EPA-600/2-78-028
March 1978
Environmental Protection Technology Series
EVALUATION OF THE RBC PROCESS FOR
MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
EPA-600/2-78-028
March 1978
EVALUATION OF THE RBC
PROCESS FOR MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
by
David L. Kluge
Vi I I age of Pewaukee
Pewaukee, Wl 53072
and
Raymond J. Kipp
Cltfford J. CrandalI
Marquette University
Mi Iwaukee, Wl 53233
Grant No. S802905
Project Officer
Robert L. Bunch
Wastewater Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORTORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publica-
tion. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
it
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of increasing
public and government concern about the dangers of pollution to the health
and welfare of the American people. Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled
land are tragic testimony to the deterioration of our natural environment.
The complexity of that environment and the interplay between its components
require a concentrated and integrated attack on the problem.
Research and development is that necessary first step in problem solu-
tion and it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and search-
ing for solutions. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory develops
new and improved technology and systems for the prevention, treatment, and
management of wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges
from municipal and community sources, for the preservation and treatment of
public drinking water supplies, and to minimize the adverse economic, socialt
health, and aesthetic effects of pollution. This publication is one of the
products of that research; a most vital communications link between the
researcher and the user community.
The case history documented herein is intended to provide the sanitary
engineering community with design and operating information on the utiliza-
tion of the rotating biological contactor process for municipal wastewater
treatment.
Francis T. Mayo, Director
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
i i i
-------
ABSTRACT
The rotating biological contactor (RBC) process was evaluated for
municipal wastewater treatment in a two-phase study conducted at the 1779
m^/day (0.47 mgd) Pewaukee, Wisconsin wastewater treatment plant. The Phase
I study demonstrated and evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of the
RBC process and compared its performance with a parallel 1136 mVday (0.30
mgd) trickling filter. The Phase II study demonstrated and evaluated
phosphorus removal and treatment upgrading by mineral addition of different
cation species (i.e. alum and ferric chloride) to the RBC process at two
different feed points upstream and downstream from the RBC units.
Phase I results indicated that superior BOD and SS effluent values were
obtained with the RBC process but that better nitrification was achieved by
the trickling filter. Neither attached growth process exhibited significant
phosphorus removal efficiencies.
Phase II results indicated that mineral addition improved RBC phosphorus
removal but resulted in a deterioration of effluent BOD and SS values,
regardless of the location of mineral addition or the cation species employed
for phosphorus removaI.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Grant No. S802905 by the
Village of Pewaukee under the partial sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. This report covers the period from 1971 to 1976, and work
was completed as of January 31, 1976.
iv
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword i i i
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vii
Acknowledgments vi ii
I. Introduction I
2. Conclusions 2
3. Recommendations 4
4. Plant Description 5
5. Testing Program 10
6. Test Results 15
Phase I 15
Phase II 24
Appendices
A. RBC design data * 45
B. Trickling filter design data 47
C. Phase I phosphorus data, RBC plant 48
D. Phase I phosphorus data, trickling filter plant 51
E. Phase 1 I phosphorus data 54
F. Phase I I organic removal data 66
G. Phase II final effluent data. . . 78
H. Trickling filter treatment summary, 1973, 4 & 6 90
I. RBC treatment summary, 1973, 4 & 6 93
-------
FIGURES
Number Paqe
I Schematic flow diagram : RBC plant, Village of Pewaukee, Wl. ... 6
2 Schematic flow diagram : Trickling Filter Plant, Village of
Pewaukee, Wl 8
3 BOD removal efficiency : RBC process (Phase I) 17
4 Effect of hydraulic loading on BOD removal efficiency : RBC
process (Phase I ) 18
5 Effect of alum on effluent total P concentrat Ton (feed after
RBC units) 29
6 Effect of alum on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed after
RBC units) 30
7 Effect of alum on effluent total P concentration (feed before
RBC units) 31
8 Effect of alum on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed before
RBC units) 32
9 Effect of iron salt on effluent total P concentration (feed
after RBC units) 34
10 Effect of iron salt on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed
after RBC units) 35
II Effect of iron salt on effluent total P concentration (feed
before RBC units) . 36
12 Effect of iron salt on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed
before RBC units) 37
13 BOD removal efficiency : RBC process (Phase II) 38
14 TOC removal efficiency : RBC process (Phase II) 40
15 Variation of effluent nitrate nitrogen : RBC process 41
16 Variation of effluent ammonia nitrogen : RBC process 42
vi
-------
TABLES
Number Page
I Sampling Description, Village of Pewaukee Study, Phase I II
2 Testing Schedule, Village of Pewaukee Study, Phase I 12
3 Sampling Description, RBC Process, Village of Pewaukee Study,
Phase II 13
4 Testing Schedule, Village of Pewaukee Study, Phase II 14
5 Treatment Summary, Village of Pewaukee RBC Plant, Phase I, 1972 . 16
6 Treatment Summary, Village of Pewaukee Trickling Filter,
Phase I, 1972 20
7 Phosphorus Removal Summary, Village of Pewaukee, Phase I, 1972. . 21
8 Nitrogen Summary, Village of Pewaukee RBC Plant, Phase 1 22
9 Nitrogen Summary, Village of Pewaukee Trickling Filter, Phase I . 23
10 Preliminary Plant Performance Data, Village of Pewaukee RBC
Plant, Phase II 25
II Organic Removal Summary, Village of Pewaukee RBC Plant,
Phase II, 1975 43
12 Final Effluent Summary, Village of Pewaukee RBC Plant,
Phase I I, 1975 . . . 44
vii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The cooperation of Frank Koehler and tiis associates at Autotrol
Corporation is gratefully acknowledged. Special assistance was also
provided by Darwin Spaal, Village of Pewaukee wastewater treatment plant
operator, and John McCarthy and Don Gamble, research assistants at Marquette
University, College of Engineering.
vi ii
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The Village of Pewaukee, Wisconsin is the site of a 1779 m /day (0.47
MOD) wastewater treatment plant incorporating the rotating biological con-
tactor (RBC) process for secondary biological treatment. The Pewaukee
faci I'ity is the first municipal wastewater treatment plant in the U.S. to
utilize the RBC process on a full-scale basis. The RBC portion of the treat-
ment plant was constructed and evaluated with Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) demonstration grant funds. The demonstration project was divided into
two phases, as reported below. This report presents the results of both
phases of the study.
PHASE I
The Phase I study commenced on December I, 1971, and continued for a one-
year period. The study was conducted jointly by the Village of Pewaukee and
Autotrol Corporation.* The objectives of this portion of the study were to
demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the RBC process
for treating municipal wastewater on a plant scale basis and to compare its
performance with the existing trickling filter. Operating variables investi-
gated included rotational disc velocity, hydraulic loading and wastewater
temperature.
PHASE I I
The Phase II study commenced on September 23, 1974,and continued for
approximately one and one-half years. The study was conducted jointly by the
Village of Pewaukee and the Marquette University Engineering Research Founda-
tion. The purpose of this portion of the study was two-fold, as follows:
I. To demonstrate and evaluate phosphorus removal by mineral addition to
the RBC process.
2. To demonstrate and evaluate overall treatment upgrading by mineral
addition to the RBC process.
Both aluminum sulfate and ferric chloride were evaluated at two differ-
ent injection points upstream and downstream from the RBC units. The objec-
tives of the study were to consistently produce an effluent phosphorus concen-
tration below 1.5 mg/l (total P) and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and sus-
pended solids (SS) levels below 15 mg/l.
*Autotrol Corporation, 5888 North Glen Park Road, Glendale, Wl 53209
I
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results observed during this study, the following conclu-
sions are presented.
PHASE I
I. The RBC process produced an effluent of satisfactory BOD and SS quality,
averaging 20 and 15 mg/l, respectively.
2. The RBC process achieved an average BOD removal efficiency of 83 percent.
3. The trickling filter process produced inconsistent effluent BOD and SS
concentrations, averaging 38 and 50 mg/l, respectively.
4. RBC process performance was not appreciably affected by variations in
raw wastewater temperature between 3.9°C (39°F) and I9.4°C (67°F).
5. Trickling filter process performance was affected by raw wastewater
temperature between 3.9°C and I9.4°C, with process deterioration at the
lower temperatures.
6. BOD removal efficiency improved with increasing influent BOD concentra-
tion applied to the RBC process.
7. Both attached growth processes exhibited poor and inconsistent phosphorus
removal efficiencies, varying from a 21 percent average for the RBC
process to a 27 percent average removal for the trickling filter.
8. The trickling filter consistently achieved significantly better
nitrification than the RBC process.
PHASE 11
I. The addition of mineral salts to the RBC process resulted in a deterio-
ration of effluent BOD and SS quality, averaging 35 and 56 mg/l,
respectively.
2. The addition of mineral salts to the RBC process resulted in a decreased
effluent phosphorus concentration averaging 3.0 mg/l, but the desired
project objective of 1.5 mg/l total P was not achieved.
-------
3. RBC process efficiency, as measured by BOD removal, was considerably
lower than Phase I performance (i.e. 63 percent compared to 83 percent);
this observation was verified by COD and TOC measurements.
4. Neither mineral salt studied provided a significant advantage over the
other relative to phosphorus removal.
-------
SECTION 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of this study, the following recommendations are
made.
«
I. Mineral salt addition after the RBC process is advised for phosphorus
removal, with close control over any side streams such as digester
supernatant that may adversely affect the process. Either iron or
aluminum salts may be utilized.
2. Filtration or polymer addition to enhance removal of precipitated
phosphorus should be investigated as a means to achieve desired
effluent phosphorus levels if mineral salts are added.
-------
SECTION 4
PLANT DESCRIPTION
GENERAL
Schematic flow diagrams of the Pewaukee wastewater treatment plant are
presented in Figures I and 2. Raw wastewater enters the plant through a
diversion manhole which divides the flow between the trickling filter plant
(1136 m3/day design flow) and the RBC plant (1779 m3/day design flow).
RBC Plant (Figure I)
Raw wastewater enters the RBC plant through a 15.2 cm (6 in.) ParshalI
flume and a comminutor into a wet well. Wastewater is'pumped by three
25.2 I/sec (400 gpm) pumps to the primary portion of the combined primary
and secondary clarifier. A I I.0 m (36 ft.) diameter by 2.I m (7 ft.) deep
inner section serves as the secondary clarifier and a 2.0 m (6.5 ft.) wide by
2.1 m (7 ft.) deep outer annular ring serves as the primary clarifier. A
single rotating bridge with two scraper mechanisms collects settled solids
from both the primary and secondary sections. The primary clarifier is
designed for a surface overflow rate of 22.6 m^/day/m2 (554 gpd/ft2) and the
secondary clarifier is designed for a surface overflow rate of 20.5 m-Vday/m2
(503 gpd/ft2).
Primary effluent flows by gravity to the RBC units where the flow stream
is divided into two parallel paths which pass through four stages of treat-
ment. Each stream is distributed along the length of the first shaft of
discs by a V-notch weir. Mixed liquor in each stage of treatment flows over
a flat-edge weir to the subsequent adjacent stage. Total head loss through
the four stages of treatment is approximately 10.2 cm (4 in.). .
The effluents from the two parallel paths of treatment are combined
after the RBC units and flow by gravity to the secondary portion of the com-
bined primary and secondary clarifiers. Effluent from the secondary clari-
fier is chlorinated prior to discharge into the Pewaukee River.
Sludge is drawn from the secondary clarifier by an automated valve and
flows by gravity to the wet well of the plant. A recirculation pump is
available to recycle secondary sludge to the RBC units. Raw wastewater pumps
lift the mixture of raw wastewater and secondary sludge to the primary clari-
fier where settling occurs, and the combined primary and secondary sludge is
pumped on an intermittent basis to the aerobic digester.
-------
LEGEND:
AEROBIC DIGESTER
s
TO TRICKLING
MLTEB HINT
i ,
TOTAL>rh_ ( j
INFLUENT DiDcuin
inriucni PARSHALl
FLUME
UPERNATANT SLUDGE
| TO AEROBIC
DIGLSTER
1 1
| 1 |
1 ' 1
i | A , , -
WET ^ | rRIMARY ^7-* ^^ ' ' '
W"1;^ fl»»IFIER ( |
* ]£J T | - .....
-I -fT
i i LJ
i 1 1
i i
1 RECYCLE
1
,
COMPOSITE SAMPLE
GRAB SAMPLE
-l
EFFLUENT
Figure I. Schematic flow diagram: RBC Plant, Village of Pewaukee, Wl
-------
The aerobic digester consists of a 9.8 m (32 ft.) diameter by 3.7 m
(12 ft.) liquid depth single stage covered unit equipped with a 14.9 kw
(20 HP) floating surface aerator. The unit is designed for a liquid detention
time of 28.5 days. Digester supernatant is drawn off intermittently by
means of a telescopic valve and flows by gravity to the raw wastewater wet
we 11.
Digested sludge is dewatered on sand drying beds prior to disposal by
landfill. A drawoff line is available for alternate hauling of wet sludge.
Trickling Filter Plant (Figure 2)
Raw wastewater entering the trickling filter plant is metered by a
15.2 cm (6 in.) ParshalI flume prior to being pumped to the primary clarifier
unit by three 25.2 I/sec (400 gpm) wastewater pumps. The primary clarifier
consists of a rectangular unit 13.1 m (43 ft.) long by 3.7 m (12 ft.) wide by
2.8 m (9.25 ft.) deep and is designed for a surface overflow rate of 23.6
m3/day/m2 (580 gpd/ft2).
Primary effluent flows by gravity to a 21.3 m (70 ft.) diameter by 1.7 m
(5.7 ft.) deep stone media filter equipped with a fiberglass cover. Effluent
from the trickling filter is settled in a rectangular secondary clarifier
identical to the primary clarifier and discharged to the Pewaukee River.
Secondary sludge is returned to the raw wastewater wet well. Primary
sludge is pumped to a single stage anaerobic digestor. Digestor supernatant
is returned to the raw wastewater wet well.
RBC UNITS
Physical Description
The RBC units are enclosed in a 15.2 m (50 ft.) by 18.3 m (60 ft.)
building which protects the discs from potential damage due to wind, precipi-
tation, vandalism, or freezing temperatures.
A total of eight shafts, each 5.5 m (18 ft.) long, are located in the
RBC building. Mounted on each shaft are 150 polystyrene discs spaced at
3.4 cm (1.33 in.) centers. The discs, each 3.0 m (10 ft.) in diameter by
1.3 cm (0.5 in.) thick provide 14.1 m2 (152 ft2) of surface area per disc for
biological growth, for a total surface area of 2118 m2 (22,800 ft2) per
shaft.
The shafts are mounted in semicircular concrete tanks, which conform to
the shape of the discs, and are arranged in two parallel paths of four shafts
each. Wastewater flow is perpendicular to the shafts and each shaft provides
an individual biological treatment stage.
Each shaft is driven independently by a drive system consisting of a
I.I kw (1.5 HP) motor, helical gear reducer, and chain and sprocket final
drive capable of discs speed variations between 0.75 to 2.0 rpm.
-------
TO RBC PLANT
ANAEROBIC
DIGESTER
SUPERNATANT
I
I
SLUDGE
TO ANAEROBIC
DIGESTER
ALTERNATE FLOW PATH
TOTAl
INFLUENT
oo
Primary
Clarifier
Trickling Filter
Secondary
a
i
EFFLUENT
RECYCLE
Figure 2. Schematic flow diagram: Trickling Filter Plant, Village of Pewaukee, Wl.
-------
Process Description
The RBC process is classified as an attached growth biological reactor.
Initially, slow rotation of the partially submerged (i.e. approximately one-
half of the disc diameter) discs in the wastewater results in the gradual
growth of an attached microbial culture, reaching a thickness of 2 to 4 mm
after approximately I week of operation. Continued rotation of the shaft
results in oxidation of organic matter in the applied wastewater. Rotation
also provides a low energy means of aeration by exposing a thin film of
wastewater on the disc surfaces to the air.
Excess biomass generated by organic carbon metabolism of the attached
culture is continuously sloughed off by the shearing forces exerted as the
discs are rotated through the wastewater. Mixing provided by the rotating
shafts keeps the sloughed biomass in suspension until this mixed liquor
stream is processed by subsequent secondary clarification.
DESIGN DATA
A summary of the detailed design data for the RBC plant is presented in
Appendix A. The plant is designed for an overall BOD removal of 90 percent,
with the primary clarifier expected to remove 30 percent of the applied BOD
and the RBC process expected to remove 86 percent of the remaining BOD.
Expected effluent quality is approximately 23 mg/l of BOD. An overall sus-
pended solids removal of 95 percent is anticipated, resulting in an average
effluent SS concentration of 18 mg/l.
Design data for the trickling filter plant are presented in Appendix B.
-------
SECTION 5
TESTING PROGRAM
PHASE I
The Phase I sampling points are indicated on Table I. Composite samples
were obtained daily from Sunday through Thursday of each week at the frequen-
cies indicated in Table I. Raw wastewater and biological process effluents
were manually composited by obtaining and mixing three daily grab samples
obtained in the morning, noon and afternoon of each day. All samples were
refrigerated prior to analysis.
