ECHIMOLOGY
The Bridge Between Research and Use
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OCTOBER 1973
NEW TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER DESIGN
MANUAL FOR NITROGEN CONTROL TO BE
INTRODUCED AT WPCF CONFERENCE
CDA Technology Transfer will participate in
the 48th Annual Conference of the Water
Pollution Control Federation being held October
5-10, 1975 in Miami Beach, Florida. This will be
the fifth consecutive year that Technology
Transfer has participated in the WPCF Annual
Conference with a major exhibit and new
publication.
The new Technology Transfer Process Design
Manual for Nitrogen Control will be introduced
and distributed at the WPCF Miami Beach
meeting. The new nitrogen manual, which will
be the latest in the familiar blue binder series,
covers all aspects of nitrification and nitrogen
removal. The manual was prepared by Brown
and Caldwell Consulting Engineers under the
direction of Dr. Denny Parker with the
NITROGEN
03N1R3L
{mj
\
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
physical-chemical sections by Gordon Culp of
Culp, Wesner, and Culp. The manual manuscript
was also extensively reviewed by Dr. Clair
Sawyer and Dr. Perry McCarty as well as
members of EPA's research and Technology
Transfer staffs.
The manual is comprehensive in nature and
includes the following major categories:
• Nitrogenous Materials in the Environ-
ment and the Need for Control in
Wastewater Effluents
• Process Chemistry and Biochemistry of
Nitrification and Denitrification
• Biological Nitrification
• Biological Denitrification
• Breakpoint Chlorination
• Selective In-Exchange for Ammonium
Removal
• Air Stripping for Nitrogen Removal
• Total System Design
Host region for this year's conference will be
EPA's Region IV. Jack E. Ravan, the Regional
Administrator, will be present for the confer-
ence, as will Asa Foster, Chairman of the Region
IV Technology Transfer Committee. It is ex-
pected that the WPCF Conference this year will
draw a record attendance of the nation's top
pollution experts.
SECOND NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
INDIVIDUAL ONSITE WASTEWATER
SYSTEMS
Technology Transfer, in conjunction with the
National Sanitation Foundation, is co-
sponsoring the Second National Conference on
Individual Onsite Wastewater Systems to be held
November 5, 6, and 7, 1975 in Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
Refer to inside last page of this publication for
complete listing of current Technology Transfer
publications.
-------
The purpose of this Conference is to present a
comprehensive state-of-the-art review of the
efficiency of individual onsite wastewater sys-
tems, and develop recommendations for related
current and future research activities. Topics to
be discussed include: Impact of Onsite Systems
on Land Development; Newer Methods of On-
site Treatment and Disposal; Effects of Effluents
on Groundwater; and Design Standards for
Individual Onsite Wastewater Systems. The Key-
note Address will be given by Mr. Joe G. Moore,
Program Director, National Commission on
Water Quality, Washington, D.C.
Additional information on this year's confer-
ence can be obtained from Dr. Nina McClelland,
National Sanitation Foundation, P.O. Box 1468,
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106.
NEW MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATION-
"AIR POLLUTION ASPECTS OF SLUDGE
INCINERATION"
A new Technology Transfer municipal semi-
nar publication has been published and is now
available for distribution. The publication, en-
titled "Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incinera-
tion," is partially extracted from the Tech-
nology Transfer Process Design Manual for
Sludge Treatment and Disposal and additional
case histories have been included. This publica-
tion discusses particulate matter, metals, gaseous
pollutants, and organics and case histories on
Air Pollution
Aspects of
Sludge Incineration
Livermore, Calif., and Palo Alto, Calif.
For your copy of this publication, use the
order blank at the back of this newsletter.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER LAND
TREATMENT SEMINAR SERIES
Four additional Technology Transfer design
seminars on "Land Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater Effluents" have been concluded in
various areas of the country since May 1975.
These were presented in Portland, Oregon, May
28-29; New York, N.Y., June 3-4; Denver, Colo.,
Sept. 4-5; and Kansas City, Mo., Sept. 9-10,
1975. Interest is continuing to be extremely
high in this seminar series with attendance at the
seminars varying from 250 to 350 engineers,
state and federal regulatory personnel, and
municipal engineers.
