United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
            Industrial Environmental Research
            Laboratory
            Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600 2-79-110
July 1979
            Research and Development
&EPA
Processing Chrome
Tannery Effluent to
Meet Best Available
Treatment Standards

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:

      1.  Environmental Health  Effects Research
      2.  Environmental Protection Technology
      3.  Ecological Research
      4.  Environmental Monitoring
      5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
      6.  Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
      7   Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
      8.  "Special" Reports
      9.  Miscellaneous Reports

This report has been assigned  to the  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research  performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution-sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
t on Service, Springfield, Virginia  22161.

-------
                                          EPA-600/2-79-110
                                          July 1979
 PROCESSING CHROME TANNERY EFFLUENT TO MEET
     BEST AVAILABLE TREATMENT STANDARDS
                     by

             Lawrence K. Barber
      A. C. Lawrence Leather Co., Inc.
      Winchester, New Hampshire 03470

             Ernest R. Ramirez
        Swift Environmental Systems
          Chicago, Illinois 60680

            William L. Zemaitis
             Envirobic Systems
          New York, New York 10001
            Grant No. S 804504
              Project Officer

              Jack L. Witherow
       Food and Wood Products Branch
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
         Corvallis, Oregon 97330
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
     OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
    U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
           CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268

-------
                                 DISCLAIMER

       This report has been reviewed by the Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, U. 3. Environmental Protection Agency,  and approved for publica-
tion.  Approval does not signify that the contents  necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U. 3. Environmental Protection Agency,  nor does men-
tion of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommen-
dation for use.
                                      ii

-------
                                 FOREWORD
     When energy and material resources are extracted, processed, converted,
and used, the related pollutional impacts on our environment and even on our
health often require that new and increasingly more efficient pollution con-
trol methods be used.  The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory-
Cincinnati (lERL-Ci) assists in developing and demonstrating new and improved
methodologies that will meet these needs both efficiently and economically.

     The A. C. Lawrence Co. has demonstrated a highly efficient wastewater
treatment system at their chrome tannery in Winchester, N. H.  The system
uses flow equalization, primary treatment by chemical addition and air
floation, and secondary treatment in an oxidation ditch.  Removal of both
carbonaceous and nitrogenous materials was. accomplished.  This study will be
of great interest to the entire leather tanning industry.  The Food and Wood
Products Branch, lERL-Ci, may be contacted for further information on the
subject.

                              David G. Stephan
                                 Director
               Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
                                Cincinnati
                                    iii

-------
                                   ABSTRACT
       To satisfy stream discharge requirements at its Winchester, N. H.,
chrome tan shearling tannery, the A. G. Lawrence Leather Co., Inc. selected
primary and secondary systems that are unique as applied to tannery effluent
treatment in the United States.  Primary clarification is accomplished by
means of coagulation and flotation, using electrolytic as well as mechanical
micro-bubble generation.  The secondary biological section is a so-called
CARROUSEL,   a technical modification of the Passveer oxidation ditch.  Dur-
ing the 12-month study, complete analytical data representing winter as well
as summer operating conditions were acquired along with operating cost data.

       This report presents these data and describes the design and operation
of the system.  Possible applications of the same principles to other tannery
wastewaters are also suggested.

       This report was submitted in fulfillment of Grant No. B 80^50^ by the
A. C. Lawrence Leather Co., Inc., under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency.  This report covers the period September 15, 19?6
through March 31» 1978 , and work was completed as of March 1, 19?8.
                                      iv

-------
                              CONTENTS
Foreword	iii
Abstract	   iv
Figures	   vi
Tables	viii
Conversion Table 	   ix
Acknowledgments	    x
   1.  Introduction	    1
   2.  Wet Process Description 	    3
   3.  Treatment Plant Components	    6
   4.  Primary Treatment 	   23
   5.  Secondary Biological Treatment	   27
   6.  Experimental Procedures	   31
   7.  Operating and Analytical Data, Discussion 	   38
   8.  Conclusions and Evaluations 	   84
   9-  Application of the System to Chrome-Cattlehide and
        Vegetable Cattlehide Tanneries 	   94
  10.  Reuse of Treated Wastewater 	  134
References	145
Bibliography 	  147
Appendices
   A.  Letters from J. L. Witherow to J. A. Reid concerning
        analysis of standard samples for analytical quality control  149
   B.  Initial cost of Winchester Tannery Wastewater Treatment
        Plant	151
                                  v

-------
                                FIGURES

Number

   1,  Schematic Diagram of Winchester Treatment Plant.               7
   2.  Holding and Equalizing Tank                                    9
   3.  Constant Head Box                                              9
   4.  Schematic Diagram of Constant Head Box                        10
   5.  Dispersed Air Generator                                       12
   6.  Coagulation Cell                                              12
   7.  Bubble Classifier                                             13
   8.  LectroClear Flotation Basin                                   13
   9.  Schematic Diagram of LectroClear System                       15
  10.  Filter Press                                                  18
  11.  Schematic Diagram of Oxidation Ditch                          19
  12.  Carrousel Oxidation Ditch                                     20
  13.  Final Clarifier                                               20
  14.  BOD^ Levels in Raw Wastewater, After Primary Treatment,       54
          5 and After Total Treatment, First Sixty Weeks
  15.  Temperature and pH in the Carrousel, First Sixty Weeks        55
  16.  Food to Microorganisms Ratio and Relationship to Final BCD-.  56
            First Sixty Weeks                                    5
  17.  Average Age of Suspended Solids in the Carrousel.  First      57
            Sixty Weeks
  18.  Suspended Solids in the Carrousel and Sludge Volume Index.    58
            First Sixty Weeks
  19.  Suspended Solids in Raw Wastewater; after Primary Treat-      59
            ment; and after Total Treatment. First Sixty Weeks
  20.  Nitrogen in Raw Wastewater; after Primary Treatment; and      60
            after Total Treatment.  First Sixty Weeks.
  21.  Ammonia Nitrogen in Raw Wastewater; and afte'r Total           61
            Treatment.  First Sixty Weeks.
  22.  Fats, Oils, and Grease in Raw Wastewater; after Primary       62
            Treatment; and after Total Treatment. Fizst Sixty Weeks.
  23.  Chromium in Raw Wastewater; after Primary Treatment; and      64
            after Total Treatment.  First Sixty Weeks.
  24.  BODjj Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary Treatment;       65
            and after Total Treatment.  Summer Test Period.
  25.  BODc Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary Treatment;       66
            and after Total Treatment.  Winter Test Period.
  26.  Suspended Solids Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary      67
            Treatment; and after Total Treatment.  Summer Test
            Period.
                                   vx

-------
2?.  Suspended Solids Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary      68
           Treatment} and after Total Treatment.  Winter Test
           Period.                                                 6g
28.  Sludge Volume Index for Carrousel Activated Sludge.            y
           Summer Test Period.
29.  Sludge Volume Index for Carrousel Activated Sludge.           70
           Winter Test Period.
30.  Volatile Suspended Solids Levels after Primary Treatment      71
           and in the Carrousel.  Summer Test Period.
31.  Volatile Suspended Solids Levels after Primary Treatment      72
           and in the Carrousel.  Winter Test Period.
32.  Total Nitrogen Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary        73
           Treatment; and after Total Treatment.  Summer
           Test Period.
33•  Total Nitrogen Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary        74
           Treatment; and after Total Treatment.  Winter
           Test Period.
34.  Kjeldahl Nitrogen Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary     75
           Treatment; and after Total Treatment.  Summer Test
           Period.
35•  Kjeldahl Nitrogen Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary     76
           Treatment; and after Total Treatment.  Winter Test
           Period.
36.  Ammonia Levels in Raw Wastewater; and after Total Treat-      78
           ment.  Summer .Test Period.
37•  Ammonia Levels in Raw Wastewater; and after Total Treat-      79
           ment.  Winter 'Test Period.
38.  Fats, Oils, and Grease Levels in Raw Wastewater; after        80
           Primary Treatment; and after Total Treatment.
           Summer Test Period.
39•  Fats, Oils, and Grease Levels in Raw Wastewater; after        81
           Primary Treatment; and after Total Treatment.
           Winter Test Period.
40.  Chromium Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary Treat-       82
           ment; and after Total Treatment.  Summer Test Period.
41.  Chromium Levels in Raw Wastewater; after Primary Treat-       63
      ;     ment; and after Total Treatment.  Winter Test Period.
42.  Schematic Diagram of Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant      98
           for a. Category 1 Chrome Tan Pulp Hair Cattiehide
           Tannery.
43.  Schematic Diagram of Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant     120
           for a Category 3 Vegetable Tan Save Hair Cattlehide
           Tannery.
44.  Schematic Diagram of a System for Proposed Re-use of         141
           Treated Wastewater.
                                 vii

-------
                                 TABLES

Number                                                               Page
  1.  Typical Winchester Effluent Analysis                            5
  2.  Laboratory Data Required for E.P.A. Project                    32
  3.  Analytical Laboratory Quality Control Comparison of            35
             Results on Divided Samples
  4.  Analytical Laboratory Quality Control Comparison of            36
             Results Between A.C. Lawrence and E.P.A.  I.E.R.L.
  5.  Analytical Laboratory Quality Control Comparison of Re-        3?
             suits On Samples Run in Duplicate
  6.  Summer Operating Conditions                                    39
  7.  Winter Operating Conditions                                    41
  8.  Summer Analytical Results                                      ^J 3
  9.  Winter Analytical Results                                      46
 10.  First Sixty Weeks Analytical Results                           49
 11.  Average Percent of Pollutant Removal.  Total Treatment.        84
             Summer and Winter Test Periods.
 12.  Comparison of Winchester Effluent with Best Available          88
             Treatment Standards for 1983
 13t  Comparison of Costs of Operation of Systems to Provide          92
             Microbubbles for a Flotation System for Sus-
             pended Solids Separation
 14.  Comparison of Carrousel Treatment Efficiencies                 93
             Winchester, N.H. vs. Oisterwijk, Netherlands
 15.  Typical Tannery Wastewater Analyses                            95
 16.  Summary of Treatment Plant Components and Estimated Cost       117
             for a Category 1, Chrome Tan, Pulp Hair,  Cattle-
             hide Tannery
 17.  Summary of Treatment Plant Components and Estimated Cost       132
             for a Category 3, Vegetable Tan, Save Hair,
             Cattlehide Tannery
 18.  Recap of Savings Possible Through Wastewater Recovery and      14,0
             Reuse.
 19.  Recap of Estimated Effluent Reuse Construction Costs          144
                                   viii

-------
Multiply (English Units)
    English Unit
British Thermal Unit
British Thermal Unit/pound
cubic foot/minute
cubic foot/second
cubic foot
cubic foot
cubic inch
degree Fahrenheit
foot
gallon
gallon/minute
hdrsepower
inch
pound
million gallons/day
pound/square inch (gauge)
square foot
square inch
tons (short)
yard
                             CONVERSION TABLE
         by
     Conversion
         0.252
         0.555
         0.028
         1.7
         0.028
        28.32
        16.39
  0.555(°F-32)*
         0.3048
         3-785
         0.0631
         0.7457
         2.54
         0.454
     3,785
(0.06805 psig+1)*
         0.0929
         6.452
         0.907
         0.9144
To Obtain Metric Units
       Ketric Unit
kilogram-calories
kilogram calories/ldbgtam
cubic meter/minute
cubic rneter/rainute
cubic meter
liters
cubic centimeters
degree Centigrade
meter
liters
liter/second
kilowatt
centimeters
kilogram
cubic meters/day
atmospheres (absolute)
square meter
square centimeters
metric tons (lOOOMlq§raii)
meter
*Actual conversion, not a multiplier
                                     IX

-------
                              ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

       The authors wish to particularly acknowledge the indispensable devo-
tion and dedication to the task of gathering the extensive amount of data
over considerable periods of time, as provided by Mr. John A. Reid, Mr. M. R.
Reynolds, and Mr. Frank Russell, all of A. C. Lawrence Leather Company, Inc.
In addition to performing the on-plant chemical analyses, Mr. Reid arranged
for and directed the analytical work done commercially, and offered valuable
advice in the area of operational adjustments towatd maximizing treatment
efficiency.

       The project is also indebted to Mr. Francis E. Stone, Plant Manager
at Winchester, who maintained a keen interest and directed prompt attention
to necessary maintenance details thus providing continuity of operation,

       It is also appropriate to acknowledge the direction and assistance of
Mr. Jack L. V/itherow and Mr. Donald F. Anderson of the U.S.E.P.A. whose cap-
able guidance was essential to this project.

-------
                                  SECTION 1

                                INTRODUCTION

       Tanneries are generally pollution-intensive industrial complexes gen-
erating large volumes of high-concentration wastewaters.  These wastes have
historically been discharged into rivers and waterways with little if any
purification.  This report presents construction and operating data, includ-
ing analytical results, for a system designed to eliminate most of the ob-
jectionable components of a tannery effluent formerly discharged directly into
a small river.

       Tanneries are not all alike.  The basic design of procedures for hide
preparation, tanning, and finishing vary rather widely according to the types
of raw hides employed and the characteristics desired in the finished leather
product.  Accordingly, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
classified the various segments of the industry into the following seven
categories:

            1.  Cattlehide  -  pulp hair    -    chrome tan
            2.  Cattlehide  -  save hair    -    chrome tan
            3.  Cattlehide  -                non chrome tan
            4.  Thru-the blue
            5«  Retan only
            6.  No beamhouse tannery
            7.  Shearlings

       The tannery investigated here is a shearling tannery, which tans and
finishes sheep pelts with the wool intact.  These skins, except for the al-
terations of character and appearance needed to accomplish permanent preser-
vation and enhance aesthetic qualities, are essentially the same entity re-
moved from the parent animal.  The pelts are received at the Winchester tan-
nery either green salted or dry salted in railroad cars or auto trucks from
large-scale meat producing points in the Midwest, Fax West, or Atlantic sea-
board.  The pelts contain large amounts of animal grease and interfibrillary,
water-soluble, proteinaceous compounds in the form of glycomucins and the
like, as well as large quantities of lanolin, wool grease, and soil attached
to or entrapped in the wool.  These components are removed early in the pro-
cessing procedure during washing operations, which coax the grease and lano-
lin into dispersal through the use of strong detergents and emulsifiers.

       The basic difference between a shearling tannery and a conventional
Cattlehide tannery is that the former requires no dehairing steps.  This
process, known as beamhouse operations, involves the use of chemical agents
such as lime and sodium sulfide to produce either cattle hair suitable for

-------
resale or denatured (pulped) hair, most of which enters the waste stream  in
the form of fine particles.  Section 2 describes the shearling process, and
Section 9 presents designs for complete cattlehide processing systems.

       The wastewater treatment system selected for the Winchester tannery
was chosen from a number of options.  The electrochemical primary system,
sometimes called LectroGlear, was favored for several reasons:

    1.  The presence of large quantities spent fatliquor solutions and emulsi-
        fied lanolin, wool grease, and animal fat all well dispersed, dictated
        a clarification system that would involve flotation rather than gra-
        vity separation.
    2.  Laboratory-scale demonstrations clearly indicated that the floated
        skimmings would have a much higher solids content (perhaps on the
        order of 10X) than a gravity system could deliver.  Sludge storage,
        handling, and dewatering would thus be expedited.
    3.  The continued flotation effect provided by the electrodes in the
        flotation basin seemed to maximize primary clarification.
    4.  The electrolytic generation of chlorine coincident with the other
        products of electrolysis appeared to have the beneficial side effect
        of providing some disinfection.
    5.  At the time of selection, ammonia reduction was thought to be occur-
        ring within the LectroGlear system.  This effect was a possible plus,
        but it was later f^und to be untrue.

       The secondary system was likewise selected from a number of possible
choices.  The carrousel concept, which is a technical modification of the
Passveer oxidation ditch, was brought to our attention by EPA and leather in-
dustry representatives who visited Holland in 19?4.  They reported rather en-
thusiastically the simplicity of design, low cost, minimum land requirement,
adaptability to northern winter climate operation, ease of control of dis-
solved oxygen, and low operating cost.  In addition, the most important, this
system was claimed to have the capability of both nitrifying and denitrify-
ing.  Because all of these factors seemed to indicate superiority over other
known systems, consultant help was secured, and the decision made to install
a carrousel unit.

       The choice of a sludge dewatering device was affected by the fact that
the land area of the tannery property was limited, and solid waste from the
treatment, plant thus had to be deposited at the regional solid waste manage-
ment facility.  Samples were submitted.  The material was accepted with the
stipulation that the dry solids content would consistently have to reach 35$£
to kVfo (and preferably 40%).  Only one  device, a filter press, could relia-
bly be expected to provide this performance.

       The choices made in assembling this treatment plant have proved to be
wise.  Consistently high-degree removals of pollutants have been achieved, in
most cases well in excess of discharge permit requirements.

-------
                                 SECTION 2

                           WET PROCESS DESCRIPTION

       Shearling processing is a complex procedure using a. much greater water-
to-hide ratio than most tanneries.  Because the wool is retained and it is
desirable to keep the wool fibers attached to the pelts free from interweav-
ing and tangling, the practice of swimming the skins in chemical solutions
has been adopted.  Other categories of tanning operations limit the chemical
floats to the smallest possible amounts.  The liquor-to-skin ratio, by weight,
for each fill and drain is on the order of 2.5 to 1.  With side leather, the
ratio is apt to be 1 to 1, and in some individual instances, it may be as
little as 0.25 to 1.   The Winchester tannery uses approximately 90 gal of
water per pelt (7,500 gal per 1,000 Ib of green salted weight as received),
or on a weight basis, a ratio of 60 to 1.  This seems very high, but is ne-
cessitated primarily by the extremely soiled condition of the pelts as re-
ceived-                 The tannery processes some 3iOOO skins per day and
discharges just under 300,000 gal of wastewater per day.

       The process used at Winchester has evolved over many years of trial
and error and has gradually been optimized by experience.  There is no close-
knit shearling trade group in the U.S. exchanging ideas for mutual benefit,
nor is there any standard procedure for converting raw pelts into finished
products.  Many tannages are used in lias, tannery, ranging from glutaraldehyde
to modified mineral and vegetable tannages, depending on the end use and
characteristics desired in the finished shearling.  The shearling process
consists of soaking and washing, pickling, tanning, retanning, dyeing, and
fatliquoring, drying, and dry finishing *  This section describes the wet
processing steps, or those contributing to liquid waste volumes.


SOAKING AND WASHING

       Chemicals used in the soaking and washing process are soda ash, de-
tergents (biodegradable), and bactericide.  Skins are immersed in water in
batches of about 100 in a horizontal, semicylindrical wooden tub, on which a
paddle wheel is mounted.  The above chemicals are added, and the paddle wheel
is rotated to provide a swirling action that enhances liquid contact with
both the skin and the wool.  A number of fills and draws are executed during
the wash and rinse cycles.  This is a overnight operation.

-------
PICKLING

       Chemicals used in the pickling process include sodium  chloride and
sulfuric acid.  Skins are immersed again in paddle vats and gently agitated,
this time in 5% salt brine containing sulfuric acid sufficient  to adjust and
maintain the pH to about 1.8.  This operation is also an  overnight one.
Equilibrium at the pH specified is achieved.
 TANNING

       Chemicals used in the tanning process are sodium chloride, basic
 chromium sulfate, and sodium formate.

       Skins are again  immersed and gently agitated in paddle  vats  to which
 the  chromium tanning solution has bean added.  This requires a 2-day  expo-
 sure.  In some  cases, depending on the product desired, the chromium  solu-
 tions  are retained and  reused.  In others, certain dyes are added that pre-
 vent reuse.
 RETANNING, DYEING, AND FATLIQUORING

        Chemicals  used in  this process are sodium chloride, basic  chromium
 sulfate,  sodium formate,  emulsified animal, vegetable, fish, and  mineral
 oils,  and various dyestuffs.  Similar equipment to that described in the
 foregoing steps is employed.  The only significant difference  in  the dyeing
 and  fatliquoring  sequence is that much higher temperatures can be tolerated
 by the now chrome-tanned  skins, and such elevations can be used to advantage
 in the exhaustion of the  dye baths and fixation of the dyestuffs.  The  time
 periods required  are relatively short - on the order of 2 to 3 hr.

        All of the above operations are carried on at the ground-floor level
 of the tannery, and the liquid contents of the paddle vats discharge by
 gravity to in-floor drains and sewers.  This means that it is  possible  for a
 number of vats to be discharging dissimilar solutions to the wastewater col-
 lection system at the same time.  Generally the soak waters are the first to
 be sewered in the workday, beginning at about 3 a.m. and lasting  until  3 p.m.
 The  pickle liquors are dropped from about 11 p.m. to 11 a.m.   The tan liquors
 from 7 a.m. to 2  p.m., and the color-fatliquor solutions from  7 a.m. to
 3 p.m.  The equalizing tank at the front end of the wastewater treatment
 works  blends dissimilar solutions and absorbs surges in hydraulic flows.

        The blended waste  stream is thus a complex mixture of organic and in-
 organic chemicals, mineral and vegetable tanning materials, animal, mineral,
and vegetable oils, both  raw and solubilized, and a spectrum of dyes.  It is
a murky brew at best, sometimes red, sometimes blue, usually dirty gray, but
always a challenge to any sanitary engineer.  A typical analysis  of a compo-
site sample from the equalizing holding tank is as follows:

-------
             TABLE 1.  TYPICAL WINCHESTER TANNERY EFFLUENT ANALYSIS


                Parameter                                    rag/1


           Suspended solids --------------     1,150

           BOD5	       812

           N%-N	        32

           TKN	        75

           FOG	

           Gr   	        99
       Though this analysis may not appear to represent contamination loads
encountered at chrome side tanneries, it is not as different as one might ex-
pect (See Section 9)-

-------
                                 SECTION 3

                         TREATMENT PLANT COMPONENTS

       Treatment plant components are described briefly as follows.  Sche-
matic views of the primary and secondary treatment systems, the constant head
box, the primary clarifier, and the carrousel are presented as Figures  1,4,
9,  and 11.

PRIMARY CLARIFICATION SECTION

Screen House

       The screen house contains a screen pit with a horizontal cylindrical
rotating monel screen.   The screen measures 3 ft. diameter by 5 ft. long and
has 5/32 in. perforations on 1/2 in. centers.  It is equipped with link  chain
mounted bar rakes that continuously remove accumulated coarse suspended solids.

       Manufacturer: Exeter Machine Co., Inc.
                     Lomura, Wisconsin

Raw Wastewater Pumps - 3

       These are submerged pumps located in a sump adjacent to and having a
water level the same as the screen pit referred to above.  These pumps  ele-
vate the wastewater to the equalizing tank as required, and are actuated by
float switches in the collection sump.

       Manufacturers Flyte Corp.
       Model No. - 6 - CP - 3126
       Capacity - 600 gpm.  Mhp -9.4

Holding and Equalizing Tank

       See Figure 2.

       This is used to accumulate wastewater during working hours, absorb
flow surges, and serve as a supply tank to allow constant flow through  the
treatment system.

       Constructions Concrete, circular.
       Size - 40 ft. diam. x 18 ft. deep
       Capacity - 17QOOO gals.

-------
                       BUILDING  OUTLINE
K
IU
                                                                                         RIVER
                                                             SAMPLE COLLECTION POINT
         Figure  1.   Schematic diagram of Winchester  treatment plant.

-------
Supply Pumps - 2

       These are submerged pumps located near  the bottom  of the  holding tank.
They  are  activated by float switches iuoun'r.ed   near  the  bottom of the tank.
They  elevate the wastewater to the constant-flow head box - see  next item.

       Manufacturer  - Same as raw wastewater pumps  above.
       Model and Capacity - Same as raw wastewater  pumps  above.

Constant-Flow Head Box

       See  Figures 3 and  ':-.

       This consists of a fiberglass vessel, cylindrical,  open top,  which has
an adjustable side weir with which to regulate the  depth  of water within it.
It has two  bottom connections, one to supply - pumps located directly below
in the holding tank ,         the other to the treatment  plant.   It  is lo-
cated within the holding tank, near the top, attached to  the perimeter.
Wastewater  is pumped upward into the head box  in an amount greater than can
be absorbed by gravity flow through the system.  The excess overflows the ad-
justable  weir and cascades back into the holding tank,  creating  turbulence
beneficial  to solids suspension and hydraulic  mixing.   The constant  head pro-
vides a constant rate of flow to and through the system until the water level
in the holding tank  is reduced to the point that the level sensing switch
shuts the primary system down.

       Diameter (ft)    	   k
       Depth (ft)       	   6.?5
       Volume (ft^)     	84
       Design flow (gpm)	400
       Design flow (gpm/ft2)-  63.5
       Design flow (gpm/ft3)_   9.5

Dosing Pump - Alum

       This is a small centrifugal pump used to meter in  alum solution
(45%  wt.  solids) from a fiberglass storage tank holding a 24 hr.  supply.

       Manufacturer  -Liquiflo Equipment Go.
       Series 34 3gpm  1/2 in. 316SS.
       Motor - G.E.  0.?5 hp DC
       Variable speed 1725 rpm max.

Dosing Pump - Lime

       This is an air actuated diaphragm pump  used  to add lime slurry (1Q&
solids) to  the wastewater stream from a continuously agitated storage tank
holding a 24 hour supply.

       Manufacturer - Dorr Oliver Corp.
       Diaphragm slurry pump
       Model  ODS if in.  -  Comp. Air 45 psi.

-------
Figure 2.  Holding anfl Equalizing Tank
      Figure 3.   Constant Head  Box

-------
                       PLAN VIEW
                       ELEVATION
OVERFLOW RETURN
       TO
  HOLDING TANK
  ADJUSTABLE
    WEIR
                     FROM
                    HOLDING
                     TANK
                                                OUTSIDE WALL
                                                    OF
                                                HOLDING TANK
                                                    FIXED
                                                    WEIR
                                   •*» TO TREATMENT SYSTEM

Figure H-*  Schematic diagram  of Constant Head  Box.
                             10

-------
Dispersed Air Generator

       See Figure  >

       This is an  in-line mixer used  to  provide  high frequency agitation for
dispersing compressed air introduced  to  it  into  fine microbubbles for floe
flotation.

       Manufacturer - Greey Mixers, Ltd.
                      Toronto, Canada
       Model No. - 4-LBC-200 Lightning
       Impeller -  5 in. diam. 316 S3.
       Motor - 2 HP  1150 rpm.

Coagulation Cell

       See Figure  6

       This is a sheet iron vessel  consisting of a cylindrical top section
and  a rectangular  bottom section.   It allows  intimate contact to develop be-
tween microbubbles and minute solids  in  suspension.  The wastewater flow
enters the chambers tangentially at the  lower level and leaves tangentially
at the upper level, thus providing  a  vortex action.  Effective residence
time +2  minutes.

       Manufacturers Local sheet metal fabricator
       Plans furnished by Swift Environmental Systems, Oak Brook, Illinois
       Diameter top section (ft)	?•£
       Depth top section (ft)     	2.5
       Length bottom section  (ft) -------7-6
       Width bottom section (ft)	7.6  ,
       Depth bottom section (ft)  -------  !.8

Dosing Pump - Polyelectrolyte

       This is a small centrifugal  pump  used  to  continuously add polyelectro-
lyte solution in small quantity to  the waste  stream from a stock tank holding
24 hr. supply.

