EPA 660/2-74 060
March 1974
Environmental Protection Technology Series
Poultry Processing Wastewater
Treatment and Reuse
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
R£3£AKCK 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 arouping
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
4. 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.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has 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.
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1.15
-------
EPA-660/2-74-060
March 1974
POULTRY PROCESSING WASTEWATER
TREATMENT AND REUSE
By
James D. Clise
Project 12060 FYG
Program Element 1BB037
Project Officer
Jack L. Witherow
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
-------
ABSTRACT
The feasibility of reclaiming poultry processing wastewater for
reuse where potable grade water is presently required was studied
at the Sterling Processing Corporation plant in Oakland, Maryland,
by the Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. In
addition, extensive study was made of poultry processing raw waste
characteristics and proportions of wastes generated during processing
and plant cleanup. Effluent characteristics from a two stage aerated
lagoon are reported.
Initially, effectiveness of microstraining wastewater lagoon effluent
followed by diatomaceous earth filtering was studied. Difficulties
were encountered in removal of colloidal solids, eventually identified
as protein, which coagulated as the result of low pH values following
attempts to chlorinate to breakpoint. Additional facilities were
constructed to provide for flocculation and sedimentation prior to
filtration. Because of longer filter runs the diatomaceous earth
filter was abandoned in favor of sand filtration.
Laboratory studies were conducted to determine compliance of reclaimed
water with Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards. Bacterio-
logical, chemical, and physical standards were consistently met with
the exception of turbidity resulting from colloidal carryover prior
to the addition of flocculation and sedimentation facilities. Even
the turbidity standard was met after this addition. The microstraining,
flocculation, sedimentation, and sand filtration system had an annual
capital and operating cost of $0.27/1,000 gallons ($0.071/1,000 liters).
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project Number 12060 FYG
under partial sponsorship of the Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Protection Agency. Work was completed as of July 1973.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 3
III Introduction 4
IV Wastewater Characteristics 10
V Design 14
VI Operation 26
VII Reclaimed Water Quality 41
'III Financial Considerations 47
IX Design Factors 50
iii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
No. Page
1 Sterling Wastewater Lagoon System 6
2 Primary Lagoon 7
3 Final Settling Basin, Chlorine Contact Chamber, 8
and Overflow Wier Discharging to River
4 BOD_ and Suspended Solids Produced Per 1000 Lbs. 13
LWK Vs. Weight of Broilers
5 Advanced Water Treatment Control House 16
6 Microstrainer 17
7 Diatoraaceous Filter 18
8 Original Facilities Design 20
9 Flocculation-Sedimentation Basin 21
10 Sedimentation Basin 23
11 Construction Drawing - Flocculation-Sedimentation 24
Basin
12 Revised Facilities Design 25
13 Overflow Sump, Chlorine Contact Chamber 27
14 Seasonal Variation in Suspended Solids 28
15 Treatment Route of Flow 38
16 Water Clarity Comparison 44
-------
LIST OF TABLES
NO» Page
1 Raw Wastewater Characteristics 10
2 Proportions of Wastes Generated During 11
Processing and Cleanup
3 Wastes Generated During Processing and Cleanup 11
4 BOD and Suspended Solids Compared to Live 12
Weight of Broilers
5 Wastewater Lagoon Effluent Characteristics Used 14
as Basis for Design
6 Wastewater Lagoon Effluent Quality Variation From 15
Values Used for Design at Advanced Treatment Unit
7 Effectiveness of Wastewater Lagoon System 26
8 Grease Content of Wastewater Lagoon Effluent 30
9 Effectiveness of Equipment 31
10 Diatomaceous Earth Filter Runs 35
11 Effect of Body Feed in Extending Diatomaceous 35
Filter Runs
12 Comparison of Effectiveness of Diatomaceous 37
Earth and Sand Filtration
13 Chemical-Physical Quality of Reclaimed Water 43
14 Annual and Capital Costs 48
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project was supported by the Environmental Protection Agency
Research and Development Grant No. 12060 FYG. Appreciation is
expressed to the Sterling Processing Corporation, Oakland, Maryland;
particularly to Mr. Oilman Sylvester, Plant Manager, for his
continued interest, cooperation, and financial support; and to
Col. Edward S. Hopkins, P.E., for his meticulous review of the data
and comprehensive assistance in developing the text of this report.
vi
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
1. The treatmentof poultry processing wastewater to the level of
compliance with biological, chemical, and physical limits in
the U.S. Public Health Service (P.H.S.) Drinking Water Standards
is feasible from the standpoint of practical application of
available equipment and economics.
2. In addition to those problems normally encountered in the treat-
ment of wastewater for reuse, advanced treatment of poultry
processing wastewater is further complicated by the presence of
colloidal protein. Treatment systems designed to reclaim poultry
processing wastewater should include facilities for coagulation
and sedimentation for the removal of colloidal solids.
3. Use of breakpoint chlorination to obtain free residual chlorine
in the microstrainer effluent prior to diatomaceous earth filtra-
tion was impractical. This was due to the high chlorine demand
at this stage and the emission of trichloramine fumes from the
degradation of organic colloidal material.
4. With the later use of coagulation and sedimentation prior to
filtration, the chlorine demand was reduced and "breakpoint"
chlorination of the sedimentation basin overflow was reached
consistently with standard chlorination equipment.
5. The effect of body feed on the diatomaceous earth filter effi-
ciency increased the average run from 19,840 gallons (75,094 liter)
to 29,518 gallons (111,726 liter). With body feed the average
flow rate was 194 gpm (12.2 I/sec), but in no instance was the
design flow rate of 300 gpm (19.1 1/s) reached.
-1-
-------
6. Annual capital and operating expense approximated $0.69/1000
gallons ($0.18/1000 liter) for the originally designed system
of microstraining and diatomaceous earth filtration.
7. Following placement of a flocculation and sedimentation unit
behind the microstrainer and replacement of diatomaceous earth
filtration with sand filtration, the design flow rate of
300 gpm (19.1 1/s) was reached.
8. Annual capital and operating expense for advanced treatment of
lagoon effluent approximated $0.27/1000 gallons ($0.071/1000
liter) using the flocculation and sedimentation, and sand filter
system in series with the microstrainer.
9. Examination of reclaimed water by the Maryland State Department
of Health and Mental Hygiene Virology Laboratory, utilizing the
Dr. Joseph L. Melnick (Baylor University) Polyelectrolyte Tech-
nique, failed to reveal the presence of any human enteric virus.
10. For average raw wastewater characteristics of 543 mg/1 five
day BOD, 831 mg/1 suspended solids, and 863 mg/1 COD; the percent
reductions by the two stage aerated lagoon, based on the average
effluent characteristics, were 92.8, 85.9, and 89.4 percent,
respectively.
11. Correlation between the live weight of birds being processed
and wastewater loads was erratic and appeared to be of little
or no consequence in the design of wastewater treatment facili-
ties.
