EPA/600/R-10/179

December 2010

Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water by Adsorptive Media

U.S. EPA Demonstration Project at

Lead, South Dakota

Final Performance Evaluation Report

by

Anbo Wang‡

Abraham S.C. Chen§

Lili Wang§ 

‡

Battelle, Columbus, OH 43201-2693

§

ALSA Tech, LLC, Columbus, OH 43219-0693

Contract No. EP-C-05-057

Task Order No. 0019 

for 

Thomas J. Sorg

Task Order Manager

Water Supply and Water Resources Division

National Risk Management Research Laboratory

Cincinnati, OH 45268

National Risk Management Research Laboratory

Office of Research and Development

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Cincinnati, OH 45268
ii

DISCLAIMER

The work reported in this document was funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) under Task Order 0019 of Contract EP-C-05-057 to Battelle. It has been subjected to the Agency’s 

peer and administrative reviews and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Any 

opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not, necessarily, reflect the official 

positions and policies of the EPA. Any mention of products or trade names does not constitute 

recommendation for use by the EPA. 
iii

FOREWORD

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the nation’s 

land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to 

formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability 

of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA’s research program is 

providing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science 

knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect 

our health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks in the future.

The National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) is the Agency’s center for investigation 

of technological and management approaches for preventing and reducing risks from pollution that 

threaten human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory’s research program is on 

methods and their cost-effectiveness for prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated sites, 

sediments and groundwater; prevention and control of indoor air pollution; and restoration of ecosystems. 

NRMRL collaborates with both public and private sector partners to foster technologies that reduce the 

cost of compliance and to anticipate emerging problems. NRMRL’s research provides solutions to environmental problems by developing and promoting technologies that protect and improve the environment; 

advancing scientific and engineering information to support regulatory and policy decisions; and providing the technical support and information transfer to ensure implementation of environmental regulations

and strategies at the national, state, and community levels.

This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory’s strategic long-term research plan. 

It is published and made available by EPA’s Office of Research and Development to assist the user 

community and to link researchers with their clients.

Sally Gutierrez, Director

National Risk Management Research Laboratory
iv

ABSTRACT

This report documents the activities performed and the results obtained from the arsenic removal 

treatment technology demonstration project at Lead, South Dakota. The main objective of the project was 

to evaluate the effectiveness of SolmeteX’s adsorptive media system in removing arsenic to meet the new 

arsenic maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 μg/L. Additionally, this project evaluated (1) the 

reliability of the treatment system, (2) the required system operation and maintenance (O&M) and 

operator skills, and (3) the capital and O&M cost of the technology. The project also characterized the 

water in the distribution system. The types of data collected included system operation, water quality 

(both across the treatment train and in the distribution system), process residuals, and capital and O&M 

cost.

The demonstration study was divided into two study periods, with Study Period I extending from April 4, 

2008, to November 29, 2009, and Study Period II from November 30, 2009, to May 23, 2010. Study 

Period I focused on evaluating the performance of ArsenXnp media. At the end of Study Period I, the lead 

vessel was replaced with LayneRTTMand the flow through the vessels was switched (such that the lag 

vessel containing partially exhausted ArsenXnp media was placed in the lead position and the former lead 

vessel containing virgin LayneRTTM media was placed in the lag position) before Study Period II began. 

ArsenXnp is an engineered hybrid inorganic/organic sorbent manufactured by Purolite. The media

consists of hydrous iron oxide nanoparticles impregnated into 300 to 1,200 μm anion exchange resin 

beads. LayneRTTM is a newer generation of the hybrid media. 

The treatment system consisted of two 42-in × 72-in fiber glass vessels in series configuration, each 

containing approximately 28 ft3

 of adsorptive media. The treatment system was designed for a peak 

flowrate of 75 gal/min (gpm) and an empty bed contact time (EBCT) of approximately 2.8 min/vessel. 

Over the performance evaluation period, the actual average flowrate was at 71.5 gpm in Study Period I 

and 69.2 gpm in Study Period II, corresponding to an EBCT of 2.9 and 3.0 min, respectively. 

In Study Period I, the treatment system operated for a total of 7,154 hr, treating approximately 27,978,780 

gal (or 133,590 bed volumes [BV]) of water. (Unless mentioned otherwise, bed volumes were calculated 

based on 28 ft3 of media in one vessel.) The average daily operating time was 12.0 hr/day and the 

average daily water production was 46,866 gal/day (gpd). In Study Period II, the treatment system 

operated for a total of 1,787 hr, treating approximately 7,231,940 gal (or 34,530 BV) of water. The 

average daily operating time was 10.5 hr/day and the average daily water production was 42,541 gpd. 

Due to leaks from the distribution system, the amount of daily water production in both study periods was

significantly higher than the design value of 9,000 gpd. During the 25-month demonstration study, the 

District located and fixed several leaks from the distribution system. 

Total arsenic concentrations in source water ranged from 16.9 to 26.3 μg/L, and averaged 21.6 μg/L. 

Soluble As(V) was the predominating species with concentrations ranging from 18.6 to 23.1 μg/L and 

averaging 20.8 μg/L. In Study Period I, arsenic breakthrough at 10 μg/L following the lead vessel 

occurred after treating 14,725,250 gal (or 70,310 BV) of water, which was about 8% higher than the 

65,000 BV working capacity projected by the vendor. By the end of Study Period I, total arsenic 

concentrations in the system effluent were reduced to 5.8 μg/L. At this point, the system had treated

approximately 27,978,780 gal of water (i.e., 133,590 BV – based on 28 ft3 of media in one vessel, or 

66,795 BV – based on 56 ft3 of media in both vessels). Study Period II ended when the system effluent 

contained only 0.5 μg/L of total arsenic.
v

Comparison of the distribution system sampling results before and after system startup showed a 

significant decrease in arsenic concentration (from an average of 22.5 to 1.1 μg/L). The average lead 

concentrations reduced from 2.0 μg/L in baseline samples to 0.8 μg/L; the average copper concentration 

reduced from 164 μg/L to 46.2 μg/L. 

The capital investment cost of $87,892 included $60,678 for equipment, $14,214 for site engineering, and 

$13,000 for installation. Using the system’s rated capacity of 75 gpm (or 108,000 gpd), the capital cost 

was $1,172/gpm (or $0.81/gpd) of design capacity. The unit capital cost would be $0.21/1,000 gal if the 

75 gpm system operated around the clock. Based on an average daily operating time of 12.0 hr/day and 

an average system flowrate of 71.5 gpm, the unit capital cost increased to $0.44/1,000 gal at this reduced 

rate of use. 

The O&M cost included only the cost for media replacement and disposal, electricity consumption, and 

labor. The media replacement cost represented the majority of the O&M cost. The unit O&M cost is 

reported in graphical form as a function of projected media run length.
vi

CONTENTS

DISCLAIMER ..............................................................................................................................................ii

FOREWORD...............................................................................................................................................iii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. iv

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................vii

FIGURES....................................................................................................................................................vii

TABLES ....................................................................................................................................................viii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................ix

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................................... xi

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Treatment Technologies for Arsenic Removal ............................................................................. 2

1.3 Project Objectives......................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 6

3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS........................................................................................................... 7

3.1 General Project Approach............................................................................................................. 7

3.2 System O&M and Cost Data Collection ....................................................................................... 8

3.3 Sample Collection Procedures and Schedules .............................................................................. 8

3.3.1 Source Water Sample Collection................................................................................... 10

3.3.2 Treatment Plant Water Sample Collection. ................................................................... 10

3.3.3 Backwash Wastewater/Solids and Spent Media Samples. ............................................ 10

3.3.4 Distribution System Water Sample Collection.............................................................. 10

3.4 Sampling Logistics...................................................................................................................... 11

3.4.1 Preparation of Arsenic Speciation Kits.......................................................................... 11

3.4.2 Preparation of Sampling Coolers................................................................................... 11

3.4.3 Sample Shipping and Handling. .................................................................................... 11

3.5 Analytical Procedures................................................................................................................. 11

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................... 13

4.1 Facility Description and Pre-Existing Treatment System Infrastructure .................................... 13

4.1.1 Source Water Quality. ................................................................................................... 15

4.1.2 Distribution System. ...................................................................................................... 17

4.2 Treatment Process Description ................................................................................................... 17

4.3 System Installation...................................................................................................................... 26

4.3.1 Permitting. ..................................................................................................................... 26

4.3.2 Building Preparation...................................................................................................... 26

4.3.3 System Installation, Shakedown, and Startup................................................................ 26

4.4 System Operation........................................................................................................................ 29

4.4.1 Operational Parameters.................................................................................................. 29

4.4.2 Residual Management. .................................................................................................. 34

4.4.3 Media Rebedding........................................................................................................... 34

4.4.4 System/Operation Reliability and Simplicity. ............................................................... 34

4.5 System Performance ................................................................................................................... 35

4.5.1 Treatment Plant Sampling. ............................................................................................ 35

4.5.2 Spent Media Sampling................................................................................................... 40

4.5.3 Backwash Water Sampling............................................................................................ 42

4.5.4 Distribution System Water Sampling. ........................................................................... 42
vii

4.6 System Cost ................................................................................................................................ 44

4.6.1 Capital Cost ................................................................................................................... 44

4.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost................................................................................... 45

5.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 48

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: OPERATIONAL DATA

APPENDIX B: ANALYTICAL DATA

FIGURES

Figure 4-1. Wellhead of Two Johns II Well at Terry Trojan Water District, SD ................................... 13

Figure 4-2. Booster Station (left) and Booster Pump (right) at Terry Trojan Water District ................. 14

Figure 4-3. Concrete Water Storage Reservoir and Partition (left) and Level Sensors (right) in 

Reservoir.............................................................................................................................. 14

Figure 4-4. Interior of Partition Housing Chemical Addition System.................................................... 15

Figure 4-5. 15-gal Chemical Day Tank, Chlorine Injection Point, and Raw Water Totalizer at 

Inlet to Storage reservoir...................................................................................................... 16

Figure 4-6. Schematic of SolmeteX’s ArsenXnp Arsenic Removal System for Lead, SD ...................... 20

Figure 4-7. Process Flow Diagram and Sampling Locations for Lead, SD............................................ 21

Figure 4-8. SolmeteX Arsenic Removal System .................................................................................... 22

Figure 4-9. Pre-Filter Installed Upstream of SolmeteX System ............................................................. 23

Figure 4-10. Chlorine Addition System.................................................................................................... 24

Figure 4-11. System Flow Path - Vessel A in Lead Position and Vessel B in Lag Position .................... 24

Figure 4-12. System Flow Path - Vessel A Taken Offline During Proposed Offsite Media 

Regeneration ........................................................................................................................ 25

Figure 4-13. System Flow Path - Vessel B in Lead Position and Rebedded/Regenerated 

Vessel A in Lag Position...................................................................................................... 25

Figure 4-14. Treatment Plant Building at Terry Trojan Water District, SD............................................. 27

Figure 4-15. Lead Treatment System (Under Tarp on Left) and Offloading (Right)............................... 27

Figure 4-16. Media Loading ..................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 4-17. Treatment System after Modification .................................................................................. 29

Figure 4-18. Operator Training at Lead, SD............................................................................................. 30

Figure 4-19. Treatment System Daily Water Production ......................................................................... 31

Figure 4-20. System Instantaneous and Calculated Flowrates ................................................................. 33

Figure 4-21. Operational Pressure Readings ............................................................................................ 33

Figure 4-22. Total Arsenic Breakthrough Curves in Study Period I ........................................................ 39

Figure 4-23. Total Arsenic Breakthrough Curves in Study Period II....................................................... 39

Figure 4-24. Arsenic Speciation Results in Study Period I....................................................................... 41

Figure 4-25. Arsenic Concentrations Measured in Distribution System Water........................................ 44

Figure 4-26. Media Replacement and Operation and Maintenance Cost ................................................. 47
viii

TABLES 

Table 1-1. Summary of Rounds 1, 2, and 2a Arsenic Removal Demonstration Locations, 

Technologies, and Source Water Quality............................................................................... 3

Table 1-2. Number of Demonstration Sites Under Each Arsenic Removal Technology ........................ 5

Table 3-1. Predemonstration Study Activities and Completion Dates.................................................... 7

Table 3-2. Evaluation Objectives and Supporting Data Collection Activities........................................ 8

Table 3-3. Sampling Schedule and Analytes........................................................................................... 9

Table 4-1. Raw and Treated Water Quality Data for Two Johns II Well in Lead, SD.......................... 18

Table 4-2. Properties of ArsenXnp Media .............................................................................................. 19

Table 4-3. Properties of LayneRTTM Media .......................................................................................... 19

Table 4-4. Design Features of the SolmeteX’s Arsenic Adsorption System......................................... 20

Table 4-5. Summary of SolmeteX System Operation ........................................................................... 30

Table 4-6. Comparison of Average Daily Water Demand and Average Daily Water Production........ 32

Table 4-7. Summary of Analytical Results for Arsenic, Iron, and Manganese..................................... 36

Table 4-8. Summary of Water Quality Parameters ............................................................................... 37

Table 4-9. Spent Media Total Metal Analysis....................................................................................... 42

Table 4-10. Distribution System Sampling Results................................................................................. 43

Table 4-11. Capital Investment Cost for the Lead SD System................................................................ 45

Table 4-12. Operation and Maintenance Cost for the Lead System........................................................ 46
ix

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Δp differential pressure

AAL American Analytical Laboratories

AM adsorptive media

As arsenic

ATS Aquatic Treatment Systems

bgs below ground surface

BV bed volume

Ca calcium

C/F coagulation/filtration process

Cl chlorine

CRF capital recovery factor

Cu copper

CWS community water system

DO dissolved oxygen

EBCT empty bed contact time

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

F fluorine

Fe iron 

gpd gallons per day

gpm gallons per minute

HDPE high-density polyethylene 

HIX hybrid ion exchanger

hp horse power

ICP-MS inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry

ID identification

IR iron removal

IX ion exchange

LCR Lead and Copper Rule

MCL maximum contaminant level

MDL method detection limit

MEI Magnesium Elektron, Inc.

Mg magnesium

Mn manganese

mV millivolts

Na sodium

NA not analyzed

NRMRL National Risk Management Research Laboratory
x

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS (Continued)

NSF NSF International 

O&M operation and maintenance

ORD Office of Research and Development

ORP oxidation-reduction potential

PO4 phosphate

POU point of use

psi pounds per square inch

PVC polyvinyl chloride

QA quality assurance

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan

QA/QC quality assurance/quality control

RFP request for proposal

RO reverse osmosis

RPD relative percent difference

SD DENR South Dakota Department of Environmental and Natural Resources

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SiO2 silica

SO4

2- sulfate

STS Severn Trent Services

TCLP toxicity characteristic leaching procedure

TDH total dynamic head

TDS total dissolved solids

TOC total organic carbon

VOC volatile organic compound
xi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to extend their sincere appreciation to Mr. Raymond Millard of the Terry Trojan Water 

District in Lead, South Dakota. Mr. Millard monitored the treatment system and collected samples from 

the treatment and distribution systems on a regular schedule throughout the study. This performance 

evaluation would not have been possible without his support and dedication.
1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) mandates that the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

identify and regulate drinking water contaminants that may have adverse human health effects and that 

are known or anticipated to occur in public water supply systems. In 1975, under the SDWA, EPA 

established a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for arsenic (As) at 0.05 mg/L. Amended in 1996, the 

SDWA required that EPA develop an arsenic research strategy and publish a proposal to revise the 

arsenic MCL by January 2000. On January 18, 2001, EPA finalized the arsenic MCL at 0.01 mg/L (EPA, 

2001). In order to clarify the implementation of the original rule, EPA revised the rule text on March 25, 

2003, to express the MCL as 0.010 mg/L (10 μg/L) (EPA, 2003). The final rule required all community 

and non-transient, non-community water systems to comply with the new standard by January 23, 2006. 

In October 2001, EPA announced an initiative for additional research and development of cost-effective 

technologies to help small community water systems (<10,000 customers) meet the new arsenic standard, 

and to provide technical assistance to operators of small systems to reduce compliance costs. As part of 

this Arsenic Rule Implementation Research Program, EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) 

proposed a project to conduct a series of full-scale, on-site demonstrations of arsenic removal 

technologies, process modifications, and engineering approaches applicable to small systems. Shortly 

thereafter, an announcement was published in the Federal Register requesting water utilities interested in 

participating in Round 1 of this EPA-sponsored demonstration program to provide information on their 

water systems. In June 2002, EPA selected 17 out of 115 sites to host the demonstration studies. 

In September 2002, EPA solicited proposals from engineering firms and vendors for cost-effective arsenic 

removal treatment technologies for the 17 host sites. EPA received 70 technical proposals for the 17 host 

sites, with each site receiving from one to six proposals. In April 2003, an independent technical panel 

reviewed the proposals and provided its recommendations to EPA on the technologies that it determined 

were acceptable for the demonstration at each site. Because of funding limitations and other technical 

reasons, only 12 of the 17 sites were selected for the demonstration project. Using the information 

provided by the review panel, EPA, in cooperation with the host sites and the drinking water programs of 

the respective states, selected one technical proposal for each site.

In 2003, EPA initiated Round 2 arsenic technology demonstration projects that were partially funded with 

Congressional add-on funding to the EPA budget. In June 2003, EPA selected 32 potential demonstration 

sites. In September 2003, EPA again solicited proposals from engineering firms and vendors for arsenic 

removal technologies. EPA received 148 technical proposals for the 32 host sites, with each site 

receiving from two to eight proposals. In April 2004, another technical panel was convened by EPA to 

review the proposals and provide recommendations to EPA with the number of proposals per site ranging 

from none (for two sites) to a maximum of four. The final selection of the treatment technology at the 

sites that received at least one proposal was made, again, through a joint effort by EPA, the state 

regulators, and the host site. Since then, four sites have withdrawn from the demonstration program, 

reducing the number of sites to 28.

With funding from Congress, EPA selected 10 more sites for demonstration under Round 2a. Somewhat 

different from the Round 1 and Round 2 selection process, Battelle, under EPA’s guidance, issued a 

Request for Proposal (RFP) on February 14, 2007, to solicit technology proposals from vendors and 

engineering firms. Upon closing of the RFP on April 13, 2007, Battelle received from 14 vendors a total 

of 44 proposals, which were subsequently reviewed by a three-expert technical review panel convened at 

EPA on May 2 and 3, 2007. Copies of the proposals and recommendations of the review panel were later 
2

provided to and discussed with representatives of the 10 host sites and state regulators in a technology 

selection meeting held at each host site during April through August 2007. The final selections of the 

treatment technology were made, again, through a joint effort by EPA, the respective state regulators, and 

the host sites. A 75-gal/min (gpm) SolmeteX arsenic removal system was selected for demonstration at 

the Terry Trojan Water District in Lead, South Dakota. The system used a hybrid sorbent, ArsenXnp, 

manufactured by Purolite and a newer generation of the hybrid sorbent, LayneRTTM, manufactured by 

SolmeteX.

As of November 2010, 49 of the 50 systems were operational and the performance evaluations of 48

systems were completed.

1.2 Treatment Technologies for Arsenic Removal

Technologies selected for Rounds 1, 2, and 2a demonstration included adsorptive media (AM), iron 

removal (IR), coagulation/filtration (C/F), ion exchange (IX), reverse osmosis (RO), point-of-use (POU) 

RO, and system/process modification. Table 1-1 summarizes the locations, technologies, vendors, system 

flowrates, and key source water quality parameters (including As, Fe, and pH). Table 1-2 presents the 

number of sites for each technology. AM technology was demonstrated at 30 sites, including four with 

IR pretreatment. IR technology was demonstrated at 12 sites, including four with supplemental iron 

addition. C/F, IX, and RO technologies were demonstrated at three, two, and one sites, respectively. The 

Sunset Ranch Development site that demonstrated POU RO technology had nine under-the-sink RO 

units. The Oregon Institute of Technology site classified under AM had three AM systems and eight

POU AM units. The Lidgerwood site encompassed only system/process modifications. An overview of 

the technology selection and system design for the 12 Round 1 demonstration sites and the associated 

capital costs is provided in two EPA reports (Wang et al., 2004; Chen et al., 2004), which are posted on 

the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ORD/NRMRL/arsenic/resource.htm. 

1.3 Project Objectives

The objective of the arsenic demonstration program is to conduct full-scale arsenic removal technology 

demonstration studies on the removal of arsenic from drinking water supplies. The specific objectives are 

to:

• Evaluate the performance of the arsenic removal technologies for use on small systems 

• Determine the required system operation and maintenance (O&M) and operator skill levels 

• Characterize process residuals produced by the technologies

• Determine the capital and O&M cost of the technologies.

This report summarizes the performance of the SolmeteX’s arsenic treatment system at the Terry Trojan 

Water District in Lead, South Dakota, from April 4, 2008, through May 23, 2010. The types of data 

collected included system operation, water quality (both across the treatment train and in the distribution 

system), residuals characterization, and capital and O&M cost. 
3

Table 1-1. Summary of Rounds 1, 2, and 2a Arsenic Removal Demonstration 

Locations, Technologies, and Source Water Quality

Demonstration 

Location Site Name Technology (Media) Vendor

Design

Flowrate 

(gpm)

Source Water Quality

As 

(μg/L)

Fe

(μg/L)

pH

(S.U.)

Northeast/Ohio

Carmel, ME Carmel Elementary School RO

Norlen’s 

Water

1,200 

gpd 21 <25 7.9

Wales, ME Springbrook Mobile Home Park AM (A/I Complex) ATS 14 38(a) <25 8.6

Bow, NH White Rock Water Company AM (G2) ADI 70(b) 39 <25 7.7

Goffstown, NH Orchard Highlands Subdivision AM (E33) AdEdge 10 33 <25 6.9

Rollinsford, NH

Rollinsford Water and Sewer 

District AM (E33) AdEdge 100 36(a) 46 8.2

Dummerston, VT Charette Mobile Home Park AM (A/I Complex) ATS 22 30 <25 7.9

Houghton, NY(c) Town of Caneadea IR (Macrolite) Kinetico 550 27(a) 1,806(d) 7.6 

Woodstock, CT Woodstock Middle School AM (Adsorbsia) Siemens 17 21 <25 7.7

Pomfret, CT Seely-Brown Village AM (ArsenXnp) SolmeteX 15 25 <25 7.3

Felton, DE Town of Felton C/F (Macrolite) Kinetico 375 30(a) 48 8.2

Stevensville, MD Queen Anne’s County AM (E33) STS 300 19(a) 270(d) 7.3

Conneaut Lake, PA Conneaut Lake Park IR (Greensand Plus) with ID AdEdge 250 28(a) 157(d) 8.0

Newark, OH Buckeye Lake Head Start Building AM (ARM 200) Kinetico 10 15(a) 1,312(d) 7.6

Springfield, OH Chateau Estates Mobile Home Park IR & AM (E33) AdEdge 250(e) 25(a) 1,615(d) 7.3 

Great Lakes/Interior Plains

Brown City, MI City of Brown City AM (E33) STS 640 14(a) 127(d) 7.3

Pentwater, MI Village of Pentwater IR (Macrolite) with ID Kinetico 400 13(a) 466(d) 6.9

Sandusky, MI City of Sandusky IR (Aeralater) Siemens 340(e) 16(a) 1,387(d) 6.9

Delavan, WI Vintage on the Ponds IR (Macrolite) Kinetico 40 20(a) 1,499(d) 7.5

Goshen, IN Clinton Christian School IR & AM (E33) AdEdge 25 29(a) 810(d) 7.4 

Fountain City, IN Northeastern Elementary School IR (G2) US Water 60 27(a) 1,547(d) 7.5

Waynesville, IL Village of Waynesville IR (Greensand Plus) Peerless 96 32(a) 2,543(d) 7.1

Geneseo Hills, IL Geneseo Hills Subdivision AM (E33) AdEdge 200 25(a) 248(d) 7.4

Greenville, WI Town of Greenville IR (Macrolite) Kinetico 375 17(a) 7,827(d) 7.3

Climax, MN City of Climax IR (Macrolite) with ID Kinetico 140 39(a) 546(d) 7.4

Sabin, MN City of Sabin IR (Macrolite) Kinetico 250 34(a) 1,470(d) 7.3

Sauk Centre, MN Big Sauk Lake Mobile Home Park IR (Macrolite) Kinetico 20 25(a) 3,078(d) 7.1 

Stewart, MN City of Stewart IR &AM (E33) AdEdge 250 42(a) 1,344(d) 7.7

Lidgerwood, ND City of Lidgerwood Process Modification Kinetico 250 146(a) 1,325(d) 7.2

Lead, SD Terry Trojan Water District AM (ArsenXnp) SolmeteX 75 24 <25 7.3
Table 1-1. Summary of Rounds 1, 2, and 2a Arsenic Removal Demonstration 

Locations, Technologies, and Source Water Quality (Continued)

4

Demonstration 

Location Site Name Technology (Media) Vendor

Design

Flowrate 

(gpm)

Source Water Quality

As 

(μg/L)

Fe

(μg/L)

pH

(S.U.)

