EPA-660/2-74-040

May 1974
                       Environmental  Protection Technology Series
   Granite Industry Wastewater

   Treatment
                                      532
UJ
CD
                                 Office of Research and Development

                                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                                 Washington, D.C. 20460

-------
             RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research  reports of the  Office  of  Research  and
Monitoring,   Environmental Protection Agency, have
been grouped  into five series.  These   five   broad
categories  were established to facilitate further
development   and  application   of   environmental
technology.    Elimination  of traditional grouping
was  consciously  planned  to  foster    technology
transfer   and  a  maximum  interface   in  related
fields.   The  five series are:

   1.  Environmental Health Effects Research
   2.  Environmental Protection Technology
   3.  Ecological Research
   <*.  Environmental Monitoring
   5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION    TECHNOLOGY   series.    This    series
describes  research   performed  to  develop  and
demonstrate    instrumentation,    equipment     and
methodology   to  repair  or  prevent environmental
degradation from point and  .non-point   sources  of
pollution.  This work provides the new  or improved
technology  required for the control and treatment
of pollution  sources to meet environmental quality
standards.
                   EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has "been reviewed by the Office of Research and
Development, EPA, and approved for publication.  Approval does
not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.

-------
                                                May 1971*-
         GRANITE INDUSTRY WASTEWATER TREATMENT
                           By
                  Willard B. Farnham
                 The State of Vermont
         Agency of Environmental Conservation
             Department  of Water Resources
               Montpelier, Vermont 05602
                   Project 12080 GCH
                Program Element 1BB037
                    Project Officer

                   Allyn Richardson
            Environmental Protection Agency
                 John  F.  Kennedy Bldg.
              Boston,  Massachusetts 02203
                     Prepared for

          OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
         U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20U60
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20102 • Price $1.46

-------
                               ABSTRACT
     A study of wastewater discharge in the granite industry has been
conducted to determine wastewater characteristics, methods of pollution
abatement and disposal methods for waste granite sludge.

     The project included a study of overall water use in a granite
plant, water optimization studies, and water reduction studies.
Laboratory testing was conducted for waste characterization and liquid
solids separation techniaues.   A pilot plant was designed, constructed
and operated to test the efficiency of plant scale separation procedures
A prototype plant was designed and constructed to test the possibility
of complete water reuse in the granite industry.  Successful operation
of both plants indicates that  a practical method of treating granite
waste effluent has been developed and that complete recycle of treated
effluent is possible and economically feasible.

     Studies were performed to determine the possibility of by-product
use of waste granite sludge.  Two uses were found for the sludge,  but
an economic evaluation indicated that there was insufficient raw
material to establish a by-product industry.

     A survey of sludge disposal methods in the industry showed that
some modification of waste disposal facilities, and more cooperation
by the industry, would improve the sludge disposal procedures.  A
modified type of settling lagoon was recommended.

     This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project No. 12080 GCH
under the sponsorship of the Environmental Protection Agency.
                                  ii

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section




I




II




III




IV




V




VI




VII




VIII




IX




X




XI




XII




XIII




XIV
Conclusions




Recommendations




Introduction




Preliminary Studies




Water Use Optimization Studies




Waste Characterization Studies




Pilot Plant Design and Operation




By-Product Use Studies




Sludge Disposal Methods




Legal Considerations




Acknowledgements




References




Glossary




Append ix
Page




 I




 2




 3




 8




13




16




21




32




33




34




36




37




38




40
                                  iii

-------
                                FIGURES



No.                                                              Page
                                                                /
I           Plant Layout - Nativi and Sons, Inc.                   9

II          Plant Layout - Granite Industries of  Vermont,  Inc.    11

III         Pilot Plant - Locally Fabricated                     23

IV          Link Belt Pilot Plant                                25

V           Prototype Pilot Plant                                27

VI          Flow Diagram - Water Reuse System                    29

VII         Electrical Wiring Diagram - Water Reuse              31

VIII        Recommended Lagoon System                            35
                                 iv

-------
                               SECTION I
                              CONCLUSIONS
     As a result of a study of water use and waste discharge In the
granite industry the following conclusions have been reached:

     1.  A saving of 25 to 507. can be realized in overall water use
by careful attention to water conservation practices and minor changes
in equipment.

     2.  The present practice of primary clarification in a settling
lagoon or pit will not produce a waste effluent that is compatible with
present effluent standards of the Vermont Department of Water Resources.

     3.  Chemical treatment of the partially settled waste discharge
with ferric chloride and lime will produce a waste effluent which is
well within acceptable standards.

     4.  Operation of a prototype pilot plant showed that an effluent
of satisfactory quality for complete reuse in plant processing could be
produced.

     5.  By-product use studies of waste granite sludge failed to find
a product that would be economically feasible to produce.

     6.  Studies of ultimate sludge disposal indicated that more
industry cooperation, design changes and better construction of waste
lagoons would greatly improve waste sludge disposal.

-------
                              SECTION II
                            RECOMMENDATIONS
     1.  Although there is no present water shortage in the area, the
granite industry should be urged to adopt water conservation practices
because of financial considerations (easier and less costly waste
treatment with less rock flour discharged), and to avoid future water
supply problems.

     2.  The industry should adopt chemical treatment of waste effluent
to produce an effluent compatible with state water quality standards and
to reduce stream pollution in the area.

     3.  Where space and financing are available, each processing plant
should consider the installation of a complete water recycle and reuse
system, to further conserve water and provide financial benefits.

     4.  Although no by-product use for waste sludge was found, several
promising leads were investigated, and it is recommended that this study
be continued on an industry-wide basis.
                           \.
     5.  Modest design changes and cooperative waste sludge disposal
are recommended, to alleviate the existing problems in ultimate disposal.

-------
                              SECTION III

                             INTRODUCTION
     The granite industry is undoubtedly the leading mineral industry
in the State of Vermont, considering the number of persons employed in
the industry and the net value of the product.  In excess of one hundred
firms are engaged in quarrying or processing granite or in furnishing
services to the industry.

     Prior to the depression of the 1930's the industry was widely
dispersed throughout the State, numerous quarries existed and several
types and hues of granite were processed.  With the economic recovery
accompanying the period following World War II, the industry tended to
concentrate in the Barre area and most types of stone except the type
known as Barre Grey decreased in popularity.  As a result, nearly all of
the stone quarried in the State now comes from a few quarries in the
Graniteville-Websterville area of Barre Town, and the processors pur-
chase their raw material from one or two quarry companies.  Since
granite processing is, in part, a wet processing procedure, this
concentration of industry has resulted in a major pollution problem in
the area of Barre Town and Barre City; an area drained by a small
tributary of the Winooski River known as the Stevens Branch.

     Processing in the granite industry involves the operations of
quarrying, sawing, shaping, surface preparation, decorating and final
cleaning.  Quarrying is not primarily a wet process, although some water
is used for lubrication while drilling, and for dust control.  The stone
is drilled, wedged and split from the quarry sides and transported,
generally by truck, to the processor.

     Sawing is performed today almost entirely by wire saws, which are
capable of better control and adjustment, and waste less usable stone.
The hardened wire, frequently mounted on wheels hundreds of feet apart
to distribute wear and thus prolong wire life, cuts through the stone
using a relatively coarse grade (90 mesh) carborundum as the cutting
agent, in a slurry of stone dust and water.  This lubricates the wire
and keeps it from whipping or vibrating and thus enlarging the cut.
Since a great deal of the slurry in this operation is recirculated to
obtain additional use of the carborundum, the volume of waste discharge
is not great.  However, final washdown of the stone at the conclusion of
the sawing process introduces a surge of heavily polluted water.

     Two other methods of sawing find limited use in granite processing.
One method, formerly widely used, involves the use of multiple strips
of hardened steel, in a regular back and forth sawing action, in former
years using sand, but today using carborundum, as the cutting agent.

-------
Water is required for lubrication and cooling, and a moderate flow of
polluted waste water is discharged.  This type of machine, generally
called a gang saw, has generally been replaced by the multiple-strand
wire saw.  For limited use in sawing small stones, the so-called "dia-
mond" saw is used.  This circular saw with a cutting edge consisting of
tungsten carbide or diamond dust, does not use carborundum as a cutting
agent, but does require water for lubrication and cooling.  Since the
waste stream contains only the stone dust produced by the sawing opera-
tion, and since a rather large volume of water is required for cooling
purposes, the waste stream is not as heavily polluted as the waste
discharges from other sawing operations.

     Shaping the stone may be entirely a dry operation using hammers,
chisels, etc., or it may involve a wet grinding process known in the
granite industry as "planing".  The "planer" is a tungsten carbide
grinding wheel up to six inches in width, mounted on an adjustable
track which may be used to produce the commonly observed curved surfaces
on monumental stones.  Use of the planer requires a large volume of
water for cooling and dust control, and produces a large volume of waste
water containing very fine particles of stone dust.
\
     Surface preparation of the stone involves grinding and polishing
operations using a slowly-rotating circular steel plate and various
grinding and polishing agents.  Initial grinding usually involves the
use of fine (130 mesh) carborundum, while the final polishing is done
with tin oxide powder.  Only enough water is used to provide necessary
lubrication, and since considerable recirculation is practiced to obtain
maximum use of the polishing agent, the waste discharge, although rather
heavily polluted, is small in volume.

     A related process known as "steeling" uses fine steel balls in
place of the carborundum as the grinding agent.  This process produces
a desirable white color on the Eft one surface and is frequently used to
provide a contrasting surface.  Since the ground-off stone dust would
darken and stain the surface if allowed to contact it, no recircula-
tion is used in this procedure.  However, at the conclusion of the
"steeling" process, the fine steel balls are washed clean and recovered
for reuse.

     Decorating the stone involves cutting designs, letters and numbers
into the finished surface of the stone, using pneumatic chisels or by
sandblasting.   Neither of these procedures produces a liquid waste
discharge, since the stone dust is collected by a vacuum system.

     The last step in processing the stone is final cleanup.  The stone
is washed, rust stains are removed with dilute hydrochloric acid, and
traces of the rubber masks used in sandblasting  are removed using
benzene or ligroin.  For final washdown, most or the companies have
adopted a high-pressure, high-velocity water jet which minimizes the
volume of waste water.  The use of organic solvents and hydrochloric

-------
acid, however, introduces the only chemical contaminants to the waste
stream.  The total volume is small compared to the total waste discharge,

     For many years it has been the custom to discharge the combined
waste water to the nearest stream.  In addition to the polluted waste
waters described above, large volumes of relatively unpolluted water
are also discharged.  The sources include cooling water for the air
compressors used in all plants, prime water and cooling water for the
pumps, and varying volumes of clean water resulting from a practice of
letting hoses continue to run when not in use.  Although none of the
discharges are metered, an estimate from municipal water system billings
indicates that more than a million gallons a day are discharged in Barre
City alone, with additional waste discharges in the surrounding area.
It is estimated that total waste discharges from the industry exceed
1.5 million gallons per day.
                                                      ;
     In 1958 the Vermont Water Resources Department initiated a study
of the waste characteristics in the granite industry, and an extensive
survey was conducted in 1959 with the aim of determining the extent and
severity of the stream damage.  Little previous attention had been given
to this waste discharge, since the primarily inorganic waste did not
reduce the oxygen content of the water.  It was immediately apparent,
however, that stream damage had been caused by the waste discharge.
Desirable trout species had declined because the silt layer on the
stream bed had covered the gravel spawning areas, and aquatic plants,
insects, etc., were practically non-existent.  Extreme turbidity
severely reduced sunlight penetration, and the abrasive particles had
weakened and depleted the remaining fish population by gill abrasion
and irritation.  It was estimated that approximately 30,000 cubic
yards, or about 20,000 tons, of waste solids are discharged annually.
The granite industry was warned that pollution abatement would be
required.  The classification order for the Stevens Branch and tribu-
taries issued on August 7, 1962, required the granite industry to
install acceptable pollution abatement facilities prior to July 1, 1965.

     Initial design criteria for treatment facilities recommended a
settling lagoon with a 30-minute detention time, an effluent turbidity
not to exceed TOO  Jackson turbidity units (J.T.U.), and settleable
solids essentially zero.  Compliance and regulation were, however,
somewhat spotty.

     Preliminary laboratory work by the Vermont Department of Water
Resources indicated that a ten-minute settling period would remove over
95% of the suspended solids, with an average residual turbidity of about
700 J.T.U. and a  small amount of settleable solids in the supernatant
liquid.  However, very little time was devoted to a study of the volume
or characteristics of the sludge produced.  It was soon evident that
the capacity of a thirty-minute lagoon was completely inadequate to
provide the needed sludge storage, unless the lagoon was cleaned daily
or oftener.  But  an even more serious problem developed with attempts
to handle the sludge.  Since one component of the sludge is partially-
used carborundum, the sludge is very abrasive.  Cleaning the lagoons
                                    5

-------
with the usual types of mechanical equipment resulted in accelerated
wear on moving parts and additional expense to the contractor.  The
sludge dewaters rather slowly, and the fine material is readily resus-
pended.  Transportation of the partially dewatered sludge generally
resulted in excessive spillage and leakage, creating additional expense
for the contractor.  The material would not slip from steel truck
bodies, requiring removal by shovel or the use of disposable plastic
liners.  Disposal sites required sizable dikes to block leakage of
sludge to nearby streams.  A hazard was created at the disposal site,
since under a surface crust the material remained liquid for many days,
behaving like quicksand.  Although none of the problems appeared to be
completely unsolvable, the expense involved caused the plant operators
to delay lagoon cleaning as long as possible.

     During the period 1962-1965, prior to implementation of the
classification order, several pilot-plant projects were developed through
the cooperation of the Vermont Department of Water Resources, the
research committee of the Barre Granite Association, and individual
granite processing companies.  Three types of commercial settling tanks
were evaluated, two being rectangular tanks with mechanical sludge
collectors, and one circular tank with a conical hopper for sludge
collection.  None of these tanks proved to be an improvement on the
excavated lagoon.  Although effluent quality was acceptable during quies-
cent settling, any attempt to remove sludge resulted in resuspension of
fine material, difficult or impossible sludge removal, or equipment
breakdown.  The combination of heavy, coarse material and extremely
fine, light material could not be handled by equipment designed to handle
sanitary waste.  Continuous operation of the mechanical collectors
resulted in a completely unsatisfactory effluent; but if the sludge
was allowed to collect for any period of time, the thixotropic
sludge set and could not be moved without breakage of the collection
mechanism.  Similarly, when using the cylindrical tank, the sludge
coned consistently and could only be removed by the use of water jets;
a procedure which resulted in a completely unsatisfactory effluent.
Further attempts to use commercial settling equipment were discontinued.

     A pilot study was also made during this period to evaluate the
possibility of centrifuge separation.  Very little improvement could be
noted in the waste stream, the effluent turbidity and solids being nearly
as high as the influent figures.