Key presentations have been given by Charles
Pound, Metcalf & Eddy, Palo Alto, Calif.;
Morgan Powell, CH2M Hill, Denver, Colo.;
Frank D'ltri, Michigan State University, Lansing,
Michigan; Y. A. Demirjian, Muskegon County,
Michigan; and Gordon Culp, Culp/Wesner/Culp,
El Dorado Hills, California.
Future Seminars in the land treatment series
are scheduled as follows:
Region Location
III Philadelphia, Pa.
V Chicago, III.
VI Albuquerque, N.M.
I Boston, Mass.
Date
Oct. 23-24, 1975
Nov. 5-6, 1975
Nov. 11-12, 1975
Nov. 24-25, 1975
For additional details contact the appropriate
Technology Transfer Regional Chairman, as
listed in the back of this newsletter.
EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication
Dr. Beatrice Willard, Member of the Council on Environmental
Quality in the Office of the President, addressing the Plenary
Session at the Second National Conference on Complete
WateReuse that was held May 4-8, 1975, in Chicago.
-------
Various shots of participants and speakers at Land Treatment
h.
Seminars.
-------
SEMINARS ON POLLUTION ABATEMENT IN
THE FRUIT & VEGETABLE INDUSTRY
Technology Transfer, in association with the
Food Processing Institute, will be conducting
five Fruit & Vegetable Seminars this Fiscal Year.
Present plans are to hold the first of the
Seminars, scheduled for December, in Atlanta.
This will be followed by Seminars in Portland,
Oregon; Stockton, California; Chicago, Illinois;
and Syracuse, New York, all to be held in the
early spring.
The Seminar series will be directed towards
plant engineers, managers and owners of fruit
and vegetable processing facilities who have the
responsibility of selecting pollution control
systems.
Emphasis will be placed on information con-
cerning proven control measures which are
currently available to fruit and vegetable proc-
essors. The relative advantages, operating charac-
teristics, and cost information on control
methods will be presented where possible. The
presentation will be supported with material on
case studies when applicable.
Prior to the Treatment and In-Plant Technol-
ogy Sessions, the latest environmental legislation
will be discussed by the appropriate regulatory
personnel. Following these technical sessions, an
informative discussion on selecting the Optimum
Financial Strategy for Pollution Control invest-
ment will be presented. This session has had a
positive response in past seminars. A panel
discussion, made up of program participants,
will be held before adjourning.
(l-r) Walton Farr, Director, Dept. of Water, City of Dayton,
Ohio; Dr. A. P. Black, Black, Crow and Eidsness; and Nicholas
Lailas, Technology Transfer, at Technology Transfer exhibit at
95th AWWA Conference, Minneapolis, Minn., June 8-13, 1975.
LAND TREATMENT
OF MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER
EFFLUENTS
I. GENERAL
Land application of municipal wastewater
effluents is now a viable alternative for munici-
pal wastewater treatment. The Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
requires that land treatment be given full and
adequate consideration in the 201 Facilities
Plans for all projects awarded after June 30
1974.
The Technology Transfer Design Seminar
Series was developed to provide federal, state,
and municipal engineers and the consulting
engineering profession with the latest design
information and case histories to properly design
information and case histories to properly design
and evaluate land treatment as a treatment
alternative.*
II. INTRODUCTION
Land application of municipal wastewaters or
treated effluents entails the use of plants, soil
surfaces and the soil martix for removal of
certain wastewater constituents. Land applica-
tion systems may be used not only for treat-
ment, but also for a combination of water reuse
and disposal, with the renovated water either
discharged to the groundwater or collected for
discharge to surface waters.
Table 1 is a representative list of the possible
design considerations that may apply to most
land application systems. A wide range of design
possibilities exist due to specific site character-
istics, climate, treatment requirements, and
project objectives.
Because land application by nature must be
site specific, and because a wide range of design
possibilities is available, the designer must rely
on a comprehensive understanding of the prin-
ciples involved, site evaluation by specialists, and
his own ingenuity. A multidisciplinary approach
to planning land application systems is neces-
sary, encompassing fields such as (1) environ-
mental engineering, (2) hydrology, (3) soil
science, (4) agriculture, (5) geology, and (6) land
use planning.
•Portions of this article extracted from the Technology
Transfer Design Seminar series on Land Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater Effluents. Material from this series will be available
through our order form within the next few months.