Midwest/Southwest

Willard, UT Hot Springs Mobile Home Park IR & AM (Adsorbsia) Filter Tech 30 15.4(a) 332(d) 7.5

Arnaudville, LA United Water Systems IR (Macrolite) Kinetico 770(e) 35(a) 2,068(d) 7.0

Alvin, TX

Oak Manor Municipal Utility 

District AM (E33) STS 150 19(a) 95 7.8

Bruni, TX

Webb Consolidated Independent 

School District AM (E33) AdEdge 40 56(a) <25 8.0 

Wellman, TX City of Wellman AM (E33) AdEdge 100 45 <25 7.7

Anthony, NM

Desert Sands Mutual Domestic 

Water Consumers Association AM (E33) STS 320 23(a) 39 7.7 

Nambe Pueblo, NM Nambe Pueblo Tribe AM (E33) AdEdge 145 33 <25 8.5

Taos, NM Town of Taos AM (E33) STS 450 14 59 9.5

Rimrock, AZ Arizona Water Company AM (E33) AdEdge 90(b) 50 170 7.2

Tohono O'odham 

Nation, AZ Tohono O’odham Utility Authority AM (E33) AdEdge 50 32 <25 8.2

Valley Vista, AZ Arizona Water Company AM (AAFS50/ARM 200) Kinetico 37 41 <25 7.8

Far West

Three Forks, MT City of Three Forks C/F (Macrolite) Kinetico 250 64 <25 7.5

Fruitland, ID City of Fruitland IX (A300E) Kinetico 250 44 <25 7.4 

Homedale, ID Sunset Ranch Development POU RO(f) Kinetico 75 gpd 52 134 7.5

Okanogan, WA City of Okanogan C/F (Electromedia-I) Filtronics 750 18 69(d) 8.0

Klamath Falls, OR Oregon Institute of Technology

POE AM (Adsorbsia/

ARM 200/ArsenXnp) 

and POU AM (ARM 200)(g) Kinetico 60/60/30 33 <25 7.9

Vale, OR City of Vale IX (Arsenex II) Kinetico 525 17 <25 7.5

Reno, NV

South Truckee Meadows General 

Improvement District AM (GFH) Siemens 350 39 <25 7.4

Susanville, CA Richmond School District AM (A/I Complex) ATS 12 37(a) 125 7.5

Lake Isabella, CA Upper Bodfish Well CH2-A AM (HIX) VEETech 50 35 125 7.5 

Tehachapi, CA

Golden Hills Community Service 

District AM (Isolux) MEI 150 15 <25 6.9

AM = adsorptive media process; C/F = coagulation/filtration; HIX = hybrid ion exchanger; IR = iron removal; IR with ID = iron removal with iron addition; IX = ion 

exchange process; RO = reverse osmosis

ATS = Aquatic Treatment Systems; MEI = Magnesium Elektron, Inc.; STS = Severn Trent Services

(a) Arsenic existing mostly as As(III).

(b) Design flowrate reduced by 50% due to system reconfiguration from parallel to series operation. 

(c) Withdrew from program in 2007. Selected originally to replace Village of Lyman, NE site, which withdrew from program in June 2006. 

(d) Iron existing mostly as Fe(II).

(e) Facilities upgraded systems in Springfield, OH from 150 to 250 gpm, Sandusky, MI from 210 to 340 gpm, and Arnaudville, LA from 385 to 770 gpm. 

(f) Including nine residential units.

(g) Including eight under-the-sink units.
5 

Table 1-2. Number of Demonstration Sites Under Each Arsenic 

Removal Technology

Technologies

Number 

of Sites

Adsorptive Media(a) 26

Adsorptive Media with Iron Removal Pretreatment 4

Iron Removal (Oxidation/Filtration) 8

Iron Removal with Supplemental Iron Addition 4

Coagulation/Filtration 3

Ion Exchange 2

Reverse Osmosis 1

Point-of-use Reverse Osmosis(b) 1

System/Process Modifications 1

(a) Oregon Institute of Technology site at Klamath Falls, OR, 

had three AM systems and eight POU AM units.

(b) Including nine under-the-sink RO units. 
6

2.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

SolmeteX’s arsenic treatment system at Lead, South Dakota began operation on April 4, 2008. Based on 

the information collected from April 4, 2008, through May 23, 2010, the following summary and 

conclusion statements are made: 

Performance of the arsenic removal technology for use on small systems: 

• ArsenXnp media was effective in removing arsenic. Arsenic breakthrough at 10 μg/L from 

the lead vessel occurred after treating 14,725,250 gal (or 70,310 bed volumes [BV]) of water

(based on 28 ft3 of media in one vessel). This media run length was about 8% higher than the 

working capacity projected by the vendor.

The media in the lead vessel was changed out when the arsenic concentration from the lag 

vessel was 5.8 μg/L. The system could have run longer and likely would have reached the 

10 μg/L level after the two bed system (56 ft3

) had treated more than 70,000 BV of water. 

• The operation of the treatment system significantly lowered arsenic concentrations in the 

distribution system water to below 1.1 μg/L (on average). The treatment system also reduced 

lead and copper concentrations in distribution system water. 

Required system O&M and operator skill levels:

• Under normal operating conditions, the skill requirements to operate the system were 

minimal, with a typical daily demand on the operator of about 60 min. Operation of 

the system did not appear to require additional skills beyond those necessary to 

operate the existing water supply equipment. 

Process residuals produced by the technology: 

• No backwash residuals were produced because the hybrid media did not need backwash. 

Cost-effectiveness of the technology:

• Based on the system’s rated capacity of 75 gpm (or 108,000 gal/day [gpd]), the capital cost 

was $1,172/gpm (or $0.81/gpd) of design capacity. 

• O&M cost included only the cost for media replacement and disposal, electricity, and 

labor. There was no chemical consumption cost.
7

3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 General Project Approach

Following the predemonstration activities summarized in Table 3-1, the performance evaluation study 

of the SolmeteX AM system began on April 4, 2008, and ended on May 23, 2010. Table 3-2 summarizes 

the types of data collected and/or considered as part of the technology evaluation study. Overall 

performance of the system was evaluated based on its ability to consistently remove arsenic to below the 

arsenic MCL of 10 μg/L through the collection of water samples across the treatment plant, as described 

in a Performance Evaluation Study Plan (Battelle, 2007). The reliability of the system was evaluated by 

tracking the unscheduled system downtime and frequency and extents of repair. The plant operator 

recorded unscheduled downtime and repair information on a Repair and Maintenance Log Sheet. 

Table 3-1. Predemonstration Study Activities 

and Completion Dates

Activities Date

Introductory Meeting Held 12/08/06

Project Planning Meeting Held 07/17/07

Draft Letter of Understanding Issued 07/24/07

Final Letter of Understanding Issued 07/27/07

Request for Quotation Issued to Vendor 07/30/07

Vendor Quotation Received by Battelle 08/10/07

Purchase Order Completed and Signed 08/30/07

Engineering Package Submitted to SD DENR 09/13/07

System Permit Granted by SD DENR 09/14/07

One-Time Ground Discharge Permit Granted by SD DENR 09/17/07

Equipment Shipped 10/30/07

Final Study Plan Issued 10/30/07

System Installation Completed/Air Bubbles Observed in System 11/02/07

System Operation Suspended due to Air Bubbles 11/19/07

Modified Engineering Package Submitted 03/12/07

System Shakedown Completed/Air Bubbles Issue Resolved 03/31/08

Modified Engineering Package Approved by SD DENR 04/01/08

Performance Evaluation Begun 04/04/08

SD DENR = South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources 

The required system O&M and operator skill levels were evaluated through quantitative data and 

qualitative considerations, including the need for pre- and/or post-treatment, level of system automation, 

extent of preventive maintenance activities, frequency of chemical and/or media handling and inventory, 

and general knowledge needed for relevant chemical processes and related health and safety practices. 

The staffing requirements for system operation were recorded on an Operator Labor Hour Log Sheet. 

The cost of the system was evaluated based on the capital cost per gpm (or gpd) of design capacity and 

the O&M cost per 1,000 gal of water treated. This required tracking the capital cost for equipment, site 

engineering, and installation, as well as the O&M cost for media replacement and disposal, chemical 

consumption, electrical power usage, and labor. 
8

Table 3-2. Evaluation Objectives and Supporting Data Collection Activities

Evaluation Objectives Data Collection

Performance -Ability to consistently meet 10 μg/L of arsenic MCL in treated water

Reliability -Unscheduled system downtime 

-Frequency and extent of repairs, including a description of problems, 

materials and supplies needed, and associated labor and cost

System O&M and 

Operator Skill 

Requirements

-Pre- and post-treatment requirements

-Level of automation for system operation and data collection 

-Staffing requirements including number of operators and laborers

-Task analysis of preventative maintenance including number, frequency, 

and complexity of tasks

-Chemical handling and inventory requirements 

-General knowledge needed of relevant chemical processes and health and 

safety practices

Residual Management -Quantity and characteristics of aqueous and solid residuals generated by 

system process

System Cost -Capital cost for equipment, engineering, and installation

-O&M cost for media replacement, electricity usage, and labor

3.2 System O&M and Cost Data Collection

The plant operator performed daily, weekly, and monthly system O&M and data collection according to 

instructions provided by the vendor and Battelle. The plant operator recorded system operational data

such as pressure, flowrate, system throughput, and hour meter readings on a Daily System Operation Log 

Sheet, and conducted visual inspections to ensure normal system operations. If any problem occurred, the 

plant operator contacted the Battelle Study Lead, who determined if the vendor should be contacted for 

troubleshooting. The plant operator recorded all relevant information, including problems encountered, 

course of actions taken, materials and supplies used, and associated cost and labor incurred, on the Repair 

and Maintenance Log Sheet.

 

The capital cost for the arsenic-removal system consisted of the cost for equipment, site engineering, and 

system installation. The O&M cost consisted of the expenditure for media replacement and disposal, 

incremental electricity consumption, and labor. Incremental electricity consumption was tracked through 

electric bills before and after system startup. Labor hours for routine system O&M, system 

troubleshooting and repairs, and demonstration-related work, were tracked using an Operator Labor Hour 

Log Sheet. Routine O&M included activities such as completing field logs, performing system 

inspections, and others as recommended by the vendor. Demonstration-related work, including activities 

such as performing field measurements, collecting and shipping samples, and communicating with the 

Battelle Study Lead and vendor, was recorded but not used for the cost analysis.

No chemicals were required by the arsenic treatment system. The existing chlorine addition system was 

moved from the shed next to the storage tank to the treatment building for post-chlorination. The cost for 

the chlorine addition was not included in O&M cost.

3.3 Sample Collection Procedures and Schedules

To evaluate system performance, samples were collected from the wellhead, across the treatment plant, 

and from the distribution system. Table 3-3 provides the sampling schedule and analytes measured 

during each sampling event. Specific sampling requirements for analytical methods, sample volumes, 
9

Table 3-3. Sampling Schedule and Analytes

Sample 

Type

Sampling

Locations(a)

No. of 

Sampling

Locations Frequency Analytes

Sampling

Date

Source 

Water

IN 1 Once during 

initial site 

visit

Onsite: pH, temperature, 

and ORP

Offsite: 

As (total and soluble), 

As(III), As(V),

Fe (total and soluble),

Mn (total and soluble),

Sb (total and soluble),

Al, V, Na, Ca, Mg, Cl, F, 

NO3, NO2, NH3, SO4, 

SiO2, P (total), TOC, 

TDS, turbidity, and 

alkalinity

12/08/06

Treatment 

Plant Water

IN, TA, TB 3 Once in 

each 8-week 

cycle(b)

(Speciation 

Sampling)

Onsite: pH, temperature, 

DO, ORP, and Cl2 (total 

and free)(d) 

Offsite: 

As(total and soluble), 

As(III), As(V),

Fe (total and soluble), 

Mn (total and soluble), 

Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4, 

SiO2, P (total), turbidity, 

and alkalinity

See Appendix B

Three times 

in each 8-

week cycle(c) 

(Regular 

Sampling)

Onsite: pH, temperature, 

DO, ORP, and Cl2 (total 

and free)(d)

Offsite: As (total), Fe 

(total), Mn (total), SiO2, 

P (total), turbidity, and 

alkalinity

See Appendix B

Distribution 

Water

Three LCR 

locations 

3 Monthly(e) pH, alkalinity, and total 

As, Fe, Mn, Pb, and Cu

Baseline sampling:

See Table 4-10

Monthly sampling:

See Table 4-10

Spent 

Media

Top, middle and 

bottom of Vessel 

A 

3 Once As, Fe, Mn, Ba, Ca, Mg, 

P, and Si

11/30/2009

(a) Abbreviations in parentheses corresponding to sample locations shown in Figure 4-7: IN = at wellhead; TA = 

after Vessel A; and TB = after Vessel B. 

(b) Actual sampling frequency varied from once every 4 to 14 weeks. Speciation sampling discontinued after July 

21, 2009. 

(c) Actual sampling frequency varied from once every 1 to 3 weeks; analytes reduced after July 21, 2009, to total 

arsenic, pH, temperature, DO, ORP, and chlorine. 

(d) Measured only at TB.

(e) Monthly distribution water sampling discontinued after July 7, 2009. 

DO = dissolved oxygen; LCR = Lead and Copper Rule; ORP = oxidation-reduction potential; TDS = total 

dissolved solids; TOC = total organic carbon 
10

containers, preservation, and holding times are presented in Table 4-1 of the EPA-endorsed Quality 

Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (Battelle, 2003). 

3.3.1 Source Water Sample Collection. During the initial visit to the site on December 8, 2006, 

one set of source water samples was collected by Battelle for detailed water quality analyses. Source 

water also was speciated onsite using a speciation kit (see Section 3.4.1). The sample tap was flushed for 

several minutes before sampling; special care was taken to avoid agitation, which might cause unwanted 

oxidation. Analytes for the source water sample are listed in Table 3-3.

3.3.2 Treatment Plant Water Sample Collection. During the system performance evaluation 

study, the plant operator collected water samples across the treatment train for onsite and offsite analyses. 

The Battelle Study Plan called for biweekly sampling. Once in each 8-week cycle, treatment plant 

samples were collected at the wellhead (IN), after Vessel A (TA), and after Vessel B (TB). These 

samples were speciated and analyzed for the analytes listed under “Speciation Sampling” in Table 3-3. 

Three additional biweekly samples were collected at the same three locations in the same 8-week cycle 

and analyzed for the analytes listed under “Regular Sampling” in Table 3-3. The actual sampling 

frequency varied from 4 to 14 weeks for speciation sampling and 1 to 3 weeks for regular sampling. 

Because only trace amounts of As(III) existed in source water, speciation sampling was discontinued on 

July 21, 2009, 15 month into the demonstration study. Meanwhile, analytes for the regular sampling were 

reduced to total arsenic plus five water quality measurements, i.e., pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen 

(DO), oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), and total and free chlorine performed onsite by the operator. 

3.3.3 Backwash Wastewater/Solids and Spent Media Samples. Because the system was not 

backwashed during the entire study period, no backwash residuals were produced. 

Three spent media samples were collected from the top, middle, and bottom of the lead vessel (Vessel A) 

during the media changeout on November 30, 2009. Spent media were removed from the vessel using a 

shop vac. Representative samples were collected at each level and stored in an unpreserved, 1-gal widemouth high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bottle. One aliquot of each sample was air-dried and aciddigested for the analytes listed in Table 3-3. 

3.3.4 Distribution System Water Sample Collection. Samples were collected from the 

distribution system to determine the impact of the arsenic treatment system on the water chemistry in the 

distribution system, specifically arsenic, lead, and copper levels. Prior to system startup, three sets of 

baseline samples were collected at three locations on October 31, 2007, December 19, 2007, and February 

21, 2008. Following system startup, distribution system water sampling continued at the same three 

locations on a monthly basis. The monthly distribution water sampling discontinued after July 7, 2009. 

The three locations selected were residences within the District’s historic Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) 

sampling network, designated as DS1 (i.e., 21111 Barefoot Loop), DS2 (i.e., 21193 High Ridge), and 

DS3 (i.e., 21163 Last Chance). The baseline and monthly samples were collected following an 

instruction sheet developed according to the Lead and Copper Monitoring and Reporting Guidance for 

Public Water Systems (EPA, 2002). First-draw samples were collected from cold-water faucets that had 

not been used for at least 6 hr to ensure that stagnant water was sampled. Samplers recorded the date and 

time of last water use before sampling and the date and time of sample collection for calculations of the 

stagnation time. The samples were analyzed for the analytes listed in Table 3-3. Arsenic speciation was 

not performed for the distribution system water samples.
11

3.4 Sampling Logistics

All sampling logistics, including preparation of arsenic speciation kits and sample coolers, and sample 

shipping and handling are discussed as follows. 

3.4.1 Preparation of Arsenic Speciation Kits. The arsenic field speciation method used an anion 

exchange resin column to separate soluble arsenic species, As(V) and As(III) (Edwards et al., 1998). 

Resin columns were prepared in batches at Battelle laboratories in accordance with the procedures 

detailed in Appendix A of the EPA-endorsed QAPP (Battelle, 2007). 

3.4.2 Preparation of Sampling Coolers. For each sampling event, a sample cooler was prepared 

with the appropriate number and type of sample bottles, disc filters, and/or speciation kits. All sample 

bottles were new and contained appropriate preservatives. Each sample bottle was affixed with a preprinted, color-coded, and waterproof label, consisting of the sample identification (ID), date and time of 

sample collection, collector’s name, site location, sample destination, analysis required, and preservative. 

The sample ID consisted of a two-letter code for the specific water facility, sampling date, a two-letter 

code for a specific sampling location, and a one-letter code for designating the arsenic speciation bottle (if 

necessary). The sampling locations at the treatment plant were color-coded for easy identification. For 

example, red, yellow, and blue were used to designate sampling locations for IN, TA, and TB, 

respectively. The pre-labeled bottles for each sampling location were placed in separate zip lock bags and 

packed in the cooler. When needed, the sample cooler also included bottles for the distribution system 

water sampling.

 

In addition, all sampling and shipping-related materials, such as latex gloves, sampling instructions, 

chain-of-custody forms, pre-paid/pre-addressed FedEx air bills, and bubble wrap, were included in each 

cooler. Except for the operator’s signature, the chain-of-custody forms and air bills had already been 

completed with the required information. The sample coolers were shipped via FedEx to the facility 

approximately 1 week prior to the scheduled sampling date. 

3.4.3 Sample Shipping and Handling. After sample collection, samples for off-site analyses were 

packed carefully in the original coolers with wet ice and shipped to Battelle. Upon receipt, the sample 

custodian verified that all samples indicated on the chain-of-custody forms were included and intact. 

Sample IDs were checked against the chain-of-custody forms and the samples were logged into the 

laboratory sample receipt log. Discrepancies noted by the sample custodian were addressed with the plant 

operator by the Battelle Study Lead. 

Samples for metal analyses were stored and analyzed at Battelle’s inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry (ICP-MS) laboratory. Samples for other water quality analyses were packed in separate 

coolers and picked up by couriers from American Analytical Laboratories (AAL) in Columbus, OH and 

TCCI Laboratories in Lexington, OH, both of which were under contract with Battelle for this 

demonstration study. The chain-of-custody forms remained with the samples from the time of 

preparation through analysis and final disposition. All samples were archived by the appropriate 

laboratories for the respective duration of the required hold time and disposed of properly thereafter. 

3.5 Analytical Procedures

The analytical procedures described in detail in Section 4.0 of the EPA-endorsed QAPP (Battelle, 2007) 

were followed by Battelle ICP-MS, AAL, and TCCI Laboratories. Laboratory quality assurance/quality 

control (QA/QC) of all methods followed the prescribed guidelines. Data quality in terms of precision, 

accuracy, method detection limits (MDLs), and completeness met the criteria established in the QAPP 

(i.e., relative percent difference [RPD] of 20%, percent recovery of 80 to 120%, and completeness of 
12

80%). The QA data associated with each analyte will be presented and evaluated in a QA/QC Summary 

Report to be prepared under separate cover upon completion of the Arsenic Demonstration Project. 

Field measurements of pH, temperature, DO, and ORP were conducted by the plant operator using a 

VWR Symphony SP90M5 Handheld Multimeter, which was calibrated for pH and DO prior to use 

following the procedures provided in the user’s manual. The ORP probe also was checked for accuracy 

by measuring the ORP of a standard solution and comparing it to the expected value. The plant operator 

collected a water sample in a clean, plastic beaker and placed the Symphony SP90M5 probe in the beaker 

until a stable value was obtained. The plant operator also performed free and total chlorine measurements 

at a sample tap after post-chlorination using Hach chlorine test kits following the user’s manual.
13

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Facility Description and Pre-Existing Treatment System Infrastructure

Located at 21111 Barefoot Loop, Lead, SD, the community water system (CWS) at the Terry Trojan 

Water District provided drinking water to 177 residential and 10 commercial service connections. The 

commercial service connections included 37 condominium units at the Barefoot Condominiums, four 

condominium units at the Shake Condominiums, 16 motel units at the Terry Peak Lodge, and the Terry 

Peak Ski Resort that had an office, a ski rental shop, a cafeteria/dining hall, and a lounge. The CWS was 

supplied by the Two Johns II Well, which operated approximately 2 hr/day to meet the District’s average 

daily demand of approximately 9,000 gal prior to this demonstration project. A second well also existed; 

however, it was not in use due to the high total arsenic concentration. 

The 6-in diameter Two Johns II Well was drilled into an abandoned mine “decline” and equipped with a 

30-horsepower (hp) Grundfos 855 30-26 submersible pump rated for 50 gpm at 564 lb/in2

 (psi) or 1,300 ft 

H2O of total dynamic head (TDH). The submersible pump was set at 360 ft below ground surface (bgs). 

Figure 4-1 presents a photo of the wellhead. 

Figure 4-1. Wellhead of Two Johns II Well at Terry Trojan Water District, SD

Water from the wellhead at an elevation of 5,924 ft was pumped via a 4-in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) 

transmission line to a booster station (Figure 4-2), which was 306 ft above the wellhead. At the booster 

station, a 30-hp Sterling Fluid Systems C1020 AMBF booster pump was used to pump water via a 6-in 

PVC transmission line to a 90,000-gal (56 ft × 32 ft × 12 ft) concrete storage reservoir (see Figure 4-3) 

located on a small peak near the Barefoot Condominiums. The total length of the transmission line was 

14,000 ft and the total elevation difference between the wellhead (at 5,924 ft) and the storage reservoir (at 
14

Figure 4-2. Booster Station (left) and Booster Pump (right) at Terry Trojan Water District

Figure 4-3. Concrete Water Storage Reservoir and Partition (left) 

and Level Sensors (right) in Reservoir
15

6,646 ft) was 722 ft H2O. On/off of the well pump was controlled by level sensors in the storage reservoir

with the high and low level sensors set at 10 ft 5 in (1 ft 1 in below the overflow line) and 9 ft 10 in (1 ft 8 

in below the over flow line), respectively. The overflow line is 11 ft 6 in ft above ground level. 

As shown in Figure 4-4, a small partition attached to the storage reservoir housed the pre-existing 

treatment system, including a flow meter/totalizer on the incoming transmission line and a chlorine 

addition system. The chlorine addition system (see Figure 4-5) consisted of a 15-gal polyethylene 

chemical day tank and a 3.0-gpd peristaltic metering pump, which was interlocked with the well pump. 

Chlorination was accomplished using a 12.5% NaOCl stock solution for a target dosage of 1.25 mg/L (as 

Cl2) and a target free chlorine residual level of 0.75 mg/L (as Cl2) in the distribution system. The state of 

South Dakota required that free chlorine residuals be maintained at 0.5 mg/L (as Cl2) within the 

distribution system. The pre-existing chlorination system was relocated to a new treatment building for 

post-chlorination.

Figure 4-4. Interior of Partition Housing Chemical Addition System

4.1.1 Source Water Quality. Source water samples were collected on December 8, 2006, when a 

Battelle staff member traveled to the site to conduct an introductory meeting for the demonstration 

project. Source water also was filtered for soluble arsenic, iron, manganese, and antimony, and then 

speciated for As(III) and As(V) using the field speciation method modified from Edwards et al. (1998) by 

Battelle (Wang et al., 2000). Onsite measurements for pH, temperature, DO, and ORP were performed 

using the VWR Symphony SP90M5 Handheld Multimeter. Table 4-1 presents analytical results of the 

December 8, 2006, sampling event. Also presented in the table are results of EPA’s February 21, 2006, 

sampling event, and the historic data from November 26, 1996, through July 15, 2003, as documented in 

an engineering report prepared by Itasco E.S.C (Schreier, 2005). These historic data represent quality of 

water after chlorination. Overall, Battelle’s data are comparable to EPA’s and the historic data. 
16

Figure 4-5. 15-gal Chemical Day Tank, Chlorine Injection Point, 

and Raw Water Totalizer at Inlet to Storage Reservoir
17

Arsenic. Total arsenic concentrations in source water ranged from 14.0 to 23.9 μg/L. Based on 

Battelle’s results obtained on December 8, 2006, out of 23.9 μg/L of total arsenic, 22.5 μg/L (or 94%) 

existed as soluble As(V) and 0.5 μg/L (or 2.1%) as soluble As(III). Low levels of As(III) in source water 

suggest that without pre-oxidation, adsorptive media can be an effective process. Battelle and EPA’s total 

arsenic results were slightly higher than those provided by Itasco E.S.C. 

Iron and Manganese. Total iron concentrations in source water were below the MDL of 25 μg/L. Due 

to the low iron content in source water, this site was an ideal candidate for adsorptive media, which works 

best with low influent iron levels. The total manganese concentration obtained by Battelle was 2.8 μg/L 

with almost all existing as particulate manganese. Battelle’s data were consistent with EPA data, which 

showed 2.3 μg/L for total manganese.

Competing Anions. For adsorptive media, removal of arsenic can be influenced by competing anions 

such as silica and phosphate. Adsorptive media has been reported to be affected by elevated levels of

silica and phosphate (Meng et al., 2002; Meng et al., 2000). The Two Johns II Well water contained 14.4 

to 15.0 mg/L of silica and <0.01 mg/L of total phosphate (as P), which did not appear to be high enough 

to impact the adsorptive media treatment process. 

Other Water Quality Parameters. Battelle’s data indicated a moderate pH of 7.3, which was within the 

commonly-agreed target range of 5.5 to 8.5 for arsenic removal. Total alkalinity concentrations ranged 

from 141 to 162 mg/L (as CaCO3); total hardness from 136 to 163 mg/L (as CaCO3); turbidity at 0.7

NTU; total dissolved solids (TDS) from 144 to 178 mg/L; and nitrate from 0.4 to 2.7 mg/L. Total organic 

carbon (TOC) and ammonia were below the respective MDLs of 1.0 and 0.05 mg/L. All other analytes 

were below detection limits and/or low enough not to adversely affect the arsenic removal process. 

4.1.2 Distribution System. The Terry Trojan Water District distribution system consisted of 187

service connections (or water meters), including 177 for residential and 10 for commercial (one 

commercial has five meters; one has three; and the other two have one each). The distribution system 

material was comprised of 2 to 6-in diameter steel and polyvinyl (PVC) pipes. The District sampled

water from the distribution system monthly for bacterial analysis; quarterly for pesticides; yearly for 

nitrate; and once every three years for LCR, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and inorganics.

4.2 Treatment Process Description

The treatment system installed at the Terry Trojan Water District consisted of arsenic adsorption using 

either ArsenXnp or LayneRTTM media. The performance evaluation was sub-divided into two study 

periods. Study Period I took place from April 4, 2008, through November 29, 2009, using ArsenXnp and 

Study Period II followed from November 30, 2009, through May 23, 2010, using LayneRTTM. 

