluent with suspended solids and BOD5 less than 50 mg/1
and a coliform bacteria count less than 240 MPN/lOOml.
2. Shipboard tests demonstrated that the system met the
performance goal.
3. The marine sanitation system was converted to a re-
circulating system (without any additional treatment processes)
to meet the Environmental Protection Agency's "No Discharge"
vessel standard and reduce maintenance on the ship's
plumbing system associated with sea water flushing. A
series of five-day shipboard tests in a recycle mode was
performed which showed that the suspended solids in the
recycled flush water increased from less than 50 mg/1 on
the first day to values ranging between 60 and 100 mg/1
by the fifth day; that the BOD5 increased from approxi-
mately 50 mg/1 on the first day to values ranging between
140 and 400 mg/1 by the fifth day; and that a noticeable
ammonia odor appeared during the second day. The appearance
of the recycled flush water varied from a slight milky
color on the first day to a milky gray on subsequent days.
Coliform bacteria count remained less than 240 MPN/100 ml
throughout each five-day test, and the chlorine residual
in the recycle tank was approximately 0.5 to 1.0 mg/1.
4. Results of the recycle tests provide the basis for
system modifications which can upgrade treatment to insure
an effluent that is clear, odorless, or otherwise accept-
able for recirculation as flush liquid.
5. Data collected during the program demonstrated the
system's performance reliability and maintainability.
Level gages shorted out on two occasions, and the rubber
stator in one of the pumps required replacement due to
1.
-------
excessive wear. Apart from the down time caused by
these malfunctions, the system operated reliably 16
hours per day.
6. During the laboratory phase of the program, two
problems were encountered which were successfully re-
solved in the initial stages. The first was finding
the proper type of sewage (fresh and aerobic) for test
purposes. The second was plugging of the centrifuge due
to fibrous material which passed through an in-line
comminuter up-stream of the centrifuge. This problem
was resolved by substituting a vibrating screen for the
comminuter. Two operational problems arose during ship-
board tests. During the peak flow periods in the peak
season, the volume of wastewater discharged to the sani-
tation system exceeded the storage capacity of the col-
lection tank. This was caused by a flow of 6,000 gpd
imposed on a system designed for 5,000 gpd, aggravated by
stuck toilet valves due to sand sucked from the bottom of
Delaware Bay. The other operational difficulty encountered
was flooding of the solids holding tank on three occasions
caused by pressure surges to the sanitation system during
the maintenance shift.
7. The initial cost of the marine sanitation system (5,000
gallon-per-day size) was $40,000.00. Installation cost,
including vessel modifications, was $26,000.00. During the
three-month peak season on the Cape May-Lewes Ferry, the
chemical costs were approximately $120 per month, including
fuel costs of $20 per month for the diesel generator which
was used because alternating current was not available on
the vessel. For the remainder of the season, chemical costs
would be approximately $25 per month, with the fuel costs
remaining constant at $20 per month. Cost of disposing of
accumulated solids by sewage tank truck was $80 per month.
Operation and maintenance of the system did not require
additional manpower costs, since these functions were
handled by existing crews in addition to their normal duties.
8. Although solids holding with periodic pump out at
dockside was the technique used for solids disposal during
the program because it was a convenient method, on-board
drying of the solids with subsequent disposal of a sterile
cake would be a feasible technique which can be used. This
method would be especially helpful for vessels which do not
dock every night as does the Cape May-Lewes Ferry.
2.
-------
SECTION II
REC OMMENDATIONS
The test program successfully demonstrated a "flow-
through" marine sanitation system capable of providing
a high degree of secondary treatment. In view of the
"No Discharge" standards promulgated by the U. S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency on June 23, 1972, however,
it is recommended that this available shipboard test
vehicle be utilized for additional demonstrations. These
would include the following:
1. The addition of relatively simple known treatment
processes to the existing system to provide a no-discharge
system, with recycling of an aesthetically acceptable
treated sanitary wastewater. It is recommended that
these processes be incorporated into the existing system
aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry and demonstrated when
the vessel resumes operation in the spring of 1973.
2. It is further recommended that the information and
experience gained on this program be used to design, fabri-
cate, and install another marine sanitation system aboard
a Government vessel (such as a Corps of Engineers vessel)
to provide a test bed for additional data. Performance
data would be obtained for the following processes: (1)
"primary" treatment (separation of solids by means of a
vibrating screen only, with disinfection and discharge of
the partially clarified wastewater); (2) "improved primary"
treatment (same as above with the addition of centrifuging
prior to disinfection); (3) "secondary" treatment (screening
plus centrifuging plus carbon column treatment plus dis-
infection, with the tests performed over an extended period
of time, and various types of carbon evaluated to determine
the type best suited for shipboard wastewater treatment);
(4) "no-discharge, recycle" treatment, also over an extended
period of time. On-board drying of the sludge would be
a major item evaluated.
3.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a marine sanitation
system demonstration performed under U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency Project No. 15020 GYM, awarded to the
Delaware River and Bay Authority. The system was designed,
developed, and patented by Marland Environmental Systems,
Inc. (formerly Pollution Control Industries, Inc.), located
in Wayne, Pennsylvania, and was tested both in the labo-
ratory and on the Delaware River and Bay Authority's Cape
May-Lewes Ferry.
The sanitation system tested is a physical-chemical system
capable of providing a high degree of secondary treatment,
that is, one providing a reduction of suspended solids
in excess of 90 percent and a reduction in BODs in excess
of 80 percent. Functionally, this was accomplished by
first separating the suspended solids in a two-stage
mechanical operation, consisting of a vibrating screen and
a centrifuge, without any accompanying chemical treatment,
and then reducing the dissolved organics by means of carbon
columns. The wastewater was chlorinated before and after
carbon column treatment. Separated suspended solids were
stored in a solids holding tank which was periodically
pumped out to a sewage tank truck brought aboard the vessel
while it was docked at night, with subsequent on-land
disposal of the sludge.
The system was designed as a "flow-through system", that is,
one which discharges a treated effluent overboard. The
performance goal was a treated effluent with suspended solids
less than 50 mg/1, 6005 less than 50 mg/1, and a coliform
bacteria count less than 240 MPN/100 ml. The original
objective of this program was to demonstrate the system in
this mode of operation. After promulgation in June 1972
of the Environmental Protection Agency's "No Discharge"
standards, the program was revised to include the evaluation
of the system in a recycle mode, using the treated effluent
for sanitary flush water. To accomplish this purpose, a
recycle water storage tank was added to the originally
designed system. Testing in the recycle mode was then con-
ducted to determine the effects of such recycling on the
treated wastewater, i.e., buildup and effect on treatment
of constituents in the wastewater.
4.
-------
Land-based testing was completed early in the program,
using a prototype laboratory system, in order to demon-
strate system feasibility and obtain design verification
data. Shipboard testing aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry
was successfully conducted during the months of July,
August, and September 1972 in both the overboard discharge
and recycle modes.
The Cape May-Lewes Ferry is an ocean-going vessel used for
transporting vehicles and passengers. Designed to carry
up to 800 passengers per trip, it makes four round trips
each day across Delaware Bay from Cape May, New Jersey to
Lewes, Delaware. Time in transit on each single crossing
is 75 minutes, with a departure from Lewes scheduled 2
hours after departure from Cape May. The first trip departs
from Cape May at 7:30 a.m., and the last trip arrives at
Cape May at 10:30 p.m. The maintenance shift runs from
10:30 p.m. until 6:30 a.m. the next morning.
5.
-------
SECTION IV
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
The Marland physical-chemical marine sanitation system
treats wastewater by first removing suspended solids in
a two-step physical operation, then reducing the dissolved
organics by adsorption on activated carbon columns, and
disinfecting the effluent prior to discharge overboard.
The system process flow diagram is shown in Figure 1.
The total wastewater on the Cape May-Lewes Ferry consists
of sewage from toilets and urinals, washwater from sinks
and showers, and wastewater from the snack bar. The major
portion of the total wastewater consists of feces and urine
flushed down the toilets and urinals. The contribution
from the showers is negligible, since these are seldom
used by the crew. Wastewater from the snack bar first
passed through a grease removal unit before it joined
the other components of the total wastewater flow.
Immediately upstream of the system, an emergency raw
wastewater bypass valve was located to bypass the flow
overboard in the event of system malfunction.
The wastewater enters the system through a gross solids
separator (a vibrating screen), which immediately removes
large particles and discharges them into a solids holding
tank. This technique also eliminates the BODs which would
be immediately released to the wastewater if the large
particles broke open or were comminuted. In addition,
the partially clarified wastewater is more easily pumped
and treated. Also, the separated solids are of relatively
high density. The wastewater which passes through the
gross solids separator accumulates in a collection tank
sized to meet the anticipated surge loads for the vessel.
When the wastewater reaches a predetermined upper level,
the wastewater is pumped at a constant flow rate to a
fine solids separator. When a predetermined low level is
reached, pumping is automatically stopped, and the additional
wastewater accumulates in the collection tank. Fine
solids separation is obtained by a centrifuge, which
removes most of the remaining suspended solids and dis-
charges them into the same solids holding tank used to
accumulate solids from the gross solids separator.
6.
-------
Ton_e-r«>
-------
The centrifuge effluent is prechlorinated and disinfected
in a disinfection tank prior to carbon treatment. The
original intent of this prechlorination was to reduce
the bacterial activity on the carbon columns in order to
prevent possible plugging of the columns, which would
then require frequent backwashing. From the disinfection
tank the wastewater is pumped through columns of activated
carbon, operating in a packed-bed downflow mode, where
most of the dissolved organics are removed from the
wastewater stream. The discharge from the carbon columns
is then postchlorinated, and the treated effluent is then
discharged overboard.
During the program it was observed that the discharge
from the carbon columns was anaerobic, as indicated by
the odor of hydrogen sulfide in samples taken immediately
downstream of the columns. This result confirmed the
experience of others (references 1 and 2) that anaerobic
biological activity takes place in the carbon beds. This
activity is beneficial in that it increases the total
capacity of the carbon beds for removing dissolved organics,
that is, it increases the life of the carbon beds. The
hydrogen sulfide is eliminated in the postchlorination
stage, but this demands some of the chlorine intended
for final disinfection. Although the existence of anaer-
obic biological activity in the carbon beds makes the
necessity for prechlorination questionable, prechlorination
was used throughout the program.
The solids holding tank is sized to retain the separated
solids prior to their ultimate disposal. For the Cape
May-Lewes Ferry the solids were periodically pumped to
a sewage tank truck brought aboard the vessel during the
maintenance shift and ultimately disposed of at a sani-
tary landfill.
The carbon columns are backwashed each day during periods
of low flow. On the Cape May-Lewes Ferry this was done
during the maintenance shift, when the vessel was docked
for the night. The backwash water is pumped to the col-
lection tank and then reprocessed through the system.
The design described above was the one demonstrated
under this program. Water for flushing was sea water
pumped from Delaware Bay. After promulgation of the
8.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency's "No Discharge" standards
in June 1972, a program revision was made to include an
evaluation of recycling the treated effluent for sanitary
flush water, without any additional treatment processes,
in order to determine the effects of such recycling on
build-up of contaminants in the recycled effluent. To
accomplish this purpose, a recycle storage tank was placed
aboard the vessel which was initially filled with city
water, and the effluent was recycled through this tank.
9.
-------
SECTION V
SYSTEM DESIGN AND INSTALLATION
For installation aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry, the
Marland marine sanitation system was designed as a 5,000
gpd "flow-through" system. The sizing was based on flow
measurements taken aboard the ferry for an entire day at
the vessel's sanitary pump and fresh water pump. The
flows were increased by the ratio of passengers during
the peak passenger day in August 1970 to passengers
aboard the vessel on the flow measurement day in June 1971.
The flow measurement and prediction data and the procedure
for selecting the flow rate and sizing the collection tank
are presented in detail in Appendix A-l. From these data
it was established that a system flow through rate of 5
gpm and a collection tank of about 600 gallons would be
adequate. This information was then used to size two
systems - a prototype laboratory system and the shipboard
system. The prototype system was used for early land-based
testing to demonstrate system feasibility and to obtain
design confirmation data on suspended solids and BOD5
removals while design and fabrication of the shipboard
system were in progress.
The major components of the prototype system are listed
in Table 1. Except for the pilot carbon column unit, all
components were full scale hardware. The gross solids
separator selected was a 24-inch-diameter SWECO vibro-
separator, the particular size chosen being based on an
estimate of 25 gpm peak flow rates on the vessel. The
fine solids separator selected was a Westfalia SA7-06
Desludger disc-type centrifuge. Based on highly successful
tests for suspended solids and BOD5 removals (described
in Section VI of this report) with the prototype system
at the design flow rate, the same solids separation
components were selected for the shipboard system.
