### MEMORANDUM

TO: William Swietlik, U.S. EPA/EAD

FROM: Dan

- Tam Nguyen, ERG Eva Knoth, ERG Lydia Lambert, ERG Kim Wagoner , ERG Betsy Bicknell, ERG Mary Willett, ERG

DATE: November 22

, 2013

SUBJECT: Supplemental Quality Assurance and Control Plan for the Development and Population of the Industrial Wastewater Treatment Technology Database

As required by Clean Water Act § 304(m) , EPA conducts an annual review of effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs). As part of this review , EPA evaluates whether an applicable and demonstrated technology, process change, or pollution prevention approach would substantially reduce the hazard from pollutants 1 d ischarged by each regulated i ndustrial point source category. EPA is planning to review new technologies and improvements to existing technologies to determine whether existing ELGs should be revised to reflect improved treatment technology performance

, or if technologies might contro l pollutant discharges that are not currently regulated.

ERG developed an industrial wastewater treatment technology (IWTT) database to capture and

store existing wastewater treatment technology data

. EPA will use this database to identify and
evaluate t he performance of new treatment technologies (or new applications for existing treatment technologies) that specific industries are implementing . This technology evaluation will support activities related to EPA’s 304 ( m ) annual review process, EAD industry studies, and ELG development

.

K ey steps in the development of the IWTT database include :

1. D ata collection

. ERG is conducting literature searches to identify data sources (chiefly technical articles) presenting new or improved industrial wastewater treatment technologies.

2. Q uality assessmen t

. ERG is reviewing the quality of the collected data sources

.

1 From EPA’s November 2002 Draft Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial Regulations Effluent Limitation Guidelines, Pretreatment Standards, and New Source Performance Standards.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page 2

3. Database structure development

, testing , and verification

. ERG developed a database
structure in MS ® Access containing data fields that capture in formation on the data source, facility, treatment technology

, and wastewater characteristics. ERG developed
forms and structured query language ( SQL ) to facilitate data entry, track changes

, and quality control (QC) checks within MS ® Access.

4. Data entry and quality reviews

. ERG is compiling the information in the MS ® Access
database and checking the accuracy of the data entry

.

5. Data review and reporting

. ERG will evaluat e the overall treatment performance data
based on available data in the MS ® Access da tabase and report conclusions in future Annual Review Reports.

This document outlines the procedures ERG is implement ing during each step of the development and population of the IWTT database to ensure that the contents meet the specifications set forth in the Environmental Engineering Support for Clean Water Regulations Programmatic Quality Assurance Project Plan (PQAPP, Rev

. 1 , Approved October 20, 2013)

. ERG will follow the procedures set fo rth in the PQAPP and in this memorandum for further development and population of the database.

1.0 D ATABASE R OLES AND R ESPONSIBILITIES

The primary roles and responsibilities of the IWTT database staff are as follows:

**•** Database task lead

. C oordinate s IWTT database activities, including technical development, population

, and review of the database. The task lead develops the expectations and procedures for each step of development and ensures that procedures are
followed.

**•** Database developer

. C reate s da tabase structure and functional objects to meet the needs of the project. The developer verifies the technical approach and creates objects and modules to facilitate presentation and analysis of information.

**•** Article r eviewer. R eview s each article and popu late s the appropriate fields with the
technical information for each assigned article in accordance with the data entry
instructions manual.

**•** QC reviewer

. R eview s each article and verif ies that all information for each article i s entered accurately and completely ( with the exception of treatment system information );
mak e s corrections as needed to clarify the information in the article ; and complete s the QC review checklists

.

**•** Senior t ec hnical reviewer

. V erif ies that the treatment system information for e ach article is entered accurately and completely. This includes ensuring that the treatment units wereMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page 3

entered to reflect the correct order of operations. Also, correct s and clarif ies the
information in the article and complete s the senior technical review checklist

.

The specific tasks of each responsible party are discussed in detail in the following sections.

2.0 D ATA C OLLECTION AND Q UALITY A SSESSMENT

ERG is conduct ing literature searches to collec t and review a comprehensive set of data on new or improved IWTT performance from the following technical literature:

**•** Conference proceedings. ERG is reviewing references from three key technical
conferences on wastewater that included technical presentations across a broad range of
industries . Thes e conferences were: the Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibit and Conference, the International Water Conference, and the Water Environment
Federation’s Industrial Wastewater Seminar.

**•** Water

- related journals. ERG is reviewing peer

- reviewed journ al articles from water

related societies that may provide information on new, more effective industrial wastewater treatment technologies.

**•** Industry

- specific organizations. ERG is reviewing industry trade organization publications, such as treatment publications from the American Petroleum Institute and the American Chemical Society.

Based on direction from EPA, ERG is obtaining full text articles identified during literature
searches in a portable document format (pdf). ERG is then review ing the content to determine
whether the article should be entered into the IWTT database. In accordance with Section 4.3 of the PQAPP, ERG is selecting articles for data entry that describe full

- scale industrial treatment system s

. ERG is also selecting articles for entry that describe pilot

- scale systems, as these systems may provide an indication of the performance of more advanced and cutting edge technologies.

ERG developed a set of qual ity criteria based on the criteria outlined in the PQAPP . ERG is
select ing articles for data entry if the treatment technology performance data presented meet the following quality criteria:

**•** Accuracy. The accuracy of the treatment technology performance data is based on the
extent to which the documented data in an article are consistent with the body of information collected as part of the literature search. For the purposes of this analysis,
ERG is a ssuming that the underlying data and information contained in state and federal reports

, peer

- reviewed journal articles

, industry publications, and conference proceedings

are accurate. Although industry publications and conference proceedings are not peer

reviewed, these resources may provide useful information for capturing the full range of processes and/or wastes generated by a specified industry point source or a range of information on specified treatment technologies.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page 4

**•** Reliability . The reliability of the treatment technology performance data is based on whether the data source incorporates the following attributes:

— Scientific work is clearly written, so that all assumptions and methodologies can be identified.

— Assumptions and methodologies are consis tently applied throughout the analysis, as reported in the source.

— Waste stream, parameters

, units , and detection limits (when appropriate) are clearly characterized.

ERG is finding that the majority of articles from industry publications and conferences do not describe the analytical methods used to measure pollutant concentrations . However,
the detection limits are consistently provided when measured concentrations are reported
at or below detection. ERG deemed this was sufficient to pass the initial treatment technologies screening process ; however, in such cases, ERG recommends requesting the analytical methods used from the article authors during future ELG development.

**•** Representativeness

. The data must be representative of a modern treatment technology applied to industrial wastewater; therefore, ERG is collecting industrial wastewater treatment technology information and performance data published since 2000 so that the data are representative of current industrial processes and treatment cha llenges.

**•** Reasonableness

. The reasonableness of the treatment technology performance data is
based on historical knowledge of each industry’s wastewater characteristics, such as:

— Range of concentrations expected in the untreated stream.

— Types of pollutant s expected in the untreated waste stream.

— Wastewater generation rates and the expected capacities of the evaluated treatment technologies.

After the database is populated, ERG will compare treatment systems by (for example)
evaluat ing and compar ing pollut ants targeted for removal across point source categories (PSC), and across standard industrial classification (SIC) and/or Northern American industry classification (NAICS) categories. ERG will also consider the capacity of the systems to check for reasona bleness (e.g., flow rates for a full

- scale system should be in
the hundreds of gallons per minute).