Manufactured by Purolite, ArsenXnp is an engineered hybrid inorganic/organic adsorbent that incorporates 

a nanoparticle technology originally developed by researchers at Lehigh University, PA and further 

refined by SolmeteX, Inc., of Northborough, MA. According to the manufacturer, the hybrid material 

contains approximately 25% of iron (dry weight) or 36% of iron oxide, Fe2O3. Because the hybrid resin 

beads are attrition-resistant, they do not generate fines and do not require backwash. The media is 

regenerable and is NSF International (NSF) 61 certified for use in municipal water treatment systems. 

Table 4-2 summarizes ArsenXnp media’s physical properties. 

LayneRTTM media also is a hybrid adsorbent; physical properties of the media are summarized in Table 4-

3. Similar to ArsenXnp, LayneRTTM does not require backwashing, is regenerable, and is NSF 61 certified 

for use in municipal water treatment systems. 
18

Table 4-1. Raw and Treated Water Quality Data for Two Johns II Well in Lead, SD

Parameter Unit

EPA 

Raw Water 

Data

Battelle

Raw Water 

Data

Historic

Treated Water 

Data(a,b)

Sampling Date 02/21/06 12/08/06 11/26/96–07/15/03

pH S.U. NA 7.3 7.6–7.7

Temperature °C NA 10.4 NA

DO mg/L NA NA NA

ORP mV NA 300 NA

Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L 147 162 141

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 150 163 136

Turbidity NTU NA 0.7 NA

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L NA 178 144–147

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) mg/L NA <1.0(c) NA

Nitrate (as N) mg/L 0.4 0.5 0.35–2.7 [0.75]

Nitrite (as N) mg/L <0.01 <0.05 <0.05

Ammonia (as N) mg/L <0.03 <0.05 NA

Chloride mg/L <5.0 1.0 0.5–2.0

Fluoride mg/L NA 0.7 0.78–0.86

Sulfate mg/L 10.8 2.0 <10.0–20.9 [<10.0]

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L 14.4 15.0 NA

Orthophosphate (as P) mg/L 0.09 NA NA

Total P (as P) mg/L <0.065 <0.01 NA

Al (total) μg/L <25 NA <50

As (total) μg/L 23 23.9 14.0–21.0 [18.0]

As (soluble) μg/L NA 23.0 15.0-18.0

As (particulate) μg/L NA 0.9 NA

As (III) μg/L NA 0.5 NA

As (V) μg/L NA 22.5 NA

Fe (total) μg/L 14 <25 NA

Fe (soluble) μg/L NA <25 NA

Mn (total) μg/L 2.3 2.8 NA

Mn (soluble) μg/L NA 0.8 NA

Sb (total) μg/L <25 0.3 NA

Sb (soluble) μg/L NA 0.3 NA

V (total) μg/L NA 0.7 NA

Na mg/L 2.0 2.4 NA

Ca mg/L 46.3 49.9 38.7–47.5

Mg mg/L 8.4 9.3 8.1–10.2

(a) Source: Schreier, 2005

(b) Minimum–maximum [average].

(c) Sample analyzed out of hold time.

NA = not available.
19

Table 4-2. Properties of ArsenXnp Media

Property Value

Physical Form and Appearance

Reddish-brown spherical beads

Particle Size (μm) 300 to 1,200

Operating Temperature (oF) 33 to 176

Operating pH (S.U.) 5.0 to 8.5

Bulk Density (g/cm3 [lb/ft3]) 0.79 to 0.84 [49−52] 

Moisture Content (%) 55−60

Base Polymer Macroporous Polystyrene

Active Component Hydrous Iron Oxide

Minimum Bed Depth (in.) 18

 Source: SolmeteX

Table 4-3. Properties of LayneRTTM Media

Property Value

Physical Form and Appearance

Reddish-brown spherical beads

Particle Size (μm) 300 to 1,200

Operating Temperature (oF) 33 to 172

Operating pH (S.U.) 5.0 to 8.5

Bulk Density (g/cm3 [lb/ft3]) 0.79 to 0.84 [49−52] 

Minimum Contact Time (min) 2

Base Polymer Macroporous Polystyrene

Active Component Hydrous Iron Oxide

 Source: SolmeteX

As shown in Figure 4-6, the arsenic removal system at Lead, SD consists of two skid-mounted adsorption 

vessels and associated piping/valves and instrumentation on a welded carbon steel frame (note that neither 

the 50-μm pre-filter nor the post-chlorination system is shown). Table 4-4 specifies the key system 

design parameters of the treatment system.

Figure 4-7 presents a process flowchart, along with the sampling/analysis schedule, for the 75-gpm 

ArsenXnp arsenic removal system. Figure 4-8 is a photograph of the system.

 
20

Figure 4-6. Schematic of SolmeteX Arsenic Removal System for Lead, SD

Table 4-4. Design Features of SolmeteX Arsenic Adsorption System

Parameter Value Remarks

Pre-treatment

Pre-filter One 50-μm 

bag filter – 

Adsorption 

No. of Vessels 2 –

Configuration Series –

Vessel Size (in) 42 D × 72 H –

Vessel Cross Section (ft2) 9.6 –

Media Volume (ft3/vessel) 28 56 ft3 total 

Media Depth (in) 35 –

Hydraulic Loading Rate (gpm/ft2) 7.8 Based on 75 gpm flowrate

EBCT (min/vessel) 2.8 Based 28 ft3 of media and 75 gpm 

flowrate

Differential Pressure across Tank (psi) 10 Across a clean bed

Maximum Daily Production (gpd) 108,000 Based on peak flowrate, 24 hr/day

Average Daily Production (gpd) 9,000 –

Hydraulic Utilization (%) 8.3 Typical operation is 2 hr/day

Projected Media Run Length to 10-μg/L 

As Breakthrough from Lead Vessel (BV)

65,000 1 BV = 28 ft3=209 gal 

Throughput to 10-μg/L As Breakthrough 

(gal)

13,600,000 – 

Projected Media Life (month) 50 Based on 9,000 gpd water usage
21

pH(a), temperature(a)

, DO/ORP(a)

,

As (total), Fe (total), Mn (total), SiO2, 

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

INFLUENT

(TWO JOHNS II WELL)

Speciation Sampling

Lead, SD

SolmeteX Arsenic Removal System

Design Flow: 75 gpm

DISTRIBUTION 

SYSTEM

DA: Cl2

Footnote

(a) On-site analyses

TA

TB

pH(a), temperature(a)

, DO/ORP(a),

As (total and soluble), As (III),

As (V), Fe (total and soluble),

Mn (total and soluble),

Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4, SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

pH(a)

, temperature(a), DO/ORP(a),

As (total), Fe (total), Mn (total), SiO2, 

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

pH(a)

, temperature(a), DO/ORP(a), 

Cl2 (total and free),

As (total and soluble), As (III),

As (V), Fe (total and soluble),

Mn (total and soluble),

Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4, SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

MEDIA 

VESSEL 

B

MEDIA 

VESSEL 

A

pH(a), temperature(a), DO/ORP(a),

Cl2 (total and free), As (total),

Fe (total), Mn (total), SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

pH(a)

, temperature(a)

, DO/ORP(a),

As (total and soluble), As (III),

As (V), Fe (total and soluble),

Mn (total and soluble),

Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4, SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

STORAGE RESERVOIR

(90,000 GAL)

PRE-FILTER

IN

LEGEND

Influent

After Vessel A

DA: Cl2

INFLUENT

Chlorine Disinfection

Unit Process

Process Flow

Water Sampling Locations

IN

TB

TA

After Vessel B

Regular Sampling

pH(a), temperature(a)

, DO/ORP(a)

,

As (total), Fe (total), Mn (total), SiO2, 

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

INFLUENT

(TWO JOHNS II WELL)

Speciation Sampling

Lead, SD

SolmeteX Arsenic Removal System

Design Flow: 75 gpm

DISTRIBUTION 

SYSTEM

DA: Cl2

Footnote

(a) On-site analyses

TA

TB

pH(a), temperature(a)

, DO/ORP(a),

As (total and soluble), As (III),

As (V), Fe (total and soluble),

Mn (total and soluble),

Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4, SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

pH(a)

, temperature(a), DO/ORP(a),

As (total), Fe (total), Mn (total), SiO2, 

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

pH(a)

, temperature(a), DO/ORP(a), 

Cl2 (total and free),

As (total and soluble), As (III),

As (V), Fe (total and soluble),

Mn (total and soluble),

Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4, SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

MEDIA 

VESSEL 

B

MEDIA 

VESSEL 

A

pH(a), temperature(a), DO/ORP(a),

Cl2 (total and free), As (total),

Fe (total), Mn (total), SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

pH(a)

, temperature(a)

, DO/ORP(a),

As (total and soluble), As (III),

As (V), Fe (total and soluble),

Mn (total and soluble),

Ca, Mg, F, NO3, SO4, SiO2,

P (total), turbidity, and alkalinity

STORAGE RESERVOIR

(90,000 GAL)

PRE-FILTER

IN

LEGEND

Influent

After Vessel A

DA: Cl2

INFLUENT

Chlorine Disinfection

Unit Process

Process Flow

Water Sampling Locations

IN

TB

TA

After Vessel B

LEGEND

Influent

After Vessel A

DA: Cl2

INFLUENT

Chlorine Disinfection

Unit Process

Process Flow

Water Sampling Locations

IN

TB

TA

After Vessel B

Regular Sampling

Figure 4-7. Process Flow Diagram and Sampling Locations for Lead, SD
22

Figure 4-8. SolmeteX Arsenic Removal System

The key process steps and major components of the arsenic removal system are discussed as follows:

• Intake – Raw water was pumped from the Two Johns II Well and fed to the treatment system 

via a 14,000-ft, 4-/6-in diameter PVC transmission line. 

• Pre-filter – A 50-μm pre-filter was placed ahead of the SolmeteX system to remove any 

particulate from the well water (Figure 4-9). 

• Adsorption – The arsenic removal system consisted of two 42-in × 72-in adsorption vessels, 

configured in series, each containing 28 ft3 of media supported by 12-in garnet underbedding. 

The vessels were polyethylene construction, rated for 150 psi working pressure, and piped to 

a valve rack on a welded carbon steel frame. Based on a design flow rate of 75 gpm, the

empty bed contact time (EBCT) was 2.8 min/vessel (or 5.6 min for both vessels) and the 

hydraulic loading rate was 7.8 gpm/ft2

. The design pressure drop across a clean resin bed 

was approximately 10 psi. 

All plumbing for the system was schedule 80 PVC. The skid-mounted system was preplumbed with the necessary isolation valves, check valves, sampling ports, and other 

features. 

• Filter Backwash – For source water containing little or no iron, the media does not require 

backwashing during standard operation. For the initial media loading, the media was flushed 

to remove dust and fines generated during shipping. The first 1200-gal of wastewater 

generated was discharged to and hauled away by a septic truck. The remaining was 

discharged directly to the ground per the one-time dewatering permit issued by the State of 

South Dakota (Section 4.3.1). 
23

Figure 4-9. Pre-Filter Installed Upstream of SolmeteX System

• Post-chlorination – The chlorine addition system consisting of a pre-existing 15-gal 

polyethylene chemical day tank and a 3.0-gpd peristaltic metering pump was relocated to the 

treatment plant building for post-chlorination (see Figure 4-10). Chlorination was 

accomplished using a 12.5% NaOCl stock solution to maintain a target dosage of 1.25 mg/L 

(as Cl2) and a target free chlorine residual level of 0.75 mg/L (as Cl2) in the distribution 

system. The state of South Dakota required that the free chlorine residual level be maintained 

at >0.5 mg/L (as Cl2) within the distribution system. 

• Media Regeneration/Rebedding – SolmeteX initially recommended regenerating spent 

ArsenXnp media in the lead vessel (Vessel A) offsite when total arsenic levels following the 

lag vessel exceeded MCL. The system would operate with only the lag vessel (Vessel B) 

when the lead vessel was taken offline. SolmeteX claimed that ArsenXnp can be regenerated 

up to 10 times with the arsenic adsorptive capacity of a regenerated media reduced 

approximately 15% following each regeneration. 

Instead of regenerating the spent media, it was decided to rebed the lead vessel with 

LayneRTTM, a new adsorptive media. Upon completion of media replacement, the newly 

rebedded lead vessel (Vessel A) was placed at the lag position with Vessel B containing 

partially exhausted ArsenXnp placed at the lead position. Figures 4-11 through 4-13 show the 

system flow path under different vessel configurations. 

Pre-Filter
24

Figure 4-10. Chlorine Addition System

Source: SolmeteXTM

Figure 4-11. System Flow Path - Vessel A in Lead Position and Vessel B in Lag Position
25

Source: SolmeteXTM

Figure 4-12. System Flow Path - Vessel A Taken Offline During Proposed Offsite 

Media Regeneration

Source: SolmeteXTM

Figure 4-13. System Flow Path - Vessel B in Lead Position and 

Rebedded/Regenerated Vessel A in Lag Position
26

4.3 System Installation

The installation of the treatment system was completed by SolmeteX on November 2, 2007. The 

following summarizes predemonstration activities, including permitting, building preparation, as well as 

system offloading, installation, shakedown, and startup.

4.3.1 Permitting. The system engineering package, prepared by SolmeteX and its subcontractor,

Schrieir Engineering, included the following documents and drawings:

• A system design report

• A general arrangement and piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) 

• Electrical and mechanical drawings and component specifications 

• Building construction drawings detailing connections from the system to the tie-in points at 

the inlet and the entry point to town’s distribution system 

The engineering package was certified by a South Dakota Professional Engineer and submitted to D 

DENR for review and approval on September 13, 2007. A water supply construction permit was issued 

by SD DENR on September 14, 2007, and fabrication of the system began thereafter. 

In addition to the treatment system construction permit, a one-time de-watering request was submitted in 

September 2007 and a permit was granted by SD DENR on September 17, 2007, to allow for one-time 

ground discharge of backwash wastewater during initial media loading.

 

4.3.2 Building Preparation. Because the existing treatment partition (Figure 4-4) was insufficient to 

house the SolmeteX arsenic removal system, the Terry Trojan Water District constructed a new treatment 

plant building (Figure 4-14) in 2006. Sitting on a 5-in thick concrete slab, the 20 ft × 40 ft × 14 ft 

structure had a 12 ft × 12 ft overhead door to enable ease of equipment placement and installation. 

 

4.3.3 System Installation, Shakedown, and Startup. The treatment system was delivered to the 

site on October 30, 2007. SolmeteX performed the off-loading (Figure 4-15) and installation, including 

connections to the tie-in points. Because the treatment plant building was located at the top of a hill and 

the access road was not accessible to the delivering flatbed, a construction forklift was used to transport 

the equipment through the narrow and rutted access road to the treatment plant building.

To load media into the adsorption vessels, a scaffold was laid across the top of the system. The vessels 

were first half-filled with water. Vessel headers were then removed and 8 ft3 of garnet was loaded into 

each vessel. To facilitate observation of the fill level in each vessel, light in the treatment plant building 

was turned off and an emergency light was shined over the opposite side of the vessel. The level of the 

garnet layer was about 2 in above the start of the bottom dome. Twenty eight ft3

 of ArsenXnp was then 

loaded to each vessel and the vessels were filled with water to the level approximately 12 in below the 

start of the top dome. Figure 4-16 is a photograph of media loading.

Upon completion of media loading, 41 ounces of SaniSystem liquid sanitizer, consisting of 1 oz of 

sanitizer concentrate per gal of water, was added to each vessel to sanitize the vessel. The headers were 

replaced and the vessels and piping were filled with water. After 5 min, the liquid in the system was 

discharged to a 1200-gal septic truck at 10 to 20 gpm. Backwash purge continued with water passing 

through the system in all vessel configurations, followed by media rinsing. After the septic truck was 

full, media rinsing continued for two additional hours with wastewater discharged directly to the ground 

as permitted by SD DENR (Section 4.3.1). System sanitation was complete on November 2, 2007.
27

Figure 4-14. Treatment Plant Building at Terry Trojan Water District, SD

Figure 4-15. Lead Treatment System (Under Tarp on Left) and Offloading (Right) 
28

Figure 4-16. Media Loading

Immediately after system installation, air bubbles were observed in the treatment system/piping. Elevated 

differential pressure of over 30 psi also was observed across the system. A teleconference among 

Battelle, SolmeteX, and Schreier Engineering was held on November 19, 2007, and a joint decision was 

made during the call to temporarily suspend system operation until the air bubble issue was resolved. 

Upon investigation of the treatment system and transmission line by Schreier Engineering, the source of 

air bubbles was linked to a leak from the 8,060-ft transmission line between the booster station and the 

treatment plant. Because the treatment plant is located 415 ft above the booster station, water in the 

transmission line would retrieve to, at least, where the leak was, whenever the booster and well pumps 

were idle. Upon restart of the booster and well pumps, air in the transmission line would be pushed into 

the treatment system, thus causing the air bubble problem. According to the water static pressure 

measured at the level of booster station, the leak would be at a point approximately 6,990 ft away from 

the treatment plant (or 360 ft below the elevation of the treatment plant). 

Instead of repairing the leak on the transmission line, Schreier Engineering proposed the following: 

• Install a combination air release valve (Figure 4-17) on the system inlet piping to allow for 

release of air immediately after the well and booster pumps were triggered
29

Figure 4-17. Treatment System after Modification

• Install an air release valve (Figure 4-17) on top of each vessel to assist in purging air from the 

treatment system immediately after the well and booster pumps were triggered and during

system operation 

• Elevate the inlet piping to above the adsorption vessels so that when the well and booster 

pumps were shut down, water in the arsenic removal system would not be siphoned back into 

the transmission line.

SD DENR approved the proposed modifications submitted by Schreier Engineering and the modifications 

were completed by the firm’s plumbing contractor on March 27, 2008. When operating the system at the 

design flowrate of 75 gpm, the system inlet pressure was reduced to 18 to 20 psi, compared to the 30 psi 

observed before the modifications. Air accumulating in the treatment system during the initial system 

shakedown in November 2007 was expelled from the lead vessel air release valve for 10 to 20 sec and 

from the lag vessel for approximately 5 min. Since the modifications, no air bubbles were observed in the 

treatment system. The system shakedown was therefore complete on March 31, 2008, and the 

demonstration study began on April 4, 2008.

Two Battelle staff members arrived at Lead, SD, on July 22, 2008, to inspect the treatment system and 

provide operator training, which included calibration and use of field water quality meters, collection and 

recording of operational data, collection of water samples, use of arsenic speciation kits (see Figure 4-18), 

and handling and shipping of collected samples. 

4.4 System Operation

4.4.1 Operational Parameters. Operational data were collected during the period of April 4, 

2008, through May 23, 2010, and are attached as Appendix A after tabulation. Table 4-5 summarizes key 

operational parameters. The performance evaluation study was divided into two study periods with Study 

Period I extending from April 4, 2008, through November 29, 2009, and Study Period II from November 

30, 2009, through May 23, 2010. Study Period I evaluated the performance of ArsenXnp. Study Period II 

Combination Air 

Release Valve Vessel B

Air Release

Valve

Elevated 

inlet piping
30

Figure 4-18. Operator Training at Lead, SD

Table 4-5. Summary of SolmeteX System Operation

Parameter Study Period I Study Period II

Data Period 04/04/08–11/29/09 11/30/09–05/23/10

Adsorptive Media Lead Vessel: Virgin ArsenXnp

Lag Vessel: Virgin ArsenXnp

Lead Vessel: Partially Exhausted ArsenXnp

Lag Vessel: Virgin LayneRTTM

Total Operating Time (hr) 7,154(a) 1,787

Total Operating Days 

(day)

597 170

Daily Operating Time 

(hr/day) 

2–24 (12.0) 2–24 (10.5)

Throughput to Distribution 

(gal)

27,978,780

(133,590 BV)

7,231,940

(34,530 BV)

Average Daily Use 

(gpd)

46,866 42,541

Calculated System 

Flowrate(b) (gpm)

23.6–112 (71.5) 48.9–136 (69.2)

Empty Bed Contact Time 

(min/vessel)

1.9–8.9 (2.9) 1.5–4.3 (3.0)

Hydraulic Loading to Each

Vessel (gpm/ft2)

2.5–11.7 (7.4) 5.1–14.2 (7.2)

Pressure Loss Across Each 

Vessel (psi)

Vessel A 4–20 (12)

Vessel B 2–10 (6)

Vessel A 6–20 (13)

Vessel B 3–7 (7)

1 BV = 28 ft3 (media in one vessel) or 209.4 gal. 

(a) Operational time from April 4 through May 25, 2008, estimated based on total number of operating 

hours and total number of operating days during remainder of Study Period I. 

(b) Based on readings of totalizer at system outlet and hour meter at wellhead.
31

began after rebedding of the lead vessel with LayneRTTM and switching of the newly rebedded vessel to 

the lag position. 

The system operating time was tracked by a well pump hour meter, which was installed on May 26, 2008, 

52 days after commencement of the performance evaluation study. From May 26, 2008, through 

November 29, 2009, the treatment system operated for a total of 6,589.6 hr. Because the operating time 

was not recorded from April 4 through May 25, 2008, the operation time (564 hr) during this period was

estimated by multiplying the average daily operating time (12 hr/day) during the remainder of Study 

Period I by the number of days (47 day) when the system was in operation. Therefore, the total system 

operating time during Study Period I (i.e., from April 4, 2008, through November 29, 2009) was 7,154 hr. 

The total operating time in Study Period II (from November 30, 2009 to May 23, 2010) was 1,787 hr. 

(Note that the system was still in operation when Study Period II ended.) The average daily operating 

time was 12.0 hr/day in Study Period I and 10.5 hr/day in Study Period II.

The total volume throughput was 27,978,780 gal, or 133,590 BV (1 BV = 28 ft3

 of media in one vessel) in 

Study Period I, and 7,231,940 gal, or 34,530 BV in Study Period II, based on a totalizer installed at the

system outlet. Figure 4-19 plots amounts of daily water production, which averaged 46,866 gpd in Study 

Period I and 42,541 gpd in Study Period II. These amounts were approximately five times the daily 

demand of 9,000 gal originally provided by the District for the system design. 

 

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

Daily Water Production (gpd)

Study Period I 

(04/04/08 - 11/29/09)

Study Period II 

(11/30/09 - 05/23/10)

Figure 4-19. Treatment System Daily Water Production

To help identify the cause(s) of the discrepancy between the daily water production and daily water 

demand, the District provided Battelle its monthly water usage data, i.e., customers’ water bills, from 

December 2007 through July 2008. As shown in Table 4-6, averaged daily water demands based on 

customers’ water bills ranged from 10,143 to 19,204 gpd, which were about 1 to 2 times the amount 

(9,000 gpd) estimated by the District. Average daily water production volumes were 3 to 4 times those 

delivered to customers, indicating possible loss of water after the entry point.
32

Table 4-6. Comparison of Average Daily Water Demand and 

Average Daily Water Production

Month

Average Daily

Water Demand

Based on Customers

Water Bills 

(gpd)

Average Daily

Water Production

Based on Totalizer at 

System Outlet

(gpd)

Dec 2007 16,287 -

(a)

Jan 2008 16,965 -

(a)

Feb 2008 19,204 -

(a)

Mar 2008 12,313 -

(a)

Apr 2008 10,143 39,073

May 2008 11,558 40,584

June 2008 14,483 53,421

July 2008 19,106 62,162

(a) Demonstration study had not begun; no throughput data 

available.

During the 25-month performance evaluation study, four leaks at the water storage reservoir and in the 

distribution system were detected and repaired on July 20, 2008; October 19, 2008; March 7 through 9, 

2010; and April 14 through 16, 2010. Nonetheless, no noticeable decrease in daily water demands was 

observed after the leaks were repaired. Average daily productions still ranged from 27,000 to 44,260 gpd. 

Daily/incremental average flowrates were calculated based on daily/incremental throughputs recorded by 

the electromagnetic flow totalizer installed at the system outlet and wellhead hour meter readings. 

Instantaneous flowrates were tracked with a rotameter located at the system inlet. Figure 4-20 plots both 

calculated and instantaneous flowrates. Calculated daily/incremental flowrates ranged from 24 to 112 

gpm and averaged 71.5 gpm in Study Period I, and ranged from 49 to 136 gpm and averaged 69.2 gpm in 

Study Period II (compared to the design value of 75 gpm [Table 4-4]). These average flowrates 

represented average EBCTs of 2.9 and 3.0 min (compared to the design value of 2.8 min) and average 

hydraulic loading rates of 7.4 and 7.2 gpm/ft2 (compared to the design value of 7.8 gpm/ft2

). 

Due to a leak from the transmission line between the booster station and the treatment plant, system 

flowrates decreased 29% starting on March 1, 2009, and continuing through May 19, 2009, as shown in 

Figure 4-20. The leakage was identified and fixed on May 19, 2009, and flowrates returned to the normal 

range. Average rotameter readings in Study Periods I and II were 73.8 and 76.7 gpm (on average), 

respectively, which were 3.2% and 9.8% higher than the corresponding calculated flowrates. Note that 

data collected between March 1 and May 19, 2009, when a leak occurred, were not included in the 

calculation of the average flowrates.

As shown in Figure 4-21, differential pressure (Δp) readings across Vessel A ranged from 4 to 20 psi and 

averaged 12 psi in Study Period I, and ranged from 6 to 20 psi and averaged 13 psi in Study Period II. Δp

readings across Vessel B ranged from 2 to 10 psi and averaged 6 psi in Study Period I and ranged from 3 

to 7 psi and averaged 7 psi in Study Period II. Δp readings across Vessel A were about twice those across 

Vessel B. The average Δp across Vessel A was about 20 to 30% higher than the design value of 10 psi, 

while the average differential pressure across Vessel B was about 30 to 40% lower than the design value. 
33

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Flowrate (gpm)

Calculated Average Flowrate

Rotameter Reading

Study Period I 

(04/04/08 - 11/29/09)

Study Period II 

(11/30/09 - 05/23/10)

Low flowrates caused by a leaking pipe 

between the booster station and treatment plant

Figure 4-20. System Instantaneous and Calculated Flowrates

0

5

10

15

20

25

∆P (psi)

Vessel A

Vessel B

Study Period I 

(04/04/08 - 11/29/09)

Study Period II 

(11/30/09 - 05/23/10)

∆P drops due to lower flowrates 

caused by a leak from transmission

line between booster station and 

treatment plant

Figure 4-21. Operational Pressure Readings
34

Reduced Δp readings were observed between March and May 2009, due to lower system flowrates caused 

by a broken transmission line discussed above. Δp readings across Vessel B were rather steady 

throughout the entire performance evaluation study. However, Δp across Vessel A increased gradually 

after May 2009 to 16 to 20 psi before rebedding, likely due to accumulation of sediment or media fines in 

the lead vessel. Δp readings across Vessel A returned to the levels of 10 to 15 psi after rebedding.

