Onsite Wastewater Nutrient Reduction Systems (OWNRS) For 

Nutrient Sensitive Environments 

Darnann L. Anderson* 

Mark B. Tyl 

Richard J. Otis 

Timothy G. Mayer 

Kevin M. Sherman 

ABSTRACT 

Negative impacts to the Florida Keys coral reef ecology have been documented in recent years, 

and water quality degradation from nutrient overloading is a suspected cause. To protect the waters of the 

Florida Keys from further degradation, the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) was 

established by the federal government in 1990. In 1993 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) identified domestic wastewater as a major source of nutrient loading to FKNMS waters. Many 

dwellings and commercial establishments in the Keys use onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS), 

so the Florida Keys Onsite Wastewater Nutrient Reduction Systems (OWNRS) Demonstration Project 

was initiated in l 995 to demonstrate the use of OWTS which could significantly improve treatment and 

reduce the concentrations of nutrients discharged to the near-shore environment of the Keys. 

To meet this objective, a unique test facility was designed and constructed to evaluate various 

OWNRS processes simultaneously, under controlled conditions, using a common wastewater source. 

Five principle wastewater treatment process streams were operated concurrently at the test facility, with 

several unit processes in each stream. Unit processes evaluated included attached growth and suspended 

growth biological processes (both aerobic and anaerobic), physical/chemical processes (adsorption, 

precipitation, ion exchange) and natural systems utilizing drip irrigation for plant uptake and evapotranspiration. Influent and effluent quality were monitored monthly with 24-hour flow-composite 

samples. Results after the first year of operation indicate that OWNRS effluent concentrations of 5 mg/L 

CBOD5, 5 mg/L TSS, 10 mg!L total nitrogen, and 1 mg/L total phosphorus are achievable without 

chemical addition using combinations of the processes tested. Although excellent treatment was achieved 

with OWNRS, significant additional construction, operation, and maintenance was required for these 

systems in comparison with conventional OWTS. 

Keywords: Onsite wastewater treatment, Nutrient removal, Nitrogen removal, Phosphorus removal, 

Advanced wastewater treatment 

INTRODUCTION 

The Florida Keys are an environmentally sensitive chain of islands extending from the 

southern tip of Florida southwestward to Key West and the Dry Tortugas. The clear waters 

surrounding this area contain the only living coral reefs in the continental United States. Over 

80,000 people make their homes in the Florida Keys and more than 3 million tourists visit the Keys 

annually. 

*Damann L. Anderson, Mark B. Tyl, Ayres Associates, 3901 Coconut Palm Drive, Tampa, FL, 

33619; Richard J. Otis, Ayres Associates, 2445 Darwin Rd., Madison, W1, 53704; Timothy G. Mayer, 

Kevin M. Sherman, Florida Dept. of Health, Onsite Sewage Program, 1317 Winewood Blvd., 

Tallahassee, FL, 32399 
.

Background 

In 1990, the United States Congress recognized the national and international significance of 

resources in the Florida Keys with the passage of The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and 

Protection Act (Public Law 101-605). The sanctuary established by this legislation consists of 

approximately 9,500 km2 of coastal and oceanic waters and the submerged land beneath them. The 

shoreward boundary of the sanctuary is the mean high-water mark. 

Under the sanctuary designation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 

is charged with developing a comprehensive management plan and implementation regulations. The U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in conjunction with the State of Florida and NOAA, must 

develop and implement a water quality protection program. 

The water quality protection program has identified nutrient loading from wastewater sources as 

one of the major water quality concerns in the Keys. Onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) have 

been targeted as one of the primary wastewater sources of nitrogen and phosphorus. The Water Quality 

Protection Program Report (Continental Shelf Associates, 1993) to the EPA documented the need for a 

demonstration of nutrient-reducing OWTS in the Florida Keys. The Florida Department of Health 

initiated the Florida Keys Onsite Wastewater Nutrient Reduction System (OWNRS) Demonstration 

Project in response to this need. 

