Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Water Environment Association of Texas
Peracetic Acid for Disinfection of Municipal Wastewater
Effluent Dr. Carl Linden, University of Colorado Part 1: PAA Fundamentals
Dr. Allegra da Silva, Stantec Part 2: PAA Current Regulatory Status & Issues
Part 3: WERF LIFT PAA Study Update
Webinar and CEU sheet can be found at:
http://www.weat.org/peraceticacidwebinar.shtml
Dr. Michael J. Watts, Garver Part 4: Case Study #1: Pilot Testing of PAA with UV Disinfection at Little Rock, AR
Sarah Stewart, CDM-Smith Part 5: Case Study #2: The First Peracetic Acid Disinfection System in Texas – Up and Running
Leonard Levine, Gulf Coast Authority Part 5: Case Study #2: The First Peracetic Acid Disinfection System in Texas – Up and Running
Water Environment Association of Texas
Michael Watts, Garver Moderator
Webinar, slides, and CEU sheet can be found at:
http://www.weat.org/peraceticacidwebinar.shtml
Peracetic Acid for Disinfection of Municipal Wastewater
Effluent
Water Environment Association of Texas
Part 1: Peracetic Acid (PAA) Fundamentals
Dr. Carl Linden
University of Colorado
Water Environment Association of Texas
Part 1 Agenda
• PAA Chemistry and Composition
• Inactivation of Indicator Organisms
• PAA Residuals and Effluent Quality
• PAA Residuals and Aquatic Life
• PAA Compatibility
• Benefits of PAA
Water Environment Association of Texas
Major Classes of Disinfectants Applied for WW Treatment
Halogen-releasing
• Cl2
• HOCl
• OCl-
Peroxygens
• H2O2
• O3
• CH3COOOH Peracetic Acid
Ultraviolet
• LP
• LPHO
• Amalgam
• MP
Water Environment Association of Texas
WW market is still dominated by halogen-releasing chlorine
Chlorination
UV
Ozone
WRRFS 7 Facilities
Hypo or Gas 2009 WEF Survey of WRRF Disinfection Strategies (>4,000 facilities in U.S.)
Water Environment Association of Texas
With limited market share, why so much talk about peroxygens like PAA?
Peracetic Acid (PAA)
Inherently Safer
Stable Bulk Solutions
Low-Cost, Fast Retrofits
No Halogenated DBPs
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA solutions are an equilibrium mixture of H2O2 and PAA
H2O2 + CH3COOH ↔ CH3COO-OH + H2O
Chemical Typical
Composition
Peroxyacetic Acid (PAA) >5%
Acetic Acid >7%
H2O2 >20%
PAA
Up to 22%
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA is a colorless liquid, at low pH (<3), with a pungent odor
Most frequent application is
surface disinfection in medical and food
industries
Water Environment Association of Texas
When free of impurities (reducing agent, metals), PAA is stable for up to 1 year
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Lbs/
gal
Months
Stored in original tote, or clean bulk tank
Typical 15% solution
<2% loss in strength
Water Environment Association of Texas
Unlike Cl2, low instantaneous PAA demand has been observed in secondary effluent
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 3 6 9 12
PA
A R
esid
ua
l, m
g/L
Contact Time, min.
Test No. 1 (HACH) Test No. 2 (HACH) Test No. 2 (I-2020)
Test No. 3 (HACH) Test No. 3 (I-2020)
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA is an effective biocide for E. coli
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Log
Red
uct
ion
of
E. C
oli
(-
log
N/N
0)
PAA CT (mg-min/L)
20 to 30 min of contact time with a final 1 mg/L PAA residual
Batch reactor trials with tertiary effluent
Water Environment Association of Texas
A 2016 NYC DEP study found that PAA is less effective for enterococci inactivation compared to Fecal Coliform
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Chlorine PAA
Ave
rage
CT
for
Co
mp
lian
ce, m
g-m
in/L
Fecal Coliform Enterococcus
Water Environment Association of Texas
Normalizing for other effects, PAA adds 0.9 to 1 ppm of BOD5 per ppm of PAA
Water Environment Association of Texas
If PAA residuals are relatively sturdy what effects do they have in receiving water body?
