18661

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research

Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 4 5 2 6 8
Research and Development
&EPA
Biological Treatment
of Wastes From the
Corn Wet Milling
Industry
EPA-600 2 - 7 8 - 1 0 5
M a y 1978
[&L 3
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development c1 S Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series These nine broad categories were established to facilitate further development and application of environmental technology Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields
The nine series are
E nv i ro n me nta l Hea It h Effects-Res?a rc
Environmental Protection Technology
Ecological Research
Environmental Monitoring
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
"Special" Reports
Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY series This series describes research performed to develop and demonstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent environmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards
This document !s svailabie tc the public thrcjdgh the luational Technical Information Service. Springfield Virginia 221 61
EPA-600/2-/8-iijL:
May 1978
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF WASTES FROM
THE CORN WET MILLING INDUSTRY
Donald R. Brown
Gretchen L. Van Meer
Argo, I l l i n o i s 60501
Grant No. 12060 DPE
Project Officer
Max W. Cochrane
I n d u s t r i a l P o l l u t i o n Control D i v i s i o n
I n d u s t r i a l Environmental Research Laboratory
C i n c i n n a t i , Ohio 45268
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY

OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Industrial Environmental !?search

Laboratory-Cincinnati (IERL-Ci), U . S . Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication. Approval does not s gnify that the cgntents
necessarily reflect the views and policies o f he U,S, Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention o f trade names or cpmmercial products constitute endorsement or recomendation for use.
ii
ABSTRACT
The Pekin, Illinois plant of CPC International Znc, i s t r e a t i n g 0.9

mgd of corn wet milling process wastes with a completely mixed activated
sludge system, Laboratory studies had shown t h a t this treatment method
would produce a satisfactory effluent; i n a d d i t i o n , a simultaneous p i l o t
p l a n t study had shown t h a t an aerated lagoon would also provide satisfactory treatment for either the process wastes alone or combined w i t h
the plant's 18 mgd of cooling water, Economic factors dictated the
selection of the activated sludge plant,
Problems encountered d u r i n g initial stages of operation of the waste
treatment facility included the splittipg o f the rubber liners in the
eqialization and aeration tanks, and odor problems t h a t developed i n the
thickener and the equalization t a n k , The rubber liners were replaced
w i t h concrete, The thickener was converted t o an aerated biomass storage t a n k .
The equalization t a n k design was modifled and aeration was increased.
The major problem with the P e k i n activated sludge waste treatment p l a n t
has been i t s failure t o consistently meet effluent suspended solids
criteria, Efforts t o reduce effluent suspended $01 ids levels have
included nutrient analyses ; examination of the effects of the food-tomicroorganism r a t i o (F/M), PH, and hydraulic loading; and the use of a
cationic polymer as a flocculating agent in the clarifier overflow,
A1 though these efforts have resulted in considerable improvement i n performance compared with initial operation, the effluent s t i l l does n o t
consistently meet the design effluent standards.
This report was submitted i n fulfillment o f Grant Number 12060DPE under

the p a r t i a l sponsorship of the Offiqe of Research and Monitoring,
Environmental Protection Agency.
iv
FOREWORD
When energy and material resources are extracted, processed, converted,

and used, the related pollutional impacts on our environment and even on our
health often require t h a t new and increasingly more e f f i c i e n t pollution control methods be used. The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory Cincinnati (IERL-Ci) a s s i s t s i n developing and demonstrating new and i m proved methodologies that will meet these needs both e f f i c i e n t l y and economical ly.
"Biological Treatment of Wastes from the Corn Wet Milling Industry" was
a part of the Industrial Pollution Control Division's program to develop and
demonstrate new technology f o r the treatment of industrial wastes. A f u l l scale completely mixed activated sludge system was constructed t o process
0.9 MGD of corn wet milling process wastewater. In order t o assure a functional biological system modifications t o both the equalization basin and
sludge thickening were required. Although the waste i s amenable t o
aerobic biological degradation, problems were encountered i n consistently
maintaining an effluent BOD and suspended solids that met design effluent
standards.
For further information contact the Food and Wood Products Branch o f
the Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory - Cincinnati.
David G. Stephan
D i rector
I ndus tri a1 Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati
iii
CONTENTS
...............................................................
...............................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
........................................................
....................................................
................................................
...................................................
......................................
..
..................................................
.................
...........................................
..........................
................................................
...................................................
......................................... ,
...................................................
...........................................
..............................................
....................................
..........................................
..................................
......................................
..............
....................
............................
...........................................
........................................
........................................
........................
.....................................
...............................................
..............................................
.................................
......................................................
....................................................
.....................................................
...........................................
............................
iii
Foreword
iv
Abstract
List of Figures
vii
List of Tables
xi
Acknowledgments
xii
Sect i ons
I Conclusions
1
I 1 Recommendations
3
I11 Introduction
5
Purpose of P r o j e c t
,.... 5
8
Biological Treatment: Completely Mixed Activated Sludge
, ..
Background
9
IV Laboratory and P i l o t P l a n t Development Stuides
11
P i l o t Plant: Aeration Pond-Settling Pond System ............. 1 2
Laboratory Studies
21
Completely Mixed Activated Sludge
21
Batch Tests
30
V Design Basis
39
Equalization
,,... 39
Cooling
39
Aera ti on
, ....... 43
C1 a r i f i c a t i o n
47
D i s s o l ved A i r F1 o t a t i o n
48
Sol i d s T h i c h i ng
49
Final Effluent Reaeration
50
VI P l a n t S t a r t u p and Operation: November 1970-September 1971 ..... 51
Rubber Liner Problems
53
Equalization Tank and Thickener Odor Problems
62
VI I P1 a n t Operation: October 1971-January 1973
65
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
66
Suspended Sol i d s
77
Nutrient Addl t i o n
77
Hydrau1 i c Loading
81
Food-to-Microorganism Ratio (F/M)
81
Chemical F1 occul a n t s
85
Effect of pH
Biomass Yield
8
Effect of Dissolved Oxygen
89
costs
90
Summary
90
VI11 References
93
95
IX List o f Publications
97
X Glossary o f Terms and Abbreviations
Y3
CONTENTS (Cont I d )
XI
Appendices
A. Laboratory and P i l o t Plant Analytical Methods
B. Original Data from the Pekin Waste Treatment Plant
of CPC I n t e r n a t i o n a l , Inc., November 1970-August 1971
C. Original Data from the P e k i n Waste Treatment Plant
o f CPC I n t e r n a t i o n a l , Inc., October 1971-January 1973
D. Treatment P1 a n t performance, January 1973-September 1975
E. Metric conversion f a c t o r s
F. Additional p r o j e c t c o s t data
.
G. Additional s t a t i s t i c a l studies
............
.......
.......
................................
........... ........ ..........
.................... ......
vi
99
105
112
143
147
148
149
LIST OF FIGURES
No.
-
Page
1.
The Corn R e f i n i n g Process
2.
A e r a t i o n Pond P i l o t P l a n t Flow Diagram
13
3.
P i l o t P l a n t A e r a t i o n Pond
16
4.
Foaming Problem i n P i l o t P l a n t A e r a t i o n Pond
17
5.
P i l o t P l a n t S e t t l i n g Pond and A e r a t i o n Pond
18
6.
Frozen P i l o t P l a n t A e r a t i o n Pond
19
7.
E f f e c t o f N i t r o g e n and Phosphorus on E f f l u e n t S o l u b l e COD
20
8.
E a r l y A e r a t i o n Pond C u l t u r e s
22
9.
L a t e r A e r a t i o n Pond C u l t u r e s
23
10.
Schematic Drawing o f Laboratory A c t i v a t e d Sludge Reactor
24
11.
E f f e c t o f F/M on Growth Rate o f MLSS
29
12.
E f f e c t o f F/M on Conversion Y i e l d o f MLSS
31
13.
E f f e c t o f F/M on Oxygen Uptake Rate
33
14.
U n i t Rate o f Removal i n Laboratory Reactors
34
15.
Reactor C u l t u r e s :
Undesirable Growth
36
16.
Reactor Cultures:
Improved Growth
37
17.
Pekin Waste Treatment P l a n t Flow Diagram
40
18.
Pekin Waste Treatment F a c i l i t y
41
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
(continued )
No.
Page
19.
Pekin Waste Treatment F a c i l i t y
42
20.
COD Concentration:
52
21
I n f l u e n t Total COD Concentration:

Occurrence
Probability o f
54
22.
E f f l u e n t Total COD Concentration:

Occurrence
Probability o f
55
23.
E f f l u e n t Suspended Sol i d s :
Semi-monthly Averages
56
24.
E f f l u e n t Suspended Solids:
P r o b a b i l i t y o f Occurrence
57
25.
E q u a l i z a t i o n Basin L i n e r Problems
58
26.
Aeration Tank Problems
60
27.
Repair Work i n Aeration Tank and E q u a l i z a t i o n Basin
61
28.
Concentrated Waste Flow, October 1971-January 1973
67
29.
BOD as a Function o f E f f l u e n t COD, P l a n t Operation
69
30.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, I n f l u e n t and E f f l u e n t
71
31.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Percent Removed
72
32.
E f f l u e n t BOD:
73
33.
BOD Removal as a Function o f Recycle Rate
75
34.
BOD Removal as a Function o f F/M
76
Semi -monthly Averages
viji
LIST OF FIGURES
(continued)
No.
Page
35.
Effluent Suspended S o l i d s a s a Function o f Hydraulic

Loading
82
36.
E f f l u e n t Suspended S o l i d s a s a Function of F/M
83
37.
E f f l u e n t Suspended S o l i d s :
38.
E f f l u e n t BOD a s a Function o f Effluent Suspended S o l i d s
92
39.
Sample Data from Batch Test
101
40:
E f f e c t of TbOD on U n i t Rate o f Removal
103
41.
P r o b a b i l i t y Graph:
Flow, January-December 1972
150
42.
Effluent BOD mg/l, Jan-Dec 1972
151
43.
Effluent SS mg/l, Jan-Dec 1972
152
44.
Effluent BOD lb/day, Jan-Dec 1972
153
45.
Probabi 1 i t y Graph:
E f f l u e n t SS 1 b/day, Jan-Dec 1972
154
46.
Effluent BOD lb/1000 BU, Jan-Dec 1972
155
47.
Effluent SS lb/1000 Bu, Jan-Dec 1972
156
48.
Flow, July-Dec 1972
157
49.
Effluent BOD mg/l, July-Dec 1972
158
50.
Effluent SS mg/l , July-Dec 1972
159
51 . Probabi 1 it y Graph:
Effluent BOD 1b/day
ix
, July-Dec 1972
88
160
L I S T OF FIGURES
(continued)
Page
__
No.
52.
Probabil it y Graph:
E f f l u e n t SS 1 blday, July-Dec 1972
53.
E f f l u e n t BOD lb/1000 Bu, July-Dec
54.
E f f l u e n t SS lb/1000 Bu, July-Dec 1972
161
lgY?
162
163
LIST OF TABLES
Page
No.
1.
Laboratory Reactor Studies
27
2.
Continuous Laboratory Reactor Oxygen Uptake Analyses

Summary
32
3.
Correlation Coefficients, BOD a s a Function of COD
68
4.
Rotifer Growth i n Activated Sludge Systems
79
5.
Analysis of P e k i n Final Effluent D u r i n g C-300 Test
86
6.
Sample Data f o r Batch Test
102
7.
Metric Conversion Factors
147
xi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Special acknowledgment i s due t o Mr. H. 0. Bensing, Chief Chemist

('retired) of the P e k i n Plant of CPC Internatioqal, Inc., who supervised the p i l o t plant and laboratory t r e a t a b i l i t y studies. All
analytical services were provided by personnnel of the laboratory
a t the P e k i n Plant.
The p i l o t plant and laboratory studies, and the full scale p l a n t

design, were done under the direction of Dr. W. B. Davis, who a t
t h a t time was associated w i t h Texas A & M University.
The guidance of Clifford Risley, Jr., PA Office of Research
and Monitoring, Region V, and Project Officen Max Cochrane, are
ac know1 edged w i t h sincere thanks
xii
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
1.
Corn wet milling wastes are readily biodegradable i n a completely

mixed activated sludge process. However, incomplete suspended
biological solids removal has resulted i n f a i l u r e t o meet the
expected effluent quality a t the Pekin, I l l i n o i s p l a n t of CPC
International Inc.
2.
Aerated lagoon treatment was studied i n a p i l o t plant and a laboratory

study was made of completely mixed activated sludge treatment. The
aerated lagoon study o f corn wet m i l l i n g wastes indicated good
soluble chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal when treating e i t h e r
a d i l u t e mixture o f combined process waste and cooling water o r the
concentrated stream o f process wastes alone. The activated sludge
study resulted i n data f o r r a t e o f biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
removal, oxygen uptake, and biomass yield f o r design of a full-scale
treatment plant f o r treating the concentrated process wastes. Economic
factors dictated the selection of the activated sludge system. The
total waste flow of 13-25 million gallons per day (mgd) from the
plant included process wastes, cooling water, and sanitary wastes.
The sanitary wastes were isolated and sent t o the Pekin municipal
treatment plant, and the cooling water d i d not require treatment.
The activated sludge p l a n t was therefore designed t o t r e a t the
0.9 mgd of process wastes.
3.
The waste treatment plant as designed and modified often removes

90% or more of incoming BOD. Removal o f organic solubles is usually
satisfactory. However, t o meet the design effluent c r i t e r i a of
40 milligrams per l i t e r (mg/l) BOD, BOD removal must be on the order
o f 97 t o 99%. High effluent suspended biological solids concentrations
prevent meeting both the suspended solids and BOD c r i t e r i a f o r more
t h a n a few days a t a time. The influent BOD fluctuations are
considerable, largely due t o the v a r i a b i l i t y i n b o t h the raw material

and the factory production schedule. Deterioration of effluent
quality can nearly always be traced t o a shock load of 2 t o 5 times
the normal load of BOD, which r e s u l t s i n poor separation of biomass
i n the c l a r i f i e r and flotation c e l l . The r e s u l t i s f a i l u r e t o meet
both the effluent suspended solids and effluent BOD c r i t e r i a . The
suspended solids are unflocculated bacteria, formed d u r i n g the
biological reaction. The BOD i n the effluent i s almost e n t i r e Y
due t o these suspended bacteria.
4.
Increase i n biomass recycle r a t e s , from 25-35% t o 75-100% of the

supply, and reaeration of the recycled biomass resulted i n some
improvement i n solids separation. Also, under some conditions,
addition of 10 mg/l of a cationic polymer t o the c l a r i f i e r overflow, followed by the dissolved a i r f l o t a t i o n , resulted i n a s a t i s factory effluent quality of less than 25 mg/l suspended solids.
Addition of nutrients t o produce a B0D:N:P r a t i o near the recommended
m i n i m u m r a t i o of 100:5:1 resulted i n an improved population of
suitable microorganisms, thereby improving the quality of treatment.
As of this w r i t i n g , an effluent suspended solids level of 35 mg/l
o r less is being achieved about 25 per cent of the time.
5.
I t appears t h a t the major problems encountered i n the treatment o f

corn wet milling wastes are: ( a ) dealing w i t h the variations i n
waste t h a t are the inevitable r e s u l t of u s i n g a natural product
subject t o variations i n composition and quality, and ( b ) reduction
of suspended solids i n the final effluent. As of this w r i t i n g , no
method of adequately reducing the effluent suspended solids t o meet
water quality standards has been found w i t h any treatment method or
combination of treatment methods t r i e d w i t h the existing treatment
plant.
SECTION I 1
RECOMMENDATIONS
For the treatment of corn wet m i l l i n g wastes by a completely mixed
activated sludge system i t i s recomnended t h a t :
1.
process wastes be isolated from cooling water and sanitary

wastes for the most economical and efficient treatment.
2.
equalization be used t o reduce shock loads t o aeration

tanks, and t o minimize the variability t h a t results from
u s i n g a natural product such as corn, and having a variable production schedule.
3,
odor prevention methods be used, including aerating

equalization tanks and avoiding the use of large t h i c k eners or other equipment where biomass i s held without
oxygen for long periods.
4,
nutrient analyses be made t o determine any need for additions of nitrogen, phosphorus, and trace elements t o
provide a complete growth medium f o r appropriate microorganisms.
5.
the use of flocculating chemicals, together with solids

removal equipment such as flotation cells, o r other
effluent polishing devices be included i n waste treatment
plant design f o r corn wet milling wastes, t o help reduce
effluent suspended solids,
6.
a d d i t i o n a l studies be made t o determine the best method o f
obtaining lower effluent suspended sol ids concentrations.
I'
SECTION I11
I NT RO DUCT I ON
PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The corn wet milling industry, also called the corn refining industry,
gets i t s name because large quantities of water are used t o separate
and refine the constituent parts of the corq kernel, For every bushel
of corn processed, 12 t o 15 gallons of water are used i n d i r e c t contact
w i t h the corn or i t s components. A simplified flow chart of the process i s shown i n Figure 1 .
The industry i s comprised of 12 companies w i t h 17 domestic plants. The
converted products i n the industry are worth over $700 million annually.
The 500 different products include adhesives, food ingredients , animal
feed, and consumer products, serving 60 industries i n the food, chemical
and heavy industry areas,
The over-all efficiency of the corn wet milling process i s h i g h , u t i lizing close t o 100% of the n p u t material, However, trace amounts o f
end products such as syrups, sugar, and starch are found i n the waste
process water, Up u n t i l the present study was done, no information was
available on specific guide1 nes and operating parameters f o r the t r e a t ment of wet mill ing wastes. For t h i s reason, a Federal EPA research
and demonstration grant was awarded t o CPC International Inc. with the
objective of utilizing laboratory reactor data t o design a full-scale
treatment f a c i l i t y a t the Pekin, I l l i n o i s plant, A one-year demonstrat i o n period was included t o determine i f the laboratory data resulted
i n an adequate design, I t was believed t h a t this information, while
directly applicable only t o the special circumstances of the Pekin plant
FIGURE 1
THE CORN REFINING PROCESS

SHELLED CORN
1st C O R N CLEANERS
I
S T O R A G E
DtGEPMIWATORS
( O N C f N 1R A 1E 5
C R I H D I N G MILLS
WlNTt RlZlNG
FEED DRIERS
WASHIN6 f l l l l l l
.,
STARCH DRIERS
R t l l N I N G
D R Y STARCHES
o f CPC International Inc., would prove useful i n the selection and
design of waste treatment systems for other corn wet m i l l i n g plants,

and possibly for the cane and beet sugar, and the p o t a t o , wheat and
rice starch industries.
The scope of the g r a n t included biological treatment and biomass separat i o n , b u t did not include methods for excess biomass disposal, which are
n o t discussed i n this report.
The only water-borne waste from the actual milling of corn and separat i o n into i t s components i s the condensate resulting from the evaporation of steepwater. The condensate contains volatile substances which
are formed during the steeping process and vaporized during evaporation,
and some entrained steepwater sol ids.
In-plant sources of other liquid wastes vary, depending on the products
made and the processes used, Possible sources include f i l t r a t e s from
the preparation of modified starches, with associated dissolved chemicals used for modification i f any, and some soluble carbohydrate formed
during the process. Other possible sources result from the refining of
corn syrups and dextrose,
CPC International Inc, operates four wet m i l l i n g plants in the United
States, Two of these pay for treatment of their wastes in municipal
treatment plants. In the past, the other two discharged waste directly
t o the waterways, As awareness of the environmental effects of this
discharge increased, i t became evident t h a t this practice could n o t
continue, Hence, a program was undertaken a t the Pekin plant of CPC
International Inc, t o determine the most economical waste treatment
method t o meet the effluent standards then i n existence.
Since the waste products from t h e wet rrii 11 in q procpss a r e p r i m a r i l y

biodegradable carbohydrates biological treatment W ~ St h e rrletnod of
choice f o r the treatment of the concentrated waste s t r e a m ,
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT:
COMPLETELY M I X E D ACTIVATED SLUDGE
Biological wastewater treatment consists of a combination of interrelated operations, beginning w i t h the transfer of impurities from the
wastewater t o film, f l o c , or other forms o f biomass by interfacial
contact and associated absorptions and adsorptions, This process i s
f a s t and effective i f the interface between the liquid and the biomass
i s large, i f the concentration gradient of the substances to be removed
from one phase t o the other i s steep, and i f obstructive liquid films
and concentrations o f interfering substances do not build up on the
interface, Quality, therefore, as well as extent of contact i s
important.
Second and equally important i s the preservation of this quality of
contact, accomplished primarily by the biological oxidation of organic
matter and synthesis of new c e l l s , Contact quality i s maintained
because of the tendency of dissolved matter t o change i n concentration
so as t o decrease surface tension in the biotic film o r floc. Substances concentrating a t surfaces are adsorbed, t h e n decomposed by the
accumulating enzymes of living c e l l s , New c e l l s are then synthesized,
and the end products of decomposition are washed i n t o the waters or
escape t o the atmosphere. Finally, conversion of the biomass into
settleable o r otherwise removable solids proceeds as a function of the
quality of contact, and determines the over-all effectiveness of the
process 1
In the activated sludge system, air i s provided continuously to keep

the units aerobic, i n s p i t e of heavy concentrations of living organisms.
In order t o operate t h e process on a continuous basis, the solids gener-
ated must be separated for recycle t o the aeration t a n k , w i t h the excess

2
sludge from the system being withdrawn f o r disposal ,
In the completely mixed activated sludge system, influent waste and the
recycled sludge are immediately and uniformly mixed i n t h e aeration
tank, This allows for uniform oxygen demand t h r o u g h o u t the aeration
tank, and adds some operational s t a b i l i t y when treating shock loads o f
industrial waste. However, when there are unusually large variations
i n waste, equalization must be used t o smooth out some of the v a r i a t i o n
prior t o aeration.
BACKGROUND
Because of b o t h the nature of the raw product and the nature of the
production schedule of most plants, wastes i n the corn wet milling
industry are subject t o unusually large v a r i a t i o n s , The raw product,
corn, i s a natural product, subject t o significant variations as a
r e s u l t of weather and other factors, The production schedule i s unique
in t h a t it i s more economical to run the various portions o f the plant
a t full production capacity f o r a number of days each week, s h u t t i n g
down and starting up a major portion of the plant each weekend, Some
products have seasonal cycles, while others have relatively stable
demands. In addition, finished product inventories are kept t o a m i n i mum because natural products have a limited storage l i f e .
Waste sources i n the Pekin plant consist of process water, cooling
water, and sanitary wastes, w i t h a total flow of 13-25 mgd. The p o l l u tion abatement program began w i t h several major i n - p l a n t changes f o r
the purpose of reducing the waste load t o be treated.
BOD was reduced by about h a l f by isolating sanitary wastes and diverting
t h e m t o the Pekin municipal treatment plant; by installation o f new

process control instruments i n c r i t i c a l areas; by operator and supervisor training regarding process losses, supported by an extensive
waste stream monitoring system; and by discontinuing an intermittently
operated process which generated a large, d i f f i c u l t to t r e a t waste load.
When these changes were made, process wastes and cooling water were combined in a single effluent, During the t r e a t a b i l i t y studies described
l a t e r i n t h i s report, economic studies showed that i t was more economical t o i s o l a t e the process wastes for treatment, as the cooling water
discharge met the effluent water quality standards in e f f e c t a t the
time, Separating the cooling water flow of 18 mgd l e f t the process
wgter, which averaged 0.9 mgd, t o be treated. This process water i s
referred t o as the concentrated waste stream,
I t was estimated t h a t prior t o the waste reduction program, process and
sanitary waste flows t o t a l l e d 1.6 mgd, so the program resulted i n reduci n g the flow t o be treated by about 45%. Much of the flow reduction was
due t o the abandoned process (0.29 mgd) and the sanitary wastes (0.1
mgd). Cooling water flow rates were not affected by the waste reduction
program.
A t the P e k i n p l a n t , the major waste sources are from production to dextrose, corn syrup, steepwater, and starch, The contribution of each of
the waste sources varies considerably on a time basis, b u t the general
composition indicates t h a t the concentrated raw waste stream i s made up
of about 35% from the corn syrup channel, 25% from volatiles i n the
steepwater channel, 20% from the dry starch channel, 15% from the steepwater entrainment, and 5% from the dextrose channel. Treatment of the
concentrated process waste stream i s the subject of this report.
10
SECTION IV
LABORATORY AND PILOT PLANT DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Two methods of waste treatment were considered f o r the Pekin p l a n t : a

completely mixed , activated sludge process operating on a concentrated
waste stream, and a simple aeration lagoon and quiescent pond process
which could operate on the d i l u t e plant waste stream, consisting of a
combination of process wastes and cooling water. Two parallel process
investigations were undertaken t o determine the f e a s i b i l i t y and economics of each method, The d i l u t e waste lagooning process was studied i n
a p i l o t plant, to determine the e f f e c t s of summer and winter operation,
and .to o b t a i n effluent quality d a t a on the system for year-around
operation. Simultaneously, a laboratory investigation of a completely
mixed activated sludge process was implemented u s i n g concentrated waste.
The studies showed both methods t o be suitable f o r obtaining satisfactory effluent quality. However, the completely mixed activated sludge
process was more economical t h a n the aerated lagoon s e t t l i n g pond
process ,
Results from the laboratory tests provided information on r a t e of COD
removal, r a t e of oxygen u t i l i z a t i o n , biomass growth r a t e , and characteri s t i c s of microbial cultures grown i n corn wet milling wastes,
Pqrameters measured included BOD, total COD, soluble COD, total biological oxygen demand (TbOD), dissolved oxygen (DO) nitrogen, phosphorus,
and mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS). The use of soluble COD, MLSS,
and TbOD t o calculate the u n i t r a t e of removal (lb soluble COD/lb MLSSday) i s detailed i n Appendix A.
11
PILOT PLANT:
AERATION POND-SETTLING POND SYSTEM
The aeration pond-settling pond system i s suitable where large areas of

low cost l a n d are available. I t i s a simple, relatively inexpensive
procedure, requiring a minimum of operator attention, b u t using many
acres of l a n d , Oxygen and nutrients are added i n the aeration pond so
that the waste undergoes bioconversion t o suspended sol ids. This mixture then passes into the s e t t l i n g pond where the solids a r e allowed t o
s e t t l e t o the bottom and the effluent flows into the receiving stream.
The settled solids continue t o biodegrade anaerobically, b u t w i t h
adequate surface area the upper part of the s e t t l i n g pond remains aerobic so t h a t odors should not be a problem. Periodically the accumulated solids must be removed, w i t h intervals varying from several months
to years, depending on the concentration of the waste,
A schematic diagram o f the p i l o t plant i s shown i n Figure 2.
Flow was
taken from the 30-inch and 48-inch sewers i n proportion t o the flow
rates i n the respective sewers, The waste flowed into the aeration
chamber, and overflowed into the s e t t l i n g chamber where the solids
settled t o the bottom. The aeration pond was operated over the range o f
10 t o 96 hours retention time, Combined holding time w i t h the s e t t l i n g
chamber ranged from 1 to 10 days, No nutrients were added t o t h e system
when i t was operating w i t h d i l u t e waste,
Evaluation of d i l u t e effluent treatment was not pursued i n d e p t h ,
because economic studies soon showed t h a t treatment o f concentrated
waste would be less costly, However, the r e s u l t s while operating w i t h
the d i l u t e waste indicated t h a t an average effluent soluble COD concent r a t i o n of 40 mg/l was obtained i n both cold and warm seasons (February
through April 1967). Soluble COD i n the raw waste ranged from 75 t o
175 mg/l, averaging about 100 mg/l, While this is only about 60% removal of soluble COD, batch tests showed the waste contained about
12
I
4
i
I
I
I
M
CI
7 4
X I
d
27
13
25 mg/l of non-biodegradable COD, so 40 mg/l COD i n the effluent was
considered satisfactory for a continuous reactor,

