EVALUATION OF A
          LEACHATE  COLLECTION AND TREATMENT
          FACILITY  IN ENFIELD, CONNECTICUT
               Contract No.  68-01-4438
                        Task  #6
            FINAL  TASK ASSIGNMENT  REPORT
                     SMC-MARTIN
                Engineering & Geotechnical
                        Consultants
61 East Oakland Street
Doylestown, Pennsylvania 18901
(215) 348-7730
              A Subsidiary of Science Management Corporation

-------
            EVALUATION OF A
   LEACHATE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT
   FACILITY IN ENFIELD, CONNECTICUT

        Contract No. 68-01-4438
                Task #6
     FINAL TASK ASSIGNMENT REPORT
             Submitted To:

 U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials
        Washington, D.C.  20460

         C. W. Rhyne (WH-564)
            Project Office
             Prepared By:

           SMC-MARTIN, INC.
        61 East Oakland Avenue
    Doylestown, Pennsylvania  18901
               May 1981

-------
      FOREWORD




(By Program Director)

-------
                          ABSTRACT






     Leachate generated from the Enfield, Connecticut



landfill was highly variable in terms of quantity and



quality, with both being affected by rainfall.  General



improvements in the quality of the raw leachate with time



were noted.



     Based on bench scale research on anaerobic treatment of



raw leachate, a Pilot Plant Facility was designed, constructed



and operated.  The facility performed its intended functions



of improving the quality of leachate passing through, producing



methane gas, and allowing for examination of a full size



plant.



     A number of problems were encountered during construction



and operation of the plant.  Most problems of a technical



nature were eventually remedied.  The raw leachate strengths



encountered, however, were only a fraction of those anticipated,



producing a low treatment/cost efficiency.  The anaerobic



process proved to be almost totally self sustaining and



exhibited maximum effectiveness when treating highly



biodegradable leachate.  Overall, however, the Pilot Plant



did not consistently reach removal efficiency levels



exhibited by bench scale systems.
                             11

-------
                     CONTENTS



Forward	  i

Abstract	 ii

List of Figures	 iv

List of Tables	  v

Acknowledgement	 vi

Section    I  Introduction'.	  1

          II  Research and Development
              Background	  4

         III  Site Conditions and Hydrology..  7

          IV  Pilot Plant Design	 16

           V  Pilot Plant Construction	 30

          VI  Pilot Plant Startup	 33

         VII  Equipment Evaluation	 38

        VIII  Process Evaluation	 50

          IX  Economic Evaluation	 76

           X  Recommendations	 82

References	 89

Appendices	 91
                        111

-------
                           FIGURES
Number                                                  Page
   I      Location Map, Enfield, CT	   2

   I A    Location of Original Leachate Collection
          Wells at the Town of Enfield Landfill	   3

  II      Completely Mixed Anaerobic Filter	   6
                               •
 III      East-West cross-section, Enfield Landfill,
          showing groundwater flow directions	  14

 III A    Water Table Contours, Enfield Landfill	  15

  IV A    Systems Facilities Flow Diagram	  23

  IV B    Leachate Storage Tank - Plan & Section	  24

  IV C    Treatment Plant Site Plan	  25

  IV D    Anaerobic Reactor Vessel Plan	  26

  IV E    Anaerobic Reactor Vessel Section	  27

  IV F    Leachate Storage Tank, .Overflow Piping.	  28

  IV G    System Facilities Plan	  29

  VI      Underdrain Trench, PVC Drain Option	  36

  VI A    New PVC Well and Drain System.	  37

 VII      Well No. 4 - Main Collection Well	  39

 VII A    Filter Unit, Substitute Sampling Connections
          for Two  (2) Thermocouples	 .  40

VIII C    Chemical Oxygen Demand  (COD)	  71
                             IV

-------
                           TABLES
Number
                                              Paqe
  IV


VIII

VIII A

VIII B
Relationship of Organic Loading Rate to
Influent C.O.D	
17
Summary of Treatment System Performance	  56

Average Characteristics of Raw Leachate	  58

Proposed Relationship between COD/TOC,
BOD/COD, Absolute COD, and Age of Fill to
Expected Efficiencies of Organic Removal
from Leachate	  59

-------
                      ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS






     This report was prepared for the United States



Environmental Protection Agency, The Office of Solid




Waste, Washington, B.C.  20460, by SMC-MARTIN, Inc.,




Consulting Engineers, King of Prussia, PA in cooperation




with Mr. Roger J. Mullins, Public Works Director, and Mr.



Thomas G. Thompson, Superintendent, Water Pollution Control




Division (Town of Enfield, Connecticut).



     We wish.to thank Foppe B. DeWalle, Dept. of Environmental



Health, University of Washington, Seattle, and Edward S. K.




Chian, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Georgia Institute of



Technology, Atlanta, for their contributions to various




sections of this report and their invaluable assistance.



     Also, we would like to thank all of the many people




associated with this Demonstration Project from initial



research to final evaluation through whose efforts it



was made possible.
                              VI

-------
                          SECTION I



                        INTRODUCTION






     The purpose of this report is to provide a record on



the demonstration project undertaken as a cooperative effort



by the United States Environmental Protection Agency's



Office of Solid Waste, The State of Connecticut, Department



of Environmental Protection, and the Town of Enfield,



Connecticut, Department of Public Works.



     The Project culminated in the operation of a pilot



plant which collected and anaerobically treated leachate



generated within the town's sanitary landfill  (Figure 1).



     The purpose of the pilot plant was to allow for evaluation



of the process with a full scale facility.



     The total project included research, site evaluation,



design, construction and operation of the facility.



     This report includes information on all primary elements



of the project and places particular emphasis on those



areas which will be important in terms of future installations



of a like process.

-------
                     ENFIELD
                     LANDFILL 8
                     PILOT PLANT
                     LOCATION
  LOCATION MAP

ENFIELD CONNECTICUT
        Figure I

-------
f
f
\
\
t oJ-C.-l
, \ OL.C--Z
t OL.C.-3
\ OL.C.-4
V 0t»C--5
\
f
1
\ /
\ 1
. .
^^, 	 '
<\
1
ki r~t if.
NEW i
LANDFILL l '
. -:,.-. 1
. \: , - •
V
                        N

                         ;
                       /
                    r
  OLD


LANDFILL
                       \
          KEY


         O LEACHATE COLLECTION WELL
                                         \
             \
                                                y
                                               s
                                                     SCALE IN FEET
                           F/GURE  1-A

-------
                         SECTION II




              RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT BACKGROUND






     Anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge is a developing




process utilized in many areas of the world to reduce the




organic content of waste matter and to produce usable quan-




tities of methane gas.  Full scale application of this




process in America and Europe dates back 50 to 75 years;



however, the biology and chemis.try are just now becoming




better understood.



     Considerably less is known about anaerobic digestion of



other liquid organic wastes, e.g. landfill leachate.  Over



the past 15 years some research has been carried out on this



subject by J.C. Young and P.L. McCarty^; E.G. Foree and V.M.




Reid (et al)^; and more recently by F.B. DeWalle and



E.S.K. Chian under contract from the United States Environmental



Protection Agency.3/4,5




     DeWalle and Chian*s work resulted in a bench scale



system to anaerobically treat raw leachate.  The system



utilized an upflow, anaerobic reactor  (vertical column



packed with an open plastic media) with recycle provisions




to buffer the acidic raw leachate influent without the need



for chemical addition to the process.



     Laboratory experimentation of this system indicated a



potential to effectively treat high organic strength leachate




with some capabilities for removing metals.^



     Resultantly, their system was then utilized as the



theoretical base from which the full scale Enfield Pilot

-------
Plant developed.   A compilation of various papers presented



by DeWalle and Chian pertinent to their research is included



in Appendix A of this report.

-------
         V= I..4J2
      E
      o

      CD
      sr
      CVI
  Recirculoiion

  Pump
                         20.2 cm


                          18.7cm
t5.!cm
E
o
,§
pv

-•

Inflow
»  »  * _^
= .54.65
                           V
F_/

Eil h ll II !l ,, 1
11 1. I- .. •: •-. 'I


-^V=3.8J2^
^^ ^r
— n 	 ' \



              L
Gas  CoLlecjion Line
                                                     \J
                                                   V
                 •Filier Wedia
                                        10.2 cm
                                         28 cm
                                     Solids  Colieciion
                                    Outflow
                               ^Re'circulGiion
                                                      r\    Vessel
                   The Completely Mixed Anaerobic Filter


                                  Figure  H

-------
                         SECTION III




                SITE CONDITIONS AND HYDROLOGY






Site Description



     The Enfield,  Connecticut,  landfill is situated on the




valley walls on the east side of the Scantic River in the




Connecticut River Valley region of the state.  Immediately




to the west of the landfill is the broad, swampy flood plain




of the Scantic River.  The uplands to the east of the valley



wall are gently rolling, huiranocky. topography typical of



glacial morraines.  The landfill has been developed in two



ravines using an area method of landfilling.  The southern



ravine was developed from 1967 to 1972 and covers an area of




approximately 5 hectares (12 acres).  The filling of this



ravine cut off drainage from the east and resulted in the




formation of a small pond immediately east of the access




road.  Water which once flowed across the land surface now.



periodically drains through the completed southern landfill.




     The present active landfill also covers an area of approx-




imately 5 hectares  (12 acres) and has been developed in the



north ravine since 1972.  The original northern ravine was deep-



ened and broadened by excavation of the clay material along its




upper slopes.  Landfilling started at the toe of the ravine



and proceeded to fill it using the area method.  The site



accepts an estimated 159 to 204 tonnes per day, six days per



week, of municipal and commercial solid waste^  Each lift



is approximately 2-1/2 to 3 m  (8 to 10 ft) in height.




Excavated clay material was originally used  for cover; but



cover material is now obtained from sand banks immediately

-------
to the north of the newer landfill site.   Refuse is continually




compacted and covered at the end of each working day with 15




to 30 cm (6 in to 1 ft)  of sand.  The western face of the




landfill is steep and the sand cover readily erodes.  Leachate




discharges from the toe of the fill and from a series of




small springs and seeps along the top of the first and



second lifts.  The leachate from the new landfill flows to




the west and southwest through old meander scars in the



Scantic River flood plain.  Leachate from the old landfill



flows primarily to the west and joins leachate from the new




landfill shortly before discharging into the Scantic River.








Climatology








     The climate of north central Connecticut is humid and



its temperature is characterized by cool winters, warm




summers, and frequent weather changes.  The weather is



influenced by cool and dry continental air in winter and



warm maritime air in the summer.  Heavy precipitation and



persistent northeast winds frequently accompany coastal



storms and exceptionally heavy precipitation results when




these storms take the form of tropical hurricanes.  During



the summer, the area is also subject to frequent and heavy




thunder storms.  Precipitation is uniformly distributed



throughout the year, so that water is potentially avail-



able for recharge throughout the year.  For the period 1921



to 1950, annual precipitation averaged slightly more than



102 cm  (40 in), with about one-third in the form of snow.






                               8

-------
Annual precipitation ranged from 84 cm (33 in) in 1941 to



160 cm (63 in) in 1955.



     Temperature in the area also varies considerably from



season to season. The mean.annual temperature is 10°C (50°F)



and ranges from an average monthly low of -3°C (27°F) in



January to an average monthly high of 23°C (74°F) in July.



Ground is generally frozen during the months of January and



February.  The pan evaporation from May to October during the



period of 1918 to 1956 had a mean.value of 12.21 cm  (4.81 in)



per month.
Soils
     For the most part, the soils at the landfill site have



been removed and used for cover material.  Presently its




surface is primarily comprised of glacial sands with minor



areas of glacial clay toward the landfill toe.  The use of



sand as cover material and the methods of spreading and com-




paction used produce a highly-permeable final cover  (greater



than 15 cm (6 in) per hour).  Thus, surface run off is minor,



except during high intensity storms on steep slopes and near



the toe of the landfill.








Geology








     The landfill is located on the moderately steep slopes of



the eastern valley wall of the Scantic River in the Connecticut




Valley lowland or Triassic lowland physiographic division.

-------
The areas to the east and to the north of the site consist -of



hummocky uplands.  The area to the west of the site is the low



lying river flood plain.



     The triassic lowland has a nearly flat floor.formed in



easily-eroded eastward dipping sedimentary rock of triassic



age, which in most areas is covered by thick unconsolidated



glacial deposits.  The triassic deposition took place in a



basin which accumulated several thousand feet of sediments



under nonmarine oxidizing conditions.  The triassic bedrock,



which does not crop out in the area of the landfill, has an



eastward dip for 15 degrees.  The nearest outcrops consist



of reddish-brown and gray arkosic siltstone, sandstone, and



conglomerate.  Between the triassic and pleistocene time,



the area was uplifted and eroded, forming a flat wide-bottom



valley.  This valley was overridden by several glacial ice



sheets which deposited a significant thickness of unconsolidated



sediments.  The basal sediment consists of glacial till which



is a very poorly sorted, nonstratified mixture of clay, sand,



silt, pebbles and boulders.



     Varying thickness of glaciofluvial deposits occur above



the till layer, and directly beneath the landfill is a lake



deposit of thick layers of fine silts .and clays.  The hills



surrounding the landfill are underlain by water-born sands,



silts and clays, with sand predominating, in the near surface



deposits.  During the post-glacial period, the flood plain of



the Scantic River was covered with a veneer of alluvial deposits



of fine sand and silt.
                              10

-------
Hydrogeology Of The Landfill Site








     The hydrology of the landfill site is such that rainwater



infiltration enters the ground-water flow system on the uplands



above as well as directly through the surface of the landfill,



and flows downward and laterally towards the river.  Much of the



flow occurs above the layer of silts and clays which are relatively



impermeable and which lie below the landfill.  A smaller amount



of water percolates through-the silts and clays and reaches the



bedrock aquifer and the tills, sands, and gravels, where they



exist.  This ground water, too, flows toward and eventually dis-



charges into the Scantic River.  The flow plain below the landfill



is a major ground-water discharge area, with a significant upward



vertical gradient.



     For the area in general, precipitation averages slightly more



than 102 cm  (40 in) per year.  A wide range of stream discharges



are reported with an average of 56 cm  (22 in) rainwater equiv-



alent.  The average stream flow of the Scantic River is 354,650



cubic meters (93.7 million gallons) per day or the equivalent of



51 cm (20 in) of precipitation.  This runoff includes both the



surface and ground-water flows of the river.  The USGS estimates



that approximately 60 percent of the total runoff is ground-water



base flow.  Therefore, 31 cm  (12 in) of precipitation represents



base flow and 20 cm (8 in) is surface runoff.  Evapotranspiration



is.the difference between the 102 cm  (40 in) of rain per year



and the total runoff of 51 cm  (20 in) per year, or 51 cm  (20 in)



per year.  The pan evaporation record from the Hartford Municipal



District totals 73.25 cm  (28.84 in) per year.  The pan evaporation



generally represents the maximum potential evaporation from a





                              11

-------
free water surface, while the actual evapotranspiration from a

soil surface is nearly always lower than this figure.

     In order to verify that the regional hydrology was representative

of the conditions at the landfill, the precipitation onto and

runoff from the landfill were monitored during the winter and

spring of 1975-76.  The instrumentation consisted of two weirs

located beyond the toe of the landfill which monitored the surface

runoff and the surfacing seepage from the basin, which included the

north landfill.
                                •
     The landfill water budget generally agreed with the regional

pattern.  For the region, half of the 102 cm (40 in) of precipitation

manifests itself as runoff, with approximately 15 cm (6 in) being

surface runoff and 31 cm (12 in) underflow.  The seasonal distribution

of the runoff in the region is:  2.5 cm  (1 in)  of water runs off per

month in the summer and fall, 5 cm  (2 in) in the winter, and 5.8 cm

(2.3 in) in the spring.  Measurements at the landfill during the late

fall and early spring yielded runoff rates of 5.6 cm (2.2 in) per

month and 6.1 cm  (2.4 in) per month.  These estimates, although

slightly higher than those for the region, are in good general

agreement.  During the period of measurement, the precipitation was

was heavier than normal and since the landfill is not vegetated,

less evapotranspiration would occur.

     The leachate generation from the landfill should be equiva-

lent to the ground-water portion of the runoff, or approximately

31 cm (12 in) per- year.  Leachate generation for the new landfill

would therefore be 12,300 to 14,800 cubic meters (10 to 12 acre-ft)

per year, based on 80 to 100 percent of the annual recharge from

the 8-hectare  (20-acre) basin moving through the refuse.
                              12

-------
      A diagrammatic flow cross section and water table map have



 been developed for the landfill and are shown on Figures III and



IIIA. The shallow near surface flow comprises the bulk of water



 movement in the vicinity of the landfill while some precipitation



 infiltrating east of the landfill moves downward through the per-



 meable sands and enters deeper flow systems.  Both the shallow and



 deep flow systems discharge into the Scantic River in the vicinity



 of the landfill.
                               13

-------
LEACHATE
COLLECTION WELL
                                                                     LACIOFLUVIAL / DEPOSITS
ALLUVIUM
                                    LAKE  CLAY
                                                                             GROUNOWATER FLOW

                                                                             WATER TABLE
                                       BEDROCK
NOT DRAWN TO .SCALE
             Figurelll—Generalized east-west cross-section of the Enfield, Connecticut
                          Landfill showing groundwater flow directions.

