v>EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Program Operations (WH-647) Washington DC 20460 September 1984 Innovative and Alternative Technology Projects: A Progress Report ------- INNOVATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS: A PROGRESS REPORT U, S, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE OF WATER WASHINGTON, D, C, 20460 ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Overview 1 Professional Recognition 3 Program Information 4 Table 1 — Innovative Technology Projects Funded 6 Through the I/A Technology Program Table 2 — A Summary of Alternative Technology 24 Projects Funded Through the I/A Program Table 3 — Selected Operating Alternative 25 Technology Facilities Funded Through the I/A Technology Program Table 4 — Field Test Projects and 100% 28 M/R Awards Table 5 — Federal and State I/A Technology 29 Coordinators and Contacts NOTE The Office of Water Program Operations issues this annual summary to provide interested parties with an overview of progress in the implementation of innovative and alternative technologies under provisions of the Clean Water Act. The report is based on information from grant awards through March for the year of issue as provided by state agencies or EPA regional offices. State, EPA Region, and EPA headquarters staff have worked diligently to make the listings as accurate and helpful as possible. Richard E. Thomas, National I/A Coordinator, who is listed in Table 5, should be contacted to report errors, omissions, or suggestions to improve the usefulness of the report. 1 ------- OVERVIEW The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (P.L. 92—500) authorized a major Federal funding program to abate water pol.lution from municipal treatment facilities. The language of P.L. 92—500 did not define an innovative and alternative (I/A) program, but it did send a clear message that use of the Federal grant funds authorized y t his law should encourage implementation of alternative technologies. In reviewing progress toward use of alternative technologies in 1977, Congress chose specifically to define and authorize an I/A program in the Clean Water Act (CWA). The language in this law spelled Out and strengthened the Congressional mandate that federal funds should encourage use of innovations and alternatives which would conserve and reuse resources. Specific provisions of the CWA of 1977 established a three— year test program that included a financial incentive, a mandatory reserve fund, and the authority to federally fund correction of failures. The financial incentive came in the form of a ten percent bonus grant for projects which met certain criteria. The Federal criteria established two classes of qualifying projects. Alternative technology projects were eligible by definition and were named in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations detailing the provisions of the I/A program. Individual projects or parts of projects could gain eligibility by being designated as innovative on a case—by—case basis. Overall, the I/A reserve for the three—year test program anticipated increasing participation with time. The reserve was two percent for the first two years and three percent in the third year. The fact that the reserve is used to fund the ten percent difference between a 75 percent and 85 percent grant means that each percent of set—aside controls about ten percent of a state’s total grant funds. The authority to use Federal funds to correct failures was intended to compensate for the requirement that the applicant must take a risk to participate in a program intended to encourage use of rela- tively unproven or unfamiliar technologies. The 1981 amendments to the CWA continued and strengthened the statutory mandate to encourage use of innovative and alterna- tive technologies. The I/A provisions of the CWA of 1977 were extended through fiscal year 1985 with changes that increased the financial incentives and added a provision to fund a new category of projects designated as field testing. The bonus ------- grant for I/A projects will become a mandatory 20 percent bonus of eligible and fundable I or A costs in fiscal year 1985. Some states have exercised an interim option so that the Federal share for their grant applicants is 55 percent for conventional technologies and 75 percent for I/A technologies. The mandatory set—aside was increased to four percent which means that it has been increased from two percent in the first year of the program to four percent or more in the fourth year of the program. Recognizing a need for flexibility, the Congress provided states the option to increase the set—aside up to a seven and one—half percent maximum. The field testing program provides a mechanism to verify the basis of design for promising advances in treatment technology to reduce the risk of failure before funding construction of many similar projects through the I/A program. In summary, there has been a consistent statutory trend from 1972 to the present to direct federal funds to the implementa- tion of innovations which are promising but unproven for the proposed use and comparatively unknown alternatives for wastewater treatment. The increasingly stronger mandates of Congress have had substantial effects in a comparatively short time. Response to the I/A program at the local and state level has resulted in over 2,900 grant awards for I/A technol- ogies from inception of the program on October 1, 1978 through March of 1984. There is every indication that the national response to the program will encourage the Congress to continue strong legislative support when it considers further authorization of the program. 2 ------- PROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION Professional engineering societies such as the American Consulting Engineers Council (ACEC), the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), and the Water Pollution Control Federation (WPCF) continue to recognize I/A projects for their engineering excellence. Even before the establishment of the I/A program, projects emphasizing conservation and reuse gained national recognition. For example, the Muskegon County, Michigan project was selected as one of the ten outstanding engineering achievements of 1972 in the United States by NSPE. Many projects under the auspices of the I/A program have been nominated for national recognition. Seven I/A projects were chosen as finalists by the officers, member firms, and award committees of the ACEC in their 1983 Engineering Excellence Awards Program. Award—winning projects represented a cross section of I/A technologies. State Award Finalists included Indianapolis, Indiana (pure oxygen/single stage nitrifica- tion); Hagerstown, Maryland (dual aerobic/anaerobic di- gestion); Hastings, Nebr.aska (land application of liquid sludge); Rochester, Minnesota (Pho—strip/digestor gas utilization); Passaic Valley, New Jersey (computerized financial management system); and Clayton Co., Georgia (silviculture). The Glen Cove coiricineration system project was selected as the ACEC grand award winner and the NSPE National Achievement Award Winner. 