Project Objectives 

The Florida Keys OWNRS Demonstration Project was designed to demonstrate the capability and use of 

alternative OWTS technologies for the Florida Keys. Wastewater treatment processes which provide a 

level of treatment superior to conventional OWTS were tested to evaluate their potential to reduce 

organic, solids, and nutrient loading to near-shore waters of the Keys. An additional goal of the project 

was to determine if Florida advanced wastewater treatment (AWT) standards of 5 milligrams per liter 

(mg/L) for Carbonaceous Biological Oxygen Demand (CBOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS), 3 

mg/L for Total Nitrogen, and 1 mg/L for Total Phosphorus, are feasible for OWTS. 

MATERIALS AND METHODS 

Central Test Facility 

A central test facility was constructed at a minimum security correctional institution in the Florida 

Keys to test various processes for onsite wastewater treatment removal. The central test facility was 

designed to allow comparative testing of numerous onsite wastewater treatment processes simultaneously, 

under controlled conditions, with a common wastewater source. Use of a common source eliminated the 

difficulty of making valid comparisons of technology performance based on a limited number of 

installations with widely varying wastewater characteristics. The test facility allows accurate monitoring 

of influent wastewater quality and flow, and the capability for flow-composited effluent sampling to 

determine treatment performance. 

The test facility was initially set up to evaluate five principle wastewater treatment process 

streams. Electronically activated dose systems provide each of the process streams with influent 

wastewater, diverted from the correctional institution's wastewater collection systems. The dosing 

schedule is shown in Figure 1 and rniq:~ics the typical wastewater flow from a home, with peaks in the 

morning and early evening. Under normal operating conditions, each of the treatment streams receives 

200 gallons per day. The facility is designed so this volume can be adjusted for stress testing and other 

special purpose research. The central test facility was activated in October of 1996. 

2 

• 
~ 15 

11. 

~ 

31': 

0 

ii: 10 

5 

0 

E 

~ "' 

0 

E 

"' 

~ 

E E "' "' N <") 0 0 E E "' "' ~ N 

E E E E 

"' "' "' ..,. II) "' <0 ..... 0 0 0 0 

E E E ~ "' "' "' ..,. <0 "" II) 

E ~ E E E &. [ E E 

"' "' "' a. a. a. 

co a> 0 ~ N ..... N (") ..,. 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 

E 0 0 0 E E E E [ E E K "' "' a. a. co "' "' "' N ~ N (") ..... a> 0 ~ ~ 

~ ~ 

Time 

Figure 1: Daily Dose Schedule to Treatment Systems (5 gallons per dose) 

Treatment Processes 

E 

a. E a. E a. E a. E a. [ [ E 

II) <0 ..... co a> 0 ~ N "' 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 

K E E E K 0 0 0 

K K a. a. a. E ..,. II) <0 ..... co a. a> 0 ~ 

..... ~ 

The principle treatment technologies currently under evaluation are physical, chemical, and 

aerobic and anaerobic biological treatment processes. One "passive" technology stream and four "active" 

technology process streams are currently under evaluation. A description of the five principle process 

streams follows. Figure 2 provides a schematic of the test facility and process streams currently in 

operation. 

Process Stream 1 consists of a septic tank (ST -1) followed by a recirculating sand filter (RSF) 

and an anoxic bio-filter (ABF). Effluent from the system is discharged to an un.lined drip irrigation bed. 

Treatment occurs through digestion and settling in the septic tank and physical, chemical, and attached 

growth aerobic biological processes in the RSF. Adsorption by the RSF media removes limited quantities 

of phosphorus. The nitrified RSF effluent is mixed with anoxic septic tank effluent in the recirculation 

chamber (RC) to encourage denitrification. The effluent also undergoes further nutrient reduction in an 

anoxic bio-filter and by plant uptake in the drip bed as well as adsorption on the drip field media. 

