lastID = -294476
Skip to main content Skip to top navigation Skip to site search
Top of page
  • My citations options
    Web Back (from Web)
    Chicago Back (from Chicago)
    MLA Back (from MLA)
Close action menu

You need to login to use this feature.

Please wait a moment…
Please wait while we update your results...
Please wait a moment...
Description: Access Water
Context Menu
Description: Book cover
RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS
  • Browse
  • Compilations
    • Compilations list
  • Subscriptions
Tools

Related contents

Loading related content

Workflow

No linked records yet

X
  • Current: 2022-05-04 16:37:58 Adam Phillips
  • 2022-05-04 16:37:57 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-03-27 00:43:07 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-02-01 03:50:10 Administrator
  • 2020-02-01 03:50:09 Administrator
Description: Access Water
  • Browse
  • Compilations
  • Subscriptions
Log in
0
Accessibility Options

Base text size -

This is a sample piece of body text
Larger
Smaller
  • Shopping basket (0)
  • Accessibility options
  • Return to previous
Description: Book cover
RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS

RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS

RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS

  • New
  • View
  • Details
  • Reader
  • Default
  • Share
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • New
  • View
  • Default view
  • Reader view
  • Data view
  • Details

This page cannot be printed from here

Please use the dedicated print option from the 'view' drop down menu located in the blue ribbon in the top, right section of the publication.

screenshot of print menu option

Description: Book cover
RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS
Abstract
Water treatment plants have historically disposed of water treatment residuals through discharge to rivers or lagooning, either permanently or semi-permanently. Consequently, little thought was given to the residuals treatment processes during plant design. However, as a result of more stringent discharge limitations and decreasing land availability, mechanical dewatering systems are becoming more common, often with the objective of zero discharge plant operation.At the same time that the number of installations generating residuals return streams has grown, an increasing number of states have established guidelines that limit the turbidity in plant return streams to less than 2 NTU to minimize possible recycle of Cryptosporidium to the plant headworks. Meeting these guidelines has forced the design of water treatment plants to include evaluation of return stream quality and possible treatment process options.The number of return streams generated at a water treatment plant complicates the return stream treatment process. These return flows, which include spent filter backwash, thickening decant, and dewatering filtrate, have varying solids concentrations, chemistry, and are often generated on an intermittent basis. In addition, installations that use membrane separation technologies as part of their water treatment trains can be affected by the presence of polymer in return streams. All of these conditions present challenges to combined treatment. As a result, a variety of treatment systems have emerged for residuals return streams. These systems include processes that range from conventional clarification, thickening, and lagoon treatment to ballasted flocculation, high rate clarification, and membrane treatment.This paper investigates the state of the practice of return stream treatment implemented to meet the 2 NTU turbidity guideline. Since the selection of return stream treatment systems is based on a number of factors, including the type and operation of the raw water treatment processes, space availability, and plant staff preferences, different treatment systems are discussed, along with discussion of the selection, design criteria, and available pilot data from a high rate clarification process.
Water treatment plants have historically disposed of water treatment residuals through discharge to rivers or lagooning, either permanently or semi-permanently. Consequently, little thought was given to the residuals treatment processes during plant design. However, as a result of more stringent discharge limitations and decreasing land availability, mechanical dewatering systems are becoming more...
Author(s)
Patricia ScanlanAnthony DeLescinskisA.J. CapuzziRyan Hess
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 19: Water Plant Residuals II
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2007
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20070101)2007:3L.1021;1-
DOI10.2175/193864707787976254
Volume / Issue2007 / 3
Content sourceResiduals and Biosolids Conference
First / last page(s)1021 - 1029
Copyright2007
Word count326

Purchase price $11.50

Get access
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: Book cover
RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS
Pricing
Non-member price: $11.50
Member price:
-294476
Get access
-294476
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.

Details

Description: Book cover
RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS
Abstract
Water treatment plants have historically disposed of water treatment residuals through discharge to rivers or lagooning, either permanently or semi-permanently. Consequently, little thought was given to the residuals treatment processes during plant design. However, as a result of more stringent discharge limitations and decreasing land availability, mechanical dewatering systems are becoming more common, often with the objective of zero discharge plant operation.At the same time that the number of installations generating residuals return streams has grown, an increasing number of states have established guidelines that limit the turbidity in plant return streams to less than 2 NTU to minimize possible recycle of Cryptosporidium to the plant headworks. Meeting these guidelines has forced the design of water treatment plants to include evaluation of return stream quality and possible treatment process options.The number of return streams generated at a water treatment plant complicates the return stream treatment process. These return flows, which include spent filter backwash, thickening decant, and dewatering filtrate, have varying solids concentrations, chemistry, and are often generated on an intermittent basis. In addition, installations that use membrane separation technologies as part of their water treatment trains can be affected by the presence of polymer in return streams. All of these conditions present challenges to combined treatment. As a result, a variety of treatment systems have emerged for residuals return streams. These systems include processes that range from conventional clarification, thickening, and lagoon treatment to ballasted flocculation, high rate clarification, and membrane treatment.This paper investigates the state of the practice of return stream treatment implemented to meet the 2 NTU turbidity guideline. Since the selection of return stream treatment systems is based on a number of factors, including the type and operation of the raw water treatment processes, space availability, and plant staff preferences, different treatment systems are discussed, along with discussion of the selection, design criteria, and available pilot data from a high rate clarification process.
Water treatment plants have historically disposed of water treatment residuals through discharge to rivers or lagooning, either permanently or semi-permanently. Consequently, little thought was given to the residuals treatment processes during plant design. However, as a result of more stringent discharge limitations and decreasing land availability, mechanical dewatering systems are becoming more...
Author(s)
Patricia ScanlanAnthony DeLescinskisA.J. CapuzziRyan Hess
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 19: Water Plant Residuals II
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2007
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20070101)2007:3L.1021;1-
DOI10.2175/193864707787976254
Volume / Issue2007 / 3
Content sourceResiduals and Biosolids Conference
First / last page(s)1021 - 1029
Copyright2007
Word count326

Actions, changes & tasks

Outstanding Actions

Add action for paragraph

Current Changes

Add signficant change

Current Tasks

Add risk task

Connect with us

Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Connect to us on LinkedIn
Subscribe on YouTube
Powered by Librios Ltd
Powered by Librios Ltd
Authors
Terms of Use
Policies
Help
Accessibility
Contact us
Copyright © 2024 by the Water Environment Federation
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: WWTF Digital Boot 180x150
WWTF Digital (180x150)
Created on Jul 02
Websitehttps:/­/­www.wef.org/­wwtf?utm_medium=WWTF&utm_source=AccessWater&utm_campaign=WWTF
180x150
Patricia Scanlan# Anthony DeLescinskis# A.J. Capuzzi# Ryan Hess. RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Web. 4 Jul. 2025. <https://www.accesswater.org?id=-294476CITANCHOR>.
Patricia Scanlan# Anthony DeLescinskis# A.J. Capuzzi# Ryan Hess. RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Accessed July 4, 2025. https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-294476CITANCHOR.
Patricia Scanlan# Anthony DeLescinskis# A.J. Capuzzi# Ryan Hess
RETURN STREAM TREATMENT – NOT AS SIMPLE AS IT LOOKS
Access Water
Water Environment Federation
December 22, 2018
July 4, 2025
https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-294476CITANCHOR