Floating solids i n the s e t t l i n g chamber often led t o h i g h total COD i n
the effluent, When s e t t l i n g was good, effluent total COD was i n the
range of 50 t o 75 m g / l , When floating solids were present, the value
was usually 125 t o 175 mg/l , Optimization of the s e t t l i n g chamber
design, and provisions f o r skimming floating solids from the surface,
would probably result i n a satisfactory effluent.
A major change i n p i l o t plant procedure came as a result of a decision,
based on economic factors, t o s p l i t the concentrated plate waste streams

o u t of the 30-inch and 48-inch sewers f o r separate treatment. This
.would reduce the flow of waste t o be treated from about 20 mgd t o about
1 mgd, When t h i s decision was reached, p i l o t plant operation on a synt h e t i c waste concentrate, w i t h characteristics which would be typical of
the new concentrated waste stream, was begun, This procedure was used
from approximately s p r i n g of 1967 through October 1967. As soon as the
concentrated plant wastes were separated from the cooling water stream,
the p i l o t plant was operated on the actual concentrated plant waste
stream.
The p i l o t plant was operated as a washout reactor, since no equipment
f o r biomass recycle had been installed. I t was found t h a t w i t h a retention time of 4 days i n the aeration tank, effluent soluble COD of 60 to
100 mg/l was obtained, w i t h a supply concentration of about 1000 mg/l.
The non-biodegradable COD i n the concentrated waste was usually about
40 mg/l as determined by batch t e s t s . This procedure i s described i n
Appendix A,
No evaluation of solids separation was made while operating w i t h concentrated waste, because by this time i t had become apparent t h a t an a c t i -
14
v a t e d s l u d g e system w i t h recycle would be selected for f i n a l design

f o r economic reasons.
Figure 3 shows the aeration pond i n normal operation. A foaming condit i o n which occasionally occurred is shown i n Figure 4a, This i l l u s t r a tion shows a particularly severe case, probably caused by a COD shock
load, The foam was several f e e t high and interfered w i t h the oxygen
transfer capabilities of the aeration equipment, The problem was solved
by the use of an anti-foam agent (Nalco G613), the results of which can
be seen i n Figure 4b.
Figure 5a shows bubbles and foam on the surface of the s e t t l i n g pond
which resulted from the anaerobic decomposition of solids on the bottom
of the pond. The resultant gases percolate up through the solids and
liquid t o the surface of the pond, occasionally carrying large clumps of
floating material w i t h them, and causing a mildly offensive odor.
Furthermore, the floating sol ids caused unacceptably h i g h suspended
solids levels i n the effluent. T h i s problem occurred most often i n
summer, when increased temperatures accelerate the r a t e of anaerobic
decomposition and simultaneously reduce the capacity of water t o hold
dissolved oxygen. The solution i n a full-scale plant i s t o provide a
s e t t l i n g pond of adequate s i z e for the expected waste load, Figures 5b
and 6 also show the aeration pond i n winter. In spite of the ice
accumulation the aerator continued t o provide adequate dissolved oxygen,
When the aeration pond operated on the d i l u t e waste stream, no nutrients
were added. W i t h the change t o concentrated supply, there was a noticeable increase i n effluent soluble COD i n the effluent ranging from 250
t o 500 m g / l , The addition of nitrogen and phosphorus i n the r a t i o
C0D:N:P = 100;5:1 produced the r e s u l t s shown i n Figure 7 , w i t h effluent
soluble COD dropping t o an acceptable 100 mg/l, These results showed
clearly that nutrient addition should be incorporated into the f u l l
scale plant.
15
FIGURE 3
P I L O T PLANT AERATION POND
3a.
Aeration pond (background) and s e t t l i n g pond ( f o r e g r o u n d ) .
3b.
Aeration pond w i t h a e r a t o r i n o p e r a t i o n .
16
FIGURE 4
FOAMING PROBLEM IN PILOT PLANT
4a.
Foam coming over baffle in the aeration pond.
4b.
After u s i n g an antifoam agent, 45 minutes elapsed

time.
17
FIGURE 5
P I L O T PLANT SETTLING POND AND AERATION POND
5a.
Overflow system a t the end of the s e t t l i n g pond (summer),

showing bubbles and foam on the surface o f the pond.
5b.
Aerator (winter), which continued t o provide adequate

dissolved oxygen i n s p i t e of ice accumulation.
18
FIGURE 6
FROZEN P I L O T PLANT AERATION POND
6a.
Aeration pond (winter), showing t h a t only a small portion o f

the a e r a t i o n zone was free water d u r i n g the c o l d e s t p a r t o f
the winter.
66. Frozen foam accumulation
19
FIGURE 7
EFFECT OF NITROGEN AND PHOSPHOROUS

NUTRIENTS ON EFFLUENT SOLUBLE COD
P i l o t P l a n t A e r a t i o n Pond
S y n t h e t i c Waste Supply - 1000 mg/l COD
4-Day R e t e n t i o n Time
w
Nutrient
Addition
Started
3
-I
0
N
I--
60f
3
J
L
L
W
40C
0
c1
OCTOBER 1967
NOVEMBER 1967
I December 1967
Because biological waste treatment consists essentially o f the care and

feeding of microorganism, the process o f the growth o f microbial cultures i s shown i n Figures 8 and 9. The biomass showed good growth
characteristics with appropriate s e t t l i n g tendencies. The conclusion
of the p i l o t plant study was that the method was feasible for adequate
waste treatment. Hqwever, economics dictated the construction o f an
activated sludge waste treatment f a c i l i t y ,
LABORATORY STUDIES
Completely Mixed Activated Sludge

The activated sludge process i s a compact, v e r s a t i l e and e f f i c i e n t
methbd, widely used i n waste treatment, The effluent from t h e aeration
tank i s continuously separated i n t o settleable solids and l i q u i d effluent i n a c l a r i f i e r , w i t h most of the biomass b e i n g recycled t o the
aeration t a n k . Because of the continuous nature of the activated sludge
process, it i s impartant In a laboratory situation t o develop the b i o logical culture i n a continuous mode of operation3, so as t o simulate
the actual environment encountered i n the treatment plant as closely as
possible.
The activated sludge procesq was studied on a laboratory scale, using
continuous flow regctors of a b o u t 5 l i t e r s capacity. A schematic o f the
apparatus i s shown i n Flgure 10, Supply t o the reactors was taken from
a cooled storage vessel, containing 2 days supply, The effluent was
drawn off through a siphon arrangepent into a bottle calibrated t o shqw
the quantity of sybsjtrate qseq per day.
R ~ Wwaste
supply was collected periodically from the p l a n t concentrated

waste discharge. T h e waste wps diluted t o lOQ0 ~ g / lCOD concentration.
The pH was usually i n the range of 5.5 t o 7.0, b u t i f the pH was below 5 . 5 , i t
21
s!
FIGURE 8
EARLY AERATION POND CULTURES
8a.
I n i t i a l operation, dispersed growth w i t h numerous small

c 1umps
8b.
A f t e r two weeks o f operation, w i t h some increase i n s i z e

o f clumps.
22
FIGURE 9
LATER AERATION POND CULTURES
9a.
A f t e r one month o f operation, some f i l a m e n t o u r s organisms

present
9b.
A f t e r two months o f operation, showing some h i g h e r l i f e forms.
23
10
FIGURE
SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF LABORATORY

ACTIVATED SLUDGE REACTOR
To
AsDirator
2 Liter
Percolator
E f f 1uen t
Storage
6 Liter
Percol a t
Alr D i f f u s e r s
I Rotameter
MI1
Substrate
Reservoir
Punlp
Waste
M i xed
Liquor
24
was adjusted t o 6.0. Nitrogen and phosphorus were added i n the r a t i o o f

C0D:N:P = 100:5:1 . The laboratory reactor studies were conducted a t
ambient temperatures (73"-77"F).
In retrospect, t h i s method o f supply preparation contributed t o the

f a i l u r e of the laboratory reactors t o simulate performance of the f u l l scale plant. Since the laboratory reactor raw waste supply was nearly
constant i n concentration and pH, none of the problems l a t e r encountered
w i t h varying supply conditions in the full-scale plant were recognized
i n the laboratory,
The laboratory reactor operation was begun i n June 1967 t o develop

bacterial cultures acclimated t o the concentrated Pe kin waste stream.
The development of acclimated biological cultures w i t h good s e t t l i n g
characteristics was the primary objective for the f i r s t few months o f
continuous laboratory reactor operation. For this period, the reactors
were operated on a flow-through basis without use o f the s e t t l i n g chamber f o r the reactor effluent and without any recycle of biological
solids from the e f f l u e n t stream, In this way, an acclimated culture was
devel oped.
The next phase was simulation o f normal operation w i t h the separation of
solids from the effluent, and the recycle of a portion of the s e t t l e d
biomass, Four reactors were r u n a t d i f f e r e n t supply r a t e s and MLSS concentrations t o investigate a broad range of F/M r a t i o s . The food rate
f o r a given reactor was controlled by varying the supply volumetric
r a t e , since the supply COD concentration was kept constant a t about
1000 mg/l. The concentration of MLSS i n a given reactor was controlled
by adjusting the amount of s e t t l e d biomass recycled back t o the reactor
and the biomass waste r a t e .
25
Material balance data and analytical data were obtained f o r each of the
continuous reactors throughout the experimental investigation, Periodic
tests were run f o r BOD, COD, MLSS, phosphorus, nitrogen, and dissolved
oxygen, using standard laboratory techniques 4 The steady-state mater i a l balance data f o r the continuous 1aboratory reactors a t various
operating conditions are summarized i n Table 1 , The data were analyzed
w i t h the computer program which performed a material balance f o r COD
and suspended solids over a period of days. Usually the period chosen
was 10 days. The major operating parameters were then calculated and
reported.
All four reactors were operated on a flow-through basis without recycle

f o r the f i r s t 4 months i n order t o develop suitable cultures. During
this period, the MLSS concentration in the reactors was low, mostly i n
the range of 200 t o 400 mg/l ,
The r e s u l t s i n Table 1 show t h a t soluble COD removal was 90% or more a t
nearly a1 1 conditions. Generally, the e f f l u e n t suspended solids concent r a t i o n from the settling chamber was high, although a t times low concentrations were obtained. I t was the opinion of our consultant t h a t
the hydraulics of the laboratory scale s e t t l i n g chambers d i d not r e f l e c t
conditions t h a t would exist i n a full-scale plant, Since good solids
separation was obtained a t times i n the laboratory reactors, he f e l t
t h a t by designing the full-scale plant on the basis of soluble COD
removal as determined by batch tests, satisfactory solids separation
would be obtained. I t will be seen t h a t this conclusion was not borne
o u t i n the r e s u l t s of the full-scale plant,
The biomass growth rate expressed a s pounds of MLSS produced per pound
of MLSS under aeration per day as a function of the F/M r a t i o 3 i s shown
i n Figure 11 These data were obtained from 10-day material balance
26
TABLE
LABORATORY
REACTOR STUDLE!
S t e a d y S t a t e ? l a t e r i a l Balance S u m a r i e s
Growth
Rate
Produced,
Keteutiori
Dates
lime,
davs
Wastage,
% of
Feed
103
113-1 1 1 2 , 1 9 6 8
1 / 3 - 1 1 1 2 , 1968
113-1112, 1966
2
3
2
1
5c
100
0
0
2
3
4
it29
100
4 .:
1 :Ju
0
0
10
50
25
50
25
3128-416,
3126-416,
31 2 8 - 4 1 6 ,
3128-416,
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
5f14-5/23,
5/14-5123,
5/14-5123,
5/14-5123,
1968
1968
1968
1968
6/18-6127,
6/18-6127,
6118-6/27,
6/18-6127,
1968
1968
1068
1968
7130-818,
a)
1968
FIN,')
Reactor.
lb COD/
lb
MLSS,
MLSS-dav
1
n.5
3
2
3
4
0.25
50
75
90
100
i 0.45
II
0.45
)J
0.45 u
lb YLSS/
lb
Aeration
XLSS-day
Removed
COD
Soluble
COD Renoval
Efficiency
1
1
I.
10
0
0.455
0,901
0.291
2.641
1031
521
2573
387
59.7
56,9
44.4
52.2
25?
246
70
391
0.081
0.214
0.035
1.012
0.190
0.251
0.127
0.404
94.1
94.3
95.6
94.8
0.204
0.461
0.621
2455
1907
1872
2252
36.8
42.8
43.0
59.4
99
133
139
129
0.036
0.076
0.131
0.189
0.186
0.356
0.297
0.244
96.3
95.7
95.7
94.1
0.668
0.915
0.633
0.806
1854
1202
1739
5133
66.7
70.5
71.5
58.3
46
36
12 7
2 70
0.208
0.311
0.208
0.227
0.333
0.364
0.353
0.298
93.6
93.2
93.1
94.4
2.662
1.735
0.500
2.142
749
6 19
2028
1887
43.5
46.3
48.4
69.0
148
32 7
57
30 2
1.335
1.735
0.159
0.863
0.523
0.459
0.335
0.432
95.7
95.4
95.2
93.2
692
977
1345
476
103.8
61.8
79.4
104.5
153
188
68
2 85
0.999
0.337
0.196
1.247
0 395
0.446
0.270
0.354
89.6
93.7
92.1
89.6
1621
42.1
2 84
0.364
0.329
95.7
0.222
0.5
50
75
.1
0.25
90
10
90
10
0,s
3
50
25
25
2.818
0.806
0.708
3.933
1.155
mgfliter
Reactsra) Effluent
COD,
MLSS,
mglliter mgfliter
-I___
I
_
_
_
I
I
-
113 - 1 / 1 2 , 1 9 6 8
2/19-2125,
2119-2128,
2/19-2/25,
2/19-2128,
4
Reactor
Recycle,
% of
Feed
Yield,
lb XLSS
Produced1
Ib Soluble
1
2
3
4
0.5
50
75
90
75
0,s
103
COD values a r e s o l u b l e .
10
TABLE
(Continued)
LABORATORY REACTOR STUDIES
Steady S t a t e M a t e r i a l Balance Summaries
Re teution
Reactor
Dates
O3
6/4-6113. 1967
6/4-6113. 1967
614-6113, 1967
614-6113, 1967
711-719,
711-719,
711-719,
711-719,
1
2
3
4
1967
1967
1967
1967
2
3
Time,
davs
--
a>
Recycle,
% of
Feed
Wastage,
x of
Feed
F/M,
l b COD/
lb
NLS S - d a\,
a>
Reactor
PUSS,
mgllit e r
0.45 u
Reactor
COD I
n g l li t e r
- 0.45 u
Effluent
MLSS,
mg/l i t e r
f 0.45
-
~i
Growth
Rate
Produced,
l b XLSSI
lb
k e r a t i on
:fLS S-day
Yield,
l b MLSS
Produced 1
l b Soluble
COD
So l u b 1e
COD Removal
Efficiency,
Removed
8
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.830
0.513
0.370
0.429
291
2 89
296
199
53.3
46.9
44.4
61.0
2 89
2 89
295
198
0.238
0.118
0.075
0.046
0.304
0.243
0.214
0.116
94.2
94.9
95.2
93.4
4
6
8
0
0
0
10
0.623
0.652
0.519
0.374
277
211
19 7
196
64.2
72.5
77,3
89.9
278
213
20 1
19 3
0.177
0.174
0.132
0.037
0.303
0.288
0.275
0.110
93.7
92.9
92.4
91.1
142
513
644
750
68.8
69.2
63.4
44.6
142
512
638
725
0.163
0.333
0.415
0.763
0 * 109
0.608
0.619
0.787
92.7
92.7
93.3
95.2
4
6
0
0
0
8/11-8120.
8/11-8120,
8/11-8/20,
8/11-8120,
1967
1967
1967
1967
1
2
3
4
I!
3
7
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.609
0.590
0.719
1.017
9/21-9130.
9/17-9126,
9/21-9130.
9/19-9128,
1967
1967
1967
1967
1
2
3
4
1:
3
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.984
1.313
1.927
2.659
227
233
256
30 8
77.4
69.8
64.1
76.4
22 7
233
25 7
30 8
0.244
0.303
0.466
0.787
0.269
0.248
0.258
0.320
92.4
93.2
93.7
92.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.692
1.094
1.222
2.207
318
30 5
42 3
42 7
55.8
121.9
109.1
107.3
335
310
416
422
0.238
0.362
0.529
0.942
0.365
0.377
0.487
0.478
94.2
87.7
89.0
89.2
2
2
J
0
0
0
0
0.680
0.820
1.154
2.060
366
36 6
431
482
47.8
41.1
34.9
32.4
366
362
433
483
0.262
0.282
0.511
1.011
0.404
0.359
0.459
0.512
95.1
95.8
96.4
96.7
100
50
0
0
0
1.297
1.358
0.702
3.144
35 8
341
1475
329
33.0
46.2
41.6
60.8
26 3
330
148
330
0.344
0.445
0.093
0.977
0.274
0.343
0.139
0.330
96.8
95.5
95.9
94.1
1019-10118,
1019-10118,
1019-10118,
1019-10118,
1967
1967
1967
1967
1
2
3
4
10123-1111.
1012 3-11 11,
10/23-11/1,
10/23-11/1,
1967
196 7
1967
1967
1
2
3
4
1216-12/15,
12/6-12/15,
1216-12115,
1216-12115,
1967
1967
1967
1967
1
2
3
4
a)
3
2
1
2
2
1
COD values a r e s o l u b l e .
100
0
FIGURE 11
EffECT OF F/M ON GROWTH RATE
OF BIOLOGICAL MASS (MLSS)
I
.o
v,
-1
r: 0.8
L=
~-
0
-7
l
a
L
0.6
0.4
0.2
aJ
l-
0
LIJ
0
3
0
0
s
a
m
m
-1
F/M, db Soluble COD/lb MLSSIDay
calculations, and may be used t o estimate the quantity of sludge t h a t

w i l l be produced i n a treatment process. The same d a t a , expressed as
y i e l d o f MLSS per unit of soluble COD removal are shown in Figure 1 2 .
Table 2 sumnarizes oxygen uptake rate data from the continuous labora3
tory reactors, A t steady-state this rate should be a constant , The

u n i t oxygen uptake rate i s plotted i n Figure 13.
Batch Tests
The purpose of a b a t c h test i s t o obtain the unit rate of reaction (removal of soluble COD) for a given culture as a function of the concentration of substrate available for reaction (BOD). The BOD was estimated by calculating the difference between total COD and non-biodegrad5
able COD5. The batch test procedure was t o mix measured amounts of
culture from the continuous reactor and substrate t o be tested i n the
prescribed proportion. The mixed liquor was then placed into the batch
test vessel under adequate aeration, Samples were withdrawn a t halfhour intervals for the f i r s t 4 or 6 hours with a final sample taken
after 8 or 1 2 hours.
The soluble COD d a t a for a given batch test were plotted as a function
of time, and the rate of removal was determined a t various values of the
soluble COD remaining i n the mixed l i q u o r solution, The results are
shown i n Figure 1 4 ,
Effluent standards issued by regulatory agencies usually specify acceptable levels of BOD, The use of BOD analysis i s not practical for laboratory studies, where great numbers of analyses are required; therefore
the COD analysis was used for a l l o f the experiments, Correlations were
developed between BOD and COD, so t h a t test results could be related
30
FIGURE 1 2
EFFECT OF F/M ON CONVERSION
Y I E L D OF BIOLOGICAL MASS (MLSS)
v,
d
L
00
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
I
2.0
2.4
F/Ms l b SOLUBLE C O D / l b MLSS/DAY
2.8
3.2
Table 2
C O N T I W O U S LABOK\TOF.Y
REACTOR 0SYGL.N UPTAKE A M L Y S ES SC':?IAXY
R2actor
MLSS
mg/li t e r
7
Date
w
N
R e iic t o r
FlY
l b Soluble
COD /
l b !!LS S-da;.
Oxygen
Uptake ,
mgl lit e r minute
Unit Oxygen
Up t &e,
1b 0 2 1
l b YLSS-hr
3/15/68
3/15/68
31 1 5 I 6 8
3/15/68
1
2
3
4
1820
1 9 70
1470
2160
0.24
0.25
0.62
0.89
0.215
0.205
0.325
0.65
0.0071
0.0063
0.0133
0.0180
3/19/68
3/19/66
3/19/68
3/19/68
0.18
3
4
2 S30
2350
2000
1910
0.24
0.47
1.01
0.23
0.22
0.33
0.59
0.0049
0.0056
0.0099
0.0185
3/27/68
3210
1.56
2.00
0.0374
4/4/68
4/4/68
4/4/68
4/4/68
1
2
3
4
1916
10 32
1840
5110
0.4J
1.12
0.48
0.71
0.41
0.59
0.75
1.75
0.0128
0.0229
0.0150
0.0205
7/9/68
336
6.65
0.80
0.1429
7/17/68
688
3.39
0.40
0.0349
5/1/68
5/1/68
5/1/68
5/1/68
1
2
1840
720
1 9 30
3290
1396
0.48
1.37
0.50
1.21
1.30
0.41
0.32
0.42
1.43
0.845
0.0134
0.0267
0.0131
0.0261
0.0363
3
4
4
FIGURE 1 3
EFFECT OF F / M ON OXYGEN UPTAKE RATE
60
50
40
W
W
30
20
10
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
F/M, l b Soluble COD/lb MLSS/Day
2.4
2.8
I
3.2
FIGURE 14
U N I T RATE OF REMOVAL FOR
CULTURES DEVELOPED I N CORN
WET M I L L I N G WASTE WATER
LABORATORY BIOLOGICAL REACTORS
5.0
4.0
HIGH RANGE
3.0
/
AVERAGE
LOW RANGE
2.0
1 .o
100
200
300
EFFLUENT BOD CONCENTRATION, mg/l
34
400
t o e f f l u e n t standards f o r BOD. The data indicate t h a t the BOD is 25%

t o 30% of the COD f o r t r e a t e d wastes. Calculations a r e shown i n Append i x A.
Because o f the importance of microorganisms i n waste treatment6, several

photomicrographs a r e shown i n Figures 15 and 16 t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e b i o logical cultures i n the laboratory reactors, Figure 15a i s taken from
a reactor which was operating a s a wash-out process, Because the biomass was not recycled, bacterial clumps f a i l e d t o develop,
Filamentous organisms 9 4 sometimes appeared i n the reactors, resulting
i n a culture with poor s e t t l i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . An example of t h i s i s
given i n Figure 15b.
Cultures developed i n reactors operating w i t h recycle showed the best
s e t t l i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Rotifers i n p a r t i c u l a r a r e shown in Figure
16a, while Figure 16b shows a large variety of biological forms, Both
pictures show excel 1ent cl umping.
35
FIGURE 15
REACTOR CULTURES: UNDESIRABLE GROWTH
15a.
Culture from a r e a c t o r which was o p e r a t i n g a s a wash-out

process.
15b.
Filamentous organisms, which sometimes appeared i n the

reactors.
36
FIGURE 16
REACTOR CULTURES:
IMPROVED GROWTH
16a.
Culture from a r e a c t o r o p e r a t i n g a t 100% recycle.
16b.
Culture from a r e a c t o r o p e r a t i n g a t 90% recycle.
37
SECTION V
DESIGN BASIS
result of th laborator! work and some additional sol d s separation
studies, the following process steps were decided upon for treating the
waste.
A
1. Equalization
2. Cooling
3 . Aeration
4. Clarification
5. Dissolved Air Flotat on

6. Solids Thickening
7. Final Effluent Reaeration
A schematic of this system is shown in Figure 17. Some of the equipment

is shown in Figures 18 and 19. The following description is of the
equipment as originally installed. Many modifications, described later,
have since been made.
EQUALIZATION
As is the case with many industrial wastes, the raw waste suspended
solids concentrations are not great enough to require initial
clarification. The first phase of the completely mixed activated
sludge process is usually aeration. However, in this study all waste
load data were based on 24-hour composite samples. It was known that
product changes and batch operations in the manufacturing area could
cause wide variations in BOD concentration and pH within a 24-hour
period. Therefore, it was decided to install an equalization tank
with 24 hours retention at normal flow, or 900,000 gallons. It was
also necessary to provide some volume for accumulation of waste so
that the treatment plant could be shut down for maintenance without
shutting down the manufacturing plant. Essentially all maintenance
requirements could be accomplished within 8 hours. Allowing for
39
Figure 17
PEKIN WASTE TREATMENT PLANT
T
1
-
FLOW DIAGRAM
Raw Waste
0.9 mgd
Cooling
I -
75 hp
Equal 1 r a t i o n
P
0
1,200,000 gal
I
Recycle
9
y5:-/
Clarifier
325,000 gal
75 hp
325,000 gal
Sol Ids
Thickener
30 hp
Final Effluent
Final
E f f 1 uent
Reaeratlon
Dissolved Air F l o t a t i o n
400 sq f t
To R i v e r
20 mgd
1
Coolins Water 48" Sewer

Cooling Water 30" Sewer
FIGURE 1 8
PEKIN WASTE TREATMENT FACILITIES
18a.
Equalization basin, foreground, w i t h a d j a c e n t aeration t a n k s
on l e f t .
186.
Cooling tower, w i t h c l a r i f i e r i n background.
41
FIGURE 19
P E K I N WASTE TREATMENT F A C I L I T I E S
19a.
C l a r i f i e r ( r i g h t ) and t h i c k e n e r ( l e f t ) .
19b.
F l o a t i n g a e r a t o r being lowered i n t o r e a e r a t i o n basin,

w i t h I 1 1i n o i s R i v e r i n background.
42
a normal e q u a l i z a t i o n basin o p e r a t i n g volume o f 900,000 g a l l o n s and an

8-hour accumulation o f an a d d i t i o n a l 300,000 g a l l o n s i n case of r e p a i r
and maintenance, t h e t o t a l design volume was 1.2 m i l l i o n gallons.
An
a d d i t i o n a l b e n e f i t o f t h i s design was t o p r o v i d e an adequate supply t o

t h e a e r a t i o n tanks on weekends, when t h e waste f l o w from t h e manuf a c t u r i n g p l a n t was g r e a t l y reduced.
Because o f t h e shape and s i z e o f t h e a v a i l a b l e l a n d area, t h e equalizat i o n b a s i n i s o f i r r e g u l a r shape, and was constructed w i t h an i n t e r i o r
1/16-inch t h i c k rubber l i n i n g over s l o p i n g compacted e a r t h and g r a v e l
As w i l l be seen, t h i s was n o t a s a t i s f a c t o r y design.
walls.
b i n e a g i t a t o r s mix t h e contents.
Two t u r -
The u n i t i n t h e l a r g e r end was 25 hp
and t h e one i n t h e s m a l l e r end was 20 hp.
These a g i t a t o r s were s i z e d by
t h e manufacturer t o meet t h e s p e c i f i c a t i o n s o f m a i n t a i n i n g a suspension

o f up t o 1700 mg/l o f s t a r c h granules, and o f b l e n d i n g t h e basin cont e n t s u n i f o r m l y w i t h i n 30 minutes.
The 25-hp a g i t a t o r had a 102-inch
i m p e l l e r o p e r a t i n g a t 37 rpm, and t h e 20-hp u n i t had an 84-inch i m p e l l e r

o p e r a t i n g a t 45 rpm.
As w i l l be seen l a t e r , these turned o u t t o be
inadequate f o r t h e job.
Waste
is pumped from t h e e q u a l i z a t i o n basin, w i t h a l e v e l r e c o r d e r pro-
vided t o a i d i n adjustment o f t h e f l o w r a t e .
Alarms i n d i c a t e pump o r
a g i t a t o r motor f a i l u r e .
COOLING
The waste stream temperature averages 120F, o c c a s i o n a l l y reaching
150F.
In o r d e r t o m a i n t a i n a temperature range o f 75"-90F i n t h e
a e r a t i o n b a s i n i n summer, some o f t h e waste stream must be cooled.
A spray-type c o o l i n g tower i s provided f o r t h i s purpose.
43
The tower was sized t o cool the concentrated waste stream t o an average
of n o t more t h a n 90F over a 24-hour period a t the most severe conditions o f temperature and relative humidity, Meterological data from
the U.S. Weather Bureau for the Peoria, Illinois area d u r i n g several
recent years were used t o determine these conditions.

The temperature i n one aeration t a n k i s recorded, The temperature control element is located i n the combined supply and recycle line t o the
aeration basin, Temperature control is obtained by automatically passi n g a suitable volume of the supply stream through the cooling tower,
AERATION
The purpose of the aeration t a n k i s t o provide an environment suitable

for the growth of the appropriate microorganisms, An extensive laboratory program was conducted a t the Pekin plant t o determine the rate of
COD removal, oxygen requirements, and biomass growth rate for the completely mixed activated sludge process, using cultures developed i n the
environment of corn wet milling wastes, As a result of these tests,
u n i t rate o f removal curves were determined f o r a wide range o f laboratory operating conditions, described i n Appendix A, Most of the d a t a
fell w i t h i n the range of the dotted lines shown in Figure 14. The s o l i d
curve represents the approximate average. These curves show the quant i t y of COD t h a t can be removed per day per pound o f MLSS under aeration,
a t different BOD values.
The effluent BOD standard for discharge into the Illinois River when the
treatment process was designed was 40 mg/l, Another constraint on the
operation of the aeration process, determined during the development
work, i s that the system should be maintained a t less than 100 mg/l
soluble COD, t o minimize the chance of growth of filamentous bacteria,
In the laboratory studies, the C0D:BOD relationship for the treated
44
effluent had been found t o be approximately 100:30 (C0D:BOD correlations a r e given i n Appendix A ) , Therefore, 100 mg/l COD was used f o r
design, An MLSS concentration of 3000 mg/l was selected, based on laboratory t e s t s which showed t h a t operation a t t h i s level generally r e sul ted i n a culture w i t h good s e t t l i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , The concentration can be increased i f necessary f o r t r e a t i n g unusually high waste
loads o r i f lower r a t e s of removal a r e experienced d u r i n g winter operat i o n . This level is controlled by varying the biomass recycle and
wastage r a t e s ,
The raw waste flow i s approximately 900,000 gallons per day (gpd) w i t h
a COD concentration of 2,500 mg/l. The calculations f o r sizing the
aeration basins are summarized below,
Raw Waste Volume. gal/day

COD Concentration mg/l
COD i n Waste, lb/day
Effluent COD, mg/l
Effluent COD, lb/day
COD Removed, lb/day (3)
(5)
Effluent BOD, mg/l
U n i t Rate of Removal a t 40 mg/l BOD (from
Figure 141, l b COD/lb MLSS/day (using low
range of d a t a )
MLSS Required, 16 (6) + (8)
MLSS Concentration mg/l
Aeration Tank Volume Required, gallons
900,000
2,500
18,800
100
750
18,050
30-40
1.1
16,200
3,000
650 000
Oxygen requirements f o r the completely mixed activated sludge process

were determined by laboratory tests and a r e summarized i n Table 2 . The
maximum load expected was 30,000 l b COD per day, The u n i t oxygen uptake
45
r a t e i s a function of the F/M r a t i o , as shown i n Figure 13. The oxygen

requirement calculations a r e as follows.
(1 1
(2)
(3)
(4)
Maximum Waste Load, 1b COD/day
Normal MLSS i n Aeration Tanks, l b

Maximum F/M (1) + (2)
U n i t Oxygen Rate, l b 02/hr/lb MLSS
(Figure 13)
(5) Oxygen Required, lb/hr (4) x (2)
30,000
16,200
1.85
0,041
665
The calculations showed t h a t 665 l b / h r of oxygen t r a n s f e r was required.

