EPA 430/9-74-011


  SUPPLEMENT TO  FEDERAL GUIDELINES: DESIGN, OPERATION,
  AND MAINTENANCE OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
WASTEWATER  TREATMENT
                        MARCH 1974
          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
              Office of Water Program Operations
                   Washington, D.C.  20460



-------
          SUPPLEMENT TO  FEDERAL GUIDELINES:  DESIGN
                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
               WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES

          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                   TECHNICAL BULLETIN

               WASTEWATER TREATMENT PONDS
1.  PURPOSE:

    This Bulletin presents technical information which will be used by
Environmental Protection Agency Regional Administrators to review grant
applications involving wastewater treatment ponds.

2.  RELATED PUBLICATIONS:

    This Bulletin supplements the Federal Guidelines:  Design, Operation,
and Maintenance of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants.  Additional
process design information is contained in EPA Technology Transfer publi-
cations entitled "Upgrading Lagoons" (1) and "Upgrading Existing Lagoons"
(2), and therefore is not repeated in this Bulletin.

3.  TERMINOLOGY:

    A wastewater treatment pond is a large, relatively shallow basin
designed for long term detention of wastewater which may or may not
have received prior treatment.  While in the basin the wastewater is
biologically treated to reduce biochemical oxygen demand and suspended
solids.  There are many different types of lagoons and ponds; however,
the following terminology is used for the wastewater treatment ponds
discussed in this Bulletin

    a.  Photosynthetic pond - A pond which is designed to rely on
photosynthetic oxygenation (i.e. oxygen from algae)  for any portion of
the oxygen needed for waste treatment.  This includes oxidation ponds
and facultative lagoons.  These ponds may have supplemental aeration
by mechanical means.  With regard to hydraulic flow, photosynthetic
ponds are either of the (1) flow-through type, in which the pond
discharges relatively continuously throughout the year; or, (2) con-
trol led-discharge type, in which the pond is designed to retain the

-------
          SUPPLEMENT TO FEDERAL GUIDELINES:   DESIGN
                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
               WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES

          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                   TECHNICAL BULLETIN

               WASTEWATER TREATMENT PONDS
1.  PURPOSE:

    This Bulletin presents technical information which will  be used by
Environmental Protection Agency Regional Administrators to review grant
applications involving wastewater treatment ponds.

2.  RELATED PUBLICATIONS:

    This Bulletin supplements the Federal Guidelines:  Design, Operation,
and Maintenance of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants.   Additional
process design information is contained in EPA Technology  Transfer publi-
cations entitled "Upgrading Lagoons" (1) and "Upgrading Existing Lagoons"
(2), and therefore is not repeated in this Bulletin.

3.  TERMINOLOGY:

    A wastewater treatment pond is a large, relatively shallow basin
designed for long term detention of wastewater which  may or may not
have received prior treatment.  While in the basin  the wastewater is
biologically treated to reduce biochemical oxygen demand and suspended
solids.  There are many different types of lagoons  and ponds; however,
the following terminology is used for the wastewater  treatment ponds
discussed in this Bulletin

    a.  Photosynthetic*pond - A pond which is designed to  rely on
photosynthetic oxygenation (i.e. oxygen from algae) for any  portion of
the oxygen needed for waste treatment.  This includes oxidation ponds
and facultative lagoons.  These ponds may have supplemental  aeration
by mechanical means.  With regard to hydraulic flow,  photosynthetic
ponds are either of the (1) flow-through type, in which the pond
discharges relatively continuously throughout the year; or,  (2) con-
trol led-discharge type, in which the pond is designed to retain the

-------
 wastewater without discharge from six  months  to one year, followed
 by controlled discharge over a  short time  interval (typically about
 one to three weeks).

