EPA Lagoon Design Manual

14 MGD
D

480 acres

1.2 miles
 Manual Layout

1. Introduction
2. Planning, Feasibility Assessment and Site Selection

3. Design Of Municipal Wastewater Stabilization Ponds

Ponds

4. Advanced
R Design Systems
5 NutriientR emovall
5.
6. Physical Design and Construction
7. Upgrading Pond Effluents
8. Cost and Energy Requirements
9. Operation and Maintenance
 Introduction

Basic Processes
• Anaerobic
• Facultative
• Aerobic

In Pond Design Evolution and Enhancements

• AIWPS™ (Oswald)
• Deep Sludge Pits
• High Performance Shallow Ponds
• BIOLAC™

Oxygen Addition
• LAS International, Ltd.
• PRAXAIR, Inc.
 Introduction
Modifications that require energy
• Partial Mix
• Complete Mix
• High
High-Performance
Performance Aerated Ponds (Rich)
• BIOLAC™

Nutrient Removal
• Nitrogen
In pond
Modified high performance aerated systems for
nitrification/denitrification
In pond with wetlands and gravel bed filters
• Phosphorus
 Introduction
Effluent
ff TSS (Alg
gae))Removal
• Lemna
• Alg
gae settling
gbasins
• Barley straw
 Planning, Feasibility Assessment

andd Site
Si Sel
S lection
i
• Estimates for
f Land Area
• Potential for Floods
• Water Rights
 Planning, Feasibility Assessment

andd Site
Si Sel
S lection

• Land Area Estimates for

f 1 MGD Sy
ystems

Treatment North Mid-Atlantic South

S t
System
Facultative 165 110 50
Controlled
160 160 160
Discharge
Partial-Mix
50 35 30
Aerated
Complete-Mix
5 5 2.5
Aerated
AIWPS™ 30 20 15
1981 1973

1985
Design Of Municipal
P Wastewater

S bili
Stabilization
i P onds

• Anaerobic ponds
• Facultative ponds

• Aeratted
d pond
d systtems
 Anaerobic ponds
Advantages
• Infrequent sludge removal
• High degree of stabilization is possible

• Low or no energy requirements

• Ease of operation

Disadvantages
• Incomplete BOD5 removal
• Odors
• Processes are sensitive to temperature

 Facultative ponds
Advantages
• Infrequent sludge removal
• Effective in removing settleable solids, BOD5,
pathog
p gens,,
fecal coliform,,and ,to a limited extent ,
ammonia

• Easy to operate
• Requ
Requires
res little
l ttle energy, particularly
cularly if
f designed
des g
ned to
operate with gravity flow

 Facultative ponds

Disadvantages
• Sludge accumulation is higher in shallow facultative
ponds and in cold climates
• Ammonia levels in effluent are not easyy to control in
all seasons
• Emergent vegetation must be controlled to avoid
creatinggbreedin g areas for mosqquitoes and similar
insect vectors
• Requires relatively large areas of land due to shallow
depth
• Objectionable odors occur if the aerobic blanket
decreases and during spring and fall pond turnover
 Aerobic ponds

Advantag ges
• The advantages are similar to those for conventional
facultative ponds with more reliable BOD5 removal.
Significant nitrification of ammonia is also possible,
possible
given sufficient mean cell resident time (MCRT).
Added O2 allows for more treatment in less space and
reduces the potential for noxious odors.
odors

Disadvantages
• The disadvantages relate to the increased capital and
operation and maintenance costs, including the need
for more and better trained staff.
 Aeration Types
Diffused
ff
• Course bubble
• Fine bubble

Mechanical
• Fi
Fixed
d
• Splash

• Floating

Floating
• Turbos
 Advanced Design Systems

• Advanced Integ
grated Wastewater Pond Sy
ystems®

• Systems with Deep Sludge Cells

• High-performance
High performance Aerated Pond System (Rich design)
design)

Advanced Integrated Wastewater Pond

S t
Systems®

Anaerobic Pretreatment Cell

• HRT = 2 days
• Integrate fermentation pits
• Infl
fluentt contacts
ts anaerobi
bic bi
biomass
ss
• Provide mechanism for solids removal piping and

t
hookupps for vacuum truck

• Several pits in a single pond vs. several ponds each

with single pit

• Stuck in acid phase

• Low levels inhibit methane production
• Add alkalinity if needed
Advanced Integrated Wastewater Pond

S t
Systems®

Cell #2: Secondary yor Hi gh Rate Pond

• Oxic environment for dissolved solids digestion
• Oxygen supplied by mechanical aeration equipment

or algae usi
sing sh
shall
llow racettrack
kddesign
si
with
ith paddl
ddle

l
wheel mixer
• Depends on available sunshine
Advanced Integrated Wastewater Pond