       Manufacturer - Liquidflo Equipment Go.
       Series 36 5 gpm 3/4 in 316 S3
       Motor: G.S. 0.7.5 HP  D.G.
       Variable speed 1725 rpm max.

Bubble Classifier

       See Figure  7

       This is a rectangular  open top steel tank located in the line of flow
between  the coagulation cell and the  LectroGlear basin.  The wastewater leav-
ing  the  coagulation cell contains some bubbles which are too large to be
effective in floe  flotation and cause agitation  and disruption of the sludge

                                      11

-------
Figure
      Dispersed Air Generates?
Figure 6.  Cosgulation Cell
             12

-------
     Figure 7.  Bubble Classifier
Figure 8.  LectroClear Flotation Basin
                   13

-------
 blanket at the surface of the primary clarifier.  This vessel allows oversize
 bubbles to escape to the atmosphere prior to entering the primary clarifier.

        Manufacturer - Local sheet metal fabricator
        Length (ft)		4
        Width (ft)	3
        Depth (ft)	4.5

 LectroClear Glarifier 1'2-3'4'5'6

        See Figures 8 and 9-
        This is a large rectangular steel tank in which coagulated suspended
 solids rise to the surface, and are continuously skimmed off.  Skimmer flights
 are mounted on the top of the tank structure, 10* apart, traveling at 2.5'
 per min.  Travel is continuous while the system is operating.  Floating
 solids are pushed forward and up a beach into a continuously rotating screw
 conveyor.  The conveyor discharges the skimmed material into a receiving tajik
 from which it is intermittently transferred  to storage tanks to await compac-
 tion.  In order to avoid flow channelling in the basin, 4 baffles,  equally
 spaced, with 67% free space consisting of 3  in. holes on 4 in. centers, are
 equally spaced about 7 ft. apart in the clarifier.  These are made  of marine
 plywood.  The clarifier contains 78»  2 3/16 in. diam. Duriron electrodes,
 Type TA-2.  They are operated in pairs with  a surface to surface spacing of
 half an inch.  They are mounted in polypropylene cradles 10 in. above the
 basin bottom.  One half of the electrodes are concentrated in the front quar-
 tile of the clarifier.

        Manufacturer - Local sheet metal fabricator
        Length (ft)		-35
        Width (ft)   	12
        Depth (ft)   		5.5
        Operating depth (ft)	5
        Current requirement - amperes	1400 to 1?00
        Current requirement - volts    -_-___  6 to 7 DC

 Current Rectifier

        This unit is used to furnish direct current to the electrodes in the
 LectroClear clarifier for generation of electrolytic microbubbles to assist
 in  floe flotation.

        Manufacturer -  Oxymetal Industrial Corp.,  Warren, Michigan
        Model - Udalite No.  4 MDV -  5000
        Type  - SASS  C 460V
        Water cooled.

Skimmings Pump

        See Figure 9.

        This  is an open impeller centrifugal  trash pump used to move skimmings
from the receiving  tank at  the  LectroClear clarifier to the skimmings storage

                                       14

-------
                         SKIMMER FLIGHTS
             SCREW
           CONVEYOR
     BUBBLE CLASSIFIER

      POLYELECTROLYTE
DISPERSED
   AIR
 PRIMARY
CLARIFIED
 EFFLUENT
                                SKIMMINGS
                     COAGULATION   PUMP
                        CELL
           Figure 9.   Schematic diagram of  LectroClear  system

-------
tank.  It is actuated by a float switch in the receiving tank.

       Manufacturer - Gorman Rupp Go 4
       Capacity (gpm)	__-	100
       Model - 3 in Centrifugal
       Motor - 3 HP 1750 rpm

Sludge Storage Tanks

       These are large cylindrical steel tanks used to store and accumulate
primary clarifier sludge and return sludge frcm the secondary final clarifier
to allow compaction to be carried out at a convenient time.

       Manufacturer - Local sheet metal fabricator
       Height (ft)	15
       Diameter (ft)	12
       Volume (gal)  	  12000
       Steel thickness (in)  -----------  3/8
       Number ------------------   2
 SLUDGE COMPACTION SECTION

 Sludge Compaction Pump

      This  is  an air actuated diaphragm pump, which forces sludge from the
 sludge storage tanks through steam heated tubular heat exchangers and  through
 the  filter press.

        Manufacturer - ¥arren Rupp Pump Go.   Mansfield, Ohio
        Model  No. - SA3A   Sand Piper
        Air Actuation (psi)	75

 Heat Exchangers

        These  are used to elevate the temperature of the stored primary and
 secondary  sludge to 175 F to aid in filter press compaction.  Operated in
 parallel.

        Manufacturer - Eimco, Inc.
        Length (ft)	14
        Shell  diameter (in)	8
        Design - Two pass
                Tube diameter (in) -------  0.5
                Number of tubes each pass  - - - 12
                Stainless steel 316
        Number - 2

Air Compressor

        This unit is used to supply compressed air to the sludge compaction
diaphragm pump and to the dispersed air generator.

                                      16

-------
       Manufacturer - Kellog American
       Model No. B-462
       Motor HP	.	25
       Pressure (psi)	.	100 to 125

Filter Press

       See Figure 10.

       This unit dewaters and compacts sludges produced in the primary and
secondary sections to the degree required by state regulations for land-fill
material.

       Manufacturer - Sperry Equipment Go.
                      East Aurora, Illinois
       Model No. 48EHCL
       Number of plates -------------- 75
       Plate design
             Width (in)	.	48
             Height (in)	48
             Feed port	Center
             Feed vent  -------------- Corner
             Face pattern 	 pyramid
       Filter cloth fabric  ------------ Polyester
                                                    nonwoven
BIOLOGICAL REDUCTION SECTION

Carrousel Oxidation Ditch 7-8.9.1°.11.12 13

       See Figures 11, 12, 13,

       This is one of the major components of the entire treatment system.   It
is a  closed loop raceway of patented design constructed of concrete,  mostly
below grade.  Two aerators, mounted at specific locations,provide dissolved
oxygen by aeration and hydraulic force for continuous circulation of contents
through the channels.

       Manufacturer - Local construction contractor
       Design and specifications - Envirobic Systems, Inc., New York,  N.  Y.
       Design F/M ratio - (BOD/MLSS)	0.06
       Design MISS ( mg/l)	5500
       Length over-all (ft)	123
       Width over-all (ft)	66
       Operating depth under aerators (in) 	  98
       Operating depth in channels (in) 	   79
       Operating volume (gal) ----------------- 380,000
       Channel length - total (ft)	610
                                      17

-------
Figure 10.  Filter-
              18

-------
                     PLAN   VIEW
                  TOR TWO
                 DO 1.0
               AERATOR ONE
              & DO 1.5
        FINAL CLARIFIER SLUDGE
                                           DO O.O
                                      TO FINAL CLARIFIER
               RETURN
                   ELEVATION
Figure  11.   Schematic  Diagram of Oxidation Ditch,

-------
gure 1?.  Carrousel Oxidation Ditc
   Figure 1.3.  Final  Clarifier
                 20

-------
       Aerators -
              Oxygenation capacity - Oo/hp/hr (ib)	3.5
              Design formula - Q£ - 1.5 x BOD + 4.6 TKN
              Number ----------- «__.._.__«.2
              Manufacturer - Hubert Sneek
              Type 190
              Diameter (mm)	1900
              Motorized adjustable immersion
                  Minimum (cm) ----------__-._.   o
                  Maximum (cm) ----------------  30
              Motors - Drive motors
              Manufacturer - Scorch
              HP	20
              Speed (rpm) ---------..----__    1160

              Immersion adjustment motors
              Manufacturer - Leroy
              HP	   1
              Speed (rpm)	1700

Final Clarifier

       This j.s a rim flow clarifier with bottom sweeps directing settled solids
to a collection point.  It removes biological solids generated in the oxida-
tion ditch and discharges a clear effluent to the river.

       Manufacturer - Glow Corp.
                      Florence, Ky.
       Model - UEOFLO
       Diameter (ft)	46
       Depth (ft)	    9
       Operating depth (ft) -----------------    8
       Feed ---------------------- 	 - Peripheral
       Sludge draw	Center
       Effluent outlet 	  Center

Sludge Return Pumps

       These pumps return solids separated from the wastewater flow in the
final clarifier to the oxidation ditch, or to the sludge holding tanks as
wasted.

       Manufacturer - Midland Pump Co.
       Model - Midwhirl No. 4WS-4511
       Capacity (gpm) 	   350
       Motor HP	    30
HOUSING

       All of the components of the primary section, and the solids compaction
equipment are housed in a prefabricated, insulated, steel building.


                                      21

-------
Manufacturer - Butler Buildings, Inc.
Length (ft)	104
Width (ft)	40
Height - bottom of truss (ft)	  16
Ventilation -
    Exhaust fans at gable peak,  each end.
    Diameter (in) -----------------  36
    Speed (rpm)	500
                               22

-------
                                  SECTION I*

                               PRIMARY TREATMENT


       Evaluation of processes for primary wastewater treatment began at Win-
chester in  1971.   During that year, following laboratory bench-scale  work,  a
pilot plant using electrolytic microbubbles and suspended solids flotation  was
designed and  constructed to treat 15 gpm.  The preliminary runs with  this
equipment were  encouraging but not successful because of incomplete flotation
of solids.

       Modifications were made, and during the summer of 19?2,  preliminary  test
runs were repeated.   These pilot tests clearly showed that the  eleetroflota-
tion basin  alone  was inadequate to give reproducible and consistently accept-
able treated  wastewater.  Finally in 1973, an electrocoagulation cell was de-
veloped, designed, and installed just ahead of and in series with the electro-
flotation basin (Figure 9 ).  This step was the key to success.

       During the summer of 197^i round-the-clock runs were made operating  the
pilot unit  at 12  gpm.  These tests lasted for several weeks, and the  results
conclusively  showed  that the two-step electrocoagulation electroflotatlon
technology  could  provide the results desired.


SISCTROCOAGULATION
                                         123456
Theory of the Blectrocoagulation Process ' ''

       The  key  step  in this primary treatment is the addition of microbubbles
to the wastewater after metal coagulants have been added and before the  addi-
tion of a polyelectrolyte.   This step is especially important in wastewaters
that have suspended  material of high specific gravity (3 and higher).  In the
electrocoagulation cell,  the surface charges  on the pollutant particles  are
neutralized by  the metal coagulant.  This condition brings about a growth in
aggregate size  of pollutants.  Under these circumstances,  the high density  of
the pollutants  invariably leads to a rapid settling action.

       The  notable contribution of this new  two-step technology is the  addi-
tion of a buoyancy factor (microbubbles) to the pollutant particles.   Pairing
of particles  and  microbubbles is enhanced either by vortex action or  other
turbulence, which increases the probability of collision between pollutant
aggregates and  microbubbles.  Once the microbubble and pollutant particle
have collided and united,  the addition of the polyelectrolyte flocculates the
solid-gas aggregate   and forms a gross floe that is buoyant.


                                       23

-------
       In the initial work at the A. C. Lawrence Leather Company, only elec-
trolytic raicrobubbles were employed in the coagulation cell.  Since that time,
extensive tests have shown that dispersed air as well as dissolved air can
effectively be used in the two-step process.  Single-step jar tests carried  '
out with direct-dissolved air flotation were not successful.

       In summary, this two-step concept provides a useful new technology for
treatment of industrial wastewater.

Dispersed-Air Coagulation Cell Versus Electrocoagulation Cell

       An electrocoagulation cell employing electrolytic microbubble genera-
tion was initially the only source of flotation and was evaluated at the
Winchester plant.  The cell contained 126 TA-2 electrodes with a horizontal.
surface-to-surface spacing of half an inch.  These electrodes were placed
beneath the wastewater flow pattern and were situated below the coagulation
cell proper.  The electrolytic microbubbles generated at the electrodes rose
to the center of the vortex coagulation seclion by natural buoyancy.

       ¥astewater enters and leaves the coagulation cell tangentially.  The
design called for the coagulation cell to use 6 to ? V DC and to provide a DC
current of approximately 3*000 A.  Under these conditions, the volume of
electrolytic gases generated was 30 liters/min (STP, 2.0 vol %  of the waste-
water treated).  Microbubbles that coalesced in the coagulation cell were
vented through a 3-in pipe in the center of the vortex coagulation unit.

       Problems developed quite early in the electrolytic microbubble genera-
tion section.  The wooden electrode supports deteriorated rather quickly, and
some electrodes shorted out.  Problems also occurred with wool and debris ac-
cumulation on and around the electrodes,which interfered with good bubble
formation.  Our consultants suggested as a remedy the use of an in-line mixer
that, when properly supplied with air, could cause minute bubbles to form
directly in the waste stream.

       This dispersed-air generator, which is produced by Lightning Mixer
(Figure 5)1 is housed in a 10-in. diameter pipe that is placed just before
the vortex coagulation cell.  Compressed air (10# psi and higher) is fed to
the bottom of the mixer.  Air volume is regulated,,in the mixer by a rotaraeter
valve, which is adjusted for a flow of about 2 ft^ (56.6 It/min  STP).  The
microbubbles generated by the dispersed-air device are definitely coarser
than those generated electrolytically.  A small percentage of bubbles pro-
duced by the dispersed-air device are very large, approaching 2,000 microns
in diameter.  These microbubbles are deleterious to the overall process and
must be removed in the fractioriator.  This device is an open-top vessel lo-
cated approximately 10 ft downstream from the vortex coagulation cell (see
Figure 9).  The microbubble fractionator is 3 by 3 ft and 4 ft high.  Bubbles
larger than a certain size (approximately 400 microns in diameter) exit from
the wastewater through the fractionator.  The fine bubbles, because of their
slow rise rate, are held in the hydraulic flow pattern.  Failure to use a
bubble frationator invariably leads to poor results in the  electroflotation
basin, since the wastewater carries large bubbles into the flotation basin,
where the turbulence they


                                      24

-------
create breaks up the floe as  it  is  being skimmed off.


ELECTROFLOTATION

       A major component in the  primary treatment system follows  next in  the
sequence, the LectroGlear flotation basin (Figure9 ).   The design was fur-
nished by Swift Environmental Systems  of Chicago,  the  holder of patents in
connection with the application  of  this device.   The flotation  basin  contains
microbubble-producing electrodes that  perform two main functions! the first
is to provide assistance to stray floe agglomerates that may not  have ac-
quired enough bouyaney  in the coagulation cell to help them  to  the surface,
and the second is that  as the microbubbles rise  and encounter the underside
of the floating sludge  blanket  they   add   bouyaney    and   raise
the top of the blanket  above  the water surface.   As a  consequence of  this
action, substantial dewatering occurs  through downward flow  of  water  and the
solids content of the skimmed sludge increases to as high as 1($.  In actual
practice, the operators say that all is well with the  system when the skim-
mings look like wet crumbly gingerbread,


SOLIDS COMPACTION

       The skimmings, which now  contain nearly all of  the influent suspended
acO.idSj are directed by the screw conveyor on the LectroGlear flotation basin
to a transfer purap and  thence into  storage tanks to await charging into the
filter press during the normal working day*  They are  withdrawn from  the
storage tanks by means  of an  air-actuated diaphragm pump called a Sand Piper,)
which is particularly efficient  for this purpose.  At  the end of  the  charging
cycle, the pump is working at 100 psi  and thus creates a very solid cake in
the press.  Filtration  and compaction  are enhanced by  raising the temperature
at 150° F or so, hence  the inclusion of a heat exchanger between the  Sand
Piper and the filter press,


OPERATION OF THE PRIMARY SECTION

       The plant obtains about 90$  of  its water  for processing  from the
Ashuelot River.  City water is used for drinking and for certain limited
plant processing steps. Dumping of the water used for processing the pelts
occurs between the hours of 3 a.m.  and 7 p.m., with the peak, hydraulic waste-
water flow occurring at about 11:00 a.m.  As the wastewater  leaves the plant,
it passes through a stainless steel, cylindrical Stehling screen where some of
the wool fiber is removed.  From this  point, the water passes into a  3»000-gal
pit and is then pumped  directly  into the 170,000-gal holding tank.  Wastewater
in the holding tank is  lifted by an immersion pump and passes through a head
box that provides the hydraulic  head to feed the primary LectroClear  operation.
This hydraulic head provides  a flow of about 300 gpm,  and the wastewater  flows
by gravity from the headbox to and  through the entire  primary phase.

       When the wastewater leaves the  head box (in a 10 in.  pipe), 1,000  mg/1
of alum is added.  At a distance of approximately 20 ft from the  alum addition


                                       25

-------
and just "before the dispersed-air device, 800 ppm of hydrated lime is added
from a 10 vi,% lime slurry.  Both chemical additions are added by   metering
iV.jj; manually set to a predetermined feed.  The wastewater then passes through
the dispersed-air device and the vortex coagulation cell for a dwell time of
2.2 min, after which 12 mg/1 of polyelectrolyte is added (X-400 Swift anionic
polyacrylic acrylamide).  At this point, the pH is consistently between ?.5
and 8.5.  The pH is monitored frequently, and deviations from the just-above-
neutral zone are corrected by adjustment to the lime-feeding mechanism.

       The intention was to control pH by automatic adjustment of lime feed-
ing.  Equipment was provided for this at the outset, but thus far, manual ad-
justment has not only been found to be adequate, but more reliable.

       The system is designed as an on-off operation.  This on-off control is
carried out by a float switch in the holding tank.  When the water in the
holding tank is above a predetermined level, the float switch keep all pumps
and power on.  Conversely,when the water is below a certain level, it keeps
all pumps and power off.
                                      26

-------
                                   SECTION 5

                         SECONDARY BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT


 OXIDATION  DITCH7'8'9'10'11'12'13

        The secondary wastewater treatment process consists  of biological re-
 duction using an oxidation ditch of proprietary design known as a CARROUSEL,TO
 and  a rim  flow clarifier.

        The carrousel concept was first applied to sewage treatment in 1968 at
 Oosterwolde,  Netherlands.  Today more than 100 carrousel installations are in
 operation. Capacities range up to 300 mgd flow with 500 to 600 mg/1 BOD.
 Dairy,  food,  tannery, brewery, chemical, pharmaceutical, and paper industry
 wastes  have all been treated.  The first carrousel installation in the United
 States  went on line in December 19?6 at the A. C. Lawrence Leather Company, at
 Winchester, N. H.

        The carrousel is a technical modification of the original oxidation
 ditch developed during the 1950's by Dr. Ir. A. Pasveer of the Netherlands
 Research Institute for Public Health Engineering, Delft, Holland.   Several
 thousand of these oxidation ditches are in operation worldwide.  Aeration in
 the  original  ditches was supplied by horizontally mounted cage rotors,  whose
 oxygenation rates and amounts depended on the rotor design,  immersion depth,
 and  the rpm.

        The extended aeration process used in most oxidation ditches yields a
 high percentage of BOD,  COD, and suspended solids reduction and a sludge  that
 has  been aerobically digested.  The latter is a result of the endogenous  res-
 piration phase undergone by microorganisms.

        The carrousel concept was developed and patented by Dwars,  Heederik en
 Verhey,  B.V.,  Amersfoort, Holland ~ a European consulting firm.   It is a hy-
 draulic application of vertically mounted mechanical aerators that impart oxy-
 gen  and- that  simultaneously provide sufficient horizontal velocity to prevent
 solids  from settling in the aeration channels.  Final settling tanks are  the
 only major components needed in addition to the aeration channels for most ap-
 plications.   Settled sludge is returned to the aeration unit, with excess
 sludge  being  wasted periodically.

        The  number of aerators and the size are based primarily on the amount
 of oxygen needed.   In turn,  the channel cross-section dimensions are based on
 the  aerator impeller size.   The channel length is a function of the volume,
which is related  to the  treatment efficiency or the type of activated sludge


                                        27

-------
process selected.  Special shaping is used to optimize the velocity.   The
platform or bridge must be designed to handle all of the forces and vibrations
associated with the aerator.  See Figure 11.

       The common design factors or criteria required to produce a BOD reduc-
tion of 95% to 99% and a GOD reduction of 90$ to 95% are as follows:
       a. Mixed liquor suspended solids (inLSS) (mg/l)  -----  5000  to 6000
       b. Organic loading (ib BOD/lb MLSS/day) ---------  0.05  to 0.10
       c. Oxygen supply (lb/lb BOD) --------------   2.0 to  2.5
       d. Hydraulic volume (ft3/lb BOD)  ------------  80

       The carrousel can be operated to achieve nitrogen removal  without addi-
tional treatment units and without the use of chemicals for a carbon source.
Thorough nitrification is achieved by large numbers of nitrifying organisms
maintained in the aeration unit.  The high MISS, the long retention time, and
the well-conditioned sludge are all conducive to good nitrification.

       After the organic nitrogen has been oxidized to nitrate, denitrif ica-
tion  is accomplished by specific strains of organisms in the carrousel.   A
section of the channels is made to operate at or near zero D0(0 to 0.5 ^.g
thus  creating a favorable environment for denitrifying bacteria.  This may be
accomplished by automatic control of the dissolved oxygen concentration  at the
aerators by using a DO probe and instrumentation that can activate a mechanism
to change the depth of immersion and thereby the rate of oxygenationj  or by
manual depth adjustment.  The mixed liquor is passed through this anoxic zone,
in which an adequate carbon source is available from the continual inflow of
raw waste , during which denitrif ication takes place .  This phase  lasts only a
few minutes, as the velocity in the channel normally exceeds 1 fps.  Odor pro-
blems do not develop because of stable sludge condition as well as the very
short time period in the anoxic zone for each pass.  An advantage of combining
oxygenation and denitrification in the design is the release of oxygen during
denitrif ication for BOD removal.

       The interconnection of DO probes and instrumentation with  the aerators
to allow the automatic monitoring of DO levels to control immersion depths of
the aerators on this carrousel has not been successful to date.   Since this
was a design feature A. G. Lawrence has, on several occasions, attempted to
derive satisfaction on this point from the licensor, but as of the close of
this  demonstration period the control of » immersion depths is manual.


FINAL GLARIFIfiR

       A high content of suspended solids (7000 to 8000 mg/l) is  generated in
the carrousel through bacterial activity.  This material must be. removed be-
fore  the wastewater flow can be released to the river.  A rim flow clarifier
is used for this purpose having a maximum solid flux design load  of 1.0  lb/ft2
per day, and peak flow limited to 600 gal/ft2 per day.  Suspended solids re-
moved by this clarifier are continuously returned to the carrousel or wasted
to the sludge holding tanks for a period each day.
                                       28

-------
OPERATION OF THE SECONDARY

Dissolved Oxygen Control.

       The measure  of dissolved oxygen at the aerators is  used  to control  the
biological activity and  operating efficiency of the carrousel.   The  operator
uses a portable DO  meter for this purpose, taking readings at least  daily,  and
more often if necessary  or  desired,  just downstream from aerators one and  two.
Aerator one is designated as the unit nearest the discharge point, and since
this is next adjacent to the anoxic  zone it is required to furnish oxygen  to
the greater degree.

       The operating goal is to maintain a level of 1.5 mg/1 of dissolved  oxy-
gen at aerator one  and about 1.0 mg/1 at aerator two,  with residuals of 0.5
at the section of the carrousel farthest from the aerators,  and at or near
zero at the discharge point.  See Figure 11 .

       Since dissolved oxygen is almost if not non-existent in  the wastewater
stream as it emerges from the carrousel it is necessary to substantially raise
the DO before discharge  to  the river.  Stream requirements call for  a minimum
of 4 mg/1.  This is accomplished with four waterfalls,  each with a free fall
of about three feet. The first is at the carrousel discharge overflow weir,
the second is at the overflow weir at the final clarifier,  and  the third and
fourth are arranged between the final clarifier and the river.   Through these
waterfalls the stream specification  for dissolved oxygen as required by the
State of New Hampshire is satisfied.

Suspended Solids -  Activated Sludge

       Mixed liquor suspended solids (MISS) and mixed  liquor volatile sus-
pended solids (MLVSS) are sampled and analyzed at least weekly  at sample
point 83.  These are indicative of the biological activity in the carrousel.
It is desired to maintain the MLSS at ?000 to 8000 mg/1 and the MLVSS at 60
to 65$ of MLSS.

       Since the wastewater passing  from the primary treatment  section to  the
secondary treatment section (carrousel) is relatively  free from suspended
solids the high analytical  values for MLSS and MLVSS are the result  of bib-  •
logical activity.   These solids are  removed in-the final clarifier.  They are
continuously completely  returned to  the carrousel except for a  period each day
when a portion is wasted into the sludge holding tanks to  be concentrated  in
the filter press and directed to land-fill.  The time  of wasting each day  is
dictated by the actual level of MLSS at 83 compared with the desired operating
concentration.  It  is usually about  four hours.

Phosphorus

       Phosphorus  is nutritionally required for vigorous bacterial life  sup-
port.  It is found  in relatively large concentrations  in the Winchester  tan-
nery wastewater, amounting  to as much as 20 mg/1.  The chemicals used  in pri-
mary treatment, principally alum and lime, remove or combine with some of the
phosphorus, however, making it mostly unavailable as t£ nutrient for the  bac-


                                        29

-------
teria in the secondary treatment section.  The accepted nutrient ratio of
100 BOD to 5 nitrogen to 1 phosphorus for good bacterial growth indicates that,
for every 100 parts of BOD treated, one part of phosphorus must be available.

       At this treatment plant the mean BOD loading to the biological section
is 280 mg/1 or an average of ?00 to 800 pounds per day.  On this basis the
daily addition of 2 gallons of 75$ phosphoric acid, containing approximately
six pounds of phosphorus as P, in addition to the residual available in the
flow to the secondary, was dictated.  The resulting BOD reductions and other
manifestations of biological activity demonstrated that the amount was suffi-
cient.  The phosphorus content in the final effluent is low, usually 5 mg/1
or less, indicating good balance of biological usage and chemical absorption.
       When the plant started operation in December, 19?6, foaming on the
oxidation ditch was extensive.  Anti-foaming agents were considered, but as
the MISS increased the foaming decreased.  As the MLSS approached design
foaming was no longer present.
                                      30

-------
                                   SECTION 6

                           EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 SELECTION OF PARAMETERS
        Soon after this demonstration project was approved and accepted by
E.P.A.  a meeting was held at Winchester at which all of the principals of the
program were present, including the project officer, the project director,
the  consultants,  and local operating personnel.  Data collection and analysis
were discussed in detail.  The parameters considered essential are listed in
Table 2,  along with where and how the samples for them should be taken.   In
addition to those listed a number of daily measurements and readings were
specified which would be needed to properly assess the performance and allow
operating costs to be calculated.  These were:

                 Pelts processed
                 Lime consumed
                 Alum consumed
                 Polymer consumed
                 Electricity consumed
                 Dissolved oxygen at aerators one and two
                 Depths of the top of the sludge blanket in the final clarifier
                 Primary sludge volume
                 Secondary sludge volume wasted
                 Outside temperature

Values  for all of the parameters and readings for the special periods of  this
project are given in Section 7, Tables 6, 7, 8, and 9.  The absence of chemi-
cal  oxygen demand (COD) as an analytical parameter and measure of performance
will be noted throughout this report.  The high concentration of chloride in
the  waste stream,  unchanged during the treatment process,  interfered with the
analytical procedure to such a degree as to render the determination useless.


