WORKSHEET D SCREENING INFORMATION FOR NONHAZARDOUS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESSES

Transcription

1 WORKSHEET D SCREENING INFORMATION FOR NONHAZARDOUS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESSES This worksheet provides summary information on the characteristics and treatment removal efficiencies of conventional wastewater treatment processes that can be used at an industrial common effluent treatment plant (CETP). D.1 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESS EVALUATION PROCEDURE The following discussion describes a procedure for the preliminary evaluation and comparison of treatment options for nonhazardous wastewater. This procedure allows the reader to identify candidate options for the preliminary cost evaluation described in Section The material in Chapter 5, especially the sections on treatment processes (Section 5.2 and 5.3) and selection criteria (Section 5.4.1) should be reviewed prior to reading this worksheet. Worksheets D-1 and D-2 facilitate this procedure and allow comparison of up to three technologies on one page. If more than three are to be evaluated, use additional worksheets. To complete Worksheet D-1: Step 1. Step 2. Step 3. Select wastewater treatment options to be evaluated from Table D-1, based on the available information about wastewater quality, site characteristics, and any initial screening criteria. For example, initial screening criteria might be chosen to exclude any technology with high overall cost (row 1) and low cost effectiveness (row 2). Enter the technologies to be evaluated at the head of the Option columns in Worksheet D-1. Rate the evaluation criteria according to importance, placing a P (primary) or S (secondary) in teh second column by each criterion. Enter the most favorable rating (L, M, H, VH, Y or N) for each criterion for the treatment options being evaluated in the third column of Worksheet D-1. Enter the ratings from Table D-1 for each of the 21 selection criteria for each treatment option being evaluated in columns 3 through 5. Review these ratings based on the available knowledge if the specific project and adjust these ratings as appropriate. 2-70

2 Step 4. Circle the ratings in columns 3 through 5 that equal the most favorable rating, and count the number of primary and secondary criteria in each column receiving the most favorable rating. Enter the totals at the bottom of each column. This provides a semiquantitative basis for comparing options, which may be useful for screening out options that do not merit further evaluation. For biological treatment processes, the advantages and disadvantages identified for specific methods in Section 5.3 also should be evaluated. To complete Worksheet D-2: Worksheet D-2 can be used to make a preliminary assessment of whether a specific treatment process can provide treatment to the level required by effluent discharge standards (Section 5.1.5) or which of several options is likely to give the highest level of treatment. It can be used in conjunction with Worksheet D-1 or separately to evaluate options identified in Tables D-2 through D-5 that are not specifically listed in Table D-1. It also can be used to evaluate whether contaminants in influent wastewater exceed pretreatment standards for discharge to a CETP or whether they may inhibit biological treatment processes. Although this worksheet can be used without specific information on characteristics of the wastewater to be treated, it is most useful if this information is available. Step 5. Step 6. Step 7. Enter the technologies to be evaluated at the head of each option column. For each wastewater parameter, enter a known or estimated waste concentration in the second column of Worksheet D-2. Identify any applicable limits against which wastewater concentrations are to be evaluated, including: (a) pretreatment standards, (b) inhibiting concentrations for biological treatment processes, or (c) existing regulatory discharge limits for treated effluent. Enter the type of limit at the head of the third column of Worksheet D-2 and the values for each parameter for which a limit is available throughout the third column. Calculate the minimum percent removal required to comply with the limit for all parameters that exceed the limit. Calculate this using the following formula: Minimum Removal (%) = [(Waste Concentration/Applicable Limit) 1] x 100 Step 8. Enter the ratings from Table D-2 and the percent removal efficiencies from Tables D-3 through D-5. Compare the removal percentages for each option with the required percentage to meet the limit. Any option that does not meet the limit is either unsuitable or would require the use of an additional treatment process. 2-71

