EPA -660/2-74-027
April 1974
Environmental Protection Technology Series
Treatment of Packinghouse Wastes
By Anaerobic Lagoons and
Plastic Media Filters
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and
Monitoring, Environmental Protection Agency, have
been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further
development and application of environmental
technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology
transfer and a maximum interface in related
fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
i*. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY series. This series
describes research performed to develop and
demonstrate instrumentation, equipment and
methodology to repair or prevent environmental
degradation from point and .non-point sources of
pollution. This work provides the new or improved
technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality
standards.
REVIEW NOTICE
This report lias "been reviewed "by the Office of Research and
Development, EPA, and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency,
nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
EPA-660/2-74-027
April 1974
TREATMENT OF PACKINGHOUSE WASTES
BY ANAEROBIC LAGOONS AND PLASTIC
MEDIA FILTERS
by
Darrell A. Baker
Allen H. Wymore
James E. White
Project 12060 DFF
Program Element 1BB037
Project Officers
Mr. Otmar 0. Olson,
Dr. William Garner
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region VII
Kansas City, Mo.
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
For nb by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. GoTermnent Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1.20
-------
ABSTRACT
Studies were conducted to demonstrate the efficiency and suitability
of using dissolved air flotation, anaerobic lagoons, plastic media
trickling filters and chlorination as a system for treating 1 mgd
of wastewater from a meat packing plant.
The overall reduction of 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD,,)
through the system averaged 98.570 over the ten month evaluation
period leaving a discharge concentration of 61 mg/1. Suspended solids
were reduced 95.4% through the entire system, leaving an effluent
concentration of 90 mg/1 after chlorination. The BOD5 reduction in
the anaerobic lagoons averaged 82% and accounted for the majority
of BOD,- removed in the system. The BOD reduction through the plastic
media trickling filters averaged 74% of the applied loading which was
below the 91% efficiency expected during design. Hydraulic overload,
organic overload, and possibly grease concentrations contributed
to the lower-than-expected performance.
The cost of the treatment system was calculated to be $0.079 per hog
killed or $0.344 per 1000 Ib live weight killed.
11
-------
CONTENTS
Section
I Conclusions
II Recommendations
III Introduction
IV Plant Description
V Sampling and Analyses
VI Results
VII Costs
VIII References
IX Appendix
Page
iii
-------
FIGURES
No. Page
1 Schematic diagram of the Denison, Iowa, anaerobic 8
lagoon - trickling filter system
2 Monthly pattern of BOD,, removal through the anaerobic 20
lagoon system
3 BOD_ concentration removal characteristics of the 23
anaerobic lagoon system
4 BOD,, load removal characteristics of the anaerobic 24
lagoon system
5 Monthly pattern of BOD5 removal through the plastic 28
media trickling filters (without final settling)
6 Monthly pattern of BOD,- removal through the plastic 29
media trickling filters and final clarifier and after
chlorination
7 BOD- concentration removal characteristics of the 30
plastic media trickling filters (without final
settling)
8 BOD,- load removal characteristics of the plastic 31
media trickling filters (without final settling)
9 BOD5 concentration removal characteristics of the plastic 32
media trickling filter - final clarifier system
10 BODc load removal characteristics of the plastic 33
media trickling filter - final clarifier system
iv
-------
TABLES
No. Pagjs
1 Bulk properties of plastic media 4
2 Sampling stations and procedure 12
3 Plant flows 15
4 Trickling filter flows 14
5 Raw wastes BOD,. 17
6 Operational data 18
7 Summary of raw wastes 16
8 Dissolved air flotation tank performance 19
9 Anaerobic lagoon performance 21
10 Anaerobic lagoon influent BOD,- 22
11 Trickling filter performance 26
12 BOD changes through trickling filter system 27
13 Suspended solids analysis through trickling filter 35
system
14 Chlorine contact basin performance 37
15 Chlorine usage and coliform reduction 39
16 Summary of process efficiency 40
17 Annual operating expenses, 1970 41
18 Operating expenses, 1970 41
19 Estimated annual operating expenses, 1971 42
20 Estimated operating expenses, 1971 42
v
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was conducted by Farmland Foods, Inc., at Denison, Iowa
under the direction of Darrell A. Baker, Chemist-In-Charge for Farm-
land Foods, Inc. Burns and McDonnel Engineering Company, Kansas City,
Mo. designed the trickling filter, clarifier and chlorination system.
Other technical personnel involved in the project were Janet Bachmann,
and Albert Roundy, of Farmland Foods, Inc., Denison, who assisted with
the analytical work.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Grant No. 12060DFF
(formerly WRPD241-01-68). Dr. James C. Young, a consultant to Farmland
Foods during the report preparation phase, assisted with the data
analysis and report writing. Mr. Otmar 0. Olson was the project officer
during the construction and operational phase of the study while
Dr. William Garner was project officer during the data analysis and
write-up phase. Special recognition is made of the efforts of Mr. Jack
L. Witherow of the National Environmental Research Center at Corvallis,
Oregon.
vi
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
Anaerobic lagoons provide high rates of removal of organic materials
from packinghouse wastes. The units used in this study removed 82%
of the applied BOD5 at an average loading of 24.7 lb BOD /day/1000 ft.3
Plastic media trickling filters followed by clarifiers used to treat
anaerobic lagoon effluent removed 74% of the BOD- at an average ap-
3
plied loading of 70 lb BOD5/day/1000 ft . However, removal effi-
ciencies were lower than anticipated during design because of both
hydraulic and organic overloading throughout most of the operating
period, leaving an average effluent suspended solids concentration of
108 mg/1 and BOD- concentration of 124 mg/1 in the effluent from the
final clarifiers. As a result of hydraulic overload, suspended solids
removal in the final clarifier was not as high as expected.
The performance of the trickling filters, taking into account the in-
creased BOD_ loading, agreed reasonably well with calculations made
using designs established by the manufacturers of the plastic media.
The chlorine contact basin,with an average dosage of 7.7 mg/1 of
chlorine, resulted in reduction of coliform counts from 10 /100 ml to
103/100 ml.
Dissolved air flotation applied to the raw waste stream removed 33% of
the BOD- and 62% of the grease from the packinghouse waste. However,
this unit was considered to be an in-plant recovery process.
Cost of the treatment system, excluding air flotation, was calculated
to be $0.079 per hog killed or $0.344 per 1,000 lb live weight killed
when amortizing the capital costs over a 30 year period'at 6.57,
interest.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
During the course of the study, it was found that the flows fluctuated
widely, due largely to the type of waste and the character of the
packing plant involved. It is recommended that treatment facilities
be designed to buffer these fluctuations; i.e., larger lagoons to
accommodate a 10-12 day flow, larger clarifiers to provide better
solids separation, and chemical flocculation in the air flotation
unit to improve grease recovery.
It is further recommended that recycling options to the trickling
filter should be included to allow the operator to compensate for
variable flow rates, slug waste discharges, and other operational
problems.
Additional studies are recommended to determine performance character-
istics of plastic-media trickling filters for a wider range of con-
trolled hydraulic and organic loadings when operating during both
winter and summer temperature extremes. Further investigation needs
to be made to more clearly distinguish the advantages and disadvan-
tabes of series operation of the trickling filters as compared to
parallel operation with and without effluent recirculation to control
the hydraulic loading.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
GENERAL
The need for a high degree of treatment for packinghouse wastes is
well documented. These wastes generally have high BOD and suspended
solids concentrations. A typical packinghouse slaughtering hogs has a
population equivalent of 15 to 30 per hog depending on the various pro-
cesses conducted within the production facilities. These wastes usual-
ly are warmer than domestic wastewater and contain a high concentration
of animal blood and fat unless these components are removed in the
slaughtering and processing plant.
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
In the Summer of 1968, Farmland Foods, a subsidiary of Farmland Indus-
tries, Inc., Kansas City, Missouri, a farmer-owned cooperative, initi-
ated the design of a waste treatment plant for the Denison, Iowa, pork
operation. Several limitations affected the design of this plant, but
foremost was the limited land available. Therefore, consideration was
given to construction of a treatment plant system not requiring exten-
sive aerobic lagoons for effluent polishing. Shortly after the incep-
tion of the plan, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, then
FWPCA, was approached for possible funding of a demonstration project
involving the use of plastic-media trickling filters for treating the
effluent from anaerobic lagoons. The construction of the project be-
gan in April 1969 with FWPCA participating through a Research,
Development and Demonstration grant.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The use of anaerobic lagoons for treating packinghouse wastes is well
1-4
documented . Experience has shown that anaerobic lagoons will
remove 70 to 90 percent of the applied 5-day, 20 C biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD-) loading, with loading rates varying from 10 to 30
3
pounds BOD- per 1,000 ft of lagoon volume. Normally, these
anaerobic lagoons are followed by a series of aerated and unaerated
3
-------
lagoons to provide additional treatment and to make the wastewater
suitable for discharge to natural watercourses. The primary objec-
tive of this project was to determine the feasibility of substituting
a plastic media trickling filter system for any or all of the aerobic
lagoons.
The use of plastic media in trickling filters is relatively new.
Plastic media offer distinct advantages over rock media in that
plastic media can be loaded at higher organic and hydraulic loadings
and the media can be stacked up to 30 feet without intermediate sup-
ports. These advantages can contribute to significant economic
savings in land and capital costs over rock media filters.
There are three major manufacturers of plastic media: The Dow
Chemical Company, B. F. Goodrich Company, and the Ethyl Corporation.
Table 1 gives pertinent data for the three plastic media.
Table 1. BULK PROPERTIES OF PLASTIC MEDIA
Manufacturer
Dow Chemical Company
B. F. Goodrich Company
Ethyl Corporation
Material
PVC
PVC
PVC
Surface area,
2 3
ftVft"
27
37
29
Void space,
%
94
97
97
Unit wt.,
lbs/ft3
2.6
2.74-4.13
2.44
Each of these manufacturers has a basic design equation for designing
the filter towers.
Dow Chemical Company
The basic equation expressing the BOD fraction remaining at any media
depth follows (5):
e = -KD/Q
(1)
-------
where: L = BODp of waste fed to filter (recirculation not included)
L = BOD5 remaining
K = Rate coefficient, treatability factor (0.088 for
domestic sewage)
D = Depth of filter media, ft
2
Q = Hydraulic dosing rate, gpm/ft
(recirculation not included)
In determining the volume of filter media required for a particular
project, the value of L /L is know, D is assumed for the particular
project, and K is obtained from the Dow Chemical Company for values
for wastes other than domestic sewage. Thus, the hydraulic dosing
rate, Q, is the unknown to be determined. Then, knowing the hydraulic
dosing rate, the influent flow rate and the depth, one can calculate the
volume of filter media required.
