-------
en
tr
evj
4000
3500 -
oq 3000
UJ
< 2500
Q
UJ
UJ
Ul
z
E
o
_i
X
o
2000
1500
1000
UJ
o
UJ
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
E 0.5
o
5 0.4
Ul
0.3
0.2
10 o.i
_L
_L
J_
_L
_L
J_
J_
_L
4/28 5/5 5/9 5/16 5/235/31 6/6 6/13 6/21 6/27 7/7 7/18 7/25
DAYS
_L
_L
_L
_L
J L
J_
_L
4/285/5 5/9 5/16 5/235/31 6/6 6/13 6/21 6/27 7/7 7/18 7/25
DAYS
Figure II. Feed rate vs. chlorine demand
69
-------
Table 12
MEASUREMENTS IN RIVER
MAY 31, 1978
INSTRUMENT #1
From Left Bank
Chlorine
% Loc.
5%
Time
8:30 am
Temp
26.5°C
Tap Water Check
Polly Branch
Polly Branch
Polly Branch
9:55 am
9:55 am
9:55 am
Holston RM 105.3
Above Polly
Above Polly
5%
Branch
Branch
11:00 am
11:15 am
11:30 am
Tap Water
11:40 am
11:50 am
12:00 pm
12:15 pm
12:30 pm
12:35 pm
12:40 pm
12:45 pm
12:50 pm
12:55 pm
1:00 pm
1:10 pm
1:20 pm
1:30 pm
Tap Water
1:40 pm
1:50 pm
27.0
27.0
27.0
Check
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
Check
27.0
27.0
Bottle No. Free
Background 0
0
11 0
385 0
5 0
375 0
13 0
13 .05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
mg/1 Total
0
1 . 10*
0
0
0
0
0
.05
0
0
0
0 . 66*
0
0
0
0.02
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.04*
0.02
0.02
*Tap Water
70
-------
Table 12 (Continued)
Time
MEASUREMENTS IN RIVER*
MAY 31, 1978
INSTRUMENT #2
Temp
Extra
Extra
10:55 am
11:03 am
11:10 am
11:20 am
11:25 am
11:30 am
11:40 am
11:50 am
12:00 noon
12:05 pm
12:10 pm
12:14 pm
12:18 pm
12:22 pm
12:25 pm
12:31 pm
12:35 pm
12:40 pm
12:43 pro
12:47 pm
12:51 pm
12:54 pm
12:57 pm
1:01 pm
1:06
1:10
27.0°C
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27. 0
27.3
27.5
27.6
27.7
27.8
27.8
28.0
27.8
27.7
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
28.5
28.5
Chlorine
Free mg/1 Total
100 yds. below channel
4 yds. below channel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.20
0.10
0
0
0
0
0.78
0.62
0.68
0.62
0.69
0
0
0
0
0
*Air boat anchored in discharge channel just below effluent from Unit 4.
Chlorine injection being done manually. Schedule: Unit 1 - 11:00 to
11:20 a.m. Unit 2 - 11:30 to 11:50 a.m. Unit 3 (chlorinated but unit
not operating) - 12:00 to 12:20 p.m. Unit 4 - 12:30 to 12:50 p.m.
71
-------
Table 13
MEASUREMENTS IN DISCHARGE CANAL
JULY 18, 1978
% From Left Bank of Discharge Canal
Chlorine
% Loc.
Blank
17
33
50
67
84
Time
(added CL2
8:30 am
8:34
Temp
to blank)
Chlorinating Unit 2
17
33
50
67
84
17
33
50
67
84
17
33
50
67
84
17
33
50
67
84
17
33
50
67
84
9:05
9:11
9:15
9:19
9:24
9:28
9:37
9:41
9:51
9:55
88
88
87
87
85
88
86
87
88
88
80
87
88
87
87
87
88
88
88
89
89
88
88
88
89
Bottle No.
from 9:00 a.m.
6
18
62
269
356
391
236
11
3
2
15
18
22
23
43
13
271
128
14
11
18
43
23
22
15
Free
2.1
0
0
0
0
0
to 9:30 a.m.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
2.38
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.35
.42
.02
0
0
.24
.43
0
0
0
.38
.47
.03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
72
-------
Table 13 (Continued)
MEASUREMENTS IN DISCHARGE CANAL
JULY 18, 1978
% From Left Bank of Discharge Canal Chlorine
% Loc. Time Temp Bottle No. FreeTotal
Blank .30 .40
Chlorinating Unit #4 from 10:00 a.m. to 10:10 a.m.
17 10:10 am 88 22 00
33 88 11 00
50 87 128 0 0
67 89 15 .25* .37
84 10:14 87 23 .03 .22
17 10:20 88 13 00
33 88 43 00
50 88 18 00
67 88 14 00
84 10:24 89 271 0 0
Chlorinating Unit #3 from 1.1:00 a.m. to 11:20 a.m.
17 11:10 89 18 00
33 88 43 0 .02
50 88 271 0 .38
67 90 13 0 .08
84 11:14 89 14 0 .08
17 11:20 89 23 00
33 89 15 0 .02
50 89 11 0 .33
67 89 128 0 .07
84 11:24 89 22 0 .07
17 11:30 89 391 0 0
33 89 236 0 0
50 89 11 0 .05
67 89 2 0 0
84 11:34 89 3 0 0
*Doubtful value since the maximum FRC concentration measured at the
condenser outlet was 0.14 mg/1.
73
-------
Table 13 (Continued)
MEASUREMENTS IN DISCHARGE CANAL
JULY 18, 1978
% From Left Bank of Discharge Canal Chlorine
% Loc. Time Temp Bottle No. Free Total
Chlorinating Unit //I from 12:00 to 1:00 p.m.
17 12:10 pm 90 15 0 .35
33 89 11 0 .02
50 89 43 00
67 89 14 00
84 12:14 89 13 00
10 12:25 90 356 0 .52
33 89 269 0 .05
50 89 62 00
67 89 18 00
84 12:29 89 6 00
10 12:40 90 11 .30* .47
25 90 15 0 .08
50 89 14 00
67 90 13 00
84 12:44 90 43 00
10% 12:48 90 Sample taken + 50' below 0 .21
the mouth of discharge
canal in Holston River
All of the samples above were collected + 150' up in discharge
canal. Moved sampling location to + 40' in discharge canal
(below rapids).
10% 12:55 89 271 0 .02
50 12:56 89 18 00
75 12:57 90 23 00
10 13:10 90 15 00
50 13:11 89 356 0 0
75 13:12 90 23 00
"Doubtful value since the maximum FRC concentration measured at the
condenser outlet was 0.16 mg/1.
74
-------
Table 14
MEASUREMENTS IN DISCHARGE CANAL
AUGUST 29, 1978
From Left Bank of Canal
% Loc.
Background
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
Time
C12 Water
8:25
8:30
8:35
Unit #1 9:
8:57
9:00
9:03
9:10
9:13
9:16
9:20
9:23
9:26
9:30
9:33
9:35
9:40
9:43
9:45
C12 Water
10:03
10:05
10:07
10:11
10:13
10:15
10:20
10:22
10:25
10:30
10:33
10:36
Temp Bottle No.
25.5
25.5
26.0
00 to 9:20 a.m.
26.0
26.3
26.3
26.2
27.0
26.5
27.0
27,0
26.2
20.3
27,0
26.3
27.0
27.1
27.0
(Test) (Unit 2)
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.1
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.1
27.1
Chlorine
Free
4.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.85
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
4.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.95
0
0
0
0
0.05
0
0
0.11
0.02
0.13
0
0
75
-------
Table 14 (Continued)
MEASUREMENTS IN DISCHARGE CANAL
AUGUST 29, 1978
From Left Bank of Canal
% Loc.
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
10
60
90
90
Total C12 =
ramp.
Time
10:40
10:42
10:45
Unit #3
11:03
11:05
11:07
11:10
11:12
11:14
11:20
11:22
11:24
11:31
11:35
11:37
11:41
11:44
11:46
Unit #4
12:10
12:13
12:15
12:18
12:20
12:22
12:27
12:29
12:31
12:36
12:38
12:40
12:43
.01 to .02
Temp Bottle No.
27.0
27.0
27.0
11:00 to 11:20 a.m.
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.2
27.0
27.3
27.3
27.2
27.3
27.6
28.0
12:00 to 12:20 p.m.
27.5
27.7
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.5
27.5
28.0
28.0
28.2
from discharge canal to wi
Chlorine
Free
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.24
.10
0
.24
.08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.25
0
0
.29
0
0
0
0
76
-------
In addition to sustained condenser efficiency, this feed rate is desirable
for the following reasons:
1. The condenser is chlorinated once per shift.
2. The length of feed allows sufficient time for periodic grab
sample analysis.
77
-------
SECTION 7
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS SUMMAKY
Introduction
This section summarizes the major findings of the three-phase study
of chlorine minimization conducted at the John Sevier Steam Plant and
focuses on integrating the results from all three phases into a compre-
hensive overview. Special emphasis is placed on condenser performance,
residual chlorine at the condenser outlet, the relationship of water
quality parameters to chlorine minimization, and potential lower limits
to the chlorination scheme at John Sevier. General recommendations for
chlorine minimization studies are also made.
Phase I of the study was a pilot phase intended to gather information
to design the Phase II of the study. Phase I focused on determining the
proper "direction" for frequency and duration of feed as well as collecting
descriptive data on the chlorination procedure in use at that time with its
associated parameters.
Based on the Phase I results, a more detailed test program with lower
feed rates and different combinations of frequency and duration of feed
were investigated in Phase II. The results from Phase II allowed the
development of a chlorination procedure which was implemented and conducted
in Phase III. In general, Phase III substantiated the hypotheses proposed
from Phase II, and indicated that lower limits of chlorination may be pos-
sible. We say "may" because Phase III indicated the strong possibility of
byproducts "masking" the true levels of FRC and TRC in the system. Caution
must therefore be used.
Apparent Cleanliness Factor
This section focuses on two major questions: (1) Has the condenser
performance, as measured by ACF, been adversely affected by the chlorine
minimization program?; and (2) Based on all available data, what are the
major factors influencing ACF?
Condenser Performance: 1974-1978--
The major motivation for the entire chlorination study was to deter-
mine if adequate condenser performance could be maintained at lower chlorine
feed rates. The following analysis compares ACF readings over time to deter-
mine if condenser performance has been significantly affected since the
chlorine minimization program was started. Table 15 gives the annual ACF
by unit with the sample size in parentheses and the overall annual ACF.
78
-------
TABLE 15. ACF'S FOR THE PERIOD 1974-1978
Unit
Year
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1
74.87 (3)
73.86 (8)
73.37 (15)
73.56 (16)
76.83 (18)
2
76.06 (5)
74.70 (5)
75.88 (14)
75.63 (16)
76.50 (18)
3
78.97 (5)
77.38 (8)
74.39 (13)
77.44 (16)
77.67 (21)
4
76.35 (3)
76.70 (9)
75.88 (14)
76.21 (14)
76.75 (16)
Overall
ACF
76.80 (16)
75.79 (30)
74.86 (56)
75.69 (62)
76.97 (73)
At first glance, the overall ACF seemed to decline from 1974 through
1976 and then started rising again. Since the chlorine minimization pro-
gram was started in May of 1976, the decline from 1974 to 1975 cannot be
attributed to the lower feed rate. No inlet water temperatures were availa-
ble for these years, so it cannot be conclusively labeled as inlet water
temperature variation. Since the chlorine minimization program started,
feed rates have been lowered substantially; so if there was a significant
deterioration of condenser performance as measured by ACF, it would seem
that the ACF would have steadily declined.
To test if the chlorine minimization program has had an adverse effect
on condenser performance, the available ACF data were divided into two groups--
the first being all ACF data prior to the minimization program, and the second,
ACF data gathered since. The difficulty in assessing the difference between
the two group means is the estimation of an appropriate standard error to
determine if the difference is significant or not. A comparison of the
variation in each group was made, but they were not significantly different
and were combined into a single estimate. The result of the statistical
test indicated no significant difference in the average ACF before or
during the chlorine minimization study. This conclusion is based on
several simplifying assumptions which had to be made since no data were
available to estimate and remove the effects of inlet water temperature,
etc. The following table summarized the statistical test:
TABLE 16. TEST OF CONDENSER PERFORMANCE - BEFORE AND DURING STUDIES
Before
ra = 57
X = 76.30
s = 5.4464
During
m = 180
X = 75.69
s = 4.8764
F Test for Equality of Variances
FC = 5.44642/4.87642 = 1.247
Not significantly different at
a = .05
Test of Difference in Mean ACF's
Pooled S2 = 25.1816 .". standard error = 0.7627
79
-------
Zcalc = 76.30 - 75.69 = 0.61 =
caic 0.7627 0.7627 °-/yyb
Not significantly different at a = .05.
Conclusion: There has been no detectable deterioration in condenser
performance during the chlorine minimization study.
Major Factors Influencing Condenser Performance as Measured by ACF:
The major factor influencing ACF for a fixed feed, frequency, and
duration of chlorination was water temperature. The effects of water
temperature are extremely large when compared to other factors. These
effects are large because increases in water temperature promote, among
other things, biofouling while also increasing the chlorine demand of
the water which results in less chlorine available as a mechanism for
biofouling control. A 3°F rise in temperature on the average results
in a 1 percent ACF reduction.
The second most important factor influencing ACF was the amount of
free residual chlorine available at the condenser inlet. The FRC at
the condenser inlet in turn was a function of the chlorine dosage, the
inlet water temperature, the duration of feed, and various water quality
parameters. A regression model characterizing the free residual chlorine
to be found at the condenser inlet has been developed. Since it is based
on Phase II and III data combined, a note of caution must be made--Phase II
data were collected with a faulty chlorinator while Phase III, for the
majority of the data, had a new chlorinator. Therefore, simply combining
the data, fitting a regression model and expecting accurate, unbiased
results cannot be done. The regression model was developed as a point of
reference and as an aid for discussion and further investigation. Having
qualified the model, it is
FREE-IN = 0.7213 - 0.0011 COND - 1.0946 ORGN + 0.4118 CL2 - 0.0073 IWT
where FREE-IN is the amount of free residual chlorine (mg/£) available at
the condenser inlet, COND is conductivity (jjMHOS), ORGN is organic nitro-
gen (mg/£), CL2 is the chlorine dosage (mg/1), and IWT is the inlet water
temperature (°F). This model had an r2 of 0.66, EMS of 0.0166, and an F
value of 21.41, based on 4 parameters and 45 degrees of freedom.
This model indicates that a rise in conductivity or organic nitrogen
or inlet water temperature reduces the amount of FRC at the condenser inlet.
Also, as the chlorine dosage increases, the FRC at the condenser inlet
increases.
Another important factor affecting ACF was the frequency of feed.
Phase II data indicated that lower feed rates combined with more frequent
dosing of the system maintained condenser performance. Frequency of feed
must be combined with an appropriate dosage of chlorine to provide suffi-
cient FRC at the condenser inlet to meet condenser demand.
80
-------
To maintain satisfactory condenser performance while minimizing/
optimizing chlorination, an appropriate feed, frequency, and duration
scheme must be devised. These factors at John Sevier were found to be
highly temperature dependent and a function of the system and condenser
demand. The impact of water quality must also be examined for its
effects. In studies being conducted at other plants, it is recommended
that a similar sequence of tests be done to identify inlet water tempera-
ture effects, system and condenser demands, and factors affecting FRC at
the condenser inlet, with special attention to the initial chlorine
dosage, residuals at the condenser outlet, and water quality parameters.
Residual Chlorine at the Condenser Outlet
Free and total residual chlorine readings at the condenser outlet
are a source of two important pieces of information: (1) when combined
with condenser inlet readings, condenser demand can be investigated; and
(2) the readings can indicate when a chlorination scheme has too high a
chlorine dosage. This is not to say that the outlet alone can be used
as a control point.
The following table summarizes the total and free residual chlorine
at the condenser outlet by phase:
TABLE 17. MEAN FRC AND TRC AT CONDENSER OUTLET FOR PHASES II AND III
Phase Mean FRC (mg/1) Mean TRC (mg/1)
II 0.38 1.04
III 0.31 0.86
Table 17 indicates an 18 percent reduction on the average of FRC at
the outlet with a 17 percent reduction in TRC between Phases II and III,
with no decline in condenser performance. The recommended chlorination
scheme, based on Phase II results, was successful in reducing the chlorine
level at the condenser outlet.
Several factors seemed to be significantly correlated with the FRC
at the condenser outlet. Table 18 lists the factors and the simple
correlation coefficient.
The fact that most of the water quality parameters are negatively
correlated indicates that as the levels go up, the amount of FRC at the
condenser outlet goes down. The positive correlation with the 5- and
10-minute demands is puzzling. As water demand increases, the FRC at
the condenser outlet must decrease. Therefore, this correlation analysis
is interesting but highly suspect since expected chemical results did
not hold true.
81
-------
TABLE 18. FACTORS CORRELATED- WITH THE FRC AT THE CONDENSER OUTLET
Factor Simple Correlation Coefficient
Chlorine Dosage 0.62
5-Minute Demand 0.41
10-Minute Demand 0.59
FRC at Condenser Inlet 0.80
Conductivity -0.26
Alkalinity -0.42
Total Suspended Solids 0.33
Ammonia -0.26
Organic Nitrogen -0.51
Total Nitrates-Nitrites 0.24
Kjeldahl Nitrogen -0.43
^Significant at the 0.10 level or smaller.
Condenser Consumption of Free Residual Chlorine
Estimated Condenser Demand
Estimates of chlorine consumed in the condenser, called condenser
demand for simplicity, have varied substantially during the three phases
of the study. Based on system variability, chlorinator malfunctions, and
even the variability of condenser demand due to extraneous factors, the
average estimates have changed. Phase I estimated condenser demand at
0.5 mg/1 FRC with feed rates between 4500 and 6000 lbs/24 hrs. Phase II
data estimated condenser demand at 0.08 mg/1 FRC with feed rates between
1500 and 4500 lbs/24 hrs. Also noted in Phase II was the decrease in con-
denser demand of FRC as the feed rate dropped. A feed rate of 4500 lbs/24
hrs had an average condenser demand for FRC of 0.13 mg/1, 2500 lbs/24 hrs
had an average demand of 0.07 mg/1, and 1500 lbs/24 hrs had an average of
0.03 mg/1. Phase III estimated condenser demand of FRC at an average of
0.04 mg/1 with the bulk of the data from a feed rate of 2500 lbs/24 hrs
with its associated average condenser demand of 0.04 mg/1.
In order to meet condenser demand of FRC and ensure adequate disin-
fecting action, a minimum FRC at the condenser inlet of 0.04-0.08 mg/1
must be available. Adding in detection error of about 0.05 mg/1 at the
chlorine dosages noted in Phase III, a measured FRC of at least 0.09-
0.12 mg/1 at the condenser inlet appears necessary to ensure that condenser
demand is met.
Factors Affecting Condenser Demand
A correlation analysis was carried out to identify factors which may
significantly affect condenser demand. Table 19 below summarizes the
factors correlated with condenser demand of FRC at a significance level
of 0.05 or smaller.
82
-------
TABLE 19. FACTORS CORRELATED WITH CONDENSER DEMAND OF FRC
Factor Simple Correlation Coefficient
FRC at Condenser Inlet 0.69
Conductivity -0.32
Ratio of Condenser Inlet
FRC/TRC 0.72
A regression model was estimated which explained 61 percent of the total
variation in condenser demand. The model was
Delta-F = -0.2857 + 0.4353 Free-In + 0.0039 ALKA -0.1795 D5
where Delta-F is the predicted condenser demand of FRC, Free-In is the
amount of FRC at the condenser inlet, ALKA is the alkalinity of the water,
and D5 is the 5-minute chlorine demand of the water. Since this model
is based on data combined from Phases II and III, it is intended as a
point of reference and discussion and not for prediction. Phase II
data were gathered under different circumstances than Phase III, and
their combination cannot be depended upon for reliable estimates of
the coefficients. However, the factors which are significant and the
signs of the coefficients are interesting and seem reasonable. As the
FRC at the condenser inlet goes up, condenser demand goes up. As the
alkalinity goes up, the demand goes up. As the water demand rises,
the condenser demand drops—which seems surprising until you realize
that the rise in water demand reduces the FRC at the inlet, which
results in lower condenser consumption of FRC.
The correlation coefficients when viewed with the regression model
indicate that the condenser demand of FRC is highly dependent on the
FRC level at the condenser inlet. The other factors in turn affect the
FRC level at the condenser inlet and show up as being "related" to
condenser demand.
Negative Consumption
In both Phases II and III, occurrences of "negative" consumption of
FRC was noted. Since this may be an instrument error under certain cir-
cumstances, an analysis was carried out to identify any extreme conditions
associated with the negative consumption. Table 20 shows factors which
were significantly correlated with negative FRC condenser demand.
83
-------
TABLE 20. FACTORS CORRELATED- WITH NEGATIVE FRC CONDENSER CONSUMPTION
Factor Simple Correlation Coefficient
Conductivity -0.48
Total Organic Carbon -0.65
Total Nitrates-Nitrates -0.53
Chlorine Dosage -0.50
""Significant at the 0.10 level or smaller.
A regression model was developed to see which combination of factors
explained the variation in negative condenser consumption of FRC. A model
explaining 61 percent of the variation is:
Neg = -0.74 + 0.27 Free-In -0.89 NOX +0.01 ALKA + 0.42 CL2 -.20 CL22
The model identifies alkalinity (ALKA) and total nitrates-nitrites (NOX) as
significant factors. In addition, the chlorine dosage (CL2) and the amount
of FRC at the condenser inlet (Free-In) also have an effect on the negative
condenser consumption of FRC (Neg). It should be noted that the Phase III
analysis showed that only conductivity was a significant factor and that
no regression model was adequate to explain the Phase III data. It would
appear, therefore, that water quality is most closely connected with the
apparent negative consumptions and that water quality parameters are highly
interrelated. This in turn suggests that various compounds are being formed
with the nitrogens which mask the true levels of FRC present. Therefore,
this model should be used only as a general tool.
Chlorine Demand of the Water
Phase II data indicated a possible relationship between total organic
carbon and the chlorine damand of the water. Phase III data showed that
the 1-, 5-, and 10-minute demands were correlated with several factors
which may directly affect the demand. Table 21 below shows those factors
significant at the 0.10 level or smaller and the coefficients for Phases II
and III data combined.
An attempt to explain the variation of the 1-minute demand with a
regression model was unsuccessful in arriving at a model which explained
a large portion of the variation. A stepwise regression procedure did
put chlorine dosage, total organic carbon, and inlet water temperature
in the model: but only 10 percent of the variation was explained.
The 5-minute demand was modeled as a function of the chlorine dosage
and pH and explained 77 percent of the variation. The model was
D5 = -1.1958 + 0.4427 CL2 + 0.1218 pH
with an error mean square of 0.0060 and the model F value of 71.55.
84
-------
TABLE 21. FACTORS CORRELATED WITH CHLORINE DEMAND AND THE
ASSOCIATED CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Factor
1 Minute
5 Minute
10 Minute
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Chlorine Dosage
FRC at Condenser
A. Inlet
B. Outlet
TRC at Condenser
A. Inlet
B. Outlet
Inlet Water Temperature
Conductivity
Alkalinity
Total Suspended Solids
Total Organic Carbon
Ammonia
Organic Nitrogen
Kjeldahl Nitrogen
0.39 0.78
0.25
0.41
0.49
0.55
0.39
0.50 0.42
0.35
0.28
-0.32
-0.25
-0.35
0.79
0.40
0.59
0.61
0.60
0.28
-0.26
0.27
-0.37
-0.30
-0.41
Similarly, the 10-minute demand was modelled as a function of chlorine
dosage and pH also. The model explained 67 percent of the total variation,
with an error mean square of 0.0155 and a model F value of 42.81. The model
is
D10 = -1.5820 + 0.5504 CL2 + 0.1627 pH.
These models are consistent with what would be expected and has been
observed in Phases II and III. Again, a note of caution on the models--
since they are based on data gathered under two extremely different sets
of conditions, they are to be used as a point of reference and discussion
only.
Water Quality Parameters
The importance of water quality to a successful chlorine minimization/
optimization study was recognized from the onset. However, identifying the
significant water quality parameters during Phases I and II was extremely
difficult due to the large variability induced by the faulty chlorinator.
Only the extremely dominant factors could be identified in that situation.
Phase III data, using the new chlorinator, allowed identification of signi-
ficant water quality parameters. Particular ones have been mentioned
earlier in this report where they had an effect on an item of interest.
This section will take a more general overview.
Primarily due to the Phase III data, it has become apparent that the
nitrogen compounds are directly involved with the chlorine chemistry. They
are highly intercorrelated with each other and statistically, for a given
analysis or model, one may be slightly more efficient than another. Alka-
linity, conductivity, and total suspended solids are other water quality
85
-------
parameters affecting the chlorination mechanism. Surprisingly, pH does not
show up often as being a significant factor. This may be due to its being
highly correlated (negatively) with ammonia, but it is still surprising.
The formation of byproducts which may "mask" the instrument detection of
the true levels of free and total residual chlorine is directly dependent
on the levels of the water quality parameters.
In order for a chlorine minimization program to succeed, these parame-
ters must be monitored and their effects estimated since they affect the
levels of FRC in the system and the ability of the instrumentation to
accurately detect the FRC and TRC concentrations in the system.
Potential Lower Limits for Chlorination at John Sevier Steam Plant
The data from Phases I, II, and III have indicated that lower feed
rates could be effective in maintaining adequate condenser performance.
Based on a detailed examination of the data from all three phases, with
particular emphasis on Phase III, potential lower limits of chlorine feed
have been estimated for different ranges of inlet water temperature (see
Table 22). These feed rates should result in an estimated average outlet
FRC of 0.2 mg/1 or less, which in turn would result in zero FRC being
detected at the point of compliance. Thus, since the present standard is
a 0.2 mg/1 average FRC concentration, the feed rates may be set at some
level above these lower limits and still produce a chlorine level within
compliance limits. Based on Phase III data in fact, the recommended
chlorination scheme met all standards at the point of compliance with no
loss in condenser performance noted. So there appears to be no problem
in meeting the present compliance limits.
TABLE 22. ESTIMATED LOWER LIMITS OF FEED RATES FOR CHLORINATION
Inlet Water Temperature Feed Rates in Lbs/24 Hours
<60°F 1500
60-75°F 2000
>75°F 2500
Again, these are suggested lower limits which should be approached
in an evolutionary operation with careful monitoring of condenser
performance and the chlorine residual behavior. It is possible that
somewhere between the present chlorination scheme and these estimated
lower limits, there is a range of values of feed rates beneath which
condenser performance could be adversely affected.
Justification for the recommended chlorine feed rates in Table 22
is found in the following scenario.
86
-------
Table 23, which is in two parts, displays the FRC at the condenser
inlet and outlet from Phase III when the recommended chlorination scheme
was being followed and when it wasn't. Following the recommended chlori-
nation scheme resulted in an average 0.28 mg/1 FRC at the condenser inlet
and 0.10 mg/1 FRC at the condenser outlet. The minimum FRC at the inlet
was 0.17 rag/1 while the minimum outlet FRC was 0.05 mg/1. Based on a 0.1
to 0.2 mg/1 of FRC at the condenser outlet as being necessary to maintain
condenser performance for inlet water temperatures less than 55°F a feed
rate of <1500 lbs/24 hours appears reasonable. For 55°-60°F, a feed rate
of 1500-1800 lbs/24 hours looks achievable. Part B of the table indicates
that a 2500 lbs/24 hours feed rate and a 3500 lbs/24 hours at inlet water
temperatures of 50°F and 59.9°F, respectively, are too high since the
average FRC at the inlet was 0.60 mg/1 and at the outlet 0.46 mg/1.
TABLE 23. LOW INLET WATER TEMPERATURE CHLORINATION
TEMPERATURE <60°F.
<2000 LBS/24 HOURS RECOMMENDED
IWT
37.4
37.4
53.6
56.6
A. Following Chlorination Scheme
Date Unit Feed
2/3/78
2/3/78
3/24/78
3/24/78
FRC At
Condenser Inlet
3
4
2
4
1500
1500
1500
1500
Means =
.30
.37
.29
.17
.28
FRC At
Condenser Outlet
.05
.13
.14
.07
.10
B. Not Following Chlorination Scheme
59.0
59.0
59.9
59.9
10/17/78
10/17/78
5/16/78
5/16/78
1
2
2
3
2500
2500
3500
3500
Means =
.51
.66
.25
.96
.60
.39
.61
.19
.66
.46
Table 24 summarizes the medium inlet water temperature chlorination
scheme, which was set up as being between 60°F and 68°F. Average FRC at
the inlet was 0.20 mg/1 while an average outlet of 0.09 mg/1 of FRC
occurred. For inlet water temperatures of 60°-65°F, a lower limit in
the range of 1800-2000 seems possible while a feed rate of 2000 lbs/24
hours seems necessary in the 65°F and warmer range.
87
-------
TABLE 24. MEDIUM INLET WATER TEMPERATURE CHLORINATION
60°F < TEMPERATURE < 68°F. 2000-2500 LBS/24 HOURS RECOMMENDED
Following Chlorinatiori Scheme
IWT
Date
Unit
62.6
62.6
62.6
66.2
66.2
66.2
4/13/78
4/13/78
4/13/78
10/3/78
10/3/78
10/3/78
2
4
3
1
3
4
Feed
1500
1500
2500
2500
2500
2500
Means =
FRC At
Condenser Inlet
.25
.18
.24
.16
.17
.20
.20
FRC At
Condenser Outlet
.06
.04
.05
.12
.15
.13
.09
Table 25, Part A, shows a high inlet water temperature (>68°F) with
a feed rate of 2500 lbs/24 hours. As the temperature of the inlet water
increases, the FRC at the condenser inlet and outlet decrease. Part B,
in conjunction with Table 24, Part C, indicates that in the range of
65°-70°F a feed rate of 2000-2300 lbs/24 hours may maintain adequate
condenser performance.