Effluent
Sample
15% PAA
PAA+Effluent
Lab
Water
0%, 31%, 41%,
55%, 74%, 98%
Serial Dilutions
Modified EPA Method 1000
C. dubia P. promelas
Water Environment Association of Texas
C.dubia shows significant sensitivity to residual PAA
Organism Survival Reproduction
C. dubia
No Effect Conc. 31% 0%
Lowest Observed Effect Conc. 41% 31%
Survival Growth
P. promelas
No Effect Conc. 98% 98%
Lowest Observed Effect Conc. -- --
Equates to a final PAA conc. of ~0.3 mg/L
Dilutions in tertiary effluent
Water Environment Association of Texas
Resolution on PAA toxicity required. . . however, in general . . .
Discharge to WW-dominated Streams
PAA Quenching Likely (e.g., Sodium Bisulfite)
Surface-spreading, Rapid Infiltration, or Ocean Discharge
PAA Quenching Unlikely
Water Environment Association of Texas
Part 2: PAA Current Regulatory Status & Issues
Dr. Allegra da Silva
Stantec
Water Environment Association of Texas
Interest in PAA
• Criteria for halogenated DBPs are becoming increasingly more stringent – PAA doesn’t form these – PAA low aquatic toxicity, relative to chlorine
• Safety of handling toxic gases including chlorine and sulfur dioxide – No Risk Management Plan (RMP)
• Low capital cost for chlorine retrofit – May not require quenching – Cheaper than capital cost to convert to UV
• Cost effective for difficult to treat wastewaters • Long shelf-life
Water Environment Association of Texas
Typical Path to PAA
Bench test
Pilot test Full-scale
trial Change permit
Install & start up
Photos courtesy of PeroxyChem
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA in Texas
Bench test
Pilot test Full-scale
trial Change permit
Install & start up
Photos courtesy of PeroxyChem
Marshall Fort Worth North Texas Dallas Austin El Paso
Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority (Pasadena, TX)
Industrial effluent
Trinity River Authority
Water Environment Association of Texas
Chlorine Retrofit: Weighing chemical costs
1. PAA
2. Quenching agent
1. SHC
2. Ammonia
3. Quenching agent
Water Environment Association of Texas
Chlorine retrofit: weighing the chemical costs
Bench test
Pilot test Full-scale
trial Change permit
Install & start up
1. PAA
2. Quenching agent
1. SHC
2. Ammonia
3. Quenching agent
Water Environment Association of Texas
Regulatory Status and Issues Current USEPA approved PAA products
Water Environment Association of Texas
What goes in a permit
Bench test
Pilot test Full-scale
trial Change permit
Install & start up
Residual limit pH BOD/cBOD/COD WET testing
Water Environment Association of Texas
Regulatory Status and Issues TCEQ standing on use of PAA
Water Environment Association of Texas
Regulatory Status and Issues TCEQ process – implementation of innovative technology
• Application
• Administrative Review – Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to
Obtain Permit is published after the application is declared
administratively complete
• Technical Review – if the application is complete, staff will proceed a draft
permit, technical summary or fact sheet for the application and public
notice and a Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision is published
• Comments from the Applicant – Review and comment on TCEQ draft;
publish notice of draft permit and provide instructions for public comment
• Public Comments
• Final Action on the Application
• Engineering Review – Plans and specs for innovative technologies shall be
submitted plans along with the summary transmittal letter
Water Environment Association of Texas
Regulatory Status and Issues TCEQ process – lessons from other states/agencies?
