c/EPA
160
430/9-79-002
1978 Needs Survey
Conveyance and Treatment of
Municipal Wastewater
Summaries of Technical Data
-------
This Report was prepared under the direction of:
James A. Chamblee, Chief
Priorities and Ueeeis Assessment Branch
Office of Water Program Operations
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
(202) 426-4443
Copies of this Report, FRD-2, 1978 Needs Survey, Conveyance and Treatment
of Municipal Wastewater Summaries of Technical Data are available from the
address below. When ordering, please include the title and FRD number.
General Services Administration (8FSS)
Centralized Mailing Lists Services
Building 41, Denver Federal Center
Denver, Colorado 80225
-------
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER
SUMMARIES OF TECHNICAL DATA
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
Introduction 1- 2
Description of Categories Reported 2- 3
Facilities Reported 3-
Present and Future Needs 3- 4
Metric Measure 4-
Presentation of Data 4-
Table 1 - Number of Facilities by Nature of Facilities - (Existing and Planned) 6- 7
Table 2 - Number and Nature of Wastewater Facilities - (Existing and Planned) - 8-9
United States Totals
Table 3 - Number and Percent by State of Treatment Plants by Flow Range - 10- 11
(Existing and Planned)
Table 4 - Average Flows by State - Present, Projected & Percent Change 12- 13
Table 5 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 14- 15
Existing in 1978 - All Facilities
Table 6 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 16- 17
Projected for 2000 - All Facilities
Table 7 - Treatment Populations - Present, Projected, Resident & Nonresident 18- 19
Table 8 - Populations Served by Treatment with No Discharge - Present Resident & 20- 21
Nonresident
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Pages
Table 9 - Populations to be Served by Treatment with No Discharge - Projected 22- 23
Resident & Nonresident
Table 10 - Populations Served by Raw Discharge - Present Resident & Nonresident 24- 25
Table 11 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 26- 27
Existing in 1978 - Facilities Providing Raw Discharge
Table 12 - Populations Served by Primary Treatment - Present Resident & Nonresident 28- 29
Table 13 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 30- 31
Existing in 1978 - Facilities Providing Primary Treatment
Table 14 - Populations Served by Advanced Primary Treatment - Present Resident & 32- 33
Nonresident
Table 15 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 34- 35
Existing in 1978 - Facilities Providing Advanced Primary Treatment
Table 16 - Populations Served by Secondary Treatment - Present Resident & Nonresident 36- 37
Table 17 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 38- 39
Existing in 1978 - Facilities Providing Secondary Treatment
Table 18 - Populations to be Served by Secondary Treatment - Projected Resident & 40- 41
Nonresident
Table 19 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 42- 43
Projected for 2000 - Facilities Providing Secondary Treatment
Table 20 - Number of Plants Projected for Secondary Treatment for Year 2000 - Total 44- 45
Projected Flow
Table 21 - Number of Secondary Treatment Plants to be Constructed Between 1978 and 46- 47
2000 - Total Projected Flow
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Pages
Table 22 - Number of Secondary Treatment Plants to be Enlarged Between 1978 and 48- 49
2000 - Total Existing Flow
Table 23 - Number of Secondary Treatment Plants to be Enlarged and Upgraded 50- 51
Between 1978 and 2000 - Total Existing Flow
Table 24 - Dollar Needs for Secondary Treatment Facilities by Plant Sizes - Total 52- 53
Projected Flow
Table 25 - Number of Facilities and Reasons for Treatment More Stringent Than Secondary 54- 55
Table 26 - Populations Served by Advanced Secondary Treatment - Present Resident & 56- 57
Nonresident
Table 27 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 58- 59
Existing in 1978 - Facilities Providing Advanced Secondary Treatment
Table 28 - Populations to be Served by Advanced Secondary Treatment - Projected 60- 61
Resident & Nonresident
Table 29 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 62- 63
Projected for 2000 - Facilities Providing Advanced Secondary Treatment
Table 30 - Populations Served by Tertiary Treatment - Present Resident & Nonresident 64- 65
Table 31 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 66- 67
Existing in 1978 - Facilities Providing Tertiary Treatment
Table 32 - Populations to be Served by Tertiary Treatment - Projected Resident & 68- 69
Nonresident
Table 33 - Plant Loadings, Removal Efficiencies and Discharge Rates from Facilities 70- 71
Projected for 2000 - Facilities Providing Tertiary Treatment
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Pages
Table 34 - Number of Plants Projected for More Stringent Treatment for Year 2000 - 72- 73
Total Projected Flow
Table 35 - Number of More Stringent Treatment Plants to be Constructed Between 1978 74- 75
and 2000 - Total Projected Flow
Table 36 - Number of More Stringent Treatment Plants to be Enlarged Between 1978 and 76- 77
2000 - Total Existing Flow
Table 37 - Number of More Stringent Treatment Plants to be Enlarged and Upgraded 78- 79
Between 1978 and 2000 - Total Existing Flow
Table 38 - Dollar Needs for More Stringent Treatment Facilities by Plant Sizes - 80- 81
Total Projected Flow
Table 39 - Analysis of Liquid Effluent Disposal 82- 83
Table 40 - Number and Total Estimated I/I Flow of Treatment Plants 84- 85
Table 41 - Projected Industrial Flow to Municipal Treatment Plants by Number, Flow, 86- 87
and Percent of Total Flow
Table 42 - Summary Treatment Process and Sludge Handling Methods - Numbers of Plants 88- 90
and Associated Flow - United States Totals
Table 43 - Projected Change in Treatment Process Use - Numbers of Plants and Associated 92-123
Flow - United States Totals
Table 44 - Collection Populations - Present, Projected, Resident & Nonresident 124-125
Table 45 - Numbers of Facilities Needing Collector Sewers by Service-Area Population 126-127
and Per-Capita Sewer Cost
Table 46 - Percent of Collector Dollar Needs by Service-Area Population and Cost/Capita 128-129
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded)
Pages
Table 47 - Required Infiltration/Inflow Corrective Actions and Basis of Estimate - 130-131
Number of Facilities with Needs
Table 48 - Dollar Needs for Required Infiltration/Inflow Corrective Actions by Basis 132-133
of Estimate
Table 49 - Required Replacement and/or Major Rehabilitation Actions and Basis of 134-135
Estimate - Numbers of Facilities with Needs
Table 50 - Dollar Needs for Replacement and/or Major Rehabilitation by Basis of 136-137
Estimate
Table 51 - Total Pipe Length Needed by Diameter 138-139
Table 52 - Length and Cost of Pipe Based on 2000 Population to Receive Collection 140-141
Table 53 - Dollar Needs for all Pipe Size Categories by Diameter 142-143
Appendix I - Conduct of the Survey - Categories I-IV (Treatment Plants and Sewers) 1-1- 1-4
Appendix II - Description of the 1978 Survey Form II-1-II-6
-------
CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER
SUMMARIES OF TECHNICAL DATA
The 1978 Needs Survey
I. INTRODUCTION
This report is a part of the 1978 Needs
Survey Report and is a supplement to the Cost
Estimate Report to the Congress (FRD-1). It
provides summaries of the detailed technical
and cost data reported in the Survey for
Categories I through IV. A separate supple-
mental report has been prepared for Categories
V and VI (FRD-3). A description of the 1978
Survey methodology is presented in Appendix I
herein.
The Needs Survey was performed in compliance
with the provisions of Sections 205(a) and
516(b)(2) of the Clean Water Act, of 1977,
PL 95-217. The Environmental Protection
Agency submitted the cost estimates for munic-
ipal wastewater collection and treatment needs
to Congress on February 10, 1979.
The 1978 Needs Survey is the fourth such
Survey performed by the Agency. After the
first two Surveys had been completed, a need
became apparent for the tabulation of the
great amount of technical data accumulated.
The 1976 Survey responded to this need by
publishing a report similar to this one which
summarized the technical data acquired for
the Survey.
Costs of facilities have historically held
the primary focus for these Surveys because
they have been used by the Congress to provide
relative allocations of construction grant
funds among the States. Besides the cost data
large amounts of technical data are accumulated
during each Survey. These technical data are
used in many of the cost breakdowns, but have
been found to be very useful to many levels of
government and quasi-government officials and
to industrial organizations. EPA receives a
large number of requests annually from these
sources for data summaries. One of the pur-
poses of this report is to reduce the number
of such requests for special summaries by
publishing the commonly asked for information.
In addition, the transfer of this material to
the total user community working in the field
of municipal wastewater treatment and collec-
tion, planning, and engineering is considered
important to the management and operation of
the EPA grant program. EPA foresees these
data can be useful in the facilities planning
process, both by the Federal government and
the State and local governments.
Only data reported to or accumualted by the
Survey is summarized herein. The data collec-
tion process is described in Appendix I.
-------
EPA feels the completeness and accuracy of
this data base is the best and most up-to-
date ever available. In an attempt to make
it better or more useful to the user commu-
nity, comments, discussion, or suggestions
for improvements are welcomed.
II. DESCRIPTION OF CATEGORIES REPORTED
The 1978 Needs Survey was conducted on a
facility-by-facility basis for Categories I
through IV. Appendix II presents a copy of
the form (EPA-1) which was completed for each
of the 32,000 facilities in the country. The
codes used, with an explanation of each, are
also presented. Cost estimates for all needs
categories are presented in "Cost Estimates
for Construction of Publicly-Owned Wastewater
Treatment Facilities - 1978 Needs Survey,"
(FRD-1). Detailed methodology and cost data
for Categories V and VI are presented in
"Summary of Technical Data for Combined Sewer
Overflow and Stormwater Discharge," (FRD-3).
A general description of the categories
follows:
Category I - Secondary Treatment
This category includes facilities which are
only required to provide "secondary treatment"
or "best practicable wastewater treatment
technology" (BPWTT). For the purpose of the
Survey, BPWTT and secondary treatment were
considered synonymous. Systems designed to
serve individual residences are reported in
this category.
Category II - Higher Than Secondary Treatment
Facilities reported in this category are for
treatment plants that must achieve treatment
levels more stringent than secondary. This
requirement generally exists where water
quality standards require removal of such
pollutants as phosphorus, ammonia, nitrates,
or organic and other substances. Included in
Category II is the construction necessary to
raise the treatment level, e.g. if the exist-
ing treatment level of a facility is primary,
then construction necessary to raise the treat-
ment level to secondary is reported in Category
II, together with the construction for treat-
ment levels greater than secondary.
Category IIIA - Correction of Infiltration/
Inflow
Included is the correction of sewer system
infiltration/inflow problems. Preliminary
sewer system analysis and detailed sewer system
evaluation surveys are also itemized.
Category IIIB- Major Rehabilitation of Sewers
Requirements for replacement and/or major
rehabilitation of existing sewer systems were
reported in this category. If corrective
actions were necessary to protect the total
integrity of the system, they were reported.
Major rehabilitation is considered to be ex-
tensive repair of existing sewers beyond the
scope of normal maintenance programs, where
sewers are collapsing or structurally unsound.
-------
Category IVA - New Collector Sewers
This category includes construction of new
collector sewer systems and appurtenances de-
signed to correct violations caused by raw
discharges, seepage to waters from septic
tanks and the like, and/or to comply with
Federal, State or local actions.
Category IVB - New Interceptor Sewers
Included in this category were new interceptor
sewers and transmission pumping staitons nec-
essary for the bulk transport of wastewaters.
Category V - Control of Combined Sewer
I
Overf1ow
This category reported facilities designed to
prevent and/or control periodic bypassing of
untreated wastes from combined sowers to
achieve water quality objectives and which
are eligible for Federal funding. It does
not include treatment and/or control of
stormwaters in separate storm and drainage
systems.
Category VI - Treatment and/or Control of
Stormwaters
This category includes projects designed to
abate pollution in urbanized areas from
stormwater runoff channeled through sewers
and other conveyances used only for such run-
off. Stormwater channeled through combined
sewers which also carry sewage are not in-
cluded in Category VI.
III. FACILITIES REPORTED
The 1978 Survey is the first Needs Survey
which contains a complete inventory of all
known and identified facilities for Categories
I through IV. In past years States were given
two options to report their needs. They could
report all facilities, i.e. 100 percent report-
ing. Twenty-nine States and Territories chose
this option in the 1976 Survey.
The second option was to include all communi-
ties within Standard Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (SMSA's}, and all communities with 1970
populations equal to or greater than 10,000.
For the remaining communities outside SMSA's
and with 1970 populations of less than 10,000,
the State could choose to randomly select a
sample proportion for reporting. The minimum
sample allowable was 20 percent. Twenty-seven
States chose this second sampling option. The
samples used in the 1976 Needs Survey ranged
from 20 to 63 percent.
Thus, the 1978 Survey eliminated the second
option and all States and Territories com-
pleted a 100 percent inventory. The data base
and resulting compilations of information are
thus more accurate in 1978, particularly for
the smaller facilities.
IV. PRESENT AND FUTURE NEEDS
Two time periods pervade Needs Survey report-
ing. These are the present, meaning January 1,
1978, and the future, which means the year
2000. When dollars are used in this report,
-------
they represent January 1978 dollars. This is
true for both present and future needs. Pre-
sent populations used are July 1, 1977.
V. METRIC MEASURE
All units shown in the technical summaries
are in metric units. Where space permits,
English units are shown in parentheses beside
the metric measure. The following are the
most common units used in this report:
1. Flows are reported in thousands of cubic
meters per day. Millions of U.S. gallons
per day are shown in parentheses.
2. Per capita flows are shown in liters per
day. U.S. gallons are shown in
parentheses.
3. Pipe diameters are shown in centimeters.
Pipe lengths are shown in meters.
VI. PRESENTATION OF DATA
The report's format has been structured in
such a way that a discussion of each table or
series of tables is presented immediately be-
fore the table. The reader is also referred
to Appendix II where an explanation is given
for all items in the EPA-1 data form. Item
numbers referred to in the text in parentheses
refer to the Appendix II explanations.
The tables are arranged in the following
general sequence:
2. Unit Processes
3. Wastewater Conveyance Systems
4. Miscellaneous
Please refer to the Table of Contents for a
listing of all tables.
1, Treatment Plants
-------
TABLES 1-53
-------
TABLE 1 - NUMBER OF FACILITIES BY NATURE OF
FACILITIES - (EXISTING AND PLANNED)
Table 1 lists the total number of facilities,
by State required to satisfy discharge re-
quirements by the year 2000. Included are
those in operation in 1978, those under con-
struction in 1978, and those proposed to be
built before 2000.
The various codes are defined as follows:
_Cod_e_ 1: A complete wastewater treatment
system (includes a treatment plant, with
associated collector and/or interceptor
sewers, and methods for disposal of effluent,
under control of the same treatment authority)
with combined sewers.
Code 2; A complete wastewater treatment
system (including all items under Code 1)
with separate sanitary sewers.
Code 3: A separate treatment plant, under
the control of a separate authority. (Sewers
which discharge to these plants are under
control of one or more different authorities.)
Code 4: A collection system of separate sani-
tary sewers under the control of one authority
contributing to a treatment plant operated by
a different authority.
Code 5: A collection system with combined
sewers under the control of a separate
authority.
Code 6: Other types of systems.
Code 7: A system for the bulk transmission
of wastewater with or without pumping sta-
tions, and with or without interceptor sewers.
Code 8: A facility which provides only for
the treatment and disposal of sludge including
vehicles or vehicle fleets.
A further breakdown on numbers of treatment
plants and sewer systems is presented in
Table 2.
Code 6, "Other," accounts for approximately
9.7 percent of the total of 30,670 facilities.
The majority of these facilities are communi-
ties which are presently using septic tank
systems and plan to use similar systems
through the year 2000. They may or may not
have needs. Systems (communities, areas,
authorities, etc.) which are served by septic
tank systems in 1978 and plan to construct a
collection system and treatment plant before
2000 are identified under other codes, usually
Code 2.
Facilities existing in 1978, but planned to be
abandoned prior to 2000, are included in these
summaries.
As used in this report, combined sewers are
defined as sewers which carry both storm and
sanitary wastewaters. Separate sewers carry
only sanitary wastes. Storm sewers convey
only storm runoff.
-------
FEBRUARY 10 > 1979
IABLE 1
1978 NtfcOS SURVEY
NUMSEK OF FACILITIES 9Y NATURE Of FACILIII
(EIISTING AND PLANNED)
STATE
ALIBAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CDNNECTJCUI
DELAWARE
DISI. OF CULUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDINO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IDriA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MUNI ANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEH HAMPSHIRE
NEH JERSEY
NEK MEXICO
NErf YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOJTH DAKUIA
TENNESSEE
TEIAS
UTIH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
O.S. TOTALS
TOTAL
524
23/
201
785
1.669
111
201
46
1
493
B05
55
230
1,458
708
1.010
67*
468
563
258
461
260
1.072
903
665
1.040
171
537
R7
185
05H
177
2.02!)
868
37(1
1.211
7B7
300
Z.300
40
461
327
371
J.256
260
117
661
449
63B
975
13H
6
I
5
34
3*
*
30.670
(CUBE 11
1
2
1
a
I
u
IB
4
0
2
9
0
12
100
109
24
B
Ib
0
54
10
36
76
35
2
14
20
i
0
25
13
0
5B
5
7
90
1
29
94
2
0
9
1
2
1
28
11
50
52
11
3
0
o
o
i
0
0
1.070
(CUOE 2]
379
124
148
646
989
SOU
91
24
1
396
529
55
170
779
487
900
653
405
517
141
362
106
450
560
620
945
147
461
70
115
226
160
B23
723
349
B59
719
223
1,196
23
393
308
326
ItOBl
214
73
371
291
492
629
124
6
r
4
33
23
2
21.270
(CODE 31
15
0
4
4
24
2
\
0
0
5
9
0
0
36
5
1
0
4
3
7
12
7
14
19
5
2
0
a
2
2
24
0
51
19
0
3
5
3
37
0
16
0
4
42
1
0
15
3
1
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
428
7
(CODE 4)
44
0
16
41
226
41)
35
15
0
82
71
C
16
242
89
30
7
35
31
30
67
96
333
139
1
66
4
6
14
29
327
1O
577
ioe
o
179
15
34
694
12
34
0
37
131
57
6
124
BO
S3
205
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.546
1COUt 51
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
o
67
9
2
0
f)
0
16
2
13
41
4
0
0
0
0
0
5
15
O
19
0
0
12
0
1
101
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
330
ICODt 61
91
111
36
94
415
6
55
1
0
8
187
0
IB
234
9
53
1
1
10
4
8
2
149
146
36
10
0
61
I
9
53
7
491
13
20
68
47
10
173
1
18
10
1
0
7
9
141
14
8
tor
3
0
0
1
0
II
2
2.985
(CODE 7)
C
0
0
C
7
C
0
D
V
u
u
u
C
D
C
0
i
(I
6
C
0
9
C
1
1
0
o
o
0
o
o
6
0
0
V
0
0
5
0
o
o
o
0
0
0
2
0
V
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
tCLOfc 8)
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
D
0
0
0
-------
TABLE 2 - NUMBER AND NATURE OF WASTEWATER
FACILITIES - (EXISTING AND PLANNED) -
UNITED STATES TOTALS
Table 2 is a two part table. The top indi-
cates the number of facilities by treatment
plants, sewer systems, other, trunk sewers,
and separate sludge handling facilities.
Whether these facilities were existent on
January 1, 1978 or are planned to be built is
also indicated.
Trunk sewers are defined as sewers not a part
of a collection system, but which convey
waste from one system to another, or from one
system to a treatment plant in another system.
The lower part of the table further delineates
the total U.S. data base by separating the
facilities according to the projected con-
struction, if such is planned. A brief'expla-
nation of each follows:
Enlarge: This is applicable to both treatment
plants and collection systems. For collection
systems, it refers to an existing system being
enlarged to cover a larger service area. For
treatment plants, enlarge means an existing
treatment will be expanded to receive a larger
flow at the present level of treatment.
"Planned" refers to a new facility which will
be built and, at a later date, but prior to
2000, will be enlarged.
Upgrade: This code is applicable to treatment
plants and septic tank systems. It refers to
an existing facility which will remain at its
present hydraulic loading but its level of
treatment will be increased. An existing
primary plant being upgraded to a secondary
plant is an example.
Enlarge and Upgrade: This code is applicable
only to treatment plants. It is a combination
of Upgrade and Enlarge, as defined above.
New Construction: This code applies equally
to treatment plants and conveyance systems.
These facilities are planned for a completely
new site. Some are for a new authority.
Replace: This code applies to both treatment
plants and conveyance systems. In most cases
plants are involved. This situation is nor-
mally one in which an existing plant will be
torn down and a completely new plant con-
structed on the site.
Abandon: This code applies to both treatment
plants and conveyance systems, but generally
is the former.
No Change: This category delineates treatment
plants and conveyance systems in existence
which will remain unchanged through the year
2000.
Other; A number of possible situations fall
into this category. One common situation is
a treatment plant which will require capital
expenditures, such as for a new laboratory,
but the level of treatment or capacity will
not be changed.
8
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 197V
TABLE 2
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBtR AND NA1URE OF WASTEWATER FACILITIbS
(EXISTING E PLANNED)
UMITED STATES TOTALS
UF FACILITIES*****************
SLUUGfc
NUHBER OF TREATMENT SEWER TRUNK HANDLING
FACILITIES PLANTS SYSTEMS OTHER SEWERS FACILITIES
EXISTING
PLANNED
TOTALS
20.U18
8,176
30*6/0
17,109 2,610
10,107 375
27,216 2,985
18
20
38
1
2
3
EXISTING
PLANNED
TOTALS
««««e««**«*»*««*#**NATURk OF PROJECTED CHANGE********************
ENLARGE
AND NEW NU
ENLARGE UPGRADE UPGRADE CONST. REPLACE ABAMDON CHANGE OTHER
3,108 130 1,3** *%1 b,**b 1,617
7 10,2*3 8 2 30* 37
3,115 10,373 1,352 **3 6,7*9 1,65*
42
2,910
-------
TABLE 3 - NUMBER AND PERCENT BY STATE OF
TREATMENT PLANTS BY FLOW RANGE -
(EXISTING AND PLANNED)
Table 3 is a summary of all treatment plants
in operation in 1978 plus all those proposed
to be built between 1978 and 2000. These
plants have been further separated by ranges
of flow expressed in thousands of cubic
meters per day and, in parentheses under that
flow, as million gallons per day. These data
are presented for each State along with the
total number of treatment plants proposed for
each State. National totals are summarized
at the bottom of the table.
The data indicate 88.69 percent of the treat-
ment plants in the nation will be smaller
than 1.0 mgd in design capacity, serving
populations of approximately 10,000 people or
less. Approximately two-thirds of these
treatment plants will be designed for a flow
of 105,000 gallons per day or less, serving
populations of 1,000 people or less.
These data are for all types of plants regard-
less of level of treatment. Numerous other
tables follow which further break down these
summaries by level of treatment for existing
(1978) and planned (2000) plants.
The flows used to segregate the plants are
design flows for plants not yet built and
existing flows for presently operating plants.
Existing flow may be equal, greater, or less
than the design flow for any particular plant.
Existing plants which
between 1978 and 2000
summaries.
will be abandoned
are included in these
10
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE )
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBER AND PERCENT BY STATE OF TREATMENT PLANTS BY FLOW HANCE
(EXISTING I PLANNED)
CUHIC METERS PER D*Y X 1000 6-.HO
(MILLION SALLOWS PER DAY} CO-. 105)
TOTAL » OF(X OF)
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
OIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I QUA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEK HAMPSHIRE
NE» JERSEY
NE» MEXICO
NEM YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC, TR. TERR,
VIRGIN ISLANDS
NUMBER OF PLANTS PL*N T3(PL ANTS)
369
126
153
650
1,020
323
110
26
I
40}
547
55
202
<>i5
601
425
6*1
424
«o
202
364
144
540
614
*27
461
167
4*4
72
142
263
160
412
747
356
452
725
255
1,327
25
409
It?
311
1.125
216
101
397
344
545
661
127
6
7
4
34
23
2
198CS0.90)
108(85.71)
88(57,52)
494(76.00)
611(59.90)
187(57.89)
22(20.00)
12(42.86)
0( 0.00)
167(06.40)
287(52.47)
31(56. 3b)
131(65.84)
434(47,413
355(59.07)
665(71.89)
466(70.50}
265(62.50)
312(60.00)
137(67.82)
307(79.95)
58(38.93)
270(50.00)
382(62.21}
441(70.11)
702(73.05)
109(65.27)
347(74.78)
44(61,11]
99(69.72)
49(18.63)
104(65.00}
567(60.84)
479(64.12)
316(86.76)
515(54.10)
528(72.61)
124(48.63)
858(64.66)
10(40.00)
208(50,86)
258(61.39)
119(41.74)
507(45.07)
147(66.06)
52(51.49)
243(61.21)
181(52,62)
450(62.57)
372(56,26)
61(63.78)
5(83.33)
4(57,14)
2(50,00)
2( 5.88)
23(00.00)
1(50,00)
,401-4.0
(.106-1.05)
« DFU OF)
PLANTS(PLANTS)
111(11,68)
15(11.90)
51(14.64)
118(18.15)
221(21.67)
IOSCJ2.51)
17(11,64)
11(46.41)
0( 0,00)
122(10.27)
106(14,00)
15(27.27)
50(24.75)
155(18.80)
J67(27.7«)
222C24.00)
162(24.51)
121(28.54)
147(28.27)
42(20.79)
51(13. 2»>
38(25.50)
195(36.11)
193(11.43)
142(22.65)
208(21.64)
46(27.54)
99(21.14)
20(27.78)
27(19.01)
107(40. 6«)
42(26.25)
221(21.71)
182(24.16)
32( 6.99)
302(11,72)
156(21.52)
93(36.47)
110(21,36)
5(20.00)
157(18.39)
50(15.77)
115(40.54)
460(40.69)
40(18.52)
39(16.61)
107(26.95)
115(11.41)
75(13.76)
229(34,64)
14(26.77)
1(16.67)
1(14.29)
2(50.00)
21(61.76)
0( 0.00)
0( 0.00)
4.001-40
(1.06-10.5)
* OFU OF)
PLANTS(PLANTS)
54(11.88)
2( 1.59)
4( 5.88)
17( 5.69)
156(15.29)
2&( 6.05)
42(36.16)
2( 7.14)
0( 0.00)
83(20.60)
63(11.52)
6(14.55)
16( 6.9"
106(11. B
6J(1«.«C)
IK 1.57]
10( 4.54)
15( 6.25)
58(11.15)
22(10.89)
22( 5.71)
«2(26.19)
55(10.19)
16( S.»6)
«2( 6.70)
43( 4.47)
IK 6.59)
15C 1.21)
4( 5.56)
16(11,27)
94(15.74)
12( 7.50)
107(11.46)
78(10.44)
8( 2.25)
116(12,16)
16( 4.97)
34(11.13)
146(11.00)
9(16.00)
39( 9.54)
6( 2.52)
54(16.22)
137(12.18)
24CU.11)
10( 9.90)
34( 6.56}
41(11.92)
19( 1.49)
S0( 7.56)
12( 9.45)
OC 0.00)
2(26.57)
0( 6.00)
6(21.51)
OC 0.00)
1(50,00)
10. 001-190
(10.57-50,2)
OF(* IF)
PLANTS(PLANTS)
6(1.54)
1(0.79)
2(1.31)
1(0,15)
23(2.25]
3(0.91)
9(8.18)
0(0.00)
0(0.00]
10(2.46)
10(1.83)
Of 11 OP)
PLANTS(PLANTS)
OC 0.00)
OC 0.00)
1( 0.6b)
OC 0.00)
9( 0.88)
2( 0.62)
0( 0.00)
1( 3.57)
1(100.00)
1C 0.25)
1( 0.18)
1( 1.62)
0( 0.00)
3( 0.33)
2< 0.33)
0( 0.00)
0( 0.00)
1( 0.24)
OC 0,00)
0( 0.00)
1C 0.26)
2( 1,34)
2( 0.37)
1C 0.16)
OC 0,00)
1C 0.31)
01 o.oo)
0( 0.00)
1C 1.39)
0( 0.00)
4( 1.52)
0( 0.00)
14( 1,50)
0( 0.00)
0( 0,00)
6( 0,64)
OC 0.00)
i( 0.19)
4( 0,30)
U 4.00)
0( 0.00)
OC 0.00)
1C 0,90)
4( 0,16)
0( 0,00)
0( 0,00)
1( 0,25)
1C 0.29)
0( 0.00)
2( 0.30)
0( 0.00)
0( 0,00)
0( 0,00)
0( 0,00)
0( 0,00)
0( 0.00)
0( 0.00)
u.s, TOTALS
22,766
13,976(61,36)
6,217(27.11)
2«214( 9,72)
285(1.25)
76( 0.13)
11
-------
TABLE 4 - AVERAGE FLOWS BY STATE - PRESENT,
PROJECTED & PERCENT CHANGE
Table 4 summarizes present (1978) and pro-
jected (2000) total flow treated by publicly
owned treatment plants, along with the indus-
trial component of the flow. The percentage
of the total flow from industrial origins is
also identified, as is the per capita daily
average flow. The percentage change in each
category is shown by comparing 1978 with pre-
dicted 2000 figures.
A further explanation of these summaries
presented below:
is
Total Flow: The total flow is expressed as
thousands of cubic meters per day followed in
parentheses by million gallons per day. These
figures were derived from the existing flow
for each treatment facility in a State as re-
ported on the EPA-1 form in Block 29(l)(a)
for 1978 and 29(1)(c), projected design flow,
for the year 2000. Total flows include domes-
tic flow, inflow/infiltration, and industrial
flow.
Industrial Flow: The total industrial flow
is expressed in the same units as Total Flow.
The figures were derived from the existing
industrial flow for each treatment facility
as reported on the EPA-1 form in Block 29(2)
(a) for 1978 and 29(2)(c), projected design
flow, for the year 2000.
Industrial Percentage: This number is the
of a State's industrial
flow for that State.
Liters/Capita/Day: Per capita average daily
flows, in liters per capita per day, are
shown followed in parentheses by gallons per
capita per day. These flows are based on the
nonindustrial component. The populations used
to calculate the per capita flows are the
resident and nonresident populations receiving
treatment in 1978 and 2000, respectively.
Thus, for 1978, the 1978 Total Flow minus the
Industrial Flow is divided by the 1978 resident
population plus the 1978 nonresident population
receiving treatment for each State.
Percent Change: These columns simply compare
the change in each parameter between 1978 and
2000, expressed as an increase or decrease
using 1978 as the base.
Note: The sum of all entries may not equal
the total due to rounding of individual
i terns.
calculated percentage
flow compared to the total
12
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 4
SIATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAMARE
DIST. OF CULUM
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IOAHU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOW*
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NE« MEXICO
NEW YUNK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYDMlNt
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
TOTAL
FLO*
1,283(338)
135(35)
754(199)
1,481(391)
1,343(354}
316(83)
1,046(276)
2,<404<6Sb)
1,902(502)
345(41)
7.757(2049)
2.771(732)
1,170(309)
633(220)
974(257)
1,115(294)
362(100)
1,213(320)
3,163(635)
5,«38(143»)
1,566(414)
8?4(2J7)
2,167(577)
260(68)
677(179)
314(84)
208(55)
3,772(996)
376(100)
8,971(2370)
1,664(439)
145(36)
5,358(1415)
903(238)
1,060(260)
5,322(1406)
398(105)
966(261)
207(54)
1,748(461)
4,790(1265)
802(211)
166(43)
1,620(427)
1,548(422)
363(101)
2,367(625)
161(42)
23(6)
509(134}
9(2)
P R E S E N
JND.
FLOW
236(62)
14(3)
26(7)
120(31)
1,661(439)
21«(55)
237(62)
140(37)
202(53)
422(111)
34(9)
62(16)
1,537(406)
553U46)
198(52)
124(32)
23M62)
41(10)
90(23}
753(199)
1,164(312)
41AU10)
401(106)
7(1)
141(37)
00
44(11)
1118(216)
879(232)
550(145)
12(3)
1,036(273)
249(64)
735(194)
123(32)
25M66)
29(7)
467(128)
341(90)
65(17)
167(44)
203(53)
61(16)
686(161)
1O
OO
0(>
47(12)
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
AVERAGE FLOWS BY STATE
PRESENT, PROJECTED 1 PERCENT CHANCE
IN THOUSANDS OF CUBIC METEHS PER DAY
JND, LITERS /
* CAP. /DAY
16.
10.
3
19.
12.
14.
17.
44.
0.
8.
22.
9.
18,
14.
19.
16.
14.
24.
3.
23.
17.
23.
21.
26.
14.
16.
I,
20.
0.
21.
21.
S.
9,
33.
8,
19.
8.
23.
13.
30.
26.
13.
27.
7.
8.
10.
10.
12,
16.
29.
0.
0.
0.
0.
9.
0.
505(133)
595(157)
391(103)
423(111)
503(143)
87(128)
578(152)
342(90)
398(105)
411(108)
527(139)
1,217(321)
570(150)
632(167)
601(159)
448(118)
392(103)
438(115)
451(119)
598(156)
405(107}
563(148)
636(166)
389(102)
549(145)
417(110)
500(132)
418(110)
460(121)
502(132)
63(122)
345(91)
590(155)
441(116)
3)1(82)
533(140)
392(103)
561(148)
495(1)0}
514(135)
502(132)
394(104)
558(147)
38(115)
624(164}
561(148)
405(107)
503(133)
418(110)
481(127)
471(124)
967(255)
325(86)
1,452(363)
268(70)
234(61)
0.0 429(11))
TOTAL
FLOW
1,992(526)
356(94)
1.418(374)
1,214(320)
14,013(3701)
2,610(689)
2,104(555)
601(158)
1,169(309)
6,461(1706)
3,750(490)
736(194)
637(168)
11,013(2909)
4,149(1096)
1,776(469)
1,401(370}
2,098(554)
2,446(646)
667(176)
2,979(786)
4,904(1295)
8,330(2200)
2,470(652)
1,260(332)
3,848(1016)
444(117)
1,008(266)
998(263)
704(187)
5,711(1508}
591(156}
15,189(4012)
3,338(881)
228(60)
8,481(2210)
1,629(430}
1,930(510)
7,979(2107)
642(169)
2,906(767)
326(86)
3,330(879)
8,624(2279)
1,1J5(29«)
254(68)
3,160(634)
3,354(666)
1,055(278)
2,570(679)
224(54)
24(6)
70(18)
21(5)
1,346(356)
40(10)
14(3)
R 0 J E C T
IND.
FLO*
326(86)
18(4)
24(6)
166(43)
2.464(651)
312(82)
394(105)
160(42)
OO
383(101)
776(205)
57(15)
84(22)
2,197(560)
937(247)
337(89)
216(57)
541(143)
123(32)
147(39)
353(93)
1,217(321)
1.604(476)
665(175)
142(37)
760(200)
14(3)
239(63)
19(5)
165(43)
1,350(356)
25(6)
1,677(443)
1,021(269)
19(5)
1,849(501)
122(32)
289(76)
1,061(260)
194(51)
500(132)
37(9)
9)7(247)
430(113)
93(24}
26(7)
568(150)
377(99)
120(31)
646(170)
!()
10(2)
OO
OO
241(6))
OO
OO
E D **********
IND. LITERS /
X CAP, /DAY
16.3 466(123)
5.2 512(1)5)
1.7 360(95)
13.6 434(115)
[7.5 410(108)
11.9 518(137)
18.9 584(154)
26.6 369(97)
0.0 499(132)
5.