3 D.2 REFERENCES Martin, E.J., and E.T. Martin Technologies for Small Water and Wastewater Systems. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY. Pohland, F.g. and S.R. Harper Critical Review and Summary of Leachate and Gas Production from Landfills. EPA/600/2-86/073 (NTIS PB ). Washington, DC. 2-72

4 Worksheet D-1. Wastewater treatment technology screening evaluation form Instructions: Enter the treatment options to be evaluated in the fourth through sixth columns. Rate the evaluation criteria (1 through 21) according to importance, placing a P (primary) or S (secondary) in the second column by each criterion. Enter the most favorable rating for each criterion in the third column (L, M, H, VH, Y, or N). Enter ratings for each criterion for each option being evaluated from Table D-1. Review ratings from Table D-1 for appropriateness to project, and place any revised ratings after the slash. Circle the rating(s) for each option that is closest to the most favorable rating. Evaluation Criteria Sig. 1 Most Option #1 Option #2 Option #3 (Table D-1) (P/S) Favorable Rating (1) Life cycle cost / / / (2) Cost effectiveness / / / (3) Reliability / / / (4) Simplicity of operation / / / (5) Ease of maintenance / / / (6) Performance / / / (7) Ability to meet water quality objectives / / / (8) Adaptability to changes in influent quality / / / (9) Performance dependent on pretreatment / / / (10) Adaptability to varying flow rate / / / (11) Ease of construction / / / (12) Adaptability to upgrading / / / (13) Availability of major equipment / / / (14) Equipment/supplies available locally / / / (15) Postinstallation service/ chemical delivery / / / (16) Personnel skill level / / / (17) Energy use / / / (18) Residue production / / / (19) Cost of residue disposal / / / (20) Potential for effluent use/reuse / / / (21) Importance of air emissions / / / Number of Primary Top Ratings Number of Secondary Top Ratings 1 Rate the significance of each criterion by placing a P (primary) or S (secondary) in the second column. 2-73

5 Worksheet D-2. Wastewater treatment option capability comparison form Instructions: Enter the treatment options to be evaluated in the fourth through sixth columns. Enter wastewater characteristics for all parameters for which data are available in the second column. Review Table D-2 and enter capability removal ratings in the first space under each treatment option, and Tables D-3 through D-5 and other available sources for percent removal efficiencies or ranges and enter in after the slash under each technology option. Parameters Waste Limits 1 Option #1 Option #2 Option #3 Conc. (mg/l) mg/l/% 2 Rating/% Rating/% Rating/% BOD / / / / COD / / / / Oil and Grease / / / / Total Suspended Solids (TSS) / / / / Total Solids / / / / Total Organic Carbon (TOC) / / / / Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) / / / / Hardness / / / / Taste & Odor / / / Color / / / Turbidity / / / Inorganics Ammonia-N / / / / Arsenic / / / / Asbestos / / / / Cadmium / / / / Chromium / / / / Copper / / / / Cyanide / / / / Iron / / / / Lead / / / / Mercury / / / / Nickel / / / / Zinc / / / / Organics Amines / / / / Benzene / / / / Carbon Tetrachloride / / / / Chloroform / / / / Ethylbenzene / / / / Methylene Chloride / / / / PCBs / / / / Pesticides / / / / 2-74

6 Worksheet D-2. (continued) Parameters Waste Limit 1 Option #1 Option #2 Option #3 Conc. (mg/l) mg/l/% 2 Rating/% Rating/% Rating/% Organics (cont.) Phenols (total) / / / / Phthalates / / / / Tetrachloroethylene / / / / Toluene / / / / Trichloroethylene / / / / Trihalomethanes (THMs) / / / / THM precursors / / / / Xylenes / / / / 1 Enter the type of limit against which waste concentrations are being compared, including: (1) pretreatment standards for discharge to CETP or conventional wastewater treatment plant (use applicable standards or refer to Section and Table 5-1); (2) concentrations inhibiting biological treatment processes (see Table 5-2); or (3) treated effluent discharge limits (use applicable regulatory standards or refer to Section and Table 5-3). 2 Enter the percent reduction of waste concentration required to meet the applicable limit. Calculate this using the formula: Minimum Removal (%) = [(Waste Concentration/Applicable Limit) - 1] x