Surface aeration was selected f o r the Pekin process due t o i t s r e l a t i v e l y h i g h oxygen transfer efficiency, and good l i q u i d mixing charact e r i s t i c s f o r the completely mixed process, The CY. and 6 values, f a c t o r s
r e l a t i n g oxygen t r a n s f e r rate and oxygen saturation i n the mixed liquor,
respectively, t o the values f o r water, were determined t o be 0.85 and
0.95. The oxygen requirements and other data were sent t o several aera t o r suppliers for b i d s . The selected supplier (as well as o t h e r s )
found t h a t four 75 hp surface aerators were required.
The aeration s t a t i o n was designed t o consist of two excavated, rubberlined basins, each w i t h a capacity of 325,000 gallons, Oxygen i s provided by two 75 hp surface aerators i n each t a n k . Fixed-mount aerators
were selected because of lower c o s t i n comparison w i t h f l o a t i n g mount
f o r this size u n i t , Depth o f submersion i s c r i t i c a l for proper operat i o n of surface a e r a t o r s . Level control i s obtained by overflowing a
weir a t one end of each tank, The weir was designed t o hold the level
within one inch of nominal over t h e expected range of flows, so t h a t
optimum aerator submergence could be obtained.
Waste i s pumped from the equalization basin t o the aeration tanks

through a flow recorder-controller, The flow r a t e i s set according t o
46
the level i n the equalization tank. The supply stream i s automatically

sampled, and s p l i t equally between t h e two aeration tanks. T h i s i s
accomplished by u s i n g symnetrical p i p i n g , and flow d i s t r i b u t i o n nozzles
on the outlet t o each tank, In addition t o the waste, the supply stream
contained added nutrients, recycled biomass from the c l a r i f i e r , and
thickener overflow.
Nutrient addition i s necessary t o maintain t h e r a t i o C0D:N:P = 100:5:1.
Nitrogen i s added i n the form of ammonia, w i t h a flow control s t a t i o n
for controlling the r a t e o f addition, Phosphorus i s added in the form
of phosphoric a c i d , which i s stored i n a 3000-gallon tank, The concent r a t i o n o f acid i n the t a n k i s maintained a t 65% t o 70% t o prevent
freezing, as the freezing point i s below 0F a t these concentrations,
CLARIFICATION
The mixed liquor from the aeration tank i s pumped t o a c l a r i f i e r f o r
the purpose o f separating the suspended s o l i d s from water by gravity
s e t t l i n g , The c l a r i f i e r supply r a t e , supply sol i d s concentration ,. overflow r a t e , and desired overflow concentration were given t o four c l a r i f i e r manufacturers. Each recomnended a 45-foot diameter unit corresponding t o an overflow r a t e of about 550 t o 650 gallons per day per
square foot over t h e expected range of flows,
A suction-type c l a r i f i e r was selected, which uses a r o t a t i n g , perforated
tube for collecting s o l i d s across the entire bottom, t o a collecting
well, The construction of t h e u n i t i s concrete, w i t h the i n t e r i o r
coated. The suction arm i s galvanized s t e e l , and the remaining s t e e l i s
pai n ted ,
C l a r i f i e r overflow goes t o the dissolved a i r f l o t a t i o n tank. The sett l e d biomass collected from t h e c l a r i f i e r was expected t o have a concen-
47
t r a t i o n o f 8,000 t o 10,000 mg/l sol ds. Most of this stream i s recycled

t o the aeration t a n k .
Settled biomass w h i c h i s n o t needed t o maintain the culture in the aera t i o n t a n k must be removed. This excess biomass went t o the thickener.
Flow controls were provided for the biomass recycle stream and for the
excess biomass stream.
DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION
Since laboratory studies had indicated t h a t the waste was susceptible

t o the growth of filamentous organisms, resulting in an effluent w i t h
poor settl i n g characteristics , and since filamentous organisms can be
removed from suspension by dissolved a i r flotation, a dissolved a i r
flotation station was included i n the process design.
Overflow from the clarifier flows by gravity t o the flotation c e l l ,
Some of the effluent from the flotation cell i s recycled t h r o u g h a pump
t o a pressure t a n k , where i t i s contacted with a i r a t 60 t o 70 psi,
The air-saturated water then returns t o the flotation cell. When the
pressure i s released from the recycle stream, the a i r t h a t had been dissolved a t the h i g h e r pressure comes o u t of solution as very small bubbles, The air bubbles rise t o the surface, carrying suspended particles
with t h e m , These floated solids are removed by paddles suspended from
a moving chain, The solids are raked onto a beach plate, and then
dropped i n t o the foam collecting t a n k where i t mixes with the settled
solids from the thickener. The clarified water from the flotation cell
flows by g r a v i t y t o the reaeration t a n k .
The supplier selected a 400-square foot unit, based on specifications of
an average supply stream of 625 gallons per minute containing 500 mg/l
48
suspended s o l i d s , t o produce an e f f l u e n t of l e s s than 45 mg/l suspended

sol ids.
SOL IDS THICKEN ING
The purpose of the thickener was t o increase the concentration of the

c l a r i f i e r underflow i n order t o reduce the volume of excess biomass t o
be processed. In order t o determine the necessary thickener s i z e , data
from the continuous laboratory reactors was used t o estimate the quant i t y of excess biomass production i n the aeration tanks, Figure 11
shows the biomass growth r a t e as a function o f F/M, The excess biomass
h a n d l i n g system was sized f o r average F/M as follows.
(1 ) COD i n Waste, 1b/day
(2) MLSS i n Aeration Tanks, l b
(3) F/M, 16 COD/lb MLSS/day (1) t (2)
(4) Growth Rate, l b MLSS/day/lb MLSS i n
Aeration Tanks (from Figure 11)
(5) Excess Solids Produced, lb/day (4) x (2)
18,800
16,200
1.1
0.41
6,700
The anticipated flow r a t e and concentration of the biomass stream were

given t o several thickener manufacturers who were asked t o give their
recommendations f o r the diameter of the u n i t , Recommendations varied
from 30 t o 45 feet i n diameter,
I t was decided t o use a 45-foot diameter u n i t , the same as t h e c l a r i fier, since t h i s simplified the design and construction of the concrete
tanks somewhat. In addition, the l a r g e r u n i t provided adequate volume
f o r biomass accumulation d u r i n g times when the excess biomass disposal
process i s not operating. The thickener was similar t o the c l a r i f i e r
i n design and construction, except t h a t the s e t t l e d solids were
discharged by a rotating rake mechanism, rather than by a suction t u b e .
49
According t o the manufacturer, a thickener o f t h i s capacity should

increase the concentration of the biomass t o a b o u t 3% s o l i d s , The
thickener underflow was removed f o r disposal, a process n o t covered by
this report. The thickener overflow was returned t o the aeration tanks.
F I N A L EFFLUENT REAERATION
The treated effluent i s combined i n the reaeration t a n k w i t h the cooling

water from the 30-inch and 48-inch sewers, creating a single outfall for
sampling and measuring. The 25 h p floating aerator i s sized t o increase
the dissolved oxygen content of the effluent t o 4 mg/l a t an average
flow of 20 mgd .
50
SECTION VI
PLANT STARTUP AND OPERATION: NOVEMBER 1970-SEPTEMBER 1971
P l a n t o p e r a t i o n began i n November 1970, u t i l i z i n g the e q u a l i z a t i o n
basin and a e r a t i o n tanks. Development of the biological culture was
s t a r t e d by using c l a r i f i e r underflow from another corn wet m i l l i n g a c t i vated sludge p l a n t a s s e e d , I n i t i a l l y , 5,000 g a l l o n s of s e e d , 100,000
g a l l o n s of concentrated waste and 200,000 g a l l o n s o f c i t y water were
placed i n each t a n k , A fill-and-draw procedure was used f o r t h e f i r s t
6 days of o p e r a t i o n , u n t i l the MLSS concentration was b u i l t up t o about
1500 mg/l. For the next two weeks, the a e r a t i o n tanks were operated on
a w'ashout b a s i s , t r e a t i n g about 25% of the p l a n t waste. Because no
recycled biomass was a v a i l a b l e , the MLSS dropped t o 900 mg/l i n the
aeration tanks,
The c l a r i f i e r was p u t i n t o o p e r a t i o n December 1970. I n i t i a l o p e r a t i o n

on the t o t a l p l a n t waste flow produced an effluent w i t h a s o l u b l e COD
c o n c e n t r a t i o n of less than 100 mg/l , w i t h a suspended s o l i d s concentrat i o n i n the a e r a t i o n tanks o f 2000 t o 3000 mg/l. Clarifier underflow
had a suspended s o l i d s c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f 10,000 t o 20,000 mg/l ; overflow,
100 t o 150 mg/l,
The remaining equipment f o r the waste t r e a t m e n t p l a n t was placed i n
service by the end of January 1971, However, the smooth operation
observed during t h i s period was t o be the l a s t t h a t would be seen f o r
n e a r l y a y e a r , A combination o f mechanical f a i l u r e s and unforeseen
operational problems demanded a g r e a t deal of time, a t t e n t i o n , and
money.
Figure 20 g i v e s the semimonthly average t o t a l COD concentration f o r
influent and effluent, c a l c u l a t e d by computer, Monthly averages were
51
FIGURE 20
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
YOV 1970-AUG 1971
SEMI-MONTHLY AVERAGES
600C
5000
m
E
4000
0
0
2
E
3000
2000
1000
52
n o t used because of the r e l a t i v e l y short time period involved. S e m i monthly averages were chosen rather than biweekly averages in order t o
f a c i l i t a t e computer programing. The original data are given i n
Appendix C.
Figures 21 and 22 give the probability of occurrence of influent and
effluent COD concentrations, respectively, These figures are based on
computer-generated distributions of the daily d a t a , given i n Appendix C
along w i t h computer-generated histograms of these d i s t r i b u t i o n s .
Figure 23 shows the semimonthly averages for e f f l u e n t suspended sol i d s ,
calculated by computer i n the same manner as the COD d a t a , Figure 24
gives the probability of occurrence f o r effluent suspended solids concentrations, developed from a computer-generated d i s t r i b u t i o n , The
original data, the d i s t r i b u t i o n , and a computer-generated histogram o f
t h i s d i s t r i b u t i o n a r e also given i n Appendix B,
Of the problems encountered d u r i n g t h i s period, the most serious were
the s p l i t t i n g of the rubber l i n e r s in the equalization and aeration
tanks, and odor problems t h a t developed in the equalization t a n k and
t h i c kener ,
RUBBER L I N E R PROBLEMS
On December 14, 1970, it was noticed t h a t a seam i n the equalization

basin was open f o r a distance of about 30 f e e t , as shown i n Figure 25a.
As recommended by consultants, based on s o i l boring t e s t s , the equalizat i o n and aeration tanks were constructed w i t h sloping s i d e s , w i t h the
slope r a t i o 1,5:1, This turned out t o be s u f f i c i e n t l y close t o the
angle of repose of the soil t h a t the wave action due t o the a g i t a t o r s
and aerators caused the soil t o come loose under the l i n e r and f a l l t o
53
FIGURE
21
INFLUENT TOTAL CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND

NOVEMBER 1970-AUGUST 1 9 7 1
0000
8000
6000
4000
c
\
(3,
E
8s
2000
0
-J
-t
I-
1000
800
400
300
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
99
99.9
PROBABILITY OF OCCURENCE:
PERCENT OF DAYS COD WAS LESS
THAN OR EQUAL TO INDICATED CONCENTRATIO14
54
FIGURE 22
EFFLUENT TOTAL CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
NOVEMBER 1970-AUGUST 1971
10003
8003
6000
4000
2000
i
n
E
D
0
c,
zi
1000
t0
800
I-
600
400
200
100
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE
55
99
99.9
FIGURE 23
EFFLUENT SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION
NOVEMBER 1970-AUGUST 1 9 7 1
SEMIMONTHLY AVERAGES
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Nov.
1970
Jan.
1971
FIGURE
24
EFFLUENT SUSPENDED SOLIQS

6000
4000
2000
..
10000
8000
7
m
E
n
m
0
-1
0
n
w
n
1000
800
600
I-
LL
400
200
LL
100
10
20
40
30
90
95
99
99.9
60
57
FIGURE 25
EQUALIZATION BASIN L I N E R PROBLEMS
25a. Split seam in the rubber lining o f the equalization basin.
25b.
Repair work on the lining o f the equalization basin.
58
the bottom. The resultant tension applied t o the rubber lining caused
the seam t o s p l i t .
Repair work involved draining and cleaning the tank, cutting away the
l i n i n g , replacing the f a l l e n material, and adding cement t o create a
s o i l cement w i t h a 1 t o 6 mixture, Figure 25b shows the repair work i n
progress.
During this time, p i p i n g was i n s t a l l e d t o allow pumping the waste
d i r e c t l y t o the aeration tanks. The lining was repaired, b u t the repaired areas f a i l e d again immediately upon being p u t back i n service.
Supplying raw waste d i r e c t l y t o the aeration tanks resulted i n severe

fo'aming problems, i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure 26a. T h i s problem disappeared
when the equalization basin was returned t o service a f t e r being repaired
the second time,
In February 1971 the south aeration t a n k developed the same problem as
had occurred i n the equalization t a n k , shown i n Figure 26b. I t was
decided t o remove the rubber l i n e r , pour a 4-inch concrete pad on the
sides of the tank, and cover the concrete with rubber l i n e r , shown i n
Figure 27a. T h i s was completed i n April 1971. However, the rubber d i d
not adhere t o the concrete, and so was removed completely, The concrete
surface was covered w i t h 3 coats of epoxy t a r coating,
Plant performance during t h i s time was not improved by the f a i l u r e o f
two more seams i n the equalization basin, For two weeks i n April while
the equalization basin was being repaired, the plant was operating on
one aeration basin only, As can be seen from Figures 20 and 23, e f f l u ent COD and suspended solids reached their highest concentrations d u r i n g
this time,
59
FIGURE 26
AERATION TANK PROBLEMS
26a.
Foaming i n t h e a e r a t i o n tank during shutdown o f the

equal i za t ion basin .
26b.
Tension and breakage o f the rubber l i n i n g i n the south

a e r a t i o n basin due t o s o i l accumulation.
6U
FIGURE 27
REPAIR WORK I N AERATION TANK AND EQUALIZATION B A S I N
27a.
Concreted and relined aeration basin.
276.
New baffles in equalization basin.
61
Because of the time required t o cure t h e concrete and the coating, the
south aeration basin was not ready f o r service until the end o f April
1971. The north aeration basin was then renovated by i n s t a l l i n g conc r e t e slabs over the reconditioned s o i l sides, w i t h the rubber lining
under the concrete. T h i s was completed by June 1971, and similar work
on t h e equalization basin was completed by August 1971, All concrete
surfaces were coated w i t h epoxy tar. No f u r t h e r problems have been
encountered w i t h the tank l i n i n g s .
EQUALIZATION TANK AND THICKENER ODOR PROBLEMS
In April 1971, complaints of odors were received from a nearby indust r y . The equalization t a n k and thickener were identified as contribufors t o the odors,
Odors i n waste treatment f a c i l i t i e s a r e generally caused by a depletion
in the oxygen supply. T h i s r e s u l t s i n anaerobic a c t i v i t y on the p a r t of
faculative and anaerobic bacteria2, which use oxygen contained i n chemical compounds, creating odorous gases as a byproduct of t h e i r decomposition activity.
Odors were not the only concern centering on the thickener a t t h i s time.
Additional storage was needed f o r the biomass. Both problems were
solved simultaneously by converting the thickener t o an aerated storage
tank. The inside sweep mechanism was removed, and 600 cubic feet per
minute (cfm) of air dispersed by a 15 hp a g i t a t o r maintained the biomass
i n an aerobic condition.
The odor problem i n the equalization basin appeared t o be caused by
sol i d material s settling out and undergoing anaerobic decomposition.
Part of the problem was due t o the concrete a g i t a t o r supports being
higher than the basin bottom, creating dead spaces unaffected by the
62
a g i t a t i o n . This problem was attacked by i n s t a l l i n g a smooth concrete

bottom i n the equalization basin, and adding baffles f o r b o t h a g i t a t o r s ,
shown i n Figure 27b. This was done when the rubber l i n e r was being
replaced w i t h concrete, and the tank was returned t o service in August
1971,
The odor problem, i t turned o u t , was n o t yet solved, I t was decided t o

increase a g i t a t i o n , and add aeration, A second impeller was added t o
each a g i t a t o r , The 25 hp north agitator was replaced with a 50 hp one,
and the 20 hp south a g i t a t o r was replaced by a 30 hp one w i t h the agit a t o r s h a f t speed increased from 45 t o 68 rpm, A 1000 cfm a i r blower
was i n s t a l l e d , w i t h the air b e i n g dispersed by the a g i t a t o r s ,
Thi's equipment was p u t i n t o operation September
been no recurrence of the odor problem since.
63
1971, and there has
SECTION VI1
PLANT OPERATION : OCTOBER 1971-JANUARY 1973
After the i n i t i a l equipment and operation problems of t h e plant were

solved, efforts were concentrated on optimization o f the waste treatment
process, Of primary concern was meeting the I l l i n o i s EPA effluent quali t y standards for BOD and for suspended solids. A t the time the Pekin
f a c i l i t y was designed, the c r i t e r i a i n effect for allowable effluent
concentrations were 40 mg/l BOD and 45 mg/l suspended solids. These
c r i t e r i a have since been reduced t o 30 and 35 m g / l , and beginning i n
1975 will be 20 mg/l BOD and 25 mg/l suspended solids,
I t was found that the treatment plant effluent seldom met the effluent
c r i t e r i a . The problem was nearly always due t o poor separation of biomass i n the c l a r i f i e r and flotation c e l l . High suspended solids i n the
effluent resulted in f a i l u r e t o meet b o t h the suspended solids and BOD
criteria.
Several process modifications were made which improved treatment plant
performance. The most significant changes, described i n detail later
i n this section, were:
1.
Amnonia nitrogen concentration of the waste stream was

reduced.
2.
The biomass recycle r a t e was increased from the conventional rate of 25% t o 35% of the supply to 75% to 100%
of the supply,
3,
Recycled biomass was aerated before being returned t o

the aeration t a n k ,
65
4.
The use o f chemical flocculating agents was tested.
These modifications were made over a short time period, and the i n d i v i d u a l effects could not be determined. The over-all effect can be seen
by comparing operating results d u r i n g the period July 1972 t o January
1973, a f t e r the changes had been made with those discussed i n e a r l i e r
sections, Some dramatic improvements i n treatment plant performance can
be seen, although the anticipated eff uent quality was s t i l l not consistently attained. For example, during the time period October 1971
t h r o u g h June 1972, 90% of the effluent BOD values were below 540 mg/l;
d u r i n g the time period July 1972 t h r o u g h January 1973 the 90% occurrence
had been reduced t o 205 mg/l (see Figure 32). Also, d u r i n g the e a r l i e r
period, effluent suspended solids concentrations were below 795 mg/l
90% of the time; during the l a t e r period t h i s was reduced t o 330 mg/l
(see Figure 37). Detailed descriptions of the changes that brought
about these improvements are given below.
Throughout the reporting period, waste flow f e l l w i t h i n or below the
maximum design flow of 1 . 2 mgd maximum, The average flow was 0.763 mgd.
Flow data are given i n Appendix C, Computer-generated distributions
were made for each of the time periods under consideration, and are also
shown i n Appendix C. However, the difference i n flow for these two
periods i s insignificant, and the d a t a were combined to give the d i s t r i b u t i o n shown i n Figure 28,
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BOD)

The BOD constitutes an empirical t e s t i n which standard laboratory procedures are used t o determine the relative oxygen requirements of waste
waters and effluents f o r the stabilization of oxidizable organic matter
4
present, The procedure i s described i n Standard Methods , The t e s t
has i t s widest application i n measuring the waste loadings t o treatment
66
F I G U R E 28
CONCENTRATED WASTE FLOW
OCTCIBER 1971 -JANUARY 1973
I
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
W
m
E
3:
0
-J
LL
0.2
0.11
5
10
20
40
60
80
90
95
99
PROBABILITY O F OCCURRENCE
99.9
plants and i n evaluating the efficiency (BOD removal) of such treatment

systems. Furthermore, effluent water quality standards frequently
include BOD levels, Since complete stabilization of a waste may require
an incubation period too long for practical purposes, the 5-day period
a t 20C has been accepted as standard, The Pekin waste treatment f a c i l i t y was originally designed t o meet the then existing effluent 5-day BOD
criterion of 40 mg/l.
Because of the length of time required for the BOD t e s t , i t i s often
easier t o use the COD t e s t , which measures the oxygen equivalent of
matter i n a sample t h a t i s susceptible t o oxidation by a strong chemical
oxidant, whether or n o t i t i t biodegradable. For a given waste, there
i s usually a relatively constant relationship between BOD and the COD7
l'he correlation coefficients were calculated by computer for BOD as a
function of COD for b o t h influent and effluent. Separate calculations
were done for each of the two time periods under consideration.
Although there i s considerable scatter in the data, good correlation
coefficients were obtained for b o t h time periods, and are given i n
Table 3.
TABLE
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS, BOD AS A FUNCTION OF COD
October 1971 J u n e 1973

Influent
0.89
Effl uent
0.98
July 1972-January 1973

Influent
0.82
Effluent
0.81
The data f o r these calculations are given i n Appendix C , The relationship for the second time period only are shown graphically i n Figure 29,
The COD test was used for determining the daily operating conditions i n
the treatment plant. However, treatment plant performance described i n
this section was calculated from 5-day BOD t e s t s .
68
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
g
7
0
0
N
0
h
0
W
0
L
to
0
0
W L O
1/6M a09 I N T l l J N I
69
?-.
0
0
0
0
M
0
0
N
0
0
F
u3
0
0
cr)
0
0
N
0
0
7
cu
Throughout this report, BOD and COD removals and loadings, and influent
BOD and COD values, are based on samples of the stream from the equalization tank t o the aeration tanks. Effluent samples were taken from
the discharge o f the flotation c e l l , Both samples were collected in
continuous, refrigerated samplers. I t has been observed t h a t signifi c a n t soluble COD reduction occurs i n the equalization t a n k ; about 1/3
a t times. Thus the influent BOD and COD values i n t h i s report reflect
the loading t o the aeration tanks, b u t do n o t represent the total raw
waste load from the manufacturing process,
The semimonthly average influent and effluent BOD concentrations are

shown i n Figure 30 for October 1971 t h r o u g h January 1973, The d a t a ,
shown i n Appendix C were averaged by computer. As can be seen, the
fluctuations are considerable, This i s due largely t o the variability
i n b o t h the raw material and the production schedule, discussed previously. The lower effluent BOD levels i n the second half of the time
sequence are due partly t o the lower influent BOD levels and partly t o
improvements i n managing the waste treatment plant, As can be seen from
Figure 31, the per cent reduction of BOD was improved significantly
during this period. During the period September 1971 through June 1972
the per cent BOD reduction was below 90% forty-five per cent of the
time, b u t from July 1972 through January 1973 i t was below 90% only ten
per cent of the time, These calculations are based on computer-generated distributions, given i n Appendix C.
In spite of t h i s relatively h i g h level of efficiency, effluent c r i t e r i a
were d i f f i c u l t t o meet, As can be seen in Figure 32, based on computergenerated distributions also given i n Appendix C, during the period
October 1971 t h r o u g h June 1972 the design BOD standard o f 40 mg/l was
rarely met. During the period July 1972 t h r o u g h January 1973 t h i s
standard was met nearly 60% of the time. While s t i l l not completely
satisfactory, t h i s represents a substantial improvement.
70
FIGURE 30
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
SEMI-MONTHLY AVERAGES
OCTOBER 1 9 7 1
JANUARY 1 9 7 3
INFLUENT BOD
\
E
n
0
m
2000
EFFLUENT BOD
SEPT.
1971
JAN.
1972
MAY
SEPT.
JAN.
1973
>
w
h
r u m
h
7
m c n
72
cu
cn
cn
0
0
0
d
ru
0
c
0
7
w
w
e
oi
0
0
LL
0
0
FIGURE 32
EFFLUENT BOD
1000
800
600
400
200
7
m
E
n
t;
I _
100
1
LL
80
60
OCTOBER 1971
JULY 1972
JUNE 1972
JANUARY 1973
40
20
.
1
40
60
80
99
95
99
73
99.9
One o f the changes i n operating procedure during this period was t o

increase the biomass recycle rate from the c l a r i f i e r t o the aeration
tanks from 25% t o 35% of the supply r a t e t o 75% t o 100%. The reason
for this change was t o decrease the time t h a t the biomass was held i n
the c l a r i f i e r without oxygen. A t times, gas bubbles had been observed
rising t o the c l a r i f i e r surface, resulting i n carryover of f l o c t o the
effluent, The effect on BOD removal i s shown i n Figure 3 3 , using computer calculated semimonthly averages. The original d a t a are given in
Appendix C. As can be seen, a t the lower recycle rates results were
sometimes adequate; a t the higher recycle rates BOD removal was nearly
always 90% or better. Figure 33 can be compared with Figure 31, which
i s based on a distribution of d a i l y data, t o give a better idea o f the
results.
In a d d i t i o n t o the h i g h e r recycle rates, a t this time i t was also
decided t o aerate the biomass p r i o r t o recycling i t t o the aeration
tanks, The thickener, which had been modified due t o odor problems
(described i n Section 11), was utilized for t h i s purpose. Pilot scale
tests had indicated some improvement i n flocculation with a d d i t i o n a l
time under aeration, A t normal recycle flow rates, the biomass underwent about 5 hours retention time i n the thickener.
The F/M r a t i o i s described i n a l a t e r section; however, the relationship

between BOD removal and F/M i s shown i n Figure 34. Computer calculated
semimonthly averages are used, based on the original d a t a given i n
Appendix C. The curve represents best results, The scatter indicates
other factors besides F/M affecting the BOD removal.
The c l a r i f i e r was designed t o operate a t an overflow rate of 550 t o 650
gallons per day per square foot over the expected range of flow, The
characteristics o f the bianass are such that t h i s overflow rate usually
results i n a high sludge blanket level i n the c l a r i f i e r . A t times, even
74
55
E
)
,-,
4
0 0
0
0
oo
I
0
h
a3
0
c
n
lWAOW311 lF133Hld QO9
75
v,
W
CY
>
4
W
Q
t
z
0
U
I-
O
LL
z
Q
v,
d
c3
0
a3
0
0
0
0
c
I
0
when laboratory settling t e s t s show t h a t settling should occur, floc i s

carried over the t o p of the c l a r i f i e r , A lower overflow rate should
result in a lower sludge blanket, and less frequent floc carryover.
I t should be noted, however, t h a t while carryover of floc has occurred
often, the primary cause of failure t o meet suspended solids c r i t e r i a
i s the presence of unflocculated bacteria which do n o t s e t t l e even i n a
s t a t i c settling t e s t . Lower c l a r i f i e r loading alone will not overcome
this problem,
SUSPENDED SOL IDS
One.of the factors essential t o the performance of the activated sludge

process i s effective flocculation of the sludge, with subsequent rapid
settling and compaction of the floc7 , Inadequate flocculation and
settling will result i n an unacceptably high level of suspendes solids
i n the effluent,
Several factors were examined for their effect on the suspended solids
level i n the effluent, These include nutrient levels, hydraulic loadi n g , food-to-microorganism ratios, and the use of chemical flocculating
agents,
Nutrient Addition
In the highly complex microorganism population of an activated sludge
system, good settling characteristics are associated with the presence
of protozoa, stalked c i l i a t e s , rotifers and other higher microbial 1 i f e
forms, Developing a suitable microorganism population depends largely
on nutrient balance, With the exception of nitrogen and phosphorus ,
most o f the minerals entering i n t o the growth o f these populations are
narmally available from water supplies used for the transport of waste
77
substances 1 , Minimum requirements f o r nitrogen and phosphorus are

placed a t ratios of B0D:N:P = 150:5:1 and requirements for maximum
8
N and P content of sludge a t 90:5:1 ,
In the Pekin plant, phosphorus levels i n the waste were below minimum
levels, and provision f o r the addition of phosphoric acid was included
i n the plant design, The ammonia nitrogen level i n the waste, however,
was unusually h i g h because of i t s use i n one of the manufacturing processes, B0D:N r a t i o s , prior t o January 1972, averaged around 65:5,
significantly outside the normal range f o r optimum operation Since
the microorganism population was low i n protozoa, stalked c i l i a t e s ,
r o t i f e r s , and other higher l i f e forms, and since the plant effluent had
-poor settling characteristics, an e f f o r t was made t o reduce the level
of ammonia nitrogen t o the waste, and studies were undertaken t o t r y t o
improve the types of microorganisms i n the activated sludge.
A study on the growth of r o t i f e r s i n activated sludge systems, undertaken
by the Technical Service Department of CPC International Inc., indicated
t h a t ammonium toxicity was the only factor t o have an appreciable effect

on t h e establishment of higher l i f e forms i n the Pekin waste. The study
examined the effects of mineral addition, pH and shear, as well as
ammonium nitrogen toxicity. The results of this study are summarized i n
Table 4 ,
For the mineral study, r o t i f e r growth i n Pekin's c l a r i f i e r overflow

water was compared w i t h growth i n a control mediwn known t o support
r o t i f e r s . I t was found t h a t mineral additions t o the overflow water
appeared t o stimulate the r o t i f e r growth r a t e and support a higher
density o f r o t i f e r s than the control system. The source of water i n
the concentrated waste stream a t the Pekin plant i s primarily condensed
water vapor from evaporators. I t was suspected that some trace elements
required f o r optimum microbial growth might be lacking, Analyses of
78
TABLE
ROTIFER GROWTH IN ACTIVATED SLUDGE SYSTEMS
Per cent i n c r e a s e i n numbers of rotifers i n Pekin c l a r i f i e r overflow

