EPA/600/R-07/017
April 2007
Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water by Ion Exchange
U.S. EPA Demonstration Project at Fruitland, ID
Six-Month Evaluation Report
by
Lili Wang
Abraham S.C. Chen
Ning Tong
Chris T. Coonfare
Battelle
Columbus, OH 43201-2693
Contract No. 68-C-00-185
Task Order No. 0019
for
Thomas J. Sorg
Task Order Manager
Water Supply and Water Resources Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
The work reported in this document is funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) under Task Order 0019 of Contract 68-C-00-185 to Battelle. It has been subjected to the Agency's
peer and administrative reviews and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Any
opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not, necessarily, reflect the official
positions and policies of the EPA. Any mention of products or trade names does not constitute
recommendation for use by the EPA.
-------
FOREWORD
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the
nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency
strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and
the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research program
is providing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science
knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect
our health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) is the Agency's center for investigation
of technological and management approaches for preventing and reducing risks from pollution that
threaten human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on
methods and their cost-effectiveness for prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water, and
subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated
sites, sediments and groundwater; prevention and control of indoor air pollution; and restoration of
ecosystems. NRMRL collaborates with both public and private sector partners to foster technologies that
reduce the cost of compliance and anticipate emerging problems. NRMRL's research provides solutions
to environmental problems by developing and promoting technologies that protect and improve the
environment; advancing scientific and engineering information to support regulatory and policy
decisions; and providing the technical support and information transfer to ensure implementation of
environmental regulations and strategies at the national, state, and community levels.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan. It is
published and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the user
community and to link researchers with their clients.
Sally Gutierrez, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
in
-------
ABSTRACT
This report documents the activities performed during and the results obtained from the first six months
of the performance evaluation of a Kinetico ion exchange (IX) system to remove arsenic (As) and nitrate
from source water at the City of Fruitland in Idaho. The 250-gal/min (gpm) IX system consisted of a
bank of five sediment filters and two 48-in-diameter by 72-in-tall pressure vessels configured in parallel.
Each resin vessel contained 50 ft3 of a strong base anionic exchange resin, i.e., A300E manufactured by
Purolite. The system installation first began in March 2004; however, the commencement of the system
operation was repeatedly delayed until June 2005 due to a series of problems encountered. The problems
started with excessive sediment production from the original supply well, followed by the failure of a
replacement well to pass bacterial testing even after repeated sanitation efforts. The problems were
further compounded by the need to replace the resin that was erroneously installed in the resin vessels and
a broken well pump that was salvaged from the original supply well into the replacement well.
During this reporting period from June 14 through December 16, 2005, the IX system operated for a total
of 3,635 hr, averaging 20 hr/day. The system treated 35.9 million gal of water with an average daily
production of 194,000 gal/day (gpd). The average flowrate was 165 gpm, which was equivalent to 66%
of the 250-gpm design flowrate. This average flowrate yielded a 4.5-min empty bed contact time (EBCT)
and a 6.6-gpm/ft2 hydraulic loading rate to each resin vessel. The IX resin was regenerated in a
downflow, co-current mode using a sodium chloride brine solution at a target salt level of 10 lb/ ft3 of
resin. Triggered automatically by a pre-set throughput in the programmable logic controller (PLC), the
two IX vessels were regenerated sequentially, each cycling through the steps of brine draw, slow rinse,
and fast rinse before returning to service. A total of 110 regeneration cycles took place during this
reporting period, consuming approximately 172,390 lb (or 86 ton) of salt. Therefore, each regeneration
cycle used an average of 1,567 lb of salt, or 15.7 lb/ft3 of resin, which was 5 7% higher than the design
value. Close examination of the regeneration steps revealed that this unexpectedly high salt usage was
the result of a higher brine draw rate caused by improper flow control.
Total As concentrations in raw water ranged from 33.6 to 60.8 ug/L and averaged 42.1 ug/L, which
existed primarily as As(V). Nitrate concentrations in raw water ranged from 6.9 to 11.2 mg/L (as N) and
averaged 9.5 mg/L (as N). After treatment, total As and nitrate concentrations were reduced to below the
respective maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), except when the system was freshly regenerated or
experiencing mechanical problems. Removal of uranium, vanadium, and molybdenum by the IX system
also was observed.
Sulfate, the most preferred anion by the resin, was removed from an average of 58 mg/L in raw water to
less than 1 mg/L in the treated water, except when the system was experiencing mechanical problems.
Raw water pH values ranged from 7.3 to 7.9. A significant reduction in pH in the treated water was
observed immediately after resin regeneration, presumably due to the removal of bicarbonate ions by the
freshly regenerated IX resin, as evidenced by the corresponding decrease in total alkalinity.
Resin run length studies were conducted over the course of three separate service runs. The purpose of
the studies was to delineate the arsenic and nitrate breakthrough curves and determine the resin run length
between two consecutive regeneration cycles. Based on the results of these studies, the resin run length
was upwardly adjusted from the initial factory setting of 214,000 gal (or 286 bed volume [BV]) to
335,000 gal (or 448 BV), then downwardly adjusted to 316,000 gal (or 422 BV) to reach an optimal
service run length. Effluent samples collected from the IX vessels indicated arsenic and nitrate leakage
during the first 50,000 to 60,000 gal (or 67 to 80 BV) of throughput, which was consistent with the
observations made during the treatment plant sampling in the six-month period. As expected, total
alkalinity and pH values were significantly reduced during the early stage of all service runs.
IV
-------
During the first six months, the resin regeneration scheme was adjusted several times to improve
regeneration efficiency and minimize residual production. Originally, the factory settings for the resin
regeneration consisted of 64 min of brine draw with a 4% brine, 64 min of slow rinse, and 30 min of fast
rinse. These settings were changed to 32 min of brine draw with an 8% brine (to achieve the same salt
regeneration level), 40 min of slow rinse, and/or 6 or 15 min of fast rinse. The adjustments to the
regeneration settings resulted in significant reductions in wastewater production. For example, the
decrease in the brine draw time from 64 to 32 min reduced the spent brine volume by 50%, from 2,304 to
1,152 gal per regeneration cycle. The reduction in the slow rinse and fast rinse times also decreased the
wastewater volume proportionally. Under a set of modified settings consisting of 25 min of brine draw
with an 8% brine, 40 min of slow rinse, and 15 min of fast rinse, the amount of wastewater generated was
5,740 gal per cycle, accounting for 1.8% of the total volume treated (i.e., 316,000 gal). Because treated
water was used for regeneration, the system production efficiency was 98.2%.
Two resin regeneration studies were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the resin regeneration
process and characterize the residuals produced. Although the majority of arsenic and nitrate on the resin
was eluted during the brine draw and slow rinse steps, arsenic concentrations as high as 35 (ig/L were still
measured towards the end of the fast rinse step. Therefore, it was not surprising to detect over 10 (ig/L of
arsenic during the early stage of the subsequent service run. Extending the fast rinse time from 6 to 15
min did not resolve the problem because the arsenic leakage was found to continue up to 52,000 gal (or
70 BV) of throughput, or approximately 3 to 4 hr into the service run. The waste stream discharged to the
sewer contained an average of 1.2 to 2.4 mg/L of arsenic and 0.42 to 0.5 g/L of nitrate, equivalent to a
mass loading of 31 to 56 g for arsenic and 8,615 to 12,649 g for nitrate per regeneration cycle. The
percent recoveries were 114 and 63% for arsenic, 99 and 130% for nitrate, and 118 and 74% for sulfate,
in the two regeneration studies, respectively.
The capital investment cost was $286,388, which included $173,195 for equipment, $35,619 for site
engineering, and $77,574 for installation. This capital cost was normalized to the system's rated capacity
of 250 gpm (360,000 gpd), which resulted in $1,146 per gpm ($0.80 per gpd). Funded separately by the
City of Fruitland, the cost associated with the new building, sanitary sewer connection, and other
discharge-related infrastructure was not included in the capital cost.
The operation and maintenance (O&M) cost for the IX system included the incremental cost associated
with the salt supply, electricity consumption, and labor. Over the six-month operation period, the cost of
the salt supply was $0.51/1,000 gal of water treated based on the average salt usage of 4.80 lb/1,000 gal.
This salt cost could be reduced to $0.35/1,000 gal if the brine draw flow was controlled properly to reach
a target salt usage of 3.16 lb/1,000 gal. Incremental electricity consumption associated with the IX
system was not available, but assumed to be minimal. The actual power usage for operating the entire
plant was approximately $0.08/1,000 gal of water treated. The routine, non-demonstration related labor
activities consumed about 30 min/day, which corresponded to a labor cost of $0.04/1,000 gal. Therefore,
the total O&M cost was approximately $0.63/1,000 gal (actual) or $0.47/1,000 gal (design), with the
majority of the cost incurred by the salt supply.
-------
CONTENTS
FOREWORD iii
ABSTRACT iv
FIGURES vii
TABLES viii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ix
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xi
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Treatment Technologies for Arsenic Removal 1
1.3 Project Objectives 2
2.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 3
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS 5
3.1 General Project Approach 5
3.2 System O&M and Cost Data Collection 6
3.3 Sample Collection Procedures and Schedules 7
3.3.1 Source Water Sample Collection 7
3.3.2 Treatment Plant Water 7
3.3.3 Regeneration Wastewater 7
3.3.4 Distribution System Water 7
3.4 Resin Run Length and Spent Resin Regeneration Studies 9
3.4.1 Resin Run Length Studies 9
3.4.2 Spent Resin Regeneration Studies 10
3.5 Sampling Logistics 11
3.5.1 Preparation of Arsenic Speciation Kits 11
3.5.2 Preparation of Sampling Coolers 11
3.5.3 Sample Shipping and Handling 12
3.6 Analytical Procedures 12
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 13
4.1 Facility Description 13
4.1.1 Source Water Quality 13
4.1.2 Distribution System and Treated Water Quality 16
4.2 Treatment Process Description 17
4.2.1 Ion Exchange Process 17
4.2.2 Treatment Process 17
4.3 System Installation 25
4.3.1 Building Construction 25
4.3.2 Installation of Replacement Well 25
4.3.3 Permitting 26
4.3.4 System Installation, Shakedown, and Startup 26
4.4 System Operation 29
4.4.1 Operational Parameters 29
4.4.2 Regeneration 29
4.4.2.1 Regeneration Settings 29
4.4.2.2 Regeneration Monitoring 31
VI
-------
4.4.2.3 Salt Usage 32
4.4.3 Residual Management 33
4.4.4 System/Operation Reliability and Simplicity 33
4.4.4.1 Pre- and Post-Treatment Requirements 35
4.4.4.2 System Automation 35
4.4.4.3 Operator Skill Requirements 35
4.4.4.4 Preventive Maintenance Activities 36
4.4.4.5 Chemical/Media Handling and Inventory Requirements 36
4.5 System Performance 36
4.5.1 Treatment Plant Sampling 36
4.5.1.1 Arsenic and Nitrate Removal 36
4.5.1.2 Arsenic Speciation 42
4.5.1.3 Uranium, Vanadium, and Molybdenum Removal 42
4.5.1.4 Other Water Quality Parameters 42
4.5.2 Resin Run Length Studies 46
4.5.3 Regeneration Studies and Residual Sampling 46
4.5.3.1 Regeneration Study 1 (July 30, 2005) 46
4.5.3.2 Regeneration Study 2 (September 22, 2005) 49
4.5.3.3 Residual Sampling 53
4.5.4 Distribution System Water Sampling 53
4.6 System Cost 56
4.6.1 Capital Cost 56
4.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Costs 58
5.0 REFERENCES 59
APPENDIX A: OPERATIONAL DATA A-l
APPENDIX B: ANALYTICAL DATA B-l
FIGURES
Figure 3-1. Regeneration Wastewater Sampling 9
Figure 4-1. Historic Nitrate Concentrations Over Time in Well No. 6 15
Figure 4-2. Purolite A300E Simulation 18
Figure 4-3. Process Schematic of Kinetico's IX-248-As/N Removal System 19
Figure 4-4. Photograph of Bank of Five Bag Filters 20
Figure 4-5. Photograph of IX-248-As/N System at Fruitland, ID 20
Figure 4-6. Sampling Taps, Pressure Gauges, and Valves 21
Figure 4-7. Photograph of Brine System 21
Figure 4-8. Process Flow Diagram and Sampling Locations/Analyses for Fruitland IX System 23
Figure 4-9. Salt Delivery to Fill Salt Saturator 25
Figure 4-10. New Addition to Old Well House 26
Figure 4-11. Equipment Off-Loading 27
Figure 4-12. Cutting and Soldering Salt Saturator 28
Figure 4-13. Total Arsenic Concentrations Measured over Six-Month Period 40
Figure 4-14. Nitrate Concentrations Measured over Six-Month Period 41
Figure 4-15. Concentrations of Arsenic Species at Wellhead and Combined Effluent 43
Figure 4-16. Reconstructed Breakthrough Curves for Total U, V, and Mo Over Six-Month
Period 44
vn
-------
Figure 4-17. Reconstructed Breakthrough Curves for Sulfate, pH, and Total Alkalinity over Six-
Month Period 45
Figure 4-18. Total Arsenic and Nitrate Breakthrough Curves from Run Length Studies 47
Figure 4-19. Total Alkalinity, pH, Sulfate, and Vanadium Breakthrough Curves from Run
Length Study 3 (December 7 through 8, 2005) 48
Figure 4-20. Tank B Regeneration Curve 49
Figure 4-21. Tanks A and B Regeneration Curves of Arsenic, Nitrate, and Sulfate 50
Figure 4-22. Tanks A and B Regeneration Curves of TDS and pH 51
Figure 4-23. Regeneration Flowrate 52
TABLES
Table 1-1. Summary of Arsenic Removal Demonstration Technologies and Source Water
Quality Parameters 2
Table 3-1. Pre-Demonstration Study Activities and Completion Dates 5
Table 3-2. Evaluation Objectives and Supporting Data Collection Activities 6
Table 3-3. Sampling and Analysis Schedule at Fruitland, ID 8
Table 3-4. Sampling and Analytical Schedules for Resin Run Length Studies 10
Table 3 -5. Sampling and Analysis Schedule for Spent Resin Regeneration Studies 11
Table 4-1. Source Water Quality Data of Old and Replacement Wells 14
Table 4-2. Historic Water Quality Results for Well No. 6 15
Table 4-3. Radiological Sampling Results for Well No. 6 16
Table 4-4. Typical Physical and Chemical Properties of Purolite A300E Resin 18
Table 4-5. Design Specifications of IX System 22
Table 4-6. Summary of IX-248-As/N System Operation at Fruitland, ID 30
Table 4-7. IX System Regeneration Settings at Fruitland, ID 30
Table 4-8. IX System Regeneration Parameters 31
Table 4-9. IX System Salt Usage Calculations 32
Table 4-10. Comparison of Wastewater Production Under Different IX Regeneration Settings 34
Table 4-11. Summary of IX System Operational Problems 34
Table 4-12. Summary of Arsenic and Nitrate Data 37
Table 4-13. Summary of Other Water Quality Parameters 38
Table 4-14. Mass Balance Calculations for Total Arsenic, Nitrate, and Sulfate 54
Table 4-15. Summary of Distribution System Sampling Results for City of Fruitland 55
Table 4-16. Cost Breakdowns of Capital Investment for Fruitland IX System 57
Table 4-17. O&M Cost for Fruitland, ID Treatment System 58
Vlll
-------
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AAL American Analytical Laboratories
Al aluminum
AM adsorptive media process
As arsenic
bgs below ground surface
Ca calcium
Cl chlorine
C/F coagulation/filtration process
Cu copper
DO dissolved oxygen
EBCT empty bed contact time
EMCT equilibrium multicomponent chromatography theory
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
F fluoride
Fe iron
FRP fiber reinforced plastic
GFH granular ferric hydroxide
gpd gallons per day
gpm gallons per minute
HOPE high-density polyethylene
hp horsepower
ICP-MS inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry
ID identification
IDEQ Idaho Department of Environmental Quality
IX ion exchange
LCR Lead and Copper Rule
MCL maximum contaminant level
MDL method detection limit
MDWCA Mutual Domestic Water Consumer's Association
Mg magnesium
Mn manganese
Mo molybdenum
mV millivolts
Na sodium
NA not applicable
NaOCl sodium hypochlorite
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
IX
-------
NRMRL National Risk Management Research Laboratory
NSF NSF International
NTU nephelometric turbidity units
OIP operator-interface-panel
O&M operation and maintenance
ORD Office of Research and Development
ORP oxidation-reduction potential
PE professional engineer
P&ID piping and instrumentation diagrams
PLC programmable logic controller
psi pounds per square inch
PVC polyvinyl chloride
QA quality assurance
QAPP quality assurance project plan
QA/QC quality assurance/quality control
RPD relative percent difference
SBA strong-base anion exchange
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SM system modification
STMGID South Truckee Meadows General Improvement District
STS Severn Trent Services
TBD
TCLP
TDS
TOC
U
UPS
uv
to be determined
Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
total dissolved solids
total organic carbon
uranium
uninterrupted power supply
ultraviolet
V vanadium
WRWC White Rock Water Company
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to extend their sincere appreciation to the staff of the City of Fruitland Public Works in
Fruitland, Idaho. The Fruitland Public Works staff monitored the treatment system daily and collected
samples from the treatment and distribution systems on a regular schedule throughout this reporting
period. This performance evaluation would not have been possible without their efforts.
XI
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) mandates that U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
identify and regulate drinking water contaminants that may have adverse human health effects and that
are known or anticipated to occur in public water supply systems. In 1975 under the SDWA, EPA
established a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for arsenic at 0.05 mg/L. Amended in 1996, the
SDWA required that EPA develop an arsenic research strategy and publish a proposal to revise the
arsenic MCL by January 2000. On January 18, 2001, EPA finalized the arsenic MCL at 0.01 mg/L (EPA,
2001). In order to clarify the implementation of the original rule, EPA revised the rule text on March 25,
2003, to express the MCL as 0.010 mg/L (10 (ig/L) (EPA, 2003). The final rule requires all community
and non-transient, non-community water systems to comply with the new standard by January 23, 2006.
In October 2001, EPA announced an initiative for additional research and development of cost-effective
technologies to help small community water systems (<10,000 customers) meet the new arsenic standard,
and to provide technical assistance to operators of small systems in order to reduce compliance costs. As
part of this Arsenic Rule Implementation Research Program, EPA's Office of Research and Development
(ORD) proposed a project to conduct a series of full-scale, on-site demonstrations of arsenic removal
technologies, process modifications, and engineering approaches applicable to small systems. Shortly
thereafter, an announcement was published in the Federal Register requesting water utilities interested in
participating in the first round of this EPA-sponsored demonstration program to provide information on
their water systems. In June 2002, EPA selected 17 sites from a list of 115 to be the host sites for the
demonstration program. The facility at City of Fruitland in Idaho was selected to participate in this
demonstration program.
In September 2002, EPA solicited proposals from engineering firms and vendors for cost-effective arsenic
removal treatment technologies for the 17 host sites. EPA received 70 technical proposals for the 17 host
sites, with each site receiving from one to six proposals. In April 2003, an independent technical panel
reviewed the proposals and provided its recommendations to EPA on the technologies that it determined
acceptable for the demonstration at each site. Because of funding limitations and other technical reasons,
only 12 of the 17 sites were selected for the Round 1 demonstration program. Using the information
provided by the review panel, EPA, in cooperation with the host sites and the drinking water programs of
the respective states, selected one technical proposal for each site. An ion exchange (IX) system proposed
by Kinetico was selected for demonstration at the Fruitland, Idaho site for the removal of arsenic and
nitrate from drinking water supplies.
1.2 Treatment Technologies for Arsenic Removal
The technologies selected for the 12 Round 1 EPA arsenic removal demonstration host sites include nine
adsorptive media systems, one IX system, one coagulation/filtration system, and one process modification
with iron addition. Table 1-1 summarizes the locations, technologies, vendors, and key source water
quality parameters of the 12 demonstration sites. An overview of the technology selection and system
design for the 12 demonstration sites and the associated capital cost is provided in two EPA reports
(Wang et al., 2004; Chen et al., 2004), which are posted on the EPA website at
http://www.epa.gov/ORD/NRMRL/wswrd/dw/arsenic/index.html. As of April 2007, 11 of the 12
systems have been operational and the performance evaluation of eight systems has been completed.
-------
Table 1-1. Summary of Round 1 Arsenic Removal Demonstration Sites
Demonstration Site
WRWC (Bow), NH
Rollinsford, NH
Queen Anne's County, MD
Brown City, MI
Climax, MN
Lidgerwood, ND
Desert Sands MDWCA, NM
Nambe Pueblo, NM
Rimrock, AZ
Valley Vista, AZ
Fruitland, ID
STMGID, NV
Technology
(Media)
AM(G2)
AM (E33)
AM (E33)
AM (E33)
C/F (Macrolite)
Process
Modification
AM (E33)
AM (E33)
AM (E33)
AM (AAFS50
/ARM 200)
IX (A300E)
AM (GFH)
Vendor
ADI
AdEdge
STS
STS
Kinetico
Kinetico
STS
AdEdge
AdEdge
Kinetico
Kinetico
Siemens
Design
Flowrate
(gpm)
7000
100
300
640
140
250
320
145
90(a)
37
250
350
Source Water Quality
As
(HS/L)
39
36(b)
19(b)
14(b)
39(b)
146(b)
23(b)
33
50
41
44
39
Fe
(HS/L)
<25
46
270(c)
127oo
546(c)
l,325(c)
39
<25
170
<25
<25
<25
PH
7.7
8.2
7.3
7.3
7.4
7.2
7.7
8.5
7.2
7.8
7.4
7.4
AM = adsorptive media process; C/F = coagulation/filtration process; IX = ion exchange process;
MDWCA = Mutual Domestic Water Consumer's Association;
STMGID = South Truckee Meadows General Improvement District; WRWC = White Rock Water Company;
STS = Severn Trent Services
(a) Design flowrate reduced by 50% due to system reconfiguration from parallel to series operation.
(b) Arsenic existing mostly as As(III).
(c) Iron existing mostly as Fe(II).
1.3
Project Objectives
The objective of the Round 1 arsenic demonstration program is to conduct 12 full-scale arsenic removal
technology demonstration studies on the removal of arsenic from drinking water supplies. The specific
objectives are to:
• Evaluate the performance of the arsenic removal technologies for use on small
systems.
• Determine the required system operation and maintenance (O&M) and operator
skill levels.
• Characterize process residuals produced by the technologies.
• Determine the capital and O&M costs of the technologies.
This report summarizes the performance of a Kinetico IX system at Fruitland, Idaho during the first six
months of operation from June 14 through December 16, 2005. The types of data collected include
system operational, water quality (both across the treatment train and in the distribution system), residuals
characterization, and capital and O&M costs.
-------
2.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on the information collected during the first six months of system operation, the following
conclusions were made relating to the overall objectives of the treatment technology demonstration study.
Performance of the IX arsenic/nitrate removal technology for use on small systems:
• The A300EIX technology is effective at removing arsenic and nitrate, provided that the
system is regenerated properly. The system achieved a run length of 316,000 gal (422 BV) to
the 10-mg/L nitrate (as N) breakthrough, which occurred before arsenic reached 10-ug/L
breakthrough.
