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

-------