Process Stream 2 is a relatively passive technology consisting of a septic tank (ST-2) with 

effluent discharged to a lined drip irrigation field. A commercially available subsurface drip irrigation 

(SDI) system by AztexTM Products is used for effluent distribution to the root zone. This process stream 

represents the most "low tech" of the systems. Reduction of nutrients and other parameters is 

accomplished by preliminary digestion and settling in the septic tank with additional 

-3 -
8IUQ( 

E CHIP 

.s 

Cll 

>- (I) 

c 

0 

"" .. 

f U!CA 

~ 0 

i 

c 

'2 

:::> lAND 

AYRES 

ASSOCIATES 

FLORIDA KEYS ONSITE WASTEWATER NUTRIENT REDUCTION 

SYSTEM (OWNRS) DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 

CENTRAL TEST FACILITY SCHEMATIC 

Retum to Pri1on WNTP --------------

! l I l 

r-:l r-:-1 1~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ 

ABF - Anoxic bio-filter 

1\C • Adaofplion Cel 

1\C-1 • 8nck Chips 

AC-2-AILminum Silic.IM 

.AC-3-LECA 

~ 

CFCR • ConlinuoUs Feed Cycle ReiiCIOr PCP • Procea C-ol P..ts 

CPU · Chemicel Precipitation Unft RBC • Rotating Biological Contador 

OP • Drip Irrigation Pump Sys1em RC - Recircullllion Ct.nber 

FAS • Fbc-.1-FIIm AdivcMcl Sludge RSF • RecWc::ulatng S.nd Filter 

1MT - lrAient t.fox Tank ST - Septic T ri 

Salle: NTS 

Figure 2: Central Test Facility Schematic 

physical, chemical, and biological treatment processes occurring in the lined bed underlying the drip field 

and by plant uptake. The lined bed contains a one foot thickness of saturated media under 1.5 feet of 

unsaturated media. The effluent undergoes nitrification in the upper unsaturated (aerobic) portion of the 

drip bed and limited denitrification in the saturated (anaerobic) lower portion of the drip bed. Three 

treatment media (crushed red brick, silica sand, and an expanded clay aggregate from Norway, 

commercially known as LECA TM) underlie distinct zones of the drip field. Two of these, the bricks and 

LECA, were selected for their phosphorus adsorption potential. Because these media beds have been 

built over an impermeable liner, the program includes an assessment of the effectiveness of evapotranspiration in reducing effluent volumes. 

The principle treatment unit in process stream 3 is a proprietary unit known as the Bio-Microbics 

FAS'fTM aerobic unit. This unit uses fixed-film activated sludge (FAS) treatment. The treatment is a 

combination suspended growth and attached growth aerobic biological process. This system provides 

nitrification of the effluent before discharge, and also provides denitrification by mixing anaerobic 

conditions that favor the growth of denitrifying microorganisms and conversion of nitrate to nitrous oxide 

or nitrogen gas. Additional processes would be required for phosphorus removal following this system. 

- 4-

• 
Process stream 4 consists of proprietary treatment unit known as the AES BESTEP- IDEA T M 

system. This system is a suspended growth biological treatment process that operates as a continuous 

feed cyclic reactor (CFCR). The process is similar to a sequencing batch reactor (SBR), but is unique in 

that it allows continuous flow while using only one process tank. Aeration to the tank is cyclical, which 

causes alternating aerobic and anaerobic conditions. This fluctuating environment results in nitrification 

followed by denitrification and also luxury uptake of phosphorus by the activated sludge biomass. 

Process stream 5 consists of a proprietary treatment unit known as the .Klargester BiodiscTM. It is 

a rotating biological contactor (RBC), followed by an anoxic bio-fllter (ABF). The RBC is an attached 

growth, aerobic biological treatment process that provides internal recycle for nitrification and 

denitrification. It produces a nitrified effluent that then undergoes further denitrification in the ABF. 

Additional processes would be required for phosphorus removal following this system. 

Additional unit processes are available for testing at the facility. These include chemical 

precipitation, supplemental carbon addition for denitrification, and additional phosphorus adsorption 

media. The test facility was designed so that the effluent from the principle treatment process streams 

described above can be routed to any of these additional processes for further treatment and evaluation. 

These additional processes are currently under evaluation and are not included in this paper. Effluents 

from the various process streams are discharged to a sump tank after water quality sampling and returned 

to the correctional institution's wastewater treatment plant. 

Treatment Performance Monitoring 

Twenty-four hour flow composited samples were collected from the influent mix tank and from 

each of the five treatment process effluents from November 1996 through August 1997. Samples were 

analyzed according to Standard Methods (APHA, 1992) for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) , 

carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) , total suspended solids (TSS), total kjeldahl nitrogen 

(TKN), nitrate +nitrite-nitrogen (N02N03-N), and total phosphorus (TP). Total nitrogen (TN) was 

obtained by summation. 