3 ------- PROGRAM INFORMATION The I/A program is now in its third year as an integral part of the overall construction grants program after a three—year test period. Most parts of the program are reaching stabilty while the field test and 100 percent modification/replacement grant activities are in a state of transition. The basic provisions of the 1977 law are quite stable as evidenced by the award of over 2,900 grants to design and/or construct over 1 ,400 facilities with innovative or alternative components. Over $320 million of set—aside funds have been used to provide the ten percent bonus for eligible components of the projects with a total construction cost exceeding $3.8 billion. The effect of increasing the mandatory set—aside to four percent should cause these figures to increase even more rapidly in 1984 and into 1985. Program staff are processing the first few applications under the provision to provide 100 percent modification and replacement (M/R) funding to correct failures of innovative or alternative components. With over 200 of the I/A—funded facilities now in operation, it is reassuring that we have very few requests for 100 percent t4/R funding. The new field test program established by the 1981 law is in the early stages of development. There is one field test project already completed, several in progress, and many other projects are under consideration. Recognizing the value of specific project information, the Office of Water Program Operations has compiled several tabulations to provide summary information on the I/A program. Table 1 lists facilities which include components that meet the criteria to receive federal grant funds as innovative. This table lists the type of technology, location, design flow, basis for approval as innovative, consulting engineering firm, and whether the project is in operation. Table 2 is a numerical summary of those facilities utilizing a defined alternative technology. This listing is arrayed by the EPA Regions and States to show the geographic distribution of facilities using these technologies. Table 3 provides additional information as to location, size, and the consult- ing firm for selected operating facilities using alternative technologies. 4 ------- Tables 1 and 3 can be used to make contact with facility owners or consulting firms to obtain additional information on the design, construction, and operation of innovative and alternative technologies. Table 4 contains information on field test and 100 percent modification/replacement grant projects. Additional information on the I/A program and individual projects can be obtained from the appropriate State or EPA contacts listed in Table 5 . 5 ------- TABLE 1 -- IHNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PRO JECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTEf 4ATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM Design Flow Basis of Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD) Approval Design Consulting Firm “ &ERATION/MIXDG” Counter-Current Aeration Bay Minnette, AL. 1.8 energy Boaz, AL k.1 energy (1)Sheffield, AL 4.O energy Sylacauga, AL 2.’i energy Tuskegee, AL 2.0 energy Hilisborough Co., FL 1.5 energy Rome, GA 18.0 energy Frai*lin, KY 2.3 energy Ashboro, MC 6.0 energy Cramerton, NC 0.25 energy Greenville, MC 10.5 energy Ranlo, MC 0.2 energy Troy, NC O.8L1 energy - (1)E. Richiand, SC 7.0 energy (2)Clairborne Co., TN 0.32 energy - Decherd, TN O.’ 8 energy 3onesboro, TN 0.5 cost & energy Lebanon, TN 3.7k energy - Portland, TN 1.0 energy - Springfield, TN 3.’i4 energy - (1)Fra*lyn,VA 2.0 cost R. Kenneth Weeks Parker Co., TX 0.091 energy Hays & Lindsey, Inc. Dame Diffused Meriden, CT 11.6 energy C. E. Maguire, Inc. (1)Brockton, MA 18.0 cost & energy Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, Inc. (1)Madison Nine Springs, WI 50.0 Req. discr. O’Brien & Cere Submerged Mixing of Equalization Tanks Mas*ato, HN 10.0 cost Bolton & Menck In-Situ Gas Cleaning of Fine Bubble Diffusers Alliance, OH 7.5 cost FA Thomas & Assoc. Lakewood, 011 18.0 cost Watermation, Inc. (1)Indicates that this facility Is listed under more than one innovative technology. (ZFindtcates that this facility Is operational. 6 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Basis of Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD) Approval Design Consulting Firm Draft Tube Atmore, AL 2.0 energy - Eufaula, AL 2.55 energy - Foley, AL 1.0 energy Opelika, AL 0.911 energy - Fairfield, IA 2.8 energy French, Raneker & Assoc. (1)Presque Isle, HE 5.2 cost & energy Wright-Pierce Star, MC 0.6 energy - (1)Bonner Springs, KS 1.4 cost A.C. Klrkwod & Co. Submerged Turbine Draft Tube Cranston, RI 23.0 energy Universal Engineering Corp. U-Tube (1)Lewes, DE 0.75 cost Kidde Consultants Submerged Propellor Mixer Ishpeming, MI 2.6k energy Foth & Van Dyke & Assoc. (1)Storm Lake, IA 3.4 cost & energy Kuehi & Payer ‘CLARIFIERS” Aerated Clarifier (1,2)Choctaw, OK 0.5 Reg. dLscr. Rca Engineering & Assoc., Inc. Fixed-Media Clarifier (1)Waynesburg, OH, 0.4 energy Aspirating Propelior Pump Welch, WV - cost - Flocculating Clarifier Central Valley, UT 50.0 energy Brown & Caidweil/Koon, King & Knowlton Denmark, WI 0.5 Reg. discr. (1)Madlson Nine Springs, WI 50.0 Reg. discr. OBrIen & Cere Inclined Plate Settler (2)Sanford, t 3.6 Reg. discr. Environmental Engineers, Inc. (1)Lndicates that this facility is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indicates that this facility is operational. 7 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECNNOIOCY PROXCTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INPIOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD) Intra—Channel or Integral Clarifters (1)Lewes, DE (1)Storm Lake, IA (1)Fairfield, II (1)Bonner Springs, KS Berea, KY Irvington, KY Owensboro, KY Paintsville, KY Springfield, KY Natchitoches, LA Fredrick, 4) Bismark, MO Callatin, P 1) Little Blue Valley, MO Sedalia, MD (l)Spring Valley, 144 (1)Suffern, NY (1)8r an, OH (1)Clyde, OH Kidde Consultants Kuehi and Payer Henry Mel setheimer A.C. Klrkwood & Co. Beard Engineering, Inc. Greef* orne & O’Mara, Inc. Kieberger & Assoc. Burns & McDonnell Burns & McDonnell Burns & McDonnell Donohue & Assoc. Thomas Riddick Assoc. Engineering Assoc. Ltd. Floyd C. Browne & Assoc. Tube Settlers w/Chlorination (1)Flagstaff, AZ 6.0 cost Brown & Caidwell “ COLLECT ION SYSTEM” Collection of Septic (1 )Marathon, IA (1)Lake Monroe, 1P4 Kenneth, P14 (1)Lincoln, MT Mosking , OH CSO Treatment Ogdensburg, NY 6.5 cost Lo ardo Associates, Boston Lift Station Houston, TX (1)Indlcates that this facility is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility is operational. Design Consulting Firm Basis of Approval cost cost & energy cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost & energy cost cost cost cost & energy cost & energy cost cost cost cost 0.75 3.4 0.91 1.4 2.1 0.14 6.8 0.99 0.43 6.5 7.0 0.25 0.23 40.0 2.60 0.60 1.8 0.43 2.2 Tai c Effluent 0.04 cost DCR & Assoc. 