The major components of the shipboard system are listed
in Table 2. A 600-gallon collection tank was provided.
From the prototype system tests is was estimated that
approximately 20 gallons of solids would be produced each
day aboard the ferry, and a solids holding tank of 400
gallons capacity (operating volume of 350 gallons) was
10.
-------
TABLE 1
PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
MAJOR COMPONENT LIST
1. Gross Solids Separator
SWECO Vibro-Separator, 24" diameter, with 64- and
105-mesh screens
2. Fine Solids Separator
Westfalia SA7-06 Desludger Centrifuge
3. Carbon Columns
Four column pilot unit, each column 5" diameter
and 6' high, containing 0.4 cu. ft. of Calgon Filtra-
sorb 300 (8 x 30 mesh)
4. Tanks
a. Receiving: 1,200 gal.
b. Collection: 600 gal.
c. Disinfection: 85 gal.
5. Process Pumps
Moyno FS 33
11.
-------
TABLE 2
SHIPBOARD SYSTEM
MAJOR COMPONENT LIST
1. Gross Solids Separator
SWECO Vibro-Separator, 24" diameter, with 64-mesh
screen
2. Fine Solids Separator
Westfalia SA7-06 Desludger Centrifuge
3. Carbon Columns
Four carbon columns, arranged in parallel series.
Each column 14" diameter and 6' high, containing 120 Ib.
(4 cu. ft.) of Calgon Filtrasorb 300 (8 x 30 mesh).
4. Tanks
a. Collection: 600 gal.
b. Solids Holding: 400 gal.
c. Disinfection: 75 gal.
d. Surge: 55 gal.
e. Recycle Storage: 1,400 gal.
5. Pumps
a. Process: Moyno FS33
b. Fresh Water Feed: Moyno FS33
c. Backwash: Moyno FS67
d. Recycle: Moyno FS67
e. Solids Discharge: Marlow 3CR18EL
f. Chlorine Metering: Wallace & Tiernan 94-110
6. Motors
a. Vibro-Separator: Baldor, 1/3 hp
b. Centrifuge: Louis-Allis, 5 hp
c. Process Pumps: Baldor, 1/2 hp
d. Fresh Water Feed Pump: Baldor, 1/2 hp
e. Backwash Pump: Baldor, 2 hp
12.
-------
TABLE 2
(Continued)
6. Motors (continued)
f. Recycle Pump: Baldor, 2 hp
g. Solids Discharge Pump: Baldor, 3 hp
7. Diesel Generator
Hoi-Gar Model 33D6-WRD, 120/240 VAC, 30
13,
-------
provided to minimize the number of times the solids would
be pumped out (about once every 2-1/2 weeks).
The carbon columns were sized to provide a carbon contact
time of 25 minutes, based on gross carbon volume, and four
columns were used, arranged in parallel - series, because
this arrangement yielded a practical configuration which
met desirable length-diameter ratio, superficial velocity,
and expansion during backwash.
The electrical power aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry is
direct current. Since it was desired to use alternating
current components, a diesel generator was selected to
provide approximately 10 kilowatts power with both 240 and
120 volt, 3 phase, 60 Hertz circuits. Except for carbon
column backwash and sludge disposal, all functions were
automatic once the system was turned on, and a power and
control cabinet was provided to perform these functions.
Photographs of the system assembled in the shop prior to
shipment are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2 shows
the solids separation and storage components, some of the
process pumps, and the control cabinet. Figure 3 shows
one of the hypochlorite tanks, a process pump, the post-
chlorination surge tank, the backwash pump, and two of
the four carbon columns positioned in the carbon column
support structure.
The system was installed aboard the S. S. DELAWARE, in an
essentially empty mid-ship hold compartment located
between the engine room and the boiler room, as shown in
Figure 4. The spread-out arrangement was selected deliber-
ately in order to expedite the taking of samples and pro-
viding easy access to all parts of the system, since a
very large space was available, measuring approximately
18 feet by 20 feet, with extra space available for a diesel
generator and a recycle tank on the other side of the vessel,
Ceiling height was approximately 18 feet.
The dry weight of the system, including the recycle tank,
was approximately 10,000 pounds and the wet weight approxi-
mately 31,000 pounds.
14.
-------
FIGURE 2: SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL AND STORAGE COMPONENTS
OF CAPE MAY-LEWES FERRY SYSTEM
-------
FIGURE JS
CARBON COLUMN AND POST-CHLORINATION COMPONENTS
OF CAPE MAY-LEWES FERRY SYSTEM
16
-------
D\S\MF&CTlONl TA.MK.
DIESEL.
OIL. TA.KJK
ACCEiS
"TRUNJ
. 4-
O
SVSTEM
THE
CAPE
- LEWES FERRY
17.
-------
SECTION VI
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Prototype System Tests and Performance
The initial test period was primarily devoted to evaluating
centrifuge performance in removing suspended solids from
raw sewage. Based on the results of early tests conducted
at the vendor's laboratory, a Westfalia SA7-06 centrifuge
was selected for evaluation. The results of these early
tests are summarized in Figure 5. Clarification tests on
comminuted sewage, with and without prior chemical treat-
ment, were conducted with a Westfalia SAMN-205 centrifuge.
This machine is a scale model of the Westfalia SA7-06
Desludger, and results obtained at a given flow rate with
the smaller machine can also be expected with the SA7-06
at a flow rate six times higher. The curves in Figure 5
show that prior chemical treatment is beneficial at lower
flow rates, but that poorer results are obtained at higher
rates, probably because the floe formed by the chemicals
is broken up in the centrifuge at the higher rates. At
the system design flow rate of 5 gpm through the SA7-06
(0.833 gpm through the SAMN-205), the suspended solids in
the centrifuge effluent are 64 mg/1 for untreated sewage
and 45 mg/1 with the addition of lime.
In the early stages of prototype testing, centrifuging
was preceded by sewage comminution (a Franklin-Miller
3-inch-diameter in-line pipeline Delumper). The test
procedure employed was as follows: (1) On the morning
of the test, raw sewage was pumped by a sewage tank truck
either out of underground storage tanks or the inlet to a
municipal treatment system, delivered to the laboratory,
and pumped through the comminuter to a holding tank. (2) A
test batch of sewage was pumped to a collection tank, from
which it was pumped at a rate of 5 gpm, the ship system
design flow rate, through the centrifuge. (3) Samples
of both the feed and the centrate were taken and analyzed
for suspended solids. Although the Delumper comminuted
the sewage to a satisfactory size, it was not always capable
of preventing fibrous material from entering the centrifuge.
This resulted at times in the formation of a mat of solids
across the desludging ports of the centrifuge which was
not always ejected completely when the two bowls of the
18.
-------
UlOO
w
EH
W
U
H
CO
Q
O
CO
Q
W
W
fc
CO
£>
CO
.80
L.60
L40
h-20
FIGURE 5
CLARIFICATION TESTS ON COMMINUTED SEWAGE
WESTFALIA SAMN-205 CENTRIFUGE
1 Unadjusted sewage; S.S. =
310 mg/1; pH = 7.0
2 Sewage(S.S.=310 mg/1)
adjusted with 20g FeCl3 &
5g Ca(OH)2 Per 50 gal. to
S.S.=575 mg/1; pH=6.8
3 Sewage(S.S.=263 mg/1)
adjusted with addition of-
lime to S.S.=685 mg/1;
pH=9.3
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
SAMN-205
1.2
2.4
3.6 4.8 6.0
FLOW RATE (GPM)
7.2
8.4
SA7-06
-------
centrifuge separated during the desludging cycle. The
partially ejected mat prevented complete closure of the
bowls following the desludging cycle, which resulted in
bowl leakage. The problem was solved by eliminating the
comminuter and substituting a SWECO vibro-separator
upstream of the centrifuge. This device was tested with
both 70 and 100 mesh screens. With the introduction of
the vibro-separator, no further desludging problems were
encountered, and when the centrifuge was dismantled
following a series of tests, the bowl was always completely
clean.
In addition to the prevention of desludging problems,
the vibro-separator also provides another advantage.
With this device, the gross suspended solids are immediately
separated from the wastewater stream without break up of
the solids. When gross solids are broken apart in a
wastewater stream, BOD5 is immediately released to the
stream and goes into solution. This disadvantage of
comminution of solids is eliminated by the use of the
vibro-separator.
As part of the early test program, preliminary samples
were taken of sewage discharged from the Cape May-Lewes
Ferry. A break was made in one of the overboard discharge
lines, and the sewage was collected in 55-gallon drums
during the first trip. A sample was taken from the drums
and analyzed. The results are presented in Table 3. The
high value of total solids is due primarily to the presence
of salts in Delaware Bay water, which was used for flushing.
Although the suspended solids level (396 mg/1) is repre-
sentative of values found during later shipboard testing,
the BOD5 level is relatively low. (See results of ship-
board tests discussed later in this section of the report.)
Difficulties were encountered during early centrifuging
tests in finding the right kind of sewage for test purposes.
Since the wastes on the vessel discharge directly into the
treatment system, the test sewage should be raw and com-
pletely aerobic. Most of the sewage taken from under-
ground holding tanks was septic. Batches from the municipal
plant also contained industrial wastes, and suspended
solids loads were sometimes very high (values ranged from
about 100 to 4,860 mg/1). The suspended solids removals
20.
-------
TABLE 3
RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF
PRELIMINARY SAMPLE OF SEWAGE
FROM CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
PARAMETER
VALUE IN
Mg/1
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Dissolved Solids
Total Volatile Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Volatile Dissolved Solids
BOD5 on Total Sample
on Filtered Sample
44,834
396
44,438
8,998
272
8,726
180
88
NOTE: Delaware Bay sea water used for
flushing
21.
-------
obtained from these sewage batches, with and without
chemical treatment prior to centrifuging, showed consider-
able scatter, regardless of chemical treatment. These
early results are presented in Appendix A-2.
The proper sewage, fresh and raw, was finally obtained
from an apartment complex known as English Village Apart-
ments. The sewage was collected immediately upstream of
the comminuter/bar screen assembly of the apartments'
package sewage treatment system as the sewage flowed
directly from the buildings to the treatment plant.
Batches were always taken during the morning of a test
run. With the proper sewage available, prototype testing
was expanded to include not only suspended solids removal,
but also carbon column treatment preceded by and followed
by chlorination.
For each test run approximately 1,000 to 1,200 gallons of
sewage were used. Grab samples were taken every 40 minutes,
for a total number of 4 or 5 samples per location, and
these samples were composited for analysis. Samples were
taken of the feed, vibro-screen underflow, centrifuge effluent
and carbon column effluent. The samples were kept on ice
during the test period and delivered on ice to the analysis
laboratory (a trip of approximately 30 minutes), where the
samples were immediately prepared for analysis. All analyses
were performed in accordance with approved EPA procedures in
"Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes," except
(for the prototype system) for the coliform tests, which
were performed at the test facility using a Hach kit.
Suspended Solids and BODc, Removal
The results of 12 runs with English Village sewage, with
no chemical additives, are summarized in Table 4, which
lists the suspended solids and BOD5 levels at various
stages in the treatment process. From the highly favor-
able results of these tests, it was concluded that chemical
treatment was not required. The suspended solids data are
also plotted in Figure 6, and the BOD5 data in Figure 7.
The results of these tests show that the suspended solids
in the effluent were always below the performance goal of
50 mg/1, and that the BOD5 in the effluent was also always
below the performance goal of 50 mg/1, except for two test
22.
-------
TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE - PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
ON FRESH DOMESTIC SEWAGE WITH NO CHEMICAL ADDITIVES
AT A FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
RUN
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
482
-
144
306
648 (1)
124
360
130
434
258
132
151
SU
348
172
78
172
290
75
148
120
282
256
124
112
CE
27
17
47
20
46
20
26
5
67
45
38
27
'
CCE
12
16
10
10
11
9
10
2
18
24
4
21
BODs
F
165
180
107
86
420<1>
118
130
78
440
172
145
212
SU
130
104
_
360
76
101
127
375
173
128
163
CE
_
65
60
40
358
50
35
15
114
103
69
120
CCE
26
10
23
18
67
12
30
3
47
35
33
6l(2)
to
00
NOTES: All values in mg/1
Sewage Source: English Village Apts.
