NATURAL SEWAGE RECYCLING SYSTEMS

BROOKHAVEN
ASSOCIATED

NATIONAL
UNIVERSITIES,

LABORATORY
INC.

tm4DER CoNmAcl No. EY.76.c.020016 wm THE UNITEDSTATES ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION

(Environmental Coi~trol Technology ond EarthSciences - TlD4DD)

RECYCLING SYSTEMS I

January 1977

DEPARTMENT Of APPLIED SCIENCE BROOKHAVEN

ASSOCIATED UPTON,

NATIONAL
UNIVERSITIES, NEW YORK

LABORATORY
INC. 11973

is not used in these pond systems

prototype

marsh/pond

and meadow/marsh/

and no sludge with data

is generated. systems in detail are described for the marsh/

Experiments and performance pond. Empirical are suggested natural

two prototype are presented

interpretations for

of results

achieved

to date as

use in the design systems. costs

of marsh/$onds

sewage recycling Construction

and operating state-of-the-art

for

a proposed

250,000

G.P.D.,

plant

are presented.

iii

In with the

1973,

Brookhaven systems

National

Laboratory their work

began experiments effectiveness is still the in

three treatment

natural

to determine sewage. This effort

of domestic system

proceeding Town of

as a cooperative Rrookhaven, Energy provides staff N.Y.

development

between

and the Atomic and Development of its 5500 acre

Energy

Commission,

now the The Laboratory half project for

Research a part costs: half the

Administration. site and pays for

Town provides

all

the hardware

and pays staff out

the other The project collaborative Capital operation

of the operating

and development year of carrying

costs. this

is now in the fifth contract. expenses to date

have been about will

$250,000

and $1,400,000 do not incurred

and development Year

expenses 1977. expense

have been almost costs

by the end of Fiscal include the considerable County

These operating for laboratory

analysis

by the Suffolk nor the

Water

Authority

and not billed

to the project, from time

laboratory

analytical

expense also contributed Department,

to time by the Suffolk Department

County Health

and the N.Y. State

of Environmental

Conservation

at Stony Brook. Association

1Presented at the New York hater Pollution Control Winter Meeting, New York City, January 17, 1977.

-l-

Under investigated aerated

this

arrangement,

three

natural

systems

have been

as to their

relative water

effectiveness quality. all three

in renovating first two

sewage to drinking years

For the systems

and a half in various open sites systems. year

of the project,

were operated @ray,

modes simultaneously* for During one: and two different

These were the Upland lowland spread

closed

the second
period,

two and a half lowland

years closed

of the fivesystems

development

only'the

continue

to be investigated. systems have been described by Brookhaven and reported Laboratory.

The open upland

f on previously,
In brief, gators, vegetated Long Island,

in some detail, work confirmed that will given

National

(l-4)

this
namely plots

that

of other
land,

engineering
spray irrigated,

investi-

sufficient sewage.

renovate land

For the porous soils

of greater

of

their

requirement open system since

than 130 acres

sites out

per m,

simply

priced

spray

irrigation

of the running. sewage fractions

Moreover, which it

there

is a finite

limit

to the

safely

can be accummulated in upland controlled, to farming. open In crop and water in order to

crops and soils,

system, production, applied upland

was concluded (5) that is better

spraying

suited

the rate to the land

and strength

of nutrient,toxins

as sewage need to be regulated

-2-

gain

the best

harvest

and the

least

contamination are not simply

of

land. with

These objectives the incidental

and necessary use of land

controls

compatible

and vegetation water of sewage,

as media for its

the renovation composition with since

to drinking or rate

no matter

of delivery. systems

Consequently, stopped early

experiments in 1975 and'

open spray that time,

application all effort

at BNL has been in the development systems, which accept rather sewage as it than by spraying.

of the two closed comes and is applied The two closed previously, reported marsh/pond

lowland

by gutter lowland

spreading systems also

k;zve been described for

and some preliminary by BNL.U-7) series Briefly

results reviewed,

both have been

one system is a meadow/ is a prototype raw sewage are

prototype

plant.

The other

marsh/pond series.
blended pretreated with septage.

Both experimental
Before for

systems accept the blends

application,
removal

by degritting

of non-degradables, 1 shows a schematic test

cornminuted, and flow

facilities.

mixed,

and aerated.

Figure

sheet

of the pretreatment through

and experimental pretreatment

Sewage flew

generally area aerated

is pumped intermittently.
is continuous, hold-up overflows. by gravity,

Flow through
after delivery

the experimental from the final

pond through

the marsh and pond to recharge

of the pond

-3-

Figure

1.

