WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES
12060—10/70
     Treatment of
      Citrus  Processing Wastes
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY • WATER QUALITY OFFICE

-------
     WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES
The Water Pollution Control Research Reports describe the
results and progress in the control and abatement of
pollution in our Nation's waters.   They provide a central
source of information  on the research, development, and
demonstration activities in the Water Quality Office of
the Environmental Protection Agency, through inhouse n-
search and grants anc!  contracts with Federal, State and
local agencies, research institutions, and industrial
organizations.

A triplicate abstract  card sheet is included in the
report to facilitate information retrieval.  Space is
provided on the card for the user's accession number
and for additional uniterms.

Inquiries pertaining to Water Pollution Control Research
Reports should be directed to the Head, Project Reports
System, Planning and Resources Office, Office of Research
and Development, Water Quality Office, Environmental  Pro-
tection Agency, Room 1108, Washington, D. C.  20242.
         For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing OfUcc
                    Waefilni'tnn. TXC. 20402 - Price $2.75

-------
Treatment of Citrus  Processing  Wastes
                     by

     THE COCA-COLA. COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

            Orlando,  Florida 32802
                    for the


         ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACENCY

              WATER QUALITY OFFICE
             Program 12060	10/70
                  WPRD 38-01-67
                  October 1970

-------
                 EPA Review Notice
This report has been reviewed by the Water Quality Office,
EPA, and approved for publication.  Approval does not signi-
fy that the contents necessarily reflect the views and poli-
cies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention
of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.

-------
                                    ABSTRACT
         Plant scale  studies were  performed  to  determine operational  and treatment
parameters for citrus processing wastewaters. Part I discusses  treatment of concentrated
citrus processing wastewaters combined with domestic sewage  using a modified activated
sludge process; namely, extended aeration. Part II  discusses treatment of weak processing
wastewaters using a system which functioned as an aerated lagoon.

         Extended aeration yielded 94 to 95 percent BOD removal; however, difficulties
concerning positive control of the treatment process were encountered. Variations in mixed
liquor suspended solids concentrations, sludge volume indices, sludge recirculation rates, and
hydraulic loading were considered principal causes adversely affecting the treatment process.

         Excess sludge buildup amounted to  approximately  0.5 pounds per  pound of
influent BOD and sludge wastage accounted for  the greater portion of overall nutrient
removal from the system.

         The aerated lagoon process afforded 91 percent BOD removals when daily average
hydraulic and organic loadings were controlled at 6.4 mgd and  6,770 pounds,  respectively
(detention time 7.9 days).

         Kinetic studies  yielded a BOD  removal rate coefficient  for  citrus processing
wastewaters of 1.46 and an average temperature coefficient of 1.05.

         Ecological studies indicated that BOD:N:P ratios of the order of 150:5:1 were
adequate for supporting the population of organisms required for effective bio-oxidation.

         Organic nutrient removal studies using hyacinths indicated a minimum of 5 days'
detention would be required to afford substantial  nutrient reduction. Significant organic
loading reductions (BOD, COD) were also  attained  by the hyacinth plant system during the
5-day detention period.

         It was found that dried hyacinth plants were similar in food value to alfalfa hay
and could be used as a supplement in cattle feed.

         This report was submitted in fulfillment of Demonstration Grant No. WPRD
38—01—67  between  the  Federal  Water Quality Administration  and  The Coca-Cola
Company, Foods Division.
                                     m

-------
                    CONCLUSIONS  AND RECOMMENDATIONS
LEESBURG - PART I

1.       The extended aeration modification of the activated sludge process is capable of a
         high degree of secondary treatment for combined citrus processing and municipal
         wastewaters. Organic removals averaging 94 percent were afforded even though
         loading levels  exceeded  design capacity by an average of 52  percent (4,000
         pounds) during weekday operation. Mixed liquor suspended solids concentrations
         varied  generally from 3,000 mg/1 to greater than 5,000 mg/1. BOD reductions
         varied  generally between 90 and 98 percent. A slight correlation was suggested
         between higher mixed liquor suspended solids  levels and higher BOD removals.
         This was accomplished despite inexperience of operators and several difficulties
         enumerated below.

2.       The Leesburg plant was designed for a daily biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
         loading of  8,000 pounds,  and constructed  for  about $500,000.  Based  on
         long-term  data, it afforded  an average  BOD reduction of 95.6 percent at an
         average daily loading  of 6,810 pounds, and 94.2 percent BOD  reduction at an
         average weekday  loading of  12,200  pounds. Underdesign of the clarifiers and
         inadequate sludge removal  faculties significantly deterred continuous optimum
         daily operations.

3.       Principal difficulties with the  treatment process involved positive  control of
         following factors:

         A.       Highly  variable BOD loads prevented practicable control of mixed
                  liquor suspended solids (MLSS) at design ratio of 10 pounds MLSS per
                  pound of BOD applied;

         B.       High  sludge volume indicies (SVI) caused by filamentous organisms,
                  sphaerotilius, due to high carbohydrate concentrations characteristic of
                  citrus wastewaters;

         C.       Sludge  recirculation rates  were  extremely variable  due to erratic
                  wastewater flow patterns; and

         D.       Hydraulic loadings were subject to considerable variation due to erratic
                  citrus wastewater flow patterns.

4.       Treatment process control and efficiency would be enhanced significantly by:

         A.       Design Parameters

                  1.        Equalization of citrus process wastewater loadings; and

                  2.        Minimization of flow surges by means of a holding pond.

-------
         B.       Operational Parameters

                  1.       Maintain a MLSS concentration of about 4,500 mg/1 or about
                           14 pounds of MLSS under aeration per pound of influent
                           BOD per day; and

                  2.       Maintain a sludge recirculation rate of less than 100 percent
                           of plant influent flow.

5.       Clarification was affected significantly by sludge bulking due to poor SVI control
         and flow surges. Solids carryover in clarifier effluent was almost a daily occurance
         during the height of the citrus processing season.

6.       Based on very rough estimates, some  0.4 to 0.6 pounds of waste sludge solids
         were provided  per pound of influent BOD. This was significantly higher than
         anticipated for domestic waste alone by extended aeration.

7.       Facilities for disposing of waste sludge were inadequate. Further studies  are
         required  to determine most  economical improvements. However, the current
         disposal problems  could  be minimized  by controlling MLSS concentration to
         about 4,500 mg/1 by daily  wastage  from clarifier at highest practical solids
         content

8.       BOD reductions of better than 90 percent were afforded with no supplemental
         nutrients, despite a relatively  high  BOD: Nitrogen ratio of about 30:1  in  the
         combined raw wastewater. The addition of supplemental nutrients produced no
         observable change in BOD removal efficiencies.

9.       Average nitrogen and phosphorous removals of the order of 70 and 90 percent,
         respectively, were largely accounted  for in waste sludge removal from the system.
         These removals appeared  to  be  independent of MLSS levels. Oxygen transfer
         levels were not studied.

10.      The  oxidation  pond  was quite effective in compensating for deficiencies in
         treatment process  control. The  pond contributed significantly to overall BOD
         reductions during periods of excessive  solids carryover from the clarifiers. On an
         average the pond achieved 14 percent out of the  94 percent total average BOD
         removal.

11.      The  oxidation  pond  following  the activated sludge  process did  not provide
         substantial  nitrogen or phosphorous reductions, probably  because of  the large
         amount of solids released to the pond over the clarifier weirs.

12.      Clarifiers for service conditions at Leesburg probably should be designed for lower
         overflow ratio  than  750 gpd per square foot The sludge blanket frequently
         approached the weir level because of consistently high SVI values. Sludge was
         sensitive  to turbulence  during high flow rates and solids carryover  resulted.
         Further studies should be conducted to determine a more suitable design overflow
         rate.
                                     VI

-------
13.      Lower costs probably  do  not justify  the use  of vertical  turbine  pumps
         recirculating  sludge  under  conditions at  Leesburg.  Excessive  outages  were
         experienced due to stringy solids such as hair which fouled impellers and bearings.


AUBURNDALE - PART H

1.       The Aubumdale plant was designed for a daily biological oxygen demand (BOD)
         loading of  18,500 pounds and hydraulic loadings of 30 mgd. Construction costs
         were approximately $485,000.

2.       The existing facility will not operate as an extended aeration system due to the
         inadequacy of the sludge collection system. During the period  of attempted
         operation as an extended aeration plant BOD removals averaged 62  percent and
         mixed liquor suspended  solids (MLSS) concentrations averaged  only 67  mg/1,
         despite a wide variety of operating procedures. Therefore, the majority of original
         grant objectives could not be satisfied.

3.       Modification  of the  existing facility to operate as an extended  aeration  plant
         would require:

         A.       Two 200 foot diameter clarifiers;

         B.       A sludge recirculation system; and

         C.       Sludge wastage and treatment facilities.

4.       Additional  studies during the 1968—1969 citrus  processing season indicated that
         the existing facility would afford adequate BOD removals when operated as an
         aerated lagoon system. BOD removals of 91 percent were attained at daily average
         hydraulic and organic (BOD) loadings of 6.4 mgd and 6,770 pounds, respectively.

5.       Modification of the existing facility to operate as an  aerated lagoon system would
         entail:

         A.       Approximately  40 additional acres of  aeration basins  with mechanical
                  aerators;

         B.       Six additional 75 horsepower mechanical aerators; and

         C.       Relocating three aerators from the existing aeration pond to the settling
                  pond.

6.       Kinetic studies conducted at Aubumdale yielded an average BOD removal rate
         coefficent (K20°C w^ nutrients) of 1.46 and an average temperature coefficent
         (O) of 1.05 (see Appendix 5).
                                     vu

-------
7.       Ecological  studies confirmed that BOD:N:P ratios of 150:5:1  provided a well
         balanced system  (nutritionwise) that was capable of supporting the variety of
         organisms required for effective bio—oxidation.

8.       The hyacinth study indicated that:

         A.       A minimum of five days' detention was required to attain a substantial
                  nutrient removal  which  was  most  significant at  dissolved oxygen
                  concentrations below 0.5 mg/1.

         B.       Hyacinth  plants  appeared  to be  comparable to  alfalfa hay  in
                  composition;

         C.       A substantial  quantity of wastewater and nutrient was released when
                  the hyacinth plants were squeezed during a drying process (one acre of
                  hyacinths would yield 34,000 gallons of pressed liquor containing 63
                  mg/1 PO4-P and 335 mg/1 total-N.

         D.       Existing feed  mill equipment would require  modification in order to
                  incorporate hyacinth plant processing with present feed mill operations;

         E.       Microbiota attached to the hyacinth  plant roots produced  substantial
                  biological and chemical oxygen demand removals (averaging 70 and 47
                  percent, respectively);

         F       Large scale harvesting operations could be accomplished by means of
                  mechanical devices now available for aquatic vegetation control.

9.       Principal difficulties with the treatment process included:

         A.       Sludge  recirculation could not  be accomplished due to an  inadequate
                  sludge collection system.

         B.       Mixed liquor  suspended solids  concentrations could not be increased
                  above a maximum monthly average  of 103 mg/1 due to low sludge
                  concentration of recirculated sludge.

         C.       Organic (BOD)  and hydraulic  loadings increased significantly due to
                  increased  processing  levels at  both  The Coca—Cola Company  and
                  Adams  Packing Company.  Statistical studies  conducted  during the
                  1966—1967 citrus processing season indicated daily average hydraulic
                  and organic  (BOD)   loadings   of 17.9  mgd  and  18,400  pounds,
                  respectively.  Studies during  the  1968—1969 citrus processing season
                  indicated daily average hydraulic and organic loadings of 30 mgd and
                  32,500   pounds,  respectively.  This  represents a hydraulic loading
                  increase of 67 percent and an organic loading increase of 77 percent.
                                     Vlll

-------
10.       Inadequacies in plant equipment were found in:

         A.       Sludge  collection  system  prevented implementing design concept
                  involving the extended aeration process. Sludge collection area was too
                  large and slopes too gentle (15°) to effectively move sludge  to the
                  gravity pickups without mechanical devices. A minimum slope of about
                  60° is recommended.

         B.       Aerator flotation devices were constructed of fiber glass and were not
                  properly tested by the manufacturer prior to delivery. Apparently 75
                  horsepower aerators created more stress than the fiber glass floats could
                  withstand causing  fatigue  cracks  and the floats were  no  longer
                  watertight. This adversly affected the level of aerator submergence.

         C.       High volume, low head lift pumps were used to provide a low cost lift
                  station. The lift pumps were sensitive to small head variations and when
                  all pumps were running simutaneously, discharge rates were somewhat
                  lower than rated capacities.

         D.       A low  cost metering system was  provided to measure flows between 5
                  and   50  mgd.  However,   due   to  intermittent  pumping  and
                  subatmospheric  pressures when  two  or more transfer pumps  were
                  operating, air frequently became  trapped in the transmitter lines. Daily
                  manual venting of the air bleed-off valves was required.

11.       Polishing  ponds  afforded biological  oxygen  demand  (BOD)  reductions  of
         approximately 14 percent. Nitrogen concentrations  exhibited reductions of 21
         percent  and  phosphate  concentrations decreased  about 26 percent. Further
         studies are required to  determine whether  the nitrogen and phosphorus are
         soluble forms or are associated with the particulate (suspended solids) matter.

12.       Chemical  oxygen  demand (COD) analyses  should  be used as an  operational
         control parameter since citrus processing wastewaters inherently contain materials
         that are toxic, and therefore affect biological oxygen demand (BOD) results. Also
         the 5-day incubation period required  for BOD tests renders the tests useless for
         operational purposes;  whereas, COD tests can  be performed in less than one
         hour's time and operational procedures can  be adjusted accordingly.

13.       Treatment plant effluent contained about 30 mg/1 BOD. However,  it could  be
         used for cooling water with little or no additional treatment. At present, pumping
         costs involved to return effluent water about a half mile  to the process plant do
         not make reuse of treatment plant effluent economically attractive.

14.       COD/BOD ratios  on the influent stream averaged 1.73. Treatment plant effluent
         stream COD/BOD  ratios averaged 3.34.  Influent  organic  loadings could  be
         estimated by multiplying influent COD loadings by 0.578.
                                     IX

-------
IS.       Due to the variety of mechanical and operational problems inherent during the
         first year's  operation  of a new waste treatment facility, detailed research and
         plant evaluation studies should be delayed until these difficulites are corrected. At
         least one years' time should be allowed between completion of construction and
         beginning of research. This would allow sufficient time to acquaint operators with
         the treatment process and waste characteristics.

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                PART I
ABSTRACT

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
  Leesburg
  Auburndale
Page Number

    iii

  v — x
    V
    vii
SECTION 1       INTRODUCTION

SECTION 2       SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES

SECTION 3       GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WASTEWATERS
                3.01   The Coca—Cok Company Foods Division
                3.02   City of Leesburg Sewage

SECTION 4       WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
                4.01   General Description
                4.02   Design Criteria and Characteristics

SECTION 5       PLAN OF INVESTIGATION

SECTION 6       PLANT OPERATION
                6.01   Startup (1966-1967) Citrus
                      Processing Season
                6.02   1967-1968 Citrus Processing Season

SECTION 7       SAMPLING AND TESTING
                7.01   Sampling
                7.02   Testing

SECTION 8       RESULTS
                8.01   General Conditions
                8.02   Flow Data
  1-2

    3

  5-6
    5
    6

  7-8
    7
    8

    9

  11-13

    11
    11

    15
    15
    15

  17-19
    17
    17
                                XI

-------
                           TABLE OF  CONTENTS
                                  PART I
                                (continued)
Section 8 — continued
                 8.03   Daily BOD Loadings
                 8.04   Suspended Solids
                 8.05   Dissolved Oxygen
                 8.06   pH Values
                 8.07   Temperature
                 8.08   Sludge Recirculation
                 8.09   BOD Removal
                 8.10   Suspended Solids Removal
                 8.11   Sludge Volume Index
                 8.12   Waste Sludge
                 8.13   Nitrogen and Phosphorous Analyses

SECTION 9       DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
                 9.01   Flow Data
                 9.02   BOD Loadings and Removals
                 9.03   Wastewater Suspended Solids and Removal
                 9.04   Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS)
                 9.05   Sludge Wastage
                 9.06   Sludge Recirculation and Sludge Volume
                       Index (SVI)
                 9.07   Dissolved Oxygen Levels
                 9.08   pH Value and Temperature
                 9.09   Nutrient Removal
                 9.10   Plant Equipment
                 9.11  Cost of Treatment
SECTION 10      ECOLOGICAL STUDY
                 10.01  General
                 10.02  Leesburg Extended Aeration System
Page Number

     17
     18
     18
     18
     18
     18
     19
     19
     19
     19
     19

  21 -27
     21
     22
     23
     23
     24

     24
     25
     25
     25
     26
     27
  29-30
     29
     29
                                         xu

-------
                                    TABLES
                                    PARTI


                                                                     Page Number

Table 1           Characteristics of Treatment Plant Facilities               T — 1

Table 2           City of Leesburg Sewage Treatment Plant
                 Operating Data During 1966—67 Citrus Processing
                   Season
                 Minute Maid Company — Leesburg, Florida               T - 5

Table 3           Characteristics of Typical Wastewaters                    T — 6

Table 4           Nutrient Levels and Removals                           T — 7

Table 5           Analyses for Nitrogen and Phosphorus                    T — 9

Table 6           Leesburg Biota — Extended Aeration
                 The Coca—Cola Company Foods Division                 T — 10
                                    xui

-------
                                   FIGURES

                                    PART I
                                                                    Page Number

Figure 1          Location Map — The Coca—Cola Company
                 Leesburg, Florida                                      F — 1

Figure 2          Vicinity Map — The Coca—Cola Company
                 Leesburg, Florida                                      F — 2

Figure 3          Wastewater Sources — Typical Citrus
                 Concentrate Plant                                      F — 3

Figure 4          City of Leesburg — Wastewater Treatment
                 Facilities                                              F - 4

Figure 5          Daily Operation Record                                 F — 5

Figure 6          Weekly Average Wastewater Flows      -                F — 6

Figure 7          Weekly Average BOD Loadings                           F — 7

Figure 8          Weekly Average Combined Wastewater
                 BOD Concentration                                    F - 8

Figure 9          Weekly Average MLSS Concentrations                    F - 9

Figure 10         Weekly Average Clarifier Effluent Suspended
                 Solids F -  10

Figure 11         Weekly Average D.O. Concentration — Aeration
                 Basin No. 1                                            F - 11

Figure 12         Weekly Average D.O. Concentration — Aeration
                 Basin No. 2                                            F - 12

Figure 13         Weekly Average D.O. Concentration Oxidation
                 Pond Effluent                                         F - 13

Figure 14         Typical Weekly pH Record Citrus Wastewater             F — 14

Figure 15         Weekly Average Effluent Temperatures                   F — 15
                                    xv

-------
                                   FIGURES
                                    PART I
                                   (continued)


                                                                     Pace  Number

Figure 16          Weekly Average Sludge Recirculation                     F — 16

Figure 17          Weekly Average BOD Removals                          F —17

Figure 18          Weekly Average Suspended Solids Removals               F — 18

Figure 19          Weekly Average Sludge Volume Indices                   F -19

Figure 20          Weekly Average Sludge Wastage                          F - 20

Figure 21          Weekly Average D.O. Concentrations                     F - 21

Figure 22          Weekly Average MLSS Concentrations - BOD
                  Removals                                             F - 22

Figure 23          Weekly Average MLSS Concentrations — Sludge
                  Wastage                                               F - 23

Figure 24          Weekly Average MLSS Concentrations — Sludge
                  Recirculation — Sludge Volume Indices                   F — 24

Figure 25          Weekly Average MLSS Concentrations — Sludge
                  Volume Indices                                        F — 25

Figure 26          Weekly Average Sludge Recirculation — Sludge
                  Volume Indices — Clarifier Effluent Suspended
                  Solids                                                F - 26
                                           xvi

-------
                               APPENDIX
                                 PARTI
                                                              Page Number

Appendix 1       Laboratory Studies, 1966-67 Citrus Processing
                Season                                            A - 1
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
                               FOR  PART  II
                         FOLLOWS PARTITION  PAGE
                         AT  THE END OF PART I
                                 xvii

-------
                                   SECTION 1

                                 INTRODUCTION
         Citrus production,  processing, and marketing comprises a $2 billion industry in
Florida alone. More than 800,000 acres of the peninsula, extending some 250 miles from
north to south, are planted in citrus trees. This area yields about 75 percent of oranges and
80 percent of grapefruit grown in the United States. The total Florida citrus  crop for  the
1967-1968 season amounted  to about 9.0 million tons. For comparison, the United States
produced 3.3 million tons of apples, 1.8 million tons of peaches, and 12.1 million tons of
potatoes in 1964.  Since about one-third of orange acreage had not attained bearing age by
the 1966-67 season, and since citrus acreage is constantly expanding, a steady increase in
production is anticipated for years to come. Thus, the citrus industry is a very important
factor hi the economy of Florida.

         The majority of Florida citrus is subjected to processing within the State to
produce single-strength or concentrated juice for marketing in containers. A survey in 1965
revealed a total of 52 citrus processing plants in the State. These processed about 82 percent
of the 1965-1966  crop. It is  understandable that operations of such magnitude yield great
quantities of waste materials  to be dealt with. The industry has made substantial progress in
disposing of wastes through recovery of valuable by-products. For example, Florida plants
produced  350,000 tons of  cattle feed  and 48,000  tons of citrus molasses during  the
1965-1966 season. Cattle feed production in 1966-1967 amounted to about 573,000 tons.
The  above  mentioned survey indicated, however, that some  130 million gallons per  day
(mgd) of wastewater, with a  5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) loading of the order
of 319,000 pounds per day,  were discharged from Florida plants. The  Bureau of Sanitary
Engineering of the Florida State Board  of Health is vigorously proposing treatment of
wastewaters from the industry.

         There are no standard  design parameters for citrus processing plant wastewater
treatment.  It is  generally  recognized  that plant location is an  important factor in
determining treatment requirements and  planning treatment facilities. For example, The
Coca-Cola Company, Foods  Division plant at Leesburg,  Florida (Figure  1) is located on
limited space within the city limits. Prior to  1967, raw wastewater from the plant  and
primary treated sewage from the  nearby Leesburg sewage treatment plant were discharged
separately into Lake Griffin (Figure  2). It was determined earlier by the Bureau of Sanitary
Engineering, Florida State Board  of  Health, that secondary treatment of both wastewaters
was required for adequate protection of receiving waters. In this particular case, it appeared
mutually advantageous for the citrus processing plant and the  City  to provide treatment
facilities  for the  combined wastewaters.  Based on results of laboratory and pilot plant
studies covering a two-year period,  a treatment plant of the extended aeration type was
installed to accommodate the combined wastewaters. This plant was placed in service during
1966-1967  citrus  season, and  it is  the  first large-scale  facility of its type in the citrus
processing industry.

-------
         Although the plant was provided primarily for BOD reduction, it was recognized
by the design engineers (Black, Crow and Eidsness, Inc.), that accelerated eutrophication in
receiving waters is a problem that must be faced in the future. It was seen also that the
facilities afford an opportunity for investigation of nutrient removal, as well as for further
studies regarding factors affecting organics removal.

         The  Coca-Cola Company Foods Division  was known as Minute Maid Company
during the  first part of this study.  The latter designation appears on some of the material
presented herein to describe results of the study.

-------
                                    SECTION 2

                            SCOPE AND  OBJECTIVES
         The general purpose of this study was to investigate treatment of combined citrus
processing and municipal  wastewaters afforded by  the  City of  Leesburg Wastewater
Treatment Plant. More specific  objectives  included investigation of operating parameters,
determination of suitable control limits, and evaluation of plant design criteria. Examination
of nitrogen and phosphorous removal in the treatment system was also included in the scope
of work.

         The primary objective of plant operations at all times is to fulfill an obligation to
the  public by satisfying the established  need  for a high degree of  treatment  of all
wastewaters entering the plant. Operational restrictions imposed by this service requirement
were seen to place significant limitations on the latitude of investigative work. In view of
these  restrictions and design capabilities of the plant, it was  anticipated that principal
operational variables subject to some  degree of control for study purposes are mixed liquor
suspended  solids  (MLSS)  concentration,  phosphorous  concentration,  and   sludge
recirculation rate. Investigation  of effects  of these controlled variables on  treatment were
prime objectives of the study.

         As the plant stands, such variables as dissolved oxygen concentration and nutrient
removal are not subject to operational control. Analyses of operating data to relate these
variables to other treatment factors were included as study objectives.

-------
                                    SECTION 3

                  GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WASTEWATERS
3.01     The Coca-Cola Company Foods Division

         Citrus processing plants are operated on a seasonal basis. Some early varieties of
fruit mature by  September or October, but  a succession of others reach maturity later.
Inasmuch as oranges may stay on  the tree in mature condition for two to five months,
considerable control is exercised over the harvesting and processing season,  which may
extend over eight to ten months.

         The principal processing season at the Leesburg plant usually extends from early
December into June. Processing is usually discontinued or slackened about midseason
between crops of early and late maturing fruit. This lull may extend from a few days to a
few weeks, depending upon crop conditions. During the off season, plant facilities are used
sporadically for processing lemons and limes and for repacking operations. These off-season
activities yield relatively light wastewater loadings.

         Wastewater sources in a typical citrus concentrate plant are indicated in Figure 3.
The major source of high-strength wastewater is the juice extractor and finisher area, where
relatively  large volumes of  water are  used during  frequent clean-up periods.  Other
high-strength wastewaters result from less frequent cleaning of juice storage, evaporator,
blend tank, chiller, and packaging areas. All of these wastewaters at the Leesburg plant  are
screened to remove pulp, peel, seeds, and other suspended solids.

         Fruit unloading and preparation operations and barometric condensers yield large
volumes of low-strength wastewaters. The former are screened  at the  Leesburg plant to
remove gross solids.

         In general, citrus processing wastewaters may be considered as dilute solutions of
citrus juice. The pH value is  variable. Citric acid  content of the juice tends to yield mildly
acid values. However, periodic discharges of alkaline agents during clean-up operations result
in high pH values.  Total  solids are  comprised  largely of sugars,  which  are  readily
biodegradable.  Other  constituents  include peptizing agents, which interfere  with  gravity
clarification, and peel oils,  which may act as bacteriostatic agents. The wastewaters  are
usually  deficient in  nitrogen  and/or phosphorous  compounds  required for  optimum
treatment  by  biological processes. Wastewater volume and  strength may be subject to
considerable fluctuation, depending upon the nature of processing operations.

         Total citrus wastewater flow at Leesburg is of the order of 12 mgd. Wastewaters
are segregated within the plant into low and high strength fractions. The former, amounting
to some 95 percent of the total flow and exhibiting BOD of the  order of 30 milligrams per
liter (mg/1), is discharged directly to Lake Griffin. The latter are discharged to the City of
Leesburg wastewater treatment facilities.

-------
         The citrus processing plant at Leesbuig operates on a 24-hour per day basis during
the principal  crop season. It is usually shut down on weekends and holidays. The shutdown
period is variable and dependent upon processing requirements.
3.02     City of Leesburg Sewage

         The population  of Leesbuig in 1960 was 11,172. A population of 22,000 is
anticipated during the  1980's. The Coca-Cola Company Foods Division citrus processing
plant is by far the largest industry in the City.

         Existing sewerage  serves approximately  80 percent of the population.  Average
daily sewage flow is of the order of 1.15 mgd. The sewage flows to the treatment facilities in
a relatively fresh condition and exhibits an average BOD of the order of 145 mg/1.
                                       6

-------
                                   SECTION 4

                      WASTEWATER TREATMENT  PLANT
4.01     General Description

         The plant is a modification of the activated sludge type designed for extended
aeration of  unclarified wastewaters with completely mixed recycled sludge. A shallow
oxidation  pond  was provided for  further polishing of the effluent  prior to ultimate
discharge. A schematic flow diagram is presented in Figure 4.

         The plant includes elements of an older primary plant provided for City of
Leesburg sewage. Additional secondary treatment facilities were constructed on an adjoining
site to accommodate combined sewage and citrus processing plant wastewaters. Elements of
the above mentioned primary plant are indicated  in the upper portion of Figure 4. Certain
of these, including the comminutor, degritter parshall flume and wet well still accommodate
City sewage  alone.  The thickener indicated in Figure 4  is actually the old primary plant
clarifier, with no modifications.  Remaining elements  of the primary  plant are the  two
digesters and sludge drying beds indicated in the figure.

         Citrus processing wastewaters are delivered to the treatment site by a pumping
station located at the citrus plant. Facilities were included at the treatment plant for adding
supplemental phosphorus, in the form  of phosphoric acid, to  the  citrus waste. Citrus
wastewater, raw sewage and recirculated sludge are blended in a head box, which is the  first
element of the new treatment facilities.  The mixture is apportioned by mud valves in the
bottom of the head box to two aeration basins. These are lined earthen basins, and each was
provided with two 60 horsepower, mechanical aerators mounted on piers.  Aeration basin
effluent is combined in common gravity piping  and then divided into two suction type
clarifiers. Clarified wastewater is recombined in common gravity piping, chlorinated,  and
discharged to a shallow, earthen pond. Pond effluent is discharged to Lake  Griffin (Figure
2).

         Provisions were made for wasting sludge from the two clarifiers to the clarifier of
the old primary  plant, described in Figure  4  as a thickener. It was anticipated that  this
clarifier and  the digesters would be adequate for storage and thickening of  sludge prior to
further dewatering on the drying beds and/or ultimate disposal by hauling.

-------
4.02     Design Criteria and Characteristics
         Plant design criteria are summarized as follows:
                                          City          Citrus
                                         Sewage       Processing       Total
Daily Wastewater flow, mgd:
     Average                               2.50         0.85          3.35
     Maximum                             6.25         1.15          7.40
BOD concentration, mg/1                     144          706          287
BOD (5-day) load, Ibs/day                    3,000        5,000        8,000
Recirculated sludge, mgd                                                3.35
BODlbs/Mcf                                                          18.3
Extended aeration:
     Mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS)
          Under aeration, Ibs/lb BOD                                    10
          Concentration, mg/1                                          2,937
     Detention, hours                                                  24
Clarifier surface overflow rate, gpd/sq. ft                                  730
BOD reduction, %                                                      90+
         Design flow and BOD load for city sewage were based on projected conditions for
1975. Actual sewage flow  and BOD load averaged 1.15 mgd and 1,400 pounds per day,
respectively, in 1964. According to The Coca-Cola Company Foods Division management
personnel, above design flow and BOD load for citrus processing waste, which were based on
1964 conditions, should suffice for projected 1975 conditions.
         Further details of plant facilities are described in Table 1.

-------
                                   SECTION  5

                           PLAN OF INVESTIGATION
         The  general plan  of experimentation  involved  the  few variables that were
anticipated  to be subject to reasonable  operational  control.  These were mixed liquor
suspended solids (MLSS), phosphorous concentration, and sludge recirculation rate. It was
planned to vary one of these variables at a time in series of tests covering one citrus season.
Routine  data indicated  in  Figure 5  would   be  collected  throughout the  season.
Supplementary routine analyses for nitrogen and phosphorous concentrations in combined
wastewater and in clarifier and pond effluents were  provided for.