The Phase I testing schedule is presented in Table 2. The indicated
analytical techniques were performed in accordance with the 13th Edition
of Standard Methods.
PHASE I I
Phase II sampling points are indicated on Figure I and described in
Table 3. Automatic composite samples were obtained daily from Sunday through
Thursday of each week. Raw wastewater samples were composited proportional
to flow by means of a bucket-type sampler located in the raw influent channel
prior to the point where the flow is split between the two plants. The
bucket sampler was calibrated to collect one sample for every 37.9 m3 (10,000
gallons) of wastewater entering the plant. Primary ancj final effluent
samples were composited on a timed basis, with a sample collected for com-
positing every 15 minutes. A single grab sample of undigested primary sludge
was obtained daily from Monday through Friday, timed to coincide with sludge
withdrawal from the primary clarifier to the aerobic digester.
All analyses were performed at the Marquette University Engineering
Research Foundation Environmental Laboratory with the exception of those
tests which were conveniently measured at the plant (i.e. D.O., temperature
and pH). The Phase II testing schedule is presented in Table 4. All
analyses were performed in accordance with the appropriate sections of the
13th Edition of Standard Methods.
10
-------
TABLE I. SAMPLING DESCRIPTION, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE STUDY, PHASE
Samp 1 Ing
Method
Samp 1 ing
Frequency
RBC
Sampl ing
Point
Trickl i ng
Fi Iter Sampl ing
Point
Raw
Wastewater
Automatic
Compos i te
1 Hour
Intervals
Diversion
Manhole
Diversion
Manhole
SAMPLE IDEN
Primary
Effluent
Automatic
Compos i te
1 'Hour
Interval s
RBC
Influent
Trough
Primary
Clarifier
Ef f 1 uent Trough
T 1 F 1 C A T 1 0 N
Biological
Process Effluent
Manual
Compos i te
3 Times
Dai ly
RBC
Effluent
Trough
Tri ckl i ng
Fi Iter
Ef f 1 uent Trough
Final
Effluent
Automati c
Compos i te
1 Hour
Intervals
Secondary
Clarifier
Outfal 1 Line
Secondary
Clari f ier
Outfal 1 Line
-------
TABLE 2. TESTING SCHEDULE, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE STUDY, PHASE
ANALYTICAL FREQUENCY, PER WEEK
B i o 1 og i ca 1
Raw Primary Process Final
ANALYSES Wastewater Effluent Effluent Effluent
(1)
(2)
(3)
BOD5
BODc, Carbonaceous
COD
CU Demand
TSS
TVSS
TKN
NH3-N
N02 & N03-N
Total P
Total Filtrable P
Ortho P
Temp .
pH
Setteable Solids (volumetric)
D.O. (probe)
5
0-2
5
2
1
2
2-5
1-2
2
2
2
7
5-7
7
5
5
0-2
5
-
2
1
2
2-5
1-2
2
2
2
7
5-7
7
5
2
0-2
-
-
1
1
2
2-5
1-2
-
-
-
7
5-7
7
5
5
0-2
0-1
2
1
2
2-5
1-2
2
2
2
7
5-7
7
5
NOTE: (1) 0.5 mg/l al lylth iourea added.
(2) June, 1972 through December,
(3) Trickling filter effluent on
1972 only.
ly.
-------
TABLE 3. SAMPLING DESCRIPTION, RBC PROCESS,
VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE STUDY, PHASE II
Samp 1 ing
Method
Sampl ing
Frequency
* Sampl ing
Point
* Numbers in
Figure |.
SAMP
Raw
Wastewater
Automatic
Composite
1/2 Hour
1 ntervals
Diversion
Manhole
(1 )
parentheses refer
L E 1 D E N
Primary
Effluent
Automat i c
Compos i te
1/2 Hour
Intervals
RBC
Influent
Trough
(2)
to samp 1 i ng
T 1 F 1 C A T
Final
Effluent
Automatic
Composite
1/2 Hour
Intervals
Secondary
Clari f ier
Outfall Line
(3)
point location
ION
Undigested
SI udge
Grab
Samp le
Once
Dai ly
Sludge
Pump
Discharge
Line
(4)
shown in
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING SCHEDULE, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE STUDY, PHASE II
(1)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(3)
ANALYSES
BOD5
COD
TOC
TSS
TS
VS
Total P
Soluble P
TKN
NH3-N
N03-N
A 1 ka 1 i n i ty
pH
Temperature
D.O.
Al
Fe
NOTES: (1) June
(2) Moni
(3) Moni
Raw
Wastewater
3
2
5
5
-
-
5
-
5
5
2
7
7
-
-
1975 through
tored 5 days
ANALYTICAL FREQUENCY,
Primary Ft
Effluent Eff
3
2
5
5
-
-
5
1
5
5
*" *
(See Note
-
December 1975 only.
per week at Stages 1
tored only when added for P remova
PER WEEK
nal Undi
luent SI
3
2
5
5
-
-
5
5
5
5
2
7
7
(2) )
2
2
& 4 of RBC uni
1.
gested
udge
_
-
-
-
5
5
-
-
-
~
~
^
t.
-------
SECTION 6
TEST RESULTS
PHASE I
Phase I data are summarized in Tables 5 to 9, Figures 3 and 4, and
Appendices C and D. A brief discussion of the data classified according to
significant categories is presented below.
BOD and Suspended Solids
RBC Process
Summary of operation Table 5 summarizes monthly RBC process operation
during Phase I of the study. Effluent BOD and suspended solids averaged 20
and 15 mg/l, respectively, which are well within expected conventional
biological wastewater treatment levels of 30 mg/l for both variables.
Further examination of the data indicates that average monthly BOD and SS
values were both consistently below 30 mg/l and that plant performance was
not significantly effected by wastewater temperature. The annual average
flow of 1154 m5/day (305,000 gpd) was well within the average design flow of
1779 mVday (470,000 gpd), which was not exceeded during any month on an
average basis.
The RBC unit achieved an average BOD removal of 83 percent for the one
year period studied. Total plant BOD removal also averaged 83 percent during
this period.
Effect of BOD concentration on process efficiency Figure 3 presents
the effect of influent BOD concentration (i.e. primary effluent BOD) on RBC
process BOD removal, with wastewater temperature indicated ^as a parameter.
In order to cover temperature extremes and investigate what effect, if any,
that.wastewater temperature had on process efficiency, data were selected for
the two warmest months (i.e. August and September) and the two coldest months
(i.e. February and March). Wastewater temperatures averaged 18.3 and I7.9°C
in August and September and 8.3 and 8.2°C in February and March.
The data indicate more efficient BOD removals at higher influent BOD
concentrations. The data do not indicate a significant temperature effect in
the wastewater temperature range encountered.
Effect of hydraulic loading on process efficiency The effect of
hydraulic loading on RBC process efficiency is presented in Figure 4.
15
-------
TABLE 5. TREATMENT SUMMARY, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT, PHASE I, 1972
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw Avg .
Water Flow
Temp . °C nvVday
9.2
8.3
8.2
9.2
1 1 .8
15.7
17.3
18.3
17.9
15.7
13.0
10.9
12.9
*0rgani
(i .e.
723
715
1083
1098
1313
852
999
1060
(643
1298
1317
1749
1154
B 0
Raw
167
146
145
105
110
(26
98
80
94
95
128
181
124
Percent
D m g / 1 BOD Removal S . S . m g / 1
Primary Final Total RBC Raw Primary Final
150
147
129
100
100
MO
110
108
158
90
109
122
120
c loading expressed as
organic loading to RBC
24
16
27
22
17
14
14
19
23
18
23
21
20
kg' primary
units).
86
89
81
79
85
89
86
76
75
81
82
88
83
BOD/day
84 163
89 142
79 143
78 100
83 1 16
87 107
87 III
82 95
85 107
80 70
79 108
83 ~
83 115
per 1000
79
83
103
91
77
78
79
134
252
75
99
105
sq. m.
17
13
20
18
15
1 1
14
16
21
14
16
15
of RBC
Hydraul ic
Loading
m3/ day /I 000 m2
42.8
42.4
64.0
64.8
77.4
50.1
59.1
62.8
97.0
76.6
77.8
103.1
62.8
surface area
Organ! c
Loading
8.20
6.20
8.25
6.49
7.76
5.51
6.49
6.73
15.32
6.88
8.44
13.52
8.15
-------
100
. 50
A A
IEGEND :
O TEMP. > 15.5°C
A TEMP. < 10.0°C
50
100 150 200
PRIMARY EFFLUENT BOD, mg/l
250
300
Figure 3. BOD removal efficiency: RBC process (Phase I).
-------
CO
100
_T 50
LEGEND:
O TEMP.
15.5°C
A TEMP. < 10.0°C
I
50
100 150
HYDRAULIC LOADING. m3/doy/1000m2
200
250
Figure 4. Effect of hydraulic loading on BOD removal efficiency: RBC process (Phase I).
-------
Wastewater temperature is again represented as a parameter, using the same
data selected for presentation in Figure 3. The data indicate a decrease in
RBC process efficiency at increased hydraulic loading (or decreased retention
time), which is consistent with RBC process theory.
Trickling Filter Process
Summary of Qpej-ation Table 6 summarizes monthly trickling filter
process operation during Phase I of the study. Effluent BOD and suspended
solids values averaged 38 and 50 mg/I, respectively, which were considerably
higher than the RBC process effluent levels. Further examination of the data
indicates a relationship between process performance and wastewater tempera-
ture. The highest process BOD removals of 94 and 80 percent were achieved
during July and August when the wastewater temperature averaged 17.3 and
I8.3°C, respectively, compared to the lowest process BOD removals of 58
percent during January and February when the wastewater temperature averaged
9.2 and 8.3°C, respectively. Total plant BOD removal averaged 71 percent and
trickling filter process removal averaged 70 percent during Phase I.
The annual average flow of 768 m^/day (203,000 gpd) was less than the
average design flow of 1136 nvVday (300,000 gpd). During three months of the
Phase I study, the average design flow was equalled or exceeded (i.e. August,
September and October).
3 7
Hydraulic loading to the trickling filter averaged 2.15 m /day/m (2.30
mgad) and organic loading averaged 158 g BOD/day per m^ (9.86 Ibs. BOD per
1000 cu. ft. per day). Both of these loadings are characteristic of a
standard or low-rate trickling filter. A BOD removal efficiency of 85 to 90
percent is reasonable for this type of filter. However, as indicated by the
data in Table 6, this range of removal was achieved only once on a monthly
basis during the one year period studied.
Phosphorus
RBC Process
A detailed summary of Phase I phosphorus data for the RBC plant is
presented in Appendix C. Raw wastewater total phosphorus values averaged
8.1 mg/l during the 12 month interval. In comparison, primary effluent total
phosphorus values averaged 8.6 mg/l during that same period, indicating the
possible influence of aerobic digester supernatant on phosphorus levels.
Final effluent total phosphorus values averaged 6.9 mg/l, of which 6.5 mg/l
were f i Itrable.
The daily percent removals varied considerably, as indicated by the data
in Appendix C. Annual total phosphorus removals averaged 14.9 percent for
the complete plant and 20.6 percent for the RBC process.
Trickling Filter Process--
Phosphorus data for Phase I trickling filter plant operation are pre-
sented in Appendix D. Raw wastewater phosphorus values are the same reported
for the RBC plant. Similar to the RBC plant, trickling filter primary efflu-
ent total phosphorus values increased over the raw wastewater values, in this
19
-------
TABLE 6. TREATMENT SUMMARY, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE TRICKLING FILTER, PHASE I, 1972
i-o
o
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
.NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw Avg .
Water Flow
Temp . °C m-Vday
.9.2
8.3
8.2
9.2
1 1.8
15.7
17.3
18.3
17.9
15.7
13.0
10.9
12.9
*0rgani
(i.e.
772
537
753
749
575
689
572
1154
1268
1 136
462
560
768
c loading
g/day/m-^).
B 0
Raw
167
146
145
105
1 10
126
98
80
94
95
128
181
124
Percent
D m g / 1 BOD Removal S . S . m g / 1
Primary Final Total T.F. Raw Primary Final
197
154
146
122
97
130
343
91
61
84
68
155
137
expressed as
»
82
64
52
37
30
38
20
18
17
23
25
45
38
g primary
51
56
64
65
73
70
80
78
82
76
80
75
71
BOD/day
58 163
58 142
64 143
70 100
69 116
71 107
94 III
80 95
72 107
73 70
63 108
71
70 115
per m of
170
196
146
163
157
177
778
138
69
97
66
196
trlckl
81
69
60
54
51
63
31
32
33
34
40
50
ing f 1 Iter
Hydraul ic
Loading
m3/day/m2
2.16
1.51
2.10
2.09
1.61
1.93
1.60
3.23
3.54
3.18
1 .29
1.57
2. 15
volume
Organic
Loading
*
245
133
177
147
90
144
315
169
132
153
50
140
158
-------
TABLE 7. PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL SUMMARY, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE, PHASE I, 1972
Description
1 . Raw Wastewater
Total P
Filt. P
Ortho P
R B C P L
Annual Avg.
Cone, mg/l
8.1
6.6
3.4
ANT
Range
mg/l
3.0-18.4
1.0-13.9
1.2- 8.0
TRICKLING
Annual Avg.
Cone, mg/l
8.1
6.6
3.4
FILTER
Range
mg/l
3.0-18.4
1.0-13.9
1.2- 8.0
2. Primary Effluent
Total P
FiIt. P
Ortho P
8.6
6.7
4.6
4.6-12.2
2.0-10.1
1.2- 7.3
10.4
6.8
4.8
3.5-66.0
2.4-18.0
I.1-16.0
3. Final Effluent
Total P
Filt. P
Ortho P
Avg. Per Cent
RemovaI
(Total P)
6.9
6.5
5.1
2.4-10.3
2.1- 9.2
1.3- 7.4
14.9 (over-all)
20.6 (RBC only)
7.6
6;5
4.8
3.3-11.2
2.6- 9.8
1.9- 7.9
5.8 (over-alI)
26.6 (T.F. only)
case averaging 10.4 mg/l. Although this value is considerably higher than
the corresponding RBC primary effluent total phosphorus value, the filtrable
phosphorus values are approximately the same, averaging 6.8 mg/l for the
trickling filter and 6.7 mg/l for the RBC plant. The influence of anaerobic
digester supernatant on nonfiltrable phosphorus levels is indicated by the
data.
Final effluent total phosphorus values averaged 7.6 mg/l, of which 6.5
mg/l were filtrable. Annual total phosphorus removals averaged only 5.8
percent for the complete plant, but a more acceptable removal of 26.6*percent
was achieved by the trickling filter process.
Process Comparison
A comparison of phosphorus removal performance for the RBC and trickling
filter processes is presented in Table 7. Of significance is the fact that
both processes exhibited comparable, though poor, performance and resulted in
the same average filtrable effluent phosphorus concentration (i.e. 6.5 mg/l).
Thus, neither attached growth process appears to offer an advantage for
phosphorus removal.
Nitrogen
RBC Process
A summary of nitrogen data for the RBC plant during Phase I is presented
in Table 8. Raw wastewater total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) averaged 27.3 mg/l
21
-------
TABLE
Month
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Avg.
-71
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
.-72
-72
-72
-72
8. NITROGEN SUMMARY,
Raw
TKN
30.2
32.9
30.2
23.6
21.5
22.5
22.5
15.3
19.7
21.2
18.2
26.3
43.6
27.3
MONTHLY
Was tew ate r
NH3-N N03-N
15.4
15.8
15.4
13.7
12.9
14.0
14.8
10.5
11.7
10.7
II. 0
10.7
15.4
14.3
1.9
I.I
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.2
0.6
1.7
1.3
2.2
1.8
1.2
V 1 LLAGE
OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT,
AVERAGE
Primary Eff
TKN NH3-N
21
26
30
25
23
20
21
20
24
21
17
22
25
25
.8
.9
.3
.4
.3
.0
.4
.7
.9
.9
.9
. 1
.6
.2
12.6
17.6
17.5
12.3
13.5
12.1
14.1
13.3
13.5
9.5
10.5
11.7
15.6
14.5
S , m
luent
N03-N
0.7
0.9
1.0
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.3
2.0
0.5
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.8
PHASE
1
9 / I
Final Effluent
TKN NH3-N N03-N
19.3
21.6
17.7
13.1
12.4
8.6
9.5
8.2
9.5
1 1.9
8.1
13.6
16.9
14.2
13.0
16.4
13.1
8.0
8.8
5.6
7.8
7.3
6.5
7.1
6.5
9.0
13.5
10.2
0.8
1.3
4.9
3.1
3.9
4.9
3.9
3.6
5.2
2.6
2.9
2.1
1.3
3.4
during, that period, which is within the range of values considered typical
for domestic wastewater. Ammonia nitrogen accounts for approximately one-
half of the raw wastewater Kjeldahl nitrogen, averaging 14.3 mg/l.