     b.  Aerated  pond  -  A pond which is not designed to rely on any
 photosynthetic oxygenation  to provide  oxygen  needed for biological
 waste treatment.   Air is supplied by mechanical means.  Aerated
 ponds are either (1)  complete mix, in  which sufficient energy is
 imparted to the  wastewater  to prevent  deposition of solids in the
 pond, or, (2)  partial-mix,  in which only sufficient energy is used
 to dissolve and  mix oxygen  in the wastewater.  Solid materials
 settle in the  partial-mix pond  and are decomposed anaerobically.
 There will  be  algae in  the  partial-mix aerated pond, but usually
 far fewer than in  a photosynthetic pond.

     c.   Complete  retention  pond - This  type of pond relies on evapora-
 tion and percolation  exceeding  inflow  so that there is no discharge of
 pollutants.  This  method is  acceptable  at  some locations with suitable
 climatic conditions and where consistent with water rights.  Special
 attention must be  given to  protecting  ground water and preventing odors.

 4.   USE  OF THE CRITERIA:

     Projects involving  waste  treatment  ponds proposed for Federal
 financial  assistance  from EPA will be based on the criteria contained
 in  this  Technical  Bulletin.   Approval  can  be given to different designs
 if reasonable  assurance can be  given to the EPA Regional  Administrator
 that satisfactory  performance will be achieved.

     There is a wide variation in  the types  of ponds and the wastewaters
 treated  by  such ponds,  as well  as  the performance of ponds in different
 geographical locations.   The  criteria in this Technical Bulletin are
 intended to provide a conservative baseline of engineering practice, and
must be  applied with engineering  judgement  on a case-by-case basis.
The  EPA  Regional  Administrator will review  each project to identify
and  resolve additional  factors  important to the design of a specific
project.   Responsibility  for satisfactory  performance, however,  remains
with  the  grant applicant.  Additional  construction may be necessary if
completed facilities are  not  in compliance with effluent limitations.

     It is the  policy of EPA to encourage the use of new technology.
EPA  Regional Administrators will continue to give full consideration
to new methods which may not be included in this bulletin.

-------
 5.  PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS:

    The  Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (the
 Act) established the minimum performance requirements for publicly
 owned treatment works.  In accordance with Section 301(b)(l)(B) of the
 Act, publicly owned treatment works must meet at least effluent limita-
 tions based on secondary treatment as defined by the EPA Administrator.
 EPA has  published information on secondary treatment in 40 CFR Part
 133(3).  The criteria in this Technical Bulletin are intended to
 result in wastewater treatment ponds which can achieve effluent limi-
 tations  based on the secondary treatment information.  More stringent
 performance requirements may be necessary to meet other requirements
 such as  water quality standards.  In such cases the criteria contained
 in this  Bulletin will have to be adjusted accordingly.

 6.  BACKGROUND:

    There are more than 4,000 publicly owned ponds in the United States.
 Generally these ponds are located in small communities and are designed
 for flows less than 1 MGD.  Ponds have been used because operation is
 simple,  operating costs are low, and land is available.  The great
 majority of the existing ponds are the photosynthetic flow-through type.

    There is a wide variation in the design of these systems.  Organic
 loadings per acre (both in design practice and actual operation) have
 increased with time.  Comprehensive performance data on these ponds is
 generally lacking, particularly for the flow-through, photosynthetic
 type.  At the typical facility there has been no test program or, at
 the most, infrequent grab sampling.

    Regarding the ability of flow-through photosynthetic ponds to
meet secondary treatment requirements, the limited data indicates that:

    a.   The BOD level Js borderline, but probably could be achieved by
 conservative design.  The BOD level would not be met if the pond continued
 to discharge while there is prolonged ice cover over the pond.

    b.   The suspended solids level is generally not achieved because
of the algae in the effluent.

    c.   Fecal coliform levels are not achieved without a positive
means of disinfection such as chlorination.

-------
     d.   The pH of the effluent  varies markedly depending on alkalinity/C02
 relationships.  The variation is,  however,  rarely sufficient to require
 pH adjustment (4).

     Despite these generalizations,  it is important to note that there
 are reports of flow-through  ponds which do  achieve secondary treatment
 performance.   Satisfactory performance appears to be attributable to
 either  favorable year-round  climate as in the Southwestern United States
 or conservative design (up to 6 cells).

