9330.2-11
                                EPA/540/2-90/007
                                AUGUST 1990
  CERCLA SITE DISCHARGES TO POTWS
         TREATABILITY MANUAL
                 Prepared by

    THE INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION

OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS

             OFFICE OF WATER
                Prepared for

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY AND REMEDIAL RESPONSE

   U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

          WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

-------

-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Preparation of this document was directed by Ruth A. Lopez, Project Officer, of the
Industrial Technology Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards. Additional
EPA Support was provided by select EPA Headquarters and Regional personnel who
supplied valuable comments and recommendations. Support was provided under EPA
Contract No. 68-03-3412.
Additional copies of this document may be obtained from:

                  National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

         —       U.S. Department of Commerce

                  5285 Port Royal Road

:                  Springfield, Virginia  22161

                  (703) 487-4600


                  NTIS Document  Order Number:  PB91-921206

                  NTIS Diskette  Order Number:  PB91-507236

-------

-------
                                TABLE OF CONTENTS
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 SECTION
 SECTION
 SECTION
 SECTION
 SECTION
 SECTION 6 -
 SECTION 7 -
 SECTION 8 -
 SECTION 9 -
 SECTION 10
 SECTION 11
 SECTION 12
 SECTION 13
tSECTION 14
 SUBSTANCES  FOUND  AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL  SITES
 SUBSTANCES  FOUND  IN CERCLA  SITE WASTEWATERS
 CERCLA  SITE SAMPLING DATA
 SUMMARY SITE VISIT  REPORT
 STATE NPDES PROGRAM STATUS
 PERCENT REMOVAL OF  COMPOUNDS IN POTWS
 COMPUTER SOFTWARE PACKAGES
 PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL CONSTANTS OF COMPOUNDS
 USEPA CONTAMINANT LISTS
-DESCRIPTION OF AEROBIC  BIOLOGICAL  SYSTEMS
- INFORMATION FOR  EVALUATING PRETREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
- ORD TREATABILITY PROJECTS
- WERL TREATABILITY  DATA  BASE
- FATE MODEL
 9.89.107C
 0002.0.0

-------

-------
                               EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 The "CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs Treatability Manual"  was  prepared for the
 U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No.  68-03-3412.  The manual
 is a compilation of mostly technical information and treatability data obtained
 in a study conducted by the Office of Water Regulations  and Standards  Industrial
 Technology Division (OWRS-ITD) on Comprehensive  Environmental  Response,
 Compensation,  and Liability Act (CERCLA)  wastewater discharges to POTWs.  The
 information is provided to aid in the evaluation of the  feasibility  of
 discharging wastes from CERCLA sites to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs).
 This executive summary provides a brief overview of the  contents of  each section
'of the manual.

 SECTION 1  - SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL  SITES.   This section
 lists the October 1986 analytical data from proposed and final National
 Priorities List (NPL) sites,  providing an overview of the  types of contaminants
 that may be present in the CERCLA wastestream.

 SECTION 2 - SUBSTANCES FOUND IN CERCLA SITE WASTEWATERS.   As part of the ITD
 CERCLA site discharges to POTWs study,  samples from seventeen  sites  with
 contaminated groundwater and from three sites with leachate were collected and
 analyzed for the full ITD list of 443 compounds.  Tables  were generated to give
 the user an indication of the contaminants,  the  frequency  of occurrence,  and  the
 concentrations at which they occurred at  the groundwater and leachate  CERCLA
 sites sampled.

 SECTION 3 - GERCLA SITE SAMPLING DATA REPORT.  Section 3 presents an evaluation
 of the sampling data from 20 sampling visits regarding the following:

 1.   Frequency of occurrence of compounds,

 2.   Variations (daily and annually) in the treatability of CERCLA site
      wastewater,

 3.   Contaminant treatability,

 4.   Comparison of CERCLA site treatability data to data in the USEPA  Office  of
      Research  and Development (ORD)  Treatability Data Base,  and

 5.   Comparison of indicator parameter treatability to organic
      contaminant treatability.


 SECTION 4 - SUMMARY SITE VISIT REPORT.  Site visits were conducted with
 personnel associated with 27 CERCLA sites which  had existing,  potential,  or
 denied discharges to a POTW.  The site visits consisted of  meetings with members
 of USEPA,  state,  POTW,  or potentially responsible parties  (PRPs) in  order to
 discuss experiences with implementing the discharge of wastewater from a
 specific CERCLA site.
 891003B-mll
 1.
E-l

-------
 Section 4 presents  a summary of individual  site visits  conducted with
 representatives  from EPA,  state,  POTW,  or responsible parties  to discuss the
 discharge of a specific CERCLA site wastewater to  a POTW. The  information
 presents the major  political,  technical, and  economic issues concerning the
 discharge of CERCLA site wastewaters  to POTWs that were found  to arise in the
 negotiations and approval  process, and  is provided to aid the  user  in foreseeing
 potential issues that may  require consideration.

 SECTION 5 -  STATE NPDES PROGRAM STATUS.  Section 5 presents the status of State
 National Pollutant  Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs.   The table
 indicates whether the state  is authorized to  administer the NPDES permit
 program,  regulate federal  facilities, and whether  the state has an  approved
 state pretreatment  program.   The  NPDES  authority can assist in the
 identification of POTWs that may  accept a CERCLA site discharge and provide
 specific information about the POTW that will be helpful for screening the POTWs
 during  the RI/FS process.  Section 5  identifies the appropriate agency to
 contact (either  the USEPA  regional office or  a state agency) for NPDES issues.

 SECTION 6 -  PERCENT REMOVAL  OF COMPOUNDS IN POTWS.  To  evaluate the feasibility
 of discharging wastes from CERCLA sites to  POTWs,  the user of  the treatability
 manual  may need  to  estimate  the treatability  of compounds in the CERCLA waste
 and  their potential to  impact removal processes in the  treatment system.  The
 removal mechanisms  in a POTW include  air stripping, partitioning (sorption) to
 the  solids and biomass,  and  biodegradation.   Section 6  presents summary tables
 of published treatability  data for individual compounds that can be used to
 estimate a mass  balance for  each  compound detected in a CERCLA wastestream if
 site specific treatability data is unavailable.

 SECTION 7 -  COMPUTER SOFTWARE  PACKAGES.   Section  7 presents a list of computer
 software  packages that  can assist the POTW  authorities  and regulatory agencies
 in developing local limits.  Local limits can be used to determine the level of
 pretreatment required at a CERCLA site.

 SECTION 8 -  PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL CONSTANTS OF  COMPOUNDS.   Section 8 presents.the
 compound  name, the  molecular weight, Henry's  Law Constant, Log octanol/water
 coefficient  (Kow),  and  solubility of compounds where information was available
 for  compounds  on the ITD list  of  analytes (Section 9).   The physical and chemical
 constants  of compounds  detected in CERCLA wastestreams  can be  used to evaluate a
 compound's fate  in  a POTW where no other data are  available.   The compound's
 fate can be  estimated by using its physical and chemical constants  (as well as
 its  compound class)  to  locate  similar compounds for which fate (percent removal)
 data are  available.

 SECTION 9  - USEPA CONTAMINANT  LISTS.   Section 9 presents several commonly
 referenced lists of compounds:  a) the ITD List of Analytes, taken from "The
 1987 Industrial Technology Division List of Analytes";,USEPA Industrial
Technology Division;  Office  of Water Regulations and Standards; Washington,
D.C.; March 1987, b)  the Target Compound List (TCL),  a list developed by the
 Superfund program, which contains compounds commonly found at CERCLA sites,  c)
 the Priority Pollutant List,  developed by the USEPA Office of Water and lists
organic toxic pollutants, d)  the  "Appendix VIII List",  a list of the RCRA
891003B-mll
2.
E-2

-------
hazardous constituents as defined in the Federal Register. Volume 51. Number 151
Appendix VIII. and e) the "Section 110 SARA List", a list of 100 hazardous
substances as defined by Section 110 of SARA in the Federal Register. Volume 52.
Number 74.

SECTION 10 - DESCRIPTION OF AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS.  Various studies have
documented the fate of contaminants in the most common conventional biological
treatment processes.  Those processes include aerated lagoons, activated sludge,
trickling filters, rotating biological contactors (RBCs), and powdered activated
carbon treatment (PACT) facilities.  Section 10 presents a description of each
of the above listed treatment processes.

SECTION 11 - INFORMATION FOR EVALUATING PRETREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES.

Prior to discharge of a CERCLA wastestream to a POTW, the stream may require
pretreatment.  Pretreatment systems are commonly composed of a number of unit
operations,  depending on the types of contaminants and concentrations in a
wastestream.  Section 11 provides information on 12 separate unit operations
that may be used to construct a pretreatment system.  A description of each unit
operation (how the process works, equipment types available,  advantages and
limitations, design criteria, etc.) and a detailed evaluation of the process
(effectiveness, implementability, costs, etc.) are included.   The section is
structured to contain information in the same format as a CERCLA Feasibility
Study.

The user of the technology manual may use Section 11 in two ways:

     o    To help make screening decisions while assembling the
          pretreatment train.

     o    To provide information that can be used in the detailed
          evaluation of the "discharge to POTW" alternative.

SECTION 12 - ORD TREATABILITY PROJECTS.  The USEPA Office of Research and
Development Water Engineering Research Laboratory (ORD-WERL)  conducted research
to support the evaluation for the potential to use POTWs to treat CERCLA and
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) wastes.  ORD, in conjunction with
the Engineering Department at the University of Cincinnati, performed pilot-
scale treatability studies at the EPA Testing and Evaluation Facility to
generate treatability data for toxic organic compounds.  Eight technical papers
were produced as a result of the studies.  Section 12 presents a list of the
papers with a brief description of each study.

SECTION 13 - WERL TREATABILITY DATA BASE.  The USEPA Office of Research and
Development Water Engineering Research Laboratory (ORD-WERL)  developed and is
continuing to expand a data base containing information on the treatability of
compounds in various types of waters and wastewaters.  The data base consists of
selected published data taken from government reports and data bases, peer
reviewed journals, and various other publications.  Each source has been
reviewed by a quality review committee before inclusion in the data base.  In
addition to treatability data, the data base contains chemical and physical
891003B-mll
3.
E-3

-------
properties, environmental data, and adsorption data for specific compounds,
where available.  Section 13 includes installation instructions.
SECTION 14 - FATE MODEL.   As part of the CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs study,
a user friendly, computerized  model has been developed to evaluate the fate of
inorganic and organic pollutants discharged to POTWs. POTW managers and
feasibility study writers can use the model to evaluate the fate and
treatability of toxic pollutants discharged to POTWs by predicting the overall
percent removal of the compounds and percent removals of organic compounds due
to volatilization, sorption, and biodegradation.


                                  The FATE User's Manual, provided in Section
14, Introduces the user of the model to the concepts and assumptions used in its
development and presents simple instructions for the model's operation.
891003B-mll
4.
E-4

-------
                    SECTION 1




SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL SITES




                  OCTOBER 1986

-------
SECTION 1   - SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL SITES.  This section
lists the October 1986 analytical data obtained from 888 proposed and final
National Priorities List  (NPL) sites, providing an overview of the types of
contaminants that may be present in the CERCIA wastestream.
891003B-mll
5.

-------
            SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NFL SITES
                              OCTOBER 1986
CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
TRICHLORDETHYIENE (TCE)
LEAD (PB)
1DIDEME
CHROMIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (CR)
BENZENE
CHLOROFORM
POraCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS, NOS
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHENE
ZINC AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (ZN)
CADMIUM  (CD)
ARSENIC
PHENOL
XYLENE
ETHYLBENZENE
COPPER AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (OJ)
1,2-TRANS-DICHDDROETHYLENE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
1,1-DICHLOROETHANE
1,1-DIOILOROETHENE
MERCURY
CYANIDES (SOLUBLE SALTS), NOS
VINYLCHLORIDE
NICKEL AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (NI)
1,2-DICHLOROEIHANE
CHIOROBENZENE
CARBON TETRACHIDRIDE
HEAVY METALS, NOS
PENTACHIDROPHENOL (PCP)
NAPHTHALENE
METHYL ETHYL KETONE
TRICHLDROEIHANE, NOS
IRON AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (FE)
BARIUM
VOIATILE QRGANICS, NOS
MANGANESE AND COMPOUNDS, NOS ,(MN)
ACETONE
PHENANTHRENE
BENZO A PYRENE
CHROMIUM, HEXAVALENT
1,1,2-TRICHIDROETHANE
ARSENIC AND COMPOUNDS, NOS  (AS)
DICHLOROETHYLENE, NOS
DDT
STYRENE
     311
     286
     243
     220
     208
     179
     159
     151
     149
     142
     141
     141
     121
     113
     111
     106
     104
      91
      85
      79
      78
      73
      70
      65
      64
      64
      61
      56
      53
      48
      42
      38
      33
      32
      31
      31
      30
      28
      27
      27
      25
      25
      24
      22
      22
                                1-1

-------
             SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NFL SCTES
                              OCTOBER 1986
 CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
ANTHRACENE
LINDANE
BIS (2-ETEKIHEXYL) PHEHAIATE
TETRACHLDKOETHANE, NOS
SELENIUM
1,1,2,2-TETRACHIQROEIHANE
CREOSOTE
PYRENE
WASTE OILS/SLUDGES
SULFURIC ACID
AIIMINUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (AL)
ACID, NOS
BENZO (J,K)  FLUORENE
FBJORENE,  NOS
RADIUM  AND COMPOUNDS, NOS  (RA)
TRICHEOROFUJORCMETHANE
ASBESTOS
DICHIOROETHANE, NOS
ACENAPTHENE
dS-1, 2HDIOEOROETHYLENE
ETHYL CHLORIDE
CHLORDANE
TRDJITRDTOLUENE  (TNT)
URANIUM AND  COMPOUNDS, NOS (U)
ANTIMDNY AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (SB)
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
DI^-BUTYLHEHIHAIATE
RADON AND  COMPOUNDS, NOS (RN)
AMKDNIA
DICHIOROBENZENE, NOS
TETRAHYDROFURAN  (I)
OffOROMETHANE
METHYL  ISOBUTYL KETONE
CHRYSENE
TETRACHLOBDETHENE, NOS
DIOXIN
DDE
PESnCXDES, NOS
WASTE SOLVENTS
HEXACHDDROCTCIOPENTADIENE  (C56)
2,4-DINITROTOIUENE
1, 4-DICHIOROBENZENE
DIELDRIN
NITRATES, NOS
     22
     21
     21
     21
     20
     19
     19
     19
     18
     18
     18
     17
     17
     17
     16
     15
     15
     15
     14
     14
     14
     13
     13
     13
     13
     12
     12
     12
     12
     12
     11
     11
     10
     10
     10
     10
     10
      9
      9
      9
      9
      9
      9
      9
      9
                                1-2

-------
            SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL SITES
                              OCTOBER 1986
CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
THORIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (TH)
HYDROCARBONS, NOS
TRIBROMOMETHANE
ETHYL E1HER
2 , 6-DINITROTOIIJENE
DIETHYL PHTHAIATE
1, 2-DICHLOROBENZENE
CRESOLS
BROMOMETHANE
RDX
FLUORIDE, NOS
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS, NOS
1, 1, 2-TRICHLORO-l, 2 , 2-^naFIDOROETHANE
BERYLLIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (BE)
WASTE lACQUER/PAINT
GREASE AND OIL
HEXACHU3ROBUTADIENE (C46)
1 , 2-DICHIOROPROPANE
HEPTACHIOR
ENDRIN
ALDRIN
BORON AND COMPOUNDS, NOS  (B)
ODD
SILVER
TRICHLOROPHENOIS, NOS
CHROMIUM, TRTVAIENT
PHTHIATES, NOS
DIBENZOFURAN
CHLORIDE (ION)
COAL TARS
1,2, 3-TRICHLDROPROPANE
METHANOL
2 , 4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
 1 , 3-DICHLOROBENZENE
 CYCLOHEXANE
 BIS  (2-CHIOROETHYL) ETHER
 BENZ A ANTHRACENE
 ACROLEIN
 M-XYLENE
 TKEMETHYL BENZENE
 PHOSPHORIC AdD
 ACENAPTHYLENE
 HAIDGENATED SOLVENTS, NOS
 CHROMIC  ACID
      9
      9
       8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      8
      7
      7
      7
      7
      7
      7
      7
      7
      6
      6
      6
      6
      6
      6
      6
      6
      6
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
      5
                                 1-3

-------
            SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NEL SITES
                              OCTOBER 1986
CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
METHANE
SULEATE (ION)
COBALT AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (CO)
1,2, 4-^IRICHLORDBENZENE
1,3, S-TEtENTTEOBENZENE
NITROBENZENE
HYDROGEN SULFIDE
1, 2-DIEKOMO-3-CHLOEOEROPANE
COMENE
2-CHLOROFHENOL      ^
CALCIUM CHROM&TE
TOXAFHENE
SODIUM CYANIDE
METHYINAFHTHAIENE
TKECHLOSOBENZENE
HALOGENATED ORGANICS, NOS
HEXACH1XKOCTCLOHEXANE, NOS
NITRIC ACID
SODIUM HYDROXIDE
HYDROCHLORIC ACID
N-PENTANE
HEXANE
N-HEPTANE
BRC1XDDICHIOROMETHANE
K)LYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
2,4,5-TP  (SILVEX)
2,4, 5-T
RESORdNOL
4-NITROFHENOL
F05MALDEHYDE
1, 2-DHHENYIHYDRAZINE
DI-N-OCTYL  FHTHAIATE
2 , 4-DICHIOROFHENOL
PH3ILORO-M-CRESOL
BENZIDINE
ANILINE
FLUORINE  (F)
ENDOSULEAN
BERYLLIUM DUST, NOS
ARSENIC TRIOXIDE
1, 2-DICHLOROETHENE
DINTTROTOIIJENE, NOS
SULEATES, NOS
ALIPHATIC HYDROCARBONS, NOS
     5
     5
     5
     5
     4
    ,4
    1 4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     4
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
                                1-4

-------
            SUBSTANCES POUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NFL SITES
                              OCTOBER 1986
CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
MIREX
OCTANE
VANADIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (V)
TIN AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (SN)
MAGNESIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (MG)
TITANIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (TI)
NTTROPHENOL, NOS
ISOPROPANOL
ISOPHQRONE
ETHYLENE GLYCOL
ETHANOL
BUTADIENE
ADIPIC ACID
SELENIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (SE)
PHTHALIC ESTERS, NOS
HALCMETHANE, NOS
BENZO (B) FIDORANTHENE
BARIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS  (BA)
MINERAL SPIRITS
PLATING SLUDGES
NON-VOLATILE ORGANICS, NOS
ALCOHOL, NOS
METHOXYCHLOR
2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL
TOLUENE DIISOCYANATE
PEWTACHIOROBENZENE
METHYL METHACRYLATE
4,4' -METHYLENE-BIS-(2-CHLORQANILINE)
HYDROFLUORIC ACID
HEXACHLOROETHANE
ETHYL ACETATE
1,4-DIOXANE
DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
3,3'-DICHLOROBENZIDINE
CYCLOHEXANONE
1-BUTANOL
BIS (2-CHLOROETHOXY)  METHANE
ACKYLONITRILE
PHOSGENE
PARATHION
2,4-DINTTROPHENOL
BENZYL CHLORIDE, NOS
CARBON DISULFIDE
2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC AGED
DITHIANE, NOS
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     3
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
     2
                                1-5

-------
            SUBSTANCES POUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL SITES
                              OCTOBER 1986
CHEMICAL NAME
                                                  FREQUENCY
2 1 4 , 6-TRINZEROTOIDENE
DIETHYIHEXXL PHTHAIATE
THIOCXftNATES, NOS
1, 3 , 5-TRIMETHYIBENZENE
N-BOTYLBENZENE
TRIS, NOS
PHENOL, DICHLORO, NOS
3 1 4-BENZOFIJJORANTHENE •
METfKLENE CHLOROFORM
NICKEL CHLORIDE
EaJEONIUM 239
TRITIUM
1, 2 , 4-TR3METfKLBENZENE
DIACETONE-ALOOHOL
ATRAZINE
EROEENYIBENZENE
KETONES, NOS
OIEFINIC HYDROCARBONS, NOS
DIMETHYIANTTiTNE
KNTACHIOROBUTADIENE
POLYBROMINATED BUHENYL (PBB) , NOS
(P) ETHYL TOLUENE
(P) METHYL STRYRENE
HYPOCHLORIC AdD
METHYL£XCLOHEXANE
DIMETHYL POSMftMIDE  (DMF)
ZIRCONIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (ZR)
SULFUR  (ELEMENTAL - S)
STRONTIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (SR)
SODIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (NA)
PHOSPHOROUS AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (P)
PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS, NOS
MOLYBDENUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (MO)
BIPHENYL
SULFUR DIOXIDE
NITROCELLULOSE
NAPHTHA
ISOPROPYL ETHER
DICYCLOPENTADIENE
OEORODIFHWRCMETHANE
4-CHIOROPHENOL
THALLIUM AND COMPOUNDS, NOS
                            (TL)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
                               1-6

-------
             SUBSTANCES POUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL SITES
                              OCTOBER 1986
 CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
 MUSTARD GAS
 ARAMTTE
 CAUSTICS,  NOS
 BRAKE FLUID (OFF.  SPEC.)
 GLYCOLS, MIXED
 FUNGICIDES
 PYRETHRDM
 BEARING PACKING
 PIASTICIZERS
 #2 FUEL OIL
 PETROLEUM AND PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
 GASOLINE
 TRIS (2,3-DIBROMDPROPYL)  PHOSPHATE
 1,2,4,5-TETRACHLORDBENZENE
 PYRIDINE
 2-METHYLPYRIDINE
 PHTHALIC ANHYDRIDE
 PENTACHLOROETHANE
 N-NITROSO-N-MEmYLURETHANE
 KEPONE
 HYDRAZINE
 FURFURAL               .
 3,3'-D3METHOXYBENZIDINE
 1,2-DIBROMOETHANE
. DIBENZ (A,H) ANTHRACENE
 4H3ID3RO-2-MEnHYLBENZENAMINE
 2-(CHLOROMETHYL)  OXIRANE
 CHLOROBENZHATE
 CHLORAL
 (TRICHIOROMETHYL)  BENZENE
 ACETOPHENONE
 ACETONTTRILE
 ACETALDEHYDE
 ZINC CYANIDE
 SODIUM AZIDE OR SMITE
 POTASSIUM CYANIDE
 PHORATE
 N-NITRC1SODIMETHYIAMINE
 NITROGLYCERINE
 2-METHYLAZIRIDINE
 HYDROCYANIC AdD
 AZIRIDINE
 DISULFOTON
 CYANOGEN
 COPPER CYANIDE
     2
     2
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
                                1-7

-------
            SUBSTANCES FOUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NFL SITES
                              OCTOBER 1986
CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
DIMETHXLHENOL, NOS
TETRACHIO3ROEHENOL, NOS
STODDARD SOLVENT
BENZYL BUTYL PHfflLATE
PHENOL SULFONATE
TEIKACHLOSOBUTADIENE
O-66
TETRAMEEEHIEENTANONE  ,
TRBIETHXLCTCLOHEXANOL
METHYLPHENANTHRENE, NOS
EROMXHLOROEENZENE, NOS
1H3TJHKL-2-METHYL BENZENE
TRIMETHm>XABICTCXOCCI!RNE
2-METHYL 1,3,-DINTTJROBENZENE
A1MOTHM, NOS
BENZOEYRENE, NOS
BENZOHENANIHRENE, NOS
EERYLENE
TERPENES, NOS
BEOOBENZENE
4 , 4-DIAMINO-3 , 3-DIODJ3I?ODIEENYIMETHAN
2,4-DIMETHYL-lf3 DIOXANE
IBDRONE
EDUTONIUM 238
TETRAMETfOL BENZENE, NOS
CHROMIUM AILMEN
PALLADIUM,  NOS
KELTHANE
POTASSIUM CHROMATE
BORAX
CARBON
MAIATHION
ETHION
ORATREN
CAPTAN
TRICfiRBOXYLIC ACID, BETA-ACETOXYTRBOT
LORSBMJ
PHDSPHORDDriHIOIC AGED, 0-EIHYL S,S-D
PHENOL,  4,4-ISOPROPYLIDENEDI-(BISPHEN)
INDENE
BENZOTHIOPHENE, NOS
ESTERS,  NOS
lEAD^DLYBDENUM CHROMATE
LEAD CHROMATE
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
                                 1-8

-------
            SUBSTANCES POUND AT PROPOSED AND FINAL NPL SPIES
                              OCTOBER 1986
CHEMICAL NAME
FREQUENCY
HEXAMETHYLENEDIAMINE
ETHYIAMINE
CAMPHOR
BUTANE
BENZOIC ACID
AMYL ALCOHOL
HEXACHDDRCKXCa^SffiXANE, BETA ISOMER
HEXACmORCCYCLOHEXANE, ALPHA ISOMER
1,3-DINTEROBENZENE
DIOIEDROFnJOROMEIHANE
TRICHLOROPROPANE, NOS
SILVER AND COMPOUNDS, NOS (AG)
N-NITROSONORNICOTINE
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE (ALPHA, BETA, GAMMA)
CHLORINATED ETHANE, NOS
BUTYIJRENZYL PHIHAIATE
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
Number of Recorded Substances - 466
Number of Sites with Chemical Data - 888
                               1-9

-------

-------
                                   SECTION 2

                  SUBSTANCES  FOUND IN CERCLA  SITE  WASTEWATERS
9.89.107C
0004.0.0

-------
SECTION 2 - SUBSTANCES FOUND IN CERCLA SITE WASTEWATERS.  As part of the ITD
CERCLA Site Discharge to POTWs study, samples from 17 sites with contaminated
groundwater and from 3 sites with leachate were collected and analyzed for the
full ITD list of compounds  (See Section 9).  The resulting data was used to
generate Tables 2-1 through 2-6.  The tables present the frequency at which the
compounds occurred above the detection limits at the sites and the minimum and
maximum concentrations at which they occurred.  Tables 2-1, 2-3, and 2-5 present
the data for organic, inorganic, and conventional and non-convent!onal
pollutants at the groundwater sites, respectively, and 2-2, 2-4, and 2-6 present
the data from the leachate  sites.

The tables were generated to give the user an indication of the contaminants,
the frequency of occurrence, and the concentrations at which they occurred at
the groundwater and leachate CERCLA sites sampled.  The tables, as in Section 1,
show the wide variety of contaminants among sites and the wide range of
concentrations detected.
891003B-mll
6.

-------
Page No.
05/18/90
                                             TABLE 2-1
                       COMMON ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA SITE WASTEWATER
                                  GROUNDUATER SAMPLED AT 17 SITES
CONTAMINANT

TRICHLOROETHENE
TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE
TETRACHLOROETHENE
1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
ACETONE
TOLUENE
BENZENE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
PHENOL
BENZOIC ACID
CHLOROBENZENE
P-DIOXANE
1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
2-BUTANONE (MEK)
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
BISC2-ETHYLHEXYDPHTHALATE
CHLOROFORM
ISOPHORONE
OCDD
1,1-DICHLOROETHANE
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
2,3,7,8-TCDF
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOIC ACID
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
NAPHTHALENE
0-+P-XYLENE
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
1,2,3.4,6,7,8-HpCDD
1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
ANILINE
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BIPHENYL
M-XYLENE
MINIMUM MAXIMUM
FREQUENCY CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION
DETECTED DETECTED
13
11
9
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
19.9
11.4
34.6
14.2
56.0
19.2
12.2
18.6
10.9
55.3
34.8
13.2
13.4
396.2
68.3
59.4
406.3
13.2
0.0
15.0
15.2
123.0
0.0
28.4
33.5
35.0
68.0
24.7
12.0
363.6
31.2
0.0
70.6
20.1
19.5
11.7
18.0
8369.7
1516.5
58017.0
4742.0
19420.0
9178.3
314.5
3571.0
1441.8
1825.0
3646.0
955.0
1451.2
2817.1
2767.0
2261.7
1000.0
1910.0
0.5
269.3
38.8
403.0
10.8
131.2
287.0
347.0
422.0
326.5
55.6
935.5
3481 .0
0.1
167.0
1223.0
89.6
5541.5
50.5
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
                                                 2-1

-------
 Page No.      2
 05/18/90
                                             TABLE 2-1
                        COMMON ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA SITE WASTEUATER
                                  GROUNDWATER SAMPLED AT 17 SITES
 CONTAMINANT

 N-OOOECANE (N-C12)
 0-CRESOL
 P-CRESOL
 TOTAL HpCDD
 VINYL CHLORIDE
 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE
 2,4.5-T
 2,4-D
 2-NITROPHENOL
 4-NITROPHENOL
 N-DECANE (N-C10)
 0-TOLUIDINE
 STYRENE
 1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
 1,2,3-TRICHLOROSENZENE
 1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE
•1.3-DICHLORO-2-PROPANOL
 2,4,5-TP (SILVEX)     '
 2,4-DIAMINQTOLUENE
 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
 2,4-DIHITROPHENOL
 2-CHLOROPHENOL
 2-HEXANONE
 2-METHYL-4.6-DINITROPHENOL
 2-HETHYLNAPHTHALENE
 3-CHLOROPROPENE
 ACETOPHENONE
 ACROLEIN
 ALPHA-PICOLINE
 ALPHA-TERPINEOL
 BISC2-CHLOROETHYDETHER
 BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
 CHRYSENE
 DIBENZOFURAH
 DIETHYL  ETHER
 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
MINIMUM
FREQUENCY CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10.5
11.3
29.2
0.0
22.4
17.0
43.7
136.0
150.0
159.8
230.7
14.5
15.0
12.0
70.3
20.4
5667.9
23.0
1550.0
112.0
66.7
435.7
87.6
151.4
174.3
15.0
~ 13.8
87.1
63.0
52.8
11.5
19.0
1708.1
24.0
30.0
64.0
105.9
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
969.7
165.8
70.7
0.1
230.0
244.3
49.7
1100.0
430000.0
174.3
446.9
278.1
37.0
240.0
70.3
20.4
5667.9
23.0
1550.0
112.0
66.7
435.7
87.6
151.4
174.3
15.0
13.8
87.1
63.0
52.8
11.5
19.0
1708.1
24.0
30.0
64.0
105.9
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
                                                  2-2

-------
Page No.
osm/90
                                             TABLE 2-1
                       COMMON ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA SITE WASTEWATER
                                  GROUNDWATER SAMPLED AT 17 SITES
CONTAMINANT




FLUORENE

HEXACHLOROETHANE

ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL

N-OCTACOSANE (N-C28)

NITROBENZENE

OCDF

P-CYMENE

PCS-1232

PHENANTHRENE

PHOSPHAMIDON

TEPP

TOTAL  HpCDF

TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE

VINYL  ACETATE
FREQUENCY C
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINIMUM
IONCENTRATION C
DETECTED
246.5
10.6
11.4
10.8
18378.0
0.1
20.8
10445.0
130.0
8500.0
79000.0
0.0
200.8
50.0
MAXIMUM
:ONCENTRATION
DETECTED
246.5
10.6
11.4
10.8
18378.0
0.1
20.8
10445.0
130.0
8500.0
79000.0
0.0
200.8
50.0
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
PPT
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
                                                 2-3

-------
Page Ho. 1
04/17/90
COMMON
CONTAMINANT
PHENOL
BENZOIC ACID
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
CHLOROFORM
AZINPHOS METHYL
TRICHLOROETHENE
TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE
TOLUENE
TETRACHLOROETHENE
P-CRESOL
2,3,7,8-TCDO
ACETONE
BENZENE
BENZYL ALCOHOL
HEXANOIC ACID
CHLOROBENZENE
ACETOPHENONE
1 ,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
BISC2-CHLOROETHYDETHER
2,4-DlMETHYLPHENOL
1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
ETHYLBENZENE
2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
ISOPHORONE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
N-DOCOSANE (N-C22)
N-EICOSANE (N-C20)
N-HEXADECANE (N-C16)
N-OCTADECANE (H-C18)
2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL
1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
PENTACHLOROBENZENE
2,3,7,8-TCDF
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1,2-D I CHLOROBENZENE

TABLE 2-2
ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA SITE WASTEWATER
LEACHATE SAMPLED AT 3 SITES
FREQUENCY
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

MINIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
35.0
53.5
1305.0
518.0
50.0
601.0
170.0
13483.0
1299.0
72.5
5.9
• 3245.5
1740.0
709.0
24.5
2670.5
20.5
596.0
141.0
52.0
101.0
4662.0
2639.0
833.0
58.5
3544.5
10.5
15.0
23.0
24.5
1167.0
964.0
548.0
0.4
1835.5
719.0
2-4
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
1548330.0
2316700.0
2942.0
8958.0
51.7
3525.5
1359.5
18166.0
3615.5
161.0
31.6
52518.0
2934.5
13308.0
131.0
3773.0
20.5
596.0
141.0
52.0
101.0
4662.0
2639.0
833.0
58.5
3544.5
10.5
15.0
23.0
24.5
1167.0
964.0
548.0
0.4
1835.5
719.0

UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L


-------
Page No.     2
04/17/90
CONTAMINANT




CHLOROMETHANE

DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE

AZINPHOS ETHYL

N-TETRADECANE (N-C14)

FENSULFOTHION

CHLORFEVINPHOS

FENTHION

CROTOXYPHOS

LEPTOPHOS

DIAZINON

MALATHION

DICROTOPHOS

MEVINPHOS

DIOXATHION

PARATHION

CHLORPYRIFOS

DICHLORVOS

DIMETHOATE

DISULFOTON

DELTA-BHC

PCB-1254

PHORATE

SULFOTEPP

TERBUFOS

TETRACHLORVINPHOS
                                             TABLE 2-2
                       COMMON ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN  CERCLA SITE UASTEWATER
                                    LEACHATE SAMPLED AT  3 SITES
FREQUENCY (
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINIMUM
:ONCENTRATION C
DETECTED
10566.0
26.5
1.2
17.5
1.9
7.2
4.2
14.4
13.1
10.1
7.7
29.1
1.6
27.0
4.5
5.0
27.6
28.4
0.5
1.6
6.0
21.0
1.0
5.0
0.8
MAXIMUM
IONCENTRATION
DETECTED
10566.0
26.5
1.2
17.5
1.9
7.2
4.2
14.4
13.1
10.1
7.7
29.1
1.6
27.0
4.5
5.0
27.6
28.4
0.5
1.6
6.0
21.0
1.0
5.0
0.8
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
                                                2-5

-------
Page Ho. 1
05/18/90
CONTAMINANT
SODIUM
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
BARIUM
SILICON
MANGANESE
SULFUR
IRON
BORON
ZINC
STRONTIUM
TITANIUM
ALUMINUM
POTASSIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
NICKEL
COBALT
YTTRIUM
CADMIUM
ARSENIC
MOLYBDENUM
VANADIUM
PHOSPHORUS
BERYLLIUM
LITHIUM
SILVER
TIN
LANTHANUM
GADOLINIUM
CERIUM
LEAD
NEOOYMIUM
SELENIUM
IODINE
IRIDIUH
GOLD

TABLE 2-3
COMMON INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA SITE WASTEUATER
GROUNDWATER SAMPLED AT 17 SITES
FREQUENCY
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
16
16
14
13
12
11
10
10
10
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3

MINIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
5560.0
21620.0
2960.0
5.6
3.0
25.4
2.4
16.0
20.8
6.7
0.7
3.0
110.0
2.0
10.2
8.0
25.0
9.6
2.0
5.2
2.4
12.0
3.0
1500.0
1.8
0.1
7.5
30.0
100.0
540.0
6300.0
69.0
400.0
3.5
533.0
240.0
2900.0
2-6
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
1075000.0
487600.0
1242857.1
870.5
34500.0
341000.0
6337143.0
387400.0
168000.0
56042.9
12420.0
722.0
1994285.7
30700.0
121428.6
9370.0
19520.0
3380.0
4594.0
2826.0
6000.0
541.0
1620.0
12000.0
120.0
2200.0
44.0
50.2
2100.0
857.0
19000.0
1550.0
3300.0
21.0
6000.0
3229.0
3371.0

UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L ,
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L .
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L


-------
Page No.     2
05/18/90
                                             TABLE  2-3
                      COMMON INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN  CERCLA SITE WASTEWATER
                                  GROUNDWATER SAMPLED AT  17  SITES
CONTAMINANT
YTTERBIUM
OSMIUM
GALLIUM
ANTIMONY
DYSPROSIUM
SCANDIUM
URANIUM
SAMARIUM
TANTALUM
PRASEODYMIUM
RUTHENIUM
LUTETIUM
NIOBIUM
GERMANIUM
ERBIUM
TUNGSTEN
INDIUM
MERCURY
ZIRCONIUM
FREQUENCY
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINIMUM MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION
DETECTED DETECTED
100.0
0.2
600.0
4.0
400.0
250.0
640.0
620.0
700.0
1600.0
4300.0
200.0
1543.0
320.0
410.0
1000.0
1100.0
6.0
100.0
400.0
1100.0
700.0
34.0
960.0
300.0
1300.0
780.0
2740.0
1600.0
4300.0
200.0
1543.0
320.0
410.0
1000.0
1100.0
6.0
100.0
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
                                                 2-7

-------
Page Ho.     1
04/17/90
                                            TABLE 2-4
                      COMMON INORGANIC  CONTAMINANTS  IN CERCLA SITE WASTEWATER
                                    LEACHATE SAMPLED AT 3 SITES
CONTAMINANT
NICKEL
SODIUM
ALUMINUM
SULFUR
IRON
SILICON
POTASSIUM
ZINC
CALCIUM
TITAHIUH
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
BORON
COPPER
MOLYBDENUM
BARIUM
LITHIUM
STRONTIUM
OSMIUM
PHOSPHORUS
VANADIUM
LEAD
IODINE
CADMIUM
COBALT
CHROMIUM
TIM
ARSENIC
TANTALUM
URAHIUM
FREQUENCY I
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINIMUM
:ONCENTRATION
DETECTED
18.5
51750.0
140.0
7050.0
6700.0
2040.0
1010.0
70.0
4145.0
8.0
2885.0
708.0
247.0
26.0
31.0
15.0
600.0
1500.0
100.0
1285.0
32.5
108.0
2000.0
23.5
16.0
53.5
33.0
28.5
500.0
1000.0
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
1567.0
3495000.0
3515.0
471500.0
763000.0
6400.0
621000.0
555.0
821500.0
36.5
254000.0
12800.0
14950.0
28.9
293.0
77.0
9400.0
3150.0
100.0
118000.6
32.5
108.0
2000.0
23.5
16.0
53.5
33.0
28.5
500.0
1000.0
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L ,
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
                                               2-8

-------
Page No.     1
05/18/90
                                             TABLE 2-5
                      COMMON CONVENTIONAL AND NON-CONVENTIONAL CONTAMINANTS IN
                                       CERCLA SITE UASTEWATER
                                  GROUNDWATER SAMPLED AT 17 SITES
CONTAMINANT




SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE

CHLORIDE

SULFATE

TOC

NITRATE + NITRITE, AS N

FLASH POINT

AMMONIA, AS N

COD

PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL AS P

NITROGEN, TOTAL (CJELDAHL

BOD

TSS

TDS

FLUORIDE

OIL & GREASE, TOTAL
RECOVERABLE

RESIDUE, FILTERABLE

CORROSIVITY

SULFIDE, TOTAL (IODOMETRIC)

NITROGEN, TOTAL KJELDEHL

CYANIDE, TOTAL

RESIDUE, NON-FILTERABLE

FLOURIDE

TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
FREQUENCY
17
17
16
16
15
14
13
13
12
11
11
10
10
9
8
6
6
6
5
4
4
3
1
MINIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
264.0
10833.0
14500.0
2180.0
51.0
0.0
158.0
30800.0
103.0
104.0
6850.0
15857.0
231429.0
207.0
5000.0
180000.0
1.7
1000.0
156.0
24.3
12117.0
308.0
2467.0
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
17571.4
2900000.0
19428571.0
1300000.0
250042.0
57000.0
21667.0
4340000.0
12000.0
24857.0
1446000.0
2500000.0
33000000.0
250000.0
54000.0
30000000.0
92.0
28000.0
24667.0
100.0
266667.0
16500.0
2467.0
UNITS
UMH/C
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
25 DE
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
MPY
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
                                                  2-9

-------
Page No.     1
04/17/90
CONTAMINANT
                                             TABLE 2-6
                      COMMON CONVENTIONAL  AND NON-CONVENTIONAL CONTAMINANTS IN
                                       CERCLA SITE WASTEWATER
                                    LEACHATE  SAMPLED AT 3 SITES
TDS
OIL & GREASE, TOTAL
RECOVERABLE
TSS
TOC
COD
SULFIDE, TOTAL (ICOOMETRIC)
BOD
PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL AS P
NITROGEN, TOTAL KJELDAHL
AMMONIA, AS N
FLUORIDE
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
SUCFATE
NITRATE + NITRITE, AS N
FLASH POINT
CHLORIDE
MINIMUM MAXIMUM
FREQUENCY CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION
DETECTED DETECTED
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
128.5
21.0
16.5
89.0
260.0
2.0
52.0
0.4
2.1
1.6
0.7
275.0
52.0
5.5
44.0
58.0
1300.0
545.0
18500.0
3350.0
10400.0
76.0
6500.0
310.0
44.0
7.9
12.0
275.0
52.0
5.5
44.0
58.0
UNITS
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
UMH/C
MG/L
MG/L
DEC C
MG/L
                                               2-10

-------
                                   SECTION'S
                           CERCLA SITE SAMPLING DATA
9.89.107C
0005.0.0

-------
SECTION 3 - CERGLA SITE SAMPLING DATA REPORT.   The CERCLA site sampling data
described previously (Section 2) was evaluated and presented in the CERCLA. Site
Sampling Data Summary Report in Section 3.   Specific tasks presented in the
report include:

     1.   Evaluation of the frequency of occurrence of compounds.

     2.   Evaluation of the daily variation in treatability of CERCLA site
          wastewater.

     3.   Evaluation of the variability between sampling events at the
          Stringfellow Site.

     4.   Evaluation of contaminant treatability.

     5.   Comparison of CERCLA site treatability data to data in the
          USEPA Office of Research and Development (ORD) Treatability
          Data Base.

     6.   Evaluation of air sampling data from the Chemdyne site.

     7.   Comparison of indicator parameter treatability to organic contaminant
          treatability.

Section 3 was generated to provide the user with a summary of the variety of ITD
as well as non-ITD compounds and concentration ranges present at CERCLA sites,
the treatability of CERCLA compounds, and the efficiency of on-site treatment
systems.
891003B
7.

-------
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE
3-1.0 INTRODUCTION 	 	
3-1.0 Background 	
3-1.2 Site Summaries 	 	
3-2.0 REDUCTION OF CERCLA SITE SAMPLING DATA BASE 	
3-3.0 EVALUATION OF CERCLA SITE SAMPLING DATA BASE 	
3-3.1 Task 1: Frequency of Occurrence of Contaminants 	
3-3.1.1 Contaminants Detected and Frequency of
Occurrence 	 	
3-3.1.2 Frequency of Occurrence of Contaminants
on Regulatory Lists 	 	
3-3.2 Task 2: Daily Variation in Treatability of CERCLA
Site Wastewater 	
3-3.3 Task 3: Variability at the Stringfellow Site 	 	
3-3.4 Task 4: Evaluation of Contaminant Treatability 	
3-3.4.1 Treatability of Inorganic Contaminants 	
3-3.4.2 Treatability of Organic Contaminants 	
3-3.5 Task 5: Comparison of CERCLA Site Treatability Data
to Data in the ORD Treatability Data Base 	
3-3.6 Task 6: Evaluation of Chemdyne Air Sampling Data....
3-3.6.1 Sample Point Description 	
3-3.6.2 Data Reduction 	
3-3.6.3 Treatment Efficiency and Mass Balance 	
3-3.7 Task 7: Comparison of Indicator Parameter
Treatability to Organic Contaminant Treatability 	
3-4.0 CONCLUSIONS 	 	 	 . .
PAGE NO.
3-1
3-1
3-2
3-4
3-5
3-5

3-5

3-17

3-22
3-22
3-23
3-26
3-26

3-27
3-30
3-30
3-30
3-32

3-32
3-35
ATTACHMENT A  SITE DESCRIPTIONS
ATTACHMENT B  SITE SUMMARY TABLES
ATTACHMENT C  UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY TABLES
891003-mil
1.

-------

-------
                                LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
                                     TITLE
                                                                      PAGE NO.
 3-1

 3-2


 3-3


 3-4


 3-5


 3-6


 3-7


 3-8

 3-9


3-10


3-11

3-12


3-13


3-14


3-15


3-16
          CERCLA SITES CHARACTERIZATION.
          RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
          ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA GROUNDWATER AT 17 SITES	

          RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
          ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA LEACHATE AT 3 SITES	
          RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110, AND PRIORITY P.OLLUTANT
          INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA GROUNDWATER AT 17 SITES..

          RCRA-APP. VII, TCL, SARA 110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
          INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN CERCLA LEACHATE AT 3 SITES	
          RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
          CONVENTIONALS/NOil-CONVENTIONALS IN GROUNDWATER AT 17 SITES,

          RCRA-APP. VII, TCL, SARA 110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
          CONVENTIONALS/NON-CONVENTIONALS IN LEACHATE AT 3 SITES	
          NUMBER OF CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT CERCLA SITES.
          NON-TCL ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT 17 CERCLA
          GROUNDWATER SITES	
          NON-TCL ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT 3 CERCLA
          LEACHATE  SITES	
          NUMBER OF  ITD, TCL, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANTS DETECTED.
          ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT ALL THREE STRINGFELLOW
          SAMPLING  EVENTS	

          ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS NOT DETECTED DURING  SAMPLING EPISODE
          1221	

          COMPARISON  OF CERCLA SITE  TREATABILITY DATA TO DATA  IN ORD
          TREATABILITY DATA BASE	,	
          VOLATILE  ORGANIC  COMPOUND  LIST  FOR AIR SAMPLE ANALYSIS
          USING  GC-MS  METHOD OF TO-14	
          VAPOR PHASE ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT  EFFICIENCY.

          AIR STRIPPER MASS  BALANCE	
 3-3


 3-6


 3-9


3-11


3-13


3-14


3-15

3-16


3-18


3-20

3-21


3-24


3-25


3-28


3-31

3-33

3-34
 891003-mll
 2.

-------
 TABLE
                                 LIST OF TABLES
                                   (continued)
                                      TITLE
                                                                       PAGE NO.
   3-18    PERCENTAGE OF CONTAMINANTS DETECTED FROM VARIOUS REGULATORY
           LISTS	   3.37
891003-mil
3.

-------
3-1.0  INTRODUCTION

As part of the CERGIA Site Discharge to POTWs study, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) Industrial Technology Division (ITD) directed various
sampling visits in order to collect samples from several CERCLA sites.  This
report evaluates and summarizes the results of the CERCLA site sampling data.
Specific tasks presented in this report include:

     1.   Evaluation of the frequency of .occurrence of contaminants,
     2.   Evaluation of the daily variation in treatability of CERCLA site
          wastewater,
     3.   Evaluation of the variability between sampling events at the
          Stringfellow site,
     4.   Evaluation of contaminant treatability,
     5.   Comparison of CERCLA Site Treatability Data to data in the USEPA
          Office of Research and Development (ORD) Treatability Data Base,
     6.   Evaluation of the air sampling data from the Chemdyne site, andj
     7.   Comparison of indicator parameter treatability to organic contaminant
          treatability.

3-1.1  Background

The objectives of sampling the CERCLA sites were to:

     o    Identify the variety of compounds and concentration ranges present at
          the CERCLA s.ites;

     o    Collect data on the treatability of compounds achieved by various on-
          site pretreatment systems; and

     o    Evaluate the impact of CERCLA discharges  to a receiving Publicly Owned
          Treatment Works (POTW).

Based on these objectives, the original criteria for site selection was sites
with current discharges  to POTWs.  An extensive research of Records of Decision
(RODs) led  to the identification of approximately 100 sites  that listed the
discharge to a POTW as part of.the selected remedial action.  However, only
twelve sites were verified to have actually implemented the  discharge to a POTW.
Of these twelve  sites, only seven were sampled.  Access was  restricted at the
remaining sites  which were currently involved in sensitive negotiations.  In
order  to achieve the first two sampling objectives  with a larger representative
data base,  the scope of  sampling was expanded to include sites using  remedial
alternatives other than  discharging to a POTW.   In  all, eighteen different sites
were sampled.  Of the sites sampled:

     o    seven  sites discharge  to a POTW,

     o    five sites discharge directly to surface  water,

     o    one  site reinjects  to  groundwater, and
 891003-mll
                                      3-1

-------
      o    six sites' monitoring wells were sampled.

 3-1.2  Site Summaries

 Attachment A presents detailed descriptions for each site sampled and Table 3-1
 presents a summary of each of the CERCLA sites sampled.   The summary table
 provides information with regard to the average flow,  wastewater type,
 treatment, where the treated water is discharged,  and the total mass loading to
 the site.                                            „

 The CERCLA sites sampled spanned most of the USEPA Regions across the United
 States.  Exceptions to this included Region VII and Region VIII.   In general few
 CERCLA sites are located in either region.   One site was contacted in Region VII
 but not chosen for sampling due to the low contaminant concentrations in its'
 wastestream.  Region VIII has the fewest sites of  any  region.   In addition,  many
 of those located in Region VIII are mining sites with  wastestreams consisting
 primarily of only one or two contaminants.

 The majority of the sites sampled were operating 24 hours per  day,  7 days  per
 week at the time of sampling.  Exceptions to this  included Stringfellow and
 United Chrome,  both of which operated 8 hours per  day, 5 days  per week,  and Love
 Canal,  which only operated 8 hours per day,  2 days per week.

 A wide  range of wastewater flow rates was observed at  the CERCLA  sites  sampled.
 The average flow rates ranged from 0.006 MGD at Hyde Park to 5.0  MGD at Well
 12A.  Sites discharging to POTWs typically had flow rates lower than those
 discharging to  surface water.  Flow rates ranged from  0.006 MGD (Hyde Park)  to
 1.4 MGD (Reilly Tar)  for sites discharging to POTWs and  from 0.1  MGD (Tyson's
 Dump) to 5.0 MGD (Well 12A)  at sites  discharging to surface water.   The  average
 flow rate of all sites discharging to a POTW was 0.25 MGD compared to 1.9  MGD
 for sites discharging to surface water.

 The average capacity  of the  POTWs which received the CERCLA sites  discharges
 ranged  from 8.8  MGD to 220 MGD.   The  flow from the sites  was therefore  diluted
 by factors  ranging  from approximately 100 (Tyson's Dump)  to 8,000  (Hyde  Park).
 In addition,  the sites provided high  levels  of pretreatment prior  to  discharging
 to the  POTW.  As a  result, once the CERCLA wastestream is  discharged  to  the
 POTW, wastes  are typically not detectable in the POTW influent.  This was
 evident in  the fact that an  original  objective  of  the program was  to  sample
 POTWs currently  accepting CERCLA discharges.  No POTWs could be identified where
 a  GERCLA waste would be  detectable.

 In order  to reduce  sampling  errors and account  for system  anomalies,  sites that
were currently operating a treatment  system, with  the exception of Bridgeport
Rental, were  sampled each day over a  4 to 5  day period.   In addition, the
Stringfellow  site was  sampled at  three  different times during the program
 (November 1987, March  1988,  and August  1989) in order to assess the variability
of contaminants  and the  treatment process over an  extended period of time.
891003-mil
                                      3-2

-------
Site
Bridgeport
Rental
Charles
George
Chemdyne
Geneva
Gold Coast Oil
Hyde Park
Love Canal
Nyanza
ReillyTar
Stringfellow
Sylvester
Time Oil
Tyson's Dump
Episode
: 1222
1309
1807
1224
1242
1220
:1219
1310
1239
1221
1240
1805
1325
1804
1568
United Chrome 1738
Verona
Well 12A
Western Proc.
Wh'rtehouse
Oil
1223
1808
1739
1241
Region
II
I
V
VI
IV.
II
II
	 . 	
V
IX
II
X
III
X
V
X
X
IV
City, State
Logan Township, NJ
TyngsborougH, MA •
Hamilton. OH
Houston, TX
Miami. FL
Niagra Falls. NY
Niagra Falls, NY
Ashlahd, MA
St, Louis Park, MN
Glen Avon Heights, CA
Nashua, NH
Tacoma, WA
King of Prussia, PA
Corvallis.OR
Battle Creek, Ml
" TacomarWA
Kant, WA
Whltehousa, FL
Dote of Visit
Dec. 17,1987
Apr. 28, 1988
Oct. 9-1 3, 1989
Feb. 16, 1988
Mar. 24, 1988
Sep. 30, 1987
Sep. 29, 1987
Apr. 27, 1988
Feb, 22-26, 1988
Nov. 3, 1987
Mar. 7-1 1,1 988
Aug. 21-25, 1989
May 16-21, 1988
Aug. 14-19, 1989
Jun. 25-29, 1988
Apr. 24-27,1988
Jan. 25-30-1988
Aug. 14-18, 1989
May 1-6, 1989
Mar. 22,1988
Avg, Flow
300 GPM
-
750 GPM
-
-
< 6,000 GPD
40,000 GPD:
-
I.OOO:GPM
0.04 MGD
t
300 GPM
150 GPM
100,000 GPD
60,000 GPD
2,000 GPM -
2,100 GPM
3.500 GPM
100 GPM
-
Operating
Hours
24 Hours/7Days
-
24 Hours/7 Days
-
-
-
2 Days/Wk

24 Hours/7 Days
8 Hours/ 5 Days
24 Hours/7 Days
24 Hours/ 7 Days
24 Hours/2 Days/Wk
8 Hours/5 Days
24 Hours/7 Days
24 Hours/7 Days
24 Hours/7 Days
.
Wostewater
Type
Leachate
Groundwater
Groutldwater
Groundwatsr
Groundwater
Leaehals
taachale
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwatar
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwaier
Groundwater
Groundwatar
Groundwater
Groundwater •
Treatment1

Future Treatment
AS
Future Treatment
Future Treatment
Lagoon
GAC
Future Treatment

CP-SF-GAC
CP-SF-AS-BT
GAC
AS
CP-HT
GAC-AS
AS
AS-CP-GAC
Future Treatment
Discharge2


. 60% Surface Water
40%Relniection 	

•"•
48 MGD
POTW
POTW

Water Supply
$20 MGD POTW
Relnjectioti
«
Surface Water
8-10 MGD POTW
8.8 MGD POTW
Surface Water
Surface Water
42MGO
POTW
~
influent 3
MOSS,
Loading
(LB5/yr)


675,720
-
-
1286,620
48,020

630,650
542.740
1^29,030
968,190
247.300
46,850

229/420
1,742,570
1247,300
416.660
—
U)

CO
      Notes:

      1. AS = Air Stripping
        BT = Biological Treatment
        CP = Chemical Precipitation
        DAF = Dissolved Air Flotation
        GAC = Granular Activated Carbon
        HT = Holding Tank
        MF= Multi-Media Filter
        OS = Oil/Water Separator
        SF - Sand Filter

      2.  POTW flows are yearly averages

      3.  Includes organic and inorganic Industrial Technology Division Analytes
                             TABLE 3-1
CERCLA SITES CHARACTERIZATION
     6098-01

-------
 At each CERCIA site sampled, samples were collected across each unit process,
 where possible, and analyzed for the full ITD List of Analytes.  The ITD list  is
 composed of 443 pollutants including organic and inorganic compounds and
 miscellaneous conventional and non-conventional parameters (e.g.,  total organic
 carbon, chemical oxygen demand, reactivity,  etc.).  The list,  along with the CAS
 number for each contaminant, is presented in Section 9 of this Treatability
 Manual.

 The sampling data collected from the eighteen CERCLA sites have been
 incorporated into a site sampling data base.   The data base is a dBASE file
 consisting of the following:

      1.   Compound name
      2.   Class of the compound (organic,  inorganic,  semi-quantitative screen
           metal,  conventional,  non-conventional,  pesticide/PCB)
      3.   Amount detected
      4.   Detection limit if amount detected was  a non-detect
      5.   Laboratory qualifier, where applicable
      6.   Concentration units
      7.   Episode number
      8.   Sample number


 3-2.0  REDUCTION OF CERCLA SITE SAMPLING DATA BASE         -   •

 Prior to  evaluating the CERCLA  site data,  it  was  necessary to  reduce  the data.
 The data  base originally consisted of samples taken at various  points  in the
 treatment process and the corresponding contaminant concentration that was
 detected  for each day that samples were collected.  In order to compare
 treatability of contaminants across different sites and to  determine  the
 frequency with which contaminants  occurred at the  eighteen sites, an  average
 concentration of  each sample point^was  calculated for  sites where sampling
 occurred  for more than one day.  Duplicate samples  taken  during each  sampling
 event were also averaged with its  respective  sample location.   In addition, raw
 wastewater samples  collected at two different sample locations  were averaged for
 Hyde  Park (These  samples  were averaged  since  the  leachate  collected at the
 sample  locations  is  pumped from the wells  and combined in a holding lagoon where
 separation of the aqueous and non-aqueous  phase occurs).  For samples  reported
 as non-detect,  the  detection limit was  used in calculating the  average.

 To determine  the  frequency of occurrence of contaminants at the  sites, the
 averaged  data were used as  described above; however, if non-detect data were
 observed  for  a  contaminant  in more  than fifty  percent  of the samples across the
 unit processes  that  composed the treatment system,  the contaminant concentration
was considered  to be non-detectable and thus,  not detected in all samples
 collected at  the  site.  This  criterion was followed to account  for system or
 analytical anomalies that may have  occurred.   The criterion was not followed if
 the influent  concentration was above the detection limit and all other samples
collected over  the system were non-detect.   The criterion was also not followed ,
for some of the organics data collected at Tyson's Dump.   Many of the concen-
891003-mll
                                      3-4

-------
 trations  detected for duplicate samples  collected at  the  site  were  higher than
 concentrations  detected for other samples  at the  site.  Therefore,  if other
 samples collected at the site for a contaminant were  non-detect,  except for the
 concentration of the duplicate,  the contaminant was considered non-detect in the
 wastestream when calculating the frequency of occurrence.

 A more detailed description of the reduction of the CERCLA site data and the
 actual data and the percent removals across each  unit process  at each site are
 presented in the "CERCLA. SITE DISCHARGES TO POTWs CERCLA  SITE  SAMPLING PROGRAM:
 DETAILED  DATA REPORT" (EPA/542/90/008).


 3-3.0  EVALUATION OF CERCLA SITE SAMPLING  DATA BASE

 The seven data  evaluation tasks are discussed below.

 3-3.1  Task 1:   Frequency of Occurrence  of Contaminants

 The frequency of occurrence of contaminants detected  at the sites was evaluated
 for sites treating groundwater and for sites treating leachate.   Site wastewater
 defined as groundwater was subsurface water that  was  either extracted and
 treated or extracted, placed in a holding  lagoon  for-  storage,  and subsequently
 treated.   Wastewater defined as leachate was wastewa.ter collected at a landfill
 site that was collected in a leachate collection  system for treatment.   The
 lagooned  waste  at Bridgeport Rental was  evaluated as  a leachate since it
 consisted of an oily waste not representative of  groundwater.

 In 1987,  a list was compiled from analytical data collected from proposed and
 final National  Priorities List (NPL) sites.   The  frequency of  occurrence was
 compiled  for contaminants detected in soil,  water, and other media  and is
 presented in Section 1 of this Treatability Manual.

 3-3.1.1  Contaminants Detected and Frequency of Occurrence.

 Tables 3-2 through 3-7 present the frequency of occurrence of  contaminants at
 the sites sampled,  the maximum concentrations,  and the regulatory lists
 (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  [RCRA]-Appendix VIII,  Target Compound
 List (TCL),  Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization  Act  [SARA]-110,  and/or
 Priority  Pollutant) for each contaminant.   The TCL, formerly the Hazardous
 Substance List  (HSL), was established under CERCLA and SARA and the Priority
 Pollutant List  was developed by the USEPA  Office  of Water under the Clean Water
 Act.   The TCL,  Priority Pollutant, RCRA-Appendix  VIII, and SARA-110 lists are
 presented in Section 9,  Tables 9-5 through 9-8 respectively.   Tables 3-2,  3-4,
 and 3-6 present organic, inorganic,  and  conventional  and  non-conventional
 contaminants, respectively,  for sites treating groundwater.  Tables 3-3,  3-5,
 and 3-7 present the data for the leachate  streams.  Table 3-8  presents a summary
 of the total number of contaminants detected above the detection limit at each
 of the specific sites sampled for each class of compound.

The organic contaminants most frequently detected at  the  sites varied somewhat
 between the groundwater and leachate sites (Table 3-2 and 3-3).   Phenol was
 891003-mll
                                      3-5

-------
                                                                             TABLE 3-2
                                                       RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110, AJfl) PRIORITY POLLUTAHT
                                                      ORGANIC CONTAMINATES IH CERCLA GSOOHOWATER AT 17 SITES
 I
ON
          CONTAMINANT
TRICHLOROETHENE
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TETRACHLQROETHENE
1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
ACETONE
TOLUENE
BENZENE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
PHENOL
BENZOIC ACID
CHLOROBENZENE
P-DIOXANE
1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
2-BUTANONE (HEK)
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
BISC2-ETHYLHEXYDPHTHALATE
CHLOROFORM
ISOPHORONE
OCDD
1,1-DICHLOROETHANE
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
2,3,7,8-TCDF
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOIC ACID  .
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
NAPHTHALENE
0-+P-XYLENE
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
ANILINE
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BIPHENYL
M-XYLENE
N-DODECANE (N-C12)
0-CRESOL
P-CRESOL
TOTAL HpCDD
K1HIKUH MAXIMUM
FREQUENCY CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION
DETECTED DETECTED
13
11
9
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
19.9
11.4
34.6
14.2
56.0
19.2
12.2
18.6
10.9
55.3
34.8
13.2
13.4
396.2
68.3
59.4
406.3
13.2
0.0
15.0
15.2
123.0
0.0
28.4
33.5
35.0
68.0
24.7
12.0
363.6
31.2
0.0
70.6
20.1
19.5
11.7
18.0
10.5
11.3
29.2
0.0
8369.7
1516.5
58017.0
4742.0
19420.0
9178.3
314.5
3571.0
1441.8
1825.0
3646.0
955.0
1451.2
2817.1
2767.0
2261.7
1000.0
1910.0
0.5
269.3
38.8
403.0
10.8
131.2
287.0
347.0
422.0
326.5
55.6
935.5
3481.0
0.1
167.0
1223.0
89.6
5541.5
50.5
969.7
165.8
70.7
0.1
UMITS RCRA
CONTAMINANT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X


X
X
X
X
X



X

X
X

X
X




X
.X

TCL
CONTAMINANT
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X


X
X
X
X

X

X

X

X
X

SARA 110
CONTAMINANT
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X



X
X
X

X
X


X




PRIORITY
POLLUTANT
CONTAMINANT
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X

X


X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X


X

X
X

X









-------
U)
 I
          CONTAMINANT
VINYL CHLORIDE
1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
1,1-DICHLOROETHENE
2,4,5-T
2,4-D
2-NITROPHENOL
4-NITROPHENOL
N-DECANE (N-C10)
0-TQLUIDINE
STYRENE
1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE
1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE
1.3-DICHLORO-2-PROPANOL
2,4,5-TP (SILVEX)
2,4-DIAMINOTOLUENE
2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
2,4-DlNITROPHENOL
2-CHLOROPHENOL
2-HEXANONE
2-METHYL-4.6-DINITROPHENOL
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
3-CHLOROPROPENE
ACETOPHENONE
ACROLEIN
ALPHA-PICOLINE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
BUTYL BENZYL  PHTHALATE
CHRYSENE
DIBENZOFURAN   •
DIETHYL ETHER
DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
FLUORENE
HEXACHLOROETHANE
ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL
N-OCTACOSANE  (N-C28)
NITROBENZENE
OCDF
P-CYMENE
PCS-1232
                                          FREQUENCY
                                                                        TABLE 3-2 (CONTINUED)
                                                        RCRA-APP. VIII,  TCL,  SARA 110,  AND  PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                       ORGANIC CONTAMINATES IN CERCLA GROUNDWATER AT 17 SITES
                                                  MINIMUM        MAXIMUM
                                            CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                                                 DETECTED       DETECTED
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
22.4
17.0
43.7
136.0
150.0
159.8
230.7
14.5
15.0
12.0
70.3
20.4
5667.9 •
23.0
1550.0
112.0
66.7
435.7
87.6
151.4
174.3
15.0
13.8
87.1
63.0
52.8
11.5
19.0
1708.1
24.0
30.0
64.0
105.9
246.5
10.6
11.4
10.8
18378.0
0.1
20.8
10445.0
230.0
244.3
49.7
1100.0
430000.0
174.3
446.9
278.1
37.0
240.0
70.3
20.4
5667.9
23.0
1550.0
112.0
66.7
435.7
87.6
151.4
174.3
15.0
13.8
87.1
63.0
52.8
11.5
19.0
1708.1
24.0
30.0
64.0
• 105.9
246.5
, 10.6
.11.4
10.8
18378.0
0.1
20.8
10445.0
PRIORITY
UNITS RCRA TCL SARA 110 POLLUTANT
CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
X
X
X
X


X



X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
X


X
X
X

X
X

X
X

X


X
XXX
XX X
X X X
•

X X
X X


X



X


XXX
X ' X X
X X
X
X X
X


X


X XX
X X
X X X
X
X
XXX
X X
XXX


X X X


XX X

-------
                                                                          TABLE 3-2 (CONTINUED)
                                                          RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110,  AM) PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                         ORGANIC CONTAMINATES IN CERCLA GROWUATER AT 17 SITES
            CONTAMINANT
            PHENANTHRENE
            PHOSPHAMIDON
            TEPP
            TOTAL HpCOF
            TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE
            VINYL ACETATE
                  MINIMUM        MAXIKUM
FREQUENCY   CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                 DETECTED       DETECTED
1
1
1
1
1
1
130.0
8500.0
79000.0
0.0
200.8
50.0
130.0
8500.0
79000.0
0.0
200.8
50.0
                                                   PRIORITY
UNITS      RCRA          TCL         SARA 110     POLLUTANT
        CONTAMINANT  COHTAHINANT   CONTAMINANT   CONTAMINANT
                                               UG/L
                                               PPT
                                               PPT
                                               PPT
                                               UG/L
                                               UG/L
U)
 I
oo

-------
U)
 I
          CONTAMINANT
PHENOL
BENZOIC ACID
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
CHLOROFORM
AZINPHOS METHYL
TRICHLOROETHENE
TRANS-1,2-01CHLOROETHENE
TOLUENE
TETRACHLOROETHENE      .
P-CRESOL
2,3,7,8-TCDD
ACETONE
BENZENE
BENZYL ALCOHOL
HEXANOIC ACID
CHLOROBENZENE
ACETOPHENONE
1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
ETHYLBENZENE
2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
ISOPHORONE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
N-DOCOSANE  (N-C22)
N-EICOSANE  (N-C20)
N-HEXADECANE  (N-C16)
N-OCTADECANE  (N-C18)
2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL
1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
PENTACHLOROBENZENE
2,3,7,8-TCDF
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROMETHANE
DI-N-BUTYL  PHTHALATE
AZINPHOS ETHYL
N-TETRADECANE (N-C14)
FENSULFOTHION
                                          FREQUENCY
                                                                             TABLE 3-3
                                                       RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                        ORGANIC CONTAMINATES IN CERCLA LEACHATE AT 3 SITES
                                                  MINIMUM        MAXIMUM
                                            CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                                                 DETECTED       DETECTED
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
35.0
53.5
1305.0
518.0
50.0
601.0
170.0
: 13483.0
1299.0
72.5
5.9
3245.5
1740.0
709.0
24.5
2670.5
20.5
596.0
141.0
52.0
101.0
4662.0
2639.0
833.0
58.5
3544.5
10.5
15.0
23.0
24.5
1167.0
964.0
548.0
0.4
1835.5
719.0
10566.0
26.5
1.2
17.5
1.9
1548330.0
2316700.0
2942.0
8958.0
51.7
3525.5
1359.5
18166.0
3615.5
161.0
31.6
52518.0
2934.5
13308.0
131.0
3773.0
20.5
596.0
141.0
52.0
101.0
4662.0
2639.0
833.0
58.5
3544.5
10.5
15.0
23.0
24.5
1167.0
964.0
548.0
0.4
1835.5
719.0
10566.0
26.5
1.2
17.5
1.9
PRIORITY
UNITS RCRA TCL SARA 110 POLLUNTANT
CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
X

X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X

X


X
X

X
X
X
X

X

X




X
X

X
X
X
X
X



X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
X


X
X
X
X



X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X

X


X


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X





X


X
X
X
X



X

X
X

X
X
X
X

X

X


X


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X





X


X
X
X





-------
                                                                        TABLE 3-3 (CONTIHWEO)
                                                         RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA 110, AW PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                          ORGANIC CONTAMINATES IN CERCLA LEACHATE AT 3 SITES
LO
 I
           CONTAMINANT
CHLORFEVINPHOS
FENTHION
CROTOXYPHOS
LEPTOPHOS
DIAZINON
MALATHION
DICROTOPHOS
MEVINPHOS
DIOXATHION
PARATHION
CHLORPYRIFOS
DICHLORVOS
DIHETHOATE
DISULFOTON
DELTA-BHC
PCB-1254
PHORATE
SULFOTEPP
TERBUFOS
TETRACHLORVINPHOS
                                                 MINIMUM        MAXIMUM
                                FREQUENCY   CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                                                DETECTED       DETECTED
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7.2
4.2
14.4
13.1
10.1
7.7
29.1
1.6
27.0
4.5
5.0
27.6
28.4
0.5
1.6
6.0
21.0
1.0
5.0
0.8
7.2
4.2
14.4
13.1
10.1
7.7
29.1
1.6
27.0
4.5
5.0
27.6
28.4
0.5
1.6
6.0
21.0
1.0
5.0
0.8
UNITS      RCRA          TCL
        CONTAMINANT  CONTAMINANT
                 PRIORITY
  SARA 110     POLLUNTANT
CONTAMINANT   CONTAMINANT
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L

-------
CO
 I
               CONTAMINANT
SODIUM
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
BARIUM
SILICON
MANGANESE
SULFUR
IRON
BORON
ZINC
STRONTIUM
TITANIUM
ALUMINUM
POTASSIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
NICKEL
COBALT
YTTRIUM
CADMIUM
ARSENIC
MOLYBDENUM
VANADIUM
PHOSPHORUS
BERYLLIUM
LITHIUM
SILVER
TIN
LANTHANUM
GADOLINIUM
CERIUM
LEAD
NEODYMIUM
SELENIUM
IODINE
IRIDIUH
GOLD
YTTERBIUM
OSMIUM
GALLIUM
ANTIMONY
                                     FREQUENCY
                                                                                TABLE 3-4
                                                          RCRA-APP.  VIII,  TCL,  SARA  110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                         INORGANIC CONTAMINATES IN CERCLA GROUNDWATER AT 17 SITES
                                        MINIMUM        MAXIMUM
                                  CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                                       DETECTED       DETECTED
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
16
16
14
13
12
11
10
10
1
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
5560.0
21620.0
2960.0
5.6
3.0
25.4
2.4
16.0
20.8
6.7
0.7
3.0
110.0
2.0
10.2
8.0
25.0
9.6
2.0
5.2
2.4
12.0
3.0
1500.0
1.8
0.1
7.5
30.0
100.0
540.0
6300.0
69.0
400.0
3.5
533.0
240.0
2900.0
100.0
0.2
600.0
4.0
1075000.0
487600.0
1242857.1
870.5
34500.0
341000.0
6337143.0
387400.0
168000.0
56042.9
12420.0
722.0
1994285.7
30700.0
121428.6
9370.0
19520.0
3380.0
4594.0
2826.0
6000.0
541.0
1620.0
12000.0
120.0
2200.0
44.0
50.2
2100.0
857.0
19000.0
1550.0
3300.0
21.0
6000.0
3229.0
3371.0
400.0
1100.0
700.0
34.0
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L.
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
RCRA
CONTAMINANT



X










X

X


X
X



X

X




X

X





-
X
TCL SARA 110
CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT
X
X
X
X

X

X

X X


X
X
X X
X
X X
X

X X
X X

X

X X

X X




X X

X X






X
PRIORITY
POLLUTANT
CONTAMINANT









X




X
X
X


X
X



X

X




X

X






X

-------
i—•
to
                CONTAMINANT
DYSPROSIUM
SCANDIUM
URANIUM
SAMARIUM
TANTALUM
PRASEODYMIUM
RUTHENIUM
LUTETIUM
NIOBIUM
GERMANIUM
ERBIUM
TUNGSTEN
INDIUM
MERCURY
ZIRCONIUM
                                                                           TABLE 3-4  (COHTIKUED)
                                                           RCRA-APP. VIII,  TCL,  SARA  110, AND  PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                          INORGANIC CONTAMINATES IN CERCLA  GROUWDWATER AT  17 SITES
MINIMUM MAXIMUM
FREQUENCY CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION
DETECTED DETECTED
- 2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
400.0
250.0
640.0
620.0
700.0
1600.0
4300.0
200.0
1543.0
320.0
410.0
1000.0
1100.0
6.0
100.0
960.0
300.0
1300.0
780.0
2740.0
1600.0
4300.0
200.0
1543.0
320.0
410.0
1000.0
1100.0
6.0
100.0
                                                                                   UNITS
                                                                               RCRA
                                                                            CONTAMINANT
                        TCL
                    CONTAMINANT
  SARA 110
CONTAMINANT
  PRIORITY
 POLLUTANT
CONTAMINANT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L

-------
                                                                                 TABLE 3-5
                                                           RCRA-APP. VIII,  TCL,  SARA 110,  AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                            INORGANIC CONTAMINATES IN CERCLA LEACHATE AT 3 SITES
U>
I
t—•
U)
                CONTAMINANT
NICKEL
SODIUM
ALUMINUM
SULFUR
IRON
SILICON
POTASSIUM
ZINC
CALCIUM
TITANIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
BORON
COPPER
MOLYBDENUM
BARIUM
LITHIUM
STRONTIUM
OSMIUM
PHOSPHORUS
VANADIUM
LEAD
IODINE
CADMIUM
COBALT
CHROMIUM
TIN
ARSENIC
TANTALUM
URANIUM
                                             MINIMUM        MAXIMUM
                           FREQUENCY   CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                                            DETECTED       DETECTED
- 3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
18.5
51750.0
140.0
7050.0
6700.0
2040.0
1010.0
70.0
4145.0
8.0
2885.0
708.0
247.0
26.0
31.0
15.0
600.0
1500.0
100.0
1285.0
32.5
108.0
2000.0
23.5
" 16.0
53.5
33.0
28.5
500.0
1000.0
1567.0
3495000.0
3515.0
471500.0
763000?. 0
6400.0
621000.0
555.0
821500.0
36.5
254000.0
12800.0
14950.0
28.9
293.0
77.0
9400.0
3150.0
100.0
118000.0
32.5
108.0
2000.0
23.5
16.0
53.5
33.0
28.5
500.0
1000.0
UNITS
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
RCRA TCL
CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT
X X
X
X
'
X

X
X
X

X
X

X

X X




X
X X

X X
X
X X

X X


PRIORITY
SARA 110 POLLUNTANT
CONTAMINANT CONTAMINANT
X ( X






X X





X







X X

X X

X X

X X



-------
                                                                                TABLE 3-6
                                                          RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL,  SARA 110,  AMD PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                       COHVEHTIONALS/NON-CONVEHTIOHALS IN GROUMDWATER AT 17 SITES
OJ
 I
            CONTAMINANT
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
TOC
NITRATE + NITRITE, AS N
FLASH POINT
AMMONIA, AS N
COO
PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL AS P
NITROGEN, TOTAL KJELDAHL
BOD
TSS
TDS
FLUORIDE
OIL & GREASE, TOTAL
RECOVERABLE
RESIDUE, FILTERABLE
CORROSIVITY
SULFIDE, TOTAL (IODOMETRIC)
NITROGEN, TOTAL KJELDEHL
CYANIDE, TOTAL
RESIDUE, NON-FILTERABLE
FLOURIDE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
                                                  MINIMUM        MAXIHUH
                                FREQUENCY   CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                                                 DETECTED       DETECTED
17
17
16
16
15
14
13
13
12
11
11
10
10
9
8
6
6
6
5
4
4
3
1
264.0
10833.0
14500.0
2180.0
51.0
0.0
158.0
30800.0
103.0
104.0
6850.0
15857.0 ..
231429.0
207.0
5000.0
180000.0
1.7
1000.0
156.0
24.3
12117.0
308.0
2467.0
17571.4
2900000.0
19428571.0
1300000.0
250042.0
57000.0
21667.0
4340000.0
12000.0
24857.0
1446000.0
2500000.0
33000000.0
250000.0
54000.0
30000000.0
92.0
28000.0
24667.0
100.0
266667.0
16500.0
2462.0
                                                   PRIORITY
UNITS      RCRA          TCL         SARA 110     POLLUTANT
        CONTAMINANT  CONTAMINANT   CONTAMINANT   CONTAMINANT
 UMH/C
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 25 DE
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L

 UG/L
 MPY
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L

-------
(jj
 I
                                                                              TABLE 3-7 .
                                                         RCRA-APP. VIII, TCL, SARA  110, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANT
                                                        CONVENTIONALS/NON-CONVENT10NALS IN LEACHATE AT 3 SITES
           CONTAMINANT
TDS
OIL & GREASE, TOTAL
RECOVERABLE
TSS
TOC
COD
SULFIDE, TOTAL (IODOMETRIC)
BOD             ,
PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL AS P
NITROGEN, TOTAL KJELDAHL
AMMONIA, AS N
FLUORIDE
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
SULFATE
NITRATE + NITRITE, AS N
FLASH POINT
CHLORIDE
                                                  MINIMUM        MAXIMUM
                                FREQUENCY   CONCENTRATION  CONCENTRATION
                                                 DETECTED       DETECTED
                                                    PRIORITY
UNITS      RCRA          TCL         SARA 110     POLLUNTANT
        CONTAMINANT  CONTAMINANT   CONTAMINANT   CONTAMINANT
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
128.5
21.0
16.5
89.0
260.0
2.0
52.0
0.4
2.1
1.6
0.7
275.0
52.0
5.5
44.0
58.0
1300.0
545.0
18500.0
3350.0
10400.0
76.0
6500.0
310.0
44.0
7.9
12.0
275.0
52".0
5.5
44.0
58.0
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L x
MG/L
UMH/C
MG/L
MG/L
DEG C
MG/L

-------
                   TABLE 3-8
NUMBER OF CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT CERCLA SITES
                                Pesticides
                                                          Semi
Site
Bridgeport
Hyde Park
Love Canal
Chemdyne
Charles George
Geneva
Gold Coast Oil
Nyanza
Reilly Tar
Stringfellow (1221)
Stringfellow (1240)
Scringfellow (1805)
Sylvester
Time Oil
Tyson's Dump
United Chrome
Verona
Well 12A
Western Processing
Whitehouse Oil
891003T
001.0.0
Discharge
Leachate
Leachate „
Leachate
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater


Oreanics
14
16
21
16
10
14
6
10
4
12
32
24
28
8
12
5
16
4
28
11


Dioxins
0
2
1
5
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
3
0
0
0
1
1
3
1
0


PCBs
2
22
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
0


Inorganics
15
15
13
12
14
19
12
19
9
22
22
20
14
9
12
20
15
7
20
21


X^ctll* UViJ-CGll
Metals
4
9
6
4
5
4
3
11
4
21
20
10
4
3
3
13
3
3
5
8


                   3-16

-------
 detected at seven and benzoic acid at six of the seventeen groundwater sites but
 were detected at all three of the leachate sites.  :In addition, pesticides
 and/or PCBs were detected at two of the three leachate sites  (Hyde Park and
 Bridgeport) whereas few pesticides and only one PCB was detected  (PCB-1232,
 detected at Geneva) at the groundwater sites.

