EPA (1997). Annotated Outline <strong>for</strong> Technology <strong>and</strong> Cost Document in Draft Regulatory Analysis <strong>and</strong>St<strong>and</strong>ards Support Documentation, September 8, 1997.EPA (1997). Technology Design Conference In<strong>for</strong>mation Package, USEPA Office <strong>of</strong> Ground <strong>Water</strong><strong>and</strong> <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong>.EPA (1998a). Guide <strong>for</strong> Implementing Phase I <strong>Water</strong> Treatment Upgrade, USEPA Office <strong>of</strong> Ground<strong>Water</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong>.EPA (1998b). <strong>Water</strong> Treatment <strong>Costs</strong> Development (Phase I): Road Map to Cost Comparisons,USEPA Office <strong>of</strong> Ground <strong>Water</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong>.EPA. (2000). <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> from <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong> by Coagulation/Filtration <strong>and</strong> Lime S<strong>of</strong>teningPlants. Prepared by Battelle under contract 68-C7-0008 <strong>for</strong> EPA ORD. June 2000.EPA. (2000). <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> from <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong> by Iron <strong>Removal</strong> Plants. Prepared by Battelleunder contract 68-C7-0008 <strong>for</strong> EPA ORD. August 2000.EPA. (2000). <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> from <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong> by Ion Exchange <strong>and</strong> Activated AluminaPlants. Prepared by Battelle under contract 68-C7-0008 <strong>for</strong> EPA ORD. October 2000.Ficklin, W.H. (1983). “Separation <strong>of</strong> As (III) <strong>and</strong> As (V) in Ground <strong>Water</strong>s by Ion-Exchange,”Talanta, 30:5:371.Fields, K., T. Sorg, A. Chen, <strong>and</strong> L. Wang. (2000). “Long-Term Evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong>in Conventional <strong>Water</strong> Treatment Systems.” AWWA Inorganic Contaminants Workshop,Albuquerque, NM, February 27-29, 2000.Fox, K.R. <strong>and</strong> T.J. Sorg (1987). “Controlling <strong>Arsenic</strong>, Fluoride, <strong>and</strong> Uranium by Point-<strong>of</strong>-UseTreatment,” J. AWWA, 10:81-84.Fox, K.R. (1989). “Field Experience with Point-<strong>of</strong>-Use Treatment Systems <strong>for</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong>,” J.AWWA, 2:94-101.Fox, K.R. (1994). “Point-<strong>of</strong>-Use Treatment <strong>for</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong>,” USEPA Risk ReductionEngineering Laboratory 20 th Annual Symposium, March 15-17, 1994, pp. 52-54.Frank, P. <strong>and</strong> D. Clif<strong>for</strong>d (1990). Project Summary: <strong>Arsenic</strong> (III) Oxidation <strong>and</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> from<strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong>, EPA/600/S-2-86/021.Frey, M.M. <strong>and</strong> M. Edwards (1997). “Surveying <strong>Arsenic</strong> Occurrence,” J. AWWA, 89:3:105.Frey, M.M., M. Edwards <strong>and</strong> G. Amy (1997). National Compliance Assessment <strong>and</strong> <strong>Costs</strong> <strong>for</strong> theRegulation <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> in <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong>, AWWA, Washington.Frey, M., D.M. Owen, Z.K. Chowdhury, R.S. Raucher <strong>and</strong> M. Edwards (1998). “Cost to Utilities <strong>of</strong>a Lower MCL <strong>for</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong>,” J. AWWA, 90:3:89.6-4