-------
                                           SOIL BORING
                                       •   i.EACHATE COLLECTION  WELL
                                    (Subsequently re-numbered 1 through 5
SCALE : I  =3331
           Map of the water table  contours at the Enfield, Connecticut
     Landfill—October 1975.
                              Figure ffiA

-------
                         SECTION IV



                     PILOT PLANT DESIGN






Background:



     In March 1975 the Environmental Protection Agency



awarded the contract to produce plans, specifications and



the necessary bid documents for an experimental pilot plant



to SMC-MARTIN, Inc.  (formerly A. W. Martin Associates,



Inc.), King of Prussia, PA.



     Using the process guidelines developed by Chian and



DeWalle through their bench scale studies as a base, SMC-



MARTIN, Inc. in consultation with various Federal, State and



local officials prepared a folio of nine design drawings^



along with contract documents for construction entitled "Town



of Enfield - Leachate Treatment Facilities."



     The primary design criteria included:



          Reactor volume — 25,500 gallons



          Detention Time — 10 to 15 days desired



                         — hydraulic loading rate range



                            required, 1.8 to 1.2 gpm



                         — hydraulic loading rate provided,



                            0.25 to 5.0 gpm



                         — recommended normal operating rate,-



                            2.0 gpm



          Filter media — 24' high x 12' diameter = 2228 cu ft.



          Organic loading — average 0.09 to 0.20 Ibs COD/DAY/



                          cu ft of media, desired.



                          peak 0.40 Ibs COD/DAY ft of media



                          desired.



                             16

-------
RELATIONSHIP OF ORGANIC LOADING RATE TO INFLUENT C.O.D.
     ORGANIC LOADING
HYDRAULIC LOADING RATE
   GPU. AT CJOD. SHOWN
                            TABLE XL
            Recycle Rate — range desired  (recycle/influent) ,

                            10:1 to  20:1

                            @ 2 gpra  influent; range desired,

                            20-40 gpm

                            range provided,  10-50 gpm

                            recommended normal recycle rate =

                            20 gpm (including influent)

            Temperature — mean temperature  desired, 85°F, heat

                           exchanger provided

            *Sludge Production — 1/4 Oth of  feed volume: % solids

                                  3.8%, expected

            *Gas production — 2. 71 J. gas/-? leachate

                               0.46J2 gas/gr  COD removed

                               0.32^ methane/gr COD removed

            *Dependent on COD

-------
Description of Process

     Raw leachate is secured from infiltration into collection

wells.  As leachate accumulates in the well, a sump pump

operated by a self-contained switch transfers the liquid to

a storage tank.  The purpose of the tank is to provide a

supply of leachate during periods of prolonged dry weather

when production rate from the landfill subsides.  The tank

has a storage capacity of 55,500 gallons and is equipped
                               *
with a high-level control switch which will halt the oper-

ation of the well pumps when the maximum liquid operating

level is reached.

     The leachate transfer pump, installed in duplicate as

a standby unit, is a positive displacement mechanically

variable-speed pump.  It varies the rate of raw feed into

the system.  The feed rate is adjustable to any rate up to

five gallons per minute.

     The raw leachate is introduced into a recycle system

which operated at a flow rate of approximately 20 gallons

per minute.  For best performance the reactor must be at a

warm temperature, in the range of 85 to 95 degrees F. and

thus a heat exchanger has been incorporated in the recirculation

loop.

     The heat exchanger is a tube and shell type unit with

the leachate on the tube side and hot water on the shell

side of the exchanger.  Through a temperature sensor and a

controller a motorized valve regulates the flow of hot water
                             18

-------
into the heat exchanger so as to produce a desired exit




temperature of the leachate.  The warmed leachate liquor



then enters the reactor through a bottom inlet distributor




and proceeds in an up-flow mode to the top of the unit



through a twenty-four (24) foot high packing of plastic




filter media.




     The filter media is made of 2'  x 4' modules containing




30 square feet of surface area/cu. ft. media, and 96% voids.



The media does not filter or strain the leachate as would a




sand bed, but rather it acts similar to a sewage plant



trickling filter in the respect that its principal purpose



is to provide a large amount of surface area on which bacteria




may adhere and thrive and these organisms, in turn, decompose




and purify the organic substances in the leachate.



     At the top of the unit the recycle liquor is withdrawn



through another manifold and a rate equal to the raw feed



input into the system overflows weirs into an outlet launder



and to the gas release tank.  Through a water sealed outlet



the treated leachate overflows into a weir box, which measures



the final effluent flow rate, and from the box the treated



water is discharged into one of six open sand beds.  It was




intended that the beds will be rotated as required.



     The treatment reactor unit provides anaerobic biological



decomposition of the leachate and in this respect its action



is much like the fermentation process in a sewage plant sludge



digester.  Methane gas is generated, collected in the tank's




dome and the gas's pressure causes it to travel concurrently
                               19

-------
with the liquid overflow into the gas release tank.  The gas


is comprised of approximately 70% methane and 30% carbon


dioxide.


     When gas production is in excess of that required by


the system, this excess is released by a pressure regulator


to a waste gas burner.  As an auxiliary fuel for start-up


and to meet the requirements during periods of extremely


cold weather, a propane supply is available.

                               »
Description of Facility:


     Raw leachate from the Enfield landfill was originally


collected in two 18" diameter galvanized steel casing wells


sunk to depths of 17-1/2' to 18-1/2' and located at the


western edge of the site (Figure IV G).  These wells were


subsequently supplemented by a new collection well system


(Figures VI & VI A).  The landfill in this vicinity slopes


from east to west and the wells are situated at the lowest


point in the first lift of refuse.  (Approximate surface


elevation 74 ft.).  The wells were fitted with 1/2 hp


submersible pumps, associated float switches, check valves


and electrical gear.  Leachate was pumped from the wells


to a 50,500 gallon precast circular concrete storage tank


located several hundred feet north of the wells at approxi-


mate elevation 70 ft.  (Figure IV B).  The storage tank was


equipped with a float switch which cut out the well pumps


when the tank was full.  Low level switches cut out the


feed pumps and actuated a visual alarm system.  The tank
                              20

-------
itself had a cast in place concrete bottom and top with

precast, segmented walls.  Two access hatches were located

in the top and a trapped vent-overflow system installed at

the "high water" level (Figure IV F).  Additionally, the tank
                              %
was provided with a sump near the point of withdrawal and a

drain line to allow for removal of settlable solids.

     A small precast concrete pump house was located next to

the storage tank and contained two leachate feed pumps  (3/4

hp positive displacement pumps rated at .5 to 5 gpm) with

variable speed drives, a flowmeter and electrical gear.  The

leachate feed pumps transfered the liquid from the storage

tank some 700 ft. north  (vertical lift approximately 125 ft.)

to the treatment plant site  (Figure IV C).  Leachate piping

from the wells to the plant was buried polyvinylchloride  (PVC).

Electrical conductors enclosed in PVC conduit were buried

in the same trench.  The treatment plant itself consisted of

a concrete block building  (13'x20'); a 25,500 gallon "anaerobic

filter" vessel; 6 effluent sandfilter beds, plus associated

mechanical and electrical gear.  The "anaerobic reactor"

was fabricated of steel and measured 12 ft. in diameter by

approximately 35 ft. high with a shallow conical steel

top (Figure IV E).  It was set on a circular concrete base,

the inside of which was conical in shape.  The internal

conical concrete base section .forms a hopper in which sludge

generated from the process is collected.  A withdrawal  pipe and

shut off valve were installed to facilitate the removal of
                               21

-------
the sludge.  The exterior of the vessel was entirely



insulated and the inside contained a proprietary plastic



media set on a steel grate above the base and extending



upward for 24 ft.   (Figures IV D & IV E).



     Raw leachate was fed into the bottom of the tank



through a header arrangement (Figure IV E), and as it flowed



upward through the media it was acted upon by anaerobic



bacteria (which produce methane and carbon dioxide gas).



Approximately 700 cubic feet at, the top of the vessel acts



as gas storage volume.  The liquid contents of the vessel



are recycled from top to bottom (one "turnover"per 24 hrs.)



via 1-1/2 HP recycle pumps.  Treated effluent overflows



into a launder  (Figure IV E) arrangement several feet below



the top of the tank and was piped to a gas release tank



located in a separate, sealed off, room in the building



(liquid effluent and gas exit the vessel through the same



pipe lines).  The entire gas system as installed was provided



with relief valves, pressure regulators and flame arresters



in appropriate locations.  Liquid effluent from the gas



release tank was conveyed through a flow measuring device



and then via PVC piping to one of the sand filter beds.



Gas was vented through a flare or used to operate a gas



fired heater.  Propane gas supplied from a 500 gallon buried



tank furished fuel  for pilots on both flare and boiler.



The heating system  allowed for maintaining the contents of



the anaerobic filter at a set temperature as well as providing



building heat.
                             22

-------
                         FLAK**
RAW LRACHATS.
                                         KeACTO*    S UtACTO*
                                          9A3*
                   HtAT
   •COLLSCTIOH WBLL
i-
\
\ \ r, •
J,
it
-P^rr-

r* •«


^l«t.
PUMPS
0-SOVPM
                                                                    9AHO
                                                                         V
                                                         TANK
                                      net
                      TKANSPt* PUMPS
                       0-5 6PM
                          tfor 7b

-------
OVgKFLOW 4
        ViHT
   TO OUTfALL
             1
          T*AN8?e* PUMPS-
            0 TO 5 6PM
                                              PlPtLINi FROM
                                              COLLiCTION WCLL3
                                       .PIPCLINE TO
                                       THSATMBNT  PLANT
                                    PUMP HOUSi
                           PLAN
 TO
                               30' /.O.
         TKAP —
                y*
                   C.
    t-
PKOM COLLECTION
WffLLS
                J
                    LSACHATS
                 STOKAGK  TANK,
                    58,700 SALS*
                     AT H.W-L.
                          SECTION
                                              •INLET
                                                 CAST
    FIGURE NO.UTS -  Leachate Storage  Tank  -  Plan &  Section

-------
\
 «
   \
H14C70X
                                                       T4NK
                                        .: i.*.«»
                       **«;
                        v.i
                         •••
                                          F4MKIN9
                 HI AT

                HOT win* ao/te*—
                  '*•.
                                 0?
                                 H
     ^   »
       »   •"
                   9614'
                8-0
                             *
                             *»
                             ««
                             ^
2f<-*f
s*
                M)


              ">£/VC/"
                    \
              /
                                a«5
                        7
                                                {
                                                 tNTMHC*
                                                      .»•.}•{;•;«
                                                      t ••• •• Jl • »t
                                                                   i*g

-------
                                           OUTLBT (OVERFLOW)
                                              xe crci.e PIP INS
                          PL4M
                OUTLET PIPING 4 LAUNDER
                             I
MEDIA
(sreit.)
INLCT P1PIH6
                                               INLET PIPING
                         PLAN
              INLET  PIPING
            5UPPOR T  GRA TING
           FIGURE NO.BTO  -  Anaerobic Reactor Vessel Plan
                           26

-------
                               12-O" 01 A.
                                                 P5KFOKATED  P/PS
OVER PLOW %
REATED LBACHATE
 6 AS TO 64S
KS LEASE TANK.—
      INSULATED
     STEEL TANK
       9TEBL
     SUPPORT
     SKATING
                            PVC  MEDIA
                              MODULE9
                                                           INLET
                                                           PIPING
           9LV0&E REMOVAL
                              SECTION
                              NOT TO SC4LC
            FIGURE NO.HE  -   Anaerobic  Reactor Vessel  Section


                                27

-------
Jccurc/y
                                             Oi/crf/ow
                      f/// trap w/'M an^f- freeze
                           (By 0wncr)
                   ,
         (3.5O"O.O.)
                                          3 '#c turn
                                          3/4' P/ug
     4' /.D. CJ.Dra/n
                              Storage Tank
S.T.B. 8-/2-7S
 SECTION  VIEW
        N.T. S.
 FIGURE 1ST F
\  COM/V. - LEACH ATE STORAGE TAUK
Overf/ow  P/ping
                                  28

-------
                         LlACHATg
                         STOK4SB
                          TANK-
/   /:
 LI4CH4T8
COLL tCTI ON
   WBLLS
                                 1/0
                                                     POLY8THYLINK PIP*
                                      3 AN IT A *Y  LANDFILL
                                                    100'

-------
                         SECTION V



                  PILOT PLANT CONSTRUCTION






     Construction of the pilot plant was broken into three



separate contracts^with bids received mid-February,



1976, after public advertisement the previous month.  The



main contract for pilot plant construction  (collection,



transmission, facilities and site work) was awarded to Fred



Brunoli & Sons, Inc., Avon, Conn.  Two large dollar-value



hardware items were bid separately, those being the plastic



media (supplied by B. F. Goodrich), and the large steel



anaerobic reactor  (fabricated by Alfred B. King Co., New



Haven, Conn.)



     Drawings and component specifications were submitted by



the contractors to the engineer for review and approval.



Construction activities began in the spring of 1976, and



proceeded in a relatively routine manner with the engineer



making periodic inspections and reports on the progress at



the site.  By October 22nd, 1976 the work was 95% complete



and checkout of the various facilities and subsystems was



underway.



     As testing procedures continued substantial problems



arose with three of the system's major components.  The



first problem to develop concerned leaking seams in the



walls of the prefabricated concrete leachate storage tank..



Resultantly the tank had to be filled and drained twice



before the leaks were finally eliminated by coating the



inside of the tank with epoxy sealant.
                              30

-------
     Shortly thereafter as testing progressed throughout the



system, leakage became apparent from the anaerobic reactor.



A considerable amount of time and effort was required to



resolve this situation due to the number of interests involved



and the uncertain origin of the leaks, in that the tank was



covered with insulating panels.  Eventually it was determined



that the problem was from nail holes, caused by the insulation



installer in the conical roof, near the point of its attachment



to the side walls.  It then became necessary to remove the



roofing material and roof insulation to implement repairs.



     Perhaps the most serious problem to arise, and the one



requiring the most time to resolve, involved random shutdown



and difficulty in restarting the gas-fired boiler.  On



several occasions during the winter of 1976-77 the boiler



frequently malfunctioned and was off long enough to allow



the water in the heating system pipes to freeze and thereby



rupture.  Each time this occurred it was necessary to isolate



the heating system, restart the boiler, thaw the frozen



pipes and make repairs to those sections which were ruptured.



This problem required nearly a full year of testing, design



reviews, meetings and investigations by an independent



consultant.7   It was finally determined that the boiler and



burner may be incompatible.  Unfortunately, the matter could



not be satisfactorily resolved with either manufacturer,



requiring the engineers to select replacement equipment of a .



different design.  The new equipment was then purchased,



installed and tested, with more favorable results.
                              31

-------
     The resolution of these and other minor problems



incurred during construction extended into the spring of



1978, at which time the pilot plant was ready for startup.
                              32

-------
                         SECTION VI



                     PILOT PLANT STARTUP



     Startup of the leachate treatment plant had been



scheduled a number of times over a period of approximately



one year beginning in the Spring of 1977 and continuing into



the spring of 1978.  However, various construction and/or



equipment related problems forced repeated cancellation of



anticipated starting dates.



     Following resolution of these problems, the pumping of



raw leachate to the storage tank finally began during the



first week of April 1978.  Within the first few days, it



became apparent that the quantity of leachate being pumped



from the wells was much less than the yield encountered



during the initial checkout of the subsystem approximately



one year before.  Investigation into the collection well's



low output indicated that silt mixed with organic material



was infiltrating the wells and burying the pumps.  However,



since sufficient leachate was being collected to allow for



plant startup at a reduced hydraulic load rate, the date of



April 17 was set.



     Approximately 24,000 gallons of the river water previously



used to check out the system had been maintained in the



filter vessel and was brought to a temperature of 77°F.



(25°C.) several weeks before startup.  Dissolved oxygen



tests were frequently run to assure that anaerobic conditions



existed within the vessel.  Arrangements had previously
                             33

-------
been made with the Poquonock, Conn.  Water Pollution Control



Facility to obtain 1,000 gallons of sewage sludge digester



supernatant to act as "seed" material.  On April 17, 1978



this material was picked up and transported via tanker truck



to the leachate treatment plant whereupon the supernatant



was transferred to the bottom section of the anaerobic



reactor.  One raw leachate feed pump was put on line and the



flow rate set at the minimum rate obtainable (approximately



0.25 gpm) .  The recycle rate wa.s set at 18 gpm.



     The procedures and schedules which had previously been



developed for daily monitoring of the plant were immediately



put into effect.  A minimum of four hours per day were



devoted to sample and data collection, testing and servicing



of equipment.  An additional four hours per day, five days



per week, were spent on laboratory work.



     Chian and DeWalle's paper, "Operation of an Anaerobic



Filter"^ provided the basis for process startup procedures



and data collection.  The operations manual, "Anaerobic



Sludge Digestion"  (EPA 430/976001) proved to be an excellent



practical guide to plant operation.