State Allowable PAA Residual (ppm)
Alabama 1 mg/L
Arkansas Up to 2 mg/L in trials California Allowing trials and supplemental PAA for underperforming UV systems
Colorado 0.4 mg/L (monthly average) at DF=0; up to 0.7 mg/L as a daily max (trial) Florida 1 mg/L
Georgia 1 mg/L (trials) Illinois 1 mg/L
Iowa 0.7 mg/L Kentucky Per engineer recommendation, generally 1 mg/L Missouri 1 mg/L as a daily maximum, 0.7 mg/L as a monthly average
New Jersey 1 mg/L for trials (under review) Ohio 0.33 mg/L (Steubenville, OH)
Oklahoma 1 mg/L (Guidance published August 2017) Oregon 1 mg/L, requiring monitoring of enteric viruses
Tennessee 0.4 mg/L for low DF; site specific for high DF, up to 2 mg/L Texas Anticipate EPA label requirements (1 mg/L); GCWDA did not reopen permit
BALLAST WATER 0.5 mg/L as PAA per USCG 33 CFR Part 151
Water Environment Association of Texas
Regulatory Status and Issues Current USEPA efforts on PAA
EPA Technical Assessment Report:
Operational Experiences with Peracetic Acid (PAA) for
Disinfection of Municipal Wastewater
• Literature review
• Full-scale experiences
• Implementation strategies
• Technology performance
• Capital and O&M costs
• Lessons learned
• Case studies
States’ Permitting Challenges: How to handle residual with no AWQC How to measure residual PAA with no approved method listed in 40 CFR 136
EPA’s draft is in review; coordinated with:
1. Ongoing $1.3M WE&RF/LIFT 14T16
PAA research
2. WEF PAA guidance document – 2018
Water Environment Association of Texas
Part 3: WERF LIFT PAA Study Update
Water Environment Association of Texas
WE&RF LIFT 14T16 study update Project team
Water Environment Association of Texas
WE&RF LIFT 14T16 study update Research project objectives
• Document current state of knowledge; identify knowledge gaps – Conduct testing and fill knowledge gaps
– Bench, pilot, full-scale testing
– Peer-reviewed publications
• Specific research questions – What is PAA disinfection efficacy for:
• Fecal and total coliforms
• E. coli and Enterococcus
• Bacteriophage or other viruses
– How does wastewater quality impact PAA efficacy?
– How does PAA effect effluent pH, cBOD, COD, TOC, DO, and solids?
– What effect does PAA-treated effluent have on aquatic life?
– How else can PAA be used in wastewater treatment?
– What is needed to reduce regulatory ambiguity for PAA?
Water Environment Association of Texas
WE&RF LIFT 14T16 study update Project schedule
2016
• Contract start – September 15 • Preliminary Texas utility workshop October 7 • Demonstration pilot reactor testing commences at 4 Texas utilities
2017
• PAA piloting completed, and full-scale demonstrations • Pilot testing of UV+PAA • Data analysis and peer-review publications
2018
• Publication of comprehensive guidance document • Research report summarizing findings
Water Environment Association of Texas
WE&RF LIFT 14T16 study update
• High level overview of study and status of work
Participating Utility Task 4 – Demonstration Testing
Bench Test Pilot -test Full-scale test
PAA Efficacy, Kinetics and Water Quality Impacts
Denver MWRD Norovirus/MS2,
UV+PAA Pilot reactor for E. coli --
Dallas Water Utilities E. coli Pilot reactor for E. coli/WET --
North Texas MWD E. coli Pilot reactor for E. coli/WET --
El Paso Water Utilities E. coli Pilot reactor for E. coli/WET --
Austin Water Utilities E. coli Pilot reactor for E. coli/WET --
Metro Vancouver Langley WWTP -- -- Cold weather; toxicity
City of Memphis Maxson and Stiles WWTPs E. coli E. coli inactivation & DBPs E. coli at Stiles
NYCDEP, Hunts Point WWTP -- FC, Enterococcus, CN --
GCWDA, Washburn Tunnel Enterococcus Enterococcus, DBPs
East Bay MUD FC and Enterococcus -- --
San Francisco PUC FC and Enterococcus Pilot reactor for FC and
Enterococcus/WET --
Napa Sanitation District FC and Enterococcus Pilot reactor for FC and
Enterococcus/WET --
East Bay Dischargers Authority E. coli E. coli inactivation E. coli inactivation
Metro Nashville Dry Creek WWTP -- -- E. coli inactivation
Ft. Worth Village Creek WWTP Biosolids E. coli inactivation --
Secondary Uses of PAA at WWTPs
Gwinnett County FWH WRC FC -- UV+PAA for FC/WET
TRA CRWS WWTP -- E. coli/WET Tertiary filter trial
Water Environment Association of Texas
WE&RF LIFT 14T16 study update Project deliverables
Peer reviewed articles to meet EPA QA/QC data requirements • Overview articles
– State of the knowledge of PAA applications in municipal wastewater disinfection (Texas pilot results; target WER)
– PAA impact on effluent quality, results from bench tests (target WER)
– Economic evaluation of PAA (Texas pilot results; target WE&T)
• Viruses – Murine Norovirus and MS2 Bacteriophage
(ES&T 2017 and J. Environ. Mgt., accepted)