• The A300E IX technology is also effective at removing uranium, vanadium, and
molybdenum.
• After the system was freshly regenerated, arsenic and nitrate leakage was detected in the
treated water up to 50,000 to 60,000 gal (67 to 80 BV) of throughput (or 3 to 4 hr into the
service run). This early leakage is indicative of the incomplete resin regeneration in the
down-flow, co-current mode employed by the Fruitland system. Upflow counter-current
regeneration will be tested for the later part of the study.
• Freshly regenerated IX resin removes bicarbonate ions, causing reduction in pH and total
alkalinity during the initial 100 BV of a service run.
• Arsenic and nitrate peaking can occur if the system is allowed to operate beyond the planned
run length. The proper regeneration frequency can be determined based on the arsenic and
nitrate breakthrough curves during the service runs.
• Salt consumption by the Fruitland IX system was almost 50% higher than expected (i.e., 4.80
Ib salt/1,000 gal of water treated) due to improper flow control of the brine draw.
Consideration should be given to improve brine injection and the use of less dilute brine
solution to save salt consumption.
• It is important to monitor the salt usage during a regeneration cycle to ensure the resin is
regenerated properly.
Required system operation and maintenance and operator skill levels:
• Operational issues related to low flow and high pressure drop across the treatment
system were experienced during system shakedown and startup. They were addressed
through modifications to the flow restrictor on each resin vessel.
• Under normal operating conditions, the skill requirements to operate the system are
minimal, with a typical daily demand on the operator of 30 min. Other skills needed
for performing O&M activities include replacing filter bags periodically, using a
hydrometer to check brine concentrations, monitoring salt inventory levels,
scheduling salt delivery, and working with the vendor to troubleshoot and perform
minor on-site repairs.
-------
Process residuals produced by the technology:
• Residuals produced by the IX system include spent brine and rinse water. The volume of
wastewater produced is dependent upon the regeneration frequency and settings.
• Regeneration wastewater can be disposed of to the sewer at the Fruitland, Idaho site.
Cost of the technology:
• Using the system's rated capacity of 250 gpm (or 201,600 gpd), the capital cost is
$l,146/gpm (or $0.80/gpd) of the design capacity.
• Cost of salt supply is the most significant add-on to the previous plant operation. The actual
salt supply during the six-month period cost $0.51/1,000 gal of water treated, which can be
lowered to $0.35/1,000 gal if the designed salt usage (i.e., 3.16 lb/1,000 gal) is achieved.
-------
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1
General Project Approach
Following the predemonstration activities summarized in Table 3-1, the performance evaluation of the IX
system began on June 14, 2005. Table 3-2 summarizes the types of data collected and/or considered as
part of the technology evaluation process. The overall system performance was evaluated based on its
ability to consistently remove arsenic and nitrate to below the respective MCLs of 10-|a,g/L arsenic and
10-mg/L nitrate (as N) through collection of weekly and monthly water sampling across the treatment
train. The reliability of the system was evaluated by tracking the unscheduled system downtime and the
frequency and extent of repairs and replacement. The unscheduled downtime and repair information were
recorded by the plant operator on a Repair and Maintenance Log Sheet.
Table 3-1. Pre-Demonstration Study Activities and Completion Dates
Activity
Introductory Meeting Held
Request for Quotation Issued to Vendor
Vendor Quotation Received by Battelle
Purchase Order Completed and Signed
Letter Report Issued
Draft Study Plan Issued
Engineering Package Submitted to IDEQ
Concrete Pad Poured
Building Construction Began
Final Study Plan Issued
IX-248-As/N System Shipped
Building Construction Completed
IX-248-As/N System Arrived
Excessive Sediment Production in Well No. 6 Occurred
Well Investigation on Sediment Production
Replacement Well No. 6-2004 Drilled
Temporary Treatment System Permit Issued
System Installation Completed
System Shakedown Halted due to Positive Coliform Tests
Well Sanitized Repetitively due to Positive Coliform Tests
Incorrect Resin Removed and Replaced with A300E Resin
Negative Coliform Tests Obtained and Submitted to IDEQ
New Pump Installed in Well No. 6-2004
Request for Discharging Treated Water to Distribution System
Approved by IDEQ
System Shakedown Completed
Performance Evaluation Began
Date
08/21/03
08/26/03
09/19/03
10/16/03
10/17/03
11/26/03
01/25/04
02/06/04
02/10/04
02/25/04
03/03/04
03/03/04
03/08/04
03/25/04-03/26/04
04/01/04-04/13/04
05/04/04-05/07/04
05/10/04
07/27/04
07/28/04
07/04-04/05
04/21/05
05/04/05
05/19/05
06/07/05
06/13/05
06/14/05
IDEQ = Idaho Department of Environmental Quality
The system O&M and operator skill requirements were evaluated based on a combination of quantitative
data and qualitative considerations, including the need for pre- and/or post-treatment, level of system
automation, extent of preventative maintenance activities, frequency of chemical and/or media handling
and inventory, and general knowledge of relevant chemical processes and related health and safety
practices. The staffing requirements for the system operation were recorded daily.
-------
Table 3-2. Evaluation Objectives and Supporting Data Collection Activities
Evaluation Objectives
Performance
Reliability
System O&M and
Operator Skill
Requirements
Residual Management
System Cost
Data Collection
-Treated water quality, particularly arsenic and nitrate concentrations
-Unscheduled downtime system
-Frequency and extent of repairs including a description of problems, materials
and supplies needed, and associated labor and cost
-Pre- and post-treatment requirements
-Level of system automation for system operation and data collection
-Staffing requirements including number of operators and laborers
-Task analysis of preventive maintenance to include number, frequency, and
complexity of tasks
-Chemical handling and inventory requirements
-General knowledge of relevant chemical processes and health and safety
requirements practices
-Quantity and characteristics of spent brine and rinse water generated by process
-Capital cost for equipment, engineering, and installation
-O&M cost for chemical and/or media usage, electricity, and labor
The quantity of residuals generated was estimated by monitoring the flowrate and duration of each
regeneration step (i.e., brine draw, slow rinse, and fast rinse) and the number of regeneration cycles
during the study period. Regeneration wastewater was sampled and analyzed for chemical characteristics.
The cost of the system was evaluated based on the capital cost per gpm (or gpd) of design capacity and
the O&M cost per 1,000 gal of water treated. This task required tracking of the capital cost for
equipment, engineering, and installation, as well as the O&M cost for salt supply, electrical power use,
and labor hours.
3.2 System O&M and Cost Data Collection
The plant operator performed daily, weekly, and monthly system O&M and data collection following the
instructions provided by the vendor and Battelle. On a daily basis, the plant operator recorded system
operational data, such as pressure, flowrate, system throughput, operating hours, and regeneration counter
readings on a Daily System Operational Log Sheet, checked brine day tank and salt saturator levels, and
conducted visual inspections for leaks or faults. If any problems occurred, the plant operator contacted
the Battelle Study Lead, who would determine if the vendor should be contacted for troubleshooting. The
plant operator recorded all relevant information on the Repair and Maintenance Log Sheet. On a weekly
basis, the plant operator measured water quality parameters, including pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen
(DO), and oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), and recorded the data on a Weekly Water Quality
Parameters Log Sheet. During the study period, the system was regenerated automatically when triggered
by a predetermined throughput setpoint. Occasionally, the system regeneration was initiated by the
operator for sampling purposes.
The O&M cost consisted primarily of the cost for salt use, electricity consumption, and labor. Salt was
delivered in bulk quantities by Western Step Saver, Inc., in Boise, Idaho, on a weekly or as needed basis
to the treatment plant. The salt usage was tracked from the monthly invoices of the salt delivery. The
electricity consumption was obtained from the utility bills for the reporting period. Labor for various
activities, such as the routine system O&M, troubleshooting and repairs, and demonstration-related work,
were recorded daily on an Operator Labor Hour sheet. The routine O&M included activities such as
completing field logs, replenishing chemical solutions, ordering supplies, performing system inspections,
and others as recommended by the vendor. The labor for demonstration-related work including activities,
-------
such as performing field measurements, collecting and shipping samples, and communicating with the
Battelle Study Lead, was recorded but not used for the cost analysis.
3.3 Sample Collection Procedures and Schedules
To evaluate system performance, samples were collected rountinely by the operator from the wellhead,
across the treatment plant, and from the distribution system. Table 3-3 summarizes the sampling schedule
and analyses measured during each sampling event. Specific sampling requirements for analytical
methods, sample volumes, containers, preservation, and holding times are presented in Table 4-1 of the
EPA-endorsed Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (Battelle, 2003). The procedure for arsenic
speciation is described in Appendix A of the QAPP.
3.3.1 Source Water. During the initial site visit on August 21, 2003, one set of source water
samples was collected and speciated using an arsenic speciation kit described in Section 3.5.1. Because it
had been taken offline due to elevated nitrate concentrations, Well No. 6 was purged for several hours
before the samples were taken from a temporary tap on a hose discharging the water to a sump outside of
the well house. Special care was taken to avoid agitation, which might cause unwanted oxidation. After
installation of a replacement well, Well No. 6-2004, another set of source water was taken from this new
well by the plant operator on July 13, 2004.
3.3.2 Treatment Plant Water. During the study period, water samples were collected by the
operator weekly, on a four-week cycle, for on- and off-site analyses. For the first week of each four-week
cycle, samples taken at the wellhead (IN) and after the two resin vessels combined (TT) were speciated
on-site and analyzed for the anaytes listed in Table 3-3. For the next three weeks, samples were collected
at three locations across the treatment train, including IN and after each resin vessel (i.e., TA and TB) and
analyzed for the analytes listed in Table 3-3. On-site measurements for pH, temperature, DO, and ORP
were performed during each sampling event. The sampling locations, frequency, and associated analytes
are shown on a system flow diagram in Figure 4-8. Starting from May 2006, readings from a flow
totalizer located on the combined effluent line were recorded at the time of sampling (instead of at the
time of filling the Daily Log Sheet) in order to track the volume of water treated by the system (see
discussions in Section 4.2.2). There were no individual totalizers available to track the volume of water
treated by each vessel.
3.3.3 Regeneration Wastewater. Following Battelie's on-site regeneration study on September
22, 2005 (Section 3.4.2), six composite samples were collected monthly from the regeneration wastewater
generated by both resin vessels, starting November 15, 2005. As shown in Figure 3-1, a garden hose was
connected to the drain pipe underneath each tank to divert a portion of the wastewater produced from
each of the three regeneration steps (i.e., brine draw, slow rinse, and fast rinse) into three separate 32-gal
plastic containers over the entire duration of each step. At the end of Tank A regeneration, the content in
each of the three containers was thoroughly mixed, and a portion of the water was transferred to sample
bottles for total arsenic, nitrate, and sulfate analyses. The same procedure was repeated subsequently for
the Tank B regeneration. Arsenic speciation was not performed on the wastewater samples. The operator
used a Regeneration Log Sheet to record the time, duration, and flowrate of each regeneration step as well
as the specific gravity of the brine (using a hydrometer) and the volume of saturated salt used for
regenerating each tank.
3.3.4 Distribution System Water. Water in the distribution system was sampled to determine the
impact of the IX system on the water chemistry in the distribution system, specifically, the arsenic,
nitrate, lead, and copper levels. Since the City of Fruitland had 11 wells to supply the distribution system,
sampling locations were selected from a small area of homes that received water primarily from Well No.
6-2004, including one residence (the operator's house) and two non-residential locations, even though
none of them were part of the City's Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) sampling locations.
-------
From December 2003 to March 2004 prior to the system startup, four monthly samples were collected
from three locations within the distribution system to establish the baseline condition. Following the
startup of the IX system in June 2005, distribution system sampling continued on a monthly basis at the
same three locations. Analytes for the distribution system sampling are presented in Table 3-3.
Table 3-3. Sampling and Analysis Schedule at Fruitland, ID
Sample
Type
Source Water
Treatment
Plant Water
Distribution
Water
Regeneration
Wastewater
Sampling
Location(s)(a)
At Wellhead
(IN)
At Wellhead
(IN), after Tank
A (TA), and
after Tank B
(TB)
At Wellhead
(IN) and after
Tanks A and B
Combined (TT)
One Non-LCR
Residence and
Two Non-
Residential
Locations
Drain Pipe off
Tanks A and B
No. of
Locations
1
3
2
3
2(b)
Frequency
Once
Weekly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Analytes
Off-site: As (total and soluble),
As(III), As(V),
Fe (total and soluble),
Mn (total and soluble),
Al (total and soluble),
V (total and soluble),
Mo (total and soluble),
Sb (total and soluble), Na, Ca,
Mg, Cl, F, NO3, S2; SO4, SiO2,
PO4, TOC, pH, and alkalinity
On-site: pH, temperature, DO,
andORP
Off-site: As (total), Fe (total),
Mn (total), U (total), V (total),
Mo (total), F, NO3, SO4, SiO2,
PO4, total P, alkalinity, and
turbidity
On-site: pH, temperature, DO,
andORP
Off-site: As (total and soluble),
As(III), As(V),
Fe (total and soluble),
Mn (total and soluble),
U (total and soluble),
V (total and soluble),
Mo (total and soluble), Ca, Mg,
F, NO3, SO4, SiO2, PO4, total P,
alkalinity, turbidity, and TDS
Off-site: Total As, Fe, Mn, Pb,
and Cu, pH, alkalinity, and
NO3
Off-site: Total As, NO3, and
SO4
Collection Date(s)
08/2 1/03 (Well No.
6),
07/13/04 (Well No.
6-2004)
06/23/05, 06/29/05,
07/06/05, 07/20/05,
08/03/05, 08/10/05,
08/24/05,08/31/05,
09/07/05, 09/21/05,
09/28/05, 10/05/05,
10/26/05, 11/02/05,
11/16/05, 11/30/05
06/15/05, 07/13/05,
08/17/05, 09/14/05,
10/12/05, 11/09/05,
12/14/05
Baseline Sampling:
12/08/03, 01/06/04,
02/02/04, 03/02/04
Monthly Sampling:
06/29/05, 08/03/05,
08/24/05, 09/21/05,
10/26/05, 11/30/05,
12/15/05
11/15/05
(a) Abbreviations in parentheses corresponding to sample
(b) One composite sample collected from each of three rej
locations in Figure 4-8.
generation steps during regeneration of each vessel.
-------
The operator collected all of the samples following an instruction sheet developed according to the Lead
and Copper Rule Monitoring and Reporting Guidance for Public Water Systems (EPA, 2002). First-draw
samples were collected from a cold-water faucet that had not been used for at least six hours to ensure
that stagnant water was sampled. The sampler recorded the date and time of last water use before
sampling and the date and time of sample collection for calculation of the stagnation time. Arsenic
speciation was not performed on these samples.
Figure 3-1. Regeneration Wastewater Sampling
3.4
Resin Run Length and Spent Resin Regeneration Studies
3.4.1 Resin Run Length Studies. Because the routine weekly samples collected from the
treatment plant only represented discrete data points from multiple service runs, it was necessary to
collect samples from a few complete service runs to delineate arsenic and nitrate breakthrough curves and
determine the appropriate run length of the IX system. The results of the studies were used to modify and
optimize system performance. Table 3-4 summarizes the sampling and analytical schedules for three run
length studies, during which the effluent from either one or both vessles was sampled throughout the
entire service runs. The combined effluent totalizer was used to track the volume of water treated
between two consecutive regeneration cycles. The totalizer was automatically reset to "zero" when
regeneration of Tank A was complete and regeneration of Tank B just started. The reset of the totalizer
also signaled the beginning of the service run. The service run ended when the totalizer reached a preset
throughput, which triggered the next regeneration cycle. Additional information for each of the studies is
provided below.
Run Length Study 1. During July 28 and 30, 2005, a vendor technician was on site to collect samples of
the combined effluent from both resin vessels during one service run and perform field measurements for
the analytes shown in Table 3-4. Sampling began when Tank A completed regeneration and went into
service and when Tank B just began regeneration. Hourly samples were collected until 392,000 gal (524
BV) of water had been processed. In addition, operational parameters,
-------
Table 3-4. Sampling and Analytical Schedules for Resin Run Length Studies
No.
1
2
o
J
Date
07/28/05-
07/30/05
08/16/05-
08/17/05
12/07/05-
12/08/05
Run Length
Setpoint
(gal)
214,000(a)
335,000
316,000
(BV)
286
448
422
Sampling
Location
IN,(b) TT
IN,(b)
TA
IN,(b)
TA, TB
No. of
Samples
30
11
22
Analytes
As (total), NO3, conductivity, pH, and
temperature (on-site analysis only)
As (total) and NO3
As (total), U (total), V (total), Mo
(total), NO3, SO4, alkalinity, and pH
(a) System not regenerated at setpoint. Samples collected up to 392,000 gal (524 BV) of throughput.
(b) Inlet sample collected once at beginning of test.
such as system inlet and outlet pressure, flowrate, and throughput were recorded every hour. Arsenic was
analyzed on site using a Quick™ arsenic test kit (Industrial Test Systems) and a 28°C water bath to
maintain the required sample temperature between 24 and 30°C. Nitrate was measured using a Hach
nitrate test tube (CAT No. 14037-00). pH was measured using Macerey-Nagel pH 0-14 test strips.
Conductivity was taken using a Myron-L, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
certified meter. Because effluent arsenic and nitrate concentrations reached detectable levels of 2 ug/L
and 5 mg/L, respectively, at approximately 400 BV (see Section 4.5.2), the regeneration throughput
setpoint was upwardly adjusted from 214,000 gal (or 286 BV) to 335,000 gal (or 448 BV) on July 30,
2005.
Run Length Study 2: On August 16 and 17, 2005, the plant operator collected a series of samples from
Tank A to help construct the arsenic and nitrate breakthrough curves. Sampling at TA began
approximately 30 min after regeneration of Tank A had been completed, and continued by intervals of 1
to 3 hr except during the night. The flowrate and throughput were recorded at the time of sampling for
calculation of the resin run length. The samples collected were sent to Battelle for arsenic and nitrate
analyses.
Run Length Study 3: Following another adjustment to the throughput setpoint from 335,000 gal (or 448
BV) to 316,000 gal (or 422 BV) on September 19, 2005, 10 samples were collected by Battelle staff and
the plant operator from each resin vessel during September 22 through 23, 2005, to further examine the
arsenic and nitrate breakthrough from the IX system. Sampling from each vessel was repeated on
December 7 and 8, 2005, because, for unknown reasons, the arsenic and nitrate concentrations in all TA
and TB samples collected on September 22 and 23, 2005, were similar to those in raw water. The first
TA and TB samples were collected approximately 30 min after regeneration of Tanks A and B had been
completed. Subsequent samples were taken every 1 to 3 hr thereafter (except during the night). The last
sample was collected at 288,000 gal, before reaching the 316,000-gal setpoint. The samples collected
were sent to Battelle for total As, U, V, Mo, NO3", SO42", pH, and alkalinity analyses.
3.4.2 Spent Resin Regeneration Studies. During the first six months, the regeneration scheme
was adjusted a few times to improve the brine regeneration efficiency and minimize waste production.
Two studies were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the resin regeneration process and determine
the quantity and chemical characteristics of the residuals. Table 3-5 summarizes the sampling schedules,
analytes measured, and corresponding regeneration settings.
Regeneration Study 1. During the late July 2005 trip to Fruitland, the vendor technician changed the
brine concentration from 4 to 8% and the brine draw time from 64 to 32 min in an attempt to maintain a
10
-------
Table 3-5. Sampling and Analysis Schedule for Spent Resin Regeneration Studies
No.
1
2
Date
07/30/05
09/22/05
Throughput
of Previous
Run (gal)
392,000
316,000
Regeneration
Step
Brine Draw
Slow Rinse
Fast Rinse
Brine Draw
Slow Rinse
Fast Rinse
Duration
(min)
32
64
30
32
64
6
No. of
Grab
Samples
31
61
28
8
6
2
No. of
Composite
Samples
Not
collected
1
1
1
Analytes
specific gravity and
conductivity
TDS, pH, alkalinity,
total As, U, V, Mo,
NO3, and SO4
target regeneration level of 10 Ib NaCl/ft3 resin. Upon completion of the Run Length Study 1 as
described above, the technician continued to perform the regeneration study by monitoring the
conductivity and specific gravity of the regeneration wastewater using a Myron-L NIST-certified meter
and a hydrometer every minute. Regenerant and rinse samples were not taken for arsenic and nitrate
analyses.
Regeneration Study 2. To further characterize the residuals, a regeneration study was conducted on both
resin vessels by Battelle staff on September 22, 2005. The test apparatus was similar to that described in
Section 3.3.3 except that a flow-through cell attached to the inner rim of a 32-gal plastic container was
used to receive water continuously from each vessel during each of the three regeneration steps (see
Figure 3-1). A Hanna HI 9635 conductivity/TDS meter (Hanna Instruments, Inc., Woonsockett, RI) and a
WTW Multi 340i handheld meter (VWR) were placed in the flow-through cell for continuous
measurements of conductivity/TDS, pH, and temperature during regeneration. In addition, the time
elapsed and flow totalizer readings also were recorded every 1 to 2 min. Grab samples were collected
every 4 to 6 min by filling up sample bottles with the overflow from the flow-through cell. At the end of
the regeneration cycle, the content in each 32-gal container was thoroughly mixed, and a composite
sample was collected from each container. The samples were shipped to Battelle for analyses.
3.5
Sampling Logistics
All sampling logistics including arsenic speciation kit preparation, sample cooler preparation, and sample
shipping and handling are discussed as follows:
3.5.1 Preparation of Arsenic Speciation Kits. The arsenic field speciation method used an anion
exchange resin column to separate the soluble arsenic species, As(V) and As(III) (Edwards et al., 1998).
Arsenic speciation kits were prepared in batches at Battelle laboratories according to the procedures
detailed in Appendix A of the EPA-endorsed QAPP (Battelle, 2003).
3.5.2 Preparation of Sampling Coolers. All sample bottles were new and contained appropriate
preservatives. Each sample bottle was taped with a pre-printed, colored-coded, and waterproof label.
The sample label consisted of sample identification (ID), date and time of sample collection, sampler
initials, location, where the sample was being sent to, analysis required, and preservative. The sample ID
consisted of a two-letter code for a specific water facility, the sampling date, a two-letter code for a
specific sampling location, and a one-letter code for the specific analysis to be performed. The sampling
locations were color-coded for easy identification. For example, red, yellow, green, and blue were used
for IN, TA, TB, and TT sampling locations. Pre-labeled bottles were placed in one of the plastic bags
(each corresponding to a specific sampling location) in a sample cooler. When arsenic speciation samples
were to be collected, arsenic speciation kits also were included in the cooler.
11
-------
When appropriate, the sample cooler was packed with bottles for the three distribution system sampling
locations and/or the two backwash sampling locations (one for each tank). In addition, a packet
containing all sampling and shipping-related supplies, such as latex gloves, sampling instructions, chain-
of-custody forms, prepaid Federal Express air bills, ice packs, and bubble wrap, also was placed in the
cooler. Except for the operator's signature, the chain-of-custody forms and prepaid Federal Express air
bills had already been completed with the required information. The sample coolers were shipped via
Federal Express to the facility approximately one week prior to the scheduled sampling date.