     Following several weeks of process operation with no



signs of gas production, it was decided to increase the



operating temperature to 86°F. in order to increase biological



activity.  Gas production began shortly thereafter  (38 days



after startup). However, because of operating at the reduced



flow rate, it was not of sufficient quantity to operate the



boiler.
                             34

-------
     Attempts to increase leachate supply throughout the



spring were unsuccessful, and by mid-1978 it became obvious



that a new collection system would be required.



     The pilot plant was temporarily run at a reduced feed



rate from the storage tank while the design and construction



of a new well and collection system were under way.  The new



system, called a "curtain drain" intercepted leachate both



horizontally and vertically, and performed well producing



between 2 and 5 gpm  (depending upon rainfall).8



     The plant ran at the 2 gpm normal operating rate during



January of 1979 until a frozen line on February 9th necessitated



backing down to a reduced rate once more.  The line became



operable by the first week of March, 1979 when they resumed



pumping raw leachate to the storage tank.
                             35

-------
                                FIGURE  "21
                            ;BACKFILL  HlTH SANK RUN
                            GRAVEL UHLESS OTHERWISE
                            HOTED
    UNDISTURBED
    MATERIAL-
                                SECTION  A-A
                              3/8" DIAM.
                                                              SCREENED GRAVEL
                       UHDERDRAIH P!PE-
                       6" SCH. 120 PVC
                       PERFORATED HlTH
                       3/8" DIAM. HOLES
                       AS SHOW BELOW.
                                                            PAYMEHT LIMITS FOR EXCAVATION
                                                            BELOW NORMAL
              UNSUITABLE MATERIAL  TO BE
              REMOVED TO THE LIMITS AS
              DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
              BACKFILL WITH BAHK RUN
              GRAVEL
     6-IN.. SCHEDULE  120
PVC PIPE-PERFORATION  DETAILS
NOTES:

1.  JOINTING METHODS ARE TO BE APPROVED  8* THE ENGINEER
    PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.

2.  ALL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS NOT SHOHH ARE TO SE AS
    SHOWN ON THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS.
                             UNDERDRAIN  TRENCH
                              PVC  DRAIN  OPTION
                                        NO SCALE
                                                                         M ETC A LF » E OO 1

-------
o
I
IV)
                                                                  I-,
                                                                        W£LL  L.C. 4  ro &£
            60—,
U

I
         Ul
         -J
         m
            4O—'
                    I   LIMIT Of=
                   &CBS.W
                   CAP	.
                  CTVP)  \^

             ^VT^WT
                                    G 6 LOCATED
                                         6H CH
                                         FGUC&
                                            ~I-O"
LIMIT OF WORK.
                                                                         APPKOX. CX/STT
                                                                         GttOUfJO £L. 74.O
                                                                                      -nkwnr
                       £L.*>4.0-\
                                  DETAILS  TO &£ APPROVED
                            BY ffi/GM€£f? PKIOZ TO CONSTRUCTION.
                                                                            r—,?'.cr
               o,  ". •*"•: *« I
               •H ••  •'••
               b'inf
                                WELL L.C. 3
                                                                 OP
                                                              WAT6DPVC P/P£
                                                              T-0"
                                                                                           PVC.   BOTTOM
                                                                                          PL.ATS OP CAP
                                                     JOtfiJT DETAILS
                                                 TO &£ AfP«OV£O  8Y
                                                                   TO
                                  PVC  WGLL-  AUO
                                                                             <$YSTGM
                                                                                                               - 34 CAS/fiJG
                                                                                                      . SCK6t-tJ£D
                                                                                                    OKA V£L
                                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                                       c
                                                                                                                       3)
                                                                                                                       m

-------
                        SECTION VII



                    EQUIPMENT EVALUATION






COLLECTION WELL PUMPS - Except for malfunctions caused by silting



:in the original collection wells, the well pumps performed their



intended function without any failures and required only routine



maintenance.  One small problem noted, was that the pumps were



suspended by a wire rope and were fitted with flexible plastic



discharge pipe, which allowed for pump motion and consequently



the float switch occasionally hung up against the inside of the



collection well.



TRANSFER PUMPS  - The transfer (feed) pumps were positive dis-



placement progressive cavity types powered by 3/4 h.p. mechanical



variable speed drives.  Although performing well, it was noted



that the motors were fully loaded at a pumping rate of 2 gpm



rather than the specified 5 gpm.  This discrepancy has yet to



be resolved.  Aside from cases of dry pump operation which led



to internal damage, they required only routine maintenance.



RECYCLE PUMPS - The recycle pumps were centrifugal types directly



driven by 1-1/2 h.p., 1750 rpm motors.  The pumps performed well



over the entire range of operation and required only routine



maintenance.



GAS-FIRED BOILER/BURNER - The original boiler and gas-fired



burner were adequately sized for the installation.  However,



it was determined that flame characteristics of the burner in



the combustion chamber of the boiler produced soot in sufficient



quantities to cause burner controller malfunctions which would
                             38

-------
   FtNCt
9V6Mt*9tM PUMP   ^
         seer ION 4
               HOT TO 9C4LI

-------
                                               c Secf/eroraunc/
                                               C/obe fofrc
                                         C/0Sff fo Tan* as
                                         Jnju/cr//'on fo be p face of on
                                            a// exfcr/or
                                          1/4' P/QS//C
                   SECTION   VIEW
                           . r. s.
                     FIGURE ZZA
                                • F/L
S.T.S, S-/2-76
   4-22-St
Connec//ons
              for Two (2)
                                 40

-------
randomly shut the burner down.  The second boiler/burner

combination was also adequately sized and performed very well,

requiring only routine maintenance.

CHEMICAL FEED SYSTEM  - The chemical feed system was a small

package system and consisted of a tank with mixer and a

diaphragm metering pump.  The system functioned satisfactorily

during the initial system check, but was never used in operation

as chemical additives to the process were not required.
                                •
PIPING AND APPURTENANCES - All the piping was found to be suitable

in terms of material; however, winter freeze-ups to the piping

buried between the collection wells and raw leachate storage

tank, and the baseboard heating pipes in the treatment facility

building were frequently encountered.  The first problem stemmed

mostly from the fact that the well pumps discharged intermittently

(due to low leachate supply) and the outlet inside the storage

tank was exposed to sub-freezing air temperatures, in that it

terminated above high water level.  Provisions to drain the riser

portion of these pipes could help solve this problem.

     The freeze-ups to the baseboard heating pipes resulted

from a combination of the original boiler shutdowns, and the fact

that the baseboard could experience below freezing temperatures

while temperatures at higher levels in the room were actually

above the thermostat setting.  Two factors which contributed to

this condition were that the concrete block building was un-

insulated with the baseboard radiator mounted directly against

the blocks at or near floor level, and that the uninsulated

process piping and heat exchanger provided enough heat in the
                              41

-------
building to keep temperatures at higher levels above the

thermostat setting, thereby necessitating only infrequent hot

water circulation through the baseboards.

     The effluent pipeline between the weir box and sand filter

distribution box periodically plugged with a precipitate (thought

to be iron oxide).  Cleanouts and/or access points in this line

could help alleviate this problem in future installations.

     The gas pipeline between the building and waste gas burner
                                »
was improperly installed and trapped condensation  (there was

apparently an improper pitch or dip at some point} which

necessitated the release of somewhat large volumes of gas from

time to time to blow out the line.

     Two liquid flow meters were provided; one to measure the

raw leachate feed rate to the process and the other to measure

the recycle flow (it actually measured recycle plus feed).

Aside from occasional disassembling for cleaning, the leachate

feed flow meter performed well.  The recycle flow meter however

was calibrated in increments of 2 gpm which made the necessary

precision possible, but difficult.  Additionally, the upstream

piping to the meter had to be altered to provide as long as a

straight run of pipe as was possible in that unstable operation

prevented accurate readings in the early stages of plant

operation.

     A gas pressure regulating device, the smallest commercially

available, proved to be unsuitable, as it was too large for the

quantity of gas produced and would not regulate the pressure.
                              42

-------
An attempt was made to locate a smaller valve, however, 10



 or 12 different manufacturers indicated that they did not



make such a device.  Since the pressure regulating valve was



essential to proper operation of the plant, the original valve



was modified by installing a smaller orifice and a needle



valve oh the stem.  The modification worked reasonably well



and service to this regulator consisted of replacing only one



diaphragm.



     The gas release tank which was manufactured to the engineer's



design worked well as a liquid/gas separator.



     The original gas meter worked well except its installation



allowed for moisture collection from the gas which eventually.



led to its failure.  A new meter was purchased and installed



with a modification of adding electrical tracing tape to its



influent pipe to prevent condensation.  This solution was effective,



however, future designs may consider a drain trap or before the



meter as added protection.  The only other problems noted were



related to reading the meter during periods of low gas production



(less than 100 cu. ft. per day!, in that the original meter



(calibrated in lOOcu. ft. intervals) was sized for design gas



production levels which never occurred due to low organic loadings.



HEAT EXCHANGER - The heat exchanger was a shell and tube type



and was suitable in all respects.



FILTER MEDIA - The plastic filter media along with the influent



distribution system, through test results discussed later in this



report, were indicated as haying effectively prevented short-



circuiting of leachate within the reactor.





                              43

-------
     The media  also  appeared  to provide an adequate surface
 area for biological  growth, and no "clogging"  signs were ap-
parent  (realizing, however, that loading rates were low and
-therefore, fewer microorganisms developed).
     When the reactor  is  ultimately drained and its interior
 inspected physically,  a more  detailed evaluation of the media's
 performance will be  possible.
 COLLECTION WELLS - The five original 24" diameter leachate
          •^^™^^^^^^^™^~™                »
 collection wells were  drilled during August 1975 in the first
 lift of the landfill (see Fig.  IB and 4).   They were originally
 numbered 26, 28, 29, 30 and 33 from north to south in the
 boring lot-1-0 and subsequently renumbered 1-5.  Galvanized
 pipe (18" dia.) was  placed in the wells.   The  lower 71  of the
 pipe was slotted and gravel packing was placed between the pipe
 and the solid waste.   These wells eventually proved unsuitable.
 because silt mixed with organic material continually infiltrated
 the wells and buried the  well pumps.   All attempts at cleaning
 the wells and/or raising  the  pumps were effective for no more
 than two or three days immediately following such action.  In-
 sufficient leachate  supply made plant operation at or near
 design feed rates impossible.
     By mid-1978, after repeated unsuccessful  attempts to remedy
 the situation,  specifications and drawings for a new modified,
 leachate collective  system were developed.   The design (Fig VI & VI A)
 consisted of a  well  and approximately 100'  of  perforated underdrain.
                               44

-------
with  stone and  sand  in  such  a manner  as  to  intercept leachate

both  horizontally.and vertically  (a so-called  "curtain drain").

The project was advertised and bid in mid-November  1978.   The

-job was awarded to Baier Construction Company, Hartford,  Conn.,

and construction was completed by late December  1978.   The new

collection system performed  well supplying  between  2 and  5 gpm

 (depending on rainfall) up until mid-July 1979.  A  month-long

drought then caused  a reduction in output to approximately 1  gpm,
                               »
which continued throughout the summer of 1979, improving

temporarily after each  rainfall.

STORAGE TANK - A vertical 50,500 gallon  raw leachate storage

was constructed by Terry Hill Concrete Products, Terry Hill,

Pennsylvania and was made up of both  precast concrete vertical

panels and cast-in-place concrete base.  The overall tank

measured approximately  30' in diameter by 12*  deep.

      The original concept for leachate storage envisioned a

clay-lined lagoon; however,  local officials objected to the

possibility of  serious  odor  problems.  The  enclosed concrete

storage tank was very successful in eliminating  this problem.

      The main reason for the relatively  large  storage volume

was to have a steady supply  of leachate  during dry  conditions.

The tank was successful in this respect.

      Another reason  was to smooth out large fluctuations  in

ileachate strength  (e.g. COD).  The data  for the  storage tank

indicates a 228% variance between the low and  high  readings

of COD concentration (low 1120 mg/1,  high 2550 mg/1).   Other

leachate components  exhibited similar fluctuations.   At first
                              45

-------
glance it appears that the 50,500 gallon storage tank did

not provide the "damping" effect that it was designed for.

Before reaching conclusions in this regard it should be noted

that because of lower-than-expected leachate supply/ the storage

tank was not always filled to its design capacity.  Therefore,

changes to the quality of the raw leachate entering the storage

tank would show a more pronounced effect on the overall con-

centration in the tank.  In addition, the low and high figures
                               t
are .both within the values normally considered as low strength

when considering the broad range of values commonly found in

landfills.  In order to adequately determine whether mechanical

mixing within the tank is necessary, additional testing would

be required with the tank maintaining a constantly nearly-full

volume with leachate strengths of higher concentrations to more

adequately compare the differences.  The data from this 'run1

exclusively however, it appears mixing would be advantageous.

     During the winter months, with most of the tank above

ground and its contents exposed to extremes in temperature, ice

would form inside to the extent that it was necessary to drain

the tank to prevent structural damage (this also meant shutting

down the process).  Future designs might incorporate a buried

tank and/or installation to help alleviate this problem.  Ad-

ditionally, this would maintain the raw leachate in storage

and at higher temperature such that less energy would be needed

to raise it to that required for the process.

SAND FILTER BEDS - The six sand filter beds were concrete block

construction on poured concrete footings.  The walls were mostly
                              46

-------
below grade.  These beds were adequate from a structural

standpoint and no problems arose concerning their infiltration

capacity.

ANAEROBIC REACTOR  The anaerobic reactor tank was fonnd to
                 V
be adequate in all structural respects once the construction-

related problems were resolved.  Still to be determined, pending

final inspection, is the extent of internal corrosion  (if any)

and the possible need for internal coating.  The plexiglass

observation window originally installed proved to be unusable

due to internal condensation and was eventually replaced with

a steel plate.  A ladder on the side of the tower was eliminated

from the original design for fear of attracting "climbers".

Originally, samples were taken from the upper taps via a long

extension ladder, however this proved awkward and difficult.

Subsequently, these taps were extended to ground level.  However,

two new problems were created; wintertime freeze-ups and the

need to completely flush the lines each time before samples could

be collected  (see Fig. VII A).  Future designs should give

consideration to these problems.

TEMPERATURE CONTROLLER - The process temperature controller

system consisted of three primary elements:

     1.   A thermal couple located in the process line just

          downstream from the heat exchanger.

     2.   A positioned proportioning controller.

     3.   An electric motor actuated valve located in

          the hot water return line between heat exchanger

          and the boiler.
                              47

-------
     The system functioned well until approximately two years




after initial startup, at which time a limit switch on the motor



actuated valve failed.  This situation was remedied by a "factory"



service representative shortly thereafter.  Minor leakage around



the valve stem was noted, but it was not serious enough to warrant



shutting down the boiler to make repairs.



     A seasonal problem was encountered in regard to maintaining



a set temperature.  This problem was most pronounced during the



summer months when the process temperature kept increasing in



spite of the fact that the motor actuated valve was closed.  It



became necessary on many occasions to shut the boiler down in



an effort to limit system temperature.  The cause of this problem



appeared to be heat transfer between the hot water in the boiler



system and the heat exchanger (via the piping and the water in



it).  More specifically, the process fluid and heat exchanger



were always about 90°F. cooler than the boiler water temperature



and created a heat sink.  Future designs should include longer



and/or thermally non-conductive pipe lengths between these



components to help avoid this problem.








ELECTRICAL SWITCH GEAR - All the electrical switch gear,



motor starters and boxes were properly sized and installed,



and functioned without problems.  One minor wiring change was



made after the plant was in operation when it was discovered



that the recycle pumps did not restart automatically after a



power failure.  Future designs should include these provisions



in all switch components in facilities which are not attended



24 hours per day.






                               48

-------
                   EQUIPMENT LIST


Collection Well Pumps.  ENPO-CORNELL, Model 150M, 460v/3ph/60Hz,

Leachate Feed Pumps.   Robbins & Myers Frame 2L3 MOYNO with
3/4 HP Reliance variable speed drive, 460v/3ph/60Hz.
                                                   *
Boiler.
  A.  Original.  New Yorker steel boiler with Adams burner
      and Honeywell controls.          '  '.         '    .:

  B.  Final.  Hydrotherm Model MR-420.    .                -

Recycle Pumps.  Goulds Pumps Inc./ Model 3196S.
      • •        ••••.-   .   "    •-•»'••••  •                -
Gas Meter.  American Meter Division, Model AL-425.       ,

Chemical Feed System.  Barclay Chemical Co., mix tank & mixer.
 Neptune Chemical Co., Pump Model 510-S-N3.              . • '...

Liquid Flow Meters.
A.  Leachate Feed.  Brooks Instrument Division, Model 3602.
B.  Recycle.  Brooks Instrument Division, Model 3604 - 2 inch.

Gas Pressure Regulator.  VAREC, Inc., Fig. 386 - 2 inchi

Flame Arresters.  VAREC, Inc., 2 inch size.

Pressure & Vacuum Relief Valve.  VAREC,  Inc., Fig. 481,  3 inch.