         It was proposed to operate under each set experimental conditions for about one
month to assure collection of a reasonable average  data under equilibrium conditions. Since
the duration of the citrus processing season is usually about six months, a rather limited
program was planned. This program is summarized as follows:


                   Controlled     Variable                Test
              Recirc.            BOD:P Ratio               MLSS        duration,
Condition    Sludge, %        (Combined Waste)             mg/1         months

     1           100                 100:1                  3,000           1

     2           100                 100:1                  4,000           1

     3           100                 100:1                  5,000           1

     4           100               As received            Optimum          1

     5           100               Midway above          Optimum          1

     6            50               Optimum              Optimum          1

                                                           Total            6
         Analysis of  all data was proposed  to  afford evaluation of  nutrient removal,
treatment efficiency, and plant design.

-------
                                    SECTION 6

                               PLANT OPERATION


6.01     Startup (1966-1967) Citrus Processing Season

         Plant construction was far from completion  at the beginning of the 1966-1967
citrus processing season, during which it was originally proposed to initiate the investigation.
Insistence from City officials resulted in acceptance of citrus wastewaters at the plant early
in December, 1966,  before  any of the secondary treatment units were operable. Citrus
wastewaters were routed through one aeration basin, in  which the mechanical aerators were
inoperable, and remaining facilities were by-passed with a temporary arrangement. Separate
operation of the old primary  plant was  continued  for treatment  of City sewage  in
accordance with prior practice. As anticipated, premature acceptance of citrus wastewaters
resulted in a variety of significant problems, including objectionable odors, hindered orderly
completion  of  facilities, and multiplied difficulties  usually encountered  during plant
startups.

         It  was not until  February  24,  1967, that plant  construction was reasonably
complete, and City sewage was diverted to the new facilities. Remainder of the season was
devoted largely to training of plant personnel, who were totally inexperienced in operation
of  secondary  treatment  facilities;  solving  usual   startup  problems  with mechanical
equipment,  instrumentation, etc.; and establishing treatment  control,  sampling,  and
analytical procedures to be employed during the investigation.

         Reasonable satisfactory operation of the  plant was established by mid-April,
1967. Phosphoric acid was  added to yield a BOD:P  ratio of about 80:1 in raw combined
wastewater based on average requirements indicated during pilot plant studies preceding
design. Operating data  obtained during the  last  two months of the citrus season  are
summarized  in  Table 2. Sludge  wastage was insignificant during this period, and the
uncontrolled MLSS  concentration ranged to values  of 6,000 to  7,000 mg/1. Citrus
wastewater BOD loadings were significantly higher than the design loading 92 percent of the
time, due probably to a bumper crop of fruit and associated problems within the citrus
plant. Despite an average weekday BOD loading of 12,200 pounds per day, amounting to  an
overload of 53 percent of the design loading, BOD reductions were consistently higher than
anticipated and  averaged 94.2 percent until an aerator reduction gear failure on June 3,
1967. Principal  problems  of process  control involved MLSS concentration and solids
carryover from the clarifiers.

6.02     1967-1968 Citrus Processing Season

         The detailed program of investigation described earlier was initiated at the outset
of the  1967-1968 season. Improvements were made to  sampling facilities just prior to the
season  to assure  more dependable data during the studies. These consisted  of automatic
proportional  samplers for raw sewage, raw citrus wastewater, and clarifier effluent, as well as
sample pumps for continuous delivery of aerator basin  effluent and recirculated sludge. A
pH recorder  was provided for raw citrus wastewater.  These improvements are indicated in
Figure  4. Analyses for nitrogen and  phosphorous compounds in the wastewaters were
initiated in December, 1967.
                                        11

-------
         Average MLSS concentration during the week of November 12, 1967, was about
6,500 mg/1. It was reduced to about 3,000 mg/1 by the end of the month and maintained at
weekly average'values of about 3,100 to 3,750 mg/1 until the week of January 14, 1968, in
accordance with condition 1 of our  program.  This  was accomplished by wasting some
1,430,000 gallons of sludge at an average rate of 30,500 gpd and ranging to 168,000 gpd.

         Sludge was wasted by  pumping to the thickener and digesters; settling; drawing
off supernatant, which was returned to the sewage wet well; and discharging to a tank truck
or sludge drying beds. Since the capacity of the  drying beds was no more than about 7,500
gpd, the majority was hauled away to the City's  solids disposal area. Limited tests indicated
that waste sludge could be thickened to  about 3.2 percent solids during the procedure. The
thickened sludge dewatered well on the drying beds with little odor, comparable with
anaerobically digested sludge.

         Reasonable  control was  maintained over sludge recirculation during the initial
study condition. Average recirculation amounted  to about 80 percent.

         Phosphorous levels in the combined raw wastewaters were considerably higher
than anticipated from preliminary laboratory and pilot plant studies preceding design of the
plant. BOD:P ratios averaged  about 57:1 over the season. Addition of phosphoric acid
during the initial study condition resulted in an  average BOD:P ratio of about 53:1 rather
than 100:1 as indicated in our program.  This ratio was maintained, approximately, through
March,  1968, to  minimize  effects of the variable on  subsequent studies.  Addition  of
phosphoric acid was discontinued on April 2,  1968, and BOD:P ratios averaged about 70:1
in combined raw wastewaters throughout the remainder of the season.

         Operating personnel were requested on January 12, 1968, to maintain a MLSS
concentration of about 4,000 mg/1 in accordance with condition 2 of our program. This
concentration was  maintained reasonably well for about two weeks. It was then purposely
decreased to  about 3,100 mg/1, through wasting sludge, by plant personnel on the advice of
Florida State Board of Health personnel in  an effort  to control a considerable clarifier
carryover problem. Thus, the average MLSS concentration for the  planned period of study
amounted to no more than 3,400 mg/1, or roughly the same  as that of the initial  period.
Sludge recirculation was increased  from about 80  percent to about 130 percent by plant
personnel in a further effort to control clarifier carryover.

         Plant and  regulatory  agency personnel were quite  reluctant to increase MLSS
concentration in accordance with our program to 5,000 mg/1 despite satisfactory operation
at concentrations of more than 6,000 mg/1 during the previous season. In view of this and
the previous abundant data at higher solids loadings, it was agreed  that treatment would be
controlled as nearly  as possible to design conditions for the remainder of the season. The
program  involving deliberate variations  of  treatment factors was abandoned in favor of
greater emphasis on collection and analysis of operating data.  As it turned out, the season
afforded a very wide variety of operating conditions for study. For example, weekly  average
MLSS concentrations varied from about 2,000  to 4,750 mg/1, and sludge recirculation varied
from about 70 to about 185 percent.
                                       12

-------
         BOD loadings were generally within the design value throughout the season,
although  one weekly average amounted to some 11,300 pounds per day and four others
ranged from 8,300 to 9,200 pounds per day. Principal process control problems involved
MLSS  concentration and clarifier  carryover  due to sludge bulking.  As  a result  of
inexperience, there was a pronounced reluctance on the part of operators to experiment in
solving problems. A variety of problems are certain to arise in unique wastewater treatment
systems such as that at Leesburg, and operating personnel with adequate education and
training in this discipline are requisite to proper end results.
                                      13

-------
                                  SECTION 7

                           SAMPLING  AND TESTING
7.01     Sampling

         Routine sampling of the raw sewage, raw citrus waste, and clarifier effluent was
accomplished by  means of Chicago Pump Company, "Tru—Test" samplers. Locations are
indicated in Figure 4. The sampling systems provided composite samples automatically in
direct proportion to flow.  Samples were  collected over 24-hour periods in 2-gallon
polyethylene containers, and were maintained at 40°F. in the refrigerated compartment of
the sampler throughout the sampling period.

         Since there was no suitable sampling point for collection of combined wastewater
samples,  these  were constructed from  composited raw sewage citrus waste samples in
proportion to their respective daily flows. A simple nomograph was provided the  treatment
plant operator to facilitate manual preparation of the samples.

         Daily composite samples of the oxidation pond effluent were constructed from
periodic grab samples collected over a 24-hour period. These were  also maintained at
approximately 4CrF. in  a standard  laboratory refrigerator. Aeration  basin effluents and
recirculated sludge samples were grab samples taken and tested once each 8-hour shift.

7.02     Testing

         Routine tests conducted at the plant are indicated in Figure 5.

         Semiweekly composite samples of combined wastewater, clarifier effluent, and
oxidation pond effluent were analyzed for total nitrogen and phosphorous content. Total
nitrogen was determined from analyses for ammonia, organic nitrogen, nitrate, and nitrite.

         All  testing procedures were in accordance  with "Standard  Methods for
Examination of Water and Wastewater," 12th Edition, APHA, AWWA, WPCF (1965).

         Routine sampling and analyses were accomplished by the operating personnel of
the City of Leesburg wastewater treatment plant. Training and supervision were provided by
Black, Crow and Eidsness, Inc. Nitrogen and phosphorous determinations were made by L &
S Laboratory, Winter Haven, Florida.  Samples were transported to this laboratory  in a
refrigerated shipping container by bus. A schedule for handling samples was arranged to
permit analysis within a few hours after collection.
                                      15

-------
                                   SECTION 8

                                    RESULTS
8.01     General Conditions

         Data were collected and reviewed for purposes of this investigation from April 19,
1967, through June 30, 1968, covering a total of some 62 weeks. The 1966-1967 citrus
processing season was represented by data for April 19 - June 3,1967. An aerator reduction
gear failure on the latter date resulted in bypassing of citrus wastewaters on June 16,1967.
This wastewater stream was returned to the treatment system on July 4, 1968, after the
closing of the processing season.  The aerator was returned to service on July 6. Citrus
wastewaters from this date to early December,  1968, resulted principally from sporadic
processing of  lemons  and limes and  for  repacking operations. The  main  1967-1968
processing season was represented by data collected from December,  1967, through June,
1968.

         Typical analytical data pertaining to the wastewaters are shown in Table 3.

8.02     Flow Data

         Flows  of raw  sewage,  raw  citrus wastewater,  and recirculated  sludge  were
measured by Kennison nozzles located as  indicated in Figure 4. These were arranged with
B-I-F instrumentation to indicate, record and totalize flow of each stream. Clarifier effluent
flow was measured by a Parshall flume as shown in Figure 4, also arranged for indicating,
recording and totalizing the flow.

         Flow data collected during the period of investigation are summarized in Figure 6.
Daily sewage flows ranged from 0.723 to 2.02 mgd and averaged 1.106 mgd. Daily citrus
wastewater flows during the portion of the 1966-1967 season covered by the investigation
ranged to 1.122 mgd and averaged 0.935 mgd. During the 1967-1968 season they ranged to
1.631  mgd and averaged 0.528 mgd. It is seen from Figure 6 that offseason flows were
considerable.

8.03     Daily BOD Loadings

         Daily  BOD loadings  are  summarized in Figure 7. Combined wastewater  BOD
loading ranged to 31,400 pounds per day and averaged 12,200 during the last few weeks of
the 1966-1967 season. During the  1967-1968 season, maximum and average loadings were
22,300 and 6,810 pounds per day, respectively.

         Whereas citrus wastewater BOD loading ranged to 29,900 pounds  per day and
averaged  11,200 during  the latter part of the 1966-1967 season, maximum and average
loadings during the subsequent season were 20,200 and 5,050 pounds per day, respectively.

         Daily BOD loading contributed  by City sewage during the entire period of the
study averaged 1,315 pounds per day and ranged to 5,840 pounds per day.
                                       17

-------
         Combined wastewater BOD  concentrations during the  1967-1968 season are
summarized in Figure 8.

8.04     Suspended Solids

         Suspended solids concentration in citrus wastewater and sewage averaged 182 and
162 mg/1, respectively, during the period of study.

         MLSS concentrations are summarized in Figure 9. Weekly average concentrations
ranged between 1,630 and 6,550 mg/1 during the period of study.

         Clarifier effluent suspended solids concentrations  are summarized in Figure 10.
Concentrations varied between 0 and 779 mg/1 and averaged 78 mg/1 during the period of
study.

         Pond effluent suspended solids varied from 6 to 160 mg/1 and averaged 32 mg/1.

8.05     Dissolved Oxygen

         Dissolved oxygen concentrations in aeration basins 1 (south) and 2 (north) are
summarized in Figures 11 and 12, respectively. Concentration in basin 1 varied from 0.1 to
9.0 mg/1 and averaged 2.8 mg/1 during the study. That in basin 2 varied from 0.1 to 8.4 mg/1
and averaged 2.3 mg/1.

         Dissolved oxygen concentrations in the oxidation pond are summarized in Figure
13. These were found to vary considerably with weather conditions, algae blooms, etc., and
ranged from 0.2 mg/1 to 31 mg/1. The average concentration was 9.3 mg/1.

8.06     pH Values

         Citrus wastewater pH values were monitored and recorded continuously by means
of a  Beckman Model 729 Process Flow Chamber  located as indicated in Figure 4. Values
ranged from 4.2 to 11.8 and averaged 7.5. A typical weekly  pH record  is shown in Figure
14. pH  values for sewage clarifier effluent and  oxidation pond were  determined on
composited samples. These were quite uniform and averaged about 8.0. Values ranged from
7.0 to 10.1.

8.07      Temperature

         Temperatures were comparable in aeration basin and oxidation pond effluents
and varied from 17°C. to 31°C.,  depending upon  the ambient temperature. Temperatures
for the entire study period are summarized in Figure 15.

8.08     Sludge Recirculation

         Data pertaining to sludge recirculation  are summarized in Figure  16.  Weekly
average flows ranged from 42 percent to 184 percent of plant influent flow.
                                      18

-------
8.09     BOD Removal

         Data pertaining to overall BOD removal in the plant are summarized in Figure 17.
Despite an average BOD loading some S3 percent in excess of the design loading during the
latter part of the  1966-1967 season, the average removal amounted to some 94.2 percent
until the aerator  failure  of June 3, 1967. This failure  resulted in decreased  removals
indicated in Figure 17 from the week of June 4 through the week of July 9,1967.

         Weekly average BOD removals for the 1967-1968 season ranged from 89.0 to 99.0
percent and averaged 95.6 percent.

         Despite the aerator failure and subsequent aerator shutdowns to replace reduction
gears in all units, average BOD removal for the period of study amounted to 94 percent.

8.10     Suspended Solids Removal

         Sparse data pertaining to suspended solids removals were  accumulated and are
presented in Figure 18. Weekly average removals ranged from 54 percent to 96 percent and
averaged 81 percent during the period of study.

8.11     Sludge Volume Index

         Sludge volume indices were variable, ranging from a low of 67  to a high of 507
during the period  of study. The average SVI value was 263. The data are summarized in
Figure 19.

8.12     Waste Sludge

         Data pertaining to waste sludge are summarized in Figure 20. Sludge was wasted
in insignificant  amounts  until  the week  of November  26, 1967,  at  the start of the
1967-1968 season. Sludge wastage during this season ranged to 165,000 gpd and averaged
20,100 gpd.

8.13     Nitrogen and Phosphorous Analyses

         Nitrogen  and phosphorous determinations were made to determine:  1) if
sufficient quantities  of nutrient  were available in the influent for efficient bio-oxidation;
and 2) removal of these nutrients during treatment. All data in this regard were  collected
during the 1967-1968 season, and these are summarized in Tables 4 and 5.
                                       19

-------
                                   SECTION 9

                           DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
9.01     Flow Data

         Figure 6 illustrates that combined wastewater flows were well below the design
average of 3.35 mgd. The maximum weekly average flow was 2.38 mgd, and the maximum
daily flow of record was 3.24 mgd. The average daily citrus wastewater flow of 0.935 mgd
during the latter part of the 1966-1967 season exceeded the design average of 0.85, but the
average flow of 0.528 mgd during the more normal 1967-1968 season was significantly less
than design conditions.

         As indicated in Figure 6, daily citrus wastewater flow were subject to considerable
variation. The erratic  flow  pattern,  in conjunction with high and variable BOD loadings,
contributed significantly to difficulties in  controlling MLSS concentration and sludge
recirculation rate.

         Daily peak flow of sewage was of the order of 3.0 mgd, although occasional peaks
ranged higher. Variable speed drives on the two 3.0 mgd pumps afforded reasonably smooth
and predictable flows throughout the day. Typical weekday citrus plant  operations during
the season resulted in cyclical surging of citrus wastewatef flow rates between about 0.5
mgd and  1.25 to 1.40 mgd. The lower rate corresponded to operation of one 350 gpm wet
well pump,  while the larger rate resulted from operation of the 1,000 gpm pump. During
weekend or other plant  shutdowns, wastewater flow rate usually varied from 0 to less than
0.5 mgd.

         The usual operating procedure resulted in cyclical surging of recirculated sludge
between minimum flow rates of about 0 to 0.75 mgd and maxima of 2.0 to 3.5 mgd.

         Surging of citrus  wastewater and  recirculated sludge probably contributed to a
significant problem of solids carryover from the clarifiers.  Based  on an average sludge
recirculation rate of the order of 1.0 mgd, an estimated maximum momentary flow rate of
7.9 mgd to  the head box (Figure 4) would tend to result in a momentary clarifier surface
overflow rate of the order of 1,500 gpd per square foot. The actual effect of such condition
on the overflow rate depends, of course, on the flow rate dampening effect afforded by the
oxidation ponds.

         Indicated measures to minimize difficulties associated with flow surges include:

         1.        Equalization of  citrus wastewater flows by means of a suitable surge
                  pond and variable special pumps,

         2.        Proper  adjustment of sludge recirculation  rate controls to minimize
                  surgings,

         3.        Increased clarifier capacity, and/or,
                                      21

-------
         4.       Provisions for better flow rate equalization in aeration basins.

9.02     BOD Loadings and Removals

         Daily BOD loadings were highly variable, as indicated  in Figures 7 and 8 and in
Table 2. These data show that the variability was due mainly to citrus wastewaters. It is seen
further that design loadings were exceeded rather extensively. A revealing summary in this
regard is as follows:
                                        Average Dafly
                                     BOD Loading, Ibs.
                                   Design           Actual
                          Percent of Time
                          Design Loading
                           Was Exceeded
     City sewage

     Citrus wastewater

         1966-1967 season(1)

         1967-1968 season(2)

     Combined wastewater
3,000


5,000

5,000
 1,315


11,200

 5,050
92

40
1966-1967 season1'"
1967-1968 season(2)
8,000
8,000
12,200
6,810
61
20
    Partial, April 19-June 9,1967, only.

<2> December 1,1967 - June 30,1968.

         Above described loading characteristics subjected the treatment process to severe
"shocking," which  promoted  sludge bulking. This phenomenon contributed  largely to
frequent difficulties with MLSS concentration  control  and solids carryover from the
clarifiers.

         The effect was  often well demonstrated early  in the week. In these cases the
treatment process was  upset  by resumption of citrus  processing, following weekend
curtailment. Towards the latter part of the week  the sludge evidently became acclimatized
to the loading, and evidence of bulking became less pronounced.

         Indicated  means for  minimizing difficulties resulting from the highly variable
BOD loads involve equalization of citrus wastewater discharges to the plant throughout the
week. Some type of holding  tank  is the most  obvious  solution, but potential problem
conditions   within such  a tank receiving raw  concentrated citrus wastes should  be
anticipated.  Laboratory studies showed  that aeration may  cause the raw waste to gel
(probably because of high dissolved sugar concentrations)  and produce odors, but  no
aeration may lead to anaerobic conditions with even more severe odor problems.
                                        22

-------
         Despite  above described loading characteristics, the  treatment system afforded
excellent BOD reduction, as attested to by data shown in Figure 17. The oxidation pond
played a significant part in overall BOD reduction during period of excessive solids carryover
from the clarifiers. For example, contributions by the pond to monthly average overall BOD
reductions ranged from 0 to 14.7 percent and averaged 3.0 percent during the 1967-1968
season. During prolonged period of optimum treatment, the pond played a very minor role
in BOD reduction. At times BOD values actually increased somewhat through the pond, due
evidently to carryover of dead algae cells, etc.

         Decreased  BOD removals indicated in Figure 17 for weeks of June 4 - July 19,
1967, resulted from  an  aerator failure. Average BOD reductions amounted to 94.2 and 95.6
percent for the 1966-1967 and the 1967-1968 seasons, respectively.

9.03     Wastewater Suspended Solids and Removal

         Suspended solids content of raw sewage and citrus wastewater were of the same
general order of magnitude (Table 3). Overall removals described in Figure 18 were affected
significantly by copious quantities of algae cells discharged continuously from the oxidation
pond. Apparent removals of 80 percent or more occurred 59 percent of the time.

         As indicated  in Figure  10, suspended solids  content of clarifier effluent was
variable. Erratic clarification was due to effects of sludge bulking and flow surges mentioned
earlier. The data show that  the oxidation pond was of significant benefit in compensating
for poor clarifier performance.

9.04     Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS)

         The  quantity of MLSS under  aeration is of prime concern in activated sludge
processes.  The design criteria of 10 pounds of MLSS under aeration per  pound of daily
influent BOD is a generally  accepted level for the extended aeration modification of the
process. To realize this level with the plant design BOD load of 8,000 pounds per day,
would require maintaining a MLSS  concentration of 3,000 mg/1 in  accordance with the
design control.

         In practice the concentration would be adjusted in accordance with actual BOD
loading to maintain the above described 10:1 ratio. The highly variable BOD loads indicated
in Figure 7 made such control so difficult that it could not be accomplished reasonably.

         Comparison shown in Figure 22 indicates a trend towards a direct relationship
between BOD removal and  MLSS  concentration, particularly  when MLSS concentration
exceeded 3,000 mg/1. By including Figure 7 in the comparison, it  appears that a MLSS
concentration of 4,000 to 4,500 resulted in better BOD removals with BOD loads  near or
exceeding  the plant design load. On this basis, it is concluded that some 14 pounds of MLSS
under aeration per  pound  of daily  influent  BOD is appropriate for  conditions at the
Leesburg plant. Equalization of citrus wastewater discharges to the plant would facilitate
MLSS control.
                                       23

-------
9.05     Sludge Wastage

         Average  sludge wastage of 20,100 gpd for the 1967-1968 season was for the
purpose of maintaining a MLSS concentration of 3,000 mg/1 over all but about two weeks
of the season. As shown in Figure 9 such wastage was insufficient to fully satisfy this
objective. Conditions were too erratic for collection of reliable data concerning waste sludge
solids produced per pound of influent BOD. Based on very rough estimates in regard to
average waste  sludge solids concentration and solids carryover from the clarifiers, this could
have amounted to  some 0.4 to 0.6 pounds per pound of BOD during the 1967-1968 season.

         Comparisons in Figure 23 indicate that quantity of waste sludge solids produced
during citrus processing varies inversely with MLSS concentration. Thus, control of MLSS
concentration  to  a range of the order  of 4,500 mg/1 as suggested above would tend to
minimize the solids handling and disposal problem.

         Waste sludge disposal facilities were obviously inadequate for long term operation.
The anaerobic digester was too small for the large volumes of sludge produced. The interim
solution  adopted was periodic hauling of sludge in tank trucks  to a land fill for disposal. It
was recognized at  the outset that improvements would  be advisable as soon as problems
peculiar to the unique treatment system were clearly defined and evaluated.

9.06     Sludge Recirculation and Sludge Volume Index (SVI)

         Sludge recirculation rate must be varied directly as SVI in controlling MLSS to a
fixed level.  The relationships are illustrated by  comparison of data for weeks of November
26, 1967 through  March 31, 1968  in Figure 24. MLSS was controlled within a relatively
narrow range during most of this period, while sludge recirculation rate and SVI gradually
increased.

         SVI  is dependent  to a large  extent  on  factors associated  with the particular
wastewater.  Citrus wastewaters contain large amounts of carbohydrates. Such compounds
are notorious for promoting growth of filamentous organisms, such as sphaerotilus, during
treatment by activated sludge processes.  These  organisms yield  light, bulky sludges that do
not settle well and thus promote  relatively high sludge volume indices. In view of the
relationship  between SVI and recirculation rate described above, citrus wastewaters may be
expected to require higher than usual recirculation rates during activated sludge treatment.
These  factors  are  believed largely  responsible for solids  carryover  from the clarifiers
illustrated in Figure 10.

         Comparisons in Figure 25 yield  some evidence that SVI varies inversely with
MLSS  concentration.  Thus,  positive control  of MLSS concentration within the  above
suggested range of 4,000 to 4,500 mg/1 could benefit clarification. Comparisons in Figure 26
afford  evidence that bulking and solids carryover from the clarifiers might be minimized by
positive  control of sludge recirculation rate to an  absolute minimum. In general, lower
sludge  volume indices accompanied  sludge recirculation rates of less than 100 percent of
influent flow.

         Equalization of flows and BOD loading would facilitate better control of MLSS
concentration, sludge recirculation and SVI.
                                       24

-------
9.07     Dissolved Oxygen Levels

         Inspection of Figure 21 shows that dissolved oxygen levels were generally higher
in aeration basin No.  1  (south) than in No. 2 (north). From the week of September 24,
1967, through  the week of  March  31, 1968,  dissolved oxygen concentrations  were
consistently higher in  No. 1. This was accounted for by short circuiting in the head box
(Figure 4).  Due to the arrangement of Kennison nozzles and the two mud valves serving the
basins, basin No.  2  received a  disproportionate amount of  recirculated  sludge. This
condition was alleviated by baffling late in March, 1968.

         Comparison  of Figures 6, 7 and 21 shows that dissolved oxygen concentration in
the aeration basins varied inversely with flow and BOD load, as would be expected.

         From Figures  10 and 13, it is seen that dissolved oxygen concentration in the
oxidation pond appeared to  be affected in varying degrees by  solids carryover from the
clarifiers. Weather conditions and algae blooms were probably of more overall consequence.

9.08     pH Value and Temperature

         Despite wide variations in citrus wastewater pH value, as indicated by Figure  14,
average pH value  of this stream was about 7.5. Buffering capacities of City sewage and
mixed liquor were sufficient to yield relatively uniform pH values of the order of 7.5 to 8.0
in the aeration basins.

         Although citrus  wastewaters were quite warm, temperature of mixed-liquor was
relatively uniform and  followed seasonal patterns.

9.09     Nutrient Removal

         The  treatment would be expected to yield a final  effluent containing little
ammonia and organic nitrogen. Nitrate concentration would be expected to increase during
treatment A review of Table 5 shows that such expected results were obtained. Comparison
of data in Table 5 for the period of January 17 through May 24, 1968, shows a direct
relationship between clarifier effluent suspended solids (bulking) and organic nitrogen in the
effluent  It is indicated  that the effect  of bulking extended through the oxidation pond,
where there was a substantial increase in ammonia nitrogen as well as in organic nitrogen.

         It is seen in Table 4 that average nitrogen removal through the clarifiers amounted
to about 69 percent. There was an indicated additional removal of about 7  percent in  the
oxidation pond. This  is  not  regarded to  be of particular significance, in view of  the
variability in analytical results.

       :  From Table 4, average phosphorous removal amounted to about 53 percent, and
the oxidation pond afforded no additional removal. Average removals through the clarifiers
and pond  during  the  period  of phosphoric acid  addition were 70 and 61 percent,
respectively, as compared to  34  and  31  percent after  phosphoric  acid  addition was
discontinued. During these respective periods BOD:phosphorous ratios were 53:1 and 70:1.
                                        25

-------
         Since an average daily volume of waste sludge amounting to some 20,100 gallons
was  removed  from the system during  the  1967-1968 season an attempt was made  to
determine the effect on overall removals reported in Table 4. A very limited amount of
analytical data was obtained  on the sludge. These data indicated that nutrients were
removed largely in the waste sludge. Although the data pertaining to nitrogen were rather
inconsistent, they show that practically all nitrogen removal was accounted  for in  the
sludge. It was indicated that phosphorus removed in waste sludge amounted to about 94
percent of the  overall removal reported in Table 4.

         It is generally accepted that BOD:nitrogen ratios of the order of 15:1 to 20:1 and
BOD:phosphorus ratios of the order of 80:1 to 100:1 are required for optimum biological
treatment of wastewaters. Extensive analytical data collected  during laboratory and pilot
plant studies preceding plant design indicated that raw combined wastewaters would contain
ample nitrogen, but that they would be deficient hi phosphorus. Data in Table 4 indicate
opposite  conditions  hi  regard  to  raw wastewater  nutrient levels. Although  some
consideration might be given to feeding of a nitrogen compound rather than  phosphoric
acid, excellent BOD reductions were obtained despite the indicated nitrogen deficiency.

9.10     Plant Equipment

         Principal inadequacies in plant equipment were found to deal with waste sludge
disposal, sludge recirculation pumps, clarifiers, and citrus wastewater flow control.

         Inadequacies in waste  sludge disposal facilities  were mentioned above under
"Sludge Wastage." Improvements to be considered might include digestion facilities, either
aerobic  or  anaerobic. However, observed dewatering characteristics of undigested waste
sludge appeared good.  Further  studies might indicate economic advantages for unproved
thickening facilities for undigested sludge to be used in conjunction with vacuum filtration,
centrifugal  filtration, or increased  drying bed capacity. In  any case, operating procedures
should be improved to include  daily wastage of sludge from clarifiers at highest practical
solids content.

         It was  assured  by the  manufacturer that vertical turbine pumps would afford
satisfactory service for anticipated recirculated sludge. With this  assurance, such pumps were
selected as an  economic measure. Excessive outages were experienced as a result of solids
characteristics. Undegraded gross solids were found to foul  impellers and bearings. Stringy
solids such as hair were particularly troublesome in fouling bearings.  It is possible that such
difficulties could have been minimized by different bearing materials, such as Teflon.

         As  mentioned  previously,  flow  surges  and bulking of  sludge  resulted  in
clarification problems. It was apparent that clarification of the high SVI solids characteristic
of citrus wastewaters was quite sensitive to turbulence in the  clarifiers. High sludge levels
prevailed because  of the relatively high sludge volume indices. Under such conditions, cross
members and  other obstructions hi the upper portion of the clarifiers contributed to
intolerable  velocities, particularly at high flow rates, that caused solids to  carry over the
wiers. Further studies  are required to  determine  a more  suitable  design overflow rate.
Apparently this rate should be substantially less than the design  value of 750 gpd per square
foot that was employed, although the latter is considered conservative in usual design
practice.
                                       26

-------
          As mentioned previously,  equalization facilities  for citrus
wastewaters would afford better control  of  such variables as MLSS  and
sludge recirculation rate.   Clarification would benefit  as  a result  of
improved sludge volume indices and  reduction of flow surges.

9.11      Cost  of Treatment

          For the 1969-70 season the  Leesburg Plant processed  ...
6,785,000 boxes of fruit and sent 996,000#  BOD to the city  treatment
plant for treatment.