Insignificant changes occurred during primary clarification, as indi-
cated by the same approximate average nitrogen values for the primary
effluent and the raw wastewater. Final effluent ammonia nitrogen and nitrate
nitrogen values averaged 10.2 and 3.4 mg/l, indicating that some nitrifica-
tion took place.
Trickling Filter Process
A summary of nitrogen data for the trickling filter plant during Phase I
is presented in Table 9. Raw wastewater data are identical to those
presented in Table 8.
22
-------
TABLE 9. NITROGEN SUMMARY, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE TRICKLING FILTER, PHASE
Month
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
-71
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
-72
.-72
-72
-72
-72
Raw
TKN
30.2
32.9
30.2
23.6
21.5
22.5
22.5
15.3
19.7
21 .2
18.2
26.3
43.6
27.3
MONTHLY
Wastewater
NH3-N N03-N
15.4
15.8
15.4
13.7
12.9
14.0
14.8
10.5
11.7
10.7
1 1.0
10.7
15.4
14.3
1 .9
I.I
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.2
0.6
1.7
1.3
2.2
1.8
1.2
AVERAGE
Primary Effl
TKN NHyN
34.4
28.2
32.7
24.5
26.2
18.4
23.7
19.8
18.7
13.7
16.0
17.9
24.9
20.6
14.2
12.7
10.2
12.1
8.5
13.4
8.3
9.4
7.3
9.9
8.6
13.8
12.4
S , m g / 1
uent Final Effluent
N03-N TKN NH3-N N03~N
I.I
2.2
0.9
0.8
0.6
1.9
i.4
0.4
0.6
1.4
1.2
2.6
1.4
18
16
16
10
9
7
II
10
7
5
5
4
10
1 1
.0
.4
.9
.9
.1
.3
.7
.5
.7
.3
.8
.7
.6
.2
10.3
9.4
8.4
4.5
4.9
2.4
5.7
5.0
4.4
2.4
3.4
1.6
8.4
5.9
5.5
9.7
8.3
7.5
6.9
9.0
6.1
6.7
5.9
7.5
7.7
10.9
9.3
8.4
The effect of primary clarification on nitrogen concentrations is
similar to that observed previously for the RBC plant, with generally insig-
nificant changes occurring. Final effluent ammonia nitrogen and nitrate
nitrogen values averaged 5.9 and 8.4 mg/l, indicating that significant
nitrification occurred.
Process Comparison
A comparison of nitrification performance for the RBC and trickling
filter processes indicates that the trickling filter was consistently more
effective in achieving nitrification.
23
-------
PHASE II
Preliminary Study
Before chemical feed to the RBC units was initiated, a preliminary
study was conducted to characterize diurnal variations of the raw wastewater
and provide background information on treatment plant performance. The main
purposes of th!s study were to determine the most appropriate sampling tech-
niques and estimate the required chemical feed rates.
Table 10 summarizes preliminary plant performance data for eight
selected variables over a period of thirteen consecutive days. Raw influent,
primary affluent and final effluent samples were composited over a 24-hour
period and the indicated analyses performed on the composites. During this
period the influent wastewater averaged 9.2 mg/l total P, the primary efflu-
ent averaged 6.2 mg/l and the final effluent averaged 5.9 mg/l. Thus, an
average total P removal of approximately 33 percent was achieved by primary
clarification, but an average removal of only 6 percent was achieved by the
RBC units.
Relatively high average effluent BOD and SS concentrations of 60 mg/l
and 43 mg/l, respectively, were observed during this period. BOD removal by
the RBC process averaged approximately 58 percent.
Diurnal flow variations were obtained by calculating average hourly
flows from continuous flow records; the calculated flows were compared to
flow meter totalized flows with good agreement. The flow pattern repre-
sented was typical of normal domestic wastewater loadings, with the peak
flow occurring during the day and early evening and minimum flow occurring
from midnight to 6 AM.
The diurnal variations of COD and SS were also investigated. A pattern
similar to that of flow variation was obtained for both variables, with
lower concentrations in the early morning compared to higher daytime levels.
The diurnal variation of influent phosphorus was determined for 4
selected days. Significant variation was shown in the daytime levels but a
uniformly low loading was evident during the late evening and early morning
hours. These data served as the basis for characterizing the phosphorus
loading to the plant and subsequent selection of chemical feed rates. The
estimated average total phosphorus loading levels were 0.9 kg/hr (2.0 Ibs/
hr) between 9 AM and 5 PM, 0.5 kg/hr (1.0 Ibs/hr) between 5 PM and midnight,
O.I kg/hr (0.3 Ibs/hr) between midnight and 7 AM, and 0.5 kg/hr (1.0 Ibs/hr)
between 7 and 9 AM.
Operating Conditions
The operating conditions under which mineral addition was to be evalu-
ated are summarized below:
a. Aluminum addition after the RBC units but prior to the secondary
clarif ier (case I).
24
-------
TABLE 10. PRELIMINARY PLANT PERFORMANCE DATA, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT, PHASE II
IN)
Ul
Raw
Primary
Final
B.O.D. mg/l:
Primary
Final
Total Phosphorous mg/l:
Raw
Primary
Final
Susp. So 1 i ds mg/ 1 :
Primary
Final
A 1 urn in urn mg/l :
Raw
Primary
Fi nal
1 ron mg/ 1 :
Raw
Pri mary
Final
Nitrate N mg/l :
Fina 1
Ammon ia N mg/l :
Final
Flow m /day
23
7.4
7.3
8.0
184
62
7.5
8.0
7.0
92
74
0.036
0.036
0.010
3.1
2.0
2.5
1.90
651
Analyses
S E
24
7.5
7.4
7.7
127
65
9.0
7.2
9.5
76
.78
0.076
0.006
0.012
12.5
1. 1
0.4
0.65
654
of 24 hour Composite Samples
PTEMBER, 1974
25 26 29
7.2
7.1
7.2
193
61
9.0
6.2
6.2
87
59
0.076
0.006
0.006
9.2
0.8
0.6
0.60
818
7.4
7.5
7.5
72
31
7.5
5.5
6.0
70
36
0.036
0.016
0.006
7.2
0.6
0.3
0.45
13.3
783
7.3
7.4
7.3
86
42
1 1.0
4.6
4.7
54
18
0.044
0.024
0.006
8.7
1.2
0.6
0.50
780
30
7.3
7.4
7.4
80
45
6.8
6.0
6.0
52
31
0.050
0.024
0.060
5.3
I.I
0.8
0.45
13.5
1014
-------
TABLE 10. (continued)
CTi
Raw
Primary
Final
B.O.D. mg/l :
Primary
Final
Total Phosphorous mg/l:
Raw
Primary
Final
Susp. Sol ids mg/l :
Primary
Final
Al uminum mg/l :
Raw
Primary
Final
1 ron mg/ 1 :
Raw
Primary
Final
Nitrate N mg/l:
Final
Ammon i a N mg/ 1 :
Final
Flow nvVday
*Averaqe of 13 Dailv Resu
01
7.2
7.5
7.5
132
55
9.5
5.8
6.2
67
35
0.015
0.026
0.020
5.8
0.8
0.5
0.45
867
Its
Anal
02
7.3
7.5
7.4
102
49
9.5
6.0
5.8
77
63
0.025
0.014
0.010
7.7
0.8
0.8
0.60
912
yses of 24
0 C T 0
03
7.4
N.S.
7.5
N.S.
46
9.0
N.S.
6.3
N.S.
39
0.060
N.S.
0.026
1 1 .4
N.S.
1.4
0.95
901
hour Compos 1
B E R , 19
07
7.2
7.5
7.5
451
171
11.0
7.0
4.5
198
46
0.070
0.006
0.016
25.2
3. 1
0.8
1.25
1090
Ite Samp
7 4
08
7.3
N.S.
7.3
N.S.
84
II '. 75
N.S.
4.5
N.S.
42
0.060
N.S.
0.014
23.8
N.S.
0.6
0.50
988
les
09
N.S.
7.5
7.4
97
35
N.S.
7.2
5.0
75
27
N.S.
0.014
0.018
N.S.
0.6
1.0
0.34
908
10
7.45
7.45
7.4
89
44
6.5
5.5
5.7
64
21
0.010
0.006
0.018
3.8
0.6
0.5
0.04
1 170
Avg.*
7.3
7.4
7.5
144
60
9.2
6.2
5.9
83
43
0.044
0.016
0.016
10.0
I.I
0.8
0.66
13.4
886
-------
b. Aluminum addition prior to the RBC units but after the primary
clari fier (case 2).
c. Iron addition after the RBC units but prior to the secondary
clarifier (case 3).
d. Iron addition prior to the RBC units but after the primary
clarifier (case 4).
In addition, it was decided to evaluate the effect of cation : P molar
ratio on phosphorus removal efficiency. Consequently, cation : P molar
ratios ranging from I.35 : I to I.75 : I for both aluminum and iron were
initially identified for consideration.
Because of the variable nature of the phosphorus loadings indicated in
the preliminary study, it was decided to vary the mineral addition rate to
correspond to the anticipated phosphorus loading rates. However, because of
manpower and equipment limitations, it was not possible to vary the mineral
addition rate as often as desired. Instead, the chemical feed pump was
adjusted to deliver at (I) a minimum rate (i.e. dependent upon chemical feed
concentration and desirable cation:P molar ratio) between 4:30 PM and 7:30 AM
when lower phosophrus loadings were anticipated, and (2) a rate twice the
minimum rate between 7:30 AM to 4:30 PM when higher phosphorus loadings were
anticipated. This schedule was also selected because it coincided with
normal plant operation.
A positive displacement chemical feed pump was used for mineral addi-
tion. The pump was capable of feeding both liquid alum and ferric chloride,
which were selected as the sources of aluminum and iron. A polyethylene tank
located inside the RBC building was utilized for temporary chemical storage.
The tank was calibrated and daily observations were made to determine the
actual amount of mineral addition. Every time that a new supply of alum or
ferric chloride was obtained, a sample was taken and analyzed for either
aluminum or iron. In this manner, a precise record of chemical feed strength
was obtained.
The schedule followed in Phase II of the study is summarized below:
Date Chemical Feed Conditions
Jan. 7 - May 6, 1975 Alum feed after RBC units
May 12 - July 20, 1975 Alum feed before RBC units
Aug. 5 - Aug. 28, 1975 .Alum feed after RBC units (enhanced mixing)
Sept. 7 - Oct. 30, 1975 Ferric chloride feed after RBC units
Nov. 2 - Dec. 23, 1975 Ferric chloride feed before RBC units
Alum was fed one additional month (i.e. August) after the RBC units in
order to evaluate a system of enhanced mixing. A wide range of Al:P and Fe:P
ratios were obtained during the study because of the difficulty in predicting
influent phosphorus levels.
27
-------
RBC speed was maintained at 2 rpm, corresponding to a peripheral
velocity of approximately 0.3 m/sec (60 fpm), throughout the Phase II test
period.
Data Presentation
Phase II data are summarized in Figures 5 to 16, Tables II and 12, and
Appendices E to G. A brief discussion of the data classified according to
significant categories is presented below.
Phosphorus Removal
Case I Alum was introduced after the RBC units from January 7 to
May 6 and August 5 to 28. A wide range of AI:P molar ratios, varying from
approximately 0.4 to 3.5, were obtained.
The effect of AI:P molar ratio on effluent total P concentration is
presented in Figure 5. Although a decrease in effluent total P was achieved
with increasing AI:P molar ratios, the desired project objective of total P
less than 1.5 mg/l was seldom realized and, in fact, a value less than 1.0
mg/l total P was achieved only once, at an AI:P molar ratio of 2.72.
The effect of AI:P molar ratio on effluent ortho-P concentration is
presented in Figure 6. This plot demonstrates that ortho-P concentrations
below 1.5 mg/l were consistently achieved at an AI:P molar ratio of approxi-
mately 1.0 or greater. These data, when compared to total P data, suggest
the need for either improved clarification or filtration to achieve desirable
effluent P Iimits.
Case 2 Alum was fed prior to the RBC units from May 12 to July 20.
A wide range of AI:P ratios, varying from approximately 0.2 to 3.2, were
obtained.
The effect of AI:P molar ratio on effluent total P concentration is
presented in Figure 7. Once again, a decrease in effluent total P with
increasing AI:P values is evident, but the desired project objective of 1.5
mg/l total P was not consistently achieved. In this case, not a single
effluent value less than 1.0 mg/l total P was realized.
The effect of Al:P molar ratio on effluent ortho-P concentration is
presented in Figure 8. As in the Case I results, these data suggest potential
improvement in effluent P quality with improved secondary solids removal. In
this case, an AI:P molar ratio of approximately 1.5 or greater corresponds to
effluent ortho-P concentrations less than 1.0 mg/l.
Effluent aluminum data for both Case I and Case 2 alum feed conditions
were observed. The data generally indicate increasing effluent aluminum con-
centrations with increasing AI:P molar ratios. However, with the exception
of two observations, effluent aluminum concentrations less than 2.5 mg/l were
consistently found over a broad range of AI:P molar ratios.
28
-------
ro
vD
10.0
9.0
8.0
o 7.0
2
^ 6.0
5.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
0
cP
oo
o
oo
0.5
1
.0 1.5 2.0
AL P MOLAR RATIO
2.5
o
0
3:5
Figure 5. Effect of alum on effluent total P concentration (feed after RBC units).
-------
Q.
i
o
- 3.0
0.5
1.0 1.5 2.0
AL P MOLAR RATIO
Figure 6. Effect of alum on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed after RBC units).
-------
10.0
9.0
8.0
CL 6.0
|,o
t 4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
UJ
I
CD
0.5
1.0 1.5 2.0
AL P MOLAR RATIO
2.5
3.0
3.5
Figure 7. Effect of alum on effluent total P concentration (feed before RBC units).
-------
CM
hO
5.0
4.0
. 3.0
2.0
1.0
a a
D
,n a -
a
0.5
1.5 2.0
AL' P MOLAR RATIO
2.5
3.0
3.5
Figure 8. Effect of alum on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed before RBC units).
-------
Case 3 Ferric chloride was introduced after the RBC units from
September 7 to October 30. A relatively wide range of Fe:P molar ratios,
ranging from approximately O.I to 1.9, were obtained.
The influence of Fe:P molar ratio on effluent total P concentration is
shown in Figure 9. In a pattern similar to that shown for aluminum, decreas-
ing effluent total P concentrations are achieved with increasing Fe:P molar
ratios, but the project objective of 1.5 mg/l total P was not consistently
realized even at the higher Fe:P values.
Effluent ortho-P concentration is plotted against Fe:P molar ratios in
Figure 10. Considerable improvement in effluent P quality is indicated by
these data. Significantly low effluent ortho-P concentrations are achieved
at Fe:P molar ratios less than 1.0. These data suggest potential achievement
of project objectives with improved secondary solids removal.
Effluent iron data for Case 3 ferric chloride feed conditions were
determined and a random pattern of effluent iron concentration was observed.
Values ranging from approximately 1.0 to 10.0 mg/l Fe were found.
Case 4 Ferric chloride was fed prior to the RBC units from November 2
to December 23, 1975 and a short period in January, 1976. A wide range of
Fe:P ratios, varying from approximately 0.4 to 2.7 were obtained.
The effect of Fe:P molar ratio on effluent total P concentration is
shown in Figure II. A random variation of the data is evident, accompanied
by inconsistent achievement of the project objective of 1.5 mg/l effluent
total P.
However, when considering effluent ortho-P data, as presented in Figure
12, once again the potential for improvement in P removal performance with
improved secondary solids removal is obvious. The data of Figure 12 are
noteworthy because they indicate effluent ortho-P values less than 1.4 mg/l
for all Fe:P values. In fact, effluent ortho-P values less than 1.0 mg/l
were achieved on all but three days tested.
Organic Removal
BOD Figure 13 presents the effect of influent BOD on RBC
process efficiency. These data indicate more efficient BOD removal
at higher BOD loadings, although there is a considerable amount of scatter,
particularly at the lower influent BOD values.
The effect of hydraulic loading on RBC process BOD removal was also
observed. Considerable scatter was evident in the data, but a decrease in
RBC process efficiency was indicated at increased hydraulic loading.
The effect of organic loading on RBC process efficiency was investigated
but not found to be significant.
TQC Total organic carbon (TOO data were collected in addition to BOD
and COD data in order to determine organic removal efficiencies directly
33
-------
o o
0.5
1.0 1.5
FE : P MOLAR RATIO
2.0
2.5
3.0
Figure 9. Effect of iron salt on effluent total P concentration (feed after RBC units),
-------
D
D
n
a
F q n
n
0
0.5
1.0 1.5 2.0
FE ! P MOLAR RATIO
2.5
3.0
Figure 10. Effect of iron salt on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed after RBC units)
-------
^^
£
10.0
9X>
8O
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
o o
0.5
1.0 1.5
FE ' P MOLAR RATIO
2.0
3.0
Figure II. Effect of iron salt on effluent total P concentration (feed before RBC units),
-------
4.0
04
e>
2
Q.