. Detectable concentrations for organic contaminants  (including PCBs, pesticides,
 and dioxins) at groundwater sites ranged from 0.001 parts per trillion  (ppt) and
 58,017 pg/S.  (2, 3, 7, 8-TCDF, detected at Reilly Tar and tetrachloroethene,
 detected at Gold Coast Oil).  Concentrations for the organic  contaminants
 detected at the leachate sites  ranged from 3.85xlO"4 pg/& (2,3,7,8-TCDF,
 detected at Hyde Park) and 2,316,700 vg/t  (benzoic  acid, also detected at Hyde
 Park).  The  total number of organic pollutants detected ranged  from 5 to 32  at
 the groundwater sites and from  16 to 40 at the leachate sites.

 The inorganic contaminants most frequently detected at the sites  treating
 groundwater were similar tp the most frequently  detected contaminants at the
 sites  treating  leachate.  Silicon,  sodium, sulfur,  manganese, magnesium, iron,
 and calcium were detected at  all of the sites  (Tables 3-4 and 3-5).  The maximum
 concentrations  detected of  the  above listed  inorganic contaminants were
 generally  higher at  the groundwater sites  than at  the leachate  sites  (except for
 sodium,  iron, and  calcium).   The concentrations _for inorganic-contaminants  at
 the groundwater sites  ranged  from 0.05 ng/SL  (lithium, detected at Geneva)  and
 6,337,143  tig/Z  (sulphur, detected at Stringfellow).  The minimum  inorganic
 concentration detected at  the leachate  sites was 8.0 p.g/1  (titanium,  detected  at
 Bridgeport)  and the  maximum concentration detected was  3,495,000  pg/S.  (sodium,
 detected at  Hyde Park).  The  total  number of inorganic  contaminants  detected at
 the  sites  varied between  sites.  The total number of inorganics detected at
 groundwater  sites  ranged  from 10 to 43  inorganic contaminants and from 19  to 24
 at the leachate sites  (see  Table 3-8).

  3-3.1.2  Frequency of Occurrence of Contaminants on Regulatory Lists.

 Of the 345 organic contaminants (volatiles,  semi-volatiles,  pesticides,  PCBs,
  and dioxins) on the ITD list of analytes,  only 88 (approximately  26%)  were
  detected at one or more sites where groundwater is being treated (see
  Table 3-2).   Of those 88  contaminants,  approximately 63% are on the TCL,  44% are
  on the Priority Pollutant list, 59% are RCRA-listed,  and 50% are  SARA
  110-listed.   Many of the analytes on the ITD list and not on the  TCL,  RCRA,
  Priority Pollutant,  and/or SARA lists were detected at only one site.   Organic
  contaminants on the ITD list but not on the TCL that were detected at
  groundwater sites are presented in Table 3-9.   Only two of the most frequently
  occurring organic contaminants (detected at five or more sites of the seventeen
  sites sampled)  are currently on the ITD list and not on the TCL list (OCDD and
  p-dioxane).   All of the non-TCL organic contaminants detected at any site were
  detected at concentrations below 1000 pg/Jl,  with the exception of three
  contaminants; biphenyl (5,541 ng/£), aniline (1,223 pg/Z),  and
  1,2, 3-tr ichloropropane (5,668
  891003-mll
                                       3-17

-------
                                              TABLE 3-9
                                     NON-TCL ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS
                               DETECTED AT 17 CERCLA GROUNDWATER SITES
 CONTAMINANT
 P-DIOXAHE
 OCOD
 0-+P-XYLENE
 2,3,7,8-TCDF
 N,N-D1METHYLFORMAMIDE
 HEXANOIC ACID
 TOTAL HpCDD
 ANILINE
 M-DCOECANE (N-C12)
 H-XYLENE
 BIPHENYL
 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
 2,4,5-T
 0-TOLUIDINE
 2,4-D
 N-DECANE (N-C10)
 ACROLE1N
 ALPHA-PICOLINE
 ALPHA-TERPINEOL
 ACETOPHENONE
 3-CHLOROPROPENE
 2,4-DIAHINOTOLUENE
 1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE
 1,3-DICHLORO-2-PROPANOL
 TOTAL HpCOF
 2-HETHYL-4,6-DINITROPHENOL
 1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE
 N-OCTACOSANE (N-C28)
 OCDF
 DIETHYL ETHER
 P-CYHENE
 1234678-HpCDD
 TRICHLOROFLUCROHETHANE
 1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
2,4,5-TP (SILVEX)
 ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL
PHOSPHAHIDON
TEPP
FREQUENCY
6
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1 .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
13.200
0.030
12.000
0.000
68.000
35.000
0.030
20.140
10.500
18.000
11.670
0.030
136.000
15.000
150.000
14.500
63.000
52.830
11.500
87.140
13.800
112.000
20.430
23.000
0.040
174.290
5667.860
10.830
0.060
64.000
20.830
0.030
200.830
70.330
1550.000
11.400
8500.000
79000.000
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
955.000
0.520
55.570
10.850
422.000
347.000
0.120
1223.000
969.710
50.500
5541.500
0.080
1100.000
37.000
430000.000
278.140
63.000
52.830
11.500
87.140
13.800
112.000
20.430
23.000
0.040
174.290
5667.860
10.830
0.060
64.000
20.830
0.030
200.830
70.330
1550.000
11.400
8500.000
79000.000
                                                                                      UNITS
 UG/L
 PPT
 UG/L
 PPT
 UG/L
 UG/L
 PPT
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 PPT
 PPT
 UG/L
 PPT
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 PPT
 UG/L
 UG/L
 UG/L
 PPT
 UG/L
 UG/L
 PPT
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
PPT
PPT
                                           3-1.8

-------
Organic contaminants detected at the sites treating leachate (see Table 3-3)
were similar to those found at groundwater sites.  Sixty-one (approximately 18%)
organic contaminants that are ITD listed were found at detectable
concentrations.  Of the 61 organic contaminants, 48% are on the TCL, 39% are on
the Priority Pollutant list, 51% RCRA-listed, and 43% SARA 110-listed.  Most of
the contaminants that are not listed on the RCRA, TCL, Priority Pollutant, or
SARA 110 lists were detected at only one, -of the three sites, many of which were
pesticides detected at Hyde Park.  The organic contaminants on the ITD list but
not on the TCL that were detected at leachate sites are presented in Table 3-10.
Azinphos methyl, hexanoic acid, and 2,3,7,8-TCDD were the only compounds
detected at two or more of the three sites sampled that are ITD- listed but not
on the TCL.  All of the organic contaminants detected at the leachate sites that
are not on the TCL were detected at concentrations below 500 ng/£ with the
exception of pentachlorobenzene (548 /*g/-O and 1, 2, 3- tr ichlorobenzene
Of the 69 inorganic analytes of the ITD list, 56 (approximately 81%) were
detected at one or more sites treating groundwater (see Table 3-4).  Of the 56
contaminants detected, 39% are on the TCL, 21% are on the Priority Pollutant
list, 20% are RCRA-listed, and 18% are SARA 110-listed.  Most of the inorganic
parameters that are on the ITD list and not on the other three regulatory lists
were detected at more than one site.  Sulfur and silicon are not on the TCL but
were detected at all of the groundwater sites sampled.

Thirty of the 69 ITD-listed inorganic parameters (approximately 43%) were
detected at sites treating leachate (see Table 3-5).  Fifty-seven percent of the
30 are on the TCL, 23% are on the Priority Pollutant list, and 20% are RCRA and  •
SARA 110 listed.  Again, many of the inorganic parameters detected that are on
the ITD list but not on one or more of the three other regulatory lists were
detected at two or more of the three sites.  Sulfur, silicon, titanium, and
boron were detected at all three of the sites and are not on the TCL.

The only conventional and non- conventional contaminants detected in groundwater
that are on the RCRA, TCL, Priority Pollutant, and/or SARA 110 lists were
cyanide, which is listed on all four regulatory lists, and ammonia, which is
found on SARA 110 (see Table 3-6).  Cyanide was detected at four of the
seventeen sites treating groundwater and ammonia was detected at thirteen of the
seventeen sites sampled.

Of the conventional and non- conventional contaminants detected at the sites
treating leachate (see Table 3-7), ammonia was the only contaminant detected
that is listed on one of the four regulatory list (SARA 110).  The_ remaining
contaminants are not listed on RCRA, TCL, Priority Pollutant, or SARA 110.

Table 3-11 presents a summary of the total number of contaminants detected (by
class) at each specific CERCLA site sampled and the number of contaminants
detected that are on the ITD, TCL and Priority Pollutant lists.  Many of the
organic and inorganic contaminants detected that are ITD-listed are also on the
TCL.  On the average, 79% of the organics detected (not including pesticides and
PCBs) and 81% of the TCL metals are on both the TCL and ITD list.  Twelve
percent of the semi -quantitative screened metals detected are on the TCL.
891003-mll
                                     3-19

-------
                                             TABLE 3-10
                                    NON-TCL ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS --
                                DETECTED AT 3 CERCLA LEACHATE SITES
CONTAMINANT
2,3,7,8-TCDD
AZINPHOS METHYL
HEXAHOIC ACID
1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE
2,3,7,8-TCDF
ACETOPHENONE
AZINPHOS ETHYL
CHLORFEVINPHOS
CHLORPYRIFOS
CROTOXYPHOS
DIAZINON
DICHLORVOS
DICROTOPHOS
DIHETHOATE
DIOXATHION
DISULFOTON
FEHSULFOTHIOH
FENTHION
LEPTOPHOS
HALATMIOH
HEVINPHOS
H-DOCOSANE (N-C22)
N-EICOSANE (M-C20)
N-HEXADECANE (N-C16)
H-OCTADECANE (N-C18)
H-TETRADECANE (N-C14)
PARATHIOH
PENTACHLOROBENZENE
PHORATE
SULFOTEPP
TERBUFOS
TETRACHLORVINPHOS
FREQUENCY
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
. 1
1
1
1





1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
5.950
50.000
24.500
596.000
0.390
20.500
1.200
7.250
5.000
14.400
10.100
27.600
29.100
28.450
27.000
0.500
1.950
4.250
13.050
7.650
1.600
10.500
15.000
23.000
24.500
17.500
4.450
548.000
21.000
1.000
4.950
0.850
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
DETECTED
31 .620
51.700
131.000
596.000
0.390
20.500
1.200
7.250
5.000
14.400
10.100
27.600
29.100
28.450
27.000
0.500
1.950
4.250
13.050
7.650
1.600
10.500
15.000
23.000
24.500
17.500
4.450
548.000
21.000
1.000
4.950
0.850
                                                                                    UNITS
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
PPT
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
                                           3-20

-------
                                                                     TABLE 3-11
                                                 NUMBER OF  ITD, TCL, AND PRIORITY POLLUTANTS DETECTED
Semi-Quan.
Oreanic
Site
Bridgeport
Hyde Park
Love Canal
Chemdyne
Charles George
Geneva
Gold Coast Oil
Nyanza
Re illy Tar
Stringfellow (1221)
Stringfellow (1240)
^ Stringfellow (1805)
,'o Sylvester
- Time Oil
Tyson's Dump
United Chrome
Verona
Well 12A
Western Processing
Whitehouse Oil
Discharge
Leachate
Leachate
Leachate
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
ITD
14
16
21
16
10
14
6
10
4
12
32
24
28
8
12
5
16
4
28
11
TCL
8
16
18
12
7
11
5
9
3
11
25
20
23
8
8
3
14
4
17
6
PP
4
13
14
12
3
9
4
9
2
9
20
15
17
8
7
1
10
4
19
2
Dioxins
ITD
0
2
1
5
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
3
0
0
0
1
1
3
1
0
TCL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PP
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Pesticides/PCBs
ITD
2
22
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
0
TCL
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PP
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Inorganics
ITD
15
15
13
12
14
19
12
19
9
22
22
20
14
9
12
20
15
7
20
21
TCL
13
12
9
10
11
14
10
16
7
18
17
16
13
7
10
15
11
7
16
18
PP
5
5
2
4
4
5
3
7
1
9
8
7
6
1
3
6
3
1
8
9
Metals
ITD
4
9
6
4
5
4
3
11
4
21
20
10
4
3
3
13
3
3
5
8
TCL
1
1
1
\ 1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
PP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NOTES:  ITD - Industrial Technology Division Analyte
        TCL - Target Compound List
       891003T
       004.0.0

-------
 Sixty-three percent of the organics detected and 32% of the TCL metals detected
 are on the Priority Pollutant list.  No semi-quantitative screened metals are  on
 the Priority Pollutant list.

 3-3.2  Task 2;   Daily Variation in Treatability of CERCLA Site Wastewater

 For each CERCIA site where sampling occurred for more than one day,  the percent
 removal and the total removal for the system was calculated for each compound
 across each unit process each day that samples  were collected.   Sites included
 Verona,  Reilly Tar,  Stringfellow,  Sylvester,  Time Oil,  Tyson's Dump,  United
 Chrome,  Chemdyne (including both the wastewater and air data),  Well  12A,  and
 Western Processing.

 The daily variability in wastestream and air characteristics and the treatment
 efficiencies on a daily basis were assessed for the sites.   Although some
 variability existed,  the variability of the organic contaminants concentration
 and removal efficiency was low for all sites.   Contaminants  were consistently
 detected at similar  concentrations and the  removal efficiency remained fairly
 consistent across each unit process for all days.   For  example,  the
 concentration of trichloroethene,  detected  at the Verona Well Fields,  ranged
 from 506 fig/£ to 812  ng/£ for the  days of sampling;  the total removal remained
 consistent,  ranging  from 98%  to 99%.

 The variability of inorganic  parameters in  the  CERCLA. site wastestreams was also
 low at most sites.   Some of the inorganic contaminants  received little or no
 treatment,  but  the treatability remained constant.   This  is  an indication that
 the system was  not specifically designed to treat the particular contaminant
 (i.e., sodium at the  Sylvester site)  and probably is  not  a concern.   The
 inorganic data  for the Tyson's Dump site appears  to be  questionable.   The
 influent concentrations for many of the inorganic contaminants  are less than the
 final  effluent  concentrations,  resulting in negative  percent  removals.  As a
 result,  the data were considered questionable and not used for  evaluating the
 treatability of inorganic contaminants.   The  treatment  system at Tyson's  Dump
 has also been updated and improved since this sampling  event.  As a  result, any
 anomalies due to the  actual treatment system may  have been corrected.

 The variability of the conventional and non-conventional  contaminants  is
 consistently high for many of the  parameters at all of  the sites  sampled.  As
 was  discussed previously,  this  is  probably  due to variation  in  the wastestreams
 and the  low influent  concentrations  detected for  the  conventional and
 non-conventional contaminants.

 3-3.3  Task  3:   Variability at  the  Stringfellow Site

 The Stringfellow site was  sampled  three  different  times during the program; a
 one-day  sampling event  on November  3,  1987  (Episode 1221), a  five-day  sampling
 event from March 7 through 11,  1988  (Episode 1240), and a four-day sampling
 event from August 22  through  25, 1989  (Episode 1805).  The site was sampled
 three times  in order  to assess  the variability of contaminants and the treatment
process  over  an  extended period of  time.
891003-mil
                                     3-22

-------
In general, the number of contaminants detected at the site changed over time
for the organic compounds and stayed fairly consistent for the inorganics.
Thirteen  organic compounds were detected above the detection limit during
Episode 1221, 32 organic compounds were detected during Episode 1240, and 27
organic compounds were detected during Episode 1807.  The influent
concentrations and treatability of organic contaminants detected during the
three events remained fairly consistent and are summarized in Table 3-12.
Contaminants showing the most variability included 1,3-dichlorobenzene and
acetone.  The treatability of all organic contaminants detected during all
events remained high and consistent between events (i.e., greater than 90% for
most compounds).

A number of organic contaminants detected above the detection limit during the
four- and five-day events were not detected during the one-day event and are
summarized in Table 3-13.  Many of these contaminant's influent concentrations
were at levels below 1,000 ug/^K.  Exceptions to this included 2-butanone (1,500
Hg/£ and 2,817 ug/,8) and 4-methyl-2-pentanone (1,404 ng/£ and 2,767 ug/^) during
the four- and five-day events, respectively, and butylbenzyl phthalate, which
was detected only during the five-day event (1,708 ug/^).  Treatability of some
of the contaminants detected during the four- and five-day events were also
somewhat lower (less than 70% removal).  Lower removals are, however, probably
due to the lower influent concentrations detected.

Arsenic was the only TCL inorganic detected above the detection limit during the
one-day sampling event that was not detected during the four- and five-day
events.  Although the semi-quantitative screened metals varied somewhat between
events, the actual number was the same.

The influent concentrations of most of the inorganics remained fairly consistent
(i.e., within 30%).  Exceptions to this included compounds such as boron,
magnesium,, and molybdenum.  Influent concentrations decreased over time for
boron  (16,900 ug/Jl, 4,215 ug/i, and 3,034 ng/Ji) and molybdenum (512 ug/Ji,
12 ug/<8, and 100 /*g/-O and increased for magnesium  (355,000 ug/Jl,
1,242,857 ug/,8, and 1,156,000 Mg/^)•  Treatability remained fairly consistent
between sampling events.

3-3.4  Task 4:  Evaluation of Contaminant Treatabilitv

The treatability of CERCLA pollutants was evaluated by calculating the percent
removal across each unit process at each individual site.  Tables for each site
summarizing the number of contaminants, the minimum and maximum influent and
effluent concentrations for organics and inorganics, the total mass discharged
to and from the treatment system, the percent removal over each unit process,
and the total removal for the system are presented  in Attachment B.  The data
presented  in the tables are the average concentrations that were calculated, as
described previously.  Total removal for the system was not calculated for the
Stringfellow site since two different streams were  combined mid-way through the
system and flow information was not available.
 891003-mll
                                      3-23

-------
                                   TABLE 3-12

                        ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT
                        ALL THREE STRINGFELLOW SAMPLING
                                     EVENTS
     Compound

 1,2-Dichlorobenzene
 1,3-Dichlorobenzene
 1,4-Dichlorobenzene
 Acetone
 Chlorobenzene
 Chloroform
 Isophorone
 Methylene Chloride
 Trichloroethene
                                        Influent Cone.  (ug/l)/GAC% Removal*
   1221

 3,985/99
   123/90
 1,077/96
14,116/96
 1,264/97
 1,000/96
 1,910/99
 3,571/99
 8,020/99
   1240

 3,624/99
   155/89
 1,432/97
19,420/97
 1,469/97
   945/97
 1,782/99
 1,860/99
8,369/>99
  1807

4,742/99
  403/60
1,451/96
5,006/97
1,515/97
  970/97
1,027/99
2,415/98
6,847/99
*GAC - Granular Activated Carbon
891003T-mll
                                   3-24

-------
                                  TABLE 3-13
                      ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS NOT DETECTED
                         DURING SAMPLING EPISODE 1221
    Compound

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2-Butanone
2-Chlorophenol
2-Hexanone
2-Methyl-4, 6-Dinitrophenol
2-Nitrophenol
4-Me thy1-2-Pentanone
4-Nitrophenol
Acetophenone
Benzene
Benzyl Alcohol
Benzene
Bis(2-EthyIhexy1)phthalate
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Ethylbenzene
Isobutyl Alcohol
M-Xylene
Napthalene
N,N-Dimethylformamide
N-Decane
N-Dodecane
0- + P-Xylene
OCDD
P-Dioxane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Total HpCDD
Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
                                       Influent Cone.  (ug/D/GAC % Removal*
  1240

   91/17
  436/22
2,817/93
   88/25

  174/26
  174/59
2,767/92
  447/61
   87/29

   90/65
  105/23
1,708/<1
  106/59
  118/73
  165/77
  278/23
  970/53
  357/
-------
 Tables  sumarizing the  treatment efficiency of  the various unit processes at the
 sites sampled are presented in Attachment  C.   The tables present  the pollutant,
 treatment technology,  matrix (groundwater  or leachate), effluent  concentration,
 and the site  episode number.   The  data  is  divided according to the  influent
 concentration range  (i.e.,  0-100 ng/£,  100-1,000 ng/Ji, 1,000-10,000 pg/Jl,
 10,000-100,000,  and  >100,000 ng/Jl) .   The organic compounds evaluated include
 those pollutants in  the  top 25% of those most  frequently detected at the sites
 sampled and are  presented in Table C-l.

 The top 25% most frequently occurring inorganics plus  six additional compounds
 are presented in Table C-2.   The additional inorganic  compounds were added to
 include more  priority  pollutants in the evaluation.  Since air stripping and
 granular activated carbon are not  typically used to treat inorganic contaminants
 in  wastewater, these technologies  were not evaluated for the inorganic
 pollutants.

 3-3.4.1  Treatability  of Inorganic  Contaminants.  The  inorganic contaminants
 that were analyzed for are  presented in Section 9, Table 9-4, to  show the two
 groups  the inorganic contaminants were divided into for analysis; the inorganics
 that are included on the CERCLA Target Compound List (TCL) and the
 semi-quantitative screened inorganics.

 In  general, treatment  of inorganic  contaminants was effective for sites where
 chemical precipitation was  a component of  the  treatment system (Stringfellow,
 Sylvester,  United Chrome,  and Western Processing).  These systems were designed
 to  treat metals  since  the concentrations were  generally higher at those sites
 compared to sites that did  not use  precipitation.  Chemical precipitation
 achieved treatment levels,  on the  average,  greater than 75% for many of the TCL
 and priority pollutant inorganics detected at  these sites.  Removal was often
 higher  (greater  than 90%) at  concentrations greater than 100 ng/A.  The metals
 listed  on the semi-quantitative list (see  Section 9, Table 9-4) showed slightly
 lower treatment  levels (averaged less than 55%).  In addition,  calcium, sodium,
 and tin showed low levels of  treatment at  all  of the sites sampled.

 3-3.4.2   Treatability  of Organic Contaminants.   Treatment systems at the CERCLA
 sites varied from site to site,  depending  on the,type of contaminants present.
Activated carbon and air stripping were the primary treatment technologies used
 at  the  sites to  treat  organic  contaminants.  Activated carbon was used at five
 of  the  sites  (Stringfellow, Reilly Tar,  Love Canal,  Time Oil,  and Bridgeport).
Air  stripping was  used at Sylvester, Tyson's Dump, Chemdyne,  and Well 12A.
 Carbon adsorption followed by  air stripping was used at the Verona Well Fields,
and  air stripping followed by  carbon adsorption was used at Western Processing.
The  treatment of organic contaminants using these systems was generally
effective at the  sites that were sampled since most of the concentrations of
organic contaminants detected  in the influent were reduced to the detection
limits.

In order  to evaluate the effectiveness of  the organic treatment systems, the
removal efficiency of compounds treated with air stripping and the removal
891003-mil
                                     3-26

-------
efficiency of compounds treated using carbon adsorption were compared for
contaminants detected at more than one site.  In general, activated carbon was
slightly more effective for treating volatile organic compounds at the CERCLA
sites sampled, although both carbon and air stripping showed removal
efficiencies greater than 90%.   The influent concentrations discharged to the
carbon adsorption units were, however,  often higher than the influent
conc'entrations discharged to the air stripper; higher influent concentrations
often result in relatively higher removal efficiencies.

Activated carbon was typically the technology used to treat semi-volatile
contaminants and was again effective for reducing contaminant concentrations to
their detection limits.

Carbon adsorption followed by air stripping was used at the Verona Well Fields.
For most organic contaminants,  carbon adsorption alone effectively treated the
site wastewater (total removal did not increase substantially after the stream
was treated using air stripping).  However, for a few volatile organics
(1,1,1-trichloroethane, acetone, and trans-l,2-dichloroethene) treatment with
air stripping did increase the level of treatment.

Air stripping followed by chemical precipitation and carbon adsorption was used
at Western Processing.  Of the organic contaminants detected above the detection
limit at the site, removal due to carbon adsorption increased for approximately
50% of the compounds.   The percent removal due to carbon ranged from 1%
(benzene) and 83% (trichloroethene).   In general, removal due to carbon
adsorption was observed for both volatile and semi-volatile compounds.  However,
most compounds that were not treated by carbon adsorption were semi-volatiles
that were already effectively removed using only air stripping (i.e.,
2-nitrophenol, 4-nitrophenol, and phenol) or were removed by air stripping as
well as by chemical precipitation (e.g.,  benzoic acid, o-cresol, isophorone,
etc.).

3-3.5  Task 5:  Comparison of CERGLA Site Treatability Data to Data in the ORD
Treatability Data Base

Table 3-14 presents a summary comparison of the treatability of selected
frequently occurring compounds detected at the CERCLA sites to data in the ORD
Treatability Data Base.  The contaminant, treatment technology, ORD influent
concentration range in which the CERCLA influent falls,  the CERCLA site percent
removal, and the ORD percent removal are presented in the table.  The type of
wastestream treated is defined in the ORD data base by the "Source Matrix"
(i.e.,  groundwater, industrial, domestic, etc.).  The wastestreams at the CERCLA
sites sampled were either groundwater or leachate.  Therefore, since data in the
ORD data base were limited for some compounds that were treated in either a
groundwater or leachate wastestream,  percent removal data from the ORD data base
was evaluated for industrial flow, hazardous leachate, superfund waste, and/or
groundwater (rather than evaluating only data for groundwater or hazardous
leachate), depending on the data that were available.  Section 13 of this
Treatability Manual presents the ORD data base.
891003-mll
                                     3-27

-------
                                  TABLE 3-14
            COMPARISON OF CERCLA SITE TREATABILITY DATA TO DATA IN
                          ORD TREATABILITY DATA BASE
CONTAMINANT
Trichloroethene






Trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene






Methylene
Chloride






Benzene





1,1,2,2-
Tetra-
chloroethene

Zinc


Nickel


TECHNOLOGY
Air Str.
Air Str.
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon + Air Str.
Air Str. + Carbon

Air Str.
Air Str.
Air Str.
Air Str.
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon + Air Str.

Act SI.
Air Str.
Air Str.
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon + Air Str.
Air Str. + Carbon
Act SI.
Air Str.
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon + Air Str.
Air Str. + Carbon


Air Str.
Carbon
Precip .
Precip .
Precip .
Precip .


CERCLA
INFL. CONG.
RANGE (ue/t)
0-100
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
1000-10,000
100-1000
1000-10,000

0-100
100-1000
1000-10,000
0-100
0-100
100-1000
100-1000

0-100
0-100
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
0-100
0-100
0-100
100-1000
0-100
1000-10,000
0-100
0-100


0-100
1000-10,000
0-100
100-1000
10,000-100,000
100-1000
1000-10,000
10,000-100,000
CERCLA
PERCENT
REMOVAL
50-83
94-96
83
95-98
98->99.9
99
99

12
94-97
95
84
9-32
94-98
88

60
29-74
91
25-64
99
46
88
46
93
60
>99
60
60


54-68
98->99
1.0
87
>99.9
78
93-99
>99
ORD
PERCENT
REMOVAL
87-99.68
87-99.9
98.6->98.8
>95.8->99.36
>99.46
No data
No data

No data
No data
>99.9
No data
No data
>92.5
No data

>77-92
No data
99
No data
>94.4->99
No data
No data
>89.6
99.09->99.74
No data
>99.28
No data
>90.9


No data
>99.11
No data
96.7
. 99.932
No data
58-93.4
84-99.52
891003T
003.0.0
                                    3-28

-------
                                  TABLE 3-14
                                  (continued)
            COMPARISON OF CERCIA SITE TREATABILITY DATA TO DATA IN
                          ORD TREATABILITY DATA BASE
CONTAMINANT
Boron
-
Cadmium
*TECHNOLOGY
Act. SI.
Precip .
Precip .
Precip .
Precip .
Carbon
Precip.
Precip.
Carbon
CERCLA
INFL. CONG.
RANGE (ug/Jl)
100-1000
100-1000
1000-10,000
XLOO.OOO
100-1000
XLO.OOO
100-1000
1000-10,000
0-100
CERCLA
PERCENT
REMOVAL
12
24-86
2-71
76
0-45
9
99
99->99.9
11-23
ORD
PERCENT
REMOVAL
No data
No data
69
No data
No data
No data
No data
99.31
No data
*Technology Key: Air Str.
                 Act. SI.
                 Carbon
                 Precip.
- Air Stripping
- Activated Sludge
- Granular Activated Carbon
- Chemical Precipitation
891003T
003.1.0.0
                                    3-29

-------
In most Instances, treatabllity at the CERCIA sites compares closely to the data
found in the ORD data base for the technologies and concentration ranges where
data were available.  Many of the CERCIA percent removals are in the range or
close to the range of data in the ORD data base which indicates that the removal
efficiencies of treatment technologies at CERCIA sites are similar to those of
industrial waste treatment facilities.

Data at various concentration ranges for specific technologies were unavailable
or limited for some compounds (trans-1,2-dichloroethene, methylene chloride,
benzene, zinc, boron, and cadmium).  In addition, data for the treatability of
phenol, acetone, and benzoic acid for the concentration ranges and technologies
observed at the CERCIA sites were unavailable in the ORD data base.

3-3.6  Task 6;  Evaluation of Chemdyne Air Sampling Data

Air sampling at the Chemdyne site was performed in order to evaluate air
emission concentrations relative to wastewater concentrations and to evaluate
process efficiency ratings.  A description of the sample locations, data
reduction, the treatment efficiency of the vapor phase activated carbon unit,
and the results of the,mass balance of the air stripper are presented in
subsequent sections.

3-3.6.1  Sample Point Description.  The treatment process at the Chemdyne
facility consists of one air stripper.  Air emitted from the stripping tower is
treated using vapor phase activated carbon since the wastewater at the site is
primarily contaminated with volatile organic compounds.  The average wastewater
flow through the system is 750 gpm and flows into an airstream flowing at
approximately 7,212 cubic feet per minute (ft3/min).

Air samples from the system were collected over a,three day period.  Samples
were taken at the carbon scrubber inlet and outlet simultaneously to determine
the carbon scrubber efficiency.  In addition, one sample was collected at the
intake of the stripper, one blank (ambient air) sample was collected, and a
duplicate was collected at the carbon scrubber inlet and outlet.  Each sample
was analyzed for the list of 41 priority pollutants (based on previous
wastewater sampling results) presented in Table 3-15.  The air samples were
analyzed using Method T014 in EPA's Compendium of Methods for the Determination
of Toxic Compounds in Ambient Air, modified to detect all of the compounds
presented in Table 3-15.

3-3.6.2  Data Reduction.  To evaluate the analytical data, it was assumed that
the air stripping process was leak tight (i.e., air enters through one duct and
exits through one duct).  Secondly, air entering the air stripping process was
considered clean for mass balance purposes.

To evaluate the air sampling data, the concentrations detected at each sample
point over the three day sampling event were averaged.  The duplicate samples
taken at the carbon scrubber inlet and outlet were included in the average.  The
averaged data was then reduced so that the emission concentrations relative to
the wastewater concentrations could be compared.
891003-mil
                                     3-30

-------
                                    TABLE 3-15

                        VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND LIST FOR
                  AIR SAMPLE ANALYSIS  USING GC-MS METHOD OF TO-14
                           Dichlorodifluoromethane
                           Methyl Chloride
                           1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane
                           Vinyl Chloride
                           Methyl bromide
                           Ethyl chloride
                           Trichlorofluoromethane
                           Methylene  Chloride
                           1,1-Dichloroethene
                           1,1,2:Trichloro-l,2,2-Trifluoroethane
                           1,1-Dichloroethane
                           cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
                           Chloroform
                           1,2-Dichloroethane
                           1,1,1-Trichloroethane
                           Benzene
                           Carbon  Tetrachloride
                           1,2-Dichloropropane
                           Trichloroethene
                           cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
                           trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
                           1,1,2-Trichloroethane
                           Toluene
                           1,2-Dibromoethane
                           Tetrachloroethene
                           Chlorobenzene
                           E thyIb enz ene
                           m-Xylene
                           p-Xylene
                           Styrene
                           1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
                           o-Xylene
                           1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
                           1,2,4-TrimethyIbenzene
                           m-Dichlorobenzene
                           Benzyl  chloride
                           o-Dichlorobenzene
                           p-Dichlorobenzene
                           1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
                           Hexachlorobutadiene
                            1,2-trans-Dichloroethene
891003T-mll
                                       3-31

-------
 The mass balance on the air stripper was performed using a wastewater flow rate
 of 750 gpm and an air flow rate of 7,212 ft3/min.   The wastewater flow is  an
 approximate rate for the period during which sampling occurred.  The air flow
 rate was calculated using the measured air velocity through the  stripper and  the
 area of the stripper.  Although a three day average was  calculated  and used in
 the mass balance,  system anamolies can effect the  velocity and cause it  to
 fluctuate within plus or minus 10%.

 Prior to evaluating the air data,  the field blank  (ambient air), laboratory
 canister blanks,  and air intake data were analyzed to determine  that field or
 laboratory contamination were not contributing to  the analytical sample  data.
 All concentrations detected in both the field blank and  canister blanks  were
 below the detection limit.

 Some compounds were detected in the sample collected at  the intake  of the
 stripper.   The concentrations detected were,  however,  low (i.e., less than 1
 fig/S. after reducing,  as described previously)  and  were therefore considered
 negligible.

 3-3.6.3  Treatment Efficiency and Mass Balance.  The treatment efficiency  of  the
 vapor phase activated carbon system was evaluated  and is  summarized in Table  3-
 16.   The compound,  carbon scrubber inlet and outlet concentrations,  and  percent
 removal are presented.   Although the percent removal for  many 'of the compounds
 was  low (less  than 60%) many of the  contaminants were treated to their detection
 limits.   In many cases, the low percent removals are therefore probably  due to
 low influent concentrations rather than low efficiency.   In addition to  low
 influent concentrations,  low removal efficiencies  could also be  attributed to
 system anamolies,  or  the fact that a particular compound  is not  effectively
 treated using  carbon  (i.e.,  vinyl  chloride).

 The  results  of the  mass balance of the air stripper for those contaminants
 detected in the wastewater  are summarized in Table  3-17.   The raw wastewater
 concentration  entering  the  stripper,  the wastewater air stripper effluent,  the
 concentration  emitted from  the air stripper,  and the total mass  recovered  .(air
 stripper effluent plus  air  stripper  emission)  are presented.  A mass  balance
 within 20% was achieved for many of  the compounds  (1,1-dichloroethane,
 trichloroethene, 1,1,2-trichloroethane,  chlorobenzene, and  1,1,2,2-
 tetrachloroethane).   However,  the  mass  recovered of the remaining compounds was
 significantly  different than the mass  discharged to  the air stripping system.
 Factors  possibly contributing to the discrepencies  include both the  air  and
 wastewater flow rates (which can fluctuate plus or minus,  ten percent), a high
 relative humidity,  fluctuations  in air  temperature  and pressure throughout  the
 day, and analytical variations.

 3-3.7  Task  7:  Comparison  of Indicator Parameter Treatability to Organic
 Contaminant  Treatability

An attempt was made to  evaluate  the  removal efficiency for various organic
 contaminants by comparing the  removal efficiency of  specific organic
 contaminants at a site  to the various indicator parameters for the site  (i.e.,
biological oxygen demand and chemical oxygen demand).  It was;  however, not
891003-mll
                                     3-32

-------
                                    TABLE 3-16

                           VAPOR PHASE ACTIVATED CARBON
                               TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
Scrubber1 .^

Compound
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1- Dichloroethene
1,1,2-Trichloro-
1,2, 2 -Trif luoroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroe thane
Cis - 1 , 2 -Dichloroethene
Chloroform
1, 2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 , 1 -Trichloroethane
Benzene
Trichloroethane
1,1, 2 -Trichloroethane
Toluene
Tetrachloroethene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
P-Xylene
1,1,2, 2 -Tetrachloroe thane
0-Xylene
1,3, 5 -Trimethylbenzene
1 , 2 , 4-Trimethylbenzene
1,2- trans -Dichloroethene
Inlet
(uz/X)
4.8
1.40

0.06
0.30
6.39
0.16
0.39
0.09
0.95
2.44
3.13
0.15
2.23
0.40
1,53
2.10
0.78
0.10
0 . 09
0.21
0.54
Scrubber1-2
Outlet
(ue./£)
6.2
1.5

0.08U
0.30
6.30
0.15
0.35
0.07
0.42
1.50
0.30
0.07U
0.07U
0.07U
0.07U
0.07U
0.07U
0.07U
0.07U
0.07U
0.56

Percent
Removal
<1
<1

<1
0
1
6
10
22
56
39
90
>53
>97
>83
>95
>97
>91
>30
>22
>67

Represents  concentrations  detected in air  samples  that have been  reduced  for
 comparison to wastewater samples.

2U indicates the compound was  analyzed for  but  not  detected.  The  minimum
 detection limit for the sample is reported (e.g.,  0.07U).
891003T-mll
                                       3-33

-------
                                      TABLE 3-17




                              AIR STRIPPER MASS BALANCE


Compound
Vinyl Chloride
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
Benzene
Trichloroethene
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Chlo rob enz ene
Ethylbenzene
0- + P-Xylene

Raw Water
dbs/dav")
0.53
0.45
0.63
0.34
0.41
2.03
2.20
4.00
0.31
0.30
0.35
1,1, 2, 2-Tetrachloroethane 0.77
Trans-l,2-Dichloroethene
2.06
Air ^Stripper
Effluent
abs/davl
0.09
0.09
0.16
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.29
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.08
0.35
0.09
Air Stripper1
Emission
(Ibs/davl
3.11
0.91
0.19
0.25
0.62
1.58
2.03
1.45
0.26
0.99
1.43
0.51
0.35
Total Mass
Recovered
dbs/day")
3.20
1.00
0.35
0.34
0.71
1.67
2.32
1.54
0.35
1.08
1.52
0.86
0.44
      the Vapor Phase Activated Carbon Scrubber Inlet.
891003T-mll
                                  3-34

-------
possible to compare the indicator parameters to organic contaminants due to the
low and inconsistent influent and effluent concentrations of the indicator
parameters .  The concentrations of both the influent and effluent at all of the
sites were typically low and the effluent concentration was often slightly
greater than the influent.  As a result, overall percent removal of many of the
indicator parameters was either low or negative and inconsistent between sites,
which made it impossible to compare to organic compound removal efficiencies.
3-4.0  CONCLUSIONS

In general, the CERCLA sites sampled are providing high levels of treatment to
most inorganic and organic contaminants detected at the sites.  Chemical
precipitation effectively treats most inorganic contaminants and both air
stripping and carbon adsorption individually provide effective removals of
organic contaminants.  Many of the contaminants are being treated to their
detection limits prior to discharge.  In addition, in those cases where the
discharge is to a POTW, the CERCLA wastewater discharge volumes and contaminant
concentrations are typically low relative to the total POTW treatment volume and
contaminant loading.  It is therefore possible, that in those cases where the
discharge is to a POTW, the predicted treatment potential of the POTW is not
fully used.  This is emphasized by the treatability data in the ORD treatability
data base which indicated that biological treatment, the technology used at a
majority of POTWs, is effective for organics at concentrations between 0 and
100 ng/£ (for those compounds evaluated) .
The day-to-day contaminant levels and treatment effectiveness in the
wastestreams at sites sampled for more than one day was generally consistent for
organics as well as inorganic contaminants.  The inorganic data from Tyson's
dump is, however, an exception since the influent concentration for many of the
inorganic parameters was consistently lower than the effluent concentration.
The data is therefore questionable and should not be used as an indication of
the removal efficiency of inorganic contaminants .

The wastestreams at the CERCLA sites sampled varied in contamination type, the
ranges of concentrations , and the actual number of contaminants detected at each
site.  The most frequently occurring contaminants detected at all of the sites
(both groundwater and leachate) were conventional and non- conventional
pollutants, which is to be expected.  The most frequently occurring inorganic
parameters detected at the sites treating groundwater and at the sites  treating
leachate were similar (zinc, sodium, manganese, boron, iron, and calcium).  The
organic parameters, however, varied somewhat between sites.  Inorganic
contaminant concentrations ranged from 8 fig/A to 3,495,000 ng/S. at leachate
sites and from 0.05 H&/H to  6,337,143 ng/Ji at groundwater sites.  Organic
pollutants ranged from 3.85  x 10"4 to 2,316,700 ng/Jt at leachate sites and
10"6 pg/Jl to 58,017  MS/-2 at groundwater sites.   The actual number of organic and
inorganic contaminants detected above the detection limit at individual sites
ranged from 35 to 65 at  leachate sites and 17 to 74 at groundwater sites.
 891003-mil
                                      3-35

-------
AH of the  samples  collected  from each of the CERC1A sites were analyzed for the
full ITD list of 443  organic  and inorganic analytes.  A summary of the percent
of ITD analytes detected at the sites and, of those compounds detected, the
percent on  the RCRA Appendix  VIII, TCL, SARA 110, and Priority Pollutant
contaminant lists is  presented in Table 3-18.

Many of the organic contaminants detected at the leachate sites that are not on
the TCL were pesticides.  This explains the low percentage of organics detected
at the leachate sites that are not on the TCL.  In addition, most organic
contaminants that are not on  the TCL and were detected at the leachate and
groundwater sites were detected at low concentrations (less than 500 /Jg//8 and
1,000 ng/£, respectively).

Of the inorganic parameters detected that are not on the TCL, most were the
semi-quantitative screened metals.  Approximately 81% of the ITD list metals
detected are on the TCL whereas only 12% of the semi-quantitative screened
metals were on the  TCL.  Overall, the number of both organic and inorganic
contaminants detected at the  CERCLA sites was much lower than the compounds
analyzed for from the ITD List (345 organics and 69 inorganics).

In general, concentrations of organic and inorganic contaminants at the
Stringfellow site stayed fairly consistent.  The concentrations for most
contaminants in both  classes  of compounds did not fluctuate substantially and
the treatability of many contaminants remained high (i.e., greater than 90%)
during all  events.

The treatment efficiency of the vapor phase activated carbon system at the
Chemdyne site was low (less than 60%) for many of the contaminants.  Many
contaminants were,  however, treated to their detection limits which indicates
that low percent removals were probably due to low influent concentrations
rather than low efficiencies.

The mass balance of the Chemdyne air stripper was within 20% for many compounds.
Differences in mass recovered from the mass discharged to the system was
probably due to various factors including discrepencies in the air and
wastewater  flow rates, a high relative relative humidity,  fluctuations in air
temperature and pressure, and analytical variations.

It was not possible to compare the removal efficiencies of organic contaminants
to the removal efficiency of  indicator parameters due to the low influent and
effluent concentrations detected for the indicator parameters.
891003-mil
                                     3-36

-------
                                  TABLE 3-18
                      PERCENTAGE OF CONTAMINANTS DETECTED
                         FROM VARIOUS REGULATORY LISTS
Groundwater
Leachate
organic
inorganic

organic
inorganic
 Percent of
 ITD Listed
Contaminants
  Detected

    26%
    81%

    18%
    43%
                                              Percent of Contaminants Detected
                                                on Various Regulatory Lists
                                                                      Priority
                                                      TCL    SARA    Pollutant
59%
20%

51%
20%
63%
39%

48%
57%
50%
18%

43%
20%
44%
21%

39%
23%
891003T
006.0.0
                                    3-37

-------

-------
                                ATTACHMENT A
                              SITE  DESCRIPTIONS
891003-mil

-------

-------
                       BRIDGEPORT RENTAL - EPISODE 1222
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Bridgeport Rental and Oil Services (BROS) site is located on Cedar Swamp
Road at the divergence of Route 130 and 1-295 in Logan Township, Gloucester
County, NJ, approximately one mile east of the Town of Bridgeport, NJ and about
2 miles south of the Delaware River.  The total area of the site is about
30 acres.  The site includes a tank farm and a 12.7 acre lagoon that contains
waste oil and wastewater.  The-area surrounding the BROS facility is
predominately rural and agricultural.

The BROS lagoon began to form in the 1940's when dumping of waste oil into a
sand and gravel excavation was initiated.  From the 1940's to present, the
lagoon increased in size from 0.54 acres to 12.7 acres as various liquids and
oil accumulated.  Presently the lagoon is 21 feet deep in some locations and the
bottom 13 feet of lagoon contents are in contact with the groundwater.  The
lagoon contents consist of a layer of surface oil and scum 1 to 2 feet thick, a
middle aqueous layer approximately 10 feet thick, and a bottom layer of oily
sludge.  Review of analytical data from the middle of the aqueous layer
indicated only low levels of contamination with 10-15 pollutants.

Remedial efforts at the BROS site have been divided into three separate contract
phases.  Phase I consists of removal of all tanks and waste associated with the
tank farm and removal and on-site treatment of the aqueous phase liquid from the
lagoon.  Phase I began in the summer of 1987 and is projected to be completed by
the end of 1987.  Operation of the wastewater treatment system began only a few
weeks prior to this site visit.

The second contract, projected to cover approximately three years, includes  L
removal and disposal of nonaqueous waste from the lagoon by either on-site or
off-site incineration and the final  lagoon closure (backfill and revegetate).  A
third contract will include an RI/FS for the purpose of determining the most
cost effective groundwater cleanup approach.

The present on-site treatment system for aqueous waste was designed by TAMS and
constructed by the U.S. Army Corps,  of Engineers (COE).  The system includes
oil/water  separation, flocculation and sedimentation with chemical addition,
dissolved  air flotation, multi-media filtration, and granular activated carbon
filtration.  The treated wastewater  is discharged to Little Timber Creek.
Separated  oil will be disposed of in the same manner as the oil removed from the
lagoon.  The system is projected to  be used  for  treatment of aqueous phase
liquids  encountered during cleanup  of buried drums, incidental maintenance
pumping, and future groundwater cleanup.

Two previous removal  actions to lower the  liquid level of the lagoons before COE
involvement, included pumping of the aqueous phase liquid through a mobile
activated  carbon treatment  system.
 4-90-61
 Page 1

-------

-------
                         CHARLES GEORGE - EPISODE 1309
                                SITE DESCRIPTION
The Charles George Land Reclamation Trust  (CGLRT) site is an inactive municipal
and industrial waste landfill, located on  approximately 63 acres in the
southwestern corner of Tyngsborough, Massachusetts, and on seven adjoining acres
in the neighboring town of Dunstable.  The site is in Middlesex County, about
60 miles northwest of Boston, Massachusetts, and 4 miles south of Nashua, New
Hampshire.

The landfill is bordered on the north and  northwest of Blodgett-Cummings Road
and the Tyngsborough-Dunstable town boundary, on the east by the U.S. Route 3,
on the south by the Cannongate II  condominium complex, and on the west by
Dunstable Road.

In the mid- to late 1950s, on-site waste disposal activities began near the
intersection of Dunstable and Blodgett-Cummings roads.  The site served as the
Tyngsborough municipal dump, operated by a private contractor until 1973.  The
site was acquired by Charles George, Sr.,  in 1967, and by CGLRT in 1971.  In
1973, the Massachusetts DWPC issued CGLRT  a permit to accept hazardous waste
(USEPA, 1985).

In 1976, the Town of Tyngsborough  authorized the CGLRT to extend the landfill to
'the east, expanding its area from  38 to 63 acres" (NUS, 1986).  In 1977, COM
designed a clay liner for the landfill to  prevent downward migration of leachate
in the site's eastern and central  portions.  Previous investigations found, no
record of actual construction of a liner  (NUS-RAMP, November 1983).

Hazardous wastes, including drummed and bulk VOCs and toxic metal sludges, were
known to have been disposed on-site from January 1973 to June 1976.  The
quantity and burial locations of discarded wastes are not known.  According to
the preliminary RI report, CGLRT violated  DEQE  regulations from 1978 to 1982
(NUS, 1986).  VOCs were found in 1982 at water  supply wells serving the
Cannongate condominium complex, located  approximately 800 feet southeast of the
landfill.  The DEQE closed these wells in  July  1982.  A temporary, aboveground
pipeline was installed to supply water to  the complex.  This water line froze
during December 1982.  In 1983, the Massachusetts Attorney General, acting for
the DEQE, suspended use of the site as a landfill  (USEPA, 1985).

.Two RODs  concerning the CGLRT have been  issued  by USEPA, one in December 1983
and the other  in July 1985.  To address  Operable Unit I, the USEPA installed a
temporary insulated pipeline under the ROD issued on December 29, 1983.  A
permanent waterline connecting the complex to the Lowell municipal water supply
was required in the 1983 ROD.  Under  this  ROD,  the waterline may also  serve as a
water supply to a limited number of private  residences  in the
Cannongate-Dunstable Road area,  if necessary.

In 1983 and 1984, USEPA contracted for the installation of a .security  fence
around portions of the landfill, regraded part  of  the landfill,. placed a soil
cover over exposed refuse, and  installed 12  gas vents.  Explorations during the
 4-90-61
 Page 2

-------
1984 preliminary RI disclosed the need for on-site source control measures.   The
objectives of Operable Unit II were addressed and a source control
recommendation was presented in a subsequent source-oriented FS (NUS,  1985).   As
a result, USEPA issued their second ROD on July 11, 1985, to install a flexible
membrane cap over the landfill surface, a leachate collection system,  and
additional gas vents as primary contaminant source-control measures.  Operable
Units III and IV are being addressed through a USEPA contract to Ebasco
initiated in June 1986.
4-90-61
Page 3

-------
                             CHEMDYNE-EPISODE 1807
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Chem-Dyne site is located in a northern section within the limits of the
City of Hamilton, Ohio.  The site is bounded by a residential district, a
municipal park, the Ford Hydraulic Canal which flows to the Great Miami River,
and a railroad right-of-way adjacent to a sheet metal fabrication plant.

The Chem-Dyne site is believed to have begun receiving hazardous substances as
early as 1974.  Additionally, Spray-Dyne, an affiliated company, produced ^~
antifreeze solution on-site by recycling chemical wastes and using virgin
chemicals.  By 1976, Chem-Dyne was a rapidly growing corporation specializing
in storage, recycling, and disposing a wide variety of industrial chemical
waste.  Chem-Dyne sold chemical fuels produced by mixing chemical wastes in
bulk storage tanks, open containers, and gravel-lined loading docks.  Other
wastes were stored in drums and tanks (including at least one old leaking
railroad tank car) in buildings and outdoors.

In five years of operation, the facility accepted waste from approximately 200
generators.  Materials handled included pesticides and pesticide residues,
chlorinated hydrocarbons, solvents, waste oils, plastics and resins, poly-
brominated biphenyls, polychlorinated biphenyls, flame retardants, acids and
caustics, heavy metal and cyanide sludges, and package laboratory chemicals,.
More than 300,000 drums and 300,000 gallons of bulk materials were on-site when
Chem-Dyne ceased operations.

Chem-Dyne operations resulted in uncontrolled releases of hazardous materials.
Mixing of liquid wastes was often done in open gravel-lined pits, releasing
noxious vapors into the atmosphere, and contaminating soil and groundwater.
Reportedly, 55-gallon drums were punctured and were allowed to leak,, or were'
dumped on the  ground and into troughs and sewers.  Wastes were frequently
spilled, and  at one time, a  large pool of waste reportedly covered one portion
of the site surface.

A number of environmental incidents were reported at the Chem-Dyne facility
during its operation,  including at  least five fish kills, a series of  fires,
many odor complaints,  and a  fuming  railroad tank car incident caused by improp-
er mixing of  chemical wastes.  Legal actions resulting from Chem-Dyne's han-
dling of wastes  resulted in  settlements with which Chem-Dyne did not comply.
Eventually, court  action forced Chem-Dyne to stop operations, remove wastes
from the site, and clean up  suspected soil and groundwater contamination.

The Chem-Dyne facility ceased operation  in January  1980 when the state of  Ohio
named a  receiver to  assume operations and respond to the problems at Chem-Dyne.
In  1981, the  receivership ran short of  funds to continue waste  removal from  the
site and stopped operation.  USEPA  began removal actions and initiated a  site
remedial  investigation (RI)  and feasibility  study  (FS)  in March  1982.   Poten-
tially responsible parties  (PRPs),  generators of wastes  left on-site,  were also
identified and contacted to  remove  wastes and negotiate  cleanup  contributions.
 6.90.22
 0001.0.0

-------
As a result of the initial cleanup operations, all containerized surface waste
has not been removed from the site, and an RI and FS have been completed.  The
RI indicated extensive soil contamination by priority pollutant acids and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), several of which are considered carcinogens.
Inorganic chemicals, semivolatile organic compounds, and pesticides were found
in the upper three feet of soils at the site while VOCs were found mainly in
the upper six feet of soil.

A hydrogeological investigation and chemical analyses of groundwater samples
conducted as part of the RI indicated that a contaminant consisting primarily
of VOCs is present in groundwater near the site and has the potential to affect
receptors in the near future.  Aquifer characteristics suggest that, plume
contaminants could be taken in by a number of industrial production wells
located within a one-mile radius, resulting in near-term exposures due to
volatilization of contaminants within these industrial facilities from the use
of contaminated water.  The city of Hamilton's contamination of drinking water
would result in long-term exposures due to contamination of the drinking water
supply.

RI sampling and observation also indicated extensive contamination of some of
the utilities and buildings on-site which present a future source of soil and
groundwater contamination and pose a current threat from direct contact or air
exposure.

The FS developed and evaluated remedial action alternatives to address environ-
mental problems as identified in the site RI.  USEPA issued a
Record-of-Decision (ROD) on July 5, 1985, documenting the selection of a
remedial action alternative which has since been implemented.  Remediation
includes source control measures and groundwater extraction, treatment by air
stripping, clarification, and vapor-phase carbon adsorption for air stripping
offgas discharge in part to the aquifer to increase the efficiency of the
extraction system and also to the Ford Canal.
6.90.22
0002.0.0

-------
                            GENEVA  - EPISODE 1224
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Geneva Industries site is a. 13.5 acre tract located at 9334 Caniff Road in
Houston, Texas immediately adjacent to the limits of the city of South Houston.
The site is within one mile of Interstate Highway 45 and within two miles of
William P. Hobby Airport.  The property is bound on the north by Caniff Road, on
the southwest by Easthaven Boulevard, and on the east by a Harris County Flood
Control Channel.

The site is an abandoned refinery which manufactured a variety of organic
compounds including biphenyl, polychlorinated, biphenyls (PCBs),  phenyl phenol,
naptha, and Nos. 2 and 6 fuel oils from 1967 through 1978.

Prior to 1967, the property was used for petroleum exploration and production.
Geneva Industries began manufacturing biphenyl by distillation of toluene
dealkylation bottoms in June 1967, began .producing PCBs in June 1972, and
declared bankruptcy in November 1973.  Since that time, four other corporations
owned and operated the Geneva facility, including:

     Pilot Industries, February 1974 - December 1976
     Intercoastal Refining, December 1976 - December 1980
     Lonestar Fuel Co., December  1980  - May 1982
     Fuhrmann Energy, May 1982 -  Present

Operation of the facility ceased  in  September 1978 and was never resumed.  The
current owner,  Fuhrmann Energy, has  salvaged much of the  equipment onsite for
resale.

Records from the Texas Water Quality Board and  the Harris County Pollution
Control district indicate that several citations were  issued  to the various
owners  for unauthorized  discharges  of  wastewater into  the adjacent flood control
channel.  These records  also  indicate  that plant operation was marked by
numerous  spills and  process  leaks and  that housekeeping and disposal  practices
deteriorated with  time.  As  of 1981,  the  site contained processing tanks,
piping, and equipment, three  open and  one closed wastewater lagoon,  a diked  tank
area,  several drum storage  areas, a landfill, and possibly a  landfarm.

A Planned Removal  was  performed  by EPA during the period  from October 1983 to
February  1984 to close out  three onsite  lagoons,  remove all drummed  waste  on the
surface,  remove all  offsite soils containing greater  than 50  ppm PCBs,  install a
cap over  all  onsite  soils  containing greater than 50  ppm  PCBs,  and  improve site
drainage.   Approximately 3,400  cubic yards  of  contaminated  soils and sludges,
550 drums,  and  30  tons of asbestos were  removed and transported to  an approved
 disposal  facility  in Emmelle,  Alabama.  Other  removal actions to. plug abandoned
wells onsite  and remove  storage  tank materials  were performed in May and
 September 1984, respectively.

 A Cooperative Agreement for a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
 (RI/FS) for $630,000 was awarded by EPA to  the  State of Texas in December 1983.
 4-90-61
 Page ,4

-------
 D'Appolonia,  Inc.,  not IT Corporation,  in association with Environmental
 Research and  Technology,  Inc.,  and Rollins Environmental Services  (TX)  Inc., was
 contracted by the  State to conduct the  RI/FS.   The initial site  work was
 completed in  September 1984,  at which time it  was  determined that  additional
 field work would be required.   An amendment to the grant for $300,000 was
 awarded in March 1985  to  investigate  possible  a seismic  faulting at  the site.
 All  field work was  completed  in October 1985.

 The  Remedial  Investigation was  completed in December  1985.   The  Feasibility
 Study began in December 1984  and  completed in  April 1986.   The long  feasibility
 study period  was due to the need  for  the extensive fault investigation conducted
 in September  1985.   The detailed  development and evaluation of remedial
 alternatives  could not be done  until  the effects of possible faulting across the
 site could be determined.

 Due  to  the temporary protective cap placed on  the  site during the  1984 Planned
 Removal,  on-site surface  expressions  of faulting were not  discovered during the
 site investigation.  However, faulting  in the  vicinity of  Geneva Industries has
 been documented  by  the United States  Geologic  Survey.  To  further  define the
 potential for faulting at the site, an  area survey was conducted to locate
 surficial expressions  of  faulting within 1/2 mile  of  the site.

 Wells M-5 and M-9 tap  the shallow water and deep water aquifers, respectively.
 Remediation efforts  include plans  to  convert monitoring  wells M-5  and M-9 to
 extraction wells for a future pump and  treat system.   These  two  wells were the
 recommended sample points for an  EPA-ITD sampling  effort.
4-90-61
Page 5

-------
                        GOLD COAST OIL  - EPISODE  1242
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Gold Coast Oil Corporation (GCO) site is a 2-acre parcel of flat, sandy land
located at 2835 SW 71st Avenue, Miami, Florida.  The site has no distinguishable
surface drainage and is enclosed by a fence with a locking gate.  It is bordered
on the north and west by railroad tracks, on the south by a group of small
businesses and on the east by SW 71st Avenue.  The site operations are currently
inactive.  The Coral Gables Canal is approximately 850 feet south of the site on
the other side of the small businesses.  The canal drains to the Biscayne bay
and on to the Atlantic Ocean.

The site property is owned by Seabord Systems Railroad Company, which is now
known as CSX Transportation, who leased the property to Gold Coast Oil
Corporation in the early 1970s.  Gold Coast-Oil, along with Solvent Extraction,
Incorporated were in the business of distilling mineral spirits and lacquer
thinner and reclaiming solvents.  All waste generated by the .solvent recovery
operations were disposed or stored on site; no waste was shipped off-site during
the 11 years 'of operation.  Slowdown from the operations sprayed directly onto
the ground, and 53 drums of sludge-contaminated soil were stored in the
southwest area of the site near the distillation unit.  Still-bottomwaste from
the distilling operation was pumped into a  tank truck for storage.  There were
also 2500 corroded and leaking drums containing sludge from the distilling
operation, contaminated soils, and paint sludges located on site, along with
large storage tanks of hazardous waste.

Representatives of the Dade County Department of Environmental Resources
Management (DERM) took samples of illegally dumped and stored sludge, and from
on-site wells at the Gold Coast Oil site on April 22, 1980.  DERM issued a
complaint for temporary, permanent, mandatory and prohibitory injunctive relief,
civil damages, and civil penalties  against  Gold Coast Oil, on January 14, 1981.
On March 16, 1981, the complaint was  amended to include CSX Transportation, the
owner of the property.

The DERM reported the site  to  the EPA in early May 1981.  The EPA Surveillance
and Analyses Division  (SAD)  conducted a  sampling investigation of the site in
June 1981.  The SAD sampled groundwater  from existing wells, soil, and waste
material.  In August 1981,  the EPA  filed a  complaint against Gold Coast Oil
along with a Consent Agreement and  Final Order.  In the fall of  1981, the Gold
Coast Oil site was submitted to the EPA  for inclusion on  the Interim National
Priority List.  Two hazard  ranking  scores by Ecology and  Environment's  (E&E)
Field Investigation Team  (FIT) was  46:51.

Also, in October  1981,  the  FDER conducted  a RCRA interim  status  inspection and
reported the results to EPA.   On December  1, 1981, EPA  filed a  Default Order
against  Gold Coast Oil  for  failing  to file  a-timely answer  to  the complaint
issued previously and  for non-payment of the civil penalty  imposed.  In
December 1981,  an earth resistivity survey by  FIT IV.was  conducted.  In early
1982, Dade County, with the assistance of  FDER, began to  prepare an  enforcement
case  against  the  property owner,  the  CSX Transportation Company,  as  well  as the
 4-90-61
 Page 6

-------
 Gold  Coast Oil Corporation.   CSX Transportation was also advised that the EPA
 was going to undertake  immediate removal of.the hazardous waste on-site under
 the authority of CERC1A.  Neither of  these  actions were undertaken because in
 June  of 1982, CSX Transportation evicted Gold Coast Oil from the property and
 agreed to voluntarily clean up  the site.  In July 1982, CSX Transportation
 submitted for approval  a  cleanup and  disposal plan to clean up the site's
 surface.             *

 The cleanup action of the surface contaminants at the GCO site was undertaken
 the following month.  The clean-up, conducted by Chemical Waste Management under
 contract to the Railroad, involved removing  the drums, emptying the storage
 tanks and excavating and  removing contaminated soils to a depth of approximately
 six inches.

 In March 1983, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation requested that
 EPA take the lead at this site,  and in September 1983 the GCO site was added to
 the National Priority List with a 46.5 hazardous ranking score.
                                                                        /
 In June 1983, a Remedial  Action Master Plan  (RAMP) was developed by NUS
 Corporation under an EPA  contract.  In March 1984, BCM Eastern Incorporated,
 consultants for the PRP Steering Committee, produced an "Environmental
 Investigation of the Gold Coast Site".  In June 1984 a "Draft Remedial
 Alternatives Evaluation Report  for  the Gold Coast Oil Corporation Site" was
 produced by Engineering and Science under an EPA contract.   In May 1985 BCM
 Eastern submitted a "Selection  of Remedial Approach" report,  again a report for
 the PRP Steering Committee.

 The Biscayne Aquifer Study area-wide groundwater Record of Decision was signed
 by the Assistant Administrator,  Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response in
 September 1985.  The cleanup  levels established as a result of that study and
 that Record of Decision have been revised and approved by the Florida Department
 of Environmental Regulation for the Gold Coast Oil site.

 The groundwater data associated with the site indicate an area of significant
 contamination in the northeast  corner of the site.  The levels of contaminants
 have generally decreased  across  the site except for the levels of
 trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene which have increased in this northeast
 corner.  The levels of metals in the groundwater are considered to be at normal
 environmental levels since they are relatively constant throughout the entire
 area of the site.   Wells  M-8 and M-13 are considered representative of the area
 of highest levels of contamination and are recommended sample points for an
 EPA-ITD sampling effort.
4-90-61
Page 7

-------
                           HYDE PARK - EPISODE 1220
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Hyde Park landfill is approximately 15 acres in area and is located
northwest of the City of Niagara Falls in the northwest corner of the Town of
Niagara.  It is"immediately surrounded by several industrial facilities and
property owned by the Power Authority for the State of New York.  There is a
residential neighborhood to the northwest and south of the landfill.  The
Niagara River is located 2,000 feet to the northwest.

From 1954 until 1975, Occidental Chemical Corporation (OCC), then known as
Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corporation, disposed of approximately 80,000 tons
of chemical wastes in the Hyde Park Landfill.  These wastes included chloro-
benzenes, hexachlorocyclopentadiene (C-56) and trichlorophenols.  Previous
chemical analyses have identified 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in the
Hyde Park wastes.

In 1979, EPA and, in 1980, the State of New York Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) sued OCC to clean up the on-site and off-site contami-
nation resulting from leakage of chemical wastes from the landfill.  Negotia-
tions, were held among all the parties and on April 30, 1982, a Stipulation and
Judgement approving the Hyde Park Settlement Agreement was approved by the
United States District Court.

The Settlement Agreement provided that OCC (1) conduct surveys and tests
(Aquifer Survey Program) to determine how far and how deep groundwater had
carried chemicals away from the Hyde Park Landfill and (2) assess ways to
contain and/or clean up this contamination through the use of Requisite Remedial
Technology  (RRT).  OCC completed this survey program in December 1983 and
presented its findings to the federal and state governments.  The findings
stated that a two-phase "plume" of chemicals is migrating away from the land-
fill:  a non-aqueous phase liquid (NAPL) and an aqueous phase liquid  (APL).
NAPL is composed of many chemicals that do not dissolve readily in water.  It
moves more  slowly than APL through soil and rock, and is more dense than water.
APL also is composed of many chemicals; however, the chemicals are dissolved in
groundwater and tend to be carried along with it.  The APL plume has  spread
further away from the landfill than the NAPL plume.

As required by the Settlement Agreement, OCC began a RRT Study  in October  1983
to determine which remedies were most appropriate to clean up and/or  contain the
chemicals that had escaped and were continuing to .escape from the Hyde- Park
Landfill.   OCC submitted, its RRT report  to the EPA and NYSDEC in May  1984  and
the agencies responded to the report  in  September 1984.  Since  that time,  the
EPA, NYSDEC, and OCC have had many meetings  to resolve outstanding  issues  and
concerns raised by OCC's  report and the  agencies' review Of that report.   The
RRT ultimately agreed to by  the parties  is described in a document  entitled
Stipulation on Requisite Remedial Technology Program submitted  to the United
States  District  Court for approval on November 26, 1985.

To date, OCC has  installed a barrier  collection system around the perimeter of
the landfill and capped  the  site.  Leachate  intercepted by  the  barrier drain
 4-90-61
 Page 8

-------
 system  collects in two wet-wells  located at the  two western  corners fof  the
 landfill.  The leachate  is pumped from the wet-wells  to a holding lagoon where
 separation of APL and NAPL occurs.  The APL is transferred from the lagoon to a
 tank  truck several times  each day.  The truck hauls the waste  to OCC's  off-site
 pretreatment facility.   The NAPL  removed to an on-site storage area consisting
 of four 10,000 gallon railroad tank cars surrounded by a clay  dike.   Presently,
 OCC is  requesting authorization to incinerate the NAPL at an incineration
 facility located at  its plant on  Buffalo Avenue  in Niagara Falls.
4-90-61
Page 9

-------
                           LOVE  CANAL -  EPISODE 1219
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
Love Canal is an abandoned landfill once owned by Hooker Chemicals (now
Occidental Chemical Corporation) where 21,800 tons of both drummed and undrummed
liquid and solid chemical wastes were disposed from 1942 to 1953.  Love Canal is
now a contained area controlled by the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) since August 1978.

NYSDEC installed a French drain around the dump boundary and capped the site in
1979.  Leachate and groundwater intercepted by the drain collects in four
collection chambers located along the collection system.  In the northern and
central sectors of the canal, vertical centrifugal pumps transfer leachate from
the collection chambers to six underground storage cells (30,000-gallon total
capacity) located behind the leachate treatment plant.  Horizontal centrifugal
-pumps transfer leachate collected in the southern sector to a 25,00,0-gallon
in-ground holding ,tank at a rate of 300 gpm.

Raw leachate from the holding tank and the storage cells is pumped to a
2,000-gallon fiberglass storage tank located inside the treatment building.  A
double-diaphragm pump transfers the water from the fiberglass tank to the
15,600-gallon rectangular clarifier that contains redwood flights and weirs.
Equipment is available for the addition of coagulants and flocculants, however,
it is not used.  Every other month, sludge is removed from the clarifier to a
fiberglass holding tank.  The effluent from the clarifier flows by gravity to a
2,000-gallon fiberglass filter feed tank.  Two double-diaphragm pumps transfer
the water at a rate of 160 gpm from the filter feed tank through two separate
feed lines to 50 /im polypropylene filter bags (a series of two in each line).
Filtrate from the filters combines before going to two Calgon carbon adsorbers
operated in series.  Treated wastewater is discharged from the treatment system
to the City's sewer at an average rate of 40,000 gallons per operating day.

Sludge removed from the clarifier is transferred to a 1,500-gallon sludge
holding tank.  Supernatant from the sludge holding tank is recycled back to the
filter feed tank, and the settled sludge is pumped to one of the four on-site
outdoor storage tanks, each with a 10,000-gallon capacity.  Three of the four
outdoor sludge storage tanks are unlined:  one is epoxy-lined.  The Love Canal
pretreatment system produces approximately 150 gallons per month of sludge,
which is being stored on-site until NYSDEC officials can find a suitable means
for its disposal.

All of the treatment system piping at Love Canal was teflon-lined, and the
system itself was designed by Conestoga-Rovers & Associates, Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada.

The entire pretreatment system at Love Canal is closed to the atmosphere, and
55-gallon carbon canisters scrub the vented gases from the treatment plant unit
operations, including the raw leachate holding tank, the clarifier, the filter
feed tank, and the sludge holding tank.
 4-90-61
.Page  10

-------
The current average wastewater discharge from Love Canal is 40,000 gallons per
operating day.  During the summer, discharge occurs approximately once every two
weeks; during the spring, discharge is as often as twice per week.  The volume
of discharge has decreased from 4.5 to 2.5 million gallons per year since
capping of the site was completed.

The pollutants identified in previous studies at Love Canal are Lindane
(33 percent), and chlorinated hydrocarbons (67 percent) such as toluene,
benzene, heptachlor, di-octyl phthalates,  chloroform, methylene chloride,
tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene, total phenols, and chlorobenzene.
4-90-61
Page 11

-------
                        NYANZA CHEMICAL - EPISODE 1310
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The 35-acre Nyanza site is located on Megunko Road in the Town of Ashland,
Middlesex County, Massachusetts, approximately 35 miles west of Boston.  The
site was the location of chemical dye manufacturing facilities for 61 years and
is currently occupied by several small industrial enterprises.  The current
owners are MCL Development Corporation (MCL) and Edward Camille.

From 1917 to 1977, the site was occupied by several companies involved in the
manufacture of textile dyes and dye intermediates.  During that period, several
types of chemical wastes were disposed in various on-site locations.  These
wastes included partially treated process wastewater; chemical sludge from the
wastewater treatment process; solid process wastes (e.g., chemical precipitate
and filter cakes) in drums; solvent recovery distillation residue in drums; and
off-specification products.  Process chemicals that could not be recycled or
reused (e.g., phenol, nitrobenzene, and mercuric sulfate) were also disposed
on-site.  The most recent dye manufacturing company to occupy the site, Nyanza,
Inc., acquired the property in  1965.

The first type of contamination linked to Nyanza was mercury, discovered in the
Sudbury River in 1972  (CDM, 1982).  From 1972 through 1977, the Massachusetts
Departments of Public Health and Water Pollution Control  (DPH and DWPC) cited
Nyanza, Inc., for several contamination problems associated with dumping
activities.  In  1974,  Camp, Dresser, and McKee  (CDM), working for Nyanza, Inc.,
devised plans to control groundwater contamination on the Nyanza property;
however,  implementation did not occur.  Nyanza, Inc., ceased business  in 1978
due to financial difficulties.

Edward Camille,  a private  citizen,  acquired the property  from Nyanza,  Inc., in
1978.  In 1979,  the  Department  of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE)
stayed plans, on behalf  of Mr.  Camille,  to  complete  the groundwater pollution
control activities,  pending  further investigation by the  newly  established DEQE
Division  of Hazardous  Waste.

Since 1972,  several  investigations have  been prompted by  contamination present
at or originating from Nyanza.  JBF Scientific  Corporation conducted a 1972
Sudbury River  investigation that  revealed mercury contamination paused by
uncontrolled sludge  disposal at the Nyanza, Inc.,  property.   Tfcfe.-.CDM groundwater
pollution control program designed in 1974 for  Nyanza,  Inc.,. included a  site
 investigation aimed at source identification.   In 1979,  Mr.  Camille hired
 Connorstone Engineering,  Inc.,  to complete the  CDM pollution control program.
 In 1980,  the DEQE released a Preliminary Site Assessment Report summarizing  the
 site history and findings of previous investigations at the site (DEQE,  October
 1980).

 In 1981,  MCL acquired a portion of the property.   MCL hired Connorstone  Engi-
 neering,  Inc.,  and Carr Research Laboratory, Inc.,  to characterize soil  compo-
 sition and locate sludge deposits.
 4-90-61
 Page 12

-------
The Nyanza site was  included  on  the  original National Priority  List  (NPL) of
Superfund sites in 1982.  A preliminary Remedial Action Master  Plan  (RAMP) was
prepared for EPA by  CDM in 1982.  To expedite  remediation,  the  RI/FS for Nyanza
was divided into two phases,  or  "operable units."  At that  time,  some sampling
and analysis had been performed,  and it became evident that site  remediation
would ultimately address  two  distinct problems:  surficial  deposits of sludges
and sediments contaminated primarily by heavy  metals, and groundwater contami-
nated primarily by organic chemicals.  The  surficial sludge and sediment problem
was designated Phase I, or Operable  Unit I, and primarily encompassed source
identification and control.   In  1984, EPA authorized NUS Corporation (NUS) to
complete an RI/FS for Operable Unit  I (NUS, March 1985).

A Record of Decision (ROD) for Operable Unit I was signed in September 1985.
The ROD  calls for excavation  of  nine localized areas of contamination; solidi-
fication of the excavated sludges, sediments,  and soils; and placement of those
materials  on the "Hill" area  in  the  southern part of the site.  A diversion
trench will also be  constructed  around the  southern end of  the  capped area to
divert surface water flow and lower  the groundwater table within  the capped
area.

In 1986,  EPA authorized CDM to conduct additional field investigations to define
source locations and design the  remedial action stipulated  in the ROD.  The
design is  currently  underway, and remediation  of some contaminated areas is in
progress.

After further investigation,  EPA elected to divide the remaining problems at
Nyanza into two additional operable  units.  Operable Unit II addresses ground-
water contamination  and migration.   This study is the focus of Nyanza II.
4-90-61
Page 13

-------
                          REILLY TAR  - EPISODE  1239
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Reilly Tar and Chemical Company site occupies 80 acres of land located in
St. Louis Park, Minnesota.  The plant site, called the Republic Creosote Works,
is located west of Gorham, Republic, and Louisiana Avenues, south of
32nd Street, east of Pennsylvania Avenue, and north of Walker Street.  The City
of St. Louis Park purchased the land from Reilly in 1972.  The St. Louis Park
Housing and Redevelopment Authority currently controls the site.  The City is
contiguous to the City of Minneapolis and exhibits a similar population density.
Currently, the "site is a park with a portion of it developed with condominiums.
It is located in the midst of a residential area with some small industry.

From 1918 to 1972 the company operated a coal tar distillation facility and wood
preserving plant.  Its primary production was creosote.  The chemical compounds
associated with this process are polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and
phenolics.  The release to the environment of these compounds occurred during
the coal  distillation process and from materials stored on the site.  The
materials were apparently dumped into a well, referred to as W-23, which
penetrated to the Mt. Simon/Hinckley Aquifer, a depth of about 900 feet.  The
well was  cleaned out by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to a depth
of 866 feet.  Coal tar was removed down to a depth of 740 feet.  Wastes
containing coal tar and its distillation by-products were discharged, as a
matter of disposal practice, overland into ditches that emptied into a peat bog
south of  the site.  This practice, according to Reilly, occurred from 1917 to
1939.  In 1940 and 1941 Reilly installed a wastewater treatment plant and
discharged the effluent into the bog south of the site.  The values of both
phenolics and oil and grease in the discharge water varied typically from 100 to
1,000 milligrams per liter.  This discharge continued for the duration of
Reilly's  operation.  The peat bog has retained contamination that was discharged
over the  years and, as is explained below, is now a major source of groundwater
contamination.

In 1972,  the plant was dismantled and the land sold to the City of St. Louis
Park.  In 1973,• a storm water runoff collection system was built which fed into
a  lined pond on the site.  The pond discharges into a drain which is routed to
another pond off-site before it eventually discharges into Minnehaha Creek.  The
City of St. Louis Park (SLP) monitors the discharge into the creek.
Construction of a block of condominiums  on the northern part of the site began
in 1976.  At this time, no further  construction is underway, although plans for
new development of the site are pending by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.  All excavation of material has been inspected by the  State and if
contaminated,  the soils were disposed of.

There are three  conceptual operable units  involved with  the Reil.ly Tar Remedial
response.  These  include:   (1) restoration of drinking water supply  to St. Louis
Park,  (2) containment or  treatment  of groundwater in contaminated aquifers, and
 (3) source  control of the bog  and contaminated soil at the site.

In August 1981,  the MPCA  was awarded a cooperative agreement to investigate Well
W23,  and  to perform  a feasibility study  for  restoration  of drinking  water.
 4-90-61
 Page 14

-------
During that study, the State removed coal tar deposits from Well W23 that were a
source of groundwater contamination.  The well itself is now clean although some
residual contamination probably remains in the aquifers penetrated by the well.

Presently, there are two extraction wells that alternately pump contaminated
groundwater to an on-site pretreatment facility.  The wastestream is pumped to a
sand filter (iron removal) prior to discharge to a granular activated carbon
unit.  Treated effluent from the carbon unit flows to a 1.5 million gallon
holding tank where approximately 95 percent of the water is discharged to the
drinking water supply for the City.  The remaining 5 percent is discharged to
the City's sewer system.
4-90-61
Page 15

-------
                     STRINGFELLOW ACID  PITS  -  EPISODE 1221
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
Stringfellow Acid Pit was operated by Stringfellow Quarry Co. from 1956 to 1972
as a hazardous waste disposal facility.  The landfill disposal site was permit-
ted by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (R¥QCB).   About
34 million gallons of wastes, mostly from metal finishing, electroplating, and
DDT production, were deposited on approximately 17 acres of the site.  In 1969
and 1978, excessive rainfall caused the ponds used for solar evaporation to
overflow, spreading contamination into the nearby town of Glen Avon.  In July
1980, the RWQCB advocated total removal of all solids and liquids but the funds
were not available.  In December 1980, RWQCB selected an interim plan that
included installation of channels to divert surface water, a gravel drain and a
network of wells for monitoring and extraction, and a clay core barrier dam
downgradient to ,stop subsurface leachate migration.