     Controlled discharge  ponds  have been used in the North, where, if
 properly operated,  they can  meet the BOD level.  They are borderline on
 the suspended solids, but probably  could meet the level with careful
 operation.   Such ponds may not  require positive disinfection to meet
 the fecal coliform  levels.

     Aerated ponds with suspended solids separation and disinfection,
 if properly designed, can meet  the  BOD requirements, but partial-mix
 units are borderline on suspended solids.   Granular media filtration
 may be  needed to assure satisfactory year round performance.

 7.   FLOW-THROUGH PHOTOSYNTHET1C PONDS:

     Regional  Administrators  will make grants for this type of pond
 without  supplemental  treatment  only when there is reasonable assurance
 that the pond will  perform satisfactorily.

     The  determination could  be  based on satisfactory performance of a
 similar  pond  in  a comparable environment or on pilot plant performance
 with conservative scale-up factors..  Data from at least one year's
 operation should be  sufficient  to show satisfactory performance.  Data
 from shorter  periods  may  not adequately reflect seasonal variations in
 performance.

     When Regional Administrators make such grants, the Facilities Plan
 should include a discussion  of  actions to be taken if upgrading is
 determined to be necessary after the plant is placed in operation.

 8.   CONTROLLED DISCHARGE  PONDS:

    The  controlled discharge pond is designed to receive and retain
wastewaters for  six   months to one year.  At the end of this long-term
 detention, the contents of the  pond are discharged during an interval
 of one to three weeks.  Since experience with this type of pond is
 presently limited to  Northern States with definite climatic seasons,
 it may be necessary to  run pilot studies in States with only slight
 seasonal climate changes.

-------
    Ponds of this type have operated satisfactorily in Michigan using
the following design criteria:

            Overall organic loading:  20-25 pounds BOD5/acre.

            Liquid depth:  not more than 6 feet for the first
            cell.  Not more than 8 feet for subsequent cells.

            Hydraulic detention:  At least 6 months above the
            2 foot liquid level (including precipitation), but
            not less than the period of ice cover.

            Number of cells:  At least 3 for reliability, with
            piping flexibility for parallel or series operation.

    The design of the controlled discharge pond must include an anlysis
showing that receiving stream water quality standards will be maintained
during discharge intervals, and that the receiving watercourses can
accomodate the discharge rate from the pond.

    Selecting the optimum day and hour for release of the pond contents
is critical to the success of this method.  The operation and maintenance
manual must include instructions on how to correlate pond discharge with
effluent and stream quality.  The pond contents and stream must be care-
fully examined, before and during the release of the pond contents.  A
Statewide program of controlled releases (keyed to tests of 8005, dis-
solve oxygen, and suspended solids, fecal  coliform as well as sunlight,
weather, and streamflow) has been effective.

    In the Michigan program, discharge of effluents follows a consistent
pattern for all  ponds.   The following steps are usually taken:

    a.  Isolate the cell to be discharged, usually the final one in the
series, by valving-off the inlet line from the preceding cell.

    b.  Arrange to analyze samples for BOD, suspended solids,  volatile
suspended solids, pH, and other parameters which.may be required for a
particular location.

    c.  Plan work so as to spend full time on control of the discharge
throughout the period.

    d.  Sample contents of the cell to be discharged for dissolve oxygen,
noting turbidity, color and any unusual  conditions.

-------
     e.  Note conditions in the stream to receive the effluent.

     f.  Notify the State regulatory agency of results of these observa-
 tions and plans for discharge and obtain approval.

     g.  If discharge is approved, commence discharge and continue so
 long as weather is favorable, dissolved oxygen is near or above satura-
 tion values and turbidity is not excessive following the prearranged
 discharge flow pattern among the cells.  Usually this consists of
 drawing down the last two cells in the series (if there are three or
 more) to about 18-24 inches after isolation; interrupting the discharge
 for a week or more to divert raw waste to a cell which has been drawn
 down and resting the initial cell before its discharge.  When this
 first cell is drawn down to about 24 inches depth, the usual  series
 flow pattern, without discharge, is resumed.  During discharge to the
 receiving waters samples are taken at least three times each  day near
 the discharge pipe for immediate dissolved oxygen analysis.  Additional
 testing may be required for suspended solids.