Drip Trap and Waste Gas Burner.  VAREC,  Inc., Fig. 246 and
Fig. 238 respectively.

Heat Exchanger.  Patterson-Kelley Co., Dwg. 3475-4MP.

Gas Release Tank.  Manufactured by Patterson-Kelley Co.

Electrical Switch Gear, Motor Starters and Boxes.  Square D Co.

Lighting & Miscellaneous Gear.  Harvey Hubbell Inc.

Temperature Controller System.  Honeywell, Inc.

Temperature Indicators.  Honeywell, Inc.
                             49

-------
                         SECTION VIII



                     PROCESS EVALUATION






PROCESS GOALS



     The bench scale studies performed by Chian & DeWalle



indicated the potential for effective treatment of high strength



landfill leachate utilizing an anaerobic reactor.  They noted



much variation in effluent quality and removal efficiencies



relative to the character of the raw leachate treated, with



highly biodegradable samples producing the most favorable results.



     It was concluded that when treating leachate collected from



directly within the Enfield landfill (initial COD, 32,000 mg/1),



the anaerobic reactor under optimum operating conditions could



remove as much as 90% of the COD and fatty acids.  The removals



of -iron and other heavy metals were expected to be in a similar



range.



     Their work with leachate collected from the toe of the



landfill  (11,628 mg/1, COD) resulted in an average removal of



only slightly over 50%.  However, the investigators believed



that heavy metals toxicity was experienced during this labora-



tory run, and predicted approximately 80% COD removal under



optimum treatment conditions.  Suspended solids for this



leachate were reduced by an average of 70%, reaching a high



of 88%.  Total iron removal was 64%.  A large part of the iron



was found to be present in suspension, as analytical data on



filtered samples showed as much as a 99% difference between



influent and effluent concentrations.  It was presumed that
                             50

-------
total iron removals  in the pilot plant could  reach 97% under

the assumption that  suspended solids and the  attending iron

would effectively  precipitate in the lower portion of the

reactor unit and settle as sludge.  Other heavy metal removals

were found to be generally satisfactory.  Gas production

during these studies averaged 7400 cubic feet gas per 1000

pound COD removed  by the process.  The decrease in organic

removal efficiency encountered with the leachate from the

toe of the landfill, results from considerable degradation

which occurs during the raw leachate's travel through the

landfill, leaving  a higher presence of nonbiodegradable

refractory organics which are not affected by biological

treatment.

     The State of  Connecticut, Department of  Environmental

Protection upon  reviewing the results of these studies and

the final pilot  plant design and construction issued a

permit to discharge an average daily flow of  7,200 gallons

to the groundwaters in the watershed of the Scantic River

 (via a seepage bed). A summary of the desired effluent

quality from the experimental plant is provided below:
                *Average Daily    *Maximum Daily    *Average Daily
Parameter          Quantity          Quantity       Concentration

C.O.D.             60.0 Ibs/day     210.0 Ibs/day      1000 mg/1
Suspended Solids    3.6 Ibs/day       6.0 Ibs/day        60 mg/1
Iron-(total)        2.4 Ibs/day      15.0 Ibs/day        40 mg/1
     *Based on expected 90% treatment of influent (raw leachate).
                              51

-------
EVALUATION PERIOD



     The time period selected for process evaluation by



the operators and the Environmental Protection Agency



extended for 107 days, between March 6, 1979 and June 20,



1979.  This interval was chosen on the basis that it represents



the closest simulation by the Enfield plant to the operational



parameters derived through the bench scale models achieved



during any portion of the 'run'.



     The system had been operating since February 9, 1979 at a



reduced flow rate (0.25-0.5 gpm), and possessed a suitable



environment and sufficient anaerobic microbial growth for



evaluative monitoring purposes.  Efforts to increase leachate



supply the previous winter (via a new underdrain collection



system) resulted.in a hydraulic availability of 2-5 gpm, and



were considered successful.   It was recognized, however,



that because of raw leachate strengths being only a small



fraction of those encountered during preliminary testing in



1976, as discussed later in this report, organic loading



rates would never reach design values.



     Various samples and process readings were taken every



day and laboratory analyses were conducted on a seven day/week



basis. A summary of the specified tests, equipment and



procedures utilized in the monitoring can be found in Appendix B.



     A graphical summary of the primary- operational parameters



throughout the evaluation period are contained in Appendix C.
                               52

-------
SUMMARY OF EVALUATIVE 'RUN1.


Operation


     Throughout the evaluation period the process proved to


be almost totally self-sustaining with regard to maintaining


conditions favorable to anaerobic biological activity.  The

pH value within the reactor averaged 7.1  (minimum 6.6,


maximum 7.8), thereby eliminating the need for acidic or


basic additives to the system.  Although some of the data
                               »
relating to heavy metals were considered unreliable by the


operators, due to testing equipment malfunctions, there was

no evidence of heavy metal toxicity.  Provisions had been


made to feed sulfides (sodium sulfide) to chemically precipitate

heavy metals, however, none was needed.


     The ratio of volatile acids to alkalinity was regularly


monitored as an indicator of to what extent the organics in


the leachate feed were taken beyond the acid formation to


the methane formation regime by the microorganisms.  DeWalle


recommended that the ratio not exceed 0.35.  With the excep-


tion of one 3-day period, during which.the ratio peaked at

0.5, the process continually performed under that value.


All test results with regard to the oxidation reduction

potential  (ORP), indicated an anaerobic raw leachate  (average,

-166 mv) and increasing anaerobicity between the reactor

influent and effluent.


     Hydraulic loading to the system was steadily increased


over the first eleven days of the 'run' from its pre-evalua-


tion reduced rate of 0.5 gpm to the recommended normal ©Derating
                             53

-------
rate of 2 gpm.   For the remainder of the evaluation period



it was held constant at the latter value.  Organic loading



rates were consistently and significantly lower than those



anticipated in the plant's design, resulting from drastic



changes in the character of the raw leachate which occurred



in the 36-month interval between initial preliminary testing



and the evaluation period.  The most striking difference was



the change in COD, and is reflected in an .85% decrease  (from



11,628 mg/1 to 1,697 mg/1, average).  Explanations for



changes in the long-term quality of raw leachate such as



these are inherently speculative in nature.  However, as



discussed in greater length later in this text, the factors



of leachate age and dilution/exhaustion are felt to be at



least partially responsible for the change.  Based on the



original leachate strengths the anticipated design daily



organic loading to the system was 446 pounds per day.



During the 'run1 the maximum achieved was only 61.9 Ibs/day



(14% of design value).



     The recycle flow was held constant at the recommended



normal operating rate during the entire evaluation period



(between 18 and 20 gpm, which included the 2 gpm raw feed).



This value proved effective in providing for a well-mixed



anaerobic reactor as specified by Chian and DeWalle, in that



test results taken concurrently from sampling points on the



reactor  (1/3 point, 2/3 point and overflow) reflected similar



values.
                             54

-------
     The process experienced frequent variations in day-to-day



temperatures (commonly + 3°F) as the result of temperature



controller malfunctions.  On the average however, the process



temperature was held at 86°F from March 6 to May 1 and



increased for comparison purposes to 96°F from May 1 to June



20. ;






Performance



     Overall, the Enfield pilot plant succeeded in providing



a leachate effluent quality which satisfied the criteria



specified in its discharge permit presented earlier on Page 51



It should be recognized however, that this success was due



in part to the low overall concentration of the raw leachate



treated during the evaluation period.  Removal efficiencies



for certain components were lower than originally thought



possible through the bench scale studies.  Table VIII below



summarizes the system's influent/effluent quality, overall



treatment effectiveness for the significant leachate components



and characteristics monitored during the evaluation period.
                            55

-------
                              TABLE VIII
                SUMMARY OF TREATMENT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
COD

Suspend

Total Carbon

Total 0

Volatil

PH
Component
Solids
>on
mic Carbon
icids
From 3/6/79-S/ 6/79
From 5/7/79-6/20/79
Reactor
Influent
1685.6
117.0
1135.0
882.5
1774. A
6.4*
7.4*
Reactor
Effluent
496.9
55.0
425.0
80.0
331.1
6.8
7.6
Removal
Efficiency
70. 5Z
53. OZ
65.3Z
91. OZ
81. OZ
N/A
N/A
Expected
Efficiency
801
over 70Z
—
-
80Z
N/A
N/A
                                                     223 NTU*
                                                       3.68
                                                       0.24
Turbidity                           236 NTU*

Phosphate (Results considered unreliable)

Iron                                 21.9

Zinc (Results considered unreliable)

Nickel                                0.58

Cadmium               "               Trace

Lead (No results)

Chromium                              0.33

Copper                                0.24

* All mg/1 unless otherwise noted.

     Discussion on the plant's treatment performance for individual

leachate components and characteristics can be found in the analysis

portion of this report.
 N/A
83.0%
58.7%
                                                       0.11

                                                       0.11
67.0%

54.0%
N/A
 97%
                                           56

-------
     The gas produced by the process was seen to increase in



general proportion to organic loading.  It is calculated



that on the average 29,980 cubic feet of gas was produced



for every 1,000 pounds of COD removed.  The gas analysis



showed it was composed of 70% methane (CH4) and 30% carbon



dioxide (CC>2) , values commonly experienced in digestion of



sewage sludge.  The gas was of a burnable quality and was



flared off on a continuous basis; however, at no time was



the gas production sufficient t,o operate the boiler because



of the low organic loading to the system.





PROCESS ANALYSIS



Raw Leachate Characteristics



     Significant changes in the long  term quality of the raw



leachate occurred in the 36-month interval between initial



preliminary laboratory testing and the field evaluation



period. One of the most noticeable changes involves an 85%



decrease in COD  (from 11,628 mg/1 to  1,697 mg/1, average).



Table VIII A summarizes and compares  the major characteristics



of the raw leachate collected during  both periods.



     Several factors are believed to  have contributed to



these changes.  The first, with respect to the decreased



organic content, involves the age of  the landfill.  As the



landfill grows older, considerable degradation of organics



occurs within it, resulting in lower  concentrations of these



components in the leachate produced.  The COD/TOC ratio has



been hypothesized by Chian & DeWalle  through independent



studies "as providing a method of accessing the relative age,
                              57

-------
                                   TABLE Ym A
                  AVERAGE CHARACTERISTICS OF RAW LEACHATE
                       ENFIELD, CONNECTICUT LANDFILL
          Component

COD

Suspended Solids

Total Carbon

Total Inorganic Carbon

Total Organic Carbon

Volatile Acids

Alkalinity
                    During Evaluation
                       Period 1979
pH
From 3/6/79-5/6/79
From 5/7/79-6/20/79
ORP

Turbidity

Conductivity

Ammonia Nitrogen

Chlorides

Phosphorus

Sulfate

Sodium

Potassium

Calcium

Manganese

Iron

Zinc (Results considered unreliable)

Nickel

Cadmium

Lead (No results)

.Chromium

Copper

*A11 mg/1 unless otherwise noted
During Preliminary
   Testing 1976
1697.5
108.0
1052.5
251.2
801.3
1724.3
2861.8
6.4*]
7.4*]
- 166 MV*
288 NTU*
2092 NMhos*
289.5
418
1.25
30.0
345.0
202.0
29.1
66.0
21.9

0.58
Trace

0.33
0.24
11,628
—
-
-
4,094
4,628

6.48*
-
-
12,300 MNhos*
184
-
19.2
308
779
735
- 790
277
430
16
1.2
.027
.38
1.7
5.6
                                         58

-------
organic strength and anticipated treatability of raw  leachate,

over time.  Table VIII B below summarizes their hypothesis.
           • —Proposed Relationship between COD/TCC. BOD/COO. Absolute COO..
      and Age of FBI To Expected Efficiencies of Organic Removal from Leachate
Character oJ Luohan




COD/
TOC
HI
>U
ro-zs

<2.0





BOO/
COO
CO
X1S
0.1-OJ

<0.l



•
Ao.
o(
KB
C3)
You*
Medium
ISjrr-IOyrJ
OU
OlOjrrt



COO. in
minigmm
pcrlftsr
M
>IO.OtJO
XU- 10.000


-------
expected COD concentrations of only 500 to 10,000 mg/1.


Once again, both the leachate's age (approximately seven years


old) and concentration (1697.5 mg/1) are consistent with the


table above, lending support to Chian & DeWalle's hypothesis


and providing a possible explanation for the decreased organic


concentrations encountered during the evaluation period.


     The concentration of inorganic components of the leachate


such as sulfates and metals, and of dissolved solids as indicated
                   /

by conductivity, were also seen to decrease significantly from


those originally measured.  It is believed that these decreases


were mainly the result of an exhaustion of their sources, due


to constant leaching from within the landfill during the time


between the original testing and the evaluation period.  In


addition, seepage patterns within the landfill may have changed


such that some of the original leachate supply sources were


no longer tributary to the facility's collection wells.


     Throughout the 'run', the raw leachate quality was seen


to vary with rainfall.  The rainfalls of April 1 through April 5


and from April 14 through April 17 produced short term increases


in the COD concentration of the raw leachate, while those of


March 6 and 7, and May 24 through May 26 produced decreases.


Although not studied in detail, it would appear that rainfall


can either dilute raw leachate, or strengthen it by carrying


out additional material.  After the.extremely large .rainfall


from April 27 through April 29  (total over 4 inches), the data


on volatile acid concentrations showed an increase of 230%


which continued for most of the remainder of the  'run1.  Sudden,


substantial changes to the raw leachate quality such as this,



                                60

-------
may indicate that large rainfall -events, through extended



infiltration, can reach new sources of pollutants which were



previously "untapped", and produce new or modified seepage



patterns from within the landfill.



     A lag time of approximately eight  (8) days on average was



noted between rainfall events and variations in storage tank



concentrations.



     The quantity of raw leachate collected during the evalua-



tion period allowed for continuous process operation at the



recommended normal operating irate of 2 gpm.  The quantity inter-



cepted by the collection wells at any given time was seen to be



a function of rainfall, and more specifically; surface water



infiltration and percolation through the landfill, in possible



combination with upsurging replenished groundwater supplies.



During periods of low collection well yield, the storage tank



supplemented raw leachate availability to the system.





Process Operability



Indicators—



     Throughout the evaluation period the reactor's environment



was constantly sampled and tested to monitor whether any toxicity



was present and in general how favorable conditions within it



were to anaerobic biological activity.  The data from these



tests indicated no long-term toxicity and the anaerobic process



proved to be almost totally self-sustaining.  The indicators



chosen and monitored for these purposes are discussed below.
                                 61

-------
     pH—The pH value within the reactor remained within




acceptable limits throughout the entire evaluative 'run1 re-



quiring no acidic or basic additives to the system.  The



average reactor pH was 7.1, with the data reflecting high and



low values of 7.8 and 6.6, respectively.



     The raw leachate pH values (and subsequent values through-



out the system) fell into two distinct groupings.



     During the first eight weeks of the 'run1 the pH of the raw



leachate varied between 6.2 and '6.7.  This slightly acidic con-



dition prevailed throughout the process (except for the sludge)



and it was noted that operation was at the very lower limit of



pH normally associated with proper digester functioning (i.e.,



6.8 to 6.9).



     Between May 4, 1979 and May 9, 1979 the raw leachate pH



gradually increased before a significant jump about May 9



from 6.7 to 7.3, which prevailed for the remainder of the evalua-



tion period.  Initially it was thought that the pH meter was at



fault; however, subsequent events and significant changes in



other parameters indicated a change in the character of the raw



leachate, which was apparently produced by the extremely heavy



rains of April 27 - 29.





     Oxidation - Reduction Potential (ORP)—The oxidation



reduction potential is measured with a pH meter fitted with



platinum and calomel electrodes.  Negative readings reflect the



degree of the system towards reduction reactions or anaerobicity.



The raw leachate in the storage tank exhibited a long-term trend



of increasing anaerobicity  (-70 mv to -240 mv).  Increasing






                                62

-------
anaerobicity was indicated between the filter influent and


effluent (average influent -160 mv, average effluent -195 mv).


DeWalle states that an upper limit of -300 mv is usually de-


sirable for optimum anaerobic biological activity, in that a


heavy metal toxicity can more likely occur in a system possessing


more positive ORP values.  Although the data from the evaluation


period falls outside the desired range, there was no evidence


of toxicity from heavy metals, possibly because of their low

                                *
influent concentrations.



     Volatile Acids - Alkalinity—Two important parameters to


be measured in terms of any digester operation are the volatile


acids and alkalinity.  The volatile acids are essentially a


measurement of the free fatty acids (readily biodegradable)


while alkalinity indicates the buffering capacity of the liquid.


The ratio of volatile acids to alkalinity must be maintained


within certain limits  (DeWalle recommended operating under


  0.35) for proper digester functioning.  With the exception


of one 3-day period between May 10 and 13 during which a ratio


peak at 0.5, the process continually performed within that


range.


     Both the volatile acids and alkalinity concentrations


remained relatively stable for approximately the first 57 days


of the evaluative  'run1.  As previously discussed however, the


character of the raw leachate experienced a notable change some-


time shortly after the extremely large rainfall of April 27-29.