Fuller, C.C., J.A. Davis, G.W. Zellwegger <strong>and</strong> K.E. Goddard (1988). “Coupled Chemical, Biological,<strong>and</strong> Physical Processes in Whitewood Creek, South Dakota: Evaluation <strong>of</strong> the Controls <strong>of</strong>Dissolved <strong>Arsenic</strong>,” Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the Technical Meeting, Arizona, US Geological SurveyToxic Substances Hydrology Program, September 26-30, 1988.Garling, R.A. (1981). “Evaluation <strong>of</strong> Electrodialysis <strong>for</strong> Process <strong>Water</strong> Treatment <strong>for</strong> In-SituMining,” Presented at Fifth Annual Uranium Seminar, Albuquerque, NM.Ghurye, G., D. Clif<strong>for</strong>d <strong>and</strong> J. Tong (1998). “Iron Coagulation/Filtration <strong>for</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong>,”AWWA Inorganic Contaminants Workshop, San Antonio, TX, February 23-24, 1998.Gibbs, J.W. <strong>and</strong> L.P. Scanlan (1998). “<strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> in the 1990's: Full Scale Experience fromPark City, Utah,” AWWA Inorganic Contaminants Workshop, San Antonio, TX, February 23-24, 1998Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River Board <strong>of</strong> State Public Health <strong>and</strong> Environmental Managers(1997). Recommended St<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>for</strong> <strong>Water</strong> Works, Health Education Services, Albany, NY,1997.Gulledge, J.H. <strong>and</strong> J.T. O’Connor (1973). “<strong>Removal</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> (V) <strong>From</strong> <strong>Water</strong> by Adsorption onAluminum <strong>and</strong> Ferric Hydroxides,” J. AWWA, 8:548-552.Gupta, S.K. <strong>and</strong> K.Y. Chen (1978). “<strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> by Adsorption,” Journal <strong>of</strong> WPCF, 3:3:493.Harper, T.R. <strong>and</strong> N.W. Kingham (1992). “<strong>Removal</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> from Wastewater Using ChemicalPrecipitation Methods,” <strong>Water</strong> Environment Research, 64:3:200.Hathaway, S.W. <strong>and</strong> F. Rubel, Jr. (1987). “Removing <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>From</strong> <strong>Drinking</strong> <strong>Water</strong>,” J. AWWA,79:8:61-65.Hecht, P.M. U.G. Kelkar <strong>and</strong> D.J. Hiltebr<strong>and</strong> (1994). “Enhanced Coagulation: Impacts on ResidualManagement Programs,” Proceedings AWWA Annual Conference, New York.Hering, J.G. <strong>and</strong> M. Elimelech (1996). <strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> by Enhanced Coagulation <strong>and</strong> MembraneProcesses, AWWA, Denver.Hering, J.G., P. Chen, J.A. Wilkie, M. Elimelech, <strong>and</strong> S. Liang (1996). “<strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> by FerricChloride,” J. AWWA, 88:4:155-167.Hering, J.G., P-Y. Chen, J.A. Wilkie <strong>and</strong> M. Elimelech (1997). “<strong>Arsenic</strong> <strong>Removal</strong> <strong>From</strong> <strong>Drinking</strong><strong>Water</strong> During Coagulation,” J. Env. Engineering, 123:8:800-807.Hering, J.G., <strong>and</strong> V.Q. Chiu (1998). “The Chemistry <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong>: Treatment <strong>and</strong> Implications <strong>of</strong><strong>Arsenic</strong> Speciation <strong>and</strong> Occurrence,” AWWA Inorganic Contaminants Workshop, SanAntonio, TX, February 23-24, 1998.6-5
- Page 1:
United StatesEnvironmental Protecti
- Page 5:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis document was pr
- Page 8 and 9:
2.5.7 Reverse Osmosis .............
- Page 10 and 11:
5.0 POINT-OF-ENTRY/POINT-OF-USE TRE
- Page 12 and 13:
LIST OF FIGURES2-1 Pressure Driven
- Page 14 and 15:
LIST OF ACRONYMSAAAWWAAWWARFBLSBVC/
- Page 16 and 17:
POUpoint-of-useppbparts per billion
- Page 18 and 19:
# Alternative treatment processes s
- Page 20 and 21:
This page was intentionally left bl
- Page 23 and 24:
ends up as ferric hydroxide. In alu
- Page 25 and 26:
Optimization Hierarchy for Coagulat
- Page 27 and 28:
Substantial arsenic removal has bee
- Page 29 and 30:
Vickers et al. (1997) reported that
- Page 31 and 32:
was reduced to 0.05 mg/L when the i
- Page 33 and 34:
Field StudiesSurveys of lime soften
- Page 35 and 36:
Effect of pHpH may have significant
- Page 37 and 38:
RegenerationRegeneration of AA beds
- Page 39 and 40:
een developed provide important inf
- Page 41 and 42:
applicability of IX at a particular
- Page 43 and 44:
TABLE 2-1Typical IX Resins for Arse
- Page 45 and 46:
solution strength. Arsenic elutes r
- Page 47 and 48:
2.4.12 Typical Design ParametersThr
- Page 49 and 50:
2.5.2 Important Factors for Membran
- Page 51 and 52:
arsenic size distribution to correl
- Page 53 and 54:
AWWARF (1998) also performed UF pil
- Page 55 and 56:
presumably due to changes in electr
- Page 57 and 58:
RO performance is adversely affecte
- Page 59 and 60:
TABLE 2-10Arsenic Removal with RO a
- Page 61 and 62:
eversal is the decreased potential
- Page 63 and 64:
2.6 ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES2.6.1 I
- Page 65 and 66:
20 mg As per gram of iron was remov
- Page 67 and 68:
The most significant weakness of th
- Page 69 and 70:
3.0 TECHNOLOGY COSTS3.1 INTRODUCTIO
- Page 71 and 72:
included in the estimates presented
- Page 73 and 74:
Table 3-3Water Model Capital Cost B
- Page 75 and 76:
3.2.3 Implementing TDP Recommended
- Page 77 and 78:
sources. The September 1998 index v
- Page 79 and 80:
Amortization, or capital recovery,
- Page 81 and 82:
3.3 ADDITIONAL CAPITAL COSTSThe cos
- Page 83 and 84:
PilotingThe Technology Design Panel
- Page 85 and 86:
The 1993 Technology and Cost Docume
- Page 87 and 88:
cause disinfection by-product (DBP)
- Page 89 and 90:
Figure 3-1Pre-oxidation - 1.5 mg/L
- Page 91 and 92:
3.6 PRECIPITATIVE PROCESSES3.6.1 Co
- Page 93 and 94:
enhanced coagulation treatment plan
- Page 95 and 96:
Figure 3-4Enhanced Coagulation/Filt
- Page 97 and 98:
Small Systems (Less than 1 mgd)The
- Page 99 and 100:
Figure 3-6Coagulation Assisted Micr
- Page 101 and 102:
3.6.6 Enhanced Lime SofteningEnhanc
- Page 103 and 104:
Figure 3-8Enhanced Lime SofteningO&
- Page 105 and 106:
3. Empty Bed Contact Time (EBCT) is
- Page 107 and 108:
For design flows greater than 1 mgd
- Page 109 and 110:
Figure 3-9Activated AluminaCapital
- Page 111 and 112:
Figure 3-11Activated Alumina (pH 8
- Page 113 and 114:
Figure 3-13Activated Alumina (pH Ad
- Page 115 and 116:
3.7.2 Granular Ferric HydroxideGran
- Page 117 and 118:
6. The capital costs include a redu
- Page 119 and 120:
Figure 3-15Bed Volumes to Arsenic B
- Page 121 and 122:
Figure 3-17Anion Exchange (< 20 mg/
- Page 123 and 124:
Figure 3-19Anion Exchange (20-50 mg
- Page 125 and 126:
quality feed stream and often requi
- Page 127 and 128:
Figure 3-20Greensand FiltrationCapi
- Page 129 and 130:
3.11 COMPARISON OF COSTSThe April 1
- Page 131 and 132:
4.0 RESIDUALS HANDLING AND DISPOSAL
- Page 133 and 134: mechanical dewatering processes. Wh
- Page 135 and 136: Storage lagoons are best suited for
- Page 137 and 138: the current Industrial Pretreatment
- Page 139 and 140: 4.3.3 Dewatered Sludge Land Applica
- Page 141 and 142: usually determined by the Paint Fil
- Page 143 and 144: for arsenic toxicity by a substanti
- Page 145 and 146: The solids content of the backwash
- Page 147 and 148: carbonate hardness removal produces
- Page 149 and 150: Domestic sewage means untreated san
- Page 151 and 152: 4.4.10 Reverse OsmosisReverse osmos