ERG is maintaining a quality evaluation tracking spreadsheet to record whether each identified
article me e t s the quality criteria for entry into the IWTT database

. ERG continues to consult with EPA to confirm the applicability of t he quality criteria

, and notifies EPA of data sources that do not meet quality criteria in monthly 304(m) progress reports. Table 2

- 1 describes the fields in the quality evaluation tracking s preadsheet.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page 5

Table 2

- 1 . Description of Quality Evaluation Tra cking Spreadsheet Fields

Field Name Field Description Field Type
Article ID Automatic number assigned to article when entered into the spreadsheet. Number

DCN Document control number for articles entered in the record. Number
Title Title of the article. Text
Author Author of the article. Text
Source Bibliographical information on the article. Text Page Count Total number of pages in the PDF. Number
Publication Year Year article was published. Date Publication Type Type of publication ( Peer

- Reviewed Article; Industry Publication;
C onference Proceeding ; Government Publication; News Article ). Text

Keyword(s) Keywords used in the search engine to identify the article. Text Industry Industry of the treatment technologies evaluated in the article. Text
Scale Scale of experiment highlighted in the article (Lab; Pilot; Full). Text DOI (or URL) Digital Object Identifier (http://dx.doi.org) or web address where
article was found. Text

Date Entered Date article information was entered. Date Entered By Name of the person that entered the article information. Text
Full Text? Tracking field for whether the full text article has been acquired

. Yes/No Full Text Acquired Date Date the full text article was acquired. Date Retrieved By Name of the reviewer that located the full text article. Text
File Name Name of the PDF. Text
Initial Reviewer Name of person conducting the initial review of the article. Text
Initial Review Date Date the initial article review was completed

. Date Data Entry Approval Tracking field identifying whether the ar ticle should be reviewed in depth and the results entered in the IWTT database. Yes/No

Quality Criteria

- Accurate Tracking field identifying whether the article meets the accuracy quality criterion identified in Section 2.0

. Yes/No

Quality Criteria

- Reliable Tracking field identifying whether the article meets the reliability quality criterion identified in Section 2.0

. Yes/No

Quality Criteria

- Representative Tracking field identifying whether the article meets the representativeness quality criterion identified in Section 2.0

. Yes/No

Quality Criteria

- Reasonable Tracking field identifying whether the article meets the reasonableness quality criterion identified in Section 2.0

. Yes/No

Quality Notes Notes to EPA explaining why a quality criterion identified in Section
2.0 was not achieved. Text

3.0 D ATA BASE S TRUCTURE D EVELOPMENT , T ESTING , AND V ERIFICATION

ERG reviewed several EPA treatability and literature review databases, and then presented EPA
with three approaches for database development. ERG proposed several options for compiling the information and recommended data elements to capture in the database. EPA selected an
MS ® Access database structure to store the wastewater treatment technologies performance data.
The data objects (i.e., tab les, forms, and queries) in the IWTT database are described in the following subsections.

In accordance with the PQAPP

, ERG test ed the IWTT database and verified : 1) that the technical approach to the database structure design wa s appropriate , 2) that the relationships between dataMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page 6

tables we re assigned correctly , and 3) that the design of the input forms allow s entered data to be
saved into the intended tables.

ERG documented the testing and verification of the database design through MS ® Excel spreadshe ets distributed between the ERG database task lead and the ERG database developer. In addition, at least one other ERG staff member verified the functionality of the forms and all database elements throughout development. ERG also saved old er versions of the database as back

- up files and to track changes

.

3.1 Tables

ERG created several data tables in the IWTT database to organize the information found in each
article and minimize redundancy and dependency within the database. Table 3

- 1 provides a brief description of each data table. Figure A

- 1 in Attachment A illustrates the relationships ERG established between the input tab les within the database.

Table 3

- 1

. List of Data Tables

Table Name Table Description
Informational Data 0_READ ME

– Description of Tables Contains descriptions of the information included in the database
tables and other relevant references used. 0_READ ME

– Description of Fields Contains descriptions of the fields in each input data table.
Input Data ( Data O btained from the A rticles) 1_INPUT_Reference_Information Contains article bibliographical information. 2_INPUT_Treatment_Technology Contains information on treatment design, operations, and costs. 2_INPUT_Treatment_Technology_Codes Crosswalk between treatment technology operations codes and each treatment system reported.

3_INPUT_Detection_Limits Contains information on pollutant detection limits

. 4_INPUT_Performance_Data Contains influent and effluent pollutant concentration data. Output Data (Data for Results Summaries) 3_OUTPUT_Detection_Limits Contains query results on detection limits reported in the articles.
4_OUTPUT_Performance_Data Contains query results on available influent/effluent pollutant data and whether or not to include the information in evaluating treat ment performance. 5_Calculated_Percent _Removals Contains query results on treatment performance data included in the analysis. QC Data 6_Article_Review_and_QC_Information Document s the article review

, QC review, and senior technical reviews
for each article. 7_QC_Input Document s the QC review checklist s and the senior review checklist
for each article. 8_QC_TrackChanges Document s all revisions from the original data entry to the latest update/revision of article information. Lookup KEY_Document_Types Identifies the list of document types

. KEY_Lab_Scale Identifies the scale in which the measurements were conducted

. KEY_Motivation Identifies the motivation categories for the treatment technologyMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page 7

Table 3

- 1

. List of Data Tables

Table Name Table Description implementation. KEY_NAICS Identifies the NAICS c ode in which the treatment technology is used. KEY_param_cat_crosswalk Crosswalk table between the KEY_paramcatID and KEY_Parameter_Code tables. KEY_paramcatID Identifies the parameter categories

. KEY_Parameter_Code Identifies the parameter s

. KEY_PerformStat I dentifi es the value type reported (e.g., average, minimum, maximum )

. KEY_PSCSIC_Crosswalk I dentif ies the PSCs and respective SIC code s

. KEY_TreatmentTechCode Identifies the treatment technology code s

. Administrative Data 0_Version Control Document s the database versions. ZADMIN_import_databases Reference table for import routine to identify and merge data entry database copies into the master database.

3.2 Data Entry Forms

Using Visual BASIC for Applications (VBA) programming, ERG developed four data entry
forms in the IWTT database that contain all the required data elements included in the input
tables

. The forms populate the corresponding fields in each of the input tables with relevant
information. The data entry forms provide an interface that facilitates data entry, promotes
standardization of data fields

, and improves data security. The purpose of each form is listed
below :

**•** Form 0

, Mai n Menu ( F igure B

- 1) contains a listing of the existing articles entered into the
database and allows data entry staff to edit an existing article entry or create a new article entry. Form 0 provides access to Form 1, a review documentation table

, and an im port routine (see Section 3.5 ).

**•** Form 1

, Reference Information ( Figure B

- 2) contain s all the data fields that identify and summarize the article reference, including bibliographical information, abstract, and key findings. Form 1 provides access to Form 2.

**•** Form 2

, Treatment Technology ( Figure B

- 3) contains all of the data fields that capture the treatment system design, unit order, operating conditions, and cost information

. If an article discusses more than one treatment system, an additional Form 2 must be populated
for each system. Form 2 provides access to Form 3.