Brookhaven National lowland treatment

Laboratory systems.

schematic

-4-

Each aeration the experimental from an initial theoretical decreased

pond has a 60,000 period, 12,000 flows through

gallon

capacity.

During

the system 40,000

have ircreased

GPD to the present time for preaeration

GPD, Thus have

days.

detention from an initial

and mixing 4 l/2

15 days to the present arrangement, time it

Because of the physical further to reduce aeration

has not been possible

to the one day which

is believed

to be sufficient suspension.
which assure

for odor control

Each aerated adequate

and completely

mixed solids aerator to

pond has a single

to supply

5 hp floating

is more than ice-free

air but is necessary

mixing

in the winter. system has received half the daily operation sewage began

Each experimental input on a 24 hour, 1975.

7 day basis

since

continuous

in April been tried

Several

blends

of septage to raw sewage have through 1:lO for a 6 month Since one

from 1:2 at the outset,

period, objective

to 1:5 from January in the development for separate

1976 to the present.

of these systems is to avoid sludge the relative blends capacities application of the

generation
two

disposal, solids

systems to accept high has been a principal even at only input)

at high

rates

evaluation

factor.

When operated the 12,000 GPD a 2 week on/

at l:2 blend, initial total

6,000 GPD (half

the meadows clogged with

-5-

2 week off a satisfactory

alternating effluent GPQbut

application at

mode.

The meadows produced

1:lO blends appear

in a 3 week alternation
capable Of operating mode. rate They at

mode at 10,000 1:5 at 10,000 became seriously when operated

do not

GPD each in a 3 week alternating clogged continuously by that (without application alternation)

and strength from April

through August 1976. Despite under high meadow clogging solids applications, to discharge and its consequent lower performance system as fn fact, and the

the meadow/marsh/pond satisfactory pond water.

a whole continued the pond water

discharged

by both the meadow/marsh/pond and strength

marsh/pond systems,

under the same rate

applicationsj it is the

is of about equal quality. apparent entire

filtered

From these observations, series alone will renovate

that

a marsh/pond

spectrum of applied
effluent through

sewage blends the highest

from very weak meadowand rates that

strengths

we have applied roughly half

to date.

Since a marsh/pond

series

requires series, producing the

the land needed for is the more efficient Because of its

a meadow/marsh/pond sewage treatment/water domination

the former

system of the two. balance of this

in renovation,

paper is devoted only.

to a more detailed

examination

of the marsh/pond

-6-

A look at Figures

2 through

11 gives

a'feel

for

a marsh/

pond system in operation. Figure 2 -+eptage tanker Figure 3 --Aeration being delivered to the pretreatment and mixing by Town area.

in one of the hold-up

60,000 gal. ponds: Figure 4

--Ditto--in center

pretreatment

in summer.
winter; around final visitors odor, note open area ice in formation. pond in to detect minimum

considerable pretreatment anxious no flies,

Figure

--Ditto--the summer with

some odor --no aerosols.

Figure

--The

gutter

feed

to marsh--note

no

spray, Figure 7 --Biologist

hence no aerosols. planting cattails in the underlies these closed

marsh --note this and all

membrane which components of

systems. Figure 8 --Field after technician in marsh three 1976. months Note is

replanting--June

volunteer -7-

Lemna (Duckweed)

which

prolific water

in nutrient aerifier: 'great

,ufitake:and,

is a

to have in the the,pond..

marsh--a Figure 9 --Marsh/pond with it. Figure 10

nuisance,in

system in summer in pond mmnay-they eat

carp stocked--no

--Pond--without

carp--prolific

Lemna weekly in

which must be harvested summer-mass will If not harvested, and kill Figure 11 --Marsh/bond
vegetation fish

double

in 6 days. go anaerobic

pond will
lack

for

of 02.

system in winter--despite
and ice will cover, continue if

sere

deep enough and Lemna to

the renovation still

in the marsh will

continue

vegetate.

The preceding it has looked since facility.

illustrations
first put Until

show the marsh/pond in operation April 1975, basic time, it in

system

as

1973 as an was operated in

experimental

a weekly batch recycling

of nutrients since from sewage.

mode for At that sufficient

research it

in the uptake that the basic

was decided to support

no longer

were there

funds

-8-

-9-

Figure

3.

- 11 -

Figure

5.

Figure

6.

- 13 -

Figure

7.