20,
7.
13.
14.
22.
18.
15.
25.
5.
22.
11,
24.
21.
26.
11.
19,
23^
1.
23.
23.
4.
11.
30.
8,
22.
7.
15.
13.
30,
17.
11.
28,
4.
8.
10,
17.
II.
II.
25.
0.
44.
0.
0.
17,
0.
0.
438(113)
445(130)
442(117)
537(141)
745(196)
591(156)
483(127)
465(122)
458(121)
517(1)6)
477(126)
507(134)
580(153)
711(188)
77(126)
490(129}
465(122)
585(154)
435(115)
741(195)
520(137)
27(112)
410(106)
640(164)
474(125)
360(95)
564(149)
54(120)
544(143)
5)0(140)
515(1)6)
732(193)
60(121)
551(145)
80(126)
608(160)
507(1)4)
416(110)
607(160)
53(114)
532(140)
56(121)
S75(4«)
322(85)
624(166)
341(40)
363(96)
92(1)0)
***** PERCENT CHAMJt *****
TOTAL
PLOW
+55.2
+163.1
+88.0
+92.7
+ 7.6
+ 76.2
+56.6
+»0.2
+ 11.7
+168.7
+47.1
+112.9
+85.6
+41.9
+49.7
+51.7
+68.1
+115.2
+119.2
+ 74.7
+145.4
+ 55.0
+53.1
+57,5
+ 52.7
+ 75.9
+70.8
+ 48.8
+212.3
+240.3
+51.3
+56.1
+69.2
+100.5
+57.6
+58.3
+ 80.3
+82.1
+ 49.9
+61.11
+194.2
+57.1
+40.4
+ 80.1
+41. J
+55.7
+95.1
+109.9
+175.5
+8.5
+34.1
+1332.6
+196.9
+686.7
+164.6
+8130.7
+47. «
I NO.
FLOH
+ 38.1
+ 30.4
7.1
+ 38.4
+ 48.0
+48.2
+ 68.4
+ 13.4
+0.0
+ 89.7
+83.9
+ 66.1
+36.4
+42.8
+ 69.4
+69.5
+ 74.4
+127.2
+198.6
+ 63.8
+ 66.0
+ 61.5
+52.2
+58.9
+29.3
+ 89.4
+ 96.4
+ 69.2
N/M
+271.0
+ 64.9
+ 11.8
+90.8
+ 85.3
54.1
+83.2
+53.0
+ 18.2
+ 44.2
+58.1
+ 93.7
+29.0
+92.4
+26.0
+51. 0
+239.7
+65.7
+96.9
-5.8
+5.5
+ 0.0
+ 0.0
+0.0
+407.3
+ 0.0
+0.0
LI TEWS /
CAP. /DAY
-7.5
-13,9
8.0
+ 3.5
-24,4
+ 6.3
+ 1.0
»2i!i
+3.9
-6.0
-63.6
5.8
+ 17. B
1.7
+ 7.6
+ 18.5
+4.6
+ 1U.5
-2U.2
+ 25.2
+2.4
+ 11.7
+22.5
-10.7
+ 11.5
+ 17.0
+ 4.2
+ 61.0
+ 3.6
7.8
+ 18.5
+8.5
+ 7.3
+ 15.9
+5.8
+ 15.9
2.9
+ OJ2
+ 45.7
+ 16.7
1.2
+4.7
2.5
-4.6
+2.7
+20.6
+ 8.4
+ 10.6
2.7
-61.1
-0.9
56.6
+27.3
+55,1
+ 14.6
U.S. TUIALS 99,200(26205) 16,306(4307) 16.4 506(133) 161,772(42735) 26,714(7057) 16.5 517(1)6) +63,0 +63.8 +2.2
NOTESl 1. FLONS IN CUBIC METERS X 1000 2. APPROXIMATE MGD IN PARENTHESES 3. SUM OF ENTRIES MAY NOT EfiUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUNO-OFFS
13
-------
TABLE 5 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
EXISTING IN 1978 - ALL FACILITIES
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (6005) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from existing flow
(not design flow) as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total existing flow,
with appropriate conversion factors, and
totaled for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For instance, some
phosphorus is present in all wastewaters and
a percentage is removed in all treatment
plants. Unless there is a specific require-
ment to remove phosphorus, neither influent
nor effluent values are reported. Thus,
removals are shown only where stipulated.
It should be noted that some State totals
for nutrients and "Other" indicate a higher
effluent than influent value. Part of this
for a variety of
effluent values
level of accu-
value was left
discrepancy is caused by rounding errors.
The greatest cause of this paradox results in
those locales where it was known that water
quality standards require limited quantities
of these constituents in the effluent but
influent values were unknown
reasons. In these cases the
were recorded to the highest
racy known, but the influent
blank unless accurate data were available.
Thus, percentage removals are meaningless and
the reader is cautioned not to attempt their
use.
Table 5 summarizes the plant's loadings and
effluent quantities, as well as efficiencies
for all treatment plants in operation on
January 1, 1978 and reported in this Survey.
Note that the total flow is equal to the flows
reported in Table 4 for each State.
14
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1«I79
TA6Lt 5
1»78 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE MATES
FROM FACILITIES EXISTING IN 1978
IN METRIC TONS PEN DAY
LL FACILITIES
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
OIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IONA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEK HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSfcY
NE« MEXICO
NEK YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
MASHING TON
NEST VIRGIN!*
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAhQ*
GUAM
N, MAKIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
FLU*
1,283(338)
135(35)
754U9<))
630(166)
12,988(34}!)
1,481(341)
1,343(354)
316(83)
1,046(276)
2,404(635)
1,402(502)
345(91)
343(90)
7,757(2049)
2,771(732)
1,170(304)
833(220)
974(257)
1,115(244)
382(100)
1,213(320)
3,163(835)
5,438 ( 1436)
1,568(414)
624(217)
2,187(577)
260(68)
677(174)
314(84)
206(55)
3.772(996)
376(100)
8.971(2370)
1.664(439)
145(38)
5.357(1415)
903(238)
1.060(260)
5,322(1406)
398(105)
986(261)
207(54)
1,748(461)
4,790(1265)
802(211)
166(43)
1,620(427)
1,598(422)
363(101)
2,365(624)
161(42)
10
23(6)
20
509(134)
OO
4(2)
***
INF.
210
20
152
172
3,701
351
197
55
162
455
384
74
82
1,108
479
401
199
239
213
68
304
517
1,458
4(0
160
492
46
201
70
47
861
84
1,210
343
33
485
140
213
926
41
273
53
561
1,021
113
26
314
319
89
572
32
0
5
0
133
0
1
HUOb
iff.
42
a
2S
35
970
69
4«
A
29
62
63
62
12
104
60
64
42
64
70
24
63
273
25S
68
24
226
7
78
6
17
518
21
445
52
2
172
27
23
245
21
52
6
136
96
16
13
61
117
27
62
4
0
5
0
53
0
1
*****
X RgM,
79.6
56.4
63.0
74.3
73.8
74.5
74.8
84,7
81,9
81,4
63.4
16.0
85.2
90.6
87,4
79.0
78,8
73.2
66.4
72.7
74,0
47.2
82.5
63.3
64.4
54.1
83.3
60.6
90.2
63.1
39.6
74.7
63.2
66.7
93,6
82.5
65. 6
69,0
73.5
7,1
80,8
64.0
75.7
90.4
65.6
52.7
60.6
69?6
65.6
70.6
3.2
6.6
66.6
60.4
36.4
12.6
***
INF.
237
26
163
190
3,902
354
215
60
151
455
331
65
73
1,432
557
367
210
264
221
66
271
556
2,535
463
151
566
34
206
70
47
863
81
1,144
327
31
1,202
205
221
1,101
S3
145
44
543
1,141
116
25
304
334
65
5t4
33
0
5
0
115
0
2
SOLIDS
EFF.
46
8
31
SI
«28
75
40
16
30
76
41
50
11
128
69
70
43
54
73
14
63
222
426
5«
44
174
8
73
6
13
243
16
340
65
3
225
32
*272
26
53
7
226
160
17
9
44
82
19
111
6
0
s
0
31
0
1
*****
x REM,
80.3
66.4
80.7
73.0
76.6
78.7
61,1
73.6
80,0
62.7
72.5
22.1
85,1
41,0
67,6
60.8
74.1
74.4
66.6
76.3
76,8
60,0
83.2
67,5
70.9
64.2
78.3
64,5
90.2
72,2
66.1
79.5
67,3
80.2
66,6
81,3
84,1
86,0
75,2
50.6
72.5
64.5
56.3
66.0
85.1
63.1
83.7
75.3
76,6
75J7
7JO
41.7
72.3
56.1
44.4
** PHOSPHORUS ***
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
49 35
6 2
2
5 2
10 4
37 13
) 1
2k 12
3 1
1
11 3
* NH3 NITROGEN *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
***** OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
43
It
15
1
77
15
4
12
12
94
II
13
32
9
5
2
2
35
12
I
1
21
U.S. TOTALS 94,148(26205) 20,924 5,166 75.3 23,124 5,061 76.1 164 80 269 220
NOTES! 1. FLOWS IN CUBIC METERS X 1000 2. APPROXIMATE MGD IN PARENTHESES 3. METRIC TONS X .9072 SHORT TONS
4, SUM OF ENTRIES MAY NOT EQUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUNDOFFS
15
-------
TABLE 6 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
PROJECTED FOR 2000 - ALL FACILITIES
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD5) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from projected design
flow information as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total design flow, with
appropriate conversion factors, and totaled
for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For instance, some
phosphorus is present in all wastewaters and
a percentage is removed in all treatment
plants. Unless there is a specific require-
ment to remove phosphorus, neither influent
nor effluent values are reported. Thus,
removals are shown only where stipulated.
It should be noted that some State totals
for nutrients and "Other" indicate a higher
effluent than influent value. Part of this
discrepancy is caused by rounding errors.
The greatest cause of this paradox results in
those locales where it was known that water
quality standards require limited quantities
of these constituents in the effluent but
influent values were unknown for a variety of
reasons. In these cases the effluent values
were recorded to the highest level of accu-
racy known, but the influent value was left
blank unless accurate data were available.
Thus, percentage removals are meaningless and
the reader is cautioned not to attempt their
use.
Table 6 summarizes the waste treatment plant
loadings and effluent quantities for all
treatment plants existing in 1978 which will
remain in operation through 2000, plus all
those projected to be built during that
period. All plants anticipated to be aban-
doned are deleted from this summary. Level
of treatment is not indicated.
16
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 6
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE KATES
FROM FACILITIES PROJECTED FOR i960
IN METRIC TONS PER DAY
ALL FACILITIES
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLOSAOU
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DIST. OF COLD*.
FLORIDA
GEOWG1A
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW TURK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
CUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
P*C. TR. TE«R.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
FLO*
1 ,992(526)
356(94)
t ,
-------
TABLE 7 - TREATMENT POPULATIONS - PRESENT,
PROJECTED, RESIDENT & NONRESIDENT
Table 7 summarizes the populations, by State,
for 1978 and 2000 which are now or will be
receiving treatment of their wastewaters.
Resident populations are permanent residents
of the area. Nonresident populations include
commuters living in one area and working in
another, as well as temporary residents at
resort areas and similar locations.
The year 2000 ceiling population is the popu-
lation expected to be resident in each State
as predicted by the Department of Commerce,
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). The pro-
jections were produced by BEA after extensive
analysis which included review and comment by
State agencies responsible for population
projections. All levels of treatment are
included under "Receiving Treatment."
Residents not receiving treatment are those
residents of established authorities within a
State. Many rural residents, who are counted
as a part of a State's ceiling population,
are not counted in the resident receiving or
not receiving treatment categories. There-
fore, the totals of residents receiving treat-
ment and not receiving treatment do not equal
the total population of a State.
The "Percent Served" figures are based upon
resident populations compared with BEA 1978
estimates and 2000 ceilings. 1978 BEA popu-
lation estimates can be found in other tables,
such as Table 8.
18
-------
FEBRUARY 10. 1474
TABLE 7
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
TREATMENT POPULATIONS
PRESENT, PROJECTED, HESJOENt * HONdl3lOf.Hl
t IN THOUSANDS )
****** KECEIVING TREATMENT ***»*
** NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT ***
PERCENT SERVED
2000
CEILING
STATE POPULATION
ALAHAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DIST, OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OKEGUN
PENNSYLVANIA
RHOOE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGIN!*
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N, MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. T». TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
4,140
667
4,149
2,970
26,786
3,868
3,741
841
661
15,049
7,053
1 ,166
1,181
12,158
5,732
3,101
8,517
4,224
4,659
t ,222
5,583
«,614
10,314
4,505
2,740
5,225
802
1,714
1,111
1,306
»,747
1,436
18,922
7,419
690
12,031
1,196
1,209
12,365
1,033
3,700
730
5,57)
18,069
1,666
607
6,755
4,117
2,003
5,553
484
40
275
35
1,700
170
116
1978
RES.
1,970
200
1,742
1,182
19,82)
2,436
1,872
462
729
4,510
2,683
222
478
1, BOO
3,444
2,044
1,795
1,610
2,314
(108
2,147
1,818
6,56)
2,930
1,276
3,414
472
1,268
60)
269
5,704
1,014
11,65)
2,341
42S
8,051
2,096
1,415
8,739
486
1,220
439
2,164
10,013
1,164
220
3,263
2,334
752
3,408
323
1
69
1
1,757
2
19
1978
NONRES,
102
3
65
20
1,025
167
41
SO
1,698
835
123
12
13
12
241
VI
12
50
64
79
127
455
114
22
9
867
13
15
90
56
670
14
2,056
179
0
47
t
17
526
48
2*1
1)
72
122
IS
45
296
16
79
16
0
S
0
0
0
1
2000
RES.
3,365
640
1,666
2,346
26,70]
3,906
2,879
616
611
12.J46
5,761
1,2411
948
11,77*
4,933
2,834
2,532
,326
,146
944
,686
,740
,916
3,740
2,202
5,206
692
1,742
1,141
844
8,919
1,347
17,194
4,445
576
11,567
3,300
2,919
11,753
745
2,787
616
4,191
16,824
1,66)
181
5,754
4,099
2,014
3,409
468
16
215
SI
3,242
107
25
2000
NONRES.
204
18
203
U
1.412
5Z4
39
178
1,728
1,841
220
216
79
46
501
140
15
67
45
140
486
611
251
40
75
1,427
41
22
180
150
1,240
32
1,684
441
0
92
to
7)
1,294
71
498
10
145
230
27
77
470
600
24
201
18
1
3
2
0
4
3
1476
RES.
328
66
222
65
4)2
13
e»6
59
0
1.51)
423
467
5)
117
304
64
116
158
217
187
324
1.251
1,127
140
2)0
19)
23
16
40
255
556
129
1,427
1,005
0
676
107
304
1,252
166
397
2
774
651
5
64
313
330
2)9
199
0
27
19
8
1.092
48
3
1978
NONRES,
3
0
4
0
7
0
0
0
0
21
0
58
5
0
23
0
0
0
8
0
10
35
2
0
1
0
0
0
o
7
104
0
45
4
0
0
0
2
11
0
)
0
0
0
0
9
0
15
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2000
RES.
43
14
20
0
no
0
514
16
0
17*
252
1
9
12
2i
0
0
252
0
184
77
796
254
30
119
0
1
0
0
22)
56
45
856
834
0
26
0
0
244
too
97
0
260
0
0
61
56
96
22
28
0
2
22
0
754
26
0
2000
NQNRE3,
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
55
6
0
Q
0
c
0
o
60
o
2
14
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
7
0
0
a
0
ft
0
0
a
t
o
0
1978 2000
5), 4 01.)
49.2 46.1
76.1 86.4
55.2 79.0
90.5 99.7
93.1 101.0
60.) 77.0
79.4 47.1
105.8 92.4
$3.4 62. «
53.2 62.0
24.9 94.7
55.9 60.2
67*2 95.3
64.6 86.1
72.4 91.6
77.2 100.6
47.2 76.6
59.0 94.4
17*7 T7 7
J ' . ' 1 r m 1
56.7 64.0
66.0 86.6
71.9 66,4
73.7 63.0
53.4 60.4
71.1 49.6
62.0 66.3
61.) 100.5
95 1 AA A
11.
77.
85
65.
42.
fc5«
7*1
* ^ *
59.
52!
42.
63.
50.
41.
45.
6).
61.
7J.
79.
4.
75.
U.
55.
1
2fll
ft vv * v
68,5
102.0
9) A
90.4
59.4
Mm
<*
QJk 1
' I
97 9
~ * »c
91.6
»5.J
77.1
7S.J
66.5
TS )
f 9.C
«|
. t
99.7
62.8
65.2
92.6
101.6
M*
. *
*6.»
90.5
76.5
89.4
69.0
21.7
U.S. TOTALS
270,411 151,955 11,672 219,760 20,954
20,597
389
6,976
165
*9.1
SB.7
19
-------
TABLE 8 - POPULATIONS SERVED BY TREATMENT WITH
NO DISCHARGE - PRESENT RESIDENT &
NONRESIDENT
Table 8 summarizes the existing populations,
by State, which are receiving treatment by a
facility having no discharge to surface waters.
This table does not differentiate between
treatment levels.
The majority of the facilities are oxidation/
stabilization ponds designed for evaporation
and/or infiltration of the total flow. Re-
cycling and reuse, including spray irrigation
systems, are also included.
Since populations are given in 1000's, a few
States (see Arkansas) indicate treatment
plants with no contributory populations. This
is due to rounding of the small facilities.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as listed.
Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do not contri-
bute to the treatment facility because they are
not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used for Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
20
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1479
TABLE 8
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
POPULATIONS SEKVEU BY TREATMENT »JTH MU DISCHARGE
PRESENT RESIDENT t NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS 3
****** RECEIVING
1978 1978
RES, NONRES.
0 0
2 0
107 10
0 0
1,460 122
IS 2
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
15 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
73 0
o o
0 0
o «
0 0
0 0
66
0
0
0
24
34
26
0
0
161
0
0
14
0
47
8
0
0
0
10
0
25
45
t
12
0
24
19
0
0
0
0
0
U.S. TOTALS 311,955 2,1*7 161
NOTEl SUM op ENTRIES MAY NOT EQUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUNDOFFS.
NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT *«**
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
OELAHARE
DIST. Of COLUM
FLORIDA
seoi*siA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IO«A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAJN
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNES01A
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NE» JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW fOHH
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
ORE60N
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VtR«INIA
MSHINSTON
WEST «IR6IMA
KISCONSIN
YOMIN6
AMERICAN SAMOA
6UAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC, TH. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
1978
POPULATION
1,690
407
},iit>
I, tun
21.896
2,619
J.108
502
690
B,«b2
5,0KB
8*5
457
11,245
5,130
2.879
2, JJb
3.458
1,921
LOSS
1,139
5,782
9,129
J.97S
2,389
4, SOI
7*1
1,561
63)
84*
7. 329
1,140
17,924
5,525
65J
10,701
2, 811
2,37$
11,785
935
l,tlt>
fc8»
«,Z9*
12,810
i,m
«)
f,II5
3,65*
1(059
4,651
406
29
»J
12
),i»t
111
«S
1*7*
HSS,
0
0
28
0
237
0
6
0
A
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
a
o
0
9
13
0
o
o
1
0
3
3
0
1«
o
o
1*78
NONRES.
«* PERCENT SERVED *« NO. OF
Ti
1*78
TREATMENT
PLANTS
I
340
21
0.0
0.6
1.7
0.0
O
0.0
9.0
9.0
0.0
o!l
l.S
o.o
I.*
0.0
3.2
0.9
0.
o!
».
o.
0.
J.
2.
4.
0.
0.
13.
0.
0,
I.
o.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
t.
3.
I.
0.
».
2.
0.
«.
I.
0.
t.
I.
1.0
0
1
uo
2
253
3*
1
0
0
0
1
3
21
1
a
i
131
t
)
0
a
o
4d
o
o
s
42
SS
15
t
51
0
0
II
0
4S
9
0
0
t
21
0
s
22
1
0
IB
9
31
20
0
I
0
0
0
0
*B5
-------
TABLE 9 - POPULATIONS TO BE SERVED BY TREAT-
MENT WITH NO DISCHARGE - PROJECTED
RESIDENT & NONRESIDENT
Table 9 summarizes the year 2000 projected
populations, by State, which will be receiving
treatment by a facility having no discharge to
surface waters. This table does not differen-
tiate between treatment levels.
The majority of the facilities are oxidation/
stabilization ponds designed for evaporation
and/or infiltration of the total flow. Re-
cycling and reuse, including spray irrigation
systems, are also included.
Since populations are given in 1000's, a few
States (see Minnesota) indicate treatment
plants with no contributory populations. This
is due to rounding of the small facilities.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as listed.
Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do not contri-
bute to the treatment facility because they are
not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding used
for Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
22
-------
10, 1979
TABLE 9
1978 NEEDS SUHKEY
POPULATIONS 10 ME SERVED BY TNEATMtNT vilTH NO DISChtHGt
PROJECTED RESIDENT 1 NONRESIDENT
( in THOUSANDS )
****** RECEIVINS TREATMENT **«*
*** NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT **
* PERCENT SERVED * NO. OF
2000
RES.
0
0
»55
1
3,«B
14
0
0
0
0
0
79
36
0
0
1
IIS
0
1
II
0
s
204
0
0
1
14
97
74
S)
0
257
0
0
16
0
176
II
0
0
0
14
0
34
70
1
0
32
0
32
I
0
12
0
0
U.S. TOTALS 270.4(4 5,450 588
NOTEl SUP OF ENTRIES MAY NOT EQUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUNDOFFS.
£000
STATE PDPULAT1QN
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECT ICUT
OELANAKE
DIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IO«A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVAUA
NEN HAMPSHIRE
HEN JERSEY
NEH MEXICO
MEM YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
NEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
NYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
6UAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PACt tR, TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
il'IO
«>67
a. 1*9
2,970
ii,78b
J,6(»8
$,741
041
661
IS, 049
7,053
1,166
1,1113
12,158
5,712
3,101
2,517
4,22«
4,659
1,?22
5,583
6,614
10,314
4, SOS
2.7UO
5,225
802
1,731
1,141
1,306
8,747
l,«36
18,922
7,119
690
12,011
3.3«6
1,209
12,365
1,013
3,700
710
5,573
18,069
1,688
607
6,755
4,417
2,003
5,553
484
40
27*
35
4,700
ITO
116
2000
fcGNRES,
0
0
148
0
298
4
0
0
0
0
0
13
2
0
0
0
0
o
0
2
0
12
33
0
0
1
3
2000
RES,
0
c
II
0
24
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
8
0
0
6
0
0
0
I
o
0
26
0
0
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
c
7S
2000
NQNRE3.
I)
0
0
0
0
2
23
2000
0,0
0.0
11.0
0.1
13.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
3.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
4.6
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.1
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
4.3
5,6
6.5
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.S
0,0
5.2
0.4
0.
o.
0.
2.
o.
9.
«.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
«.
0.
0.
I:
2.0
TREATMENT
PLANTS
0
0
61
4
581
30
1
0
9
0
0
7
29
0
0
2
232
0
6
18
0
4
77
2
0
23
42
171
37
36
0
95
0
1
22
0
277
9
0
0
0
25
0
5
IS
2
0
23
9
II
7
0
3
0
0
2
0
1,891
23
-------
TABLE 10 - POPULATIONS SERVED BY RAW
DISCHARGE - PRESENT RESIDENT &
NONRESIDENT
Table 10 summarizes 1978 populations served
by authorities when the collected waste is
not treated, but is discharged to the envi-
ronment as a raw waste. This would include
preliminary treatment (comminution, screen-
ing, grit chambers, etc.), but not primary
sedimentation.
Since populations are given in 1000's, a few
States (see Maine) indicate treatment plants
with no contributory populations. This is
due to rounding of the small facilities.
The populations listed as "Not Served" are
those people within the service area or
authority whose waste is discharged raw, but
are themselves not contributing to the dis-
charge because they are not on a sewer system.
Approximately 64 percent of the facilities
having a raw discharge are in coastal States
and 10 percent in Great Lakes States.
This table was developed based upon coding
used for Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
A similar table for the projected year 2000
population is not relevant since this treat-
ment and disposal method does not meet the
requirements of the Clean Water Act and is
planned to be eliminated by that date.
24
-------
NEEDS SURVEY
POPULATIONS SERVED BY RAH DISCHARGE
PRESENT RESIDENT 1 NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
*****«»* SERVED ***«*«* ***» NOT SERVED ******
FEBRUARY 10. 1479
TABLE 10
* PERCINT SERVED ** «0. OF
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
4RIZON*
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAxAWE
01 ST. OF COLUM
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IO«A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEN HAMPSHIRE
N£« JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
MONTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OHt CON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
NEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
1978
POPULATION
3|b90
407
2,296
2,144
21,896
2,619
3,108
582
690
8,4S2
5,048
895
857
11,245
5,330
2,879
2,126
3,458
3,921
1,085
4,139
5,782
9,124
3,975
2,389
4,801
761
1,561
633
849
7,329
1,190
17,924
s.sis
653
10,701
2,811
2,376
11,765
»35
2,876
689
4,299
12,810
1,268
483
5,135
3,b5»
1,859
4,651
406
24
93
12
3,282
114
95
1478
»ES.
0
0
a
15
10
1978
NONRES.
2
1978
RES.
0
1
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
26t>
i
2S
0
0
me
NONRES.
0
0
a
a
a
o
o
o
o
21
a
10
U.S. TOTALS 219,955 J6« 21
NOTE! SUM Or ENTRIES MAY NOT eflUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUND Offt.
512
37
1978
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
o.o
o.o
0.0
t.i
0,0
o.o
0.0
o.o
o.o
o.o
0.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.1
0.0
0.
0.
>.
0.
0.
0.
o.
0.
0.
o.
o.
0.
0.
o,
o.
o.
0.
9.
o.
0.
P. Z
FACILITIES
1
25
-------
TABLE 11 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
EXISTING IN 1978 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING RAW DISCHARGE
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BODs) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from existing flow
(not design flow) as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total existing flow,
with appropriate conversion factors, and
totaled for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For this treatment
category no nutrient data is presented.
Table 11 is an extension of Table 10. Because
of the small flows and populations affected,
rounding of the summaries created some rather
confusing results. The user of this table,
therefore, should consider only the U.S.
totals to be meaningful.
26
-------
FEBRUARY tO( 197*
TABLE 11
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLDHAOO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
OIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOMA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSUURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NED HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NE* MEXICO
NE« YURK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
NEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
MYOMlMG
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. r«. TERR,
VIRGIN ISLANDS
00
00
OO
12(3)
OO
OO
oo
00
oo
e>2(i6i
00
OO
00
00
00
OO
00
oo
154(40)
OO
OO
OO
OO
00
00
00
00
00
oo
oo
OO
00
00
00
00
00
00
oo
oo
oo
00
00
oo
on
00
00
to
oo
00
00
10
00
00
oo
oo
oo
oo
1476 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE RATES
FROM FACILITIES EXISTING IN 1Q78
FACILITIES PROVIDING RAN DISCHARGE
IN METRIC TONS PER DAY
U.S. TOTALS
NOTES)
3)0(60)
1. FLOnS IN CUBIC METERS
*»*
INF.
0
0
0
»
0
0
0
0
0
ii
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
a
0
0
a
0
0
o
0
53
TERS
BOOS
EFF.
0
0
0
i
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
a
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
45
X 1000
««»»
x HEM.
0.0
0.0
o.o
81.7
0.0
o.o
0.0
o.o
o.o
2.9
0.0
0.0
o.o
85.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
o.o
o.o
0.0
o.o
o.o
0.0
0.0
o.o
77.0
0.0
o.o
o.o
o.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
fl.fl
o.o
0,0
o.o
o.o
0.0
o.o
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.
0.
BO.
0.
0.
".
57.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
15.1
2. A
*»»* SOLIDS **
INF. EFF. S REN.
* PHOSPHORUS *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
* NH1 NITROGEN *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
***** OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SB
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
57
0,0
o.o
o.o
0,5
0.0
0,0
o,
o,
0,
«,
0.
o,
0.
67,
0.
0,
0.
0.
o.
0.
o.
0.
0,
o.
0.
0.
JO.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
«.
0.
0.
0.
0.0
0.0
o.o
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.0
86.2
0.0
4.0
'3.3
30.7
0.
0.
o,
0.
0,
0,
t.7
NOTEl PHOSPHORUS AND NMJ NITROGEN NOT REMOVED Bf THIS
TYPE TREATMENT PROCESS
2. APPROXIMATE MGO IN PARENTHESES 3. METRIC TONS X .4072 SHORT TONS
27
-------
TABLE 12 - POPULATIONS SERVED BY PRIMARY
TREATMENT - PRESENT RESIDENT &
NONRESIDENT
Table 12 summarizes 1978 populations served
by authorities where the collected waste is
treated only to the primary level prior to
discharge. Preliminary treatment (comminu-
tion, screening, grit chambers, etc.) plus
primary sedimentation would be included.
Chiorination may or may not be a unit process.
Treatment plants are included in this summary
without regard to the processing or disposal
of sludges generated.
Since populations are given in 1000's, a few
States (see Oregon) indicate treatment plants
with no contributory populations. This is
due to rounding of the small facilities.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table v/as developed based upon coding
used for Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
A similar table for the projected year 2000
population is not relevant since this treat-
ment and disposal method does not meet the
requirements of the Clean Water Act and is
planned to be eliminated by that date.
28
-------
FEBRUARY |0, |»79
T»BLE 12
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
POPULATIONS SERVED BY PRIMARY TREATMENT
PRESENT RESIDENT t NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
**«»< RECEIVING TREATMENT *****
* NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT **** * PERCENT SERVED *» NO. OF
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
OISl, OF COLUM
FLORIDA
GEUMBIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INOIAMA
IOMA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHICAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEK HAMPSHIRE
NEK JERSEY
NEK MEXICO
NEW YONK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
QRESON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRSINJA
WASHINGTON
NEST VIRGINIA
NISCUNSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
SUAM
N, MAHJANAS
PUERTO RICO
PACt TR. TERR.
VIR6IN ISLANDS
1978
POPULATION
3,690
407
2,296
2,144
21,896
2,619
3,106
582
. »90
8,«52
5,046
895
8S7
11,245
SiSIO
2,879
2,32*
1,458
3,921
1,085
4,119
5,762
9,129
1,975
2,389
K.S01
761
1,561
633
8«9
7,329
1,190
17,924
5,525
653
10,701
2,811
2,376
11,765
9J5
2,876
689
1,399
12,630
1,268
«83
5,135
3,658
1,859
4,651
406
29
93
12
3,212
114
95
1978
RES.
33
126
88
197
1,640
44
350
12
0
26
210
74
27
305
8
200
212
50
Ib3
75
174
Z|H73
168
150
68
1,713
19
576
1
150
1,071
219
1,480
at
3
451
2*1
0
1,608
143
133
6
69
31
I
114
633
1,040
212
45
21
1
61
0
1,106
1
19
1978
NONRES.
9
0
0
1
18
0
0
16
0
0
3
12
0
0
0
15
a
o
o
28
89
4KB
0
0
1
785
0
0
0
18
329
0
219
0
0
0
0
0
205
5
5
0
0
0
0
17
22
303
0
18
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
U.S. TOTALS 219,455 18,747 2,519
NOTEl SUM OF ENTRIES MAY NOT E8UAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUND OFF8.
197*
RES.
1
us
5
14
81
0
14}
0
0
5
34
36
1
13
0
s
47
IS
3
58
29
563
27
a
9
44
0
5
1
66
76
0
166
10
D
19
20
a
135
22
80
a
is
0
0
31
60
116
113
8
0
27
1)
0
664
2
3
2,677
1978
NONRES.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
1978
0.9
31.6
9^2
7.5
1.7
M.3
2.2
0.0
0.3
4.2
i.7
0.2
T.O
1,5
*,2
T.O
«»!
i,
s,
2.
35.
2.
37.
0,
17,
20.
18.
8.
1.
0.
4.
6.
0.
13.
IS.
«.
ft.
1.
0.
0.
21.
12.
26.
11.
1,
5.
4.
6*.
S:
56
TREATMENT
PLANTS
13
S
7
31
31
8
a
t
0
4
27
4
12
6)
2
22
15
9
8
13
23
32
55
37
36
S
25
4
16
59
7
116
21
5
56
160
1
46
5
28
9
1*
15
2
I*
46
S»
44
33
A
2
2
0
19
1
1
1,306
29
-------
TABLE 13 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
EXISTING IN 1978 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING PRIMARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of^This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (8005) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from existing flow
(not design flow) as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total existing flow,
with appropriate conversion factors, and
totaled for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For this treatment
category no nutrient data is presented.
(or high flow) of primary plants.
The national totals indicate approximately
the levels of efficiency these types of
plants achieve.
Table 13 is an extension of Table 12. Round-
ing of flows and loadings causes some apparent
errors in the table due to a relatively small
data base. The value of this analysis is
greater for those States having a large number
30
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 11
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS! REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE RATES
FROM FACILITIES EXISTING IN 1978
FACILITIES PROVIDING PRIMARY TREATMENT
IN METRIC TONS PER DAY
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZUNA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
OIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEOR51A
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IONA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEM HAMPSHIRE
NEM JERSEY
NE« MEXICO
NEM YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKtAHUMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
EST VIMGINU
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
FLO*
16(4)
92(24)
Z»(7)
-)6(J5)
608(160)
571(96)
248(65)
I1O)
on
9(2)
251(61)
7(12)
19(5)
IBK4B)
1(1)
131(15)
109(28)
18(10)
68(18)
79<2I)
89(21)
2,229(589)
101(26)
94(25)
95(25)
1,215(121)
!»(«)
32S(BS)
1()
109(29)
1,095(288)
87(21)
1,435(179)
52(11)
Ml
228(60)
105(27)
o
1,278(117)
70(16)
107(26)
2()
49(11)
9(2)
on
101(27)
J2»(85)
764(202)
105(27)
22(5)
9(2)
to
21(5)
on
186(101)
oo
9(2)
***
INF.
1
11
6
24
165
107
12
1
0
1
46
7
1
41
0
62
17
10
in
1*
20
151
14
31
24
2«3
2
112
0
21
231
19
197
15
0
44
20
0
186
12
29
0
10
0
18
58
111
SO
4
2
0
5
0
99
0
BOD5
EFF.
1
6
1
14
102
55
19
0
0
0
8
4
1
18
0
31
18
6
*
10
14
241
8
19
4
164
0
68
0
12
169
e
134
3
0
24
4
0
104
a
a
0
s
0
0
10
35
77
13
2
0
0
5
0
4S
0
1
«
x HEM,
58.2
48,9
77.7
49.9
37.8
48.7
38.7
74.1
0.0
87.5
82. 4
14.4
66.4
55.5
47.4
46,2
51.1
16.1
5«.5
44,9
32.8
31.4
40.4
0.4
81.6
32, «
56.0
39.7
76.4
44.7
26.9
5J.7
32.0
BO. a
72. b
45.4
77.9
75.0
41,9
30.7
71.8
23,1
49.9
69.0
40.1
40.5
40,6
11.7
57.0
46.5
53.1
3.2
o.o
0,0
54. S
36.0
12.6
***
INF.