0.039 cost Beam, Longest & Neff 0.01 Reg. dlscr. McCoebs-Knutson, Assoc. 0.11 eny. ben. Stahly Eng. & Assoc. 320 cost Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam 8 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PRO3LCTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD ) Small Diameter Gravity Collection (1)Crawford, NY (1)Woodstock, NY Montgomery Co., VA “ DISIMEC T ION” IJV Disinfection (1,2)Lamar, AR (1)Payson, AZ Deep River, CT PeUa, IA (2)Hesston, KS (2)McPherson, KS (2)Clear Spring, MD (2)Smlthburg, MO (2)Thurmont, MD Dexter, ME Kennebunkport, I E (1)Presque Isle, ME Albert Lea, I t Beniidjl, MN Knife River, l t N. Koochiching, MN Northfleld, Pt (2)Cassville, MO (1)Chinook, MT 0.2 0.2 1.0 0.54 5.2 3.4 2.5 0.04 env. ben. cost Req. discr. env. ben. env. ben. COst Req. disc r. cost & env. ben. Philip 3. Clark, Engineers, Inc. Lombardo Assoc. of Boston Drape r-Aden Burrough, Verling, Braswell, Inc. Moore-Knickerbocker C. E. Maguire, Inc. Veenstran & Kinis Wilson & Co., Engineers and Architects Wilson & Co. Fellows & Reed Harrington, Lacey & Assoc. Coffin & Richardson, Inc. Edward C. 3ordan Co., Inc. Wright-Pierce Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson & Assoc. Reicke-Carrol 1-Muller Widseth Smith Noltin Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc. Ailgeler, Martin & Assoc. Robert Peccia & Assoc. Huribut, Kersich & McCullough PhillIp 3. Clark, Engineers, Inc. Brinnier & Larios Thomas & Riddick Lombardo Associates, Boston Rea Engineers & Assoc., Inc. Robert L. McCoy O’Brien & Cere Eckhoff, Watson & Preator Western Design Consultants (1)Indicates that this facility is list under n re than one Innovative technology. (2)Indicates that this facility is operational. Design Consulting Firm Basis of Approval cost cost cost & energy 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.011 2.4 0.088 2.28 0.586 0.16 discr. disc r. cost Req. Req. cost cost 2.3 2.5 0.5 0.5 Lewistown, MT 2.83 cost (1)Crawford, NY 0.15 cost Rhinebeck, NY 0.129 Req. discr. (1)Suffern, NY 1.8 cost (1)Woodstock, NY 0.2 cost (1)Waynesburg, OH 0.4 energy (1)Choctaw, OK 0.5 Req. discr. Marietta, OK 0.31 Req. discr. (1)Madison Nine Springs, WI 50.0 Req. discr. Evanston, WY 2.9 cost Lander, WY 2.12 cost 9 ------- TABLE 1 -- lP$ OVATIV [ TECI*IOLOCY PROWCTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD ) Riverton, WY Worland, WY 4.95 cost 1.12 cost ARIX AR IX Ozonat Ion P4oorhead, P14 6.0 Reg. dlscr. Watermatlon, Inc. Pre-Ozonat Ion N.E. Ohio, OH “ DISPOSAL OF EFFLUENT ” 50.0 Engineering Science Deep Well Injection of Effluent (1)St. Petersburg, FL 60.5 cost Subsurface Filter/Surface Discharge Lee County, FL Town of Newport, VT 10.0 cost & energy 0.4 env. ben. Phillips & Fimberley, Inc. Water Supply/Aquifer Recharge Lee Co., FL (1)El Paso, TX 10.0 env. ben. 10.0 env. ben. Parkh!ll, Smith & Cooper, Inc. “ ENERGY CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ” Active/Passive Solar Heating (1)Hlllsborough, NH Providence, RI 0.45 energy 60.0 energy Anderson-Nichols Assoc., Inc. Universal Engineering Corp. Solar Heat/Earth Shelter Insulation Lake Crystal, P44 0.31 energy Bolten & Menk Active Solar Heating (1,2)Vlnton, IA City of Newport, VT 1.8 energy 1.2 energy H.R. Green & Co. Webster-Martin, Inc. Energy Recovery/Heat Pumps (1)Stor,n Lake, IA New York City, NY Hastings, NE (1)Mlllsborough, NH cost & energy energy energy energy Kuehl & Payer SEA Consultants, Inc. Henningson, Durham & Richardson Anderson-Nichols Assoc., Inc. (1)Indlcates that this facility Is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility Is operational. Basis of Approval Design Consulting Firm 3.4 110.0 5.7 0.45 10 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MGD ) Hydroelectric Generating Station Bonney Lake, WA 2.0 energy Phillip H. Botch & Assoc. Solar Collectors/Energy Conservation Pine River, 141 0.25 Reg. discr. D. L. Floan Solar Power System (1)Waynesburg, OH 0.4 energy Solar Space Heating Beam, Longest & Neff AR IX Supplemental Solar Heating (1)Flagstaff, AZ 6.0 energy Brown & Caidwell Digester Gas Utilization Culiman, AL (1)Lee Co., FL (2)Gleenwood, IA (1)Hardlnsburg, KY (1)Lexington-Fayette, KY (1)Hagerstown, MD Omaha, NE 4.75 cost & energy 10.0 env. ben. 1.43 cost 0.73 energy 16.0 env. ben. & reliability 8.0 cost & energy 46.6 Reg. discr. Henningson, Durham & Richardson Buch art - Horn Klrkhatn-Michael & Assoc. Boonestroo Rosene Anderlink Bolton & Menk Kirkham-Mlchael & Assoc. Black & Veatch/Fell, Burton & Knowles ParkhllI, Smith & Cooper, Inc. Use Waste Steam from Power Plant Waukesha, WI 11.6 energy Alvord, Burdic & Howson (1)Indlcates that this facility Is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility Is operational. Basis of Approval Design Consulting Firm Cornella, GA 3.0 Req. discr. Lake Monroe, IN 0.039 cost Gaffney, SC 3.2 Req. discr. (2)Jackson, WY 3.5 energy Fergus Falls, MN 2.81 energy (1)Lake Crystal, 141 0.31 energy (1)Rochester, MN 19.1 energy (1)Henderson, NC 4.14 env. ben. & (1,2)N. Tulsa, OK 30.0 Req. dlscr. (1)Austin, TX 26.0 energy 11 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PRO3 [ CTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Basis of Description of Technology/Grantee ( MGD) Approval Design Consulting Firm Waste Heat Recovery t4acon-Blbb, GA 28.0 Joint munic./ indust. (1)Greensboro, NC 20.0 energy (l,2)Horth Tulsa, OK 30.0 Req. disce. Black & Veatch/Fell, Brusso, Bruton & Knowles (1)TrI-City, OR 13.5 cost & energy CH 2 M Hill Engineers “ FILTRATION” Continuous Clean Sand Filter Eveleth, P11 1.7 cost & energy Robert R. Wallace & Assoc. 3ohnstown, OH 0.75 cost [ van, Mechwart, Ambleton & Titon, Inc. One Cell Lagoon/Dual Sand Filter Beckemeyer, IL 0.13 cost Harold Roffman Grant Park, IL 0.3 Sode nann & Assoc. Hanover, IL 0.1 cost Fehr, Graham & Assoc. Hoyleton, IL 0.05 cost Watwood & Pyle, Inc. Mill Shoals, IL 0.0k cost Henry Meisenheimer and Gende Pittsburg, IL 0.08 cost RA Mack & Assoc. Prairie du Rocher, II 0.06 cost 3. T. Biankinship & Assoc. St. [ iwo, IL 0.3 cost Hurst-Rosche Engineers Tanuns, IL 0.08 cost Warren and Van Praag Treinont, IL 0.275 Cost Anderson & Assoc. Floating Dredge Sand Filter Green River, WY 1.5 Req. Discr. Cuip, Wesner, Cuip Intermittent Sand Filtration (1)Marathon, IA 0.0k cost DGR & Assoc. Microscreens (2)Sterllng, CO 3.88 Req. dlscr. MIX Burley, ID 2.25 Cost & energy CH 2 M Hill Newton, MS 0.77 cost Wayne Watts, Engineer Scottsbluff, P 3.1k 3ohn E. Olsson & Assoc. (1)Indicates that this facility Is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indicates that this facility Is operational. 