At that time the data in the storage tank shows sharp increases


in the concentrations of both components  (from 1,182 to 3,260
                                63

-------
mg/1, and from 1,932 to 4,644 mg/1, respectively); which then



declined gradually over the balance of the 'run1.  This



perturbation was evident throughout the entire system  (delayed



by several days).  This together with an unintentional process



temperature jump of approximately 18°F. on May 7 constituted



a process shock load, as indicated by a volatile acid/alkalinity



ratio of 0.5 in a recycle stream on May 11.  The options available



for counteracting these rapid changes included:  dumping the



contents of the storage tank, adding dilution water to the storage



tank, or reducing the influent feed rate.  It was decided, however,



that no action would be taken in order to observe the durability



of the process.  Resultantly, the system was able to withstand the



shock and returned to normal in just a few days.





     Heavy Metals—Throughout the evaluative 'run1 the concentra-



tions on heavy metals throughout the system were low and no



toxicity problems were indicated.  The overall level of iron in



the raw leachate was lowered by a factor of approximately 20 when



compared to the results of the initial testing in 1976  (21.9.



vs. 430.0 mg/1/-.respectively) .  The data collected on  zinc



presented a very confusing "picture" and are considered unre-



liable by the operators; however, they reported overall levels



in the raw leachate were very low  (average of  < 1 mg/1).  No



data is available on lead concentrations due to testing equipment



malfunctions throughout the  'run'.  When considering that lead



concentrations during the initial testing were very low 0.38



mg/1), it is assumed that similar or even lower concentrations
                               64

-------
were present during the evaluative 'run1.  The plant's design



had incorporated a chemical feed system to precipitate heavy



metals if necessary, however with no toxicity indicated, it



was never utilized.






Loading Rates—



     In order to achieve the desired theoretical detention



time of approximately 10 days for the reactor  (25,500 gallon



volume) a hydraulic loading rate^of approximately 1.8 gpm



(rounded to 2 gpm) was required.  The pilot plant was equipped



with feed pumps capable of providing the reactor with anywhere



from 0.25 to 5 gpm.  For the first 11 days of the evaluative



'run' hydraulic loading to the system was steadily increased



from its pre-evaluation reduced rate of 0.5 gpm to the recommended



normal operating rate of 2 gpm mentioned above.  For the remainder



of the 'run1 hydraulic loading was held constant at this rate.



     The raw feed rate of 2 gpm theoretically translates to a



leachate detention time of approximately 8.6 days within the



reactor.  This was confirmed by the monitoring of chlorides



(largely unaffected by the biological process) which showed a



"difference in dips" between the reactor influent and effluent



of approximately 9 days following the heavy rains of April 27-29.



This value corresponds very closely to the theoretical detention



time and thus indicates that both the design of the influent



distributor and filter media were effective in preventing Vshort



circuiting" of the leachate within the reactor.



     The constant hydraulic rate utilized throughout the majority



of the evaluative  'run1 excludes examination of the reactor's
                                65

-------
response to variations in organic loadings and/or detention



times, data that could be of much value.  Most data from the



first 11 days of the 'run1 (when the hydraulic loading rate



was varied) is considered of no value due to process adaptation



factors.  Resultantly, further analysis of the effects of hy-



draulic loading on the process is not possible at this time.



     Organic loading rates to a system during the evaluation



period due to the decreased raw leachate strength, as previously



discussed, amounted to only a fraction of the plant's capability.



The bench scale studies had indicated the anaerobic reactor was



capable of effectively treating raw leachate at design organic



loading rates in the range of 0.09-0.2 pounds COD per cubic foot



of filter media per day.  With 2,228 cubic feet of media volume



provided, this translated to a design daily organic loading



range of approximately 201-446 pounds COD per day for the pilot



plant.  The ability to provide this daily loading to the reactor



was a function of both the influent COD concentration and the



hydraulic loading rate.  The combination of the constant 2 gpm



hydraulic loading rate and the consistently low raw leachate



strengths resulted in an average daily organic loading to the



reactor of only 41.7 pounds per day.   (10 to 20% of design



value).  The maximum achieved during the  'run' was only 61.9



pounds per day or 14% of the design rate.



     Given the average raw leachate COD concentration throughout



the 'run' of 1,697 mg/1, the reactor, at a 5 gpm hydraulic



loading rate could have been provided with 104 pounds per day



COD.  The leachate detention time at this rate would have decreased
                                66

-------
significantly from the design value; however, such a test



would have been of value to monitor the system's response to



this type of change.





Recycle rate



     A recycle rate in the range of 10:1 to 20:1 (recycle to



hydraulic loading rate) was indicated through the bench



scale studies as providing for the desired well-mixed anaerobic



reactor.  The pilot plant was equipped with pumps capable of



recycling anywhere from 10 gpm to 50 gpm.  Using the 10:1



ratio and 2 gpm normal feed rate as a base, a recommended



normal recycle rate of 18 to 20 gpm was arrived at.  The



recycle flow was held constant at this value throughout the



evaluative 'run1.  This rate provided the anaerobic reator



with one volume, "turnover" per 24 hours.  Similarity in



daily test results for the various locations throughout the



reactor where samples were taken  (i.e. lower tap, upper tap,



recycle), indicate that the design recycle rate proved



effective in providing for a well-mixed anaerobic vessel as



specified by Chian and DeWalle.  Scheduled variations to.the



recycle rate, if conducted, could have indicated more clearly



whether the 18-20 gpm rate was actually the optimum.





Temperature



     The process temperature throughout the evaluation



period experienced frequent day-to-day variations  (commonly,



+ 3°F) resulting from temperature controller malfunctions.  On the
                               67

-------
average, however, the process temperature was held at 86°F.



from March 6 to May 1 and increased to 96°F. from May 1 to



June 20 for evaluative purposes.



     The data indicates that during the portion of the 'run1 when



the average process temperature was higher, the COD removal



efficiency increased by nearly 5%  (67.5% removal at 86°F. 72%



removal at 96°F).  Also most gas production peaks during the



'run1 were seen to occur at temperatures very near 90°F.  However,



no clear-cut conclusions regarding gas production as related to



process temperature .should be drawn, as the data is limited.



     Rapid and extreme temperature variations were indicated



through the data as resulting in decreases to both organics



removal and gas production.  The greatest temperature variation



experienced by the process occurred on May 7 (96°F. to approxi-



mately 114°F.).  During this period the system was already ex-



periencing large variations in the character of the raw leachate



which had apparently resulted from the large rainfall of April 27



through April 29.  This temperature jump to 114°F. was not only



rapid and extreme, but also exceeds the acceptable range for



the survival of mesophyllic organisms.  This is believed to have



resulted in a stunning effect which greatly reduced their ability



to feed on the volatile acids within the system.  Resultantly,



both COD removal and gas production decreased and, as previously



noted on page 60 was the only instance when the volatile acids/



alkalinity ratio deviated from within its recommended -allowable



limits during any portion of the evaluative  'run'.
                               68

-------
PROCESS PERFORMANCE

Treatment - Removal

COD - Chemical Oxygen Demand

     During the evaluation period, the COD samples indicated

the following concentrations throughout the system (all in

mg/1):

                              Low       High      Average

     Storage Tank:            1120      2550      1697

     Filter Influent:         1190      2580      1686

     Lower Tap:                350       990       581*

     Upper Tap:                265      1090       517*

     Recycle:                  205       960       485*

     Filter Effluent:           70      1050       497*

     Sludge:                   670       800       735



*First four  (4) weeks' data thrown out before computing
 averages resulting from tank dilution from previous runs.

     The COD concentrations throughout the process, at the

four locations where samples were taken (lower tap, upper

tap, recycle, filter effluent) are relatively close in

magnitude representing a well-mixed leachate within the

vessel.

     Figure VIII C shows how COD influent/effluent and

removal efficiency varied throughout the 'run.1  With

the respect to COD removal, the overall.reactor efficiency

averaged 70.52%, which falls short of the/80% removal felt

possible by Chian & DeWalle through their bench scale studies,
                               69

-------
                              Figure 3ZBT C



                   CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
B
p.
oo

CN
cm
c
-H
T3
tfl
O
tfl
^
•u
>-.

•K
             % Removed
COD (Ibs./day)*
                          70

-------
Independent studies by others*-*- ,  have indicated that a

leachate's age may be directly related to not only, its

characteristics but its overall treatability.  The Enfield

leachate during the evaluation period would best be classi-

fied as medium aged (approximately five years old).  This

age leachate is less effectively treated by biological

processes than a younger highly biodegradable sample as was

used in the bench scale studies.  Another contributing

factor could be the greater than desired temperature varia-
                               *
tions experienced by this system during the evaluation

period.  These operating conditions have been seen in conventional

anaerobic sewage digesters to lead to decreased system

efficiency.  Given a steady feed of younger, stronger leachate

and a more consistent process temperature it is likely that

the overall COD removal efficiency could average close to 80% as

was predicted.

Carbon
                                                     Total inorganic
                                                          (TIC)	

                                                        251.25

                                                        252.5

                                                        347.5

                                                        357.5

                                                        355

                                                        345

*Data collected March 3, 1979 exhibited values which were
 significantly different in the balance of the run consequently
 were eliminated from all calculations.
                             71
Summary
of Average
Total carbon
(TC)
Storage Tank
Influent
Lower Tap
Upper Tap
Recycle
Effluent
1052.5
1135
450
447.5
465
425
Concentrations
Total organic carbon
(TOC)
801.25
882.5
102.5
90.0
110
80

-------
     The process removal efficiency averaged 91% for organic



carbon producing a satisfactory effluent concentration of 80



mg/1.  Total carbon removal was 62.6%.  Organic carbon was



seen to represent 78% of the total carbon in the raw leachate.



The data also indicated that some organic carbon (approximately



92.5 milligrams/liter was converted to the inorganic form



and exited with the effluent).



     One point of interest, still unresolved is that for



both total and organic carbon the influent concentrations



averaged higher than those in the storage tank.



Suspended Solids





                 Suspended Solids in Mg/1
                        Low        High      Average
49.2
42.0
29.0
29.0
30.0
27.0
166.0
176.0
253.0
91.0
111.0
87.0
123.0
819.0
108.1
117.0
53.0
61.5
49.4
55.0
492.5
Storage Tank



Filter Influent



Lower Tap



Upper Tap



Recycle



Filter Effluent



Sludge
     The process averaged 53% removal of suspended solids



throughout the evaluation period producing an effluent



concentration averaging 55 mg/1.  This quality effluent
                              72

-------
is within the allowable range for the discharge to seepage

beds as utilized on this project.  It should.be noted,

however, that it is above the criteria recommended by most

government agencies for direct stream discharge (approximately

40 mg/1). The effluent concentration remained essentially

the same throughout the run  (40 to 60 mg/1) even though the

influent varied by as much as 500% (42 mg/1, low; 253 mg/1,

high).  This data would indicate .that in order to obtain

lower effluent concentrations of suspended solids additional

settling and/or flocculation may be necessary.  The frequent
                                                    i
temperature variations experienced throughout the run may be

responsible for the higher effluent suspended solids and

related lower process efficiency through the "sloughing of

microorganisms" which is felt to have occurred.

Metals

     The overall concentration of metals during the evaluation

period was low when compared to the preliminary testing

results.  The process showed no signs of heavy metals toxicity

throughout the run although this could be merely the result

of the low influent concentrations experienced.  The plant

was equipped with provisions to chemically feed sodium

sulfide to precipitate metals if needed^  However, none was

required.  Three of the more important metals which were

evaluated are discussed below.
                              73

-------
Iron



     The overall level of iron in the raw leachate was lower



by a factor of approximately 20 when compared to preliminary



testing results (21.8 mg/1-vs. 430 mg/1).  Iron removal



averaged 83% during the run.  Effluent concentrations were



low averaging 3.7 mg/1.



                         . IRON Mg/1



                    Low       High      Average



Storage              -         -•          -



Filter Influent     12.8      28.8       21.8



Lower Tap            -         -



Upper Tap            -         -



Recycle              2.1       7.5        3.7



Filter Effluent      2.2       6.5        3.7



Sludge               -         -






Zinc



     The data collected on this metal is considered unreliable



by the operators.  Overall levels of zinc which were .in the



raw leachate were low however averaging  1.0 mg/1.





Lead



     No results were obtained on tests for this element.  The



problem seemed to be with the lamp used for the test  (could



not zero).





REACTOR GAS



     The gas produced by the process was regularly measured,



sampled and analyzed.  Subsequent to an initial stabilization
                             74

-------
period of four weeks, gas production averaged 856 cubic feet



per day.  In general, the rate increased in proportion to



organic loading, from a low of 100 to a high of 1,200 cubic



feet per day, with COD loading of 7.2 to 52.8 pounds per



day, respectively.  It is calculated that 29,980 cubic feet



of gas is produced for every 1,000 pounds of COD removed by



the process.



     Although not extensively .studied, the data indicated



that gas production is affected by operating temperature and



that peak gas rate occurs at a temperature near 90°F.



     The gas analysis showed it was composed of 70% methane



and 30% carbon dioxide, values commonly experienced in the



digestion of sewage sludge.  The gas was of burnable quality



and was flared off on a continuous basis; however, at no



time was the gas production at a sufficient rate to operate



the boiler because of the low organic loading to the system.
                             75

-------
                         SECTION  IX

                       ECONOMIC ANALYSIS


 1.0  GENERAL

      Since the performance of the treatment system is
 judged marginal due to the short period of acceptable
 operation and the quality of leachate treated, it is
 difficult to compare total equipment and operating costs
 with the total COD removed.  However, efforts have been
 made herein to make that comparison as well as comparing
 costs to quantities of leachate treated.  Conclusions
 and recommendations are precedent on the basis and assump-
 tions made.

 2.0  FUNDING

      Funding for this project was received through the
 United States Environmental Protection Agency on a cost
 sharing basis with the City of Enfield, Connecticut,
 seventy-five percent by the USEPA and twenty-five percent
  (primarily construction and operation costs) by the City.

 3.0  TOTAL COST

      The total cost of the project is broken down as follows:

 3.1  Capital Costs

      Equipment Purchase and Construction        $284,730.00*
      Start-up and Debugging Labor                 15,873.00
      Electrical Power Cost                         1,690.00
      Propane Cost                               	160.00
                                                 $302,453.00

 3.2  Operating Costs - Period March through June 1979

      Direct Labor                               $  3,565.00
      Electrical Power                ..               238.00
      Propane                                         160.00
      Travel                                        1,170.00
                                                 $"5,133.00
                                             Four month period

      Estimated Annual Cost =                    $ 15,399.00



*See  Construction Cost Estimate, p. 81
                              76

-------
4.0  PROJECT COST

4.1  Depreciation

     Assuming the straight line method of depreciation of
the capital cost of $302,453 over a useful life of 10 years
and a salvage value of $20,000 in equipment the annual depre-
ciation is represented by the relationship:

     D =  C-L
           n


     Where  C = Material Cost = $302,453
            L = Salvage Value = 20,000
            n = Term       =   10 yrs.

     Then   D = $302,453 - $20,000   
-------
5.2  Cost/Pound of COD removed is:

               CL
     PC COD =  COD


     Where     PC COD = Dollars per pound of COD removed
                   Cl.= Total cost per year
                  COD = Total COD removed per year
                        @ average of 28.72 removed

                    28,267
          Pe COD =  28.72 x 365 = $2.70 per Ib. COD removed


5.3  Potential annual fuel savings cost from methane
     production (1,697 mg/1)  leachate

          Ps = Ma x Vm x C

               Ps = Potential Savings
               Ma = Annual Methane Product
                    in CF average 800 CF/day
               Vm = Average market value of natural gas
                    (approx.  $.005/CF)
               C  = Coefficient of efficiency  (methane/propane)

               Ps = 292,000 x $.005 x .41% =   $599.00

     The use of modular components coupled with an established

regional network and program to treat landfill leachate could

increase cost efficiency significantly by allowing for the

reuse of components on future installations involving "young

leachate" where biological treatment appearsvmost effective.
                              78

-------
              ENERGY ANALYSIS FOR OPERATION OF THE

                ENFIELD LEACHATE TREATMENT SYSTEM

0 Current Usage of Pumps

  All pumps operate on a 460 volt power supply.

  A.   Raw Leachate Well Pump - discharge is not adjustable,
       pumps off or on.  Nominal pump output is 5 gallons
       per minute, with a current draw of about 0.7 amp.
  B.   Transfer Pump  - discharge controlled by adjusting
       pump  speed.
                                    •
              Flow Rate	      '	Current Draw (amps)
L/min.
1.9
3.8
7.6
15.1
18.9
C. Recycle
gal./min.
0.5
1.0
2.0
4.0
5.0
Pump - discharge
Recycle Rate
L/min .
57
76
114
151
189
Energy Usage
gal./min.
15
20
30
40
50
of Pumps

2.50
2.60
2.65
2.70
2.80
controlled by throttling flow
Current Draw (amps)

2.65
2.70
2.72
2.75
2.78

   The  general equation used for calculating energy is:

                       E =  I V t

       where:   E =  energy  (watts)
                I =  current (amperes)
                V =  voltage (volts)
                t =  time
                                 79

-------
   Since in this case there are three energy consumers (the three
   pumps) the total energy consumed is additive and may be expressed
   in the following form:

             E = Jl Vl *1 + J2 V2 *2 + J3 V3 *3
             where the subscripts 1, 2 and 3 represent raw leachate
             transfer, and recycle pumps, respectively.

   t  and t  are identical since the transfer and recycle pumps
   operate continuously.

   t-i  is a function of t_ since the raw leachate well pump operates
   intermittantly.  Vj, V2 and Vg are the same (460 volts).
   Therefore, the expression can be restated as follows:
             E = Vt (FI-L + I2 * I3)

             where F = fraction of total time, during which raw leachate
                     well pump actually operates (ratio of transfer pump
                     flow rate to raw leachate well pump flow rate ) .