SAMPLING  PERIODS

        Activated  sludge operations are temperature-dependent,  and most full-
scale wastewater  treatment systems are expected to reduce  BOD more efficiently
in summer than in winter.   The claimed superiority of the  carrousel design in
this respect  prompted a large share of the interest in this project.  A specJal
condition for data collection and analysis was set forth in a grant amendment
dated August  23,  1976.   This condition was:
                The sampling and data collection procedure in part IV-e
                of the  proposal shall:

                                       31

-------
N>

Parameter
Dissolved oxygen
BOD5
Solids-total
-Suspended
-volatile
-Settleable
PH
Fats, oils, grease
Nitrogen-Ammonia
Kjeldahl
Nitrite
Nitrate
Phosphorus-Total
Chromium-Cr
Fecal Golif onn
Flow
Temperature °G
Chloride
Sample Type
TABLE
Equalized
influent
sl

D**
0
D


D
D
D
D



D

D
D
0*
G*
2. LABORATORY
Primary
effluent
S2

D

D
D

D
D

D



D




C
DATA REQUIRED
Carrousel
effluent
s3
D


D
D
D










D

G*
FOR EPA PROJECT
Final Return
effluent sludge
s^ s5

D
0**
D 0


D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D

0
G* G

Primary Dewatered
sludge sludge
s6 s?


C
0



0

0



0




G G
       * 2 hour intervals during working day



      ** Frequency       D - Daily      0- Occasionally

-------
                     —be performed  on not  less than 25 days of
                     typical operation during the winter and on
                     not less than 25 days of typical operation
                     during the summer.

       At the time of selection of parameters and data readings it was
established that operating temperatures for  mixed liquors would be limited to
a minimum of 21°G for summer operating conditions, and a maximun of 16°C for
winter.  On eight occasions during the winter this rule was violated slightly,
particularly toward the end of the  operating week, when the warm wastewater
from the tannery was sufficient to offset atmospheric cooling.  The average
temperature recording in the carrousel at 83 during the winter period was
15.60C.  This result demonstrates the innate resistance of the carrousel to
atmospheric interference, since the average  of the outside highs and lows was
minus 8.8, and the lowest low minus 26°C.


SAMPLING

       The following procedures were  used for procuring samples at sample
points Si through Slj,.  See Figure 1.
       BI - wastewater from the holding and  equalizing tank.  This is also
            called raw wastewater in  this report.
            Four 1 liter grab samples were taken from the tank at approxi-
            mately 2-hr intervals.  These were refrigerated, and composited
            at the end of each day.
       So - effluent from LectroClear primary treatment.  An Isco sampling
            instrument was used.  Ice was employed in the instrument.  The
            device was programmed to  sample  10 ml every 15 min.
       So - grab samples taken at the discharge overflow weir of the carrou-
            sel.  These were taken four times a day at about equal intervals,
            refrigerated, and composited at  the end of each day.
       Sn - grab samples taken after  discharge from the final clarifier four
            times a day at about equal intervals, refrigerated, and composited,
ANALYTICAL METHODS

       The analytical methods used were those specified inj
                Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Waste  1976
                U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency


FREQUENCY OF ANALYSES

       Since two  periods of intensive sampling were specified for this  pro-
ject, 25 days of  summer conditions and 25 days of winter conditions, sampling
and analysis were performed five days each week for five consecutive weeks
beginning September 12,  1977, and for 25 working days of seven consecutive
weeks beginning December 12,  1977, and extending into February, 1978.
                                       33

-------
PERFORMANCE OF ANALYSES

      Routine weekly  analyses have been  performed  in the  laboratory at the
Winchester wastewater treatment  plant  since  start-up.  This routine was not
interrupted during  the demonstration periods.

      Since daily analyses are not feasible  in the on-plant facility most of
the  analytical work for  this project was performed by Tighe and Bond, a
certified and approved laboratory located at Easthampton,  Mass.  Composite
samples from sampling points Sj., 831 83,  and S^ were delivered  by A. G.
Lawrence personnel  to Tighe and Bond each day  on the day  they were obtained.

      It will be noted in reviewing the  tables of  analytical data, and the
graphs, that analysis was not made for every parameter  at all four sampling
points.  Those not  showing were  considered by the project  officer and consul-
tants to have insufficient significance  to be  included.


QUALITY CONTROL

      Two approaches  to  quality  control  of analytical work were used.
              v

      The first was the  analysis of identical  samples by  the A. C. Lawrence
laboratory and by Tighe  and Bond.  Composites  from each of the  sampling
points Sj_, S£, 83,  and Sty were divided on three separate  days,  one portion
going.to each laboratory.  The results are presented in Table  3.  Examination
of the comparative  values reveals very few instances of unsatisfactory agree-
ment. A. C. Lawrence results were consistently higher  for nitrite in the
final effluent, and one  Tighe and Bond analysis for fats,  oils  and grease was
so high as to be technically suspect.  Otherwise there  were no  deviations be-
tween laboratories  in excess of  standard.

      The second approach was the furnishing of standard  samples by the
U.S.E.P.A. Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory to the  A. C. Lawrence
laboratory at Winchester.  The samples were  received in May, 19?8.  Results
by A. C. Lawrence were reported  early  in July. The values reported and the
values provided by  E.P.A. for the standard samples are  presented in Table If.
The  agreement was generally good. A critique of this effort prepared by the
Project Officer is  presented as Appendix A.

      The third quality  control measure  was  the analyzing of samples in
duplicate in the. treatment plant laboratory.  These analyses are presented
in Table 5«  The agreement is good for all parameters.

PRESENTATION OF DATA

       No statistical  analysis of data has been attempted.   All analytical
determinations as presented in the tables are  as reported by the analysts.
In some cases inconsistencies occur, such as ammonia nitrogen in excess of
kjeldahl nitrogen in the same sample.  These are considered to  be within the
experimental error.
                                      34

-------
                                 TABLE 3. ANALYTICAL LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL
                                          COMPARISON OF RESULTS ON DIVIDED SAMPLES
OJ
Ul
Sample
Date
9/lV??
A. C. Lawrence *
Tighe and Bond **
10/12/7?
A . C . Lawrence
Tighe and Bond
12/12/7?
A. C. Lawrence
Tighe and Bond


9/14/7?
A . C . Lawrence
Tighe and Bond
10/12/77
A. C. Lawrence
Tighe and Bond
12/12/7?
A. C. Lawrence
Tighe and Bond
BODs (mg/l)
Suspended Volatile suspended
Solids (mg/l) Solids (mg/l)
Fats, oils
Grease (mg/l)
si £>2 *4 s»l i>2 *J &4 ^2 "3 al °2 34

960
990

8?0
790

988
980
Ammonia
(nw/i:
Si

25
32

39
40

41
31

131
262

366
34?

366
324
N
)
S4

0.50
0.4?

1.44
2.?0

2.?0
1.86

5
4

7 1,

6?0 141
828 150

104 410
6 1,005 412

6 1,
7

Si

104
73

76
81

91
82

0?0 135
992 194
TKN
(m«/l)
S2

4?
44

52
56

42
56

8
9

9
8

11

,360 30
,280 32

,730 64
,669 13

,362 19
12,360 68

S4

3.9
3-1

4.5
5.6

5-3
4.2
Nitrite
(mg/l)
S4

• 750
.180

.640
.295

.610
.164

105
126

868
905

76
102

5,010
5,550

6.750
5,205

7,120
7,610
Nitrate
OssZi)
S4

34.5
40.1

8.5
9-9

13.3
14.8
Si

82
70

95
110

120
115

539 32
401 33

454 82
480 101

548 37
559 22
Chromium
Cr (mK/1)
S2

7.9
5.5

28.
39.

11.9
9-5

8.8
5.4

0.8
18.0

5-5
3.2

S4

1.01
0.81

0.45
0.?4

0.60
0.61
         * Treatment  plant  laboratory
       ** Commercial laboratory

-------
TABLE 4. ANALYTICAL LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL
        COMPARISON OF RESULTS BETWEEN
      A. C. LAWRENCE AND E.P.A. I.E.R.L.
Sample
Parameter number
BOD5 1

2
COD 1

2

Ammonia-N 3

TKN 5
6
Nitrate-N 3
24'
PO^-P 3
4
Total - P 5
6
Chromium-Cr 7

8

9

A.C. Lawrence
value
20.9

94
74

234

3.08.
8.96
5.04
38.08
•925
6.46
.066
1.43
0.906
4.30
11.6

82,65

368.3

E.P.A. I.E.R.L.
value or comment
within one standard
viation
about 40^ low
within one standard
viation
within one standard
viation
2.6
8.8
2.1
38
1.2
6.7
.13
2.4
0.85
4.28
within one standard
viation
within one standard
viation
within one standard
viation

de-


de-

de-











de-

de-

de-


-------
                                 TABLE 5. ANALYTICAL LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL
                                          COMPARISON OF RESULTS ON SAMPLES RUN IN DUPLICATE*
u>
BOD^
Date S/j,
10/5/77 A 3M
10/5/77 AA 3.25

10/5/77 A
10/5/77 AA
12/28/77 A
12/28/77 AA
Suspended
Solids (mg/1)
S^ Sg S-j S^
739 233 8,787 31.
725 223 8,990 31.
Nitrite Phosphate
N02(mg/l) PO^ (mg/1)
0.521 0.913
0.525 0.916
0.091
0.096
Volatile suspended Pats/oUs NH^-N
Solids (mg/1) graeeftiK/l) (mg/l)
s2 s3 s4 si s4
0 128 5,339 18 32 0.9
1 128 5,220 27 32 0.9
Chromium
Cr (mg/1)
sl S2
75-^ 2.^9
76.6 2.51


TKN
5.0^
^.48

S4
1.21
1.06
1.95
1.9^
           * Treatment plant laboratory

-------
                                 SECTION ?

                       OPERATING AND ANALYTICAL DATA

                                  DISCUSSION

       In connection with this special demonstration project two separate
test periods were selected, one in summer, one in winter, during which  samples
were taken frequently, for most of the time daily, and analysed by  an outside
laboratory.  Analytical results for those periods are recorded in Table 8  and
Table 9.

       During the entire period that this treatment plant has been  in opera-
tion samples at each of the significant sampling points have been obtained at
least weekly, with few exception, and. analyzed by the staff analytical  techni-
cian.  Those results are presented in Table 10.

       Thus three groups of analytical data have been accumulated from  which
 conclusions as to system capability can be  derived.
Graphs  of analytical results.

        In order to more clearly show the levels and trends of parameter in-
cidence and removals across the treatment system a number of graphs have been
plotted.  These follow as Figures 14 through 41.  Parameters plotted are:

                BOD5  (Ib/day)
                pH
                Temperature (°c)
                Food to microorganism ratio in the carrousel
                Sludge age (days)
                Mixed liquor suspended solids (mg/l)
                Mixed liquor volatile suspended solids  (mg/l)
                Sludge volume index
                Suspended solids (ib/day)
                Nitrogen as TKN, nitrate and total.   (Ib/day)
                Ammonia nitrogen (Ib/day)
                Fats, oils and grease (Ib/day)
                Chromium (Ib/day)

       Where results are shown in pounds per day a rough conversion to milli-
grams per liter can be made by multiplying by 0.4.  This assumes  a normal
daily flow of 300,000 gals.  The sampling locations and procedures are ex-
plained in Section 6.


                                       38

-------
                                TABLE 6. SUMMER OPERATING CONDITIONS
Wastewater
Date Volume (gal)
9/12/7?
9/13/77
9/14/77
9/15/77
9/16/77
9/19/77
9/20/77
9/21/77
9/22/77
9/23/77
9/26/77
9/27/77
9/28/77
9/29/77
9/30/77
10/3/77
10/4/77
10/5/77
10/6/77
10/7/77
10/11/77
10/12/77
10/13/77
10/14/77
10/15/77
661,734
286,344
280,492
302,058
275,868
529,038
288,090
307,296
277,614
331,740
515,070
316,026
277,614
296,820
316,026
312,534
347,454
370,152
316,026
308,990
275,600
288,404
368,406
279,360
310,996
Est. Ave,
Pelts
Processed
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
3,120
Coagulants added
Lime**** Alum***
(gal) (gal)
1,986
1,102
1,010
1,290
1,019
4,045
1,369
1,100
1,750
2,400
2,098
1,912
1,202
1,974
2,554
1,808
2,772
2,608
2,090
1,794
1,210
1,390
1,409
1,392
1,561
1,485
800
540
560
600
1,209
804
804
610
810
590
610
544
675
651
630
910
870
689
576
620
786
970
806
775
Polymer**
(gal)
868
1,643
1,191
1,300
1,683
3,080
1,671
1,508
1,650
1,980
1,406
1,976
760
1,808
1,982
1,972
2,308
2,010
1,900
1,870
1,648
1,710
2,062
1,674
1,910

Si
6.2
6.0
5.1
4.9
4.9
6.8
6.4
6.1
6.7
5-7
5.6
5.0
5.4
6.0
4.0
6.1
5.2
6.7
5-0
4.6
5.0
4.8
5.5
3.9
5.6
PH
S?
6.1
8.0
7-5
6.4
9.4
9.1
7.5
7.7
8.2
8.6
7.8
7-9
10.4
8.7
7-9
7-4
5-9
8.0
7.3
7.4
5.6
7.8
8.9
6.2
7.5

SL.
6.7
7.2
7.4
6.8
6.9
7.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
7.1
6.9
6.5
7.5
7.6
7.1
7.0
6.6
7.3
7-5
7.2
7.4
7.5
6.7
6.5
7.1
T
Si
27
31
29
28
29
30
28
29
27
28
28
29
29
29
30
27
27
26
28
28
28
28
29
27
27
emp. (
Si
23
25
26
24
24
25
23
23
23
24
22
24
25
25
24
20
21
22
22
22
22
22
22
21
21
°fi)
O.S.*
11
12
14
15
15
17
16
8
9
10
9
14
10
13
9
12
7
8
11
7
7
9
9
7
6
****  10# Solids
 ***  45^ Solids
  **   0.2$ Solids
   *  Average  of  outside high and low
(Continued)

-------
TABLE 6. (CONTINUED)
Flotatior
basin
Date
9/12/77
9/13/77
9/14/77
9/15/77
9/16/77
9/19/77
9/20/77
9/21/77
9/22/77
9/23/77
9/26/77
9/27/77
9/28/77
9/29/77
9/30/77

10/3/77
10/4/77
10/5/77
10/6/77
10/7/77
10/11/77
10/12/77
10/13/77
10/14/77
10/15/77
volts .
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7-2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7-2
7.2
7.2

7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
amps.
1,720
1,300
1,900
1,500
1,600
1,800
1,700
1,600
1,600
1,700
1,600
1,600
1,400
1,900
1,700

1,700
1,900
1,700
1,700
1,600
1,700
1,900
1,900
1,900
1,900
Primary
sludge
volume
(gal/day)
6,000
4,900
4,000
5,000
4,800
7,000
4.700
4,200
3,900
4,200
3,900
4,400
4,000
3,800
4,000

6,000
4,000
4,400
4,700
5,160
4,400
5,000
6,000
6,100
4,800
Dissolved
oxygen (ppmj
aerator
one
1.5
4.1
3.8
2.0
3.1
3.4
3.4
3.3
3.0
3.4
3.9
4.5
5.0
2.4
2.6

2.6
5.7
2.6
2.6
-
_
-
-
0.9

Settling T
Sq (m
two 83 a.m.
2.0 640
3.7 ' 900
3.0 ' 890
OUT ' 550
3.0 | 910
2.9 ' 870
3.0 ' 760
4.7 o 820
OUT o 900
3.0 8- 870
3.4 % 910
3.3 ^ 840
OUT KI 710
1.6 & 590
2.0 £ 790
-x3
3.4
4.9
2.3
2.4
-
_
-
-
0.5

670
910
970
840
890
850
850
940
870
850
sst £
1/1) c
p.m.(i
710
870
900
640
870
850
710
810
850
900
870
810
680
-
790

810
890
870
840
880
840
850
700
860
710
.econdary
Jlarifier
T;. clear)
4
3
3
5
5
4.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5.5
1.5
4

5
5
5
5
3.5
5 .
4
3.5
4
4
Secondary
sludge waste
(gal/day)
2,400
1,920
1,200
2,400
2,400
2,000
2.700
2,100
2,300
2,450
2,300
2,150
1,975
4,800
2,500

3,430
2,940
5,880
3,675
2,500
3,400
2,900
2,205

3:, 000

-------
TABLE ?.
WINTER OPERATING CONDITIONS
Coagulants
Wastewater Pelts
Date Volume (gal) Processed
12/12/7?
12/13/7?
12/14/??
12/15/7?
12/16/7?
12/29/77
12/30/77
1/3/78
1/4/78
1/5/?8
1/6/78
1/9/78
1/10/78
1/11/78
1/12/78
1/13/78
1/19/78
1/23/78
1/24/78
2/1/78
2/2/?8
2/3/78
2/6/78
2/9/78
2/10/78
V y YiM 4 fyif
A A TtrK T^LJ/O
***45#
332,640
269,280
285,120
285,120
205,920
241,?40
180,540
306,000
264,180
233,640
250,272
290,700
300,960
313,296
-
180,720
306,858
301,410
323,136
313,650
91,392
178,500
317,016
312,732
184,212
Solids **
Solids *
3,205
3,210
3,429
3,190
3,510
3,650
3,773
3,600
3,58?
3,680
3,625
3,750
3,605
3,626
3,450
3,762
3,693
3,810
3,830
4.070
3,890
3,896
3,890
3,664
3,903
0.2fi Solids
Average of
added
Lime**** Alum*** Polymer*^
(gal) (gal) (gal)
2,045
1,269
1,018
2,04?
1,288
2,2?1
1,820
2,49?
2,705
2,538
2,576
1,916
2,138
2,522
2,388
1,83?
2,589
1,440
2,522
2,255
601
1,252
2,00?
2,095
1,570

outside
461
199
430
576
578
516
36?
642
65?
49?
489
626
720
751
65?
40?
?06
516
931
757
282
563
595
556
313

high and
1,380
776
979
857
801
1,423
1,171
1,835
1,683
1,651
1,585
1,811
1,340
1,804
1,171
1,085
2,27?
1,056
1,665
1,520
518
?02
1,534
1,68?
1,443

low.
It
si
5.5
5-7
6.4
5.2
4.6
5.6
4.2
4.4
4.7
4.9
4.8
5.4
4.9
5.0
5.0
4.5
5.2
4.8
5-3
4.9
5.6
4.9
5.1
5.4
4.5


vH
S2
7.5
6.8
8.3
8.2
7.7
9.2
7.8
9.0
8.8
9.0
8.8
8.1
7.4
8.6
8.5
8.0
7.3
6.2
8.2
6.7
7.5
8.0
7.8
7.4
7.9


Temp. (°G)
S4
7.1
7.5
7.5
7.0
7.*
7.1
7 .4
7.6
7.2
7.3
7-5
7.5
7-3
7.4
7.2
7.2
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.0
7.0
7.0
6.8
7.3
7-1


Si
23
24
26
25
26
24
24
26
26
26
28
21
26
26
2?
2?
26
24
25
25
26
24
24
26
26


83 QS.*
11 -5
14 1
16 -2
18 -5
18 -4
15 -12
15 -11
12 -10
15 -12
18 -11
19 -2
15 9
13 0
15 -14
18 -10
18 -5
15 -8
13 -9
16 -11
15 -13
17 -12
16 -12
13 -14
16 -14
18 -13



-------
TABLE ?, (CONTINUED)
Flotation
basin
Date
12/12/77
12/13/77
12/14/77
12/15/77
12/16/77
12/29/77
12/30/77
1/3/78
1/4/78
1/5/78
1/6/78
1/9/78
1/10/78
l/H/78
1/12/78
1/13/78
1/19/78
1/23/78
1/24/78
2/1/78
2/2/78
2/3/78
2/6/78
2/9/78
2/10/78
volts .
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
amps.
1,900
2,000
2,100
2,100
1,900
1,800
1,800
2,100
2,000
2,500
1,900
1,350
1,500
2,800
2,000
1,700
1,800
1,700
1,700
1,700
1,700
1,700
1,300
1,500
1,600
Primary
sludge
volume
(gal/day)
9,979
8,078
8,553
8,661
6,177
7,252
5,416
9,180
7,925
7,009
7,508
8,721
9,028
9,398
-
5,421
9,205
9,042
9,694
9,409
2,741
5,355
9,510
9,381
5,526
Dissolved
oxygen (ppm)
B
aerator
one
1.1
.8
1.1
.5
1.2
2.0
2.6
1.2
2.4
2.2
2.4
3.3
1.2
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
_
0.7
0.9
-
0.7
0.6
1.8
0.7
two
.30
.30
.50
.30
.30
.25
.25
1.10
0.25
0.25
0.25
1.75
1.1
1.0
0.15
0.15
0.20
_
0.10
0.30
-
0.35
0.30
0.15
0.15
S3
.20
'.20
.50
.10
.10
.25
.30
.20
0.25
0.25
0,50
1.90
0.20
0.20
0.15
0.25
0.20
_
0.30
0.20
-
0.35
0.30
0.10
0.30
ettling Test
S-, (ml/1)
a.m.
550
560
950
580
820
700
725
810
700
675
800
875
875
825
725
760
800
850
800
700
720
900
950
775
700
p.m.
625
670
825
600
710
535
750
750
660
630
590
800
775
650
800
650
700
825
740
750
770
800
810
690
625
Secondary Secondary
clarifier sludge wasted
(ft. clear) (gal/day)
5.0
5.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
5*0
5-0
7.0
6.5
6.0
6.0
7.5
3.5
2.0
1.5
4.0
2.5
_
1.5
2.0
2.0
4.0
5.5
5.0
3.5
1,800
1,800
1,800
1,650
900
1,920
1,920
1,920
3,840
1,920
2,560
^
3,520
2,560
2,400
2.720
1,920
2,280
2,304
1,920
-
-
1,500

-

-------
TABLE 8. SUMMER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
BOD.; (mg/l)
Date
9/12/77
9/13/77
9/14/77
9/15/77
9/16/77
9/19/77
9/20/77
9/21/77
9/22/77
9/23/77
9/26/77
9/27/77
9/28/77
9/29/77
9/30/77
10/3/77
10/4/77
10/5/77
10/6/77
10/7/77
10/11/77
10/12/77
10/13/77
10/14/77
10/15/77
10/18/77
10/19/77
sl
750
1,080
990
840
630
1,140
960
1,195
950
570
660
690
975
930
470
600
690
683
990
610
870
870
790
830
580
720
881
S2
288
270
262
252
210
300
284
283
322
246
308
354
315
336
240
192
246
248
312
216
300
366
347
288
312
252
286
S4
5
5
4
3
5
3
5
5
3
4
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
5
4
4
7
6
4
6
3
8
sl
884
702
828
1,098
480
1,414
1,028
1,020
896
558
988
1,294
1,225
1,222
674
972
954
732
1,078
676
1,022
1,104
1,005
1,004
608
1,164
1,080
Suspended
solids (mg/l)
S2
37k
192
150
160
230
182
256
40
210
122
214
160
81
316
306
308
180
228
236
118
332
410
412
252
316
142
96
s3
9,270
9,730
9,280
9,790
10,310
10,470
9,990
8,140
10,810
10,400
10,790
10,030
10,664
9,180
10,670
10,470
10,390
8,888
10,060
9,730
9,850
9,730
8,669
10,110
9,700
10,620
8,677
Volatile suspended
solids (mg/l)
S4
98
92
32
42
52
82
120
28
78
176
140
50
126
34
46
80
58
31
32
32
60
64
13
40
182
66
44
S2
216
98
126
50
72
96
110
28
86
68
94
92
41
158
178
176
124
128
142
54
174
254
262
132
182
84
59
S3
5,560
5,660
5,550
5,820
5,880
6,390
5,820
4,880
6,060
6,020
6,330
5,980
6.730
5,590
6,340
6,160
6,720
5,430
6,190
5,660
6,060
6,750
5,205
6,290
5,920
6,520
5,299
Pats , oils Chromium
grease (mg/l) Cr (mg/l)
Sl
283
462
401
470
282
439
298
550
258
223
510
573
596
402
266
1,563
439
370
452
265
377
454
480
415
218
413
542
S2
-}4
20
33
17
27
6
16
25
28
17
15
13
11
39
72
134
104
43
25
5
21
82
101
9
61
5
24
S4
0.6
0.8
5.4
1.6
4.4
1.2
0.8
1.5
5.6
4.4
4.8
3.6
4.6
3.2
2.0
6.6
2.8
2.2
2.8
0.8
1.2
0.8
18.0
2.8
1.8
4.8
7.0
sl
65
80
70
80
75
95
85
76
70
120
87
110
100
105
110
100
85
94
100
100
85
95
110
100
110
65
104
s2
17.1
4.5
5.5
6.5
^.5
2.2
5.0
2.5
7-5
8.0
7.1
11.3
3.8
9.2
22.0
17.5
6.5
11.5
23.2
3.5
12.0
28.0
39.0
6.3
27.1
1.6
4.7
S4
l.l
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.1
0.9
0.9
1.1
1,2
1.6
1.2
1.1
2.0
0.7
1.1
1.1
0.8
0.9
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.5
0.8
1.0
1.5

-------
TABLE s. (CONTINUED)
NHo-N
Date
9/12/77
9/13/77
9/14/77
9/15/77
9/16/77
9/19/77
9/20/77
9/21/77
9/22/77
9/23/77
9/26/77
9/27/77
9/28/77
9/29/77
9/30/77
10/3/77
10/4/77
10/5/77
10/6/77
10/7/77
10/11/77
10/12/77
10/13/77
10/14/77
10/15/77
10/18/77
10/19/77
sl
23
13
25
31
12
42
28
38
42
43
35
42
35
42
31
31
34
32
24
37
34
39
40
39
34
10
36
S4
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.2
1.2
0.5
1.0
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.6
3.1
3.2
0.7
0.4
0.9
0.4
0.6
0.5
1.4
2.7
3.5
3.8
0.9
2.4
sl
77
76
104
80
48
85
88
102
92
55
85
88
102
92
55
71
70
73
65
43
79
76
81
83
44
62
80
TKN
(mg/1)
S2
44
43
44
50
36
52
47
55
53
43
52
47
55
53
43
40
35
46
20
28
19
52
56
47
27
32
43

S4
4.2
1.4
3.1
4.8
4.2
3.4
3.9
6.2
3.3
5.8
3.4
3.9
6.2
3.3
5.8
3.6
3.1
4.8
2.0
5.0
2.8
4.5
5.6
7.8
8.7
3.9
6.7
NOo
mS4
.50
.18
.20
.22
.05
.01
.03
.52
.02
.10
.00
.51
.09
.02
.02
.02
.01
1.17
.01
.76
.11
.64
.30
.00
.30
.34
.00
NO^ Fecal *
(mg/1) Coliforms
9.7
35-5
40.0
41.0
45.5
62.0
51.0
55.0
35.0
2.5
61.0
63.0
75-0
66.0
46.0
61.0
53.0
48.0
22.0
2.5
13.0
9.0
10.0
8.0
5.0
23.0
9.0
4
60
56
204
36
<1
<1
<1
18
100
660
130
469
<1
160
<1
<1
7
24
18
36
30
70
66
18
12
40
*Colonies per 100 ml.