(c.0,) and i n a control b r o t h a t pH 7.0
% Increase
C.O.
Control Broth
C.O. plus 5 mg/l Mg
C.O. plus 15 mg/l Fe
C.0: plus 5 mg/l Mg and 1 5 mg/l Fe
i n 24 hr
28
31
25.3
39
57.5
Doubling Time of
Population hr
85.6
77.2
95.7
67.7
41.8
- _ _ .
Effect o f pH on r o t i f e r s
Ammonium nitrogen t o x i c i t y on r o t i f e r s
% Increase i n 24 hr
pH
% Increase i n 24 hr
31
+ 26
- 32
- 61
4
5
6
7
8
9
2.0
t 3.76
t 2-44
9.5
+ 3.75
5.37
Control Broth
+ 100 mg/l NH4
+ 200 mg/l NH4
t 300 mg/l NH4
Effect of shear on r o t fers

Waring Blender, rpm
0
840
2700
3500
4200
Blade Tip.Speed, fpm

0
550
1775
2290
2750
Rotifer Density
21.1
19.2
16,8
19,8
19.2
The t i p speed of t h e a g i t a t o r s i n the Pekin Aeration Pond i s 1100 fpm.
79
the waste stream showed t h a t concentrations of iron, n i t r a t e , potassium,

zinc and cobalt m i g h t be below required levels, Based on the results
o f this study, ions were added t o the P e k i n system as follows.
NO;
K+
++
Zn +++
co
5
1
1
1
Ppm
PPm
PPm
PPm
Shortly a f t e r this mineral addition, higher forms of microorganisms

such as stalked c i l i a t e s and rotifers appeared i n the system, However,
the mineral addition was discontinued a f t e r a period of two months, and
the l i f e forms remained, I t was concluded t h a t mineral deficiency was
not a significant factor i n propogation of higher forms.
The pH studies indicated t h a t the rotifers were able t o tolerate a relatively wide range w i t h l i t t l e effect on growth, from approximately pH
4.0 t o pH 9.0. Also, shear does not appear t o be particularly damaging
t o rot f e r s , Laboratory t e s t s w i t h rotifers i n a Waring Blender for
five minutes w i t h a blade t i p speed of 2750 feet per minute (fpm) showed
no adverse effects, The t i p speed of the aerators i n the Pekin waste
treatment system i s 1100 fpm,
Tests on ammonium toxicity indicated t h a t this was the major problem,
The study showed t h a t the growth of rotifers began t o be inhibited a t
100 ppm amnonium concentration and continued t o be further depressed as
the concentration increased, Amnonium concentrations i n the Pekin waste
had ranged from 150 t o 200 ppm.
In February 1972, the use of ammonia i n manufacturing was stopped completely, and nitrogen i n the form of amnonia was added t o the waste i n
80
appropriate quantities along w i t h the phosphoric acid, Suspended

solids i n the effluent dropped t o significantly lower levels following
this change.
Hydraul i c Loading
Although the wastewater flow r a t e t o the waste treatment plant was
reasonably consistent, the relationship between the hydraulic loading
and effluent suspended solids was examined. For the f i r s t time period,
October 1971 through June 1972, the correlation coefficient was found
to be 0.0002, showing no relationship between the t y ~parameters.
The correlation coefficient for the second time period, July 1972
t h r p u g h January 1973, was somewhat higher a t 0.13, b u t s t i l l not h i g h
enough t o indicate a significant relationship. The graph i o Figure 35
of a representative sample of data points shows the randomness of the
relationship, Therefore, other factors were examined f o r t h e i r effect
on effluent suspended solids. Original data used t o calculate the
correlation coefficients are given i n Appendix C.
Food -to -Microorgan i sm Rat io (F/M)

The most d i f f i c u l t parameter t o control has been the F/M r a t i o ,
Figure 36 shows t h a t there i s a limited, b u t significant correlation

between effluent suspended sol ids and average F/M, The correlation
coefficient f o r both the time period October 1971 through June 1972 and
for July 1972 through January 1973 i s 0.3, showing a low, b u t definite
relationship9 , However, the nearly identical slopes of the two regression lines indicate t h a t other factors may be o f greater significance
i n reducing the effluent suspended solids levels.
0-ne o f the most significant factors affecting effluent quality has been
81
FIGURE
35
EFFLUENT SUSPENDED SOLIDS AS A

FUNCTION OF HYDRAULIC LOADING
400
300
0 3
m
D
0
v)
n
W
n
0
0
200
n
v)
3
v)
!W
2
3
A
LL
LL
100
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
HYDRAULIC LOADING mgd
82
0
0.8
1 .o
1.2
FIGURE
36
EFFLUENT SUSPENDED SOLIDS AS A FUNCTION OF F/M
500
400
v,
300
c.l
-I
0
v,
n
W
n
z
W
200
v,
3
v,
I-
z
W
=>
-I
LL
LL
W
100
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
F/M
0.8
1 .o
1.2
1.4
observed t o be shock changes i n t h e raw waste load. Even with t h e 24hour r e t e n t i o n time equalization t a n k , changes i n COD concentration t o
the aeration tanks of as much a s 5:l have been observed, and changes
o f 2:l are common.
Depending on t h e s e v e r i t y of t h e shock, the e f f e c t can vary from the
growth of i n d i v i d u a l bacteria or t i n y f l o c s which do not s e t t l e , t o
formation of a b u l k i n g sludge which does not s e t t l e a t a1 1 . The f l o t a t i o n c e l l generally does n o t have the capacity t o remove t h e l a r g e
amounts of suspended sol ids r e s u l t i n g from t h e s e upsets, Recovery from
an upset requires from several days, t o as much as 3 or 4 weeks f o r a
very l a r g e shock,
Examples of the e f f e c t of a moderate and a severe shock COD load a r e
shown be 1ow :
Nov. 13, 1972
Moderate Shock
Dec, 4-5, 1972
Aeration Tank Supply COD

Day before shock, mg/l
865 (Nov. 1 2 )
1451 (Dec. 3)
Aeration Tank Supply COD

Day of shock, mg/l
1497 (Nov, 13)
5588 (Dec. 5)
Severe Shock
Average Effluent BOD f o r

3 days before shock, mg/l
36 [Nov.
10-12)
8 (Dec. 2-4)
Average Effluent BOD f o r

3 days a f t e r shock, mg/l
51 [Nov. 13-15)
240 (Dec. 6-81
84
Nov. 13, 1972

Moderate Shock
Dec. 4-5, 1972

Severe Shock
Average Effluent Suspended

S o l i d s for 3 days before
shock, mg/l
68 (Nov. 10-12)
19 (Dec, 2-4)
Average Eff 1uen t Suspended

Solids for 3 days a f t e r
shock, mg/l
184 (Nov. 13-15)
577 (Dec, 6-8)
These changes i n waste load, and the resulting changes i n F/M, are considered t o be the most significant factor i n failure t o consistently
meet the effluent standards,
Chemical Flocculants
The suspended solids i n the c l a r i f i e r overflow generally consisted of
individual bacteria or very small clumps. The particle size of the
solids was t o o small for removal i n the dissolved a i r flotation c e l l .
Successful flotation requires particle sizes large enough for air bubbles coming o u t t o solution t o become attached and f l o a t them t o the
surface,
In order t o overcome this problem, an attempt was made t o t r e a t the
c l a r i f i e r overflow w i t h a flocculating agent, increasing the particle
size of the solids, and improving solids removal i n the flotation u n i t .
Several chemical suppliers tested numerous flocculating agents i n the
laboratory, Four products showed some promise in laboratory t e s t s and
were further tested full scale i n the treatment plant, The products and
manufacturers were:
85
Calgon Corp.
American Chemicals Co.
Nalco Chemical Co.
CPC I n t e r n a t i o n a l
A l u m + WT3000 polymer
CN51 polymer
634 polymer + 650 c l a y
C-300 polymer
Using t h e ava l a b l e mixing, dosing, and blending equipment i n t h e t r e a t ment process, only C-300 showed f u l l s c a l e results t h a t confirmed l a b C-300 polymer i s an experimental product made by CPC
oratory t e s t s
I n t e r n a t i o n a l , and i s n o t commercially a v a i l a b l e ,
Results of some of t h e e a r l y f u l l s c a l e tests w i t h C-300 are shown i n

Table 5. The polymer dose was 10 mg/l , The results i n d i c a t e t h a t when
t h e c l a r i f i e r overflow suspended solids concentration was about 100
mg/l, f l o t a t i o n e f f l u e n t was i n t h e range of the design basis of 45
mg/l, Lower values of s o l i d s i n the c l a r i f i e r overflow resulted i n even
better e f f l u e n t q u a l i t y .
TABLE 5
ANALYSIS OF PEKIN FINAL EFFLUENT DURING C-300 TEST
Suspended Sol ids (mg/l )

of Final Effluent
24-nr Composite Samples
Suspended S o l i d s o f
Air F1 o t a t i o n I n f l u e n t
Grab Sample Taken
a t 7:30 A,M,
J u l y 28, 1972
J u l y 29
July 30, 31
6
26
40a
33
59
101
August 1
August 2
August 3
14
24
18
34
46
22
Date
-
a)
48-hour composite sample.
86
However, w i t h continued operation, i t was found that the polymer was n o t

always effective. When suspended solids i n the c l a r i f i e r overflow was
above about 150 mg/l, flocculation was not complete. Even a t lower concentrations, there were periods when effective flocculation was not
obtained. The reason is not f u l l y understood. Tests are s t i l l i n
progress t o f i n d a commercially available flocculant that i s effective
a t a l l conditions.
Figure 37 shows the range of suspended solids levels i n the treatment
plant effluent for the period October 1971 through June 1972, and for
July 1972 t h r o u g h January 1973. The computer-generated d i s t r i b u t i o n i s
given i n Appendix C. Substantial improvement can be seen as a result
of the combined factors of higher biomass recycle rates, aeration of
reiycled biomass, control of nutrients, and intermittent use of the
cationic polymer. During the e a r l i e r period, the effluent suspended
solids concentration was rarely below 100 mg/l; d u r i n g the l a t e r period
i t was below this level 67% of the time. However, this i s s t i l l above
water quality standards, and continuing e f f o r t s are being made t o
correct this deficiency.
EFFECT OF pH
Corn wet milling wastes tend t o be low i n pH. Both h i g h and low pH
streams a r e discharged, b u t when combined and equalized, the pH is
usually about 6.0. Certain production schedules and product mixes
result i n pH values below 5.5. When this occurs, pH is adjusted by
adding sodium hydroxide t o the stream entering the equalization t a n k .
87
FIGURE
37
EFFLUENT SUSPENDED SOLIDS

OCTOBER 1971-JANUARY 1973
2000
1000
800
m
n
1
0
600
n
W
n
z
w
a
400
Iz
w
3
-J
LL
LL
1972
200
1973
100
20
40
60
PROBABILITY
80
90
95
OF OCCURRENCE
88
99
99.9
The a e r a t i o n tanks a r e highly buffered. I f the e q u a l i z a t i o n tank pH i s

above 5.5, the a e r a t i o n tank pH n e a r l y always f a l l s between 7 . 0 and 7,5.
There have been occasional process upsets caused by extreme pH due t o

accidental discharge o f m a t e r i a l s , o r f a i l u r e of t h e pH Control on the
stream supplying t h e e q u a l i z a t i o n tank. Aeration pH control has not
been a major problem i n operation of t h e process a s long a s the equalized waste pH i s between 5.5 and 8.5.
BIOMASS Y I E L D
The excess biomass wasted averaged 0,41 l b p e r l b t o t a l COD removed
during the period of October 1971 t o J u l y 1972. This figure was d e t e r mindd by calculating t h e t o t a l biomass wasted and t o t a l COD removed
over 6-day i n t e r v a l s throughout t h e period, The range of values was
0.16 t o 0,64 l b excess biomass per l b t o t a l COD removed, but most of
the values f e l l between 0.3 and 0.5, Because of the extreme v a r i a t i o n s
of F/M r a t i o w i t h i n the 6-day i n t e r v a l s used t o c a l c u l a t e the y i e l d , no
c o r r e l a t i o n could be found between F/M and biomass y i e l d .
The average y i e l d of 0,41 i s higher t h a n predicted from the l a b o r a t o r y
d a t a (0.3 t o 0,351, However, the a c t u a l y i e l d includes some i n s o l u b l e
material i n the raw waste (such as powdered carbon), which was n o t
p r e s e n t i n the l a b o r a t o r y tests.
EFFECT
OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN
The a e r a t o r s have maintained a positive dissolved oxygen under a l l cond i t i o n s , Although i t is p o s s i b l e t h a t extreme shock loads m i g h t have
caused oxygen d e f i c i e n c i e s for s h o r t periods, whenever oxygen concentrat i o n was measured, a p o s i t i v e value was obtained, Oxygen supply was n o t
considered t o be a cause of any of t h e problems encountered w i t h the
89
treatment process.
COSTS
The Total c o s t o f the p r o j e c t discussed i n t h i s r e p o r t was approximate Y

$2,000,000. This c o s t i s described i n more d e t a i l i n Appendix F. An
additional $1,000,000 was spent f o r excess biomass disposal f a c i l i t i e s
Average treatment p l a n t operating c o s t s f o r t h e period J u l y 1972-January
1973 a r e l i s t e d below.
$/mo
Operator and supervisor s a l a r i e s

Laboratory s a l a r i e s
Maintenance
Chemicals and o t h e r supplies
E l e c t r i c power
Overhead
Total
4 ,522
2,040
6,334
3,378
6,543
1,574
24,391
$/lo00 gal t r e a t e d
0.19
0.09
0.27
0.14
0.28
0.07
_cc
1.04
The c o s t per 1000 gallons is based on the actual flow t r e a t e d d u r i n g the

period. The BOD removal averaged 9571 lb/day (based on the average o f
monthly averages) f o r the period, and t h e operating cost. was $0,085/lb
BOD removed on this b a s i s , excluding biomass disposal c o s t s .
SUMMARY
Although the waste treatment p l a n t a s designed and modified o f t e n removes 90% o r more of the incoming BOD, and under normal circumstances
reaches a soluble BOD t h a t would meet present and future criteria, the
90
nature of the waste i s such t h a t suspended s o l i d s , and therefore total

BOD c r i t e r i a are seldom met f o r more than a few days a t a time. Deterioration of effluent quality can nearly always be traced t o a shock
load of COD, which causes an increase i n effluent suspended s o l i d s , and
a corresponding increase i n BOD. The BOD i n the effluent is primarily
due t o the suspended solids. Figure 38 shows the relationship between
effluent BOD and suspended sol ids based on computer calculated monthly
averages f o r 1972. Original data a r e given i n Appendix C.
Further improvement i n effluent quality will require stabilization of
the waste load, and improved suspended solids removal,
91
F I G U R E 38
5 00
EFFLUENT BOD A S A F U N C T I O N OF
E F F L U E N T SUSPENDED S O L I D S
MONTHLY AVERAGES 1972
400
\
Es,
300
En
ro
200
100
0
SUSPENDED S O L I D S , mg/l
SECTION VI11
REFERENCES
1.
F a i r , Gordon M . , Geyer, John C . , and O k u n , Daniel A., Hater and

Wastewater Engineering, Volume 11, John Wiley & Sons, 1968.
2.
Process Design Manual f o r Upgrading E x i s t i n g Wastewater Treatment

P l a n t s , Environmental Protection Agency Technology Transfer,
Roy F. Weston, Inc., West Chester, Pennsylvania, October 1971.
3.
Busch, A. W. , "Biochemical Oxidation of Process Wastewater'',

Chemical Engineering, 72, 71-76, 83-86, 1965.
4.
Standard Methods f o r the Examination o f Water and Wastewater,

American Pub1 i c Health Association, American Water Works Associa t i o n , Water Pollution Control Federation, Thirteenth Edition,
1971.
5.
Hiser, L. L. and Busch, A. W . , "An 8-Hour Biological Oxygen Demand

Journal of the Water
Test Using Mass Culture Aeration and C.O.D.",
Pollution Control Federation, pp 505-516, April , 1964.
6.
Pelczar, M. J . , J r . , and Reid, R. D., Microbiology, T h i r d Edition,

McGraw-Hill , 1972.
7.
Eckenfelder, W. Wesley, Jr. , I n d u s t r i a l Water Pollution Control ,

McGraw-Hi 11 , 1966.
93
REFERENCES
8.
Sawyer, C. N . , Biological Treatment o f Sewage and IndustrialWastes, Volume I , J. McCabe and W. W. Eckenfelder, J r . , Editors,
Reinhold, New York, 1956.
9.
Sentor, R. J . , Analysis of Data, S c o t t , Foreman & Co., 1960.
94
SECTION IX
PUBLICATIONS
Bensing, H. 0. and Brown, D , R,, Process Design f o r Treatment of Corn

Wet M i l l i n g Wastes, Proceedings o f Third National Symposium o f Food
Processing Wastes, March 28-30, 1972, New Orleans, La. , P a c i f i c Northwest Water Laboratory o f the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Bensing, H. O . , Brown, D. R., and Watson, S. A,, Waste U t i l i z a t i o n
and Pollution Control i n Wet M i l l i n g , Cereal Science Today, Vol. 1 7 ,
No, 10, October, 1972.
95
SECTION X
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Activated Sludge - Biological waste treatment process which uses microorganisms i n suspension t o oxidize soluble and c o l l o i d a l organics t o
C02 and H20 i n t h e presence of molecular oxygen,
Aerobic
- Pertaining
t o an oxygen-dependent form o f r e s p i r a t i o n .
Anaerobic - P e r t a i n i n g t o an oxygen-independent form of r e s p i r a t i o n ,

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) - An empirical t e s t t o determine the
r e l a t i v e oxygen requirements of wastewaters, e f f l u e n t s and polluted
waters, Water q u a l i t y standards a r e based on t h e 5-day 20C BOD,
cfm - Cubic f e e t per minute.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

A measure o f the oxygen equivalent of
t h a t p o r t i o n of t h e organic matter i n a sample t h a t i s s u s c e p t i b l e t o
o x i d a t i o n by a strogn chemical oxidant.
Correlation Coefficient - S t a t i s t i c ranging from -1 t o +1. The absol u t e value gives t h e magnitude o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n ; the s i g n t e l l s
whether t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p i s d i r e c t or i n v e r s e ,
DO -
Dissolved oxygen.
Filamentous Organisms - Microorganisms such as t h e bacteria

Sphaerotilus and Beggiatoa which may cause bulking i n a c t i v a t e d
s l udge.
97
Floc
-I
Aggregation of suspended p a r t i c l e s i n water o r wastewater,
Food-to-Microorganism Ratio (F/M)
- Lbs.
COD per l b s . MLSS per day,
fpm - Feet per minute,

gpd
- Gal lons
per day.
- Horsepower.
m n
- Million
gallons per day,
Mil 1 igrams per Liter (mg/l )

In water and wastewater, approximately
equivalent t o p a r t s per m i l l i o n ,
Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS)
treatment l i q u o r .
ppm - Parts
Solids i n suspension i n a waste
per m i l l i o n .
psi - Pounds per square inch,

rpm
- Revolutions
Suspended Solids
per minute.
- Insoluble
substances i n water o r wastewater,
Total Biological Oxygen Demand (TbOD) - A r e l a t i v e l y quick method o f

measuring t h e oxygen demand of the biodegradable f r a c t i o n of a sample,
5
described by Hiser and Busch
98
APPENDIX A
LABORATORY AND PILOT PLANT ANALYTICAL METHODS
Tests for biochemical oxygen demand ( B O D ) , chemical oxygen demand ( C O D ) ,

dissolved oxygen (DO), nitrogen ( N ) , and phosphorus ( P ) used the procedure described in Standard Methods 4 . The t o t a l biological oxygen
demand (TbOD) t e s t and the mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) t e s t
5
are described in an a r t i c l e by Hiser and Busch
The TbOD t e s t i s a relatively quick method of measuring the oxygen

demand of the biodegradable fraction of a sample, The procedure i s t o
measure the COD on a filtered portion of the original sample. Then
another portion of the sample i s mixed with a biological culture and
aerated, Samples are taken periodically over a period of 8 hours, and
the COD of each sample measured a f t e r f i l t e r i n g t h r o u g h a membrane
f i l t e r , A graph o f the COD plotted against time will show a plateau
COD, indicating t h a t a l l the biodegradable material has been removed.
The TbOD i s the difference between the original COD and the plateau COD.
The plateau COD i s a measure of the nonbiodegradable fraction of the
waste,
TbOD was used for preparation of unit rate of removal curves. The most
important p a r t of these curves, when used for design, i s a t low values
of residual COD, Here, even small variations in plateau COD are import a n t , so TbOD i s used as the parameter for unit rate of removal curves.
Batch Test
The batch t e s t i s an important analytical method f o r determining the

u n i t rate of removal characteristic of a biological culture 3 , The
batch t e s t procedure i s similar t o the procedure for the TbOD t e s t . A
99
sample of the culture t o be c h a r a c t e r i z e d i s mixed w i t h a sample o f the

raw waste t o be t r e a t e d . The mixture i s a e r a t e d f o r 8 hours, Samples
a r e withdrawn a t 30 t o 60-minute i n t e r v a l s , and each sample i s analyzed
f o r MLSS and s o l u b l e COD,
Soluble COD and MLSS values are p l o t t e d against time, a s shown i n Figure 39. The s l o p e o f the COD curve i s c a l c u l a t e d a t several p o i n t s .
The s l o p e is divided by the corresponding MLSS value from the MLSS
curve, and m u l t i p l i e d by 24 t o o b t a i n a b a s i s o f 1 day. The r e s u l t i n g
curve shows the u n i t r a t e o f removal, w i t h the units of pounds of COD
removed per day per pound MLSS under a e r a t i o n ,
U n i t r a t e o f removal i s c a l c u l a t e d for a number o f values of COD over

the range o f t h e batch test. The u n i t r a t e of removal i s t h e n p l o t t e d
a g a i n s t t h e corresponding TbOD values ( s o l u b l e COD m i nus plateau COD)
a s shown i n Figure 40. Sample d a t a a r e shown i n Table 6. Sample calcul a t i o n s are shown below.
In o r d e r t o determine the effect of TbOD on the u n i t r a t e of COD remova l , t h e rate of change o f s o l u b l e COD must be c a l c u l a t e d , For example,
a t 0.5 hour, d c / d t = 176 mg/l COD removal/hr, The u n i t r a t e o f COD
removal i s the l b COD removed/lb MLSS-day. The MLSS a t 0.5 hour i s
859 mg/l. Therefore:
dc
dt
24 - 176 mg/l COD removed

hour
- X T -
24 hours
- day
This u n i t r a t e o f removal occurs a t a TbOD of 205 mg/l, The remaining

data i n Table 6 were c a l c u l a t e d i n l i k e manner and a r e shown i n Figure
40
100
FIGURE
39
SAMPLE BATCH TEST DATA

F
BATCH TEST NO. 336
g~1400
n
0
0
1
a
-I
E 1200
1000
\
07
Ln
800
400
1
(5,
200
0
0
a,
-5 1 0
n
TIME HOURS
101
TABLE 6
SAMPLE DATA.
Total
COD,
T i me mg/l
1005
1015
1030
1045
1100
1115
1130
145
2 00
215
230
245
1300
1315
1330
1345
BATCH TEST NO. 336
m9/ 1
dc/dt
Rate of
Change o f
Sol ubl e
COD
,(? 0.45 11)
ms/17hr.
856
41 9
24.4
6.84
398
858
31 9
17.6
4.92
203
905
228
12.2
3.24
124
1000
112
8.5
2.03
62
1032
41
4.7
1.10
36
992
16
3.3
0.80
13
936
104
15
0.38
91 8
104
M MLSS,
mg/l
(+ 0.45
p)
C Soluble
COD
dc/Mdt
U n i t Rate
o f Removal,
16 COD/
TbOD,
16 MLSS-day mg/l
1389
1368
1347
1285
1244
265
233
21 3
S t a r t i n g Time = 1000
I n i t i a l COD = 402
I n i t i a l MLSS = 856
I n i t i a l F/M
= 0.47
Batch Test Temperature = 90F
102
FIGURE
40
U N I T RATE OF REMOVAL
BATCH TEST NO. 336
100
300
200
EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION TbOD, mg/l
103
400
The u n i t r a t e of removal c u r v e c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e a b i l i t y o f a c u l t u r e
t o remove s o l u b l e COD from t h e waste a t v a r i o u s e f f l u e n t TbOU concentrations,
F i g u r e 40 shows t h a t t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r e c o s l d remove
2.75 pounds o f COD p e r day p e r pound o f MLSS, a t an e f f l u e n t TbOD

c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f 100 m g / l ,
104
APPENDIX B
ORIGINAL DATA FROM THE PEKIN WASTE TREATMENT PLANT OF CPC INTERNATIONAL I N C . ,
These data were taken during the s t a r t u p p e r i o d described i n Section V I ,

and i n c l u d e the i n f l u e n t t o t a l COD (column 2 ) , i n f l u e n t suspended s o l i d s
(column 3 ) , e f f l u e n t t o t a l COD (column 4, and e f f l u e n t suspended s o l i d s
(column 5).
The data are given i n chronological order f o r each day t h a t
data were a v a i l a b l e from November 18, 1970 through
105
August 26, 1971.
P E K I N WASTE T R E A T M E N T PLANT
DATE
1 1 / 18/70
11/19/70
11/20/70
11/21/70
11/22/70
11/23/70
11/24/70
11/25/70
11/26/70
11/27/70
11/28/70
11/29/70
11/30/70
12/01/70
12/02/70
12/03/70
12/04/70
12/05/70
12/07/70
12/08/70
12/09/70
12/10/70
12/11/70
12/12/70
12/14/70
12/21/70
12/22/70
12/28/70
12/29/70
12/30/70
12/3 1/70
1/12/71
1/13/71
1/14/71
1/15/71
1/03/71
1/04/71
1/05/71
1/06/71
1/07/71
1/21/71
T O T A L COD
IlvF M G / L
13400
14360
1682.
16500
16810
2000.
1866.
14560
1650.
18270
16740
1856.
15000
1735.
15230
15790
16170
2020.
14460
19070
16170
18970
18970
68870
2456.
10260
2548.
1990.
50730
36814
INF
T O T A L COD
EFF M G / L
TSS
MC/L
460 r
304
82.
164.
1330
1030
93b
2260
6320
708.
629r
40 r
l b
300
490
290.
1530
250r
390 b
llob
230r
220b
420,
220,
250r
3600
720r
190b
230r
290r
820
112b
1030
92
102.
770
860
1240
1150
2500
820
750
135.
70
313.
1096.
902.
435b
1493.
1057r
3000
1804.
420r
320r
370,
1140.
28200
3301
10500
3000
1460r
7650.
2470
1430 r
1402.
871,
8910
1025.
106
EFF
TSS
MG/L
41100
9100
6606
1130.
700.
7700
730r
580.
690r
800b
680.
7400
1110.
180.
230.
1600
96r
1406
2460
300r
1240
2001
164,
1720
360r
1760r
820.
2400
940r
1165.
9200
P E K I N WASTE TREATMENT PLANT
DATE
1/08\71
1/16/71
1/18/71
1/19/71
1/20/71
1/22/71
1/24/71
1/26/71
1/27/71
1/28/71
1/29/71
1/30/71
1/25/71
1/21/71
1/31/71
2/01/71
2/02/71
2/03/71
2/04/71
2/05/71
2/06/71
2/08/71
2/09/71
2/10/71
2/11/71
2/12/71
2/13/71
2/15/71
2/16/71
2/17/71
2/18/71
2/19/71
2/20/71
2/22/71
2/23/71
2/24/71
2/25/71
2/26/71
2/27/71
3/01/71
3/02/71
TOTAL C O D
INF MG/L
INF
TSS
MG/L
TOTAL COD
EFF M G / L
480r
4000
1700
1300
7900
1430a
908
208.
220.
212.
484r
752 b
3520
(I
107
P E K I N W A S T E TREATMENT PLANT
DATE
3/03/71
3/04/71
3/05/71
3/06/71
3/07/71
3/08/71
3/09/71
3/10/71
3/11/71
3/12/71
3/14/71
3/15/71
3/16/71
3/17/71
3/18/71
3/19/71
3/21/71
3/24/71
3/30/71
3/31/71
3/22/71
3/23/71
3/25/71
3/26/71
3/2a/7i
3/29/71
4/01/71
4/02/71
4/04/71
4/05/71
4/14/71
4/a5/7i
4/06/71
4/07/71
4/08/71
4/09/71
4/13/71
4/25/71
4/16/71
4/18/71
4/19/71
T O T A L COD
I N F MG/L
T O T A L COD
EFF M G / L
TSS
INF
MG/L
2975.
1793.
1202.
1072.
1620.
1565.
1244.
1340.
2464.
2423.
2093.
2633.
2767.
1610.
1441.
1052.
1210.
2712.
2280.
2536.
170.
3900
240.
2300
320.
380.
2100
110.
560
10000
490
580r
440
3400
40 r
1800
2780.
3520r
4200
660
2820.
4297.
2804.
6837.
45190
50930
770,
240 r
3638.
1938.
1244r
3904
720.
770.
lllO0
5700
8500
7300
1270r
3100
160,
2300
4200
250r
6200
108
27100
16400
910.
866.
6220
972
206200
747.
1140r
420.
T SS
MG/L
995.
1379.
249.
196.
217.
309r
2470
404r
6140
640r
518.
12170
3280
1062.
299.
3380
2425.
2196r
10370
533.
398 0
2800
4980
532r
1194.
1347.
784.
39394
1171.
2639r
39280
7570
7382.
548Eir
1042.
EFF
2600
3920
3640
5000
7200
180r
7008
600
2280
1630.
4760
7406
5000
1800
80.
5160
284.
460.
5101
4500
25000
480.
21400
52800
1500
400.
430r
10330.
5000
410,
P E K I N WASTE T R E A T M E N T PLANT
DATE
4/22/71
4/23/71
4/24/71
4/26/71
4/27/71
4/28/71
4/29/71
4130171
4/20/71
4/21/71
5/02/71
5/03/71
5/04/71
5/05/71
5/06/71
5/07/71
5/11/71
5/12/71
5/13/71
5/14/71
5/09/71
5/10/71
5/16/71
5/17/71
5/20/71
5/21/71
5/22/71
5/24/71
5/25/71
5/26/71
5/27/71
5/28/71
5/29/71
5/19/71
6/02/71
6/03/71
6/04/71
6/05/71
6/07/71
6/08/71
6/09/71
T O T A L COD
INF MG/L
2578.
2967.
5488r
5515.
7018.
6343r
5730.
3545.
1413.
1944.
2726.
23420
1968.
2177.
2854.
2900.
4241.
66950
3394.
41540
3957b
4478.
3055r
2590.
2136r
2610.
2674.
1687.
1696.
6270.
3172.
5348.
2894.
3192.
3118.
3769.
1957.
2489.
TOTAL COD
EFF M G / L
TSS
INF
MG/L
522 r
473.
944.
1177r
1441.
1090b
705.
230r
820r
550r
670.
320r
390.
5300
720r
310r
260r
450r
480 b
430,
410.
440 b
360r
870,
490r
630r
384.
281,
249 r
11-70
276.
389.
610.
519.
703r
705.
639.
12906
726r
4310
5440
289r
1370.
265r
462.
448 r
1029r
952.
650.
3380r
1720r
4101
260r
1212.
3101
360.
530r
730r
230r
220b
990 r
3101
12101
430.
100 b
1100,
720r
2460r
706.
2460r
455.
421.
1328r
1811.
1109.
622.
1060r
160.
380r
109
EFF
TSS
MG/L
350r
370,
400.
610.
330r
170.
3200
290,
200.
170b
gob
1806
130.
790r
2400
70.
480.
210.
430r
1040r
490.
5300
340r
240,
192,
764
272.
268r
2886
1220.
1700
1220.
204.
120b
404.
700r
260.
370.
PEKIN WASTE T R E A T M E N T P L A N T
DATE
6/10/71
6/11/71
6/12/71
6/14/71
6/15/71
6/16/71
6/17/71
6/18/71
6/19/71
6/21/71
6/22/71
6/23/71
6/24/71
6/25/71
6/26/71
6/28/71
6/29/71
6/30/71
7/02/71
7/05/71
7/06/71
7/07/71
7/08/71
7/09/71
7/11/71
7/12/71
7/13/71
7/14/71
7/15/71
7/16/71
7/18/71
7/19/71
7/20/71
7/21/71
7/22/71
7/25/71
7/26/71
7/27/71
7/28/71
7/29/71
7130171
T O T A L COD
INF MG/L
2260.
2197.
1967.
1540.
2709.
3538.
2462.
2236.
2152.
1804.
1476.
1696.
1674.
1871.
2718.
1418.
2125.
1914.
5081.
2789.
1032.
1262.
1849.
3401.
4188.
2532.
1412.
1155.
3264.
1979.
2298.
6796.
43590
12555.
11097.
INF
TSS
MG/L
5000
500.
760.
4100
370.
370.
240.
T O T A L COD
EFF M G / L
385.
295.
303.
321.
452.
324.
4660
490.
478.
439.
4-75.
557.
617.
2101
60.
1500
3300
440 b
440 b
700.
1420.
760.
10100
11000
16440.
5420.
350.
5600
970.
1100.
2050.
590.
120.
230.
318.
313.
301.
400
864.
724.
1003.
249.
1801
232.
294.
318.
2064.
505.
471.
383.
323.
153.
1130.
1352.
1926.
303.
1245.
975.
462.
345.
1054
72
1580.
660
80300
54900
1620.
6670,
9050r
18500
19700
4370.
looob
2040.
163100
110
EFF
T SS
MG/L
1300
140.
100.
160.
188.
184.
200.
280.
210.
208.
2926
364.
396,
140.
420.
156.
2566
520.
2804
736.
116.
680
104.
700.
120.
1540.
1726
164.
1520
164.
88.
6800
548.
1360.
208.
4600
550.
1960
1600
36.
20.
P E K I N WASTE TREATMENT PLANT