     In addition to the pilot plant studies described above, a labora-
tory study of chemical flocculating agents was undertaken by the Vermont
Department of Water Resources' laboratory staff.  Twenty-three different
substances were evaluated for their flocculating ability on granite
waste.  These included the inorganic compounds lime, alum and ferric chloride;
insoluble materials such as bentonite, kaolin and celite; and a large
number of the so-called synthetic polyelectrolytes.  Thirteen of the
compounds tested showed some degree of flocculating ability on one or
more waste streams.  However, the study indicated that no one material

-------
could be depended upon to effectively flocculate all types of V7ast
-------
                              SECTION IV


                          PRELIMINARY STUDIES
     Upon acceptance of the grant, the granite processing firm of
Nativi & Sons, Inc., was selected as the project site.  Unfortunately,
soon after .Initiation of the project, Nativi enlarged by acquiring a
nearby plant , and expanding and separating their processing.  This
resulted in isome additional work, as certain water-use measurements had
to be repeate'd at the newly-acquired plant.  With this exception, the
project proceeded as planned, although there were some unavoidable
delays in securing necessary equipment.

     The Barre Granite Association employed DuBois & King, Engineers
and Planners, of Randolph, Vermont, to perform the engineering services
required for this project.  Preliminary work performed by DuBois & King
included plant inventory of equipment and processes, water-use reduction
studies, and pilot plant design.

     The civil engineering department of the University of Vermont
performed waste characterization studies, solid-liquid separation studies,
and supernatant amd sludge analyses.  Byproduct uses for sludge were
also explored to tihe extent possible with available time and resources.
Plant Equipment and Process Inventory

     The Nativi plamt originally selected for the project site contained
one single-strand wire saw, two polishing machines, one planer, several
stations for hand and pneumatic chisel work, and a wash stand.

     Since the hand and chisel work does not involve a liquid discharge,
this section of the plant is not detailed in the plant layout pictured
in Figure I.  Since a custom sandblasting company occupied part of the
same building, Nativi subcontracted the sandblasting work; and since
this does not involve* a liquid discharge, it also is omitted from the
figure.  Both of these processes, however, are major dust producers and
have long been considered a major reason for the high incidence of
silicosis.  Each granilte plant is now required by the Department of
Health to maintain an extensive and efficient dust collection system.

     The Granite Industries of Vermont plant, acquired by Nativi and
operated in conjunction with the parent company, contained four polish-
ing machines with largei: beds than those of the Nativi plant, a single-
strand wire saw and a se'ven-strand saw.  A site was available for an
additional multiple-strand wire saw, but it was not being used at the
time.  (Figure II).

-------
VO
    OT
                  MATCH
                  LINE
                                                                                              COMPRESSOR
                                                                                                  ROOM
                         POLISHING
                           PIT
                             SUMP
                                DOOR
POLISHING
  PIT
                       VACUUM
                       MACHINE
                                                                             SURFACE
                                                                             CUTTER
WIRE
SAW
                                            SUMP
                                         BOILER
                                          ROOM
              WASH
              STAND
\
           n   o
                                                                                    PLANER
                      PIT
                                                                                                        SUMP
                                                               K6RINDER

                                                            |   |SUMP

                                                              I  SUMP  I
                                                                                                                           MATCH
                                                                                                                            LINE
                                                                                              BARRE GRANITE  ASSOCIATION
                                                                                              NATIVI  GRANITE  SHED
                                                                                              R.FO.  12/11/70

-------
     The multiple-strand saw  is needed  to saw  large blocks of granite
into several slabs of  the desired widths.  These slabs are further sawed
by the single-sitrand saws into blanks  slightly larger than the desired
final size of t.he headstone.   (Although some granite is used in construc-
tion of both buiildings and road curbings, about 99% of the industry  is
involved in the: manufacture of granite  monumental headstones).  The
abrasive materi.al used is generally 90-mesh carborundum, with added
stone dust to sstabilize the wire.  Extensive recirculation is practiced
to obtain maximum use  of the  abrasive,  and only enough fresh water is
added to maintain the  desired consistency of the liquid mixture.  At
the conclusion of the  sawing  operation  the stone is washed off, and
only at this tilme is a relatively large volume of polluted water discharged,

     The seven--strand1  wire saw operation is generally similar to opera-
tion of single—strand  saw, with the additional requirements of the
added strands of wire.  Since the several slabs can be washed at one
time, washing  the cut  stone is a somewhat more efficient process.

     The sever al polishing machines are similar in operation, in that
all use a slowly rotating steel disk which may be moved over the surface
of the carefu'lly positioned stone.  The process varies with the type of
abrasive used .  Several steps may be performed by the same machine
using different abrasives, or the stone may be moved to another machine
for each additional  process.

     After m ext sawing to an  approximate size, the surface of the stone
is smoothed  and evened using  an abrasive material, generally 130-mesh
carborundum.   Recirculation of the abrasive slurry is practiced to
obtain maximum reuse of the abrasive material. The stone surface may be
used as it i comes  from  this process, or  it may  be further processed by
polishing or  steeling. The steeling process uses small steel balls  as
the abrasive  a^ent,  and produces a whitish surface which may be desirable
for contra;st  purposes. Since the abraded stone dust, if brought into
contact wi.th  th\e  steeled surface, would make it darker, no recirculation
is practiced  in this process  and the volume of waste discharge is somewhat
greater t'han  from other similar processes.  However, steeling is performed
on surfac es already  ground smooth, and  does not require a long grinding
process.   Since the  steel balls can be  washed  clean and reused after
completion of the  grinding process, only a slight additional amount  of
waste discharge is  involved.

     Finish poliishing  is performed using tin oxide abrasive.  For all
except  the  final polishing and buffing, the liquid is recirculated to
obtain reuse  of the  polishing agent.  Polishing darkens the surface  and
impar'ts  additional contrast to the finished stone.  Use of rouge as  a
polis,hing agent has  been largely discontinued.

     The process ing  step using the greatest amount of water and having
the  greatest  volume  of liquid waste discharge  is a process known as
"planing".  This is  essentially a grinding process using a rather wide
                                    10

-------
            t
               DIRT
                            IOFFICE
              POLISHER
                                POLISHER
           STEELING
          POLISHER
GRINDER
  PIT
                                                         SETTLING TANK
TJ
H-
00
»

Is)
                              DOUBLE /
                              SETTLING
                              TANK

                                  SETTLING
                                  TANK
                                                                                             I SAW PIT
                                                                                             ^
                                                                                                         PUMP
                                                                                                         PIT
                                            WIRE
                                            "SAW
QTANK
                                                                                          0--P
                         OUTSIDE
                        SETTLING
                          TANK
                                    SETTLING
                                    TANK-
                                              SUMP
                                              PIT
PIT
                                                          SETTLING
                                                          TANK
                                      70025   B. G. A.
                                     GRANITE  INDUSTRIES
                                     OF  VERMONT
                                     A.EO. 2/21/71
            SEVEN  STRAND  WIRE SAW  BUILDING

-------
tungsten carbide grinding wheel.  The wheel is mounted on a track which
allows it to be moved forward and backward, or the track may be modified
to grind a curved surface on the stone.  To cool the surface of the stone
and the grinding wheel, and to prevent discharge of fine dust particles
to the air, a large stream of water is directed upon the stone surface.
Because the water is not recirculated, a large volume of waste discharge
containing the fine stone particles is produced*by the planer.  This
material is so fine that planer waste does not settle readily and produces
most of the residual turbidity after primary settling of the total waste
stream.

       The one other wet processing step is final cleanup.  By the time it
reaches this final step the stone has received several Bashings, and the
small amount of residue is a result of the chisel or sandblasting operations
used in "decoration" (lettering or other carving).  Some stains, however, may
be present as a result of contact with rusty metal.  These stains may be
removed by treatment with dilute hydrochloric acid, which is then discharged
with the waste stream.  If a sandblasting step has been performed, some
of the rubber masking material may remain on the stone.  This is removed by
the use of organic solvents such as benzene, toluene or ligroin, which may
also be added to the waste stream.

     A final washdo^n completes the cleaning operation.  Host of the plants,
including Nativi, use a small high-pressure stream of water for final clean-
ing, so that the volume of waste is not large.  The presence of hydrochloric
acid, organic solvents and occasional small amounts of detergents, however,
introduces a new form of chemical pollution.

     Although not directly involved in the granite processing, several
other sources of liquid discharges were discovered.  Since a great deal
of liquid, both water and waste, is circulated within a granite processing
plant, several pumps to circulate the liquid material are required.  To
maintain the prime of these pumps for immediate use, a stream of fresh water
is circulated through them when not otherwise in use.  To operate air-
powered equipment in the plant, compressors requiring large volumes of
cooling water are used.  This is generally discharged with the waste stream,
although not polluted except with a small amount of residual heat.  Practices
differ at the various plants, some of which may separate certain discharges
and combine others, while some combine all in one discharge stream.  At the
Nativi plant the compressor cooling water and the wash-stand discharge are
separated from the remaining waste stream and not discharged to the waste
lagoon.  All other waste streams including the excess pump priming water
are discharged to the waste settling lagoon outside the plant.
                                     12

-------
                               SECTION V

            WATER USE OPTIMIZATION AND CONSERVATION STUDIES
     Since no estimates or measurements were available with respect  to
water use by each type of equipment,  the  first plant modification for
the research project involved the  installation of water meters on each
of the water lines supplying individual pieces of equipment.  The meters
were read daily from January through  June 1971 and average water use
calculated.  These results may be  found in the appendix Tables I - X.
Attempts were also made to calculate  an average rate of discharge per
unit of stone processed but results varied so widely that no meaningful
results could be obtained.  Wire Saw  (Tables No. IV and V) readings
taken over a six month period at the  wire saw at the Nativi plant
averaged about one gallon per minute  discharge while operating.  Similar
readings over a two month period at the single strand wire saw at the
Granite Industries of Vermont (G.I.V.) plant gave about the same results.
Since considerable recirculation is practiced in this operation and
since the practice of allowing hoses  to run unchecked during the sawing
operation had been discontinued at these plants there was little oppor-
tunity for major reduction in water use in this operation.  Some
operators are experimenting with various methods of abrasive concentra-
tion such as cyclone separation but the amount of water to be saved
appears to be negligible.

     An attempt was made to evaluate  water use by the seven strand wire
saw.  However, time of operation was  so variable that no meaningful
averages could be calculated.  A measurement of discharge rate while the
machine was operating gave a value of six gallons per minute, a figure
in reasonable agreement with the figures obtained for the single strand
saws.  (Table X) .

Polishers - Water use for these machines varied markedly with the opera-
tion being performed.  (Tables VI, VII, VIII and IX)  For the operations
where considerable recirculation was  practiced the average discharge
in all cases was a fraction of a gallon per minute.  Thus surface grind-
ing, polishing and buffing vary from 0.1 to 0.3 gallons per minute
average discharge.  Steeling on the other hand, where no recirculation
is practiced, averages a little over one gallon per minute discharge.
Again, because of the recirculation presently practiced, little reduction
in water use can be expected.

Planer - Water use for the planer which was expected to be high averaged
about eight gallons per minute.   Since the water use seemed to be
excessive for the results sought, it appeared possible to materially
reduce water use in this instance.  Microscopic examination of fine
material obtained from the planer waste indicated no evidence of heat
deformation, an indication that the amount of water needed for cooling
                                   13

-------
might be reduced.  However, it was necessary to maintain a sufficient
water volume to trap the fine particles produced in the grinding
operation.  Since this appeared to be at least partly a problem of the
shape and character of the water flow, it was decided to use fog nozzles
in an attempt to reduce the overall water use and at the same time, main-
tain a large volume of wet space.  Fog nozzles were secured and tried, but
failed to provide sufficient protection against dust particles and were
discontinued.  Nozzles to produce a fan spray were then installed and two
nozzles adjusted to provide a fan for each side to cover the grinding
wheel.  Initially, these nozzles worked satisfactorily and reduced water
use by more than fifty percent.  However, as the wheels wore down and
decreased in diameter, the fan spray which had originally just covered
the width of the wheel now extended well beyond the edge and a great
deal of the water was wasted.  This reduced the efficiency to such an
extent that more water was required.  Partial compensation was effected
by adjusting the nozzle so that one edge of each fan was parallel to the
edge of the grinding wheel, thereby reducing loss as the wheel decreased
in diameter.  It was, however, necessary to supply additional water
through a central nozzle as the wheel neared its minimum diameter.
Evaluation of the data contained in Table II indicates that average
water use was reduced from eight gallons per day to about four gallons
per day at the end of the period.  Instantaneous use rates, however,
were reduced from an original rate of greater than 20 gallons per minute
to a rate of about five gallons per minute, a savings of 757. of the
water used.

Other Water Uses - Because of the location and construction of the final
wash stand at the Nativi plant, no samples could be collected and tested
so no water use data were collected.  At this plant the wash stand waste
is discharged to a small dry well away from the stream and is not con-
nected to the total waste discharge.  Although the total volume is small,
the nature of the waste might be a significant contribution to the waste
stream at certain plants.

     Table I shows the amount of water used for compressor cooling at the
Nativi plant.  Although an average rate of six gallons per minute is
indicated, the water is not polluted and will not require treatment unless
mixed with the polluted waste discharge.  At the Nativi plant the com-
pressor cooling water is discharged to an area away from the stream and
separate from the polluted waste discharge, but in many plants this dis-
charge constitutes a major portion of the total waste stream.  Separation
and reuse of this water is possible since the temperature increase is very
small.

     Table III gives the water used by the pump designated as the planer
sump pump.  This is the water necessary to maintain the prime on the pump
used to pump the planer waste discharge from the collection sump to the
waste treatment lagoon.  In normal operation the water is turned on at the
beginning of the work day and allowed to run full force while the planer
                                   14

-------
is being operated.  Since this water passes through the pump and mixes
with the polluted waste discharge, it is somewhat polluted and needs to be
discharged to the treatment facility.  However, once the pump is full and
in operation only a small stream or no water at all may be needed to main-
tain the pump prime and much of the water presently discharged could be
saved.  As can be seen from Table III, average daily use varied from a
rate of four gallons per minute to a peak rate of seventeen gallons per
minute.  Although part of this variation is a result of variation in daily
operation, some of the lower rates resulted from efforts by employees to
reduce the water use.  It is felt that significant water savings can be
made in this area by careful adjustment of water usage to maintain only
the stream necessary to maintain a prime on the pump.
                                   15

-------
                              SECTION VI

                    WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STUDIES


     This laboratory work was performed at the University of Vermont in
Burlington under the direction of Dr. Arthur Condren.  A qualified
chemistry technician was employed to perform the chemistry tests and other
sections of the Civil Engineering Department cooperated in making the
special measurements required.

     Research investigation began during December, 1970, after needed
equipment had been purchased.  Initial studies were qualitative and semi-
quantitative so that the researchers could obtain a more firm grasp of
the wastewater to be dealt with.  Grab samples were obtained on various
occasions and the following average values were obtained.