Research by Germain indicated that when using media manufactured by
Dow Chemical Company recirculation did not cause a statistically signi-
ficant effect of BOD removal. Consequently, recirculation was not
considered in the development of Equation 1.
B. F. Goodrich
B. F. Goodrich uses the basic equation developed by Schulze in the de-
sign of their facilities. The equation is expressed as follows:
L e
o
Where: L = BOD- of waste fed to filter
o 5
L = BOD,, remaining
K = Treatability factor
T-20 C
9 = Temperature factor, (1.035)
D = Depth of filter media, ft
2
Q = Hydraulic loading, gpm/ft
n = Media factor
T = Temperature, C
-------
This equation is very similar to Germain's with the exception that a
temperature correction factor is included in the Schulze equation.
The coefficients used for design and those calculated from treatment
performance will be compared later in this report.
Ethyl Corporation
Ethyl Corporation has developed curves for the removal of BOD for
several types of wastes. The data from which the curves were deve-
loped were obtained from actual pilot and commercial installations.
Copies of these BOD reduction curves are available from the manufac-
turer.
-------
SECTION IV
PLANT DESCRIPTION
SOURCE OF WASTES
The packing-slaughterhouse plant at which this study was conducted is
located northwest of Denison, Iowa, and has the capacity to kill and
dress 5,000 hogs per day. Typical live weight of hogs killed was
about 230 Ibs. The hog cutting and processing operation generally
accounted for about 40 percent of the kill including two or three
hundred head per day shipped to the Denison plant from a plant at
Iowa Falls, Iowa. The overall processing schedule is summarized as
follows:
BREAKDOWN OF HOG PROCESSING, Ib/day
KILL CUT
1,000
\
nnn ^ /.nn nnn
i
Fresh Cuts
r 170,000
600,000
Shipped (46,000 Ib/day
PROCESS
& £\WUJLlWw
i
Hams Picnics
38,000 14,720
to rendering, by-products and
Bacon
27,600
waste)
Wastes from the plant were typical of most packinghouse operations,
having high BOD, grease and solids content, with variable pH and tem-
perature. The waste from the slaughter-packing plant was collected
in two interceptors. Interceptor No. 1 received all wastes from the
kill floor area except the scald tank; and Interceptor No. 2 received
wastes from the hog pens, scald tank, rendering, blood drying opera-
tion, and the domestic waste. There was no cooling water entry into
either line. Figure 1 gives a schematic diagram of the entire treat-
ment system.
-------
00
RAW WASTES
FROM KILL
FLOOR
CLARIFIER
NO' } CHLORINE
CONTACT
TANK EFFLUENT
TO RIVER
TT~*
S-7
CLARIFIER
NO. 2
PRE-AERATION
TANK
AIR FLOTATION
TANK
ANAEROBIC
LAGOON
NO. 2
ANAEROBIC
LAGOON
NO. 1
RAW WASTES
LEGEND
NORMAL OPERATION
(FILTERS IN SERIES)
__^- FILTERS IN PARALLEL
- SLUDGE LINE
T.F. TRICKLING FILTER
-• SAMPLING POINT
tTo) PUMPS
INCLUDING
HOG PENS
SCALD TANK
AND DOMESTIC
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the Denison, Iowa, anaerobic lagoon - trickling filter system
-------
PLANT UNITS
Wastes from the Interceptor No. 1 were pumped into a dissolved air
flotation cell for pretreatment before discharge into two anaerobic
lagoons (Figure 1). Grease removed from the flotation cell was
rendered and sold as brown house grease.
The flotation cell effluent and the flow from Interceptor No. 2 were
combined shortly before discharging into the two anaerobic lagoons
which were operated in parallel. The combined flow, including sludge
recirculation from the final clarifiers, was measured at the anaerobic
lagoon inlet with a V-notch weir meter. The anaerobic lagoons served
two important functions; that of providing biological treatment of
the wastes and equalizing the flow .to the trickling filter plant
evenly throughout the work week.
Effluent from the anaerobic lagoons flowed through a control valve
which could be operated manually or automatically; then through a
preaeration tank which was designed for two purposes: to control odors
emanating from the anaerobic effluent by releasing them at a desig-
nated location where they possibly could be treated and to supply a
limited amount of oxygen to the wastewater before treatment by the
trickling filters. Occasionally, a masking agent was used to con-
trol odors in the anaerobic effluent.
The preaeration tank effluent was then pumped to two trickling filters
normally operated in series; the plastic media in each unit was manu-
factured by B. F. Goodrich. The filter effluent was discharged to
two final clarifiers and then to a chlorine contact basin for dis-
infection. Sludge removed from the final clarifiers was recycled
to the anaerobic lagoons using a positive-displacement pumped operated
on a pre-set schedule.
-------
DESIGN CRITERIA
Design criteria and unit sizes for the treatment facilities are
summarized as follows:
Raw Waste Characteristics
Hogs killed per day
BOD loading:
5,000 hogs killed(4.3 Ibs/hog)
Average waste flow (operating days)
Gallons per hog
Gallons per day
Maximum daily flow
Peak hourly flow
Air Flotation Tank
Diameter
Water depth
Hydraulic rate
BOD removal, percent
Grease removal, percent
Anaerobic Lagoon
Number of cells
BOD applied, Ibs/day
Design loading, Ibs BOD per day/
1,000 ft
Water depth, ft
Water surface area, acres
BOD removal, percent
Total Lagoon area, acres
Lagoon volume, 1000 ft
Preaeration Tank
Detention, minutes
Volume of air, cfm
Trickling Filter
Number of filters
Diameter, ft
Media depth, ft
Media volume, 1000 fr
5,000
21,500 Ibs/day
170 gal/hog
g50,000 gpd
1,000,000 gpd
1,500,000 gpd
22'-6"
12'-0"
1000 gpm
40
85
2
12,900
15
14
1.64
80
1.97
900
30
100
2
39
22
52.56
10
-------
BOD loading, Ibs per day/1,000 ft3
First stage 98
Second stage 31
Total trickling filter 49
Hydraulic loading, gpm/ft surface area 0.5
Recirculation None
BOD removal, percent (includes final
clarifiers) 91
Final Clarifier (In Parallel)
Number of clarifiers 2
Diameter, ft 26
Water depth, ft 7
Surface settling rate, gpd/ft (average) 800
Weir overflow rate, gpd/lin.ft (average) 6,800
Chlorine Contact
Detention, at avg. daily flow, minutes 49
Max. chlorine dosage capacity, Ibs
Cl2/day 100
Chlorine dosage rate, mg/1 10
Treatment Plant PumpingJFacilities
Trickling filter pumps - variable speed
Filter No. 1:
Number of pumps 2
Rated capacity, gpm 700
Filter No. 2:
Number of pumps 2
Rated capacity, gpm 700
Final clarifier sludge pumps
Number of pumps 2
Rated capacity, gpm 85
11
-------
SECTION V
SAMPLING AND ANALYSES
Originally, the primary purpose of the evaluation program was to
study the performance of the trickling filter system. However, after
the program was begun, sampling stations were added so that the
dissolved air flotation tank and the anaerobic lagoons could be in-
cluded in the analysis of the treatment plant performance. The loca-
tion of all sampling stations is shown in Figure 1. Table 2 shows
the location of sampling stations set up for composite and grab
samples.
Table 2. SAMPLING STATIONS AND PROCEDURE
Sampling station Type of sampling
S-l, Air flotation tank influent Composite
S-2, Air flotation tank effluent Composite
S-3, Anaerobic lagoon influent Composite
S-4, Anaerobic lagoon effluent Grab
S-5, Trickling filter effluent Grab
S-6, Final clarifier effluent Grab
S-7, Chlorine contact tank effluent Grab
S-8, Final clarifier sludge Composite
S-9, Domestic, hog pens, scald tank Composite
The final clairfier sludge was sampled by hand several times through-
out the pumping cycle. These samples were then mixed together to
form a composite.
Three types of automatic samplers were used throughout the program.
They included, (1) a suction-type sampler with 24 bottles for com-
positing, (2) a dip-type sampler which dipped a 10-15 ml sample at
a set interval and (3) a rotating disc-type suction sampler. None
of the samplers worked satisfactorily on the air flotation tank
influent because of the extremely high grease content which con-
tinually caused clogging and the high moisture content in the
12
-------
atmosphere which shorted-out the motors. This problem was eventually
solved by providing a siphon off the flotation tank influent line
which discharged into a 55-gallon barrel. The sample for analysis
was then taken from the barrel after the solution was properly mixed.
All laboratory procedures and analyses were conducted in accordance
8
with Standard Methods . The following analyses were made during the
program:
Dissolved Oxygen Total Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand Fixed Solids
Chemical Oxygen Demand Volatile Solids
pH Chlorine Residual
Temperature Grease
Alkalinity Coliform
Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen Phosphate
Ammonia Nitrogen Sulfate
Nitrite Nitrogen Hydrogen Sulfide
Nitrate Nitrogen
13
-------
SECTION VI
RESULTS
The trickling filter plant was designed to be operated at a constant
flow rate with the anaerobic lagoons acting as equalizing ponds so
that the flow discharged to the trickling filters would be relatively
constant seven days a week. The average daily flow discharged to the
trickling filters during each month is designated as anaerobic lagoon
effluent in Table 3.
From January through July, the flow rate to the trickling filters was
controlled to distribute the flow over a seven day week. In general,
this was done satisfactorily, except on some Sundays when the flow
decreased substantially.
From August through December, a major operational change was made.
It was decided not to have treatment plant personnel present on week-
ends. Therefore, the anaerobic lagoon was not used for flow
equalization and the major part of the flow to the trickling filters
was treated as it came in. Thus, only a minor flow was discharged to
the filters during the weekends. Table 4 shows the daily average
flow to the filters during these two different operational procedures
as compared to the design flow.