-------
                                            TABLE 8 (CONTINUED)1
Ui
Date
10/12/7?
9/12/7?
9/14/7?
9/16/??
9/20/7?
9/22/7?
9/26/7?
9/28/7?
9/16/7?
9/26/7?
9/14/77
10/12/7?
10/7/7?
10/12/77
10/13/7?
10/19/7?
Total solids Chloride Press Cake
rag/1 BdmarySixLsB Secondary 3LuJp mg/1 #
S2 S^ 55 solids ?S solids S1 S^ Solids FOG Cr
17,880 10,212 7,291 5,775
8.?0
8.?6
6.43
8.08
7.69
8.29
8.25
1.66
1.21
21 2.0? 0.59
29 4.06 0.9?




Phosphate
POk
TKN mg/1
0.25
2.80
.25
4.48
1.30
0.65
0.00
1.00


0.45
0.54
0.50
0.12
0.00
0.66
            *Parameters  on this table  required  to be determined  occasionally  only.

-------
                                       TABLE 9.  WINTER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
ON
Suspended
BOD^ (mK/1) solids (mg/l)
Date
12/12/77
12/13/7?
12/14/77
12/15/77
12/16/7?
12/29/77
12/30/77
1/3/78
1/4/78
1/5/78
1/6/78
1/9/78
1/10/78
1/11/78
1/12/78
1/13/78
1/19/78
1/23/78
1/24/78
2/1/78
2/2/78
2/3/78
2/6/78
2/9/78
2/10/78
Sl
660
790
980
690
720
930
583
680
1,067
690
630
510
990
1,258
1,100
990
1,020
930
990
1,222
690
630
720
750
720
32
312
330
324
276
300
348
212
272
355
312
288
276
360
437
432
372
372
479
420
434
408
456
444
348
252
34
6
4
7
8
6
13
12
5
7
7
11
3
4
7
6
11
4
3
10
9
12
20
4
12
20
Sl
1,012
1,036
992
1,120
482
2,216
1,280
1,120
794
1,760
1,890
1,270
1,830
1,060
1,790
1,300
1,520
1,320
1,330
1,100
1,510
1,200
1,800
1,650
1,380
s2
282
146
194
174
148
212
292
342
151
330
348
186
320
159
336
280
200
732
310
248
298
406
438
476
236
s3
13,050
14,130
12,360
15,750
14,280
11,690
12,320
13,280
11,130
15,040
13,990
10,100
13,750
10,880
14,070
21,640
13,400
13,740
19,680
11,640
13,110
14,620
14,690
5,340
13,590
Volatile suspended
solids (mg/1)
S4
76
104
68
76
68
168
62
100
39
158
90
46
152
16
114
214
66
110
92
25
50
74
38
62
46
S2
190
82
102
98
110
108
158
156
82
100
140
118
186
101
170
158
108
262
166
175
216
256
306
292
114
s3
?,860
8,750
7,610
9,820
8,810
7,280
7,740
8,300
7,060
9,030
8,700
6,640
8,780
7,080
8,600
14,180
8,230
8,780
12,710
7,800
8,680
9,660
9,550
460
8,730
Fats, oils
grease (mg/l)
sl S2 S4
320
421
559
310
273
421
428
444
550
527
463
215
614
685
525
224
579
375
320
620
554
464
438
575
536
42
24
22
18
19
39
16
16
36
15
9
26
34
56
42
52
29
23
69
7?
60
90
92
73
34
0.8
7.5
3.2
2.8
3.8
0.4
1.2
2.0
10.0
0.8
1.8
2.6
2.2
1.8
2.0
1.0
4.0
3.2
5.1
2.3
2.6
6.8
3.0
3.4
3.2
Chromium
Cr (mK/1)
Sl
80
95
115
135
145
105
135
115
131
100
80
75
85
126
100
105
95
85
100
99
95
100
115
125
110
S2
18,0
8.0
9.5
6.5
8.1
7.0
11.0
6.0
6.7
17.0
1.7
8.0
10.0
7.6
7.0
6.0
7.0
15.0
8.0
11.0
10.0
18.0
16.0
5.0
22.0
S4
1.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.0
1.2
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.35
0.55
0.50
1.15
0.106
0.60
0.55

-------
TABLE 9. (CONTINUED)
Date
12/12/77
12/13/77
12/14/77
12/15/77
12/16/77
12/29/77
12/30/77
1/3/78
1/4/78
1/5/78
1/6/78
1/9/78
1/10/78
1/11/78
1/12/78
1/13/78
1/19/78
1/23/78
1/24/78
2/1/78
2/2/78
2/3/78
2/6/78
2/9/78
2/10/78

NH^-N
(mg/l)
Sl
15
29
31
18
44
2?
37
33
37
32
37
5
25
43
68
33
29
37
24
44
20
46
30
27
31
* Colonies per

S4
0.6
0.4
1.9
5.5
9.3
JJ-.5
12.4
0.0
7.0
13.4
15.5
0.0
5.8
3.7
6.1
16.7
5.5
1.2
15.5
16.0
7.5
10.0
1.4
16.2
28.0
100 ml.

Sl
(J-6
68
82
86
72
95
62
79
78
81 .
64
61
71
105
88
59
87
79
89
85
70
67
85
72
63

TKN
(mg/1)
S2
31
43
56
62
51
60
46
52
53
58
43
35
45
65
61
45
52
50
58
55
41
52
28
52
44


S4
0.6
0.4
1.9
5.5
9.3
4.5
12.4
0.0
7.0
13.4
15-5
0.0
5.8
3.7
6.1
16.7
6.7
1.4
15-7
14.0
21.0
23.0
1.7
16.8
30.0

(mg/l)
S4
.02
.01
.16
.01
.63
.00
.12
.00
.05
.03
.04
.03
.14
.04
.02
.03
.32
.03
.01
.019
.010
.006
.002
.030
.000

NCH Fecal
(mg/l) Coliforms*
SK. s4
0.44
0.44
1.48
0.44
0.62
0.44
0.89
3.30
0.51
0.00
3.50
3.70
1.30
0.33
0.00
1.10
18.20
5-30
9.60
0.13
0.00
0.62
1.60
0.44
0.44

28
4
40
110
7,000
<1
20
430
148

-------
                                             TABUE 9.  (CONTINUED)
03
Date
11/30/77
12/14/77
12/12/77
12/14/77
12/16/77
12/19/77
1/3/78
1/6/78
1/10/78
1/11/78
1/12/78
2/6/78
2/8/78
12/15/78
1/23/78
11/30/77
1/12/78
Total solids Chloride Press Cake
m^/1 PrimarySlute SesorriarySM^ m^/1 $
S2 S^ # solids # solids S1 S^ Solids FOG Cr
17,000 13,000 7,870 6,736
15,000 12,000 6,523 6,346
6.25
8.00
6.17
7.89
7.55
6.90
7.9^
7.07
6.79
7.49
7.^2
1.43
1.34
33 3.84 0.98
34 4.15 1.26
Phosphate
POk
TKN mg/1
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.21
0.29
0.20
0.00
0.03
0.00
1.43
0.11
0.20
4.34


0.57
0.41

-------
TABLE 10. FIRST SIXTY WEEKS ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Week
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Day Volume °
Sampled mgd
12/21/76
12/28/76
1/4/77
1/11/77
1/18/77
1/25/77
2/1/77
2/8/7?
2/15/77
2/22/7?
3/1/77
3/8/77
3/15/77
3/22/7?
3/29/77
4/5/7?
4/12/7?
4/19/77^
4/26/77
5/3/7?
5/10/77
5/17/77
5/24/77
5/31/7?
6/7/77
6/14/7?
6/21/77
6/28/7?
7/5/7?
7/12/7?
7/19/77
.306
.31?
.295
.319 .
.344
.28?'
.355
.295
.286
.305
.28?
.321
.321
.26?
.2?6
.37? -
.283
.272
.269
.312
.295
.316
.304
.336
.313
.241
.313
.376
.343
.36*4
No Data
BOD< Ib/day
Sl
1,465


1,654







1,505

3,908
2,948
2,386
3,23?
3,438
2,296
3,8?4
3,537
3,221


2,584
3,05?
2,303
2,313

S2
816
785
78?
?82
1,248.
771
953
814
935



1,205

1,004
1,185
1,393
1,352
1,452
942
861
1,062
1,40?
869


848
1,151
1,459


S4
128
12?
96
154
20?
136
89
91
86
51
48
59
32
74
48
4?
18
25
40
36
17
32
12
10


15
34
14
14

Suspended
Solids Ib/day
sl
2,456


1,360






6,409
3,630
4,553
4,968
4,61?
3,425
4,871
4,080
3,959
4,451
4,881
4.777


3,216
3,920
3,753


S2
388
315
249
72
668
84
186
145
262



112
203
470
164
843
1,520
1,873
403
635
182
1,039
219


405
643
1,799


S4
299
313
346
215
23?
175
86

74
41
6?
2?
71
90
98
25
61
63
47
18
42
15
38


17
27
29
49

MLSS Sludge
Ibs Age
S-j Days
8,580
9,813
7,621
15,428
11,780
12,448
11,940

12,905
13,940
18,108
15,473
18,935
15,831
21,210
19,766
24,899
27,630
27,279
20,251
24,921
29,54?
25,551


25,273
27,148
26,959
26,151

12
13
11
15
15
16
15




14

15
24
14
18
18
22
24
26
22
32


33
31
22


Chromium
Cr Ib/day
sl
111.0


6?.0






324.
200.
262.
2??.
250
220
2?2
234
249
226
284
266


201
229
226


S2 Sij.
4.08
5.08
2.95
2.66
19.22
1.80 6.22
3-55 3-85
6.2? 1.6?
8.11 4.84
2.04
1.96
.94
1.34
1.83
2.0?
3.08
.9?
1.84
2.60
2.60
1.11
1.93
.98
1.65


.4?
1.10
62.9 1.09
.85


-------
                                               TABLE! 10. CONTINUED
t_n
O
Week
No.
32
33
&
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
4?
48
49
50
51
52 -
53 .
54
55
56
5?
58
59
60
Day Volume
Sampled mgd
7/26/7?
8/2/77
8/9/77
8/16/77
8/23/77
8/30/7?
9/6/7?
9/13/77
9/20/7?
9/27/7?
10/4/7?
10/11/7?
10/18/7?
10/25/7?
11/1/77
11/8/77
11/15/7?
11/22/7?
11/29/77
12/6/7?
12/13/7?
12/20/7?
12/27/7?
1/3/78
1/10/78
1/17/78
1/24/78
1/31/78
2/7/78
No Data
.363
.325
.366

.342
.28?
.231
.30?
.2?8
.370
.288
.313

.250
.283
.325
.260
.266
.261
.285
.356
.242
.264
.313
.30?
.323
.314
.313
BOD*
Si '

2,516
2,098
1,758

918

1,850
3,060
2,261
2,108
1,898
2,300






2,348
2,366
1,877
2,349
3,284
2,611
2,66?
1,964
1,958
Ib/day
S2

730

861

391

252
737
730
765
834
74?






8?0
846
702
782
1,141
953
1,131
911
908
Suspended
Solids Ib/day
S4

10
11
11

16
10
10
13
12
9
14
21

6
50
18
9
33
21
15
10
26
15
18
10
2?
31
31
Si

2,604
2,971
3,724

3,195
1.972
2,48?
6,688
6,585
6,971
5,798
7,359






2,543
1,6?8
4,4?3
1.748
2,76?
3,892
3,583
2,880
4,30?
S2

109
2,56?
1,774

231
311
524
261
436
2,172
2,378
655






321
229
428
333
415
512
835
650
1,243
S4

38
51
62

185
96
112
184
677
296
75
300

67
113
108
52
35
70
45
59
339
86
42
169
24?
66
162
wisa Sludge
Ibs . Age
Sj Days

26,85?
32,096
29,170

24,538
24,819
26,704
26,001
34,063
28,390
27,691
27,716


29,150
30,754
35,871
38,985
36,909
36,293
36,734
37,340
35,552
34,753
42,803
62,862
37,181
17,057

4?

43

75
38
85
38
45
48
33
41






41
54
71
61
40
60
74
54
25
Or
Si

294
293
369

251

158
195
232
290
264
271






285
288
211
289
329
243
269
259
326
Chromium
Ib/day
S2

5-5
141.0
79.4

22.5
10.5
15.2
6.4
8.8
35-5
93.7
12.3






27.8
22.3
14.1
14.8
19.8
17.9
21.6
28.8
13.1

34

2.82
2.98
2.05

6.85
3.83
1.9
2.8
4.6
2.8
1.7
3.9

1.7?
2.36
2.63
1.30
2.38
1.94
1.50
1.19
1.82
2.64
1.31
0.7?
0.94
1.44
1.57

-------
TABLE 10. CONTINUED
Week
no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Day
Sampled
12/21/76
12/28/76
1/4/77
1/11/77
1/18/77
1/25/77
2/1/77
2/8/77
2/15/77
2/22/77
3/1/7?
3/8/7?
3/15/77
3/22/7?
3/29/7?
V5/7?
4/12/7?
4/19/7?
4/26/7?
5/3/7?
5/10/77
5/17/7?
5/24/7?
5/31/7?
6/7/7?
6/14/??
6/21/7?
6/28/77
7/5/7?
7/12/77
7/19/7?
Pats, oils, and
grease Ib/day
Sl

1,190



833






2,241
1,336
1,754
196
1,8?9
1,361
1,7^5
1,859
1,274
1,950
1,643
1,728
No Data
No Data
1,201
1,455
1,242

No Data
%
80.6
55-0
39-4
77.2
200.8
43.1
45-9
66.4
116.9
?8.4


^5-5
98.0
198.0
66.0
455-5
453.7
540.?
124.9
179-6
23.7
329.6
62.7


138.4
235.2
489.2


34










31.1
16.1
16.1
24.5
54.7
23.6
7.1
13.6
33.7
46.8
27.1
23.7
1?.?
5-2


32.4
8.2
45.8
9.1

Kjeldahl - N Nit
1h/rla.v
Sl















352
342
206
424
234
199
250
241
214


170
20?
23?


s2















157
137
152
168
130
128
111
140
9?


10?
116
169


S4















59-7
66.1
81.?
69.6
72.9
81.2
94.9
81.3
74.4


33-9
42.0
37.2
18.8

rate - N
Lb/day
S4












.62
.22
.41

.21
.45
.74
.91
.25
.26
.06
.28


.26
.19
.54
.94

Total-N
Ib/day
S4
















66.3
82.2
70.3
73-8
81.5
95-2
81.4
74.?


34.2
42.2
37.7
19.7

Ammonia-N Temperature
Ib/day °C PH
*1



104
95
6?
121
89
88



62
87
97
120
97
93
9?
81
98
103
122
15?


73
74
100


b4






118.4
96.0
73.9
61.1
43.1
56.2
32.1
66.8
55-2
66.0
73-2
81.?
65.1
62.5
81.2
94.9
75.7
70.3


2?.4
4?.0
24.3
4.6

S3
11
8
9
12
13
12
11
11
13
17
16
17
17
15
21
1?
19
21
20
22
19
25
28
25


26
28
25
29

S3

?.^
7.4
?.?
7.3
7.4
7.3
7.7
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.6
7.3
3.2
7.8
7.2
3.5
7.5
?.?
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.4
8.1


7.7
7.4
7.4
7.3


-------
Ol
.TABLE 10. CONTINUED
no.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Sampled
7/26/77
8/2/77
8/9/77
8/16/77
8/23/77
8/30/77
9/6/77
9/13/77
9/20/77
9/27/77
10/4/77
10/11/77
10/18/77
10/25/77
11/1/77
11/8/77
11/15/77
11/22/77
11/29/77
12/6/77
12/13/77
12/20/77
12/27/77
1/3/78
1/10/78
1/17/78
1/24/78
1/31/78
2/7/78
Fats, oils, and
grease Ib/day
Sl
No Data
1,386
1,418

No Data


1,038
1,408
1,382
1,142
1,153
1,413
No Data





1,303
1,058
850
1,212
1,788
1,483
862
1,624
1,501
S2

13.6
745.6
488.0

49.9
64.7
62.
64.
26.
133.
243.
62.6






88.0
62.4
78.7
79-3
146.2
74.3
185.9
201.6
190.6
S4

11.5
17.6
27-5

25.4
21.6
17.0
3.8
10.7
6.8
43.2
18.3

13.4
177.0
19.0
3.3
15-1
15-5
13.1
36.6
0.8
22.0
4.7
10.2
13.7
6.0
8.9
K jeldahl -
Ib/dav
Sl

221
241
211

248

141
261
236
225
195
209






216
202
192
172
274
222
240
222
188
S2

121

150

123

91
141
128
142
135
112






136
149
121
117
170
133
156
144
136
N Nii
34

10.0
13.6
11.9

16.0

7.5
15-9
14.4
14.8
13.5
17-5

8.8
42.5
43.4
10.2
30.0
23.9
12.6
14.9
9.1
26.4
9.7
17.2
42.3
36.7
43.9
;rate - N Total-N
Ib/day Ib/day

4.66
2.63
5-71

51-51

15.02
31.79
39.29
33.44
5.42
5.31

1.60
0.18
0.20
0.38
0.26

7.14
24.4?
0.20
0.25
0.20
10.52
5.84
0.08
0.26

14.7
16.2
17.6

67.5

22.5
47-7
53-7
48.2
18.9
22.8

10.4
42.7
43.6
10.6
30.3

19.7
39.4
9.3
26.7
9.9
27.7
48.1
36.8
44.2
Ammonia-N Temperature
Ib/flav °G PH
Sl

112
127
107

49
72
62
97
81
99
96
94






98
131
54
82
112
74
65
115
71
34

2.4
2.7
2.1

1.1
3.4
1.0
2.6
1.4
2.8
6.5
6.3

2.7
37.8
29.8
5.0
12.7
19.6
6.4
5-9
9.1
15.4
9.7
14.1
41.8
41.9
42.3
S3

26
27
26

28
25
26
23
25
22
22




16
17
17
16
16
15
15
15
15
16
15
16
S3

6.6
6.8
6.6

6.8
7.6
7.4
6.6
7.5
7-3
6.7
6.6

7.1
7.2
7.0
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.1
7.2
7.4
7.1
7.1
7.0
7.3

-------
Discussion of graphs  of  analytical results.

        The results as depicted  in the graphs indicate operational features
and dependent variables  that  have occurred during the three periods.   Com-
ments upon each graph follow:

Figure 14.  BOD vs. Week;   This graph indicates that biological stability or
           consistency was not established until about the 20th week  of  opera-
           tion.  The overall results indicate a BOD of 10 to 20  Ib/day
           (^ to 8 mg/l)  is readily achieved.  The special test periods  do not
           indicate any  abnormalities.

Figure 15.  pH and Temperature vs. Weekt  A notable indication in  this graph  is
           that the plant was put into operation during a very cold period
           which was  generally much colder than the winter of 19??-?8.   This
           curve might seemingly indicate that the reason for the long break-
           in period  was the  cold weather, but other factors such as  opera-
           tional problems in the primary and secondary and overall plant
           break-in problems  were equally significant.

Figure 16.  F/M vs. Weekt   This curve shows that the design F/M of 0.06
           was not reached until about the 20th week of operation.  The  best
           BOD efficiency is  seen to occur during the lowest F/M  loading
           periods.
 Figure 1?.  Sludge  Age  vs.  Week;   This curve indicates that the  sludge age is


 Figure 38.
           over 30 days which  insures  the  sludge to be aerobically digested.
           MISS, MLVSS, and SVI vs. Weekt   This  curve  indicates a very good
           set of values for SVI, but  it also shows that the MISS is much
           higher than designed or expected.

Figure 19 .  Suspended Solids vs. Weekt  This  graph indicates a higher than ex-
           pected amount of suspended scOMs in the effluent.  The very high
           MISS or solids  in the aeration unit can be  imagined to be the
           cause, but other reasons including final clarifier upset, erratic
           sludge return,  and  inability to  waste excess sludge were respon-
           sible in part.

Figure20.  Nitrogen vs. Week;  The nitrogen plots indicate a trend toward
           consistent nitrogen removal which seems to  be independent of tem-
           perature or pH.  The erratic values indicate a need for refine-
           ment in operational procedures,  but no change in the design.

Figure 21.  Ammonia vs. Weekt   This curve indicates a potential for high am-
           monia removal.  It  also seems to indicate that nitrification and
           denitrification maximizes during the  summer or warm water tempera-
           ture period.

Figure22.  Fats, Oils and Grease vs. Weekt  This plotting indicates erratic
           primary and secondary removal, but a.  very consistent overall re-
           moval .
                                       53

-------
10000
        WINTER
   SPRING   I   SUMMER
              FALL   |   WINTER
 1000
(0
  100
O
DO
  10
         BREAK-IN

          PERIOD
            BIOLOGICAL

            STABILITY
            10
    20
30      40
   WEEKS
50
                                                      60
  Figure lit.,
BOD,-  levels  in paw wastewater,  after primary
treatment, and after  total  treatment.
First sixty  weeks.
                               54

-------
100C-
     WINTER  I   SPRING  I  SUMMER  |   FALL  |  WINTER I
1 _________ L..._l
                                  ...... J ________
  0       10     20     30     40      50      60
                        WEEKS
 Figure 1$.  Temperatare and pH In the carrousel.
              PIrat  sixty weeks.
                       55

-------
 100
0.01
                         30      40
                            WEEKS
  Figure 16.
Food to microorganisms ratio and relation-
ship to final BOD^.   First sixty weeks.
                           56

-------
 100
I
UJ

a

UJ
O 10
O
  1.0
       ~~r      i	i—r
          10
                  20
30       40

   WEEKS
                                         50
                       I.
                      60
   Figure I?.   Average age of suspended solids In the car-

                rousel.  First sixty weeks.
                            57

-------
  100,000
  10,000
E
 i

Q

O
Q
UJ
Q
z
UJ
Q.
(/)  1,000

V)
X
uj  100
Q
UJ
5
UJ
O
Q
     10
(f)

       7       T
                       7
10
        20
30      40
  WEEKS
50
       _L
        60
      Figure 18.   Suspended solids  in the carrousel and  sludge
                   volume index.  First sixty weeks*
                               58

-------
  10,000
 I
Q
LU
O
z
UJ
Q.
V)
  1,000|- —
    100
                               WEEKS
      Figure 19*  Suspended solids in raw wastewater;  after
                  primary treatment; and after  total treat-
                  ment.   First sixty weeks.
                              59

-------
  100
•o
^
111
CD
O
QC
   10
                                          7
          TKN
          TKN
   1.0
                                <<\;
                                   A I

                                  fM'
              TOTAL  N-S4~-
    I *  ft
    'i. \..  PAH
            NITRATE N-S4
                '\
                        "A I
            10
                    L  _  L       1      J       J
                   20      30       40      50      60
30       40

  WEEKS
     Figure 20*   Nitrogen in raw wastewater; after primary
                 treatment; and after total treatment.
                 First sixty weeks.
                            60

-------
   100
O


<
  0.1
_L _ J
 10     20
                                 7
                          30     *0
                            WEEKS
 [    _L_  J
50      60
   Figure 21.  Ammonia nitrogen in raw wast ©water;  and after
               total  treatment.  First sixty weeks.
                           61

-------
 10,000
 1,000
(0
•o
 I

HI
UJ
DC
o
   100
                            30       40
                              WEEKS
50
60
    Figure 22.   Pats,  oils, and grease in raw waste-water;
                 after primary treatment;  and after  tfital
                 treatment.  First  sixty weeks.
                             62

-------
Figure 23.  Chromium vs. Week;   The characteristics of this plot are  similar
           to the previous Fats,  Oils and Grease curves.   Content  in the
           final effluent is low  and consistent.

Figure     BOD vs % Frequencyt  This set of plots indicates good removal and
  2k,  25    or satisfaction of BOD as shown by the effluent BOD  at  S^.  The
           results would be better if the solids were filtered  from  the
           samples prior to analyzing for BOD.  The efficiency  is  seen to be
           the same for the two special test periods.  The variations are
           about what they would  be expected to be.

Figure     Suspended Solids vs. % Frequency;  The primary significance in
  26,  2?    this set of plots  is the relatively poor removal of  solids in the
           secondary clarifier,,  The MLSS in the aeration unit  is  much higher
           than the design.  This was due to a combination of reasons which
           will ultimately be corrected, including inability to waste excess
           sludge on a set schedule because of clogging of return  pumps.
           This difficulty also contributed to the high solids  content in
           the final effluent.  The secondary clarifier was subject  to set-
           tling upsets and short circuiting assumed to be due  to  changes
           which the unit could not handle.  The overall plant  efficiency is
           over 90^ and does  not  vary greatly with seasonal changes.

Figure     SVI vs. % Frequency»  The consistent value of less than 100 in-
  28,  29    dicates a very stable  sludge condition.  The sludge  condition
           changed somewhat from  the first test period to the second but the
           amount of MLSS also  changed appreciably.

Figure     Suspended Solids (%  Volatile) vs. % Frequency;  This set  of plots
  30,  31    did not indicate anythdng significant except to show the  great
           variation in the primary effluent and the consistently  low MLVSS
           content in the aeration unit.  The low volatile percentage can be
           assumed to be due  to c-arryover of suspended solids from the primary
           section.

Figure     Nitrogen vs. % Frequency;  These plots indicate one  of  the most
  32,  33    important determinations of this demonstration project, the ability
           of the secondary treatment to remove over ?0# of the total nitrogen
           summer or winter.  During the summer more nitrate and less ammonia
           occured in the effluent than during the winter test  period, but
           the overall nitrogen removal for the total plant was greater in
           the winter 90$ to  $4$.  The erratic results were due to operational
           trials, changes, and adjustments, but the overall ability to remove
           substantial amounts  of :nitrogen can be seen.  More work must be
           done on optimizing the loperation through instrumentation  in order
           to eliminate operator  control and error.

Figure     TKN vs. % Frequency t This set of plots is very similar  to the total
 34,  35    nitrogen plots, Figures 15 & 24.  When nitrates are  present the
           total nitrogen includes them, as in Figure 20, but they are not
           included in the TKN.  The TKN includes Mj.  It does not, by itself,
           indicate the degree  of nitrification.