                                Table A

                               Wire Saw          Polisher          Planer

Total Solids mg/1               64,796.0           718.0           2,455.0

Suspended Solids mg/1           63,421.0           648.0           2,308.0

pH                                   7.6             6.2               8.2


     Settling studies were performed on the wire saw samples and typical
data are presented below for a sample containing 69,050 mg/1 suspended
solids.  The supernatant, after 24 hours of settling, still had a suspended
solids concentration of 10,644 mg/1.  This supernatant also had a turbidity
of 30,000 mg/1  (Si02).


                                Table B

Time (Min.)                                           Interface Height (Ml)

      0                                                       1000
      5                                                        840
     15                                                        680
     15                                                        520
     20                                                        360
     25                                                        230
     30                                                        190
     35                                                        158
     40                                                        142
     60                                                        129
    W                                                        118
    180
                                   16

-------
     A mass balance of Che solids showed that the sludge  fraction was
51.8 percent solids, 48.2 percent water.

     Composite sampling was conducted on February 3, 5, and 8, 1971
and the analytical results are presented below:
Wire Saw

2/3/71
2/5/71
2/8/71

Polisher

2/3/71
2/5/71
2/8/71

Planer

2/3/71
2/5/71
2/8/71
                  Table C

Susp. Solids (tng/1)      pH
      20,832
      45,235
      39,717
       5,173
      12,179
       4,194
       3,882
      10,329
       2,120
8.7
9.5
9.6
8.2
8.5
8.1
8.9
7.9
7.6
Alkalinity

    55
    83
    65
    61
    62
    58
   118
    75
    70
Turbidity

  8,400
 33,000
 26,000
 12,000
 96,000
 40,000
  2,200
  2,900
    540
     Settling curves for the polisher and planer wastewater samples
were conducted and representative data are presented below  (Studies
performed in Imhoff Cones):
Time  (Min.)

      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      10
      15
      20
      25
      30
      35
      60
    120
        Polisher

           0.3
           1.0
           1.8
           2.4
           3.1
           7.5
          33.0
          33.0
          27.0
          24.0
          23.0
          22.0
          21.0
                                Table D
  Solids Interface(ml)
        Planer

         0.65
           30
           00
           50
           90
           30
           30
           00
           50
           80
           00
         8.00
         8.90
                                   17

-------
     The turbidity remaining in the supernatant fraction after 24
hours of settling vas, on the average, still in excess of 20,000 mg/1
for the polisher wastewater and 1,000 mg/1 for the planer wastewater.

     The flow data in gallons per day for these days was as  follows:

                                 Table E

                        2/3/71               2/5/71                 2/8/71
                                 t

Wire Saw                  696                  554                    688

Polisher                  —                  —                    —

Planer                   4039                 3351                  1346


     The meter for the polisher had not been installed; however, an
approximate volume for this process was 600 gallons per day.

     Based on the averages for flow and suspended solids, the wire saw
generated 186 Ib. of solids per day; for the polisher 36 Ib. per day;
and the planer 156 Ib. per day.  Data on areas of granite processed on
these days was available and the average waste generation for each
process was as follows:

                                Table F

Wire Saw - 3.8 Ib. ss/sq.ft. of granite sawed
                                        v
Polisher - 0.3 Ib. ss/sq.ft. of granite polished

Planer - 5.8 Ib. ss/sq.ft. of granite planed.

     It is interesting to note that in spite of the relatively low
concentration of solids in the waste discharge from the planer, the
total amount of solids produced per day is very close to that produced
by the wire saw, while the solids produced per unit of processed stone
exceeds  that  of  the wire  saw.

     Grain size analysis of the suspended material in the granite
.wastewater gave the following average results:
                                   18

-------
                                 Table G
                                                 !

     Particle  Size(ram)                           %  Finer (By Weight)

          0.0300                                          90
            .0230                                          80
            .0175                                          76
            .0135                                          60
            .0100                                          50
            .0178                                          40
            .0056                                          30
            .0038                                          20
            .0023                                          10
            .0016                                           5
     Specific gravity  of  the  suspended  material  gave  the  following
average results:
                                Table  H
                     ".'•»•'               i •    £

           1.  'Air dried sample                       GD  -  2 .82
                                                      o

           2.  Oven dried  sample                      G0  -  2.88
                                                      s

           3.  "Natural" sample                        Gs  -  2.75


     An Atterberg limit test indicated  that the  suspended solids were
non-plastic in nature.  The fact  that  the waste  solids  exhibit no plastic-
ity and the use of a dispensing agent  for grain  size analysis indicates
that the particles have very low  surface chemistry activity.

     Additional analyses  of specific waste streams may  be found in the
Appendix under Table XI.  Because of the wide daily  variations, the
averages calculated for each machine have little  significance in most cases,
Two items, however, are worthy of note.  Nearly  all pH's are wellj on the
alkaline side, a significant factor in  later studies of solids-licmid
separation techniques.  Average turbidity for the composite sample super-
natant and for most of the other  supernatants averaged  over 100 units.
Since the Vermont Water Resources Board has established a limit of 100
turbidity units for any waste discharged to the waters  of the State, this
indicated that simple settling would not provide adequate treatment.
Solids-Liquid Separation

     As noted above previous work by the Vermont Department of Water
Resources had indicated that chemical flocculating agents could be used
                                   19

-------
to improve solids-liquid separation in granite wastes, but that the
different characteristics of waste from the various plants required an
individual evaluation and a different treatment process for each waste.

     Preliminary work at the University of Vermont indicated that this
condition did not exist for plant waste which had been treated by primary
settling.  All solid-liquid separation tests, therefore, were performed on
the supernatant from samples which had already been treated by a simple
settling process.

     Primary tests were made using the common waste treatment chemicals,
lime, alum, and ferric chloride.  These all worked satisfactorily and in
each case a final turbidity of less than 10 units could be obtained.
Test results are given in the Appendix, Table XII.  As noted in Table XII,
ferric chloride gave the best results at the lowest concentration and was
selected as the chemical to be used in the pilot plant operation.  In view
of the excellent results obtained with the few chemicals tested, no
further examinations were performed using the more expensive polyelectrolytes.
                                  20

-------
                              SECTION VII

                   PILOT PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION
     As a result of the laboratory tests performed at the University
of Vermont , chemical treatment of the settling lagoon effluent was
adopted as a design concept.  However, during the earlier plant evalua-
tion  studies, a different concept involving industry-wide group
treatment was considered.  It appeared possible at one time to reduce
water use to about 25% of the present usage.  This would involve a
total waste discharge in the City of Barre of about 250,000 gallons
per day.  It was estimated that a discharge of this size could be
accepted at the municipal treatment plant, which was in the process
of being enlarged and upgraded to secondary treatment.  Each plant
would then pretreat its waste by primary settling for 24 hours and
discharge the partially clarified supernatant to the municipal
wastewater treatment plant for final treatment.  When it became
apparent that not more than 30% of the water use could be eliminated,
this concept was abandoned.

     To some extent the emphasis of the research project had been
changed after the project was initiated.  One of the major problems
to be studied was handling and treatment of the waste sludge.  The
adoption by the Vermont Water Resources Board in May, 1971, of new
and more restrictive water quality regulations which provided that no
waste effluent with a turbidity in excess of 100 units could be
discharged to the waters of the state, required that additional
emphasis be placed on improving effluent quality.  To a certain
extent this resulted in some de-emphasis of the sludge studies.

     Since the design concept adopted for pilot plant testing required
additional treatment at the local plant, a design was developed for
a locally fabricated treatment plant to treat a flow of five gallons
per minute of settled supernatant from the Nativi settling lagoon.
Initially, the plan was to use commercial pilot plant equipment of
the proper type, but inquiry indicated that no commercial equipment
was available at the time required.  The following design criteria
were therefore developed for a locally fabricated treatment facility,
including auxiliary equipment:

     Pump:  (Used to pump lagoon effluent to pilot plant)  Denver
            SRL 1% x IV  @ 1,100 RPM

     Pipe:  Plastic 1" PCV - 100 P.S.I.

     Chemical Feed Pumps as follows:
          Ferric Chloride - B.I.F. Model 1210 solution feed, from
          55 gal. drum storage tank.  Fed, solution approximately
          3.53% (39% stock solution diluted with ten parts water).
                                   21

-------
          Lime - B.I.F. Model 1203 slurry feed, from 55 gal. drum
          storage tank.  Lime slurry to contain 1% CaO.

     Rapid Mix Tank - 20 gal. drum.  Detention time four minutes.

     Lightning Mixer - % to 3/4 h.p. @ 1,800 R.P.M.

     Flocculation Tank - 55 gal. drum.  Detention time eleven minutes.

          Fractional H.P. Mixer geared to 10 R.P.M. with paddle area
          of 240 sq. ft. per day.                ,            '*•••. •,.

     Sludge Return - gravity flow to plant -sump through plastic    '"•
          pipe.  From sump to lagoon by centrifugal pump used to pump
          plant waste stream.

     Large Sedimentation Tank - Capacity 770 gallons;  detention time
          2% hours, surface area 9.6 sq. ft., surface  overflow rate
          750 gallons per sq. ft. per day.

     Above detention times, overflow rates,  etc., are  based on a
standard flow rate of 5 gallons per minute.   The plant is pictured
under Fig. III.

     This pilot plant was erected adjacent to the Nativi plant on the
same side of the building as the settling lagoon.  To  protect the
installation from vandalism and to protect neighborhood children from
the hazards of an "attractive nuisance", the plant  was completely
enclosed in a roofless plywood structure with entrance from inside
the granite plant only.  Additional protection was  afforded by using
a wooden ladder for access to the upper part of the installation and
locking it inside the plant at night.  Construction of the pilot plant
took place during July, 1971, and testing began on August 3, 1971.
                  IB/-.
     Influent for the pilot plant was obtained by pumping from the
effluent end of the Nativi settling lagoon.   As noted  above, settling
removes about 95-98% of the total weight of solids. However, the
influent stream to the pilot plant had a turbidity in  excess of 1,000
units.  Under the regulations adopted by the State  of  Vermont, Water
Resources Board, this turbidity must be reduced to  100 units or less
before discharge to a stream.

     Operational data for the pilot plant are contained in Tables
XIII - XXXIII in the appendix.  Ferric chloride and lime were the only
chemicals used, since laboratory testing had established ferric
chloride as the most efficient coagulant.  The data indicated that a
concentration  of  about  25 mg/1 was necessary to maintain optimum
treatment.  The data also  indicates  that  ferric chloride alone will
give equally good  treatment, undoubtedly because the normally high  pH
of the waste stream maintains adequate alkalinity.  However,  the data
                                   22

-------
  CHEMICAL
    FEEDER
FLASHMIXER
INFLUENT
(SUPERNATANT
 FROM LAGOON)
    LOCALLY  FABRICATED
        PILOT PLANT
                                                                 EFFLUENT
                                                                 TO RIVER
                                         NOT TO SCALE
                                  Fig-  3

                                    23
                                                              *• -4-0  DIA.
                                                                 8" DIA.
                                                                "PIPE
                                                                4 DIA.
                                                                ECCENTRIC
                                                                DISCS
                                                                IV9" DIA.
                                                                SLUDGE
                                                                RETURN
                                                                TO
                                                                LAGOON

-------
from Table XX indicates that lime alone in moderate quantities will
not give adequate treatment under the operating conditions existing
in the pilot plant process.

     As indicated in the data contained in Table XIII  - XXXIII,  a
turbidity of approximately 10 units could be obtained  under  normal
operating conditions.  This is considerably better than required by
the water quality regulations.  However, it allows a comfortable
safety margin should a temporary malfunction occur and it also
presented the possibility of water reuse, a possibility which warranted
further investigation.


Link-Belt Pilot Plant (Figure IV)

     Although an inquiry directed  to several equipment companies had
indicated that no commercial equipment would be available during the
desired period, we were informed in late June,  1971,  that a pilot plant
would be available from the Link Belt Company.   Because of previous
unsatisfactory results with commercial equipment,  it  was  decided to
rent this pilot plant for the minimum period to insure that commercial
equipment would operate satisfactorily with the proposed  treatment
process.  The pilot plant equipment arrived in Barre  in July and was
installed inside the Nativi plant  near the location of the locally
fabricated plant.  Normal capacity of this plant was  1.5  gallons per
minute with auxiliary equipment designed to give normal detention times.
Data for this equipment is given in Tables XXXIV-XXXIX in the Appendix.
This equipment was operated from July 30,  1971 to  August  11,  1971 with
no major problems developing, and then returned. The  data indicated that
a concentration of approximately 20 mg/1 ferric chloride  were required
for optimum clarification—a figure close to the 25 mg/1  required by
the larger pilot plant.
Prototype Pilot Plant

     The excellent results obtained from the pilot plant operation
indicated as noted above, that an effluent of sufficient purity could
be obtained to permit reuse of the water in the processing operations.
Most of the granite plants purchase city water for plant processing use,
and an extensive program of water reuse in the granite industry would
greatly reduce demands upon the city municipal water system, demands
which the city had found difficult to meet in recent years and which
had required expensive modifications of the water supply system.  It
was therefore decided that a locally designed and fabricated prototype
plant would be constructed with adequate capacity to treat the entire
waste discharge from the Nativi & Sons, Inc. plant.  Since an inside
pump of adequate capacity was available at the Nativi plant, the
installation of a minimum amount of pumping equipment would'permit full
scale testing of reuse of treated wastewater.  The larger plant would
                                  24

-------
to
CJ1
    0<3
FLASH
MIXER SLOW 	
CHEMICAL [""] M'XER /
FEEDER LJ /
1 1
INFLUENT \ /
b, 	 -
(SUPERNATANT
FROM LAGOON)
t
<
<
>
>
>


:

^_JTT
^ JLJ
«£ 	 3 ~° 	 fc.




SETTLING
TANK —7 COLLECTOR-, EFFLUENT
I/V X VsWL.^b.V^ 1 \jr\ ^ T^\ DIt/C*D
V\ / / iUf\lvt.n
v * / m j
i
\
^_
k \ /
p D\
^ \
b_ _Q
|| //X/«§S»^
S. 11 	 ji 	 ^SLUDGE RETURN
>±T TO LAGOON
B'-CT
1
-''^

                                               NOT  TO  SCALE
                                      LINK-BELT  PILOT  PLANT

-------
also permit a test of settling tubes and an estimate of the ultimate
capacity of the treatment plant equipment.

     Specifications for the prototype plant were as follows:

         Design flow - 23 gallons per minute

         Rapid Mix Tank - 6 cu. ft. capacity, detention time - 2 minutes

         Flocculation Tank - 46 cu. ft. capacity, detention time -
         15 minutes

         Clarifier - 280 cu. ft. capacity

            Surface area - 55 sq. ft.

            Surface overflow rate - 600 gallons per day per sq. ft.