Table 4. TRICKLING FILTER FLOWS
a Actual Average
Months _ Design flow _ daily flow
January - July 607,000 gpd 782,050 gpdb
August - December 607,000 gpd 1,142,880 gpdc
Based on the 5-day working week flow being discharged to the
filters over a 7-day period (without sludge recirculation)
Based on raw wastewater flow measurement x 5/7 plus sludge
recirculation
Based on flow during working days only including sludge recircula-
tion
14
-------
Table 3. PLANT FLOWS
(8Pd)
Month
Raw wastes to
anaerobic lagoon
High
Low Average
Final
clarifier
sludge
return
Anaerobic lagoon
a
influent
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
Low
Average
High
Low
Average
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Feb.'
Aug.
Sept
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Aug.
1,085,000 855,000
1,047,000 835,000
1,067,000
1,121,000
813,000
812,000
1,099,000 728,000
1,023,000 842,000
•July Average
1,128,000 976,000
1,094,000 1,007,000
1,091,000 1,017,000
1,103,000 966,000
1,139,000 931,000
-Dec. Average
925,000
960,000
927,000
972,000
961,000
917,000
943,670
1,028,000
1,035,000
1,054,000
1,014,000
1,043,000
1,034,800
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
108,000
1,193,000
1,155,000
1,175,000
1,229,000
1,207,000
1,131,000
963,00
943,000
921,000
920,000
836,000
950,000
1,236,000 1,084,000
1,202,000 1,115,000
1,199,000 1,125,000
1,211,000 1,074,000
1,247,000 1,039,000
1,033,000
1,068,000
1,035,000
1,080,000
1.069,000
1,025,000
1,052,670
1,136,000
1,143,000
1,162,000
1,122,000
1,151,000
1,142,800
1,066,000
1,025,000
1,031,000
1,148,000
1,219,000
541,000 783,000
601,000 778,000
522,000 830,000
696,000 880,000
950,000 1,100,000
874,200
1,510,000 764,000 1,253,000
1,406,000 852,000 1,278,000
1,642,000 1,077,000 1,361,000
1,796,000 866,000 1,296,000
1,796,000 681,000 1,382,000
1,314,000
Average
985,000
1,093,000
1,094,000
a
Flow on working days only (includes recirculation) measured by V-notch weir at station S-3
Flow, including recirculation, measured by Parshall flume ahead of the pre-aeration tank
Anaerobic lagoons were used to equalize 5 day industrial flow over 7-day period Feb.-July.
No flow equalization in anaerobic lagoons Aug.-Dec.
-------
RAW WASTE ORGANIC LOAD
Initially, sampling of the dissolved air flotation tank influent was
not a part of the evaluation program. After the program was begun,
EPA requested that this waste stream be sampled so that the dissolved
air flotation tank could be evaluated. Therefore, data for this
waste stream and the domestic waste stream (Interceptor No. 2) are
available for only the last seven months of the evaluation program.
Table 5 shows the monthly average BOD,, load in the two raw waste
streams. It is evident that the waste characteristics vary consider-
ably from month to month. Approximately 80 percent of the organic
wastes was discharged to the dissolved air flotation tank while the
remaining 20 percent (from Interceptor No. 2) was discharged directly
to the anaerobic lagoons.
OPERATIONAL DATA SUMMARY
Table 6 summarizes the basic operational data for the year. The
production facilities were operated at an average daily kill rate of
3,458 hogs per day, approximately 69 percent of maximum production
rate. The actual waste flow per hog averaged 278 gallons. Table 7
compares the design criteria with the actual 1970 operational data.
Monthly averages of all analytical measurements are given in Appendix
Tables A-l through A-18.
Table 7. SUMMARY OF RAW WASTES
Parameter
BOD5
IBs/day
Ibs/hog
Waste Flows
Gallons per day
Gallons per hog
Design
21,500
4.3
850,000
170
Average of
1970 data
17>716a
4.8a
985,000
278
June - December only
16
-------
Table 5. RAW WASTES BODr
Domestic
(Interceptor no.
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
High,
mg/1
_ _ —
1,224
1,449
3,240
5,133
3,004
2,197
1,052
Low,
mg/1
_ _ _
369
112
411
317
378
308
369
Average,
mg/1
___
769
655
1,260
2,058
1,402
1,362
639
2)
Average,
Ibs/day
_-_
2,609
2,818
4,489
6,949
4,841
4,240
2,095
Dissolved air flotation
tank influent
(Interceptor no. 1)
High,
mg/1
6,795
2,944
3,720
6,336
4,301
2,290
7,558
Low,
mg/1
1,134
943
2,484
1,407
971
1,206
1,125
Average ,
mg/1
__-
3,194
1,771
3,178
3,515
1,768
1,621
3,325
Average,
Ibs/day
___
15,945
8,377
16,592
20,165
9,297
8,315
17,282
Total
Ibs /day
18,554
11,195
21,081
27,114
14,138
12,555
19,377
Monthly average
4,006
13,710 17,716
-------
Table 6. OPERATIONAL DATA
00
— ' " ~~
•
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
Monthly average
Hogs
Head
3,015
3,366
3,216
3,340
3,386
3,382
3,031
3,519
3,876
3,743
4,241
4,149
3,458
===. ,
killed/day
pounds
live weight
692,000
765,000
731,000
763,000
784,000
774,000
674,000
772,000
869,000
865,000
947,000
960,000
800,000
Gallons of
Per head
275
299
278
287
284
303
292
267
282
235
251
278
=======
waste flow
per 1000 Ib
live weight
1,209
1,311
1,215
1,240
1,241
1,364
1,331
1,191
1,220
1,070
1,086
1,224
IT— ' , =
BOD5,
per head
__-
---
_--
5.5
3.7
6.0
7.0
3.8
3.0
4.7
4.8a
Ib
per 1000 Ib
live weight
—
---
---
— — —
«« •»
24.0
16.6
27.3
31.2
16.3
13.3
20.2
21. 3a
June-December only
-------
PERFORMANCE DATA
DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION TANK
This treatment unit is generally considered to be an in-plant recovery
unit. However, analyses were run on the unit from June through
December to determine the performance of the unit. Since it was ex-
tremely difficult to obtain a representative sample of the flotation
tank influent, the results are somewhat limited in value. The main
constituents removed in the flotation tank are BOD, COD, grease, and
solids. The average performance is summarized in Table 8.
Table 8. DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION TANK PERFORMANCE
Influent,
Analysis
BOD5
COD
Grease
Total suspended solids
mg/1
2,624
4,591
1,484
2,223
Effluent,
mg/1
1,762
4,106
559
1,507
Removal,
%
33
11
62
32
ANAEROBIC LAGOONS
The anaerobic lagoons performed well during the test period. Averages
of the data for the more important parameters are shown in Tables 9
and 10. The performance of the lagoons was probably enhanced by the
thick grease cover which acted as an insulator. The minimum tempera-
ture of 60 F in the lagoon contents occurred in December and summer
temperatures varied between 70-75 F (Figure 2). Average influent
wastewater temperature over the test period was 82.9 F and average
lagoon effluent temperature was 69 F.
19
-------
TOO
50
6000
: 4000
2000
ANAEROBK: LAGOON
INFLUENT TEMPERATURE-
EFFLUENT TEMPERATURE
INFLUENT BOD.
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
Figure 2. Monthly pattern of BOD- removal through the anaerobic
lagoon system
20
-------
Table 9. ANAEROBIC LAGOON PERFORMANCE
Analysis
BOD
COD
Grease
Total solids
Volatile solids
Total suspended solids
Organic nitrogen (N)
Ammonia nitrogen (N)
Sulfates
Hydrogen sulfide
pH (units)
Influent,
mg/1
2,635
4,396
485
4,094
2,112
1,402
95.9
67.8
332.0
0.0
6.6
Effluent,
mg/1
477
1,403
106
1,955
663
579
42.1
121.6
38.8
4.6
7.0
Removal,
7o
82
68
78
52
69
59
--
--
88
--
The lagoons performed as expected, removing an average of 82 percent
of the applied BOD- even though the lagoons were loaded much heavier
than design loading. The total applied organic loading averaged
22,186 pounds of BOD,, per day (Table 10). Thus the lagoon loading
3
rate averaged 24.7 pounds of BOD_ per 1,000 ft of lagoon volume.
Figures 3 and 4 show the overall performance of the anaerobic lagoon
system in terms of removal of both BOD,, concentration and load. The
reduction in effluent BOD^ after June was associated with a corres-
ponding reduction in influent BOD- concentration and load (Figures
3 and 4). It can not be determined from the data available whether
this reduced effluent BOD,, concentration was a result of the higher
temperature in the lagoons or the reduced BOD_ load to the lagoons.
The total suspended solids removal of 59 percent was uncommonly low.
However, the actual lagoon detention during the evaluation program
was five days as compared to an expected detention of 7.5 days, based
on design hydraulic flows; and this may have resulted in the lower
removal of suspended solids. As expected, much of the organic
nitrogen was converted to ammonia nitrogen in the lagoons. The pH
remained relatively constant during the year, averaging 7.0.
21
-------
Table 10. ANAEROBIC LAGOON INFLUENT BOD,
N3
TO
Month
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Domestic
High,
mg/1
5,960
3,406
5,265
4,645
2,780
2,130
3,521
4,149
2,265
2,520
2,041
+ air flotation tank effluent
Low,
mg/1
3,836
1,648
2,760
2,986
1,295
1,260
1,370
1,013
818
2,521
1,421
Average,
mg/1
4,868
2,392
3,940
3,830
2,102
1,672
2,176
2,440
1,453
2,386
1,731
Average,
Ib/day
37,554
19,151
30,460
31,048
16,847
12,787
18,656
21,062
12,772
20,178
15,057
Final
clarifier
sludge
return,
Ib/day
770
770
770
770
770
770
770
770
770
770
770
Average
anaerobic lagoon
influent,
Ib/day
38,324
18,921
31,230
31,818
17,617
13,557
19,426
21,832
13,542
20,948
15,827
Average
2,635
21,416
770
22,186
-------
1200
LU
LU
1.
o
o
o
800
400
SLOPE = 0.13
Y
0
R =
143.16
83.84%
JAN.-JUNE- •
JULY 0
AUG.-DEC.- O
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
ANAEROBIC LAGOON INFLUENT BOD, mg/l
6000
Figure 3. BOD,, concentration removal characteristics of the anaerobic
lagoon system
23
-------
8-
o
8
o
2
D
u_
u_
UJ
z
o
o
o
y 2
CD
o
exi
LU
SLOPE = 0.14
Y = 1238.88
R =
81.89%
O
O
o
JAN.-JUNE •
JULY 0
AUG.-DEC.- O
10 20 30 40 50
ANAEROBIC LAGOON INFLUENT BOD, 1000 Ib/doy
Figure 4.
system
BOD,, load removal characteristics of the anaerobic lagoon
-------
Farmland Foods receives its water from the city of Denison, Iowa.