12 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MGD ) Recirculating Rock Filter (2)Marionvllle, MO (2)Seymour, MO O.k9 cost 0.25 cost Hood-Rich Hood-Rich Harris & Assoc. Wlnzley & Kelly Barttelbort & Rhutas Crane & Fleming Company Missouri Engineering Crane & Fleming Company Kramer, Chin & Mayo Slow Rock Filter New Haven, IL (1)West Monroe, LA 0.07 cost 5.6 Hunter H. Martin & Assoc. Primary Effluent Filtration Wheaton, IL Corry, PA Warminster, PA ‘ LAGOONS ’ 8.9 cost 9.0 cost & energy Baxter & Woodman Lake Engineerl .ng Carrol Engineering Contalrvnent Pond Ceraich, NV (2)Marietta, OK Controlled Discharge Stabilization Pond Jackman, t€ 0.103 cost & energy Carroll & Taylor Assoc. Deep Lagoons Dodge City, KS £ .25 Reg. dlscr. Engineering Enterprises, Inc. Complete Mix Lagoon Douglas, WY 1.5 cost Black & Veatch (1)Indlcates that this facility is listed under more (2)Indtcates that this facility is operational. than one innovative technology. Basis of Approval Design Consulting Firm Recirculating Sand Filter 0.033 energy Contra Costa, CA Miranda, CA 0.O 6 energy Damiansville, IL 6.0 Reg. dlscr. Sadleville, KY 0.03 cost (2)Alton, MD 0.1085 cost & energy Eminence, MO 0.29 cost & energy (2)Mountaln View, MO 0.27 cost & energy Lane, OR O.O’ 4 energy 0.03 0.3 cost Y alter & Beyer 13 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD ) Facultative Lagoons Bristol Bay, AK Holbrook, AZ 0.15 cost & energy 1.3 energy Tryck, Nyman & Hayes John Corollo Engineers Hydrograph Controlled (2)Blountsville, AL (l)Butler, AL Courtland, AL Falkvllle, AL (2)Linden, AL LaCenter, KY (2)West Monroe, LA Calhoun City, P45 Canton, MS Heidelberg, MS (2)Ralelgh, MS (2)Vaiden, MS Vardaman, MS Verona, 145 Athens, WI cost energy/cost cost & energy CO St cost cost cost cost cost CO St cost cost cost cost Willis Engineers C. B. Holder & Assoc. Cook-Coggin Engineers Barth & Assoc. Lagoon in Lieu of Chlorination Canton, Pf 0.04 Reg. dlscr. Woodward & Curran, Inc. LAND APPLICATION OF EFFLUENT ” Aguaculture (l)Woodstock, NY 0.2 cost Lombardo & Assoc. Duckweed Paragould, AR 2.2 Reg. discr. Black & Veatch Overland Flow Alma, AR (l,2)Lainar, AR (2)Wabbaseka, AR (2)Ralford, FL Fillmore, IL Arcadia, LA Castor, LA Nichle Wagner Assoc. Burrough, Verling, Braswell, Inc. Affiliated Engineers (1)Indicates that this facility Is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indicates that this facility is operational. Basis of Approval Design Consulting Firm Release Lagoon Betz Converse Murdoch Inc. 0.275 0.5 0.15 0.27 0.45 0.16 5.6 0.32 3.5 0.21 0.2 0.15 0.15 1.05 0.135 Beecher-Hopp 1.27 0.11 0.104 1.3 0.05 0.515 0.03 env. ben. env. ben. em’. ben. cost Reg. dlscr. env. ben. env. ben. Knostman & Assoc. Balar and Assoc. S. H. Cothren 14 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD) Rapid Infiltration Waycross, GA Payette Lakes, ID (1)Lincoln, MT (2)Madlson, SD Laramie, WY Alex Theriot, Jr. & Assoc. Alex Therlot, Jr. & Assoc. Alex Theriot, Jr. & Ptssoc. Alex Theriot, Jr. & Assoc. US Enviroriiiental Planners Roy F. Weston Clark Dietz Engineers Ultigh Engineers Johnson, Erickson & O ’Brien Alford Engineering Co. Dan Sherwood & Assoc. Gilbreth & Assoc. JUB Engineers, Inc. Stahly Engineers & Assoc. Banner Assoc., Inc. ARIX Silviculture (1)Dalton, CA Eagle Lake, ME (2)Eagle Lake, ME 40.0 reliability 0.023 env. ben. & reliability 0.146 env. ben. & reliability Carroll & Taylor & Assoc. Carroll & Taylor & Assoc. Bennett & Assoc. Kirkham-Mlchael & Assoc. William H. Klingner Bruce Gilrnore & Assoc. Baker & Sweeney Kirkham-Michael & Assoc. (1)Indlcates that this facility is listed under more than one innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility is operational. Design Consulting Firm (2)Esterwood, LA Forrest Hill, LA (2)Hall Summit, LA (2)Morse, LA Norwood, LA Vinton, LA (2)Cleveland, MS Dickinson, ND (2)Clay Center, NE Heavener, OK Balleyton, TN Luttrell, TN Boling, TX (2)Corsicana, TX Basis of Approval env. ben. env. ben. env. ben. env. ben. other env. ben. energy cost cost env. ben. cost cost cost energy cost CO St env. ben. cost cost 0.018 0.06 0.056 0.09 0.035 1.0 3.0 2.85 0.12 0.45 0.065 0.2 0.133 1.0 7.0 1.8 0.11 1.8 5.0 Spray Irrigation 0.5 energy (1)Butler, AL (1)St. Petersburg, FL 60.5 cost (1)Dalton, GA 40.0 reliability (2)Fredericksburg, IA 0.95 cost (2)Sartorn, IA 0.34 cost Camp Point, IL 0.2 Reg. discr. (2)Fullerton, NE 0.2 cost (2)Cordon, NE 0.4 cost (2)Schuyler, NE 0.6 cost Hilton Head, SC 0.8 env. ben. Betz Converse Murdoch Inc. 15 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design F low Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD ) Charlotte, TN (2)Heber Valley, UT 0.08 cost 2.5 Req. dlscr. Horrocks Engineers Steep Slope Spray Irrigation (2)Craigsvlile, VA 0.25 env. ben. Betz, Converse & Murdock Aguacul ture Paragould, frR Wilton, AR (1)Austln, TX Wet lands Granger, IA Norwalk, I A Riverside, IA St. Paul, KS Incline Village, NV Cannon Beach, OR “ NITRIF ICAT ION ” Fixed Growth Biological Ni trificatlon Redwood Falls, 144 0.7 Reg. discr. Pure Oxygen/Single Stage Nitrification Indianapolis, IN 125.0 Req. discr. Reid, Quebe, Allison Wilcox & Assoc. Upf low Packed Bed Nitrificatlon (2)lipper Eagle Valley, CO 3.2 cost M&I Engineers RBC Nitrificatton P$iiford, P - Req. discr. Haley & Ward, Inc. “ NUTRIENT REMOVAL ” Bardevçho Ft. Meyers, FL (1)Payson, AZ 24.0 energy 2.4 cost Moore Knickerbocker & Assoc. (1)Indicates that this facility is listed under (2)Indlcates that this facility Is operational. more than one innovative technology. Basis of Approval Design Consulting Firm 2.2 0.09 cnv. ben. 26.0 energy 0.311 0.633 2.14 49.0 env. ben. env. ben. env. ben. env. ben. cost cost & energy McClelland Consulting Engs. Inc. Parkhill, Smith & Cooper, Inc. Veenstra & Kinw , Inc. Associate Engineers, Inc. Shive-Hattery & Assoc. Shetler, Griffith & Shetlar CH 2 H Hill Engineers/Culp-Wesner-Culp CH 2 14 Hill Engineers 16 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Description of Technology/Grantee Design Flow Basis of ( MCD) Approval Design Consulting Firm Chemical Addition to Lagoon for P R nova1 Albany, It Albertvllle, MN 0.4 cost 0.12 cost Rieke-Carroli-Muller & Assoc. Meyer RohlIn, Inc. PhoStr Ip (1)Brockton, t .tA (1)Rochester, *1 Reno, NV Amherst, NY cost & energy energy cost cost Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, Inc. Klrkham-PlIchael & Assoc. Kennedy, Jenks Engineers Ueussbuner, Clark & Veizy Bloftiter/Diffused Air Ti Removal Oakland, MD Water Valley, KS 0.9 cost 1.4 Franklin Assoc. Waste Pickle Liquor/P Removal (1)Baltimore, 14) 170.0 cost Whitman, Reguardt & Assoc. Anoxic/Oxic System Largo, FL (1)Baltlmore, MD (1)TrI—City, OR Lancaster, PA Chatham, VA cost cost cost & energy cost cost & energy Whitman, Reguardt & Assoc. CH 2 M Hill Engineers Huth Engineers Olver, Inc. “ OXIDATION DITCH ” Over-Under Aeration Cleveland, VA 0.04 energy Benthal Stabilization Welisboro, PA 2.0 cost Tatman & Lee Carrousel Oxidation Ditch (2)Mount Holly Springs, PA 0.3 cost & energy Tracy Engineers Draft Tube Oxidation Ditch Eufaula, AL Foley, AL Opelika, AL (2 plants) 2.55 1.0 0.94 4.0 (1)Indicates that this facility Is listed under more than one innovative technology. (2)IndLcates that this facility Is operational. 