RESULTS 

Results of the water quality analyses for the influent and five process stream effluents are 

provided in Table I. For the lined bed drip irrigation system (Process Stream 2), only the results of the 

crushed brick media (LBRICK) are reported here. 

Influent wastewater quality was typical of that reported in the literature for domestic wastewater 

(Metcalf and Eddy, 1991) with mean CBOD5, TSS, TN, and TP values of 137.8, 117.5, 38.4, and 8.4 

mg/L, respectively. Significant variations about these mean values were measured over the 12 sampling 

events, also typical of domestic wastewater from individual homes. 

Effluent quality for all treatment processes was excellent in terms of traditional wastewater 

treatment parameters, CBOD5, and TSS. 

CBOD5: All five process streams met the A WT CBOD5 effluent standard of 5 mg/L. Figure 3 

shows the 95% confidence intervals about the mean for the five processes. These data illustrate the 

stability of fixed-film attached growth biological processes such as the RSF and RBC. 

TSS: Only the CFR and the RBC systems did not meet the A WT effluent TSS standard of 5 

mg/L, but they were within 2 mg/L of the standard. Figure 4 shows the 95% confidence intervals for 

TSS. These data indicate the stability of biological filter type processes such as the RSF for TSS 

removal. The crushed brick media also indicated stable TSS removals later in the study period, once the 

fine media particles stabilized and grass growth took hold. 

Effluent quality for the nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorus, showed significantly more variation 

between processes, and typically did not meet A WT effluent standards. 

- 5-
Table 1: Summary of Influent and Effluent Water Quality Data 

Parameter Statistic Influent System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4 System 5 

(IMT) (RSF-ABF) (LBRICK) (FAS) (CFCR) (RBC-ABF) 

mean 170.90 2.27 4.17 5.58 4.16 2.42 

Std. Dev. 73.85 2.51 6.29 3.90 5.45 1.38 

BODs min 62.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 

max 299.00 9.70 21.30 14.00 17.20 5.00 

n 10 12 11 11 8 11 

mean 137.80 1.50 2.81 2.70 3.19 1.68 

Std. Dev. 60.13 0.90 4.04 3.11 5.18 1.24 

CBODs min 59.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 

max 220.00 4.00 14.40 9.01 15.90 5.00 

n 10 12 11 11 8 11 

mean 117.50 2.25 4.09 4.63 6.85 5.75 

Std. Dev. 92.09 1.76 3.83 3.93 6.62 4.47 

TSS min 17.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 

max 345.00 6.00 11 .00 14.00 20.00 16.00 

n 12 12 11 12 10 12 

mean 38.58 1.01 1.75 1.55 1.16 2.75 

Std. Dev. 10.67 1.44 2.10 0.82 0.52 2.62 

TKN min 19.20 0.26 0.34 0.49 0.56 0.42 

max 62.50 5.30 8.19 3.40, 2.20 7.40 

n 12 11 12 12 9 11 

mean 0.03 21 .09 18.3.6 9.42 14.30 9.77 

Std. Dev. 0.02 6.76 10.56 4.06 6.49 3.69 

N02N03-N min 0.01 14.00 1.60 "3.90 2.54 3.60 

max 0.05 35.20 36.60 19.70 23.00 17.00 

n 10 11 11 12 9 11 

mean 38.61 20.76 20.24 10.97 15.46 12.52 

Std. Dev. 10.67 5.61 11.64 4.05 6.60 5.98 

TN min 19.25 14.46 3.00 4.55 3.53 4.05 

max 62.55 30.23 44.79 20.19 24.20 23.00 

n 12 10 11 12 9 11 

mean 8.39 1.76 0.60 5.38 6.24 4.67 

Std. Dev. 5.79 0.48 0.23 1.44 1.59 1.05 

TP min 4.32 0.92 0.34 3.22 4.80 2.50 

max 26.00 2.40 1.20 8.70 9.90 5.90 

n 12 10 11 12 10 12 

Nitrogen: None of the five process streams met the AWT nitrogen standard of3 mg/L. The FAS 

and RBC-ABF systems performed best for nitrogen removal, with mean effluent TN values of 11.0 and 

12.5 mg/L, respectively. Figure 5 shows the 95% confidence intervals for TN. 