4.4.2 Residual Management. Because backwashing was not required, no residuals were produced 

during routine system operation. One-time discharge of backwash wastewater was done during system 

startup as discussed in Section 4.3.1. During Vessel A rebedding, the vendor took back the spent 

ArsenXnp media with no charge (except for the freight).

4.4.3 Media Rebedding. To prepare for possible rebedding/regeneration, Battelle requested in 

August 2009 that SolmeteX produce a quote for media replacement with two options: (a) rebedding the 

lead vessel with LayneRTTM or (b) regenerating spent ArsenXnp on or offsite and rebedding the lead 

vessel with the regenerated ArsenXnp. Because the vendor had discontinued ArsenXnp media production, 

it recommended that LayneRTTM be used to replace ArsenXnp. Another reason for selecting this option

was that the wastewater from media regeneration could not be discharged onsite and, therefore,

regeneration had to be conducted offsite. Due to the logistic complexity of offsite regeneration, it was 

decided to replace the spent media with LayneRTTM. 

On November 17, 2009, after treating approximately 27,439,000 gal (or 131,000 BV) of water, arsenic 

concentrations were 70% of the influent concentration following the lead vessel and 58% of the arsenic 

MCL following the lag vessel. Although the media was not fully exhausted in November 2009, the 

District expressed its desire to move forward with lead vessel rebedding because it needed to complete all 

rebedding activities before the access road to the treatment building was closed due to snow cover. 

The media replacement for the lead vessel was conducted on November 30, 2009, after the system had 

treated approximately 27,978,780 gal (or 133,590 BV) of water (based on the amount of media in one 

vessel). Before loading LayneRTTM, freeboard heights in Vessel A were measured at 23.5 in from the 

media surface to the top flange and 62 in from the underbedding garnet surface to the top flange. 

Therefore, the bed depth was 38.5 in, which was about 3.5 in deeper than the design value of 35 in

(Table 4-4). 

Upon removal of the spent media, virgin LayneRTTM was loaded on top of the garnet underbedding at a

target freeboard value of 23.5 in from the media surface to the top flange. Meanwhile, flow through the 

vessels was switched such that the lag vessel was placed in the lead position and the newly rebedded

vessel was placed in the lag position. A BAC-T sample was taken after rebedding and the result was 

negative. Therefore, the system was put online without further sanitization. 

4.4.4 System/Operation Reliability and Simplicity. In addition to the air bubble problem 

discussed in Section 4.3.3, the only O&M issues encountered were with the well pump controller due to a 

lightening strike and the leaky transmission line between the booster station and treatment plant. Both 

issues were solved in a timely manner and caused no more than one day of system downtime. The system 

O&M and operator skill requirements are discussed below in relation to post-treatment requirement, 

levels of system automation, operator skill requirements, preventive maintenance activities, and frequency

of chemical/media handling and inventory requirements.

Pre- and Post-Treatment Requirements. No pre-treatment was required. The existing chlorination 

system was relocated to the treatment plant building for post-chlorination. The operator monitored 

chlorine tank levels to estimate consumption rates and residual chlorine levels using a Hach meter. 
35

System Automation. Because of simple system operation (i.e., no periodic backwashing, no chemical 

addition, etc.), the adsorption system was operated manually. The operator manually opened or closed all 

hand valves to achieve an intended tank configuration and correct flow path. The operator monitored and 

adjusted the system flowrate and operating pressure, recorded log sheets, and took routine samples of raw 

water, treated water, and samples after each vessel.

Operator Skill Requirements. Skill requirements to operate the system demanded a higher level of 

awareness and attention than the previous system of only chlorination. The operator’s knowledge of

system limitations and typical operational parameters were keys to achieve system performance 

objectives. The operator was onsite typically seven times a week and spent approximately 60 min each

time to perform visual inspections and record relevant system operating parameters on the Daily System 

Operation Log Sheets. The basis for the operator skills began with onsite training and a thorough review 

of the system operations manual; however, increased knowledge and invaluable system troubleshooting 

skills were gained through hands-on operational experience. 

The State of South Dakota requires that all community and non-transient, non-community water systems 

have a certified water distribution operator. Any system that owns its own source and treats the water 

must also have a certified water treatment operator. The State categorizes treatment plants and systems 

into four classes, designated as Class I, II, III, or IV, according to complexity of operation. Class IV is 

the highest or most complex. The plant operator at Lead, SD, has Water Treatment Plant Class I and 

Water Distribution System Class I licenses.

 

Preventive Maintenance Activities. Preventive maintenance tasks included periodic checks of flow 

meters and pressure gauges, inspection of system piping, valves, and NaOCl injection pump. Typically, 

the operator performed these duties while onsite for routine activities. 

Chemical/Media Handling and Inventory Requirements. NaOCl was used for post-chlorination. The 

operator ordered and handled the chemical as done prior to installation of the SolmeteX system. 

4.5 System Performance

4.5.1 Treatment Plant Sampling. In Study Period I, treatment plant water samples were collected 

on 42 occasions (including three duplicate samples collected during three regular sampling events) with

field speciation performed during nine of the 42 occasions at IN, TA, and TB sampling locations. 

Treatment plant water samples were collected on 13 occasions at IN, TA, and TB sampling locations in 

Study Period II. No duplicate sampling or speciation sampling was performed in Study Period II. 

Table 4-7 summarizes the analytical results of arsenic, iron, and manganese at the three sampling 

locations across the treatment train. Table 4-8 summarizes the results of other water quality parameters. 

Appendix B contains a complete set of analytical results throughout the performance evaluation study.

Arsenic. Total arsenic concentrations in source water ranged from 16.9 to 26.3 μg/L and averaged 22.2

μg/L in Study Period I; and ranged from 19.4 to 22.6 μg/L and averaged 21.0 μg/L in Study Period II. 

Based on the nine speciation sampling events taking place in Study Period I, soluble As(V) was the 

predominating species, ranging from 17.5 to 22.7 μg/L and averaging 20.4 μg/L. Trace levels of soluble 

As(III) also existed, with concentrations ranging from <0.1 to 1.1 μg/L and averaging 0.4 μg/L. 

Particulate arsenic concentrations were low as well, ranging from <0.1 to 1.8 μg/L and averaging 0.8 

μg/L. Arsenic concentrations in source water measured during the performance evaluation study were 

consistent with those collected previously during source water sampling (Table 4-1). 
36

Table 4-7. Summary of Analytical Results for Arsenic, Iron, and Manganese 

Study 

Period Parameter

Sampling 

Location(a) Unit Count

Concentration Standard 

Minimum Maximum Average Deviation

I 

As (total)

IN

μg/L

42 16.9 26.3 22.2 1.9

TA 42 <0.1 21.9 -

(b) -(b)

TB 42 <0.1 6.1 -

(b) -(b)

As (soluble)

IN

μg/L

9 18.6 23.1 20.8 1.5

TA 9 0.0 18.6 -

(b) -(b)

TB 9 <0.1 2.2 -

(b) -(b)

As 

(particulate)

IN

μg/L

9 <0.1 1.8 0.8 0.6

TA 9 <0.1 0.4 -

(b) -(b)

TB 9 <0.1 0.1 -

(b) -(b)

As (III)

IN

μg/L

9 <0.1 1.1 0.4 0.3

TA 9 <0.1 0.4 -

(b) -(b)

TB 9 <0.1 1.0 -

(b) -(b)

As (V)

IN

μg/L

9 17.5 22.7 20.4 1.7

TA 9 <0.1 18.4 -

(b) -(b)

TB 9 <0.1 2.0 -

(b) -(b)

Fe (total)

IN

μg/L

32 <25 <25 <25 NA

TA 32 <25 <25 <25 NA

TB 32 <25 36.8 <25 NA

Fe (soluble)

IN

μg/L

9 <25 <25 <25 NA

TA 9 <25 <25 <25 NA

TB 9 <25 37.5 <25 NA

Mn (total)

IN

μg/L

32 <0.1 3.4 0.6 0.6

TA 32 <0.1 3.3 0.6 0.7

TB 32 0.2 3.5 1.1 0.9

Mn(soluble)

IN

μg/L

9 0.2 0.9 0.3 0.2

TA 9 0.2 0.8 0.5 0.3

TB 9 0.3 1.6 0.8 0.5

II As (total)

IN

μg/L

13 19.4 22.6 21.0 1.0

TA(c) 13 0.3 2.5 -

(b) -(b)

TB(c) 13 5.7 12.1 -

(b) -(b)

(a) See Figure 4-7 for sampling location.

(b) Not meaningful for concentrations related to breakthrough; see Figures 4-22 and 4-23 and 

Appendix B for results.

(c) Vessel positions switched after rebedding such that TA was after lag vessel and TB after lead vessel.

NA = Not Applicable

One-half of detection limit used for samples with concentrations less than detection limit for 

calculations. 

Figures 4-22 and 4-23 present total arsenic breakthrough curves for Study Periods I and II. In Study 

Period I, total arsenic concentrations following the lead vessel reached 10 μg/L after treating 

approximately 70,310 BV of water (based on 28 ft3 of media in the lead vessel), which was about 8% 

higher than the 65,000 BV of working capacity projected by the vendor (Table 4-4). Afterwards, total 

arsenic concentrations following the lead vessel continued to ramp higher and reached over 70% of 

influent concentrations by the end of Study Period I. By then, the system had treated 27,978,780 gal 
37

Table 4-8. Summary of Water Quality Parameters 

Study 

Period Parameter

Sampling 

Location(a) Unit Count

Concentration Standard 

Minimum Maximum Average Deviation

I 

Alkalinity 

(as CaCO3) 

IN

mg/L

32 136 158 147 5.5

TA 32 141 155 147 3.7

TB 32 141 170 148 6.1

Fluoride

IN

mg/L

9 0.4 0.8 0.7 0.1

TA 9 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.0

TB 9 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.0

Sulfate

IN

mg/L

9 5.4 10.8 9.9 1.7

TA 9 10.1 11.1 10.7 0.3

TB 9 10.3 11.3 10.7 0.3

Nitrate (as N)

IN

mg/L

9 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.1

TA 9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0

TB 9 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.0

Total P (as P)

IN

μg/L

32 <10 18.0 6.0 3.0

TA 32 <10 23.3 6.0 3.6

TB 32 <10 <10 <10 NA

Silica (as SiO2) 

IN

mg/L

32 14.5 18.4 16.4 1.0

TA 32 14.6 17.9 16.4 1.0

TB 32 14.7 19.6 16.6 1.3

Turbidity

IN

NTU 

32 <0.1 2.6 0.8 0.7

TA 32 <0.1 2.9 0.6 0.8

TB 32 <0.1 2.8 0.6 0.8

pH

IN

S.U.

35 6.8 7.4 7.2 0.1

TA 35 7.1 7.8 7.3 0.1

TB 35 7.1 7.4 7.3 0.1

Temperature

IN

°C

35 10.3 16.9 13.2 1.9

TA 35 10.3 16.9 13.1 2.0

TB 35 10.1 16.9 13.1 2.0

DO

IN

mg/L

33 3.6 8.8 6.5 2.1

TA 33 3.8 9.0 6.6 2.0

TB 33 3.8 8.8 6.7 2.0

ORP

IN

mV

35 304 472 421 41

TA 35 309 489 412 41

TB 35 295 493 410 45

Free Chlorine

(as Cl2) TB mg/L 35 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.0

Total Chlorine

(as Cl2) TB mg/L 35 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.1

Total Hardness 

(as CaCO3) 

IN

mg/L

9 117 179 153 18

TA 9 116 171 153 19

TB 9 118 173 155 17

Ca Hardness 

(as CaCO3) 

IN

mg/L

9 95.4 135 117 14

TA 9 93.8 135 118 14

TB 9 98.0 134 120 13

Mg Hardness 

(as CaCO3) 

IN

mg/L

9 18.9 45.1 35.2 7.5

TA 9 19.1 41.5 34.5 6.9

TB 9 19.5 42.7 35.7 7.1
38

Table 4-8. Summary of Water Quality Parameters (Continued)

Study 

Period Parameter

Sampling 

Location(a) Unit Count Minimum Maximum Average

Standard 

Deviation

II(b) 

pH

IN

S.U.

11 6.9 7.2 7.1 0.1

TA 11 7.1 7.3 7.2 0.03

TB 11 7.2 7.3 7.2 0.04

Temperature

IN

°C

11 10.3 11.8 11.3 0.4

TA 11 10.1 11.9 11.3 0.6

TB 11 9.9 12.1 11.3 0.7

DO

IN

mg/L

11 8.2 8.4 8.3 0.1

TA 11 8.2 8.4 8.2 0.1

TB 11 8.2 8.4 8.2 0.1

ORP

IN

mV

11 418 440 432 6.4

TA 11 352 621 440 65

TB 11 316 435 420 35

Free Chlorine 

(as Cl2) TB mg/L 11 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.1

Total Chlorine 

(as Cl2) TB mg/L 11 1.0 1.2 1.0 0.1

(a) See Figure 4-7 for sampling location. 

(b) Vessel positions switched after rebedding; sampling location TA was after lag vessel and TB after lead vessel.

NA = Not Applicable.

One-half of detection limit used for samples with concentrations less than detection limit for calculations.

(or 133,590 BV) of water. At this point, the arsenic concentration following the lag vessel, based on the 

water sample collected on November 17, 2009, was 5.8 μg/L, which was still below the 10-μg/L MCL. 

The system could have run longer and likely would have reached the 10 μg/L level after the two bed 

system (56 ft3

) had treated more than 70,000 BV of water. 

The lead vessel was rebedded with LayneRTTM media (Section 4.4.3) at the end of Study Period I. After 

switching vessel positions, the vessel containing partially exhausted ArsenXnp (in the lead position) 

treated an additional 4,492,800 gal (or 21,340 BV) of water before arsenic concentrations in the vessel

effluent reached 10 μg/L (see Figure 4-23). By the end of Study Period II, arsenic concentrations 

following the lead vessel were 11.7 μg/L (based on the sample collected on May 18, 2010) after treating

an additional 7,051,380 gal (33,670 BV) of water. At this point, the concentration after the lag vessel was 

<1 μg/L. 

According to the breakthrough curves obtained in Study Period I, after reaching 11 to 12 μg/L, the lead 

vessel could treat an additional 10,912,580 gal (52,104 BV) of water before the concentration in the 

vessel effluent would reach 70% of influent concentration. Assuming an average daily production rate of 

42,541 gpd (Table 4-5), the system could operate for an additional 8 months after May 2010 before the 

lead vessel (Vessel B) would require rebedding.

 
39

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000

Total As Concentration (μg/L)

Throughput (gal)

Study Period I

(April 4, 2008 to November 29, 2009)

IN, Influent

TA, After Lead Vessel (Virgin ArsenXnp)

TB, After Lag Vessel (Virgin ArsenXnp)

MCL=10μg/L

Breakthrough at 

14,725,250 gal

or 70,310 BV

Figure 4-22. Total Arsenic Breakthrough Curves in Study Period I

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000

Total As Concentration (μg/L)

Throughput (gal)

Study Period II

(November 30, 2009 to May 23, 2010)

IN, Influent

TA, After Lag Vessel (Virgin LayneRT)

TB, After Lead Vessel (Partially Exhausted ArsenXnp)

MCL=10μg/L

Breakthrough at 

4,492,800 gal

or 21,450 BV

Figure 4-23. Total Arsenic Breakthrough Curves in Study Period II
40

Figure 4-24 contains three bar charts showing concentrations of total arsenic, particulate arsenic, soluble 

As(III), and soluble As(V) at the IN, TA, and TB sampling locations for each of the nine speciation 

sampling events in Study Period I. After treatment, soluble As(V) concentrations reduced to less than the 

MDL of 0.1 μg/L until 90,400 BV (1 BV = 28 ft3

). Afterwards, soluble As(V) started to break through 

the lag vessel and reached 2.0 μg/L at 110,000 BV, according to the result of the last speciation event on 

July 21, 2009. As(III) concentrations reduced only slightly from 0.4 μg/L (on average) in raw water to 

0.3 μg/L (on average) after the lag vessel. The adsorption vessels filtered out some particulate arsenic, 

with the average concentration reduced from 0.8 μg/L in raw water to 0.1 μg/L after the treatment system.

Iron and Manganese. Total iron concentrations in source water and following the adsorption vessels 

were below the MDL of 25 μg/L (Table 4-7), except for the lag vessel sample collected on June 23, 2009, 

with total and soluble concentrations of 36.8 and 37.5 μg/L, respectively. Total manganese levels in 

source water also were low, ranging from <0.1 to 3.4 μg/L and averaging 0.6 μg/L. Total manganese 

concentrations in system effluent were at similar levels to those in source water, ranging from 0.2 to 3.5 

μg/L and averaging 1.1 μg/L. 

Competing Anions. Phosphate and silica, which might influence arsenic adsorption, were measured in 

Study Period I at IN, the TA, and TB sampling locations across the treatment train. Phosphorus 

concentrations were at or below 18 μg/L in source water and below the MDL of 10 μg/L in system 

effluent. Silica concentrations in source water ranged from 14.5 to 18.4 mg/L and averaged 16.4 mg/L. 

No silica reduction was observed after treatment, with concentrations averaged at 16.6 mg/L in the system 

effluent. 

Other Water Quality Parameters. As shown in Table 4-8, alkalinity, reported as CaCO3, ranged from 

136 to 158 mg/L and averaged 147 mg/L in source water. As expected, alkalinity after the treatment 

system remained essentially unchanged at 148 mg/L (on average) after the lag vessel. Sulfate 

concentrations were consistently low, averaging 9.9 mg/L in source water and 10.7 mg/L after the lead 

and lag vessels. Fluoride and nitrate levels ranging from 0.4 to 0.8 mg/L and from 0.2 to 0.6 mg/L (as N), 

respectively, across the treatment train did not appear to have been affected by ArsenXnp. 

Average pH values ranged from 7.2 to 7.3 in Study Period I and from 7.1 to 7.2 in Study Period II. Total 

hardness concentrations, reported as CaCO3, ranged from 117 to 179 mg/L and averaged 153 mg/L in 

source water. Total hardness remained unchanged at 153 to 155 mg/L, on average, following Adsorption 

Vessels A and B. Average DO levels throughout the treatment train ranged from 6.5 to 6.7 mg/L in Study 

Period I, and from 8.2 to 8.3 mg/L in Study Period II. Average ORP readings throughout the treatment 

train ranged from 410 to 421 mV in Study Period I, and ranged from 420 to 440 mV in Study Period II. 

As expected, the mining tunnel water was rather oxidizing. 

4.5.2 Spent Media Sampling. Three sets of spent media samples were collected from the top, 

middle, and bottom of the lead vessel (Vessel A) during media changeout on November 30, 2009. Table 

4-9 presents the ICP-MS results. As shown in the table, arsenic loadings on the spent media were 

constant across the media bed, with 4.43, 4.39, and 4.53 mg/g of dry media measured at the top, middle, 

and bottom of the bed, respectively. The uniform arsenic loading across the media bed indicated that the 

media bed was close to complete exhaustion.

The adsorptive capacity also was calculated by dividing the arsenic mass represented by the area between 

the influent (IN) and the lead vessel effluent (TA) curves, as shown in Figure 4-22, by the amount of dry 

media in lead vessel. Assuming no media loss, the dry weight of the media, i.e., 601 lb/vessel, was 

calculated based on 1,414 lb of wet media (i.e., 28 ft3 of media at an average bulk density of 50.5 lb/ft3

) 

and an average moisture content of 57.5% (Table 4-2). Using this approach, the theoretical arsenic 
41

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

As Contration(

μg/L)

As Species at Wellhead (IN) As(III)

As(V)

As(particulate)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

As Contration (

μg/L)

As Species afterVessel A (TA) As(III)

As(V)

As(particulate)

MCL=10μg/L

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

As Contration(

μg/L)

As Species after Vessel B (TB) As(III)

As(V)

As(particulate)

MCL=10μg/L

Figure 4-24. Arsenic Speciation Results in Study Period I
42

Table 4-9. Spent Media Total Metal Analysis

Analyte (μg/g) Mg P Si Ca Fe Mn As Ba

Vessel A 

Top

Run 1 536 772 3,211 2,381 223,134 3,663 4,536 31.4

Run 2 499 746 3,359 2,387 207,605 3,838 4,316 35.6

Avg. 518 759 3,285 2,384 215,369 3,751 4,426 33.5

Vessel A 

Middle

Run 1 544 754 3,502 2,510 20,368 3,151 4,342 27.6

Run 2 572 797 4,732 2,422 222,570 3,695 4,432 36.3

Avg. 558 775 4,117 2,466 121,469 3,423 4,387 32.0

Vessel A 

Bottom

Run 1 615 882 1,511 2,331 235,353 3,993 4,478 38.4

Run 2 621 1,000 1,585 2,477 241,143 4,234 4,584 35.4

Avg. 618 941 1,548 2,404 238,248 4,113 4,531 36.9

loadings on the media would be 5.50 mg/g of dry media. Therefore, ICP-MS analysis recovered 

approximately 80.8 % of arsenic. 

4.5.3 Backwash Water Sampling. As recommended by the vendor, backwashing of the media

was not conducted during the performance evaluation study.

4.5.4 Distribution System Water Sampling. Distribution system water samples were collected to 

determine if water treated by the arsenic removal system would impact the lead, copper, and arsenic 

levels and other water chemistry in the distribution system. Prior to system startup, baseline distribution

system water samples were collected on October 31, 2007; December 19, 2007; and Februray 21, 2008. 

Since system startup, distribution system water sampling continued monthly at the same three locations 

until July 7, 2009. Table 4-10 presents the results. The stagnation times for the first draw samples ranged 

from 6.5 to 13.0 hr, which met the requirements of the EPA LCR sampling protocol (EPA, 2002). 

Arsenic concentrations were reduced significantly from a pre-startup level of 22.5 μg/L (on average) to a 

post-startup level of 1.1 μg/L. Arsenic concentrations measured in the distribution system water were 

compared to those measured in the plant effluent. As shown in Figure 4-25, before 77,170 BV 

(16,163,800 gal) of throughput, arsenic concentrations in the distribution system water were higher than 

those in the plant effluent. Afterwards, arsenic concentrations decreased to levels similar to the plant

effluent. These results suggest occurrence of some initial redissolution and/or resuspendsion of arsenic

previously accumulated in the distribution system. After that, arsenic concentrations in the distribution 

system water essentially mirrored those of the plant effluent.

Iron concentrations measured in the distribution system were low both before and after system startup, 

with the majority of the samples measured at <25 μg/L. Manganese concentrations also were low both 

before (0.2 μg/L) and after (0.4 μg/L) system startup. Lead concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 3.0 μg/L

after startup, with no sample exceeding the action level of 15 μg/L. Copper concentrations ranged from 

1.9 to 143 μg/L after startup, with no sample exceeding the 1,300 μg/L action level. Compared to 

baseline samples, the average lead concentration reduced from 2.0 μg/L in baseline samples to 0.8 μg/L

after startup; the average copper concentration reduced from 164 μg/L to 46.2 μg/L after startup. 

Measured pH values ranged from 7.4 to 7.8 and averaged 7.5. Alkalinity levels ranged from 139 to 

159 mg/L (as CaCO3) and averaged 147 mg/L. The arsenic treatment system did not seem to affect pH 

and alkalinity levels in the distribution system.
43

Table 4-10. Distribution System Sampling Results

Sampling 

Event

DS1 DS2 DS3

21111 Barefoot Loop 21193 High Ridge 21163 Last Chance

LCR LCR LCR

1st Draw 1st Draw 1st Draw

Stagnation Time pHAlkalinityAsFeMnPbCuStagnation Time pHAlkalinityAsFeMnPbCuStagnation Time pHAlkalinityAsFeMn PbCu

No. Date hr S.U. mg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L hr S.U. mg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L hr S.U. mg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L

BL1 10/31/07 7.0 7.6 157 21.7 <25 0.1 <0.1 85.4 7.3 7.5 147 12.1 <25 0.5 8.7 517 8.0 7.6 145 14.0 66.0 0.7 8.0 433

BL2 12/19/07 11.8 7.6 146 24.7 <25 0.3 0.2 94.0 13.0 7.8 148 23.2 <25 0.2 0.2 8.2 11.0 7.7 148 23.3 <25 0.3 0.6 24.5 

BL3 02/21/08 8.0 7.5 151 28.6 <25 <0.1 0.2 101 10.0 7.5 151 27.7 <25 <0.1 <0.1 91.1 11.0 7.5 147 27.1 <25 <0.1 <0.1 117

1 08/11/08 8.0 7.5 146 3.8 <25 <0.1 1.6 130 9.5 7.5 148 1.5 <25 0.3 1.2 26.6 9.5 7.8 146 2.1 <25 0.5 1.0 63.0

2 09/04/08 10.3 7.5 142 3.8 <25 0.1 1.9 143 10.8 7.5 146 1.7 <25 1.2 0.8 61.3 9.8 7.5 146 1.3 <25 0.6 3.0 38.4

3 10/01/08 6.5 7.5 139 1.1 <25 0.6 1.8 31.6 6.3 7.6 141 1.4 <25 0.4 0.7 63.4 6.5 7.5 141 1.2 <25 0.4 0.1 31.2

4 10/30/08 NA 7.4 143 0.6 <25 0.2 0.6 18.5 NA 7.5 143 0.5 <25 0.5 1.1 41.3 NA 7.5 146 0.7 <25 0.2 <0.1 1.9

5 12/03/08 NA 7.5 152 0.3 <25 0.2 <0.1 10.6 NA 7.7 159 0.8 <25 0.4 1.1 98.4 NA 7.5 157 0.6 <25 <0.1 2.5 114

6 01/08/09 8.0 7.8 146 0.4 <25 0.1 <0.1 9.1 9.0 7.6 146 0.7 <25 0.4 0.7 119 9.5 7.5 144 1.4 <25 1.1 0.8 22.5

7 02/25/09 7.8 7.5 148 1.1 <25 0.6 0.2 33.1 8.0 7.4 148 1.4 <25 2.1 0.9 23.2 8.5 7.5 144 0.6 <25 0.1 <0.1 27.2

8 03/19/09 8.0 7.5 145 0.4 <25 0.1 0.5 66.3 8.0 7.4 149 <0.1 <25 <0.1 1.9 39.0 6.5 7.4 153 <0.1 <25 0.2 0.1 2.7 

9 04/15/09 7.5 7.6 148 0.4 <25 <0.1 0.6 140 9.5 7.8 141 0.2 <25 0.1 <0.1 18.1 10.5 7.6 159 <0.1 <25 <0.1 1.5 33.0

10 05/13/09 11.5 7.8 145 0.7 <25 0.2 <0.1 10.3 11.0 7.6 145 0.5 <25 0.2 1.6 37.0 11.0 7.7 145 1.0 <25 0.4 1.3 138

11 06/11/09 10.5 7.4 150 1.3 <25 0.2 0.2 5.8 9.5 7.4 150 1.2 <25 0.2 0.2 5.7 10.0 7.5 152 1.2 <25 0.2 0.4 9.9

12 07/07/09 10.0 7.6 155 1.8 <25 0.2 <0.1 18.4 7.0 7.5 150 1.7 <25 0.2 0.2 15.0 10.5 7.5 148 1.7 <25 0.5 0.3 16.5

Lead action level = 15 μg/L; copper action level = 1.3 mg/L 

BL = baseline sampling; NA = not available 

The unit for alkalinity is mg/L as CaCO3. 
44

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000

Total As Concentration (μg/L)

Throughput (gal)

Study Period I

(April 4, 2008 to November 29, 2009)

TB

DS1

DS2

DS3

Figure 4-25. Arsenic Concentrations Measured in Distribution System Water

4.6 System Cost

System cost was evaluated based on the capital cost per gpm (or gpd) of the design capacity and the 

O&M cost per 1,000 gal of water treated. The capital cost includes the cost for equipment, site

engineering, and installation. The O&M cost includes the cost for media replacement and disposal, 

electrical use, and labor.