            Detention time - 2 hours

     As actually constructed, the flocculation tanks were considerably
undersized and provided a detention time of only five minutes at the
design flow of 23 GPM.  At the water temperature prevailing during the
winter, this does not provide adequate floe formation.  Since cold
weather was approaching, the equipment was fabricated and installed in a
small enclosed addition to the Nativi plant to allow cold weather
operation without freeze-up.  This plant is illustrated in Figures V-VII.
It was fabricated locally from plates of sheet steel and was erected by
local labor.  Operational data are contained in Tables XL - XLV.

     Operation of this treatment plant indicated that the granite
processing plant could operate satisfactorily on treated wastewater
effluent.  However, since the acid ferric chloride solution tended to
progressively lower the pH with each cycle of reuse, it was necessary
to increase the lime dosage somewhat and to use lime continuously, in
contrast to the pilot plant experience with a once through waste treat-
ment.  The colder temperature of the influent waste during the winter
reduced the flocculation rate sufficiently to require about a 1007. in-
crease in ferric chloride dosage.

     Although the plant was designed to operate at a rate of approxi-
mately 10,000 gallons per day, it was found possible to operate at
nearly double that rate without seriously affecting the treatment.
At that rate, however, the flocculation tanks were barely adequate
and it is suggested that size of the flocculation tanks be increased to
insure proper floe formation at the maximum operating rate.  Use of
tube settlers proved to have little observable effect on a settling
tank of this size, possibly because of the reduction of tank area and
volume at the edges of the tube banks.  Since few of the plants have
                                  26

-------
PROTOTYPE  TREATMENT  PLANT
            ^
            K
                            JLL
SETTLE
                            PLAN
                          3/8"= I'-O"

                                             FLOG
                                             MIX
                                            FLOG
A
                      SETTLE
                     SECTION A-A
                      3/8" = I'-O"
                                        MIX
                                        WASTE
                                              D
                                                    MIX

                                                      P
                                            CD
                                            ED
                                  D
                                             FLOG
                                FLOG
                                                       IN
                                                  SECTION B-B
                                                 3/8"= I'-O"
                                Fig. 5

                                  27

-------
a discharge rate in excess of 20,000 gallons per day, not more than one
or two plants will require a larger capacity treatment facility.

     In order to insure uninterrupted plant operation, certain refine-
ments were added to the recirculation system by Nativi & Sons, Inc.
These included a variable pressure reducer to regulate water pressure
in the plant, a low water float actuated valve to add city water to the
clear well when needed, a high water shut-off to suspend operation of
the treatment facility if the clear well is full and a low pressure
alarm in the water line to detect malfunction of the recirculating
pump.  These added controls provided almost completely automatic opera-
tion of the waste treatment and water reuse system and reduced supervisory
time to a minimum.  Operation of the recirculation pump at a constant
175 pound pressure and use of the pressure reduction valve provided
more efficient water use than use of city water at an average pressure
of 115 pounds.
Costs of Operation

     An added benefit from construction and operation of the prototype
treatment facility was the opportunity to obtain relatively firm cost
figures for construction and operation of this type of waste treatment
facility.  Capital costs for this facility were as follows:

         Fabrication of Settling Tanks                 $1,600.00
         Chemical Feed Pumps                              588.00
         Chemical Mix Stirrers (Motor and Stirrer)        IbS.OO
         Chemical Holding Tanks                            12.00
         Waste Pump (Treatment Facility Influent Pump)    300.00
         Tube Settlers                                    500.00
         Electrical Wiring                                250.00

         Total Cost                                    $3,415.00

     The use of tube settlers is optional and, as noted above, does not
appear to increase settling capacity appreciably.  Elimination of the
tube settlers will reduce the above costs to less than $3,000.00.
However, some construction may be required to house the facility for
winter operation.  For use as a complete recirculation system, a clear
well may have to be constructed and additional controls may be desirable
to insure uninterrupted operation without the necessity of close
supervision.  These additions will increase capital costs, but they
should not exceed $5,000.00 for a facility of this size.

     Estimated operating costs for this facility when processing
approximately 10,000 gallons per day of waste effluent were calculated
to be as follows:
                                  28

-------
                         HEATING -
                         ELEMENT
 WASTE  FROM
 INDUSTRIAL
 PROCESS
                                  O
                                                      LAGOON
                                                    FOOT  VALVE
   PUMP
         FLOW DIAGRAM

       WATER  REUSE SYSTEM
(£
UJ


I


Z'
o
o
WATER TO
  INDUSTRIAL

   PROCESS
                    SLUDGE TO PUMP
                                       BY PASS TO LAGOON


• 1
SETTLE



                 FLOC
MIX
FLOC
                                                            -CA (DHL
                    CLEARWELL
                                  PUMP      RECIRCULATED
                                              WATER
                                          LCHECK VALVE


                                          fGATE VALVE
                        -D—J
                        PRESSURE
                        REDUCER
                                                         CITY WATER
                                    LOW WATER
                                    FLOAT VALVE
                            NOT  TO  SCALE
                                     .  6


                                    29

-------
         Ferric Chloride                               $2.00 per day
         Lime                                            .03 per day
         Electricity                                     .75 per day

         Total Operating Cost                          $2.78 per day


     The operating cost figures were determined for the facility during
winter operation and during the complete recirculation trial when ferric
chloride addition was at the maximum and when continuous addition of
lime was required.  Summer operation or operation of the facility
without recirculation would reduce operating costs somewhat.

     The reuse of treated wastewater in a granite plant is regarded
with mixed feelings by many plant operators.  In addition to the above
mentioned benefits to the City of Barre through reduced demands upon
the city water system, direct benefits to the operator include reduced
water purchases, constant water quality, improved water pressure, and
control of water pressure for more efficient use.  Disadvantages from
the manufacturer's point of view include increased cost for water
treatment, extra space requirements for treatment facilities and for the
clear well and associated equipment, and the capital expenditure required
for the new equipment, repiping, rewiring, etc.  Water use for Nativi
averaged nearly 20,000 gallons per day prior to installation of the
water reuse system.  At the prevailing water rates for the City of Barre,
annual cost for this volume of water is nearly $600.00.  If we assume
that a complete water reuse system would reduce water purchases by 90%,
a net saving of about $550.00 per year at prevailing rates is realized.

     At this saving, the capital cost of the Nativi system could be
recovered in about six years.  According to Vermont tax law, pollution
control facilities are not assessed as capital improvement, thus the
installation of this equipment should not increase the tax liability
of the company.

     Since the capital costs and water use will vary widely from company
to company, the above figures are only an approximation of the savings
that can be realized.
                                  30

-------
                                   .TO LAGOON  INTAKE
                                    PIPING  HEAT LINE
              30 240V
                FUSED
              BREAKER
                FROM
              PLANT
                FEED
30 240V
60 AMP
 THROW
SWITCH
co   w
240V 30
 STEP
 DOWN
 TRANS.
  TO
I2OV 10
                                    TO  S T P LIGHTING
                                     RECEPTACLES
4 BRK. DI$T
 PANEL
 u,  ,21
               60 AMR
               240V 30
               M.C. W/
               120V PILOT
                 DUTY
               RELAY
                                                 | SHUNT
      CLEARWELL
    LOW WATER PRESSURE
        ALARM
                                                                                      TO MIXER MOTORS 8
                                                                                    CHEMICAL FEED PUMPS
240V 30
STEP DM.
 TRANS.
   TO
120V 10
30 240V
  60A.
 THROW
 SWITCH
                                                                            PANEL
f
f
a
L
$
1

n
#•
tt
f


                                                             M.C. FOR
                                                             240V30
                                                              CLEAR
                                                              WELL
                                                              PUMP
                                                           M.C. FOR
                                                           240V 30
                                                           LAGOON
                                                           INTAKE
                                                            PUMP
                                                                        , 'HIGH
                                                                        /WATER
                                                                        ICUT  GUI
                                                                          /ITCH.
                                         ELECTRICAL  SCHEMATIC

                                              NOT  TO SCALE
                                                           LOW
                                                          WATER
                                                          PRESS.
                                                          RELAY
                                                         SWITCH
                                                          LEGEND

                                                      M.C.  MOTOR CONTROL

                                                     -H- NO. CONDUCTORS (2)

                                                     -/ft- NO. CONDUCTORS (3)

-------
                            SECTION VIII

                        BY-PRODUCT USE STUDIES

     Studies on the by-product use of waste granite sludge were performed
at the University of Vermont, College of Engineering.

     Following the waste characterization tests described above several
types of by-product use were investigated.  One successful use involved
the addition of small amounts of waste solids to the glazing material for
pottery.  The granite solids imparted an attractive bluish-green color
to the glazed pottery.  Unfortunately total demand for this use would not
be expected to exceed a few pounds a year.

     A more desirable investigation from the point of view of large
volume use involved the possibility of creating a ceramic material for
use in tile and ceramic pipe.  Initial studies which involved heating
a mixture of granite solids and water indicated that a firing temperature
in excess of 1900° F was required to produce a suitable product.  Under
proper condition and using the proper mixture an attractive maroon red
tile with a gray center could be produced which had satisfactory hardness.
The addition of 2% bentonite to the mixture of granite dust and water
produced a "\nud" of the desired plasticity to allow proper moulding for
the production of the desired forms.

     Although a usable tile product could be produced certain problems
developed during further investigation.  The tile produced proved to be
more porous than desired, absorbed liquid including oil readily and
stained badly.  Variations in batches of starting material resulted in
wide variations in finished products, some of which were extremely brittle,
while others deformed badly during firing.  It appeared that it would be
necessary to develop some form of cooperative pooling of waste sludge
by the industry in order to produce a satisfactorily uniform product.

     In order to determine the economic feasibility of attempting to
develop a ceramic by-product industry, Professor W. E. Brownell of
Alfred University, was employed to conduct the economic evaluation.  Dr.
Brownell estimated that a capital investment of $3,500,000 would be
required to construct a plant using 250 tons per day of waste solids in
order to compete with established tile producers.  Since previous studies
in the industry had indicated that only 10% of this amount of waste
solids was available, it did not appear the further studies of tile
manufacture were indicated.  It therefore appeared that for the immediate
future at least, the industry would be required to dispose of waste
solids by the least objectionable method, probably as landfill material.
                                     32

-------
                           SECTION IX
                       SLUDGE DISPOSAL METHODS
   A survey of the waste sludge disposal methods presently in use by
the granite industry was conducted by DuBois & King for the Barre Granite
Association.  As noted before several problems had developed in the
process of cleaning the existing waste lagoons.  Attempts to resolve
these problems by the individual manufacturers had resulted in several
improvements in procedure although none of them was considered completely
satisfactory.  To avoid spillage of the liquid waste the contractors had
used sealed dump trucks, tank trucks and self-propelled concrete mixers
with some success.  Each system increased the cost of sludge removal
either because of increased time and personnel or the use of expensive
equipment.  The survey by DuBois & King attributed the sludge disposal pro-
blems to three main areas as follows:

     1.  Poor lagoon design.  No apparent attempt had been made to
         design lagoons to facilitate sludge handling and removal.

     2.  Failure to maintain adequate cleaning schedules.  Lack of
         cooperation and excess sludge deposits greatly increased the
         cost of lagoon cleaning.

     3.  Failure to dewater sludge before handling.

     The survey indicated that the operators who had had the fewest
problems and least expense had used a two lagoon system allowing the
sludge to dewater thoroughly before hauling it away.  This indicated
that a properly designed double lagoon system with a realistic cleaning
schedule would minimize the handling problems.  A suggested design for
such a lagoon system is included as Figure VIII.  The Barre Granite
Association is presently developing a cooperative program of lagoon
cleaning and maintenance for the industry in Barre.
                                     33

-------
                              SECTION X

                        LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS


     In April of 1970, the Vermont legislature passed a pollution control
act that was widely hailed as the first pay-to-pollute legislation in
the United States.  Although the actual payment of pollution charges
has been postponed and modified by successive legislatures the legal
authority for assessing pollution charges still exists for polluters who
do not maintain a satisfactory schedule of pollution abatement.  The
following calculation of the pollution charge is an estimate based on
present law and regulations for an average discharge in the Barre area.

     Average suspended solids (settling lagoon effluent) 400 mg/1
     Average daily discharge (for calculation purposes) 10,000 G.P.D.
     B.O.D. - pounds per day -0
     Suspended solids - pounds per day - 33.3
     Daily charge per pound of B.O.D. and suspended solids - .033
     Daily charge - 1.10
     Annual charge (250 days operation) - $275.00

     The daily charge per pound is taken from a graph which proportions
the charge rate to the average flow of the receiving stream.  However,
since nearly all plants in the Barre area discharge to the same stream,
the Stevens Branch of the Winooski River, the daily rates would be
identical and the total charge would be the ratio of their discharge to
the 10,000 gallons per day used for calculation purposes.  Plants
discharging to the Jail Branch would pay a higher rate because of a
lower dilution factor, while plants discharging to the Winooski River
would have a lower rate.  Maximum and minimum rates were established by
the 1972 legislature and present charges are based on these rates.

     However, attractive as these rates might appear to a firm faced
with a major capital expenditure for pollution abatement equipment the
law does not provide for the permanent or long term payment of pollution
charges.  The law specifically provides that a Temporary Pollution Permit
shall be issued only for the minimum time necessary to provide adequate
abatement facilities.  Failure to maintain a reasonable schedule of
construction could subject a firm to prosecution for violation of a
permit.  Penalty for permit violations or discharging without a permit is
a not more than 6 months in prison or 25,000 for each day in violation.
The present project has provided a method of treatment which will allow
granite processing firms to comply with present water quality standards
and also an opportunity to recover part of the expense by water reuse and
the avoidance of pollution charges or fines for illegal discharges.
                                     34

-------
oo
    00
ij ^7 w.s.
r: w r

t
»
*7 W.S.
t W .
t I ' ' ' *« * »
••
*
«i_

                          SECTION B-B




              "W" TO  BE DETERMINED BY DIMENSIONS

              OF MACHINE USED IN CLEANING OPERATION
GATE VAL
N
TO TREATMENT PLANT
GAT!
A
PROCESS.
EFFLUENT^
BY -PASS
*i r^-B
T ^ /^NPUMP K
i VALVE5*" ' Y 1
8


!
n
1 1 	 1
1 1
b1


«
\
A

GATES
„,. AM DISTRIBUTION
PLAN nnY
                                                                 ACCESS FOR

                                                                 MACHINERY
_ s _r'±i WATER LEVEL
     JTOPERAfffiG "w»fER~E'VEL
                                                                                                           DISTRIBUTION
                               ISOMETRIC
                                                                                    TYPICAL  LAGOON

-------
                              SECTION XI

                          ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
     Major direction of the project in the Barre area was by officials
of the Barre Granite Association, Mr. Milton Lyndes, Manager and Mr.
Glenn Sulham, Manager of Member Services.  Engineering services by the
firm of DuBois & King, Engineers and Planners of Randolph were under the
direction of Joseph S. King, Vice President with Mr. Robert R. Lamson
as Project Engineer.  Technicians assisting in the project included
Richard Oberman, Richard Sawyer and Thomas Mancini.