**•** Form 3

, Removal Performance ( Figure B

- 4) con tains all of the data fields that capture performance data for each parameter removed by each treatment system. The form captures a single parameter’s removal (influent and effluent concentration and/ or percent removal), detection limits, and discharge lim its. If an article discusses the removal of more than one parameter, an addition al Form 3 must be populated for each parameter

.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page 8

Figure 3

- 1 illustrates the overall structure and navigation between the forms. Figures B

- 1 through
B

- 4 in Attachment B are s creenshots of the data entry forms.

Figure 3

- 1 . Data Entry Form s Structure

The database is designed to transfer the information from the forms into the input tables automatically as the user navigates between forms . Howe ver, the forms also include a “Cancel ”
button , which , when selected, will not save any new information entered into the data tables.

3.3 Review Chec klists

ERG developed the following four review checklists in the IWTT database :

**•** Form 1

, QC Review Checklist ( Figure C

- 1) requires the QC reviewer to confirm that all of the applicable reference information has been entered accurately , including the bibliographical information, abstract, key findings, motivation, treatment system scales,
and selection criteria.

**•** Form 2

, QC Review Checklist (Figure C

- 2) requires the QC reviewer to confirm that all of the applicable treatment system in formation has been entered accurately , including the industry classification codes, scale, chemical addition, process diagram, costs, and
selection criteria.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page 9

**•** Form 2

, Senior Technical Review Checklist (Figure C

- 3) requires the senior technical
reviewer to confirm that the treatment system description and codes have been entered accurately

.

**•** Form 3

, QC Review Checklist (Figure C

- 4) requires the QC re viewer to confirm that all of the applicable performance data ha ve been entered accurately , including the par ameter name, analytical methods, detection limits, and percent removal.

U sing VBA programming

, t he checklists populate the respective fields in each QC table with
relevant information. The checklists can be toggled on or off, so that they are only visible during QC and senior technical review activity

. Completing the checklists ensure s that the reviewer s check the fields that are essential to evaluate the treatment system performance and the fields
that are c ommonly difficult for the article reviewer to interpret ( e.g

. , PSC, SIC

, and NAICS
codes )

. At the bottom of each checklist, is a comment field where the reviewer can note anything
unusual about the article. Figures C

- 1 through C

- 4 in Attachment C are scree n shots of the
checklists

.

During the QC and senior technical review, any necessary updates to the data fields are automatically tracked in a separate table to retain the previous values entered into those data
fields and document t he review activities. In contrast, a ny updates made during the initial data entry are not tracked in the database.

3.4 Import Routine

E RG created an import routine

, using VBA programming, to merge several copies of the IWTT database into one master file. This routine allows multiple article reviewers to populat e the database concurrently, but in separate files. The database task lead and the database developer

, using several test cases, ver ified that the routine functioned as intended.

After each import exercise, the database task lead confirms that the total number of articles in each imported database was transferred to the master database and spot checks that the data from the input tables w ere transferred correctly.

3.5 Queries

ERG incorporated several sequential queries into a si mple macro routine in the IWTT database

to identify parameters with complete data and calculate treatment performance in the output
tables listed in Table 3

- 1

. The goal of the queries is to calculate percent removal for each water quality parameter with appropriate data so that system treatment performance s can be compared

. The initial queries in the sequence filter out parameters with incomplete data (i.e.

, only influent

or only effluent concentration) or for which percent removal is not an appropriate calculation. The p ercent removal is not calculated for parameters where :Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page 10

**•** The influent and effluent u nits are not mass or concentratio n (e.g.

, pH, oxidation

reduction potential )

.

**•** The i nfluent concentration is greater than effluent concentration

.

**•** The i nfluent concentration is below the detection limit

.

T he ERG database task lead assigned a QC reviewer to review the sequential queries. T he QC
reviewer was knowledgeable about the IWTT database, but not directly involved with the development of the queries. The QC reviewer received a separate version of the database to
conduct the review and documented testing and verification of each query

. In accordance with
Table 2

- 4 in the PQAPP, t he responsibilities of the QC reviewer included the following :

**•** V erify the appropriateness and technical soundness of the meth ods and approaches used.

**•** C heck that equations in the queries produced the correct result and were entered into the query accurately. For example, the QC reviewer manually recalculate d the percent removal values that represented the lowest, midpoint, and h ighest values.

**•** N ote all discrepancies identified during review to the ERG database developer in a
written document.

**•** C onfirm the ERG database developer corrected the identified errors by re

- re viewing the revised queries.

4.0 D ATA E NTRY AND Q UALITY R EVIEWS

ERG prepared a data entry instruction manual

, presented in Attachment D

, setting out procedures for ensuring the accuracy of t he data entry. Before reviewing any articles or entering data into the IWTT database, ERG data entry staff members attend an internal training session and complete data entry of one common test case

. The ERG database task lead then provides the staff
with individual feedback on the test case. E RG is selecting data entry staff with experience in
environmental science or waste water engineering to enter i nformation from the identified articles
into the IWTT database

. The roles and responsibilities of the data entry staff are identified in
Section 1.0

.

After each stage of the data entry, the staff document s that the review is complete and the date of completion. At any time throughout the data entry process , i f the staff determine s that an article
does not meet the quality criteria specified in Section 2.0 , the y flag the article for removal and
document the reason for removal in the IWTT database . In addition, ERG provid es written
notification s of the articles flagged for remova l in monthly 304 ( m ) progress reports. If the inclusion of an article is question able , staff members discuss the article with the senior technical
reviewer

, and may discuss the issue with the EPA Work Assignment Manager ( WAM )

.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page 11

5.0 D ATA R EVIEW AND R EPORTING

ERG is continuing to expand the IWTT database for future 304(m) annual reviews to identify industrial categories or pollutants that warrant further review for new or revise d ELGs

. The quality assurance and control procedure s specified in this memorandum will continue to be implemented to ensure the quality and security of the information contained in the IWTT
database

. In addition, f urther development of the database will follow the procedures set forth in
this memorandum

. E RG will develop a dditional quality assurance and control procedures
address ing new features, data fields

, or uses of the database

, in accordance with Section 8.0 of the PQAPP . Quality reports containing summaries of the article reviews, QC activities

, and database updates will be provided to EPA, as needed.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page A

- 1

A TTACHMENT A
I NPUT T ABLE R ELATIONSHIPS

Figure A

- 1. Relationships between Input TablesMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page B

- 1

A TTACHMENT B
D ATA E NTRY F ORM S CREEN SHOTS ( L AST R EVISED N OVEMBER 22 , 2013 )

Figure B

- 1. Form 0

– Main MenuMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page B

- 2

Figure B

- 2. Form 1

– Reference InformationMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page B

- 3

Figure B

- 3. Form 2

– Treatment TechnologyMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page B

- 4

Figure B

- 4. Form 3

– Removal PerformanceMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page C

- 1

A TTACHMENT C
R EVIEW C HECKLIST S CREEN SHOTS ( L AST R EVISED N OVEMBER 22 , 2013 )

Figure C

- 1. QC Review Checklist for Form 1 (Reference Information)Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page C

- 2

Figure C

- 2. QC Review Checklist for Form 2 ( Treatment Technology )

Figure C

- 3. Senio r Technical Review Checklist for Form 2 ( Treatment Technology )Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page C

- 3

Figure C

- 4. QC Review Checklist for Form 3 (Performance Data)Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 1

A TTACHMENT D
I NDUSTRIAL W ASTEWATER T REATMENT T ECHNOLOGY D ATABASE D ATA E NTRY I NSTRUCTIONS M ANUAL ( L AST R EVISED N OVEMBER 22

, 2013 )

ERG conducted literature searches to collect and review a comprehensive set of data on new or improved industrial wastewater treatment technology (IW TT) performance. ERG th en evaluated
the identified articles against the quality criteria documented in the Environmental Engineering Support for Clean Water Regulations Programmatic Quality Assurance Project Plan (PQAPP,
Rev . 1, Approved October 20, 2013) and documented the results in a quality evaluation tracking spreadsheet. Any article th at met all of the quality criteria was deemed acceptable for entry into
the IWTT database.