   In order that energy may be expressed in common units (kilowatt-
   hours) the expression should be divided by 1,000 while time is
   expressed in hours.  The final expression for the energy usage
   of the three pumps is then:

                  E + Vt (Fl! + I2 + I3)
                              1000
6.2  Example of Energy Usage and Cost Calculation

     Assume a transfer pump flow rate of .5 gpm and recycle pump
     flow rate of 20 gpm.  From the tables found in I.E. and I.C.
     we find respective currents of 2.50 amp. and 2.70 amp.  What
     is the amount of energy consumed in 30 days?

               E = Vt (FI  + I  + I )
                         -i-    £-    O
                          1000

               E = 460 x 24 x 30 (5/.5 x .7 + 2.50 +  2.70)

                                   1000

               E = 1741 Kw. hr.

     @ $.06/kw-hr the monthly cost for electrical energy would be:

                         $104.46
                                          80

-------
         ENFIELD LEACHATE TREATMENT PLANT

 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE - UPDATED TO JUNE 1979


          Item                                Cost


Leachate Collection Wells
     Original Well                       $   5,500
     Reconstructed Well                     34,000

Control Building                            20,800
Transfer Pump Vault                          9,200
Raw Leachate Storage Tank                   40,600
Reactor Tank (erected)                      38,500
Reactor Media Fill           •               13,400
Reactor Foundation                           4,000
Gas Release Tank                               800
Insulation (tank)                            9,500
Insulation (pipe)                              550
Seepage Beds (3)                             2,700
Monitoring Wells  (3)                        12,000
Site Preparation                             1,300
Fencing                                      1,800
Access Road                                  1,300
Mechanical                                  13,600
Electrical*                                 12,000
Propane Tank (installation only)             1,050
Water Tank & Pump                              600
Chemical Feed System                           640
Work Bench & Sink                              200
Room Heating w/Pumps                           500
Equipment:   (installed cost)
     Raw Well Pumps (2)                      1,260
     Leachate Transfer Pumps  (2)             4,900
     Recycle Pumps  (2)                       2,250
     Rotameters  (2)                            950
     Boiler & Burner                         3,450
     Heat Exchanger                          2,330
     Temp. Controller & Monitor              2,560
     Gas Regulators & Safety Equip.          4,300
     Raw Storage Level Controls           $   1,050

                    Construction  Cost....$  247,590

                    Contingency 15%......   37,140

TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST	$  284, 730


 *  Based on  electrical supply being available near site.
                             81

-------
                          SECTION X

               CONCLUSIONS AND .RECOMMENDATIONS



     The Enfield Pilot Plant was successful in treating raw
                    \
leachate anaerobically to produce an acceptable quality

effluent. Although many problems were encountered throughout

the project, the data collected and evaluated is sufficient

to provide a base from which future judgments concerning the

feasibility of the process can be made.  Two factors exper-

ienced during the run, however, limited the scope of know-

ledge which was gained, namely:

        the process was never given the opportunity to

        perform at its design loading rates due to the

        sporadic and low strength raw leachate supply which

        was available at the site.

        the many problems encountered with .leachate supply,

        equipment and operation prevented the achievement of

        a long, steady period of monitoring during which the

        operators could .systematically vary individual para-

        meters for evaluative purposes.

     Nonetheless, from the available data collected during

the evaluation period, certain significant conclusions about

the anaerobic process can be drawn, and recommendations on

its feasibility and future use made, as follows:
                             82

-------
RESEARCH/CONCEPT



     The anaerobic process appears conceptually to be a



viable, workable alternative for treating raw leachate.  It



exhibited a great deal of stability and durability toward



changes in process environment throughout the run.  It was



almost .totally self-sustaining with regard to maintaining an



environment conducive to anaerobic digestion, with no



chemical additives needed.  The removal, efficiencies achieved



by the process during the evaluative run were, in general,



somewhat lower than thought possible during the bench scale



studies.  However, given a more optimum set of operational



circumstances, it is likely that most could increase, in



varying degrees, to somewhere near those expected.








DESIGN



     The pilot plant's design allowed for close duplication



of the operational parameters derived through the bench



scale studies  (specifically, loading rates, recycle ratio,



detention time, operating temperature, etc.).  The influent



distribution system and filter media proved effective in



providing for a well mixed anaerobic environment with no



evidence of short-circuiting.  The major aspect of the



design open to future improvement would appear to be the



process temperature control, as many problems arose in



holding constant process temperatures.



     Based on the evaluative run and the knowledge gained



through pilot plant operation, the following modifications



to the original design are recommended:




                              83

-------
1.    The design of future collection wells should



     incorporate a more sophisticated underdrainage



     system to maximize the available supply of raw



     leachate to the process.



2.    The storage tank should be insulated and/or partially



     buried to minimize the energy required to increase



     the raw leachate temperature to that required by



     the process.  Also, some test data indicates that



     a mechanical mixer may also be needed in the



     storage tank to smooth out fluctuations in leachate



     strength.  It is not possible at this time to



     determine whether this additional equipment is a



     necessity, however, since the storage tank was



     only partially full during most of the run and



     thereby its full volume was not utilized. Also,



     flow rates from the collection wells were generally



     low and inconsistent, creating a minimal leachate



     circulation within the tank.



3.    The upper and lower sample taps should be insulated



     and extended to ground level for ease in operation.



4.    The burner/boiler units should be specified and



     purchased as a package from one manufacturer to



     eliminate the possibility of incompatability as



     was experienced with the original equipment chosen



     for the pilot plant.



5.    The boiler water should be kept in the tube side



     of the heat exchanger to minimize fouling potential,



     with the process stream occupying the shell side.




                       84

-------
          This may necessitate a stainless steel interior
          lining for the heat exchanger, depending on the
          leachate to be treated.
     6.    The temperature control valve should be relocated
          to be in line before the heat exchanger, not
          after, for improved hydraulic functioning.
     7.    The piping between the heat exchanger and boiler
          should either be increased in length or include a
          thermally nonconductive "break", to prevent heat
          transfer between the boiler water and process
          fluid.
     In that .the approximately 9 day normal detention time
provided closely resembles the recommended bench scale
parameters, it would not appear that an increased reactor
size or reduced hydraulic loading rate would appreciably
increase process efficiency.
     Since it appears that the anaerobic process is most
efficient in treating young biodegradable leachate, it would
be of advantage in future designs to utilize as many modular
and/or transportable components as possible.  In this way,
as a landfill ages and the leachate produced is less efficiently
treated by biological means, it would be feasible to reuse
"standard" components of the facility at other locations.
CONSTRUCTION/STARTUP
     The construction of the pilot plant was generally a
smooth,  efficient operation with the engineer making site
inspections and reports as the project advanced.
     A major construction related problem developed, however,
with regard to intermittent freezeups of the various under-
ground collection and transmission pipelines.  The design of
these lines specified a minimum of four foot of cover over
                              85

-------
them.  However, some of the lines eventually became uncovered,



especially where they traversed steep slopes (through erosion



of the landfill material, which was used as backfill).



Future installations should consider increased compaction



requirements and the use of more suitable earth or other



materials for backfilling.



     One other problem occurred with respect to the construction



sequence for the anaerobic reactor.  It should be noted that



the tank be pressure tested before the insulation is in-



stalled to uncover any internal problems at that point.



Also, more detailed procedures should be specified for



application of the insulation to prevent puncturing at the



tank, as occurred on this project.








PROCESS/OPERATION



     The pilot plant achieved high removal efficiencies for



volatile acids  (81.0%) and organic carbon  (91.0%) indicating



that the process is most effective in treating young, high



strength, readily biodegradable leachate.  Given an influent'



of this type and a more optimum process operation it is



likely that the overall COD removal would reach very near to



the 80% felt possible by Chian & DeWalle.  Suspended solids



removal could also be expected to rise under more steady



state conditions  (particularly, a more constant process



temperature) to minimize the "sloughing of microorganisms".



However, it would appear that coagulation and/or additional
                             86

-------
settling would be required to utilize direct stream dis-



charge.  There was no evidence of heavy metals toxicity;



however, this may be atypical of the normal due to the low



overall metal concentration of the Enfield leachate.  Pro-



visions to chemically precipitate heavy metals as were



included in the pilot plant's design would likely be of



benefit in future .installations.  Also, due to low organic



loadings there was no appreciable amount of sludge generated



during the evaluation period, however, sludge collection



facilities should be included in any future designs in



similar proportions .to that allowed for this project.



     From the limited data collected and evaluated, it is



projected that the process removal and cost efficiency would



increase under the following conditions:



     1.   Character of Influent—young, high-strength, readily



                                 biodegradable leachate



                                  (Influent COD:  greater than



                                 10,000 mg/1)



     2.   Hydraulic Loading Rate—dependent on organic strength



                                  of leachate as per Table IV,



                                  pg. 17 of this report



     3.   Recycle Rate—(R/I), 10:1  .



     4.   Process Temperature—90° to 95°F.  (variations not



                               greater .than 2°±/day)



     It is difficult to predict whether the above set of



operating parameters are actually the optimum due to the



lack of controlled variation to individual process parameters,
                            87

-------
which was performed during the evaluation period.  It is



possible, however, that efficiency levels could reach near



those predicted in the bench scale studies once these and



possible"additional refinements to the process operation are



made.



     A site visit and visual inspection of the pilot plant



made on February 5 and 6, 1981 has revealed that the facility



could be restarted with minimal expense if further evaluative



testing of the anaerobic process is desired.  In view of the



funds which have 'already been invested into this concept, it



seems appropriate that if all possible, the process should



be given the opportunity to perform its intended function of



treating high-strength landfill leachate.  It is recommended,



therefore, that a brief availability study be made of the



geographical area surrounding Enfield, Connecticut to determine



the feasibility of transporting high-strength leachate to



the site or a short re-evaluation of the process.  If addi-



tional studies such as these are decided upon, they would be



best started during the summer months so to minimize energy



requirements and to avoid any possible problems with under-



ground pipes freezing, as were incurred previously.  It



would also be of advantage to systematically vary the hydraulic



loading rate and recycle rates, tests which were not performed



in the original evaluative run, in order to more accurately



project the optimum performance and cost efficiency of the



process.
                             88

-------
                         REFERENCES
1.   The Anaerobic Filter for Waste Treatment
     by J. C. Young and P. L. McCarty
     W. P. C. F. Journal, May 1969

2.   Anaerobic Biological Stabilization of Sanitary Landfill
     Leachate
     by E. G. Foree and V. M. Reid
     College of Engineering, University of Kentucky
     January 1973, UKY TR65-73-CE17

3.   Treatment of Leachate with the Anaerobic Filter Process
     by F. B. DeWalle and E. S. K. Chian
     University of Illinois  (Published ?)

4.   Kinetics of Substrate Removal in a Completely Mixed
     Anaerobic Filter
     by F. B. DeWalle and E. S. K. Chian
     Biotechnol & Bioeng., 18, 1275  (1976)

5.   Operation of the Anaerobic Filter
     by F. B. DeWalle and E. S. K. Chian
     University of Illinois  (Published ?)

6.   Heavy Metal Removal with the Completely Mixed Anaerobic
     Filter"
     by F. B. DeWalle, E. S. K. Chian and J. Brush
     W. P. C. F. Journal, January 1979

7.   Investigation of Boiler Mai-functions at Enfield Leachate
     Facilities, Town of Enfield, CT Sanitary Landfill
     December 31, 1975
     by A. W. Martin Associates, Inc.

8.   Report from Metcalf  & Eddy, Inc., 50 Staniford Street,
     Boston, MA  02114, dated February 16, 1979
     by Donald H. Bruehl, Hydrogeologist

9.   Town of Enfield, CT Leachate Treatment Facility
     Set of Drawings by A. W. Martin Associates, Inc.
     December 1975, Pages 1 through 9
                             89

-------
10.   Contract Documents for Construction of the Leachate
     Treatment Facilities, Town of Enfield, CT Sanitary
     Landfill
     December 31, 1975
     by A.  W. Martin Associates, Inc.

11.   Demonstration of a Leachate Treatment Plant
     by R.  L. Steiner, J. D. Keenan and A. A. Fungaroli
     of Applied Technology Associates, Inc.
     for U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
                            90

-------
                LIST OF APPENDICES
A.   A Compilation of Research and Development Papers
     by E. S. K. Chian and F. B. DeWalle

B.   Summary of Tests, Equipment . & Procedures

C.   Graphic Symmary of Evaluative Run
     March, April, May, June 1979
                       91

-------
                   APPENDIX A




A COMPILATION OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PAPERS

                       by

        E. S. K. Chian and F. B. DeWalle
    Composition of Organic Matter in Leachate
     Collected From The Enfield Solid Waste Landfill
    Treatment of Leachate With The Anaerobic
     Filter Process
                       92

-------
          COMPOSITION OF ORGANIC MATTER IN LEACHATE.
       COLLECTED FROM THE ENFIELD SOLID WASTE LANDFILL

              E. S. K. Chian and F. B. DeWalle
                   University of Illinois
                   Urbana, Illinois  61801
1.   Introduction

          It was the purpose of this study to determine the

composition of organic matter in leachate samples collected

from the solid waste landfill of the Town of Enfield (Conn.)
                                *
and to evaluate whether the organic matter can be treated

effectively by anaerobic trickling filter.


2.   Site Location

          The Enfield disposal area is located in the flood

plain and on the east valley wall of the Scantic River (Fig. 1)

This site consists of approximately 10 acres of land which

has been excavated at the eastern boundary to a reported depth

of 40 feet creating approximately 450,000 cubic yards of

capacity.  The site has been used for the last 7 years and is

presently filled at a rate of 50,000 tons/year by the 46,200

inhabitants  (1972 census) of the town.  The southern half of

the site was filled between 1967 and 1972.  It started from

the east side in 1967 and reached the west side in 1969 and

moved back to the east side in 1972.  The northern half has

been filled  from the west side since 1973 and is propagating

eastward.
                              93

-------
          The Scantic River is located about 150 feet from



the western boundary of the disposal site and flows onto a



broad bedrock valley filled with glacial fluvial deposits as



much as 40 feet thick consisting of collapsed stratified



drift.  This is overlaid by lake deposits with a thickness



varying from 4 to 20 feet with the thickest layer closest to



the river.  The lake deposits consist of horizontally laminated



yellowish brown silty clay interchanged by silty sand.  The



surface .of the flood plain is composed of 3 feet thick



reworked sand and silt and the thickness of this layer



corresponds approximately to the depth of the river.  The



ground water table in this layer is varying and is located



near the surface to one foot below it.  The valley wall



consists of terrace sand and laminated clay deposits.  At



some locations near the fill, especially at the northeastern



corner o.f the fill, the lake deposits are not present and



the terrace sand rests directly on the fluvial deposits.



          The leachate generated at the site originates



primarily from rain water infiltrating the clayey silt cover.



The sandy cover is not well sloped and numerous depressions



augment the infiltration.  The construction of the disposal



area cut off a drainage swale and created a depression at the



northeastern edge of the fill.  The formation of a pond at



that location  (Figure 1) allows the water to recharge through



the southern section of the solid waste, thereby enhancing the



leachate formation.  A section of water-laden sands underlaying



the lake deposits was observed at the southern edge of the
                             94

-------
fill which may facilitate upwelling water to reach the



solid waste and enhance the leachate generation.






3.   Sample Collection and Analysis



          The leachate is discharged at several locations



at the western base of the fill and major streams were ob-



served to originate at the northern half between sampling



points 1-1 and 2-1 CFigure 1) and at the southern half between



sampling points 5-2 and 6-1.  These streams merge on the flood



plain and generally discharge in the Scantic River at location



8-1.  The volume of the discharged leachate is enhanced by



small surface run-off streams at locations 1-1 and 5-1.  The



majority of the leachate generated, however, will move through



the reworked surface layer above the clayey lake deposits or



through the sand in this layer, and discharge in a diffuse



front into the river.



          In order to collect leachate samples for physical



and chemical analyses, six lysimeters were installed about



10 feet from the western edge of the fill  (Figure 1).  The



lysimeter consisted of a porous cup having an effective pore



diameter of 2 micron, mounted at the bottom end of a 5 feet



PVC pipe having a diameter of 3 cm.  A 10 cm diameter hole



was drilled in the soil to a depth of approximately 3 feet.