This well water supply contains from 344 to 461 mg/1 of sulfate.
Most of this sulfate was reduced to sulfide in the anaerobic lagoons
and sulfide odors were detected at the lagoon overflow weir and the
preaeration tank. A masking agent injected into the anaerobic effluent
stream for odor control worked well. Sanfac DX-85 was found to be
suitable, but this does not mean that other masking agents would not
have performed as well.
Trickling Filter and Final Clarifier
At the beginning of the study it was determined that both parallel and
series operation would be used to study the effect of both types of
operation on filter performance. However, the trickling filters were
operated in series for most of the study program.
During series operation, the hydraulic loading rate averaged 0.64
2
gpm/ft of surface area on a raw-flow basis, whereas the design
2
hydraulic loading was 0.5 gpm/ft . The annual average performance of
the trickling filter and final clarifier is given in Table 11 while the
month-to-month performance is summarized in Table 12. Figures 5 and 6
are plots of the BOD,, data from all samples collected throughout the
test period. A comparison of effluent vs influent BOD- concentration
and load shows considerable scattering of data (Figures 7-10). Much
of the BOD removal occurred in the final clarifiers. The filters
provided enough aeration of the wastewater that the dissolved oxygen
in the final clarifier effluent averaged 3.9 mg/1 (Table 11).
The correlations shown in Figures 7-10 are not sufficiently accurate
for designing plastic-media trickling filter systems to treat anaerobic
lagoon effluent. They do give evidence of the effect of some of the
problems associated with this study such as highly variable flows and
loads, inconsistent flow to the trickling filters, and sampling and
analytical problems. Additional studies are needed to define more
accurately the treatment characteristics and to develop more accurate
25
-------
design data for these systems.
The data from the limited nitrate analysis were quite variable; but,
as indicated in Table 11, some nitrification appeared to occur in
the filters. Somedenitrification also occurred in the final clarifier
and may have contributed to problems experienced with floating sludge.
The preaeration-filter-settling system removed 100 percent of the
hydrogen sulfide present but did not remove any phosphates, with
approximately 47 mg/1 being discharged in the final clarifier
effluent (Table 11).
Table 11. TRICKLING FILTER PERFORMANCE
Analysis
Dissolved Oxygen
BOD
COD
Grease
Volatile Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Organic Nitrogen (N)
Ammonia Nitrogen (N)
Nitrate Nitrogen (N)
Sulfates
Hydrogen Sulfide
Total Phosphates
Trickling
filter
influent,
mg/1
0
477
1,403
106
663
418
579
42.1
121.6
9.3
38.8
4.6
47
Trickling
filter
effluent,
mg/1
2.3
296
1,010
73
706
443
602
41.1
103.2
25.2
64.3
0.2
47
Final
clarifier
effluent,
mg/1
3.9
124
372
33
354
83
108
21.3
100.0
15.1
63.7
0
42
Total
removal,
%
—
74
73
69
47
80
80
49
18
--
--
100
11
The 74% BOD- removal in the trickling filter system was lower than the
anticipated removal of approximately 90% of the applied organic load-
ing. The design organic loading was 2,580 pounds BOD5 per day, where-
as the actual average organic loading was 3,637 pounds BOD,, per day
of operation during the test year. This resulted in an overall load-
3
ing rate of 70 pounds of BOD- per day per 1,000 ft of filter media
3
as compared to the 49 pounds per day per 1,000 ft used for design.
26
-------
Table 12. BOD5 CHANGES THROUGH TRICKLING FILTER SYSTEM
ho
FloW «£J-
rate, influent BOD,
Month
Jan..
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
0
mg/ 1 m'g/ 1 Ib / day
-..
0.769
0.794
0.770
0.802
0.794
0.763
1.136
1.143
1.162
1.122
1.151
a
Loading on days
--
765
543
604
732
407
305
424
502
284
343
347
477
having
--
4906
3596
3879
4896
2695
1941
4017
4781
2752
3210
3331
3637
flow to
Trickling
filter
effluent BOD,
mg/1 lb/daya
120
150
506
506
461
329
327
476
398
286
298
318
296
trickling
--
962
3351
3249
3084
2179
2081
4510
3794
2772
2789
3053
2893
filters
Final
clarifier
effluent BOD,
mg/1
108
133
129
152
129
160
115
113
125
86
124
89
124
-i _ j
lb/daya
__
733
738
839
747
915
732
969
1079
756
1049
774
848
Chlorine
contact
effluent BOD.
mg/1
44
44
76
61
87
41
74
78
81
29
30
81
61
lb/daya
__
243
435
337
504
235
404
669
699
255
254
705
431
0.108 mgd
-------
100
I 50
800
600
400
200
TRICKLING FILTER
INFLUENT TEMPERATURE
•- EFFLUENT TEMPERATURE
^•INFLUENT BOD
EFFLUENT BOD
1 L
1
L I
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
Figure 5. Monthly pattern of BOD removal through the plastic media
trickling filters (without final settling)
28
-------
OC
LU
o-
O
to
100
50
800
600
400
200
0
TRICKLING FILTER + FINAL CLARIFIER
CHLORINE CONTACT TANK
INFLUENT TEMPERATURE
CLARIFIER EFFLUENT TEMPERATURE
CLARIFIER EFFLUENT
BOD
CHLORINE CONTACT
TANK EFFLUENT
"BOD /v
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
Figure 6. Monthly pattern of BOD removal through the plastic media
trickling filter and final clarifier and after chlorination
29
-------
I
g 600
ut
D
£ 400
Z 200
- R
SLOPE = 0.41
70.30
50.74%
YQ = 170.30
JAN.-JUNE- •
JULY 0
AUG.-DEC.- O
i
200 400 600 800
TRICKLING FILTER INFLUENT BOD, mg/l
1000
Figure 7. BOD- concentration removal characteristics of the plastic
media trickling filters (without final settling)
30
-------
YQ = 1126.92
JAN.-JUNE •
JULY 0
AUG.-DEC.- O
1 2 3 45
TRICKLING FILTER INFLUENT BOD, 1000 Ib/doy
Figure 8. BOD5 load removal characteristics of the plastic media
trickling filters (without final settling)
31
-------
0
O
CD
LU
300
t 200
HJ
U 100
SLOPE = 0.13
Y
0
R =
48.57
62.97%
JAN.-JUNE- •
JULY 0
AUG.-DEC.- O
0
O
0
O
O
O
I
\
200 400 600 800
TRICKLING FILTER INFLUENT BOD, mg/1
1000
Figure 9. BOD5 concentration removal characteristics of the plastic
media trickling filter - final clarifier system
32
-------
5
8 1500
Ul
D
11000
< 500
z
"- 0
SLOPE = 0.10
Y "= 396.03
R =
51.61%
JAN.-JUNE- •
JULY 0
AUG.-DEC.- O
0 O
0 o
1
I
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
TRICKLING FILTER INFLUENT BOD, Ib/doy
Figure 10. BOD,, load removal characteristics of the plastic media
trickling filter -final clarifier system
33
-------
This trickling filter performance agreed fairly close with the theore-
tical efficiencies derived by the equations presented in section III
when using the following average annual design factors:
K = 0.04 (assumed in plant design stage)
D = 22.0 ft. 2
Q = 0.56 gpm/ft (based on average flow rate of 985,000 gpd)
n = 1/2 (assumed in plant design stage)
T = 16°C (Average annual trickling filter effluent temperature)
Based on these criteria, the trickling filter BOD removal was deter-
mined to be 69 percent by the Dow Chemical Company equation, 64 percent
by the B. F. Goodrich equation, and 75 percent by the standard curves
developed by Ethyl Corporation.
These comparisons indicate that the treatability factor, K, is slightly
greater than the 0.04 used in the original design. Rearranging the
Germain and the Schulze equations and solving for K, gives averages of
0.046 and 0.053 respectively.
The suspended solids concentration in the final clarifier effluent
averaged 108 mg/1 during the evaluation program. Further reduction
of suspended solids and BOD within the clarifiers would be extremely
difficult to obtain at such high hydraulic loading rates unless
chemical coagulation facilities were added ahead of the clarifiers.
Another factor which may have affected the settling characteristics
of the solids was the grease concentration in the trickling filter
effluent. The filter effluent averaged 73 mg/1 of grease. It is
possible that the grease adhered to the solids and changed their
specific gravity creating a light sludge with poor sludge settling
characteristics. Flotation of solids and grease was apparent in the
basins. Although skimming was provided on the final clarifiers,
considerable solids were discharged in the effluent.
Table 13 shows the average pounds of suspended solids per day in the
trickling filter and final clarifier influent and effluent streams.
34
-------
Table 13. SUSPENDED SOLIDS ANALYSIS THROUGH TRICKLING FILTER SYSTEM
LO
Ol
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flow
rate ,
mgd
—
0.769
0.794
0.770
0.802
0.794
0.763
1.136
1.143
1.162
1.122
1.151
• • •— — • — ••••
Trickling
filter
influent SS,
mg/1
399
326
354
353
434
463
494
691
954
728
837
911
579
Ib/day
_-
2091
2344
2267
2903
3066
3144
5763
9094
7055
7832
8745
4937
-=
Trickling
filter
effluent SS,
mg/1
284
546
589
386
445
477
433
771
771
794
731
1008
602
Ib/day
• M
3502
3900
2479
2976
3159
2755
7305
7350
7695
6840
9676
5240
-
Final
clarifier
effluent SS.
mg/1
122
115
116
77
73
57
123
77
102
82
159
186
108
Ib/day
634
664
425
423
326
672
660
880
721
1345
1618
761
Flow adjusted for operating days only including sludge recirculation
rate of 0.108 mgd
-------
The average suspended solids loading discharged to the filters was
4,937 pounds per day, whereas the total pounds of suspended solids
removed as sludge and discharged in the clarifier effluent averaged
5,240 pounds per day, for a net gain in suspended solids of 303
pounds per day. This increase in solids, no doubt, was a result of
bacterial cells synthesized from the soluble BOD and sulfides in the
influent to the trickling filter system. This synthesis also would
account for the high degree of BOD,, removal in the final clarifiers,
as compared to the trickling filter, where the major biological re-
action was synthesis and not oxidation. Lower organic loadings to
the trickling filters should have permitted more oxidation in the
filters and, therefore, a greater BOD removal efficiency might have
occurred.