• Toxicity – PAA and ecotoxicity; WET data from field trials (target WS&T)
Water Environment Association of Texas
WE&RF LIFT 14T16 study update Project deliverables, continued
• Methods for measuring and monitoring PAA – A path for EPA 40 CFR 136 status (target WE&T)
Other project deliverables • Economic evaluation tool, spreadsheet tool • Final research report, 12 –16 page practical executive summary of
work, referencing peer reviewed manuscripts from project • WEF Special publication on PAA implementation at municipal WWTP
Water Environment Association of Texas
Looking ahead
PAA is a viable tool in our disinfection toolbox, supplementing our existing options Scientific and regulatory data sharing/ collaboration is critical to success of PAA
Water Environment Association of Texas
Part 4: Case Study #1 – From Pilot to Full Scale with PAA Supplemental Disinfection at
Little Rock, AR
Dr. Michael J. Watts
Garver
Water Environment Association of Texas
The Adams Field Treatment Facility (AFTF) is the largest municipal water reclamation facility in Central Arkansas
Avg. Day Q = 36 MGD
Water Environment Association of Texas
Peak influent flow at Adams Field WRRF is linked with elevated effluent E. coli
0
1000
2000
3000
20 40 60 80Treated Flow, MGD
Eff
lue
nt
FC
, C
FU
/10
0m
L
UV Disinfection at
Adams Field WRRF
Water Environment Association of Texas
Suppressed UVT has also affected the plant’s ability to meet effluent coliform limits
50 60 70 80
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
2011-2014
UVT(%)
Cum
ula
tive D
istr
ibution
10th percentile
Design UVT
55%
Water Environment Association of Texas
In 2014, LRW faced a key decision. . .
Replace existing UV?
Only 6 years old. . .
Supplement UV with chemical
disinfection?
Effluent permit
contained restrictive TRC limits
What about PAA?
Water Environment Association of Texas
A PAA pilot study was conducted in 2015 to assess the dosing requirements in secondary clarifier effluent that could assist UV in meeting effluent coliform limits
Water Environment Association of Texas
Key Outcomes of the Pilot Study
• PAA CT of 10 mg-min/L: <1000 cfu/100mL
• PAA CT of 20 mg-min/L: <100 cfu/100mL
• 1:1 PAA:DO increase in effluent DO
• Some pH suppression in low alkalinity effluent: ~0.3 pH units in pilot effluent
• ~1:1 PAA:BOD increase in pilot effluent
Water Environment Association of Texas
The encouraging FCB kill in the pilot study led to a full-scale trial (2016-2017)
UV
PAA Feed
Water Environment Association of Texas
Former Cl2 storage area was utilized for PAA storage and feed
Water Environment Association of Texas
New carrier piping was installed for injection of PAA into the clarifier effluent box at AFTF
Water Environment Association of Texas
Full-Scale trial testing with PAA began in 08/2016
Test Parameter
Min. PAA Dose 0.5 mg/L
Max. PAA Dose 1.5 mg/L
Data Collected
Secondary Eff. FCB, cfu/100mL
UV Influent FCB, cfu/100mL
Final Effluent FCB, cfu/100mL
Final Effluent PAA Residual
Effluent UVT, %
No. of UV Channels in Operation
UV Lamps in Operation
Effluent DO, mg/L
Effluent TSS, mg/L
PAA Feed Rate, gal/hr
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA upstream of UV has assisted LRW in meeting seasonal effluent coliform limits
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
cfu
/10
0m
L
Sec Eff FCB Pre-UV FCB Final Eff FCB October - April FCB Limit
Water Environment Association of Texas
During this trial period, without PAA, effluent FCB concentrations were ~1-log greater
Water Environment Association of Texas
This ~1-log FCB inactivation is occurring with relatively short PAA contact times
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
cfu
/10
0m
L
Contact Time, min
Sec Eff FCB Pre-UV FCB
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA/UV maintained a consistent effluent FCB even with variability in effluent UVT(%)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
8/1
/20
16
8/6
/20
16
8/1
1/2
01
6
8/1
6/2
01
6
8/2
1/2
01
6
8/2
6/2
01
6
8/3
1/2
01
6
9/5
/20
16
9/1
0/2
01
6
9/1
5/2
01
6
9/2
0/2
01
6
9/2
5/2
01
6
9/3
0/2
01
6
10
/5/2
01
6
10
/10
/20
16
10
/15
/20
16
10
/20
/20
16
10
/25
/20
16
10
/30
/20
16
11
/4/2
01
6
11
/9/2
01
6
11
/14
/20
16
11
/19
/20
16
11
/24
/20
16
11
/29
/20
16
12
/4/2
01
6
12
/9/2
01
6
12
/14
/20
16
12
/19
/20
16
12
/24
/20
16
12
/29
/20
16
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Eff
lue
nt F
CB
, cfu
/10
0m
L
UV
T(%
)
UVT(%) FCB with PAA & UV
Water Environment Association of Texas
Short-term PAA decay in good agreement with PAA decay observed during pilot scale treatment
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25
PA
A/P
AA
0
Time, min
Pilot Scale Full Scale
Photodegradation?