          Cost  of Treatment            $9,442.00
          Waste Load - #BOD            996,000#
          Fruit Processed -  Boxes     6.785X106
          Treatment Cost
             $/#BOD                   $.0095
             $/Box Fruit              $.0014
                                  27

-------
                                   SECTION 10

                              ECOLOGICAL STUDY
10.01    GENERAL

         A detailed ecological survey of the Leesburg wastewater treatment facility was
made by Dr. James B. Lackey to characterize biota associated with the treatment process.
At the time of the facility to characterize biota associated with the treatment process.  At
the time of the survey the plant was operating effectively and BOD removal averaged better
than 95 percent.
10.02    LEESBURG EXTENDED AERATION SYSTEM

         Over a period of several years, intermittent observation of the Leesburg situation
exhibited that: (1) a high degree of BOD removal had not been achieved; (2) combinations
of citrus waste and domestic sewage produced a varied biota in a pilot plant trickling filter
experimentally operated; (3) large quantities of citrus waste solids entered the canal which
extended out to Lake Griffin; (4) a great deal  of gassing occurred in this canal and that
sludge banks had formed therein; (5) in this canal containing the combined waste, a large
and heterogeneous population of algae and protozoa was found,

         On March 10, 1969, microbiota at the Leesburg plant were studied.  A qualitative
examination of the sludge floes in the aeration chambers, of the growths on the clarifier
walls, of the rising sludge  in the polishing pond, and of the polishing pond (final) effluent
was made and the results  are exhibited in Table 6. Mixed liquor in the aeration basins was a
light brown mixture of debris,  bacteria, and animals.  No photosynthetic organisms were
present  in  the mixture. Bacteria were predominant and typical of biota developed on a
complex organic substrate, actively carrying on conversion to a simple substrate. Free living
bacteria were scarce; however, bacterial masses, typical  colonies of Zooglea, unidentified
filamentous forms and Sphaerotilus were present in vast quantities. As shown in column 1
of Table 6, the remaining organisms (except forAcineta) were consumers of bacteria. They
totaled 7,575 per ml and 7,067 of these were Vorticella, Opercularia, and Epistylis. With
such a predator population, the bacteria should be kept at a high reproductive working level.

         The floe in  the clarifiers appeared to  have excellent settling properties, and the
supernatant (clarifier effluent) was free of suspended solids. Growth on the clarifier walls
was composed of the  same organisms found in the aeration basins with an additional five
photosynthetic genera. Three were blue—green algae with Euglena gracilis which is indicative
of simpler organic compounds available for uptake. Navicida, the dominant one of these five
is probably  more dependent upon nitrogen and phosphorus.

         The polishing pond was green in color, with a visibility of about  two feet.  Its
effluent was of excellent  clarity and free of odor.  Its biota contained 11 photosynthetic
species  to  9 colorless species. However,  green  algae  were  predominant  and  a small
                                       29

-------
filamentous green (unrecognized) was the most abundant.  Three  Volvoades and one
Euglena indicated a good uptake of soluble organic matter, but the remaining seven species
are known to utilize nitrogen and phosphorus. The numbers present indicate considerable
uptake.

         The algal population should insure good oxygenation despite an indication that
substantial quantities of organic matter remain in the clarifier effluent and exert a high
oxygen demand.  This is  supported  by  the fact  that  Trepomonas, Hexamitus,  and
Gastronauta,  which tolerate low oxygen tensions, were found in the sludge which floats up
from the bottom of the oxidation pond.

         The Leesburg plant was operating successfully and had a balanced biota; however,
the balance between efficient and inefficient performance is delicate. A sudden change such
as a large slug of peel oil or alkali could adversely affect the treatment process.

         Organisms in the oxidation pond effluent that are contributed  to Lake Griffin are
acceptable  species. Together with  the biota presently existing in the  lake, they  should be
able to mineralize the increased fertilization. Since the biota concerned is a balanced one,
and of the type desirable in lake water of good quality, it is beneficial to the lake.
                                         30

-------
TABLES

-------
                                  TABLE 1




            CHARACTERISTICS OF TREATMENT  PLANT FACILITIES






Sewage Facilities:




      Comminutor




              Capacity, mgd                                           6.0




      Degritter




              Type                                              Air




              Capacity, mgd                                           6.0




      Wet well pumps




              Number                                                2




              Drive                                           Variable speed




              Capacity (each), gpm                                  2,100




              Head, ft.                                               40




Citrus Wastewater Facilities




      Wet well pumps (at citrus plant)




              Low service




                       Number                                       2




                       Type                                  Non clog wet pit




                       Capacity (each), gpm                           350




                       Head, ft.                                      15




              High service




                       Number                                       1




                       Type                                  Non clog wet pit




                       Capacity, gpm                                1,000




                       Head, ft.                                      36
                                  T-l

-------
                                   TABLE 1
                                   (continued)
            CHARACTERISTICS  OF TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES
      Phosphoric acid feeding equipment
               Storage tank capacity, gal
               Feed pumps
                       Number
                       Type

Combined Wastewater Facilities
      Aeration basins
               Number
               Capacity (total), MMG
               Detention (design), hours
               Aerators
                       Number
                       Type
                       Horsepower (each)
Clarifiers
      Number
      Type
      Diameter, ft
      Detention (design), hours
      Surface overflow rate (design) gpd/sq. ft
      Weir overflow rate (design), gpd/lin. ft
Sludge recirculation pumps
      Number
      Type
     1,500
Wallace & Tiernan A747
single head metering
        2
        3.26
       24
Mechanical
       60
Suction (Eimco)
       55
        2.5
      750
    10,000
Vertical turbine
                                  T-2

-------
                                    TABLE  1
                                   (continued)
            CHARACTERISTICS OF TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES
Sludge recirculation pumps - (continued)
      Capacity (each), gpm
      Head, ft
Waste sludge pumps
      Number
      Type
      Capacity (each), gpm
      Head, ft
Chlorination equipment
      Chlorine storage
      Feeder capacity, lbs/24 hours
Oxidation Pond
      Depth (approx.), ft
      Area (approx.), acres
      Capacity (approx.), MMG
      Detention (design), hours
Thickener
      Diameter, ft
      Capacity, gallons
Digesters
      Large
                Type
                Diameter,  ft
                Capacity, gallons
    1,400
       25
Non clog wet pit
      150
       25

1-ton containers
     1,000

        3
        5
        4.40
       31.5

       50
   157,000
Floating cover-unheated
       50
   150,000
                                   T-3

-------
                                   TABLE  1
                                  (continued)

            CHARACTERISTICS OF TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES
Digesters - (continued)

      Small

               Type                                          Fixed cover-unheated

               Diameter, ft.                                           25.5

               Capacity, gallons                                    76,000

Sludge drying beds

      Area, sq. ft.                                                  8,590
                                 T- 4

-------
                                                                                      TABLE 2
cn
CITY OF LEESBURG SZWAGE TREATMENT PLANT











MINUTE MAID COMPANY
Federal W
Date
1 467
Apr.l
19
21
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
May
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
IB
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
June
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14

Wee
W
F
M
T
W
T
F
5
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
S
M
T
W
T
F
5
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
S
M
T
W
T
F
5
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
S
M
T
W
ID
(2)
(3)
ln!lu<
m Flow, M Gal.
f Minute
k Maid Cily
900
919
922
72
980
961
1 ,017
914
48
685
1,026
1,048
983
1,015
1,021
88
101
1,106
1,089
692
1,080
991
48
45
1,017
1,017
1,029
994
933
155
722
312
R64
962
880
861
82
1,008
. 963
1,01 1
1,023
248
961
1,004
1,038
1,041
1,122
1,099
897
488
1,0?5
Not inc
Sludge
1,020
1 ,013
919
1 ,087
1,051
1,018
907
841
962
956
976
972
967
978
913
1,023
942
965
1,024
1,024
978
886
1,071
970
966
976
950
926
870
1,042
1,042
980
982
959
961
890
983
948
905
929
896
792
960
949
882
911
909
848
772
953
902
luding was
(1)
1,920
1,932
991
2,067
^,032
2,055
1,621
889
1,648
1,982
2,024
1,955
1,982
1,999
1,001
1,124
2,046
2,054
1,716
2, 104
1,969
934
1, 116
1,987
) ,985
2,005
1,944
1,861
1,025
1,764
1,354
1,844
1,944
1,839
1,B22
972
2,045
1,956
1,868
1,940
1,919
1,040
1,921
1,953
1,920
1,952
2,031
1,947
1,669
1,441
1 ,927

S
MGD
660
«.
770
994
1,267
1,182
1,597
1,034
866
1,451
1,477
1,310
1,256
1,321
1,348
1, 342
1,108
,716
,482
,426
,545
,239
, 194
,530
,563
, 181
959
1,079
985
932
518
643
1,027
1,428
1,556
1,225
1,420
1,382
1,455
1,483
1,345
1, 142
,235
,246
,352
,407
,306
,369
,404
,335
1,611

u d
Perce
34. 4
8. 0
1. 1
7. 7
8. 1
62.4
67.3
87. 7
lib
52.5
73. 2
73. 0
6 '.0
63. 4
66. 1
135
119
54. 1
83. 5
86. 4
67. 8
78.5
133
107
77.0
78. 7
58.9
49.3
58.0
96. 1
52. B
36. 3
34.9
52.8
77. 7
85. 4
126
69.4
70. 7
82.6
77. 9
76. 4
70. 1
110
64.3
63. a
70. 4
72. 1
64.3
70. 3
84. 1
92.6
83 6

Su.per
r,l (3) Liquor
1 ,710
2,980
3,440
3,400
3,630
3,710
3,520
thickener
3,810
I, 500 gal. 3 ,810
4,080
4,730
6, 160
4, 130
3,000 gal 4, 760
5, 100
5, 110
5, 170
5,730
5,710
1,875 gal. 5, 170
5,730
5,890
5,820
6,360
6,380
3,000 gal. 5,980
6, 110
5,900
6, 140
6,360
6,000
5,920
5,860
5,880
6,220
7,020
4, 800 gal. 6,540
6,280
6,500
6,680
6,300
5,240
5,300
5,700
5,620
5,760
5,600
5, 600 gal.
5,840
5,760
5,440
— Tr-s
de d Sol
Clanfx
EfHue,,
17
13
1 1
34
11
14
16
43
667
18
53
13
217
29
46
48
70
19
65
206
36
23
44
14
20
180
132
168
44
30
162
18
60
24
96
0
546
202
78
60
1 ID
78
256
66
278
420
144
86
114
..umPv
i d i ma
Effluen
56
22
28
38
43
24
59
31
37
52
44
40
42
36
55
48
48
45
19
22
39
5
0
7
6
4
70
64
42
66
78
40
10
10
50
82
58
48
64
66
62
54
70
74
B2
82
90


/' 5 - Day BOD
combined
t Maid
4, QUO
1,200
1,117
416
1,467
2,550
884
978
1,213
1,650
299
2,400
1 ,685
1, 142
1,750
1,200
2,150
367
1,113
771
1,033
975
197
383
820
1,100
927
1, 167
1,394
800
1,433
1,233
1,000
1,367
2,000
1,238
1,666
1,433
1,186
1,300
1,800
2,750
1,875
2,200
1,800

City
164
174
47
300
130
285
96
46
75
68
195
210
147
92
70
69
70
80
179
91
83
100
118
158
142
79
110
LOB
105
225
89
40
20
127
141
143
269
56
32
129
103
132
113
42

(5)
1,960
1,077
S87
309
765
1,290
477
516
687
862
201
1, 120
944
736
915
648
253
L06
683
452
664
541
105
128
497
633
514
651
297
390
503
625
515
664
286
711
928
818
639
693
528
1,430
1,028
1,241
980
«• in
RW

- LEESBURG, FLORIDA
C 1 Ad t
m R / 1
Clarilier
Effluent
14
38
5
21
54
26
315
42
37
30
120
32
30
49
94
10
27
86
22
26
8
7
a
3
1
8
1
41
26
239
76
72
87
101
288
257


Effluen
21
20
19
22
40
31
18
23
25
24
23
22
16
16
17
25
36
35
23
17
19
20
21
19
21
19
19
23
20
28
22
10
17
26
26
28
30
47
122
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)

t % Liquor
98.9 1.0
1. 1
97.0
96.6
92 9 1.0
94.8 0.8
97.6 0.8
96.2 1.3
95.5 5 0
96.4
88. 1
97. 1 4. 3
97.7 0.6
97.5 0.7
98. 3
97.4
90. 1 1. 6
66.0 0.4
94,9 0.3
94.7 0.3
97. 4
96. S
81.0 1.6
83.6 1.5
96.2
96.7 0.7
96.3
97. 1
92. 3
94.9 0.5
94.4 5.0
96.5
96.9
97.4
90.9
96.3 1.3
97.0 0,9
96-3
87.4
0. 2
0. 2
87.6
0,2
0. 1
6 -day BOD values
4-day BOD value*

Effluent Effluent
0.05 22.5
03 28 4
0.5 25 8
0.4 19.4
0.9 8.5
1.6 7.5
3.5 5.5
4.0 9.0
0. 5 14. 3
0.7 5 . .7
0.5 12.4
0. 4 19. 3
0.4 19.2
0.2 6.2
1.3 6.8
1.7 5.0
0.5 25.8
0.5 9-0
3.6 7.3
0.9 75.0
0.9 56.9
0.3 12.4
0.2 9. 7
0.3 0.3
0.1 2.8


Maid
29,970
9,430
9 ,730
250
1 1 ,990
19,740
7,230
8,450
11, 170
12 .svn
120
13.700
14,410
9,980
14,331
10,150
1,580
309
10,260
7,000
5,960
8.780
79
143
6,946
9,330
7,950
9,670
1,800
4,820
3,730
8,880
8,020
10,020
1,370
10,960
13,990
9,910
9,520
10,950
3,720
22,030
15,690
19,030
15,620


City
1 .400
1 .470
402
2,300
1 , 180
2,780
841
390
593
514
1 , 370
1,665
1, 180
749
567
556
532
682
1,400
731
1 ,060
709
738
1,050
1,280
1, 140
642
871
783
912
1,950
727
327
160
943
1,160
1,130
2,080
423
248
855
824
1,040
831
319
45 P.M.

Tutal
31 , iTO
10,900
10, 130
2,550
1 J, 170
22,520
8,070
8,840
1 1, 760
13 ,OBO
1,490
15.390
15.590
10,730
14,900
10,710
2, 110
991
11,660
7,730
7,020
9,490
817
1, 190
8,230
10,470
8,590
10, 540
2, 540
5, 730
5,680
9,610
8,350
10, 180
2,313
12,120
15, 120
11,990
9,940
11,200
4,580
22,850
16, 730
19,860
15,940

R.-marks
(6)
(?)
(6)
(8)


-------
                           TABLE 3

          CHARACTERISTICS OF TYPICAL WASTEWATERS
                                Citrus Wastewater
 Combined
Wastewater
Constituent
BOD (5-day), mg/1
Solids:
Suspended, mg/1
Settleable, ml/1
Nutrients, mg/1:
Nitrogen (total)
Phosphorus (total)
BOD: Nutrient Ratio:
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
pH value
City 1966-67 1967-68 1966-67 1967-68
Sewage Season Season Season Season
139 1470 1044 782 409
149 144 196 148 183
6 60 20 21 8
17.2
7.9
31:1
57:1
8.2 8.4^ 8.0^ *) 8.0 7.9
Subject to extreme variation.
                           T-6

-------
                   TABLE 4




        NUTRIENT LEVELS AND REMOVALS
BOD.-Nutrient Ratio
Sample
Date
1967
Dec 14
16
20
23
27
29
1968
Jan 3
5
10
12
17
19
24
26
31
Feb 2
7
12
14
16
22
24
28
Raw Combined
Wastewater
Nitrogen

39:1
31
33
33
16
39

33
34
25
30
37
24
42
33
42
43
46
-
27
30
36
30
28
Phosphorus

26:1
17
66
60
29
78

53
62
30
63
75
71
77
63
88
80
88
-
49
61
56
69
65
Dosed(1)
Wastewater
Phosphorus

97:1
79
45
44
23
55

46
53
27
52
61
55
60
51
71
66
72
-
40
51
46
53
47
Removal. %
Nitro
Clarifier

89
92
92
95
94
92

95
93
94
94
85
70
-
72
12
60
69
67
64
87
-
13
22
gen
Pond

79
90
91
94
93
91

93
92
94
95
93
95
86
85
90
87
76
82
77
85
69
74
66
Phosphorus'"*)
Clarifier

63
66
40
39
71
40

84
86
83
85
84
41
-
76
41
71
75
45
63
67
7
4
39
Pond

61
49
44
48
62
59

70
75
89
79
86
75
68
60
75
74
65
72
65
65
54
36
37
                  T-7

-------
                             TABLE 4
                            (continued)

                NUTRIENT  LEVELS AND REMOVALS
      BOD : Nutrient   Ratio

    Raw  Combined   Dosed
Removal,   %
Sample
Date
1968 -
Mar 1
6
8
13
Apr 3
5
10
12
17
26
May 3
17
24
Average
Wastewater Wastewater
Nitrogen
(continued)
30
25
14
14
29
33
-
31
23
33
26
31
40
31:1
Phosphorus Phosphorus

84 65
61 54
25 24
47 41
75
89
-
53
49
65
62
76
94
57:1<2) 53:1
Nitr
Clarifier

44
90
86
13
-
82
20
71
64
60
70
76
60
69
og en
Pond

74
79
75
50
-
39
61
32
49
57
55
52
51
76
Phosphorus
Clarifier

-
85
83
37
-
21
20
-
41
25
80
34
15
53
(3)
Pond

41
48
58
34
21
26
40
6
41
14
54
34
39
53
Raw combined wastewater dosed with phosphoric acid through April 2, 1968.
Average through March 13, 1 968 only, 59:1.
Based on dosed wastewater from December 14, 1967 - May 24, 1968.
                            T-8

-------
                                                      TABLE  5

                                   ANALYSES FOR  NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS
                                                   (Results in mg/1)


        R_a«r   Combined   Wast«w_ate_r	CU_rifier    Effluent       _Qxidation   Pond  Effluent
„    ,   Nitrogen, as ~               BQD  Nitrogen, as_N                  BOD  Nitrogen, as K                 BOD
 oTte   NH3  Org. ~NO3~ Phos.lU SS<2>  May  NHj  Org.  NOj_ Pho..tD  SS
-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
FIGURES

-------
                                   FIGURE
              0
-------
                                                    FIGURE 2
        TTl
  LXD^af0<^TN<7
  L4K§JMl££ILid£
B ' ?.^I3 SB
-^ ^^^= F^V'
                                                   Lake
                                               IA COMPANY
                                               f Florido

                                              AND EIDSNESS, INC

-------
                                                                                                                                       4 HOUM
oooe
PULP • KB. •V-PmOUGT>

VAPOR                             •••••••••••

UNCt NOT LAMLE0 Oil STMMUZEO ARC U»EO WATE1I
                                                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                                                           <=
                                                                                                                                                           SO
                                                                                                                                                           m

                                                                                                                                                           CO

-------
 cur _
SEIAtE
                                                              PARSHALL
                                                                FLUME
   CITRUS IASTEIATEH _
  FROI PlWPinii STATION
        AERATION BASINS
"f:gSgi
•<:-S  >3~
" > 5 "*  ° y "
°*"?>is
:gf=  o 3s
"ilz|S«
  s      > i-
                                           (PHOSPHOAIC  \
                                          ACID STORACE  j
                                 -OpH RECORDER
                                                                                                               HEAD
                                                                                                               B01
                                                                                               o
                                                     CHLORINE FROI _
                                                    I-TOM GOUT*I HERS
                                                                     SPLITTER
                                                                      ton

,
:R
CLARIFIERS
(21

1
H.
r
                                                                                         CHLORINE
                                                                                         ESIDUIL
                                                                                       -JESIDU





                                                                                       PtRSHtLL
                                                                                        FLUU
                                                                                   HASTE SLU06E
                                                                                                                                       OIClSItRS
                                                                                                                                                                             1
                                                                                                                                 © -  KENBISON
                                                                                                                                      OUTOIUTIC SAIPLER
                                                                                                                                      (FLOU PIOnillTIONtL)
                                                                                                                                                 011 DAT I ON POND
                                                                                                                                                           >_TO SLUDGE
                                                                                                                                                            OR)INC tltS
_ TO
 LAKE

-------
                                                                                                   FIGURE  5
                                    DAILY  OPERATION
                                              RECORD
City of Leesburg
Sewage Treatment Plant
                                                    24-hr,  period ending on:
                                            	,	,  19	
                                            Weekday    Month    Day    Year
    FLOW  DATA   (Figures in thousand gallons, as recorded on totalizers.
                    Readings taken at	M each day.)
                   Raw Minute Maid
                    (Citrus) Waste
    Present Day

    Previous Day

    Difference
                                                  Raw City Sewage
                                                            Total Flow
                                                         (Clarifier Effluent)
    RECIRCULATED  SLUDGE

    Present Day

    Previous Day

    Difference
    % Of Total Flow
                         WASTE SLUDGE - (Hours pumping into each)
                                        Head Box
                         Pump No. 1

                         Pump No. 2

                         Total Hours
                                                      Pond
                                                              Thickener
    PHOSPHORIC ACID  FED:
Pump #1
    Present Day

    Previous Day

    Difference
                                                   Pump Setting
                                                     #1     #2
                            TOTAL:
                                                                 CHLORINE FED:
                                          Cylinder Weight, Ibs:

                                          Prev. Day
                                          Pres. Day

                                          Difference
                                                                         Avg. Residual
                                                                            Chlorine
                                                                           Maintained
                                                                                  mg/1
                                                                            TOTAL:
    ROUTINE  SAMPLING  AND TESTING RESULTS
                                                                      TEST
     Sampling
      Point
Type  of
 Sample
    Raw Sewage       Cent.  Composite

    Raw Citrus         "       "

    Combined Waste   Constructed
                      grab-
                                     M
    Aerator Eff.
    Clarifier Eff.
    Return Sludge
                                    _M

                                     M
                      grab-
                                     M
                                     M
                                     M
    Pond Effluent      Comp. of	grabs
                    Temp
                     °C
                                                   _E5_
D. Oxy.
5-day BOD
   mg/1
                                                                           -r
                  3ett. Solids
                      ml/1
   Susp.  Solids
Tot,  mg/11 % Volatile
    REMARKS:
                                                   F-5
                                                                                    Operator

-------
     24(0-1
     2200
     2000-
     1600-
   Z UOO-
   o1400-
      1200-
o> 3 1000-
    0  eoo—
       600-
       400-
       200-
 *   I
ijll!

'ill
                                r-y
                                           r-r
                                                          WEEKLY PERIOD       APRIL 1967 - JUNE 1988
MINUTE MAIO

CITY

-------
      20 i
      II -
    £14-
    5 iH
    in
      10 -
•M,
       2 -
r
                                            TOTAL OESI8N 10*0
                                        r
                                           MINUTE 11*10 DESIGN LOAD
                                      nn
                                    i^^^^n
                  r*. r>   fa, *• p*
 c  «•"
flH;:
V'lii
                                                WEEKLY PERIOD      APRIL 1967 - JUNE 1968
                                                                             MINUTE N»IO
                                                                             CITY

-------
850—1
600-
550-
500-
450-
400 —
330-
300-
250-
200-
150-
100-
         CD  tO «B  CO
rfSff

i!J*
                 WEEKLY PERIOD       DECEMBER 1967 - MAY 1968
                                                                                                                                                               tf>

                                                                                                                                                               *>
                                                                                                                                                               m

                                                                                                                                                               oo

-------
       6000—
       5500—
    r5000—
      14500—
    S 4000—
-n  g 3500-
I   2S
  (O  (D  r-  (O • —  «» in  •   •  u>  *•*  o
!»}  f^.  _-  f«g  CM  •* ~-  «— CN f*O>^-  f*  <*>

^intntnm
                                                               —  CM
                                                                                                                             r~  —  CN 
-------
O   z
        490 —i
        400 -
        350 -
        300 -
        250 -
        200 —
        150 -
        100 -
        50 -
                              III

                          ID ID (D I"-
             m o •  «  •—
             r* m r»  v-  N
                                                  WEEKLY PERIOD      APRIL 1967 - JUNE 1988
.1
ll.i
                                                                                                                     10 «n tn
                                                                                                                                    a>

-------
1.9-
8.0—
5.5—
5.0-
4.5 —
4.0 —
B "
z 3.3-
iU
£
o
S 3.0-
»
0 .
v>
v>
= 2.5-
2. 0-
1.5-
1.0 —
0.5-
0
"*
• m
0*

z <
— i m
3D SD
>. »
— < n
*" m
















(D <0 P- t t

















3 r-
3 i

















»^.
to

















^- r*
CD (0

















^
€»
















0
3
—
00
















!O
—
n
















0 t
* •
N
39 -
















D
-

















0
B .

















D a
n CN
- *N
- M
















CO

















r- c
ID
< e
n .

















D «
M <

















D
n
- <











•-





o
o
•s.

















r- (O
< O

















CD

















O CO
*>« o

















•e
 CO
D <0 CO
M cn to
- — c*

















*0 CO CO CD
CD CO ' '
. to «•>
N 0» — CM

WEEKLY PERIOD        APRIL 1967  - JUNE  19B8

-------
B.5-
6.0—
5.5 —
5.0—
4 . 5 —
4.0 —
E
z 3.5-
(O
X '
o
•n g 3.0-
•w _|
N> 5
v>
0 2.5-
Z.O-
1.5-
1.0-
„ 0.5-
30 '
* *§«
f!|?*° o o-

K at -las
o — m

















r
c
<

















o o
•) C
M <•
» *

















? f
a
y
t f
r u

















r
* c
3
1 M

















- f*
O 0
V —
- o
rt ir
















Hill
to f* to to to **• »
i (O i i - «J (
«s* •* — — c* «>* <

















1—
•^ co
O '
1 to
A —

















r-- *•
to (i
<•> e

















a r
t
3
"> t

















r
— (
D
C
J •

















•- P*
o to
r> o
- CM

















(D
r-
CM

















r^
^ CD
D .

















P. r
— C

















- p.
» —
M
C

















- r- to
X (O i
• in
- OB —
» O O

















™ ? ;
rsi at
M CM «

















- u
o
r> »-

















> to a
a> a
~- c-

















3 r^ «
3 ' <
-we
















1
o co a
3 P- ^
- — r
M CM C
















1
3 tO
•* CW

















a
>

















a t
r
t

















D
- <
M t

















O
' CD
B i
v* *r

















 r

















a
D
















ll,
s oo CD a
r r- oo • c
CM tsi in T
















|
O «D «O
< ,
<4 a> to
- — (SI '

















a
0 0)
i i c
•M at .

















o to
O 0
"
-
-
-
-
-
•
-

p
-
•
—
-
-
-
-


                                                                                                       en
WEEKLY PERIOD       APRIL 1987 - JUNE 1868

-------
22 —
20 —
18 —
I 2 —
                         i
H
i
-i
                                             <£> r-~  ID  to  (Or~(O  to to (O
                                                                                      ui CD to  r«  ID
                                                                                                                               ID  •  O
                                                                                                                                                  to  to  to to  to  co  
-------
                       FIGURE
    TYPICAL WEEKLY pH RECORD
       CITRUS WSTEUTER
   THE COCA-COLA COMPANY
        FOODS DIVISION
        t««iburg, Florida
BLACK, CROW  AND  EIDSNESS, INC.
          Enfineert

-------
        50-1
        40—
        3J—
        SO-
      •B
      ua .«_





?M
<»    110-
        1S-
        10-
Jl'lt m       »i»»»i
t||lB n^     «^ioinininBvBiDr*p»^r*



"I  1 "5
                                                            VEEKLY  PERIOD       APRIL 1967 - JUNE  1988
                                                                                                                                                    AERATION  (AtlN

-------
       200-,
       110-
       180-
    2 140-
       120-
    _ 100-
o»   ,   to-


    I    •
    ui
    «  (0-
       20-
                                                                                                                                 I  I  I I  I  I I
                                                          WEEKLY  PERIOD      APRIL 1997 - JUNE 1988
                                                                                                                                                                O>

-------
     100—1
      90 —
      60 -
       70  -
    geo -
       50 -
    a
    o
    oo
       40 -
       30 —
       20 -
       10 -
                      ^  H oo   §  •• •» to  <   i  10  **>  o
                                        '   ,   *  '  '   '  '««'«*o»«e*«o»«»ior*^  —  •
I    MA
                                                                   WEEKLY  PERIOD        APRIL  1867 -  JUNE 1966

-------
      100—1
       90-
       10—
    X 70—
    UJ
    Cl
    ^ 60-
    M 8°~


L  i
00  e «0-
    o
    2
    VI
    3 30-
       20-
       10-
>t'l!'  »
 llllo*
•"1:1
                                                                                                                   _i,e,^-<>i».io--««
                                                                                                                    ,  I  ill  I  •<  I   •  •  JL i .1 i
                                                       WEEKLY PERIOD      APRIL 1BB7  -  JUNE 1966

-------
     550—1
     500—
     450—
     400-
     350—
     I 300-
<0   S 250-
                                 I....11111
ml








          n o  •• -
          <« •* in in in -in to 
-------
 80
 50—
 45-
u. 40-
 35-
 30-
  25-
  20-
  13-
  10-
  5-
LUDGE WASTAG
IHt COCA-CMA C^MMNf
•DOMMTMOM
*—*-^K-l*.
*CI. MOW WO »ti«IL MC
        -T
^.^JM^MM^
u
J
**
          w^ta»l0pH'<0tO
          < -to. i •  i(o* * .« . ,

          — «»  - t- « in  • < to  n o i r*)Or^'
                              *
                                r*
-------
   e.s—i
   8,0—
   5.5—
   5.0-
   4.5—
   4.0-
   3.5"
eg
>-
x
   2.5-
  2.0-
   1.5-
   1.0-
  0.5-
                                                                                                                                                           I-/
                                                           (0  CO (O
                n in tn co
                                                                       v> f* at  • w


                                                         WEEKLY PERIOD        APRIL 1867 - JUNE 1966

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
APPENDIX

-------
                            LABORATORY STUDIES
                     1966-67 CITRUS  PROCESSING SEASON

                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY, FOODS  DIVISION
                             LEESBURG,  FLORIDA
                        Federal Water Quality Administration
                            Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
         During December 1966, January, and February 1967, a series of laboratory tests
were conducted at the Phelps Research Laboratory. The purposes of these tests were:

         1.        To develop a biological floe acclimated to a 50-50 mixture of sewage
                  and citrus waste;

         2.        To establish the biological oxidation rate (Kj) for citrus waste and for a
                  50-50 mixture of citrus waste and domestic sewage from the Leesburg
                  area;

         3.        To determine the  effect  of various  mixed liquor suspended solids
                  (MLSS) concentrations on the  removal of  BOD and the buildup of
                  sludge mass.
Test  No.  1

Purpose:  Acclimation of a biological floe.

Procedure:

         Twelve liters of a 50-50 mixture of degritted Leesburg sewage and citrus waste
were placed in a  15-liter container. One liter  of returned  activated  sludge from the
University of Florida Campus Sewage Treatment Plant was added and the mixture aerated
for 24 hours.

         At the end of 24 hours the air supply was cut off and the mixture allowed to
settle for 30 minutes. Eight liters of the  supernatant were decanted from the top, leaving 5
liters of sludge mixture. Eight liters of a  50-50 sewage-citrus waste mixture were added and
the air supply turned on.

         This procedure was repeated daily for two and one-half months.

         The mixed liquor suspended solids settled rapidly and no odor problems were
experienced.
                                    A-l

-------
         In an effort to reduce the amount of travel between Gainesville and Leesburg,
degritted sewage from the campus plant was substituted for the Leesburg sewage at the end
df the first week. No problems were experienced.