3
19
7
22
162
101
37
2
0
1
25
2
44
0
57
34
11
16
18
17
370
14
22
23
316
2
117
0
25
168
16
IBS
13
0
51
22
0
217
12
29
0
10
I
0
15
54
141
26
3
2
0
5
0
80
0
2
SOLIDS
EFF.
1
7
2
11
74
17
12
0
0
0
13
3
1
32
0
20
15
5
«
e
9
189
6
B
5
117
1
61
0
9
*1
7
97
3
0
19
5
0
109
6
6
0
3
0
0
6
21
56
9
1
0
0
5
0
27
0
1
«
X REM.
49.8
62.5
61.
St.
54.
62.
67.
7«.
«.
86.
48.
S8.
62.
27.
47.
»J.
54.
49.
71.
56.
47.
49.
58.
61.
77.
63.
28.
48.
47.
62.
45.
55.
4».
TO.
69.
61.
73,
75.
54.
4«.
72.
57.
61.
59.
46.
59.
60,
60.
64.
54.
73.
4.
0.
0.
65.
S«.
4«.
** PHOSPHORUS *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
NH1 NITROGEN *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
***** OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
NOTE I PHOSPHORUS AND NH1 NITROGEN NOT REMOVED BY THIS
TYPE TREATMENT PROCESS
U.S. TOTALS 12.926(1414) 2,511 1,487 40.8 2.549 I,124 55.9
NOTES! I. FLONS IN CUBIC METERS X 1000 2. APPROXIMATE MGD IN PARENTHESES I. METRIC TONS X .9072 SHORT IONS
-------
TABLE 14 - POPULATIONS SERVED BY ADVANCED
PRIMARY TREATMENT - PRESENT RESI-
DENT & NONRESIDENT
Table 14 summarizes 1978 populations served
by authorities in which the collected waste
is treated by advanced primary treatment
prior to discharge. This category of treat-
ment usually has greater removal efficiencies
of BOD and suspended solids than do primary
plants, but less than secondary treatment
plants.
Many of the plants in question are various
types of lagoon systems which provide some
biological treatment, but are at present de-
signed for inapplicable standards (number of
cell, etc.) and probably will be upgraded in
the future. Some trickling filter plants are
also in this category. It should be noted
that those States having the largest number
of advanced primary facilities are in areas
of the country practicing lagoon treatment -
the plains States and the arid western and
southwestern states. Kansas, for instance,
has the highest population served (41.6 per-
cent) by this level of treatment of any State.
Eleven and one-half percent of the existing
U.S. population use this type of treatment.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used for Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
A similar table for the projected year 2000
population is not relevant since this treat-
ment and disposal method does not meet the
requirements of the Clean Water Act, and is
planned to be eliminated by that date.
32
-------
I1BLI 14
ID,
19T8
POPULATION! 5{RkEI> B» ADVANCED P«:»*RY TREATMENT
RESIDENT I NONRESIDENT
C ID THOUSANDS >
ST»U
.**».. RECEIVING T«EATfEM *»««
1978
» NOT RECEIVING
ALASKA
AKI2JN4
AflKAItSAS
COLUNAUO
CQMHECIICUT
DCSl. OF CUUJM.
TLQWJDA
6ELWS1A
HAM II
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
lOnA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAHIt-AND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
XI3SUUHI
MONTANA
NE8KASKA
NEVADA
DEW HAUfSHJse
NEW JEHSE*
NEW MEXICO
NEW fOKK
NORTH CAROLINA
NUR1H DAKOTA
OHIO
SHEWN
DHDDE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
JOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
IEXA9
UTAH
VERNUNT
VIRGINIA
M.3H1MGTU*
IMENTCAN SAMOA
GUAM
N, "UH1ANAS
PUEKTO BICC
PAC. TR. TERR,
VIRGIN ISLANDS
21 .»9b
lillB
5,048
895
«S7
2.6T9
1 ,085
5.'82
9,129
4,801
761
1.561
633
849
Ul«0
653
IU.TO!
II, T«
935
"b89
izieso
*4«1
)|65«
1,859
a.fcSl
ttOb
29
12
95
III
i
4
II
SB?
75
1*1
415
b»
A27
i
UlM,
0
55
*71
Sb
19*
22
1
217
Ml
i32S
272
2<
.141
494
0
175
1«S
SO
8)2
S
0
jas
3^9
19
1
C
13
I
1
0
C
o
65
0
4
«
49
0
iea
i
o
19
0
u
0
0
i
2
4
T
1
0
18
23
n
14
10
0
0
0
0
0
a
U.S. TOTALS 2I9.9SS it,331 1,607
NOTEl SUM OF ENTRIES HIT NOT EflUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUND OFFJ,
BIS,
II
0
5
0
0
ft
T
;a
384
1
3fe
39
IT
77
1
J1
0
6
3
%c
32
7
5
I
124
m
o
;T
14
0
iS
a
12
ss
0
0
IS
3
D
tt
0
ft
226
8
a
1,972
NONRCS.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
D
a
88
4
I)
2
a
4
4
a
o
«
o
o
o
t>
o
0
0
t
D
D
D
&
0
a
t
B
a
o
o
o
D
»
t
I
0
(
0
a
o
o
o
o
0
0
0
t
3*
** PERCENT SERVED
1978
17.8
24.8
36.5
10,5
O^T
0^1
11.5
a.
21.
S.
t.
n!
o,
IS,
0.
o!
ft.2
14.0
7.4
i!b
0,5
».*
LI,
6,
21.
1,
*.
a,
o,
6.
to,
1,
«.
32.
10,9
o|o
11.5
NO. OF
TREATMENT
PLANTS
172
47
SI
i
I
0
5
iO
7
OS
132
16
ID
121
1
17
0
13
96
to
2*1
22
69
4
I
11
U
31
21
JO
72
127
HO
14
0
47
114
17
il»
I
0
7i
4*
1
at
34
0
a
i
4
I
*
2,472
33
-------
TABLE 15 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
EXISTING IN 1978 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING ADVANCED PRIMARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (6005) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from existing flow
(not design flow) as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total existing flow,
with appropriate conversion factors, and
totaled for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For this treatment
category no nutrient data is presented.
(or high flow) of advanced primary plants.
The national totals indicate approximately
the levels of efficiency these types of
plants achieve.
Table 15 is an extension of Table 14. Round-
ing of flows and loadings causes some apparent
errors in the table due to a relatively small
data base. The value of this analysis is
greater for those States having a large number
34
-------
TABLE is
10,
STATE
FLO"
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZ(J»A
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
OELAKAME
DIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOHA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Hfm JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YOHK
NORTH CANULINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
ORCGUN
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAHOLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMQA
GUAM
N. MAKIANAS
PUERTO RICD
PAC. TR, TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
86(22)
on
216(62)
131(15)
35(9)
DO
0( j
90(21)
429(11!)
269(71)
152(40)
236 ( 6i)
17(9)
464(122)
461(121)
17(4)
2«>8(70)
0()
722(190)
9O
19(10)
88(21)
101(27)
454(120)
34 (91
51(11)
11(1)
IO
122(12)
2,414(6)7)
226(59)
8(2)
758(200)
207(54)
172(45)
771(201)
111(10)
56(14)
36(9)
114(81)
20
oo
101(79)
12(1)
121(121
72(19]
OO
DO
2O
89(21)
OO
1976 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE RATES
FROM FACILITIES EXISTING IN 1978
FACILITIES PROVIDING ADVANCED PRIMARY TREATMENT
IN METRIC TONS PER DAY
*»**
INF.
11
n
in
5ft
1,063
15
8
0
n
17
87
59
19
50
5
160
106
1
55
n
188
0
7
2«
17
127
5
10
2
0
26
9
2*5
62
1
159
4!
30
131
0
26
IS
6
71
0
0
27
81
2
34
14
0
0
0
«
0
0
HOOS
EFF.
b
0
9
9
593
5
1
0
0
1
16
56
7
11
2
32
18
0
14
0
40
0
2
4
1
40
1
2
0
0
11
1
104
11
0
28
7
5
4}
D
5
3
1
13
0
0
3
28
0
11
S
0
0
0
6
0
0
**** *
X RE*. IMF.
52.1 10
0.0 0
71.7 12
83.9 52
44.2 1,290
83,7 31
84.2 13
47.7 0
0,
89.
80.
6.
79,
72.
54.
79.
82.
79.
74.
50.
78.
0.
69.
82.
78.
62.
79.
79.
69.
85.
55.
66.
61.
81.
89.
82.
81.
82.
66.
0.
80.
77.
77.
81.
81.
Q0
88.
64.
79.
65.
57.
0.
0.
68.
71.
0.
0.
0
18
77
50
13
$8
5
159
118
3
56
0
167
0
7
22
16
141
10
i
0
10
8
26*
46
1
272
47
32
195
0
21
14
69
0
0
26
69
2
30
14
0
0
«
24
0
0
SOLIDS ****
EFF, I RE*.
5 50.7
0 0.
6 81.
14 71.
491 61.
5 83.
1 86.
0 68.
0 0.
9 47.
28 63.
45 8.
6 79.
IS 73.
2 62.
27 82.
21 81.
1 68.
13 75.
0 53.
19 76.
0 0.
1 76.
« 81,
7 57.
37 73.
0 78.
2 76.
0 69.
0 85.
12 61.
2 74.
93 »4.
12 74.
0 82.
62 77.
5
1
1
1
80.
81.
70.
0.
»».
75.
83.
79,
85.
0.
82,
79.
89.
63.
68.
0.
0.
41.
85.
0.
0.
«* PHOSPHORUS «*
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
NHI NITROGEN «
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
* OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
NOTEl PHOSPHORUS AND NHI NITROGEN NOT REMOVED >Y THIS
TYPE TREATMENT PROCESS
U.S. TOTALS lit,116(1736) 3,210 1,167 63.6 3,SSI 1,093 69.2
NOTESt 1. FLO»S IN CUftlC METERS X (000 2. APPROXIMATE HGD IN PARENTHESES 3. METRIC TONS X .9072 SHORT TONS
35
-------
TABLE 16 - POPULATIONS SERVED BY SECONDARY
TREATMENT - PRESENT RESIDENT &
NONRESIDENT
Table 16 summarizes 1978 populations served
by authorities in which the collected waste
is treated by secondary treatment prior to
discharge. In general this treatment includes
most biological processes - trickling filters,
activated sludge including oxidation ditches,
rotating biological contactors, etc. - with no
additional treatment except disinfection.
This category is by far the largest, serving
approximately one-fourth of the total 1978
U.S. population.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used on Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
36
-------
FEHHUARY 10.
TABLE 16
1970
8UMVEV
PUPULATIUNS SEHVEO BY SECONDARY THEITMENT
PRESENT KESJOENT t NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
««*« RECEIVING TREATMENT **»
** NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT ***
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFIJKNU
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
OEIAMAKE
01 ST. 'if CUlUM
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
10«A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOIA
MISSISSIPPI
MiSSOum
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
MEN JEHStv
Nln MEXICO
MEN YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH OAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N, MAHIANAS
PUEHTU RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
1978
POPULATION
1.690
107
2,296
2. 144
31,896
2,619
3,108
582
, 690
8,152
5,0<4«
89$
857
11,245
$.530
2,879
I, lift
3, ass
3,921
1,085
4,139
5,782
9,139
3,975
2,169
4,801
7*1
1,561
633
849
7,329
1.190
17,921
5,52$
653
10,701
2.811
2.376
11.785
935
2.876
689
1.299
12,839
1.268
483
5.135
3,658
1,659
4,651
406
29
93
12
3,282
114
95
1978
I ,843
41
1,187
367
3,718
1,884
I, 'I1C
14
72«
2,578
1,774
68
121
I.T1S
1.696
1.015
5«2
1 ,413
1,?31
272
314
1,202
A2I
1.679
1,010
907
370
549
J87
112
2.815
521
5.412
1.011
37*
2,296
913
147
?,98b
341
743
221
1.578
3,237
«4S
89
352
455
268
922
156
0
8
0
94
1
0
1978
93
1
21
2
177
137
23
11
1,691
486
51
17
7
e
2)6
25
10
43
61
50
2
6
2«
0
24
13
35
11
248
14
830
15*
0
4
0
e
105
43
132
1
33
7
9
14
54
54
10
30
5
0
a
a
0
o
o
U.S. TOTALS 219.955 56,256 5,36S
NOTEl SUM OF ENTHIE8 MAY NUT EBUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUND OFFS.
1978
«ES.
210
7
162
12
228
7
681
3
0
45
340
18
3
7
133
39
28
291
127
111
119
627
204
77
160
61
13
26
1
180
33*
61
759
570
0
165
26
12
486
152
202
1
75
213
1
28
63
SO
34
83
D
0
3
0
17S
36
0
6,719
1478
NONRES,
3
0
4
0
0
0
0
a
o
o
o
20
0
0
3
9
0
0
I
0
0
6
I
0
1
0
0
0
0
«
81
0
37
2
0
0
0
1
5
0
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
tea
** PERCENT StHVED * NO. OF
T'
1978
TREATMENT
PLANTS
10.3
SI. 7
17.1
17.0
72.9
5.4
a.s
105.6
JO. 5
M.i
».T
14.1
15.4
II. a
35.3
23.3
40.9
31. «
25.1
7.6
20. a
*.o
42.2
42.3
ie.9
46.7
35.2
61.2
13.}
JB.4
43.8
»«.*
18. J
58.0
21.5
25.3
36.5
25.9
32.2
36.7
25,2
54.9
16.5
6.9
U.5
14.4
0.0
6.7
o.o
2.9
1.0
o.o
25.6
201
36
43
50
1«3
174
71
11
1
122
391
ID
33
261
167
261
145
175
151
63
5t
66
154
49
206
233
76
242
17
12
109
35
193
431
215
256
54
69
296
10
146
62
173
267
26
39
66
104
74
267
37
0
3
0
5
«
0
6,606
37
-------
TABLE 17 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
EXISTING IN 1978 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING SECONDARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (6005) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from existing flow
(not design flow) as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total existing flow,
with appropriate conversion factors, and
totaled for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For this treatment
category no nutrient data is presented.
(or high flow) of secondary plants.
The national totals indicate approximately
the levels of efficiency these types of
plants achieve.
The fact that the national totals indicate
approximately 81 percent removal for BOD and
suspended solids versus the statutory 85 per-
cent is indicative of both inefficient plants
and overloaded plants. These data are derived
from existing facilities, using actual opera-
tional information, not design information.
Table 17 is an extension of Table 16, Round-
ing of flows and loadings cause some apparent
errors in the table due to a relatively small
data base. The value of this analysis is
greater for those States having a large number
38
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 17
STATt
FLO*
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARI2UNA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIAN*
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JEHSEY
NEW MEXICU
NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OHEGUN
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONI
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
HI SCONS IN
YOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
900(217)
25(6)
559(147)
229(«0)
«7 1(210)
1,021(270)
8(2)
1,046(276)
1,271(315)
1,184(113)
27(7)
70(18)
1,208(119)
1,114(347)
549(145)
215(62)
842(222)
600(158)
255(67)
147(19)
821(217)
769(202)
861(228)
585(154)
414(114)
197(52)
285(75)
209(55)
95(25)
1,961(521)
201(51)
1,900(1010)
777(205)
110(34)
1,368(361)
373(98)
183(48)
1,660(438)
326(86)
645(170)
106(28)
1,259(332)
1,665(440)
402(106)
50(13)
196(51)
301(79)
145(38)
565(149)
71(19)
2(3
on
31(8)
on
on
1478 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE RATES
FHPM FACILITIES EXISTING IN 1978
FACILITIES PROVIDING SECONDARY TREATMENT
IN METHIC TONS PER DAY
»« BODS
INF. EFF.
»**
x HEM.
***» SOLIDS ***»
INF. EFF, X HEM.
U.S. TOTALS 18,175(10137) 8,222 1,S9t
NOTESl 1. FLO»3 IN CUBIC METERS X 1000
172
1
105
65
1,538
IBB
151
t
162
214
218
6
17
140
259
168
49
210
110
55
37
148
147
206
111
102
36
74
42
21
491
40
5)1
166
30
260
81
54
298
28
163
30
467
147
64
8
52
80
30
130
15
0
0
0
10
0
0
26
1
15
9
220
24
28
0
29
31
37
1
2
22
33
17
5
55
17
7
6
30
19
13
IS
12
5
8
1
4
317
9
180
24
1
40
10
e
43
1}
30
1
117
15
9
2
8
7
9
IS
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
»4.
70.
84.
85.
»5,
86.
81.
88.
81.
86.
84.
".
88.
88.
87.
89,
88.
73.
84.
87.
83.
79,"
86.1
81.1
86.1
88.1
84.1
88. t
90. <
80.1
15.'
76,'
66.
85.,
94.
»4.
86. (
63.<
85.1
54. (
8i.:
88, (
74. «
«».'
85.!
70.:
84.1
»l.
69.'
88.1
83.'
O.I
91. <
O.I
«!.!
38,,
0,(
149
3
115
94
1,472
200
158
1
151
245
216
6
14
232
275
159
51
261
107
58
36
r 155
> 219
> 264
I 102
) 40
> 30
1 75
> 42
> 21
1 551
> 43
565
> 142
29
> 302
» 88
1 60
1 336
> 41
I 123
> 26
> 448
1 407
i 65
1 8
) 4]
75
r 31
) 122
> IS
) 0
i 0
I 0
( 10
* 0
) 0
31
1
22
14
205
29
26
a
30
32
48
1
1
27
35
21
6
50
17
6
9
31
25
33
28
16
5
9
4
1
170
7
171
29
1
46
12
11
48
20
11
2
207
73
9
2
8
8
6
18
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
84.0
69.2
80.4
84, a
86,0
85.6
83.4
79,0
80,0
86.9
78.0
74.8
86.6
88.1
87,0
84.1
87.1
80.5
81.5
88.2
73.1
79,9
8«.l
87,4
72.6
82,2
81. 0
87.2
89.9
83.4
69.1
83.7
69.7
79.0
88.7
84.5
85.8
80.2
85.5
50.8
»4.J
86.9
S3. 7
82.1
84.9
64.2
80.5
9,4
80.6
as. 3
81.5
0.0
94.9
0.0
92.2
56.6
0.0
** PHOSPHORUS ***
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
*H1 NITROGEN
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
**** OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
NOTEl PHOSPHORUS AND NHJ NITROGEN NOT REMOVED BY THIS
TYPE TREATMENT PROCESS
80.6 8,563 1,648 80.0
2, APPROXIMATE MGD IN PARENTHESES 1. METRIC TONS X .9072 SHORT TONS
39
-------
TABLE 18 - POPULATIONS TO BE SERVED BY
SECONDARY TREATMENT - PROJECTED
RESIDENT & NONRESIDENT
Table 18 summarizes projected 2000 populations
to be served by authorities in which the
collected waste will be treated by secondary
treatment prior to discharge. In general this
treatment includes most biological processes -
trickling filters, activated sludge including
oxidation ditches, rotating biological con-
tactors, etc. - with no additional treatment
except disinfection.
As will be noted from the summary, 35.2 per-
cent of the total population will be served
by this type of treatment in 2000 compared to
25.6 percent in 1978.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used on Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
40
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 18
1976 NEEDS SURVEY
POPULATIONS TO BE SERVED BY SECONDARY TREATMENT
PROJECTED RESIDENT » NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
****** RECEIVING TREATMENT *****
2000
NONftES.
156
16
49
1
769
134
35
0
0
585
71
224
68
5
28
36
12
30
89
135
8
569
23
0
5
1,104
35
18
63
104
789
9
2,660
207
0
2
0
17
688
67
394
4
11
0
0
29
221
621
13
131
ie
1
3
2
0
4
3
U.S. TOTALS 270,411 95,173 10,591
NOTE I SUM OF ENTRIES MAY NOT E8UAL TO TOTALS DUE TO ROUND Off 9.
*** NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT ****
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
BIST. OF COLUM
FLORIOA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
lOnA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEN HAMPSHIRE
NEK JERSEY
NEN MEXICO
NEN YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
NEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TH. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
2000
POPULATION
4,140
667
4,149
2,970
26,786
3,868
3,741
841
661
15.049
7,053
1,366
1,183
12,358
5,732
3,101
2,517
4,224
4,659
1,222
5,583
6,614
10,314
4,505
2,740
5,225
802
1,734
1,141
1,306
8,747
1,436
18,922
7,419
690
12,0)1
3,396
3,209
12.365
1,033
3,700
730
5,573
18,069
1,688
607
6,755
4,417
2,003
5,553
484
40
275
35
4,700
170
116
2000
RES.
1,877
586
3,185
953
13,585
1,601
2,210
2
0
3,863
1,851
1,214
523
502
775
1,464
2,153
1,415
3.794
816
92
4,307
797
I
812
4,852
599
1,574
733
693
4,124
952
10,488
1,214
561
1,302
382
193
3,514
540
1,870
295
1,227
132
0
143
8,178
3.052
1,355
803
437
36
203
31
3.1J7
102
25
2000
RES.
31
6
16
0
98
0
409
0
0
200
88
5
0
0
0
0
91
0
162
4
536
24
0
37
0
o
o
o
129
37
0
296
335
0
1
0
0
70
52
59
0
35
0
o
56
36
27
3
12
0
2
18
0
728
26
0
3,644
2000
NONRES.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
60
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
146
** PERCENT SERVED NO. OF
2000
TREATMENT
PLANTS
45.4
88.0
76.8
32.t
50.7
41.4
59.1
0.3
0.0
25.7
26.3
88.9
44.3
4.1
13.5
47.2
85.5
33.5
81.4
66.8
I.T
65.1
7.7
0.0
29,7
92.9
74.8
90.8
64.3
53.1
47.2
66.1
55.4
16.4
81.4
10.8
H.3
*.0
28.4
52.4
50.6
40.5
22.0
«.8
0.0
23.6
32.)
69.1
67.7
14.S
90.)
90.5
TJ.9
89.4
66.7
60.1
21.7
35.2
193
124
71
141
284
236
65
3
0
67
2S4
37
158
394
122
765
397
148
403
1S8
60
96
228
4
193
785
122
269
25
64
6
»J
487
272
)34
141
25
92
721
18
151
274
87
12
0
61
192
302
428
320
116
5
3
)
36
21
2
10,091
41
-------
TABLE 19 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
PROJECTED FOR 2000 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING SECONDARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tabled found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BODs) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from projected design
flow information as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total design flow, with
appropriate conversion factors, and totaled
for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For this treatment
category no nutrient data is presented.
number (or high flow) of secondary plants.
The national totals indicate approximately
the levels of efficiency these types of
plants achieve.
It will be noted that the percentage removals
indicate a greater efficiency for secondary
treatment in 2000 than was the case in 1978
(88.1 percent versus 80.6 percent for 6005).
This reflects the lessor influence of existing
overloaded plants since the 2000 information
is for design flows, and most of these plants
will have been enlarged.
Table 19 is an extension of Table 18. Round-
ing of flows and loadings causes some apparent
error in the table due to the size of the data
base in some States. The value of this analy-
sis is greater for those States having a large
42
-------
TABLE 1*
10, 1971
1976 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES Ar*0 DISCHARGE HATES
FROM FACILITIES PROJECTED FOB 2000
FACILITIES PROVIDING SECONDARY TREATMENT
TN METRIC TONS PER DAY
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
AAIZUN*
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
01ST. OF COLUH,
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
KAHAII
10 AMU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MAMYLAND
MASSACMUSITTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NE* HAMPSHIRE
NEr, JtHStr
NE« MEXICO
NE
0(3
on
2.151(568)
1,106(292)
892(162)
314(68)
216(62)
607(160)
971(230)
1,186(511)
991(252)
2,187(577)
S74US1)
4S(I2>
1,914(1014)
5<>7(I49)
1(3
449(116)
3,621(958)
J0K101)
909(240)
412(104)
5fl«(154)
i, 141(630)
"U5OU)
4, 815(2592)
920(241)
2U(57)
81«(21*>
189(50)
268(70)
2,927(667)
454(120)
1, 179(311)
117(16)
1,051(277)
90(2])
00
103(27)
i,]}°(35i)
2,463(650)
702(165)
SHU 42)
211(55)
24(6)
6»(17>
21(9)
1,110(146)
19(10)
14(1)
*«
INF.
2>6
54
277
105
2,013
204
316
0
0
476
211
161
«6
»7
122
261
292
?02
492
140
10
766
110
0
91
126
70
112
«2
1*5
1,004
90
1.710
210
55
213
41
64
500
1KB
302
11
197
22
0
21
517
571
141
125
44
8
13
2
164
6
2
BODS
iff.
11
4
36
1]
166
23
47
0
0
64
IS
20
12
7
17
26
35
26
65
17
1
111
IS
0
14
106
11
2?
8
17
91
12
229
27
5
21
5
8
75
11
35
4
31
2
0
1
19
71
21
16
3
**** »**
X RE«, INF,
66,
82.
87.
87.
40.
ea.
as.
85.
o.
86.
85.
66.
85.
85.
89.
90.
87.
85.
86,
87.
87.
85.
66.
86,
84,
66,
»1,
«t.
69.
40.
90.
65.
86.
66.
90.
89.
86.
40.
84,
87,
68,
87.
42.
87,
0.
5.
7.
87.
5.
87.
85.
90.
85.
85.
84,
7.
81,
2S2
64
272
too
2,149
IBS
326
0
0
502
210
14*
81
55
130
229
320
206
505
142
10
676
110
0
40
8TZ
74
127
85
140
1,04*
90
1.849
210
55
2*4
44
84
538
lol
2*1
33
357
21
4
20
307
580
144
122
44
3
IS
2
328
a
i
SOLIDS
EFF.
34
4
15
13
142
23
46
0
0
64
35
17
12
7
18
34
16
28
67
17
1
114
17
0
15
121
11
29
a
17
4]
12
241
26
6
25
5
12
75
1)
15
4
12
2
0
3
39
75
21
It
b
0
1
0
19
1
0
*»* ** PHOSPHOMUS ** * NHI NITROGEN * ***** OTHER *****
I »EM, INFLUENT EFFLUENT INFLUENT EFFLUENT INFLUENT EFFLUENT
86.5
84.*
66. 8
86.1
41.0
87,1
85.7
85.5
0.0
67.2
84.
86.
84,
87.
84.
85.
87.
86.
8*.
87.
86.
87.
84.
85.
83.
66.
84.
40.
89.
40.
41.
65.
87,
66.
68,
40,
87,
85,
85,
86,
«*;
87.
41.
87.
0,
85.
87.
86.
85.
66.
85.
80.
86.
85.
86,
NOTE) PHOSPHORUS AND NN3 NITROGEN NOT REMOVED BY THIS
TYPE TREATMENT PROCESS
87.2
84.0
U.S. TOTALS 62,167(16475) 14,711 1,748 88.1 15,104 l,«0fc 88,0
NOTESl 1, FLO«3 IN CUBIC METERS X 1000 2. APPROXIMATE MSB IN PARENTHESES S, METRIC TONS X .9072 « SHORT TONS
43
-------
TABLE 20 - NUMBER OF PLANTS PROJECTED FOR
SECONDARY TREATMENT FOR YEAR 2000 -
TOTAL PROJECTED FLOW
Table 20 summarizes the secondary treatment
plants projected to be in operation by the
year 2000. In general this treatment includes
most biological processes - trickling filters,
activated sludge including oxidation ditches,
rotating biological contactors, etc. - with no
additional treatment except disinfection.
The table summarizes the total number of
plants per State, as well as the number of
plants in each of seven ranges of flow. The
flow range is determined by the year 2000
design flow.
The summary includes all plants now in exis-
tence which will not be abandoned between 1978
and 2000, primary and advanced primary plants
which will be upgraded to secondary before
2000, and new secondary plants which will be
constructed prior to 2000.
It should be noted that over 50 percent of the
plants will be designed for flows less than
100,000 gallons per day.
Plants having levels of treatment designed for
removals greater than secondary are summarized
in Tables 25 and 34. Further summaries of
secondary plants are presented in Tables 21,
22, and 23.
44
-------
FEKKU««» 10. 1979
TABLE 20
CUBIC ME1EH3/DAV X 1000
(MILLION UALLUNS/OAY)
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFUHNIA
COLUKAIHI
CONNECTICUT
OELAWANi
DIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IUNA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
N£B«ASKA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NIX JtHStY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YONK
NORTH CAROLINA
NOKTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
*EST VIRGINIA
KtSCUNSlN
«YOM1«G
AMERICAN SAMOA
BUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUEKTU RICO
PAC. 1H. TERR.
VIRSIN ISLANDS
U.S. TOTALS
I9T8 NEEDS SURVEY
OF PLANTS PROJECTED FUR SECONDARY TREATMENT FOR YEAR 2000
TOTAL PROJECTED FLO*
TOTAL
PLANTS
193
124
71
141
285
216
6S
1
0
67
257
37
158
344
122
76-5
397
148
403
158
60
96
228
4
193
785
122
289
25
86
48
42
490
272
3}4
lit
25
92
721
19
153
274
87
12
0
61
192
302
428
321
116
5
j
3
26
21
4
10,104
0-.40
(fl-.10b)
51
94
11
65
74
91
0
3
0
7
69
2
80
214
49
544
168
62
154
49
42
7
92
3
102
478
54
165
7
15
0
10
170
131
279
48
4
45
133
1
20
207
21
2
0
26
69
68
171
1 76
71
2
4,657
.401-1.9
(.106-.S019)
60
11
31
45
84
61
6
0
0
22
111
7
48
165
47
161
138
59
137
56
12
16
115
I
57
177
42
66
10
17
S
13
160
73
42
56
12
32
240
1
S4
58
37
6
0
23
79
110
191
97
23
2
0
1
0
I
1,220
1.91-4.0
(.502-1.05)
24
6
10
14
29
28
6
0
0
a
31
6
11
11
9
IS
29
7
38
16
3
15
11
0
15
63
12
19
1
10
1
4
52
27
1
11
4
8
67
1
23
4
U
0
0
5
12
32
42
20
791
1.001-19
(1.06-5.019)
26
11
10
10
52
27
10
0
0
17
34
13
14
4
10
13
30
11
56
89
3
36
8
0
12
49
9
13
4
18
16
11
48
28
6
16
3
A
69
7
41
5
14
1
0
7
19
50
19
20
15
0
1
2
7
3
2
967
19.1-40
(5.02-10.51
3
1
3
4
19
5
13
0
0
6
3
5
1
0
1
5
10
J
6
J
0
7
0
0
S
6
3
3
0
2
11
1
14
6
4
3
1
0
7
1
9
0
2
0
0
0
2
U
3
4
1
1
2
0
4
0
1
210
40.001-190
(10.6-50.2)
9
1
5
1
20
4
4
0
0
6
7
1
2
0
6
S
1
5
6
3
0
9
1
0
2
4
2
2
3
4
11
0
11
4
0
2
1
1
3
I
6
0
0
1
0
0
11
9
2
2
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
20S
190*
0
0
1
0
7
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
4
1
0
0
3
0
I
0
0
2
1
15
0
0
I
0
0
2
1
0
u
2
0
0
a
o
1
o
o
0
o
45
-------
TABLE 21 - NUMBER OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
PLANTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED BETWEEN
1978 AND 2000 - TOTAL PROJECTED
FLOW
Table 21 summarizes the secondary treatment
plants projected to be constructed between
1978 and 2000. In general, this treatment
includes most biological processes, as dis-
cussed in Table 20.
The table summarizes the total number of
entirely new secondary plants which are
planned to be constructed by the year 2000,
by State, and by flow ranges. The flows are
determined by the year 2000 design flow.
It is noted that approximately 70 percent of
the new plants will be smaller than 100,000
gallons per day.
No upgraded primary plants, upgraded advanced
primary plants, or existing secondary plants
which will be enlarged are included in this
table.
46
-------
FEBRUARY |0,
TABLE 21
me NEEDS
OF SECONDARY TREATMENT PLANTS TO SI COMSIOUCTEO BETHEEN 1*71 ANQ 2(100
TOTAL.
CUBIC MtTERS/DAf X
(H1LLIUN
ALABAMA
ALASKA
1000
CALlFO«MA
CONNECTICUT
OELAHAKE
oisr. OF
FLOHIDA
GECIHGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I DMA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACMUSCTI9
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
MEBNASKA
NEVADA
ME* HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
N£* MEXICO
Ht* »OH*
NOHTh CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CIO-OLTNA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEJCAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
ISCOMSIN
AMENICAN SAMOA
N, NARIANAS
PUERTO RKU
PAC, TR. TEH*.
TOTAL
PLANTS
if.
79
2*
60
91
36
9
J
0
JS
SI
22
53
160
(IB
276
37
as
202
92
46
24
126
0
46
W3
20
t
6
«7
*
9
105
107
"3
51
3
2«
S29
7
S3
T2
jj
2
0
25
95
11*
3n»
10}
21
0
2
J
IB
1
0-,«0
CO-.IOi)
till
70
6
S2
S5
22
0
3
0
7
43
2
34
124
39
272
32
56
124
42
38
b
0
74
35*
19
5
2
II
0
«
153
77
BJ
30
2
23
S04
3
11
72
1 5
D
0
IS
«t
65
157
S3
20
2
0
0
0
4
ft
,101.1,9 1.41-4,0 4.01)1-14
(,1«6-.5«I9J (.502-1.05) (1.06-S.OI4)
40 6
3 1
19 |
5 1
24 a
4 2
1 2
0 0
« 0
1* 1
2» 7
5 5
12 1
16 0
ft 0
1 0
1 0
2*
54
35
4
T
54
0
12
21
1
0
2
26
0
3
114 |
17
P
IT
1
t
172 I
^
It
1
U
t
t
It
33
ao
IS2 }
16
0
2
0
1
0
10
1
1
1
1
4
3
2
10
8
0
2
0
0
22
3
a
14.1-40
40.4*1-140
U0.6-S0.23
140t
(54.2*}
0
o
o
0
I
U.S. TOTALS
4.2AB 2.7«0
1,004
169
173
30
47
-------
TABLE 22 - NUMBER OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED BETWEEN 1978
AND 2000 - TOTAL EXISTING FLOW
Table 22 summarizes the secondary treatment
plants projected to be enlarged between 1978
and 2000. In general, this treatment includes
most biological processes as discussed in
Table 20.
These plants are primarily secondary plants
in existence in 1978 which will be enlarged
to treat a greater flow. Also included are
a few plants included in Table 21, "To Be
Constructed," which will be both constructed
and subsequently enlarged between 1978 and
2000.
The State totals and seven flow ranges are
based upon flows existing in 1978.