4.6.1 Capital Cost. The capital investment for equipment, site engineering, and installation of the 

treatment system was $87,892 (see Table 4-11). The equipment cost was $60,678 (or 69% of the total 

capital investment), which included the cost for two adsorption vessels, system skid frame, 56 ft3

 of 

ArsenXnp media, prefilter, flowmeter, and shipping. 

The engineering cost included the cost for the design work necessary to develop the final system layout 

and footprint within the building, design of the piping connections up to the water storage reservoir inlet 

pipe, and the design of the electrical connection and conduit plan. The engineering cost also included the 

cost for the submission of the plans and permit application to SD DENR. The site engineering cost was 

$14,214, or 16% of the total capital investment. 

The installation cost included the equipment and labor to unload and install the skid-mounted unit, 

perform piping tie-ins and electrical work, load and backwash the media, perform system shakedown and 

startup, and conduct operator training. The installation cost was $13,000, or 15% of the total capital 

investment.
45

Table 4-11. Capital Investment Cost for Lead, SD System

Description Quantity Cost

% of Capital 

Investment Cost

Equipment Cost

System Skid Frame 1 $17,625 –

Fiberglass Pressure Vessels 2 $8,125 –

Prefilter Assembly 1 $3,350 –

ArsenXnp Media (ft3) 56 $23,800 –

Totalizer/flow meter 1 $1,778 –

Shipping – $6,000 –

Equipment Total – $60,678 69

Engineering Cost

Vendor Labor – $14,214 –

Engineering Total – $14,214 16

Installation Cost

Vendor Labor – $10,000 –

Subcontractor Labor – $1,000 –

Travel – $2,000 –

Installation Total – $13,000 15

Total Capital Investment – $87,892 100

The total capital cost of $87,892 was normalized to the system’s rated capacity of 75 gpm (108,000 gpd), 

which resulted in $1,172/gpm of design capacity ($0.81/gpd). The capital cost also was converted to an 

annualized cost of $8,296/yr using a capital recovery factor (CRF) of 0.09439 based on a 7% interest rate 

and a 20-year return period. Assuming that the system operated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at the 

system design flowrate of 75 gpm to produce 39,420,000 gal of water per year, the unit capital cost would 

be $0.21/1,000 gal. Because the system operated an average of 12 hr/day at approximately 71.5 gpm 

(based on the data in Study Period I, see Table 4-5), producing 18,790,000 gal of water annually, the unit

capital cost increased to $0.44/1,000 gal at this reduced rate of use.

4.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost. The O&M cost included the cost for media replacement 

and disposal, electricity, and labor (Table 4-12). The media replacement and disposal cost was $9,693, 

including the cost for 28 ft3 of LayneRTTM media and freight for shipping the virgin LayneRTTM media to 

the site and the spent ArsenXnp media to a SolmeteX location. Because the facility performed rebedding 

itself, the cost did not include labor and equipment for removing the spent media and loading the new 

media. To encourage the use of LayneRTTM for rebedding, the vendor offered a discounted price of 

$250/ft3

, instead of its regular price of $480/ft3. Therefore, an adjusted cost of $16,133 (including the cost 

for 28 ft3 of LayneRTTM at $480/ft3 and the freight as discussed above) was used to calculate the media 

replacement cost per 1,000 gal of water treated as a function of total throughput at 10-μg/L arsenic 

breakthrough from the lag vessel (Figure 4-26). Should additional cost for labor and equipment be 

included, the rebedding cost would be higher than $16,133.

Comparison of electrical bills before and after system startup did not indicate any noticeable increase in 

power consumption. Therefore, electrical cost associated with system operation was assumed to be 

negligible.

The chemical cost associated with the operation of the treatment system included only post-chlorination. 

This treatment step was in use at the site prior to installation of the treatment system. Therefore, the

incremental chemical cost for the treatment system was negligible. 
46

Under normal operating conditions, routine labor activities to operate and maintain the system consumed 

an average of 1 hr/day. Therefore, the estimated labor cost was $0.40/1,000 gal of water treated based on 

this time commitment and a labor rate of $21/hr. This estimation assumes that maintenance and 

operational procedures were consistently performed through the completion of the system performance 

evaluation. 

Table 4-12. Operation and Maintenance Cost for the Lead System

Cost Category Value Assumptions

Volume Processed (gal/year) 18,790,000 Based on 12 hr/day and 71.5 gpm flowrate

Media Replacement and Disposal

Media Cost ($) 7,000 or 13,440 28 ft3 of LayneRTTM media at $250/ft3

(discounted price) or $480/ft3 (regular price)

Shipping ($) 1,418 –

Freight of Spent Media to

SolmeteX Facility ($)

1,275 –

Subtotal ($) 9,693 or 16,133 With a media cost of either $7,000 or 

$13,440

Media Replacement and Disposal 

Cost ($/1000 gal)

See Figure 4-26 Based upon media run length at 10μg/L 

arsenic breakthrough

Electricity Consumption

Power Use ($/1,000 gal) Negligible –

Labor

Average Weekly Labor (hr/wk) 7 1 hr/day; 7 day/wk

Total Labor Hours (hr/year) 364 –

Total Labor Cost ($/year) 7,644 Labor rate=$21/hr

Labor Cost ($/1,000 gal) 0.40 –

Total O&M Cost/1,000 gal See Figure 4-26 Based upon media run length at 10μg/L 

arsenic breakthrough
47

$0.00

$0.50

$1.00

$1.50

$2.00

$2.50

$3.00

$3.50

$4.00

$4.50

$5.00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

Cost ($/1,000 gal)

Media Working Capacity, Bed Volumes (x1,000)

O&M cost

Media replacement cost

Note: One bed volume equals 28 ft3 (209 gal) 

Figure 4-26. Media Replacement and Operation and Maintenance Cost
48

5.0 REFERENCES

Battelle. 2007. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Evaluation of Arsenic Removal Technology. 

Prepared under Contract No. EP-C-05-057, Task Order No. 0019, for U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. 

Battelle. 2007. System Performance Evaluation Study Plan: U.S. EPA Arsenic Removal Technology 

Demonstration - Round 2a at Lead, South Dakota. Prepared under Contract No. EP-C-05-057, 

Task Order No. 0019 for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management 

Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. 

Chen, A.S.C., L. Wang, J. Oxenham, and W. Condit. 2004. Capital Costs of Arsenic Removal

Technologies: U.S. EPA Arsenic Removal Technology Demonstration Program Round 1. 

EPA/600/R-04/201. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management 

Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. 

Edwards, M., S. Patel, L. McNeill, H. Chen, M. Frey, A.D. Eaton, R.C. Antweiler, and H.E. Taylor. 

1998. “Considerations in As Analysis and Speciation.” J. AWWA, 90(3):103-113.

EPA. 2001. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Arsenic and Clarifications to Compliance 

and New Source Contaminants Monitoring. Fed. Register, 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142.

EPA. 2002. Lead and Copper Monitoring and Reporting Guidance for Public Water Systems. 

EPA/816/R-02/009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. 

EPA. 2003. Minor Clarification of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for Arsenic. 

Federal Register, 40 CFR Part 141.

Meng, X.G., S. Bang, and G.P. Korfiatis. 2000. "Effects of Silicate, Sulfate, and Carbonate on Arsenic 

Removal by Ferric Chloride." Water Research, 34(4):1255-1261. 

Meng, X.G., G.P. Korfiatis, S.B. Bang, and K.W. Bang. 2002. "Combined Effects of Anions on Arsenic 

Removal by Iron Hydroxides." Toxicology Letters, 133(1):103-111. 

Schreier, A.M. 2005. Terry Trojan Water District Distribution, Storage & Transmission System

Planning Study, prepared by Schreier Engineering for Terry Trojan Water District.

Wang, L., A.S.C. Chen, and K. Fields. 2000. Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water by Ion Exchange 

and Activated Alumina Plants. EPA/600/R-00/088. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. 

Wang, L., W. Condit, and A. Chen. 2004. Technology Selection and System Design: U.S. EPA Arsenic 

Removal Technology Demonstration Program Round 1. EPA/600/R-05/001. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, 

OH. 
APPENDIX A

OPERATIONAL DATA
A-1

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Fri 04/04/08 NM 11 74 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 450,943 NA NA

Sat 04/05/08 NM 11 74 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 530,566 79,623 NA

Mon 04/07/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 697,152 246,209 NA

Tues 04/08/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 787,412 336,469 NA

Wed 04/09/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 868,703 417,760 NA

Thur 04/10/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 955,531 504,588 NA

Fri 04/11/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 972,404 521,461 NA

Sat 04/12/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 987,800 536,857 NA

Sun 04/13/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 1,003,943 553,000 NA

Mon 04/14/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 1,045,719 594,776 NA

Tues 04/15/08 NM 11 72 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 1,078,003 627,060 NA

Wed 04/16/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 1,117,155 666,212 NA

Thur 04/17/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 5 2 NA 3 1,156,805 705,862 NA

Fri 04/18/08 NM 11 72 18 NM NM 7 3 NA 4 1,197,999 747,056 NA

Sat 04/19/08 NM 11 69 32 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 1,245,574 794,631 NA

Sun 04/20/08 NM 11 70 25 NM NM 12 5 NA 7 1,297,428 846,485 NA

Mon 04/21/08 NM 11 71 20 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 1,323,854 872,911 NA

Tues 04/22/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 6 3 NA 3 1,377,283 926,340 NA

Wed 04/23/08 NM 11 73 19 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 1,406,836 955,893 NA

Thur 04/24/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 1,443,849 992,906 NA

Fri 04/25/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 6 4 NA 2 1,480,288 1,029,345 NA

Sat 04/26/08 NM 11 73 18 NM NM 6 4 NA 2 1,511,968 1,061,025 NA

Sun 04/27/08 NM 11 72 18 NM NM 8 5 NA 3 1,556,732 1,105,789 NA

Mon 04/28/08 NM 11 74 16 NM NM 8 2 NA 6 NM 1,105,789 NA

Tue 04/29/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 8 2 NA 6 1,597,741 1,146,798 NA

Wed 04/30/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 8 2 NA 6 1,618,019 1,167,076 NA

Thu 05/01/08 NM 11 73 18 NM NM 6 2 NA 4 1,637,874 1,186,931 NA

Fri 05/02/08

Sat 05/03/08

Sun 05/04/08

Mon 05/05/08

Tue 05/06/08

Wed 05/07/08 NM 11 73 18 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 1,658,575 1,207,632 NA

Thu 05/08/08 NM 11 73 18 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 1,679,314 1,228,371 NA

Fri 05/09/08 NM 11 72 18 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 1,701,297 1,250,354 NA

Sat 05/10/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 1,724,244 1,273,301 NA

Sun 05/11/08 NM 11 75 16 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 1,745,029 1,294,086 NA

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Study Period I

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

3

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Rotameter 

Flowrate 

System Pressure 

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

ΔP Tank 

A

4

5

6

1

2

System bypassed due to snow storm (05/02/08 to 05/06/08). 
A-2

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 05/12/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 1,766,068 1,315,125 NA

Tue 05/13/08 NM 11 72 24 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 1,795,783 1,344,840 NA

Wed 05/14/08 NM 11 74 16 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 1,818,567 1,385,593 NA

Thu 05/15/08 NM 11 73 16 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 2,915 1,426,345 NA

Fri 05/16/08 NM 11 73 18 NM NM 5 3 NA 2 11,376 1,467,098 NA

Sat 05/17/08 NM 11 74 24 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 12,268 1,507,851 NA

Sun 05/18/08 NM 11 74 20 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 16,432 1,548,604 NA

Mon 05/19/08 NM 11 74 20 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 24,335 1,589,356 NA

Tue 05/20/08 NM 11 72 20 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 28,015 1,630,109 NA

Wed 05/21/08 NM 11 72 26 NM NM 13 7 NA 6 33,887 1,670,862 NA

Thu 05/22/08 NM 11 73 24 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 39,695 1,711,615 NA

Fri 05/23/08 NM 11 72 24 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 43,432 1,752,367 NA

Sat 05/24/08 NM 11 73 26 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 48,743 1,793,120 NA

Sun 05/25/08 NM 11 73 26 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 55,685 1,833,873 NA

Mon 05/26/08 49.4 11 73 20 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 60,065 1,874,625 NA

Tue 05/27/08 61.2 12 75 22 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 66,159 1,915,378 58

Wed 05/28/08 73.7 13 73 22 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 72,681 1,956,131 54

Thu 05/29/08 81.6 8 73 24 NM NM 18 9 NA 9 36,301 1,996,884 86

Fri 05/30/08 92.7 11 73 28 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 93,079 2,053,662 85

Sat 05/31/08 102.9 10 73 20 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 147,784 2,108,367 89

Sun 06/01/08 113.9 11 75 24 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 204,452 2,165,035 86

Mon 06/02/08 126.8 13 75 22 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 275,346 2,235,929 92

Tue 06/03/08 138.0 11 73 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 333,863 2,294,446 87

Wed 06/04/08 145.5 8 73 25 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 369,737 2,330,320 80

Thu 06/05/08 157.4 12 73 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 425,395 2,385,978 78

Fri 06/06/08 166.6 9 73 26 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 469,369 2,429,952 80

Sat 06/07/08 176.0 9 75 26 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 513,290 2,473,873 78

Sun 06/08/08 188.9 13 75 26 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 578,257 2,538,840 84

Mon 06/09/08 198.5 10 75 24 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 623,175 2,583,758 78

Tue 06/10/08 211.4 13 NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA 687,856 2,648,439 84

Wed 06/11/08 218.0 7 NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA 719,487 2,680,070 80

Thu 06/12/08 231.3 13 74 28 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 783,240 2,743,823 80

Fri 06/13/08 239.1 8 73 28 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 821,378 2,781,961 81

Sat 06/14/08 252.9 14 75 28 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 886,710 2,847,293 79

Mon 06/16/08 276.1 12 74 27 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 1,002,115 2,962,698 83

Tue 06/17/08 286.5 10 75 23 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 1,053,321 3,013,904 82

Wed 06/18/08 300.8 14 76 24 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 1,126,185 3,086,768 85

Thu 06/19/08 311.6 11 76 24 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 1,178,725 3,139,308 81

Fri 06/20/08 323.8 12 75 24 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 1,240,565 3,201,148 84

Sat 06/21/08 334.1 10 75 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 1,290,024 3,250,607 80

Sun 06/22/08 346.4 12 74 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 1,351,572 3,312,155 83

9

10

11

12

7

8

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-3

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 06/23/08 356.9 11 74 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 1,401,599 3,362,182 NA

Tue 06/24/08 367.6 11 74 27 NM NM 13 6 NA 7 1,454,473 3,415,056 82

Wed 06/25/08 377.6 10 75 27 NM NM 13 6 NA 7 1,501,395 3,461,978 78

Thu 06/26/08 390.7 13 75 27 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 1,568,190 3,528,773 85

Fri 06/27/08 403.4 13 75 28 NM NM 14 8 NA 6 1,630,365 3,590,948 82

Sat 06/28/08 416.1 13 78 28 NM NM 14 8 NA 6 1,695,950 3,656,533 86

Sun 06/29/08 429.2 13 78 22 NM NM 14 6 NA 8 1,760,777 3,721,360 82

Mon 06/30/08 443.7 15 73 24 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 1,834,770 3,795,353 85

Tue 07/01/08 452.7 9 75 26 NM NM 13 6 NA 7 1,877,045 3,837,628 78

Wed 07/02/08 468.4 16 75 26 NM NM 13 6 NA 7 1,957,706 3,918,289 86

Thu 07/03/08 478.9 11 73 28 NM NM 13 6 NA 7 2,008,640 3,969,223 81

Fri 07/04/08 491.7 13 72 22 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 2,074,147 4,034,730 85

Sat 07/05/08 504.4 13 73 28 NM NM 6 3 NA 3 2,136,513 4,097,096 82

Sun 07/06/08 522.9 19 75 25 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 2,233,615 4,194,198 87

Mon 07/07/08 536.9 14 75 24 NM NM 11 5 NA 6 2,306,547 4,267,130 87

Tue 07/08/08 549.8 13 74 27 NM NM 13 7 NA 6 2,370,001 4,330,584 82

Wed 07/09/08 562.3 13 74 27 NM NM 13 7 NA 6 2,431,807 4,392,390 82

Thu 07/10/08 578.1 16 50 21 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 2,503,321 4,463,904 75

Fri 07/11/08 595.7 18 75 24 NM NM 11 5 NA 6 2,561,771 4,522,354 55

Sat 07/12/08 613.4 18 73 26 NM NM 10 5 NA 5 2,621,181 4,581,764 56

Sun 07/13/08 631.3 18 73 27 NM NM 13 7 NA 6 2,682,702 4,643,285 57

Mon 07/14/08 651.4 20 50 15 NM NM 7 3 NA 4 2,751,444 4,712,027 57

Tue 07/15/08 670.2 19 50 15 NM NM 7 3 NA 4 2,815,474 4,776,057 57

Wed 07/16/08 687.4 17 50 15 NM NM 7 3 NA 4 2,889,730 4,850,313 72

Thu 07/17/08 706.7 19 55 15 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 2,963,925 4,924,508 64

Fri 07/18/08 726.3 20 50 16 NM NM 8 4 NA 4 3,036,473 4,997,056 62

Sat 07/19/08 743.8 18 50 15 NM NM 7 3 NA 4 3,110,292 5,070,875 70

Sun 07/20/08 765.7 22 50 15 NM NM 7 3 NA 4 3,149,210 5,109,793 30

Mon 07/21/08 779.4 14 50 15 NM NM 7 3 NA 4 3,185,073 5,145,656 44

Tue 07/22/08 790.9 12 75 24 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 3,233,417 5,194,000 70

Wed 07/23/08 803.7 13 73 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 3,295,150 5,255,733 80

Thu 07/24/08 816.7 13 73 27 NM NM 13 7 NA 6 3,358,890 5,319,473 82

Fri 07/25/08 826.5 10 73 25 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 3,405,356 5,365,939 79

Sat 07/26/08 840.7 14 73 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 3,476,456 5,437,039 83

Sun 07/27/08 852.9 12 72 25 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 3,535,410 5,495,993 81

Mon 07/28/08 863.8 11 72 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 3,587,627 5,548,210 80

Tue 07/29/08 874.7 11 73 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 3,640,049 5,600,632 80

Wed 07/30/08 885.5 11 73 27 NM NM 13 6 NA 7 3,691,447 5,652,030 79

Thu 07/31/08 897.7 12 75 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 3,750,222 5,710,805 80

Fri 08/01/08 904.7 7 75 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 3,782,008 5,742,591 76

Sat 08/02/08 942.8 20 72 26 NM NM 12 6 NA 6 3,853,562 5,814,145 58

Sun 08/03/08 948.8 6 73 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 3,882,156 5,842,739 79

17

18

13

14

15

16

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-4

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 08/04/08 962.8 13 75 18 NM NM 9 4 NA 5 3,949,482 5,910,065 80

Tue 08/05/08 977.9 20 73 18 NM NM 9 4 NA 5 4,024,852 5,985,435 83

Wed 08/06/08 995.9 18 73 16 NM NM 8 3 NA 5 4,080,733 6,041,316 52

Thu 08/07/08

Fri 08/08/08 1020.4 12 75 17 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 4,301,030 6,261,613 NA

Sat 08/09/08 1048.6 11 73 17 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 4,452,535 6,413,118 NA

Sun 08/10/08 1056.4 11 73 17 NM NM 4 2 NA 2 4,568,553 6,529,136 NA

Mon 08/11/08 1056.9 11 75 28 NM NM 18 9 NA 9 4,570,318 6,530,901 59

Tue 08/12/08 1065.6 11 73 27 NM NM 16 8 NA 8 4,633,330 6,593,913 NA

Wed 08/13/08

Thu 08/14/08 1075.6 11 73 28 NM NM 14 7 NA 7 4,683,140 6,643,723 83

Fri 08/15/08 1095.5 11 72 25 24 24 12 6 12 6 4,785,418 6,746,001 57

Sat 08/16/08 1105.4 11 73 26 25 24 13 7 11 6 4,834,092 6,794,675 82

Sun 08/17/08 1110.1 11 73 26 25 24 13 7 11 6 4,857,495 6,818,078 83

Mon 08/18/08 1125.3 13 73 22 20 18 8 4 10 4 4,934,492 6,895,075 84

Tue 08/19/08 1139.2 14 73 22 20 18 8 4 10 4 5,003,753 6,964,336 83

Wed 08/20/08 1148.5 9 73 27 26 24 13 7 11 6 5,049,700 7,010,283 82

Thu 08/21/08 1155.6 7 75 29 28 16 7 3 9 4 5,083,900 7,044,483 80

Fri 08/22/08 1168.3 13 73 23 22 15 7 4 8 3 5,149,907 7,110,490 87

Sat 08/23/08 1183.2 14 73 22 21 16 8 4 8 4 5,224,392 7,184,975 83

Sun 08/24/08 1198.4 15 73 27 26 17 8 4 9 4 5,300,845 7,261,428 84

Mon 08/25/08 1210.5 13 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 5,361,060 7,321,643 83

Tue 08/26/08 1220.3 10 72 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 5,408,335 7,368,918 80

Wed 08/27/08 1227.6 7 72 29 26 27 26 16 NA 10 5,444,144 7,404,727 82

Thu 08/28/08 1239.1 11 72 27 26 25 15 7 10 8 5,503,192 7,463,775 86

Fri 08/29/08 1255.8 17 72 26 25 23 16 8 7 8 5,587,294 7,547,877 84

Sat 08/30/08 1270.0 14 72 27 26 25 14 7 11 7 5,658,017 7,618,600 83

Sun 08/31/08 1284.4 14 73 23 22 22 10 8 12 2 5,729,809 7,690,392 83

Mon 09/01/08 1290.0 6 73 29 28 26 16 8 10 8 5,756,131 7,716,714 78

Tue 09/02/08 1305.0 15 72 29 28 26 16 8 10 8 5,833,854 7,794,437 86

Wed 09/03/08 1316.5 11 72 26 25 24 14 7 10 7 5,890,681 7,851,264 82

Thu 09/04/08 1324.6 8 72 28 27 25 16 7 9 9 5,929,712 7,890,295 80

Fri 09/05/08 1329.9 5 73 27 26 24 17 8 7 9 5,957,337 7,917,920 87

Sat 09/06/08 1343.0 13 73 28 26 25 16 9 9 7 6,021,900 7,982,483 82

Sun 09/07/08 1363.4 20 72 28 27 25 16 8 9 8 6,125,041 8,085,624 84

Mon 09/08/08 1375.7 13 73 24 23 21 11 6 10 5 6,186,888 8,147,471 84

Tue 09/09/08 1386.5 11 72 28 26 25 12 7 13 5 6,241,387 8,201,970 84

Wed 09/10/08 1399.2 13 72 28 26 25 12 7 13 5 6,307,404 8,267,987 87

Thu 09/11/08 1413.5 14 73 27 25 24 11 6 13 5 6,373,515 8,334,098 77

Fri 09/12/08 1425.9 12 73 22 21 20 10 5 10 5 6,413,199 8,373,782 53

Sat 09/13/08 1442.0 15 48 21 20 19 10 5 9 5 6,475,642 8,436,225 65

Sun 09/14/08 1455.6 14 73 28 26 25 12 7 13 5 6,543,467 8,504,050 83

21

22

23

24

19 Lighting striked the well pump controler on 8/7/08, the system was off.

20

System was offline to install a pressure gauge after the rotameter

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-5

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 09/15/08 1468.8 14 73 24 26 21 11 6 10 5 6,609,464 8,570,047 83

Tue 09/16/08 1489.9 21 73 24 23 22 12 7 10 5 6,721,539 8,682,122 89

Wed 09/17/08 1501.1 11 73 27 25 24 14 7 10 7 6,776,191 8,736,774 81

Thu 09/18/08 1505.9 5 73 26 25 24 13 7 11 6 6,800,196 8,760,779 83

Fri 09/19/08 1523.3 17 73 26 25 24 13 7 11 6 6,888,419 8,849,002 85

Sat 09/20/08 1539.9 16 72 25 24 22 12 6 10 6 6,971,355 8,931,938 83

Sun 09/21/08 1550.6 11 72 26 25 24 13 7 11 6 7,023,685 8,984,268 82

Mon 09/22/08 1560.1 10 73 26 25 23 13 7 10 6 7,072,619 9,033,202 86

Tue 09/23/08 1572.6 12 73 26 25 23 13 7 10 6 7,134,063 9,094,646 82

Wed 09/24/08 1576.2 4 73 23 21 20 10 5 10 5 7,149,897 9,110,480 73

Thu 09/25/08 1588.3 12 73 24 23 18 12 6 6 6 7,211,874 9,172,457 85

Fri 09/26/08 1601.4 13 73 26 23 23 13 6 10 7 7,276,458 9,237,041 82

Sat 09/27/08 1610.4 9 72 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 7,320,076 9,280,659 81