DATE
8/01/71
8/02/71
8/03/71
8/04/71
8/05/71
8/06/71
8/08/71
8/09/71
8/10/71
8/11\71
8/12/71
8/13/71
8/15\71
8/16/71
8/17/71
8/18/71
8/19/71
8/20/71
8/22/71
8/23/71
8 / 24/71
8/25/71
8/26/71
TOTAL COD
I N F MG/L
3215.
1222.
1717.
1935.
1275.
1873.
2386.
4110.
2696.
3629.
2520.
1577.
1939.
1472.
1277.
1524.
1665.
1233.
1812.
13200
1389.
1437.
1156e
INF
TSS
MG/L
TOTAL COD
EFF MG/L
2100.
830.
890.
580.
160.
610.
440 (I
1990.
1530.
21700
121
140.
196.
513.
1363.
532.
260.
608.
240.
600
233.
739.
1278.
263.
1440
856.
5124
1320
590.
300.
244.
244.
320.
164.
1480
188.
44
28.
16.
580.
309
546.
514.
339,
3770
293.
2940
237.
266.
124.
121.
240.
121.
111
960
206.
1104.
320.
3400
450
70.
570.
610.
360.
790.
490.
410.
TSS
MG/L
200.
120.
490.
EFF
APPENDIX C
ORIGINAL DATA FROM THE PEKIN WASTE TREATMENT PLANT OF CPC INTERNATIONAL INC.,
OCTOBER 1971 -JANUARY 1973
Columns headed " i n f l u e n t " represent the stream from the equalization
tank t o the aeration tanks, and not the raw waste from the manufacturing
plant. Effluent samples were taken from the e f f l u e n t of the dissolved
a i r f l o t a t i o n tank. Both of these samples were 24-hour composites. All
others were grab samples. The composite samples were time proportioned.
However, because of the equalization tank i t was seldom necessary t o
change the flow r a t e through the treatment plant more than once each
day, so the samples i n e f f e c t a r e a l s o flow proportioned.
The f i r s t section o f this appendix l i s t s a l l of the treatment plant data
d u r i n g t h e operating period discussed i n Section VI1 (October 1971January 1973). Semimonthly averages of these data were used t o prepare
Figures 30, 33 and 34. Monthly averages were used f o r Figure 38.
Representative data p o i n t s were used f o r Figures 29, 35 and 37.
The probability curves i n Figures 28, 31, 32 and 37 were developed from
computer generated d i s t r i b u t i o n s .
112
FLOW
MGD
DATE
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
2CT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
A
--I
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
MOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
KOV
KOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
26
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
27 1971
28
29
31
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
22 1971
Om8140
0.6180
0.7460
0.8430
0 7440
0.6950
0.7060
0.5820
0.6780
0 7300
3.6670
0 I 6460
0.7010
0.9420
0.7260
3.7220
0.7510
0.7990
0.7550
0.e3io
0.6093
0.7790
0.6260
0.8490
008020
0.7170
0.2630
0.5770
0.6450
0.8760
0.8300
0.3840
0.4320
0.4152
0.5532
INFLUENT
TOTAL
COD '.1G/L
1821.
1476.
1708.
1423.
3258
2588.
3700.
2526.
1897.
3011.
4916.
3155.
37110
0.4572
0.5000
0.7665
0.8300
0.8368
0.8346
0.6808
3701
3650.
3722.
1866.
2030.
3068.
1760.
2114.
3791
3696.
2739
1467
1784.
10103.
2322.
2114.
2578.
2208.
5311.
3671.
6784.
3980.
3567.
6758.
7774.
3692.
2742.
3569.
4081.
2887.
2807
0.8720
2330.
0.8761
0 . $690
INFLUENT
SOLUBLE
CGD M G / L
IiLFLUENT
BOD M G / L
1281.
1016.
11250
1000.
1485.
1876.
3555.
2041
1067
1897.
1310.
1610.
2570.
2370.
1400.
440Co
4312.
6800.
2516.
1316.
1897.
2258.
153i.
1037.
1015.
2405
2150.
3635.
3585.
3145.
1895.
1239-
12370
27421853.
15000
928.
1619
1650.
3050.
2650.
2025.
80420
6140.
3470 o
1620.
1970
1814.
1866.
20520
17310
2312.
26253753.
3361.
2928.
2529.
2304.
2543
1897.
2851.
3487.
1954.
1837.
1382.
INFLUENT
PH
609
6.4
5.4
5.1
5.0
4.8
5.3
6.2
5.3
4.7
6.3
6.4
5.7
5.3
5.9
6.0
6.2
6.2
6.4
4.0
5.8
IliFLUENT
AMMON I A
N MG/L
291.0
272.0
260.0
21300
232.0
260.0
235.0
249.0
263.0
174.0
185.0
221.0
218.C
272.0
283.0
252.0
238.0
202.0
263.0
263.0
207.0
230.0
1E8.0
174.0
216.0
3000.
68001
4330.
4230.
3510.
2155.
2930.
4330.
1535.
6.1
4.1
5.5
5.2
4.5
4.2
4.3
4.2
4.5
5.7
4.9
5.2
6.5
6.9
64 5
294.0
238.0
370.0
297.0
204.0
24100
311.0
50700
101.0
305.0
263.0
291.0
11.0
140.0
106.0
38100
666.0
104.0
336.0
7.1
102.0
6.6
4.5
INFLUENT
I NOk G A N I C
P MG/L
123.0
105.0
33.0
75.0
87 S O
97.0
48.0
39.0
43.0
32.0
43.0
70.0
61 e0
67.0
56.0
0.1
18.0
19.0
15.0
11 .a
39 0 0
12.7
42.0
3 1 -0
17 .O
11.0
10.0
9.0
11.0
12.0
10.0
11.0
18.01
27.0
10.0
10.0
23.0
83.0
15.0
12.0
11.0
83.0
37.0
36.0
DATE
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
1 1971
3 1971
4 1971
5 1971
6 1971
7 1971
8 1971
10 1971
11 1971
12 1971
13 1971
14 1971
15 1971
17 1971
18 1971
19 1971
20 1971
21 1971
22 1971
24 1971
25 1971
26 1971
27 1971
28 1971
29 1971
31 1971
1 1971
2 1971
3 1971
4 1971
5 1971
7 1971
8 1971
9 1971
10 1971
11 1971
12 1971
14 1971
15 1971
16 1971
17 1971
18 1971
19 1971
21 1971
2 2 1971
A E R A T I ON
PH
6.1
6.6
6.9
6.3
6.6
6.8
6.1
5.6
6.5
5.7
4.7
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.0
7.2
6.8
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.4
5.3
6.6
6.4
6.6
8.9
3.8
3.9
5.2
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.9
6.7
7.2
6.7
6.3
7.0
7.4
7.4
7.9
7.9
7.5
7.5
AERATION
TEMP
DEG F
80.
72.
72
70.
70
72
66
60.
60
65.
60.
61.
64
72.
64.
71
71
71.
72
68
62
66.
65.
70.
72
60.
62
62
68.
70.
69.
48.
51.
60.
64.
72 e
72
680
72
72
AERATION
0.0. M G / L
St T T L I NG
ML/L
1.6
4.1
4.9
6.1
5.7
5.5
4.3
5.2
4.7
1.8
3.6
3.1
5.5
2.1
5 7
130.
210.
2 10.
140.
230.
640.
450.
280.
320.
290.
280.
220.
280.
230.
4.1
2 10.
250.
300.
3.2
1.5
3.6
2.8
4.2
5.3
4.0
2.2
lr2
280.
190.
350.
350.
270.
360.
510.
530.
620.
710.
500.
540.
220.
230.
320.
250.
220.
310.
70.
700
60.
64.
1.7
6.1
340.
490.
290.
310.
EFFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
E FFLUENT
SOLUBLL
COD M G / L
1211.
247 e
262 e
351.
907.
6270
489.
285.
213.
276r
1063.
561
144.
159.
146.
128.
173.
194.
315.
132r
123.
153.
754.
231.
174.
136.
148.
190.
116.
94.
79.
79.
87.
76.
126.
121.
82.
330.
243.
301.
268.
182.
135.
124.
121.
113.
146.
193.
175.
172.
10413.
7152.
1485.
503.
381-
329.
357.
344.
384.
313.
232.
239.
332
359.
254.
332.
2ti9.
202.
227.
9073.
5ti67.
730.
285.
207.
137.
127.
132.
132.
136.
104.
111.
187.
190.
119.
74.
190.
161.
123.
tFFLUtNT
SS M G / L
EFFLUENT
BOD M G / L
856.
112.
112.
248.
848
1140.
208.
24
144.
176.
224348.
2640
152.
88.
124.
104
56.
48.
60.
50.
02.
102.
122.
142.
105.
408.
400.
65
90.
4000
50.
167.
147.
110.
63
24
26
43.
38
116.
488.
1200.
720.
196.
7340
6140.
708.
174.
135.
208.
228.
256.
228.
268.
120.
108.
100.
152.
180.
125.
150.
163
123.
76.
66
180.
103.
163.
124.
92
120.
52.
EFFLUENT
AMMONIA
DATE
OCT
OCT
OCT
E
m
1 1971
3 1971
4 1971
5 1971
6 1971
7 1971
8 1971
10 1 9 7 1
11 1 9 7 1
12 1 9 7 1
13 1 9 7 1
14 1971
15 1 9 7 1
17 1971
18 1971
19 1 9 7 1
20 1971
21 1971
22 1 9 7 1
24 1971
25 1 9 7 1
26 1 9 7 1
27 1 9 7 1
,28 1 9 7 1
29 1 9 7 1
31 1 9 7 1
1 1971
2 1971
3 1971
4 1971
5 1971
7 1971
8 1971
9 1971
10 1 9 7 1
11 1 9 7 1
12 1971
14 1971
15 1971
16 1 9 7 1
17 1971
18 1971
19 1971
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV 21 1971
NOV 22 1 9 7 1
N MG/L
15400
176.0
196.0
232 - 0
216.0
202.0
190.0
185.0
196.0
185.0
148.0
118.0
126.0
182.9
213.0
210.0
19000
154.0
165.0
151a 0
179.3
146.0
151-0
115.0
137.0
342 e 0
319.0
260.0
174.0
185.0
176.0
193.0
266.0
230.0
213.0
193.0
45 e 0
193.0
302.0
302.0
353.0
140 0
325.0
283.0
EFFLUENT
I N O R G A N IC
P MG/L
120.0
86.0
40.0
67.0
72.0
88.0
92.0
52.0
22.0
3.0
53.0
55.0
41.0
47.0
13.0
0.1
11.0
14.0
11.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.7
1.8
10.0
16.0
21.0
7.0
5.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
3.0
4.0
3.0
32.0
35.0
RECYCLE
RATE
GPM
300.
300
300
300.
300
300.
300 e
300
300.
300
300.
300 0
300
300.
300.
300
300.
300
300.
300
300.
30U.
3000
300
300
300 6
300 e
3CO.
300.
300.
300.
240
200.
100.
100
..
75
100.
45 e
40
80.
200.
230.
300.
200
200 0
RECYCLE
55 MG/L
10370.
9160.
5800.
7270.
6800.
9480.
10020.
13650.
12450.
9350.
7620.
10799.
11210.
16830.
17390.
17220.
12650.
25990.
11520.
10721).
8840.
28170.
12540.
17090.
8950.
14780.
15440.
8650.
10450.
10460.
7920.
10790.
16970.
13190.
16620.
19100.
19460.
232601
11030.
9800.
10770.
10820.
89ao.
10620.
12730.
EXCESS
BIOMASS
WASTE L B / D A Y
7439.
65 7 0
3485.
3515.
3289.
4588 b
4843.
6600
6038.
6708
5438.
7826.
8041.
8143.
8410.
12350.
11394.
6919.
7688.
63880
6067.
14180.
7419.
6229
7534.
7534.
7603.
3888.
3665.
4752.
13970.
16057.
16360-
8381.
3974.
8824.
9052.
9092.
8628.
7017.
8411.
AERATION
MiSS
MG/L
3150.
3590.
3710.
2710.
3320.
3440
2740.
5110.
3310.
3660.
5010.
5070.
4380.
6390.
7250.
6930
7030
5220.
5800.
4360.
4250.
5753.
7040.
5790.
4430
6720.
3765
4875.
4535.
3625
62 30
6060
5830.
4880.
4790.
4365
4240.
3495.
3430.
4290
5015.
4705
43964310.
F/H L5 SOL
C O D / L B ML5S
DAY
0.43
0.34
0.32
0.37
0.51
C.67
0.96
0.54
0.28
0.55
0.93
0.51
0.36
0.40
0131
0.26
0.20
0.24
0.53
0.38
0.28
0.59
0.29
0.36
0.27
0.27
FLOk
MGD
DATE
23
24
25
26
28
29
30
DEC 1
DEC 2
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
DEC 3
DEC 5
DEC 6
3EC 7
DEC 9
DEC 9
DEC 10
DEC 12
e
e
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
29
30
31
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
J A N 10
J A N 11
J A N 12
JAN 13
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1?72
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
0.3482
0.6290
0.2600
0.2980
0.2220
0.2540
0.6790
0.9500
0.8830
0.9340
0.4430
0.4850
0.7550
3.9503
0.9590
1.0320
0.5150
0.7730
0.7430
0.7610
0.8520
0.8550
0.7210
0.7140
0.7080
0.8640
0.3040
0.2a90
0.2930
0.4990
0 7440
0 7940
0.a4io
0.4310
0.5456
0.6485
0.9368
0.9294
0.8821
0.2854
0.5270
0.8~33
9.9950
1.0030
IlVFLUENT
TOTAL
COD d G / L
INFLUENT
SOLUBLE
COD M G / L
IlVFLUENT
BOD M G / L
INFLUEhT
1876
1196 a
1586.
PH
7.0
3999.
2953
4100.
4.5
7639
4969
4697 0
3856.
1920.
2913.
3569
6537.
4743.
3429.
2928.
3134.
3835.
7815.
4266.
2666.
1835.
1856.
2091 6
1897.
1320.
1349.
4081.
3918.
2953.
2195.
14101
1361.
2789.
4846
3361
2021.
2062
2351.
2451
1845.
1784.
1538.
1175.
12581360.
1938
2543.
2449
1939.
2010.
11131989
1999
1704
1723-
3414.
11998
7526.
3364 0
4040.
302 1
2276,
2206.
1743.
1856.
1897.
13601010.
4060.
59604
26806
2880.
4330.
2365.
1800
1700.
1325.
1090.
887.
969
2475
7753.
7485
2512.
2051 a
1674.
2031
1593.
12611436.
1713.
23800
2130.
1835.
2085.
10100.
6500.
3145.
3995.
2325.
2025.
1725.
2425.
274.0
608
7 01
26000
5.9
606
4.8
5.9
5.2
297.0
308.0
325.0
30800
249.0
171.0
316.0
4.8
5.1
5.3
6.5
6.2
5.4
5.7
6.9
7.5
6.0
5.2
5.5
4.9
5.1
4.6
408
4.3
4.5
4.8
6.0
6.7
5.5
6.7
6.3
5.5
4.6
I N F L U EN T
I NOKGANIC
P MG/L
18.0
18 0 0
36 - 3
232.0
246.0
255.0
84.0
272.0
6.2
7.6
5.0
1620.
INFLUENT
AMKONIA
N MG/L
328.0
28600
236.0
258.0
213.0
269.0
26000
249 0
216.0
358.0
27400
232.0
2 1 .o
19.0
110 0
9.0
19.0
8.0
2 2 .O
15.0
9.0
8 .O
1100
9.0
39.0
24.0
12.0
6.0
11.0
12.0
15.0
15.0
700
13.0
33.0
18 00
1 0 .O
314.0
235.0
213.0
244.0
230.0
235.0
92.0
252 - 0
216.0
182.0
10 00
9 .O
16.0
3.0
24.0
18.0
11.0
11.0
1 2 00
11 .O
18 00
AERATION
PH
DATE
c--
c--
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
23
24
25
26
28
29
30
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
29
30
31
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
AEHAT I O N
TEMP
DEG F
7.6
69
7.3
52
7.8
7.7
7 04
49.
56.
66.
66.
67.
67.
67.
62
66.
72
74.
74.
7.5
7.5
6.8
7.1
7.4
7.6
7.3
7.0
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.3
AEKAT IOiL
D.0.
MG/L
4.7
6.2
SETTLING
ML/L
LFFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
E F F L UEiL: T
SOLUBLE
COD M G / L
EFFLUENT
SS M G / L
EFFLUENT
BOD M G / L
250.
285.
169.
148.
46
139.
432
624.
495.
377a
279.
124.
197.
484.
499
404.
261.
264.
107.
281.
427.
525.
254.
202.
285.
235.
282.
194.
190.
148.
239.
197.
164.
58.
101.
336.
239.
173.
131.
140.
49.
57.
187.
148.
144.
280.
312.
196.
128.
136.
72.
172.
288.
260140.
168.
1320
152.
288.
111.
550.
76.
176.
1480
200.
96.
279.
359.
257.
197.
152.
176.
206.
529.
1563.
738.
505.
502.
404.
532.
476
97.
406.
1555.
525.
250.
216.
143.
177.
172.
135.
164.
200.
8.7
6.6
4.4
5.9
6.0
7.0
5.0
3.4
1.8
1.9
56.
62
68
64.
61.
9.0
5.8
5.3
5.6
6.0
62
61.
65.
6.9
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.3
6.9
59.
58.
67.
70.
8.8
6.8
6.0
4.7
6.7
6.3
6.5
6.8
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.0
7.0
61
60.
62
70.
73.
68.
5662
68.
64
6.9
3.9
2.3
3.6
4.2
7.1
7.7
8.0
7.6
5.3
4.6
280.
260.
730.
650.
590.
410.
300.
500.
910.
860.
390.
460.
250.
190.
200.
270.
220.
190.
120.
160.
160.
170.
380.
300.
250.
350.
430.
910.
890.
440.
340.
290.
340.
290.
200.
260.
290.
330.
373.
443
120.
110.
103.
99.
107.
131.
1150
44.
310.
172.
224.
268.
270.
6 4e
112.
2040
164.
248
284.
320.
344.
296.
168.
88.
210.
63.
372
183-
106
128.
217.
243.
95
90.
68.
78.
57.
280.
86.
167.
87.
253.
1675.
498.
240
205
305
158.
165.
DATE
c-
c.
03
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
CEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
CEC
DEC
DEC
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
2 3 1971
24 1971
2 5 1971
26 1971
2 a 1971
29 1971
30 1971
1 1971
2 1971
3 1971
5 1971
6 1971
7 1971
8 1971
9 1971
1 0 1971
12 1971
13 1971
14 1971
15 1971
16 1971
17 1971
19 1971
20 1971
21 1971
2 2 1971
2 3 1971
2 4 1971
26 1971
27 1971
28 1971
29 1971
30 1971
3 1 1971
2 1972
3 1972
4 1972
5 1972
6 1972
7 1972
9 1972
1 0 1972
11 1972
12 1972
13 1972
EFFLUENT
AMMONIA
N MG/L
269.0
140.0
112.0
143.0
168.0
232.0
227.0
218.0
165.0
151.0
218.0
227.0
81.0
224.0
230.0
266.0
251.0
249.0
204.3
224.0
221.0
218.0
199.0
165.0
199.0
196.0
EFFLUENT
I NOHGA!J I C
P MG/L
RECYCLL
RATE
GPM
EXCESS
8 1Ob1A S S
WASTE L B / D A Y
AERATION
MLSS
MG/L
27.0
200.
425
6430.
3859.
3685
26.0
16.0
80 0
22670.
5446 0
3525
21460.
13410.
13980.
48690
4780.
3915.
4215.
14.0
9.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
7.0
5.0
6.0
4.0
5.0
7.0
9.0
13.0
30
60
30
42
160.
240
220.
130.
40
80
260
240
140.
40
20.
70
30 0
50 0
50.
75.
75
105.
1980
144.
12.0
10.0
16.0
17.0
1300
95
50
46
121.
112.
108.
146.0
140.0
109.0
129.0
171.3
190.0
202.0
235.0
215.0
165.0
RECYCLE
55 M G / L
5.0
2.0
700
3.0
6.0
4.0
18.0
27.0
i9.3
15.0
13.0
112.
85.
74.
70.
72
90
88
170.
145
150.
130.
10028.
F/M L B SOL
C O D / L B MLSS
DAY
10800.
9343.
4803
10890.
11400
32820.
18390.
12810.
15330.
17420.
12190.
33600.
24200.
28860.
27680.
8108.
8492.
14588.
3973.
7690
10224.
13397.
9377.
16140.
12794.
10398.
166170
4070
3680.
4490
5580.
5560.
5360.
5970.
3700.
4490.
SO40
3820.
9720.
21520.
10390.
6320.
14920
3378.
10339.
4988
4174.
5374.
2320.
1740.
2470.
2380.
2500.
0.96
0.66
0.49
0.64
9110.
9 740
8460.
3690.
12080.
10440.
12 140
13820.
18900.
16200.
11720.
8940.
5660.
7640
7480.
9340.
12580.
2515.
5846.
6100.
6384.
7012.
3170.
2940.
2840.
29YO.
3190.
0120
0.72
2.11
0.85
0.90
2044.
1993.
15665.
15564.
11118.
6445
2039.
2752.
4131.
5048.
7857.
400U.
5060.
4710.
3550.
2820.
2380.
3290.
30102530.
2640.
2820.
0.47
56G0
3050.
0.69
0.56
0.61
0. 58
1.09
0.97
0.60
0.80
0.60
0.81
0.62
0.97
0.71
0.62
9.81
1.51
1.69
1033
1.06
0.99
0.32
0.53
0.71
1.02
0.91
FLOW
I-
DATE
JAN 14 1972
JAN 16 1972
JAN 17 1972
JAN 18 1972
JAN 19 1972
JAN 20 1972
JAN 21 1972
JAN 23 1972
JAN 24 1 9 7 2
JAN 25 1 9 7 2
JAN 26 1 9 7 2
JAN 27 1972
JAN 28 1972
JAN 30 1972
JAN 31 1972
FEE
1 1972
FEB
2 1972
FEE
3 1972
FEE
4 1972
FEE
6 1972
FEB
7 1972
FEB
8 1972
FEE
9 1972
FEB 10 1972
F E B 11 1 9 7 2
F E E 1'3 1 9 7 2
FEB 1 4 1972
FER 1 5 1 9 7 2
FEB 16 1972
FEB 1 7 1972
F E B 18 1 9 7 2
FEB 20 1 9 7 2
FEE 2 1 1972
FEE 2 2 1972
FEB 23 1972
FEE 24 1 9 7 2
FEE 25 1972
FEB 27 1972
F E B 28 1 9 7 2
FEB 29 1 9 7 2
MAR
1 1972
MAR
2 1972
MAR
3 1972
NAR
5 1972
MAR
6 1972
KG3
OeeY70
0.5640
0.6770
0.7170
0.7630
0 8420
0.8780
0 5000
0.7150
0.7350
006620
0~6700
0.9130
0.6410
0.4330
0.7190
0.9410
0.5940
0.6240
0.5940
0.7000
0.4250
0.5200
C.7380
0.9810
0.8720
0 9460
0.8530
0.8740
0.8820
0.8420
0.5760
0.4200
0.4260
0.4710
0.5850
0.6590
0.7040
0.6620
0.5940
0.5760
0.6170
INFLUElvT
TOTAL
COD X G / L
1918.
2195.
2629.
7836.
3155.
2165.
1665
7794.
2174.
2125.
2701
2789.
2359.
2144.
1567.
1919.
2392.
2625
2092.
1856.
3165.
3102.
2371.
2680.
3175.
2716.
3402
2072
3604
3110.
2377.
5901.
5114.
4371.
2804.
4892
1691.
1660.
2510.
1876.
1464.
2351.
1592.
1959.
1743.
IIdFLUEhT
SOLUBLE
COD V G / L
134Cr
1692.
1691.
2103.
1804.
1217.
995.
1825r
1836.
17860
1907.
20510
16200
1309.
1443
1459
1928.
1887r
1374.
1423
1835.
2643 6
16080
1845e
2598 I
2032 6
22582072
2562.
2684.
1639.
3687.
3196
1887
1815.
13476
12580
1474s
1194.
1366
122721240
1470.
1041
1231.
INFLUENT
BOD M G / L
2060.
4420.
2 300
1750.
1925.
1775r
1385.
1335.
1635.
2135.
20850
1690.
2290.
4270.
3670.
INFLUENT
PH
5.9
4.7
7.4
4.8
7.1
6.7
7.1
4.9
7.0
5.4
5.6
4.6
5.6
5.0
7.5
6.5
5.2
7.0
5.3
4.4
4.8
505
4.6
4.3
4.5
4.6
4.0
5.7
3.8
3.5
4.5
2230.
34600
0.2
2.3
10.0
6.4
1084.
1210.
4.2
4.7
7.5
I NFLUEkT
AKMON I A
N MG/L
I NFLUEkT
I NOR G AN I C
i7.0
109.0
311.0
179.0
196.0
196.0
224.0
101.0
56.0
17.0
232.0
19600
230.0
19300
238.0
193.0
185.0
84.0
196.0
168.0
87.0
204.0
21600
196.0
160.0
92.0
0.1
11.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
3.0
3.0
16.0
1 7 -0
18.0
0.1
P MG/L
50.0
27.0
9.0
16.0
39.0
12.0
9.0
1 5 -0
10.0
16.0
13.0
11.0
11.0
17 e 0
16.0
10.0
14.0
9 .O
10.0
13.0
1 300
11.0
11.0
9.0
19.0
11.0
24.0
23.0
50.0
29.0
30.0
40.1
0.1
13.0
1.0
0.1
28.0
6.0
0.1
5.2
5.8
0.1
0.1
6.0
1 2 .o
7.0
AERAT I O N
PH
DATE
'3
0
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
FEE
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEE
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEE
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
14
16
17
18
19
20'
21
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
28
29
1
2
3
5
6
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
7.2
6.5
6.5
6.9
7.4
7.3
7.5
6.8
7.3
7.3
6.9
6.7
7.0
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.0
7.6
7.3
6.9
5.9
5.8
5.9
6.7
6.6
6.6
6.3
6.6
7.1
6.5
5.3
5.7
5.0
6.1
2.1
2.4
7.2
6.8
6.1
7.1
7.0
7.2
6.9
6.8
6.4
AERAT I O h
T EM?
DEG F
AERAT IOlL
D.0.
MG/L
64
5.6
49.
67.
70.
74.
72
9.3
4.5
5.7
4.2
5.1
62
60
64
63.
66.
3.2
6.2
5.6
56.
600
72.
72
56.
56.
56.
57.
61.
610
5.7
7.9
7.6
4.0
3.6
4.4
5.5
605
6.4
5.1
5.0
SETTLING
ML/L
360.
400.
850.
340.
310.
340.
390.
960.
550.
410.
400.
760.
980.
970.
973.
410.
410.
600.
730.
700.
950.
530.
970.
950.
960.
920.
900.
910.
850.
830.
820.
860.
220.
670.
76.
77.
72
77.
77.
2.3
2.3
1.2
2.0
1.7
0.8
81.
74.
74.
76 a
75.
0.6
1.2
70.
71.
78.
64
60
6.5
5.8
5.1
5.9
6.4
670.
800.
820.
880.
919.
920.
930.
560
6.7
850.
EFFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
280.
492
309.
412.
318.
210.
183.
363.
295.
286.
309.
328.
357.
330 0
169.
282.
330.
418.
566.
392.
507.
714.
516.
342
470.
775.
722.
42.8
454.
485.
289.
1084.
949
6680
1571e
593
234.
314.
124.
140.
157.
184r
746 0
1091.
E F F L UE IN T
soLuaLt
COD MG/L
E F F L UE h T
SS MG/L
132.
226.
132.
181.
132.
78
142.
148.
144.
114.
107.
119.
1230
111.
91.
212.
200.
ld4.
240.
192.
92.
112.
294.
104.
180.
200.
120.
192.
131.
144.
197.
238.
165.
289.
331.
227.
173.
214.
240.
313.
176.
237.
387.
140.
345.
441.
445.
tF F L U tN T
BOD M G / L
142.
152.
17~.
83
115.
113.
129.
167.
160.
160.
172.
1968
236.
152.
272
328.
336.
276.
184.
216.
456.
344.
296.
2940
216.
84.
88.
67.
154.
267.
327.
179.
149.
199.
297.
800.
443
652.
257.
232928.
308.
136.
114.
83 0
58.
74.
102.
231.
328.
228.
108.
8.
100.
112.
$6.
404.
1212.
972 0
396.
81.
74
EFFLUENT
AMKON IA
N MG/L
DATE
I-
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
FEB
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
FEB 9
FEB 10
F E B 11
FEB
FER
FEE
FEB
FEB
FEB
FE3
FER
FEB
FE3
FEB
FE9
FEE?
F59
FE3
AAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
13
14
15
16
17
18
23
21
27
23
24
25
27
28
29
1
2
3
5
6
1972
1972
I972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
7600
10600
151.0
179.0
123.0
140.0
168.0
90.0
1 0 1 .o
129.0
lH8.0
143 B O
162 a 0
14600
165.0
207.0
196.0
188.0
204.0
19300
10600
760.0
168.0
14000
120.0
64.0
0.1
0.1
25.0
8.0
0.1
7.0
0.1
0.1
1c.o
3.0
0.1
2 1 .o
8.0
4.0
3.0
28.0
45.0
EFFLUENT
INORGANIC
P MG/L
16.0
17.0
6.0
7.0
11.0
11.0
9.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
11.0
8.0
11.0
11.0
13.0
10.0
13.0
14.0
13.0
11.0
14.0
8.0
6.0
8.0
9.0
8.0
6.0
8.0
5.0
RECYCLE
RATE
GPM
100.
100.
60
68
70.
105.
130.
60
100.
80.
70 0
70
200.
60 0
60
50
104.
140
125.
130.
105.
220.
110.
180.
250.
180.
l80I
165.
230.
303.
12.0
7.0
5.0
28.0
8.0
128.
153.
150.
150.
150.
300.
5.0
6.0
4.0
1.0
2.0
300.
9.0
10.0
200.
210.
168.
290.
313.
293.
290.
RECYCLE
ss MS/L
10700.
15280.
13363.
9460 9
7540.
7120.
9640.
12650.
13180.
12720.
10663.
6260.
13620.
12080.
12720.
10260.
1940.
27480.
7000.
11600.
6960.
12140.
11260.
11263.
14200.
15820.
12900.
12700.
11943.
11920.
26465.
17360.
16700.
4890.
2 705
9040.
11380.
13040.
i4a03.
EXCESS
BIOMASS
WASTE L B / D A Y
6681.
5504.
6417.
6138.
6340.
5560.
52 1 0
33546
791.
6016.
6401.
3350.
7361.
36272331.
4123.
3481.
4008.
7286.
27b4.
3481
4008 e
7286.
2704.
5409 a
5967.
3799
7284.
12200.
8605.
10020.
117380
834'3.
18053.
5275.
1296
067.
1917.
1882.
2838.
iioao.
1076C.
11050.
7800.
5860.
3405
2793.
2098
AERATION
MLSS
MG/L
2680.
3290.
3530.
2550.
2240.
2003.
2410.
3890.
3110.
2480.
2423
3130.
3640.
3300.
2940
2230.
2410.
2810.
3080.
2703.
3773.
3240.
3820.
3906
3470.
4620.
5400.
4620.
5490.
5060.
4963.
8940.
3160.
540L:.
1920.
3200.
3790
5060.
7443.