- Page 153 and 154: Figure 4-1Anion Exchange (< 20 mg/L
- Page 155 and 156: Figure 4-3Anion Exchange (20-50 mg/
- Page 157 and 158: Figure 4-5Coagulation Assisted Micr
- Page 159 and 160: Figure 4-7Coagulation Assisted Micr
- Page 161 and 162: Figure 4-9Activated Alumina (pH 7 -
- Page 163 and 164: Figure 4-11Activated Alumina (pH Ad
- Page 165 and 166: Figure 4-13Greensand FiltrationWast
- Page 167 and 168: 5.0 POINT-OF-ENTRY/POINT-OF-USE TRE
- Page 169 and 170: chromatographic peaking, which occu
- Page 171 and 172: 5.3.1 Case Study 1: Fairbanks, Alas
- Page 173 and 174: Manufacturer and laboratory data su
- Page 175 and 176: Figure 5-2POU Reverse OsmosisO&M Co
- Page 177 and 178: # Installation time - 1 hour unskil
- Page 179 and 180: Figure 5-3POU Activated AluminaTota
- Page 181 and 182: 6.0 REFERENCESAmy, G.L. and P. Bran
- Page 183: Cooperative Research Centres for Wa
- Page 187 and 188: Le, X.C., and M. Ma (1998). “Dete
- Page 189 and 190: Scott, K., J. Green, H.D. Do and S.
- Page 191: Appendix AVery Small Systems Capita
- Page 194 and 195: Table A4 - VSS Document Capital Cos
- Page 197 and 198: Table B1.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 199 and 200: Table B3.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 201 and 202: Table B5.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 203 and 204: Table B7.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 205 and 206: Table B9.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 207 and 208: Table B11.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 209 and 210: Table B13.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 211: Appendix CW/W Cost Model Capital Co
- Page 214 and 215: Table C2.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 216 and 217: Table C4.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 218 and 219: Table C6.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 220 and 221: Table C8.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
- Page 222 and 223: Table C10.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 224 and 225: Table C12.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 226 and 227: Table C14.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 228 and 229: Table C16.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 230 and 231: Table C18.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 232 and 233: Table C20.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 234 and 235:
Table C22.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 236 and 237:
Table C24.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 238 and 239:
Table C26.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
- Page 240 and 241:
This page was intentionally left bl
- Page 243 and 244:
APPENDIX D: BASIS FOR REVISED ACTIV
- Page 245 and 246:
Company case study is 18 minutes (2
- Page 247 and 248:
egressed against their respective v
- Page 249 and 250:
costs for small systems is as follo
- Page 251 and 252:
were based on $40/sq ft). The proce
- Page 253 and 254:
Basis. Capital cost components incl
- Page 255 and 256:
The source water at Plant D has the
- Page 257 and 258:
equation y = (2*10 -8 )x 2 + 0.0002
- Page 259 and 260:
The maximum run length is 18,500 be
- Page 261 and 262:
Since the available arsenic capacit
- Page 263 and 264:
If the first column can be operated
- Page 265 and 266:
which includes lighting, ventilatio
- Page 267 and 268:
disposal costs, if needed, are cove
- Page 269:
Appendix EBasis for Revised Anion E
- Page 272 and 273:
2. The estimated cost of the anion
- Page 274 and 275:
9. The capital costs have been esti
- Page 276 and 277:
Thus, the cost of a road and fence
- Page 278 and 279:
length when sulfate is at or below
- Page 280 and 281:
the labor rates for both large and
- Page 282 and 283:
2. US EPA. Technologies and Costs f
- Page 284:
This page was intentionally left bl