Table 25, Part B, shows a feed rate of 3000-3500 lbs/24 hours
at the high inlet water temperatures. In the range of 70°-75°F, feed
rates in the range of 2300-2500 lbs/24 hours appear possible based
on Parts A and B of Table 25. From 75°F and up, 2500 Ibs or more
appear necessary.
88
-------
TABLE 25. HIGH INLET WATER TEMPERATURE CHLORINATION
TEMPERATURE >68°F. 2500-3500 LBS/HOURS RECOMMENDED
A. Feed = 2500
IWT
Date
Unit
Feed
69.8
69.8
73.4
73.4
73.4
73.4
73.4
73.4
73.4
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
77.0
77.0
77.0
9/19/78
9/19/78
8/02/78
8/02/78
8/02/78
8/02/78
8/29/78
8/29/78
8/29/78
7/18/78
7/18/78
8/08/78
9/06/78
9/06/78
9/06/78
9/06/78
7/25/78
7/25/78
7/25/78
2
3
1
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
4
4
1
2
3
4
2
3
4
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
FRC At
Condenser Inlet
.43
.41
.19
.31
.42
.43
.32
.44
.43
.15
.10
.11
.18
.23
.23
.28
.21
.18
.20
FRC At
Condenser Outlet
.37
.37
.16
.26
.31
.38
.19
.41
.38
.10
.09
.07
.17
.19
.20
.26
.17
.15
.18
B. Feed = 3000-3500
IWT
Date
Unit
Feed
68.9
68.9
68.9
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
75.2
6/06/78
6/06/78
6/06/78
6/21/78
6/21/78
6/21/78
6/27/78
6/27/78
6/27/78
6/27/78
1
2
3
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
3500
3500
3500
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
FRC At
Condenser Inlet
.55
.68
.66
.33
.45
.40
.49
.69
.59
.62
FRC At
Condenser Outlet
.42
.30
.37
.32
.41
.39
.25
.34
.34
.29
89
-------
SECTION 8
CHLORINATED ORGANICS
Introduction
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has conducted tests for
chlorinated organics at many major water treatment plants across the
country. The resulting data led to the inclusion of many chlorinated
organics on the priority pollutant list. Since then, many of these
compounds have been shown to be carcinogenic to humans.
It has been assumed that these compounds are formed as a direct
result of the chlorination process used by the water treatment plants.
It is also assumed that these compounds are formed by the chlorination
process used to reduce biofouling in the cooling water systems of fossil
fuel and nuclear power plants. The power industry will have to comply
with any limits on these compounds issued by EPA in their final criteria
documents or in future criteria. Since many states having the authority
to issue NPDES permits have a tendency to use these criteria as effluent
guidelines and there are still questions regarding these compounds in
chlorinated cooling water systems, it is imperative that uncertainties
regarding the formation of these compounds in chlorinated cooling water
systems be reduced.
As a result of EPA's tests, TVA examined the magnitude of chlorinated
organics produced in a once-through cooling system. This was accomplished
by defining the scope to determine: (1) the concentration of specific
chlorinated organics that exist in the plants cooling water source; (2)
compounds produced in the chlorination process and discharged by the plant;
and ,*) the relationship of compounds formed in the process to water quality.
To achieve these goals, field sampling and laboratory analysis of speci-
.. c chlorinated organics taken from the priority pollutant list (see Table 26)
were performed. This data enables TVA to determine if present chlorination
practice is producing chlorinated organic priority pollutants above the con-
centrations defined in the draft water quality criterion documents published
for review by EPA in 1978 and 1979.
Experimental Procedure
It was our intention to characterize the plant's condenser cooling
water system for volatile and semivolatile chlorinated organics. This was
accomplished by collecting water from the following points: intake, con-
denser inlet, and condenser outlet. The intake samples helped to determine
what compounds and their concentrations are present before entering the plant.
The inlet and outlet samples helped to determine what specific chlorinate
organic compounds and their concentrations are being produced by the
chlorination process of the plant.
90
-------
TABLE 26. PRIORITY POLLUTANT LIST*
1. Chlorobenzene
2. 1, 2, 4 - Trichlorobenzene
3. Hexachlorobenzene Chlorinated Benzenes
4. Tetrachlorobenzene
5. Pentachlorobenzene
6. 1, 2 - Dichlorobenzene
7. 1, 3 - Dichlorobenzene Dichlorobenzenes
8. 1, 4 - Dichlorobenzene
9. 1, 2 - Dichloroethane
10. 1, 1, 1 - Trichloroethane
11. Hexachloroethane
12. 1, 1 - Dichloroethane Chlorinated Ethanes
13. 1, 1, 2 - Trichloroethane
14. 1, 1, 2, 2 - Tetrachloroethane
15. Chloroethane
16. Bis (Chloromethyl) Ether
17. Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether Chloroalkyl Ethers
18. 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether (mixed)
19. 2-Chloronaphthalene
20. 1, 1 - Dichloroethylene Dichloroethylenes
21. 1, 2 - Trans-Dichloroethylene
22. Tetrachloroethylene
23. 1, 2 - Dichloropropane
24. 1, 3 - Dichloropropylene (1, 2 Dichloropropene)
25. 2, 4, 6 - Trichlorophenol
26. 2, 4 - Dichlorophenol
27. 2 - Chlorophenol
28. 3 - Chlorophenol
29. 4 - Chlorophenol
30. Trichlorophenol Chlorinated Phenols
31. Tetrachlorophenol
32. Pentachlorophenol
33. Dichlorophenol
34. Chloroform
35. Methylene Chloride
36. Methyl Chloride
37. Methyl Bromide
38. Bromoform Halomethanes
39. Dichlorobromomethane
40. Trichlorofluoromethane
41. Dichlorodifluoromethane
42. Chlorodibromomethane
43. Bromodichloromethane
44. Carbon Tetrachloride
45. Mono-Chlorocresols
46. Di-Chlorocresols
47. Tri-Chlorocresols
48. Tetra-Chlorocresols
"-Compiled from the 129 List of EPA.
91
-------
The chlorination process is a major factor contributing to the forma-
tion of chlorinated organics. Therefore, samples were taken during the
chlorination cycle to determine: (1) if the formation is instantaneous
or if there is a time interval before the formation begins; and (2) what
compounds and their concentrations are formed. The sampling schedule
(see Table 27) was determined based on a 20-minute chlorination cycle.
TABLE 27. SAMPLING SCHEDULE
Intake - Before chlorination cycle
Condenser Inlet - 8 minutes into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet - 8 minutes into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet - 16 minutes into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet - 5 minutes after chlorination cycle has ended
Intake - After chlorination cycle
All samples were collected and immediately cooled to 4°C by packing
them in ice. The samples were transported to the labroatory for analysis.
The presampling preparation and sampling procedures were the techni-
ques set down by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,15 and the TVA Office
of Natural Resources, Laboratory Branch.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on the data gathered in this study, the following conclusions
and recommendations are presented:
Conclusions--
1. Chlorinated organics were found at the condenser inlet and
outlet in measurable levels. The largest single measurement
was less than 10 pg/1.
The following compounds were identified: chloroform, bromodi-
chloromethane, and dibromochloromethane. On the average, these
compounds were measured at 5.7 M8/1 chloroform, 2.4 |Jg/l bromo-
dichloromethane, and 0.83 (Jg/1 for dibromochloromethane.
2. Chlorine dosage appears to be directly related to the level of
chloroform concentration and dibromochloromethane concentrations
observed. Bromodichloromethane formation does not appear to be
as strongly influenced by the chlorine dosage.
92
-------
3. While chlorine dosage appears to be the nicu.n driving force in
the formation of chloroform and dibromochloromethane, the pos-
siblity of a secondary reaction between the two compounds appears
likely. This factor should be considered in future studies.
4. Other factors, which could not be identified with the data at
hand, also influenced the formation of chlorinated organics. It
is suspected that some of these factors are pH, water temperature,
water quality, organic precursors, amino acids, and time. These
factors will be studied in future projects.
5. The formation of dibromochloromethane appears to occur after
chloroform and bromodichloromethane formation.
Recommendations
A more intense study should be performed on chlorinated organics.
This study should focus on the relationship of water quality, organic
precursors and amino acids to chlorinated organics.
Discussion
This section will be divided into three parts: (a) chloroform,
(b) bromodichloromethane, and (c) dibromochloromethane.
Chloroform--
The formation of chloroform appears to be instantaneous. This com-
pound was detected at the condenser inlet shortly after chlorination began.
The largest average chloroform concentration occurred five minutes into the
chlorination cycle at the condenser inlet and averaged 5.70 (Jg/1. At the
condenser outlet, 8 and 16 minutes into the chlorination cycle, average
chloroform concentrations of 5.67 (Jg/1 occurred. The largest observed
chloroform concentration was 9.3 (Jg/1 at the condenser inlet on November 15,
1978, and the smallest was below detection limits at the condenser inlet
on November 1, 1978. Table 28 summarizes these results. Chloroform was
not detected in the unchlorinated raw river water.
93
-------
TABLE 28. CHLOROFORM CONCENTRATIONS (ng/1)
Condenser Inlet Condenser Outlet Condenser Outlet
Date 5 minutes into Cycle 8 Minutes into Cycle 16 Minutes into Cycle
11/01/78 <1.0 7.1 7.1
10/03/78 3.2 4.0 3.9
01/09/79 3.3 7.3 6.5
08/29/78 4.8 5.4 5.2
11/29/78 4.9 5.5 5.2
01/23/79 8.7 5.9 5.4
11/15/78 9.3 8.7 8.4
07/25/78 - 3.8 4.1
09/19/78 - 3.2 5.2
Average 5.70 5.67 5.67
There was a definite relationship between the chlorine dosage (mg/1)
and the chloroform concentration. The average change in chloroform in [Jg/1
in response to a change in chlorine dosage in mg/1 was approximately five
to one at the condenser outlet eight minutes into the chlorination cycle
and three to one 16 minutes into the chlorination cycle. For example, if
the chlorine dosage increased 0.2 mg/1, then the chloroform concentration
eight minutes into the cycle increased 1.0 pg/1 at the condenser outlet
and 0.6 |Jg/l 16 minutes into the cycle. Due to the large variability in
the data, these ratios must be regarded with caution. Also, the large
variability associated with the levels of chlorine dosage indicate that
other factors are affecting the chloroform concentration. It is suspected,
although collaborative data were not available, that pH, water temperature
and/or other constituents in the cooling water are the source of this
variability.
Based on the data collected, chlorine dosage was not the dominant
factor in the formation of chloroform at the condenser inlet. This is
not to say chlorine dosage does not affect chloroform formation at the
condenser inlet; but it is probably equivalent in magnitude to other
factors such as pH, water quality, temperature and time.
The concentration of bromodichloromethane was compared to the
chloroform concentration. In general, the amount of bromodichloro-
methane formed averaged approximately 38-42 percent of the chloroform
concentration in |Jg/l. Table 29 summarizes the data.
Table 30 presents the ratio of chloroform concentration to
dibromochloromethane. One noticable feature was the increase in dibro-
mochloromethane after the chlorine pulse passed through the system.
This indicated that the development of dibromochloromethane lags behind
the formation of chloroform and bromodichloromethane.
94
-------
TABLE 29. CHLOROFORM (CHC13) AND BROMODICHLOROMETHANE (CHCl2Br)
FORMATION (|Jg/l)
Date
11/01/78
12/03/78
01/09/79
08/29/78
11/29/78
01/23/79
11/15/78
07/25/78
09/19/78
AVERAGE
Condenser Inlet Condenser Outlet Condenser Outlet
5 Minutes into Cycle 8 Minutes into Cycle 16 Minutes into Cycle
CHC13
<1.0
3.2
3.3
4.8
4.9
8.7
9.3
CHCl2Br Ratio1
<0.2 <0.20
1.7 0.53
1.7 0.52
1.2 0.25
3.2 0.65
<0.2 <0.02
4.2 0.45
5.70 2.40 0.42
CHC13
7.1
4.0
7.3
5.4
5.5
5.9
8.7
3.8
3.2
5.67
CHCL2Br
3.8
2.1
1.1
1.4
3.5
1.0
4.6
1.3
1.0
2.20
Ratio1
0.54
0.53
0.15
0.26
0.64
0.17
0.53
0.34
0.31
0.39
CHC13
7.1
3.9
6.5
5.2
5.2
5.4
8.4
4.1
5.2
5.67
CHCl2Br
3.3
2.0
1.0
1.4
3.4
0.9
4.4
1.4
1.6
2.16
Ratio1
0.4
0.5
0.15
0.25
0.65
0.17
0.52
0.34
0.31
0.38
iRatio = CHCl2Br/CHCl3
TABLE 30. CHLOROFORM (CHC13) AND DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE (CHClBr2)
FORMATION ((Jg/1)
Condenser Inlet Condenser Outlet Condenser Outlet
5 Minutes into Cycle 8 Minutes into Cycle 16 Minutes into Cycle
Date CHClo CHClBr, Ratio1
11/01/78
12/03/78
01/09/79
08/29/78
11/29/78
01/23/79
11/15/78
07/25/78
09/19/78
AVERAGE
3.2
3.3
4.8
4.9
8.7
9.3
<0.2
0.7
<0.2
0.2
1.1
0.2
1.3
<0.20
0.22
<0.06
0.04
0.22
0.02
0.14
5.70 0.70 0.12
CHC13
7.1
4.0
7.3
5.4
5.5
5.9
8.7
3.8
3.2
5.67
CHCLBr2
1.1
0.8
1.7
0.3
1.2
0.3
1.5
0.3
0.2
0.82
Ratio1
0.15
0.20
0.23
0.06
0.22
0.05
0.17
0.08
0.06
0.14
CHC13
7.1
3.9
6.5
5.2
5.2
5.4
8.4
4.1
5.2
5.67
CHClBr2
0.9
0.6
1.7
0.2
1.3
<0.2
1.4
0.3
0.2
0.83
Ratio1
0.15
0.15
0.26
0.04
0.25
<0.04
0.17
0.07
0.04
0.15
iRatio = CHClBr2/CHCl3
As can be seen, chloroform is the most abundant priority pollutant
produced in the cooling water system during chlorination. In future studies
an attempt will be made to identify the other variables involved in the
formation of chloroform.
95
-------
Bromodichloromethane—
Bromodichloromethane was the second most abundant priority pollutant
produced in the cooling water system during chlorination. The largest
average bromodichloromethane concentration occurred at the condenser inlet
five minutes into the chlorination cycle and averaged 2.40 pg/1. The average
concentrations at the condenser outlet 8 and 16minutes into the chlorina-
tion cycle were 2.20 pg/1 and 2.16 |Jg/l, repectively. Table 31 summarizes
these results.
TABLE 31. BROMODICHLOROMETHANE CONCENTRATIONS (|Jg/l)
Date
11/01/78
11/23/79
09/29/78
10/03/78
01/09/78
00/29/78
11/15/78
11/25/78
09/19/78
Condenser Inlet
5 Minutes into Cycle
<0.2
<0.2
1.2
1.7
1.7
3.2
4.2
-
-
Condenser Outlet
8 Minutes into Cycle
3.8
1.0
1.4
2.1
1.1
3.5
4.6
1.3
1.0
Condenser Outlet
16 Minutes into Cycle
3.3
0.9
1.4
2.0
1.0
3.4
4.4
1.4
1.6
AVERAGE
2.40
2.20
2.16
11/01/78
01/23/79
08/29/78
10/03/78
01/09/79
11/29/78
11/15/78
01/25/78
09/19/78
AVERAGE
The formation of bromodichloromethane and dibromochloromethane appear
to be strongly related according to the data analysis. The dibromochloro-
methane was approximately 28-32 percent of the concentration of bromodichlo-
romethane. This average was fairly stable at both the condenser inlet and
outlet. Table 32 summarizes this data.
TABLE 32. BROMODICHLOROMETHANE (CHCl2Br) AND DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE
(CHClBr2) FORMATION (|Jg/l)
Condenser Inlet
5 Minutes into Cycle
CHCl2Br
<0.2
<0.2
1.2
1.7
1.7
3.2
4.2
CHClBr2
<0.2
0.2
0.2
0.7
<0.2
1.1
1.3
Ratio1
<1.00
>0.20
0.17
0.41
<0.12
0.34
0.31
2.40
0.70
0.32
Condenser Outlet
8 Minutes Into Cycle
CHCl2Br
3.8
1.0
1.4
2.1
1.1
3.5
4.6
1.3
1.0
2-20
CHClBr2
1.1
0.3
0.3
0.8
1.7
1.2
1.5
0.3
0.2
0.82
Ratio1
0.29
0.33
0.21
0.38
1.55
0.34
0.33
0.23
0.20
0.30
JRatio = CHClBr2/CHCl2Br
2Average ratio does not include 1/9/79 data
Condenser Outlet
16 Minutes into Cycle
CHCl2Br
3.3
0.9
1.4
2.0
1.0
3.4
4.4
1.4
1.6
2.16
CHClBr2
0.9
<0.2
0.2
0.6
1.7
1.3
1.4
0.3
0.2
0.83
Ratio1
0.27
<0.2
0.14
0.3
1.7
0.38
0.32
0.21
0.13
0.28
96
-------
The strong relationship between bromodichloromethane and dibromochloro-
methane may be due to each being strongly related to other factors such as
chlorine dosage, water temperature, water quality, pH, and time. But,
collaborative data were not available.
Dibromochloromethane--
Table 33 summarizes the occurrence of dibromochloromethane. The
largest average dibromochloromethane concentration was 0.83 pg/1 occurring
at the condenser outlet 16 minutes into the chlorination cycle.
TABLE 33. DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE CONCENTRATIONS (|Jg/l)
Condenser Inlet Condenser Outlet Condenser Outlet
Date 5 Minutes into Cycle 8 Minutes into Cycle 16 Minutes into Cycle
11/01/78 <0.2 1.1 0.9
01/09/79 <0.2 1.7 1.7
08/20/78 0.2 0.3 0.2
01/23/77 0.2 0.3 <0.2
10/03/78 0.7 0.8 0.6
11/29/78 1.1 1.2 1.3
11/15/78 1.3 1.5 1.4
07/25/78 - 0.3 0.3
09/19/78 - 0.2 0.2
AVERAGE 0.70 0.82 0.83
There was a definite relationship between the chlorine dosage (mg/1)
and the dibromochloromethane concentration. However, variability of the
data around this relationship indicated that other factors were also having
an effect on the formation of dibromochloromethane.
These three compounds have been identified in the cooling water
systems during chlorination. Samples were collected after chlorination
had ended and none of these compounds were identified. At the low con-
centration levels of these compounds, they do not appear to pose a problem
to the receiving stream.
97
-------
SECTION 9
CONDENSER PERFORMANCE SENSITIVITY STUDY
Introduction
In Section 4 the calculation of condenser performance as formulated
by the Heat Exchange Institute (HEI) and the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME) was discussed. This method is a steam-side calculation.
TVA has developed a method of calculating the condenser performance by
closing the heat balance on the water side of the condenser. While this
new method is much easier to use, it still contains many of the same
variables which effect the steam-side calculations. In addition, this
new method should only be used for a "quick" check on condenser performance.
The HEI and ASME method should still be used for reporting condenser per-
formance. While this new method was not used during the study at John
Sevier, it did support the relationship of inlet water temperature to con-
denser performance developed in the statistical analysis.
Equation Derivation
Condenser performance, otherwise known as the apparent cleanliness
factor (ACF), is the relationship of the measured heat transfer coefficients
(HTC (U)) of a used tube to a new tube.
ACF = ^o (1)
U
n
Measured HTC = (2)
where: q = condenser duty
CSA = condenser surface area
k = design correction factor
LMTD = logarithmic mean temperature difference
AT
LMTD = —
s1 (3)
then: HTC = U = C-y/velocity where C depends on tube diameter.
For a 7/8- to 1-inch tube diameter, C=263.
therefore:
ACF = CSA . LMTD • k . U (4)
98
-------
where: AT
DfflJ=log V1'
t£ = outlet water temperature
ti = inlet water temperature
t s inlet steam temperature, corresponding to the steam
s pressure (1.2263 - 0.002067 tt)
* = — (5)
100
for 40° < ta < 85°F
1 gpm = 0.002228 ft3 /sec = 500 Ib/hr (6)
Using equation 6, q = 500 • AT • cooling water flow (7)
! - q 0.002228
Using equation 6, the tube velocity = c<5g^ x ^x x 500 (8)
where: CCSA = condenser cross-section area
By substituting equations 5, 7, and 8 into equation 4, the apparent
cleanliness factor becomes:
500 VCCSA t -t.
> i
ACF = 12.4140 x k x CSA x CCW flow x log -
6 Vtz (9)
This equation can be simplified to the following:
ACF = 40.277 x ^wa * CCW * -e ^-ug (10)
k x CSA
Therefore, for a given condenser, it can be observed that the inlet
water temperature can alter the ACF. Figure 12 depicts the trend of ACF
vs. inlet water temperature.
The design correction factor, k, was modeled based on the values
obtained from the TVA computer program of the HEI calculation. The
equation developed was:
log k = (1.2263 - 0.002067 ti) log tt - log 100 (11)
e e °e
where: tj = 40°F < t! < 5°F
The correlation coefficient calculated using the HEI calculation versus
equation 11 is 0.999. A graph of k versus inlet water temperature may
be found in Figure 13. The design correction factor is 1 at 70°F inlet
99
-------
water temperature. Therefore, the ACF will best measure tube fouling at
70°F. At other temperatures, the ACF measures both the fouling of the
tubes and the inherent change of ACF with inlet water temperature.
Looking at Figure 12, it can be seen that at 85°F inlet water tem-
perature the ACF is 0.8 rather than 0.85 at 70°F. This relationship is
solely due to inlet water temperature. Conversely, at 60°F the ACF is
approximately 0.9. Again, this relationship is solely due to inlet water
temperature. This analysis confirms the statistical analysis previously
performed and shows a linear estimate of a 3°F change in inlet water tem-
perature results in a 1.2 percentage point change in ACF. The previous
statistical analysis reported a 1 percentage point change in ACF for a
3°F change in inlet water temperature.
The model for ACF has been programmed in BASIC and is routinely run
on a Tektronix 4050 series computer.
100
-------
A
C
F
I .3
1 .25
1 .2
1 . 15
1 .05
1
0.95
0.9
0.85'
0.8'
0.75'
0.7
35
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
INLET WATER TEMPERATURE
Figure 12. Apparent c 1 ean I i ness 'Factor vs. inlet water temperature
-------
1.1
1 .05
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
INLET WATER TEMPERATURE
Figure 13. Design correction factor vs. inlet water temperature
-------
REFERENCES
1. Heat Exchange Institute. Standards for Steam Surface Condensers.
Sixth edition, New York, 1970.
2. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. ASME Power Test Codes
for Steam Condensing Apparatus. 1955.
3- White, George Clifford. Handbook of Chlorination, Van Nostrand Reinhold
Company, New York, NY, 1972.
4. Johnson, J. D., "Polluted Cooling Waters: Their Chemical Composi-
tion and Its Effects on Chlorine Demand and Residual Oxidant Measure-
ments," a proposal prepared for the Tennessee Valley Authority,
November 1979.
5. Johnson, J. D., "Organic Nitrogen and Chlorination in Low-Salinity
Cooling Waters," a report prepared for the Tennessee Valley Authority,
July 1979.
6. Characklis, W. G., Turlear, M. G., Stathopoulos, N., "Fundamental
Considerations in Biofouling Control," presented at the Annual Meeting
of the Cooling Tower Institute. January 1980.
7. Manabe, Ronald M., "Measurement of Residual Chlorine Levels in Cooling
Waters—Amperometric Method," August 1974.
8. Ram, N. M., and Morris, J. C., "Environmental Significance of Nitrogen
Organic Compounds in Aquatic Sources," presented at the third confer-
ence on the Environmental Impact of Water Chlorination, Colorado
Springs, Colorado, (1979).
9. Ram, N. M., and Morris, J. C., "Identification of Organic Compounds
in Aquatic Sources by Stopped-Flow Spectral Scanning Techniques,"
presented at the third conference on the Environmental Impact of
Water Chlorination, Colorado Springs, Colorado, (1979).
10. Wajon, J. E., and Morris, J. C., "The Analysis of Free Chlorine in
the Presence of Nitrogenous Organic Compounds," presented before
the Division of Environmental Chemistry, ACS, Anaheim, CA, March
1978.
11. Saunier, B. M., and Selleck, R. E., "The Kinetics of Breakpoint Chlori-
nation in Continuous Flow Systems," J.A.W.A., March 1979.
12. UWAG, EEI, NRECA, "Collaborative Test Results for Chlorine Analysis
by Amperometric Titration," March 1979.
13. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Quality and Waste Treatment
Requirements on the Upper Holston River. EPA-TS-03-71-208-07, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, Georgia, 1972.
103
-------
14. American Public Health Association. Standard Methods for the Exami-
nation of Water and Wastewater. Fourteenth edition, Washington, DC,
1971.
15. U.S. EPA, "Sampling and Analysis Procedures for Screening of Indus-
trial Effluents for Priority Pollutants," April 1977.
16. Feber, Douglas, Taras, Michael J., "Studies on Chlorine Demand
Constants," Journal AWWA, November 1951.
17. Feber, Douglas, Taras, Michael J., "Chlorine Demand Constants of
Detroit's Water Supply," Journal AWWA, May 1950.
18. Taras, Michael J., "Preliminary Studies on the Chlorine Demand of
Specific Chemical Compounds," Journal AWWA, May 1950.
104
-------
APPENDIX A
ANALYSIS OF PHASE II CHLORINATION STUDY DATA
105
-------
APPENDIX A
I. INTRODUCTION
This report documents the data and its analysis from the chlorine
minimization/optimization project which was conducted at the John Sevier
Steam Plant in compliance with EPA effluent guidelines and National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Phase II,
conducted during the summer of 1977, focused on the factors affecting
condenser performance, free and/or total residual chlorine consumption
in the system, and the relationship between inlet water temperature and
variables associated with chlorine use such as turbine backpressure,
total nitrogen, total organic carbon, and chlorine demand. Phase III,
conducted from October 1977 to December 1978, focused on a verification
of the Phase II conclusions and provided further information concerning
the relationships connected with lower levels of chlorination and associa-
ted parameters, such as inlet water temperature, Kjeldahl nitrogen, turbine
backpressure, and pH.
The objective of the analysis of the data was to broaden the under-
standing of the characteristics for the system affecting chlorine use
while identifying more precisely the operating conditions to maintain
adequate condenser performance with low concentrations of chlorine in
the effluent. The factors affecting the interpretation of the statis-
tical results and the examination of the results of the condenser
performance, chlorine consumption, and chlorine in effluent analyses
in terms of the overall objective are denoted below.
A. Significant Sources of Variation
During the analysis of the data, it became evident that significant
sources of variation existed which affected the interpretations and con-
clusions drawn from the data. The variability of the chlorinator, the
inherent error in the measurement technique of chlorine, and the varia-
tion induced by inlet water temperature were adjusted, if possible, or
recognized and considered when interpreting the results.
B. Some Statistical Considerations
Wherever possible considerable cross-checking of estimates such as
means, variances, and standard errors was done. In order to have balance
in some of the analyses, some data points were not used but were included
in the cross-checking. Some of the raw data were obviously in error, such
as extremely negative chlorine consumption in the system, and not used at
all.
For most of the analyses, the error mean square was fairly consistent
(after adjusting for unequal sample sizes)—usually about 0.02.
The scheduled test program for Phase II included 20 test dates. The
feed rate was 4500 lbs/24 hours for May through July , 3000 lbs/24 hours for
August, and 2500 lbs/24 hours for September. As the raw data in Appendix B
indicate, some minor departures from the schedule took place. The frequency
and rate of chlorine feed to each condenser were as follows:
106
-------
Unit 1: Twice per day for 1 hour each (control)
Unit 2: Twice per day for 30 minutes each
Unit 3: Three times per day for 20 minutes each
Unit 4: Six times per day for 10 minutes each
This test schedule was designed so that the fixed feed rate for May
through July would allow estimation of time effects, frequency and duration
of chlorine feed rates. The frequency and duration of feeds at the various
condensers allow a comparison of the effects of frequency and duration of
feed rates. The August and September data allow estimation of the differences
in feed rates as compared with varying the other factors.
Results indicated that adequate condenser performance could be main-
tained with low concentrations of chlorine in the effluent if the chlorine
feed is three times per day for 20 minutes each with approximately the
following feed rates for different levels of inlet water temperature and
assuming that there is no drastic change in seasonal chlorine demand:
(1) 2500 - 3000 lb/24 hours for inlet water temperatures of 68°F
or more;
(2) 2000 - 2500 lb/24 hours for inlet water temperatures between
60°F and 68°F; and
(3) less than 2000 lb/24 hours for inlet water temperatures less
than 60°F.
In addition, on nine test dates outlet free and total residual
chlorine were measured by the DPD and amperometric methods. These data
were gathered to allow a comparison of the two methods.