California placed Stringfellow at the top of the California priority list.  The
State conducted a study in compliance with the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (the National Contingency Plan or NCP) to
obtain CERCLA funds.  The results of the study indicated that on-site management
was more cost effective than total removal.

On July 22, 1983, Lee Thomas, Assistant Administrator of the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER),  signed a Record of Decision (ROD) which
endorsed the State's request for funds for both existing activities and proposed
actions.  The interim actions authorized in the ROD were:

     o    removal of DDT contaminated material

     o    operation of extraction wells upgradient of the clay barrier to
          protect the barrier

     o    fencing the entire site to prevent entry

     o    erosion control to prevent destruction of a clay cap

The state also requested EPA to lead a fast track Remedial Investigation/Feasi-
bility Study (RI/FS) while the Department of Health Services completed the
long-term RI/FS.

As a result of the fast track RI/FS, a pretreatment system was installed to
treat the groundwater before its discharge to the Santa Ana Watershed Project
Authority.  The series of extraction wells transfer two groundwater streams from
the contaminated canyon area to the field storage tanks.  On-site groundwater
(Stream A), known to contain metal compounds and organics, is transferred from
the field storage tanks to one of four equalization tanks (each with a
12,000-gallon capacity) at the on-site treatment plant.  Once equalization of
Stream A occurs, Stream A proceeds to a 400-gallon capacity rapid mix tank where
lime and caustic soda are added to aid precipitation and to control
acidity/alkalinity, and polymer is added to aid floe formation.  The chemically
treated and mixed stream flows to two parallel-operating clarifiers.
4-90-61
Page 16

-------
The thickened sludge is pumped from the clarifiers to the sludge holding tanks,
and the clarified effluent flows to two gravity sand filters operating in
parallel.  Each filter has a 7.6 square foot area, and the sand is about three
feet deep.  Wastewater from the sand filters is transferred to the 500-gallon
Stream A filter effluent tank.

Groundwater from mid-canyon (Stream B), which contains mostly organic compounds,
is transferred from the field storage tanks to one of three equalization tanks
(12,000-gallon capacity each) located at the on-site treatment plant.  Stream A
effluent from the 500-gallon filter effluent tank is blended with Stream B
before discharging to activated carbon adsorption vessels.  The two carbon
adsorption vessels each have a 10-ton capacity for granular activated carbon and
are operated in series with a third vessel functioning as a transfer tank.

Effluent from the carbon adsorption vessels is transferred to one of four final
effluent storage tanks (80,000-gallon total capacity), before it is discharged
to the sewer at an average rate of 870,000 gallons per month.  As necessary,
effluent from these storage tanks is used as backwash and other plant utility
water.

Sludge is pumped from the clarifiers to two 11,000-gallon sludge holding tanks."
The sludge from the two sludge holding tanks is fed to two plate-and-frame
filter presses.  Depending on the pollutant content, the filtrate from the
filter press operation can be recycled to either the Stream A influent equal-
ization tanks, the Stream B influent equalization tanks, or the Stream A filter
effluent tank.  Usually, the filtrate is pumped to the Stream A equalization
tanks.  The sludge cake is discharged into containers and is hauled off-site by
a contractor for disposal at a RCRA approved Class I disposal site as hazardous
waste.

As part of the Stringfellow discharge permit, the effluent must be tested prior
to any discharge.  Currently, the facility is allowed to fill two storage tanks
simultaneously, but is only required to test one tank.

The pretreatment system located at Stringfellow operates five days per week
during the daylight hours.
4-90-61
Page  17

-------
                     STRINGFELLOW ACID  PITS  -  EPISODE  1240
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
Stringfellow Acid Pit was operated by Stringfellow Quarry Co. from 1956 to 1972
as a hazardous waste disposal facility.  The landfill disposal site was permit-
ted by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).   About
34 million gallons of wastes, mostly from metal finishing, electroplating, and
DDT production, were deposited on approximately 17 acres of the site.  In 1969
and 1978, excessive rainfall caused the ponds used for solar evaporation to
overflow, spreading contamination into the nearby town of Glen Avon.  In July
1980,  the RWQCB advocated total removal of all solids and liquids but funds were
not available.  In December 1980, RWQCB selected an interim plan that included
installation of channels to divert surface water, a gravel drain,.and a network
of wells for monitoring and extraction, and a clay core barrier dam downgradient
to stop subsurface leachate migration.

California placed Stringfellow at the top of the California priority list.  The
State conducted a study in compliance with the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (National Contingency Plan (NCP)) to
obtain CERCLA funds.  The results of the study indicated that on-site management
was more cost effective than total removal.

On July 22, 1983, Lee Thomas, Assistant Administrator of the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), signed a Record of Decision (ROD) which
endorsed the State's request for funds for both existing activities and proposed
actions.  The interim actions authorized in the ROD were:

     o    removal of DDT contaminated material

     o    operation of extraction wells upgradient of the clay barrier to
          protect the barrier

     o    fencing the entire site to prevent entry

     o    erosion control to prevent destruction of a clay cap

The State also requested EPA to lead a fast track Remedial Investigation/Feasi-
bility Study (RI/FS) while the Department of Health Services completed the
long-term RI/FS.

As a result of the fast track RI/FS, a pretreatment system was installed to
treat the groundwater before its discharge to the Santa Ana Watershed Project
Authority.  The series of extraction wells transfer two groundwater streams from
the contaminated canyon area to the field storage tanks.  On-site groundwater
(Stream A), known to contain metal compounds and organics, is transferred from
the field storage tanks to one of four equalization tanks (each with a
12,000-gallon capacity) at the on-site treatment plant.  Once equalization of
Stream A occurs, Stream A proceeds to a 400-gallon capacity rapid mix tank where
lime and caustic soda are added to aid precipitation and to control
4-90-61
Page 18

-------
acidity/alkalinity, and polymer is added to aid floe formation.  The chemically
treated and mixed stream flows to two parallel-operating clarifiers.

The thickened sludge is pumped from the clarifiers to the sludge holding tanks,
and the clarified effluent flows to two gravity sand filters operating in
parallel.  Each filter has a 7.6 square foot area, and the sand is about three
feet deep.  Wastewater from the sand filters is transferred to the 500-gallon
Stream A filter effluent tank.

Groundwater from mid-canyon (Stream B),  which contains mostly organic compounds,
is transferred from the field storage tanks to one of three equalization tanks
(12,000-gallon capacity each) located at the on-site treatment plant.  Stream A
effluent from the 500-gallon filter effluent tank is blended with Stream B
before discharging to activated carbon adsorption vessels.   The two carbon
adsorption vessels each have a 10-ton capacity for granular activated carbon and
are operated in series with a third vessel functioning as a transfer tank.

Effluent from the carbon adsorption vessels is transferred to one of four final
effluent storage tanks (80,000-gallon total capacity), before it is discharged
to the sewer at an average rate of 870,000 gallons per month.  As necessary,
effluent from these storage tanks is used as backwash and other plant utility
water.

Sludge is pumped from the clarifiers to two 11,000-gallon sludge holding tanks.
The sludge from the two sludge holding tanks is fed to two plate-and-frame
filter presses.  Depending on the pollutant content, the filtrate from the
filter press operation can be recycled to either the Stream A influent equal-
ization tanks, the Stream B influent equalization tanks, or the Stream A filter
effluent tank.  Usually, the filtrate is pumped to the Stream A equalization
tanks.  The sludge cake is discharged into containers and is hauled off-site by
a contractor for disposal at a RCRA approved Class I disposal site as hazardous
waste.

As part of the Stringfellow discharge permit, the effluent must be tested prior ,
to any discharge.  Currently, the facility is allowed to fill two storage tanks
simultaneously, but is only required to test one tank.

The pretreatment system located at Stringfellow operates five days per week
during the daylight hours.

A one-day sampling episode was conducted by E.G. Jordan Co. at the Stringfellow
site on November 3, 1987.  The decision was made at that time to return for a
supplemental five-day sampling episode if permission could be obtained.  Upon
receipt of permission, Jordan personnel conducted the sampling as outlined in
this report.
4-90-61
Page 19

-------
                           SYLVESTER - EPISODE 1325
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Gilson Road hazardous waste dump site is located in the City of Nashua, New
Hampshire, off Route 111, in the south easterly corner of that community.  The
6-acre site had been used as a sand borrow pit for an undetermined number of
years.  During the late 1960s, the operator of the pit began an unapproved and
illegal waste disposal operation, apparently intending to fill the excavation.
Household refuse, demolition materials, chemical sludges, and hazardous liquid
chemicals all were.dumped at the site at various times.  The household refuse
and demolition material were usually buried, while the sludges and hazardous
liquids were either mixed with the trash or were allowed to percolate into the
ground adjacent to the old sand pit.  Some hazardous liquids were also stored in
steel drums which were either buried or placed on the ground surface.

The illegal dumping at the site was first discovered in late 1970.  After
several court appearances, and court actions, an injunction was issued in 1976
which ordered the removal of all materials from the site.  This injunction was
ignored by the operator.

The first indication that the illegal dumping had included hazardous wastes came
in November 1978 when State personnel observed drums being stored at the site.
A court order was  issued in October 1979 prohibiting all further disposal of
hazardous wastes on the site.

It is impossible to estimate the total quantities of waste materials discarded
at the site.  However, it has been documented that over 800,000 gallons of
hazardous waste were discarded there during a ten month period in 1979.

In 1981,  initial investigations  showed that there were high concentrations of
heavy metals and volatile and extractable organics in  the groundwater under the
site.  The contamination formed  a plume  in  the groundwater which was moving from
the site  toward Lyle Reed Brook  at the rate of 0.8 to  1.6 feet per day.

The Gilson Road hazardous waste  site has received remedial action under the
Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation, and Liability Act  (CERCLA) since
November, 1981.  EPA used CERCLA emergency  funds to install a ground water
interception and recirculation system.   This system was  operated until October,
1982  when a slurry wall  was' completed.   The State of New Hampshire developed  a
remedial  investigation  and  feasibility study in January, 1982 and a  supplemental
study providing  costs associated with  various groundwater treatment  rates  in
July, 1982.  A Record of Decision was  signed in July,  1982 which approved  the
 installation of  the  slurry  wall  and pilot  studies.

Upon  completion  of the  slurry wall, a  pilot treatment  plant was constructed and
 operated  for several months.  The  data from this pilot study  resulted  in a
 recommendation  to  construct a treatment  plant capable  of removing  90 percent  of
 the hazardous constituents  within the  slurry wall.  This design was  based  on
 evaluating  the present  and  potential hazards to human health  and  environmental
 targets previously identified in the  risk  assessment  portion-of the  feasibility
 4-90-61
 Page 20

-------
 study and supplement.   A subsequent design modified to reduce operation and
 maintenance costs,  but still capable of 90 percent removal is presently
 operating at the site.

 The treatment system includes chemical precipitation,  filtration,  and air
 stripping before the waste stream splits.   Approximately 250 gpm is  reinjected
 through recharge trenches inside the slurry wall and the remaining flow
 (~ 50 gpm) receives biological treatment before reinjection to the groundwater
 through trenches outside the slurry wall.
4-90-61
Page 21

-------
                           TIME OIL  - EPISODE 1804
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Time Oil Site's history includes waste oil recycling processes and paint and
lacquer thinner manufacturing.  The City of Tacoma maintains a treatment system
for a production well (Well 12A) near the Time Oil Site.  Studies associated
with Well 12A resulted in the development of the present treatment system at the
Time Oil Site.  Operation of the Well 12A treatment system by the City of Tacoma
continues on a seasonal basis to protect the wellfield.

Because the remedial investigation completed in late 1982 identified a general
source area only and not a specific site, EPA authorized in December 1982 a
study of historical solvent use and disposal practices in the suspect area.
Records of past investigations by the Tacoma/Pierce County Health Department,
Tacoma Water Division and the State Department of Ecology were reviewed and
interviews were conducted with owners of numerous businesses in the area.  A
follow-up study focused on the historical uses and disposal of
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane in the vicinity of Well 12A.  These studies reduced
both the number and location of potential sources of the contamination.

In mid-May 1983, EPA authorized a supplemental remedial investigation to define
further the extent of groundwater contamination and to attempt to locate the
source.  Four monitoring wells were installed and these, as well as the
previously installed monitoring wells, were sampled several times between July
and November.  One of the new wells (near the Time Oil, Fleetline and Burlington
Northern property) showed levels of trichloroethylene, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
and 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene in the low parts per million (ppm) range;
substantially higher than detected in other wells.
                              S
With the apparent source area narrowed down substantially, EPA obtained air and
near surface  soil samples along the Burlington Northern railroad spur adjacent
to the Time Oil plant.  Air sampling results showed very low levels of
contaminants, but soil samples were very high in trichloroethylene and
1,1,2,2,-tetrachloroethane.

Research into the past ownership and activities on these properties indicated
that waste oil and solvent reclamation processes were used and that some of the
spent filter  cake was used to build the railroad spur'.  The use of the Time Oil
site for oil  recycling and related operations dates back to 1927 when
William Palin began operations under the name of Palin and Son.  In 1933,  the
business name was changed to  National Oil and Paint.  The two main activities of
the businesses were waste oil recycling and paint and lacquer thinner
manufac tur ing.

The waste oil recycling process consisted of collecting waste oil in a large
tank, adding  chemicals such as  sulfuric  acid, and pressurizing and heating the
contents of  the vessel.  This process resulted  in the formation for a tar-like
sludge on the bottom  of the tank which was removed and  disposed of.  Absorbents
and clay materials were also  added  to the oil.  The sludge was filtered  from the
oil, and the  resulting filter cake was disposed of or stored'in various  piles on
the site.   Some  of  this sludge  was  also  used for fill around the site.
 4-90-61
 Page 22

-------
The paint and lacquer  thinner manufacturing .involved the use of many solvents
that were stored on  the  site in barrels which may have leaked their contents
into the soil.

Prior to purchase of the property by Time Oil, Inc., in 1964, the remaining
barrels and drums of solvent were removed from the site.  After Time Oil
purchased the property,  operations continued under the name National Oil and
Paint until 1972.  During this period, National Oil was involved only in waste
oil recycling.  Waste  sludges and filter cakes were not known to be stored on
the site during this period.

In 1972, Time Oil leased the facilities to Golden Penn, Inc.  Golden Penn
operated on the site until 1976, before going out of business as a result of a
destructive fire.  In  1975 and 1976, Golden Penn was ordered by the State of
Washington to clean up the site by removing some of the filter cake and spilled
oil from the ground.

In 1976, Time Oil resumed operation at the site.  Since then their operation has
been limited to canning  oil brought to the site in bulk containers.  In 1982,
the Burlington Northern  Railroad spur was extended by Time Oil to its present
length so that oil could be delivered by tanker car.  During the construction of
the spur, some of the  filter cake or sludge material stored on the site was used
in the roadbed.

During the remedial  investigation, the extent of soil and groundwater
contamination near the Time Oil plant was explored by means of surface soil
samples, shallow and deep soil borings and monitoring wells.

Chemical data for 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane and tetrachloroethylene taken from
soil borings along the spur and along a North-South line and data for
trichloroethylene shows  these compounds are the ones of primary interest because
they are the contaminants at Well 12A.  Many others, not found at Well 12A, were
also detected at much  lower concentrations.

Along the east-west line of borings, high values of soil contamination are
located along the spur adjacent to the western Time Oil building and continuing
for a distance of at least 150 feet west of that building.  Measured
concentrations of the  contaminants is greater than 3,000 parts per billion (ppb)
of soil to depths of about 25 feet.  Highest concentrations were found near the
surface at levels up to  1000 parts per million (ppiri) of soil.

Along the north-south  soil boring line, soil contamination concentrations to
about 3,000 ppb of soil  were measured to a depth of about 20 feet on the north
end of the Fleetline property.

Continuity between this  near surface soil contamination and that in the aquifer
was established.  The  total quantity of solvents contained in the soil from the
ground surface to the  groundwater level was grossly estimated at about 1500 Ibs.

Groundwater contamination was found along the east-west line,of borings in the
same boreholes as the major soil contamination,  Levels ranged up to about
4-90-61
Page 23

-------
11,000 ppb of water.   Along the north-south line of borings,  levels up to
863,000 ppb were measured under the Fleetline property.   This southward
displacement of the highest aquifer contamination is likely to have resulted
from the previous pumping action of the wellfield.

Prior to startup of the Well 12A treatment system in July 1983, Well 12A had
been shutdown since mid 1981, except for brief periods of operation for water
sampling.  However, other wells in the wellfield had been being operated on
demand.

The approximate contours of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane that existed at the time
of startup of the treatment system shows the highest concentrations existed near
the Time Oil site with decreasing concentrations toward the wellfield.  The
translation of the plume is toward operating wells (9A & 2B).  After pumping
began at Well 12A, the contamination levels increased at Well 12A and decreased
at the other production wells as the plume was preferentially drawn to Well 12A.
At the end of the pumping season in early November, the
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane concentration at Well 12A was about 45 ppb, a decrease
from the mid August level of about 60 ppb.  Following shutdown of the 12A
treatment system in November; the plume contours returned more nearly to their
original locations, and the concentration at Well 12A was reduced to about
5 ppb.

A liquid phase carbon adsorption system is used at the Time Oil facility to pump
and treat contaminated groundwater.  Treated groundwater is discharged to a
stormwater sewer system.  Sampling was conducted during the same week as
sampling at the Well 12A site.
 4-90-61
 Page 24

-------

-------
                          TYSON'S  DUMP  -  EPISODE 1568
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
Tyson's Dump Site is an abandoned septic waste and chemical waste disp.osal site
reported to have operated from 1960 to 1970 within a sandstone quarry.  The site
is located in Upper Merion Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.  Several
formerly unlined lagoons were used to store various industrial municipal, and
chemical wastes.  Spills and overflows reportedly occurred during the period of
operation, thus allowing for the dispersal of wastes throughout the site.
Surface water run-off and seeps contributed to off-site migration of the wastes
toward the Schuylkill River.  The approximately 4-acre plot, which constitutes a
series of formerly unlined lagoons, is bordered on the east and west by unnamed
tributaries to the Schuylkill River, a steep quarry high-wall to the south, and
a Conrail railroad switching yard to the north.  North of the Conrail tracks is
the Schuylkill River floodplain.  The area of the former lagoon lies above the
100-year floodplain.

The Tyson's Site was owned and operated by companies owned by Franklin P. Tyson
and Fast Pollution Treatment, Inc.  (FPTI).  The stock of FPTI was owned by the
current owner of the land, 'General Devices, Inc. (GDI) and by Franklin P: Tyson.
The site was used by Tyson and FPTI for disposal of liquid septic tank waste and
sludges and chemical wastes which were hauled to the site in bulk tank trucks.

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PADER) ordered GDI to
close the facility in 1973.  Although some ponded water was removed in 1973, GDI
did not arrange for removal and off-site disposal of contaminated soils.

In January 1983, EPA investigated an anonymous citizen complaint about condi-
tions at Tyson's and subsequently determined that immediate removal measures
were required.  These measures included the construction of a leachate collec-
tion and treatment system, drainage controls and cover over the site, and the
erection of.a fence around the lagoon area.

Between January 1983 and August of  1984, EPA and its contractors conducted a
series of investigations primarily  in what is now referred to as the On-Site
Area.  The On-Site Area is defined here as that area south of the railroad
tracks and within or immediately adjacent to the security fence erected during
the emergency response measures.  In December 1984, EPA issued its Record of
Decision  (ROD) for the On-Site Area which recommended  the following remedial
actions:

          Excavation and off-site disposal of contaminated soils and wastes to a
          permitted Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA) landfill.

          Upgrading the existing air-stripping  facility to treat leachate,
          shallow groundwater and surface run-on encountered during excavation.

          Excavation and off-site disposal of contaminated sediments within the
          tributary which  receives  effluent from the existing air stripper.
 4-90-61
 Page  25

-------
Following issuance of the ROD, EPA began remedial design for the selected
alternative in January 1985.  this design included additional borings throughout
the lagoon area to define the volume of material to be excavated.  From August
1985 through November 1985, EPA performed additional borings and magnetometer
surveys throughout the lagoon area to better delineate the areas to be
excavated.

In the fall of 1985, CIBA-GEIGY Corporation agreed to conduct a further inves-
tigation of the Off-Site Area, the need for which was described in the December
1984 EPA ROD.  The Off-Site Area is defined here as that area outside of the
security fence including the deep aquifer (bedrock aquifer).   EPA subdivided the
Off-Site Area into five sub-areas or "operable units."  The Off-Site Operable
Units included the following:

          Deep Aquifer (Operable Unit 1)
          Hillside Area (Operable Unit 2)
          Railroad Area (Operable Unit 3)
          Floodplain/Wetlands (Operable Unit 4)
          Seep Area (Operable Unit 5)

On May 27, 1986, an Administrative Consent Order (AGO) was signed between EPA
and Ciba-Geigy Corporation for the Off-Site Operable Unit Remedial Investiga-
tion/Feasibility Study (RI/FS).

In November 1986, Ciba-Geigy Corporation initiated an on-site pilot study using
an innovative vacuum extraction technology process.  Due to zoning restrictions,
the pilot study operated for only a short duration (less than 10 days).
However, in May 1987, the pilot study was recommended and operated for more than
three weeks.

In December 1986, Ciba-Geigy submitted a draft Off-Site Operable Unit RI Report
to EPA.  This report indicated that much of the site-related contamination had
migrated off-site into the deep aquifer toward the Schuylkill River.

On March 24, 1987, a second addendum to the Off-site RI/FS Work Plan was
submitted to EPA by Ciba-Geigy Corporation.  This addendum included a detailed
investigation of the Schuylkill River and the installation of wells on the north
side of the river.

In June and July 1987, four responsible parties, Ciba-Geigy Corporation,
Smith-Kline Beckman, Wyeth Laboratories, and Essex Group submitted a proposal to
EPA for clean-up of the on-site lagoon areas, upgrading of the leachate
collection system and clean-up of the tributary sediments.  Additionally, the
parties proposed to initiate groundwater remediation measures since the
information contained in the draft Off-Site Operable Units RI report indicated
that much of the contamination formerly in the lagoon areas was now in the
aquifer system, downgradient of the site, and was discharging to the Schuylkill
River.

The parties' proposal was based on a Comprehensive Feasibility Study (CFS)
submitted to the Agency on June 15, 1987.  The CFS was developed independently
4-90-61
Page 26

-------
by Ciba-Geigy Corporation and was not formally commented on by EPA.  The CFS
incorporated the results of the innovative vacuum extraction process for
clean-up of the lagoon soils, preliminary results of the Off-Site RI and
additional studies for the installation of groundwater recovery wells.  Some of
the results of the CFS indicated that the contaminants in the bedrock underlying
the lagoons would be a source of continuing contamination of the backfilled
soil.  The study raised the possibility that the remedy selected in the ROD
would be of limited effectiveness without the installation of a barrier, which
would limit upward movement of contamination from the underlying bedrock.

On July 29, 1987, Ciba-Geigy Corporation submitted the final draft Operable
Units RI report to EPA.  This report concluded that much of the site
contamination, specifically the dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLS), were
in the underlying bedrock and aquifer.  The report also found that a dissolved
portion of the DNAPLs was discharging into the Schuylkill River.

The leachate collection and treatment system constructed in 1983 is scheduled to
operate through 1988, and will then be dismantled.  The air-stripping treatment
system was installed to remove volatile organic compounds from the collected
leachate.  The plant is effective in removing many volatile organic compounds,
however, its efficiency for reducing some organic compounds, particularly
xylenes and 1,2,3 trichloropropane, is lower.
 4-90-61
 Page 27

-------

-------
                         UNITED CHROME - EPISODE 1738
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The United Chrome Products (UCP) site is a former industrial hard chrome plating
facility located at 2000 Airport Road in the Airport Research Industrial Park
complex, approximately 3.5 miles south of the city of Corvallis, Oregon. , The
UCP site consists of a single building on approximately 1.5 acres of level
ground and is bounded by the Corvallis Airport.  The city of Corvallis owns the
UCP site and all surrounding property.

UCP began electroplating operations in 1956.  A dry well disposal pit was
created in the same year and was reportedly used until 1975 to dispose of floor
drippings, washings, and product rinsate from a sump within the building.
Liquids were reportedly neutralized with sodium hydroxide and/or soda ash prior
to disposal in the dry well.  The specific composition of water discharged is
unknown; however, the nature of the facility indicates that spent plating bath
solutions; spent stripping and cleaning bath solutions, and sludges from plating
baths may have been disposed in the dry well.  Quantities of waste discharges
are unknown, but have been estimated at 1,000 gallons per year.  Use of the dry
well reportedly ceased in 1975.-  The amount and disposition of wastes produced
since then is unknown.

In November 1984, UCP announced that it would shut down and cease all
operations, and in May 1985, the equipment and contents of the building were
sold.  The building is currently vacant, and the city of Corvallis has indicated
that it presently has no plans for alternative use of the site area and
building, or for demolition of the facility.

Environmental investigations at UCP conducted by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality  (ODEQ) and EPA took place between November 1982 and
December  1984.  In July 1983, the site was scored using the Hazard Ranking
System  and subsequently included on the National Priorities List.  Investi-
gations indicated considerable chromium contamination in the soil beneath and
near the  building and  in both the upper and lower aquifers as a result of
leaching  from the drywell and plating tanks.   Investigations also indicated
contamination of approximately 2.4 million gallons of groundwater in the upper
unconfined and lower confined aquifers.  Total chromium concentrations  in the
upper aquifer are as high as 1.5 percent near  the former plating tanks, but
range from 142 to 689  milligrams per  liter  (mg/1) in the surrounding monitoring
wells.  Total chromium concentrations in the lower aquifer are  generally an
order of  magnitude  lower; however, the primary drinking water standard  of
0.05 mg/  has been exceeded  in numerous deep well samples.

An immediate removal action initiated in July  1985 and completed in October  1985
stabilized the site after the company vacated  the building.  Perimeter  fencing
was  installed, and  spent plating solution,  drums, and  containers were removed
from the  site.   All hazardous substance source materials are believed to have
been removed from the  site  with the  exception  of residual  sludges in plating
tanks.
 4-90-61
 Page 28

-------
EPA completed a Feasibility Study  (FS) addressing site cleanup alternatives in
August 1985.  A Record-of-Decision (ROD) was issued by EPA Region X in September
1986 recommending limited excavation of contaminated soil from the dry well and
plating tank areas, and unconfined and confined aquifer groundwater extraction,
treatment, and surface discharge.   Installation of two percolation, barriers in
the excavated area was recommended to flush contaminated soil in the unsaturated
zone above the shallow groundwater table.  The ROD recommended that the drainage
ditch within the contaminated area be culverted to protect the local surface
drainage ditch system from contamination.  The objective of the selected
alternative is to remove contamination in the confined aquifer and control the
migration of further contamination from the upper unconfined zone,  The cleanup
criteria in the confined aquifer is the drinking water standard of 0.05 mg/ for
chromium, because this aquifer is  considered a drinking water source in direct
hydraulic connection with the local drinking water supply wells.  The cleanup
criteria for the unconfined aquifer is also 0.05 mg/.  The site boundary is
considered the point of compliance  at which these criteria must be met.

UCP site remediation is currently  in progress.  Extracted groundwater is being
treated on-site.  Groundwater is pumped to an influent holding tank and then
transferred to a sectioned tank.  Metals are reduced chemically in the first
section.  Groundwater then flows to a section where the pH is raised to between
9 and 10 to cause the formation of metal hydroxides and a polymer flocculant
solution is added.  Groundwater then flows to the final section for settling and
clarification.  After settling and  clarification, the groundwater flows from the
sectioned tank through polishing filters (not operating during sample episode)
to one of the two holding tanks where total chromium and pH are monitored to
determine whether the water meets  discharge standards.   If treated water does
not meet discharge standards, it is recirculated through the treatment system.
Adequately treated water is discharged as a batch from the holding tank to an
on-site sewer which connects to the Corvallis wastewater treatment plant.
4-90-61
Page 29

-------
                             VERONA - EPISODE 1223
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Verona Well Field is located  approximately 1/2 mile northeast of Battle
Creek, Michigan.  The well field  incorporates property on both sides of the
Battle Creek River, consisting of three wells west of the river  (in .Bailey
Park), and 27 wells, with a major pumping/water treatment station, east of the
river.  The area north and east of  the well field is essentially rural.  Land
use to the south and west is light  to heavy industrial, with a residential area
directly south, and the Grand Trunk Western Railroad (Grand Trunk) marshaling
yard adjoining the well field on  the east.

The,Verona Well Field provides potable water to 35,000 residents of Battle
Creek, and part or all of the water supply requirements for two major food
processing industries and a variety of other commercial and industrial* estab-
lishments.  A review of the monthly pumping data indicates that the City
requires an average supply of water equal to approximately 10 million
gallons/day (MGD) with additional supplies needed to meet a peak demand
equalling 19 MGD.

During August 1981, while conducting routine testing of private water supplies,
the Calhoun County Health Department discovered that the water supply from the
Verona Well Field was slightly contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOCs).  Follow-up testing by the Calhoun County Health Department and the
Michigan Department of Public Health (MDPH) revealed that ten of the City's
30 wells contained detectable levels of volatile compounds.  The MDPH then began
weekly sampling of the well field.

During that same period, the MDPH began sampling private residential wells in
the area to the south of the well field.  To date, approximately 80 private
wells have been found to contain  varying concentrations of contaminants.
Several of the private wells have total VOC contamination levels on the order of
1,000 parts per billion (ppb); the  private well with the highest reported level
had a dichloroethylene concentration of 3,900 ppb.

The Verona Well Field was listed  as a National Priorities List site in July
1982.  Since then several studies,  investigations, and activities have been
conducted in'the area.

The Michigan, Department of Natural  Resources (MDNR) investigated potential
sources of the contamination, and identified the Thomas Solvent Company facili-
ties, the Grand Trunk marshaling  yard, and the Raymond Road Landfill as possible
sources of the volatile hydrocarbons.  The EPA Technical Assistance Team (TAT)
conducted a groundwater survey during the spring of 1982, and further concluded
that the source of contamination  was most likely in the vicinity of the Thomas
Solvent facilities.  The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)  initiated a hydrological
investigation under contract with the City of Battle Creek in 1982.   The study
examined the geology and groundwater flow patterns in the vicinity of the Verona
Well Field.   The,USGS has prepared  a groundwater flow model (1985) to evaluate
the effects of pumping Verona wells on groundwater flow.   E-PA began Phase I of a
remedial investigation (RI) in November 1983.
4-90-61
Page 30

-------
The purpose of the RI was to identify the sources of contamination to the well
field.

By January 1984, all but six of the City's 30 water supply wells in the Verona
Well Field were contaminated with VOCs from the advancing groundwater plume.
Under these conditions,  it was apparent -that there would not be a sufficient
supply of uncontaminated water to meet the City's peak demand in the summer of
1984.  In response, EPA initiated a focused feasibility study (FFS) in February
1984 to address the water supply problem, while the remedial investigation on
the sources of contamination proceeded.                          ,

The FFS resulted in a Record-of-Decision by Region V,  EPA in May 1984 that
recommended the installation of three new water supply production wells,  and the
use of selected existing Verona wells to form a blocking well system to halt the
spread of contamination to the northernmost Verona wells.   The purge water from
the blocking wells would be treated by an air stripper to be constructed at the
well field.

Blocking well operations were initiated in May 1984, with temporary carbon
adsorption beds providing treatment until the air stripper could be constructed.
Construction of the air stripper was completed in August 1984.  Since operation
of the barrier wells began, the advance of the contaminant plume has been
halted.  In its Record-of-Decision, EPA determined that the barrier system
should be maintained for a period of five years to insure adequate supplies of
uncontaminated water until final remedial measures are implemented.

The results of the Phase I remedial investigation were published in technical
memorandum in November 1984.  The results confirmed that the Thomas Solvent
facilities are major sources of groundwater contamination, and also identified
an unknown source of perchloroethylene (PCE) from a location east of the well
field.

Phase II of EPA's remedial investigation was initiated in July 1984 to charac-
terize in greater detail the extent of VOC contamination at the Thomas Solvent
facilities, and to investigate the source of the eastern plume of PCE.

The Thomas Solvent Company operations at the Raymond Road facility consisted of
the packaging and distribution of liquid solvent commercial products, with the
exception of minor amounts of reclaimed acetone.  The generators of the re-
claimed acetone hauled by Thomas are unknown, and since this activity repre-
sented a. minor portion of Thomas Solvent business (less than 5 percent),
enforcement efforts have been directed at Thomas as owner/operator.

In February 1985, EPA determined that source control measures at the Verona Well
Field site should be carried out in separate operable units.  Source control at
the Thomas Raymond Road facility was identified as the first operable unit that
should be conducted at the Verona Well Field site because of the relative
magnitude of contamination at the facility.  The groundwater beneath and
surrounding the facility is contaminated at levels exceeding 100,000 ppb VOCs.
This is approximately 100 times more concentrated than levels in the majority of
the plume.
4-90-61
Page 31

-------
Presently, contaminated groundwater from the Thomas Raymond Road facility is
pumped from several on-site extraction wells to the pretreatment facility at the
Verona Well Field site.  This wastestream is discharged to, two of three
activated carbon adsorption vessels before blending with groundwater from the
blocking well system.  The blended streams collect in a wet well prior to being
pumped through an air stripping unit.  Final discharge is to the Battle Creek
River.

Personnel from MDNR have noted that desorption of several compounds from the
granular activated carbon units occurs periodically.  These compounds are not
air-stripped efficiently and have on occasion been found by MDNR in the final
'effluent.
4-90-61
Page 32

-------

-------
                           WELL 12A -  EPISODE  1808
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Well 12A site in Tacoma, Washington is a production well with treatment
consisting of an air stripping system discharging treated water to either
Commencement Bay or to the City's water system.  During the remedial investi-
gation, 11 monitoring wells were installed.  By measuring groundwater elevation
in the wells, it was determined that the natural (undisturbed by well field
pumping) groundwater flow direction was from west to east with a relatively flat
gradient and therefore, a low flow velocity.  The study also determined that the
major source of contamination was generally northeast of Well 12A.  A specific
source was not identified.  Under these conditions, with the wellfield shut down
most of the year, the contaminant plume moves slowly away from the production
wells.  However, under the influence of production well pumping action, the
natural gradient is reversed and the contamination is drawn towards the
operating wells.

One conclusion of the Remedial Investigation was that operation of Well 12A
would intercept the contamination drawn from the source area even if other
production wells were pumping.  In effect, Well 12A would provide a barrier to
the spread of contamination and protect the rest of the wellfield.  If Well 12A
were not operated to provide a barrier, other operating wells would draw the
contaminant plume and would be lost for use.

To avoid the potential loss of the wellfield during the approaching summer peak
water demand period, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in January
1983, authorized a focused  feasibility study to determine a cost-effective
treatment system for the  output of Well 12A.  Treatment of the wellwater was
necessary to achieve a quality that would permit discharge to Commencement Bay,
or would permit its use in  the City water system.

The initial  remedial measure for Well 12A treatment was determined to be an air
stripping system consisting of five packed towers  operating in parallel at a
total  flow rate of 3,500  gallons per minute (gpm)  and discharging treated water
to either Commencement Bay  or the  the City's water system depending on measured
quality and  the City's needs.  The decision level  used to determine whether the
treated well water would  be used  in  the City water system or discharged to the
bay was the  10"6 level of hazard at the tap (after dilution in the system) .

Construction of this  treatment  system was authorized in late March 1983, and  it
was  started  up  in mid-July  and  operated by the City  until early November.
Treatment performance  was better  than anticipated  and effluent solvent concen-
trations  did not reach the  design levels.  Treated water was therefore suitable
for use in  the  City's  water system during the  full pumping  season.

Operation of the Well 12A treatment system by  the  City  of Tacoma  will  continue
 on a seasonal basis  to protect  the wellfield.

Research into  the  past ownership  and activities on these properties  indicated
 that waste  oil  and solvent reclamation processes were used  and  that  some of  the
 4-90-61
 Page 33

-------
spent filter cake was used to build the railroad spur.  The use of the Time Oil
site for oil recycling and related operations dates back to 1927 when
William Palin began operations under the name of Palin and Son.  In 1933;  the
business name was changed to National Oil and Paint.  The two main activities of
the businesses were waste oil recycling and paint and lacquer thinner
manufacturing.

The waste oil recycling process consisted of collecting waste oil in a large
tank, adding chemicals such as sulfuric acid, and pressurizing and heating the
contents of the vessel.  This process resulted in the formation of a tar-like
sludge on the bottom of the tank which was removed and disposed of.  Absorbents
and clay materials were also added to the oil.  The sludge was filtered from the
oil, and the resulting filter cake was disposed of or stored in various piles on
the site.  Some of this sludge was also used for fill around the site.

The paint and lacquer thinner manufacturing involved the use of many solvents
that were stored on the site in barrels which may have leaked their contents
into the soil.

Prior to purchase of the property by Time Oil, Inc., in 1964,  the remaining
barrels and drums of solvent were removed from the site.  After Time Oil
purchased the property, operations continued under the name National Oil and
Paint until 1972.  During this period, National Oil was involved only in waste
oil recycling.  Waste sludges and filter cakes were not known to be stored on
the site during this period.

In 1972, Time Oil leased the facilities to Golden Penn, Inc.   Golden Penn
operated on the site until 1976, before going out of business  as a result  of a
destructive fire.  In 1975 and 1976, Golden Penn was ordered by the State  of
Washington to clean up the site by removing some of the filter cake and spilled
oil from the ground.

In 1976, Time Oil resumed operation at the site.  Since then their operation has
been limited to canning oil brought to the site in bulk containers.  In 1982,
the Burlington Northern Railroad spur was extended by Time Oil to its present
length so that oil could be delivered by tanker car.  During the construction of
the spur, some of the filter cake or sludge material stored on the site was used
in the roadbed.

During the remedial investigation, the extent of soil and groundwater contami-
nation near the Time Oil plant was explored by means of surface soil samples,
shallow and deep soil borings and monitoring wells.

Chemical data for 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane and tetrachloroethylene taken from
soil borings along the spur and along a north-sbuth line and data for tri-
chloroethylene shows these compounds are the ones of primary interest because
they are the contaminants at Well 12A.  Many others, not found at Well 12A,  were
also detected at much lower concentrations.

Along the east-west line of borings, high values of soil contamination are
located along the spur adjacent to the western Time Oil building and continuing
4-90-61
Page 34

-------
for a distance of at least 150 feet west of that building.  Measured
concentrations of the contaminants is greater than 3,000 parts per billion (ppb)
of soil to depths of about 25 feet.  Highest concentrations were found near the
surface at levels up to about 1,000 parts per million (ppm) .

Along the north-south soil boring line, soil contamination concentrations to
about 3,000 ppb of soil were measured to a depth of .about 20 feet on the north
end of the Fleetline property.

Continuity between this near surface soil contamination and that in the aquifer
was established.  The total quantity of solvents contained in the soil from the
ground surface to the groundwater level was grossly estimated at about
1,500 pounds. '

Groundwater contamination was found along the east-west line, of borings in the
same boreholes as the major soil contamination.  Levels ranged up to about
11,000 ppb of water.  Along the north-south line of borings, levels up to
863,000 ppb were measured under the Fleetline property.  This southward dis-
placement of the highest aquifer contamination is likely to have resulted from
the previous pumping action of the wellfield.
 4-90-61
 Page 35

-------

-------
                      WESTERN  PROCESSING -  EPISODE 1739
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The Western Processing site is located at 7215 South 196th Street in Kent, King
County, Washington.  From 1953 to 1961, the site was leased and used as a
U.S. Army Nike Anti-Aircraft Artillery facility.  In 1961, the property was sold
to Western Processing Company, Inc. (Western Processing).  Originally, Western
Processing was a reprocessor of animal by-products and brewer's yeast.  In the
1960s, the business expanded to recycling, reclaiming, treating, and disposing
of many industrial wastes, including waste oils, electroplating wastes, waste
pickle liquor, battery acids, steel mill flue dust, pesticides, spent solvents,
and zinc dross.

Discharges from Western Processing were monitored and regulated by the
Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) until 1981.  U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency  (EPA) inspected the site in March 1981 to determine compliance
with the new RCRA regulations and in September 1982, EPA.initiated an
investigation.  Western Processing had violated many EPA hazardous waste
management regulations.  Approximately 100 of the 129 priority pollutants were
detected in the soil or groundwater on and off the Western Processing Site, or
in the adjacent Mill Creek.

After  soil and groundwater sample analyses were completed in April 1983,
confirming widespread  site contamination, EPA ordered cessation of site
operations.  Western Processing could not comply with EPA's specifications to
clean  up the site,  so  EPA conducted emergency cleanup operations funded by
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act  (CERCIA).
The emergency response activities included removal of wastes  (drums, liquids,
and solids) for off-site disposal, reorganization of the remaining on-site
drums, and excavation  of contaminated soil from the reaction pond area.

A Record-of-Decision was signed fn 1984.  In July 1984,  further site cleanup
activities were initiated as  a result of  the agreement reached between EPA,
WDOE,  and the potentially responsible parties  (PRPs) for the Phase I remedial
action program.  These surface cleanup activities were completed in November
1984 under the direction of Chemical Waste Management, Inc.  (consultant for the
PRPs).

The selected  alternative  for  the Phase II remedial action program included
installation  of a  slurry wall around the  site  to a depth of 42  to 46 feet below
ground and pumping and treating the groundwater from the shallow aquifer
directly below the site and  contaminated  groundwater from deeper in the aquifer
that has migrated  off-site.   More  than 200 well points,  laid  out in a  grid
across the site, will  be used to extract  groundwater from below the site.
Extraction wells located  off-site  will be used to  pump contaminated groundwater
from  deeper in the aquifer.   The on-site  well  points  and off-site pumping wells
are divided into six  different cells so  that  the pumping zones  and the pumping
rate  from each cell can be controlled.   Interspersed  amongst  the on-site  well
points are  infiltration drains that will  be used to recycle  clean water through
the unsaturated zone  and  flush contamination  from  the  shallow soils.   The
 4-90-61
 Page 36

-------
groundwater was pumped initially at a rate of 100 gallons per minute (gpm) and
routed through an on-site pretreatment plant designed by Chemical Waste
Management, Inc. (and subcontractors HDR and Canoni) .   The pumping system and
pretreatment plant are designed to pump and treat the groundwater at a rate of
up to 200 gpm.  Pretreated groundwater is discharged directly into the city
sewer system for additional treatment by activated sludge at the Renton
wastewater treatment plant.

Negotiations were initiated in 1986 between EPA, WDOE and the POTW authority of
Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) to discuss the feasibility of discharging
contaminated water from the Western Processing site.  Initially, Metro was
reluctant to accept the wastewater because of concerns about liability.  In
April 1987, EPA entered a Consent Decree to expedite the Phase II clean-up
effort.  Chemical Waste Management, Inc.,•submitted a contract to Metro for
discharge from the site in the summer of 1987.  After Metro received written
indemnification assurance from EPA and WDOE regarding environmental consequences
associated with accepting the contaminated wastewater, Metro developed initial
local limits for acceptable loading from the site.

The Western Processing pretreatment plant operates 24 hours per day,  and will
operate for a minimum of seven years.   The pretreatment plant process includes
sequentially:  air stripping with carbon adsorption and hot gas regeneration
systems to control volatile emissions; phenol oxidation; metals reduction;  pH
adjustment; flocculation; inclined-plate clarification;  and sludge thickening.
A stand-by granulated carbon adsorption system to treat the groundwater is  also
in place.  The sludge generated from the pretreatment plant is disposed at  the
Arlington, Oregon,  hazardous waste landfill.
4-90-61
Page 37

-------
                        WHITEHOUSE OIL  - EPISODE  1241
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
The community of Whitehouse, Florida is located within 0.25 miles east and
southeast of the site.  Two major east-west highways, U.S.  Highway 90 and
Interstate 10, are approximately 0.5 miles south of the site.   A low-density
residential area is located west and northwest of the site, and several miles
northwest of the site is the Cecil Field U.S.  Naval Air Station.  The area north
and northeast of the site is largely undeveloped land comprised of pine forests
and cypress swamp.

The Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits occupy approximately seven acres on an upland
area.  The northern and western sides of the site border a swamp system through
which the Northeast Tributary runs.  The stream originates from a 220-acre
cypress swamp located approximately 0.5 miles  upstream from the site.  The
southern side of the site is bordered by open grassland, with the exception of
the southwestern corner, which is a private residence.

The site consists of seven unlined pits where  waste oil sludge, acid, and
contaminated waste oil from an oil reclaiming process were disposed. 'Allied
Petroleum constructed the pits to dispose of waste oil sludge and acid from its
oil reclaiming process.  The first pits were constructed in 1958, and by 1968
the company had constructed and filled seven pits.  Allied Petroleum then went
bankrupt, and most of the property transferred to the City of Jacksonville for
nonpayment of taxes.  After they were abandoned by Allied Petroleum, the pits
remained an "open dump" for several years.  It is reasonable to assume that.
indiscriminate dumping occurred during that time.

The waste oil recovery process used by Allied Petro Products was the
Acid-Clay Process.  This process forms, as by-products, a waste-acid tar and
spent acidic clays which are corrosive.  The seven unlined pits contained an
estimated 127,000 cubic yards of waste.  Stabilization activities have increased
the volume of contaminated material to an estimated 240,000 cubic yards.

Major contaminants at the site include hexavalent chromium, arsenic, lead,
phenols, benzene, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) (fluoranthene,
phenanthrene, pyrene).

Improvements made to the site by the City of Jacksonville in 1980 and the
initial remedial measures (IRM) done under cooperative agreement with the State
have significantly reduced the hazards at the site and ensured that no
large-scale spills would occur again.  Erosion continues to be a problem at the
site.  Testing by the State indicated that heavy rains and eroding dike walls
have allowed pollutants to slowly seep into surface water.  As expected, soil
samples from beneath the clay cap of the pits show gross contamination by heavy
metals and low levels of a few organic compounds.  The only soils beyond the
pits which are badly contaminated are the soils in the swamp or floodplain north
of the pits, between the pits and the northeast tributary.
4-90-61
Page 38

-------
The quality of surface water was tested at five sampling stations in the
drainage basin.  These samples show that the surface water quality in McGirt's
Creek significantly improved since 1977.  This improvement is directly related
to the work done by the local, state, and federal agencies which prevented
further large scale contamination.  However, the effect of the pits is still
evident since the surface water contains heavy metals and a lowered pH.  The
water quality of the creek is also threatened by the seepage which has polluted
the soil in the flood plain north of the pits.

Areas of potential groundwater contamination were located by conductivity tests.
Thirty-six wells at a variety of depths were installed to sample groundwater.
The shallow groundwater (7 to 15 feet) between the pits and the northeast
tributary is grossly contaminated by heavy metals and organic compounds.   Only
low levels of organic compounds were detected across the northeast tributary and
beyond the south drainage ditch.  Thus, shallow groundwater contamination seems
to be localized close to the site.

Vertical migration has reached into the aquitard (35 - 60 feet).  The deeper
wells (100 to 125 feet) close to the site show low levels of heavy metals and
organic compounds.  This is of special concern since these wells are in the same
aquifer used by many residents.  All the residential wells near the site that
were downgradient of the pits were tested during the remedial investigation.  No
contamination from the pits was detected in any of the wells.   The State will
continue to monitor quality of the residential wells.

The eventual receptor for surface runoff is McGirt's creek which empties into
the St. John's River approximately ten miles downstream.  Neither of these
bodies of water supply drinking water, but are areas of environmental concern.

As late as 1983 (prior to completion of the IRM),  seepage of contaminated
leachate through the dike walls was observed.  State bioassays using a weak
concentration of the leachate showed it to be very toxic.  Direct contact with
leachate and leachate contaminated surface water is a concern.

The domestic water supply aquifer beneath the site is protected by a fairly
consistent aquitard.  Sampling has shown contamination in the shallow aquifer
and evidence of contamination moving down into the aquitard (permeability about
10-s centimeters/second) .   Groundwater degradation is an immediate concern and a
reason for taking preventative action.

Although the IRM was constructed as an attempt to reinforce the dike walls and
prevent further spread of contamination, this measure is not adequate for long-
term containment of the waste.  To compound site problems, erosion caused by
motorcycles, dirt buggies, heavy rainfall, and hurricanes pose additional risks
to all population .groups surrounding the site.

Monitoring Wells MW-5 and MW-9, and RW-1 (4-inch pump test well) are being
considered in future remediation efforts as representative wells to be used as
extraction wells for a pump and treat system.  These wells would be recommended
sample points for an EPA-ITD sampling effort.
4-90-61
Page 39

-------
                    STRINGFELLOW ACID PITS  - EPISODE 1805
                               SITE DESCRIPTION
Stringfellow Acid Pit was operated by Stringfellow Quarry Co. from 1956 to 1972
as a hazardous waste disposal facility.   The landfill disposal site was permit-
ted by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).   About
34 million gallons of wastes, mostly from metal finishing,  electroplating, and
DDT production, were deposited on approximately 17 acres of the site.  In 1969
and 1978, excessive rainfall caused the ponds used for solar evaporation to
overflow, spreading contamination into the nearby town of Glen Avon.  In July
1980,  the RWQCB advocated total removal of all solids and liquids but the funds
were not available.  In December 1980, RWQCB selected an interim plan that
included installation of channels to divert surface water,  a gravel drain and a
network of wells for monitoring and extraction, and a clay core barrier dam
downgradient to stop subsurface leachate migration.

California placed Stringfellow at the top of the California priority list.  The
State conducted a study in compliance with the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (the National Contingency Plan or NCP) to
obtain CERCLA funds.  The results of the study indicated that on-site management
was more cost effective than total removal.

On July 22, 1983, Lee Thomas, Assistant Administrator of the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), signed a Record of Decision (ROD) which
endorsed the State's request for funds for both existing activities and proposed
actions.  The interim actions authorized in the ROD were:

     o    removal of DDT contaminated material

     o    operation of extraction wells upgradient of the clay barrier to
          protect the barrier

     o    fencing the entire site to prevent entry

     o    erosion control to prevent destruction of a clay cap
                         6
The state also requested EPA to lead a fast track Remedial Investigation/Feasi-
bility Study  (RI/FS) while the Department of Health Services completed the
long-term RI/FS.

As a result of the fast track RI/FS, a pretreatment system was installed to
treat the groundwater before its discharge to  the Santa Ana Watershed Project
Authority.  The  series of extraction wells transfer two groundwater streams from
the contaminated canyon area to the field storage tanks.  On-site groundwater
(Stream A), known  to contain metal compounds and organics, is transferred from
the field storage  tanks to one of four equalization tanks (each with a
12,000-gallon capacity) at the on-site treatment plant.  Once equalization of
Stream A occurs, Stream A proceeds to a 400-gallon capacity rapid mix tank where
lime and caustic soda are added to aid precipitation and to.control
acidity/alkalinity, and polymer is added to aid floe formation.  The chemically
treated and mixed  stream flows to two parallel-operating clarifiers.
 4-90-61
 Page  40

-------
 The thickened sludge is pumped from the clarifiers to the sludge holding tanks,
 and the clarified effluent flows to two gravity sand filters operating in
 parallel.   Each filter has a 7.6 square foot area, and the sand is about three
 feet deep.  Wastewater from the sand filters is transferred to the 500-gallon
 Stream A filter effluent tank.

 Groundwater from mid-canyon (Stream B),  which contains mostly organic  compounds,
 is  transferred from the field storage tanks  to one of three equalization tanks
 (12,000-gallon capacity each) located at the on-site treatment plant.   Stream A
 effluent from the 500-gallon filter effluent tank is blended with Stream B
 before discharging to activated carbon adsorption vessels.   The two carbon
 adsorption  vessels each have a. 10-ton capacity for granular activated  carbon  and
 are operated  in series with a third vessel functioning as a transfer tank.

 Effluent from the carbon adsorption vessels  is transferred to one of four final
 effluent storage tanks (80,000-gallon total  capacity),  before it is discharged
 to  the sewer  at an average rate of 870,000 gallons per month.   As necessary,
 effluent from these storage tanks is used as backwash and other plant  utility
 water.

 Sludge is pumped from the clarifiers to  two  11,000-gallon sludge holding  tanks.
 The sludge  from the two sludge  holding  tanks is fed to two  plate-and-frame
 filter presses.   Depending on the pollutant  content,  the  filtrate from the
 filter press  operation can be recycled  to either  the Stream A influent equal-
 ization tanks,  the Stream B influent equalization tanks,  or the Stream A  filter
 effluent tank.   Usually,  the filtrate is pumped to the Stream A equalization
 tanks.   The sludge cake is discharged into containers and is  hauled off-site by
 a contractor  for disposal at a  RCRA approved Class I disposal site  as  hazardous
waste.

As  part of  the  Stringfellow discharge permit,  the effluent  must be  tested prior
 to  any discharge.   Currently,  the facility is  allowed to  fill two storage tanks
 simultaneously,  but is only required to  test one  tank.

The pretreatment system located at Stringfellow operates  five  days  per week
during the daylight hours.
4-90-61
Page 41

-------
                                 ATTACHMENT B
                             SITE SUMMARY TABLES
891003-mll

-------

-------
         Influent From
         Lagoon
                                                                                     Surface
                                                                                     Water
                        Treatment: OS - DAF - MF - HT - GAC
                        Wastewater Type: Leachate
                        Average Ftow: 300 GPM (24 Hours/7Days)
                        Surface Water Discharge
                                                                           % Mass
                        # Compounds  Cone   Cone    Influent    Discharge  Removed
                                  r      1       2          3                   4
                          Detected
ITD
PP2    Loading
OS4
 %Mass
Removed
  DAF4
 %Mass
Removed
   MF4
 %Mass
Removed
  GAC4
 %Mass
Removed
 Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organlcs
Metals
PP : TCL : TO
5 : 8 : 16
5:14:19
Mln-Max
6-3246
^™
Mln-Max
6401
1u9g3/I3
(SR)
»,««
680 : 106X190

-------
                                                    Treatment: Future
                                                    WastewaterType: Groundwater
                                                    # Compounds  Cone   Cone
                                                      Detected1
Pollutant
Total
Organlcs .
Metals
PP:TCL:ITD
3:?no
4:12:19
Mln-Max
15-643
ug/L
a200-15900
ug/L
Mln-Max
15-93
ug/L
10-213
ug/L
                                                    NOTES:
                                                    1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                      TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                      ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                                    2. From samples collected from a one day sampling event
                                                                                                                  FIGURE B-2
                                                                                                    CHARLES GEORGE -1309
                                                                                                 ONE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                              REGION ITYNGSBOROUGH, MA
6098-01

-------
                                   Influent
                                                                                                     To Surface
                                                                                                     Water
                                    Treatment: Air Stripping
                                    Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                                    Average Flow: 750 GPM (24 Hours/7Days)
                                    60% to Surface Water/ 40% Relnjected
                                                                                          % Mass
                                     # Compounds  Cone   Cone    Influent    Discharge   Removed
                                       n^t^-tn^ii     rrn2    002    i .^Hin/-! 3       a          AS *
                                                    ITD2
PP2    Loading
AS
 % Mass
Removed
   CL4
 %Mass
Removed
 Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organlcs
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
12:12:16
4:11:16
Mln-Max
0.027ppt-
444tig/L
2-
137.167
ug/L
Min-Max
34-444
ug/L
6-34
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:fTD
5,110:6,300
225 : 669X120
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
344; 490
97 : 375,900
PP: ITD
89:88
13.: 3
PP: ITD
41:34
78:42
PP: ITD
93:92
57:43
                                     NOTES:
                                     1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                       TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                       ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                     2. Taken from concentration averages over a four day
                                       sampling event

                                     3. Based on pollutant concentration averages

                                     4. AS = Air Stripping
                                       CL = Clarifier
                                                                                                                                    FIGURE B-3
                                                                                                                             CHEMDYNE-1807
                                                                                                                  FIVE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                                     REGION V HAMILTON, OH
6093-01

-------
                                                     Treatment: Future
                                                     WastewaferType: Groundwater
                                                      # Compounds  Cone   Cone
                                                       Detected'    ITD2     PP*
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP:TCL:ITD
20:25:32
5 : 14 : 23
Mln-Max
Mppt-IOMJ
ug/l
3-1.075.000
ugfl.
Mln-Max
16-10X145
UQ/l
5-25
ug/L
                                                      NOTES:
                                                      1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                       TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                       ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                                      2. From samples collected from a one day sampling event
                                                                                                                      FIGURE B-4
                                                                                                     GENEVA INDUSTRIES -1224
                                                                                                     ONE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                        REGION VI HOUSTON, TX
6098-01

-------
                                                      Treatment: Future
                                                      Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                                                      # Compounds  Cone   Cone
                                                        Detectedr    1TD2    PP*
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
4:5;6
3:10:15
Mln-Max
12-68,017
UQ/L
4-205/300
ug/L
Mln-Max
30-58J017
ug/L
4-1,130
ug/L
                                                      NOTES:
                                                      1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                        TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                        ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                                      2. From samples collected from a one day sampling event
                                                                                                                       FIGURE B-5
                                                                                                          GOLD COAST OIL-1242
                                                                                                      ONE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                              REGION IV MIAMI, FL
6098-01

-------
                                                        Wet-We*
                                                           A
     AH.-TO
Pielreohnsnf/POlW
                                                                         Holding
                                                                         Lagoon
                                                         Wet-Well
                                                            B
                                                Treatment: Lagoon
                                                WastewaterType: Leachate
                                                Average Row: <6,000 GPD
                                                T048MGDPOTW
    NAPL-To
   Storage Area
                                                         "      „                             '         %Mass
                                                 # Compounds  Cone   Cone   Influent    Discharge   Removed
                                                  Detected1     ITD2    pp2    Loading3               Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organlcs
Metals
PP : TCL : [TD
ISH7J40
5:13:24
Mln-Max
0.38 ppf-
2,316,700
ug/L
16-349300
ug/L
Mln-Max
^2ppt-
1548,330
ug/L
24-1567
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
195,180;
484x590
270:801,930
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
118^001
517250
91:521260
PP:ITD
39t<1
66:35
                                                NOTES:
                                                1. APL = Aqueous Phase Liquid
                                                  NAPL = Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid

                                                2. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                  TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                  ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                                3. From samples collected from a one day sampling event

                                                4. Based on average of raw leachate collected from two
                                                  wet-wells
                                                                                                                                    FIGURE B-6
                                                                                                                            HYDE PARK-1220
                                                                                                                  ONE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                                REGION II NIAGRA FALLS, NY
6098-01

-------
                                 Influent
                                                                                                  To Sanitary  ^
                                                                                                  Sewer
                                                Treatment: Granular Activated Carbon
                                                Wastewater Type: Leachate
                                                Average Flow: 40,000 GPD (2Days/Wk)
                                                T048MGDPOTW
                                                # Compounds  Cone    Cone
                                                  Detected1     ITD2     PP2
                      %Mass
Influent    Discharge   Removed
Loading                Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
15 ; T8 ( 22

2:10: 19
Mln-Max
6ppt-
ST496
U0/L
27-225000
. ug/L
Mln-Max
6ppt-
18,166
ud/L
70-144
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
3050; 7J300

19 : 40220
(LBS/YR)
PPilTD
32; 23

7:37,130
PP:ITD
>99;>99

63:8
                                                NOTES:
                                                1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                  TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                  ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                                2. From samples collected from a one day sampling event
                                                                                                                               FIGURE B>7
                                                                                                                       LOVE CANAL-1219
                                                                                                              ONE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                            REGION II NIAGRA FALLS, NY
6098-01

-------
                                                       Treatment: Future
                                                       WastewaferType: Groundwater
                                                       # Compounds  Cone   Cone
                                                         rwor-te>Hr    rrnz     no 2
                                                         Detected
PP:
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
9;9:10
7:17:30
Mfn-Max
164-18,378
ug/L
12-821000
ug/L
Mln-Max
164-18,378
ug/L
12-6000
ug/L
                                                       NOTES:
                                                       1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                         TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                         ITD = Industrial Technology Division Ahalyte

                                                       2. From samples collected from a one day sampling event
                                                                                                                         FIGURE B-8
                                                                                                         NYANZA CHEMICAL-1310
                                                                                                        ONE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                           REGION I ASHLAND, MA
6098-01

-------
                                                                                                   95% To Drinking Water Supply
                                                                                                   5% To POTW
                                    Treatment: SF-GAC
                                    Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                                    Average Flow: 500 GPM (24 Hours/7Days)
                                    95% To Drinking Water Supply
                                    5% To POTW
                                                                                           %Mass
                                                                                           To IVIUS5
                                    # Compounds   Cone    Cone     Influent    Discharge  Removed
                                      Detectedr    ITD5     PP2    Loading3                  SF *
 %Mass
Removed
  GAC4
                                    NOTES:
                                    1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                      TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                      ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                    2. Taken from concentration average over a five day sampling event


                                    3. Based on pollutant concentration averages

                                    4. SF = Sand Filter
                                      GAC = Granular Activated Carbon
 %Mass
Removed
 Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
2:2:4
1 :7:13
Mln-Max
0,001 ppt-
2262
ug/L
7-89617
ug/L
Mln-Max
18-2262
ug/L
7
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
9,970:10,070
29 : 620580
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
900:990
245:616,060
PP:ITD
8231

-------
                              Treatment: CP-SF-GAC
                              WastewatefType: Groundwater
                              Average Flow: 0.04 MGD (8 Hours/5 Days/Wk)
                              To220MGDPOTW
                                                                                    % Mass
                              # Compounds  Cone    Coric    Influent    Discharge   Removed
                                         r       2       2                               5
PP2    Loading
                                                                                     CP
                              NOTES:
                              1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte


                              2. Prom samples collected from a one day sampling event


                              3. Based on pollutant concentration averages


                              4. The flows for streams A and B are unavailable - overall
                                removal can not be calculated


                              5. CP = Chemical Precipitation
                                SF = Sand Filter
                                GAC = Granular Activated Carbon
 % Mass      % Mass
Removed    Removed
   SF s       GAC5
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP:TCL:rTD
9:11:13
9:19:43
Mln-Max
ug/L
9-2.130.000
Mln-Max
^gf
44.1MJOOO

1,830:3240
•ffi
TO
8:17
11:196/20
PP:fTD
39:57
>99:48
PP : ITD
<1:<1

-------
Stream A ^"

i
Filtrate

Equalization
Tanks



Chemical
Precipitation
	 »-( Clarifier ) 	 »•


Filter
CO
1


                                   Treatment: CP-SF-GAC
                                   Wastewater Type:  Groundwater
                                   Average Flow: 0.04 MGD (8 Hours/5 Days/Wk)
                                   To 220 MGD POTW
                                   # Compounds   Cone   Cone    Influent
                                     Detected'     ITD1     PP2    Loading
            %Mass
Discharge   Removed
   4          CP5
 %Mass
Removed
   SF 5
 %Mass
Removed
  GAC5
Pollutant
Total
Organic$
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
20:25:32
8 : 18 : 42
Mln-Max
87-19/420
12-6.337,143
ug/L
Mln-Max
88-8,370
ug/L
13-121/129
ug/L
(LPSR)
2,090:4,540
18,010 :
1, 024x140
99:68
PP:ITD
7:<1
3:<1
PP:ITD
83:82
56:14
                                   NOTES:
                                   1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                     TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                     ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte


                                   2. Taken from concentration averages over a five day event


                                   3. Based on pollutant concentration averages


                                   4. The flows for streams A and B are unavailable - overall
                                     removal can not be calculated


                                   5. CP = Chemical Precipitation
                                     SF = Sand Filter
                                     GAC = Granular activated Carbon
                                                       FIGURE B-11
                                            STRINGFELLOW-1240
                                      FIVE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                            REGION IX GLEN AVON HEIGHTS, CA
6098-01

-------
I
                                           Treatment: CP-SF-GAC
                                           Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                                           Average Flow: 0.04 MGD (8 Hours/5 Days/Wk)
                                           To 220 MGD POTW
                                           # Compounds  Cone   Cone    Influent
                                             Detectecf    ITD2     PP2     Loading
            % Mass      % Mass      % Mass
Discharge   Removed    Removed    Removed
              CP5        SF 5       GAC5
Pollutant
Total
Organlcs
Metals
PP : TCL : (TD
15:20:27
7:17:30
Mln-Max
Q.Q28ppt
-6,848
ug/L
30-
5,792,000
ug/L
Mln-Max
12-
6.848
ug/L
114-
112,600
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
1,760:2/190
16,780 : 965,700
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
13; 45 '
8: 212X160
PPilTD
24:29
>99:57
PP:ITD
14:17
33:<1
PP:ITD
97:94
58:5
                                           NOTES:
                                           1. PP= Priority Pollutant
                                             TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                             ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                           2. Taken from concentration averages over a four day sampling event

                                           3. Based on pollutant concentration averages

                                           4. The flows for streams A and B are unavailable - overall
                                             removal can not be calculated

                                           5. CP = Chemical Precipitation
                                             SF= Sand Filter
                                             GAC = Granular Activated Carbon
                                                       FIGURE B-12
                                            STRINGFELLOW-1805
                                    FOUR DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                            REGION IX GLEN AVON HEIGHTS, CA
         6098-01

-------
                             Flow from
                                                                                                                  To Relniectlon   _
                             MonWells
                                                                                           To Relnjectlon Trench
                                                                                            Outside Slurry Well
                          Treatment: CP-SF-AS-BT
                          Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                          Average Flow: 400,000 GPD (7Days/Wk, 24 Mrs/Day)
                          Relnjected Treated Water
                          Sludge Temporarily Disposed at On-Site Landfill
# Compounds  Cone    Cone    Influent
  Detected"    ITD2     PP2     Loading3
                                                                                  %Mass
                                                                     Discharge   Removed
                                                                                    CP4
 %Mass
Removed
   SF  4
 %Mass
Removed
   AS4
 %Mass
Removed
   BT4
 %Mass
Removed
 Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
»»,»
6:14:18
Mln-Max
13-9,178
ug/L
*$L6
Mln-Max
13-9,178
ug/l
"S?
(KR)
'l99:99
99:85
                          NOTES:
                          1. PP= Priority Pollutant
                            TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                            ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                          2. Taken from concentration averages over a five day sampling event

                          3. Based on pollutant concentration averages

                          4. CP = Chemical Precipitation
                          '  SF = Sand Filtration
                            AS = Air Stripping
                            BT = Biological Treatment
                                                                                                                                          FIGURE B-13
                                                                                                                                   SYLVESTER -1325
                                                                                                                              REGION II NASHUA, NH
6098-01

-------
                                 Influent from
                                 Extraction Wells
                                                                                             To Sanitary Sewer
                                   Treatment: Granular Activated Carbon
                                   Wastewafer Type: Groundwater
                                   Average Flow: 160 GPM
                                   Stormwater Sewer System
                                                                                        %Mass
                                   # Compounds  Cone   Cone    Influent    Discharge  Removed
                                     Detectedr    fTD?     PP2    Loading3	       GAC1
 %Mass
Removed
  GAC"
                                   NOTES:
                                   1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                     TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                     ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte


                                   2. Taken from concentration averages over a five day sampling event


                                   3. Based on pollutant concentration averages
 %Mass
Removed
 Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
8:8:8
1:8:12
Mln-Max
17-
1543
ug/L
3-
21.620
ug/L
Mln-Max
17-
1543
.Ug/L
18 ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
3,720:5,720
12 : 43,130
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
250:250
9 : 47.380
PP:ITD
96:96
30:<1
PP:ITD
<1;<1

-------
                                            Influent
                                                                                             To Surface
                                                                                             Water
                                                   Treatment: Air Stripping
                                                   Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                                                   Average Flow: 43,000 GPD (24 Hours/2 Days/WK)
                                                   Surface Water Discharge
                                                   # Compounds  Cone   Cone    Influent .
                                                     Detected'     ITD2    PP2     Loading'
            %Mass
Discharge   Removed
            Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organlcs
Metals
PP : TCL : tTD
7)3:12
3:10:15
Mln-Max
1W,668
ug/L
2-22,357
ug/L
Mln-Max
H-70,571
ug/L
2-289
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
22:520
27 : 6,670
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
7:164
45 ; 6,920
PP : ITD
68:68

-------

S~^ S~
\
Influent from Chemical _ L^SSJJSSLA ^HoldlncA ToPOTW ^
Extraelion Wells

Addition - ^- osssry ' v Taok
rX
Sludge
Press

Treatment: CP-HT
Wastewater Type: Groundwater
Average Flow: 50,000 GPD (8 Hours/5 Days)
T08.8MGDPOTW
# Compounds
Detected1
Pollutant PP:TCL:rTD
Total
Organics
Metals °:i°'33
% Mass % Mass % Mass
Cone Cone Influent Discharge Removed Removed Removed
ITD* PPf Loading3 CP 4 HT " Overall
Mln-Max Mln-Max «j*jff Offlff PF
H7^/L 82 ug/L 9:77 6:89 <
12- 12- 100 ion .
4B7/SOO 1526 VSoiJn' 640:621,690
ug/L ug/L -2V.J4U
NOTES:
1. PP = Priority Pollutant
TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte
2. Taken from concentration averages over a five day sampling event
3. Based on pollutant concentration averages
4. CP = Chemical Precipitation
HT = Holding Tnak
: ITD PP : fTD PP : ITD
1:<1 43s* 33: 99 3 : < 1 > 99 : < 1
FIGURE B-16
UNITED CHROME -1738
FIVE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
REGION X CORVALLIS, OR
6098-01

-------
               Influent
                     To Surface
                                                                                                                 Water
                             Treatment: GAC-AS
                             WastewaterType: Groundwater
                             Average Row: 2,000 GPM (24 Hours/7 Days)
                             Surface Water Discharge
                                                                                 %Mass
                              # Compounds  Cone   Cone    Influent   Discharge  Removed
                                Detected1     ITD2     PP2    Loadings               GAC4
 %Mass
Removed
  WW4
                              NOTES:
                              1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                               TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                               ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte


                              2. Taken from concentration averages over a five day sampling event


                              3. Based on pollutant concentration averages


                              4. GAC = Granular Activated Carbon
                               WW = Wet Well
                               AS = Air Stripping
 %Moss
Removed
   AS4
 %Mass
Removed
 Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP:TCL:fTD
10:13;17
3:11:18
Mln-Max
0.004ppt--
1,884
ug/L
6-103,200
ug/L
Mln-Max
H-532
ug/l
6-10
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
21,7t5!
44,700
238:
1,697,865
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
2,130:4,800
206:
1490,590
PP:(TD
74:64
10:11
PP:ITD
62:69
1 :<1
PP:ITD
3:4
3:2
PP:ITD
89:90
13:12
                                                                                                                               FIGURE B-17
                                                                                                             VERONA WELL FIELDS -1223
                                                                                                               FIVE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                             REGION V BATTLE CREEK, Ml
6098-01

-------
                                              Influent
                   To Surface   _
                                                                                                 Water
                                                     Treatment; Air Stripping
                                                     WastewaterType: Groundwater
                                                     Average Flow: 3,500 GPM (24 Hours/7 Days)
                                                     Surface Water Discharge
                                                                                                            %Mass
                                                     # Compounds  Cone   Cone    Influent ,   Discharge   Removed
                                                       rv-v+^-iv^l     irn2     DD'     I ^-i,-lli-i/-id               Owen-nil
                                                                     [TD
PP
Loading'
                                                     NOTES:
                                                     1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                       TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                       ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                                     2. Taken from concentration averages over a five day sampling event

                                                     3. Based on pollutant concentration averages
Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organlcs ,
Metals
PP : TCL : ITD
4:4:7
1:8:10
Mln-Max
0.084-
142ug/L
6-
24.360
ug/L
Mln-Max
11-142
ug/L
62ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
3,740; 3,740
790:
U43560
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
4,12014120
122:
1246560
• PP:(TD

-------
               Influent
               Groundwater
                                                                                                                    To POTW
                             Treatment: AS-CP-GAC
                             Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                             Average Row: 100 GPM (24 Hours/7 Days)
                             T042MGDPOTW
# Compounds  Cone
  Detected'
                                                                                 % Mass      % Mass      % Mass
                                                   Cone   Influent    Discharge   Removed    Removed    Removed
                                                    PP2    Loadings        y       AS <        CP"        GAC*
 % Mass
Removed
 Overall
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP:TCL:ITD
19:17:34
8:17:25
Mln-Max
aiSppt-
1,804
ug/L
2-
341.667
ug/L
Mln-Max
14-
t.804
ug/L
2-
35533
ug/L
(LBS/YR)
PP:[TD
2,740:3^70
17200:
413,390
(LBS/YR)
PP:ITD
100:240
70 : 327,220
PP:ITD
90:79
<1:5
PP:ITD
35:46
99:5
PP:ITD
40:44
69 : 12
PP:ITD
46:93
>99:21
                             NOTES:
                             1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                               TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                               ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                             2. Taken from concentration averages over a five day sampling event

                             3. Based on pollutant concentration averages

                             4. AS = Air Stripper
                               CP = Chemical Precipitation
                               GAC = Granular Activated Carbon
                                                                                                                               FIGURE B-19
                                                                                                            WESTERN PROCESSING -1739
                                                                                                               FIVE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                                       REGION X KENT, WA
6096-01

-------
                                                      Treatment: Future
                                                      Wastewater Type: Groundwater
                                                      # Compounds  Cone   Cone
                                                        Detectedr    ITD2    PP?
Pollutant
Total
Organics
Metals
PP:TCL:fTD
2t*ni
9:19:29
Mln-Max
iMASOOX
ug/L
4-852,500
ug/L
Mln-Max
64-364
ug/L
4-6,375
ug/L
                                                      NOTES:
                                                      1. PP = Priority Pollutant
                                                        TCL = Compound from Target Compound List
                                                        ITD = Industrial Technology Division Analyte

                                                      2. From samples collected from a one day sampling event
                                                                                                                     FIGURE B-20
                                                                                                    WHITEHOUSE OIL PITS -1241
                                                                                                     ONE DAY SAMPLING EVENT
                                                                                                     REGION IV WHITEHOUSE, FL
6098-01

-------
                                ATTACHMENT C  .
                  UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY TABLES
891003-mll

-------

-------
                            KEY TO EPISODE NUMBERS
Bridgeport Rental
Charles George
Chemdyne
.Geneva Industries
Gold Coast Oil
Hydepark  Landfill
Love Canal
Nyanza
Reilly Tar
Stringfellow
Stringfellow
Stringfellow
Sylvester
Time Oil
Tyson's Dump
United Chrome
Verona Well  Fields
Well 12A
Western Processing
White House  Oil
   EPISODE NUMBER

        1222
        1309
        1807
        1224
        1242
        1220
        1219
        1310
        1239
        1221
        1240
        1805
        1325
        1804
        1568
        1738
        1223
        1808
        1739
        1241
                              KEY TO TECHNOLOGIES
                          AirS
                          Bio
                          ChPt
                          DAF
                          GAG
                          OWS
                          SF
Air Stripping
Activated Sludge
Chemical Precipitation
Dissolved Air Flotation
Granular Activated Carbon
Oil-Water Separator
Sand Filter
 891003-mll

-------

-------
                                  TABLE C-l

                      UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
        ITD ORGANIC POLLUTANTS FREQUENTLY DETECTED AT 18 CERCLA SITES
891003-mll

-------

-------
                          TABLE C-1
               UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
ITD ORGANIC POLLUTANTS FREQUENTLY DETECTED AT 18 CERCLA SITES
                        1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS • GW 10.00
Airs GW 39.17
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC LE 10.00
LAGOON LE 2435.00
GAC GW 84.67
0 - 100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
68
54
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
17
98


EPISODE
1808
1807


EPISODE
1219
1220
1804
1 , 2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 11.00
GAC GW 10.00
AirS GW 10.00
ChPt GW 11.20
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX ' CONC.
GAC LE 10.00
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
2
17
86
88
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99


EPISODE
1240
1240
1568
1240


EPISODE
1219

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE (CONTINUED)


TECHNOLOGY
ChPt ,
GAC
SF
GAC
ChPt
Airs
AirS+ChPt+GAC
AirS
GAC
GAC+AirS
AirS


TECHNOLOGY
LAGOON



TECHNOLOGY
GAC
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 11.20
• GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.25
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 64.20
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 1,000 -
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
LE 1211.00
1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 10.00
UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-12
0
2
11
33
38
38
73
-65
74
84
10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
34

UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
60


EPISODE
1739
1805
1805
1739
1805
1739
1739
1807
1223
1223
1223


EPISODE
1220



EPISODE
1805

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 48.20
SF GU 69.20
GAC GW 10.00
GAC GW 10.00
SF GW 100.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100 - 1,
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPT GW 100.00
ChPt GW 83.40
ChPt GW 62.25
1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS GW 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100 - 1
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC GW 10.00
GAC GW 10.00
GAC GW 10.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
23
17
89
90
0
,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
19
46
85

UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
26
,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
96
96
97
EPISODE
1805
1240
1240
1221
1221

EPISODE
1221
1240
1805


EPISODE
1568

EPISODE
1221
1805
1240

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF
SF
GAC

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
ChPt
ChPt


TECHNOLOGY
GAC
AirS
BIO
SF
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
AirS
GAC
MATRIX
GU
GW
GU
LE
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW

INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
EFFL.
CONC.
476.00
605.80
605.40
10.00
CONCENTRATION 1,000 -
EFFL.
CONC.
485.00
704.60
656.00
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
CONC.
15.00
17.57
10.00
39.40
33.60
10.00
32.40
10.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
2
8
14
99
10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
55
51
55

UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
6
38
69
-17
2
71
18
78
EPISODE
1221
1805
1240
1219

EPISODE
1221
1240
1805


EPISODE
1222
1568
1325
1325
1325
1325
1325
1739

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 2,4-DIHETHYLPHENOL (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 44.60
SF LE 24.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
OWS LE 110.00
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC LE 15.00
DAF LE 74.00
AirS GW 69.00
AirS+ChPt+GAC GW 10.00
2,4-DINITROPHENOL
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 -
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 74.80
GAC GW 50.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY , MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 60.80
PERCENT
REMOVAL
35
68
- 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-9
85
33
47
92

100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-23
22
- 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
86
EPISODE
1739
1222

EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1739
1739


EPISODE
1240
1240

EPISODE
1240

-------
                                              TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
                                        UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                         2-BUTANONE (MEK) (CONTINUED)
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS GW 50.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100 - 1
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC GW V 54.20
GAC+AirS GW 50.00
ChPt GW 691.00
GAC ' GW 50.00
GAC GW 50.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 1,000 -
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 1105.00
SF GW 1076.40
ChPt GW 1242.25
ChPt GW 1179.00
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
8
,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
86
87
-27
92
93
10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
6
13
17
58

UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL

EPISODE
1223

EPISODE
1223
1223
1738
1805
1240

EPISODE
1240
1805
1805
1240


EPISODE
ChPt
                                   GW
                                                       71.00
                                                                            -42
                                                                                              1739

-------
                                             TABLE  C-1   (CONTINUED)
                                      UNIT  PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                        4-HETHYL-2-PENTANONE  (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS GW 50.00
Ai rS+ChPt+GAC GW 50.00
GAC GW 50.00
BIO GW 50.00
GAC GW ' 50.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS GW 80.20
GAC GW 50.00
SF GW 613.00
SF GW 599.20
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 1009.20
ChPt . GW 915.80
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW 50.00
ChPt GW 738.00
ChPt GW 1070.00
ACETONE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
PERCENT
REMOVAL
27
27
30
38
48
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
87
92
17
35
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
6
17
95
47
61

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
EPISODE
1739
1739
1739
1325
1805

EPISODE
1325
1240
1805
1325

EPISODE
1240
1325
1325
1805
1240


EPISODE
ChPt
                                   GW
                                                       53.00
1738

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 ACETONE (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
BIO
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
SF
AirS
AirS

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
GAC
GAC
GAC
GAC+AfrS
GAC
SF
DAF
SF
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
ChPt
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GU
GU
GU
GU
GU
GU
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GU
GU
GU
GU
GU
LE
LE
LE
GU
LE
LE
GU
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
50.00
582.20
50.00
590.20
145.20
55.33
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
50.00
50.00
50.00
912.80
55.33
2565.00
2350.00
2426.00
4964.00
2925.00
2565.00
5343.50
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
66
H
-10
91
-1
75
94
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
96
97
97
52
97
-8
3
17
-60
10
21
-7

EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325
1325
1223

EPISODE
1221
1805
1240
1223
1223
1222
1222
1222
1240
1222
1222
1805

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 ACETONE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
SF

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
ChPt
LAGOON


TECHNOLOGY
AirS
GAC
SF
GAC
ChPt
ChPt
BIO
GAC
GAC+AirS
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 4085.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 2256.00
GW * 3110.20
LE 63472.00
BENZENE
' ; INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.67
GW 10.00
GW 10.80
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 17.40
GW 10.67
PERCENT
REMOVAL
24
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
84
84
-21

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
0
0
; 1
18
38
46
60
60
34
60
EPISODE
1805

EPISODE
1221
1240
1220


EPISODE
1223
1805
1805
1739
1805
1739
1325
1223
1223
1739
1739

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 BENZENE (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS GW 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 245.60
AlrS GW 18.40
ChPt GW 241.20
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC LE 10.00
LAGOON LE 2363.00
BENZOIC ACID
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC GW 50.00
GAC LE 50.00
OUS LE 67.00
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC LE 50.00
ChPt GW 72.60
PERCENT
REMOVAL
78
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-2
93
23
97
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
19

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
0
-25
7
-31

EPISODE
1807


EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325


EPISODE
1219
1220



EPISODE
1739
1222
1222
1222
1325

-------
      TABLE Cr1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 BENZOIC ACID (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
ChPt
BIO
DAF
SF
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
AirS

TECHNOLOGY
SF,
GAC
GAC
SF
SF
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
LE
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX .
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
EFFL.
CONC.
50.00
50.00
50,00
124.00
80.00
56.80
50.00
59.80
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
60.00
50.00
45.00
1023.20
736.00
677.40
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
819.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
50.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
10
12
16
-85
-10
23
32
25
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
52
90
91
-51
10
25
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
55
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99
EPISODE
1325
1739
1325
1222
1325
1739
1739
1325

EPISODE
1222
1221
1240
1240
1221
1240

EPISODE
1221

EPISODE
1219

-------
                                              TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
                                        UNIT PROCESS,TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                         BENZOIC ACID (CONTINUED)
~""~™~™™™""'~~~~~"---------'--------------------«---------»»------.»----------«.----.---.--___«.»______„»,





                                       INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  > 100,000 UG/L

                                                         EFFL.            PERCENT
 TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE

 LAGOON                             LE             3210030.00                -39               1220





                                                 BENZYL ALCOHOL
>«•....__._..._____-•---.--.___».»»___«»_w________-_-___________-_--__________---______	_«•_„.__„_„

                                       INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  0 -  100 UG/L

                                                         EFFL.            PERCENT
 TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE
 Airs

 SF

 GAC

 GAC

 GAC+AirS

 ChPt




 TECHNOLOGY

 GAC




 TECHNOLOGY

 LAGOON
GW

GW

GW

GW

GW

GW
  21.00

  24.60

  10.00

  17.80

  21.00

  26.00
                                         -18

                                           5

                                          65

                                          49

                                          40

                                          71
   INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  100 - 1,000 UG/L
                     EFFL.
                     CONC.
                    PERCENT
                    REMOVAL
MATRIX

LE                  10.00                 99

   INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
MATRIX

LE
   EFFL.
   CONC.