The lysimeter was placed in the opening and the earth was



backfilled and compacted to prevent seepage along the shaft



of the lysimeter.  The contents of the lysimeter were pumped



out several times before sampling and a sample was only taken
                             95

-------
after the lysimeter had been in place for 24 hours.  A sample



collected with a lysimeter is only representative of the



leachate composition at the depth of the location of the



porous cup.  In addition to the lysimeters, two test pits



were dug about 2 feet deep and 2 feet wide at locations 4-2



and 5-2 to collect a composite leachate sample representative



of the entire depth of the excavation.  A similar sampling



procedure was used as for the lysimeters.  Surface leachate



samples were collected at location 1-1 where the leachate



mixes with a small surface stream at point 8-1 (Figure 1)



before it discharges into the river.



          After collection, the leachate samples were refrig-



erated and transported to the University of Illinois for



analysis.  The analysis was conducted according to Standard



Methods  (1971) as modified by Chian and DeWalle  (.1975) .  The



analysis consisted of first measuring gross parameters



such as oxidation reduction potential CORP), pH, conductivity,



absorbance at 400 nm and total and total and volatile solids.



The organic matter was analyzed for chemical oxygen demand



(COD) , biochemical oxygen demand  (.BOD) , and total organic



carbon  (TOC) and inorganic carbon  (.1C) .  Specific organic



constituents such as free volatile fatty acids were determined



with both the column partition chromatographic method and the



hydroxyl amine test.  The individual fatty acids were deter-



mined with a Hewlett-Packard Research Chromatograph 57SOB



and a Linear Instruments Corporation Disc Integrator using an



acid column consisting of 0.3 percent SP1000 and 0.3 percent
                             96

-------
H3P04 on Carbopack A.  Phenol was employed as an internal



standard.  Carbohydrates were determined with the phenol



sulfuric acid method while aromatic hydroxyl compounds were
                   i


measured with the Folin-Ciocalteau test.  Organic nitrogen



was determined with the Kjeldahl method after 30 minutes



digestion.





4.   Results and Discussion



          Results of the leachate analysis are shown in



Figures 2, 3 and 4.  It is seen from these figures that the



most polluted leachate samples are observed at locations 2-1



and 5-2 and the least polluted ones are noticed at 1-1, 4-2,



and 6.  Although the refuse at the southern half was placed



earlier than the northern portion, this does not seem to affect



the maximum strength of the leachate.



          Substantial differences were noted between the



leachate obtained from the lysimeters as compared to that



from the test pits.  At location 4, the COD of leachate from



the test pit was approximately half that from the lysimeter,



while at location 5 the test pit resulted in a leachate having



20 times higher concentration.  This may indicate that the



leachate movement through the soil is confined to localized



layers which may not be detected with lysimeters since they



are restricted to one specific layer.  In a test pit leachate



of different strength was drained from several layers and was



mixed before sampling.  This may result in a higher average



concentration.  If, however, the lysimeter is installed in a
                             97

-------
specific layer having a high leachate concentration, its



strength will be higher than that obtained from a test pit.



As the lysimeter and test pit were located several feet



apart/ the results may also indicate that the leachate



ground water flow is confined to relatively small paths from



a plain view.  In order to identify the different flow paths,



more lysimeters may have to be installed to reduce the chance



of missing certain ground water flow.paths.



          Further analysis of the strength of pollutants in



different leachate samples indicated that some of the variation



resulted from the varying degree of dilution.  Assuming that



the leachate with the highest strength  (COD = 35,905 mg/1)



was not diluted at all, the dilution factor for the other



leachate samples was calculated from the values of the conserva-



tive ions such as Cl- and Na+ (Figure 3).  The highest dilution



was observed at the northwest corner at  location 1-1 where



leachate intermixed with a small surface runoff stream; this



was confirmed by visual observations.  The mixing apparently



also reduced the total organic strength  of the leachate as



measured by COD and TOC.  The southwest  corner is the second



location where leachate experiences a large dilution apparently



due to upwelling ground water.  However, this did not sub-



stantially lower the concentration of organic matter.  The



relatively high-dilution at location 5-1 may also have resulted



in the lower COD and TOC observed, but the low concentration



at nearby location 6-1 was not the result of any dilution.  The
                             98

-------
same can be observed for location 4-1 and 4-2.  These data



indicated that processes other than dilution caused a re-



duction in the strength of organic matter.



          Analysis of the data in Figures 3 and 4 indicate



that the values for the pH and ORP were inversely related.



A high pH value also corresponded with a high bicarbonate



concentration as measured by the inorganic carbon with the



total carbon .analyzer.  High bicarbonate concentrations re-



sulted from the dissolution of CC>2 in water.  CC>2 is formed



during the methane fermentation stage.  The increase in pH



is due to the reduction of the fatty acids and the buffer



capacity of the sample.  During the methane fermentation



stage the environment becomes more and more reduced thus



lowering the ORP.  Since the relative amount of bicarbonate,



or. inorganic carbon, to the organic carbon indicates the



degree of biological degradation, a ratio between these two



parameters can be established with which the other parameters



such as pH and ORP can then be related.  In order to obtain



a maximum ratio of unity, the ratio of organic carbon to



total carbon  (organic and inorganic carbon) was used in



Figures 5 and 6.  They indicate that with increasing biological



degradation or decreasing TOC/TC ratio the pH increases



while the ORP decreases.



          The next step was to determine the relative changes



that the organic matter undergoes during the biological



degradation, since this may influence the effectiveness of
                             99

-------
the treatment process.  An important parameter is the amount

of fatty acids which are the intermediates between the

degradation of the complex organics in the refuse and final

products of CH4 and C02:

               (C6H12O6)n  -*, CH3COOH or CH3CH2COH

                CH3COOH  -*  CH4 + C02

                              2 H20
                4 CH3CH2COOH    -*-  7 CH4 + 5 C02


                                *


          Figure 7 indicates that the relative amount of

fatty acids does not decrease with respect to the other

dissolved organics in the leachate during the early stage of

leachate degradation.  Only when the ratio of TOC/TC de-

creases below 0.65 does the relative fatty acid concentration

decrease with respect to the other organics.  Since the fatty
                                i
acids are the direct precursors of C02 and CH4, and since

the methane fermentation has already progressed substantially

when the ratio of TOC/TC decreases to 0.65, a constant ratio

of fatty acid to other organics indicates that this fraction

is initially replenished by the breakdown of complex organics

in the refuse.  During the methane fermentation stage, the

higher molecular weight  free volatile fatty acids, such as

butyric, isotontyric, valeric,  isovaleric, and caproic

acids, are converted  to  acetic  and propionic acids.  Since

all of the individual free volatile fatty acids were determined

with the gas chromatography, the relative change  in fatty

acid composition can  be  determined.  The data in  Figure 5,
                              100

-------
however, indicate that the relative fatty acid composition



with respect to acetic and propionic acid does not decrease,



suggesting that all acids are replenished continuously due



to the degradation of the complex organic matter, thus con-



firming an earlier conclusion.



          The biological oxygen demand (BOD) follows the



similar pattern as the fatty acids, and shows a relatively



rapid decrease as compared to the other organics when the



TOC/TC ratio decreases below 0.55  (Figure 8).  The relative



magnitude of the BOD was calculated with respect to COD of



the sample.  This parameter is also expressed as oxygen



demand but still reflects the total organic carbon.  Figure



8 tends to indicate that the relative BOD concentration even



shows a slight increase during progressing methane fermentation,



since breakdown of complex organics results in better aerobic



degradability of the sample.  Further evaluation of the BOD



test showed that most of the oxygen demand is exerted during



the first 24 hours as shown for sample 8 in Figure 10.  Only



one sample, i.e. 7-1, experienced  a one-day delay and this



may have been due to a relatively  high concentration of



complex organics that caused some  inhibition, as indicated



by the high concentration of aromatic hydroxyl compounds in



that sample.



          Further evaluation of the degradation of the



different organic fractions in the leachate showed that the



non-nitrogenous organics are degraded more rapidly than the



nitrogenous compounds  (Figure 11).  The relatively slow rate






                              101

-------
of removing these nitrogenous compounds is due to the slower




rate of removal of complex nitrogenous organics and the



simultaneous release of amino acids, such as glutamic acid,



during the microbial degradation of other organic matter.



In the later stages of the biological degradation, high



molecular weight organic compounds containing nitrogen are



released from the bacteria together with carbohydrates and



other high molecular weight refractory materials.



          The non-nitrogenous organic fraction that is



removed along with the free volatile fatty acids is charac-



terized by the relatively high concentrations of aromatic



hydroxyl groups.  Figure 12 shows that this results in a



degradation similar to Figure 11.  The nature of these



organics is not yet known but may consist of slightly soluble



lignin-like material or condensation products from the



cellulosic compounds.



          The breakdown of the complex organics during the



acid fermentation stage and the removal of the fatty acids



during the methane fermentation stage is followed by the re-



lease of high molecular weight organics by the bacteria when



all degradable organics are removed.  Figure 13 shows a con-



tinuous increase of the relative carbohydrate concentration



with decreasing TOC/TC ratio.  The excretion of these high



molecular weight organics has an effect on the flocculation



of the dispersed bacteria and may protect them from being



washed out.
                              102

-------
5.   Conclusions



          The above considerations indicate that variations



in concentrations of organic matter are affected to some



extent by the dilution of the leachate by infiltrating



surface runoff or upwelling ground water.  The most important



factor, however, is the biological degradation of the re-



sulting leachate.  Definitive trends were observed in which



complex organic matter was degraded to free volatile fatty



acids which in turn were converted to C02 and CH^.  Analysis



of all leachate samples indicates that they are biodegradable



and are suitable for treatment by anaerobic filters.  In an



anaerobic filter the same process is expected to occur as



with the individual samples discussed above.  However, they



are confined in a better controlled environment and will



thus proceed at a higher rate.  As the most degraded sample



(No. 6-1) has a COD of 586 mg/1 and is only diluted by 1.78



times, it may be estimated that the COD of the most concentrated



leachate sample  (No. 2-1) may decrease from 35,905 mg/1 to



1040 mg/1 while being treated with an anaerobic filter.



This corresponds to 96 percent COD removal.  If, however,



both dilution of the leachate with ground water and anaerobic



degradation in the soil occurs, lower treatment efficiencies



are expected.



          The most important unknown that still has to be



determined is the actual leachate concentration within the



landfill before it has traveled any distance through the
                              103

-------
soil, causing the above mentioned modifications.  As of now




it is not yet known whether the progressing biological




degradation of the leachate samples are a reflection of the




conditions in the soil through which the leachate has traveled



or whether they reflect the different solid waste characteristics




within the landfill.  For that reason, additional lysimeters




should be placed within the fill near the west edge, opposite



to the ones already installed in the soil.  Only analysis of
                                *


such leachate can be used to predict the concentration of



leachate to be expected for treatment by the anaerobic



filter.
                              104

-------
              Figure 1.   Contour Map of the Landfill Site
                         with the Sampling Points
/'"/'
•' /   <' r- -\
/  I
                             105
                                                                                              Ay-
\ 'I
                                                                         //

-------
        TOC
       (mg/0
                                                     COD
                                                   . (mg/s,)
                                                            - 40,000
                                                            . 30,000
                                                            - 20,000
                                                            - 10,000
             1-1  2-1   3-1   4-1   4-2  5-1   5-2   6-1  7-1 8-1

          Figure  2.   COD and TOC Data  of the  Collected Leachate-Samples
Absorbance
1.5
                   A
               ~  / \
             O Absorbance
        i'-   \ AORP

                Dilution  factor
                     \
OR?
mv)
                                                              40  -
                                                              50  -
                                                              60  _
                                                              70  -
                                                              80  -
                                                              90  -
                                                              100
                                                          Dilution factor
             1-1 2-1  3-1  4-1  4-2 5-1  5-2  6-1  7-1   8-1
          Fiqure 3.  Absorbance, ORP and Dilution Factor of Collected
                     Leachate Samples
                                    106

-------
Inorganic
 Carbon
 (mg/i)
                             i     i     i    i     i     i
         1_1   2-1   3-1  4-1   4-2  5-1  5-2  6-1   7-1   8-1

     Figure 4.   Inorganic Carbon and  pH of Collected Leachate  Samples
     pH
                          o.
                                         o
                                                     o
             Increased biological
                 stabil izatjon
O

          0   0.1  0.2 0.3  0.4  0.5  0.6 0.7  0.8 0.9  1.0

                           TOC/TC (-)

     Figure 5.  Effect of Increased Biological Stabilization on pH
                Increase and TOC/TC Decrease
                                107

-------
    ORP
   (-mv)
 10

 20

 30

 40

 50

 60

 70

 80

 90

100
                                          o
                                            /
                                                      0
                                 o
                                          o
                           0
           0   0.1   0.2  0.3 0.4   0.5   0.6  0.7   0.8 0.9   1.0
                              TOC/TC
      F.jaure 6.   Effect of Increased Biological  Stabilization  on  ORP
            	Decrease and TOC/TC Decrease	.
Fatty Acids
 TOC/TC
       0.7

       0.6

       0.5

       0.4

       0.3

       0.2

       0.1
                                  O

                                  o-
                                  O
                         P
                    O
                1     1     1    1     1     1
                                            1     1
           0.   0.1   0.2  0.3   0.4  0.5   0.6   0.7  0.8  0.9  1.0
                             TOC/TC

      Finure 7.   Effect of Increased Biological  Stabilization  on  Decrease
                 of Relative  Fatty Acid Concentration
                                108

-------
BOD

COD

  0.9


  0.8


  0.7

  0.6


  0.5


  0.4


  0.3


  0.2

  0.1
                                                      0
                                          O
                                        /O'


                                                 i
           0    0.1   0.2 0.3  0.4  0.5  0.6 0.7  0.8  0.9  1.0

       Finure  8.   Effect of Increased Biological Stabilization  on  Decrease
                  of Relative Biochemical Oxygen Demand
03
  •o
«J -r-
•r- U
4-3 ro
O)
O O
rtJ •!-

<*- O
O T-
  CL
O O
O J-
1— CX

I/)
 o
 fO
o
c.
 3.0
  2.0
       1.0
                                     O
                      O~
                    _L
                    _L
                                   I
_L
      0    0.1   0.2.0.3  0.4  0.5 0.6  0.7  0.8  0.9  1.0

  Finure  9.   Effect of Increased Biological Stabilization  on  Relative
             Fatty Acid Distribution
                                 109

-------
DO
(mg/£)
3
2
1
1:1500
(4800)
-.-'"I: 2000
f (4000) n
/rr"TT3ooQ_ X
/yy~('4'800) "
^Tf-"P (2000), ,
8-1 1:300 (1280)
	 _ — . 	 • @
e^" 1:400 (1280)
, o — O fT500 (1250)
7
^ . , .
01     234501     2345
                     time (days)

 Finure 10.   BOD Curves  for Sample  7-1  Showing One Day Adaptation
             Period,  and Sample 8-1  Representative of Other Samples
             Showing  no  Delay in Oxygen Uptake
. TOC
Organic - N

150

100


50



O
. 0
O
' C
0 / o
/°
/ 0
o
o
1 1 S 1 1 1 1 1 ,
      0   0.1 0.2  0.3  0.4  0.5 0.6  0.7 0.8  0.9  1.0
                         TOC/TC

 Figure 11.  Decrease of Non-Nitrogenous Matter During
             Leachate Stabilization
                           110

-------
                                                             (7-1)
 c.
 •3
 o
 o.
 X
 o

"a o-—-
 >,o i
 o

 c
 ro
 cr.
 j-
o
CJ
o
01
•»->
to

-u
o
JD
03
O
O



O
  O I

o:o9

0.08
O.C7
0.06
0.05
0.04

0.03
0.02

0.01

• - -cr-
—
O


o / c

o
* /

»
o
/
1 1 1 / 1 1 1 1 1 1
             0  0.1  0.2  0.3 0.4  0.5  0.6 0.7   0.8   0.9   1.0
                               TOC/TC

            Figure 12.   Decrease of Aromatic Hydroxyl  Compounds  During
                        Leachate Stabilization
0.09
0.08

0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
s
0.03
0.02
0.01



\o
\
\
\
\
o\
\
\°
X
8 x ^
,o
cc
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
             0   0.1  0.2  0.3 0.4  0.5  0.6  0.7  0.8   0.9   1.0
                                TOC/TC

            Finure 13.   Increase of Carbohydrate  Compounds  During
                        Leachate Stabilization
                                 111

-------
     Treatment of Leachate With the Anaerobic Filter Process


           Foppe B. DeWalle and Edward S. K. Chian
               Department of Civil Engineering
         University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


     The present study was conducted to evaluate the treatability

of high strength leachate with the anaerobic filter.  The

anaerobic filter consists of a supporting medium to which

anaerobic bacteria are attached..  The first step in the

anaerobic breakdown of organics consists of hydrolysis of

complex organics to their monomers which are then converted

to free volatile fatty acids by acid forming bacteria.  The

last step consists of the formation of methane by methane

bacteria from the fatty acids.  The major advantage of the

process is that the stabilization can be accomplished with

a relatively low production of biological solids so that

problems with the ultimate disposal are minimized.  A byproduct,

the methane gas, is produced as a result of the process and

valuable energy can be recovered from the gas by subsequent

combustion.  Another advantage is that the need for aeration

equipment, costly to install and operate, is eliminated.