The scheduled test program for Phase III was for 36 test dates. The
feed rate was adjusted according to the inlet and outlet FRC concentrations,
inlet water temperature, chlorine demand, and condenser performance.
Based on the Phase III analysis, some apparent contrasts were noted
when comparing the data with Phase II. While the feed rates were run at
considerably lower levels in Phase III than in Phase II, the mean apparent
cleanliness factor (ACF) was slightly higher in spite of higher inlet
water temperatures. While not significantly higher, this does reinforce
the justification for the chlorination scheme which maintains adequate
condenser performance at lower feed rates. Another factor noted was
the significant decrease in experimental error in the data. This was
probably due to the improved performance of the new chlorinator.
As a result of the Phase III analysis, the following lower limits
of feed rate for various intervals of inlet water temperature might be
achievable:
107
-------
Table A-l
FEED RATE AS A FUNCTION OF INLET WATER TEMPERATURE
Inlet Water Chlorine Feed Rate
Temperature (°F) (Lbs/24 hrs-)
<60°F 1500
60-75°F 2000
>75°F 2500
These values should be approached cautiously in an evolutionary operation
with careful monitoring of condenser performance and the chlorine residual
behavior.
II. CONDENSER PERFORMANCE
A. Discussion
Condenser performance is measured by the apparent cleanliness factor
(ACF) as calculated by the Heat Exchange Institute.* The main concern was
the effect of different chlorination rates and frequency and duration of
feed on the apparent cleanliness factor. Compounding the analysis problem
was inlet water temperature variation, which is related to the apparent
cleanliness factor. An analysis of covariance with inlet water temperature
as the covariate was performed.
The analysis of condenser performance, adjusting for the effects of
inlet water temperature, assumed that the apparent cleanliness factor was a
linear function of feedrate and "unit factor" with an interaction. Although
there are many other factors which influence ACF, we are limiting these
factors for statistical purposes.
"Unit factor" is the effect of frequency and duration of feed. Since
the effects of frequency and duration of feed were mixed or confounded with
the units, special comparisons or contrasts of the unit means were made to
estimate the effects of varying frequency and the duration of feed.
*This method of calculating the ACF is widely used throughout the utility
industry. It must be carefully noted, however, that the ACF only approxi-
mates the true condenser performance. Thirty-seven variables are used in
the steam-side calculation so it must not be construed as absolute. Such
variables as inlet water temperature, turbine back pressure, gross genera-
tion, condenser duty, and air leakage will greatly affect the results of
this calculation. For further explanation of ACF, please refer to Section 4
and Appendix J.
108
-------
B. Phase II
Table A-2 summarizes the analysis. Note that feed rate, "unit
factor," and their interaction were significant. Table A-3 presents the
adjusted ACF means.
TABLE A-2
ANALYSIS OF APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
(AFTER ADJUSTING FOR INLET WATER TEMPERATURE)
Source
Feed Rate
Unit
Interaction
Inlet Water
Temperature
Error
Corrected Total
DF
1
3
3
1
15
23
Sum of
Squares
0.0091
0.0076
0.0039
0.0004
0.0018
0.0228
Mean
Square
0.0091
0.0025
0.0013
0.0004
0.0001
F Value
73.88*
20.53*
10.55*
3.49*
"'Significant
TABLE A-3
MEAN VALUES OF APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
AFTER ADJUSTING FOR INLET WATER TEMPERATURE
Feed Rate
(lb/24 hrs.)*
4,500
1,500
1
.7351
.6861
Unit
2
.7364
.7516
3
.7549
.7641
4
.7549
.7756
*This is only a relative feed rate. The absolute FRC concentration
is not constant from day to day at the inlet to the condenser due
to changing levels of chlorine demand and cooling water flow.
109
-------
Testing for interaction effects yielded a significant interaction
effect. While it was smaller than the main effects, it did indicate
that the proper model was not additive in its effects. Interpretation
of the interaction effect was difficult due to the effect of duration
of feed being completely confounded with the unit effects. Examination
of the adjusted mean apparent cleanliness factors indicates that at the
lower feed rate, as the frequency of feed increases while the duration
is lowered, the response of condenser performance increases more
rapidly than the pure addition of feed rate and "unit factor."
A comparison of the mean apparent cleanliness factors for each feed
rate was made to examine the means and the differences between them for
Units 3 and 4 combined. Two considerations were made in choosing the
appropriate error mean square. First, because an analysis of covariance
was carried out, an allowance for the sampling error of the regression
coefficient was made. Secondly, the unequal sample sizes for the two feed
rates were factored in. The comparison showed the lower feed rate had a
significantly higher apparent cleanliness factor.
A comparison of the average apparent cleanliness factors for each
unit was made to determine the differences between units. Comparisons
were made to determine the direction of change necessary in frequency
and duration of feed to increase condenser performance. Estimating the
appropriate error mean square for the comparisons was simpler because
the sample size (six good data points) was equal for each unit. To
evaluate the effects of varying frequency, the average of Units 1 and 2
(which had the same frequency) were contrasted with the means of Unit 3
and Unit 4, respectively. The comparisons showed that Unit 3 and Unit 4
had significantly higher condenser performance than the average of Units 1
and 2. The higher condenser performance of Units 3 and 4 was not solely
attributed to the change in frequency alone as there may have been unit
differences and duration of feed differences. Since Units 1 and 2 had the
same frequency but different durations of feed, the response of condenser
performance was indicated by comparing Units I and 2. The difference
between Units 1 and 2 condenser performance was significant, with the
lower interval of duration having significantly higher condenser per-
formance. Units 3 and 4 were not significantly different from each
other, but were significantly higher than Units 1 or 2.
Significantly better condenser performance was achieved by using a
lower feed rate more frequently with a shorter duration of feed than a
higher feed rate less frequently for longer durations of feed. Units 3
and 4 were not significantly different from each other indicating that
either the combination of feeding three times a day for 20 minutes or 6
times a day for 10 minutes will result in adequate condenser performance.
110
-------
1. Statistical Analysis
a. Comparing Feed Rates, Adjusting for Inlet Water Temperature, Similar
Units
Mean ACF for a feed rate of 4500 lbs/24 hours (adjusted for inlet
water temperature) based on 8 data points = .7549. Mean ACF for a feed
rate of 1500 lbs/24 hours (adjusted for inlet water temperature) based
on 4 data points = .7699.
Comparison = ..699 - .7549 = .0150
Error Mean Square of the Comparison = .0067
T = .0150/.0067 = 2.24
This comparison is significant at the 0.10 level.
b. Comparing Changes in Frequency and Duration of Feed
Adjusted for Inlet Water Temperature
Unit 1 mean ACF = .7189
Unit 2 mean ACF = .7414
Unit 3 mean ACF = .7579
Unit 4 mean ACF = .7618
(1) Unit 3 versus the average of Units 1 and 2:
Comparison = .7579 - ((.7189 + .74l4)/2) = .0278
Error Mean Square of the Comparison = .0049
T = .02787.0049 =5.67
There is a 90 percent confidence that Unit 3 data are significantly
different from those of Units 1 and 2.
(2) Unit 4 versus the average of Units 1 and 2:
Comparison = .7618 - ((.7189 + .74l4)/2) = .0317
Error Mean Square of the Comparison = .0049
T = .0317/.0049 = 6.46
There is a 90 percent confidence that Unit 4 data are significantly
different from those of Units 1 and 2.
(3) Unit 2 versus Unit 1:
Comparison = .7414 - .7189 = .0225
Error Mean Square = .0057
T = .02257.0057 = 3.95
There is a 90 percent confidence that Unit 2 data are significantly
different from Unit 1 data.
Ill
-------
(4) Unit 4 versus Unit 3:
Comparison = .7618 - .7579 = .0039
Error Mean Square = .0057
T = .0039/.0057 = 0.68
This comparison is not significant.
(5) Unit 4 versus Unit 2*
Comparison = .7618 - .7414 = .0204
Error Mean Square = .0057
T = .0204/.0057 = 3-58
There is a 90 percent confidence that Unit 4 data are significantly
different from Unit 2 data.
C. Phase III
The Phase III chlorination study had an average apparent cleanliness
factor (ACF) of 77. The ACF for the Phase II data was 74. Given that the
average inlet water temperature for Phase II was 68°F and 61°F for Phase III,
it is easily seen that the present chlorination scheme has not had a detre-
mental effect on condenser performance as measured by ACF. Since a 3° rise
in temperature results in about a 1 percent change in ACF, the two ACF's are
equivalent (within experimental error) on a temperature-adjusted basis.
D. Turbine Backpressure
1. Behavior After Tube Cleaning
There was insufficient data from Phase III to realistically evalute if
a drop in turbine backpressure occurred consistantly after tube cleaning.
2. Relationship to Inlet Water Temperature
A detailed analysis has conclusively identified the role of inlet
water temperature and other factors to turbine backpressure and apparent
cleanliness factors. See Section 8 for further details.
III. CHLORINE CONSUMPTION
A. Discussion
This section discusses the behavior of the system consumption of free
and total residual chlorine. The system consumption was estimated by
*No comparison of Units 3 and 2 is necessary since there is no significant
difference between Units 4 and 3.
112
-------
subtracting the amount of chlorine at the outlet of the condenser from the
chlorine concentration at the intake.
B. Phase II - System Consumption of Free and Total Residual Chlorine
1. Fixed Feed Rate
Data gathered for May, June, and July with the units operating at
a feed rate of 4500 lbs/24 hours allowed evaluation of the time and
operating conditions for a fixed feed rate. For both free and total
residual chlorine, there was no significant difference in consumption
over the time period of the data.
There was no significant correlation between FRC consumption and
inlet water temperature on any unit. However, there was a statistically
significant negative correlation between TRC consumption and inlet water
temperature for units 2 and 3, and a nonsignificant positive correlation
between TRC consumption and inlet water temperature for units 1 and 4.
For units 2 and 3, TRC consumption tends to decrease as inlet water tem-
perature increases. The correlations always had the same sign (either
both positive or both negative) for FRC and TRC consumption with inlet
water temperature on each unit.
This negative relationship between inlet water temperature and TRC
consumption for Units 2 and 3 should be treated with caution until all
data have been analyzed.
As Table A-4 indicates, reducing the duration of feed and increasing
the frequency of feed tends to increase chlorine consumption for the fixed
feed rate. However, the difference between units was not significant for
either FRC or TRC consumption.
TABLE A-4
MEANS OF FREE AND TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
CONSUMPTION (mg/1) BY UNIT
(FEED RATE = 4500 LBS/24 HOURS)
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4
Average Free Residual Chlorine Consumed
Average Total Residual Chlorine Consumed
2.15
1.48
2.36
1.57
2.30
1.64
2.43
1.72
2. Fixed Duration of Feed
Effects within units were used to make inferences about the
response of chlorine consumption to varying the feed rate and different
inlet water temperatures. Each unit had a different duration of feed,
so the sources of variation affecting chlorine consumption for a given
113
-------
unit were feed rate, time, inlet water temperature, and chlorine demand.
Chlorine demand can be assumed equal for all units. The mean free
residual chlorine consumed in the system for each feed rate, time
interval, and unit is presented in Table A-5.
With respect to the free residual chlorine consumption for fixed
duration of feed, there was a consistent trend for consumption to decline
as the feed rate declined. Free residual chlorine consumption tended to
increase as inlet water temperature increased. The FRC consumption
declined to about 1.02 mg/1 for inlet water temperatures of 60°F or less.
Reliable data for total residual chlorine consumed in the system
was available for May, June, and July at a feed rate of 4500 lbs/24 hours.
Table A-6 displays the mean total residual chlorine consumed by data for
the different units.
TABLE A-5
MEANS OF FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
IN mg/1 (SAMPLE SIZE)
Feed Rate
(lbs/24 hours)
4500
2500
1500
Date
May
June
July
Sept.
Oct/Nov
Unit 1
2.12(3)
2.17(4)
2.13(2)
1.26(2)
1.04(2)
Unit 2
2.67(1)
2.33(5)
2.28(2)
1.18(2)
0.98(2)
Unit 3
2.41(4)
2.29(5)
1.94(1)
1.33(2)
1.05(2)
Unit 4
2.45(3)
2.41(5)
2.44(2)
1.37(2)
1.03(2)
TABLE A-6
MEANS OF TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
IN mg/1 (SAMPLE SIZE) FEED RATE = 4500 LBS/24 HOURS
Date
May
June
July
Unit 1
1.41(2)
1.44(4)
1.63(2)
Unit 2
1.48(1)
1.60(5)
1.56(2)
Unit 3
1.95(2)
1.54(5)
1.51(1)
Unit 4
1.68(3)
1.72(5)
1.82(2)
114
-------
3. Varying Feed Rate, Frequency, and Duration of Feed
Free residual chlorine consumed in the system is, as expected, most
responsive to feed rate. As the feed rate is lowered, consumption is
lowered. Table A-7 presents the analysis of variance table (ANOVA) for
the free residual chlorine consumption over all feed rates.
Table A-7
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
ALL FEED RATES
Factor
Feed Rate
Units
Interaction
Error
Total
df
2
3
6
41
52
Sum Sq
15.1487
0.0766
0.1517
2.9391
18.6273
MSQ F Calc.
7.5744 105.66
0.0255 0.36
0.0253 0.35
0.0717
Calculated
Sig. Level
.001
>.25
>.25
The effect of frequency and duration of feed as identified by the
"unit factor" was not significant. A test for interaction effects yielded
no significant interaction indicating that a single variable model was
essentially correct for free residual chlorine consumption.
Total residual chlorine consumption in the system may have had a
marginal effect due to "unit factor." The statistical evidence for this
effect is weak since the significance level is only 0.12. Table A-8 shows
the analysis of variance table for the analysis. Available data did not
allow quantitative analysis of varying feed rates.
115
-------
Table A-8
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
FEED RATE = 4500 LBS/24 HOURS
ANOVA
Factor
Time
Units
Error
Total
Calculated
df Sum Sq MSQ F Calc. Sig. Level
2
3
28
33
4. Statistical
a . ANOVA
Feed
Factor
Time
Units
Error
Total
Table
Rate of
df
2
3
31
36
0.0397 0.0199 .43 >.25
0.2929 0.0976 2.10 0.12 approx.
1.3023 0.0465
1.6361
Analysis
for Free Residual Chlorine Consumed in System with a
4500 Lbs/24 Hours
Calculated
Sum Sq MSQ F Calc. Sig. Level
0.0970 0.0485 0.57 >.25
0.4307 0.1436 1.68 >.15
2.6487 0.0854
3.1552
Conclude time and units are not significant at the .10 level.
C. Phase Ill—System Consumption of Free Residual Chlorine
1. Constant Feed Rate
The Phase III data did not contain an adequate number of data points
for a fixed feed rate and duration of feed to evaluate FRC consumption
with regard to time, inlet water temperature, or water quality parameters
116
-------
2. Varying Feed Rates and Durations of Feed
An unbalanced analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to examine
the system consumption of FRC as a function of feed rate, frequency and
duration of feed identified as "block," and inlet water temperature as a
covariate. As Table A-9 indicates, feed rate and block were significant
factors. Table A-10 shows the feed, block, and individual cell means
which indicate that a feed rate of 3500 lbs/24 hours and block 1 (a fre-
quency of two times/day for 30 minute durations) had a slightly higher
FRC consumption than the remainder of the feed and block combinations.
No factor could be identified as the cause of the high FRC consumptions
for the two data points available.
Table A-9
FRC CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
UNBALANCED ANOVA OF CHLORINE DATA
DEPENDENT VARIABLE:
SOURCE
MODEL
ERROR
CORRECTED TOTAL
SOURCE
FEED
BLOCK
IWT
BLOCK*FEED
FRC-CON
DF SUM OF SQUARES
12 0.82772190
10 0.12146941
22 0.94919130
DF
2
3
1
6
DF
2
3
1
6
TYPE I SS
0.62361988
0.15952737
0.00060224
0.04397241
TYPE IV SS
0.14045049
0.13600001
0.00125059
0.04397241
MEAN SQUARE
0.06897682
0.01214694
F VALUE
25.67
4.38
0.05
0.60
F VALUE
5.78
3.73
0.10
0.60
F VALUE
5.68
PR > F
0.0049
PR > F
0.0001
0.0326
0.8283
0.7230
PR > F
0.0215
0.0492
0.7549
0.7230
R-SQUARE
0.872029
In general, by adjusting the feed rate as a function of inlet water
temperature as was done in Phase III, it would be expected that the system
consumption of FRC would be fairly constant. However, the model signifi-
cance level of 0.01 in Table A-ll shows that variations in FRC consumption
are probably not random fluctuations around a constant value. The chlori-
nation scheme is designed to meet the water and system demand and provide
enough FRC to maintain adequate condenser performance. Table A-ll presents
the ANOVA for the significant factors affecting FRC consumption with inlet
water temperature as a covariate, which is not significant.
117
-------
Table A-10
MEAN FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE SYSTEM CONSUMPTION
FEED
2500
3000
3500
N
9
7
7
MEAN
FRC CONSUMED
1.35666667
1.47428571
1.75000000
BLOCK*
1
2
3
4
N
5
9
4
5
MEAN
FRC CONSUMED
1.69400000
1.41666667
1.55750000
1.46600000
BLOCK
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
FEED
2500
3000
3500
2500
3000
3500
2500
3000
3500
2500
3000
3500
N
1
2
2
5
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
MEAN
FRC CONSUMED
1.46000000
1.60000000
1.90500000
1.29400000
,42000000
.72000000
.55000000
.47500000
1.73000000
1.36500000
1.33000000
1.63500000
'"Block 1 is chlorinating 2 times/day for 30 minutes.
Block 2 is chlorinating 3 times/day for 20 minutes.
Block 3 is chlorinating 6 times/day for 10 minutes.
Block 4 is chlorinating 2 times/day for 60 minutes.
3. Possible Relationship to Water Quality Parameters
FRC consumption in the system was examined for possible relationships
with ammonia, organic nitrogen, Kjeldahl nitrogen, nitrates plus nitrites,
pH, conductivity, alkalinity, total suspended solids, and total organic
carbon. Although feed and block explained a significant portion of the
variation, analysis indicated that organic nitrogen and pH were additional
factors affecting FRC consumption. However, the organic nitrogen and pH
are correlated with each other (simple correlation coefficient of 0.68).
Of the two, organic nitrogen was the more dominant, as can be seen by
the ANOVA analyses summarized in Tables A-12 and A-13.
118
-------
Table A-ll
FRC CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
UNBALANCED ANOVA OF CHLORINE DATA
DEPENDENT VARIABLE: FRC-CON
SOURCE DF
MODEL 6
ERROR 16
CORRECTED TOTAL 22
SOURCE DF
FEED 2
BLOCK 3
IWT 1
SUM OF SQUARES
0.78374949
0.16544182
0.94919130
TYPE I SS
0.62361988
0.15952737
0.00060224
MEAN SQUARE
0.13062491
0.01034011
F VALUE
30.16
5.14
0.06
F VALUE
12.63
PR > F
0.0001
PR > F
0.0001
0.0111
0.8124
R-SQUARE
0.825702
DF
2
3
1
TYPE IV SS
0.16181190
0.15701810
0.00060224
F VALUE
7.82
5-06
0.06
PR > F
0.0043
0.0118
0.8124
Table A-12
FRC CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
DEPENDENT VARIABLE: FRC-CON
SOURCE DF
MODEL 7
ERROR 15
CORRECTED TOTAL 22
SUM OF SQUARES
0.83326729
0.11592402
0.94919130
MEAN SQUARE
0.11903818
0.00772827
F VALUE
15.40
PR > F
0.0001
R-SQUARE
0.877871
SOURCE
FEED
BLOCK
ORGN
pH
DF
2
3
1
1
TYPE I SS
0.62361988
0.15952737
0.04241764
0.00770240
F VALUE
40.35
6.88
5.49
1.00
PR > F
0.0001
0.0039
0.0333
0.3340
DF
TYPE IV SS
F VALUE
PR > F
2
3
1
1
0.54177162
0.10069917
0.01333816
0.00770240
35.05
4.34
1.73
1.00
0.0001
0.0216
0.2087
0.3340
119
-------
Table A-13
FRC CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
DEPENDENT VARIABLE: FRC-CON
SOURCE DF
MODEL 6
ERROR 16
CORRECTED TOTAL 22
SUM OF SQUARES
0.81992912
0.12926218
0.94919130
MEAN SQUARE
0.13665485
0.00807889
F VALUE
16.92
PR > F
0.0001
R-SQUARE
0.863819
SOURCE
FEED
BLOCK
pH
DF
2
3
1
TYPE I SS
0.62361988
0.15952737
0.03678188
F VALUE
38.60
6.58
4.55
PR > F
0.0001
0.0042
0.0487
DF
2
3
1
TYPE IV SS
0.53016627
0.13242017
0.03678188
F VALUE
32.81
5.46
4.55
PR > F
0.0001
0.0089
0.0487
D. phase Ill—System Consumption of Total Residual Chlorine
1. Constant Feed Rate
The Phase III data did not contain an adequate number of data points
for a lixed feed rate and duration of feed to evaluate TRC consumption with
regard to time, inlet water temperature, or water quality parameters.
2. Varying Feed Rates and Duration of Feed
The system consumption of TRC was examined as a function of feed
rate, frequency and duration of feed labeled as "block," with inlet
water temperature as a covariate. As Table A-14 indicates, feed rate
was the most influential with block and inlet water temperature. Since
no feed and block interaction is apparent in Table A-15, a simple addi-
tive model describes the data. Table A-16 lists the average TRC consump-
tion by feed rate, by frequency and duration combinations (blocks), and
for the feed rate and block cells. Significantly low TRC consumptions
occurred at a feed rate of 2500 lb/24 hours.
120
-------
DEPENDENT VARIABLE: TRC-CON
SOURCE DF
MODEL 6
ERROR 16
CORRECTED TOTAL 22
Table A-14
TRC CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
UNBALANCED ANOVA
SUM OF SQUARES
0.49936128
0.08888220
0.58824348
MEAN SQUARE
0.08322688
0.00555514
F VALUE
14.98
PR > F
0.0001
R-SQUARE
0.848902
SOURCE
FEED
BLOCK
IWT
DF
2
3
1
TYPE I SS
0.44212919
0.04561002
0.01162206
F VALUE
39.79
2.74
2.09
PR > F
0.0001
0.0778
0.1674
DF
2
3
1
TYPE IV SS
0.24459647
0.04039404
0.01162206
F VALUE
22.02
2.42
2.09
PR > F
0.0001
0.1036
0.1674
121
-------
DEPENDENT VARIABLE: TRC-CON
SOURCE DF
MODEL 12
ERROR 10
CORRECTED TOTAL 22
Table A-15
TRC CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
UNBALANCED ANOVA
SUM OF SQUARES
0.52351223
0.06473124
0.58824348
MEAN SQUARE
0.04362602
0.00647312
F VALUE
6.74
PR > F
0.0025
R- SQUARE
0.889958
SOURCE
FEED
BLOCK
IWT
BLOCK*FEED
DF
2
3
1
6
TYPE I SS
0.44212919
0.04561002
0.01162206
0.02415096
F VALUE
34.15
2.35
1.80
0.62
PR > F
0.0001
0.1341
0.2099
0.7101
DF
2
3
1
6
TYPE IV SS
0.20003791
0.03607036
0.00498876
0.02415096
F VALUE
15.45
1.86
0.77
0.62
PR > F
0.0009
0.2007
0.4880
0.7101
122
-------
Table A-16
MEAN TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE SYSTEM CONSUMPTION
MEANS
FEED N TRC-CON
2500 9 0.83000000
3000 7 1.10285714
3500 7 1.12428571
BLOCK N TRC-CON
1 5 1.12400000
2 9 0.93777778
3 4 1.06500000
4 5 0.94800000
BLOCK FEED N TRC-CON
1 2500 1 0.84000000
1 3000 2 1.21000000
1 3500 2 1.18000000
2 2500 5 0.81400000
2 3000 2 1.02500000
2 3500 2 1.16000000
3 2500 1 0.91000000
3 3000 2 1.12500000
3 3500 1 1.10000000
4 2500 2 0.82500000
4 3000 1 1.00000000
4 3500 2 1.04500000
3. Possible Relationship to Water Quality Parameters
TRC system consumption was examined for possible relationships with
various water quality parameters. Analysis indicated total suspended
solids were correlated with TRC system consumption (simple correlation
coefficient of 0.45) as was 5-minute chlorine demand (simple correlation
coefficient of 0.83). In examining the intercorrelation between the
various water quality parameters, it became apparent that several water
quality parameters might be contributing to the system consumption of TRC.
Examination of several regression models indicates that, based on Phase
III data, total suspended solids and 5-minute chlorine demand were the
water quality parameters most affecting system TRC consumption. The
following equation was the best estimate using regression analyses:
TRC-CON = .3901 + .0061 TSS + .8855 D5
123
-------
where TRC-CON is the amount of TRC consumed in the system, TSS is the
total suspended solids, and D5 is the 5-minute chlorine demand. The
above model explains 72 percent of the total variation in system TRC
consumption. The F statistic for the model is 53.17 and is highly sig-
nificant. The error mean square was .0032. the sample size was 42.
E. Condenser-Related Free and Total Residual Chlorine Behavior
1. Free Residual Chlorine at the Condenser Inlet
The amount of free residual chlorine (FRC) at the condenser inlet
for a fixed feed rate, frequency, and duration is different over time.
The reason for the difference is inlet water temperature. The following
model was fit to Phase III data for a fixed feed rate of 2500 lbs/24 hours
and frequency of feed of 3 times/day for 20 minutes. For this combination,
there were eight data points available.
FREE-IN = 9.9226 - 0.1186 IWT
where FREE-IN is the amount of FRC at the condenser inlet, and IWT is the
inlet water temperature. The above model explained 69 percent of the total
variation in the FRC at the condenser inlet.
The amount of FRC at the condense^ inlet does vary with the feed rate,
and with the frequency and duration of feed. Tables A-17 and A-18, respec-
tively, give the ANOVA and the mean FRC at the condenser inlet. Table A-17
indicates that feed is highly significant with the block (frequency and
duration of feed) effect being moderately significant. Table A-18 indi-
cates that the amount of FRC at the condenser inlet increased with feed
rate and was the highest at 3500 lbs/24 hours at 0.62 mg/1. Block 2,
which is feeding three times/day for 20 minutes duration, had the highest
FRC at the inlet, 0.41 mg/1. While the Phase III data in Table A-17 did
not show inlet water temperature as being a significant factor after
considering the effects of feed rate and block, it is felt that inlet
water temperature is a significant factor as the fixed data indicated.
An analysis was carried out to determine if any of the water quality
parameters had an effect on the FRC measured at the condenser inlet.
Correlation analysis indicated a number of factors might be related to
the FRC at the inlet. Table A-19 lists the factors and their simple
correlation coefficient.
124
-------
Table A-17
UNBALANCED ANOVA OF FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE AT THE CONDENSER INLET
DEPENDENT VARIABLE: FREE-IN
SOURCE DF
MODEL 12
ERROR 12
CORRECTED TOTAL 24
SUM OF SQUARES
0.86931519
0.34608481
1.21540880
MEAN SQUARE
0.07244293
0.02984040
F VALUE
2.51
PR > F
0.0622
R-SQUARE
0.715258
SOURCE
FEED
BLOCK
IWT
FEED*BLOCK
DF
2
3
1
6
TYPE I SS
0.63395065
0.15769490
0.00006920
0.07760044
F VALUE
10.99
1.82
0.00
0.45
PR > F
0.0019
0.1967
0.9617
0.8328
DF
2
3
1
6
TYPE IV SS
0.24006886
0.11151803
0.00000090
0.07760044
F VALUE
4.16
1.29
0.00
0.45
PR > F
0.0424
0.3229
0.9956
0.8328
125
-------
Table A-18
MEAN FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE AT CONDENSER INLET
FEED
2500
3000
3500
N
11
7
7
MEANS
FREE-IN
0.25181818
0.29142857
0.62000000
BLOCK*
1
2
3
4
N
5
11
4
5
FREE-IN
0.31200000
0.40545455
0.33000000
0.36200000
FEED
2500
2500
2500
2500
3000
3000
3000
3000
3500
3500
3500
3500
BLOCK
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
N
1
7
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
FREE-IN
0.15000000
0.31857143
0.10000000
0.14500000
0.24000000
0.30500000
0.27500000
0.40000000
0.46500000
0.81000000
0.67000000
0.56000000
"'Block 1 is chlorinating 2 times/day for 30 minutes
Block 2 is chlorinating 3 times/day for 20 minutes
Block 3 is chlorinating 6 times/day for 10 minutes
Block 4 is chlorinating 2 times/day for 60 minutes
126
-------
Table A-19
FACTORS CORRELATED- WITH FRC AT THE CONDENSER INLET
Factor Simple Correlation Coefficient
Chlorine Dosage at Intake 0.57
10-Minute Demand 0.41
Conductivity -0.41
Organic Nitrogen -0.49
pH -0.34
Total Nitrates-Nitrites 0.37
Kjeldahl Nitrogen -0.32
""Significance level of .05 or smaller
The correlation analysis indicated the possibility of water quality
parameters contributing to the variation of FRC at the condenser inlet.
The following model, estimated using regression analysis, indicates that
the amount of FRC at the inlet is a result of the chlorine dosage at the
intake and is dependent upon the organic nitrogen content of the water, the
conductivity, and the inlet water temperature,
FREE-IN = .8531 -.0011 COND -1.1202 ORGN + .3539 C12 - .0077 IWT
where COND is the conductivity, ORGN is the organic nitrogen, C12 if the
chlorine dosage at the intake, and IWT is the inlet water temperature.