Each reviewer will be assigned a batch of articles listed in the quality ev aluation tracking spreadsheet and an individual “shell” IWTT database file in which to enter information from
their assigned articles. A rticle reviewer s will follow the data entry instructions specified in the following sections. Once data entry is complet e, the ERG database task lead will import the
articles into a master database.

1.0 D ATA E NTRY P REPARATION

In preparation for data entry, first read the abstract (if there is one) and skim the article to glean key ideas and consider the following selection cri teria:

**•** Does the article present pilot

- or field

- scale treatment system(s) ?

**•** Does the article present performance data (influent and effluent dat a and/or percent removal) on the treatment system(s) ?

**•** Does the article present performance data that are based on empirical evidence (actual testing and not modeled data)?

In addition, take note of the number of discre te treatment systems described, their scale (lab, pilot

, or field) , and the available performance data (removal efficiency)

.

Then browse the tables described in the following subsections to identify the industrial classifications, treatment technology codes, and key parameters.

1.1 Point Source Category and Standard Industrial Classification Codes Crosswalk

The Point Source Category and Standard Industrial Classification Codes Crosswalk table contains a crosswalk of the point source category (PSC) and standard industrial classification (SIC) codes generated from the Discharge Monitoring Report ( DMR ) Pollutant Loading Tool

. 2

2 The PSC and SIC codes were accessed from the DMR Pollutant Loading Tool at the following website : http://cfpub.epa.gov/dmr/ In the database, this table can either be accessed by navigating to theMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 2

“ KEY_PSCSIC_Crosswalk ” table or selecting the lookup buttons in the applicable forms. You will need to assign each treatment system a PSC and SIC code.

Once you have selected PSC and SIC codes for each treatment system, verify the SIC code by comparing the industry descriptions in the article to the SIC descriptions from the following
website: http://www.osha.go v/pls/imis/sicsearch.html

.

If an article does not pertain to a specific industry, enter “99” in the PSC field and “9999” in the
SIC field to represent a “Non

- Classifiable Establishments” industry

.

1.2 Northern American Industry Classification Codes Key

The North American Industry Classification Codes Key table contains a list of the Northern American industry classification (NAICS) codes generated from the 2012 United States Census
Bureau

. 3 In the database, this table can either be accessed by navigating to the KEY_NAICS table or selecting the lookup buttons in the applicable forms. You will need to assign a NAICS
code to each treatment system.

If an article does not pertain to a specific industry, enter “999999” in the NAICS field to represent a “Non

- C lassifiable Establishments” industry.

1.3 Treatment Technology Codes Key

The Treatment Technology Codes K ey table contains a listing of every identified treatment system uni t

, their assigned codes, and synonymous treatment system s

. In the database, this table can either be accessed by navigating to the “ KEY_TreatmentTechCode ” table or selecting the lookup buttons in the applicable forms. You will need to assign a treatment technology code to
each unit within the treatment train

. If an article presents a new treatment technology (or unit) that requires a new unique code, contact the ERG database task lead to confirm that the code
should be added to this table. For additional guidance to assist in assigning the treatment technology codes, refer to Table 1 below.

Table 1. Treatment Technology Codes Guidance

Treatment Name Code Synonyms Description
Alkaline
Chlorination AC N/A Used to destroy cyanides. Most often the process is operated in two stages, with separate tanks for each stage.
Destruction of dilute solutions of cyanide by chlorination can be accomplished by direct addition of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), or by addition of chlorine gas plus sodium hydroxide (NaOH) to the wastewater. Aerobic Digestion AD Aerated B iological
R emoval Biodegradable organic compounds in wastewater are consumed by microorganisms. This process is aerated.

3 The NAICS codes were accessed from the 2012 United States Census Bureau at the following website : http://www.census.gov/cgi

- bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch?chart=2012Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 3

Table 1. Treatment Technology Codes Guidance

Treatment Name Code Synonyms Description Adsorptive Media ADSM N/A New materials used to remove pollutants via surface adhesion. Do not use this code for packed

- bed or any granular

- filtration process. Expect these to have copyrighted names. This code exclu d es GAC.
Aerobic Fixed Film Biological
Treatment AFF Attached G rowth,
Fixed Bed R eactor, Rotating B iological
C ontactor, Trickling Filter, Fluidized
Bed R eactor Microorganisms attach to inert media. This process is
aerated.

Aeration AIR Aeration Channel,
A erobic Polishing
C ell Providing contact with air or pure oxygen to increase dissolved oxygen ( DO ) in wastewater.

Hydrolysis

, Alkaline or Acid AKH N/A Addition of an acid or base (e.g. sodium or potassium hydroxide) to enhance biodegradability of organic substances. Used as a pre

- treatment step before biological

trea tment and to reduce the toxicity of pesticides.
Anaerobic Digestion AND Non

- A erated, Anoxic, F acultative A biological treatment process that is non

- aerated, hence, without oxygen.
Anaerobic Fixed Film Biological
Treatment ANFF Attached Growth,
Fixed Bed Reactor, Rotating B iological Contactor, Trickling Filter, Fluidized
Bed R eactor Microorganisms attach to inert media.

Anaerobic Suspended Growth ANSG A naerobic L agoon Biodegradable organic compounds in wastewater are consumed by microorganisms. The microorganisms are suspended within the wastewater, creating a sludge that is separated from the water.
Advanced
Oxidation Processes, Not
Classified Elsewhere ( NEC ) AOP Supercritical Water Oxidation, Catalytic Oxidation, Photo Cataly sis (UV +
TiO 2 ) , Fento n's Reagent Various mechanisms to oxidize organic materials not
elsewhere classified.

Aerobic Suspended
Growth ASG A ctivated S ludge,
A erobic L agoon Biodegradable organic compounds in wastewater are consumed by microorganisms. The microorganisms are suspended within the wastewater, creating a sludge that is separated from the water (during clarification

– CLAR)

. This process is aerated. Biological
Activated Carbon
Filters BAC GAC C olumns that support biofilm GAC filters with biofilm growth that can remove residual pollutants via adsorption, biodegradation, and bioregeneration.
Biofilm Airlift Suspension
Reactor BASR Airlift B ioreactor Pneumatic device with defined channels for fluid flow. Air pumped into the unit forces the fluid to flow through
ch annels (internal or external loops). Usually will contain gas, solid

, and liquid phase s

. Bag and Cartridge
Filtration BCF N/A Used to remove suspended solids

, typically in systems with
lower flow rates. Media are shaped as a bag or cylindrical cartridge.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 4

Table 1. Treatment Technology Codes Guidance

Treatment Name Code Synonyms Description
Ballasted
Clarification BCLAR BioMag, CoMag, Enhanced Settling, High Rate S ettling,
Actiflo Improve s gravitational settling rates by addition of a weighing agent to the clarifier, typically magnetite or sand.