3.5.3 Sample Shipping and Handling. After sample collection, samples for off-site analyses were
packed carefully in the original coolers with wet ice and shipped to Battelle. Upon receipt, sample
custodians verified that all samples indicated on the chain-of-custody forms were included and intact.
Sample label identifications were checked against the chain-of-custody forms and the samples were
logged into the laboratory sample receipt log. Any discrepancies were addressed with the field sample
custodian, and the Battelle Study Lead was notified.
Samples for water quality analyses by Battelle's subcontract laboratories were packed in coolers at
Battelle and picked up by a courier from either AAL (Columbus, OH) or TCCI Laboratories (New
Lexington, OH). The samples for arsenic speciation analyses were stored at Battelle's Inductively
Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) Laboratory. The chain-of-custody forms remained with
the samples from the time of preparation through analysis and final disposal. All samples were archived
by the appropriate laboratories for the respective duration of the required hold time and disposed of
properly thereafter.
3.6 Analytical Procedures
Analytical procedures are described in detail in Section 4.0 of the EPA-endorsed QAPP (Battelle, 2003).
Field measurements of pH, temperature, DO, and ORP were conducted by the plant operator using a
WTW Multi 340i handheld meter, which was calibrated prior to use following the procedures provided in
the user's manual. The plant operator collected a water sample in a 400-mL plastic beaker and placed the
Multi 340i probe in the beaker until a stable measured value was reached.
Laboratory quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) of all methods followed the guidelines provided in
the QAPP (Battelle, 2003). Data quality in terms of precision, accuracy, method detection limit (MDL), and
completeness met the criteria established in the QAPP, i.e., relative percent difference (RPD) of 20%,
percent recovery of 80% to 120%, and completeness of 80%. The QA data associated with each analyte
will be presented and evaluated in a QA/QC summary report to be prepared under separate cover and to be
shared with the other 11 demonstration sites included in the Round 1 arsenic study.
12
-------
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Facility Description
Fruitland is located in southwest Idaho, approximately 50 miles northwest of Boise on Highway 1-95.
The City of Fruitland has multiple production wells (Wells No. 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 20)
that supply water to approximately 4,000 residents. Well No. 6, originally selected for this demonstration
project, is located on South Utah Street between Southwest 4th and 7th Streets. Drilled in 1973 to replace
old Well No. 3, the well was installed to a total depth of 199 ft below ground surface (bgs) in a 24-in-
diameter by 204-ft-deep borehole, using a rotary drilling method. The well was lined with a 12-in-
diameter steel casing extending from 3 ft above ground to 109 ft bgs and a 10-in-diameter steel casing
extending from 109 ft to 199 ft bgs. The well had four screened sections: 44 to 54 ft bgs, 58 to 68 ft bgs,
109 to 119 ft bgs, and 179 to 189 ft bgs. The static water level was 36.4 ft bgs. A submersible pump
placed at 105 ft bgs was rated at 250 gpm. A downhole camera survey on October 29, 1998, indicated
that 90% of the third screen (109-119 ft bgs) was plugged and that the fourth screened section was
completely buried in sediment. Well No. 6 was taken offline since January 2000 due to higher-than-MCL
levels of nitrate in the well water. There was no water treatment in place prior to the installation of the IX
system.
Problems with sediment production were encountered with Well No. 6 during the shakedown of the IX
system in March 2004. A replacement well, Well No. 6-2004, was installed in June 2004 to a total depth
of 125 ft bgs in a 20-in-diameter by 140-ft-deep borehole using a cable tool drilling method at a location
approximately 25 ft from the existing well (see more details in Section 4.3). The well was constructed of
a 12-in-diameter steel casing with three screened sections: 50 to 70 ft bgs, 95 to 105 ft bgs, and 110 to
120 ft bgs. The submersible pump from the old Well No. 6 was placed into the new well at 105 ft bgs.
The well pumping tests indicated that this well could produce about 200 gpm of water while maintaining
a similar static water level at 36.3 ft bgs (aggressive pumping was not desired by the City due to its
concern over potential subsidence of the ground).
4.1.1 Source Water Quality. Source water samples were collected from the old Well No. 6 on
August 21, 2003, and from the replacement well, Well No. 6-2004, on July 13, 2004. The analytical
results of both wells are presented in Table 4-1 and compared to the data provided by the City to EPA for
the demonstration site selection and the data independently collected by EPA and Kinetico. Figure 4-1
plotted the historic nitrate data for Well No. 6 obtained from IDEQ. Tables 4-2 and 4-3 summarize the
historic data of several heavy metals, fluoride, and radiological analytes for Well No. 6. Based on the
July 13, 2004 data, water quality of the new well was very similar to that of the old well.
Arsenic Species. The total As concentration in Well No. 6-2004 was 49.7 |og/L, including 39.9 |o,g/L of
soluble As and 9.8 |o,g/L of particulate As. Although the total As concentration was somewhat higher than
that in the old well, which ranged from 32 to 46 |o,g/L (Tables 4-1 and 4-2), the soluble As concentration
was very similar to that in the old well (i.e., 39.9 vs. 40.1 ng/L). The higher particulate concentration
(i.e., 9.8 vs. 3.4 |o,g/L) might be caused by insufficient well purging or sample tap flushing. Depending on
the particle size, particulate As might be removed by the pre-filters located upstream of the IX resin
vessels. Removal of particulates and sediments can help alleviate adverse effects on the resin beds.
Similar to the old well, most soluble As was present as As(V) or arsenate (i.e., H2AsO4", 39.0 |o,g/L) with
only a small amount existing as As(III) or arsenite (i.e., H3AsO3, 1.0 ng/L). Because IX resin is effective
at removing arsenate, pre-oxidation of the water upstream of the IX process would not be required.
13
-------
Table 4-1. Source Water Quality Data of Old and Replacement Wells
Parameter
Unit
Well ID
Sampling Date
PH
Total Alkalinity
(as CaCO3)
Hardness
(as CaCO3)
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate (as N)
Sulfide
Sulfate
Silica (as SiO2)
Orthophosphate
(as PO4)
TOC
As (total)
As (soluble)
As (paniculate)
As (III)
As(V)
Fe (total)
Fe (soluble)
Al (total)
Al (soluble)
Mn (total)
Mn (soluble)
V (total)
V (soluble)
Mo (total)
Mo (soluble)
Sb (total)
Sb (soluble)
Na (total)
Ca (total)
Mg (total)
S.U.
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
HB/L
HB/L
HB/L
HR/L
W?/L
HB/L
HB/L
HB/L
HB/L
W?/L
HB/L
HB/L
HB/L
HB/L
W?/L
HB/L
HB/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Facility
Data
No. 6
NA
7.4
357
252
14.0
NS
5.2-13.9
NS
60.0
57.8
0.12
0.1
37.0
NS
NS
8.0
34.0
10-190
NS
NS
NS
50.0
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
107
60.5
25.4
EPA
Data
No. 6
08/28/02
NS
NS
251
NS
NS
NS
NS
57.3
54.3
NS
NS
41.0
NS
NS
NS
NS
744
NS
120
NS
32.0
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
<25
NS
104
60.0
24.6
Kinetico
Data
No. 6
NA
7.6
388
271
17.8
0.72
8.7
NS
64.0
57.8
0.3
(asP)
NS
44.0
NS
NS
NS
NS
450
NS
NS
NS
50
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
118
66.0
26.0
Battelle
Data
No. 6
08/21/03
7.4
381
233
16.0
1.0
NS
NS
58.0
55.1
0.10
<1.0(a)
43.5
40.1
3.4
0.8
39.3
<30
<30
21
<10
1.6
0.5
36.2
35.1
9.7
9.2
<0.1
<0.1
97
55.0
23.1
Battelle
Data
No. 6-2004
07/13/04
7.4
379
240
12.0
0.6
14.0
NS
53.0
57.4
0.10
2.2
49.7
39.9
9.8
1.0
39.0
268
<25
151
<10
28.3
18.0
34.0
33.7
6.2
6.6
O.I
0.1
114
51.3
27.2
(a) Sample collected on October 14, 2003.
NS = Not sampled
Nitrate. Nitrate concentration in the new well was 14.0 mg/L (as N), which was comparable to the
highest level of detection in the old well. Figure 4-1 showed an increasing nitrate concentration in the old
well from 5.2 mg/L in July 1986 to 13.90 mg/L in November 2001. According to the vendor, the A300E
IX resin selected for Fruitland had a similar run length to reach the respective MCLs for arsenate and
nitrate, thus maximizing the efficiency of the system.
14
-------
_J
3)
0
o
Fruitland Nitrate Concentrations Over Time
(July 1986 through November 2001)
1 R n ^
14 n
190-
100-
R n -
R n
A n
9 n -
0 0
«*
Xx • * ** •
r*w *
* *** * V** *
A, »*»*T
. * •
+
A A.
Date
Source: Idaho Department of Environmental Quality
Figure 4-1. Historic Nitrate Concentrations Over Time in Well No. 6
Table 4-2. Historic Water Quality Results for Well No. 6
Analyte
Arsenic
Antimony
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Sodium
Thallium
Fluoride
10/24/95
07/28/98
03/30/00
6/26/00
11/05/01
Concentration (mg/L)
0.046
0.005
0.05
0.0005
0.0005
0.002
0.0005
0.02
0.005
85.8
0.002
0.68
0.043
0.005
0.06
0.0005
0.0005
0.002
0.0002
0.02
0.005
67.7
0.002
0.68
0.034
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.032
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.039
0.005
0.06
0.0005
0.0005
0.002
0.0002
0.02
0.005
110
0.002
0.65
Source: Idaho Department of Environmental Quality
NS = Not sampled
15
-------
Table 4-3. Radiological Sampling Results for Well No. 6
Sampling
Date
10/24/95
12/06/95
03/04/96
06/06/96
09/17/96
06/08/00
09/29/00
12/06/00
06/25/01
11/05/01
03/08/02
Radium 226
(pCi/L)
NS
0.0±0.2
O.OiO.l
0.0±0.2
0.1±0.2
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.2
Uranium
(Hg/L)
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
22.4
NS
NS
NS
Gross Alpha
Activity
(pCi/L)
12.8±4.3
NS
NS
NS
NS
19.7
23.2
21.7
11.2
17.5
NS
Gross Beta
Activity
(pCi/L)
6.3
NS
NS
NS
NS
6.6
13.9
13.4
14.3
15.1
NS
Source: Idaho Department of Environmental Quality
NS = Not sampled
pCi/L = picoCuries per liter
Sulfate. The sulfate concentration in the new well was 53.0 mg/L, slightly lower than that (ranging from
57.3 to 64.0 mg/L) in the old well (see Table 4-1). Because sulfate is more preferred by the A300E IX
resin than arsenate and nitrate and because of its higher concentration, sulfate is a strong competing anion
for arsenic and nitrate removal.
Other Water Quality Parameters. Total dissolved solid (TDS) concentration in source water was not
measured, but estimated to be 560 mg/L based on 114 mg/L sodium, 51.3 mg/L of calcium, 27.2 mg/L of
magnesium, 379 mg/L of bicarbonate, 12.0 mg/L of chloride, 0.6 mg/L of fluoride, 14.0 mg/L of nitrate,
53.0 mg/L of sulfate, and 57.4 mg/L silica after taking into account the loss of CO2 and H2O upon
evaporation of Ca(HCO3)2 and Mg(HCO3)2. This estimated TDS value agreed with the average TDS of
571 mg/L measured during the study period (see Table 4-13 on page 38). Other dissolved ions present
included 33.7 |o,g/L of vanadium and 6.6 |o,g/L of molybdenum. The uranium concentration measured on
December 6, 2002 was 22.4 |o,g/L (Table 4-3), lower than its MCL of 30 |o,g/L. Iron and aluminum were
present primarily as particulates; the dissolved species were below the respective detection limits. The
pH value of raw water was 7.4. Unlike adsorptive media, IX resins are not sensitive to the water pH.
4.1.2 Distribution System and Treated Water Quality. The City of Fruitland employs a looped
drinking water distribution system, with water from multiple production wells entering the distribution
system at various locations. Water produced from Wells No. 5, 9, and 10 is pumped into a reservoir,
which is then connected to the distribution network. Water from Wells No. 14 and 20 is blended prior to
entering the distribution system. The distribution system is constructed of asbestos cement pipe in the
area of Well No. 6, but some sections in other areas of the town are constructed of polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) pipe. During periods in which production exceeds demand, the excess water is stored in one one-
million-gal ground level tank and one 200,000-gal elevated tank. The well pumps are controlled by level
sensors in the water tanks.
Process water from the IX treatment system enters the distribution system via an existing 6-in-diameter
line, which includes a branch line to a small area of homes receiving water primarily from Well No. 6-
2004. The service lines to individual homes in this area are mainly copper, while the lines within these
16
-------
homes are constructed of galvanized iron, copper, and polyethylene pipes. Three sampling locations were
selected from this area for the distribution system sampling (Section 3.3.4).
The City of Fruitland samples water from the distribution system for several analytes. Four monthly
samples are collected from a group of six locations for fecal coliform analysis. Samples also are taken for
asbestos analysis every three years. Under the EPA LCR, samples are collected from customer taps at 10
locations every three years.
4.2 Treatment Process Description
4.2.1 Ion Exchange Process. Ion exchange is a proven technology for removing arsenic and
nitrate from drinking water supplies (Clifford, 1999; Ghurye et al., 1999; Wang et al, 2002). It is a
physical/chemical process that removes dissolved arsenate and nitrate ions from water by exchanging
them with chloride ions on anion exchange resins. Once its capacity is exhausted, the resin is regenerated
with a brine solution containing a high concentration of chloride ions to displace the arsenate and nitrate
ions on the resin. Strong-base anion exchange (SBA) resins are commonly used for arsenate and nitrate
removal. Resin capacity typically is not sensitive to the pH values (in the range of 6.5 to 9.0) of the water
treated.
An SBA resin tends to have a higher affinity for more highly charged anions, resulting in a general
hierarchy of selectivity as follows:
SO42 > HAsO42 > NO3 > NO2 > Cl > H2AsO4 , HCO3 » Si(OH)4; H3AsO4
Because sulfate is more preferred by the resin over arsenic and nitrate and because its concentration is
about three orders of magnitude higher than that of arsenic, it is a major competing anion to arsenic and
nitrate removal by the IX process. High TDS levels also can significantly reduce arsenic and nitrate
removal efficiencies. In general, the IX process is not economically attractive if source water contains
high TDS (>500 mg/L) and sulfate (>150 mg/L). Also, particulates in feed water can potentially foul the
resin, and must be removed by bag filters upstream of an IX vessel.
The Fruitland IX system used Purolite A300E, a Type II SBA resin in chloride form, to remove arsenic
and nitrate from source water. The resin is NSF International (NSF) Standard 61 approved for use in
drinking water treatment and its typical physical and chemical properties are presented in Table 4-4.
According to Purolite's computerized simulation on the Fruitland water, the A300E resin has a relatively
higher capacity for arsenic and nitrate removal than A520E, a nitrate-selective resin. As shown in Figure
4-2, A300E reaches the 10-mg/L nitrate (as N) and 10-(ig/L arsenic breakthrough at approximately 700
and 880 BV, respectively (note that this simulation significantly over-predicts the actual resin run length,
which was 422 BV as discussed in Sections 4.4 and 4.5). Because nitrate breaks through before arsenate,
nitrate will determine the resin run length (Ghurye et al., 1999). Using Clifford's equilibrium multi-
component chromatography theory (EMCT) model, the run length to the 10-mg/L nitrate (as N)
breakthrough was estimated to be about 580 BV when using a type II SBA resin (like A300E) for the
Fruitland Well No. 6-2004 water. The estimated run length was further refined to about 450 BV after
taking considerations of mass transfer (Clifford, 2006). This run length was very close to the 422 BV
actually experienced at the Fruitland, Idaho site.
4.2.2 Treatment Process. The IX system for the Fruitland, Idaho site utilized the packed-bed
anion exchange technology to remove arsenic and nitrate from source water. Figure 4-3 is a process
schematic of the system. The process equipment included one bank of five skid-mounted bag filters, two
skid-mounted resin tanks, one skid-mounted central control panel, one floor-mounted salt saturator
17
-------
Table 4-4. Typical Physical and Chemical Properties of Purolite A300E Resin
Property
Polymer Structure
Functional Groups
Physical Appearance
Ionic Form
Mesh Size Range (U.S. Standard
Mesh) (Wet)
Uniformity Coefficient
Water Retention
Swelling
pH Limitations
Temperature Limitations
Chemical Resistance
Whole Clear Beads
Shipping Weight
Total Capacity
Values
Macroporous styrene-divinylbenzene
Quaternary ammonium: R(CH3)2(C2H4OH)]S^
Clear spherical beads
Chloride
16x50 (+16 mesh < 5%; -50 mesh < 1%)
1.7 maximum
40-45%
Salt -OH, 10%
None
185 °F maximum
Unaffected by dilute acids, alkalis,
and most solvents
92% minimum
44 lb/ft3 (705 g/L)
1.45-1.6 meq/mL minimum volumetric (wet);
Source: Kinetico
IX-SIM Removal of Arsenic with A-300E
- Kinetico - Fruitland FL
0
n
0
11
Q.
a
virgin resin
ACL
to
40
35
on
OU
25
20
15
m
I U
5
0
u
f
/
Nitrate /
/
/
Arsenate
/ /
Z /
") o in o 10 o LO o in o in o in o
QOincoocoincoocomcooco
T— cNcoco^incocor^-ooo^o)
Bvs
70
60
50 ^
40 w
30 •§.
5
20
10
Jt8
— Sulfate
- Nitrate
Arsenic V
S-53 ppm
N-14ppm
H-462ppm
C-18ppm
As - 40 ppb
Source: Kinetico
Figure 4-2. Purolite A300E Simulation
18
-------
Sediment
Filters
*• Backwash/Regen
Waste to Sewer
by Others
Treated Water to
Storage / Distribution
by Others
Water from Storage or Distribution
systsm oy umers
rh
15 ton
Sail
Saturate*
Brine Transfer
Pump
BAwD
Edueto
Exehar
i
Brine
Day
Tank
rawn by
ion Ion
geSkld
t
Source: Kinetico
Figure 4-3. Process Schematic of Kinetico's IX-248-As/N Removal System
system, one skid-mounted pre-wired brine transfer pump, one brine tank, one floor-mounted air
compressor, as well as associated valves, sample ports, pressure gauges, and flow elements/controls.
Figures 4-4 through 4-6 are photographs of the system and its components being installed at Fruitland.
The IX system was fully automated and controlled by a central control panel that consisted of a PLC, a
touch screen operator-interface-panel (OIP), and a data communication modem. The OIP allowed the
operator to monitor system flowrate and volume throughput since last regeneration, change system
setpoints as needed, and check the status of alarms. The modem allowed the vendor to remotely dial in
for monitoring and troubleshooting purposes. All pneumatic valves were constructed of PVC and all
plumbing was Schedule 80 PVC solvent bonded. Table 4-5 summarizes the design specifications of the
IX system.
Figure 4-7 presents a process flow chart, along with the sampling/analysis schedule, for the IX-248-As/N
system. The major process steps and system components are presented as follows:
• Sediment Filtration. Prior to entering the resin tanks, raw water was filtered through a skid-
mounted bag filter assembly to remove sediment, if any. The bag filter assembly consisted of
five FSI XI00 polypropylene housing units in parallel, each lined with a 20-um filter bag.
The filter bags were replaced when the pressure gauges on the inlet and outlet of the bag filter
assembly indicated a head loss of over 6 pounds per square inch (psi).
19
-------
Figure 4-4. Photograph of Bank of Five Bag Filters
Figure 4-5. Photograph of IX-248-As/N System at Fruitland, ID
20
-------
Figure 4-6. Sampling Taps, Pressure Gauges, and Valves
Figure 4-7. Photograph of Brine System
21
-------
Table 4-5. Design Specifications of IX System
Parameter
Value
Remarks
IX Vessels
Tank Size (in)
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2/tank)
No. of Tanks
Configuration
48 D x 72 H
12.6
2
Parallel
—
Media
IX Resin Quantity (ft3)
Resin Type
Flint Gravel Support Media (ft3)
Polypropylene Filler Beads (ft3)
50 (per tank); 100 (total)
Purolite A300E
3 (per tank); 6 (total)
3 (per tank); 6 (total)
Bed depth = 48 in
Approximately 12 in deep
Approximately 12 in deep
Pre-treatment (Bag Filter Assembly)
No. Bag Filters
Configuration
Filter Pore Size (um)
5
Parallel
20
IX Service
Design Flowrate (gpm)
Hydraulic Loading (gpm/ft2)
EBCT (min)
Estimated Working Capacity (BV)
Volume Throughput (gal)
250
10
3.0
400-500
299,200-374,000
Based on flowrate of 250 gpm for
two tanks in parallel
1 BV = 100 ft3 = 748 gal
Resin Regeneration
Regeneration Mode
Regeneration Level (Ib of salt/ft3 of
resin)
Brine Draw Duration (min)
Brine Draw Flowrate (gpm)
Slow Rinse Duration (min)
Slow Rinse Flowrate (gpm)
Fast Rinse Duration (min)
Fast Rinse Flowrate (gpm)
Wastewater Production (gal)
Salt Consumption (Ib/regeneration)
Co-current, downflow
10
64
23
64
23
30
75
5,200 (per tank); 10,400
(total)
500 (pertank);l,000 (total)
Based on 4% brine solution
Brine System
Brine Day Tank Size (in)
Brine Day Tank Material
Brine Transfer Pump Size (hp)
Salt Saturator Size (in)
Salt Saturator Material
61 D x64H
HOPE
!/2
96 D x 180 H (original)
96 D x 148 H (shortened)
Fiberglass
Capacity = 685 gal
Saturator shortened by 32 in
(straight height) to fit building
height; corresponding capacity
reduced from 15 to 12.3 tons
22
-------
INFLUENT
(WELL No. 6-2004)
Monthly
pHW, temperature^, DO^,
As (total and soluble), As(III), As(V),
Fe (total and soluble), Mn (total and soluble),
U (total and soluble), V (total and soluble),
Mo (total and soluble), Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4,
SiO2, PO4, IDS, turbidity, alkalinity
SEWER
IDS, As (total) _ _
NO3, SO4
pHW, temperature^, DO^,
As (total and soluble), As(III), As(V),
Fe (total and soluble), Mn (total and soluble),
U (total and soluble), V (total and soluble),
Mo (total and soluble), Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4,
SiO2, PO4, IDS, turbidity, alkalinity
CARTRIDGE
FILTRATION
Fruitland, ID
Ion Exchange Technology
Design Flow: 250 gpm
pH
-------
• IX Resin Filtration. After passing through the bag filters, water flowed downward through
two 48-in-diameter by 72-in-height pressure tanks configured in parallel. The pressure tanks
were of fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) construction, rated for 150 psi working pressure, and
mounted on a polyurethane coated, welded steel frame. Each tank had a 6-in top and bottom
flange and two 4-in side flanges, and was equipped with a diffuser-style upper distributor and
a hub and lateral-style lower distributor. Each tank was filled with 3 ft3 of flint gravel support
media, 50 ft3 of A300E resin, and 3 ft3 of polypropylene filler beads on the top (to prevent
resin from being washed away in an upflow, counter-current regeneration). The system was
designed to treat 250 gpm, with a hydraulic loading of 10 gpm/ ft2 and an EBCT of 3 min.