-------
Table 1. General Design Considerations
Wastewater
characteristics
Climate
Geology
Soils
Plant cover Topography Application
Flow volume
Constituent
load
Precipitation
Evapotrans-
piration
Temperature
Growing
season
Occurrence
and depth of
frozen ground
Storage
requirements
Wind velocity
and direction
Groundwater
Seasonal
depth
Quality
Points of
discharge
Bedrock
Type
Depth
Permeability
Type
Gradation
Infiltration/
permeability
Type and quantity
of clay
Cation exchange
capacity
Phosphorus adsorp-
tion potential
Heavy metal adsorp-
tion potential
pH
Organic matter
Indigenous
to region
Nutrient
removal
capability
Toxicity
levels
Moisture
and shade
tolerance
Marketability
Slope
Aspect of
slope
Erosion
hazard
Crop and farm
management
Method
Type of
equipment
Application
rate
Types of
drainage
III. METHODS OF LAND APPLICATION
The three basic methods of land application
are irrigation, infiltration-percolation, and over-
land flow. Each method can produce renovated
water of different quality, can be adapted to
different site conditions and can satisfy different
overall objectives.
A. Irrigation is the predominant land applica-
tion method in use today. It involves the
application of effluent to the land for treatment
and for meeting the growth needs of plants.
Treatment is accomplished by physical, chemical
and biological means as the effluent seeps into
the soil. Application is either by sprinkling or by
surface techniques such as ridge and furrow or
border strip flooding. Figure 1 schematically
depicts the irrigation methods.
B. Infiltration-percolation is a method that
applies the effluent to the soil at higher rates by
spreading it in basins or by sprinkling. Treat-
ment occurs as the water passes through the soil
matrix. System objectives can include (1)
groundwater recharge, (2) natural treatment
followed by pumped withdrawal or underdrains
for recovery, or (3) natural treatment with
renovated water moving vertically and laterally
in the soil and recharging a surface water-
course. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the
infiltration-percolation method.
C. Overland flow is essentially a biological
treatment process in which wastewater is applied
EVAPORATION
CROP
SPRAY OR
SURFACE
APPLICATION
SLOPE
VARIABLE
DEEP
PERCOLATION
ROOT ZONE
SUBSOIL
Figure 1.—Irrigation Method.
-------
Figure 2.—Infiltration-Percolation Method.
EVAPORATION
f SPRAY OR SURFACE
) / APPLICATION
_ VWgW''1'
OLD WATER TABLE
over the upper reaches of sloped terraces and
allowed to flow across the vegetated surface to
runoff collection ditches. Renovation is accom-
plished by physical, chemical, and biological
means as the wastewater flows in a thin sheet
down the relatively impervious slope.
Overland flow can be used as a secondary
treatment process where discharge of a nitrified
effluent low in BOD is acceptable or as an
advanced wastewater treatment process. The
latter will allow higher rates of application (5
in./wk. or more), depending on the degree of
advanced wastewater treatment required. Where
a surface discharge is prohibited, runoff can be
recycled or applied to the land in irrigation or
infiltration-percolation systems. Figure 3 depicts
the overland flow method.
IV. DESIGN FACTORS
A brief discussion of the essential design
factors that must be considered to properly
evaluate and design an effective and viable land
treatment facility follows.
A. Preapplication Treatment — Treatment of
wastewater prior to land application may be
necessary for a variety of reasons, including (1)
maintaining a reliable distribution system, (2)
allowing storage or wastewater without nuisance
conditions, (3) maintaining high infiltration
rates into the soil, or allowing the irrigation of
crops that will be used for human consumption.
B. Land Suitability — A checklist of character-
istics to be evaluated for land suitability should
contain the following general items: (1) location
EVAPORATION
Figure 3.—Overland Flow Method.
-------
with respect to point of wastewater collection/
treatment facilities, (2) compatibility of planned
objectives with overall land use plan, (3) proxim-
ity to surface waters, and (4) number and size of
available land parcels.
C. Selection of the Land Application Method
— Selection of the appropriate land application
method requires matching the management of
objectives and wastewater characteristics to the
characteristics of potential sites, expected treat-
ment efficiencies, and land requirements. Cri-
teria for climate, topography, soil geology,
hydrology, and vegetation vary with the type of
land application method. Site evaluation is
essential to the selection process.