Biological
Treatment BIO N/A Biodegradable organic compounds in wastewater are consumed by microorganisms. This is a general term that
should ONLY be used for unspecified biological

treatments

. Biological Nutrient
Removal BNR Modified Ludzack

Ettinger (MLE)
Process General term for technologies designed to remove nitrogen species from wastewater.

Chemical
Disinfection CD Hydroxyl Radical, Oxygen, Hydrogen Peroxide, Chlorine
S pecies, Halogens Use of chemicals to disinfect (destroy pathogens in)

wastewater. Use CO when referring to ox idation of pollutants.

Cloth Filtration CF C loth M edia (Disc)
F ilter Water is passed through a cloth medi um to remove solids. Cloth is often shaped into discs.
Controlled Hydrodynamic
Cavitation CHC M echanical Energy
D evice Device that uses mechanical energy to prevent biofouling,
scale

, and corrosion. High temperatures and physical forces generated promote chemical reactions, oxidation of organic compounds

, and kill pathogens. Cavitation is the formation and implosion of cavities (bubbles) in a liquid.
Chemical Precipitation Chem
Pre C oagulation and
F locculation Process to remove suspended solids from water. Chemical addition first neutralizes charged particles (coagulation) and promotes particle adhesion to form large, visible clumps (flocculation) that can then settle out of the

wastewater. This term is also used for the addition of lime, alum, ferric sulfite, or other precipitants to remove soluble metals from solution by forming insoluble compounds.
Clarification CLAR Settling,
S edimentation Separation of suspended particles from water by gravitational settling. Chemical Nitrogen
Removal CNR N/A Redox reaction to remove nitrogen from water or convert between different forms of nitrogen.
Chemical
O xidation CO Hydrogen Peroxide, Permanganate, Chlorine, B leach Addition of chemicals (in any phase) to oxidize organic compounds. This code excludes o zone

.

Chemical Phosphorous
Removal CPR N/A Addition of metal

- salts , most commonly alum, to precipitate phosphorus species out of solution.

Centrifugal Separators CS ( Liquid)
H ydrocyclone Mechanical separation of liquids or particles of different densities. Used to separate oil from water and separate light
from dense solids. Crystallization CYS Fluidized B ed
C rystallization Crystallization describes the formation of solid crystals precipitating from a solution. It can be applied post

evaporation (EVAP) to create a solid waste product or to recover a product in the wastewater. When used for product recovery, c rystallization combines four treatment steps

– coagulation, flocculation, sludge/water separation

, and dewatering. H igh

- purity , reus able water is also produced

.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 5

Table 1. Treatment Technology Codes Guidance

Treatment Name Code Synonyms Description
Dissolved Air
Flotation DAF N/A Air is dissolved under pressure and then released at atmospheric pressure in a tank. The released air creates bubbles which adhere to suspended solids, causing the solids to float to the surface where they can be removed by skimming. Removes suspended solids, oil

, and grease

De chlorination DCL N/A The process of removing residual chlorine from disinfected wastewater prior to discharge into the environment. Sulfur dioxide is most commonly used. Not to be confused with degradation of chlorinated organics. Capacitive
Deionization DEI E lectro

- sorption Removal of dissolved ions through an electrochemical
mechanism.
Dissolved Gas
Flotation DGF Same process as DAF, but uses gases other than air (e .g. , natural gas, nitrogen ). Degasification DGS M embrane
D egasification,
F orced D raft
D egasification Remov al of dissolved gases from water by pressure reduction, membrane degasification , or an unspecified method. This includes heating to remove a gas. If heating is used to vaporize water, use EVAP.
Distillation DST N/A In distillation, contaminated water is heated to form steam, leaving inorganic compounds and large, non

- volatile organic molecules behind. The steam is then condensed, forming purified water. Distillation requires input of energy and collection of the purifie d water.
Enhanced Biological Phosphorus
Removal EBPR Enhanced
B iological
P hosphorus U ptake Use of phosphate

- accumulating organisms to store phosphate within the cell. Phosphate removed in waste sludge.

Electrocoagulation EC N/A Electrocoagulation entails passing the wastewater across
metal electrodes. EC is u sed to remove colloids, heavy metals, and emulsified oils. The DC current solubilizes
metal ions and destabilizes charged particles

, promoting coagulation and flocculation. Electrodialysis ED Electrodialysis Reversal (EDR) Electrodialysis involves moving ions in a potential field across alternating polymeric anion

- and cation

- exchange
membrane s . A potential difference applied across the membranes traps ions and separates a brine waste stream
fro m purified water. Electrodialysis works best for removing low molecular weight charged species. Flow Equalization EQ B uffer tank, F low
C ontrol, F low
B alance A b asin, lagoon, tank

, or reactor that serves to control a
variable flow of wastewater to achieve a near constant flow into the treatment system or between units. Evaporation EVAP N/A Water is vaporized and sometimes condensed for reuse. The remaining product is concentrated brine containing the dissolved solids from the original wastewater. The process may be carried out naturally in solar (shallow) evaporation ponds or through the use of commercially available evaporation equipment. The brine may be further

conc entrated during the crystallization process (CYS). Biological Aerated
Filters FBA S ubmerged A erated
F ilters A unit filtration process that consists of three phases: solid phase ( to support microbial growth ) , liquid phase

, and gas phase (aeration). Able to achieve solids, biological oxygen demand ( BOD )

, and nutrient removal in a single reactor.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 6

Table 1. Treatment Technology Codes Guidance

Treatment Name Code Synonyms Description
Denitrification
Filters FDN N/A Granular

- media filtration beds that support growth of denitrifying bacteria. These units reduce nitrate to nitrogen gas and remove suspended solids.
Granular

- Media
Filtration FI Conventional
F iltration, Multi

M edia F iltration

, Sand Filter Removal of suspended solids is accomplished by passing wastewater through a filter bed of granular media. Media may include sand, walnut shells

, and steel slag.

Forward Osmosis FO E ngineered or Manipulated
O smosis Water transfer through a selectively permeable membrane driven by the osmotic pressure difference across the
membrane. Water is drawn across a membrane to a solution with a higher concentration (relative to the wastewater). The resulting separated water mu st then be further treated to produce a high quality effluent.
Granular Activated
Carbon Adsorption GAC N/A Uses the physical/chemical adsorption process to remove
soluble contaminants from wastewater. GAC is a highly
effective a d sorbent due to its larg e surface area and high porosity. Used to remove organics and some metals and for
taste and odor control.
Gasification GAS D owndraft, Updraft
or Fluidized Bed
G asifier Thermo

- chemical process to convert carbon

- containing biosolids into gas ( carbon dioxide and methane) and

energy. Resulting e nergy can be used for heating. Gases

are use d to generate fuels, electricity

, and heat. GAS a lso reduces the volume of solids for disposal. Ion Exchange ION S oftening,
D eionization Ion exchange is a physical

- chemical p rocess in which ions are swapped between a solution phase and a solid resin phase. Different resins are used to target different charged particles. Commonly used for softening (removing dissolved calcium and magnesium) and nitrate removal. Liquid Extracti on LE (F lotation) Liquid

Liquid E xtraction,
S olvent E xtraction Separation of chemicals based on different solubilities in two solutes. Allows recovery of the chemical from

wastewater. Moving Bed Bio
Reactor MBBR N/A A hybrid suspended

, growth

- fixed film system.