Sun 09/28/08 1617.0 7 73 24 23 21 13 6 8 7 7,353,836 9,314,419 85

Mon 09/29/08 1631.1 15 73 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 7,423,605 9,384,188 82

Tue 09/30/08 1637.1 6 73 28 27 26 15 7 11 8 7,451,319 9,411,902 77

Wed 10/01/08 1644.8 8 72 26 25 24 13 6 11 7 7,490,612 9,451,195 85

Thu 10/02/08 1658.1 13 73 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 7,556,709 9,517,292 83

Fri 10/03/08 1664.8 7 73 28 27 26 16 7 10 9 7,589,695 9,550,278 82

Sat 10/04/08 1670.2 5 73 27 26 25 14 7 11 7 7,618,005 9,578,588 87

Sun 10/05/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NM NA

Mon 10/06/08 1692.1 11 73 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 7,728,055 9,688,638 84

Tue 10/07/08 1695.7 4 73 27 26 25 14 7 11 7 7,746,756 9,707,339 87

Wed 10/08/08 1709.2 13 73 28 26 25 14 7 11 7 7,814,795 9,775,378 84

Thu 10/09/08 1718.5 9 75 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 7,861,585 9,822,168 84

Fri 10/10/08 1727.5 7 73 28 27 25 16 7 9 9 7,906,457 9,867,040 83

Sat 10/11/08 1734.3 10 73 26 26 25 13 6 12 7 7,942,303 9,902,886 88

Sun 10/12/08 1746.5 12 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 8,004,129 9,964,712 84

Mon 10/13/08 1754.5 8 73 28 27 26 14 7 12 7 8,043,939 10,004,522 83

Tue 10/14/08 1763.6 9 73 27 26 26 14 7 12 7 8,088,197 10,048,780 81

Wed 10/15/08 1773.2 10 73 27 26 25 13 6 12 7 8,132,891 10,093,474 78

Thu 10/16/08 1779.7 6 73 28 27 26 16 8 10 8 8,164,479 10,125,062 81

Fri 10/17/08 1789.2 9 73 28 27 26 16 8 10 8 8,204,655 10,165,238 70

Sat 10/18/08 1800.3 11 73 27 26 25 15 8 10 7 8,262,384 10,222,967 87

Sun 10/19/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA 8,262,384 NA NA

Mon 10/20/08 1810.9 11 73 28 28 24 16 8 8 8 8,312,538 10,273,121 80

Tue 10/21/08 1819.5 9 73 28 26 24 17 8 7 9 8,356,018 10,316,601 84

Wed 10/22/08 1828.3 9 73 27 25 25 16 7 9 9 8,398,851 10,359,434 81

Thu 10/23/08 1837.9 10 73 27 26 24 16 7 8 9 8,445,286 10,405,869 81

Fri 10/24/08 1852.4 11 73 28 27 24 16 8 8 8 8,515,860 10,476,443 81

Sat 10/25/08 1856.7 6 73 28 26 24 14 7 10 7 8,544,813 10,505,396 112

Sun 10/26/08 1868.5 12 73 28 26 25 16 7 9 9 8,590,337 10,550,920 64

27

28

29

30

25

26

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-6

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 10/27/08 1875.2 7 73 26 25 24 12 6 12 6 8,623,114 10,583,697 82

Tue 10/28/08 1884.0 9 73 26 24 24 12 6 12 6 8,665,169 10,625,752 80

Wed(c) 10/29/08 1917.6 24 73 26 25 24 11 6 13 5 8,712,745 10,673,328 24

Thu 10/30/08 1923.9 10 73 28 25 24 11 6 13 5 8,738,054 10,698,637 67

Fri 10/31/08 1934.0 10 72 27 26 22 12 6 10 6 8,780,648 10,741,231 70

Sat 11/01/08 1945.5 11 73 28 27 24 13 7 11 6 8,826,225 10,786,808 66

Sun 11/02/08 1952.7 7 73 26 25 24 12 6 12 6 8,853,129 10,813,712 62

Mon 11/03/08 1962.6 10 73 26 25 24 12 6 12 6 8,895,512 10,856,095 71

Tue 11/04/08 1970.1 7 73 26 25 24 12 6 12 6 8,923,719 10,884,302 63

Wed 11/05/08 1981.3 11 73 26 25 24 13 7 11 6 8,969,492 10,930,075 68

Thu 11/06/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Fri 11/07/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 11/08/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sun 11/09/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Mon 11/10/08 2026.9 8 73 27 26 24 13 6 11 7 9,148,836 11,109,419 66

Tue 11/11/08 2037.9 11 73 27 26 24 12 7 12 5 9,193,209 11,153,792 67

Wed 11/12/08 2044.7 7 73 26 25 20 8 4 12 4 9,220,705 11,181,288 67

Thu 11/13/08 2058.7 14 73 26 25 20 7 3 13 4 9,279,276 11,239,859 70

Fri 11/14/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 11/15/08 2071.8 7 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,331,992 11,292,575 67

Sun 11/16/08 2085.0 12 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,384,717 11,345,300 67

Mon 11/17/08 2094.5 8 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,421,574 11,382,157 65

Tue 11/18/08 2103.0 9 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,456,191 11,416,774 68

Wed 11/19/08 2111.6 9 72 26 25 22 12 6 10 6 9,490,808 11,451,391 67

Thu 11/20/08 2121.6 10 73 28 27 24 12 6 12 6 9,530,030 11,490,613 65

Fri 11/21/08 2129.8 8 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,562,912 11,523,495 67

Sat 11/22/08 2138.0 13 73 25 24 20 10 5 10 5 9,595,794 11,556,377 67

Sun 11/23/08 2147.7 10 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,634,250 11,594,833 66

Mon 11/24/08 2157.4 7 72 27 26 22 13 6 9 7 9,672,701 11,633,284 66

Tue 11/25/08 2164.4 7 73 28 27 24 14 7 10 7 9,700,324 11,660,907 66

Wed 11/26/08 2176.1 12 73 28 27 24 14 7 10 7 9,746,149 11,706,732 65

Thu 11/27/08 2184.0 8 74 29 28 26 15 8 11 7 9,777,579 11,738,162 66

Fri 11/28/08 2191.9 8 73 28 27 24 14 7 10 7 9,808,999 11,769,582 66

Sat 11/29/08 2205.6 19 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,866,543 11,827,126 70

Sun 11/30/08 2219.4 14 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,924,168 11,884,751 70

Mon 12/01/08 2228.5 7 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 9,961,804 11,922,387 69

Tue 12/02/08 2239.3 11 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 10,004,198 11,964,781 65

Wed 12/03/08 2248.1 9 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 10,039,534 12,000,117 67

Thu 12/04/08 2254.1 6 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 10,062,560 12,023,143 64

Fri 12/05/08 2266.7 13 73 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 10,111,892 12,072,475 65

Sat 12/06/08 2273.2 10 73 28 27 25 12 6 13 6 10,137,311 12,097,894 65

Sun 12/07/08 2281.4 8 73 27 26 24 14 7 10 7 10,169,079 12,129,662 65

35

36

31

32

33

34

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-7

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 12/08/08 2295.8 10 73 28 27 26 14 7 12 7 10,228,452 12,189,035 69

Tue 12/09/08 2302.3 7 73 25 24 22 8 4 14 4 10,252,220 12,212,803 61

Wed 12/10/08 2314.5 12 73 28 27 26 14 7 12 7 10,301,960 12,262,543 68

Thu 12/11/08 2321.2 7 73 28 27 26 14 7 12 7 10,328,468 12,289,051 66

Fri 12/12/08 2331.9 11 73 28 27 26 14 7 12 7 10,370,303 12,330,886 65

Sat 12/13/08 2344.9 20 73 28 27 26 13 7 13 6 10,409,162 12,369,745 50

Sun 12/14/08 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Mon 12/15/08 2357.9 5 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 10,531,444 12,492,027 NA

Tue 12/16/08 2365.0 7 73 28 27 26 14 7 12 7 10,558,934 12,519,517 65

Wed 12/17/08 2382.2 17 73 23 20 20 8 4 12 4 10,631,758 12,592,341 71

Thu 12/18/08 2394.5 12 73 23 21 20 8 4 12 4 10,683,047 12,643,630 69

Fri 12/19/08 2411.5 17 73 24 21 20 8 4 12 4 10,755,548 12,716,131 71

Sat 12/20/08 2427.1 23 73 23 20 18 7 4 11 3 10,822,316 12,782,899 71

Sun 12/21/08 2444.0 17 73 23 20 18 7 4 11 3 10,848,390 12,808,973 NA

Mon 12/22/08 2464.8 16 75 20 18 16 4 2 12 2 10,936,770 12,897,353 71

Tue 12/23/08 2482.7 18 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,012,630 12,973,213 71

Wed 12/24/08 2498.7 17 73 26 24 21 10 5 11 5 11,079,540 13,040,123 70

Thu 12/25/08 2514.4 15 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,146,006 13,106,589 71

Fri 12/26/08 2529.1 15 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,212,033 13,172,616 75

Sat 12/27/08 2544.0 24 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,277,869 13,238,452 74

Sun 12/28/08 2559.5 16 75 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 11,344,337 13,304,920 71

Mon 12/29/08 2577.6 13 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,411,874 13,372,457 62

Tue 12/30/08 2595.8 19 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,488,320 13,448,903 70

Wed 12/31/08 2612.9 17 70 25 24 21 10 5 11 5 11,495,501 13,456,084 NA

Thu 01/01/09 2629.4 16 73 26 25 23 10 5 13 5 11,567,038 13,527,621 NA

Fri 01/02/09 2647.1 18 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,703,770 13,664,353 NA

Sat 01/03/09 2666.2 23 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,775,999 13,736,582 63

Sun 01/04/09 2691.9 12 75 28 27 26 14 7 12 7 11,888,229 13,848,812 73

Mon 01/05/09 2694.9 2 73 25 24 22 7 3 15 4 11,901,380 13,861,963 73

Tue 01/06/09 2702.5 8 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,933,620 13,894,203 71

Wed 01/07/09 2713.2 11 73 27 26 24 12 6 12 6 11,974,650 13,935,233 64

Thu 01/08/09 2723.0 10 72 26 25 23 10 5 13 5 12,013,339 13,973,922 66

Fri 01/09/09 2734.5 12 72 26 25 23 10 5 13 5 12,059,751 14,020,334 67

Sat 01/10/09 2745.9 11 73 26 25 24 12 6 12 6 12,106,078 14,066,661 68

Sun 01/11/09 2757.7 12 73 27 24 22 12 6 10 6 12,151,375 14,111,958 64

Mon 01/12/09 2770.5 13 73 27 25 23 12 6 11 6 12,203,348 14,163,931 68

Tue 01/13/09 2777.4 7 73 27 26 23 10 5 13 5 12,229,070 14,189,653 62

Wed 01/14/09 2787.3 10 73 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 12,268,865 14,229,448 67

Thu 01/15/09 2797.3 10 73 27 26 23 10 5 13 5 12,308,661 14,269,244 66

Fri 01/16/09 2809.2 12 73 28 26 24 14 7 10 7 12,354,440 14,315,023 64

Sat 01/17/09 2820.4 17 73 28 26 22 12 6 10 6 12,399,721 14,360,304 67

Sun 01/18/09 2831.7 11 73 24 22 20 8 4 12 4 12,445,003 14,405,586 67

41

42

37

38

39

40

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-8

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 01/19/09 2848.7 13 73 27 25 24 12 6 12 6 12,514,777 14,475,360 68

Tue 01/20/09 2859.2 11 73 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 12,556,247 14,516,830 66

Wed 01/21/09 2874.0 15 73 28 27 25 16 8 9 8 12,567,959 14,528,542 NA

Thu 01/22/09 2888.8 15 73 26 25 20 6 3 14 3 12,579,621 14,540,204 NA

Fri 01/23/09 2913.1 24 73 26 24 20 12 6 8 6 12,632,901 14,593,484 NA

Sat 01/24/09 2928.1 22 73 28 27 24 14 7 10 7 12,695,110 14,655,693 69

Sun 01/25/09 2943.1 15 73 24 22 20 8 4 12 4 12,757,320 14,717,903 69

Mon 01/26/09 2958.1 12 73 28 27 24 14 7 10 7 12,813,595 14,774,178 63

Tue 01/27/09 2967.1 9 73 28 27 25 14 7 11 7 12,853,155 14,813,738 73

Wed 01/28/09 2977.7 10 73 26 24 24 12 6 12 6 12,895,005 14,855,588 66

Thu 01/29/09 2990.4 13 73 26 25 24 12 6 12 6 12,933,766 14,894,349 51

Fri 01/30/09 3000.3 10 72 27 25 23 14 7 9 7 12,976,646 14,937,229 72

Sat 01/31/09 3011.7 17 73 28 25 24 14 7 10 7 13,019,960 14,980,543 63

Sun 02/01/09 3020.3 9 73 28 24 24 12 6 12 6 13,062,407 15,022,990 82

Mon 02/02/09 3030.9 8 73 28 26 25 14 7 11 7 13,104,827 15,065,410 67

Tue 02/03/09 3041.6 11 73 28 27 25 12 6 13 6 13,147,247 15,107,830 66

Wed 02/04/09 3052.7 11 73 28 25 24 14 7 10 7 13,190,862 15,151,445 65

Thu 02/05/09 3063.9 11 73 28 26 24 14 7 10 7 13,234,477 15,195,060 65

Fri 02/06/09 3073.4 10 73 28 26 24 14 7 10 7 13,271,726 15,232,309 65

Sat 02/07/09 3082.9 13 73 28 25 24 14 7 10 7 13,308,975 15,269,558 65

Sun 02/08/09 3099.1 16 73 28 25 24 14 7 10 7 13,375,106 15,335,689 68

Mon 02/09/09 3109.4 8 73 28 26 24 12 6 12 6 13,416,253 15,376,836 67

Tue 02/10/09 3119.9 10 73 28 26 24 12 6 12 6 13,457,550 15,418,133 66

Wed 02/11/09 3130.1 11 73 27 25 23 10 5 13 5 13,498,549 15,459,132 67

Thu 02/12/09 3142.6 12 73 27 25 23 10 5 13 5 13,548,451 15,509,034 67

Fri 02/13/09 3155.1 13 73 28 26 24 12 6 12 6 13,599,268 15,559,851 68

Sat 02/14/09 3167.8 19 73 28 26 24 12 6 12 6 13,650,277 15,610,860 67

Sun 02/15/09 3180.7 13 73 25 24 22 8 4 14 4 13,702,160 15,662,743 67

Mon 02/16/09 3194.4 10 73 26 24 20 16 8 4 8 13,757,809 15,718,392 68

Tue 02/17/09 3206.3 12 73 28 25 24 12 6 12 6 13,809,711 15,770,294 73

Wed 02/18/09 3221.9 16 73 28 25 24 12 6 12 6 13,869,094 15,829,677 63

Thu 02/19/09 3235.3 13 72 23 20 18 8 4 10 4 13,922,713 15,883,296 67

Fri 02/20/09 3247.3 12 72 24 22 20 10 5 10 5 13,976,000 15,936,583 74

Sat 02/21/09 3260.2 21 73 28 25 24 12 6 12 6 14,029,785 15,990,368 69

Sun 02/22/09 3275.8 16 73 23 20 18 8 4 10 4 14,083,570 16,044,153 57

Mon 02/23/09 3283.9 6 73 28 25 24 12 6 12 6 14,115,830 16,076,413 66

Tue 02/24/09 3295.5 12 73 28 25 24 12 6 12 6 14,160,450 16,121,033 64

Wed 02/25/09 3307.9 13 72 26 24 22 10 5 12 5 14,203,242 16,163,825 58

Thu 02/26/09 3319.1 11 73 28 25 24 12 6 12 6 14,245,829 16,206,412 63

Fri 02/27/09 3328.9 10 73 28 25 24 12 6 12 6 14,288,621 16,249,204 73

Sat 02/28/09 3341.4 19 70 24 22 20 7 3 13 4 14,331,515 16,292,098 57

Sun 03/01/09 3357.7 16 59 25 23 22 8 6 14 2 14,374,410 16,334,993 44

47

48

43

44

45

46

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-9

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 03/02/09 3377.9 15 55 16 14 16 4 2 12 2 14,433,970 16,394,553 49

Tue 03/03/09 3393.5 16 55 18 14 14 4 2 10 2 14,479,490 16,440,073 49

Wed 03/04/09 3406.6 13 53 23 21 20 12 6 8 6 14,516,670 16,477,253 47

Thu 03/05/09 3421.4 15 53 25 23 20 12 6 8 6 14,558,540 16,519,123 47

Fri 03/06/09 3436.2 15 55 24 22 20 12 6 8 6 14,600,760 16,561,343 48

Sat 03/07/09 3454.8 20 55 24 22 20 12 6 8 6 14,656,785 16,617,368 50

Sun 03/08/09 3473.4 19 55 25 23 16 4 2 12 2 14,712,810 16,673,393 50

Mon 03/09/09 3493.4 15 55 24 21 20 14 7 6 7 14,772,125 16,732,708 49

Tue 03/10/09 3509.3 16 57 24 21 20 14 7 6 7 14,818,065 16,778,648 48

Wed 03/11/09 3525.2 16 57 24 20 22 14 7 8 7 14,864,006 16,824,589 48

Thu 03/12/09 3537.8 13 55 23 21 18 6 3 12 3 14,899,849 16,860,432 47

Fri 03/13/09 3555.3 18 55 24 20 20 14 7 6 7 14,952,512 16,913,095 50

Sat 03/14/09 3572.8 21 55 16 14 20 12 6 8 6 15,003,175 16,963,758 48

Sun 03/15/09 3594.6 22 57 24 12 16 4 2 12 2 15,069,445 17,030,028 51

Mon 03/16/09 3614.6 15 53 24 21 20 12 6 8 6 15,127,950 17,088,533 49

Tue 03/17/09 3631.6 17 53 24 21 18 12 6 6 6 15,174,865 17,135,448 46

Wed 03/18/09 3647.0 16 53 28 25 16 4 2 12 2 15,221,780 17,182,363 51

Thu 03/19/09 3658.5 12 53 24 21 15 4 2 11 2 15,255,623 17,216,206 49

Fri 03/20/09 3676.7 18 53 18 15 12 6 3 6 3 15,306,625 17,267,208 47

Sat 03/21/09 3693.8 24 55 20 18 15 10 5 5 5 15,357,410 17,317,993 49

Sun 03/22/09 3714.2 20 55 17 14 13 4 2 9 2 15,417,025 17,377,608 49

Mon 03/23/09 3728.8 11 53 26 23 20 12 6 8 6 15,458,438 17,419,021 47

Tue 03/24/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Wed 03/25/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Thu 03/26/09 3772.7 15 53 26 23 20 14 7 6 7 15,582,680 17,543,263 47

Fri 03/27/09 3787.2 15 53 24 22 20 14 7 6 7 15,622,919 17,583,502 46

Sat 03/28/09 3802.4 21 55 25 22 20 14 7 6 7 15,666,819 17,627,402 48

Sun 03/29/09 3817.6 16 53 23 20 18 14 7 4 7 15,710,720 17,671,303 48

Mon 03/30/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Tue 03/31/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Wed 04/01/09 3861.2 13 53 27 25 22 14 7 8 7 15,832,430 17,793,013 47

Thu 04/02/09 3875.6 15 53 24 21 18 14 7 4 7 15,873,000 17,833,583 47

Fri 04/03/09 3890.1 14 55 25 23 21 14 7 7 7 15,913,570 17,874,153 47

Sat 04/04/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sun 04/05/09 3905.2 9 53 25 22 20 12 - 8 15,956,186 17,916,769 47

Mon 04/06/09 3935.5 24 53 25 22 20 14 7 6 7 16,041,420 18,002,003 47

Tue 04/07/09 3949.4 15 55 25 23 20 14 7 6 7 16,080,315 18,040,898 47

Wed 04/08/09 3963.0 14 53 24 24 22 14 7 8 7 16,117,850 18,078,433 46

Thu 04/09/09 3975.6 13 53 25 25 20 14 7 6 7 16,153,267 18,113,850 47

Fri 04/10/09 3988.3 13 53 24 24 22 14 7 8 7 16,188,415 18,148,998 46

Sat 04/11/09 4005.8 18 55 25 25 24 12 6 12 6 16,239,587 18,200,170 49

Sun 04/12/09 4023.4 17 58 24 24 18 4 2 14 2 16,290,760 18,251,343 48

53

54

49

50

51

52

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-10

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 04/13/09 4041.7 14 55 22 22 20 12 6 8 6 16,344,950 18,305,533 49

Tue 04/14/09 4056.5 15 55 24 24 21 12 6 9 6 16,387,160 18,347,743 48

Wed 04/15/09 4067.5 11 53 25 25 24 14 7 10 7 16,417,470 18,378,053 46

Thu 04/16/09 4078.5 11 55 20 20 18 8 4 10 4 16,447,780 18,408,363 46

Fri 04/17/09 4093.6 15 57 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 16,484,790 18,445,373 41

Sat 04/18/09 4100.3 10 55 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 16,508,286 18,468,869 58

Sun 04/19/09 4114.8 14 55 26 26 16 4 2 12 2 16,547,350 18,507,933 45

Mon 04/20/09 4133.2 14 55 25 25 24 14 7 10 7 16,599,590 18,560,173 47

Tue 04/21/09 4144.9 11 53 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 16,632,160 18,592,743 46

Wed 04/22/09 4160.6 16 55 24 24 23 12 6 11 6 16,675,910 18,636,493 46

Thu 04/23/09 4171.0 11 53 25 25 23 12 6 11 6 16,704,960 18,665,543 47

Fri 04/24/09 4183.7 13 53 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 16,740,400 18,700,983 47

Sat 04/25/09 4192.4 12 55 21 21 20 10 5 10 5 16,764,530 18,725,113 46

Sun 04/26/09 4207.8 15 55 22 22 20 12 6 8 6 16,808,107 18,768,690 47

Mon 04/27/09 4223.2 12 53 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 16,851,685 18,812,268 47

Tue 04/28/09 4237.5 14 53 25 25 22 14 7 8 7 16,891,715 18,852,298 47

Wed 04/29/09 4250.5 13 55 25 25 22 12 6 10 6 16,928,135 18,888,718 47

Thu 04/30/09 4264.3 14 55 25 25 22 12 6 10 6 16,967,047 18,927,630 47

Fri 05/01/09 4278.1 14 53 25 25 23 14 7 9 7 17,005,960 18,966,543 47

Sat 05/02/09 4289.7 16 55 25 25 22 12 6 10 6 17,040,084 19,000,667 49

Sun 05/03/09 4301.4 12 53 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 17,074,209 19,034,792 49

Mon 05/04/09 4321.4 15 53 25 25 23 12 6 11 6 17,130,497 19,091,080 47

Tue 05/05/09 4335.7 14 55 26 26 24 12 6 12 6 17,171,058 19,131,641 47

Wed 05/06/09 4350.1 14 53 24 24 23 14 7 9 7 17,211,620 19,172,203 47

Thu 05/07/09 4359.9 10 53 26 26 25 14 7 11 7 17,238,570 19,199,153 46

Fri 05/08/09 4370.9 11 55 20 20 18 6 3 12 3 17,268,392 19,228,975 45

Sat 05/09/09 4381.5 16 55 19 19 18 6 3 12 3 17,298,215 19,258,798 47

Sun 05/10/09 4399.2 18 53 25 25 23 12 6 11 6 17,349,232 19,309,815 48

Mon 05/11/09 4417.0 13 53 25 25 24 14 7 10 7 17,400,250 19,360,833 48

Tue 05/12/09 4428.2 11 55 26 26 24 12 6 12 6 17,431,626 19,392,209 47

Wed 05/13/09 4437.0 8 55 22 22 20 8 4 12 4 17,456,252 19,416,835 47

Thu 05/14/09 4454.2 17 53 25 25 24 14 7 10 7 17,505,998 19,466,581 48

Fri 05/15/09 4471.5 17 55 25 25 24 14 7 10 7 17,555,795 19,516,378 48

Sat 05/16/09 4480.6 14 60 28 28 26 16 8 10 8 17,582,095 19,542,678 48

Sun 05/17/09 4489.8 10 55 25 25 24 14 7 10 7 17,608,446 19,569,029 48

Mon 05/18/09 4511.6 16 55 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 17,670,172 19,630,755 47

Tue 05/19/09 4532.9 21 53 25 25 23 12 6 11 6 17,683,563 19,644,146 NA

Wed 05/20/09 4556.4 23 NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Thu 05/21/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Fri 05/22/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 05/23/09 4628.9 3.50 72 38 38 36 36 2 17,695,695 19,656,278 NA

Sun 05/24/09 4645.0 24 75 27 27 25 25 4 17,763,070 19,723,653 70

59

60

55

56

57

58

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-11

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 05/25/09 4670.7 19 77 22 22 18 5 2 13 3 17,877,735 19,838,318 74

Tue 05/26/09 4696.5 22 75 26 26 24 13 7 11 6 17,994,250 19,954,833 75

Wed 05/27/09 4706.2 10 76 26 26 24 14 7 10 7 18,031,920 19,992,503 65

Thu 05/28/09 4717.1 11 76 28 28 26 14 7 12 7 18,077,247 20,037,830 69

Fri 05/29/09 4724.8 7 75 28 28 24 14 6 10 8 18,106,785 20,067,368 64

Sat 05/30/09 4737.4 20 76 28 28 26 14 7 12 7 18,158,672 20,119,255 69

Sun 05/31/09 4750.0 13 76 28 28 26 13 7 13 6 18,210,560 20,171,143 69

Mon 06/01/09 4760.8 8 76 26 26 24 10 5 14 5 18,256,234 20,216,817 70

Tue 06/02/09 4770.7 10 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 18,296,618 20,257,201 68