     The assistance of Mr. Silvio Nativi, President of Nativi & Sons, Inc.,
and Granite Industries of Vermont is gratefully acknowledged.  In
addition to on-the-spot assistance as manager of the participating
companies he provided much needed support as president of the Barre
Granite Association and member of the Association research committee.  The
following employees of Nativi & Sons provided much needed assistance in
installing equipment and maintaining supervision during operational
studies:  Francis Grenier and Fritz Anderson.  In addition the following
firms in the area provided essential services such as plumbing, pipe
fitting, transportation of equipment, construction, etc.:  Rock of Ages
Corp., Smith, Whitcorab & Cook, Dessureau Machines, Inc. and Roland
Valliere, Contractor.

     Dr. Arthur J. Condren was in charge of the project for the Univer-
sity of Vermont.  Analytical measurements were made by Vivienne Bouchard.
Mr. William C. Walker, a senior engineering student at the University
of Vermont assisted in design and construction of the pilot plants and
following graduation acted as operator in charge of pilot plant operation.
He also conducted the survey of sludge disposal methods for DuBois &
King.

     Project Officer for the Environmental Protection Agency was Allyn
Richardson of E.P.A.'s Region One Office.  The assistance of Arthur H.
Mallon, P.E. of E.P.A. headquarters is also acknowledged.
                                     36

-------
                              SECTION XII

                              REFERENCES



1.  Unpublished Data - Vermont Water Resources  Department

2.  Nemerow, Theories and Practices of Industrial Waste Treatment.
    Chapter 9-1.

3.  Manual of Water ASTM STP 442. Chapter IV and V.

4.  Nemerow, Liquid Waste of Industry, Theories. Practices and Treatment.
    Chapter 6-4.

5.  IBID, Chapter 11
                                   37

-------
                            SECTION XIII

                      GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS
B. P.P. - Biochemical Oxygen Demand

Carborundum - An extremely hard synthetic material made of silicon and
carbon.

Classification - A legal process by which'the State after a period of
testing and study, assigns use designations to the different types of
waters in the State.

Composite Sample - A laboratory sample which Is secured by adding small
increments to the sample container at equal intervals over a specified
period of time.

Cvclone - A centrifugal type separator used to separate heavy carborundum
from  lighter stone dust in the waste stream.

Detention Time - The time necessary to completely fill a water treatment
facility at the average flow rate or the time necessary to completely
change the total amount of water in the facility.

Effluent - The final discharge waste stream after treatment.

Flocculant - A substance which by altering the electrical characteristics
of a  colloid allows the particles to collect together and precipitate.

Gang  Saw - An older type of sawing equipment in which the sawing is done
by strips of steel using a back and forth motion, also using an abrasive
material such as sand or carborundum and water and granite dust as a
lubricant.

Grab  Samples - A laboratory sample which is secured by collecting all
of the samples at one time.

Granite - An igneous, crystalline stone extensively used in the produc-
tion  of monumental headstones.

Imhoff Cones - Graduated cone-shaped glassware generally used for,
settleable solids determination.

Influent - The waste stream before treatment.

J.T.U. - Jackson Turbidity Units
                                     38

-------
mg/1 - Milligrams per  liter, a  common unit  of measurement  for  small
amounts of material.

Optimization - Adjustment  to provide  the  best results  for  the  least
expenditure.

'Pilot Plant - A facility similar  in design  and  equipment but generally
smaller in  size and  capacity,  in  which a  process may be tested under
the same conditions  which  will  exist  in the full scale plant.

Planer - A  granite processing machine which uses a grinding wheel to
shape and smooth  the surface of the stone.

Polvelectrolvte - A  synthetic  long chain  polymer which, by virute of
its unique  electrical  characteristics possesses the ability to flocculate
collidal suspensions.

Quarry - A  natural deposit of  useful  stone, used as a  source of raw
material, generally  in the form of open pit mining.

Recirculation  - Recycling  or reuse of waste water formerly discharged to
 the stream.  It  involves discharging  the  treated waste water to a
 central  storage  tank and repumping into the plant water system.

 Sand  Blasting  - A method of cutting letters or  decorative  designs in
 stone using a  high velocity stream of sand  particles as the cutting
 agent.

 Settleable  Solids -  The volume of solid material  that  settles  in a
 fixed period,  generally one hour.
                                      39

-------
                             SECTION XIV
                              APPENDIX
TABLES I - X
PROCESS WATER USAGE
TABLE XI
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
TABLE XII
JAR TESTS, SOLIDS-LIQUID SEPARATION
TABLES XIII - XXXIII     PILOT PLANT OPERATIONAL DATA
TABLES XXXIV - XXXIX     LINK BELT PILOT PLANT DATA
TABLES XL - XLV
PROTOTYPE PILOT PLANT DATA
                                    40

-------
                       LIST OF TABLES  (APPENDIX)


No..                                                               Page

I         Compressor Cooling Water - Nativi fit Sons, Inc. (Nativi)   43

II        Planer Water Use - Nativi                                46

III       Planer Sump Pump - Priming Water - Nativi                49

IV        Single Strand Wire Saw - Nativi                          51

V         Single Strand Wire Saw - Granite Industries of Vt.,  Inc.  53
          (G.I.V.)

VI        Grinder-Polisher - G.I.V.                                54

VII       Steeler-Polisher - G.I.V.                                56

VIII      Buffer-Polisher - G.I.V.                                 58

IX        Fining (Final Polisher) - G.I.V.                         60

X         7-Strand Wire Saw - G.I.V.                               62

XI        Waste Characterization Studies                           63

XII       Bench Tests, Solid-Liquid Separation                     65

XIII      Pilot Plant Operation - 8/3/71                           68

XIV       Pilot Plant Operation - 8/4/71                           69

XV        Pilot Plant Operation - 8/5/71                           70

XVI       Pilot Plant Operation - 8/6/71                           71

XVII      Pilot Plant Operation - 8/9/71                           72

XVIII     Pilot Plant Operation - 8/10/71                          73

XIX       Pilot Plant Operation - 8/11/71                          74

XX        Pilot Plant Operation - 8/16/71                          75

XXI       Pilot Plant Operation - 8/17/71                          76

XXII      Pilot Plant Operation - 8/18/71                          77
                                  41

-------
No.
XXIII
XXIV
XXV
XXVI
XXVII
XXVIII
XXIX
XXX
XXXI
XXXII
XXXIII
XXXIV
XXXV
XXXVI „
XXXVII
XXXVIII
XXXIX
XL
XLI
XLII
XLIII
XLIV
XLV

Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Pilot Plant Operation
Link Belt Pilot Plant
Link Belt Pilot Plant
Link Belt Pilot Plant
Link Belt Pilot Plant
Link Belt Pilot Plant
Link Belt Pilot Plant
Prototype Pilot Plant
Prototype Pilot Plant
Prototype Pilot Plant
Prototype Pilot Plant
Prototype Pilot Plant
Prototype Pilot Plant

- 8/20/71
- 8/23/71
- 8/25/71
- 8/26/71
- 9/27/71
- 9/28/71
- 9/29/71
- 10/1/71
- 10/4/71
- 10/5/71
- 10/6/71
- 7/30/71
- 8/4/71
- 8/5/71
- 8/6/71
- 8/9/71
- 8/11/71
- 2/14/72
- 2/15/72
- 2/16/72
- 2/17/72
- 2/22/72
- 2/28/72
£21
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
42

-------
Table I.  MACHINE:  COMPRESSOR -  METER #2




              Nativi & Son, Inc.
Date
1/13/71
1/14/71
1/15/71
1/18/71
1/19/71
1/20/71
1/21/71
1/22/71
1/25/71
1/26/71
1/27/71
1/28/71
1/29/71
2/01/71
2/02/71
2/03/71
2/04/71
2/05/71
2/08/71
2/09/71
2/10/71
7/11/71
2/12/71
2/15/71
2/16/71
2/17/71
2/18/71
2/19/71
2/27/71
2/23/71
2/24/71
2/25/71
2/26/71

3/19/71
3/22/71
3/23/71
3/24/71
3/25/71
3/26/71
3/29/71
3/30/71
3/31/71
Gallons used
4106.52
4061.64
3934.48
4114.00
3971.88
2852.20
3859.68
3769. 9?
3889.60
3859.68
4398.24
3590.40
3485.68
3575.44
3485.68
3216.40
3193.96
3231.36
3029.40
3223.88
3149.08
3104.20
2902.24
3006.96
2760.12
3036.88
3021.92
2999.48
3074.28
2917.20
2864.84
2977.04
2962.08
Plant closed for two weeks
3208.92
3074.28
3014.44
3208.92
3089.00
3074.00
2932 .00
3052.00
3201.00
Average gpm*
8.55
8.46
8.19
8.57
8.27
8.02
8.04
7.85
8.10
8.04
9.16
7.48
7.26
7.44
7.26
6.70
6.70
6.73
6.31
6.71
6.56
6.46
6.04
6.26
5.75
6.32
6.20
6.24
6.40
6.07
— -y x
5.96
6.20
6.17

6.68
61 f\.
.40
6 A f\
.28
6X ^
.68
61 t
.44
61 f\
.42
61 1
.11
6O C.
.3b
6f Q
.DO
                   43

-------
Table I (continued).  MACHINE:  COMPRESSOR - METER #2




           Nativi and Son, Inc.
Date
4/01/71
4/02/71
4/05/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/14/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/19/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/22/71
4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4/30/71
5/02/71
5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/06/71
5/10/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/13/71
5/14/71
5/17/71
5/18/71
5/19/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
5/26/71
5/27/71
5/28/71
6/01/71
6/02/71
Gallons used
2970.00
3007.00
2835.00
2985.00
2738.00
2842.00
2910.00
2648.00
2551.00
2603.00
2618.00
2573.00
3007.00
2753.00
2887.00
2895.00
2715.00
2745.00
2790.00
2925.00
2723.00
2857.00
2653.00
2685.00
2685.00
2708.00
2596.00
2566.00
2581.00
2558.00
2558.00
2607.00
2607.00
2655.00
2670.00
2670.00
2693.00
2528.00
2536.00
2607.00
2607.00
2573.00
2498.00
2566.00
Average gpm*
6.19
6.27
5.90
6.20
5.72
5.92
6.07
5.53
5.32
5.44
5.47
5.37
6.27
5.75
6.02
5.91
5.66
5.73
5.82
6.10
5.68
5.95
5.61
5.60
5.60
5.65
5.42
5.35
5.38
5.34
5.34
5.43
5.43
5.53
5.56
5.56
5.61
5.27
5.28
5.43
5.43
5.36
5.22
5.35
                       44

-------
         Table 1 (continued).  MACHINE:  COMPRESSOR - METER #2

                         Nativi and Son, Inc.


  Date                      Gallons used                  Average gpm*

6/03/71                       2558.00                          5.34
6/04/71                       2513.00                          5.25
6/07/71                       2468.00                          5.15
6/08/71                       2506.00                          5.23
6/09/71                       2431.00                          5.07
6/10/71                       2461.00                          5.14
6/11/71                       2506.00                          5.23
6/14/71                       2409.00                          5.02
6/15/71                       2356.00                          4.91
6/16/71                       2371.00                          4.94
6/17/71                       2446.00                          5.10
*  Assumed Average 480  rain./day
                                 45

-------
Table II.  MACHINE:  PLANER - METER #3




        Nativi and Son, Inc.
Date
1/13/71
1/14/71
1/15/71
1/18/71
1/19/71
1/20/71
1/21/71
1/22/71
1/25/71
1/26/71
1/27/71
1/28/71
2/03/71
2/04/71
2/05/71
2/08/71
2/09/71
2/10/71
2/11/71
1/12/71
2/15/71
2/16/71
2/17/71
2/18/71
2/19/71
2/22/71
2/23/71
2/24/71
2/25/71
2/26/71

3/19/71
4/22/71
3/23/71
3/24/71
3/25/71
3/26/71
3/29/71
3/30/71
3/31/71
4/01/71
Gallons used
4136.44
4682.48
3351.04
3089.24
4076.60
4465.56
3440.80
1353.88
2296.36
3867.16
3620.32
4001.80
4039.20
3403.40
3351.04
1346.40
3403.40
2992.00
3493.16
2124.32
3747.48
4488.00
4772.24
3530.56
3897.08
3478.20
4114.00
2971.88
4091.56
3680.16
Plant closed for two weeks
3156.56
3620.32
2872.32
2066.80
1690.00
2955.00
2483.00
3478.00
3366.00
3411.00
Average gpm*
8.61
9.75
6.98
6.43
8.49
9.30
7.16
2.82
4.78
8.05
7.54
8.33
8.42
7.09
6.98
2.80
7.09
6.23
7.27
4.42
7.80
9.35
9.94
7.35
8.11
7.24
8.57
8.27
8.52
7.66

6.57
7.54
5.98
6.38
3.52
6.15
5.19
7.25
7.02
7.10
                 46

-------
          Table II (continued).  MACHINE:  PLANER.- METER #3

                         Nativi and.Son,  Inc.
  Date

4/02/71
4/05/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/13/71
4/14/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/19/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/22/71
4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4/20/71
5/02/71
5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/06/71
5/10/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/13/71
5/14/71
5/17/71
5/18/71
5/19/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
5/26/71
5/27/71
5/28/71
6/01/71
6/02/71
Gallons used

  1765.00
  2895.00
  3860.00
  4189.00
  4772.00
  3411.00
  3605.00
  4249.00
  2547.00
  2547.00
  4062.00
  3164.00
  1653.00
  1451.00
  1563.00
  1227.00
   935.00
  2020.00
  1608.00
  1885.00
  1616.00
  1563.00
  1728.00
  1945.00
  1892.00
  1668.00
  1661.00
  1010.00
  1571.00
  1833.00
  1922.00
  3609.00
  3609.00
  4742.00
  3329.00
  2805.00
  3067.00
  1863.00
  2229.00
  2323.00
  2322.00
  1429.00
  1990.00
  1608.00
Average gpm*

    3.68
    6.03
    8.03
    8.72
     ,94
     ,10
9,
7.
7.
      51
    8.85
    5.
    5.
 ,10
 ,10
8.49
5.60
3.45
      03
      26
      56
      95
      21
      35
      93
      37
      26
      60
    4.05
    3.95
    3.48
    3.47
    2.11
      28
      83
      01
      53
      53
      88
      94
      86
3.
3.
4.
7.
7.
9.
6.
5.
    6.36
    3,
    4,
    4,
    4,
    2,
    4
  88
  65
  85
  85
  98
  15
    3.38
                                    47

-------
          Table II (continued).  MACHINE:  PLANER - METER #3

                         Nativi and Son, Inc.


