Record Display for the EPA National Library Catalog

RECORD NUMBER: 154 OF 203

Main Title Removal of Organic Contaminants from Drinking Water Supply at Glen Cove, New York, Phase II.
Author Ruggiero, Dominick D. ; Ausubel, Robert ;
CORP Author Nebolsine Kohlmann Ruggiero Engineers, New York.;Municipal Environmental Research Lab., Cincinnati, OH.
Year Published 1982
Report Number EPA-CR-806355-01; EPA-600/2-82-027;
Stock Number PB82-258963
Additional Subjects Water treatment ; Organic compounds ; Potable water ; Adsorption ; Aeration ; Design criteria ; Capitalized costs ; Operating costs ; Cost analysis ; Pilot plants ; Chlorine organic compounds ; Glen Cove(New York) ; Ethylene/trichloro ; Ethylene/tetrachloro ; Ethylene/dichloro ; Ethane/trichloro
Holdings
Library Call Number Additional Info Location Last
Modified
Checkout
Status
NTIS  PB82-258963 Some EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. 07/26/2022
Collation 118p
Abstract
This research program was initiated with the overall objective of obtaining relevant design parameters and capital and operating costs of both adsorption and aeration techniques for the removal of specific organic contaminants from the City of Glen Cove's drinking water supply. Major contaminants present are: trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, cis-1,2-dichloroethylene, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane. The results of Phase II supported the conclusions of Phase I, (PB81-115040), November 1980 and further indicated the applicability of both adsorption on resin and aeration as treatment for groundwater containing the above listed organic compounds. The testing of resins indicated that the use of columns in a downflow mode of operation, with upflow steam regeneration, appears to be the best approach. With proper steam regeneration, the resin returns to better than 90% of the original adsorptive capacity of the virgin resin and its continued use results in lengths of runs similar in time to those of the virgin resins. The regeneration of activated carbon with steam was not successful under the test conditions and, therefore, this approach is not recommended. The aeration testing indicated a slight edge in removal efficiencies for the packed column over the diffused aeration column. However, its additional cost may outweigh its advantage. The results from the small cooling tower indicate that this type of cooling tower would not be acceptable for treatment of the contaminated water present at Glen Cove.