                                       63

-------
1,000
 0.1
          10
                  20
30       40

  WEEKS
50
60
   Figure 23.  Chromium in raw wastewater; after primary
               treatment; and after total treatment.
               First sixty weeks.
                           64

-------
10,000
    FT

|
Summer
Test Period



 1,000

(0
•o

.0
O
CD
  10O
   10
   1.0
                            -* *
                     " MEAN 2100
     V
                      MEAN 740
    2   5



Figure
                 -'fe « « MEAN 12
I	L	i	I	U	I_LLJ_
5   10       30    50     70      90
                                           98
        levels in paw wastewater;  after pri-
        t?I2twnt; and after t^otal treatment,
                       65

-------
   10,00
    1,000
 (0
 O
 CO
     10
    i.o
               T    T
                  Winter
                Test Period

             Tr	T FT
            *  *
5   10
            30    50     70
                                           90
                                                   9
Figure 2$.
      Frequency Of Occurrence, %
  BOD,- levels  in raw wastewater; after prim-
  ary treatment;  and after total treatment.
                            66

-------
1000
 1.0
10       30    SO     70      90

  Frequency Of Occurrence,
                                              98
  Figure 26.   Suspended solids levels in raw
               wastewater; after primacy treat-
               ment;  and after total treatment
                      67

-------
10,000
  10
           10       30    50    70

             Frequency Of Occurrence, %
9O
        98
   Figure 27.   Suspended solids levels in raw
                wastewater;  after primary treat-
                ment;  and after total treatment.
                       68

-------
  120
X
Ul
Q
  100
   80
§
Ul
O
Q
   60
   40
                T
            Summer

           Test Period
        1      T
                                  MEAN 84
         0.1
 5      10      SO      80  90  95   98 99   99.5


Frequency Of Occurrence, %
   Figure 28.   Sludge  voluwe ladex for carrousel activated sludge
                                   69

-------
 120
 O)
 i

X
UJ
Q

5 80

UJ
g
UJ60
O
O
  40
              1     T
                                   Winter

                                 Test Period
                             MEAN 55  »>"
                   d	L
20
                                  so
                                            	L.LU.	.1
                                         80  90 95  98 99
                     Frequency of Occurrence, %

  Figure  29.   Sludge volume index for carrousel activated sludge.
                                 70

-------
     0.1
Figure 30.
15      20      50      80   90  95  98 99

      Frequency Of Occurrence, %

 Volatile suspended solids levels after primary
 treatment,  and In the carrousel.
                            71

-------
Figure 31.
                         L.U_LL
1     5     10     50     80  90 95  98 99
     Frequency Of Occurrence, %
Volatile suspended solids levels  after* primary
treatment,  and in the earrousel.
                           72

-------
1,00
                                  80    90
             Frequency Of Occurrence,%
98
  Figure 32.  Total nitrogen levels  IB  raw waste-
              water; after primary treatment;  and
              after total treatment.
                        73

-------
1000
 1.0
           Frequency Of Occurrence, %

   Figure 33.  Total nitrogen levels in raw waste*
               water; after primary treatment;
               and after total treatment.
                        74

-------
  1,000
 (0


^s" 100
LU
o
O
DC
I-
X
<
Q
   10
   1.0
     E~T~T—T
     1
                        Summer

                      Tesl  Period

                      T   f  j	I
                         MEAN 11
1
                                                 98
  2    5   10    20     40    60     80   90


           Frequency  Of Occurrence - °/0

Figure 3lj..   Kjeldahl aitrogen levels la paw waste-
             water; after primary  treatment;  and
             after total treatment.
                          75

-------
1,000
 1.0
   2   5   10   20     40    60     80    90

            Frequency Of  Occurrence -%
98
  Figure 35«  Kjeldahl  nitrogen levels la raw
              wastewater;  after primary treatment;
              and  after total treatment.
                        76

-------
Figure     Ammonia vs. % Frequencyt  This graph  indicates very good removal
  36,  37    or conversion of NHo.  It also indicates better efficiency during
           the summer test period.

Figure     Fats, Oils and Grease  (FOG)  vs. % Frequencys This plot shows con-
  38,  39    sistency, good removal, and  low effluent concentration.

Figure     Chromium vs. % Freq uency \  The most important observation in this
  40,  41    set of plots is the  consistently  high removal efficiency and the
           low final effluent concentration.
                                        77

-------
  100
                       MEAN 95
>.
CO

^
£

i
   10
O
FT	i	r
                        Summer

                       Test Period
1	T
                       TT1
    2    S   10   20    40    60     80   90       98
            .Frequency Of Occurrence -%,.
   Figure 36.  ammonia levels in raw wastewater
               and after total treatment.
                        78

-------
 1,000
  100
(0
   10
z
o
   1.0
   0.1
                        Winter
                       Test Period
                    rr~TTT
             10   20
40
                            60
                                  80
                       98
             V   *»»     -TV
              Frequency  Of  Occurrence -%
     Figure 3?.   Ammonia levels in raw wastewater,
                 and  after  total treatment*

                        79

-------
10,00
 1.0
  2
LJ_i	LLLLL	L
                            98
    5   10   20   40    60    80  90
        Frequency Of Occurrence - %
Figure  38. Pats, oils, and grease levels in
         paw wastewater; after primary treat-
         ment; and after total treatment.

                 80

-------
 10,000
  1,000
<0
•o

.Q

I

HI
C/>
<
LU
DC
O
o

<
                         .ILL	I	-
100
        5   10   20    40    60
            Frequency Of Occurrence -
    Figure 39.  Pats, oils, and  grease levels in raw
              waafeewater; aftep primary treatment;
              and after total  treatment.
                      81

-------
1,000
                   I     Summer

                      Test Period
 1.0
           10
            Frequency  Of Occurrence - %
   figure UO.   Chromium levels in  raw wastewater;
               after primary treatment;  and after
               total treatment, expressed as Cr.
                        82

-------
 1,000
  100
eo
O
O
cc
X
O
    10
    1.0
         i    i     r
            Winter

           Test Period


           TTT7
T~	r
                         MEAN 230
                   20
                                60
                        80    90
1U    
-------
                                  SECTION 8

                        CONCLUSIONS AND EVALUATIONS

                     CONCLUSIONS AS TO PARAMETER REMOVALS

       The first objective of this demonstration grant was to determine the
effectiveness of this treatment system in finite terms.  One of the principal
further objectives was to determine the effect of cold weather upon bacterial
activity in the secondary portion.  The data in tables 8 and 9 has been sum-
marized to show the total pollutant removal efficiency of this wastewater
treatment plant while operating under summer conditions as well as winter
conditions.  This summary follows:

               TABLE 11.  AVERAGE PERCENT OF POLLUTANT REMOVAL
               TOTAL TREATMENT* SUMMER AND WINTER TEST PERIODS

                                                   % Removal
Pollutant
BOD5
Suspended solids
Nitrogen- total
TKN
Ammonia
Fats, oils and grease
Chromium
Summer
99-1
80.9
94.7
94.1
96.4
98.8
99-0
Winter
97.6
84.1
83-5
87-4
74.6
99.0
98.8
        *0n basis of differences between samples taken at Sj_ and

       It is evident from this table that winter operating conditions did re-
duce carbonanceous and nitrogenous biological activity noticeably but substan-
tial reduction continued to occur.
BOD Remo v^als

       Cold weather has a substantial effect upon many biological wastewater
treatment systems in lowering the efficiency of BOD removal.  In this study
                                       84

-------
the average .BOD reduction during winter was only slightly less than in summer.
In addition, Table 9 reveals  that single-digit results in mg/1 were frequently
achieved in winter, thus indicating excellent resistance by the carrousel de-
sign to atmospheric conditions  well below freezing.

       Table 11 shows in excess of 97% removal of BOD  regardless of seasonal
conditions.  The average residual BOD is shown by analysis to  be on the order
of 6 mg/1.  This is one-fifth of the unofficial BAT  standard.   Obviously this
wastewater treatment plant  is very effective in reducing biological oxygen
demand.

Suspended Solids Removal

       Short of an actual freeze low temperatures would not be expected to be
much of a deterrent to removal  of suspended solids.  Actually  the record
shows the removals to be a  little better in winter than in summer,  but exa-
mination of the data reveals  that temperature was not  a factor in the  inci-
dence of residual suspended solids as discharged.

       Table 12 shows suspended solids to be in excess of the  unofficial BAT
requirements.  Terminal removal is dependent upon the  efficiency of the final
clarifier.  Obviously some  additional fine tuning will be required  but com-
pliance seems to be attainable.

Nitrification - Denitrification

       The data shows that  the  carrousel is capable  of supporting nitrifying
and denitrifying bacteria.  The former converts nitrogenous compounds to
nitrates, and the latter converts nitrates to free nitrogen.   Analytical re-
sults reported in Table 8 and Table 9 bear this out.   Some TKN removal occurs
chemically in the primary section.  The tables clearly show that ammonia
nitrogen and organically bound  nitrogen entering the carrousel at S£ were
substantially reduced in the  ditch, more in summer than in winter.   Table 9
also reveals that on some days  during winter operation very low concentra-
tions of NH3-N and TKN did  occur at 84,  indicating that lower  average nitri-
fication activity in winter may have been more attributable to occasional in-
cidence of an unknown form  of toxicity than temperature.

       Conversion of nitrates to nitrogen is not only  an interesting and per-
haps unique feature of this system but it also has broad implications  in the
whole field of wastewater treatment.  Support of denitrifying  bacteria seems
to be somewhat more difficult than that of the nitrifying strain.   Additional
study toward establishing a more stable environment  for these  organisms would
certainly be worthwhile.  Denitrifiers were rather late in developing during
the summer period but they  were extremely active and efficient during the^
winter period   Later on, after this grant project was completed, the denit-
rifiers were adversely affected for a time,  but they have now  returned.  They
may have been subjected to  some form of chemical toxicity,  or  perhaps  the
balance of aerobic/anoxic conditions was not agreeable.  Work  is continuing
to gain further insight.
                                      85

-------
Fats, Oils and Grease Removal

       As with suspended solids the removal of fats, oils and grease would
not seem to be very temperature dependent, and the results are consistent
with this.  Average removal was actually a little higher in winter than in
summer but it is not possible to fix to this any real significance .

       In comparison with unofficial 1983 BAT levels the average results are
better than required, with residual pollutant in the effluent approximately
    of that allowable by BAT. 99$ removal is achieved.
Chromium Removal

       Chromium is probably the most important parameter, from the point of
view of removal, of any of the components of tannery effluent.  Controversy
exists as to the relative toxicity of tannery chromium discharged.  Actually
it exists entirely in the trivalent form and as such is highly insoluble at
pH's encountered in a biological treatment system, but many investigators are
skeptical and suspect that a portion may exist as or be converted to the hexa-
valent form which is highly toxic.  The existence of chromium .in this system
at the  residual level after primary treatment has never poisoned the bacteria
in the secondary or limited biological activity in any way, thus indicating
rather conclusively that it is all trivalent, virtually insoluble, and benign.

       The analytical data shows a high degree of removal, 99% on the average,
both summer and winter.  In terms of kilograms discharged per kilogram of raw
pelt the average amount discharged is within the BAT requirement.


SYSTEM EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION

       The proposal for this grant states on page 20, Part IV-^te, Sampling
and data collection procedures, that methods for evaluating the results of
the project will consist of:

       a.  Evaluating the character of the final effluent in terms of attain-
           ment of BAT requirements.

       b.  Fixing the cost of operation while producing effluent at BAT
           levels in terms of:

               Cents per foot of finished leather product .

               Gents per pound of finished leather product.

               Cents per pound of BOD plus GOD removed.

               Cents per pound of suspended solids removed, compacted and
               placed at final destination.

               Cents per pound of nitrogen removed.
                                      86

-------
       The grant amendment dated August 23, 1976, added other means of eval-
uating the results.  These are:

       Page 5A, item 3C
         Include the cost in cents per 1,000 gallons treated.

       Page 5A, item 5
         The grantee shall include a section which compares the demonstrated
         processes with  other processes used for the same or similar purposes
         in the tanning  industry and describe what changes in design or cost
         would be expected when applying the demonstrated technology to a
         typical cattle  hide tannery.  Specific items to be addressed ares

         a.  comparison  on a cost-effective basis of the LectroGlear with
             available information on conventional primary treatment or dis-
             solved  air  flotation being utilized by the industry,  or with the
             possibility of no primary treatment.

         b.  comparison  of the performance and other data on the carrousel
             with available information on the unit in Oisterwijk,  Nether-
             lands treating tannery wastewaters.

         c.  based on  the demonstrated design criteria and available infor-
             mation, make a preliminary design and cost estimate for install-
             ing the system at a typical cattle hide tannery in the U.S. to
             meet the  1983 guidelines.

       In this section of the report the above specified means of evaluation
will be dealt with in  the order of listing, with the exception of item 5c,
which will be detailed in a separate section.  See Section 9-
ATTAINMENT OF BAT REQUIREMENTS

       The BAT requirements for 1983 (unofficial) are compared in  Table  12
with the results obtained during thV summer and winter operating periods  of
the Winchester project.   Compliance is achieved in almost every category ex-
cept suspended solids,  TKN in the winter, and fecal coliforms.  The  latter
can be controlled only  by disinfection.  Ghlorination has not been provided
as a function of the treatment facility,   Undoubtedly some chlorine  genera-
tion occurs as a result  of electrolysis in both the coagulation cell and the
flotation  basin but this was not evaluated.  It may account for the  lower in-
cidence of coliform colonies during the first test period when electrolytic
activity was  greater.   It is interesting to note that the average  level  of
.1*0 kg of  TKN per 1,000  kg of raw pelt in the treated wastewater during  win-
tertime conditions,  while in excess of BAT, represents an 87% removal  of TKN
from the raw  wastewater.
                                       87

-------
                                TABLE  12.  COMPARISON OF WINCHESTER EFFLUENT WITH
                                BEST  AVAILABLE TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR 1983 *
oo
CO
BAT BAT Winchester
average of daily
maximum/day _ values for summer conditions
30 consecutive days /£c ciays)
Pollutant
BOD^ **
Total suspended solids **
Chromium **
Oil and grease **
Sulf ide **
TKN **
Fecal Coliforms/100 ml
PH

3.20
3.60
0.12
1.26
0.012
0.62
400
6.0-9.0
1.60
1.80
0.06
0.63
0.006
0.31
no std.
no std.
max/day
0.4?
12.34
0.14
3-25
-
0.59
660
6,5-7-6
ave/day
0.29
4.77
0.06
0.34
-
0.31
-

Winchester
winter conditions
(25 days)
max/day
0.86
9.24
0.07
1.63
-
1.29
7,000
6.8-?.6
ave/day
0.36
3-65
0.06
0.19
-
0.40
-i

                * Federal Register Volume 39  Number 69   April 9, 1974.  Promulgated but remanded.  Par42553


               ** Unit is kg/1000 kg raw pelt.

-------
COSTS OF OPERATION

       One of the study objectives was  to -determine the operating costs of
producing treated effluent  at BAT levels  in terms  of cents per foot of fin-
ished father product, cents per pound  of finished leather product, cents per
pound of BOD  removed, cents per pound  of suspended solids removed, compacted
and placed at final destination, cents  per  pound of nitrogen removed, and
cents per 1,000 gallons of  wastewater treated.
       Operating costs for  the  12-month study period weie as follows:
               Plant personnel	   $46,860.68
               Chemical supplies and  electricity —    78,301.20
               Repairs and  equipment  ----____     8,423.00
               Total	$133,584.88
       Production during the 12~month period was:
               Skins produced (dozen)	       58,466
                                 O
               Skins produced (ft )	    5,846,600
Gents per Foot of Finished  Leather Product
       The cost of producing BAT level  effluent per foot of finished leather
product is determined as follows:
               Operating cost/year 	  $133,584.83
               Skins produced (ft2)   	    5,846,600
               Cost per square  foot of  product - - -         $.0228
Cents per Pound of Finished Leather Product
       Cost of the BAT-level effluent per pound of finished leather product
is determined as follows:
               Operating cost/year 	  $133»584.88
               Skins produced (dozen)	    58,446
               Average weight per dozen (ib) - - - -        24
               Total weight (ib)		1,402,?04
               Total cost per pound	        $0.095
Cents per Pound of BOD Removed
       Cost of removing BOD is determined as follows:
               Operating cost/year 	  $133,584.88
               Operating days/year 	       250
               Operating cost/day	      $53^
                                      89

-------
               BOD removed/day (ib)	      2,050
               Cost/lb BOD removed	         $0.26
Cents per Pound of Suspended Solids Removed, Compacted, and Placed at
Final Destination
       Cost for removing suspended solids, compacting them, and placing them
at their final destination is determined as follows:
               Operating cost/day ------------       $53^
               Suspended solids removed/day (ib)  - - - -      2,39^
               Gost/lb suspended solids removed -----          $.22
Gents per Pound of Nitrogen Removed
       Cost for removing nitrogen is determined as follows:
               Operating cost/day ------------       $53^
               Nitrogen removed/day (ib)  --------        272
              , Gost/lb nitrogen removed ---------         $1.96
Cents per 1,000 Gal, of Wastewater treated
       Cost per 1,000 gal of wastewater treated is determined as follows:
               Average daily flow (gal)	301,000
               Operating cost/day ------------       $53^
               Gost/1,000 gal wastewater treated  - - - -         $1.77

OPERATING COST OF MIGROBUBBLE GENERATION BY ELECTROLYSIS, DISPERSED AIR,
AND DISSOLVED AH.
       Elsewhere in this report it is stated that the LectroGlear electroly-
tic cell, as a primary source of microbubbles,  was discontinued for two rea-
sons; an inordinate amount of difficulty was encountered with maintaining
electrodes in the coagulation cell operational, and clear evidence was estab-
lished that the electrolytic generation of microbubbles could not compete
cost-wise with dispersed air generation.
Electrolysis
       The cost of operation of the LectroGlear electrolytic cell, the ori-
ginal principal LectroGlear microbubble generator is determined as follows:
               Design amperage requirement  -------       2,900
               Design voltage requirement (DC)   -----           6
               Kilowatts required per hour  -------          17.^
                                      90

-------
               Power cost per kilowatt hour	       $0.035
               Cost of power  per hour	.	       $0.609
               Hydraulic flow rate  (gpm)	      JQO
               Cost per 1,000 gallons	        $.034
Dispersed Air

       The cost of operation  of the dispersed  air generator is determined as
follows!
               Design power requirement (hp)	        2
               Kilowatts per  horsepower ---------        0.746
               Power cost per kilowatt hour -------       $0.035
               Cost of power  per hour	       $0.052
               Hydraulic flow rate  (gpm)	      300
               Cost per 1,000 gal.	.	        $.003
Dissolved Air12
       The estimated cost of  operation of dissolved air flotation for this
application, 300 gpm throughput with 50%  recirculation for microbubble forma-
tion is calculated as follows:
               Design rate  of flow  (gpm)- --------      300
               Recirculation  rate - 50% (§pra)  ------      150
               Back pressure  for air solubilization (psi)       60
               Required pump  HP-------------        7
               Kilowatts required per hour	         5«2
               Power cost perKWH	       $0.085
               Cost of power  per hour ----------       $0.182
               Hydraulic flow rate  (gpm)	      300
               Cost per 1,000 gallons 	       $0.010
       These calculations show  that the cost of electrolytic generation of
microbubbles is on the order  of eleven times that of dispersed air genera-
tion.  Considering this, along  with less  than  adequate electrode reliability,
leads to rejection of the electrolytic concept as a principal source of en-
couragement to flotation.   Likewise the calculated cost of operation of a
system designed to provide  microbubbles by means of dissolved air for floe
flotation is in excess of the cost  determined by actual operation for dis-
persed air.
                                      91

-------
      TABLE 13.   COMPARISON OF COSTS OF OPERATION OF SYSTEMS TO PROVIDE
                     MICROBUBBLSS  FOR  A FLOTATION SYSTEM
                       FOR SUSPENDED SOLIDS  SEPARATION
                                                       Cost of operation
            Microbubble                                        per
           generation mode                             1,000 gals treated
LectroClear
Dissolved Air
Dispersed Air
$.034
$.010
$.003
 CONSIDERATION OF THE POSSIBILITY  OF NO PRIMARY  TREATMENT

        The  possibility  of  elimination of primary clarification,  and  depen-
 dence upon  a  biological treatment  system plus  a final  clarifier  only has  been
 considered.   The existence of a  relatively large amount of  chromium  in the
 non-clarified wastewater as a substance potentially toxic to activated sludge
 bacteria has  been  a deterrent to experimental  by-pass  of the primary section.
 Other toxic chemicals which may  be absorbed in the agglomerated  precipitates
 in the  primary  section  and removed there are suspected of being  present in
 the raw wastewater also, which could interfere with bacterial activity in the
 carrousel, although these  were not identified  in this  study.  Chromium and
 alumium hydroxides formed  by pH  adjustment to  7.5 to 8.5 to remove them,  as
 well as to provide agreeable environmental conditions  for bacteria in the se-
 condary, are  gelatinous precipitates which do  not rapidly settle to  a reason-
 ably compact  bottom sludge layer.  These facts, and the high incidence of
 emulsified fats and oils encountered in the waste stream, led to a laboratory
 bench scale testing decision in  the design stage that  removal of the suspend-
 ed solids introduced to the system would best  be removed by flotation. These
 considerations,  in addition to the compaction  feature  provided by microbubbtes
 continuously  rising, raising and dewatering the sludge blanket atop  the flo-
 tation  basin, haxe  adequately demonstrated the  desirability  of maximum separa-
 tion of suspended  solids in a primary clarification section prior to acti-
 vated sludge  treatment.


 COMPARISON OF THE  PERFORMANCE OF THIS CARROUSEL WITH ONE AT OISTERWIJK,
 NETHERLANDS13

        A full scale carrousel has  been in operation at Oisterwijk, Nether-
 lands since 1973 treating  tannery  wastewater.  The tannery  is in the category
 1 classification,  chrome tan-hair  burn, and is of medium size, processing not
much more raw hide  weight  (55»000  Ib/day) than the Winchester tannery
 (<^3i200 Ib/day green salted shearlings).  Water usage  at 0.475 mgd is in
direct proportion  on a  green hide  or skin weight basis to the volume used at
Winchester (.350 mgd).  Following  is a table showing waste  loadings  to the
                                     92

-------
Oisterwijk carrousel  as well as the Winchester carrousel,  and the degree of
removal of pollutants affected significantly by secondary  treatment,  BOD,
NH«j-N and total N.


          TABLE 14.   COMPARISON OF CABROUSEL TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES
                WINCHESTER,  N. H. vs. OISTERWIJK,  NETHERLANDS
Treatment
plant
Winchester BOD5
Oisterwijk BOD5
Winchester-NH-^-N
Oisterwijk-NH3-N
W inches ter- 1 otal-N
Oisterwijk-total-N
Influent
mg/1
31?
1,100
32
264
10?
408
Effluent
mg/1
6
20
5
248
12
2?0
Removal
%
98
98
84
6
89
34
       The  loadings to the carrousel at Oisterwijk are  far  greater than to
the carrousel at Winchester as shown above.   This may be due to removal of
BOD and nitrogenous material in the Winchester primary  section, whereas it
is the understanding that the Oisterwijk treatment plant does not have pri-
mary coagulation and clarification.

       Comparison  of the efficiency of each  in terms  of removal of parameters
clearly shows superiority of the Winchester  operation.  Further proof of this
is demonstrated by quoting from a recently issued DRAFT of  an E.P.A. develop-
ment document for  the leather tanning and finishing industry!3 Investigators
who prepared this  document state, on lines 6863 through 6866, "This (analysis
of data) indicates that this (Winchester) activated sludge  system produced
better results than the Netherlands (Oisterwijk)  application, including de-
monstration of insensitivity to winter temperatures in  removal of carbonace-
ous oxygen  demand  (BOD5) and nitrogenous oxygen demand  (ammonia) by nitrifi-
cation ."

       The  Oisterwijk application,  according to analytical  data available,
was not very effective in nitrification and  denitrification.  Experience at
Winchester  at times other than the  demonstration periods has shown that de-
nitrification in particular is a sensitive process.   It is  also possible
that the Oisterwijk facility was not being operated with any emphasis upon
nitrification-denitrification at the time the above data was recorded.  More
operating background and understanding is needed to further establish relia-
bility at high levels of nitrification-denitrification.
                                      93

-------
                                  SECTION 9


                          APPLICATION OF THE SYSTEM

                                      TO

                 CHROME-CATTLEHIDE AND VEGETABLB-CATTLEHIDE

                                  TANNERIES
CONSIDERATION AND COMPARISON OF PROCESSES

       Three of the seven categories of tanneries relate to full-scale cattle-
hide processing - including hair removal, tanning, coloring and fatliquoring,
and finishing.  The three categories are cattlehide tanneries that (l) pulp
hair and chrome tan, (2) save hair and chrome tan, and (3) save hair and
vegetable tan.

       Few if any chrome tanneries save hair.  More and more the mode has been
to soak, wash, and hair-burn using strong sodium sulfide liquors.  Most tan-
neries operating this way reclaim sulfide liquors and separate pulped hair
solids from those solutions, directing the solids to land-fill, thus keeping
as much as possible of those materials out of the waste stream.  Similarly
systems have been developed by most chrome tanners to conserve chromium by
precipitation and reuse or by recycling of chrome tan liquors, and most are
conscious of the need for water conservation, not only from the point of view
of initial cost, but in consideration of the effects of wasteful dilution, and
the hydraulic load cost of disposal and sewerage treatment.

       In a different but similar manner most vegetable tanneries employ a
hair save process.  This system uses much less sulfide and produces a valua-
ble by-product in the form of cattle hair.  Not unlike chrome tanners, vege-
table  tarmere have been able to reduce or eliminate some process steps which
formerly required much water.

       The net result of these in-plant activities has been to reduce high
potency waste liquors to levels which are not so different from those encoun-
tered at the shearling tannery.  Because a shearling tannery is not typical,
since it does not process cattlehide and has no beamhouse, transfer of identi-
cal wastewater treatment technology is not possible.  Nevertheless, very real
similarities do exist in the nature of the respective tannery discharges,
which lead to speculation that adaptations should be explored.
                                      94

-------
COMPARISON OF WASTEWATERS
, v,             t0 rather definitely establish the similarity the following
table of typxcal analyses of wastewater from these A, G.  Lawrence tanneries,
all of which are considered to be more or less representative  of complete
tanning operations  in  their respective categories are presented.
                TABLE 15.  TYPICAL TANNERY WASTEWATER ANALYSES
Parameter
BOD-
Suspended solids
Total solids
Calcium-Ca
Fats, oils, greases
pH
Chromiuni-Cr
Ammonia-N
TKN-N
Volume-mgd
Raw hide or pelt Ib/day
Water usage-gal/lb hide
Category 1
Cattlehide
Chrome tan-pulp hair
South Paris, Maine
mg/1
1,630
2,?18
5,620
649
580
10.9
18?
14
126
0.8
130,000
6.1
Category 3
Cattlehide
VegtawsERenair
Hazelwood, N.C.
mg/1
686
1,080
5,314
550
201
9.9
-
73
179
0.3
52,000
5.8
Gate, - .y 7
Shearlings
Chrome tan
Winchester
mg/1
812
1,150
14,000
400*
450
5.1
99
32
75
0.3
41,500
6.9
 *Added at treatment plant
       Examination of this table shows that there is a remarkable similarity
in the nature  of the wastewater from each.  The volumes are  not the same, of
course, but  the  significant differences in pollutant strengths are on the
order, for the most part,  of about 2X.  Total volume is considerably greater
for the side leather tannery since this is a function of capacity.  The
figure of 14,000 mg/1 for total solids in the Winchester column reflects the
very large comparative amount of curing salt in and on a raw pelt or entrapped
in the wool, and the use of long brine floats in paddle pits while processing
shearlings as  opposed to short brine floats in drums for hides.