8220.00
                                      PERCENT
                                      REMOVAL

                                          38
    1223

    1240

    1240

    1223

    1223

    1240




EPISODE

    1219




EPISODE

    1220

-------
                                            TABLE C-1   CCONTINUED)
                                      UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                       BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE (CONTINUED)
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC GW 37.80
SF GW 59.20
GAC GW 46.40
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 50.80
GAC GW 206.17
AirS GW 239.33
GAC GW 192.17
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY . MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 394.60
SF+GAC GW 192.17
CHLOROBENZENE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
23
-17
22
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
52
-77
-69
51
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
83
92

0 - 100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL

EPISODE
1240
1240
1223

EPISODE
1240
1804
1808
1239

EPISODE
1239
1239


EPISODE
BIO
                                   GW
                                                       10.00
                                                                             28
                                                                                              1325

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 CHLOROBENZENE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
AirS

TECHNOLOGY
AirS
SF
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
GAC
GAC
GAC
SF
SF
SF

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
ChPt
ChPt
LAGOON
GAC
MATRIX
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
LE
LE
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
CONCENTRATION 100 -
EFFL.
CONC.
13.80
186.00
189.60
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
1000.00
620.00
737.20
CONCENTRATION 1,000
EFFL.
CONC.
600.00
657.20
878.00
2267.00
10.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
71
1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
93
2
15
96
97
97
97
-67
6
16
- 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
53
55
42
15
> 99
EPISODE
1807

EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325
1221
1805
1240
1221
1240
1805

EPISODE
1221
1240
1805
1220
1219

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 CHLOROFORM (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
BIO
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
GAC-
GAC
SF
AirS
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
GAC
SF
SF
SF
ChPt
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GU
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
LE
GW
GW
GW
GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
10.00
19.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
10.00
10.00
368.40
23.00
56.00
10.00
359.40
10.00
10.00
491.60
1000.00
603.60
523.80
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
47
57
66
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
96
97
97
-2
94
86
98
18
98
98
6
-84
16
45

EPISODE
1739
1325
1739

EPISODE
1221
1240
1805
1325
1325
1739
1739
1325
1325
1219
1240
1221
1805
1240

-------
                                              TABLE C-1   (CONTINUED)
                                       UNIT  PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                         CHLOROFORM  (CONTINUED)

                                                        EFFL.            PERCENT
TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE


ChPt                               GW                 718.50                 26               1805

ChPT                               GW                 544.00                 46               1221




                                                CHLOROMETHANE

                                       INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  10,000 - 100,000 UG/L

                                                        EFFL.            PERCENT
TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE

LAGOON                             LE                7049.00                 33               1220




                                                ETHYLBENZENE

                                       INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  0 - 100 UG/L

                                                        EFFL.            PERCENT
TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE
BIO

GAC

AirS

SF

ChPt




TECHNOLOGY

ChPt

ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
GW

GW

GW

GW

GW
 10.00

 10.00

 10.00

 30.20

 37.00
     0

    30

    70

    18

    55
   INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  100 - 1,000 UG/L
MATRIX

GW

GW
  EFFL.
  CONC.

419.00

 10.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL

   -46

    97
    1325

    1805

    1807

    1805

    1805




EPISODE

    1325

    1325

-------
      TABLE C-1  CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 ETHYLBENZENE (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS GW 10.00
SF GW 345.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
LAGOON LE 2156.00
HEXANOIC ACID
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
DAF LE 10.00
GAC LE 10.00
SF LE 10.00
OWS LE . 10.00
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC ; LE 10.00
GAC GW 9.00
GAC GW 10.00
SF GW 100.00
INFLUENT, CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC LE 10.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
97
18
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
18

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
0
0
59
59
78
90
0
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
92
EPISODE
1325
1325

EPISODE
1220


EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1222
1222
1240
1221
1221

EPISODE
1219

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 HEXANOIC ACID (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
ChPt
SF
ChPT


TECHNOLOGY
GAC
BIO
ChPt
SF
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
AirS
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
GAC
SF
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
DAF
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW

INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
LE
LE
LE
LE
LE
EFFL.
CONC.
154.00
97.00
100.00
ISOPHORONE
CONCENTRATION 0 -
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
10.00
10.00
13.20
12.60
10.00
11.00
12.20
10.00
23.00
60.00
60.00
23.00
58.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-7
37
71

100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
9
18
-5
4
24
17
*
21
35
57
-3
-3
61
3
EPISODE
1240
1240
1221


EPISODE
1739
1325
1739
1325
1325
1325
1325
1739
1739
1222
1222
1222
1222
1222

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 ISOPHORONE (CONTINUED)
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100-1,
1 .
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
GAC _ GW 10.00
GAC GW 10.00
GAC GW 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 1,000 -
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY . MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 1749.25
SF GW 1130.00
SF GW 1495.60
SF GW 1269.20
ChPt GW 1577.40
ChPT GW 1102.00
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS GW 10.00
GAC GW 14.00
GAC+AirS GW 10.00
000 UG/L

PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
99
99
10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-70
-3
5
27
12
42

UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
29
25
46



EPISODE
1221
1805
1240


EPISODE
1805
1221
1240
1805
1240
1221



EPISODE
1223
1223
1223

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 HETHYLENE CHLORIDE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
ChPt
BIO
GAC
ChPt
AfrS
AirS+ChPt+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
SF
AirS
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
GAC
GAC
GAC

TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF
ChPt
ChPt
SF
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GU
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
EFFL.
CONC.
27.40
10.00
10.00
52.33
21.80
10.00
CONCENTRATION 100 -
EFFL.
CONC.
271.60
25.20
249.60
10.00
10.00
10.50
10.00
CONCENTRATION 1,000
EFFL.
CONC.
1226.40
1382.00
1227.80
1230.25
2706.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-26
60
64
36
74
88
1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-9
91
24
97
99
99
99
; 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
-12
34
49
1
EPISODE
1739
1325
1739
1738
1739
1739

EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325
1805
1240
1221

EPISODE
1240
1805
1240
1805
1221

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 METHYLENE CHLORIDE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
LAGOON
ChPT


TECHNOLOGY
GAC
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
GAC
AirS
ChPt
BIO
SF
AirS
Ai rS+ChPt+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
SF
ChPt
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
LE 2279.00
GW 2729; 00
N.N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 18.83
GW 78.40
GW 10.00
GW 15.50
GW 78.40
GW 38.80
GW 10.00
GW 76.80
GW 77.80
GW 18.83
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100 - 1
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 109.40
GW 147.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
36
24

UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
51
-15
85
77
-2
50
87
2
15
79
,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
26
11
EPISODE
1220
1221


EPISODE
1739
1325
1325
1240
1325
1739
1325
1325
1739
1739

EPISODE
1240
1240

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 P-CRESOL (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
GAC
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
SF
BIO
ChPt
SF
AirS
OAF
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
OWS
OWS-fDAF+SF+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GH
LE
GW
GW
LE
GW
GW
GW
GW
LE
GW
GW
LE
LE
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
10.00
48.20
10.00
44.00
10.00
10.00
52.40
42.20
36.00
44.80
10.00
66.00
10.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
63
-65
66
-22
76
78
-9
19
45
37
86
9
86
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
94

EPISODE
1739
1222
1325
1325
1222
1325
1739
1325
1325
1222
1739
1739
1222
1222

EPISODE
1219

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 P-DIOXANE (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
ChPt
GAC
GAC

TECHNOLOGY
ChPt
SF
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
GAC
SF
ChPt
ChPt
AirS
SF
BIO
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
11.00
83.00
119.83
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
150.60
107.00
102.60
131.83
131 .83
152.00
155.25
111.60
471 .60
457.40
367.50
459.40
367.50
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
17
1
-20
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-47
4
27
6
12
2
28
69
-3
0
22
12
30

EPISODE
1738
1805
1240

EPISODE
1739
1240
1739
1739
1739
1805
1805
1240
1325
1325
1325
1325
1325

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 PHENOL (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
AirS
ChPt
SF
GAC
OUS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
DAF
BIO
AirS
GAC

TECHNOLOGY
SF
GAC
ChPt
SF
GAC
ChPt
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
LE
LE
LE
LE
LE
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
LE
GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
10.00
10.00
45.00
27.00
36.00
27.00
27.00
10.00
42.60
10.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
49.60
10.00
162.00
134.20
10.00
125.80
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
8
44
-67
16
-3
23
25
77
14
83
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
61
93
-2
17
95
39

EPISODE
1739
1568
1739
1222
1222
1222
1222
1222
1325
1325
1240

EPISODE
1325
1221
1240
1240
1219
1325

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 PHENOL (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
ChPt+SF+AiYs+BIO
SF
>
TECHNOLOGY
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
LAGOON
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 10.00
GU 215.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 17.80
GW , 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
LE 932050.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
95
19
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
99
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
40
EPISODE
1325
1221

EPISODE
1739
1739

EPISODE
1220
TETRACHLOROETHENE

TECHNOLOGY
AirS
ChPt
GAC
BIO
GAC
AirS
SF
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 10.00
GW 11.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 65.00
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
-10
9
41
66
71
22

EPISODE
1223
1739
1739
1325
1805
1568
1805

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 TETRACHLOROETHENE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
SF
GAC

TECHNOLOGY
AirS
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
SF
GAC
ChPt
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
ChPt
AirS
GAC
GAC+AirS

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
LAGOON
MATRIX
GW
GU
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
LE
EFFL.
CONC.
93.00
10.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
17.00
10.00
10.00
145.60
15.00
83.00
150.20
10.00
94.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
3037.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
. 1
90
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
88
93
93
3
91
58
35
96
76
98
98
98
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
16
EPISODE
1240
1240

EPISODE
1325
1739
1739
1325
1804
1805
1325
1325
1240
1807
1223
1223

EPISODE
1219
1220

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 TOLUENE (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
AirS
GAC
GAC
ChPt
AirS
Ai rS+ChPt+GAC
GAC

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
SF
SF
BIO
ChPt
GAC
GAC+AirS
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
AirS
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 11.80
GW 26.80
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
:. GW 10.00
GW 155.20
GW 207.80
GW 10.00
GW 192.25
GW 10.00
GW 10.00
GW 224.80
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 270.60
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
15
48
56
53
82
86
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
92
19
8
96
57
98
98
64
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
96

EPISODE
1223
1739
1804
1739
1739
1739
1805

EPISODE
1240
1805
1240
1325
1805
1223
1223
1240

EPISODE
1325

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 TOLUENE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
SF GW
ChPt GW
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
LAGOON LE
GAC LE
EFFL.
CONC.
6397.00
7006.40
10.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
9757.00
10.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
9
24
> 99
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
28
> 99
EPISODE
1325
1325
1325

EPISODE
1220
1219
TRANS- 1 , 2-D I CHLOROETHENE
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
GAC GW
AirS GW
GAC GW
SF GW
SF GW
SF+GAC GW
GAC GW
ChPt GW
ChPt GW
BIO GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
10.00
10.00
14.80
19.40
13.17
13.17
15.20
15.75
10.00
0 - 100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
9
12
34
6
-9
26
32-
33
48
84

EPISODE
1805
1808
1739
1805
1239
1239
1239
1739
1805
1325

-------
                                            TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
                                      UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                       TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
GAC
GAC+AirS
AirS
AirS
GAC
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
SF
AirS
LAGOON
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO


TECHNOLOGY
EFFL.
HATRIX CONC.
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 100 - 1,
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
LE 10.00
GW 334.60
GW 21.00
GW 10.00
GW 21.00
GW 10.00
GW 22.80
GW 10.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 1,000 -
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 1320.20
GW 60.60
LE 1000.00
GW 1299.60
GW 10.00
TRICHLOROETHENE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION 0 - 100
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
PERCENT
REMOVAL
000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
94
-87
88
96
94
98
97
99
10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-2
95
26
14
99

UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
EPISODE

EPISODE
1219
1223
1223
1807
1223
1804
1739
1739

EPISODE
1325
1325
1220
1325
1325


EPISODE
AirS
                                   GW
                                                       10.00
                                                                             50
                                                                                              1568

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 TRICHLOROETHENE (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
BIO
AirS
ChPt
AirS
GAC

TECHNOLOGY
AirS
AirS
SF
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
GAC
GAC
GAC+AirS

TECHNOLOGY
GAC
GAC
AirS
AirS+ChPt+GAC
GAC
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
LE
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
10.00
60.00
10.00
10.00
CONCENTRATION 100 -
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
25.20
388.60
393.00
10.00
10.00
31.60
10.00
CONCENTRATION 1,000
EFFL.
CONC.
30.67
10.00
54.00
10.00
10.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
60
68
-11
83
83
1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
96
94 "
1
22
98
98
95
99
- 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
98
99
97
99
99
EPISODE
1325
1223
1739
1808
1739

EPISODE
1807
1325
1325
1325
1325
1219
1223
1223

EPISODE
1804
1805
1739
1739
1221

-------
      TABLE C-1  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 TRICHLOROETHENE (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
GAC GW
LAGOON LE
SF GW
SF GW
SF GW
ChPt GW
ChPT GW
ChPt GW
EFFL.
CONC.
10.00
2661.00
2977.20
3366.40
5247.00
3654.00
5429.00
3679.40
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99
25
19
9
3
47
32
56

EPISODE
1240
1220
1805
1240
1221
1805
1221
1240

-------

-------
                                   TABLE  C-2

                      UNIT  PROCESS TREATMENT  EFFICIENCY
        ITD  INORGANIC  POLLUTANTS  FREQUENTLY DETECTED AT  18  CERCLA SITES
891003-mil

-------

-------
                          TABLE C-2
               UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
ITD INORGANIC POLLUTANTS FREQUENTLY DETECTED AT 18 CERCLA SITES
                        ALUMINUM
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
SF LE
SF GW
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW
ChPt GW
BIO GW
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC ' LE
OWS LE
DAF LE
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
SF GW
LAGOON LE
SF GW
ChPt GW
. SF GW
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
ChPt GW
AirS+ChPt+GAC GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
9.00
92.80
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
119.33
94.00
119.33
37.00
422.00
66.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
2230.00
2760.00
5262.00
35.00
5580.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
229.00
136.67
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
86
1
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-8
15
-7
91
-5 ;
84
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
9
21
3
> 99
38
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
> 99

EPISODE
1222
1325

EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1222
1222
1222

EPISODE
1221
1220
1240
1738
1805

EPISODE
1739
1739

-------
                                               TABLE  C-2   (CONTINUED)
                                         UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT  EFFICIENCY
                                         ALUMINUM  (CONTINUED)
*""*™™~"""""*~"""~~~~~~~~"*~~~~~"~"'~""~""""------"""-------*--------------------«-----.»----.--•«._______




                                        INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  > 100,000 UG/L

                                                         EFFL.            PERCENT
 TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX     ,         CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE

 ChPT                               GW                2460.00           >  99               1221

 ChPt                               GW                8987.50           >  99               1805

 ChPt                               GW                5440.00           >  99               1240




                                                 ARSENIC

                                       INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  0 - 100 UG/L

                                                         EFFL.            PERCENT
 TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE
 AirS+ChPt+GAC

 ChPt

 ChPt

 SF

 LAGOON




 TECHNOtOGY

 SF

 BIO

 ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO

 ChPt

 ChPT
 GW

 GW

 GW

 GW

 LE
  3.15

  2.00

 20.00

 40.00

  6.00
 71

 84

-56

-82

 79
   INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  100 - 1,000 UG/L
MATRIX

GW

GW

GW

GW

GW
  EFFL.
  CONC.

123.00

104.50

104.50

114.20

 22.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL

 -8

 21

 81

 80

 97
 1739

 1739

 1738

 1221

 1220




EPISODE

 1325

 1325

 1325

 1325

 1221

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 BARIUM (CONTINUED)
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
SF LE
SF GW
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC LE
OWS LE
DAF LE
BIO GW
SF GW
SF GW
ChPt GW
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW
ChPt GW
ChPt GW
AirS+ChPt+GAC GW
ChPt GW
INFLUENT
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX
SF .GW
SF+GAC GW
SF GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
9.30
13.20
13.00
16.00
9.30
17.83
27.80
31.00
25.75
17.83
13.40
9.00
11.67
9.80
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
98.20
171 .33
170.20
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
1
13
-7
42
-10
-8
-19
14
59
69
81
76
86
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
3
2
3 \

EPISODE
1222
1325
1222
1222
1222
1325
1805
1221
1805
1325
1325
1738
1739
1739

EPISODE
1240
1239
1239

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 BORON (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
SF
BIO
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
SF
SF
SF+GAC
OAF
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
OWS
ChPt
SF

TECHNOLOGY
SF
AirS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt
ChPt
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
LAGOON
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
LE
GW
GW
LE
LE
LE
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
124.40
135.83
119.20
135.83
177.00
225.20
225.00
214.00
135.00
241.00
52.67
950.20
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
1204.00
1820.00
2246.00
931.00
1212.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
0.01
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-4
12
24
13
17
-1
0
11
45
2
86
-2
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
1
18
2
69
71
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99

EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325
1222
1239
1239
1222
1222
1222
1738
1805

EPISODE
1240
1739
1739
1805
1240

EPISODE
1220

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 BORON (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
SF

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT


TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF
SF
LAGOON

TECHNOLOGY
Ai rS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
ChPt
ChPT
ChPt
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GU 40400.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GU 39800.00
CADMIUM
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 4.20
GW 7.20
GW 13.00
LE 21.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 4.00
GW 4.60
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX . CONC.
GW 6.20
GW 13.00
GW , 4.75
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-2
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
76

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
12
-16
0
11
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
99
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99
> 99
> 99
EPISODE
1221

EPISODE
1221


EPISODE
1805
1240
1221
1220

EPISODE
1739
1739

EPISODE
1240
1221
1805

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 CALCIUM (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
SF
DAF
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
SF
BIO
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
ChPt
SF
SF+GAC
AfrS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
ChPt
ChPt
SF
SF
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
LE
LE
LE
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
3850.00
3830.00
4110.00
4030.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
59380.00
72816.67
72816.67
59360.00
89920.00
89633.33
61800.00
82920.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
545000.00
684250.00
190333.33
578000.00
763000.00
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-T
7
1
3
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
-18
8
25
0
0
34
17
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-40
-52
61
-6
-12

EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1222

EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325
1239
1239
1739
1739

EPISODE
1221
1805
1738
1221
1805

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 CALCIUM (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
LAGOON
SF


TECHNOLOGY
BIO
SF
SF
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
ChPt
SF
SF
SF
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
DAF

TECHNOLOGY^,
AirS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
LE 665000.00
GW 891800.00
CHROMIUM
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW , 10.17
GU 10.40
LE 6.00
GW 10.17
GW 11.60
GW 28.00
GW 45.00
GW 29.40
LE 55.00
LE 4.00
LE 13.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 13.00
GW 12.60
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 34.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
19
-1

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
11
10
54
28
18
18
1
41
-3
93
76
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
99
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99
EPISODE
1220
1240


EPISODE
1325
1325
1222
1325
1325
• 1221
1240
1805
1222
1222
1222

EPISODE
1739
1739

EPISODE
1221

-------
                                             TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
                                       UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                        CHROMIUM (CONTINUED)

                                                        EFFL.            PERCENT
TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE


ChPt                               GW                  50.00           >  99               1805

ChPt                               GW                  45.60           >  99               1240




                                                COBALT

                                      INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  0 - 100 UG/L

                                                        EFFL.            PERCENT
TECHNOLOGY                         MATRIX               CONC.            REMOVAL          EPISODE
SF

SF

LAGOON

SF

ChPt

AirS+ChPt+GAC




TECHNOLOGY

ChPt




TECHNOLOGY

ChPT

ChPt

ChPt
GU

GU

LE

GW

GW

GW
 9.00

10.00

10.00

25.00

20.00

20.00
                                        0

                                        0

                                       38

                                        0

                                       67

                                       77
   INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  100 - 1,000 UG/L
                     EFFL.
                     CONC.
                  PERCENT
                  REMOVAL
MATRIX

GW                  20.00              85

   INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  1,000 -  10,000 UG/L
MATRIX

GW

GW

GW
 EFFL.
 CONC.

10.00

25.00

 9.00
                                      PERCENT
                                      REMOVAL

                                    >  99

                                       99

                                    >  99
 1805

 1221

 1220

 1240

 1738

 1739




EPISODE

 1739




EPISODE

 1221

 1240

 1805

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 COPPER (CONTINUED)
,
TECHNOLOGY
DAF
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
SF
SF
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
ChPt
BIO

TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF
SF
AirS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
ChPt
ChPt
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
LE
LE
LE
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
37.00
24.00
17.00
18.00
17.60
24.17
71.20
24.17
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
140.00
250.00
198.80
9.00
44.40
6.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
'CONC.
315.00
274.80
0 - 100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-54
8
35
51
75
72
17
74
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
7
9
37
98
90
99
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
96
97

EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1222
1325
1325
1325
1325

EPISODE
1221
-1240
1805
1739
1739
1738

EPISODE
1805
1240

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 COPPER (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPT GW 150.00
IRON
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 25.00
SF GW 60.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW * 10Z.20
SF GW 70.40
SF GW 233.60
SF+GAC GW 149.33
SF GW 49.00
BIO GW 148.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF LE 635.00
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC LE 308.00
OWS LE 9070.00
DAF LE 8260.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW 148.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
98

0 - 100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
55
15
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
10
52
8
75
92
84
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
92
97
0
9
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
EPISODE
1221


EPISODE
1738
1221

EPISODE
1240
1805
1325
1239
1239
1325

EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1222

EPISODE
1325

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 IRON (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 253.40
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
Ai rS+ChPt+GAC GW 614.50
ChPt GW 371.20
ChPt GW 113.40
ChPT GW 71.00
ChPt GW 147.25
LAGOON LE 0.01
LEAD
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF LE 24.00
SF GW 41.00
SF GW 50.00
SF GW 50.00
DAF LE 24.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
OWS LE 88.00
i
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC LE 24.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99
> 99
> 99
> 99
> 99
> 99

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
0
0
1
73
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
19
78
EPISODE
1325

EPISODE
1739
1739
1240
1221
1805
1220


EPISODE
1222
1805
1221
1240
1222

EPISODE
1222
1222

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 LEAD (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
ChPt
ChPt


TECHNOLOGY
ChPT



TECHNOLOGY
SF
OAF
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
SF
810
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO


TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF+GAC
SF
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 50.40
GW 41.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 50.00
MAGNESIUM
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
LE 2690.00
LE . 2680.00
.LE 2860.00
LE 2460.00
GW 2964.00
GW ' 3355.00
GW 3014.00
GW 3355.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 31560.00
GW 31466.67
GW 45700.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
77
92
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
97

1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
6
1
15
2
0
55
50
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-1
-1
-20

EPISODE
1240
1805


EPISODE
1221



EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1222
1325
1325
1325
1325


EPISODE
1239
1239
1805

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 MAGNESIUM (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
AirS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF
ChPt
LAGOON
ChPT
ChPt
ChPt


TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF
SF+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
BIO
DAF
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GU 34216.67
GU 39480.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 107020.00
GW 136000.00
GW 7723.33
LE 201000.00
GW 137000.00
GW 38000.00
GW 109500.00
MANGANESE
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.'
GW 42.40
GW 84.20
GW 83.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 29.83
LE 847.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
17
11
> 100.000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
2
1
95
21
61
97
91

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
6
0
2
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
86
-20
EPISODE
1739
1739

EPISODE
1240
1221
1738
1220
1221
1805
1240


EPISODE
1325
1239
1239

EPISODE
1325
1222

-------
                                                                     TABLE C-2   (CONTINUED)
                                                               UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
                                                                MANGANESE  (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
SF

TECHNOLOGY
SF
ChPt
SF
SF
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
AirS+ChPt+GAC

TECHNOLOGY
LAGOON
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
ChPt
ChPt
MATRIX
LE
LE
LE
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
LE
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
- GW
GW
EFFL.
CONC.
705.00
668.00
814.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
1117.80
4.00
2334.00
4740.00
45.00
29.83
1471.67
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
0.01
2278.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
4820.00
1058.75
2388.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
6
4
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-6
> 99
2
2
99
99
83
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99
83
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
98
>, 99
99
EPISODE
1222
1222
1222

EPISODE
1805
1738
1240
1221
1325
1325
1739

EPISODE
1220
1739

EPISODE
1221
1805
1240
_

-------
      TABLE C-2   99
97
93
99
99
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99

EPISODE
1805
1222
1222
1222
1222
1240
1221
1325
1325

EPISODE
1738

EPISODE
1220
1739
1739
1325
1325

EPISODE
1240

-------
TABLE C-2 (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
NICKEL (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX _ CONC.
ChPT GW 27.00
ChPt GW 11.00
POTASSIUM
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
OWS LE 1000.00
SF GW 1560.00
chpt GW 1580.00
SF LE 3420.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
chp* GW 15700.00
SF GW 20500.00'
ChPT GW 20700.00
ChPt GW 24900.00
SF GW 24920.00
AirS+ChPt+GAC GW 26167.00
ChPt GW 30400.00
,-
PERCENT
REMOVAL EPISODE
> 99 1221
> 99 1805

1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL EPISODE
1 1222
1 1240
0 124Q
13 1222
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL EPISODE
-8 1738
1 1221
14 1221
-3 1805
0 1805
15 1739
4 1739
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION > 100,000 UG/L
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
LAGOON . LE 438000.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL EPISODE
29 1220

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 SILICON (CONTINUED)

TECHNOLOGY
SF

TECHNOLOGY
SF

TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF+GAC
SF
OWS
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC
DAF
SF
BIO
LAGOON
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
ChPt
ChPt

TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION i
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GU 0.01
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 129.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW 1240.00
GW 1267.00
LE 1620.00
LE 2090.00
LE 1550.00
LE 1690.00
GW 4140.00
GW 4050.00
LE 5200.00
XGW 0.01
GW 4050.00
GW 4180.00
GW 3067.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
MATRIX CONC.
GW . 179.00
0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
28
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
2
0
4
-2
24
19
1
5
19
> 99
45
43
66
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99

EPISODE
1240

EPISODE
1221

EPISODE
1239
1239
1222
1222
_ 1222
1222
1325
1325
1220
1240
1325
1325
1738

EPISODE
1221

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 SILICON (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS+ChPt+GAC GU 5133.00
ChPt GU 2340.00
ChPt GW 225.00
SODIUM
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 8332.00
SF+GAC GW 8351 .67
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 31080.00
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW 38400.00
SF GW 31160.00
BIO GW 38400.00
OWS LE 51900.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF LE 124000.00
ChPt GW 484600.00
AirS+ChPt+GAC GW 466333.33
ChPt GW 996000.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
66
88
99

1.000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-1
-1
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-23
-52
0
-20
0
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-1
-66
-36
-15

EPISODE
1739
1739
1805



EPISODE
1239
1239


EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325
1222


EPISODE
1222
1739
1739
1240

-------
      TABLE C-3  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 SODIUM (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
ChPT
SF
SF
SF
LAGOON
-

TECHNOLOGY
SF
SF
SF+GAC
BIO
ChPt
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO
AirS+ChPt+GAC
ChPt
SF

TECHNOLOGY
SF
ChPT
SF
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
GU
LE

INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GU
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GW
GW
EFFL.
CONC.
943000.00
943000.00
1290000.00
1656000.00
2500000.00
STRONTIUM
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00 •
200.00
400.00
520.00
1120.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
1100.00
1080.00
1440.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
0
-30
0
28

100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
0
0
0
0
50
50
37
28
-36
1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-2
2
0
EPISODE
1221
1221
1240
1805
1220


EPISODE
1325 _
1239
1239
1325
1325
1325
1739
1739
1805

EPISODE
1221
1221
1240

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 STRONTIUM (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 1440.00
ChPt GW 825.00
LAGOOM LE 2300 .fOO
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 6967.00
SULFUR
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF LE 4180.00
DAF LE 4230.00
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC LE 3090.00
OUS LE 6210.00
SF GW 8800.00
SF+GAC GW 9167.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO . GW 37200.00
ChPt GW 34780.00
BIO GW 37200.00
SF GW 34620.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
7
59
27
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
44

1,000 - 10,000 UG/L
*
PERCENT
REMOVAL
1
32
56
12
8
4
10,000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-92
-79
-9
0

EPISODE
1240
1805
1220


EPISODE
1738



EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1222
1239
1239


EPISODE
1325
1325
1325
1325

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 SULFUR (CONTINUED)
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL,
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 203000.00
AirS+ChPt+GAC GW 147167.00
LAGOON LE 379000.00
SF GW 1600000.00
SF GW 1712000.00
SF GW 1760000.00
ChPT V GW 1490000.00
ChPt • GW 1655000.00
ChPt GW 1746000.00
TITANIUM
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF -GW 4.20
SF LE 5.00
SF GW 9.00
OWS+DAF+SF+GAC LE 5.00
OWS LE 9.00
DAF LE 5.00
SF GW 13.00
> 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-17
28
20
-7
-3
-1
30
71
72

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
1
0
-29
.'' t 38
:" -12
44
-20

EPISODE
1739
1739
1220
1221
1805
1240
1221
1805
1240


EPISODE
1805
1222
1221
1222
1222
1222
1240

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 TITANIUM (CONTINUED)
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
AirS+ChPt+GAC GW 13.17
ChPt GW 3.60
LAGOON LE 40.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 4.25
ChPt GW 10.80
ChPt GW 6.67
ChPT GW 7.00
ZINC
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
SF GW 8.00
SF GW 20.20
SF GW 18.00
BIO GW 24.33
SF GW 30.00
ChPt+SF+AirS+BIO GW 24.33
ChPt ' GW 24.40
SF LE 17.00
INFLUENT CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
TECHNOLOGY MATRIX CONC.
ChPt GW 18.00
PERCENT
REMOVAL
-7
83
-10
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
96
91
98
98

0-100 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
32
-46
18
-10
-23
1
1
60
100 - 1,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
87
EPISODE
1739
1739
1220

EPISODE
1805
1240
1738
1221


EPISODE
1805
1240
1221
1325
1325
1325
1325
1222

EPISODE
1738

-------
      TABLE C-2  (CONTINUED)
UNIT PROCESS TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
 ZINC (CONTINUED)
TECHNOLOGY
DAF
OUS+DAF+SF+GAC
OWS
LAGOON

TECHNOLOGY
AirS+ChPt+GAC
ChPT
ChPt
ChPt
ChPt
MATRIX
LE
LE
LE
LE
INFLUENT
MATRIX
GW
GU
GW
GW
GW
EFFL.
CONC.
42.00
25,00
309.00
_ 593.00
CONCENTRATION
EFFL.
CONC.
59.67
22.00
11.75
220.40
13.80
PERCENT
REMOVAL
86
92
1
-7
10.000 - 100,000 UG/L
PERCENT
REMOVAL
> 99
> 99
> 99
> 99
> 99
EPISODE
1222
1222
1222
1220

EPISODE
1739
1221
1805
1739
1240

-------

-------
                                   SECTION 4

                           SITE VISIT  SUMMARY REPORT
9.89.107C
0006.0.0

-------
SECTION 4  - SUMMARY SITE VISIT REPORT.  Site visits were conducted with
personnel  associated with 27 CERCLA sites which had existing, potential, or
denied discharges to a POTW.  The site visits consisted of meetings with members
of USEPA,  state, POTW, or potentially responsible parties (PRPs) in order to
discuss experiences with implementing the discharge of wastewater from a
specific CERCIA site.

Section 4  presents a summary of individual site visits conducted with
representatives from EPA, state, POTW, or responsible parties to discuss the
discharge  of a specific CERCLA. site wastewater to a POTW.  The information
presents the major political, technical, and economic issues concerning the
discharge  of CERCLA. site wastewaters to POTWs that were found to arise in the
negotiations and approval process, and is provided to aid the user in foreseeing
potential  issues that may require consideration.
891003B-mll
8.

-------
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
1
2
3
4





5
6
.0
.0
.0
.0





.0
.0
TITLE
INTRODUCTION 	 ' 	
SUPERFUND SITE WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS 	
POTW CHARACTERISTICS 	 	
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES. . . ' 	
4.1 Negotiations 	
4.2 POTW Concerns. 	 	
4 . 3 Discharge Limits 	
4.4 Liability 	 	 	 , . . .
4.5 Costs 	
CONCLUSION 	
REFERENCE . . . 	 	 	
PAGE NO.
. . . 4-1
. . . 4-1
... 4-3
... 4-3
. . . 4-3
. . . 4-4
... 4-4
... 4-5
... 4-5
... 4-6
... 4-7
TABLE
                      LIST OF TABLES

                           TITLE
PAGE NO.
  4-1
REGIONAL OVERVIEW OF SITES VISITED AND DISCHARGE STATUS
  4-2
JW050301
002.0.0

-------

-------
1.0  INTRODUCTION

USEPA initiated a two-year program to collect information regarding technical,
economic, regulatory, and administrative issues associated with Superfund site
wastewater discharges to POTWs.  The purpose of the study was to conduct site
visits in each USEPA region with USEPA and state regulatory personnel,
responsible parties, and POTW representatives to evaluate current experience
with the discharge to POTW remedial alternative.  During 1988 and 1989, sites
with existing or prospective discharges to POTWs were identified.  Where site
access was provided, 47 site visits were conducted associated with 27
Superfund sites with existing, potential, or denied discharges of wastewater
to a POTW.

Each site visit consisted of an informational meeting with a regional USEPA,
state, POTW, or responsible party representative to discuss discharge of a
specific Superfund site wastewater to a POTW.  The site visit program targeted
all ten USEPA regions to address potential regional variations in
implementation of discharges and other issues and concerns associated with the
POTW discharge alternative.  Table 1 provides a regional overview of the sites
visited and their discharge status at the time of the visit.

The site visits were used to collect a broad range of information.
Information obtained from POTW operators ranged from basic technical data
concerning POTW treatability characteristics and flow capacity to specific
information concerning economic and liability issues associated with accepting
a Superfund wastewater discharge.  Information derived from discussions with
USEPA and state regulatory personnel was geared toward developing an
understanding of the negotiation process and administrative, regulatory, and
technical issues involved in evaluating and implementing a discharge of
Superfund wastewater to a POTW.  The remainder of this report summarizes the
variety of Superfund wastestreams considered for POTW discharges and the
characteristics of the POTWs that have been evaluated as potential receptors.
The significant issues that affect the implementability of the POTW discharge
alternative are also presented.


2.0  SUPERFUND SITE WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS

Contaminated groundwater is the most common wastestream either currently being
discharged or considered for discharge to a POTW; leachate is the second most
common.  Surface water, storm water, decontamination water, and wastewater
generated by on-site soil treatment methods have also been discharged or
considered for discharge to a POTW.  Most wastewaters are pretreated or
planned for pretreatment either on- of off-site before discharge to a POTW.
Both the untreated and pretreated wastestreams generally contained only low
levels of contaminants.  For the Superfund sites studied, wastewater discharge
volumes generally comprised less than four percent of the POTW influent
volume.
JW050301
003.0.0
4-1

-------
                                   TABLE 4-1
            REGIONAL OVERVIEW OF SITES VISITED AND DISCHARGE STATUS
USEPA
REGION

   I

  II

 III

  IV

   V

  VI

 VII

VIII

  IX

   X
 SITES
VISITED

   1

   8

   1

   1

   5

   2

   1

   1

   3

   4
   NUMBER OF POTW DISCHARGES
EXISTING   NEGOTIATING   DENIED
    4

    1
                     ALTERNATE
                     DISCHARGES
    2

    1

    1
1

3
jw0503tl
001.0.0
                           4-2

-------
Most Superfund wastewaters are transported to the receiving POTW via an
existing sewer.  In several cases, sewer lines are planned or were constructed
specifically to receive Superfund site wastewaters.  Sewer transport was
preferred for its safety and convenience.  When sewer transport was not
available or feasible, truck transport was typically the next most common
transport method.  One of the planned future discharges will use dedicated
pipe to transport the wastestream from the site to the POTW.

Under the Domestic Sewage Exclusion at Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part 261.4, when the Superfund wastewater is considered a hazardous waste
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), but is mixed with
domestic waste as it flows through the sewer system to the POTW, the POTW is
not required to meet the additional regulatory requirements for a RCRA
permit-by-rule facility.  None of the POTWs visited were RCRA permit-by-rule
facilities, nor were any interested in adopting additional RCRA requirements.
3.0  POTW CHARACTERISTICS

Each of the 16 POTWs receiving existing or potential discharges of Superfund
wastewaters use secondary treatment processes.  The most prevalent form is
activated sludge, followed by rotating biological contactors and other aerated
biological treatment processes including brush aeration, oxidation ponds, and
trickling filters.  One POTW employs physical-chemical treatment.  At least
five POTWs use additional tertiary treatment.

Seven POTWs have design flows less than 10 million gallons per day (MGD), six
have flows between  10 and 100 MGD, and three have flows greater than 100 MGD.
Nine POTWs land-apply, two landfill, and three incinerate their sludge.  One
POTW is storing incinerator ash for an undetermined reuse, one landfills its
ash, and another sends ash off-site for metals reclamation.

The majority of the POTWs which have previously received or are currently
receiving Superfund wastewaters have approved pretreatment programs and most
have good compliance records.  In some cases, a poor POTW compliance record
led USEPA to eliminate discharge to the POTW from consideration as a remedial
alternative.
 4.0   SIGNIFICANT  ISSUES

 Several  significant  issues which  affected the  evaluation and  implementation of
 Superfund  site wastewater discharges  to POTWs  were  identified during the site
 visit study.  These  issues are  discussed in the  following paragraphs.

 4.1   Negotiations

 Discharge  negotiations proceeded  most smoothly when POTW representatives were
 involved in discharge planning  either during the remedial investigation or
 early in the feasibility study  process.  POTW  representatives indicated that
 they were  more likely to accept a Superfund wastewater when they were
 technically confident that POTW operations would not be adversely  impacted.
 Early involvement in discharge  planning and technical evaluation fostered this
 confidence.
 jw050301
 005.0.0
4-3

-------
4.2  POTW Concerns

POTW representatives expressed various concerns which impacted their decisions
to accept or reject Superfund site wastewater discharges.  Limited
availability of specific regulatory guidance addressing Superfund wastewater
discharges discouraged some POTW representatives from accepting discharges.
Other POTWs were willing to accept Superfund site discharges as a service to
the community.  Occasionally, POTW representatives accepted discharges in
exchange for discharger-provided community benefits, such as sewer
construction subsidies or site-related construction contract bidding
preference.

Most POTW representatives were primarily concerned about the potential impact
of Superfund wastewater on the POTW's biological treatment systems, effluent
quality, and sludge management practices. Several POTW representatives
expressed concern that accepting a Superfund discharge for many years would
reserve POTW capacity that might better serve community growth.  In some
instances, negative public responses impacted the POTW's decision to accept
the discharge.

4.3  Discharge Limits

Contaminant concentration limits for discharges of Superfund site wastewaters
to POTWs are set in various ways.  Discharges of Superfund wastewaters must
comply with identified applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements.
If a POTW had previously developed pretreatment limits for compounds in its
existing influent, those limits often became part of the site discharge
limits.  Some sites used national categorical standards when the Superfund
site previously operated as an industry for which standards are promulgated.
In most cases, discharge limits were based on concentrations believed or
proven to be treatable at the POTW, or based on alternative regulatory
criteria such as ambient water quality criteria or toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure concentrations.

Though some Superfund site wastewater contaminants are often not regulated by
local limits or any published standard, many contaminants are the same as
those found in industrial discharges.  POTW representatives familiar with
industrial discharges are therefore somewhat more prepared to evaluate effects
of Superfund wastewater discharges on POTW operations than representatives of
POTWs which more exclusively treat domestic sewage.  Many POTWs needed
guidance or lacked the financial resources to perform detailed treatability
studies to evaluate the potential impacts of unfamiliar Superfund site
wastewater contaminants on POTW treatment operations, permit compliance, and
sludge management.  POTW representatives commonly instituted highly
conservative site discharge limits that did not fully utilize predictable
treatment potential at the POTW.  These .highly conservative limits were set to
protect the POTW from violating its own discharge permit or other
environmental or safety standards.  The POTW was rarely considered a primary
treatment source for Superfund site wastewaters.  Rather, discharging to a
POTW was considered a cost-effective form of secondary treatment for highly
pretreated wastewaters.  Discharge limits often reflected the highest level of
contaminant removal attainable by on-site pretreatment systems.
JW050301
006.0.0
4-4

-------
In a few cases, USEPA or state regulatory personnel requested more
conservative limits than the limits agreed upon by the POTW and responsible
party.  USEPA and state regulatory personnel explained that conservative
discharge limits are often set to (1) reduce the possibility of environmental
degradation once wastewaters leave the Superfund site; (2) address POTW
representatives'  concerns about the potential impacts of the wastewater on the
POTW's operations; and (3) address citizens' concerns.

4.4  Liability

When POTW representatives, regulatory personnel, and responsible parties
failed to come to a discharge agreement, irreconcilable liability issues were
often cited.  Factors influencing the amount of liability protection a POTW
required before authorizing a discharge include community concern, wastewater
contaminants, and POTW toxic pollutant treatment experience.  A POTW's
discharge authorization and control mechanisms usually reflected the level of
liability protection POTW representatives required.

Some POTW representatives requested indemnification agreements releasing the
POTW of any and all liability for adverse impact to POTW treatment processes,
effluent, or sludge.  However, under Section 119(c)(5)(D) of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) and subsequent USEPA decisions,
USEPA cannot provide indemnification to any POTWs under Section 119 authority
(USEPA, 1987).

POTW representatives authorized discharges of Superfund site wastewaters
either by contract, permit, or letter agreement with the discharger.  The
majority of discharges were authorized by permits renewable annually or every
two years.  These permits generally specified acceptable site discharge limits
and/or conditions and contained enforcement provisions for violations.
Permits provided POTW representatives a convenient regulation and liability
protection method.  Under Section 107(J) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), "federally permitted
releases" are exempt from clean up cost liabilities.  A POTW with an approved
pretreatment program can protect itself from CERCLA liabilities by regulating
the contaminants of concern in its local limits or in a permit issued to the
Superfund wastewater discharger.

Because most Superfund site wastewater discharges are anticipated to extend
beyond one permit term, the permit system does not guarantee the wastewater's
access to the POTW throughout site remediation.  .Contracts were favored by
some dischargers because they offered more reliable long-term access to the
POTW.  Contracts generally described conditions under which the POTW could
terminate the discharge.  In several cases, a less formal letter agreement
was used when the negotiating parties readily came to agreement upon the
duration of and contaminant concentrations in the wastewater discharge.

4.5  Costs

POTW representatives did not want to accept a Superfund site wastewater
discharge if acceptance would cost more than collected revenue either in labor
costs, monitoring costs, or fines resulting from enforcement actions.  POTWs
accepting Superfund site wastewater discharges have incurred unanticipated
 JW050301
 007.0.0
4-5

-------
            costs for increased recordkeeping requirements, sample analyses which must be
            contracted outside the POTW laboratory, and increased liability insurance
            premiums.

            Many state and regional USEPA regulatory personnel and responsible parties
            considered POTW discharge a relatively inexpensive Superfund remedial
            alternative component.  POTWs usually charge for treatment services on a
            per-gallon or contaminant concentration-based rate.  The rate applied to
            Superfund site discharges was often the same rate applied to local industrial
            discharges.  In some cases, however, the Superfund discharge's rate increased
            to reflect increased POTW liability insurance and monitoring costs.  Discharge
            to POTW costs increased if no sewer existed to transport the waste from the
            site to the POTW.  Where sewer lines were not readily available, more costly
            truck transport was used, or new sewer lines were planned and constructed. For
            the sites studied, disposal of Superfund wastewaters at an off-site RCRA
            treatment facility was predictably more costly than discharging to a POTW.
            Lengthy negotiations, POTW treatability studies, and wastewater monitoring
            requirements can also affect the cost of Superfund wastewater discharges to
            POTWs.

            Costs of discharging a Superfund wastewater to a POTW are often comparable to
            or lower than the costs of discharging directly to surface waters.
            Implementing a direct discharge could require costly permit negotiations, and
            meeting potentially more stringent direct discharge standards could increase
            on-site pretreatment costs.  Discharge pipe construction or trucking costs
            could also increase direct discharge costs.


            5.0  CONCLUSION

            The information collected as part of the site visit study indicated that the-
            POTW discharge alternative can be a successful, effective, and safe means of
            disposing wastestreams from Superfund sites.  Like any other remedial
            alternative, there are important issues that affect and complicate the
            evaluation and implementation process.  The wastewater characteristics,  POTW
            characteristics, and the level and type of wastewater pretreatment provided or
            required created a unique set of circumstances at each site.

            The information that was gathered from discussions with USEPA, state, PRP, and
            POTW representatives familiar with the evaluation and implementation process
            served to highlight the major issues and obstacles that must be overcome to
            successfully implement the POTW  discharge alternative.   In summary, the major
            issues are as follows:

            o    Comprehensive regulatory and technical guidance was not previously
                 available to assist POTW representatives, PRPs, and RPMs with evaluating
                 and implementing CERCLA site discharges to POTWs;  agreement on '
                 acceptable discharge limits often represents several iterations of
                 negotiation;

            o    Superfund wastewater discharge volumes and contaminant concentrations are
                 typically low relative to total POTW treatment volume and contaminant
                 loading;
_
            JW050301
            008.0.0
4-6

-------
           cannot provide  indemnification  to any POTWs  accepting Superfund
     wastestreams.   This lack of indemnification has  lead to concern over
     liability and,  therefore, can impact  a POTW's decision to accept a
     Superfund wastewater  discharge;

     Including a POTW early in the negotiation process  is a key step to
     developing- open communication and can facilitate the evaluation of the
     POTW discharge  alternative;

     Currently, there are  few incentives offered to POTWs to encourage
     acceptance of  Superfund wastestreams.  POTWs that  have accepted Superfund
     wastestreams have incurred additional costs related to increased
     recordkeeping  and reporting requirements, sample analyses, and increased
     liability insurance premiums;

     Most POTWs considered for CERCLA site wastewater discharges lack the
     resources to conduct  treatability studies for unfamiliar wastewater
     contaminants.   As a result, the Superfund wastestreams are often highly
     pretreated and the treatment capability of the POTW is not fully
     employed;

     Community perception and acceptance is an important variable in a POTW's
     willingness to accept CERCLA. site wastewaters.
6.0  REFERENCES

USEPA Memorandum, 1987.  "USEPA Interim Guidance on Indemnification of
Superfund Response Action Contractors Under'Section 119 of SARA"; J.W. Porter,
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response; C.M. Kinghorn, Office of
Administration and Resources Management; Directive No. 9835.5, October 6,
1987.

USEPA 1990 "CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs," Office of Water, Industrial
Technology Division, Draft, April 1990.
 jw050301
 009.0.0
                                       4-7

-------

-------
                                   SECTION 5

                          STATE NPDES PROGRAM STATUS
                                   JULY 1987
9.89.107C
0007.0.0

-------
 SECTION 5 -  STATE NPDES PROGRAM STATUS.   Section 5  presents  the  status  of State
 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)  programs.   The  table
 indicates whether the state is authorized to  administer  the  NPDES  permit
 program,  regulate federal facilities,  and whether the  state  has  an approved
 state pretreatment program.   The NPDES authority can assist  in the
 identification of POTWs that may accept a CERCIA site  discharge  and provide
 specific information about the POTW that will be helpful for screening  the POTWs
 during the RI/FS process.   Section 5 identifies the appropriate  agency  to
 contact (either the USEPA regional office or  a  state agency)  for NPDES  issues.
891003B-mll
9.

-------
                               STATE NPDES PROGRAM STATUS
                                                                      7/10/87
^Arkansas
 Alabama
 California
^Colorado
 Connecticut
 Delaware
 Georgia
 Hawaii
"Illinois
 Indiana
 Iowa
 Kansas
-Kentucky
 Maryland
 Michigan
 Minnesota
 Mississippi
^Missouri
^Montana
 Nebraska
 Nevada
*New Jersey
 New York
 North Carolina
 North Dakota
 Ohio
^Oregon
 Pennsylvania
*Rhode Island
 South Carolina
 Tennessee
*Utah
 Vermont
 Virgin Islands
 Virginia
 Washington
*West  Virginia
^Wisconsin
 Wyoming

 TOTALS
                       Approved State
                       NPDES Permit
                         Program
39
                 Approved to
               Regulate Federal
                  Facilities
30
                Approved  State
                Pretreatment
                   Program
11/01/86
10/19/79
05/14/73
03/27/75
09/26/73
04/01/74
06/28/74
11/28/74
10/23/77
01/01/75
08/10/78
06/28/74
09/30/83
09/05/74
10/17/73
06/30/74
05/01/74
10/30/74
06/10/74
06/12/74
09/19/75
04/13/82
10/28/75
10/19/75
06/13/75
03/11/74
09/26/73
06/30/78
09/17/84
06/10/75
12/28/77
07/07/87
03/11/74
06/30/76
03/31/75
11/14/73
05/10/82
02/04/74
01/30/75
11/01/86
10/19/79
' 05/05/78
—
—
•
12/08/80
06/01/79
09/20/79
12/09/78
08/10/78
08/28/85
09/30/83
—
12/09/78
12/09/78
01/28/83
06/26/79
06/23/81
11/02/79
08/31/78
04/13/82
06/13/80
09/28/84
—
01/28/83
03/02/79
06/30/78
09/17/84
09/26/80
—
07/07/87
—
—
02/09/82

05/10/82
11/26/79
05/18/81
11/01/86
10/19/79
...
— —
06/03/81
— —
03/12/81
08/12/83
— —
--
06/03/81
— —
09/30/83
09/30/85
06/07/83
07/16/79
05/13/82
06/03/81
--
09./07/84
*"'•.•
04/13/82
--
06/14/82
— —
07/27/83
03/12/81
— -
09/17/84
04/09/82
08/10/83
07/07/87
03/16/82
— -
--
09/30/86
05/10/82
12/24/80
--
                                        25
 COMPLETE State Programs (NPDES, Federal Facilities & Pretreatment)

 * - indicates State approved to issue General Permits
                                         20
 7.88.93T
 0018.0.0
              5-1

-------

-------
                                  SECTION 6

                    PERCENT REMOVAL OF COMPOUNDS IN POTWS
9.89.107C
0008.0.0

-------
 SECTION 6  -  PERCENT REMOVAL OF COMPOUNDS  IN POTWS.  To evaluate the feasibility
 of discharging wastes  from CERCLA sites to-POTWs, the user of the treatability
 manual may need  to  estimate the treatability of compounds in the CERCLA waste
 and their  potential to impact  removal processes in the treatment system.  The
 removal mechanisms  in  a POTW include air  stripping, partitioning (sorption) to
 the solids and biomass,  and biodegradation.  Section 6 presents summary tables
 of published treatability  data for individual compounds that can be used to   ,
 estimate a mass  balance for each compound detected in a CERCLA wastestream if
 site specific treatability data is unavailable.

 The data presented  in  Table 6-1 was generated from a number of different
 published  studies on the total percent removal of specific pollutants in
 biological treatment systems.   Biological treatment systems presented in the
 tables include aerated lagoon  (AL), activated sludge (AS), and trickling filter
 (TF).   The data  was separated  into six concentration ranges, and distinguished
 between effluent samples that  were chlorinated and those that were not.  The
 number of  observations (OBSV)  is the number of publications from which data was
 taken and  averaged  to  obtain a mean percent removal.  The minimum and maximum
 percent removal, standard  error (SE), and 90% confidence interval are also
 presented.

 The following key is to  be used with Table 6-1:
AL   -  Aerated Lagoon
AS   -  Activated Sludge
TF   -  Trickling Filter
N   -   Number of Data Points
OBSV  - Number of Publications Used
MEAN - Mean Percent Removal
MIN  - Minimum Percent Removal
MAX  - Maximum Percent Removal
SE   - Standard Error
90% CI - 90% Confidence Interval
Table 6-2 presents an estimated average percent of the influent that may be
partitioned to sludge and/or volatilized in activated sludge treatment systems
for many compounds.  Published partitioning and volatilization data in
biological treatment systems were limited for most compounds and non-existent
for almost all compounds with regard to biodegradation.  The tables can,
however, be used to obtain an estimated overall percent removal.
891003B-rall
10.

-------
                                                 TABLE  6-1

                      TOTAL PERCENT REMOVAL IN BIOLOGICAL  TREATMENT PLANTS

                         CERCLA. SITE DISCHARGES TO  POTWS GUIDANCE  MANUAL

PARAMETER: 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
POTW - Percent Removal
                                                                                                         •\S-l\pr-9Q


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000



N

6
-
-
-
-

N
140
29
24
0
6

N
30
12
6
-
-
-

CHLORINATED NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I. . N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 90.91 90.91 90.91 0.00 (0,0)
1 88.76 88.76 88.76 0.00 (0,0) .----- -
- - - - -
------
-.----,
-----
TREATMENT: AS TREATMENT: AS
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I. N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
16 50.51 0.00 95.35 10.45 (32,69) 103 18 69.67 0.00 100.00 7.06 (57 82)
/ m /.7 SR Oi. OR AS R AR ffS 99} 6 2 77.64 69.57 85.71 8.0( (ly.lUUJ
4 87:82 11:66 U'.ll 6.76 ffi'.W) 24 4 95.33 90.40 99.77 1.93 (91)100)
i 98 28 98 28 98 28 0 00 (0 0) 7 2 98.93 97.98 99.88 0.95 (93,100)
1 87:04 87:04 &7.ol 0.00 (O'.O) 6 2 99.25 98.64 99.24 0.60 (95,100)
TREATMENT: TF TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I. N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
5 55 08 0.00 98.00 22.57 (7,100) 6 1 41.18 41.18 41.18 0.00 (0,0)
] 92:94 92:94 92:94 0:§0 $$ 6 i 98.40 98.45 98.40 0.00 (0,0)
_
----- " ""
-
	 	 _ _-- 	 „-___--- 	 -S--S 	 ==-=-=:==-====:= === =-=== 	 ===== 	 ====_========-========-=-===
 PARAMETER:  1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
    INFL
   CONC.

     0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
     0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
=======================================================
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
53 4 22.22 0.00 88.89 22.22 (0,75)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
7 2 85.29 70.59 100.00
0 1 90.00 90.00 90*00
6 2 95.31 94.53 96.15
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
.


SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
14.71 (0,100)
0.00 (0,0)
0.81 (90,100)
SE 90% C.I.
-
                                                            6-1

-------
                                                           2-9

    (O'O)    OO'O   Z/'*£  Z/'<7£  ZZ'^£  I      n


    (O'O)    OO'O   OO'S^  OO'SZ  OO'S/  I      9

    T3 %06   3S    XVH    NIH    NV3H   ASSO    N


                           dl '1N3H1V381
    (001'8/) ZZ'Z   WV6  00'06  ZZ'Z6  Z      n

    (SS'££)  6S'6   OO'OOL OO'O   Z6'6V  II     L*J

    'I'0%06   3S    XVH    NIH    NV3H   ASSO    N

                           SV :j
    (o'o)    oo'o   srs9  s/'89  srs9  i      n



    'I'3 7,06 .35    XVW    NIH    NV3H   ASSO    N

                           IV :j
                         a31VNia01H3-NON
===================================Z====ESr3323E = ESS!:
(O'O) OO'O OO'O OO'O OO'O I 9
'I '3 %06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO H
di 'lN3HlV3Hi
(OOl'O) S£'SZ OS'/S OO'O £8'S«7 £ El
'I '3 %06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO H
SV '1N3H1V3H1
(O'O) OO'O 96'Z9 96'E9 96'E9 I 9
'I '3 %06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO N
TW * luauiwavi
iv * Anan*V3ax
031VN!tt01H3
S3KXKXBXXKK
OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
001-lS
os-o

OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
oooi-ios
OOS-lOl
001-lS
os-o

OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
001-lS
os-o
•ONOD
1JM1


   ==============-==^=========================================================================S==
T3 %06    3S     XVH     NIH     NV3H   ASSO     N
(£8'9Z)   £S'0    OO'OS  S6'8Z  1M'6L   Z       OZ

(OOL'O)   00'6Z   OO'OOL  OO'O   SZ'ZS   £       S

TO %06   3S     XVH    NIH     NV3H   ASSO    N

                       SV :j
T37.06    3S    XVH    NIH    NV3H   ASSO    N

                       IV  'J
                         Q31VNI2101H3-NON
                                                                                                3NVH130»01HOia-l'l


                                                             ============5======:ss===:=========!:====s==ss=ss33ssSB
                                                              'I '3 %06   3S
                                                                               XVH
 NIH

dl :
                                                         (06'S)   £8'6l  S9'S6  OO'O

                                                         M'3%06   3S    XVH    NIH

                                                                                SV
                                                                                        NV3H   ASSO
                                                                                             NV3H
              S      18

               ASSO   "H
                                                              'I '3  %06   3S
                                                                          XVH
 NIH

IV :
                                                                                        NV3H   ASSO
                                                                                                                     OOOS <
                                                                                                                     OOOS- 1001
                                                                                                                     OOOl-lOS
                                                                                                                     OOS-lOl
                                                                                                                     00 I- IS
                                                                                                                     os-o
                                                                                                                     OOOS <
                                                                                                                     OOOS-lOOl
                                                                                                                     OOOl-lOS
                                                                                                                     OOS-lOl
                                                                                                                     001-lS
                                                                                                                     os-o
                                                                                                                     OOOS <
                                                                                                                     OOOS-lOOl
                                                                                                                     OOOl-lOS
                                                                                                                     OOS-lOl
                                                                                                                     001-lS
                                                                                                                     os-o
                                  *3HOO
                                  UHI
                                                                      ==SSSS=SSSS====5^:=====:==SSSSSSSSBSHSSSSaXSSSX8SKBXSZ)GVBB
                                                                                              3NVH130»01H3I8i-2'l'l  :
06-Jdv-8l
                                                                                                                        - mod

-------
POTW - Percent Removal
PARAMETER: 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500 .
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N 'OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
100 8 50.92 0.00
TREATMENT: TF
_ N OBSV MEAN MIN
6 1 75.00 75.00
MAX SE 90% C.I.
98.61 15.43 (22,80)
MAX SE 90% C.I.
75.00 0.00 (0,0)
NON -CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
14 1 60.85 60.85
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
12 4 53.47 0.00
20 1 99.74 99.74
14 2 94.20 93.40
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
6 1 50.00 50.00
14 1 59.91 59.91


MAX
60.85
MAX
97.22
99.74
95.00
MAX
50.00
59.91
=rrs;s:=s===5====— =
SE 90% C.I.
o.do  5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
35 2 57.35 50.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE- 90% C.I.
64.71 7.35 (11,100)
MAX SE 90% C.I.

NON -CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX

SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 83.33 83.33 83.33
16 4 89.51 83.33 100.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
3.75 (81,98)
SE 90% C.I.
-
                                                                 b-3

-------
POTU - Percent Removal




PARAMETER: 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
18-Apr-90
IMFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
xsxwxsxatsa;
PARAMETER: 1
CHLORINATED

N
TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
H
76
6
6
N
12
ZSSSSS3SS
,2-DICHLC
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
11 53.22 0.00 95.65 12.27 (31.75)
1 98.00 98.00 98.00 0.00 (6,0)
1 94.29 94.29 94.29 0.00 (0)0)
TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
2 25.00 0.00 50.00 25.00 (0,100)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX

SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
36 8 39.96 0.00 100.00
5 3 91.79 90.00 93.82
6 2 99.72 99.50 99.94
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
6 1 28.57 28.57 28.57
IROETHANE
SE 90% C.I.
14.72 (12,68)
1.11 (89,95)
0.22 (98,100)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)

IHFL
CMC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED

N
TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN

MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N
6
6
6

N
OBSV MEAN MIN
4 21.72 0.00
1 99.75 99.75
2 60.94 32.85
TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
86.91 21.72 (0,73)
99.75 0.00 (0.0)
89.03 28.09 (0,lfiO)

MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 50.00 50.00 50.00 0.00 (0,0)
ssasassss=s=====ss======== 	 =—======= 	 =—========= — =s
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
14 1 70.59 70.59
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
4 4 60.30 0.00
14 2 87.81 85.62
5 1 98.28 98.28
6 2 98.41 98.25
TREATMENT,: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
14 1 39.22 39.22
MAX SE
70.59 0.00

MAX SE
90.00 20.71
90.00 2.19
98.28 0.00
98.57 0.16

MAX SE
39.22 0.00
90% C.I.
(0,0)

90% C.I.
(12,100)
(74,100)
(0,0)
(97,99)

90% C.I.
(0,0)
                                                               6-4

-------
POTW - Percent  Removal




PARAMETER: 1,2-01CHLOROPROPANE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 99.54 99.54 99.54 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
6 1 33.33
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
33.33 33.33 0.00 (0,0)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE

90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
8 2 75.00 50.00 100.00 25.00
25 3 94.33 90.00 98.06 2.35
6 2 99.33 99.01 99.65 0.32
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN .MIN MAX SE
90% C.I.
(0,100)
(88,100)
(97,100)
90% C.I.

PARAMETER: 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
======srs=:==
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
35 2 45.70 33.33 58.07 12.37 (0,100)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
0 1 87.10 87.10 87.10 0.00 (0,0)
0 1 90.00 90.00 90.00 0.00 (0,0)
6 3 99.80 99.48 99.99 0.16 (99,100)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
.
                                                                 6-5

-------
 POTW - Percent Removal


 PARAMETER: 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
                                                                                                   18-Apr-90
    IHFL
  C0NC.
     0-50
   51-100
  101-500
 501-1000
1001-5000
   > 5000
     0-50
   51-100
  101-500
 501-1000
1001-5000
   > 5000
     0-50
   51-100
  101-500
 501-1000
1001-5000
   > 5000


                                     CHLORINATED
           TREATMENT: AL

     OBSV   MEAN    HIN    MAX
           TREATMENT: AS

H    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX

 35      1  83.33  83.33  83.33
                            TREATMENT: TF

                      OBSV   MEAN    MIN
                                            MAX


SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
-
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 9
11 2 83.33 67.67 100.00 16.67
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 9
36 5 86.52 70.59 100.00 5.02
11 1 94.62 94.62 94.62 0.00
0 1 90.00 90.00 90.00 0.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 9
11 1 37.63 37.63 37.63 0.00
                                                                                                   (6,0)
                                                                                                   (00)
PARAMETER: 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL


1UFI
COMC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
H OBSV MEAN MIN
35 1 50.00 50.00
-
- - _ .
TREATMENT: TF
H OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I,.
50.00 0.00 (0,0)
- - •
- -

MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
NON-CHLORINATED
================

TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
.
• -..".
11 1 32.02 32.02 32.02
-
-
'TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
2 1 100100 100.00 100.00
16 3 95.88 93.08 99.54
6 2 86.19 77.18 95.20
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
-
-----
11 1 12.28 12.28 12.28
-
-
SE "90% C.I.


0.00 (0,0)

-

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
1.92 (90,100)
9.01 (29,100)

SE 90% C.I.


0.00 (0,0)

-
                                                               6-6

-------
POTU - Percent Removal




PARAMETER: 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
                                                                                                                   18-Apr-90
=== — =======:


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

:===-======-======-=== — =====-=======-====== — ===========
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
-
-
------
------ -
_ . - - - ^ -
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
35 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
------
-
------
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
------
------
------
------
- -
------
	 — _ _ 	 	 _—- = ==- _= ===

NON -CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
-
"
- —
— — —
— —

TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
3 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
8 1 99.06 99.06 99.06
5 2 96.57 95.00 98.15
-
"

TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
-

— —
-
- - -





SE 90% C.I.
-






SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0.0)
1.57 (87,100)




SE 90% C.I.
-






 PARAMETER:  2,4-DINITROPHENOL
	 	

INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.

NON -CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 90.00 90.00 90.00
5 1 91.23 91.23 91.23
6 1 99.31 99.31 99.31
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
- - - -


SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
-
                                                                 6-7

-------
                                                          8-9
     T3  %06   3S
                      XVH
                             HIM    NV3H   ASSO    N


                            dl :iN3HJLV3Hl
     (00)     OO'O    00'S6   00'S6   00'S6   I       0
     (00)     OO'O    96'££   96'££   96'££   I       S
     (00)     OO'O    OO'OOl  OO'OOl  OO'OOl  I       Z
     T3 %06    3S
                     XVH
                             NIW     NV3H   ASSO

                            SV  :iN3HJ.V3Hi
     •I'0%06    3S    XVW    NIW    NV3W   ASSO    N


                           IV  :
                         C13iVNia01H3-NON

1

1



-
•
((
•
-
•

'I'3 X06   3S    XVH    NIH    NV3H   ASSO    N

                       di =J
(O'O)    OO'O   OO'O   OO'O   OO'O   I      S£

•I'3 %06   3S    XVH    NIH    NV3H   ASBON"

                       SV :j
'I'3 %06   3S    XVH    NIH    NV3H   ASSO    N


                       IV :j
                                                                              Q31VNI2I01H3
                                                                                                                      ooos <
                                                                                                                      OOOS-lOOl
                                                                                                                      0001-LOS
                                                                                                                      OOS-lOV
                                                                                                                      OOl-lS
                                                                                                                      os-o
                                                       ooos <
                                                       OOOS-lOOl
                                                       oooi-tos
                                                       OOS-lOl
                                                       OOl-lS
                                                       os-o
                                                                                                                      ooos <
                                                                                                                      OOOS-lOOl
                                                                                                                      0001.-LOS
                                                                                                                      OOS-lOl
                                                                                                                      OOl-lS
                                                                                                                      os-o
                                                         •DNOD
                                                         1JH!
                                                                                                     10N3Hd05K)1H3-3
(O'O) OO'O OO'O OO'O OO'O L 0
•I'0%06 3S XVW NIH NV3H AS80 N
dl :iN3WiV3ai
(O'O) OO'O OO'OOl OO'OOl OO'OOl I 0
(O'O) OO'O 00'S6 00'S6 00'S6 1 0
(O'O) OO'O OO'OS OO'OS OO'OS I 0
TO %06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO N
SV :iN3HiV3ai
(O'O) OO'O OO'OOl OO'OOl OO'OOl I 0
'I'0%06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO N
IV :iN3H.LV381
031VNIM01H3-NON

'I'O %06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO N
dl :iN3HiV3Hi
T3 %06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO N
SV UN3H1V3U1
'I'D %06 3S XVH NIH NV3H ASSO N
IV UNSHiVSai
031VNI2I01H3
:S]»BSB8««B
OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
oos-ioi
OOl-lS
os-o

ooos <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
oos-ioi
OOl-lS
os-o

ooos <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
os-o
•3K03
IdHl

06-JdV-8l

-------
POTU • Percent Removal



PARAMETER:  ACENAPHTHENE
                                                                                                                 18-Apr-?G


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
35 2 89.18 88.89 89.47 0.29 (87,91)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.

=====-======-==============-===========
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
1 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
18 3 99.00 96.99 100.00
5 1 94.05 94.05 94.05
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
.


SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
1.01 (96,100)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.

 PARAMETER: ACENAPHTHYLENE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
35 1 0,00 0.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
.
MAX SE 90% C.I.
0.00 0.00 (0,0)
MAX SE 90% C.I.

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 50.00 50.00 50.00
5 1 92.31 92.31 92.31
0 1 95.00 95.00 95.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
;======================================================
                                                                 6-9

-------
POTU - Percent Removal




PARAHETER: ANTHRACENE
18-Apr-90


tuci
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000



0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
afatxssHjesxss:


CHLORINATED


TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
...
• . .
...
...
...
...
MIN MAX
.
. .
.
_
.
-
SE 90% C.I.
.
_
_
_
-
-
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
116 14 8.10
6 1 78.85

...
...
MIN MAX
0.00 80.00
78.85 78.85

.
-
SE 90% C.I.
6.02 (0.19)
0.00 (0,0)

.
-
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
42 6 6.76
...
...
.
...
MIN MAX
0.00 40.54
_
_
.
-
SE 90% C.I.
6.76 (0,20)
_
_
.
-


	 	 	 - 	
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
6 1 0.00

...
...
...
...
MIN MAX
0.00 0.00

_
_
.
-
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)

_
_
.
-
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
62 11 17.95
0 1 95.00
...
...
MIN MAX
0.00 100.00
95.00 95.00
.
-
SE 90% C.I.
12.04 (0,49)
0.00 (0,0)
_
-
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
6 1 0.00
-
-
-
-

MIN MAX
0.00 0.00
_
„
_
-

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
_
_
.
-
	 	 	
PARAHETER:  ANTIMONY


TUPI
CMC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
a*«M«Bawran


CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
35 3 41.23 0.00
....
....
TREATMENT: TF
H OBSV MEAN MIN
...
...
...
...
...
- * -
SSSSSESISSSSSSS — SS— SSSS — S— — S —
MAX SE 90% C.I.
73.68 21.72 (0,100)
-
-

MAX SE 90% C.I.
.
-
.
- .
. .
-
	 	 _ _ _
NON-CHLORINATED
=================

TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 2 17.11 0.00 34.21
0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00
- ....
.....
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
17.11 (0,100)
0.00 (0,0)
_
-

SE 90% C.I.
I
                                                               6-10

-------
POTW -  Percent Removal




PARAMETER:  ARSENIC
18-Apr-90
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
149 19 39.40 0.00 90.63 7.53 (26,53)
0 1 50.00 50.00 50.00 0.00 (6,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
6 1 25.00
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
25.00 25.00 0.00 (0,0)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT:
AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
TREATMENT:
AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
45 3 33.85 18
0 1 50.00 50
TREATMENT:
.93 63.33
.00 50.00
TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
6 1 10.00 10
.00 10.00

SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
14.74 (0,77)
0.00 (p,0)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
PARAMETER: BARIUM
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N
_
-
6
-
-
~
OBSV
_
-
1
-
-
,
MEAN
_
-
75.90
-
-
"
MIN
•
-
75.90
-
-
"
MAX
_
-
75.90
-
-
—
SE
.
-
0.00
-
-
—
90% C.I.
_
-
(0,0)
-
-
—
TREATMENT: AS
N
6
37
170
4
-
-
OBSV
1
5
18
1
-
-
MEAN
72.09
70.43
72.75
65.68
-
-
MIN
72.09
64.15
43.72
65.68
-
—
MAX
72.09
75.64
99.17
65.68
-
"
SE
0.00
2.24
3.79
0.00
-
—
90% C.I.
(0,0)
(66,75)
(66!79)
(6,0)
-
. "
TREATMENT: TF
N
_
18
30
-
-

OBSV
.
3
4
-
-

MEAN
_
58.56
50.21
-
-

MIN
_
38.89
21.28
-
-

MAX
_
87.37
70.23
-
-

SE
.
14.72
11.91
-
-

90% C.I.
.
(16.100)
(22,78)
-
-

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-----
6 1 56.60 56.60 56.60 0.00 (0,0)
------
------
------
	
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
12 2 75.82 72.62 79.01 3.20 (56,96)
52 10 76.14 62.31 94.21 4.04 (69,84)
------
- -
	
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
.
12 2 55.65 53.55 57.75 2.10 (42,69)
------
------

                                                              6-11

-------
POTW - Percent Removal



PARAMETER: BENZENE
18-Apr-90


CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 98.91 98.91 98.91 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
124 13 53.68 0.00 85.71 9.02 (38,70)
18 3 96.72 91.09 99.55 2.81 (89,100)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
30 4 56.74 0.00 96.97 21.26 (7,100)


N
0
N
56
20
13
5
15
N
6
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
2 100.00 100.00 100.00
1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: AS
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
12 74.04 48.53 98.25
1 99.73 99.73 99.73
4 98.41 95.00 99.83
1 98.97 98.97 98.97
3 99.95 99.87 100.00
TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
1 91.67 91.67 91.67


SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (100,100)
o.oo (6,0)
SE 90% C.I.
5.58 (64.84)
0.00 (6.0)
1.14 (96,160)
0.00 (0,0)
0.04 (99,100)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
PARAMETER:  BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY) METHANE

tuei
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
35 1 66.67 66.67 66.67 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
3SS333S=ss=sss=ss=s=s==s==sss:=ssss=r =====:==:=:::==:===:==:=:===
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
0 1 66.67 66.67 66.67 0.00 (0,0)
0 1 10.00 10.00 10.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
" — — — — - "
                                                              6-12

-------
POTW - Percent Removal


PARAMETER: BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL) ETHER
                                                                                                                  18-Apr- PO
   INFL
  CONC.
     0-50
   51-100
  101-500
 501-1000
 1001-5000
   > 5000
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
                 N    OBSV   MEAN

                 ~~~0      1   0.00
CHLORINATED
NT: AL
MIN MAX SE 90%- C.I.
ENT: AS
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
ENT: TF
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
- •
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
11 1 28.67 28.67 28.67
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 3 66.67 0.00 100.00
11 2 84.51 79.02 90.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
11 1 7.69 7.69 7.69


SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
33.33 (0,100)
5.49 (50,100)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
 PARAMETER: BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000 ,
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
============================================ 	
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
6 1 40.65 40.65
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
157 17 39.80 0.00
36 6 61.57 0.00
18 4 76.24 55.63
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV . MEAN MIN
36 5 32.94 14.29
6 2 6.06 0.00
MAX
40.65
MAX
87.50
89.54
98.76
MAX
64.52
12.12
SE 90% C.I.
.0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
7.91 (26,54)
14.37 (33.91)
9.93 (53,100)
SE 90% C.I.
8.50 (15,51)
6.06 (0,44)

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV
5 1
6 1
11 1
MEAN
100.00
23.47
79.76
MIN
100.00
23.47
79.76
MAX
100.00
23.47
79.76
SE
0.00
0.00
0.00
90% C.I.
(0,0)
(0,0)
(00)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV
41 10
26 4
61 6
MEAN
43.93
48.41
82.25
MIN
0.00
10.11
58.53
MAX
78.00
78.14
100.00
SE
9.40
16.56
6.19
90% C.I.
(27,61)
(9,87)
(70,95)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV
12 3
11 1
MEAN
65.66
76.79
MIN
33.33
76.79
MAX
100.00
76.79
SE
19.27
0.00
90% C.I.
(10,100)
(0,0)
===::= =:=:====
                                                                  6-13

-------
(OOt'O) SZ'L£ OS'Z9 OO'O S2'l£ Z Zl
T3%06 3S XVW NIW NV3W AS80 N
JJ. :iN3WiVaai
(O'O) OO'O 00'56 00'S6 00'56 1 0
(00) OO'O Z0'£6 Z0'£6 Z0'£6 1 5
(Z9 6Z) Z/'Ol OO'OOL OO'O 06VV 51 V/
'I '3 %06 3S XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
(OOl'<7Z) ZS'£ OO'OOL 98'Z6 £V96 Z 9
'1'3 7.06 3S XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
. iv =iNawivaai
a3JLVNia01H3-NON
(£9'l) 9Z'SL
'I '3 %06 3S
(001 '66) £1'0
(00) OO'O
(zrzi) 9iv
'I '3 %06 3S
(O'O) OO'O
'I '3 X06 3S


OZ'2.6 OO'O 90'Z£ L 8V
XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
jj. :iN3WiV3ai
89'66 £V66 9S'6(5 Z 9
/9'96 /9'96 /9'96 I 9
00'Z6 OO'O 09'VZ 02 9VI
XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
SV :j.N3WJLV3HJL
OO'O OO'O OO'O I 9
XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
IV :iN3WJLV3Hi
aaiVNi™
ooos <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
os-o

ooos <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
os-o

ooos <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
00 I- IS
os-o
*3KOO
Id HI



------
'I '3 %06 3S XVW NIW 'NV3W ASSO N
JJ. :j.N3WiVaiU
(O'O) OO'O 8/'6'6 8Z'66 8/'66 I OZ
(001 6) OS'ZL OO'OOL OO'S/ OSV8 Z S
T3 %06 35 XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
SV : J.N3W1V3U.I.
T3 %06 3S XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
IV :1N3W1V31U
Q31VNIH01H3-NON


HiVIVHlHd 1AZN38 lAiP
-
TO %06 3S XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
(9S'S) £8'0l OO'OS OO'O £8'0£ V 81
'I '3 %06 35 XVW NIW NV3W ASSO N
-
'I '3 %06 3S XVW NIW NV3H ASSO N
IV :1N3H1V3U
Q31VNia01H3

SSEXHEKSBIX
8 :»3i9Hmd
OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
os-o

ooos <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
os-o

ooos <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
os-o
*ON03
1JNI


06-Jdv-8l

-------
P07W - Percent Removal



PARAMETER: CADMIUM
1S-Apr-90
        =================:=========:========—==:========:====:============
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N
.
6
-
-
-
-
OBSV
_
1
-
-
-
-
MEAN
_
0.00
-
-
-
—
MIN
_
0.00
-
-
-
—
MAX
_
0.00
-
-
-
"
SE
_
0.00
-
-
-
"
90% C.I.
_
(0,0)
-
-
-
"
TREATMENT: AS
N
265
12
6
6
6
-
OBSV
35
2
1
1
1
-
MEAN
39.47
43.14
91.38
90.06
93.96
~
MIN
0.00
0.00
91.38
90.06
93.96
~
MAX
99.47
86.28
91.38
90.06
93.96
~
SE
6.24
43.14
0.00
0.00
0.00
"
90% C.I.
(29.50)
(0,100)
{0,0)
(00)
(0,0)
"
TREATMENT: TF
N
48
-
-
-

OBSV
7
-
-
,-

MEAN
6.35
-
. -
-

MIN
0.00
-
-
-

MAX
33.33
-
-
-

SE
4.76
-
-
-

90% C.I.
(0,16)
-
-
-

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
6 1 44.00
-
-
_
- - -

MIN MAX
44.00 44.00
-
•
•
~ *

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
-
"
— -
~ *

TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
119 15 30.60
6 1 97.02
0 1 27.00
-
-
.
MIN MAX
0.00 97.06
97.02 97.02
27.00 27.00
-
-

SE 90% C.I.
9.47 (14.47)
0.00 (6,0)
0.00 (0,0)
-
-

TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
20 2 14.00
6 1 76.12
•
_
.