Each resin tank was equipped with a 125-gpm flow-limiting device to prevent filter overrun
and possible damage to the system. The flow-limiting devices, however, overly restricted the
flow and were removed later to maximize the water production. The system treated less than
200 gpm of flow during the study period.
An insertion-type paddle wheel flow element was installed on the combined effluent line to
register the flowrate and volume throughput of the system since last regeneration. When a
pre-determined throughput setpoint was reached, Tank A was automatically taken out of
service for regeneration first, whereas Tank B remained in service to treat water, which
would not be registered on the totalizer during Tank A regeneration. Once Tank A
regeneration was complete, the totalizer was automatically reset to zero and began to register
the amount of water treated by Tank A. Meanwhile, Tank B was taken out of service for
regeneration. After Tank B regeneration was complete, the totalizer registered the amount of
water treated by both tanks.
• Resin Regeneration. Regeneration can be initiated automatically based on a throughput
setpoint or manually by pressing a push-button on the PLC. Once regeneration was initiated,
the PLC controlled the sequence of three regeneration steps, i.e., brine draw, slow rinse, and
fast rinse. To achieve a regeneration level of 10 Ib NaCl/ft3 of resin, the original design
called for 64 min of brine draw at 23 gpm using a 4% brine solution. During the study, the
regeneration scheme was adjusted several times to optimize the regeneration efficiency,
reduce waste production, and minimize arsenic and nitrate leakage (Section 4.4.2). The
duration of each regeneration step can be reset on the PLC. The brine concentration was
adjusted using a hand valve located upstream of the eductor to change the brine draw rate and
a hydrometer was used to measure the specific gravity of the brine solution to confirm its
concentration. Brine was drawn from a brine day tank into the resin tanks via a Venturi
eductor. The brine day tank was equipped with high/low level sensors interlocked with a
brine transfer pump to fill the tank with saturated brine (about 23 to 26%) from a 15-ton salt
saturator. The saturator was sized to hold 30 days of salt supply for daily regeneration and
was re-filled by a salt delivery truck on a weekly or as needed basis (see Figure 4-9). Treated
water was used to make the brine solution and rinse the beds. The wastewater produced was
discharged to a floor drain connecting via a 6-in drain line to a lift station outside of the
building, where the water was pumped to the existing city sewer.
The system was designed to regenerate in either a co-current or a counter-current mode. The
vendor decided to use downflow, co-current regeneration, which was thought to be superior
to upflow, counter-current regeneration for arsenic and nitrate. Upflow regeneration would
force the contaminants concentrated at the bottom of the resin beds back through the entire
resin beds, which tended to leave relatively more contaminants in the resin. Clifford et al.
(1987, 2003) recommended the co-current downflow regeneration for arsenic removal
because it was easier to implement. For nitrate removal, co-current "complete" regeneration
(i.e., removing over 95% of exchanged nitrate) is recommended only when bypass blending
24
-------
is allowed, which was not the case in Fruitland. Due to the arsenic/nitrate leakage problems
detected at Fruitland, the co-current regeneration was converted to counter-current
regeneration during the later part of the study.
Figure 4-9. Salt Delivery to Fill Salt Saturator
4.3
System Installation
Since the system installation first began in March 2004, a series of events had taken place that seriously
delayed the commencement of the demonstration study until June 2005. The events taking place included
the production of excessive sediment from the old well, installation of a replacement well, repeated
failures of bacterial testing, replacement of resin, and replacement of a well pump. These events are
discussed in detail in the following sections.
4.3.1 Building Construction. The City of Fruitland constructed an addition to the existing pump
house for the IX system. The 17 ft-tall addition covered 360 ft2 of floor space and was with a wood
frame, steel siding and roofing, and a roll-up door. The total cost was approximately $18,000. The
building construction began on February 6, 2004, when the concrete pad was poured. Construction of the
wood frame began on February 10, 2004, and the building was completed (with the exception of the
electrical and the final siding) on March 3, 2004. A photograph of the new structure, adjacent to the
existing well house, is shown in Figure 4-10.
4.3.2 Installation of Replacement Well. After the IX-248-As/N system was delivered to the
newly completed building on March 8, 2004, the system installation began immediately. The installation
was nearly complete when excessive sediment accumulation was noted in the bag filters and the empty
resin vessels (as much as 3 in) during a hydraulic test performed on March 25 and 26, 2004. Completion
of the system installation, including loading the resin in the tanks, was put off to allow the facility to
investigate the sand production problem. The City performed an investigation of the well from April 1
through 13, 2004, including an initial video surveying, cleaning, bailing, and pumping, and final video
25
-------
surveying. The investigation revealed the presence of two holes in the well casing, with each hole having
an associated void in the adjacent sand pack. On April 13, 2004, the City Council voted to replace Well
No. 6 with a new well on the same lot, located approximately 25 ft from the existing well.
•
Figure 4-10. New Addition to Old Well House
The initial design for Well No. 6-2004 called for a 12-in-diameter steel casing completed to 95 ft bgs,
with a screened interval from 50 to 70 ft bgs. Installation of the replacement well commenced on May 5,
2004, after the well location was approved by IDEQ and a well drilling permit was issued by the Idaho
Department of Water Resources. Well installation continued through May 26, when well development
and pump testing indicated that the well was unable to produce an adequate supply of water, presumably
caused by the shorter screen interval installed. On May 28, the City Council voted to increase well depth
to 120 bgs with two additional screened sections extending from 95 to 105 ft bgs and from 110 to 120 ft
bgs (see Section 4.1). The modifications to Well No. 6-2004 were completed in July 2004, and water
samples were collected for coliform tests. The first water sample was tested positive for coliform,
requiring another chlorine shock and a second round of coliform sampling. Following the second
chlorine shock and a negative coliform test result, the vendor proceeded with the loading of the IX resin
in the vessels on July 23, 2004 and the shakedown/startup and operator training activities were scheduled
to begin on July 28.
4.3.3 Permitting. Engineering plans for the system permit application were prepared by Holladay
Engineering, a Kinetico subcontractor (also serving as the engineer for the City of Fruitland) located in
Payette, Idaho. The plans included general arrangement diagrams, specifications of the IX-248-As/N
system, and drawings detailing the connections of the new unit to the existing facility and new building.
After incorporating comments from the vendor and Battelle, the plans were submitted on January 25,
2004, by the City to IDEQ for review and approval. Review comments provided by IDEQ on February
25, 2004, were addressed by the City and Holladay Engineering within a week. On May 10, 2004, IDEQ
sent an e-mail stating that the submittal for the demonstration was generally acceptable, and that the
project was approved to proceed once the new well was installed.
4.3.4 System Installation, Shakedown, and Startup. The IX-248-As/N system was delivered to
the site on March 8, 2004. Mechanical Installation, Inc., a subcontractor to Kinetico, performed the off-
26
-------
loading and installation of the system, including connections to the existing entry and distribution piping
(Figure 4-11). Because the salt saturator had the same height, i.e., 17 ft, as the building, it had to be
shortened before it could be brought into the building. As such, the top section of the fiberglass vessel
was cut off and then a 32-in long section of the straight shell was removed. After the shortened vessel
was brought into the building, the top section was placed back and soldered on March 18, 2004 (Figure 4-
12).
Figure 4-11. Equipment Off-Loading
Following the installation of the replacement well, the vendor proceeded with the loading of the IX resin
in the tanks on July 23, 2004. Battelle personnel arrived at Fruitland on July 28, 2004, to provide data
and sample collection training to the operator. The vendor engineer also was on-site to install a new
touch screen on the control panel. However, the City learned on the same day that the latest bacterial
sample taken from the system had failed and that the system would require further sanitation. This was
complicated by the fact that the IX resin had already been loaded into the vessels and that the resin could
not be exposed to the chlorine treatment. The City re-shocked the well with chlorine and bypassed the IX
system by pumping water to waste. Battelle and Kinetico proceeded with the operator training as
scheduled and left the site on July 29, 2004.
The City began a series of chlorine shocking, pumping, and sampling activities for Well No 6-2004
immediately following the completion of operator training. The City administered multiple cycles of
treatment, but the samples continued to test positive for coliform. The well driller remobilized to the site
in December 2004 to redevelop the well, clean the screens, and disinfect the pump and the well.
However, intermittent positive coliform results continued after the redevelopment effort. In light of the
coliform data, IDEQ agreed to a post-chlorination system at Well No. 6-2004 for the period of the
27
-------
Figure 4-12. Cutting and Soldering Salt Saturator
demonstration. However, chlorination was not desired by the City due to concerns regarding taste and
odor and resistance from a local beverage bottling facility.
The City continued to shock the well with chlorine from December 2004 through April 2005 following a
pattern of shocking, pumping to waste, sampling, and analyzing for coliform and residual chlorine.
Intermittent positive results for coliform persisted during this period. The City considered potential
treatments to allow water to enter the distribution system, including prechlorination (upstream of the IX
system), postchlorination (prior to entering the distribution system), and ultraviolet (UV) treatment. The
City also collected samples from the outlet of the resin tanks in March 2005; the results for these samples
were negative for coliform. The vendor, therefore, determined that a special sanitization method most
likely would not be needed to treat the resin that might have been exposed to the coliform-contaminated
water because the regeneration brine was deemed sufficiently toxic to kill coliform, if any, in the IX
system.
In April 2005, samples collected at the IX system effluent during a short test run (while the treated water
was discharging to waste) indicated that arsenic breakthrough had already occurred. The vendor
determined that a nitrate-specific resin, A-520E (also manufactured by Purolite), had been erroneously
delivered to the site and loaded into the IX vessels. A vendor technician arrived on-site on April 20,
2005, to remove A-520E resin from and load A300E resin into the vessels. After resin replacement and
upon IDEQ's request, water samples were collected from the wellhead and the system effluent for the
bacterial test, which showed negative coliform results. The sample results were submitted to IDEQ on
May 4, 2005. Meanwhile, it was discovered that the pump in Well No. 6-2004, which had been salvaged
from the original well, Well No. 6, was broken and required replacement. The new pump was installed
on May 19, 2005, and was disinfected and began pumping to waste on May 20, 2005. Samples collected
28
-------
on May 23 and 24, 2005, indicated the absence of coliform. Holladay Engineering sent a letter to IDEQ
on June 1, 2005, reporting the negative coliform results and requesting permission to send the treated
water to distribution. IDEQ provided an approval in an e-mail dated June 7, 2005. As such, the
performance evaluation study officially began on June 14, 2005. After Battelle reviewed the data and
sample collection procedures with the operator via telephone, the first set of samples was collected from
the IX system on June 15, 2005.
4.4 System Operation
4.4.1 Operational Parameters. The plant operational data collected from June 14 through
December 16, 2005 is tabulated and attached as Appendix A and key parameters are summarized in
Table 4-6. During the first six months, the IX system operated for 3,635 hr based on the well pump hour
meter, with an average daily operating time of 20 hr. Well No. 6-2004 operated longer in the summer, 22
hr/day between June and September compared to 16 hr/day between October and December. The six-
month throughput was 35.9 million gal based on the wellhead totalizer. The average daily demand was
194,300 gpd; the peak daily demand was 255,000 gpd, which occurred on September 14, 2005.
The IX system was equipped with an insertion paddle wheel flow meter/totalizer on the product water
discharge line to monitor the combined flow from both resin vessels. During the first week of operation,
the product water flowrates through both vessels ranged from 130 to 144 gpm (except for 73 gpm on June
16, 2005, when one vessel was regenerating), which was 28 to 35% lower than the 200-gpm well capacity
and 42 to 48% lower than the 250-gpm design flowrate. The pressure drop (AP) across the system also
was elevated, with values ranging from 20 to 30 psi. It was speculated that the 100-gpm flow restrictor
on the outlet of each vessel might have caused the lower-than-expected flowrate. As such, each flow
restrictor was modified with a wider opening on June 21, 2005, which resulted in a higher flowrate of 170
gpm and a lower AP of 6 psi. The flow restrictors were later replaced with blank pipe sections on July 7,
2005, which did not seem to further increase the system flowrate.
Since then, the product water flowrates ranged from 138 to 179 gpm and averaged 165 gpm and the AP
ranged from 8 to 18 psi (excluding those recorded during resin regeneration). Thus, the corresponding
hydraulic loading to each tank ranged from 5.5 to 7.1 gpm/ft2 and averaged 6.6 gpm/ft2, which was 34%
lower than the design value of 10 gpm/ft2. The corresponding EBCT ranged from 5.4 to 4.2 min and
averaged 4.5 min, which was 50% higher than the design value of 3 min. When one vessel was being
regenerated, the second tank was still in service, providing treated water at a flowrate of 122 to 145 gpm.
The flowrates exceeded the 125-gpm limit, at times, due to the removal of the flow restrictors. This flow
range represents a hydraulic loading of 9.7 to 11.5 gpm/ft2 and an EBCT of 3.1 to 2.6 min. The pressure
drop across each tank was 8 to 10 psi most of the time during normal operation but could increase to 20
psi during regeneration.
4.4.2 Regeneration. The system PLC automatically initiated a regeneration cycle based on a
throughput setpoint. The duration of each of the three regeneration steps, i.e., brine draw, slow rinse, and
fast rinse, was controlled by the PLC. During the six-month operation, a total of 110 regeneration cycles
took place, including 33 at the factory setpoint of 214,000 gal, 33 at a field-modified setpoint of 335,000
gal, and 44 at yet another field-modified setpoint of 316,000 gal (see Table 4-7).
4.4.2.1 Regeneration Settings. Table 4-7 presents the initial and modified regeneration settings for
the IX system during the six-month period. From June 14 through July 26, 2005, regeneration was
triggered by a factory throughput setpoint of 214,000 gal. A 4% brine solution was used to regenerate the
resin at 23 gpm for 64 min to achieve the designed regeneration level of 10 Ib of salt/ft3 resin. Based on
the results of the arsenic/nitrate run length and regeneration studies discussed in Sections 4.5.2 and 4.5.3,
29
-------
Table 4-6. Summary of IX-248-As/N System Operation at Fruitland, ID
Parameter
Operational Period
Total Operating Time (hr)
Average Daily Operating Time (hr/day)
Throughput to Distribution (gal)
Average Daily Use (gpd)
Peak Daily Use (gpd)
Number of Regeneration Cycles
Service Flowrate (gpm)
Empty Bed Contact Time (min)
Hydraulic Loading to Each Resin Tank (gpm/ft2)
Pressure Loss across Each Resin Tank (psi)
Pressure Loss across Entire System (psi)
Value
June 14, 2005-December 16,
2005
3,635
22 (from June to September)
16 (from October to December)
35,946,000(a)
194,300
255,000
110(b)
138(c)-179 (average 165)
5.4-4.2 (average 4.5)
5.5-7.1 (average 6.6)
8-10(d)
8-18(e)
(a) Based on existing wellhead totalizer readings.
(b) Including 33, 33, and 44 regeneration cycles at a throughput setpoint of 214,000, 335,000,
and 316,000 gal, respectively.
(c) Excluding lower flowrates during regeneration.
(d) As high as 20 psi pressure loss recorded during regeneration of other resin vessel.
(e) As high as 26 psi pressure loss recorded during regeneration of other resin vessel.
Table 4-7. IX System Regeneration Settings at Fruitland, ID
Parameter
Operational Period
Run Length Setting (gal)
Run Length Setting (BV)
Regeneration Interval (hr)(a)
Brine Concentration (%)
Brine Draw Time (min)
Slow Rinse Time (min)
Fast Rinse Time (min)
Total Regeneration Time (mm/vessel)
No. of Regeneration Cycles
Salt Delivered (Ib)
Average Salt Usage (lb/cycle)(a)
Average Regeneration Level (Ib/ft3)(b)
Initial
Setting
06/14/05-
07/26/05
214,000
286
22
4
64
64
30
158
33
37,260
1,129
11.3
Modified
Setting 1
07/27/05-
09/19/05
335,000
448
34
8
32
64
30
126
33
55,295
1,675
16.7
Modified
Setting 2
09/20/05-
12/05/05
316,000
422
32
8
32
64
6
102
39
67,705
1,736
17.4
Modified
Setting 3
12/06/05-
12/16/05
316,000
422
32
8
25
40
15
80
5
12,110
NA
NA
(a) Calculated by dividing amount of salt delivered by number of regeneration cycles, assuming same
salt storage levels in saturator at beginning and end of each operational period.
(b) Calculated based on 100 ft3 of resin in two tanks. Design value was 10 lb/ft3.
NA = not available due to insufficient data
the regeneration settings were modified three times during the six-month period, including: 1) on July 26,
2005, a vendor technician was on site to increase the brine concentration from 4 to 8%, reduce the brine
draw time from 64 to 32 min, and increase the throughput setpoint to from 214,000 to 335,000 gal based
on his field arsenic/nitrate measurements; 2) on September 19, 2005, the operator was instructed by the
vendor to reduce the throughput setpoint from 335,000 to 316,000 gal and the fast rinse time from 30 to 6
30
-------
min based on the results of an arsenic/nitrate breakthrough study conducted on August 16 and 17, 2005;
and 3) on December 5, 2005, the operator was instructed again to decrease the brine draw time from 32 to
25 min and slow rinse time from 64 to 40 min, and increase the fast rinse time from 6 to 15 min.
Rationales of these modifications are discussed in Sections 4.5.2 and 4.5.3.
4.4.2.2 Regeneration Monitoring. Regeneration parameters were monitored on September 22,
November 10, and November 15, 2005, as summarized in Table 4-8. The volume of the treated water
used for each regeneration step was recorded from a totalizer installed upstream of the Venturi eductor
and used to calculate the average flowrate of each step. Brine usage was recorded from the 685-gal brine
day tank with 50-gal graduations. The volume of brine draw (i.e., diluted brine) was calculated using
Equation (1).
' brine, d \ /brine,s ' brine,$ * 'water) ' /brine,d
(1)
where:
Vbrine.d = volume of diluted brine (gal)
Vbrine,* = volume of saturated brine (gal)
Vmter = volume of water used (gal)
Ibrine.s = specific gravity of saturated brine, i.e., 1.176 for 23% brine
lbrine,d = specific gravity of diluted brine, i.e., 1.061 for 8% brine.
About 350 to 375 gal of saturated brine was used to regenerate each tank. The average flowrate of brine
draw was 36 gpm, about 56% higher than the design value of 23 gpm. This higher flowrate resulted in
the higher salt consumption as discussed in Section 4.4.2.3. The slow rinse flowrate ranged from 24 to 27
gpm, close to the design value. The fast rinse flowrate ranged from 58 to 67 gpm, lower than the design
value of 75 gpm. Regeneration produced 6,127 to 6,650 gal of wastewater per vessel, equivalent to 16 to
18 BV. At a regeneration setpoint of 316,000 gal (422 BV), the water production efficiency was 96%.
Table 4-8. IX System Regeneration Parameters
Date of Regeneration
Vessel Regenerated
09/22/05
A
B
Total
11/10/05
A
B
Total
11/15/05
A
B
Total
Brine Draw
Brine Used in Day Tank (gal)
Treated Water Used (gal)
Brine Draw Volume (gal)(c)
Brine Draw Time (min)
Brine Draw Flowrate (gpm)
360
802
1,149
32
36
NA
l,340(a)
NA
32
NA
720(b)
l,604(b)
2,299(b)
64
36(b)
350
800
1,137
32
36
350
800
1,137
32
36
700
1,600
2,274
64
36
375
900
1,258
32
40
375
700
1,070
32
34
750
1,600
2,328
64
37
Slow Rinse
Slow Rinse Volume (gal)
Slow Rinse Time (min)
Slow Rinse Flowrate (gpm)
1,519
64
24
1,542
64
24
3,061
128
24
1,900
64
30
1,600
64
25
3,500
128
27
1,900
64
30
1,600
64
25
3,500
128
27
Fast Rinse
Fast Rinse Volume (gal)
Fast Rinse Time (min)
Fast Rinse Flowrate (gpm)
383
6
64
359
6
60
742
12
62
300
6
50
400
6
67
700
12
58
400
6
67
400
6
67
800
12
67
Total Waste Production per Regeneration Cycle
Wastewater Produced (gal/cycle)
Wastewater Produced (B V/cycle)
6,100
16
6,500
17
6,650
18
(a) Including an unknown amount
(b) Assuming TB consumed same
(c) Calculated using Equation 1.
of water that went into salt saturator.
amount of brine and water as TA.
31
-------
4.4.2.3 Salt Usage. The amount of salt used by each regeneration cycle was calculated based on the
concentrations and volumes of saturated and diluted brine solutions, respectively, according to Equation
(2). The results are presented in Table 4-9.
where:
Jbrine
Wsalt = weight of salt (Ib)
Fftrine = volume of brine (gal)
7bnne= specific gravity of brine
dv>ater= density of water, i.e., 8.34 (Ib/gal)
Csait= percent of salt
(2)
Table 4-9. IX System Salt Usage Calculations
Date
09/22/05
10/25/05
11/10/05
11/15/05
Saturated Brine
Volume
(gal)(a)
720
750
700
750
Specific
Gravity'10
1.176
1.176
1.176
1.176
Percent
of Salt
(%)
23
23
23
23
Average
Salt
Usage
(Ib)
1,624
1,692
1,579
1,692
1,647
Diluted Brine
Volume
(gal)(a)
2,299
NA
2,274
2,328
Specific
Gravity(c)
1.061
NA
1.061
1.061
Percent
of Salt
(%)
8
NA
8
8
Average
Salt
Usage
(Ib)
1,627
NA
1,609
1,648
1,628
(a) Data from Table 4-8 except for that on 10/25/05.
(b) Ideal salt saturation level used for calculation.
(c) Measured using a field hydrometer.
The specific gravity of the saturated brine measured with a hydrometer on September 22, 2005, was 1.16,
corresponding to 21% of NaCl, which was lower than the ideal salt saturation level of 23 to 25%. The
specific gravity of the diluted brine measured was 1.061, corresponding to 8% of NaCl as expected.
Using the ideal salt saturation level for calculation, it yielded the amount of salt usage (by weight) similar
to that based on the diluted brine, as shown in Table 4-9. The average salt usage per cycle was 1,647 and
1,628 Ib based on the saturated and 8% brine, respectively, which was over 60% higher than the design
value of 1,000 Ib (derived from 10 Ib of salt/ft3 of resin for 100 ft3 of resin in both vessels).
The salt usage also was estimated based on the amount of salt delivered and the number of regeneration
cycles taking place over a period of time, assuming the same level of salt in the salt saturator at the
beginning and end of the period. During the 27 weeks of operation, a total of 172,390 Ib (or 86 tons) of
salt was delivered in 28 shipments with quantities varying from 3,205 to 9,035 Ib per shipment. Because
the system was regenerated 110 times during this 27-week period, regeneration of both vessels used, on
average, 1,567 Ib of salt. Table 4-7 presents the average salt usage under different regeneration settings,
i.e., 1,129 Ib for the period from June 14 through July 26, 1,675 Ib from July 27 to September 19, and
1,736 Ib from September 20 to December 5, 2005. Divided by 100 ft3 of resin in both vessels, these salt
usage values corresponded to a regeneration level of 11.3, 16.7 and 17.4 lb/ft3 of resin, respectively. The
salt regeneration level was only 13% higher than the design value of 10 lb/ft3 initially, but became 67 and
74% higher since July 26, 2005.