“ Biocarrier ” media are provided in a tank for the microorganisms to grow on. Increases the effective surface area for reaction while reducing the footprint of the system.
Anaerobic
Membrane
BioReactor AnMB
R N/A Combination of suspended growth biological treatment under low or zero oxygen conditions with ultrafiltration.

Membrane Bio
Reactor MBR N/A Combination of suspended growth biological treatment with ultrafiltration. Ultrafiltration replaces the use of secondary clarifiers (solids separation) in conventional WWTPs. Can be used to reduce BOD, TSS, nitrogen

, and phosphorus.

Membrane
Filtration MF Microfiltration,
U ltrafiltration Filtration methods that remove particles as small as 100 nm (microfiltration ) and 10 nm (ultrafiltration). Many molecules are within this size range.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 7

Table 1. Treatment Technology Codes Guidance

Treatment Name Code Synonyms Description
Mechanical Pre

Treatment MPT Screen, B ar, R ack,
G rit Chamber,
C omminuter,
G rinder,
P reliminary
T reatment Physical removal of debris and coarse solids. This is the first step in wastewater treatment, which serves to protect downstream treatment equipment.

Nanofiltration NANO N/A A membrane filtration method used to remove particles as
small as 1 nm from wastewater. This includes divalent and large monovalent ions (e.g.

, heavy met als). Used for desalination and softening.
Oil/Water Separation OW N/A Removal of gross quantities of oil and suspended solids by skimming and collecting oil from the surface of water.
Ozonation OZ Advanced
Oxidation P rocess Ozone is a highly unstable gas used to either oxidize organic substances or disinfect wastewater. It must be produced onsite for immediate use in a contact chamber.
Powdered
Activated Carbon PAC N/A Same removal mechanisms as GAC, but finer particles (<=
1.0 mm dia meter ).

Reverse Osmosis RO Desalination A membrane filtration method used to remove small ions (e.g., Na + ) from water. Requires a high pressure hydraulic pressure gradient counteracts the osmotic pressure gradient
that would otherwise favor movement of water into (instead of out of) the concentrated wastewater or saltwater

. Stripping ST A ir or G as S tripping The removal of substances with equilibrium vapor pressures at ambient temperatures, such as ammonia and

many volatile organic compounds ( VOCs )

. Ultrasound US Sonicat ion High frequency bandwidth of sound applied to agitate particles in solution, disrupt cell membranes. Used in water storage facilities to suppress algal growth and biofilm
formation.

UV UV Ultraviolet Light o r R adiation Ultraviolet radiation penetrates into the wastewater to oxidize organics and/or disinfect. Used as a last, polishing step in water treatment. May be used with chemical oxidants such as peroxide and ozone.
Wet Air Oxidation WAO N/A The oxidation of soluble or suspended components in water using oxygen as the oxidizing agent. Air is used as the source of oxygen.
Constructed
Wetlands WET Reed B ed, Artificial Wetland, Peat L and Application of natural processes and use of vegetation to remove BOD, nutrients, and suspended solids. "Green" technology that can minimize energy use d for water

treatment. Zero Valent Iron ZVI nZVI Granular or nanoscale ZVI are used to remove metals by adsorption and reductive precipitation mechanisms. Utilized through a separate rea ctor unit. Similar configuration to granular

- media filtration. Zero Liquid Discharge A multi

- unit process that produces solid, but not liquid waste. The main technologies enabling ZLD are evaporation and crystallization (EVAP and CYS)

. The facility can al so choose to reuse all wastewater after a certain amount of treatment. Th e decision to fully
reuse wastewater is not considered a treatment technology. Indicate ZLD as a motivation category in Form 1.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 8

Table 1. Treatment Technology Codes Guidance

Treatment Name Code Synonyms Description
Blowdown Boiler Wastewater is fed to the boiler , which vaporize s water and generate s concentrated brine. Not
a direct treatment process

. Use EVAP

. N/A

– Not applicable.

When you are trying to identify a code for a biological treatment unit, refer to the biological treatment hierarchy shown in Figure 1 for guidance. You should always use the code that is the most descriptive level presented in the article.

Figure 1. Biological Treatment Hierarchy

1.4 Parameter Code s Key

This table contains a listing of the identified parameter s , their chemical abstract service (CAS) number, their category (i.e., metal, nutrient, conventional, and non

- conventional), and whether the parameter is a Clean Water Act priority toxic pollutant. The table was generated from the Discharge Monitoring Repor t ( DMR ) Pollutant Loading Tool 4 and modified to standardize the parameter name format . The naming convention was updated to the parameter name followed by

a comma and descriptor (e.g. “Iron, total” or “Solids, total dissolved”).

You will need to assign a parameter to each set of performance data (e.g., influent, effluent, and/or percent removal)

. In the database, the Parameter Codes Key table can either be accessed by navigating to the “ KEY_Parameter_Code ” table or using the drop

- down menu in the applica ble form. The parameter name must exactly match the parameter name presented in the
article. Be only as specific as the article. For instance, if an article identifies the parameter as “selenium,” enter “selenium” instead of “selenium, total.” If an articl e presents a new parameter, contact the ERG database task lead to confirm that the parameter should be added to this table.

4 The PSC and SIC codes were accessed from the DMR Pollutant Loading Tool at the following website : http://cfpub.epa.gov/dmr/Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 9

2.0 D ATA E NTRY P ROCEDURES

When you first open the database, a security warning message will appear directly below the
ribbon. Select t he “Options...” button followed by “Enable this content” to enable the Visual BASIC for Applications (VBA) Macro . You must complete this each time you open the database
and before beginning data entry

.

2.1 Database Structure

The database contains the following four forms that can be filled out for each article:

**•** Form 0 (Main Menu) m aintains a listing of the entered articles and is used to access an existing article entry or create a new article entry. Form 0 provides access to Form 1.

**•** Form 1 (Reference Informat ion) s ummarizes gene ral information about the article

, including the reference information, abstract, and key findings. This form must be completed for every article. Form 1 provides access to Form 2.

**•** For m 2 (Treatment Technology) c aptures treatment system information presented in the article, including system design, unit order, operating conditions, and cost information

. This for m must be completed for each pilot

- or field

- scale treatment system presented in
the article. Form 2 provides access to Fo rm 3.

**•** Form 3 (Removal Performance) c aptures removal performance data presented in each
article , include influent and effluent concentrations, percent removals, analytical methods, and effluent limits . This form must be completed for each parameter with

p erformance removal data presented in the article.

Figure 2 . Data Entry Forms StructureMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 10

2.2 Navigation between Forms

The information populated into each form is saved once one of the following navigation buttons
in the lower left hand corner of the form is pressed:

**•** Go Back to Menu

. Press this button when you want to leave and save a form without completing the entire data entry

. This button will only work if you have entered all of the required fields in the form. The required fields are denoted with an as terisk (*) at the end of the field name. If you do not enter all of the required fields before pressing this button

, a window will appear prompting you to enter the required fields.