-2-
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
The technical and economic feasibility of reclaiming poultry processing
wastewater to level of compliance with bacteriological, chemical, and
physical criteria of Drinking Water Standards creates the potential
for reuse where potable grade water is presently required. Based
on established criteria, few, if any, surface sources of raw water
could compare with the level of attainable quality demonstrated by
this project. It is recommended the project be continued with the
following objectives.
1. To demonstrate reliability of .the unit to continuously
provide the demonstrated level of treatment.
2. To determine uses that can safely be made of reclaimed
poultry processing wastewater.
3- To demonstrate the presence or absence of health signifi-
cant characteristics of reclaimed poultry processing
wastewater not demonstrated by application of existing
Drinking Water Standards.
-3-
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
Sterling Processing Corporation, a company engaged in the slaughtering,
eviscerating, and processing of poultry, is located in Oakland, MD.
Plant facilities were constructed in 1956-57, with an original capacity
of 3,000 birds an hour, equipped to process broilers, fowl, turkeys,
and kosher killed turkeys. Present plant capacity is 6,000 birds an
hour with operations restricted to the processing of broilers, averaging
167,000 Ibs. (75,750 kg.) live weight killed (Iwk) per day.
Wastewater at the Sterling plant results from the processing of poultry
which is delivered live, slaughtered, scalded, picked, eviscerated,
chilled, cut up, and packaged; from refrigeration drains; and from
plant cleanup. The sanitary sewage from the toilets is not mixed with
»»
these wastewaters, but disposed of in a separate system.
Production at the Sterling plant has been limited by the availability
of potable water, with frequent interruptions to operations resulting
from water shortages. A proposal was submitted to the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Department of Interior, in 1970,
requesting financial support for a water reclaiming project to investi-
gate the utilization of reclaimed wastewater for plant water supply
augmentation. The primary objective of the proposal was to demonstrate
the technical and economic feasibility of reclaiming poultry eviscera-
ting wastewater for reuse where potable grade water is presently required.
Drinking water for the employees was to be from bottle water fountains.
The project was also to provide an opportunity for extensive study of
poultry eviscerating wastewater characteristics.
Prior to the beginning of this project, Sterling Processing Corporation
initiated a series of water conservation measures. Initially, an em-
ployee awareness program was conducted. Written directions were issued
and daily inspections were made to identify opportunities for employees
to assist in the reduction of wasted water. The entire piping
system was inspected and all leaks eliminated. Where possible,
-4-
-------
the use of hoses was eliminated and all essential hoses were equipped
with automatic shut-off valves. A valve was installed on each supply
line serving the processing plant to allow for regulation of flow. A
portable high pressure cleaning system was installed and cleanup
personnel were provided with brooms to assist in the removal of solids
from the floors. Refrigeration compressor water was recycled to the
raw water section of the water treatment plant. Pumps were provided
to allow the recycling of chill vat water for reuse in the scalder.
Valves were provided on the water lines leading to the water treatment
plant filters to more closely control filter rates and eliminate water
pressure variations within the distribution system. These efforts
reduced water consumption from 11 gallons (41.64 liters) per bird to at
average of 6.8 gallons (25.74 liters).
The community water supply serving the town of Oakland is of inadequate
capacity to provide water to the poultry plant. Groundwater resources
in the area are limited and of unsatisfactory quality. Sterling
Processing Corporation constructed two wells in 1956, and has since
acquired a third well which was abandoned by Oakland when the town
obtained a surface water supply. In 1965, a water treatment facility
was constructed at the poultry plant and is currently in use for the
removal of iron and control of bacteriological quality.
Treatment consists of alum-lime flocculation, with final pH adjustment
for iron precipitation, followed by settling and filtration. Raw
water is prechlorinated in the mixing basin, with additional chlorine
for residual control introduced into the main service line leading to
the processing plant. Settled water is filtered through two sand
filters, each 15 feet (4.57 m) in diameter, operated alternately at
a maximum rate of 350 gpm (22.1 1/s). Filter outlet pressure
fluctuation due to variation in filter condition results in
erratic flow rates through water outlets on poultry processing lines.
Significant water conservation has been attained through controlled
application rates onto the filters.
Poultry processing wastes are treated and disposed of by rotary
-5-
-------
screening for removal of feathers and viscera which are sold for
protein reclamation, with wastewater treated in two mechanically
aerated lagoons in series,,followed by chlorination and discharge to
the Little Youghiogheny River. Present wastewater treatment
facilities were constructed in 1965-66, replacing an anaerobic
lagoon which discharged into the Oakland sewer system.
Figure 1
Sterling Wastewater Lagoon System
-6-
-------
The waste-water treatment system consists of two lagoons totalling
2.75 acres (1.11 hectares) in area. Each lagoon is 140' (42.7 m)
wide. The primary unit is 590' (177 m) long and the secondary
lagoon is 230' (69) long. Each pond is six feet '('1.8 m) deep.
Primary lagoon capacity is approximately 3.75 million gallons
o 3
(14,195 m ) and secondary capacity is 1.5 million gallons (5,678 m )
providing holding capacity for 12 working days' flow.
The primary lagoon is equipped with 64 Link Belt circulators, a
grease skimmer, and an effluent wier trough discharging into the
second lagoon, (Figure 1).
Figure 2
Primary Lagoon, Showing Surface
Turbulence From Circulator Discharge
-I-
-------
Entering at the bottom of the circulators, wastewater is discharged
at the surface in one direction, creating a counter-clockwise surface
flow, (Figure 2).
Air is supplied to the circulators by three positive displacement
blowers, each powered by a 20 hp (14.9 kw) motor. The system provides
3,360 cfm (15.8 m3/s) of air at 2.8 psig (19.3 kN/m2). Air is distri-
buted to the circulators through a header pipe encircling the two lagoons
The secondary lagoon is equipped with 40 Ling Belt circulators, a
grease skimmer, and a combination settling unit and chlorine contact
chamber with an overflow wier trough and discharge line to the river,
(Figure 3).
Figure 3
Final Settling Basin, Chlorine Contact Chamber and
Overflow Wier Discharging to River
-8-
-------
Incoming raw wastewater has a BOD averaging 450 mg/1, amounting to
a loading approximating 400 Ibs/acre/day (448 kg/ha/day) with a 93%
reduction in the lagoon system. Raw wastewater suspended solids
average 858 mg/1 equaling a loading of 750 Ibs/acre/day (841 kg/ha/day)
with an 88% reduction in the system.
Wastewater treatment facilities were designed and installed by Griffith
Engineering of Falls Church, Virginia.
The project as approved by the Department of Interior in January, 1971,
was for a two-year period under project number 12060 FYG, later extended
to July, 1973. Federal funds supported the construction of an advanced
water treatment plant to reclaim wastewater effluent for use in
augmenting Sterling's limited potable water supply and provided for
operation and continuous surveillance of the units. Expansion of
Department of Health laboratory capabilities was necessary for
daily monitoring of the units.
The project was designed in three phases. The first phase was for
design and construction of the advanced water treatment facility.
Phase two was for operation and study of effectiveness of the water
treatment facility, and phase three was for introduction of reclaimed
water into the poultry plant's cleanup procedures with ultimate
integration of reclaimed water into the plant's raw water supply.