Parallel operation was tried several times with very poor results. The
recommended minimum hydraulic loading to keep solids from accumulating
2
in excessive amounts in the filters was 0.25 gpm/ft . The highest
loadings that were attained when parallel operation was attempted
2
ranged from 0.16 to 0.19 gpm/ft . B. F. Goodrich engineers indicated
that this was insufficient hydraulic loading to accomplish the neces-
sary treatment. The overall results when parallel operation was used
was a very highly colored brownish effluent to the clarifiers with a
high suspended solids content which carried over to the chlorine
contact tank.
In theory, series operation would provide better efficiency for a
given wastewater since two filters in series would represent essential-
ly a doubling of height on a single filter; and Equation 2 indicates
efficiency increases directly with increased height but only by the
square root of the fractional decrease in hydraulic loading.
36
-------
Chlorine Contact Basin
The chlorine contact basin was designed for disinfection of the final
effluent. However, the analyses show that some BOD and suspended
solids were also removed in the chlorine contact basin (Figure 6,
Table 14).
Table 14. CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN PERFOKMANCE
Analysis
BOD5
COD
Grease
Volatile Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Chlorine, total
Coliforms (per 100 ml)
Basin
influent,
mg/1
124
372
33
354
83
108
7.7
23,800,000
Basin
effluent,
mg/1
61
371
17
348
68
90
1.3
1,276
Removal,
%
51
0
49
2
18
17
—
99.99
Except Coliforms
In studying the BOD,- and COD data for the chlorine contact basin
(Table 14), it appeared that the chlorine affected the BOD test of the
final effluent even though the proper procedure for dechlorination was
g
followed in accordance with Standard Methods . Since 7.7 mg/1 of chlorine
cannot oxidize 63 mg/1 of BOD, other biological or physical actions may
have been the cause. The volatile suspended solids removal through the
chlorine contact tank averaged 15 mg/1. Therefore, since the BOD_
of volatile suspended solids is normally less than 1.0 mg BOD5/mg VSS
it was calculated that approximately 20 mg/1 of BOD was removed by
settling in the chlorine contact basin. This was evident by the need
to clean the basin periodically.
37
-------
Table 15 gives the monthly chlorine usage and coliform destruction
through the chlorine contact basin. Excellent disinfection was
accomplished during the year. With such high ammonia nitrogen concen-
trations in the waste stream, it is expected that the majority of the
chlorine was immediately tied up as combined chlorine.
Summary of Treatment Plant Performance
Table 16 summarizes the average efficiency of each plant unit.
38
-------
Table 15. CHLORINE USAGE AND COLIFOEM REDUCTION
Chlorine contact
tank influent
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Chlorine,
Ibs/day
50
50
44
50
50
60
50
70
60
90
70
70
60
Chlorine,
mg/1
9.1
8.0
8.5
7.9
7.3
7.5
6.3
8.7
7.2
6.7
7.7
Chlorine contact tank
effluent
Free
chlorine,
mg/1
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
Combined
chlorine,
mg/1
3.2
0.8
0.2
0.3
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
2.7
1.1
Total
chlorine,
mg/1
3.9
1.3
0.6
0.4
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.9
2.8
1.3
Coliforms/ 100ml
Chlorine
contact tank
influent
22,200,000
34,000,000
17,700,00
35,200,000
12,300,000
21,200,000
...
23,800,000
Chlorine
contact tank
effluent
65
125
836
4,500
767
1,360
1,276
-------
Table 16. SUMMARY OF PROCESS EFFICIENCY
BODs removal COD removal Grease removal Suspended solids Coliform removal
efficiency, efficiency, efficiency, removal efficiency, efficiency,
Unit
Dissolved air
flotation
^Ugo"0
Trickling
filters
Chlorine
contact
Unit
33
82
74
51
Total
33
87.9
96.9
98.5
Unit
11
68
73
0
Total
11
71.5
92.3
92.3
Unit
62
78
69
49
Total
62
91.6
97.4
98.7
Unit
32
59
80
17
Total Unit
32
72.1
94.4
95.4 99.99
-------
SECTION VII
COSTS
Operating expenses were recorded for all treatment units with the
exception of the dissolved air flotation tank. Since the primary
purpose of the flotation tank is to recover a saleable product,
grease, it is considered to be an in-plant recovery unit and not a
treatment unit. Operating expenses include personnel salaries,
utilities, chemicals, repairs, and debt service. Table 17 summarizes
the annual operating expenses for 1970.
Table 17. ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES, 1970
Item Cost
Salaries $ 47,893
Utilities 1,443
Operating and maintenance 10,412
Subtotal $ 59,748
Debt service 50,900
Total $110,648
The debt service was based on the entire construction cost of $644,000
amortized over a 30-year period at 6 1/2 percent interest.
The daily operating expense was $303 per day. Table 18 shows the
total operating expenses based on different parameters.
Table 18. OPERATING EXPENSES, 1970
Item Cost
Per hog killed (at 900,000 head/yr) 0.123
Per 1,000 Ibs live wt.(at 230 Ib/head) 0.535
Per Ib BOD5 to treatment (at 3.2 Ib BOD,./head) 0.038
Per 1,000 gallons of raw wastes(at 278"gal/head) 0.442
41
-------
During the latter part of 1970, Farmland Foods, Inc. reduced their
personnel at the treatment facilities. This significantly reduced
their annual operating expenses but should not have affected the
plant operation. Table 19 shows the operating expenses projected
after this change in operation.
Table 19. ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES, 1971
Item Cost
Salaries $ 10,500
Utilities 1,500
Maintenance 300
Operating 8,100
Subtotal $ 20,400
Debt service 50,900
Total $ 71,300
Table 20 shows the estimated expenses for 1971, based on the same
parameters as shown in Table 18. These figures are based on the
assumption that the kill rate, waste flow and organic concentration
of the waste stream were similar to the 1970 averages.
Table 20. ESTIMATED OPERATING EXPENSES, 1971
Item Cost
Per hog killed (at 900,000 head/ yr) $0.079
Per 1,000 Ibs. live wt. (at 230 Ib/head) 0.344
Per Ib. BOD5 to treatment (at 3.2 Ib BOD5/head) 0.025
Per 1,000 gallons of raw wastes (at 278 gal./head) 0.285
42
-------
SECTION IX
REFERENCES
1. Frederick, R. A, Meat Packing Waste Treatment Lagoons Report,
Presented at the 49th Annual Conference, Iowa Water Pollution
Control Association (1967)
2. Wymore, A. H. and J. E. White, Treatment of a Slaughterhouse
Waste Using Anaerobic and Aerated Lagoons, Proceedings, 23rd
Waste Conf., Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind., pp. 601-618,
(1968); and Water and Sewage Works, 115, 10, pp. 492-498 (1968)
3. Enders, K. E., M. J. Hammer and C. L. Weber, Field Studies on an
Anaerobic Lagoon Treating Slaughterhouse Wastes, Proceedings,
Industrial Waste Conf., Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind., pp.
126-137 (1967)
4. Rollag, D. A. and J. N. Dornbush, Anaerobic Stabilization Pond
Treatment of Meat Packing Wastes, Proceedings, 21st Industrial
Waste Conf., Purdue Unitersity, Lafayette, Ind., pp. 768-782 (1966)
5. Germain, J. E., Economical Treatment of Domestic Waste by Plastic-
Medium Trickling Filters, Journal Water Pollution Control Federa-
tion, 38, 2, pp. 192-203 (1966)
6. B. F. Goodrich Co., Industrial Products Division, Akron, Ohio,
44318
7. Ethyl Corporation, Commercial Development Division, Baton Rouge,
La., 70801
8. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,
Twelfth Edition, American Public Health Association, Inc.
New York (1965)
43
-------
SECTION IX
APPENDIX
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
A-l.
A- 2.
A-3.
A-4.
A-5.
A-6.
A- 7.
A-8.
A- 9.
A- 10.
A-ll.
A- 12.
A- 13.
A- 14.
A- 15.
A- 16.
A- 17.
A- 18.
Dissolved Oxygen
COD
Grease
Total Solids
Total Volatile Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Total Dissolved Solids
Organic Nitrogen
Ammonia Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Phosphates
PH
Total Alkalinity
Sulfates and Hydrogen Sulfide
Chlorides
45
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
71
73
75
76
44
-------
Table A-l. DISSOLVED OXYGEN
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Low
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Average
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Trickling filter
effluent
High
5.6
6.3
5.5
2.0
2.4
2.5
2.2
2.0
3.6
3.1
4.1
4.4
Low
4.2
4.5
3.5
0
0.5
0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
1.2
1.8
Average
4.9
4.9
4.1
0.3
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.1
1.5
2.2
2.8
2.3
Final clarifier
effluent
High
6.0
5.8
6.4'
6.0
3.9
5.3
3.8
4.5
5.2
5.8
5.6
6.3
Low
1.7
3.1
3.3
0.6
0.2
1.4
1.5
2.5
0.6
2.9
1.0
5.6
Average
3.8
4.1
5.0
3.7
2.5
3.3
2.7
3.9
3.3
4.4
4.4
5.8
3.9
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
7.7
8.3
7.7
7.8
6.9
7.4
7.0
6.3
7.2
7.1
7.4
5.7
Low
5.3
6.9
6.7
5.8
3.9
3.9
4.9
2.1
3.8
5.0
4.2
3.7
Average
6.7
7.5
7.3
6.8
5.3
5.7
6.1
5.6
5.7
6.2
6.3
4.8
6.2
-------
Table A-2.
(tng/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
influent3
Hi«h
6795
2944
3720
6336
4301
2290
7558
Low
1134
943
2484
1407
971
1206
1125
Average
3194
1771
3178
3515
1768
1621
3325
2624
Flotation cell
effluent
High
4652
3933
2502
4248
3493
2693
2755
Low
1602
758
1482
1018
449
711
1176
Average
2287
1637
1841
2224
1415
1012
1916
1762
Domestic
High
1224
1449
3240
5133
3004
2197
1052
Low (Average
369
112
411
317
378
308
369
*•••••••
•• w **
769
655
1260
2058
1402
1362
639
1164
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
5960
3406
5265
4645
2780
2130
3521
4149
2265
2520
2041
3836
1648
2760
2986
1295
1260
1370
1013
818
2251
1421
4868
2392
3940
3830
2102
1672
2176
2440
1453
2386
1731
2635
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-2 (continued). BOD,.