       It seems  in order then, to take the stance that this  treatment system,
with some modifications, is suitable for any tannery.  One of the require-
ments of this  demonstration project is to prepare a preliminary design and
cost estimate  for a system suitable for a. typical U.S. cattlehide tannery to
meet 1983 BAT  guidelines.   This exercise will include a system for a chrome
                                      95

-------
tan-pulp hair category 1 tannery, and a system for a vegetable tan-save hair
category 3 tannery.  Since A. G. Lawrence Leather Company operates and has
intimate knowledge of fairly typical tanneries processing cattlehides in both
of these categories those tanneries will comprise the basis for the designs.

       Comparison of parameters, as in Table 15» seems to impart validity to
the statement that the only apparent differences between wastewater a treat-
ment facility suitable for a hide tannery, and a shearling tannery, would be;
(l) size, (2) provision for initial sedimentation to remove some of the heavy
beamhouse and tanhouse solids before intermixing the two streams and (3)»
proper built-in precaution, particularly in the case of the chrome-pulp hair
tannery, to consistently maintain the pH in the mixed beamhouse-tanhouse
liquor above 8.5 to prevent evolution of hydrogen sulfide as an obnoxious
and perhaps potentially lethal gas.  These considerations are incorpoxated
in the designs.
                                      96

-------
               PRELIMINARY DESIGN AMD  COST DEVELOPMENT FOR A

                  WA3TEWATSR TREATMENT PLANT FOR A CHROME

                TAN-PULP HAIR  CATEGORY 1  GATTLSHIDE TANNERY

       This exercise is addressed by expanding  the detailed information on
the Winchester treatment plant components as presented in Section 3 of this
report, and cost information for the complete system presented as Appendix B.
Two reports, entitled "Supplemental Report on Combined Wastewater Treatment
Facilities, Paris Utility District, South Paris, Maine" by Whitman and Howard,
Inc. Boston, Mass, and the other, "Activated Sludge Treatment of Chrome Tan-
nery Wastes" by A. C. Lawrence Leather Co.,  South  Paris, Maine, F.W.P.C.A.
Publication ORD-5 are used for background information in developing the
chrome-tan pulp hair preliminary design.   Co'sting  of components is estimated
by comparing flows and parameter loadings at South Paris and Winchester where
applicable, and arriving at a  reasonable  estimation.  No attempt has been
made to provide engineering designs or obtain equipment or construction con-
tractors bids for any item.  Costing of concrete construction has been esti-
mated by examination of costs  presented in the  above documents, and has been
determined to be about $8.00 per cubic foot  of  total tank volume, after up-
dating 1974 and 19?6 prices by compounding at 8$ per year.

       See Figure 42 for schematic  diagram.
                                      97

-------
                                     CONSTANT
                                     HEAD BOX
                                      DISPERSED AIR
                                              COAGULATION
                      ALKALINE FLOW
                    EQUALIZATION TANK
                                                ALUM
                                                            CELL
                                                         BUBBLE
                                                        CLASSIFIER
                BEAMHOUSE FLOW
                    CLARIFIER
      QC
      Ul
      z
                ACID FLOW
             EQUALIZATION TANK
               TANHOUSE


               CLARIFiER*
00
          RIVER

         I        FINAL

                CLARIFIER
Figure L.2.
                        Schematic  Diagram of Proposed  Wastewater Treatment  Plant
                        for a Category  1 Chrome  Tan Pulp Hair  Cattlehide Tannery

-------
Basic Design Parameters  - Chrome Tan, Pulp->Hair wtfTP

               Total flow (mgd)	0.8

               Beamhouse flow  (mgd) ---------___-_  0.575

               Tanhouse  flow (mgd)	0.225

               Pollutant loadings - see Table 15.

               Treatment plant operating day (hrs)  	 20

               Equalized beamhouse flow (gpm) --------  ^79

               Equalized tanhouse flow (gpm)- --------  200

               Total equalized treatment plant operating
                    flow (gpm)	   679

 Design and Cost Estimation of  Components

 Coarse Screening

       This  is not necessarily a part of a treatment system per se.  Coarse
 screening at the point the effluent  stream emanates from  the tannery is es-
 sential whatever the destination may be, for protection of transmission lines
 if nothing else.  Therefore, this item is not being included as such, but
 provision for removal of solids which can be separated by simple sedimenta-
 tion is included in the plans  for the alkaline and acid wastewater holding
 tanks.

 Raw Wastewater Pumps

       These are needed only in the  event that grades are not adequate for
 gravity flow, and are related to transmission rather than treatment.  In
 most cases  the holding tanks can be  located below grade if necessary, and the
 constant flow pumps will provide whatever elevation is needed.

 Holding and Equalizing Tanks

       The  wastewater flow from the  tannery arrives at the treatment plant  in
 two streams, beamhouse flow which is highly alkaline because of its lime and
 sodium sulfide content, and tanhouse flow which  is acidic. Both flows are
 erratic because each is dependent upon batch operation dumps   Also both
 flows may contain suspended solids in sizes ranging from  fiue ^ goss.  In
 view of difficulties encountered with entrained  solids at existing treat-
 lent Santa where their presence was not sufficiently recognized during the
 desLf SaSe  i?is considered essential to include solids removal in  the




                          2 S£"s-h S^S teve  tte ^

 %£.•% sSotiS,,  s*  ^^^jrrsjs'ss
 tion of each to direct  sedimented soj-1^
 entering end,  very  similar  to a standard

                                     99

-------
Beamhouse  flow  holding,  equalizing,  and clarifying tank

        This  tank  is  envisioned  to be of concrete,  rectangular,' and is di-
vided  into two  sections  by  a wall located  two thirds of the total length
of the tank  from  the entering end.   The wall extends from the top of the tank
to,/bhe bottom,  with  a three inch horizontal  opening in the wall across the
full width of the  tank,  two feet from the  bottom of the tank.  This horizon-
tal slot opening  allows  flow to pass from-the first section into the second
section where   the constant flow head box  is located,  whilst minimizing back-
passage of turbulence and discouraging wash-through of solids at times when
the liquid level  may be  low. The aforementioned scraper flights are located
in the first section,  travelling in  the direction  counter to flow across the
bottom, thence  vertically upward to  near the top of the tank, horizontally
in the direction  of  flow across the  top of the tank,  and vertically downward
to the beginning.  In order to  avoid excessive length for the wooden flights
the width  of the  tank should not exceed twenty feet.

    Design parameters

           Detention time (hrs) --------------  10

           Beamhouse flow (mgd) --------------   0.575

           Width  of  tank -  see  above (ft)	max 20
    Sizing and  specifications
           Construction  - concrete
           Volume  - 2$ x 5?5fOOO (gal)  	   239,000
           Constant-gal/ft^	        7.5
           Volume  (ft-3)	32,000

           Width  (ft)	        20
           Length  (ft)	       100
           Depth  (ft)	         16
    Cost estimate
                                               o
           Estimated  unit cost  -  see  above (ft )- - - -       $8.00
           Volume  (ft3)  	 	   32,000

           Construction  cost	$256,000
           Total cost  including sedimentation
               equipment (est)  	  $275,000


Tanhouse flow holding, equalizing, and  clarifying tank

       This tank is also envisioned as  being constructed of concrete,  rec-
tangular,  and of the same total  concept as the beamhouse flow tank,  except
that it is smaller, and  the  second section would not contain a constant flow
head box,  but would be the  location of  the tanhouse wastewater flow pumps.
                                     100

-------
     Design parameters

       Detention time (hrs)		        ^0

       Tanhouse flow (mgd)	        0 225

       Width of tank (ft) - -	max   20

     Sizing and specifications

       Construction - concrete
                10
       Volume - T5F x 225,000 (gal)	   94,000

       Constant - gal/ft3	        y ^

       Volume (ft3) 	  	   12,500

       Width (ft)	        20

       Depth (ft)	-	        16

       Length (ft)	         40

     Cost estimate
                              o
       Estimated unit cost (ft )	         $8.00
                 O
       Volume (ft-*) 	     12,500

       Construction cost ---------------  $100,000

       Total cost including sedimentation
          equipment (est)	$115,000

Constant Flow Equipment

       The concept of constant flow  through the treatment system was incor-
porated into the design of the Winchester, W.W.T.P.  Pumps in the holding tank
elevate wastewater to an overflow weir box of  special design (see Section 3),
from whence it flows to and through  the system at a constant rate.   This mode
of operation simplifies process control since  all of the components of the
primary treatment section operate in unison without adjustment for flow
variations.  The primary section operates  either ail-on or ail-off, depend-
ing upon the availability of effluent  to be treated, thus allowing constant
settings for dosing pumps and the dispersed air microbubble generator, and
eliminating wear and tear when flows are low or non-existent.   The  on-off
control is provided in this situation  through  level sensing switches located
in the beamhouse flow holding tank,  which activate or interrupt the constant
head supply pumps and the tanhouse flow pumps  according to the availability,
in this case, of alkaline tannery effluent.
                                     101

-------
Constant flow head box
    See Section 3
    Design parameter
        Horizontal cross section  (gal/ft^/min) -------        32
    Sizing of vessel
        Total volume of beamhouse flow  (gpd)	575»000
        Design treatment plant operating day (hr)  -----        20
        Flow rate through weir box (gpm) ----------      479
        Gross sectional area needed @ 32 gal/ft2/min -  (ft2)        15
        Diameter (ft)	.	 - -         4.5
        Depth (ft)	.	        9
    Cost estimate
        Fiberglass lay-up	      $750
Constant flow supply pumps - beamhouse  flow holding 'tank
       These are submerged pumps  to be  located near the bottom of the beam-
house flow holding tank at the end opposite from the flow entrance.   They
elevate the beamhouse wastewater  to the constant-flow head box- and  thence into
the treatment system.  Two pumps, each  capable of supplying full flow are in-
cluded here to avoid interruption in case of single pump failure.
    Design parameter
        Flow rate (gpm)	       479
    Sizing and pump specification
        Capacity (gpm)	        600
        Manufacturer - Flyght Corp. Norwalk, Conn.
        Model No. 6- GP - 3126
        Motor HP	        9.4
    Cost estimate
        Pumps - 2    $1,500 each	   $3,000
Tanhouse Wastewater Flow Pumps
       Tanhouse waste will be collected in the tanhouse flow holding  tank and
dispensed therefrom at a constant rate  as long as alkaline waste is available
unless interrupted by the pH sensing device located in the main flow  line
downstream of the constant flow head box, signalling that the  danger  condition
of pK 9.0 is being approached.  It is estimated that the constant flow rate
for this material will be 200 gpm, which would deplete the design supply in
10.75 hours, slightly sooner than the design supply of alkaline beamhouse
waste from the beamhouse flow holding tank.  Actual practice or pilot plant
                                      102

-------
work might disclose that  a higher rate  of acid waste  flow could be tolerated
but it seems important  to have  the two  waste  streams  become exhausted at about
the same time.  Two pumps,  each capable of supplying  full flow are specified
here, as in the beamhouse line,  to avoid interruption in case of single pump
failure.                                                                *  ^
      Design parameter
         Flow rate (gpm)		    200
      Sizing and specification
         Capacity - each  (gpm)	.	    200
         Manufacturer - Flyght  Corp.
                        Norwalk,  Conn.
         Model No  -  4  -  GP - 3105
         Motor HP	     5
               RPM	- -  - -	1,750
      Cost estimate
         Pumps - 2  $1,000 each	$2,000
pH Sensing for Acid Waste Flow  Control
       As noted in the  foregoing this sensor  would function only as a safe-
guard against development of an acid condition in the  mixed wastewater flow.
      Design parameters
         pH range ---------------------   7«5 to 11
         Power interruption level (pH)  ---------
      Specifications
         Manufacturer - Beckman Instrument Go.
                        Cedar Grove, N. J.
         Model No. -  940  pH analyzer
         Special feature  - !<%>  dead band @ pH	   8.0 to  9.0
      Cost estimate
         Instrument		      $1,500
         Remote sensor  connection - 150 ft.	         200
         Total	-	     ^'7°°
Dosing Pump - Alum
       Alum is used to  develop  agglomerated flocculation which not only aids in
entrapping and removing finely divided  suspended solids, but also aids in en-
trapping microbubbles to  enhance  flotation.   The alum  is purchased and used  in
    wt. solids solution,  sp. gr.  1.330.
                                       103

-------
     Design parameter
          1,000 mg/Lto be added to combined beamhouse-tanhouse flow
     Sizing and pump specification
          2qualized beamhouse flow (gpm) -------------    479
          Equalized tanhouse flow (gpm) -------------     200
          Total equalized flow (gpm)	      679
          Weight of flow (ib/gal)	         8.5
          Weight of flow (ib/min)	     5,770
          Weight of alum @ 1,000 mg/l(lb/min)	         5-77
          Weight of stock alum solution needed @ k^% solids (ib)       12.82
          Weight of stock alum solution (ib/gal)	         11.1
          Volume of stock alum solution needed (gpm) -----          1.15
          Pump capacity needed (gpm) -------------       +  1.15
          Manufacturer - Liquiflo Equipment Go.
                         Warren, N. J.
          Series 34  3 gpm  | in.  316 S3
          Motor HP (DC)	         0.75
          Speed - variable.  Max rpm                                1,725
     Cost estimate
          Pump and motor -------------------       $250
Dispersed Air Generator
     See Figure 5«
     Microbubbles are used to provide flotation for the suspended solids re-
moval principle used in this treatment system.  Dispersed air is the least
expensive means for providing the same, see section 8.
     Design paramter
          Ft-' of air/100 gal of flow	          0.5
          Total equalized flow rate (gpm) --------- —        679
     Sizing and specifications.
          Manufacturer - Greey Corp.
                         Toronto, Canada
          Model No. 6 - LEG - 300   316 S3
          Motor HP	           3
     Cost estimate
          Generator with motor, complete ----------       $4,500

                                      104

-------
Coagulation Cell
      See Figure 6 .
        x  ? US6d t0 provide Detention time  to allow microbubbles and suspend-
ed floe to become intimately associated,  thus enhancing flotation.
      Design parameter
        Effective residence time  2 minutes
      Sizing and specifications.
        Total equalized  flow rate (gpm) -----------     6?9
        Cell volume required for  2 min. flow (gal) -----    1,358
        Cell volume required for  2 min. flow (ft^) -----      181
        Diameter of top  section (ft) ------------        7.5
        Depth of top section (ft) --------------       2.5
        Width of bottom  section (ft) ------------        8.0
        Length of bottom section  (ft)  ------------       8.0
        Depth of bottom  section (ft) ----- -- _____        2.0
        Manufacturer - Local sheet metal  fabricator
      Cost estimate
        Same as 19?6 updated <§ %?0 per  year (est) ------  $10,500
Dosing Pump - Polyelectrolyte
       This pump is used to continuously  add about 12 ma/1 of polyelectrolyte
in 0,2?» solution to the  waste stream to aid  flocculation and flotation.
      Design parameter
        12 mg/1 to be added to combined flow.
        Polyelectrolyte  solution  strength -  0.2^
      Sizing and specifications.
        Total equalized  flow rate (gpm) -----------     6?9
        Weight of flow (ib/gal) ---------------       8-^
        Weight of flow (Ib/min) ...............   5,700
        Weight of polyelectrolyte needed @ 12 mg/1 (ib)  ---       0.068
        Solution strength (%} ----- • -----------       °-2
        Weight of solution needed/min  (ib) ----------     3^
        Factor - Ib/gal @ sp. gr. 1.015 -----------       8«5
        Volume of solution needed (gpm) - ----------       *
                                      105

-------
           Pump capacity needed (gpm) -------------     ^
           Manufacturer - Liq.uiflo Equipment Go.
           Series 36  5 gpm  3/4 in.  316SS
           Motor (HP)		 -     0.75DC
                Variable speed, i,?25 rpm max.
       Cost estimate
           Pump and motor (est) ----------------  $300
Bubble Classifier
       See Figure ?
       This unit is an open top, rectangular, steel tank through which the
waste stream is passed, after introduction of microbubbles,  to allow oversize
bubbles to escape before entering the flotation basin.  Large bubbles disrupt
the floating sludge blanket at the entering end of the LectroGlear  tank.
       Design parameter
              »             2
           Surface area (ft /100 gpm)	     3
           Depth (ft/100 gpm)	     1
       Sizing and specifications
           Total equalized/flow rate (gpm) ----------    679
                                     O
           Surface area - 100 x 3 (ft )	      20
           Length (ft)	      5
           Width (f^g-	      4
           Depth -100x1	      7
           Manufacturer - Local sheet metal fabricator
       Cost estimate
           Tank complete (est) ----------------   $750
LectroGlear Solids Flotation Basin
       See Figure 8
       For description see Section 3
       Design parameters
                            o
           Surface area - ft /100 gpm —•	     100
           Vertical cross section perpendicular to direction
              of flow - ft /100 gpm	      15
           Width - maximum (ft) ---------------      20
           Electrode density - number/100 gpm --------      20
                                      106

-------
     Sizing and specifications
        Total equalized flow rate (gpm)
        Area of vertical cross^section
         ® 15 ffyioo gpm (fir) --- - ...........     102
        Depth of vessel,  say (ft) ----------  . ___        5
        Width of vessel (ft) -----------------      j_7
        Surface area @ 100 ft2/100 gpra (ft2) ---------     6?9
        Length of vessel (ft) ----------_______     40
        Manufacturer - Local machinery fabricator
     Cost estimate
        Cost of Winchester LectroGlear (19?6) --------  $31,200
        Update for 19?0 @ 8$ per year ------------  $35,000
        Volume of Winchester unit (ft^) -----------    2,100
                                         o
        Volume of unit sized as above (ft ) ---------    4,080
        Comparative size (x) ----------------         1.9^
        Comparative cost of unit (19?8) -------- . ---  $6?, 900
        Electrodes needed ------------------      136
        Cost of electrodes,  each --------------       $95
        Total cost of electrodes --------------   $12,920
        Total cost of flotation basin, installed (est) ---   $80,820
Current Rectifier
       Direct current is required for microbubble generation by electrolysis
in the LectroClear flotation basin.
    Design parameter
       2,600 amperes at 7 volts, D.C.
    Sizing and specifications
       Manufacturer - Oxymetal Industrial Corp.,  Warren, Mich.
       Model - Udalite No. 4 MDV-5000
       Type SASS e 460V
       Water cooled
    Cost estimate
       Winchester cost (1976) including switches
         and wiring, installed ...............   $10,500
       Estimated total cost  updated to 1978 --------    $12,250
                                      107

-------
Skimmings Pump
       Floated solids in the LectroGlear unit are skimmed off and directed
into a receiving tank, see figure 8, from which they are pumped to sludge
holding tanks.
    Design parameters
       Open impeller trash pump design.
       Capacity 2 times Winchester unit.
    Sizing and specifications
       Manufacturer - Gorman Rupp Go.
       k inch intake, 3" discharge
       Motor 3 HP, 1750 rpm, direct connected
    Cost estimate
       Pump, installed	$1,500
Solids Slurry Pumps
       Solids separated by sedimentation in the two holding tanks have to be
transferred to the sludge holding tank to be compacted along with skimmed
solids from the LectroClear and wasted solids from the carrousel.  These will
be activated by timers.  Three pumps are needed, one at each initial clari-
fier, beamhouse and tanhouse, and a third for a spare.  The advantage of
standardization calls for specifying three alike.
    Design parameters
       Vaughn chopper pumps
       Corrosion resistant construction
    Sizing and specifications
       Total volume of beamhouse flow (mgd) ---------       0.575
       Suspended solids removed by sedimentation (mgA) (est)-     500
       Constant (ib/gal) 	        8.5
       Weight of beamhouse flow (ib/day)	4,887,500
       Weight of suspended solids removed (ib/day)	    2,445
       Weight of solids slurry ® 1% solids (ib/day)	244,500
       Constant (Ib/gal) 	        8.5
       Average pumping rate $ 20 hr. day (gpm) -------       24

       Total volume of tanhouse flow (mgd) ---------        0.225
       Suspended solids removed by sedimentation (est) (mg/L)      400
       Weight of tanhouse flow (Ib/day) ---- 	 - 	 1,912,500

                                     108

-------
         Weight of suspended solids removed  (ib/day) ____      760
         Weight of solids slurry @ 1% solids  (ib/day) ----   ?6,000
         Weight of slurry (ib/gal) -------------        8.5
         Volume of tanhouse flow solids slurry (gpd) ____    8,950
         Average pumping rate @ 20 hr. day (gpm) ------        7.5

         Number of pumps required - 3  Interchangeable
         Manufacturer - Vaughn Co., Inc.
                        Montesano, Wash.
         Model 150.  Motor 5 HP, 1,750 rpm

    Cost estimate
         Pumps, each $3,500 ----------------- $10,500
Sludge Storage Tanks
       These tanks are used to accumulate and store sludge during the entire
wastewater flow period so that the filter press can be operated mostly  during
the normal working day.
    Design parameters
         Storage capacity - 28 hrs.
         Stirrers for uniformity and solids suspension
    Sizing and specifications
         Volume of flow in this W.W.T.P. (mgd) -------        0.8
         Volume of flow in Winchester W.W.T.P. (mgd) ----        0.3
         Factor for flow- increase (x) - - - - — ______       2.7
         Suspended solids analysis, combined wastewater,
            this W.W.T.P. fogA) ---------------   2,718
         Suspended solids analysis, raw wastewater, Winchester
            (mg/l) .......................  i'295
         Factor for suspended solids- increase (x) - _ - - --       2.10
         Volume of sludge generated at Winchester,
            see table 9 (spd) ----------------  18,000
         Estimated sludge volume generated this W.W.T.P.
            18,000 x 2.? x 2.1 (gpd) .............  102,060
         Estimated sludge volume - 28 hrs (gal) -------  120,000
         Number of tanks needed ---------------       **
         Construction - reinforced concrete, rectangular  with  stirrers.
                                     109

-------
        Size of tanks,  each
            Volume (gal)  ---- ......... ----     30,000
            Volume (ft3)  ------ - --------  --      4,000
            Depth (ft)  --------- - --------         JA
            Width (ft)  ------------------         18
            Length (ft) ------------------         18
   Cost estimate
      Estimated cost of rectangular concrete tank
         construction (ft ) ---------------          $8
      Estimated cost of each tank ------------     $32,000
      Estimated cost of four tanks  -----------    $128,000
      Estimated cost of four tanks with stirrers (est)~ -    $150,000
Sludge Compaction
       Compaction in this exercise calls for the use of a filter press,  thus
requiring a special charging pump, and a heat exchanger to improve the rate
of filtration.
Sludge compaction pumps
   Design parameters
       Sand Piper, air actuated, or equivalent
       Maximum delivery pressure (psi) ---------          100
   Sizing and specifications
       Total volume of sludge (gal/day) ---------      102,600
       Sludge compaction  operating day (hr) ------            16
       Sludge pump operating time (hrs) --------            12
       Average rate of sludge flow to filter press (gpm)
       Peak rate of sludge flow to filter press
         (start of batch) (gpm)                                   300
       Pump capacity required (gpm) ----------           300
   Cost estimate
       Manufacturer - Warren Rupp Pump Co.,
                      Mansfield, Ohio
       Model no. - SA3A
       Number required @ 300 gpm ------------            2
       Estimated cost, each --------------        $1,^00
       Total cost -- --- -- ------  ------        $2,800
                                     110

-------
Filter press

       According to information available the plate and frame filter press is
capable of dewatering sludge to a greater degree than any other equipment de-
signed for that purpose.  Maximum dewatering is economically essential.
    Design parameters
      Solids content of press  cake  (%} ------------       35
    Sizing and specifications
      Total volume of sludge,  Winchester (gpd) 	   18,000
      Total volume of sludge,  this  unit  (gpd)	   102,600
      Factor of size increase  (x) --------------         5.7
                                                    2
      Total filter area,  Winchester filter press (ft ) 	      2,^00
      Filter area needed, this unit (ft2) -	      13,680
    Cost  estimate
      Cost of Winchester  filter press, installed 19?6 	     $55,000
      Cost of Winchester  filter press, installed 19?8 - - -     $6^,150
      Estimated cost of unit 5*7  times larger 	    $365,650
 Heat  exchanger
    Design parameters
      Stainless steel  construction  (316)
      Temperature  increase  - 25°G to 65CG
    Sizing and specifications
      Contact area of  Winchester  unit (ft  )	          88
      Peak rate of sludge flow Winchester  unit  (gpm)	          50
      Peak rate of sludge flow this unit (gpm)	         300
      Factor of increase  in contact area needed 	           6
             \       j  ,,                     /^
      Estimated contact area,  this  unit  (ft  )	         528
    Cost  estimate
      Cost of Winchester  unit  19?6	       $4,000
      Cost of Winchester  unit  19?8	       $4'665
      Cost of unit 6 times larger	      $28,000
                                      111

-------
Air Compressor
       Since the sludge compaction pump is air actuated it is important to
have an adequate and reliable air source readily available.  It is possible
that the tannery compressed air would be adequate, but in the absence  of  in-
formation,, compressed air generation is being included.
    Design parameters
       Air pressure required (psi) -----------     max  100
       Air volume required, each pump (cfm)~ ------     max  125
    Sizing and specifications
       Number of compaction pumps specified ------             2
       Air requirement vs. Winchester W.W.T.P. (x)- - -             2
       Manufacturer - Kellog American
                      Oakmont, Pa.
       Model no - A 462-TVI
       Motor HP	            25
       Capacity @ 100 psi (cfm)	            83
    Cost estimate
       Cost of Winchester compressor 19?6 	        $3,000
       Cost of Winchester compressor 19?8 -------         3.500
       Cost of compressor with 2x capacity (est)~ - - -        $5»000
Carrousel Oxidation Ditch
    Design parameters
       The volume of the oxidation ditch and the number and size of aerators
is determined by the amount of oxygen demanding material in the feedwater
entering the ditch,  BOD and TKN each use oxygen.  Both are substantially re-
duced in the primary treatment phase,  BOD by 6Q&, and TKN by 40%.  The re-
sidual material after primary treatment determines the load on the secondary.
       Design MISS (mg/l)	         7,500
       Design F/M ratio - (BOD/MLSS)	             .06
       Fixed design average swd in carrousel (ft)- - - -           13•A
       Fixed design single channel width (ft) -----            13
       Oxygen required to satisfy BOD and TKN in the carrousel
       1.5 x BOD + 4.6 x TKN
       Oxygen rating per aerator 0?/hp/hr --------           3.5
                                     112

-------
Sizing and specifications
   BOD present  in  combined  flow  raw  wastewater (ng/1}	    1,630
   Residual BOD after  60?3 removal in primary  (mg/l)	      652
   TKN present  in  combined  flow  raw  wastewater (rag/I)	      126
   Residual TKN after  4C$ removal in primary  (mg/L)	       76
   Average daily total flow (mgd) 	         0.8
   BOD entering the  secondary (ib/day) 	      4,353
   TKN entering the  secondary (ib/day) 	        507
   Oxygen furnished  per aerator  (02/hp/hr) 	          3.5
Calculation of  volume  of carrousel
         BOD    i 0.06  = MISS (Ib)
         l|353  f  0.06 = 72,550
    72,550 Ib @  7,500 mg/l » 1.15 M Sal
    1.15 KG -  152,520 ft3
Calculation of  surface area of carrousel
             o
.   Volume (ft-*)	152,520
   Average depth (ft)	       13.5
                   p
   Surface area (ft  )	   11,300
Calculation of  total channel length
                   o
   Surface area (ft  )	?•	   11,300
   Design channel  width (ft) 	        13
   Total channel length (ft)	       870
Selection of number  of channels
    870 ft, total channel length  required, indicates using a configura-
   tion of three channel circuits, six single channels, each 135 ft.
   long plus 80 ft of  cross channel  automatically included.  This ar-
   rangement" calls for three aerators.
Calculation of  aerator horsepower required
   Oxygen required - 1.5 x  BOD + 4.6 x TKN
   09 - 1.5 x 4353 •*• 4.6 x  507
    £t
   Q  = 8,862 Ib/day
   HP - 8,862 T (3.5 x 24)  = 105.5
   Three aerators  will be used,  see  channel selection above.
   Each aerator (HP)	        ko
                                 113

-------
    Cost estimate
      Volume of Winchester carrousel (gal) -----------   380,000
                                        o
      Volume of Winchester carrousel (ft )-----------    $0,666
      Volume of this carrousel (ft^) --------------    152,500
      Comparative size of this carrousel to Winchester
         carrousel (x) ---------------------         3«0
      Cost of Winchester carrousel unit 19?6 ----------  $197,700
      Cost of Winchester carrousel unit 1978 (8/S/year) -----  $230,597
      Estimated cost of this carrousel unit (3«^x)  -------  $593,100
      CarrouselTh license fee ($.10/gal) -----  - ------  $11^,985
      Total cost, carrousel unit ----------------  $708,085
Secondary Glarifier
       Although the primary section produces a clear effluent passing into
the secondary* biological activity in the secondary generates a high level
of suspended solids which have to be removed.  They are relatively light in
density and therefore somewhat difficult to separate .
    Design parameters
                                       r\
      Surface area at peak flow (gal/ft /day) ----- - -- -        300
      Peak flow - 2x normal average flow.
    Sizing and specifications
      Total average wastewater flow (gpd) ------------  800,000
      Peak flow (gpd) --------------------- -1,600,000
      Peak flow 4 300 (ft2) -------------------    5,333
      Diameter of 5,333 ft2 circle (ft) -------------       82
      Diameter of final clarlfier (ft) -------------        82
      Depth of final clarifier (swd) (ft) ------------        8
      Manufacturer: Glow Corp.
                    Florence, Ky.
      Models Veof low .  Periferal feed center sludge drawt. center
                       effluent outlet
    Cost estimate
                                              T
      Volume of Winchester final clarifier (ft^) --------    13 » 295
      Volume of this final clarifier
      Comparative size of this clarifier to Winchester
         final clarifier (x) -- - --- ------- - ----         3.2
                                     114

-------
         Cost of Winchester unit 1976	„	$33 500

         Cost of Winchester unit 1978	$37,650

         Estimated cost of this clarifier (3.2x)  - -	$120,000

Sludge Return Pumps

       These pumps return solids separated in the final clarifier to the
oxidation  ditch or to the sludge holding tanks as wasted.
     Design parameter

         Open pattern sludge pumps, standard construction,  Midland Midwhirl
            or equivalent 100$ return flow.
     Sizing and specification

         Total wastewater flow (gpd)	.	    800,000
         Average wastewater flow (gpm)	~ - -	_	        557

         Manufacturer - Midland Pump Go.