F Means Feed
SU Means Screen Underflow
CE Means Centrifuge Effluent
CCE Means Carbon Column Effluent
(1) Bread added to feed to
raise BOD
(2) Result for single
carbon column
-------
SUSPENDED SOLIDS - MG/L
NJ
FEED
VIBRO-
SEPARATOR
CENTRIFUGE
Performance
goal
CARBON
COLUMN
FIGURE 6
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE - PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
ON FRESH RAW SEWAGE WITH NO CHEMICAL ADDITIVES
AT A FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
-------
BOD5 - MG/L
Ul
FEED
VIBRO-
'SEPARATOR
CENTRIFUGE
Performance
goal
CARBON
COLUMN
FIGURE 7
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE - PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
ON FRESH RAW SEWAGE WITH NO CHEMICAL ADDITIVES
AT A FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
-------
runs (No. 5 in Table 4, where the BOD5 level was artifi-
cially increased by adding pieces of bread to the sewage,
and No. 12, where the BOD result is given for only one
column rather than two columns in series). For Run No. 5,
most of the BODs was in the dissolved form. This can be
seen in Figure 7, where the BOD5 after the vibro-screen
is only slightly less than the BOD5 before the vibro-screen,
even though Figure 6 shows a considerable reduction in
suspended solids by the screen. It is also evident from
Table 4 and Figure 6 that, except for Run No. 9, the
suspended solids loading in the centrate was less than
50 mg/1, even before the filtering effect of the carbon
columns. The first ten runs were made with fresh water
sewage. In order to determine the effects of salt water
on performance, Aqua-Biotic marine salts, distributed
commercially by Aquarium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., were added
to the fresh water sewage for Run No. 11. The salts
contained in this mixture are listed in Appendix A-3.
Only 150 gallons of the sea water sewage were tested. The
results showed no substantial difference from the fresh
water data, and from these very limited data, it was con-
cluded that no differences would be expected in shipboard
tests.
The percentage reductions in suspended solids and BOD5 at
the various stages in the treatment process are listed in
Table 5 for the test runs of Table 4. For the 12 runs
the average values of suspended solids reduction are 31.5%
through the vibrating screen, 85.3% through the centrifuge,
and 94.9% through the carbon columns. The average values
of BOD5 reduction are 20.6% through the vibrating screen,
51.7% through the centrifuge, and 81.7% through the carbon
columns. All percentage reductions are based on the original
values in the feed.
The carbon columns used for prototype testing were pilot
columns 5 inches in diameter with a carbon bed depth of
3 feet. The columns were employed in the packed bed, down
flow mode. A comparison between the pilot and vessel
columns is given in Table 6. The vessel design is based
on four columns arranged in parallel-series, as shown in
Figure 8, providing a total carbon contact time of 25
minutes, based on gross carbon volume. With this arrange-
ment, the vessel wastewater flow at 5 gpm is first split
into two parallel streams of 2.5 gpm each, and each stream
passes through two columns in series. Hence the contact
26.
-------
TABLE 5.
PER CENT REDUCTIONS OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND BOD5
PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
RUN
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
AVE.
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
su
27.8
-
45.8
43.9
55.3
39.5
59.0
7.7
35.0
0.-8
6.1
25.8
31.5
CE
94.5
67.3
90.3
93.0
84.0
93.0
96.0
84.6
82.5
71.3
82.0
85.3
CCE
97.5
93.0
97.0
98.3
92.9
97.3
98.3
96.0
90.6
96.9
86.0
94.9
BOD5
F
_
-
-
-
SU
21.2
42.2
14.3
35.6
22.3
CE
_
63.9
43.9
53.5
14.8
57.6
73.0
NOT COUNTED
14.8
0
11.7
23.1
20.6
74.1
40.1
52.4
43.5
51.7
CCE
84.4
87.9
78.5
79.1
84.1
89.9
77.0
89.4
79.6
77.3
71.2
81.7
-------
TABLE 6
CARBON COLUMN COMPARISON
PILOT AND VESSEL
DIAMETER (IN.)
CARBON HEIGHT (FT.)
CARBON VOL. (GALS.)
CARBON VOL. (FT3)
FLOW RATE (GPM)
SUPERFICIAL
VELOCITY (GPM/FT2)
CARBON CONTACT TIME (MIN. )
CARBON
PILOT
COLUMNS
5
3
3.06
0.409
0.25
1.84
12.2
CALGON
FILTRASORB
300 (8x30)
VESSEL
COLUMNS
14
4
30.9
4.27
2.5
2.43
12.4
CALGON
FILTRASORB
300 (8x30)
28.
-------
FIGURE 8
SHIPBOARD CARBON COLUMN ARRANGEMENT
AND RETENTION TIMES
2.5 gpm
5 gpm
5 gpm
to
2.5 gpm
12.5 minutes
retention time
12.5 minutes
retention time
25 minutes
retention time
-------
time for each column is 12.5 minutes. The BOD5 removals
obtained in the pilot columns can also be expected from
the vessel columns if the following parameters are identical
for the two columns: type of carbon, carbon contact time,
superficial velocity, and carbon depth. As indicated in
Table 6, type of carbon and contact time are identical,
superficial velocities are close to each other, and the
lower velocity in the pilot columns is compensated for by
the smaller depth. Hence the results obtained are one-to-
one applicable to the vessel columns. This was confirmed
by land-based tests on the full scale vessel columns when
the full scale ship system was tested prior to shipment.
The results of those tests are listed in Table 7. The data
are for two columns in parallel, so that the results apply
to a single column for each 2.5 gpm stream. Approximately
1,000 gallons of sewage were processed through the full
scale ship system for each of these runs, and sampling
and analysis procedures were the same as those described
above.
Disinfection
A limited number of tests and analyses were performed to
determine the disinfection obtained by chlorination before
and after carbon column treatment. The disinfectant employed
was household laundry bleach (5.25% sodium hypochlorite)
diluted and metered to provide a dosage of 15 mg/1 of avail-
able chlorine. A hypochlorite was selected as the disinfectant
because the U. S. Coast Guard had indicated that they would
not approve the use of a gas chlorinator aboard ship, for
safety reasons. Of the two hypochlorites (sodium and calcium),
preference was given to Sodium because it was more readily
available, and even though the concentrations of available
chlorine are less with bleach than with calcium hypochlorite,
the dosages required for 5,000 gpd do not lead to excessive
amounts of bleach. The 15 mg/1 dosage was selected simply
because this is a value recommended in the literature for
postchlorination of effluent from secondary treatment plants.
The results are summarized in Table 8. For the first
three runs the centrifuge effluent was chlorinated with
a dosage of 15 mg/1 of available chlorine and a retention
time of 15 minutes. This was sufficient to reduce the
confirmed total coliform count to less than 14 MPN/100 ml.
Examination of the effluent from carbon columns showed,
30.
-------
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
LAND BASED TESTS ON SHIP SYSTEM
FRESH DOMESTIC SEWAGE
WITH NO CHEMICAL ADDITIVES
AT A FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
RUN
NO.
13
14
15
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
220
322
214
SU
176
392
420
CE
36
40
62
CCE
24
24
28
BODc;
F
240
310
180
SU
180
420
160
CE
60
140
80
CCE
34
44
38
-------
TABLE 8
SUMMARY OF DISINFECTION TESTS
LAND BASED TESTS ON PROTOTYPE AND SHIP SYSTEMS
RUN
NO.
10
11
12
13
CENTRIFUGE
EFFLUENT
1,600
1,600
16,000
2,400,000
CHLORINATED
CENTRIFUGE
EFFLUENT
(1) 141
(1) 5
(1) 141 (P)
(2) 172 (P)
(2) 14 (C)
CARBON
COLUMN
EFFLUENT
33
348
1,609 (P)
1,600
CHLORINATED
CARBON COLUMN
EFFLUENT
(3) 22 (P)
(3) 0 (C)
CHLORINE
RESIDUAL
Mg/1
1.0
NJ
NOTES All values in MPN/100 ml
(P) means presumptive
(C) means confirmed
(1) After 15 minutes at 15 mg/1 dosage
(2) After 15 minutes at 20 mg/1 dosage
(3) After 5 minutes at 15 mg/1 dosage
-------
however, that recontamination of the wastewater occurred
during passage through the columns. Hence, both pre and
post chlorination were used for the fourth run, in which
a single column was used. Prechlorination was at a
dosage of 20 mg/1 of available chlorine with a retention
time of 15 minutes, and postchlorination was at a dosage
of 15 mg/1 of available chlorine with a retention time
of 5 minutes. This combination reduced the confirmed
total coliform count in the final postchlorinated effluent
to zero.
Sludge Density
Since the weight density of the sludge resulting from
suspended solids separation is a consideration in sizing
the solids holding tank, samples of the vibro-separator
screen overflow and the centrifuge solids discharge were
analyzed for sludge concentrations. The results are listed
in Table 9. The density of the screen overflows varied
from approximately 6 to 12% by weight, and the centrifuge
discharge from 1.9 to 11.6%. For fresh aerobic sewage
(English Village), the variation for the centrifuge dis-
charge density was 4.9 to 11.6%. For a combination of
the two types of solids collected in the same tank, it
appears safe to use a minimum density of 5%. An average
of about 8 to 9% appears to be reasonable.
The significance of sludge density can be determined
from Figures 9 and 10. Figure 9 is a plot of dry solids
present in wastewater for various flows and suspended solids
concentrations. For a concentration of 500 mg/1 and a
flow of 5,000 gpd, for example, the total weight of dry
solids is 20.8 pounds per day. From Figure 10, for this
weight the volume of sludge produced is 50 gpd for a 5%
sludge and 27.7 gpd for a 9% sludge. The storage volume
which must be provided by the solids holding tank is
determined by these values. The solids tank provided
for the shipboard system (400 gallons) would be adequate
for a storage period of about two weeks with the 9% sludge,
but not with the 5% sludge.
Summary of Land-Based Tests on Prototype and Ship Systems
The results of the prototype system tests, confirmed by
land-based tests on the full scale ship system, showed
that, in treating fresh domestic sewage (with suspended
33.
-------
TABLE 9
PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
SLUDGE DENSITIES
u>
RUN
NUMBER
3. to 7.
8. to 14.
16. to 20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
27.
28.
i
SOURCE
Hatfield
Hatfield
Ft. Washington
Ft. Washington
Ft. Washington
Ft. Washington
Ft. Washington
English Village
English Village
SCREEN
OVERFLOW
3.58 to 10.32
5.12
3.08
3.36
LI. 99
3.20
CENTRIFUGE
DISCHARGE
6.02 to 9.9
1.91 to 7.55
2.5
4.03
5.44
7.78
5.65
11.6
4.9
NOTES
All Values in Weight Per Cent
For Identification of Run Numbers, See Appendix A-2
-------
O
fe
O
w
Q
W
ED
O
ffi
w
H
I
W
EH
FIGURE 9
RELATION BETWEEN DRY SOLIDS WEIGHT,
DAILY FLOW, AND SUSPENDED
SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS
Influent
Suspended
Solids
(mg/1)
10 20 30
DRY SOLIDS WEIGHT (LB/DAY)
35.
-------
FIGURE 10
RELATION BETWEEN SLUDGE VOLUME,
SLUDGE DENSITY, AND DRY SOLIDS WEIGHT
a
o
o
£3
F-q
O
>
w
10 20 30
DRY SOLIDS WEIGHT (LB/DAY)
36,
-------
solids varying from 130 to 480 mg/1 and BOD5 varying
from 76 to 420 mg/1), the system, for a flow rate of
5 gpm and without any chemical pretreatment of the
sewage, consistently reduced the influent suspended solids
and BOD5 to values less than 50 mg/1. Percentagewise, on
an average basis, this represented a suspended solids
reduction of 95% and a BOD5 reduction of 82%. Chlorination
at dosages of 15 and 20 mg/1 before and after carbon
column treatment reduced the total coliform count in the
effluent to values approaching zero. Based on very limited
data, there was no apparent difference in performance
between sewage in fresh water and sewage in sea water.
Hence, the prototype system met the design goals of
effluent suspended solids and BOD5 less than 50 mg/1 and
a total coliform count less than 240 MPN/100 ml.
Ship System Tests and Performance
Installation of the shipboard system aboard THE DELAWARE
was completed early in July 1972, and operational check-
out and crew training commenced on July 11. After pro-
mulgation of the Environmental Protection Agency's "No
Discharge" standard in June 1972, it was decided to limit
the tests of the system in a "flow-through" overboard
discharge mode to a minimum number believed adequate to
confirm the results of the land based tests, and to
emphasize tests of the system in a "no-discharge" recycle
mode. The ship system test schedule is shown in Figure
11. Upon completion of the check-out tests in both the
overboard discharge and recycle modes, performance data
were first obtained with the system operating in the
"flow through" mode, using Delaware Bay sea water for
flushing purposes, with only two of the four carbon
columns operating. Performance data were then obtained
for recycle mode testing, first with two and later with
four carbon columns, using recycled fresh water for
flushing. The program was completed at the end of
September with overboard discharge tests employing four
carbon columns.