18.0 19.1 30.0 12.0 13.0 70.0 13.5 30.0 0.45 Betz Converse Murdoch Inc. Betz Converse Hurdoch . Inc. Betz Converse Murdoch Inc. Betz Converse Murdoch Inc. 17 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD ) Rehobeth Beach, DE Sante Fe, NM Montgomery, NY Monticello, NY Thompson, NY Woodbury, NY Halistead, PA (1)Franklin, VA Keysville, VA South Hill, VA (2)Crab Orchard, WV Oxidation Ditch Fairfield, IA (1,2)Vinton, IA (1)Fairfield, IL (1)Bonner Springs, KS (1)Sprlng Valley, 41 (1)Bremen, OH (1)Clyde, OH McAlester, OK (2)IUng George County, VA (2)Sinlthfleld, VA (2)Southhampton County, VA “ RBC ‘ s ” COst energy cost cost cost cost cost & energy cost cost & energy energy energy Betz, Converse, Murdoch Scanlon & Assoc., Inc. Erlkson & Silber Erlkson & Silber Philip 3. Clark Erikson & Schmitt Bellante & Clauss R. Kenneth Weeks May-He! nes & Assoc. Gates Engineering Hydraulically Assisted RBC’s (1)Hardinsburg, KY 0.73 energy Air Driven RBC’s Oakview, CA 1.0 cost & energy James Montgomery Engineers “ SLUDGE TECHNOLOGY ” Thickeners, Belt Filter Presses (1)Cape May Co., NJ 6.3 Req. discr. Pandullo, Quirk & Assoc. (1)Indicates that this facility is listed under more than one innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility Is operational. Basis of Approval Design Consulting Firm 4.0 6.5 0.5 3.1 1.0 ‘4.0 0.35 2.0 0.03 1.0 1.0 2.8 1.8 0.91 1.4 0.60 0.43 2.2 1.3 0.05 0.5 0.303 energy cost cost cost & energy cost cost cost cost & energy Req. discr. Req. discr. Req. discr. French Reneker H.R. Green & Co. Henry Melsenheimer A.C. Klrkwood & Co. Donahue and Assoc. Engineering Assoc. Ltd Floyd C. Browne & Assoc. Poe & Assoc. Gilbert W. Clifnor R. Kenneth Weeks Henry 1. Sadler 18 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Description of Technology/Grantee ( MGD ) Lateral Flow Thickeners (1)Bonner Springs, KS (1)Hutchison, KS 1.4 energy 8.3 cost A.C. Kirkwood & Co. Wilson & Co. Carver-Greenf leld Los Angeles, CA Mercer Co., NJ 420.0 energy 56.0 cost, energy & env. ben. Montgomery & Parsons Clinton-Bogart Assoc. Belt Filter Presses With Lime Feed Ewing-Lawrence, NJ 18.0 cost & energy Buck Siefort & Jost Vacuum Sludge Drying Beds Nevada City, CA Brighton, CO Belle Plalne, IA Gilman, IL (2)Portage, IN (2)Unlon City, IN (1)Chlnook, PIT Hendrickson, Durham, Richardson H.R. Green Co. Jerry Lacy & Assoc. American Engineering H. W., Inc. Robert Peccla & Assoc. Buena Vista, VA - cost White & Co. Vacuum/Belt Series Oklahoma City, OK 40.0 energy Benham-Blair & Affiliates, Inc. Odor Control for Sludge Lagoons Sacramento, CA Disposal - cost & energy Sacramento Area Consultants Co-Di sposal (2)ECO-Rock, PA 250.00 Reg. d [ scr. Greeley & Hansen Facultative Sludge Lagoons (1)Flagstaff, AZ 6.0 cost & energy Brown & Caidwell Traveling Guns to Land Apply Sludge Grand Strand, SC 6.0 cost (1)Ind!cates that this facility Is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility is operational. Basis of Approval Design Consulting Firm - energy 1.76 cost 0.61 Reg. discr. 0.5 Req. discr. 3.5 Req. dlscr. 1.5 Req. discr. env. ben. 19 ------- TABLE 1 -- ltt4OVATIVE TECI*4OLOCY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE IHNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Basis of Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD) Approval Design Consulting Firm mci nerat Ion Chromium Detoxification of Fluidized Bed Ash S. Essex, pj kl.O Req. dlscr. Tighe and Bond Co-mci nerat Ion Macon Co., GA lk.0 Cost Glen Cove, NY 8.0 Req. discr. Wm. F. Cosullck & Assoc./E. F. W. Frank Memphis, TN 80.0 cost & energy - Starved Air Combustion of Sludge (2)St. Louis, 167.0 energy Consoer, Townsend & Assoc. (1)Creensboro, MC 20.0 energy - Sludge Composting Aerated Static Pile Composting (1)Lexlngton-Fayette, KY 16.0 em’. ben & reliability Myrtle Beach, SC 12.5 env. ben. & reliability Modified Windrow Composting Tampa, FL 60.0 cost Invessel Mechanical Composting Brunswick, CA 10.0 - - (1)Cape Nay, NJ 6.3 Req. dlscr. Panduilo, Quirk & Assoc. Clinton Co., NY - cost Metcalf & Eddy New York, NY 280.0 cost NY City/Compost Systems, Inc (1)East Richiand, SC 7.0 em’. ben. & - reliability Sludge Composting Jefferson Co., AL 35.0 em’. ben. & reliability (2)Beatrlce, NE 1.9 cost Hoskings, Western & Sonderegger (1)E1 Paso, TX 10.0 cmv. ben. Parkhill, Smith & Cooper, Inc. (1)indlcates that this facility is listed under more than one innovative technology. (2)Indicates that this facility Is operational. 20 ------- TABLE 1 -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Basis of Description of Technology/Crantee ( MGD) Approval Design Consulting Firm Sludge Digestion Aerobic Digestion (1)Welser, 10 2.3 env. ben. CH 2 M Hill (1)Chlnook, MT 05 cost & Robert Peccia & Assoc. env. ben. Anaerobic Digestion (1)Aroostook/Presque Isle, ME 1.3 energy Wright-Pierce, Inc. Dual Aerobic/Anaerobic Digestion (1)Hagerstown, MD 8.0 cost & energy Buchart-Horn (1)Henderson, NC 4.14 env. ben. & reliability Lackawanna, NY 4.5 reliability Neussbuner, Clark & Veizy “ MISCELLANEOUS” Aerobic Pure Oxygen Fluidized Bed Reactor East Bay Dischargers, CA 13.1 cost & energy CH 2 M Hill Nassau Co., NY 10.0 Reg. dlscr. Consoer, Townsend & Ptssoc. Biological Aerated Filter Oneonta, AL 2.2 cost Wallace, NC 0.64 cost St. Ceorge, SC 0.8 cost Captor Moundsvllle, WV 2.75 cost Cerrone & Vaughn, Inc. Chemical Air Scrubber Odor Control Western Lake Superior, MN 43.9 Reg. discr. Southwest Survey Eng. Community “Mound System ” Elbe, WA 0.4 cost Byrne-Stevens & Assoc. Computerized Financial Management Passaic Valley, NJ - Cost Arthur Young & Company (1)Indicates that this facility is listed under more than one innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility Is operational. 