48
-------
CUBIC «tiens/D»y x moo
(MILLION GALLONS/DAY)
ALABAMA
ALASKA
AttlZQNA
ARK*NS»8
C«LIFUNMA
COLUHIOCI
CONNECTICUT
OEL»«»»E
OIST. OF COLII*.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I UNA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NE« JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEM YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NOSTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
ORESUN
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRSINU
WASHINGTON
MEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
"TQM 1KB
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARUNA8
PUEHTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERB.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
U.S. TOTALS
TABLE 22
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBER OF SECONDARY TREATMENT PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED BETWEEN 1978 AND 2000
TOTAL EXISTING FLOW
10, I»79
TOTIL 0-.40 .401-1.9 t. 91-4.0 «. 001-19 14.1-40 «0, 001-190 1404
PLANTS (o-.ios) i.m-.som t. 502-1.05) (St. a*)
15 4 6
B « 3
18 4 B
2 0 I
T8 IS l« \
JO 18 9
IS 1 1
00 0
oo o
20 4 3
48 13 24
6 1 3
7 5 1
62 3
18 3 4
39 26 4
2S 10 10
16 4 10
14 2 B
26 t 7
2 1 1
IS 7 13
38 14 22
00 0
82 2
28 8 14
18 11 7
71 SO 15
74 J
12 4 4
14 2 3
82 2
2» 7 7
20 9 7
12 *> 13
* 1 «
7 1 3
1* 11 3
» * 13
2 1 0
Ui 4
12 * 5
11 1 3
00 0
00 0
10 6 2
19 a .
13 2 7
10 1 9
SI IS IS
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
2 8
0 0
2
1
0
0
0
9S7
368
324
96
125
21
20
-------
TABLE 23 - NUMBER OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED AND UPGRADED
BETWEEN 1978 AND 2000 - TOTAL
EXISTING FLOW
Table 23 summarizes the secondary treatment
plants projected to be both enlarged and up-
graded between 1978 and 2000. In general,
this treatment includes most biological pro-
cesses as discussed in Table 20.
Plants to be upgraded are those plants pre-
sently in existence which do not meet secon-
dary standards (primary, advanced primary)
which will be upgraded to meet this standard.
Enlarged is simply to expand the design
capacity to accommodate a higher flow. The
plants listed in this table are planned to be
both enlarged and upgraded. Therefore, no
secondary plants in existence in 1978 are a
part of this summary.
50
-------
FEBRUARY 10. 1*79
TABLE 21
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBER OF SECONDARY TREATMENT PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED AND UPGRADED BET'EEN 1478 AND 2000
CUBIC MtTEWS/DM X
(MILLION
ALABAMA
1000
ARUONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
QEHiAKE
DIST. Of COLUM.
FLOHIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
ION*
KANSAS
KEItUCKT
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESCJU
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEN HAMPSHIRE
NCN JEKSEY
NEW MEXICO
HIM TOHH
NORTH CAROLINA
HIMIH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
RHODE ISLAND
SQUIH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
NISCONSIN
» 10* ING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
»U6"TO HICO
P*C. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
u.s.
TOTAL EXISTING FLOW
TOTAL 0-.40 .101-1. 9 I.4I-U.O «, 001-19 19.1-00 4V. 001-190 1*0*
PLANTS to-.tos) <.m»-.sot»> (.502-1.0$) (i.o»-<5.oi«] (
-------
TABLE 24 - DOLLAR NEEDS FOR SECONDARY TREAT-
MENT FACILITIES BY PLANT SIZES -
TOTAL PROJECTED FLOW
Table 24 summarizes the projected cost, re-
ported as first quarter 1978 dollars, for all
secondary wastewater treatment plant construc-
tion to be performed through 2000. The indi-
vidual plants and types of construction have
been summarized in Tables 21, 22, and 23.
The summary indicates a total dollar need per
State for secondary facilities (Category I).
The dollar needs are further broken down by
plant capacity expressed in ranges of year
2000 design flow.
It can be seen that the greatest expenditure
is required for the largest plants, those
with design capacities greater than 50 mgd.
This flow range accounts for approximately
one-third of the secondary treatment needs.
To obtain total treatment plant needs, this
summary should be used in conjunction with
Table 38, "Dollar Needs for Treatment More
Stringent Than Secondary By Plant Sizes."
-------
FEBBUAHY JO,
TA8LE 24
1970
CUBIC ME1EHS/CA* t 1000
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
AUKANSA3
COLUHAOU
CUNHSCTICUT
OELAHAKt
oisr. UF COLIC*.
FLOKIDA
GEORGIA
HAnAU
IUHHU
ILLINOIS
INDIAN*
IOWA
KANSAS
LOUISIANA
"UINE
MASSACHUSETTS
MISSOUHI
MQnTAN*
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEK JEHStr
NEK MEXICO
CAROL IN*
NOStw DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
RHUDE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUfM OAKDTA
TENNESSEE
TEX»3
UTAH
VEHMUNT
WASHINGTON
tfEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MAHIANAS
PUERTO HICO
PAC. TN. TERR.
ISLAND!
U.S. TOTALS
1S78 NEEDS
DOLLAR NEEDS FOH SECONDARY TREATMENT FACILITIES B» PLANT SUES
(THOUSANDS OF 1976 DOLLARS)
TQTIL PHOJECTEO KLC"
TUTHL
PLANTS
I"J
121
71
111
2SS
236
*5
3
0
67
257
37
158
314
122
765
397
118
403
158
60
96
?S8
a
193
T»5
122
21)9
25
86
ue
"?
«90
272
S31
1*1
2S
02
721
19
153
274
87
12
0
6!
192
302
428
321
116
5
3
3
26
21
a
0,104
0-. 40
CC-.105J
4.4118
14,04s
723
3,4B3
12,119
1,052
0
S73
0
*82
4,440
7S9
15,630
36,307
T.420
5«tl?fc
2i,as«
5,989
1«,577
11.330
4.621
1.5»S
17,894
0
6,396
Jl.UOJ
3,174
1.2-94
346
3,378
0
475
36,249
6,785
5,689
6,658
329
5.6UU
55,S7b
657
1,778
9,413
1,999
6}
0
4.2S2
n,»«.5
n,*ii
11.145
16,648
1,035
622
0
0
0
1.148
0
S02.335
,01-1,*
(.106-. 5019}
18,760
11,346
7,902
9,5*0
35,2«5
15,595
1,254
0
0
10, 60s
18,616
la, ab?
29,789
41 ,594
*,»54
63,«70
38,984
19.201)
33,412
26,779
4,050
*,*»$
51,899
0
11,616.
57,ST8
10,339
9,111
1,442
26,751
2,306
4,67*
«S,219
25,872
6,042
IS 1 652
Ii63<
8,8*9
119.T9*
2,016
18,516
15,409
10,523
2.717
«
8,693
«1.»0
46,152
117,112
46,296
9,670
1.183
0
2,900
0
10,586
1.761
1,203,965
1.91-4.C
t. 502-1. 05)
15,007
11.5*2
8,599
6.075
»u.5?3
JO, 656
1,245
0
0
4Q6
13,736
0
0
«6,53«
15,132
Si, 303
0
0
0
20.170
61.991
5,357
36,025
24.334
0
20,510
0
«
«|21«
1*, 481
2,163
17,479
0
26,803
110,924
12,377
13,463
22,307
26,179
7,000
3,672
0
16,743
0
46,434
0
9,171
0
0
0
7,562
62,312
17,75«
6,177
0
21.069
16,096
0
42,095
0
0
I.I3>,615
HO, 001-190
(10. 6-50. 23
66, IBS
170,610
49,431
17,909
661,005
«tlVT
66.137
0
0
9I,«11
27.566
32.670
4,000
4
14,704
996
16,666
29,649
135,322
10,624
t
165,655
12,254
0
5,837
211,841
0
49,086
52,171
73,420
1*5,765
0
146,689
5,298
0
2*,216
C
0
25,863
25,925
27,664
0
0
0
0
0
241,529
176,931
0
0
0
0
0
0
216,663
0
0
3,174,997
190*
<50.2O
0
0
2U.66*
0
9Sb,454
0
0
0
0
242,465
0
92,914
0
0
0
0
ST, 23«
0
73,665
0
0
167,469
0
0
0
142,690
0
51,284
0
0
559,460
13,573
1,995,0*5
0
0
0
0
0
29,965
95,065
0
0
126,465
122,40
0
C
52,162
0
0
5,252.2*2
-------
TABLE 25 - NUMBER OF FACILITIES AND REASONS
FOR TREATMENT MORE STRINGENT THAN
SECONDARY
Table 25 is a summary of the numbers of treat-
ment facilities required and planned for 2000
which are to have treatment levels more
stringent than secondary treatment. This
summary includes all those plants existent in
1978 treating wastes to these levels plus
those required to be constructed or upgraded
to this level between 1978 and 2000.
The first column lists, by State, the total
number of treatment plants required in 2000.
The second column lists the number of plants
more stringent than secondary required by the
same date. It can be seen that 41 percent of
all the treatment plants in the nation are
expected to be treating wastes at a higher
level than secondary.
The remaining columns in the table describe
the reasons the treatment levels will be
greater than secondary. These headings are
self-explanatory. It is to be noted that
more than one reason is possible for any
single treatment being required to provide
these levels of treatment. Therefore, the
columns for reasons do not equal the number
of plants for all States.
Included in this category are "advanced
secondary" and "tertiary" plants, as further
described by Tables 26 through 38.
54
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 23
1976 NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBER OF FACILITIES AND REASONS FOR TREATMENT MORE STRINGENT THAN SECONDARY
********.REASONS FOR TREATMENT LEVEL BEING MORE STRINGENT THAN SECONDARY*
STATE
TOTAL
NUMBER OF
TREATMENT
FACILITIES
NUMBER
REQUIRING
MORE STRINGENT
TREATMENT
ERA-APPROVED STATE FEDERAL DISCHARGE STATE OR FEDERAL
«TE« QUALITY COURT COURT PERMIT ENFORCEMENT VOLUNTARY STATE
PLAN ORDER ORDER CONDITIONS ORDER COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OTHER
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLONAOU
CONNECTICUT
DELA4ARL
DtSl. OF CCILUM,
FLORIDA
CEONCIA
HAkAII
ID4MU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I OKA
KANSAS
KCMUCKV
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEK HAMPSHIRE
NE« JERSEY
NEK MEXICO
MEN YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKI AHOrtA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
ESI VIRGINIA
MISCUNSIN
YOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
U.S. TOTALS
18")
12li
Ibl
650
1,020
323
110
It
I
03
547
ss
202
915
601
925
*»l
424
520
202
3B4
149
540
614
627
961
167
464
72
142
261
160
932
747
356
952
T2S
255
1.327
25
409
117
333
1.125
216
101
397
344
545
661
127
6
7
4
34
23
2
2Z.768
149
2
11
481
103
IS
29
21
1
304
192
2
14
4S7
469
124
5
256
J7
22
320
43
21B
588
34S
10
3
3
9
51
123
16
3tS
396
2
T33
356
143
567
7
133
IS
211
1.085
200
IS
150
10
I OS
2S7
2
0
2
0
5
0
0
4,321
6
0
4
5
7
2B
6
20
0
21
38
0
4
3
74
S
1
IS
2
0
296
22
30
146
II
4|
0
194
79
123
136
2
26
2
26
5
2
}
S9
2
69
13
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
1.S7S
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
15
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
19
0
7
30
0
15
0
0
62
0
0
0
0
0
0
c
1
0
0
4
0
0
0
ft
0
0
0
173
55
0
3
1
1
3
85
2
1
51
86
1«
14
16
0
99
101
2
a
425
soi
24
0
104
10
3
133
9
174
525
104
7
1
3
5
5
a
9
20
116
2
S31
IBS
92
347
2
46
16
140
61
190
6
SS
6
33
144
7
I
4
3
3
2
4,325
256
24
72
0
3
426
10
2
7
1
0
165
111
0
3
190
32
95
4
190
29
16
5
14
25
89
257
22
I
0
I
44
IS
11
287
267
0
38
95
0
111
3
76
1
2
1,844
3
25
II
1
13
159
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,078
4
104
-------
TABLE 26 - POPULATIONS SERVED BY ADVANCED
SECONDARY TREATMENT - PRESENT
RESIDENT & NONRESIDENT
Table 26 summarizes the 1978 populations
served by treatment plants classified as
advanced secondary. The treatment levels
attained by advanced secondary were defined
primarily on effluent BOD concentrations.
Advanced secondary effluents are those whose
BOD is 10 mg/1 or greater, but less than 30
mg/1. If specific processes are planned to
remove nutrients in excess of those removed
by these processes, the plants are normally
classified as tertiary.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used for Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
56
-------
FEflSUASV |0, 1»79
TABU 26
1978 NEEOS 3UHVt»
POPULATIONS SEBVED BY ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMENT
PRESENT RESIDE*! 4 NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS J
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
AflllDN*
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAHAKE
015 T, OF COLU1
FLORIDA
CECHSIA
HAnAH
IOAHU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
lUffA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NE« HAMPSHIRE
HE* JERSEY
"E" "EXICO
NEW tORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH OAKOTl
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHOOE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
NASH1NETON
«EST VIHGJNI*
MI3CONSIN
WYOMJNC
AMERICAN SAMOA
CUAN
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO *ICO
P»C, TR. TERR,
VIRGIN ISLANDS
1978
POPULATION
3,690
407
2,296
2,144
21,696
2,619
1,100
582
690
8,452
5,041
895
asj
11,24$
5.330
2.679
2,326
3,15ft
1,921
1,085
4,139
5.76J
9,129
3,975
2,369
4, SOI
761
1,561
633
649
7,129
1,190
17,92*
5,525
65)
1C, 701
2,611
2,376
11,785
935
2.876
689
4.299
12,610
1,268
483
5,1 35
3,658
1.859
4,651
406
29
91
12
1,282
114
95
1471
30
87
0
17
2,667
166
53
ISO
o
li»71
85
<3
I JO
4
0
7*
bl
5*
1)54
113
»u
.74-
22
121
0
1
164
I
1,179
4
1,172
517
2.143
i
21
44
IS
1,617
246
W
1,357
TRE«t»£NT **«*
1978
NONRES,
0
0
0
13
103
J
16
23
0
238
1
0
1
11
2
0
0
2
0
0
33
0
2
12
0
II
SI
2
42
0
11
12
0
1!
0
10
«
0
38
6
0
2
20
5
* NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT *»
* PERCENT SCHVED »* NO. OF
1978
RES,
16
11
0
3
19
1
52
56
0
30A
21
a
27
53
411
0
0
la
u
12
mo
»1
72
52
53
«
0
12
1
loo
0
770
156
a
218
14
129
198
7
13
0
14
J55
4
o
132
100
In
52
0
a
o
o
o
o
o
19TS
MUNRES.
U.S. TUTALS 219,955 30,917 1,178
NOTEl SUM Of ENTRIES MAY NO? EQUAL TOTALS DUE TO HOUND OFFS.
1978
0.8
6.4
0.
1.
12.
.
t.
17.
I.
o.
IS.
15.
l«.
o.
0.
2.
I.
t.
11,0
2.0
1.2
22. 0
2.5
0.0
26.
0.
16.
0.
6.
II.
0.
31.
10.
21.
18.
0.
a.
b.
I.
II.
2»,
I.
H,
.
5.
0.
o.
0.
«.
a.
0.4
14.1
TREATMENT
PLANTS
1
14
110
3
15
II
0
108
15
0
6
194
102
59
7
11
304
6
a
0
1
s
3
5k
0
91
28
0
74
177
1
4
i
12
J»»
25
1
74
3
1»
4*
0
0
a
a
o
0
0
ZilIT
57
-------
TABLE 27 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
EXISTING IN 1978 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of This Table; This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (6005) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from existing flow
(not design flow) as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5,6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total existing flow,
with appropriate conversion factors, and
totaled for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For instance, some
phosphorus is present in all wastewaters and
a percentage is removed in all treatment
plants. Unless there is a specific require-
ment to remove phosphorus, neither influent
nor effluent values are reported. Thus,
removals are shown only where stipulated.
It should be noted that some State totals
for nutrients and "Other" indicate a higher
effluent than influent value. Part of this
discrepancy is caused by rounding errors.
The greatest cause of this paradox results
in these locales where it was known that water
quality standards require limited quantities
of these constituents in the effluent but
influent values were unknown for a variety of
reasons. In these cases the effluent values
were recorded to the highest level of accu-
racy known, but the influent value was left
blank unless accurate data were available.
Thus, percentage removals are meaningless and
the reader is cautioned not to attempt their
use.
Table 27 demonstrates that existing flows
from the advanced secondary treatment plants
are nearly all greater than the 85 percent
BOD and suspended solids removals of secon-
dary treatment. The national averages of 89
and 88 percent demonstrate this fact.
Influent and effluent nutrient data are pro-
vided for some of the States, but not all of
them. Some fraction of the influent nutri-
ents will be removed by all types of advanced
secondary plants even though the primary pur-
pose is the removal of BOD and/or suspended
solids. When data were available on the
quantities removed, they were collected and
have been summarized herein.
58
-------
FEBRUARY 10. 1479
TABLE 27
STATE
FLO*
ALABA1A
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I UNA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEH HAMPSHIRE
MEN JEMSEY
NEH MEXICO
NE« YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
MEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
17(4)
16(4)
OO
22(5)
1,290(340)
75(80)
26(7)
294(77)
OO
41(11)
OO
64(23)
2,663(703)
700 ( 185)
OO
00
12(8)
22(S)
4S( 12)
240(61)
43(24)
41(24)
488(129]
82(21)
0 ( )
oo
86(22)
l()
$70(151)
0 ( )
889(215)
155(93)
OO
2.177(627)
156(41)
1,144(302)
to
19(5)
1KB)
50(11)
2,596(685)
106(801
IKS)
851(225)
120(11)
45(12)
971(256)
to
00
00
OO
OO
OO
OO
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE RATES
FROM FACILITIES EXISTING IN 1978
FACILITIES PROVIDING ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMINT
IN METRIC TONS PER DAY
***#
INF.
2
3
4
132
15
4
50
116
9
0
20
174
119
0
0
IS
54
14
14
141
1
19
0
21
0
112
135
76
112
31
64
22}
0
4
4
8
560
35
1
151
21
11
2)2
0
0
BOOS ***«
EFF. X HEM.
0 86. S
0 87. S
0 84.6
2$ 42.1
3 77.1
0 91.2
7 es.)
8 93.0
0 92.1
0 0.0
1 94.5
11 91.0
7 93.6
0 0.0
0 89,0
6 St. 9
I 94.2
1 88. S
2 84.4
10 92.8
0 90.5
1 92.4
0 9«,0
2 90,6
0 95.9
20 82.1
19 85.9
7 90.2
69 81.1
1
a
1
J
86.3
9J.6
85.2
68.5
87.4
72.9
92.5
41.9
85.1
96.0
90.6
96.6
77.4
86.7
0.0
0.0
.0
.0
.0
a ,o
o .0
****
INF.
2
3
4
41t
12
56
117
7
0
21
416
110
0
4
11
47
27
17
148
4
17
0
21
0
112
124
66
444
14
58
240
0
4
S
8
631
16
!
149
26
8
272
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SOLIDS
EFF.
0
0
0
25
2
0
14
4
1
0
1
11
9
0
1
4
4
1
2
11
1
S
0
1
0
19
21
9
86
4
5
18
0
0
0
1
67
6
0
14
0
1
54
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*»**
X RE"
80.4
87.7
89.5
93.
78.
40,
73.
«.
85.
0.
«.
»2.
«.
0,
BA
*'.
75.
63.
»o.
»3.
85.
92.
69.
80,
«,
»2.
»*.
*S.
82.
85.
80.
85.
»o.
IS,
7T,
87.
82,
88.
89.
«Z.
««.
«o.
»6.
76.
60.
0.
0.
0.
o.
o.
0.
0.
** PHOSPHORUS. *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
* NHJ NITROGEN *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
***** OTWtH «
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
19
4
1
12
1
1 1
16 ID
2 1
U.I. TOTALS 17,911(4731) 3.419 363 89.4 3,730 445 88.1 22 10 45 2«
NOfESi 1. FLO«S IN CUBIC METERS X 1000 2. APPROXIMATE MCO IN PARENTHESES 3. METRIC TONS X .9072 SHORT TONS
59
-------
TABLE 28 - POPULATIONS TO BE SERVED BY
ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMENT -
PROJECTED RESIDENT & NONRESIDENT
Table 28 summarizes the 2000 populations
served by treatment plants classified as
advanced secondary. The treatment levels
attained by advanced secondary were defined
primarily on effluent BOD concentrations
which are 10 mg/1 or greater, but less than
30 mg/1. A further discussion of advanced
secondary can be found on Table 26.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used for Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
60
-------
FtbRUARY 10, 1471
TABLt 2A
1978 NtEDS SUNVtY
POPULATIONS in (tfe sewvtu HT ADVANCED SECUNDAHY TREATMENT
PROJECTED HtSIUENT ft NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
2000
ST*U POPULATIUM
ALABAMA
ALASKA
AR(2UNA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DElAMKt
BIST. OF CULUM.
FLORIDA
CEOOGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IO*A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHICAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NCN HAMPSHIRE
NEK JERSEY
MEN MEXICO
Hf.M YQRH
NORTH CAKOLtNA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
MC3T VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N, MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
AC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
4,140
667
4,149
?,«ro
26,786
3,868
3,741
841
661
15,049
7,053
1
1
,366
,183
,J5»
.732
,101
,517
,224
,659
(222
,583
,614
,314
,505
,740
i225
802
.734
,141
,306
,747
.436
18,922
T,41»
690
12«031
Si 196
3,209
12,365
1,033
1,700
730
5,571
18,069
1,688
607
»,7S5
,417
2,003
5,553
484
40
275
35
4,700
170
116
*. UECtlVINC
2AOO
NFS.
128
5«
2
402
2,676
2
63
0
5.303
260
0
30
3,647
1,461
32
|04
624
5«9
78
*« NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT *«*
** PfUCtNT SEHVtD ** NO. OF
94
326
1,217
71
IIS
0
71
10
17
2,611
32
3,500
68
0
495
2,326
1,1113
a, 083
8
125
3«
1*
8,500
10
8
2,022
212
S7J
6
U.S. TOTALS 270,414 44,090 3,359
NOTE1 SUM OF ENTRIES MAT NOT EOUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUND OFF},
2
0
0
30
BO
0
3
217
0
874
«
0
o
5
46
0
0
»
6
0
«67
18
18
19
2
6
64
2
a
32
9
23
2000
His.
(1
R
0
D
II
0
3d
5
0
111
2
0
0
0
o
0
0
2
0
1
23
09
6
6
0
0
0
0
a
A
7
05
200
10
0
0
5
2000
NONREJ.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
1
1
no
2000
3.1
8.1
0.1
13.6
10,0
I!T
26.1
0.0
35.2
3.7
0.0
2.6
29.5
18.5
1.0
l«'.t
11.8
6.4
22.1
1.5
3.2
27.0
2.6
2.2
o.o
4.1
0.9
1.3
29.9
2.3
18.S
o!o
4.1
68.5
16.9
ol«
3.4
4.6
47!8
0.6
*9l9
10^6
6.7
6.8
8.8
8.8
6.0
1.4
0.0
0.8
16.3
TREATMENT
PLANTS
10
2
1
186
41
1
10
15
o
119
22
0
3
328
390
2
S
12
3
290
11
12
515
7
2S
II
3
1
4
69
3
ITl
IS
0
190
332
106
162
»
«7
3
8
9SS
3
2
100
I
TO
83
0
0
0
a
2
0
0
4,366
-------
TABLE 29 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
PROJECTED FOR 2000 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BODs) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from projected design
f1ow information as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total design flow, with
appropriate conversion factors, and totaled
for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For instance, some
phosphorus 1s present in all wastewaters and
a percentage is removed in all treatment
plants. Unless there Is a specific require-
ment to remove phosphorus, neither Influent
nor effluent values are reported. Thus,
removals are shown only where stipulated.
It should be noted that some State totals
for nutrients and "Other" indicate a higher
effluent than influent value. Part of this
discrepancy is caused by rounding errors.
The greatest cause of this paradox results in
those locales where it was known that water
quality standards require limited quantities
of these constituents in the effluent but
influent values were unknown for a variety of
reasons. In these cases the effluent values
were recorded to the highest level of accu-
racy known, but the influent value was left
blank unless accurate data were available.
Thus, percentage removals are meaningless and
the reader is cautioned not to attempt their
use.
Table 29, like Table 27, demonstrates national
average removal efficiencies of BOD and sus-
pended solids are significantly greater than
normal secondary treatment. They are predicted
to be two to three percent better than the
existing efficiencies of the same type of
plant. The 1978 results are based upon exist-
ing flows while the 2000 results are based
upon design flow.
It is predicted that 2,432 mgd more waste
will be treated to this level in 2000 than in
1978, an increase of over 50 percent.
62
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1479
TABLE 29
me NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LOAD1NCS. REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE RA1ES
FROM FACILITIES PROJECTED FUR 2000
FACILITIES PROVIDING ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMENT
IN METRIC TONS PER DAY
*» PHOSPHORUS
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
* BUDS *«
STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
OELAHAHE
OIST. OF COlUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAHAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOHA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBNASKI
NEVADA
NEK HAMPSHIRE
NEK JtHStY
NJE» MEXICO
f»E" TURK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
NASHlNGTON
NEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
FLO*
70(16)
36(9)
20
aol(SJ)
1,542(407)
1C)
35(9)
173(453
0(1
2.701(734)
200(5?)
on
H 14(11)
2,516(664)
6SJCI7Z)
20(6)
61(21)
396(i04>
?JO(60)
5a(|4)
1,045(276)
111(29)
268(70)
718(189)
46(12)
52(13)
00
46(12)
30
12(»
1,390(367)
12(3)
S.30HSTZ)
76(20)
0()
256(67)
1,164(307)
633(167}
3,117(821)
6(2)
71(18)
16(1)
11(3)
4,197(1108)
3()
4(1)
1,141(301)
16(«)
94(25)
2«1(63)
0()
01)
0()
on
Z0(5)
on
on
INF. iff, X REM,
18
7
0
SO
423
0
9
54
0
584
47
0
6
495
1Z«
4
19
87
U8
9
242
16
S5
197
10
13
0
13
0
2
374
730
16
0
51
259
132
661
2
17
6
2
«86
0
0
237
4
20
55
2
4
3
I
1
91,7
88.1
94,0
95.7
93.3
90.0
96.0
95,6
0.0
91.5
91.7
0.0
9«.9
93.6
95.1
92.6
95.8
90.6
94.6
85.1
93.6
91.2
87.5
"Z.Z
91.9
96.0
0.0
69.2
90.0
0 »7.9
31 4|.l
0 40.2
70 40.4
1 40.0
0 0.0
4 42.2
23 91.1
10 42.1
57 91.4
0 94.3
1 40.0
0 94.1
0 92.8
75 91.5
0 95.1
0 91.9
11 94.2
0 90.0
1 9). 5
4 91.7
0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
0 9 .5
0 .0
0 .0
*** SOLIDS
INF. EFF.
20
7
0
46
396
0
7
52
0
691
39
0
7
571
135
4
14
113
47
6
238
34
52
187
10
12
0
15
0
2
346
2
757
16
0
58
266
133
793
2
16
5
3
699
0
0
237
4
19
54
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
2
0
0
3
35
0
0
3
0
52
5
0
0
38
6
0
0
10
5
0
13
1
6
16
1
0
0
1
0
0
32
0
76
2
0
4
34
10
73
0
1
0
0
79
0
0
13
**
1 REM.
89.2
87.8
92.0
43.1
41.1
90.0
94.8
93.9
0.0
91.2
65.5
0,0
95. b
93.2
95,4
84.2
94.3
90.4
66.7
65.5
94.5
95.9
67.6
90.3
87,5
94.4
0.0
40.8
90.0
87.9
90.5
90.0
89,8
87.8
0.0
91.6
68.0
92.1
90.7
94.6
69.0
93.7
93.8
91.2
95.1
9J.9
94.2
90.0
93.0
92.4
0.0
.0
.0
.0
9 .0
.0
.0
16
1
i
* NH3 NITROGEN *
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
28
***** OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
IS 2
U.S. TOTALS 27,115(7163) 5.992 463 92.3 6,253 528 91.6 43 6 33 I
NOTES) 1. FLOWS IN CUBIC METERS « 1000 2. APPROXIMATE MGD IN PARENTHESES J. METRIC TONS X .9072 SHORT TONS
11
63
-------
TABLE 30 - POPULATIONS SERVED BY TERTIARY
TREATMENT - PRESENT RESIDENT &
NONRESIDENT
Table 30 summarizes the 1978 populations
served by tertiary treatment, based upon
existing flow. Tertiary treatment* or
advanced wastewater treatment, as used in the
Survey and included on this and subsequent
tables, is a treatment level higher than
advanced secondary. Generally this includes
BOD removal to levels less than 10 mg/1 or
significant removal of nutrients or certain
other contaminants, mostly toxics.
It should be noted that there are only 701 of
these plants existent in the country, serving
a population of approximately 18 million.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used on Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
64
-------
FEBRUARY 10,
TABLE 30
1979
1478 NEEDS SURVEY
POPULATIONS SERVED 0V TERTIARY TREATMENT
PRESENT RESIDENT 1 NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
«»...» HECCIVING TREATMENT «»*
NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT **** * PERCENT SEKVED NU. OF
STATE
ALAUAMt
ALASKA
ARIIUNA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLOKAUO
CONNECTICUT
OELAflARC
OIST, UF CULIIM
FLomoA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IOAMU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
low*
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHISAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
Htm HAMPSHIRE
tin JERSEY
NE» MEXICO
Ntn YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
MEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
NYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. fR, TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
1978
POPULATION
3,*90
407
2,246
2,l<4
21 ,«96
2,619
3,108
%*2
, 640
R.4S2
5,0KB
845
8S7
11,245
5,330
2,874
,J26
,4S«
.921
,085
,134
,7«Z
,124
.975
.389
,801
761
1.561
633
*«9
7,329
1,140
I7,9Z4
5,525
653
10,701
2.811
2,176
11,785
915
2,876
689
4,244
12,830
1,268
83
5,135
3.658
I. 854
4,651
40*
29
4]
12
J.282
114
45
1078
RE3,
175
0
0
31
2,336
44
It
0
0
312
30
2
0
3.13k
702
34
a
63
0
0
37
21
5,,3.
26
1978
NdNHES.
7
0
0
0
82
18
0
»
0
8»
1
8
^
i
364
0
862
101
478
0
146
10
410
374
100
o
170
180
157
852
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
U.S. TOTALS 219,955 18,117 627
WOTEl SUM OF ENTRIES MAY NOT EOUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUND OFFS.
11
3
6
1
1978
RES.
SB
0
0
0
124
0
2
«
0
80
0
0
0
3«
7H
2
0
10
0
0
6
19
700
«
2
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
102
2U
0
184
7
102
187
0
13
0
297
25
2
0
0
«
34
«
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,448
1»78
NONRES.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
1978
1
2
I
5
2
1
I
20
0
8,2
TREATMENT
PLANTS
II
0
0
It
2$
«
2
I
0
10
18
1
0
38
31
t
0
12
a
0
5
4
102
9
10
0
0
0
I
I)
I
0
17
35
0
83
2
10
110
0
11
2
28
13
1
5
701
65
-------
TABLE 31 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
EXISTING IN 1978 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING TERTIARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (8005) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from existing flow
(not design flow) as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total existing flow,
with appropriate conversion factors, and
totaled for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For instance, some
phosphorus is present in all wastewaters and
a percentage is removed in all treatment
plants. Unless there is a specific require-
ment to remove phosphorus, neither influent
nor effluent values are reported. Thus,
removals are shown only where stipulated.
It should be noted that some State totals
for nutrients and "Other" indicate a higher
effluent than influent value. Part of this
discrepancy is caused by rounding errors.
The greatest cause of this paradox results in
those locales where it was known that water
quality standards require limited quantities
of these constituents in the effluent but
influent values were unknown for a variety of
reasons. In these cases the effluent values
were recorded to the highest level of accu-
racy known, but the influent value was left
blank unless accurate data were available.
Thus, percentage removals are meaningless and
the reader is cautioned not to attempt their
use.
Table 31 demonstrates that in most States the
removals of nutrients and BOD are greater
than for other treatment methods. This table
is based upon existing flow to the plants
summarized.
66
-------
FEBRUARY 10. 1974
TABLE 11
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
PLANT LU»OINCS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AND DISCHARGE RATES
FROM FACILITIES EXISTING IN 1978
FACILITIES PHOVIDINC TERTIARY TREATMENT
IN METRIC TON* PER DAY
*»*» RODS **** *** SQLID9 ****
STA1E
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
01ST. UF COLU-i.
FLORIDA
GEORS1A
HANAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I OK A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YUHK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
4EST VIRGINIA
HISCONSIN
NVOMlNG
AMERICAN SAMOA
6UAM
N, MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. IH. TRR,
VIRGIN ISLANDS
FLOW
262(69)
00
OO
32(8)
11(5)
i(2)
n( )
DO
106(60)
IMS)
OO
OO
i, 463(914)
715(189)
24(6)
OO
4301)
OO
00
15(4)
4,410(1164)
31(8)
22(6)
OO
OO
00
oo
00
OO
oo
111(87)
252(66)
OO
625(165)
46(12)
181(100)
467(123)
OO
102(27)
4(1)
151(92)
196(51)
71(18)
OO
96(25)
102(27)
74(19)
671(177)
00
OO
OO
OO
OO
OO
00
INF. £FF. X MEM. If»F. Iff. X REM.
21 9 '
A 0
0 0
6 0
i«o 24 <
w (j
1 *
o o
0 0
71 2«
2 0
0 0
0 1)
451 IS
9U 16
9 0
0 0
9
A
A
2
2
1(268 22
3
1
A
0
0
A
A
A
0
60
72
0
>». 22 7 66.1
0. 00 0.0
o. oo o.o
»7. 6 0 92.4
»1. 170 28 92.1
12. 1 0 91.2
J7. 1 0 82,8
0. 00 0.0
o, oo o.o
59, 60 15 75.0
>«. 2 0 7«.9
11. 0 0 96.9
0, 00 0.0
»6. 661 22 46.6
!!. 145 21 85.5
)8. It 0 9T.O
0.0 0 0 0.0
il.4 8 1 87.1
0.0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0 0 0.0
JO.J 2 0 92.1
»«,2 2 0 92.5
92.5 2.271 190 82.8
»J,6 5 0 96.0
19.5 1 1 46.6
0.0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0 0 0,0
0,0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0
0.0 0
0.0 0
18.0 52
»2.6 57
0.0 0
108 10 40.7 129 1
8 »
'8.2 9
61 4 92.0 69
86 2» 75.8 91 1
0 0
0.0 0
49 7 84.0 11
0 « 95.6 0
68 tl 82.7 67 I
18 4 87.8 29
9 1 81.3 10
0 0 46.0 0
21 0 99.2 30
20 1 85.0 20
14 1 87.7 IS
166 21 86.9 151 2
0 U
0 0
4 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0.0 0
.0 0
.0 0
.0 0
.0 0
.0 0
.0 0
0.0
0.0
0.0
89.9
84.0
0.0
«2.2
97.4
89.0
80.4
0.0
57.4
96,0
81.1
81.3
'1 «2
2.0
85*. 0
86.6
82.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
* PHOSPHORUS **
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
14
NH1 NITROGEN
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
***** OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
19
IS
ao
I
II
10
35
J.9. TOTALS 14,411(3812) 1,107 409 86.8 4,111 587 86.4 50 25 91 30 83
NOTES! I. FLO»$ IN CUBIC METERS > tOOO 2. APPROXIMATE MCD IN PARENTHESES 3. METRIC TONS X .9072 SHORT TONS
26
67
-------
TABLE 32 - POPULATIONS TO BE SERVED BY TERTI-
ARY TREATMENT - PROJECTED RESIDENT
& NONRESIDENT
Table 32 summarizes the 2000 populations to
be served by tertiary treatment. Tertiary
treatment, or advanced wastewater treatment,
as used in the Survey and included in this
table, is a treatment level higher than
advanced secondary. Generally this includes
BOD removal to a level less than 10 mg/1 or
significant removal of nutrients.