Two-column tests were chosen for the early tests because
the land-based tests on the full scale carbon columns
showed that the performance goals of suspended solids
37.
-------
FIGURE 11
OJ
00
SHIP SYSTEM TEST SCHEDULE
TYPE OF TEST
1. Operational Check-Out
2. Overboard Discharge Mode, 2 c/c ' s
3. Recycle Mode
Two carbon columns
Four carbon columns
«,
4. Overboard Discharge Mode, 4 c/c' s
JULY
AUG
A
A
A
SEPT
A
A
-------
and BOD5 less than 50 mg/1 could be met with only two
columns arranged in parallel (see Table 7), and since
an additional two columns were available, it would always
be possible to bring these into service if only two
columns proved to be inadequate.
A list of all shipboard test runs in given in Table 10,
which presents the date of each test run, the operational
mode, the type of flush water used, the number of
passengers (both the total for the day and the number aboard
during the test period), and the wastewater flow (total
for the day and the test volume). The total flow values
in parentheses are estimates, obtained by multiplying
the total number of passengers by the ratio of test flow
gallons to test period passengers. For three of the
runs (No. 10, 14, and 18), total flows for the day were
measured. The test periods and testing procedures are
described later in this section.
Table 10 shows that the total flow increased from 3,000
gpd on July 11 to a peak of 6,000 gpd on July 25, and
for the month of August varied between 4,000 and 6,000
gpd. in September the flow dropped significantly,
varying from 3/000 gpd at the beginning of the month to
300 gpd at the end.
Operational Check-Out Tests
Operational check-out tests (the first six test runs)
were conducted in both the overboard discharge and recycle
modes in order to establish that all components of the
system operated as designed. The test procedure was as
follows:
1. The diesel-powered a.c. generator was turned on to
provide power to the system.
2. The fresh water feed valve to the system was opened,
supplying boiler feed water to the backwash pump and to
the fresh water feed pump.
3. The fresh water feed pump was turned on, providing
water under pressure to operate four valves on the
centrifuge and to flush out the centrifuge during a
desludge cycle.
39.
-------
TABLE 10
LIST OF SHIPBOARD TEST RUNS,
PASSENGER LOADINGS, AND TEST FLOWS
RUN
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
DATE
1972
7/11
7/13
7/20
7/24
7/25
7/31
8/3
8/8
8/15
8/17
8/23
8/24
8/25
8/26
8/29
8/30
8/31
9/3
9/6
9/7
OPERA-
TIONAL
MODE
0/B
O/B
0/B
O/B
0/B
Recycle
Recycle
0/B
0/B
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
0/B
Recycle
Recycle
0/B
0/B
0/B
TYPE
FLUSH
WATER
Sea
Sea
Sea
Sea
Sea
Fresh
Fresh
Sea
Sea
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Sea
Fresh
Fresh
Sea
Sea
Sea
PASSENGERS
TOTAL
1672
2221
2398
2417
3104
2086
2585
2710
2755
3076
2933
2735
2479
3034
2271
2556
2626
2093
1167
1143
TEST
237
1052
257
849
541
631
1096
525
520
1527
237
334
849
3034
191
829
849
2093
76
260
FLOW (GALS)
TOTAL
(3000)
(4400)
(4700)
(4600)
(6000)
(4100)
(4700)
(5200)
(5400)
5970
(5800)
(5500)
(4500)
5555
(4300)
(4200)
(4300)
3440
(1700)
(1700)
TEST
425
2103
510
1600
1030
1228
2013
1003
1040
3184
470
730
1540
5555
325
-
-
3440
110
430
NO. OF
CARBON
COLS.
2
2
2
4
2
i
2
DATA
TAKEN
NO
'
NO
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
-------
TABLE 10 (Continued)
LIST OF SHIPBOARD TEST RUNS,
PASSENGER LOADINGS, AND TEST FLOWS
RUN
NO.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
DATE
1972
9/8
9/9
9/10
9/11
9/12
9/13
9/14
9/15
9/16
9/17
9/18
9/19
9/20
9/21
9/22
9/23
9/24
9/25
9/26
9/27
OPERA-
TIONAL
MODE
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
O/B
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
Recycle
O/B
TYPE
FLUSH
WATER
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Fresh
Sea
PASSENGERS
TOTAL
1379
1388
1929
1113
951
911
1039
1251
1863
2220
1175
981
1115
557
819
1597
1416
609
479
655
TEST
570
924
846
789
-
876
-
-
1047
552
1026
487
644
438
420
247
250
512
FLOW .(GALS)
TOTAL
(2100)
(2100)
(2900)
(1300)
(900)
(900)
(900)
(1100)
(1700)
(2000)
(1400)
(800)
(900)
(500)
(700)
(1000)
(900)
(300)
(300)
(400)
TEST
870
-
1065
819
889
-
800
-
-
1259
-
850
400
500
-
-
122
159
347
NO. OF
CARBON
COLS.
4
1'
4
-
DATA
TAKE
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
-------
TABLE 10 (Continued),
LIST OF SHIPBOARD TEST RUNS,
PASSENGER LOADINGS, AND TEST FLOWS
RUN
NO.
41
42
43
44
DATE
1972
9/28
9/29
9/30
10/1
OPERA-
TIONAL
MODE
O/B
0/B
O/B
O/B
TYPE
FLUSH
WATER
Sea
Sea
Sea
Sea
PASSENGERS
TOTAL
484
637
709
-
TEST
247
286
376
-
FLOW (GALS)
TOTAL
(300)
(300)
(600)
-
TEST
170
140
311
263
NO. OF
CARBON
COLS.
4
4
DATA
TAKEN
Yes
Yes
NOTE: Quantities in parentheses are estimates.
-------
4. During recycle tests, the effluent pump was turned
on to provide water from the recirculation tank to the
toilets for flushing.
5. The centrifuge was turned on. After a 2.5 minute
interval, the time required for the centrifuge to come
to full operating speed, the vibrating screen turned
on automatically.
6. The wastewater inlet valve to the sanitation system
was opened, and the emergency overboard by-pass valve
was closed.
7. Thereafter the system operated automatically, the
level controls in the various tanks turning on and off
the process pumps and chlorine metering pumps as required,
8. During the maintenance shift, after the vessel was
docked for the night, the carbon columns were backwashed
for ten minutes with boiler feed water pumped through
the columns by the backwash pump. Except during one
later stage of the test program, when the carbon columns
were backwashed overboard, the backwash water was sent
to the collection tank; and after completion of the
backwash cycle, the backwash water was re^-processed
through the system and the treated backwash water was
either discharged overboard or pumped to the recir-
culation tank.
9. At periodic intervals the sludge in the solids
holding tank was pumped to a sewage tank truck brought
aboard the vessel and hauled away for land disposal.
Although no samples were taken for analysis during the
first six runs, grab samples were taken for visual
examination. In addition, periodic observations were
made during the day of the contents of the various tanks
in the system. Chlorine residual readings were also
taken on samples withdrawn from the prechlorination and
postchlorination tanks. The results were consistently
good and apparently comparable to the land-based test
results. The effluent was clear in color, contained no
visible particles, and exhibited a chlorine residual.
From these preliminary results, it was concluded that
43.
-------
the system was operating properly, and the taking of
samples for analysis was begun.
Maintenance and Operational Experience
Only minor component difficulties were encountered through-
out the land-based testing and the three-month shipboard
program. Two level gages shorted out, one caused by an
overflow of the collection tank (discussed below) while
operating in an inadvertent unsealed tank condition,
and the other due to an unexplained liquid penetration
of the level gage seal. Late in the test program the
rubber stator in the feed pump showed signs of excessive
wear and was replaced. It is believed that this was due
to a combination of the temperature of the boiler feed
water in the pump (in excess of 100° F) and the fact
that the pump was run continuously with no discharge for
approximately 16 hours a day.
Only two operational difficulties occurred. During the
peak passenger period (latter part of July to mid-August)
the rate of flow into the collection tank during peak
flow periods at times produced a volume of water which
exceeded the storage capacity of the tank, and it was
necessary to by-pass the incoming flow overboard for a
short period. During overboard discharge mode operation,
it was found that this condition was aggravated by toilet
flushing valves stuck in the open position. The valves
tend to become stuck when the vessel's sanitary pump
draws sand from the bottom of the bay when the vessel is
loading or unloading at Cape May and Lewes. However, the
tank flooding condition also occurred during recycle mode
tests. As mentioned earlier, the collection tank was
sized for 600 gallons, based on a 5,000 gpd system size.
As indicated in Table 10, however, the flow during the
peak passenger period was 6,000 gpd. For Run No. 10, a
total flow of 5,970 gpd was measured, and for Run No. 5,
a total flow of 6,000 gpd was estimated. Flows in excess
of 5,000 gpd were also either measured or estimated for
Runs 8, 11, 12, and 14. For a 6,000 gpd system the col-
lection tank is slightly undersized. A volume of 800
gallons rather than 600 gallons would have eliminated
the problem. For the system as actually installed on the
ferry, the problem can be solved simply by additional pumps
44.
-------
which increase the flow-through rate in the system when
the liquid level in the collection tank becomes too high.
The increased flow rate for short periods of time would
not seriously affect the overall performance of the
system.
The other operational difficulty encountered was the
flooding of the solids holding tank on three occasions.
This happened twice when the fresh water feed valve from
the boiler feed tank to the sanitation system was in-
advertently left open during the ferry maintenance shift,
at the same time that the valve to the fresh water feed
pump and the valves on the centrifuge were left open,
with the centrifuge not operating. High pressure surges
during the filling of the boiler water feed tank caused
water to leak through all valves into the solids holding
tank. The solids tank was also flooded once when the
pressure setting on the centrifuge feed valve was acci-
dentally set at 80 psi rather than 40 psi.
Apart from these problems, the system operated as designed,
with a minimum of down-time.
Test, Sampling and Analysis Procedures
Three different test periods were used when samples were
taken for analysis. Sample pick-up at Lewes, Delaware,
was governed by arrival times of the ferry. The most
frequent test periods were for samples collected and
composited from 0700 hours until 1230 hours, with pick-up
at 1300 hours, or for samples collected and composited
between 1100 hours and 1630 hours, with pick-up at 1700
hours. In either case, the test period covered three
continuous trips, with a time span of 5.5 hours. On a
number of occasions samples were collected and composited
from 0700 to 1630 hours, with pick-up at 1700 hours.
Early in the program samples were taken at the following
locations: collection tank effluent (vibro-separator
underflow), centrifuge effluent, carbon column effluent,
and post-chlorinated effluent. Later in the program, in
order to minimize sample analysis costs, sampling was
confined to vibro-separator underflow and post-chlorinated
effluent. For each location grab samples were taken
approximately once each hour and composited in one-gallon
45.
-------
plastic containers which were kept on ice. At Lewes
these containers were transferred to ice chests and
driven to the analysis laboratory, where analyses were
immediately started. When the plastic containers were
picked up at Lewes, a laboratory representative came
aboard the vessel and took a sample for coliform bacteria
analysis. The sampling outlet was heated with a torch
immediately before withdrawal of the sample. A chlorine
residual reading was taken, and then the sample was de-
chlorinated. All analyses were performed in accordance
with approved EPA procedures in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes."
Results of Overboard Discharge Mode Tests
Performance data were taken for seven overboard discharge
mode tests. Early in the program the system was operated
with only two carbon columns in service, arranged in
parallel, which provided a carbon contact time of 12.5
minutes. At the end of the program, following the recycle
mode tests, the system was again operated in the overboard
discharge mode, with four carbon columns arranged in
parallel-series, which provided a carbon contact time of
25 minutes. For all of the overboard discharge mode tests
the toilet flushing water was sea water pumped from
Delaware Bay.
The suspended solids and BOD^ data for these teste are
listed in Tables 11 and 12, the former representating the two-
column data and the latter the four-column data. Samples
were taken of the vibrating screen underflow (SU), the
centrifuge effluent (CE), the carbon column effluent (CCE),
and the post-chlorination effluent(PCE). The piping
arrangement at the influent end of the marine sanitation
system was such that it was difficult to take samples of
the incoming feed (F). Therefore the suspended solids and
BOD5 levels in the feed were estimated. This was done as
follows. For the suspended solids alone, the prototype
tests (Table 5) showed that approximately 30% of the
suspended solids in the influent were removed by the vibrating
screen. It is felt that this same percentage could be applied
for estimating purposes to solids in the shipboard wastewater.