32
-------
As noted above, the higher-than-expected salt usage was caused by the higher brine draw rate (i.e., 36
gpm versus the design value of 23 gpm). It was suspected that, when the 4% brine solution was changed
to 8% on July 26, 2005, a hand valve located upstream of the Venturi eductor might have been overly
adjusted, resulting in the higher brine draw rate. For the same period of time from September 20 to
December 5, 2005, the salt usage rates based on the salt delivery data were consistent with those
calculated based on the saturated and diluted brine consumption rates as shown in Table 4-9 (i.e., 1,736 Ib
versus 1,647 Ib and 1,628 Ib, respectively).
After being notified of the higher brine draw rate issue, the vendor instructed the operator to shorten the
brine draw time from 32 to 25 min on the PLC on December 5, 2005. Shortening the brine draw time on
the PLC was recommended because it was easy to do (versus manipulating the hand valve upstream of
the Venturi eductor to try to reach target brine draw flowrate). Reduction of the brine draw time from 32
to 25 min, however, would decrease the salt usage by only 22%. Further decrease in the brine draw time
was not recommended by the vendor because of the concern over incomplete regeneration. The actual
salt usage after the December 5, 2005 change will be evaluated in the final report after sufficient data are
collected.
The salt usage in terms of 1,000 gal of water treated was calculated to be: 1) 4.80 lb/1,000 gal based on
the amount of salt consumed, i.e., 172,390 Ib, and the amount of water treated, i.e., 35,946,000 gal, over
the six-month period, and 2) 3.16 lb/1,000 gal based on the design value of 1,000 Ib of salt and the actual
run length of 316,000 gal (because the higher brine draw rate was due to the improper flow control and
was not intended). The second salt usage value was consistent with the 3.19 lb/1,000 gal stated in the
vendor's proposal and those reported in the literature (Clifford et al., 1987 and 2003). For example, in a
nitrate study conducted at Glendale, Arizona, where similar run length to nitrate breakthrough (-400 BV)
was obtained from atype II resin, Clifford et al. (1987) reported a salt usage of 3.25 lb/1,000 gal for
complete regeneration and 2.36 lb/1,000 gal for partial regeneration. Outer's work on nitrate removal in
McFarland, California (1981) produced an even lower salt consumption than experienced in Glendale,
Arizona.
4.4.3 Residual Management. Residuals produced by the IX system included spent brine and rinse
water, which was discharged to a floor drain. The wastewater was then transported via a 6-in
underground drain pipe to a lift station outside of the building before being pumped to a nearby sanitary
sewer for disposal. The volume of wastewater produced was determined by the regeneration frequency
and the volume of wastewater generated per regeneration cycle. Table 4-10 presents the calculations of
wastewater production under different regeneration settings using the flowrates derived from Table 4-8,
i.e., 36 gpm for brine draw, 26 gpm for slow rinse, and 62 gpm for fast rinse. The adjustments to the
regeneration settings resulted in significant reductions in the wastewater production. For example, the
increase of the brine concentration from 4% to 8% reduced the spent brine volume by 50%, from 2,304 to
1,152 gal per regeneration cycle. The reduction in slow rinse and fast rinse time also decreased the
wastewater volume proportionally. Under Modified Setting 3, the total wastewater volume per cycle was
reduced to 5,740 gal, which was 50% of that under the initial setting. The monthly wastewater production
was estimated for the different regeneration settings (assuming an average daily demand of 194,300 gpd)
and also presented in Table 4-10. Depending on the settings, the system would regenerate 17, 18, or 27
times each month and produce 105,900 to 293,400 gal of wastewater per month, corresponding to 94.6%
to 98.2% of production efficiencies. Based on the number of regeneration cycles performed under each
setting, approximately 949,000 gal of wastewater was produced during the first six months of operation.
4.4.4 System/Operation Reliability and Simplicity. Table 4-11 summarizes the operational
problems encountered and corrective actions taken during the first six months of system operation. A
power outage occurred over the weekend of June 18 and 19, 2005, causing several operational problems.
First, the product water totalizer read 341,000 gal on June 20, 2005, exceeding the regeneration setpoint
33
-------
Table 4-10. Comparison of Wastewater Production Under Different IX Regeneration Settings
Parameter
Run Length Setting (gal)
Initial
Settings
214,000
Modified
Settings 1
335,000
Modified
Settings 2
316,000
Modified
Settings 3
316,000
Brine Draw
Brine Concentration (%)
Brine Draw Time (min)
Brine Draw Rate (gpm)(a)
Brine Draw Volume (gal)
4
64
36
2,304
8
32
36
1,152
8
32
36
1,152
8
25
36
900
Slow Rinse
Slow Rinse Time (min)
Slow Rinse Flowrate (gpm)(a)
Slow Rinse Volume (gal)
64
26
1,664
64
26
1,664
64
26
1,664
40
26
1,040
Fast Rinse
Fast Rinse (min)
Fast Rinse Flowrate (gpm)(a)
Fast Rinse Volume (gal)
30
62
1,860
30
62
1,860
6
62
372
15
62
930
Total Waste Production
Wastewater Produced per Vessel (gal)
Wastewater Produced per Regeneration Cycle (gal) (b)
Average Monthly Production (gal/month)(c)
Monthly Regeneration Cycles (times/month)
Monthly Wastewater Production (gal/month)
Water Production Efficiency (%)
5,828
11,656
5,829,000
27
293,400
94.6
4,676
9,352
5,829,000
17
162,700
97.2
3,188
6,376
5,829,000
18
117,600
98.0
2,870
5,740
5,829,000
18
105,900
98.2
(a) Flowrates measured under Modified Setting 3 used for calculations under other settings.
(b) Regeneration of both vessels in one regeneration cycle.
(c) Based on an average daily demand of 194,300 gpd in Table 4-6.
of 214,000 gal. An examination of the system revealed that the brine transfer pump had been reset to
"off, thus, preventing the scheduled regeneration from taking place. Second, due to the power outage,
the PLC regeneration setting was returned from "co-current" to the factory default "counter-current".
Although the system was designed with flexibilities to support both regeneration modes, the plumbing
and valving was configured in the field only to support the "co-current" regeneration. Therefore, it was
suspected that the system had not been properly regenerated for about 10 days, as indicated by the higher-
Table 4-11. Summary of IX System Operational Problems
Date
06/14/05-
06/21/05
06/15/05
06/18/05-
06/29/05
08/03/05
Problem Encountered
System experienced low flow and elevated pressure loss
Brine transfer pump malfunctioned
After a power outage, IX system restarted but failed to
initiate regeneration because brine transfer pump had
been reset to "off; PLC returned to default "counter-
current" regeneration instead of "co-current"
Regeneration failed to occur after treating 534,000 gal
of water due to a broken low level sensor in brine day
tank
Corrective Actions Taken
Flow restrictors modified and subsequently
removed on 07/07/05
Pump fixed on same day by operator
PLC setting changed back to "co-current"
on 06/29/05; an uninterrupted power supply
(UPS) installed on 07/26/05 to provide
back-up power
Level sensor fixed on same day by operator
34
-------
than-expected arsenic and nitrate concentrations in the treated water samples on June 23 and 29, 2005
(Sections 4.5). The PLC setting was changed back to "co-current" on June 29, 2005, after sample
collection. In addition, an uninterrupted power supply (UPS) was installed by the vendor on July 26,
2005 to provide a backup power to the PLC. The system failed to regenerate again on August 3, 2005,
due to a broken level sensor in the brine day tank. The product water totalizer read 534,000 gal on that
day, far exceeding the setpoint of 335,000 gal. The prolonged service run resulted in higher-than-
influent-levels of arsenic and nitrate in the treated water, known as "chromatographic effect" (see
Sections 4.5). The level sensor was repaired by the operator on the same day.
The required system operation and operator skills are further discussed below according to pre- and post-
treatment requirements, levels of system automation, operator skill requirements, preventive maintenance
activities, and frequency of chemical/media handling and inventory requirements.
4.4.4.1 Pre- and Post-Treatment Requirements. Pretreatment included filtration with a bank of five
bag filters to remove sediment from source water. The bag filters were replaced when the AP across the
bag filters was greater than 6 psi. The bag filters were replaced four or five times during the six-month
operation and it took approximately one hour each time to replace all five filter bags. There was no post-
treatment employed, except for the provision of post-chlorination in case of any bacterial outbreak.
4.4.4.2 System Automation. The IX system was fully automatic and controlled by the PLC in the
central control panel. The control panel also contained a touch screen OIP that allowed the operator to
monitor system flowrate and throughput since last regeneration. The OIP also allowed the operator to
change system setpoints, as needed, and check the status of alarms. Setpoint screens were password-
protected so that changes could only be made by unauthorized personnel. Typical alarms were for no
flow, storage tank high/low, and regeneration failure. The IX system was regenerated automatically
based on a throughput setpoint, except during the regeneration sampling events when the system was
regenerated manually in order to capture spent regenerant and rinse samples. Although the system would
require minimal operator oversight and intervention if all functions were operating as intended, a number
of operational issues did arise with the automated resin vessel regeneration and associated equipment, as
noted in Section 4.4.4.
4.4.4.3 Operator Skill Requirements. The O&M of the IX system required minimal additional
operator skills beyond those required for small system operators, such as solid work ethic, basic
mathematical skills, abilities to understand chemical properties, familiarities with electronic and
mechanical components, and abilities to follow written and verbal instructions. Understanding of and
compliance with all occupational and chemical safety rules and regulations also were required. Since all
major system operations were automated and controlled by the PLC, the operator was required to
understand and learn how to use the PLC and OIP to perform tasks after receiving training from the
vendor.
The level of operator certification is determined by the type and class of the public drinking water
systems. IDEQ's drinking water rules require all community and non-transient non-community public
drinking water and distribution systems to be classified based on potential health risks. Classifications
range from "Class I" (lowest) to "Class IV" (highest) for treatment systems and from "Very Small" to
"Class IV" for distribution systems, depending on factors such as the system complexity, size, and source
water. There are 11 different types and classes of individual drinking water operator classes for which
licenses are issued. The City of Fruitland Public Water System is classified as a "Class II" distribution
system and the plant operator has a matching "Class II" license. After receiving proper training by the
vendor during the system startup, the operator understood the PLC, knew how to use the OIP, and worked
with the vendor to troubleshoot and perform minor on-site repairs.
35
-------
4.4.4.4 Preventive Maintenance Activities. Preventive maintenance tasks recommended by the
vendor included daily to monthly visual inspection of the piping, valves, tanks, flow meters, and other
system components. Routine maintenance also may be required on an as needed basis for the air
compressor motor and the replacement of o-ring seals or gaskets on automated or manual valves and the
brine transfer pump (Kinetico, 2004). During this reporting period, maintenance activities performed by
the operator included replacing filter bags periodically, checking the brine concentration using a
hydrometer, adjusting regeneration frequency and setpoints as instructed by the vendor, and conducting
troubleshooting activities as described in Section 4.4.2 related to the malfunction of automated
regeneration operations.
4.4.4.5 Chemical/Media Handling and Inventory Requirements. The chemicals required for the IX
system included sodium chloride for regeneration. The system has fully automated controls with the
regeneration being triggered by volume throughput. The salt truck delivered salt on a weekly or as
needed basis with or without the operator's presence. The salt saturator was sized to hold 15 tons of salt
supply; this capacity, however, was reduced by 18% to 12.3 ton due to shortening of the tank height to fit
the building. Assuming that the system regenerates 18 times per month (see Table 4-10) and uses 1,000
Ib of salt per event (as designed), it would require 18,000 Ib or 9 tons of salt per month. Therefore, the
salt saturator holds about six weeks of salt supply.
4.5 System Performance
The performance of the IX-248-As/N system was evaluated based on analyses of water samples routinely
collected from the treatment train, regeneration cycles, and the distribution system. Since the IX system
was regenerated several times a week, the routine weekly samples collected from the treatment plant only
represented discrete data points from multiple service runs. Therefore, the resin run length and
regeneration studies were conducted to provide additional insights into the system performance.
4.5.1 Treatment Plant Sampling. The treatment plant water was sampled on 24 occasions
(including one duplicate sampling event) and speciated on seven occasions during the six months of
operation. Table 4-12 summarizes the arsenic and nitrate analytical results. Table 4-13 summarizes the
results of other water quality parameters. Appendix B contains a complete set of analytical results
through the six-month period. The results of the water samples collected throughout the treatment plant
are discussed as follows.
4.5.1.1 Arsenic and Nitrate Removal. Arsenic and nitrate were the two primary contaminants of
concern in source water; thus, their removal was crucial to assessing the performance of the IX system.
Figures 4-13 and 4-14 show total As and nitrate concentrations across the treatment train, respectively,
over the six-month period. Each figure consists of two plots: the first plots total As or nitrate
concentrations against the sampling dates and the second plots the same set of concentration data against
the system throughput at the time of sample collection. Because the system was regenerated two to three
times a week, the weekly treatment plant samples were collected from multiple service runs. Typically, a
breakthrough curve is constructed with data from the same service run. To better understand the IX
system performance with data collected from multiple service runs, the concentration data were plotted
against the system throughput (from low to high) when samples were collected. These "reconstructed"
breakthrough curves are presented in Figures 4-13b for total arsenic and 4-14b for nitrate.
36
-------
Table 4-12. Summary of Arsenic and Nitrate Data
Parameter
As (total)
As (soluble)
As
(paniculate)
As(III)
As(V)
Nitrate (as N)
Sampling
Location01'
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
IN
TT
IN
TT
IN
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
Unit
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
ug/L
Ug/L
ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Number
of
Samples
24
14(b)
14(b)
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
24
13(b)
14(b)
7
Concentration
Minimum
33.6
0.7
0.5
0.7
37.3
0.7
0.1
<0.1
0.9
0.8
35.9
0.1
6.89
0.41
0.33
0.40
Maximum
60.8
25.6
15.1
2.8
59.9
3.2
8.9
0.2
2.4
2.4
58.7
0.8
11.20
9.70
9.83
4.34
Average
42.1
4.6
4.5
1.4
42.6
1.4
2.1
0.1
1.6
1.5
41.0
0.2
9.46
2.32
1.92
1.29
Standard
Deviation
7.8
7.5
4.9
0.9
8.1
1.1
3.2
0.0
0.6
0.6
8.3
0.3
0.88
2.49
1.98
1.43
One-half of detection limit used for non-detect samples for calculations.
Duplicate samples included calculations.
(a) See Figure 4-8 for sampling locations.
(b) Excluding data collected on June 23 and 29 and August 3, 2005, when system was not
regenerated properly.
Total As concentrations in raw water ranged from 33.6 to 60.8 ug/L and averaged 42.1 ug/L (Table 4-12).
Nitrate concentrations in raw water ranged from 6.89 to 11.20 mg/L (as N) and averaged 9.46 mg/L (as
N). After the IX treatment, total As and nitrate concentrations were reduced to below the respective
MCLs at the TT location for all seven sampling events when the samples were collected at a system
throughput between 37,000 (first data point) and 224,000 gal (7th data point), as shown on Figures 4-13b
and 4-14b. However, samples collected after individual resin vessels at the TA and TB sampling
locations exceeded the MCLs on several occasions, due to either mechanical failure (i.e., June 23 and 29
and August 3, 2005) or leakage from the freshly regenerated resin beds (i.e., August 10 and 31, 2005).
These results are further discussed below:
Samples Taken on June 23 and 29, 2005. TA and TB samples collected on June 23 and 29, 2005 after
212,000 gal (or 283 BV) and 147,000 gal (or 197 BV) of water had been treated, respectively, showed
almost no arsenic or nitrate removal (data not shown on the "reconstructed" breakthrough curves). It was
discovered later that, after a power outage on June 17, 2005, the system PLC was reset automatically to
the default "counter-current" regeneration (see Sections 4.4.4). As a result, the system was not properly
regenerated during this period. The effluent water quality returned to normal after the problem was
corrected on June 29, 2005.
Samples Taken on August 3, 2005. TA and TB samples showed higher-than-raw-water-levels of arsenic
and nitrate (i.e., 41.4 and 46.3 ug/L vs. 34.2 ug/L for total As and 9.7 and 9.7 mg/L vs. 9.3 mg/L (as N)
for nitrate) because the system had failed to regenerate at the setpoint of 335,000 gal (448 BV) and
continue to operate up to 534,000 gal (714 BV) due to a broken brine tank level sensor. The prolonged
37
-------
Table 4-13. Summary of Other Water Quality Parameters
Parameter
Alkalinity
(as CaCO3)
Fluoride
Sulfate
Orthophosphate
(as PO4)
Total P
(as PO4)
Silica (as SiO2)
Turbidity
TDS
pH
Temperature
Dissolved
Oxygen
Sampling
Location'3'
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
Unit
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
NTU
NTU
NTU
NTU
mg/L
mg/L
S.U.
S.U.
S.U.
S.U.
°C
°c
°c
°c
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
No. of
Samples
24
16
17
7
8
1
1
7
24
16
17
7
24
16
17
7
6
4
4
2
22
17
17
7
24
16
17
7
7
7
22
15
16
7
23
15
16
7
22
15
16
6
Concentration
Minimum
365
3.0
3.0
286
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.5
40.8
<1
<1
<1
0.05
O.05
O.05
0.05
O.03
0.03
0.03
O.03
46.6
53.8
54.5
45.9
O.I
0.1
O.I
O.I
550
498
7.300
6.8
6.0
7.2
14.6
14.6
14.6
14.8
1.9
1.8
2.1
1.7
Maximum
484
462
462
484
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
76.0
94.0
63.0
<1
0.56
0.23
0.25
0.85
0.40
0.03
0.03
0.35
63.4
61.6
63.2
57.2
1.4
0.7
0.6
1.6
598
558
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.7
15.4
15.9
15.4
15.2
4.3
3.4
3.5
3.0
Average
386
338
299
421
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.5
58.5
13.3
10.7
<1
0.12
0.05
0.05
0.14
0.29
0.03
0.03
0.18
56.4
57.3
57.5
53.6
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
571
535
7.6
7.6
7.4
7.4
15.1
15.0
14.9
15.0
2.8
2.5
2.6
2.5
Standard
Deviation
22.9
140
186
74.6
0.1
-
-
0.0
7.8
28.6
22.8
0.0
0.12
0.07
0.07
0.31
0.14
0.00
0.00
0.24
3.4
1.7
1.9
4.7
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.6
14.6
20.1
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.5
38
-------
Table 4-13. Summary of Other Water Quality Parameters (Continued)
Parameter
ORP
Total Hardness
(as CaCO3)
Ca Hardness
(as CaCO3)
Mg Hardness
(as CaCO3)
Fe (total)
Fe (soluble)
Mn (total)
Mn (soluble)
U (total)
U (soluble)
V (total)
V (soluble)
Mo (total)
Mo (soluble)
Sampling
Location'3'
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
IN
TT
IN
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
IN
TA
TB
TT
IN
TT
Unit
mV
mV
mV
mV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
ug/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Ug/L
HB/L
ug/L
Ug/L
Hg/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
HB/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
ug/L
Ug/L
Ug/L
ug/L
Number
of
Samples
23
15
16
7
7
7
8
7
7
7
24
17
17
7
7
7
24
17
17
7
7
7
24
17
17
7
7
7
24
17
17
7
7
7
22
15
15
7
7
7
Concentration
Minimum
191
180
3.0
172
227
229
134
140
86.2
89.3
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
11.8
13.9
14.3
9.9
10.0
10.4
16.6
<0.1
0.1
<0.1
16.2
0.1
30.6
0.3
0.3
0.1
36.6
O.I
12.0
O.I
0.1
0.1
11.8
0.1
Maximum
276
297
260
260
303
252
180
155
123
104
211
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
30.8
33.7
28.0
26.5
30.4
28.7
22.6
0.3
2.5
O.I
19.7
0.1
53.0
16.6
36.1
4.2
45.2
5.7
14.6
13.0
13.3
0.5
14.0
0.4
Average
235
229
214
231
251
244
150
146
101
98
24.5
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
22.9
22.9
22.4
20.4
21.1
21.1
18.9
0.1
0.2
O.I
18.5
0.1
39.2
3.3
6.2
1.5
40.2
1.8
12.8
1.7
1.8
0.2
12.8
0.2
Standard
Deviation
23.8
31.0
60.5
30.6
25.1
7.9
13.8
5.2
11.2
4.6
43.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.9
4.5
4.0
6.2
7.2
6.7
1.4
0.1
0.6
0.0
1.2
0.0
4.0
4.1
8.9
1.6
2.6
2.1
0.8
3.7
4.2
0.1
0.8
0.1
One-half of detection limit used for non-detect samples for calculations.
Duplicate samples included for calculations.
(a) See Figure 4-8 for sampling locations.
(b) Excluding an outlier on 07/06/05.
39
-------
70
60-
50 -
0)
o
c
O 30 -
w
20-
10-
10-u.g/LMCL
06/01/05
07/01/05
07/31/05
08/30/05 09/29/05
Sampling Date
10/29/05
11/28/05
12/28/05
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
Note: 06/23/05 and 06/29/05 data not shown due to
improper regeneration
System Throughput (gal)
Figure 4-13. Total Arsenic Concentrations Measured over Six-Month Period
(a) Temporal Plot; (b) Reconstructed Breakthrough Curves
40
-------
06/01/05 07/01/05 07/31/05 08/30/05 09/29/05
Sampling Date
10/29/05
11/28/05
12/28/05
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
"0'"0™"6'0 System Throughput (gal)
Figure 4-14. Nitrate Concentrations Measured over Six-Month Period
(a) Temporal Plot; (b) Reconstructed Breakthrough Curves
41
-------
service run forced previously exchanged arsenic and nitrate to be displaced, presumably, by more
preferred anions, such as sulfate, in raw water, resulting in the "chromatographic peaking" observed.
According to the selectivity sequence discussed in Sections 4.2.1, an SBA resin like A300E prefers
sulfate over HAsO42", nitrate, and H2AsO4"; the HCO3" ion is less preferred than HAsO42" but has a similar
affinity to the resin as H2AsO4".
Samples Taken on August 10 and 31, 2005. TA and TB samples collected at 28,000 gal (37 BV) of
throughput contained 25.6 and 15.1 (ig/L of total As, respectively, exceeding the 10- (ig/L MCL. This
early arsenic leakage reoccurred on August 31, 2005, when 11.4 (ig/L of total As was measured in the TB
sample at 28,000 gal (37 BV). The arsenic leakage problem was further investigated in the resin run
length studies.
Samples Taken on September 28, 2005. The TA sample contained 17.6 (ig/L of total As and 9.7 mg/L of
nitrate (as N), exceeding the arsenic MCL and approaching the nitrate MCL. The samples were collected
after 314,000 gal (420 BV) of water had been treated, which was close to the regeneration setpoint of
316,000 gal (422 BV). However, since the TB sample contained only 2.1 (ig/L of total As, the combined
effluent from both tanks, if equally blended, would have been just under the arsenic MCL.
4.5.1.2 Arsenic Speciation. Figure 4-15 shows the arsenic speciation results of samples collected at
the wellhead and combined effluent. As(V) was the predominant species in raw water, ranging from 35.9
to 58.7 |o,g/L and averaging 41.0 |og/L. Only trace amounts of particulate As and As(III) existed, with
concentrations averaging 2.1 and 1.6 |og/L, respectively. After treatment, As(III) concentrations remained
essentially unchanged, averaging 1.5 |o,g/L. As expected, the IX process did not remove the neutral
species of arsenite.