These results are excellent considering they were obtained without supplemental carbon addition 

to enhance denitrification. In fact, the RBC-ABF effluent was not significantly different from the RBC 

effluent alone, indicating insufficient residual carbon for denitrification in the ABF tank following the 

RBC. 

- 6-

• 
I 

. 

-

~ .§. 

c 

0 

= 

~ c 

., 

u 

c 

0 

u 

Q 

Effluent CBOD5 Concentrations (mean± 95% C.l.) 

·~----------------------------------------------

7 

Influent CBOD1 = 137.8 :t 42.4 mg/L 

8 

5 ------- ----------- --- - - --- - --- - - - - --- - - - - -- - - AWTLimlt4 

3 

0 2 

m I u 

1 

0+---------~----~---;----------~--~----~----

-------

I 

RSF-ABF LBRICK FAS CFCR RBC -ABF . 

Treatment Unit 

Figure 3: Effluent CBODs Concentrations (mean ± 95% C.I.) 

c 

0 

I 

u 

c 

0 

u 

Cl) 

!!? 

Effluent TSS Concentrations (mean ± 95% C.l.) 

14~----------------------------------------------

Influent TSS = 117.5 :t 57.9 mgiL 

12 

10 

• 

-----· AWTLimlt - --

4 

. I 0+---------1---------~--------~--------~----

-----

RSF-ABF LBRICK FAS CFCR RBC -ABF 

Treabnent Unit 

Figure 4: Effluent TSS Concentrations (mean ± 95% C.I.) 

- 7 -

...
Effluent TN Concentrations (mean ± 95% C. I.) 

30~---------------------------------------------------------~ 

Influent TN = 38.4 :t 6. 7 mg/L 

26 

~ E 20· 

-

c 

j 

c 

CD 

u 

8 

~ 

15 ~ 

10. I __ .:. _ ----------- AWT Umlt - ---------------------------------------

0+----------+----------~--------~--------~--------~ 

RSF·ABF LBRICK FAS 

Treatment Unit 

CFCR RBC-ABF 

Figure 5: Effluent Total Nitrogen Concentrations (mean ± 95% C.I.) 

Supplemental carbon addition is currently being evaluated at the Keys test facility, and 

preliminary results indicate that an effluent TN value of 5 mg/L may be achievable by adding carbon to 

an ABF unit following the F AS or RBC. 

Phosphorus: Only the lined drip irrigation system with crushed brick (LBRICK) media met the 

A WT effluent standard for phosphorus. The LBRICK and RSF-ABF systems both provided excellent TP 

removals with mean effluent TP values of0.60 and 1.8 mg!L, respectively. figure 6 shows the 95% 

confidence intervals for TP. These data suggest that adsorption of phosphorus on the RSF sand and drip 

field crushed brick media are also the most stable phosphorus removal mechanisms tested. It remains to 

be seen, however, how long these removal efficiencies will Last. Once the media adsorption sites reach 

capacity, breakthrough of phosphorus at higher concentrations may occur. 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

A field evaluation of several onsite wastewater nutrient reduction systems (OWNRS) was 

conducted to evaluate the potential for improved treatment effectiveness of onsite wastewater treatment 

systems (OWTS) in the Florida Keys. Results indicated that the systems tested provided excellent 

treatment performance (CBOD5 and TSS <5 mg/L), but no individual system was capable of meeting the 

Florida advanced waste treatment (A WT) effluent standards of 5 mg!L CBOD5, 5 mg/L TSS, 3 mg/L TN, 

and I mg/L ofTP. 

- 8-

.. 
Effluent TP Concentrations (mean ± 95°k C.l.) 

8 

Influent TP = 8.39 :1: 3.64 mg/L 

7 

::; 6 

Q 

.5. 

c 5 

0 

~ 

i 4 I I 

• u 

c 

0 3 u 

~ 2 I 

1 - ----------------------· AWT Umlt 

I 

0 

RSF·ABF LBRICK FAS CFCR RBC-ABF 

Treatment Unit 

Figure 6: Effluent Total Phosphorus- Concentrations (mean± 95% C.I.) 