When comparing this table with Table 30, it
can be seen that 3,731 additional tertiary
plants are planned to serve an additional
77,000,000 people in 2000 as compared to
existing 1978 figures.
The total population within a service area or
an authority is the sum of "Receiving Treat-
ment" and "Not Receiving Treatment," as
listed. Those "Not Receiving Treatment" do
not contribute to the treatment facility be-
cause they are not on a sewer system.
This table was developed based upon coding
used on Item 26 of the EPA-1 form.
68
-------
FEBRUARY 10. 1»79
TABLE 12
19)8 NEEDS SURVEY
POPULATIONS TO HE SEHVED BY TEHTIAKY TNEATMENT
RESIDENT i NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
»* SfCElVlwG TREATMENT *****
*** NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT *** ** PERCENT SEWVED ** NO. OF
STATE
ALAH»Mt
ALASKA
ARIZUNA
ARKANSAS
CALlfO«MA
COLUHAUIJ
CONNfcCUCUl
DELAnAKE
DIST. at COLDM
FLORIDA
&EUHG1A
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINt
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MQNl ANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NEW "EXJCd
NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIKGINl*
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
SUAM
N. MANIANAS
PUENTU RICO
PAC. TH. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
2000
POPULATION
4,140
667
4,149
2>970
£6,76*
1.468
3.7«l
sai
. bfrl
15,049
7,053
1(166
1,101
12,156
5.712
3. 101
?,517
4,224
4,654
1,222
5.5BJ
6,614
10,314
4. SOS
2,740
5.225
802
1,714
1,141
1,106
8,747
1,416
10,922
7,414
690
12,011
1,196
1,209
12,365
1,011
3,700
710
5,571
18.064
1,688
607
6,755
4,4|7
2,001
5,553
484
40
275
15
4,700
170
116
2000
»F.S.
0
24
489
6.8SI
2,267
604
594
611
1,147
1,664
0
557
7,626
1,097
1,141
159
1,286
47
41
3,152
1,126
7,5*7
2,521
1,117
235
58
0
122
110
2,1*3
104
1.704
3.1*o
o
9,766
415
1,551
4,155
246
791
271
2,947
8,117
1,602
226
1,551
1,007
465
2,200
27
0
0
0
41
g
0
U.S. TOTALS 270,414 9b,0l« 6.414
NOTEl SUC OF ENTRIES KAY NOT EQUAL TOTALS DUE TO ROUND OFFS.
2000
NflNfitS.
45
0
«
9
2B1
184
0
81
1,726
181
141
0
9
IS
426
101
0
27
0
2
10
9
176
20
67
0
s
o
105
6
436
21
579
212
0
63
0
28
261
4
104
4
111
118
26
"1
9
171
2
60
0
0
20«0
RES.
11
0
0
0
1
0
71
12
0
64
160
0
3
12
22
0
o
IS*
0
12
44
210
217
23
61
0
0
0
0
59
II
0
159
488
0
24
0
0
120
46
36
0
225
0
0
24
T
7«
15
5
0
0
0
0
10
a
o
2,625
2000
NONRES,
o
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2000
12.8
0.0
0.6
13.1
25.
16.
70.
»2.
20.
52.0
0.0
30.2
61.7
S4.0
41.3
6.4
1C.5
1.0
60.0
20.1
73.6
56.0
46.1
4.S
7.1
0.0
26.J
10.0
25.0
7.3
16.9
42.6
0.0
61.2
12.2
48.1
11.6
23.9
21.4
37.2
52.9
45.0
95,0
37.6
23.0
22.6
23.2
19.6
5.7
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
35.1
TREATMENT
PLANTS
11*
0
1
284
41
15
15
1
1
141
156
0
9
126
71
119
1
245
b
IB
22
10
196
62
127
4
2
0
5
11
2
10
167
170
0
464
22
26
161
6
»0
14
197
101
161
11
1»
9
16
182
4,412
69
-------
TABLE 33 - PLANT LOADINGS, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES
AND DISCHARGE RATES FROM FACILITIES
PROJECTED FOR 2000 - FACILITIES PRO-
VIDING TERTIARY TREATMENT
General Explanation of This Table: This is
one of a number of similar tables found in
this report. It is designed to estimate the
quantities of various pollutants accepted by
a treatment plant and the quantities of these
same pollutants in the effluent. Quantities
are given in metric tons per day for all
parameters. Five day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (8005) and Suspended Solids (shown as
Solids) are summarized for each State. The
nutrients phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen, as
well as "Other" are also listed.
These data are derived from projected design
flow information as reported in Block 29,
Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the EPA-1
form. The concentrations of the pollutants
are multiplied by the total design flow, with
appropriate conversion factors, and totaled
for each State.
Nutrients and "Other" pollutants are not
reported unless the plant is specifically
designed to remove them. For instance, some
phosphorus is present in all wastewaters and
a percentage is removed in all treatment
plants. Unless there is a specific require-
ment to remove phosphorus, neither influent
nor effluent values are reported. Thus,
removals are shown only where stipulated.
It should be noted that some State totals
for nutrients and "Other" indicate a higher
effluent than influent value. Part of this
discrepancy is caused by rounding errors.
The greatest cause of this paradox results in
those locales where it was known that water
quality standards require limited quantities
of these constituents in the effluent but
influent values were unknown for a variety of
reasons. In these cases the effluent values
were recorded to the highest level of accu-
racy known, but the influent value was left
blank unless accurate data were available.
Thus, percentage removals are meaningless and
the reader is cautioned not to attempt their
use.
Table 33 demonstrates the high degree of BOD
and suspended solids removal expected to occur
in the tertiary (advanced wastewater treatment)
plants at design capacity in 2000. 93.9 and
93.1 percent removal for BOD and suspended
solids, respectively, are predicted. It should
be noted that high removal efficiencies are
anticipated for the nutrients also.
The efficiencies of these plants are signifi-
cantly greater than the same category of plant
in 1978 {see Table 31). Since the 1978 data
is based upon existing flows and removals, not
design flow, this may indicate that many exist-
ing plants are overloaded or have other opera-
tional problems which impair their performance.
Also,.absolute effluent values are high, but
the percentage removals are somewhat lower as
a result of weak influent waste at many
locations.
70
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1479
TABLE 51
1*71 NEEDS JURVE*
Lu»ui"t3, REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES »NO DISCHARGE RATES
FROM FACILITIES PROJECTED FOR 2000
FACILITIES PROVIDING TERTIARY TREATMENT
IN "ETHIC TOMS PE» OH1
STME
FLU*
.< BUDS
* SOLIDS
» BUDS *" *« SULIB
INF. EFF. I REM, INF, EFF.
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADCJ
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DIST, OF COLU1*.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IOAHU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IO-A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEM HAMPSHIRE
NEM JERSEY
NEM MEXICO
NEM TURK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAMQLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
ASHlNGTON
EST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
TONING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC, T«. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
794(209)
0(|
10(2)
554(l«»)
3 ,421 (901)
1 .111(351)
373(94)
42*(112)
1,1*9(108)
l,51*(«00)
2,4«4(*45)
oo
2*2(**>
.2*0(2182)
2,8»9(7*1)
878(231)
78(20)
7*7(197)
23(6)
14(9)
1 ,805(477)
87J(230)
7,404(145*)
1.751(4*2)
7*5(202)
118(31)
41(111
00
544(142)
1(22)
1,177(311)
49(11)
2,072(5*7)
2,l*0(fclB)
1)
7,405(195*1
201(51)
1.021(270)
2.13«(kl*>
179(47)
l,*55(417)
1*1(42)
2,2*8(599)
4,325(11*2)
1.091(288)
1*8(39)
k84(182)
30(219)
254 (*8 I
1,775(4*9)
11(3)
OO
OO
OO
18(4)
OO
OO
159
0
2
128
979
10*
7*
7
280
105
S19
0
57
1.251
581
285
19
152
5
9
425
192
1,«00
«79
1*1
35
*
0
52
18
28*
10
*15
«23
0
1,512
4*
259
502
49
IBS
49
kll
1.1*3
215
31
1*4
194
77
412
3
0
0
0
5
0
0
12
0
0
5
38
10
7
k
5
19
12
8
5
8*
11
12
1
9
0
0
IS
12
1*9
i*
12
1
1
0
5
1
11
0
3)
28
0
99
1
14
la
2
15
2
40
29
10
2
2
IS
3
32
92.*
0.0
88.0
9k. 0
9k. 1
90.2
90.4
93.1
97.9
41.*
o|o
4l!l
9*. 7
95.*
92.1
91.5
9*.0
95.8
9k. 3
91.7
87.9
42J2
4k. 4
81. 1
0.0
9.1
94.4
95.1
92.1
92.2
45.4
0.0
43.5
41.*
44.5
42.4
45,2
4k. 0
44.4
43.4
47.4
94.9
91.9
48.4
42.0
95. 9
42.1
89. S
0.0
9.*
.0
4.2
o»o
o.o
1*0
0
2
119
1,0*7
12*
71
7
280
111
«a*
0
57
1.845
»70
240
22
Ikl
5
9
JTO
190
2,0*4
5)0
15*
21
*
0
49
19
108
10
491
510
0
l,*9k
49
247
503
45
115
47
510
1,193
2)3
30
149
214
75
399
2)
0
0
3*
10
4
8
a
24
*)
0
*
101
10
19
1
IS
0
0
9
12
142
17
21
1
1
0
2
0
14
0
12
7
0
111
1
1*
50
2
48
I
54
38
10
2
21
3
31
85.7
0.0
88.0
91.0
9*.5
90.8
91.*
90.0
97.1
92.1
8*,9
0.0
88.*
94,4
45.4
41.7
»!T
92.*
95.1
*7. «
91.2
91.2
4*. 7
0k. 0
44. k
1.7
0.0
44.1
95.*
95.2
91. a
91.*
7.*
0.0
93.4
91.1
94.2
89.9
41.9
5.5
91.7
4.4
4*. a
45.3
41,1
44,1
90.9
95,3
91.5
84. S
0.0
0.0
0,0
8,3
0.0
0.0
PHOSPHORUS ***
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
ii
3
a
i)
9
5
14
* NHJ NITROGEN
INFLUENT EFFLUENT
1* 2
«>» OTHER *****
INFLUENT EFFLUIN1
14
*7
2
*7
2
4
22
1
8
2
12
41
21
4
1
15
4
41
4
126
19
21
I
14
10
19
25
2
2
I
19
28
35
no
i
45
2
29
5
4*
45
3
12
14
2
IB
k
2
ia
25
11
10
*
B
1
9
II
90
k
a
1
21
10
U.S. TOTALS *8,59008119) 15.021 910 43.4 U,*tk I,111 93.1 107 25 «14 114
NOTES! 1. FLO«8 IN CUBIC METERS X 1090 2. APPROXIMA1E MGD IN PARENTHESES 3, METRIC TONS X .9072 »HORT TONS
134
125
71
-------
TABLE 34 - NUMBER OF PLANTS PROJECTED FOR
MORE STRINGENT TREATMENT FOR YEAR
2000 - TOTAL PROJECTED FLOW
Table 34 summarizes the total number of treat-
ment plants which will have treatment levels
with greater efficiencies than secondary .in
the year 2000. The reasons for the high level
of treatment have been tabulated on Table 25.
The treatment plants expected to be in opera-
tion in 2000 include: existing facilities
designed for more stringent treatment, those
which will be built as new construction be-
tween 1978 and 2000, and those which will be
upgraded from a less efficient plant between
now and 2000. Tables 36, 37, and 38 further
define the type of construction predicted.
72
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 34
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
OF PLANTS PROJECTED F0» MORE STRINGENT TREATMENT FOR YEAH 2000
COlUM.
CUBIC METERS/DAY X 1000
(MILLION GALLONS/DAY)
LA8AHA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
OELAMAHE
DISt. (JF
FLOHIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I OK A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
MEN JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEH YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
NCST VIRGINIA
HI SCONS IN
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUe»TO RICO
PAC. IR, TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
U.S. TOTALS
TOTAL
PLANTS
me
2
2
177
93
36
25
18
1
260
17<»
0
12
156
4*1
12
-------
TABLE 35 - NUMBER OF MORE STRINGENT TREATMENT
PLANTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED BETWEEN
1978 AND 2000 - TOTAL PROJECTED
FLOW
Table 35 summarizes the treatment plants
designed for more stringent treatment than
secondary required to be constructed between
1978 and 2000. In general, these plants will
be advanced secondary and tertiary facilities.
The plants are totaled for each State and
further categorized into flow ranges.
It is noted that 66 percent of the plants
will be smaller than 100,000 gallons per day
capacity, and 92 percent will be smaller than
1.0 mgd. This reflects the needs of many
small communities located on water quality
limited minor streams, many of which are
located in the mountains or the Great Lakes
region.
74
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 35
1<)7B NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBER OF MOHE STHIN6ENT TREATMENT PLANTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED BETWEEN 1978 AND 2000
TOTAL PROJECTED FLO*
CUBIC MtTE"S/DAY x I000
(MILLION GALLU*S/DAY>
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
CQLUKAOU
CONNECTICUT
DELA*AH£
Disr, Of COL'J*.
FLORIDA
6EO«CIA
HAH AH
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENtUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEflKASKA
NEVADA
NEW
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NED YOHK
NORTN CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
DRE60N
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
H. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR,
VIK6IN ISLANDS
U.S. TOTALS
TOTAL
PLANTS
4]
0
1
512
11
1
0
]
0
m
60
0
I
65
22*
2
1
128
16
15
?0»
13
2«
103
21J
10
0
0
i
9
23
0
17*
104
0
221
7J
24
1S2
2
77
1
SB
20«
III
7
43
2
71
34
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0-.40
(0-.105)
24
0
0
260
1
1
0
0
0
22
19
0
0
31
1S1
0
0
82
7
<9
1*1
t
6
89
199
7
0
0
0
2
0
0
71
70
0
135
57
10
»9
0
55
0
27
132
toe
2
II
0
«a
i«
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.001-1.9 1,91-4.0 «. 001-19 19.1-40 40.001*190 190*
(.106-. 5019) (.502-1.05) (1.06-5.019) (5.02-10.5) (10.6-50.2) (50. 2»)
15
0
0
25
2
0
0
1
0
56 1
25
0
0
20
39
0
0
38
5
3
38
2
11
7
7
60 |
20
0
57
n
s
BO 2
0
l«
0
22
56
21
1
17
0
2*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4000
0000
1000
500
2 1 3
000
000
1 1 0
000
17 3
10 5
0 0
1 0
5 0
3 0 1
200
1 0 0
2
0
e
5
4
1
3
0
0
0
0
5
0
16
9
0
IS
\
HI
9
|
4
1
j
g
1
0
I
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.026
Ii913
707
IIS
171
48
«1
75
-------
TABLE 36 - NUMBER OF MORE STRINGENT TREATMENT
PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED BETWEEN 1978
AND 2000 - TOTAL EXISTING FLOW
Table 36 summarizes the existing plants which
have treatment more stringent than secondary
treatment which will be enlarged between 1978
and 2000. The level of treatment will not be
altered in any way. That is, an advanced
secondary plant will remain as advanced secon-
dary, but its hydraulic capacity will be
increased.
No secondary plants are included in this
table.
76
-------
FEBRUARY 10, t«T9
TABLE U
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBER OF MORE STRINGENT TREATMENT PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED BETWEEN 19TB AND ZOCtt
TOTAL EXISTING fLO»
CUBIC MttERS/OAY X 1000
(MILLION GAUONS/DAY1
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLOHAOll
CONNECTICUT
DElAnARE
OUT. OF COlUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HANAII
IOANU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IONA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEN HAMPSHIRE
NEN JERSEV
NEN MEXICO
NEN YORK
NORTH CAHOLIMA
NORTH DAHUTl
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
NABHInCTQN
EST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N, MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR, TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
U.B. TOTALS
TOTAL 0-.40 .401-1.9 1.91-0.0 4.001-19 19.1-40 40. 001-190
PLANTS (O-.IOS) (.106-.S019I C.S«2-1.0S) tl.06-i.OI9) <5. 02-10. 5) (IO.b-SO.2)
00 0 0
10 1 0
00 0 0
1
2*
2
2
S
«
21
1
0
So
19
0
0
0
I
1
21
2
0
0
1
1
1*
0
14
6
0
1}
IT
ie
J
9
1
I
t
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
(S».Z«>
419
111
IS
2S
77
-------
TABLE 37 - NUMBER OF MORE STRINGENT TREATMENT
PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED AND UPGRADED
BETWEEN 1978 AND 2000 - TOTAL
EXISTING FLOW
Table 37 summarizes the treatment plants
which will be both enlarged and upgraded to a
higher level of treatment than secondary be-
tween 1978 and 2000. This level of treatment
includes both advanced secondary and tertiary
as defined and summarized in Tables 26 and 30.
Plants to be upgraded are those plants pre-
sently in existence which meet secondary or
lower standards which will be upgraded to a
higher level than secondary. Enlarged is
simply to expand the design capacity to accom-
modate a higher flow. The plants included in
this table are planned to be both enlarged and
upgraded.
78
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE IT
1978 MEEDS SURVEY
NUMBER OF MORE STHINUENT TREATMENT PLANTS TO BE ENLARGED AND UPEHAOEO BETWEEN 1978 AND 2000
TOTAL EXISTING FLUH
CUHIC METEKS/OAY X
(MILLION
1000
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
COLORADO
CONNECIICU1
OEL*«AHE
OliT. OF COL'IM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
I Ox A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NCM HAHPSHIHt
Ne*» JERSEY
NCN MEXICO
ME* YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
ORESUN
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENMflSlE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRSINIA
AIH1N6ION
HIST VltttlNIA
ISCONBIN
TONING
AMERICAN SAMOA
DAM
N. MARIANAS
POIBTO RICO
PAC. T*. TERR.
VIRCIN ISLANDS
U.S. TOTALS
TOTAL
PLANTS
14
0
0
64
19
7
to
0
91
60
0
7
129
59
52
J
7*
S
4
2
15
69
66
22
7
1
2
1
55
96
T9
0
I9S
27
9
19
9
S*
11*
24
7
*J
11
to*
1 «
o-.to
CO-.10SJ
2
0
0
26
1
2
0
1
0
9
1«
0
1
IS
10
6
0
a
t
i
14
0
0
12
3
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
20
0
27
6«
1
21
1
1
0
4
IT
I
J
0
1
19
1
0
0
4
196
. 401-1. 9
C.106-. 5019)
10
0
0
21
S
I
0
S
0
27
16
0
1
55
2«
24
«
»
1
1
10
2
27
11
4
1
0
0
0
g
«
2
21
t
91
20
14
44
2
4
1
4
41
(.502-1.05)
2
0
0
7
2
I
2
0
24
11
0
1
2*
II
0
11
1
0
4
I
14
1«
1
0
0
2
0
14
0
S
0
21
S
22
0
2
1
10
14
I
3
2
14
0
0
0
2
0
»
2t?
«.001-19
Cl.06-5.019)
D
0
7
12
S
S
I
0
22
12
0
«
25
IS
S
0
IT
I
2
4
10
IB
S
4
1
I
I
t
24
0
11
0
1*
2
S
t
IS
2*
7
I
I
2
IS
I
D
I
I
I
0
411
19.1-40
(5.02-10.S)
40.001-190
C10.6-S0.2)
190*
(50.2+)
IT
79
-------
TABLE 38 - DOLLAR NEEDS FOR MORE STRINGENT
TREATMENT FACILITIES BY PLANT
SIZES - TOTAL PROJECTED FLOW
Table 38 summarizes the projected cost,
reported as first quarter 1978 dollars, for
all wastewater treatment plant construction
for plants whose treatment is more stringent
than secondary treatment (Category II, as
defined in the Introduction). This includes
all such construction to be performed between
1978 and 2000. The individual plants and
their characteristics have been discussed and
summarized in Tables 25 through 37.
The summary indicates a total dollar need per
State for these facilities (Category II).
The dollar needs are further broken down by
plant capacity expressed in ranges of year
2000 design flow. The total U.S. dollar
needs for this category are $20.5 billi'on.
To obtain total treatment plant needs, this
summary should be used in conjunction with
Table 24, "Dollar Needs for Secondary Treat-
ment Facilities by Plant Sizes."
80
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 38
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
DOLLARS NEEDS FOR MORE STRINGENT TREATMENT FACILITIES BY PLANT SIZES
(THOUSANDS OF 1978 DOLLARS)
TOTAL PROJECTED FLOW
CUBIC METERS/DAY < 1000
(MILLION GALLONS/DAY)
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAHARE
DIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOHA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NED HAMPSHIRE
MEM JERSEY
NEK MEXICO
NElt YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKUTt
OHIU
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
NISCONSIN
MYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR, TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
TOTAL
PLANTS
me
2
2
177
93
36
25
18
1
260
170
0
12
456
063
121
5
250
37
21
312
41
208
577
331
29
2
3
6
17
Hi
13
339
385
0
655
354
134
507
7
127
17
205
1,058
186
33
119
10
108
266
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
O-.UO
(0-.105)
10,409
0
0
20,987
61,692
55
0
0
0
7,640
3,677
0
345
12,222
47,059
3,347
0
35,117
1,417
a, 00|
27,15a
0
2,058
3'8,025
40,122
2,450
0
0
0
1,190
9
336
24,208
17,810
0
53,248
11,110
3,614
26,859
332
8,710
657
12,082
30,949
15,221
1,086
3,519
0
9,579
11,309
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.401-1.9
(.106-. 5019)
45,004
0
0
26,279
5,614
1,037
872
4,238
0
74,500
21,263
0
0
58,306
70,937
51,069
0
62,028
3,501
2,212
33,570
3,788
41,071
66,953
38,955
6,498
0
0
0
1,372
17,428
20
98,973
27,387
0
119,090
29,736
19,760
125,781
0
18,243
931
42,377
108,249
20,578
9,778
25,361
817
26,153
56,550
1811
0
0
0
0
0
0
U.S. TOTALS
8,619 550,265
1,369,467
1.91-4.0
(.502-1. OS)
23,162
0
0
13,990
30,976
4,al8
835
5,342
0
64,783
23,525
0
1,983
61,704
23,973
22,650
0
26.421
5.539
2,150
35,299
6,809
57,149
41,533
12,322
1,700
0
0
0
568
26,896
3,533
73,811
31,571
0
100,202
14,716
21,171
106,80%
0
4,922
3,433
31,546
66,245
13,071
6,520
26,846
2,751
21.249
57,888
0
0
0
0
2,634
0
0
1,102,561
8]
4.001-19
(1.06-5. Oil)
84,247
3,650
3,360
88,212
66,214
47,064
15,636
5,905
0
376,844
99,«27
0
18,811
167,479
103,390
73,439
13.800
75,245
37,328
13,809
61,621
50,056
195,267
90,662
62,644
12,920
221
2,580
20,857
35,733
356,812
13,163
225,631
73,130
0
395,145
40,367
«7,796
261,560
11,167
16,548
37,548
135,580
277,4*8
36,595
57,648
38,844
10,036
27,166
119,713
1,763
0
0
0
17,470
0
0
4,029,571
19.1-40
(5.02«10.5>
22,687
2,320
0
4,344
261,485
17,015
6S,957
0
0
232,679
86,772
0
14,298
95,224
56,581
35,651
55,449
17,318
9,850
0
67,025
50,323
66,532
58,204
30,153
0
6.228
0
18,247
17,293
133,113
0
271,378
141,239
0
252,202
22,465
123,480
146,099
18,614
13,453
0
28,504
118,703
26,253
10,393
51,905
41,857
4,100
16,332
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,711,725
40,001>190
(10.6-50.2)
9,650
0
0
17,906
713,029
43,732
56,132
42,788
0
530,201
160,326
0
60,378
195,243
107,146
129,984
54,051
68,253
0
0
95,112
136,722
119,866
105,009
23,133
0
0
0
09,407
0
232,437
0
519,108
165,093
0
210,. ;89
64,454
158,303
80,473
66,837
0
57,276
66,800
223,872
113,013
0
57,915
0
24,510
98,163
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,858,651
190+
(50.2+)
0
0
0
0
443,132
201,931
0
20,000
15,406
117,299
142,674
0
0
701,406
127,308
0
0
88,746
0
0
507,502
3,276
488,253
305,150
53,665
P
0
0
27,075
0
99,484
0
75,000
0
0
528,035
29,747
28,600
386,469
0
1,747
0
63,763
369,289
2,121
0
124,870
136,674
0
274,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,363.322
-------
TABLE 39 - ANALYSIS OF LIQUID EFFLUENT
DISPOSAL
Table 39 summarizes the methods which are
proposed to be used in the year 2000 to dis-
pose of the liquid effluents after treatment.
The categories of disposal methods are self-
explanatory.
The nature of the projected change is self-
explanatory also, and has been described in
detail in the narrative accompanying Table 2.
The totals cannot be compared with most other
tabulations since there is significant double
counting in this summary. For instance,
15,400 facilities plan to abandon present
septic tank fields. The wastes from these
existing facilities will undoubtedly be col-
lected and discharged, after some treatment.
This discharge may be included under many of
the disposal methods and any of the natures
of projected change, but probably largely
under new construction. Additionally, many
facilities have two or more methods of efflu-
ent disposal in operation simultaneously.
82
-------
1970 NEEDS SURVEY
ANALYSIS OF LIQUID EFFLUENT DISPOSAL
NUMBER OF RESPONSES
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 39
UN1TEO STATES TOTAL
IN OPERATION
40,046
*CUR»ENT STATUS*
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
1,097
REQUIRED, BUT NOT YET
APPROVED OR FUNDED
12,70S
«*****DISPOSAL METHOD******
OUTFALL TO SURFACE WATERS
OCEAN OUTFALL
HOLDING POND
DEEP WELL
GROUND NATER RECHARGE
OTHER LAND DISPOSAL
RECYCLING AND REUSE
SEPTIC TANK FIELD
OTHER
NO DISCHARGE
3PRAY IRRIGATION
DITCH IRRIGATION
TO OTHER WWT PLANTS
**TOTAL**«
**«***************NATURE OF PROJECTED CHANGE*********************
ENLARGE
AND NEW NO
ENLARGE UPGRADE UPGRADE CONST, REPLACE ABANDON CHANGE OTHER
***TOTAL*«*
752
19
186
6
69
4
0
5
7
8
54
13
239
1,370
395
6
27
0
20
1
1
957
U
0
4
3
41
1,471
540
6
24
0
16
1
4
5
4
4
10
9
14
657
6,999
192
931
31
435
35
73
153
46
473
514
89
3,858
13,729
329
16
15
1
7
1
0
6
lit
6
1
1
16
512
2,362
63
73
4
aa
9
3
15,400
96
421
21
10
33
15,563
9,011
156
627
6
234
12
37
a, 437
26
566
306
110
2,421
17,9«9
54
1
5
0
1
0
1
1
2
9
1
0
IS
90
20,462
461
1,760
40
030
63
127
20,964
300
1,407
911
235
6,637
54,321
83
-------
TABLE 40 - NUMBER AND TOTAL ESTIMATED I/I
FLOW OF TREATMENT PLANTS
Table 40 summarizes the infiltration/inflow
(I/I) quantities which are cost effective to
eliminate from conveyance systems, rather
than provide treatment.
The "Total Number of Plants" is a summation
of the plants within a State from which some
I/I flow will be eliminated. The total
number of plants receiving such flows is
slightly less than the total number of con-
veyance systems reporting I/I problems (see
Table 47). The difference is accounted for
by the fact that many authorities which only
operate collection systems discharge their
waste to another authority which treats it.
Thus, a single treatment plant can receive
wastes from more than one collection system.
The "Total Estimated I/I Flow" is the summa-
tion of I/I flows per State, in mgd, which
are cost effective to eliminate. These flows
are wet weather flows and are determined by
Block 22 of the EPA-1 form. The I/I flow
which is more cost effective to treat (versus
eliminate) is not included in this summary.
The "Total Existing Flow" is the total pre-
sent average daily flow in mgd to treatment
plants which have excessive I/I in their con-
tributory conveyance systems. The total
existing flow includes the industrial flow,
dry weather I/I flow, and domestic flow.
In some State summaries the I/I flow can be
seen to be an extremely large percentage of
the total flow. This occurs because the
former is wet weather flow, the latter dry
weather flow.
84
-------
FEBHIIAH* 10, 1979
TABLE »0
STATE
ALAHAMI
ALASKA
AHUONA
ARKANSAS
CAUFIWNIA
COtOSADO
CONNECTICUT
DI81, OF COLUM,
FLOHIDA
HAWAII
IOAHU
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAHVLUMI)
MASSACHUSETTS
"ICHI6AN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEl» HAMPSHIRE
NE" JERSEY
»£« MEXICO
NE* TURK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
ORESOM
PENNSYLVANIA
MHOOE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
IE1NC3SCE
TEXAS
UTAH
HA9HINCTON
BEST
SAMUA
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO «ICO
P»C. TB. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
u.s. TOTALS
NEEDS SURVEY
AND TOTAL ESTIMATED I/I H.QH OF TMCATHENT PLANTS
TOTAL
OF PLANTS
139
9
T
MS
Hi
an
IS
A
1
98
226
S
75
169
911
zoe
91
l»6
Tt>
25
17
21
7b
112
J09
J19
2*
25
7
19
1)0
1
251
191
4
218
"0
82
64
7
ir«
22
Ii2
171
29
15
50
59
14
It's
Si
zs
4,115
ESTIMATED I/I FLO"
HJ.91
15.5J
.62
«5.b2
210.44
17.51
52. IS
,M
50.00
63.«J
101,50
IC.fcu
ll«,OJ
67.K5
6^,76
12.77
61,17
87.10
7, 68
6.89
«,22
194,00
19,17
72,99
59,62
8,68
1,17
2.35
7,«7
94,81
,28
1*1.90
47,82
1.67
172.12
15,82
106.79
111.40
2.77
91.61
*,2a
112.88
255.04
48,11
1.78
19.06
51.911
4,65
199.67
9,»3
.SO
41,14
1,290,SB
85
TOTAL
EXISTING FLOW
2Sr.7)
8 <4,54
2.17
s«,r«
125.7)
45.00
92.47
1.72
276.45
177.29
105.26
1.41
61. 7»
1,510.90
162.11
IS9,«4
112.50
215.14
87.16
21.20
19.19
0.15
822.25
58.14
iri.65
114.60
2S.BO
1.82
6.AS
15.67
«75.59
.57
1.115.87
271.61
6.94
707.40
14.09
221.79
aib.18
15.66
219.71
£5,01
«oa.6S
486.17
1«3.69
1.08
76.66
219.44
14.67
101.46
Z0.97
4.00
115.52
lfl.7M.5T
-------
TABLE 41 - PROJECTED INDUSTRIAL FLOW TO
MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS BY
NUMBER, FLOW, AND PERCENT OF
TOTAL FLOW
Table 41 summarizes, by State, year 2000 in-
dustrial flows predicted to be received by
municipally owned wastewater treatment facil-
ities. The summary is further broken down
into industrial flow ranges. A description
of each column is presented below.
Column 1: Name of State or Territory.
Column 2: Number of Treatment Facilities.
This is the total number of facilities pro-
jected for each State in 2000 without regard
to level of treatment or whether industrial
flows will be existent or not. Note totals
agree with many other tables; Tables 2 and 3,
for example.
Column 3: Flow of Treatment Facilities.
This is the total flow of all projected
treatment plants, in mgd, for year 2000.
The flow includes totals for each State of
dry weather I/I, industrial, and domestic
flows. Again, these totals compare with
other tables; Table 4 for example ("Projected
Total Flow").
Columns 4-15: These columns further delin-
eate the plants and industrial flows by
ranges of flow. The flow ranges, given in
1000 cubic meters per day and, in parentheses,
mgd, are for the industrial component, not
the projected design flow of the treatment
plant in question. The individual columns
under each flow range summarize the following:
Number of Plants: This column summarizes the
number of treatment plants projected to re-
ceive industrial wastes in that range. For
example, 34 wastewater treatment plants in
Indiana are expected to each receive between
one and 10 mgd industrial waste flows each.
Total Industrial Flow: This column summa-
rizes the total industrial flow, in mgd,
which is projected to be received for each
flow range given. Using the Indiana example
above, the 34 plants will receive 156 mgd
among them. Using Nevada as another example,
one plant will receive 5 mgd of industrial
waste. This plant may be a 20 mgd plant.
The sum of the total industrial flow for any
State is the same as the Projected Industrial
Flow given in Table 4.
% of Total Flow: Under each flow range the
percent of total flow contributed by indus-
trial flow has been summarized. The total of
these percentages equals the percentage in-
dustrial flow summarized in Table 4.
Small errors in totals may be present caused
by rounding.
86
-------
10, 1474
TABLE «t
1*78 DEEDS SURVEY
PROJECTED INDUSTRIAL FLU* TO MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS BY NUMBER, FLOW, AND PERCENT OF TOTAL FLO*
CUBIC MEIERS/DAY I 1000 0-.40
CHILLIUN GALLONS PER (JAY) (0-.105)
NUMHER AND
FLU" OF NOHBER TOTAL X UF
TREATMENT OF IhOUS TOTAL
STATE FACILITIES PLANTS FLDN FLOn
ALABAMA J80 526 116 2 .44
ALASKA 12* 44 2 o .12
ARUONA i$] 374 1 0 .00
ARKANSAS 450 Jla 17 fl ,|4
CALIF. 1,420 1.7S1 45 2 .05
COLORADO 123 691 U
CONN. tin 58} 12
DELAnAKfc 28 158 5
MASH. I>.C. 1 104 0
FLORIDA 403 1,816 105
6COR6IA 507 1,011 117
HAWAII 55 200 ?
IDAHU 202 180 7
ILLINOIS 415 2,918 66
INDIANA 601 1.096 SS
IOWA «25 470 22
KANSAS 661 170 20
KENTUCKY tl» 554 |}U
LOUISIANA 520 648 11
MAINE 202 176 IS
MARYLAND jat 786 57
MASS. 149 1,297 14
MICHIGAN 540 2,212 59
MINNESOTA 6I« 654 69
MISS. 627 115 81
MISSOURI 461 1,017 64
MONTANA 1*7 117 10
NEBRASKA 46 14
VIR6INIA 197 834 56
NASH1N6TON 144 886 17
« VIR6INU 5*5 278 207
NISCONSIN 661 1,016 122
WYOMING |2T $«
AHER SAMOA 6 6
GUAM 7 18
N MARIANAS 4 S
PUCK. RICO 34 3S6
PAC TR TER 23 10
VIR6IN IS 2 30
.07
.11
.11
.00
.15
.31
.05
.18
.11
.16
.17
.IS
,48
.08
.31
.16
.05
0,10
0.40
0.48
0.23
0.33
0.16
0.01
.54
.06
.15
.11
.44
0.61
0.10
0.13
0.09
0.10
0.04
0.19
0.32
0.25
0.09
0.22
0.68
.20
.10
.»*
.46
.18
,00
,00
,00
.12
.18
.00
US TOTAL 22,7*8 41,42$ 2,486 60 0.18
(
NUMBER
OF
PLANTS
14
i
u
22
69
12
15
4
0
1)
48
I
9
87
42
20
21
34
6
14
13
44
37
56
28
54
4
11
0
IB
4!