 9.  COMPLETE-MIX AERATED PONDS:

     This type of pond can be sesigned to meet secondary treatment
 requirements on a similar basis as an activated sludge process, with
 or without solids return (5).  The criteria in this Bulletin  are not
 applicable to a complete-mix aerated pond.

10.  PARTIAL-MIX AERATED  PONDS:

     The process design can be based on reactor mixing, flow regime,
 biological  kinetics, and oxygen transfer rates.  As defined in this
 Bulletin,  the partial-mix aerated pond will not include any allowance
 for photosynthetic oxygenation.

     At least three cells will be provided with aeration in each cell
 (except designated clarifier cells)  so that dissolved oxygen  is present
 throughout the surface layer.  It is usually beneficial to recirculate
 effluent high in dissolved oxygen to the pond influent.  The  aeration
 should be  tapered so that the final  portion of the final  cell  is a
 quiescent  zone and can function as a clarifier, or a separate  clarifier
 can be provided.

     The pond volume will  be sized on the basis of low temperature
 reaction rates, with allowance for sedimentation.  Aeration equip-
 ment will  be sized for the warm weather oxygen uptake rate and for
 mixing in  the pond.   Oxygen transfer will  include consideration of
 pond depth,  which, for a new pond, typically is 8 feet or greater.

-------
     In cold climates, surface aerators will  be designed  to  ensure
 satisfactory operation during freezing weather, including splash guards,
 heated housings, and design to keep floating ice away from  the  aerator.

     See EPA Technical Bulletin 430-99-74-001 (6) for aeration unit
 reliability criteria.

     Partial-mix ponds may have high suspended solids on  an  infrequent
 basis due to algae.  To ensure satisfactory  performance, capability
 should be provided for algae removal.  Because of the relatively low
 amounts of algae a granular dual  media filter, along with capability
 for feeding a polymer filter aid, should be  satisfactory.

11.  GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:

     The following criteria apply  to the waste treatment  ponds covered
 in this Bulletin:

     a.  Positive Disinfection

     In the past, pond designs have relied on natural die-off of pathogens.
 Performance data shows that this  method is not sufficiently reliable
 for a flow-through photosynthetic pond to achieve secondary treatment
 fecal  coliform levels except with recommended loadings and  very well
 managed controlled discharge systems.  A positive means  of  disinfection
 must be provided except where data from a similar pond in a comparable
 environment shows satisfactory performance.   In that case the grant
 applicant must agree to install  positive disinfection if performance
 is not achieved following construction.

     Chlorination can achieve the  required fecal  coliform kills; however,
 if algae are not removed, excessive chlorination can result in  algae
 die-off and increased BOD due to  algae cell  decay.   Echelberger, et al.  (7)
 studied the clorination of algae  laden waters and concluded that
 apparent algae cell lysing following chlorination to a desirable residual
 level  significantly increases the soluble organic concentration in the
 water.  They also concluded that  if chlorine is  used as  the disinfectant,
 serious consideration should be given to effective algae removal prior
 to disinfection.  Horn (8) presents a laboratory method to optimize the
 the chlorine residual and reaction time when chlorinating algae laden
 waters.  These considerations would be important where the  effluent
 BOD is close to the permitted value and BOD  increase due to algae die-
 off would result in a permit violation.

     The chlorine should be applied to the pond effluent  at  a concentra-
 tion and contact time sufficient  to achieve  effluent limitations.  The
 optimum chlorine residual will  be determined when the system is opera-
 tional.  A contact time of 20 minutes at peak hourly flow is recommended.