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA has provided the following benefits as a supplemental disinfectant to UV at Adams Field
PAA has assisted in maintaining consistent effluent FCB even with fluctuating UVT
~1-log additional FCB inactivation due to PAA
• Low initial PAA doses of 1 mg/L (on avg.)
• Short contact times (less than 10 min)
Water Environment Association of Texas
Sequential PAA/UV may not be feasible for WRRF with restrictive effluent BOD limits . . .
Sequential PAA/UV may not be feasible for WRRF with restrictive effluent BOD limits
• ~1:1 PAA Dose:ΔBOD(in effluent)
Water Environment Association of Texas
Acknowledgements
• Walter Collins, LRWRA
• John Thompson, LRWRA
• Jo Anna Brown, LRWRA
• Eric Wassell, LRWRA
• Aaron Stallmann, Garver
• Paul Strickland, Garver
Water Environment Association of Texas
Part 5: Case Study #2 – The First Peracetic Acid Disinfection System in Texas – Up and
Running!
Sarah A. Stewart, P.E. CDM Smith
Leonard Levine, P.E. GCA
Water Environment Association of Texas
GCA Overview
• Created by Legislature 1969
• Initially served Galveston, Harris and Chambers Counties, now all Texas
• No ad valorem taxes
58
Central Lab Pasadena, TX
Washburn Tunnel WWTP Pasadena, TX
Bayport Industrial WWTP Pasadena, TX
Blackhawk Regional WWTP Friendswood, TX
40-Acre Industrial WWTP Texas City Area
Odessa South Industrial WWTP Odessa, TX
Water Environment Association of Texas
Washburn Tunnel • Flow:
– Two trains for a combined flow: • 12 MGD ADF • 43 MGD PHF
• Water Quality Characteristics: – Temperature: Up to 105 degrees F – UVT: 16% – Nitrite up to 28 mg/L
• Permit Requirements: – Effluent Enterococcus: 168 CFU/100 ml as a 30-day
geometric mean – 500 CFU/100 mL Maximum Grab – Chlorine Limit: Non-detect
Washburn Tunnel WWTP Pasadena, TX
Water Environment Association of Texas
Disinfection Evaluation
DISINFECTION ALTERNATIVES
• Chlorination/ Dechlorination
• Chloramination/ Dechlorination
• UV
• Ozone
• PAA
• Ferrate
• Chlorine Dioxide
CRITERIA
• Capital/Operation and Maintenance (O&M) costs
• Performance with Varying Water Quality
• O&M Complexity and Safety
• Equipment Life Expectancy
• Expandability
• Site Impacts
• Electrical Needs versus Current Capacity
• Permitting Effort
60
Water Environment Association of Texas
Pilot Testing • GCA conducted several pilot tests:
– 5 gpm pipe reactor for 3 weeks
– Side-by-side 25 gpm pipe reactors for both chloramination/ dechlorination and PAA
Water Environment Association of Texas
Reasons for Selecting PAA
• Reduced contact time (as compared to chloramination) of 7.5 minutes
• Lower capital cost than chloramination/chlorination disinfection system
• Less variability in dosing than chloramination/chlorination under similar water quality
62
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA Design Criteria
• Contact time: 7.5 minutes
• Design Doses: 3.5 mg/L average and 8 mg/L peak
• Temporary Quenching System was included
– Retained due to the chlorine effluent limit • PAA gives a false positive in the TRC test if present
Water Environment Association of Texas
Unique Features of the Design
• Value Engineering Session
• Limited Site Availability
• Flow Measurement and Hydraulic Limitations
• PAA Procurement
Construction Trailers
Disinfection Area
Water Environment Association of Texas
PAA Procurement – From Scratch!