S t
Systems®

Cell #3: Settling

g Pond
• Algae removal
• HRT of 1 to 2 days

Cell #4: Maturation Pond

• Provides
ro des storage after chlorination
chlor nat on
• HRT of 10 to 20 days
 Systems with Deep Sludge Cells
Variation of AIWPS
• Cell #1: Anaerobic cell
• Cell #2: Aerated cell
• Cell
C ll #3
#3: SSettling
ttli cellll
• Recirculation from cell 3 to cell 1 for odor cap
• HRT
H of 15
5 to 20 days
days
High-performance
High performance Aerated Pond System

Two cell syystem

• Complete mixed cell
• Settling basin
• Solids
S lids stabilization
st bili ti and d sl
sludge
d ststorage.
• Algal growth is controlled by low hydraulic retention
time.
 BIOLAC® Process

BIOLAC
Advantag ges
• Either a partial mix or complete mix cells
• Operate as an extended aeration activated sludge
system to nitrify NH3 or to achieve nitrification and
denitrification.

Disadvantages
• Operation and maintenance are more complex,
• Conventional extended aeration activated sludge when

nitrification or denitrification are required.

 LEMNA systems

Duckweed sy
ystem for
f photo-shading
g
Required harvesting duckweed
Now using floating covers for same effect

 Nitrogen Removal

• Alg
gal up
ptake
• Sludge deposition
• Adsorption by bottom sediments
• Nitrification
• Denitrificati
D i ifi ion
• Volatilization
 Nitrogen Removal

Ammonia removal
• Function of pH
• Function of temperature
• 2 Models used
• Plug
Pl flow
fl reactor
• Complete mix reactor
 Nitrogen Models

Plug
g flow
• Ne = No e-KT [ t + 60.6 (pH - 6.6)]

– Ne = effluent total nitrogen, mg/L

– N0 = influent total nitrogen,
nitrogen mg/L

mg/L
– KT = temperature dependent rate constant
– KT = 0 0064 ( 11.039
0.0064 039) (T-20)
-20)

– t = detention time in system, day

– pH = pH of near surface
 Nitrogen Models

Comp
plete mixed
N0
Ne =
• 1 + t(0.000576T − 0.00028)e (1.080−0.042T )(pH−6.6 )

– Ne = effluent total nitrogen, mg/L

– N0 = iinfluent
fl totall nitrogen,
i mg/L
/L
– T = temperature of pond
– pH = pH of near surface
 Ammonia Form Depends on pH

100%

NH4+ - N NH3 - N
ammonium ammonia gas
80%
ionized ammonia unionized ammonia
entage

60%
perce

40%

20%

0%
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
pH
Ammonia Curve depends on Temperature

0 degrees 10 degrees 20 degrees

100%

80%
percentage NH3

60%

40%

20%

0%
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

pH

 Nitrogen Removal

Lag
goon modifications
f
• ATLAS IS™ – Internal clarifier system
• CLEAR™
CLEAR Process
Process – SBR variant
• Ashbrook SBR – SBR variant
• AquaMat®
A M ®P Process – Plastic
Pl i biomass
bi carrier
i ribbons

ibb
• MBBR™ Process – Plastic biomass carrier elements

• Poo-Gloo™
 Phosphorus Removal

Lag
goon – Chemical Addition
• Calcium – Lime
• Aluminum – Alum,
Alum Poly Aluminum Chloride
• Iron – Ferric Chlorine
• Pickle
Pi kl Liquor
Li - Ferrous
F sulfate
lf
 Total Suspended Solids Removal

Control of
f Alg
gal Growth
• Shading
• Barley Straw
• Ultra Sound (sonicfication)
 Physical Design and Construction

Dike construction
• Wave Protection
• Weather Protection
• Animal Protection
• Seepage
 State Standards

9,000

7,500

Utah
6,000
gpd/acre
e

4,500
g

3,000

1 500
1,500
Nevada
New Mexico
0 Wyoming
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Liquid Depth

 State Standards

9,000

7,500

Utah
6,000
gpd/acre
e

4,500

Idaho & Wyoming

g

3,000

1 500
1,500
Colorado
Arizona
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Liquid Depth

 Cost and Energy Requirements

• Construction Costs
• Power Costs
 Power Usage

6,000

5,000

4 000
4,000
W h/MG

3,000
kW

2,000

1,000

0
Lagoons Trickling Filters Activated Sludge Membranes

Process Type