4.5.1.3 Uranium, Vanadium, and Molybdenum Removal. Figure 4-16 presents the reconstructed
breakthrough curves of total U, V, and Mo during the six-month period. Total U concentrations ranged
from 16.6 to 22.6 (ig/L in raw water, which was removed to less than 1 (ig/L in treated water except for
July 6, 2005 at 2.5 (ig/L (TB). Total V concentrations ranged from 30.6 to 53.0 (ig/L and averaged
39.2 (ig/L in raw water. After treatment, total V was removed to less than 10 (ig/L except for a few
occasions with samples collected at 50,000 gal or less of throughput. The highest detection of total V
was 36.1 (ig/L (TB) on July 6, 2005. Total Mo in raw water was less than 15 (ig/L, which was removed
to less than 1 (ig/L in treated water except for June 23 and 29, 2005.
4.5.1.4 Other Water Quality Parameters. Figure 4-17 presents the "reconstructed" breakthrough
curves for sulfate, pH, and total alkalinity during the six-month period. Sulfate concentrations ranged
from 41 to 76 mg/L in raw water, which was removed to less than 1 mg/L after treatment except for June
23 and 29 and August 3, 2005, when the system experienced mechanical problems (see section 4.4.4).
Raw water pH values ranged from 7.3 to 7.9 and averaged 7.6 (except for an outlier of 6.7 on July 6,
2005). Treated water pH values remained in the similar range, but lower pH values were observed for a
short duration after the system had been freshly regenerated. For example, the pH values at IN, TA, and
TB locations were 7.8, 7.0, and 7.3, respectively, on August 10 and 7.7, 7.5, and 6.8, respectively, on
August 31, 2005, after 28,000 gal of water treated. This pH reduction corresponded to the significant
reduction in total alkalinity, i.e., from 383 to 3 and 3 mg/L (as CaCO3) on August 10, 2005, and from 374
to 158 and 7 mg/L (as CaCO3) on August 31, 2005. The pH measurement on July 6, 2005, at 29,000 gal
was questionable (i.e., 6.7, 6.8 and 6.0 at the IN, TA, and TB locations); however, the total alkalinity
values were measured at 396, 176, and 6 mg/L (as CaCO3), very similar to the August 31, 2005 data. The
reduction in pH and alkalinity was attributed to the removal of bicarbonate ions by the IX resin. As well
documented in the literature, one disadvantage of the IX process is the production of low pH and
corrosive water by the freshly regenerated resin during the initial 100 BV of an service run (Clifford,
1999). Afterwards, rapid bicarbonate elution from the resin vessels raises the pH values to above neutral.
42
-------
Arsenic Species at Inlet (IN)
= 30-
DAs(paiticulate)
As(V)
DAs(lll)
06/15/05 07/13/05
08/17/05 09/14/05 10/12/05
Date
11/09/05 12/14/05
Arsenic Species after Tanks A and B Combined (TT)
DAs(particulate)
IAs(V)
DAs(lll)
06/15/05 07/13/05
08/17/05 09/14/05 10/12/05
Date
11/09/05 12/14/05
Figure 4-15. Concentrations of Arsenic Species at Wellhead and Combined Effluent
43
-------
?40
I
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
System Throughput (gal)
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
Note 06/23/05 and 06/29/05 data not shown due to System Throughput (gal)
* 10
§
o
i
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
Note OB/23/05 and 00/20/05 data not shown duo to System Throughput (gal)
mproper regeneration
Figure 4-16. Reconstructed Breakthrough Curves for Total U, V, and Mo
Over Six-Month Period
44
-------
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
System Throughput (gal)
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
System Throughput (gal)
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000
System Throughput (gal)
Figure 4-17. Reconstructed Breakthrough Curves for Sulfate, pH, and Total
Alkalinity over Six-Month Period
45
-------
4.5.2 Resin Run Length Studies. Figure 4-18 presents the total arsenic and nitrate breakthrough
curves from three service runs that started on July 28, August 16, and December 7, 2005, respectively.
Total alkalinity, pH, sulfate, and total V also were measured during the December 7, 2005 service run and
their breakthrough curves are presented in Figure 4-19.
Run Length Study 1 (July 28-30, 2005): Combined effluent samples were collected and analyzed for
total As and nitrate using field test kits (Section 3.4.1). Arsenic and nitrate reached the respective
detectable concentrations of 2 (ig/L and 5 mg/L after 303,000 gal (~ 400 BV) of water had been treated.
Samples collected at 366,000 gal (489 BV) showed arsenic and nitrate breakthrough at 20 (ig/L and 10
mg/L, respectively. Subsequent samples were collected from individual vessels to confirm the results.
Total As concentrations were measured at > 50 (ig/L in Tank A effluent and 10 (ig/L in Tank B effluent.
The higher arsenic breakthrough from Tank A was expected because it had been in service longer than
Tank B. Nitrate concentrations were measured at 10 mg/L for both vessels. As a result of this study, the
regeneration setpoint was adjusted from 214,000 gal (286 BV) to 335,000 gal (448 BV) on July 30, 2005
(Section 3.4.1).
Run Length Study 2 (August 16-17, 2005). The first sample was collected from Tank A at 86,000 gal
(115 BV) and contained 5 (ig/L of total arsenic and 1.5 mg/L of nitrate (as N). Total arsenic
concentrations then decreased to as low as 1.2 (ig/L at 302,000 gal before rising again to as high as 5.4
(ig/L before approaching the 335,000-gal setpoint. Nitrate concentrations decreased to 0.1 mg/L (as N) at
250,000 gal, and then increased steadily to 10 mg/L (as N) at 302,000 gal. Therefore, nitrate reached its
MCL earlier than arsenic did, which was consistent with the hierarchy of selectivity of an SBA resin (i.e.,
the divalent arsenate ion is more preferred than nitrate) as discussed in Section 4.2.1. The results of the
study prompted the regeneration setpoint to be reduced to 316,000 gal (422 BV) on September 19, 2005
(Section 3.4.1).
Run Length Study 3 (December 7-8, 2005). In this study, samples were collected from each tank with
more samples taken during the first 60,000 gal (or 80 BV) of throughput. The sampling results clearly
indicated the initial arsenic and nitrate leakage from both resin vessels. Tank A arsenic and nitrate
breakthrough curves were very similar to those of the second run length study. The initial arsenic leakage
from Tank B was as high as 18.7 (ig/L at 24,000 gal (or 32 BV). The initial nitrate leakage from either
tank was similarly elevated, but below the MCL. The nitrate concentration after Tank A reached 10 mg/L
(as N) at 288,000 gal (or 385 BV).
As shown on Figure 4-19, total alkalinity and pH values were significantly reduced to as low as 11 mg/L
(as CaCO3) and a pH unit of 6 for the first 24,000 gal, consistent with the six-month monitoring data
(Figure 4-17). Total alkalinity and pH values gradually approached the raw water levels and leveled off
after approximately 250 BV. Sulfate concentrations were below the detectable level throughout the
service run. The total V breakthrough curves also showed initial leakage, with more severe leakage
observed at Tank B. Total U and Mo levels were below the respective method detection limits throughout
the service run.
4.5.3 Regeneration Studies and Residual Sampling
4.5.3.1 Regeneration Study 1 (July 30, 2005). Figure 4-20 presents the specific gravity and
conductivity of the discharge water during the Tank B regeneration on July 30, 2005. Specific gravity of
the eluent from Tank B increased rapidly as the brine solution was drawn into the vessel, leveled off, and
then decreased rapidly a few minutes after the commencement of the slow rinse step. Specific gravity
measured the percent concentration of salt in the brine solution. It was verified that the brine solution
entering Tank B had a specific gravity of 1.06, corresponding to 8% of salt. Because neither the brine
draw flow nor the day tank usage was monitored during this study, the salt consumption could not be
46
-------
Run Length (BV)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
40
35 -
4=
§ 20 -
o
O 15 -
Run Length Study 1
Combined Effluent
(July 28-30, 2005)
- 15
- 10
20
Field analysis using test kits
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
System Throughput (gal)
Run Length (BV)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
20 H ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' r 20
O) j r-
n. 15 -
c
o
I
a 10
o
o
3 5
o
Run Length Study 3
Vessel A Effluent
(December 7-8, 2005)
- 15
- 10
- 5
o
O
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
System Throughput (gal)
Run Length (BV)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
20 H ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' r 20
o
%
is
o
o
3 5
o
20
.15-
o
?
£
10 -
| 5H
Run Length Study 2
Vessel A Effluent
(August 16-17, 2005)
h 15
MO
- 5
o
O
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
System Through! (gal)
Run Length (BV)
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Run Length Study 3
Vessel B Effluent
(December 7-8, 2005)
- 15
20
- 10
E.
c
o
£
i
3
5!
o
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
System Throughput (gal)
Figure 4-18. Total Arsenic and Nitrate Breakthrough Curves from Run Length Studies
-------
Run Length (BV)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
500 -I— ' ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1—r 9.0
400
300
u>
5-
I 20°
100
Vessel A Effluent
(December 7-8, 2005)
Total Alkalinity
-pH
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
System Throughput (gal)
Run Length (BV)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
500 H ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '—r 9.0
0400
O
300 -
5-
'
200 -
S 100
o
Vessel B Effluent
(December 7-8, 2005)
Total Alkalinity
-pH
- 8.0
- 7.0
- 6.0
5.0
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
System Throughput (gal)
30
Run Length (BV)
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Vessel A Effluent
(Deceirtoer 7-8, 2005)
-15 =!
20
0
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
System Throughput (gal)
Run Length (BV)
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
30
_ 25 -
o
1
20 -
15 -
f
10 -
5 -
Vessel B Effluent
(December 7-8, 2005)
-V
-SO4
20
- 15
- 10
- 5
8
6
o
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
System Throughput (gal)
Figure 4-19. Total Alkalinity, pH, Sulfate, and Vanadium Breakthrough Curves from Run Length Study 3
(December 7 through 8, 2005)
-------
Vessel B Regeneration (07/30/05)
1.100
1.080 -
1.060 -
4,500
2
0
1.040 -
1.020 -
1.000
0.980 -
0.960
90 100 110 120 130
Source: Kinetico
Figure 4-20. Tank B Regeneration Curve
verified. Conductivity of the eluent exceeded the meter range during the brine draw, dropped rapidly
during the slow rinse, and then leveled off at about 1,200 (is after about 65 min into the regeneration. The
data suggested that the slow rinse and fast rinse time could be significantly reduced to minimize the
volume of water used and wastewater generated. While the slow rinse time was unchanged, the fast rinse
time was adjusted to 6 min on September 19, 2005.
4.5.3.2 Regeneration Study 2 (September 22, 2005)
Regeneration Curves. Figures 4-21 and 4-22 present the concentrations of total arsenic, nitrate, sulfate,
TDS, and pH in the eluent from the regeneration of both Tanks A and B on September 22, 2005. These
regeneration curves were typical of an IX system and similar to those observed previously (Wang et al.,
2002). The TDS concentration was indicative of the salt concentration in the eluent. As the 8% of salt
solution was drawn into the tank, the arsenic, nitrate, and sulfate on the exhausted resin were displaced by
the highly concentrated chloride ions into the eluent. The highest concentrations of arsenic and sulfate
were detected after 8 to 12 min into the regeneration, slightly earlier than nitrate. The highest
concentrations measured were 14.9 mg/L of arsenic, 2.3 g/L of nitrate (as N), and 51 g/L of sulfate for
Tank A, and 18.9 mg/L of arsenic, 2.2 g/L of nitrate (as N), and 49 g/L of sulfate for Tank B. While the
nitrate concentration dropped to below 10 mg/L towards the end of fast rinse, the arsenic concentration
was still around 35 (ig/L. Therefore, it was not surprising to detect over 10-(ig/L arsenic leakage during
the early stage of the subsequent service run. Extending the fast rinse time to 15 min on December 5,
2005, did not appear to resolve the problem because the arsenic leakage continued as much as 52,000 gal
(or 70 BV), approximately 3 to 4 hr into the service run.
49
-------
Vessel A Regeneration (09/22/05)
,000
Brine Draw
(32 min)
Slow Rinse + Fast Rinse
(64 min + 6 min)
100
80
- 60
OT
O
0 10 20
30 40 50 60
Time (min)
70 80 90 100
60,000
Vessel B Regeneration (09/22/05)
Slow Rinse + Fast Rinse
(64 min + 6 min)
- 80
- 60 -
100
8
40
- 20
0 10 20 30
40 50 60
Time (min)
70 80 90 100
Figure 4-21. Tanks A and B Regeneration Curves of Arsenic, Nitrate, and Sulfate
50
-------
Vessel A Regeneration (09/22/05)
Slow Rinse + Fast Rinse
(64 min + 6 min)
- 80
- 60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
100
V)
Q
- 40
- 20
Vessel B Regeneration (09/22/05)
Slow Rinse + Fast Rinse
(64 min + 6 min)
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
- 80
- 60 _
2!
OT
Q
Figure 4-22. Tanks A and B Regeneration Curves of TDS and pH
51
-------
As shown in Figure 4-22, the pH value of the eluent was close to neutral (i.e., 7.5) at the beginning of the
regeneration cycle but rapidly rose to close to 9.0 during the brine draw, presumably due to the release of
bicarbonate ions from the resin. The pH value dropped to between 5.5 to 6.0 by the end of fast rinse due
to removal of bicarbonates by the freshly regenerated resin. This is consistent with that observed in the
above-mentioned run length studies and the treatment plant sampling during the six-month operation
period.
Regeneration Flowrate. As part of the September 22, 2005 regeneration study, regeneration flowrates
were monitored during the regeneration of each tank and plotted in Figure 4-23. Due to concerns over the
accuracy of the flowrate readings from a floater-type rotameter installed on the waste discharge line,
readings of the totalizer located upstream of the Venturi eductor also were recorded every 1 to 2 min for
flowrate calculations. Because the totalizer did not register the volume of the saturated brine drawn by
the eductor, the brine draw flowrates shown in Figure 4-23 were lower than the actual values. For Tank
A, flowrates varied from 22 to 29 gpm for brine draw, 22 to 28 gpm for slow rinse, and 56 to 75 gpm for
fast rinse. As a result, a total of 802, 1,519, and 383 gal of wastewater was produced from each step,
corresponding to an average flowrate of 25, 24, and 64 gpm, respectively. Adding the volume of the
saturated brine (i.e., 360 gal), the average flowrate for brine draw would be 36 gpm, about 56% higher
than the design value of 23 gpm.
Regeneration Flowrate (09/22/05)
100
90 -
80 -
70 -
E 60
Q.
S
S 50 -
£
o 40 -I
30 -
20 -
10 -
0
Brine Draw
(32 min)
Slow Rinse + Fast Rinse
(64 min + 6 min)
10
20
30
* Higher flowrate for Vessel B caused by
inclusion of water used to fill salt saturator
40 50 60
Time (min)
70
80
90
100
Figure 4-23. Regeneration Flowrate
For Tank B, the flowrates were similar to those of Tank A except for the brine draw. A total of 1,340,
1,542, and 359 gal of water was used, corresponding to an average flowrate of 42, 24, and 60 gpm,
respectively. The higher brine draw flowrates for Tank B were caused inadvertently by the chain of
events described below. The low-level sensor in the brine day tank was triggered during the Tank B
regeneration so that the brine transfer pump was turned on to transfer brine from the salt saturator to refill
the day tank. Meanwhile, the level sensor in the salt saturator also reached a low level so that it called for
water to make up more brine solution. The water filling the salt saturator was registered on the same
52
-------
totalizer used for flowrate measurements, causing the seemly higher water usage and flowrates during the
Tank B regeneration.
Saturated Brine Usage. As shown in Table 4-8, approximately 360 gal of saturated brine (i.e., 730 Ib of
salt) was used for Tank A regeneration, equivalent to 14.6 Ib of salt/ft3 of resin. This regeneration level
was 46% higher than the designed value of 10 Ib of salt/ft3 of resin. For a throughput setpoint of 316,000
gal, the salt use is 4.6 lb/1,000 gal of water treated. The brine usage was not recorded for Tank B because
the day tank was refilled automatically in the middle of the brine draw. Although the 600-gal day tank
was sized to supply 500 gal of brine for regeneration of both tanks, it had to be refilled in the middle of
the brine draw due to the higher usage. To track the brine usage by each tank, the day tank was refilled
manually prior to the regeneration of each tank and the data are discussed in Section 4.4.2.3. To reduce
the salt usage to close to the design level of 10 lb/ft3, the brine draw time was shortened from 32 min to
25 min with the brine draw flowrate remaining unchanged on December 5, 2005. This modification
would achieve a 22% reduction in salt usage as discussed in Section 4.4.2.
4.5.3.3 Residual Sampling. Composite samples were collected from both tanks from each
regeneration step (i.e., brine draw, slow rinse, and fast rinse) on September 22 and November 15, 2005.
Analytical results of total arsenic, nitrate, and sulfate are included in Table 4-14. As expected, the
majority of arsenic, nitrate, and sulfate was eluted from the tanks during brine draw, with average
concentrations from both tanks at 6,048 ug/L, 990 mg/L, and 9,150 mg/L, respectively, for the September
22, 2005 event; and 3,480 ug/L, 1,420 mg/L, and 5,900 mg/L, respectively, for the November 15, 2005
event. These concentrations and the respective volumes of the waste stream were used to calculate the
mass of arsenic, nitrate, and sulfate recovered from the regeneration, as shown in Table 4-14. It was
estimated that 56.0 g of total arsenic, 9.7 kg of nitrate, and 81.9 kg of sulfate were recovered and
discharged to the sewer in the September 22, 2005 event and 31.0 g of total arsenic, 12.6 kg of nitrate,
and 51.1 kg of sulfate in the November 15, 2005 event. Assuming 6,100 and 6,650 gal of wastewater
were produced for the two events (see Table 4-8), the average concentrations of arsenic, nitrate, and
sulfate in the waste stream would be 2.4 mg/L, 0.42 g/L, and 3.55 g/L, respectively, for the September 22,
2005 event, and 1.2 mg/L, 0.5 g/L, and 2.03 g/L, respectively, for the November 15, 2005 event.
The percent recovery of arsenic, nitrate, and sulfate from regeneration was calculated using Equation (3):
%R = Mmcovered IMremoved x 100% (3)
where:
%R = percent recovery
Mrecovered = mass of arsenic, nitrate, or sulfate in regenerant waste (mg or g)
^removed = mass ofarsenic, nitrate, or sulfate removed from raw water (mg or g)
As shown in Table 4-14, the percent recoveries were 114 and 63% for arsenic, 99 and 130% for nitrate,
and 118 and 74% for sulfate, for the two sampling events, respectively. The percent recovery for an IX
system was reported to be 85% to 100% in the literature (Clifford, 1999). More data are being collected at
Fruitland to further evaluate the regeneration efficiency of the IX system.
4.5.4 Distribution System Water Sampling. The results of the distribution system sampling are
summarized in Table 4-15. The stagnation times for the first draw samples ranged from 5.8 to 12.5 hr,
which met the requirements by the EPA LCR sampling protocol (EPA, 2002).
During the baseline sampling period from December 2003 to March 2004, the old Well No. 6 was not in
service due to its higher-than-MCL nitrate concentration and the distribution system was supplied by
other wells. Well No. 6-2004 was drilled in May 2004 and put online with the IX treatment system in
53
-------
Table 4-14. Mass Balance Calculations for Total Arsenic, Nitrate, and Sulfate
Parameter
Volume of Water Treated
Concentration in Composite Brine Draw
Concentration in Composite Slow Rinse
Concentration in Composite Fast Rinse
Brine Draw Volume
Slow Rinse Volume
Fast Rinse Volume
Mass Recovered from Brine Draw
Mass Recovered from Slow Rinse
Mass Recovered from Fast Rinse
Total Mass Recovered in Regeneration Waste
Mass Removed from Raw Water*-1
Percent Recovery
Concentration in Composite Brine Draw
Concentration in Composite Slow Rinse
Concentration in Composite Fast Rinse
Brine Draw Volume
Slow Rinse Volume
Fast Rinse Volume
Mass Recovered from Brine Draw
Mass Recovered from Slow Rinse
Mass Recovered from Fast Rinse
Total Mass Recovered in Regeneration Waste
Mass Removed from Raw Water*-1
Percent Recovery
Concentration in Composite Brine Draw
Concentration in Composite Slow Rinse
Concentration in Composite Fast Rinse
Brine Draw Volume
Slow Rinse Volume
Fast Rinse Volume
Mass Recovered from Brine Draw
Mass Recovered from Slow Rinse
Mass Recovered from Fast Rinse
Total Mass Recovered in Regeneration Waste
Mass Removed from Raw Water*'
Percent Recovery
Unit
gal
09/22/05
316,000
Tank A
TankB
Total
11/15/05
314,000
Tank A
TankB
Total
Arsenic Mass Balance
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
gal
gal
gal
mg
mg
mg
mg
mg
%
6,014
293
35.0
1,149
1,519
383
26,155
1,685
51
27,890
6,082
271
35.7
1,149
1,542
359
26,450
1,582
49
28,081
6,048(a)
282(a)
35.4(a)
2,298
3,061
742
52,605
3,266
99
55,971
49,278
114
2,602
62.3
32.9
1,258
1,900
400
12,390
448
50
12,887
4,358
61.1
35.0
1,070
1,600
400
17,650
370
53
18,073
3,480(a)
61.7(a)
33.9(a)
2,328
3,500
800
30,039
818
103
30,960
48,966
63
Nitrate Mass Balance
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
gal
gal
gal
g
p
&
g
g
p
&
%
1,020
80.4
2.9
1,149
1,519
383
4,436
462
4
4,902
961
99.8
3.2
1,149
1,542
359
4,179
582
4
4,766
990(a)
90.1(a)
3.1(a)
2,298
3,061
742
8,615
1,045
9
9,669
9,772
99
1,230
22
4.4
1,258
1,900
400
5,857
158
7
6,022
1,610
16.8
3.4
1,070
1,600
400
6,520
102
5
6,627
l,420(a)
19.4(a)
3.9(a)
2,328
3,500
800
12,377
260
12
12,649
9,710
130
Sulfate Mass Balance
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
gal
gal
gal
p
&
g
g
p
6
g
%
9,200
318
3.6
1,149
1,519
383
40,010
1,828
5
41,844
9,100
81
1.1
1,149
1,542
359
39,576
473
1
40,050
9,150(a)
199(a)
2.4(a)
2,298
3,061
742
79,586
2,301
7
81,894
69,371
118
4,300
26
4.7
1,258
1,900
400
20,475
187
7
20,669
7,500
12.7
<1
1,070
1,600
400
30,375
77
1
30,452
5,900(a)
19.4(a)
2.6(a)
2,328
3,500
800
50,849
264
8
51,121
68,932
74
(a) Average of two tanks.
(b) Calculated using average concentrations in raw and treated water.