         Samples of citrus waste were obtained periodically from the head box at the new
Leesburg wastewater  treatment plant.  Samples were  collected in  13-gallon carboys,
transported to Gainesville, and stored at 4°C. until used. The 50-50 mixture was made up
daily.

         On several occasions, the pH of the citrus waste was found to range as high as
12.0 to 12.6. After mixing with sewage, the pH was lowered to 7.0 plus or minus, by the
addition of sulfuric acid. No attempt was made to raise the pH if it was on the acid side of
the scale.

Results:

         The biological floe developed without difficulty. No odors were experienced and
the floe settled rapidly.
Test  No.   2

Purpose: The determination of biological  oxidation rates for citrus waste and a 50-50
         mixture of domestic sewage and citrus waste.
Procedure:

         A sample of Leesburg citrus waste was collected on December 10, 1966. Serial
BOD dilutions were set up and incubated at 20°C. for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12 days. The
results were as follows:
Time
(Days)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
12
BOD
(mg/1)
0
95
472
(590)*
650
766
857
907
Calculated BOD
Kj = -0.106 La
0
246
442
592
710
804
877
1081
Values
= 1141








     *No dilution within range. Estimated.
                                     A-2

-------
         Judging from the difference between the first and second day BODs, a significant
lag appears. This is probably due to the fact that the citrus waste was seeded with normal
domestic sewage and the sewage biota had to be acclimated to the citrus waste.

         Using the slope method suggested  by Thomas, values for  Kj and  La were
calculated and found to be as follows:

                                  K! = 0.106

                                  La=1141mg/l

         Using these values, the theoretical BOD values were calculated and included in the
above table.

         Samples of Leesburg citrus waste and  Leesburg domestic sewage were collected on
December 29, 1966. Serial dilutions were set up on a 50-50 mixture and incubated at 20°C.
for 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 10 days. The results were as follows:
Time
(Days)
0
1
2
3
4
6
10
BOD
(mg/1)
0
468
736
1446
1544
1792
2312
Calculated BOD
Kj= -0.101 La
0
502
880
1226
1475
1833
2199
Values
= 2438







         Using the slope method suggested by Thomas, Kj and La values were calculated
and found to be:

                                  K! = -0.091

                                  La=2623

         The  graphical method suggested by Thomas and Tsiroglou's daily difference
method were also used to calculate Kj and L&.

         A summary of the values is given below:

              Method                             Kj            La

       Thomas'Slope Method                    0.091         2623

       Thomas' Graphical Method                0.088         2644

       Tsiroglou's Daily Difference
       Method                                 0.125         2048

              Average                          0.101         2438

                                    A-3

-------
         Using the average values for K j and La, the theoretical BODs were calculated.
Test    No.   3

Purpose:  To determine the effects  of various mixed liquor  suspended solids (MLSS)
         concentrations on the removal of BOD and the buildup of sludge mass.
Procedure:

         Four 15-liter containers were filled with 12 liters of a 50-50 mixture of Leesburg
citrus waste and domestic sewage. Varying amounts of an acclimated biological floe were
added to each unit and the units aerated for 24 hours. Samples were withdrawn from each
unit at  predetermined time intervals  and the BOD and suspended solids determined. A
summary of the results is given below:

                 Test  A        Test   B         Test  C         Test  D
    Time          250 ml           500 ml           1000 ml          1500 ml
   Hours        BOD    MLSS    BOD    MLSS    BOD    MLSS    BOD    MLSS

      0         1032    1084    1213     1208     899      1240    1088    1268
      2          645    1150      599     1160     554      1310     511    1140
      4          506    1200      500     1210     432      1290     410    1270
      6          398    1180      373     1300     336      1290     329    1260
      8          338    1180      286     1170     244      1220     224    1320
     12          165    1020      122     1490     117      1340      61    1400
     24          115    1110      102     1210      97      1310      79    1300
                                   A-4

-------
                          TABLE  OF CONTENTS
                                 PART 0
SECTION 1       PURPOSE AND SCOPE
SECTION 2       GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WASTEWATERS
                2.01  The Coca—Cola Company Foods Division
                2.02  Adams Packing Company
                2.03  City of Auburndale

SECTION 3       CITRUS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
                3.01  General Description
                3.02  Statistical Study
                3.03  Design Criteria

SECTION 4       PLAN OF INVESTIGATION
                4.01  General
                4.02  Sampling Procedures
                4.03  Testing Procedures

SECTION 5       PLANT OPERATION
                5.01  Citrus Processing Season, 1968—69
                5.02  Problems Encountered
Page Number
     1
   3-5
     3
     4
     4

   7-9
     7
     8
     8

   11 -12
     11
     11
     12

   13-15
     13
     14
SECTION 6       HYACINTH STUDY
                 6.01   General
                 6.02   Nutrient Uptake
                 6.03   Hyacinth Plant Characteristics
                 6.04   Pressed Liquor
   17-20
     17
     17
     19
     20
SECTION 7       ECOLOGICAL STUDY
                 7.01   General
                 7.02   Auburndale Aerated Lagoon System
   21 -23
     21
     21

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                   PART H
                                  (continued)
SECTION 8
SECTION 9
SECTION 10
KINETIC STUDY
8.01  General
8.02  Laboratory Study
RESULTS
9.01  General
9.02  Hydraulic Loadings
9.03  Organic Loadings
9.04  COD/BOD Ratios
9.05  BOD and COD Removals
9.06  Suspended Solids
9.07  Dissolved Oxygen
9.08  Temperature and pH Values
9.09  Nutrient Removals
9.10  Reuse of Treatment Pknt Effluents in
      Citrus Processing Plant

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
10.01 Hydraulic Loadings
10.02 Organic Loadings and Removals
10.03 COD/BOD Ratios
10.04 Dissolved Oxygen
10.05 Nutrient Removal
10.06 Reuse of Treatment Plant Effluents in
      Citrus Processing Plant
 10.0? Cost of Treatment
Page Number
    25
    25
    25

  27-29
    27
    27
    27
    28
    28
    28
    28
    28
    29

    29

  31-34
    31
    31
    32
    32
    33
                                                                      33
                                                                      34
                                  11

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                 PART H
                                (continued)

                                                              Page Number
SECTION 11      AERATED LAGOON DESIGN                       35 - 36
                11.01  General                                      35
                11.02  Experimental Data                             35
                11.03  Design Criteria                                36

SECTION 12      SUGGESTED DESIGN PARAMETER
                EXTENDED AERATION                            37 - 38
                12.01  General                                      37
                12.02  Preliminary Background Data                     37
                12.03  Design Parameters                              37
                                HI

-------
                                    TABLES
                                    PART II

                                                                    Page Number

Table 1            Wastewater Pond Characteristics                         T - 1

Table 2            Wastewater Flow Data                                  T - 2

Table 3            Daily Area Precipitation                                T - 9

Table 4            Raw Wastewater Analyses at Weir No. 1                   T - 10

Table 5            Raw Wastewater Analyses at Darby Avenue                T — 13

Table 6            Raw Wastewater Analyses at Weir No. 2                   T - 14

Table 7            Wastewater Pond Characteristics and Equipment            T — 15

Table 8            Treatment Plant Characteristics                          T -16

Table 9            Average Analyses 2.4-Day Detention                     T - 18

Table 10          Hyacinth Pond Microbiota                              T -19

Table 11          Average Analysis 5-Day Detention                       T - 20

Table 12          Pressed Liquor Analyses                                T — 21

Table 13          Auburndale Biota                                      T - 22

Table 14          Average Weekly Operating Data
                  1968-69 Citrus Processing Season                        T - 24

Table 15          Design Characteristics — Aerated Lagoon
                  System                                               T - 25

Table 16          Summary of Operations 5 MGD Flow Rate                T - 26

Table 17          Summary of Operations 10 MGD Flow Rate               T - 29

Table 18          Summary of Average Monthly Operations
                  1968-69 Citrus Processing Season                        T - 32

Table 19          Summary of Nitrogen and Phosphorous Analyses           T — 33

Table 20          Monthly Average Data — Wastewater Treatment
                  Plant                                                 T - 34

-------
                                   FIGURES
                                    PARTH
                                                                    Page Number

Figure 1           Location Map — The Coca—Cola Company
                  Auburndale, Florida                                   F — 1

Figure 2           Vicinity and Location Map — The Coca—Cola
                  Company — Auburndale, Florida                        F — 2

Figure 3           Wastewater Treatment Plant                            F — 3

Figure 3a          Wastewater Sources - Citrus Concentrate
                  Plant and Hi "C" Plant                                 F - 3a

Figure 3b          Wastewater Sources — Adams Packing Company           F — 3b

Figure 4           Daily Average Flow at Weir No. 2
                  1966-67 Citrus Processing Season                       F — 4

Figure 5           Daily Peak Flow at Weir No. 2
                  1966-67 Citrus Processing Season                       F — 5

Figure 6           Daily Minimum Flow at Weir No. 2
                  1966—67 Citrus Processing Season                       F — 6

Figure 7           BOD Load at Weir No. 2
                  1966-67 Citrus Processing Season                        F — 7

FigureS           BOD:Nitrogen  Ratio at Weir No. 2
                  1966—67 Citrus Processing Season                        F — 8

Figure 9           BODrPhosphorus   Ratio at Weir No. 2
                  1966—67 Citrus Processing Season                        F — 9

Figure 10         BOD Removal Rate                                    F - 10

Figure 11         Daily Operation Record                                F — 11
                                    Vll

-------
                                 APPENDICES
                                    PART II
Appendix 1       Grab Sample Analyses Taken During January
                 and February

Appendix 2       Kinetic Studies — Auburndale Plant

Appendix 3       Kinetic Studies — Auburndale Plant

Appendix 4       Kinetic Studies — Leesburg Pknt

Appendix 5       Theoretical Considerations — Aerated
                 Lagoon Design
Page Number


   A-l

   A-2

   A-3

   A-4


   A-5
                                   IX

-------
                                    SECTION 1

                              PURPOSE AND SCOPE
         The purpose  of this study was to investigate treatment of a relatively large
quantity of weak citrus  wastes  from  two  processing plants; namely, The Coca—Cola
Company Foods Division and Adams Packing Company, along with the treated effluent
from  the domestic waste treatment plant of the City of Auburndale. The investigation
included loading parameters, evaluation of plant design, required nutrient levels, operational
control parameters, and a study of the ecology of the raw waste stream, the entire treatment
process, and finally, of the receiving stream. Kinetic studies and nutrient removal by aquatic
plants were also included in this investigation.

         Operational parameters  such as minimum dissolved oxygen levels, excess sludge
buildup,  and  sludge  recirculation rates could not be  fully  investigated  as  previously
anticipated due to the inadequacy of the sludge collection and return system. Because of
this, the  plant could not be effectively operated as an extended aeration plant and had to be
converted to operate as an aerated  lagoon system. The scope of this investigation was
broadened to include design parameters to treat weak citrus wastes by means of an aerated
lagoon system.

         Further study objectives included the possible  use of water hyacinths in cattle
feed and the possible reuse of treated wastewater in the citrus processing plant.

         Velocity distribution studies in the lagoons using Rhodamine-B dye as a tracer
were unsuccessful due to adsorption of the dye by high solids concentrations in the lagoon
system.

-------
                                   SECTION 2

                  GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WASTEWATERS


2.01     THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

         Wastewater characteristics and  sources are described generally in the Introduction
to Part I of this report. Specific sources and characteristics of individual waste streams were
not included in the scope of this investigation.

         Project  location and vicinity  maps  are shown in Figure  1  and Figure 2,
respectively. Sources  of  wastewater at  the Auburndale plant are shown in  Figure 3 a.
Measurements of volumes and strengths  of wastes from various processes within the plant
will be  begun by The Coca-Cola  Company during the 1969-70 citrus processing season.
Some investigative work to trace sources of overload throughout the study period indicated
that wastes from  feed  mill,  juice extractor, Hi  C  plant,  and  oil recovery processes
contributed significantly to the total waste load. Some typical COD values from both The
Coca—Cola Company  and Adams  Packing Company are exhibited in Appendix  1. These
values were on grab samples taken during January and February, 1969, and are by no means
to be construed to be typical for all process plants nor all operating conditions.

         The  citrus processing season  at Auburndale usually extends from December
through July, depending upon crop conditions. Processing is slackened or halted for a short
period in March for the midseason changeover to later maturing fruit. During the changeover
and off season the principal wastes are  from the repacking, ades and bases, and beverage
operations. The wastewater loadings and volumes during these operations are relatively light.

         Wastewater from the concentrate plant is screened to remove peel, pulp, seeds,
and other suspended material. Gross solids are also removed from wastewater from the fruit
unloading and preparation operations and the barometric condensers. Unlike the Leesburg
processing  plant, the two wastewater streams are not segregated; therefore, the processing
wastes yield large volumes of moderately low-strength wastewater.

         Wastewater volume and  strength vary  considerably  depending upon processing
operations. Poor operation in the feed mill, pressed liquor and oil recovery systems have a
detrimental effect on  the biological treatment process. Peel oil is  toxic and acts as a
bacteriostatic agent, greatly affecting both the biological process and the major operational
control parameter; namely, the BOD.

         Variations in pH  values are  caused by discharges of caustic  during  cleanup
operations. However, due to the large dilution, these variations are  slight and pH values
average about 7.0.

         In general, the wastewaters are  deficient in nitrogen and/or phosphate compounds
required for optimum biological treatment.

-------
         Total citrus wastewater flow from The Coca—Cola Company at Auburndale is
approximately 20 mgd. Biological and chemical oxygen demands are of the order of 120
mg/1 and 210 mg/1, respectively. The wastewater is discharged into Lake Lena Run and the
entire creek is taken into the wastewater treatment facility.

         The citrus processing plant at Auburndale operates on a  24-hour per day basis
during the crop season. Daily production levels during the 1968—1969 processing season
averaged 50,000 boxes of fruit.
2.02     ADAMS PACKING COMPANY

         Wastewater characteristics and sources from Adams are essentially the same as
those of The Coca-Cola Company. However, in addition to the concentrate process, Adams
includes wastewater from a sectioning operation in fruit  processing and  a single-strength
operation in juice processing which produce about 3 mgd  of wastewater and average COD
values of the order of 500 mg/1. Sources of wastewater at the Adams Packing Company are
shown in Figure 3b.

         Adams' processing season at Auburndale usually extends from November through
July with a brief slackening during midseason.

         Wastewater  from  the concentrate plant,  fruit  unloading and  preparation
operations, and barometric  condensers are not  segregated. Gross solids are removed by
screening prior to discharge into Lake Lena Run. The process yields large volumes of
moderately low-strength wastewater deficient in nitrogen and/or phosphate compounds.

         Wastewater volume and strength have the same degree of variability as those from
The Coca-Cola Company and for the same general reasons.

         Total wastewater  flow from Adams at Auburndale is approximately  10 mgd.
Biological  and  chemical  oxygen demands are approximately 190 mg/1 and 290 mg/1,
respectively. pH values average about 7.0.

         Adams' processing plant at Auburndale operates on a 24-hour per day basis during
the principal crop  season. In slack and off seasons principal wastes are from repackaging
operations which yield  relatively light flows and organic loadings. Daily production levels
during the 1968—1969 processing season averaged 60,000 boxes of fruit.
2.03     CITY OF AUBURNDALE

         The population of Auburndale in 1969 was  7,030. A population of 11,396 is
expected by 1980. The economy  of Auburndale is based almost entirely on the citrus
processing industry.

         The City  of Auburndale  sewage treatment  plant receives waste  from  both
domestic and industrial sources. The average daily flows are of the order of 762,650 gpd and
influent BOD's average 225 mg/1.

-------
         Industrial wastes from certain manufacturing  complexes  contain  appreciable
amounts of formaldehyde and other toxic compounds. This greatly affects the efficiency of
the biological process and adds an additional organic load and possibly toxic substances to
the treatment plant effluent. Effluent from the domestic treatment plant is discharged
through an 18-inch outfall extending 2,800 feet below the city treatment plant into Lake
Lena Run above the citrus treatment plant. The effluent from the city treatment plant is
included in the wastewater received by the citrus wastewater treatment facility.

         The effluent wastewater exhibits BOD's of approximately  75 mg/1. The  flow
averages 762,500 gallons per day and contains appreciable quantities of both nitrogen and
phosphate compounds.

-------
                                    SECTION  3

                   CITRUS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
3.01     GENERAL DESCRIPTION

         The plant was designed for  extended aeration of unclarified wastewater with
completely mixed recycled sludge. Two shallow oxidation ponds (in series) were provided
for further polishing of the effluent before discharge into Lake Lena Run. A schematic flow
diagram is given in Figure 3.

         The plant  consists  of four  unlined, earthen  ponds  covering  an area  of
approximately 23.6 acres. Citrus  processing wastewaters (including the effluent from  the
City of Auburndale) are delivered, by gravity, to the treatment site by means of Lake Lena
Run. A weir is provided below the treatment plant intake so that the entire run flows into
the aeration pond. Flow rates exceeding  30 mgd (with 40 percent recirculation) overflow
the weir and that portion of  the flow bypasses the treatment plant. The aeration pond
covers  3.15 acres, is  11.7  feet deep, has  a capacity of 9.7  million gallons (MMG), and is
equipped with six 75-horsepower floating mechanical aerators/3' A  float control in  the
aeration pond activates each of three transfer pumps which lift the mixed liquor from  the
aeration pond to the second pond. The transfer pumps have a total pumping capacity of 42
mgd. Two pumps are equipped with 50 horsepower motors and one pump is equipped with
a 30 horsepower motor. The two larger pumps each have a pumping capacity of 17 mgd and
the smaller has a capacity of 8 mgd. The mixed liquor from the aeration pond flows through
a vented 42-inch discharge line into a distribution trough in  the second earthen pond. This
pond serves as a clarifier and has a dual function; namely, sludge settling and collection. The
settling and collection section  of the pond covers approximately 2.72  acres, is 14.2 feet
deep, and has a capacity of 9.2 MMG. The remainder of the pond covers 4.1 acres, is  9.7
feet deep, and has a capacity of 11.6 MMG. Sludge collection and recycling is accomplished
by suction-type sludge pickups into a vented 36-inch  gravity line back to the aeration pond.

         Metering devices' ' include Dall tubes (installed in both the 42-inch transfer line
and the 36-inch gravity return sludge line), transmitters and continuous flow recorders with
totalizers.  Flow measurements on the 42-inch transfer line represent the total flow (plant
influent and recirculated sludge); whereas those measurements on the 36-inch gravity line
represent only the recirculated sludge. The daily plant influent is obtained by difference.

         The effluent from the settling  pond flows by gravity into a third  earthen pond
which serves as an oxidation pond. This pond covers 6.85  acres, is 5.0 feet deep, and has a
capacity of 10.5 MMG. A  fourth earthen  pond (also  an oxidation pond) is gravity fed from
the third pond. An area of 6.85  acres is utilized with an average depth of 4.5 feet and a
capacity of 9.5 MMG. The pond effluent is discharged, without chlorination, into Lake Lena
Run.


         a Manufactured  by Yeomans Brothers Company, Melrose Park, 111.

           Manufactured  by B-I-F Division, Providence, R.I.

-------
         Flow control baffles were provided in each of the last three ponds to insure better
mixing within each pond and to prevent short circuiting of the treated effluents.

         Facilities were included for adding  both aqua ammonia and phosphoric acid as
supplemental nutrients. These are added to the mixed liquor in the aeration pond.

         No provisions were made for wasting or treating waste sludge. Sludge carryover
from the settling pond to the oxidation ponds will necessitate periodic dredging of one or
both of these ponds.

         A summary of wastewater pond characteristics is presented  hi Table 1.
3.02     STATISTICAL STUDY

         Weirs,  level  recorders, and automatic sampling devices were installed at points
indicated in Figure 2  to provide design data for Auburndale citrus wastewater treatment
facilities. Weir No. 1 was located in Lake Lena Run below Adams Packing Company. Wen-
No. 2 was located at Recker Highway and included flows from Adams Packing Company,
The Coca-Cola Company, and the City of Auburndale sewage treatment plant

         Flows were measured at the above described weirs throughout the 1966-67 citrus
processing season, and the results are given in Table 2. Area precipitation during the season
is described in Tables 2 and 3.  Statistical analyses were made for flows at Weir No.  2 as
shown in Figures 4,5, and 6.

         Organic loads (BOD) and  nutrient levels at Weir No. 2 were analyzed statistically
as shown in Figures 7,8, and 9.

         Composite samples were  collected and analyzed routinely at each  of the weirs
during the first half of the 1966-67 processing season, and two samples were collected at
Darby Avenue (Figure 2). Results of the analyses are given in Tables 4, 5, and 6.
3.03     DESIGN CRITERIA

         Basic design of these faculties involves the activated sludge (extended aeration)
process. Plant design criteria was partially based on a statistical study made during the
1966-67 citrus season. Design parameters were primarily based on a survey of the industry
by Fiske and Gay.^ They reported a combined volume from the two citrus processing plants
of approximately 25.5 mgd with a combined organic loading (COD) of 29,500 pounds.
Using the COD-BOD conversion factor suggested  by McNary,2 the 5-day, 20°C. BOD
strength would be of the order of 18,500 pounds per day. Design hydraulic and BOD
loadings of 30 mgd and 18,500 pounds per day, respectively, were assumed.
                                    8

-------
         A relatively inexpensive settling basur0'  was  substituted  for conventional
clarifiers to minimize construction costs.  Treatment  units  were arranged to  permit
wastewater transfer and sludge recirculation with a single, low cost pump station. The plant
will accommodate hydraulic loadings of 30 mgd with an additional 40 percent of this flow
as sludge recirculation.

         Plant characteristics were as follows:


         Plant influent, mgd:
                Average                                                15.6
                Maximum                                              30.0

         BOD concentration, mg/1                                        74

         BOD loading, Ibs/day                                        18,500

         Recirculated sludge, mgd                                   12.0 - 26.4

         Extended aeration:
                Mixed liquor suspended solids:
                  Concentration, mg/1 (ave)                             2,300
                  Under aeration,
                    Ibs/lb BOD                                           10

         Total plant area, acres                                          23.6

         Total detention time, days (ave)                                  3.2
         Further details of pond and treatment plant characteristics are described in Tables
7 and 8.

         Actual  data  collected during the  1968-69  citrus  processing season indicated
substantial  increases in the organic (BOD)  loadings.  This was due, in part, to unexpected
changes in processing  and increased production at both The Coca-Cola Company  and
Adams. Production levels during the 1969-1970 processing  season increased by 10,000
boxes of fruit per day and are expected to increase yearly by the same for the next few
years.
         0  See Section 5.02, first paragraph.

-------
                                    SECTION 4

                            PLAN OF INVESTIGATION
4.01     GENERAL

         Principal objectives of plant operation  during the  1968—69  citrus processing
season were to  demonstrate capabilities of the low cost plant and to determine favorable
operating procedures.

         The general plan  of experimentation involved the variables that were subject to
operational control. These were loading, nutrient level, and sludge recirculation rate. It was
planned to change one of these variables at a time, under optimum conditions, in a series of
tests covering the  1968—69 citrus processing  season. However, despite a wide variety of
operating procedures, the mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) concentration could not be
increased above about 200 mg/1. It was concluded prior to midseason that the settling basin
did not afford MLSS control because of an inadequate sludge collection system. Due to this
inadequacy, the plan of investigation had  to  be altered somewhat from the original plan
since the system was  operating as an aerated lagoon system rather than an activated sludge
system. Sludge recirculation rates were maintained at  100 percent of the influent flow and
the only control variables were hydraulic loadings and nutrient levels.

         Supplementary routine analyses for  nitrogen and  phosphorous concentrations in
the wastewater and pond effluents were made.

         Kinetic  studies were performed to determine BOD removal rate coefficients and
temperature coefficients which are necessary  in order to design an aerated lagoon system
(see Appendix 5).

         Experimentation included  an ecological  study throughout the treatment system
and also  the use of aquatic plants (hyacinths) for nutrient removal. Aquatic plants were
further studied for nutritional value and possible use in cattle feed.
4.02.     SAMPLING PROCEDURES

         Routine sampling of the combined citrus wastewater flow was accomplished by
means of a Chicago Pump Company "Tru—Test" sampler. Effluent flows from the settling
pond and Polishing Pond No. 2 were collected routinely by means of portable automatic
samplers.  Locations  of the sampling stations are indicated in  Figure  3. Samples  were
collected over 24—hour periods in polyethylene containers. Those samples collected in the
"Tru—Test" sampler  were maintained at 40° F.  in the refrigerated compartment of the
sampler throughout the 24—hour  period. Other samples were kept packed  in  ice  in  a
polystyrene cooler throughout the same sampling period.

         Grab samples were taken from the aeration pond effluent, Polishing  Pond No.  1
effluent, and recirculated sludge return line once  each 24—hour shift. Plant influent grab
samples were analyzed once each 8—hour shift for COD concentrations.
                                       11

-------
         Automatic samplers,  although  convenient,  do not  take truly  representative
samples due to the stringy solids in the waste. On several occasions analyses were made on
grab and automatic samples collected simultaneously. BOD, COD, and suspended solids
results generally were higher on the grab samples by 10 to 20 percent. However, all data
presented in this report were based on the automatic sampling procedures described in the
preceding paragraphs. Since the  data are consistent,  all efficiencies (ratios) are only slightly
affected; influent data may be slightly low.
4.03     TESTING PROCEDURES

         All  testing procedures were  in  accordance  with "Standard  Methods  for
Examination of Water and Wastewater," 12th Edition, APHA, AWWA, WPCF (1965).

         Routine sampling and testing were accomplished by the operating personnel of
The Coca-Cola Company Foods Division  wastewater treatment plant. A summary of the
tests conducted at the plant is shown in Figure 11. Training and supervision were provided
by Black, Crow and Eidsness, Inc.

         Weekly composite  samples  of  the plant influent, settling  pond effluent, and
Polishing Pond No.  2 effluent were analyzed for forms of nitrogen and total phosphates.
These samples were preserved with mercuric chloride to prevent changes  in the nitrogen
balance due to further biological activity. Nitrogen and phosphorous determinations were
made by Black,  Crow and Eidsness personnel on a Technicon AutoAnalyzer, Gainesville,
Florida. Samples were transported to the laboratory within 24 hours after collection.
                                          12

-------
                                   SECTION 5

                               PLANT OPERATION


5.01.     CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON, 1968-69

         Plant  construction was completed November, 1968.  Processing wastes  from
Adams and The Coca-Cola Company were received on November 14 and December 2,1968,
respectively. Although  citrus processing wastes  were  received and a detailed sampling
program initiated at the start of the 1968—69 season, the treatment plant facilities were not
fully operative until January 15, 1969. Between January 17 and 20,1969,60,000 gallons of
waste activated sludge from the Leesburg plant were added to the aeration pond in an effort
to rapidly build up the mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS). However, despite a wide
variety of operating procedures, the MLSS concentration could not be increased above 200
mg/1.  It was concluded in  February that the sludge collection system was inadequate and
that existing treatment facilities could not be operated as an extended aeration system. BOD
removals between December, 1968, and February,  1969, averaged about 62 percent and
MLSS concentrations averaged 67 mg/1. See Table 16 for average weekly operating data.

         Hydraulic loads during the outset  of the processing season were about one—half
the design capacity; however, organic loadings (BOD) were almost twice those anticipated.

         During March, 1969, the treatment plant was  set up to operate as an aerated
lagoon system as described in "Industrial Water Pollution Control" by W.W. Eckenfelder.3
The principal objectives during the remainder of the processing season were to determine
optimum operating conditions and to collect pertinent background data required for design
of an aerated lagoon system.

         The Coca-Cola Company halted operations on March 3,1969, for the mid-season
changeover to Valencias and resumed operations April 15, 1969.

         Reasonable control was  maintained over influent flows and recirculation rates
during the last phase of the research  program.  Influent flow rates were maintained at
approximately 5 mgd from May 1 through May  19, and at approximately 10 mgd from May
20  through June 13, 1969.  Recirculation rates averaged 4.8 mgd and 10.4 mgd, respectively,
during these periods. BOD  removals averaged 94.5 percent and 83.8 percent, respectively, at
the 5 mgd and 10 mgd influent flow rates.

         Nitrogen levels in  the raw wastewaters were low and were supplemented by the
addition of aqua ammonia. BOD:N ratios during the processing season averaged about 20:1,
which is higher than the  30:1  BOD:N ratio  recommended  by  Helmers in a paper by
Eckenfelder.4 Phosphorous levels in the raw wastewater were variable and when necessary
were supplemented by the addition of phosphoric acid. BOD:P ratios averaged 103:1 for the
entire  study period and 148:1  and 99:1,  respectively, during the 5 mgd and  10  mgd
controlled  flow  period. These values compare to phosphate levels recommended in the
literature  as being  adequate  for  optimum  biological  activity. It appears that  the
supplemental nutrients are required to promote favorable growth  conditions at the startup
                                       13

-------
of a biological system and become of lesser importance  once the  system is acclimated.
Phosphorus appeared least important after  startup,  since supplemental phosphorus was
omitted  for long periods of tune with little  or no change noted  in BOD removals. A
BOD:N:P ratio of 150:5:1 appears to be applicable to citrus wastes.
5.02     PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED

         The major problem was the failure of the sludge collection system to collect
sludge, making it impossible  to study the design concept involving the extended aeration
process.  The  sludge collection area was too large and the  slopes were too  gentle to
effectively move the sludge to the gravity pickups. (A minimum slope of approximately 60°
is suggested, whereas the slope in the sludge collection section of the settling pond was only
about 15°.) Mechanical scrapers may have aided the collection procedure; however, due to
the size scrapers required, the  cost would have been substantial.

         Minor difficulties were encountered in the metering transmission system on the
transfer lines between the aeration pond and Pond No. 2 (settling pond). This was caused by
air trapped in the transmission system.

         Other inadequacies  in plant equipment were found in the flow metering system,
transfer pumps, and flotation devices on the mechanical aerators. The low cost metering
system was provided to cover a range of between 5 and 50 mgd and still deliver reasonable
accuracy. However, the Dall  tube designed for this flow range  operates at subatmospheric
pressures (negative head) at this installation when two or more pumps are operating. This is
not a serious problem so long as the pressure piping from the flow tube to the transmitter is
airtight. Air trapped in the transmitter lines could lead to minor metering inaccuracies. Daily
manual venting of the ah- bleed-off valves is recommended.

         High volume, low head lift pumps of the type used in irrigation of citrus groves
were used to provide a low cost lift station to transfer the mixed liquor from the aeration
pond to the higher elevation of the settling pond. This  provided a means for gravity sludge
recirculation, thereby eliminating a second pumping station. The lift pumps are extremely
sensitive  to small head variations and when all three pumps are operating simultaneously,
the discharge rates are somewhat lower than the rated capacities indicated by the pump
discharge curves.

         Only three of the  six floating mechanical aerators  were operative when plant
operation began in November-December, 1968, due to a design fault hi the flotation devices.
The fourth aerator was placed in service on December 21, 1968, and the fifth  and sixth
aerators were in service by January 15, 1969. In repairing the flotation devices, buoyancy
was increased  and it was May, 1969, before aerators could  be operated at  maximum
efficiency.