Hence, the feed suspended solids values were estimated on
this basis. The prototype tests also showed that approxi-
mately 20% of the BOD5 in influent wastewater was
46.
-------
TABLE 11
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
SHIPBOARD OVERBOARD DISCHARGE MODE TESTS
SEA WATER FLUSHING
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
TWO CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
isd)
15 (2)
20
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
(200)
SU
143
329
*80
CE
M
236
*148
CCE
25
216
*112
PCE
70
217
*154
BODs
F
(330)
(360)
(230)
SU
294
326
210
CE
190
218
160
CCE
*290
39
60
PCE
33
33
60
NOTES
All values in mg/1
F means Feed (Values estimated)
SU means Screen Underflow
CE means Centrifuge Effluent
CCE means Carbon Column Effluent
PCE means Post-chlorinated Effluent
(1) Samples analyzed by E. H. Richardson Associates,
(2) Samples analyzed by EPA
Inc.
* Erratic Test Data
-------
TABLE 12
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
SHIPBOARD OVERBOARD DISCHARGE MODE TESTS
SEA WATER FLUSHING
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
FOUR CARBON COLUMNS
RUN.
NO.
40
41
42
43
44
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
(250)
(380)
(280)
(940)
(550)
SU
178
263
193
660
388
PCE
45
60
18
43
40
BOD5
F
(230)
(440)
(960)
(570)
(330)
SU
210
390
860
510
300
PCE
110
130
150
110
98
48.
-------
removed by the vibrating screen. For wastewater generated
aboard the ferry, however, it is believed that a greater
percentage of BODg is in dissolved form, and consequently,
for estimating purposes, it was assumed that only 10% of
the total incoming BODg would be removed by the screen.
The estimated feed values are shown in parentheses.
Table 11 shows that the two-column shipboard tests confirmed
the BOD5 removal performance of the prototype system. Two
sets of data are shown for Run No. 15. The test samples
were split, half going for analysis to E. H. Richardson
Associates, Inc., Dover, Delaware (the commercial laboratory
which performed all analyses for the shipboard tests), and
the other half to EPA's National Environmental Research
Center in Edison, New Jersey. Except for a disagreement
on the BOD^ in the carbon column effluent (290 mg/1 from
the Richardson analyses and 39 mg/1 from the EPA analyses),
the data are in reasonable agreement. It is believed that
the Richardson value for CCE is in error, since it would
represent an increase in BOD^ in passing through the carbon
columns.
The analytical results for suspended solids from these
tests are questionable. For Run No. 15 the two laboratories
disagree both regarding magnitude and pattern of removal
through the sanitation system. In addition, the suspended
solids pattern for Run No. 20 is erratic. Hence, the
suspended solids data from these tests are inconclusive.
The results of Runs No. 40 through 44 (Table 12), on the
other hand, show a consistent pattern for both suspended
solids and 6005. The suspended solids in the post-chlorinated
effluent range from 18 to 60 mg/1, with all values except
one below 50 mg/1. Percent reduction based on estimated
suspended solids in the feed (250 to 940 mg/1) was 90%.
These results are slightly lower than those obtained with
the prototype system.
For Runs 40 through 44 the BOD5 values in the post-
chlorinated effluent vary over a very narrow range (98 to
150 mg/1, with an average of 120 mg/1) for estimated
influent BOD5's ranging from 230 to 960 mg/1, with an
average of 506 mg/1. On an average basis this represents
a BOD5 reduction of 76%, which is lower than the reduction
of 82% obtained with the prototype system. That the system
49.
-------
is capable of reducing the BOD in shipboard wastewater
to values less than 50 mg/1 was established by the test
results shown in Table 11 and some of the early recycle
tests discussed later in this report. A number of
possible reasons, therefore, suggest themselves for the
higher values:
1. The higher BOD values may reflect carbon column
exhaustion caused by the preceding recycle mode tests.
Of the four carbon columns in service for Runs 40 through
44, the first two had previously been the second set for
Runs"NO. 21 through 34 and had then become the first set
for Runs 35 through 44. During the recycle tests these
columns were exposed to the higher organic loadings
experienced in the recycle tests and to dosages of potassium
permanganate and disinfecting chemicals (pine oil in some
cases and a commercial toilet cleaner containing hydro-
chloric acid).
2. The higher BOD's may be the result of inadequate back-
washing of the carbon columns. It was noticed that the
effluent from the fresher second set of carbon columns
was darker than the first set, which is the reverse of
what had been observed during previous tests. All four
carbon columns are backwashed simultaneously, with the
backwash flow being split between each set of columns
and then converging at a single connection in the piping
system. It is possible that the backwash flow did not
split evenly and that a larger percentage of the flow
passed through the older columns, causing a build-up of
solids in the second set of columns.
For Runs No. 15 and 20 (Table 11) the total and fecal
coliform bacteria counts in the effluent were less than
10 MPN/100 ml for a prechlorination dosage of 15 mg/1
and a post-chlorination dosage of 20 mg/1, and chlorine
residuals varied from 1.0 to 3.0 mg/1. On some of the
early test runs, overboard discharge and recycle modes,
occasional fecal coliform counts as high as 3,000 MPN/100 ml
were recorded. These deviations from the <. 10 value
followed no pattern and appeared to be caused by carbon
fines in the effluent which adsorbed the chlorine. No
coliform data were taken for Runs 40 through 44 (Table 12),
but measurements taken during the test showed a chlorine
residual greater than 1.0 mg/1.
50.
-------
In reviewing the overboard discharge results it should be
pointed out that at least 9 days of "flow-through" testing
were conducted at the beginning of the shipboard test
period during which the effluent was visually checked.
The results were consistently good and apparently comparable
to the land test results, i.e., essentially no visible
particles, clear in color and containing a chlorine
residual. Consequently, data for only 7 test runs (2 before
recycle testing and 5 after) were obtained. The suspended
solids results from these tests are considered to be
good. The BOD results before the recycle testing are also
good, with the results after the recycle testing higher
than previously experienced, as discussed above. The
first day results of recycle tests, presented in the
following section, are similar to "flow-through" testing
and confirm the system capability in this regard.
Results of Recycle Mode Tests
Two-Carbon Column Tests
Recycle mode tests were first run with only two carbon
columns in service, arranged in parallel. The flushing
water employed was fresh city water, stored in a 1,400
gallon recirculation tank, which after passage through
the sanitation system, was recycled back to the tank.
Suspended solids and BOD^ data for these tests are listed
in Table 13, COD data in Table 14, and disinfection data
in Table 15. Runs 7 and 10 were separate single-day runs,
with a fresh tank of water used for each run. Run 12 was
the first day of a multi-day run, with Run 13 the second
day. For Run 12 four carbon columns were used for 730
gallons of the 2,578 gallons processed that day, while for
Run 13 only two columns were employed. The suspended
solids data for all of these tests are in excellent agree-
ment. Both sets of data confirm that, in a "flow-through"
mode, the system met the design goals, since these one-day
runs are comparable to a flow-through case in which the
treated water is not reused. The COD data for Run No. 10
(Table 14) essentially confirm the BOD5 data for that run.
Run No. 12 is especially interesting. The incoming
suspended solids were high (870 mg/1 estimated), and the
BOD5 loading was very high (in excess of 1,000 mg/1), due
in part to the use of pine oil in the toilets on that day.
51.
-------
TABLE 13
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
TWO .CARBON COLUMNS
en
RUN
NO.
7
10
12
13
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
-
(170)
(870)
(520)
su
-
118
613
363
CE
-
22
115
38
CCE
_
10
28
8
PCE
-
6
18
15
BOD5
F
-
(230)
(1100)
(830)
SU
-
210
1000
750
CE
-
170
720
540
CCE
-
57
160
370
PCE
44
69
12
270
(1)
(1)
(2), (3)
(4)
NOTES
(1) Single day test
(2) Four carbon columns
(3) First day of multi-day test
(4) Second day of multi-day test
-------
Ul
co
TABLE 14
COD DATA FOR SINGLE RUN
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
TWO CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
10
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
(170)
SU
118
CE
22
CCE
10
PCE
6
BOD5
F
-
SU
630
CE
300
CCE
89
PCE
66
NOTE
See Table 13, Run No. 10, for corresponding BOD5 data.
-------
TABLE 15
DISINFECTION DATA
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
TWO CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
7
10
12
13
COLIFORM IN EFFLUENT
MPN/100 ml
TOTAL
47.000
< 10
< 10
21,000
FECAL
3, 300
< 10
< 10
300
CHLORINE
RESIDUAL
mg/1
0
1.0
1.0
0.5
54.
-------
The system responded well to this high loading.
Run No. 12 is the first day of a two-day recycle test,
and Run No. 13 is the second day. The high influent
suspended solids and BOD5 of Run No. 12 were reduced by
the system, and the influent values for both parameters
were lower on the second day. Influent variations such
as these were also exhibited in the "flow-through" tests
(see Table 12). The sanitation system reduced the suspended
solids, but an increase in BOD5 occurred in the effluent.
In addition, a noticeable ammonia odor was detected in the
recycle tank.
The coliform count in the post-chlorinated effluent for
these recycle mode tests is shown in Table 15. The high
values for Run No. 7 were believed to be caused by carbon
fines in the post-chlorination tank which adsorbed some
of the chlorine, making it unavailable for disinfection.
The reason for the counts in Run No. 13 is unknown. For
Runs No. 10 and 12 the counts were less than 10 MPN/100 ml.
Four-Carbon Column Tests
Sustained four-column recycle mode tests of the sanitation
system commenced with Run No. 21 and continued through Run
No. 39 (see Table 10). For Runs 21 through 25, potassium
permanganate was added to the post-chlorination step to
determine if chemical oxidation of the effluent would reduce
the build-up of BOD^ encountered during recycling of the
treated wastewater. This approach was abandoned for Runs
No. 26 through 30, in which the chlorination dosage was
increased. For Runs No. 31 through 39 the carbon columns
were backwashed overboard instead of back into the system.
Suspended Solids and BODg Reduction
The performance data for Runs 21 through 25, a continuous
5-day recycle test, are summarized in Table 16. Chlorine
dosage was 15 mg/1 in the prechlorination step and 30 mg/1
in the post-chlorination step. The potassium permanganate
dosage, also added at the post-chlorination step, was 35 mg/1.
Except for Run No. 25, the suspended solids date are con-
sistent with the results of the prototype system tests.
Three of the five tests show an increased in suspended solids
in passing through the post-chlorination step, due possibly
55.
-------
TABLE 16
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
CHLORINATION AND POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE TREATMENT
FOUR CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
21
22
23
24
25
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
(280)
(620)
(220)
(300)
(240)
SU
196
436
152
212
170
CE
156
60
38
60
60
CCE
24
54
25
42
72
PCE
52
52
60
50
70
BODs
F
(130)
(400)
(460)
(410)
(340)
SU
120
360
410
370
310
CE
100
380
320
160
300
CCE
-
110
200
310
220
PCE
-
130
220
320
140
RECYCLE
DAY
1
2
3
4
5
(Jl
NOTES
Prechlorination dosage: 15 mg/1
Post-chlorination dosage: 30 mg/1
Potassium permanganate dosage: 35 mg/1
Values in parentheses are estimates
-------
to a slight build-up of solids in the post-chlorination
tank. The BOD5 values in the effluent continue to increase
with each day of recycling, except for an unexplained
decrease on the fifth day. The BODs data for Run No. 24
are inconsistent. Either the centrifuge effluent (CE) BOD
is too low or the carbon column effluent (CCE) and post-
chlorinated effluent (PCE) are too high. It is interesting
to note that, even though the final BOD's are high, the
system continued to decrease the incoming BOD,
The potassium permanganate, at the dosage employed, had
no apparent effect on the BOD5 levels in the recycled
effluent. Hence, because of the corrosiveness of this
material and the fact that it discolored the flushing water,
its further use was discontinued.
The next series of recycle mode tests was performed with
increased chlorine dosage in both the prechlorination and
post-chlorination steps. Prechlorination dosage was increased
to 40 mg/1 and post-chlorination to 200 mg/1. The suspended
solids and BOD results for these tests (Runs 26 through 30)
are listed in Table 17. The data for the first day of
these tests (Run No. 26) confirm the order of magnitude of
the flow-through mode results, but for all subsequent days
both the suspended solids and BOD5 results showed a build-
up. The solids build-up and ammonia odor led to the
termination of this series of tests.