         Model Ho. - Midwhirl ^WS  - 4-511
         Capacity (gpm) 	       350

         Motor HP	       30

     Cost  estimate

         Pump and motor - each ----------------     $2,500
         Two required --------------------      $5,000

Chemical Tanks, Piping, Power and  Wiring

       The foregoing items and costs as calculated,  and summarized in table
16, are, in part, for equipment in place,  including excavation where required.
A major portion of the cost of construction of any treatment plant is for
small tanks,  pumps and piping,  power and wiring.   Preliminary estimates for
these items,  in the absence of engineering  drawings,  must be calculated from
existing data.   Appendix B lists costs for  many of the major items in the
Winchester treatment plant, total  cost,  and categorical costs for tanks,
pumps, piping and electrical.  Taken as a group these total $122,500 out of
a total of $611,900,  exclusive  of  housing and laboratory., or 20>S.  This per-
cent of the  total estimated cost of equipment for this exercise, as itemized
in table 16,  amounts to $380,700.   However,  some  items of pumps are included
in table 16,  aggregating to $25,350,  and thus must be deducted from the total.
So doing leaves an estimated balance amount,  to cover chemical tanks, piping,
power and  wiring,  of $355,300

Housing

       The dosing solution tanks,  dosing pumps,  flotation basin and sludge
compaction equipment must be protected from weather if located  in  other  than
a tropical climate.   Considering the size and possible arrangement of equip-
ment it is estimated  that a building about  200 ft x 100 ft would be required.


                                      115

-------
Specification
    All steel, insulated, Butler building or equivalent
    Forced ventilation at roof peaks.
    Approximate size 100 ft x 200 ft.
    Concrete slab floor with drains.
Cost estimate
    Size of Winchester building -
      Length (ft)	     104
      Width (ft)	       40
      Floor area (ft2)	    4,160
    Size of building needed, this exercise
      Length (ft)	.	       200
      Width (ft) - •	•	      100
      Floor area (ft2) 	   20,000
    Cost of Winchester building 19?6 	  $8?,500
    Cost of Winchester building 19?8 (est) - - 	 - 	 $102,000
    Estimated cost of housing, this project ------  $400,000
      This estimate has been reduced from $500,000 in deference
      to size, realizing that there would be some economy in scale.
                                 116

-------
              TABLE 16. SUMMARY OP TREATMENT PLANT COMPONENTS
           AND ESTIMATED COST FOR CATEGORY 1 CHROME TAN-PULP HAIR
                             GATTLBHIDJJ: TANNERY
                Item
    Cost
Beamhouse flow holding, equalizing, and clarifying tank
Tanhouse flow holding^ equalizing, and clarifying tank
Constant flow head box
Constant flow supply  pumps
Tanhouse wastewater flow  pumps
pH sensing for acid waste flow,control
Dosing pump  - alum      ^
Dispersed air generator
Coagulation  cell
Dosing pump  - polyelectrolyte
Bubble classifier
LectroClear  solids  flotation basin
Current  rectifier
Skimmings pump
Solids slurry pumps
Sludge storage  tanks
Sludge compaction pump
Air compressor
Filter press
Heat exchanger
Carrousel oxidation ditch,  complete
Secondary clarifier
Sludge return pumps
Total for above
Chemical tanks,  piping,  power and wiring
Housing
Total
 Contingencies - lQ?i
 Total estimated cost of project
 $275,000
  115,000
      750
    3,000
    2,000
    1,700
      250
    ij-,500
   10,500
      300
      750
   80,820
   12,250
    1,500
   10,500
  150,000
    2,800
    5,000
  365,650
   28,000
  708,085
  120,000
    5.000
$1,903,355
   355,300
  il-00,000
$2,658,700
   265,800
$2,92^,500
                                      117

-------
Estimated Cost of Operation

       Examination and study of table 15 reveals that a cattlehide, chrome,
pulp hair, tannery could be expected to emit effluent in slightly less volume
per pound of raw hide or pelt than a shearling tannery, 6.1 gal/lb hide vs.
7.2.  In terms of BOD and suspended solids, the cattlehide tannery wastewater
contains about double the amount of the shearling tannery in each instance.
Since most of the cost of operation is in removal and deposition of suspended
solids, and in electric power for aeration to support biological activity for
BOD reduction, it follows that the cost of operation of a treatment facility
for a cattlehide, chrome, pulp-hair tannery would be about double that of a
shearling tannery.  Section 8 reveals a cost of $1.7?Per thousand gallons of
wastewater treated.  Assuming some economy of scale the cost of operation for
this model would be expected to be on the order of $3.00 per one thousand
gallons treated.
                                     118

-------
                  PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND COST DEVELOPMENT
                       FOR A WASTEtfATER TREATMENT PLANT
                  FOR  A VEGETABLE TAN-SAVE HAIR CATEGORY  3
                              GATTLEHIDE TANNERY

       Comparison of parameters in Table 15 for the  category 3 tannery - veg
tan, cattlehide,  hair  save - with category ?, shearlings, reveals a high de-
gree of similarity.  BOD, Suspended Solids, and volume of effluent, the most
significant parameters, are all very close to being  the same.  In category 3,
as in category  1, alkaline beamhouse wastes and acid tanhouse wastes are in-
volved.  Therefore the same approach to treatment, particularly as it per-
tains to the primary section, would be used as for the category 1 tannery.
See schematic diagram, Figure 43.  Also the same sources  for background in-
formation are used in  this exercise as used for the  category 1 development
preceding.

Basic Design Parameters - Vegetable Tan,  Save Hair tf.tf.T.P.

     Total flow (mgd)	   0.3
     Beamhouse  flow  (mgd) -------------------   0.215

     Tanhouse flow (mgd)	    0.085
     Polluta-nt  loadings - see Table 15
     Treatment  plant operating day (hr) -----------    20
     Equalized  beamhouse flow (gpm)	  ----------  179

     Equalized  tanhouse flow (gpm) 	     71
     Total equalized treatment plant operating flow  (gpm)	    250

Design and Cost Estimation of Components

Coarse Screening

       Not included.   See comments page  99..

Raw Wastewater  Pumps

       Not included.   See comments page  9°.

Holding and Equalizing Tanks

       See general comments page   99,.   The  sizing of the  two tanks in this
case are calculated  on the  basis  of volume  needed to accomodate 10 hours of
flow from each  source,  alkaline and acid.

                                      119

-------
                            CONSTANT
                            HEAD BOX
                         DISPERSED AIR
                                 COAGULATION
             ALKALINE FLOW
           .EQUALIZATION TANK
                                      ALUM
       BEAMHOUSE FLOW
           CLARIFIER
                                     CELL    BUBBLE
                                           CLASSIFIER
                                                                  SLUDGE
                                                                  HOLDING
                                                                  TANKS
Figure lj.3.
Schematic Diagram of Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant for
a Category 3 Vegetable Tan Save Hair Cattlehide Tannery.

-------
Beamhouse flow holding, equalizing,  and  clarifying tank
       This tank is  of concrete  rectangular.  See general comments page 100.
   Design parameters
       Detention time  (hr)	         ^0
       Beamhouse flow (mgd)		          0.215
   Sizing of tankn
       Volume - 24" x 215,000  (gal)	-     89,600
       Constant - gal/ft	_           7,5
       Volume (ft3)  	      11,944
       Width (ft)	-	          14
       Length (ft)	           65
       Depth (ft)	          13
   Cost estimate
                                     rt
       Estimated cost  - see page (ft ) ---------           $8
       Volume (ft3)  	 	 	        11,944
       Construction  cost  -------------- —        95»552
       Total cost including sludge moving equipment (est)    $110,000

 Tanhouse flow holding, equalizing, and clarifying tank
       This tank is  also  constructed of  concrete, rectangular, and of the
 same total concept as  the beamhouse  flow tank except that it is smaller.  See
 comments page 100 .
    Design parameters
       Tanhouse flow (mgd)	            0.085
       Detention time  (hr)	           10
    Sizing of tank
       Volume - 24 x 85,000 ( gal)	        35»^20
       Constant - gal/ft3	              ?-5
       Volume - (ft3)		         ^'?22
       Width (ft)				            ^
       Depth (ft) -	            13
       Length (ft)			            26
                                     121

-------
    Cost estimate
        Histirnated cost -                   _____-----      $8
        Volume (ft3)		   4,722
        Construction cost  ------------------ $37»77&
        Total cost including sludge moving equipment ----- $50,000
Constant Flow Equipment
    See general comments page 101-.
Constant flow head box
    See section 3
    Design parameter
                                    r~)
        Horizontal cross-section (ft /gal/ruin) --------      32
    Sizing of vessel
        Total, volume of beamhouse flow (gpd)	215,000
        Design treatment plant operating day (hr) ------       20
        Flow rate through weir box (gpm) -----------     179
        Cross sectional?area needed
            @ 32 gal/ft /inin (fir)		--       5.6
        Diameter (ft)	       3
        Depth (ft)	        6
    Cost estimate
        Fiberglass lay-up, standard mandrel ---------     $500
Constant flow supply pumps
    See general comments page 102 .
    Design parameter
        Flow rate (gpm)	 - -      179
    Sizing and pump specification
        Capacity (gpm) -------------------       300
        Manufacturer - Flyght Corp.
        hodel No. 6-CP-3126
        Capacity - 600  gpm  9.4 HP
    Cost estimate
        Pumps - 2  $1,500 each	     $3,000
                                     122

-------
Tanhouse vJastewater Flow Pumps
     See general comments page 102 .
     Design parameter
        Flow rate (gpm) ----
     Sizing and pump specification
        Capacity, each (gpm) ---
        Manufacturer - Flyght Corp.
        Model No. if-CP-3105
        Motor HP-------~-----~~~_______      5
     Cost estimate
        Pumps - 2    $1,000 each ---------------  $2,000
pH Sensing For Acid Waste Flow Control
     See general comments page 103 .
     Design parameters
        pH range --------------------- -7-5 to  11
        Power Interruption level (pH) ------------       9»0
     Specifications
        Manufacturer - Beckman Instrument Go.
                       Cedar Grove, N. J.
        Model No. - 940 pH analyzer
        Special feature - ICP/o dead band SpH -------  8.0 to 9.0
     Cost estimate
        Instrument ---------------------   $1,500
        Remote sensor connection (150 ft)  ---------     200
        Total ........................   $1.
Dosing Pump - Alum
     See general comments page  103.
     Design parameter
        l,000mg/lto be added to combined beamhouse-tanhouse flow
        Alum solution 45^ solids @ sp gr 1.330, 11.1 Ib/gal.
                                     123

-------
    Sizing and pump specification
       Equalized beamhouse flow (gpm) ----------         179
       Equalized tanhouse flow (gpm) --------- —          71
       Total equalized flow (gpm) ------------         250
       Weight of flow (Ib/gal)	            8.5
       I/eight of flow (Ib/mln)	       2,125
       Weight of alum @ l,000mg/l (ib/rain)	            2.12
       Weight of alum solution & k$}o solids (ib/min)	            4-7
       Volume of alum solution @ 11.1 Ib/gal (gpm) - - -            0,42
       Pump capacity required (gpm) ----------            +0.5
       Manufacturer - Liquiflo Equipment Go.
       Series 34 3 gpm 0,5 in 316 S3
       Motor HP	            0.75 DC
       Variable speed - max rpm -------------      1»725
    Cost estimate
       Pump and motor (est)	       $250
Dispersed Air Generator
    See Figure 5
    See general comments page  104.
    Design parameter
       Ft-3 of air/100 gal of flow	           0.5
    Sizing and specifications
       Manufacturer - Lighting Mixer Corp.
       Model No. - 4 - LSC - 200  5 in  316 S3
       Motor HP	.	           2
    Cost estimate
       Generator with motor, complete ----------     $3i500
Coagulation Cell
    See Figure 6
    See general comments page 105.
    Design parameter
       Effective residence time 2 minutes
                                     124

-------
    Sizing and specifications
       Total equalized flow rate (gpm)	      250
       Cell volume required for 2 min flow (gal)	      500
       Cell volume required for 2 min flow (ft-*)	       6?
       Diameter of top section (ft)	        7,5
       Depth of top section (ft)	        2.5
       Diameter of bottom section (ft)	        7.5
       Depth of bottom section (ft)	         1.8
       Manufacturer - Local sheet metal shop
    Cost estimate
       Same as Winchester 1976 updated to 1978	$10,500
Dosing Pump - Polyelectrolyte
    See general comments page 105.
    Design parameter
       12 mg/1 to be added to combined flow
       Polyelectrolyte solution strength - 0.270
    Sizing and specifications
       Total equalized flovr rate (gpm) ----------      250
       Weight of flow (ib/gal)	        8.4
       Weight of flow (ib/min)	    2,100
       Weight of polyelectrolyte needed © 12 mg/1 (ib)	         .024
       Solution strength (%} 	        0.2
       Weight of solution needed @ 12ag/l (lb)	       12
       Weight of solution (ib/gal) 	        8-5
       Volume of solution needed (gpm) 	        1«^
       Pump capacity needed (gpm) 	         1«^
       Manufacturer - Liquiflo Equipment Go.
       Series 36-5 gpm 0-75 in 316 S3
       Motor HP		         0.75DC
         Variable speed 1,725 rpm max
    Cost estimate
       Pump and motor (est)	      $300
                                     125

-------
Lubble Classifier
     See Figure  ?
     See general comments page 106.
     Design parameter
        Surface area = 3 ft /100 gprn flow
        Depth - 1 ft/100 gpm
     Sizing and specifications
        Total equalized flow rate (gpm) -----------      250
        Surface area @ 3 ft2/100 gpra (ft2)	         7.5
        Depth (ft)	         2.5
        Manufacturer - Local sheet metal shop
     Cost estimate
        Same as 19?6 updated @ 6%/yr (est) ----.	      i<500
                     
-------
    Cost estimate
       Winchester cost (19?6), including switches and
        wiring, installed 	   $10 ^00
       Estimated total cost updated to 1978 	   $12 2C0
Skimmings Pump
    See general comments page 108.
    Sizing and specifications
       Same as Winchester
    Cost estimate
       Pump, installed •	    $1,500
Solids Slurry Pumps
    See general comments page 108.
    Design parameters
       Vaughn  chopper pumps
       Corrosion resistant construction
    Sizing and specification
       Total volume of beamhouse flow" (rngd) ---------  .        0.215
       Suspended solids removal by sedimentation (est) (mg/L)-        500
       Constant (ib/gal) 	           3.5
       Weight of beamhouse flow (ib/day) 	  	  1,827,500
       Weight of suspended solids removed (ib/day) -----         91^
       Weight of solids slurry @ 1% solids (ib/day)	     91>/-!-00
       Weight of slurry (ib/gal) --------------           8.5
       Volume of beamhouse flow (gpd) 	     10,750
       Average pumping rate & 20 hr. day (gpm)	           9
       Total volume of tanhouse flow (mgd)	           0.085
       Suspended solids removed by sedimentation (est) (jngA)         ^0°
       Constant (Ib/gal) 	           8-5
       Weight of tanhouse flow (Ib/day) 	    722,500
       Weight of suspended solids removed (Ib/day) 	         289
       Weight of solids slurry S \% solids (Ib/day) 	     28,900
       Weight of slurry (Ib/gal) 	           8-5
       Volume of tanhouse flow solids slurry (gpd) 	       3,iK)0
                                     127

-------
        Average pumping rate '•& 20 hr. day (gpm) ------       3

        Number of pumps required - 3 Interchangeable

        Pump selection - Vaughn Chopper
        Manufacturer - Vaughn Go., Inc.
                       Hontesano, Wash.

        Model 150   Motor 5 HP 1,750 rpm
    Cost estimate
        Pumps, each $3,500 - - - 	  $10,500

Sludge Storage Tanks

       These tanks are used to accumulate and store sludge during the entire
daily wastewater flow period so that the filter press can be operated mostly
during the normal working day.  Table 15 indicates that the total hydraulic
flow, and the incidence of suspended solids is no more in the veg-tan hair
save cattlehide tannery than at Winchester, therefore, the same tank design
and capacity can be used.  See section 3«
    Cost estimate
        Two 12,000 gallon steel tanks
          $3,500 each 	  $7,000

Sludge Compaction

    See general comments page  110.

       Since the wastewater in this exercise is expected to generate the same
amount of sludge as the Winchester tannery effluent, the same equipment items
and the same size of each can be used.

Sludge compaction pump

    Specification
        Manufacturer - Warren Rupp Pump Co.
                       Mansfield, Ohio
        Model No. - SA3A

    Cost estimate
       . Number needed --- — _______________      j_

        Estimated cost installed --_---------__ 
-------
       The press now in service at Winchester should be adequate for this
use.                                                       u
   Specifications
         Manufacturer - D. R. Sperry Go.
                        East Aurora, 111.
         Model No. 48 EHG_.
         75 rectangular, pyramid face pattern, 48 in by 48 in plates.
         Center feed, corner vent.
   Cost estimate
         Cost of Winchester press 1976 	     $55,000
         Cost of Winchester press 1978	     $64,150
Heat exchanger
       The unit now used for this purpose at Winchester should be adequate.
See section 3«
   Specifications
         Manufacturer Eimco, Inc.
         Length (ft)	          14
         Diameter  (in) ----- — ____________           8
         Two pass.
   Cost estimate
         Cost of Winchester heat exchanger 1976	     $4,000
         Cost of same 1978	     $4,665
Air Compressor
   See general comments page 112.
       The same size compressor as that in use at Winchester will suffice.
   Design parameters
         Air pressure required (psi) 	 max     100
         Air volume required (cfm)	roax     125
   Sizing and specifications
         Number of compaction pumps 	 	         1
         Air requirement vs. Winchester 	      same
                                     129

-------
       Manufacturer - Kellog American
                      Oakinont, Pa.
       I-;odei Ko. A-462-TVI
       I-iOtor HP	        25
       Capacity 3 100 psi (efm)	         8.3
  Cost estimate
       Cost of Winchester compressor 19?6 ---------    $3,000
       Cost of Winchester compressor 19?8 ---------    $3,500
Carrousel Oxidation Ditch
       Due to similarity of wastewater characteristics a ditch of the same
size and detailed specifications should be adequate for this use.  See sec-
tion 3«
  Cost estimate
       Cost of Winchester unit 19?6, exclusive of pumps, piping,           '
        valves, and electrical 	 - $251,200   /
       Cost of same, 1978'	$293,000
Secondary Clarifier
  See general comments page  114.
       As is true with other components of this treatment plant the Win-
chester size arid specifications will provide an adequate secondary clarifier.
See section 3«
  Cost estimate
       Cost of Winchester secondary clarifier 19?6 - 	 -    $33,500
       Cost of Winchester secondary clarifier 19?8 - 	    $39,000
Sludge Return Pump
  See general comments page  115•
  Same size as used at Winchester.
  Specification
       Manufacturer - Midland Pump Co.
       Model No. - Midwhirl 4W3-4511
       Capacity (gpm) 	         350
       Motor Hi'	          30
  Cost estimate
       Pump and motor --------------____      $2,500

                                     130

-------
Housing
   See general comments page  il6.
       The same steel Butler  building will provide  the protection needed for
this application.  See section  3«
   Specification
       Manufacturer - Butler  Buildings,  Inc.
       Dimensions  - 40 ft wide  x 104 ft  long.
       Concrete floor with drains.
   Cost estimate
       Cost  of Winchester Butler building 1976 	 - 	    $8?,500
       Cost  of Winchester Butler building 1978 --------   $102,000
Chemical Tanks, Piping, Power and Wiring
       See explanation page 115.   Refer  to table  17 instead of table 16 for
itemization  of equipment  and.  totalisation of cost.
   Cost estimate
       Total cost  of itemized equipment, this exercise - - - -   $667,745
       20?o of total cost	»-    133i549
       Itemized  cost of pumps,  table 17-	•	      24,050
       Estimated  cost  of  chemical tanks, piping,  power
         and wiring ---		 - -	     109,500
                                      131

-------
                     TABLE 1?.  SUMMARY OF TREATMENT PLANT
                         COMPONENTS  AND ESTIMATED COST
                         FOR  CATEGORY  3 VEGETABLE TAN
                        SAVE: HAIR CATTLEHIDE TANNERY
                 Item
Cost
Beainhouse flow holding, equalizing,  and  clarifying tank-  -  - -   $110,000
Tanhouse flow holding, equalizing, and clarifying  tank -  -  - -     50,000
Constant flow head, box --------------------        500
Constant flow supply pumps ------------------      3»000
Tanhouse wastewater flow pumps ----------------      2,000
pH sensing for acid waste flow control ------------      1,700
Dosing pump - alum ----------------------        250
Dispersed air generator -------------------      3»500
Coagulation cell -----------------------     10,500
Dosing pump - polyelectrolyte ----------------        300
Bubble classifier 	        500
LectroClear solids flotation basin --------------     43,430
Current rectifier ----------------------     12,250
Skimmings pump ------------------------      1,500
S'olids slurry pumps ---------------------     10,500
Sludge storage tanks ---------------------      7,000
Sludge compaction pump --------------------      4,000
Filter press -------------------------     64,150
Heat exchanger ------- — -  ----___--_____      4,665
Air compressor ------------------------      3,500
Carrousel oxidation ditch ---------_-________   293,000
Secondary clarifier -----------------_____    39,000
Sludge return pump ---------------------	2,3.00
Total for above	$667,745
Chemical tanks, pumps, power and wiring -------____    109,500
Housing	    102,000
Total	    879,245
Contingencies - 10%	     87,925
Total estimated cost of project ---------______   $967,170
                                   132

-------
Estimated Cost of Operation

        Reference to table 15 reveals that there are no substantial differ-
ences in pollution load or volume, per pound of raw hide or pelt, between a
cattlehide,  veg tan, hair save, category 3 tannery and a category ? shearling
tannery.  Therefore the operating costs presented in terms of a number of
parameters in section 8 are applicable to this model.

General Statement

        It must be recognized that the attempted technology transfer from a
 category 7 tannery to one of category 1 and one of category 3, as described
 in some detail in this section  is not based upon actual experience.  Obviously
 there has been no opportunity to apply the principles used in the Winchester
'•treatment system on any other tannery wastewater.  The concept suggested for
 receiving and combining two waste streams, alkaline and acid, only seems to
 have credibility based upon observations at the South Paris facility.  As for
 biological activity in the oxidation ditch with respect to carbonaceous as
 well as nitrogenous bacteria strains it can only be speculated that similar
 results would be forthcoming if similar conditions would be established.

         The factor of scale has  not been taken into account in the calcula-
 tions for construction of most  of the high cost items, particularly in the
 chrome  cattlehide  model, hence more engineering refinement could reveal
 lower costs there.
                                      133

-------
                                 SECTION 10

                        REUSE OF TREATED WASTEWATER

       A definite potential would seem to exist for wastewater reuse at the
Winchester tannery.  River water, the primary source of plant process water,
has substantial deficiencies.  During the winter, the water temperature is
well below the acceptable level for use, and during the summer, it can be too
warm.  At times of flooding contamination is considerable, and, indeed at all
times it is far from pure.  Thus the treated effluent water is consistently
more uniform in some important aspects than the source from which it is drawn,
and seemingly it could be used to advantage at almost any point in the process.