A preliminary study of the wastewater effluent indicated that re-
claiming facilities should provide for removal of suspended solids;
chlorination, preferable to breakpoint; and final filtration. The
facility was designed with these needs in mind.
-9-
-------
SECTION IV
WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
The project provided an opportunity for extensive study of poultry
wastewater characteristics. Studies included daily continuous
sampling of raw wastes, and segregated sampling of processing and
cleanup wastes.
Composite samplers were installed on the wastewater line from the
poultry plant to the primary wastewater lagoon, with samples collected
each morning prior to beginning of plant operations. Composite
samplers provided for continuous contribution to samples from the
normal eight hours of operation, and six to eight hours of plant
cleanup.
Table 1 shows average values of wastewater characteristics studied.
It should be noted that throughout the study total water usage
averaged 6.8 gallons (25.741iters) per bird.
Table 1. RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Station A - mg/1
*
BOD
COD
Suspended Solids
Grease
Number
of
Samples
148
7
119
47
Mean
Value
543
863
831
403
Standard
Deviation
229
183
464
239
Maximum
Value
1043
1230
2780
4667
Minimum
Value
141
665
172
88
Samples to segregate processing and plant cleanup wastes were collected
at the end of each day's operation and again each morning for a period
of six weeks.
Volume of water used for plant cleanup consistently approximated the
-10-
-------
volume used for processing operations. For the entire six week period
studied, the difference between processing and cleanup flows equalled
only 6% of the total flow. Total flows average 6.8 gallons (24.74 liters)
per bird.
Tables 2 and 3 show percentages and volumes of major wastewater
components resulting from processing operations and plant cleanup.
Table 2. PROPORTIONS OF HASTES GENERATED
DURING PROCESSING AND CLEANUP
Percent of Total Based on Median Values
Water
BOD5
Grease
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Dissolved Solids
Processing
53
87
90
78
85
66
Cleanup
47
13
10
22
15
34
Table 3. WASTES GENERATED DURING PROCESSING AND CLEANUP
Kg/1000 kg LWK
Mean
Water
(Gallons)
(Liters)
BOD 5
Grease
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Dissolved Solids
Processing
7,759
(909)
(3,341)
5.6
9.5
18.7
10.4
7.7
Cleanup
6j721
(805)
(3,047)
0.9
1.0
5.3
1.9
4.0
Total
14,300
(1,714)
(6,487)
6.5
10.5
24.0
12.5
11.7
-11-
-------
An effort was made to determine if increase in the live weight of
birds being processed resulted in variation of wastewater loads.
Average daily live weights were compared with daily wastewater
composite sample results for a period of eighteen months. Five
live weight ranges were selected between 3.5 Ibs and 4.26 Ibs
(1.59 - 1.93 kg). Although distinct variations in wastewater loads
can be correlated with average live weight variation, as indicated
in Table 4 and Figure 4, Correlations are erratic and would appear
to be of little or no consequence in the design of wastewater
treatment facilities.
Table 4. BOD5 AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS COMPARED TO
LIVE WEIGHT OF BROILERS
Broiler Live
Weight
kg (Ibs.)
Suspended Solids
kg/1000 kg
LWK
BOD 5
kg/1000 kg
LWK
1.59 - 1.67 (3.5 - 3.69)
1.68 - 1.72 (3.7 - 3.79)
1.72 - 1.76 (3.8 - 3.89)
1.77 - 1.81 (3.9 - 3.99)
1.81 - 1.93 (4.0 - 4.26)
16.93
9.78
10.26
11.79
8.20
5.64
5.18
5.26
7.58
6.80
-12-
-------
p
0
u
N
D
S
P
E
R
1
0
0
0
L
B
S
L
W
K
Figure 4
BOD and Suspended Solids Produced
Per 1000 LBs. LWK Vs. Weight of Broilers
18
15
10
3.50 to
3.69 Ibs
(1.59 to)
(1.67 kg)
SS
BOD,
3.60 to
3.79 Ibs
(1.68 to)
(1.72 kg)
3.80 to
3.89 Ibs
(1.72 to)
(1.76 kg)
3.90 to
3.99 Ibs
(1.77 to)
(1.81 kg)
4.00 to
4.26 Ibs
(1.81 to)
(1.93 kg)
Live Weight of Broilers
-13-
-------
SECTION V
DESIGN
Preliminary grab sample evaluations of wastewater lagoon effluent
indicated the wastewater treatment facility reduced the BOD value
to an average of 15 mg/1, (Table 5). Continuous study indicates
this value to approximate 30 mg/1 based on 24 hour composite
samples, (Table 6 ). Composite sampling revealed comparable variations
in other measurable parameters when compared to grab sample results.
The effluent characteristics as shown in Table 5, determined by
grab sampling, were used for design purposes.
Table 5. WASTEWATER LAGOON EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
USED AS BASIS FOR DESIGN
mg/1
Grease 7.8
Phosphate as P 1.3
Iron as Fe 0.3
Chloride as Cl 88
Nitrogen as Free Ammonia 8.8
Albuminoid Ammonia 1.0
Nitrites 0.005
Nitrates 3.0
Alkalinity as Calcium Carbonate 148
Hardness as Calcium Carbonate 178
Turbidity 30
Color 80
BOD5 15
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 140
Total Solids 426
Dissolved Oxygen 2.9
Suspended Solids 58
Volatile Solids 400
pH 7.0
-14-
-------
Wastewater lagoon effluent characteristics, as determined during the
study, exceeded the basic design criterion from 52% to 77% as shown in
Table 6 , resulting in overloading of equipment and the subsequent
alteration of project design.
Table 6. WASTEWATER LAGOON EFFLUENT QUALITY VARIATION FROM VALUES USED
FOR DESIGN OF ADVANCED TREATMENT UNIT
BOD
Suspended Solids
Grease
Design
Value
mg/1
14.8
58
7.8
12 Month
Mean
mg/1
31
106
24
12 Month
Median
mg/1
25
109
19
Percent
Samples
Exceeding
Design Value
52.37.
70.0%
76.7%
Basic design of the water treatment facility consists of a control
building, (Figure 5); 35 micron microstrainer, (Figure 6); diatomite
2
filter containing 200 square feet (18.6 m ) of septum, (Figure 7)
rated at 1.6 gpm/sq ft
pressure storage tank.
2 3
rated at 1.6 gpm/sq ft (1.08 1/s/m ); and 20,000 gallon (76 ra )
Supplemental equipment consists of a 3,000 gallon (11,360 liter)
concrete pit used as a collection sump for lagoon effluent; sewage pump
for the delivery of effluent to the mlcrostrainer; high head pump for
delivery of microstrained effluent to the diatomite filter (50 psi,
345 kN/m2); chlorine recorder; and electrical control panel. All
equipment is automatically controlled by the water height in the
pressure storage tank. Each unit can be independently operated
manually. All equipment is rated at approximately 300 gpm (19 liter/s).