With the increased chlorine dosages of Runs 26 through 30
retained, a series of runs was then made to determine the
effects of backwashing the carbon columns overboard rather
than back into the system. The results of these runs (31
through 34) are listed in Table 18. For Runs 33 and 34 two
sets of data are presented, analyzed by E. H. Richardson
Associates, Inc. and EPA's National Environmental Research
Center. The EPA values for suspended solids and BODs are
consistently lower, but the fact that most of the values
are in reasonable agreement established the credibility of
the analytical procedures employed throughout the test program.
Again, the suspended solids data confirm the order of
magnitude of the prototype system tests. The BOD5 data
show no substantial difference from values obtained in the
previous recycle mode runs, except that the high values
for Run No. 31, the first day of this series with a fresh
tank of water, indicate that the carbon columns may be ap-
57.
-------
TABLE 17
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
INCREASED CHLORINE DOSAGE
FOUR CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
26
27
28
29
30
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
(220)
(340)
(410)
(1150)
-
su
152
240
288
806
93
CE
94
182
228
342
183
CCE
36
104
105
86
78
PCE
40
82
95
104
73
BOD5
F
(360)
(720)
(620)
(840)
(690)
SU
320
650
560
760
620
CE
340
450
500
530
540
CCE
100
240
320
280
410
PCE
64
250
320
260
410
RECYCLE
DAY
1
2
3
4
5
Ul
oo
NOTE
Prechlorination dosage: 40 mg/1
Post-chlorination dosage: 200 mg/1
Values in parentheses are estimates
-------
TABLE 18
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
CARBON COLUMNS BACKWASHED OVERBOARD
FOUR CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
31
32
33*
33**
34*
34**
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
(200)
(720)
(290)
(270)
(480)
(360)
SU
138
505
206
190
333
252
PCE
13
53
55
45
75
31
BOD5
F
(430)
(760)
(650)
(580)
(770)
(410)
SU
390
680
590
521
690
372
PCE
250
320
320
233
330
307
RECYCLE
DAY
1
2
3
3
4
4
NOTES
* Samples analyzed by E. H. Richardson Associates, Inc.
** Samples analyzed by EPA
Values in parentheses are estimates
59.
-------
preaching exhaustion. It is significant, however, that
the carbon columns are still reducing the incoming BOD$.
EPA grab sample data corresponding to Runs 33 and 34 are
presented in Table 19, and show that there is no differ-
ence between the grab and composite sample data.
For the final series of recycle mode tests (Runs 35
through 39), the carbon was replaced in two of the four
columns. The fresh columns became the second set in the
parallel-series arrangement. Low wastewater flows on the
ferry during this period hampered the taking of meaningful
data. The suspended solids and BOD5 data are listed in
Table 20. Data were not available for the first day of
the series (Run No. 35) because of the time consumed in
changing the carbon, but the results for the second day
(Run No. 36) indicate that the first day values would have
duplicated the results of the prototype system tests.
Data from subsequent days show the usual build-up in EOD^.
The color of the recycle water, which was clear at the
beginning, became milky in appearance and then became
gray by the end of the recycle series.
Nitrogen in the System
As mentioned above, by the second day of the recycle mode
tests, a noticeable ammonia odor appeared in the recycled
wastewater. Analyses of the post-chlorinated effluent
were performed to determine both the ammonia and organic
nitrogen levels present, and the results are listed in
Table 21. Generally the ammonia nitrogen values are an
order of magnitude higher than the values in raw domestic
sewage (see Appendix A4). The temperature of 90°F is
an estimate based on the fact that the temperature in the
hold of the vessel where the sanitation system was located
varied from about 110°F during July and August to about
95°F during the latter part of September.
The nitrogen levels show no consistent pattern. Runs 28
through 30, for example, represent the third through fifth
days of a five-day series of tests. The ammonia nitrogen
increases steadily, but the organic nitrogen is not con-
sistent. These were tests at the increased chlorination
levels discussed above. Runs 31 through 34, on the other
hand, show a consistently decreasing ammonia nitrogen level,
with scatter in the organic nitrogen. These were tests at
the increased chlorination levels with the carbon columns
60.
-------
TABLE 19
EPA GRAB SAMPLE DATA
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
CARBON COLUMNS BACKWASHED OVERBOARD
FOUR CARBON COLUMNS
DATE
1972
9/20
9/20
9/21
9/21
9/21
TIME
1' PM
3 PM
11 AM
1 PM
3 PM
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
(160)
(330)
(270)
(320)
-
su
114
232
188.
221
-
CE
77
65
184
177
250
CCE
-
-
-
-
-
PCE
19
54
60
41
85
BOD5
F
(660)
(700)
(410)
(460)
(530)
SU
593
632
372
413
479
CE
486
482
355
366
497
CCE
-
-
-
-
-
PCE
277
294
346
239
333
NOTES
9/20 samples correspond to Run No. 33 in Table 18
9/21 samples correspond to Run No. 34 in Table 18
Values in parentheses are estimates
-------
TABLE 20
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
EFFECTS OF CHANGING TWO OF FOUR CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
35
36
37
38
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F
-
(240)
(210)
(350)
SU
-
168
148
246
PCE
-
56
84
62
BODs
F
-
(400)
(490)
(830)
SU
-
360
440
750
PCE
-
120
250
350
RECYCLE
DAY
1
2
3
4
NOTE
Values in parentheses are estimates
62.
-------
TABLE 21
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
NITROGEN LEVELS IN POST-CHLORINATED EFFLUENT
RUN
NO.
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
NH3-N
200
360
460
340
230
200
50
145
266
100
ORGANIC N
140
370
170
220
190
250
50
-
5
-
_
PH
8.9
9.0
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.9
8.9
-
9.0
8.7
8.7
TEMP °F
~~ 90
/-^ 90
NOTE
All nitrogen values in mg/1
63.
-------
backwashed overboard. Since the only difference between
the tests of Runs 28-30 and 31-34 are the overboard
backwash of the carbon columns and a somewhat decreased
passenger loading for the latter tests, the steadily
decreasing ammonia levels might be attributed to the
overboard backwash of the columns. However, the carbon
columns were also backwashed overboard for Runs 36-38, and
in addition fresh carbon was added to two of the four
columns, yet these tests showed scatter in the ammonia
nitrogen levels. EPA analyses for the grab samples
taken on 9/20 and 9/21/72 (Runs 33 and 34) show ammonia
nitrogen levels of 270 mg/1, which are higher than the
values in Table 21.
Disinfection
The coliform count in the post-chlorinated effluent for
the four-column recycle mode tests are listed in Table 22.
Except for an occasional deviation, including one caused
by lack of prechlorination, the total and fecal coliform
counts are less than 10 MPN/100 ml. Chlorine residuals
are generally 1.0 mg/1.
Summary of Recycle Mode Test Results
From the results obtained in all of the recycle mode tests,
the following general conclusions can be drawn;
1. On the first day of the recycling operation, using a
fresh tank of water, the suspended solids and BOD5 loadings
in the post-chlorinated effluent are in the 50 mg/1 range.
This substantiates the flow-through results for both the
prototype and shipboard tests, and confirms that the sani-
tation system, operated in the flow-through mode, met the
design objectives of the program. The recycle water is
slightly cloudy but clean in appearance.
2. After the first day the BOD5 of the recycled effluent
increases so that by the end of 5 days its value is in the
range 200 to 400 mg/1. Suspended solids levels, however,
are generally low.
3. By the second day the recycled wastewater exhibits a
noticeable ammonia odor. The ammonia nitrogen levels vary
from 50 to more than 300 mg/1. The color of the water
64.
-------
TABLE 22
DISINFECTION DATA
SHIPBOARD RECYCLE MODE TESTS
FLOW RATE AT 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
FOUR CARBON COLUMNS
RUN
NO.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
TOTAL
COLIFORM
4 x 103
80 x 103
10
10
10
1.1 x 106
10
20
< 10
-
-
FECAL
COLIFORM
10
800
< 10
<10
<10
80 x 103*
<10
<10
<10
<10
-------
becomes gray and darker as the number of recycle days
increases.
Recommended Recycle Mode Design Changes
As explained earlier, the marine sanitation system demon-
strated on this program was designed as a "flow-through"
system which provides a high degree of treatment. An
investigation of recycling of the effluent showed that,
in order to --make the system an effective recycle system
certain design changes would be required. The following
are recommended:
1. The ammonia in the system can be reduced by air
stripping. This can be accomplished by agitating and
aerating the recycle wastewater in the storage tank. This
technique is most efficient at high pH and temperature
values, and consequently pH monitoring and control would
be required. The elevated temperature in the hold of the
vessel may be sufficient without additional heating. Break-
point chlorination may also be employed for ammonia removal.
2. BOD5 in the recycled wastewater can be reduced by
chemical oxidation following carbon column treatment.
Sodium hypochlorite is not suitable, since the concentrations
of available chlorine are not sufficiently high. Chlorine
can either be generated aboard using a brine solution as a
source or a chemical like calcium hypochlorite (with 70%
available chlorine) may be employed. Chlorine dosages
required would probably be of the order of magnitude of
thosands of milligrams per liter. In either case the design
must take into consideration the handling and disposal of
the oxidation products, corrosive effects, etc.
Solids Collection and Disposal
Except for the flooding of the solids holding tank on
three occasions (discussed earlier in this report), no
problems were encountered with the holding of solids in
a tank vented to weather and periodic pump-out to a sewage
tank truck brought aboard the vessel during the maintenance
shift. The tank was emptied approximately once every two
weeks except during the latter part of the problem, when
the program director insisted on weekly pump-out, following
66.
-------
the tank flooding incidents, in order to ensure no inter-
ruptions to the test program. Actually, the weekly pump-
outs were unnecessary since by this time operating personnel
had been indoctrinated about the necessity for closing the
valves which led to the flooding problems.
The sludge pumped easily to the tank truck, and only on
two occasions was it necessary to dismantle the solids
pump because solids were stuck in the impeller. On one
occasion this was caused by the presence of a comb, which
collected paper towels about itself.
No sludge density data were obtained during the shipboard
tests. From observation, the sludge did not differ in
appearance from the sludge collected during the land-
based tests. The 400 gallon solids holding tank proved to
be entirely adequate.
As mentioned earlier in this report, the solids were
ultimately disposed of at a sanitary landfill.
Initial and Operating Costs
As part of the program, initial and operating cost data
were obtained. These are presented in Table 23. Initial
costs were $66,000, consisting of $40,000 for system hard-
ware and $26,000 for system installation, including ship
modifications. Operating costs were $200/month for the
months of July through September. Estimated operating costs
for the remaining months is $85/month. No additional man-
power operating costs were required, since operation and
maintenance of the system were handled by regular crews,
in addition to their normal duties.
67.
-------
TABLE 23
INITIAL AND OPERATING COSTS
INITIAL COSTS
System hardware costs $40,000
Installation costs (including
vessel modifications) 26,OOP
Total Initial Costs $66,000
OPERATING COSTS (July through September)
ITEM QUANTITIES/MONTH COSTS/MONTH
Activated Carbon 120 Ib. $40
Disinfectant 120 gal. 60
Fuel Oil 140 gal. 20
Sludge Removal 2 80
TOTAL $200
ESTIMATED OPERATING COSTS (October through June)
ITEM QUANTITIES/MONTH COSTS/MONTH
Activated Carbon 43 Ibs. $13
Disinfectant 60 gal. 12
Fuel Oil 140 gal. 20
Sludge Removal 1 40
TOTAL $85
ADDITIONAL MANPOWER COSTS: NONE
68
-------
SECTION VII
EVALUATION OP CAPABILITIES AND APPLICATIONS
The results of the tests performed on the Marland marine
sanitation system have shown that a "flow-through" system
capable of providing a high degree of secondary treat-
ment has been demonstrated, and the results of the
recycle mode test have indicated the design additions
which will be required to upgrade the system to a true
recycle system for no-discharge applications. Moreover,
the modular design of the system makes it capable of
meeting the EPA standards promulgated on June 23, 1972.