7 Table D-1. Conventional wastewater treatment technology selection guidelines Selection Criteria Technology (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) Physical/Chemical Preliminary Treatment L H L H L H L H N H M H H H H H L H L L M Rotary Screen H H M M L M H H Y M L M M M L H H H M H M Wedgewire Screen H H M M L M H H Y M L M M M L H H H M H M SedimentationPrimary M M H M M M L H N H L H H L L M L H M L M Settling Plate M H H M L H M H N L L L H H M H L H M M L Flocculation M H H L M H H H N M L M H H M H L H H H M Flotation M M H M L M M L N L L L L L L H H M M M H Precipitation/Filtration M H H L L H H H N M L H H H H H M H H H L GAC Adsorption H VH H L L M H L Y L L L L L L H H M H M M Chlorination H H H L L H H H Y L L L M L L H M L L H L UV Disinfection H M M L L M M M Y L L L L L H H H L L H L Granular Media Filtration Slow Sand Filter L M H H L H H H Y H M L H H M M L H H H L Rapid Sand Filter H M M L L M H M Y M L H H H M H H H H H L Intermittent Sand Filter M L M L M M M M Y H L H H L H M H H H L Pulsed Bed Filtration M M M L L H M H Y H L H H L H M H H H L Upflow Filter H H M L M M H H Y M L M H L L H M H H M L Dual Media Filter H M H L L H H H Y M L M H L L H H H H H L Biological Land ApplicationSlow Rate M H M M H M M M N M M M H H H M M L L H H Land ApplicationPercolation H H M M H M M M N M M L H H H M M L L H H Land ApplicationOverland Flow L M L M L L L H Y L H H H H H M L M L L H Lagoon-Aerobic M M M L L M M H N M M L H M M M H L L M M Lagoon-Aerated M M L L L M M H N M M M H H H M H M L L M LagoonFacultative L M M M M L L H N M M H H H H M L M L L M Lagoon-Anaerobic L M L M L M M M N M M H H H H M L L L L M LagoonHydrograph Release M M M L L H M M N H M H H H M M L L L M 2-76

8 Table D-1 (continued) Selection Criteria Technology (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) Biological (cont.) Activated Sludge M M M M L M H H Y M L H M M M H M M M M H Sequencing Batch Reactor M M M L L M M M Y M L H M L L H M M M M H Rotating Biol. Contactor M M M L L M M M Y M L L L L L H M M M M H Trickling FilterRoughing L L L M M M M M N H M H H H H M L M L L M Trickling FilterRock M H L M M M L M N M M H H H H M M M L L M Trickling FilterPlastic M H M M H M L H N M M M M M M M M M L L M Trickling FilterLow Rate M H L M M M L H N L M H H H H M L M L M M Aquaculture L H L M L L L H N H H L H H H L L L L L M Imhoff Tank L H H M L M M M N H M H H H M M L M M L M Sludge Dual Digestion M H H H M H L M N H L H H H H L M M H Methane Recovery M H H L M H L M N H L H M H H L M L H Sludge Land Application L H H M H M H M Y L H M M M M M L L L H H Sludge Drying Bed L H H H H H H H N L H H H H H L L H M M H Sludge Vacuum Filter M M H L L M H H Y H L M M M L H H H M L H Sludge Composting L M M M M H M M N H H H H H M L VH M H Source: Adapted from Martin and Martin (1991). L = low, M = moderate, H = high VH = very high, Y = yes, N = no. Selection Criteria: (1) Life cycle cost, (2) cost effectiveness, (3) reliability, (4) simplicity of operation, (5) Ease of maintenance, (6) performance, (7) ability to meet water quality objectives, (8) adaptability to changes in influent quality, (9) performance dependent on pretreatment, (10) adaptability to varying flow rate, (11) ease of construction, (12) adaptability to upgrading, (13) availability of major equipment, (14) equipment/supplies available locally, (15) post-installation service/chemical delivery, (16) personnel skill level, (17) energy use, (18) residue production, (19) cost of residue disposal, (20) potential for effluent use/reuse, and (21) importance of air emissions. 2-77