**•** Article Review Complete

. Press this button when you want to leave and s ave a form after you have completed the entire data entry

. This button will only work if you have entered all of the required fields in the form. The required fields are denoted with an asterisk (*) at the end of the field name. If you do not enter all of the required fields before pressing
this button , a window will appear prompting you to enter the required fields. Upon successfully pressing this button, the “Entry Complete” column in Form 0 will update to “Yes.” You can still edit an entry after it has b een marked as complete; however, it is best practice to avoid pressing this button until the data entry is complete.

To close a form with out saving the information, press the “Cancel” button in the upper right hand corner of each form. When you press the button, a warning message will appear.
The follow ing subsections expla in how to navigate between forms in the database and enter
article information

.

2.2.1 Main Menu ( F orm 0 )

This form is the default screen when the database is first opened. It contains a listing of the
entered articles and indicates whether the article reviews, QC reviews, or senior technical reviews are complete. It also specifies whether the article was identified for removal after database population. Throughout your review

, it is important to continue to evaluate the article to

ensure that the content meets the following quality criteria:

**•** Accuracy. The accuracy of the treatment technology performance data is based on the
extent to which the documented data in an article are consistent with the body of information collected as part of the literature search. For the purposes of this analysis,
ERG is assuming that the underlying data and information contained in state and federal reports

, peer

- reviewed journal articles , industr y publications, and conference proceedings

are accurate. Although industry publications and conference proceedings are not peer

reviewed, these resources may provide useful information for capturing the full range of processes and/or wastes generated by a specified industry point source or a range of information on specified treatment technologies.

**•** Reliability . The reliability of the treatment technology performance data is based on whether the data source incorporates the following attributes:Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 11

— Scientific work is clearly written, so that all assumptions and methodologies can be identified.

— Assumptions and methodologies are consistently applied throughout the analysis, as reported in the source.

— Waste stream, parameters, units, and detection limit s (when appropriate) are clearly characterized.

ERG is finding that the majority of articles from industry publications and conferences do not describe the analytical methods used to measure pollutant concentrations. However,
the detection limits are cons istently provided when measured concentrations are reported at or below detection. ERG deemed this was sufficient to pass the initial treatment technologies screening process.

**•** Representativeness

. The data must be representative of a modern treatment techn ology applied to industrial wastewater; therefore, ERG is collecting industrial wastewater treatment technology information and performance data published since 2000 so that the data are representative of current industrial processes and treatment challeng es.

**•** Reasonableness

. The reasonableness of the treatment technology performance data is
based on historical knowledge of each industry’s wastewater characteristics, such as:

— Range of concentrations expected in the untreated stream.

— Types of pollutants expected in the untreated waste stream.

— Wastewater generation rates and the expected capacities of the evaluated treatment technologies.

If the article does not meet one of the quality criteria, flag the article for removal in the database.
For more infor mation on updating the review status listed in Form 0, see Section 2.3

.

To enter a new article into the database, p ress the “Add New Reference” button to proceed. If you need to edit or finish an incomplete article entry, select the entry from the list and press the
“Edit/Review Reference” button or double click the entry.

2.2.2 Reference Information (Form 1)

When entering a new article into Form 1

, use the following ins tructions:

**•** Reference ID

. Enter the assigned ID listed the quality evaluation tracking spreadsheet. This ID will carry throughout all of the forms. It can only be edited in Form 1.

**•** Bi bliographic information

. Enter the title, author name(s), main author affiliation, year of publication, number of pages in the article, the name of the journal/publisher/conference, and the document type.

**•** Country

. Select the location of the treatment system described in the document.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 12

— If there are multiple systems and at least one was built in the United
States , select “ USA ”

.

— If the location is outside of the United States or is not specified, select

“ International ”

.

**•** Abstract

. Copy and paste abstract (if available) , or briefly summarize article.

**•** Key f indings

. Summarize the treatment system used, the performance (removal efficiency) of the system ( if provided ), and the most important conclusions from the
article in one to three sentences

.

**•** Motivation

. Summarize why the study was completed and the primary reason a specific technology was implemented . Begin the text with “To...”

.

**•** Motivation c ategories

. Select all of the motivation categories that are applicable to the
article. The intent of this field is to differentiate whether a facility is investing in a new treatment system to achieve environmental regulation compliance, conserve water use, or increase cost savings. Use ctrl

- click to select/unselect one or more cat egories . If an article presents a new motivation category, contact the ERG database task lead to confirm that the motivation category should be added to this table.

**•** Important p arameters (or classes of)

. Enter the main parameters or categories removed. Acronyms and parameter classes may be used, as this is a text field ( i.e., not linked to parameter codes).

**•** Waste s tream

. Enter the waste steam treated (e.g., acid mine drainage, cooling water, stormwater, milli ng wastewater, refinery wastewater) . For general unspecified
wastewater, please enter “process wastewater

. ”

**•** Scale

. Indicate whether the study was a lab, pilot

, or field scale . Use ctrl

- click to
select/unselect one or more scales.

**•** Treatment technology cod e(s)

. If the article ONLY describes lab

- scale treatment

processe s, enter the applicable treatment tech nology codes . Ensure the treatment technology codes are entered in the order of the treatment train. Use the “Lookup Treatment Tech” button to identify th e applicable codes. If the article describes pilot

- or field

- scale treatment processes, leave this field blank. For more information on how to identify the applicable codes , see Section 1.3

.

**•** PSC/SIC c ode ( s )

. If the article ONLY describes lab

- scale treatment processe s, enter the applicable PSC and SIC codes . Use the “Lookup PSC/SIC” button to identify the applicable codes. If the article describes pilot

- or field

- scale treatment processes, leave
this field blank. For more information on how to identify the applicable codes , see Section 1.1

.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 13

**•** Notes

. D escribe any unique or important information from the article that you will not
enter in other fields of the database, such as background information, capacity of the industrial process generating wastewater , or other design considerations. You can briefly
mention lab

- scale s tudies; however, focus on pilot

- or field

- scale data that is not mentioned in abstract or summarized in the key findings

.

**•** Selection c riteria

. Select the following applicable check boxes :

— Does the article present pilot

- or field

- scale treatment system(s) ?

— Does the article present performance data (influent and effluent dat a and/or percent removal) on the treatment system(s) ?

— Does the article present performance data that are based on empirical evidence (actual testing and not modeled data)?

— Select for review?

If the first three check boxes are selected, check the “Select for review?” check box.

The next steps of the data entry are dependent on the selection criteria. After all of the applicable fields in Form 1 are populated, complete one of the following:

**•** If the article does not present pilot

- or field

- scale treatment systems (i.e., lab

- scale only), press the “Article Review Complete” button. Selecting this button will save all of the
information entered into the form , close the form, and update “Entry Complete” column
in Form 0 to “Yes.”

**•** If the article presents pilot

- or field

- scale treatment systems, press the “Enter System Information” button. Selecting this button will allow you to proceed to Form 2.

2.2.3 Treatment Technology (Form 2)

Refer to Figure D

- 2 for guidance on when to complete Form 2. Form 2 will automatically assign a treatment system ID, which is dependent on the n umber of systems presented in the article. The
nami ng convention for each system is [Ref erence ID] “T” [Integer] (e.g., 124T1)

. When entering a new article into Form 2, use the following instructions:

**•** Industry

. This field will automatically populate when you enter a PSC code.

**•** PSC

. Enter the applicable PSC code for the treatment system . Use the “Lookup
PSC/SIC” but ton to identify the applicable code. For more information on how to identify the applicable code , see Section 1.1

.