Referring to the process flow diagram shown in Figure 1,
the EPA's "primary treatment" standard for existing vessels
(no visible floating solids and a coliform bacteria
count in the effluent less than 1,000 MPN/100 ml) can
be met by eliminating the carbon columns and centrifuge
from the flow-through system and discharging the pre-
chlorinated wastewater directly overboard. This would
require a higher chlorine dosage, but since the only
suspended solids in the effluent are those which have
passed through a fine screen (64 to 105 mesh), the
chlorination would be effective. A higher degree of
treatment would be obtained by retaining the centrifuge
but still eliminating the carbon columns. Varying
degrees of higher treatment can be obtained by adding
varying numbers of carbon columns to the system. The
highest treatment - a true no-discharge recycle system -
can be obtained by the design additions described earlier
in this report.
Although this demonstration grant was conducted on a
large ferry, requiring a 5,000 gpd system, the system
can be sized to handle flows from 500 to 20,000 gpd,
and possibly higher. In its various sizes it is
applicable to tug boats, freighters, tankers, passenger
liners, offshore drilling rigs, military vessels, etc.
For example, a 4,000 gpd system designed for a 40-man
crew was installed on the tanker S. S. Mobil Arctic
and is shown in Figure 12. In contrast to the spread-
out arrangement used aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry,
the entire system was packaged into a space measuring
approximately 11 x 7 x 7 feet.
69.
-------
The system can also be used in land applications
where tight space is a governing consideration. The
system would be expecially applicable to marinas
receiving and treating shipboard wastes retained in
holding tanks. For this application chemical treat-
ment with coagulants would be desirable prior to
centrifuging.
In summary, the physical-chemical nature of the system
and its modular design make the system extremely
flexible in its applications.
70.
-------
FIGURE 12: 4,000 GPD SYSTEM INSTALLED ABOARD S.S. MOBIL ARCTIC
-------
SECTION VIII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Marland Environmental Systems, Inc. gratefully
acknowledges the contributions made by the following
persons to the successful completion of this program:
1. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
a. Mr. Hal Bernard, who showed an early interest in
the design of the Marland marine sanitation system and
encouraged us to submit a demonstration grant appli-
cation.
b. Dr. Thomas Padden, for his interest in the program
and his encouragement.
c. Mr. William Librizzi and Mr. Leo McCarthy, Project
Officers on the program, for their direction and timely
support throughout the program.
2. The Delaware River and Bay Authority
a. The Board of Commissioners of the Delaware River
and Bay Authority, for their interest in the program
and their approval to make the Cape May-Lewes Ferry
available as a test bed.
b. Mr. William J. Miller, Jr., Director, and Mr. Theodore
C. Bright, General Manager, who showed an early interest
in the program and were instrumental in securing approval
to use the Cape May-Lewes Perry.
c. Captain William G. Evans, Superintendent, and Mr.
Parker A. Drummond, Port Engineer, of the Cape May-Lewes
Ferry, who went out of their way to assure the success-
ful completion of the program.
d. The officers, chiefs, and crews of the Cape May-
Lewes Ferry, for their cooperation in operating and
maintaining the system.
72.
-------
3. Turbo Machine Company
Mr. C. Thomas Snyder, for supervision of fabrication
of the system.
4. Coast Engineering Company
Mr, Harry W. Keeling, Jr. and Mr. John Chivis, for design
of the installation aboard the S. S. Delaware.
5. Dorchester Industries, Inc.
Mr. Robert Morgan, for supervision of the installation.
6. Marland Environmental Systems, Inc.
a. Mr. Joseph L. Cooperstein and Mr. John Bidrawn, for
design, coordination, testing and evaluation of the system.
b. Miss Wendy Hilles, for administrative support and
typing the manuscript of this report.
73.
-------
SECTION IX
REFERENCES
1. Shell, G. L. and Burns, D. E., "Get the Most When
You Pick a Process", Water and Wastes Engineering,
Vol. 9, No. 9, Sept. 1972, pp. 69-72.
2. Weber, W. J., Jr., Hopkins, C. B., and Bloom,
R., Jr., "Physicochemical Treatment of Wastewater",
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 42,
No. 1, Jan. 1970, pp. 83-99.
74.
-------
SECTION X
APPENDICES
75.
-------
APPENDIX A-l
MEASURED AND PREDICTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
76.
-------
Appendix A-l: Measured and Predicted Wastewater Flows
In order to estimate the capacity of the proposed marine
sanitation system, select the system through-put flow rate,
and size the various components of the system, flow-
measurements were made aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry on
June 11, 1971, and on the basis of these flows and the
passenger loadings, projections were made of the anticipated
flows for the peak passenger day in 1972. Since it would
have been practically impossible to measure the actual
flow of Wastewater from the vessel, measurements were made
instead at the vessel's sanitary pump, which provides
Delaware Bay water for flushing purposes and for auxiliary
cooling, and at the fresh water pump. It was assumed
that these flows would eventually be routed to the sani-
tation system.
The measured cumulative flows at both pumps for the eight
trips made on June 11, 1971 are listed in Table Al-1. From
these data the total flow for each trip and the total for
the day were obtained and are listed in Table Al-2. The
sanitary pump flows for trips No. 1 and No. 7 were estimates.
On trip No. 1, it was discovered that most of the flow-
was being used for auxiliary cooling. Hence the sanitary
pump flow for this trip was estimated, based on the passenger
ratios, from trip No. 2. The sanitary pump flow for trip
No. 7 was estimated because, for a 10-minute period, the
pump was required for auxiliary cooling purposes. The flow
for this period was assumed to be the same as the previous
10-minute flow. Table Al-2 shows that, for a total of
1,061 passengers, there was an estimated flow of 1,448
gallons, approximately two-thirds of which is flushing water
and the remaining one-third fresh water ( sinks, galley ).
For the purpose of estimating the flow for the peak passenger
day in 1972, the peak passenger day in 1970 (August 15, 1970)
was used as a basis. The number of passengers carried on
each trip and the total for the day are listed in Table Al-3.
77.
-------
In 1971 the Cape May-Lewes Ferry abandoned the practice
of using a single vessel to make 10 trips in a single
day, and adopted the 8-trip day shown in Table Al-1.
Hence, the 10-trip passenger loading was adjusted by
subtracting the passengers for the last two trips. As
a result, the predicted peak passenger loading is 1972
would be 3,111. The ratio of this number to the June 11,
1971 number (1,061) is slightly less than 3. A factor
of 3 on wastewater flow was adopted, which predicts a
total flow (3 times 1,448 gallons) of approximately 4,400
gallons, that is, a nominally 5,000 gpd system. If it
is assumed that this flow occurs over a 16-hour period
(a 15-hour operating day plus approximately one hour to
process the wastewater still accumulated in the collection
tank at the end of the last trip), a system through-put
flow rate of 5 gallons per minute is adequate. Higher
rates would, of course, handle the wastewater flows more
efficiently, but there are a number of reasons for selecting
the lowest practical rate. First, the lower the flow rate,
the more efficiently does the centrifuge separate suspended
solids, which is a major consideration in the design.
The lower flow rate also minimizes the size of the carbon
columns and the disinfection tank, since the sizes of
these units are governed by retention time. The lower
flow rate does, however, maximize the size of the collection
tank.
The required storage capacity for the collection tank was
determined by plotting the flows from Table Al-1, multi-
plied by a factor of 3, and superposing the pump-out at
a 5 gpm rate. The difference between the two ordinates
represents wastewater accumulated in the tank. The process
is illustrated in Figures Al-1 through Al-8, each repre-
senting a single trip.
The flow to the tank for the first trip (Figure Al-1) is
shown by the solid line. From preliminary designs of
the collection tank and level sensors positions, it was
determined the pump emptying the tank would not start
until the accumulated wastewater reaches a volume of
100 gallons, and that the pump will shut off when the volume
is, for all practical purposes, zero. The pump-out at
a rate of 5 gpm is shown dotted. It empties the tank
at a time of 0850 hours, and at the end of the trip an
accumulated volume of 25 gallons is left in the tank.
78.
-------
This figure becomes the base for the second trip. The
tank is emptied at a time of 1000, and the pump doesn't
start again until 1015. At the end of the second trip
the accumulated wastewater is 175 gallons. This becomes
the base for the third trip, and the process is repeated
until the end of the day. From this procedure it was
established that the maximum required storage capacity,
which occurs in the fifth trip, is 520 gallons. A 600-
gallon tank was designed to provide a margin of safety.
Following docking at the end of the last trip, the
sanitation system would continue to operate for 88 minutes
until the collection tank is empty, at which time the
system would begin automatically turning itself off.
79.
-------
TABLE Al-1
MEASURED CUMULATIVE FLOWS
AT SANITARY PUMP AND FRESH WATER PUMP
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
JUNE 11, 1971'
TRIP
1
l
NO. OF
PASSENGERS
49
l
TIME
0700
0710
0720
0730
0740
0750
0800
0810
0820
0830
0840
0845
0850
0910
0920
SANITARY
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
0
70
115
200
261
325
391
454
527
666
728
801
-
-
1024
FRESH WATER
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
0
0
0
0
0
34
34
73
91
TOTAL
FLOW
(gals)
0
70
115
200
261
359
391
527
600
739
801
892
-
-
1115
REMARKS
Lv.N.J. 0735
Discovered
that most of
sanitary flovv
was being
used for
auxiliary
cooling
Ar.Del. 0920
00
o
-------
TABLE Al-1
(Continued)
TRIP
2
,
3
'
NO. OF
PASSENGERS
116
134
TIME
0920
0930
0940
0950
1000
1010
1020
1030
1040
1050
1100
1110
1120
1130
1135
1140
1150
1200
1210
1220
1230
SANITARY
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
1024
1035
1038
1041
1049
1060
1084
1100
1115
1125
1136
1153
1155
1164
1166
1167
1188
1199
1210
1250
1268
FRESH WATER
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
91
1]
i
.1
i
127
1
T
151
t
172
1
T
TOTAL
FLOW
(gals)
1115
1146
1149
1152
1160
1187
1211
1227
1266
1276
1287
1304
1306
1315
1317
1318
1339
1350
1382
1422
1440
REMARKS
Ar .-Del. 0920
Lv.Del. 0935
Ar.N.J. 1045
Lv.N.J. 1135
00
-------
TABLE Al-1
(Continued)
TRIP
4
5
*
NO. OF
PASSENGERS
179
i
1'
111
I
I
TIME
1230
1240
1250
1305
1310
1320
1330
1340
1350
1400
1410
1420
1430
1440
1445
1500
1510
1520
1530
1540
1550
1600
SANITARY
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
1268
1279
1300
1270
1277
1325
1335
1354
1371
1389
1396
1417
1421
1428
1432
1447
1453
1465
1495
1503
1506
1515
FRESH WATER
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
172
187
217
217
242
\
1
'
270
1
277
277
p
288
1
r
TOTAL
FLOW
(gals)
1440
1466
1487
1457
1464
1512
1552
1571
1613
1631
1638
1687
1691
1698
1709
1724
1730
1742
1772
1791
1794
1803
REMARKS .
Ar.Del. 1250
Lv.Del. 1305
Pump lost
prime at 1305
Ar.N.J 1430
Lv.N.J. 1500
oo
to
-------
TABLE Al-1
(Continued)
oo
co
TRIP
,
6
7
NO. OF
PASSENGERS
202
156
TIME
1600
1610
1620
1630
1640
1650
1700
1705
1710
1720
1730
1740
1750
1800
1810
1820
1830
1840
SANITARY
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
1515
1526
1536
1540
1543
1569
1590
1602
1621
1634
1643
1656
1671
1679
1694
1702
1703
1707
FRESH WATER
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
288
307
I
t
323
335
I
T
352
TOTAL
FLOW
(gals)
1803
1833
1843
1847
1850
1892
1913
1925
1944
1957
1978
1991
2006
2031
2046
2054
2055
2059
REMARKS
Ar.Del. 16
Lv.Del. 17
Ar.N.J. 18
Lv.N.J. 18
-------
TABLE Al-1
(Continued)
TRIP
7
8
NO. OF
PASSENGERS
156
114
TIME
1840
1850
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2100
2110
2120
2130
2140
2150
2155
SANITARY
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
1707
1711
1717
1750
1763
1837
1851
1855
1867
1861
1866
1902
1899
1907
1916
1920
1938
1942
1958
1970
1970
FRESH WATER
PUMP FLOW
(gals)
352
372
'
I
377
\
1
385
J
I
1
401
1
414
'
'.