The above model explains 64 percent of the total variation of the inlet
FRC and has an F-statistic of 16.76, which is highly significant. The
error mean square is 0.0161. This model is based on verified phase III data.
To further examine the behavior of FRC at the condenser inlet and
perhaps gain a better understanding of the chlorination chemistry, the
amount of FRC at the condenser inlet was examined as a fraction of the
total residual chlorine (TRC) at the condenser inlet. Table A-20 sum-
marizes the correlation analysis of factors possibly related to the
fraction of TRC at the condenser inlet which is FRC.
Table A-20
FACTORS CORRELATED* WITH THE FRACTION OF FRC/TRC AT THE
CONDENSER INLET
Factor Simple Correlation Coefficient
pH -0.30
Conductivity -0.47
Organic Nitrogen -0.41
Total Nitrates-Nitrites 0.39
^Significant level of .05 or smaller.
127
-------
The fraction, of TRC at the condenser inlet exhibited some of the
same correlative factors as the FRC at the condenser inlet. The best
model explaining the variation in the fraction was surprising. It is
PCT = 2.4513 - .0010 COND - .1273 pH - 1.4124 ORGN - .0064 IWT
where PCT is the predicted fraction of the TRC at the condenser inlet
which is FRC, COND is the conductivity, ORGN is the organic nitrogen in
the water, and IWT is the inlet water temperature. The above model
explains 45 percent of the variation. In comparing this model with
the one derived for FRC, conductivity, organic nitrogen, and inlet
water temperature were the common factors. This suggested that the
water quality parameters might be intercorrelated, which they are (see
the section on Interrelationships Between Water Quality Parameters).
Taking both approaches into account then suggests that the amount
of FRC at the condenser inlet is related to chlorine dosage, inlet water
temperature, and water quality parameters. Of the water quality para-
meters, conductivity stands out along with the organic nitrogen compounds
in the water.
2. Condenser Consumption of Chlorine
Analysis focused on the amount of FRC consumed in the condenser.
Correlation analysis indicated that inlet water temperature (r = -0.34)
and the one-minute chlorine demand (r = -0.33) were possible factors
having a significant effect on condenser consumption of FRC. The
following model explained 62 percent of the total variation of FRC
consumed in the condenser:
DELTA-F = -.3195 + .4340 FREE IN + .0041 ALK - .1530 D5
where DELTA-F is the amount of FRC consumed in the condenser, FREE IN
is the FRC at the condenser inlet, ALK is the alkalinity, and D5 is
the five-minute chlorine demand. The F-statistic is 21.46, which is
highly significant. The error mean square is .0046.
IV. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Descriptive statistics related to chlorine consumption of the condenser
are presented below.
A. Phase II
1. Mean Free Residual Chlorine at Inlet of Condenser (Sample Size)
(a) By unit Unit 1 = 0.52(14) Unit 3 = 0.46(13)
Unit 2 = 0.43(14) Unit 4 = 0.43(13)
(b) By feed rate 4500: 0.61(26)
2500: 0.42(14)
1500: 0.23(14)
(c) Overall mean = 0.46(54)
128
-------
2. Mean Free Residual Chlorine at Outlet of Condenser (Sample Size)
(a) By unit Unit 1 = 0.43(14) Unit 3 = 0.38(14)
Unit 2 = 0.36(14) Unit 4 = 0.33(14)
(b) By feed rate 4500: 0.48(28)
2500: 0.34(14)
1500: 0.20(14)
(c) Overall mean = 0.38(56)
3. Mean Free Residual Chlorine Consumed in Condenser (sample size)
(a) By unit Unit 1 = 0.09(14) Unit 3 = 0.08(13)
Unit 2 = 0.08(14) Unit 4 = 0.10(13)
(b) By feed rate 4500: 0.13(26)
2500: 0.07(14)
1500: 0.03(14)
(c) Overall mean = 0.09(54)
4. Mean Total Residual Chlorine at Inlet of Condenser (sample size)
(a) By unit Unit 1 = 1.09(12) Unit 3 = 1.08(12)
Unit 2 = 1.07(11) Unit 4 = 1.06(12)
(b) By feed rate 4500: 1.22(24)
2500: 0.96(13)
1500: 0.70(10)
(c) Overall mean = 1.08(47)
5. Mean Total Residual Chlorine at Outlet of Condenser (Sample Size)
(a) By unit Unit 1 = 1.05(12) Unit 3 = 1.05(12)
Unit 2 = 1.05(11) Unit 4 = 1.01(12)
(b) By feed rate 4500: 1.22(24)
2500: 0.91(13)
1500: 0.67(10)
(c) Overall mean = 1.04(47)
6. Mean Total Residual Chlorine Consumed in Condenser (Sample Size)
(a) By unit Unit 1 = 0.05(12) Unit 3 = 0.03(12)
Unit 2 = 0.01(11) Unit 4 = 0.06(12)
(b) By feed rate 4500: 0.04(24)
2500: 0.05(13)
1500: 0.03(10)
(c) Overall mean = 0.04(47)
129
-------
B. Phase III
1. Condenser Chlorine Consumption-Related Statistics
a. Mean Free and Total Residual Chlorine at Inlet of Condenser in mg/1
(Sample Size)
(1) By feed rate in lbs/24 hours
Free
Residual Chlorine (FRC)
1500
2500
3000
3500
(2) By block-
1
2
3
4
0.24
0.25
0.29
0.62
( 2)
(11)
( 7)
( 7)
Total
Residual Chlorine (TRC)
0.51
0.73
0.83
1.13
( 2)
(10)
( 7)
( 8)
FRC
TRC
0.31 ( 5)
0.41 (11)
0.30 ( 5)
0.35 ( 6)
0.90 ( 5)
0.85 (10)
0.89 ( 6)
0.81 ( 6)
*Each block is a particular frequency and duration of feed combination
where block 1 = chlorine feed 2 times/day, 30 minutes each time
block 2 = chlorine feed 3 times/day, 20 minutes each time
block 3 = chlorine feed 6 times/day, 10 minutes each time
block 4 = chlorine feed 2 times/day, 60 minutes each time
(3) Overall mean
FRC
TRC
0.36 (27)
0.86 (27)
Mean Free and Total Residual Chlorine at Outlet of Condenser in mg/1
(Sample Size)
(1) By feed rate in lbs/24 hours
1500
2500
3000
3500
(2) By block
1
2
3
4
(3) Overall mean
FRC
0.07 ( 2)
0.22 (11)
0.42 ( 7)
0.41 ( 8)
FRC
0.28 ( 5)
0.34 (11)
0.32 ( 6)
0.28 ( 6)
FRC
0.31 (28)
TRC
0.46 ( 2)
0.71 (10)
0.79 ( 7)
1.20 ( 8)
TRC
0.85 ( 5)
0.80 (10)
1.04 ( 6)
0.78 ( 6)
TRC
0.86 (27)
130
-------
c. Mean Free and Total Residual Chlorine Consumed in Condenser (Sample
Size)
(1) By feed rate
FRC Consumed TRC Consumed
1500 0.18 ( 2) 0.05 ( 2)
2500 0.04 (11) 0.02 (10)
3000 -0.13 ( 7) 0.04 ( 7)
3500 0.19 ( 7) -0.07 ( 8)
(2) By block
FRC TRC
1 0.03 ( 5) 0.05 ( 5)
2 0.07 (11) 0.05 (10)
3 -0.03 ( 5) -0.15 ( 6)
4 0.07 ( 6) 0.04 ( 6)
(3) Overall mean FRC Consumed TRC Consumed
0.04 (27) 0.001 (27)
C. Average Condenser Consumption of FRC and TRC
Average condenser consumption of free residual chlorine for Phase III
was 0.04 mg/1 with an average FRC of 0.36 mg/1 at the inlet and 0.31 mg/1
at the condenser outlet. When compared with the Phase II figures of
0.46 mg/1 at the inlet, 0.38 mg/1 at the condenser outlet and an average
of 0.08 mg/1 of FRC consumption in the condenser, it becomes apparent that
the outlet FRC was reduced because of the inlet FRC reduction. The average
condenser demand in Phase III was approximately half of that in Phase II,
which confirms the trend noted in Phase II of the condenser consumption
declining as the feed rate declined. The average condenser consumption
of FRC is depressed by some large negative consumption figures. If these
figures are left out of the analysis, then the overall average consumption
of FRC in the condenser is about 0.10 mg/1. This figure is still smaller
than previous estimates of average condenser demand (0.3-0.5 mg/1) and is
probably due in part to the reduced feed rate used in Phase III.
Average condenser consumption of total residual chlorine for Phase III
was 0.001 mg/1 with an average TRC of 0.86 mg/1 at the inlet and 0.86 mg/1
at the outlet. The figures for Phase II were a TRC average consumption
of 0.04 mg/1 with 1.08 mg/1 at the inlet and 1.04 mg/1 at the outlet.
Again, the effects of reducing the overall feed rate are seen.
D. Negative Condenser Consumption
Eighteen instances of negative FRC consumption greater than 0.05 mg/1
across the condenser occurred during the Phase III. They occurred on twelve
different dates and at least once on each unit. The values for chlorine
dosage, inlet FRC, and outlet FRC do not systematically deviate from the
means for these variables. Since there appeared to be some relationship
131
-------
between conductivity and alkalinity and negative FRC consumption, FRC was
modeled as a function of those parameters. Conductivity was consistently
significant in the model; however, alkalinity was not highly significant.
The regression model confirmed the trend that was seen in the raw
data—an increase in conductivity is associated with a decrease in FRC
consumption across the condenser. However, the model had such a poor r2
value (predicted FRC consumptions less negative than those observed in the
data) that we have not included it in this report. Two data points were
excluded from consideration in the model and the calculation of means;
although they are listed in the data tables. FRC consumption for Unit 3
on May 9, 1978, was deleted because of the unusually high inlet FRC mea-
surement and the TRC consumption for May 16, 1978, was deleted because of
the high outlet TRC measurement. The following table summarizes the data:
Table A-21
DATA ASSOCIATED WITH LARGE NEGATIVE CONDENSER CONSUMPTION OF
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE
FRC at Condenser
Date Unit Inlet Outlet Consumption Cond. Alka.
7-7-78 4 0.150 0.520 -0.370 430 94
7-7-78 2 0.150 0.480 -0.330 430 94
5-9-78 2 0.060 0.320 -0.260 350 90
7-7-78 3 0.160 0.390 -0.230 430 94
10-31-78 1 0.360 0.570 -0.210 400 90
11-14-78 1 0.210 0.420 -0.210
5-9-78 4 0.040 0.222 -0.182 350 90
10-31-78 3 0.390 0.560 -0.170 400 90
10-31-78 2 0.400 0.490 -0.090 400 90
10-28-77 1 0.211 0.297 -0.086 240 78
11-18-77 3 0.068 0.150 -0.082 220 80
5-5-78 3 0.030 0.110 -0.080 290 86
5-4-78 3 0.070 0.140 -0.070
11-28-78 2 0.360 0.420 -0.060 410 90
6-20-78 4 0.410 0.470 -0.060
10-31-78 4 0.420 0.480 -0.060 400 90
11-28-78 4 0.420 0.480 -0.060 410 90
11-18-77 4 0.087 0.145 -0.058 220 80
Phase III Averages: COND = 308.8 fjmhos
ALKA =85.0 mg/1
Ten instances of negative TRC consumption greater than 0.05 mg/1,
across the condenser occurred during Phase III. These occurred on eight
different dates, three of which corresponded with the dates which had
negative FRC consumption. Of the ten instances of negative TRC consumption
only three occurred on the same date, November 18, 1977. The data are
presented below.
132
-------
Table A-22
DATA ASSOCIATED WITH LARGE NEGATIVE CONDENSER CONSUMPTION OF
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
TRC at
Date
5-16-78
5-23-78
5-9-78
4-13-78
2-17-78
7-18-78
11-18-77
11-18-77
5-5-78
11-18-77
Unit
4
3
2
4
4
2
3
4
3
2
Inlet
1.160
1.000
1.040
0.400
0.430
0.650
0.550
0.548
1.160
0.451
Outlet
2,
1.
1
.200
.270
.210
0.550
0.550
0.720
0.617
0.613
1.220
0.504
Condenser
Consumption Cond. Alka.
-1.040 340 91
-0.270 340 83
-0.170 350 90
-0.150 360 100
-0.120 290 89
-0.070 320 91
-0.067 220 80
-0.065 220 80
-0.060 290 86
-0.053 220 80
No model was found which described TRC consumption as a function of
water quality parameters.
E. Condenser Outlet Compared With Point of Compliance
Tests were conducted on November 2, November 6, and November 9, 1978,
for Units 2, 3, and 4 to compare free and total residual chlorine readings
at the outlet of the condenser and the point of compliance. All three units
were feeding 2500 lbs/24 hours (a higher feed rate than recommended), three
times per day, for 20 minutes duration. Table A-23 below compares the esti-
mated steady-state maximum free residual chlorine on all three dates for all
three units.
Table A-23
MAXIMUM STEADY-STATE FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE READING (mg/1)
Date
11-2-78
11-6-78
11-9-78
Unit Condenser Outlet Point of Compliance Difference
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
Overall Average
Unit 2 Average
Unit 3 Average
Unit 4 Average
0.50
0.30
0.35
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.40
0.15
0.15
0.26
0.35
0.20
0.22
0.15
0.20
0.20
0.14
0.15
0.10
0.30
0.10
0.10
0.16
0.20
0.15
0.13
0.35
0.10
0.15
0.01
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.05
0.10
0.10
0.15
0.05
0.10
133
-------
On the average, the difference between the condenser outlet and the
point of compliance was approximately 0.10 mg/1 of free residual chlorine
while averaging 0.16 mg/1 at the point of compliance. The high reading
of 0.26 mg/1 at the condenser outlet results from the feed rate of
2500 lbs/24 hours while the associated inlet water temperature on these
dates was in the low 60°'s F. The free residual chlorine reading at the
point of compliance can be hypothesized as being a function of the free
residual chlorine at the condenser outlet, diminished by the demand of
the water, plus the time effect resulting from a flow rate. However,
insufficient data at the time does not allow the identification or
estimation of the above effects.
Unit 2 indicated a higher free residual chlorine reading on the
average than did Units 3 and 4. The average higher reading was consistant
at the point of compliance also. There was no identifiable reason for the
higher readings of Unit 2.
Table A-24 compares the estimated steady-state maximum for total
residual chlorine on all three dates for all three units.
Table A-24
MAXIMUM STEADY-STATE TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE READING (mg/1)
Date
11-2-78
11-6-78
11-9-78
Unit Condenser Outlet Point of Compliance Difference
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
Overall Average
Unit 2 Average
Unit 3 Average
Unit 4 Average
0.90
0.85
0.85
0.80
0.80
0.75
1.15
0.80
0.72
0.85
0.95
0.82
0.77
0.70
0.72
0.72
0.70
0.70
0.74
0.84
0.70
0.68
0.72
0.75
0.71
0.71
0.20
0.13
0.13
0.10
0.10
0.01
0.31
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.20
0.11
0.06
On the average, the difference in total residual chlorine readings
between the condenser outlet and point of compliance was 0.12 mg/1 with
an average total residual chlorine reading of 0.72 mg/1 at the point of
compliance. Unit 2 had higher readings of total residual chlorine at
the condenser outlet and at the point of compliance, as occurred in the
free residual chlorine readings. The higher chlorine readings of Unit 2
are apparently real. No present explanation can be made which can be
based on the data.
Table A-25 presents the ratio of the free residual chlorine reading
to the total residual chlorine for all three units for all three dates.
134
-------
This ratio is a rough indicator of the transition of free residual
chlorine into combined forms of chlorine. It appears that Unit 2 at the
condenser outlet had more free residual chlorine available for transfor-
mation into combined compounds than did the other units. This would
indicate that the feed rate to Unit 2 could be reduced until the free
residual chlorine readings at the condenser outlet are closer to those
of Units 3 and 4. A possible malfunction in the automatic chlorine feed
system may be attributing to this phenomenon on Unit 2. The automatic
valves on Unit 2 may not be closing off when the other units are being
chlorinated.
Table A-25
RATIO OF STEADY-STATE MAXIMUM FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE READING TO
MAXIMUM TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE READING
Date Unit Condenser Outlet Point of Compliance
11-2-78
11-6-78
11-9-78
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
Overall Ratio
Unit 2 Ratio
Unit 3 Ratio
Unit 4 Ratio
0.56
0.35
0.41
0.19
0.19
0.20
0.35
0.19
0.21
0.31
0.37
0.24
0.29
0.21
0.28
0.28
0.20
0.21
0.14
0.36
0.14
0.15
0.22
0.27
0.21
0.18
F. Interrationships Between Water Quality Parameters
This section summarizes an analysis performed to identify the water
quality parameters in Phase III which correlated with each other. This
section was the result of observing that different water quality parame-
ters were related to chlorine consumption and also related to each other.
The following table of correlation coefficients is self-explanatory:
135
-------
Table A-26
INTERRELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
COND ALKA TSS TOC NH3 ORGN NH2 + NH3 KJN
.03 .20 -.18
.53* .02
.05
.06
.01
-.01
.20
-.34*
.33*
.39*
-.29
-.01
.09
.33*
.02
-.54*
.13
.45*
-.21
-.38*
-.29
-.20
-.40*
.13
-.27
-.21
.38*
.29
-.45*
.05
.92*
.76*
-.03
PH
COND
ALKA
TSS
TOC
NH3
ORGN
NH2 + NH3
""Significance level .05 or smaller.
These variables, which are highly correlated with each other, are identified
with an asterisk by the simple correlation coefficient.
Probability > /R/, under H : RH = 0, is < .05
Note: High correlation does not necessarily imply a causal relationship.
136
-------
APPENDIX B
DATA FOR ANALYSIS
137
-------
OJ
00
Inlet Free
Date
5/06/77
5/OA/77
S/Oo/77
5/U/77
5/12/77
5/12/77
5/20/77
5/20/77
5/20/77
5/27/77
5/2V77
5/27/77
5/27/77
6/03/77
6/03/77
6/03/77
6/03/77
6/10/77
6/10/77
6/10/77
6/10/77
6/:"/77
6/17/77
V37/77
6/1V77
i>.'2 ./77
6/2V77
6/2V77
6/2'./77
6/3U/77
6/30/77
6/30/77
6/30/77
Unit
1
2
3
1
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
3
It
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Avg. of
All No'»
.417
.797
.56
1.15
1.40
.797
1.13
.98
.7
.512
.478
.345
.367
.364
.367
.24
.24
.581
.93
.764
.975
.526
.537
.297
.495
1.49
.779
.97
1.05
.939
.767
.862
.577
Avg. of
Steady
State
.410
.734
.483
1.26
1.60
.936
1.135
1.2
1.15
.496
.414
.375
.467
.382
.389
.27
.33
.663
.93
.778
.975
.569
.544
.311
.50
1.49
.773
1.00
1.1
.931
.758
.875
.64
No's
Not
Used
.1;.8
.15;!. 88
.35;!. 0
.1;.3
.3;.66;1.68
.1
.4;!. 3
.1;.3
.1
.1;.S
.22;!. 5
.1;.5
.1;.6
.16;. 48
.06;. 50
.05;. 31
.06
.07i.05;.8
-
.65
-
.15;. 8
.45
.15;. 35
.45;. 525
1.4;1.61
.57;!. 03
.7
.9
.78;!. 05
.32;!. 32
.16;!. 42
.1;.8
Outlet Free
Avg. of
All No'i
.356
.482
.242
.375
.868
.877
.577
.223
.234
.206
.22
.25
.358
1.57
1.73
.659
.834
.56
.58
.248
.458
.25
.365
1.5
.60
.83
.58
.961
.535
.519
.485
Avg. of
Steady
State
.351
No Data
.523
No Data
.233
.355
.864
1.0
.7
.234
.236
.208
.22
.241
.366
.147
.21
.676
.937
.62
.745
.268
.46
.245
.365
1.54
.608
.878
.688
.957
.539
.603
.519
No1 8
Not
Uaed
.25;. 49
.15;. 69
.12;. 14
.17;. 66
.78;. 91
.61;!. 02
.33
. 08 ; . 32
.2;. 26
.14;. 26
-
.05;. 54
.21; .45
. 1 ; . 2
.1
.2;. 98
.01
.15;. 73
.25
.15;. 17
.37;. 53
.17;. 34
-
1.15
.375;. 675
.4
.15
.74)1.22
.45;. 60
.1;.3;.65
.35
Difference*
Steady State
Free
Inlet-Outlet
.059
.
-.041
.
1.37
.58
.271
.20
.45
.262
.178
.167
.247
.141
.023
.123
.12
-.013
-.007
.158
.230
.301
.084
.066
.135
-.05
.165
.122
.412
-.026
.219
.272
.121
Inlet Total
Avg. of
All No's
1.33
1.53
1.46
1.43
1.42
.797
1.53
1.21
1.07
1.26
1.28
1.10
.87
.99
.975
1.15
.878
1.14
1.49
1.44
1.55
1.11
1.21
1.19
1.06
1.83
1.36
1.27
1.21
1.42
1.17
1.31
1.297
Avg. of
Steady
State
1.52
1.62
1.48
1.49
1.60
.936
1.57
1.44
1.4
1.3
1.41
1.15
1.51
1.29
1.25
1.295
1.255
1.245
1.59
1.45
1.58
1.24
1.28
1.22
1.19
1.93
1.35
1.45
1.38
1.41
1.17
1.44
1.51
No'«
Not
Uaed
.2;. 6
.29;2.2
1.3;1.6
.1;.4;.9;
9;. 92
.3;.66;1.8
.1
.5;!. 75
.Ijl.B
.2;. 3
.3;1.4S
.4
.2;!. 55
.1;.2;.3;
1.6
.16;. 31;
1.32
.12;. 33;. 56
.4l;1.33
.22;. 78
.43;. 51;
1.45
.3;!. 7
1.325
1.46
.21;. 56
.35
.95
.53
1.45
1.17)1.45
.2;.9;1.65
.5
. 28 ; 1 . 69
.32;!. 98;
1.32
.31;. 32;
2.08
.28;!. 45
Avg. of
All No'i
1.24
1.41
.79
.91
1.15
1.54
1.1
1.28
1.43
1.32
1.05
1.08
1.184
1.20
1.13
1.21
1.57
1.25
1. 10
1.23
1.19
.99
1.21
2.05
1.27
1.33
1.065
1.35
1.13
1.15
1.0
Outlet Total
Avg. of
Steady
State
1.31
No Data
1.40
No Data
.77
.917
1.19
1.54
1.22
1.38
1.43
1.43
1.44
1.15
1.285
1.21
1.13
1.29
1.53
1.29
1.26
1.25
1.28
1,20
1,21
.264
1.28
1,375
1.28
1.38
1.17
1.20
1.11
No'i
Not
Used
.55;1.4
1.37;1.45
.29;.3;1.87
.17;!. 62
.39;!. 36
-
.88
.08;!. 46
.52;!. 48
.52;1.48
.40;. 51
,14;1,31
.11;1.45
1.06; 1.30
-
.51
1.69;1.7
,65;1.63
.79
1.01;1.28
.44;1.35
.48;.37;1.28
-
1.75;2.15
1.05;1.3S
.9:1.4
.2
1.02;1.43
.5;!. 95
.6;!. 31
.55
Difference*
Steady State
Total
Inlet -Outlet
.21
-
.08
-
.83
.019
.38
-.10
.18
-.08
-.12
-.28
.07
.14
-.035
.035
.125
-.045
.06
.16
.32
-.01
0
.02
-.02
-.71
.07
.075
.10
.03
0
.24
.40
*We have noted free and total residual chlorine concentrations at the condenser outlet higher than at the condenser inlet.
Since this phenomenon (inlet minus outlet^. - 0.1 mg/1) has only occurred 28 times out of 354 data points (7.97.), we have
attributed the phenomenon to field experimental error until hypotheses can be tested. An analysis of this "negative
consumption" may be found in Appendix A.
-------
VO
Inlet Free
D-jte
7/05/77
7/o-:/77
7/05/77
7/05/77
7/13/77
7/1J/77
7/13/77
7/13/77
7/20/77
7/23/77
7/20/77
7/20/77
7/27/77
7/27/77
7/27/77
7/27/77
Bj :S/77
8/1S/77
8/1S/77
£/;S/77
8/25/77
3/25/77
6/25/77
9/02/77
9/02/77
9/02/77
9/02/7?
9/08/77
9/05/77
9/03/77
9/G8/ 7 7
9/16/77
S/16Y77
5, 16/77
9/16/77
5/2.3/77
9/23/77
Unit
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
Avg. of
All No's
.804
.407
1.00
1.1
.991
.580
.748
.484
.989
1.06
.622
.70
.638
.46
2.01
.567
.462
.747
.64
.514
.247
.291
.249
.26
.144
.255
.205
.469
.409
.V.I
.376
.515
.492
.373
.646
.522
.444
Avg. of
Steady
State
.824
.42
1.02
1.1
.991
.678
.864
.542
1.04
1.12
.62
.55
.575
.479
2.4
.8
.481
.792
.64
.52
.249
.283
.248
.276
.185
.246
.20
.475
.412
.463
.367
.509
.518
.39
.606
.531
.433
No's
Not
Used
.36;!. 15
.08;. 6
.62;!. 3
-
-
.05;. 75
.05;. 4;. 975
.05;.!;. 95
.36;!. 13
.19;!. 26
-2;1.05
.4;!. 15
.35;!. 30
.lj.7
.25;3.0
.1
.03;. 66
.04;. OS;
1.01
-
.05;. 74
.1;.38
. 225 ; . 38
.2;. 3
.1
.13;. 23
.1; .48
.17;. 25
.28;. 58
.15;. 65
.08;. 58
.2; .58
.4;. 6
.12;. 63
-2;. 44
.4;!. 09
.26;. 7
.2;. 6
Outlet Free
Avg. of
All No's
.324
.378
.345
.392
.813
.485
.893
.76
1.05
.891
.963
1.04
.154
.337
2.63
.388
.724
.761
.75
.078
.252
.245
.229
.158
.217
.142
.462
.544
.475
.422
.596
.166
.375
.159
.450
.345
Avg. of
Steady
State
.339
.386
.411
.394
.859
.485
.89
.76
1.07
.977
1.0
1.13
.193
.306
3.45
.436
.722
No Data
.772
.75
.072
.248
.247
.228
.157
.221
.142
.488
.563
.46
.422
.596
.171
.375
.153
.473
.369
No's
Not
Used
.18;. 2;
.55
.125;. 475
.05;. 075;
.45
.3;. 475
.2;!. 06
,35;. 62
.813;. 98
.9
.025
.55;!. 15
.45
.01;. 05;
.42
.25;. 375
.225;. 55;
3.8
.05
.68;. 78
.68;. 79
.61;. 89
.06;. 10
.225;. 275
.225;. 3
.18;. 26
.13;. 225
.15;. 26
-
.08;. 58
.15;. 76
.425;. 65
_
.54;. 63
.1
-
.05;. 2
.05;. 64
. 05 ; . 45
Difference
Steady State
Free
Inlet-Outlet
.475
.34
.609
.706
.132
.193
-.026
-.218
-.03
.143
-.38
-.58
.382
.173
-1.05
.364
-.241
-
-.132
-.23
.177
.035
.001
.048
.028
.025
.058
-.013
-.151
.003
-.055
-.087
.347
.015
.453
.058
.064
Inlet Total
Avg. of
All No's
1.09
.681
1.27
1.37
1.29
1.12
1.24
.706
1.41
1.35
.846
1.06
.956
1.27
2.75
1.0
.964
1.31
1.25
1.12
.667
.889
.835
.738
.854
.728
.77
.829
.830
.905
.914
1.05
.943
.94
.99
.916
.894
Avg. of
Steady
State
1.09
.706
1.33
1.55
1.29
1.32
1.30
.879
1.47
1.42
.83
1.3
.942
1.33
3.13
1.28
1.02
1.38
1.2
1.07
.668
.892
.883
.768
.874
.854
.77
.931
.92
.994
.923
1.06
.957
1.03
1.07
.872
.91
No's
Not
Used
.79;1.43
.08;!. 03
.66;1.53
1.0
-
.1;1.35
.55;1.45
.1
.45;1.65
.28;1.58
.5;!. 24
.48;!. 4
1.4;. 6
.55:1.45
1.05;3.7
.45
.52;. 54;
1.18
.42;!. H
1.4
. 25 ; 1 . 6
.58;. 75
.85;. 92
.54;. 94
.44
.66;. 91
.1;.32;.88
-
.01;!. 02
.4;!. 28
.085;!.!