(mg/D
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
HiRh
930
678
756
834
506
396
621
1092
411
387
368
___
646
460
414
584
345
253
297
271
149
300
326
Average
765
543
604
732
407
305
424
502
284
343
347
477
Trickling filter
effluent
High
172
210
599
707
537
485
436
514
703
468
340
361
Low
85
115
70
196
312
125
223
301
187
147
158
267
Average
120
150
506
506
461
329
327
476
398
286
298
318
296
Final clarifier
effluent
High
153
161
157
177
183
168
182
139
249
148
220
152
Low
71
109
98
113
93
152
53
96
44
43
83
64
Average
108
133
129
152
129
160
115
113
125
86
124
89
124
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
72
52
92
94
181
35
132
121
213
57
40
104
Low
29
36
47
28
36
46
30
19
13
16
17
65
Average
44
44
76
61
87
41
74
78
81
29
30
81
61
-------
Table A-3. COD
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
influent®
High
«•••••
•»«»*•
8108
8019
9818
10,097
4811
Low
" M M •*
•»«•*•
... .
2623
1502
1794
1479
1909
...
—
Average
...
...
5426
2825
5085
6029
3590
—
4591
Flotation cell
effluent
High
9588
6147
9869
7926
9644
.-—
—
Low
MMM
•*«*••
M •* M
490
818
1444
1714
1707
—
Average
5065
3959
3707
3957
3840
—
4106
Domestic
High
•»••••
2473
5544
3198
1972
4542
9901
6358
---
—
Low
534
167
328
283
525
476
354
...
--.-
Average
--- .
1348
2077
1863
1160
1928
3616
2408
. .._ •
2057
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
7810
9501
6271
4535
7042
7162
6390
Low
« M> ••
...
• •» •
3383
4446
1745
1000
1337
1281
1650
.„.
Average
5460
7625
3903
3169
3146
3898
3576
4396
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-3 (continued). COD
(mg/D
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
2765
2500
2623
1147
1488
1774
1623
Low
756
538
624
361
615
840
981
—
verage
...
—
1907
1519
1788
846
1112
1275
1374
...
1403
Trickling filter
effluent
High
___
1943
1630
1247
1080
1498
1285
1448
Low
707
323
811
229
195
360
673
verage
_—
1153
1123
938
741
943
982
1193
__-
—
1010
Final clarifier
effluent
High
896
978
802
472
553
427
364
Low
__-
356
215
328
94
91
80
158
Average
—
_--
678
429
602
234
285
379
284
_--
___
372
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
885
669
846
318
553
491
374
---
...
Low
---
297
108
309
94
163
40
119
— — —
---
Average
•
___
---
565
411
588
192
282
275
283
___
___
371
-------
Table A-4. GREASE
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
Q
influent
High
...
...
2623
7006
1257
15924
1658
Low
-...
245
221
203
201
234
—
Average
...
mm** mm
••**•••
«••*••
849
1455
756
3613
746
...
1484
Flotation cell
effluent
High
...
—
1145
1456
1670
1156
690
—
—
Low
—
...
—
192
39
80
402
92
—
...
Average
...
517
552
447
812
469
—
559
Domestic
High
759
213
1146
128
596
1193
5540
3818
Low
54
34
41
25
25
33
37
54
...
Average
...
—
219
71
306
81
144
287
1183
640
366
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
326
521
675
923
3167
825
2152
1024
Low
132
97
132
122
26
76
311
82
Average
...
194
219
327
383
967
366
920
511
,
485
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table AZ4 (continued). GREASE
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
152
166
185
138
241
224
400
179
162
168
••
Low
88
107
106
30
45
53
39
35
59
32
—
Average
136
136
137
83
111
93
112
87
102
98
106
Trickling filter
effluent
High
72
102
80
93
241
138
107
299
171
180
Low
6
28
32
29
62
41
23
13
31
41
—
—
Average
29
51
61
68
104
76
85
93
74
93
73
Final clarifier
effluent
High
87
30
45
28
136
35
321
275
92
92
Low
6
13
3
8
0
7
4
1
0
0
Average
30
20
26
15
30
17
82
50
13
46
33
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
58
24
30
30
55
63
81
115
26
58
Low
10
12
3
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
Average
22
16
9
15
15
21
42
41
12
22
.
17
-------
Table A-5. TOTAL SOLIDS
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
a
influent
HiRh
—
_.-
...
5933
12107
6089
25619
9646
6031
9484
Low
...
2204
1421
2425
1448
1906
2137
3193
Average
...
...
...
...
2862
4389
3682
7558
3968
4381
5574
4630
Flotation cell
effluent
HiRh
.-.
5901
25488
23517
6454
10425
4836
17081
Low
^** ••
•»« ••
881
2778
2379
2474
2460
1971
2420
Average
3353
6355
5711
3409
4572
4265
5432
4728
Domestic
High
2716
3515
5015
20176
5931
5860
3477
8983
4566
8789
1800
Low
1259
917
883
943
603
978
864
1086
952
1476
1217
Average
—
1813
2020
2346
1728
1197
1192
1864
2809
2578
4168
1484
1895
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
HiRh
6247
8084
8909
46405
4058
3704
5986
4661
7669
4917
3372
Low
2896
2574
2484
2378
1980
2016
2329
2497
2280
2220
2014
Average
3889
3994
4855
9581
3625
2884
3280
3096
3611
3497
2722
4094
a
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-5 (continued). TOTAL SOLIDS
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
1711
1774
1969
2096
2094
2546
1879
1992
2321
2552
2218
2826
Low
1223
1608
1490
1723
1738
1721
1609
1722
1324
1347
1894
1915
Average
1580
1669
1775
1820
1961
2331
1748
1850
2212
2101
2115
2301
1955
Trickling filter
effluent
High
1564
4969
5659
2024
2087
2533
1966
2436
2450
2587
2323
3297
Low
1162
1574
1430
1542
1698
1853
1688
1681
1863
1922
1858
1867
Average
1486
2023
1998
1857
1944
2272
1776
1941
2168
2259
2142
2427
2024
Final clarifier
effluent
High
1424
1536
1631
1669
1630
2136
1594
1461
1685
1637
1689
1928
Low
1011
1442
1287
1441
1437
1365
1388
1246
1352
1426
1467
1382
Average
1342
1494
1530
1544
1613
1685
1466
1379
1521
1552
1584
1592
1525
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
1386
1544
1613
1707
1608
2144
1503
1471
1595
1630
1664
1691
Low
1004
1428
1301
1155
1447
1387
1394
1256
1228
1473
1456
1350
Average
1335
1468
1487
1543
1603
1673
1429
1386
1504
1557
1548
1556
1393
-------
Table A-6. TOTAL VOLATILE SOLIDS
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
influent
HlRh
...
1922
1663
5599
18870
3553
5086
3027
Low
«••»••
M •* W
1313
588
1641
611
753
1221
1762
Average
...
—
•••»••
1786
2830
2711
5453
1616
2388
2942
2818
Flotation cell
effluent
High
-__
1908
23307
21451
5220
8672
3536
15340
Low
— _
— _
—
...
905
986
930
858
590
1122
1166
Average
...
1312
4900
4124
1679
2577
2622
3851
3009
Domestic
High
1534
2266
3632
1630
879
1375
2584
6769
3153
6846
2835
Low
608
397
359
477
212
381
441
543
392
695
551
Average
--_
707
1131
1406
1204
564
541
1147
1449
1474
2372
810
1164
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
3526
4302
7287
3749
2539
2457
4054
3327
6145
3814
2302
Low
...
1353
1134
849
1527
987
1341
1077
763
740
1478
973
Average
2143
2434
2324
2287
1638
1806
2089
1801
2272
2394
1553
2112
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-6 (continued). TOTAL VOLATILE SOLIDS
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
HiBh
632
557
618
666
755
728
640
770
1585
1001
873
1144
L
Low
442
388
456
458
549
544
487
594
611
214
679
678
Average
551
509
533
533
627
628
576
682
843
746
812
925
663
Trickling filter
effluent
HiRh
534
3398
4088
666
755
594
734
1056
1585
1055
988
1294
Low
225
327
370
295
549
485
488
613
789
692
680
687
Average
462
739
694
560
610
560
458
744
899
885
845
1017
706
Final clarifier
effluent
HiEh
451
418
446
343
303
308
505
438
544
487
512
675
Low
242
284
252
219
266
285
239
280
330
339
373
325
Average
342
337
299
288
321
265
378
350
434
390
451
397
354
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
HiRh
382
389
295
392
404
340
427
477
517
495
491
479
Low
94
244
191
150
275
230
235
302
321
355
265
265
Averaee
325
323
283
297
316
273
353
367
437
402
435
373
348
-------
Table A-7. TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
kverage
Flotation cell
. r., a
influent
High
3449
8618
5133
18305
2893
4231
6920
Low
195
347
757
464
434
392
644
Average
— -
...
2051
2055
2104
4832
1037
1360
2120
2223
Flotation cell
effluent
High
...
3590
3080
1773
3982
3053
2471
2818
Low
...
413
551
615
552
145
485
481
Average
...
—
1360
1682
1225
1685
1628
1282
1687
1507
Domestic
High
499
2571
3631
19178
2168
331
2478
4968
3052
6456
805
Low
__- .
85
154
121
162
116
205
189
294
145
366
219
Average
_-_
270
945
819
2402
613
219
883
1351
1762
2148
426
1076
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
-__
1148
5913
4007
4022
2168
2306
2278
1953
3366
2057
1652
Low
___
175
440
277
701
486
604
738
398
912
679
454
Average
539
2115
1637
2190
1370
1197
1363
1147
1425
1419
. 1019
1402
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-7 (continued). TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
\verage
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
535
543
510
564
1345
611
655
931
2110
1079
1201
1193
Low
188
181
198
219
379
215
384
564
503
429
666
591
Average
399
326
354
353
434
463
494
691
954
728
837
911
579
Trickling filter
effluent
High
516
3677
4394
804
606
661
616
1140
1184
1079
867
1958
Low
168
71
155
105
124
301
363
468
369
547
646
410
Average
284
546
589
386
445
477
433
771
771
794
731
1008
602
Final clarifier
effluent
High
208
210
472
118
337
126
230
119
244
180
386
691
Low
15
38
57
44
20
18
45
48
64
21
98
67
Average
122
155
116
77
73
57
123
77
102
82
159
186
108
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
353
157
132
161
161
326
165
138
256
145
135
286
Low
16
29
31
34
22
47
20
43
19
24
41
49
Average
103
75
85
70
75
90
81
80
106
61
116
140
90
-------
Table A-8. VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS
(tag/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
a
influent
HiRh
1891
5157
5159
17901
2173
4179
6847
Low
---
...