O
5
b
3.0
1.0
O.5
1.0 1.5 2.0
FE ' P MOLAR RATIO
I °o
2.5
3.0
Figure 12. Effect of iron salt on effluent ortho-P concentration (feed before RBC units)
-------
00
50
100
150 200
PRIMARY EFFLUENT BOD, mg/l
250
300
Figure 13. BOD removal efficiency: RBC process (Phase II)
-------
instead of through the oxygen demanding tests. The effect of influent TOC
concentration on RBC process removal efficiency is presented in Figure 14.
The pattern presented in this plot verifies the previous observation of
variable and poor organic removal efficiencies, particularly at, but not
limited to, lower organic loadings.
Summary A summary of organic removal data for the Phase II test
period is presented in Table II. It is significant to note the close agree-
ment in average BOD, COD and TOC percent removals for both total plant (i.e.
77, 80' and 78 percent) and RBC process performance (i.e. 63, 64 and 65
percent).
Nitrification
A detailed study of the fate of nitrogen was undertaken during the
period from June to December. The variation of effluent nitrate-nitrogen and
ammonia-nitrogen are presented in Figures 15 and !6, respectively. It can be
seen from Figure 15 that variable nitrification occurred during the six-month
period of observation, with relatively high nitrate-nitrogen levels occurring
during the month of September. Corresponding ammonia-nitrogen data indicate
that complete nitrification did not occur, however, as significant effluent
ammonia-nitrogen values are observed in Figure 16.
E f fIuen t S umma ry
A summary of final effluent data achieved during the Phase II test
period is presented in Table 12. When comparing these data to Phase I data
for the RBC process, it is evident that some significant changes occurred.
Average effluent values of 35 mg/l BOD, 56 mg/l SS, and 3 mg/l total P were
achieved during Phase II, compared to 20 mg/l BOD, 15 mg/l SS and 7 mg/l
total P during Phase I.
It can generally be stated that, although improvement was noted in total
P removals, the net effect of mineral addition to the RBC process was a
deterioration in effIuent quality.
ADDITIONAL PLANT DATA
Summaries of treatment plant performance during the interim between
Phase I and Phase II (1973 and 1974) and for the year following Phase II
(1976) are presented in Appendices H and I. Appendix H summarTzes trickling
filter operating data for those periods and Appendix I summarizes RBC
operating data.
39
-------
100
90
80
t/>
wt
£ 70
o
c
^ 60
«
; 50
e
x
IM
" 40
w>
e
H-
^ 30
ho
oo /oo 0
°0 -.00 0°
20-0
10
ft ' f* ^3^'
o o
0
50
100 150 200
PRIMARY EFFLUENT TOC, mg/l
250
300
Figure 14. TOC removal efficiency: RBC process (Phase II).
-------
JUNE JULY
AUGUST SEPT. OCT.
Calendar Year, 1975
NOV.
Figure 15. Variation of effluent nitrate nitrogen: RBC process.
-------
25
20
15
z
i
ro
I 10
J
S
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST SEPT
Calendar Year, 1975
OCT
NOV.
DEC.
Figure 16. Variation of effluent ammonia nitrogen: RBC process.
-------
TABLE
ORGANIC REMOVAL SUMMARY, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT, PHASE II, 1975
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
Avg. Organic Avg. Hydraulic Average Percent Removals
Chemical Loading kg Prim. , Loading ? BOD COD TOG
Feed Conditions BOD/day/IOOO m2 m /day/ 1000 m Total RBC Total RBC Total RBC
Al after discs
Al after discs
Al after discs
Al after discs
Al after discs (1-6)
Al before discs (12-29)
Al before discs
Al before discs
Al after discs
(enhanced mixing)
Fe after discs
Fe after discs
Fe before discs
Fe before discs
8.
6.
8.
7.
8.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
12.
76.
12.
83
10
59
32
98
98
39
20
78
88
05
91
20
68
61
106
110
129
98
96
80
52
52
58
61
81
.46
.53
.36
.43
.18
.21
.58
.28
.16
.98
.68
.94
.50
86
83
68
63
71
59
74
76
85
91
87
81
77
69
72
49
57
64
42
40
52
68
77
76
85
63
92
84
68
68
77
64
81
79
86
92
87
81
80
77
74
51
64
67
47
53
44
67
72
78
79
64
71
52
76
73
82
83
85
90
90
76
78
61
53
61
57
49
59
75
72
78
87
65
-------
TABLE 12. FINAL EFFLUENT SUMMARY, VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT, PHASE II, 1975
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
Chemical
Feed Conditions
Al after discs
Al after discs
Al after discs
Al after discs
Al after discs (1-6)
Al before discs (12-29)
Al before discs
Al before discs
Al after discs
(enhanced mixing)
Fe after discs
Fe after discs
Fe before discs
Fe before discs
BOD
38
27
40
27
22
37
39
34
33
32
43
49
35
COD
49
65
88
57
52
83
72
79
59
83
72
102
78
M
TOC
22
24
9
30
19
13
20
21
25
88
27
0 N T H
Total P
2.65
2.35
3.05
2.40
1.82
2.51
4.07
4.44
3.85
1.97
1.86
4.78
2.98
L Y A V
Ortho P
1.67
0.52
0.46
0.67
0.62
1.24
2.69
2.35
2.77
0.67
0.53
0.22
1.20
ERA
SS
33
46
68
44
27
47
39
40
36
38
58
190
56
G E S
N03-N
4.0
3.4
1.2
3.6
3.3
1 .7
1.5
1.3
4.0
1 .8
1.8
0.9
2.4
, m g / 1
NH3-N TKN
6.7 10. I
8.2 10.4
6.3 8.6
9.0 II. 0
8.7 11.7
7.8 17.4
7.8 11.5
Al
0.12
1.09
1.33
1.53
1.26
0.64
0.62
0.96
0.94
Fe
2.3
6.0
4.0
14.5
6.7
-------
APPENDIX A
TABLE A-l. DESIGN DATA. RBC PLANT
I. Design factors
Avg. daily flow = 1779 m3/day (470,000 gpd)
Avg. influent BOD = 239 mg/l
Avg. influent S.S. = 363 mg/l
Avg. volatile solids = 277 mg/l
Max. design flow = 4360 m3/day (48,000 gph)
2. Unit design
a. Primary Clarifier: the primary clarifier consists of the outer
annular tank of a concentric "Donau" type
clari f ier.
Weir loading = 124.2 m3/day/m (10,000 gpd/ft.)
Surface area = 77.5 m2 (834 sq. ft.)
Overflow rate, avg. = 22.6 m3/day/m2 (554 gpd/sq. ft.)
Volume = 165.4 m3 (43,700 gal)
Avg. detention time = 1.5 hrs.
b. RBC Units: two parallel paths of 4 stages each are provided; each
stage having 150 discs.
Total no. of discs = 1200 _
Total disc area = 16,945 m (182,400 sq. ft.)
Organic loading = 17.5 g BOD/day/m2
(3.59 Ib. BOD/1000 sq. ft./day)
Hydraulic loading =7.8 m3/stage (2062 gal./stage)
Avg. detention time = 42.2 min.
= 10.5 min./stage
c. Secondary Clarifier: center tank of the "Donau" clarifier.
Weir length = 33.2 m (109 ft.)
Weir loading = 53.5 m3/day/m (4310 gpd/ft.)
Surface area = 86.8 m2 (934 sq. ft.)
Overflow rate, avg. = 20.5 m3/day/m2 (503 gpd/sq. ft.)
Volume = 163.9 m3 (43,300 gal.)
Detention time = I.5 hrs.
d. Chlorine Contact Chamber
Capacity = 45.4 m3 (12,000 gal.)
Contact time = 15 min. (at max. pumping rate)
Chlorine demand = 8 mg/l
Chlorine dosage = 13.9 kg/day (30.6 Ibs./day)
e. Aerobic Digester
Volume of primary sludge = 0.2 m /hr (52.5 gph)
(re. 30$ SS removal, 4% solids)
(continued)
45
-------
TABLE A-I (continued)
Volume of secondary sludge = 0.3 m /hr (84.7 gph)
(re. 86.2$ BOD removal,
50% conversion to solids,
2% solids concentration)
Total sludge volume =0.5 nru/hr (137.2 gph)
= 9.5 m /day (2500 gpd)
Digester volume ,
(4.75 m diam. x 3.66 m liquid depth) = 275.4 m (72,750 gal.)
Avg. detention time =28.5 days
Oxygen requirement = 635 kg 02/day
(1400 Ib. 02/day)
(re. 1.5 kg 09/kg raw BOD) = 26.4 kg 02/hr
Z (58.3 Ib. 02/hr)
Aerator capacity (at 45 rpm) = 31.0 kg 02/hr
(68.4 Ib. 02/hr)
f. Sludge Beds
No. of sludge beds = 4
2
Area of each sludge bed = 125.4 m (1350 sq. ft.)
(re. 7.6 m x 16.5 m each)
?
' Total sludge bed area = 501.6 m (5400 sq. ft.)
46
-------
APPENDIX B
TABLE B-l. DESIGN DATA. TRICKLING FILTER PLANT
Design Factors
Avg."dally flow = 1136 m3/day (300,000 gpd)
Raw wastewater pumps = 3 @ 2180 m /day (400 gpm) each
Unit Design
a. Primary Clarifier: 13.1 m (43 ft.) x 3.7 m (12 ft.) x 2.8 m
(9.25 ft.) depth S.W.D. = 2.4 m (7.75 ft.)
2
Surface area = 47.9 m (516 sq. ft.)
3 2
Overflow rate, avg. = 23.6 m /day/m (580 gpd/sq. ft.)
Volume = 113.6 m3 (30,000 gal.)
b. Trickling Fi Iter: 21.3 m (70 ft.) diam. x 1.7 m (5.7 ft.) depth
(stone media, equipped with fiberglass cover)
Surface area = 357.5 m2 (3848 sq. ft.)
= 0.0357 ha (0.0883 acres)
Volume = 621.2 m3 (21,936 cu. ft.)
c. Secondary Clarifier; 13.1 m (43 ft.) x 3.7 m (12 ft.) x 2.8 m
(9.25 ft.) depth S.W.D. = 2.4 m (7.75 ft.)
(i.e. Design identical to primary clarifier.)
47
-------
00
TABLE C-l.
APPENDIX C
PHOSPHORUS DATA. PHASE L JANUARY - JUNE.
1972. RBC PLANT
Date
l-l 1
21
28
2- 5
10
18
25
3- 3
10
30
4- 5
13
18
20
25
27
5- 2
4
1 1
16
18
23
25
6- 6
8
13
15
21
23
27
29
P H
Raw
Total
11.3
10.7
18.4
10.0
10.4
6.5
8.8
10.8
7.5
7.4
8.3
8.1
7.2
9.3
7.6
9.3
6.9
6.1
8.1
11.2
8.7
16.7
9.8
8.8
10. 1
6.1
5.3
11.7
9.7
10.9
8.3
OSPHORUS
Wastewater
Filtrable Ortho
9.6
8.2
7.7
8.0
8.2
4.7
6.3
8.3
6.8
6.1
4.2
5.3
6.7
6.4
7.3
4.4
4.9
6.5
9.0
7.2
13.9
7.8
7.4
7.9
4.0
4.0
9.8
8.0
8.7
6.4
3.7
3.6
6.4
3.7
3.4
2.4
2.8
4.5
3.4
2.9
2.5
2.8
2.9
2.8
3.2
2.8
1.5
2.6
3.5
3.1
7.5
3.1
3.8
5.0
2.8
2.4
4.7
4.3
4.9
4.0
CONCENTRATIO
Primary Effluent
Total Filtrable Ortho
9.4
7.8
8.4
9.3
1 1.0
10.3
10.7
10.7
6.5
9.4
8.1
10.5
9.0
8.2
8.4
8.1
6.4
6.7
8.1
8.8
8.5
1 1 .7
10.2
9.8
II. 1
7.9
5.7
8.6
8.7
9.1
7.9
6.5
6.7
7.8
9.4
9.4
8.6
8.3
6.8
6.9
6.0
7.1
6.4
7.1
6.6
5.2
5.5
6.6
7.4
7.0
9.8
8.3
8.1
8.6
6.7
4.6
7.2
7.3
7.6
6.1
4.8
4.8
6.2
5.7
5.1
5.8
6.4
6.1
5.8
4.4
4.9
4.6
4.3
4.5
3.2
1.9
4.2
5.5
5.3
7.1
5.9
4.8
6.4
3.8
3.1
4.3
5.6
6.1
N S , m g / 1
Final Effluent
Total Filtrable Ortho
8.2
6.7
6.8
7.7
9.4
8.2
9.0
9.2
4.2
6.2
4.7
10.3
7.6
6.9
8.3
6.9
6.0
4.5
6.4
7.8
7.1
9.6
8.3
8.2
8.1
6.8
5.4
7.8
8.0
9.2
7.6
7.9
6.5
6.5
7.6
9.0
7.9
8.6
8.2
5.9
5.4
5.8
7.2
6.4
7.5
6.7
5.4
4.3
6.4
7.6
6.7
9.2
7.8
7.9
7.6
6.4
5.1
7.4
7.4
8.6
7.3
6.9
5.4
5.5
6.6
5.8
6.0
6.2
6.4
4.8
4,9
4.9
5.5
5.0
4.8
5.2
4.1
2.9
4.3
5.1
5.2
7.3
5.9
6.7
6.6
5.1
4.2
6.2
5.6
6.9
5.7
PER CENT REMOVAL
Total P
Overall R.B.C.
27.4
37.4
63.0
23.0
9.6
0.0
0.0
14.8
44.0
16.2
43.4
0.0
0.0
25.8
0.0
25.8
13.0
26.2
21.0
30.6
18.4
42.5
15.3
6.8
19.8
0.0
0.0
33.3
17.5
15.6
8.4
12.8
14.1
19.0
17.2
14.5
20.4
15.9
14.0
35.4
34.0
42.0
1.9
15.6
15.9
1.2
14.8
6.3
32.8
21.0
11.4
16.5
17.9
18.6
16.3
27.0
13.9
5.3
9.3
8.0
16.5
-------
TABLE C-2. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PHASE I. JULY - SEPTEMBER. 1972. RBC PLANT
VD
Date
7- 6
II
13
18
20
25
27
31
8- 8
10
15
17
22
24
29
31
9- 7
12
14
19
21
26
28
P H
Raw
Total
10.8
11.0
10.3
9.5
6.7
1 1.2
7.8
8.7
4.5
12.6
6.9
12.1
4.3
10.7
16.2
4.9
3.0
3.8
7.5
5.2
OSPHORUS
Wastewater
Filtrable Ortho
10.8 .
1.0
8.4
8.0
7.1
9.0
7.8
7.4
3.4
9.5
5.3
10.2
3.0
8.8
13.5
3.4
2.4
3.1
6.1
4.2
8.0
6.0
5.0
5.1
3.4
7.2
4.3
2.6
2.3
6.4
3.4
3.5
1 .8
4.6
4.5
2.6
1.5
1 .2
2.7
2.1
CONCENTRATIONS, mg/l
Primary Effluent Final Effluent
Total Filtrable Ortho Total Filtrable Ortho
9.1
10. 1
7.4
7.1
7.1
1 1.3
9.3
1 1 .1
10. 1
11.2
9.0
6.9
10.0
7.9
9.2
9.3
10. 1
10.8
7.5
4.6
16.9
6.9
5.3
7.8
8.8
6.0
6.0
5.8
8.9
4.4
9.6
7.5
6.8
6.9
5.4
8.1
7.9
6.2
5.9
7.0
8.9
5.6
2.0
3.1
4.5
4.0
6.6
6.9
4.1
3.8
3.9
6.3
4.8
6.6
5.7
5.7
5.0
4.5
4.5
4.2
4.5
3.9
5.3
6.5
4.5
1.2
2.6
3.4
2.5
8.1
8.4
6.4
6.7
6.0
8.6
7.0
8.7
7.8
7.4
6.2
6.1
5.9
7.0
6.3
8.1
9.1
6.2
3.1
4.2
5.5
2.4
7.7
8.3
6.1
6.1
5.6
8.3
6.7
8.6
7.5
7.0
6.0
5.9
5.9
6.4
5.9
7.6
8.7
5.8
2.1
3.3
4.6
2.1
6.4
6.9
5.3
5.4
4.7
7.2
5.5
7.4
6.3
6.3
5.5
3.7
4.2
5.3
4.8
5.9
7.4
5.2
1.3
2.6
3.6
1.9
PER CENT REMOVAL
Total P
Overal 1 R.B.C.
25.0
23.6
35.0
9.5
0.0
22.3
5.1
0.0
51.6
14.5
42.1
0.0
24.3
43.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
26.7
53.8
II. 0
16.8
13.5
5.6
15.5
23.9
24.7
21.6
22.8
33.9
10. 1
39.0
12.7
23.9
32.3
19.8
15.7
17.3
32.6
75.1
20.3
54.7
-------
1972. RBC PLANT
VJl
o
Date
10- 3
5
10
12
17
19
24
26
31
II- 2
7
9
14
16
12- 5
7
19
Avg.