-15-
-------
Equipment is housed in a 20' x 30'(6.1 m x 9.14 m) concrete block
structure located between the poultry plant and wastewater treatment
lagoons, (Figure 5).
Figure 5
Advanced Water Treatment Control House
Six inch (15.24 cm) PVC pipe is used to carry effluent from the
secondary wastewater treatment lagoon overflow sump to the control
house. All piping within the control house is 6" (15.24 cm) steel
with bolted flange connections.
-16-
-------
Solids removed by microstraining of the wastewater lagoon effluent are
returned to the primary wastewater lagoon by gravity flow from the
microstrainer drum.
Initial design provided for diatomite filter recirculation water to
be discharged into the microstrainer sump for return to the filter
during recharge, (Figure 6).
Figure 6
Microstrainer Showing Recirculation Line
From Diatomaceous Filter to Microstrainer Sump
-17-
-------
i
Figure 7
Diatomaceous Filter - 325 gpm (20.5 liter/s) Capacity,
Used in First Phase of Project Operation
To Filter Microstrainer Effluent. This
Unit Was Replaced by Sand Filtration in
Second Phase of Operation
-18-
-------
An elevated settling tank was later provided to receive diatomite
filter backwash water allowing settled sludge to be withdrawn by
gravity and supernatant returned to the primary lagoon.
The pressure storage tank was placed underground, with one end
extending through the building wall into a floor sump.
Figure 8 is a schematic outline of wastewater treatment and advanced
water treatment flow as originally designed. Indicated sampling
points were used throughout the study. Sampling point C was varied
to allow sampling of wastewater lagoon effluent before and following
chlorination.
-19-
-------
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND
WATER RECLAIMING FACILITIES
CHLORINE
CONTACT
CHAMBER'
SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION
A - SCREENED RAW WASTEWATER
B - PRIMARY LAGOON EFFLUENT
Q- SECONDARY LAGOON1 EFFLUENT
D-MICROSTRAINED EFFLUENT
- FILTERED WATER
MICROSTRAINER
CHLORINATOR
OlATOMlTE
FILTER
PRESSURE
STORAGE
TANK
EVISCERATING PLANT
Figure 8
Original Desiga
-20-
-------
Wastewater effluent characteristics as determined during the study
varied significantly from those values used in the original design
of project facilities, (Table 6).
Variations prompted redesign of the unit to include facilities for
flocculation and settling of effluent prior to filtering, and
abandonment of the diatomite filter in favor of use of one of the
sand filters serving the processing plant's water treatment unit.
Figure 9
Flocculation - Sedimentation Basin and Flash Mix Room
-21-
-------
A flocculation-sedimentation basin was constructed adjacent to the
control house. The unit was poured in place with a concrete block
lime storage and flash mix room attached, (Figure 9). Overall dimensions
are 53* x 16' 4" (16.3 m x 5.7 m), providing for a three minute flash
mix following addition of lime, a fifteen minute flocculation chamber,
2
and a settling area of 450 sq ft (42 m ). The settling basin is 10'
3;05 m) deep, providing for two hours' retention and a maximum over-
flow rate of 950 gpd/sq ft/day (38.75 m3/m2/day).
The floor of the settling basin slopes to a sump at the inlet end to
facilitate collection and removal of sludge. Sludge is delivered to
ground level utilizing the hydraulic head of the basin, and pumped
to an elevated holding tank for scavenger removal. Emergency drains
provide for complete discharge of the settling basin to the river.
Alum is added to the suction side of the pump delivering water to the
flocculation unit, utilizing pump action for initial mixing.
Following settling, water returns to the control house by gravity
flow through 6" (15.24 cm) FVC pipe. The entire unit was constructed
at the lowest elevation possible, with excavated earth graded to the
maximum water level as protection against freezing, (Figure 10).
Since no heat is provided in the unit, to protect against extreme
winter weather common to Oakland, manual controls were provided to
allow the flash mixer and flocculators to be operated during periods
of shutdown to maintain water movement within the basin.
Figure 11 is a construction drawing prepared for the flocculation-
sedimentation unit. Flocculators were designed and built specifically
for the 9' x 15' (2.74 m x 4.57 m) flocculation chamber to facilitate
the flow through design without directional change or use of overflow
gutters.
-22-
-------
Figure 10
Sedimentation Basin With Finished Grade Above
Water Line for Protection Against Freezing
Figure 12 is a schematic outline of the revised wastewater treatment
and advanced water treatment flow. To facilitate comparison of
sampling data between the original and revised unit, sampling
designations remained unchanged with the addition of "X" to
designate samples of water following sedimentation.
-23-
-------
Figure 11
Construction Drawing
Flocculation-Sedimentatton Basin
-24-
-------
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND
WATER RECLAIMING FACILITIES
jLTO RIVER
COLLECTION
BASIN
SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION
A - SCREENED RAW WASTEWATER
B - PRIMARY LAGOON EFFLUENT
G- SECONDARY LAGOON EFFLUENT
Q -MICROSTRAINED EFFLUENT
X~ FLOCCULATED - SETTLED
EFFLUENT.
E - FILTERED WATER
CHLORINE
CONTACT
CHAMBER'
*2
B
J
ON
>
^ „ —
i
*>£
&*?
LAGOON
#\
MICROSTRAINER
iFLOCCULATION-
| SEDIMENTATION
Jl
BASIN
CHLORINATOR
PRESSURE
STORAGE
TANK
SAND
FILTER
EVISCERATING PLANT
Figure 12
Revised Design
-25-
-------
SECTION VI
OPERATION
Operations were conducted to provide advanced treatment of effluent
from the existing two stage aerated wastewater treatment lagoon
system. Effectiveness of the lagoon system in the treatment of
poultry processing wastewater, as determined during the study, is
indicated in Table 7.
Table 7. EFFECTIVENESS OF WASTEWATER LAGOON SYSTEM
mg/1
Raw
Wastewater
N X C)
Primary Lagoon
Effluent
N X 0
Secondary Lagoon
Effluent
N X 0~
BOD
COD
s.s.
Grease
148
7
119
47
N = Number of
543
863
831
403
229
183
464
239
Samples
79
8
67
10
251
235
392
95
176
83
342
90
X = Mean Value
210
8
214
78
0 = Standard
39
91
117
18
40
20
100
17
Deviation
The operational phase was conducted in two segments. The first utilized
facilities as originally designed consisting basically of a 30 micron
microstrainer and diatomaceous filter. The second segment incorporated
changes made in an effort to solve unanticipated treatment problems
and utilized 70 micron screening, flocculation, sedimentation, and
sand filtration.
Initially, secondary lagoon effluent was pumped directly from the
overflow sump at the chlorine contact chamber as shown in Figure 13.
Due to air entrapment and variation in overflow rate, a 3,000 gallon
(11,360 liters) pit was inserted in the effluent line from the
secondary lagoon to act as a reservoir for lagoon effluent and pro-
viding flooded suction for the self-priming pump. The pump discharges
directly into the microstrainer drum.