     A major disadvantage of the method is the high sensitivity

of the methane forming bacteria to acidic pH values.  In

addition the methane fermenters are sensitive to heavy

metals.  In order to increase the acidic pH values in the

leachate, it is necessary to dilute it with buffered effluent

of the unit, as a result of which the filter is operated as

a completely mixed system.


                            112

-------
Materials and Methods



     In order to predict the operation  of  the  full  scale



demonstration anaerobic filter  to  be  constructed near the



town of Enfield, Connecticut, a laboratory scale evaluation



was made at the University of Illinois  using leachate



similar to the leachate that will  be  used  to finally operate



this filter.



     The anaerobic  filter column is constructed of  plexiglass



with an overall height of 246 cm and  20.2  cm OD (Figure 1).



The height of the filter medium in the  column  is 199 cm and



comprises a volume  of 54.6-5  (1.93 cu ft). Additional



clearance at the top of the column represents  an additional



1.4JZ. while the inlet space consists  of 2.8JL.   A solids



collection device is located in the bottom of  the column and



has a volume of 3.8-£.  A recirculation vessel with a volume



of 5.2 Ji contains effluent of the  anaerobic filter  that is



used to dilute the  incoming untreated leachate and  to raise



the pH of the mixture.  The total  volume of the column is



therefore 67.8 Ji of which 54.6  JL or 81% contains the media



'to which the bacteria are attached.



     The media in the column consists, of plastic "surface"



slabs  (Dow Chemical Midland, MI) and  has a specific density



of 1.45 g/cm^.  As  the average  thickness based on 100



measurements is 0.57 mm, the specific surface  area  of the



media is 34.9 cm2/cm3 filter media volume. The specific



surface area of the media in the column is 2.06
                             113

-------
column volume (63 ft2/ft3 column volume).  The total surface



area in the column is therefore 11.3m2  (121.6 ft2) and only



6% of the column volume is taken up by the filter media



resulting in a porosity of 94%.  A comparable study  (McCarty,



1967) used tones instead of plastic with a resulting specific



volume of 1.1 cm2/cm3 column volume (33.5 ft2/ft3 column



volumes) and a porosity of only 42%.



Results



     The initial evaluation of the filter treating the



Enfield Leachate was conducted at a relatively low loading



in order to acclimate the bacteria to the specific waste



stream.  The selected loading was 23.3 Ib COD/1000 cu ft day



equivalent to a 32 day detention time.  The filter was



previously operated for a one and one half year period



treating a very biodegradable leachate having an  initial COD



of 30,000 mg/1.  Using this leachate it was noted that 96%



of the COD could be removed at a loading of .50 Ib COD/1000



cu ft day corresponding to a detention time of 25 days



resulting in a 1400 mg/1 effluent COD.  The removals observed



with the Enfield leachate having an initial COD of 11,628



mg/1 was generally smaller than in the previous study, and



the average percentage COD removal was 50% while  fatty acid



removals were 70% during the first four, month period.



Several reasons, however, explain why the obtained results



are lower than previously obtained.  During the initial 25



days of the operating period the bacteria were not able to
                            114

-------
respond to the specific waste stream and almost no COD



removals for example were observed after 9 days.  A gradual



improvement was observed, however, during the next 25 days



and COD removals of as large as 88% and fatty acid removals



of 97% were observed at day 45  (Figure Id).  This corresponded



with a gradual increase in gas production as shown in Figure



2c.  As a result of the anaerobic conditions the sulfates



showed a gradual decrease  as they were converted to sulfides



thereby precipitating the heavy metals such as iron  (Figure



3a) and nickel (Figure 4).  Settling of these precipitates



in the bottom section of the unit resulted in a decrease of



the effluent suspended solids.



     Significant variability in effluent organic matter



concentration was observed between day 50 and day 130 after



the initial adaptation of the microorganisms had occurred.



At times the removal was as low as 30%, while it could



increase to as high as 90%.  It was noted that high removals



generally corresponded with high pH values and high gas



production rates, indicating that some periodic toxicity may



be occurring.  The fatty acid concentration generally



varies parallel to the COD and removals also ranged from 90%



to as low as 30%.  Some of the observed toxicity may also be



due to variation in heavy metal concentrations.  Evaluation



of the initial iron concentrations would indicate that high



effluent COD values correspond to high iron values.  However,



more samples will have to be analyzed before solid conclusions
                            115

-------
can be reached.  If such toxicity is occurring, addition of



sulfate or sulfide may enhance the operation of the unit;



such steps will be evaluated during subsequent studies.



When the unit is operating under optimum conditions, it is



expected that COD removals will be as large as 80%, while



fatty acids will be removed for about 90%.  The lower



removals of the COD as opposed to the higher removals of the



fatty acids is the result of the presence of non biodegradable



refractory organics that are not removed by any biological



treatment process.  Since the tested leachate was collected



in the floodplain at the toe of the fill, considerable



degradation .had already occurred during travel through the



soil.  This resulted in a COD decrease from about 32,000 to



11,000 mg/1.  Since the designed treatment plant will be



treating the leachate with a concentration of 32,000 mg/1, a



similar effluent quality will be expected, i.e. a COD of



about 2500 mg/1 and a fatty acid concentration of about 500



mg/1, which will result in a 92% COD removal and 97% fatty



acid removal.



     The average removal of the suspended solids was 70%



during the first 100 day study period but was gradually



improving and reaching 88%.  The high suspended solids



reductions were also reflected in the turbidity removal



which was as high as 93%.  Contrary to the SS no decrease in



effluent concentration was observed with time, indicating



that other species besides the suspended solids affect the
                            116

-------
turbidity.  The average color removal was 54% but increased



to 75% at the end of the monitoring period.



     The removals of the heavy metals were generally satis-



factory and filtered iron concentrations decreased by as



much as 99%.  Since the majority of the iron in the effluent



is present in the suspended solids and not in solution, the



total iron removal was only 64%.  However, when the suspended



solids are effectively precipitated in the bottom section of



the unit the total iron removal will approach 97%.  The



removal of soluble zinc was about 71% while total zinc



removal was 65%.  Other heavy metals are still being analyzed.



The soluble calcium was decreased by 69%, while total calcium



decreased by 28% indicating that a significant fraction is



present in the suspended solids possibly as carbonates or



hydroxides.  Since other metals may be present in similar



form and because these precipitates are pH dependent, the



high pH values may be  more effective to reduce soluble



metals thus decreasing their toxicity.  A smaller toxicity



or higher pH may in turn enhance the bacterial degradation



and result in lower effluent COD values.  However, due to the



short evaluation period, no solid conclusions can yet be



made concerning the complicated interactions that occur in



the unit.



     The gas production was 2.7lJ£ gas/J> leachate which



corresponded to 0.46JL gas/gr COD removed or 0.32.^ methane



gas/gr COD removed.  This value is only slightly less than
                            1 1

-------
the theoretical value of 0.35, indicating that the methane



conversion is not affected by a possible heavy metal toxicity.



Conclusions



     Based on the limited data that are available it was



concluded that under optimum operating conditions the



anaerobic filter will remove as much as 90% of the COD and



fatty acids when treating leachate that is collected within



the landfill.  The removals of iron and other heavy metals



will be in a similar range.  Since some variability in



effluent quality was observed in the present laboratory



study indicating possible toxicities, no solid conclusion



can yet be reached concerning expected effluent qualities of



the unit.
                            118

-------
I 3V.J
                                          119

-------

-------
     •HI
     ii;ii
     liSi
                              xnitii
                                                                               .
                                                                               i.'i !"!
                                                                                        Tm
                                                                                        >• j»
                                                                                        liii
:::: :i:i
.::• tin
ITT-tetT
                                                                                          iMiliiii
                 Hi
IS
     Fliil::


                            rp
                   iiil!
                          nr^Ti



                                                                               ... 4 ....
     53:5!
  10
                                                                                          ^H}=77
                                                                                                , . . .
A>:H;fe
           7-rj::-

                                                      ."~T—L™ ~ IT-~.lJt!Iri


                          :rn«-
                                                      —j —
                                                      . _I_ |_, ^.'

                                                                        ZCZlJ ~
                                      :
       iSi

                                                                             :rr:
     Jfiiii
•JOO


?.,,.

     3
      ™1"™.
        1 J-:-i.
     Jii:'i^^..'jii..i



                                                       :L-_^J^L
     :X~l"."]i''i :' H"-1'
     :f!!ir-.:i::::::-:ii'? .
                       _.	
                       'v'G
                                                                       iJL^li
                                                    121

-------
/o
    m
t:;t
                                                                                     1
      1
•i * •
Hii
ill.  . !!
    m
                            111
                                                                                           :):::•
                                                                     ,•:!—
                                                                              1..
                                                                                    :i::::
                                   tiiili
                                   jl
                                                              1' T".
                                                              iln;



                                                              ^£3T

                                         IHrr
                                i"rt:.~
                                                       ^4-::
                                                               :tl=
~j|-::

                                         rrdr
     ~:i:.
                                         TTT

                                         I ill
      irni
                                                                                 Tt-.-r

                                                             122

-------
£SrSiH!i
                               •B

                                                                  tl!
                                                                           111!
                                                                                  -.11
                                                                                                i
                                                                                                   IK!
                                                                                                   Uii
                                                                Tiii-iliT
                                                                        101
                                                                       blla'Hl
                           •'Q
           .
 •Soi
(ivC

 ICO
                                                                                                    iia
                                                  ;j.m:i
                                      :-i::
                                      _u;:
                           1
                                            ::|::-::::::;:;::::::;jj1
                            ftTfi.
                                                                                iliiiili

                                                    123

-------
                         APPENDIX B
          SUMMARY OF TESTS, EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES
OPERATORS

     Town .tff Enfield, Connecticut, Water Pollution Contol
Division

     Mr. Robert G. Mullins, Public Works Director
     Mr. Thomas G. Thompson, Superintendent
                             124

-------
                                  APPENDIX B
                        TESTS, EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES
  STS
I

I
    ATI ON
 'EDUCTION:
 ,OTENTIAL
CONDUCTIVITY



I
 TURBITIY
1
ETALS
                       EQUIPMENT.

                    Photovolt:
                    Model 115 A
                   Scale O - 14      .   • .
                 Electrode Broadley » James
                    Photovolt         .
                    Model 115 A
                    Scale 400 - 400• MI..V.     :
                Electrode Photovolir. Cat# 1120
                    Platinum Electrode
                    la"b - Line
                Portable Lectro MHO Meter
                    Ltodel MC 3
                    Scale 0.1 — 100 u mhos
                    Range XL - Xlooo
                    Sargent Welch
                    Model S-83700
                    Scale 0 - 1000
                    Range 1 -- 1000
     Perkin - Elmer
 Atomic Absorptions Spectre.
     Ltodel 37O A
                               -  PROCEDURES

                               Standard Methods 14 Ed;
                               p.. 276  Glass Electrode .
                               Method
                               Photovolt, Operation
                               and Maintance Manual
                                Photovolt Operation-
                                and. Maintance Manual
                                Instructments Operation
                                and Maintance Manual
                                Standard Methods 14 Ed.
                                Sargent Welch Operation
                                and Maintance Manual
Perkini - Elmer Manual
Analytical Methods For
Atomic Absorption:
Spestropnotometry
I
:ULPATE3
     Coleraan Instruments
Model 44 Spectrophotometer
Standard Methods 14 Ed;
Turbidmetic Method
Coleraan Operation and
Maintance Manual
 ?OTAL PO -P
     Coleraan Instruments
Model 44 Spectrophotometer
                                               S.tandard Methods 14 Ed.
                                               Coleraan Operation and
                                               Maintance Manual
 GAS COMPOSITION:
                    Surrell- Gas Apparatus
                    Model No. 950 - 488
                                Burrell Manual For
                                Gas Analysts 7 Ed.
                                    125

-------
                                 APPENDIX  B
   TS.
uriLORIDES
               CONTENTS:  TESTS,, EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES.
                       EQUIPMENT'

                    Orion Research Inc,
              Model 407 A Specific Ion Meter
                Electrodes Orion lonalyzer
                        Model 94-17
                Usual Lab Apparatus
  PROCEDURES

Orion Research Manual
For Model 407 A
Orion Tonalyzer Manual.
For- Electrodes
Wastewater Analysis
Handbook p.. 14Q
Standard Methods 14 Ed,
 AMMONIA,
 I-ITRO&ENf
                    Same as Chlorids
Orion Research Manuals
Standard Methods 12 Ed.
i
OLA3HLE
.CIDSJ
                      Usual Latr. Apparatus
Standard Methods 14 Ed,
Procedure letter from
G.£.. Schlessinger PhD
State Chemist

                      Usual Lab. Apparatus
                                                Standard Methods  14 Ed,
                                                Procedure letter  from
                                                &..&*. Schlessinger PhD
                                                State Chemist;
                      Usual Lab; Apparatus
                      Usual Lab Apparatus
                                                Standard Methods 14 Ed,
                                                See attached sheet for
                                                reagents,  procedure and
                                                calculation •  :
 T... 0. C
                     Samples .sent out to Griswold and Fuss
                     Environmental Laboratories Inc.
                                     126

-------
                               C.O.D.

 Reagents                                                      .

 1.   Oxidizing  solution:   Dissolve 2.5 grams potassium dichromate in a mix-
     ture  of 500 ml.  each of cone, sulfuric acid and 857. ortho-phosphoric
     acid. Triturate the dichroraate with small amounts of the phosphoric
     acid  before adding  the sulfuric acid.              -  -     .      .

 2.   Potassium  Iodide Solution:   Dissolve 55.3 grams of potassium iodide in
     200 ml. of distilled water.

 3.   Starch Indicator Solution:   Prepare according to Standard Methods.

 A.   .1  N  thio  = boil and cool 1  liter of distilled water, add 24.82 g
     NA2S2°3  ? H2°*   Preserve with *§ NAOH Per liter.          .-..

     .05 N thio =  cut this with equal  volume of distilled water.       .   .

 Procedure           .        .'..-.;  .'"     . .         . .         . "... •

 1.   Pipette 25 ml.  of oxidizing  solution into a 500-ml. Erlenmeyer flask.
 2.   Pipette 5  ml. of the sample  (or larger or smaller amounts depending  -.
     upon  the strength of the waste*:)   into the oxidizing solution.

 3.   Insert a thermometer into mixture and place on a hot plate.

-4.   Bring the  temperature of the mixture to 165-170°C.  Do not go over
     170°C.                              . :    ..     ' - - - -:-

 5.   Cool  the mixture to room temperature.-.-       ....:•..—  .......  .---I-—     ....

 6.   Add 200 ml. of distilled water.   .           .         .

 7.   Add 10 ml. of potassium iodide solution.                   •

 8.   Titrate with  sodium thiosulfate in the follwing manner:  Add  thio-
     sulfate until mixture is a straw color.  Add sufficient starch
     indicator  solution to produce a dark, opaque color.  Continue adding
     thiosulfate slowly until a light transparent blue color is prpduced.
     The endpoint  is now a few drops away.  Add thiosulfate dropwise  until
     the blue color is dissipated leaving a greenish-blue clear solution.

 9.   Run a blank the same as above with the exception that distilled  water
     is substituted for the  sample of waste;..                 ;

 Calculation                                         .          .

     mg/1  C.O.D. = (B-S) 400            .
                  ml of sample

     B = mis  of thio to titrate blank.
     S = mis  of thio to titrate sample.
                                   127

-------
           APPENDIX C






GRAPHIC SUMMARY OF EVALUATIVE RUN




  MARCH, APRIL, MAY, JUNE 1979
              128

-------
       .GRAPHIC  SUMMARY OF EVALUATIVE  RUN  -  MARCH *79
     3 4 F. 6 7  6 3  /Q // /2  /3 14- 16 16 H Id 15 20 21. g 2} 24 25 2627 26 21 W 31
/  Z
                                                                        30 3 1

-------
	GRAPHIC.SUMMARY_QF EVALUATIVE  RUN_.i. APRIL  '?9
 2 .3 4  5 S  7 6 -9-JO-JJ 12 13 J4.-I5 '6 J7 IS 19 20 2LJ? 73 24 Z* 2f 27 W 23 30
                                    16  17 'B Id 2O Zl Z2 23

-------
       GRAPHIC   SUMMARY  OF  EVALUATIVE  RUN - MAY  '79
/ 2  3  4 S  6  7  Q S>  /O II  12 13 U  IS  IS 17 IB 19 2O 21 22 2$ 24- 26 26  27 28 23 SO
                     3  A? //  12  13 14 15 /6 17 18 13 2O  21 22 23 24 25 26 27  26
30 31

-------
       GRAPHIC  SUMMARY OF EVALUATIVE  RUN  - JUNE  '79
/  2  3 4-  S  6  7  B  3  10  I' II  II  14 IS /g 17 18  'S 2O 2i  It 2}  24 25 26 17
30

-------