         The fiber glass flotation devices were not properly tested by the manufacturer
prior to  delivery to the plant site. Although similar flotation units equipped with smaller
aerators have  been successful at  other installations, starting the  75  horsepower aerators
created significantly more stress than the fiber glass  floats could withstand. Consequently,
                                        14

-------
small fatigue cracks developed at points of excessive stress and the floats were no longer
watertight. The level of submergence was adversely affected and the flotation units had to
be removed from the  system and repaired by reinforcing and filling the floats with bouyant
material. Unless significant changes in design are made on the fiber glass floats, steel floats
with positive flotation are recommended for future installations involving aerators exceeding
60 horsepower.

         Earthern aeration basins should be provided with concrete pads or some sort of
stabilizing material below the mechanical aerators. Poor mixing in the aeration basin was
noted during March,  1969. Investigation of the problem revealed that turbulence from the
mechanical aerators had dug hc'es approximately eight feet in depth below  the bottom level
of the aeration basin, greatly affecting mixing patterns.

         Several thousands of gallons (approximately 3,500) of pressed liquor (toxic) from
Adams and excessive  feed mill wastes (high BOD) from both  Adams and The Coca-Cola
Company were discharged into Lake  Lena  Run and subsequently taken into the waste
treatment plant on January 3 and 4, and again on January 6, 1969. This material grossly
overloaded the  system. With only four aerators in operation, the required volume of air for
proper  treatment could  not be  supplied.  Consequently, the entire  system of ponds
developed anaerobic conditions and had to be drained on January 11, 1969.

         It is apparent  from this study that a generous variety of problems are inherent
during the first year's operation of a new waste  treatment facility. Mechanical equipment
requires frequent adjustment and plant operators in  many cases are not familiar with the
plant's capabilities nor the degree of variability of  the  wastewater. Therefore, detailed
research, plant design, and  capability evaluations should not be initiated  until plant
operations  are stable and operators have a thorough knowledge of the treatment process and
waste characteristics.
                                        15

-------
                                   SECTION 6

                               HYACINTH STUDY
6.01     GENERAL

         The purpose of this study was to examine nutrient uptake by water hyacinths and
to investigate the possible use of these plants in cattle feed.

         A hyacinth pond with a total surface area of 1,130 square feet, an average depth
of six feet, and a total volume of 50,850 gallons was constructed of plywood and lined with
plastic in Polishing Pond No. 1. Influent to the water hyacinth pond was pumped from the
effluent from the settling pond. Influent 5-day BOD's ranged from 22  mg/1 to 56 mg/1
during the period of this study. Nitrogen and phosphorous concentrations were well above
those recommended  as being  sufficient for bio-oxidation.  Average total  nitrogen
concentration ranged from 3.58 mg/1 to 5.27 mg/1, and average phosphorous concentrations
ranged from 0.75 mg/1 to 0.76  mg/1.

         Hyacinths were harvested from Lake Parker, Lakeland, Florida, and a total of 850
pounds of plants were placed in the hyacinth pond at Auburndale on April 22, 1969. The
plants loosely covered an area of 660 square feet out of a total pond area of 1,130 square
feet. Plant root lengths ranged from 6 to  16 inches and averaged 8 inches. The hyacinth
plants were acclimatized for a one-week period prior to experimentation. The investigative
period extended from April 30 through  June 30,1969.

         Penfound and Earle  conducted studies on hyacinth plants  in New Orleans,
Louisiana. They determined that the wet weight of hyacinth plants varied from 120 to 180
tons per acre and would yield 7 to 10  tons of dry plant material. Rate of propagation was
also studied and they concluded that  ten plants would cover an area of one acre in one
growing season. Our study confirmed  this  propagation rate since after a one-week period
each plant had produced three new plants. Penfound and Earle further determined that
hyacinths could withstand temperatures of 33°F. for periods of 12 hours with slight leaf
damage; however, 24-hour exposures at 20°F. killed the plants. Temperatures seldom range
below 33°F. at Auburndale for extended periods; therefore, environmental conditions are
ideal for a long growing season. Other observations by Penfound and Earle were that oxygen
levels below dense mats of hyacinths were less than 0.1 mg/1; under closely growing plants
but without a mat, dissolved oxygen concentrations were 0.5 mg/1; where only 80 percent
of the total surface area was covered, dissolved oxygen levels averaged about 1.5 mg/1.
6.02     NUTRIENT UPTAKE

         The first phase of study extended from April 30,1969, through May 28,1969. A
2.4-day detention time with continuous flow conditions was employed. Plant root lengths at
the influent end of the hyacinth pond averaged 12 inches, whereas the roots at the effluent
end remained approximately 8 inches long. A slime covered the roots of the plants at the
influent portion of the  pond  but was absent from those at the effluent end. Dissolved
                                       17

-------
oxygen concentrations in the influent and effluent hyacinth pond streams averaged 1.9 mg/1
and  1.0  mg/1,  respectively. Chemical  oxygen  demand  (COD) reductions averaged 29.9
percent and biological oxygen demand (BOD) reductions averaged 45.2 percent.  Organic
nitrogen exhibited reductions of 25.8 percent and little or no changes were observed in the
remaining forms of nitrogen. Phosphate reductions averaged 14.7 percent. A summary of
the 2.4-day detention period data is given in Table 9.

         The last phase of investigation covered the period June 2 through June 30,  1969.
A  5-day detention time with continuous flow conditions was employed. Little change was
observed  in root  lengths during this period of study. Microbiota attached to the hyacinth
roots at the influent portion of the  hyacinth pond  were studied. Several forms of bacteria,
blue-green  algae,  green  algae, volvocales, zooflagellates, and  ciliates  were found. These
organisms account for the  substantial biological purification observed across the hyacinth
pond. A summary of microbiota found on the hyacinth plant roots and in the influent and
effluent streams  of the hyacinth  pond are  exhibited  in Table  10. Dissolved  oxygen
concentrations did not deplete as expected due to the fact that we only had approximately
72 percent of the total surface area covered. Dissolved oxygen  levels averaged 1.24 mg/1 in
the influent stream and  1.00 mg/1 in the effluent stream. This agrees with the work done at
Louisiana, since Penfound and Earle reported oxygen levels of 1.5 mg/1 with approximately
80 percent of the water's surface covered by plants. An  area of 36 square feet of hyacinths
yielded a wet weight of 140 pounds. This is equivalent to 86 tons of hyacinths per acre and
further indicates  that a  dense  growth had  not been attained since Penfound and  Earle
commonly found  120 to 180 tons of hyacinth plants  per acre. Biological  and chemical
oxygen demands  were reduced by 69.6 and 47.2  percent,  respectively, during this  study
period. Organic nitrogen decreased by 59.9 percent and ammonia nitrogen increased by 411
percent. Slight reductions in both nitrite and nitrate nitrogens  were observed. Decreases in
organic nitrogen are attributed to the increased biomass on the roots and the sharp decrease
in suspended solids. An increase in ammonia nitrogen is contrary to the findings of Clock.
Although the pressed liquor analyses indicate a greater uptake  of ammonia nitrogen (Table
12) during the 5-day detention period,  apparently the denitrification process released more
nitrogen as ammonia  than  the plants could utilize  at this detention time. Overall nitrogen
reductions  were  only slightly higher than  at the 2.4-day  detention time.  Phosphate
reductions were substantially better at the longer detention periods as 35.5 percent of the
phosphate was removed, compared to 14.7 percent at the 2.4-day detention period.  Table
11 summarizes the 5-day detention period data.

         Based on the above data, the following conclusions were reached:

          1.        A minimum  of 5  days' detention would be   required   to obtain
                   significant nutrient reductions.

         2.        Since the average total detention time in the polishing ponds is only 42
                   hours,  nutrient removal by hyacinths  in  the  present facility is not
                   applicable.

         3.        Biological  and chemical oxygen demand reductions by  the hyacinth
                   plant system appear to be more promising than nutrient removals.
                                       18

-------
                            >~l
         Furman and Gilcreas  reported serious mosquito breeding problems in a study
near Tampa, Florida, when hyacinths formed dense mats over the-water's surface. This was
not found  to be a serious  problem at Auburndale, however, our hyacinth pond was
relatively small compared to the lagoon system studied by Furman and Gilcreas.
6.03     HYACINTH PLANT CHARACTERISTICS

         Detailed chemical analyses were made on the hyacinth plants at the outset of this
investigation, during the 2.4-day detention period, and during the 5-day detention period.
Air dried samples averaged 95 percent moisture throughout the study period. Protein and
ash concentrations  increased significantly with  detention  time,  whereas  crude fiber
concentrations remained virtually unchanged. Results of these analyses are shown below.

                                    Average         Analyses
Constituent
2
Moisture, percent
Protein, percent
Ash, percent
Crude fiber, percent
Ether extract, percent
Carotene, mg/lb
Xanthophylt, mg/lb
Dicumarol, mg/lb
KNO3, g/g
Oxalate, mg/g
Total PO4 - P, mg/g
Total N, mg/g
Hyacinth Plants
Natural State
95.0
12.26
13.75
15.12
1.99
-
-
-
649
-
0.65
-
2 -Day
Detention
95.0
11.00
16.00
12.05
2.09
0-28
70
35
505
0.4
7.0
112.0
5 -Day
Detention
95.0
19.90
16.80
16.93
1.14
2L6
304
-
367
-
7.7
55.8
         * Analyses were made by personnel of University of Florida, Animal Nutrition
Laboratory and personnel of  The  Coca—Cola Company,  Foods  Division Research
Laboratory.

         "Moisture on air dried samples at 103°C. averaged 10 percent.
                                      19

-------
         Chemical  analyses of  Alfalfa hay  exhibit characteristics similar  to  the  dried
hyacinth plants. Protein values average IS percent, fiber 28 percent, and moisture about 9
percent  Bahai grasses average 10  percent protein and  5  percent  ash. Based  on these
comparative analyses, dried hyacinth plants have good potential as a supplemental feed for
cattle.

         An attempt was made to process the hyacinth plants through the existing feed
mill facilities at Auburndale; however, due to the fibrous nature of the hyacinth plant,
fouling of equipment was encountered. It was concluded that hyacinth plants would require
special processing equipment and that present feed mill facilities were inadequate to process
the plants without some capital improvements.

         Harvesting of  the  hyacinth plants could be  accomplished on a large  scale
operation by means of several mechanical devices  now  available for aquatic vegetation
control. Harvesting operations during this study were done manually.
6.04     PRESSED LIQUOR

         Pressed liquor analyses indicate that significant quantities of nutrient are released
during processing. A summary of pressed liquor analyses is given in Table 12. Nitrogen and
phosphorous concentrations in the pressed liquor increase with detention time. Also, the
volume of wastewater from the squeezing process is considerable.

         Based on an average  wet weight  of 150 tons of plants per acre,  of which
approximately 95 percent is water, 34,000 gallons per acre of additional wastewater would
be produced. Assuming an average PO^P concentration of 63 mg/1 and an average total—N
concentration of 335 mg/1 in the pressed liquor, this amounts to an additional  18 pounds
per acre and 95 pounds per acre,  respectively, of phosphorus and nitrogen in the wastewater
stream. Gtrus wastewater flows would be increased by some  0.1 percent per acre of plants
processed;   however,   nitrogen   and phosphorous  concentrations  would  be  increased
significantly in the normally nutrient deficient process water. During periods of hyacinth
plant processing  a  small  savings in chemical costs for supplemental nutrient would  be
realized.
                                       20

-------
                                   SECTION 7

                              ECOLOGICAL STUDY
7.01     GENERAL

         A detailed ecological survey was made by Dr. James B. Lackey of the Aubumdale
wastewater treatment plant to characterize types of biota associated with the treatment
process. Aubumdale facilities had recently been converted to operate as an aerated lagoon
system and had not stabilized by the time of the first survey. A second study was made at
Aubumdale after three months' operation as an aerated lagoon system.
7.02.     AUBURNDALE AERATED LAGOON SYSTEM

         No previous background data were available for the Aubumdale treatment plant
At the first visit  conditions throughout the plant were not satisfactory, although BOD
removals averaged about 70 percent. The principal objection was odor. Since the treatment
plant  effluent discharges  into  Lake  Lena  Run which terminates  at  Lake Hamilton,
widespread odors  could  be considered a nuisance  and improper  treatment could  be
detrimental to the lake. Vast improvement was noted on the second visit as BOD removals
averaged better than 80 percent and there were no objectionable odors.

         Microbiota at Aubumdale were first studied on March 11,1969. The ponds were
turbid, but not colored. The mixed liquor in the aeration pond did not contain as a great a
quantity of organisms  as found  at Leesburg,  but the biota  was roughly the same. A
qualitative examination of the biota in the aeration pond indicated a nontoxic, high organic
content, low carbon, high nitrogen, and high phosphate substrate with a BOD high enough
to be putrescible if not sufficiently mineralized. The high nitrogen and phosphate were due
to supplementary nutrients added as aqua ammonia and phosphoric acid at  a BOD:N:P ratio
of roughly 150:5:1.

         Some of the organisms were attached to roots or the sides of the aeration pond.
These  were  filamentous green algae  such  as Ulothrix, Schizomeris,  and Rhizoclomwn,
probably  Stigeoclonium  as well, and several worms, noticeably  chironomid  larvae.
Sphaerotilus was  the dominant organism  hi the mixed liquor (substrate). Colonies  of
Zooglea were abundant   and the numbers of free  swimming  bacteria seemed low.
Nevertheless, large numbers of Rotifera, Vorticellids, and Ciliatas indicated a good food
supply. Beggiatoa and large numbers of a Spirillum further indicated a low oxygen content
In addition, photosynthetic algae such as Navicula,  Ankistrodesmus,  and Euglena were
present.

         The concentration of  oxygen in the first polishing pond was low, but nutrient
conditions excellent as evidenced by the large variety of organisms shown  in Table 13. The
low oxygen  is indicated by Trepomonas, Saprodinium, and various facultative organisms
such as Spirillum and Paramecium calkinsi. Ciliates, Oicomonas, and Rotifera are bacterial
                                      21

-------
consumers.  Blue-green  algae,  the colorless  euglenids  Peranema, Sphenomonas,  and
Spondymonum indicate soluble organic matter, while the various green algae add oxygen
and utilize nitrogen and phosphorous. The second polishing pond was much the same,
microbiota was varied, and there were indications that oxygen concentrations were low. Of
particular interest was that seven green euglenids and Spondylomorum were numerous; in
fact, so numerous as to constitute a bloom. Such a bloom of these organisms is prima facie
evidence of recent organic contaimination, usually fecal. This was probably due to the large
numbers of egrets and other birds that congregate on the flow control baffles and berms of
the polishing pond.

         Conditions in Lake  Lena Run, downstream from the  treatment plant, further
indicate the variety  of microbiota in the treatment process. Here, all the organisms found in
the treatment and others were present. At  a point about 1.75 miles downstream, there was a
heavy white coating of the colonial vorticellid Zoothamnium on every stick or other solid in
the stream. These were dominant and  could be seen from several yards away. In the stream
the colorless flagellate Monas was dominant It is also a consumer of bacteria, but ciliates
were also present in large numbers. Blue-green algae, diatoms, green algae, many euglenids,
desmids (a whole collection of typical stagnant water organisms) were present, such as are
found in a relatively fertile situation.

         A sample  of unpolluted water from Saddle Creek was also examined at this time.
This sample showed more  varied diatoms, euglenids, volvocales, and desmids. The only
group present here and lacking in Lake Lena Run was the Cryptophyceae.

         A second  ecological survey was made on June 11,  1969.  Conditions were
somewhat  more favorable.  Lake Lena  Run above  the  waste treatment plant revealed
considerable numbers of recently dead organisms. Either oxygen depletion or a slug of toxic
material  was implicated. The  fact that two green organisms were  alive, although few in
number, and that some tolerant flagellates  were present in the sludge supports this idea.

         Substantial numbers of green organisms, as well  as bacteria-consuming ciliates,
were present in the  aeration pond. A bloom had already developed of two photosynthetic
algae, namely, Ankistrodesmus falcatus and Chlorellasp.

         A steady improvement was noted throughout the plant until the bridge about one
mile below the treatment  plant outfall.  Here the temperature was 36°C. and dissolved
oxygen was only 0.5 mg/1.  This was due  to intentional bypassing of part of the untreated
wastewater in order to maintain a controlled influent flow of 10 mgd for a phase of research
in progress at  the time of this survey. This caused a noticeable decrease in the number of
bacteria, yeasts, and phycornycetes downstream as seen in Table 13.

         The   diversity of  species was  greater  and green algae  had  assumed greater
prominence since the first visit. The odor, prevalent on the first visit, had diminished. The
stream's appearance toward Lake Hamilton was good.

         Table 13 summarizes the data from both visits. In addition to the large number of
genera and species  present, the organisms found were  quite similar  to those of a well
functioning domestic treatment plant. The waste was fairly well balanced nutritionwise. The
                                       22

-------
initial steps in decomposition produce large numbers of bacteria and related organisms.
These,  in  turn,  support  a  good  population  of  colorless  flagellates and ciliates.
Euglenophyceas and Volvocales in the later stations, utilize the partially degraded organic
matter and release enough inorganic nutrients to  support a green  population, useful  in
reaeration.

          A buildup  of sludge in the bottom of  the  polishing ponds  at Leesburg and
Auburndale could result in anaerobic conditions leading to odors and  an increasing rise, due
to gassing, with more solids going out in the effluent. It is suggested that these ponds be
taken out of service periodically, the sludge dried and removed before the pond is put back
in service. This may  be necessary as often as every  other  year, depending on  treatment
practices.
                                         23

-------
                                  SECTION 8

                                KINETIC STUDY
8.01     GENERAL
                                                             o
         Kinetic studies were performed as described by Eckenfelder  using an acclimated
sludge at various temperatures, with and without nutrients. The purpose of these studies was
to determine BOD removal rate coefficients and temperature coefficients (Appendix 5).
These values are necessary in order to calculate design parameters for an aerated lagoon
system.  BOD  removal rates exhibited  a retardant-type reaction where removal  rates
decreased with time and concentration. A typical removal rate curve is presented in Figure
10.
8.02     LABORATORY STUDY

         Studies were conducted at Auburndale during May and June, 1969. BOD removal
rates were determined simultaneously  at 20°C. and 25°C., with and without nutrients.
Supplemental  nutrients  were  added  as ammonium  hydroxide and  phosphoric  acid;
concentrations were  5  mg/1 NH^-N and 1 mg/1 PO^-P. Mixed liquor suspended solids
(MLSS) concentrations ranged from 160 mg/1 to 220 mg/1. The results of these studies are
summarized as follows:

                               BOD Removal Rate              Temperature
                               Coefficient - k2Q° c.             Coefficient - 0

Average                               1.46                         1.05
Maximum                             2.80                         1.06
Minimum                             0.80                         1.04

         Variations of the BOD removal rate coefficients were caused by discharges of
pressed liquor into the plant effluent, which is toxic and decreases the biological activity of
the activated sludge.  Also, the concentration of mixed liquor suspended solids affects the
removal rate.

         A  study by Furman during  the  1966-67 citrus processing season  at Leesburg
reported a  BOD removal  rate  coefficient (k20°C.)  of ^'8^' Cample  calculations of
Auburndale and Leesburg data are presented  in Appendices 2-4.
                                      25

-------
                                    SECTION 9

                                    RESULTS
9.01     GENERAL

         Although  the  1968-69 citrus processing season extended from November 14,
1968, through July 25, 1969, only those data collected between December, 1968, and June,
1969, were reviewed  for  purposes  of this investigation.  Citrus wastewaters received in
November,  1968, and July, 1969, were principally from sporadic processing operations and
not representative of wastewaters received during the main processing season.

         Citrus  processing wastewaters were bypassed on  several occasions during the
period of this investigation. Prior to January 15, 1969, intentional bypassing was employed
in order to maintain aerobic conditions throughout the treatment plant, as only a portion of
the aeration equipment was operative. During the period  May 1 through June 13, 1969,
investigations concerning plant capabilities required that influent flow rates be controlled at
5 mgd and 10 mgd. Therefore, a significant quantity of the wastewater stream was again
intentionally bypassed. Thus, average hydraulic and organic loading values, as shown in this
report, are somewhat lower than actual  full-scale operating conditions.

         Table 14 summarizes the  average weekly data for the 1968-69 processing season
presented in the forthcoming sections.
9.02     HYDRAULIC LOADINGS

         Flow measurements were made by Dall tubes as indicated in Figure 3. These were
installed with B—I—F instrumentation  to indicate, record, and totalize flows from the
aeration pond (total)  and recirculated  sludge line. Daily influent wastewater flows were
obtained by difference.

         Daily  total flows ranged  from 11.3 to 31.9 mgd and averaged 20.3 mgd. These
data included daily influent wastewater  flows which ranged from 5.5 to 20.5 mgd and
averaged 12.8 mgd, and recirculated sludge flows which ranged from 2.4 to  13.2 mgd and
averaged 7.5 mgd.
9.03     ORGANIC LOADINGS

         Since citrus  wastewaters contain substances which, at times, are bacteriostatic,
both BOD  and COD  determinations were made in order to obtain  comparative organic
loading values.

         Daily BOD loadings ranged from 3,432 to 22,099  pounds per day and averaged
12,256 pounds per  day. Citrus processing wastewater 5-day BOD values ranged from 43
mg/1 to 201 mg/1 and averaged 117 mg/1. Daily COD loadings ranged from 8,021 to 52,516
pounds per day and averaged 20,756 pounds per day. COD concentrations in the influent
stream ranged from 99 mg/1 to 297 mg/1 and averaged 190 mg/1.
                                      27

-------
9.04     COD/BOD RATIOS

         COD/BOD ratios varied from 1.30 to 2.40 and averaged 1.73 on the untreated
citrus processing wastewater (plant influent) and from 1.43 to 6.50 with an average of 3.34
on the wastewater treatment plant effluent during the study period.
9.05     BOD AND COD REMOVALS

         Organic removal was somewhat lower than  anticipated due to an inadequate
sludge collection system which prevented operating the treatment facility as an extended
aeration plant BOD removals between December, 1968, and February, 1969, ranged from
6.7 to 85.5 percent and averaged 61.8 percent COD removals were lower and ranged from
14.1 percent to 76.1 percent and averaged 46.7 percent for the 13-week period.

         During March the operation was changed to explore the aerated lagoon process.
Controlled  flow conditions  during May,  1969, and June, 1969, yielded  average BOD
removals of 94.5 percent and 83.8 percent, respectively. COD removals during the same
period averaged 76.9 percent and 64.6 percent, respectively.

         BOD removals for the entire 1968-69 citrus processing season ranged from 6.7 to
95.3 percent and averaged 70.8 percent COD removals for the study period ranged from
14.1 percent to 79.4 percent and averaged 53.0 percent
9.06     SUSPENDED SOLIDS

         Suspended solids concentrations in both the influent stream and treatment plant
effluent ranged from 0 mg/1 to 120 mg/1 and averaged 27 mg/1.
9.07     DISSOLVED OXYGEN

         Dissolved oxygen concentrations in the aeration pond ranged from 2.0 to 6.8 mg/1
and averaged 4.3 mg/1. Settling pond (Pond No. 2) dissolved oxygen concentrations ranged
from 0 to 2.6 mg/1 and averaged 1.3 mg/1. Polishing pond dissolved oxygen concentrations
for the study period ranged from 0 to 5.7 mg/1 and averaged 1.5 mg/1.

9.08     TEMPERATURE AND pH VALUES

         Influent  temperature and pH  values averaged  27.4°C. and 7.1, respectively.
Variations in temperature were * 6°C. and pH variations were * 0.2. Effluent temperatures
were affected  by  climatological conditions and ranged  from 19.5°C. to 30.4°C. and
averaged 23.6°C. Effluent stream pH values ranged from 7.1 to 7.7 and averaged 7.2.
                                      28

-------
9.09     NUTRIENT REMOVALS

         Nitrogen and phosphorous determinations were made on the influent wastewater
stream once each week to determine if nutrient concentrations were ample for biological
treatment. Supplemental nitrogen and phosphorus were added to maintain desired nutrient
levels. Effluent wastewaters were likewise analyzed to determine the reduction in nitrogen
and phosphorous concentrations during bio-oxidation of the citrus processing wastewaters.
Reductions were based on dosed influent nitrogen and phosphorous concentration levels.

         Influent nitrogen concentrations (undosed) (Table 14) ranged from 1.60 to 5.64
mg/1 and averaged 3.05 mg/1, whereas effluent concentrations varied from 2.01 to 5.12 mg/1
and averaged 3.63 mg/1. Overall nitrogen removals for the study period averaged 36 percent
and ranged from 0 to 70 percent.

         Phosphorous concentrations (undosed) (Table  14) ranged between 0.21 and 1.84
mg/1  and  averaged 0.81  mg/1 on the influent  stream.  Effluent  stream phosphorous
concentrations varied from 0.58 to 1.88 mg/1 and averaged 1.16 mg/1. Phosphate removals
for the 1968-69 citrus season ranged from 0 to 82 percent and averaged 37 percent.
9.10     REUSE OF TREATMENT  PLANT EFFLUENTS IN CITRUS PROCESSING
         PLANT

         Water uses at the Auburndale citrus processing plant include (1) process; (2)
cooling; and (3) steam generation. Process water must be of potable quality, cooling water
can be of a lower quality, and water for steam generation must have low hardness and other
special requirements.

         Analyses of the  wastewater  treatment plant effluent during the 1968-69 citrus
processing season are exhibited in Table 14, indicating a potential for reuse as cooling water.
                                        29

-------
                                   SECTION  10

                            DISCUSSION OF  RESULTS
10.01    HYDRAULIC LOADINGS

         Average flow measurements of 12.8 mgd as shown in Table 14 are lower than
actual, due to intentional bypassing of a portion of the wastewater stream for control and
research purposes. Observations during the study period indicated that average flows would
approach  25-30  mgd when both  The  Coca—Cola  Company and Adams were  in full
production. Studies made prior to and during the 1966-67 citrus processing season further
support this idea. Fiske and Gay reported an average flow from both plants of 25.5 mgd and
our statistical studies indicated average flows of 17.9 mgd.

         Results from the controlled flow experiments shown in Tables  16 and  17 and
design characteristics shown in Table  15 indicate that the present facility operating as  an
aerated lagoon system would accommodate wastewater flows of 6.4 mgd and achieve 91.3
percent BOD removal.

         Production levels during the  1968-69  season from both citrus processing plants
were approximately 110,000 boxes  per day. Projected production levels for the  1969-70
season approach 135,000 boxes per day. Unless wastewater volumes are  reduced in the
processing plants, it is conceivable that wastewater flows during the next processing season
will average in excess of 36 mgd.
10.02    ORGANIC LOADINGS AND REMOVALS

         Many of the organic loadings reported were artifically reduced hi order to study
plant capabilities at lower influent flow rates. The average organic loadings passed through
the  treatment  plant are consequently somewhat lower than the output  of the citrus
processing plants.

         Based on flow data and 5-day BOD values obtained during full production, BOD
loadings of the order of 32,500 pounds per day are anticipated during the 1969-70 citrus
processing season.

         A detailed summary of average monthly operations is presented in Table 18. Data
for the month of May indicate that BOD loadings of 287 pounds per day per acre (6,789
pounds BOD  per day) are optimum for the present facility. Based on kinetic data collected
during this study and  projected requirements  for  the  1969-70 processing season,  an
additional 40 acres of aeration space are necessary in order to operate the present facility as
an aerated lagoon system and to  obtain the required 90 percent BOD removal (see Section
11). To operate the facility as an extended aeration plant, two 200-foot diameter clarifiers
and waste sludge handling facilities are needed using design criteria set forth in Section 12.
                                       31

-------
         BOD reductions of the order of 57.3 percent were afforded through the aeration
pond and the settling pond during the 1968-69 processing season. Additional aeration in the
settling pond might increase BOD reductions by 5 percent; however, detention time is a
major limiting factor in an aerated lagoon system as seen from data summarized in Table 18.
The polishing ponds contributed  significantly to overall BOD reductions during the study
period. BOD removals through the polishing ponds averaged 13.5 percent as shown in Table
14. Operating the existing facility as an aerated lagoon system, with additional aeration in
the settling pond and with hydraulic and BOD loading levels as indicated by this study, a
maximum BOD removal of 75 percent would be estimated.
10.03    COD/BOD RATIOS

         Weekly and monthly average COD/BOD ratios were determined and are exhibited
in Tables 14 and 18, respectively. The small differences between the average values is due to
the fact that the monthly averages tend to level out extreme variations more readily than
weekly averages.

         COD analyses were performed  at the outset of the 1968-69 processing season.
Refluxing times were varied  from 10 minutes to  2  hours to determine maximum COD
recovery. Since citrus wastes consist primarily of  carbohydrates, they are susceptible to
rapid oxidation. Reflux times of 20 minutes afforded better than 98 percent of the COD
value obtained after two hours' refluxing; therefore,  routine COD analyses were refluxed for
a  period of  30 minutes to  minimize error.  COD/BOD ratios of the citrus processing
wastewater at Auburndale averaged 1.76. McNary^ reported an average value of 1.56 during
a pilot plant study.

         The COD test plays a significant role in  plant operations since organic loadings
can be determined quickly and treatment operations adjusted accordingly. BOD analyses are
not suitable for this purpose because of the 5-day time period required to obtain the results.

         Another important factor concerning the COD test is that certain wastes from the
citrus process are toxic and tend to give misleading (low) BOD values. Therefore, once a
COD/BOD  factor is determined, more accurate BOD  values and organic loadings can be
obtained from COD  measurements  than from  BOD  measurements when toxicity is
suspected.
10.04    DISSOLVED OXYGEN

         Average  dissolved oxygen concentrations (Table 19) in the ponds during the
study period were good. Except for gross overloading during January and February causing
anaerobic conditions, especially in the settling pond and the first polishing pond, oxygen
levels were within the range  of  0.6-2.6 mg/1 recommended  by Mueller**  for maximum
oxygen uptake by bacterial floe. A paper by Eckenfelder described filamentous growths as
obligatory aerobes which flourish in the presence of a readily available carbon source and at
oxygen levels below 0.5 mg/1, oxygen uptakes are low. Since the filamentous growths have a
high surface area to volume ratio, they will consume most of the available oxygen. High
oxygen concentrations tend to favor floe-forming bacteria.
                                       32

-------
         Based on the results of this study and the data discussed in the above papers, it is
feasible  that additional  aeration in the settling basin would afford an increase in BOD
removals; however, an increase of not more than 5 percent would be anticipated.
10.05    NUTRIENT REMOVAL

         Nitrogen and phosphorous removals during the study period averaged 36 percent
and 37 percent, respectively. The settling pond afforded nitrogen removals of 14.8 percent
and phosphorous removals of 10.3 percent. Primary nutrient reductions occurred through
the polishing ponds. Nitrogen concentrations  exhibited reductions of 21.2 percent and
phosphate concentrations decreased an  average of 25.7 percent. Nutrient removals were
based on dosed influent concentrations.

         Ecological studies at Auburndale indicated that the treatment process was well
balanced nutritionally and that the microbiota present were favorable for bio-oxidation of
the citrus wastewater. Under aerobic conditions, ammonia nitrogen and organic nitrogen
concentrations would be expected to decrease while nitrate nitrogen concentrations would
be expected to increase. Data presented in Table 19 show that although ammonia nitrogen
concentrations decreased, organic nitrogen increased and nitrate nitrogen remained virtually
unchanged. Settling pond effluent samples indicate a substantial increase (approximately 65
percent) in organic nitrogen over the influent samples. Appreciable quantities of organic
matter (BOD) in the settling pond wastewater probably contributed to  further production
of plant biomass.  The biomass contains significant quantities of proteinaceous material
which, in turn, contributed to the higher organic nitrogen concentrations experienced in the
settling pond effluent. Organic nitrogen removals of the order of 20 percent were indicated
between the settling pond and the final polishing pond effluent.