It appeared that a combination of processes, such as an aerobic biological treatment unit followed by an 

anoxic bio-filter (ABF) with supplemental carbon addition, discharging to an engineered media drip 

irrigation bed could meet the A WT standards for CBOD5, TSS, and TP and come very close to the 

standard for TN. The duration of the TP removals by the drip irrigation bed is unknown; however, 

continued monitoring of these systems is recommended to address longevity issues and solids handling 

requirements. Based on the evaluation conducted to date, following conclusions are drawn: 

• A WT effluent standards for CBOD5, TSS, and TP can be consistently met with combinations of 

the technologies tested; 

• TN reductions of>70% are achievable without supplemental carbon addition and 90% with 

carbon addition; 

• Continued monitoring of the OWNRS are required to quantify phosphorus removal duration and 

treatment performance longevity, solids handling requirements, and maintenance requirements; 

• Construction of the OWNRS and operation for one year bas indicated that OWNRS will require 

considerably greater capital, operation and maintenance expenditures in comparison to 

conventional OWTS. 

-9-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

This project was funded by the Florida Department of Health (Contract #LP988) under a grant 

from the US Environmental Protection Agency (Cooperative Agreement #X994394-93-0), and this 

financial support is acknowledged. The Florida Department of Corrections, and specifically the staff of 

the Big Pine Key Road Prison, are gratefully acknowledged for the cooperation and assistance on the 

OWNRS Demonstration Project. Finally, the time and material provided by the numerous equipment 

manufacturers made this study possible, and their support is acknowledged. 

REFERENCES 

1. APHA, 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 1 81h ed., 

American Public Health Association, Washington DC. 

2. Continental Shelf Associates, Inc., Batelle Ocean Services, Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari & 

Hetlstrom, Inc., Batelle Pacific Northwest Division and Batelle Seattle Research Center, 1993. 

Water Quality Protection Program, Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, Phase ll Report. 

Report to the US Environmental Protection Agency, Oceans and Coastal Protection Division 

under Contract 68-C2-0134. 

3. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment Disposal, and Reuse. 3rd ed., 

McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991. 

- 10 -
FLORIDA OWNRS PROJECT PHASE 1- TEST DATA 

PARAMETER UNITS SAMPLE DATES 

11/20196 12/18/96 1/29/97 

BOD (5-Da f@20°C) 

INFLUENT mg/L 137.00 148.00 299.00 

FAST mg/L 3.26 7.75 8.02 

FAST-ABF mg/L NO OAT NO OAT 10.00 

BOD (Carbonaceous) 

INFLUENT mg/L 176.00 136.00 215.00 

FAST mgiL 2.48 8.85 9.01 

FAST-ABF mg/L NO OAT NODA ~ 16.10 

Ammonia Nitrogen 

INFLUENT mg/LN 18.90 34.90 50.80 

FAST mg/L N 0.32 1.24 1.73 

FAST-ABF mg/L N NO OAT NO OAT 2.50 

Nitrate-Nitrite Nitrogen 

INFLUENT mg/L N 0.05 0.05 0.05 

FAST [mgtL N 9.23 9.39 8.47 

FAST-ABF mg/L N NO DAT NODAT 18.81 

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 

INFLUENT mg/LN 19.20 46.90 62.50 

FAST mg/LN 1.23 1.n 1.82 

FAST-ABF [mg/L N NO OAT NO OAT 2.39 

Total Nitrogen(lKN+Hitnt..) 