5
82
64
n
58
19
11
9}
4
56
12
44
75
7
11
14
1«
18
87
2
0
0
0
10
0
0
1,527
.401-4.
.106-1,
TOTAL
INDUS
FLO"
14
0
1
10
28
4
16
1
0
6
18
0
3
41
14
7
9
13
3
7
20
16
19
11
21
2
5
0
9
19
1
32
26
1
32
9
4
33
5
22
4
21
29
4
4
11
5
6
33
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
614
0
US)
X OF
TOTAL
FLOW
2.70
0.26
0.50
3.09
0.76
0.71
2.86
0.76
0,00
0.36
1.84
0.24
2.07
1.41
1.77
1.58
2.52
2.35
o.so
4. 41
0.53
1.54
0,75
J.0»
3. 15
2.07
1.99
1.92
0.00
5.07
1.27
1.23
0.79
2.44
3.06
1.42
2.10
0.87
1.59
3.29
2.90
s.ss
2.42
1.10
1.15
7.2«
1,40
0,60
2.27
1.30
0.45
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.70
0.00
0,00
1.46
87
4
11
NUMBER
OF
PLANTS
20
i
2
16
52
7
22
1
9
12
10
I
1
32
34
21
6
a
T
la
25
IB
10
10
17
1
7
1
7
2S
1
se
i
»2
4
1
31
1
2*
1
16
19
5
1
18
11
4
22
0
1
0
t
4
0
0
754
.001-40
.06-10.
TOTAL
INDUS
FLO"
69
4
4
33
196
12
67
2
0
44
96
2
18
130
156
69
IS
20
28
30
32
79
64
29
24
56
1
17
5
20
41
a
180
193
3
121
22
IS
84
4
41
4
52
50
20
1
49
40
20
90
0
2
0
0
48
0
0
2,541
S)
» OF
TOTAL
FLO*
13.17
4. 87
1.21
9.96
5.24
1.74
11,50
LSI
0,00
2.46
9.59
0,44
10.28
14^25
14.70
4.14
3.78
4.41
17.28
4.0*
6.11
3.14
4.54
7.38
5.51
0.93
6.75
1.84
11.12
6.02
2.90
4.44
21.90
4.96
5.1)
5.24
1.06
4,01
5.87
11.94
5.60
6.02
2.21
ill*
5,88
4.S6
7.20
a. as
0.00
44.00
0,00
0.00
13.50
0,0ft
0,00
5.8S
40
CIO
NUMBER
OF
PLANTS
0
0
4
4
12
2
2
1
0
2
1
1
0
6
1
1
2
0
0
1
B
B
0
1
0
2
0
I
5
0
7
1
0
12
0
2
7
2
1
0
1
2
0
0
4
2
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
118
,001«I90
.57-50.2)
TOTAL X OF
INDUS TOTAL
FLOW FLO*
0 O.OQ
0 0.00
0 0.00
0 0.00
112 8.12
64 4.14
31 5.31
38 24.21
0 0.00
57 1.13
35 3.48
12 6.23
0 0.00
156 5.11
70 6.38
11 2.48
31 8.56
106 19.17
0 0.00
0 0.00
SS 7.04
116 8.46
143 6.46
27 4.1«
0 0,00
12 1.22
0 0.00
39 141.86
0 0.00
12 6.50
«5 6.11
0 0.00
147 3.68
45 5.11
0 0.00
35t 15. «7
0 0.00
56 10.97
IK 7,18
35 21.09
15 1.46
0 0.00
7 11.10
31 1.16
0 0.00
0 0.00
87 10.37
52 5.47
0 0.00
80 7.06
0 0.00
0 0.00
0 0.00
0 0.00
12 3,60
0 0.00
0 0.00
2,599 5.98
1404
NUMBER TOTAL
1
X OF
OF INDUS TOTAL
PLANTS FLO*
FLOft
0 0 0.00
0 0 0.00
0 0 0.00
0 0 0,00
2 115 1.08
o o o.oo
o u o.oo
0 0 0.00
0 0 0.00
0 U 0.00
1 52 S,l5
0 0 0,00
0 0 0,00
) 260 8.86
0 0 0.00
« 0 0.00
o o o.oo
0 0.00
0 0.00
0 0.00
0 0.00
105 8,11
1 245 11,07
1 46 14.67
0 0 0,00
2 108 10.66
0 0 0.00
o o o.oo
0 0 0.00
0 0 0.00
t 150 4.92
0 0 0.00
1 80 I.B9
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
1 7
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 81
0 I
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
8,14
0,00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.10
0.00
> 7.86
D.OO
0 0 0.00
0 0 0.00
0 0 0,00
0 0 0,00
0 0 0.00
0 <
) 0.00
14 1|366 3.14
-------
TABLE 42 - SUMMARY TREATMENT PROCESS AND SLUDGE
HANDLING METHODS - NUMBERS OF PLANTS
AND ASSOCIATED FLOW - UNITED STATES
TOTALS
Table 42 summarizes the unit processes based
upon the inventory performed during the 1978
Survey. Processes 1 through 61 are for the
liquid line and 62 through 92 are for the
sludge (solids) line, including treatment,
handling, and disposal. Table 43 expands the
data available for each of the 92 unit
processes.
The basis for these summaries is the data
developed in Block 30 of the EPA-1 form. The
number of plants using a process is given,
plus the associated flow for the treatment
plant of which it is a part. Existing flow is
used for the columns under "Now in Use" while
design flow is used for those "Under Construc-
tion" and "Required but not yet Funded."
A unit process is defined to mean the complete
process. For instance, activated sludge in-
cludes the aeration basin, associated blowers
and other integral mechanical equipment, and
the secondary clarifier, which is not listed
separately.
Some flow summaries (Ion Exchange) show a zero
flow with the,unit process in use or required
in the future. This is due to rounding errors
and low flows associated with small numbers of
facilities,
Multiple or parallel processes are counted as
one process for any single facility. For
instance, if a facility has four aerobic
digesters, the number of aerobic digesters
counted in this summary is one, not four.
Therefore, the "Number" column denotes the
number of plants using that process.
Please refer to Table
detail of each of the
in Table 42.
43 for additional
unit processes listed
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1474
TABLt 42
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
ARY TREATMENT PKfJCESS AND SLUOSE HANDLING METHODS
NUMBtus OF PLANTS AND ASSOCIATED FLO*
CFUUH IN TH(1US»NU3 OF CUBIC METERS ptH CAY)
UMTEl) STATES TOTALS
NOD IN USE
FLOW
PLASTIC
«Er>*oor> SLATS
01HEH MEDIA
CONVENTIONAL
HIGH HATF
CONTACT STABILIZAJION
EXTENUEO ltK«riO~
TREATMENT PROCESSES
I. PUMPING,MA* MSTE»ATF.«
2. PRELIMINARY TREATMENT « HAH SC»EEN
3. PRELIMINARY THEATMENT . GRIT REMOVAL
4. PRELIMlNlfiY TREATMENT -
S, PRELIMINARY THEAIMENt .
6, SCUM HtMf)»AL
7. FLU* EQUALIZATION HASINS
8. PREAtKAItCN
9, PRIMARY SJDI»ENTATION
10. TKICKLHC FILTEK - NOCK MEDIA
11. TWIOL1.MG FILTEh
12. TRICKL1-J6 FILTER
13. TKKuLJNt FILTEH
14. ACTIVATED SLUDGE
15. ACTIVATED SLUDGE
16. ACTIVATED SLUUGE
17. ACTIVATED SLUOOE
i», PURE OXYGEN ACTIVATED SLUDGE
19, MICROSTRAIlMERS » PRIMARY
20, MRRCJSTRAINERS - SECONDARY
21. SANP FILTEUS
2?. MIXED-MEDIA FILTERS (SANU «ND COAL)
23. OTHER FILTHATIUNS
24. ACTIVATED C*RBCH -
25. ACTIVATED CARBON -
26. TMO STASE Ll"E TREATMENT of HAH HASTExATER
27. T*0 SlARE TERTIARY LI"E TREATMENT
28. SINGLE STAGE LIME TREATMENT of RAM N«5TE«ATER
29. SINGLE STASt TERTIARY LIMf THEATMEMT
3l! NEUTRALIZATION
jj. ALUH AonntnN TO PRIMARY
I), ALUP AQOITION TO SECONDARY
34. ALUM AOOITION TO SEPARATE STAGE TERTIARY
35. FERKI-CHLOH10E ADDITION TO PRIMARY
36, FERKI-CHLOR1DE ADDITION TO 3ECONDAMY
37. FERhl-CNLOHlOE AOOITION 7O SEPARATE STAGE TERTIARY
36. OTHEH CHEMICAL A001TIONS
19. BIOLOGICAL MTRIFICMION - SEPARATE. STAGE
40. 8IOLW.1CAL NltfilFICAIIOH - HDU J. NlT.
41. BIOLOGICAL OENITRIFICATION
42. ION EXCHANGE
43; BREAKPOINT CHLOHINATIOt
44. AMMONIA STRIPPING
45. CHLORINATIC* FO« DISINFECTION
46. OZONATK1N FOR DISINFECTION
47. OTHER DISINFECTION
an, LAND TREATMENT UF PRIMARY EFFLUENT
49, LANli TREATMENT OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT C30/JO)
so. LAND TREATMENT OF IMERIMEDIATE EFFLUENT
51. STABlLIZATIUN PONDS
52. AERATED IAGPUNS
53. POST AERATIUN (REAERATIOM
54. UIU-OJSC (RCTATJN6 SIOL06ICAL FILTER)
55. OXIOATIOK DITCH USING MECHANICAL AERATORS
56. CLARIFICATION USING TUBE SETTLERS
57, OUTFALL PUMPING
58. OUTFALL DIFFUSES
59. EFFLUENT TO OTHER PLANTS
60, EFFLUENT OUTFALL
61. UTM£R TREATMENT
5,700
8,174
!,8b7
3,492
45
3t>0
302
3»S
5,736
2,778
4J
11
11
3,bl6
34
87J
1,902
as
22
7i
1.010
111
16
13
J
a
11
Ik
?«
14
1J
61
1<>1
40
36
127
Y 20
70
76
112
Je
2
2S
24
biZ13
12
4
90
305
93
5.B26
1,005
432
71
JS7
40
207
52
9
10,030
6U2
»7,243
84,155
69,714
31,382
1,757
17,741
5,851
18,022
78,956
16,106
300
K75
210
72,237
2,917
8,541
4,530
6,093
1,751
1,947
U.821
3,217
116
4«B
201
52
174
180
$40
296
116
1,387
3,274
814
1,284
1,699
229
t, 196
t,12l
1,812
1,258
0
785
110
53,132
192
SO
98
1,9«65
rrj
496
267
463
30
124
2, 779
1,16)
366
277
826
184
«, 522
l»3
«
2
ZOl
13
596
191
8t777
1.090
107
173
U,36«
586
71
2.729
1,523
4,116
5,730
2,950
2,004
9
116
379
97
3,346
121
58
17
4
3,176
19
2«9
3,177
50
it
73
4,065
305
30
20
6
15
26
20
in
49
23
58
407
71
14
130
24
Si
565
758
212
6
1J7
102
6,674
16
)
46
«71
51
3,366
1,316
976
399
503
9
246
36
12
5,992
129
18,134
17,469
15,227
6,167
20
3,083
10,418
Z|729
15,051
S.1S3
2,281
452
99
21,463
479
1,924
4,380
9,6*8
333
1,117
20,781
9,454
633
1,436
301
lit
447
S17
1,304
307
295
692
1,822
1,573
310
755
555
664
15,902
9,456
4,950
111
1,051
536
19,389
1,357
9
65
2,567
123
2,606
1,6*6
b,230
1,357
660
41
1,654
4,767
77»
11,82*
1,337
89
-------
FEBRUARY to, 1974
TABLE 42 (CONT'O)
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
SUMMARY TRtATMENT PROCESS «ND SLUDGE HANDLING METHODS
NUMRtRs OF PLANTS AND ASSOCIATED FLO*
(FLOW IN THOUSANDS OF CUBIC METERS PER DAY)
UNITED STATES TOTALS
SLUDGE HANDLING METHODS
62. AEROBIC DIGESTION - AIR
63. AEROBIC DIGESTION - OXYGEN
6«. COMPOSTING
65. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
66. SLUDGE LAGOONS
67. HEAT TREATMENT
68. CHLORINE OXIDATION OF SLUDGE
69. LIME STABILIZATION
70. WET AIR OXIDATION
71. AIR DRYING
72. DEWATERING - MECHANICAL
73. DEWATERING - MECHANICAL
MECHANICAL
OTHERS
VACUUM FILTER
CENTRIFUGE
FILTER PRESS
70. DEWATERING
75. DEWATERING
76. GRAVITY THICKENING
77. AIR FLOTATION THICKENING
78. INCINERATION - MULTIPLE HEARTH
79. INCINERATION - FLUIDIZEO REDS
80, INCINERATION - ROTARY KILN
81. INCINERATION - OTHERS
ea. PYROLYSIS
83. CO-INCINERATION WITH SOLID
84. CO-PYROLYSIS WITH SOLID WASTE
85.; RECALCINATION
66. LAND FILL
87. LAND SPREADING OF LIOUID SLUOGE
88. LAND SPREADING OF THICKENED SLUDGE
89. TRENCHING
90. OCEAN DUMPING
9i. OTHER SLUDGE HANDLING
92. DIGEST GAS UTILIZATION FACILITIES
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
2,287
40
10
a, 714
S7«
148
28
50
45
6,291
1,042
155
54
24
557
156
320
15
7
9
2
4
1
27
«,930
1,003
878
6
a9
216
173
13,507
338
1,341
59,268
11,211
8,188
1,11*
1,512
1 ,986
40,519
36,552
7,229
1,193
1,418
27,251
9,723
20,303
455
131
24?
76
71
*
0
1,438
47,496
8,008
10,959
1,074
9,767
9,788
6,475
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
2SO
|2
S
209
54
22
8
11
6
341
177
31
30
3
104
41
41
3
1
1
0
1
0
6
327
79
49
3
0
20
5
2,219
117
1,211
4,968
731
2,314
174
279
157
1,792
3,449
1,234
1*565
24
2,375
3,136
1,936
259
90
26
0
15
n
300
2,131
498
300
26
0
575
1,741
REQUIRED
NOT VF.T
FUNDED
NUMBER
2,439
27
15
1,624
184
48
14
33
?
4,368
702
67
74
7
279
110
98
0
2
3
»7
3
2
23
4,071
387
293
V
p
94
39
BUT
FLOW
8,497
690
646
11,095
2,340
9,668
155
745
?59
10,2«4
14,553
',2,26
2.J85
146
8.410
6,492
7,921
0
30
223
7,097
224
378
1,056
21,017
1,741
4,217
2
0
4,903
2,436
90
-------
(This page Intentionally left blank.)
91
-------
TABLE 43 - PROJECTED CHANGE IN TREATMENT PRO-
CESS USE - NUMBERS OF PLANTS AND
ASSOCIATED FLOW - UNITED STATES
TOTALS
Table 43 is a companion and expansion of
Table 42. Each unit process summarized in
Table 42 is presented in greater detail
herein.
For easy reference the summaries are pre-
sented in the same sequence as in Table 42.
For instance, Preaeration, item no. 8 in
Table 42 can be found under Table 43-8, the
last number referring to the Table 42 number.
Flows associated with each unit process are
the sum of the total plant flows for all the
facilities using that particular process.
They are given in thousands of cubic meters
per day followed in parentheses by mgd.
The "projected change codes" are defined as
follows:
Enlarge: The same unit process presently in
existence will be enlarged to a higher
capacity.
Upgrade: The same or similar unit process
will be used but it will be designed for
greater efficiency.
Enlarge and Upgrade:
nitions apply.
Both the above two defi-
Install in New Plant: The unit process will
be constructed in a new or existing plant.
Replace: This is a unit process, usually
presently in use, which will be replaced by
another unit process in the same plant.
Abandon:
abandoned
built elsewhere
be specified.
The unit process
either because a
or another
will be completely
new plant will be
unit process will
No Change: No alteration in the unit process
is anticipated.
Other: Generally special cases, but few in
total number. Installing automated equipment,
telemetering, etc. are examples.
The accuracy of these data is at the level of
available information at Regional offices.
Required facilities for which engineering
designs were not available were estimated
using commonly accepted practice for the area.
92
-------
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
PROJECTED CHANGE IN TREATMENT PROCESS USE
NUMBERS OF PLANTS AND ASSOCIATED PLOW
(FLOW IN THOUSANDS OF CUBIC METERS PER DAY)
UNITED STATES TOTALS
FEBRUARY 10, 1*79
TABLE 43
43-1 PUMPING,RAW WASTEHATER
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
1,212 16,413(4336)
211 2,414(637)
366 5,715(1509)
I 0(0)
252 1,416(374)
flflO 9,965(2632)
2,751 31,275(8262)
7 33(8)
5,700 67,234(17761)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
47 607(160)
4 8(2)
9 98(25)
327 1,952(515)
4 29(7)
5 36(9)
7 30(8)
1 0(0)
404
2,764(730)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
2 117(31)
1 2(0)
0 0(0)
4,313 18,008(4757)
0 0(0)
9 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4,316 18,128(4788)
43-2 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT - BAR SCREEN
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
"EPLACE
ABANDON
"o CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN use
NUMBER FLOW
1,417 20,011(5286)
281 2,387(630)
504 5,199(1373)
6 5(1)
366 1,903(502)
1,230 8,540(2256)
4,366 46,071(12170)
4 22(5)
8,174 84,142(22228)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
54 844(223)
3 17(4)
12 282(74)
414 1,791(473)
11 1,257(332)
3 18(4)
17 66(22)
1 0(0)
515 4,300(1136)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
3 124(32)
1 11(2)
2 79(20)
5,714 17,210(4546)
1 0(0)
4 0(0)
4 54(14)
1 0(0)
5,730 17,480(4617)
93
-------
43-3 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT - GRIT REMOVAL
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AMD UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NO* IN USE:
NUMBER FLO»t
7X2 14,9«9(3949)
144 1,765(466)
300 4,631(1276)
5 385(101)
181 2,165(572)
475 6,611(1799)
2,027 38,720(10228)
3 76(20)
3,667 69,706(16415)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
32 481(127)
1 34(8)
10 1,443(361)
264 2,336(617)
4 10(2)
2 19(5)
II 412(106)
1 30(7)
325
4,766(1259)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLC.W
0 0(0)
1 15(3)
0 0(0)
2,939 15,152(4002)
0 0(0)
4 0(0)
5 54(14)
1 0(0)
2,950 15,223(4021)
43*4 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT - COMMINUTORS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEN PLANT
KEPLACE
AflANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
587 7,274(1921)
146 618(163)
305 2,216(585)
7 7(2)
119 494(130)
446 5,454(1440)
1,660 17,260(4559)
2 50(13)
3,492 33,376(6817)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
26 371(96]
3 40(10)
4 15(31
250 1,302(344)
3 6(2)
1 1(0)
8 60(21)
0 0(0)
295 1,822(461)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
2 5(1)
0 0(0)
1,995 6,094(2138)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 7(1)
3 56(15)
2,004 6,165(2157)
43-5 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT OTHERS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
3 54(14)
1 HP)
3 5(1)
0 0(0)
3 5(1)
li 112(29)
24 1,576(416)
0 0(0)
45 1,757(464)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
o 6(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOM
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
9 20(5)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
9 20(5)
94
-------
43-6 SCUM REMOVAL
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOw
06 2,161(570)
19 7,120(1881)
12 751(198)
0 0(0)
3 2(0)
It 423(111)
203 7,286(1925)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
6 82(21)
0 0(0)
2 152(40)
24 790(208)
0 0(0)
1 1(0)
1 310(81)
0 0(0)
360
17,749(4668)
34
1,337(353)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
116 3,063(614)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
116 3,063(614)
43-7 FLOW EQUALIZATION BASINS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN N£W PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NU CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
81 1,691(446)
7 101(26)
11 715(186)
0 0(0)
6 19(5)
36 136(35)
161 3,167(642)
0 0(0)
302
5,651(1545)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
7 519(137)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
67 879(232)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
74 1,396(369)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
379 10,417(2752)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
379 10,417(2752)
43-6 PREAERATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOw
70 2,997(791)
24 660(174)
28 1,293(341)
o 0(0)
17 563(148)
54 833(220)
202 11,674(3084)
0 0(0)
395 16,021(4760)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLON
3 53(14)
0 0(0)
2 21(5)
32 610(161)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 12(3)
0 0(0)
41
696(184)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
97 2,729(721)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
97 2*729(721)
95
-------
43-9 PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN use
NUMBER FLOW
1,043 17,759(4691)
347 5,832(1540)
546 11,461(3033)
3 4(1)
192 1,384(365)
1,364 5,176(1367)
2,232 37,145(9812)
9 164(43)
5,736 78,949(20856)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
44 930(245)
5 63(16)
19 849(224)
188 1,085(286)
11 95(25)
1 0(9)
9 4S2U19)
1 0(0)
278 3,477(918)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
2 11BC31)
3 16(4)
0 0(0)
3,330 14,690(3933)
0 0(0)
8 1(0}
1 14(3)
2 5(1)
3,346 15,046(3974)
43-10 TRICKLING FILTER - ROCK MEDIA
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NE* PLANT
REPLACE
A9ANDON
NO CHANGE
UTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLO*
234 2,154(569)
350 1,594(418)
267 1,601(423)
0 0(0)
132 717(189)
1,029 3,091(1028)
752 6,097(1610)
14 61(16)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
10 278(73)
4 33(8)
6 42(11)
33 292(77)
2 17(4)
3 6(1)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2,77fl
16,108(4255)
58
672(177)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLON
0 0(0)
1 794(209)
1 5(1)
119 1,352(357)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
121 2,155(566)
43-11 TRICKLING FILTER - PLASTIC MEDIA
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NE" PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NU CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NO*
NUMBER
6
1
3
n
1
7
i*3
0
< IN USE
FLO*
67(17)
6(2)
7(1)
0(0)
3(0)
25(6)
189(50)
0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
2 89(23)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17 199(52)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 49(13)
0 0(0)
300(79)
21
338(89)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
56 2,281(602)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
58 2,281(602)
96
-------
43-12 TRICKLING FILTER - REDWOOD SLATS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLO*
6 68(19)
1 0(0)
1 2(0)
0 0(0)
1 6(1)
a ni(29)
14 266(75)
0 0(0)
31
175(125)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 70(18)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 70(18)
REQUIRED 8UT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
« 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17 452(119)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17
452(119)
43-13 TRICKLING FILTER OTHER MEDIA
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
1 6(1)
t 8(2)
t 5(1)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 5(1)
5 184(48)
0 0(0)
11
210(55)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 27(7)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 27(7)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 99(26)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 99(26)
43-14 ACTIVATED SLUDGE - CONVENTIONAL
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW in USE
NUMBER FLOW
749 14,617(3661)
237 a,531(2253)
005 9,448(2496)
6 7(1)
90 5,134(1356)
626 7,697(2033)
1,690 26,727(7060)
5 66(18)
3.816 72,232(19081)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
19 437(115)
4 60(15)
14 1,150(303)
326 4,716(1245)
5 31(8)
0 0(0)
10 123(32)
0 0(0)
376 6,520(1722)
97
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
2 0(0)
6 139(36)
0 0(0)
3,157 23,194(6127)
0 0(0)
8 0(0)
2 45(11)
3 76(20)
3,178 23,456(6197)
-------
ACTIVATED SLUDGE - HIGH RATE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NE« PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NU CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
6 128(34)
1 412(106)
5 877(231)
0 0(0)
? 29(7)
2 6(1)
17 1.459(385)
1 HO)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLO*
1 7(1)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 827(218)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLON
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
19 479(126)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
34
2,917(770)
19
479(126)
43-16 ACTIVATED SLUDGE CONTACT STABILIZATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
141 3,782(999)
88 246(65)
104 1,309(345)
1 0(0)
20 184(48)
160 553(146)
358 2,463(650)
1 2(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLON
5 17(4)
0 0(0)
3 26(7)
65 337(89)
1 1(0)
I 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
873
8,541(2256)
75
385(101)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
249 1,924(508)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
249 1,924(508)
43-17 ACTIVATED SLUDGE - EXTENDED AERATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
330 1,221(322)
126 174(45)
129 468(123)
2 0(0)
20 25(6)
344 979(258)
947 1,640(433)
4 19(5)
1,902 4,530(1196)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLON
7 13(3)
0 0(0)
3 14(3)
162 626(165)
0 0(0)
2 1(0)
1 0(0)
1 0(0)
176
98
656(173)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLON
1 1(0)
1 4(1)
2 2(0)
3,172 4,370(1154)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
3,177 4,378(1156)
-------
43-18 PUKE OXYGEN ACTIVATED SLUDGE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NU CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
13 1,374(363)
3 90(23)
7 3,314(875)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 62(16)
ID 1,252(330)
0 0(0)
US 6,093(1609)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 24(6)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
24 2,755(727)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0}
0 0(0}
25 2,779(734)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOH
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
SO 9,666(2554)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
50 9,668(2554)
43-19 MICROSTRAINERS PRIMARY
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN N£W PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBfR FLOW
* 167(44)
1 56(15)
0 0(0)
0 0(0}
1 69(16)
6 26(6)
9 1,429(377)
0 0(0}
22
1,751(462)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 50(13)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 50(13)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*«
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
28 333(68)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
26
333(86}
43- 20 MICROSTRAINERS SECONDARY
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
8 99(26)
3 16(4)
3 6(1)
1 2(0)
0 0(0)
10 1,176(311)
46 643(169)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
21 313(82)
0 0(0)
0 OCO)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
73
1,947(514)
22
314(63)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
73 1,117(295)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
73 1,117(295)
99
-------
43-21 SAND FILTERS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND
INSTALL IN Ngw PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANCE
OTHER
TOTAL
til
36
36
5
10
(i
1,010
N USE
FLO«
1,088(287)
119(31)
612(161)
6(1)
135(35)
299(70)
0(0)
4,824(1274)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
FLOW
4 175(46)
0 0(0)
1 1(0)
301 2,772(732)
0 0(0)
I 16(4)
7 38(10)
0 0(0)
314 3,004(793)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
4 22(6)
0 0(0)
4,073 20,729(5476)
0 0(0)
5 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 22(6)
a,085 20,775(5486)
03-22
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEw PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
FILTERS (SAND AND COAL)
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
39 1,420(377)
3 1(0)
3 400(105)
0 0(0)
1 1(0)
13 52(13)
72 1,332(352)
0 0(0)
131
3,217(050)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
S 340(89)
0 0(0)
1 25(6)
68 1,961(518)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
74 2,327(614)
REQUIRED 8UT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO"
0 0(0)
0 OCO)
0 0(0)
305 9,453(2497)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
305 9,453(2497)
43-23 OTHER FILTRATIONS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NE« PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
0
0
0
0
11
21
0
IN USE
FLOW
25(6)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
10(2)
82(21)
0(0)
118(31)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 54KH2)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5 260(68)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
«> 802(211)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO«
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
30 633(167)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
30
633(167)
TOO
-------
43-24 ACTIVATED CARBON - GRANULAR
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL JN NgW PLANT
HEPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
' FLOW
3 26(7)
2 62(16)
1 21(5)
0 0(0)
n 0(0)
1 0(0)
f> 374(99)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 136(35)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
13 640(169)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
13
468(120)
14
776(205)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
20 1*436(379)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
20 1,436(379)
«3-25 ACTIVATED CARBON POWDERED
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 201(53)
0 0(0)
3 201(53)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 26(7)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 28(7)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLON
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
6 301(79)
0 OtO)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
8 301(79)
«3-2fe TWO STAGE LIME TREATMENT OF RAW WA3TEWATER
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
3 14(3)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 17(4)
2 21(5)
0 0(0)
8 52(13)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5 26(7)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5 26(7)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
15 94(24)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
15
94(24)
101
-------
{.1*1
5
o
I
0
0
2
J
0
II
IN use
FLOn
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
Jim
0(0)
174(46)
OF
NO c«»*>6e
01 Hit.
tout
NO"
RFR
2
I
0
0
0
2
II
0
IN USE
FLO"
1(0)
72(19}
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
3(0)
102(27)
0(0)
14
100(47)
)*2* BlN«LC BTA6C TltTI»«T
TREATMENT
CNLABC1
jH»t4lL !>
NU CH*N6f
!OT*L
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOn
» llt(Jl)
A 0(0)
I 12(3)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
20
0
2*
2*5(7S)
0(0)
UNDfB
CONSTBUCTIO*
f\.0m
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
210(55)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0
0
0
IS
0
0
0
0
REQUIRED BUT
NOT TIT
FUNDED
FLO"
0 0(0)
9 0(0)
0 0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
IS
210(*5)
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER
0
0
0
t
0
0
0
0
FLO*
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
370(«7)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
NEOUIRED BUT
NOT »ET
FLO*
0(0)
{
(*)
917MU)
0(0)
370(«7)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER r\.o»
1 253(*»)
0(0)
0
0
24
0
0
0
0
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0
t
0
«3
0
0
0
0
30 t,T32(«57)
102
eoumeo BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER nO«
«()
210)
0(0)
1. 301(14})
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
44 1,304(344)
-------
RECARBONATJON
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL in NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
a
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
10 174(46)
0 0(0)
14 296(78)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 253(66}
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17 313(62)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
49 107(81)
0 0(0}
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1«
567(149)
49
307(01)
43»3l NEUTRALIZATION
ENLAHGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
MOM IN USE
NUMBER FLOM
2 24(6)
Q 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 4(1)
7 B7(23)
0 0(0)
13
116(30)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 17(41
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 17(4)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
23 295(76)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
23
295(7»)
"3-32 ALUM ADDITION TO PRIMARY
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER fLQW
7 39(10)
1 10(2)
5 12(3)
0 0(0)
1 3(0)
2! 126(33)
26 1,194(315)
0 0(0)
61 1,387(366)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOM
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17 965(2541
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17
965(254)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
58 892(235)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
58 892(235)
103
-------
43-33 ALUM ADDITION TO SECONDARY
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN ME* PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
31 618(216)
11 19(13)
\ti 349(92)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
IS 71(18)
0 0(0)
3,274(665)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
2
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
66 614(215)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
69 973(257)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
405 4*621(1275)
0 0(0)
2 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
407 4*621(1273)
43-34 ALUM ADDITION TO SEPARATE STAGE TERTIARY
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
8 136(36)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
u 57(15)
27 622(164)
0 0(0}
ao 819(216)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
3 291(77)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
24 204(54)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
27
496(131)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLON
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
71 1,573(415)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
71 1,573(415)
43-35 FERRI-CHLORIOE ADDITION TO PRIMARY
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
2 585(154)
0 0(0)
1 16(4)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17 229(60)
16 456(121)
0 0(0)
3
-------
43-36 FERRI-CHLORIDE ADDITION TO SECONDARY
CNLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
11 765(207)
7 39(10)
4 72(19)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
8 50(13)
97 2,751(726)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 62(16)
36 400(105)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
755(199)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
127
3,699(977)
37
063(122)
130
755(199)
43-37 FERRI-CHLORIDE ADDITION TO SEPARATE STAGE TERTIARY
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
0 67(17)
0 0(0)
2 21(5)
0 0(0)
1 3(0)
0 0(0)
13 137(36)
0 0(0)
20
229(60)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5 30(7)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5 30(7)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
24 555(146)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
24 555(146)
13-38 OTHER CHEMICAL ADDITIONS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
9 109(28)
1 0(0)
6 54(14)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17 96(25)
37 1,935(511)
0 0(0)
70
2,196(560)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
14 129(34)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
52 669(182)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
14
129(34)
52
669(182)
105
-------
«3-39 BIOLOGICAL NITRIFICATION - SEPARATE STAGE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN ME* PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
UTHER
TOTAL
MOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
13 240(65)
? 1(0)
a 121(32)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 29(7)
50 728(192)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
I 579(153)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
75 2,193(579)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
1 4(1)
0 0(0)
76
1,121(296)
SO
2,779(734)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
565 15,901(4200)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
565 15,901(4200)
43-40 BIOLOGICAL NITRIFICATION BOD t NIT.