.5; 1.30
.9;I.l
.8
. 22 ; 1 . 1
.5jl. 09
.52;!. 15
.8)1.0
Avg. of
All No's
.973
1.05
1.0
1.02
1.19
1.15
1.31
1.26
1.45
1.28
1.32
1.45
.772
1.26
3.34
1.21
1.22
1.25
1.07
.622
.758
.821
.72
.807
.729
.742
.873
.843
.958
.955
1.06
.614
.906
.818
.809
.845
Outlet Total
Avg. of
Steady
State
.983
1.16
1.19
.14
.20
.17
.32
.26
.46
1.37
1.42
1.54
,826
1.27
4.34
1.28
1.36
No Data
1.26
1.24
.622
.821
.825
.724
.842
.729
.742
.926
.887
.931
.967
1.07
.905
.992
.938
.83
.906
No's
Not
Used
.6;!. 15
1.075;. 2
.1;.4
.45
1 . 1 ; 1 . 28
.96;!. 27
1.37;1.18
-
1.35
.325; 1.45
.60
.85; 1.625
.05;. 96
1.2;1.3
.6;1.1
.45;1.50
1.08;1.3
1.17;1.3
.28;1.36
-
.2;. 875
.80
.7;. 75
.35;. 875
-
-
-1;.98
.25;!. 0
.9;!. 15
.825;!. 05
1;1.1
.15;. 3
.22
.1
.1;1.05
.2;. 95
Difference
Steady State
Total
Inlet-Outlet
.102
-.454
.14
.41
.09
.15
-.02
-.381
.01
.05
-.59
-.24
.116
.06
-1.21
0
-.34
-.06
-.17
.046
.071
.058
.044
.032
.125
.028
.005
.033
.058
-.Oi;
.001
.052
.033
.132
.042
.004
-------
Date
Unit
Inlet Free
Avg. of
All No's
.75
.4
.264
.102
.418
.20
.212
.159
.167
.194
.193
.131
.073
.036
.324
.305
Avg. of
Steady
State
.75
.475
.28
.105
.42
.20
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
.211
.162
. 187
. 167
No Data
So Data
No Data
No Data
.188
.124
.068
.087
.356
.308
.6;
• i;
.02
.03
.37
-
.09
.09
.09
.07
.1;
.01
.01
.05
.04
• ll
So',
Mot
Used
.9
.55
;•«
;.16
;.44
i-34
;.28
;.26
;.40
.33
;.29
;.16
; .12
.4
Outlet Free
Avg. of
All No's
.628
.35
.164
.039
.241
.051
.406
.205
.367
.367
.30
.353
.429
.290
.235
.34
.289
.126
.11
.124
.407
.406
.31
.28
.172
. 147
.145
.128
.163
.141
Avg. of
Steady
State
.64
.388
.181
.039
.244
.05
.414
.21
.367
.41
.42
.383
.423
.315
.250
.4
.297
.127
.113
.123
.4
.423
.3
.26
.165
.148
.150
.145
.162
.136
No's
Not
Used
.575;. 675
.05
.05
.02
.2;
.03
•2;
.14
-
.1;
.1;
.26
•3;
.12
.04
.1
.22
• i;
.06
.1;
.44
.3;
.34
,14
.13
.13
.13
.06
.13
.18
;.425
;.26
;.06
.275
jl.O
.55
i.25
.46
.46
.6
-,.35
;.34
;.375
.15
; . 13
.15
.46
;.44
;.20
;. 16
;. 16
;.2
Difference
Steady State
Free
Inlet-Outlet
.11
.012
.099
.101
.174
.15
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-.086
.035
.074
.071
.
-
.
-
.023
-.024
-.082
.058
.194
.172
Inlet Total
Avg. of
All No's
1.1
.75
.506
.388
.664
.49
1.06
.594
.577
.582
.745
.448
.53
.51
.527
.475
Avg. of
Steady
State
1.
No
Ho
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
1,
No
No
No
No
,1
.933
.54
,403
,663
.51
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
,02
.608
,578
,60
Data
Data
Data
Data
,737
,451
.55
.548
533
.493
No's
Not
Used
1.05
.2
.04;
.21;
.65;
.43;
.69;
.49;
.49;
.39;
.65;
.19;
.07;
•22;
.4;.
.3;.
;1.12
.67
.43
.68
.53
1.75
.73
.66
.72
.91
.68
.69
.65
6
54
Outlet Total
Avg. of No's
Avg. of Steady Not
All No's State Used
1.05
.721
.488
.341
.618
.373
.807
.682
.85
.907
.74
.958
1.13
1.01
.868
1.02
.726
.58
.541
.588
.713
.740
.615
.547
.642
.493
.559
.583
.443
.466
1.05
.80
.476
.367
.619
.376
.833
.7
.85
.988
.767
.96
1.14
1.05
.932
1.1
.709
.58
.58
.593
.7
.72
.6
.56
.657
.504
.617
.613
.443
.462
1.025;!.07
.1;.95
.1;.65
.03
.6;.63
.03;.7
.5;.88
.55;.74
.8;.9
.5
.44;.96
.87;!.0
l.ljl.S
.88
.2;1.04
.6;!.2
.65;.92
.52;.60
.25;.60
.53;.63
.74
.66;.8
.58;.64
.34;.74
.45;.7
.13;.55
.05;.66
.45;.625
.4;.48
.43;.53
Difference
Steady State
Total
Inlet-Outlet
.05
.133
.064
.036
.044
.134
.311
.028
.002
.007
.08
.053
.067
.065
.09
.031
-------
(late
08-15-78
08-29-78
08-29-78
08-29-78
09-06-78
09-06-78
09-06-78
09-06-78
09-19-78
09-19-78
09-19-78
09-19-78
10-03-78
10-03-78
10-03-78
10-17-78
10-17-78
10-17-78
10-31-78
10-31-78
10-31-78
10-31-78
11-14-78
11-14-78
11-14-78
11-28-78
11-28-78
11-28-78
12-07-78
12-07-78
12-07-78
12-19-78
12-19-78
12-19-78
Avg of All
Unit Numbers
4
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
4
1
2
4
.40
.29
.41
.41
.17
.22
.22
.27
.53
.40
.38
.32
.15
.16
. 19
.48
.65
.75
.34
.39
.40
.39
.19
.20
.20
.29
.34
.37
.49
.50
.57
InlcL Free
Avj> of
Su-ady Slate
.39
.32
.44
.4.3
.18
.23
.23
.28
.55
.43
.41
.35
.16
.17
.20
.51
.66
.75
.36
.40
.39
.42
.21
.22
.21
.31
.36
.42
No Data
No Data
No Data
.49
.50
.58
Outlet Free
Numbers Avg of All Avg of
Hot Used Numbers Steady Slate
.47,
.42,
.58,
.51,
.23,
.23,
.29,
.32,
.60,
.48,
.44,
.40,
.21 ,
.20,
.23,
.53,
.68,
.76,
.41,
.44,
.46,
.47,
.27,
.23,
.25,
. .33 ,
.44,
.43,
.54,
.53,
.61,
.34
.03
.03
.07
.08
.08
.03
.03
.35
.03
.07
.03
.05
.05
.06
.31
.57
.72
.06
.26
.34
.03
.06
.06
.05
. 15
.02
.04
.46
.40
.48
.33
.18
.38
.35
.16
.18
.19
.25
.39
.35
. 35
.34
.12
.14
.13
.40
.58
.57
.51
.46
.51
.45
.39
.25
.21
.24
.41
.45
.42
.37
.40
.41
.38
.42
.35
.19
.41
.38
.17
.19
.20
.26
.43
.37
.37
.37
.12
.15
.13
.39
.61
.61
.57
.49
.56
.48
.42
.27
.22
.24
.42
.48
.46
.38
.44
.44
.39
.45
Numbers Difference Steady State \v£ of All
Not Used Free (Inlet - Oullel) Numbers
• 39 ,
.25,
.44,
.42,
. 25 ,
.23,
.27,
.33,
..55 ,
.47,
.41,
.39,
. 18,
.16,
. 16,
.60,
.64,
.75,
.64,
.61,
.64,
.63,
.55,
.35,
.25,
.38,
.65,
.55,
.55,
.39,
.51,
.51,
.45,
.51,
.05
.08
.09
.08
.03
.10
.08
.06
.09
.05
.12
.07
.03
.03
.05
.22
.35
. 10
.05
.08
. 03
.03
.06
.05
. 15
.02
. 11
.06
.08
.28
.03
. 14
.22
.15
.04
.13
.03
.05
.01
.04
.03
.02
.12
.06
.04
- .02
.04
.02
.07
. 12
.05
. 14
- .21
- .09
- . 17
- .06
- .21
- .05
- .01
.07
- . 05
- .06
.05
. 11
. 13
.56
.69
.67
.44
.49
.52
.57
.87
.70
.72
.67
.62
.68
.71
.96
1 .02
1.10
.80
.88
.84
.83
.65
.69
.69
.72
.62
.77
.89
.85
.92
InlelJTufi..! __ .._.
Avg of Numbers Avj>
Steady Stale Nol Used N^l
No Data
.63
.74
.72
.47
.53
.55
.61
.87
.75
.78
.75
.67
.72
.77
.96
1.03
1.08
.87
.88
.90
.91
.75
.78
.79
.72
.81
.87
No Da I a
No Dala
No Data
.89
.86
.93
.77
.82
.80
.50
.56
.65
.69
.89
.82
.80
.78
.70
.78
.84
.98
1.05
1.05
.91
.93
.92
.94
.78
.82
.83
.70
.86,. 03
.91
. 76 , .
.86
, .03
, .03
, .12
, .11
, -12
, .06
, .08
, .84
, .06
, .10
, .06
, . 12
, . 15
, .12
, .93
, -97
,1.25
, .11
, .84
, .40
, .09
, .06
, .06
, .05
, . 75
, .04,. 07
, .04
73, .92
Oultel Tol-nl
"oT'Ai'i Avg of Numbers Difference Steady State
mbe£s Steady State Not Used IjjV.i 1 ..Un 1 et ^I'ulJ et)
.59
.71
. 66
.46
.51
.54
.57
.73
.67
.66
.66
.56
.63
.62
.87
.93
.83
.74
.72
.68
.62
.62
.54
.62
.58
.74
.69
.77
.75
.73
.79
.76
.76
No Data
. 67
.76
. 72
.49
.50
.58
.61
.84
.73
.70
.72
.61
.67
.68
.87
.92
.90
.79
.77
.74
.74
.68
.59
.66
. 70
.78
.75
. 78
. 76
.83
. 78
.80
. 82
.78, .12
78 10
.56^ .08
.53, .45
.62, .15
. 65 , .11
.87, .12
.76, .08
.76, .18
.75, .15
.69, .12
.72, . 10
.71, .12
.88, .84
.96, ,85
1.01, .16
.88, .11
.82, .15
.86, .05
. 83 , . 1 2 , . 08
.13, .76
.12, .70
. 75 , .27
. 02 , . 31 , . 1 5 , . 75
.19,. 40, .89
.10, .50, .80
. 65 , . 82
.66, . 73 , . 74, . 78
.08 ,. 77, .88
. 85
.63, .55
. 34
- 04
.02
Q
- .02
.02
- .03
0
.03
.02
.08
.03
.06
.05
.09
.09
. 11
. 18
.08
.11
.16
.17
.07
.19
. 1 3
. 02
.03
.12
. 1 1
.06
. 1 1
-------
JS
K>
Date
06-13-78
06-13-78
06-13-78
06-13-78
06-20-78
06-20-78
06-20-78
06-20-78
06-21-78
06-21-78
06-21-78
06-21-78
06-27-78
06-27-78
W-27-78
OS-27-78
07-07-78
07-07-78
07-07-78
07-07-78
07-18-78
07-18-78
07-18-78
07-18-78
07-25-78
07-25-78
07-25-78
08-02-78
08-02-78
08-02-78
08-02-78
08-08-78
08-08-78
08-08-78
08-15-78
08-15-78
Unit
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
2
3
Inlet Free
Outlet Free
Avg of All Avg of Numbers Avg of All Avg of Numbers Difference Steady State \vg of All
Numbers Steady State Not Used Numbers Steady State Not Used Free (Inlet - Outlet) Numbers
.26
.54
.35
.37
.33
.37
.43
.33
.40
.31
.44
.39
.49
.69
.55
.63
.18
.15
.16
.14
.12
.15
.07
.09
.20
.17
.19
.18
.30
.42
.40
.11
.07
.13
.36
.42
.28
.57
.36
.41
.35
.41
.43
.41
.40
.33
.45
.40
.49
.69
.59
.62
.18
.15
.16
.15
.11
.15
.07
.10
.21
.18
.20
.19
.31
.42
.43
.11
.08
.11
.39
.42
.32,
.64,
.38,
.56,
.40,
.43,
.51,
.43,
.43,
.40,
.49,
.44,
.55,
.75,
.65,
•69,
.25,
.24,
.20,
.18,
.23,
•30,
.10,
.11,
.24,
.23,
.23,
.24,
.19,
• 45,
.48,
.13,
.08,
.30,
.44,
.44,
.05
.02
.25
.05
.03
.03
.35
.07
.33
.03
.35
.32
.42
.62
.17
.59
.11
.06
.09
.09
.04
.02
.06
.07
.05
.04
.05
.10
.33
.38
.03
.08
.06
.09
.06
.38
.24
.49
.29
.37
.34
.42
.41
.42
.43
.32
.39
.36
.25
.33
.34
.27
.19
.46
.39
.51
.11
.11
.07
.10
.17
.15
.17
.15
.25
.30
.36
.10
.07
.07
.30
.33
.25
.52
.30
.40
.35
.41
.41
.47
.43
.32
.41
.39
.25
.34
.34
.29
.19
.48
.39
.52
.11
.10
.07
.09
.17
.15
.18
.16
.26
.31
.38
.11
.08
.07
.32
.36
.28,
.59,
.36,
.58,
.43,
.48,
.45,
.50,
.48,
.39,
.45,
.43,
.31,
.40,
.42,
.36,
.26,
.60,
.43,
.60,
.16,
.29,
.09,
.14,
.22,
.22,
.22,
.24,
.33,
.43,
•42,
.15,
.08,
.10,
.40,
.39,
.11
.05
.18
.03
.08
.38
.33
.08
.33
.20
.27
.22
.15
.09
.27
.07
.10
.02
.33
.37
.06
.06
.05
.08
.09
.03
.04
.04
.09
.03
.03
.03
.05
.03
.03
.05
.03
.05
.06
.01
0
0
.02
- .06
- .03
.01
.04
.01
.24
.35
.25
.33
- .01
- .33
- .23
- .37
0
.05
0
.01
.04
.03
.02
.03
.05
.09
.05
0
0
.04
.07
.06
.73
1.05
.85
.80
.78
.84
.90
.83
.79
.69
.84
.79
.70
.85
.74
.87
.63
.86
.87
.86
.68
.68
.73
.75
.68
.62
.75
.62
.72
.79
.78
.66
.66
.70
.68
.72
Inlet Total
Outlet Total
Avg of Numbers Avg of All
Steady State Not Used Numbers
.78
1.12
.85
.92
.81
.92
.90
.97
.79
.73
.84
.77
.70
.85
.79
.90
.63
.91
.89
.91
.68
.65
.74
.76
.74
.66
.81
.67
.74
.80
.87
.66
.66
.70
.72
.73
.81,
1.18,
.68,
1.07,
.84,
.96,
• 93,
1.00,
.82,
.82,
.88,
.83,
.73,
.94,
.86,
• 92,
.68,
1.00,
.92,
.95,
.72,
.71,
.81,
.77,
.76,
.81,
.84,
.40, .63
.69,
.75
.81, .77
.68,
.68,
.73,
.79,
.75,
.10
.08
.82
.08
.47
.04
.87
.38
.75
.03
.82
.76
.67
.78
.25
.72
.57
.25
.65
.62
.64
.56
.62
.73
.10
.08
.10
,.58
.65
,.06
.63
.63
.63
.24
.67
.71
.97
.75
.75
.75
.92
.84
.79
.80
.73
.73
.78
.72
.81
.79
.66
.61
.80
.84
.77
.73
.69
.59
.73
.62
.55
.63
.60
.61
.58
.72
.62
.63
.64
.60
.64
Avg of Numbers D
Steady State Not Used T
.75
1.04
.80
.86
.81
.92
.85
.92
.76
.73
.74
.80
.73
.85
.83
.72
.65
.85
.85
.81
.73
.72
.63
.73
.68
.59
.67
.72
.69
.75
.79
.61
.63
.66
.64
.69
.78, .20
1.10, .08
.85, .30
1.03, .08
.84, .10
.95, .88
.86, .81
.94, .10
.83, .78
.78, .66
.78, .62
.84, .67
.75, .69
.91, .18
.87, .40
.89, .10
.68, .25
.92, .08
.89, .78
.91, .50
.75, .69
.80, .27
.76, .06
.74, .70
.71, .11
.75, .06
.76, .09
.67, .14, .10
.65, .14, .60
.06, .70, .73
.07, .75, .76
.68, .54
.65, .58
.71, .35
.72, .07
.73, .10
ifference Steady State
otal (Inlet - Outlet)
.03
.08
.05
.06
0
0
.05
.05
0
0
.10
- .03
- .03
0
- .04
.18
- .02
.06
.04
.10
- .05
- .07
.11
.03
.06
.07
.14
- .05
.05
.05
.08
.05
.03
.04
.08
.04
-------
Outlet Total
U>
Date
02-03-78
02-03-78
02-03-78
02-17-78
02-17-78
02-17-78
03-24-78
03-24-78
04-13-78
04-13-78
04-13-78
04-28-78
04-28-78
04-28-78
OS-04-78
(fcj-05-78
05-05-78
05-05-78
05-09-78
05-09-78
05-09-78
05-16-78
05-16-78
05-16-78
05-23-78
05-23-78
05-23-78
05-23-78
05-31-78
05-31-78
05-31-78
05-31-78
06-06-78
06-06-78
06-06-78
06-06-78
Unit
2
3
It
1
2
4
2
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
3
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Avg of All
Numbers
1.07
.29
.32
.31
.28
.18
.30
.17
.25
.33
.18
.43
.15
.22
.10
.05
.04
.04
.06
1.43
.04
.25
.88
.54
.61
.82
.66
.52
.64
.65
.97
Avg of Numbers Avg of All
Steady State Not Used Numbers
.66
.30
.37
.31
.28
.17
.29
.17
.25
.24
.18
.37
.15
.28
.07
.04
.03
.04
.06
1.43
.04
.25
.96
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
.57
.61
.84
.67
.55
.68
.66
1.06
3.0 ,
.41,
.37,
.38,
.58,
.28,
.55,
.32,
.42,
.37,
.31,
.80,
.24,
.04,
.18,
.10,
.06,
.06,
.08,
1.51,1
.05,
.32,
1.02,
.61,
.62,
.93,
.70,
.61,
.72,
.72,
1.68,
.34
.08
.22
.25
.07
.08
.12
.05
.05
.08
.06
.30
.05
.30
.06
.02
.03
.02
.02
.34
.02
.18
.50
.26
.58
.55
.60
.10
.11
.56
.06
.36
.06
.16
.06
.09
.08
.13
.07
.07
.06
.04
.14
.09
.09
.13
.07
.10
.05
.28
0
.18
.19
.64
.36
.46
.51
.68
.57
.40
.29
.35
.46
Avg of Numbers Difference Steady State Avg of All
Steady State Not Used Free (Inlet - Outlet) Numbers
.35
.05
.13
.06
.09
.10
.14
.07
.06
.05
.04
.13
.09
.09
.14
.07
.11
.05
.32
0
.22
.19
.66
.30
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
.48
.51
.69
.57
.42
.30
.37
.36
.5 ,
.10,
•3 ,
.1 ,
.1 ,
.10,
.08,
.07,
.13,
.10,
.05,
.20,
.13,
.10,
.20,
.08,
.14,
.06,
.35,
.04,
.04,
1.07,
.76,
.57,
.58,
.77,
.61,
.45,
.41,
.47,
1.18,
.23
.05
.1
.05
.07
.05
.15
.05
.04
.05
.025
.10
.05
.07
.05
.05
.05
.05
.03
.24
.27
.07
.02
.24
.43
.56
.51
.14
.02
.08
.02
.31
.25
.24
.25
.19
.07
.15
.10
.19
.19
.14
.24
.06
.19
- .07
- .03
- .08
- .01
- .26
1.43
- .18
.06
.30
-
-
.09
.10
.15
.10
.13
.38
.29
.70
1.89
.60
.54
.58
.49
.40
.78
.43
.63
.61
.40
.76
.77
.61
1.2
1.01
1.13
1.16
1.03
2.27
1.11
1.08
1.04
1.16
1.31
.97
1.26
1.12
1.13
1.19
1.36
1.29
.97
1.12
1.13
1.31
Avg of Numbers Avg of All
Steady State Not Used Numbers
1.37
.64
.52
.59
.50
.43
.71
.43
.61
.61
.43
.74
.84
.74
1.2
.99
1.16
1.20
1.04
2.23
1.10
1.06
1.09
1.16
1.10
.97
1.00
1.06
1.14
1.18
1.45
1.29
1.04
1.13
1.13
1.54
4.0 ,1.
.70, .
.60, .
.61, .
.66, .
.56, .
1.8 , .
.68, .
.93, .
.90, .
.57, .
1.0 , ,
.90, ,
.79, .
-
1.25, .
1.25, .
1.20,1,
1.18,
2.54,2
1.13,1.
1.30,1
1.16,
1.23,1
4.0 , ,
1.06, ,
4.0 , .
1.54,1
1.16,1
1.22,1
1.48,
1.31,1
1.07, .
1.18,1
1.16,1
2.10,
33
21
50
.53
18
.17
.39
18
.49
25
.11
.60
.30
.18
.86
.92
,05
.80
.10
,1
.04
.60
.10
,98
,93
.65
.04
,01
.16
.63
.25
.20
,02
.08
.16
1.13
.54
.26
.44
.49
.41
.53
.42
.54
.67
.55
.72
.84
.75
.95
.87
1.16
1.05
1.65
2.13
.82
.90
1.10
2.21
1.23
.96
1.48
.89
1.10
1.10
1.32
1.18
.94
.93
1.04
1.33
Avg of Numbers Difference Steady State
Steady State Not Used Total (Inlet - Outlet)
1.08
.53
.30
.44
.48
.55
.53
.48
.54
.66
.55
.74
.88
.75
1.09
.90
1.22
1.05
1.21
2.13
1.03
.95
1.10
2.2
.98
1.01
1.27
.96
1.10
1.10
1.34
1.20
.98
.99
1.05
1.4
1.4 ,1
.55,
.35 ,
.50,
.55,
.55,
.55,
.51,
.55,
.80,
.57,
.75,
.91,
.75,
1.29,
1.0 ,
1.86,
1.08,1
4.4 ,1
2.13,2
1.10,
1.08,
1.15,
2.9 ,1
4.0 ,
1.08,
4.0 ,
1.0 ,
1.14,1
1.18,1
1.39,1
1.21,1
1.04,
1.21,
1.10,
2.45,
.0
.60
. 10
.40
.47
.15
.52
.07
.50
.55
.55
.60
.65
.73
.05
.55
.32
.02
.15
.1
.14
.18
.98
.55
.93
.32
.96
.53
.05
.01
.13
.16
.43
.05
,94
.08
.29
. 11
.22
. 15
.02
- .12
. 18
- .05
.07
- .05
- .12
0
- .04
- .01
.11
.09
- .06
.15
- .17
.10
.07
.11
- .01
-1.04
.12
- .04
- .27
.10
.04
.08
.11
.09
.01
.14
.08
.14
-------
APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
Date
C.F.
Date
C.F.
Date
C.F.
Unit 1
3/28/74
6/11/74
7/25/74
2/13/75
3/20/75
4/23/75
7/22/75
8/26/75
9/30/75
11/5/75
12/8/75
1/12/76
2/18/76
3/23/76
4/28/76
5/6/76
6/3/76
6/10/76
6/16/76
7/9/76
7/22/76
7/29/76
8/5/76
8/12/76
11/11/76
12/13/76
82.10
70.11
72.40
79.13
75.48
76.62
72.67
70.31
69.04
72.63
74.98
87.00
75.00
72.00
69.00
71.00
72.00
69.00
70.00
71.00
69.00
69.00
69.00
72.00
81.94
83.37
6/1/77
6/17/77
6/30/77
7/13/77
7/27/77
8/9/77
8/24/77
9/8/77
9/22/77
10/5/77
10/19/77
11/2/77
11/18/77
12/2/77
12/14/77
12/30/77
1/4/78
1/10/78
1/17/78
1/25/78
2/8/78
2/13/78
2/17/78
2/22/78
3/13/78
5/31/78
72.00
72.00
71.00
72.00
71.00
72.00
70.00
70.00
69.00
72.00
74.00
70.00
73.00
81.00
81.00
87.00
86.00
89.00
92.00
85.00
80.00
73.00
76.00
79.00
76.00
72.00
6/6/78
6/14/78
6/21/78
7/7/78
7/18/78
8/2/78
8/14/78
8/28/78
10/19/78
72.00
72.00
71.00
71.00
73.00
72.00
71.00
71.00
73.00
144
-------
APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
Date
C.F.
Date
C.F.
Date
C.F.
Unit 2
3/18/74
5/9/74
6/13/74
7/29/74
8/29/74
7/22/75
8/27/75
9/30/75
11/11/75
12/16/75
1/21/76
2/24/76
5/6/76
6/8/76
6/16/76
7/9/76
7/22/76
7/29/76
8/6/76
8/12/76
8/19/76
10/13/76
11/15/76
12/27/76
6/1/77
6/17/77
86.15
76.30
71.25
73.54
73.08
74.36
72.08
72.64
74.81
79.61
90.00
82.00
71.00
72.00
70.00
71.00
72.00
72.00
73.00
72.00
70.00
75.98
82.98
88.41
74.00
71.00
6/1/77
6/17/77
6/30/77
7/13/77
7/27/77
8/9/77
8/19/77
9/8/77
9/22/77
10/5/77
10/18/77
11/2/77
11/18/77
12/2/77
12/14/77
12/29/77
1/10/78
1/23/78
2/8/78
2/22/78
3/22/78
4/5/78
4/19/78
5/2/78
5/16/78
6/6/78
74.00
71.00
71.00
73.00
74.00
73.00
71.00
71.00
72.00
73.00
76.00
78.00
80.00
80.00
84.00
89.00
90.00
84.00
83.00
88.00
80.00
75.00
76.00
77.00
73.00
69.00
6/14/78
6/21/78
7/7/78
7/18/78
8/2/78
8/14/78
8/28/78
10/16/78
10/19/78
74.00
70.00
84.00
71.00
71.00
73.00
71.00
74.00
70.00
145
-------
APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
Date
C.F.
Date
C.F.
Date
C.F.
Unit 3
2/26/74
5/21/74
7/11/74
8/28/74
11/22/74
1/15/75
2/27/75
5/13/75
6/17/75
7/22/75
9/30/75
11/7/75
12/8/75
1/12/76
2/19/76
3/23/76
4/26/76
6/9/76
6/16/76
7/9/76
7/22/76
7/29/76
8/6/76
8/12/76
8/19/76
10/13/76
91.48
76.16
72.95
73.15
81.11
84.94
83.34
78.90
75.09
74.98
68.96
74.30
78.53
87.00
79.00
76.00
73.00
72.00
74.00
71.00
73.00
72.00
71.00
72.00
73.00
74.10
5/6/77
5/20/77
6/3/77
6/16/77
6/30/77
7/13/77
8/10/77
9/8/77
9/21/77
10/6/77
10/19/77
11/3/77
11/17/77
12/01/77
12/14/77
12/29/77
1/11/78
1/23/78
2/8/78
2/22/78
3/10/78
3/24/78
3/30/78
4/5/78
4/19/78
5/2/78
72.00
75.00
75.00
74.00
74.00
74.00
75.00
73.00
73.00
77.00
78.00
79.00
79.00
86.00
86.00
89.00
91.00
93.00
90.00
89.00
80.00
67.00
73.00
70.00
74.00
80.00
5/16/78
6/6/78
6/14/78
6/21/78
7/7/78
7/18/78
8/2/78
8/15/78
8/28/78
10/16/78
10/19/78
77.00
74.00
73.00
74.00
74.00
74.00
73.00
75.00
74.00
78.00
78.00
146
-------
APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
Date
Unit 4
5/21/74
7/11/74
8/28/74
1/21/75
3/19/75
4/18/75
5/21/75
6/30/75
8/13/75
9/30/75
11/5/75
12/15/75
1/22/76
5/20/76
5/26/76
6/9/76
6/16/76
6/30/76
7/12/76
7/22/76
7/29/76
8/6/76
8/12/76
8/19/76
10/20/76
11/22/76
C.F.
78.28
76.32
74.44
78.87
79.87
78.19
78.55
74.57
72.12
72.77
75.87
79.52
90.00
73.00
74.00
74.00
74.00
75.00
75.00
73.00
74.00
71.00
72.00
73.00
80.45
83.87
Date
5/20/77
6/3/77
6/16/77
6/30/77
7/13/77
7/27/77
8/10/77
9/9/77
9/21/77
10/6/77
10/19/77
11/3/77
11/17/77
12/01/77
2/1/78
2/22/78
3/24/78
4/5/78
4/19/78
5/2/78
5/16/78
5/31/78
6/14/78
6/21/78
7/7/78
7/18/78
C.F.
74.00
75.00
74.00
74.00
74.00
74.00
77.00
74.00
73.00
77.00
79.00
78.00
82.00
82.00
91.00
88.00
79.00
76.00
77.00
78.00
76.00
72.00
76.00
74.00
75.00
74.00
Date C.F.
8/2/78 74.00
8/15/78 74.00
8/28/78 71.00
10/19/78 73.00
147
-------
CHIORINE CONCENTRATIONS
Date
6/9/76
6/15/76
6/16/76
7/7/76
7/8/76
7/16/76
8/13/76
8/19/76
5/6/77
5/12/77
5/20/77
Unit
2
3
4
1
1
2
3
4
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
1
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
3
4
C12
Feed Rate
(lb/24 hrs.)