461
497
497
TOTAL
FLOW
(gals)
2059
2083
2089
2122
2140
2214
2228
2232
2252
2246
2251
2303
2300
2308
2317
2334
2352
2356
2419
2467
2467
REMARKS
Lv.N.J. 1840
Flow for cooling
betw. 1920 &
1930
Ar.Del. 2000
Pump lost
prime at 2010
Lv.Del. 2040
Pump lost
prime at 2040
Ar.N.J. 2155
00
-------
00
TABLE Al-2
MEASURED AND PREDICTED FLOWS PER TRIP
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
JUNE 11, 1971
TRIP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TIME
0730
0930
1130
1300
1500
1700
1830
2030
TOTALS
NO. OF
PASSENGERS
49
116
134
179
111
202
156
114
1061
SANITARY
PUMP FLOW
(gal)
(38)
91
185
151
119
162
(105)
103
(954)
FRESH WATER
PUMP FLOW
(gal)
91
60
36
83
30
49
33
112
494
TOTAL
FLOW
(gal)
(129)
151
221
234
149
211
(138)
215
(1448)
Notes: 1,
2,
Quantities in parentheses are estimates
Totals for each trip are from arrival to arrival
(see Table Al-1)
-------
TABLE Al-3
NUMBER OF PASSENGERS PER TRIP
PEAK PASSENGER DAY IN 1970
(AUGUST 15, 1970)
TRIP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
TIME
0630
0830
1030
1230
1430
1630
1830
2030
2230
0030
TOTAL FOR 10 TRIPS
MINUS LAST 2 TRIPS
TOTAL FOR 8 TRIPS
NO. OF
PASSENGERS
144
455
380
372
411
441
533
375
436
152
3,699
- 588
3,111
86.
-------
FIGURE Al-1
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 1
CO
S
O
J
J
<
U
fci
O
CO
Q
W
tf
Q
13
O
ffi
8
w
EH
CO
25
S-l
(0
-p
CO
Flow to
Collection tank
0
87.
-------
FIGURE Al-2
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 2
CO
o
s!
o
CO
Q
W
w
I2
w
EH
CO
0);
p;
Flow to
Collection tank
88.
-------
FIGURE Al-3
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 3
Flow to
Collection_
Tank
89.
-------
10
FIGURE Al-4
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 4
O
J
J
<
U
fc
O
w
Q
W
PS
Q
£
P>
ffi
w
EH
(U
Q
207
01
Q
Flow to ;
Colle.cti.on Tank
X
X
484
X
x *
x g?
/ Pump out
o
o
*
-------
FIGURE Al-5
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 5
10
8
co 6
Q
W
8
w
EH
EH
CO
484
0
o
CN
O
O
in
rH
Floy to;
I , ,
'Collection Tank
o
CM
X
X
Pump-out
o
^
un
o
o
vo
rH
X
o
(N
VD
M'
SH
91.
-------
FIGURE Al-6
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 6
Flow to
Collection Tank
92.
-------
FIGURE Al-7
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 7
Flow to
Collection Tank
93.
-------
FIGURE Al-8
WASTEWATER FLOW DESIGN CURVE
CAPE MAY - LEWES FERRY
TRIP NO. 8
Flow to
Collection Tank
94.
-------
APPENDIX A-2
INITIAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL TESTS
95.
-------
Appendix A2: Initial Suspended Solids Removal Tests
The initial investigation performed on the program was
an evaluation of the suspended solids removal capability
of the system, using a comminuter and a Westfalia SA7-06
centrifuge. The comminuter was abandoned when it was
found that the device did not remove fibrous material
from the wastewater, which could lead to plugging of
the centrifuge, especially when the suspended solids
loading was high. The comminuter was removed from the
system and its place was taken by a SWECO vibro-
separator, which eliminated the plugging problem com-
pletely.
Difficulty was encountered in obtaining the correct type
of sewage for test purposes. Since the toilets aboard
the vessel discharge directly into the treatment system,
the sewage should be fresh. Sewage from various facilities
was tested until an appropriate sewage was found at an
apartment complex called English Village Apartments.
Sewage for test purposes was collected, on the morning
of the test, immediately upstream of the comminuter/
bar screen of the apartments' package wastewater treat-
ment plant.
Sewage from the following sources was rejected for the
reasons given below:
1. 7-Eleven Store - Septic sewage, held too long (12 days
usually).
2. Hatfield Municipal Treatment Plant - Sewage was only
able to be drawn from point where coagulation chemicals
were recycled to the inlet to the treatment facility.
3. Jiffy Jon portable toilet pump outs - Chemical addi-
tives to reduce odor in the portable toilets affected
the character of the sewage solids with regard to
turbidity and surface tension (caused foaming).
4. Fort Washington Industrial Park - Chemical additives
used to clean a milk plant in the industrial park were
detected by odors, and soluble milk solids contributed
milk sugars which were not absorbable by activated
carbon.
96.
-------
5. Eastern Baptist College dormitory - Septic sewage,
by the configuration of their existing piping and
sewage draw point.
The results of all suspended solids removal tests con-
ducted with the prototype system are presented in the
following table. Except for some high values in the
centrifuge effluent with high suspended solids in the
feed, the removals are generally satisfactory.
97.
-------
TABLE A2-1
PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
SUSPENDED SOLIDS LEVELS (MG/L)
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
RUN
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
SOURCE
7-Eleven
Store
(7-30-71)
Hatfield
Municipal
Sewage
Plant
(8-11-71)
(8-20-71)
(8-20-71)
(8-26-71)
(8-26-71)
Jiffy Jon
Portable
Toilets
(9-1-71)
F
310
SU
-
CE
48
CCE
-
VERY HIGH SOLIDS, PLUGGED
5680
2920 (D)
3820(C)
3870(C)
3720(C)
2380
900
1375
1060
1025(C)
712 (C)
1083 (C)
CENTRIFUGE
4860
-
-
-
-
1367
-
-
-
375
198
197
102
112
-
62
16
48
72
52
60
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
Chemical additives used in
the toilets to prevent excessive
odors caused foaming & the over-
all dark brown color was highly
turbid both before & after centri-
fuging. No samples analyzed.
NOTE
C means chemical addition prior to centrifuging
D means dilution
98.
-------
TABLE A2-1 (Continued)
PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
SUSPENDED SOLIDS LEVELS (MG/L)
FLOW RATE OF 5 GALLONS PER MINUTE
RUN
NO.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
SOURCE
Ft. Wash.
Ind. Park
(9-10-71)
(9-10-71)
(9-27-71)
(9-30-71)
(10-4-71)
(10-7-71)
(10-7-71)
Eastern
Baptist
(10-12-71)
English
Village
(10-19-71)
(10-20-71)
(10-21-71)
(10-28-71)
(11-3-71)
(11-17-71)
(11-18-71)
(12-2-71)
(12-13-71)
(1-18-72)
(1-19-72)
F
380?
438
640 (C)
770(C)
95 (C)
420
230
304
564
564 (C)
198
482
106?
144
306
648
124
360
130
434
258
132
SU
860
-
-
-
430
112
332
436
544
-
348
172
78
172
290
75
148
120
282
256
124
CE
68
48
50
76
25
104
56
122
148
244
19
27
17
47
20
46
20
26
5
67
45
38
CCE
80
_
-
48
82
-
37
12
16
10
10
11
9
10
2.3
18
24
4
NOTE
C means chemical addition prior to centrifuging
D means dilution
99.
-------
APPENDIX A-3
MARINE SALTS
100.
-------
Appendix A-3: Marine Salts
For simulated salt water tests with the prototype system,
Aqua-Biotics Marine Salts, distributed by Aquarium
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., were used. Using one pound of
salt for each three gallons of fresh water, each liter
of solution will contain the following:
Manganese Sulfate 3.950 mg.
Disodium Phosphate 3.290 mg.
Lithium Chloride 0.987 mg.
Sodium Molybdate 0.987 mg.
Calcium Gluconate 0.658 mg.
Potassium Iodide 0.095 mg.
Potassium Bromide 0.029 mg.
Aluminum Sulfate 0.475 mg.
Cobalt Sulfate 0.053 mg.
Rubidium Chloride 0.157 mg.
Strontium Chloride 19.700 mg.
Copper Sulfate 0.448 mg.
Zinc Sulfate 0.101 mg.
Sodium Chloride 27.500 Gm.
Magnesium Chloride 5.380 Gm.
Potassium Chloride 0.722 Gm.
Sodium Bicarbonate 0.200 Gm.
Magnesium Sulfate 6.770 Gm.
Calcium Chloride 1.375 Gm.
101.
-------
APPENDIX A-4
NITROGEN LEVELS IN DOMESTIC WASTEWATER
102.
-------
Appendix A-4: Nitrogen Levels in Domestic Wastewater
It was mentioned in Section VI of this report that the
ammonia nitrogen levels measured in recycled wastewater
aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry (50 to 460 mg/1) were an
order of magnitude higher than the levels in domestic
wastewater. The basis for comparison was performance data
obtained for two 10,000 gpd land-based biological waste-
water treatment plants by the Aquatair Corporation of
Dayton, Ohio, an affiliate of the Mead Corporation. A
typical Aquatair plant consists of the following sequence
of tanks: a sludge holding tank, a recirculation chamber
on top of which is mounted a plastic media trickling
filter, a secondary clarifier, and a chlorination chamber.
Performance data for the two plants are listed in Tables
A4-1 and A4-2. In order to give an overall picture of
performance, suspended solids and BOD^ data are listed,
in addition to the nitrogen data. The Moose Lodge plant
(Table A4-1) handles kitchen wastes, showers, toilets and
urinals, and wash basins. The Alexandria Township School
plant (Table A4-2) handles the wastewater for an elementary
school. The ammonia nitrogen in the influent is 21.80 mg/1
for the Moose Lodge plant and 14 mg/1 for the school plant.
These values are roughly an order of magnitude lower than
the ammonia nitrogen values obtained during the recycle
tests aboard the Cape May-Lewes Ferry.
The performance data for the two plants also show that
ammonia can be removed from the wastewater by biological
nitrification.
103.
-------
TABLE A4-1
PERFORMANCE DATA
AQUATAIR BIOLOGICAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
MOOSE LODGE
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
PARAMETER
Suspended Solids
BOD5
Nitrogen
NO3-N
N02-N
Organic N
NH3-N
Total-N
INFLUENT
186
1066
0.23
0.02
12.88
21.80
34.94
EFFLUENT
24
15
12.11
0.04
2.18
1.02
15.35
NOTES
(1) All values in mg/1
(2) 10,000 gpd system
104.
-------
TABLE A4-2
PERFORMANCE DATA
AQUATAIR BIOLOGICAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
ALEXANDRIA TOWNSHIP SCHOOL
EVERETTSTOWN, NEW JERSEY
PARAMETER
Suspended Solids
BOD5
Nitrogen
N03-N
N02-N
Organic-N
NH3-N
Total N
INFLUENT
500
180
0.2
0.01
76
14
90
EFFLUENT
50
16
7.8
0.03
11.0
4.2
23.0
NOTES
(1) All values in mg/1
(2) 10,000 gpd system
105..
U.S, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973 514-155/315 1-3
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
7. R<-uort No.
w
Marine Sanitation System Demonstration
5. i<,-l>0rt 'U,l.l.-;
u.
S. :>' -form> / Orga, Cation
Kaminsky, E0L0, Roberts, W0F0, Volk, J0C0/ Jr.
Delaware River and Bay Authority
New Castle, Delaware
12. S nsorir. Organ ;tion
Environmental Protection Agency report
number, EPA-R2-73-226, May 1973.
EPA 15020 GYM
Typ< : Rep,: and
A "flow-through" physical-chemical marine sanitation system
capable of providing a high degree of secondary treatment was success-
fully demonstrated in the laboratory and on board the Delaware River and
Bay Authority's Cape May-Lewes Ferry. Effluent performance goals of sus-
pended solids and BOD5 less than 50 mg/1 and coliform bacteria count less
than 240 MPN/100 ml were met. Following promulgation of the Environmental
Protection Agency's "No Discharge" standard, the system (without the
addition of any treatment processes) was also tested in a recycle mode
by recycling the treated effluent for toilet flushing purposes0 On the
first recycle day, the suspended solids and BOD5 remained at the "flow-
through" levels With each succeeding day the suspended solids increased
only slightly, but the BODs increased to values ranging between 140 and
400 mg/!0 Coliform bacteria count was less than 10 MPN/100 ml. The
color of the recycled water changed from clear to a gray milky appearance.
A noticeable ammonia odor appeared on the second day0 Ammonia nitrogen
levels were in the 50-460 range0 The ammonia can be removed by air
stripping or breakpoint chlorination, and the increased BODs levels can
be reduced by chemical oxidation,,
Activated Carbon, Chlorination, Marine Sanitation,Physical-Chemical
Treatment, Wastewater Recycle, Wastewater Treatment
J.9. Security Class.
'Repo;
"')- Si'.. -
------- |