**•** SIC

. Enter the applicable SIC c ode for the treatment system . Use the “Lookup PSC/SIC”
button to identify the applicable code

. For more information on how to identify the applicable code , see Section 1.1

.Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 14

**•** NAICS

. Enter the applicable NAICS code for the treatment system. Use the “Lookup NAICS” button to identify the applicable code. For more information on how to identify the applicable code , see Section 1.2

.

**•** Scale

. Indicate whether the treatment system was a pilot for field scale. Use ctrl

- click to
select one of the scales. Only one scale can be sel ected at a time.

**•** Treatment technology code(s)

. Select the code for each individual treatment unit included
in the treatment system in the order of the treatment train by double clicking the code in
the window . The selected codes will appear in the field b elow. For more information on how to identify the applicable codes, see Section 1.3

.

**•** Operating p arameters

. Enter the media type for treatment units using filters or membranes, operating pH range ( minimum and maximum ), and indicate whether the pH

range was low or high in descriptor field (if specified)

. If the system is operated at a steady pH enter it both in the minimum and maxim um field. Anything that doesn’t fall into these categories may be entered into “Any other relevant parameters

. ”

**•** System d escription

. Provide a detailed description of the overall treatment system and each individual system step identified.

**•** Chemical a dditi on

. Enter types (and amount) of chemicals added. Indicate the chemical
was added in the treatment train

.

**•** Any other relevant parameters

. Enter system parameters, such as flow rates, footprint,
residence time

, etc. The purpose of this field is to capture information about the capacity and scale of the system. Do not spend time entering other engineering design
considerations , such as specific surface area or biological rates of reaction.

**•** Process diagram(s)/p hoto(s)

. Extract the process diagram an d any useful photos of the system from the pdf and save the file in a joint photographic experts group (jpeg) format to add as attachments. The filename should begin with the treatment system ID followed by an underscore and a description of the diagram/ph oto (e.g.

, 25T1_Process diagram).
To add or remove t he attachment , click your mouse in the field and press the paperclip button that appears in the submenu.

**•** Wastewater discharge t ype

. Select the discharge type. If the effluent is discharged to
surface waters , select “ D irect .” If the effluent is transferred to a publically owned treatment works ( POTW ) , select “ I ndirect.” If the article is not explicit, leave this field
blank.

**•** Manufacturer

. Enter the name of the company that manufactured the treatment s ystem or individual units (if provided).Memorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 15

**•** Costs

. Enter the capital and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs (if provided)

. Indicate when the costs were estimated by typing “( e st.)” after the value

.

**•** Notes

. D escribe any unique operational or system charact eristics

, including footprint size, energy requirements, other waste streams generated, etc. Also, e laborate or comment on any other system parameters entered on this form.

**•** Selection criteria

. Select this check box if the article presents measured water q uality data
and /or removal efficiency information

.

The next steps of the data entry are dependent on the selection criteria. After all of the applicable fields in Form 2 are populated, complete one of the following:

**•** If the article does not present m easured water quality data and /or removal efficiency
information for that treatment system

, either enter information for the next treatment system (if there is more than one treatment system described in the article) by pressing the “Enter New System” butt on , or complete the article review by press ing the “Article Review Complete” button. Selecting this button will save all of the information entered
into Form s 1 and 2, close the forms, and update the “Entry Complete” column in Form 0
to “Yes.”

**•** If the art icle presents m easured water quality data and /or removal efficiency information for that treatment system , press the “Enter Performance Data” button. Selecting this button will allow you to proceed to Form 3.

2.2.4 Removal Performance (Form 3)

Refer to Figure 2 for guidance on when to complete Form 3. Form 3 will automatically carry over the treatment system ID assigned in Form 2. When entering a new article into Form 3 , use the following instructions:

**•** Parameter

. Select the applicable parameter from the drop do wn list. For each treatment system, e nter the information required for each parameter with influent and effluent
concentrations or percent removal data presented

. The field in the data entry form should dynamically filter possible results based on what is typed into the text box. For more information on selecting a parameter, see Section 1.4

.

**•** Analytical m ethod

. Enter the method u sed to measure the parameter

, if ava ilable,
otherwise enter “None Described

. ”

**•** Effluent quality/parameter removal g raphs

. Extract the graphs/figures of pollutant concentration or removal (over time) for the parameter from the pdf and save the file s in jpeg format to add as attachments. The filename should begin with the treatment system ID followed by an underscore and a description of the graph / figure (e.g.

, 25T1_ Copper
Removal Graph ). To add or remove the attachment, click your mouse in the field andMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 16

press the p aperclip button that appears in the submenu. If multiple parameters are included on the same figure, attach the figure to each of the parameter forms.

**•** Detection l imits

. Enter the detection limit values (if provided) for the influent and effluent
to the tr eatment system. If none are provided, leave these fields blank. Detection limits must be expressly stated in these fields when a parameter concentration has either a < flag or a > flag.

**•** Performance d ata

. Enter the influent and effluent concentrations, uni ts, and flags (e.g.

, <, >, ND) for each parameter. Enter the units given in the source document, but use the units of mass/volume preferentially. Do not convert the units. Enter the percent removal and any description flags (e.g., >), if percent removal is provided in the reference. If a range
of values is presented or summary statistics are given, enter the values in the following order of preference : average, median, mode, maximum, minimum. Indicate the measured value in the dropdown box to complete the s entence

, “The data represent a(n) [ ] sample
concentration.” If the type of measured value is not clearly stated in the document, select “unspecified.” If additional performance data are listed in the article

, but n ot captured in the database (e.g., average values are entered into the database but min imum /max imum values are also listed in the article), select the “Additional performance data (not captured in this form) reported in source material” check box.

**•** Effluent s tandards

. Enter in any effluent standards (e.g., NPDES permit limits or water quality standards) stated in the article. The description should include the duration and description of the limit (e.g.

, daily max, monthly average) if provided

.

**•** Notes

. Describe any related information that may be useful, including the date or season of the sampling event.

After all of the applicable fields in Form 3 are populated, complete one of the following :

**•** If another parameter with removal efficiency data is provided in the article for that

tre atment system, press the “Enter New Parameter ” button

. Repeat until all of the measured parameter data ha ve been entered. Once finished, press the “Go Back to System” button and enter the next treatment system (if another treatment system is
described in t he article)

, as described in Section 2.2.3

.

**•** If all of the measured parameter data and treatment systems have been entered, press the “Article Review Complete” button

. Selecting t his button will save all of the information
entered into Forms 1 through 3 , close the forms, and update the “Entry Complete”
column in Form 0 to “Yes.”

2.3 Review Documentation

All stages of the review process should be documented in the

“ 6_Article_Review_and_QC_Information ” table. To access this table, select the “QualityMemorandum November 22, 2013 Page D

- 17

Control Table” button at the bottom of Form 0. The data populated into this table are linked to the listing in Form 0.

If , during your review, you identify an article t hat does not meet the quality criteria specified in
Section 2.2.1 , select the “Remove” check box and enter the reason for removal in the “Notes_Removal” field. If the inclusion of the article is in question, consult with the senior technical reviewer and/or EPA Work Assignment Manager (WAM) before flagging the article
for removal.

Once you have completed your article review, enter the article reference ID, your in itials, and the date of completion in the review documentation table

.