Phase I
6000
4500
6000
6000
4500
4500
4500
4500
7500
4500
6000
6000
7500
4500
6000
6000
7500
4500
6000
4500
6000
6000
7500
4500
6000
Phase II
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
Flow
Rate
(Gal/min)
113,967
99,799
124,694
128,581
128,581
133,390
121,317
122,466
138,798
139,631
129,241
139,924
138,798
139,631
129,241
124,128
137,866
119,689
130,245
103,227
115,352
139,655
128,108
132,630
130,766
154,000
141,000
151,000
135,872
114,000
136,425
140,007
122,911
131,289
126,583
C12
Cone.
Cmg/1)
4.38
3.75
4.00
3.88
2.91
2.77
3.09
3.06
4.50
2.68
3.86
3.57
4.49
2.68
3.86
4.02
4.52
3.13
3.83
3.63
4.33
3.58
4.87
2.82
3.82
2.43
2.66
2.48
2.76
3.28
2.75
2.67
3.05
2.85
2.96
Continued
148
-------
CHLORINE CONCENTRATIONS
Date
C12
Feed Rate
Unit (lb/24 hrs.)
Flow
Rate
(Gal/rain)
C12
Cone .
(mg/1)
Phase II (Continued)
5/27/77 1
2
3
4
6/3/77 1
2
3
4
6/10/77 1
2
3
4
6/17/77 1
2
3
4
6/24/77 2
3
4
6/30/77 1
2
3
4
7/6/77 1
2
4
7/13/77 1
2
3
4
7/20/77 1
2
3
4
7/27/77 1
2
4
8/18/77 1
3
4
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
3000
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
137,765
128,856
132,873
128,117
137,591
125,638
134,127
130,984
137,609
110,547
133,895
129,926
138,196
138,243
133,404
129,732
136,154
137,242
127,881
140,402
137,322
133,030
123,675
139,381
140,354
125,952
135,885
135,287
132,145
122,053
137,828
133,534
131,285
122,505
136,518
136,904
117,125
135,131
132,390
126,904
2.72
2.91
2.82
2.92
2.72
2.98
2.79
2.86
2.72
3.39
2.80
2.88
2.71
2.71
2.81
2.89
2.75
2.73
2.93
2.68
2.73
2.82
3.03
2.69
2.67
2.97
2.76
2.77
2.83
3.07
2.72
2.80
2.85
3.01
1.83
2.74
3.20
2.77
2.83
2.95
Continued
149
-------
CHLORINE CONCENTRATIONS
Date
C12
Feed Rate
Unit (lb/24 hrs.)
Flow
Rate
(Gal/min)
C12
Cone.
(mg/1)
Phase II (Continued)
8/25/77
9/2/77
9/9/77
9/16/77
9/23/77
10/6/77
10/28/77
11/3/77
11/18/77
12/1/77
1
2
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
2500
3000
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
1500
2500
2500
2500
1500
2500
2500
2500
Phase III
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
132,934
130,492
130,785
134,564
125,908
127,631
125,812
135,583
122,450
124,760
124,049
134,233
121,183
126,038
124,200
131,287
117,328
123,407
103,268
108,776
110,813
109,223
101,133
110,628
112,831
113,287
100,587
112,868
113,496
109,409
94,299
113,261
100,137
101,970
108,257
112,362
112,937
111,681
1.56
1.91
1.59
1.55
1.65
1.63
1.65
1.53
1.70
1.67
1.01
1.55
1.72
1.65
1.01
1.58
1.77
1.68
1.21
1.15
1.13
1.14
1.23
1.13
1.11
1.10
1.24
1.10
1.10
1.14
1.32
1.10
1.25
1.22
1.15
1.11
1.11
1.12
Continued
150
-------
CHLORINE CONCENTRATIONS
Date
12/22/77
2/3/78
2/17/78
3/24/78
4/13/78
4/28/78
5/5/78
5/9/78
5/16/78
5/23/78
5/31/78
6/6/78
6/13/78
6/20/78
Unit
Phase
2
3
2
3
4
1
2
4
2
4
2
3
1
4
2
3
4
3
2
4
2
4
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
C12
Feed Rate
(lb/24 hrs.)
.blow
Rate
(Gal/min)
C12
Cone.
(mg/1)
Ill (Continued)
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
2000
1500
2000
2500
2000
3000
3000
3000
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3600
3500
3500
3000
3500
3000
3500
2800
2800
2800
2800
114,738
112,152
105,676
102,695
98,319
102,777
107,375
95,636
108,314
108,310
111,656
108,639
108,748
109,634
110,539
108,537
110,427
112,492
148,344
125,315
117,349
124,050
134,354
128,219
123,584
140,541
131,538
133,860
128,087
143,378
126,009
140,054
136,929
132,612
139,479
122,574
134,986
132,104
141,147
134,764
134,559
130,883
1.09
1.11
1.18
1.22
1.27
1.21
1.16
1.31
1.15
1.15
1.12
1.15
1.53
1.14
1.51
1.92
1.51
2.22
1.68
1.99
2.48
2.35
2.17
2.27
2.37
2.07
2.21
2.18
2.27
2.03
2.30
2.14
2.13
2.20
1.79
2.38
1.85
2.20
1.65
1.73
1.73
1.78
Continued
151
-------
CHLORINE CONCENTRATIONS
Date
6/21/78
6/27/78
7/7/78
7/18/78
7/25/78
8/2/78
8/8/78
8/16/78
8/29/78
9/6/78
Unit
Phase
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
C12
Feed Rate
(lb/24 hrs.)
Flow
Rate
(Gal/min)
C12
Cone.
(mg/1)
Ill (Continued)
3000
3000
3000
3000
3100
3000
3000
3000
2500
3000
3000
3000
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
NA
2500
2500
2500
NA
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
141,147
134,764
134,559
130,883
144,602
135,813
136,340
128,655
141,569
115,407
137,792
126,613
133,424
133,680
139,010
127,074
133,723
142,512
135,150
133,625
136,125
145,339
131,536
129,253
137,480
137,276
128,196
143,061
128,201
133,069
131,949
137,686
139,076
132,657
128,580
127,932
136,550
133,386
130,284
1.76
1.84
1.83
1.89
1.78
1.84
1.83
1.94
1.47
2.16
1.81
1.97
1.56
1.56
1.50
1.64
1.56
1.46
1.54
1.56
1.53
1.43
1.58
1.61
1.51
1.52
1.62
NA
1.62
1.56
1.58
NA
1.50
1.57
1.62
1.63
1.52
1.56
1.60
Continued
152
-------
CHLORINE CONCENTRATIONS
Date
9/19/78
10/3/78
10/17/78
10/31/78
11/14/78
11/28/78
12/19/78
Unit
Phase
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3
4
C12
Feed Rate
(lb/24 hrs.)
Flow
Rate
(Gal/min)
C12
Cone.
(mg/1)
Ill (Continued)
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
2500
127,932
136,550
133,386
130,284
112,284
108,133
107,633
112,284
108,606
108,133
112,284
108,606
108,133
107,633
106,969
105,065
105,328
106,969
104,771
105,328
106,501
94,380
82,248
1.63
1.52
1.56
1.60
1.86
1.92
1.93
1.86
1.91
1.92
1.86
1.91
1.92
1.93
1.95
1.98
1.97
1.95
1.99
1.97
1.95
2.20
2.53
Feed Rate lb/24 hrs.
Flow Rate gal/rain.
= mg/1 C12
153
-------
WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
Date
Cond.
Alkalinity T.S.S. T.O.C.
NH,
Org N
N02
N03
Inlet
Water
Temp-°F
Phase I
5/26/76
6/9/76
6/15/76
6/16/76
7/8/76
7/16/76
8/13/76
8/19/76
7.8
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.5
7.3
7.5
330
290
340
270
330
240
200
210
85
98
94
100
82
66
54
63
26
15
7
24
22
20
10
20
6.2
3.0
5.6
2.9
4.2
4.9
3.1
2.8
.14
.26
.50
.25
.15
.14
.16
.19
.47
.13
.43
.30
.38
.20
.24
.22
1.1
.78
.97
.78
.79
.55
.58
.60
73
70
81
77
72
73
77
73
5/6/77
5/12/77
5/20/77
5/27/77
6/3/77
6/10/77
6/17/77
6/24/77
6/30/77
7/6/77
7/13/77
7/20/77
1/27/77
8/25/77
9/2/77
9/8/77
9/16/77
9/23/77
9/30/77
7.8
8.3
7.7
7.8
7.9
8.0
8.0
7.5
7.6
7.8
7-7
7.7
7.6
7.6
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.5
280
220
240
310
320
260
260
280
270
270
200
180
250
300
240
270
280
220
210
94
82
82
91
90
80
82
74
73
79
66
56
64
80
72
72
74
76
75
25
22
21
17
20
28
21
-
26
20
25
22
28
21
19
16
13
20
21
2.9
2.2
2.8
1.9
5.2
7.8
3.8
4.2
3.7
2.9
4.1
2.5
2.1
-
-
4.8
4.0
5.2
6.6
.81
.07
.12
.21
.12
.09
.14
.39
.11
.13
.15
.06
.20
.11
.12
.13
.16
.10
.09
.07
.15
.18
.27
.24
.15
.11
.33
.18
.16
.14
.14
.22
.19
.16
.15
.19
.20
.09
.74
.70
.70
.67
.62
.53
.62
.37
.54
.62
.58
.50
.57
.53
.62
.70
.71
.63
.68
75
59
64
72
72
64
70
72
72
77
72
75
70
72
73
70
72
68
63
10/28/77
11/18/77
12/22/77
2/3/78
2/17/78
3/24/78
4/13/78
4/28/78
5/5/78
5/9/78
5/16/78
7.5
7-4
7.5
7.5
7.9
8.2
7.5
7.3
7.2
7.1
7.2
240
220
210
250
290
320
360
320
290
350
340
78
80
78
76
89
100
100
86
86
90
91
36
34
10
16
10
13
16
28
23
22
29
4.1
4.3
1.0
3.2
2.3
2.9
4.0
2.4
1.4
1.9
2.9
.07
.06
.04
.21
.07
.09
.49
.10
.17
.15
.19
.13
.32
.22
.29
.13
.17
.27
1.3
.20
.18
.19
.65
.68
.76
.92
.98
.63
.63
.57
.71
.61
.71
59
50
43
37
43
54
63
54
61
64
60
154
-------
WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
Date
5/23/78
5/31/78
6/6/78
6/13/78
6/21/78
6/27/78
7/7/78
7/18/78
7/25/78
8/2/78
8/8/78
8/15/78
8/29/78
9/6/78
9/19/78
10/3/78
10/17/78
10/31/78
11/14/78
11/28/78
12/19/78
PH
7.8
7.6
7.7
7.2
7.6
7.6
7.6
8.2
7.8
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.4
8.1
7.6
7.5
7.6
7.4
7.8
7.4
7.3
Cond.
340
290
240
320
310
260
430
320
240
290
400
320
210
340
220
420
290
400
470
410
350
Alkalinity
83
88
83
85
84
89
94
91
78
85
86
82
68
84
77
87
64
90
88
90
98
T.S.S.
23
11
29
32
36
26
26
20
20
29
31
27
19
25
24
24
19
15
13
12
5
T.O.C.
5.0
3.4
5.7
2.6
3.4
3.0
6.3
4.0
3.6
3.5
4.3
3.2
4.2
3.8
2.8
4.4
3.0
5.0
4.4
2.8
2.9
NH3
.15
.16
.09
.10
.10
.08
.15
.15
.07
.12
.16
.10
.07
.07
.08
.11
.13
.21
.11
.16
.08
Org N
.23
.14
.13
.21
.12
.13
.18
.29
.19
.16
.16
.10
.21
.21
.16
.27
.19
.19
.23
.14
.36
N02
N03
.79
.87
.69
.85
.72
.72
.95
.73
.65
.67
.77
.75
.68
.53
.74
.32
.86
.77
1.0
1.1
1.1
Inlet
Water
Terap-°F
66
72
69
73
75
75
81
75
77
73
75
75
73
75
70
66
59
61
64
-
-
155
-------
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE
CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
Ul=3000
U2-4=4500
4500
Ul=2500
U2-4=3000
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2- 4=25 00
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
1500
Date
05-06-77
05-12-77
05-20-77
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-24-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
07-20-77
07-27-77
08-18-77
08-25-77
09-02-77
09-09-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
10-30-77
11-18-77
12-22-77
Unit 1
.86
-
.47
1.13
1.12
.68
1.09
-
.38
1.01
.86
.30
.72
.66
.71
.57
.34
-.09
.03
.43
.48
—
Unit 2
.
-
-
1.22
1.12
.76
.89
.77
.83
.95
.90
.42
1.06
-
.71
.62
.20
.60
.42
.53
.40
.38
Unit 3
.67
1.41
.42
1.20
1.25
.78
1.16
.48
.81
-
.52
.42
-
.64
-
.60
.39
.48
.24
.31
.47
.42
Unit 4
1.02
.78
1.24
1.22
.69
1.08
.78
1.00
1.09
.77
.37
1.16
.72
_
.67
.41
.67
.45
.50
.47
-
156
-------
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
Ul=3000
U2 -4=4500
4500
Ul=2500
U2-4=3000
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
1500
Date
05-06-77
05-12-77
05-20-77
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-24-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
07-20-77
07-27-77
08-18-77
08-25-77
09-02-77
09-09-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
10-30-77
11-18-77
12-22-77
Unit 1
-.09
-
.14
-.02
.21
.07
.10
-
-.04
.36
.18
-.10
.09
.02
.16
.07
-.10
-.56
-.32
-.09
-.01
-
Unit 2
.
-
-
.02
.20
.16
.07
.09
.19
.17
.21
.03
.1
-
.13
-.07
-.12
-.13
-.12
-.01
0
.09
Unit 3
-.07
.87
-.11
-.02
.18
.11
.20
-.01
.21
-
.09
.01
-
.15
-
.10
-.08
-.13
-.16
-.02
0
.10
Unit 4
.46
.26
.02
.3
.18
.23
.18
.40
.34
.27
-.03
.32
.23
-
.07
-.13
-.11
.04
-.04
-.01
-
157
-------
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
USED IN ANALYSIS
TOTALS (SAMPLE SIZE)
Feed Rate
(lbs/24 hrs)
4500
2500
1500
Date
May
June
July
Sept
Oct/Nov
Unit 1
0.82(3)
0.82(4)
0.93(2)
0.45(2)
0.46(2)
Unit 2
1.22(1)
0.87(5)
0.92(2)
0.41(2)
0.47(2)
Unit 3
0.93(4)
0.90(5)
0.52(1)
0.50(2)
0.40(2)
Unit 4
1.01(3)
0.95(5)
0.95(2)
0.55(2)
0.49(2)
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
USED IN ANALYSIS
TOTALS (SAMPLE SIZE)
Date
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Unit 4
May
June
July
0.07(2)
0.08(4)
0.27(2)
0.02(1)
0.15(5)
0.19(2)
0.42(2)
0.14(5)
0.09(1)
0.25(3)
0.26(5)
0.31(2)
158
-------
FREE RESIDUAL CHIORINE
AT INLET
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
1500
Date
05-27-77
06-3-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
09-30-77
10-28-77
11-18-77
Unit 1
.50
.38
.66
.57
.93
.81
.99
.28
.48
.51
.53
.28
.21
.19
Unit 2
.41
.39
.93
.54
.76
.42
.68
.19
.41
.52
.42
.11
.16
.12
Unit 3
.38
.27
.78
.31
.88
1.02
.86
.25
.46
.39
.75
.42
.19
.07
Unit 4
.47
.33
.98
.50
.64
1.10
.54
.20
.37
.61
.48
.20
.17
.09
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
AT INLET
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
Date
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-13-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
10-28-77
11-18-77
Unit 1
1.30
1.29
1.25
1.24
1.41
1.29
.77
.93
1.06
.87
1.02
.74
Unit 2
1.41
1.25
1.59
1.28
1.17
1.32
.87
.92
.96
.91
.61
.45
Unit 3
1.15
1.30
1.45
1.22
1.44
1.30
.85
.99
1.03
1.1
.58
.55
Unit 4
1.51
1.26
1.58
1.19
1.51
.88
.77
.92
1.07
.93
.60
.55
159
-------
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE
AT OUTLET
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
1500
Date
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
09-30-77
10-28-77
11-18-77
Unit 1
.23
.24
.68
.27
.96
.34
.86
.23
.49
.60
.47
.18
.30
.17
Unit 2
.24
.37
.94
.46
.54
.39
.49
.16
.56
.17
.37
.04
.13
.15
Unit 3
.21
.15
.62
.25
.60
.41
.89
.22
.46
.38
.64
.24
.11
.15
Unit 4
.22
.21
.75
.37
.52
.39
.76
.14
.42
.15
.39
.05
.12
.15
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
AT OUTLET
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
Date
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-13-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
10-28-77
11-18-77
Unit 1
1.38
1.15
1.29
1.25
1.38
1.20
.72
.93
1.07
.83
.71
.66
Unit 2
1.43
1.29
1.53
1.29
1.17
1.17
.84
.89
.91
.91
.58
.50
Unit 3
1.43
1.21
1.29
1.20
1.20
1.32
.73
.93
.99
1.05
.58
.62
Unit 4
1.44
1.13
1.26
1.21
1.11
1.26
.74
.97
.94
.80
.59
.61
160
-------
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INLET AND OUTLET
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
1500
Date
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
09-30-77
10-28-77
11-18-77
Unit 1
.27
.14
-.02
.30
-.03
.47
.13
.05
-.01
-.09
.06
.10
-.09
.02
Unit 2
.17
.02
-.01
.08
.22
.03
.19
.03
-.15
.35
.06
.07
.03
-.03
Unit 3
.17
.12
.16
.06
.28
.61
-.03
.03
0
.01
.11
.18
.08
-.08
Unit 4
.25
.12
.23
.13
.12
.71
-.22
.06
-.05
.46
.09
.15
.05
-.06
161
-------
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE
CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
AND INLET WATER TEMPERATURE
Date
05-06-77
05-12-77
05-20-77
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-24-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
07-20-77
07-27-77
08-18-77
08-25-77
09-02-77
09-09-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
10-30-77
11-18-77
12-22-77
Unit
Chlor.
.86
_
.47
1.13
1.12
.68
1.09
_
.38
1.01
.86
.29
.72
.66
.71
.57
.34
-.09
.03
.43
.48
-
1
Temp.
71
62
68
74
72
66
74
71
72
82
76
77.5
75
73
77
76
71
73
71
61
55
-
Unit
Chlor.
_
-
-
1.22
1.12
.76
.89
.77
.83
.95
.9
.42
1.06
-
.71
.62
.20
.60
.42
.53
.40
.38
2
Temp.
_
-
-
71
71
62
73
71
71
79.5
74
74
71
-
75
75
71
72
68
59
54
44
Unit
Chlor.
.67
1.41
1.20
1.20
1.25
.78
1.16
.49
.81
-
.52
.42
-
.64
-
.60
.39
.48
.24
.31
.47
.42
3
Temp.
69
60
66
71
71
64
72
69
70
80
74
76
72
71
75
75
72
72
69
65
53
43
Unit
Chlor.
_
1.02
.78
1.24
1.22
.69
1.08
.78
1.00
1.09
.77
.37
1.16
.72
-
.67
.41
.67
.45
.5
.47
™
4
Temp.
69
64
69
72
71
64
72
71
70
79
74
74
72
70
-
74
71
72
68
-
54
™
162
-------
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
CONSUMED IN SYSTEM
AND INLET WATER TEMPERATURE
Date
05-06-77
05-12-77
05-20-77
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-24-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
07-20-77
07-27-77
08-18-77
08-25-77
09-02-77
09-09-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
10-30-77
11-18-77
12-22-77
Unit
Chlor .
-.09
-
.14
-.02
.21
.07
.10
-
-.04
.36
.18
-.1
.09
.02
.16
.07
-.10
-.56
-.32
-.09
-.01
-
1
Temp.
71
62
68
74
72
66
74
71
72
82
76
77
75
73
77
76
71
73
71
61
55
-
Unit
Chlor.
—
-
-
.02
.05
.16
.07
.09
.19
.17
.21
.03
.1
-
.13
-.07
-.12
-.13
-.12
-.01
.0
.09
2
Temp.
—
-
-
71
71
62
73
71
71
79
74
74
71
-
75
75
71
72
68
59
54
44
Unit
Chlor.
-.07
.87
-.11
-.02
.18
.11
.20
-.01
.21
-
.09
.01
-
.15
-
.10
-.08
-.13
-.16
-.02
.00
.10
3
Temp.
69
60
66
71
71
64
72
69
70
80
74
76
72
71
75
75
72
72
69
65
53
43
Unit
Chlor.
_im
.46
.26
.02
.3
.18
.23
.18
.40
.34
.27
-.03
.32
.23
-
.07
-.13
-.11
.04
-.04
-.01
-
4
Temp.
69
64
69
72
71
64
72
71
70
79
74
74
72
70
-
74
71
72
68
-
54
-
163
-------
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INLET AND OUTLET
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
4500
2500
2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
Ul=1500
U2-4=2500
1500
1500
Date
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-13-77
09-02-77
09-09-77
09-16-77
09-23-77
10-30-77
11-18-77
Unit 1
-.08
.14
-.04
-.01
.03
.09
.05
0
-.01
.04
.31
.08
Unit 2
-.02
-.04
.06
0
0
.15
.03
.03
.05
0
.03
-.05
Unit 3
-.28
.09
.16
.02
.24
-.02
.12
.06
.04
.05
0
-.07
Unit 4
.07
.13
.32
-.02
.40
-.38
.03
-.05
.13
.13
.01
-.06
164
-------
CONDENSER PERFORMANCE DATA USED TO ESTIMATE THE CHANGE
IN AFC RELATIVE TO A CHANGE IN INLET WATER TEMPERATURE (IWT)
Date
05-20-77
06-03-77
06-16-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-13-77
07-27-77
08-10-77
08-24-77
09-08-77
09-09-77
09-21-77
09-22-77
11-02-77
11-03-77
11-17-77
11-18-77
12-01-77
Unit
ACF
.72
.71
.72
.71
.70
.69
.70
.73
1
IWT
74
72
76
75
77
71
61
55
Unit
ACF
.71
.71
.73
.74
.71
.72
.77
.80
2
IWT
73
71
74
71
75
68
59
54
Unit
ACF
.75
.75
.74
.74
.74
.75
.73
.73
.79
.79
.85
3
IWT
66
71
72
70
74
71
72
69
65
53
53
Unit
ACF
.75
.74
.74
.74
.77
.74
.73
.78
.82
4
IWT
71
70
74
72
72
71
68
65
54
DATA USED TO ANALYZE CONDENSER PERFORMANCE WITH INLET
WATER TEMPERATURE (IWT) AS A COVARIATE
Date
06-03
06-17
06-30
07-13
11-03
11-18
Feed Rate
4500
4500
4500
4500
1500
1500
Unit
ACF
.72
.72
.71
.72
.70
.73
1
IWT
72
74
72
76
61
55
Unit
ACF
.74
.71
.71
.73
.77
.80
2
IWT
71
73
71
74
59
54
Unit
ACF
.75
.74
.74
.74
.79
.79
3
IWT
71
72
70
74
65
53
Unit
ACF
.75
.74
.74
.74
.78
.82
4
IWT
71
72
70
74
65
54
165
-------
ON
ON
8.6
8.4
8.2
8.0
* 7.8
76
7.4
7.2
7.0
25
o:
uj -^
< UJ
* i
UJ
O 23
"
21
UJ
19
17
15
MAY
JUNE
JULY
MONTHS
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
Water quality data for 1977.
-------
ON
MAY
JUNE
JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
MONTHS
Water quality data for 1977 .
-------
o
O
ON
00
CT
E
8
7
6
5
3
2
I
1.2
I.I
z
UJ
o
o 1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
f
M
I t
I \
I \
I
A
V
I
l\
V
V
I
I
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
MONTHS
Water quality data for 1977.
-------
OS
10
6/10 6/17 6/24 6/30 7/6 7/13
7/20 7/27 8/2 8/9
TIME (MONTHS)
8/18 8/25 9/2 9/9 9/16 9/23 9/30
Unit 3 inlet vs. outlet free residual chlorine 1977.
-------
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
LJ
oc
o
_J
g 0.5
o 0.4
V)
\jj
a:
uj 0.3
UJ
cc
0.2
O.I
0
11=04
INLET
OUTLET
_L
J_
_L
11 '-06
\0&
IhIO
Ihl2 IN4
TIME (MINUTES)
IM6
I hl8
11 = 20
Ih22
Unit 3 inlet vs. outlet free residual chlorine 9-9-77.
-------
LJ
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
g 06
<-> 0.5
5 0.4
Q L..
tr
u
LU
cr
u_
0.3
n 9
U.t
O.I
0
INLET
OUTLET---
I
I
I
I
I
I
=03 11=05 11=07 II--09 11 = 11 11=13 11 = 15 11 = 17 11 = 19
TIME (MINUTES)
11 = 21
11 = 23
Unit 3 inlet vs. outlet free residual chlorine 9-16-77.
-------
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
NJ
UJ
? 0.6
cr
o
_j
o 0.5
O.4
UJ
cr
UJ
UJ
cr
0.3
0.2
O.I
0
Ih05
11=07
\\-09
INLET
OUTLET
Ihl!
1 = 17
11 = 19
\-2\
1 = 23
TIME (MINUTES)
Unit 3 inlet vs. outlet free residual chlorine 6-3-77.
-------
CO
UJ
oc.
o
x
o
Q
(ft
UJ
OC.
LU
OC.
li.
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
O.I
11 =04
ll'06
Ih08
INLET
OUTLET
11 = 10
h!6
Ihl8
TIME (MINUTES)
Unit 3 inlet vs. outlet free residual chlorine 6-10-77.
-------
1.0
0.9
0.8
I" 0.7
UJ
o
<-> 0.5
a 0.4
(75
UJ
tr
ui
UJ
tr
u.
0.3
0.2
O.I
INLET
OUTLET
1=04
11'06
11=08
IhIO 11 = 12
TIME (MINUTES)
Ihl4
Ih 16
11 = 18
Unit 3 inlet vs. outlet free residuol chlorine 9-30-77.
-------
£
UJ
cr
o
en
UJ
UJ
ui
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
I.I
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.2
O.I
O1
INLET
OUTLET---
I
I
I
I
1 = 04
11 = 06
1=08
11-10
IM2
TIME
IIM4 II 16
(MINUTES)
h!8
11=20
\\--22
11 = 24
Unit 3 inlet vs. outlet free residual chlorine 6-30-77.
-------
1.4
1.3
1.2
o>
E
UJ
oc
o
_i
X
o
ID
O
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 10-28-77
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
g
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
I 0.00
1:30
n- INLET
0- OUTLET
h35
1:40
TIME
1:45
1 =50
-------
00
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
9
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 11-18-77
0.20-
o- INLET
O- OUTLET
0.15-
0.10-
0.05H
0.00
10:00
10:05
10:10
10:20
10:25
TIME
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 12-22-77
10
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
0.50-
0.45-
0.40-
0.35-
0.30-
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
m 0.05H
g
1 0.00
I I
10:00
' I
10:05
10:10 10:15
TIME
D- INLET
O- OUTLET
10:20
10:25
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 2-3-78
00
O
0.45-1
D- INLET
O- OUTLET
10:25
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 4-13-78
CO
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
9
0.401
0.35-
0.30-
0.25-
0.20-
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
I 0.00
10:00
D- INLET
O- OUTLET
I
10 = 05
I
10:10
TIME
10:15
I
10:20
-------
oo
N5
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vc TIME UNIT 3 4-13-78
0.50-
0.45-
0.40-
0.35-
0.30-
0.25
0.20
0.15
0. 10
m 0.05 I
9
1 0.00
10:25
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
10:30
1 0:35
TIME
10:40
10:45
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 4-28-78
oo
uo
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
9
0.25n
0.20-
0.15-
0. 10-
0.05-
0.00
10:00
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
10:05
10:10
10: 15
10:20
I
10:25
TIME
-------
00
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE ve TIME UNIT 3 5-4-78
0.25-
0.20H
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
m
9
1 0.