- 14 -

Figure

8.

- 15 -

Figure

9.

Figure

10.

Figure

11.

18 -

research pragmatic

necessary approach

to understand would

the marsh/pond its

system,

be used to determine

effectiveness

as a sewage-to-water The system the marsh/pond mode. would First,

treatment

plant.
design

development would

plan then was set under which in a continuous, application straight rate through gradually capacity

be operated

the

continuous
to that

hydraulic
rate

be increased

at which the renovative thus establishing upper rate, to that

of the marsh/pond
upper blend limit. strength

began to fail, at that

an hydraulic the sewage strength

Next,

hydraulic

gradually

would be increased capacity

at which the renovative

fail, thus establishing failure

of the marsh/pond began to upper total

loading limit.

an apparent

Renovative

was defined

as the production

of pond effluent

which,

after

filtration

through

vegetated if,

plots, roughly
as it

was not potable.

as built, it

The marsh/pond would be satisfactory

would water accept for domestic without

sewage and septage hazardous

came and produce objectionable

reuse

or otherwise

environmental

effects. plan has progressed design

upper limit to the point of 100,000 It of GPD/ has

This experimental establishing

acre

an hydraulic

of marsh or about 50,000 GPD/acre that performance

of marsh/pond.

been demonstrated

can be maintained

at that

- 19 -

design

loading

rate

increased

by 100% overload in 24 hours.

such as would hydraulic Thus each of

occur with capacity

4 inches is suspected

of rain

A greater

but has not been demonstrated. rate of 2,3 GPD per square foot

the design hydraulic

marsh and pond, has been set. Since April hydraulic least rate 1976, the marsh has been loaded at this
which

will 1977.

be continued

without

increase with

at the

through

April

The marsh has been loaded

same blend earlier without for

strengths

over the same time periods

mentioned
experience, with that increase the marsh

the meadow system but,contrary

change

to that

any noticeable
It

in marsh performance from these results

in strength. safely septage, higher At that domestic

is concluded

can be loaded with

The marsh

a blend

of 5 parts
capable

sewage to 1 part
still

is suspected

of assimilating

strength blend,

loading
the

but this

has not been demonstrated. the strength increased. must be of prea of medium

influent

is at about

sewage.

This strength
it

is now being that state.

To avoid odors, delivered

treatment

is believed

influent

to the marsh in an aerobic air,

in addition

An excess odor, will nitrogen However,

to controlling

produce

reduction
is all

in BOD and the hydrolysis

to the good but is probably

of organic a luxury.

(13) which
the

- 20 -

probably determined treatment cesspool of floating influent

much lower for fresh

.

limit

for

necessary

air has not yet been all preof .3 hp

sewage entering

a marsh since often

septic

to date has been of old, pumpings and sewage. aerator

blends

A conservative

minimum of

per 1,000 gallon/day

design rate

of marsh

is set by BNL experience sewage blends. assures

as the design

minimum for

these recirculated that this

BNL work has demonstrated

BOD5 and Total N reductions odor-

amount of air

on the order free influent Following previously,

aerators .

of 50% and 40% respectively which is acceptable

in a completely

to the marsh. plan, as mentioned

the pragmatic

development

sewage delivered
is now being

to the present Septage

15 hp pretreatment deliveries were

strengthened.

stopped and only domestic accepted

sewage settled quantities

raw solids
after

were
1976.

in steadily-increasing pretreatment

August

Since then, yearly increase

influent

BOD5 has increased ppm.

from the previously Despite this strength marsh

average of about 220 to 2,000 ahead of aeration,

has continued

the subsequent below

BOD5 in applied 100 ppm with Spring, until

to average

no odor-the amount odor is

a 95% reduction

by pre aeration.

Come this

of pretreatment noticeable,

air will

be reduced

in stages

and/or

contaminant

loading

proves to be excessive.

- 21 -

Assuming

renovation

continues

to be acceptable

up to that

point,

as is anticipated,

it will design

then be possible limit as a function

to set the low of sewage strength

pretreatment
as well

air

as flow. of such optimism, system now only

however,

Irrespective design a marsh/pond

it

is possible
of predictions

to

on the hasis

which safely The Laboratory report plotted

can be extrapolated has just published

from measurements
(8)

made to date. data and/or

the

first

marsh/pond

as a presentation after analysis

of

of 32 parameter

data tabulated

53 weeks of sampling data

the marsh influent

and the pond effluent.