MIN MAX
0.00 28.00
76.12 76.12
-
•
••

SE 90% C.I.
14.00 (0,100)
0.00 (0,0)
~
"
~ ~

 PARAMETER:  CHLOROBENZENE

INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
• > 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
41 2 40.00 0.00 80.00 40.00 (0,100)
6 2 99.32 98.91 99.72 0.40 (97,100)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 2 37.50 0.00 75.00 37.50 (0,100)

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
17 3 62.22 20.00
20 4 97.10 90.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
100.00 23.20 (.0,100)
99.89 2.37 (92,100)
MAX SE 90% C.I.
.
                                                                  6-15

-------
POTU - Percent Removal




PARAMETER: CHLOROETHANE
18-Apr-90


fUCt
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


===== — === 	 = 	 = — ================ — =====_========= — ======================
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN HIM
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
H OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
------
------
-
------
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
5 1 58.33 58.33 58.33 0.00 (0,0)
0 1 95.00 95.00 95.00 0.00 (0,0)
------
------
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV «MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
'
------
---___
------
- -
-

PARAMETER:  CHLOROFORM


fuel
COMC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
axxxsxxxxss:


CHLORINATED

H
.
•
6
-

H
152
6
.
-

N
42
6
-
.
.
-
ssssssss
TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN
_
_ .
' 97.79 97.79
"
TREATMENT: AS
OBSV MEAN MIN
23 40.27 0.00
2 60.44 52.06
1 50.00 50.00
...
- - -
TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN
6 37.64 0.00
1 85.92 85.92
-
. . -
_
...
	

MAX
.
.
97.79
-

MAX
96.49
68.83
50.00
.
-

MAX
87.50
85.92

.
.
-
	 '. —

SE
.
_
0.00
-

SE
6.78
8.39
0.00
.
-

SE
15.59
0.00

.
-
-
	

90% C.I.
_
-
(0,0)
-

90% C.I.
(29.52)
(7,100)
(0,0)
.
-

90% C.I.
(6.69)
(0,0)

-
.
-
	 	 .

	
	


NON-CHLORINATED

N
6
_
14
3
-

N
166
39
.
0

N
12
14
-
.
-


OBSV
1
_
1
1
-

OBSV
28
4
.
1

OBSV
3
1
-
.
-

TREATMENT: AL
MEAN MIN
0.00 0.00
_
60.74 60.74
100.00 100.00
-
TREATMENT: AS
MEAN MIN
59.22 0.00
92.58 86.67
.
99.25 99.25
TREATMENT: TF
MEAN MIN
87.83 77.78
24.44 24.44

. .
-


MAX
0.00
.
60.74
100.00
-

MAX
100.00
97.37
,
99.25

MAX
100.00
24.44

.
•
	

SE
0.00

0.00
0.00
-

SE
5.56
2.55
.
0.00

SE
6.50
0.00

.
-
	

90% C.I.
(0,0)

(0,0)
(0,0)
• ••

90% C.I.
(50,69)
(87,99)
.
(0,0)

90% C.I.
(69,100)
(0,0)

.
-
——__—__ 	
                                                             6-16

-------
POTW - Percent  Removal




PARAMETER: CHLOROMETHANE


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV 'MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% c.i.
6 1 58.33 58.33 58.33 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
47 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
18 3 81.65 67.29 97.98 8.92 (56,100)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
0 1 100.00 100.00 10.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
0 1 95.00 95.00 95.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 60.32 60.32 60.32 0.00 (0,0)
 PARAMETER:  CHROMIUM
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED

N
6

. N
58
53
160
6
18

N
36
= -12
TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN
1 89.78 89.78
TREATMENT: AS
OBSV MEAN MIN
3 94!24 89^73
TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN
5 36.41 0.00
2 46.49 22.59

MAX
89.78

MAX
83.72
94 55
93«44
97! 46

MAX
58.33
70.40


SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
2~32 (87,l6o)

SE 90% C.I.
10.12 (15,58)
23.90 (0,100)
-======= — ===-===-=-=-============================-===
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 48.78 48.78 48.78 0.00 (0,0)
14 1 70.59 70.59 70.59 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV. MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
50 10 81.29 70.00 89.49 1.90 (78,85)
45 1 46.03 46.03 46.03 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 67.39 67.39 67.39 0.00 (0,0)
20 2 54.20 51.58 56.18 2.62 (38,71)
                                                                .6-17

-------
POTU - Percent Removal




PARAMETER: COPPER
18-Apr-90
IHFL
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
H
6
OBSV
1
MEAN
96.38
MIN
96.38
MAX
96.38
SE
0.00
90% C.I.
(0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
H
39
89
137
18
6
OBSV
10
18
1
MEAN
63.77
80.18
81.85
91.47
92.43
MIN
0.00
41.27
50.00
89.91
92.43
MAX
90.00
99.00
95.51
93.82
92.43
SE
11.82
6.26
2.95
1.20
0.00
90% C.I.
(41,87)
(69 92)
(77,87)
(88'95)
(6,0)
TREATMENT: TF
H
6
12
24
OBSV
1
2
4
MEAN
MIN
MAX
0.00 0.00 0.00
53.89 49.15 58.62
58.41 38.18 74.79
.*.,._
szssssssss—ssr: =:=:=========
SE
0.00
4.73
9.56
90% C.I.
(0.0)
(24,84)
(36,81)
NON-CHLORINATED

TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
6 1 20.97
14 1 74.20
MIN MAX
20.97 20.97
74.20 74.20
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
6 2 45.24
12 , 3 79.93
62 10 80.07
45 1 80.00
MIN MAX
0.00 90.48
56.10 99.00
0.00 96.97
80.00 80.00
SE 90% C.I.
45.24 (0,100)
12.61 (43*100)
9.18 (63.97)
0.00 (6,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
.
PARAMETER:  CYANIDE
IHFL
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED

N
6

N
50
12
18

H
6
36
6

OBSV
1

OBSV
6
8
8
2

OBSV
1
1
TREATMENT: AL
MEAN MIN
89.78 89.78
TREATMENT: AS
MEAN MIN
55.68 0.00
18.99 0.00
59.78 28.76
69.04 57.91
86.72 71.13
TREATMENT: TF
MEAN MIN
36.15 36.15
39.29 0.00
56.80 56.80

MAX
89.78

MAX
85.71
67.07
91.87
80.17
97.58

MAX
36.15
73.14
56.80


SE
0.00

SE
11.87
9.65
7.99
11.13
7.99

SE

90% C.I.
(0,0)

90% C.I.
(32,80)
(1 37)
(45 75)
(0,100)
(63,100)

90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
16.19 (5,74)
0.00 (6,0)
:==.=====.::======: =====:
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
6 , 1 7.35 7.35 7.35
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
12 4 47.57 0.00 75.00
30 7 58.29 33.14 90.00
6 1 65.41 65.41 65.41
18 3 85.49 79.92 89.49
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
12 2 42.16 26.64 57.68

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
17.45 (7,89)
7.97 (43.74)
0.00 (6.0)
2.87 (77,94)

SE 90% C.I.
15.52 (0,100)
                                                             6-18

-------
P01V • Percent Removal



PARAMETER: DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
35 1 0.00 0.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
0.00 0.00 (0,0)
MAX SE 90% C.I.
=====-= 	 =— =— =- — ===sr=======:=========:====i:===============-
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX

SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
13 2 82.56 82.14 82.98
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
0.42 (80,85)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.

 PARAMETER: DIBROMOCHLOROMETANE


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
.
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
5 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
20 1 87.93 87.93 87.93 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
M.M M
                                                               6-19

-------
POTU - Percent Removal
                                                                                                                18-Apr-90
PARAMETER: DIETHYL PHTHALATE

Til PI
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
MEKS3XXX3S!
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN HIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
187 23 54.03 0.00 100.00 8.05 (40,68)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
30 4 33.75 0.00 60.00 13.44 (2,65)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
6 2 50.00 0.00 100.00 50.00
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
85 14 28.68 0.00 100.00 11.57
5 2 91.64 90.00 93.28 1.64
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
12 2 30.77 0.00 61.54 30.77
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 0.00


90% C.I.
(0,100)

90% C.I.
(8,49)
(81,100)

90% C.I.
(0,100)
(0,0)
PARAMETER:  ETHYLBENZENE
1HFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 61.54 61.54 61.54 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
199 24 41.53 0.00 97.73 8.98 (26,57)
12 3 98.73 97.45 98.73 0.64 (97,100)
TREATMENT: TF
H OBSV MEAN
48 7 33.03
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
0.00 90.00 13.06 (8,58)

N
9
14
N
95
26
19
24
0
N
12
14
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
2 91.67 83.33 100.00
1 75.68 75.68 75.68
TREATMENT: AS
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
17 62.10 0.00 99.22
3 96.66 90.72 99.76
4 96.91 94.60 99.80
1 100.00 100.00 100.00
1 99.95 99.95 99.95
TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
6 25.00 0.00 50.00
1 72.07 72.07 72.07

SE 90% C.I.
8.33 (39,100)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
9.57 (45.79)
2.97 (88,100)
1.26 (94 100)
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
25.00 (0,100)
0.00 (0,0)
                                                              6-20

-------
POTW - Percent  Removal




PARAMETER:  FLUORANTHENE
18-Apr-90
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
35 2 41.67 0.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN

MAX SE 90% C.I.
83.33 41.67 (0,100)
MAX SE 90% C.I.

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 (0,0)
11 1 65.39 65.39 65.39 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
13 4 85.46 64.71 100.00 7.73 (67,100)
11 1 95.19 95.19 95.19 0.00 . (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
11 1 52.89 52.89 52.89 0.00 (0,0)
PARAMETER: FLUORENE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
35 1 0.00 0.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
0.00 0.00 (0,0)
MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
10 . 3 97.42 94.12 100.00 1.74 (92,100)
5 1 91.07 91.07 91.07 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
. .
                                                              6-21

-------
 POTU - Percent  Removal


 PARAMETER:  HEPTACHLOR


 l«»miaaz=ii:====s================:==============================================================-===-=-.
                                                                                             18-Apr-90
    I NFL
  COHC.
     0-50
   51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
   > 5000
     0-50
   51-100
   101-500
 501-1000
 1001-5000
   > 5000
     0-50
   51-100
  101-500

 1001-5000
   > 5000
                                      CHLORINATED
      TREATMENT: AL

OBSV   MEAN    HIM
MAX    SE   90% C.I.
                            TREATMENT: AS

                      03SV   MEAN    HIM
                      MAX    SE   90% C.I.
                            TREATMENT: TF

                      OBSV   MEAN    MIN
                      MAX    SE   90% C.I.
                                                                                      NON-CHLORINATED
           TREATMENT: AL

N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE   90%~c"i"

  3      1   66.67  66.67  66.67   0.00(0^0)"
                                          TREATMENT:  AS

                               N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE   90% C.I.

                                11      2  79.71    6.67  92.74  13.04  (0,100)
                                          TREATMENT:  TF

                               N    OBSV   MEAN     MIN    MAX    SE    90% C.I.

                                 3      1   53.85   53~85~"53"85~"~o!oO~"~(o]o)~
POTW - Percent Removal


PARAMETER: IRON
rr3EK=SE3-E3 =
IHFL
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

N
6

H
6
120
85

M
CHLORINATED

03SV
1

OBSV
1
15
9

OBSV
TREATMENT: AL
MEAN MIN
85.46 85.46
TREATMENT: AS
MEAN MIN
81.18 81.18
80.66 42.58
88.41 66.78
TREATMENT: TF
MEAN MIN
24 3 74.52 55.23
18 3 32.65 3.74
6 1 50.61 50.61

MAX
85.46

MAX
81.18
98.00
99.20

MAX
90.71
69.97
50.61

SE
0.00

SE
0.00
3.37
4.11

SE
10.36
19.58
0.00

90% C.I.
(0.0)

90% C.I.
(0,0)
(75,87)
(81196)

90% C.I.
(44,100)
(6.90) .
(6,0)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
6 1 25.98 25.98 25.98 0.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
111 12 85.41 67.00 96.65 3.
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
12 6 72.30 68.87 75.72 3.

90% C.I.
00 (0,0)

90% C.I.
27 (80,91)

90% C.I.
42 (65,79)
                                                                 6-22

-------
POTW - Percent Removal




PARAMETER: ISOPHORONE
18-Apr-90


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
: : i '. '. '. i
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
:= 	 ====================================================-
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
11 1 23.60 23.60 23.60
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
2 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
11 1 97.75 97.75 97.75
5 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
11 1 19.10 19.10 19.10


SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
 PARAMETER: LEAD


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


N
6

N
148
56
65
6
6

N
42
6
5SS=='======:==================================-==============:::=====:==:=:====— === 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
CHLORINATED NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL TREATMENT: AL
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I. N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
I I I I - '- 61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
1 7.83 7.83 7.83 0.00 (0,0) 14 1 57.58 57.58 57.58 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS TREATMENT: AS
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I. N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
15 45 95 0.00 97.96 10.88 (27,65) 18 . 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
9-7721 196 9868 1059 (5897) 24 5' 48. 17 9.09 86.46 13.20 (20,76)
12 7391 51 22 98 18 486 (65:83) 38 ' 7 56.59 25.20 83.09 8.56 (40!73)
1 7$:93 79:93 79:93 3:00 (6,0) 45 1 87.50 87.50 87.50 0.00 (6,0)
1 97.22 97.22 97.22 0.00 (0,0) - - - - - -
TREATMENT: TF . TREATMENT: TF
OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I. N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 9.03 0.00 54.17 9.03 (0,27, 6 1 £00 £00 £00 0.00 <0 0)
1 19.62 19.62 19.62 0.00 (0,0) 14 1 47.88 47.88 47.88 0.00 (0,0)
                                                                6-23

-------
 POTW - Percent Reraoval


 PARAMETER:  LIHDANE
                                                                                                                   18-Apr-90
    1HFL
   COMC.
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    >  5000
     0-50
   51-100
  101-500
 501-1000
1001-5000
   > 5000
     0-50
   51-100
  101-500
 501-1000
1001-5000
   > 5000
PARAMETER: MANGANESE
                                      CHLORINATED
                            TREATMENT: AL

                      OSSV   MEAN    HIM
                                            MAX
                                                   SE   90% C.I.
                            TREATMENT: AS

                      OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE   90% C.I.

                          2  37.50   0.00  75.00  37.50  (OJOO)~
                            TREATMENT: TF

                      OBSV   MEAN    MIN
                                            MAX
                                                   SE   90% C.I.
                                                                                      NON-CHLORINATED
           TREATMENT: AL

N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE   90% C.I.

  3      1  43.59  43.59  43.59   0.00    (0~0)
           TREATMENT:  AS

N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE    90%  c'.l'.'

 11      2  31.91   20.51  43.30   11.39   (0,100)
  0      1   7.58    7.58   7.58    0.00    (o,0)
                                                                                     TREATMENT: TF

                                                                          N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE   90%'c'ii"

                                                                            3      1  12.82  12.82  12.82   0.00    (0,0)



INFL
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
SHXSS8SSS3;

CHLORINATED
==-=—==== 	 ===_= — === — ==-===== 	 ====== 	 =====-=

TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
21 3 33.33 0.00 50.00
7 1 33.33 33.33 33.33
91 9 32.69 11.77 86.67
-----
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
16.67 (0.82)
0.00 (0,0)
7.96 (18,4>)
-

SE 90% C.I.
53S33sssss333rs=3— 3— 3 — -— . 	 . 	 -. 	
=====-=================
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
45 1 38.46 38.46
-
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
38.46 0.00 (0,0)
-

MAX SE 90% C.I.
------

                                                               6-24

-------
                                                   SZ-9
=-=-====-=-============-= — === — ==-=-========-========



(O'O)
(O'O)
(O'O)
•ro %06

(001 '66)
(O'O)
(001 £S)
(001 ZZ)
(zs'zz)
•ro %06


(O'O)

(O'O)
•ro %06




OO'O
OO'O
OO'O
as

OI'O
OO'O
£6'£l
8S'£l
OS'S
as


OO'O .

OO'O
as




££'68
W99
OO'OOl
xvw

16 '66
28 'I/
oo;ooi
6Z-£6
XVH


OO'OOl

SL'96
- XVW




££'68 ££'68
V0'99 V0'99
OO'OOl OO'OOL
NIH NV3H
di :iN3WiV32Ji
ZZ'66 L8'66
/8'IZ /8'1/
O0'_0 16;6/
OO'O ll'/£
NIH NV3H
SV :iN3WiV3>U

OO'OOl OO'OOl

Sl'96 Sl'96
NIW NV3W
IV :iN3WiV3Hi



L
I
AS80

I
£
Asao


L

I
Asao




9
9
0
N

9
0
81
SZ
N


£

9
N

OaiVNiaOIHO-NON
	
	






_
(O'O) OO'O
(62 */> 9£'0
(£8'99) 69'£
•ro %06 as

(O'O) OO'O
(OOl'OX- Z8'l£
(OOl'O) SZ'ZZ
(001 0) l£'/Z
(.01. Zl) SO'Ol
(OV'OZ) 8/'S
•ro%06 as


-
_
(O'O) OO'O
•ro %06 as


_
_
££'£8
xvw

9£'ll
61'66
iz;s/
29' 09
00 '09
xvw


-
_
Z9'18
XVW


_
_
Z9'99
NIW
di =iN
9£;n
OO'O
OO'O
69VZ
OO'O
NIH
SV :iN

-
_
Z9'L8
NIW


_
_
l£'9/
59 ~1L
NV3W
3WiVaai
9£'ll
99.99
££'9£
l£VZ
86; Of
NV3W
3WiV3*u

-
_
Z9'18
Nvaw
	 	 	
_
_
.
I 9
V 0£
AS80 N

I 9
£ *Z
£ ZL
Z 9
£ ZV
91 911
AS80 N

.
_ •
.
I 9
AS80 N
TW * 1 M2LI 1 W3M 1
IV • JLr(3n i v 3u J.
aaiVNiaonHO





OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
000 1 -LOS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
OS-0


OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
OOOl-lOS
OOS-IOL
OOl-lS
.05-0


OOOS <
OOOS-lOOl
0001 -IDS
OOS-lOl
OOl-lS
OS-0
'ONOO
IdNI



  (OOL'06)  LZ'Ol  ZrU  OO'OS  l/'09  Z      Zl

  •ro %06    as    xvw    NIW    Nvaw   Asao   N

                        di :iN3W!V3Hi
 (U'S£)  /I'Ol  OO'OOl OO'O   8l'£S  91      III

 •ro %06   3s    xvw    NIW    Nvaw   ASSO    N

                       sv ••iNawivaai
 (O'O)    OO'O   QO'O   OO'O   OO'O   I       9

"•ro %06   as    xvw    NIW    Nvaw  ASSO    N

                       IV =J
                       Q3iVNia01HO-NON
                                                          (99'6l)  Sl'Zl  OO'SZ   OO'O   ZS'Zf  /
                                                                                                    8V
                                                         •ro %06   as    xvw    NIW    Nvaw   Asao    N

                                                                               di :iN3WiV3Hi
                                                          (O'O)    OO'O
                                                          (WX0£>  80V
                                                                         10'OV   LO'OV  10'Of  I
                                                                         S2'£6   OO'O   90'ZV  Z
                                           9
                                           SOZ
                                                           •ro %06   as
                                                                           XVH
                       NIW

                      SV
                                                                                         Nvaw   Asao
(O'O)    OO'O

•I'3 %06   3S
Z9-99  /9'99  /9'99  I

 xvw    NIW    Nvaw  Asao

       IV :iN3WiV3Hi
                                                     OOOS <
                                                     OOOS-LOOL
                                                     0001- LOS
                                                     OOS-IOL
                                                     OOl-LS
                                                     OS-0
                                      OOOS <
                                      OOOS-lOOl
                                      OOOL-IOS
                                      OOS-IOL
                                      OOl-lS
                                      OS-0
                                                                                                                OOOS <
                                                                                                                OOOS-lOOl
                                                                                                                OOOL-LOS
                                                                                                                OOS-lOl
                                                                                                                OOl-lS
                                                                                                                OS-0
                                                                                                                  •ONOO
                                                                                                                  UNI
06-Jdv-8l
                                                                                                                   - HiOd

-------
POTW - Percent  Removal




PARAMETER:  NAPHTHALENE
                                                                                                               18-Apr-90



INFL
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> sooo


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


====»*=

============================-=
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV
m „
_ ^
-
.
- -
MEAN
_
w
-
-
™
MIN
.
_
-
-
™
MAX
-
_
-
-
"*
SE 90% C.I.
.
_
-
-
"
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV
157 17
12 2
6 1
*
MEAN
41.12
89.79
94.65
~
MIN
0.00
85.46
94.65
**
MAX
96.33
94.12
94.65
~
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV
18 3
6 1
. .
.
-
MEAN
16.67
60.00
-
-
-
MIN
0.00
60.00
-
-
.
MAX
50.00
60.00
-
-
-

SE 90% C.I.
10.33 (23.59)
4.33 (62,100)
0.00 (0,0)
"
S
SE 90% C.I.
16.67 (0,65)
0.00 (6,0)
-
-
-





NON-CHLORINATED

N
8
11
-
~


N
80
8
11
0


N
6
0
11
-
-
~
— = 	 == — ===== ===-======-===-

OBSV
2
1
-
"


OBSV
13
2
1


OBSV
1
1
-
-
"
======
TREATMENT: AL
MEAN MIN
50.00 0.00
66.67 66.67
~ "
"

TREATMENT: AS
MEAN MIN
31.94 0.00
99.09 99.09
95.65 95.00
99.25 99.25
97.83 97.83

TREATMENT: TF
MEAN MIN
96.30 96.30
100.00 100.00
31.48 31.48
~
-
"


MAX
100.00
66.67
~
~


MAX
100.00
99.09
96.30
99.25
97.83


MAX
96.30
100.00
31.48
"
•



SE
50.00
0.00
"
~


SE
11.88
0.00
0.65
0.00
0.00


SE
0.00
0.00
0.00
~
"



90% C.I.
(0,100)
(0,0)
—



90% C.I.
(11,53)
(0.0)
(92,160)
(0,0)
(0,0)


90% C.I.
(0,0)
(0,0)
(0)0)
~
"


PARAMETER: NICKEL



INFL
CMC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

CHLORINATED

N
_
6
-
-
-

N
104
99
80
6
6
-

N
24
18
6
-
-
-

OBSV
.
1
-
•
-

OBSV
16
13
~

OBSV
4
2
1
-
-
-
TREATMENT: AL
MEAN MIN
_
75.69 75.69
-
-
- -
TREATMENT: AS
MEAN MIN
39.86 0.00
22.45 0.00
50.26 15.00
44.87 0.00
81.22 81.22
~ "
TREATMENT: TF
MEAN MIN
15.92 0.00
54.43 23.44
4.27 4.27
-
-
-

MAX
-
75.69
-
-
—

MAX
94.44
56.99
99.71
76.56
81.22
~
.
MAX
56.00
85.42
4.27
-
-
-

SE
.
0.00
-
-
—

SE
8.49
8.24
7.92
23.06
0.00
"*

SE
13.48
30.99
0.00
-
-
-


90% C.I.
-
(0,0)
-
-
"

90% C.I.
(25,55)
(6 38)
(36.64)
(OMOO)
{0,0)
"

90% C.I.
(0.48)
(0,100)
*0,0)
-
-
—


N
6
14
-
~
"

N
30
18
77
0
"

N
6
20
-
-
"*
	 	


OBSV
1
1
~
~


OBSV
5
3
2


OBSV
1
2
-
-
"

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
MEAN MIN
13.64 13.64
35.46 35.46
- -
*" ""

TREATMENT: AS
MEAN MIN
8.33 0.00
39.37 16.67
35.19 5.80
27.34 0.00

TREATMENT: TF
MEAN MIN
35.48 35.48
32.84 30.50
-
"
"



MAX
13.64
35.46
~
~


MAX
41.67
66.67
60.00
54.69


MAX
35.48
35.19
"
"




SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
— ~
-


SE 90% C.I.
8.33 ' (0,26)
14.62 (0,82)
6.64 (22.48)
27.34 (0,100)


SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
2.34 (18,48)
~
.


                                                               6-26

-------
POJU • Percent Removal

PARAMETER: NITROBENZENE
==— =— r"==== —

INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
•i
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 2 93.89 90.00 97.79
5 1 96.97 96.97 96.97
6 2 65.83 33.87 97.80
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX



SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
. 0.00 (0,0)
3.90 (69,100)
0.00 (0.0)
31.97 (0,100)

SE 90% C.I.
-
 PARAMETER:  PCB-1254
    INFL
   CONC.
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
                             TREATMENT:  AL
                             TREATMENT: AS
                             TREATMENT: TF
NATED

MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
MAX SE 90% C.I.
- •
MAX SE 90% C.I.
.


N C
-
N (
8
0
N <
-
                                                                                      NON-CHLORINATED
      TREATMENT: AL

OBSV   MEAN    MIN
MAX
       SE   90% C.I.
      TREATMENT: AS

OBSV   MEAN    MIN
                                                                                                       MAX
                                                                                                              SE    90% C.I.
    1  91.34  91.34  91.34   0.00    (0,0)

    1  92.00  92.00  92.00   0.00   " (0,0)
      TREATMENT: TF

OBSV   MEAN    MIN
                                                                                                       MAX
                                                                                                              SE   90% C.I.
                                                                 6-27

-------
POTM - Percent Removal




PARAMETER: PEHTACHLOROPHENOL
18-Apr-90

TttFf
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

o-so
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
TREATMENT: AS
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
104 9 38.52 0.00 86.67
TREATMENT: TF
H OSSV MEAN MIN MAX
36 5 30.87 0.00 68.89


SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
10.04 (20,57)
SE 90% C.I.
13.50 (2,60)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
6 1 50.00 50.00 50.00
11 1 32.14 32.14 32.14
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
11 1 2.38 2.38 2.38
6 1 35.86 35.86 35.86


SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0)0)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
PARAMETER:  PHEHANTHRENE
IHFL
COfiC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
40 4 35.16 0.00 90.63 21.93 (0.87)
6 1 78.85 78.85 78.85 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
H OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
-
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
11 1 57.90 57.90 57.90
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
8 2 93.95 90.63 97.28
11 1 95.79 95.79 95.79
0 1 98.24 98.24 98.24
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
11 1 46.32 46.32 46.32
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
93.95 (73,100)
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
                                                             6-28

-------
POTW - Percent Removal
PARAMETER: PHENOL

INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
116 14 31.28 0.00 94.44 11.67 (11.52)
18 3 54.82 11.11 95.71 24.46 (0,100)
53 4 93.12 80.10 99.59 4.48 (83,100)
12 . 2 99.57 99.25 99.89 0.32 (98,100)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
6 1 96.08
MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
96.08 96.08 0.00 (0,0)


18-Apr-9
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
9 2 75.00 50.00
11 1 33.33 33.33
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
54 9 19.07 0.00
61 7 94.14 80.77
6 1 99.99 99.99
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
6 2 90.00 80.00
6 1 98.18 98.18
11 2 74.60 49.21

MAX
100.00^
33.33
MAX
80.00
100.00
99.99
MAX

SE
25.00
0.00
SE
10.11
2.69
0.00
SE
100.00 10.00
98.18 0.00
100.00 25.40
==" •======—=—=

90% C.I.
(0,100)
(0,0)
90% C.I.
(0,37)
(89,99)
(0,0)
90% C.I.
(37,100)
(0,0)
(0,l60)
POTW -  Percent Removal




PARAMETER:PYRENE
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
*"" -
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN
MAX SE 90% C.I.
. .
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
11 1 65.39 65.39 65.39
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
18 3 86.04 64.71 100.00
11 1 95.19 95.19 95.19
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
11 1 53.85 53.85 53.85


SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
10.84 (54,100)
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
                                                               6-29

-------
POTU - Percent Removal
PARAKETER:SILVER
       19-Apr-90

111 PI
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
znasanEsssxs:
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
H OBSV MEAN HIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
35 4 72.38 26.04 94.22 15.72 (35,100)
TREATMENT: TF'
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
BSHSSSSSSSSSSSSI:====S===— s — — 	 ===s=s:=s;=s:=:===r= 	 :
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
45 4 58.80 26.04 94.22 16.15 (21,97)
0 1 90.00 90.00 90.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.

PARAH6TER:TETRACHLOROETHENE



tuci
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL

H
1
»
.
.
-
-

OBSV
6
_
.
.
-
-

MEAN
80.00
.
.
_
.
-

MIN
80.00
_
.
_
.
-

MAX
80.00
_
.
.
.
-

SE
0.00

.
„
.
-

90% C.I.
(0,0)

-
_
.
-
TREATMENT: AS
N
95
9
18
0
6
™
OBSV
17
6
3
1
1
"*
MEAN
47.11
78.63
74.02
99.21
84.63
""
MIN
0.00
32.69
65.20
99.21
84.63
~
MAX
100.00
97.53
79.49
99.21
84.63
~
SE
9.07
9.93
4.46
OJOO
0.00
—
90% C.I.
(31,63)
(59,99)
(61!87)
(0,0)
(0,0)

TREATMENT: TF
N
30
12
6

-
—
OBSV
4
1

-
—
MEAN
48.50
90.59
97.80

-
—
MIN
0.00
87.27
97.80

.
—
MAX
81.82
93.90
97.80

-
-
SE
17.29
3.32
0.00

.
-
90% C.I.
(8.89)
(70,100)
(0,0)

.
-
                                                                                     NON-CHLORINATED
                                                                                     TREATMENT:  AL
                                                                          N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE   90% C.I.
                                                                            6      2  95.65  91.30100.00   4.53(68,100)
                                                                                     TREATMENT:  AS
N OBSV
120
47
6
21
4
2
MEAN
62
93
98
.69
.50
.24
MIN
0
90
97
.00
.00
.42
MAX
100.00
96.68
99.05
SE
7.
1.
0.
02
37
82
90%
(51
(90
(93.
C.I.
,75)
,97)
100)
                                                                                     TREATMENT:  TF
                                                                          N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN     MAX
                                                                           12      2  90.00  86.67   93.33
SE   90% C.I.
3.33 (69,100)
                                                               6-30

-------
POTW - Percent Removal


PARAMETER:TETRACHLOROHETHANE
             19-Apr-90
INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
~ ~ 1 ™ ~ *"
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX
12 1 50.00 50.00 50.00
6 1 87.79 87.79 87.79
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.

NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX
14 1 78.26 78.26 78.26
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX
0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00
26 3 93.61 81.16 100.00
2 2 95.00 90.00 100.00
0 1 99.90 99.90 99.90
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN
MIN MAX
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0.0)
6.23 (75,160)
5.00 (63,100)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.

PARAMETER:TOLUENE


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N
1
-
_
6
-
—
OBSV
.
-
_
1
-
—
MEAN
.
-
-
97.23
-
—
MIN
.
-
-
97.23
-
—
MAX
-
-
-
97.23
-
"
SE
.
-
-
0.00
-
"
90% C.I.
-
-
-
(0.0)
-
"
TREATMENT: AS
N
124
12
57
12
6
~
OBSV
17
2
6
2
1
"
MEAN
53.74
98.24
78.88
96.16
99.81
~
MIN
0.00
97.86
0.00
92.84
99.81
~
MAX
97.73
98.63
99.11
99.48
99.81
~
SE
9.51
0.39
15.87
3.32
0.00
"
90% C.I.
(37.70)
(96,100)
(47,100)
(75 100)
{0,0)
"
TREATMENT: TF
N
42
-
6
-
-
"
OBSV
6
-
1
-
-
"
MEAN
61.90
-
97.29
-
-
"
MIN
0.00
-
97.29
-
-

MAX
96.00
•
97.29
-
-

SE
14.50
-
0.00
-
-

90% C.I.
(33,91)
-
(0,0)
-
-

                                                                                      NON-CHLORINATED
                                                                                      TREATMENT: AL

                                                                           N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX    SE  .90% C.I.

                                                                             6      1  88.89  88.89  88.89  (0,0)
                                                                                      TREATMENT: AS

                                                                                OBSV   MEAN    MIN
                                                                           N
MAX
       SE   90% C.I.
                                                                           112
                                                                            19
                                                                            58
                                                                             6

                                                                             0
19
4
6
1
1
85
98
98
95
99
99
.21
.01
.85
.39
.84
.94
0
96
95
95
99
99
.00
.67
.00
.39
.84
.94
TOO
99
100
95
99
99
.00
.00
.00
.39
.84
.94
       5.65  (75,95)
       0.49  (97.99)
       0.78 (97,100)
       0.00    (0,0)
       0.00    (00)
       0.00    (0,0)
                                                                                      TREATMENT: TF

                                                                                OBSV   MEAN    MIN
                                                                                                      MAX
       SE   90% C.I.
                                                                   6-31

-------
 POTU - Percent Removal




 PARAMETER:TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
19-Apr-90

IHFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
»»UBKZS2:
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV REAM HIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
6 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
146 20 42.09 0.00 100.00 8.88 (27,57)
TREATMENT: TF
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
48 7 47.07 0.00 97.67 17.99 (12,82)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
6 1 87.50 87.50 87.50 0.00
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
59 11 49.22 0.00 93.75 12.45
0 1 90.00 90.00 90.00 0.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE
6 1 50.00 50.00 50.00 0.00
	

90% C.I.
(0,0)

90% C.I.
(27,72)
(0,0)

90% C.I.
(0,0)
PARAMETER:TR1BROMOMETHANE
IHFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0*50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN
-
HIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN
.
HIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
I
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN

HIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
:ssss====ss:3ss======-=— ===========
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
14 1 83.33 83.33 83.33
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
14 1 67.78 67.78 67.78
0 1 65.00 65.00 65.00
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
14 1 54.44 54.44 54.44

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (00)
0.00 (00)
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
                                                            6-32

-------
POTW - Percent Removal


PARAMETER:TRICHLOROETHENE
                                                                                                                  19-Apr-90


INFL
CONC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000


0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
========5=====================================-= 	 =======
CHLORINATED

N
6
-
-
-
-
-

N
157
36
12
6
-
~

N
24
18
6
-
-


OBSV
1
-
-
-
-
™

OBSV
17
2
1
-
~

OBSV
3
1
-
-

TREATMENT: AL
MEAN MIN
75.00 75.00
-
-
-
-
— —
TREATMENT: AS
MEAN MIN
48.24 0.00
78.46 51.72
89.71 86.86
86.80 86.80
-
«. —
TREATMENT: TF
MEAN MIN
94.19 88.84
94.19 88.84
99.19 99.19
-
-


MAX
75.00
-
-
-
-
—

MAX
97.73
98.21
92.56
86.80
-
~

MAX
98.04
98.04
99.19
-
-


SE
0.00
•
-
—
-
"

SE
10.22
7.87
2.85
0.00
-
"

SE
2.85
2.85
0.00
-
-


90% C.I.
(0,0)
-
-
-
-


90% C.I.
(30,66)
(62 95)
(72,100)
(0,0)
-


90% C.I.
(86,100)
(86,100)
(0,0)
-
-

:==-====== 	 ======- -===-====- _ ==== 	 = 	 . 	
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV
6 1
-
- -
- -
-

MEAN
97.30
~
-
~
~

MIN MAX
97.30 97.30
~ ""
~ ™
~ ~
~

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
"
"
-
—

TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV
106 18
6 1
26 3
"
~ -

MEAN
53.77
97.65
97.74
~
~

MIN MAX
0.00 100.00
97.65 97.65
95.00 99.61
— —
-

SE 90% C.I.
8.26 (39.68)
0.00 (6.0)
1.40 (94,100)
"
-

TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV
6 2
6 1
-
~
-

MEAN
91.67
88.24
-
~
t

MIN MAX
83.33 100.00
88.24 88.24
"
~ ""
• **

SE 90% C.I.
8.33 (39,100)
0.00 (0,0)
~ ~
"
~ —

 PARAMETER:TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE
    INFL
   CONC.
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
      0-50
    51-100
   101-500
  501-1000
 1001-5000
    > 5000
                                     CHLORINATED


                            TREATMENT: AL
OBSV   MEAN
               MIN
                      MAX
                   41
      TREATMENT: AS

OBSV   MEAN    MIN    MAX

    2  48.65   0.00
                             TREATMENT:  TF

                  N    OBSV   MEAN    MIN

                    6      1   0.00   0.00
                      MAX
D

SE 90% C.I.
- ,
( SE 90% C.I.
50 48.65 (0,100)
< SE 90% C.I.
30 0.00 (0,0)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0" 1 95.00 95.00 95.00
5 1 100.00 100.00 100.00
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
0 1 100.00 100.00 100.00


SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0,0)
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
                                                                6-33

-------
 POTW - Percent Ronoval
                                                                                                                19-Apr-90
PARAHETER:VINYL CHLORIDE

1NFL
COHC.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000

0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
H OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
TREATMENT: AS
H 06SV MEAN MIN MAX
41 Z 0.00 0.00 0.00
6 1 71.43 71.43 71.43
6 1 94.05 94.05 94.05
6 1 92.93 92.93 92.93
TREATMENT: TF
H 06SV MEAN MIN MAX



SE 90% C.I.
-
SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (0)0)
0.00 (0,0)
0.00 (OjO)
SE 90% C.I.

=========== 	 =—==========—====—==—====:==============
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.
5 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 (0,0)
0 1 95.00 95.00 95.00 0.00 (0,0)
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX SE 90% C.I.

PARAMETERIZING
IHFL
CO«C.
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
0-50
51-100
101-500
501-1000
1001-5000
> 5000
•Ksssssssa:

CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N
6
OBSV
1
MEAN
89.98
MIN
89.9E
MAX
89.98
SE
0.00
90% C.I.
(0,0)
TREATMENT: AS
H
7
183
24
69
12
OBSV
1
21
i
MEAN
97.50
68.59
82.13
83.32
71.27
HIN
97.50
29.73
74.15
49.05
63.64
MAX
97.50
68.59
88.74
99.25
78.90
SE
0.00
3.41
4.27
4.66
7.63
90% C.I.
(0,0)
(63,74)
(70,95)
(75!92)
(23,100)
TREATMENT: TF
N
6
42
ssssssss!
OBSV
1
6
MEAN
17.20
47.20
MIN
17.20
30.77
MAX
17.20
75.17
SE
90% C.I.
0.00 (0.0)
6.27 (34. &0)
NON-CHLORINATED
TREATMENT: AL
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
6 1 51.10 51.10 51.10
TREATMENT: AS
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
48 9 79.90 60.00 90.27
18 3 77.24 82.55 80.45
45 3 74.10 62.90 90.63
TREATMENT: TF
N OBSV MEAN MIN MAX
12 2 69.25 65.49 73.01

SE 90% C.I.
0.00 (0,0)

SE 90% C.I.
3.42 (74,86)
1.63 (72,82)
8.26 (51,99)

SE 90% C.I.
3.76 (46,93)
                                                               6-34

-------
 Page Ho.
 04/18/90
 COMPOUND
                                                          TABLE 6-2
                                  PERCENT OF INFLUENT PARTITIONED TO SLUDGE AND  VOLATILIZED
                                             IN ACTIVATED SLUDGE TREATMENT PLANTS

                                                              PERCENT OF INFLUENT
                                                                  VOLATILIZED
                               PERCENT OF INFLUENT
                               PARTIONED TO SLUDGE
**  METALS (AN I ON.)
 ARSENIC
 SELENIUM

**  METALS (CATION)
 ANTIMONY
 BARIUM
 CADMIUM
 CHROMIUM
 LEAD
 MERCURY
 NICKEL
 SILVER

**  MISCELLANEOUS
 CYANIDE

**  PCBs
 PCB-1016
 PCB-1221
 PCB-1232
 PCS-1242
 PCB-1248
 PCB-1254
 PCS-1260

**  PESTICIDES  (HERBICIDE)
 DNBP

**  PESTICIDES  (ORGANOHALIDE)
 2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC  ACID
 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC  ACID
 ALDRIN
 CAPTAN
 CHLORODANE
 ENDRIN
 METHOXYCHLOR
 TOXAPHENE
 TRI PLURAL IN

**   PESTICIDES (ORGANOPHOSPHOROUS)
 DIAZINON
 DICHLORVOS
 DISULFOTON
  FENTHION
 MEVINPHOS
  NALED
  PARATHION
  PHORATE

 **   SEMI-VOLATILES (ACID)
  2,4,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL
  2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
  2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
  2,4-DINITROPHENOL
  2-CHLOROPHENOL
  CRESOLS
  PENTACHLOROPHENOL
  PHENOL
  RESORCINOL

 **  SEMI-VOLATILES (BASE)
  BENZENAMINE
  DIPHENYLAMINE
  N-NITROSCOIMETHYLAMINE
  P-NITROANILINE
  PYRIDINE

 **  SEMI-VOLATILES (NEUTRAL)
  1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
  1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
  1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
  1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
  2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
0
0
9
0
54
57
0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
 42
 45
 45
 45
 1
                                         50
                                         50
0
90
27
70
30
50
35
90
                                         90
34
34
34
34
8
8
8
7
7  '
33
7
33
35
8
4
33
 7
 9
 7
 6
 9
 8
 0
 7
 8
 8
 8
 9
 8
 8
 17
 14
 10
                                          10
                                          7
                                          9
                                          0
                                          2
 8
 32
 3
 22
 35
                                                                6-35

-------
 Page Ho.
 04/18/90
 COMPOUND
                                                    TABLE  6-2  (CONTINUED)
                                  PERCENT OF INFLUENT PARTITIONED  TO SLUDGE AND VOLATILIZED
                                             IN ACTIVATED  SLUDGE TREATMENT PLANTS

                                                              PERCENT OF INFLUENT
                                                                  VOLATILIZED
                               PERCENT  OF  INFLUENT
                               PARTIONED TO  SLUDGE
 ACEHAPHTHYLENE
 ANTHRACENE
 BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE
 BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL> ETHER
 BISC2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
 BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
 DIETHYL PHTHALATE
 ETHYLENETHIOUREA
 HEXACHLOROeUTADIEKE
 HEXACHLOROETHANE
 NAPHTHALENE
 NITROBENZENE

**  VOLATILES
 1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
 1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
 1,1-DlCHLOROETHANE
 1,1-D1CHLORO£THENE
 1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE
 1,2-DlCKLOROETHANE
 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
 1,4-DIOXANE
 2-BUTANOHE
 2-PICOtINE
 2-PROPAHONE
 2-PROPENAL
 2-PROPEHEMITRILE
 BENZENE
 8ROHOHETHANE
 CARBOH DISULFIDE
 CHLOROBENZENE
 CHLOROETHANE
 CHLOROFORM
 CHLOROMETHANE
 DIBROHOMETHANE
 ETHYL8ENZENE
 KETHYLENE CHLORIDE
 STYRENE
 TETRACHLOROETHENE
 TETRACHLOROHETHANE
 TOtUENE
 TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
 TRIBROMOMETHANE
 TR1CHLOROETHENE
 TRICHIOROFLUOROMETHANE
 VINYL CHLORIDE
 XYLEHES
19
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
48
76
36
40
63
76
30
45
45
0
1
1
1
1
0
24
86
76
27
76
63
86
42
24
38
22
45
72
24
63
36
66
76
86
24
9
52
1
9
66
43
1
8
9
9
27
9
4
9
4
0
0
0
6
4
0
9
10
8
10
10
0
2
0
1
14
1
2
1
13
0
13
14
3
12
27
49
5
6
0
2
14
                                                              6-36

-------
                                  REFERENCES
Anthony, Richard M. and Breimhurst, Lawrence H.,  "Determining Maximum Influent
     Concentrations of Priority Pollutants for Treatment Plants."  Journal of
     the Water Pollution Control Federation. Vol. 53, No. 10, (Oct. 1981) pg.
     1457-1468.

Berglund, R.L. and Whipple, G.M., "Predictive Modeling of Organic Emissions."
     Chemical Engineering Progress. (Nov. 1987) pg. 46-54.

Convery, J.J., Cohen, J.M. and Bishop, D.F., "Occurrence and Removal of Toxics
     in Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facilities."  Seventh Joint United
     States/Japan Conference, May 1980.

Hannah, Sidney A., et al., "Comparative Removal of Toxic Pollutants by Six
     Wastewater treatment Processes."  Journal of the Water Pollution Control
     Federation. Vol. 58, No. 1, (Jan. 1986) pg. 27-34.

Hutton, D.G.  and E.I. duPont de Nemours and Co., Inc., "Removal of Priority
     Pollutants."  Industrial Wastes. March/April, 1980, pg. 22-26.

Kincannon,  Don F., et al., "Removal Mechanisms for Toxic Priority Pollutants."
     Journal  of the Water  Pollution Control Federation. Vol. 55, No. 2 (Feb.
     1983)  pg. 157-163.

Namkung,  Eun  and Rittman,  Bruce  E., "Estimating Volatile Organic Compound
     Emissions From  Publicly Owned Treatment Works."  Journal of the Water
     Pollution Control  Federation. Vol.  59, No.  7  (July  1987) pg.  670-678.

Neiheisel,  Timothy W.,  et al.,  "Toxicity Reduction:  Municipal Wastewater
     Treatment Plants."  Journal of the  Water  Pollution  Control  Federation.  Vol.
     60,  No.  57  (Jan.  1988) pg.  57-67.

Patterson,  John.  Industrial Wastewater Treatment Technology.  2nd Edition, pg.
     340-360.

Petrasek, A.C.,  Kugelman,  I.J.,  "Metals  Removals and Partitioning  In
     Conventional Wastewater Treatment Plants."  Journal of the  Water  Pollution
     Control  Federation.  Vol.  55,  No. 9,  (Sept.  1983)  pg.  1183-1190.

 Petrasek, Albert C.,  et al.,  "Fate of Toxic Organic  Compounds In Wastewater
     Treatment Plants." Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation.  Vol.
      55,  No.  10  (Oct.  1983)  pg.  1286-1296.

 Russell,  Larry L., et al., "Impact of Priority Pollutants on Publicly Owned
     Treatment Works Processes:   A Literature Review.   1984 Purdue Industrial
     Waste Conference.
 900409-mil
 Page 1
6-37

-------
Weber, W.J. and Jones B.E.,  "Toxic Substance Removal In Activated Sludge and PAC
     Treatment  Systems."  USEPA Office of Research and Development, Water
     Engineering Research Laboratory.

Yurteri, Coskun, et al., "The Effect of Chemical Composition of Water on Henry's
     Law Constant." Journal  of the Water Pollution Control Federation. Vol. 59,
     No. 11.  (Nov. 1987) pg. 950-956.
                        *                                                 i
USEPA, "Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment Works - 30 Day
     Study."  (July 1982).

USEPA, "Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment Works - Final
     Report."   (Sept. 1982).

USEPA, "Guidance Manual on the Development and Implementation of Local Discharge
     Limitations Under the Pretreatment Program."  (Nov. 1987).

USEPA, "Report  to Congress on the Discharge of Hazardous Wastes to Publicly
     Owned Treatment Works."  (Feb. 1986).
900409-mil
Page 2
6-38

-------
                                  SECTION 7

                         COMPUTER SOFTWARE PACKAGES
9.89.107C
0009.0.0

-------
 SECTION 7 - COMPUTER SOFTWARE PACKAGES.    Section 7 presents a list of computer
 software packages that may aid POTW authorities and regulatory agencies in
 developing local limits.  Local limits can be used to determine the level  of
 pretreatment required at a CERCLA site.
891003B-mll
11.

-------
                          COMPUTER SOFTWARE  PACKAGES
    Wastewater  Data  Management  System.  This  software  package was  reviewed in
    the  April issue  of  Pollution Engineering  magazine.   It  is IBM  PC/XT-,  AT-
    compatible,  costs about  $2,000,  and rated very highly except for ease  of
    use,  initially.  For  more information,  contact WDMS  Computer Services,
    P.O.  Box 27561,  .Tulsa, Oklahoma   74149,,  (918)  241-5755.

    Pretreattnent.  This software package was  written by  a USEPA pretreatment
    coordinator.   It is IBM  PC-, PC/XT-,  or PC/AT-compatible and costs  about
    $2,500.  For more information, contact  Spica Systems, 4921 Seminary Road,
    Suite 1502,  Alexandria,  Virginia  22311,  (703) 671-5874.

    PGME Software.   This  is  a package developed by USEPA to go along with  the
    PCME guidance  and training.   It  is IBM  PC-, PC/XT-,  or  PC/AT-compatible
    and  will be essentially  free.  For more information, contact Richard Kinch
    at (203) 475-8319.
     PRELIM.   This  is  a USEPA product for use in developing local limits.
     is IBM PC-,  PC/XT-, or PC/AT-compatible.   For more information,  call
     (202)  475-9539.
                                       It
     PRETRE.   This  is a comprehensive package that is  IBM PC-,  PC/XT-,  and
     PC/AT-compatible and costs about $2,500.  For more information,  contact
     Jay Fink, Cochran Associates,  Inc.,  236 Huntington Avenue,  Boston,  Massa-
     chusetts  02115, (617)  247-0444.

     Operator Ten.   This is  a package that requires minimal development, is IBM
     PC-, PC/XT-,  and PC/AT-compatible,  and costs about $2,500.   For  more
     information,  contact Don G.  Knaur,  Macola Inc., 196 S. Main Street,
     P.O. Box 485,  Marion, Ohio  43302,  (800) 468-0834.

     Integrated Model For Predicting The Fate Of Organics In Wastewater Treat-
     ment Plants.   This software package is currently  being developed by the
     USEPA Office of Research and Development.  For more information  contact
     Richard Dobbs  at (513)  569-7649.

     FATE.  The Fate and Treatability Estimator (FATE) model predicts the fate
     of pollutants  in activated sludge POTWs and is contained in Section 14.
     This IBM PC-compatible  software was developed by  C-E Environmental, Inc.
     for the USEPA Industrial Technology Division (ITD).  For more information,
     contact ITD at (202) 382-7149.
9.89.107C
0010.0.0
7-1

-------

-------
                                   SECTION  8

                   PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL  CONSTANTS  OF  COMPOUNDS
9.89;107C
0011.0.0

-------
SECTION 8 - PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL CONSTANTS OF COMPOUNDS.  Section 8 presents the
compound name, the molecular weight, Henry's Law Constant, Log octanol/water
coefficient (Kow), and solubility of compounds where information was available
for compounds on the ITD list of analytes (Section 9).   Values of Henry's Law
constant and Log Kow were extracted from various EPA publications (i.e.,
Treatabilitv Manual: Vols. 1-5; USEPA 600/2 82-001A through 600/2 82-042;
September-October 1986 and "Superfund Public Emergency and Remedial Response;
USEPA/540/1-86/060; 1986) and in most cases, were measured values.

The physical and chemical constants of compounds detected in CERCLA wastestreams
can be used to evaluate a compound's fate in a POTW where no other data are
available.  The compound's fate can be estimated by using its physical and
chemical constants (as well as its compound class) to locate similar compounds
for which fate (percent removal) data are available.
891003B-mll
12.

-------
    Page No.
    04/18/90
     REGULATORY  NAME
                                                                                               TABLE  8-1
                                                                                    CHEMICAL  AND  PHYSICAL  PROPERTIES
                                                             MOLECULAR WEIGHT
                                                                (g/mole)
                                                                                   HENRY'S LAW COEF.
                                                                                   (atm m3/mole)
                                                LOG KOU
SOLUBILITY
  (ppm)
                                                                                            SOLUBILITY TEMP
                                                                                              (CELCIUS)
oo
I
**  DIOXINS
 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 1.2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 Dibenzo[b,e][1,4]dioxin,  2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
 Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
 Hexachlorodvbenzofurans
 Pentachlorodibenzo-p-di.oxins
 PentachIorod ibenzofurans
 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
 TetrachIorodibenzofurans

**  METALS (ANIONS)
 Arsenic
 Boron
 Chlorine
 Iodine
 Phosphorus (black, uhite, red, yellow, or violet)
 Selenium
 Silicon
 Sulfur

**  METALS (CATIONS)
 Aluminum
 Antimony
 Barium
 Beryllium
 Bismuth
 Cadmium
 Calcium
 Cerium
 Chromium
 Cobalt
 Copper
 Dysprosium
 Erbium
 Europium
 Gallium
 Germanium
 Gold
 Hafnium
 Holmium
 Hydrogen  ion
 Indium
 Iridium
 Iron
 Lanthanum
 Lead
 Lithium
 Lutetium
 Hagnes i urn
 Manganese
 Mercury
 Molybdenum
                                                                322
75
10.81
35.45
126.9
30.97
79
28.09
32.06
                                                                26.98
                                                                122
                                                                137
                                                                9
                                                                208.98
                                                                112
                                                                40.08
                                                                140.12
                                                                52
                                                                58.93
                                                                64
                                                                162.5
                                                                167.26
                                                                151.96
                                                                69.72
                                                                72.59
                                                                196.97
                                                                178.49
                                                                164.93

                                                                114.82
                                                                192.2
                                                                56
                                                                138.91
                                                                207
                                                                6.94
                                                                174.97
                                                                24.31
                                                                55
                                                                201
                                                                95.94
                      3.60X10E-03
                                                                                                                 6.72
                                                                                                                                        0.0002

-------
     Page Wo.
     04/18/90
     REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                         TABLE 8-1  (CONTINUED)
                                                                                    CHEMICAL AHO PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
                                                         MOLECULAR HEIGHT
                                                            (g/wole)
                       HENRY'S LAM COEF.
                       (atsi mS/mole)
                                                                                                                LOG KOW
SOLUBILITY
  (ppm)
SOLUBILITY TEHP
  (CELCIUS)
00
I
ro
 Neodyraium
 Nickel
 Niobium
 Osmium
 Palladiun
 Platinum
 Potassium
 Praseodymium
 Rhenium
 Rhodium
 Ruthenium
 Samarium
 Scandium  v
 Silver
 Sodium
 Strontium
 Tantalum
 Tellurium
 Terbium
 Thallium
 Thorium
 Thulium
 Tin
 Titanium
 Tungsten
 Uranium
 Vanadium
 Ytterbium
 Yttrium
 Zinc
 Zirconium

**  MISCELLANEOUS
 Ammonia
 Asbestos
 Biochemical Oxygen Demand
 Chemical Oxygen Demand
 Chloramine
 Chloride
 Chlorine dioxide
 Chlorite
 Copper cyanide (CuCN)
 Corrosivity
 Cryptosporidium
 Cyanides (soluble salts and complexes)  NOS
 Cyanogen chloride
 Disodium cyanodithioimidocarbonate
 Fluoride
 Hypochlorite ion
 Ignitability
 Nitrate/nitrite
 Nitrites
 OjI and grease
 OiI and grease
 Reactivity
 Residue, filterable
144.24
59
92.91
190.2
106.4
195.09
39.1
140.91
186.2
102.91
101.07
150.35
44.96
108
22.99
87.62
180.95
127.6
158.92
204
232.04
168.93
118.69
47.9
183.85
238
51
173.04
88.91
65
91.22
                                                                17.03
                                                                67.45

                                                                115.58

-------
Page Ho.
04/18/90
REGULATORY NAME
                                                         MOLECULAR WEIGHT
                                                            (g/mole)
                                                                                   •TABLE  8-1  (CONTINUED)
                                                                                CHEMICAL  AND  PHYSICAL  PROPERTIES
HENRY'S LAW COEF.
(atm nti/mole)
LOG KOW
SOLUBILITY
  (ppn.)
                                            SOLUBILITY TEMP
                                              (CELCIUS)
      Residue, non-filterable
      Residue, total
      Specific conductivity
      Sulfide
      Total organic carbon
      Total volatile organic carbon

     **  PCB
      PCB-1016
      PCB-1221
      PCB-1232
      PCB-1242
      PCB-1248
      PCB-1254
      PCB-1260

     **  PESTICIDES (CARBAMATES)
      Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid, salts and esters
      Diallate \ Avadex
      Nabam
      Maneb \ Vancide
      Zineb \ Dithane Z
      Busan 85
      Carbamic acid, methyldithio-, monopotassium salt
oo    Carbamic acid, dimethyldithio-, sodium salt
'      Thiram \ Thiuram \ Arasan
      Ziram \ Cymate

     **  PESTICIDES (HERBICIDES)
      2,4-D \ Acetic acid,  (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-
      Pronamide \ Kerb
      DNBP \ Dinoseb \ 2-sec-butyl-4,6-dimtrophenol
      Dinex \ DN-111 \ 2-Cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
      2,4,5-TP \ Silvex

     **  PESTICIDES (ORGANOHALIDES)
      Isodrin (Stereoisomer of Aldrin)
      Mi rex \ Dechlorane
      Kepone
      Dichlone \ Phygon
      Endrin
      Aldrin
      2,4,5-T \ Ueedone \ Acetic  acid,  2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy-
      Heptachlor epoxide
      Dieldrin
      Alachlor \ Metachlor  \ Lasso
      4,4'-DDD/Benzene,
      1,1'-(2,2-dichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro-
      4,4'-DDE/Benzene,
      1,1'-(dichloroethenlyidine)bis[4-chloro
      4,4'-DDT/Benzene,
      1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethytidene)bis[4-chloro
      Chiordane
      Heptachlor
      Captafot \ Difolatan
      Captan
                                                            257.9
                                                            200,
                                                            232,
                                                            266.
                                                            299.
                                                            328,
                                                            375.7
                                                            274
                                                            256.34
                                                            265.3
                                                            275.73
                                                            240.41
                                                            273.59
                                                            221
                                                            256.14
                                                            240
                                                            266.25
                                                            269.51
                                                            490.6
                                                            227
                                                            380.9
                                                            365
                                                            255.48
                                                            389.3
                                                            381

                                                            320

                                                            318

                                                            354.5

                                                            409.8
                                                            373.3

                                                            300.6
1.8x10E-04
3.24X10E-04
8.64x10E-04
5.7x10E-04
3.5x10E-03
2.8x10E-03
7.1x10E-03
1.65x10E-04
Low



1.88x10E-04

1.20x10E-03
0.5x10E-06
1.6x10E-05

4.39x10E-04
4.58x10E-07

7.96x10E-06

6.8x10E-05

5.13x10E-04

9.63x10E-06
8.19x10E-04

4.7x10E-05
4.38
4.08
4.54
4.11
5.60
6.04
7.15
                                                                                                             0.73
                                                                                                             Low
                                                                                                             2.81
 2.00

 5.6
 5.30

 2.70
 3.50

 6.20

 7.00

 6.19

 3.32
 4.40

 2.35
0.049
0.59
1.45
0.10
0.054
0.057
0.08
                                                                                                                                    14
                       620

                       50

                       140
  0.010
 Insoluble
 0.26
 0.017-0.18
 278
 0.35
 0.20

 0.02-0.09

 0.040

 0.0031

 0.056-1.85
 0.18

 0.5
24C
24C
25C
24C
25C
24C
24C
                                                                            25C
25C
25C
25C
25C
25C

25C

20C

25C

25C
25C

25C-

-------
      Page Ho.
      04/18/90
       REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                           TABLE  8-1  (COHTIKUED)
                                                                                      CHEMICAL  AJTO PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
MOLECULAR WEIGHT
   (g/roole)
HEHRY'S LAU COEF.
(atra m3/mole)
                                                                                                                  LOG KOU
SOLUBILITY
  Cppt)
SOLUBILITY TEMP
  (CELCIUS)
      Hethoxychlor
      Chtorobenzilate \ Ethyl-4,4'-dichlorobenzilate              325.2
      Lindone \ gamma-BHC \ Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamna)         290.8
      alpha-BHC         "                                          290.8
      delta-BHC                                                   290.8
      beta-BHC                                                    290.8
      6.9-Methano-2,3,4-benzodioxathiepin, 6,7                    423
      Thiodan I
      Thiodan II
      Endrjn aldehyde
      Endrine ketone
      Mitrofen \ TDK
      Camphechlor                                                 414
      o.p'-DDT
      Trifluralin \ Treflan

     **   PESTICIDES (ORGANOPHOSPHOROUS)
      Coumaphos \ Co-Ral                                          362.8
      Crotoxyphos \ Ciodrin
      Mevinphos \ Phosdrin                                        224.2
      Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0,8-triethyt ester
      Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-methyl ester
      Zinophos \ Thionazin
      PCNB \ Terraclor \ Quintozene                               295
CD    Phosacetin
i      Trichlorofon \ Dylox                                        257
*•    Naled \ Dibrora                                              380.8
      Dichlorvos \ DDVP                                           221
      Tetrachlorvinphos \ Gardona
      Chlorfenvinphos \ Supona
      Dicrotophos \ Bidrin
      Monocrotophos \ Azodrin
      Phosphamidon \ Dimecron
      Tricresylphosphate \ TCP \ TOCP
      Trimethylphosphate
      Hexametnylphosphoramide \ HHPA
      Oemeton \ Systox
      Diazinon \ Spectracide                                      304.4
      Chlorpyrifos \ Dursban                                      350.6
      Fensulfothion \ Desanit
      Phorate \ Thimet                                            260.4
      Disulfoton                                                  274.4
      Azinphos-ethyl \ Ethyl Guthion
      Terbufos \ Counter
      Azinphos-methyl \ Guthion                                   317.3
      Phosmet \ Imidan
      Cygon \ Dimethoate                                          229
      Fenthion \ Baytex
      Ethion \ Bladan                                             384.5
      Dioxathion
      Carbophenothion \ Trithion
      Parathion \ Parathion, ethyl                                291.3
      Methyl parathion \ Parathion-methyl \ Hetaphos              263.2
      Famphur \ Faraophos
      Leptophos \ Phosvel
      EPN \ Santox
                          7.85x10E-06
                          5.87x10E-06
                          2.07X10E-07
                          4.47X10E-07
                          4.89x10E-03
                          3.2x10E-08
                          6.18x10E-04

                          1.71x10E-11

                          3.4x10E-07
                          1.4x10E-06
                          4.1x10E-06
                          2.5x10E-06


                          3.8x10E-06
                          6.1x10E-07
                          5.59x10E-08
                          3.90
                          3.90
                          4.10
                          3.90
                          3.66
                          3.3
                          5.45

                          2.29
                                                   2.71
                                                    1.91
17.0
1.63
21.3
0.70
0.117
0.5




1.5

Hiscible



0.071

154,000
Almost Ins
10,000
     24C
     25C
     25C
     25C
     25C




     25C

     25C
     25C

     20C
                                                40
                                                2

                                                50
                                                25
                                                33

                                                25,000

                                                Slightly
                                                24
                                                60
                          20C
                          35C
                          23C


                          25
                          25C
                          25C

-------
CO
I
Ln,
     Page No.
     04/18/90
     REGULATORY NAME
 Malathion \ Sumitox
 TEPP \ Phosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester
 Sulfotepp \ Bladafum \ Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate

**  SEMI-VOLATILES (ACIDS)
 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
 2,3,6-Trichlorophenol
 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
 2,4-Djchlorophenol
 2,4-Dimethylphenol
 2,4-Dinitrophenol
 2,6-Dichlorophenol
 2-Chlorophenol
 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
 4-Nitrophenol
 Benzoic acid
 Benzonitrile, 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxy-
 Hexanoic acid
 PentachIorophenol
 Phenol
 Phenol, 2-methyl-4,6-dinitro-
 Resorcmol
 Sulfurous acid, 2-chloroethyl-, 2-C4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)
   phenoxy]-1-methylethyl ester
 m-Cresol
 o-Cresol
 p-Cresol

**  SEMI-VOLATILES (BASES)
 1,1'-Biphenyl-4.4'-diamine, 3,3'-dimethoxy
 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
 1,2-Etfianediamine, N,N-dimethyl-N'-2pyridinyl-N'-(2-
   thienylmethyl)-
 1,3-Benzenediamine, 4-methyl-
 1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(1-propenyl)-
 1,4-Dichlorobenzene
 1,5-Naphthalenediamine
 1-Naphthylamine
 2,3-Dichloroaniline
 2,6-Dinitrotoluene
 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline
 2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole
 2-Chloronaphthalene
 2-Nitroaniline
 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
 3-Nitroaniline
 4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)
 4-Chloro-2-nitroaniline
 5-Nitro-o-toluidine
 7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
 Acetamide, N-(4-ethoxyphenyl)-
 Anmonium, (4-(p-(dimethylamino)-alpha-phenylbenzyli
   dine)-2,5-cylcohexadien-1-ylidene)-dimethyl chloride
 Aniline, 2,4,5-trimethyl-
                                                                                         TABLE 8-1  (CONTINUED)
                                                                                    CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
MOLECULAR WEIGHT
(g/mole)
330.36
290i2
322.31
231.89
197.46
197.45
197.45
163.0
122.17
184.11
163.0
128.56
142.59
139.11
122.1
276.92
116.16
266.34
94.11
198.13
110.11
334.87
108.15
108.14
108.14
244
215.89
184.24
261 .39
122
168
147.0
158.21
143
162.02
182.1
207.02
162.5
138.13
253.13
267
152
256
179.21
HENRY'S LAW COEF.
(atm m3/mole)





2.18x10E-04
4.0x10E-06
2.75X10E-06
2.52x10E-06
6.45x10E-10

4.7x10E-06
2.5x10E-06

1.82X10E-08


2.8x10E-06
4.54x10E-07
4.49x10E-05
1.0x10E-13




1X10E-11

3.42x10E-09

1.28X10E-10
3.25X10E-12
3.1X10E-03

5.21X10E-09

3.27x10E-06

3.15x10E-04

8.33X10E-07




                                                                                                                                        SOLUBILITY
                                                                                                                 LOG KOW
                                                                                                                 2.89
                                                                                                                 4.1

                                                                                                                 3.72
                                                                                                                 3.87
                                                                                                                 2.90
                                                                                                                    50
                                                                                                                    53
                                                                                                                  2.17
                                                                                                                  3.13
                                                                                                                  1.91
                                                                                                                  5.04
                                                                                                                  1.48
                                                                                                                  2.70
                                                                                                                  0.80
                                                                                                                  1.46
                                                                                                                  4.67
                                                                                                                  2.90
                                                                                                                  0.35
                                                                                                                  2.66
                                                                                                                  3.60

                                                                                                                  2.07

                                                                                                                  2.05


                                                                                                                  4.12

                                                                                                                  3.50
                                                                                                                  6.94
145
Hiscible
25-66
1,000

1190
800
4,500
1,000
5,600

28.500
3,850
16,000
2,900
14
80.000
25&
2,290,000
                                                                                                                                         31,000
                                                                                                                                         24,000
0.3
1840
47,700
1090
79

2350

270


6.74

4.0
0.0004
760
                                                                                                                                                          SOLUBILITY TEMP
                                                                                                                                                            (CELCIUS)
25C

20C
25C
25C
25C
20C
18C

20C
20C
25C
20C
20C
25C

30C
                          40C
                          40C
22C
25C



22C


25C

22C

-------
     Page Ho.
     04/18/90
     REGULATORY HAKE
                                                        MOLECULAR WEIGHT
                                                           Cg/mole)
                                                                                         TABLE 8-1 (CONTINUED)
                                                                                    CHEMICAL AWO PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
                                                                                   HENRY'S LAM COEF.
                                                                                   (ntm ra3/mole)
                                                                                                                 LOG KOW
                       SOLUBILITY
                         (ppt)
                     SOLUBILITY TEMP
                       (CELC1US)
oo
I
 Benzenmine
 Benzenwnine, 4-chloro-
 Benzenwiine, N,N-dintethyt-4-(pehnylazo)-
 Benzencthiol
 Benzidine
 Carbazole
 Di-n-propylnitrosamine
 Diphenylatine
 N-Nitrosodi-n-butytawiine
 N-Nitrosodiethylamine
 N-Nitrosodimethylamine
 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
 N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
 N-Nitrosomethylphenylamine
 N-Nitrosonwrpnoune
 N-Mitrosopiperidine
 Nitrobenzene
 Phenothiazine
 Propane, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloro-
 Pyridine
 Thioxanthe-9-one
 [1,1'-Biphenyl]-4-amine
 beta-Maphthylamina
 o-Anisidine
 o-Toluidine
 o-Toluidine, 5-chloro-
 p-Nitroanihne

**  SEMI-VOLATILES (NEUTRAL)
 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
 1,2,3-Trimethoxybenzene
 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxyljc acid,  dibutyl  ester
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid,  dimethyl ester
 1,2-Dichlorobenzene
 1,2:3,4-Diepoxybutane
 1,3,5-Trithiane
 1,3-Cyclopentadiene, 1.2,3,4,5,5-hexachloro-
 1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol
 1,3-Dichlorobenzene
 1, 3 -Di nit robenzene
 1,4-Naphthoquinone
 1-Chloro-3-nitrobenzene
 1-Hethylfluorene
 1-Hethylphenanthrene          ,
 1-Phenylnaphthalene
                                                       3-
  methoxy-
2,3-Benzofluorene
2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-di-tert-Butyl-p-benzoquinone
2,7-Dimethylphenanthrene
2-Isopropylnaphthalene
2-Hethylbenzothioazole
2-Hethylnaphthalene
                                                                93.1
                                                                127.57
                                                                225
                                                                110.17
                                                                184.23
                                                                167.21
                                                                130.19
                                                                169

                                                                102
                                                                74.08
                                                                198.23
                                                            114
                                                            123.1
                                                            199.28
                                                            236
                                                            79.10

                                                            169.0
                                                            143.0
                                                            123.16
                                                            107.16
                                                            141.61
                                                            138.13
                                                                181.45
                                                                168.2
                                                                181.4
                                                                278.35
                                                                194.2
                                                                147.0 -
                                                                86.09
                                                                138.27
                                                                272.8
                                                                128.99
                                                                147.0
                                                                168
                                                                158.16
                                                                157.56
                                                                180.25
                                                                192.26
                                                                204.28
                                                                216.29
                                                                192
                                                                182.1
                                                                222.23
                                                                206.28
                                                                170.25

                                                                142.20
                                                                                  1.1X10-E06

                                                                                  7..19X10E-09

                                                                                  3.03x10E-07

                                                                                  6.92x10E-06
                                                                                  1.47x10E-07

                                                                                  Low
                                                                                  7.9X10E-07
                                                                                       1.11x10E-08
                                                                                       1.3X10E-05

                                                                                       3.11x10E-04
                                                                                       7.0x1OE-09

                                                                                       1.59x10E-08
                                                                                       8.23x10E:08
                                                                                       1X10E-06
                                                                                  2.3x10E-03
                                                                                  2.8X10E-07
                                                                                  2.10x10E-07
                                                                                  1.93x10E-03
                                                                                  1.37x10E-03

                                                                                  3.59x10E-03
                                                                                   5.09x1OE-06
0.98
1.83
3.72
2.52
1.30

1.50
3.60

0.48
0.68
2.57
-0.49
1.85

2.29
0.66

2.78
2.07
1.3,9
4.28
5.6
2.12
3.60
5.04

3.56
1.62
2.01
35,000

13.6
470
400

9,900
57.6
Hiscible
1,900,000
1,900

1.000
Hiscible

842
586
25C
15C
12C

25C
25C
20C
12
13
5,000
145
1.8

123
470
270
22C
25C
20C
25C
25C

25C
                                                                                                                                                              22C

-------
      Page No.
      04/18/90
      REGULATORY NAME
                                                         MOLECULAR WEIGHT
                                                            
-------
     Page Ho.
     04/18/90
     REGULATORY NAME
                                                          HOIECULAR WEIGHT
                                                             (g/n»le)
                                                                                         TABLE 8-1 (CONTINUED)
                                                                                     CHEMICAL AW) PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
                       HENRY'S LAW COEF.
                       (atra rrt5/mole)
                                                                                                                 LOG KOW
                                                 SOLUBILITY
                                                   (ppffl)
                                            SOLUBILITY TEHP
                                              (CELCIUS)
oo
I
00
 Triphenylene
 Tripropyleneglycol methyl ether
 alpha-Terpineol
 bis(2-Chloroethoxy)roethane
 bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether
 bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether
 bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
 n-Decane
 n-Docosane
 n-Dodecane
 n-Eicosane
 n-Hexacosane
 n-Hexadecane
 n-Octacosane
 n-Octadecane
 n-Tetracosane
 n-Tetradecane
 n-Triacontane
 p-Cymene

**  VOLATILES
 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
 1,1,2-Trichloroethane
 1,1-Djchloroethane
 1,1-Dichloroethene
 1,2,3-Trichloropropane
 1,2-Dibromoethane
 1,2-Dichloroethane
 1,2-Dichloropropane
 1,3-Dichloropropane
 1,4-Dioxane
 1-Bromo-2-chlorobenzene
 1-Bromo-3-chlorobenzene
 1-Propene, 3-chloro-
 2-Butanone
 2-Butenal
 2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro (mixture of cis and trans)
 2-Chloro-1.3-butadiene
 2-Chloroetnylvinyl ether
 Z-Hexanone
 2-Picoline
 2-propanone
 2-Propen-1-o1
 2-Propenal
 2-Propenenitrile
 2-Propenenitrile, 2-methyl-
 4-HethyI-2-pentanone
 Benzene
 Bromodichloromethane
 Bromomethane
 Carbon disulfide
 Chloroacetonitrile
 Chlorobenzene
 Chloroethane
                                                                 228.29

                                                                 154.26
                                                                 173.1
                                                                 143.01
                                                                 171.07
                                                                 390.54
                                                                 142.29
                                                                 310.61
                                                                 170.34
                                                                 282.56
                                                                 366.72
                                                                 226.45
                                                                 394.78
                                                                 254.51
                                                                 338.67
                                                                 198.4
                                                                 422.83
                                                                 134.22
167.85
133.4
167.8
133.4
98.96
96.94
147.43
187.9
98.98
113.0
112.99
88
191.46
191.46
76.53
72
70.1
125
88.5
106.55'
100.16
93.13
58.08
58.08
56.1
53.1
67.09
100.16
78.11
163.8
94.94
76.14
75.5
112.56
64.52
                       2.7x1OE-07
                       1.3x10E-05
                       1.13X10E-04
                       3.0X10E-07
3.8U10E-04
1.44x10E-02
3.8x10E-04
1.17x10E-03
4.26x1OE-03
3.4x10-02

6.73x10E-04
9.78x10E-04
2.31x10E-03

1.07x10E-05
                                                                                       0.4
                                                                                       2.74x10E-05
                                                                                       1.4x10E-05
                                                                                        2.16x10E-05

                                                                                        2.4x10E-05
                                                                                        2.06x10E-05
                                                                                        3.69x10E-06
                                                                                        6.79x10E-05
                                                                                        8.84x10E-05
                                                                                        5.55x10E-03
                                                                                        2.12X10E-03
                                                                                        1.06X10E-01
                                                                                        1.2x10E-02

                                                                                        3.72x10E-03
                                                                                        1.48x10E-02
                          1.26
                          1.46
                          2.10
                          8.70
3.04
2.49
2.39
2.47
1.80
1.84
2.01
1.76
1.53
2.00

0.001
                          0.26
                          1.28

                          1.20
                          0.57
                          -0.22
                          -0.097
                          0.25
                          2.13
                          1.88
                          1.10
                          2.00

                          2.84
                          1.54
                       81,000
                       10,200
                       1,700
                       0.285
200
4,400
2,900
4,500
5.500
210

4,310
8,690
2,700
                       3,600
                       268,000
                       180,000
                       6,000
                       Hiscible
                       5.10X10E5
                       208,000
                       73,$00
                       1,780,1800

                       900
                       2,940

                       488
                       5,740
                          25C
                          25C

                          24C
20C
20C
20C
20C
20C
25C

30C
20C
20C
                                                                                                                                                                  20C
                          20C
                          20C
                          25C

                          20C
                          20C

                          25C
                          20C

-------
Page No.
04/18/90
REGULATORY NAME
MOLECULAR UE1GHT
   (g/mole)
                                                                                    TABLE 8-1 (CONTINUED)
                                                                               CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
HENRY'S LAW COEF.
(atm m3/mole)
                                                                                                            LOG KOW
                       SOLUBILITY
                         (PPnO
                     SOLUBILITY TEMP
                       (CELCIUS)
Chloroform
Chloromethane
D jbromochIoromethane
Dibromomethane
Dichloroiodomethane
Diethyl ether
Ethyl cyanide
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethylbenzene
lodomethane
Isobutyl alcohol
Methyl methacrylate
Methylene chloride
Styrene
Tet rachIoroethene
Tetrachloromethane
Toluene
Total xylenes
Tribromomethane
Trichloroethene
TrichlorofIuoromethane
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
o + p xylene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
   119.4
   50.49
   208.3
   173.85
   210.83
   74.12
   55.08
   114.15
   106.2
   142
   74
   100.13
   84.94
   104.1
   165.8
   153.8
   92.13
   106.2
   252.8
   131.4
   137.4
   86.10
   62.5
   111.0
   106.2
   96.94
   m.o
3.39x10E-03
4.4x10E-02
2.08x10E-03
9.98x10E-04
6.44x10E-03
5.34x10E-03

2.43x10E-01
2.03x10E-03
9.7x10E-03
2.59x1OE-02
23x10E-02
6.7x10E-03
5.1x10E-03
5.52x10E-04
9.10x10E-03
5.8x10E-02
6.20x10E-04
8.19x10E-02
3.55x10E-03

6.6x10E-03
3.55x10E-03
1.97
0.95
2.09
3.15
1.69

0.79
1.30
2.95
2.6
2.64
2.73
2.8-3.2
2.4
2.38
2.53

1.38
1.98

0.48
1.98
9,300
6,450
0.2
11,000
152
14,000
16,700
300
150
785
515
Insoluble
3,200
1,100
1.100
20.000
1.1
2,700

600
2,800
25C
20C
20C
20C
25C
20C
20C
20C
20C

30C
25C
25C
20C
25C
25C

20C
25C

-------

-------
                                  SECTION 9

                           USEPA CONTAMINANT LISTS
9.89.107C
0012.0.0

-------
 SECTION 9 - USEPA CONTAMINANT LISTS.   Section 9  presents  several  commonly
 referenced lists of compounds:   a)  the ITD List  of Analytes,  taken from "The
 1987 Industrial Technology Division List of Analytes"; USEPA  Industrial
 Technology Division;  Office of Water Regulations and Standards; Washington,
 D.C.;  March 1987,  b)  the Target Compound List (TCL),  is a list  generally used by
 the CERCLA program,  which contains  compounds commonly found at  CERCLA sites,  c)
 the Priority Pollutant List,  was developed by the USEPA Office  of Water and
 lists  organic toxic pollutants,  d)  the "Appendix VIII List",  a  list of the RCRA
 hazardous constituents as defined in the Federal Register.  Volume 51.  Number  151
 Appendix VIII.  and e)  the "Section  110 SARA List",  a list of  100  hazardous
 substances as defined by Section 110  of SARA in  the  Federal Register.  Volume  52.
 Number 74.