P H
Raw
Total
5.1
3.1
6.0
4.4
5.3
3.6
3.3
9.7
4.0
7.6
7.8
6.0
6.2
7.9
4.7
8.6
8.1
0 S P H 0
Wastewater
Fl Itrable
4.0
2.4
4.8
3.6
4.0
3.0
2.4
8.2
2.9
6.4
6.4
4.7
5.0
6.0
3.5
7.2
6.4
R U S
Ortho
2.8
1.5
3.1
2.1
2.2
1.4
1.8
3.1
1.6
3.2
2.9
2.4
2.8
4.1
2.9
4.1
3.4
CONCENTRAT 1 0
Primary Effluent
Total Ft Itrable Ortho
6.6
6.4
9.7
6.8
8.4
7.0
5.1
4.8
7.1
5.8
8.1
7.0
8.3
7.8
10.0
8.7
12.2
8.6
5.3
4.6
8.3
5.4
6.4
5.5
3.9
3.6
5.6
4.6
6.5
5.7
7.0
5.8
8.5
7.2
10. 1
6.7
3.2
3.2
4.2
3.6
3.4
3.4
1.8
2.1
3.0
2.8
3.6
3.6
4.2
3.5
6.7
5.2
7.3
4.6
N S , m g
Final
Total Fil
5.7
4.8
6.8
5.6
6.8
6.0
4.2
3.8
5.7
4.7
6.3
5.6
7.4'
6.0
9.5
6.6
8.7
6.9
Effl
Itrab
5.2
4.4
6.4
5.2
6.0
5.8
3.7
3.6
5.4
4.4
6.0
5.2
7.0
5.6
9.1
6.3
8.3
6.5
uent
le Ortho
4.2
3.4
5.0
4.2
4.6
4.4
2.7
2.5
4.0
3.6
4.7
4.2
5.4
3.8
7.3
5.2
7.2
5.1
PER CENT REMOVAL
Total P
Overall R.B.C.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
41.2
0.0
17.1
23.1
0.0
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.9
13.6
25.0
30.0
17.6
19.0
14.3
17.6
20.8
19.7
19.0
22.2
20.0
10.8
23.1
5.0
24.1
28.7
20.6
(Entire
Year)
-------
Ul
TABLE D-l
APPENDIX D
PHOSPHORUS DATA. PHASE I. JANUARY - JUNE.
1972. TRICKLING FILTER
Date
l-ii
21
28
2- 5
10
18
25
3- 3
10
30
4- 5
13
18
20
25
27
5- 2
4
1 1
16
18
23
25
6- 6
8
13
15
21
23
27
29
PHOSPHORUS
Raw Wastewater
Total Filtrable Ortho
1 1.3
10.7
18.4
10.0
10.4
6.5
8.8
10.8
7.5
7.4
8.3
8.1
7.2
9.3
7.6
9.3
6.9
6.1
8.1
1 1 .2
8.7
16.7
9.8
8.8
10. 1
6.1
5.3
11.7
9.7
10.9
8.3
9.6
8.2
7.7
8.0
8.2
4.7
6.3
8.3
6.8
6.1
4.2
5.3
6.7
6.4
7.3
4.4
4.9
6.5
9.0
7.2
13.9
7.8
7.4
7.9
4.0
4.0
9.8
8.0
8.7
6.4
3.7
3.6
6.4
3.7
3.4
2.4
2.8
4.5
3.4
2.9
2.5
2.8
2.9
2.8
3.2
2.8
1 .5
2.6
3.5
3.1
7.5
3.1
3.8
5.0
2.8
2.4
4.7
4.3
4.9
4.0
CONCENTRATIONS, mg/l PER CENT REMOVAL
Primary Effluent Final Effluent Total P
Total Filtrable Ortho Total Filtrable Ortho Overall T.F.
12.1
10.4
10.0
9.4
1 1 .4
1 1.3
11.5
9.4
7.4
7.9
8.4
12.6
10.5
9.7
9.1
9.0
__
8.3
9.4
10.6
9.4
12.9
10.2
1 1 .6
1 1 .0
8.4
6.6
9.4
10.2
10.8
10.3
9.2
7.9
7.5
7.1
9.2
8.7
8.5
7.4
5.6
6.1
5.9
7.5
7.1
7.4
7.0
5.7
6.2
7.7
7.0
10.4
7.8
7.9
7.6
5.7
4.5
6.8
7.3
8.1
7.7
7.1
5.7
5.9
6.0
6.4
5.8
6.1
7.1
5.6
4.3
3.7
4.9
4.3
3.7
4.9
3.1
4.4
4.9
5.2
7.4
5.7
5.3
5.1
3.6
2.9
4.1
4.5
5.2
5.0
9.5
8.5
8.5
8.4
10.8
10.7
10. 1
7.7
5.9
6.8
7.5
7.8
9.1
7.9
7.9
7.3
7.1
7.1
9.6
7.8
11.2
9.1
9.3
8.9
8.8
6.2
9.0
9.4
10.2
9.1
8.0
7.2
7.0
7.3
9.4
9.2
9. 1
4.7
4.4
7.5
5.6
7.2
6.6
6.7
6.2
5.6
6.0
8. 1
6.5
9.8
7.8
7.1
6.9
6.6
4.7
7.2
7.3
8.5
8.0
6.3
5.6
5.8
5.8
6.6
7.0
6.3
4.7
4.4
4.6
4.3
5.3
4.5
4.6
4.1
2.7
4.5
5.3
4.3
6.5
5.6
4.9
4.8
4.8
3.3
4.8
4.9
6.4
5.7
15.9
20.6
.53.8
16.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
28.7
21.3
8.1
9.6
3.7
0.0
0.0
15.1
0.0
0.0
12.3
14.3
10.3
32.9
7.1
0.0
1 1 .9
0.0
0.0
23.1
3.1
6.4
0.0
21.5
18.3
15.0
10.6
5.3
5.3
12.2
18.1
20.3
13.9
10.7
38.1
13.3
13.2
12.2
14.5
24.5
9.9
17.0
13.2
10.8
19.8
19.1
0.0
6.1
4.3
7.8
5.6
1 1.6
-------
TABLE D-2. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PHASE I. JULY - SEPTEMBER. 1972. TRICKLING FILTER
VJl
Date
7- 6
II
13
18
20
25
27
31
8- 8
10
15
17
22
24
29
31
9- 7
12
14
19
21
26
28
P H
Raw
Total
10.8
II. 0
10.3
9.5
6.7
11.2
7.8
8.7
4.5
12.6
6.9
12.1
4.3
10.7
16.2
4.9
3.0
3.8
7.5
5.2
OSPHORUS
Wastewater
FI Itrable Ortho
10.8
1.0
-
8.4
8.0
7.1
9.0
7.8
7.4
3.4
9.5
5.3
10.2
3.0
8.8
13.5
3.4
2.4
3.1
6.1
4.2
8.0
6.0
5.0
5.1
3.4
7.2
4.3
2.6
2.3
6.4
3.4
3.5
1.8
4.6
4.5
2.6
1.5
1.2
2.7
2.1
CONCENTRATIONS, mg/l PER CENT REMOVAL
Primary Effluent Final Effluent Total P
Total Fl Itrable Ortho Total Fi Itrable Ortho Overall T.F.
!3.4
12.7
1 1.7
15.7
12.3
66.0
53.0
18.5
7.3
8.8
8.9
7.4
8.8
7.3
7.3
6.8
8.3
6.3
3.5
5.0
6.4
4.4
13.4
9.9
8.8
8.5
7.3
18.0
16.0
7.0
4.1
8.8
6.8
5.2
5.0
5.8
5.3
4.8
6.3
4.8
2.4
3.3
3.9
3.4
7.5
7.4
6.8
7.5
6.5
16.0
12.0
7.5
3.0
4.6
4.2
4.0
4.5
4.6
3.1
3.5
4.4
2.8
I.I
1.8
2.4
1.9
9.4
1 1.0
10.3
6.8
6.0
9.0
7.6
9,5
7.7
7.3
7.6
6.2
7.8
5.6
6.6
6.6
8.6
5.5
3.3
3.7
4.4
4.4
8.0
9.8
9.1
6.5
5.6
8.4
6.9
8.5
7.0
6.8
6.9
5.6
6.9
5.6
5.8
5.8
7.5
4.7
2.6
3.0
4.0
3.4
6.5
7.9
7.1
5.4
4.8
7.0
5.6
7.0
5.3
5.6
5.0
4.7
4.6
4.2
4.3
4.5
5.3
3.6
1.9
2.0
2.9
2.5
13.0
0.0
__
34.0
5.3
0.0
15,2
6.4
12.6
0.0
38.1
18.8
45.5
0.0
46.9
0.0
0.0
2.6
41.3
15.4
30.0
13.4
12.0
56.7
51 .2
86.4
85.7
48.6
0.0
17.0
14.6
16.2
11.4
23.3
9.6
2.9
__
0.0
12.7
5.7
26.0
31.3
0.0
-------
TABLE D-3. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PHASE I. OCTOBER - DECEMBER. 1972. TRICKLING FILTER
ui
PHOSPHORUS
Raw Wastewater
Date Total Filtrable Ortho
10- 3
5
10
12
17
19
24
26
31
1 1- 2
7
9
14
16
12- 5
7
19
Avg.
(Entire
Year)
5.1
3.1
6.0
4.4
5.3
3.6
3.3
9.7
4.0
7.6
7.8
6.0
6.2
7.9
4.7
8.6
8.1
4.0
2.4
4.8
3.6
4.0
3.0
2.4
8.2
2.9
6.4
6.4
4.7
5.0
6.0
3.5
7.2
6.4
2.8
1.5
3.1
2.1
2.2
1.4
1 .8
3.1
1 .6
3.2
2.9
2.4
2.8
4.1
2.9
4.1
3.4
CONCENTRATIONS, mg/l PER CENT REMOVAL
Primary Effluent Final Effluent Total P
Total Filtrable Ortho Total Filtrable Ortho Overall T.F.
5.0
5.0
7.3
5.4
7.6
9.2
4.1
4.4
6.1
6.0
6.7
6.2
7.2
5.8
8.5
10.6
10.4
4.1
4.0
6.1
4.0
6.2
6.3
3.2
3.6
5.0
4.8
5.9
5.4
6.2
5.0
6.2
7.6
6.8
2.4
v 2.3
3.8
2.8
4.1
4.2
1.9
1 .9
2.9
3.0
4.4
3.2
3.5
3.4
4.0
5.8
4.8
5.3
4.8
7.0
5.3
7.1
7.4
4.7
4.3
6.6
6.3
6.9
5.8
6.8
6.1
9.1
8.2
10.7
7.6
4.6
4.2
6.2
4.6
6.7
6.1
3.9
3.5
5.6
5.3
6.1
5.0
6.2
5.4
7.7
6.8
9.2
6.5
3.1
3.0
4.4
3.6
4.7
4.4
2.9
2.6
3.6
3.7
4.2
3.8
4.3
4.3
5.8
5.7
6.0
4.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
32.0
0.0
9.2
25.6
0.0
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
0.0
4.0
4.1
0.0
6.6
19.6
0.0
2.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.5
5.6
0.0
3.5
0.0
26.6
-------
TABLE E-I.
APPENDIX E
PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. JANUARY 1975
'- " *-
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31-
Avg.
NOTE:
AI/P
Mole Ratio
1.02
1.36
0.99
2.11
0.75
3.10
3.41
0.52
1.03
1.08
1.25
0.57
0.72
2.69
1.47
ALUM FEED
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
5.66
5.66
5.00
3.16
3.66
.50
.00
.16
.26
.33
1 .60
2.20
2.20
2.80
3.44
1.74
1.50
2.90
2.80
NS
2.65
AFTER RBC
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
5.25
5.50
4.10
4.05
4.50
' 1.60
0.38
0.17
0.20
0.12
0.45
1.60
0.42
0.45
0.40
0.27
0.27
1.55
1 .57
NS
1 .67
UNITS
Plant Flow
rrvVday
946
1045
973
943
954
1064
1064
1226
1843
2411
1821
1332
1685
1 158
1075
965
ION
825
810
1 166
101 1
1226
1 177
1351
1552
738
871
1329
757
799
992
1 162
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
5.39
6.01
5.31
3.87
6.74
2.00
1.68
1.34
1.35
1 .28
1.29
2.56
2.22
3.43
4.05
1 .28
1.30
3.85
2.12
Effluent
Ortho P '
kg/day
5.00
5.84
4.35
4.96
8.29
2.13
0.64
0.20
0.21
0.11
0.36
1.86
0.42
0.55
0.47
0.20
0.23
2.05
1.18
54
-------
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Avg.
NOTE :
TABLE E-2.
AI/P
Mole Ratio
2.58
1.79
1.91
2.20
1.56
2.74
3.09
3.25
1.31
3.46
2.72
2.59
2.48
1.90
1.94
3.14
2.64
2.34
2.42
ALUM FEED
PHOSPHORUS
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
2.80
2.24
2.00
1.50
2.80
3.20
3.94
2.10
2.30
2.60
2.20
0.50
1.60
3.40
3.14
NS
2.60
1.60
1.80
2.35
AFTER RBC UN
DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. FEBRUARY 1975
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
1.65
0.72
0.40
0.25
0.70
1.65
1.50
0.30
0.35
0.30
0.27
0.03
0.15
0.33
0.46
NS
0.11
0.18
0.11
0.52
ITS
Plant Flow
rrvVday
1 170
1166
723
806
1052
1041
977
1060
1166
939
878
878
867
1 196
1067
1192
937
1064
1128
1249
912
1223
ION
1 162
1219
1086
1052
10! 1
1045
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
2.02
1.80
2.10
1 .56
3.26
3.00
3.46
1 .84
1.99
3.10
2.06
0.53
1.80
4.24
3.17
3.17
1 .73
1.89
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
1. 19
0.58
0.42
0.26
0.81
1.55
1.32
0.26
0.30
0.35
0.25
0.03
0.17
0.41
0.46
0.13
0.20
0. II
55
-------
TABLE E-3. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. MARCH 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
AI/P
Mole Ratio
1.84
2.46
3.10
2.86
2.58
0.54
1.31
1.80
2.50
2.43
0.62
0.69
0.93
0.90
1.03
1.23
0.92
1.18
i.10
0.81
1.54
: ALUM FEED
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
2.0
2.34
1.84
2.24
2.40
3.20
4.00
2.24
2.34
3.20 -
4.50
3.00
3.40
2.40
3.06
3.00
3.48
3.20
3.84
2.60
NS
3.04
3.05
"AFTER RBC UN
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
0.17
0.22
1079
0.17
0.14
0.10
0.78
0.25
0.16
0.20
1.18
0.82
0.37
0.35
0.64
0.41
0.59
0.64
0.69
0.56
NS
1.18
0.46
ITS
Plant Flow
1003
787
1079
1.98
988
1033
980
590
1223
1098
1083
1048
939
958
1185
1340
1919
2589
2755
3123
3369
1877
2396
2975
2559
1900
1699
2161
2146
1821
2566
1684
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
1.57
2.52
0.12
2.21
2.48
3.91
2.12
2.42
2.45
3.00
6.02
5.75
10.09
6.61
9.55
7.18
10.35
8.18
7.29
4.41
7.79
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
0.14
0.24
0.17
0.14
0.12
0.86
0.27
0.17
0.19
1.58
1.57
0.96
0.96
2.00
0.98
1.75
1.63
1.31
0.95
3.03
56
-------
TABLE E-4. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. APRIL 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5 '
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2!
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE:
AI/P
Mole Ratio
1.57
1.26
1.28
0.91
1.10
1.50
1.27
1.43
0.85
1.09
1.08
1.21
1.46
1.10
1.36
1.56
1 .80
1.84
1.39
1.38
2.05
2.23
1.40
ALUM FEED
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
3.50
3.16
3.10
2.80
2.60
3.34
2.20
2.90
NS
1.86
NS
2.50
2.50
NS
2.84
2.26
2.10
1.76
2.44
2.72
1 .76
1.60
2.40
AFTER RBC UN
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
0.57
0.77
0.66
0.74
0.43
0.91
0.57
0.80
NS
0.48
NS
0.55
0.81
NS
0.92
0.68
0.58
0.56
0.61
1.25
0.32
0.33
0.67
ITS
Plant Flow
m5/day
1930
1900
1752
1677
1620
1552
1866
1832
1715
1669
1646
1419
1317
1469
1374
1412
1336
1669
1317
1385
1435
1382
1 559
1450
1370
1215
1582
1207
2460
21 12
1537
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
6.75
6.00
5.43
4.34
8.45
6.1 1
3.77
4.83
2.73
3.52
3.34
4.07
3.12
3.27
2.55
3.86
3.28
4.33
3.37
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
1. 1 1
1.46
1. 15
1. 15
0.80
1 .66
0.98
1.43
0.71
0.78
1 .08
1.40
0.93
0.90
0.81
0.96
1.51
0.78
0.69
57
-------
TARIF F-5. PHOSPHORUS DATA.