658
363
692
502
369
365
596
Average
*•«••*
•••*••
...
.._
1121
2258
2192
4660
866
1521
2056
2096
Flotation cell
effluent
High
*» f»«M
••••*•
-..
» •»*•
1103
22708
18831
3524
4379
2756
14371
Low
*• « M»
•
••«••§
421
543
558
361
662
621
147
Average
—
705
4155
3815
926
1316
1724
3007
2235
b
Domestic
High
570
1940
2869
1240
294
284
2263
5861
2455
6073
1562
Low
---
68
111
104
298
46
105
142
212
761
207
147
Average
190
768
609
729
176
224
798
848
942
1273
542
645
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
1074
4552
2716
2853
1693
2190
1865
1586
3072
1962
1562
Low
--_
91
317
300
845
450
601
702
313
454
421
342
Average
441
1676
1364
1736
927
1105
1199
887
1229
996
729
1117
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-8 (continued). VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct..
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
435
499
420
447
426
494
530
605
1349
787
639
940
Low
199
89
217
216
269
296
320
329
540
246
456
627
Average
315
278
303
294
199
398
409
481
617
452
571
701
418
Trickling filter
effluent
High
321
1376
3876
694
417
439
501
756
852
813
627
956
Low
142
116
153
59
312
209
263
359
247
373
442
404
Average
252
328
512
328
342
347
338
482
564
564
530
737
443
Final clarifier
effluent
High
194
168
258
145
92
130
224
95
171
180
254
503
Low
20
6
50
18
60
59
18
8
15
33
63
4
Average
149
99
90
64
67
22
112
65
61
83
120
59
83
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
121
151
121
107
127
103
159
105
190
180
188
198
Low
4
10
24
8
11
13
6
29
58
30
13
19
Average
76
66
75
53
56
57
73
59
73
42
87
93
68
-------
Table A-9. TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
(ng/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
a
influent
High
•• M ••
•• «• —
3460
3489
2455
7254
8807
8870
8870
Low
...
1159
1178
956
979
1407
1635
2096
Average
...
—
.--
2022
2008
2262
2639
3042
2739
3462
2622
Flotation cell
effluent
High
...
4667
2717
3820
3688
5804
3451
2733
Low
...
— -
1784
1494
1042
1907
1288
1476
2000
Average
2777
2077
2179
2439
3169
2456
2316
2488
. b
Domestic
High
2737
1849
3545
2140
2935
4639
1137
3970
1642
3886
1387
Low
989
763
762
596
1872
676
662
785
957
924
801
Average
1617
1052
1513
1185
2360
1330
986
1567
1254
2191
1057
1467
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
5099
2911
8155
3949
2935
2262
3711
2703
4305
3240
1986
Low
1190
1417
1746
1180
1494
1306
1314
1531
1622
1255
1142
Average
3153
2083
3440
2241
2287
1679
1998
1959
2374
2397
1496
2130
-------
Table A-9 (continued). TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
Hieh
1317
1449
1719
1638
1615
2105
1340
1287
1312
1480
1403
1487
Low
927
1188
1192
1399
1374
1414
1188
781
1196
1297
1003
1271
Average
1181
1343
1421
1467
1527
1868
1254
1158
1258
1373
1278
1390
1377
Trickling filter
effluent
High
1325
1492
1546
1596
1574
2117
1445
1394
1529
1548
1529
1589
Low
766
1292
1192
1376
1292
1392
1213
1167
1248
1375
1208
1249
Average
1202
1392
1409
1471
1499
1795
1343
1269
1397
1465
'l411
1419
1422
Final clarifier
effluent
High
1342
1463
1524
1601
1655
2081
1375
1386
1495
1593
1587
1576
Low
960
1342
1314
1393
1329
1372
1315
1193
1337
1376
1226
1237
Average
1093
1379
1414
1467
1540
1628
1343
1300
1419
1496
1425
1492
1416
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
1330
1457
1536
1605
1609
2079
1376
1397
1547
1570
1598
1576
Low
754
1163
1312
1389
1346
1373
1228
1213
1308
1398
1181
1234
Average
1232
1393
1402
1473
1528
1583
1348
1306
1398
1496
1432
, 1416
1417
-------
Table A-10. ORGANIC NITROGEN
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
Influent*
HiRh
—
63.0
151.0
126.0
103.0
47.3
Low
63.0
87.0
15.0
90.0
47.3
...
Average
63.0
76.2
56.0
96.5
47.3
...
67.0
Flotation cell
effluent
High
...
151.0
95.0
276.0
Low
___
—
M Ml ••
...
16.0
20.0
78.0
—
Average
...
-—
92.2
79.0
177.0
117.0
Domestic
High
109.2
952.0
123.0
182.0
199.0
95.0
142.0
80.0
Low
... .
75.6
33.6
44.8
53.0
11.0
64.0
31.0
80.0
Average
110.2
48.1
65.5
147.7
94.7
65.0
71.6
80.0
80.8
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
___
85.4
125.0
135.7
195.0
162.0
95.0
228.0
Low
___
75.6
28.0
77.8
142.1
72.8
35.0
67.0
—
Average
-_-
80.5
86.1
106.8
159.7
108.6
71.6
147.5
.
95.9
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-10 (continued). ORGANIC NITROGEN
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
50.4
36.2
33.6
38.0
76.0
148.0
159.0
146.0
59.0
Low
56.0
25.2
25.2
22 A
34.0
39.0
28.0
39.0
59.0
Average
25.2
39.9
30.8
27.9
44.9
63.0
40.0
48.6
59.0
__..
42.1
Trickling filter
effluent
High
39.2
36.4
33.6
70.0
62.0
67.0
45.0
40.0
53.0
Low
8.4
19.6
22.4
25.2
31.0
45.0
34.0
26.0
47.0
Average
27.8
28.5
34.9
41.0
45.0
54.4
38.0
38.6
62.0
41.1
Final clarifier
effluent
High
58.8
28.0
25.9
37.1
29.0
28.0
22.0
18.0
Low
12.6
14.0
14.8
13.6
9.0
14.0
11.0
17.0
Average
23.8
22.8
21.9
24.3
21.7
24.3
17.6
17.0
21.3
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
50.4
30.8
25.2
25.2
29.0
25.0
17.0
17.0
Low
11.2
19.6
16.8
19.6
5.0
14.0
11.0
12.0
Average
21.8
24.4
20.8
21.7
19.4
22.7
16.1
15.3
20.2
-------
Table A-11. AMMONIA NITROGEN
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
3
influent
Hieh
_—
28.0
58.0
80.0
7.0
2.0
___
Low
28.0
3.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
_._
Average
—
28.0
20.0
46.0
4.0
2.0
—
20.0
Flotation cell
effluent
Hieh
___
—
—
53.0
100.0
7.0
2.0
__-
Low
...
12.0
4.0
2.0
2.0
___
Average
-._
29.0
60.0
2.3
2.0
23.3
Domestic
Hieh
___
54.9
57.7
38.7
58.0
61.0
114.0
47.0
7.0
—
-._
Low
... •
29.7
4.4
10.7
13.0
15.0
13.0
33.0
7.0
—
—
—
Average
...
47.4
25.7
20.8
37.2
36.0
71.0
40.3
7.0
—
35.6
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
Hieh
...
52.1
62.4
45.9
72.0
68.0
110.0
26.0
33.0
Low
...
51.7
4.9
36.4
42.1
5.2
7.2
16.0
33.0
—
\veraee
...
51.9
29.9
41.1
55.5
44.3
65.6
19.0
33.0
—
. —
42.5
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-11 (continued). AMMONIA NITROGEN
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
124.9
122.1
110.9
122.1
136.0
184.0
181.0
131.0
150.0
„_.
Low
91.3
99.0
94.6
110.8
94.0
53.0
75.0
123.0
150.0
—
Average
113.3
112.8
105.8 .
120.1
114.0
122.0
130.0
127.3
150.0
_-_
•• mm w»
121.6
Trickling filter
effluent
High
119.2
127.6
98.2
108.0
133.0
153.0
156.0
98.0
117.0
_-_
Low
70.0
88.0
91.2
92.8
91.0
104.0
80.0
83.3
83.0
Average
97.6
100.0
94.4
100.2
109.0
120.0
118.0
90.3
100.0
103.2
Final clarifier
effluent
High
165.2
119.2
96.8
99.6
133.0
151.0
156.0
94.0
—
Low
92.0
88.4
88.4
90.0
88.0
113.0
80.0
83.0
Average
101.6
99.0
91.7
96.0
107.2
121.0
110.0
89.0
83.0
100.0
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
118.0
102.4
102.4
99.6
142.0
151.0
151.0
91.0
77.0
Low
88.4
88.0
88.5
88.4
86.0
104.0
80.0
83.0 -
77.0
Average
96.8
91.1
90.5
93.8
107.0
121.0
108.0
88.3
77.0
.
97.1
-------
Table A-12. NITRATE NITROGEN
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
a
influent
Hi*h
3.97
—
—
—
___
—
— •
Low
—
3.97
—
...
...
—
—
—
—
Average
___
...
3.97
...
_.-
3.97
Flotation cell
effluent
HiRh
...
Low
...
...
...
---
...
Average
...
...
-__
—
Domestic
High
40.00
5.0
4.99
3.00
—
—
Low
....
40.00
4.85
4.97
3.00
—
—
—
—
—
...
Average
40.00
4.93
2.97
3.00
—
—
...
—
—
—
12.72
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
—
5.07
3.25
—
___
—
__.
—
Low
1.20
3.25
___
Average
3.42
3.25
—
—
—
—
—
—
3.33
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-12 (continued). NITRATE NITROGEN
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
Hieh
30.99
39.99
4.2
24.99
3.0
___
Low
1.70
3.79
4.0
6.99
3.0
-__
Average
7.44
14.43
4.0
17.49
3.0
9.27
Trickling filter
effluent
High
20.89
56.62
8.62
109.55
...
___
Low
0.99
3.99
7.42
28.98
___
Average
4.19
19.47
8.02
69.26
--.