 Tables 9-1 through 9-4 present the  ITD list analytes  in various formats.  Table
 9-1 lists the compounds according to  their compound  classification (volatiles,
 semi-volatiles,  elements,  etc).   Within each compound classification,  the
 compounds are listed alphabetically according to each compound's  Regulatory
 Name.   The CAS  Number and Common Name are also listed to  help locate  the
 specific compound of interest.   To  further aid the user in locating the compound
 of interest,  Tables  9-2 through 9-4 are also presented.   Table  9-2  lists  the
 compounds according to the CAS  Number.   The Regulatory Name,  Common Name, and
 Compound Class  are also included.   Table 9-3 lists the compounds  alphabetically
 according to  the Common Name  and also includes the Regulatory Name, Compound
 Class,  and CAS  Number.    Table  9-4  lists the ITD inorganic  contaminants.

 Tables 9-5  through 9-8 present  the  remaining lists mentioned above.
891003B-mll
13.

-------
 Page No.
 04/18/90
                                            TABLE  9-1
                                      CLASSES  OF COMPOUNDS
                      USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY  DIVISION  LIST OF ANALYTES
 REGULATORY NAME
                                                           CAS NUMBER
                                                                              COMMON NAME
**  DIOXINS
 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-djoxin
 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 DibenzoCb.e][1,4]dioxin, 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
 Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
 HexachIorodibenzofurans
 Pentachlorodibenzo-p-djoxins
 PentachIorodi benzofurans
 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
 Tetrachlorodibenzofurans

**  METALS (ANIONS)
 Arsenic
 Boron
 Chlorine
 Iodine
 Phosphorus  (black, white, red, yellow, or violet)
 Selenium
 Silicon
 Sulfur

**  METALS (CATIONS)
 Aluminum
 Antimony
 Barium
 Beryllium
 Bismuth
 Cadmium
 Calcium
 Cerium
 Chromium
 Cobalt
 Copper
 'Dysprosium
 Erbium
 Europium
 Gallium
 Germanium
 Gold
 Hafnium
 Holmium
 Hydrogen  ion
 Indium
 Indium
37871004         1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpOD
   1-030         1,2,3,4,7,8-HxDD
57653857         1,2,3,6,7,8-HxDD
19408743         1,2,3,7,8,9-HxDD
40321764         1,2,3,7,8-PeDD
 1746016         Dioxin \ TCDD \ 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
   1-200         Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
   1-201         Hexachlorodibenzofurans
   1-289         Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
   1-290         Pentachlorodibenzofurans
   1-331         Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
   1-332         Tetrachlorodibenzofurans
 7440382         As
 7440428         B
 7782505         Chlorine
 7553562         I
 7723140         P
 7782492         Se
 7440213         Si
 7704349         S
 7429905         Al
 7440360         Sb
 7440393         Ba
 7440417         Be
 7440699         Bi
 7440439         Cd
 7440702         Ca
 7440451         Ce
 7440473         Cr
 7440484         Co
 7440508         Cu
 7429916         Dy
 7440520         Er
 7440531         Eu
 7440553         Ga
 7440564         Ge
 7440575         Au
 7440586         Hf
 7440600         Ho
    1-006         pH
 7440746         In
 7439885         Ir

-------
                Page Ho.
                04/18/90
                                                           TABLE 9-1
                                                     CLASSES OF COMPOUNDS
                                     USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF AHALYTES
                REGULATORY NAME
                                                                          CAS NUMBER
                                                                               COMMON NAME
vO
I
NJ
 Iron
 Lanthanum
 Lead
 Lithiun
 Lutetium
 Magnesium
 Manganese
 Mercury
 Molybdenum
 Neodymium
 Nickel
 Niobium
 Osmium '
 Palladium
 Platinum
 Potassium
 Praseodymium
 Rhenium
 Rhodium
 Ruthenium
 Samarium
 Scandium
 Silver
 Sodium
 Strontium
 Tantalum
 Tellurium
 Terbium
 Thallium
 Thorium
 Thulium
 Tin
 Titanium
 Tungsten
 Uranium
 Vanadium
 Ytterbium
 Yttrium
 Zinc
 Zirconium

**  MISCELLANEOUS
 Ammonia
 Asbestos
 Biochemical Oxygen Demand
 Chemical Oxygen Demand
 Chloramine
 7439896
 7439910
 7439921
 7439932
 7439943
 7439954
 7439965
 7439976
 7439987
 7440008
 7440020
 7440031
 7440042
 7440053
 7440064
 7440097
 7440100
 7440155
 7440166
 7440188
 7440199
 7440202
 7440224
 7440235
 7440246
 7440257
13494809
 7440279
 7440280
 7440291
 7440304
 7440315
 7440326
 7440337
 7440611
 7440622
 7440644
 7440655
 7440666
 7440677
                                                                              7664417
                                                                              1332214
                                                                                1-002
                                                                                1-004
                                                                                0-012
Fe
La
Pb
Li
Lu
Hg
Mn
Hg
Ho
Nd
Ni
Nb
OS
Pd
Pt
K
Pr
Re
Rh
Ru
Sm
Sc
Ag
Na
Sr
Ta
Te
Tb
Tl
Th
Tm
Sn
Ti
U
U
V
Yb
Y
Zn
Zr
                 Ammonia
                 Asbestos
                 BOD
                 COD
                 Chloramine

-------
 Page No.
 04/18/90
                                            TABLE 9-1
                                      CLASSES OF COMPOUNDS
                      USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION  LIST OF ANALYTES
 REGULATORY NAME
                                                           CAS NUMBER
                                                                              COMMON NAME
 Chloride
 Chlorine dioxide
 Chlorite
 Copper cyanide (CuCN)
 Corrosivity
 Cryptosporidium
 Cyanides (soluble salts and complexes)  NOS
 Cyanogen chloride
 Disodium cyanodithioimidocarbonate
 Fluoride
 Hypochlorite ion
 Ignitability
 Nitrate/nitrite
 Nitrites
 Oil and grease
 Oil and grease
 Reactivity
 Residue, filterable
 Residue, non-filterable
 Residue, total
 Specific conductivity
 Sulfide
 Total organic carbon
 Total volatile organic carbon

**  PCB
 PCB-1016
 PCB-1221
 PCB-1232
 PCB-1242
 PCB-1248
 PCB-1254
 PCB-1260

**  PESTICIDES (CARBAMATES)
 Carbamodithioic acid, 1,2-ethanediylbis-,  salts and
  esters
 Carbamothioic acid, bis(1-methytethyl)-S-(2,3-dichloro
  -2-propenyl) ester
 Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid, -sodium salt
 Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid,-manganese  salt
 Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid,-zinc salt
 Potassium dimethyldithjocarbamate
 Potassium-N-methyldithiocarbamate
 Sodium dimethyldithiocarbamate
 Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetramethyl
 Zinc bis(dimethyldithiocarbamato)-
   1-003         Chloride
10049044         Chlorine oxide
   0-011         Chlorite
  544923         Copper cyanide
   1-014         Corrosivity
   0-039         Cryptosporidium
   57125         Cyanides (soluble salts  and complexes)
  506774         Chlorine cyanide
  138932         Disodium cyanodithioimidocarbonate
16984488         Fluoride
   0-009         Hypochlorite ion
   1-013         Ignitability
   1-005         Nitrate/nitrite
14797650         Nitrites
   1-007         O&G
   1-016         Retort
   1-015         Reactivity
   1-010         Total  dissolved solids \ TDS
   1-009         Total  suspended solids \ TSS
   1-008         Total  solids
   1-011         Conductivity,  specific
18496258         Sulfide
   1-012         TOC \  Organic  carbon, total
   1-001         TVOA \ VOC \ Organic carbon,  volatile
12674112         Aroclor 1016
11104282         Aroclor 1221
11141165         Aroclor 1232
53469219         Aroclor 1242
12672296         Aroclor 1248
11097691         Aroclor 1254
11096825         Aroclor 1260
  111546         Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic  acid,  salts  and  esters

 2303164         Diallate \ Avadex

  142596         Nabam
12427382         Maneb \ Vancide
12122677         Zineb \ Dithane Z
  128030         Busan 85
  137417         Carbamic acid,  methyldithio-,  monopotassium salt
  128041         Carbamic acid,  dimethyldithio-,  sodium salt
  137268         Thiram \ Thiuram \ Arasan
  137304         Ziram \ Cymate

-------
                 Page Ho.
                 04/18/90
                                                            TABLE 9-1
                                                      CLASSES OF COMPOUNDS
                                      USEPA  INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF AMALYTES
                 REGULATORY NAME
                                                                           CAS NUMBER
                                                                               COMMON HAKE
I
•P-
**  PESTICIDES (HERBICIDES)
 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, salts and esters
 Benzamide, 3,5-dichloro-N-(1,1-djniethyl-2-propynyl)-
 Phenol, 2-(1-methylpropyl)-4,6-dinitro-
 Phenol, 2-cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitro-
 Propanoic acid, 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)-

**  PESTICIDES (ORGANOHALIDES)
 1,2,3,4f10,10-Hexachloro-1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-1,4:5,
  8-endo,endo-dimethanonaphthalene
 1,3,4-Hetheno-1H-cyclobuta[cd]pentalene, 1,1a,2,2,3,3a,
  4I5,5,5a,5b,6,-dodecachlorooctahydro
 1,4-Maphthoquinone, 2,3-dichloro-
 1,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-
  1a,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,8,8a-octahydro-endo,endo-
 1,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-
  1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-endo,exo-
 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid
 2,5-Hethano-2H-indeno[1,2b]oxirene, 2,3,4,5,6,7,7-hepta
  chloro-1a,1b,5,5a,6,6a-hexahydro- (alpha, beta, and
   gamma isomers)
 2,7:3,6-Dimethanonaphth(2,3-b)oxirene, 3,4,5,6,9,9-hexa
  chloro-1a,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,7a-oxtahydro-, (1a-alpha,
 2-beta  2a-alpha, 3-beta, 6-beta, 6a-alpha, 7-beta,
 7a-alpha>-
 2-Chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)
  acetamide
 4,4'-ODD

 4,4'-DDE

 4,4'-DDT

 4,7-Hethano-1H-indene 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-octachloro-2,3,3a,
 • 4,7,7a-hexahydro-
 4,7-Hethano-1H-indene,  1,4,5,6,7,8,8-heptachloro-da,4,7,
  7a-tetrahydro-
 4-Cyclohexene-1,2-dicarboximide N-((1,1,2,2-tetrachloro
  e'thyDthio)-
 4-Cyclohexene-1,2-dicarboximide N-(trichloromethyl)thio-
 4-Hetheno-2H-cyclobuta(cd)pentalen-2-one,  1,1a,3,3a,
  4,5,5,5a,5b,6-decachlorooctahydro-
 Benzene,  1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene)bis[4-
  methoxy-                ^                  .
 Benzeneacetic  acid,  4-chloro-alpha-(4-chlorophenyl)-
  alpha-hydroxy,  ethyl ester
   94757         2,4-D \ Acetic acid,  (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-
23950585         Pronaraide \ Kerb
   88857         DNBP \ Dinoseb \ 2-sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
  131895         Dinex \ DH-111 \ 2-Cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
   93721         2,4,5-TP \ Silvex


  465736         Isodrin (Stereoisomer of Aldrin)

 2385855         Hi rex \ Dechlorane

  117806         Dichlone \ Phygon
   72208         Endrin

  309002         Aldrin

   93765         2,4,5-T \ Weedone \ Acetic acid,  2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy-
 1024573         Heptachlor epoxide


   60571         Dieldrin
                                                                               15972608         Alachlor \ Metachlor \ Lasso

                                                                                  72548         4,4'-DDD/Benzene,
                                                                                              - 1,1'-(2,2-dichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro-
                                                                                  72559         4,4'-DDE/Benzene,
                                                                                               1,1'-(dichloroethenlyidine)bis[4-chloro
                                                                                  50293         4,4'-DDT/Benzene,
                                                                                               1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro
                                                                                  57749         Chlordane

                                                                                  76448         Heptachlor

                                                                                2425061         Captafol \ Difolatan

                                                                                 133062         Captan
                                                                                 143500         Kepone    "

                                                                                  72435         Methoxychlor

                                                                                 510156         Chlorobenzilate \  Ethyl-4,4'-dichlorobenzilate

-------
Page No.
04/18/90
                                           TABLE 9-1
                                     CLASSES OF COMPOUNDS
                     USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES
REGULATORY NAME
                                                          CAS NUMBER
                                                                              COMMON NAME
 Cyclohexane,  1,2,3.4,5,6-hexachloro-,  (1-alpha, 2-alpha,
  3-beta,  4-alpha,  5-alpha, 6-beta)
 Cyclohexane,  1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-,  (1-alpha, 2-alpha,
  3-beta,  4-alpha,  5-beta, 6-beta)-
 Cyclohexane,  1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-,  (1-alpha, 2-alpha,
  3-alpha,  4-beta,  5-alpha, 6-beta)-
 Cyclohexane,  1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-,  (1-alpha, 2-beta,
  3-alpha,  4-beta,  5-alpha, 6-beta)-
 Endosulfan sulfate
 Endosulfan-I
 Endosulfan-II
 Endrin aldehyde
 Endrin ketone
 Ether, 2,4-dichlorophenyl p-nitrophenyl-
 Toxaphene
 o,p'-DDT
 p-Toluidine,  alpha,  alpha,  alpha-trifluoro-2,6-dlnlt^o-
  N,N-dipropyl-

**  PESTICIDES (ORGANOPHOSPHOROUS)
 Coumarin, 3-chloro-7-hydroxy-4-methyl-,  0-ester with 0,
  0-diethylpyrophosphorothioate
 Crotonic acid, 3-hydroxy,  alpha-methylbenzyl ester,  di
  methylphosphate (E)
 Crotonic acid, 3-hydroxy-,  methyl  ester,  dimethyl phos
  phate (E)-
 0,0,0-Triethylphosphorothioate
 0,0-Diethyl S-methyl ester of phosphorodithioic acid
 0,0-Diethyl-0-(2-pyrazinyl)phosphorothioate
 Pentachloronitrobenzene
 Phosphoramidothioic acid,  acetamidoyl, 0,0-bis(p-
  chlorophenyl) ether
 Phosphoric acid, (2,2,2-trichloro-1-hydroxyethyl)-,
  dimethyl ester
 Phosphoric acid, 1,2-dibromo-2,2-dichloroethyl di
 • methyl ester
 Phosphoric acid, 2,2-dichlorovinyl dimethyl ester
 Phosphoric acid, 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl)
  vinyl dimethyl ester                             .
 Phosphoric acid, 2-chloro-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)vmyl di
  methyl ester
 Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester, ester with (E)-3-
  hydrox-N,N-dimethylcrotonamide
  Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester, ester with (E)-3-
  hydroxy-N-methylcrotonamide
  Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester, ester with 2-chloro-N-
  N-diethyl-3-hydroxycrotonamide
   58899         Lindane \ gamma-BHC \ Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma)

  319846         alpha-BHC

  319868         delta-BHC

  319857         beta-BHC

 1031078         6,9-Methano-2,3,4-benzodioxathiepin, 6,7
  959988         Thiodan I
33213659         Thiodan II
 7421934         Endrin aldehyde
53494705         Endrine ketone
 1836755         Nitrofen \ TOK
 8001352         Camphechlor
  789026         o,p'-DDT
 1582098         Trifluralin \ Treflan



   56724         Coumaphos \ Co-Ral

 7700176         Crotoxyphos \ Ciodrin

 7786347         Mevinphos \ Phosdrin

   126681         Phosphorodithioic  acid, 0,0,5-triethyl ester
 3288582         Phosphorodithioic  acid, 0,0-diethyl S-methyl ester
   297972         Zinophos. \ Thionazin
   82688         PCNB \  Terraclor \ Quintozene
 4104147         Phosacetin

   52686         Trichlorofon \ Dylox

   300765         Naled  \.Dibrom

   62737         Dichlorvos \ DDVP
   961115         Tetrachlorvinphos  \  Gardona

   470906         Chlorfenvinphos \  Supona

   141662         Dicrotophos \ Bidrin

  6923224         Monocrotophos \ Azodrin

 13171216         Phosphamidon \ Dimecron

-------
                Page Ho.
                04/18/90
                                                           TABLE 9-1
                                                     CUSSES OF COMPOUNDS
                                     USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST Of AHALYTES
                REGULATORY NAME
                                                                          CAS NUMBER
                                                                              COMMON HAKE
I
0\
Phosphoric acid, tri-o-tolyl ester                              78308
Phosphoric acid, trimethyt ester                               512561
Phosphoric triamide, hexamethyl-                               680319
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(2-(ethylthio)          8065483
 ethyl) ester mixed with 0,0-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)
  ethyl) ester (7:3)
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(2-isopropyl-6-          333415
 methyl-4-pyrimidinyI) ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(3,5,6-trichloro-       2921882
 2-pryidyl) ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(p-(methylsul            115902
 finyOphenyl ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-t(ethylthio)             298022
 methyl] ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)           298044
 ethyl] ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl ester, S-ester with       2642719
 3-(mercaptomethyl)-1,2,3-benzotriazin-4(3H)-one
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl-S-<«1,1-dimethyl        13071799
 ethyl)thio)methyl ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl ester, S-ester with        86500
 3-(mercaptomethyl)-1,2,3-benzotriazin-4(3H)-one
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl ester, S-ester with       732116
 N-(mercaptomethyl)phthalimide
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl s-[2-(methylainino)-        60515
 2-oxoethyl] ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl-, 0-(4-methylthio)-        55389
 m-tolyl)ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, S,S'-methylene 0,0,0',O'-tetra         563122
 ethyl ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, S,S'-p-dioxane-2,3-dryl 0,0,0',         78342
 O'-tetraethyl ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, s(((p-chlorophenyl)thio)               786196
 methyl) 0,0-diethyl ester
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(4-nitrophenyl)             56382
. ester
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl 0-{4-nitrophenyl)           298000
 ester
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl 0-[p-[(dimethylamino)        52857
 sulfonyOphenyl] ester
Phosphorothioic acid, phenyl, 0-(4-bromo-2,5-dichloro        21609905
 phenyl) 0-methyl ester
Phosphorothioic acid, phenyl-, 0-ethyl 0-(p-nitro             2104645
 phenyl) ester
Succinic acid, mercapto-, diethyl ester, S-ester with 0,       121755
 0-dimethyl phosphorodithioate
Tetraethylpyrophosphate                                        107493
Tricresylphosphate \ TCP \ TOCP
Trimethylphosphate
Hexamethylphosphoramide \ HHPA
Deweton \ Systox


Diazinon \ Spectracide

chlorpyrifos \ Dursban

Fensulfothion \ Desanit

Phorate \ Thimet

Disulfoton

Azinphos-ethyl \ Ethyl Guthion

Terbufos \ Counter

Azinphos-methyl \ Guthion

Phosmet \ Imidan

Cygon \-Dimethoate

Fenthion \ Baytex

Ethion \ Bladan

Dioxathion

Carbophenothion \ Trithion

Parathion \ Parathion, ethyl

Methyl parathion \ Parathion-methyl \ Metaphos

Famphur \ Famophos

Leptophos \ Phosvel

EPN \ Santox

Halath ion \ Sumitox

TEPP \ Phosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester

-------
 Page No.
 04/18/90,
                                            TABLE 9-1
                                      CLASSES OF COMPOUNDS
                      USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF  ANALYTES
 REGULATORY NAME
                                                           CAS NUMBER
                                                                               COMMON  NAME
 Thiopyrophosphoric acid (t(HO)2P(S)]20),  tetraethyl           3689245
  ester

**  SEMI-VOLAT1LES (ACIDS)
 2.3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol                                       58902
 2,3,6-Trichlorophenol                                          933755
 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol                                           95954
 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol                                           88062
 2,4-Dichlorophenol                                             120832
 2,4-Dimethylphenol                                             105679
 2,4-Dinitrophenol                                               51285
 2,6-Dichlorophenol                                      .        87650
 2-Chlorophenol                                                  95578
 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol                                         59507
 4-Nitrophenol                                                  100027
 Benzoic acid                                                    65850
 Benzonitrile. 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxy-                          1689845
 Hexanoic acid                                     .             142621
 Pentachlorophenol                                               87865
 Phenol                                                         108952
 Phenol, 2-methyl-4,6-dinitro-                                  534521
 Resorcinol                                                     108463
 Sulfurous acid, 2-chloroethyl-, 2-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)       140578
  phenoxy]-1-methylethyl ester
 m-Cresol                                                       108394
 o'Cresol                                                        95487
 p-Cresol                                                       106445

**  SEMI-VOLATILES (BASES)
 1,1'-Biphenyl-4,4'-diamine, 3,3'-dimethoxy                     119904
 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene                                      95943
 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine                                          122667
 1,2-Ethanediamine, N,N-dimethyl-N'-2pyridinyl-N'-(2-            91805
  thienylmethyl)-
 1,3-Benzenediamine, 4-methyl-                                   95807
 .1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(1-propenyl)-                              120581
 1,4-Dichlorobenzene                                            106467
 1,5-Naphthalenediamine                                        2243621
 1-Naphthylamine                                                134327
 2,3-Dichloroaniline                                            608275
 2,6-Dinitrotoluene                                             606202
 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline                                 .    99309
 2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole                                    615225
 2-Chloronaphthalene                                             91587
 2-Nitroaniline                                                  88744
 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine                                          91941
 3-Nitroaniline                               .                   99092
Sulfotepp \ Bladafum \ Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate
Phenol,  2,3,4,6-tetrachloro-
2,3,6-Trichlorophenol
Phenol,  2,4,5-trichloro-
Phenol,  2,4,6-trichloro-
Phenol,  2,4-dichloro-
Phenol,  2,4-dimethyl-
Phenol,  2,4-dinitro
Phenol,  2,6-dichloro-
Phenol,  2-chloro
p-Chloro-m-cresol  \ Phenol, 4-chloro-3-methyl-
p-Nitrophenol  \ Phenol, 4-nitro-
Benzoic  acid
Bronnoxynil  \ 3,5-Dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrile
Caproic  acid
PCP \ Phenol,  pentachloro-
Carbolic acid
2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol  \  DNOC \ 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
1,3-Benzenediol
Aramite

3-Methylphenol \  Phenol,  3-methyl-
2-Methylphenol \  o-Cresylic acid \ Phenol,  2-methyl-
4-Methylphenol \  Phenol,  4-methyl-
 3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine
 Benzene,  1,2,4,5-tetrachloro-
 Hydrazine,  1,2-diphenyl
 Methapyrilene

 2,4-Diaminotoluene \ Toluene, 2,4-diamino-
 Isosafrole
 Benzene,  1,4-dichloro- \ p-Dichlorobenzene
 1,5-Naphalenediamine
. alpha-Naphthylamine
 2,3-Dichloroaniline
 Benzene,  2-methyl-1,3-dinitro-
 Dichloran \ Botran
 2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole
 Naphthalene, 2-chloro-
 Benzenamine, 2-nitro
 1,1'-Biphenyl-4,4'-diamine, 3,3'-dichloro
 Benzenamine, 3-nitro

-------
                 Page Ho.
                 04/18/90
                                                            TABLE 9-1
                                                      CUSSES OF COMPOUNDS
                                      USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST Of AHALYTES
                 REGULATORY NAME
                                                                           CAS HUHBER
                                                                               COMHOH NAME
VD
I
00
 4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)                             101144
 4-Chtoro-2-nftroamtine                                         89634
 5-Hitro-o-toluidine                                             99558
 7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene                                  57976
 Acetamide, N-(4-ethoxyphenyl)-                                  62442
 Aimonium, (4-(p-(dimethylamino)-alpha-phenylbenzyli            569642
  dine)-2,5-cylcohexadien-1-ylidene)-diniethyl chloride
 Aniline, 2,4,5-trimethyl-                                      137177
 Benzenamine                                                     62533
 Benzenamine, 4-chloro-                                         106478
 Benzenamine, N,N-diroethyl-4-(pehnylazo)-                        60117
 Benzenethiot                                                   108985
 Benzidine                                                       92875
 Carbazole                                                •       86748
 Di-n-propylnitrosamine                                         621647
 Diphenylamine                                                  122394
 N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine                                       924163
 N-Nitrosodiethylamine                                           55185
 N-Nitrosodimethylamine                                          62759
 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine                                          86306
 N-Nitrosomethylethylamine                                    10595956
 N-Njtrosomethylphenylamine                                     614006
 N-Nitrosomorpholine                                             59892
 N-Nitrosopiperidine                                            100754
 Nitrobenzene                                                    98953
 Phenothiazine                                                   92842
 Propane, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloro-                                  96128
 Pyridine                                                       110861
 Thioxanthe-9-one                                               492228
 [1,1'-Biphenyl]-4-amine                                         92671
 beta-Naphthylamine                                              91598
 o-Anisidine                                                     90040
 o-Toluidine                                                     95534
 o-Toluidine, 5-ehloro-                                          95794
 p-Mitroaniline                                                 100016

*'*  SEHI-VOLATILES (NEUTRAL)
 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene                                          87616
 1,2,3-Trimethoxybenzene                                        634366
 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene                                         120821
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dibutyl ester                     84742
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester                   131113
 1,2-Dichlorobenzene                                             95501
 1,2:3,4-Diepoxybutane                                         1464535
 1,3,5-Trithiane                                                291214
 1,3-Cyclopentadiene,  1,2,3,4,5,5-hexachloro-                    77474
 1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol                                         96231
Benzensnine, 4,4'-niethylenebist2chloro \ HOCA
4-Chloro-2-nitroaniIine
Benzenamine, 2-rnethyl-5-nitro
9,10-Dimethyl-1,2-Benzanthracene
Phenacetin \ Phorazetim
Malachite green \ C.I. Basic Acid Green 4

2,4,5-Trimethylaniline
Aniline
p-Chloroaniline
p-D imethylami noazobenzene
Thiophenol \ Hercaptobenzene
(1,1'-Biphenyl)-4,4'-diam?ne
Carbazole
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylainine
Benzenamine, N-phenyl
1-Butenainine, N-butyl-N-nitroso
Ethanamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso-
Dimethylnitrosamine \ Hethamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso-
Benzenamine, N-nitroso-N-phenyl
Ethanamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso
N-Nitrosomethylphenylamine
Horpholine, 4-nitroso-
Piperidine, 1-Nitroso-
Benzene, nitro-
Nemazine \ 10H-Phenothiazine
Dibroipochloropropane \ DBCP
Pyridine
Thioxanthone \ Thiaxanthone
4-Aminobiphenyl
2-Naphthylamine
o-Anisidine
o-Toluidine
5-Chloro-o-toluidine
Benzenamine, 4-nitro-
                                                                                               1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
                                                                                               1,2,3-Trimethoxybenzene
                                                                                               Benzene,  1,2,4-trichloro-
                                                                                               Di-n-butyl phthalate \ Dibutyl  phthalate
                                                                                               Dimethyl  phthalate
                                                                                               Benzene,  1,2-dichloro- \ o-Dichlorobenzene
                                                                                               Erythritol anhydride \ 2,2'-Bioxirane
                                                                                               1,3,5-Trithiane
                                                                                               Hexachlorocyclopentadiene  \ HCP
                                                                                               1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol

-------
                Page No.
                04/18/90
                                                           TABLE 9-1
                                                     CLASSES OF COMPOUNDS
                                     USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES
                REGULATORY NAME
                                                                         CAS NUMBER
                                                                                             COMMON NAME
I
vD
1,3-Dichlorobenzene                                           541731
1,3-Dinitrobenzene                                             99650
1,4-Naphthoquinone                                            130154
1-Chloro-3-nitrobenzene                                       121733
1-Methylfluorene                                              1730376
1-Methylphenanthrene                                          832699
1-Phenylnaphthalene                                           605027
17-alpha-19-Norpregna-1,3,5(10)-trien-20-yn-17-ol,  3-           72333
 methoxy-
2,3-Benzoftuorene                                             243174
2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene                                      3209221
2,4-Dim'trotoluene                                            121142
2,6-di-tert-Butyl-p-benzoquihone                              719222
2,7-Dimethylphenanthrene                                      1576698
2-Isopropylnaphthatene                                        2027170
2-Methylbenzothioazole                                        120752
2-Methylnaphthalene                                            91576
2-Nitrophenol                                                  88755
2-Phenylnaphthalene                                           612942
3.3'-Dichloro-4,4'-diaminodiphenyl ether                     28434868
3,6,-Dimethylphenanthrene                                      1576676
4,5-dimethyl phenanthrene                                     203645
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether                                    101553
4-Chlorophenylphenyl ether                                    7005723
Acenaphthene                                                   83329
Acenaphthylene                                                208968
Anthracene                                                    120127
Benz[j]aceanthrylene, 1,2-dihydro-T3-methyl-                    56495
Benzanthrone                                                   82053
Benzo(a)anthracene                                             56553
Benzo(a)pyrene                                                 50328
Benzo(b)fluoranthene                                          205992
Benzo(ghi)perylene                                            191242
Benzo(k)fluoranthene                                ,          207089
Benzyl  alcohol                                                100516
Biphenyl                                                       92524
Biphenyl, 4-nitro                                              92933
Butyl benzyl phthalate                                         85687
Chloropicrin                                                   76062
Chrysene                                                      218019
Di-n-octyl phthalate                                          117840
D|benzo(a,h)anthracene                                         53703
Dibenzofuran                                                  132649
Dibenzothiophene                                              132650
Diethyl phthalate                                              84662
Dimethyl sulfone                                               67710
Diphenyl ether                                                101848
Benzene, 1,3-dichloro- \ m-Dichlorobenzene
Benzene, 1,3-dinitro- \ m-Dinitrobenzene
1,4-Naphthalenedione
3-chloronitrobenzene
1-Methylfluorene
1-Methylphenanthrene
1-Phenylnaphthalene
Mestranol \ 17-alpha-Ethynylestradiol 3-methyl  ether

2,3-benzofluorene
2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene
Benzene, 1-methyl-2,4-dinitro
2,6-di-tert-Butyl-p-benzoquinone
2,7-Dimethylphenanthrene
2-Isopropylnaphthalene
2-Methylbenzoth i oazole
Naphthalene, 2-methyl
Phenol, 2-nitro-
2-Phenylnaphthalene
3,3'-Dichloro-4,4'-diaminodiphenyl ether
3,6-Dimethylphenanthrene
4,5-dimethyl phenanthrene
1-Bromo-4-phenoxybenzene \ Benzene, 1-bromo-4-phenoxy-
Benzene, 1-chloro-4-phenoxy
Acenaphthylene, 1,2-dihydro-
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
3-Methylcholanthrene
Benzanthrone
Benz[a]anthracene \ 1,2-Benzanthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benz[e]acephenanthrylene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzenemethanol
Diphenyl
4-Nitrobiphenyl
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, butyl phenylmethyl ester
Methane, trichloronitro-
Chrysene
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dioctyl ester \ Dioctyl ph
D i benz[a,h] anthracene
Dibenzofuran
Dibenzothiophene
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, diethyl ester
Dimethyl sulfone
Diphenyl ether

-------
              Page Ho.
              04/18/90
             10
                                                         TABLE 9-1
                                                   CLASSES OF COMPOUNDS
                                   USEPA IHDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES
              REGULATORY MAKE
                                                                        CAS NUMBER
                                                                                           COMHOH HAHE
vO
I
 Diphenyldisulfide
 Ethane,  pentachloro-
 Ethanethioamide
 Ethanone,  1-phenyl
 Ethylenethiourea
 Fluoranthene
 Fluorene
 Hexachlorobenzene
 HexachIorobutadi ene
 Hexachloroethane
 Hexachloropropene
 Indenod,2,3-cd)pyrene
 Isophorone
 Longifolene
 Methanesulfonic acid,  ethyl  ester
 Methyl methanesulfonate
 N.N-Dimethylfortiamide
 Naphthalene
 PentachIorobenzene
 Pentamethylbenzene
 Perylene
 Phenanthrene
 Pyrene
 Safrole
 Squalene
 Thianaphthene
 Triphenylene
 Tripropyleneglycol  methyl ether
 alpha-Terpineol
 b|s(2-Chloroethoxy)methane
 bis(2-Chloroethyl)  ether  •
 bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether
 bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
 n-Decane
 n-Docosane
•n-Dcxiecane
 n-Eicosane
 n-Hexacosane
 n-Hexadecane
 n-Octacosane
 n-Octadecane
 n-Tetracosane
 n-Tetradecane
 n-Triacontane
 p-Cymene
  882337         Diphenyl sulfide
   76017         Pentachloroethane
   62555         Thioacetamide
   98862         Acetophenone
   96457         Ethylenethiourea
  206440         Fluoranthene
   86737         Fluorene
  118741         HCB \ Benzene,  hexachloro-
   87683         1,3-Butadiene,  1,1,2,3,4,4-hexachloro-
   67721         Ethane,  hexachloro
 1888717         1-Propene,  1,1,2,3,3,3-hexachloro-
  193395         Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
   78591         3,5,5-Trimethyl-2-cyclohexenone
  475207         Longifolene
   62500         Ethyl methanesulfonate
   66273         Methylsulfonic  acid,  methyl  ester
   68122         N,N-Dimethylformamide
   91203         Naphthalene
  608935         Benzene, pentachloro-
  700129         Pentamethylbenzene
  198550         Perylene
   85018         Phenanthrene
  129000         Benzo[def]phenanthrene
   94597         1,3-Benzodioxole,  5-(2-propenyl)-
 7683649         Squalene
   95158         2,3-Benzothiophene \  Benzo(b)thiophene
  217594         Triphenylene
20324338         Tripropyleneglycol methyl ether
   98555         alpha-Terpineol
  111911         Ethane,  1,1'-[methylenebis(oxy)]bis[2-chloro-
  111444         Dichloroethyl ether
  108601         Propane, 2,2'-oxybisC1-chloro-
  117817         1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl)ester
  124185         n-C10
  629970         n-C22
  112403         n-C12
  112958         n-C20
  630013         n-C26
  544763         n-C16
  630024         n-C28
  593453         n-C18
  646311         n-C24
  629594         n-C14
  638686         n-C30
   99876         p-Isopropyltoluene

-------
                Page No.
                04/18/90
                            11
                                                           TABLE 9-1
                                                     CLASSES  OF COMPOUNDS
                                     USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES
                REGULATORY NAME
                                                                         CAS NUMBER
                                                                                             COMMON NAME
vD
I
**  VOLATILES
 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
 1,1,2-Trichloroethane
 1,1-Djchloroethane
 1,1-Dichloroethene
 1,2,3-Trichloropropane
 1,2-Djbromoethane
 1,2-Dichloroethane
 1,2-Djchloropropane
 1,3-Dichloropropane
 1,4-Dioxane
 1-Bromo-2-chlorobenzene
 1-Bromo-3-chlorobenzene
 1-Propene, 3-chloro-
 2-Butanone
 2-Butenal
 2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro (mixture of cis and trans)
 2-Chloro-1,3-butadiene
 2-Chloroethylvinyl ether
 2-Hexanone
 2-Picoline
 2-Propanone
 2-Propen-1-o1
 2-Propenal
 2-Propenenitrile
 2-Propenenitrile, 2-methyl-
 4-Methyl-2-pentanone
 Benzene
 BromodichIoromethane
 Broroomethane
 Carbon disulfide
 Chloroacetonitrile
 Chlorobenzene
 Chloroethane
 Chloroform
 Chioromethane
 D i bromochIoromethane
 Dibromomethane
 Dichloroiodomethane
 Diethyl ether
 Ethyl cyanide
 Ethyl methacrylate
 Ethylbenzene
  lodomethane
  Isobutyl  alcohol
 630206         Ethane,  1,1,1,2-tetrachloro-
  71556         Methyl chloroform \ Ethane,  1,1,1-trichloro-
  79345         Ethane,  1,1,2,2-tetrachloro
  79005         Ethane,  1,1,2-trichloro
  75343         Ethylidene chloride \ Ethane,  1,1-dichloro-
  75354         1,1-Dichloroethylene \ Vinylidine chloride
  96184         Propane, 1,2,3-trichloro-
 106934         Ethylene dibromide \ EDB \ Ethane, 1,2-dibromo-
 107062         Ethylene dichloride \ EDC \  Ethane,  1,2-dichloro-
  78875         Propylene dichloride \ Propane,  1,2-dichloro-
 142289         1,3-Dichloropropane
 123911         p-Dioxane \ 1,4-Diethyleneoxide
 694804         2-Bromochlorobenzene
 108372         3-Bromochlorobenzene
 107051         Allyl chloride \ 3-Chloropropene
  78933         Methyl ethyl ketohe \ MEK
4170303         Crotonaldehyde \ Crotylaldehyde
 764410         1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
 126998         Chloroprene \ 1,3-Butadiene,  2-chloro
 110758         Ethene,  (2-chloroethoxy)
 591786         2-Hexanone
 109068         alpha-Picoline \ 2-Methylpyridine
  67641         Acetone
 107186         Allyl alcohol
 107028         Acrolein
 107131         Acrylonitrile
 126987         Methacrylonitrile
 108101         MIBK \ Methylisobutylketone \ 2-Pentanone, 4-methyl
  71432         Benzene
  75274         Methane, bromodichloro
  74839         Methyl bromide \ Methane, bromo
  75150         Carbon disulfide
 107142         Chloroethanenitrile
 108907         Benzene, chloro-
  75003         Ethane, chloro \ Ethyl chloride
  67663         Methane, trichloro- \ Trichloromethane
  74873         Methyl chloride \ Methane, chloro
 124481         Chlorodibromomethane \ Methane,  dibromochloro-
  74953         Methylene bromide \ Methane, dibromo
  0-015         Dichloroiodomethane
  60297         Diethyl ether
 107120         Propionitrile \Propanenitrile
  97632         2-Propenoic ,acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester
 100414         Benzene, ethyl
  74884         Methyl  iodide \ Methane,  iodo
  78831         1-Propanol, 2-methyl-

-------
                  Page Ho.
                  M/18/90
12
                                                             TABLE 9-1
                                                       CUSSES OF COMPOUNDS
                                       USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF AHALYTES
                  REGULATORY NAME
                                                                            CAS HUHBER
                                                                  COMMON  NAME
                  Methyl methacrylote
                  Methylene chloride
                  Styrene
                  Tetrachloroethene
                  Tetrachloromethane
                  Toluene
                  Total xylenes
                  Tribromomethane
                  Trichloroethene
                  Trichlorofluoromethane
                  Vinyl acetate
                  Vinyl chloride
                  cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
                  o + p xylene
                  trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
                  trans-1,3-DichIoropropene
                  t rans-1,4-D i chIoro-2-butene
                                                    80626
                                                    75092
                                                   100425
                                                   127184
                                                    56235
                                                   108883
                                                  1330207
                                                    75252
                                                    79016
                                                    75694
                                                   108054
                                                    75014
                                                 10061015
                                                    1-952
                                                   156605
                                                 10061026
                                                   110576
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl, methyl ester
Dichloromethane \ Hethane, dichloro-
Benzene, ethenyl-
Perchloroethylene \ Ethene, tetrachloro
Carbon tetrachloride \ Hethane, tetrachloro-
Benzene, methyl
Benzene, dimethyl- \ Xylenes \ Xylene,  (total)
Bromoform \ Hethane, tribromo-
Ethene, trichloro \ Trichloroethylene
Fluorotrichloromethane \ Hethane, trichlorofluoro-
Acetic acid, ethenyl ester
Ethene, chloro
1-Propene, 1,3-dichloro-, (Z)-
o + p xylene
Ethene, 1,2-dichloro-, (E)-
1-Propene, 1,3-dichloro-, (E)-
2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro-, (E)-
vO
I

-------
''age No.
'J4/18/90
 CAS NUMBER
                      REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                              TABLE 9-2
                                                                                    ANALYTES SORTED BY CAS NUMBER
                                                                         USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                                                 COMMON NAME
                                                                     CLASS
    0-009       Hypochlorite ion
    0-011       Chlorite
    0-012       Chloramine
    0-015       Dichloroiodomethane
    0-039       Cryptosporidium
    1-001       Total volatile organic carbon
    1-002       Biochemical Oxygen Demand
    1-003       Chloride
    1-004       Chemical Oxygen Demand
    1-005       Nitrate/nitrite
    1-006       Hydrogen ion
    1-007       Oil and grease
    1-008       Residue, total
    1-009       Residue, non-filterable
    1-010       Residue, filterable
    1-011       Specific conductivity
    1-012       Total organic carbon
    1-013       Ignitability
    1-014       Corrosivity
    1-015       Reactivity
    1-016       Oil and grease
    1-030       1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
    1-200       Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
    1-201       Hexachlorodibenzofurans
    1-289       Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
    1-290       Pentachlorodibenzofurans
    1-331       Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
    1-332       Tetrachlorodibenzofurans
    1-952       o + p xylene
    50293       4,4'-DDT
    50328       Benzo(a)pyrene
    51285       2,4-Dinitrophenol
    52686       Phosphoric acid, (2,2,2-trichloro-1-hydroxyethyl)-,     dimethyl ester
    52857       Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl 0-[p-[(dimethylamino)sulfonyl)phenyl]  ester
    53703       Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
    55185       N-Nitrosodiethylamine
    55389       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl-, 0-(4-methylthio)-m-tolyl)ester
    56235       Tetfachloromethane
    56382       Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(4-nitrophenyl)     ester
    56495       Benztjlaceanthrylene, 1,2-dihydro-3-methyl-
    56553       Benzo(a)anthracene
    56724       Coumarin, 3-chloro-7-hydroxy-4-methyl-, 0-ester with 0,
                0-diethylpyrophosphorothioate
    57125       Cyanides (soluble salts and complexes) NOS
    57749       4,7-Methano-1H-indene 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-octachloro-2,3,3a,4,7,7a-hexahydro-
    57976       7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
    58899       Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1-alpha, 2-alpha,3-beta, 4-alpha,
                5-alpha, 6-beta)
Hypochlorite ion                                                    MISC
Chlorite                                                            HISC
Chloramine                                                          MISC
Dichloroiodomethane                                                 VOL
Cryptosporidium                                                     HISC
TVOA \ VOC \ Organic carbon, volatile                               MISC
BOD
Chloride
COD                                                                 MISC
Nitrate/nitrite                                                     MISC
PH                                                                  MCCD
O&G                                                                 MISC
Total solids                                                        MISC
Total suspended solids \ TSS                                        MISC
Total dissolved solids \ TDS                                        MISC
Conductivity, specific                                              MISC
TOC \ Organic carbon, total                                         MISC
Ignitability                                                        MISC
Corrosivity                                                         MISC
Reactivity                                                          MISC
Retort                                                              MISC
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxDD                                                    DIOXINS
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins                                         DIOXINS
Hexachlorodibenzofurans                                             DIOXINS
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins                                      ,  DIOXINS
Pentachlorodibenzofurans                                            DIOXINS
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins                                        DIOXINS
Tetrachlorodibenzofurans                                            DIOXINS
o + p xylene                                                        VOL
4,4'-DDT/Benzene, 1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro      P(OH)
Benzo(a)pyrene                                                      SV(M)
Phenol, 2,4-dinitro                                                 SV(A)
Trichlorofon \ Dylox                                                P(OP)
Famphur \ Famophos                                                  P(OP)
Dibenz[a,h]anthracene                                               SV(N)
Ethanamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso-                                      SV(B)
Fenthion \ Baytex                                                   P(OP)
Carbon tetrachloride \ Methane, tetrachloro-                        VOL
Parathion \ Parathion, ethyl                                        P(OP)
3-Methylcholanthrene                                                SV(N)
BenzCa]anthracene \ 1,2-Benzanthracene                              SV(N)
Coumaphos \ Co-Ral                                                  P(0P)

Cyanides (soluble salts and complexes)                              MISC
Chlordane                                                           P(OH)
9,10-Dimethyl-1,2-Benzanthracene                                    SV(B)
Lindane \ gamma-BHC \ Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma)                 P(OH)

-------
"•age Ho.
 (4/18/90
 CAS NUMBER
                  REGULATORY HAKE
                      TABLE 9-2
            AHALYTES SORTED BY CAS MUHB6R
USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF AMALYTES

                         COMMON HAKE
                                                                                                                                                                     CLASS
£1
I
58902       2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
59507       4-Chloro-3-»ethylphenol
59892       H-Hitrosomorpholine
60117       Benzenamine, H,N-di»ethyl-4-(pehnytazo)-
60297       Diethyl ether
60515       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl s-[2-(methylamino)-2-oxoethyl]  ester
60571       2,7:3,6-Dimethanonaphth(2,3-b)oxirene, 3,4,5,6,9,9-hexa
            chloro-1a,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,7a-oxtahydro-, (1a-alpha, 2-beta2a-alpha, 3-beta,
            6-beta, 6a-alpha, 7-beta, 7a-alpha)-
62442       Acetamide, N-(4-ethoxyphenyl)-
62500       Methanesulfonic acid, ethyl ester
62533       Benzenamine
62555       Ethanethioamide
62737       Phosphoric acid, 2,2-dichlorovinyl dimethyl ester
62759       N-Nitrosodimethylamine
65850       Benzoic acid
66273       Methyl methanesulfonate
67641       2-Propanone
67663       Chloroform
67710       Dimethyl sulfone
67721       Hexachloroethane
68122       N,N-Dimethylformamide
71432       Benzene
71556       1,1,1-Trichloroethane
72208       1,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-
            1a,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,8,8a-octahydro-endo,endo-
72333       17-alpha-19-Norpregna-1,3,5(10)-trien-20-yn-17-ol, 3-   methoxy-
72435       Benzene, 1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene)bis[4-         methoxy-
72548       4,4'-ODD
72559       4,4'-DDE
74839       Bromomethane
74873       Chloromethane
74884       lodomethane
74953       Dibromomethane
75003       Chloroethane
75014       Vinyl chloride
75092       Hethylene chloride
75150       Carbon disulfide
75252       Tribromomethane
75274       Bromodichloromethane
75343       1,1-Dichloroethane
75354       1,1-Dichloroethene
75694       Trichloroflupromethane
76017       Ethane, pentachloro-
76062       Chloropicrin
76448       4,7-Methano-lH-indene, 1,4,5,6,7,8,8-heptachloro-da,4,7,7a-tetrahydro-
77474       1,3-Cyclopentadiene, 1,2,3,4,5,5-hexachloro-
78308       Phosphoric acid, tri-o-tolyl ester
                        Phenol,  2,3,4,6-tetraehloro-                                        SV(A)
                        p-Chloro-m-cresol  \ Phenol, 4-chloro-3-roethyl-                      SV(A)
                        Horpholine,  4-nitroso-                                              SV(B)
                        p-Ditnethylaminoazobenzene                                           SV(B)
                        Diethyl  ether                                                      VOL
                        Cygon \  Diraethoate                                                 P(OP)
                        Dieldrin                                                           P(OH)


                        Phenacetin \ Phorazetira                                            SV(B)
                        Ethyl methanesulfonate                                              SV(M)
                        Aniline                                                             SV(B)
                        Thioacetamide                                                      SV(N)
                        Dichlorvos \ DDVP                                                   P(OP)
                        Dimethylnitrosamine \ Hethamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso-                SV(B)
                        Benzoic  acid                                                       SV(A)
                        Hethylsulfonic  acid, methyl ester                                   SV(N)
                        Acetone                                                             VOL
                        Methane, trichloro- \ Trichloromethane                              VOL
                        Dimethyl sulfone                                                   SV(N)
                        Ethane,  hexachloro         '                                        SV(N)
                        N,N-Dimethylformamide                                               SV(N)
                        Benzene                                                             VOL
                        Methyl chloroform  \ Ethane, 1,1,1-trichloro-                        VOL
                        Endrin                                                             P(OH)

                        Mestranol \  17-alpha-Ethynylestradiol 3-methyl ether          .      SV(N)
                        Methoxychlor                                                       P(OH)
                        4,4'-DDD/Benzene,  1,1'-(2,2-dichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro-        P(OH)
                        4,4'-DDE/Benzene,  1,1'-(dichloroethenlyidine)bis[4-chloro           P(OH>
                        Methyl bromide  \ Methane, bromo                                   .  VOL
                        Methyl chloride \  Methane, chloro                                   VOL
                        Methyl iodide \ Methane, iodo                                       VOL
                        Hethylene bromide  \ Methane, dibromo                                VOL
                        Ethane,  chloro  \ Ethyl  chloride                                     VOL
                        Ethene,  chloro             '                                   i      VOL
                        Dichloromethane \  Methane, dichloro-                                VOL
                        Carbon disulfide                                                   VOL
                        Bromoform \  Methane, tribromo-                                      VOL
                        Methane, bromodichloro                                              VOL
                        Ethylidene chloride \ Ethane, 1,1-dichloro-                         VOL
                        1,1-Dichloroethylene \  Vinylidine chloride                          VOL
                        Fluorotrichloromethane  \ Methane, trichlorofluoro-                  VOL
                        Pentachloroethane                                                   SV(N)
                        Methane, trichloronitro-                                            SV(N)
                        Heptachlor                                                         P(OH)
                        Hexachlorocyclopentadiene \ HCP                                     SV(N)
                        Tricresylphosphate \ TCP \ TOCP                                    -P(OP)

-------
"age No.
'14/18/90
 CAS NUMBER
                      REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                              TABLE 9-2
                                                                                    ANALYTES SORTED BY CAS NUMBER
                                                                        USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                                                 COMMON NAME
                                                                    CLASS
    78342       Phosphorodithioic acid, S,S'-p-dioxane-2,3-dryl  0,0,0', O'-tetraethyl ester
    78591       Isophorone
    78831       Isobutyl alcohol
    78875       1,2-Dichloropropane
    78933       2-Butanone
    79005       1,1,2-Trichloroethane
    79016       Trichloroethene
    79345       1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
    80626       Methyl methacryIate
    82053       Benzanthrone
    82688       Pentachloronitrobenzene
    83329       Acenaphthene
    84662       Diethyl phthalate
    84742       1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dibutyl ester
    85018       Phenanthrene
    85687    ,  Butyl benzyl phthalate
    86306       N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
    86500       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl ester, S-ester
                with3-(mercaptomethyl)-1,2,3-benzotriazin-4(3H)-one
    86737       Fluorene
    86748       Carbazole
    87616       1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
    87650       2,6-Dichlorophenol
    87683       Hexachlorobutadiene
    87865       Pentachlorophenol                                     #
    88062       2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
    88744       2-Nitroaniline
    88755       2-Nitrophenol
    88857       Phenol, 2-(1-methylpropyl)-4,6-dimtro-
    89634       4-Chloro-2-nitroaniline
    90040       o-Anisidine
    91203       Naphthalene
    91576       2-Methylnaphthalene
    91587       2-Chloronaphthalene
    91598       beta-Naphthylamine
    91805       1,2-Ethanediamine, N,N-dimethyl-N'-2pyridinyl-N'-<2-    thienylmethyl)-
    91941       3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
    92524       Biphenyl
    92671        [1,1'-Biphenyl]-4-amine
    92842       Phenothiazine
    92875       Benzidine
    92933       Biphenyl, 4-nitro
    93721       Propanoic acid, 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)-
    93765       2,4,5-THchlorophenoxyacetic acid
    94597       Safrole
    94757       2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, salts and esters
    95158       Thianaphthene
    95487       o-Cresol
Dioxathion
3,5,5-Trimethyl-2-cyclohexenone
1-Propanol, 2-methyl-
Propylene dichloride \ Propane, 1,2-dichloro-
Methyl ethyl ketone \ MEK
Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro
Ethene, trichloro \ Trichloroethylene
Ethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloro
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl, methyl ester
Benzanthrone
PCNB \ Terraclor \ Quintozene
Acenaphthylene, 1,2-dihydro-
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, diethyl ester
Di-n-butyl phthalate \ Dibutyl phthalate
Phenanthrene
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, butyl phenylmethyl ester
Benzenamine, N-nitroso-N-phenyl
Azinphos-methyl \ Guthion

Fluorene
Carbazole
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
Phenol, 2,6-dichloro-
1,3-Butadiene, 1,1,2,3,4,4-hexachloro-
PCP \ Phenol, pentachloro-
Phenol, 2,4,6-trichloro-
Benzenamine, 2-nitro
Phenol, 2-nitro-
DNBP \ Dinoseb \ 2-sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
4-Chloro-2-nitroaniline
o-Anis,idine
Naphthalene
Naphthalene, 2-methyl
Naphthalene, 2-chloro-
2-Naphthylamine
Methapyrilene
1,1'-Biphenyl-4,4'-diamine, 3,3'-dichloro
Diphenyl
4-Aminobiphenyl
Nemazine  \ 10H-Phenothiazine
(1,1'-Biphenyl)-4,4'-diamine
4-Nitrobiphenyl
2,4,5-TP  \ Silvex
2,4,5-T \ Ueedone \ Acetic acid,  2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy-
1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(2-propenyl)-
2,4-D  \ Acetic acid,  (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-
2,3-Benzothiophene  \  Benzo(b)thiophene
2-Methylphenol \ o-Cresylic acid  \ Phenol, 2-methyl-
P(0f)
SV(N)
vou
VOL
VOL
VOL
VOL
VOL
VOL
SVCN)
P(OP)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SVCN)
SV(N)
SV(B)
P(OP)

SV
-------
age Ho.
"./18/90
CAS NUMBER
REGULATORY HAHE
                      TABLE 9-2
            AMALYTES SORTED BY CAS WJHBER
USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION  LIST OF ANALYTES

                         COMMON HAHE
                                                                                                                                                                    CLASS
   95501       1,2-Dichlorobenzene
   95534       o-Toluidine
   95578       2-Chlorophenol
   95794       o-Toluidfne, 5-chloro-
   95807       1,3-Benzenediemine, 4-rnethyt-
   95943       1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
   95954       2,4,5-Trichtorophenol
   96128       Propane,  1,2-dibron»-3-chloro-
   96184       1,2,3-Trichloropropane
   96231       1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol
   96457       Ethylenethiourea
   97632       Ethyl methacrylate
   98555       alpha-Terpineol
   98862       Ethanone,  1-phenyl
   98953       Nitrobenzene
   99092       3-Nitroaniline
   99309       2,6-dichloro-4-nitroanilfne
   99558       5-Nitro-o-toluidine
   99650       1,3-Dinitrobenzene
   99876       p-Cymene
  100016       p-Nitroaniline
  100027       4-Nitrophenol
  100414       Ethylbenzene
  100425       Styrene
  100516       Benzyl alcohol
  100754       N-Nitrosopiperidine
  101144    .  4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)
  101553       4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
  101848       Diphenyl  ether
  105679       2,4-Dimethylphenol
  106445       p-Cresol
  106467       1,4-Dichlorobenzene
  106478       Benzenamine, 4-chloro-
  106934       1,2-Dibromoethane
  107028       2-Propenal
  107051       1-Propene, 3-chloro-
  107062       1,2-Dichloroethane
  107120       Ethyl cyanide
  107131       2-Propenenitrile
  107142       Chloroacetonitrile
  107186       2-Propen-1-61
  107493       Tetraethylpyrophosphate
  108054       Vinyl acetate
  108101       4-Hethyl-2-pentanone
  108372       1-Bromo-3-chlorobenzene
  108394       m-Cresol  -
  108463       Resorcinol
  108601       bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether
                                                                          Benzene, 1,2-dichloro- \ o-Dichlorobenzene
                                                                          o-Tolufdine
                                                                          Phenol, 2-chloro
                                                                          5-Chloro-o-toluidine
                                                                          2,4-Oia«inotoluene \ Toluene, 2,4-diatnino-
                                                                          Benzene, 1,2,4,5-tetrachloro-
                                                                          Phenol, 2,4,5-trichloro-
                                                                          Dibromochloropropane \ DBCP
                                                                          Propane, 1,2,3-trichloro-
                                                                          1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol
                                                                          Ethylenethiourea
                                                                          2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester
                                                                          alpha-Terpineol
                                                                          Acetophenone
                                                                          Benzene, nitro-
                                                                          Benzenamine, 3-nitro
                                                                          Dichloran \ Botran
                                                                          Benzenamine, 2-methyl-5-nitro
                                                                          Benzene, 1,3-dinitro- \ m-Dinitrobenzene
                                                                          p-Isopropyltoluene
                                                                          Benzenamine, 4-nitro-
                                                                          p-Nitrophenol \ Phenol, 4-nitro-
                                                                          Benzene, ethyl
                                                                          Benzene, ethenyl-
                                                                          Benzenemethanol
                                                                          Piperidine, 1-Nitroso-
                                                                          Benzenamine, 4,4'-methylenebis[2chloro \ HOCA
                                                                          1-Bromo-4-phenoxybenzene \ Benzene, 1-bromo-4-phenoxy-
                                                                          Diphenyl ether
                                                                          Phenol, 2,4-dimethyl-
                                                                          4-Methylphenol \ Phenol, 4-methyl-
                                                                          Benzene, 1,4-dichloro- \ p-Dichlorobenzene
                                                                          p-Chloroaniline
                                                                          Ethylene dibromide \ EDB \ Ethane, 1,2-dibromo-
                                                                          Acrolein
                                                                          Allyl chloride \ 3-Chloropropene
                                                                          Ethylene dichloride \ EDC \ Ethane, 1,2-dichloro-
                                                                          Propionitrile \ Propanenitrile
                                                                          Acrylonitrile
                                                                          Chloroethanenitrile
                                                                          Allyl alcohol
                                                                          TEPP \ Phosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester
                                                                          Acetic acid, ethenyl ester
                                                                          MIBK \ Hethylisobutylketone \ 2-Pentanone, 4-methyl
                                                                          3-Bromochlorobenzene
                                                                          3-Hethylphenol \ Phenol, 3-methyl-
                                                                          1,3-Benzenediol
                                                                          Propane, 2,2'-oxybis[1-chloro-
                                                                                           SV(H)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(A)
                                                                                           SV
                                                                                           SV(B>
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           SV(H)
                                                                                           SV(H)
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           SV(N)
                                                                                           SV(H)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(N)
                                                                                           SV(N)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(A)
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           SV(N)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(M)
                                                                                           SV(N)
                                                                                           SV(A)
                                                                                           SV(A)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           SV(B)
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           P(OP)
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           VOL
                                                                                           SV(A)
                                                                                           SV(A)
                                                                                           SV(N)

-------
age No.
'4/18/90
CAS NUMBER
                     REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                             TABLE 9-2
                                                                                   ANALYTES  SORTED BY CAS NUMBER
                                                                        USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                                                COMMON NAME
                                                                                                                                                                 CLASS
                                                                       esters
                                                                       finyOphenyl  ester
108883       Toluene
108907       Chlorobenzene
108952       Phenol
108985       Benzenethiol
109068       2-Picoline
110576       trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
110758       2-Chloroethylvinyl  ether
110861       Pyridine
111444       bis(2-Chloroethyl)  ether
111546       Carbamodithioic acid,  1,2-ethanediylbis-, salts and
111911       bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane
112403       n-Dodecane
112958       n-Eicosane
115902       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(p-(methylsul
117806       1,4-Naphthoquinone, 2,3-dichloro-
117817       bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
117840       Di-n-octyl phthalate
118741       Hexachlorobenzene
119904       1,1'-Biphenyl-4,4'-diajnine,  3,3'-dimethoxy
120127       Anthracene
120581       1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-<1-propenyl>-
120752       2-Methylbenzothioazole
120821       1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
120832       2,4-Dichlorophenol
121142       2,4-Dinitrotoluene
121733       1-Chloro-3-nitrobenzene
121755       Succinic acid, mercapto-, diethyl  ester,  S-ester with 0,0-dimethyl
             phosphorodi th i oate
122394       Diphenylamine                                 '
122667       1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
123911       1,4-Dioxane
124185       n-Decane
124481       Dibromochloromethane
126681       0,0,0-Triethylphosphorothioate
126987       2-Propenenitrile, 2-methyl-
126998       2-Chloro-1,3-butadiene
127184       Tetraehloroethene
128030       Potassium dimethyldithiocarbamate
128041       Sodium dimethyldithiocarbamate
129000       Pyrene
130154       1,4-Naphthoquinone
131113       1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid,  dimethyl  ester
131895       Phenol, 2-cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitro-
132649       Dibenzofuran
132650       Dibenzothiophene
133062       4-Cyclohexene-1,2-dicarboximide N-(trichloromethyl)thio-
134327       1-Naphthylamine
137177       Aniline, 2,4,5-trimethyl-
Benzene, methyl
Benzene, chloro-
Carbolic acid
Thiophenol \ Mercaptobenzene
alpha-Picoline \ 2-Methylpyridine
2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro-,  (E)-
Ethene, (2-chloroethoxy)
Pyridine
Dichloroethyl ether
Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid,  salts and esters
Ethane, 1,1'-[methylenebis(oxy)]bis[2-chloro-
n-C12
n-C20
Fensulfothion \ Desanit
Dichlone \ Phygon
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid,  bis(2-ethylhexyl)ester
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid,  dioctyl ester \  Dioctyl  ph
HCB \ Benzene, hexachloro-
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine
Anthracene
Isosafrole
2-Methylbenzothioazole
Benzene, 1,2,4-trichloro-
Phenol, 2,4-dichloro-
Benzene, 1-methyl-2,4-dinitro
3-chloronitrobenzene
Malathion \ Sumitox

Benzenamine, N-phenyl
Hydrazine, 1,2-diphenyl
p-Dioxahe \ 1,4-Diethyleneoxide
n-C10
Chlorodibromomethane \ Methane,  dibromochloro-
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0,5-triethyl ester
Methacrylonitrile
Chloroprene \  1,3-Butadiene, 2-chloro
Perchloroethylene \ Ethene, tetrachloro
Busan 85
Carbamic acid, dimethyldithio-,  sodium salt
Benzo[def]phenanth rene
1,4-Naphthalenedione
Dimethyl phthalate
Oinex \ DN-111 \ 2-Cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
Dibenzofuran
Dibenzothiophene
Captan
alpha-Naphthylamine
2,4,5-Trimethylaniline
VOL
VOL
SV
-------
age Ho.
'4/18/90
CAS HUHBER
REGULATORY HAME
                      TABLE 9-2
            AHALYTES SORTED BY CAS HUHBER
USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY OIVISIOK LIST OF AHALYTES

                         COHHOH HAHE
                                                                                                                                                                     CUSS
  137268      Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetromethyl
  137304      Zinc bis(din«thyldithiocarba»ato)-
  137417      Potassiun-N-methyldithiocarbauiate
  138932      Disodiun cyanodithioimfdecarbonate
  140578      Sutfurous acid, 2-chloroethyl-, 2-[4-(1,1-dimethyl6thyl)phenoxy]-1-methylethyl
               ester
  141662      Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester, ester with (E)-3-
               hydrox-N,N-dirnethylcrotonamide
  142289      1,3-Dichloropropane
  142596      Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid, -sodium salt
  142621       Hexanoic acid
  143500      4-Hetheno-2H-cyclobuta(cd)pentalen-2-one, 1,1a,3,3a,
               4,5,5,5a,5b,6-decachlorooctahydro-
  156605      trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
  191242      Benzo(ghi)perylene
  193395      Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
  198550      Perylene
  203645       4,5-dimethyl phenanthrene
  205992      Benzo(b)fluoranthene
  206440      Fluoranthene
  207089      Benzo(k)fluoranthene
  208968      Acenaphthylene
  217594       Triphenylene
  218019      Chrysene
  243174       2,3-Benzofluorene
  291214       1,3,5-Trithiane
  297972       0,0-Diethyl-0-(2-pyrazinyl)phosphorothioate
  298000       Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl 0-(4-nitrophenyl)
  298022       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-C(ethylthio)
  298044       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)
  300765       Phosphoric acid, 1,2-dibromo-2,2-dichloroethyl di
  309002       1,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-
               1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-endo,exo-
  319846       Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1-alpha, 2-alpha,3-beta, 4-alpha,  5-beta,
               6-beta)-
  319857      Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1-alpha, 2-beta, 3-alpha, 4-beta,
               5-alpha, 6-beta)-
  319868       Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1-alpha, 2-alpha,3-alpha, 4-beta,
               5-alpha, 6-beta)-
  333415       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(2-isopropyl-6-   methyl-4-pyrimidinyl)
               ester
  465736       1,2,3,4,10,10-Hexachloro-1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-1,4:5,
               8-endo,endo-dimethanonaphthalene
  470906       Phosphoric acid, 2-chloro-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)vinyl dimethyl ester
  475207       Longifolene
  492228       Thioxanthe-9-one
  506774       Cyanogen chloride
  510156       Benzeneacetic acid, 4-chloro-alpha-(4-chlorophenyl)-    alpha-hydroxy,  ethyl
               ester
                                                 ester
                                                 methyl] ester
                                                 ethyl] ester
                                                 methyl ester
                        Thiraw \ Thiuram \ Arasan
                        Ziram \ Cymate
                        Carbaiiiic ocid, »ethyldithio-, roonopotassiuii salt
                        Disodium cyanodithioimidocarbonate
                        Arami te

                        Dicrotophos \ Bidrin

                        1,3-Dichloropropane
                        Nabam
                        Caproic acid
                        Kepone

                        Ethene, 1,2-dichloro-,  (E)-
                        Benzo(ghi)perylene
                        Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
                        Perylene
                        4,5-dimethyl phenanthrene
                        Benz te]acephenanthrylene
                        Fluoranthene
                        Benzo(k)fIuoranthene
                        Acenaphthylene
                        Triphenylene
                        Chrysene
                        2,3-benzofluorene
                        1,3,5-Trithiane
                        Zinophos \  Thionazin
                        Methyl parathion \ Parathion-methyl \ Hetaphos
                        Phorate \ Thimet
                        Disulfoton
                        Naled \ Dibrom
                        Aldrin

                        alpha-BHC

                        beta-BHC

                        delta-BHC

                        Diazinon \  Spectracide

                        Isodrin (Stereoisomer of Aldrin)

                        Chlorfenvinphos  \ Supona
                        Longifolene
                        Thioxanthone \ Thiaxanthone
                        Chlorine cyanide
                        Chlorobenzilate  \ Ethyl-4,4'-dichlorobenzilate
P(C)
P(C)
PCC)
HISC
SV(A)

P(OP)

VOL
P(C)
SV(A)
P(OH)

VOL
SV(H)
SV(H)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(M)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(M)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
P(OP)
P(OP)
P(OP)
P(OP)
P(OP)
P(OH)

P(OH)

P(OH)

P(OH)

P(OP)

P(OH)

P(OP)
SV(M)
SV(B)
HISC
P(OH)

-------
nge NO.
14/18/90
CAS NUMBER
                     REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                              TABLE 9-2
                                                                                   ANALYTES  SORTED BY CAS NUMBER
                                                                        USEPA INDUSTRIAL  TECHNOLOGY DIVISION  LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                                                 COMMON NAME
                                                                                            CLASS
  512561       Phosphoric acid, trimethyl ester
  534521       Phenol, 2-methyl-4,6-dinitro-
  541731       1,3-Dichlorobenzene
  544763       n-Hexadecane
  544923       Copper cyanide  (CuCN)
  563122       Phosphorodithioic acid, S,S'-methylene 0,0,0',O'-tetra  ethyl ester
  569642       Ammonium, (4-(p-(dimethylamino)-alpha-phenylbenzyli
               dine)-2,5-cylcohexadien-1-ylidene)-dimethyl chloride
  591786       2-Hexanone
  593453       n-Octadecane
  605027       1-Phenylnaphthalene
  606202       2,6-Dinitrotoluene
  608275       2,3-Dichloroaniline
  608935       Pentachlorobenzene
  612942       2-Phenylnaphthalene
  614006       N-Nitrosomethylphenylamine
  615225       2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole
  621647       Di-n-propylnitrosamine
  629594       n-Tetradecane
  629970       n-Docosane
  630013       n-Hexacosane
  630024       n-Octacosane
  630206       1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
  634366       1,2,3-Trimethoxybenzene
  638686       n-Triacontane
  646311       n-Tetracosane
  680319       Phosphoric  triamide,  hexamethyt-
  694804       1-Bromo-2-chlorobenzene
  700129       Pentamethylbenzene
  719222       2,6-di-tert-Butyl-p-benzoquinone
   732116       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl  ester, S-ester
               HithN-(mercaptomethyl)phthalimide
   764410       2-Butene,  1,4-dichloro  (mixture of  cis and trans)
   786196       Phosphorodithioic acid, s(((p-chlorophenyl)thio)
               ester
   789026       o,p'-DDT
   832699        1-Methylphenanthrene
   882337      Diphenyldisulfide
   924163       N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine
   933755        2,3,6-Trichlorophenol
   959988       Endosulfan-I
   961115        Phosphoric acid, 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl)
  1024573       2,5-Methano-2H-indeno[1,2b]oxirene, 2,3,4,5,6,7,7-hepta
                chloro-1a,1b,5,5a,6,6a-hexahydro-  (alpha,  beta,  and      gamma  isomers)
  1031078       Endosulfan sulfate
  1330207       Total xylenes
  1332214       Asbestos
  1464535       1,2:3,4-Diepoxybutane
methyl) 0,0-diethyl
vinyl dimethyl ester
Trimethylphosphate  .
2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol  \ DNOC \ 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
Benzene, 1,3-dichloro- \ m-Dichlorobenzene
n-d6
Copper cyanide
Ethion \ Bladan
Malachite green \ C.I. Basic Acid Green 4

2-Hexanone
n-C18
1-Phenylnaphthalene
Benzene, 2-methyl-1,3-dinitro-
2,3-Dichloroaniline
Benzene, pentachloro-
2-Phenylnaphthalene
N-Nitrosomethylphenylamine
2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine
n-CH
n-C22
n-C26
n-C28
Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloro-
1,2,3-T r i methoxybenzene
n-c30
n-C24
Hexamethylphosphoramide \ HMPA
2-Bromochlorobenzene
Pentamethylbenzene
2,6-di-tert-Butyl-p-benzoquinone
Phosmet \  Imidan

1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
Carbophenothion \ Trithion

o,p'-DDT
1-Methylphenanthrene
Diphenyl sulfide
1-Butenamine,  N-butyl-N-nitroso
2,3,6-Trichlorophenol
Thiodan I
Tetrachlorvinphos \ Gardona
Heptachlor epoxide

6,9-Methano-2,3,4-benzodioxathiepin, 6,7
Benzene, dimethyl-  \  Xylenes  \ Xylene,  (total)
Asbestos
Erythritol anhydride  \ 2,2'-Bioxirane
P(QP)
SVCA)
SVQN)
SVCN)
MISC
P(OP)
SVCB)

VOL
SVCN)
SVCN)
SVCB)
SVCB)
SVCN)
SVCN)
SVCB)
SVCB)
SVCB)
SVCN)
SVCN)
SVCN)
SVCN)
VOL
SVCN)
SVCN)
SVCN)
P(OP)
VOL
SVCN)
SVCN)
P(OP)

VOL
P(OP)

P(OH>
SVCN)
SVCN)
SVCB)
SV
-------
1 age Ho.
•4/18/90
 CAS NUMBER
REGULATORY HAHE
                      TABLE 9-2
            AHALYTES SORTED BY CAS HW8ER
USEPA 1MDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY D1VISIOH LIST OF AMALYTES

                         COHHOH HAKE
                                                                                                                                                                    CLASS
  1576676       3,6-Dimethylphenanthrene
  1576698       2,7-Dimethylphenanthrene
  1582098       p-Toluidine, alpha,  alpha,  alpha-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-
  1689845       BenzonitrUe, 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxy-
  1730376       1-Methylfluorene
  1746016       Dibenzo[b,e][1,4Jdioxin, 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
  1836755       Ether, 2,4-dichlorophenyl p-nitrophenyl-
  1888717       Hexachloropropene
  2027170       2-Isopropylnaphthalene
  2104645       Phosphorothioic acid,  phenyl-,  0-ethyl  0-(p-nitro
  2243621       1,5-Naphthalenediamine
  2303164       Carbamothioic acid,  bis(1-methylethyl)-S-(2,3-dichloro
  2385855       1,3,4-Hetheno-1H-cyclobuta[cd]pentalene,  1,1a,2,2,3,3a,
                4,5,5,5a,5b,6,-dodecachlorooctahydro
  2425061       4-Cyclohexene-1,2-dicarboximide N-((1,1,2,2-tetrachloro
  2642719       Phosphorodithioic acid,  0,0-diethyl ester,  S-ester with
                3-(inercaptomethyl)-1,2,3-benzotriazin-4(3H)-one
  2921882       Phosphorodithioic acid,  0,0-diethyl 0-(3,5,6-trichloro-
  3209221       2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene
  3288582       0,0-Diethyl  S-methyl ester  of Phosphorodithioic  acid
  3689245       Thiopyrophosphoric acid  ([(HO)2P(S)]20),  tetraethyl
  4104147       Phosphoramidothioic  acid, acetamidoyl,  0,0-bis(p-
  4170303       2-Butenal
  6923224       Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester,  ester  with 
-------
'•'age No.
14/18/90
 CAS NUMBER
                      REGULATORY  NAME
                                                                                             TABLE 9-2  .
                                                                                   ANALYTES SORTED BY CAS NUMBER
                                                                        USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                                                COMMON NAME
                                                                    CLASS
  7440166       Rhodium
  7440188       Ruthenium
  7440199       Samarium
  7440202       Scandium
  7440213       Silicon
  7440224       Silver
 •7440235       Sodium
  7440246       Strontium
  7440257       Tantalum
  7440279       Terbium
  7440280       Thallium
  7440291       Thorium
  7440304       Thulium
  7440315       Tin
  7440326       Titanium
  7440337       Tungsten
  7440360       Antimony
  7440382       Arsenic
  7440393       Barium
  7440417       Beryllium
  7440428       Boron
  7440439       Cadmium
  7440451       Cerium
  7440473       Chromium
  7440484       Cobalt
  7440508       Copper
  7440520       Erbium
  7440531       Europium
  7440553       Gallium
  7440564       Germanium                '                                       .
  7440575       Gold
  7440586       Hafnium
  7440600       Holmium
  7440611       Uranium
  7440622       Vanadium
  7440644       Ytterbium
  7440655       Yttrium
  7440666       Zinc
  7440677       Zirconium
  7440699       Bismuth
  7440702       Calcium
  7440746       Indium
  7553562       Iodine
  7664417       Ammonia
  7683649       Squalene
  7700176       Crotonic acid, 3-hydroxy, alpha-methylbenzyl  ester, di  methylphosphate (E)
  7704349       Sulfur
  7723140       Phosphorus (black, white, red, yellow,  or violet)
Rh
Ru
Sm
Sc
Si
Ag
Ma
Sr
Ta
Tb
Tl
Th
Tin
Sn
Ti
U
Sb
As
Ba
Be
B
Cd
Ce
Cr
Co
Cu
Er
Eu
Ga
Ge
Au
Hf
Ho
U
V
Yb
Y
Zn
Zr
Bi
Ca
In
I
Ammonia
Squalene
Crotoxyphos \ Ciodrin
S
P
M(C)
MCC)
MCC)
M(C)
M(A)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCA)
HCC)
MCC)
MCA)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCO
MCC)
MCC)
MCC)
MCA)
MISC
SV(N)
PCOP)
MCA)
MCA)

-------
 age Ho.
 4/18/90
10
 CAS NUMBER
                      REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                  TABLE 9-2
                                                                        AHALYTES SORTED BY CAS mJHB'ER
                                                            USEPA  INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST Of ANALYTES