4570.
4610.
5530.
5600.
5390
3i90.
F / M L B SOL
C O D / L B MLSS
DAY
0.83
0.47
0 05 9
0.71
0.99
0.83
0.62
0.41
0.70
0.70
0.69
0.72
0.66
0.45
0.33
0.79
1.59
0.71
0.56
0.52
0.64
0.56
0.35
0.58
1.31
0.74
0.78
0.40
0.81
0.77
0.44
1.50
0.47
0.30
0.31
0.49
0.37
0.37
0.51
0030
0-22
0.36
FLOW
MG2
DATE
b!AR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
c-'
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
?4AR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
APE
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
AFR
APR
APR
APR
APR
7 1972
0 1972
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
20
29
30
31
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
A P R 19
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APA
23
21
23
24
25
26
27
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
INFLUENT
TOTAL
COD Y G / L
0.6280
0.7360
0.7240
0.7470
0.8580
0.5410
0.6153
1732.
1380.
1629.
13110.
1788.
2881.
0.7840
1313.
1026.
958.
1093.
1897.
0.9270
0.9500
0.0090
0.8650
0.7970
0 8400
0~ 9 5 8 0
0.9220
0.7940
0.7870
0.7190
0 8430
0 8630
0.8770
0.0590
0.8610
0.9100
1.0020
1.0190
0.9420
0.8950
0.8380
0.8470
0.9160
0.8490
0.7260
C.5290
0.7780
0.9510
1.0170
1.0140
0.5620
0.8070
1.0460
1.0190
0.9540
1886.
2003.
1534.
1629.
1072
14600
2578.
1989.
1429.
1583.
1638.
2021.
1546
1493
1072
1354.
170:.
2186.
2144.
1443
1866.
1700.
3774.
3587.
3031.
2371.
2441.
1526.
202 1
2062
1653.
1368.
1265
INFLUENT
SOLUULE
COD M G / L
1196
9740.
1464.
1072.
1184
1918.
1575.
1005.
861
771
845
1608
173?r
1285
1443.
887.
1230.
1897.
1610.
1388.
1347.
1347-
1949
1477.
1233.
907
1067.
928
1340
1351.
1175.
1562.
1202.
3671
3275.
1918.
1907.
1856.
INFLUENT
BOD M G / L
1050.
1350.
686.
806.
0.1
0.1
0.1
30 0
0.1
0.1
6.0
4.0
0.1
0.1
2 00
11.0
1 .0
0.2
6.4
5.2
8.3
9.6
6.3
5.1
6.7
5.0
1180.
5.8
7.6
1300.
0.5
12446
672.
5240
1324.
3865.
1890.
1518.
1026.
INFLULNT
INORGAN!C
P MG/L
1.0
6.9
6.3
1158.
1195.
INFLUENT
AMMQNIA
N MG/L
3.1
4.0
1113.
1526.
2062
1653r
13681265.
INFLUEhT
PH
7.3
7.0
5.9
5.8
5.3
5.6
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.2
8.2
7.5
7.4
806
6.6
7.1
701
7.2
5.3
4.4
5.1
4.7
5.1
6.0
5.7
5.3
5.5
6.5
6.7
0.1
0.1
0.1
1 .o
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
1.0
5.0
0.3
1 .o
0.3
3 .O
2.0
1.0
1.0
2 .O
1 00
4.C
3.0
2b o
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
2.0
0.1
0. 1
7.0
2.0
1.0
0.3
1.0
0.2
1 .o
1.0
3.0
2.0
2 .O
2 .o
3.0
2 00
1.0
1.0
0 04
2
.o
2.0
2 00
2 .O
2.0
4.0
AERAT ION
PH
DATE
+
r\)
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
MAR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
APR
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
29
30
31
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
6.8
711
6.8
6.6
5.9
7.1
7.5
70 4
7.0
AERATION
TEMP
DEG F
65.
60.
66
70.
686
62
670
74.
74.
7.1
6.4
6.4
7.3
7.2
7r 1
7.5
7.2
6.7
7.5
7.4
7.8
7.5
70.
80.
74.
700
72
74
68.
72
70.
70.
73.
73.
6.9
7.0
6.8
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.5
7.3
7.4
7.2
8.0
6.5
7.2
7.3
7.5
7r7
7.4
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.8
7.6
73
74.
78.
74.
74.
77.
75.
A E R A T 1O N
0.0. M G / L
4.2
8.3
a .2
6.0
8.0
5.5
7.5
6.5
7.6
80.
66 0
73.
72
71.
77.
74.
72
70.
70.
70.
70.
7 0s
70.
70.
2.7
204
2.8
4.0
2r5
5 ab
4.9
8.0
4.8
4.6
4.8
5.5
2r5
2.0
2.6
3.3
5.5
6.3
5.2
5.8
6.9
SETTLING
ML/L
940.
660.
600.
460.
970.
980.
980.
930.
3200
190.
660.
760.
4250
475.
480.
490.
485.
490.
485.
485.
460.
455.
EFFLUE~T
TOTAL
COD M G / L
1468
1039.
685
544.
220r
489.
941.
755.
279.
175.
Si.
487.
400
166.
132.
260.
92
148 0
742
506.
182.
431.
500.
363 0
7670
5516
478.
254.
2276
194.
194.
239.
212.
199.
133.
775 b
1089.
12250
1563.
500.
421.
495.
495.
305.
260.
300.
280.
450.
400.
425.
465.
475.
450.
500.
500.
495.
475.
495.
500.
107.
470
547
294.
373.
EFFLUENT
SOLUBLE
COD MG/L
206.
173.
124.
82.
69
133.
112.
103.
53.
58.
58.
99.
62
66.
54.
33.
36.
45.
53.
49.
50.
50
0
115.
82
87.
49.
62.
66.
49.
82.
67r
75.
94.
182.
95.
660
86.
74.
45.
58.
89.
79.
33.
EFFLUENT
SS M G / L
1060.
980.
550.
390.
1240
224.
856.
696.
192.
60.
112.
460.
360.
160.
66.
52.
92
964.
372
180.
300.
92.
544.
136.
1240
216.
140.
EFFLUENT
BOD K G / L
50;).
380.
366.
113.
106.
53
219.
60
282.
ao.
188.
86.
2ca.
164.
128.
10360
1608.
1732.
15YO.
308.
10.
356.
292252.
316.
131.
116.
127.
116.
543.
478.
516.
790.
19Y.
32
169.
410.
221.
153.
DATE
7 1972
YAR
MAR
8 1972
:4AR
9 1972
M A R 13 1972
MAR 12 1972
MAR 13 1972
MAR 14 1972
M A R 1 5 1972
;IAR 1 6 1972
-b
MAR 17
MAR 19
MAR 20
MAR 21
MAR 2 2
MAR 2 3
MAR 24
MAR 26
MAR 27
MAR 26
MAR 29
MAR 30
MAR 3 1
APR
2
APR
3
APR
4
APR
5
APR
6
APR
7
APR
9
APR 10
APR 11
APR 12
APR 13
APR 14
APR 16
APR 17
APR 18
APR 19
APR 20
APR 21
APR 2 3
APR 24
APR 2 5
APR 26
APR'27
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
EFFLUEhT
AMb!3N I A
N :.:c/L
EFFLUENT
I NORGAN IC
P MG/L
RECYCLE
RGTE
G I>
25.0
29.0
15.0
1.0
0.3
330.
403 a
20L.
200.
240
172.
200.
125.
120.
150.
170.
8123.
8623.
9740.
11200.
9740.
10820.
10580.
10500.
20080.
160.
10880.
225.
225.
230.
250
253.
245.
200.
170r
9700.
105CO.
0.1
11.0
0.1
6.0
17.6
10.3
3.0
1.o
8.0
0 01
6.0
9.0
6.6
4.0
1.0
4.0
5.0
0.1
0.1
6.0
7.0
0.1
4.0
4.0
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.2
15.0
19.0
0.5
6.0
6.0
0.1
id1
180.
10.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
3.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
8.0
4.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
3.1
3.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
8.0
1.0
9.0
5.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
4.0
16.0
3.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
10.0
2.0
5.0
24.0
1.0
1.0
220.
220.
250.
200.
200.
200.
240 e
22C.
220.
210.
203.
201).
201).
200.
400
350.
400.
200.
300
250.
200.
200.
200.
RECYCLE
ss M t i / L
4440.
8020.
11620.
10680.
11223.
12180.
11460.
12280.
11140.
84204
14320.
8940.
11360.
10500.
12960.
12420.
14340.
13200.
11600.
10320.
10160.
12100.
9620.
7440.
7080.
4860.
7280.
8960.
7420.
7580.
7560.
10340.
EXCESS
BIOMASS
WASTE L B / D A Y
518.
935.
947.
1005.
1136.
2705 e
2353.
3876.
4373.
2536.
4850.
2435.
3474.
3760
4839.
4448
3364.
5884.
6595.
6649.
5832.
5050.
4294.
5362
5488.
3149.
3130.
3724.
4300.
5498.
483 1
5588.
6053.
5043.
5770.
4462 *
4246.
1457.
5215.
4851.
4450.
6692.
4156.
5684.
AERATION
MLSS
KG/L
3170.
2980.
3120.
3110.
3510.
4740.
3940.
3860.
2430
3119.
3350.
F / M LB SOL
MLSS
DAY
COG/LB
0042
0.44
0.72
0.50
0.58
0.52
0.53
0.46
0.52
0-51
0-42
0.77
0-75
0.61
0.75
3840.
3770.
3670.
3690.
4030
6920.
5830.
6760.
2620.
4450.
3560.
0.50
0.38
0.53
0.68
0.58
4850.
4780
4160.
3220.
4290.
4470.
4675
4950.
4333.
4200.
3673.
5770.
4670.
4100.
3283.
2183.
2270.
3282.
2720.
2530.
2700.
5690.
0.74
0.49
0.48
0.48
0059
0.42
0.50
0.46
0.42
0.67
0.52
1.13
0.60
0.63
0.92
1.26
0.92
0.78
0.94
1.23
0.87
0.58
0.40
0.38
cn
DATE
APR 28 1972
APR 3 0 1 9 7 2
MAY
1 1972
MAY
2 1972
MAY
3 1972
MAY
4 1972
MAY
5 1972
MAY
7 1972
8 1972
MAY
9 1972
MAY
MAY 1 0 1 9 7 2
M A Y 11 1 9 7 2
MAY 12 1 9 7 2
MAY 1 4 1972
MAY 15 1972
MAY 1 6 1 9 7 2
MAY 1 7 1 9 7 2
MAY 18 1972
MAY 1 9 1972
MAY 21 1972
MAY 22 1972
MAY 23 1972
MAY 2 4 1972
MAY 2 5 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 6 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 9 1 9 7 2
MAY 30 1 $ 7 2
MAY 31 1972
JUN
1 1972
JUN
2 1972
JUN
4 1972
JUN
5 1972
JUN
6 1972
JUN
7 1972
JUN
8 1972
JUN
9 1972
JUN 1 1 1 9 7 2
JUN 1 2 1 9 7 2
JUN 1 3 1 9 7 2
JUR 1 4 1 9 7 2
JUN 1 5 1 9 7 2
JUN 1 6 1 9 7 2
JUN 1 8 1 9 7 2
JUN 19 1 9 7 2
JUN 2 0 1 9 7 2
INFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
IP4FLUEtIU:
SGLUBLE
COD MG/L
0.8850
0.7310
1196.
3470
1196
3470.
6.5
5.1
0.1
0.1
0.8160
0.8060
0.6463
0.9920
0.8340
0.7540
1.0500
0.9480
0.9900
0.8390
0.2020
1859.
1875.
1850.
1119.
953
990.
1026.
1042
1072
1052.
1794.
1427
1350.
1325.
964 s
766
887.
820
802
856.
763
1248.
5.2
6.2
10.4
7.1
7.3
8.2
6.5
7.8
8.3
8.0
7.9
0.1
FLOW
MGD
0.6370
0.7800
0.8430
0.9120
0.8640
0.9500
0.8940
1.0220
1.0270
0.5910
1897.
2032
2195.
1646.
1237 e
928
2646
2041 a
2104.
18288.
1052.
1429
1856.
1469.
1083
784.
2297.
1656.
18431721.3.
0.5580
0.9130
1.0280
1.0170
0.8670
0 7240
0.9740
0.891G
0 6920
0.7520
3.85ao
0.8480
0.8410
0.8170
0.8110
0.7080
0.7890
0.7540
0.9390
3166
1281.
1118.
1010.
953
989.
1323.
1332.
1646.
2041
1479
1093
1479 a
1156.
860
794.
806 1
812.
1010.
11-15
1312.
1770.
1250.
711.
757.
1489.
1026.
1772
1588.
954
985.
1037.
2062 s
1265.
2197.
1794
1313.
1233.
IhFLUENT
BOD M G / L
1105.
721.
824.
2150.
978.
INFLUENT
Pti
6.3
6.9
5.9
5.9
9.2
7.2
6.9
6.8
1695.
7.2
4.4
6.0
7.2
720 0
691
1382.
885.
8.4
6.7
6.9
700
6.2
5.8
5.8
8.5
7.4
7.3
7.1
1310.
1096.
6.5
7.1
7.1
6.2
7.0
6.0
INFLUENT
AMiviOiiIA
N MG/L
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.6
2.0
7.0
3.0
7.0
1.0
5.0
3.0
0.1
2.0
4.0
5.0
28.0
13.0
9.0
3.0
1.0
1.0
INFLUENT
IfiOKGANIC
P HG/L
2.0
3.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.o
2.0
1a 0
2.0
2.0
2.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
2 .O
1b
1e
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
3.0
0.2
0.2
0.3
1.3
1 .O
1.0
1.0
1a 0
2.0
2.0
1 .o
3.0
2 .o
2 .o
1.0
5.0
1 .o
DATE
c--I
cn
APR
APR
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
MAY
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
28 1972
30 1972
1 1972
2 1972
3 1972
4 1972
5 1972
7 1972
8 1972
9 1972
10 1 9 7 2
1 1 1972
12 1972
1 4 1972
15 1972
16 1972
17 1972
18 1972
19 1972
21 1972
22 1 9 7 2
23 1972
24 1972
25 1 9 7 2
26 1 9 7 2
29 1972
30 1972
3 1 1972
1 1972
2 1972
4 1972
5 1972
6 1972
7 1972
a 1972
9 1972
11 1972
1 2 1972
13 1972
14 1972
15 1972
16 1972
18 1972
19 1972
20 1972
AERAT I ON
PH
7.8
7.2
7.1
7.2
7.3
8.0
7.5
7.5
7.5
6.3
7.6
7.9
7.7
7.8
7.3
7 04
7.6
7.5
7.5
8.3
7.7
7.0
6.9
5.8
4.0
5.6
7.2
7.6
7.9
7.8
7.6
7.9
7.6
6.8
6.9
7.5
8.1
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.9
7.5
AEKAT I O N
TEMP
DEG F
70
75.
70.
70.
69.
72
68 0
660
66 0
70 s
70.
70.
660
70.
74.
76.
77.
77.
77.
77.
78.
80.
80.
AERATION
D.0.
MGIL
6.2
3.2
6.5
700
5.8
7.3
5.8
7.0
6.6
7.5
7.0
6.9
6.3
4.2
3.1
2.9
4.8
3.2
1.0
80.
80.
70.
70.
70.
70.
76 0
74.
80.
80.
82.
87.
72.
75.
83.
82.
82.
82.
75.
78.
84.
82
2.0
5.5
6.7
6.0
6.0
5.2
3.5
4.0
3.3
1.9
209
2.9
5.6
209
2.8
S E T T L I NG
KL/L
5000
501).
500.
495.
475.
425.
475.
365.
325.
275.
300.
450.
495.
495.
360.
460.
460.
500.
480.
400.
300.
500.
460.
450.
485.
175.
180.
450.
450b
370.
670.
780.
950.
720.
650.
870.
950.
980.
EFFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
LFFLLiEivT
SOLUBLE
CQD M G / L
383.
990.
580
73.
1635.
760,
250.
249.
332.
598.
706.
450 0
635.
730 e
691.
31.
60.
50.
52.
41.
41.
49.
6250.
45.
58.
528.
3010
954.
750.
804.
722.
1132.
1066.
887.
3722
124.
21.
21.
31.
21.
52.
53.
121.
87.
3358.
152 1
575.
303.
202.
117.
258.
1021.
635.
579.
225.
675.
210.
91.
550.
211.
95
107.
172.
692.
1460
52.
87.
80.
58.
42.
49.
62
58.
52.
54.
25.
71.
66
66.
70.
70.
58.
EFFLUENT
SS M G / L
200.
448.
1900.
388.
240.
220.
324.
644.
636.
380.
616.
392.
492.
490.
2600
1050.
820.
780.
560.
11480
920.
1092.
732
360.
296.
72
EFFLUENT
BOD M G / L
116.
772.
905.
422 1
101.
76.
111.
151.
204s
141.
264.
438
319.
260.
220.
680.
509.
349.
265.
489.
718.
2692510.
760.
210.
125.
loa.
151.
100.
280.
952.
716.
528.
168.
652.
152.
44.
371.
371.
291
641
117.
335.
77.
56.
584.
81.
38.
32
59.
28.
512.
128.
20.
60.
140.
6800
300-
i-
y"
DATE
APR 2 8 1 9 7 2
APR 3 0 1 9 7 2
MAY
1 1972
MAY
2 1972
,YAY
3 1972
MAY
4 1972
MAY
5 1972
MAY
7 1972
MAY
8 1972
MAY
9 1972
PlAY 1 0 1 9 7 2
MAY 11 1 9 7 2
MAY 1 2 1 9 7 2
M A Y 1 4 197.2
MAY 1 5 1 9 7 2
MAY 1 6 1 9 7 2
MAY 17 1 9 7 2
MAY 1 8 1 9 7 2
MAY 1 9 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 1 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 2 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 3 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 4 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 5 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 6 1 9 7 2
MAY 2 9 1 9 7 2
MAY 3 0 1 9 7 2
MAY 3 1 1 9 7 2
JljN
1 1972
JUN
2 1972
Jut4
4 1972
JUN
5 1972
JUN
6 1972
JUN
7 1972
JUN
8 1972
JUN
9 1972
JUN 11 1 9 7 2
JUN 12 1 9 7 2
JUN 1 3 1972
J U N 14 1 9 7 2
JUN 15 1 9 7 2
JUN 16 1 9 7 2
JUY 18 1972
JUN 1 9 1 9 7 2
JUN 20 1 9 7 2
EFFLUENT
AMMON I A
N MG/L
8.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
6.0
9.0
1 2 .o
17.0
15.0
16.0
10.0
14.0
E .O
10.0
9.0
3.0
0.1
6.0
13.0
9.0
6.0
1.0
6.0
6.0
5.0
0.1
13 0.0
15.0
36.0
23.0
16.0
8.0
0.1
10.0
0.1
9.c
25.0
24.0
25.0
10.0
2 .O
3.0
10.0
7.0
EFFLUENT
I NORGAN I C
P FrG/L
5.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.8
3.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
17.0
6.0
1.0
0.1
0.3
0.7
6.0
7.0
7.0
1.0
1.0
7.0
6.0
0.3
0.1
9.0
6.0
9.0
8.0
2.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
2.0
9.0
7.0
8.C
8.0
6.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
R E C Y C t. t
RATE
G PM
153.
200.
180.
180.
190.
110.
150.
150.
100.
150.
150.
150
150.
150.
150.
200.
200.
150.
150.
230.
2CO
150.
150.
300
300.
150.
153.
150.
150.
150.
15U.
400
200.
200.
400
400.
400.
400.
400
400
500.
520.
5000
520.
500
RLCYCLE
SS MG/L
11080.
9700.
6380.
6240.
8640.
7860.
a480
9020.
67206480.
6660.
6400.
6060.
4820.
7200.
7180.
6520.
62406
4540.
2240.
2 300 e
2680.
4840.
3120.
6620.
2760.
5080.
9160.
8240.
8980.
6500.
46602780.
3760.
5560.
4880.
3830.
5060.
46004
4520.
4720.
5720.
7520.
7260.
6180.
EXCESS
BIOMASS
WASTE L B / D A Y
3968.
4040
4464.
29100
1223.
1898.
2542.
5230.
1623.
1565.
1319.
2033.
3150.
4470.
1096r
541.
555.
647.
AERATIOh
MLSS
MG/L
3040
4990
3170.
262U.
2105.
2230.
2090.
19200
2060.
1990.
1840.
2360.
1843.
2300.
2400.
2870.
2a80.
2843.
183C.
1350.
1040.
17700
iaao.
2270
5300.
1390.
1980
3830.
1990.
3216.
20034
854.
509.
438.
1065s
1179.
918.
1222.
1762.
2183.
1965 8
34306
5387b
2419.
4100.
4150.
1853.
3110.
1900.
2630.
2250"
2040
177G.
1790.
2430.
2703.
2130.
2500.
2750.
2510.
2680.
3680.
F / M L5 SOL
COD/LB MLSS
DAY
0.53
1-56
0.75
0.88
0.77
0.86
0.64
0.83
0.75
0.82
0.58
0.46
0.45
0.73
1.14
1.16
1.06
1.09
2.49
1.72
1.66
4-16
0.95
0.74
0.58
0.62
0.58
0.54
1.06
2.46
2.25
1.02
0.81
0.49
0.45
0.87
0.60
0.72
0.60
0.33
0.98
DATE
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JLJL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
30
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
JUL
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG 11
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
FLOW
MGD
INFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
I NFLCliNT
SOLUBLE
COD M G / L
0.9520
0.9320
0.6880
0.7180
0.7210
0.7410
0.7920
0 5400
1358.
1784.
1052 0
1793.
1629.
1333.
840 0
2804.
954.
1258.
917.
1451
1155.
1062 0
0.5540
0.7910
0.9110
0.8700
0.8640
0.9370
0.9600
0.9870
0.5910
0.6000
0.2240
0.5450
0.8950
0.9020
0.6170
0.5200
0.5840
0.3820
0.5770
0.7140
0.7320
0.4910
0.4380
0.4330
0.7450
0.7860
0.7220
0.8000
0.8000
C.6720
0 e6440
0.8600
0.8730
0 8470
1161.
1113.
11136
1700.
1608
2031
1783.
1544.
167018970
1200 b
1544.
881.
1382 a
2239.
1588.
1384.
1103.
1202
1021.
1507
1268.
1855.
861.
1210.
1036.
.
..
1031.
861 0
722 b
746
619.
1046
1 5 6 7 I)
1140
677
INFLUENT
AMKON I A
N NG/L
5.4
6.0
7.3
7.2
6.1
4.9
5.2
5.3
4.7
1.o
3.0
1.0
1 .o
2.0
1.0
INFLUENT
INORGANIC
P MG/L
8a 0
0.5
C.1
0.3
0.4
1b 0
2.0
2 .0
4.4
1450.
1382.
13706
881.
598
498
1099
1140
881
804
516.
697 a
653.
5180
670 o
782 8
940
1604.
INFLUENT
Pil
6.8
1100.
2351.
5640
1700.
1608.
2031
1783.
1844.
1794.
2227.
17230
1648 6
1202
1382
1078.
1493.
1441.
1057.
1155.
773.
1026.
1037.
1326.
1332.
INFLUENT
BOD M5/L
660.
1730.
706
1044.
1003.
1135,
702
1680.
7.1
8.0
6.8
5.1
4.9
6.5
5.6
6.4
7.9
7.5
7.3
7.2
7.4
6.7
4.0
7.0
7.2
7.3
8.2
7.5
7.0
7.9
6.7
6.9
7.3
7.2
8.5
7.8
7.7
8.1
7.2
7.9
7.4
7.3
4.0
0.1
5.0
1.0
2.0
1.O
0.4
0.2
0.6
1.0
087
5e 0
1.0
1.o
1.0
1.0
3.0
4.0
0.1
2.0
4.0
2.0
1.0
1.o
6.2
1.O
c.4
3.0
2.0
0 -4
0.1
2.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
1.0
2 .0
1.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
1 .o
0.5
0.3
1 .O
2.0
1.0
1.0
0 06
2 .O
0 04
0.3
0.8
0 04
1.0
12.0
2.0
3.0
2 .O
2.0
2.0
2.0
2 00
AERATION
DATE
'3
a
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUN
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
JUL
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
2 1 i972
2 2 1972
23 1972
2 5 1972
26. 1972
27 1972
28 1972
29 1972
30 1972
2 1972
3 1972
4 1972
5 1972
6 1972
7 1972
9 1972
10 1972
11 1972
12 1972
13 1972
14 1972
16 1972
17 1972
1 8 1972
19 1972
20 1972
2 1 1972
23 1972
24 1972
2 5 1972
26 1972
27 1972
28 1972
30 1972
3 1 1972
1 1972
2 1972
3 1972
4 1972
6 1972
7 1972
8 1972
9 1972
10 1972
11 1972
~~
PH
7.5
7.6
7.8
7.4
7.0
7.3
7.0
7.1
AERATION
TEMP
DEG F
82.
77.
75.
80.
82.
80 e
80.
80.
AERAT I O i k
D e 0 . MGIL
3.2
3.6
4.4
1.6
2.8
2.0
2.1
SETTLING
ML/L
980.
980.
850.
850.
480.
500.
870.
EFFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
850.
EFFLUENT
55 M G / L
EFFLUENT
BOD M G / L
54.
66.
54s
50.
49
41.
54.
66
62
772.
396.
300.
172.
114.
73.
1230
128.
130.
120.
7 08
87.
54.
82.
66 0
49
53.
110.
92.
128.
48.
64.
64.
66
25.
29.
53.
46.
33.
66.
62.
62.
31.
35.
23.
49.
43.
35.
33.
33.
495.
192.
124.
140
132.
174.
177.
7.1
7.7
670
950.
7.1
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.6
7.5
7.3
7.8
7.5
7.0
6.9
7.4
7.1
6.7
6.3
6.4
6.7
7.0
7.2
7.1
6.9
6.5
7.2
7.1
7.3
7.4
7.5
74
760
78.
1.6
80.
1.5
850.
790.
840.
750.
720.
3100
610.
540.
650.
650.
700.
620.
78
4.9
2.8
4.5
4.2
5.5
7.1
4.9
6.5
2.6
6.1
7e 0
4.0
4.9
4.1
7.4
7.3
7.1
7.3
7.5
7.4
5.0
2.7
3.6
550.
550.
700.
590.
410.
550.
550.
520.
550.
600.
520.
470.
590.
740.
800.
950.
900.
900.
980.
990.
940.
EFFLUENT
SOLUBLE
COD M G / L
128.
123.
loo*
112.
120.
145 e
91.
41
52 e
74
74e
49
46 0
37.
49
23.
.
.
101.
62
43.
31.
43.
50.
56.
72.
118.
116.
98
.
.
50
18.
96.
60
39.
25.
29.
29.
29.
256
35.
53.
37.
120.
54.
136.
132.
132.
1601
85.
87.
129.
80.
116.
96.
32
92 e
7s.
63
78
92
60.
52
71.
59.
28.
43
BO*
.?be
600
32
72
59.
26
28.
23.
49.
ao.
22.
36 *
34.
46.
26.
22.
36
6.
260
.
.
30.
iL.
22
15e
8.
40.
34.
14.
24.
18.
26.
16.
1430.
52
80.
18.
17.
11.
7.
21.
17.
Id.
19.
25.
33.
22.
0"
DATE
JUN 2 1 1972
J U N 22 1 9 7 2
JUN 23 1972
JUN 25 1972
JUN 26 1972
JGN 27 1 9 7 2
JUN 28 1972
JUN 29 1972
JUN 30 1972
JUL
2 1972
JUL
3 1972
JUL
4 1972
JUL
5 1972
JUL
6 1972
JUL
7 1972
9 1972
JUL
J U L 10 1 9 7 2
J U L 11 1 9 7 2
JUL 12 1972
J U L 13 1972
JUL 1 4 1972
J U L 16 1972
JUL 17 1972
J U L 18 1972
JUL 19 1972
J U L 20 1 9 7 2
J U L 21 1972
JclL 2 3 1 9 7 2
JUL 24 1972
J U L 25 1972
J U L 26 1972
J U L 27 1 9 7 2
JUL 28 1 9 7 2
J U L 30 1972
JUL 3 1 1972
AUS
1 1972
AUG
2 1972
AUG
3 1972
AUG
4 1972
AUG
6 1972
AUG
7 1972
AUG
8 1972
AUG
9 1972
AUG 1 0 1 9 7 2
AUG 11 1 9 7 2
EFFLUEhT
AMblOiL I A
N MG/L
8.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
1.o
0.6
1.0
0.7
1.0
7.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
4.0
004
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.7
2.0
1.0
0.7
0.9
EFFLUE~VT
I Nc'rRLAN IC
P VG/L
RECYCLE
RATE
GPM
2.0
2.0
6.0
0.2
3.0
5.0
4.0
1.0
500
0.1
0.1
On8
5.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
0.2
0.1
1.0
4.0
1.o
1.o
0.1
2.0
11.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
4.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.4
1.0
1.0
0.1
0.7
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.0
6.0
12.0
7.0
3.0
2.0
0.2
0.1
0.3
3.0
1.0
3.0
2 .o
1.3
500.
400
400
500
500.
5000
400
300.
300.
400
400 0
450
450.
450
450.
400
500 e
500
500.
400
400.
400
500
500.
500
500
400
400 s
500
500.
530.
400
403.
400
500.
500
550.
550
500
450
500.
500.
650
690.
RECYCLE
S5 M G / L
4200.
5140.
600C.
7980.
6740.
7500.
6320.
5840.
EXCESS
BIOMASS
WASTE L B / D A Y
1014.
985.
1099.
1462.
3256.
2686.
1526.
3502.
10000.
9800.
9700.
5780.
10460.
10730.
10220.
9123.
7800.
9800.
5700.
8620s
7420
6780.
6000.
5760.
5600.
COD/LB MLSS
MG/I
CAY
2820.
27900
1.22
0.50
0.42
0.55
0.38
0.37
0.44
0.51
3150.
4240
4170.
38900
3910.
4760
5240.
5540.
7560.
8620.
F / M L B SOL
AERATION
KLSS
3652.
5169.
4165.
4082.
4686.
4650.
4550.
4820.
5263.
5130.
2900 e
4750.
5370.
5880.
4950
2020.
4890.
3830.
4630.
4680.
5150.
3530.
3820.
3170.
6880.
3080.
7940.
6680.
6060.
6740.
9120.
8900.
8080.
6980.
6660.
6880.
61200
7880.
8080.
6920.
4050.
4560
3583.
3820
4020
4380
3450
3630.
3840
3720.
4150.
4410.
4410.
4240
0.15
0.42
0.45
0.48
0.46
0.55
0.77
0.60
0.23
0.32
0.19
0.35
0.20
0.45
0.29
0.19
0.21
0.10
0.22
0.26
0. 1 9
0.14
0.17
0.21
0.53
0.32
0.29
0.27
0.28
0.21
0.32
0.48
0.47
0.27
DATE
w
W
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AU5
AUG
AUG
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
28
29
30
31
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
SEP 2 0
SEP 2 1
S E P 22
SEP 2 4
SEP 25
SEP 2 6
SEP 2 7
SEP 28
SEP 2 9
OCT
1
OCT 2
OCT
3
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1372
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
FLOW
.Y G D
0.9480
0.8900
0.8340
0.4590
0.4330
0.4890
0.8680
0.8560
0.9330
0.9360
0.8240
0.6520
0.5160
0.6340
0.7950
0.6080
0.8060
0.6100
0.9360
0.9370
0.9320
0.9650
0,4790
0 6460
001950
0.5760
0.8130
0.8970
0.7750
0.8070
0.7953
0.8310
G.8270
0.8680
@ 9490
0.9470
0.9553
0.8250
0.8920
0.9200
1 C430
1a 2 3 6 0
0.9160
0.9560