54
-------
Table 4-15. Summary of Distribution System Sampling Results for City of Fruitland
ID
Sample Type
Flushed
/1st Draw
42
01
6
z
BL1
BL2
BL3
BL4
Sampling Date
12/08/03
01/06/04
02/02/04
03/02/04
Average
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
06/29/05
08/03/05
08/24/05
09/21/05
10/26/05
11/30/05
12/15/05
Average
DS1
Non-Residence
1st Draw
Stagnation Time (hr)
NA
NA
NA
10.3
10.8
9.7
NA
NA
NA
12.5
NA
o.
7.7
7.3
7.4
7.6
7.6
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.9
7.8
'c
264
292
258
279
273
383
374
427
396
440
431
462
416
3.
46.1
55.8
61.0
66.2
57.3
39.9
44.0
2.7
1.1
4.0
2.8
5.6
3.2
s.
<25
<25
198
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
G
1.1
1.0
0.5
1.1
0.9
13.2
22.4
19.1
22.8
19.1
17.8
23.0
19.6
D-
9.5
10.4
10.9
6.7
9.4
0.8
1.0
0.6
0.3
1.5
0.5
0.5
0.8
3
O
159
148
44.9
108
115
21.3
22.5
9.7
11.5
22.0
33.1
15.6
19.4
o"
6.9
7.4
7.9
8.9
7.8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
June 2005. Since then, the monthly distribution sampling resumed at the same locations to evalute any
impacts of the treatment system on the distribution water quality. However, due to the use of a new well,
different water quality of the supply wells also could be a contributing factor. For example, the average
concentrations of nitrate, alkanility, and total Mn were lower in the baseline samples than those measured
at inlet to the IX system (Tables 4-12 and 13), i.e., 7.4 mg/L (as N), 278 mg/L (as CaCO3), and 0.2 ng/L
in the baseline flushed samples vs. 9.5 mg/L (as N), 386 mg/L (as CaCO3), and 23 |o,g/L in the well
samples. In addition, the average concentration of total As was higher (i.e., 65 |o,g/L) in the baseline
samples vs. 42 |o,g/L in the well samples.
During the six-month operation period, the arsenic levels in the distribution sytem were significantly
reduced to below the MCL when the IX system operated normally. Higher-than-MCL concentrations
were measured during the first two sampling events (June 29 and August 3, 2005) when the system
experienced operational problems. The November 30, 2005, arsenic data were below 10 |o,g/L at DS1 and
DS3 locations, reflecting the low arsenic concentration in the plant effluent. However, the DS2 samples
contained 16.3 and 18.7 |o,g/L of arsenic in the first draw and flushed samples, respectively. It was
unclear if it was due to a sampling error or if the DS2 location received water from other sources at the
time of sampling. Nitrate was only analyzed on the Decemer 15, 2005, samples, which showed <0.05 to
4.0 mg/L of nitrate (as N).
No significant changes in the pH values were observed in the distribution samples. The pH values ranged
from 7.3 to 7.7 in the baseline samples and 7.4 to 7.9 after the system was placed online. On two
occasions when the plant effluent had a pH value below 7 (i.e., pH 6.0 on July 6 and pH 6.8 on August
31, 2005), distribution samples were not collected. Therefore, there was lack of evidence on whether the
low pH water produced by the freshly regenerated resin would impact the the pH in the distribution
system. Alkalinity levels ranged from 200 to 304 mg/L and averaged 270 mg/L (as CaCO3) in the
baseline samples. After the system was in place, they ranged from 264 to 462 mg/L (as CaCO3) with an
average of 387 mg/L (as CaCO3). This higher alkalinity was likely attibuted to the different water
quality of the supply wells as discussed above. The freshly regenerated IX system would reduce the
alkalinity for a short period of time due to exchange of bicarbonates onto the resin. Unfortunately, no
distribution samples were taken at the time when the abnormally low alkalinity occurred in the plant
effluent on July 6, August 10, and August 31, 2005.
Reduction in lead and copper levels was observed in the first draw samples at DS1 and DS2 locations.
For example, previously, the average lead concentrations were 9.4, 8.3, and 0.5 |o,g/L in the first draw
samples at DS1, DS2, and DS3, respectively; they were reduced to 0.8, 0.8, and 0.3 |o,g/L afterwards. The
average copper concentrations were 115, 231, and 156 |o,g/L in the baseline samples and reduced to 19,
74, and 61 |o,g/L afterwards. Therefore, the lead and copper levels in the distribution system appeared to
be lowered by the operation of the IX system.
4.6 System Cost
The cost of the system was evaluated based on the capital cost per gpm (or gpd) of design capacity and
the O&M cost per 1,000 gal of water treated. This required the tracking of the capital cost for the
treatment equipment, engineering, and installation and the O&M cost for salt supply, electricity
consumption, and labor. The cost associated with the new building, sanitary sewer connection, and other
discharge-related infrastructure was not included in the capital cost because it was out of the scope of the
demonstration project, and was funded separately by the City of Fruitland.
4.6.1 Capital Cost. The capital investment for the Fruitland IX system was $286,388, which
included $173,195 for equipment, $35,619 for site engineering, and $77,574 for installation. Table 4-16
56
-------
presents the cost breakdowns of the capital cost provided by the vendor. The equipment cost included the
cost for the IX resin, filter skid, tanks, brine system, pre-filters, air compressor, instrumentation and
controls, engineering subcontractor, labor, and system warranty. The system warranty covered repairs
and/or replacement of any equipment or installation workmanship for a period of 12 months after system
startup. The equipment cost was 61% of the total capital investment.
Table 4-16. Cost Breakdowns of Capital Investment for Fruitland IX System
Description
Quantity
Cost
% of Capital
Investment Cost
Equipment Cost
IX Resin, Filter Skid, and Vessels
Brine System
Pre-treatment Filters
Air Compressor
Instrumentation & Controls
Engineering Subcontractor
Labor
Warranty
Equipment Total
-
-
-
$63,673
$35,388
$3,540
$1,295
$11,524
$8,000
$32,870
$16,905
$173,195
-
-
-
-
-
-
61%
Engineering Cost
Labor
Engineering Total
-
-
$35,619
$35,619
-
12%
Installation Cost
Labor
Travel
Subcontractor
Installation Total
Total Capital Investment
-
-
-
-
-
$11,524
$4,095
$61,955
$77,574
$286,388
-
-
-
27%
100%
The site engineering cost included the cost for preparing a process design report and the required
engineering plans, including a general arrangement drawing, P&IDs, inter-connecting piping layouts, tank
fill details, a schematic of the PLC panel, an electrical on-line diagram, and other associated drawings.
After being certified and stamped by an Idaho-registered professional engineer (PE), the plans were
submitted to IDEQ for permit review and approval. The engineering cost was 12% of the total capital
investment.
The installation cost included the cost for labor and materials for system unloading and anchoring,
plumbing, and mechanical and electrical connections (see Section 4.3). The installation cost was 27% of
the total capital investment.
The total capital cost of $286,388 was normalized to the system's rated capacity of 250 gpm (360,000
gpd), which resulted in $1,146 per gpm ($0.80 per gpd). The capital cost also was converted to an
annualized cost of $27,032/yr using a capital recovery factor of 0.09439 based on a 7% interest rate and a
20-year return. Assuming that the system operated 24 hr/day, 7 day/wk at the design flowrate of 250 gpm
to produce 131 million gal of water per year, the unit capital cost would be $0.21/1,000 gal. In fact, the
system operated an average of 22 hr/day at 165 gpm (see Table 4-6), producing 35.9 million gal of water
during the six-month period. At this reduced rate of operation, the unit capital cost increased to
$0.38/1,000 gal.
57
-------
The City of Fruitland constructed an addition to their existing pump house to house the IX system. The
17-ft tall addition covered 360 ft2 of floor space with a wood frame and steel siding and roofing, and a
roll-up door. The total cost for the material and electrical was approximately $18,000.
4.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost. The O&M cost included primarily the cost associated
with salt supply, electricity consumption, and labor, as summarized in Table 4-17. Morton solar salt was
used to prepare brine solution for the resin regeneration. Over the six-month period, a total of 172,390 Ib
of salt was consumed to treat 35,946,000 gal of water. The salt delivery charge totaled $18,313 for the
same period which included fuel surcharges of $50 per delivery starting October 2005. The average salt
use was 4.80 lb/1,000 gal, which corresponded to a salt cost of $0.51/1,000 gal (Table 4-17). However,
this higher-than-expected salt usage was caused by improper flow control of the brine draw as discussed
in Section 4.4.2. If the target salt usage of 3.16 lb/1,000 gal were achieved, the salt cost would have been
reduced to $0.35/1,000 gal. Incremental electricity consumption associated with the IX system was not
available, but assumed to be minimal. The actual power usage for operating the entire plant was obtained
from utility bills and used to estimate the electricity cost at $0.08/1,000 gal of water treated. The routine,
non-demonstration related labor activities consumed about 30 min/day, as noted in Section 4.4.4. Based
on this time commitment and a labor rate of $21/hr, the labor cost was estimated at $0.04/1,000 gal of
water treated. In sum, the total O&M cost was approximately $0.63/1,000 gal based on the actual salt
usage and $0.47/1,000 gal based on the target salt usage.
Table 4-17. O&M Cost for Fruitland, ID Treatment System
Cost Category
Volume Processed (1,000 gal)
Value
35,946
Assumptions
From June 14 through December 16, 2005
Salt Usage
Salt Unit Price ($/lb)
Total Salt Usage (Ib)
Salt Use (lb/1,000 gal)
Total Salt Cost ($)
Unit Salt Use Cost ($/l,000 gal)
0.11
172,390
4.80
18,313
0.51
Unit price increased progressively from $0.095
to $0. 10 and $0. 1 1 per pound
Quantity delivered and invoiced
Based on actual salt usage
Based on total invoiced amounts, including fuel
surcharges.
Based on target salt usage of 3 . 16 lb/1,000 gal,
the salt cost would be $0.35/1,000 gal
Electricity Consumption
Power Use ($/l,000 gal)
0.08
Based on utility bills for entire treatment plant.
Labor
Average Weekly Labor Hours (hr)
Total Labor Hours (hr)
Total Labor Cost ($)
Labor Cost ($/l,000 gal)
Total O&M Cost ($/l,000 gal)
2.5
72
1,512
0.04
0.63
30 min/day; 5 day/wk
Including 1 hr for replacing bag filters each
time for 5 times
Labor rate = $2 1/hr
58
-------
5.0 REFERENCES
Battelle. 2003. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Evaluation of Arsenic Removal Technology.
Prepared under Contract No. 68-C-00-185, Task Order No. 0019, for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
Battelle. 2004. Final System Performance Evaluation Study Plan: U.S. EPA Demonstration of Arsenic
Removal Technology a Fruitland, ID. Prepared under Contract No. 68-C-00-185, Task Order No.
0019, for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
Chen, A.S.C., L. Wang, J. Oxenham, and W. Condit. 2004. Capital Costs of Arsenic Removal
Technologies: U.S. EPA Arsenic Removal Technology Demonstration Program Round 1.
EPA/600/R-04/201. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management
Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
Clifford, D.A. 1999. "Ion Exchange and Inorganic Adsorption." Chapter 9 in R. Letterman (ed.), Water
Quality and Treatment Fifth Edition. McGraw Hill, Inc., New York, NY.
Clifford, D.A., C. C. Lin, L. L. Horng and J. V. Boegel. 1987. Nitrate Removal from Drinking Water in
Glendale, Arizona, EPA/600/52-86/107, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk
Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
Clifford, D.A, Ghurye G., Tripp A.R. 2003. Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water Using
Ion-Exchange with Spent Brine Recycling. J. AWWA 95(6): 119-130.
Clifford, D.A. 2006. Technical Manuscript Review Comments on the Draft Arsenic Removal from
Drinking Water by Ion Exchange, U.S. EPA Demonstration Project at Fruitland, ID. Six-Month
Evaluation Report.
Edwards, M., S. Patel, L. McNeill, H. Chen, M. Frey, A.D. Eaton, R.C. Antweiler, and H.E. Taylor.
1998. "Considerations in As Analysis and Speciation." J. AWWA, 90(03): 103-113.
EPA. 2003. Minor Clarification of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for Arsenic. Federal
Register, 40CFRPart 141. March 25.
EPA. 2002. Lead and Copper Monitoring and Reporting Guidance for Public Water Systems.
EPA/816/R-02/009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
EPA. 2001. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Arsenic and Clarifications to Compliance
and New Source Contaminants Monitoring. Federal Register, 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142.
Ghurye, G.L., D.A. Clifford, and A.R. Tripp. 1999. "Combined Arsenic and Nitrate Removal by Ion
Exchange." JAWWA, 97(10): 85-96.
Outer, G. A. 1981. Removal of Nitrate from Contaminated Water Supplies for Public Use, U.S. EPA
Grant No. R-805900-01-02-03, Final Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National
Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
59
-------
Kinetico. 2004. Operation and Maintenance Manual, IX-248-As/N Arsenic-Nitrate Removal System,
The City of Fruitland, Idaho.
Wang, L., W. Condit, and A.S,C, Chen. 2004. Technology Selection and System Design: U.S. EPA
Arsenic Removal Technology Demonstration Program Round 1. EPA/600/R-05/001. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
OH.
Wang , L., A.S.C. Chen, T.J. Sorg, and K.A. Fields. 2002. "Field Evaluation of As Removal by IX and
AA". JAWWA,94(4):161-173.
60
-------
APPENDIX A
OPERATIONAL DATA
-------
US EPA Arsenic Demonstration Project at Fruitland, ID - Daily System Operation and Operation Labor Log Sheet
1
2
3
4
5
6
Date
06/14/05
06/15/05
06/16/05
06/17/05
06/20/05
06/21/05
06/22/05
06/23/05
06/27/05
06/28/05
06/29/05
06/30/05
07/01/05
07/05/05
07/06/05
07/07/05
07/08/05
07/11/05
07/12/05
07/13/05
07/14/05
07/15/05
07/18/05
07/19/05
07/20/05
07/21/05
07/22/05
Pump House
Opt.
Hours
hr
NA
22.4
24.2
15.5
56.4
22.0
21.1
16.2
88.1
22.0
8.4
20.6
21.4
93.2
25.0
24.0
20.4
66.0
23.9
23.1
24.3
24.0
72.0
23.5
23.5
23.7
23.7
Cum.
Hours
hr
NA
22.4
46.6
62.1
118.5
140.5
161.6
177.8
265.9
287.9
296.3
316.9
338.3
431.5
456.5
480.5
500.9
566.9
590.8
613.9
638.2
662.2
734.2
757.7
781.2
804.9
828.6
Master
Flow
Meter
kgal
80,712
80,866
81,067
81,197
81,666
81,838
82,031
82,195
83,028
83,237
83,315
83,516
83,704
84,620
84,851
85,085
85,288
85,908
86,144
86,386
86,632
86,869
87,594
87,830
88,067
88,307
88,545
Treated
Volume
kgal
NA
154
201
130
469
172
193
164
833
209
78
201
188
916
231
234
203
620
236
242
246
237
725
236
237
240
238
Product Water Flow Meter
Product
Water
Flowrate
gpm
130
144
73
142
142
142
170
171
167
155
156
160
150
167
165
122
164
163
168
170
170
168
164
167
169
167
167
Product
Water
Flow
Totalizer
kgal
111
37
NA
122
341
100
58
212
98
72
147
127
77
34
24
18
211
109
99
94
94
85
70
62
52
47
43
BV
Treated
BV
0
0
NA
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
System Pressures
Combined
System
Inlet
Pressure
(IN)
psig
74
72
84
73
64
65
52
62
63
62
64
62
60
62
60
70
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
58
Tank A
Outlet
Pressure
(TA)
psig
65
64
78
68
62
62
52
58
55
58
56
56
54
56
54
60
52
54
50
48
48
50
50
50
50
50
50
TankB
Outlet
Pressure
(TB)
psig
62
62
In Regen
65
70
70
62
58
56
58
58
56
52
54
54
In Regen
52
54
50
48
48
50
48
48
50
50
50
Product
Water
Pressure
(TT)
psig
44
44
42
46
44
44
46
46
45
50
48
46
44
46
46
40
44
46
46
45
44
48
42
44
48
48
48
Regeneration
Regen.
Counter
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
13
14
15
15
18
19
20
21
22
25
26
27
28
29
Salt
Delivered
Ib
3,945
3,950
5,000
8,860
6,470
Cumulative
Salt
Delivered
Ib
3,945
7,895
12,895
21,755
28,225
-------
US EPA Arsenic Demonstration Project at Fruitland, ID - Daily System Operation and Operation Labor Log Sheet (Continued)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Date
07/25/05
07/26/05
07/27/05
07/28/05
07/29/05
08/01/05
08/02/05
08/03/05
08/04/05
08/05/05
08/08/05
08/09/05
08/10/05
08/11/05
08/12/05
08/15/05
08/16/05
08/17/05
08/18/05
08/19/05
08/22/05
08/23/05
08/24/05
08/25/05
08/26/05
08/29/05
08/30/05
08/31/05
09/01/05
09/02/05
09/06/05
09/07/05
09/08/05
09/09/05
Pump House
Opt.
Hours
hr
69.5
23.2
23.6
24.0
49.9
42.8
23.3
23.2
24.4
21.0
72.0
23.8
23.9
22.0
23.8
69.5
23.5
24.4
21.8
23.7
68.9
22.8
23.3
22.7
23.2
70.5
22.7
23.3
23.0
23.3
87.4
23.1
22.1
21.5
Cum.
Hours
hr
898.1
921.3
944.9
968.9
1018.8
1061.6
1084.9
1108.1
1132.5
1153.5
1225.5
1249.3
1273.2
1295.2
1319.0
1388.5
1412.0
1436.4
1458.2
1481.9
1550.8
1573.6
1596.9
1619.6
1642.8
1713.3
1736.0
1759.3
1782.3
1805.6
1893.0
1916.1
1938.2
1959.7
Master
Flow
Meter
kgal
89,225
89,454
89,678
89,901
90,139
90,842
91,077
NM
91,543
91,760
92,387
92,631
92,882
93,111
93,349
93,984
94,223
94,477
94,699
94,939
95,626
95,846
96,078
96,294
96,520
97,179
97,411
97,652
97,893
98,131
99,035
99,267
99,487
99,696
Treated
Volume
kgal
680
229
224
223
238
703
235
NA
466
217
627
244
251
229
238
635
239
254
222
240
687
220
232
216
226
659
232
241
241
238
904
232
220
209
Product Water Flow Meter
Product
Water
Flow rate
gpm
129
127
154
160
165
161
159
161
163
155
138
178
138
168
163
109
175
173
133
167
161
161
158
162
158
147
170
139
170
169
170
161
130
157
Product
Water
Flow
Totalizer
kgal
2
218
197
175
168
90
314
534
124
332
232
115
4
223
103
7
234
120
336
215
169
37
259
117
332
258
128
5
237
114
274
145
3
265
BV
Treated
BV
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
System Pressures
Combined
System
Inlet
Pressure
(IN)
psig
66
66
60
58
62
58
58
58
58
58
52
58
68
58
58
62
60
58
70
60
60
60
60
60
58
58
58
70
58
58
58
59
68
58
Tank A
Outlet
Pressure
(TA)
psig
50
In Regen
50
50
52
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
In Regen
60
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
TankB
Outlet
Pressure
(TB)
psig
In Regen
48
50
48
52
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
In Regen
50
50
In Regen
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
In Regen
50
50
50
50
In Regen
50
Product
Water
Pressure
(TT)
psig
44
44
46
42
46
48
46
46
46
46
42
44
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
48
46
48
46
46
44
46
46
48
48
48
48
Regeneration
Regen.
Counter
32
33
33
34
35
37
37
37
38
38
40
41
42
42
43
45
45
46
47
47
49
50
50
51
51
53
54
55
55
56
58
59
60
60
Salt
Delivered
Ib
9,035
8,970
3,985
5,485
6,010
3,205
8,425
8,025
5,860
Cumulative
Salt
Delivered
Ib
37,260
46,230
50,215
55,700
61,710
64,915
73,340
81,365
87,225
-------
US EPA Arsenic Demonstration Project at Fruitland, ID - Daily System Operation and Operation Labor Log Sheet (Continued)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Date
09/12/05
09/13/05
09/14/05
09/15/05
09/16/05
09/19/05
09/20/05
09/21/05
09/22/05
09/23/05
09/26/05
09/27/05
09/28/05
09/29/05
09/30/05
10/03/05
10/04/05
10/05/05
10/06/05
10/07/05
10/11/05
10/12/05
10/13/05
10/14/05
10/17/05
10/18/05
10/19/05
10/20/05
10/21/05
10/24/05
10/25/05
10/26/05
10/27/05
10/28/05
Pump House
Opt.
Hours
hr
65.9
22.9
18.7
27.8
21.7
61.9
21.8
22.2
16.8
22.3
73.9
24.3
14.3
11.9
16.5
51.4
20.9
18.8
24.1
20.6
69.7
17.1
14.0
5.3
39.3
16.2
14.8
17.7
4.0
38.7
18.4
21.3
18.9
18.2
Cum.
Hours
hr
2025.6
2048.5
2067.2
2095.0
2116.7
2178.6
2200.4
2222.6
2239.4
2261.7
2335.6
2359.9
2374.2
2386.1
2402.6
2454.0
2474.9
2493.7
2517.8
2538.4
2608.1
2625.2
2639.2
2644.5
2683.8
2700.0
2714.8
2732.5
2736.5
2775.2
2793.6
2814.9
2833.8
2852.0
Master
Flow
Meter
kgal
100,303
100,547
100,802
101,025
101,255
101,904
102,129
102,356
102,534
102,760
103,511
103,757
103,906
104,018
104,193
104,753
104,943
105,133
105,367
105,566
106,296
106,475
106,624
106,678
107,094
107,264
107,415
107,630
107,640
108,050
108,243
108,463
108,661
108,846
Treated
Volume
kgal
607
244
255
223
230
649
225
227
178
226
751
246
149
112
175
560
190
190
234
199
730
179
149
54
416
170
151
215
10
410
193
220
198
185
Product Water Flow Meter
Product
Water
Flowrate
gpm
140
175
171
168
165
175
170
170
170
164
170
170
170
170
174
167
125
165
165
147
167
173
173
179
170
169
170
170
170
145
170
164
173
168
Product
Water
Flow
Totalizer
kgal
81
314
209
73
294
216
106
130
300
187
264
172
314
94
261
127
NA
179
74
262
302
143
286
11
80
244
59
239
280
108
192
196
58
235
BV
Treated
BV
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
In Regen
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
System Pressures
Combined
System
Inlet
Pressure
(IN)
psig
54
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
68
58
58
58
58
58
59
58
58
59
59
59
59
68
58
59
60
59
Tank A
Outlet
Pressure
(TA)
psig
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
49
50
In Regen
50
50
50
50
50
50
48
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
TankB
Outlet
Pressure
(TB)
psig
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
49
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
48
50
50
50
50
50
In Regen
50
50
50
50
Product
Water
Pressure
(TT)
psig
46
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
46
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
50
44
46
46
46
44
Regeneration
Regen.