INFLUENT mg/LN 19.25 46.95 62.55 

FAST mg/LN 10.46 11.16 10.29 

FAST-ABF mg/L N NO OA ~ NO OAT 21 .20 

Total Phosphorus 

INFLUENT [mg/L p 4.32 7.09 11.00 

FAST [mg/LP 3.22 4.21 5.19 

FAST-ABF mg/L p NO OAT NO OAT 4.52 

Total Suspended Solids 

INFLUENT mg/L 60.00 86.00 345.00 

FAST mgiL 4.00 14.00 10.00 

FAST-ABF mg/L NO OAT NO DAT 4.00 

1 - sample collected following simulated vacation stress 

2 - sample collected following simulated wash day stress 

2/26/97 4/2/97 4/23/97 1

5/8/97 5121/97 25/29/97 

139.00 170.00 210.00 230.00 62.00 240.00 

6.00 4.30 9.00 5.70 2.60 14.00 

10.00 2.20 1.40 1.70 2.70 1.00 

183.00 150.00 200.00 220.00 59.00 130.00 

6.00 1.20 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 

10.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 

26.80 23.00 37.00 29.00 26.00 36.00 

0.58 0.75 1.40 0.10 0.07 1.90 

0.34 0.61 0.37 0.29 0.67 0.63 

0.05 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 

19.70 9.20 7.00 3.90 'II 12.00 11.00 

19.00 8.60 6.40 2.40 7.40 11.00 

37.40 32.00 46.00 39.00 33.00 44.00 

0.49 1.90 2.50 1.10 1.00 3.40 

0.64 1.60 1.10 1.10 1.60 1.60 

37.45 32.04 46.02 39.02 33.01 44.01 

20.19 11.10 9.50 5.00 13.00 14.40 

19.64 10.20 7.50 3.50 9.00 12.60 

7.07 6.60 7.80 7.10 5.80 26.00 

5.64 5.80 6.40 6.10 5.30 8.70 

5.22 5.60 5.60 5.40 5.30 5.80 

70.00 17.00 203.00 170.00 162.00 80.00 

4.00 1.00 3.00 5.50 1.00 2.00 

4.00 1.00 1.00 2.50 1.00 1.00 

AVG % RED 

6/11/97 7/17197 8/28/97 

100.00 150.00 100.00 165.42 

4.80 1.00 1.00 5.62 96.6 

1.40 1.00 1.00 3.24 98.0 

67.00 130.00 71.00 144.75 

1.00 1.00 1.00 2.91 98.0 

1.00 1.00 1.00 3.41 97.6 

30.00 27.00 27.00 30.53 

0.30 0.15 0.04 0.72 97.7 ; 

0.04 NODAT NO OAT 0.68 97.8 

0.04 NO OAT NODAT 0.03 

9.40 9.80 4.00 9.42 NA ~ 

10.00 10.00 2.40 9.60 NA 

36.00 33.00 32.00 38.42 

1.30 1.50 0.55 1.55 96.0 

0.83 1.10 0.81 1.28 96.7 

36.04 NO OAT NO OAT 39.63 

10.70 11 .30 4.55 10.97 72.3 

10.83 11.10 3.21 10.88 72.6 

5.80 7.10 5.00 8.39 

5.90 3.70 4.40 5.38 35.9 

7.10 4.50 4.20 5.32 36.5 

123.00 74.00 20.00 117.50 

4.00 6.00 1.00 4.63 96.1 

1.00 3.00 1.00 1.95 98.3 
FLORIDA OWNRS PROJECT PHASE 2- TEST DATA 

PARAMETER UNITS SAMPLE DATES 

8/19/98 9/22/98 1/18199 2/16/99 3/23/99 4122/99 MAY 

BOD JS-Da r@20°C) 

INFLUENT mg/L 160.00 120.00 NO OAT 120.00 140.00 56.00 N 

FAST mg/L NOOAl 3.40 NO OAT 4.50 NO OAT 2.50 0 

FAST-ABF mg/L NO OAT 13.00 NO OAT NODAl} NO OAT NODAl~ 

BOD (Carbonaceous) 0 

INFLUENT mg/L 150.00 91 .00 190.00 90.00 88.00 39.00 A 

FAST mg/L 1.00 1.70 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 T 

FAST-ABF mg/L NO OAT NODAl 3.80 1.50 1.00 1.00 A 

Ammonia Nitrogen 

INFLUENT 1mg/LN NO OAT 26.00 NODAl 37.00 NODAl 22.00 F 

FAST mg/LN NO DAl 0.11 NODAT 0.28 NODAl 0.28 0 

FAST-ABF mg/LN NODAl NODAl: NODAl NODAT NODAl NODAlP R 

Nitrate-Nitrite Nitrogen 

INFLUENT lmgtL N 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.26 0.28 0.01 M 