D. Distribution Techniques — As many as 20
distribution techniques for water are available
for engineered wastewater effluent applications.
Many of the techniques developed in the irriga-
tion industry have not yet been applied to
wastewater. The most common techniques by
application method follow.
1. Irrigation — Distribution techniques for
irrigation can be classified into three main
groups: fixed sprinkling systems, moving sprin-
kling systems, and surface application systems.
a. Fixed Sprinkling Systems, often called
solid set systems, may be either on the ground
surface or buried. Both types usually consist of
impact sprinklers on risers that are spaced along
lateral pipelines. These systems are adaptable to
a wide variety of terrains and may be used for
irrigation of either cultivated land or woodlands.
Above-ground systems normally use portable
aluminum pipe, which has the advantage of a
relatively low capital cost. Several disadvantages
of surface aluminum pipe are that: (1) it is easily
damaged, (2) it has a short expected life due to
corrosions, and (3) it must be moved during
cultivation and harvesting operations.
Plastic or asbestos cement pipe is most
often used for buried systems. Laterals may be
buried as deep as 1.5 feet and amin pipelines,
2.5 to 3 feet below the surface. Buried systems
generally have the greatest capital cost of any of
the irrigation systems. On the other hand, they
are probably the most dependable, and they are
well suited to automatic control.
Sprinkler spacings, application rates, nozzle
sizes and pressures, control systems, risers, and
drain valves are the major design parameters in
fixed sprinkling systems. General practice is as
follows:
Sprinkler spacing — may vary from 40 to
60 feet to 100 by 100 feet and may be
rectangular, square, or triangular. Typical spac-
ings are 60 by 80 feet and 80 by 100 feet.
Application rate — may range from 0.10
to 1 in./hr or more with 0.16 to 0.25 in./hr being
typical. Application rate is calculated using
equation (1).
Application _ 96.3Q (gpm per sprinkler) . .
rate, in./hr Area (sq ft covered) ' '
Sample calculation: Determine the application
rate for a spacing of 80 by 80 feet and a
discharge per sprinkler head of 15 gpm.
96 3 (15)
Application rate = (gg) (qq) = 0-23 in./hr
Nozzles — Generally vary in size of open-
ing from 0.25 inch to 1 inch. The discharge per
nozzle can vary from 4 to 100 gpm, with a range
from 8 to 25 gpm being typical. Discharge
pressures can vary from 30 to 100 psi, with 50
to 60 psi being typical. Single-nozzle sprinklers
are preferred because of lesser clogging tenden-
cies and larger spray diameters.
Control systems — May be automatic,
semiautomatic or manual. Automatic systems
are the most popular for land application
systems. Automatic valves may either hydrauli-
cally or electrically operated.
Risers — May be galvanized pipe or PVC
of sufficient height to clear the crop, usually 3
to 4 feet for grass. The riser should be adequate-
ly staked because impact sprinklers cause vibra-
tions that must be dampened.
Drain valves — Should be located at low
points in line with gravel pits to allow water to
drain away and prevent in-line freezing.
b. Moving sprinkling systems include (1)
center pivots, (2) side roll wheel move, (3)
rotating boom, and (4) winch-propelled sprin-
kling machines. The center pivot system is gener-
ally the most widely used for wastewater irriga-
tion and is the only system discussed here.
General practice with respect to sizes, propul-
sion, pressures, and topography is as follows:
Sizes — Center pivot systems consist of
lateral that may be 600 to 1,400 feet long,
which is suspended by wheel supports and
rotates about a point. Areas of 35 to 135 acres
can be irrigated per unit.
Propulsion - Either by means of hy-
draulic or electric drive. One rotation may take
from 8 hours to as much as 1 week.
Pressures — Usually 50 to 60 psi at the
nozzle which may require 80 to 90 psi at the
pivot. Standard sprinkler nozzles or spray heads
directed downward can be used.
Topography — Can be adapted to rolling
terrain up to 15 to 20 percent.
c. Surface application systems can be
grouped into ridge and furrow, and border strip
flooding irrigation. Ridge and furrow irrigation
is accomplished by gravity flow of effluent
through furrows from which it seeps into the
ground. General practice is as follows:
Topography - Can be used on relatively
flat land (less than 1 percent) with furrows
-------
running down the slope, or on moderately
sloped land with furrows running along the
contour.