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
7:00
7:05
7:10
TIME
7:15
7:20
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE v« TIME UNIT 3 5-5-78
00
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
9
0.15i
0.10-
0.05-
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
i 0.00
11:00
11:05
:20
11:25
-------
oo
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE v« TIME UNIT 3 5-16-78
1.10-
1.00-
0.90-
0.80-
0.70-
0.60-
0.50-
0.40-
0.30-
0.20-
I 0.00
11:00
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
11:05
11:10
11:20
11:25
TIME
-------
00
-vl
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 5-31-78
0.90-
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
m 0,10-
9
I 0.00
12:00
12:05
12:10
12:15
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
12:20
12:25
TIME
-------
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
g
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 6-6-78
0.70-
0.60-
0.50-
0.40-
0.30-
0.20-
0.10-
0.00
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
1 1 :00
It :05
tl = 10
11:15
TIME
-------
00
vo
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 6-13-78
m
9
0.30-
0.25-
0.20-
D- INLET
O- OUTLET
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
1 0.00
1 1 :00
11 ;25
TIME
-------
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
0.50-
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 6-20-78
n- INLET
0- OUTLET
0.40-
0.30-
0.20-
0.10-
m
9
I 0.00
11:00
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 6-21-78
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
0.50-
0.45-
0.40-
0.35-
0.30-
0.25-
0.20-
0.15-
0.10-
m 0.05H
9
0.00
11:00
11:10
TIME
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
I
11 :15
I
11:20
-------
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 6-27-78
m
9
0.70T
0.60-
0.50-
0.40-
0.30-
0.20-
0.10-
I 0.00
:00
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
T 1 1 T
11:05
11:10
T r
TIME
1 - r
11 = 15
' I ' ' ' ' I
11:20 11:25
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 7-7-78
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
:25
TIME
-------
10
0.15-1
0.10-
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
9
1 0.00
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 7-18-78
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
0.05-
-------
-------
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 8-2-78
0.50-1
0.45-
0.40-
0.35-
0.30-
0.25-
0.20-
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
0.00
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
' ' I ' ' ' '
11:00
11:15
TIME
11:20
11 --25
11 =30
-------
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 8-15-78
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
-------
VO
00
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
9
0.60H
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 8-29-78
n- INLET
0- OUTLET
0.50-
0.40-
0.30-
0.20-
0.10-
I 0.00
11:00
"""T"7
11:05
' I '
11:10
' I '
11:15
' I '
11 :20
' I '
11=25
' I '
11 :30
~
11:35
TIME
-------
VO
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 9-6-78
m
g
0.25-
0.20-
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
I 0.00
1 1 :00
a- INLET
O- OUTLET
1 ' ' I ' ' ' '
11:05 11:10 11:15 t1:20
TIME
1 1 :25
11:30
1 1 :35
-------
NJ
o
o
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 9-19-78
R 8.45
E
E
0.40
R
E
S 0.35
I
D
U 0.30 -
A
L
0.25H
C
H
L 0.20 1
0
R
I 0.15H
N
E
0.10-
m 0.05
9
0.00
' I ' ' ' '
11 MS 11:20
TIME
T—r
11:25
n- INLET
O- OUTLET
T—r
11:35
-------
Si
O
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
9
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 10-3-78
0.20-
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
1 0.00
n- INLET
0- OUTLET
1 - 1
1 - 1 - 1 - r
-i—r
T r
T r
11:05
11:10
11:15
11:20
TIME
11:25
:30
:35
-------
o
IS5
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
g
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 10-17-78
0.801
0.70-
0.60-
0.50-
0.40-
0.30-
0.20-
0.10-
1 0.00
11:10
n- INLET
0- OUTLET
11:15
11:20
1 1 :25
30
11:35
TIME
-------
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
m
g
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vs TIME UNIT 3 10-31-78
0.701
0.60-
0.50-
0.40H
0.30H
0.20-
0.10-
I 0.00
D-
o-
INLET
OUTLET
11:05
30
11:35
-------
F
R
E
E
R
E
S
I
D
U
A
L
C
H
L
0
R
I
N
E
INLET AND OUTLET FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE vc TIME UNIT 3 11-14-78
m
9
0,40-
0.35-
0.30"
0.25-
0.20"
0,15-
0. t0-
0.05-
I 0.00
11:05
11:10
11:15 11:20
TIME
D- INLET
O- OUTLET
11:25
11:30
-------
ORGANIC NITROGEN vs TIME
O
t/l
0
R
G
A
N
I
C
N
I
T
R
0
G
E
N
m
9
1.3
1.2
1.1
1 .0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
1
0
7
7
7
7
1
2
7
7
7
8
7
8
7
8
1 1 1 1 1 I I I T
l 1 1
456789012
777777777
888888888
7
9
-------
N02/N03 vs TIME
N
0
2
N
0
3
m
9
1 .1
1 .0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
1
0
7
7
7
7
1 1 1 T
i—i—r
i
2
7
7
8
777777777
888888888
1
0
7
8
7
8
1
2
7
8
7
9
-------
p
H
8.5
8.4
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.0
7.9
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.5
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.1
7.0
PH vs TIME
1
1
0
7
7
1
1
1
7
7
1
1
2
7
7
1
I
7
8
1
2
7
8
1
3
7
8
1
4
7
8
1
5
7
8
1
6
7
8
1
7
7
8
1
8
7
8
1
9
7
8
1
1
0
7
8
1
1
1
7
8
1
1
2
7
8
1
1
7
9
-------
CONDUCTIVITY
vs
TIME
500 —
O
00
C
0
N
D
U
C
T
I
V
I
T
Y
M
m
h
C
m
450 ~
400
350
300 —
250 —
200 —
1
0
I I I
1
1
2
1
I I I
234
Trill
56789
1 1
0 1
I I
1
2 1
7777777777777777
7778888888888889
-------
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON vs TIME
to
o
VO
T
0
T
A
L
0
R
G
A
N
I
C
C
A
R
B
0
N
m
g
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1 .5
1 .0
0.5
0.0
1
t 1
01212
77777
77788
1
1 1
34567890121
77777777777
88888888889
-------
ALKALINITY vs TIME
to
»—<
o
A
L
K
A
L
I
N
I
T
Y
!
m
9
I
100 —
95 —
90 —
85 —
80 —
75 —
70 —
65 —
60 —
1 1
1 1
0 1
1 1
1
2 1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
I
1
7777777777777777
7778888888888889
-------
T
0
T
A
L
S
u
S
p
E
N
D
E
D
S
0
L
I
D
S
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS vs TIME
m
9
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
0
7
7
7
7
1
2
7
7
7
8
7
8
7
8
7
8
7
8
6
7
8
7
8
8
7
8
7
8
1
0
7
8
7
8
1
2
7
8
7
9
-------
N)
D
E
G
R
E
E
S
85 —
T
E
M
P 75
E
R
A
T
U 65
R
E 60
70 —
55
50
45
40
35
INLET WATER TEMPERATURE vs TIME
J
A
N
F M A
E A P
B R R
M
A
Y
J J
U U
N L
A S
U E
G P
0
C
T
N
0
V
D
E
C
-------
APPENDIX C
WATER TEMPERATURE VERSUS OTHER VARIABLES
213
-------
APPENDIX C
INLET WATER TEMPERATURE VERSUS OTHER VARIABLES
Inlet water temperature was examined and adjusted for as a covariate
in the condenser performance analysis. It was also examined briefly
regarding its effects on chlorine consumption. This section examines,
briefly, inlet water temperature and possible relationships with turbine
back pressure and water quality parameters.
I. Turbine Back Pressure
Based on an analysis of 34 data points during Phase II, turbine
back pressure exhibits a general linear trend over the range of inlet
water temperatures of 54°F to 76°F. The simple correlation coefficient
is 0.8. The average rate of change of turbine back pressure per unit
change in inlet water temperature is 0.033. Variation in turbine back
pressure appears to be fairly constant over the range of inlet water
temperatures. The data may be found in Table C-l.
Table C-l
WATER TEMPERATURE VERSUS OTHER VARIABLES
Date
05-06-77
05-06-77
05-06-77
05-06-77
05-12-77
05-12-77
05-12-77
05-12-77
05-20-77
05-20-77
05-20-77
05-20-77
05-27-77
05-27-77
05-27-77
05-27-77
06-03-77
06-03-77
06-03-77
Inlet
Water
Temperature
71.0
.
69.0
69.0
62.0
m
60.0
64.0
68.0
.
66.0
69.0
74.0
71.0
71.0
72.0
72.0
71.0
71.0
Turbine
Back
Pressure
1.53
1.67
1.66
1.53
f
.
.
.
1.97
w
1.63
1.73
.
f
.
.
2.03
2.17
1.91
Unit
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
Continued
214
-------
Table Ol (Continued)
Date
06-03-77
06-10-77
06-10-77
06-10-77
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-17-77
06-17-77
06-17-77
06-24-77
06-24-77
06-24-77
06-24-77
06-30-77
06-30-77
06-30-77
06-30-77
07-06-77
07-06-77
07-06-77
07-06-77
07-13-77
07-13-77
07-13-77
07-13-77
07-27-77
07-27-77
07-27-77
07-27-77
07-27-77
07-27-77
07-27-77
07-27-77
09-02-77
09-02-77
09-02-77
09-02-77
09-09-77
09-09-77
09-09-77
09-09-77
09-16-77
09-16-77
09-16-77
09-16-77
Inlet
Water
Temperature
71.0
66.0
62.0
64.0
64.0
74.0
73.0
72.0
72.0
71.0
71.0
69.0
71.0
72.0
71.0
70.0
70.0
82.0
79.5
80.0
79.0
76.0
74.0
74.0
74.0
75.0
71.0
72.0
72.0
75.0
71.0
72.0
72.0
76.0
75.0
75.0
74.0
71.0
71.0
72.0
71.0
73.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
Turbine
Back
Pressure
1.92
t
f
r
f
1.91
1.95
1.74
1.75
f
m
f
f
1.77
1.83
1.83
1.92
1.79
1.83
1.84
1.92
.
.
2.03
2.12
2.26
2.21
.
2.38
2.26
2.21
.
2.38
.
.
.
.
1.84
1.77
1.82
1.95
.
.
.
•
Unit
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Continued
215
-------
Table C-l (Continued)
Date
09-23-77
09-23-77
09-23-77
09-23-77
09-30-77
09-30-77
09-30-77
09-30-77
10-28-77
10-28-77
10-28-77
10-28-77
11-19-77
11-19-77
11-19-77
11-19-77
Inlet
Water
Temperature
71.0
68.0
69.0
68.0
67.0
66.0
65.0
65.0
61.0
59.0
t
f
54.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
Turbine
Back
Pressure
1.85
1.76
2.01
1.89
.
.
.
.
1.73
1.52
1.48
1.56
1.52
1.22
1.41
1.35
Unit
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
II. Water Quality Parameters
As a result of the analysis of Phase III, the following table identifies
the water quality parameters which correlate fairly well with inlet water
temperature. The simple correlation coefficient is given.
Table C-2
FACTORS CORRELATED WITH INLET WATER TEMPERATURE
Factor
ACF
Total Suspended Solids
Ammonia
Organic Nitrogen
Total Nitrates-Nitrites
FRC Consumed in Condenser
TRC consumed in Condenser
Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Correlation Coefficient
-0.59
0.50
-0.41
-0.42
-0.34
-0.34
-0.52
-0.47
216
-------
APPENDIX D
CHLORINE DEMAND VERSUS FEED RATE AND
WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
217
-------
APPENDIX D
CHLORINE DEMAND VERSUS FEED RATE AND
WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
Analysis of the chlorine demand of river water from Unit 3 with
contact times of 1, 5, and 10 minutes was examined for possible rela-
tionships with inlet water temperature, water quality parameters, and
chlorine dosage.
The following table lists the variables which correltated well
with the 1-, 5-, and 10-minute chlorine demands for Phase III.
Table D-l
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR 1-, 5-, AND 10-MINUTE DEMANDS
FOR UNIT 3 WITH OTHER FACTORS
Variable 1 min.
FRC at Conden-
ser Inlet -0.81
Conductivity 0.74
Ammonia 0.79
Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.72
Variable 5 min.
CL2 0.89
Inlet Water 0.74
Temperature
Total Suspended 0.82
Solids
Total Organic 0.67
Carbon
Ammonia 0.79
Variable 10 min.
CL2 0.88
Inlet Water 0.73
Temperature
Total Suspended 0.73
Solids
Total Organic 0.76
Carbon
Ammonia 0.73
Due to the intercorrelation between the various water quality para-
meters, an analysis was carried out to try to explain the variation of
the 1-, 5-, and 10-minute demands as a function of chlorine dosage, inlet
water temperature, and the water quality parameters. Regression analysis
was used to develop the models.
I. Modeling the One-Minute Chlorine Demand
After using regression analysis to analyze the data, it was noted
that the relationships of the one-minute demand to chlorine dosage, inlet
water temperature, and the other water quality parameters were completely
random. No discernable and consistant relationships existed. There was,
however, a slightly negative relationship between total organic carbon and
the one-minute demand; but the analysis is not conclusive.
218
-------
II. Modeling the Five-Minute Chlorine Demand
The best model found to explain the variation in the five-minute
chlorine demand is
Y2 = -1.4254 + 0.4797 C12 + 0.1451 PH
where Y2 is the five-minute demand, C12 is the chlorine dosage at the intake,
and pH is the pH of the intake water. This model explains 76 percent of
the variation in the five-minute demand. The error mean square is .0059,
and the model's F-statistic is 64.30, which is highly significant.
III. Modeling the 10-Minute Chlorine Demand
The hest model found to explain the variations in the 10-minute
demand is
Y3 = -1.9711 + .6534 C12 -f .2285 pH - .0801 TOC
where Y3 is the 10-minute chlorine demand, C12 is the chlorine dosage at
the intake, and TOC is the total organic carbon. This model explains
74 percent of the variation of the 10-minute demand. The error mean
square is .0122, and the model's F-statistic is 36.40, which is highly
significant.
IV. Discussion of the Models
The models exhibit some expected and unexpected behavior. Both the
5- and 10-minute demands show a relationship with the chlorine dosage and
the pH. This is expected. The inverse relationship of TOC and the demands
is somewhat unexpected. This relationship may give us insight with respect
to the negative chlorine consumption discussed in Appendix A.
Another unexpected result was that ammonia, Kjeldahl nitrogen, and
organic nitrogen concentrations did not significantly impact the chlorine
demands as much as C12, pH, and TOC did. Therefore, these models should
be used with utmost care.
219
-------
APPENDIX E
COMPLEXITY OF ORGANIC MATERIALS IN THE WATER
220
-------
APPENDIX E
COMPLEXITY OF ORGANIC MATERIALS IN THE WATER
An analysis was also made of the chlorine demand test data for the
river water at John Sevier Steam Plant. The formula used for this analysis
was:
D = ktn
where:
D = demand of the water (feed - residual)
k = chlorine demand after 30 minutes, ppm
t = contact time in % of 30 minutes
n = slope of curve (tan 8)
D = ktn
log r = n log t
= n
The above formula was developed and extensively researched and
tested by Douglas Feben and Michael J. Taras using Detroit's water supply
as the major source of samples.16'17'18
The usefulness of this basic equation derived from measuring chlorine
demands is the variation in the exponent n (i.e., the slope of the demand
curve). The value of the exponent n reveals the speed of the reaction and
is theoretically related to the nature of the organic material involved in
the reactions with chlorine. Inorganic ions such as NH3, Fe , and S 2
react instantaneously, causing rapid initial chlorine demand. This causes
the exponent n to approach zero. Other results obtained from well waters
in the greater Detroit metropolitan area and Long Beach, California, show
remarkably similar exponential values varying between 0.01 for the Long
Beach wells to 0.03-0.07 for the Detroit area wells. A chemical analysis
of the well samples indicated the presence of the three most rapid chlorine-
consuming substances—ammonia nitrogen, sulfide, and ferrous ions. Also,
some simple unsubstituted amino acids were present; all of these substances
resulted in the low exponential value.
As the value of the exponent increases, the more complicated the organic
material becomes. Of the organic materials, Feben and Taras found that the
simple amino acids were generally found to react most readily with chlorine,
whereas complex molecules like peptides and proteins were found to react more
221
-------
slowly.16 The surface waters tested contained sizable amounts of complex
organic material and traces of ferric ions as opposed to ferrous ions.
This analysis substantiated the high exponential values calculated with
the formula D = ktn.16'17'18
In one series of tests conducted by Taras, several simple and complex
organic and inorganic substances were tested for their individual chlorine
demands; the simple and the inorganic materials resulted in low exponential
values (0.02-0.19), and the complex organic materials resulted in high
exponential values (0.19-0.30).18
The exponential reaction constant as a function of time is dependent
upon the individual structure of the amino acid. An increase in the
structural complexity results in higher values of the reaction constant
n, and will, therefore, exhibit prolonged chlorine demand. A significant
rise in the value of n would indicate a rise in the organic nitrogen
present and, further, a deterioration in the raw water quality.3
The resulting application of this equation to data from the water
samples taken during testing at John Sevier is found in Table E-l.
A representative graph of the results may be found in Figure E-l.
Based on the data, identification of the complexity of the materials
in the water using White's procedure was statistically inconclusive. The
variation of the slopes did not correlate well with the available field
data.
222
-------
Table E-l
CHLORINE DEMAND UNIT 3
Phase I
'76
Date
6/9
6/16
7/7
7/8
7/16
8/13
8/19
mg/1
Feed Rate
3.75
3.09
2.68
2.68
3.13
3.63
2.82
Cl
10 min
2.1
2.7
2.3
1.4
1.7
5 min
0.7
0.9
Demand
30
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
10
1.
1.
min
7
65
1
1
3
min
1
9
Phase
'77
Date
5/12
5/20
5/27
6/3
6/10
6/17
6/24
6/30
7/13
7/20
8/18
9/2
9/9
9/16
9/23
mg/1
Feed Rate
3.28
2.85
2.82
2.79
2.80
2.81
2.73
2.82
2.83
2.85
2.83
1.65
1.70
1.72
1.77
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cl
mm
.80
.17
.43
.41
.17
.31
.34
.47
.47
.29
.70
.30
.20
.29
.28
Demand
5 min
0.56
0.55
0.92
0.90
0.55
0.59
0.89
0.77
0.75
0.66
1.03
0.40
0.39
0.50
0.39
II
N*
Slope
0.23
-0.017
-0.082
0.37
0.27
0.65
1.08
Total N
1.17
1.33
1.20
1.32
0.89
0.98
1.01
% Organic N
11
23
19
29
23
24
22
N*
10
0.
0.
1.
1.
0.
1.
0.
1.
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
min
68
75
31
29
75
10
99
12
12
92
32
55
62
61
67
Slope
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
28
45
51
52
45
90
15
54
58
48
36
46
67
29
78
Total N
0.92
1.0
1.15
0.98
0.77
0.87
1.09
0.83
0.87
0.70
0.65
0.90
0.98
1.06
0.93
% Organic N
16.
18
23.
24.
19.
12.
30.
21.
16.
20
23.
17.
15.
17.
21.
3
5
5
5
6
3
7
1
1
8
3
9
5
223
-------
Table E-l
(Continued)
Phase III
Cl Demand
Date
10/28/77
11/18/77
12/22/77
2/3/78
2/17/78
3/24/78
4/13/78
4/28/78
5/5/78
5/9/78
5/16/78
5/23/78
5/31/78
6/6/78
6/13/78
6/21/78
6/27/78
7/07/78
7/18/78
7/25/78
8/2/78
8/8/78
8/15/78
8/29/78
9/6/78
9/19/78
10/3/78
10/17/78
10/31/78
11/14/78
11/28/78
12/19/78
log
•*-w -
IX —
log
Feed Rate
1.11
1.25
1.11
1.22
1.19
1.19
1.15
1.92
1.88
2.21
2.27
2.11
2.19
2.20
1.85
1.86
1.83
1.81
1.50
1.54
1.58
1.52
1.62
1.59
1.56
1.56
1.92
1.92
1.92
1.98
1.98
1.98
D
—
t
1 min
.22
.30
.11
.16
.13
.23
.02
.12
.27
.21
.34
.43
.50
.02
.28
.27
.19
.28
.26
0
.38
.10
.40
.20
.31
.19
.37
.30
.59
.59
.11
5 min
.29
.39
.23
.22
.20
.28
.10
.39
.45
.59
.71
.75
.73
.60
.47
.52
.49
.48
.49
.37
.45
.39
.65
.48
.58
.31
.70
.60
.79
.99
.40
10 min
.30
.51
.28
.30
.28
.48
.01
.51
.61
.77
.90
.89
.95
.69
.74
.61
.58
.59
.57
.41
.56
.46
.67
.55
.65
.48
.73
1.00
.89
1.09
.39
N*
Slope
.05
.39
.28
.45
.49
.78
-3.3
.39
.44
.39
.26
.25
.38
.20
.66
.28
.24
.25
.21
.15
.32
.24
.04
.20
.16
.63
.06
.74
.17
.14
-.04
Total N
.85
1.06
1.02
1.42
1.18
.89
1.39
.80
1.08
.94
1.09
1.17
1.17
.91
1.16
.94
.93
1.28
1.17
.91
.95
1.09
.95
.96
.81
.98
.70
1.18
1.17
1.34
1.40
1.52
% Organic N
15
30
22
20
11
19
19
16
19
19
17
20
12
14
18
13
14
14
25
21
17
15
11
22
26
16
39
16
16
17
10
24
D = 5 min demand
K = 10 min demand
t = % of 10 min (.5)
(For dates 6/9/76-8/19/76, D
t = % of 30 min [.33].)
= 10-rainute demand; K = 30-minute demand;
Chlorine Feed Rate -
«ed
-------
to
S3
t.eu
C 0.9
H
L
0 0-8
R
I
N
E
0.7_
D 0.6.
E
M
A
N 0.5.
D
m 0.4.
9
/
I
0.3.
UNIT 3
11/14/78
or
.18
1 .0
_0.9
_ 0.8
_ 0.7
_ 0.6
2 34
CONTACT TIME Cm in)
_ 0.5
_ 0.4
0.3
8 9 10
FIGURE E-l. SLOPE OF CHLORINE DEMAND CURVE Clog)
-------
APPENDIX F
DPD VERSUS AMPEROMETRIC TITRATOR DATA
226
-------
APPENDIX F
DPD VERSUS AMPEROMETRIC TITRATOR
I. DISCUSSION
On nine test dates in 1977 outlet free and total residual chlorine
were measured by both the amperometric and DPD methods on Unit 1. The
use of both methods allowed a statistical comparison on the equality of
the two methods. The raw data gathered on the nine test dates may be
found in Tables F-l through F-4. Table F-5 summarizes a paired samples
analysis carried out on the data. At a significance level of 0.10, there
is a significant difference between the two methods for both free and
total residual chlorine. Based on the differences calculated, DPD is
consistently higher than the amperometric method.
A further examination of the calculated differences shows that nega-
tive differences occur at low levels of concentration approximately 0.5
mg/1 and less. This indicates the measurements by the two methods may
depend on the level of the concentration and possibly bias the comparison
between the two methods. Section II summarizes a paired samples analysis
of free and total residual chlorine where the effect of the level of
concentration has been removed.
II. REMOVING THE EFFECT OF LEVEL OF CONCENTRATION FROM DPD AND
AMPEROMETRIC DATA
The true concentration was estimated as the mean of the observed
DPD and amperometric readings for both free and residual chlorine. The
estimated true concentration was then fitted by regression analysis as a
linear function of the observed data for each method. This allowed adjust-
ing of the DPD and amperometric data to remove the effects of concentration
level.
At a significance level of 0.10, there is a significant difference
between the two methods for both free and total residual chlorine. The
DPD method is significantly higher than the amperometric method in its
readings on the chlorine level. Table F-6 summarizes the paired samples
analysis on the adjusted data.
227
-------
Date
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-13-77
07-20-77
07-27-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
FREE
DPD
1.12
0.86
1.11
0.92
1.12
0.11
0.23
0.57
0.65
Table F-l
RESIDUAL CHLORINE
Amperometric
0.66
0.23
0.96
0.81
1.05
0.15
0.26
0.46
0.60
Table F-2
Difference
0.46
0.63
0.15
0.11
0.07
-0.04
-0.03
0.11
0.05
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
Date
06-10-77
06-17-77
06-30-77
07-13-77
07-20-77
07-27-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
DPD
1.38
1.36
1.35
1.22
1.42
0.87
0.72
0.93
1.14
Amperometric
1.21
1.23
1.35
1.19
1.12
0.77
0.69
0.86
1.06
Difference
0.17
0.13
0.00
0.03
0.30
0.10
0.03
0.07
0.08
228
-------
Table F-3
FREE RESIDUAL CHLORINE - ADJUSTED FOR CONCENTRATION LEVEL
Date
07-27-77
09-02-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
06-17-77
07-13-77
06-30-77
06-10-77
07-20-77
TOTAL RESIDUAL
Date
09-22-77
07-27-77
09-08-77
09-16-77
07-13-77
06-30-77
06-17-77
06-10-77
07-20-77
Adjusted DPD
0.89
0.90
0.92
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.96
0.96
Table F-4
CHLORINE - ADJUSTED
Adjusted DPD
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.98
Adjusted Amperometric
0.79
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.79
0.81
0.82
0.80
0.83
FOR CONCENTRATION LEVELS
Adjusted Amperometric
0.81
0.81
0.82
0.82
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
229
-------
Table F-5
SUMMARY OF PAIRED SAMPLES ANALYSIS COMPARING
DPD AND AMPEROMETRIC METHODS
Differences = DPD - Amperometric (In Mg/1)
Date
6-10
6-17
6-30
7-13
7-20
7-27
9-2
9-8
9-16
Free Residual Chlorine
0.46
0.63
0.15
0.11
0.07
-0.04
-0.03
0.11
0.05
Mean = 0.1678
Variance = 0.0515
Calculated t value =2.22
df = 8
Alpha =0.10
Total Residual Chlorine
0.17
0.13
0.00
0.03
0.30
0.10
0.03
0.07
0.08
Mean = 0.1011
Variance = 0.0084
Calculated t value = 3
df = 8
Alpha =0.10
= 3.31
230
-------
Table F-6
SUMMARY OF PAIRED SAMPLES ANALYSIS COMPARING DPD AND AMPEROMETRIC
METHODS AFTER ADJUSTMENT FOR EFFECT OF CONCENTRATION LEVEL
Free Residual Chlorine
DPD
0.89
0.90
0.92
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.96
0.96
Mean =0.13
Variance = 0
Calculated t
df = 8
Alpha =0.10
AMP DIF
0.79 0.10
0.80 0.10
0.80 0.12
0.80 0.13
0.79 0.15
0.81 0.14
0.82 0.14
0.80 0.16
0.83 0.13
.000424
value = 18.94
Total Residual Chlorine
DPD
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.98
Mean =0.14
Variance = 0
Calculated t
df = 8
Alpha =0.10
AMP
0.81
0.81
0.82
0.82
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
.000125
value =
DIF
0.12
0.13
0.13
0.14
0.14
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
37.50
231
-------
APPENDIX G
CHLORINATED ORGANICS DATA
232
-------
TABLE G-l
Concentrations in ppb (pg/1)
Sample Point
**Intake Canal
Condenser Outlet 30 rains
after chlorination started
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chloronation was ended
^Intake Canal
u> **Intake Canal
to
p
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
C*
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
^Intake Canal
Sample
Number
l(F)a
KL)
2(F)
2(L)
3A(F)
3A(L)
3B(F)
3B(L)
KF)
2A(F)
2A(L)
2B(F)
2A(L)
3A(F)
3A(L)
3B(F)
3B(L)
Chloroform Bromodichloromethane
Date (CHCla) (CHCl2Br)
7/06/78 <1.0
7/06/78 1.4
1.7
7/06/78 <1.0
7/06/78 <1.0
7/25/78 <1.0
7/25/78 2.1
3.8
7/25/78 2.6
4.1
7/25/78 <1.0
7/25/78 <1.0
<0.5
<0.5
0.9
0.9
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.2b
<0.2
0.9
1.3
1.2
1.4
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
Chlorodibromome thane
(CHClBr2)
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.2b
<0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
a. (F) Field extraction, solvent added to vial before sample collection.
(L) Lab extraction, solvent added to vial in the laboratory.
b. Due to improved analytical techniques, the detection limits for bromodichloromethane and chlorodibromomethane
were lowered from <0.5 ppb to <0.2 ppb.
c. Chlorination as of 7/25/78 is now 3 times a day for 20 minutes per cycle.
** Sample taken before chlorination cycle.
* Sample taken after chlorination cycle.
-------
N>
TABLE G-l (continued)
Concentrations in ppb (M&A)
Sample Point
**Intake Canal
Condenser Inlet 5 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
^Intake Canal
-—Intake Canal
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
^Intake Canal
Sample
Number
le
2
3
4
5
6
2
5
8
9
11
Chloroform Bromodichloromethane
Date (CHC13) (CHCl2Br)
8/29/78 <1.0
8/29/78 4.8
8/29/78 5.4
8/29/78 5.2
8/29/78 <1.0
8/29/78 <1.0
9/19/78 <1.0
9/19/78 3.2
9/19/78 5.2
9/19/78 1.3
9/19/78 <1.0
<0.2
1.2
1.4
1.4
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.0
1.6
0.5
<0.2
Chlorodibromome thane
(CHClBr2)
<0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.2
<0.2
<0.2
d. The sample for the condenser inlet has been added as of 8/29/78.
is a change of concentration across the condenser.
As of 8/29/78, all samples will be extracted in the laboratory.
Sample taken before chlorination cycle.
Sample taken after chlorination cycle.
This sample was added to see if there
e.
-------
TABLE G-l (continued)
Ul
Concentrations in ppb (pg/1)
Sample Point
**Intake Canal
Condenser Inlet 5 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
*Intake Canal
**Intake Canal
Condenser Inlet 5 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
after chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
after chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
^Intake Canal
Sample
Number
1
4
6
8
10
11
1
4
6
7
10
12
Chloroform Bromodichlorome thane
Date (CHC13) (CHCl2Br)
10/3/78 <1.0
10/3/78 3.2
10/3/78 4.0
10/3/78 3.9
10/3/78 <1.0
10/3/78 <1.0
11/1/78 <1.0
11/1/78 <1.0
11/1/78 7.1
11/1/78 7.1
11/1/78 7.3
11/1/78 <1.0
<0.2
1.7
2.1
2.0
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.8
3.3
3.6
<0.2
Chi o rod ib romome thane
(CHClBr2)
<0.2
0.7
0.8
0.6
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.1
0.9
0.9
<0.2
** Sample taken before chlorination cycle.
* Sample taken after chlorination cycle.