Wed 06/03/09 4780.7 10 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 18,337,003 20,297,586 67

Thu 06/04/09 4787.1 6 76 30 30 28 13 7 15 6 18,362,903 20,323,486 67

Fri 06/05/09 4799.6 13 76 26 26 24 10 5 14 5 18,413,484 20,374,067 67

Sat 06/06/09 4812.1 13 77 29 29 27 13 7 14 6 18,464,065 20,424,648 67

Sun 06/07/09 4824.7 13 77 28 28 25 12 6 13 6 18,517,660 20,478,243 71

Mon 06/08/09 4837.3 13 77 28 28 24 12 6 12 6 18,571,255 20,531,838 71

Tue 06/09/09 4849.0 12 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 18,620,247 20,580,830 70

Wed 06/10/09 4860.8 12 75 29 29 26 14 7 12 7 18,669,240 20,629,823 69

Thu 06/11/09 4870.5 10 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 18,709,261 20,669,844 69

Fri 06/12/09 4880.3 9 77 28 28 26 12 5 14 7 18,749,282 20,709,865 68

Sat 06/13/09 4896.6 16 76 26 26 24 12 6 12 6 18,814,858 20,775,441 67

Sun 06/14/09 4912.9 16 77 26 26 24 12 6 12 6 18,890,435 20,851,018 77

Mon 06/15/09 4923.2 10 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 18,934,858 20,895,441 72

Tue 06/16/09 4935.3 12 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 18,986,157 20,946,740 71

Wed 06/17/09 4947.6 12 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,037,456 20,998,039 70

Thu 06/18/09 4961.2 14 77 29 29 25 12 6 13 6 19,095,096 21,055,679 71

Fri 06/19/09 4971.8 11 77 26 26 24 10 5 14 5 19,140,880 21,101,463 72

Sat 06/20/09 4986.6 15 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,203,697 21,164,280 71

Sun 06/21/09 5001.4 15 78 25 25 20 12 6 8 6 19,266,515 21,227,098 71

Mon 06/22/09 5016.8 15 76 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,333,270 21,293,853 72

Tue 06/23/09 5025.5 9 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,370,395 21,330,978 71

Wed 06/24/09 5044.0 19 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,450,555 21,411,138 72

Thu 06/25/09 5056.8 13 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,505,602 21,466,185 72

Fri 06/26/09 5069.6 13 75 24 24 20 10 5 10 5 19,560,650 21,521,233 72

Sat 06/27/09 5086.3 17 77 27 27 25 14 7 11 7 19,632,385 21,592,968 72

Sun 06/28/09 5096.8 11 77 28 28 24 12 6 12 6 19,677,036 21,637,619 71

Mon 06/29/09 5107.4 12 77 24 24 20 8 6 12 2 19,721,687 21,682,270 70

Tue 06/30/09 5123.6 14 77 28 28 24 12 6 12 6 19,792,412 21,752,995 73

Wed 07/01/09 5139.6 16 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,860,015 21,820,598 70

Thu 07/02/09 5148.8 12 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 19,899,616 21,860,199 72

Fri 07/03/09 5164.7 14 77 26 26 20 10 5 10 5 19,968,295 21,928,878 72

Sat 07/04/09 5180.7 15 77 26 26 24 12 6 12 6 20,037,242 21,997,825 72

Sun 07/05/09 5196.7 16 77 27 27 24 12 6 12 6 20,106,033 22,066,616 72

65

66

61

62

63

64

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-12

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 07/06/09 5212.2 18 77 28 28 26 14 7 12 7 20,173,889 22,134,472 73

Tue 07/07/09 5227.1 13 77 29 29 28 14 7 14 7 20,236,478 22,197,061 70

Wed 07/08/09 5239.3 12 77 29 29 28 14 7 14 7 20,288,338 22,248,921 71

Thu 07/09/09 5251.5 12 77 27 27 24 12 6 12 6 20,339,699 22,300,282 70

Fri 07/10/09 5268.3 17 76 29 29 26 14 7 12 7 20,412,641 22,373,224 72

Sat 07/11/09 5283.7 15 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 20,478,900 22,439,483 72

Sun 07/12/09 5299.1 15 77 29 29 26 14 7 12 7 20,545,160 22,505,743 72

Mon 07/13/09 5310.6 12 75 29 29 26 14 7 12 7 20,593,482 22,554,065 70

Tue 07/14/09 5324.8 14 77 29 29 26 14 7 12 7 20,654,190 22,614,773 71

Wed 07/15/09 5339.1 14 76 29 29 26 12 6 14 6 20,714,968 22,675,551 71

Thu 07/16/09 5351.4 12 76 29 29 26 12 6 14 6 20,767,957 22,728,540 72

Fri 07/17/09 5368.0 16 77 29 29 28 14 7 14 7 20,837,498 22,798,081 70

Sat 07/18/09 5382.6 15 77 29 29 28 14 7 14 7 20,901,664 22,862,247 73

Sun 07/19/09 5398.3 16 77 26 26 22 10 5 12 5 20,968,641 22,929,224 71

Mon 07/20/09 5411.0 13 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 21,023,137 22,983,720 72

Tue 07/21/09 5423.8 13 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 21,076,754 23,037,337 70

Wed 07/22/09 5437.7 14 77 28 28 26 12 6 14 6 21,137,626 23,098,209 73

Thu 07/23/09 5453.1 15 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 21,202,379 23,162,962 70

Fri 07/24/09 5467.8 14 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 21,266,339 23,226,922 73

Sat 07/25/09 5483.1 15 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 21,332,009 23,292,592 72

Sun 07/26/09 5498.4 16 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 21,397,680 23,358,263 72

Mon 07/27/09 5511.5 13 76 28 28 24 12 6 12 6 21,452,763 23,413,346 70

Tue 07/28/09 5524.4 13 77 29 29 26 14 7 12 7 21,508,222 23,468,805 72

Wed 07/29/09 5539.1 15 77 30 30 28 14 7 14 7 21,570,695 23,531,278 71

Thu 07/30/09 5555.0 16 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 21,639,767 23,600,350 72

Fri 07/31/09 5571.0 16 77 28 28 24 12 6 12 6 21,708,840 23,669,423 72

Sat 08/01/09 5582.4 17 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 21,758,124 23,718,707 72

Sun 08/02/09 5591.5 7 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 21,796,907 23,757,490 71

Mon 08/03/09 5613.1 22 76 28 28 24 12 6 12 6 21,884,348 23,844,931 67

Tue 08/04/09 5626.7 17 77 28 28 26 14 7 12 7 21,948,715 23,909,298 79

Wed 08/05/09 5644.8 16 27 26 26 22 12 6 10 6 22,026,580 23,987,163 72

Thu 08/06/09 5658.8 16 77 26 26 22 12 6 10 6 22,087,881 24,048,464 73

Fri 08/07/09 5674.1 14 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 22,152,403 24,112,986 70

Sat 08/08/09 5692.2 17 77 32 32 28 14 7 14 7 22,231,850 24,192,433 73

Sun 08/09/09 5710.3 17 77 32 32 28 14 7 14 7 22,310,798 24,271,381 73

Mon 08/10/09 5723.5 14 72 29 29 27 12 6 15 6 22,367,334 24,327,917 71

Tue 08/11/09 5734.5 11 77 29 29 27 12 6 15 6 22,412,509 24,373,092 68

Wed 08/12/09 5749.9 16 77 29 29 27 12 6 15 6 22,477,806 24,438,389 71

Thu 08/13/09 5760.5 11 77 28 28 24 12 6 12 6 22,521,194 24,481,777 68

Fri 08/14/09 5772.6 12 77 28 28 24 10 5 14 5 22,571,350 24,531,933 69

Sat 08/15/09 5789.7 16 77 29 29 26 14 7 12 7 22,644,958 24,605,541 72

Sun 08/16/09 5805.2 15 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 22,710,541 24,671,124 71

71

72

67

68

69

70

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-13

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 08/17/09 5814.2 10 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 22,747,585 24,708,168 69

Tue 08/18/09 5824.4 10 77 30 30 27 14 7 13 7 22,788,098 24,748,681 66

Wed 08/19/09 5838.4 14 77 29 29 27 12 6 15 6 22,847,335 24,807,918 71

Thu 08/20/09 5848.1 12 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 22,887,337 24,847,920 69

Fri 08/21/09 5860.2 11 75 30 30 27 12 6 15 6 22,936,380 24,896,963 68

Sat 08/22/09 5873.5 12 77 30 30 27 12 6 15 6 22,992,731 24,953,314 71

Sun 08/23/09 5888.5 14 77 30 30 27 14 7 13 7 23,055,285 25,015,868 70

Mon 08/24/09 5895.0 8 77 28 28 26 14 7 12 7 23,081,903 25,042,486 68

Tue 08/25/09 5910.0 14 77 28 28 26 14 7 12 7 23,143,215 25,103,798 68

Wed 08/26/09 5916.7 7 77 27 27 25 14 8 11 6 23,169,817 25,130,400 66

Thu 08/27/09 5929.0 12 77 28 28 26 8 4 18 4 23,218,831 25,179,414 66

Fri 08/28/09 5938.3 10 77 29 29 27 10 5 17 5 23,257,172 25,217,755 69

Sat 08/29/09 5945.4 7 75 29 29 27 10 5 17 5 23,283,871 25,244,454 63

Sun 08/30/09 5956.3 11 77 30 30 27 12 6 15 6 23,329,064 25,289,647 69

Mon 08/31/09 5967.3 11 77 30 30 28 12 6 16 6 23,374,257 25,334,840 68

Tue 09/01/09 5975.7 8 77 30 30 28 12 6 16 6 23,406,740 25,367,323 64

Wed 09/02/09 5988.0 12 77 32 32 28 14 7 14 7 23,457,977 25,418,560 69

Thu 09/03/09 5996.3 8 77 29 29 26 12 6 14 6 23,491,909 25,452,492 68

Fri 09/04/09 6007.0 11 77 32 32 29 12 6 17 6 23,533,925 25,494,508 65

Sat 09/05/09 6020.4 13 77 30 30 27 12 6 15 6 23,590,274 25,550,857 70

Sun 09/06/09 6034.6 14 77 29 29 27 14 7 13 7 23,651,021 25,611,604 71

Mon 09/07/09 6048.9 14 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 23,711,768 25,672,351 71

Tue 09/08/09 6056.7 8 77 26 26 24 12 6 12 6 23,742,399 25,702,982 65

Wed 09/09/09 6068.2 12 75 32 32 29 14 7 15 7 23,790,460 25,751,043 70

Thu 09/10/09 6076.4 8 77 30 30 28 14 7 14 7 23,824,315 25,784,898 69

Fri 09/11/09 6087.7 11 77 32 32 29 14 7 15 7 23,868,936 25,829,519 66

Sat 09/12/09 6099.5 12 77 30 30 28 14 7 14 7 23,917,360 25,877,943 68

Sun 09/13/09 6111.4 12 77 30 30 28 14 7 14 7 23,965,785 25,926,368 68

Mon 09/14/09 6117.5 6 77 32 32 28 14 7 14 7 23,990,394 25,950,977 67

Tue 09/15/09 6129.0 12 77 32 32 28 12 6 16 6 24,035,729 25,996,312 66

Wed 09/16/09 6138.1 8 77 32 32 28 12 6 16 6 24,072,447 26,033,030 67

Thu 09/17/09 6144.1 6 77 30 30 27 14 7 13 7 24,095,894 26,056,477 65

Fri 09/18/09 6150.6 7 77 32 32 28 14 7 14 7 24,121,202 26,081,785 65

Sat 09/19/09 6157.7 7 77 30 30 26 14 7 12 7 24,149,306 26,109,889 66

Sun 09/20/09 6163.5 6 77 32 32 28 14 7 14 7 24,171,250 26,131,833 63

Mon 09/21/09 6172.4 9 77 34 34 28 14 7 14 7 24,203,925 26,164,508 61

Tue 09/22/09 6175.1 3 77 32 32 26 14 7 12 7 24,217,381 26,177,964 83

Wed 09/23/09 6180.4 5 77 30 30 26 12 6 14 6 24,237,794 26,198,377 64

Thu 09/24/09 6185.7 5 77 30 30 28 14 7 14 7 24,258,049 26,218,632 64

Fri 09/25/09 6191.2 6 77 30 30 27 14 7 13 7 24,278,913 26,239,496 63

Sat 09/26/09 6196.8 6 77 34 34 28 14 7 14 7 24,300,518 26,261,101 64

Sun 09/27/09 6207.6 11 77 35 35 30 10 5 20 5 24,337,874 26,298,457 58

77

78

73

74

75

76

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-14

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 09/28/09 6212.1 5 75 35 35 29 12 6 17 6 24,355,284 26,315,867 64

Tue 09/29/09 6215.5 3 77 35 35 28 14 7 14 7 24,369,370 26,329,953 69

Wed 09/30/09 6220.9 5 77 31 31 26 12 6 14 6 24,390,490 26,351,073 65

Thu 10/01/09 6226.4 6 77 35 35 29 10 5 19 5 24,411,578 26,372,161 64

Fri 10/02/09 6232.0 6 77 35 35 28 10 5 18 5 24,435,245 26,395,828 70

Sat 10/03/09 6240.4 8 77 35 35 29 12 6 17 6 24,464,813 26,425,396 59

Sun 10/04/09 6248.0 8 77 34 34 28 12 6 16 6 24,494,819 26,455,402 66

Mon 10/05/09 6254.1 6 77 28 28 24 14 7 10 7 24,514,726 26,475,309 54

Tue 10/06/09 6259.3 5 77 35 35 29 14 7 15 7 24,534,224 26,494,807 62

Wed 10/07/09 6262.8 3 77 35 35 34 14 7 20 7 24,547,188 26,507,771 62

Thu 10/08/09 6267.4 5 75 30 30 26 12 6 14 6 24,567,001 26,527,584 72

Fri 10/09/09 6273.6 6 75 30 30 26 12 6 14 6 24,591,368 26,551,951 66

Sat 10/10/09 6279.7 6 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 24,615,389 26,575,972 66

Sun 10/11/09 6286.1 7 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 24,640,160 26,600,743 65

Mon 10/12/09 6292.4 6 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 24,664,886 26,625,469 65

Tue 10/13/09 6298.7 6 75 30 30 26 12 6 14 6 24,690,053 26,650,636 67

Wed 10/14/09 6304.8 6 75 30 30 26 12 6 14 6 24,713,968 26,674,551 65

Thu 10/15/09 6311.2 6 75 28 28 24 10 5 14 5 24,738,785 26,699,368 65

Fri 10/16/09 6318.5 7 77 32 32 28 12 6 16 6 24,768,045 26,728,628 67

Sat 10/17/09 6323.5 5 75 35 35 31 14 7 17 7 24,787,478 26,748,061 65

Sun 10/18/09 6330.2 7 77 35 35 31 14 7 17 7 24,813,995 26,774,578 66

Mon 10/19/09 6333.9 4 77 35 35 31 14 7 17 7 24,827,785 26,788,368 62

Tue 10/20/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Wed 10/21/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Thu 10/22/09 6361.0 9 50 30 30 26 14 7 12 7 24,900,930 26,861,513 45

Fri 10/23/09 6364.6 4 77 35 35 31 14 7 17 7 24,915,910 26,876,493 69

Sat 10/24/09 6371.1 6 77 35 35 31 14 7 17 7 24,942,123 26,902,706 67

Sun 10/25/09 6377.7 7 77 35 35 31 14 7 17 7 24,968,288 26,928,871 66

Mon 10/26/09 6384.3 6 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 24,994,153 26,954,736 65

Tue 10/27/09 6390.7 6 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 25,019,685 26,980,268 66

Wed 10/28/09 6397.0 6 75 30 30 26 12 6 14 6 25,044,525 27,005,108 66

Thu 10/29/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Fri 10/30/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 10/31/09 6414.6 6 77 35 34 30 14 7 16 7 25,113,131 27,073,714 65

Sun 11/01/09 6420.9 6 77 35 34 30 14 7 16 7 25,138,105 27,098,688 66

Mon 11/02/09 6427.3 6 77 35 35 30 12 6 18 6 25,163,080 27,123,663 65

Tue 11/03/09 6430.5 3 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 25,175,567 27,136,150 65

Wed 11/04/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Thu 11/05/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Fri 11/06/09 6449.3 6 77 35 35 30 12 6 18 6 25,248,594 27,209,177 65

Sat 11/07/09 6456.1 6 77 35 35 30 12 6 18 6 25,275,552 27,236,135 66

Sun 11/08/09 6462.9 7 77 35 35 30 12 6 18 6 25,302,510 27,263,093 66

83

84

79

80

81

82

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-15

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 11/09/09 6468.6 6 75 30 30 27 12 6 15 6 25,325,945 27,286,528 69

Tue 11/10/09 6474.3 6 75 30 29 25 12 6 13 6 25,349,381 27,309,964 69

Wed 11/11/09 6480.9 6 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 25,375,618 27,336,201 66

Thu 11/12/09 6487.6 7 77 35 35 30 14 7 16 7 25,401,856 27,362,439 65

Fri 11/13/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 11/14/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sun 11/15/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Mon 11/16/09 6522.3 9 75 37 36 31 14 7 17 7 25,541,743 27,502,326 67

Tue 11/17/09 6526.9 5 77 35 33 30 12 6 18 6 25,559,165 27,519,748 63

Wed 11/18/09 6537.3 10 77 35 35 30 12 6 18 6 25,602,095 27,562,678 69

Thu 11/19/09 6545.5 8 77 35 35 30 12 6 18 6 25,635,701 27,596,284 68

Fri 11/20/09 6552.5 8 77 37 37 34 14 7 20 7 25,663,700 27,624,283 67

Sat 11/21/09 6561.7 8 77 37 37 34 14 7 20 7 25,701,161 27,661,744 68

Sun 11/22/09 6571.4 10 77 37 37 34 14 7 20 7 25,741,065 27,701,648 69

Mon 11/23/09 6579.2 8 77 35 33 30 14 7 16 7 25,772,902 27,733,485 68

Tue 11/24/09 6587.1 8 77 34 32 30 14 7 16 7 25,804,550 27,765,133 67

Wed 11/25/09 6594.2 7 77 34 32 30 14 7 16 7 25,833,082 27,793,665 67

Thu 11/26/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Fri 11/27/09 6614.3 10 77 34 32 30 12 6 18 6 25,914,620 27,875,203 68

Sat 11/28/09 6628.1 14 77 35 33 30 14 7 16 7 25,972,402 27,932,985 70

Sun 11/29/09 6639.0 11 77 35 33 30 14 7 16 7 26,018,201 27,978,784 70

Mon 11/30/09 6649.2 10 77 35 33 30 14 7 16 7 26,061,777 28,022,360 71

Tue 12/01/09 6653.5 4 77 27 25 20 6 6 14 26,073,037 28,033,620 44

Wed 12/02/09 6663.1 10 77 27 25 20 6 6 14 26,120,565 47,528 83

Thu 12/03/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Fri 12/04/09 6678.3 8 77 30 30 26 12 6 14 6 26,180,704 107,667 66

Sat 12/05/09 6685.6 7 77 30 29 25 12 6 13 6 26,210,905 137,868 69

Sun 12/06/09 6692.9 7 77 34 33 29 12 6 17 6 26,241,107 168,070 69

Mon 12/07/09 6696.7 4 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,252,750 179,713 51

Tue 12/08/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Wed 12/09/09 6710.4 7 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,311,560 238,523 72

Thu 12/10/09 6720.0 9 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,352,157 279,120 70

Fri 12/11/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 12/12/09 6737.3 9 77 33 32 25 12 6 13 6 26,423,375 350,338 69

Sun 12/13/09 6750.2 12 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,479,040 406,003 72

88

89

85

86

87

Study Period II

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-16

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 12/14/09 6760.1 10 75 30 28 25 12 6 13 6 26,521,828 448,791 72

Tue 12/15/09 6770.6 11 77 35 35 33 14 7 19 7 26,564,915 491,878 68

Wed 12/16/09 6782.8 12 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,617,539 544,502 72

Thu 12/17/09 6789.5 6 77 37 35 30 14 7 16 7 26,645,516 572,479 70

Fri 12/18/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 12/19/09 6813.1 12 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,744,606 671,569 70

Sun 12/20/09 6825.9 13 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,795,573 722,536 66

Mon 12/21/09 6836.6 11 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 26,845,003 771,966 77

Tue 12/22/09 6847.4 12 77 35 32 28 12 6 16 6 26,891,433 818,396 72

Wed 12/23/09 6860.1 13 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 26,945,143 872,106 70

Thu 12/24/09 6876.5 16 75 30 27 25 10 5 15 5 27,015,744 942,707 72

Fri 12/25/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 12/26/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sun 12/27/09 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Mon 12/28/09 6945.3 17 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 27,298,154 1,225,117 68

Tue 12/29/09 6963.5 19 75 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 27,366,651 1,293,614 63

Wed 12/30/09 6972.4 9 77 37 35 26 8 4 18 4 27,439,356 1,366,319 136

Thu 12/31/09 6992.3 22 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 27,528,109 1,455,072 74

Fri 01/01/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 01/02/10 7032.0 19 75 30 27 25 10 5 15 5 27,705,616 1,632,579 75

Sun 01/03/10 7052.3 20 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 27,794,370 1,721,333 73

Mon 01/04/10 7065.7 14 77 35 33 28 12 6 16 6 27,852,875 1,779,838 73

Tue 01/05/10 7078.1 12 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 27,907,565 1,834,528 74

Wed 01/06/10 7091.3 13 75 35 33 28 12 6 16 6 27,962,255 1,889,218 69

Thu 01/07/10 7104.3 14 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 28,016,886 1,943,849 70

Fri 01/08/10 7115.0 11 77 32 28 25 14 7 11 7 28,071,635 1,998,598 85

Sat 01/09/10 7129.6 14 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 28,120,865 2,047,828 56

Sun 01/10/10 7141.3 13 75 30 27 24 12 6 12 6 28,170,095 2,097,058 70

Mon 01/11/10 7153.8 12 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 28,223,684 2,150,647 71

Tue 01/12/10 7161.8 8 77 35 3 27 14 7 13 7 28,253,035 2,179,998 61

Wed 01/13/10 7176.1 14 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 28,316,974 2,243,937 75

Thu 01/14/10 7190.4 15 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 28,378,913 2,305,876 72

Fri 01/15/10 7200.9 10 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 28,423,349 2,350,312 71

Sat 01/16/10 7218.7 18 77 33 31 27 12 6 15 6 28,501,583 2,428,546 73

Sun 01/17/10 7240.1 21 77 32 30 25 5 2 20 3 28,595,671 2,522,634 73

Mon 01/18/10 7258.4 19 77 25 23 16 10 5 6 5 28,676,921 2,603,884 74

Tue 01/19/10 7281.1 22 77 25 23 16 10 5 6 5 28,779,336 2,706,299 75

Wed 01/20/10 7281.1 77 35 33 28 12 6 16 6 28,780,780 2,707,743 NA

Thu 01/21/10 7289.8 9 77 35 33 28 12 6 16 6 28,815,476 2,742,439 66

Fri 01/22/10 7302.6 13 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 28,869,330 2,796,293 70

Sat 01/23/10 7315.5 12 77 32 30 25 14 7 11 7 28,923,164 2,850,127 70

Sun 01/24/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

94

95

90

91

92

93

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-17

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 01/25/10 7336.1 11 77 32 28 25 12 6 13 6 29,008,785 2,935,748 69

Tue 01/26/10 7345.8 10 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,051,594 2,978,557 74

Wed 01/27/10 7356.0 10 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,094,404 3,021,367 70

Thu 01/28/10 7368.2 12 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,143,619 3,070,582 67

Fri 01/29/10 7380.5 12 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,195,971 3,122,934 71

Sat 01/30/10 7391.2 11 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,240,779 3,167,742 70

Sun 01/31/10 7399.0 7 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,273,382 3,200,345 70

Mon 02/01/10 7408.4 10 77 32 27 25 10 5 15 5 29,310,994 3,237,957 67

Tue 02/02/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Wed 02/03/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Thu 02/04/10 7436.7 9 72 28 25 20 12 6 8 6 29,410,651 3,337,614 59

Fri 02/05/10 7443.3 7 75 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 29,435,537 3,362,500 63

Sat 02/06/10 7451.0 8 75 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 29,469,015 3,395,978 72

Sun 02/07/10 7463.1 13 77 32 28 26 14 7 12 7 29,520,493 3,447,456 71

Mon 02/08/10 7468.6 6 75 32 30 27 12 6 15 6 29,544,925 3,471,888 74

Tue 02/09/10 7476.4 7 77 35 32 25 14 7 11 7 29,577,453 3,504,416 70

Wed 02/10/10 7484.3 11 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,609,982 3,536,945 69

Thu 02/11/10 7492.1 8 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 29,641,805 3,568,768 68

Fri 02/12/10 7505.2 10 77 32 30 27 12 6 15 6 29,694,701 3,621,664 67

Sat 02/13/10 7518.1 12 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 29,750,603 3,677,566 72

Sun 02/14/10 7531.1 16 77 35 31 27 14 7 13 7 29,806,506 3,733,469 72

Mon 02/15/10 7547.3 14 77 28 24 20 14 7 6 7 29,877,589 3,804,552 73

Tue 02/16/10 7554.2 7 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 29,905,654 3,832,617 68

Wed 02/17/10 7561.8 7 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 29,939,719 3,866,682 75

Thu 02/18/10 7571.2 9 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 29,977,700 3,904,663 67

Fri 02/19/10 7580.6 10 77 35 33 29 14 7 15 7 30,015,681 3,942,644 67

Sat 02/20/10 7590.1 10 77 35 33 25 14 7 11 7 30,055,432 3,982,395 70

Sun 02/21/10 7602.5 12 77 30 26 24 12 6 12 6 30,108,129 4,035,092 71

Mon 02/22/10 7609.5 6 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,139,622 4,066,585 75

Tue 02/23/10 7617.2 9 77 35 32 29 14 7 15 7 30,171,115 4,098,078 68

Wed 02/24/10 7625.4 8 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,204,768 4,131,731 68

Thu 02/25/10 7633.3 15 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,237,165 4,164,128 68

Fri 02/26/10 7644.5 7 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,281,702 4,208,665 66