  Date                      Gallons used                  Average gpm*

6/03/71                       1354.00                         2.82
6/04/71                       1735.00                         3.62
6/07/71                       1578.00                         3.29
6/08/71                       2977.00                         6.20
6/09/71                       1518.00                         3.16
6/10/71                       2132.00                         4.44
6/11/71                       1638.00                         3.42^
6/14/71                       1945.00                         4.05
6/15/71                       2498.00                         5.22
6/16/71                       1915.00                         3.99
6/17/71                       1489.00                         3.11
6/18/71                       1489.00                         3-11
* Assumed average 480 min./day
                                  48

-------
          Table  III.   MACHINE:  PLANER SUMP PUMP - METER #4

                         Nativi and Son, Inc.
Date
2/04/71
2/05/71
2/08/71
2/09/71
2/10/71
2/11/71
2/12/71
2/15/71
2/16/71
2/17/71
2/18/71
2/19/71
2/22/71
2/23/71
2/24/71
2/25/71
2/26/71
Gallons used
5041.52
4802.16
2805.00
2632.96
2565.64
2618.00
2468.40
2558.16
2333.76
2445.96
2468.40
2550.68
2573.12
2513.28
2543.20
2550.68
2505.80
Average gpm*
9.33
8.89
5.19
4.87
4.75
4.84
4.57
4.73
4.32
4.52
4.57
4.72
4.76
4.65
4.70
4.72
4.64
3/18/71
3/19/71
3/22/71
3/23/71
3/24/71
3/25/71
3/26/71
3/29/71
3/30/71
4/01/71
4/02/71
4/05/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/14/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/19/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/22/71
                      Plant closed for two weeks
4742.32
4787.20
4675.00
4787.20
4593.00
4668.00
4166.00
4136.00
3964.00
4077.00
9328.00
6745). 00
6515.00
6611.00
6777.00
6897.00
6597.00
6754.00
6665.00
6717.00
2251.00
6485.00
5326.00
1907.00
 8.78
 8.86
 8.65
 8.86
 8.50
 8.65
 7.72
 7.66
 7.35
 7.56
17.30
12.50
12.08
12.23
12.51
12.74
12.21
12.51
12.35
12.42
 4.17
12.00
 9.88
 3.53
                                   49

-------
     Table III (continued).  MACHINE:  PLANER - METER

                         Nativi and Son, Inc.
  Date

4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4/30/71
5/02/71
5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/10/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/12/71
5/13/71
5/17/71
5/18/71
5/19/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
5/26/71
5/27/71
5/28/71
6/01/71
6/02/71
6/03/71
6/04/71
6/07/71
6/08/71
6/09/71
6/10/71
6/11/71
6/14/71
6/15/71
6/16/71
6/17/71
Gallons used

  2177.00
  3381.00
  3351.00
  3493.00
  3261.00
  1922.00
  2910.00
  2925.00
  2947.00
  5909.00
  5467.00
  7061.00
  7173.00
  6201.00
  6590.00
  6590.00
  7084.00
  6986.00
  7226.00
  6971.00
  6351.00
  6395.00
  6530.00
  6530.00
  6500.00
  5180.00
  2573.00
  3104.00
  3082.00
  3059.00
  3134.00
  3029.00
  3119.00
  3059.00
  3029.00
  3022.00
  3014.00
  3052.00
Average gpm*

    4.03
    6.26
    6.22
    6.47
    6.05
    3.56,
    5.39'
    5.42
    5.46
   10.94
   10.11
   13.09
   13.27
   11.50
   12.20
   12.20
   13.11
   12.95
   13.38
   12.91
   11.75
   11.81
   12.09
   12.09
   12.19
    9.60
    4.77
    5,
    5.
    5.
    5,
    5,
    5,
    5.
    5,
    5,
    5,
77
71
68
81
61
78
68
61
60
59
    5.65
* Assumed average 540 min/day
                                  50

-------
               Table IV.  MACHINE:  WIRE SAW  - METER #5

                         Nativi and Son; Inc.
  Date

2/03/71
2/04/71
2/05/71
2/08/71
2/09/71
2/10/71
2/11/71
2/12/71
2/15/71
2/16/71
2/17/71
2/18/71
2/19/71
2/22/71
2/23/71
2/24/71
2/25/71
2/26/71
 3/18/71
 3/19/71
 3/22/71
 3/23/71
 3/24/71
 4/14/71
 4/15/71
 4/16/71
 4/19/71
 4/20/71
 4/21/71
 4/22/71
 4/23/71
 4/26/71
 4/27/71
 4/28/71
 4/29/71
 4/30/71
 5/03/71
 5/04/71
 5/05/71
      Gallons  used

        695.64
        628.32
        553.52
        688.16
        628.32
        590.92
        635.80
        800.36
        845.24
        800.36
        807.84
        561.00
        755.48
        613.36
        590.92
        665.72
        733.04
        912.56

Plant closed for two weeks
        837.76
        785.40
        979.88
        688.16
        755.00
        763.00
        763.00
        576.00
        494.00
        651.00
        516.00
        606.00
        486.00-
        583.00
        568.00
        688.00
        651.00
        494.00
        808.00
        621.00
Average gpm*
     .28
     .16
     .02
     .27
     .16
     .09
     .17
     .48
     .56
     .48
     ,49
     .03
     .39
     .13
     .09
     .23
     .35
    1.68
    1.55
    1.45
    1.81
    1.27
    1.40
    1.41
      .41
      .07
1,
1,
    0.91
      ,20
      .96
      .12
      .90
      .08
      .05
      .27
      .20
    0.92
    1.50
    1.15
                                    51

-------
         Table  IV  (continued).  MACHINE:   WIRE SAW - METER #5

                          Nativi and  Son,  Inc.
  Date

 5/06/71
 5/07/71
 5/10/71
 5/11/71
 5/12/71
 5/13/71
 5/14/71
 5/17/71
 5/18/71
 5/19/71
 5/20/71
 5/21/71
 5/24/71
 5/25/71
 5/26/71
 5/27/71
 5/28/71
 6/01/71
 6/02/71
 6/03/71
 6/04/71
 6/07/71
 6/08/71
 6/09/71
 6/10/71
 6/11/71
 6/14/71
 6/15/71
 6/16/71
 6/17/71
Gallons used

  561.00
  568.00
  404.00
  591.00
  763.00
  546.00
  673.00
  568.00
  673.00
  748.00
  688.00
  748.00
  598.00
  636.00
  726.00
  598.00
  688.00
  621.00
  718.00
  524.00
  703.00
  736.00
  546.00
  681.00
  561.00
  748.00
  741.00
  815.00
  688.00
  643.00
Average gpm*

    1.04
    1.05
    0.75
    1.09
    1.41
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1,
    1,
    1,
    1,
    1,
    1,
    1,
    1.
    1.
    1.
    1
    1
    1,
    1,
    1,
    1,
    1.
    1.
    1.
,01
,25
,05
,25
,39
27
39
11
18
35
11
27
15
33
   0.97
30
36
01
26
04
39
37
51
27
                                                              1.19
* Assumed average 540 rain./day
                                  52

-------
 Table V.  MACHINE:   SINGLE STRAND WIRE SAW (MACHINE #3)  - METER #2




                               G.I.V.
—————————
Date
2/23/71
2/24/71
2/25/71
2/26/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/10/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/22/71
4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
Gallons used
621.00
651.00
606.00
494.00
344.00
224.00
292.00
471.00
254.00
389.00
419.00
322.00
489.00
307.00
247.00
292.00
673.00
501.00
591.00
673.00
471.00
•MMMBIMiHB-HIW^HMMMminMM^MHMM^BMMBMMMl^MW
Average gpm*
1.15
1.20
1.12
0.91
0.64
0.42
0.54
0.87
0.47
0.72
0.78
0.60
0.91
0.57
Ot ^
.46
Op* i
.54
1t\ f
.25
Of\ A
.93
14N ^\
.09
1O C
.25
OO"7
.87
                           No reading  taken 4/25  - 5/11



                           No reading  taken 5/11  - 6/16
* Assumed average 540 min/day
                                   53

-------
                Table VI,  MACHINE:  GRINDER - METER #3

                                G.I.V.
   Date

2/23/71
2/24/71
2/25/71
2/26/71
3/09/71
3/10/71
3/11/71
3/12/71
3/13/71
3/15/71
3/16/71
3/17/71
3/18/71
3/19/71
3/22/71
3/23/71
3/24/71
3/25/71
3/26/71
3/29/71
3/30/71
3/31/71
4/01/71
4/02/71
4/05/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/14/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/19/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4/30/71
Gallons used

   561.00
   725.00
   430.00
   569.00
    37.00
    22.00
    45.00
    45.00
    45.00
    45.00
    60.00
    82.00
    52.00
    82.00
     8.00
    67.00
    45.00
    52.00
    30.00
    82.00
   105.00
    45.00
    37.00
   120.00
    90.00
    45.00
    52.00
    45.00
    37.00
    60.00
    52.00
    52.00
    45.00
    37.00
    82.00
    37.00
   194.00
    52.00
    52.00
    45.00
    37.00
    45.00
    37.00
Average gpm*
      .17
      ,51
      ,90
      ,18
    0.08
    0.05
    0.09
    0.09
    0.09
    0.09
    0.12
    0.17
    0.11
    0.17
    0.02
    0.14
    0.09
    0.11
    0.06
    0.17
    0.22
    0.09
    0.08
    0.25
    0.19
    0.09
    0.11
    0.09
    0.08
    0.12
    0.11
    0.11
    0.09
    0.08
    0.17
    0.08
    0.40
    0.11
    0.11
    0.09
    0.08
    0.09
    0.08
                                   54

-------
          Table VI (continued).  MACHINE:   GRINDER -  METER #3
  Date

5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/06/71
5/07/71
5/10/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/14/71
5/17/71
5/18/71
5/19/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
5/26/71
5/27/71
5/28/71
6/01/71
6/02/71
6/03/71
6/04/71
6/07/71
6/08/71
 6/09.71
 6/10/71
 6/11/71
Gallons used

   90.00
   22.00
   45.00
   22.00
   60.00
  112.00
   75.00
   30.00
   52.00
   75.00
   60.00
   37.00
   90.00
  120.00
   67.00
   67.00
   45.00
   45.00
   67.00
   67.00
   49.00
   49.00
   52.00
   67.00
   37.00
   60.00
   60.00
   52.00
Average gpm*

    0.19
    0.05
    0.09
    0.05
    0.12
    0.23
    0.16
    0.06
    0.11
    0.16
    0.12
    0.08
    0.19
    0.25
    0.14
    0.14
    0.09
    0.09
    0.14
    0.14
    0.10
    0.10
    0.11
    0.14
    0.08
    0.12
    0.12
    0.11
 * Assumed average 480 rain./day

-------
Table VII.  MACHINE:  STEELER - METER #4




                 G.I.V.
<^v^B9B^_^_M^^MMB_^H^_BMHWMKW«l
Date
3/30/71
3/31/71
4/01/71
4/02/71
4/05/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/14/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/19/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/22/71
4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4/30/71
5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/06/71
5/07/71
5/10/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/13/71
5/14/71
5/17/71
5/18/71
5/19/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
5/26/71
1 III
Gallons used
284.00
224.00
681.00
157.00
142.00
217.00
494.00
482.00
482.00
426.00
150.00
367.00
135.00
696.00
426.00
703.00
688.00
785.00
741.00
703.00
666.00
165.00
658.00
651.00
838.00
711.00
688.00
226.00
696.00
226.00
673.00
688.00
636.00
681.00
696.00
696.00
688.00
301.00
576.00
75.00
546.00
681.00
Average gpm*
0.59
0.47
1.42
0.33
0.30
0.45
1.02
1.01
1.01
0.89
0.31
0.76
0.28
1.45
0.89
1.46
1.43
1.63
1.54
1.46
1.39
0.34
1.37
1.36
1.75
1.48
1.43
1.54
1.45
1.51
1.40
1.43
1.32
1.42
1.45
1.45
1.42
0.64
1.20
0.16
1.14
1.42
                   56

-------
          Table VII (continued).  MACHINE:  STEELER - METER #4

                                G.I.V.


  Date                      Gallons used                  Average gpm*

5/27/71                       673.00                          1.40
5/28/71                       666.00                          1.39
6/01/71                       606.00                          1.26
6/02/71                       905.00                          1.89
6/03/71                       681.00                          1.42
6/04/71                       755.00                          1.57
6/07/71                       793.00                          1.65
6/08/71                       628.00                          1.31
6/09/71                       636.00                          1.33
6/10/71                       673.00                          1.40
6/11/71                       666.00                          1.39
* Assumed average 480  rain./day
                                    57

-------
Table VIII.  MACHINE:   BUFFER - METER #5




                G.I.V.
Date
3/30/71
3/31/71
4/01/71
4/02/71
4/05/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/14/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/19/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/22/71
4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4/30/71
5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/06/71
5/07/71 ,
5/10/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/13/71
5/14/71
5/17/71
5/18/71
5/19/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
Gallons used ••• •'*
22
262
67
165
97
90
60
67
52
135
105
97
127
120
82
82
135
284
75
75
52
90
37
142
254
209
52
91
299
75
90
60
284
60
292
67
67
75
269
180
75
Average gpm*
0.05
0.55
0.14
0.34
0.20
0.19
0.12
0.14
0.11
0.28
0.22
0.20
0.26
0.25
0.17
0.17
0.28
0.59
0.16
0.16
0.11
0.19
0.08
0.30
0.53
0.44
0.11
0.20
0.62
0.16
0.19
0.12
0.59
0.12
0.61
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.56
0.38
0.16
                  58

-------
         Table VIII  (continued).  MACHINE;

                                G.I.V.
                BUFFER - METER #5
  Date
Gallons used
5/27/71                       105
5/28/71                       381
6/01/71                        52
6/02/71                       247
6/03/71                       172
6/04/71                        45
6/07/71                        82
6/08/71                        67
6/09/71                        60
6/10/71                       150
6/11/71                        60
                              Average gpm*

                                  0.22
                                  0.79
                                  0.11
                                  0.52
                                  0.36
                                  0.09
                                  0.17
                                  0.14
                                  0.12
                                  0.31
                                  0.12
^Assumed average 480 min./day
                                  59

-------
Table IX.  MACHINE:  FINING (FINAL POLISHING) - METER #6




                         G.I.V.
H^HMH^H^^_^MHB1HHa^^H^BHHMI^^BI
Date
3/30/71
3/31/71
4/01/71
4/02/71
4/05/71
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/12/71
4/13/71
4/14/71
4/15/71
4/16/71
4/19/71
4/20/71
4/21/71
4/22/71
4/23/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4/30/71
5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/06/71
5/07/71
5/10/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/13/71
5/14/71
5/17/71
5/18/71
5/19/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
5/26/71
MMMH^*>BV^M»r^BHMaM«BVH^^^W^VVW«IB^HM*imWIWIIW*WHW«Wimill«HH^BIWM^Mi^BH«
Gallons used
105
67
45
37
37
75
45
52
60
52
52
30
37
60
60
67
7
90
37
120
60
67
60
67
52
37
52
60
37
67
37
30
37
37
30
22
30
37
45
30
45
37
..!•!!• 	 ••••••^•"l "• 1 [[[.•••••^
Average gpln*
1.22
0.14
0.09
0.08
0.08
0.16
0.09
0.11
0.12
0.11
0.11
0.06
0.08
0.12
0.12
0.14
0.01
0.19
0.08
0.25
0.12
0.14
0.12
0.14
0.11
0.08
0.11
0.12
0.08
0.14
0.08
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.05
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.09
0.08
                           60

-------
Table  IX (continued).  MACHINE:  FINING (FINAL POLISHING) - METER #6

                           G.I.V.