IlvFLiJENT
TOTAL
INFLUENT
SOLUBLt
I &FLUENT
COD M G / L
C3D M G / L
BOD M G / I
1051
4105.
7235.
5728
4051.
2695
1547.
2766
1732.
?248.
1425
1555.
1261r
1866.
4882
2072
3172.
4598.
647
2985
5742.
4969
3794.
2457
1072.
1710.
1309
97?.
1200.
1213.
692
1138.
1566
1742.
3172.
4330.
5081.
1804.
1588.
3130.
57131.
3784.
871
1436
1441
1513.
1237.
1497.
2819.
1949
1361
1072 s
1C97.
954.
1814.
138:.
1208
2135.
9sc.
878.
2104.
1916.
4552 a
13680
1289.
2446
4913
3516.
715.
1179u
1202a
1005.
938 0
1067.
1835
1223.
845
701
746 6
622
1237.
783.
812.
705
619.
663 0
1614.
1437.
INFLUENT
3340.
42-20.
2035.
1372.
IhFLUENT
pn
8.1
6.9
6.8
4.8
4.4
4.5
5.0
4.7
4.7
6.0
7.3
5.0
1569.
1096.
2712.
241Co
2660.
800.
1120.
1650.
858.
1485.
.
628 e
5.8
8.8
5.2
4.7
4.9
4.4
7.2
5.8
5.6
4.9
4-6
4.5
9. 1
9.4
8.9
6.8
7.4
7.0
6.0
7.4
8.0
7.7
7.5
7.4
7.6
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.3
7.1
5.4
5.0
AMEIOP4IA
N iMG/L
0.7
2.0
2.0
1.0
160
1.0
1.O
1.0
0.7
1.0
1.o
1.o
2.0
1.o
1 .o
2.0
8.0
5.0
9.0
1.3
2.0
1.0
0.1
0.7
3.0
3-0
3.0
1.0
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.7
2.0
0.7
1.1
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.4
1.0
1.o
I kFLUCNT
I h o d GAtL I C
P KG/L
1.0
2.0
3.0
0.1
1 .o
0 e4
0.2
0.1
1.0
0.1
006
0.1
0.1
0.4
2 .O
0.4
0.1
004
2 00
2 00
0.3
1.0
004
0.3
0.1
1.0
35.0
1.0
0.8
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.5
0 02
0.1
0 e4
1 .O
0.7
1.0
DATE
I-
Ab5
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
AUG
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
SEP
OCT
OCT
OCT
13 1972
14 1972
1 5 1972
16 1972
17 1972
18 1972
20 1972
21 1972
2 2 1972
23 1972
24 1972
2 5 1972
27 1972
2 3 1972
29 1972
30 1972
3 1 1972
1 1972
3 1972
4 1972
5 1972
6 1972
7 1972
8 1972
10 1972
11 1972
12 1972
13 1972
14 1972
15 1972
17 1972
1 8 1972
19 1972
20 1972
21 1972
2 2 1972
2 4 1972
2 5 1972
26 1972
27 1972
28 1972
29 1972
1 1972
2 1972
3 1972
AERATION
PH
7.2
6.7
5.5
5.6
6.3
6.8
7.1
7.4
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.0
7.3
7.2
7.3
7.0
7.0
7.5
7.8
7.7
6.5
7.2
6.8
7.1
7.2
7.1
7.2
7.5
7.0
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.3
7.5
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.4
6.2
7.5
AERATION
TEMP
DEG F
AEHAT I O N
D.0.
MGIL
3.6
1.0
1.1
2.0
0.5
1.2
1.1
4.2
3.9
2.1
1.6
0.7
3.0
1.0
0.3
4.2
2.9
2 06
SETTLING
ML/L
950.
940.
910.
9806
990.
990.
990.
940.
960.
960.
975.
950.
920.
950.
9YO.
204.
172.
3.3
5.7
6.3
6.0
LFFLUENT
SOLUBLE
COD M G / L
67.
1320
315.
342 e
37.
46
226.
309.
653.
136.
168.
738.
744.
558.
155.
250.
150.
266.
74.
62
62 0
239.
286.
104.
52.
37.
35.
45.
45.
35.
31.
310
39
47.
33.
37.
216.
83r
62.
66
178.
97.
220.
205
139.
220.
151.
74
222.
64
66 e
45.
46
133.
74.
231.
208.
260.
204.
251.
211.
231.
153.
58
120.
41.
124.
660
25.
29.
115.
177.
70
78
65 0
43.
58.
42
100.
81.
49.
41.
52.
54.
251.
266269.
183.
158.
131.
158.
191.
2 16.
240.
291.
202.
199.
4.0
5 06
EFFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
151.
124.
122.
530r
720.
510.
.
.
72
53.
69
83
50.
78.
60
39
640
66.
166.
EFFLUENT
SS M G / L
62
196.
142.
148.
124.
396
50.
112.
642
624.
484
80.
200.
124.
48
32
18.
22.
EFFLUENT
BOD M G / L
250
49.
206.
196.
113.
357.
571.
745.
376.
366.
20d.
60.
47.
25.
230.
70.
20.
160
84.
26.
iao.
140.
56.
1440
45.
14
24.
14.
82.
26.
660
70.
a4
60
44
20.
46.
4c
46.
38.
28.
8.
56.
32 e
63
30.
25
14 e
72
6.
133.
48.
50.
86
20
0
Id.
43
72
13641
be
6.
29.
13
la.
25
15.
130
17.
27r
+
0
DATE
AUG 1 3 1 9 7 2
AUG 1 4 1 9 7 2
AUG i 5 1 9 7 2
A U G 16 1 9 7 2
AUG 17 1 9 7 2
AUG 1 8 1 9 7 2
AGG 2 0 1 9 7 2
AUG 2 1 1 9 7 2
AUG 22 1 9 7 2
AUG 2 3 1 9 7 2
AUG 24 1 9 7 2
AUG 25 1 9 7 2
AUG 2 7 1 9 7 2
AUG 2 8 1 9 7 2
AUG 2 9 1 9 7 2
AUS 30 1972
AUG 3 1 1 9 7 2
SEP
1 1972
SEP
3 1972
SEP
4 1972
SEP
5 1972
SEP
6 1972
SEP
7 1972
SEP
8 1972
SEP 10 1 9 7 2
S E P 11 1 9 7 2
SEP 1 2 1 9 7 2
SEP 1 3 1 9 7 2
SEP 1 4 1 9 7 2
SEP 15 1972
SEP 1 7 1 9 7 2
SEP 1 8 1 9 7 2
SEP 19 1972
SEP 20 1972
SEP 2 1 1 9 7 2
S E P 22 1 9 7 2
SEP 2 4 1 9 7 2
S E P 25 1 9 7 2
SEP 2 6 1 9 7 2
S E P 27 1 9 7 2
SEP 28 1972
SEP 29 1 9 7 2
1 1972
OCT
2 1972
OCT
3 1972
OCT
EFFLUENT
AM!*?OK I A
N MG/L
0.6
0.7
0.9
0.6
0.6
1.7
3.2
5.0
3.0
16.0
19.0
12.0
2.0
FI.LUENT
I NORGAN I C
P YG/L
2.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
2.0
0.2
RECYCLE
KATE
5Pl4
700
650.
600.
620.
61C.
610.
550.
530.
1.o
0.1
7.4
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.6
3.0
7.0
0.1
0.1
430.
510.
480.
480.
483.
500
510.
510.
520.
500.
500
500.
500.
500.
0.1
500.
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.8
8.0
8.0
7.0
4.0
5.0
500
500.
500.
500
500.
500 e
500.
500
500.
50i).
500.
500.
500.
490 s
500
4CO.
475.
500.
500.
480.
490
490.
1.o
0.2
4.0
1.0
1.0
0.4
0.4
0.9
0.4
1.o
0.4
6.0
0 04
0.6
0.2
0.6
1.0
1.0
0.4
1.o
1.0
1.0
1 .O
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.1
5.0
4.0
0.4
1.0
3.0
4.0
9.0
7.0
8.0
RECYCLE
SS M G / L
6200.
8560.
11620.
10160.
10700.
8920.
6680.
5160.
11620.
3060.
4200.
4060.
370G.
6720.
5620.
6180.
8620.
9020.
6640.
7180.
6360.
9580.
8260.
10100.
8180.
11960.
7600.
6960.
5040.
7860.
8280.
7400.
6340.
13380.
6560.
5820.
9140.
6560.
5900.
6140.
5860.
8020.
9420.
11900.
EXCESS
BIOMASS
NASTE LB/DAY
AERATION
MLSS
ML/L
3373.
4730.
6830.
7910.
7640.
6390.
4350.
3720.
3650.
4110.
2600.
2503.
2610.
2900
3260.
3730.
4260
6550.
4410.
3640.
3300.
5050.
66909960
6630.
5170.
4370.
4250.
39100
5070.
5160.
4650
4460.
3770.
3940.
3830.
4360
4230.
4200.
3800.
3530.
4030.
4850.
4420
F/M L B SOL
C O D / L B MLSS
i)A Y
0.30
1.16
1.42
0054
0.38
0.31
0.31
0.64
0.63
0.46
0.55
0.56
0.38
0.50
0.75
0.72
1.02
0.86
1.12
0.57
0.61
1.02
0.72
0.56
0.03
0.21
0.38
0.39
0.33
0.37
0.53
0.39
0.30
0.28
0.36
0032
0.62
0.31
0.33
0.3:
0.35
0.35
0.65
0.58
DATE
4 1972
5 1972
6 1972
8 1972
9 1972
10 1 9 7 2
11 1972
12 1972
13 1972
1 5 1972
16 1972
17 1972
18 1972
19 1972
20 1972
OCT 2 2 1 9 7 2
OCT 2 3 1 9 7 2
OCT 2 4 1 9 7 2
OCT 2 5 1 9 7 2
OCT 2 6 1 9 7 2
OCT 2 7 1 9 7 2
OCT 2 9 1 9 7 2
OCT 3 0 1 9 7 2
OCT 3 1 1 9 7 2
NOV 1 1972
NOV 2 1972
NOV 3 1972
NOV 5 1972
NOV 6 1972
NOV 7 1972
NOV 8 1972
NOV 9 1972
N O V 10 1 9 7 2
NOV 1 2 1972
NOV 13 1972
NOV 1 4 1 9 7 2
NOV 15 1972
NOV 16 1972
NOV 17 1972
NOV 1 9 1972
NOV 20 1972
NOV 2 1 1 9 7 2
hOV 2 2 1 9 7 2
NOV 23 1972
NOV 2 4 1972
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
GCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
c--l
"p
FLOW
MGD
0.8970
0.9080
C.9330
1.0160
0.5950
0.9360
1.0120
1.0170
1.0170
0.8800
0.6480
1.0250
1.0780
0.9870
0.8550
0 7970
0.8770
0.8870
0.9370
0.8210
0.5920
0.4900
0.3310
0.7320
i NFLUENT
INFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
1389.
1031.
1016.
536.
191h.
1072
1104.
1790.
906
299.
2114.
142 1
1186.
1739.
1518 e
LOLUBLE
COD M G / L
1837.
1360.
1067.
959.
2928
3423r
4519.
2408 0
3753.
3360.
2103.
3258.
3645
5348
3093
1492
1223.
1425.
1154.
1721.
3172.
3133.
3715.
2063
1354.
1695.
1695.
1250.
841
1095.
1095.
864.
1815.
752.
803.
237.
670 0
907
708r
716583.
198
1385.
1011.
763.
1208.
943 0
1551.
1480:
670 a
574.
561
2598.
2897.
3762
187~.
3031
2701.
1804.
1949 0
2729.
35688
1918.
1144.
871
861
14Y7.
14104
15030
2041
3266.
1347.
0.6673
0 8640
0.8450
0.7800
1202.
660
IhFLUENT
BOD M G / L
503.
464.
1560.
14021
I hF L U E k T
PH
5.7
7.8
7.3
7.2
7.4
6.9
6.2
7.5
7.3
6.8
8.7
7.4
7.7
7.1
7.9
8.1
13986
698.
3340.
3900.
2410.
728.
1726.
3790.
7.4
6.5
7.0
7.3
619
6.7
10.2
5.4
4.8
4.9
5.4
4.6
4.7
4.6
4.6
5.2
6.4
6.4
6.9
10.1
7.3
6.1
6.6
6.8
7.0
6.7
6.7
746
0.4
INFLUENT
AMMON I A
N MG/L
2.0
1 .o
0.1
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.4
2.6
0.2
0.6
0.9
0.2
INFLUENT
Ii\ORGAhIC
P MG/L
1.0
0b 3
0.5
0.9
2.0
0.1
0.3
0.4
0 04
0.3
2.0
2.0
1.0
0r2
0.3
2.0
2 .o
0.3
2 00
3 00
0.4
1.0
0.7
2.1
0.7
0.1
1 .o
2.0
8.0
4.0
0.7
0.4
5.0
0.4
0.6
5.0
3.0
7.0
63.0
86.0
10.0
0.7
2 .o
6.0
1.0
1.0
0.7
0.1
0.3
0.1
1.G
0.4
5.0
6.0
1.0
12.0
28.0
7.3
0.8
0.1
23.0
35 b o
1 6 -0
.o
2.0
0 08
AERATION
PH
DATE
I-
c3
vl
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
GCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
h3V
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
k0V
NOV
NOV
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
23
24
25
26
27
29
30
31
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
7.2
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.4
7.3
7.1
7.4
7.2
7.0
7.5
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.5
7.4
7.2
7.4
7b3
7.3
7.0
6.7
7.1
6.9
6.0
6.9
7.3
7.2
7.0
7.1
7.5
7.8
7.8
7.2
701
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.7
8.0
8.0
7.5
7.3
7.3
7.2
AERATION
TEMP
DEG F
AEiiAT I O N
D.0.
MG/L
3.2
10.7
5.5
5.1
5.1
5.5
6.2
3.0
1.4
2.6
SET T L I NG
ML/L
380.
350.
350.
360.
350.
350.
300.
270.
250.
290.
750.
550.
480.
710.
700.
680.
500.
550460.
440s
450.
580.
653.
450.
390.
400.
340.
400.
483.
555.
630.
4100
370.
380.
420.
410.
4800
710.
830.
940.
920.
820.
940.
940.
980.
LFFLUENT
TOTAL
C3D MG/L
E FF L Ut;;.r T
SOLUBLL
COD M G / L
269r
177.
187.
116.
105.
115.
96
93.
56
107.
146.
54.
52.
58.
600
65.
69.
53.
37.
27.
106.
78
127.
5121.
15.
135.
90
73.
61.
66.
29.
49
120.
226.
252.
307.
386.
217.
208.
273.
371.
315.
157.
122.
121.
254.
290.
220.
433.
494.
713.
4.
2.
49.
20.
45
14.
43.
23.
37.
89.
158.
113.
206.
338.
128.
138.
181.
203.
195.
87.
83.
72.
117.
112.
75.
169.
204.
112.
EFFLUENT
55 M G / L
316.
100.
80.
178.
1520
16.
22.
32.
56.
68.
3706
58.
24.
664.
160.
E F F LU ti\ T
BOD M G / L
72
39.
47.
27.
24
21.
15.
15.
44.
18.
20
29
25.
20
19
30.
15.
14.
108.
84
76.
406
34.
52
50.
12.
15.
7.
19.
52
22
110.
154.
82.
120.
78.
208.
146.
52.
76 e
60.
116.
248.
1@8e
Yo
348
35.
26.
30
33
66
66
25.
34.
38.
56.
55.
42
340.
292.
630.
i93.
90.
72
72
224-
23.
9.
9.
35.
139.
75.
111.
176.
103.
103.
221.
94.
51.
51.
54.
c-
or
DATE
4 1972
5 1972
6 1972
a 1972
9 1572
10 1972
11 1 9 7 2
12 1972
1 3 1972
15 1972
16 1972
17 1972
18 1972
19 1972
20 1 9 7 2
22 1 9 7 2
23 1972
24 1972
2 5 1972
26 1972
27 1972
29 1972
30 1 9 7 2
31 1972
1 1972
2 1972
3 1972
5 1972
6 1972
7 1972
8 1972
9 1972
10 1 9 7 2
12 1972
13 1972
14 1 9 7 2
NOV 1 5 1 9 7 2
NOV 1 6 1 9 7 2
NOV 1 7 1 9 7 2
NOV 1 9 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 0 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 1 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 2 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 3 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 4 1 9 7 2
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
OCT
CCT
OCT
NOV
NOV
kOV
NOV
NOV
lvGV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
E F F 1- U E h f
AW9NIA
N NG/L
0.6
0.9
0.4
0.7
0.9
0.4
0.b
1.0
1.o
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.3
1.0
0.4
1.o
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.4
8.0
0.7
0.6
14.0
19.0
4.0
0.2
2.0
0.7
56.0
53.0
18 .o
38.0
3.0
3.0
0.7
E F F L U EN T
I NORGAN I C
P MG/L
9.0
8.0
10.0
9.0
9.0
5.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
0.1
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.1
3.0
0.2
0.1
0.1
6.0
9.0
10.0
1.0
0.5
0.4
2.0
8.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
3.0
8.0
10.0
10.0
10.3
9.0
0.0
9-0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
5.0
5.0
RECYCLE
RATE
GPM
490.
500.
500
500.
500.
500.
503.
500
500.
450
350.
500.
480.
500.
500 a
500.
500
500
500
500.
500 b
400
200
450.
500.
500.
500
500.
500
5C0.
500
500.
500
500.
300.
400
400
500.
500
500.
200.
500.
500 b
500.
500
RECYCLE
5s M G / L
6060.
7340.
6300.
7240.
5360.
6300.
6940.
6760.
7420.
8560.
7740.
7420.
6340
9400.
8860.
9400.
EXCESS
8 I OMASS
WASTE L B / D A Y
AERATION
FILSS
NG/L
4070.
3750.
4100.
3690.
3480.
3530.
3230.
3200
3300
4430.
5300.
4890.
4030.
5120.
5780.
5500.
8180.
5030.
7900.
8260.
4920
3820.
4100.
52 50
5240.
5760.
66800
7520.
7280.
7220.
8710.
11800.
9380.
9500.
10400.
9660.
14060.
11760.
10640.
10700.
11470.
10c)38.
6746.
7060.
8020.
8820.
3720.
8040.
7443.
6190.
5810.
5670.
6220.
7130.
817U.
7200
6230
5650.
4330.
527131.
5110.
4600
4950
5660
8733.
5590.
5100.
5169.
5ldO.
5760.
4040.
F / M L B SOL
C O D / L B MLSS
DAY
0.49
0.31
0.41
0.13
0.24
0.48
0.41
0.42
0.33
0.09
0.36
0.40
0.37
0.51
0.29
0.42
0.44
0.22
0.23
0.22
0.93
0.73
0.43
0.45
0.90
0.68
0.48
t1e56
0.64
11.72
0.43
0.26
0.26
0.32
0.27
0.30
0.35
0.64
1.01
0.26
0.21
0.38
0.38
0.29
FLOd
DATE
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
3EC
DEC
CEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
26
27
28
25
30
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
23
21
22
24
25
26
27
28
29
31
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
MGD
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
INFLUErJT
TOTAL
C 3 D mVG/L
I N F LUt;.I T
SOLUBLE
COD S ' G / L
0.8650
0.5380
0.7500
0.8750
C.8970
0.8980
0.7200
0.2950
C.4363
0.6220
0.6810
1.0530
0.5930
0.5250
0.7609
0.9020
0.9560
0.9420
0.8240
0.@890
0.9993
1 00090
0.8770
1641
2490
1513.
1182"
928
9696
1451.
3588.
5588.
4881
2757.
2520.
2051 s
3845
1783
1753.
1470.
1854.
2186.
2413.
2225.
1895.
1937.
1231 e
13980
1099.
871
722.
701
922 m
2742
4268 m
3323.
1876.
1916.
?1690
2Gllr
1068 e
969
990
948
1732.
1670
1653.
1485.
16250
0.4320
0.3320
0.7530
0.9560
2061 6
7552.
3192
2557.
1521.
6395.
2342
2186.
0.5770
0.7ti60
0.9130
0.9430
0 $403
0.9490
0.9250
0.6550
0.9250
0.9640
1357.
1510.
1316.
2625.
969 0
9180
0.8760
0.4980
0.5b30
0.9470
2516.
1237.
1587.
3320.
1937.
1588.
1161.
1433 0
2731
2184.
IhFLUENT
5 0 3 "1G/L
1490.
a20.
1055.
1860.
2425.
974.
1855.
1755.
1755.
3185.
788.
774.
5.4
5.4
5.1
7. 1
6.5
6.3
5.9
5.3
5.9
5.3
5.2
5.0
4.7
5.0
7.6
5.3
5.1
5.2
6.9
6.5
5.2
7.4
1282.
1223.
814.
835.
1480.
PH
7.1
5.0
5.8
9.7
6.9
7.2
5.1
4.8
4.6
4 4
827.
1456.
1887.
876.
1010.
1639.
1323.
1043 6
964 *
INFLUENT
2385.
5.4
6.0
6.2
6.0
6.7
4.8
I r\FLUENT
iNFLUENT
AKMO \i i A
I NO li G AN I C
bl i".5 /
0.1
0.2
0.1
1 .o
L.4
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
011
19.0
0.1
3.3
1 00
0.6
0.7
2.0
6.0
14.0
0.1
700
1 .o
0.1
P MG/L
0.7
5.0
7.0
3.0
0.9
0.4
0.5
13 r 0
3.0
1'2.0
4.0
7.0
0.1
3.0
3.0
4.0
0.5
0.1
2.0
7.3
25.0
9 .O
3.0
29.3
0* 6
2b o
2.0
19.0
5.2
0.2
62.3
5.0
2 .o
5.3
0.1
3.1
i2.0
0.1
3.2
0.7
4.3
4.0
1.0
1 3
0.6
4.5
0.1
2.6
2 .o
6.0
7.3
17.0
1y.0
8 05
2O
3.1
2.0
13.0
AERATION
DATE
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
26
27
28
29
30
DEC 1
DEC 3
DEC 4
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
3EC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
JAN
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
28
29
31
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
PH
7.3
7.2
7.3
8.0
7.6
7.4
7.2
7.0
7. 1
7. 1
7.5
7.6
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.1
6.9
7.1
7.3
7.6
AERATION
TEMP
DE6 F
E F F L UEi\ T
AERATIOiL
D.0.
MSIL
8 06
7.7
7b5
7.7
7.0
608
6.9
7.4
7.4
7.7
7.3
7.7
7.5
7.6
7.6
7.0
7.0
6.9
7.3
7.5
7.5
7.3
6.9
9.4
E F F L UE iiT
soLuaLt
COD MG/L
SETTLING
ML/L
TUTAL
COD MG/L
980.
920.
930.
950.
940.
850.
910.
970.
970.
450.
960.
930.
950.
9000
860.
890.
850.
800.
920.
690.
750.
580.
560.
779.
780.
750.
7130
56.
35
74.
101.
1036.
771
265
139.
104.
104.
93.
94.
142.
78
54.
300.
164.
62
380.
320.
510.
320.
63.
1531.
1045.
2248
43.
1502.
738.
340
1038.
21.
994.
814.
908.
34C.
300.
360.
129.
73.
96.
96 0
120.
80.
39.
73.
51r
58.
29.
52.
78.
79.
62
56.
54.
43 0
49
78.
52
20.
42
40.
44
680
668.
174.
188.
104.
136.
78 e
48.
48.
13.
27
2s
52
34
37
242.
112.
86.
35.
51.
31
57.
220.
410.
50C.
550.
450.
500.
590.
500.
800.
840.
101.
101.
103.
598.
240 e
227.
lbzo
200.
140
86.
51.
82.
83.
520
37.
33.
33.
45.
52.
115.
52.
37
41.
62
73.
58.
49.
40.
52.
57.
51.
46
EFFLUENT
55 M G / L
1260.
1120.
870.
620.
60.
30.
4.
34.
68.
720.
820.
190.
92
54.
54
26.
44
78.
60.
820.
22G.
134.
600
.
.
32
108.
296
EFFLUENT
BOD MG/L
44b
378.
30d.
123.
23.
8.
7.
8.
25
4160
208.
95.
26.
17.
27.
13.
18.
33
39.
76
216.
91.
85
.
.
.
.
DATE
NOV 2 6 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 7 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 8 1 9 7 2
NOV 2 9 1 9 7 2
NOV 3 0 1 9 7 2
DEC
1 1972
DEC
3 1972
DEC 4 1 9 7 2
DEC
5 1972
DEC 6 1 9 7 2
DEC
7 1972
DEC
8 1972
DEC 10 1 9 7 2
DEC 11 1 9 7 2
DEC 1 2 1 9 7 2
DEC 1 3 1 9 7 2
DEC 14 1 9 7 2
DEC 1 5 1 9 7 2
DEC 1 7 1 9 7 2
DEC 1 8 1 9 7 2
DEC 1 9 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 0 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 1 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 2 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 4 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 5 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 6 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 7 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 8 1 9 7 2
DEC 2 9 1 9 7 2
DEC 3 1 1 9 7 2
JAN
1 1973
JAN
2 1973
JAN
3 1973
JAN 4 1 9 7 3
JAN
5 1973
JAN
7 1973
JAN
8 1973
JAN
9 1973
J A N 10 1 9 7 3
JAN 11 1 9 7 3
JAN 12 1 9 7 3
J A N 14 1 9 7 3
JAN 1 5 1 9 7 3
JAN 1 6 1 9 7 3
EFFLUENT
AMMON I A
N MG/L
0.1
EFFLUENT
INORGANIC
P MG/L
RtCYCLE
RATE
6.0
50U
5.0
9.0
2.0
0.2
4.0
1.0
5.0
7.0
500
2.0
0.3
1.0
4.0
0.1
1e 0
0.3
1 e0
22.0
0.6
0.9
2.0
0.2
0.1
1e 0
0.1
4.0
30.0
0.2
Om 1
Om 1
8.0
9.0
7.0
5.0
7.0
2.0
8.0
27.0
13.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.9
5.0
2.0
0.1
4.0
15.0
13.0
29.0
3 1 -0
0.1
0.2
0.7
4.0
4.0
1 .O
1 .O
0.6
4.0
0.1
6.0
3.0
600
5.0
5.0
7.0
5.0
GP
300
400
500.
510.
510.
4250
200.
201)
450
500 e
500 e
500
400
500
500
500.
500
500
500.
500.
510.
510.
510.
5000
400
300.
500.
600o
500.
350.
350.
400
500
500
500.
500.
10.0
10.0
8.0
8.0
3.0
.0.6
5000
500 o
500.
500 e
5000
250s
250.
8.0
500.
RECYCLE
SS MG/L
35206
4440.
4260.
4860.
4920.
5540.
8540.
6760s
8120.
6920s
6800.
7700.
8720.
8940.
7980.
9220.
74800
6300.
7200.
83200
8360.
7380.
7140.
EXCESS
0 I OMASS
WASTE LB/DAY,
AERAT I ON
MLSS
MG/L
2830.
2810.
2790.
2840
2830.
2740.
40300
4920.
52500
4870.
5240.
4450 o
5030.
56400
5200.
4570s
4890.
4500.
4960.
4040.
4550.
4340.
42 70
6640.
7180.
8640.
51600
5040.
53300
5580.
4790
61600
66300
68301
63601
7600.
74200
101601
11340s
10840.
89000
10060.
8860.
8940.
102800
3070 e
3180.
33100
4190.
3900
5780.
6450.
5730.
6030 e
5490 a
6610.
5400
51800
F / M L B SOL
SOD/LB MLSS
DAY
0.54
0.48
0.55
0.53
0-44
0.42
0.42
0.34
0.69
0.78
0.50
0.80
0.31
0034
0.28
0.33
0.36
0.34
0.52
0m58
0.67
0m64
0.64
0m54
0.75
0.59
0m74
0 03 6
0.37
0.48
0.80
0.86
0036
0.38
0.52
0.37
0.33
0034
0.18
0.16
0m55
DATE
J A N 17 1973
JAN 18 1973
J A N 19 1973
JAN 21 1973
JAN 22 1973
J A N 23 1973
J A N 24 1973
J A N 25 1973
JAN 26 1973
JAN 28 1973
JAN 29 1973
JAN 30 1973
J A N 31 1973
FLON
MGD
INFLUENT
TOTAL
COD M G / L
0.9580
0.8810
0.7260
0.7683
0.8350
2094 e
1575.
1572 a
796 e
Qe8TOO
1118.
1650.
3791
3156.
539
1130.
1472 a
1316.
0.8800
0.8730
0 9430
0.9360
0.8060
1.0120
BO8
.
.
INFLUEIVT
SOLUBLE
COD X G / L
1648
1254.
1367 r
571
415.
708 9
INFLUENT
IhFLUtNT
BUD MG/L
1676.
693.
101r?.
3281
2895 e
1120.
736
1005
871
2441.
567.
IiLFLUEivT
PH
5.2
5.1
5.1
561
6.5
6.7
5.4
4r4
4.8
6.6
la3
7.1
7.2
AMMCh I A
N MG/I
INFLUENT
I kORGAhI C
P MG/L
7.0
0.1
4.0
2.0
25.0
22.0
29.0
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.4
10.0
0.4
0.2
6.0
11.0
17.0
17.0
12.0
1 .O
0.6
0 09
0.1
0.1
1 .o
4.9
-'I
DATE
JAN 1 7 1 9 7 3
JAN 1 8 1 9 7 3
JAN 1 9 1 9 7 3
JAK 2 1 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 2 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 3 1 9 7 3
JAN 24 1 9 7 3
JAN .25 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 6 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 8 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 9 1 9 7 3
JAN 30 1 9 7 3
JAN 3 1 1 9 7 3
AERATION
PH
7.1
7.0
7.3
6.0
AERAT 1014
TEMP
DEG F
AERATION
0.0. MG/L
2.3
830.
480.
440.
5.3
7.0
7.6
7.2
7. 1
SET TL I NG
ML/L
910.
870.
7.2
7.2
650.
750.
4.3
830.
960.
31.
153.
1 2 0b
231.
396.
126.
8.0
8.1
7.7
7.8
EFFLUENT
TOTAL
COD MG/L
89 0
97.
90
80
7.7
260.
440
93.
286.
6001
240
EFFLUENT
SOLUBLE
COD K G / L
58.
41
35.
24.
23.
EFFLUENT
5s M G / L
44.
68.
80.
EFFLUENT
BOD M G / L
59
58 e
31.
48.
26.
20.
57.
55.
10.
32
66s
23.
104.
180.
96.
340.
112.
55
75
630
62
83.
52.
920.
810.
200.
62
22.
49
--
EFFLUENT
AMMON i A
DATE
17 1973
JAN 18 1 9 7 3
JAN 19 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 1 1 9 7 3
JAN 22 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 3 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 4 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 5 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 6 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 8 1 9 7 3
JAN 2 9 1 9 7 3
JAN 3 0 1 9 7 3
JAN 3 1 1 9 7 3
JAP;
c--l
N MG/L
c.1
4.0
2.0
25.0
22.0
29.0
10.0
0.1
6.5
11.0
17.0
17.0
12.0
EFFLUENT
I XORGAN IC
P PiG/L
4.0
2.0
bo0
3.0
3.0
1.0
1.0
c.7
1.0
0.1
1.0
6.0
2.0
RECYCLE
RATE
GPY
500.
500.
403 0
500
500
501).
500
500.
500.
500.
500
500
500
RECYCLE
SS MG/L
10140.
8540.
8560.
4400.
5520.
5500.
6140.
788Li.
9700.
1540r
2820.
3640.
5800.
EXCESS
BIOMASS '
WASTE LB/DAY
AERATION
MLSS
MG/L
54FS.
5040
4630
3390.
2790.
2990.
3180.
4870.
5630.
1330.
1020.
1370.
2150.
F / M L B SOL
COD/LB MLSS
DAY
0.58
0.42
0.41
0.22
0.24
0.39
0.52
1.31
0.97
0.61
1.10
2.18
APPENDIX D
TREATMENT PLANT PERFORMANCE JANUARY 1973 - SEPTEMBER 1975
Monthly average operating r e s u l t s f o r the treatment plant f o r the period o f