-26-
-------
Figure 13
Overflow Sump, Chlorine Contact Chamber
Seasonal variations in suspended solids content of the lagoon effluent
resulted in erratic flows through the 30 micron microstrainer. This
difficulty was particularly noticeable during the algae growing season
from May through August of each year as indicated in Figure 14.
-27-
-------
Figure 14
Season Variation in Suspended Solids
mg/1
300
250
200
150 I
100
50
JJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJF
1971 1972 1973 1974
-28-
-------
During the winter months, when ice formation on the lagoon surfaces
interferred with the operation of grease skimmers, particles of grease
and tissue fibers were present in the wastewater lagoon effluent
passing into the filter plant. Increased servicing of the skimmers,
on a daily basis as opposed to the initial practice of weekly skimming,
resulted in a reduction of grease content in the lagoon effluent. The
effect of daily skimming, which was initiated in January, 1972, is
reflected in Table 8.
Daily skimmer servicing resulted in the reduction of clogging of the
microfilter screens. Maximum consistent flow, however, through the
30 micron screens never exceeded 167 gpm (10.5 1/s). Ultimately the
30 micron screens were replaced with 70 micron screens. These larger
screen openings allowed a continuous flow of 300 gpm (19 1/s) through
the microstrainers with the only appreciable decrease in effluent
quality being the increase in suspended solids from a median value
of 45 mg/1 to 96 mg/1. This increase was not significant with respect
to the final water quality performance of the sand filter which tended
to offset the effect of changing the screen size.
As indicated in Table 9, this suspended solids content is reduced
in the settling basin to an average concentration of 38 mg/1. Sand
filtration further reduced the suspended solids to an average of 5.1
mg/1.
Microstrainer screens were continuously backwashed by cold water sprays
for removal of algae and other suspended particulate matter. Due to
the presence of grease, it was necessary to provide a source of hot
water for occasional removal of adhering matter.
Cold water for the microstrainer sprays was initially obtained from
the discharge side of the high head pump transporting microstrained
water to the filter. Due to the introduction of high levels of
chlorine immediately before the take off point, difficulties were
encountered from trichloramine fumes. Spray water take off was moved
to the storage tank fed distribution system with a resulting reduc-
tion in chlorine fumes within the control house.
-29-
-------
Table 8. GREASE CONTENT OF WASTEWATER LAGOON EFFLUENT
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
April
May
June
Weekly Servicing of Skimmers
mg/1
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
N
13
12
22
X
125
64
49
0
168.31
92.76
46.94
Max.
448
285
145
Min.
2
3
3
Daily Servicing of Skimmers
7
3
13
17
7
5
14
15
19
11
22
15
6.64
13.40
10.25
8.98
21.00
8.13
23
29
37
24
53
27
8
3
4
0
2
8
= Number of Samples
X = Mean
0 = Standard Deviation
-30-
-------
Table 9. EFFECTIVENESS OF EQUIPMENT
First Segment
mg/1
BOD
COD
s.s.
Grease
BOD
COD
S.S.
Grease
Lagoon
Effluent
N M
179 25
4 88
164 109
83 19
Lagoon
Effluent
N M
36 24
4 91
37 149
18 13
Micros trainer
Effluent - 30 m
N M
106 8
4 66
144 45
101 5
Second Segment
mg/1
Microstrainer
Effluent - 70 m
N M
25 10
4 79
25 96
8 6
Filtered
Water (Diatomite)
^N
129
4
171
101
Settled
Water
N M
25 6
4 49
25 38
5 4
M
6
26
9
3
Filtered
Water (Sand)
N M
40 0.5
4 4.1
32 5.1
16 3.6
N = Number
M = Median Value
-31-
-------
Chlorination
Laboratory studies utilizing "breakpoint" chlorination were undertaken
in an effort to destroy grease. They indicated approximately 7.2 mg/1
of chlorine was required to reduce 1 mg/1 of grease to a stable com-
poind. At this point in the study grease content in the wastewater
lagoon effluent was approximately 15.5 mg/1, which would exert a
chlorine demand of 112 mg/1. Two gas chlorinators were used, one at
the secondary lagoon contact chamber and one between the microstrainer
and the diatomaceous earth filter, each operating at 80 Ibs/day (36
kg/day) for a total capacity of 160 Ibs/day (75 kg/day). This rate
approximated 45 mg/1 of chlorine, compated to the 112 mg/1 required
by the average concentration of grease, so "breakpoint" was not consis-
tently reached.
The use of highly chlorinated water in the microstrainer sprays resulted
in release of excessive chloramine fumes within the control house. The
problem was reduced by supplying microstrainer sprays with water from
the pressure storage tank. "Breakpoint" was more consistently reached
following storage in the tank.
Attempts to satisfy chlorine demand resulted in formation of an
opalescence in the filtered water. At times, when opalescence was not
present in the diatomite filter effluent, it was noticed in the filtered
reclaimed water following storage in the pressure storage tank. This
opalescence was assumed to be the result of colloidal solids which
coagulated at pH ranges below 4.6 resulting from excessive chlorine
content, indicating the probability of colloidal protein being present
in the wastewater lagoon effluent. Efforts to verify the presence of
protein through the use of available laboratory capabilities, including
the use of an infrared spectrophotometer, were inconclusive.
The presence of protein was supported, however, by evaluation of the
nitrate nitrogen present. Protein from animal sources normally contains
approximately 16% nitrogen. Therefore the concentration of protein
-32-
-------
present can be 6.25 times the concentration of nitrogen. Nitrate
nitrogen present in the wastewater lagoon effluent averaged 7.0 mg/1
throughout the study. Normal nitrate nitrogen concentration of Ster-
ling's water supply, based on routine analyses conducted during the
study, was 2.3 mg/1. Subtracting this value from the nitrate nitrogen
present in lagoon effluent and applying the factor of 6.25 indicates
a possible protein content of 29.4 mg/1:
(7.0 - 2.3) mg/1 x 6.25 = 29.4 mg/1 protein
Flocculation and Sedimentation
To eliminate problems of colloidal content, grease, and excessive
solids, additional facilities were designed and constructed to provide
for flocculation and sedimentation of wastewater effluent following
microstraining and prior to filtration. The construction was com-
pleted and the unit placed in operation in the early spring of 1973,
and was used during the remaining months of the project.
Laboratory examinations and jar tests were used to determine most
efficient and effective coagulation materials. Floe formation was'
attained through addition of 5 grains per gallon (86 mg/1) of alum
followed by the addition of an equal amount of lime.
Optimum levels of coagulants for formation of floe, as determined
by daily jar tests, remained relatively constant throughout the
study. Jar tests were conducted using 1 liter samples of micro-
strainer effluent and mechanical stirring. Initial "flash" mixing
was accomplished at 100 rpm for five minutes followed by flocculation
at 50 rpm for fifteen minutes. The subsequent subsistence period
was 30 minutes.