Date
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
| 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE
AI/P
Mole Ratio
1 .80
1 .32
1 .72
1 .95
1 .20
1 .38
1 .84
2.58
1.70
2.48
1.05
1.18
1.34
0.88
1 .55
2.32
3.04
1.73
: ALUM FEEC
ALUM FEED
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
2.04
1.32
2.56
2.00
2.72
2.20
1.26
1.82
1.90
1.44
1.44
1.26
2.50
1.72
1.60
1.14
1.10
2.66
1.94
1.16
2.54
. 1.83
AFTER RBC
BEFORE RBC
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
0.31
0.15
0.50
0.36
1.62
1 .72
0.39
0.54
0.54
0.38
0.44
0.36
0.55
0.60
0.47
0.36
0.43
1 .63
0.95
0.36
0.36
0.62
UNITS MAY 1
UNITS MAY
PEWAUKEE STP.
Plant Flow
m-Vday
2067
1930
1681
1639
1881
1927
1699
1544
1518
1332
1404
1949
2381
191 1
1427
1696
1302
1264
2267
2173
2286
1832
2263
1938
1866
2029
1412
1018
101 1
1177
893
1699
-6
12-29
MAY 1975
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
4.21
2.16
4.81
3.85
1.76
3.54
4.52
2.75
2.05
1.59
5.67
3.73
3.65
2.09
2.05
5.39
2.74
1.18
2.56
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
0.64
0.24
0.94
0.70
0.54
1.05
1.28
0.73
0.63
0.45
1.24
1.30
1.07
0.66
0.81
3.30
1.34
0.37
0.37
58
-------
TABLE E-6. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. JUNE 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE:
AI/P
Mole Ratio
0.83
2.76
2.05
1.84
. 1.73
1.16
0.91
3.25
2.19
2.57
0.23
0.85
1.33
0.56
0.55
1.17
1.22
0.74
1.28
1.17
0.84
1 .22
1.38
ALUM FEED
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
2.06
1 .82
1.72
2.22
2.44
1.62
2.50
2.50
1.58
1.46
2.38
3.80
4.74
3.88
3.48
2.04
3.08
2.60
2.34
2.00
2.20
2.80
2.51
BEFORE RBC
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
0.75
0.66
0.55
0.56
0.69
0.95
0.98
1 .00
0.72
0.72
.45
1.85
1 .20
2.00
1.85
.48
.57
.66
.62
.46
1.73
1.73
1.24
UNITS
Plant Flow
nvVday
893
1079
1075
1400
1442
1264
1056
931
1370
1041
1544
1196
1 139
1400
1522
1419
1798
1582
1412
1389
738
939
1435
1 427
1355
1313
1329
I 117
1048
1 151
1260
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
1.84
1 .96
1.85
3.1 1
3.52
1.51
3.42
2.60
2.44
1.74
3.62
5.39
8.51
6.13
4.91
1 .91
4.41
3.71
3.17
2.62
2.30
3.22
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
0.67
0.71
0.59
0.78
0.99
0.88
1.34
1.04
1.12
0.87
2.20
2.62
2.15
3.16
2.61
1.39
2.25
2.36
2.19
1.91
1.81
1.99
59
-------
TABLE E-7. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. .
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
AI/P
Mole Ratio
1 .16
1.22
1.32
0.70
0.98
1.14
0.99
0.68
.43
.94
.77
.84
.70
.40 .
0.88
ALUM FEED
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
3.32
2.26
6.60
4.32
3.04
2.70
2.90
3.80
NS
3.36
3.80
3.70
3.70
5.00
5.32
4.34
3.90
3.94
5.00
4.86
4.56
4.20
5.00
4.07
BEFORE RBC
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
2.08
1.58
3.10
3.42
2.31
1.72
1.75
1.80
NS
2.88
2.45
2.45
2.30
2.12
2.85
2.15
1.48
1.73
4.40
4.20
4.20
4.00
4.10
2.69
UNITS
Plant Flow
mVday
1385
1419
1253
1234
1287
1317
1298
1291
1279
1238
1347
1 1 13
1086
101 1
1283
1329
1438
1563
1264
1 154
1484
1325
1442
1230
1 120
984
920
942
946
946
1086
1226
IULY 1975
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
4.59
3.20
8.26
5.68
3.94
3.48
3.71
4.70
3.39
4.87
4.91
5.32
5.77
7.89
5.74
5.62
4.84
4.59
4.58
4.31
3.97
5.43
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
2.88
2.24
3.88
4.50
2.99
2.22
2.24
2.23
2.91
3.14
3.25
3.30
2.44
4.22
2.84
2.13
2.12
4.04
3.96
3.97
3.78
4.45
60
-------
TABLE E-8. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. AUGUST 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
AI/P
Mole Ratio
1.24
1. 19
1 .75
0.38
0.59
0.62
0.72
0.48
0.68
0.86
0.89
0.98
0.89
0.43
0.66
0.79
0.83
0.77
0.82
ALUM FEED
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
4.84
5.12
3.34
3.26
2.20
5.00
5.30
5.60
4.34
4.90
6.30
5.00
4.00
4.24
4.30
3.70
4.70
4.50
4.42
3.76
4.48
4.44
AFTER RBC UN
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
2.23
2.10
0.81
0.86
0.55
2.90
2.95
3.03
2.15
2.70
5.35
2.95
2.35
2.00
2.21
1.97
2.28
1.95
2.00
1 .82
4.10
2.35
ITS WITH
Plant Flow
n>Vday
1450
787
692
992
897
992
886
1366
1128
1067
1450
1306
1461
1018
829
659
674
859
920
121 1
1230
1991
1412
1 170
1510
1374
1219
1223
121 1
973
871
1 124
ENHANCED MIXING
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
3.35
5.07
2.99
3.23
1.95
5.33
7.67
7.31
6.34
4.99
4.24
4.29
3.67
5.13
5.28
4.32
7.09
6.18
5.38
4.59
3.90
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
1.54
2.08
0.73
0.85
0.49
3.09
4.27
3.95
3.14
2.74
3.60
2.53
2.16
2.42
2.72
2.30
3.44
2.68
2.44
2.22
3.57
61
-------
TABLE E-9. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. SEPTEMBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
?5
16
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE:
Fe/P
Mole Rat
0.79
0.83
1.47
1 .41
1.03
0.18
0.86
1 .44
0.48
0.18
0.05
1 .16
1.31
1.71
1 .41
0.95
FERRIC
Effluent
Total P
io mg/ 1
5.20
4.70
4.76
5.26
1 .84
2.50
1 .56
1.56
1.28
4.00
2.86
1.90
5.12
6.24
9.10
2.70
2.64
2.36
1.72
2.28
7.90
7.30
3.85
CHLORIDE FEED
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
4.70
3.88
4.10
4.00
0.75
1.35
0.47
0.40
0.90
4.85
1 .76
1 .05
4.55
5.42
7.25
1 .70
1.32
0.80
0.77
1.28
5.32
4.40
2.77
AFTER RBC UN
Plant Flow
m^/day
1033
1071
1083
1329
1752
905
844
958
950
1007
916
833
685
685
848
768
749
749
715
659
613
749
1067
931
855
836
746
678
1026
534
886
ITS
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
5.37
5.03
5.15
6.98
1.55
2.39
1.48
1.57
1.17
2.74
2.42
1.46
3.83
4.67
5.57
2.02
2.81
2.20
1 .47
1.54
8.10
3.89
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
4.85
4.15
4.43
5.31
0.63
1 .29
0.44
0.40
0.82
3.32
1.49
0.81
3.43
4.06
4.44
1.27
1 .41
0.74
0.66
0.87
5.45
2.35
62
-------
TABLE E-IO. PHOSPHORUS DATA, PEWAUKEE STP, OCTOBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
Fe/P
Mole Ratio
0. 10
0.94
-0.80
0.58
0.47
0.68
1.29
0.73
0.65
0.67
0.74
0.79
1.01
0.81
1 .26
1.69
1.54
1 .01
1.69
1.89
1.63
1.25
1 .01
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
4.76
2.16
1.80
1.20
1.12
0.90
0.66
1 .47
1.64
3.24
2.00
1 .32
1 .64
2.94
1.32
2.36
2.28
NS
1.70
0.27
0.34
1 .36
1 .97
FERRIC CHLORIDE FEED
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
5.94
1.18
0.83
0.40
0.27
0.25
0.15
0.43
0.47
0.17
0.47
0.28
0.68
0.73
0.46
0.36
0.23
NS
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.72
0.67
AFTER RBC
Plant Flow
rrP/day
818
799
783
678
655
651
886
488
897
871
731
681
939
1325
935
973
965
852
821
1249
746
783
791
836
685
829
912
802
814
761
852
833
UNITS
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
7.97
1.72
1.17
0.78
0.99
0.44
0.59
0.99
1.54
4.29
1.87
1.28
1.34
3.67
0.98
1.85
! .80
1 .55
0.21
0.27
1.03
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
4.85
0.94
0.54
0.26
0.24
0.12
0. 14
0.29
0.44
0.22
0.44
0.27
0.56
0.91
0.34
0.28
0.18
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.54
63
-------
TABLE E-l
PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. NOVEMBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE:
Fe/P
Mole Ratio
0.04
0.90
1.52
1.95
2.03
1.09
1.10
1 .73
1.45
0.87
1.06
l.ll
1.31
1 .38
0.75
l.il
0.96
1.24
1.05
0.75
1.17
Effluent
Total P
mg/l
NS
1.60
3.03
1.48
1.70
6.28
2.16
2.00
1.40
1.94
1.14
1.34
0.80
2.10
1.00
2.00
0.66
2.90
0.72
1.80
1.12
1.86
FERRIC CHLORIDE FEED
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
NS
1.02
0.48
0.50
0.50
3.32
1.07
0.43
0.27
0.26
0.50
0.38
0.37
0.40
0.17
0.20
0.27
0.18
0.18
0.08
0.08
0.53
BEFORE RBC
Plant Flow
nvVday
908
NS
1030
931
878
825
806
431
871
121 1
988
886
825
840
715
689
708
840
829
889
776
678
613
878
814
795
659
723
1442
1204
871
UNITS
Effluent
Total P
kg/ day
1340
1.65
2.82
1.30
1 .40
5.46
2.61
1.97
1.24
1.60
0.78
1 .22
0.67
1 .74
0.88
1.22
0.58
2.36
0.57
1 .18
1.34
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
1.05
0.44
0.44
0.41
2.88
1.29
0.42
0.24
0.21
0.34
0.34
0.31
0.33
0. 15
0.12
0.24
0.15
0.14
0.05
0. 10
64
-------
TABLE E-12. PHOSPHORUS DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. DECEMBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14 .
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
Effluent
Fe/P Total P
Mole Ratio mg/l
1 .40
1.56
0.65
0.46
.08
.54
.63
.52
.60
1 .14
1.62
1.63
1 .65
0.99
0.75
0.88
0.96
1.24
FERRIC
1.16
2.00
2.44
2.80
1.20
24.8
1 .60
0.60
1.32
1 .00
8.12
5.68
3.00
1.40
1.40
20.5
2.30
4.78
CHLORIDE FEED
Effluent
Ortho P
mg/l
0.06
0.06
0.29
0.79
0.24
0.40
0.08
0.07
0.01
0.09
0.16
0.07
0.09
0.16
0.12
1.38
0.09
.22
BEFORE RBC
Plant Flow
m^/day
1 181
1060
1249
121 1
912
836
780
958
905
878
863
1098
984
101 1
1 154
1098
1022
1 101
984
852
810
942
852
761
632
674
692
712
768
749
715
916
UNITS
Effluent
Total P
kg/day
1.36
2.12
3.04
3.39
0.93
23.73
1 .44
0.53
1. 13
1.01
9.37
6.23
3.04
1.54
1 .13
19.31
1.96
Effluent
Ortho P
kg/day
0.07
0.06
0.36
0.95
0.19
0.38
0.07
0.06
0.01
0.09
0.19
0.08
0.09
0.18
0.09
1.30
0.07
65
-------
APPENDIX F
TABLE F-l. ORGANIC REMOVAL DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. JANUARY 1975
Raw Organic
Water Loading
Date Temp. °C *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30.
31
Avg.
NOTE:
8
1 1
12
12
12
10
10
9
9
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
II
' II
10
II
12
II
II
*0rganic
7.52
7.08
.
6.84
8.45
30.95
8.54
4.64
5.66
6.35
13.38
7.62
8.84
3.91
3.81
8.84
loading
of RBC surface
Percent BOD Percent COD Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal Removal Removal , Loading
Total RBC Total RBC Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
82
88
89
66
95
93
94
90
82
74
91
86
63
76
85 73
74
33
90 94 87
69 95 77
83 95 85
72 94 78
63 91 74
67 81 70
83 89 78
69 92 77
expressed as kg primary BOD/dav oer 1000
area
(i.e. organic loading to RBC units).
55.8
61.5
57.0
55.4
56.2
62.7
62.7
72.1
108.8
142.2
107.1
78.2
99.4
68.0
63.1
56.6
59.5
48.5
47.7
68.4
59.5
72.1
69.3
79.4
91.3
43.6
51.3
78.2
44.4
46.9
58.3
68.4
sq. m.
66
-------
TABLE F-2. ORGANIC REMOVAL
Raw Organic Percent BOD
Water Loading Removal
Date Temp. °C * Total RBC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Avg.
NOTE:
1 1
12
12
II
10
1 1
10
10
9
10
10
12
1 1
1 1
II
1 1
8
10
9
10
10
*0rgani
of RBC
5.42
5.91
10.55
4.39
6.79
5.22
4.05
7.18
6.69
6.30
4.78
6.10
c loading
surface
90
84
87
68
83
81
94
87
75
80
84
82
83
81
66
87
41
78
72
85
77
57
84
59
72
expressed
area
( i .e.
DATA.
PEWAUKEE STP, FEBRUARY 1975
Percent COD Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal Removal Loading
Total RBC Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
89
89
83
82
89
89
75
75
84
as kg
organ!
78
86
65
77
72
79
63
74
primary BOD/day per 1000
ic loading to RBC units).
68.9
68.4
42.4
47.3
61.9
61.1
46.4
62.3
68.4
55.0
51.7
51.7
50.9
70.5
62.7
70.1
55.0
62.7
66.4
73.3
53.8
72.1
59.5
68.4
71 .7
64.0
61 .9
68.0
61.5
sq. m.
67
-------
TABLE F-3. ORGANIC
Raw Organic
Water Loading
Date Temp. °C *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
10
II
II
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
II
10
8
II
II
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
*0rganic
of RBC
6.49
5.91
4.88
9.23
6.69
7.23
20.31
7.08
3.86
14.45
8.59
loading
surface
REMOVAL DATA. PEWAUKEE STP.
MARCH 1975
Percent BOD Percent COD Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal Removal Removal , Loading
Total RBC Total RBC Total RBC rn /day /1 000 rn
74
83
80
86
77
81
18
57
57
71
68
65 80
65
60 81
72 89
69
74 83
46 2
5
0 75
37
49 68
expressed as kg
area (i .e. organ i
61
59
99
94
84
89
86
97
53
77 90
72
36
0
55
51
primary
c loadi
67
90
70
16
83
81
40
0
88
55
71
BOD/day
ng to RBC
93
83
67
74
65
81
44
83
57
67
56
64
0
4
0
36
65
50
61
per 1000
units).
59.1
46.4
63.6
63.6
58.3
61.1
57.9
39.9
82.3
86.4
85.1
70.9
63.1
56.6
70.1
79.0
113.3
152.8
162.6
184.2
198.8
110.8
154.4
200.4
172.7
112.0
114.9
145.9
126.7
122.6
173.2
106.3
sq. m.
68
-------
TABLE F-4. ORGANIC
REMOVAL DATA
, PEWAUKEE STP, APRIL 1975
Raw Organic Percent BOD Percent COD Percent TOC Hydraulic
Water Loading Removal Removal Removal -, Loading
Date Temp. °C * Total RBC Total RBC Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE:
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
10
1 1
12
12
II
II
1 1
1 1
10
II
10
10
M
12
II
*0rgani
of RBC
9176
7.32
5.22
1 1 .08
8.64
8.79
4.69
8.30
5.42
8.01
9181
8.10
8.01
4.30
7.32
c loading
surface
10
37
46
37
65
70
82
88
77
87
81
63
74
63
28 44
23
16 64
46 59
51
67 75
79 74
83
83 90
84 78
76
58 54
50 73
57 68
expressed as kg
area
(i.e. organ i
58
51
65 47
89
60
48 74
46
63 40
40
71 60
51
83
92 28
73 59
62
82
27
62 33
47 28
64 52
primary BOD/day
c loading to RBC
52
41
51
74
53
77
60
57
32
70
66
78
61
57
48
3
22
0
53
per 1000
un i ts ) .
130.4
128.3
1 18.2
1 13.3
109.2
104.7
125.9
123.4
1 15.7
1 12.4
1 1 1.2
95.7
88.8
99.0
92.5
95.3
90.0
1 12.4
88.8
93.3
96.6
93.3
122.6
1 14. 1
108.0
81.9
106.7
81.5
193.5
166.2
1 10.4
sq. m.