• Preconstruction Services – CFD modeling to confirm mixing efficacy – Shop drawings
• Equipment procurement – Feed pumps – Tanks – Controls
• Chemical purchase • System Maintenance (preventive and reactive) • System operations
65
Water Environment Association of Texas
Inner and Outer Asymmetrical Channels
Parshall Flume SBS Contact Area
PAA/ SBS Storage
Disinfection Design Considerations
CFD for Flow Split – CDM Smith CFD for Mixing – PeroxyChem
Water Environment Association of Texas
Construction Methodology
Study Design Bid Construct
Study Design Construct
January 2016
• Permit required operation by January 2016
• Due to schedule limitations, CDM Constructors (CCI) was hired as Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR)
Design – Bid – Build
Design – Build
Water Environment Association of Texas
Construction
• Duration = 14 months (On time!)
• $9.2M budget and constructed for $9.2M (On budget!)
Water Environment Association of Texas
Start Up Period • 6 Month Start-up Period
• Extended sampling through the Contact Basin
• Enterococcus testing interference
• Optimization resulted in $100,000 per year savings in chemical dose
0
2
4
6
8
10
Design PAA Dose
Do
se (
mg/
L)
Average Dose
Maximum Dose
Water Environment Association of Texas
• Selection of the PAA Provider prior to construction was critical
• Close coordination between all parties during construction was crucial to meet schedule and budget.
• Maintenance of plant operations was imperative. – Identifying critical design and construction elements early allowed for the
project to proceed with as little interruption as possible.
• The contact tank design should include a means to address algae control and scum buildup. – Covered top of the basin and coating the interior walls
– As well as adding an opening from which to collect scum.
Lessons Learned
Water Environment Association of Texas
• Start-up testing is vital to confirm dosing requirements and optimize the system. – For Washburn, this resulted in substantial cost savings.
• CFD modelling provided benefits for the asymmetrical basin.
• On-line PAA monitoring equipment did not provide the accuracy needed for process control. – Additional sampling was required to optimize the system.
• PAA interferes with TRC measurements, so make sure that your permit allows for that.
Lessons Learned
Water Environment Association of Texas
Acknowledgements • GCWDA:
– Leonard Levine, Carl Hennigar, Ed Murphree, Daniel Williams, Greg Seay, Phyllis Frank and MANY others
• CDM Smith – Josh Goldman, Janelle Amador, Adam Eaton
– CCI – Luis Tamariz, Rob Monk, Tom Kline
• PeroxyChem – Alberto Garibi and Philip Block
TEAM T – Together E – Everyone A – Achieves M - More
Water Environment Association of Texas
Peracetic Acid for Disinfection of Municipal Wastewater
Effluent Dr. Carl Linden, University of Colorado Part 1: PAA Fundamentals
Dr. Kati Bell, Stantec Part 2: PAA Current Regulatory Status & Issues
Part 3: WERF LIFT PAA Study Update
Webinar and CEU sheet can be found at:
http://www.weat.org/peraceticacidwebinar.shtml
Dr. Michael J. Watts, Garver Part 4: Case Study #1: Pilot Testing of PAA with UV Disinfection at Little Rock, AR
Sarah Stewart, CDM-Smith Part 5: Case Study #2: The First Peracetic Acid Disinfection System in Texas – Up and Running
Leonard Levine, Gulf Coast Authority Part 5: Case Study #2: The First Peracetic Acid Disinfection System in Texas – Up and Running
Water Environment Association of Texas
CEU Questions
1. Peracetic acid is an effective disinfectant for E. coli A. True B. False
1. Which of the following is the driver for the use of peracetic
acid for disinfection: A. Safer than chlorine B. More stable than liquid chlorine C. No disinfection by products D. All of the above
2. A dose of 1 mg/L of peracetic acid will approximately add 1 mg/L of BOD to the effluent:
A. True B. False
Webinar, slides, and CEU sheet can be found at:
http://www.weat.org/peraceticacidwebinar.shtml