Counter
62
62
63
64
64
66
67
68
68
69
71
72
72
73
73
75
76
76
77
77
79
80
80
80
82
82
83
83
83
85
85
86
87
87
Salt
Delivered
Ib
5,330
6,050
7,240
6,510
6,020
6,040
5,965
Cumulative
Salt
Delivered
Ib
92,555
98,605
105,845
112,355
118,375
124,415
130,380
-------
US EPA Arsenic Demonstration Project at Fruitland, ID - Daily System Operation and Operation Labor Log Sheet (Continued)
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Date
10/31/05
11/01/05
11/02/05
11/03/05
11/04/05
11/07/05
11/08/05
11/09/05
11/10/05
11/11/05
11/14/05
11/15/05
11/16/05
11/17/05
11/18/05
11/21/05
11/22/05
11/23/05
11/28/05
11/29/05
11/30/05
12/01/05
12/05/05
12/06/05
12/07/05
12/08/05
12/09/05
12/12/05
12/13/05
12/14/05
12/15/05
12/16/05
Pump House
Opt.
Hours
hr
58.1
22.2
22.0
20.4
22.0
54.7
18.8
17.7
7.8
20.5
37.5
10.5
15.0
18.5
15.7
42.7
12.0
21.8
62.1
17.3
18.5
15.0
64.1
13.6
13.8
23.3
22.9
26.2
9.1
11.1
23.8
24.7
Cum.
Hours
hr
2910.1
2932.3
2954.3
2974.7
2996.7
3051.4
3070.2
3087.9
3095.7
3116.2
3153.7
3164.2
3179.2
3197.7
3213.4
3256.1
3268.1
3289.9
3352.0
3369.3
3387.8
3402.8
3466.9
3480.5
3494.3
3517.6
3540.5
3566.7
3575.8
3586.9
3610.7
3635.4
Master
Flow
Meter
kgal
109,445
109,669
109,898
110,102
110,323
110,881
111,069
111,248
111,342
111,537
111,916
112,024
112,169
112,350
112,509
112,935
113,102
113,270
113,890
114,062
114,241
114,388
115,021
115,151
115,287
115,512
115,735
115,989
116,078
116,188
116,418
116,658
Treated
Volume
kgal
599
224
229
204
221
558
188
179
94
195
379
108
145
181
159
426
167
168
620
172
179
147
633
130
136
225
223
254
89
110
230
240
Product Water Flow Meter
Product
Water
Flowrate
gpm
165
168
165
166
138
168
161
161
171
170
160
161
160
163
169
160
160
160
170
159
158
159
158
168
167
151
151
128
158
160
150
152
Product
Water
Flow
Totalizer
kgal
148
33
252
118
NA
203
54
224
314
178
212
314
125
302
168
199
30
190
135
299
103
283
233
32
102
193
83
NA
85
190
86
294
BV
Treated
BV
0
0
0
0
In Regen
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
In Regen
0
0
0
0
System Pressures
Combined
System
Inlet
Pressure
(IN)
psig
58
58
58
58
68
67
59
59
59
58
49
49
49
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
Tank A
Outlet
Pressure
(TA)
psig
50
50
50
50
In Regen
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
In Regen
50
50
50
50
TankB
Outlet
Pressure
(TB)
psig
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Product
Water
Pressure
(TT)
psig
44
44
46
46
46
49
49
49
44
46
49
44
46
48
44
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
48
49
48
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
Regeneration
Regen.
Counter
89
90
90
91
92
93
94
94
94
95
96
96
97
97
98
99
100
100
102
102
103
103
105
106
107
107
108
109
109
109
110
110
Salt
Delivered
Ib
6,000
5,955
5,975
6,005
5,965
5,975
6,135
Cumulative
Salt
Delivered
Ib
136,380
142,335
148,310
154,315
160,280
166,255
172,390
System regenerates every
NM = Not measured
NA = Not available
316,000 gallons.
-------
APPENDIX B
ANALYTICAL DATA
-------
Analytical Results from Long-Term Sampling at Fruitland, ID
Sampling Date
Sampling Location
Parameter Unit
Water Treated
Bed Volume
Alkalinity (as CaCO3)
Fluoride
Sulfate
Nitrate (as N)
Orthophosphate (as PO4)
Total P (as PO4)
Silica (as SiO2)
Turbidity
TDS
pH
Temperature
DO
ORP
Total Hardness (as CaCO3)
Ca Hardness
Mg Hardness
As (total)
As (soluble)
As (particulate)
As (III)
As(V)
Fe (total)
Fe (soluble)
Mn (total)
Mn (soluble)
U (total)
U (soluble)
V (total)
V (soluble)
Mo (total)
Mo (soluble)
Kgal
BV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
NTU
mg/L
S.U.
UC
mg/L
mV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
M9/L
LJg/L
Hg/L
ng/L
Ljg/L
M9/L
Ljg/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
06/15/05
IN
-
-
484
0.5
52
10.0
<0.05
-
57.8
0.1
568
7.6
15.2
2.6
212
303
180
123
49.0
45.5
3.5
2.1
43.4
<25
<25
11.8
10.0
22.6
19.5
53.0
45.2
14.5
14.0
TT
37
49
484
0.5
<1
4.3
<0.05
-
57.2
<0.1
542
7.7
15.1
3.0
172
252
150
101
0.7
0.9
<0.1
0.8
<0.1
<25
<25
9.9
10.4
<0.1
<0.1
2.1
2.1
0.2
0.2
06/23/05'°''"
IN
-
-
374
-
59
10.3
<0.05
-
57.7
1.4
-
7.6
15.0
4.0
192
-
-
-
37.5
-
-
-
-
211
-
15.4
-
19.1
-
39.8
-
12.8
-
TA
TB
212
283
387
-
57
9.4
<0.05
-
57.3
0.1
-
7.5
15.2
3.4
204
-
-
-
38.2
-
-
-
-
<25
-
13.9
-
<0.1
-
0.9
-
8.2
-
387
-
59
9.8
<0.05
-
58.0
0.4
-
7.2
15.3
3.5
199
-
-
-
38.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
14.3
-
<0.1
-
1.1
-
10.7
-
06/29/05""
IN
-
-
396
0.7
58
10.1
0.2
-
59.3
0.7
-
7.4
14.9
2.4
225
-
-
-
38.0
-
-
-
-
<25
-
15.7
-
19.0
-
40.7
-
12.5
-
TA
TB
147
197
383
0.7
94
9.5
0.2
-
58.6
0.7
-
7.6
14.9
2.4
191
-
-
-
37.4
-
-
-
-
<25
-
14.5
-
<0.1
-
5.0
-
13.0
-
396
0.7
63
9.5
0.3
-
57.5
0.5
-
7.5
14.8
2.1
225
-
-
-
38.8
-
-
-
-
<25
-
15.1
-
<0.1
-
4.5
-
13.3
-
07/06/05
IN
-
-
396
-
73
11.2
0.1
-
58.6
0.2
-
6.7
15.2
3.6
209
-
-
-
39.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
19.4
-
20.6
-
39.2
-
12.1
-
TA
TB
29
39
176
-
<1
3.0
<0.05
-
58.4
0.2
-
6.8
15.8
2.2
180
-
-
-
3.6
-
-
-
-
<25
-
20.3
-
<0.1
-
8.4
-
<0.1
-
6
-
<1
6.6
<0.05
-
59.0
0.6
-
6.0
15.1
3.3
260
-
-
-
8.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
20.9
-
2.5
-
36.1
-
0.2
-
07/13/05
IN
-
-
387
0.5
75
9.6
<0.05
-
46.6
0.2
578
7.4
15.2
2.1
206
242
143
98.8
39.0
38.8
0.2
2.4
36.4
<25
<25
18.4
20.2
18.4
18.8
35.5
36.6
12.6
12.0
TT
94
126
286
0.5
<1
1.9
<0.05
-
48.1
<0.1
558
7.3
15.2
1.9
217
242
145
97.0
2.8
3.2
<0.1
2.4
0.8
<25
<25
19.8
20.2
<0.1
<0.1
4.2
5.7
0.3
0.2
07/20/05
IN
-
-
374
-
59
9.4
<0.05
-
55.8
0.1
-
7.5
15.4
1.9
191
-
-
-
35.4
-
-
-
-
<25
-
25.4
-
18.6
-
38.7
-
13.7
-
TA
TB
52
70
264
-
<1
2.7
<0.05
-
56.6
<0.1
-
7.8
15.3
2.2
209
-
-
-
3.1
-
-
-
-
<25
-
20.8
-
<0.1
-
5.6
-
0.3
-
114
-
<1
4.1
<0.05
-
55.5
<0.1
-
7.3
15.3
2.5
198
-
-
-
5.8
-
-
-
-
<25
-
23.3
-
<0.1
-
11.9
-
<0.1
-
08/03/05'°'
IN
-
-
378
-
61
9.3
0.1
-
56.2
<0.1
-
7.7
15.4
3.1
199
-
-
-
34.2
-
-
-
-
<25
-
23.3
-
16.6
-
35.4
-
12.2
-
TA
TB
534
714(d)
383
-
55
9.7
0.2
-
56.1
<0.1
-
7.5
15.1
1.8
227
-
-
-
41.4
-
-
-
-
<25
-
23.1
-
<0.1
-
1.1
-
0.3
-
378
-
53
9.7
0.2
-
55.5
<0.1
-
7.4
14.8
2.5
186
-
-
-
46.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
24.7
-
<0.1
-
2.1
-
0.7
-
(a) Nitrate, turbidity, and Orthophosphate analyzed outside of holding time.
(b) Vessels not properly regenerated due to wrong settings caused by power outage on 06/17/05. Problem fixed on 06/29/05 after sampling.
(c) Vendor technician on site from 7/26/05 through 7/30/05 conducting an arsenic and nitrate breakthrough study and regeneration study. Regeneration setpoint changed from 214,000 to 335,000 gal of
water treated. Brine draw time reduced from 64 to 32 min.
(d) Regeneration not started until 199,000 gal past the set point of 355,000 gal due to problem with level sensor in brine day tank.
-------
Analytical Results from Long-Term Sampling at Fruitland, ID (Continued)
Sampling Date
Sampling Location
Parameter Unit
Water Treated
Bed Volume
Alkalinity (asCaCO3)
Fluoride
Sulfate
Nitrate (as N)
Orthophosphate
(as PO4)
Total P (as PO4)
Silica (as SiO2)
Turbidity
TDS
pH
Temperature
DO
ORP
Total Hardness
(as CaCO3)
Ca Hardness
Mg Hardness
As (total)
As (soluble)
As (particulate)
As (III)
As(V)
Fe (total)
Fe (soluble)
Mn (total)
Mn (soluble)
U (total)
U (soluble)
V (total)
V (soluble)
Mo (total)
Mo (soluble)
08/10/05
IN
Kgal
BV
mg/L(a>
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L(b)
mg/L
mg/L
NTU
mg/L
S.U.
UC
mg/L
mV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
M9/L
Hg/L
LJg/L
ng/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
-
383
-
61
9.1
0.1
-
58.7
<0.1
-
7.8
15.4
3.0
216
-
-
-
40.6
-
-
-
-
<25
-
30.0
-
20.0
-
42.3
-
14.6
-
TA
TB
28
37
3
-
<1
2.5
0.1
-
58.4
<0.1
-
7.0
15.0
2.2
297
-
-
-
25.6
-
-
-
-
<25
-
25.8
-
0.3
-
16.6
-
0.2
-
3
-
<1
2.5
<0.05
-
58.6
<0.1
-
7.3
14.8
3.1
3.0
-
-
-
15.1
-
-
-
-
<25
-
26.4
-
0.2
-
15.7
-
0.1
-
08/17/05
IN
-
-
365
0.5
55
8.5
0.1
-
48.3
0.1
598
7.7
15.3
-
240
247
145
102
39.4
38.2
1.1
2.0
36.3
<25
<25
28.0
29.0
17.7
17.9
39.3
40.0
13.7
13.2
TT
120
160
361
0.5
<1
0.6
<0.05
-
45.9
<0.1
552
7.5
15.2
-
244
249
145
104
2.4
2.7
<0.1
2.1
0.5
<25
<25
26.4
27.2
<0.1
<0.1
3.0
3.4
0.1
0.1
08/24/05
IN
-
-
378
-
58
8.6
0.2
-
63.4
0.1
-
7.9
15.1
2.4
242
-
-
-
42.9
-
-
-
-
<25
-
26.5
-
19.5
-
39.7
-
12.8
-
TA
TB
259
346
440
-
<1
3.2
<0.05
-
61.6
0.1
-
7.9
14.7
2.6
235
-
-
-
1.4
-
-
-
-
<25
-
25.5
-
<0.1
-
1.4
-
0.3
-
462
-
<1
0.5
<0.05
-
63.2
0.1
-
7.9
14.9
2.6
244
-
-
-
1.1
-
-
-
-
<25
-
24.6
-
<0.1
-
1.1
-
0.1
-
08/31/05
IN
-
-
374
378
-
62
61
9.5
9.5
0.2
0.2
-
58.7
57.1
0.2
0.3
-
7.7
14.9
3.7
265
-
-
-
52.0
51.5
-
-
-
-
<25
<25
-
25.2
25.1
-
17.6
17.5
-
35.7
36.5
-
12.2
12.7
-
TA
TB
28
37
158
158
-
<1
<1
1.6
1.7
<0.05
<0.05
-
57.6
57.3
0.3
0.2
-
7.5
15.0
2.1
207
-
-
-
3.0
2.9
-
-
-
-
<25
<25
-
25.7
25.2
-
<0.1
<0.1
-
3.4
3.2
-
0.8
0.7
-
7
8
-
<1
<1
2.4
2.3
<0.05
<0.05
-
58.3
57.7
0.1
0.4
-
6.8
14.7
2.8
246
-
-
-
11.4
10.8
-
-
-
-
<25
<25
-
25.5
25.7
-
<0.1
<0.1
-
8.9
8.4
-
0.5
0.5
-
09/07/05
IN
-
-
374
-
60
8.9
0.3
-
57.5
0.2
-
7.8
15.1
3.8
247
-
-
-
60.0
-
-
-
-
<25
-
26.4
-
17.8
-
39.4
-
12.3
-
TA
TB
145
194
440
-
<1
0.4
<0.05
-
57.0
0.3
-
7.6
14.8
2.9
260
-
-
-
1.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
26.2
-
<0.1
-
0.8
-
0.7
-
383
-
<1
0.7
<0.05
-
57.1
0.3
-
7.4
14.8
2.4
252
-
-
-
1.2
-
-
-
-
<25
-
28.0
-
<0.1
-
1.1
-
0.5
-
09/14/05
IN
-
-
374
0.5
57
8.8
0.3
-
58.7
0.1
574
7.6
15.1
2.7
241
247
150
97.7
40.5
40.9
<0.1
1.1
39.8
<25
<25
30.8
30.4
17.2
16.2
38.7
38.4
12.9
12.4
TT
209
279
462
0.5
<1
0.4
<0.05
-
54.0
0.1
542
7.4
14.8
2.6
240
247
148
98.9
0.7
0.7
<0.1
1.1
<0.1
<25
<25
26.5
28.7
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
0.5
0.4
09/21/05
IN
-
-
383
-
58
9.2
0.1
-
55.7
0.2
-
7.8
15.1
3.0
276
-
-
-
33.6
-
-
-
-
<25
-
27.4
-
19.7
-
36.5
-
-
-
TA
TB
130
174
422
-
<1
0.4
<0.05
-
55.3
0.5
-
NAla)
NAla)
NAla)
NA(a)
-
-
-
1.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
24.4
-
<0.1
-
2.6
-
-
-
365
-
<1
0.7
<0.05
-
55.8
0.1
-
7.5
14.8
2.3
253
-
-
-
2.1
-
-
-
-
<25
-
24.2
-
<0.1
-
4.4
-
-
-
(a) Operator not recorded water quality measurement.
-------
Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling at Fruitland, ID (Continued)
Sampling Date
Sampling Location
Parameter Unit
Water Treated
Bed Volume
Alkalinity (as CaCO3)
Fluoride
Sulfate
Nitrate (as N)
Orthophosphate
(as P04)
Total P (as PO4)
Silica (as SiO2)
Turbidity
TDS
pH
Temperature
DO
ORP
Total Hardness
(as CaCO3)
Ca Hardness
Mg Hardness
As (total)
As (soluble)
As (particulate)
As (III)
As(V)
Fe (total)
Fe (soluble)
Mn (total)
Mn (soluble)
U (total)
U (soluble)
V (total)
V (soluble)
Mo (total)
Mo (soluble)
09/28/05
IN
Kgal
BV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
NTU
mg/L
S.U.
UC
mg/L
mV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
M9/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
ng/L
ng/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
ng/L
-
396
-
47
8.4
<0.05
;
56.1
1.0
-
7.7
15.0
4.3
248
-
-
-
35.1
-
-
-
-
102
-
25.5
-
21.1
-
30.6
-
13.5
-
TA
TB
314
420
440
-
<1
9.7
<0.05
;
57.4
0.2
-
7.7
15.0
2.5
214
-
-
-
17.6
-
-
-
-
<25
-
33.7
-
<0.1
-
2.8
-
0.3
-
458
-
<1
4.8
<0.05
;
58.0
0.1
-
7.7
15.0
2.7
219
-
-
-
2.1
-
-
-
-
<25
-
15.6
-
<0.1
-
3.1
-
0.1
-
10/05/05
IN
-
-
383
-
41
6.9
<0.05
;
53.8
<0.1
-
7.9
14.6
2.3
249
-
-
-
34.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
24.8
-
16.6
-
38.7
-
12.1
-
TA
TB
179
239
462
-
<1
0.5
<0.05
;
53.8
0.5
-
7.8
14.6
2.4
242
-
-
-
0.8
-
-
-
-
<25
-
23.4
-
0.0
-
0.4
-
0.8
-
458
-
<1
0.4
<0.05
;
54.5
0.1
-
7.7
14.6
2.8
216
-
-
-
0.8
-
-
-
-
<25
-
23.1
-
0.2
-
0.7
-
0.4
-
10/12/05
IN
-
-
383
0.5
52
9.4
0.6
0.4
56.7
0.2
566
7.6
14.9
3.2
242
232
134
97.1
60.8
59.9
0.9
1.2
58.7
<25
<25
23.2
21.8
19.4
19.7
38.5
40.0
12.0
13.3
TT
143
191
405
0.5
<1
0.6
0.9
<0.03
57.2
<0.1
524
7.4
15.0
2.9
260
241
142
99.2
1.3
1.2
<0.1
1.4
<0.1
<25
<25
23.0
24.0
<0.1
<0.1
0.9
0.9
<0.1
<0.1
10/26/05
IN
-
-
374
-
58
9.7
0.1
0.4
NA(a)
<0.1
-
7.7
14.8
1.9
252
-
-
-
45.8
-
-
-
-
<25
-
22.9
-
19.4
-
41.8
-
12.0
-
TA
TB
196
262
NA(a)
-
NA(a)
NA(a)
NA(a)
<0.03
57.0
NA(a)
-
7.9
14.8
3.1
251
-
-
-
0.9
-
-
-
-
<25
-
22.2
-
<0.1
-
0.6
-
0.1
-
440
-
<1
0.4
<0.05
<0.03
58.5
<0.1
-
7.6
14.8
2.2
237
-
-
-
1.0
-
-
-
-
<25
-
22.9
-
<0.1
-
0.7
-
<0.1
-
11/02/05
IN
-
-
365
-
54
9.6
<0.05
0.3
57.1
<0.1
-
7.3
14.8
2.1
248
-
-
-
35.0
-
-
-
-
<25
-
24.9
-
18.8
-
38.2
-
12.8
-
TA
TB
252
337
440
-
<1
3.4
<0.05
<0.03
58.3
0.2
-
7.5
14.8
2.9
260
-
-
-
0.7
-
-
-
-
<25
-
23.3
-
<0.1
-
0.3
-
0.1
-
462
-
<1
0.3
<0.05
<0.03
57.3
<0.1
-
7.2
14.8
2.4
220
-
-
-
0.5
-
-
-
-
<25
-
23.1
-
<0.1
-
0.3
-
<0.1
-
11/09/05
IN
-
-
383
0.5
55.7
10.0
<0.05
0.4
56.2
<0.1
566
7.7
14.7
2.6
257
257
157
99.2
37.0
37.5
<0.1
1.6
35.9
<25
<25
21.8
21.7
18.5
18.3
41.7
40.7
13.1
13.0
TT
224
299
462
0.5
<1
0.5
<0.05
<0.03
56.1
<0.1
498
7.6
14.8
1.7
259
251
155
96.5
0.7
0.7
<0.1
1.2
<0.1
<25
<25
23.0
23.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
0.1
<0.1
Cd
to
(a) Sampling error.
-------
Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling at Fruitland, ID (Continued)
Cd
OJ
Sampling Date
Sampling Location
Parameter Unit
Water Treated
Bed Volume
Alkalinity (as CaCO3)
Fluoride
Sulfate
Nitrate (as N)
Orthophosphate
(as PO4)
Total P (as PO4)
Silica (as SiO2)
Turbidity
TDS
pH
Temperature
DO
ORP
Total Hardness
(as CaCO3)
Ca Hardness
Mg Hardness
As (total)
As (soluble)
As (particulate)
As (III)
As(V)
Fe (total)
Fe (soluble)
Mn (total)
Mn (soluble)
U (total)
U (soluble)
V (total)
V (soluble)
Mo (total)
Mo (soluble)
Kgal
BV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
NTU
mg/L
S.U.
UC
mg/L
mV
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
M9/L
LJg/L
LJg/L
M9/L
Hg/L
M9/L
LJg/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
Ljg/L
Mg/L
ng/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
11/16/05
IN
-
-
396
-
56
10.2
0.1
0.3
56.1
<0.1
-
7.6
15.2
2.2
252
-
-
-
44.0
-
-
-
-
<25
-
19.9
-
19.7
-
39.2
-
12.5
-
TA
TB
125
167
418
-
<1
0.5
<0.05
<0.03
56
<0.1
-
7.5
14.8
2.1
248
-
-
-
0.7
-
-
-
-
<25
-
20.3
-
<0.1
-
0.7
-
0.4
-
352
-
<1
0.7
<0.05
<0.03
55.9
0.2
-
7.5
14.8
2.8
250
-
-
-
0.7
-
-
-
-
<25
-
21.2
-
<0.1
-
1.2
-
0.2
-
11/30/05
IN
-
-
383
-
55
10.3
0.1
0.3
57.0
<0.1
-
7.6
15.4
3.3
249
-
-
-
38.8
-
-
-
-
<25
-
21.9
-
19.2
-
43.2
-
12.6
-
TA
TB
103
138
440
-
<1
0.5
<0.05
<0.03
57.5
0.2
-
7.7
15.9
2.5
213
-
-
-
1.5
-
-
-
-
<25
-
21.4
-
<0.1
-
2.0
-
20.1
-
409
-
<1
0.5
<0.05
<0.03
57.6
0.1
-
7.5
15.4
2.4
221
-
-
-
2.3
-
-
-
-
<25
-
22.1
-
<0.1
-
4.6
-
20.1
-
12/14/05
IN
-
-
396
0.5
76
10.5
0.1
-
56.8
0.8
-
7.7
15.1
2.3
248
227
141
86.2
46.3
37.3
8.9
0.9
36.4
<25
<25
15.0
14.8
20.0
19.1
39.2
40.4
12.3
11.8
TT
190
254
484
0.5
<1
0.7
<0.05
-
56.6
1.6
-
7.2
14.9
2.5
224
229
140
89.3
1.0
0.8
0.2
1.1
<0.1
<25
<25
14.6
14.1
<0.1
<0.1
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
------- |