69
-------
TABLE
F-5. ORGANIC REMOVAL
Raw Organic
Water Loading
Date Temp. °C *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE;
12
II
13
12
12
13
12
13
13
13
13
13
14
16
15
16
13
16
17
16
17
16
14
7.13
8.59
8.01
3.42
15.18
9.18
7.76
14.35
16.40
9.62
7.91
4.88
4.20
8.98
^Organic loading
of RBC
surface
DATA. PEWAUKEE STP.
Percent BOD Percent COD
Removal Removal
Total RBC Total RBC
63
73
52
77
59
80
73
73
79
81
60
87
72
71
51
65
38
68
60
69
73
59
72
81
59
79
63
64
expressed as
area
79
66
66
84
81
79
67
87
77
kg
(i.e. organ!
73
57
62
73
71
68
63
74
67
primary
MAY 1975
Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal , Loading «
Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
17
49
7
44
58
94
88
89
91
82
97
85
84
92
93
99
97
74
85
89
76
BOD/ciay
c loading to RBC
2
II
12
0
41
89
20
60
33
57
0
89
84
87
90
85
95
94
68
67
80
61
per 1000
units).
162.6
152.0
1 13.3
110.4
126.7
151.6
133.6
104.3
102.3
90.0
94.5
131.6
187.4
150.3
112.4
133.2
102.3
99.4
178.4
171. 1
180.1
144.2
178.0
152.4
146.7
159.7
Ml. 2
80.3
79.4
92.5
70.5
129.2
sq. m.
70
-------
TABLE
F-6. ORGANIC
REMOVAL DATA, PEWAUKEE STP.
Raw Organic Percent BOD
Water Loading Removal
Date Temp. °C * Total RBC
1
2
3
4
5 '
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE:
16
17
15
17
15
16
16
16
16
16
17
17
17
17
17
18
19
18
17
18
18
18
18
17
*0rgan i
of RBC
6.84
7.13
10.69
4.98
7. 18
6.59
9.08
5.61
6.79
6.84
7.37
4.30
6.98
c loading
surface
76
54
68
46
87
77
32
1
47
68
61
87
59
69
35
61
51
69
69
9
0
1
26
59
62
42
expressed
area
(i.e.
Percent COD
Remova 1
Tota 1 RBC
76
71
65
87
10
50
81
72
64
as kg
organ i
66
62
66
70
0
5
47
63
47
primary
c load!
JUNE 1975
Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal , Loading
Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
92
82
81
94
77
94
77
60
90
65
81
83
13
47
10
53
75
73
63
68
76
83
73
BOD/day
ng to RBC
74
73
71
89
77
66
82
63
36
56
0
0
53
30
61
43
21
0
46
22
57
per 1000
units) .
70.5
84.7
84.7
1 10.0
1 13.3
99.4
83.1
73.3
108.0
81 .9
121.4
94. 1
89.6
1 10.0
1 19.8
1 1 1 .6
141 .4
124.3
1 1 1.2
109.2
57.9
73.7
1 12.9
1 12.0
106.7
103.5
104.7
88.0
82.3
90.4
98.2
sq. m.
-------
TABLE
F-7. ORGANIC REMOVAL DATA. PEWAUKEE STP.
Raw Organic
Water Loading
Date Temp. °C *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2.4
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
18
18
20
19
21
19
20
21
19
18
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
21
20
20
19
19
20
20
20
21
21
20
20
19
*0rgan i c
of RBC
9.08
5.71
8.74
6.79
6.98
7.57
6.15
6.49
3.76
3.71
5.13
6.40
loading
surface
Percent BOD Percent COD
Remova 1 Remova 1
Total RBC TotaJ RBC
61
78
68
75
81
56
73
74
82
73
75
82
84
73
74
36
49
52
47
19
57
0
54
53
51
18
40
expressed
area (i.e.
62
82
78
83
76
85
85
83
84
87
8!
as kg
organ
37
61
65
61
53
53
28
56
61
53
JULY 1975
Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal , Loading
Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
69
85
0
87
85
90
84
87
85
70
70
80
86
68
80
87
83
92
90
77
74
76
83
primary BOD/day
!c loading to RBC
32
62
43
68
82
73
26
38
0
19
57
0
60
51
4
31
49
per 1000
units).
109.2
1 1 1.6
98.6
95.3
101. 0
103.5
102.3
101.4
100.6
97.4
105.9
87.6
85.6
79.4
101 .0
104.7
113.3
123.0
99.4
90.9
116. 9
104.3
113.3
97.0
88.0
77.4
72.5
74.1
74.6
74.6
84.7
96.6
sq. m.
72
-------
TABLE F-8. ORGANIC REMOVAL DATA
Raw Organic Percent BOD
Water Loading Removal
Date Temp. °C * Total RBC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
21
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
21
21
21
20
21
21
20
21
20
20
20
20
21
20
20
20
20
21
20
20
20
19
20
20
*0rgani
of RBC
5.13
4.44
8.84
8.74
5.47
8.10
5.13
5.03
4.54
6.74
6.20
c loading
surface
82
75
81
74
84
58
83
62
80
81
76
58
49
64
53
56
41
55
27
51
66
52
expressed
area
( i .e.
. PEWAUKEE STP. AUGUST 1975
Percent COD
Removal
Tota 1 RBC
85
80
80
85
82
62
70
86
79
as kg
organ!
61
59
22
21
49
40
42
60
44
primary
ic load!
Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal , Loading _
Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
92
97
88
50
95
93
89
84
60
86
99
94
87
63
80
94
80
84
82
75
83
83
BOD/day
ng to RBC
46
66
73
84
50
53
12
42
60
92
70
56
25
32
79
68
76
63
46
83
59
per 1000
units).
114. 1
61.9
54.2
78.2
70.5
78.2
69.7
107.6
88.8
83.9
1 14.1
102.7
1 14.9
80.3
65.2
51.7
53.0
67.6
72.5
95.3
97.0
1 17.3
83.1
68.9
89.2
81.1
72.1
72.1
71.3
56.2
51.3
80.3
sq. m.
73
-------
TABLE F-9. ORGANIC REMOVAL DATA. PEWAUKEE 5TP. SEPTEMBER 1975
Raw
Water
Date Temp. °C
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE;
19
20
20
20
20
19
19
20
20
20
20
19
18
18
19
19
19
19
19
18
(8
18
18
19
18
18
18
18
18
20
19
*0rgani
of RBC
Organ! c
Loading
*
7.86
8.45
4.00
9.52
4.78
6.35
5.47
10.06
9.86
6.44
1.81
6.79
c loading
surface
Percent BOD Percent COD
Removal Removal
Tota 1 RBC Total RBC
85
77
77
93
83
86
88
91
84
85
85
89
79
85
77
51
63
85
79
83
76
73
77
83
2
68
84
79
90
86
90
94
85
86
77
86
expressed as kg
area (i .e. organ i
74
74
85
85
72
78
0
67
Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal , Loading
Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
79
58
80
91
98
97
77
82
88
86
77
82
92
88
90
87
85
89
89
85
81
85
primary BOD/day
!c loading to RBC
51
80
93
56
81
75
67
76
74
76
78
57
80
87
99
0
75
per 1000
un i ts ) .
61.1
63.1
64.0
78.2
103.5
53.4
49.7
56.6
56.2
59.5
54.2
49.3
40.3
40.3
50.1
45.2
44.4
44.4
42.4
38.7
36.3
44.4
63.1
55.0
50.5
49.3
44.0
39.9
60.7
31.4
52.1
sq. m.
74
-------
TABLE F-IO. ORGANIC REMOVAL DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. OCTOBER 1975
Raw Organic Percent BOD Percent COD Percent TOC Hydraulic
Water Loading Removal Removal Removal Loading
Date Temp. °C * Total RBC Total RBC Total RBC m /day/ 1000 m
1
2
3
4 .
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
16
18
18
18
18
17
20
19
19
19
17
17
19
20
19
18
18
18
17
18
19
19
17
17
17
16
16
17
17
18
17
18
*0rgani
of RBC
8.25
7.67
7.76
2.93
6.88
1 1.86
8.06
4.39
6.10
5.52
7.96
6.74
6.10
5.91
6.88
c loading
surface
54
86
98
96
97
73
89
97
96
88
80
99
98
95
91
32 47
82
92 94
80 98
93
44 81
81 94
87
89 93
70 91
66
95 98
89 98
78
77 92
expressed as kg
area
(i .e. organ i
23 62
87
94
93
68 97
81 98
96
97
94
49 79
87 97
92
90
92
85 94
78 85
84
88
91 98
89 95
94
72 90
primary BOD/day
c loading to RBC
47
82
81
87
65
21
92
63
86
87
61
66
73
91 ,
73
69
72
per 1000
units) .
48. 1
47.3
53.0
45.6
44.0
44.0
59.9
33.0
53.0
51.3
43.2
40.3
55.4
78.2
55.0
57.4
57.0
50.1
48.5
84.3
50. 1
53.0
53.4
56.2
46.0
55.8
61.5
54.2
55.0
51.3
57.4
53.0
sq. m.
75
-------
TABLE F-ll. ORGANIC REMOVAL DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. NOVEMBER 1975
Raw
Water
Date Temp. °C
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2!
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
NOTE:
17
17
17
16
17
16
16
16
16
14
16
16
16
16
17
16
16
18
16
16
16
15
15
15
15
15
15
13
13
13
16
*0rgan i
of RBC
Organ i c
Loading
*
9.37
21.68
17.58
14.65
10.79
7.23
8.79
11.91
10.01
8.64
12.06
c loading
surface
Percent BOD Percent COD Percent TOC Hydraulic
Removal Removal Removal Loading 7
Total RBC Total RBC Total RBC nrT/day/IOOO nT
70
90
83
88
91
80
95
86
94
90
87
50
92
88
84
83
52
88
74
86
59
76
expressed as
area
59
94
88.
91
94
95
91
87
kg
(i .e. organ!
45
96
85
86
85
89
61
78
primary
c load!
89
63
85
83
89
93
86
89
83
96
88
96
87
98
98
98
96
99
95
96
90
BOD/day
ng to RBC
69
55
94
93
55
89
84
82
53
73
80
91
80
96
89
72
83
64
81.1
78
per 1000
units).
61.1
90.4
69.3
62.7
59.1
55.8
54.2
28.9
58.7
77.0
66.8
59.9
55.8
56.6
48.1
46.4
61.1
56.6
55.8
59.9
52.1
45.6
48.9
59.1
55.0
53.8
44.4
48.9
97.4
58.7
sq. m.
76
-------
TABLE F-12. ORGANIC REMOVAL DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. DECEMBER 1975
Raw
Water
Date Temp. °C
1
2
3
4 .
5
6
7
8
9
10
I 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
NOTE:
13
12
13
14
12
12
12
14
14
13
14
14
13
14
14
1 1
9
13
12
13
13
13
13
12
10
10
10
10
10
J2
12
12
*0rgan
Organic Percent BOD Percent COD Percent TOC Hydraulic
Loading Removal Removal Removal Loading
* Total RBC Total RBC Total RBC m /day/ 1 000 m
9.28
24.51
256.33
8.84
5.71
92.28
253.89
17.47
23.63
76.95
Ic loading
of RBC surface
78 60 83
74 79 75
74 97
90 81 84
93 82 93
81 97
62 98 77
76 79 72
84 90
93
81 85 81
expressed as kg
area (i.e. organ!
94
58 74
84 82
75
93
69 91
81 89
83
94
99 8
81 62
85
98
19
98
79 76
primary BOD/day
ic loading to RBC
97
42
88
98
99
26
82
68
98
98
98
99
96
98
99
90
99
87
per 1000
units) .
79.4
71 .3
84.3
81 .5
61 .5
56.2
52.6
64.8
61.1
59.1
58.3
74.1
66.4
68.0
77.8
74.1
68.9
74.1
66.4
57.4
54.6
63.6
57.4
51.3
42.8
45.6
46.9
48.1
51.7
50.5
61.9
sq. m.
77
-------
APPENDIX G
TABLE G-l. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA,
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
BOD COD TOC
mg/ 1 mg/ 1 mg/ 1
45
32
52
29
78
37
13 31 30
23 39
17 29
30 45
69 76
73
38 73
15 46
SS
mg/l
14
10
20
23
30
22
23
36
33
27
28
34
87
73
27
48
48
18
PEWAUKEE STP, JANUARY 1975
N03-N NH3-N TKN Al
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
0.02
4.4 0.04
3.5
0.14
0.17
0.18
4.7
0.21
0.15
3.6
Avg. 38 49 33 4.0 0.12
78
-------
TABLE G-2. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. FEBRUARY 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Avq.
BOD
mg/l
21
32
22
50
28
29
10
24
39
25
16
32
27
COD TOC
mg/ 1 mg/ 1
56
48
68
66
45
51
90
94
65
SS NO,-N NH3-N TKN
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
26
39
30 3.9
34
41 4.2
43
60
40
48
54 2.5
58
26
36
54
63 3. 1
82
49
48
46 3.4
Al
mg/l
O.I 1
0.78
0.67
0.72
0.76
1.18
0.88
2.34
2.34
1.09
79
-------
TABLE G-5. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP, MARCH 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
BOD COD
mg/ 1 mg/ I
36 76
35
32 59
31 50
28
30 57
72 232
42
33 42
53 102
55
25
40 88
TOC
mg/l
2
7
14
10
18
12
42
12
26
30
20
28
47
6
23
32
64
24
31
1 1
34
22
SS
mg/l
46
48
48
54
50
32
78
44
39
55
97
56
144
76
82
90
122
78
86
50
64
68
NO^-N NH3-N TKN Al
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
2.2
3.20
4.06
0.8 0.77
1.03
0.8 0.33
0.80
I.I 0.81
0.79
1.3 0.76
1.2 1.33
80
-------
TABLE G-4. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. APRIL 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
BOD
mg/l
58
28
42
44
30
37
19
14
II
16
15
23
10
COD
mg/l
81
59
98
67
59
17
47
48
36
TOC
mg/l
28
23
23
10
25
1 1
20
27
21
17
26
17
31
25
32
14
35
31
36
SS N03-N NH3-N TKN
mg/ 1 mg/ 1 mg/ 1 mg/ 1
81
63
67
52 2.3
48
62
30
40
27
40 4.2
26
45
22
32
31 4.7
53
72 3.1
26
19
Al
mg/l
1 .48
1 .58
1 .66
1.04
0.97
1.65
1.47
2.35
1.53
Avg. 27 57 24 44 3.6 1.53
81
-------
TABLE G-5. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. MAY 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
BOD
mg/l
22
20
37
10
32
19
19
34
24
13
29
13
20
COD
mg/l
32
52
66
44
51
71
61
39
TOC
mg/l
39
48
42
10
10
1
4
4
4
3
7
3
6
6
4
3
1
2
12
12
6
SS
mg/l
30
30
30
32
31
13
18
32
31
24
34
17
50
29
27
16
20
35
37
21
25
NO^-N NH3-N TKN Al
mg/l mg/l rog/l mg/l
3.5
1.97
2.23
3.6 0.62
0.91
3.0
1.97
0.70
1.05
3.1
0.63
Avg. 22 52 9 27 3.3 1.26
82
-------
TABLE G-6. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA, PEWAUKEE STP. JUNE 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2!
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avq.
BOD
mg/l
25
42
36
29
18
22
58
60
60
45
28
16
37
COD
mg/l
60
67
59
40
184
108
79
66
83
TOC
mg/l
10
1 1
12
4
12
7
20
19
6
18
16
22
52
24
16
16
17
20
19
25
15
21
30
SS
mg/l
36
31
30
54
49
26
51
39
21
28
42
75
142
80
78
34
47
40
55
19
24
34
47
NO,-N NH3-N TKN
mg/l mg/l mg/l
1.9
1.4
.8
.5
.2
.2
.5
2.6
0.6
1.4
1.7
1.7
3.0
3.0
1.7
Al
mg/l
0.90
1.33
0.80
0.70
0.55
0.90
0.20
0.24
0.16
0.64
83
-------
TABLE G-7. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. JULY 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
BOD
mg/l
53
26
41
36
34
61
40
40
31
54
31
24
24
49
39
COD
mg/l
117
49
69
61
90
61
77
98
56
44
72
TOC
mg/l
27
II
44
20
24
9
14
15
18
23
28
19
18
36
27
17
12
25
18
23
25
25
19
SS
mg/l
41
22
102
24
40
32
37
62
30
58
35
34
42
58
37
46
24
40
31
28
14
30
39
NO,-N
mg/l
2.2
2.5
0.2
1.2
0.8
1.5
2.0
2.3
1.5
I.I
1 .6
2.4
1.2
0.6
0.6
1.2
1 .9
2.3
1.0
1.3
2.0
1.8
1.5
NH3-N
mg/l
4.4
2.8
10.5
8.6
5.7
7.2
7.2
9.7
8.5
6.9
6.7
6.6
8.3
5.4
6.6
5.0
5.2
8.5
5.7
7.7
5.2
5.4
6.7
TKN
mg/l
8.0
3.3
16.6
10.7
8.1
9.4
10.8
13.7
10.8
10.4
11.4
9.6
12.8
10.0
10.4
8.3
10. 1
12.3
9.2
10.0
7.2
7.9
10. 1
Al
mg/l
0.04
0.89
1.35
1.36
0.66
0.41
0.70
0.10
0.05
0.62
84
-------
TABLE G-8. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. AUGUST 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
.5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg.