-------
    b.  Prevention of Short Circuiting

    Multi-cell ponds, operated in series, perform substantially better
than single-cell or two-cell ponds.  Additional  cells reduce short
circuiting of untreated wastewaters through the  pond.  No less  than
three cells will be provided with the initial  cell  sized to avoid
anaerobic conditions (see the information beginning on Page 54  of
Reference 4).

    The Missouri Basin Engineering Health Council  (4), makes the fol-
lowing recommendations for photosynthetic ponds  (there are, however,
no performance reports on ponds using this system):

        "The first pond should be designed with  a 4 ft.  normal  depth
         to give maximum surface area for photosynthesis.   The  inlet
         should be designed to give a circular,  deeper,  sludge  storage
         zone below the bottom of the normal  pond.   This will allow
         maximum wind mixing to occur without  stirring up the settled
         solids.  The sludge storage section should have a maximum
         diameter of 100-200 ft.   with a  center  depth of 4 to 6 ft.
         The raw waste inlet pipe should  be located in the center
         of the sludge storage section so that the  raw wastes enter
         the pond in a radial  fashion to  distribute the  load around
         the inlet pipe in the same fashion that inlet structures  are
         designed for circular clarifiers except that all  of the
         baffles in the oxidation pond should  be submerged.   This  will
         permit the heavy solids  to remain around the inlet and under-
         go anaerobic decomposition with  a minimum  oxygen  demand.   The
         outlet from the first cell  should have  the capacity to change
         the depth from 3 to 5 ft in 6 inch increments to  give  opera-
         tional  flexibility as well  as a  drain for  the entire pond.
         The outlet structure  should be designed to minimize fluid
         velocities at a single point. In small  plants  a  large pipe
         outlet with adjustable sections  is adequate.  In  large plants
         an adjustable weir will  be required.  There should  be  three
         sets  of baffles concentrically around the  effluent  structure.
         The first baffle should  be designed to  extend around the  out-
         let structure 3-5 ft.  with  the baffle extending at  least  6
         inches  to onefoot above the highest water  level and down  to
         within one foot of the bottom of the  pond.   Thus,  the  effluent
         will  be drawn from the bottom of the  pond.   The second
         concentric baffle rises  from the bottom of the  pond to
         within 6 inches of the surface at the lowest possible  level.
         The third concentric baffle is the same as the  first,
                            8

-------
          rising above the maximum surface and dropping to within  one
          foot of the bottom of the pond.  These baffles are  designed
          to give an up and over type baffle with a bottom drawoff to
          minfmtze removal of algae from the active zone and  to  allow
          the algae to congregate at the surface within a quiescent
          ring that ts not affected by wind action.  In effect,  a
          stilling basin is created which encourages the algae to  ac-
          cumulate at the light surface and minimizes mixing  to  inter-
          fere with sedimentation."

     c.  Protection of Ground Water From Pond Seepage

     Ponds containing wastewater, if allowed to drain freely  to  aquifers
 or bedrock crevices, could cause significant ground water pollution.
 To prevent ground water degradation, ponds must be designed  to  minimize
 seepage losses and will either:  (1) have sufficient distance through
 low permeability soil to ground water to ensure protection of the aquifers,
 or (2) have all submerged surfaces of the pond sealed BO as  to  ensure
 protection of the ground water.

     In borderlines cases the Regional Administrator may require percola-
 tion tests or observation wells and a monitoring plan.

12.  SUPPLEMENTAL TREATMENT FOR FLOW-THROUGH PHOTOSYNTHET1C PONDS:

     Methods of providing supplemental treatment for flow-through  ponds
 are being researched.  Methods included in this Bulletin are those which
 are reported to have been successful at pilot or plant scale.   EPA is
 aware that other concepts have been proposed and some of these  are being
 tested.  The Bulletin will be revised from time to time as information
 on other successful  methods becomes available.

     Most techniques  for upgrading flow-through ponds involve algae
 removal.  Two comprehensive discussions of algae removal  techniques
 have been prepared (9, 10).  In this Bulletin, as in the EPA research
 program, priority has been given-to those methods which retain  the
 operational simplicity features of flow-through ponds.