                                                                                     COMHON MAHE
                                                                                                                                                                     CUSS
  7782492       Selenium
  7782505       Chlorine
  7786347       Crotonic acid, 3-hydroxy-, methyl ester, dimethyl phos  phate (E)-
  8001352       Toxaphene
  8065483       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(2-(ethylthio)    ethyl) ester mixed with
                0,0-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)    ethyl) ester (7:3)
 10049044       Chlorine dioxide
 10061015       cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
 10061026       trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
 10595956       N-Nitrosoroethylethylamine
 11096825       PCB-1260
 11097691       PCB-1254
 11104282       PCB-1221
 11141165       PCB-1232
 12122677       Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid,-zinc salt
 12'»27382       Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid,-manganese salt
 12672296       PCB-1248
 12674112       PCB-1016
 13071799       Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl-S-(«1,1-dimethyl   ethyl)thio)methyl  ester
 13171216       Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester, ester with 2-chloro-N-
                N-diethyl-3-hydroxycrotonamide
 13494809       Tellurium
> 14797650       Nitrites
1 15972608       2-Chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)        acetamide
 16984488       Fluoride
 18496258       Sulfide
 19408743       1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 20324338       THpropyleneglycol methyl ether
 21609905       Phosphorothioic acid, phenyl, 0-(4-bromo-2,5-dichloro   phenyl)  0-methyl ester
 23950585       Benzamide, 3,5-dichloro-N-(1,1-dimethyl-2-propynyl)-
 28434868       3,3'-Dichloro-4,4'-diaminodiphenyl ether
 33213659       Endosulfan-II
 37871004       1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin '
 40321764       1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
 53469219       PCB-1242
 53494705       Endrin ketone
 57653857       1,2;3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
                                                                                    Se
                                                                                    Chlorine
                                                                                    Hevinphos \ Phosdrin
                                                                                    Camphechlor
                                                                                    Demeton \ Systox

                                                                                    Chlorine oxide
                                                                                    1-Propene, 1,3-dichloro-,  (Z)-
                                                                                    1-Propene, 1,3-dichloro-,  (E)-
                                                                                    Ethanamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso
                                                                                    Aroclor 1260
                                                                                    Aroclor 1254
                                                                                    Aroclor 1221
                                                                                    Aroclor 1232
                                                                                    Zineb \ Dithane Z
                                                                                    Maneb \ Vancide
                                                                                    Aroclor 1248
                                                                                    Aroclor 1016
                                                                                    Terbufos \ Counter
                                                                                    Phosphamidon \ Dimecron

                                                                                    Te
                                                                                    Nitrites
                                                                                    Alachlor \ Hetachlor \  Lasso
                                                                                    Fluoride  •
                                                                                    Sulfide
                                                                                    1,2,3,7,8,9-HxDD
                                                                                    Tripropyleneglycol methyl  ether
                                                                                    Leptophos \ Phosvel
                                                                                    Pronamide \ Kerb
                                                                                    3,3'-Dichloro-4,4'-diaminodiphenyl ether
                                                                                    Thiodan II
                                                                                    1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpDD
                                                                                    1,2,3,7,8-PeDD
                                                                                    Aroclor 1242
                                                                                    Endrine ketone
                                                                                    1,2,3,6,7,8-HxDD
H(A)
K(A)
P(OP)
P(OH)
P(OP)

HISC
VOL
VOL
SV(B)
PCB
PCB
PCB
PCB
P(C)
P(C)
PCB
PCB
P(OP)
P(OP)

H(C)
MISC
P(OH)
HISC
HISC
DIOXINS
SV(N)
P(OP)
P(H)
SV(N)
P(OH)
DIOXINS
DIOXINS
PCB
P(OH)
DIOXINS

-------
Page No.
04/18/90
COMMON NAME
                                                                                             TABLE 9-3
                                                                                  ANALYTES SORTED BY COMMON NAME
                                                                       USEPA  INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                   REGULATORY  NAME
                                                                  CLASS
                          CAS NUMBER
                          ==========
(1,1'-Biphenyl)-4,4'-diamine
1/1'-Bipnenyl-4I4'-diamine, 3,3'-dichloro
1,1-Dichloroethylene \ Vinylidine chloride
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpOD
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxDD
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxDD
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxDD
1,2,3,7,8-PeDD
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2,3-Trimethoxybenzene
1,2-Benzertedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl)ester
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, butyl phenylmethyl ester
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, diethyl ester
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dioctyl ester \ Dioctyl ph
1,3,5-Trithiane
1,3-Benzenediol
1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(2-propenyl)-
1,3-Butadiene, 1,1,2,3,4,4-hexachloro-
1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol
1,3-Dichloropropane
1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
1,4-Naphthalenedione
1,5-Naphalenediamine
1-Bromo-4-phenoxybenzene \ Benzene, 1-bromo-4-phenoxy-
1-Butenainine, N-butyl-N-nitroso
1-Hethylfluorene
  -Hethylphenanthrene
  -Phenylnaphthalene
  -Propanol, 2-methyl-
  -Propene,  1,1,2,3,3,3-hexachloro-
  -Propene,  1,3-dichloro-,  (E)-
1-Propene,  1,3-dichloro-,  (Z)-
2,3,6-Trichlorophenol
2,3-Benzothiophene \ Benzo(b)thiophene
2,3-Dichloroaniline
2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene
2,3-benzofluorene
2,4,5-T  \ Weedone \ Acetic acid, 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy-
2,4,5-TP \  Silvex
2,4,5-Trimethylaniline
2,4-D  \  Acetic acid, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-
2,4-Diaminotoluene \ Toluene, 2,4-diamino-
2,6-di-tert-Butyl-p-benzoquinone
2,7-Dimethylphenanthrene
2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole
2-BromochIorobenzene
2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro-,  (E)-
2-Hexanone
Benzidine
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
1,1-Dichloroethene
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2,3-Trimethoxybenzene
bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
1,3,5-Trithiane
Resorcinol
Safrole
Hexachlorobutadiene
1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol
1,3-Dichloropropane
2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro (mixture of cis and trans)
1,4-Naphthoquinone
1,5-Naphthalenediatnine
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine
1-Methylfluorene
1-Methylphenanthrene
1-Phenylnaphthalene
Isobutyl alcohol
Hexachloropropene
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
2,3,6-Trichlorophenol
Thianaphthene
2,3-Dichloroaniline
2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene
2,3-Benzofluorene
2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid
Propanoic acid, 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)-
Aniline, 2,4,5-trimethyl-
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, salts and esters
1,3-Benzenediamine, 4-methyl-
2,6-di-tert-Butyl-p-benzoquinone
2,7-Dimethylphenanthrene
2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole
1-Brorao-2-chlorobenzene
trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
2-Hexanone
SV(B)
SV(B)
VOL
DIOXINS
DIOXINS
DIOXINS
DIOXINS
DIOXINS
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(A)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
VOL
VOL
SV(N)
SV(B)
SV(N)
SV(B)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
VOL
SV(N)
VOL
VOL
SV(A)
SV(N)
SV(B)
SV(N)
SV(N)
P(OH)
P(H)
SV(B)
P(H)
SV(B)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(B)
VOL
VOL
VOL
   92875
   91941
   75354
37871004
   1-030
57653857
19408743
40321764
   87616
  634366
  117817
   85687
   84662
  117840
  291214
  108463
   94597
   87683
   96231
  142289
  764410
  130154
 2243621
  101553
  924163
 1730376
  832699
  605027
   78831
 1888717
10061026
10061015
  933755
   95158
  608275
 3209221
  243174
   93765
   93721
  137177
   94757
   95807
  719222
 1576698
  615225
  694804
  110576
  591786

-------
Page Ho.
04/18/90
COKHOH HAKE
                                                                               TABLE 9-3
                                                                    AHALYTES SORTED  BY  COHHOH HAME
                                                         USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF AHALYTES

                                                    REGULATORY HAHE
                                                                                                                                    CLASS
                                                                                                                                               CAS NUMBER
2-Isopropylnaphthalene
2-Hethyl-4,6-dinitrophenol \ DNOC \ 4,6-Dinttro-o-cresol
2-Methylbenzothioazole
2-Methylphenol \ o-Cresytic acid \ Phenol, 2-methyl-
2-Naphthylamine
2-Phenylnaphthalcne
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl, methyl ester
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester
3,3'-Dichloro-4,4'-diaiTrinodiphenyl ether
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine
3,5,5-Trimethyl-2-cyclohexenone
3,6-Dimethylphenanthrene
3-Bromochlorobenzene
3-Methylcholanthrene
3-Methylphenol \ Phenol, 3-methyl-
3-chloronitrobenzene
4,4'-DDD/Benzene, 1,1'-(2,2-dichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro-
4,4'-DDE/Benzene, 1,1'-(dichloroethenlyidine)bis[4-chloro
4,4'-DDT/Benzene, 1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene)b?s[4-chloro
4,5-dimethyl phenanthrene
4-Aminobiphenyl
4-Chloro-2-nitroaniline
4-Hethylphenol \ Phenol, 4-methyl-
4-Nitrobiphenyl
5-Chloro-o-toluidine
6,9-Hethano-2,3,4-benzodioxathiepin, 6,7
9,10-Dimethyl-1,2-Benzanthracene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthylene, 1,2-dihydro-
Acetic acid, ethenyl ester
Acetone
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Ag
Al
Alachlor \ Hetachlor \ Lasso
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
AUyl chloride
Anntonia
Aniline
Anthracene
Aramite
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 1221
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
\ 3-Chloropropene
2-Isopropylnaphthalene                                            SV(H)
Phenol, 2-methyl-4,6-dinitro-                                     SV(A)
2-Hethylbenzothioazole                                            SV(H)
o-Cresol                                                          SV(A)
beta-Naphthylaniine                                                SV(B)
2-Phenylnaphthalene                                               SV(H)
Methyl raethacrylate                                               VOL
Ethyl methacrylate                                                VOL
3,3'-Dichloro-4,4'-diaminodiphenyl ether                          SV(H)
1,1'-Biphenyl-4,4'-diaraine, 3,3'-dimethoxy                        SV(B)
Isophorone                                                        SV(H)
3,6-Diraethylphenanthrene                                          SV(H)
l-Brorao-3-chlorobenzene                                           VOL
Benz[j]aceanthrylene, 1,2-dihydro-3-methyl-                        SV(H)
m-Cresol                                                          SV(A)
1-Chloro-3-nitrobenzene                                           SV(M)
4,4'-ODD                                                          P(OH)
4,4'-DDE                                                          P(OH)
4,4'-DDT                                                          P(OH)
4,5-dimethyl phenanthrene                                         SV(H)
[1,1'-Biphenyl]-4-amine                                           SV(B)
4-Chloro-2-nitroaniline                                           SV(B)
p-Cresol                               *                          SV(A)
Biphenyl, 4-nitro                                                'SV(N)
o-Toluidine, 5-chloro-                                            SV(B)
Endosulfan sulfate                                                P(OH)
7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene                                    SV(B)
Acenaphthylene                                                    SV(N)
Acenaphthene                                                      SV(N)
Vinyl acetate                                                     VOL
2-Propanone                                                       VOL
Ethanone, 1-phenyl                                                SV(N)
2-Propenal                                                        VOL
2-Propenenitrile                                                  VOL
Silver                                                            H(C)
Aluminum                                                          H(C)
2-Chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)                  P(OH)
1,4:5,8-Dinnethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-           P(OH)
2-Propen-1-o1                                                     VOL
1-Propene, 3-chloro-                                              VOL
Ammonia                                                           HISC
Benzenamine                                                       SV(B)
Anthracene                                       -                 SV(M)
Sulfurous acid, 2-chloroethyl-, 2-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)          SV(A)
PCB-1016                                                          PCB
PCS-1221                                                          PCB
PCB-1232                                                          PCB
PCB-1242                                                          PCB
 2027170
  534521
  120752
   95487
   91598
  612942
   80626
   97632
28434868
  119904
   78591
 1576676
  108372
   56495
  108394
  121733
   72548
   72559
   50293
  203645
   92671
   89634
  106445
   92933
   95794
 1031078
   57976
  208968
   83329
  108054
   67641
   98862
  107028
  107131
 7440224
 7429905
15972608
  309002
  107186
  107051
 7664417
   62533
  120127
  140578
12674112
11104282
11141165
53469219

-------
Page No.
04/18/90
COMMON NAME
                                                                                             TABLE 9-3
                                                                                  ANALYTES SORTED BY COMMON NAME
                                                                       USEPA  INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                   REGULATORY  NAME
                                                                  CLASS
                                                                                           CAS NUMBER
Aroclor 1248
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
As
Asbestos
Au
Azinphos-ethyl \ Ethyl Guthion
Azinphos-methyl \ Guthion
B
BOD
Ba
Be
Benz[a]anthracene \ 1,2-Benzanthracene
Benz[e]acephenanthrylene
Benzanthrone
Benzenamjne, 2-methyl-5-nitro
Benzenamine, 2-nitro
Benzenamine, 3-nitro
Benzenamine, 4,4'-methylenebist2chloro \ MOCA
Benzenamine, 4-nitro-
Benzenamine, N-nitroso-N-phenyl
Benzenamine, N-phenyl
Benzene
Benzene, 1,2,4,5-tetrachloro-
Benzene, 1,2,4-trichtoro-
Benzene, 1,2-dichloro- \ o-Dichlorobenzene
Benzene, 1,3-dichloro- \ m-Dichlorobenzene
Benzene, 1,3-dinitro- \ m-Dinitrobenzene
Benzene, 1,4-dichloro- \ p-Dichlorobenzene
Benzene, 1-chloro-4-phenoxy
Benzene, 1-methyl-2,4-djnitro
Benzene, 2-methyl-1,3-dinitro-
Benzene, chloro-
Benzene, dimethyl- \ Xylenes \ Xylene, (total)
Benzene, ethenyl-
Benzene, ethyl
Benzene, methyl  •
Benzene, nitro-
Benzene, pentachloro-
Benzenemethanol
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fIuoranthene
Benzo[def]phenanth rene
Benzoic acid
Bi
Bromoform \ Methane, tribromo-
Bromoxynil \ 3,5-Dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrile
PCB-1248                                                          PCB
PCS-1254                                                          PCB
PCB-1260                                                          PCB
Arsenic                                                           H(A)
Asbestos                                                          MISC
Gold                                                              M(C)
Phosphorodithioic acid,  0,0-diethyl  ester,  S-ester with            P(OP)
Phosphorodithioic acid,  0,0-dimethyl ester, S-ester with           P(OP)
Boron                                                             M(A)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand                                         MISC
Barium                                                            M(C>
Beryllium                                                         "(C)
Benzo(a)anthracene                                                SV(N)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene         .                                     SV(N)
Benzanthrone                                   -                   SV(N)
5-Nitro-o-toluidine                                               SV(B)
2-Nitroaniline                                                    SV(B)
3-Nitroaniline                                                    SV(B)
4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)                                SV(B)
p-Nitroaniline                                                    SV(B)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine                                            SV(B)
Diphenylamine                                                     SV(B)
Benzene                                                           VOL
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene                          ,              SV(B)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene                                            SV(N)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene                                               SV(N)
1,3-Dichlorob^nzene                                               SV(N)
1,3-Dinitrobenzene                                                SV(N)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene                                               SV(B)
4-Chlorophenylphenyl ether                                        SV(N)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene                                                SV(N)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene                                                SV(B)
Chlorobenzene                                                     VOL
Total xylenes                                                     VOL
Styrene                                                          * VOL
Ethylbenzene                                                      VOL
Toluene                                                           VOL
Nitrobenzene  .                                                    SV(B)
Pentachlorobenzene                                                SV(N)
Benzyl alcohol                                                    SV(N)
Benzo(a)pyrene                                                    SV(M)
Benzo(ghi)perylene                                                SV(N)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene                                              SV(N)
Pyrene                                                            SV(N)
Benzoic acid                                                      SV(A)
Bismuth                                                           M(C)
Tribromomethane                                                   VOL
Benzonitrile, 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxy-                              SV(A)
12672296
11097691
11096825
 7440382
 1332214
 7440575
 2642719
   86500
 7440428
   1-002
 7440393
 7440417
   56553
  205992
   82053
   99558
   86744
   99092
  101144
  100016
   86306
  122394
   71432
   95943
  120821
   95501
  541731
   99650
  106467
 7005723
  121142
  606202
  108907
 1330207
  100425
  100414
  108883
   98953
  608935
  100516
   50328
  191242
  207089
  129000
   65850
 7440699
   75252
 16S9845

-------
Page Mo.
04/18/90
COHMON NAME
                           TABLE 9-3
                AMALYTES SORTED BY COHHOH NAME
     USEPA IHDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF AHALYTES

REGULATORY HAKE
           E sssa
                                                                                                                                    CLASS
                                                                                                                                    X23XS
CAS NUMBER
Busan 85
COD
Ca
Camphechlor
Caproic acid
Captafol \ Difotatan
Captan
Carbamic acid, dimethyldithio-, sodium salt
Carbamic acid, roethyldithio-, monopotassium salt
Carbazole
Carbolic acid
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride \ Methane, tetrachloro-
Carbophenothion \ Trithion
Cd
Ce
Chloramine
Chlordane
Chlorfenvinphos \ Supona
Chloride
Chlorine
Chlorine cyanide
Chlorine oxide
Chlorite
Chlorobenzilate \ Ethyl-4,4'-dichlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane \ Methane, dibromochloro-
Chloroethanenitrile
Chloroprene \ 1,3-Butadiene, 2-chloro
Chlorpyrifos \ Dursban
Chrysene
Co
Conductivity, specific
Copper cyanide
Corrosivity
Coumaphos \ Co-Ral
Cr
Crotonaldehyde VCrotylaldehyde
Crotoxyphos \ Ciodrin           _
Cryptosporidium
Cu
Cyanides (soluble salts and complexes)
Cygon \ Dimethoate
DNBP \ Dinoseb \ 2-sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
Demeton \ Systox
Di-n-butyl phthalate \ Dibutyl phthalate
Dial late \ Avadex
Diazinon \ Spectracide
D i benz[a,h] anthracene
Potassium ditnethyldithiocarbamate                                 P(C)
Chemical Oxygen Demand                                            HISG
Calcium                                                           H(C)
Toxaphene                                                         P(OH)
Hexanoic acid                                                     SV(A)
4-Cyclohexene-1,2-dicarboximide N-((1,1,2,2-tetrachloro           P(OH)
4-Cyclohexene-1,2-d|carboxinide N-CtrichloromethyDthio-           P(OH)
Sodium ditnethyldithiocarbamate                                    p(C)
Potassium-N-methyldithiocarbamate                                 p(C)
Carbazole                                                         SV(B)
Phenol                                                            SV(A)
Carbon disulfide                                                  VOL
Tetrachloromethane                                                VOL
Phosphorodithioic acid, s«(p-chlorophenyl)thio)                   P(OP)
Cadmium                                                           H(C)
Cerium                                                            M(C)
Chloramine                                                        HISC
4,7-Methano-1H-indene 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-octachloro-2,3,3a,           P(OH)
Phosphoric acid, 2-chloro-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)vinyl  di           P(OP)
Chloride                                                          HISC
Chlorine                                                          H(A)
Cyanogen chloride                                                 HISC
Chlorine dioxide                                                  MISC
Chlorite                                                          MISC
Benzeneacetic acid, 4-chloro-alpha-(4-chlorophenyt)-               P(OH)
Dibromochloromethane                                              VOL
Chloroacetonitrile                                                VOL
2-Chloro-1,3-butadiene                                            VOL
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl  0-(3,5,6-trichloro-            P(OP)
Chrysene                                                          SV(N)
Cobalt                                                            H(C)
Specific conductivity                                             HISC
Copper cyanide (CuCN)                                             MISC
Corrosivity                                                       HISC
Coumarin, 3-chloro-7-hydroxy-4-methyl-,  0-ester with 0,            P(OP)
Chromium                                                          H(C)
2-Butenal                                                         VOL
Crotonic acid, 3-hydroxy,  alpha-methylbenzyl  ester, di             P(OP)
Cryptosporidium                                                   MISC
Copper                                                            H(C)
Cyanides (soluble salts and complexes) NOS                        MISC
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl  s-[2-(methylamino)-           P(OP)
Phenol, 2-(1-methylpropyl)-4,6-dinitro-                            p(H)
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl  0-(2-(ethylthio)               P(OP)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid,  dibutyl ester                        SV(N)
Carbamothioic acid, bis(1-methylethyl)-S-(2,3-dichloro             P(C)
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl  0-(2-isopropyl-6-              P(OP)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene                                            SV(N)
   128030
    1-004
  7440702
  8001352
   142621
  2425061
   133062
   128041
   137417
    86748
   108952
    75150
    56235
   786196
  7440439
  7440451
    0-012
    57749
   470906
    1-003
  7782505
   506774
 10049044
    0-011
   510156
   124481
   107142
   126998
  2921882
   218019
  7440484
    1-011
   544923
    1-014
    56724
  7440473
  4170303
  7700176
    0-039
  7440508
    57125
    60515
    88857
  8065483
    84742
  2303164
   333415
    53703

-------
Page No.
04/18/90
COMMON NAME
                                                                                             TABLE 9-3
                                                                                  ANALYTES SORTED BY COMMON NAME
                                                                       USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                  REGULATORY NAME
                                                                  CLASS
                          CAS NUMBER
                          ===5======
Dibenzofuran
D i benzoth i ophene
Dibromochloropropane \ DBCP
Dichlone \ Phygon
Dichloran \ Botran
Dichtoroethyl ether
Dichloroiodomethane
Dichloromethane \ Methane, dichloro-
Dichlorvos \ DDVP
Dicrotophos \ Bidrin
Dieldrin
Diethyl ether
Dimethyl phthalate
Dimethyl sulfone
Dimethylmtrosamine \ Methamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso-
Dinex \ DN-111 \ 2-Cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
Dioxathion
Dioxin \ TCDD \ 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Diphenyl
Diphenyl ether
Diphenyl sulfide
Disodium cyanodithioimidocarbonate
Disulfoton
Dy
EPN \ Santox
Endrin
Endrin aldehyde
Endrine ketone
Er
Erythritol anhydride \ 2,2'-Bioxirane
Ethanamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso-
Ethanamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso
Ethane, 1,1'-[methylenebis(oxy)]bis[2-chloro-
Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloro-
Ethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloro
Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro
Ethane, chloro \ Ethyl chloride
Ethane, hexachloro
Ethene, (2-chloroethoxy)
Ethene, 1,2-dichloro-, (E)-
Ethene, chloro
Ethene, trichloro \ Trichloroethylene
Ethion \ Bladan
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylene dibromide \ EDB  \ Ethane,  1,2-dibromo-
Ethylene dichloride \ EDC \ Ethane, 1,2-dichloro-
Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid, salts and esters
Ethylenethiourea
Dibenzofuran
Dibenzothiophene
Propane, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloro-
1,4-Naphthoquinone, 2,3-dichloro-
2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether
Dichloroiodomethane
Methylene chloride
Phosphoric acid, 2,2-dichlorovinyl dimethyl ester
Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester,  ester with (E)-3-
2,7:3,6-Dimethanonaphth(2,3-b)oxirene, 3,4,5,6,9,9-hexa
Diethyl ether
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester
Dimethyl sulfone
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Phenol, 2-cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitro-
Phosphorodithioic acid, S,S'-p-dioxane-2,3-dryl 0,0,0',
Dibenzo[b,e][1,4]dioxin, 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
Biphenyl
Diphenyl ether
Diphenyldisulfide
Disodium cyanodithioimidocarbonate
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)
Dysprosium
Phosphorothioic acid, phenyl-,  0-ethyl 0-(p-nitro
1,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-
Endrin aldehyde
Endrin ketone
Erbium
1,2:3,4-Diepoxybutane
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Chloroethane
Hexachloroethane
2-Chloroethylvinyl ether
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
Trichloroethene
Phosphorodithioic  acid, S,S'-methylene 0,0,0',0'-tetra
Methanesulfonic acid, ethyl ester
1,2-Dibromoethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
Carbamodithioic acid, 1,2-ethanediylbis-,  salts and
Ethylenethiourea
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(B)
P(OH)
SV(B)
SV(N)
VOL
VOL
P(OP)
P(OP)
P(OH)
VOL
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(B)
P(H)
PCOP)
DIOXINS
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
MISC
P(OP)
M(C)
P(OP)
P(OH)
P(OH)
P(OH)
M(C)
SV(N)
SV(B)
SV(B)
SV(N)
VOL
VOL
VOL
VOL
SV(N)
VOL
VOL
VOL
VOL
P(OP)
SV(N)
VOL
VOL
P(C)
SV(N)
  132649
  132650
  96128
  117806
  99309
  111444
  0-015
  75092
  62737
  141662
  60571
  60297
  131113
  67710
  62759
  131895
  78342
 1746016
  92524
  101848
  882337
  138932
  298044
 7429916
 2104645
  72208
 7421934
53494705
 7440520
 1464535
  55185
10595956
  111911
  630206
  79345
  79005
  75003
  67721
  110758
  156605
  75014
   79016
  563122
  62500
  106934
  107062
  111546
   96457

-------
Page Ho.
04/18/90
COHKOM HAHE
===========
                           TABLE 9-3
                AJMLYTES SORTED BY COHHOH NAME
     USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

REGULATORY HAHE
                                                                  CLASS
                                                                  TKX3SXS
CAS NUMBER
Ethylidene chloride \ Ethane, 1,1-dichloro-
Eu
Fumphur \ Famophos
Fe
Fensulfothion \ Desanit
Fenthion \ Baytex
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Fluoride
Fluorotrichloromethane \ Methane, trichlorofluoro-
Ga
Ge
HCB \ Benzene, hexachloro-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene \ HCP
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
HexachIorodi benzofurans
Hexamethylphosphoramide \ HHPA
Hf
Hg
Ho
Hydrazine, 1,2-diphenyl
Hypochlorite ion
I
Ignitafoility
In
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Ir
Isodrin (Stereoisomer of Aldrin)
Isosafrole
K
Kepone
La
Leptophos \ Phosvel-
Li
Lindane \ gamma-BHC \ Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma)
Longifolene
Lu
MIBK \ Methylisobutylketone \ 2-Pentanone, 4-methyl
Malachite green \ C.I. Basic Acid Green 4
Malathion \ Sumitox
Maneb \ Vancide
Mestranol \ 17-alpha-Ethynylestradiol 3-methyl ether
Methaerylonitrile
Methane, bromodichloro
Methane, trichloro- \ Trichloromethane
Methane, trichloronitro-
1,1-Dichloroethane                                                VOL
Europium                                                          H(C)
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-dinethyl 0-rp-t(dimethyla(nino)          P(OP)
Iron                                                              H(C)
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-(p-(methylsul               P(OP)
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl-,  0-(4-raethylthio)-          P(OP)
Fluoranthene                                                      SV(N)
Fluorene                                                          SV(N)
Fluoride                                                          MISC
Trichlorofluoromethane                                            VOL
Gallium                                                           M(C)
Germanium                                                         H(C)
HexachIorobenzene                                                 SV(N)
4,7-Methano-1H-indene, 1,4,5,6,7,8,8-heptachloro-da,4,7,          P(OH)
2,5-Methano-2H-indeno[1,2b]oxirene, 2,3,4,5,6,7,7-hepta           P(OH)
1,3-Cyclopentadiene, 1,2,3,4,5,5-hexachloro-                      SV(N)
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins                                       DIOXINS
Hexachlorodibenzofurans                                           DIOXINS
Phosphoric triamide, hexamethyl-                                  P(OP)
Hafnium                                                           M(C)
Mercury                                                           M(C)
Holmium                                                           M(C)
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine                                             SV(B)
Hypochlorite ion                                                  MISC
Iodine                                                            M(A)
Ignitability                                                      MISC
Indium                                     ~                      M(C)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene                                            SV(N)
Iridium                                                           M(C)
1,2,3,4,10,10-Hexachloro-1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-1,4:5,           P(OH)
1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(1-propenyl)-                                 SV(B)
Potassium                                                         H(C)
4-Metheno-2H-cyclobuta(cd)pentalen-2-one,  1,1a,3,3a,               P(OH)
Lanthanum                                                         M(C)
Phosphorothioic acid, phenyl,  0-(4-bromo-2,5-dichloro             P(OP)
Lithium                                                           M(C)
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-,  <1-alpha,-2-alpha,          P(OH)
Longifolene                                                       SV(N)
Lutetium                                                          H(C)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone                                              VOL
Ammoniura, (4-(p-(dimethylamino)-alpha-phenylbenzyli               SV(B)
Succinic acid,  mercapto-,  diethyl ester,  S-ester with 0,          P(OP)
Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic  acid,-manganese salt                    P(C)
17-alpha-19-Norpregna-1,3,5(10)-trien-20-yn-17-ol,  3-             SV(N) ,
2-Propenenitrile, 2-methyl-                                       VOL
Bromodichloromethane                                              VOL
Chloroform                                                        VOL
Chloropicrin                                                      SV(N)
    75343
  7440531
    52857
  7439896
   115902
    55389
   206440
    86737
 16984488
    75694
  7440553
  7440564
   118741
    76448
  1024573
    77474
    1-200
    1-201
   680319
  7440586
  7439976
  7440600
   122667
    0-009
  7553562
    1-013
  7440746
   193395
  7439885
   465736
   120581
  7440097
   143500
  7439910
 21609905
  7439932
    58899
   475207
  7439943
   108101
   569642
   121755
 12427382
    72333
   126987
    75274
    67663
    76062

-------
   Page No.
   04/18/90
   COMMON NAME
                                                                                                TABLE 9-3
                                                                                     ANALYTES SORTED BY  COMMON NAME
                                                                          USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                     REGULATORY NAME
                                                                                                                                    CLASS
                                                                                                                                                             CAS NUMBER
D
Methapyrilene
Methoxychlor
Methyl bromide \ Methane, bromo
Methyl chloride \ Methane, chloro
Methyl chloroform \ Ethane, 1,1,1-trichloro-
Methyl ethyl ketone \ MEK
Methyl iodide \ Methane, iodo
Methyl parathion \ Parathion-methyl  \ Metaphos
Methylene bromide \ Methane, dibromo
Methylsulfonic acid, methyl ester
Mevinphos \ Phosdrin
Mg
Mi rex \ Dechlorane
Mn
Mo
Monocrotophos \ Azodrin
Morpholine, 4-nitroso-
N,N-Dimethylformamide
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-Nitrosomethylphenylamine
Na
Nabam
Naled \ Dibrom
Naphthalene
Naphthalene, 2-chloro-
Naphthalene, 2-methyl
Nb
Nd
Nemazine \ 10H-Phenothiazine
Ni
Nitrate/nitrite
Nitrites
Nitrofen \ TDK
O&G
Os
P
PCNB \ Terraclor-\ Quintozene
PCP \ Phenol, pentachloro-
Parathion \ Parathion, ethyl
Pb
Pd
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Pentachlorodi benzofurans
Pentachloroethane
Pentamethylbenzene
Perchloroethylene \ Ethene, tetrachloro
Perylene
Phenacetin \ Phorazetim
1,2-Ethanediamine, N,N-dimethyl-N'-2pyridinyl-N'-(2-
Benzene, 1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene)bis[4-
Bromomethane
Chloromethane
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
2-Butanone
lodomethane
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl  0-(4-nitrophenyl)
Dibromomethane
Methyl methanesulfonate
Crotonic acid, 3-hydroxy-,  methyl ester,  dimethyl phos
Magnesium
1,3,4-Metheno-1H-cyclobuta[cd]pentalene,  1,1a,2,2,3,3a,
Manganese
Molybdenum
Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester, ester with  (E)-3-
N-Nitrosomorpholine
N,N-Di methylformaraide
Di-n-propylnitrosamine
N-Nitrosomethylphenylamine
Sodium
Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid,  -sodium salt
Phosphoric acid, 1,2-dibromo-2,2-dichloroethyl di
Naphthalene
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Niobium
Neodymium
Phenothiazine
Nickel
Nitrate/nitrite
Nitrites
Ether, 2,4-dichlorophenyl p-nitrophenyl-
Oil and grease
Osmium
Phosphorus (black, white, red, yellow, or violet)
Pentachloroni trobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-diethyl  0-(4-nitrophenyl)
Lead
Palladium
PentachIorodibenzo-p-dioxins
PentachIorodi benzofurans
Ethane, pentachloro-
PentamethyIbenzene
Tetrachloroethene
Perylene
Acetamide, N-(4-ethoxyphenyl>-
SV(B)
P(OH)
VOL
VOL
VOL
VOL
VOL
P(OP)
VOL
SV(N)
P(OP)
M
-------
Page Ho.
04/18/90
COMMON HAME
       ====
                           TABLE 9-3
                AHALYTES SORTED BY COHHOH HAHG
     USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST Of AHALYTES

REGULATORY NAME
                                                                  CLASS
                          CAS NUMBER
Phenanthrene
Phenol, 2,3,4,6-tetrachloro-
Phenol, 2,4,5-trichloro-
Phenol, 2,4,6-trichloro-
Phenol, 2,4-dichloro-
Phenol, 2,4-dimethyl-
Phenol, 2,4-djnitro
Phenol, 2,6-dichloro-
Phenol, 2-chloro
Phenol, 2-nitro-
Phorate \ Thimet
Phosacetin
Phosmet \ Imidan
Phosphamidon \ Dimecron
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0,8-triethyl ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-methyl ester
Piperidine, 1-Nitroso-
Pr
Pronamide \ Kerb
Propane, 1,2,3-trichloro-
Propane, 2,2'-oxybis[1-chloro-
Propionitrile \ Propanenitrile
Propylene dichloride \ Propane, 1,2-dichloro-
Pt
Pyridine
Re
Reactivity
Retort
Rh
Ru
S
Sb
Sc
Se
Si
Sm
Sn
Squalene
Sr
Sulfide
Sulfotepp \ Bladafum \ Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate
TEPP \ Phosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester
TOC \ Organic carbon, total
TVOA \ VOC \ Organic carbon, volatile
Ta
Tb
Te
Terbufos \ Counter
Phenanthrene
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2,6-Dichlorophenol
2-Chlorophenol
2-Nitrophenol
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-[(ethylthio)
Phosphoraraidothioic acid, acetamidoyl, 0,0-bis(p-
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-dimethyl ester, S-ester with
Phosphoric acid, dimethyl ester, ester with 2-chloro-N-
0,0,0-Triethylphosphorothioate
0,0-Diethyl S-ipethyl ester of phosphorodithioic acid
N-Nitrosopiperidine
Praseodymium
Benzamide, 3,5-dichloro-N-(1,1-dimethyl-2-propynyl)-
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether
Ethyl cyanide
1,2-Dichloropropane
Platinum
Pyridine
Rhenium
Reactivity
Oil and grease
Rhodium
Ruthenium
Sulfur
Antimony
Scandium
Selenium
Silicon
Samarium
Tin
Squalene
Strontium
Sulfide
Thiopyrophosphoric acid (C(HO)2P(S)]20),  tetraethyl
Tetraethylpyrophosphate
Total organic carbon
Total volatile organic carbon
Tantalum
Terbium
Tellurium
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl-S-«(1,1-dimethyl
SV(H)
SV(A)
SV(A>
SV(A)
SV(A)
SV(A)
SV(A)
SV(A)
SV(A)
SV(N)
P(OP)
PCOP)
P(OP)
PCOP)
P(OP)
P(OP)
SV(B)
M(C)
P(H)
VOL
SV(N)
VOL
VOL
H(C)
SV(B)
H(C)
MISC
HISC
M(C)
H(C)
H(A)
M(C)
M(C)
H(A)
H(A)
H(C)
M(C)
SV(N)
H(C)
HISC
P(OP)
P(OP)
HISC
HISC
H(C)
H(C)
H(C)
P(OP)
   85018
   58902
   95954
   88062
  120832
  105679
   51285
   87650
   95578
   88755
  298022
 4104147
  732116
13171216
  126681
 3288582
  100754
 7440100
23950585
   96184
  108601
  107120
   78875
 7440064
  110861
 7440155
   1-015
   1-016
 7440166
 7440188
 7704349
 7440360
 7440202
 7782492
 7440213
 7440199
 7440315
 7683649
 7440246
18496258
 3689245
  107493
   1-012
   1-001
 7440257
 7440279
13494809
13071799

-------
  Page No.
  04/18/90
  COMMON NAME
                                                                                               TABLE 9-3
                                                                                    ANALYTES SORTED BY COMMON NAME
                                                                          USEPA  INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST OF ANALYTES

                                                                     REGULATORY  NAME
                                                                 CLASS
                                                                                           CAS NUMBER
  Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
  Tetrachlorodi benzofurans
  Tetrachlorvinphos \ Gardona
  Th
  Thioacetamide
  Thiodan I
  Thiodan II
  Thiophenol \ Mercaptobenzene   ,
  Thioxanthone \ Thiaxanthone
  Thiram \ Thiuram \ Arasan
  Ti
  Tl
  Tin
  Total dissolved solids \ TDS
  Total solids
  Total suspended solids \ TSS
  Trichlorofon \ Dylox
  Tricresylphosphate \ TCP \ TOCP
  Trifluralin \ Treflan
^ Trimethylphosphate
i  Triphenylene
^ Tripropyleneglycol methyl ether
"" U
  V
  U
  Y
  Yb
  Zineb \ Dithane Z
  Zinophos \ Thionazin
  Ziram \ Cymate
  Zn
  Zr
  alpha-BHC
  alpha-Naphthylamine
  alpha-Picoline \ 2-Methylpyridine
  alpha-Terpineol
  beta-BHC
  delta-BHC
  n-C10
  n-d2
  n-C14
  n-C16
  n-C18
  n-C20
  n-C22
  n-C24
   n-C26
   n-C28
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Tetrachlorodibenzofurans
Phosphoric acid,  2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl)
Thorium
Ethanethioami'de
Endosulfan-I
Endosulfan-II
Benzenethiol
Thioxanthe-9-one
Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide,  tetramethyl
Titanium
Thallium
Thulium
Residue, filterable
Residue, total
Residue, non-filterable
Phosphoric acid,  (2,2,2-trichloro-1-hydroxyethyl)-,
Phosphoric acid,  tri-o-tolyl ester
p-Toluidine, alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-
Phosphoric acid,  trimethyl ester
Triphenylene
Tripropyleneglycol methyl ether
Uranium
Vanadium
Tungsten
Yttrium
Ytterbium
Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid,-zinc salt
0,0-Diethyl-0-(2-pyrazinyl)phosphorothioate
Zinc bis(dimethyldithiocarbamato)-
Zinc
Zirconium
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1-alpha, 2-alpha,
1-Naphthylamine
2-Picoline
alpha-Terpineol
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1-alpha, 2-beta,
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1-alpha, 2-alpha,
n-Decane
n-Dodecane
n-Tetradecane
n-Hexadecane
n-Octadecane
n-Eicosane
n-Docosane
n-Tetracosane
n-Hexacosane
n-Octacosane
DIOXINS
DIOXINS
P(OP)
M(C)
SV(N)
P(OH)
P(OH)
SV(B)
SV(B)
P(C)
M(C)
M(C)
M(C)
MISC
MISC
MISC
P(OP-)
P(OP)
P(OH)
P(OP)
SV(N)
SV(N)
M(C)
M(C)
M(C)
M(C)
M(C)
P(C)
P(OP)
P(C)
M(C)
M(C)
P(OH)
SV(B)
VOL
SV(N)
P(OH)
P(OH)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
SV(N)
   1-331
   1-332
  961115
 7440291
   62555
  959988
33213659
  108985
  492228
  137268
 7440326
 7440280
 7440304
   1-010
   1-008
   1-009
   52686
   78308
 1582098
  512561
  217594
20324338
 7440611
 7440622
 7440337
 7440655
 7440644
12122677
  297972
  137304
 7440666
 7440677
  319846
  134327
  109068
   98555
  319857
  319868
  124185
  112403
  629594
  544763
  593453
  112958
  629970
  646311
  630013
  630024

-------
Page Ho.
04/18/90
10
COHHOH HAHE
                                                                                 TABLE 9-3
                                                                       AHALYTES SORTED BY COHHOH HAKE
                                                            USEPA INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION LIST Of AHALYTES

                                                       REGULATORY HAHE
                                                                                                                                    CLASS
                                                                                                                                                              CAS NUMBER
n-C30
o + p xytene
o,p'-DDT
o-Anisidine
o-Totuidine
p-Chloro-i-cresol \ Phenol, 4-chloro-3-methyl-
p-Chloroaniline
p-Djmethylaminoazobenzene
p-Dioxane \ 1,4-Diethyleneoxide
p-IsopropyItoluene
p-Nitropnenol \ Phenol, 4-nitro-
pH
                                                       n-Triacontane
                                                       o + p xylene
                                                       o,p'-DDT
                                                       o-Anisjdine
                                                       o-Toluidine
                                                       4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
                                                       Benzenamjne,  4-chloro-
                                                       Benzenamine,  M,N-diniethyl-4-(pehnylazo)-
                                                       1,4-Dioxane
                                                       p-Cymene
                                                       4-Nitrophenol
                                                       Hydrogen  ion
SV(H)
VOL
P(OH)
SV(B)
SV(B)
SV(A)
SV(B)
SV(B)
VOL
SV(H)
SV(A)
H(C)
638686
 1-952
789026
 90040
 95534
 59507
106478
 60117
123911
 99876
100027
 1-006

-------
                                  TABLE 9-4
                     ITD LIST OF INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS
      TCL-LISTED INORGANICS

          Antimony
          Arsenic
          Aluminum
          Barium
          Beryllium
          Boron
          Cadmium
          Calcium
          Chromium
          Cobalt.
          Copper
          Iron
          Lead
          Magnesium
          Manganese
          Mercury
          Molybdenum
          Nickel
          Selenium
          Silver
          Sodium
          Thallium
          . Tin
          Titanium
          Vanadium
          Yttrium
          Zinc
SEMI-QUANTITATIVE SCREEN METALS
 Bismuth
 Cerium
 Dysprosium
 Erbium
 Europium
 Gadolinium
 Gallium
 Germanium
 Gold
 Hafnium
 Holminum
 Indium
 Iodine
 Iridium
 Lanthanum
 Lithium
 Lutetium
 Neodymium
 Niobium
 Osmium
 Palladium
Phosphorus
Platinum
Potassium
Pras eodymium
Rhenium
Rhodium
Ruthenium
Samarium
Scandium
Silicon
Strontium
Sulfur
Tantalum
Tellurium
Terbium
Thorium
Thulium
Tungsten
Uranium
Ytterbium
Zirconium
891003T
002.0.0
                                      9-33

-------
                                                TABLE 9-5
                                        USEPA TARGET COMPOUND  LIST
 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
 1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROGTHANE
 1,1,2-TRICHLORO£THANE
 1,1-DICHLOROETHANE
 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE
 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
 1,2-DICHLOROETHAHE
 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
 2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL
 2,4,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL
 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
 2,4-DIHETHYLPHENOL
 2,4-DIHITROPHENOL
 2,4-DINlTROTOLUEHE
 2,6-DIHITROTOLUEHE
 2-BUTAHONE (HEK)
 2-CHLOROETHYLVINYLETHER
 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE
 2-CHLQROPHENOL
 2-HEXANONE
 2-HETHYLNAPHTHALENE
 2-NITROANILINE
 2-HITROPHENOL
 3,3'-DICHLOROBENZIDINE
 3-HITROAHILIHE
 4,4-DDO
 4,4-DOE
 4,4-DDT
 4.6-D1HITRO-2-HETHYLPHENOL
 4-BROHOPHEHYL-PHEMYLETHER
 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
 4-CHtO«OAHILIHE
 4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHEHYLETHER
 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
 4-HITRCAHILIHE
 4-MITROPHENOL
 ACEHAPHTHENE
ACENAPHTHYLENE
ACETONE
ALDRIH
ALPHA-BKC
ALPKA-CHLORDANE
ALUH1NUH
ANTHRACENE
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
 BARIUM
BENZENE
BENZO(A)AKTHRACENE
BENZO(A)PYRENE
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
BENZO
-------
                                                TABLE 9--6
                                      THE USEPA PRIORITV'POLLUTANTS
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
1,1-DICHLOROETHANE
1,1-DICHLOROETHENE
1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
1,4-01CHLOROBENZENE
2,3,7,8-TCDO
2,4,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL
2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
2,4-DINITROPHENOL
2,4-DINITROTOLUENE
2,6-DINITROTOLUENE
2-CHLOROETHYLVINYLETHER
2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE
2-CHLOROPHENOL
2-NITROPHENOL
2-PROPENAL
2-PROPENENITRILE
3,3'-DICHLOROBENZIDINE
4,4-DDD
4,4-DDE
4,4-DDT
4,6-OINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOL
4-BROMOPHENYL-PHENYLETHER
4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHENYLETHER
4-NITROPHENOL
ACENAPHTHENE
ACENAPHTHYLENE
ALDRIN
ALPHA-BHC
ANTHRACENE
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
ASBESTOS
BENZENE
BENZIDINE
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
BENZO(A)PYRENE
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
BENZO(G,H,I)PERYLENE
BENZOdOFLUORANTHENE
BERYLLIUM
BETA-BHC
BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE
BISC2-CHLOROETHYDETHER
BIS<2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE
BROMOCHLOROMETHANE
BROMOFORM
BROMOMETHANE
BUTYL BENZYL  PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLORDANE
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROETHANE
CHLOROFORM
 CHLOROMETHANE
 CHROMIUM
 CHRYSENE
 COPPER
 CYANIDE
 DELTA-BHC
 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE
 DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
 DIBENZ(A,H ^ANTHRACENE
 01BROMOOICHLOROMETHANE
 DIELDRIN
 DIETHYLPHTHALATE
 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
 ENDOSULFAN I
 ENDOSULFAN II
 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE
 ENDRIN
 ENDRIN ALDEHYDE
 ETHYLBENZENE
 FLUORANTHENE
 FLUORENE
 GAMMA-BHC
 HEPTACHLOR
 HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE
 HEXACHLOROBENZENE
 HEXACHLOR08UTADIENE
 HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE
 HEXACHLOROETHANE
 INDENO(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE
 ISOPHORONE
 LEAD
 MERCURY
 METHYLENE CHLORIDE
 N-NITROSODI-N-PROPYLAMINE
 N-NITROSOOIMETHYLAMINE
 N-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE (1)
 NAPHTHALENE
 NICKEL
 NITROBENZENE
 P-CHLORO-M-CRESOL
 PCB-1016
 PCB-1221
 PCB-1232
 PCS-1242
 PCS-1248
 PCB-1254
 PCS-1260
 PENTACHLOROPHENOL
 PHENANTHRENE   •
 PHENOL
 PYRENE
 SELENIUM
 SILVER
 TCDD
 TETRACHLOROETHENE
 THALLIUM
 TOLUENE
 TOXAPHENE
 TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
 TRANS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
ZINC
                                                    Q-35

-------
 Page No.
 05/22/90
                                        TABLE 9-7
                                  RCRA LISTED COMPOUNDS
 COMPOUND
                                                                         CAS NUMBER
 1,1  Dimethylhydrazine
 1,1'-Biphenyl-4,4'-di8mine, 3,3'-dichloro
 1,1-Dichloroethylene \ Vinytidine chloride
 1,2  Dimethylhydrazine
 1,2  Propylenimene
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic  acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl)ester
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic  acid, butyl phenylmethyl ester
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic  acid, diethyl ester
 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic  acid, dioctyl ester \ Dioctyl ph
 1,3  Dichloropropene
 1,3  Propane sultone
 1,3-Benzenediol
 1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(2-propenyl)-
 1,3-Butadiene, 1,1,2,3,4,4-hexachloro-
 1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol
 1,3-Dfchloropropane
 1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
 1,4-Naphthalenedione
 l-(o-Chlorophenyl) thoiurea
 1-Acetyl-2-thiourea
 1-Bromo-4-phenoxybenzene \ Benzene, 1-bromo-4-phenoxy-
 1-Butenamine, H-butyl-N-nitroso
 1-Chloro 2,3-epoxpropane
 1-Propanol,  2-methyl-
 1-Propene,  1,1,2,3,3,3-hexachloro-
 1-Propene,  1,3-dichloro-, (E>-
 1-Propene,  1,3-dichloro-, (Z)-
 2,4,5-T \ Weedone \  Acetic acid, 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy-
 2,4,5-TP \  Silvex
 2,4-D \ Acetic acid,  (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-
 2,4-Diaminotoluene \ Toluene, 2,4-diamino-
 2,6-Toluenediaraine
 2-Acetylaminofluorene
 2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro-, (E)-
 2-Cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
 2-Hethyl-4,6-dinitrophenol \ DNOC \ 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
 2-Hethylphenol \ o-Cresylic acid \ Phenol, 2-methyl-
 2-Naphthylamine
 2-Nitropropane
 2-Propenoic  acid, 2-methyl, methyl ester
 2-Propenoic  acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester
 2-methyllactonitrile
 3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine
 3,3-Dimethylbenzdine
3,4 Dihydroxy-alpha-(methylamino)methyl benzyl alcohol
3,4-Tolucnediaroine
3-Chloropropionitrile
 3-Hethylcholanthrene
3-Methylphenol \ Phenol, 3-methyl-
4,4'-DDD/Benzene, 1,1'-(2,2-dichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro-
 4,4'-DDE/Benzene, 1,1'-(dichloroethenlyidine)bis[4-chloro
4,4'-DDT/Benzene, 1,1'-<2,2,2-trichloroethylidene)bis[4-chloro
4-Am!nobiphenyl
   92875
   57147
   91941
   75354
  540738
   75558
  117817
   85687
   84662
  117840
  542756
 1120714
  108463
   94597
   87683
   96231
  142289
  764410
  130154
 5344821
  591082
  101553
  924163
  106898
   78831
 1888717
10061026
10061015
   93765
   93721
   94757
   95807
  823405
   53963
  110576
  131895
  534521
   95487
   91598
   79469
   80626
   97632
   75865
  119904
  119937
  329657
  496720
  542767
   56495
  108394
•   72548
   72559
   50293
   92671
                                               9-36

-------
Page No.
05/22/90
COMPOUND
                                 .TABLE9-7 (CONTINUED)
                                  RCRA LISTED COMPOUNDS
                                                                         CAS NUMBER
4-Aminopyridine
4-Methylphenol \ Phenol,  4-methyl-
4-Nitroquinoline-1-oxide
5-(Aminomethyl)-3-isoxazolol
7H-Dibenzo(c,g)carbazole
9,10-Dimethyl-1,2-Benzanthracene
Acetonitrile
 Acetophenone
 Acetyl chloride
 Acrolein
 AeryIamide
 Acrylonitrile
 Aflatoxins
 Aldicarb
 Aldrin
 Ally! alcohol
 Allyl chloride  \ 3-Chloropropene
 Alpha-Naphthylthiourea
 Aluminum  phosphide
 Amitrole
 Anmonium  vanadate
 Aniline
 Antimony
 Antimony  and compounds,  N.O.S.
 Arami te
  Aroclor 1016
  Aroclor 1221
  Aroclor 1232
  Aroclor 1242
  Aroclor 1248
  Aroclor 1254
  Aroclor 1260
  Arsenic
  Arsenic Acid
  Arsenic pentoxide
  Arsenic  trioxide
,  Auramine
  Barium
  Barium cyanide
  Benz
-------
 Page No.
 05/23/90
 COMPOUND
                                  TABLE 9-7 (CONTINUED)
                                  RCRA LISTED COMPOUNDS
                                                                         CAS NUMBER
 Benzene,  2-methyl-1,3-dinitro-
 Benzene,  chloro-
 Benzene,  methyl
 Benzene,  nitro-
 Benzene,  pentachloro-
 Benzo(a)pyrene
 Benzo(j)fluoranthene
 Bcnzonearsonic acid
 Benzotr{chloride
 Benzyl chloride
 Beryllium
 Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
 Bis(chloromethyl)ether
 Bromoacetone
 Bromoform \ Methane, tribromo-
 Brucine
 Cacodylic acid
 Cadmium
 Calcium chromate
 Calcium cyanide
 Camphechlor
 Carbolic  acid
 Carbon disulfide
 Carbon oxyfluoride
 Carbon tetrachloride \ Methane, tetrachloro-
 Chlomaphazine
 Chloral
 Chlorambucil
 Chlordane
 Chlorinated benzenes (N.O.S.)
 Chlorinated ethane N.O.S.
 Chlorinated fluorocarbons N.O.S.
 Chlorinated naphthalene N.O.S.
 Chlorinated phenol N.O.S.
 Chlorine  cyanide
 ChIoroacetaIdehyde
 Chloroalkyl ethers, N.O.S.
 Chlorobenzilate \ Ethyl-4,4'-dichlorobenzilate
 Chlorotnethyl methyl ether     '
 Chloroprene \ 1,3-Butadiene, 2-chloro
 Chromium
 Chrysene
 Citrus red No. 2
 Coal tars
 Copper cyanide
 Creosote
 Cresols (Cresylic acid)
 CrotonaIdehyde \ Crotylaldehyde
 Cyanides  (soluble salts and complexes)
 Cyanogen
 Cyanogen bromide
 Cycasin
 Cygon \ Dimethoate
DMBP \ Dinoseb \ 2-sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
  606202
  108907
  108883
   98953
  608935
   50328
  205823
   98055
   98077
  100447
 7440417
39638329
  542881
  598312
   75252
  357573
   75605
 7440439
13765190
  592018
 8001352
  108952
   75150
  353504
   56235
  494031
   75876
  305033
   57749
  506774
  107200

  510156
  107302
  126998
 7440473
  218019
 6358538
 8005452
  544923
 8001589
 1319773
 4170303
   57125
  460195
  506683
14901087
   60515
   88857
                                            9-38

-------
Page No.
05/22/90
                                  TABLE 9-7 (CONTINUED)
                                  RCRA LISTED COMPOUNDS
COMPOUND
                                                                         CAS  NUMBER
Daunomycin
Di-n-butyl phthalate \ Dibutyl phthalate
Diallate \ Avadex
Dibenz{a,h)acridine
D i benz[a,h]anthracene
Dibenzo(a,e)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h)pyrene        ,
D i benzo(a,i)pyrene
Dibromochloropropane \ DBCP
Dichlorobenzene, N.O.S.
Dichlorodiffuoromethane
Dichloroethyl ether
Dichloroethylene N.O.S.
Dichloromethane \ Methane, dichloro-
Dichlorophenylarsine
Dichloropropane,N.O.S.
Dichloropropanol,N.O.S.
Dichloropropene N.O.S.
Dieldrin
Diethyl-p-nitro phenyl phosphate
Diethylarsine
Diethytstilbesterol
Dihydrosafrole
Diisopropylfluorophosphate (DFP)
Dimethyl phthalate
Dimethyl sulfate
Dimethylcarbamoyl chloride
Dimethylnitrosamine \ Methamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso-
Dinex \ DN-111 \ 2-Cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
Dinitrobenzene N.O.S.
Dioxin \ TCDD \ 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Disulfoton
Dithiobiuret
Dubenz(a)acridine
Endosulfan
Endothal
Endrin
Endrine ketone
Erythritol anhydride \ 2,2'-Bioxirane
Ethanamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso-
Ethanamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso
Ethane, 1,1'-tmethylenebis(oxy)]bis[2-chloro-
Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloro-
Ethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloro
Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro
Ethane/ hexachloro       t
Ethene, (2-chloroethoxy)
Ethene, 1,2-dichloro-, (E)-
Ethene, chloro
Ethene, trichloro \ Trichloroethylene
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylene dibromide \ EDB \ Ethane, 1,2-dibromo-
Ethylene dichloride \ EDC \ Ethane, 1,2-dichloro-
Ethylene glycol monoethyl ether
20830813
   84742
 2303164
  226368
   53703
  192654
  189640
  189559
   96128
25321226
   75718
  111444
25323302
   75092
  696286
26638197
26545733
26952238
   60571
  311455
  692422
   56531
   94586
   55914
  131113
   77781
   79447
   62759
  131895
25154545
 1746016
  298044
  541537
  224420
  115297
  145733
   72208
53494705
 1464535
   55185
10595956
  111911
  630206
   79345
   79005
   67721
  110758
  156605
   75014
   79016
   62500
  106934
  107062
  110805
                                          9-39

-------
Page Mo.
05/22/90
COMPOUND
                                  TABLE 9-7 (CONTINUED)
                                  RCRA LISTED COMPOUNDS
                                                                        CAS NUMBER
Ethylene oxide
Ethylenebfsdithiocarbamic acid, salts and esters
Ethyleneimine
Ethylenethiourea
Ethylidene chloride \ Ethane, 1,1-dichloro-
Farcphur \ Famophos
Fluoranthene
Fluorine
Fluoroacetsmide
Fluoroacetic acid, sodium salt
Fluorotrichloromethane \ Methane, trichlorofluoro-
Formaldehyde
Glycidylaldehyde
HCB \ Benzene, hexachloro-
Halomethane N.O.S.
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene \ HCP
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Hexachlorodibenzofurans
HexachIorophene
Hexaethyltetraphosphate
Hydrazine
Hydrazinc, 1,2-diphenyl
Hydrogen cyanide
Hydrogen fluoride
Hydrogen sulfide
Indenod ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Iron dextran
Isodrin (Stereoisomer of Aldrin)
Isosafrole
Kepone
Lasiocarpine
Lead
Lead acetate
Lead phosphate
Lead subacetate
Lindane
Lindane \ gamma-BHC  \ Hexachlorocyclohexane  (gamma)
HNNG
Halec hydrazide
Maleic anhydride
Halononitrile
Helphalan
Mercury
Mercury fulminate
Hethacrylonitri le
Methane,  trichloro-  \ Trichlororoethane
Hethapyrilene
Hethomyl
Hethoxychlor
Methyl bromide \ Methane,  bromo
Methyl chloride \ Methane,  chloro
  75218
 111546
 151564
  96457
  75343
  52857
 206440
7782414
 640197
  62748
  75694
  50000
 765344
 118741

  76448
1024573
1024573
  77474
   70304
  757584
  302012
  122667
   74908
 7664393
 7783064
  193395
 9004664
  465736
  120581
  143500
  303344
 7439921
  301042
 7446277
 1335326
   58899
   58899
   70257
  123331
  108316
  109773
  148823
 7439976
  628864
  126987
   67663
   91805
16752775
   72435
   74839
   74873
                                               9-40

-------
Page Ho.
05/22/90
                                  TABLE 9-7 (CONTINUED)
                                  RCRA LISTED COMPOUNDS
COMPOUND
                                                                         CAS NUMBER
Methyl chloroform \ Ethane, 1,1,1-trichloro-
Methyl ethyl ketone \ MEK
Methyl ethyl ketone peroxide
Methyl hydrazine
Methyl iodide \ Methane, iodo
.Methyl isocyanate
Methyl parathion
Methyl parathion \ Parathion-methyl \ Metaphos
Methylchlorocarbonate
Methylene bromide \ Methane, dibromo
Methylsulfonic acid, methyl ester
MethylthiouraciI
Mitomycin C
Morpholine, 4-nitroso-
Mustard Gas
N,N-Diethylhydrazine
N-Nitroso-N-ethyl urea
N-Nitroso-N-methylurea
N-Nitroso-N-methylurethane
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine                     /-
N-Nitrosodiethanolamine
N-Nitrosomethylvinylamine
N-Nitrosonornicotine
N-Nitrososarcosi ne
Nabam
Naphthalene
Naphthalene, 2-chloro-
Nickel
Nickel carbonyl
Nickel cyanide
Nicotine and salts
Nitric oxide
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrogen mustard N-oxide and hydrochloride salt
Nitrogen mustard and hydrochloride salt
Nitroglycerin
Nitrosamine, N.O.S.
Nitrosopyrrolidine
Octamethylpyrophosphoramide
Osmium tetroxide
PCNB \ Terraclor \ Quintozene
PCP \ Phenol, pentachloro-
Paraldehyde
Parathion \ Parathion, ethyl
Parathon
PentachIorethane
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Pentachlorodibenzofurans
PentachIoroethane
Perchloroethylene \ Ethene, tetrachloro
Phenacetin \ Phorazetim
Phenol, 2,3,4,6-tetrachloro-
Phenol, 2,4,5-trichloro-
Phenol, 2,4,6-trichloro-
   71556
   78933
 1338234
   60334
   74884
  624839
  298000
  298000
   79221
   74953
   66273
   56042
   50077
   59892
  505602
 1615801
  759739
  684935
  615532
  621647
 1116547
 4549400
16543558
13256229
  142596
   91203
   91587
 7440020
13463393
  557197
   54115
10102439
10102440
  126852
   51752
   55630
35576911
  930552
  152169
20816120'
   82688
   87865
  123637
   56382
   56362
   76017
   76017
  127184
   62442
   58902
   95954
   88062
                                           9-41

-------
Page Ho.
05/22/90
COMPOUND
                                  TABLE 9-7 (CONTINUED)
                                  RCRA LISTED  COMPOUNDS
                                                                        CAS NUMBER
Phenol, 2,4-dichloro-
Phenol, 2,4-dimethyl-
Phenol, 2,4-dinitro
Phenol, 2,6-dichloro-
Phenol, 2-chloro
Phenylenediamine
Phenylmercury acetate
Phenylthiourea
Phorate \ Thimet
Phosgene
Phosphine
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0,8-triethyl ester
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S-methyl ester
Phthalic acid esters, N.O.S.
Phthalic anhydride
Piperidine, 1-Nitroso-
Potassiura cyanide
Potassium silver cyanide
Pronamide \ Kerb
Propane, 1,2,3-trichloro-
Propane, 2,2'-oxybis[1-chloro-
Propargyl alcohol
Propionitrile \ Propanenitrile
Propylene dichloride \ Propane, 1,2-dichloro-
Propylthiouracil
Pyridine
Pyridine
Reserpinen
Saccharin and salts
Selenium
Selenium dioxide
Selenium sulfide
Selenourea
Si Ivor
Silver cyanide
Sodium cyanide
Streptozotocin
Strontium sulfide
Strychnine and salts
Sulfotepp \ Bladafum \ Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate
TEPP \ Phosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Tetrachlorodibenzofurans
Tetrachloroethane N.O.S.
Tetraethyl lead
Tetranitromethane
Thallium
Thallium (1) sulfate
Thallium and compounds N.O.S.
Thallium selenite
Thallium<1) nitrate
Thallium(1)acetate
Thai liund )carbonate
Thallium(1)chloride
  120832
  105679.
   51285
   87650
   95578
25265763
   62384
  103855
  298022
   75445
 7803512
  126681
 3288582

   85449
  100754
  151508
  506616
23950585
   96184
  108601
  107197
  107120
   78875
   51525
  110861
  110861
   50555
   81072
 7782492
 7783008
 7446346
  630104
 7440224
  506649
  143339
18883664
 1314961
   57249
 3689245
  107493
25322207
   78002
  509148
 7440280
10031591
 7440280
12039520
10102451
  563688
 6533739
 7791120
                                            9-42

-------
Page Ho.
05/22/90
COMPOUND
                                  TABLE 9-7 (CONTINUED)
                                  RCRA LISTED COMPOUNDS
                                                                         CAS NUMBER
Thioacetamide
Thiodan I
Thiodan II
Thiofanox
Thiophenol
Thiophenol \ Mercaptobenzene
Thi osemicarbazide
Th i ourea
Thiram \ Thiuram \ Arasan
Thoimethanol
Toluene diisocyanate
Toluenediamine
Trichloromethanethiol
Trichloropropane, N.O.S.
Tris(1-aziridinyl)phosphine sulfide
Tris(2,3-dibromoprppyl)phosphate
Trypan blue
Undecamethlyenediamine,N,N-bis(2-chlorobenzyl)-dihydrochloride
Uracil mustard
Vanadium pentoxide
Vinyl Chloride
Warfarin
Zinc cyanide
Zinc phosphide
Zinophos \ Thionazin
alpha.alpha-Dimethylphenethylamine
alpha-Naphthylamine
alpha-Picoline  \ 2-Hethylpyridine
n-Propylamine
p-Benzoquinone
p-Chloro-ra-cresol \ Phenol, 4-chloro-3-methyl-
p-Chloroaniline
p-D i met hyIam i noa zobenzene
p-Dioxane \ 1,4-Diethyleneoxide
p-Nitrophenol \ Phenol, 4-nitro-
p-Toluidine
q-Toluidine hydrochloride
sym-Trinitrobenzene
   62555
  959988
33213659
39196184
  108985
  108985
   79196
   62566
  137268
   74931
  584849
25376458
   75707

   52244
  126727
   72571
 2056259
   66751
 1314621
   75014
   81812
  557211
 1314847
  297972
  122098
  134327
  109068
  107108
  106514
   59507
  106478
   60117
  123911
  100027
  106490
  636215
   99354
                                            9-43

-------
 Page Ho.
 05/18/90
 COMPOUND
                                                   TABLE 9-8
                                             SARA LISTED COMPOUNDS
                                     CAS NUMBER
                                                                 COMPOUND
                                                                                                     CAS NUMBER
**  PRIORITY GROUP 1
 BENZODICHLOROGENZIDINE               91941
 BENZIDIHE                           92875
 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE                  107062
 TOLUENE                             108883
 PHENOL                              108952
 BISC2-CHLOROETHYDETHER             111444
 2,4-OIHITROTOLUENE                  121142
 BHC-ALPHA,GAMHA,BETA,DELTA          319846
 BISCCHLOROHETHYDETHER              542881
 N-HITROSODI-N-PROPYLAMINE           621647
 MERCURY                             7439976
 ZINC                                7440666
 SELENIUM                            7782492
**  PRIORITY GROUP 3
 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
 CHLOROMETHANE
 OXIRANE
 BROMOFORM
 1,1-DICHLOROTHANE
 DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
 2,4,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL
 NAPTHALENE
 NITROBENZENE
 ETHYLBENZENE
 ACROLEIN
 ACRYLONITRILE
 CHLOROBENZENE
 HEXACHLOROBENZENE
 1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
 CHLORODIBROHOMETHANE
 1,2 TRANS-DICHLOROETHENE
 INDENO(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE
 2,6 DINITROTOLUENE
 TOTAL XYLENES
 ENDRIN ALDEHYDE/ENDRIN
 SILVER
 COPPER
 AMMONIA
 TOXAPHENE

**  PRIORITY GROUP 4
 2,4-DINTROPHENOL
 P-CHLORO-M-CRESOL
 ANITINE
 BENZOIC ACID
 HEXACHLOROETHANE
 BROMOMETHANE
 CARBONDISULFIDE
 FLUOROTRICHLOROMETHANE
 DICHLORODIFLUOROMETHANE
 2-BUTANONE
 DIETHYL PHTHALATE
 PHENANTHRENE
 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE
 PHENOL,2-METHYL
 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
 2-PENTANONE, 4-METHYL
 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
 1,4-DIOXANE
 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
 FLUORANTHENE
 4.6-DINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOL
 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
 THALLIUM
71556
74873
75218
75252
75343
84742
88062
91203
98953
100414
107028
107131
108907
118741
122667
124481
156606
193395
606203
1330207
7221934
7440224
7440508
7664417
8001352
51285
59507
62533
65850
67721
74839
75150
75694
75718
78933
84662
85018
87683
95487
95501
105679
108101
120821
120832
123911
131113
206440
534521
541731
7440280
                                                      Q-ii

-------
                                  SECTION 10

                   DESCRIPTION OF AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
9.89.107C
0013.0.0

-------
SECTION 10 - DESCRIPTION OF AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS.  Various studies have
documented the fate of contaminants in the most common conventional biological
treatment processes.  Those processes include aerated lagoons, activated sludge,
trickling filters, rotating biological contactors (RBCs),  and powdered activated
carbon treatment (PACT) facilities.  Section 10 presents a description of each
of the above listed treatment processes.
891003B-mll
14.

-------
                        BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
The fate of contaminants has been studied in the most common conventional
biological treatment processes, including aerated lagoons, activated sludge
trickling filters, rotating biological contactors (RBCs), and powdered activat-
ed carbon treatment (PACT) facilities.  Each treatment process and its use and
performance characteristics is discussed in the following sections.


AERATED LAGOON

Aerated lagoons are completely mixed biological reactors without biomass
recycle.  They can be large multicellular basins or individual basins that are
mixed and aerated using surface aerators (either fixed or floating).  Good
removal of soluble organic matter can be achieved with the proper mix of
retention time and aeration.  A biomass removal step must follow the aerated
lagoon process before discharge to the receiving water.  This is often accom-
plished in a large quiescent pond or in a section of the aerated lagoon isolat-
ed by baffles or dikes.  If the lagoon is used as a pretreatment device, the
biomass is carried with the liquid to. subsequent unit processes.  The primary
purpose of the operation is to remove soluble organic matter by conversion to
biological mass.  The main differences between it and the activated sludge
system is that the microorganisms in the lagoon are grown in the dispersed
state rather than as a flocculant mass, and biomass is not recycled from the
sedimentation step to the aeration step.

The performance of aerated lagoons in removing biodegradable organic compounds
depends on several parameters, including detention time, temperature, and the
nature of waste.  Aerated lagoons generally provide a high degree of BOD
reduction.  In general, problems with aerated lagoons are excessive algae
growth, offensive odors if sulfates are present and dissolved oxygen is de-
pressed, and seasonal variations in effluent quality.  Aerated lagoons can
handle considerable variations in organic and hydraulic  loading if sized
properly, and are less vulnerable to process upsets than most biological
wastewater treatment methods.
ACTIVATED SLUDGE                                   .   .

The activated sludge system  is a biological treatment process including a mixed
suspension of aerobic  and  facultative microorganisms, a settling basin for
separation of the biomass, and a biomass recirculation system.

The microorganisms oxidize soluble organics and agglomerate colloidal and
particulate solids in  the  presence of dissolved molecular oxygen.  The mixture
of microorganisms, agglomerated particles, and wastewater (referred to as mixed
liquor)  is aerated in  a  basin.  The aeration step  is  followed by sedimentation
to separate biological solids from the treated wastewater.  A major portion of
these biological solids  are  removed .by sedimentation  and recycled to the
aeration basins to be  recombined with the  incoming wastewater.  The excess
biological solids  (i.e., waste sludge) must be disposed of by thickening,
 7.88.93
 0262.0.0
10-1

-------
pretreatment, dewatering, or direct disposal (e.g., land-spreading, landfil-
ling, and incineration.)

Activated sludge is the most widely used biological wastewater treatment
process.  The effectiveness of this process is dependent on several design and
operation variables such as organic loading, sludge retention time, mixed
liquor suspended solids concentration, hydraulic detention time, and oxygen
supply.  In addition to the removal of dissolved organics by biosorption, the
biomass can also remove suspended and colloidal matter.  The suspended matter
is removed by enmeshment in the biological floe, and the colloidal matter is
removed by physiochemical adsorption to the biological floe.  VOCs may be
air-stripped to a certain extent during the aeration process, and metals are
partially removed and accumulate in the sludge.


TRICKLING FILTER

A trickling filter is a biological waste treatment process in which a microbial
population adheres to a fixed medium and is used to biodegrade the organic
components of a wastewater.  The physical unit consists of a suitable structure
packed with an inert medium (e.g., rock, wood, or plastic) on which a biologi-
cal mass is grown.  The wastewater is distributed over the upper surface of the
medium.  As it flows through the medium, which is covered with biological
slime, both dissolved and suspended organic matter are removed by adsorption.
The adsorbed matter is oxidized by the organisms in'the slime during their
metabolic processes.  Air flows through the filter by convection or through the
use of blowers, thereby providing the oxygen necessary to maintain aerobic
conditions.  Recycling a. large portion of the flow is necessary to attain high
BOD removals.  A wide range of effluent quality can be expected, depending on
the design and operating conditions.  Many modifications of the traditional
trickling filter system are available, but all rely on a fixed media with an
attached biological growth to perform the treatment.


ROTATING BIOLOGICAL CONTACTOR

RBCs provide a fixed-film biological treatment method for the removal of BOD
from wastewaters.  The most common types consist of corrugated plastic discs
mounted on horizontal shafts to which a biological mass attaches.  The medium
slowly rotates in the wastewater with 40 to 50 percent of its surface immersed.
During rotation, the medium picks up a thin layer of wastewater (when sub-
merged), which then absorbs oxygen when exposed to the atmosphere.  The biolog-
ical mass growing on the medium surface adsorbs, coagulates, and biodegrades
the organic pollutants from the wastewater.  The excess microorganisms continu-
ously slough from the disc because of the shearing forces created by the
rotation of the discs in the wastewater.  This rotation also mixes the waste-
water, keeping the sloughed solids in suspension until they are removed in a
final clarifier.
7.88.93
0263.0.0
10-2

-------
POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT

PACT is the addition of powdered activated carbon to a biological process
(usually activated sludge).  The powdered activated carbon is added to the
aeration tank of the activated sludge system.  Depending on waste characteris-
tics, mixed liquor carbon levels in the tank will range from approximately
1,000 mg/£ to as high as 10,000 mg/Jl.  After aeration, the solids are separated
in the final clarifier and a portion of the solids are recycled to meet the
requirements of the activated sludge system (Meidl and Wilhelmi, 1986).

Performance of the PACT process generally depends on the amount of carbon
carried in the aeration tank and the solids retention time in the system.  The
PACT process is able to effect greater removals of conventional and
nonconventional organics than the activated sludge process (Grieves, et al.,
1978; Hutton and Temple, 1979).
7.88.93
0264.0.0
10-3

-------
                                  REFERENCES

Greives, L. et al.  "Powdered Carbon Enhancement Versus Granular Carbon
     Adsorption for Oil Refinery Wastewater Treatment"; 51st Annual Conference;
     WPCF; Anaheim, California; October 1978.

Hutton, D. and S. Temple.  "Priority Pollutant Removal:  Comparison of DuPont
     PACT Process and Activated Sludge"; 52nd Annual Conference, WPCF; Houston,
     Texas; October 1979.
900409-mil
Page 3
10-4

-------
                                  SECTION 11

             INFORMATION FOR EVALUATING PRETREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
9.89.107C
0014.0.0

-------
SECTION 11 - INFORMATION FOR EVALUATING PRETREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES.

Prior to discharge of a CERCIA wastestream to a POTW, the stream may require
pretreatment.  Pretreatment systems are commonly composed of a number of unit
operations, depending on the types of contaminants and concentrations in a
wastestream.  Section 11 provides information on 12 separate unit operations
that may be used to construct a pretreatment system.  A description of each unit
operation  (how the process works, equipment types available,  advantages and
limitations, design criteria, etc.) and a detailed evaluation of the process
(effectiveness, implementability, costs, etc.) are included.   The section is
structured to contain information in the same format as a CERCLA Feasibility
Study.

The user of the technology manual may use Section 11 in two ways:

     o     To help make screening decisions while assembling the pretreatment
           train.

     o     To provide information that can be used in detailed evaluation of the
           "discharge to POTW" alternative.
891003B-mll
15.

-------
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS


Section	Title	  -	Page No.

SECTION 11  INFORMATION FOR EVALUATING PRETREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES  .  .     11-1

 11-1       OIL AND GREASE SEPARATION	     11-1

            11-1.1 Description 	     11-2
            11-1.2 Evaluation of Oil and Grease Separation  .  .  .  .  .     11-6

 11-2       OXIDATION	     11-7

            11-2.1 Description	'.	     11-7
            11-2.2 Evaluation of Oxidation . 	    11-16

 11-3       REDUCTION	  .    11-17

            11-3.1 Description	    11-17
            11-3.2 Evaluation of Chemical Reduction	    11-22

 11-4       PRECIPITATION	    11-23

            11-4.1 Description 	    11-23
            11-4.2 Evaluation of Precipitation 	    11-32

 11-5       NEUTRALIZATION	    11-36

            11-5.1 Description 	    11-36
            11-5.2 Evaluation of Neutralization	    11-42

 11-6       SEDIMENTATION	    11-45

            11-6.1 Description 	 	    11-45
            11-6.2 Evaluation of Sedimentation	    11-51

 11-7       FILTRATION	    11-52

            11-7.1 Description 	    11-52
            11-7.2 Evaluation of. Filtration	    11-58

 11-8       AIR- AND STEAM-STRIPPING	    11-59

            11-8.1 Description 	    11-59
            11-8.2 Evaluation of Air- and Steam-stripping	    11-67
11.89.45
0002.0.0

-------
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                  (continued)
Section
                                     Title
                                                          Page No,
 11-9
11-10
11-11
11-12
ANAEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT 	    11-69

11-9.1 Description 	    11-69
11-9.2 Evaluation of Anaerobic Biological
       Treatment	    11-78

AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT 	    11-83

11-10.1     Description	    11-83
11-10.2     Evaluation of Aerobic Biological
            Treatment	    11-87

CARBON ADSORPTION	-	-	    11-92

11-11.1     Description	    11-92
11-11.2     Evaluation of Carbon Adsorption	    11-99

ION EXCHANGE  	   11-102

11-12.1     Description	   11-102
11-12.2     Evaluation of Ion Exchange  	   11-108
GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

REFERENCES
 11.89.45
 0003.0.0

-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
11-1
11-2
11-3


11-4
11-5
11-6
11-7
11-8
11-9
11-10
11-11
11-12
11-13
11-14
11-15
11-16
11-17
11-18
11-19
11-20
11-21
11-22
11-23
11.89.45
0004.0.0
Title *
OIL/WATER SEPARATION 	
OIL AND GREASE SEPARATION - CAPITAL COSTS 	
OIL AND GREASE SEPARATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

COSTS 	
CHEMICAL OXIDATION 	 	
ULTRAVIOLET/HYDROGEN PEROXIDE OXIDATION. v 	
OXIDATION - CAPITAL COSTS 	 	
OXIDATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS 	
CHEMICAL REDUCTION 	 	
REDUCTION - CAPITAL COSTS 	 	
REDUCTION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS 	
CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION - BATCH FLOW 	
CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION - CONTINUOUS FLOW 	 •
SOLUBILITY OF METAL HYDROXIDES AND SULFIDES 	
PRECIPITATION - CAPITAL COSTS 	 	 	
PRECIPITATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS 	
NEUTRALIZATION 	
NEUTRALIZATION - CAPITAL COSTS 	 	
NEUTRALIZATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS . . .
SEDIMENTATION 	 	
REPRESENTATIVE TYPES OF SEDIMENTATION. . . ... - - • • •
SEDIMENTATION - CAPITAL COSTS . . . 	 	 	
SEDIMENTATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS 	
GRANULAR MEDIA FILTRATION BED 	


rage a
-------
 Figure
                                 LIST OF FIGURES
                                   (Continued)
                                      Title
                                                                       Page No.
 11-24     FILTRATION - CAPITAL COSTS	    11-60

 11-25     FILTRATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS 	    11-61

 11-26     AIR-STRIPPING	    11-63

 11-27     STEAM-STRIPPING	    11-65

 11-28     AIR-STRIPPING - CAPITAL COSTS	    11-70

 11-29     AIR-STRIPPING - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS	    11-71

 11-30     ANAEROBIC TJPFLOW FILTER	    11-73

 11-31     AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT - ACTIVATED SLUDGE	    11-84

 11-32     AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT - CAPITAL COSTS 	    11-93

 11-33     AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
           COSTS	    11-94

 11-34     CARBON ADSORPTION	    11-97

 11-35     CARBON ADSORPTION - CAPITAL COSTS	   11-101

 11-36     CARBON ADSORPTION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS.  .  .  .   11-103

 11-37     ION EXCHANGE	   11-106

 11-38     ION EXCHANGE  -  CAPITAL  COSTS  	   11-111

 11-39     ION EXCHANGE  -  OPERATION AND  MAINTENANCE COSTS	   11-112
11.89.45
0005.0.0

-------
                              LIST  OF  TABLES
Table
11-1
11-2
11-3

11-4
11-5

1,1-6

11-7
1 1 _O
Title


EFFECTIVE TYPES OF PRECIPITATION FOR SELECTED METAL IONS .
VARIOUS CHEMICAL/LOADING- SPECIFIC TOXICITY OR INHIBITION




PARTIAL LISTING OF DESIGN CRITERIA: ACTIVATED SLUDGE,


PRIORITY POLLUTANT COMPOUND CLASS RESPONSES TO



Trvu TTYrHATJfiK APPT.TP ATTfyW SUMMARY 	
Page NO.
11-11
11-33

11-76
11-79

11-88

11-89
11-90
11-109
11.89.45
0006.0.0

-------

-------
                                  SECTION 11

             INFORMATION FOR EVALUATING PRETKEATMENT TECHNOLOGIES


This section provides information for evaluating pretreatment technologies.
It should be used to construct and evaluate a pretreatment train as a part of
the overall POTW discharge alternative.  The FS writer may use this section  in
two ways.
                                                                   f
     o    This section may be used to help make screening decisions while
          assembling the pretreatment train.  This  section contains detailed
          information and references that discuss applicability, performance,
          and feasibility of technologies for specific contaminants and
          wastestreams.

     o    Once the pretreatment  train is assembled,  this  section provides
          information that can be used  in the detailed evaluation  of  the
          "discharge to POTW" alternative.