         Nitrate nitrogen concentrations probably remained low due to the depth of the
settling pond and the long detention time of the treated wastewater in  the pond. Since no
additional aeration was provided in this pond,  the only oxygenation was due to surface
aeration. Therefore, the settling pond served as a facultative device where aerobic conditions
prevailed at or near the surface and anaerobic conditions, favoring denitrification, prevailed
in the deeper areas of the pond.

         Nitrogen and phosphorous analyses were made on ulfiltered samples throughout
this study since this was representative of the actual conditions from pond to pond and in
the treatment plant effluent. Further studies should include duplicate analyses on filtered
and unfiltered samples in order to substantiate the above findings.


10.06   REUSE  OF TREATMENT PLANT  EFFLUENTS  IN CITRUS PROCESSING
         PLANT

         Chemical analyses indicate substantial quantities of nitrogen (3.63 mg/1) and
phosphorus (0.74 mg/1) in the effluent stream. BOD concentrations average about 30 mg/1
and suspended solids concentrations average 27 mg/1.
                                        33

-------
          Citrus processing water requirements generally fall into
three categories:  (1) process; (2) cooling; and (3) steam generation.
Process water should be of potable quality since it comes in contact
with the product.  Treatment plant effluent would not be suitable
for use as process water without further treatment.  Additional
treatment would also be required for steam generation.  Primary water
consumption is for cooling water in the shell and tube exchangers.
Since the average temperature of the treatment plant effluent ap-
proximates that of ground water, it would be applicable for use as
cooling water.  The quality of the treatment plant effluent is ac-
ceptable without further treatment; however, due to the nutrient still
remaining in the treated effluent, bacterial slime buildup normally
encountered in the tube exchangers would be accelerated.  Therefore,
additional slime control chemicals would be required.

          The major disadvantage of reusing the treatment plant ef-
fluent at Auburndale at the present time would be the costs involved
to pump the water back to the process plant.

10.07     Cost of Treatment

          The waste load.entering the Auburndale waste treatment plant
for the 1969-70 season was generated from the processing of approximately
16X106 boxes of fruit.  The treatment plant treated a total of 3,010,000#
BOD.  It should be pointed out that this plant still does not function
properly and that part of the waste loading has frequently been bypassed
around the treatment plant.  This is, of course, reflected in a high
cost of treatment based on #BOD.

          Total Construction Cost     $616,000
          Depreciation                 145,000
            (Based on 5 yr. @ 6%)
          Direct Expense               134,000
            Annual Treatment Cost      279,000
          #BOD Treated                 3.01X106#
          Boxes Fruit Processed        16X10^

          Cost of Treatment
            $/#BOD                    $.0.090
            $/Box Fruit               $0.017
                                  34

-------
                                   SECTION  11

                          AERATED  LAGOON  DESIGN
11.01    GENERAL

         An aerated lagoon is a pond for the treatment of sewage or industrial wastes
which is oxygenated by means of induced surface aeration and by mechanical or diffused
aeration units. The depth of an aerated lagoon varies from 6  to  12 feet. Other  factors
affecting  treatment in  an aerated  lagoon system are sunlight, wastewater and ambient
temperatures, nutrient  levels, algae, evaporation, percolation, and sedimentation. Mixed
liquor suspended solids  in an aerated lagoon system are generally low (100 - 300 mg/1) and
BOD removal is a  function of the initial organic load, detention time, and temperature.
Oxygen levels of at least 2.0 mg/1  should be maintained throughout the basin in order to
insure effective biological treatment and to reduce the possibility of odors. Mechanical or
diffused aeration units should be so arranged as to maintain an oxygen level of at least 1.5
mg/1 DO throughout the system. Eckenfelder  suggests spacings of 200 feet at power levels
of 0.015 - 0.02 horsepower per  1,000 gallons of basin volume to supply the required oxygen
levels; however, these levels are inadequate to maintain solids in suspension. Both the kinetic
studies and  the ecological studies  at  Auburndale indicate a BOD:N:P ratio of 150:5:1
affords excellent nutrient levels for an effective biological process.
11.02    EXPERIMENTAL DATA

         Based on daily operating data, supported by survey data of the 1966-67 citrus
processing season and recent studies at Auburndale, combined wastewaters from The
Coca—Cola Company and Adams  at present (in  full  operation) have the  following
characteristics:

              Flow, mgd                                               30
              BOD (average) mg/1                                      130
              BOD (average), Ibs/day                                32,500
              BOD removal rate coefficient (^20°c)                     * "^
              Temperature coefficient ( O )                            1.05
              Wastewater temperature, °F.                             91.5
              Minimum monthly ambient temperature, °F.              59.0

         Monthly average data summarized in Table  20 indicate that the present system
operating as an aerated lagoon system will afford average BOD removals of approximately
72 percent. This is significantly lower than the 90 percent organic removal required by the
Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Commission.

         Controlled flow rates during  May and June,  1969,  of 5 mgd and 10 mgd,
respectively, indicate that the present facility is capable of BOD removals of the order of 90
percent at flow rates of not more than 6.4 mgd.
                                         35

-------
11.03    DESIGN CRITERIA

         Based  on  supporting  data  collected during  the  1968-69 processing season,
laboratory studies at Auburndale and theoretical considerations outlined by Eckenfelder,^
the following design criteria are suggested for 90% BOD removal:

                                             Actual Operation          Theoretical
                                         (5 mgd & 10 mgd Studies)     (Eckenfelder3)
Average flow, mgd
Influent BOD, mg/1
Effluent BOD, mg/1

Loading:
BOD, Ibs/day
BOD, Ibs/acre (including polishing ponds)

Aeration:
Area, acres
Pond depth, feet
Oxygen required, Ibs/hr
Surface, Ibs/hr
Mechanical, Ibs/hr
Total horsepower
Polishing ponds:
Area, acres
Pond depth, feet
Nutrient requirement:
Nitrogen, Ibs/day
Phosphorus, Ibs/day
Average k2Q°C.
Wastewater temperature, °F.
Temperature coefficient, O
Average ambient temperature (winter),°F.
30
130
12
GIVEN

32,500
550
CALCULATED

51
12
1,584
562
1,022
410

8-15
5.0

1,210
177
1.46
91.5
1.05
59.0
30
130
12


32,500
677


40
12
1,584
440
1,144
460

8-15
5.0

1,210
177
1.46
91.5
1.05
59.0
         * Since six aerators of 75 horsepower each are in the existing  aeration pond,
additional aerators  totalling 450 horsepower would  be required in order to be spaced
properly for proper aeration and mixing hi the larger expanded facilities.

         A summary of supporting  data  is presented in Tables 20 and  15  and sample
calculations are given in Appendix 5.

                                       36

-------
                                 SECTION 12
                      SUGGESTED DESIGN PARAMETER
                            EXTENDED AERATION
12.01     GENERAL
         The following design parameters are based as much on the engineer's estimates
derived from experience during the course of this research as on actual data obtained during
the investigation.
12.02    PRELIMINARY BACKGROUND DATA
         Laboratory and small scale pilot plant studies should be made prior to design.
Process variables, waste characteristics, and basic operating parameters should be studied.
BOD removal rates and variations, oxygen requirements, nutrient levels, excess  sludge
production and settling rates should also be determined.

12.03    DESIGN PARAMETERS
         Citrus processing wastewaters are extremely variable regarding both hydraulic and
organic loadings. Therefore, average maximum flow and loading rates rather than  overall
average rates should be used for design purposes in order to continuously meet minimum
organic removal criteria.
         Basic design parameters are as follows:
         Aeration
             Depth, feet                                       10-12
             Loading, pounds BOD/1,000 cu ft                      20
             Mechanical aeration, hp/330 Ibs
             BOD applied                                         10
             MLSS, pounds/pound BOD applied                  10-12
             MLSS, mg/1                                  2,000-6,000
             Dissolved oxygen, mg/1                            1.5-2.5
         Sludge recirculation, percent, variable                     0-100
         Clarifier overflow, gal/day/ft2                             500
         Waste sludge, Ibs/lbs BOD applied                       0.3-0.4
         Sludge digestion                                     Aerobic
         Nutrient, BOD:N:P                                  150:5:1
                                      37

-------
          Relationships  between sludge recirculation  and  sludge  settleability,  dissolved
oxygen levels, and  degree of treatment, along with sludge buildup and sludge wasting,
require further investigation.
                                          38

-------
TABLES

-------
                                           TABLE 1
                              WASTEWATER POND CHARACTERISTICS
                            THE COCA-COLA  COMPANY FOODS DIVISION
                                    AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

Water depth, feet
Bottom dimensions, feet:
Length
Width
Area, acres:
Bottom
Water surface
Capacity, mg:
Over bottom
Over slopes
Total
Capacity (min.), mg
Cross section.
area, s.f.O)
Aeration
Pond
(No. 1)
11.7
380
235
2.05
3.15
7.815
1.889
9.704
8.07

Settling Pond (No. 2)
Sludge
Section
14.2
210
439
2.11
2.72
8.305
0.906
9.211

4,536
Remainder Total
9.7
327 537
439 439
3.29 5.40
4.06 6.78
10.404 18.709
1.153 2.059
11.557 20.768


Polishing
(No. 3)
5.0
576
463
6.12
6.85
9.963
0.583
10.546


Ponds
(No. 4)
4.5
464
581
6.19
6.85
9.074
0.475
9.549


Total
System


19.76
23.63
45.561
5.006
50.567


(l)Over hopper bottom

-------
                    TABLE 2

            WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
        1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY -  AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

          Federal Water Quality Administration
             Grant No. WPRD 38-01 -67
Date
1966
Nov. 4
Nov. 5
Nov. 6
Nov. 7
Nov. 8
Nov. 9
Nov. 10
Nov. 11
Nov. 12
Nov. 13
Nov. 14
Nov. 15
Nov. 16
Nov. 17
Nov. 18
Nov. 19
Nov. 20
Nov. 21
Nov. 22
Nov. 23
Nov. 24
Nov. 25
Nov. 26
Nov. 27
Nov. 28
Nov. 29
Nov. 30
Dec. 1
Dec. 2
Dec. 3
Dec. 4'
Dec. 5
Dec. 6
Dec. 7
Day of
Week

Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Weir

Peak






12.1
17.1
18.5
11.4
5.0
9.6
9.6
10.6
10.6
11.4
8.5
7.0
16.7
9.6
9.6
1.6
10.6
15.8
3.2
8.5
7.9
7.6
7.6
6.4
4.2
0.8
4.7
10.6
19.6
No.
MGD
Min.






2.0
2.8
3.0
2.1
0.9
0.2
0.1
0.6
0.3
0.3
1.4
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.6


0.7
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.1


0.3
0.2
1 ' l'

Avg.






6.6
8.5
7.9
5.5
2.8
3.4
4.3
5.2
4.4
4.4
4.4
2.4
5.5
4.2
4.8
0.9
4.2
6.4
2.0
3.6
4.1
4.4
3.4
2.9
1.8
0.8
4.1
5.7
9.8
Weir

Peak

21.5
19.7
12.9
26.2
17.9
23.4
18.9
17.9
21.9
8.1
14.4
15.8
14.8
14.4
25.0
14.4
9.5
17.9
16.1
19.7
5.4

12.8
6.7
10.2
14.8
14.4
13.4
14.4
11.2
3.4
14.4
19.7
23.4
No.
MGD
Min.

1.6
4.4
4.2
4.2
3.2
0.5
1.9
1.6
0.3
0.3
0.3




1.4
0.3
0.8
0.4
0.8






0.3





1.4
4.4
2^>

Avg.

9.5
9.5
8.1
11.2
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
6.7
3.2
4.9
6.1
6.7
5.4
7.5
6.7
3.2
8.3
8.1
8.9
1.1

3.8
1.9
; 3.2
4.2
4.7
4.9
4.9
3.8
0.5
4.9
6.7
11.2
Area
Precipitation
Inches (3)

























0.05/0.08





/0.08
0.13/0.02


                    T-2

-------
                    TABLE 2
                   (continued)

            WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
        1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

          Federal Water Quality Administration
             Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Date
1966
Dec. 8
Dec. 9
Dec. 10
Dec. 11
Dec. 12
Dec. 13
Dec. 14
Dec. 15
Dec. 16
Dec. 17
Dec. 18
Dec. 19
Dec. 20
Dec. 21
Dec. 22
Dec. 23
Dec. 24
Dec. 25
Dec. 26
Dec. 27
Dec. 28
Dec. 29
Dec. 30
Dec. 31
1967
Jan. 1
Jan. 2
Jan. 3
Jan. 4
Jan. 5
Jan. 6
Jan. 7
Jan. 8
Jan. 9
Day of
Week

Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat

Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Weir

Peak

15.8
16.7
12.9
7.0
4.4
8.2
11.4
6.4
16.2
10.6
3.7
12.5
12.1
8.2
9.6
12.1




11.4
13.3
13.3
12.9

4.7
22.5
21.5
10.2





No.
MGD
Min.

6.4
5.8
7.0
0.2
0.3
1.2
4.2
0.9
4.7
2.6

0.8
9.0
0.1
0.0
1.8




0.9
11.4
8.5
4.7

0.1
0.3
9.9
4.7





id)

Avg.

10.6
11.0
10.1
2.4
1.9
5.2
7.6
3.5
8.0
5.8
1.6
6.3
9.1
5.5
6.2
8.0




5.2
12.1
11.4
10.2

1.5
11.2
16.7
6.8





Weir

Peak

17.9
25.4
19.7
6.1
17.2
17.9
21.5
17.9
21.5
21.5
11.2
25.0
27.4
16.1

21.9
6.1
4.2
8.0
12.8
19.7
25.4
22.7
21.5

6.6
27.4
27.4
23.8
18.9
24.2
21.9
14.8
18.2
No.
MGD
Min.

4.7
5.4
8.1
2.6
3.0
11.2
9.5
3.2
8.6
7.2
5.4
6.6
16.1
4.9

5.4
0.8
0.8
2.6
3.2
3.4
14.4
12.8
12.8

0.8
4.2
18.9
13.1
6.1
8.6
14.1
0.5
0.5
2<2>

Avg.

11.8
13.4
13.1
4.9
8.9
14.4
13.4
12.2
15.1
15.1
8.1
14.8
13.4
9.9

12.8
3.4
2.6
4.2
6.6
12.2
18.6
17.2
16.5

3.4
14.8
20.4
18.9
12.5
15.8
16.8
8.9
8.9
Area
Precipitation
Inches (3)




0.02/
0.63/0.85
0.30/0.25
0.02/


0.02/
0.04/0.06





0.07/0.08




n
0.02/





0.31/0.46
0.01/


/0.01

                    T-3

-------
                   TABLE 2
                   (continued)

            WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
       1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

          Federal Water Quality Administration
             Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Date
1967
Jan. 10
Jan. 11
Jan. 12
Jan. 13
Jan. 14
Jan. IS
Jan. 16
Jan. 17
Jan. 18
Jan. 19
Jan. 20
Jan. 21
Jan. 22
Jan. 23
Jan. 24
Jan. 25
Jan. 26
Jan. 27
Jan. 28
Jan. 29
Jan. 30
Jan. 31
Feb. I
Feb. 2
Feb. 3
Feb. 4
Feb. 5
Feb. 6
Feb. 7
Feb. 8
Feb. 9
Feb. 10
!•<*. 11
Day of
Week

Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thuis
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thuis
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Weir

Peak


8.9
9.6
11.0
11.4
9.6
10.2
133
11.0
11.0
93
9.2
8.9
9.6







11.4
12.1
12.1
12.1
10.2
8.5
16.2
12.9
16.2
16.7
11.0
11.4
No.
MGD
Min.


73
7.9
6.7
7.6
1.8
1.6
6.7
7.3
5.8
7.0
6.7
2.0
1.4







8.5
4.2
5.8
8.5
8.5

0.06
10.2
10.2
3.4
2.4
10.2
jd)

Avg.


5.4
83
9.2
9.7
7.1
5.0
9.1
9.4
9.1
7.7
8.2
5.6
5.0







10.2
9.9
93
10.6
9.6
3.0
8.5
12.1
12.1
8.5
5.4
10.6
Weir

Peak

24.2
27.4
29.5
28.7
26.6
25.8
27,4
27.4
24.6
23.8
23.4
23.4
17.9
24.2
25.4
303
23.4
31.6
26.2
19.7
29.9
27.4
29.9
333
34.2
31.6
25.0
31.2
31.6
27.4
31.6
17.5
31.6
No.
MGD
Min.

14.1
16.8
18.6
17.5
175
11.5
10.8
18.7
11.2
14.4
15.8
15.8
9.8
9.8
16.1
17.5
0.9
193
13.4
11.5
11.2
17.9
16.1
19.7
223
20.4
14.1
12.9
21.9
22.3
12.9
8.3
15.1
2<2>

Avg.

18.6
21.9
21.9
21.5
21.5
16.1
19.7
20.4
17.9
17.9
17.9
17.9
13.4
16.1
21.5
22.7
14.4
24.2
19.7
15.1
19.7
22.3
23.4
23.4
26.2
25.4
19.7
21.5
24.2
223
23.4
14.1
23.4
Area
Precipitation
Inches <3)


0.11/0.28



/0.22
0.42/0.12






0.02/

0.03/0.02

/0.10
0.071









0.21/036
0.05/035
235/2.00
0.21 /

                    T-4

-------
                    TABLE 2
                    (continued)

            WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
        1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

          Federal Water Quality Administration
              Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Date
1967
Feb. 12
Feb. 13
Feb. 14
Feb. 15
Feb. 16
Feb. 17
Feb. 18
Feb. 19
Feb. 20
Feb. 21
Feb. 22
Feb. 23
Feb. 24
Feb. 25
Feb. 26
Feb. 27
Feb. 28
Mar. 1
Mar. 2
Mar. 3
Mar. 4
Mar. 5
Mar. 6
Mar. 7
Mar. 8
Mar. 9
Mar. 10
Mar. 11
Mar. 12
Mar. 13
Mar. 14
Mar. 15
Mar. 16
Mar. 17
Day of
Week

Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Weir

Peak

9.6
13.7
14.1
13.3
14.1
14.1
12.9
10.2
13.3
15.4
7.0
10.2
12.9
11.4
12.1
12.9
14.5
14.9
14.1
14.1
10.2
11.4
10.2
19.0
7.6
13.7
12.9
12.1
10.2
6.4
12.1
7.0
7.0
7.0
No.
MGD
Min.

0.1
0.4
12.1
8.5
5.5
7.0
7.9
3.4
4.7
4.2
3.0
1.4
10.2
8.5
3.0
2.0
7.3
8.5
8.5
10.2
5.5
9.9
4.7
7.3
7.9
4.2
6.7
10.2
1.8
6.4
12.1
7.0
7.0
7.0
id)

Avg.

3.0
8.5
10.2
10.9
10.9
12.1
10.9
8.5
8.5
10.2
5.0
4.2
12.1
10.2
7.0
9.3
9.3
12.1
12.1
12.1
8.5
10.2
8.5
9.3
6.1
7.9
9.2
11.0
5.5
3.9
9.2
6.4
5.5
5.5
Weir

Peak

24.6
21.9
25.8
32.5
36.0
36.9
38.2
34.2
37.8














27.4
23.4
28.7
27.8
33.8
27.4
215
25.4
24.2
23.4
26.6
No.
MGD
Min.

7.2
2.2
11.2
21.5
22.3
17.9
22.7
18.2
18.2














19.7
9.5
8.6
20.0
23.4
10.5
7.2
14.4
10.2
10.2
10.2
2 (2)

Avg.

18.9
14.4
18.9
25.0
27.4
27.4
27.4
25.4
27.4














23.4
17.9
19.7
25.4
27.4
19.7
14.4
18.9
16.1
16.1
17.9
Area
Precipitation
Inches (3)

0.09/0.18
0.69/0.48
0.03/






0.02/1.00
1.42/0.29
0.06/











/0.55
0.32/0.08

0.02/







                    T-5

-------
                    TABLE 2
                   (continued)

            WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
        1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

          Federal Water Quality Administration
             Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Date
1967
Mar. 18
Mar. 19
Mar. 20
Mar. 21
Mar. 22
Mar. 23
Mar. 24
Mar. 25
Mar. 26
Mar. 27
Mar. 28
Mar. 29
Mar. 30
Mar. 31
Apr. 1
Apr. 2
Apr. 3
Apr. 4
Apr. 5
Apr. 6
Apr. 7
Apr. 8
Apr. 9
Apr. 10
Apr. 11
Apr. 12
Apr. 13
Apr. 14
Apr. 15
Apr. 16
Apr. 17
Apr. 18
Apr. 19
Day of
Week

Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Weir

Peak

11.0
9.6
4.2
0.2
5.5
14.1
12.1
4.2
3.4

20.0
12.1
12.1
7.9
12.1
3.7
12.1
14.1
19.0
18.5
16.7
21.0
8.5
14.1
14.1
20.0
24.1
24.1
16.2
14.1
19,5
19.0
19.5
No.
MGD
Min.

11.0
9.6
4.2
0.2
5.5
14.1
12.1
4.2
3.4

20.0
12.1
12.1
7.9
4.2


3.7
14.1
10.2
7.0
3.0
2.0
10.2
10.6
13.3
13.3
11.4
13.7
5.0
3.0
10.2
15.4
1(1)

Avg.

8.5
4.2
3.0
4.4
4.2
7.0
10.2
4.2
3.0
3.0
8.5
7.0
7.6
7.0
7.3
3.0
5.5
8.5
16.2
14.1
12.1
11.0
4.2
7.0
12.1
14.9
18.5
16.2
14.9
7.0
14.1
14.9
18.5
Weir

Peak

26.2
14.4
14.8
19.7
25.4
29.5
12.9
21.5
15.4
17.9
29.5
25.4
25.4
23.4
21.5
14.4
17.9
22.7
24.6
24.2
23.8
22.3
10.5
16.1
21.9
23.4
23.4 .
23.4
18.2
16.1
19.6
17.8
25.4
No.
MGD
Min.

12.2
6.7
4.7
12.9
14.1
15.8
27.4
13.4
9.5
5.9
11.8
16.1
16.8
16.1
13.4
9.5
6.7
8.1
19.3
17.9
14.8
11.2
7.5
7.8
19.7
18.9
17.9
17.9
13.4
8.1
6.7
11.2
13.1
2 (2)

Avg.

17.9
10.2
8.6
12.9
18.6
21.5
19.7
17.9
11.2
12.9
19.7
20.8
21.5
21.2
17.9
11.2
12.9
16.1
21.5
21.5
19.7
16.8
8.6
11.8
21.5
21.5
19.7
19.7
15.1
9.5
14.4
12.9
21.5
Area
Precipitation
Inches (3)











/0.17
0.32/0.11
0.23/




















                   T-6

-------
                    TABLE 2
                    (continued)

             WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
        1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

          Federal Water Quality Administration
              Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Date
1967
Apr. 20
Apr. 21
Apr. 22
Apr. 23
Apr. 24
Apr. 25
Apr. 26
Apr. 27
Apr. 28
Apr. 29
Apr. 30
Mayl
May 2
May 3
May 4
May5
May 6
May 7
May 8
May 9
May 10
May 11
May 12
May 13
May 14
May 15
May 16
May 17
May 18
May 19
May 20
May 21
May 22
May 23
Day of
Week

Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Weir

Peak

18.5
12.1
8.5
4.2
10.2
12.1
10.2
11.0
12.1
11.4
9.2
12.1
10.2
11.4
11.0





11.0
9.2
10.2
10.2
3.4
10.2
11.0
10.2
12.5
11.7
11.4
26.4
26.4
12.1
No.
MGD
Min.

14.5
9.2
4.2
3.0
2.6
8.5
7.9
4.7
6.1
9.2
1.1
1.1
4.2
2.0
4.4





9.9
3.4
2.1
3.7
1.4
1.1
10.2
2.6
3.0
10.6
3.9
3.0
3.4
4.2
!(D

Avg.

12.1
10.2
5.5
3.0
4.2
10.2
8.5
10.2
10.2
10.2
3.4
5.5
7.0
5.5
8.5





10.2
5.5
8.5
7.0
2.0
4.2
10.2







Weir No. 2 (2) Area
MGD Precipitation
Peak Min. Avg. Inches ' '

25.4 23.4 25.4









f-





0.85/0.54

0.01/

21.5 16.1 17.9
17.9 11.5 14.4
20.4 11.2 16.1
19.3 11.8 16.1
12.2 3.16 6.7
18.7 3.16 11.2
21.1 1.7 18.7
17.9 11.2 14.4 0.10/




1.29/2.26
0.11/0.06
                    T-7

-------
                             TABLE 2
                            (continued)

                    WASTEWATER FLOW DATA
               1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
      THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

                  Federal Water Quality Administration
                     Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Date
1967
May 24
May 25
May 26
May 27
May 28
May 29
May 30
May 31
June 1
June 2
June 3
June 4
JuneS
June 6
June?
JuneS
June 9
June 10
June 11
June 12
June 13
Day of
Week

Wed
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thun
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Wed
Thun
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tues
Weir

Peak

12.1
14.1
14.1
125
4.7
55
14.1
12.9
16.2
33.8
21.0
7.0
12.1
16.2
16.2
7.0
195
12.1
12.1
4.2
12.1
No.
MGD
Min.

4.2
3.0
6.1
4.2
3.7
3.4
3.0
55
2.0
5.0
4.2
2.4
1.6
4.2
3.0
21.0
11.4
12.1
4.2
3.0
10.2
1<1)

Avg.


8.5
10.2
85
4.2
4.7
4.2
85
10.2
16.2
10.2
4.7
55
8.5
10.2
11.0
12.1
12.1
55
55
11.0
Weir

Peak

215
15.8
18.9
18.9
11.8
11.8
18.9
16.8
42.9
42.9
22.7
175
20.4
20.4
21.2
215
25.4
22.7
19.7
18.6
23.4
No.
MGD
Min.

12.9
95
115
12.2
5.4
5.6
4.0
125
10.8
165
15.4
4.7
5.4
12.9
4.7
13.4
15.4
17.2
12.2
5.6
15.4
2 <2>

Avg.

16.1
11.8
15.1
16.1
8.1
6.7
12.9
14.4
17.9
215
17.9
11.1
12.9
16.8
16.1
17.9
19.7
19.7
16.1
12.9
18.2
Area
Precipitation
Inches (3)

0.10/0.01








3.95/1.72
1.13/0.32
1.97/052
/0-09
0.37/
1.231

10.15
052/0.04



Below Adams Packing Company.

Below Adams Packing Company, The Coca-Cola Company, and City of Auburndale
Sewage Treatment Plant.

Lake Alfred Experiment Station / Winter Haven Stations of U.S. Weather Bureau.
                            T-8

-------
                               TABLE 3

                      DAILY AREA PRECIPITATION

                  1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
         THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
                    Federal Water Quality Administration
                         Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Date
1966
Nov. 2
Nov. 3
Nov. 28

Dec. 4
Dec.5
Dec. 11
Dec. 12
Dec. 13
Dec. 14
Dec. 17
Dec. 18
Dec. 24
Dec. 29
Dec. 30

1967

Jan. 4
Jan. 5
Jan. 8
Jan. 11
Jan. IS
Jan. 16
Jan. 23
Jan. 25
Jan. 27
Jan. 28

Feb. 7
Feb. 8
Feb. 9
Feb. 10
S t a
Lake Alfred
Exp. Sta


0.05
0.05


0.13
0.02
0.63
0.30
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.07

0.02



0.31
0.01

0.11

0.42
0.02
0.03

0.07

0.21
0.05
2.35
0.21
t i o n
Winter Haven

0.05

0.08

0.08
0.02

0.85
0.25


0.06
0.08
T




0.46

0.01
0.28
0.22
0.12

0.02
0.10


0.36
0.35
2.00

Date
1967
Feb. 12
Feb. 13
Feb. 14
Feb. 21
Feb. 22
Feb. 23

Mar. 7
Mar. 8
Mar. 10
Mar. 28
Mar. 29
Mar. 30

May 6
May8
May 17
May 22
May 23
May 24

Jun. 2
Jun. 3
Jun. 4
Jun. 5
Jun. 6
Jun. 7
Jun. 9
Jun. 10
Jun. 15



Sta
Lake Alfred
Exp. Sta.

0.09
0.69
0.03
0.02
1.42
0.06


0.32
0.02

0.32
0.23

0.85
0.01
0.10
1.29
0.11
0.10

3.95
1.13
1.97

0.37
1.23

0.52




t i o n
Winter Haven

0.18
0.48

1.00
0.29


0.55
0.08

0.17
0.11


0.54


2.26
0.06
0.01

1.72
0.32
0.52
0.09


0.15
0.04
T



(1)  From U. S. Weather Bureau Records. Precipitation expressed in inches.

                              T-9

-------
                     TABLE 4
     RAW WASTEWATER ANALYSES AT WEIR NO. 1
         1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA(1)

           Federal Water Quality Administration
               Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Dates
1966
Nov.
29-30
Dec.
1-2
6-7
8-9
13-14
15-16
20-21
22-23
27-28
30-31
1967
Jan.
3-4
6-7
10-11
13-14
Days
of
Week


Tu-W

Th-F
Tu-W
Th-F
Tu-W
Th-F
Tu-W
Th-F
Tu-W
F-Sa


Tu-W
F-Sa
Tu-W
F-Sa
Flow
MGD


4.70

2.90
6.50
9.61
7.67
6.06
7.73
8.89
3.71
11.7


8.73

8.01
9.20

T o
mg/1


502

410
455
382
270
305
325
373
300
334


315
360
338
280
S o
t a 1
% Vol.


69

56
89
52
63
65
59
79
67
31


70
63
84
68
1 i
d s
Suspended
mg/1


42

40
42
42
82
72
36
23
17
26


28
24
28
17
% Vol.


48 <

55 <
40 <
31 <
18 <
39 <
97 <
87 <
100
100


93
75
100
100

Sett.
ml/1


:o.i

:o.i
0.1
0.1
:o.i
:o.i
:o.i
:o.i
0.5
0.4


0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
5-day
BOD
mg/1


118

94
108
78
75
110
120
158
65
80


100
98
98
160
Nit.
(N)
mg/1


1.40

1.12
2.52
0.28
2.41
3.81
2.69
2.97
1.2
0.9


1.8
1.3
0.8
1.7
Phos.
(P)
mg/1


1.60

1.30
1.28
0.40
1.12
1.28
0.58
0.80
0.3
0.9


0.3
0.6
0.03
0.8
Total
Alk.
mg/1


101

108
149
104
143
148
168
146





146
101
100
Temp.
pH °F. Remarks


7.2

6.9
7.0
6.9
7.0
6.9
7.2
6.7

90


91
7.3 93
6.8 88 (2)
6.6 90

-------
                      TABLE 4
                     (continued)
     RAW WASTEWATER ANALYSES AT WEIR NO. 1
          1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA (l>

            Federal Water Quality Administration
                Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Dates
1967
Jan.
19-20
20-21
24-25
26-27
Jan. 31-
Feb. 1
Feb.
3-4
7-8
10-11
15-16
17-18
21-22
Feb. 28-
Mar. 1
Mar.
3-4
7-8
Days
of
Week


Th-F
F-Sa
Tu-W
Th-F

Tu-W

F-Sa
Tu-W
F-Sa
W-Th
F-Sa
Tu-W

Tu-W

F-Sa
Tu-W
Flow
MGD


7.20
7.97



9.90

9.90
12.1
10.2
12.1
11.4
5.50

12.1

8.90
7.90

T o
mg/1


466
349
352
300

436

486
308
399
300
552
404

425

882
593
S o
t a 1
% Vol.


