2019 Englewood PWO

PERACETIC ACID DISINFECTIONThe Good, the Bad, and the Slimy

Nikki Stephens

SafetyMomentAGENDA

1. PAA

2. The Good and Bad and Slimy

3. The Future

Property ValueColor Clear, colorless

Odor Vinegar, pungent

pH <1

Ev 1.81 V

Freezing Point <-20 °F

Specific Gravity 1.14 g/mL

Disinfectant EV (volts)

-OH 2.80

Ozone 2.07

Peracetic acid 1.81

Chlorine dioxide 1.57

Sodium hypochlorite 1.36

PERACETIC ACIDPAA, peroxyacetic acid, Ethaneperoxoic acid

PAA• Colorless, Vinegar Odor, Non flammable, and Soluble• pH: <1 (1:10 dilution), SG 1.135 g/ml (9.58 lbs/gal) • Flash point >207°F, Freeze Point <-20°F

Physical data

• Reactive with bases, metals, reducing agents, and combustible materials.Reactivity data

• Corrosive to soft metals, wood, nylon, common paint, cotton, leather, rubberCorrosivity data

• Stable up to 1 year under normal conditionsThermal and

chemical stability data

• Reacts violently with incompatible materials and high heat, produces Oxygen gas and steam during rapid decomposition.

Hazardous effects of contamination

SafetyMoment

PAA catalytically decomposes when contaminated. The reaction is exothermic.

https://envirotech.com/

CAPITALO&M

• Easy retrofit• Low freezing point• Less wear and tear• Less chemical

• No ammonia• No quenching?

• Long shelf life, stable• Shorter contact times

Reduce DBPs

Lower Toxicity

•Strong oxidizer

No nitrite lock

Reduces TSS

Increases DO

PAA Drivers

Proxitane® WW-12 VigorOx® WWT II BioSideTM HS 15% Peraclean®15 Peragreen®

22WW

EPA Registration (date of registration)

68660-1 (2013)

65402-3 (2008)

63838-2 (2015)

54289-4(2015)

63838-20 (2015)

Application Rateand Allowable Residual

0.5 – 10 mg/L<1.0 mg/L

0.5 – 15 ppm<1.0 mg/L, if DF>12, 0.09*DF

0.5 – 10 mg/L<1.0 mg/L

0.5 – 15 ppm<1.0 mg/L

0.5 – 10 mg/L<1.0 mg/L

Peracetic Acid (CH3COOOH) 12% 15% 15% 15% 22%

EPA registration ≠ “permitability”

State Allowable PAA Residual (ppm)

Alabama 1 mg/L

Arkansas Up to 2 mg/L in trials

California Allowing trials for underperforming UV systems

Colorado 0.4 mg/L (30-d ave) at DF=0; >0.7 mg/L daily max

Florida 1 mg/L, but require a minimum dose of 2 mg/L

Georgia 1 mg/L (trials)

Illinois Initially 1 mg/L for trials, but has since been rescinded

Iowa 0.7 mg/L

Kentucky Per engineer recommendation, generally 1 mg/L

Missouri 1 mg/L as a daily max, 0.7 mg/L as a monthly ave

New Jersey 1 mg/L for trials (under review)

Ohio 0.33 mg/L (Steubenville, OH)

Oklahoma 1 mg/L (Guidance published August 2017)

Oregon 1 mg/L, requiring monitoring of enteric viruses

Tennessee 0.4 mg/L for low DF; site specific for high DF, up to 2 mg/L has been permitted

Texas Anticipate EPA label (1 mg/L); GCWDA did not reopen permit

Washington Anticipate EPA label (pilot testing being conducted with 1 mg/L)

BALLAST WATER 0.5 mg/L as PAA per USCG 33 CFR Part 151

The Good and The Bad

CAPEX

• Retrofit• Less contact

time• Tanks and

pumps• Vendor

packages• Outdoor storage• Stable• Longer

equipment life

• 316 SS/ compatible materials

• Planning for decomp reactions

• Odor

Operations & Maintenance

• Less chemicals

• Less chemical• Smaller

system• Long shelf life• Less leaks• Low energy

• Few suppliers• High unit cost• Nuisance slime• Decomp risk• Adds cBOD• Lowers pH

The Non-$ Factors Performance/reliability Permitability No Cl DBPs Lower Toxicity No lasting residual No nitrite lock Reduce TSS Increase DO Emerging contaminants UV Synergy/ AOP potential Viruses Benefits to downstream users GHG reduction from less truck hauling

1

10

100

1,000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

E. c

oli (

MPN

/100

mL)

Contact Time

E. coli vs. Contact Time

1 ppm PAA, 7/18

1 ppm PAA, 7/23

1ppm PAA, 7/26

1ppm PAA, 7/31

1.5ppm PAA, 7/25

1.5 ppm PAA, 7/19

The Slimy

The Slimy

Vince Chui

Residual Measurement

The Future

Control StrategiesEvery drop counts

Straight Flow-Paced Qeff, PAA Dose SP

Straight Flow-Paced with Residual Trim Qeff, PAA Dose SP, PAAFinal

Integrated CT* Qeff, CT SP, PAAInitial

Integrated CT* with Residual Trim Qeff, CT SP, PAAInitial, PAAFinal

Residual SP Residual SP, PAAInitial AND/OR PAAFinal

Feed Forward Qeff, WQPre, PAAInitial OR E.coliInitial

Integrated CT

Manoli et al., Water Research 2019, 11, 0043-13554

C(t) = (C0 – D)e-kt

Feed Forward ControlFeed Forward Qeff, WQPre, PAAInitia lOR E.coliInitial

C(t) = (C0 – D)e-kt

D(WQpre) OR ln(N/No)(WQpre)

Like UVT for UV or ORP for Cl

COD

Color

TSS

UVT

SAC

Temp

Dunkin et al., Environ. Sci Technol. 2017, 51, 2972-2981.

PAA Efficacy for Virus Inactivation

WERF StudyNational

LIFT14T16 - Evaluating Peracetic Acid as a Disinfection Alternative in Wastewater Treatment

Task 1 – Literature Review

Task 2 – Survey

Task 3 – Regulatory Workshops

Task 4 – Demonstration Studies

Task 5 – Guidance Document

Proposed Path Forward WRF Regulator Workshops

Regulations

• Develop federal water quality criteria

• Develop state water quality criteria for PAA

• Challenges:

• Decomposition kinetics

• Lack of flow-through data

• More testing is needed

• Treat PAA like ozone or UV and use the WET test

PAA Design Guidance ManualWater Environment Federation

STAY TUNED….

THANKS