-33-
-------
Effectiveness of flocculation and sedimentation in the removal of
suspended solids was approximately 60% (Table 9) with the use of
alum and lime as coagulants. Preliminary indications from jar testing
were that more rapid floe formations could be obtained through
addition of polymer aids. Termination of the project, however,
prevented adequate evaluation of such additives.
Diatomaceous Earth Filter
Solids carry-over onto the diatomite filter during early stages of
operation, in excess of those anticipated in the design state of the
project, resulted in extreme reduction of volume through the unit
and excessive backwashing. Solids, originally identified as grease
but later found to be mixed with protein, passed through the micro-
•»*
strainer so were apparently in an emulsified or colloidal state.
At the beginning of the project, two grades of diatomaceous earth
were tested as filter media. These were Johns Manville Hyflow
Super Gel, which is a medium grade of diatomaceous earth, and Johns
Manville 545 which is the next coarser grade. The 545 consistently
produced filter runs of twice the length obtained with the finer
earth and was used throughout the remainder of the first phase of the
study. Table 10 indicates the difficulties encountered in the use of
diatomaceous earth as a filter media for a typical three week period.
These filter runs were made using 545 media with an application of
1 ing/1 body feed.
Effectiveness of the use of body feed in extending the length of
filter runs was evaluated. An application of 1 mg/1 of 545 diato-
maceous earth as a body feed, as indicated in Table 11, produced
longer filter runs when based on 90 psi (621 kN/m2) as the final
inlet pressure. This increase in filter runs was minimal, however,
and was discontinued midway through the study period.
-34-
-------
Table 10. DIATOMACEOUS EARTH FILTER RUNS
N
31
31
31
31
Table
Number Runs
Average Run
Maximum Run
Minimum Run
Number Runs
Average Run
Maximum Run
Minimum Run
X 0
Volume - gallons
25,373 18,783
Time - minutes
137 92.8
Rate - gpm
185 16.1
Head Loss - Ibs/min
0.53 0.45
Max. Min.
71,700 3,600
332 19 -
202 37
1.77 0.05
11. EFFECT OF BODY FEED IN EXTENDING
DIATOMACEOUS FILTER RUNS
Total Length Gallons
Gallons of Run Per
Minutes Minute
With Body Feed - 1 mg/1
17
29,518 156 194
66,300 332 200
3,600 19 189
Without Body Feed
14
19,840 113 173
34,744 202 172
6,475 37 175
2
Gal Ions /Ft Accumulated
Minute Head Loss
psi
0.64 28
0.66 28
0.63 14
0.57 33
0.57 29
0.58 33
-35-
-------
The diatomaceous earth filter proved to be totally inadequate for use
with water of the quality being applied. In no instance was the design
volume of 300 gpm (19 liters/s) attained.
Sand filter
During the second segment of the study the diatomaceous earth filter was
bypassed and one of the sand filters in the Sterling water treatment
unit was used.
Each of the two 15' diameter sand filters in the Sterling water treatment
unit has sufficient capacity to filter the total demand flow for the
poultry plant. The piping to one filter was altered to allow it to be
used as a standby for the Sterling water treatment plant and also as the
final filter for the project's advanced water treatment unit. The
sand filter proved capable of filtering the applied water at a con-
tinuous rate of 300 gpm (19 liters/s) with weekly backwash.
Piping arrangement allowed water from the sedimentation basin clear
well to be pumped to the Sterling sand filter. The filtered water
could then be returned to the primary wastewater lagoon, bypassed
directly to the river, or discharged into the raw water basin of
Sterling's water treatment unit. This arrangement provided the oppor-
tunity to compare effectiveness of sand filtration to diatomaceous
earth filtration of the reclaimed water.
During this segment of the study, one diatomaceous earth filter run
was made each day for a period of 15 days to allow comparison of its
effectiveness with sand filtration. Results of this comparison are
shown in Table 12.
-36-
-------
Table 12. COMPARISON OF EFFECTIVENESS OF
DIATOMACEOUS EARTH AND SAND FILTRATION
tng/1
Diatomaceous Earth
N M
BOD
COD
S.S.
Grease
Volume (gpm)
2
Rate gal/ ft /rain
15
3
15
15
15
0
3.8
2.4
0
167
0.84
Sand
N M
15
3
15
15
15
0.5
4.1
5.1
3.6
300
1.7
Reuse
The Sterling plant was closed for a period of six weeks due to a
labor strike. This provided an opportunity to study problems and
effects relating to the use of reclaimed water to augment the Sterling
water supply.
During this period, the Sterling plant's water treatment unit was
operated at capacity with the total volume discharged through the
plant's drainage system into the primary wastewater lagoon. Lagoon
effluent was treated in the advanced treatment unit utilizing sand
filtration. Reclaimed water was introduced into the Sterling plant
supply at the rate of 100 gpm (6.3 I/sec), 200 gpm (12.6 ^1/sec), and
ultimately 300 gpm (18.9 I/sec).
To resolve pressure variation difficulties inherent in the inter-
connection of two pressure systems, and further, to provide maximum
treatment of reclaimed water, water from the advanced treatment unit
was introduced into the raw water basin of the Sterling water treatment
unit, and introduced into the poultry plant's distribution system
through Sterling's pumping arrangement. Continuous monitoring of the
-37-
-------
integrated supply demonstrated the ability to maintain a free chlorine
residual throughout the system and the maintenance of a turbidity level
of less than 2 (JTU). The treatment facilities utilized during this
operation are shown in Figure 15.
Figure 15
Wastewater Treatment and Advanced
Water Treatment Route of Flow
Screening
4
Primary Lagoon with grease skimming
lary Lagoon with grease skimming
I
Settling
I
\X
Chlorination
^
Microstraining
^
Flocculation, sedimentation.
4
Chlorination ("breakpoint")
„ ^
Pressure storage
^
Sand filtration
I
Chlorination ("breakpoint")
4
Flocculation, sedimentation
>
Sand filtration
4
Chlorination (free residual)
-38-
-------
Four points of chlorination are contained in the complete treatment
processes:
1. Chlorination of secondary lagoon effluent. Rate of chlorination
at this point is determined by level of disinfection necessary
for the control of coliform in effluent discharged to the
river. A minimum of 30 minutes' contact time is provided with
the objective of 1 mg/1 of free residual chlorine in discharged
effluent. At the beginning of the study it was discovered that
short circuiting of the contact chamber often resulted in the
presence of free chlorine in discharged effluent without
effective disinfection. The chlorine difuser line was lengthened
to extend the entire length of the chlorine contact chamber.
Normal rate of application in the chlorine contact chamber for
bacteriological control has been established at 20 Ibs/day.
2. Chlorination of settling basin effluent. Chlorine is added
on the suction side of the pump which delivers settled water
to the pressure storage tank prior to filtration. During the
first operational segment of the study, water was filtered
prior to discharge into the pressure tank. During the second
segment, water was pumped into the pressure storage tank prior
to delivery to the sand filter. This procedure provides for an
additional 30 minute period of chlorine contact.
Chlorine dosage at this point is determined by chlorine demand.
Normal dosage rate is 20 Ibs/day with the objective being the
reaching of "breakpoint."