BOD
mg/l
31
29
31
36
30
50
24
45
31
32
34
COD
mg/l
64
57
108
107
80
106
66
46
79
TOC
mg/l
10
14
10
6
4
19
17
22
21
12
2
9
14
27
19
10
17
8
1 1
21
9
13
SS
mg/l
14
40
33
27
25
42
54
65
46
46
15
44
49
52
48
43
64
49
29
28
21
40
3.
2,9
2.0
0.6
0.8
0.6
0.3
01 .
O.I
0.1
O.I
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.8
1 .0
2.3
3.0
3.9
3.3
4.2
1 .3
NHv-N
mg/l
12.2
7.4
0
7.5
8.0
1 1.3
7.4
8.6
8.8
10. 1
14.6
9.6
7.2
10.6
12.3
7.2
4.6
3.6
5.0
5.2
3.5
8.2
TKN
mg/l
13.4
1 1.2
2.0
9.8
9.6
14.6
11.2
12.9
12.6
16.4
16.5
12.0
9.8
13.5
14.6
8.5
7.4
5.4
6.3
6.3
4.5
10.4
Al
mg/l
1.08
1.00
0.98
1. 18
0.12
1.52
0.72
1.06
0.96
85
-------
TABLE G-9. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. SEPTEMBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
BOD
mg/l
29
38
53
13
25
26
22
25
30
43
41
22
57
33
COD
mg/l
47
49
26
38
37
39
77
75
145
59
TOC
mg/l
23
23
13
10
18
7
14
20
17
16
27
16
22
13
27
21
28
18
17
II
39
46
20
SS
mg/l
10
23
26
47
48
23
22
32
34
30
30
21
20
24
63
37
46
64
40
28
97
36
NO,-N
mg/l
3.8
4.5
3.5
3.2
4.8
4.9
5.6
5.8
5.8
6.0
4.9
5.9
5.7
6.0
6.3
5.1
1 .3
2.1
0.9
1.0
0.6
1.0
4.0
NH,-N
mg/l
2.5
5.1
2.6
1.7
3.5
8.6
6.3
3.9
4.3
5.8
6.3
6.5
7.2
5.4
4.6
5.9
10.0
8.9
7.8
1 I.-6
8.8
10.7
6.3
TKN
mg/l
3.5
6.5
8.7
4.3
5.9
10. 1
8.2
5.5
6.5
7.3
7.8
7.4
8.6
6.7
7.8
7.6
12.5
11.4
9.2
12.9
14.0
16.8
8.6
Fe
mg/l
0.80
0.80
0.80
3.40
4.30
2.50
0.80
3.00
4.00
2.30
86
-------
TABLE G-IO. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. OCTOBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
i i
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
BOD
mg/l
116
29
10
18
9
85
28
10
13
31
50
6
12
26
COD
mg/l
298
86
37
155
36
37
51
20
23
TOC
mg/l
71
23
29
19
13
10
9
10
17
56
6
16
20
14
9
26
27
26
7
16
22
SS
mg/l
140
35
42
26
17
12
20
26
21
61
39
23
30
60
28
51
54
38
21
25
23
NCU-N
mg/l
1.3
1.3
0.8
1.5
1.7
2.4
1.5
3.2
1.7
0.4
2.0
1 .7
1 .2
1 .7
1 .2
2.0
2.6
2.4
1 .7
2.1
2.0
NH3-N
mg/l
7.9
9.3
7.5
8.4
10.4
10.3
7.9
6.2
9.2
6.5
8.0
13.0
9.8
12.9
10.0
9.3
7.6
11.2
6.7
TKN
mg/l
13.5
10. 1
8.6
9. 1
1 1.7
1 1 .1
9.3
7.8
12.9
8.4
9.5
15.1
13.7
14.0
12.6
1 1 .8
10. 1
12.3
' 8.0
Fe
mg/ 1
5.2
3.0
3.5
4.0
8.6
8.6
7.0
10.0
4.0
Avg. 32 83 21 38 1.8 9.0 M.O 6.0
87
-------
TABLE G-ll. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. NOVEMBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Avg.
BOD
mg/l
75
31
37
35
31
62
18
55
24
65
43
COD TOC
mg/ 1 mg/ 1
35
154 37
30 16
18
58
18
71 29
50 22
38
20
19
12
47 32
40 4
29
12
III 36
17
29
27
72 25
SS
mg/l
27
120
40
52
140
55
78
42
84
26
38
21
67
30
69
24
98
30
64
50
58
NOy-N
mg/l
0.9
2.8
1.2
1.4
0.8
0.9
1.2
1.5
2.3
I.I
1.3
1 .5
1.6
1 .5
3.2
2.3
1.5
2.0
3.9
3.0
1.8
NH3-N
mg/l
7.8
8.2
9.2
10.0
8.3
9.5
8.6
8.6
8.5
10.3
8.8
9.8
10.0
8.6
8.7
7.3
9.5
9.5
10.0
2.4
8.7
TKN
mg/l
9.2
13.8
10.9
15.7
14.0
11.3
11.4
1 1.9
11.9
13.3
10.7
12.4
13.6
10.2
12.7
8.3
14.0
1 1.2
13.2
4.4
11.7
Fe
mg/l
2.5
4.2
6.5
5.0
2.5
1.5
6.8
2.6
4.0
4.0
88
-------
TABLE G-12. FINAL EFFLUENT DATA. PEWAUKEE STP. DECEMBER 1975
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
tl
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
BOD
mg/l
52
6!
78
27
17
51
82
56
32
38
COD TOC
mg/ 1 mg/ 1
15
91 48
122 37
70
30
518
90 21
43 27
44
31
130
123 108
142 47
40
29
268
35
SS
mg/l
51
90
91
107
45
958
76
24
75
42
312
226
106
65
47
850
67
NO-j-N
mg/l
2.3
2.7
1.2
0.7
0.4
0
1 .4
1 .1
0.6
0.5
0.3
1 .0
1 .0
0.8
0.6
0.2
0.9
NH3-N
mg/l
4.7
7.7
6.3
8. 1
13.3
5.6
8.4
9. 1
1 1 .3
6.2
3.4
5.7
6.9
6.8
8.1
1 1.2
9.3
TKN Fe
mg/ 1 mg/ 1
7.0 4.5
1 1.2
1 1.8
13.9
16.1
42.6
11.2 5.0
14.1
17.6 5.0
9.8
33.3 24.3
13.7
12.0 7.5
10.2
11.2 3.5
46.5 52.0
12.9
5.
Avg. 49 102 88 190 0.9 7.8 17.4 14.5
89
-------
APPENDIX H
TABLE H-l. TREATMENT SUMMARY^ VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE TRICKLING FILTER. 1973
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
° JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw
Water
Temp . °
10.0
8.7
9.6
10.4
11.8
15.6
19.1
20.0
19.1
17.5
14.6
12.3
14.1
*0rgani
(i.e.
Avg.
Flow
C mVday
450
587
950
1223
916
742
712
575
469
1586
848
912
746
c loading
g/day/rrv5) .
BOD mg/l
Raw Primary
141
168
149
124
1 10
141
184
160
186
167
192
129
154
66
97
104
56
77
93
129
85
81
115
116
76
91
expressed as
Percent
Percent Total Hydraulic
BOD Removal S.S. mg/l Susp. Solids Loading
Final Total T.F. Raw Primary Final Removal m3/day/m2
24
48
30
24
33
41
43
41
28
41
55
21
36
g pr
53
42
30
55
30
34
30
47
56
31
40
41
41
imary
83 -
71
80
81
70
71 _ _
77 -
74 - _
85 -
75 -
71
84 -
77 -
BOD/day per m of trickling fi
1.26
1.65
2.66
3.42
2.56
2.08
1.99
1.61
1.31
4.44
2.38
2.55
2.33
Iter volume
Organic
Loading
*
48
92
159
110
113
III
148
79
61
293
158
III
124
-------
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw
Water
Temp .
10.4
9.7
9.6
10.4
13.2
15.7
18.8
19.8
19.1
17.2
13.4
11.3
14.1
*0rgani
(1 .e.
Avg.
Flow
°C m3/day
871
814
2036
1874
2850
1900
874
700
348
72
488
363
1099
c loading
g/day/m^).
BOD mg/
Raw Primary
135
132
77
88
98
147
189
215
275
531
176
150
184
105
91
72
101
128
148
149
243
240
305
194
1 15,
158
expressed as
1
Fina
57
62
46
29
35
36
29
64
48
74
60
44
49
9 Pr>
Percent
BOD Removal
1 Total T.F. Raw
58
53
40
67
64
76
85
70
83
86
66
71
71
mary
46
32 -
36 -
71
73 -
76 90
81 NO
74 136
80 244
76 430
69 118
62 140
57 181
BOD/day per
Percent
Total Hydraul ic Organic
S.S. mg/l Susp. Solids Loading Loading
Primary Final Removal mVday/m^ *
-
-
108
236
299
264
424
!70
154
236
m3 of
-
-
43
40
63
74
120
67
60
67
trt ckl ing
-
-
52
64
54
70
72
43
57
59
fi Iter
2.43
2.27
5.70
5.25
7.98
5.32
2.45
1.96
0.97
0.21
1.37
1.02
3.08
vo 1 ume
147
119
236
304
586
425
209
273
134
35
152
67
226
-------
TASLEH-3. TREATMENT SUMMARY. VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE TRICKLING FILTER. 1976
VD
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw Avg .
Water Flow BOD mg/
Temp. °C mVday Raw Primary
10.1
9.7
9.3
10.6
12.2
15.7
17.2
18.3
19.3
15.5
12.8
9.9
13.4
*0rgani
(i.e.
416 283
662 330
1514 248
969 306
799 280
625 255
568 220
590 1 87
481 149
666 245
447 302
447 277
682 257
139
96
92
59
82
99
97
112
105
108
105
128
102
c loading expressed as
g/day/rrP).
1
Final
58
50
33
25
15
43
42
59
46
66
44
68
46
Percent
Percent Total Hydraulic Organic
BOD Removal S.S. mg/l Susp. Solids Loading Loading
Total T.F. Raw Primary Final Removal m3/day/m2 *
80
71
63
81
71
61
56
40
30
56
65
54
62
51 389
85 664
87 531
92 496
95 327
83 303
81 319
68 182
69 160
73 347
85 381
75 294
73 366
g primary BOD/day per m
79
72
58
82
79
65
62
66
73
63
42
82
69
of tri
45
40
33
41
39
39
34
29
25
38
25
47
36
ckl ing
88
94
94
92
88
87
89
84
84
89
93
84
89
filter
1.17
1.85
4.24
2.71
2.24
1.75
1.59
1.66
1.35
1.86
1.25
1 .25
1.9!
volume
93
102
224
92
105
99
88
106
81
116
75
92
106
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE l-l. TREATMENT SUMMARY. VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT, 1973
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw Avg .
Water Flow
Temp. °F nrr/day
10.0
8.7
9.6
10.4
11.8
15.6
19.1
20.0
19.1
17.5
14.6
12.3
14.1
*0rgan i
(i.e.
2366
1987
1544
2600
2100
121 1
617
727
859
757
942
1294
1417
BOD mg/
Raw Primary
141
170
148
124
110
141
184
(60
185
167
192
129
154
113
142
123
113
104
101
130
101
117
174
151
103 .
123
c loading expressed as
organic loading to RBC
Percent Percent Hydraulic Organic
1 BOD Removal S.S. mg/l Total Loading Loading
Final Total RBC Raw Primary Final Removal m3/day/IOOO m2 *
28 80
35
36
29
31
26
25
16
19
24
30
25
27
kg
uni
79
76
77
72
82
86,
90
90
86
84
81
82
p r i ma ry
ts).
75 -
75 -
71
74 -
70 -
74 -
81
84 -
84
86
80
76
78 -
BOD/day per
139.6
M7.3
91.1
153.4
123.9
71.5
36.4
42.9
50.7
44.7
55.6
76.4
83.6
1000 sq. m. of RBC surface area
15.77
16.65
11.18
17.33
12.89
7.23
29.00
4.35
5.91
7.76
8.40
7.86
12.01
-------
TABLE 1-2. TREATMENT SUMMARY^ VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT^ 1974
vo
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw
Water
Temp. °
10.4
9.7
9.6
10.4
13.2
15.7
18.8
19.8
19.1
17.2
13.4
11.3
14.1
*0rgani
(i.e.
Avg.
Flow
F mVday
988
942
2154
1809
1253
852
931
492
643
1098
889
1094
1095
c loading
organic 1
BOD mg/l
Raw Primary Final
1 35 114
132 100
77 89
88 III
98 106
143 62
189 87
215 123
275 147
531 113
176 105
150 101
184 105
expressed as
oading to RBC
29
32
25
31
28
23
31
28
60
50
1.8
22
31
kg pri
units)
Percent
BOD Removal
Total RBC
68
65
71
84
84
87
78
91
90
85
80
many
72
72
74
63
64
77
59
56
83
78
70
BOD/day
Percent Hydraulic Organic
S.S. mg/l Total Loading Loading
Raw Primary Final Removal mVday/IOOO m2 *
-
-
90
no
136
244
386
128
140
176
per
-
-
50
77
129
94
82
78
83
75
1000 sq.
-
-
7
25
28
36
35
24
24
26
m. of
1
1
-
92
77
79
85
91
81
83
84
RBC surface
58.3
55.6
127.1
106.8
73.9
50.3
54.9
29.0
37.9
64.8
52.5
64.6
64.6
area
6.64
5.56
11.31
1 1.85
7.84
3.12
4.78
3.57
5.58
7.32
5.51
6.52
6.64
-------
TABLE 1-3. TREATMENT SUMMARY. VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE RBC PLANT. 1976
Month
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
vO
Ul
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
AVG.
NOTE:
Raw Avg .
Water Flow
Temp. °F m-Vday
10. 1
9.7
9.3
10.6
12.2
15.7
17.2
18.3
19.3
15.5
12.8
9.9
13.4
*0rgan i
(i.e.
731
1238
2176
1605
1400
1037
765
674
844
413
689
723
1024
;c loading
organic 1
BOD mg/
Raw Primary
232
346
262
306
281
255
220
187
175
245
325
277
259
250
225
204
208
204
218
221
124
122
147
138
146,
184
expressed as
oading to RBC
1
Final
24
28
33
31
26
22
14
19
31
24
19
27
25
kg pri
un i ts )
Percent
BOD Removal S.S. mg/l
Total RBC Raw Primary F
90
92
87
90
91
91
94.
90
82
90
94
90
90
mary
90 390
88 630
84 531
85 496
87 327
90 303
94 315
85 182
75 179
84 347
86 389
82 294
86 365
BOD/day per
426
349
451
315
395
269
305
92
90
80
76
1 15
247
1000 sq.
Percent Hydraulic Organic
Total Loading Loading
inal Removal m^/day/IOOO m2 *
22
43
61
44
30
26
21
16
24
24
21
25
30
m. of
94
93
89
91
91
91
93
91
86
93
95
91
92
RBC surface
49.3
83.5
146.7
108.4
94.5
70. 1
51.7
79.4
99.8
48.9
81.5
85. 1
83. 1
area
12.30
18.75
29.93
22.51
19.23
12.64
11.37
9.86
12.15
7.18
11.23
12.45
14.99
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-78-028
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION>NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
EVALUATION OF THE RBC PROCESS FOR MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
5. REPORT DATE
March 1978 (Issuing Date)
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7.AUTHOR1S) David L. Kluge
Raymond J. Kipp
Clifford J. Crandall
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Village of Pewaukee
Pewaukee, Wisconsin
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BC611
53072
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
S802905
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Municipal Environmental Research LaboratoryCin.,OH
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/14
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Robert L. Bunch, Project Officer
U.S. EPA (684-7655)
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
16. ABSTRACT
The major objective of this study was to operate a full scale rotating biological
contactor (RBC) to determine if it could produce an effluent that would meet the
definition of a secondary effluent (BOD <30 mg/1; TSS <30 mg/1). An additional ob-
jective was to compare the performance and effluent quality of a RBC system with a
full scale trickling filter operating in a parallel mode on the same influent waste-
water.
A secondary objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of chemical addition (alum
and ferric chloride) to remove phosphorus and determine its effect on operating per-
formance.
The following results were determined from these studies.
(1) The effluent from the RBC process met and exceeded the standards for
secondary treatment.
(2) The RBC process gave a superior effluent qualtiy in regard to BOD and
TSS than the trickling filter.
(3) Chemical addition to the RBC process was effective for removing phos-
phorus .
(4) Chemical addition in the RBC process showed a deleterious effect on
BOD and TSS removal.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Wastewater*
Trickling Filter
Nitrification
Alum
Temperature Variation
RBC
Phosphorus Removal
Ferric Chloride
13B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport}
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
104
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
96
------- |