25.23
Final clarlfier
effluent
High
39.75
56.08
11.01
32.5
14.0
Low
0.99
2.99
7.22
21.98
14.0
Average
6.21
19.03
9.2
27.01
14.0
_-_
___
___
___
15.05
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
1.9
43.6
11.6
51.5
14.55
...
Low
0.7
2.7
7.2
21.9
14.55
_--
Average
3.38
14.45
9.4
30.63
14.55
...
—
14.40
-------
Table A-13. NITRITE NITROGEN
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May.
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
influent
Hleh
0.03
...
Low
0.03
Average
...
0.03
___
0.03
Flotation cell
effluent-
HiBh
...
___
Low
...
•
Average
___
_._
— .
...
Domestic
Hieh
0.002
0.15
0.03
0.005
---
Low
___•
0.002
0.03
0.01
0.005
Average
___
0.002
0.075
0.03
0.005
---
0.028
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
___
0.19
0.02
0.03
0.08
...
...
Low
— _
0.19
0.02
0.03
0.08
\verage
0.19
0.02
0.03
0.08
—
_j._
—
—
. —
0.008
a
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-13 (continued). NITRITE NITROGEN
(mg/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
0.008
0.007
0
0.01
__.
Low
0.002
0.001
0
0.005
_-_
Average
0.020
.004
0
0.0045
0
...
___
0.009
Trickling filter
effluent
High
0.110
0.380
0.400
0.460
0.450
Low
0.002
0.005
0.380
0.010
0.450
___
Average
0.042
0.150
0.380
0.425
0.450
...
0.289
Final clarifier
effluent
High
0.110
0.400
0.450
0.500
0.500
Low
0.002
0.007
0.330
0.020
0.500
Average
0.047
0.226
0.370
0.475
0.500
___
0.323
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
1.000
1.000
0.450
0.520
0.450
Low
0.048
0.065
0.350
0.020
0.450
Average
0.199
0.230
0.375
0.475
0.450
0.345
-------
Table A-14. PHOSPHATES
(mg/D
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May.
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
61
61
47
44
Low
12
6
2
4
_-_
___
Average
49
55
45
40
—
—
— _
47
Trickling filter
effluent
High
57
58
47
48
M •• ••
Low
8
7
2
4
_-_
Average
49
51
45
42
47
Final clarifier
effluent
High
52
55
54
48
...
...
Low
9
7
7
21
...
—
Average
43
48
47
27
—
42
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
51
58
49
48
_-_
Low
15
8
5
9
...
...
_-_
Average
36
50
44
39
—
—
42
-------
Table A-15. pH
Mongh
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
a
influent
High
-.._
7.2
6.4
7.0
6.8
6.8
7.7
7.1
6.6
Low
5.8
5.5
5.6
5.3
5.1
5.5
5.6
6.2
Average
6.5
5.9
6.3
6.2
6.2
6.5
6.3
6.3
6.3
Flotation cell
effluent
High
___
6.9
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.9
6.0
6.2
Low
...
5.5
5.4
5.1
5.4
5.3
5.3
5.1
Average
___
5.9
6.0
5.9
6.0
6.1
5.5
5.7
5.8
Domestic
High
7.3
8.4
10.3
8.2
9.4
8.0
8.2
8.6
8.0
8.1
7.9
Low
6.8
6.8
6.9
6.2
5.6
6.9
6.3
5.7
5.7
5.3
6.5
Average
7.0
7.5
7.5
7.3
6.8
7.3
7.3
7.0
7.3
6.9
7.4
7.2
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
...
6.7
7.3
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.9
6.8
7.5
7.0
6.8
6.8
Low
...
6.3
6.2
6.3
6.3
6.1
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.0
6.3
\verage
6.6
6.6
6.7
6.6
6.4
6.6
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
a
Interceptor No. 1
Interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-15 (continued). pH
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May.
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
7.2
7.0
7.3
8.1
7.9
7.5
.7.4
7.4
7.5
7.5
7.4
7.1
Low
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
7.0
7.0
7.0
6.8
7.0
6.8
6.3
Average
6.8
6.8
6.9
7.1
7.0
7.2
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.3
7.2
6.8
7.0
Trickling filter
effluent
High
8.1
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.0
8.0
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.2
Low
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.6
7.3
7.9
7.6
7.7
7.3
7.8
7.9
7.9
Average
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.9
8.1
7.8
7.9
7.9
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
Final clarifier
effluent
HiRh
8.1
8.1
8.2
8.4
8.1
8.3
7.9
8.0
8.1
8.1
8.0
8.1
Low
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.9
7.9
7.6
7.8
7.4
7.8
7.9
7.9
Average
7.9
8.0
8.0
8.1
8.0
8.1
7.8
7.9
7.8
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
8.0
8.0
8.2
8.5
8.0
8.0
8.2
8.0
7.8
7.9
8.0
8.1
Low
7.6
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.7
7.8
7.5
7.2
7.5
7.6
7.9
Average
7.9
8.0
8.0
8.1
7.9
8.1
7.8
7.8
7.6
7.8
7.8
. 8.0
7.9
-------
Table A-16. TOTAL ALKALINITY
(mg/1 as CaC03>
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Flotation cell
influent
High
121
252
111
191
101
Low
121
121
111
60
101
Average
...
121
111
111
104
101
109
Flotation cell
effluent
High
___
...
272
221
272
121
Low
80
221
70
121
...
Average
___
153
221
147
121
161
b
Domestic
High | Low
553
262
362
303
483
302
563
131
_--
167
60
21
70
80
302
121
131
—
Average
350
175
180
174
268
302
280
131
232
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
High
590
325
461
402
392
395
—
Low
360
282
160
148
148
163
Average
___
438
307
319
314
208
___
241
—
316
Interceptor No. 1
D,
interceptor No. 2
-------
Table A-16 (continued). TOTAL ALKALINITY
(rag/I as CaCO-j)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
High
653
563
563
583
795
724
493
875
815
Low
533
483
372
500
532
554
493
201
815
Average
599
537
510
546
641
692
493
782
815
623
Trickling filter
effluent
High
603
513
523
533
704
603
483
563
603
Low
502
199
453
422
463
553
342
302
301
Average
545
453
468
504
537
587
423
415
452
—
487
Final clarifier
effluent
High
603
513
483
503
563
593
463
453
362
Low
487
199
443
413
453
543
338
302
362
Average
538
442
460
460
511
567
401
380
362
458
Chlorine contact
tank effluent
High
614
493
483
473
573
593
443
420
328
Low
483
422
443
392
442
493
312
264
328
Average
537
452
452
438
490
551
378
353
328
442
-------
Table A-17. SULFATES AND HYDROGEN SULFIDE
(tng/1)
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
Average
Anaerobic lagoon
influent
SO.*
4
350.0
381.0
293.0
305.0
332.0
H2S
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Anaerobic lagoon
effluent
SO.
4
40.6
34.6
40.8
32.3
45.3
38.8
H2S
4.4
4.3
5.0
4.6
Trickling filter
effluent
S04
52.1
57.5
56.3
82.3
73.3
64.3
H2S
0.24
0.09
0.30
0.21
Final clarifier
effluent
S°4
52.1
63.7
63.3
73.3
66.3
63.7
H2S
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Chlorine contact tank
effluent
S°4
52.6
64.9
64.8
55.0
57.5
58.9
H2S
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
* Sulfate analyses were made on relatively few samples, however, the range of the analyses
shown was from 270 to 400 mg/1 as sulfate. In September of 1970, the water supply of
the plant was changed from well water to city water.
-------
Table A-18. CHLORIDES
(mg/D
Month
January
February
March
April
August
September
Average
Anaerobic
lagoon
effluent
573
755
803
819
699
735
731
Trickling
filter
effluent
528
742
793
816
684
870
739
Final
clarifier
effluent
535
737
813
839
684
700
718
Chlorine
contact tank
effluent
551
731
779
831
683
860
739
•US, GOVERNMENT MINTING OFFICi:1974 546-319/417 1-3
76
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
No.
w
Treatment of Packinghouse Wastes by Anaerobic
Laoons and Plastic-Media Filters '
5. Rcpori ii.ite 4/74
tt.
Darrel" A. Baker, Allen H. Wymore, "arid'
James E. White
12060 DFF
^^Mgi||r^ . vn.W
"' •'•• •<•>';• -.-• •:•-...-••- • - o«,,.-, .- v^v.^t,;:.^ -, '"' - $y -••<•,''" r r •" -• . , '?*• .",'"'"' &$£?•-*r--5.' .'"17 ''v;t-£^S*I& *J
15. Suppti;n»eniHiy NOI^ Environmental Protection Agency report number, EPA-660/2-74-027
April '
Hi. Abstract . • .
Studies were conducted to demonstrate the efficiency and suitability of using dissolved
air flotation, anaerobic lagoons, plastic media trickling filters and chlorination as a
system for treating 1 mgd of wastewater from a meat packing plant. The primary objec-
tive of the study was to.determine if the plastic media filters could be used to replace
the aerobic lagoon system normally used to treat the anaerobic .lagoon effluent.
The overall reduction of 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD,-) through the system aver-
aged 98.5% over the ten month evaluation period leaving a discharge concentration of
61 mg/1. Suspended solids were reduced 95.4% through the entire system, leaving an
effluent concentration of 90 mg/1 after chlorination. the"BOD, reduction in the anaer-
obic lagoons averaged 82% and accounted for the majority of>BoS. removed in the system.
The BOD5 reduction through the plastic media trickling filters averaged 74% of the
applied loading which was below the 91% efficiency expected during design. Hydraulic
overload, organic overload, and possibly grease concentrations, contributed to the lower-
than-expected performance.
The cost of the treatment system was calculated to be $0.079 per hog killed or $0.344
per 1000 Ib live weight killed.
i. (..-. ; •
^Industrial Wastes, *Packinghouse, *Waste Treatment, *Trickling Filter, ^Anaerobic
Lagoons, Wastewater treatment, Plastic Media '
lib. identifiers
*Packinghouse Wastes, *Anaerobic Lagoons, *Trickling Filter, Plastic Media, Efficiencies
19. StfCJiity Clas.v
(Rcjjojt;
70 Secuiuy Clsia
(Page)
21. No', of
Pag'is
22. )!n«.
Send To:
WATER MBSOURCBS SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
03, OCPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
WASHINGTON. OJC. M«40
James C. Young, P.E.
------- |