21 ------- TABLE I -- INHOVATIVE TECItIOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED tIU OUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Basis of Description of Technology/Grantee ( MGD) Approval Design Consulting Firm Digestor Supernatant Treatment Hokena, Ii 1.10 Reg. discr. t4ilford Engineering Dissolved Air Flotation (1)Weiser, ID 2.3 env. ben. CH 2 M Hill Earthen Pond System Quincy, CA 0.72 cost & energy 3ohn Corollo Engineers Eductor Induced Vacuiin Chemical Addition Washington, DC 309.0 cost Enclosed Impeller Screw P ps (1)I&itchison, KS 8.3 cost Wilson & Co. Westborough, MA 7.68 Reg. discr. SEA Consultants, Inc. (1)Hillsborough, NH 0.45 cost & energy SEA Consultants, Inc. Nodular Activated Sludge Edgar Springs, MD 0.04 cost Heagler & Marshall Nor,ood, MD 0.04 cost Scott Consulting Eng. Permafrost Construction Kaknek, AK - cost Tryck, Nyman & Hayes Powdered Activated Carbon/Regeneration Sauget, IL 27.0 Reg. discr. Russell Axon & Assoc. Kalamazoo, MI 53.3 cost 3ones & Henry ( )Burlington, NC 9.5 cost Bedford Heights, OH 2.5 Rag. discr. Dalton, Dalton, Little N. Olmsted, OH 8.0 cost Dalton—Dalton-Little (1)El Paso, TX 10.0 env. ben. Parkhlll, Smith & Cooper Primary Treatment Facility E. PUllinocket, PE 0.5 cost Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. Sequencing Batch Reactor Idaho Springs, CO 0.6 cost McCall, Ellingson & Norrill, Inc. Laclaire, IA 0.5 Rag. discr. Shive Hattery & Assoc. (2)Grundy Center, IA 0.83 Rag. dlscr. Clapsaddle-Garber I Assoc. Sabula, IA 0.7 Rag. discr. Shive Hattery & Assoc. Horn Point, MD 0.04 cost (1)Indlcates that this facility i listed under more than one innovative technology. (2)Indicates that this facility is operational. 22 ------- TABLE I -- INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM (continued) Design Flow Basis of Description of Technology/Grantee ( MCD ) Design Consulting Firm Poolesvllle, MD 0.6 cost & energy Kamber Engineers (1,2)Choctaw, OK 0.5 Req. dlscr. Rea Engineering & Assoc., Inc. Rush/Ryan, PA 0.05 cost & energy Nassaux-Hmnsley Tullahoma, TM 3.0 cost - Union City, 114 4.03 coSt Shallow Bed Trickling Filter Media Deimont, PA - cost Duncan & Assoc. Swirl Concentrators Auburn, IN 1.7 cost Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendof (1)Presque Isle, ME 5.2 cost & energy Wright-Pierce Toledo, OH 160.0 cost Jones & Henry Teacup Separator for Grit Ren oval (l)Lewes, DE 0.75 cost Kidde Consultants Omaha, NE 46.0 Req. discr. Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. Trickling Filter-Solids Contact (2)Coer D’Alene, ID 4.2 cost Brown & Caidwell Geneseo, IL 1.48 cost Beling Engineering Tubular Screw Pumps Ft. Meade, FL 1.0 env. ben. (1)Aroostook-Presque Isle, l IE 1.3 energy Wright-Pierce, Inc. Cardiner, P€ 1.8 Req. disce. SEA Consultants, Inc. Wind Turbine Generators Erie, MY 16.0 Cost Windmill Compressed Air Aeration Menan, ID 0.218 Thompson Engineers, Inc. (1)Indlcates that this facility Is listed under more than one Innovative technology. (2)Indlcates that this facility Is operational. 23 ------- TABLE 2 A J? 21ARY OF ALTEI ATWE TEXH DLOGY PIOJEX.TS FUNDED ‘fl11 JUGH ThE I/A pI JGppj4 Waste. tei S1u ge 11 ’?. Reqion State -. . & . I. . , . -.4, 4,’J ‘J e .-. . k •- •‘t ? C z C :: “ 2 F 3 Z h .- i V I Connecticut Maine Massadlus ett& New Ma ,ehtre e Island Ver nt 2 3 1 1 I 2 9 1 5 2 S I 2 5 S Ii 8 2 2 1 2 1 9 S 6 I 9 II NewJer sey NewYoct P rW Riw Virgin Islands 4 3 3 4 25 1 3 16 2 1 12 1 6 4 3 III Delai.sre Ne Sh.. Maryland Pennsylvania Virginia West Virginia I 2 I 2 1 3 4 1 2 8 15 S 13 3 I 5 1 I 2 2 — 1 1 2 I 3 2 — 1 1 3 IV Ajab4,ea Florada Georgia kentudcy MississLppi t rth Caroline South Carolina tennessee 1 I 7 1 2 1 1 10 9 2 1 20 8 4 2 1 8 2 3 8 2 1 11 2 2 1 2 1 S — I 1 1 4 9 2 4 1 3 Illinois Indiane $Iid igan j(y aØt Ohio Wiscunsin 1 1 6 10 2 I 8 10 1 6 5 3 5 4 3 4 10 2 1 1 1 3 1 3 I 1 4 1 3 I 2 10 4 ii 12 4 6 VI Azk.aneas Louisiana New Mexico OSdahc a Texa S 1 1 22 1 1 1 4 1 I 4 5 6 24 8 12 6 4 2 1 2 2 2 I 4 I 1 4 1 3 VII I Eanaa s Miss . ,rt Nebraska 24 18 1 2 1 I 2 9 S 3 2 16 1 1 5 2 I 1 1 2 9 1 12 17 18 4 VIII Colot. ntana No rt.hD akota South Dakota Utah Wy aArc 2 12 6 3 I 1 7 4 3 I 5 5 1 2 2 I 1 14 1 5 I 1 I 1 — . I i 6 6 1 1 I X S ’ r. Sa a A izons California G New s Nevada N. Martanas Is. P.c. Islands X Alaska Id 3 2 1 4 3 5 1 1 2 1 2 11 2 2 I 6 12 I 3 6 4 2 1 I 3 I i 2 I I I 1 2 2 e ’ on Washit ton I I I I S 4 2 2 I 2 2 2 4 5 102 13 27 83 205 63 51 10 43 29 65 24 ------- TABLE 3 SELECTED OPERATING ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY FACILITIES FUNDED THROUGH THE I/A TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM State Connunity IU..ST 4ATER TREAThENI’ AZ Alpine AZ Show Low CA Eastern Municipal CA Pall River Mills N) I I) Bruneau U, KS Lorraine Gilt ord ND Kramer ND Marmath ND Martin NE Brainard NE Broadwater NE Craig NE Edgar NE Harvard NE M ayw xd NE Overton NE Stapleton —— Ellis, Murphy & Hoqate —— Johannessen & Gerald/Rod, Gases 0.8 Neste, Brudin & Stone, Inc. —— Rolls, Anderson & Polls 0.025 Tudor Eng. Co. —- Evans, Bierly, Hutchinson & Assoc. 0.023 Lightcwler & johnson 0.01 l ’bld Engineering 0.014 North Central Consultants 0.009 Houston Eng. 0.02 Johnson, Erickson, O’Brien & Assoc. 0.018 Baker, Sweeney & ASSOC. 0.03 Consolidated Engineers 0.098 Johnson, Erickson, O’Brien & Assoc. 0.01 Price, Johnson & Erickson 0.032 Paul Mousel & Assoc. 0.068 Great Plains Eng. 0.03 Bruce L. Gilnore S Assoc. NV Elko-Jackcot NV Eureka Fox Rural OK Mooreland SD Lake Norden WY La Grange WY Glerelo CA Las Virgenes CA Mann North Glen AZ Alpine CA Davis CA Newman ID Santa-Fernweod MS Siunrall ‘D l Chico VA Kenbridge 8.0 Boyle Engineers 2.7 Mann MMD Engineers 4.0 Schaffer & Roland Ellis, Murphy & Holgate 5.0 Brown & Caldwell — Bro..’n & Calawell J—IJ-B Engineers Selected Operational Facilities Design Flow ___ ( MSD ) Contairinent Ponds Design Consulting Firm Selected Operational Pacilities Design Flow Design State Ccnriiunity ( MSD) Consulting Fins 0.237 0.05 0.0 32 0.15 0.035 0.0 95 J.V.V. Engineers Chilton Enqineers Fox & Dreohsler C. H. Guernsey & Co. Schoell & Matson Wells Engineering MSM Consultants, Inc. Direct Reuse Overland Flow 0.1 0.2 0.076 0.3 Envi rorisental Tedmoloqy Consultants, Inc. ------- TABLE 3 (contsd) Design Flow State Camnunity ( ) Design Consulting Firm Design Flow Design ( MSD) Consutt ng Firm Black & Veatch BPW Engineers CM Engineering Assoc. Brelge & Race Darrhl Dentoni & Assoc. MIX Evans, Blerly, Hutthlson & Assoc. Thomas, Dean, & Hoskins Morrlson—Maierle Kehnlein, Lightower & Johnson Phillsbt3ry, Dew I Stowell Donohue & Assoc., Inc. Morgan I Patinley MIX Alternative Collection Systess AL Dallas Co. CA Santa Ynez CA South Lake Tahoe CO Three Lakes ID Avery ID Rocky Point IN Hamilton Lake KY Fancy Farms Queen Annes MI Rudyard Township Mokane MS Granada Creswell NY Gardiner NY Orleans Th Belle Meade TX East Cedar Creek Goodwyn & Mills Montg ry Engineers Swanson & Oswald MIX David Weloh & Assoc., Inc. 3—U—B Engineers C. E. Williams & Assoc. Canard A. Griggs & Assoc. O’Brien & Gere Engs., Inc. Md amee , Porter & Seely Williams & Works Miller, Wihry & Lee C. E. l ten & Assoc. Erikson & Silber Sargeant, Webstet Crensha & Fo1le Barge, Waggener & Assoc. Johnson Eng. Co. Selected Operational Facilities Selected Operational Facilities State Ccerun i ty Aqui(er Reoharge or Rapid Infiltration AZ Pins 30.0 CA Boron 0,21 CA San Bernardino 0.21 CA Sonons 0.067 CA &Kxx bridge 0.24 I ’- ) CI CO Sterling 3.9 KS Syracuse 0.23 Bozeman 5.75 Co t’ allls 0.051 MS bast Glacier 0.91 NV TOrw ah 0.5 WI Crandon 0.026 WI Hayward 0.68 WY Jackson 3.5 Slow Rate Infiltration aThere are slow rate infiltration projects in rust states; you should contact your local I/A coordinator for the location of individual projects. 