Dimensions — Furrow lengths usually
range from 600 to 1,400 feet. Furrows are
usually spaced between 30 and 40 inches apart,
depending on the crop.
Application — Usually by gated alumi-
num pipe. Short runs of pipe (80 to 100 feet)
are preferred to minimize pipe diameter and
headloss to provide maximum flexibility. Sur-
face standpipes are used to provide 3 to 4 feet of
head necessary for even distribution.
Border strip irrigation consists of low,
paralled soil ridges constructed in the direction
of slope. The major design variable for surface
flooding using border strips include strip dimen-
sions, method of distribution, and application
rates. General practice is as follows:
Strip dimensions - Vary with type of
crop, type of soil, and slope. Border widths may
range from 20 to 100 feet; 40 to 60 foot widths
are the most common. Slopes may range from
0.2 to 0.4 percent. The steeper slopes are
required for relatively permeable souls. Strip
length may vary from 600 to 1,400 feet.
Method of distribution — May generally
be by means of either concrete-lined ditch with
slide gates at the head of each strip, under-
ground pipe with risers and alfalfa valves, or
gated aluminum pipe.
Application rates — At the head of each
strip, will vary primarily with soil type and may
range from 10 to 20 gpm per foot width of strip
for clay to 50 to 70 gpm per foot width of strip
for sand. The period of application for each strip
will vary with strip length and slope.
2. Infiltration-percolation — Intermittent
flooding in basins is the most common distribu-
tion method, although high-rate spraying (more
than 4 in./wk) may also be used. With flooding
basins, the major design variables include appli-
cation rate, basin size, height of dikes, and
maintenance of basin surfaces.
3. Overland flow — Sprinkling is the most
common technique in the United States; how-
ever, surface flooding may be practicable for
effluents relatively low in suspended solids.
V. CLIMATIC FACTORS AND STORAGE
An evaluation of climatic factors, such as
precipitation, evaportranspiration, and tempera-
ture, is important primarily for the determina-
tion of the (1) water balance, (2) length of the
growing season, (3) number of days when the
system cannot be operated, and (4) the storage
capacity requirement. Another important func-
tion of climatic factors is stormwater runoff
control.
A computer program, which relates many of
these factors has recently become available
through the National Climatic Center, in Ashe-
ville, North Carolina. It utilizes basic daily
climatic data for a given weather station, for a
given period of years, and identifies which days
are unfavorable for application. The total
storage capacity required each year can be
calculated by adding one day's flow to storage
each unfavorable day. Storage is then reduced
Table 2. Sample Printout of Climatic Data Program
Temperature, deg F Snow
depth. Precipitation, Favorable Unfavorable Storage,
Year Month Day Maximum Minimum Mean in. in. day day8 days
55
02
01
42
28
35
—
.01
X
55
02
02
34
17
26
3
.45
X
1
55
02
03
33
7
20
2
—
X
2
55
02
04
19
6
13
2
—
X
3
55
02
05
31
11
21
2
—
X
4
55
02
06
46
30
38
T
.95
X
5
55
02
07
48
32
40
—
.05
X
4.5b
55
02
08
49
19
34
—
—
X
4
55
02
09
20
9
15
—
—
X
5
55
02
10
44
28
36
—
-
X
4.5
definition of unfavorable day:
Mean temperature < 32 deg F
Precipitation > 0.50 in.
Snow depth > 1 in.
"Drawdown rate from storage on favorable days is0.5 X daily flow; i.e., on favorable days the amount actually applied to the field is
the average daily flow plus an extra 50% from storage.
-------
by some fraction of a day's flow (based ori the
actual drawdown rate) for each favorable day.
The maximum storage capacity is then identified
for each year. A simplified sample printout for a
portion of a month is shown in Table 2.
VI. SURFACE RUNOFF CONTROL
Requirements for control of surface runoff
resulting from both applied effluent and storm-
water depend mainly on the expected quality of
the runoff—for which few data exist. Considera-
tions relating to surface runoff control are
mentioned here for both irrigation and overland
flow systems. Infiltration-percolation are not
included because in almost all cases these sys-
tems are designed so that no runoff is allowed.