     Supplemental treatment must be designed for the conditions  at a
 specific site.  Pilot testing may be required, particularly  if  there
 are significant quantities of industrial waste and depending on the
 size of the facility.

-------
13.  SUPPLEMENTAL TREATMENT METHODS:

     a.  Conversion to Controlled Discharge.

     An existing flow-through pond can  be converted to a controlled
 discharge pond if the previously outlined conditions are met.  Usually
 additional  land area will  be required  to obtain  the volume required
 for controlled detention.

     b.  Intermittent Sand  Filtration.

     Intermittant sand filters were used  in the past for flows up to
 about 0.25  M6D, but the high cost of labor to clean the filter sand
 reduced this useage.  Application of pond effluents to intermittant
 sand filters has been successful  on  a  pilot scale.  Information to date
 is limited  (11) and designs  should be  conservative.  The upper limit
 of hydraulic loading for pond effluents  should be 0.4 MGD/acre until
 more information is obtained.   Design  Information is contained in
 Chapter 12  of Reference 12.   When freezing could occur on the filter
 surface, the pond should be  sized to retain the  wastewater during
 freezing weather conditions  or  there should be an alternative operational
 plan to ensure effluent limitations  are  met

     In their laboratory and  prototype  field studies of intermittant
 sand filtration of pond effluents, Marshall and  Middlebrooks (n) found:

               (1)   Viable  algae cells  passed the entire depth
                    of all  the filter sands studied.

               (2)   Hydraulic loading rate did not affect the
                    algae or  suspended  solids removal efficiency
                    at the  0.1,0.2, or  0.3 MGD/acre employed in
                    the laboratory study.   The effects of hydraulic
                    loading rate on suspended solids removals in
                    the field studies were inconclusive because
                    of the  large quantities of fines washed from
                    the filters,  but  volatile suspended solids
                    removal did  indicate  a reduction in removal
                    efficiency as  the hydraulic loading rate was
                    increased.

               C3)   Smaller effective size sands  produced better algae
                    or suspended  and  volatile suspended solids removals.
                    Sand size was  not  a  significant factor in algae
                    removal at applied  algae concentrations of 15 and
                            10

-------
                   30 mg/1, but was significant when the con-
                   centration was increased to 45-50 mg/1  in
                   both the laboratory and field filters.  At
                   the 0.5 MGD/acre hydraulic loading rate,
                   monthly mean volatile suspended solids were
                   essentially equal for the 0.17 and 0.72 mm
                   effective size sands.   Efficiences fluctuated
                   considerably from one  sand to the other during
                   the, study^ period.   But in  general  the 0.17mm
                   effective size sand produced a Setter quality
                   effluent.

    c.  Land Treatment of Pond Effluents.

    This method of using pond effluents as a water resource has particu-
lar application in water short areas where land is readily available.
Application rates vary widely depending on method of application, crops
involved, and climate.  Seasonal application is usually related to crop
growth and additional pond capacity may be required for storage during
the dormant season.  Comprehensive information on land treatment systems
is available (13, 14), including many examples where the wastewater has
been stored in a pond before land application.  Additional design in-
formation will be contained in EPA Evaluation Procedures for Land
Application Systems (now in preparation).  Technical assistance on
complex projects is available through EPA Regional Offices, the Office
of Water Program Operations, and the Robert S. Kerr Water Research
Center, Ada, Oklahoma.

    d.  Addition of Supplemental Aeration.

    A flow-through photosynthetic pond can be upgraded by the installa-
tion of diffused or mechanical aerators.  For optimum efficiency in
oxygen transfer and mixing the pond should be deepened  about 5 feet
(to about 10 feet liquid depth).  Also, additional electrical power
will be required to operate the aeration system.

    e.  Chemical Coagulation.