Sat 02/27/10 7655.4 12 77 32 28 25 12 6 13 6 30,327,527 4,254,490 70

Sun 02/28/10 7674.1 15 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,405,219 4,332,182 69

Mon 03/01/10 7680.5 6 75 30 26 22 14 7 8 7 30,434,281 4,361,244 76

Tue 03/02/10 7689.3 10 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,470,937 4,397,900 69

Wed 03/03/10 7694.4 6 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,493,508 4,420,471 74

Thu 03/04/10 7718.5 24 77 25 22 20 10 5 10 5 30,598,195 4,525,158 72

Fri 03/05/10 7741.2 23 77 25 22 20 10 5 10 5 30,700,515 4,627,478 75

Sat 03/06/10 7763.0 20 77 38 32 28 125 6 NA NA 30,795,672 4,722,635 73

Sun 03/07/10 7787.1 NA 77 25 22 20 10 5 10 5 30,907,311 4,834,274 77

100

101

96

97

98

99

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-18

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 03/08/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Tue 03/09/10 7828.3 18 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 30,907,358 4,834,321 NA

Wed 03/10/10 7836.3 8 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 30,939,900 4,866,863 68

Thu 03/11/10 7844.6 8 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 30,973,415 4,900,378 67

Fri 03/12/10 7853.6 10 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 31,010,040 4,937,003 68

Sat 03/13/10 7864.7 11 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 31,056,443 4,983,406 70

Sun 03/14/10 7879.0 14 77 35 32 27 14 7 13 7 31,116,840 5,043,803 70

Mon 03/15/10 7889.9 10 77 34 30 28 12 6 16 6 31,162,502 5,089,465 70

Tue 03/16/10 7899.4 9 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 31,201,781 5,128,744 69

Wed 03/17/10 7908.7 9 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 31,240,046 5,167,009 69

Thu 03/18/10 7917.8 9 77 35 33 27 14 7 13 7 31,277,628 5,204,591 69

Fri 03/19/10 7927.0 10 77 35 33 28 14 7 14 7 31,315,210 5,242,173 68

Sat 03/20/10 7936.8 10 77 35 32 25 14 7 11 7 31,355,749 5,282,712 69

Sun 03/21/10 7945.1 9 77 35 32 25 14 7 11 7 31,401,399 5,328,362 92

Mon 03/22/10 7957.9 15 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 31,441,351 5,368,314 52

Tue 03/23/10 7964.3 6 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 31,464,151 5,391,114 59

Wed 03/24/10 7974.1 10 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 31,509,255 5,436,218 77

Thu 03/25/10 7982.4 7 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 31,543,032 5,469,995 68

Fri 03/26/10 7990.7 8 77 35 32 28 14 7 14 7 31,576,682 5,503,645 68

Sat 03/27/10 7998.6 7 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 31,608,515 5,535,478 67

Sun 03/28/10 8006.7 9 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 31,641,471 5,568,434 68

Mon 03/29/10 8015.3 8 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 31,676,071 5,603,034 67

Tue 03/30/10 8024.3 9 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 31,712,336 5,639,299 67

Wed 03/31/10 8029.5 5 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 31,732,573 5,659,536 65

Thu 04/01/10 8033.9 5 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 31,751,567 5,678,530 72

Fri 04/02/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 04/03/10 8052.2 18 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 31,824,027 5,750,990 66

Sun 04/04/10 8060.2 8 77 32 27 24 12 6 12 6 31,855,562 5,782,525 66

Mon 04/05/10 8068.3 8 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 31,891,268 5,818,231 73

Tue 04/06/10 8076.7 9 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 31,925,138 5,852,101 67

Wed 04/07/10 - NA 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 - - NA

Thu 04/08/10 8091.7 15 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 31,985,342 5,912,305 67

Fri 04/09/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Sat 04/10/10 8100.5 9 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,020,786 5,947,749 67

Sun 04/11/10 8109.4 9 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,056,781 5,983,744 67

Mon 04/12/10 8118.2 9 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,092,461 6,019,424 68

Tue 04/13/10 8125.6 7 77 35 30 25 14 7 11 7 32,121,843 6,048,806 66

Wed 04/14/10

Thu 04/15/10

Fri 04/16/10 8136.5 10 70 35 30 25 12 6 13 6 32,163,381 6,090,344 64

Sat 04/17/10 8138.6 2 70 30 25 17 10 5 7 5 32,171,824 6,098,787 67

Sun 04/18/10 8159.8 24 70 35 30 25 14 7 11 7 32,262,272 6,189,235 71

106

107 System offline to repair leak in 

102

103

104

105

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
A-19

Table A-1. EPA Demonstration Project at Lead, SD – Daily Operational Log Sheet (Continued)

hr hr/day gpm psig psig psig psig psig psi psi gal gal gpm

Mon 04/19/10

Tue 04/20/10

Wed 04/21/10 8168.2 8 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,294,099 6,221,062 70

Thu 04/22/10 8175.4 7 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,328,270 6,255,233 79

Fri 04/23/10 8181.2 7 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,345,297 6,272,260 49

Sat 04/24/10 8189.1 8 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,374,163 6,301,126 61

Sun 04/25/10 8196.1 7 77 35 30 24 14 7 10 7 32,401,655 6,328,618 65

Mon 04/26/10 8203.1 6 77 34 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,429,878 6,356,841 67

Tue 04/27/10 8209.6 7 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,457,362 6,384,325 70

Wed 04/28/10 8216.4 7 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 32,484,579 6,411,542 67

Thu 04/29/10 8223.6 7 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,513,965 6,440,928 68

Fri 04/30/10 8231.5 8 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,545,276 6,472,239 66

Sat 05/01/10 8240.6 10 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,590,840 6,517,803 83

Sun 05/02/10 8249.9 9 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,619,084 6,546,047 51

Mon 05/03/10 8259.1 11 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,656,821 6,583,784 68

Tue 05/04/10 8266.9 7 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,688,591 6,615,554 68

Wed 05/05/10 8274.2 8 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 32,717,844 6,644,807 67

Thu 05/06/10 8281.0 7 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,745,263 6,672,226 67

Fri 05/07/10 8288.0 6 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,773,412 6,700,375 67

Sat 05/08/10 8295.3 7 77 35 30 26 14 7 12 7 32,803,053 6,730,016 68

Sun 05/09/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Mon 05/10/10 NM NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NA NA NM NA NA

Tue 05/11/10 8324.2 10 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,918,413 6,845,376 67

Wed 05/12/10 8329.9 6 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 32,939,651 6,866,614 62

Thu 05/13/10 8335.6 5 77 30 24 20 10 5 10 5 32,960,889 6,887,852 62

Fri 05/14/10 8343.7 8 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 32,992,274 6,919,237 65

Sat 05/15/10 8351.8 8 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 33,023,660 6,950,623 65

Sun 05/16/10 8362.6 13 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 33,066,790 6,993,753 67

Mon 05/17/10 8369.0 5 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 33,091,978 7,018,941 66

Tue 05/18/10 8378.0 9 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 33,124,421 7,051,384 60

Wed 05/19/10 8385.5 12 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 33,154,586 7,081,549 67

Thu 05/20/10 8400.0 10 77 35 30 27 14 7 13 7 33,204,571 7,131,534 57

Fri 05/21/10 8410.2 10 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 33,249,812 7,176,775 74

Sat 05/22/10 8414.6 6 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 33,265,038 7,192,001 58

Sun 05/23/10 8426.1 12 77 35 30 28 14 7 14 7 33,304,981 7,231,944 58

NM = not measure, NA = Not available

Tank A and B have 28 ft3 of media each.

(a)Hour meter readings were not recorded prior to 05/26/08, daily opearation time was estimated based on the average value in the following month.

(b) The totalizer was located on the outlet piping of the skid mounted treatment system

(c) K-factor of the flow meter was reset, when tried to recaliabrate the flow meter to close the gap between the throughput and the actual water usage rate.

110

111

112

108

System offline to repair leak in

109

Cum. 

Flow

Avg 

Flowrate

System Pressure Totalizer to Distribution

System 

Inlet

After 

Prefilter

After 

Rotameter

Tank A 

Outlet

System 

Outlet

ΔP Tank 

A

ΔP Tank 

B

System 

Totalizer(b)

Week 

No. Day Date

Pump 

Hours

Daily OP 

Time(a)

Rotameter 

Flowrate 
APPENDIX B 

ANALYTICAL DATA
B-1

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD

Sampling Date 04/17/08 04/28/08 05/12/08 05/27/08 07/22/08 08/11/08

Sampling Location

IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

- 3.4 - 5.3 - 6.3 - 9.1 - 24.8 - 31.2

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L

150 148 146 145 143 141 144 151 149 143 143 147 149 144 147 148 146 151

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fluoride mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.8 0.8 0.8 - - - 

Sulfate mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 10.4 10.5 10.6 - - - 

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - 

Total P (as P) μg/L

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 13.6 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L

14.9 14.7 14.7 14.5 14.6 14.7 15.9 15.8 15.7 17.1 17.4 17.3 16.2 16.4 16.3 16.7 16.5 19.5

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Turbidity NTU

1.0 2.9 0.9 0.8 1.1 0.9 1.3 1.2 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.3 <0.1 <0.1

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

pH S.U. NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.2 7.2 7.4

Temperature °C NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 12.7 12.3 12.7 16.8 16.9 16.9

DO mg/L NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 3.6 3.9 4.0 3.7 3.9 3.8

ORP mV NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 472 489 493 458 445 446

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - NA NA - NA NA - NA NA - NA NA - - 0.9 - - 0.9

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - NA NA - NA NA - NA NA - NA NA - - 0.8 - - 0.9

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 133 128 141 - - - 

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 95.4 93.8 103 - - - 

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 37.8 34.2 38.5 - - - 

As (total) μg/L

24.5 0.6 <0.1 24.0 0.8 0.8 23.5 <0.1 <0.1 25.7 0.2 0.1 23.8 0.1 0.1 21.6 0.2 0.1

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

As (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 23.1 0.0 0.1 - - - 

As (particulate) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.7 <0.1 <0.1 - - - 

As (III) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.4 0.3 0.4 - - - 

As (V) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 22.7 <0.1 <0.1 - - - 

Fe (total) μg/L

<25 99 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - <25 <25 <25 - - - 

Mn (total) μg/L

0.9 3.3 2.4 0.5 1.2 2.2 0.7 2.0 2.7 0.6 1.4 2.2 1.0 0.9 1.6 0.5 0.4 1.9

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.2 0.8 1.5 - - - 
B-2

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 08/21/08 09/04/08 9/25/2008 10/01/08 10/15/08 10/30/08

Sampling Location

IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

- 33.6 - 37.7 - 43.8 - 45.1 - 48.2 - 51.1

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L

145 145 143 146 144 146 143 146 146 143 141 141 139 143 143 143 146 146

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fluoride mg/L 0.8 0.8 0.7 - - - - - - - - - 0.7 0.7 0.8 - - - 

Sulfate mg/L 10.7 11.1 10.7 - - - - - - - - - 10.8 10.9 10.8 - - - 

Nitrate (as N) mg/L 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - - - - - - - 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - 

Total P (as P) μg/L

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10.6 <10 <10

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L

16.9 17.1 17.3 17.1 17.1 16.7 16.6 16.7 16.3 16.0 16.1 15.9 14.5 15.3 14.7 16.6 16.9 16.9

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Turbidity NTU

0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.3 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

pH S.U. 7.1 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.4 7.4 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.2 7.2 7.4 6.8 7.2 7.2 6.9 7.2 7.3

Temperature °C 16.0 16.3 16.4 16.9 16.7 16.5 16.7 16.8 16.7 16.1 16.2 16.2 13.3 13.4 13.1 14.4 13.3 13.9

DO mg/L 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.6 3.9 3.8 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.9 5.8 6.0 5.9 5.8

ORP mV 459 452 445 457 457 449 471 445 445 470 441 445 461 368 357 461 371 361

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 0.8 - - 0.9 - - 0.9 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 0.8 - - 0.8 - - 0.8 - - 0.9 - - 0.9 - - 1.0

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 161 165 163 - - - - - - - - - 153 151 150 - - - 

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 125 129 128 - - - - - - - - - 115 116 113 - - - 

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 35.4 36.6 35.6 - - - - - - - - - 37.4 34.8 36.4 - - - 

As (total) μg/L

21.9 0.2 <0.1 23.5 0.3 0.1 22.6 0.4 <0.1 23.5 0.6 0.3 22.7 0.7 <0.1 22.5 0.9 <0.1

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

As (soluble) μg/L 21.5 0.1 <0.1 - - - - - - - - - 21.3 0.7 <0.1 - - - 

As (particulate) μg/L 0.4 <0.1 <0.1 - - - - - - - - - 1.5 <0.1 <0.1 - - - 

As (III) μg/L 0.3 0.2 0.2 - - - - - - - - - 0.2 0.2 0.2 - - - 

As (V) μg/L 21.3 <0.1 <0.1 - - - - - - - - - 21.0 0.5 <0.1 - - - 

Fe (total) μg/L

<25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fe (soluble) μg/L <25 <25 <25 - - - - - - - - - <25 <25 <25 - - - 

Mn (total) μg/L

0.4 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.5 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.5 1.1 1.0 0.5 0.8

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mn (soluble) μg/L 0.4 0.6 0.9 - - - - - - - - - 0.2 0.5 1.3 - - - 
B-3

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 11/18/08 12/03/08 12/17/08 01/08/09 01/21/09 02/04/09

Sampling Location

IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

- 54.5 - 57.3 - 60.1 - 66.7 - 69.4 - 72.3

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L

136 143 143 150 152 152 147 147 145 142 144 144 138 146 146 143 148 150

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 148 148 150

Fluoride mg/L - - - - - - 0.8 0.8 0.8 - - - 0.8 0.8 0.8 - - - 

Sulfate mg/L - - - - - - 10.2 10.5 10.4 - - - 10.6 10.6 10.7 - - - 

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - - - - 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - 

Total P (as P) μg/L

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 18.0 23.3 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <10 <10 <10

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L

16.5 16.4 16.6 16.5 16.1 16.5 15.0 14.9 15.0 15.0 14.7 15.7 15.7 15.3 15.9 16.5 17.1 17.0

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 16.7 16.7 16.8

Turbidity NTU

0.3 <0.1 <0.1 1.6 0.1 0.2 2.1 2.5 2.8 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 <0.1 2.2 <0.1 0.5

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.0 0.4 0.8

pH S.U. 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.3

Temperature °C 16.7 16.8 16.4 16.6 16.4 16.3 10.3 10.3 10.4 12.3 11.4 11.9 14.7 14.5 14.7 13.6 13.5 13.7

DO mg/L 3.6 3.9 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.9 5.1 4.1 3.9 4.8 4.0 5.1 5.4 8.0 5.2 5.3 6.9

ORP mV 471 445 445 472 446 446 353 355 372 368 355 360 443 448 446 449 452 450

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - 1.0 - - 0.9 - 0.9 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 0.9

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - 0.9 - - 0.9 - 0.9 - - 0.9 - - 0.9 - - 0.9

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - 161 162 165 - - - 154 159 163 - - - 

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - 124 125 128 - - - 113 119 120 - - - 

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - 36.5 37.1 37.5 - - - 40.8 40.9 42.7 - - - 

As (total) μg/L

23.9 2.2 0.1 23.9 3.3 <0.1 22.8 4.5 0.1 23.3 9.5 0.2 21.3 9.4 <0.1 24.5 11.3 <0.1

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 24.4 11.5 <0.1

As (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - 21.4 4.4 0.1 - - - 21.5 9.7 <0.1 - - - 

As (particulate) μg/L - - - - - - 1.4 0.1 <0.1 - - - <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - - - 

As (III) μg/L - - - - - - 0.6 0.4 0.2 - - - 0.4 0.3 0.2 - - - 

As (V) μg/L - - - - - - 20.8 4.0 <0.1 - - - 21.1 9.5 <0.1 - - - 

Fe (total) μg/L

<25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <25 <25 <25

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - <25 <25 <25 - - - <25 <25 <25 - - - 

Mn (total) μg/L

0.7 0.2 0.9 0.4 <0.1 0.5 3.4 1.9 2.7 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.4 1.4

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.4 0.4 1.5

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - 0.9 0.7 1.0 - - - 0.2 0.2 0.4 - - - 
B-4

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 02/19/09 03/05/09 03/19/09 04/07/09 04/15/09 04/30/09

Sampling Location

IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

- 75.8 - 78.9 - 82.2 - 86.1 - 87.7 - 90.4

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L

156 153 156 150 148 154 147 151 149 158 155 160 157 141 141 140 142 142

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fluoride mg/L - - - 0.8 0.8 0.8 - - - - - - - - - 0.7 0.8 0.8

Sulfate mg/L - - - 10.8 11 11.3 - - - - - - - - - 9.2 10.1 10.3

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - - - - - - - 0.4 0.5 0.6

Total P (as P) μg/L

<10 <10 <10 <10 11.9 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10.8 12.2 <10

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L

15.0 15.3 15.4 16.7 16.7 16.4 16.0 16.1 16.2 14.6 14.7 14.7 17.6 17.9 17.4 18.4 17.8 19.6

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Turbidity NTU

1.2 2.4 2.8 0.2 0.1 0.3 1.0 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.6 1.8 0.8

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

pH S.U. 7.3 7.8 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3

Temperature °C 13.4 13.9 13.3 12.9 12.8 12.8 12.4 11.9 11.9 11.3 11.0 10.9 12.6 12.4 12.0 11.5 11.3 11.4

DO mg/L 5.2 5.3 5.8 5.7 7.8 6.8 7.8 7.7 7.8 8.7 7.1 7.9 8.4 8.0 7.9 8.6 8.6 8.4

ORP mV 441 440 444 304 309 326 418 411 411 419 405 408 418 412 403 418 412 410

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 0.9 - - 1.0 - - 0.9 - - 1.0

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - 117 116 118 - - - - - - - - - 154 159 162

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - 97.6 96.8 98.0 - - - - - - - - - 117 121 123

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - 18.9 19.1 19.5 - - - - - - - - - 36.2 37.5 38.2

As (total) μg/L

21.1 11.4 0.3 19.2 11.3 <0.1 21.5 15.4 <0.1 16.9 11.4 <0.1 21.7 15.5 <0.1 19.9 13.0 <0.1 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

As (soluble) μg/L - - - 18.6 11.6 0.1 - - - - - - - - - 19.0 12.7 <0.1

As (particulate) μg/L - - - 0.7 <0.1 <0.1 - - - - - - - - - 1.0 0.3 <0.1

As (III) μg/L - - - 1.1 0.4 1.0 - - - - - - - - - <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

As (V) μg/L - - - 17.5 11.3 <0.1 - - - - - - - - - 18.9 12.6 <0.1

Fe (total) μg/L

<25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - <25 <25 <25 - - - - - - - - - <25 <25 <25

Mn (total) μg/L

0.3 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.5 <0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.8 0.3 0.6

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - 0.3 0.2 0.4 - - - - - - - - - 0.3 0.2 0.3
B-5

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 05/13/09 05/28/09 06/11/09 06/23/09 07/07/09 07/21/09

Sampling Location IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

- 92.7 - 95.7 - 98.7 - 102 - 106 - 110

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L

149 147 147 148 148 148 152 152 152 148 146 144 153 148 155 156 144 170

- - - - - - 152 152 150 - - - - - - - - - 

Fluoride mg/L - - - - - - - - - 0.8 0.8 0.8 - - - 0.4 0.8 0.8

Sulfate mg/L - - - - - - - - - 10.6 10.7 10.7 - - - 5.38 10.6 10.5

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - - - - - - - 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - 0.21 0.45 0.46

Total P (as P) μg/L

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

- - - - - - <10 <10 <10 - - - - - - - - - 

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L

17.5 17.9 18.1 16.8 17.2 17.6 17.1 17.0 16.7 16.7 16.6 16.6 17.1 17.1 17.1 18.3 17.3 19.3

- - - - - - 16.8 16.9 16.8 - - - - - - - - - 

Turbidity NTU

0.2 0.1 0.3 1.0 0.6 2.1 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.6 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.2 2.6 1.2 1.6

- - - - - - 1.4 0.6 1.3 - - - - - - - - - 

pH S.U. 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.2

Temperature °C 11.9 12.1 11.8 12.1 12.4 12.3 11.9 11.7 11.5 11.7 11.7 11.6 12.7 12.8 13.0 12.9 12.9 13.1

DO mg/L 8.7 8.8 8.7 8.8 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.6 -(a) -(a) -(a) -(a) -(a) -(a)

ORP mV 420 419 418 419 419 418 420 420 420 421 420 420 441 461 476 443 475 484

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 0.9 - - 0.9 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - 164 164 164 - - - 179 171 173

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - 135 135 134 - - - 134 130 130

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - 29 29 30 - - - 45 41 43

As (total) μg/L

20.8 15.0 0.6 20.2 16.4 1.4 22.0 17.9 1.1 19.3 16.1 1.2 21.7 18.3 1.6 23.8 18.6 2.2

- - - - - - 21.4 17.6 1.0 - - - - - - - - -

As (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - 19.2 15.8 1.1 - - - 22.0 18.6 2.2

As (particulate) μg/L - - - - - - - - - <0.1 0.4 0.1 - - - 1.8 <0.1 <0.1

As (III) μg/L - - - - - - - - - 0.3 0.1 0.3 - - - 0.2 0.2 0.2

As (V) μg/L - - - - - - - - - 19.0 15.7 0.8 - - - 21.8 18.4 2.0

Fe (total) μg/L

<25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 36.8 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

- - - - - - <25 <25 <25 - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - <25 <25 37.5 - - - <25 <25 <25

Mn (total) μg/L

0.6 0.3 1.2 0.4 1.7 3.5 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.6 1.8 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.5

 - - - - - - 0.5 0.2 0.4 - - - - - - - - - 

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - 0.4 0.7 1.6 - - - 0.2 0.2 0.3

(a) Data were not available due to a mistake in measurement
B-6

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 08/04/09 08/18/09 09/02/09 09/17/09 09/29/09 10/13/09

Sampling Location

IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

- 114 - 118 - 121 - 124 - 126 - 127

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fluoride mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Sulfate mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Total P (as P) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Turbidity NTU - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

pH S.U. 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3

Temperature °C 12.8 12.7 12.6 13.0 12.9 12.7 11.8 11.7 11.7 11.9 12.1 12.0 11.7 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.7 11.8

DO mg/L 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.1 8.1 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.8 8.5 9.0 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.4

ORP mV 395 387 375 363 337 295 374 378 386 391 392 411 381 380 378 371 379 378

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.1

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.1 - - 1.1

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (total) μg/L

26.3 21.9 0.9 20.5 17.0 5.6 18.9 14.7 2.9 23.0 18.0 5.9 22.0 18.6 5.8 20.8 14.7 4.6

- - - 21.2 16.9 5.7 - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (particulate) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (III) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (V) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mn (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
B-7

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 10/27/09 11/10/09 11/17/09 12/3/09(a) 12/15/09 01/04/10

Sampling Location IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

- 128 - 130 - 131 - 0.4 - 2.3 - 8.5

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fluoride mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Sulfate mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Total P (as P) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Turbidity NTU - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

pH S.U. 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 6.9 7.2 7.3 NA NA NA 7.0 7.2 7.2

Temperature °C 12.1 12.2 12.1 10.9 10.7 10.6 10.7 10.5 10.1 10.3 10.1 9.9 NA NA NA 11.5 10.9 11.1

DO mg/L 8.4 6.3 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 NA NA NA 8.4 8.3 8.3

ORP mV 382 385 385 422 400 354 418 402 380 418 352 316 NA NA NA 432 427 425

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 0.9 - - 0.9 - - 1.0 - - NA - - 1.0

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - NA - - 1.0

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (total) μg/L

21.9 15.5 5.8 22.4 15.2 6.1 22.4 15.9 5.8 19.7 2.5 5.7 20.3 1.2 5.8 22.6 0.6 8.3

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (particulate) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (III) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (V) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mn (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

(a) Vessel A was placed in the lag position after rebedding on 12/02/09.
B-8

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 01/12/10 01/27/10 02/10/10 02/24/10 03/10/10 03/23/10

Sampling Location

IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

 - 10.4 - 14.4 - 16.9 - 19.7 - 23.2 - 25.7

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fluoride mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Sulfate mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Total P (as P) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Turbidity NTU - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

pH S.U. 7.0 7.1 7.3 7.1 7.3 7.2 NA NA NA 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2

Temperature °C 11.1 11.0 10.5 10.9 10.7 10.6 NA NA NA 11.7 11.8 11.8 11.5 11.7 11.6 11.8 11.9 12.1

DO mg/L 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.2 8.3 NA NA NA 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2

ORP mV 439 423.1 431.7 438 429.3 430.7 NA NA NA 437 435.1 435.1 440 431.6 434 432 433 434

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.1 - - 1.0 - - NA - - 0.9 - - 1.0 - - 1.1

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.1 - - 1.0 - - NA - - 1.0 - - 1.0 - - 1.1

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (total) μg/L

21.1 0.5 7.8 21.6 0.5 8.9 20.5 0.4 8.9 20.9 0.4 9.3 20.0 0.4 10.7 22.2 0.3 10.6

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (particulate) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (III) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (V) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mn (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
B-9

Table B-1. Analytical Results from Long Term Sampling, Lead, SD (Continued)

Sampling Date 04/06/10 04/20/10 05/04/10 05/18/10

Sampling Location

IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB IN TA TB

Parameter Unit

Bed Volume 103

 - 27.9 - 29.6 - 31.6 - 33.7

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fluoride mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Sulfate mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Nitrate (as N) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Total P (as P) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

Silica (as SiO2) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

Turbidity NTU - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

pH S.U. 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2

Temperature °C 11.7 11.8 11.8 11.6 11.5 11.7 11.3 11.3 11.1 11.4 11.5 11.7

DO mg/L 8.3 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.4 8.3 8.3

ORP mV 428 435 435 431 429 428 429 621 420 429 426 426

Free Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.2 - - 1.1 - - 1.0

Total Chlorine (as Cl2) mg/L - - 1.0 - - 1.2 - - 1.1 - - 1.0

Total Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Ca Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mg Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (total) μg/L

20.7 0.4 5.9 19.4 0.6 9.6 22.4 0.3 12.1 21.2 0.5 11.7

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (particulate) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (III) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As (V) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

Fe (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mn (total) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Mn (soluble) μg/L - - - - - - - - - - - -