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
KEPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
25 631(166)
3 341(90)
2 31(8)
1 3(0)
Z 6(2)
6 4(1)
73 792(209)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 11(2)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
53 1,151(304)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
112
1,612(476)
55
1,163(307)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO"
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
757 9,454(2497)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7SS 9,454(2497)
43-41 BIOLOGICAL OENITRIFICATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
KEPLACE
ABANDON
NU CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
6 27(7)
1 1(0)
3 90(23)
0 0(0)
1 66(17)
4 1(0)
23 1,071(282)
0 0(0)
3ft 1,256(332)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 37(9)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
26 350(92)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
29
366(102)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
3 5(1)
0 0(0)
206 3*774(997)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 1,169(306)
212 4,950(1307)
106
-------
43»42 ION EXCHANGE
ENLAKGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NE*n PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
I 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
o 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 277(73)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 277(75)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOM
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
6 119(}1)
0 0(0}
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
6 119(51)
43»
-------
«3-«5 CHLORINATION FOR DISINFECTION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
1,112 9,207(2432)
320 3,221(651)
514 7,256(1917)
A 12(3)
217 2,269(599)
1,006 7,559(1996)
3,032 23,562(6224)
4 30(6)
6,213
53,123(14033)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
59 1,144(302)
2 7(1)
6 50(13)
457 2,582(682)
6 48(12)
6 5(1)
16 456(120)
2 227(60)
554 4,522(1194)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
2 3(0)
4 23(6)
2 0(0)
6,660 19,351(5112)
1 0(0)
3 0(0)
2 0(0)
0 0(0)
6,674 19,379(5119)
«3-46 OZONATION FOR DISINFECTION
ENLARGE
UPGKADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
2 9(2)
fl 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
10 183(46)
0 0(01
12 192(50)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 144(36)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 49(13)
0 OCO)
6 193(51)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
16 1,357(356)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
o 0(0)
0 0(0)
16 1,357(356)
43-47 OTHER DISINFECTION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE A«JD UPGRADE
INSTALL IN ME* PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW
NUMBER
0
\
0
0
0
1
2
0
USE
FLOW
0(0)
35(9)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
14(3)
0(0)
50(13)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1
0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 9(2)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 9(2)
108
-------
«3-
-------
43-51 STABILIZATION PONDS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
9h2 2,920(771)
673 359(94)
421 549(145)
1 0(0)
240 226(59)
1,215 1,672(441)
2,256 3,285(868)
58 125(34)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
10 47(13)
1 0(0)
1 1(0)
167 199(52)
0 0(0)
2 1(0)
13 348(92)
0 0(0)
5,826
9,144(2415)
214
598(158)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLC«
1 0(0)
1 0(0)
1 0(0)
3,361 2,603(687)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
1 1(0)
3,366 2,606(688)
43-52 AERATED LAGOONS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOn
159 582(153)
114 364(96)
78 569(150)
2 1(0)
19 53(14)
166 461(121)
463 1,393(368)
4 4(1)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
6 8(2)
0 0(0)
2 0(0)
114 177(46)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 4(1)
0 0(0)
1,005
3,431(906)
123
191(50)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLON
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 1(0)
1,313 1,664(439)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
1 0(0)
1,316 1,666(440)
43-53 POST AERATION (REAERATION)
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
FLOW
51 1,258(332)
4 10(2)
10 127(33)
2 3(0)
A 86(22)
6A 125(33)
284 3,159(834)
0 0(0)
432
4,770(1260)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
4 38(10)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
131 2,707(715)
1 3(0)
1 0(0)
1 18(4)
1 9(2)
139 2,777(733)
no
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
975 6,228(1645)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
976 6,229(1645)
-------
43-54 6IO-OISC (ROTATING BIOLOGICAL FILTER)
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NE* PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
12
2
1
1
1
6
4B
0
71
53(14)
1(0)
2(0)
2(0)
3(0)
37(9)
163(48)
0(0)
283(74)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 11(2)
64 1,076(285)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
85
1,090(286)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
999 3,357(866)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
399 3,357(666)
«3-55 OXIDATION DITCH USING MECHANICAL AERATORS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLO*
62 138(36)
1« 26(7)
10 16(4)
1 0(0)
3 2(0)
12 27(7)
231 262(74)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
2 7(2)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
60 96(25)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 3(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
503 880(232)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
337
496(131)
85
107(26)
SOI
660(232)
«3-S6 CLARIFICATION USING TUBE SETTLERS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEK PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
14 113(29)
2 6(1)
5 50(13)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 15(4)
15 216(57)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 3(1)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
6 169(44)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
9 43(11)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
TOTAL
40
402(106)
10
173(45)
43(11)
-------
43-57 OUTFALL PUMPING
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMHE" FLO*
50 1,806(477)
u 604(159)
13 292(77)
1 0(0)
5 156(41)
40 248(65)
94 3,383(893)
0 0(0)
207
6,492(1715)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
2 7(1)
0 0(0)
1 51
-------
43-60 EFFLUENT OUTFALL
ENLARGE
ENLARGE AMD UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
1.124 9,918(2620)
50? 1,563(413)
U9U 4,364(1153}
15 U(3)
466 1,976(522)
1,711 10,239(2705)
5,917 49,680(13124)
6 34(9)
10,036 77,792(20550)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
20 1,073(263)
0 0(0)
6 120(31)
380 1,445(361)
7 49(13)
5 3(0)
9 37(9)
1 0(0)
430 2,729(721)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5,984 13,802(3646)
0 0(0)
4 15(3)
3 1(0)
0 0(0)
5,992 13,818(3650)
43-61 OTHER TREATMENT
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
23
21
11
0
29
385
170
3
627(165)
971(256)
640(169)
0(0)
24(6)
146(38)
3,303(872)
2(0)
642 5,717(1510)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
2 140(37)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
19 1,379(364)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 3(1)
0 0(0)
22 1,523(402)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
1 6(1)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
126 3,331(880)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
129 3,337(881)
43-62 AEROBIC DIGESTION . AIR
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
UTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
460 2,888(762)
116 645(170)
146 860(227)
2 2(0)
30 204(54)
313 4,765(1259)
1,207 4,121(1088)
5 17(4)
2,287 13,506(3566)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
11 57(15)
1 0(0)
2 30(8)
226 2,060(544)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
9 70(18)
0 0(0)
250
2,219(586)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
1 1(0)
0 0(0)
2 31(8)
2,930 8,661(2288)
0 0(0)
a 0(0)
1 0(0)
1 0(0)
2,939
113
-------
43-61 AEROBIC DIGESTION . OXYGEN
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN N£w PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
9 21(5)
4 46(12)
2 4(1)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
a 36(9)
20 226(60)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 25(6)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
11 91(24)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
27 690(182)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
40
336(89)
12
117(30)
27
690(182)
43-64 COMPOSTING
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEN PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 5(1)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
t 1(0)
6 86(22)
1 1.249(329)
10
1.341(354)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5 1,211(319)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
5 1,211(319)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
15 646(170)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
15
646(170)
43-65 ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
751 15,658(4136)
?fl4 5,276(865)
401 6,674(1763)
4 644(170)
190 1,367(361)
1,224 6,473(1710)
1,809 24,706(6526)
It 459(121)
4,714
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLO*
37 820(216)
S 1,792(473)
9 593(156)
144 1,167(308)
5 49(13)
1 62(16)
7 481(127)
1 0(0)
59,262(15655)
209
114
4,968(1312)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO*
1 1(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1,819 11,087(2929)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
1 2(0)
2 2(0)
1,824 11,093(2930)
-------
43-66 SLUDGE LAGOONS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
80 1,499(396)
32 189(50)
39 1,050(277)
0 0(0)
5 36(9)
112 1,634(484)
296 6,589(1740)
1 11(2)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
3 43(11)
0 0(0)
2 436(115)
26 247(65)
0 0(0)
2 3(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
574
11,210(2961)
34
73H193)
REQUIRED BUT
MOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
182 2,337(617)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 3(0)
184 2,340(616)
13-67 HEAT TREATMENT
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
FLOw
25 1,177(310)
9 80(21)
9 158(41)
0 0(0)
3 6(1)
14 144(36)
88 6,621(1749)
0 0(0)
148
8,188(2163)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
2 74(19)
1 435(114)
18 1,713(452)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 90(23)
0 0(0)
22 2,314(611)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
48 5,668(1497)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
48 5,666(1497)
43-68 CHLORINE OXIDATION OF SLUDGE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
KEPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
4 475(125)
0 0(0)
1 16(4)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 383(101)
19 242(64)
0 0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
8 174(46)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
14 155(41)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
28
1,118(295)
8
174(46)
14
155(41)
115
-------
43-69 LIME STABILIZATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IM NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
FLOW
h 527(139)
3 69(1«)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 168(44}
34 747(197)
0 0(0)
50 1,512(399)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 11(2)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
10 267(70)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
11
279(73)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
33 745(196)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
33 745(196)
43-70 WET AIR OXIDATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
UTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
5 234(62)
0 0(0)
5 457(120)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 167(44)
31 1,126(297)
0 0(0)
45
1,986(524)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
6 157(41)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
6 157(41)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 259(68)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 259(66)
43-71 AIR DRYING
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOw
1,214 8,629(2279)
206 816(215)
424 2,407(636)
7 379(100)
207 962(259)
1,230 8,498(2244)
2,994 17,498(4622)
9 1,298(342)
6,291
40,511(10701)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
34 636(168)
3 36(9)
10 190(50)
277 858(226)
3 26(7)
3 2(0)
9 33(9)
2 7(2)
341 1,792(473)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 2(0)
4,357 10,256(2710)
0 0(0)
5 0(0)
2 1(0)
3 15(4)
4,368 10,278(2715)
116
-------
"3-72 OE*ATE«ING - MECHANICAL - VACUUM FILTER
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
UTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN use
NUMBER FLOW
236 6,354(1678)
39 3,980(1051)
75 3,958(1045)
2 2(0)
15 526(139)
115 3,114(630)
55B 18,573(4906)
2 9(2)
1,042 36,551(9655)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
22 520(137)
4 65(17)
2 79(20)
138 2,461(650)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
11 322(85)
0 0(0)
177 3,449(911)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
2 123(32)
t 7(1)
0 0(0)
699 14,421(3809)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
702 14,552(3844)
43-73 DEWATERING - MECHANICAL - CENTRIFUGE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
41 3,207(847)
6 153(40)
15 718(189)
0 0(0)
2 30(7)
9 81(21)
Bl 3,025(799)
1 12(3)
155 7,229(1909)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
4 356(94)
0 0(0)
2 33(8)
24 535(141)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 310(81)
0 0(0)
31
1,234(326)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
67 9,226(2437)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
67 9,226(2437)
43-74 DEWATERING - MECHANICAL - FILTER PRESS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN N£W PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
11 366(96)
0 0(0)
8 290(76)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 2(0)
34 524(138)
0 0(0)
54
1,183(312)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 34(9)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
28 1,528(403)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 1(0)
0 0(0)
30 1,565(413)
117
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
73 2,770(731)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 15(3)
0 0(0)
74 2,785(735)
-------
43-75 DEwATERING - OTHERS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
3 12(3)
0 0(0)
a 1,156(305)
0 0(0)
1 2(0)
fe 9(2)
10 237(62)
0 0(0)
24
1,418(374)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 24(6)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 24(6)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 146(38)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 146(38)
43-76 GRAVITY THICKENING
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NU CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLO*
131 7,836(2070)
20 998(263)
34 2,613(690)
1 2(0)
6 89(23)
54 607(160)
310 15,045(3974)
I 53(14)
557
27,250(7198)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
8 120(31)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
91 1,884(497)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 361(95)
1 9(2)
104 2,375(627)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
1 117(30)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
278 8,292(2190)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
279 8,410(2221)
43-77 AIR FLOTATION THICKENING
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
44 3,401(898)'
5 147(38)
5 189(50)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 90(23)
97 5,893(1556)
0 0(0)
158
9,723(2568)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 18(4)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
39 3,067(810)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 49(13)
0 0(0)
41 3,136(828)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
1 10(2)
0 0(0)
113 6,482(1712)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
114
6,492(1715)
118
-------
13-78 INCINERATION . MULTIPLE HEARTH
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
HEPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
MOM IN USE
FLOW
*« 2,922(771)
21 3,660(1019)
29 3,171(837)
A 0(0)
5 867(229)
45 535(111)
156 6,945(2363)
0 0(0)
320
20,302(5363)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
a 165(43)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
33 1,330(351)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 440(116)
0 0(0)
41 1,936(511)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
96 6,690(1767)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 60(15)
1 1,169(306)
96 7,921(2092)
13-79 INCINERATION « FLUIDIZED BEDS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
2 6(2)
2 78(20)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 21(5)
1 19(5)
9 328(86)
0 0(0)
15
455(120)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 259(66)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 259(66)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
43-eo INCINERATION - ROTARY KILN
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
KEPCACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 71(18)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 4(1)
3 56(14)
0 0(0)
7 131(34)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 90(23)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 90(23)
119
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 38(10)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 38(10)
-------
«3-81 INCINERATION . OTHERS
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMRf-R FLOW
I 7(1)
t 35(9)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 198(52)
0 0(0)
9 241(63)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 26(6)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1
26(6)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 223(59)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 223(59)
13-82
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IM NE* PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
1 3(0)
0 OCO)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 72(19)
0 0(0)
2 76(20)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLO**
0 0(0)
1 1,097(289)
0 0(0)
16 6,000(1565)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
17 7,097(1875)
«3-83 CO-INCINERATION WITH SOLID WASTE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AMD UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 71(18)
0 0(0)
a 71(18)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 15(3)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1
120
15(3)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 22K59)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 22K59)
-------
43-84 CO-PYROLYSIS WITH SOLID WASTE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IM N£w PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
1 0(0)
o 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
t
0(0)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 278(73)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 278(73)
43-85 RECALCINATION
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
FLOW
5 344(90)
0 0(0)
t 348(91)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
7 109(28)
14 635(167)
0 0(0)
27
1,438(379)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
3 227(59)
0 0(0)
3 73(19)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
6 300(79)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
1 96(25)
1 5(1)
0 0(0)
21 954(252)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
23 1,056(279)
43-86 L*NO FILL
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NL> CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
546 7,631(2068)
68 707(187)
86 4,208(1111)
6 85(22)
73 316(83)
«54 7,015(1853)
3,29? 27,304(7213)
5 19(5)
4,930
47,488(12545)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
10 338(89)
0 0(0)
5 101(26)
300 1,570(414)
0 0(0)
2 1(0)
10 118(31)
0 0(0)
327 2,131(563)
121
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
2 4(1)
1 0(0)
4,062 21,003(5548)
0 0(0)
4 0(0)
2 2(0)
0 0(0)
4,071 21,010(5550)
-------
43-67 LAND SPREADING OF LIQUID SLUDGE
ENLAKGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
59 263(74)
20 90(24)
45 3,271(864)
2 2(0)
13 151(40)
133 605(159)
730 3,593(949)
1 10(2)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER PLOW
2 151(40)
0 0(0)
1 1(0)
72 321(84)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
4 24(6)
0 0(0)
1,003
6,008(2115)
79
498(131)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
387 1,741(459)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
387 1,741(459)
43-88 LAND SPREADING OF THICKENED SLUDGE
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
79 1,289(340)
20 49(13)
53 3,309(874)
1 1(0)
5 19(5)
124 1,816(479)
595 4,464(1179)
1 9(2)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
2 29(7)
0 0(0)
1 0(0)
45 251(66)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 18(4)
0 0(0)
878
10,959(2895)
49
300(79)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
293 4,217(1114)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
293 4,217(1114)
43-89 TRENCHING
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
1 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 21(5)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 1,046(276)
3 4(1)
0 0(0)
6 1,074(283)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 26(7)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
26(7)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 2(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
2 2(0)
122
-------
43-90 OCEAN DUMPING
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
HEPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
1 1(0)
1 6(1)
1 15(4)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
43 9,705(2563)
3 38(10)
0 0(0)
44 9,767(2580)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER PLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT YET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
43-91 OTHER SLUDGE HANDLING
ENLARGE
UPGHADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
21 330(87)
11 589(155)
6 2,764(730)
0 0(0)
3 23(6)
57 8ttO(222)
115 3,440(908)
3 1,798(475)
216 9,787(2585)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
3 33(8)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
IS 215(56)
0 0(0)
1 16(4)
1 310(81)
0 0(0)
20
575(151)
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
94 4,903(1295)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
94 4,903(1295)
43-92 DIGEST GAS UTILIZATION FACILITIES
ENLARGE
UPGRADE
ENLARGE AND UPGRADE
INSTALL IN NEW PLANT
REPLACE
ABANDON
NO CHANGE
OTHER
TOTAL
NOW IN USE
NUMBER FLOW
25 737(194)
6 38(10)
2a 1,604(423)
0 0(0)
5 163(43)
23 153(40)
86 3,778(998)
0 0(0)
173
6,475(1710)
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
NUMBER FLOW
1 1,589(419)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
3 145(38)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
1 6(1)
0 0(0)
5 1,741(460)
123
REQUIRED BUT
NOT VET
FUNDED
NUMBER FLOW
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
39 2,536(6*9)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
0 0(0)
39 2,536(669)
-------
TABLE 44 - COLLECTION POPULATIONS - PRESENT,
PROJECTED, RESIDENT & NONRESIDENT
Table 44 summarizes, by State, the present
and projected populations "Receiving Col-
lection" and "Not Receiving Collection" of
their wastewaters. Resident populations are
permanent residents of the service area.
Nonresident populations include commuters
living in one area and working in another, as
well as temporary residents at resort areas
and similar locations.
The year 2000 ceiling population is the popu-
lation expected to be resident in each State
as predicted by the Bureau of Economic Analy-
sis (BEA). The projections were produced by
BEA after extensive analysis which included
review and comments by State agencies respon-
sible for population projections.
Residents "Not Receiving Collection" are
those residents of a service area or authority
not serviced by the collection system operated
by the authority. Many rural residents in
sparsely populated, unincorporated areas are
included in the BEA ceiling population, but
are not counted in either the resident receiv-
ing or not receiving collection categories.
Therefore, the totals of residents receiving
or not receiving collection do not equal the
total population of a State.
The "Percent Served" figures are based upon
resident populations compared with BEA 1978
estimates and 2000 ceilings.
124
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TAHLl at
|97f NEEDS SURVEY
COLLECTION POPULATIONS
PRESENT, PROJECTED, RESIDENT I NONRESIDENT
( IN THOUSANDS )
«««« RECEIVING COLLECTION ««»
MOT HECEIVING COLLECTION **
PERCENT SERVED
POOD
CEILING
STATE POPULATION
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLOWADO
CONNECMCUT
DELAWARE
OIST. OF COLU1.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEK HAMPSHIRF
NE» JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NED YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
P«C. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
4,110
667
4. 119
2,970
26,786
3,»6B
1,741
841
661
15,0(19
7,051
1,3*6
1,18)
12,351
5,732
3,101
2,517
4,220
1,659
1 ,222
5,583
6,614
10,314
4,505
2.710
5.225
"02
1 ,714
1,141
1,306
8,747
1,136
18, 922
7 , « 1 9
690
12,011
3,396
3,209
12,365
1.0)3
3.700
730
5,571
10,069
1,688
607
6,755
1,417
2,001
5,553
484
10
275
35
4,700
170
116
1978
RES.
1.971
201
1 ,741
1,201
19,014
2,184
1,875
477
729
5,005
2,875
594
481
9,604
3,442
2.087
1.81*
1,617
2,711
526
3,121
3,801
6,614
2,925
1,280
1,451
473
l,?74
(.01
16
-------
TABLE 45 - NUMBERS OF FACILITIES NEEDING
COLLECTOR SEWERS BY SERVICE-AREA
POPULATION AND PER-CAPITA SEWER
COST
Table 45 summarizes the collector sewer needs
expressed as S/capita and service-area popu-
lations. The service-area populations are
1978 resident populations who are presently
in need of collector systems, and whose 1972
population met the "2/3 Rule." That is, 2/3
of the population requiring collector sewers
in 1978 are required to have been resident
within the service area on October 18, 1972.
The matrix delineates costs, in $/capita in
the left margin, and service-area populations
across the top. Thus, there are 225 service
areas whose populations are in the 1,000 to
4,999 range and whose average cost for collec-
tor sewers is $500-600 per capita.
A total of 5,569 individual service areas are
in need of collector sewers.
126
-------
COLLECTOR
SE*ER COST
S/CAPITA
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 45
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
NUMBERS OF FACILITIES NEEDING COLLECTOR SEWERS
BY SERVICE-AREA POPULATION AND PER-CAPITA SEWER COST
********************************* SERVICE-AREA POPULATION **********************************
0-999 1,000-4,999 5,000-9,999 10,000-49,999 SOK-100K >100K TOTAL
0-100
100-200
200-300
300-400
400-500
500-600
600-700
700-800
SOO-900
900-1000
1000-1100
1100-1200
1200-1300
1300-1400
1400-1500
>1500
TOTAL
8
17
27
25
39
90
184
too
102
156
77
16
6
6
5
56
920
37
52
74
92
99
225
411
274
190
237
263
93
54
18
11
129
2,279
19
22
26
40
33
45
86
127
63
82
124
64
39
11
11
50
844
16
40
26
45
51
46
112
163
84
130
161
144
62
38
25
72
1,257
4
4
6
4
3
11
9
16
4
20
18
14
13
5
7
14
154
2
4
2
4
7
3
7
10
9
18
9
12
5
9
6
6
US
66
139
163
210
232
420
811
690
452
645
692
345
201
67
65
329
5,569
127
-------
TABLE 46 - PERCENT OF COLLECTOR DOLLAR NEEDS
BY SERVICE-AREA POPULATION AND
COST/CAPITA
Table 46 summarizes the collector sewer needs
expressed as $/capita and service-area popu-
lations. The service-area populations are
1978 resident populations who are presently
in need of collector systems, and whose 1972
population met the "2/3 Rule." That is, 2/3
of the population requiring collector systems
in 1978 are required to have been resident
within the service area on October 18, 1972.
The matrix delineates the percent of collector
dollar needs by service-area population size
and cost per capita. This table is a compan-
ion to Table 45, which delineates number of
facilities, using the same matrix. For
example, 12.5 percent of the collector sewer
needs for service areas with populations in
the 5,000-9,999 range are in the $1,000-1,100
per capita range.
128
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 46
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
PERCENT OF CULLECTOR DOLLAR NEEDS BY SERVICE-AREA POPULATION AND COST/CAPITA
******************************** SERVICE-AREA POPULATION *******************************
0-999 1,000-4,999 5,000-9,999 10,000-49,999 50K-100K MOOK
0-100
100-200
200-300
300-400
400-500
500-600
600-700
700-800
800-900
900-1000
1000-1100
1100-1200
1200-1300
1300-1400
1400-1500
>1500
TOTALS
0.1
0.4
1.1
1,4
3,8
6. ft
14.5
11,1
8,4
11.2
11.7
2.6
1.2
1.7
1.7
22.4
100.0
0.3
0.7
1.8
2.0
3.4
6.9
12.4
13.5
6.6
7.2
12.7
6.5
5.3
1.7
0.9
17.7
100.0
0.3
0.8
1.6
3.6
2.3
3.4
8.5
13.4
10.4
8.3
12.5
9.6
7.6
3.0
2.2
12.3
100.0
0.1
1.3
0.9
2.3
2.0
2.7
7.4
13.0
7.9
8.7
12.7
12.3
10.0
4.3
3.«
11.0
100.0
0.2
1.2
2.6
1.5
1.5
6.9
2.7
1«.9
2.0
12.6
14.6
S.I
8.7
«.9
9.3
11.1
100.0
0.1
1.0
1.3
2.2
a.5
1.9
2.7
4.0
12.5
17.6
S.2
9.5
4.7
11.6
11.2
9.9
100.0
129
-------
TABLE 47 - REQUIRED INFILTRATION/INFLOW
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AND BASIS OF
ESTIMATE - NUMBER OF FACILITIES
WITH NEEDS
Table 47 summarizes, for those facilities re-
quiring infiltration/inflow corrective action,
the kind of corrective action necessary and
the basis of estimate for such action.
Individual cost estimates made in Categories
I through IV of the Survey were to be accom-
panied with a basis of cost estimate so that
the accuracy of the estimate could better be
determined. EPA has determined that the
quality of the cost estimates can be ranked
from high to low as follows:
1. Engineer/Consultant Firm Estimate.
2. Engineer/Consultant Preliminary Estimate.
3. Cost/Effective Analysis.
4. Cost of Previous Comparable Construction.
5. EPA Supplied Cost Estimating Procedures.
6. Rough Estimates.
Additionally, three other basis of estimates
were permitted for Categories IIIA and IIIB
(infiltration/inflow correction and major
sewer rehabilitation) needs only. These are:
1. State Certification.
2. Infiltration/Inflow Analysis Completed.
3. Evaluation Survey Completed.
It is noted that 781 estimates were supplied,
with no corresponding basis of estimate.
This procedure was permitted for Category
IIIA only, in order to allow needs for infil-
tration/inflow analyses where none had pre-
viously been accomplished, and infiltration/
inflow was suspected to be a problem by State
and Federal officials.
130
-------
FEBRUARY )0, 1979
TABLE 47
1976 NEEDS SURVEY
REQUIRED INFILTRATION/INFLOW CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AND BASIS OF ESTIMATE
NUMBERS OF FACILITIES *ITH NEEDS
A****************************** CORRECTIVE ACTION »**«»*
CHANCE/CREATE PROVIDE
SEAL OFF REPLACE/RELINE FLO* ROUTING FLO*
NOT KNOMN NONE SEWER LINES SEMER SECTIONS SYSTEM EQUALIZATION OTHER
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
STATE CERTIFICATION
I/I ANALYSIS COMPLETED
EVALUATION SURVEY COMPLETED
ENGINEER/CONSULTANT FIRM ESTIMATE
COST OF PREVIOUS COMPARABLE CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEER/CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE
EPA SUPPLIED COST ESTIMATING PROCEDURES
COST EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS
ROUGH ESTIMATE
(NONE GIVEN)
TOTALS
0
108
8
2
0
158
477
1
0
781
1,535
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
979
95
s
0
239
275
1
0
0
1,594
131
0
55*
144
16
0
420
43
7
0
0
1,164
0
1
1
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
6
0
12
1
0
0
to
0
0
0
0
23
0
20
5
1
0
1ft
1
2
0
0
45
0
1,674
254
24
0
649
796
11
0
761
4,369
-------
TABLE 48 - DOLLAR NEEDS FOR REQUIRED
INFILTRATION/INFLOW CORRECTIVE
ACTIONS BY BASIS OF ESTIMATE
Table 48 summarizes the dollar needs required
for infiltration/inflow corrective actions by
basis of estimate and is a companion to Table
47.
It is noted that approximately 45 percent of
the total dollar needs estimated for infiltra-
tion/inflow correction were based on completed
infiltration/inflow analyses.
132
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 46
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
DOLLAR NEEDS FOR REQUIRED INFILTRATION/INFLOW CORRECTIVE ACTIONS BY BASIS OF ESTIMATE
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
******************************* CORRECTIVE ACTION *******************************
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
STATE CERTIFICATION
I/I ANALYSIS COMPLETED
EVALUATION SURVEY COMPLETED
ENGINEER/CONSULTANT FIRM EST.
COST OF PREVIOUS COMP, CONST.
ENG./CONSULTANT PRELIM. EST,
ERA-SUPPLIED COST EST. PROC,
COST EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS
ROUGH ESTIMATE
(NONE GIVEN)
TOTALS
SEAL OFF
NOT KNOWN NONE SEWER LINES
0
35,915
1,296
93
0
46,653
234,040
15
0
6,749
322,761
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
494,609
45,706
9,473
0
157,591
131,559
456
0
0
839,474
133
REPLACE/ CHANGE/
RELINE CREATE PROVIDE
SEWER FLOW ROUT. FLON
SECTIONS SYSTEM EQUILIZA.
0
534,959
170,515
9,127
0
361,309
117,637
1.404
0
0
1,194,951
0
134
32
0
0
2,969
0
0
0
0
3,135
0
39,423
76
0
0
18,222
0
0
0
0
57,721
OTHER
0
4,943
5,695
80
0
7.663
925
84
0
0
19,410
TOTAL
0
1,108,063
223,320
18,773
0
594,427
484,161
1,959
0
6,749
2,437,452
-------
TABLE 49 - REQUIRED REPLACEMENT AND/OR MAJOR
REHABILITATION ACTIONS AND BASIS
OF ESTIMATE - NUMBERS OF FACILITIES
WITH NEEDS
Table 49 presents a summary of the required
collection system replacement and major reha-
bilitation actions by type of corrective
action and basis of estimate.
Individual cost estimates made in Categories
I through IV of the Survey were accompanied
with a basis of cost estimate, so that the
accuracy of the estimate can better be deter-
mined. EPA has determined that the quality
of the cost estimates can be ranked from high
to low as follows:
1. Engineer/Consultant Firm Estimate.
2. Engineer/Consultant Preliminary Estimate.
3. Cost/Effective Analysis.
4. Cost of Previous Comparable Construction.
5. EPA Supplied Cost Estimating Procedures.
6. Rough Estimates.
Additionally, three other basis of estimates
were permitted for Categories IIIA and 11IB
(infiltration/inflow correction and major
sewer rehabilitation) needs only. These are:
1. State Certification.
2. Infiltration/Inflow Analysis Completed.
3. Evaluation Survey Completed.
It is noted that 299 of 384 total, or approx-
imately 78 percent, of the required replace-
ment/major rehabilitation corrective actions
were based on engineer/consultant preliminary
estimates. The majority of these actions
involved replacement or relining of sewers.
134
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 49
1970 NEEDS SURVEY
REQUIRED REPLACEMENT AND/OR MAJOR REHABILITATION ACTIONS AND BASIS OF ESTIMATE
NUMBERS OF FACILITIES WITH NEEDS
******************************* CORRECTIVE ACTION I*******************************
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
NOT KNOWN NONE
SEAL OFF
SEWER LINES
REPLACE/RELINE
SEWER SECTIONS
CHANGE/CREATE
FLOW ROUTING
SYSTEM
PROVIDE
FLON
EQUALIZATION
OTHER TOTAL
STATE CERTIFICATION
ANALYSIS COMPLETED
EVALUATION SURVEY COMPLETED
ENGINEER/CONSULTANT FIRM ESTIMATE
COST OF PREVIOUS COMPARABLE CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEER/CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE
EPA - SUPPLIED COST ESTIMATING PROCEDURES
COST EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS
ROUGH ESTIMATE
(NONE GIVEN)
TOTALS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39
22
8
0
231
0
0
0
0
0
n
0
2
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
135
300
23
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
2
2
0
51
0
0
0
0
0
49
24
12
0
299
0
0
0
0
61
384
-------
TABLE 50 - DOLLAR NEEDS FOR REPLACEMENT AND/OR
MAJOR REHABILITATION BY BASIS OF
ESTIMATE
Table 50 summarizes the dollar needs estimated
for collection system replacement and/or major
rehabilitation and is a companion to Table 49.
It is noted that approximately 83 percent of
the total needs are based on engineer/consul-
tant preliminary estimates. The majority of
these needs are for replacement/relining sewer
systems.
136
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
T»8LE 50
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
DOLLAR NEEDS FOK REPLACEMENT AND/OR MAJOR REHABILITATION 8Y BA3I3 OF ESTIMATE
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
A****************************** CONNECTIVE ACTION *******************************
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
STATE CERTIFICATION
ANALYSIS COMPLETED
EVALUATION S')HV£Y COMPLETED
ENGINEER/CONSULTANT FIRM EST.
COST OF PREVIOUS COMP. CUNST.
ENG./CONSULTANT PRELIM. EST.
EPA-SUPPLIED COST EST. PROC.
COST EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS
ROUGH ESTIMATE
(NONE GIVEN)
TOTALS
SEAL OFF
NOT KNOWN
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
REPLACE/
RELINE
SEWER
NONE SEWER LINES SECTIONS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23,676
771.959
1,620
0
3,798,703
0
0
0
0
CHANGE/
CREATE
FLO* ROUT.
PROVIDE
FLOW
SYSTEM EQUILIZA.
0
52«
0
491
0
61,164
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER
0
3,569
215
492
0
212,373
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
0
27,769
772,174
5,603
0
4,072,240
0
0
0
0
0 4,598,958
137
62,179
216,649 4,677,766
-------
TABLE 51 - TOTAL PIPE LENGTH NEEDED BY
DIAMETERS
Table 51 summarizes, by State, the total
length of gravity sewer pipe in meters re-
quired to satisfy the Category IVA collector
and Category IVB interceptor needs by the
year 2000.
Total pipe lengths are shown for seven sepa-
rate ranges of pipe diameter in centimeters
(inches in parentheses). These figures do
not include force main pipe.
138
-------
FEBRUARY 10. 1979
TABLE 51
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
tOT»L PIPE LENGTH NEEOtO BY DIAMETER
(LENGTH IN METERS,DIAMETER IN CENTIMETERS)
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
UfL»»ARE
DIST. OF O1LUM.
FLUWIOA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEw JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YORK
NIJHTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
wEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO RICO
PAC. TR. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
UNITED STATES TOTALS
1S-S1
(6-12")
J.5S2.189
223.067
1 , ICO, 176
1 ,8?9,002
6,666,901
570,290
?, 565, 446
309,086
8,504,127
1,663.420
922,756
847,247
1,877,976
2,270,265
,362,888
,070,453
,059,058
,914,229
,566,515
.631.551
,459,385
,805,653
,253,692
,952,873
2,325,398
217,164
273.061
31»,733
2,273,460
4,576,610
501,084
7,912,320
6,076,618
47,934
4,431,826
1,147,702
1,249,134
9,279,355
885,183
3,707,354
138,651
1.222.610
11,209,940
827,068
550,619
3,810,316
2,775,693
5,063,785
2,320,606
29,830
70,629
12,560
169,986
1,474,609
168,127
100,954
139,828,423
31.1-54
184,381
60,819
120,180
108,903
632,906
180,708
287,327
10,299
485,151
471 ,773
163,569
66,842
226,229
184,095
166,447
313,637
195,620
215,331
129,989
148,591
473,702
482,396
102,072
203,999
325,396
30,035
34,966
45,642
209,346
333,761
131 ,277
544,205
647,517
17.H93
537,133
421,112
150,396
459,815
184,725
391,296
39,533
390,519
656,416
135,121
33,853
203,544
319,602
150,102
223,728
24,974
286,647
21,258
4,145
12,568,754
54.1-77
(22"-30M
127,355
21,484
89,190
15,240
874,424
107,728
72,490
25,036
343,344
406,597
147,305
80,350
92.737
129,632
142,063
210,188
60,719
1*9,601
20,066
174,588
136,067
248,853
64,796
78,262
72,386
13,889
40,398
17,105
81,902
176,869
20,278
263,478
283,331
2,537
322,437
104,285
133,022
188,016
56,946
124,455
26,790
162,423
439,356
42,731
435
243,765
243,577
25,132
146,878
304
75,895
187,590
11,614
7,698,268
77.1-107
(51"-42«)
56,570
111,153
30,186
445,312
99,111
15.361
436,448
214,141
66,584
5,333
87,377
58,462
19,421
55,260
166,919
87,453
9,143
89,256
76,761
64,426
31,556
110,317
67,385
10,046
92,166
2,633
44,083
18,565
183,192
147,407
4,632
309,538
56,416
70,760
17,516
29,307
59,263
5,659
69,361
367,026
50
115,920
114,928
31,052
149,188
4,324,912
107.1-122
<43"-4B")
152
51,84«
38,762
6,035
19,690
10,972
33,205
102,930
80,424
18,394
16,594
5,303
4,419
43,348
44,549
8,903
21,250
14,758
6,095
46,390
4,876
5,471
34,038
15,371
152,674
26,548
1,523
313
156,806
68,275
55,J9«
1,097,327
122.1-200
Cii9"-78")
16,733
3,907
29,149
1,584
337,562
91,391
179,742
65,145
6,746
6,19$
51,897
18,105
3,870
44,439
8,564
5,266
29,311
75,287
45,579
67,636
3,654
7,802
1,042
269,393
34,411
134,715
52,308
62,331
3,188
507
23,439
277.189
57,424
8,606
2,044,156
200*
(79«t)
53,»27
28,503
10,503
3,749
5.79J
16,818
31,394
56,645
13,702
88,471
50,596
20,253
21,153
2,773
404,364
139
-------
TABLE 52 - LENGTH AND COST OF PIPE BASED ON
2000 POPULATION TO RECEIVE
COLLECTION
Table 52 summarizes, by State, the total
lengths in meters of collector and interceptor
pipe required to serve the projected year 2000
populations. Per capita lengths and mean
costs per meter have also been calculated for
each State. Populations used for calculating
per capita length were those resident popu-
lations projected to receive collection in
the year 2000 in facilities with collector or
interceptor pipe needs.
It is noted that the highest total lengths of
pipe per capita are projected for States and
Territories which are largely rural and un-
sewered at present, such as New Hampshire
West Virginia, American Samoa, Northern Mari-
anas, and the Pacific Trust Territories. The
total pipe requirements for these areas, how-
ever, comprise only 4.5 percent of the national
total.
140
-------
FfCHUAB*
T*PLt 52
STATE
l<»7e NEEDS SURVE*
AND CUS1 Or PIPE **SED ON 2HOC POPULATION TO «ECEI«
TOI»L LENSTH I»i METEH3 P£R CAPITA LENGTH
COLLECTU* INTE«CEP?OH ALL PIPE COLLECTOR INTEKCEPTOR «LL PIPE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARK ANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DISI, Of COLUN.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
ID»A
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MABSACHUSt TT3
MIC^I BAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
M.JSSUUK1
MUNTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW MAMPSHIRF
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
HfH YORK
WORTH CAkOLJMA
NORtN DAKOT«
OHIU
(JKLAHUMA
OBECUN
PENNSYLVANIA
HHUUE ISLAND
SOUtH CAROLINA
SOUlH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRUlNIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
H, MAHIANAS
PUERTO HKO
PAC. TR, TEHH.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
U.S. TOTALS
2,919,164
147, 645
t ,060,688
1.577,846
8 ,7 JO , 616
216,496
2,033,225
1B2 ,214
0
13,117,927
1,482, 469
1 ,250 , 380
710,576
1 ,542,470
2,758,87!