These reported

were used as the system (9) to serve

basis

of a proposed

250,000 GPD marsh/pond under construction

performance

a new housing

development
The predicted BOD and Nitrogen

in the Town of
proposed 12. in x ;17 system

Brookhaven.
in removing

of this

are shown in Figure of others, (10)

Based on the experience this

the BOD curve pop.

figure

is predicted
= 425 #BID

to begin 5/day.

at 210 ppm (2,500

#BOD 5/person 425/(.25

And 2,500 from general

x 100 = .25 MGD so, experience, 24 hours in about in the the pond: (8)

x 8.34): will

210 ppm): reduce

of aeration,

BOD5 at least an average

by 50% resulting detention time

105 ppm entering marsh will give

the marsh:

a 52 ppm BOD5 marsh effluent

entering

- 22 -

4
Figure

G
12. Predicted remaining BOD5 and EN marsh/pond proposal, Rustic Ridge.

23 -

an average

18 day period
(8)

in

the pond will

produce

a pond effluent

not over 30 ppm. and deciduous the water table

Final floor

recharge will

through

a littered, effluent

mixed pine reaching

forest

result

in final

containing

not over 15 ppm of BOD5 and probably

-a 98% total

less than 5 ppm (11.) (13) The Nitrogen of 40 ppm total the experience expected

removal. an estimated
(12)

curve begins N in domestic

with

content From is to marsh/

sewage of medium strength.

(8)

of others (13) and at BNL,

preaeration

to reduce total

N to about 25 ppm in the influent blend through the BNL existing

the marsh.

Passage of this reduced total

pond prototype, effluent

N to an average of 10 ppm in the marsh and retaining preaeration

and application, system

from the pond.

of

By deepening
50F through

a sewage temperature a total divided N removal

of 80% is expected

in the proposed

among the components about as shown in Figure at BNL (5) showed a yearly
through through average a forest

12.
total floor. area N

Recharge experiments reduction Thus it

of about 40%when percolated is predicted that recharging result

reaching

the forested not table-an

of the proposed

system will

in a remainder the water

averaging 87.5%

over 5 ppm in the percolate total removal.

- 24 -

It

is noted

that

the BOD and total table. It

N removals is emphasized for

cited that

above a

are predicted marsh/pond passage if

at the water system can not

be recommended through

recharge a vegetated

without soil through the most fields

of the pond effluent removals

or over

the highest

are to be gained. forest pine, has proved old field, for

Infiltration to give and Timothy the sandy through to filter that would area

a mixed pine polishing tested

and deciduous scrub

among the and reported

on by the project

loam on or over out flow some the out

Long fsland!5) vegetated coliforms of a natural pond effluent would

The passage before

of pond effluent reuse is desirable

surface

and turbidity pond. but

due to algae In tight soils, of 5 acres

and detritus overland flow

polish alone soil, for as .25 MGD.

upwards (11) for

of recharge

be required

a .25 MGD plant: site requires only

the porous .5 acre

at the Brookhaven The table

recharge

in Figure

13 shows the average, of contaminants

maximum and

minimum concentrations before average effluent form, tered it percolates level cf

in the pond effluent litter and soil. established total will colibe filand to pubThe

through

the

forest

each contaminant water solids

is at or below except for which

and drinking total suspended

standards

and turbidity and, for high iron, nor

out during

percolation

manganese important

sodium which lit health.

are not

significantly

- 25 -

Concentration Parameter Total Solids Total Volatile Solids Total Suspended Solids Total Volatile Suspended Solids Total Dissolved Solids Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD$ Chemical wgeu Demand Total Nitrogen (liquid + solid) Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (liquid + solid) Amnonia Nitrogen (liquid) Total (NO2 + NO$-N(liquid) Total Phosphorous (liquid + solid) Orthophosphate-P (liquid) Total Coliform (#/lOChnl) Fecal Coliform (#/lOUml) Fkidity (J.U) Temperature ("C) Specific Conduct. MBAS (ABS) Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Fluoride Iron Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Zinc Ref. Effluent Criteria Average Max. Mitl.

au (11) (10)
(12) (12)

30 500 30
10 10

206 102 43 35 163

19

300 142
100

58

9.5

g;
(12)

4 200 5 .5
Sat.