A. Irrigation Systems — Surface runoff control
considerations for systems can be divided into
(1) trailwater return, (2) storm runoff, and (3)
system protection.
B. Overland Flow Systems — Significantly,
more extensive runoff control features are nor-
mally required for overland flow than for
irrigation systems, because overland flow sys-
tems are designed principally for runoff of
applied effluent rather than percolation.
Typically, 40 to 80 percent of the applied
effluent runs off. The remainder is lost to
percolation and evapotranspiration. In most
cases, the runoff is collected in ditches at the toe
of each terrace and then conveyed by open
channel or gravity pipe to a discharge point
where it is monitored, and in some cases,
disinfected. Discharge may be to surface waters,
to reuse facilities, or sometimes to additional
treatment facilities such as infiltration-
percolation.
VII. PUBLIC HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS
Public health aspects are related to (1) the
pathogenic bacteria and viruses present in mu-
nicipal wastewater and their possible transmission
to higher biological forms including man, (2)
chemicals that may reach the groundwater and
pose dangers to health if ingested, (3) crop
quality when irrigated with wastewater efflu-
ents, and (4) the propagation of insects that
could be vectors in disease transmission.
The survival of pathogenic bacteria and
viruses in sprayed aerosol droplets, on and in the
soil, and the effects on workers has received
considerable attention. It is important to realize
that any connection between pathogens applied
to land with wastewater and the contraction of
disease in animals or man would require a long
and complex path of epidemiological events.
Nevertheless, concern exists, and precautions
should be taken in dealing with the possible
transmission of pathogens.
VIII. MONITORING
As with any wastewater treatment facility, a
comprehensive monitoring program will be re-
quired to ensure that environmental degradation
is not occurring. Some monitoring requirements
are similar to those required for conventional
systems. One example of this is the monitoring
of water quality at various stages in the process
prior to application. Other monitoring require-
ments are generally unique to land application
systems and these are the only ones mentioned
here. They are presented in three categories:
A. Renovated Water - The monitoring of reno-
vated water may be required for either ground-
water or recovered water, or both. Recovered
water may include runoff from overland flow or
water from recovery wells or underdrains.
1. Groundwater - Water quality parameters
that should be analyzed in the groundwater
include (1) those normally required for drinking
water supplies, (2) those that may be required
for state or local agencies, or (3) those necessary
for system control.
2. Recovered Water — Monitoring require-
ments for recovered water will depend on the
disposition of that water. If the water is to be
discharged, the parameters to be analyzed must
include those required by NPDES permit. If the
water is to be reused, analysis of additional
parameters may be required by cognizant public
health agencies. Monitoring of the flowrate of
recovered water may be important for system
control and may also be required as a result of
water rights considerations.
B. Vegetation — When vegetation is grown as a
part of the treatment system, monitoring may
be required for the purpose of optimizing
growth and yield. Conventional farm manage-
ment techniques would generally apply; how-
ever, in many cases, special factors must be
considered because of the normally higher hy-
draulic loading rates.
For some systems, a more detailed vegetation
monitoring program may be required in which
the uptake of certain elements is analyzed. This
analysis would generally be required only in
cases where potentially toxic constituents are
present in the wastewater in abnormally high
concentrations.
C. Soils — In almost all cases, the application of
wastewater to the land will result in some
changes in the characteristics of the soil. Conse-
quently, some sort of soil monitoring program
will be necessary for most systems with at least
annual sampling recommended. Characteristics
that commonly of interest include:
1. Salinity
2. Levels of various elements
3. pH
4. Cation exchange capacity
-------
PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL FOR
SULFIDE CONTROL IN SANITARY
SEWERAGE SYSTEMS
The following changes should be made in
the Process Design Manual for Sulfide
control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems:
• Page 5-2: First equation should read
as follows:
ua = 3.0s/n
• Page 5-4, first equation and page 5-8,
both equations: The coefficient
shown as 17 X 10~6 should be 17 X
10T5. The answer to the problem, as
shown on page 5-8, 16 cfm, is correct.
PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL FOR
SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL
(January 1975 Edition)
The following change should be made in
the Process Design Manual for Suspended
Solids Removal:
• Figure 10-9, page 10-15: Delete the
"100" on the right-hand scale for
Operation and Maintenance Costs.