3. Pre-chlorination, Sterling water treatment raw water basin.
Rate of chlorination is 5 Ibs/day to control biological
growth within the unit and to satisfy chlorine demand of raw
water. Objective is to reach "breakpoint" and to carry a
chlorine residual onto the sand filter surface.
-39-
-------
4. Chlorinatiou of filter effluent. Final chlorination is
provided at the rate of 5 Ibs/day, with chlorine introduced
into water service main entering the processing plant. The
objective is to assure a chlorine residual throughout the
poultry plant distribution system.
-40-
-------
SECTION VII
RECIAIMED WATER QUALITY
Sampling and Analytical Procedures
The study provided for chemical and physical examination of samples
collected from each of five sampling points throughout the system.
Samples were collected routinely of raw wastewater, primary and
secondary lagoon effluent, microstrainer effluent, and filtered water.
During the second operational segment, samples of settled water and
comparison samples of filtered water from the diatomaceous earth and
sand filters were also examined.
Samples of raw wastes and wastewater secondary lagoon effluent were
composited over 24 hours and collected once each day. Grab samples
were collected of the primary lagoon effluent and from each point in the
advanced water treatment unit. Sampling procedures allowed for con-
tinuous evaluation of effectiveness of each phase of the wastewater
lagoon treatment and advanced water treatment processes.
Following filtration, finished water from the advanced water treatment
unit was routinely subjected to both wastewater and drinking water
examinations.
Quality Control Procedures
Routine chemical and bacteriological examinations were conducted in
the Cumberland, Maryland, branch laboratory which operates under
supervision of the Laboratories and Research Administration of the
Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Specialized
chemical, virology, and chromatograph examinations were conducted in
the Administration's central laboratory in Baltimore, Maryland.
-41-
-------
All examinations were made in accordance with the procedures established
in the following:
The Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,
13th Edition, 1971. Published by American Public Health Association,
and Water Pollution Control Association.
EPA Methods for Chemical Analyses of Water and Wastes, 1971.
Published by Environmental Protection Agency.
Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories, 1972. Published by Environmental Protection Agency.
Pesticide Analytical Manual. Food and Drug Administration.
Polyelectrolyte Technique for Virus Detection as developed by
Dr. Joseph L. Melnick (Baylor University).
Chemical - Physical Evaluation
Results of chemical and physical examinations of reclaimed water through-
out both segments of the operational phase of the study* are shown in
Table 13. With the exception of turbidity, study facilities proved
capable of consistently reaching standards established for drinking
water for each characteristic studied. Facilities used during the
second segment of the study's operational phase proved capable of
producing a finished "water with turbidities ranging from 1 to 3 units.
As indicated previously, the-limited period of study following com-
pletion of the settling basin did not allow thorough evaluation of
advantages of coagulant aids. Increased efficiency of coagulation
should result in more consistent turbidity control. Although chloride
content of the finished water was consistently below the allowable
limit of 500 mg/1, continuous recycling of Wastewater could result in
chloride's buildup exceeding satisfactory levels.
-42-
-------
Table 13. CHEMICAL-PHYSICAL QUALITY OF RECLAIMED WATER
mg/1
Drinking Water
Standard- 1962
Turbidity (JTU)
Color
Pesticides
pH
Alkalinity
Hardness
Dissolved Solids
Chloride
Cyanide
Fluoride
Nitrate (NO )
Phosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic
Cadmium
Calcium
. 6
Chromrum
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
N = Number of Samples
5
15
500
250
0.2
1
45
250
0.05
0.01
0.05
1.0
0.3
0.05
0.05
0.005
0.01
0.05
270
X = Mean
N
54
90
16
207
101
22
158
162
8
23
89
47
23
17
26
8
26
8
26
27
8
10
8
20
8
8
19
Value
X
3.5
5
0
6.6
104
131
335
117
0
0.21
31
10
13
0.03
0.01
<0.01
46
<0.01
0.06
0.27
0.01
0.02
0.003
10.7
<0.01
<0.01
21
0 = Standard
0
1
7
1.4
57
24
129
53
0.13
8
2
5
0.04
0.01
0
12
0
0.01
0.19
0.01
0.02
0.003
9.5
0
0
15
Deviation
-43-
-------
The effectiveness of various stages of treatment on water clarity is
demonstrated by Figure 16.
Figure 16
Water Clarity Comparison
A. Raw Wastewater
C. Wastewater Treatment Lagoon Effluent
D. Microstrainer Effluent
X. Flocculated-settled Water
E. Filtered Water (Sand Filter)
-44-
-------
Bacteriological Evaluation
Bacteriological samples were collected routinely from the overflow line
from the wastewater lagoon chlorine contact chamber to determine the
reliability of chlorination of lagoon effluent. A chlorine feed rate
of 20 Ibs/day (8 mg/1) was determined adequate to assure the discharge
of effluent containing fewer than 240 fecal coliform/100 ml. At a
chlorination rate of 20 Ibs/day (8 mg/1), 90% of the samples collected
over a two year period contained <3 coliform/100 ml.
During the study period, 352 bacteriological samples of filtered water
from the advanced water treatment system were collected and examined
for coliform, fecal strep, and total plate counts. A chlorine appli-
cation rate of 20 Ibs/day (8 mg/1) prior to filtering resulted in
consistent bacteriological counts of <3 coliform/100 ml; <1 fecal
strep/100 ml; and a standard plate count of <. 100/ml. The chlori-
nation rate of 60 - 80 Ibs/day, necessary to reach "breakpoint"
during the 66 minute retention period in the pressure storage tank
prior to filtering, provides additional assurance of bacteriological
safety of the water.
Virus Control
Examination procedures to assure the total absence of viable virus
organisms in water are not presently available. U. S. P. H. S.
Drinking Water Standards - 1962, indicate the inactivation of enteric
viruses in water requires a minimum free chlorine residual of 0.3 mg/1
for 30 minutes, or 9 mg/1 of combined residual for 3 minutes. As
indicated in Figure 15, chlorine was added in the wastewater lagoon
contact chamber. Chlorination at this point was in sufficient amount
to provide a combined residual following 30 minutes' retention.
Additional chlorination, at the rate required to reach "breakpoint"
during a minimum of 60 minutes1 retention, was provided prior to
filtration.
-45-
-------
Maryland's Laboratories and Research Administration has the capability
of identifying human enteric virus organisms in water. During the
study nine five gallon (18.9 liter) samples were composited at random
from filtered reclaimed water and examined for human enteric virus
organisms. All samples were negative.
Continuous automatic monitoring and recording of free chlorine
residual was provided.
-46-
-------
SECTION VIII
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Initial cost of the two wastewater treatment units was $84,000,
excluding land value. Construction cost of the advanced water
treatment unit, including control house, covered sedimentation
basin, 1000 feet (305 m) of pipe line and equipment, was $89,998.50,
resulting in a combined construction cost of $173,998.50.