6.8 3.5 2.6 2.1 1.3 *2200 *50.0 7.4 8.5

11

76 242 46 120 18 14 11.5 6.7 4 3 234,000 10,600

9.1

142 40 14
11 112 1

20 2.5
1.7

.05 .4 .4 40::
0.00

6.2 -617 151 e.02 8.8 15

K.01 x.01

(mho)

262

11:;
(12)

250 .05
1.0

3.4
30

.24

ii;;
(12) (12) (12)

.Ol

.6 .3 .05 20 5

.03 .4
1.2

3.6
.l

74 24 340 1.4 26 46 .03 .14 .6 5.5 6.3 .3

9

(10)
(12)

4 25 .2

52 .6

.2 .3 2.1 .04 .5 15 .03

Figure *Geom. mean #/lOOml

13

26

References compliance measured.

to published

standards

are cited

to demonstrate which were

"

of the system for

those contaminants . a marsh/pond

Area1 requirements renovate medium stren,gth standards

for

system design

to

domestic cited

sewage to at least

the

water quality by expanding

in Figure site total

13, can be determined dimensions. It appears parameter

contamthat

the Brookhaven test to date that systems.

from data obtained for these natural

N is the limiting words,

most other

In other

inants Nitrogen

appear to be removed satisfactorily is removed. designed

to the extent

Based on the Brookhaven experiments, recharge

system which will

a N

conservatively

reduce total for a raw

from 40 ppm in raw sewage to 5 ppm at the water sewage flow

of

table,

.25 MGD, one should

allow:

Pretreatment Marsh Pond Recharge

Access

area II II II
II

.5 Acres 2.5 N 2.0 nl

.5 1.5 7.0

Total
Since the pivotal

system

component

in the marsh/pond scaled feet to it

system as above,

is a

the marsh, with useful

design

the other

components square

unit

may be the

of marsh required For

per pound of total

N in the raw sewage to be renovated.

- 27 -

the C N removal

cited

in Figure
-

12, this 1300 ft2

works out to be
marsh/

43,560 x 2.5 \ 40 x 8.34 x .25

It is of interest

# Y N/Day.
of marsh/ plant.' Perhaps and

to compare

the performance A.W.T.

pond systems with

that

of a contemporary

a good comparison
250,000

is the Brookhaven 20,000 GPD experimental

on-line systems=, with suspended growth the Blue Plains pilot plant.

GPD proposed

100,000 GPD three-sludge, Figures

for these

(13)

14 through
three

17 are plots
showing

of four

significant

parameters of contaminants

plants,

the percentages

remaining

after

the several
14, it is

process
seen that

steps.
Tot31 process synthesis Nitrogen is about remaining &he same Plains

From Figure

after as that pilot. for

preaeration
following Nitrogen

in the Brookhaven high removal but rate organic

in the Blue

prior

to final

sand filtration sand filter, and the

is better the 250,000 90% for

Blue Plains,

because

of the vegetated managed 85% removal

Brookhaven 20,000 GPD test GPD proposed plant the Blue Plains

is predicted

to remove 88% against

pilot.
for both Brookhaven plants 15. are 96% Figures as effective suspended 16 + 17

BOD5 and COD removals against indicate as Blue 88% for that Plains Blue Plains

as shown in Figure components phosphorous

the marsh/pond in removing both

are about and total

solids.
- 28 -

t -- . . .
. .

.* 1 .+..jl---+: (),,I
-* l

Figure

14.

Total

nitrogen.

- 29 -

6 L_ . -*.. ..c *-_.

._

_..

__

_*

r-i-..

-7

-*

-+

T :

. 4 .1I 1.1.. I .

. . . ,

Figure

15.

BOD5 + COD.

30 -

i . , , .
. . i-

Figure

16.

Total

phosphorus.

31 -

_ _

c _. -

- .A .__ . . . ._ _ -. . .A

. __---_A-.--^ --- -. - -. . . .PkAlN -.---. _ ... - . OF. l>Lt& - - .7rLO~ ; __ .--c.*--- .- .- pjrJL.YS~~~ _ I -:~ .--.. r * _ .,. -. .

_ .- e.- ,. $. ..yqr+= . .I.. . . . -_ 4 : I:

--.-.+ ._-. -..--.-. . @cf b-iQw*.Ay~,g.Al -__.40 -_-+-__: ._... . . 4, ??L: -- b.1 . . . -.. - -. -. .. : . _ ..-, .__. _ _ __ _ _-,

ci& L,:; 3% , .d_ -._ * -- . -: . I -

__-. . .

L- .

.?-. l...i.

(. .:.

&_ -..

_. .... --

-_ _ . .-+ ;

. ---. . .-. - -+--A-..+ .., --. . . -. -

-.* . . . . * . * . . . . .