0.9 0.2 1 .34 0.023 0.06 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.077 0.1 0.06 0.064 0.05 0.053 0.325 ------- TABLE 3 (cont’cl) Selected operational Facilities Design Fl State Ccimnun i ty ( K2 ) ____________ Design Consulting Finn Selected Operational Facilities Design Flc Design State Cannunity ( 63D) Consulting Firm SW GE TREATMENT Alternative Collection Systems WA Black DialTond WA Eastsound On-Site Treatment CA Tayloreville ME lsletx)ro Ml kest Traverse NW Waste WA Ctielan WA Eastsound Septage Treatment ID Avery MI Michigamse M I West Traverse 0.03 Kramer, Chin Mayo, Inc. 0.08 ARC Engineering Edward C. Jordan Co. • Inc. Williams & Works Anderson—Nichols City ot Wenatchee ARC Engineering David Welch & AssoC., Inc. Mchamee, Porter 6 Seely Williams 6 Works 90% Methane Rec ery AZ Flagstaff CA Contra Costa KS Topeka MI Charlotte l .A Enume law W I Waukesha ç sting Prior to Land AWlication ME Old Town ME SOuth Portland NE Falls City —— Brown 6 Caldwell — CEtI/RKA Consultants 20.0 Van Doren, Hazard S Stallings 1.2 Capital Consultants 2.4 Kramer, Chin S Mayo, Inc. 11.6 Alvord, Burdic S howson -- James W. Souall Co., Inc. 5.5 Wright—Pierce 0.52 Garber & Work I . ’) —.1 0.045 0.0 14 0.006 0.25 0.025 0.08 0.023 0.042 0.006 Land Application *There are sludge land application projects in ITost states; you should Contact your local I/A coordinator (or the location ot individual projects. ------- TABLE 4 FIELD TEST PROJECTS AND 100% M/R AWARDS Field Test Projects Location Clinton, AR Fayetteville, AR Wauconda, IL Winnfield, LA Jackman, ME Roswell, NM Chemung County, NY Hornell, NY Toledo, OH Choctaw, OK Clear Lake, WI Status planned planned under construction planned under construction in progress in progress in progress planned planned complete Technology Involved Biological Aerated Filter Biological Nutrient Removal Trickling Filter/ Solids Contact Boat Clarifier Phosphorus Removal Aerobic Composting Trickling Filter! Solids Contact Seeded Bacterial Nitrification Swirl Concentrators Sequencing Batch Reactor Primary Effluent Filtration Fallen Leaf Lake, CA Manila, CA 100% M/R Awards Awarded 9/83 Awarded 8/83 Valves and controls in vacuum/pressure col- lection system STEP system sonic level detectors 28 ------- TABLE 5 FEDERAL AND STATE I/A TECHNOLOGY COORDINATORS AND CONTACTS US EPA — REGION I New Hampshire Charles R. Conway 1T . EPA Water Management Div. JFK Federal Building, Room 2203 Boston, Massachusetts 02203 (617) 223—3990 (FTS) 223—3990 Connecticut William Hogan Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection 165 Capital Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06115 (203) 566—2793 Maine Dennis Purington Department of Environmental Protection Hospital Street Augusta, Maine 04333 (207) 289—3901 Massachusetts Paul Currier New Hampshire Water Supply and Pollution Control Commission P. 0. Box 95, Hazen Drive Concord, New Hampshire 03301 (603) 271—2508 Rhode Island Pierce Glazer Rhode Island Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control 75 Davis Street Providence, Rhode Island 02908 (401) 277—2234 Vermont Edward Leonard Environmental Engineering Division Vermont Agency of Environmental Conservation State Office Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 (802) 828—3345 Robert Cady Division of Water Pollution Control Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering 100 Cambridge Street Boston, Massachusetts 02202 (617) 292—5713 US EPA — REGION II Bruce Kiselica tIT 7 EPA Water Management Div. 26 Federal Plaza, Room 813 New York, New York 10278 (212) 264—5670 (FTS) 264—5670 29 ------- TABLE 5 (cont’d) New Jersey Bob Kotch New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection P. 0. Box CN-029 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 (609) 292—2723 New York John Marschilok Local Assistance Section New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 50 Wolf Road Albany, New York 12233 (518) 457—3810 Puerto Rico US EPA - REGION III Lee Murph _ y U.S. EPA Water Management Div. Curtis Building 6th and Walnut Streets Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106 (215) 597—9597 (FTS) 597—9597 Delaware Richard Aurich Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Division of Environmental Control Tatnall Building Dover, Delaware 19901 (302) 736—5081 Jose Bentacourt, Chief Local Assistance Grants Section I/A Coordinator Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board p. 0. Box 11488 Santurce, Puerto Rico 00910 (809) 725—5140, ext. 355 Virgin Islands Francine Lang, Director Natural Resources Management Office Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs p. 0. Box 4340 Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00801 District of Columbia Lester Slocum District of Columbia Department of Environment 5000 Overlook Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20032 (202) 767—7603 Maryland John Milnor Office of Environmental Programs Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 201 W. Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201 (301) 383—7556 30 ------- TABLE 5 (cont’d) Pennsylva nia Florida Terry Killian Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources Bureau of Water Quality Management P. 0. Box 2063 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 (717) 787—3481 V i rg i n i a Walter Gills Virginia Water Control Board P. 0. Box 11143 Richmond, Virginia 23230 (804) 257—6362 West Virginia Michael Johnson West Virginia Department of Natural Resources Division of Water Resources 1201 Greenbrier Street Charleston, West Virginia 25311 (304) 348—0637 US EPA - REGION IV Bob Freeman - U.S. EPA Water Management Div. 345 Courtland Street, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30365 (404) 881—4015 (FTS) 257—4-& jig•V Alabama Rusty Jones Health Service Administrator Alabama Water Improvement Commission State Office Building Montgomery, Alabama 36130 (205) 277—3630 Bhupendra Vora Bureau of Wastewater Management and Grants Florida Department of Environmental Regulations Twin Towers Office 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488—8163 Georgia Bill Martello Environmental Protection Division Georgia Department of Natural Resources 270 Washington Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30334 (404) 656—4769 Kentucky Sanjiv Shah Construction Grants Branch Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet 18 Reilly Road Ft. Boone Plaza Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 (502) 564—3410, Ext. 509 Mississippi Mark Smith Municipal Facilities Branch Mississippi Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Pollution Control P. 0. Box 10385 Jackson, Mississippi 39209 (601) 961—5131 31 ------- TABLE 5 (cont’d) North Carolina Illinois Allen Wahab, Supervisor Local Planning Management Unit Division of Environmental Management North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development P. 0. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 (919) 733—6900 South Carolina Sam Grant, Section Manager 201 Planning Environmental Quality Control South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29211 (803) 758—5067 Tennessee Robert G. Threadgill, Jr. Tennessee Department of Health and Environment 150 9th Avenue North Terra Building Nashville, Tennessee 37203 (615) 741—6615 US EPA - REGION V Char 1 ! J1 a. . U.S. A Water Management Div. 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604 (312) 886—0259 (FTS) 886—0259 Tern Zeal/Jim Leinicke Division of Water Pollution Control Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 2200 Churchill Road Springfield, Illinois 62706 (217) 782—2027 Indiana Steve W. Kim Division of Water Pollution Control Indiana State Board of Health 1330 West Michigan Street Indianapolis, Indiana 46206 (317) 633—0708 Michigan Brian Myers Grants Administration Section Water Quality Division Michigan Department of Natural Resources P. 0. Box 30028 Lansing, Michigan 48909 (517) 374—9075 Minnesota Lawrence Zdon Facilities Section Division of Water Quality Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 1935 West County Road, B—2 Roseville, Minnesota 51133 (612) 296—7214 32 ------- TABLE 5 (cont’d) New Mexico Edward Stokes New Mexico Environmental Improvement Agency Water Quality Section P. 0. Box 968, Crown Santa Fe, New Mexico (505) 984—0020, ext. Oklahoma Dr. H. 3. Thung Oklahoma Department of Health Environmental Health Services 3400 North Eastern Avenue P. 0. Box 53551 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73152 (405) 271—7346 Texas Milton Rose Texas Department of Water Resources P. 0. Box 13087 Austin, Texas 78711 (512) 475—3926 US EPA - REGION VII Mario Nuncio U.S. EPA Water Management Div. 324 E. 11th Street Kansas City, Missouri 64106 (816) 374— Q5 ç c—i3 (FTS) 75 —2- r 1 dL /3 Iowa Wayne Farrand Iowa Department OL Y ctLeL, i- ir and Waste Management Henry A. Wallace Building 900 E. Grand Des Moines, Iowa 50319 (515) 281—8992 B u i Id i ng 87501 352 Ohio Sanat K. Barua, P.E. Manager, East Engineering Section Division of Construction Grants Office of Wastewater Pollution Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 361 East Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43216 (614) 466—5383 scOnS in John Melby Municipal Wastewater Section Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources P. 0. Box 7921 Madison, Wisconsin 53707 (608) 267—7666 US EPA - REGION VI Ancil Jones U.S. EPA Water Management Div. First International Building 1201 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75270 (214) 767—9905 (FTS) 729 9 90 Arkansas Martin Roy Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology 8001 National Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 (501) 562—7444 Louisiana Ashok Patel Louisiana Department of Natural Resources P. 0. Box 44066 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804 (504) 342—9009 33 ------- TABLE 5 (cont’d) Kansas Colorado Laven Brendan Kansas Department of Health and Environment Division of Environment Bureau of Water Quality Forbes Field Topeka, Kansas 66620 (913) 862—9360, ext. 240 Missouri David Cavendar Missouri Department of Natural Resources Program Support Environment Section P. 0. Box 1368 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 (314) 751—3241 Nebraska Movva Reddy Nebraska Department of Environmental Control Engineering Division P. o. Box 94877 State House Station 301 Centenniel Mall South Lincoln, Nebraska 68509 (402) 471—2186 US EPA - REGION VIII Stan Smith U.S. EPA Water Management Div. 1860 Lincoln Street Denver, Colorado 80295 (303) 837—2735 (FTS) 564—23 3S. Frank Rozich Water Quality Control Division Colorado Department of Health 4210 E. 11th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220 (303) 320—8333 Montana Joseph Steiner Water Quality Bureau Environmental Sciences Division Cogswell Building Helena, Montana 59620 (406) 449—2406 North Dakota Wayne Kern Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control North Dakota Department of Health Missouri Office Building 1200 Missouri Avenue Bismarck, North Dakota 58505 (701) 224—4856 South Dakota Larry Van Hout South Dakota Department of Water and Natural Resources Management Joe Foss Building Pierre, South Dakota 57501 (605) 773—3351 34 ------- TABLE 5 (cont’d) Utah California Kiran L. Bhayani Utah Bureau of Water Pollution Control 150 W. North Temple Street Box 2500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84110 (801) 533—6146 Wyoming Mike Hackett Water Quality Division Department of Environmental Quality Hathaway Building Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 (307) 777—7085 US EPA — REGION IX Bruce Anderson U.S. EPA Water Management Division 215 Fremont Street San Francisco, California 94105 (415) 974—8338 (FTS) 454—8338 Arizona Ron Frey Arizona Department of Health Services 1740 W. Adams Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 255—1272 Don Owen California State Water Resources Control Board P. 0. Box 100 Sacramento, California 95801 (916) 322—3004 Hawaii Hiram Young WTW Construction Grants Program Hawaii State Department of Health P.O. Box 3378 Honolulu, Hawaii 96801 (808) 548—4127 Nevada James Williams Nevada Department of Protection 201 S. Fall Street Carson City, Nevada 89710 (702) 885—5870 US EPA - REGION X Tom Johnson U.S. EPA Water Management Div. 1200 6th Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 442—4012 (FTS) 399—4012 Alaska Dick Markham Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Water Programs Pouch 0 Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465—2611 Envi ronmental 35 ------- TABLE 5 (cont’d) Idaho Robert Braun Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Division of Environment State House Boise, Idaho 83720 (208) 334—4269 Oregon B. J. Smith Department of Environmental Quality P. 0. Box 1760 Portland, Oregon 97207 (503) 229—5257 Washington MERL EPA I/A Technology Contact Jim Kreissl U.S. EPA MERL Cincinnati, Ohio (513) 684—7611 (FTS) 684—7611 R. S. Kerr EPA I/A Technology Contact George Reeler R. S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory P. 0. Box 1198 Ada, Oklahoma 74820 (405) 332—8800 (FTS) 743—2212 Chris Haynes Department of Ecology Office of Water Programs Olympia, Washington 98504 (206) 459—6101 Washington EPA I/A Technology Contact Richard Thomas U.S. EPA (WH—547) Washington, D.C. 20460 (202) 382—7370 (FTS) 382—7370 Washington EPA Small Flows Technology Contact Keith Dearth U.S. EPA (WH—595) Washington, D.C. 20460 (202) 382—7266 (FTS) 382—7266 36 45268 •U. . EPNXE T I TIN CFFIC 19 4 O—421—545/11B23 ------- |