  Date                       Gallons used                  Average gpm*

5/27/71                         30                             0.06
5/28/71                         37                             0.08
6/01/71                         60                             0.12
6/02/71                         45                             0.09
6/03/71                         45                             0.09
6/04/71                         52                             0.11
6/07/71                         52                             0.11
6/08/71                         90                             0.19
6/09/71                         30                             0.06
6/10/71                         37                             0.08
6/11/71                         52                             0.11
                                    61

-------
      Table X.  MACHINE:  7-STRAND WIRE SAW (MACHINE #1)  METER #1
           Date                                    Gallons used

          3/30/71                                      314
          3/31/71                                      501
          4/01/71                                      105
          4/02/71                                      396
          4/05/71                                      411
          4/06/71                                      232
          4/07/71                                      411
          4/08/71      '•                                434
          4/09/71                                      314
          4/12/71                                      404
          4/13/71                                      239
          4/14/71                                      389
          4/15/71                                      194
          4/19/71                                      419
          4/20/71                                      262
          4/21/71                                      374
          4/22/71                                      598
          4/26/71                                       78
          4/27/71                                      239
          4/28/71                                      299
          4/30/71                                        9
          5/06/71                                      263
          5/24/71                                      297
          5/25/71                                      322
          5/26/71                                      441
          5/27/71                                      142
          6/07/71                                      321
          6/08/71                                       60
          6/09/71                                      568
          6/10/71                                      494
          6/11/71                                      269
          6/16/71                                      183

6 GPM flow.

Since the use of the 7-strand wire saw varies  greatly  from day  to  day
no average minutes per day could  be determined.  Measurement  of the
discharge volume while the saw was operating  indicated  an average  flow
of 6 GPM.
                                 62

-------
Table XI
Raw Waste

Suspended
Solids, mg/1
GIV
7 -Strand
Saw




GIV
Single
Strand
Saw

GIV
Grinder



GIV
Buffer



GIV
Steeler



GIV
Compos ite
Sample
Nativi
Single-
Strand
Saw
106,891
213,070
50,342
263,304
82,548
63,722
163,601
6,450
4,705
8,490
2,544
16,182
3,205
85,970
45,218
41,140
130,615
4,651
17,545
5,014
9,536
14,856
8,133
28,502
8,294
43,415
123,574
48,153
146,021
145,990
49,137
68,629
43,210
50,647
17,784
Turbidity
mg/1 as SiO?
127 ,000
137,000
16,500
100,000
81,000
80,000
85,000
5,100
3,100
5,500
2,000
9,300
58,000
100,000
33,000
40,000
135,000
5,500
20,000
2,650
3,250
7,000
4,000
16,000
5,800
15,000
72,000
188,000
95,000
110,000
35,000
43,750
20,000
30,000
3,600
24-Hr.
Settled
Supernatant
ES
10.8
10.8
10.9
10.8
9.9
--
M> •*
8.0
8.5
9.8
7.7
8.3
10.4
11.1
10.5
10.6
10.1
7.5
9.8
7.8
10.0
9.6
8.6
9.8
7.8
10.0
9.6
..
^ •»
10.1
10.2
9.7
9.8
8.4
SS^mg/1 Turbidity.
206
36
85
441
29
21
18,703
7
7
24
22
28
1,782
1,066
43
2,480
522
29
787
21
10
61
18
173
19
3,214
54
3,184
19,728
123
34
90
32
68
33
72
3,820
790
39,500
33
22,800
14
15
, 19
60
45
4,750
1,010
1,060
4,600
63,500
20
375
40
66
15
140
78
106
1,800
1,600
210
46,800
34,000
195
165
950
395
850
Waste
Sludge
mg/1 Volume ml/1
185
260
90
250
125
_-_
---
25
18
15
35
70
70
100
90
21
82
30
65
17
20
41
30
58
50
90
18
--
_.
80
80
42
24
64
      63

-------
                           Table XI (continued)
                Raw Waste                      24-Hr. Settled Waste

          Suspended     Turbidity               Supernatant          Sludge
         Solids, mg/1  mg/1 as SiO?  j>H    SS.mg/1 Turbidity.mg/l  Volume ml/I

Nativi       5,647         1,550     8.2       34         110           18
Planer       9,036         5,100     8.0      102         180           10
             8,078         2,200     8.3       50         243            5
             7,416         3,250     9.2       25          58            8
             7,162         3,100     8.8      119         100            9
            19,994         6,000     —     2,907       1,960
                                      64

-------
                         Table XII.  JAR TESTS
I.  Sodium Aluminate        Dose, rag/I           Turbidity, mg/1 as Si02
    Na20 A1203 3H20
                              0                    210
                              25                      30
                              50                      20
                             100                      10
                             200                       5
                             300                       5

 Note  - all  samples were adjusted to pH 7 to obtain these results.

 II.   Aluminium Sulfate                    A
      A12  (S04) 3 18H20      Dose, mg/1            Turbidity, mg/1

                               0                     8,500
                             375                      350
                             750                        15
                            1125                        10
                            1500
                            1875                        10
                            2250                         8
                                            B
                               0            ~        7,500
                             375                       350
                             750                        18
                            1125                         7
                            1500
                            1875                         4
                            2250                         4

  III.  Lime                  Dose, mg/1             Turbidity,  mg/1  £H

       Ca (°H)2                0                     1,900          6.7
                              63                       100          9-1
                              125                        12          9'8
                              188                         5          10.7
                              250                         *          U'°
                              313                         4          U'°
                              37                          *          12'°
                                     65

-------
                   Table XII (continued).   JAR TESTS
IV. Lime -Alum
Lime, mg/1
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
C
Lime, mg/1

0
63
125
188
250
313
375
A.
Alum, mg/1
0
188
375
564
750
939
1025
0
188
375
564
750
939
1025
. D. E
Alum, mg/1

0
188
375
564
750
939
1025
pH's between 7 and 8
V. Ferric Chloride- FeCl3, mg/1
Lime
0
63
125
188
250
313
375
Ca(OH)2,

0
188
375
564
750
939
1025

Turbidity, mg/1
375,000
2,000
110
19
6
6
4
6,850
3,120
24
25
8
8
6

Turbidities, mg/1
CD E
1500 2740 1380
9 32 9
7 12 9
7 12 7
7 20 7
79 5
77 5
for all treated samples
mg/1 Turbidity, mg/1

600
7
6
5
4
4
4

ES
8.3
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.5
8.0
7.6
7.8
7.7
7.4
7.4










•
PH

8.6
8.6
8.7
8.3
8.5
8.5
9.4
Note - Best and fastest floe formation; sample settled clear in 10 rain.
       least amount of sludge formed.
                                   66

-------
                   Table XII  (continued).  JAR TESTS
VI.  Ferric Sulfate-
     Litne
               Fe2  (S04)3, mg/1    Ca(OH)2, mg/1    Turbidity mg/1    pH
                      0                 0                 600           8.6
                     63  v            188                   6           6.8
                    125               375                   5           6.7
                    188               564                   4           6.5
                    250               750                   4           6.2
                    313               939                   4           5.8
                    375              1025                   4           5.5
                                    67

-------
                  Table XIII,  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                      Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage

Lime
Time

10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00
 4:00

Average
Tuesday, August 3, 1971

On Site

5.0 gpra

10% F.S. * = 19 mg/1    Feds

607. F.S. @ 78 spm - 67 mg/1


          Turbidity mg/1

             Effluent
                 4
                 4
                 4
                 5
                 4
     Shut Down for Maintenance
Raw
* F.S. - Full Stroke
                                     68

-------
Time

 9:30
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00

Average
                 Table XIV.   PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                      Nativi  and Son,  Barre,  Vermont
                    Wednesday, August 4, 19?1

                    On Site

                    5.0 gpm

                    FeCl3:  10% F.S. - 19 mg/1

                    60% F.S. - 67 mg/1


                              Turbidity mg/1

                                 Effluent
             5
             8
             8
             8
Afternoon Was Spent Making
Adjustments to Chemical
Feed Rate
             8
                                       69

-------
                   Table XV.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                      Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage

Lime
Thursday, August 5, 1971

On Site

5.0 gpm

FeCl3:  25% F.S. - 32 mg/1

40% F.S. = 64 mg/1
Time

 8:00
 9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 1:30
 2:00
 2:30
 3:00
 3:30

Average
          Turbidity mg/1

             Effluent
Tanks were Empty from Previous
Maintenance and Had to be Filled
                 9
                 8
                 7
                 5
                 5
                 5

                 6.5
Raw
Turbidity of the Raw at 2:00 - 750 mg/1

Average % of Removal =99.0
                                     70

-------
                  Table XVI.   PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                      Natlvi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Time

 8:30
 9:00
 9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
  1:00
  1:30

Average
Friday, August 6, 1971

On Site

5.0 gpm

FeCl3:   25% F.S.  -  32 mg/1

40% F.S.  - 64 mg/1


           Turbidity mg/1

              Effluent
                  5
                  4
                  4
                  4
                  4
                  4
                  4
                  4
                  4
                  4
                  4
                                                                 Raw
                                       71

-------
                  Table XVII.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                      Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage

Lime
Monday, August 9, 1971

On Site

                 V
5.0 gpm

FeCl3:  25% F.S. - 32 mg/1

35% F.S. - 64 mg/1
Time

11:00-
12:00
12:30
 1:00
 1:30
 2:00
 2:30
 3:00
 3:30
 4:00

Average
          Turbidity mg/1

             Effluent

                 3
                 4
                 4
                 4
                 4
                 4
                 4
                 4
                 4
                 4
Raw
                                     72

-------
                   Table XVIII.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage

Lime
Tuesday, August 10, 1971

On Site

5.0 gpm

FeCl3:  25% F.S. - 32 mg/1

35% F.S. - 64 mg/1
Time

 9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
 1:00
 1:30
 2:00
 2:30
 3:00
 3:30
 4:00

Average
     Turbidity mg/1

        Effluent

            4
            4

            7
            7
            7
            4
            4
            4
            4
            5
            5
            5
            4
Raw
                                    73

-------
                Table XIX.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
                       Wednesday, August 11, 1971

                       On Site

                       5.0 gpm

                       FeCl3:  18% F.S. • 21 mg/1

                       30% F.S. - 63 mg/1
Time

 9:00
 9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
 1:00
 1:30
 2:00
 2:30
 3:00
 3;30
 4:00

Average

Raw Turbidity 800.0 mg/1

Average % Removal =99.3
Turbidity mg/1

   Effluent

       8
       8
       6
       4
       4
       4
       4
       4
       4
       5
       5
       6
       6
       7
       7

       5.5
Raw
                                    74

-------
                 Table XX.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION,DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage

Lime
  Monday, August  16,  1971

  On  Site

  5.0 gpra

  Feds:  No  Feed 7:05  to  9:30   15% F.S.  9:30-4:00-19 mg/1

  30% F.S.  -  63 mg/1
Time

 8:00
 9:30
 9:45
 9:55
10:30
11:30
 1:00
 1:30
 2:30
 3:00
 3:30
 4:00
 Average

 Average  % Removal
        Turbidity mg/1

           Effluent

               6
             149
             400

             440
             380
             210
             200
             150
              65
              44
              31


             145
 Raw

 620
 610
 810
 880
1000
 940
1020
 900
 900
1300
                                                               898
84
                                    75

-------
                Table XXI.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested
                       FeCl3:  17% F.S. - 20 mg/1

                       30% F.S. - 63 mg/1  7:00-9:50
                            Turbidity mg/1

Time                           Effluent                        Raw

 8:00                              23                          1740
 8:30                              23                          1860
 9:00                              21                          1340
 9:30                              30                          1300
10:00                              21                          1560
10:30                              25                          1630
12:00                              19                          1340
 1:00                              21                          1400
 1:30                              20                          1300
 2:00                              17                          1340
 2:30                              19                          1300
 3:00                              22                          1320
 3:30                              17                          1420
 4:00                              21                          1220
Average                            21                          1434

Average % Removal =98.5
                                   76

-------
               Table XXII.   PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
                       Wednesday, August 18, 1971

                       On Site

                       5.0 gpra

                       Feds:  17% F.S. - 20 mg/1

                       30% F.S. • 63 mg/1
Time
 8:30
 9
 9
  :00
  :30
10:00
10:30
  :00
  :30
  :00
   30
  :00
   30
  :00
   30
  :00
   30
  :00
11
11
12
12
 1
 1
 2
 2
 3
 3
 4
Average
Turbidity mg/1

   Effluent

       16
       10
       19
       18
       23
       16
       15
       15

       13
       12
       12
       13

       13
       «• •
       15
Raw

1080
1020
 920
 980
1980
2080
1560
1560

1560
1400
1360
1280

1280

1389
Average % Removal  =98.9
                                    77

-------
               Table XXIII.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow
Friday, August 20, 1971

On Site

5.0 gpm

FeCl3:  40% F.S. - 51 mg/1

0
Time
  :30
  :00
  :30
  :00
  :30
  :00
10:30
11:00
11:30
  :00
  :30
  :00
  :30
  :00
 7
 8
 8
 9
 9
10
12;
12:
 1;
 1:
 2;
 3:00

Average

Average % Removal 98.5
     Turbidity mg/1

        Effluent
            30
            21
            15
            12
            12
            12
            12
            12

            12
            12
            12
            11
            10

            13
 Raw
 860
1120
 860
1020
 860
 700
 860
 720

 860
 860
 960
 980
 980

 895
                                    78

-------
Table XXIV.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
       Monday, August 23, 1971

       On Site

       5 gpra

       FeCl3:  30% F.S. • 38 mg/1
Time
 9
 9
10
10
11
11
12
12
 1
 1
 2
 2
   00
   30
   00
   30
   00
   30
   00
   30
   00
   30
   00
   30
 3:00

Average

Average % Removal
Turbidity me/1

   Effluent

       5
       5
       5
       5
       5
       8
       8
       9
      12
      12
      12
      10
      12

       7.5
                                               Raw

                                               960
                                               960
                                               800
                                               820
                                               900
                                              1300
                                              1200
                                              1050
                                               900
                                               950
                                              1000
                                              1000
                                              1300