January 1973 t o September 1975 a r e as shown on the following pages.
I t can be
seen t h a t e f f l u e n t suspended s o l i d s and BOD continued t o be h i g h and extremely

variable, s i m i l a r t o the r e s u l t s discussed in the body of t h i s report.
Major
equipment additions and changes i n process configuration were s t a r t e d a f t e r
September 1975 i n an e f f o r t t o improve performance.
143
t-
AI R4TiC
^LSS
?ATE
J&"i
13 13
FEP
;q 4 Q
APR
1 5 73
1973
1573
AY
J!irJ
JuL
AUC
SFP
OCT
i\c '4
DEC
J A I ~
FLH
A r?
APR
:/
,-,
LiAY
JAb'
F F rj
A Fi
APR
'*I A Y
J CJ 1'
JUL
iv'
AuL
sit p
"4c1 / L
4311.
3139.
2 6 79
<
F / " ' L;.

LCL
CCD/Lb ILLS/
LIAY
Um5?
:e55
3 64
AttikTiCIPii
35i.
933.
C95.
343.
62Lt.
7.3
7
r.5
1135.
1.65
7.2
1973
2450.
ln73
1973
1973
19 1 3
1973
1977
1973
42 bC
576C;.
4737.
L55Ca
6356.
3 94
d.45
b.53
-r
19 14
1974
1774
1974
1976
1975
19 75
1975
1975
1975
1975
1975
1975
1975
5191.'.
5375.
399;.
5186.
56b~'m
5496.
4937.
21+3.
2133.
3977.
45sitla
42L5m
579a.
4875.
0.46
0.Yi
3.30
3.32
0.48
d.41
0.39
3.38
Ca3h
d.3)
5. 5 J
3.3 1
3.51
1.10
d.52
Gob3
5kTTk.i
-'L / L
1.4
/ B O .
7.4
e j d a
1.1
360.
3'14.
6.6
7.4
7.2
7.4
7.6
Cad
56L
Sd4.
771:
iL i.
515.
7 5
6d3.
1.3
476.
567.
1'16.
772.
733.
441.
7.4
6.L
7aJ
7.7
7.4
7.5
7 6
LU
237.
455.
ij 4''
!;
k7bd.
9.44
am2
517.
3 4 a~
5154.
d.23
8.3
e47.
kk
E:F FLUtPT
S 5 '4LiL
1)ATE
J A :,.!
FEO
1973
1973
f.! A I?
19'73
APri
Fl A Y
JUh
JUL
AUG
SEP
OC T
i'd0V
1973
1973
1973
1973
1373
1973
1573
1973
1973
1974
io74
1974
1974
1974
1975
1975
1975
19-75
1975
1775
1075
1975
DEC
JA h
FEcj
VA'i
APR
I$/ A Y
JA:\
F E I?
[vi A r<
APP
:4 A Y
Jlji,
JUL
AUS
SEP
1375
EFFLiJL,.IT
9ij ".',C. / L
F LUfJdS
t. t- F I U t l \ T
I
Ic
t' Y*,b/i, L L ~ , < c I A r \
:<
~ . \ C J/ L
r i tC Y C L L
;< A T t
SP?.!
!tC
i Y
hh
cLt
:dI:;/L
.
.
176.
423.
411.
364.
56.
136.
1j.4
3.5
4.2
145.
123.
5.2
8.6
6.2
3c5.
53~t1
7.2
225.
295.
232.
8.C
4.4
157.
117.
101.
181.
136.
6C
7.4
3.2
44.9
176.
153.
4Y.C
4.9
4.5
5.2
13.L
322.
395
327.
316.
34G.
3e4.
,26154114.
5466
12980.
6 U m
c6.
312.
389.
347.
337.
149.
76.
340.
1212.
49c.
530.
192.
588.
2ea.
93
45.
153.
136.
233.
79
Bo.
3s.
4C4b
J.'-tl~m
221.
1515.
457.
1362.
154.
33.i:
11.0
55.3
5.2
5.1
4.3
4'13
453.
8Z.J
9
4.7
347.
416.
95.3
5.6
342.
334.
47.P
69.2
5.3
14.6
15-U
24.3
36."
52.0
37.c
16.0
254.
169.
17.ti
24.2
114.
417.
38.G
4.3
4.8
7.b
2.5
L.1
7.7
3.0
7.2
1.4
1.2
3.3
265.
332
31U-
232
25;.
73.39
5236
/~!IY
4R6C
13931
933
6654
GCjbL
1u193.
lcli(60.
9oi3.
c.
Y3J2.
j :j 2
'4
3915
ZbC.
22b.
2VG.
1b9dt.
1Zidd-
2ii7.
1 1 124
2GL.
3E3.
432.
1iC;c;t..
lii4S4.
523c.
(j4'13
.I
APPENDIX
TABLE
METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS FOR ENGLISH

UNITS USED I N T H I S REPORT
ENGLISH UNIT
MULTIPLY BY
Horsepower
METRIC U N I T
0.74557
K i 1o w a t t
2.54
M i 11i m e t e r
MGD
0.0438
Cu Meters/sec
Pound
0.4536
K i 1ogram
Pounds p e r Sq.In.
703.1
Kg/Sq. meter
Square i n c h
6.452
Square Centimeter
Square f o o t
0.0929
Square Meter
U S Gal 1ons
3.785
Liters
U.S.Gallons
0.003785
Cubic Meters
..
OC=
0.5555
(OF -32)
147
APPENDIX F
ADDITIONAL PROJECT COST DATA
The total cost of the portion of the waste treatment process discussed in this
report was $1,948,155, as detailed below:
Cooling Tower
Aeration Equ i pment
Tanks
Agitators
B1 owers and Compressors
Process Equipment
Instruments
Pumps
Piping
Power Uiring
Machinery Supports
Miscellaneous Construction
Laboratory Facilities
Plant Maintenance Expense
TOTAL
$1,948,155
24,859
463,442
11 9,657
29,887
14,917
1 24,509
88,827
24,843
71,172
90,136
117,001
104,563
25,869
648,473
An additional cost of $952,000 was required for biomass disposal facilities.
148
APPENDIX G
ADDITIONAL STATISTICAL STUDIES
After this report had been completed, some additional statistical

studies of treatment plant performance were performed. Since the time
periods used and the method of calculation of the probabilities were
different t h a n those i n t h e body of the report, the results are presented as an appendix,
Non-parametric statistical methods were used; t h a t i s , i t was n o t
assumed t h a t the distribution of t h e data was normal. Analyses were
performed for d a i l y values, and also for 30-day averages. A moving
average was used t o generate many more 30-day averages t h a n would be
obtained by using only calendar monthly averages, However, only nonmissing d a t a were used for the averages, For example, i f a 30-day
period had 5 missing d a i l y values, the average was calculated from the
25 non-missing values,
Probability curves are given for the year o f 1972, and also for JulyDecember 1972 (the period of best operation), Graphs are presented
for flow, BOD, and t o t a l suspended solids for the treatment p l a n t
effluent, The term WCPE appearing on the graphs i s a designation used
internally for the treatment p l a n t effluent, t o distinguish i t from the
t o t a l p l a n t eff uent, which includes cooling water, BOD and suspended
solids d a t a are presented i n terms o f concentration, pounds per day,
and pounds per 000 bushels, which relates the discharge t o production
rate. A bushel of corn i s defined as 56 l b a t 17% moisture.
149
cu
h
W
0,
z
W
tx
tx
3
V
0
LL
0
2.
-1
U
205
tx
SZ
o w
m r
. a.
P6u MOlJ
150
FIGURE 42
CPC INTERNATIONAL, INC.
P E K I N PLANT
D A I L Y VALUES
MEAN 1 7 0
BOD WCPE, m g / l
JANUARY 1 9 7 2 - DECEMBER 1 9 7 2
1000
800
600
30 DAY AVERAGE
MEAN 1 7 3
400
200
g - 2
r
1oc
8C
6C
.01
.1
10
50
90
99
99.8
FIGURE 43
1000
600 -
SO0
400
201)
-J
100
m
n
80
60
40

P E K I N PLANT
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS WCPE, mg/l
E"
h
v,
n
U
30 DAY AVERAGE
MEAN 261
D A I L Y VALUES
MEAN 255
20
101
01
.1
10
50
90
99
99.8
FIGURE 44
8000

PEKIN PLANT
6000
BOD WCPE, 1 blday

4030
30 DAY AVERAGE
2000
c--l
:g
800
600
D A I L Y VALUES
MEAN 1 1 2 2
400
200
100
.Ol
.1
10
50
90
98
99.8
FIGURE 45
CPC INTERiiAT IONAL, INC.
PEKIN PLANT
T O f A L SUSPENDED SOLIDS WCPE, 1b/day
JANUARY 1972
DECEMBER 1 3 7 2
v,
n
W
PROBABILITY OF OCCURRE!KE
N
h
OI
c
I 3 w
I-
E5
tu
Y
W
C-
0
0
tu
o c o
0
*
0 0 3
tu
nq
ooo t / q i aoa
155
w
V
z
w
oc
3
V
0
0
0
0
LL
&
>
I-
I-
3
L3
H
LL
5
a
z
H
Y
W
--I
cn
n
U
-J
cn cu
a n
W
z
W
a
v,
3
cn
2
0
I-
oc
FIGURE 48
P E K I N PLANT
FLOW WCPE, mgd
JULY 1 9 7 2
DECEMBER 1 9 7 2
2
DAILY VALUES
MEAN 0 . 7 7 2
W
.a
30 DAY AVERAGE
MEAN 0.771
.6
.4
.2
.1
.01
10
50
90
99
99.8
FIGURE 49
800

600
PEKIN PLANT
BOD WCPE, mg/l
400
July 1972
D e c e m b e r 1972
200
100
80
30 DAY AVERAGE
MEAN 73
60
40
20
10
1
.Ol
.1
10
50
90
99
99.8
FIGURE 50
P E K I N PLANT
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS WCPE, mg/l
JULY 1972
DECEMBER 1972
n
w
n
I-
PROBABILITY OF OCCURRE?.ICE
a3
cn
cn
cn
m
v,
W
cn
cu
cn
In
LL
-I
3
I---
I---
0
0
0
C
0
0
0
c
0
0
0
D
e
0
0
0
cu
0
0
0
0
0
0
O C O C D
7
0
0
0
0
FIGURE 52
8900
6000
P E K I N PLANT
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS WCPE, 1 blday
JULY 1972
4000
DECEMBER 1972
2000
1000
800
600
30 DAY AVERAGE
ME.411 9 2 5
400
2 00
100
.01
.1
10
50
90
99
99.8
al
cn
cn
al
0-7
w
0
z
W
CY
CY
3
V
V
0
0
Ln
cu
2.
t;
-1
LI
I-
5
a
0
0
2
0
CY
a
0
0
0
2.
cu
oca
7
162
FIGURE 54
CPC INTERNATIONAL, I N C .
P E K I N PLANT
100
80
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS WCPE,

JULY 1972
60
3
DECEMBER
40
0
0
0
7
20
v,
n
H
cn
30 DAY AVERAGE
MEAN 1 6 . 7
0
v
,
n
w
n
z
w
10
8
I-
v,
I
-
v,
a/
O
I-
1
.Ol
.1
10
90
99
50
99.8
3. R E C IP IE NT 'S ACCESS I 0 W N 0 .
2.
1. R E P O R T NO.
EPA-600/2-78- 105
5. R E P O R T D A T E
4. T I T L E A N D S U B T I T L E
B i o l o g i c a l Treatment o f Wastes From The Corn Wet
May 1978 issuina d a t e

6. P E R F O R M I N G O R G A N I Z A T I O N CODE
M i 11 i n g I n d u s t r y .
8. P E R F O R M I N G O R G A N I Z A T I O N R E P O R T N O .
7. AUTHOR(S1
Donald R. Brown
Gretchen L. Van Meer
10. P R O G R A M E L E M E N T N O .
9. P E R F O R M I N G O R G A N I Z A T I O N N A M E A N D ADDRESS
CPC I n t e r n a t i o n a l , I n c .
M o f f e t t Technical Center
P.O. Box 345
Argo, I 1 1 in o i s 60501
1BB610
11. C O N T R A C T / G R A N T N O .
12060 DPE
12 SPONSORING A G E N C Y N A M E A N D ADDRESS
I n d u s t r i a l Environmental Research Lab.

Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency
C i n s i n n a t i . Ohio 45768
13. T Y P E OF R E P O R T A N D P E R I O D C O V E R E D
Cin. OH 45268
Final
14. SPONSORING A G E N C Y CODE
EPA/ 600/ 12
P i l o t p l a n t a e r a t e d lagoon and l a b o r a t o r y c o m p l e t e l y mixed a c t i v a t e d sludge

t r e a t m e n t s t u d i e s o f c o r n wet m i l l i n g wastes showed t h a t e i t h e r process
c o u l d produce a s a t i s f a c t o r y e f f l u e n t .
A f u l l s c a l e c o m p l e t e l y mixed a c t i v a t e d sludge t r e a t m e n t p l a n t was designed

from l a b o r a t o r y r e a c t o r data. S o l u b l e BOD removal performance has been
about as p r e d i c t e d from t h e l a b o r a t o r y data. Although t o t a l BOD removal
o f t e n exceeds 90%, t h e n a t u r e o f t h e waste i s such t h a t t h e e f f l u e n t BOD
and suspended s o l i d s c o n c e n t r a t i o n s u s u a l l y do n o t meet e f f l u e n t c r i t e r i a .
The e f f l u e n t suspended s o l i d s c o n s i s t almost e n t i r e l y o f b a c t e r i a . The
BOD i s almost e n t i r e l y due t o t h e oxygen demand o f these b a c t e r i a .
a.
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN E N D E D TERMS
DESCRl P T O RS
Corn, Wet m i l l s , a c t i v a t e d sludge

process, Biochemical oxygen demand, p i l o
plants, equalizing, aeration,
clarification, settling
18. D I S T R I B U T I O N S T A T E M E N T
119. S E C U R I T Y CLASS
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
COSATI
c o r n wet m i l l i n g
wastes, t r e a t m e n t c o s t s
UNCI ASSIFIED
(This Reporr)
20. S E C U R I T Y CLASS (Thispage)

i
C.
Field/Group
68D
121. N O . OF PAGES
17622. PRICE
UNCLASSIFIED
164
d
* U S MVERNYMlPRlNllNGOFFlCE1978-
757-140/6850
U.S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

O f f i c e o f R e s e a r c h and Developmpnt
Environmental Research Information Center
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
0 F F !C:
IA L B U S I N E
POSTAGt AND F F k S P A I ' J
us
E N V I R O N M ~ N T A LP R O T ~ C
ri(. r,
F P A 33'3
SS
F o u r t h - C l a 5 s F<<?
Special
P E N A L T Y F O R P R I V A T E U S k S311r'
A N tQUAL
Book
O P P O K [ U N I T Y EMPLO'YEH
OR LINDA W LITTLE
HES TRIANGLE INSTI IU'TE

P o 0 0 BOX 12194
R E S TRIANGLE Pk,
NC
277~9
r-I f your address
/ncorrect, please change on the above label

tear o f f , arid return to the above address.
I f you do riot d e s i r e to continue receiving these t e c h n i c a l
reports, CHECK HERE
tear o f f label, and return i t to the
above address,
IS
m,

18661

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

18661

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

United States

Industrial Environmental Research

Research and Development

RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF WASTES FROM

THE CORN WET MILLING INDUSTRY

Grant No. 12060 DPE

INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY

This report has been reviewed by the Industrial Environmental !?search

The Pekin, Illinois plant of CPC International Znc, i s t r e a t i n g 0.9

This report was submitted i n fulfillment o f Grant Number 12060DPE under

When energy and material resources are extracted, processed, converted,

The Corn R e f i n i n g Process

A e r a t i o n Pond P i l o t P l a n t Flow Diagram

Foaming Problem i n P i l o t P l a n t A e r a t i o n Pond

P i l o t P l a n t S e t t l i n g Pond and A e r a t i o n Pond

E f f e c t o f N i t r o g e n and Phosphorus on E f f l u e n t S o l u b l e COD

Schematic Drawing o f Laboratory A c t i v a t e d Sludge Reactor

E f f e c t o f F/M on Growth Rate o f MLSS

E f f e c t o f F/M on Conversion Y i e l d o f MLSS

E f f e c t o f F/M on Oxygen Uptake Rate

U n i t Rate o f Removal i n Laboratory Reactors

Pekin Waste Treatment P l a n t Flow Diagram

Pekin Waste Treatment F a c i l i t y

Pekin Waste Treatment F a c i l i t y

I n f l u e n t Total COD Concentration:

E f f l u e n t Total COD Concentration:

Aeration Tank Problems

Repair Work i n Aeration Tank and E q u a l i z a t i o n Basin

Concentrated Waste Flow, October 1971-January 1973

BOD as a Function o f E f f l u e n t COD, P l a n t Operation

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, I n f l u e n t and E f f l u e n t

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Percent Removed

BOD Removal as a Function o f Recycle Rate

BOD Removal as a Function o f F/M

Semi -monthly Averages

Effluent Suspended S o l i d s a s a Function o f Hydraulic

E f f l u e n t Suspended S o l i d s a s a Function of F/M

E f f l u e n t BOD a s a Function o f Effluent Suspended S o l i d s

Sample Data from Batch Test

E f f e c t of TbOD on U n i t Rate o f Removal

Flow, January-December 1972

Effluent BOD mg/l, Jan-Dec 1972

Effluent SS mg/l, Jan-Dec 1972

Effluent BOD lb/day, Jan-Dec 1972

E f f l u e n t SS 1 b/day, Jan-Dec 1972

Effluent BOD lb/1000 BU, Jan-Dec 1972

Effluent SS lb/1000 Bu, Jan-Dec 1972

Flow, July-Dec 1972

Effluent BOD mg/l, July-Dec 1972

Effluent SS mg/l , July-Dec 1972

Effluent BOD 1b/day

E f f l u e n t SS 1 blday, July-Dec 1972

E f f l u e n t BOD lb/1000 Bu, July-Dec

E f f l u e n t SS lb/1000 Bu, July-Dec 1972

Laboratory Reactor Studies

Continuous Laboratory Reactor Oxygen Uptake Analyses

Correlation Coefficients, BOD a s a Function of COD

Rotifer Growth i n Activated Sludge Systems

Analysis of P e k i n Final Effluent D u r i n g C-300 Test

Sample Data f o r Batch Test

Metric Conversion Factors

Special acknowledgment i s due t o Mr. H. 0. Bensing, Chief Chemist

The p i l o t plant and laboratory studies, and the full scale p l a n t