This number "10" should appear on
the right-hand scale directly opposite
the "1000" on the left-hand scale.
Similarly, "100" should appear on the
right-hand scale directly opposite the
"10,000" on the left-hand scale.
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on Items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects
of the Technology Transfer Program, contact your EPA Regional Technology
Transfer Committee Chairman from the list below:
REGION CHAIRMAN ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2304
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10017
212 264-1867
(N.Y., N.J., P.R., V.I.)
Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa., W. Va., Md., Del., D.C., Va.)
Environmental Protection Agency
Suite 300
1421 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404 526-3454
(N.C., S.C., Ky., Tenn., Ga., Ala.,
Miss., Fla.)
Clifford Risley Environmental Protection Agency
230 S. Dearborn St.
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 353-8880
(Mich., Wis., Minn., III., Ind., Ohio)
III
IV
Lester Sutton
Robert Olson
Albert Montague
Asa B. Foster, Jr.
REGION CHAIRMAN
VI Mildred Smith
John Coakley
VHI Elmer Chenault
IX
William Bishop
John Osborn
ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1600 Patterson Street, Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 7S201
214 749-1885
(Texas, Okla., Ark., La., N. Mex.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
816 374-5971
(Kansas, Nebr., Iowa, Mo.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
303 837-4343
(Colo., Mont., Wyo., Utah, N.D.,
S.D.)
Environmental Protection Agency
100 California Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111
415 556-4806
(Calif., Ariz., Nev., Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash., Ore., Idaho, Alaska)
For the following audio-visual material, please contact your Regional Technology Transfer Chairman. (See above)
MOTION PICTURES (16mm sound) VIDEOTAPES
Richardson Texas Project-Title: "Somebody around here
must be doing something good." (15 min.)
Phosphorus Removal (5 min.)
Water Quality Management, Alameda Creek, Calif.—Title:
"The Water Plan." (28% min.)
The Seattle METRO Story. (28 min.)
• Carbon Adsorption. (40 min.)
• Upgrading Activated Sludge Treatment Plants.
(40 min.)
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer.
Please send me the following publications at no charge. (Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
~ Phosphorus Removal 1001
D Carbon Adsorption 1002
~ Suspended Solids Removal 1003
~ Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 1004
G Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems 1005
~ Sludge Treatment and Disposal 1006
*~ Nitrogen Control 1007
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
G Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants 2001
G Color Removal from Kraft Pulping
Effluent by Lime Addition 2002
G Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill 2003
Q First Interim Report on EPA Alkali S02
Scrubbing Test Facility 2004
O Dry Caustic Peeling of Peaches 2005
G Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility 2006
CD SO, Scrubbing and Sulfuric Acid
Production Via Magnesia Scrubbing 2007
O Second Interim Report on EPA
Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008
G Magnesium Carbonate Process for
Water Treatment 2009
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
G Upgrading Lagoons 4001
O Physical-Chemical Treatment 4002
~ Oxygen Activated Sludge 4003
D Nitrification/Denitrification 4004
D Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Facilities—Case Histories 4005
D Flow Equalization 4006
Q Wastewater Filtration 4007
G Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal 4008
~ Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge
Incineration 4009
BROCHURES
~ Physical-Chemical Treatment 5001
G Phosphorus Removal 5002
G Upgrading Existing Wastewater
Treatment Plants 5003
G Carbon Adsorption 5004
~ Oxygen Aeration 5005
G Nitrogen Control 5006
G Seattle, Washington METRO 5007
G Wastewater Purification at Lake Tahoe 5008
G Indian Creek Reservoir 5009
O Richardson, Texas 5010
G Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.I 3001
O Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3002
G Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities
to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols.) 3003
G Upgrading Textile Operations
to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols.) 3004
HANDBOOKS
G Analytical Quality Control in Water
and Wastewater Laboratories 6001
G Monitoring Industrial Wastewater 6002
~ Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes 6003
'Publication listed for first time
If you are not currently on the mailing list for this Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added?
Yes G No G
If you no longer wish to receive this fact sheet, check this box G
Name
Employer
Street
City State — Zip
Note: Tear this sheet out and forward to Technology Transfer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, O.C. 20460
------- |