. ..

Figure

17.

Total -

suspended

solids.

32 -

Despite plant pilot,

this it

favorable

performance that

comparison marsh/ponds central

with

a central

is not suggested

be considered plants or the County, that

package
MGD

as single

systems alternative

to large

treatment

such as the Washington, now-building N.Y.,Southwest marsh/ponds treatment Bergen Point

D.C. Blue Plains 30 MGD plant Rather,

alternatives

300+ MGDplant for it

to

the Suffolk is suggested

so-called

Sewer District. be considered to handle as

plants

in the range of .l to 1 plants

flows.

In those circumstances flow range provides marsh/ponds

where the use of small an economical should provide

small

in that plant, more

in

alternative

to a central still

multiple

an alternative

cost-attractive regions

than other

systems.

Furthermore,

such as eastern

Long Island, provides

possible

where scavenger wastes

an economical with package method of systems.

are a problem, sludge-free

a marsh/pond
not

treatment,

A cost comparison treatment groundwater put on line plants that

of marsh/pond will

systems with

other

small
for

produce an effluent since

The 250,000

suitable yet

recharge in that

is difficult, service.

one has not GPD system

been

proposed aeration and recharge

for Brookhaven Town as an alternative plant complete with

to an extended filter

deep bed denitrification

to groundwater t0 offer a first

through cost

sumps, has been estimated saving of approximately

by others $i50,000

(17)

and lower

- 33 -

annual This

costs preliminary the

since

chemicals estimate

and sludge comparison is

removal

are not

required.

appropriately

conservative For

as befits its

first

commercial the project land, operating is estimated for

application estimates

of a new system. a first cost for a

own purposes, without

M/p system,

a .25 MGD flow, and maintenance at about

to be around expense, without

$1 per gallon-day; the cost of money,

50$/1000

gallons.

- 34 -

1. 2.

Small, Report

Maxwell #17588,

M.,, Upland Feb. 1973.

Recharqe

Project,

BNL Informal Eutro-

Small M. M., Woodwell, phication of Terrestrial #50420, Feb. 1974.

G. M., e&d., and Aquatic

Experimental Ecosvstems,

BNL Report

3.

Small, M., Woodwell, G. M., tit., An Experiment in the Eutrophication of Terrestrial Ecosystems with Sewaqe: Evidence of Nitrification in a Late Successional Forest. BNL Report #18797, 1974. Hennessy, J. J., and Small, M. M., Plans for Application of Raw Sewaqe, presented at the Second National Confer$nce on Water Reuse, AIChE., Chicago, May 1975. Woodwell, George M., et al., Nutrients, Toxins, and Water in Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosvstems Treated with Sewacre 1976. Plant Effluents , BNL Report in press, Ballard, J., Clinton, Eutrophication Interim Internal Report, Nov. Small, Plants, Maxwell M., BNL Report J., and Wetzler, R., Experimental Lowland ComDlex, BNL Report: 1974.

4.

5.

6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Meadow/Marsh Systems as Sewaqe Treatment #20757, Nov. 1975. System, BNL

Small, Maxwell M., Data Report--Marsh/Pond Preliminary Report #50600, Nov. 1976.
Small, M.,

Ridqe

for

Basis of Sewaqe Recharse System Desiqn at Rustic Town of Brookhaven, BNL, Oct. 5, 1976.

N.Y.C.D.E.C., Standards for Waste Treatment and G.L.U.M.R.B. Addenda l-5, August 1971.

Works,

1970

Ronald W. and Pound, Charles E., Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater, Environmental Science and Technology,
June 1976. Metcalf & Eddy, Wastewater

Crites,

12.

Enqineerinq,

McGraw-Hill,

1972.

- 35 -

13. 14.

Gehm, Harry W. and Bregman, Jacob I., Water Resources a_nd Pollution Control, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1976. U.S.E.P.A. Register, Secondarv Treatment Information, Federal Vol. 38, No. 159, Aug. 17,' 1973, p. 22298.

15. 16. 17.

U.S.P.H.S. Drinkinq Water Standards, Pub. 956, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C., May 1962. Suffolk County, New York, D.E.C., Enqineerinq Report Proposed Yaphank Sewer District, Aug. 12, 1974. for

Louis K. McLean, Consulting Engineers, Ridqe Haven Estates Marsh/Pond Svstem Sewaqe Treatment Plant, Patchogue, N.Y., Nov. 1976.

- 36 -