       Recycled water does have some real limitations, however.  The purpose
of wash water is' to carry off contaminants and other unwanted components, and
some of these, particularly sodium chloride (salt),are non-compatible pollu-
tants.  These pass through the treatment plant and are present to almost the
same degree after treatment as before.  Consequently, in order to avoid com-
pounding the existence of these materials in the process water, consideration
of recirculation has to be performed in the light of this restraint.

       Positive action should be taken to recover some of the energy used to
heat process water.  Wastewater taken after passing through the primary sec-
tion of the treatment plant could be expected to be 40°F warmer in winter and
10°F warmer in summer than river water, a year-round average of 25°F.  This
represents heat that would normally be wasted but that perhaps could be re-
covered simply by recycling.  On the other hand contaminants in the form of
BOD, ammonia, TKN, and traces of residual dyestuffs still exist in this water.

       During the secondary treatment step the continuous churning of me-
chanical aeration lowers the water temperature through evaporative cooling,
and during the cold season direct heat transfer to the atmosphere occurs.
Accordingly it might seem more reasonable to consider reusing water which has
passed through the primary section only when concerned with heat recovery.
However, the unique design of the carrousel with respect to resistance to at-
mospheric interference accomplishes heat retention to a large degree even in
winter, so that the temperature differential between effluent water from the
secondary clarifier, and river water becomes 30°F in winter and 5°F in summer,
or an average of 1?.5°F.  While this is not as attractive as the primary ef-
fluent  average differential of 25°F it is certainly appreciable and tips the
scales in favor of using totally treated effluent in the reuse concept versus
the somewhat warmer but less pure primary treated effluent flow.

       The primary individual uses for water in a shearling tannery include
initial pelt washing, soaking, make-up water for saturated brine, hose-down


                                      134

-------
for clean-up, make-up water for pickle liquors and certain  tan  liquors, and
wash and make-up water used during dyeing and fat-liquoring procedures.  Note
that all of these uses, with the exception of hose-down for clean-up, have the
capacity for adversely affecting the quality of the product.  Therefore any
potential dangers not identified by rationalization must be determined through
extensive trial before reuse is instituted.  Each usage as  above will be con-
sidered individually as to material and energy savings. Obviously the material
savings will be limited to salt since the water to be  used  is the product of a
purification process designed to remove other components which  conceivably
otherwise might be  present in recoverable amounts.


RECOVERY AND USE FOR PELT WASHING

       A large portion of the water used in this tannery is used for washing
pelts.  As received they  contain much salt and animal  soil. The water used is
river water warmed  as necessary, depending upon the time of year, to about
85°F, thus consuming energy.  No salt is used at this  point.  In fact, a large
part of this exercise is  salt removal.  Thus it becomes necessary to consider
the impact of adding salt to the wastewater discharge  system at this point
from two directions rather than one if wastewater is reused, that in and on
the skins, as usual, and  that in the recycled wastewater if recycling should
be practiced.  The  following facts help to examine this situation:

          Pelts processed per day -------------  3,600
          Salt in and on  pelts as received (lb/pelt)-  - - -    1.5
          Salt entering the system on pelts (ib/day)	  5,^00
          Water used for  pelt washing (gal/day)	150,000
          Weight  of water @ sp. gr. 1.000 (ib/gal)	  8.3^5
          Specific  gravity of effluent  	  1.005
          Weight  of effluent @ sp. gr. 1.005 (ib/gal)	  8.38?
          Weight  of 150,000 gal of recycled effluent (ib)  1,258,050

          Salt content  of effluent (%)	    I-2
          Salt entering the system in recycled
           effluent (ib/day) -- 	  15,097

       These figures  clearly show that on the order of three times as much
salt would return to  the  pelt washing operation as it is desired to remove,
thus interfering  greatly  with the efficiency of this process step.  Even  if
effective washing couM be achieved by using effluent for the first batch
washes, and fresh water for the last batch washes, recycling of even half as
much salt would lead  rapidly to saturation of the wastewater system with sodium
chloride.
                                       135

-------
Energy Saving
       As stated above, initial pelt washing does consume a considerable
amount of energy in the use of wash water at 100°F.  However, as discussed  in
the foregoing paragraph, the concept of recycling water containing salt to  a
process step that is primarily concerned with salt removal, prevents serious
consideration of any other aspect of reuse, including energy saving.
RECOVERY AND USE FOR BRINE PREPARATION
       Recycling of effluent for use in brine preparation could result in
measurable savings.  The lixator system for brine preparation, as practiced
at Winchester, in itself is a purification process since make-up water is
passed through a large bed of rock salt as a means to achieve saturation.
This mode of reuse of treated wastewater seems to hold the greatest promise
of success among those envisioned.
Material Saving
       The following facts apply:
          Salt used in brine preparation (ib/day) ------ 30,000
          Salt content of saturated brine (lb/gal)- -----   2.65
          Volume of brine used (gal/day)	11,400

       Since 11,400 gal of saturated brine is consumed each day, on the aver-
age, this is the limit of recycle volume for effluent to be used for this
purpose.
          Weight of effluent @ sp. gr. 1.005 (lb/gal) .	8.38?
          Weight of 11,400 gal effluent (ib)	95,608
          Salt content of effluent (%)	    1.2
          Salt content of 11,400 gal effluent (ib)	1,14?
          Cost of rock salt as received (ib) -  ------- $.018
          Value of salt recovered / day ---------- -$20.65
          Value of salt recovered / year (250 days)	$5,160
Energy Saving
          Volume of wastewater possibly recycled for brine
                preparation (gal/day)	11,400
          See calculation for energy saving page 138  - - - -
          Yearly saving,  heat recovery in brine preparation -  $990
                                      136

-------
RECOVERY AND REUSE FOR HOSEDOWNS AND CLEAN-UP

       No material or energy savings are envisioned for this reuse per se.
Temperature or salt content are not important.  Pumping costs would be no less
than for fresh water.  On the other hand, considering the wastewater volume as
an entity, it is  cooled,  particularly in winter, through the addition of  cold
river water to it as a result of using such water for hose-downs  and clean-up.
Therefore, reuse  of wastewater for this purpose could result in indirect
energy conservation.

Energy Saving

       Calculations are made as followsi

           Volume of water used for hose-down and
                clean-up (gal/day) 	  15,000

           See calculation for energy saving page 138   - - -

           Yearly saving, this use 	  $1,300


RECOVERY AND REUSE FOR PICKLE LIQUOR MAKE-UP

       Material and energy savings are possible in this category.   Reused ef-
fluent would carry salt and heat energy into the pickle liquors which would
not have to be provided otherwise.  Effluent contains l.Zfc salt,  and is 1?.5°F
warmer, on the average, than fresh water.  As stated before, untried quality
considerations are paramount, and this use could only occur after extensive
trial and experience.

Material Savings

       The volume of water needed for pickle liquor make-up determines the
degree of economy in effluent recovery for this purpose.  The salt would
automatically reduce the amount of saturated brine needed to reach the pro-
cess specification, for salometer.  The following facts apply:

           Volume of new pickle liquor (gal/day) 	 12,000

           Salt content of effluent (%}	    1.2
           Weight of effluent (ib/gal) 	  8.38?
           Salt content of 12,000 gal effluent (ib)	1,208

           Cost of rock salt as received (ib)	—  $-018

           Value  of salt recovered / day	$21.7^

           Value  of salt recovered / year	$5,^35
                                       137

-------
Energy Saving
          Volume of wastewater recycled for pickle liquor,
                make-up (gal/day) 	  12,000
          See calculation for energy saving below.
          Yearly saving, this use --------------  $1,042

RECOVERY AND REUSE FOR TAN LIQUOR MAKE-UP
       This reuse is much the same as for pickle liquor make-up.  A common
distribution system would serve both uses.  Again, the salt would automatic-
ally reduce the amount of saturated brine needed to reach the required total
salometer level.
Material Savings
          Volume of new tan liquor (gal/day) --------   20,000
          Salt content of effluent (%}	      1.2
          Weight of effluent (ib/gal)	    8.38?
          Salt content of 20,000 gal effluent (ib)	    2,013
          Cost of rock salt as received (ib)	    $.018
          Value of salt recovered / day	   $36.23
          Value of salt recovered / year ----------   $9,058
Energy Saving
          Volume of wastewater recycled for chrome
                liquor make-up (gal/day) ----------   20,000
          See calculation for energy saving below.
          Yearly saving, this use	    $1,738

RECOVERY AND REUSE - TOTALIZED ENERGY SAVINGS
          Potential volume for saturated brine preparation
                (gal/day) 	    11,400
          Potential volume for hose-down and clean-up 	    15,000
          Potential volume for pickle liquor clean-up
                (gal/day) 	    12,000
          Potential volume for tan liquor make-up (gal/day)    20,000
          Total potential volume effluent reuse (gal/day) -    58,400
          Weight of effluent (ib/gal) 	     8.38?
                                      138

-------
Weight of recycled volume (ib/day)	489,800
Average temperature in excess of river water (°P) -    i?«5
BTU recoverable /day	S,5?l,51^
Fuel value  of fuel oil (BTU/gal)	   1^,000
Equivalent gallons  of  oil recoverable / day	        58
Cost of oil/gal	     $0.35
Value  of  recovered heat  / day 	    $20.30
Value  of  recovered  heat  / year	    $5*075
                               139

-------
       TABLE 18. RECAP OF SAVINGS POSSIBLE THROUGH RECOVERY  AND  REUSE


                                             Material         Energy
               Use                           $ / year         $/year

       Brine preparation                      5,160            990

       Hose-down and clean-up                   -             1,300

       Pickle liquor make-up                  5,^35           1,042

       Tan liquor make-up                     9,058           1,738
                              Total          19,653           5,070
                              Grand Total          $24,723


       The combined saving is substantial.  It is probably not factual to ex-
pect that all of the heat energy would be recovered, but since this represents
by far the lesser portion of the total savings, the heat loss during transmis-
sion would not seriously impact the total.

       In order to determine the viability of a proposed recycle system from
the point of view of cost of operation and cost of construction versus savings
to be realized, it is first necessary to make a preliminary design of an ef-
fluent return system.

       Figure W is a schematic drawing of the tannery, the treatment plant,
and a proposed effluent return system, more or less to scale.


ESTIMATED COSTS FOR EFFLUENT REUSE

Consideration of Operating Costs

       Figure *& schematically shows fresh river water entering the tannery
for process use.  The water is used almost entirely on the first, or ground
floor, and is distributed in part to the same areas and use points as con-
sidered for reuse of treated wastewater.  This water is pumped from the level
of the river to the point of use through a vertical rise of about twenty feet.
Purified effluent water would be pumped from a point about ten feet above the
level of the river to exactly the same level of use.  Thus the static head
against which each of the pumps would be working is virtually the same in each
case.  The only other difference between the two would be several hundred feet
of additional pumping distance for the returned effluent, incurring some addi-
tional dynamic head due to pipe friction.  Again this is insignificant, assum-
ing proper design and pipe sizing. It is also the case that the two differences
are counterbalancing.
                                      140

-------
                    I 100 f T. 1
                                       LIXATOR
           TREATED EFFLUENT ftETUftN LINE
                 
-------
       The conclusion becomes, therefore, that pumping costs will be the same
whether fresh water or treated wastewater is used where applicable.

Consideration of Construction Costs

       Figure 44 shows that a return system for treated effluent would consist
of a pump withdrawing treated water from the outfall from the final clarifier,
and discharging into an underground (below frost level) return line to the
tannery buildings, and thence to the points of use.  All piping and valves
would be PVG.  The main would be of fairly large size all the way, with re-
duction fittings and smaller size pipe, valves, fittings, etc. at each point
of use.  Following are design parameters and cost estimates:

    Pumps

     Estimated volume to be reused (gal/day) ----------  58>400

     Time frame for reuse - minimum (min/day)  ---------     480

     Average volume to be reused (gal/min) -----------     122

     Estimated peak volume (gal/min) --------------     150

     Pump specifications
           Capacity (gal/min) -----------------      150

           5" suction, 4" discharge standard centrifugal,
           iron body, motor direct connected (HP) -------       30

     Estimated cost of pump and motor, inplace ---------  $3,000

     Power supply, wiring and switches (est) ----------   1,000

     Labor (est) ------------------------     500

     Total for pump	   $4,500


    Weather protection (pump house)

     Construction - Prefabricated insulated aluminum
                    Concrete floor-
     Size - 8 ft by 8 ft or standard.

     Estimated cost inplace ------------------    $750

    Pipe main to tannery building

     Pump suction line

     50 ft. 5 in PVC - $315/C ft.	-	    $158

     Foot valve and fittings -----------------       75

                                      142

-------
Underground to tannery.


 750 ft It in PVG - $235/C ft		|lf?62

 Trench and backfill		   1500

 Pipe fittings (est) ----- 	     2QO

 Labor (est) -- —.		,	     ^Q


 Total	.	.	$4,445


Piping inside tannery buildings

 Distribution main


 700 ft 4 in PVG - $245/C ft	$1,715

 Pipe fittings (est)	     500

 Labor (est)	.	   1,500

 Total	- - _ .	   $3,715


Valving assemblies at each pair of paddle pits.

 One 4 in to 2 in reducing tee ---------------  $10.40

 One 2 in to 1 in reducing tee ---------------    7.60

 Two 1 in valves PVG - $13.00 each	   26.00

 Two 1 in 45° tees - $1.46 each	     2.92


 Four ft 2 in pipe - $90.75/0 ft	      3.63

 Two ft 1 in pipe - $42.00/G ft	      .84

 Total material for each pit piping assembly	   51.44

 Labor for each pit piping assembly (est)	    25.00

 Total cost of each pit piping assembly	    76.44


 Average number of pits in use
     Pickle Pits	        J°
     Tan Pits	         °2
     Total Pits to be equipped	 -	      102

 Number of assemblies needed 	        51

 Total cost of use assemblies	   $3.900

                                 143

-------
         TABLE 19.  RECAP OF ESTIMATED EFFLUENT REUSE CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Item
Pump
Pump house
Outside Main
Inside Main
Point of use assemblies

Material
$4,500
600
3,695
2,215
2.625
$13,635
Labor
$500
150
750
1,500
1,275
$4,175
          Total                                       $17,810

        It is not realistic to estimate  any project cost on labor and material
 alone.   Overhead is always involved.  It is customary to add on the order of
      of the direct labor cost for this  item,  or,  in this case,  $6,262.00.
        Grand total estimated  cost  of distribution system  for reclaimed ef-
 fluent wastewater.

         Material  and equipment --------------  $13,635
         Labor --------------  -_-___--    i
         Overhead --------------------     6.262

                     Total ................  $24,072

       This estimated total of $24,072 for cost of equipment in place compares
very favorably with the estimated annual saving of $24,734, especially in view
of anticipated equality in operating costs.  It must be emphasized again, how-
ever, that some of the reuses envisioned could seriously impair quality and a
careful program of evaluation of each potential use would most certainly have
to be undertaken before adoption.

USE OF FILTER PRESS CAKE AS FUEL

       The 35^ solids filter press  cake that results from compaction of
solids removed from the waste stream is ordinarily land-filled.   This material
has a fuel value, on a dry basis, of about 6,000 BTU/lb, compared to coal  at
13,000 BTU/lb.  The relatively low  fuel value and high moisture content
(65^) make the filter cake uninteresting as a fuel.  A further consideration
is the presence of trivalent chromium which poses the  threat of formation  of
hexavalent chromium by oxidation during combustion.  Production of such a
highly toxic compound would make any burning of the filter  cake a hazardous
undertaking.

       It is the conclusion, therefore, that the filter press cake is not  a
viable source of energy.

                                     144

-------
                                  REFERENCES

1.  Ramirez,  E. R.  and Clemens,  0.  A.,  "Recovering Marketable Values from
    Beef Packinghouse Wastewaters," WWSMA Pollution  Conference, Houston,
    March  1976.

2.  Ramirez,  E. R., "Electrocoagulation Clarifies  Food Wastewater," Ohio
    Water  Pollution Control Conference, 48th Annual  Meeting, Toledo, June
3.  Ramirez,  E.  R.,  "Electrocoagulation Clarifies Food Wastewater," Deeds &
    Data,  WPCF,  April 1975.

4.  Ramirez,  E.  R.  and Clemens,  0.  A.,  "Electrocoagulation Techniques for
    Primary Treatment of Several Different  Industrial Types of Wastewater,"
    49th Conference  of WPCF,  Minneapolis, October 1976.

5.  Ramirez,  E.  R.,  Barber,  L. K.,  and  Clemens, 0, A., "Primary Physiochemi-
    cal  Treatment of Tannery Wastewater Using Electrocoagulation," 32nd
    Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, West Lafayette, May 1977•

6.  Ramirez,  E.  R.,  and Barber,  L.  K.,  "Clarification of Tannery Wastewater
    by Electroflotation," Tannery Pollution Control Seminar, New England
    Tanners Club, November 1977-
  ;\
7.  Stensel,  H.  D.,  and Wright,  J.  D.,  "Cost Effective and Energy Efficient
    Wastewater Treatment," 33rd Industrial Wastewater Conference, May 1978.

8.  Passveer, I. A., "Simplified Method of  Sewage Purification," Report
    No.  26, Research Institute for  Public Health Engineering, T.N.O.,
    Netherlands.

9.  Zemaitis, W. L., and Jenkins, C.  R., "Biological Activity in the Oxida-
    tion Ditch Method of Waste Water  Treatment," American Institute of Chemi-
    cal  Engineers,  1971•

10.  Stensel,  H.  D.,  Refling,  D.  R., and Scott, H. S., "Carrousel Activated
    Sludge for Biological Nitrogen  Removal," Book, "Biological Nutrient Re-
    moval." Ann  Arbor Science, October  1978.

11.  Sawyer, C. H., Wild, H.  E. Jr., and McMahon, T. C., "Nitrification and
    Denitrification  Facilities," E.P.A. Technology Transfer Seminar Publica-
    tion,  August 1973-
                                      145

-------
12.  Ford, D. L.,  and Elton,  R.  L,  "Removal of Oil and Grease from Industrial
     t/astewaters," Chemical Engineering Deskbook Issue,  October 197?•

13.  Leather Tanning and Finishing  Development Document, Draft, Revised,
     U.S.E.P.A.  October 19?8.
                                     146

-------
                                 BIBLIOGRAPHY


1.    "Aeration  in Wastewater Treatment",  Water Pollution  Control Federation.
      Washington:  1971.                       ~~~"~"~	~"~—

2.    "BASF Applies the  Big Treatment",  Chemical Week. April 2, 1975.

3.    Burchinal, J. C.,  Jenkins,  C.  R.,  "Ditches Provide Efficient Treatment",
      Environmental Science and Technology.  3:11:11?0; 1969.

4.    Horskotte, G. A.,  Niles,  D. G.,  Parker,  D. S., Caldwell, D. H., and
      Horstokotee,  D.  G.,  "Full-Scale  Testing of a Water Reclamation System",
      Journal  of Water Pollution  Control Federation. 1*6 p. 181; 1974.

5.    Jacobs,  A.,  "Loop  Aeration  Tank  Design Offers Practical Advantages",
      Water and  Sewage Works, October  and  Novembers 1975.

6.    Koot,  A. C.  J.,  and  Zeper,  J., "CARROUSEL, A New Type of Aeration-System
      With Low Organic Load, Water Research, Pergamon Press Vol. 6; 1972.

7.    Maier, P., "A Dutch  Approach Toward  Sewage Treatment and Automation of
      Sewage-Treatment Plants", Progress in  Water Technology, Vol. 6; 1974.

8.    Matsche, N.  F.,  and  Spatzierer,  G.,  "Austrian Plant Knocks Out Nitrogen",
      Water and  Wastes Engineering,  January; 1975•

9-    Metcalf  and  Eddy,  Inc., "Wastewater  Engineering", McGraw-Hill; 1972.

10.    Monn,  E. P.,  "Design and Maintenance of Extended Aeration Sewage Treat-
      ment Plants", Public Works, January; 19&9-

11.    Murphy,  R. S. and  Ranganathan, K.  R.,  "Bio-Processes of the Oxidation
      Ditch When Subjected to a Sub-Arctic Climate", Report No. IWR-27,
      Institute  of Water Resources,  University of Alaska, May; 1972.

12.    "Operation and Maintenance  of  Wastewater Treatment Facilities", United
      States Environmental Protection  Agency.  Washington, August; 1974.

13.   Parker,  H. W., "Oxidation Ditch  Sewage Treatment Process", Volume 6,
      Water Supply and Waste Disposal  Series,  U. S. Department of Transporta-
      tion,  April;  1972.

14.   Pasveer, I.  A.,  "Simplified Method of  Sewage Purification", Report No.
      26, Research Institute for  Public  Health Engineering. T. N. 0., Nether-
      lands.

                                      147

-------
15.   Pas veer, I. A., "A Case of Filamentous Activated Sludge", Journal
      of Water Pollution Control Federation, 51, p. 1340; 1969.

16.   Procedure Manual for Evaluating the Performance of Wastewater Treatment
      Plants, Environmental Protection Agency;
17.   Sweeris, S. and Trietsch, R., "Determination of the Oxygenation Capacity
      in CARROUSEL Plants", H20, February and March;  197^.

18.   Zemaitis, W. L., and Jenkins, C. R., "Biological Activity in the Oxida-
      tion-Ditch Method of Waste Water Treatment", American Institute of
      Chemical Engineers; 1971.

19.   Zeper, J. and DeMan, A., "New Developments in the Design of Activated
      Sludge Tanks With Low B.O.D. Loadings", I.A.W.P.R.. San Francisco,
      July; 1970.
                                      148

-------
                                APPENDIX A

    LETTERS FROM J. L.  WITHEROW TO J. A. REID  CONCERNING ANALYSIS OF
            STANDARD SAMPLES FOR ANALYTICAL QUALITY  CONTROL
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                   Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory - Cincinnati
        ,                     Food and Wood Products Branch
        i
     w^                          Corvallis Field Station
^    &


-------
s
\
            UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
.to I/,,,
'                 Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory — Cincinnati
                           Food and Wood Products Branch
                               Corvallis Field Station
                               200 S.W. 35th Street
                              Corvallis, Oregon 97330

                                    July 13, 1977

  Mr.  John A.  Reid
  A.  C.  Lawrence Leather Co., Inc.
  1  Bridge Street
  Winchester,  NH  03470

  Dear John:

       Your analytic results for NH3-NS N03-N, PO--P,  KjN,  and T-P
  arrived July 11, 1977.   The standard values of the lower  concentrations
  were 2.6, 1.2, 0.13, 2.1 and 0.85 mg/1,  respectively.   The  standard
  values for the higher concentrations were 8.8, 6.7,  2.4,  38. and
  4.28 mg/1, respectively.  Seven of your  results were "on  the money."
  As  you can see the PO,-P were half the standard values  and  the
  lower KjN value was srightly more than 2 times the standard value.
  This suggests that'dilution of the samples for these analyses may
  have been in error.

       Since we have been concerned over NH3-N measurement  techniques
  I  checked and found one standard deviation for concentrations 3 and
  4 was 0.4 mg/1 and 1.3 mg/1, respectively.  This standard deviation
  was developed from an analyses by a number of  laboratories  in a
  "round robin" testing program.  This is  about  a 15%  variation from
  the mean.  Your data indicates accuracy  and no difference between
  the two methods of analyses.

       Standard deviations for concentration 3 and 4 on PO,-P were
  0.04 and 0.4 mg/1, respectively.  The standard deviation  for con-
  centration 5 for K.N is 0.5 mg/1.  Because of  the large standard
  deviation in the P64-P analyses we  would not  reject your two
  values.   The K.N value of 5.04 mg/1 would be rejected.
                J
       Thank you for running these standards.  If you  find  dilution
  was the problem I  would appreciate knowing.  Toward  the middle  of
  the project  or upon your request I will  forward two  additional
 'sets of standard samples to aid in your  quality control efforts.

                                    Very truly yours,
                                    Jack L. Witherow
                                    Food Products  Staff
  cc:   Mr.  Barber

                                 150

-------
                                  APPENDIX B
       INITIAL COST OF WINCHESTER TANNERY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
PRIMARY CLARIFICATION SYSTEM
           Holding tank	$62,100
           Dispersed-air unit	    3,500
           Coagulation cell		    9,300
           Flotation basin	    31,200
           Electrodes 	   17.300
           Rectifier and wiring -------------   10,500
               t
           Chemical tanks, pumps and piping -------   50,700
           Power and control wiring -----------   3^,200
           Laboratory	    8,900
           Housing for above  --------------   87,500
           Total	$315,200
SLUDGE DENATURING
           Air-powered press pump -----------     $3,500
           Filter press and related sludge removal
                equipment ----------------   68,700
           Switches and wiring, installation ------     5,000
           Total	-	   $77,200
SECONDARY BIOLOGICAL
           Carrousel license --------------   £J6,300
           Concrete work	   119,4-00
           Aerators 	 	     51,800
           Pumps, piping, valves, etc. - 	 	    19,700
           Electrical 	     12,900
           Monitoring and control equipment 	 	     15,200
           Excavation and miscellaneous --------     26,500
           Total		    $283,800
SECONDARY CLARIFIER  	     $33,500
TOTAL FOR SYSTEM	    $709,700

                                     151

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO,
  EPA-600/2-79-110
                              2.
                                                            3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
     Processing Chrome Tannery Effluent To Meet Best
     Available Treatment  Standards
                                                            5. REPORT DATE
               July 1979  (issuing date)
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)

 Lawrence K. Barber, Ernest R. Ramirez*, William L. Zemaitis**
                                                            8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
     A.  C.  Lawrence Leather Co., Inc.
     Winchester, N.H.  031*70
             10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

               1BB610
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

               S 804504
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
     Industrial Environmental Research Lab. - Cinti.,  OH
     Office of Research and  Development
     U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
     Cincinnati, OH
                                                            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                  Final Report
             14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                  EPA/600/12
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
   *Swift Environmental  Systems, Chicago, Illinois  60680
  **Envirobic Systems, New York, New York 10001
16. ABSTRACT
                To satisfy  stream discharge requirements at its Winchester,  N.H.,
           chrome tan shearling tannery, the A. C. Lawrence Leather Co. , Inc.
           selected primary and secondary systems that  are unique as applied to
           tannery effluent treatment in the United States.  Primary clarification
           is accomplished  by means of coagulation and  flotation, using electrolytic
           as well as mechanical micro-bubble generation.   The secondary biological
           section is a so-called CARROUSEL,™ a technical modification of the
           Passveer oxidation ditch.  During the 12-month study, complete analytical
           data representing winter as well as summer operating conditions were
           acquired along with  operating cost data.

                This report presents these data and describes the design and operation
           of the system.   Possible applications of the same principles to other
           tannery wastewaters  are also suggested.
17.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                               b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                            ;.  COSATI l-'ield/Gtoup
          Leather
          Processing
          Wastewater
          Activated Sludge Process
          Economic Analysis
 Waste  characterization
68 D
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
                                               19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
                                                Unclassified
                                                                           21. NO. OF PAGES
          RELEASE TO PUBLIC
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)

 Uncl assi'
                                .162.
                                                                           22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77)
                                             152
                                                                 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 — 657-060/5349

-------