                                              1011
    99.3
                    79

-------
                Table XXV.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage
Wednesday, August 25, 1971

On Site

5.0 gpm

FeCl3:  207. F.S. = 25 mg/1  8:00  1:30

FeCl3:  40% F.S. = 51 mg/1  1:30  4:00
Time
 9
 9
10
10
11
11
12
12
 1
 1
 2
 2
 3
:00
:30
:00
:30
:00
:30
:00
:30
;00
:30
:00
:30
:00
 3:30

Average

Average % Removal =96.6
     Turbidity mg/1

        Effluent

            5
            6
           30
           40
          150
           98
           52
           50
           50
           50
           51
           40
           22
           17

           47
Raw

2200
1400
1100
1300
1400
1340
1040
                                                               1300
                                                               1350
                                                               1400
1383
                                   80

-------
               Table XXVI.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken          Thursday, August 26,  1971

Tested                 On Site
                                                   *
Flow                   5.0 gpm

Dosage                 FeCl3:   50% F.S. *  64 mg/1



                           Turbidity  mg/1

Time                          Effluent                         Raw

  9:30                              10                           1900
10:00                              14                           1900
10;30                               9                           1500
11:00                               9                           1720
10:30                               9                           1800
12:00                              --                           	
12:30                              --                           	
  1:00                               8                           2100
  1:30                               9                           1500
  2:00                               9                           1500
  2:30                              10                           1750
  3:00                              10                           1750
  3:30                              19                           1550

Average                           10.5                         1725

Average 70 Removal = 99.4
                                     81

-------
              Table XXVII.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
                       Monday, September 27, 1971

                       Tuesday, September 28, 1971

                       5.0 gpm

                       30% of full stroke - 38 rag/1
Time

 8:00
 9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00
 4:00

Average

Deionized HgO = .8

Average % Removal =99.5
Turbidity tag/I

   Effluent

       9
       4
       9
       9
       9
      10
      11
       8
       9
Raw

1700
1700
1700
1500
1500
1500
1700
1700
1750

1639
                                   82

-------
               Table XXVIII.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage
Tuesday, September 28, 1971

Wednesday, September 29, 1971

5.0 gpm

FeCl_:  30% of F.S. = 38 mg/1
Time

 8:00
 9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00
 4:00

Average

Average 7. Removal  = 99.3
     Turbidity mg/1

        Effluent

            8
           11
           10
           10
            8
            9
            9
            6
            7
Raw

1100
1500
1500
1200
1100
1100
1500
1200
1600

1311
                                    83

-------
                Table XXIX.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage
Wednesday, September 29, 1971

Thursday, September 30, 1971

5.0 gpra

30% F.S. - 38 mg/1
Time

 8:00
 9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00
 4:00

Average

Average 7. Removal
                            Turbidity ag/1

                               Effluent

                                   8
                                   8
                                   7
                                   8
                                   6
                                  10
                                   8
                                   9
                                   7
                                   8
                                        Raw

                                        1200
                                        1200
                                        1600
                                        1600
                                        1600
                                        1800
                                        1600
                                        1600
                                        1600

                                        1533
                    99.5
                                   84

-------
                Table XXX.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow

Dosage
  Friday, October  1,  1971

  Monday, October  4,  1971

  5.0  gpra

  25%  F.S.  -  32  mg/1
Time

  8:00
  9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
  1:00
  2:00
  3:00
  4:00

Average

Average % Removal
        Turbidity me/1

           Effluent
              15
               8
              53
               8
               8
               6
               5

               8
Raw

 900
 900
1000
1500
1200
1200
1200
1800
1300

1222
99.3
                                     85

-------
                Table XXXI.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Dosage
   Monday, October 4, 1971

   Tuesday, October 5, 1971

   20% F.S. - 25 mg/1
Time

 8:00
 9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00
 4:00

Average

Average % Removal
        Turbidity mg/1

           Effluent

               17
               14
               14
               12
               15
               11
               16
               16
               13

               14
Raw

1400
1400
1400
1400
1400
1400
1400
1400
1400

1400
99.0
                                   86

-------
               Table XXXII.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested

Flow
Tuesday, October 5, 1971

Thursday, October 7, 1971

5.0 gptn

15% of F.S. - 19 mg/1
Time

 8:00
 9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00
 4:00

Average

Average % Removal =99.9
                             Turbidity mg/1

                                Effluent

                                    14
                                    19
                                    19
                                    17
                                    17
                                    15
                                    17
                                    17
                                    19

                                    17
                                        Raw

                                         800
                                        1200
                                        1400
                                        1400
                                        1200
                                        1400
                                        2000
                                        2000
                                        1950

                                        1483
                                     87

-------
               Table XXXIII.  PILOT PLANT OPERATION DATA

                    Nativi and Son, Barre, Vermont
Samples Taken

Tested,

Flow

Dosage
     Wednesday, October 6, 1971

     Thursday, October 7, 1971

     5.0 gpm

     10 7. F.S. = 13 tng/1
Time

 8:00
 9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
 1:00
 2:00
 3:00
 4:00

Average

Average % Removal
          Turbidity mg/1

             Effluent

                 9
                 9
                60
                69
                46
                43
                53
                45
                40

                42
Raw

1200
1200
1300
1800
1600
1800
1600
1800
1900

1578
- 97.3
                                    88

-------
      Table XXXIV.   LINK-BELT PILOT PLANT
     •••^••.iiniirina.iii. !•!•! IB ^•H.MII ii  ii ,m •••^•••••••^•••a

Date                    7/30/71
Flow                    .75 gpm
Dose                    FeCl3 - 13 mg/1
Lime                    67 mg/1


   Time                Effluent Turbidity  mg/1
   10:30                       7.5
   11:00                       6.0
   11:30                       6.0
   12:00                       6.0
   12:30                       6.5
                         89

-------
Table XXXV.  LINK-BELT PILOT PLANT
Date
Flow
Dose
Lime
Time
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
12:00
8/4/71
.75 gpm
FeCl3 • 13 mg/1
67 mg/1
Effluent Turbidity - mg/1
8.5
11.5
11.5
11.5
11.5
                 90

-------
   Table XXXVI.  LINK-BELT PILOT PLANT








Date                       8/5/71




Flow                       1 gpm




Dose           -            FeCl3 - 32 mg/1




Lime                       64 mg/1
Time           Effluent Turbidity - me/1




1:00                       6.0




1:30                       5.0




2:00                       5.0




2:30                       5.0




3:00                       5.0




3:30                       5.0
                    91

-------
Table XXXVII.  LINK-BELT PILOT PLANT
MMHM^BKKnMMmMBMBHBWBMI^^MMBMm—IIWMW^HVW^BMMB
Date
Flow
Dose
Lime
Time
MMMMtllllllBMlM*
8:30
9:00
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12; 30
1:00
1:30
8/6/71
1 gpm
FeCl3 • 32 mg/1
64 mg/1
Turbidity - mg/1
5.0
4.0
8.5
6.0
4.0
4.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
                  92

-------
  Table XXXVIII.  LINK-BELT PILOT PLANT
Date
Flow
Dose
Lime
8/9/71
1.4 gpra
FeCl3 = 32
64 me /I


mg/1

Time         *      Turbidity - mg/1




12:00                      9.5




12:30                      4.5




 1:00                      4.5




 1:30                      4.5




 2:00                      4.0



 2:30                      4.0




 3:00                      4.0
                    93

-------
Table XXXIX.  LINK-BELT PILOT PLANT
Date
Flow
Dose
Lime
Time
9:00
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
1:00
1:30
2:00
2:30
3:00
3:30
4:00
8/11/71
1.0 gpm
FeCl3 - 20 mg/1
62 mg/1
^ "
Turbidity - mg/1
7.5
7.5
7.5
, 7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
4.5 ;'-'
4.0 •'•
4.0
3.5
4.0
:4.0
4.0
4.0
                94

-------
                                 Table  XL

	                                    "        ? '•




                          Samples Taken:  2/14/72


                          Dose:  FeCl,  :  47  mg/1


                                CaOlL  :  25  mg/1
                             t   f 1.1    "

                          Flow:            10  gpm




                              Turbidity mg/1


     Time                         Effluent                       Raw


       8:00                          12                          450


       9:00                          12                          538


      10:00                          12                          725


      11:00                          12                          625


      12:00                          12                          625


       1:00                          23                          688


       2:00                          17                          975


       3:00                          17                        1,088


       4:00                          16_                           -


Average                             15                          714


                          %  Removal     - 97.9


                          OFR            - 576 gal./ft.  /day


                          D.T. Floe.     - 12 min.


                          D.T. Clarifier - 112 min.
                                     95

-------
                                 Table XLI
     Time
      8:00
      9:00
     10:00
     11:00
     12:00
      1:00
      2:00
      3:00
      4:00
Average
Samples Taken:  2/15/72
Dose:   FeCl3:  47 mg/1
        CaORj:  25 mg/1
Flow:           10 gpm

     Turbidity mg/1 '

        Effluent
             8
            11
            10
            10
            12
            14
            14
            16
            11
            12
                         % Removal
                         OFR
                         D.T. Floe.
                         D.T. Clarifier
Raw
900
800
                 576 gal./ft. /day
                 12 rain.
                 112 min.
                                    96

-------
                                Table XLII
	 ' ______ _,, 	 	 	 — 	 	 	
Samples Taken: 2/15/72
Dose: FeCl3: 47 mg/1
CaOl^: 25 mg/1
Flow: 10 gpm
Turbidity
Time Effluent
8:00
9:00 8
10:00 18
11:00 25
12:00* 250
1:00* 450
•• . • - 	 i« 	 • . mi 	 '- 	 ••• •
Raw
625
475
563
      2:00

      3:00                           37                          750

      4:00                           22                          625

Average                              22                          608

     Malfunction of FeCl3 feeding system caused an extreme overdose
     eliminating all flocculation.  Problem was corrected  and  system
     returned to normal operation.  Abnormal values not averaged.


                         % Removal      - 97%

                         OFR            - 864 gal./ft.2/day

                         D.T. Floe.     - 8 min.

                         D.T. Clarifier - 73 min.
                                   97

-------
       Table XLIII
Samples Taken:  2/17/72




Dose:   FeClgt  47 mg/1




        CaOH2:  25 mg/1



Flow:           15 gpm

Time
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
Average
Turbidity mg/1
Effluent
17
37
32
30
35
20
16
29
24
27

Raw
575
475
700
625
725
775
1400
1075
975
814
% Removal




OFR



D.T. Floe.




D.T. Clarifier
96.7



864 gal./ft.2/day




8 min.




75 min.
           98

-------
                                Table XLIV
     Time




      8:00




      9:00




     10:00



     11:00




     12:00




      1:00




      2:00




      3:00




Average
Samples Taken:  2/22/72




Dose            15 gpm




Flow:           47 mg/1 lime






        Turbidity






        Effluent




         24 mg/1




         24 mg/1




         18 mg/1




         18 mg/1




         18 mg/1




         20 mg/1




         20 mg/1




         20 mg/1




         20
                         7. Removal




                         OFR




                         D.T. Floe.




                         D.T. Clarifier
                  98.0




                  864 gal./ft.2/day




                  8  min.




                  75 min.
   Raw




 600 mg/1




 800 mg/1




 800 mg/1



 800 mg/1




 900 mg/1




 900 mg/1




1160 mg/1,




1160 mg/1




 890
                                     99

-------
                                 Table XLV
Samples Taken: 2/28/72
Dose: FeCl^: 47 mg/1
CaOHg: 25 mg/1
Flow: 15 gpm
Turbidity
Time Effluent
8:00 11.5
9:00 8.5
10:00 20.0
11:00 19.0
12:00 19.0
1:00 19.0
2:00 17.0
3:00 17.0
4:00 20.0
Average 17
^WHH^HIIIHHBHH^BaH«W^H^BHV^^^MWHM^^BBHIMB*'*BHM'BB'1111^^




Raw
380
600
800
750
1000
1100
1100
1100
1300
903
                        % Removal




                        OFR



                        D.T. Floe.



                        D.T. Clarifier
98.5




864 gal./ft.2/day



8 rain.



75 min.
«US. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 546-319/419 1-3
                                    100

-------
  SELECTED WATER
  RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
  INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
                     I. Report Wo.
              2.
                        3. Accession No.
                                          w
  4.  Title
            GRANITE INDUSTRY WASTEWATER TREATMENT
  7.  Authoi(s)
                                                                   5. Report, D*te ,
                                                                                          .
                                                                   9. Performing Organization »
                                                                     Report No.        '-*'  '
              Willard B. Farnham
                                                                  10. Project No.
  9.  Organization
                     State of Vermont
     i      Agency of Environmental Conservation
              Department of Water Resources
                                         11. Contract/Grant No.
                                            12080 GCH
                                          . Type of Report tnd
  12.  Sponsoring Organization  Environmental Protection Agency
  15.  Supplementary Notes

    Environmental Protection Agency report number, EPA-660/2-7U-OUO,  May 19?U
  16.  Abstract  A study of wastewater discharge in the granite industry  has  been conducted
 to determine wastewater characteristics,  methods of pollution abatement  and disposal
 methods for waste granite sludge.
      The project included a study of overall water use in a granite  plant, water opti-
 mization studies, and water reduction studies.  Laboratory testing was conducted for
 waste characterization and liquid solids  separation techniques.  A pilot plant was
 designed, constructed and operated to test the efficiency of plant scale separation
 procedures.  A prototype plant was designed and constructed to test  the  possibility of
 complete water reuse in the granite industry.  Successful operation  of both plants
 indicates that a practical method of treating granite waste effluent has been developed
 and that complete recycle of  treated effluent is possible and economically feasible.
      Studies were performed to determine  the possibility of by-product use of waste.
 granite sludge.  Two uses were found for  the sludge, but an economic evaluation indicated
 that there was insuffieient raw material  to establish a by-product industry.
      A survey of sludge disposal  methods  in the industry showed that some modification
 of waste disposal facilities, and more cooperation by the industry,  would Improve the
 sludge disposal procedures.  A modified type of settling lagoon was  recommended.
      This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project No. 12080 GCH under  the
 sponsorship of the Environmental  Protection Agency.
  I7a.Descriptors  *Water pollution, *Pollution abatement, Granite processing, Water pollution
 sources, Water pollution control, Water  pollution effects, Water Conservation,  Waste
 water disposal, Granite processing sludge  disposal, Water reuse.
  17 b. Identifiers

*Granite industry, State of Vermont, Chemical wastewater treatment.
  17c. COWRR Field & Group
  18. Availability
19., Security Class.
   (Report)

20. Security Class,  '
   (Page)
21. No. of
   Pages

22. Priced
                             Send To:
                                                      WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
                                                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THEINTERIOR
                                                      WASHINGTON. D. C. 20240
  Abstractor  Willard B. Farnham
             institution   State  of Vermont
WRSIC 102 (REV. JUNE 1971)
                                                  Agency or fiuvirontnenca i

-------