<< Loading >>
After clicking OK, be sure to follow any system prompts that may appear. Depending on the file size, there could be a significant delay before the download begins.
Percentages can only be recreated by downloading the Details data from the Facilities tile. Choose from the options below to download the current tile's data or the Facilities data.
This chart presents ranges of daily flows (i.e., average daily flow or total daily flow) in millions of gallons per day (MGD). This flow rate was defined as the actual operational flow to the POTW in calendar year 2018. Within the Screener Questionnaire, respondents reported individual numeric flows in MGD. The ranges presented in this chart were developed for the Nutrient Removal Study Dashboard.
This chart presents biological treatment types operated in 2018 as reported by respondents. Within the Screener Questionnaire, respondents were able to select as many treatment types as applicable to their POTW. As such, individual POTWs may use more than one treatment type, in parallel or in series. All responses are displayed in this chart.
This chart presents the numbers of POTWs that reported implementing capital upgrades and/or operational changes “in the past 10 years” or planning to implement such changes “in the next three years.” Respondents were also asked about the objective of these changes, whether they were intended to improve energy efficiency, nutrient removal, or both.
Definitions for capital upgrades and operational changes were not provided within the Screener Questionnaire, but respondents were provided examples of each. Examples of capital upgrades were, “baffles, added tank capacity, new treatment unit, pumps and piping for additional return and recycle lines.” Examples of operational changes were, “adjusting residence time or mechanical aeration, additional monitoring probes in biological treatment, upgraded process control.” Descriptions of individual changes were not collected.
Due to the question phrasing and because the questionnaire collected responses over several years, the timeframes considered by respondents may vary. For example, a respondent who completed the survey in 2019 may have used 2009 to 2019 for past changes, while a respondent who completed the questionnaire in 2021 used 2011 to 2021.
This chart presents annual average concentrations of ammonia in 2018 as reported by respondents. Respondents were asked to select a defined range corresponding to their concentrations rather than providing a specific numeric concentration. The ranges presented in the chart match those presented in the Screener Questionnaire.
The questionnaire requested monitoring information from two locations that both could be considered effluent depending on POTW configuration: Treatment System Effluent (at the end of the system designed to provide physical, chemical, and/or biological treatment) and Final Outfall (where wastewater discharge leaves the facility). Results in the Dashboard prioritize measurements from the Final Outfall and only present measurements from the Treatment System Effluent where Final Outfall data were not reported. POTWs with more than one outfall were instructed to use the primary outfall to answer this question.
When reporting nutrient monitoring data, respondents were asked to indicate the units of measurement in which their data were reported. For ammonia, respondents were asked whether their data were reported in milligrams per liter (mg/L) “NH3 as N” or mg/L “other.” The questionnaire did not request a description of other units. For presentation in the Dashboard, all results were included and are simply displayed in mg/L.
This chart presents annual average concentrations of total nitrogen in 2018 as reported by respondents. Respondents were asked to select a defined range corresponding to their concentrations rather than providing a specific numeric concentration. The ranges presented in the chart match those presented in the Screener Questionnaire.
The questionnaire requested monitoring information from two locations that both could be considered effluent depending on POTW configuration: Treatment System Effluent (at the end of the system designed to provide physical, chemical, and/or biological treatment) and Final Outfall (where wastewater discharge leaves the facility). Results in the Dashboard prioritize measurements from the Final Outfall and only present measurements from the Treatment System Effluent where Final Outfall data were not reported. POTWs with more than one outfall were instructed to use the primary outfall to answer this question.
When reporting nutrient monitoring data, respondents were asked to indicate the units of measurement in which their data were reported. For total nitrogen, respondents were asked whether their data were reported in milligrams per liter (mg/L) “as N” or mg/L “other.” The questionnaire did not request a description of other units. For presentation in the Dashboard, all results were included and are simply displayed in mg/L.
This chart presents annual average concentrations of total phosphorus in 2018 as reported by respondents. Respondents were asked to select a defined range corresponding to their concentrations rather than providing a specific numeric concentration. The ranges presented in the chart match those presented in the Screener Questionnaire.
The questionnaire requested monitoring information from two locations that both could be considered effluent depending on POTW configuration: Treatment System Effluent (at the end of the system designed to provide physical, chemical, and/or biological treatment) and Final Outfall (where wastewater discharge leaves the facility). Results in the Dashboard prioritize measurements from the Final Outfall and only present measurements from the Treatment System Effluent where Final Outfall data were not reported. POTWs with more than one outfall were instructed to use the primary outfall to answer this question.
When reporting nutrient monitoring data, respondents were asked to indicate the units of measurement in which their data were reported. For total phosphorus, respondents were asked whether their data were reported in milligrams per liter (mg/L) “as P” or mg/L “other.” The questionnaire did not request a description of other units. For presentation in the Dashboard, all results were included and are simply displayed in mg/L.