Annual costs are summarized in Table 14. To arrive at the annual
cost of Sterling's wastewater treatment unit, depreciation is con-
sidered at 10%. Annual costs of the advanced water treatment
unit, due to the variety of equipment, include individual depreci-
ation rates as determined from the Internal Revenue Service
depreciation schedule. Interest on investment is charged at an
annual average rate of 8% for both units. One full time operator's
salary is shared between the two units.
Annual cost of the wastewater treatment unit has been determined
to be $22,658.75. Annual cost of the advanced water treatment
unit is $19,976.77, for a combined annual cost of $42,135.52.
This is equal to a total wastewater treatment and water
reclaiming cost of $1.01/1000 Ibs LWK ($2.22/1000 kg LWK).
-47-
-------
Table 14. ANNUAL AND CAPITAL COSTS
Wastewater Lagoon System
Initial Investment $84,000.00
Average Annual Interest at 8% $3,360.00
Depreciation (10% annual) 8,400.00
Chlorine 10,950 Ibs @ $13.50 cwt 1,478.25
Electricity 378,-500 kWh @ $0.013 4,920.50
Plant Operator 1/2 time @ $9,000.00 4,500.00
Annual Cost $22,658.75
Advanced Water Treatment System
Initial Investment $89,998.50
Average Annual Interest at 8% $3,599.00
Depreciation (I.R.S. Schedule) 5,187.52
Materials
Chlorine 3,750 Ibs @ $13.50 cwt $506.25
Lime 50,000 Ibs @ $1.90 cwt 950.00
Alum 50,000 Ibs @ $5.00 cwt 2,500.00
$3,956.25 3,956.25
Electricity 172,000 kWh @ $0.013 2,236.00
Plant Operator 1/2 time @ $9,000.00 4,500.00
Annual Cost $19,476.77
Total Annual Cost $42,135.52
Total Capital Cost $173,998.50
-48-
-------
For purposes of comparison, capital costs and annual costs were
computed on the basis of average daily volumes. On the basis of
annual costs, an average flow of 0.288 mgd, and 250 working days/
year, the cost of treatment in the wastewater lagoon unit was de-
termined to be $0.31/1000 gal with advanced water treatment cost
determined to be $0.27/1000 gal, for a total treatment cost of
$0.58/1000 gal. Capital costs for the wastewater lagoons and
advanced water treatment system were $2.91/gpd capacity and $3.12/
gpd capacity, respectively.
-49-
-------
SECTION IX
DESIGN FACTORS
Influent pump
self priming sewage pump - 10 hp (7.457 kw)
300 gpm (19 1/s)
40 feet total head (12,192 kgs/m2)
Micros tra iner
70 micron filter screen
108 sq ft screen area (10 m2)
300 gpm (19 1/s)
Chemical feeder
slurry type
dual head
variable
Low head pump
flooded suction - 2 hp (1.49 kw)
300 gpm (19 1/s)
10 feet total head (3048 kg/m2)
Mixing tank
4' 6" x 51 8" (1.37 m x 1.73 m)
600 gal (2271 1)
2 min flash mixing
Flash mixer
gear driven - 1/3 hp (.248 kw)
10" propeller (25.4 cm)
350 rpm
-50-
-------
Chemical feeder
volumetric type
1/12 hp (.062kw)
12 Ibs/hr (lime) max. (5.44 kg/hr)
Flocculation basin
15' x 91 x 4' (4.6 m x 1.2 m)
4050 gal capacity (15,330 1)
13 min flocculation time
Flocculators
horizontal type
2-10' (3.05 m) units - wooden slot
1/2 hp - 2'/sec (.37 kw - 0.6 m/s)
Sedimentation basin
15' x 30* x 10' deep (4.6 m x 9.2 m x 3.05 m)
2 hr retention
overflow rate 950 gal/day/ft2 (38,700 I/day/m2)
Pump
portable, diaphragm type - sludge pump
1/2 hp (.37 kw)
Tank - sludge storage
elevated
10' diameter x 51 deep (3.05 m x 1.52 m)
cone bottom
Chlorinator
cylinder mounted
100 Ib/day max (45.36 kg/day)
Platform scale
single beam
100 Ib graduations (45.36 kg)
-51-
-------
Pump
flooded suction - 20 hp (14.9 kw)
300 gpm (19 1/s)
2
180 feet total head (55,000 kgs/m )
Filter
diatomaceous earth
2 gal/min/ft2 (1.3
300 gpm capacity (19 1/s)
2 gal/min/ft2 (1.36 1/s/m2)
Chlorine monitor
free chlorine residual analyzer
0-3 mg/1
30 day continuous recorder chart
Tank
pressure storage
10' diameter x 54* (3.05 m x 16.5 m)
20,000 gal capacity (76,000 1)
Air compressor
1/2 hp (.37 kw)
3.8 cu ft/min (0.11 cu m/min)
175 psi (1,207 kN/m2)
-52-
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
l,< Report W».
3. Accession Mo.
^ , • I
• '*"' J
.-• 1
w
4. Title
POULTRY PROCESSING WASTEWATER TREATMENT
AND REUSE
5; Report Date
7. Author! s)
James D. Clise
Repwt *fo.
10. Project No.
Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
11. Contract/Grant No.
12060 FYG
j =>'! ?. Xvpe af Jtepo** aad
flood Covered
15, Supplementary Notes
Environmental Protection Agency report number EPA-660/2-74-060 , March
16. Abstract
The feasibility of reclaiming poultry processing wastewater for reuse where
potable water>is presently required was studied at the Sterling Processing Corporation
plant in Oakland, Maryland, by the Maryland State Department of Health and Mental
Hygiene. In addition, extensive study was made of poultry processing raw waste
characteristics and proportions of wastes generated during processing and plant
cleanup. Effluent characteristics from a two-stage aerated lagoon are reported.
The reclaiming process consisted of a two-stage aerated lagoon wastewater
treatment system followed by an advanced water treatment system of microstraining*
flocculation, sedimentation, and sand filtration.
The bacteriological, chemical, and physical drinking water standards of the
U.S. Public Health Service were consistently met. Samples were composited at
random and examined for human enteric virus organisms. All were found to be
negative.
The microstraining, flocculation, sedimentation, and sand filtration system
had an annual capital and operating cost of $0.71/1000 liters ($0.27/1000 gallons).
17a, Descriptors
Waste Water Treatment*, Reclaimed Water*, Water Reuse*, Recycling*, Water
Purification*, Potable Water*, Food Processing Industry, Poultry, Water Pollution
Control, Water Treatment, Flocculation, Filtration.
17b. Identifiers
Poultry Processing Industry, Aerated Lagoons, Microstraining, Diatomaceous
Earth Filter, Sand Filter.
17c. COWRK Field-& Group
18. Availability
19.. Security Class.
(Report)
TO. Security Class,
(Page)
21. No; of,
Pages
22. Price
Send To:
WATER Rcacnmcea SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTKR
US. DEPARTMENT Of THE INTERIOR
WAMINQflrOM, DJC. 10240
Abstractor
James F.
Institution
Environmental Protection Agency
WRSIC 102 (REV. JUNE
, G P O
------- |