72
69
82
84

66

67
97
52
77
90
68

75

80
67
1 i
d s
Suspended
mg/1


51
36
113
22

23

30
21
30
32
40
44

28

58
27
% Vol.


88
86
24
100

78

80
95
87
94
85
82

100

97
96

Sett.
ml/1


0.5
0.1
0.3
0.1

0.5

0.5
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
<0.6

0.3

1.1
<0.1
5 -day
BOD
mg/1


150
155
210
115

145

190
70
85
155
84
280

145

370
150
Nit.
(N)
mg/1


0.9
1.3
0.6
0.7

3.2

1.8
0.4
1.5
1.2

1.6

1.1

2.4
1.8
Phos.
(P)
mg/1


1.0
0.5
0.8
0.7

0.8

0.7
0.4
1.1
0.8
1.4
0.7

0.5

1.0
0.7
Total
Alk.
mg/1


88
100
80
993

151

102
98
80
93
152
130

98

95
125
pH


6.9
6.8
7.2
6.9

9.2

7.4
7.3
6.9
7.2
7.6
7.0

6.9

6.4
7.3
Temp.
OF


87
90
89
92

91

91
89

88
90
86



91
90
Remarks




(3)


(4)

(3)











-------
                                                   TABLE 4
                                                  (continued)
                                 RAW WASTEWATER ANALYSES AT WEIR NO.  1
                                      1966-67 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
                           THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

                                        Federal Water Quality Administration
                                            Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67

H
1
to
Days
of
Dates Week
Average
Maximum
Minimum
Flow
MGD
8.42
12.1
2.90

T o
mg/1
400
882
270
S o
t a 1
% Vol.
70
97
31
1 i
d s
Suspended Sett.
mg/1
38
113
17
% Vol. ml/1
78 <0.3
100 <1.1
18 <0.1
5-day
BOD
mg/1
135
370
65
Nit.
(N)
mg/1
1.6
3.81
0.4
Phos.
(P)
mg/1
0.8
1.60
0.3
Total
Alk.
mg/1
116
168
80
pH
7.1
9.2
6.4
Temp.
°F. Remarks
90
93
87
"'  24-hour composite samples initiated and terminated at 4-5 PM unless otherwise indicated.

(2)  Nitrate nitrogen -1.5 mg/1.

"'  Composite composed of three grab samples due to sample pump failure.

W  Nitrate nitrogen - 0.00 mg/1.

-------
                                                TABLE 5
                            RAW WASTEWATER ANALYSES AT DARBY AVENUE*!)
                                    1966-67  CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
                           THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

                                      Federal Water Quality Administration
                                          Grant No. WPRD 3841-67
Dates
1967
Jan. 31 -
Feb. 1
10-11
Days
of
Week


Tu-W
F-Sa

Flow T o
MGD mg/1


330
289
S o
t a 1
% Vol.


63
35
1 i
d s
Suspended
mg/1


23
24
% Vol.


96
92

Sett.
ml/1


0.8
1.0
5-day
BOD
mg/1


120
64
Nit.
(N)
mg/1


2.1
1.0
Phos.
(P)
mg/1


0.6
0.6
Total
Alk.
mg/1 pH


94 7.4
85 7.2
Temp.
°F. Remarks


91 (2)
(3)
    Below Adams Packing Company and The Coca-Cola Company.

    24-hour composite sample initiated and terminated at 5 PM.

' '  9-hour composite sample. Nitrate nitrogen - 0.1 mg/1.

-------
                                                   TABLE 6
                                 RAW WASTEWATER ANALYSES AT WEIR NO. 2
                                      196647 CITRUS PROCESSING SEASON
                            THE COCA-COLA COMPANY - AUBURN DALE. FLORIDA1 J)

                                        Federal Water Quality Administration
                                            Grant No. WPRD 38-01-67
Dates
1966
NOT.
29-30
Dec.
1-2
6-7
8-9
13-14
15-16
20-21
22-23
27-28
30-31
1967
faaM
JML
3-4
6-7
10-11
13-14
19-20
20-21
24-25
27
Jan. 31-
Feb.1
Feb.
3-4
7-8
10-11
15-16
17-18
21-22
Feb. 28-
Mar.l
Mar.
3-4
7-8
Average
Maximum
Mmnwm
Days
of
Week


Tu-W

Th-F
Tu-W
Th-F
Tu-W
Th-F
Tu-W
Th-F
Tu-W
F-Sa

Tu-W
F-Sa
Tu-W
F-Sa
Th-F
F-Sa
Tu-W
F

Tu-W

F-Sa
Tu-W
F-Sa
W-Th
F-Sa
Tu-W

Tu-W

F-Sa
Tu-W



Flow
MOD


6.86

6.04
10.7
13.5
14.1
15.3
11.0

10.4
17.6

18.4
16.4
21.3
19.9
17.6
17.6
22.7
25.6

22.4

2S.O
21.3
19.9
26.4
26.4


21.0


19.3
17.9
26.4
6.04

T o
mg/l


1450

450
388
450
J72
272
344
268
340
340

288
352
319
323
414
336
253
259

289

343
259
389
305
434
418

453

504
513
394
1450
253
S o
t a 1
%Vol.


84

49
69
56
65
62
60
63
68
63

66
74
79
73
62
61
70
85

57

68
61
67
75
95
65

75

82
81
69
85
49
1 1
d s
Suspended
mg/l


59

66
59
58
55
86
72
55
20
38

40
50
32
40
48
42
26
26

31

26
18
32
36
31
48

42

34
40
43
86
18
%VoL


61

65
66
38
31
19
89
62
95
100

82
80
100
100
83
83
100
96

94

88
89
94
94
90
83

36

88
90
80
100
19

Sett
ml/1


<0.1

<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
  9-hour composite, 7 AM -4PM.

(*)  Nitrate nitrogen - 0.00 mg/l.

ft)  Nitrate nitrogen - 0.03 mg/L
                                      T-14

-------
                                   TABLE 7

            WASTEWATER POND CHARACTERISTICS & EQUIPMENT
                THE COCA-COLA  COMPANY FOODS DIVISION
                           AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
                       Aeration   Settling  Pond ( No. 2 )
                         Pond    Sludge
                                 Polishing  Ponds   Total
Parameter
 (No. 1)  Section  Remainder Total  (No. 3)  (No. 4)   System
Water depth, feet

Bottom dimensions, feet:
  Length
  Width

Area, acres:
  Bottom
  Water surface

Capacity, MMG:
  Over bottom
  Over slopes

    Total

Cross section,
  area, sq. ft.  '

Aerators:
  Number
  Type
  Horsepower,
   (each)
  11.7
14.2
9.7
5.0
4.5
380
235
2.05
3.15
7.815
1.889
210
439
2.11
2.72
8.305
0.906
327
439
3.29
4.06
10.404
1.153
537
439
5.40
6.78
18.709
2.059
576
463
6.12
6.85
9.963
0.583
464
581
6.19
6.85
9.074
0.475

19.76
23.63
45.561
5.006
 9.704    9.211   11.557   20.768   10.546   9.549   50.567


          4,536


     6
Mechanical

    75
' *' Over hopper bottom
                                  T- 15

-------
              TABLE 8

   TREATMENT PLANT CHARACTERISTICS
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION
        AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
                 Pump  Combination

Pumping capacity (Name plate), mgd
Rerirculation (about 100%), mgd
Plant influent, mgd:
Peak
Daily:
Average
Maximum
Minimum
BOD load, lbs/day(1)
Aeration Pond (No. 1)
Detention, hours:
Average
Maximum
Minimum
BOD load, Ib/day/hp
Settling Pond (No. 2):
Sludge removal section:
Detention, hours:
Average
Maximum
Minimum
Horizontal Velocity, fpm:
Average
Maximum
Surface Overflow Rate, gpd/s.f.
Average
Maximum
Small
9.33
4.5

4.8

4.5
4.8
<2.0
4,600


51.7
>116
48.5
10.2



49.2
>110
46.1

0.092
0.098

38
40
Large
16.74
8.0

8.7

8.1
8.7
<2.0
8,300


28.7
>116
26.7
18.5



27.3
>110
25.4

0.17
0.18

68
73
Large
Small
26.07
12.0

14.1

12.0
14.1
<2.0
12,300


19.4
>116
16.5
27.3



18.4
>110
15.7

1.25
0.29

101
119
Large
Large
33.48
14.5

19.0

14.5
19.0
<2.0
14,900


16.0
>116
12.2
33.1



15.2
>110
11.6

0.30
0.39

122
160
Large
Large
Small
42.81
15.5

27.3

15.6
27.3
<2.0
16,000


14.9
>116
8.5
34.7



14.2
>110
8.1

0.32
0.56

131
230
             T-16

-------
                                 TABLE 8
                                 (continued)

                   TREATMENT PLANT CHARACTERISTICS
               THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION
                          AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
                                     Pump  Combination


Small


Large

Large
Small

Large
Large
Large
Large
Small
        Baffle Overflow Rate, gpd/s.f.:
          Average
          Maximum

        Total Basin:
          Detention, hours:
            Average
            Maximum
            Minimum

Polishing Pond (No. 3):
    Detention, hours:
        Average
        Maximum
        Minimum

Polishing Pond (No. 4):
    Detention, hours:
        Average
        Maximum
        Minimum

Total Pond System:
    Detention, days:
        Average
        Maximum
        Minimum

    BOD load, Ibs/day/acre
                                     10,200   18,500  27,400  33,000  35,600
                                     10,900   19,800  32,200  43,300  62,200
                                     111     61.6    41.6     34.4     32.0
                                   >250   >250    >250    >250    >250
                                     104     57.4    35-4     26.3     18.3
56.3
>127
52.8
31.3
>127
29.1
21.1
>127
18.0
17.5
>127
13.3
16.2
>127
9.3
                                     51.0    28.3     19.1

                                     47.7    26.4     16.2
                15.8    14.7
                  5    >115
                12.1    8.4
11.25
>25.3
10.52
6.25
>25.3
5.82
4.22
>25.3
3.59
3.49
>25.3
2.66
3.24
>25.3
1.85
                                     195
350
522
632
678
O)  Basis average BOD of 123 mg/1.
                                 T-17

-------
                             TABLE 9




               AVERAGE ANALYSES 2.4-DAY DETENTION




              THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION




                      AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
                              Hyacinth    Pond*1*
Parameter
Temperature, degrees C.
pH
Dissolved oxygen, mg/1
Chemical oxygen demand, mg/1
Biological oxygen demand, mg/1
Total suspended solids, mg/1
Total organic nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Ammonia nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Nitrite nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Nitrate nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Total phosphate, mg/1 - P
Total nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Influent

7.3
1.9
68.3
22.1
33.8
4.46
0.48
0.002
0.33
0.75
5.27
Effluent
26.3
7.2
1.0
47.9
12.1
22.5
3.31
0.52
0.002
0.34
0.64
4.17
Percent Reduction

1.4
47.4
29.9
45.2
33.4
25.8

0

14.7
20.9
' *' Average analysis of nine sampling days.
                             T-18

-------
                                      TABLE   10
                            HYACINTH  POND  MICROBIOTA
                   THE   COCA-COLA  COMPANY  FOODS  DIVISION
                                AUBURNDALE.  FLORIDA
         ORGANISMS
HYACINTH PLANT
    ROOTS
HYACINTH POND
   INFLUENT
HYACINTH POND
  EFFLUENT
BACTERIA
  FREE  FLOATING
  CHAIN
  SPHAEROTILUS NATtNS
  SARCINA
  SPIRILLI
  BEGGIATOA  ALBA
THIOROHDACEAE
BLUE GREEN  ALGAE
  OSCILLHORIA  SP.
                             450
GREEN ALGAE
  ANKISTRODESHUS  FALCATUS
  AHIUSTRODESMUS  TUMIDUS
  CHLORELLA SP.
  DICTYOSPHAERIUM EHERN.
  SCENEDESIUS  SP.
                          12800

                           9600
                             40
                             80
                          1600
                            16
                          1600
                             4
                            40
EUGLENOPHYCEAE
  EUGLENA PISCIFORMIS
  EUGLEHA SP.
  PETALOMONAS  CARINATA
  PETALOUONAS  PLAYFAIRI
  PERANEMA TRICOPHORUM
  TRACHELOMONAS VOLVOCINA
                              4
                            700
                            12
DIATOMS
  CYCLOTELLA COMTA
  NAY1CULA SP.
       (DEAD)
       (DEAD)
       20
 RHIZOPODA
   AMOEBA VESPERTILIO
   PELOMVXA SP.
 ZOOFLAGELLATA
   HEXANITUS INFLATUS
   MASTIGAMOCHA SP.
   NONAS  SP.
   OICOMONAS TERMO
   TETRAMITUS PYRIFORMIS
   ZOOFLAGEUATA
                            160
                             80
                            320
                           1600
                            640
                            24
                             4
 CILIATA
   CYCLIDIUM  SALTANS
   CYRTOLOPHOSIS
   HALTERIA  GRANLINELLA
   LEMBUS  FUSIFORMIS
   METOPUS SP.
   OXYTRICHA  PELIONELLA
   PARAMECIOM CAUDATA
   SPIROSTOMUM AMBIGUUM
   TRINYEMA  SP
   OROCENTRUM TORBO
   VORTICEUA SP.
   CILIATA
                                                    0.25
                                                    1
                                                    0.25
                                                    0.5
 ROTIFER
        (I) NUMBERS,  WHERE  REPORTED ARE AS ORGANISMS / ml
                                                T-18

-------
                             TABLE 11
                AVERAGE ANALYSIS S-DAY DETENTION
              THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION
                       AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
                           Hyacinth  Pond*1)
Parame ter
Temperature, degrees C
pH
Dissolved oxygen, mg/1
Chemical oxygen demand, mg/1
Biological oxygen demand, mg/1
Total suspended solids
Total organic nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Ammonia nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Nitrite nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Nitrate nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Total phosphate, mg/1 - P
Total nitrogen, mg/1 - N
Influent

6.90
1.24
106
56
21
3.27
0.26
0.002
0.04
0.76
3.58
Effluent
30.3
6.86
1.00
56
17
4
1.31
1.07
0.001
0.03
0.49
2.80
Percent Reduction


19.4
47.2
69.6
80.9
59.9
411<2>
50.0
25.0
35.5
21.8
' '  Average analyses of 5 sampling days. Continuous flow, 5-day detention.




^ '  Increase.
                             T-20

-------
                                         TABLE 12
                                PRESSED LIQUOR ANALYSES
                          THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION
                                   AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
Constituent
April 30
May 15
May 26
May 28
June 5
Average
Total Organic Nitrogen, mg/1— N
H
1 Ammonia Nitrogen, mg/1— N
to
Nitrite Nitrogen, mg/1— N
Nitrate Nitrogen, mg/l-N
Total Nitrogen, mg/l-N
Total Phosphate, mg/1— N
42

2.3

0.01
2.n
46.3
22.8
264

10.6

0.004

274.6
53.0
239

7.6

0

246.6
42.0
484

5.9

0.001

489.9
110.0
532

76

0.21
9.0
617.2
85.0
312

20.5

0.045
5.5
334.9
62.6
Liquid squeezed from hyacinth plants.

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
                                               TABLE 15




                                        DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS




                                       AERATED LAGOON  SYSTEM




                               THE COCA-COLA COMPANY  FOODS DIVISION




                                         AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA

H
1
to



Flow
mgd
11.8">
9.5^
6.4^)
5.3(4)
30.0(5)
BOD
Ibs/day
11,550
11,800
6,780
5,930
32,500
A e
Area, acres
9.93
9.93
9.93
9.93
51.0
ratio
Depth, ft.
11.5
11.5
11.5
11.5
12.0
n Ponds roiisning ronas
Horsepower
450
450
450
450
900
DO, mg/1
4.2
4.9
5.7
6.0
2.0
Area, acres
13.7
13.7
13.7
13.7
8l
Depth, ft
4.75
4.75
4.75
4.75
4.75
JDUU
%rem.
72.3
83.8
91.3
94.5
90.0+
DUU Luaumg
Ibs/day/acre
489
500
287
250
550
(1)  Average data 1968-69 processing season




(2)  Average-controlled influent flow June 1969




(3)  Average-month of May 1969




(4)  Average-controlled influent flow May 1969




(5)  Required based on 1968-69 processing season

-------
                                  TABLE  16

               SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS 5 MGD  FLOW RATE

                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY  FOODS DIVISION

                           AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
Total influent flow, MG
Average daily influent flow, MG
Average daily sludge recirculated, MG
Average percent sludge recirculated

Total pounds BOD - influent
Total pounds BOD - effluent
Average daily BOD - influent - mg/1
Average daily BOD - effluent - mg/1
Average BOD removal - percent

Total pounds COD - influent
Total pounds COD - effluent
Average daily COD - influent - mg/1
Average daily COD - effluent - mg/1
Average COD removal - percent

COD/BOD influent - average
COD/BOD effluent - average

Total pounds suspended solids - influent
Total pounds suspended solids - effluent
Average suspended solids - influent - mg/1
Average suspended solids - effluent - mg/1
Average total pounds MLSS (aeration basin)
Average MLSS, mg/1
Average pounds BOD/pound MLSS

Total hours aeration
Total pounds oxygen (3.5 Ibs 02/HP theoretical)
Pounds of oxygen / pounds of BOD applied
BOD load - pounds/day/HP (ave)
COD load - pounds/day/HP (ave)
Pounds of oxygen / pound of COD applied
  100.7
    5.3
    4.8
   91.4

112,632
  6,156
    134
      7
   94.5

174,610
 40,413
    208
     48
   76.9

     1.6
    6.6

 15,117
  7,559
     18
      9
  3,964
     49
   1.5:1

  2,520
661,500
   5.87
    14.3
   22.2
   3.79
                                   T-26

-------
                                  TABLE 16
                                  (continued)

               SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS 5 MOD FLOW RATE

                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

                           AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
Detention time - hours (average)
    Aeration (9.7 MMG)                                                  43-9
    Settling (20.8 MMG)                                                  94.2
    Sludge removal section (9.2 MMG)                                      41-7
    Polishing pond No. 1 (10.5 MMG)                                       47.5
    Polishing pond No. 2 (9.5 MMG)                                        43-0
    Total system (days) (50.567 MMG)                                      9.5
BOD load, pounds/day/acre (approx. 23.6 acres)                                251

Average temperature, ° C
     Influent                                                             29-6
     Effluent                                                             25-9

Average pH
     Influent                                                              l'\
     Pond 2                                                               13
     Effluent                                                              7'9

Average dissolved oxygen - mg/1
     Aeration pond                                                        *~
     Settling pond                                                         }•'
     Polishing pond No. 1                                                   -•*
     Polishing pond No. 2                                                   *•*
     Return sludge

 Nitrogen                                                                 3 2
     Average influent concentration, mg/1                                      *•*•
     Average dosage added, mg/1
     Total influent concentration, mg/1                                        *™
     Total nitrogen - influent - pounds                                       5 >039
     Total nitrogen-effluent-pounds
     Nitrogen removed - percent
     Total gallons ammonia used                                            '
                                    T-27

-------
                                 TABLE 16
                                 (continued)

               SUMMARY  OF OPERATIONS 5 MGD  FLOW RATE

                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

                          AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
Phosphorus
    Average influent concentration, mg/1                                     0.9
    Average dosage added, mg/1                                               0
    Total influent concentration, mg/1                                        0.9
    Total phosphorus - influent - pounds                                     756
    Total phosphorus - effluent - pounds                                     588
    Phosphorus removed - percent                                          22.2
    Total gallons H3PO4 used                                                0

BOD:N                                                               22.3:1
BOD-.P                                                               148:1
BOD:N:P                                                         100:4.5:07

Total rainfall - inches                                                      1-8
                                  T-28

-------
                                  TABLE 17

               SUMMARY OF  OPERATIONS 10 MGD  FLOW RATE

                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

                           AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
Total influent flow, MG
Average daily influent flow, MG
Average daily sludge recirculated, MG
Average percent sludge recirculated

Total pounds BOD - influent
Total pounds BOD - effluent
Average daily BOD - influent - mg/1
Average daily BOD - effluent - mg/1
Average BOD removal - percent

Total pounds COD - influent
Total pounds COD - effluent
Average daily COD - influent - mg/1
Average daily COD - effluent - mg/1
Average COD removal - percent

COD/BOD influent - average
COD/BOD effluent - average

Total pounds suspended solids - influent
Total pounds suspended solids - effluent
Average suspended solids - influent - mg/1
Average suspended solids - effluent - mg/1
Average total pounds MLSS (aeration basin)
Average MLSS, mg/1
Average pounds BOD/pound MLSS

Total hours aeration
Total pounds oxygen (3.5 Ibs 02/HP theoretical)
Pounds of oxygen / pounds of BOD applied
BOD load - pounds/day/HP (ave)
COD load - pounds/day/HP (ave)
Pounds of oxygen / pound of COD  applied
  237.5
    9.5
   10.4
  108.4

295,325
 47,800
    149
     24
   83.8

445,300
157,825
    225
     80
   64.6

     1.5
     3.3

 39,615
 51,500
     20
     26
  5,500
     68
   2.1:1

 3,473.8
911,873
     3.4
    27.2
    41.0
     2.2
                                     T-29

-------
                                  TABLE  17
                                  (continued)

               SUMMARY  OF OPERATIONS 10 MGD FLOW RATE

                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

                           AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
Detention time - hours (average)
    Aeration (9.7 MMG)                                                   24.5
    Settling (20.8 MMG)                                                   52.5
    Sludge removal section (9.2 MMG)                                        23.2
    Polishing pond No. 1 (10.5 MMG)                                        26.5
    Polishing pond No. 2 (9.5 MMG)                                         24.0
    Total system (days) (20.567 MMG)                                       5.3

BOD load, pounds/day/acre (approx. 23.6 acres)                                 500

Average temperature, ° C
    Influent                                                             33.1
    Effluent                                                             28.7

Average pH
    Influent                                                              7.0
    Pond 2                                                               7.1
    Effluent                                                              7.3

Average dissolved oxygen - mg/1
    Aeration pond                                                         4.9
    Settling pond                                                          1.3
    Polishing pond No. 1                                                    1.5
    Polishing pond No. 2                                                    1.5
    Return sludge                                                         1 -7

Nitrogen
    Average influent concentration, mg/1                                       4.5
    Average dosage added, mg/1                                              2.8
    Total influent concentration, mg/1                                         7.3
    Total nitrogen - influent - pounds                                      14,459
    Total nitrogen - effluent - pounds                                       4,952
    Nitrogen removed - percent                                              65.8
    Total gallons ammonia used                                            2.625
                                   T-30

-------
                                 TABLE  17
                                 (continued)

              SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS 10  MGD FLOW RATE

                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

                          AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA


Phosphorus
    Average influent concentration, mg/1                                     1.48
    Average dosage added, mg/1                                             .02
    Total influent concentration, mg/1                                       1.5
    Total phosphorus - influent - pounds                                    2,971
    Total phosphorus - effluent - pounds                                      792
    Phosphorus removed - percent                                          73.3
    Total gallons H3PO4 used                                               75

BOD:N                                                               20.4:1
BOD:P                                                               99.0:1
BOD:N:P                                                         100:4.9:1.0

Total rainfall - inches                                                       1.6
                                   T-31

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
                   TABIE 1  9
SUMMARY Of  NITROGEN  AND PHOSPHOROUS  ANALYSES
     THE COCA-COLA  COMPANY FOODS  DIVISION
               AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA



196)
DEC 4
DEC 13
DEC 18
DEC 26
DEC 31
1969
JAN 7
FEB 6
FEB 9
FEB 19
FEB 25
MAR 4
MAR 1 1
MAR 18
MAR 24
MAY 5
MAT 12
MAY 19
HAY 26
JUN 2
JUN 16
JUN 20
JUN 23
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
MINIMUM
CITRUS KASTEKATER - INFLUENT - ng/l
NITROGEN AS N
HH3

0.24
0.34
0.57
0.79
0.10

O.OB
0
0
0
0
0
o.te
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. II
3.26
0.29
3.26
0
ORO.

2.98
1.92
1.43
1 .49
2.711

1.30
1.68
1 .86
3.48
2.30
2.97
2.06
2.56
2.66
2.86
3.02
2.43
3.56
4.87
2.68
3.04
2.31
2.66
4.87
1.30
N02

0.001
0.012
0.020
0.018
0.014

0.010
0
0.003
0.002
0.004
0.001
0.012
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.004
0.007
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.001
0. 006
0.020
0
N03

0.09
0.08
0
0.06
0

0.21
0.07
0. 1 1
0.22
0. 10
O.OB
0.06
0. 19
0.17
0.36
0.51
0.41
0.26
0. 16
0.07
0.09
0.07
0. 15
0. 41
0
NHj
ADDED

1 .43
2.84
2.84
2.84
2.84

2.80
2.84
2.84
2.80
2.80
2.85
2.90
2.83
2.83
2.84
2.84
2.84.
2.84
2.84
2.84
2.84
2.84
2 .77
2.85
1 .43
TOTAL

4.74
5. 19
4.86
5.20
7.00

4.40
4.59
4.81
6.50
5.20
5.90
5.51
5.60
2.83
6.06
6.37
5.69
6.65
7.87
5.59
6.08
8.48
5.68
8.48
2.83
TOTAL PO|)-P
NAT.

1 .84
0.66
0.58
0.60
0.21

0.54
0.40
0.47
0.80
0.63
1 .03
0.94
0.96
0.70
1.14
0.85
0.77
1 .29
0.55
0.73
0.73T
1.34
0.81
1 .84
0.21
DOSED

1 .84
0.66
0.56
1.19
0.80

1.13
1.13
1 .20
1 .40
1 .22
1 .62
1.53
1 .55
0.70
1 .14
0.85
0.77
1 .88
1 . 14
0.73
0.73
1 .34
1 . IE
1 .88
0.58
SETTLING POND EFFLUENT - ng/l
NITROGEN AS N
NHj

2.43
0
0
0.66
0.07

0
0
0.69
0
0
0.59
2.34
0
0.92
0.62
_
1.03
0
0.28
0
0.39
l.ll
0.53
2.43
0
ORG.

10.26
3. 14
4.37
4.48
4.06

4.83
3.75
5.06
4. 18
2.34
4.57
3.15
4.04
3.35
3.50
_
4.64
4.81
2.00
5.05
3.72
3.66 •
4.24
10.26
2.00
N02

0
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.002

0.032
0
0.003
0.001
0
0.001
0
0
0.001
0.002
_
0.003
0.001
0.001
0 -
0.003
0.001'
0.001
0.003
0
N03

0
0.03
0.03
0.05
0

0. 18
0.05
0
0. 1 1
0
0.01
0
0.01
0.04
0.33
_
0.41
0. 14
O.IB
0.03
0,05
0.03
0.06
0.41
0
TOTAL

12.69
3. 17
4.40
5. 19
4. 13

5.01
3.80
5.57
4.29
2.34
5. 17
5.49
4.05
4.31
4.45
.
6.08
4.95
2.1(6
5.08
4. 16
4.80
4.84
12.6 >
2.34
TOTAL PO,-P

4.92
0.63
0.66
0.93
0.23

0.62
0.80
0.87
0.73
0.89
0.93
1 .83
1 .31
1 .00
0.90
.
0.64
O.B3
0.86
0.80
0.70
0.78
1 .04
4.92
0.23
FINAL EFFLUENT - ng/l
NITROGEN AS N
NH3

0
0 .
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0.01
0.53
0
1 .64
0
1.51
0.33
0
0
0
0
0
0.16
1 .64
0
ORG.

2.30
3.46
4. 1 1
4, 15
4.08

4.92
3.56
3.00
3.39
2.09
2,75
3. 17
H.70
3.41
2.31
3.91
2.45
1.89
2.87
4.21
3.85-
3.63
3.37
4.92
1 .89
N02

0.008
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.001

0.005
0
0
0
0
0.001
0
0
0.001
0.005
0.005
0.009
0
0.001
0
0.002
0.001
0.002
0.009
0
N03

0
0.01
0.04
0.03
0

0.22
0.03
0
0. 10
0
0
0
0
0.07
0.31
0.38
0.40
0. 12
0.07
0.01
0.05
0.05
0.09
0.40
0

TOTAL

2.30
3.47
4. 15
4.18
4. 18

5. 14
3.61
3.00
3.49
2.09
2.76
3.70
4.70
5. 12
2.63
5.81
3. 19
2.01
2.94
4,22
3.90
3.68
3.64
5.81
2.CI
TOTAL PO,,-P

1.12
0.65
0.63
0,67
C.2I

0.65
0.73
0.73
0.67
0.57
0.75
1.12
1.48
1.35
0.69
0.94
0.47
0.36
0.53
0.71
0.61
0.66
0.74
1 .48
0.21

-------
                                                  TABLE 20
                                          MONTHLY AVERAGE DATA
                                      WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
                                 THE  COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION
                                           AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
Month
(1968-69)
Nov.'1)
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar'(3)
Ma>>
June'5)
Average
Maximum' )
Minimum'8)
Flow
mgd
5.8
12.9
14.1
17.9
10.4
6.4
14.8
n.s'7)
26.6
0.8
BOD,
Inf.
106
109
147
120
65
127
133
124
250
14
mg/1
Eff.
12
39
47
39
17
11
34
28.4
126
2
BOD, Ibs/day BOD Removal Temperature, °C
Inf.
5,130
11,700
17,300
17,900
5,640
6,780
16,382
11,547(7)
49,474
782
Eff.
580
4,200
5,530
5,820
1,480
587
4,167
3,195<7)
19,743
38
Percent
88.7
64.2
68.0
67.5
73.8
91.3
74.6
72.3
98.4
20.9
Ambient
!6 8<*>
I'M*6)
15. 2^6)
13.9(6)
15.5(6)
21.3
21.6
17.0
34.2
15.0
Inf.