    Coagulation followed by sedimentation, and possibly filtration
has been used extensively for the removal of suspended and colloidal
material from water.  In the case of the chemical treatment of waste-
water treatment pond effluents the data are not comprehensive (10).
Lime, alum, and ferric salts are the most commonly used coagulating
agents.  Because of the many variables a pilot testing program will
usually be necessary to ensure proper operation of the system.  There
must be a satisfactory method of ultimate disposition of resultant
sludges.
                               11

-------
      Unless designed for constant flow, close control  of the process
 is required to obtain satisfactory performance.   Depending  on the
 alkalinity of the wastewater, the operating cost of the chemicals
 for this method can be relatively high.  Additional  information  is
 contained in References 1, 2, 9, and 10.

14.  ADDITIONAL FIELD EXPERIENCE:

      The information contained in this Bulletin  will be modified
 as additional  field experience becomes available.   Those having  such
 information are encouraged to submit it to the Director, Municipal
 Construction Division (AW-447), Office of Water  Program Operations,
 U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, Washington,  D.C.   20460.
                             12

-------
 Bibliography

 1.  Upgrading Lagoons, by D. H. Caldwell, D. S.  Parker,  and  W.  R.  Uhte.
     Prepared for the EPA Technology Transfer Program.  August 1973.

 2.  Upgrading Existing Lagoons, by R. F. Lewis and J.  M.  Smith.   Prepared
     for the EPA Technology Transfer Program.  October  1973.

 3.  Secondary Treatment Information, 40 CFR Part 133,  Federal Register
     Volume 38, No. 159, 22298-22299.  August 17, 1973.

 4.  Waste Treatment Lagoons - State of the Art, by Missouri  Basin
     Engineering Health Council.  EPA Research Report 17090 EHX 07/71.
     July, 1971.

 5.  Wastewater Engineering, by Metcalf and Eddy, Inc.  McGraw-Hill
     Book Company.   1972.

 6.  Technical Bulletin:  Design Criteria for Mechanical, Electric, and
     Fluid System and Component Reliability, Office of  Water Program
     Operations.  EPA Publication 430-99-74-001.   1973.

 7.  Echelberger, W. F., J. L. Pavoni, P. C. Singer, and  M.  W. Tenney,
     "Disinfection of Algae Laden Waters", Journal of the Sanitary
     Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. SA 5.  October  1971.

 8.  Horn, L., "Chlorination of Waste Pond Effluent", 2nd  International
     Symposium for Waste Treatment Lagoons, edited by Ross E. McKinney
     for Missouri Basin Engineering Health Council.  1970.

 9.  Removal of Algae from Waste Stabilization Pond Effluents - A State
     of the Art, by V. Kothandaraman and R. L. Evans. Illinois State
     Water Survey Circular 108, Urbana, Illinois.  1972.

10.  Evaluation of Techniques for Algae Removal from Wastewater Stabiliza-
     tion Ponds by E. J. Middlebrooks, D. B. Poreel la,  R.  A Gearheart,
     G. R. Marshall, J. H. Reynolds, and W. J. Grenny.  Utah  Water Research
     Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan, Utah. January 1974.

11.  Intermittant Sand Filtration to Upgrade Existing Wastewater Treat-
     ment Facilities, by G. R. Marshall and E. J. Middlebrooks.  Utah
     Water Research Laboratory, Utah State University,  Logan, Utah.
     February, 1974.
                                 13

-------
  12.  Sewage Treatment Plant Design, ASCE Manual of Engineering Practice
       No. 36/WPCF Manual of Practice No. 8.  1959.

  13.  Survey of Facilities Using Land Application of Wastewater, by
       R. H. Sullivan, M. M. Conn, and S. S. Baxter, Prepared for Office
       of Water Program Operations.  EPA Publication 430-9-73-006.   July 1973.

  14.  Wastewater Treatment and Reuse by Land Application,  by C. E.  Pound
       and R. W. Crites, EPA Research Report 660/2-73-006a.   August, 1973.


Note:  Information on EPA publications can be obtained from the EPA
       Regtonal Administrator.
                                     14

-------