9 Table D-2. Wastewater treatment technology removal capabilities (Martin and Martin, 1991) TECHNOLOGÍES PESTICIDES ARSENIC ASBESTOS CADMIUM CHROME COPPER CIYANIDE LEAD ZINC BIS-CHLORO METHYL ETHER Coagulation and M M/H H M/H M L/H L/H L/H L L M H Flocculation Chemical Precipitation H H with sedimentation Lime L M/H H L/.H M/H L/H M/H L/H M/H M/H L/H H H H L M/H Ferric Chloride H L L H H Polymer L/H M/H L/H L/H M/H L/H L H H H Sodium Carbonate H M/H H M H H L PTHTHALATES AMINES TOTAL PHENOLS BENZENE CHLOROFORM CARBON TETRACHLORIDE XILENES BENZO(A)PYRENE PCBs METHYLENE CHLORIDE THMS THM PRECURSOS HARDNESS TASTE & ODOR COLOR Barium Chloride L M M M M Sodium Hydroxide L/H M/H L/H H H M/H H H H H M/H Combined Precipitants L/H L.H M/H M/H L/H L/H H M/H H H H L Alum L L M L/.H L/H M L/H M L/H L/H H M/H H H M/H L L/H M/H L/H M H H M/H H Chemical Precipitation with Filtration Filtration L/H L/H H L/H L/H L/H L/H L/H L/H M/H M L/M H H M L L/H Sedimentation L/H L/H H L/H L/H L/H L/H L/H L/H M/H L/H M/H M H M/H Activated Sludge M L/H L/H L/H L/H L/H L/H L/H M L/H M/H L/H M/H L/H H Lagoons Aerated H H L/H M/H M H M/H L/H L/H M H Non-Aerated H H H L Chemical Oxidation Chlorine L H Ozone M L L/H L H M/H M M H H H Tricking Filter M M H Primary Filter M M H Chemical Reduction L/H M M 2-78

10 Table D-3. Pollutant removal efficiencies (percent) for major wastewater treatment processes (Martin and Martin, 1991) Trickling Activated Rotating Biological Lagoon Parámeter Primary Treatment Filter Sludge Contractor BOD COD Oils and grease Total susp. solids Ammonia nitrogen Phthalate Chloroform Copper Ethylbenzene Mercury Methylene Chloride Solids, total Sólids, volatiles, total Trichloroethylene TOC Toluene

11 Table D-4. Median removal efficiencies (percent) for wastewater treatment parameters (Martin and Martin, 1991) Sedimentation Polymer Cal Lime Polymer Alum, Coag., Aid Alum Alum, Lime Filtration Activated Sludge Aerated Lagoons Granular Carbon

12 Table D-5. Landfill leachate treatment process capabilities (Pohland et al., 1986) BOD COD TKN Fe Zn N Rem. % Effl. Mg/l Rem. % Effl. Mg/l Rem. % Effl. Mg/l Rem. % Effl. Mg/l Rem. % Effl. Mg/l Rem. % Aerobic Biological Processes Activated Sludge Combined Leachate and Sewage Aerated Lagoon Stabilization Pond Aerobic Fixed Film Anaerobic Biological Processes Attached Growth Suspended Growth Effl. Mg/l Leachate Recycle NA < 100 NA < 5 NA NA 5-50 NA NA - Physical-Chemical Processes Coagulation < Oxidation < 1 90 < 1 Reverse Osmosis < 10 Ion Exchange < < 1 Adsorption < Rem = Removal Effl. = Effluent Insufficient data to make an adequate judgement OC Basis. 2-81