32.7
33.0
32.9
35.6
27.8
Pondl
22.3
25.4
27.7
25.8
22.4
28.8
31.0
26.2
32.2
20.0
Pond 4
17.2
22.8
22.7
20.6
18.7
25.6
30.4
22.6
32.0
15.0
     15 days only
     Changeover, BOD values not included
     No data collected
     Plant influent flow controlled - 5 mgd - May 1-19
     Plant influent flow controlled - 10 mgd - May 20 - June 13
     Weather bureau data - Lake Alfred
'')   Value not absolute due to intentional bypass during research and plant overloads
'  )   Maximum and minimum values are from daily operations during 1968-69 citrus processing season

-------
FIGURES

-------
                                                   FIGURE  1
AUBURNDAL
                                     LOCATION  MAP
                                THE  COCA-COLA  COMPANY
                                     FOODS DIVISION
                                    Auburndole, Florida
                              BLACK,  CROW   AND EIDSNESS,  INC
                                     Engineers

-------
                                     FIGURE  2
PROJ      LOCATION
           F-2

-------
 AUTOMATIC SAMPLER
(PROPORTIONAL FLOW)

Auburndal*, Florida
BLACK, CROW AND EIDSNESS, »
Enfineers
CITY EFFLUENT
® = DALL TUBES
AQUA AMMONIA
a
rL_____ AUTOMATIC SAMPLERS
	 L © = rPflRTlRIFt
PHOSPHORIC 1 1 I
ACID 	 "" "*" _^^

RAW
WASTE
M01JM3AO
UJ
^ C3
>« x
t— e»
2: o-
WASTENATER TREATMENT PL
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY
FOODS DIVISION
• IFRITRR'! ffit VS/~ > . 	 	 -. ^/7\ --,
yy Hunniuna \.\> ) SETTLING ^^~"~ •• — *\J/
— ®- 5 5? 5- Y BASIM

r * ~* * * _J"™""™T
~ LEVEL 1 i
® AERATION CONTROLl 1 / POLISHING PONDS
BASIN \ \y
*-JT?
TRANSFFR
PUMPS (3)
RECIRCULATED SLUDGE
TREATED WASTE
r

-------
99.99
               99.9 99.S
                                  99    98
                                                 95       90
                                                                                                                                              1    0.5    O.Z  0.1 0.05
                                                                                                                                                                              0.01
                                                                            70     CO    50    40     30     20
 0.01
           0.05 0.1  0.2    0.5    1
10        20     30     40    50    60     70      80        90
       Percent of  Time  Equal  to  or Less  Than
                                                                                                                                        98
                                                                                                                                                          99.8  99.9
                                                                                                                                                                             99.99

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
                                                                                                                                          1    0.5    0.2  0.1  0.05
                                                                                                                                                                         0.01
                                                                  80     70    60    50    40    30     20
0.01
          0.05  0.1  0.2    0.5
                                                                  20      30    40   SO    60    70     80
                                                              Percent  of Time Equal  to  or  Less Than
90      95
                 98    99
                                   99.8 99.9
                                                      99.99

-------
     WJ9          99.9
   32
   28
   24
                                   J»	n       98      90       80     70    60    M    40    80     20        10
                  2      1    0.5    0.1  0.1 0.05
                                                  -	f


                                                                                                           :
   20
                                                                                                                           X
3
   16
   12
                                                                                                                                       I
                                                                                       /


          ::p

                                                                                                                                                 _


                           r
                                                                        :
                             i

              0.05  0.1   U    U    1     2
                                                   5       U        20     30    40    50    60     70     60
                                                                 Percent  of  Time  Equal  to  or Less Than
90      95       98     99          99.8 99J           99.99

-------
    99.99
                99.9  99.8
99   98      95     90	80    70    60    50    40    80    20
                                                                                                       10
                                                                                                               5        2    1    O.J    0.2  0.1 0.08      0.01
  45
  «a
  35
 .30
  25


                                       	|_ L	

                                                                                :


                                                                    -H

                                                                                                                       :EE
8

                                                                                              ±EE
   13
   10
                 3*rl
                                    T
                                                  '

                                                                   ;
                                                                 :

                                                                                                 ±
            S-






     ui      oo9 ai   oj   oj   i    2
                     10       20     JO    40   M   80   70     80

                          Percent  of Time  Equal to or Less  Than
                                                                                                       90      95       98    99
                                                                                                                                      89.8 99.9

-------
   100
   140
  120
   100
co  00
   .0
   It
   10
Jf

































































1
j




















01
























































r

|






;




, ,
;










































































1
1
<

1
1
1

i






J

,;
f»
/>


>












1























































"* fc"
li

,*••

j '


1 E
• !





i S
• *
Ti
. 4










0.05
99.9
T i
















































•' ar


! °




fl 1 fl*

r *~




r , ~Ty
• J^
C ' S
= -<

* ^ CT-

*t| *J*
;3 S
J *-


E S.
T' •


r-

S ^
~ —
*i o

J_,
0.1
93

























































n





P-
C.
C




•
'


7
fj
r

1
f
r*






0
.8





























































r
r
r
2

;x
»

i —
1 ~



•«
rt


-
c-

h.





2


















































































3






























































































0
























































































A
99











































































.. „











1
98










	 	

































	
























'

















2













































































•











3
























































































5

















































































/





>

















































































S




















































































m


/•

































































































90
























. .



























_±1.


"~

i

4

S1




1 '
" 11
i'
.. 4a. .


	 -^

II

_ ',X •
''M

^ :
.




.

i ; l :
10
80 70 80

-£ -JH
™
















_,_ 4

::: - 	




















T

ii in it






^t





j




at: i in i
tt"" "l i M.
t 1
« /
. T
s
•iy r- *

/*
S • «
-IxC 1
x
; > j , 4;
2f : '« '.
f:!^±:ti
S :=±: E:::;
_1 JXI
it :± 11 - _

ff •

it: ~"ii lr~": i


4 U " ~ '
1 I T I .
20 30 40
50 40
, i.ii ; !


II III I





.-t 	 I-M-I.



















^










T

tt 	



. .
,
....

tt I ± it
h ^1 T
II j _ X





i ^

V ,•
23
tltl •
^ilJ
Z;
u ;
...

^•f- "^T 1 t~ i ~f '
f I i 1 1 i
1 II

"1 "f
'i t t r
it iit~

. ., 	 	 .


• '-
j 	 ± T
, : t 1
tt




.. -. .
50 GO
:T
















































i

«





















'














JO























































/























































































/















•


















20


r T


1 j:

1 j
. i. . j.






















..i ...
J i
in
~ lit













_ iL

V
! ii!
*










,

.
"I ji"

















.



80
10







L






































s
1 * •





, . ..
































j -
90





































































































































\























































































,












































E
i





































«



X













































-.









































/



'































•











2










	 	


























S'
S





































. —










98
1
"F
±i:
±. . .t
































/













; ,
.







r"Z~ T
IE I
HI . J
14. I


i










_ _ _ .











99
0






















































1

! ' i



























.1 ...



5












































































'




































































































0























































































M
z























































































.«
0.1

: t








— —








- 1 J



































.

U-





M
.
u
h

n
J!
- . n


i '


— 1 r

it
tt
tt


i |
'

. t
99.9
0.05
i 1


















J









J






























.















	 r —









i _i


























































































0.1























































































99.
                                                        Percent of  Time Equal to or  Less  Than

-------
                                                                                                                                        1    O.S    0.2  0.1  0.05      0.01
260
240
200
 n, n
 i ?o
                                                                  80     70    60    50    40    30     20
    0.01       0.05 0.1   0.2    O.S    1     2
10       20     30    40   50    60    70
     Percent  of Tine  Equal  to  or Less Than

-------
                                  FIGURE  10
F-10

-------
                                                                                         FIGURE   11
                                      DAILY OPERATION  RECORD
                                                             WEEKDAY
                                                                          MONTH
    FLOW  DATA - H6D  (ftCURES  IN TEN THOUSANDS OF  GALLONS (POND t)  AND THOUSANDS OF GALLONS (RS), AS
                       RECORDED ON TOTALIZERS.   READINGS TAKEN AT	N., EACH DAY.)
         EFFLUEHT POND 1
     PRESENT DAY
     PREVIOUS DAY
     DIFFERENCE
                RECIRCULATED SLUDGE
                                    «  INFLUENT FLOW
    PLANT  INFLUENT

EFFLUENT  POND 1
RECIRCULATED SLUDGE -_
FLOI
   PHOSPHORIC ACID

  TIME
  SETTING (GALS/24  HRS)
                                            NUTRIENT  FEED
                                              AMMONIA

                                              TIME
                                              SETTING  (GALS/24 HRS)
       RAINFALL
   INCHES
                    WASTE SLUDGE
   ROUTINE SAMPLING  AND TESTING RESULTS
 SAMPLING POINT

t. PLANT INFLUENT
2. POND 1 EFFLUENT
3. POND 2 EFFLUENT
4. POND 3 EFFLUENT
S. POND 4 EFFLUENT
6. RECIRCULATED IASTE
7. PLANT INFLUENT


8. POND 1


B. ADAMS

 REMARKS:
TYPE OF SAMPLE

DAILY COMPOSITE
DAILY GRAB
DAILY COMPOSITE
BAILY GRAB
DAILY COMPOSITE
DAILY GRAB
GRAB
BRAB
BAILY COMPOSITE
TEMP.
°C.
-

-
-

-
-
-
-
-
_
_
-
-
-
pH





-
-
-







00
•t/l
-














COD
•»/l

-

-

-
-
-



-
-
-

BOD
•B/l

-

-

-
-
-
-
-
_
—
-
-

SETT.
SOL.
• I/!



-




-
-
_



—
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TOTAL
•B/l



-











* VOL.


-
-

-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
—
                                                                              OPERATOR
                                                  F-1

-------
APPENDICES

-------
                                                               APPENDIX 1
                 GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSES TAKEN DURING
                         JANUARY AND FEBRUARY
               INDICATED THE FOLLOWING IN-PLANT FLOWS
                     AND WASTEWATER STRENGTHS: (1>
     Source                           Flow, mgd          COD,
The Coca— Cola Company

    Hi-C Plant                                   2.0              2,750
    By-products, including
      feed mill and molasses
      evaporator                                2.0               640

    Concentrate Plant
      Process                                   3.0               810
      Evaporator                                7.0                50

Adams Packing Company

    Concentrate Plant (total)                       8.4               660
    Juice Plant                                  1.5               830
    Sectioning Plant                              1.5               280
    By-products, including
      feed mill and molasses
      evaporator                                1.7               430
        These are grab samples taken during periods of overload at the wastewater
        treatment plant and the values are not considered to be typical under all operating
        conditions.

        Estimated flows.
                                A-l

-------
                                                                   APPENDIX 2

       AUBURNDALE - THE COCA-COLA  COMPANY  FOODS DIVISION

                 Kinetic Study at 20° C
                       Lo  =    92 mg/1       Air 5 1pm
                       S.S. =    160 mg/1
                       Samples filtered through glass wool
                       Calculated O= 1.06
No Nutrients -
Hours
2
4
6
8
13
24


.0833
.1666
.2500
.3333
.5420
1.0000
Let x = Lo/L
Let y = t
                                 83
                                 71
                                 44
                                 50
                                 30
                                 27
Lo/L
Experimental
1.11
1.29
2.09
1.84
3.07
3.40
Lo/L
Least Squares
1.33
1.55
1.76
1.97
2.51
3.68
                                                   Slope
                                                  dy
                                                  dx
                                                               2.35 = 2.56
                                                               .9167
                                                                 xy
m =
b =
m =
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
2
n 2 xy - 2 x
1.11
1.29
2.09
1.84
3.07
3.40
12.80
2y
1.11
1.29
2.09
1.84
3.07
3.40
0.0833
0.1666
0.2500
0.3333
0.5420
1.0000
0.0069
0.0277
0.0625
0.1111
0.2938
1.0000
0.0927
0.2149
0.5225
0.6133
1.6639
3.4000
      n2y2-(Z y)2
       x -
                      xy
nS y2-(2  y)2

6(6.5073) -(12.80)(2.375)
    6(1.502) -(2.37S)2
                                  2.373
                                   n
                                     = m
                                          1.502
                                                               6.5073
                              = 2.564
b =    (1.502X12.80)-(2.375X6.5073) =
           6(1.502)-(2.375)2
                                          n =
  number of points
XQ = (2.564)(0) + 1.119 = 1.119
xj = (2.564)00833)+ 1.119 = 1.333
x2 = (2.564)01666) + 1.119 = 1.546
x3 = (2.564)02500) + 1.119 = 1.760
x4 = (2.564)(.3333) + 1.119= 1.967
x5 = (2.564)05420) + 1.119 = 2.508
x. = (2.564)(1.000) +1.119 = 3.683
                                  A-2

-------
                                                                  APPENDIX 3

        AUBURNDALE - THE  COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

               Kinetic Study at 20° C
                      Lo         92 mg/1       Air 5 1pm
                      S.S.    =   160 mg/1
                      Samples filtered through glass wool
                      Calculated 0 = 1.06

Nutrients - 5 mg/1 NH3  - N + 1 mg/1 - PO4 - P ^2Q°C = 2.77

       t              L           Lo/L Experimental            Lo/L Least Squares

     .0833            79                 1.16                         1.76
     .1666            62                 1.48                         1.99
     .2500            31                  2.97                         2.22
     .3333            35                 2.63                         2.45
     .5420            25                 3.68                         3.03
     1.0000            24                 3.84                         4.30

                                               dy        2.54
                                                    ~          = 2'77
                                                    y              xy
       1.             1.16           .0835          .0069          .0969
       2.             1.48           .1666          .0277          .2466
       3.             2.97           .2500          .0625          .7425
       4.             2.64           .3333          .1111          .8766
       5.             3.68           .5420          .2938          1.9946
       6.             3.84           1.0000          1.0000          3.8400
                    15.76          2.375           1.502          7.797
             6(7.797) -(15.760X2.375)  _
       m =   - /» -  ~
               6(1. 502) -(2.375)2
             (1.502X15.760) - (2.375X7.797)  _
       b ~      6(1. 502) -(2.375)2
                            x0 = (2.774)(0) +1.529 = 1.529
                            Xl = (2.774)(.0833) + 1.529  = 1.761
                            x2 = (2.774)(. 1666) + 1.529  = 1.991
                            x3 = (2.774)(.2500) +1.529  = 2.223
                            x4 = (2.774)03333) +1.5 29  = 2.454
                            x5 = (2.774)05420) + 1-529  = 3.033
                            x6 = (2.774)(1.000) +1.529  = 4.303
                                  A-3

-------
                                                             APPENDIX 4

                - THE COCA-COLA COMPANY FOODS DIVISION

                                                    k20°C = 2'86

                       Lo      =      121
                       Temp   =       25° C
                       S.S.     =      220 mg/1
                                      Lo/L                   Lo/L
                                  Experimental            Least Squares
 .0833           121                  1.00                   0.729
 .2708            95                  1.27                   1.413
 .3542            81                  1.49                   1.717
1.0000            29                  4.17                   4.073
                             dy         3.344
                       Slope        =
                                                y2
                                                       xy
  1.           1.00             .0833           .0069          .0833
  2.           1.27             .2708           .0733          .3439
  3.           1.49             .3542           .1244          .5278
  4.           4.17            1.0000          1.0000         4.1700
    S=        7.93            1.708           1.206          5.125

      4(5.125)-(7.93X1.708) _
m ~      4(1.206)-(1.70S)2

  _   (1.206X7.93)-(1.708X5.125)  = 0.425
          4(1.206)-(1.708)2

                         x0 = 3.648 (0) + 0.425 =  0.425
                         xj = 3.648(.0833) + 0.425 = 0.729
                         x2 = 3.648C2708) + 0.425 = 1.413
                         x3 = 3.648C3542) + 0.425 = 1.717
                         x4 = 3.648(1.000) + 0.425 = 4.073

ir  -V  n   0T-20
kt  k20°C G
k20°C =
» 3.65
  1.276
k20oc =
                             A-4

-------
                                                             APPENDIX  5
                      THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS
                        AERATED LAGOON  DESIGN
                THE COCA-COLA COMPANY  FOODS DIVISION
                          AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA
                             (Reference No. 3)
Influent BOD   ,  XT>    .   „.   ^  ,
	= kt (Detention Tune) +1
Effluent BOD    *
        Where k* = BOD removal rate coefficient

Combined Wastewater Characteristics

        Flow, mgd                                             30
        BOD, mg/1                                             130
        BOD, Ibs/day                                        32,500
        BOD removal rate coefficient (^2Q°(^                      * '^
        Temperature coefficient, O                               1.05
        Wastewater temperature, °F                              91.5
        Minimum monthly ambient temperature, °F                  59.0

1.       Pond No. 1 Temperature 25.4° C
                                           x


                =   (1.46X1-05)5-4


        *25.4   =   L9°

2.       Detention Time (Winter Conditions)

        Initial BOD _
        Final BOD  ~  25A

                    130
                    — =  1.90D + 1


                    D = 5.2 days.
                                A-5

-------
3.       Volume - (Average Pond Depth 12.0 Feet)

         V       =   MGD x D

                 =   (30X5.2)

                 =   156 MMG = 20.9 mcf = 1.74 mft2 = 40A

                      =   (30X91.5) +(12)(1.74)(59)   =     o
                  rw           30+(12X1.74)                h

                      Compared to 77.7°F from actual plant operation.

4.       Oxygen Requirements

         Ibs02/day  = (1.3)(30X130X8.34)(.90)

                    = l,584pph

5.       Oxygen Due to Surface Aeration

         Ibs O2/hr/sq ft  =    0.7(7.8 - 2.0) x 62.4 x 10"6

                        =    253 x 10"6

         Surface area 1.74 x 106 sq ft

            Ibs02/hr    =    (253)(1.74)

                        =    440


6.       Oxygen Required from Mechanical Aerators

                 Nm   =    NfNs

                 N_   =    O2 from mechanical aerators

                 Nt    =    Total oxygen required

                 NL    =    O^ from surface aeration
                    9          £

                  1,144 =    1,584-440
                                   A-6

-------
7.        H. P. Required - (Assume 12 large units will be sufficient)

                       = 95 Ibs 02/hr
                 95 Ibs (Whr/hp
                 2.51bS02/hr    =38hp-Say40hp
                 .'.  12 - 40 hp units required (minimum)
                                  A-7

-------
                             LIST OF REFERENCES
1.     Fiske  and  Gay  —  Engineering Report on  Florida  Citrus Processing Industry
             Wastewater  Survey for  Florida Citrus Commission,  Lakeland,  Florida,
             (October 15,1965).

2.     McNary, R.R., Dougherty, M.H., Wolford, R.W., "Determination of the Chemical
             Oxygen Demand of Citrus Wastewaters." Sewage and Industrial Wastes, 29,
             8, 894 (August, 1957).

3.     Eckenfelder, W.W.,  Industrial Water Pollution Control, McGraw-Hill, New York
             (1966, page 206).

4.     Eckenfelder, W.W., "Designing Biological Oxidation Systems for Industrial Wastes."
             Wastes Eng. May, June, July, 1961.

5.     Penfound, W.T. and Earle, T.T., "The Biology of the Water Hyacinth." Ecological
             Monographs, 18,447 (1948).

6.     Clock, Raymond Maurice, "Nitrogen and Phosphorous Removal from a Secondary
             Sewage Treatment Effluent," Doctoral Dissertation, University of Florida,
             1968.

7.     Furman, T. de  S. and Gilcreas, F.W., "The  Application of Oxidation Ponds to
             Treatment of Residential Wastes,"  Phelps Laboratory, Department of Civil
             Engineering, University of Florida, unpublished,  1965.

8.     Mueller, J.A., Boyle, W.C., and Lightfoot, E.N., "Oxygen Diffusion Through a Pure
             Culture Floe of Zooglea Ramigera."  Proc. 21st Industrial Waste Conf.,
             Purdue University, Extension Service 121, 964 (1967).

9.     Eckenfelder, W.W., "A Theory of Activated Sludge Design for Sewage." Presented at
             "The  Activated  Sludge  Process in Sewage Treatment  — A Seminar,"
             University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, February 17,1966.

-------
             Additional  References — Not  Cited in Text
Moore, W.A., Kroner, R.C., and Ruchhoft, C.C., "Dichromate Reflux Method for
       Determination of Oxygen  Consumed."  Anal.  Chem. 21, 8, 953 (August,
       1949).

McNary, R.R., Wolford, R.W., and Patton, V.D., Food Technology, 5, 319 (1951).

Moore,  W.A., Ludzach,  F.J.,  and Ruchhoft,  C.C.,  "Determination of  Oxygen
       Consumed Values of Organic Wastes." Anal. Chem. 23, 9, 1927 (September,
       1951).

O'Neal, B.F., "Progress  Report No. 1, Citrus Waste  Research Program." Florida
       State Board of Health (August 5,1952).

Ibid., Final Report (August 10,1953).

McNary, R.R., Wolford,  R.W., and Dougherty, M.H. Proceedings 8th Industrial
       Wastes Conference, Purdue University (1953).

Wakefield,  J.W., O'Neal, B.F., and Kelson, F.S., Proceedings 9th Industrial Wastes
       Conference, Purdue University (1954).

McKinney, R.E., Poliakoff, L.,  and Weichlein, R.G. "Citrus  Waste Treatment
       Studies." Water and Sewage Works, 101, 123 (1954).

Dougherty, MM., Wolford, R.W., and McNary, R.R., "Citrus Waste Water Treatment
       of Activated Sludge." Sewage and Industrial Wastes, 27, 7, 821 (July, 1955).

Lackey, James  B., Call aw ay,  Wilson  T.,  and Morgan, George B.,  "Biological
       Purification  of Citrus Wastes." Presented  at  the 28th  Annual Meeting,
       Federation of Sewage  and Industrial Wastes Assns; Atlantic  City, N.J.,
       October 10-13,1955.

McNary, R.R.,  Wolford,  R.W., and Dougherty, M.H., "Pilot Plant Treatment of
       Citrus Wastewater by Activated Sludge." Sewage and  Industrial Wastes, 28,
       7, 894 (July, 1956).

Dougherty, M.H., and McNary, R.R., "Elevated Temperature Effect on Citrus Waste
       Activated Sludge." Sewage and Industrial Wastes, 20,1263 (October, 1958).

Ludwig, R.G., and Stone, R.V., "Disposal Effects  of Citrus by-products Wastes."
       Water and Sewage Works 109, 11, 410 (November, 1962).

Dougherty, M.H.,  "Activated  Sludge  Treatment of  Cirrus  Waste." Jour. Water
       Pollution Control Federation 36, 72 (January, 1964).

-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC: Black, Crow and Eidsness, Inc. Citrus Processing
Wastewater Treatment FWQA Publication No. WPRD-38-01-67.
1970.

ABSTRACT: Plant scale  studies were  performed to determine
 operational  and  treatment   parameters  for  citrus  processing
 wastewaters. Part I discusses treatment of concentrated  citrus
 processing wastewaters combined with  domestic  sewage using a
 modified activated sludge process; namely, extended aeration. Part
 II  discusses treatment of weak processing wastewaters using a
 system which functioned as an aerated lagoon. Extended aeration
 yielded  94  to  95 percent BOD  removal; however,  difficulties
 concerning  positive  control  of  the  treatment process were
 encountered. Variations   in  mixed  liquor   suspended   solids
 concentrations,  sludge volume indices, sludge reciiculation rates,
 and hydraulic loading were considered principal causes  adversely
 affecting the treatment process. Excess sludge buildup amounted to
 approximately 0.5 pounds per pound of influent BOD and sludge
 wastage accounted for the greater portion of overall nutrient
 removal from the system. The aerated lagoon process afforded 91
 percent  BOD removals when daily average  hydraulic and organic
 loadings were controlled at 6.4 mgd and 6,770 pounds, respectively
 (detention time 7.9 days). Kinetic studies yielded a BOD removal
ACCESSION  NO.


KEYWORDS:

Citrus wastewater
 treatment
Extended aeration
Aerated lagoons
Organic nutrients
 removal
Hyacinth plants
Cattle feed
Removal rates
 coefficient
Ecological study
COD/BOD ratio
BOD:N:P ratio
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC: Black, Crow and Eidsness, Inc. Citrus Processing
 Wastewater Treatment FWQA Publication No. WPRD-38-01-67.
 1970.

 ABSTRACT:  Plant  scale  studies were performed to determine
 operational  and treatment  parameters  for  citrus  processing
 wastewaters.  Part  I discusses treatment of concentrated citrus
 processing wastewaters  combined with domestic  sewage  using a
 modified activated sludge process; namely, extended aeration. Part
 II discusses treatment  of weak processing  wastewaters  using a
 system which functioned as an aerated lagoon. Extended aeration
 yielded 94  to  95  percent  BOD  removal; however, difficulties
 concerning  positive  control  of  the treatment  process  were
 encountered.  Variations  hi  mixed liquor  suspended  solids
 concentrations, sludge volume indices, sludge recirculation rates,
 and hydraulic loading were  considered principal  causes adversely
 affecting the treatment process. Excess sludge buildup amounted to
 approximately 0.5 pounds per pound of influent  BOD and sludge
 wastage  accounted for the greater  portion  of  overall  nutrient
 removal from the system. The aerated lagoon process afforded 91
 percent BOD removals when daily average hydraulic and organic
 loadings were controlled at 6.4 mgd and 6,770 pounds, respectively
 (detention time  7.9 days). Kinetic studies yielded a BOD removal
ACCESSION NO.

KEY WORDS:

Citrus wastewater
 treatment
Extended aeration
Aerated lagoons
Organic nutrients
 removal
Hyacinth plants
Cattle feed
Removal rates
 coefficient
Ecological study
COD/BOD ratio
BOD: N:P ratio
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC: Black, Crow and Eidsness, Inc. Citrus Processing
 Wastewater Treatment FWQA Publication No. WPRD-38-01-67.
 1970.

 ABSTRACT:  Plant  scale  studies were performed to determine
 operational   and treatment  parameters  for  citrus  processing
 wastewaters.  Part  I discusses treatment of concentrated citrus
 processing wastewaters combined with domestic sewage using a
 modified activated sludge process; namely, extended aeration. Part
 II discusses  treatment of weak processing wastewaters using a
 system which functioned as an aerated lagoon. Extended aeration
 yielded 94  to  95  percent  BOD  removal; however, difficulties
 concerning  positive  control  of  the treatment  process  were
 encountered.  Variations  in  mixed  liquor  suspended  solids
 concentrations, sludge volume indices, sludge recirculation rates,
 and hydraulic loading were  considered principal  causes adversely
 affecting the treatment process. Excess sludge buildup amounted to
 approximately 0.5 pounds per pound of influent  BOD and sludge
 wastage  accounted  for the greater portion of  overall nutrient
 removal from the system. The aerated lagoon process afforded 91
 percent BOD removals when daily average hydraulic and organic
 loadings were controlled at 6.4 mgd and 6,770 pounds, respectively
 (detention time  7.9 days). Kinetic studies yielded a BOD removal
ACCESSION NO.


KEYWORDS:

Citrus wastewater
 treatment
Extended aeration
Aerated lagoons
Organic nutrients
 removal
Hyacinth plants
Cattle feed
Removal rates
 coefficient
Ecological study
COD/BOD ratio
BOD:N:P ratio

-------
rate coefficient foe chnis processing wastewaten of 1.46 and an
avenge  temperature  coefficient  of  1.05.  Ecological  studies
indicated that BOD:N:P  ratios  of the older of 150:5:1  were
adequate for supporting the population of organisms required for
effective bio-oxidation. Organic nutrient  removal  studies  using
hyacinths indicated  a mhrfmnm  of 5 day,* detention would be
required to afford  substantial  nutrient  reduction.  Significant
organic  loading redactions (BOD.COD) wen also attained by the
hyacinth plant system during the 5-day detention period. It was
found mat dried hyacinth plants were similar in food value to
alfalfa hay and could be used as a supplement in cattle feed. This
report was submitted in fulfillment of Demonstration Giant No.
WPRD-3M1-67 between the Federal Water Quality Administration
and the  Coca-Cola Company. Foods Division.
rate coefficient for dtros processing wastewaten of 1.46 and an
avenge  temperature  coefficient  of  1.05.  Ecological  studies
indicated mat  BOD:N:P ratios of the order of  150:5:1  were
adequate for supporting the population of organisms required for
effective bio-oxidation.  Organic nutrient removal studies using
hyacinths indicated a minimum of 5  days* detention would be
required to  afford  substantial  nutrient reduction. Significant
organic loading reductions (BOD.COD) were abo attained by UK
hyacinth plant  system during the 5-day detention period. It was
found mat dried hyacinth plants were similar in  food value to
alfalfa hay and could be used as a supplement in cattle feed. This
report was submitted in ruHUhnent of Demonstration Grant No.
WPRD-38-01-67 between the Federal Water Quality Administration
and the Coca-Cola Company, Foods Division.
rate coefficient for citrus processing wastewaten of 1.46 and an
average  tempetanue  coefficient of  1.05. Ecological  studies
indicated mat  BOD:N:P ratios  of the  order of  150:5:1  were
adequate for supporting the population of organisms required for
effective bio-oxidation.  Organic nutrient removal studies  using
hyacinths indicated a minimum of 5  days' detention  would be
requked to  afford  substantial nutrient reduction. Significant
organic loading reductions (BOD.COD) were abo attained by the
hyacinth plant system duiing the 5^1ay detention period. It was
found mat dried hyacinth plants were shnflar in  food value to
alfalfa hay and could be used as a supplement in cattle feed. This
report was submitted in fulfillment of Demonstration Grant No.
WFRD-38-01-67 between the Federal Water Qnalty Administration
and the Coca-Cola Company, Foods Division.

-------
1

5
Accession Number

Organization
Coca-Cola
2

Subject Field & Group
05D
SELECTED WATER RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
Company, Foods Division
      Orlando, Florida
     Title
      Treatment of Citrus Processing Wastes
 10
Authorfs)
 Goodson, James B. and
 Smith, Jack J.; Black, Crow
 and Eidsness
16
    Project Designation
                                     O1  Note
                                     -fUDate:


                                        Project Number:   12060 Series
                                          July, 1970   Contract Number:  FWQA Grant
                                                                         WPRD 38-01-67
 22
     Citation
 23
Descriptors (Starred First)
*Citrus wastewater treatment
^Extended aeration
*Aerated lagoons
 Organic nutrients removal
 Hyacinth plants
 Cattle feed
 Removal rates coefficient
                                     Ecological  study
                                     COD/BOD ratio
                                     BOD:N:P ratio
 95 Identifiers (Starred First)
 27
Abstract
 Plant scale studies were performed to determine operational and treatment parameters
 for citrus processing wastewaters.  Part 1 discusses treatment of concentrated
 citrus processing wastewaters  combined with domestic sewage using a modified  activated
 sludge process; namely, extended aeration.  Part 11 discusses treatment of weak
 processing wastewaters using a system which functioned as an aerated lagoon.  Extended
 aeration yielded 94 to 95 percent BOD removal; however, difficulties concerning positive
 control of the treatment process were encountered.  Variations in mixed liquor sus-
 pended solids concentrations,  sludge volume indices, sludge recirculation rates,  and
 hydraulic loading were considered principal causes adversely affecting the treatment
 process.  Excess sludge buildup amounted to approximately 0.5 pounds per pound of
 influent BOD and sludge wastage accounted for the greater portion of overall  nutrient
 removal from the system.  The  aerated lagoon process afforded 91 percent BOD  removals
 when daily average hydraulic and organic loadings were controlled at 6.4 mgd  and
 6,770 pounds, respectively  (detention time 7.9 days).  Kinetic studies yielded a
 BOD removal.
Abstractor
	D.  W. Hill
                          Institution
                          	Southeast Water Laboratory, FWQA.
  WR:102 (REV. JULY I9S9)
  WRSIC
                                               SEND TO:
                                                  WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
                                                  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                  WASHINGTON. D. C. 20240
                                                                               ft GPO : 1971 O - 421-931

-------