-------
N>
CO
TABLE G-l (continued)
Concentrations in ppb (|jg/l)
Sample Point
**Intake Canal
Condenser Inlet 5 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
after chlorination cycle
*Intake Canal
**Intake Canal
Condenser Inlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
Sample
Number
1
3
8
9
12
14
1
3
7
10
Chloroform Bromodichlorome thane
Date (CHC13) (CHCl2Br)
11/15/78
11/15/78
11/15/78
11/15/78
11/15/78
11/15/78
11/29/78
11/29/78
11/29/78
11/29/78
1.1
9.3
8.7
8.4
1.6
1.2
<1.0
4.9
5.5
5.2
<0.2
4.2
4.6
4.4
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.2
3.5
3.4
Chlorodibromome thane
(CHClBr2)
<0.2
1.3
1.5
1.4
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.1
1.2
1.3
after chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
*Intake Canal
11
14
11/29/78 <1.0
11/29/78 <1.0
** Sample taken before chlorination cycle.
* Sample taken after chlorination cycle.
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
-------
TABLE G-l (continued)
N>
Sample Point
**Intake Canal
Condenser Inlet 5 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
^Intake Canal
**Intake Canal
Condenser Inlet 5 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 8 mins
into chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 16 mins
Sample
Number
1
4
5
8
10
12
1
4
6
7
- — - *• *•
Chloroform Bromodichloromethane
Date (CHC1,) (CHCl2Br)
1/09/79 <1.0
1/09/79 3.3
1/09/79 7.3
1/09/79 6.5
1/09/79 <1.0
1/09/79 <1.0
1/23/79 <1.0
1/23/79 8.7
1/23/79 5.9
1/23/79 5.4
<0.2
1.7
1.1
1.0
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.99
0.87
Chlorodibromome thane
(CHClBr2)
<0.2
<0.2
1.7
1.7
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.30
<0.2
after chlorination cycle
Condenser Outlet 5 mins
after chlorination cycle
10
1/23/79
<0.2
<0.2
Sample taken before chlorination cycle.
Sample taken after chlorination cycle.
-------
TABLE G-2
Chlorine Feed Rate - JSSP
Date Feed Rate C12 cone (mg/1)
7/06/78 3000 Ibs 1.76
7/25/78 2400 Ibs 1.55
8/29/78 2300 Ibs 1.39
9/19/78 2400 Ibs 1.56
10/03/78 2400 Ibs 1.78
11/01/78 2250 Ibs 1.75
1/15/78 2500 Ibs 1.94
11/29/78 2500 Ibs 1.94
1/09/79 2500 Ibs 1.95
1/23/79 2500 Ibs 1.95
The following is the calculation used to determine the C12 concentration
(mg/1):
r, C12 Feed Rate OQ 00
Cl2 C°nC = CCW Flow Rate X 83'22
CCW is the condenser cooling water flow rate.
83.22 is a conversion factor from:
lbs/24 hrs per gal/min to mg/1
Ibs
24 hrs _ Ibs. min 24 hrs day 454 gm 1 gal
gal = gals. 24 hrs x dayx 1440 min. x Ib X 3.785 1
1000_m£ =
gm
238
-------
APPENDIX H
THE NEW CHLORINATOR
239
-------
APPENDIX H
THE NEW CHLORINATOR
Based on the analysis of Phase I data, it was concluded that the
fluctuating operation of the chlorinator was one major variable in
qualifying and quantifying the chlorine feed rates at John Sevier.
Thus, a search was initiated for a chlorination system that could
accurately monitor the flow of chlorine gas. After study and several
non-TVA site visits to inspect operating systems similar to those
defined as necessary for the study, it was recommended that a Capital
Control Series 800 Chlorinator and Series 910 flow meter and transmit-
ter would be the best system for gathering feed rate data in the
chlorination study. A comparative analysis of chlorine gas monitoring
systems indicated that the Capital Control chlorine gas flow meter-
transmitter measured flow by means of a variable orifice, and that
the mechanism for monitoring gas flow was less susceptible to corro-
sion and possibly more reliable and more accurate than other available
equipment. A diagram of the system is presented in Figure H-l. This
system (i.e., chlorine and gas metering device) was installed at the
plant in April 1977 for use during Phase II studies.
240
-------
VACUUM
REGULATING
VALVE
GAS INLET
V-NOTCH
VARIABLE
ORIFICE
PRESSURE
VACUUM
RELIEF VALVE
RATE
ADJUSTER
PRESSURE
REGULATING
VALVE
GAS FLOW
TRANSMITTER
VACUUM TRIMMER
AND DRAIN RELIEF
VALVE
Figure H-l. Schematic diagram of capital control chlorinator.
-------
APPENDIX I
CONDENSER INSPECTIONS
242
-------
APPENDIX I
CONDENSER INSPECTIONS
The following five memoranda were written as a result of the inspec-
tions of the condensers at the John Sevier Stem Plant. The result of
these inspections further indicates that as long as a small amount of
free residual chlorine is maintained at the condenser outlet, then con-
denser performance will not be impaired.
I. R. D. Moss had the opportunity to inspect the west side of Unit 4
condenser on August 25, 1977. The following summarizes the findings:
Inlet--No heavy growth of slime was noted. Three percent of the
tubes were clogged by shells. A slight amount of slime was found
in these tubes. A slight deposition was found in the bottom of all
the tubes, which is a result of settling by suspended solids when
taking the unit off line. This could easily be removed with a
fingernail. Deposition was found about 2 feet from the ends of the
tubes, but the rest of the tubes looked in satisfactory condition.
The water box looked relatively clean.
Outlet-The outlet water box looked in satisfactory condition. The
same type deposition in the bottom of the tubes was found. It could
easily be scraped off. No clams, algae, or slime growth was found.
Overall, the condenser looked in good condition. The west side is
also considered the worst side. Mr. Moss was very pleased with the
condition of the condenser.
II. R. D. Moss had the opportunity to participate in the inspection of
the west side of Unit 4 condenser on December 9, 1977, during the
scheduled unit outage. The following summarizes the findings:
Inlet-No growth of slime was noted on the tube sheet or in the tubes.
Only three tubes were blocked with shells. A slight deposit was
found in the bottom of the tubes, which is a normal result of settling
by suspended solids when taking the unit off line. Slight deposition
was found about two feet from the end of the tubes, but the rest of
the heat transfer areas looked in satisfactory condition.
The water box had a slime buildup of about 1/8-inch to 1/4-inch thick.
It was quite difficult to remove, which indicates that it had been
there for some time.
Outlet-The outlet water box looked similar to the inlet water box.
The slime growth was on the sides of the water box but not on the
tube sheet or in the tubes. No shells were found. The same type
deposition found in the inlet side was also found in the outlet.
243
-------
This condenser looked in good condition. It looked slightly better
than when it was inspected in August 1977. Very few tubes were
obstructed with clams shells, and less slime was found during this
inspection. This is especially encouraging since the west side is
the side most likely to exhibit fouling due to the water turbulence.
III. R. D. Moss and C. V. Seaman had the opportunity to assist with the
inspection of the Unit 1 condenser at John Sevier Steam Plant on
March 23, 1978. The main reason for this inspection was to try to
determine the cause or causes for the rapid loss of condenser per-
formance within a one-week span when for four previous weeks the
condenser performance had been very good with a zero chlorine feed
rate. The following summarizes our findings after inspecting the
west side of the condenser:
Inlet side—Hard slime formations of 1/4-inch deep were found on the
walls of the water box. Due to the nature of the slime, it is apparent
that it has been on the walls for some time. No slime was found on
the face of the tube sheet or in the tubes. Ten to twenty tubes were
clogged with fish approximately 5-inches long and 1 inch in diameter
and crab-like species of approximately 3-inches long by 1-1/2-inches
wide. No pitting or corrosion was found.
Outlet side—Hard slime formations of 1/4-inch deep were found on the
walls of the water box as was found in the inlet side of the condenser.
A thin layer of slime was found on the face of the tube sheet and in the
tubes. This slime could easily be removed by rubbing with the fingers,
but it was probably sufficient for reducing the condenser performance.
No active corrosion or pitting was discovered.
Summary--The inlet side of the condenser contained a lot of trash and
fish. It would seem unusual that fish of this size could be found in
the condenser. The slime found in the outlet side of the condenser
has been deemed responsible for the decrease in condenser performance
experienced on Unit 1.
IV. On June 6, 1978, C. V. Seaman had the opportunity to inspect the west
side of the Unit 4 condenser at John Sevier Steam Plant. The chlorina-
tion schedule for Unit 4 was six times a day for 10 minutes each at
the following feed rates:
1/01/78 to 4/27/78 - 1500 lbs/24 hrs.
4/28/78 to 5/03/78 - 2000 lbs/24 hrs.
5/04/78 to 5/08/78 - 3000 lbs/24 hrs.
5/09/78 to 6/08/78 - 3500 lbs/24 hrs.
The following summarizes his inspection:
Inlet—The tube sheet face had a very fine layer of slime on it.
A heavy layer of slime and dirt was found on the walls of the water
box. No slime was noted in the tubes.
244
-------
Outlet—Small patches of slime were found on the tube sheet face.
Also, slime and dirt were found on the walls of the water box. No
slime was found in the tubes, although some sand and dirt was noted
in these tubes.
Summary—A biocide, such as chlorine, is beneficial in reducing
biological growth within the condenser. The control of biofouling
in the condenser may ensure good condenser performance.
On July 2, 1978, R. D. Moss and C. V. Seaman had the opportunity to
assist in the inspection of the west side of Unit 2 condenser. This
was the first opportunity to look at this condenser since the chlori-
nation project was started at this plant in 1976. This unit has
operated for over a year without being manually cleaned. It was not
cleaned at this time since it was only down due to a boiler tube leak.
Since we have been following the relationship of apparent cleanliness
factor (ACF) and chlorine dosage, this condenser was of interest since
it had dropped to a 69 percent ACF during May. Last summer at this
time the ACF was 71 percent.
The following summarizes our findings:
Inlet—No slime was found on the facing of the tube sheet or in the
tubes. Only a small number of shells were found in the water box.
The usual slime and mud deposits were found on the supports and walls
of the water box. No active pitting or corrosion was found.
Outlet—Thin patches of slime were found on the facing of the tube
sheet. A thin film of slime was found in some of the tubes. Slime
and mud were found on the walls of the water box. Slime was found
on some of the supports inside the water box where we have not found
slime before in other condensers. No active pitting or corrosion
was found in the outlet side of this condenser.
Summary—This unit has operated longer than the other units, and,
therefore, the slime formations are not unexpected considering the
inlet water temperature (80°F) over the last few weeks. This unit
is scheduled for a maintenance outage in the fall. Its normal outage
was postponed due to the problems associated with the coal strike.
This condenser should operate without a significant loss in efficiency
for the remainder of the summer.
245
-------
APPENDIX J
FACTORS INVOLVED IN CALCULATING THE
APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
246
-------
APPENDIX J
FACTORS INVOLVED IN CALCULATING THE APPARENT CLEANLINESS FACTOR
The ACF is a percentage of how well the condenser tubes in service
transfer heat compared to how well a new tube would transfer heat. The
basic formula is
ACF (%) = ^o (1)
U
n
where: U = the apparent heat transfer coefficient of a used tube
° in Btu/hr-ft2-°F
U = the apparent heat transfer coefficient of a new tube
n in Btu/hr'ft2«°F
To calculate U and U , the HEI and ASME codes require the use of
approximately 30 variables. Some of these variables are based on the heat
balance tests across the system which were conducted at John Sevier in the
1950's. Any changes in the actual efficiencies of the boiler and turbine
which have occurred since the original tests will affect the calculation
of ACF.
One variable is condenser duty, which is based on the relationship
of unit load to heat rejection. This variable can never by computed
accurately, but the overall formula is:
For reheating-regenerative turbine-generator:
q - w (h - h ) + w (h" - h1) + w h + 0.003 p,w -
L. L. i r A r sc it
|jk (3)
Generator Eff. x Mech. Eff.
where: q = condenser duty (Btu/hr)
w = steam flow to condenser (Ib/hr)
S
h = enthalpy of steam to condenser (Btu/lb)
h = enthalpy of condensate (Btu/lb)
w = throttle steam flow rate (Ib/hr)
ht = enthalpy at throttle (Btu/lb)
h,. = enthalpy of feed water leaving final heater (Btu/lb)
w = steam flow rate to reheater (Ib/hr)
h^ = enthalpy of reheat steam (Btu/lb)
h' = enthalpy of steam before reheating (Btu/lb)
0.003 pfwt - the work transfer in feed pump (psia • Ib/hr)
p = power output (kW)
247
-------
The enthalpy of the steam entering any condenser (h ) cannot be deter-
mined from direct measurements unless the steam is superheated. Generally,
the steam is in the wet vapor region, and the average dryness fraction has
so far defied all attempts at measurement. Therefore, the only measurements
for q were made in the initial energy balance calculations in the 1950's.
Another way of describing the condenser duty is as follows:
Heat added . Heat added ,,~ . *. *. . u • ^ *.\ /--,/-i->\ i f/\
",.,- + , n ~ [(Generator output + mechanical output) (3413) J (4)
by Boiler by Pumps r r ; \ s * \ ;
Another variable is the condenser cooling water flow rate (CCW). The
basic formula for the flow rate is
(5)
where: q = condenser duty
C = specific heat of water
AT = T - T
outlet inlet
In terms of gallons per minute flow, the equation becomes
rrw - q
LLW ~ 8.021 d C AT
P
where: d = density of water (lb/ft3) at a particular temperature
It is obvious that the CCW flow is only as accurate as q, and any
changes in gross generation and the corresponding enthalpy changes (heat
rate) will affect q. A simple calculation shows that for every 1 percent
rise in heat rate of the boiler and turbine, there is a 1.74 percent change
in q.
Boiler output for one kW production = 8000 Btu/hr
less number of Btu/hr per kW produced -3413 Btu/hr
4587 Btu/hr
1% rise = 80 Btu/hr
Therefore, 80 = 1.74%
4587
It follows that if there is a 1 percent rise or loss in heat rate due
to changes in the gross generation and/or enthalpies across the system,
there will be a 1.74 percent change in the condenser duty and there will
also be a 1.74 percent change in the calculation of the cooling water flow
rate. While the flow rate may not actually change every time the gross
generation changes, the AT, across the condenser will be changed. With a
change in AT, there will also be a change in the chlorine consumption
(temperature affects the FRC at the inlet; the FRC at the inlet affects
the chlorine consumption in the condenser).
To further complicate the calculated CCW flow rate, the plant calcu-
lates CCW by determining the condensate flow theoretically corresponding
248
-------
to a particular gross generation and turbine back pressure from a graph.
This value is then multiplied by 982 (theoretical h ) and divided by 500
(theoretical heat capacity of water at a particular temperature) times the
AT. Therefore, another source of error has been introduced.
Turbine back pressure is one of the few variables that can be accu-
rately measured and can be measured to within 0.01 in. Hg. However, any
changes in the air leakage will directly affect the back pressure. The
air leakage into the steam side of the condenser can come from many sources,
some of which are welds around tubes, pipes, and valves. The measurement
of air leakage is crude and very inaccurate.
Since the back pressure is a function of air leakage and the losses
in efficiency are demonstrated by the back pressure, the back pressure will
be used to determine the logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) .
The equation for the LMTD is
LMTD = (7)
log !l
where: 6 = difference between steam temperature and CCW inlet
temperature
6 = difference between steam temperature and CCW outlet
temperature
Another form of equation (6) would be
AT AT
LMTD = , t -t. = , Temp, corresponding to back pressure -T. ,
t -t- Temp, corresponding to back pressure -T ,
s i outlet
Another variable is the design correction factor (DCF). This value
is used to equate the ACF equation to any inlet water temperature other
than 70°F. The value is found on a graph of inlet water temperature versus
the design correction factors. The ability to differentiate the appropri-
ate number from a graph may be impaired due to the quality of the graph.
The last variable is the tube velocity (TV). This value is very impor-
tant when calculating ACF. Since biofouling may affect the TV, it is rea-
sonable to assume that the TV should be known. However, TV is based on CCW.
Here again, q becomes quite important. The formula for TV is:
TV =
No. of tubes x cross sectional area of tubes
Now that the major factors involved in calculating the ACF have been
described, the formula appears as follows:
249
-------
„ condenser surface area
ACF = = - - (10)
n C AT
Total Cross Sectional Area of Tables
or
3413 P,
w fh -hj = w (h" - h') = w h +0.003 p.v; -^ \ -=—
t t f r r r s c *i t gen, effy. x mech. effy.
condenser surface area
6, - 62 AT
X fc. Q J~
log 61 log t - ti ,-i-i\
6e —^ 6e _^ ^ (11)
e2 t - t2
Q *•
ACF = ?
3413 P.
wt(ht -hf) + wr(hj -h;) -H wghc + 0.003 Pfwt - gen. effy. x mech. effy
8-021 d Cp AT
Total Cross Sectional Area of Tubes
250
-------
APPENDIX K
A GENERAL OUTLINE FOR CONDUCTING
A CHLORINE MINIMIZATION/OPTIMIZATION STUDY
251
-------
APPENDIX K
A GENERAL OUTLINE FOR CONDUCTING
A CHLORINE MINIMIZATION/OPTIMIZATION STUDY
As a result of this extensive research effort, it would be ap-
propriate to provide a general outline for conducting a chlorine mini-
mization/optimization study. The outline should be considered general
since the use of chlorine in a cooling system is very site-specific.
The reader should be thoroughly familiar with the contents of Section 4
before reading this appendix.
I. Obtain Past Plant Operations Data
The basic concept of a minimization study is to systematically
reduce the chlorine feed to the system as long as no loss in condenser
efficiency is experienced. To determine this effect on condenser effi-
ciency, the following plant operations data should be collected for the
previous ten years on each unit for comparison purposes.
A. Gross generation (kW)
B. Condenser duty (106 Btu/hr)
C. Circulating water inlet temperature (°F)
D. Circulating water outlet temperature (°F)
E. Turbine back pressure (In. Hg)
F. Exhaust steam temperature (°F)
G. Air leakage (cfm)
H. Condenser cooling water flow rate (GPM)
I. Tube velocity (ft/sec)
J. Apparent cleanliness factor (%)
K. Dates of condenser cleaning
L. Past chlorination procedures (feed rates, lengths and
frequency of feed, residuals measured)
All dates should be graphed and analyzed in terms of trends.
II. Obtain Past Water Quality Data
While all the necessary cooling system water quality data for
conducting such a study may not be available, most plants measure some
of them on a daily basis. The following data for the previous five
years should be collected if available.
A. pH
B. Ammonia
C. Total suspended solids
D. Organic nitrogen
E. Conductivity
F. Chlorine demand
These data should be graphed and analyzed for trends.
252
-------
Ill. Equipment
Two of the largest variables in a minimization study (see Section 4.)
are the equipment which is used to feed the chlorine and the equipment
which is used to measure the chlorine. Therefore, make sure that the
chlorinator is reliable. It is recommended that a recorder be connected
to the chlorinator, similar to the system described in Appendix H, so
that an accurate measurement of the feed rate can be maintained.
It was determined from the field data that there exist significant
problems associated with the accurate measurement of free and total
residual chlorine concentration. This problem is illustrated by the
instances of negative chlorine consumption, both across the condenser
and across the cooling system (chlorine injection point to condenser
outlet.) Until more research has been done in this field to develop a
better method of analysis, this problem will continue if the chlorine to
reduced nitrogen ratios are low.
At this time, the amperometric titration method is still the best
method for conducting several grab sample analyses in a short period of
time in the field. However, since this method requires considerable
experience, it is recommended that all operators should be intimately
familiar with the technique for measuring free and total residual chlorine.
IV. Sampling Locations
It is imperative that a location be found which will provide an
easily accessible and representative sample of the condenser cooling
water. The best sample points for monitoring chlorine in the condenser
would be located in the inlet and outlet condenser water boxes. There
should also be arrangements made so that a sample may be collected at a
point immediately downstream of the chlorine injection point. At John
Sevier, the chlorine was injected at the bottom of the circulating water
intake pump suction well. Therefore, a sample point was made prior to
the cone valve approximately 8 feet from the pump suction well. By
making measurements from time to time at this point, some of the varia-
bilities in the cooling water flow rate and the chlorinator feed rates
can be measured.
Sampling points should also be established at the end of the discharge
pipe to determine the amount of chlorine being released to the environment.
V. Field Studies
The field studies for a chlorine minimization/optimization project
should cover a minimum of three years. The water quality criteria
changes and the changes in plant operations, which may occur on a yearly
basis, require that the field study encompass more than just one year of
data gathering. It is recommended that two years be spent to determine
the best chlorination regime for a plant, and one year should be spent
monitoring the effects of the derived regime. The following scenario
for conducting a minimization/optimization study will include this time
frame.
253
-------
A. Water Quality Data
Samples of the condenser cooling water should be collected each
week during the study at the plant intake. These samples should be
analyzed for the following parameters :
Temperature
PH
Ammonia as N
Organic nitrogen as N
Total organic carbon
Nitrates plus nitrites as N
Chlorine demand -1,5, and 10 minute*
Conductivity
Total suspended solids
Iron
Copper
Hardness as
The results of these analyses should be studied and the models
presented in this report should be applied to determine: (1) if system
characteristics in the models apply; (2) if unusual water quality condi-
tions have occurred; and (3) the effect and potential effect of a certain
water quality condition on the chlorination regime.
The effects of temperature, pH, ammonia, organic nitrogen, and
chlorine demand on the chlorine regime have been discussed quite
frequently in this report and in other literature on chlorination.
Therefore, an accurate determination of these parameters is vital for
determining the applicable chlorine feed rate for fouling control.
Such parameters as nitrates plus nitrites, iron, and copper are
important with respect to the measurement of free and total residual
chlorine. Nitrates and nitrites can interfere with the measurements, and
copper and iron, in sufficient quantities, can poison the electrodes of
the amperometric method of analysis which will yield high readings.
B. Plant Operations
Since the objective of a minimization study is to reduce the chlo-
rine application as long as no loss in condenser efficiency has occurred,
it is imperative that the following plant operations data be collected
on each day of field testing.
*The time of the chlorine demand tests should approximate the lengths
of time it takes a particle of cooling water to arrive at critical
points in the system. These points are: the condenser inlet, the
condenser outlet, end of discharge pipe, etc.
254
-------
1. Unit gross generation (kW)
2. Turbine back pressure (In. Hg)
3. Inlet and outlet circulating water temperature (°F)
4. Exhause steam temperature (°F)
5. Condensate temperature (°F)
6. Condenser cooling water flow rate (GPM)
7. Air leakage (CFM)
4:
The above
-------
that this phenomena may be caused by the reactions of chlorine and
certain organic compounds in the water. These chloroorganic compounds
are measured as FRC via the equilibrium changes in the sample from
titrating with powerful reducing agents such as phenylarsine oxideyure
This hypothesis and other hypotheses will be tested in the near an(j wnen
Therefore, extreme care should be used when making measureme*~
analyzing results.
-, , , -r^^ „ ™^^ concentrations at
Care must also be used when measurxag FRC and TRCument carmot
0.1 mg/1 and below. It should be noted that the ins*f'urthermore the
detect electrode potential changes below 0.02 m^eiving since the
electrode response below 0.1 mg/1 can be qufctp^ -nt Additional
beginning of the titration is so close tc measuring FRC and TRC may be
explanation of the problems associate
found in Section A.
D. Variance of Feed Rate> Cation, apd Frequency of Feed
Tf thP nnwr- Plant has more than one unit, different frequencies
and duration-* of feed may be tested on different units simultaneously,
as Ion* as "he units are of the same size. One unit should be used as a
control ^nit and should remain at the same frequency and duration as was
the pa^t plant practice.
More frequent daily chlorine applications for shorter durations and
vess frequent chlorine applications for longer durations should be
tested The test period to determine the optimum frequency/duration
regime should be at least two years. The final year of testing should
have all units but the control condenser operating on the same frequency/
duration regime.
All decisions with regard to the optimum frequency/duration regime
should be based on the effect these regimes have on the condenser perform-
ance. A statistical approach should be used to determine the best
regime.
The chlorine feed rate should be reduced as long as no loss in
condenser efficiency is noted. These reductions should follow an
orderly procedure based on the water quality data and plant operations
data A free residual chlorine concentration of no less than 0.1 mg/1
should be maintained at the condenser outlet. Reductions of the chlorine
feed should not take place any faster than every three months, but this
length of time will depend on the water quality at each facility Ihis
period of time will allow the accumulation of sufficient data to determine
the effect of the feed rate on the condenser performance.
If the feed rate is to be reduced such that FRC concentrations
below 0.1 mg/1 at the condenser outlet are to be tested, this reduction
should only be made if no ambiguities have been noted in the ability to
measure the chlorine concentrations. While 0.1 mg/1 is quite low, it
would not be advisable to reduce the feed rate below 0.1 mg/1 if the
following conditions occur:
256
-------
~ 1^: The Cl2:N ratios in conjunction with kinetic rate theory
iadicate that no FRC should be measured, yet concentrations of
FRC are being detected.
2. Excessive electronic drift in the titrator as end-point is
reached.
3. Higher FRC concentrations measured at the condenser outlet
than at the inlet.
For further explanation regarding the impact of these phenomena on the
minimization/optimization of chlorine, please see Section 4.
Tests at a zero chlorine feed rate should also be conducted at
times of high and low inlet water temperatures. The tests should not
terminate until a significant loss in condenser performance has occurred
(5 percentage points). These tests will determine (1) the necessity for
chlorination; (2) the time of year most susceptible to fouling; and (3)
lag time between the cessation of chlorination and the evidence of unit
fouling.
After two years of tests, the recommended feed rates, frequency and
duration of feed should be maintained for at least a year, and the
condenser performance should be monitored every two weeks to determine
the success or failure of the chlorination regime.
E. Condenser Inspections
During the minimization/optimization study, it is very important
that the unit efficiency be monitored to determine the success or failure
of the chlorination regime. However, many inherent problems are associated
with the accurate determination of unit efficiency. (See Section 4.)
In most cases, by the time the turbine back pressure indicates that
fouling has occurred, it is too late to do anything about it.
Therefore, at every opportunity, the condensers should be visually
inspected. The inlet and outlet water boxes should be inspected for
slime growth and silt deposition. The water boxes should be cleaned so
that the deposition does not become so great that it will flake off and
plug the condenser tubes. We recommend cleaning the water box walls
every two years or less.
The tube sheet should be inspected for slime growth. Slime on the
tube sheet is a strong indicator of even more slime in the tubes.
Normally, if there is slime growth, the slime can be found more prevalent
at the condenser outlet than at the condenser inlet.
Obviously, the tubes should be inspected for growth. If tubes are
plugged via sticks, clam shells, or other debris, there is a good chance
that biofouling will occur in the tubes since no chlorine can reach the
growth in the tubes. Those tubes not plugged by debris should be inspec-
ted closely. If there is a slick feeling to the tubes, samples should
be collected via ASTM standards, preserved, and analyzed.
257
-------
The tubes and tube sheet should also be inspected for scale deposi-
tion, corrosion, or erosion. The evidence of scaling or pitting will
require other methods of treatment, most likely side-stream treatment,
in addition to chlorination for biofouling control.
VI. Followup
After the chlorine minimization/optimization study has been completed,
the water quality characteristics, the frequency of feed, the duration
of feed, the chlorine feed rate, and the plant operations data should be
monitored intermittently for several years. Since the condenser cooling
water characteristics will change from year to year, it is important to
determine the effect the chlorine regime has on the unit efficiency over
the long term (usually 5 years). While the monitoring of chlorine
residuals should occur each week on each condenser, the other parameters
mentioned should be evaluated monthly. Significant changes in inlet
water temperature, for example, will necessitate changes in the chlorine
feed rate.
258
-------
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-80-143
J_
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Chlorine Minimization/Optimization
Biofouling Control: Final Report
7. AUTHOR(S)
R.D. Moss, H.B.Flora, II, R.A.Hiltunen
C. V. Seam an
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
TVA, Energy Demonstrations and Technology
1140 Chestnut Street,Tower H
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Fin*
14.
EPA/600
is.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ffiRL-RTP project officer is J.W. Jones, MD-61
EPA-600/7-79-198 covers study phases I and II.
i6. ABSTRACT
report summarizes results of a chlorine minimization/optin
study for the control of biofouling on the surface of condenser tubes at TVA
Sevier Plant from December 1975 to December 1978. The study concluded thai
chlorine feed is a function of inlet water temperature, chlorine demand, and c&
water quality parameters; (2) chlorine consumption through the system and constf
tion of free chlorine across the condenser are directly related to chlorine feed rate,
(3) chlorine feed rate at John Sevier could be lowered with no loss of condenser per-
formance if a free residual concentration of 0. 1-0. 2 mg/1 is maintained at the conden-
ser outlet; (4) chlorination must be applied year around, regardless of inlet water
temperature; (5) more frequent chlorination cycles of shorter duration are more effi-
cient in controlling condenser performance than infrequent cycles of longer duration:
(6) although chloroform , bromodichloromethane , and dibromochloromethane were
found at the condenser inlet and outlet at John Sevier, their average concentrations
were only 2% of the maximum allowed by Federal Water Quality Crieria: (7) chloro-
form and dibromochloromethane formation rates are directly related to chlorine feed
rate; and (8) chlorination is site specific; i.e. , each plant must conduct its own mini-
mization studies , if warranted. An included format assists in such studies. _
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Pollution
Biodeterioration
Fouling Prevention
Condenser Tubes
Condensers
Chlorine
Chlorination
Cooling Water
Water Quality
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Biofouling
13B
06A
13H,13J
07A
131
07B
07C
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
259
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------