1 , t 07 ,444
888,826
4,019,461
3,013,161
1.1S1.4JHI
1 ,9(4,902
4,619, 8fl7
7 , 159, 686
1 , 156, 068
1 ,469,537
1 ,470,209
168,020
217,546
5*1,920
1,728,962
H ,572, 451
451,586
10,271,176
6,1 95, 246
26,112
1,106,146
1,769,062
8,625,411
1,206,515
3, 484, 186
SO, 924
1,656,322
8,187,279
574,940
512,770
3,915,501
2,906,898
4,770,761
2,174,256
11,501
69,610
7,059
49,517
2,491,911
*5S;"j
145,817,929
1,451,544
165,771
617,488
621,081
1,246,188
595.611
565,481
226,091
0
0,845,041
2,017,096
501,624
116,062
662,768
916,697
726,955
1,010,665
2,091,417
1,384,055
522,945
640,566
1,504,513
2,221,507
164,877
1,651,002
V ,T65 ,bll
129,906
230,711
115,440
1,148,113
705,755
220,623
2,186,961
1,190.565
58,657
2,595,600
694,5/5
624,219
1,505,076
220,076
2,541,510
208,466
2,266,141
5,686,162
426,118
111,50,1
1,456,909
1,082,157
751,142
768,912
40,186
77,114
6,470
70,469
1,216,788
153,749
20,161
61,620,914
4,402,909
113,118
1,676,677
2,198,929
11,976,8011
814,109
2,998,709
608,106
0
17,962,968
5.499,565
1,754,205
1,046,618
2,405,259
1,675,569
1,614,450
1,919,512
6,110,401
4,197,217
1 ,674,911
2,585,469
6,144,400
9,181,190
1,520,446
1,140,519
S,1S5,BM
297,927
406,107
697,660
2,877,075
5,276,206
670,211
12,458,157
9,191,611
80,990
6,262,017
2,000,722
2,391,301
10,111,009
1,468,591
6,025,902
259,140
5,421,465
14,071,441
1,001,076
6,4.4 ,272
5,172,411
1,989,255
5,522,125
2,943,169
51,691
146,724
15,529
169,966
3,710,702
802,210
118,795
207, 438,689
0.99
0.21
0.12
0.58
0.11
0.07
1.05
0.69
0.00
1.14
0.71
1.01
0.70
0,78
0.76
0.41
0.17
,26
,86
.41
.05
.00
.25
0.49
0,77
o[26
0.14
0.75
1.94
1.12
0.41
1.06
0.05
0,67
0.47
0.59
1,77
1.52
1.51
0.10
0,91
0.51
0.44
o]ss
0.72
J.19
0,65
0,01
1,42
0.07
3.18
0,77
1,18
0.42
0.79
141
0.119
0.27
0.14
0.?!
0.13
0.18
0.24
0.41
0.00
0.42
O.ul
0.42
0.10
0.44
0.25
0.27
0.41
0.67
0.40
0.54
0.15
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.85
tt.51
0.20
0.14
0.15
1.24
0,20
0.21
0.21
0.60
0.11
0.11
0.25
0.21
0.10
0.27
1.10
0.14
0.58
0.15
0.11
0^12
0.27
0.51
0.10
0. 10
2.11
0.09
0.1*
1.30
0.14
0.31
1479
COST PER METER (DOLLARS)
COLLECTOR IMERCECTOS ALL PIPE
1.48
0.52
0.51
0.61
0.47
0.25
1.29
1,10
0,00
1.56
1.11
1.45
1.01
1.22
1.01
0.64
O.S1
1.45
1.28
1.4S
0.60
1.12
1.60
0.65
1.61
1 .OB
0.47
0.26
0.40
1.22
1.52
0.64
1.24
2.15
0.16
0.47
0.71
o.no
2.07
1.79
2,61
0.44
1.51
0.86
0.77
Z.Q1
1.16
0.44
3.42
1.15
0.11
4.05
0.16
5.41
1.15
7,46
1.11
1.12
101.26
277,05
106.44
82.62
145.74
116,27
162.60
104.22
0,00
107,41
9g ,Jfl
155,55
141,29
105,45
114,50
110.58
116.11
111.16
101,23
157,67
111.66
154,48
110.04
120.75
101.43
126.07
127.62
149.76
60.75
153.64
128.90
86.55
222.11
70.35
111.1"
111.66
101.00
146.07
111.41
147.67
80.70
111.45
125,14
65.53
102.23
1&3 .Oft
112.10
144.74
108.15
121.59
108.14
115.68
141.04
160.79
42.41
fet.46
49,11
122.84
107,42
550.15
271.62
115.74
not. »4
401.24
245.24
126.61
0.00
217.67
179.64
510.82
250.06
180.14
254.27
214.12
256.52
167.89
147,47
164,41
165.64
240. IS
216,17
205.41
67.86
269.02
151.42
206.96
280.54
200.87
539.90
141,10
715,99
109,77
161,71
289.84
169.71
428,46
227.51
156,27
81.65
117,16
141.1?
160,99
126.51
\5^»»S?
214.67
295.62
115.11
215. 68
211.15
106,50
104,81
214.95
221,59
31.18
786.42
215.25
101.47
421.60
166.90
47.61
215.17
126.22
187.79
190.77
0,00
142.51
128. U
257.59
174. 1J
112.13
153.11
161.52
201.63
141.71
115.78
166.66
181.06
179.61
155,22
141.18
44.30
194,01
138,01
160.24
97.26
172.52
161*65
104.40
306.46
Bl.76
154.25
167.64
124.66
219.71
128.11
221.41
61.10
112.17
111.16
104.10
112.56
1 15 62
114.97
111,64
151.45
205.31
226.51
210.40
197.01
115.41
Si. 18
216.92
156.23
-------
TABLE 53 - DOLLAR NEEDS FOR ALL PIPE SIZE
CATEGORIES BY DIAMETER
Table 53 summarizes, by State, the total
dollar needs for all pipe broken down into
seven separate ranges of pipe size.
It is noted that the largest dollar need is
for pipe equal to or less than 20.3 cm (8 in.)
in diameter, to be used primarily for collec-
tor sewers and smaller force mains.
142
-------
FEBRUARY 10, 1979
TABLE 53
1978 NEEDS SURVEY
OULLAR NEEDS FOR ALL PIPE SIZE CATEGORIES MY DIAMETER
CENTIMETERS
STATE INCHES
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARUUNA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DEL*«ARt
OIST. OF COLUM.
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HANAM
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHISAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEK HAMPSHIRE
NED JERSEY
NE« MEXICO
NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
NEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
N. MARIANAS
PUERTO HICO
PAC. TH. TERR.
VIRGIN ISLANDS
<«20.J
«««')
120, 99S
111, l)l(>
123, 63H
139,167
1,329, lib
33, ail
375,219
51,181
0
1,179,952
357,508
196,7*1
111,861
179,735
333,733
128,357
133,323
637,206
310,650
215,922
229, 789
653,150
814,051
116,187
190,090
302,995
21,353
33,096
36,255
300,211
592,313
25,215
1,785,111
516,057
5,059
651,011
78,127
255,505
1,011,233
152, ?21
321,259
11,095
521,589
502,307
69,903
71,989
171,008
382,039
526,003
218,679
2,352
9,115
1,090
17,992
211,161
35,320
9,822
(THOUSANDS OF 1978 DOLLARS)
U.S. TOTALS
17,787,345
22.9-30.5
(9"-12")
22,25*
32,934
10,665
17,253
64,415
11,137
19,2)9
3,713
0
68,343
29,537
11,771
10,107
34,698
46,923
31,743
46,113
38,412
52,805
51,225
6,499
152,178
215,141
20,330
22,745
62,050
4,657
6,146
6,039
97,945
47,618
16.744
554,660
73,827
1,315
96,499
24,518
33,301
88,131
88,099
46,396
5,451
66,521
239,717
9,059
12,811
41,294
116,811
50,371
63,741
629
222
1,720
15,500
20,034
2,082
987
2,948,619
33-61
51,802
34,353
28,459
25,219
292,761
58,183
115,431
6,298
0
237,960
101,619
75,103
30,090
65,404
68,740
52,939
134,788
52,025
70,160
41,349
76,638
253,756
173,159
48,776
39,652
135,077
6,329
9,918
17,178
97,251
259,542
16,677
506,382
126,632
4,670
215,743
74,914
75,069
172,073
53,063
79,917
14,632
107,583
172,629
23,205
9,020
91,381
167,359
41,244
92,644
7,723
0
566
0
70,895
5,261
4,400
4,819,855
63.5-91.4
<25"-36")
25,782
5,878
61,198
11,273
562,611
61,285
16,853
10,524
0
287,275
98,525
127,262
30,197
85,580
22,382
60,740
35,543
73,697
44,202
15,401
103,264
76,300
94,153
23,548
23,013
26,916
5,774
27,466
1.553
9,487
138.704
7,911
242,018
59,382
2,152
174,949
32,931
78,126
58,390
34,703
30,910
2,662
26,951
166,314
12,629
0
191,366
97,594
0
35,716
165
23,566
202
0
133,334
0
10,560
3,596,976
94-122
<37".48">
7,192
0
47,866
21,206
50,841
30,665
5,151
12,326
0
119,673
92,692
29,379
0
17,223
39,671
8,731
43,946
12,124
21,102
9,053
13,077
20,394
22,961
23,731
20,942
12,884
0
1,982
2,828
0
19,695
1,508
94,614
35,975
0
71,539
13,106
21,955
0
0
13,437
93
26,397
146,361
0
0
1,048
25,219
0
111,207
0
0
0
0
20,976
0
0
124.5-198.1
(49". 78")
26,521
15,026
37,507
553
353,991
87,503
0
0
0
321,119
26,236
9,630
0
6,706
63,318
19,671
5,161
64,660
10,779
0
5,399
31,249
72,407
38,506
0
170,762
0
1,792
4,023
0
27,325
517
572,823
1«,197
0
52,371
26,245
69,631
6,482
0
0
203
9,725
211,395
0
0
1,156
47,093
0
0
0
0
0
0
13,136
0
0
>!">«. 1
O7B")
1,337
0
0
0
93,296
0
0
0
0
16,115
5,770
1,918
0
9,090
0
0
0
0
0
0
33,511
0
136,092
79,244
0
69,865
0
0
0
0
41,690
0
204,679
0
0
152,065
0
0
0
0
0
0
20,580
26,502
0
0
790
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,380,972
2,434,060
916,611
143
-------
APPENDIX I
CONDUCT OF THE SURVEY
CATEGORIES I-IV (TREATMENT PLANTS AND SEWERS)
The 1978 Needs Survey
BACKGROUND
Drawing on the experience of prior Surveys,
EPA and the States formed a working group to
determine the strategy for the conduct of the
1978 Survey. Several Survey goals were iden-
tified by the group:
1. That the Survey identify and quantify all
needs.
2. That the conduct of the Survey be
nationally uniform.
3. That the utilization of scarce State
personnel and dollar resources for the
Survey be minimized.
4. That a complete inventory of municipal
wastewater facilities be compiled.
The Survey approach taken for Categories I-
IV as a result of these recommendations was:
1. An independent consultant, paid by EPA,
would conduct the Survey on a facility-
by-facility basis for Categories I-IV.
The consultant's personnel were to be
based in EPA Regional offices, but would
visit State and local offices as required
to formulate cost estimates. The engi-
neering firm of Dames & Moore, with head-
quarters in Los Angeles, California, and
company resources sufficient for this
large effort, was competitively selected.
2. Survey guidance and methodology were for-
mulated for Categories I-IV in draft, and
circulated to all parties involved in the
Survey. State comments were solicited,
and final guidance was issued which re-
flected those comments.
3. While national uniformity of estimating
procedures was a Survey goal, the cost
and construction differences inherent to
various sections of the country were
recognized and accommodated.
The formal Survey of Categories I-IV began
with orientation meetings conducted in EPA
Regional offices where logistics, target
dates, and individual State problems were
discussed and resolved. States were asked
only to provide as much investment in person-
nel for the Survey as they considered prudent;
but were invited to participate fully in the
formal Survey field work.
1-1
-------
The Survey field work was conducted in the
spring, summer, and fall of 1978. As esti-
mates for Categories I-IV were completed,
copies of the estimates were reviewed by
States on a facility-by-facility basis.
When cost agreement between EPA and State
personnel could not be reached, separate
estimates were submitted by States and have
been included in this report.
Facility estimates were reviewed and accepted
and/or approved at four levels:
1. Contractor.
2. EPA Regional Office.
3. State.
4. EPA Headquarters.
After machine preparation, data for Categories
I-IV were summarized for this report.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY - OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR
CATEGORIES I-IV
Participant guidance for the Survey was for-
mulated by EPA, the States, and the consul-
tant working closely together. This document
included the following subjects:
1. Responsibilities of the participants.
2. Target dates for project milestones in-
cluding the calendar for the Survey and
the consultant's contractural obligations.
3. Descriptions of all data sources to be
provided to participants to aid in com-
pletion of the Survey.
4. Briefing schedules for the participants.
5. Provisions for State and Regional review
of consultant's data prior to finalization.
6. Definitions of terms for needs purposes.
Standards were established for definitions
of secondary treatment, design year, units
of measurement, cost estimating, basis of
cost estimate, design flows, and infiltra-
tion/inflow reporting.
7. Specific guidelines for completing Survey
forms.
8. EPA adjustments to the 1976 Needs data
base prior to its use as a starting point
in 1978.
9. Cost estimating procedures to be used when
more reliable local procedures were not
available. These included estimating pro-
cedures for treatment costs and new sewers,
with factors provided for determination of
cost variation in any of 51 areas in the
vicinity of major cities in the United
States.
10. Interceptor sewer sizing tables.
As a result of meetings and other communica-
tions with all the States, the guidance was
supplemented by request to include:
1-2
-------
1. "Rules of Thumb" for estimating needs
based on best engineering judgment. All
of the participants understood that rules
of thumb would be used only when better
information was not available. Examples
are:
a. Per capita domestic and commercial
flows were allowed consistent with
the cost effective regulations.
b. Collector and interceptor lengths
were limited to 16 feet and one foot
per capita, respectively, of unsewered
population.
2. A procedure for designating the basis of
cost estimates.
3. Additional cost data, showing national
capital costs for:
a. Chiorination facilities.
b. Pumping stations.
c. Filtration systems.
d. Aerated lagoons and waste stabiliza-
tion ponds.
e. Phosphorus removal.
4. Procedures for estimating backlog needs
for all categories.
5. Instructions for reconciliation of
populations.
6. Guidance for estimation of collector
sewer costs.
7. Information on grant eligibilities for
land costs.
8. Guidance for estimation of I/I analysis
costs.
9. Small and individual treatment systems.
BASIS OF COST ESTIMATE FOR CATEGORIES I-IV
All individual cost estimates made in Cate-
gories I-IV of the Survey were to be accom-
panied with a basis of cost estimate, so that
the quality of the estimate can be better
determined. EPA has determined that the
quality of cost estimates can be ranked from
high to low as follows:
1. Engineer/Consultant Firm Estimate.
2. Engineer/Consultant Preliminary Estimate.
3. Cost/Effectiveness Analysis.
4. Cost of Previous Comparable Construction.
5. EPA Supplied Cost Estimating Procedures.
6. Rough Estimates.
DATA SOURCES FOR CATEGORIES I-IV
1. The types of data needed in the Survey and
the sources used to access these data were
many. The major types of data used were:
1-3
-------
a. Population (year 2000 and present).
b. Total flow (average, current design,
and projected year 2000 design).
c. Industrial flow (average, current
design, and projected year 2000
design).
d. Biological Oxygen Demand and Sus-
pended Solids concentrations (aver-
age, current design, and projected
year 2000 design).
e. Nitrogen and phosphorus removal re-
quirements (average, current design,
and projected year 2000 design).
f. Treatment methods.
g. Sludge handling and treatment methods.
h. Level of treatment required.
2. The sources of these data were:
a. 1976 Needs Survey data.
b. NPDES applications and permits.
c. Grant application files.
d. Grant files and Grants Information
Control System (GICS) data.
e. Regional and/or basin plans (201,
208, and 303 plans).
f. Other engineering plans or reports.
g. State water quality standards.
SURVEY PREPARATION
The 1978 Survey form was generated by com-
puter showing the 1976 Data of Record for
each facility. Once the revised cost esti-
mates were recorded on Survey forms for each
facility, copies of the completed forms were
provided for all parties participating in
the Survey, primarily for State review and
revision. The forms were then used to record
the updated 1978 Needs Survey figures.
Census data for 1977 and BEA 2000 population
projections were used as State ceilings.
State population totals were not permitted
to exceed these ceilings.
As Survey forms were completed, they were
double-checked by EPA for accuracy of the
data collected and submitted. Each State
was then given the opportunity to review and
comment upon the revised data shown on the
Survey forms, and to review the total cost
estimates for the State.
Where differences over cost estimates were
not resolved, States submitted independent
cost estimates on the form. Few independent
State estimates were required.
1-4
-------
APPENDIX II
DESCRIPTION OF THE 1978 SURVEY FORM
The 1978 Needs Survey
The principal instrument of the 1978 Needs
Survey was form EPA-1 shown in Figure II-l.
The 1976 Survey data of record were pre-
printed on this form and copies were distri-
buted to cognizant Federal* State, and con-
tractor personnel. One form was completed
for each facility in the Needs Survey. The
data of record were then updated in accordance
with the methodology presented in Appendix I.
The form contains a large quantity of data
for each treatment plant or sewerage facility.
This is made possible by the elaborate data
coding system (Figure II-2) which allows a
huge quantity of data to be entered in a com-
pact form and permits it to be easily checked
by computer for accuracy and completeness.
Listed below is a brief explanation of each
item in the 1978 Needs Survey EPA-1 form.
1. Authority/Facility Number: This is a
discrete nine digit number assigned to
each facility. The first two digits
designate a particular State or Terri-
tory and are obtained from the Federal
Information Processing Standard for
Designating States and Outlying Areas
of the United States (FIPS-5). The next
four digits are assigned sequentially by
each State. The last three numbers are
assigned by the authority to the facility.
2. Facility Name: The official name of the
facility.
3. Authority Name; The name of the authority
which owns and operates the facility.
4. Submission Code: This is a one digit
number which indicates whether the needs
of the facility changed since the 1976
Survey, or were reported at all in 1976.
5. Grant Number: The six digit number of the
most recent EPA construction grant which
applies to the facility.
6. Farmers Home Admini strati on Eli gi bi1 i ty:
An "X" in this block indicates that the
facility is eligible for Farmers Home
Administration loan or grant funds.
7. NPDES Number; The National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System permit number
assigned through the EPA permit program.
8. 245 Number: The 13 digit number for the
facility according to the Municipal Waste
Facility Inventory.
II-l
-------
9. Facility Location: The State location
is the same two digit FIPS-5 number used
in the authority number. The county
location is based on the FIPS-6 codes.
The place location number is derived from
the "Geographic Identification Place
Scheme" developed by the Census Bureau.
10. SMSA Number: The number
Metropolitan Statistical
facility is located.
of the Standard
Area in which a
11. Basin Number: The four digit number for
Tn" which the facility is located
to the EPA major/minor basin
the basin
according
code scheme.
12. Congressional District: The number of
the Congressional District in which the
facility is located.
13. City: The name of the city or town in
which the facility is located.
14. County: The name of the county in which
the facility is located.
15. Zip Code: The official Post Office Zip
Code of the facility.
16a. Facility Status: A one digit code which
indicates whether or not the facility is
currently in operation. Facilities not
in operation are usually either proposed
or under construction.
16b. Nature of Facilit
which indicates
ty:
the
The one digit code
e type or nature of the
facility. See Figure
explanations.
11-2 for complete
16c. Construction Grant Status: A one digit
code which indicates whether or not the
facility has had a construction grant.
16d. Projected Change: A one digit code
which indicates projected physical
changes for the facility, if any.
Changes include enlargement, upgrading,
replacement, abandonment, and others.
16e. Abandonment Date: The month and year of
projected abandonment of a facility, if
applicable.
17. Summary of Category Needs: This section
is used to record the costs for Cate-
gories I-IVB. Column (a) is for the EPA
assessment; Column (b) is for the State
estimate, if different from (a); and
Column (c) is the portion required to
satisfy "backlog" facility requirements.
"Backlog" refers to the facility require-
ments based on the 1978 population rather
than the 2000 population. Column (d) is
used to record the one digit code which
indicates the basis of estimation for the
dollar amounts recorded in Column (a).
18. Facility Population: This section shows
the population which receives treatment
and/or collection by the facility. Col-
lection and treatment populations are
further categorized as follows: present
resident population, present nonresident
population, projected resident population,
11-2
-------
and projected nonresident population.
19. Need for New Collectors, Interceptors,
Force Mains, and Pumping Stations: This
section lists codes for new collectors,
interceptors, force mains, and pumping
stations and their costs. The diameter
of pipe is in inches and the length is
in feet. The capacity of pumping sta-
tions is in million gallons per day
(mgd).
20. Disposal of Liquid Effluents: A one
digit code is listed in Column (a) for
each applicable method of liquid efflu-
ent disposal. Appropriate "Use" and
"Change" codes are listed in Columns (b)
and (c), and are defined in Figure 11-2.
21. Required Infiltration/Inflow Corrective
Action:A one digit code indicating the
required action to eliminate excessive
infiltration/inflow, as defined in
Figure 11-2.
22. Estimated Infiltration/Inflow Component:
The quantity of infiltration/inflow pro-
jected to be eliminated by any corrective
action indicated in Item 21.
23. Major Rehabilitation/Replacement Required:
A one digit code for the type of correc-
tive action required to accomplish major
rehabilitation or replacement of a por-
tion of a sewerage system.
24. Do Wastewaters Originate in Communities
Existing Before October 18, 1972? This
code is self-explanatory and is answered
by "yes" or "no."
25. 1972 Collection Population: The resi-
dent population in existence in 1972
which still requires new collector sewers.
26. Effluent Characteristics: A one digit
present and future
of the facility,
code indicating the
effluent characteristics
as defined in Figure II-2.
27. Reasons for Effluent Characteristics
Greater Than Secondary: A one digit code
indicating the reason for any present or
projected effluent characteristics more
stringent than secondary treatment (see
Figure II-2).
28. Comment Code: Two spaces are provided
for one digit codes to indicate, if nec-
essary, coded reasons why other items of
the form differ from the norm. More ex-
tensive plain language comments may be
entered on the reverse side of the form.
29. Flows, Concentrations, Monthly Average:
This section is for monthly average flow
and concentration figures according to
the existing actual values, the present
design flow, and the projected design
flow for the following categories:
a. Total flow in million gallons per
day (mgd).
b. Total industrial flow in million
gallons per day {mgd).
II-3
-------
c. Domestic flow per capita in gallons
per capita per day (gpcpd).
Below these figures, influent and efflu-
ent concentrations are shown for five
day Biochemical Oxygen Demand, suspended
solids, phosphorus, total kjeldahl nitro-
gen, and others.
30. Treatment and Sludge Handling: There are
three columns in this section. Unit pro-
cess codes for liquid waste treatment and
sludge handling are entered in Column (a).
Columns (b) and (c) are for the current
use and projected change codes,
respectively.
II-4
-------
FIGURE
FOKM EPA-1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 1 this report is required by law (33 U.S.C. 1251 ET SEQ). While you are not required to respond, your
<!-"> ESTIMATE OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY REQUIREMENTS | cooperation is needed to make the results of this survey comprehensive, accurate, and timely.
1. Authotity/Fac. No. 2. Facility name
5. Grant number 6. FmHA 7.NPDESNo.
13. City
8. 245 number
3. Authority name
9. State Co. Place
i i
i i
i i
14. County
17. SUMMARY OF CATEGORY NEEDS
Category
I
n
«
»
«
.
TOTAL
Cost of record
(BII./MIIJTttou.l
(a
»
l»
(4)' " ' ' ' ;.
M ' "~ ,
.
(7)
New and/or revised cost
(BII./MII.IThou.l
f -..-'.-
satisfy backlog
(Bll. IUII. /Thou.)
(C
' V
of
est.
-,«
18. FACIL.Pf l-.r»i.;i_*T.M(
RCV.
TREATMENT
NO
TREATMENT
RCV.
COLLECTION
NOT RCV.
COLLECTION
Present resident Present nonresident
(a) (b)
« ,
(2)
(3) "***
(4)
Pro), resident
(c)
Proi. nonresident
(d)
5. ZIP
10. SMSA
ISa.Fac. b. Nat. c
11. Basin
. Grant d
4. Sub. code
12. Cong. (list.
. Chng. e. Date
19. NEED FOR NEK COLLECTORS, INTERCEPTORS,
FORCE MAINS. AND PUMPING STATIONS
Type
(»
(D
m
(3)
(4)
(5)
<«
<'>
(10)
(11)
Oiam.llnj
number
(b)
20. DISPOSAL
OF LIQUID
EFFLUENTS
CODES
Disp.
(a)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(4)
Use
(b)
Chng
(c)
Length (ft.;
Capacity (MOD)
(cl
- , -
n: i/i
Codes
22. Est. I/
Cost
(BII.IMil.lThou.)
*
-,., :*..:
-> :«
llow
23. Maj. rehab. '
rep required
Code
24. D
f
(
nate in commi-
es existing before
ctober 18, 1972?
25. 1972 collection population
26. Effluent charade
Present
27. Reasons
istic
Fu ure
28.
Comment codes
QUESTIONNAIRE
COMPLETED BY
Signature
Date
Ojm.B.No. 158-R0139:
Approval Expires February 1980
29. FLOWS/CONCENTRATIONS, MONTHLY AVERAGE
TOTAL
FLOW
(UGD)
INDUS.
FLOW
DOM.
FLOW/CAP
(GPCD)
BOD5
(mg/l)
SUS.
SOLIDS
(mgll)
PHOS-
PHORUS
(mgll)
AMMONIA
(mgll)
TOTAL
(mgll)
N
TKN
(mgll)
OTHER
30.TREATME
TR
a
(2)
Use
D
Existing
la)
<"
m _,
»
Influent
(d)
pj" -,_ " "
r-v
,;-;;'
T:.
«,-
(10)
n AND SL
CM
c
TR
a
(3)
(4)
Effluent
(e)
---;-,
",":* :'*
\^. -
..
UDGEHA
Use
b
Present design
(b)
.
Influent
(f)
n * V
t:
- T
IDLING /c
CM
C
TR
a
(S)
(6)
Effluent
(g)
,-.; -»-
,~ - -;
xJesi
Use
b
CM
c
Protected design
1C)
. v x ^ x
Influent
(h)
-; :
"^x .'^^
" -,sr.
- o V\-
-;
Effluent
(i)
,^
, "->;
;; - ^,
.. -^ -,
TR Use
a b
<»
<«, ,T:
CH
c
30. TREATMENT
AND SLUDGE
HANDLING
(Codes) -
Continued
TR
«
(TO
own
\
VS^
«s
H;
(M)
0,
(17)
(IS)
W
(20)
Use
("1
-
,.,
-:k:i
.,-~f,--
o>
^
^
;
Chng
(c)
".>>:
-^
\^
:;:->
';£
-,,.-.
'<'
STATE AGENCY
Signature
Date
EPA REGIONAL OFFICE
Signature
Date
nfOTE - Indlcttf nvlttd llgun* In tpproprltt* ihfdfd trttl
II-S
-------
FIGURE 11-2
CODE REFERENCE CHART
Item 4 - Submission Cod*
1 - No change from 1976
2 Facility not reported in 1976
3 Change from 1976
Ittni16a-Facility Status
1 In operation
2 Not in operation
Item 16b - Nature of facility
1 - A complete wastewater treatment system (includes a
treatment plant, with associated collector and/or
interceptor sewers, and methods for disposal of
effluent, under control of the same treatment
authority) with combined sewers.
2 A complete wastewater treatment system (includes
a treatment plant, with associated collector and/or
interceptor sewers, and methods for disposal of
effluent, under control of the same treatment
authority) with separate sewers.
3 A separate treatment plant. (The sewers which
discharge to this plant are under the control of one
or more different authorities.)
4 A separate municipal wastewater collection system.
(Includes one or more connected collector and/or
interceptor sewers, force mains, pumping stations,
etc., which either discharge without treatment or
discharge to a facility controlled by a different
authority. Do not include combined sewers or
storm sewers.)
6 A separate combined sewer system. (Includes one or
more interconnected sewers which carry both
sanitary wastewaters and storm waters, and which
either discharge without treatment or to a facility
operated by another authority. If facility includes
both separate sanitary sewers and combined sewers,
report as combined.)
6 - Other
7 A system for the bulk transmission of wastewater
with or without pump:mg stations, and with or
without interceptor sewers.
8 Sludge handling facilities, including vehicles or
vehicle fleets.
inm 16c Construction Gram Status
1 - Construction grants previously approved or pending
2 No applicable grants
Itam 16d. 20e, and 30e - Projected Chang*
1 - Enlarge
2 - Upgrade
3 - Enlarge and upgrade
4 - Install in new plant
6 Replace
0 Abandon
7 - No change
8 - Other
H«n 174 - Boll of Estimtt*
1 - State certification
2 - Analysis completed
3 Evaluation survey completed
4 - Engineer/consultant firm estimate
6 - Cost of previous comparable construction
6 - Engineer/consultant preliminary estimate
7 - EPA - supplied cost estimating procedures
8 - Cost effective analysis
g Rough estimate
Itam 19a - New Collectors, Interceptor!, Fore* Maim,
and Pumping Stations
CS - Collector sewers
IS Interceptor sewers
FM Force Main
PS Pumping Station
FF - Outfall sewers
SF - Ocean outfall sewers
Itam 20a - Disposal of Liquid EffliMntl
1 - Outfall to surface waters
2 - Ocean outfall
3 Holding pond
4 - Deep well
6 Ground water recharge
6 Other land disposal
7 Recycling and reuse
8 - Septic tank field
9 - Other
0 No discharge
A Spray irrigation
B Ditch irrigation
C To other wastewater treatment plant
Itanw 20b and 30b - Uta cod«
1 - Now in use
2 Under construction or provided for in approved grant
3 Required, but not yet approved or funded
4 Not applicable
Item 21 (I/I) and Itwn 23 (Major Rehab.) Corractiv* Action
1 Not known at this time
2 - None
3 Seal off sewer lines
4 - Replace/reline sewer sections
5 Change/create flow routing system
6 Provide flow equalization
7 Other corrective actions
Item 26 Characteristic of Effluent
0 - No discharge
1 - Raw discharge
2 Primary
3 Advanced primary
4 - Secondary
B - Advanced secondary
6 - Tertiary
Itam 27 - Rtaton for Treatment Mora Stringent than
Secondary
0 - A water quality plan which has been approved
by EPA
1 - Order of State Court
2 - Order of Federal Court
3 State permit or license
4 - NPDES permit or license
6 State enforcement order or proceeding
6 - Federal enforcement order or proceeding
7 - Voluntary agreement which includes a schedule of
compliance or improvements
8 - Other
9 - A certification by the State that the body of water
receiving this discharge is water quality dependent,
and that more stringent treatment is needed to meet
Federally-approved water quality standards for
dissolved oxygen or nutrients
Item 28 - Comment Codes
2 Excess I/I is cost effective to treat
3 Package plant for exact required capacity is not
available
4 Total flow is minimum that can be shown on the
form due to format restrictions
5 Existing plant has excess capacity now to treat
2000 population
6 No sludge handling facility since sludge is pumped
to another facility
7 - Receives flow from other facilities
8 Flow diverted to other facility
Itam 30a - Treatment and Sludge Handling
01 Pumping, raw wastewater
02 - Prelim
03 - Prelif
04 - Prelim
OS - Prelim
06 - Scum
nary treatment bar screen
nary treatment grit removal
nary treatment comminutors
nary treatment others
07 - Flow equalization basins
08 - Preaeration
09 - Primary sedimentation
10 - Trickling filter - rock media
11 - Trickling filter - plastic media
12 - Trickling filter - redwood slats
13 - Trickling filter - other media
14 - Activated sludge - conventional
16 - Activated sludge - high rate
16 - Activated sludge - contact stabilization
17 - Activated sludge - extended aeration
18 - Pure oxygen activated sludge
19 - Microstrainers - primary
20 - Microstrainers - secondary
21 - Sand filters
22 - Mix-media filters (sand and coal)
23 - Other filiations
24 - Activated carbon - granular
25 - Activated carbon - powdered
26 Two stage lime treatment of raw wastewater
27 - Two stage tertiary lime treatment
28 - Single stage lime treatment of raw wastewater
29 - Single stage tertiary lime treatment
30 - Recarbonation
31 - Neutralization
32 Alum addition to primary
33 Alum addition to secondary
34 - Alum addition to separate stage tertiary
35 - Ferri-chloride addition to primary
36 - Ferri-chloride addition to secondary
37 - Ferri-chloride addition to separate stage tertiary
38 - Other chemical additions
39 - Biological nitrification - separate stage
40 - Biological nitrification - combined BOD and
nitrification
41 - Biological damnification
42 - Ion exchange
43 - Breakpoint chlorination
44 Amonia stripping
45 - Chlorination for disinfection
46 - Ozonation for disinfection
47 - Other disinfection
48 - Land treatment of primary effluent
49 - Land treatment of secondary effluent (30/30)
50 - Land treatment of interimediate effluent (less than
secondary)
51 Stabilization ponds
52 Aerated lagoons
53 - Post aeration (reaeration)
64 Bio-Disc (rotating biological filter)
65 Oxidation ditch using mechanical aerators
66 Clarification using tube settlers
67 Outfall pumping
58 - Outfall diffuser
59 - Effluent to other plants
60 Effluent outfall
61 Other treatment
62 Aerobic digestion - air
63 Aerobic digestion - oxygen
64 Composting
66 Anaerobic digestion
66 Sludge lagoons
67 - Heat treatment
68 Chlorine oxidation of sludge (Purifax)
69 Lime stabilization
70 Wet air oxidation
71 Air drying
72 - Dewatenng - mechanical - vacuum filter
73 Dewatenng - mechanical - centrifuge
74 - Oewatering - mechanical - filter press
76 - Oewatering - others
76 Gravity thickening
77 - Air flotation thickening
78 Incineration-multiple hearth
79 Incineration - fluidized beds
80 Incineration - rotary kilm
81 - Incineration - others
82 Pyroysis
83 Co-incineration with solid waste
84 Co-pyrolysis with solid waste
86 - Co-incineration - others
86 Recalcination
87 - Land fill
88 - Land spreading of liquid sludge
89 Land spreading of thickened sludge
90 Trenching
91 Ocean dumping
92 - Other sludge handling
93 Digest gas utilization facilities
94 Control/ LabVmamtenance buildings
95 Fully automated using digital control (computer)
96 Fully automated using analog controls
97 Semi automated plant
A1 Manually operated and controlled plant
A2 - Package plant
A3 Semi-package plant
A4 - Custom built plant
AS Primary effluent
A6 - Secondary effluent
A7 Tertiary effluent
Item
reference
^
t~~~
"^
*^
""^
Comments
Item
reference
Comments
II-6
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1979 - 679-537A'7 Reg. 8
------- |