FAST mg/LN :· 15.00 8.20 .lor13.00 12.00 12.00 9.70 0 

FAST-ABF lmg/L N .-NO OAT 7.20 3.90 9.60 11.00 6.10 N 

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen T 

INFLUENT mg/L N 38.00 32.00 62.00 44.00 37.00 29.00 H 

FAST mg/LN 1.20 0.89 1.20 1.20 0.99 1.20 

FAST-ABF mg/LN NODAl 0.96 1.30 0.90 0.60 1.30 0 

Total Nltrogen TXN N~~n~ ... , F 

INFLUENT rng/LN 38.02 32.01 62.01 44.26 37.28 29.01 

FAST mg/LN 16.20 9.09 14.20 13.20 12.99 10.90 M 

FAST-ABF mg/L N NODAl 8.16 5.20 10.50 11 .60 7.40 A 

Total Phosphorus y 

INFLUENT mg/L P 6.50 7.80 8.00 12.00 9.40 5.80 

FAST lmg/l p 6.40 7.00 6.20 6.10 6.00 7.20 

FAST-ABF mg/L P NO OAT NODAl} NODAT NO OAT NODAl NODAl } 

Total Suspended Solids 

INFLUENT mg/L 68.00 48.00 68.00 90.00 108.00 66.00 

FAST mg/L 1.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 8.00 8.00 

FAST-ABF mg/L NO OAT NODAT NODAl NODAlP NODAl NODAlP -- Fecal Coliforms 

INFLUENT cts/100 ml NO OAT 600,000 Q,Z 600,000 v 600,000 z 600,000 630,000 

FAST cts/100 ml NO DAl 460.00 200.00 450.00 63.00 140.00 

FAST-ABF cts/100 ml NODAl} NODAl} NODAl NODAl} NODAl NODAl } 

Q - Sample analyzed beyond the accepted holding limit. (Analyzed at client's request) 

V- Greater than 6,000. Fecal coliforms exceeded 60 counts on lowest filtration volume (1 ml). 

Z- Greater than 60,000. Fecal coliforms exceeded 60 counts on lowest filtration volume (0.1 ml). 

6/22/99 7/27/99 

160.00 160.00 

NODAl~ 4.ZO 

NODAl~ NO OAT 

100.00 120.00 

1.00 1.00 

1.00 1.00 

53.00 35.00 

0.35 0.34 

NODAlP NODAT 

0.01 0.01 

12.00 9.50 

8.10 10.00 

56.00 48.00 

0.77 1.20 

0.99 0.82 

56.01 48.01 

12.n 10.70 

9.09 10.82 

9.50 5.70 

5.70 5.70 

NO DAn NO OAT 

70.00 114.00 

18.00 1.00 

NODAl NO OAT 

600,000 21,000 

1500.00 200.00 

NO OAT NODAT 

AVG %RED 

8/31/99 9/28/99 10/21/99 

160.00 110.00 150.00 133.60 

3.70 1.60 5.60 3.67 97.3 ' NODAl NODAl NODAl 13.00 90.3 

120.00 90.00 140.00 110.73 

1.10 1.00 1.00 1.16 98.9 

6.70 36.00 1.00 5.89 94.7 

47.00 30.00 40.00 36.25 

0.34 0.40 0.08 0.27 99.2 

NODAT NODAl NODAl NO DAlP NOOAlA 

0.05 0.12 0.01 0.07 

5.90 4.70 2.40 9.49 NA 

0.01 0.01 2.00 5.79 NA 

65.00 46.00 46.00 45.73 

1.50 1.20 0.35 1.06 97.7 

2.30 2.90 1.20 1.33 97.1 

65.05 46.12 46.01 45.80 

7.40 5.90 2.75 10.55 77.0 

2.31 2.91 3.20 7.12 84.5 

11 .00 8.70 7.90 8.39 

7.70 6.90 6.00 6.45 23.2 

NO OAT NODAl NO OAT NOOAlP NODAl" 

100.00 133.00 92.00 87.00 

1.00 1.00 3.00 4.18 95.2 

NODAT} NODAl NO OAT NO OAT NO DATA 

600,000 600,000 600,000 604J375 

>600 270.00 3600.00 784.78 99.9 

NODAl~ NODAT NODAl NODAT NODAl A