Section  11  is organized into 12  subsections, each discussing a  separate  unit
operation.  These unit operations are not intended  to be  used individually,  but
should be combined into an appropriate  pretreatment train.   The  information on
each technology  has been  tailored to address the  "discharge  to  POTW"  alterna-
tive .

Each subsection  is organized into two major parts:

     Description.  The  description  contains information on how  the process
     works, major  types  of  equipment  available,  advantages and  limitations of
     the technology,  chemicals  required to  implement the process,  residuals
     generated  or  released,  design  criteria,  and a  discussion of expected
     performance.  The  description  also contains the technical  data and refer-
     ences  necessary to select  and  size an appropriate unit operation.

     Evaluation.  The evaluation is designed specifically for use by the FS
     writer.   Once the  process  has  been selected;  the evaluation provides the
      information necessary to  perform a detailed evaluation of the process.
      Included are discussions  of effectiveness, implementability, and cost.
      Costs  are presented only to provide a general sense of relative costs  of
      different technologies.   The costing figures included in this section
      were generated from information gathered from several sources.  The
      references listed at the end of this section provide an initial source
      for costing information.   However, any FS should rely on site-specific
      estimates, derived from discussions with process vendors and other
      sources.


 11-1  OIL AND GREASE SEPARATION

 This subsection discusses the use of oil/water separators to remove  free  oils
 and greases from wastestreams prior to discharge to the  POTW;   Information is
                                       11-1
  11.89.45
  0007.0.0

-------
 provided to aid in the evaluation of this  technology as  a part  of  a  total waste
 treatment alternative.

 11-1.1  Description

 Oil/water separators  are  used to  separate  nonaqueous phase  organic liquids
 (oils  and grease)  from a  CERCLA waste discharge.   Separators  find  use  in
 removing oil and grease from leachate streams  and  in separating the  organic
 phase  from joint groundwater/floating product  extraction systems.

 The oil  in these streams  can exist as either free  or emulsified oil, depending
 on the wastestream characteristics and the recovery  technique..   Free oils can
 be separated by gravity separators,  which  operate  on the principal that under
 quiescent conditions,  the lighter phase will rise  to the surface and may be
 collected.   Emulsified oils  exist as small droplets  of oil  interspersed
 throughout the  aqueous stream.  These emulsions are  treated to  cause the small
 droplets to combine and separate  by gravity similar  to free oils.  The emulsion
 breaking step can  be  achieved using thermal treatment, chemical additives, or
 coalescing devices.

 Oil/water separation  is typically one of the first unit  processes  in a treat-
 ment train.   The separators  are usually large  tanks  that provide several
 minutes  (i.e.,  10  to  30)  of  holding time for the wastewater stream.

 The oil/water separator generates  three effluent streams:  the  treated waste-
 water, the  nonaqueous  phase  organic  layer,  and any sludge resulting from the
 settling of solids.   The  treated  wastewater may be suitable for discharge to a
 POTW or  further pretreatment.   If the oil  phase is hazardous, it should be
 disposed of as  a RCRA waste  or reclaimed.   Likewise,  if  the sludge is
 hazardous,  it can  be  dewatered and disposed of as  a  RCRA waste.

 11-1.1.1  Equipment Types Available.   Most oil/water separators  are based on
 the design  developed  by the  American Petroleum Institute (API)  for treatment of
 wastewater  containing  oil.   This  basic design  has  been modified by numerous
 vendors  to  optimize flow patterns  and oil  collection efficiency.  These units
 are available as self-contained package units, or  can be designed and installed
 with relative ease.

 The two  major types of treatment units  are presented in  Figure  11-1.   The raw
 discharge enters the  treatment unit  into an equalization basin  area.   Treatment
 chemicals may be added here,  if necessary.  Heavy  solids settle to the bottom
 of  the equalization basin.   The flow then  proceeds through a series of baffles
 designed to produce laminar  flow  conditions, which promote,separation of oil
 and the  remaining  solids.   Flow through the central  part of the  separator is
 characterized by the  settling  of  solid particles to  the  bottom  of the chamber
 and  rising  of oil particles  to the surface  of  the water.

 Sludge collecting on the bottom is trapped  by  a sludge baffle and drawn off
periodically.  Any nonaqueous phase  organics that  are heavier than water would
 also be  removed  at this point.  Lighter oils are trapped by an upper baffle and
 diverted into an oil collection reservoir.  Alternate methods for removing the
 light oils  include rope skimmers or  rotating drums.   These skimmer systems pass
                                     11-2
11.89.45
0008.0.0

-------
                               ACCESS PORTS
    OILY WATER .
       INLET
                        I
BAFFLES TO INDUCE
LAMINAR FLOW
                              -OIL BAFFLE
                                                                 r
                                                                    VENT
                                                      SLUDGE REMOVAL PORT
                                                                                   ON. COLLECTION RESERVOIR
                                                                                  •(PUMPOUT TO OIL HOLDING TANK)
                                                           OR. COLLECTION TROUGH
                                                                                                    .TREATED WATER
                                                                                                       OUTLET
SLUDGE BAFFLE
I
U)
                                        GRAVITY OIL/WATER SEPARATOR
     OILY WATER
      INLET
                                 COALESCING MEDIA
                                                           OIL COLLECTION TROUGH
                                                                            Ol
                                                                                                     TREATED WATER
                                                                                                        OUTLET
                                      COALESCING OIL/WATER SEPARATOR
     5307-83
                                                                                                     FIGURE 19-1
                                                                                      OIL/WATER SEPARATION

-------
through the oil phase collecting oil on. the surface of the rope or drum.  The
oil is then scraped into a collection reservoir.  Oils are periodically pumped
out of the collection reservoir.  Wastewater passing through the baffles exits
the oil/water separator ready for further pretreatment or discharge.
Coalescing separators are similar to gravity-
portion of the separator, a series of baffles
to act as a coalescing medium (see Figure 11-
oleophilic (i.e., oil-loving) materials that
droplets collect on the surface of the media
detach and float to the surface.  Oil removal
similarly to gravity separators.  Alternative
vendors for specialized applications.
type separators.   In the center
,  tubes, or plates are installed
1).  These plates are composed of
attract small oil droplets.   These
and form larger globules that
 and sludge removal are conducted
 arrangements are available  from
11-1.1.2  Advantages and Limitations.  Gravity oil/water separators are simple
processes that are easy to design and construct.  The units are extremely
reliable within design operating ranges and require little maintenance.
Dispersed or emulsified oils require the use of chemical additives or
coalescing-type separators.  High removal efficiencies can be achieved through
the use of emulsion-breaking chemicals; however, these chemicals may increase
the volume of sludge, making treatment of the sludge more difficult.  Limita-
tions of chemical treatment include increased cost and the need for skilled
operators.

11-1.1.3  Chemicals Required.  Chemicals are only required if it is necessary
to break chemically stable emulsions to separate oils.  Chemicals used include
polymers, ferric chloride  (FeC£3), alum, and sulfuric acid.

11-1.1.4  Residuals Generated.  Oil skimmings are generally disposed of by
recycling, incineration, or other commercial disposal.  Sludges may be disposed
by dewatering and landfilling or incinerating.  Chemicals used, to break emul-
sions may increase the metals content of the sludges, but these metals are of
low toxicity (Fe, Al).

11-1.1.5  Design Criteria.  Effective oil removal requires careful considera-
tion of the physical properties and mechanical relationships of oil and waste-
water.  Properties such as types of oily wastes, specific gravity, and vis-
cosity, plus mechanical relationships such as rate of rise, short-circuiting
factor, turbulence factor, horizontal velocity, and overflow rate, are impor-
tant in sizing oil separation units.  Treatment of emulsified oils requires
consideration of chemical  type, dosage and sequence of addition, pH, mechanical
shear and agitation, heat, and retention time.

Design of the API separator is based on the following three basic design
relationships:

     1.   Minimum Total Horizontal Area
                   =  F
                          m

                                     11-4
11.89.45
0010.0.0

-------
         where:

             =  minimum total horizontal area  (ft2)

         F   =  design factor

         Q   =  flow rate of wastewater  (ft3/min)
          m
         V   =  rate of rise of the minimum-size oil droplet to be  removed;
                typically 150 microns  (ft/min)

    The design factor F is the product of a short-circuiting factor recom-
    mended as 1.2 and a turbulence factor (varying  from  1.07 to 1.45  for
    V /V  ratios from 3 to 20; where V   = mean horizontal velocity  of waste
    through separator and V  = rate of rise of the  minimum-size oil droplet  to
    be removed).

    The velocity of the rising droplet,  V , is found using  a modified version
    of Stokes Law.
         V   '=  0.0241
                          S   -  S
                          w    o
         where:   S   =  specific  gravity of  wastestream
                  S   =  specific  gravity of  oil
                  jj°  =  absolute  viscosity of wastestream (poises)

         All  values  are  based on design temperature.

     2.   Minimum Vertical  Cross-sectional  Area
          A   =
           c
          where:
                 V.
                  H
          A   =  vertical cross-sectional area (ft2)
           c
          Q   =  flow rate of wastewater (ft3/min)
           m
          V   =  horizontal flow velocity (ft/min)
           H
     The value of V  should not exceed 15 times the value of V  and should not
     exceed 3 feet/minute.

     3.    Minimum Ratio of Depth to Width of 0.3

     These specifications are designed for a stream containing oil droplets of
     150-micron diameter or larger.  For smaller droplets, a coalescing-type
     separator is recommended.  In practice, most package units are designed to
                                     11-5
11.89.45
0011.0.0

-------
      meet these specifications.  For large flow systems, units may be operated
      in series or parallel to optimize oil removal and operating efficiencies.

 11-1.1.6  Performance.  The removal efficiency of oil by gravity separation is
 partly a. function of the retention time of the water in the tank and the waste
 stream composition.  The performance level of emulsion-breaking is dependent
 primarily on the raw waste characteristics and proper maintenance and function-
 ing of the system components.  The systems discussed in the previous sections
 are designed to remove free oil and grease to below 15 mg/liter (ppm).   Gravity
 separators will achieve this level of performance for droplets larger than 150
 microns.  Coalescing separators will achieve this level of performance  for
 emulsions containing droplets as small as 20 microns.

 11-1.2  Evaluation of Oil and Grease Separation

 This section provides information for evaluation of oil/water separators as a
 part of an alternative in the FS.   The information is organized under three
 general headings:   effectiveness,  implementability, and cost.

 11-1.2.1  Effectiveness.   Oil/water separators provide a highly reliable method
 for removing free  organic phase oils from a wastestream.   Typical effluent
 concentrations of  15 mg/£ total oil and grease can be achieved.   The technology
 provides a significant reduction of free oils in the wastestream.   The  oils may
 be disposed of using permanent disposal technologies,  such as  incineration.

 Oil/water separation is one of the first steps in an overall  treatment  train.
 Separators available as package units are typically constructed as  enclosed
 containers,  reducing the  possibility for VOC emissions.   In combination with
 other pretreatment technologies and/or discharge to a POTW, oil/water separa-
 tors will successfully achieve and maintain a high level  of protection  of
 public health and  the environment.

 11-1.2.2  Implementability.   Oil/water separators  are  well-proven technologies
 that are available in a variety of packaged units  for  specific  applications.
 The technology has been well-demonstrated for removal  of  free oils  and  grease
 from aqueous  streams.   With relatively few moving  parts and low maintenance
 requirements,  separators  achieve a high level of reliability.

 Separators generally are  placed at the  beginning of a  treatment  train and may
 also act as flow equalization tanks  and sedimentation  basins for large  solids.
 Trash should be removed from a  stream prior to the oil/water separator.   Post-
 treatment may  include treatment for  additional removal of  organics  or inor-
 ganics,  depending  on the  specific  discharge requirements.

 Prepackaged oil/water separators can be installed  with relatively little  site
 work.  OSM requirements are  minimal.  The  separator must be emptied  of  sludge
 and  oil  on a regular schedule.   Appropriate disposal options must be  identified
 for  these materials.

 11-1.2.3  Cost.  Cost  information was compiled for flow rates ranging from  30
 to  1,000 gpm.   These costs are based  on the following  assumptions.
                                     11-6
11.89.45
0012.0.0

-------
Capital Costs
     o    Oil/water separator of API gravity separator design with and without
          coalescing media.

     o    Separator with coalescing media designed to remove droplets as small
          as 20 microns with an effluent quality of less than 15 mg/£ total oil
          and grease.

     o    Separator without coalescing media designed to remove droplets down
          to 150 microns with an effluent quality of less than 15 mg/£ total
          oil and grease.

     o    Oil pumped from separator to storage tank capable of holding 2
          percent of daily volumetric flow.

     o    Pumps and piping designed with 100-percent backup capability.

     o    Oil/water separator installed on concrete pad.

O&M Costs

     o    Electricity to operate pumps is included.

     o    Labor required to operate and maintain system is 8 hours/week for
          system flows less than 100 gpm, and 16 hours/week for system flows
          greater than 100 gpm.

     o    No disposal costs for residual streams are included.

     o    No chemical costs are included.

Cost information is presented in Figures 11-2 and  1-1-3.  Cost curves were
prepared for two cases:  Case I, a standard API gravity separator for use with
nonemulsified oils; and Case II, a coalescing separator for use with emulsified
oils.
 11-2  OXIDATION

 11-2.1  Description

 Oxidation  is  a chemical  reaction in which one  or more  electrons  are transferred
 from  the chemical  being  oxidized to an oxidizing agent.   The process can be
 controlled to oxidize  undesirable compounds  through control of pH and choice of
 oxidizing  agent.   Metals and inorganic compounds can be  oxidized to less toxic
 forms.  Organics can either be completely oxidized to  carbon dioxide and water,
 or  partially  oxidized  to a form more desirable for subsequent treatment.
                                           e
 Industrial wastewater  treatment applications of chemical oxidation include
 destruction of cyanide,  transformation of selected organics to_biodegradable
                                      11-7
 11.89.45
 0013.0.0

-------
00
        V)
       WO
       KC
       
-------
                     OIL  &  GREASE  SEPARATION
i
vD
        CO
       
-------
forms, or detoxification of organics and inorganics.  Frequently, oxidation is
used as a preliminary step to precipitation of metals.

11~2.1.1  Equipment Types Available.  A variety of oxidizing agents are avail-
able for use.  The contaminant requiring oxidation controls the choice of
oxidizing agent; therefore, it also determines the equipment that will be
required.  Table 11-1 lists some commonly used oxidizing agents and their
corresponding applications.

All oxidizing agents in Table 11-1 can be applied as batch or continuous
processes.  Generally, smaller quantities' of wastewater are treated more
economically in batch, while larger quantities are treated continuously.
Reaction times for oxidation are typically less than one hour.  Therefore,
batch operations may require a significant amount of operator attention.  The
choice between batch and continuous oxidation is generally reduced to a compar-
ison of the tank sizes and operational requirements.

Two process flow diagrams are shown in Figures 11-4 and 11-5.  The first
represents a general diagram for continuous oxidation using chemical additions
such as ozone, chlorine, permanganate, or hydrogen peroxide.  The second
represents continuous oxidation using ultraviolet (UV) photolysis in combina-
tion with a hydrogen peroxide.  UV photolysis is also applied in combination
with ozonation.

Both flow diagrams contain conventional process equipment:  influent feed
pumps, reaction tanks, chemical addition metering pumps, mixers, oxidation
reduction potential (ORP) meters (with controls), and pH monitors (with con-
trols).  The differences are the types of reactors or contact tanks.  The
reaction tanks and chemical feed points should be designed to allow complete
mixing and reaction of waste and chemicals.

The UV photolysis contact tank, shown in Figure 11-5, is baffled to ensure the
TJV radiation sufficiently contacts the wastewater.  UV light is easily absorbed
by suspended solids and by the water itself.  If the wastestream is inconsis-
tent in flow or concentration, a flow equalization chamber may be required at
the beginning of the treatment tra'i'n.  Depending on the oxidizing agent em-
ployed, various wastewater characteristics may affect the equipment require-
ments.  Parameters affecting the process configurations are included in the
discussion of required chemicals (see Section 11-2.1.3).

11-2.1.2  Advantages and Limitations.  Advantages of using oxidation as a
metals treatment include its reliability and proven effectiveness on industrial
wastewaters.  Oxidation can destroy cyanide and oxidize selected metals to a
more precipitable form.  If reduction must also be applied to the wastestream
(i.e., chromium reduction), the oxidized contaminant must be removed from
solution prior to reduction, and vice versa.  The equipment and chemicals
required to oxidize most wastestreams are readily available.

Oxidation of organics is a growing application.  However, the primary disadvan-
tage of the technology is its inability to selectively oxidize an individual
contaminant in a wastestream.  Excessive doses of oxidizing agent may be
required to oxidize the target pollutant.  For instance, if a wastestream
                                     11-10
11.89.45
0016.0.0

-------
                                  TABLE 11-1
                APPLICATIONS OF COMMONLY USED OXIDIZING AGENTS
OXIDIZING AGENT
       TARGET COMPOUND
    REFERENCE
Ozone
Manganese, Cyanide, Phenol
Organics (general)
Iron
Patterson, 1985
Kawamura, 1987
Clifford et al., 1986
Chlorine or
Chlorine Dioxide
Cyanide
Iron, Manganese
Cyanide, Selenium, Phenol
Weber, 1972
Clifford et al., 1986
Patterson, 1985
Potassium
Permanganate
Iron
Manganese, Selenium, Phenol
Clifford et al., 1986
Patterson, 1985
Hydrogen Peroxide
Phenol, Selenium
Patterson, 1985
Ultraviolet/Ozone
or Hydrogen Peroxide
Methylene Chloride, Pentachloro-  Fletcher,, 1987
phenol
                       Phenols
                       Polychlorinated Biphenyls
                       Organics (general)
                                  McShea et al., 1986
                                  Fletcher, 1987

                                  Arisman et al.,
                                    1980
                                  Fletcher, 1987

                                  Hager, 1988
                                  Bourbigot et  al.,
                                    1985
                                  Fletcher, 1987
11.89.45T
0001.0.0
                11-11

-------
                        CAUSTIC OR
                       ACID STORAGE
                        -CHEMICAL
                         METERING
                          PUMPS
                           t
                                ,
                         OXIDIZING
                          AGENT
                         STORAGE
                                    CONTROLLER
                                    CONTROLLER
o o
 o o
                       1
           H»-OXIDIZING AGENT
           -*- pH ADJUSTMENT
           	 INFLUENT
                      _J
             ORP PROBE

             ph PROBE	
                                                        EFFLUENT
                                                                1
                                                        TO PRECIPITATION CHAMBER
                                                        (OPTIONAL DEPENDENT ON
                                                        INFLUENT CONTAINMENT)
                                                                     FIGURE 11-4
                                                          CHEMICAL OXIDATION
5307-87
                                    11-12

-------
       STORAGE
                 METERING PUMP
   INFLUENT
                                       ER
                                                     T ULTRAVIOLET  1

                                                  	|  LIGHT CONTROL

                                                     I     PANEL    I
                                                     L_	_J
           'I'
                                                     V
                                                        ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT BULBS
                                                                     EFFLUENT
      ^ HAGER 1988
                                                                    FIGURE II-5
                               ULTRAVIOLET/HYDROGEN PEROXIDE OXIDATION
5307-87
11-13

-------
  contains  high concentrations  of iron,  and the  pollutant  requiring  oxidation  is
  phenol, most of the iron will be oxidized before  the  oxidizing  agent  reacts
  With the  phenol.   A similar disadvantage  occurs when  the wastewater contains
  various contaminants.   Chemical interactions may  take place  and interfere with
  oxidation of the  target pollutant,  thus requiring high oxidant  dosing.

  The  individual  oxidizing agents have specific  advantages and limitations.
  These advantages  and limitations are discussed with the  description of the
  oxidizing agents  in the following subsection.

  11-2.1.3—Chemicals Required.   In addition to  the oxidizing agent, oxidation
  usually requires pH adjustment.   Ozone is  the  only oxidant in Table 11-1 that
  ±s not pH-sensitive.  The remainder of the oxidizing  agents listed require PH
  adjustment or buffering agents  to provide  the  hydroxide  or hydrogen ions
  required  of  the reaction.  Weber (1972) and Snoeyink  and Jenkins (1980) provide
  complete  discussions on the calculation of buffer requirements and appropriate
 buffering agents.   The  following paragraphs discuss individual oxidizing
 agents.

 Ozone'  Ozone is a  highly reactive and unstable form of oxygen and it must be
 generated  on-site.  Ozone is generated by passing air or oxygen through an
 electronic arc.  Because ozone is used as a gas,  high organic materials concen-
 trations  can create frothing in  the reaction tank, requiring skimmers  and
 ultimate disposal of the froth.  Air quality standards will require additional
 equipment to recycle or treat ozone escaping from the reaction tank.   Most
 reaction tanks are covered to minimize off-gas  losses.  A catalytic destruction
 system is  often employed to convert ozone back  to oxygen.  The additional
 equipment  requirements  associated with the use  of ozone make it much more
 expensive  than other chemical  oxidants; however,  it is the  most powerful
 oxidant.   The oxidizing potential of ozone is only slightly sensitive  to  pH;
 however, ozone is more  stable  in acidic solutions.  Manufacturers offer
 complete ozone generation and  monitoring equipment.

 Chlorine/Chlorine Dioxide.   Chlorine (C12) has  been used  as a disinfectant and
 oxidant in wastewater treatment for  over a century.   The  oxidation  potential  of
 chlorine generally increases with increasing pH.   Chlorine  is a  gas at atmos-
 pheric pressure;  therefore,  it requires special handling  considerations.
 Sodium hydroxide can be used as a method for increasing the pH  during  chlori-
 nation.  Chlorine  is used extensively  in the destruction  of cyanide.

 Chlorine oxidation of wastewaters with  high organic  content can  produce chloro-
 phenols or trihalomethanes  (THMs) as by-products;  however,  oxidation with
 chlorine dioxide reduces the production of toxic chlorophenols and  THMs.
 Chlorine dioxide is  similar  to  ozone in that they  both require on-site genera-
 tion  (due  to  chemical instability), making chlorine dioxide more expensive than
 chlorine.   Chlorine  dioxide  is  produced from sodium chlorite  (NaCIO )  and
 chlorine gas  (C12).

 Permanganate.  Permanganate  oxidation potential increases with increasing pH.
 Most organics will not completely oxidize  even  under severe alkaline condi-
 tions.  Rates of oxidation of metals and inorga'nics can be  increased through
 the use of catalysts  and pH adjustments.   Potassium permanganate  (KMn04)  is the
                                     11-14
11.89.45
0020.0.0

-------
most easily manageable form for oxidation purposes, as it will keep indefinite-
ly as a solid when stored in a cool dry place.  Potassium permanganate is
generally added to the process stream as a liquid of known concentration.

Hydrogen Peroxide.  Use of hydrogen peroxide for organics decomposition is
growing; however, at present it does not provide economic oxidation of inor-
ganics.  At increased pH, hydrogen peroxide provides more oxidizing power than
ozone for organics.  The oxidation potential can be further increased when it
is used in conjunction with UV radiation.  Hydrogen peroxide may cause foaming
similar to ozone, resulting in floe flotation problems during precipitation.

UV/Ozone or UV/Hydrogen Peroxide.  Use of UV radiation with hydrogen peroxide
or ozone is recognized as economical and efficient for the destruction of toxic
organics.  UV photolysis treatment processes require specially designed reac-
tion tanks to ensure adequate UV-wastewater contact.  Suspended solids may
interfere with UV contact by absorbing UV radiation.

11-2.1.4  Residuals Generated.  Whether a residual is generated depends on the
oxidation process employed.  For  example, oxidation of organics using ozone
creates a froth,  which ultimately must be landfilled or  incinerated.  In
addition, oxidation with ozone will require either recycling  or treatment of
gases  escaping from the reaction  tank.  For iron  and manganese, oxidation is  a
preparatory step  for precipitation.  Oxidation  of iron or manganese will
produce sludges using any oxidant.  The sludge  generated during the precipita-
tion process will require disposal  or  incineration.  The documents referenced
in  the performance section  indicate whether residuals are  generated during
individual applications.

11-2.1.5  Design  Criteria.   Design  of  an  oxidation process  for  a  wastestream is
straightforward.   Weber  (1972)  and  Snoeyink and Jenkins  (1980)  provide  infor-
mation on appropriate oxidizing agents  and pH for given  undesirable contami-
nants.  Several  oxidizing agents  may be appropriate  for  the wastewater.
Determination  of  the most effective reagent,  where several may be appropriate,
is  a  function  of  the  following:

      o    reagent consumption (grams  of oxidizing agent/gallon of wastewater)
      o    required reaction or contact time

These factors  vary with the composition and concentration of the wastewater
 requiring treatment.   Estimates of reagent consumption and the required reac-
 tion times  are possible through literature comparisons with similar appli-
 cations.   Table  11-1 lists  references for information on full-scale and
 pilot-scale applications of a variety of oxidants and contaminants.

 Although oxidation has been widely used as a treatment method for industrial
 wastestreams,  bench-testing is almost always required to determine the neces-
 sary reaction times and oxidant concentration requirements.  To determine the
 reagent consumption and reaction time in a bench test, batch reactors are
 generally used.  By performing a series of batch tests at different oxidant
 concentrations,  the optimum dosage requirement can be determined.  Sampling of
 the supernatant  at various times throughout the reaction will reveal the
 optimum reaction time.
                                       11-15
  11.89.45
  0021.0.0

-------
Bench-testing  establishes  the  relationship between the ORP  of  the wastewater
and  completeness  of the  reaction.   The  relationship between ORP and  concentra-
tion of  an unoxidized  contaminant  is  important because in full-scale designs,
ORP  electrodes can provide continuous adjustment  of chemical addition to meet
the  demand of  the wastewater,  resulting in a  consistent  effluent quality.
While analytical  data  on concentrations can take  months  to  acquire,  ORP,elec-
trodes are attached to instrumentation  that can immediately adjust feed rate of
oxidizing agents.   Knowing the relationship between the  ORP of the reaction and
a specific contaminant concentration  can ensure that the process will effec-
tively meet  discharge  limits.

The  optimum  doses  and  reaction times, with the flow rates and  flow fluctua-
tions, provide sufficient  information to determine type  and size of  the neces-
sary equipment.

11-2.1.6 Performance.   As  discussed  in previous  sections,  oxidation is not
selective, and the order in which  an  oxidizing agent reacts with the compounds
in the wastestream is  dependent on the  wastewater characteristics.   Most metals
can  be oxidized and subsequently precipitated.  The potential  for oxidation of
VOCs and SVOCs varies  within the compound class.   Table  11-1 provides referenc-
es for the treatability  of several commonly oxidized compounds.

11-2.2  Evaluation of  Oxidation

11-2.2.1  Effectiveness.   The  oxidation process can transform  a variety of
compounds into more stable, less toxic  forms.  When used in conjunction with
precipitation,  inorganics  are  transformed into more stable  solid forms.
Although this  significantly reduces the volume of the contaminant, the solids
settle to produce  a sludge  that must  be disposed  of.  Oxidation alone (i.e.,
UV/hydrogen peroxide), or  followed by biological  degradation,  can permanently
transform organics  to  less  toxic forms.   Because  oxidation  of  metals  generally
requires pH adjustment to  conditions  not normally encountered  in nature, there
is little potential for  the contaminants  to revert to their more toxic forms.

Because  of their strong  oxidizing  power,  many of  the common oxidants  can be
toxic  to microorganisms  and therefore may require residuals monitoring prior to
discharge to a POTW.   For  example,  chlorine is used as a disinfectant for
drinking water because of  its  known toxicity to many microorganisms.  Residuals
should be carefully controlled  to  prevent substituting one  undesirable pollu-
tant  for another.

11-2.2.2  Implementability.  Oxidation  is well-demonstrated for concentrated
industrial wastestreams  (see Section  11-2.1.6).   Application at hazardous waste
sites is well-demonstrated  in pilot-  and  full-scale.  The equipment  required
for  this technology is conventional and readily available.  The operational
requirements are minimal when metering  pumps are  used in conjunction with pH
and ORP monitoring  devices  and  controls.

As discussed in Section  11-2.1.5,  oxidation is not a selective process, and
bench-testing  is normally  required prior  to design of a  full-scale operation
system to identify  optimum  operating parameters.
                                     11-16
11.89.45
0022.0.0

-------
Residuals created during oxidation may require equipment for monitoring,
removal, or treatment.  One example is oxidation used prior to precipitation,
where sludge is generated.  Another example is oxidation by ozonation, which
frequently requires recycling or treatment of the ozone off-gas and disposal of
froth.
11-2.2.3  Cost.
                 Capital cost estimates for treatment by oxidation are present-
ed in Figure 11-6.  The figure shows two different chemical doses, representa-
tive of hydrogen peroxide treatment of phenol;  The doses used in the cost
estimate represent those found in the literature (5 and 20 milligrams of
hydrogen peroxide per milligram of phenol in the influent, with influent
concentrations of phenol ranging from 5 to 500 ppm) (Patterson, 1985).  Addi-
tional assumptions used to develop the capital cost estimates include the
following:

     o    all storage tanks for hydrogen peroxide are a maximum 3,000 gallons
          and separated by concrete dikes for safety;

     o    pH is adjusted to 2 to 3 using sulfuric acid in quantities of approx-
          imately half the oxidizing agent;

     o    all pumps are duplicated for easy repair and maintenance;

     o    all pumps and piping are directly attached to pH and ORP probes for
          automatic addition adjustments;

     o    reaction times are assumed to be on the order of 5 minutes; and

     o    storage tanks provide at least one-month storage.

Operation and maintenance  costs are presented in Figure 11-7.  These  costs
include  chemical  requirements, operator labor,  and electricity.   The  costs  for
the  two  different chemical usage  rates bracket  the range  of O&M  costs for
hydrogen peroxide oxidation of phenols.  Because of  its explosive nature,
hydrogen peroxide is  one of the more expensive  oxidants.   Ozone  is more  ex-
pensive  because  it  requires on-site  generation  and off-gas  treatment.

Both capital  and O&M  costs are dependent on  the contaminant type .and  concen-
tration.
 11-3  REDUCTION

 11-3.1  Description
 	—	*—	                                                  i
 Chemical reduction and oxidation occur simultaneously when electrons are
 transferred during a chemical reaction from one chemical  (the reducing agent)
 to another.  Reduction is defined as the gain of electrons; oxidation as the
 loss of electrons.  Chemical reduction is commonly used to detoxify  chromium in
 metal-plating wastewaters.  Other applications not practiced as widely are
 mercury and lead reduction.  Generally, chemical reduction must be accompanied
 by precipitation, ion exchange, or some other form of pretreatment for adequate
 wastewater treatment.  There are currently no common applications involving

                                      11-17
 11.89.45
 0023.0.0

-------
oo
       a: c
           280
            40
                                    OXIDATION
                                      CAPITAL COST
                           0.2
                   0.4          0.6
                      (Thousands)
               GALLONS PER MINUTE
a   LOW CHEM  USE           +   HIGH  CHEM USE
        0.8
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
             FIGURE 11-6
OXIDATION - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
                                6T-TT
11
wro
DOLLARS
(Millions)
maj
mm

53!
CO

§
5
§
g
m
DO
a

>
z

m
m O

I!
     n

-------
 reduction of organic compounds.   The process  of reducing chemicals  in a  waste-
 water normally consists  of an initial pH adjustment followed  by addition of  the
 reducing agent.   Although the pH adjustment can direct the  reduction process to
 be more reactive with certain metals to  a limited  extent, reduction is general-
 ly not a selective  process.

 11~3.1.1  Equipment Types Available.   Reduction process equipment is similar to
 oxidation process equipment.   Batch and  continuous  process  configurations are
 available for both  technologies.   Generally,  batch  processes  are limited to  low
 flow rates,  less than 10 gallons  per minute (gpm).   Reaction  times  for reduc-
 tion processes are  typically  short;  therefore,  batch reactions  may  require more
 operator time than  continuous reactions.
                                                                    «
 A continuous flow diagram is  shown in Figure  11-8,  which represents  the  most
 commonly used configuration.   ORP and pH probes  measure the effluent parameters
 for process  control.   Chemicals  are  added near  the  influent to  ensure adequate
 mixing,  and  reaction time prior  to pH and ORP measurement.  The pH  and ORP
 probes are connected to  control  devices,  which  continuously feed the appropri-
 ate amounts  of reducing  agent and caustic or  acid to maintain the desired pH
 and ORP.   If the flow rate of the influent is highly variable,  flow  meters can
 be used  in conjunction with the pH and ORP probes to more accurately apply the
 chemicals.   Several different control schematics are available  from  manufac-
 turers .

 Although complete package systems are not available for the continuous flow
 configuration,  the  individual pieces  of  equipment shown in the  process flow
 diagram  are  easily  obtained from  several  manufacturers., -

 11—3.1.2   Advantages  and Limitations.  Advantages of chemical reduction  include
 simple and readily  available  equipment.   It is a well-studied and understood
 reaction.  The  continuous  process configuration  is  easily automated,  reducing
 operator  requirements.

 Disadvantages  relate  to  its nonselective  nature.  The potential  for  reducing
 nontarget  compounds  in a complex  wastewater can  create  increased reducing  agent
 requirements.  Also, because  many reduced forms  of  organics and metals are more
 toxic  than the oxidized  form,  nonselective  reduction may render  a wastewater
 more toxic than  before the reduction.  Chemical  reduction appears to be  limited
 to  a few  selected metals  as a water treatment method.   Reduction has  not been
 demonstrated as  a treatment method for organic compounds.

 11-3.1.3   Chemicals Required.  The major  chemicals  required during chemical
 reduction  are the caustic  or -acid for pH  adjustment  and the reducing  agent.
 Full-scale industrial  wastewater  treatment  operations show sulfur dioxide to be
 the most  commonly used reducing agent for chromium when waste sulfur  dioxide  is
 available  (Patterson,  1985).   When sulfur dioxide is not available,   chemical
 reducing agents  such as  sodium bisulfite,  sodium metabisulfite, or ferrous
 sulfate can be used.   Commonly used reducing  agents  for mercury include  alumi-
 num, zinc, hydrazine,  stannous chloride,  or sodium, borohydride.
                                     11-20
11.89.45
0026.0.0

-------
                       CAUSTIC OR
                      ACID STORAGE
                                  CONTROLLER
                       CHEMICAL
                       METERING
                         PUMP

                       CHEMICAL
                       METERING
                         PUMP

                          O
             REDUCING AGENT
             pH ADJUSTMENT
              *- INFLUENT
                        REDUCING
                         AGENT
                        STORAGE
                                                                   FIGURE 11-8
                                                       CHEMICAL REDUCTION
5307-87
                                      11-21

-------
 Typically,  the pH for chromium reduction is  adjusted with the  addition of
 hydrochloric or sulfuric acid.   Mercury reduction occurs  at varying  pH for
 different reducing agents.   These reagents are readily available.

 11-3.1.4  Residuals Generated.   As with any  chemical reaction,  potential exists
 for the residual reducing agent to exit the  reaction chamber in the  effluent
 stream.  Proper control systems regulating the reducing agent  feed pump reduce
 the chance for this to occur.   Also,  if reduction is followed  by precipitation
 (as in the case of chromium),  sludge  that requires disposal is  produced.

 11-3.1.5  Design Criteria.   Information necessary to design a  system capable of
 reducing one or several metals  should be acquired through bench-testing prior
 to  the design.   The design information consists  of the following:

           o    reducing agent  type and dosage
           o    reaction time
           o    optimal pH
           o    ORP-contaminant  concentration ratio
These  criteria vary with  the  characteristics  of  the wastewater due to the
nonselective nature of  the process.  A variety of  compounds may compete for the
reducing  agent, 'which can increase the reducing  agent dosage and potentially
the  reaction time  required.   The pH  is affected  by the  concentration of the
reducing  agent applied.   Knowing the relationship  between the target contami-
nant concentration and  the ORP  of the wastewater will reduce the possibility of
either discharging an excess  of the  reducing  agent or allowing excessive pass-
through of the nonreduced contaminant.

The  size  of the reaction  chamber can'be determined from the known flow rate and
the  required reaction time (determined during bench-testing).  Weber (1972)
discusses in detail the process of calculating tank sizes.

11-3.1.6  Performance.  Chemical reduction of chromium  (Cr) and mercury (Hg)
has-been widely practiced in  full-scale operations.  The reduction of Cr   to
Cr   decreases the metal's toxicity  to organisms and allows subsequent removal
by precipitation.   Reduction  of ionic mercury allows recovery in the metal
form.  Treatability information on the reduction of mercury and chromium is
presented in the literature.  Applications of reduction to organics do not
appear to be practical.

11-3.2 Evaluation of Chemical  Reduction

The  following sections evaluate some of the characteristics of chemical re-
duction as they might be  discussed in an FS.  The  evaluation focuses mainly on
reduction of chromium and mercury because these  are the two compounds that have
been chemically reduced in full-scale operations successfully.
                                                       +6
+3
11-3.2.1  Effectiveness.  Reduction of chromium from Cr'~ to Cr " results in a
decrease in the toxicity of the chemical form.  Chromium can be permanently
removed from the wastewater through reduction and precipitation processes.
When ionic mercury is reduced to its metallic form, it can be permanently
removed from the wastewater by subsequent precipitation.  In summary, reduction
                                     11-22
11.89.45
0028.0.0

-------
of chromium or mercury followed by precipitation decreases the toxicity of the
wastewater.

11-3.2.2  Implementability.  A complex wastewater may contain chemicals in
their oxidized form, exerting a demand on the reducing agent.  Increased demand
on the reducing agent may decrease the overall efficiency of the reaction.
Another potential problem associated with reducing a complex wastewater is that
oxidized chemicals may be reduced to more toxic forms.  These potentially
adverse effects can be investigated through bench-testing.

In general, the process of chemical reduction of a wastewater can be quickly
and easily implemented.  The equipment is readily available and many manufac-
turers offer controls for automation.

11-3.2.3  Cost.  Cost estimates for the capital requirements of reduction of a
chromium- waste using sodium metabisulfite are presented in Figures 11-9 and
11-10.  The two curves are representative of low and high published chemical
doses (Patterson, 1985).  Sodium metabisulfite, the most commonly used reducing
agent for industries, is a medium-priced reducing agent.  The capital costs are
based on the following:

     o    a reaction time of 20 minutes

     o    premixing the dry reducing agent for influent flow rates less than
          300 gpm

     o    dry feed addition of the reducing agent for influent flow rates above
          300 gpm

     o    chemical storage, for a minimum of one month

     o    all reaction tanks are surrounded by dikes for leak protection

     o    all pumps and piping are in parallel to facilitate maintenance

Because sodium metabisulfite is readily soluble in water, its premix require-
ments may be. less than those of other reducing agents (e.g., sulfur dioxide).

O&M cost estimates, presented in Figure 11-10, include operator's labor,  low
and high published chemical doses, and electricity.  O&M costs are primarily
affected by the labor requirements involved in the chemical  addition.  Reducing
agents that are difficult  to handle, or that may produce undesirable off-gases
or sludges, will increase  the O&M costs.


11-4  PRECIPITATION

11-4.1  Description

Precipitation is a chemical unit process  in which soluble metallic  ions  are
removed from solution by conversion  to an insoluble  form.   It  is  a  commonly
used treatment technique for removal of heavy metals, phosphorus, and  hardness.
                                      11-23
 11.89.45
 0029.0.0

-------
NJ
-F-
                                  REDUCTION
                                     CAPITAL COSTS
                          0.2
         b   LOW CHEMICAL USAGE
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
          1	'	T
    0.4          0.6          0.8          1
      (Thousands)
GALLONS PER MINUTE
            +   HIGH CHEMICAL USAGE

                                 FIGURE 11-9
                  REDUCTION - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
      5l
      o
      a
                                 REDUCTION
                                    ANNUAL COSTS
                         0.2
         D   LOW CHEMICAL USAGE
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
     I      I      I
    0.4          0.6          0.8
      (Thousands)
GALLONS PER MINUTE
            +   HIGH CHEMICAL USAGE

                                FIGURE 11-10
 REDUCTION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

-------
 Chemical precipitation is always followed by a solids-separation operation,
 which may include clarification/sedimentation or filtration to  remove  the
 precipitates (see Sections 11-6 and 11-7, respectively).   The process  can  be
 preceded by chemical oxidation or reduction to change the valence of certain
 metal ions to a form that can be precipitated (see Sections 11-2 and 11-3).

 The most common precipitation treatment processes use either hydroxide,  carbon-
 ate, or sulfide compounds to produce insoluble metal  salts.   Each process  is
 pH-dependent and governed by the optimal pH for removal of the  metals  desired.
 A brief description of each process follows.

 Hydroxide Precipitation.   Hydroxide precipitation,  the most common technique,
 uses alkaline agents as a source of hydroxide to raise the pH of the wastewater
 to the optimum pH for precipitation.   The metal ions  subsequently precipitate
 as insoluble metal hydroxides.   A general form of the hydroxide precipitation
 reaction may be written as:
            M
             ,+X
                     X (OH )
 M (OH)
                                                            X
        metal  ion  +   hydroxide  compound  =   insoluble metal hydroxide

        where  X equals the metal cation charge

Principal  sources of hydroxide are  lime (CaO), hydrated lime (Ca(OH)2), and
caustic soda (NaOH).   Lime hydrolizes  in water to  form the hydroxide ion.

Carbonate  Precipitation.  Carbonate precipitation  may be used to remove metals
either by  direct precipitation or by converting hydroxides into carbonates
using carbon dioxide.   A general form  of the  direct carbonate precipitation
reaction may be written as:
       or
     M
            2M
                             CO,
                                _2
                                              MC
-------
Two processes used to precipitate metal sulfides are (1) insoluble sulfide
precipitation (ISP) (i.e., sulfide is added as a slightly soluble iron sulfide
[FeS].slurry); and (2) soluble sulfide precipitation (SSP) (i.e., sulfide is
added as sodium sulfide [Na2Sj or sodium hydrosulfide [NaHS]).  With the SSP
process, overdosing of sulfide compounds can produce toxic hydrogen sulfide gas
(H2S); therefore, reaction tanks should be covered and vented.  The advantages
and limitations of each process are discussed in Section 11-4.1.2.

11-4.1.1  Equipment Types Available.  Chemical precipitation typically requires
using a reaction tank with a mixer, a pH monitoring system, and pumps for
influent flow and chemical addition.  Chemicals utilized in precipitation are
discussed in Sections 11-4.1.2 and 11-4.1.3; this subsection addresses basic
process equipment types (Figures ll-ll and 11-12).
                                              "
Chemical precipitation requires a tank in batch (see Figure 11-11) or con-
tinuous operation for reaction (see Figure 11-12).  For small or intermittent
flow rates or where waste characteristics may vary substantially with time,
batch systems are more feasible.  Continuous treatment is applicable to uniform
and high flow rate wastewater streams (Peters et al., 1985).  A continuous
system may use an equalization tank in which retention times range from"several
hours to a few days, to even out fluctuations in contaminant levels and flows
before treatment begins (Clifford et al., 1986).

The batch treatment tanks serve the multiple functions of equalizing the flow,
acting as a reactor, a flocculation chamber, and a settler.  In Figure 11-11, a
cone bottom tank is used to allow solids to be removed.
Pump selection will depend on characteristics of the wastestream.  Corrosive
environments may necessitate special materials of construction.  The metering '
pumps, ,for precipitant and pH adjustment chemicals, are sized after assessing
the concentration of metal ions to be removed and their associated chemical
demand.  Chemical demand is determined through bench-scale testing.

Several vendors offer package precipitation treatment systems.  Alternatively,
individual components are readily available to fit other designs.

11-4.1.2  Advantages and Limitations.  The benefits of precipitation include
low treatment cost, and reliable and easily operated equipment.  However,
precipitation is primarily a metal ion removal process, potentially interfered
with by other organic, chelating, or oil and grease contaminants  (Federal
Register, 1987).  The advantages and limitations of each hydroxide, carbonate,
and sulfide precipitation process are listed in the following paragraphs
(Peters et al., 1985).
Hydroxide Precipitation.
are as follows:
                The advantages of the hydroxide precipitation process
     o
     o
     o
Certain chemicals for precipitation are available at low cost.
Systems can be automated, minimizing operator time.
Heavy metal ion concentrations can be effectively reduced.
                                      11-27
 11.89.45
 0033.0.0

-------
             FLOCCULANTS
                           METERING
                            PUMP
        CHEMICAL
       PRECIPITANTS
     INFLUENT
                      METERING
                       PUMP
                                               CONTROL
 METERING
  PUMP
                                          pH PROBE
                                      MIXER
—txh-

-N-
                                    SLUDGE TO
                                   DEWATERING
             ACID/BASE
            pH ADJUSTERS
                                                               EFFLUENT
•5307-83
                                                                  FIGURE 11-11
                                    CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION - BATCH FLOW
                                      11-28

-------
     CHEMICAL
   PREOPITANTS
    INFLUENT
                                             CONTROL
                                           r
                                           I
                    METERING
                      PUMP
                 O
                 o1
                FLOW
                METER
                   METERING
                     PUMP
                                ACID/BASE
                               pH ADJUSTERS
           a
          pH PROBE
                                    MIXER
                                                             EFFLUENT
530743
                                   FIGURE 11-12
CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION - CONTINUOUS FLOW

          11-29

-------
 The limitations of the hydroxide precipitation process are as follows:

      o    The pH must be strictly controlled near the optimal pH to ensure
           effective removal.

      o    Systems must be designed to allow adequate reaction times.

      o    Certain metals (e.g., chromium, iron, and manganese) must be reduced
           or oxidized prior to precipitation.

      o    If two or more metals are present, the optimal pH for removal may be
           different for each, thus affecting removal efficiency.

      o    Precipitated metals can resolubilize if pH changes.

      o    Complexing agents (e.g., cyanide, ethylene-diamine-tetraacetic acid
           [EDTA],  and other chelating agents) may adversely affect removal if
           the wastestream is not pretreated to overcome these effects.

      o    Sludges  may require further treatment prior to dewatering.

 Carbonate Precipitation.   The advantages of the carbonate precipitation process
 are as follows:

      o    Certain  metals  require lower pH values  to  initiate  precipitation.
                                   fM
      o    Certain  metals  can be removed more effectively than by hydroxide
           precipitation.

      o    Generally,  a  denser sludge  is produced  that is  easier  to  settle  and
           dewater.

 Carbonate precipitation limitations are similar to hydroxide  precipitation.
 Metals  can resolubilize,  complexing agents can  interfere  with the chemical
 reactions, and the  sludge may require further treatment.

 Sulfide  Precipitation.  The  advantages  of the sulfide precipitation process are
 as  follows:

     o    The process removes  metal ions  at pHs as low as  2 to 3.

     o    Sulfides  reduce hexavalent  chromium to trivalent state under the same
          conditions as required for  precipitation.

     o    Sulfides are highly  reactive, thus requiring less detention  time.

     o    Thicker sludges are  easier  to dewater and dispose.
                                     11-30
11.89.45
0036.0.0

-------
The limitations of the sulfide precipitation process are as follows:

     o    The process is more expensive.

     o    Toxic hydrogen sulfide gas is generated in the SSP process if strict
          control of chemical addition is not maintained.

     o    High sulfide concentrations in the effluent can inhibit POTW biologi-
          cal treatment processes.

However, the hydrogen sulfide gas and sulfide can be reduced by,controlling the
sulfide reagent dose or aerating after reaction time.  Housing  and venting the
process equipment controls hydrogen sulfide fumes.

Coprecipitation.  In coprecipitation, contaminants that cannot  be removed
effectively by direct precipitation are removed by incorporating them into
particles of another precipitate.  It is a phenomenon that  can  be induced by
adding calcium, iron, or other  ions to the wastewater prior to  precipitation.
Examples of coprecipitation have been documented in Peters  et al. (1985).

11-4.1.3  Chemicals Required.   The following chemicals are  described in
Section 11-4.1.  The advantages and disadvantages of each type  of precipitation
are  listed in Section 11-4.1.2.

Hydroxide Precipitation;   Quicklime  (CaO), hydrated lime  (Ca(OH)2), and  liquid
caustic soda  (NaOH).  These  compounds are most commonly used; others are
available at  a higher cost.

Sulfide Precipitation;   Sodium  sulfide  (Na2S) and  ferrous  sulfide  (FeS).

Carbonate Precipitation:   Calcium carbonate  (CaCO3),  carbon dioxide (C02),  and
sodium  carbonate  (NaCO3).

 H-4.1.4  Residuals  Generated.   Chemical  precipitation generates  solids  that
must be  removed  in a subsequent treatment step  (e.g.,  clarification or filtra-
tion).  Ultimately,  the treatment train produces a Sludge that must be de-
watered and  disposed of.   The sludge should be  sampled and tested for contami-
nant concentrations  that would  classify it as  a  hazardous waste.

 11-4.1.5  Design Criteria.  In all design considerations,  bench-  and pilot-
 scale studies should be conducted to match waste characteristics  with a treat-
 ment process.  The reaction tank is sized based on wastewater flow and chemical
 contact time required.   Pilot-  and bench-scale testing can provide other design
 criteria that depend on contaminant concentration, as follows:

      o    performance of different chemical precipitant types

      o    chemical dosage requirements to drive the precipitation reaction to
           completion

      o    minimum contact ,time to produce the desired quality  of effluent
                                       11-31
 11.89.45
 0037.0.0

-------
      o    rate of mixing to allow the chemicals and waste to react

      o    equipment sizes

      o    optimal pH for the reaction to occur

      o    sludge handling requirements

 The precipitating reagent choice is important because the chemicals affect the
 solubility and settling characteristics of precipitated metal compounds.  -The
 chemical choice can be complicated by metal complexing agents that reduce the
 number of free metal ions available to precipitate.   Polyelectrolyte (i.e.,
 flocculant) addition is required to induce particle flocculation when pre-'
 cipitated particles are too small to readily settle easily.

 The most important operating parameter of the precipitation process is pH.
 Since each metal ion has its lowest solubility at a different pH,  operating  pH
 for a mixture of metal ions is either a compromise value,  or must be based on
 the pH optimum for the metal constituent requiring the most stringent effluent
 limitation.   Alternatively, a staged precipitation process can be  used that  has
 different pH settings for specific metals to be removed during each stage
 (Cliffqrd et al.,  1986).

 During operation,  it is easier to control pH for a batch system than a continu-
 ous system.   A continuous system requires controls to  keep the pH  in optimal
 range.   Air treatment and controls are sometimes needed (as  with sulfide
 precipitation) to  vent hydrogen sulfide  fumes.

 11-4.1.6  Performance.   The precipitation process  is effective in  removing
 metal ions from wastewater.   Equipment is relatively simple  and easy to  oper-
 ate.   The process  is  most sensitive  to the chemistry involved.   Chemical
 choice,  dose,  and  the optimum operating  pH are  best determined from bench- or
 pilot-scale  studies.   However,  Table 11-2 and Figure 11-13 will provide  a
 starting point for chemical and pH considerations.  Table  11-2 lists priority
 metal pollutants and  the  precipitating compounds most  effective in removing
 that  contaminant.   The  graph in Figure 11-13 shows the solubility  of some of
 the same metal ions as  a  hydroxide or  sulfide metal salt.  Figure  11-13  may  be
 helpful  in choosing an  optimum  pH for  a  target  metal ion,  provided other ions
 do  not interfere with the chemical reaction.  Bench- or pilot-scale  data are
 not available  for  confirmation.   However,  the metal salts  solubility indicates
 that  precipitation may  occur.

 11-4.2   Evaluation of Precipitation

 11-4.2.1 Effectiveness.  Chemical precipitation can be an effective, permanent
means of reducing  the metal  ion concentration in wastewater.  Pre- and/or
post-treatment is necessary  to  remove  other  contaminants such as organics,
suspended solids, oil and grease, or residual metals.

The level of metal removal partially depends  on  how well the waste characteris-
tics were evaluated with bench-  and pilot-scale  tests.  The pH must be strictly
11.89.45
0038.0.0
                                     11-32

-------
METAL ION
                                       TABLE 11-2
                EFFECTIVE TYPES OF PRECIPITATION FOR SELECTED METAL  IONS
                         HYDROXIDE
                                              TYPE OF PRECIPITATION
                                            SULFIDE           CARBONATE
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Iron
Manganese

X

X
X
X
X

X

X

X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X
X
X

T
T
X
X
T


T
X
-

X

X



T


NOTES:

"X"  indicates process  is  applicable for removal of the metal ion.   Bench-
     or pilot-scale  data are  available to affirm precipitation occurrence.

"T"  indicates process  may be applicable for removal of the metal ion.
     Bench-  or pilot-scale data are not available for confirmation.  However,
     the  metal salt's  solubility indicates precipitation may occur.
 11.89.45T
 0002.0.0
11-33

-------
c
CD
O
-n


m
D
DO

§
o
m
§2
                         O
                         a
                         D
                         CO

                         O

                         O
                         3)




                         1
                         m
O
-n
                         N

                         >
                         3)
                         D

                         O


                         W



                         I
m

m

§


I
m


w
m
•o
                         CO
                         O)
              CONCENTRATION OF DISSOLVED METAL SALT, mg/llter
                                     o
                                      •
                                      _A
                                      N
o
 I
_L

O
                            O
                            i
                            oo
O

O)
O

M
O
o
O

 M

-------
controlled to assure optimal precipitating conditions. - Metal complexing agents
that bind metal ions in solution need to be identified.

11-4.2.2  Implementability.  Precipitation is a widely used and well-
demonstrated, method of metal removal.  The equipment is basic and easily
designed.  Many manufacturers also provide compact single treatment units that
are deliverable to a site.  Precipitating chemicals are readily available and,
as in the case of lime, relatively inexpensive.

Sludge production can be voluminous, difficult to dewater, and may require
further treatment prior to disposal.  Landfill or incineration should be
considered as disposal methods.  Contaminated sludges may need RCRA approval
for transport and disposal.

11-4.2.3  Cost.  A continuous flow sodium hydroxide (NaOH) precipitation
process has been costed based on the following assumptions.

Capital Costs

     o    Chemically resistant reaction tanks are closed and vented.  They are
          sized for a 20-minute detention time.

     o    Chemical storage tanks for liquid NaOH and a polymer are sized for 30
          days' storage.  The NaOH storage tank is insulated and heat-traced to
          prevent crystallization.
                  !
     o    A NaOH premix tank with paddle mixer and metering pump controls is
          included to dilute the NaOH in case it is too concentrated for the
          wastestream.

     o    Variable speed mixers are in reaction tanks.

     o    Metering pumps and a pH probe control NaOH and polymer addition.

     o    Pumps and piping are designed with 100-percent backup capability.
                                                                               «
     o    The process equipment is installed on a concrete pad.
O&M Costs
          Electricity to operate pumps  and mixers  is  included.

          A 50-percent NaOH  solution  is costed  for a  range  of  200  mg/£
          (0.262  gal/1,000 gal) to  1,000 mg/£ (1.31 gal/1,000  gal).

          The polymer dose ranges from  1 to  100 mg/X..

          Labor is  8 hours/week for system flows less than  or  equal  to 100 gpm,
          and 16  hours/week  for flows greater than 100 gpm.

          Solids  disposal is not costed (solids will  be removed later in the
          treatment train).
 11.89.45
 0041.0.0
                                      11-35

-------
 Capital and O&M costs are presented as a range of costs in Figures 11-14 and
 11-15.
 11-5  NEUTRALIZATION

 One of the common types of chemical treatment used by industrial wastewater
 treatment facilities is pH adjustment.  Waters that are acidic or alkaline
 could be disruptive to collection systems, treatment plants, and receiving
 waters.  The adjustment of alkalinity or acidity to yield a final pH of approx-
 imately 7.0 is called neutralization.

 One reason for pH adjustment is that the General Pretreatment Regulations
 prohibit any discharge to a POTW with a pH less than 5.0.   Further,  wastes
 entering biological treatment processes should have a pH between 6.5 and 8.0
 for optimum growth of the microorganisms (Sundstrom and Klei, 1979;  Water
 Pollution Control Federation, 1977).

 11-5.1  Description

 The process of neutralization is the interaction of an acid with a base or vice
 versa.  The typical+properties exhibited by acids in solution are a  result of
 the hydrogen ion (H )  concentration in solution.   Similarly, alkaline (or
 basic) properties are  a result of the hydroxyl ion (OH~)  concentration.   In
 aqueous solutions,  pH  is a measure of acidity and basicity where pH  = - log
 [H ],  or pH = 14.0  + log [OH_] at room temperature,  respectively.  Streams with
 a  higher concentration of OH  ion that H  ion have pH levels greater than 7.0
 and are said to 1j>e  basic or alkaline.   Streams with a higher concentration of
 hydrogen ions [H ]  have pH levels less than 7.0,  and are  said to be  acidic.   A
 typical neutralization system is shown in Figure  11-16.

 Many industries produce effluents that are acidic or alkaline in nature.
 Neutralization of an acidic or basic wastestream  is  necessary in a variety of
 situations,  for example:

     o   pH adjustment for precipitation

     o   preventing metal corrosion and/or damage to other materials

     o   preliminary  treatment,  allowing effective  operation of biological
          treatment  processes

     o   providing  neutral pH water for  recycling uses and reducing  detri-   %
          mental  effects  in the receiving water

     o   oil-emulsion breaking (see Section  11-1.1)

     o   controlling  of  chemical  reaction rates  (e.g., chlorination)

 11-5.1.1  Equipment  Types  Available.  Many acceptable methods  of neutralizing
 acidic or basic wastewaters are available,  including  the following:
                                     11-36
11.89.45
0042.0.0

-------
      W
    WO
    K C
    <0

    3s
    O O
         360
                              PRECIPITATION
                                   CAPITAL COSTS
                        0.2
        D   LOW CHEMICAL USAGE
                                GALLONS
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
0.4         0.6         0.8
  (Thousands)
  S PER MINUTE
        +   HIGH CHEMICAL USAGE

                            FIGURE 11-14
             PRECIPITATION - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
oj
00
      5°
      _i »—
=   0.6 r
                                PRECIPITATION
                                     ANNUAL COSTS
                          0.2
         D   LOW CHEMICAL USAGE
                              0.4         0.6          0.8
                                 (Thousands)
                          GALLONS PER MINUTE
                                       +  HIGH CHEMICAL USAGE
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
                                                           FIGURE 11-15
                         PRECIPITATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

-------
i
CO
vO
                 BASE
               STORAGE
                            METERING PUMP
                            AGITATOR
                        FEED
                                                                 METERING PUMP
           ACID
          STORAGE
                                                            i
                                          \
                                             \
                                             NEUTRALIZATION TANK
->• EFFLUENT
                                                                                             FIGURE IM 6
                                                                                       NEUTRALIZATION
  5307-87

-------
      o

      o
           mixing acidic and alkaline wastes so that the net effect is a near-
           neutral pH

           passing acid wastes through beds of limestone

           mixing acid wastes with lime slurries or dolomitic lime slurries

      o    adding basic solutions (e.g., caustic soda [NaOH] and soda ash
           [Na2C03]) to acid wastes

      o    blowing waste boiler-flue gas through alkaline wastes

      o    adding carbon dioxide (CO2) to alkaline wastes

      o    adding acid (e.g.,  sulfuric and hydrochloric) to alkaline wastes
           (Nemerow, 1971)

 The method chosen depends on the wastewater characteristics and subsequent
 handling or use.  For example,  mixing of various  streams is often insufficient
 as & preliminary step to biological treatment or  sanitary sewer discharge.   In
 this case, supplemental chemical addition is  generally required to obtain the
 proper pH.

 Equipment for acid or base addition include dry feeders,  metering pumps,  slurry
 pumps,  and eductors.   Lime compounds (i.e., CaO,  CaC3O, and Ca(OH)2)  are  added
 to a mixing tank with a dry feeder,  water is  added,  and the solution  is mixed
 to form a slurry.   Slurry pumps  or  eductors (water-induced flow)  are  used  to
 feed the slurry into  the wastestream for neutralization.   Metering pumps  are
 used for feeding solutions such  as  sodium hydroxide, potassium  hydroxide,  or
 acids to the wastestream.

 Addition of neutralization chemicals is  controlled by pH monitoring equipment,
 placed  near the discharge  of the neutralization tank.   Mixers are  required to
 ensure  adequate mixing of  reagents.   Where large variations in  wastewater  flow
 can occur,  flow monitoring equipment is  commonly used in conjunction  with pH
 controls to  control the  speed and frequency of metering or slurry  pumps.

 Mixing  of wastestreams  can be performed  in a collection tank, rapid mix tank,
 neutralization  tank, or  equalization tank.  Final pH adjustment in preparation
 for discharge can be done  in a small neutralization tank  at the end of the
 treatment process.

 11-5.1.2—Advantages and Limitations.  The  major limitation of  neutralization is
 that it  is subject to  the  influence  of temperature and  the  resulting  heat
 effects  common  to most chemical  reactions.  In neutralization,  the  reaction
 between  acid and base normally is exothermic (i.e., creates heat), and may
 raise the temperature of the wastewater "stream or create hydrogen  gas (an
 explosion hazard).  An average value for heat released  during neutralization  of
 dilute solutions by strong  acids or bases is 13,400 cal/g mole  (24,100 BTU/lb.
mole) of water  formed.  By  controlling the  rate of addition of  the neutralizing
 reagent(s), the heat produced may be dissipated and the temperature increase
minimized.  Heat can also be recovered by heat exchangers and used in other
                                     11-40
11.89.45
0046.0.0

-------
processes (e.g., building heating).  For each reaction, the final temperature
depends on initial wastestreara temperature, chemical species participating in
the reaction (e.g., strong acids or strong bases), and pH of the wastestream.
In general, concentrated solutions with extreme pH values (i.e., less than 3 or
greater than 12) can produce large temperature increases.  This can result in
boiling and splashing of the solution, and accelerated chemical attack on
materials, or hydrogen generation.  In most cases, proper planning of the
neutralization system with respect to required dosages of neutralizing agent,
rate of addition, reaction time, and equipment design can alleviate the heating
problem.

Neutralization will usually cause increased TDS content due to addition of
chemical agents.  Anions and cations (e.g., sulfate, chloride, and calcium)
resulting from neutralization may not be considered hazardous; however, local
limits may exist for discharge to a POTW.

Acidification of streams containing sulfide tends to produce toxic gases.  If
there is no satisfactory alternative, the gas must be removed through scrubbing
or some other treatment.  Salt-containing wastestreams should be
bench-scale-tested to determine if such a problem would occur.
 11-5.1.3  Chemicals Required.
Chemicals used in neutralization are specific to
Chemicals used frequently are lime (CaO),
the wastewater being treated.                     _
hydrated  lime  (Ca(OH)2),  limestone  (CaCO3),  sodium  hydroxide  (NaOH),  sodium
carbonate (Na2CO3), carbon  dioxide  (CO2),  sulfuric  acid  (H2SO4),  potassium
hydroxide (KOH),  and hydrochloric acid  (HC1).

The selection  of  a neutralization chemical depends  on factors  such as price,
availability,  and process compatibility.   Sulfuric  acid  is  the most common acid
used  for  the neutralization of  alkaline waste.   It  is less  costly than hydro-
chloric acid,  but tends  to  form precipitates with calcium-containing alkaline
wastewater.  When hydrochloric  acid is  used for neutralization,  the compounds
formed are soluble.  An  important consideration in  the use  of  alkaline reagents
for neutralization of  acidic wastewaters is the "basicity factor" (see
Section 11-5.1.5), which is the number  of grams of  calcium  oxide equivalent
available for  reaction in a particular  alkali.   Caustic  soda  has a high
basicity  factor and high solubility; however, it is expensive.  Lime compounds
are less  costly,  but have low-to-moderate solubility and form precipitates with
acidic wastewaters containing sulfuric  acid, potentially causing disposal and
scaling problems. Soda  ash has a  low-to-moderate basicity and higher
solubility than lime.

11-5.1.4   Residuals Generated.   Neutralization may  be accompanied by metals
precipitation  if  the treatment proceeds to an alkaline pH.   This may result  in
the generation of residuals that can be removed in  subsequent operations.
as clarification  or filtration.
                                            such
 11-5.1.5  Design Criteria.   There is no direct correlation between acidity or
 basicity and pH.  Therefore, to determine the chemical feed requirements for
 design purposes, a laboratory titration curve using a pH meter'and a titrant of
 standardized normality should be prepared using a representative sample of the
 wastewater to be treated (Water Pollution Control Federation, 1977).
                                      11-41
 11.89.45
 0047.0.0

-------
 Depending on the volumes  of  wastewater,  either batch  treatment  or  continuous
 treatment can be utilized.   With continuous  treatment,  a minimum detention time
 of 10 minutes is recommended.

 Continuous systems  can be designed  as  a  single or multiple  stage.  As a general
 rule, one stage can be used  if  the  pH  of the raw wastewater is  between 4 and
 10.  Two  or more stages are  often required if the pH  is as  low  as  2 or higher
 than 10.   Two-stage pH adjustment is often used in metal hydroxide precipita-
 tion.  The first stage provides rough  pH control, followed  by a second pH
 "trimming11 step.

 Design of an acid feed system is influenced  by many factors, including type and
 quantity  of acid to be fed,  purchase and installation costs, labor, and method
 of control.   The size  of  the neutralizing vessel depends on the wastewater
 volume or flow, reaction  time,  solubility of the reagent, and the  insoluble
 precipitates formed during the  reaction.

 11-5.2  Evaluation  of  Neutralization

 11-5.2.1   Effectiveness.  Neutralization efficiency varies  with the pH of the
 influent  stream and the reaction time.   Off-gas treatment units may be required
 when treating wastewaters that  could produce hydrogen sulfide or other undesir-
 able gases.   Effluent  streams from  a neutralization unit include the neutral-
 ized wastewater and sometimes solids or  gases.  The treated water  may require
 additional treatment to meet discharge limits.  Pretreatment may be required
 for  wastewater streams containing large  amounts of suspended solids, and oils
 and  greases.   Neutralization substantially reduces the toxicity due to pH of
 the  influent water.

 11-5.2.2   Implementability.  Neutralization  systems are feasible for on-site
 pretreatment when large volumes of  contaminated water/groundwater  require pH
 adjustment.   Neutralization  is  suitable  for  the treatment of .water with high or
 low  pH levels (outside the range of 6  to  9).

 Neutralization is used to process contaminated water  at hazardous  waste sites,
 manufacturing facilities, and municipal water treatment plants.  On-site
 facilities have proven successful for  a. broad range of pH values and flow
 rates.  Due  to the  nature of the neutralization process, a  consistent quality
 effluent  can be obtained, provided  there  are no large changes in pH that the
 system has not been designed to handle.

 11-5.2.3   Cost.  The material and methods used should be selected  on the basis
 of overall cost, because  material costs vary widely and equipment  for utilizing
 various agents will differ with the method selected.  The flow, type, and pH of
 acid or alkali waste to be neutralized are also factors in  deciding which
 neutralizing agent  to  use (Nemerow, 1971).

For  illustration, cost information was compiled for flow rates  ranging from 10
 to 1,000  gpm.  These costs,  as  presented  in Figures 11-17 and 11-18, are based
 on the following assumptions.
                                     11-42
11.89.45
0048.0.0

-------
I
-p-
U>
     a:

     5°
     ^•4 •—•
          3.5
          2.5 -
         1.5 -
            1 -
          0.5 -
                             NEUTRALIZATION
                                    CAPITAL COST
                   T	—i	1	r
                        0.2         0.4         0.6
                                      (Thousands)
                                GALLONS PER MINUTE
                 D   LOW CHEM USE           +   HIGH CHEM USE
                                                            0.8
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
                                                                FIGURE 11-17
                                               NEUTRALIZATION - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
38
rnaj
m
9
m

H




N



6
m
3)
o


>
z

m
o30
gm


531
(/>00
     n
DOLLARS

(Millions)

-------
Capital Costs
     o
     o
neutralization tank equipped with both acid and caustic feed systems
influent acidity concentrations ranging from 10 to 1,000 mg/£
O&M Costs

     o    Electricity to operate pumps is included.

     o    Labor required to operate and maintain system is 8 hours/week for
          system flows less than or equal to  100 gpm, and 16 hours/week for
          system flows greater than 100 gpm.

     o    Chemical  costs are  included.

Systems  that  require neutralization greater than 1,000 mg/£ will  require  heat
exchangers  or special tank construction at additional costs, depending on the
duration of the acid flow,  tank volume, and acid concentration.


11-6   SEDIMENTATION

11-6.1  Description

Sedimentation is  a  physical process  that  removes  suspended solids from a  liquid
matrix by gravitational  settling.   The following  are fundamental elements of
most sedimentation  processes:

      o    a basin or container of sufficient size to maintain the liquid in a
           relatively quiescent state for a specified period of time;

      o    a means of directing the liquid to be treated into the basin or
           container in a manner that is conducive to settling;

      o    a means of removing the settled particles from the liquid or vice
           versa, as may be required; and

      o    a means of removing the clarified  liquid  from the tank without
           disturbing the  separation of solids and liquid.

 Sedimentation is often preceded by precipitation or coagulation/flocculation.
 Precipitation converts dissolved material to suspended form and  coagulation/
 flocculation combines colloidal particles into larger, faster settling
 particles.   Whether or not  it is preceded with chemical pretreatment, plain
 sedimentation involves feeding the wastewater into  a tank or  lagoon,  where  it
 loses velocity and the suspended solids  settle.

 Sedimentation is used to  separate suspended  solids, chemically  precipitated
 solids,  and  other  settleable solids  from wastewater.   It  is also used in
 conjunction  with other unit processes to separate  solids  generated in other
 waste treatment.   The settling basins can also be  used for  other purposes,  such
 as  oil  and grease  separation (see  Section 11-1)  and flow  equalization.
                                       11-45
  11.89.45
  0051.0.0

-------
  11-6.1.1  Equipment Types Available.  Sedimentation tanks are square,  rectangu-
  lar, or circular in plan view, and may operate with a horizontal or vertical
  flow path.  They may have flat, pitched,  conical,  or hopper bottoms; and may be
  of single-story, two-story,  or multiple-tray design.  Sludge collection equip-
  ment is a part of most units,  although it is sometimes not included in small
  Installations.

  Sedimentation tanks can be operated on a  batch or  a continuous-flow basis
  Continuous-flow is more common except in  small installations or  in  tanks
  serving the dual purposes of chemical treatment and sedimentation.   Dual-
  purpose tanks are usually limited to small flow rates  because of their lower
  operating efficiency.   Batch treatment, however, provides  more reliable  control
  of effluent quality,  especially with widely varying waste  compositions  or flow
  rates;  therefore,  it  is used when critical control  of  effluent is necessary
  (Gurnham,  1955).

  Although there are many variations  of the  sedimentation process, the components
  of the  settling process are  the  same.  The  settling chamber  has  four zones:
  the inlet  zone,  the clarification zone, the  outlet  zone, and  the sludge zone
  The inlet  zone allows a smooth transition  from  the  high velocities of the inlet
  pipe to  the  low uniform velocity needed in the  settling zone.  Careful control
  of the velocity change  is necessary  to avoid turbulence, short-circuiting, and
  carry over.  The clarification zone must be large enough to reduce the net
  upward water velocity to below the settling rate of the solids.  The outlet
  zone provides  a  transition from  the  low velocity settling zone to the relative-
  ly high overflow velocities.  The sludge zone must effectively settle,  compact
 and  collect the solids  and allow removal of the sludge without disturbing the
 settling zone above.  The major representative types are discussed in the
 following paragraphs and are shown in Figures 11-19' and 11-20.

 Settling Ponds.  Settling ponds can vary from less  than 1 acre to several
 hundred acres in size.  The wastewater is  merely decanted as the  particles
 accumulate on the bottom of the pond and eventually fill it.   The accumulated
 sludge is periodically emptied  by mechanical shovels, draglines,  or  siphons.

 Sedimentation Tanks.  The tanks in which sedimentation is carried out may be
 circular or rectangular in design and generally employ sludge collection
 equipment.   The sedimentation basins are also classified as horizontal-flow or
 vertical-flow, according to the predominant direction of the  flow.   Applica-
 tions of vertical-flow units  are generally settling compartments  in  floccula-
 tion-clarifiers and solids contact units.

 Flow-through rectangular basins  or tanks enters  at  one  end, pass  a baffle
 arrangement,,and traverse the length of the tank to  effluent  weirs.   Rectangu-
 lar tanks are generally  used  for  removal of truly settleable  particles  from a
 liquid.   The  settled solids are mechanically transported  along the bottom of
 the tank by a scraper mechanism and  removed as  a sludge underflow. .The
 sludge-removal  equipment usually  consists  of crosspieces  or flights  attached  to
 endless  conveyor chains,  or suspended by a  bridge-type  mechanism  that travels
 up  and down the tank on  rails supported on  the  sidewalls.
                                     11-46
11.89.45
0052.0.0

-------
       FLOCCULANT
      INFLUENT •
                         Cl
                     METERING PUMP
                                              SEDIMENTATION TANK
                             FILTRATE
                     DEWATERED SLUDGE
^. SUPERNATANT WATER
"*" (TO FILTRATION)
                                                                                   WET
                                                                                 SLUDGE
                                                                                           SLUDGE
                                                                                          STORAGE
                                                                                          \/
SLUDGE DEWATERING
^










0
•« 	 • / -y
                                                                                              FIGURE 11-19
                                                                                          SEDIMENTATION
5307-83

-------
             SETTLING POND
                       Inlet Liquid
                                                                         Overflow Discharge Weir

                                                                         Accumulated Settled Particles
                                                                    Periodically Removed by Machinical Shovel
            SEDIMENTATION BASIN

                        Inlet Zone
                 Inlet Liquid
                Settled Particles Collected
                and Periodically Removed
            CIRCULAR CLARIFIER
                                               Baffles to Maintain
                                             "Quiescent Conditions'
Settling Particles Trajectory
                                                                           Outlet Zone
                                                                               Outlet Liquid
               Belt-Type Solids Collection Mechanism
                                                            Circular Baffle
                        Settling Zone.
                        Revolving Collection
                           Mechanism

_J
Inlet Zone •
V
JTlNJ



i ^

1
s
^
,/
/ 	
,'
•
1'

f Liquid
/ Flow
-'TTTT-
tion ^^^3i_am • • • ,, 	 S^^*

Annular Overflow V

Outlet Liquid

— Settling Panic
                                      Settled Particles  |        Collected and Periodically Removed
                                                    Sludge Drawoff
               Souice: De Renzo. 1978
   5307-S7
_
                                                                                             FIGURE 11-20
                                                REPRESENTATIVE TYPES OF SEDIMENTATION
                                                     11-48

-------
 The most  common  type  of  circular  basin or clarifier is  the center-feed,  in
 which the wastewater  to  be  treated enters the clarifier through the feedwell
 located at or near the liquid surface  in the center.  The bottom of the  clari-
 fier  is usually  sloped 5 to 8 degrees  to the center of  the unit where sludge is
 collected in a hopper for removal.   Mechanically driven sludge rakes rotate
 continuously and scrape  the sludge down the sloped bottom to the sludge  hopper.
 The  clarifier effluent or overflow leaves the clarifier over a weir mounted on
 the  rim of the tank.  Equipment associated with the clarifier tank and sludge-
 rake  drive assembly may  include surface skimmers and scum pits to collect foam
 and/or oil that  may collect on the surface of the clarifier, scum pumps, and
 sludge pumps. Vacuum sludge-removal equipment is also  available for the rapid
.removal of biological sludges.

 Circular  clarifiers are  usually used in applications that involve precipita-
 tion, flocculation, sedimentation, and biological sludge removal.  Very often
 all  three processes occur within the same piece of equipment, because many
 clarifiers are equipped  with separate zones for chemical mixing, flocculation,
 and  settling.  Clarifiers that use settling aids are equipped with a low lift
 turbine,  which mixes a portion of the previously settled solids with the incom-
 ing  feed  to improve the  settling efficiency.

 The  peripheral-feed or rim-feed circular clarifiers are designed to utilize the
 entire volume of the clarifier basin for sedimentation.  Wastewater is  intro-
 duced into the clarifier around the periphery of the tank causing a radial  flow
 pattern.   The clarified liquid flows over weirs located in  the center of the
 tank.

 Clarifiers or settling basins  can be designed to include  inclined plates,
 slanted  tubes, and lamella  settlers placed  in the  clarifier tank or basin  to
 decrease  the vertical settling distance  and reduce turbulence, and to increase
 the  capacity  of the  clarifier or basin.

 11-6.1.2  Advantages and Limitations.   The  major advantage  of solids  removal  by
 settling is  the simplicity of the process  itself.  The major limitation of
 simple settling  (without chemical addition) is  the long retention  time  neces-
 sary to  achieve complete settling,  especially  if the specific gravity of the
 suspended matter  is  close  to that of  water.  In addition,  some materials are
 not  removed  by  simple sedimentation alone  (i.e.,  dissolved solids),  and chemi-
 cals must be added to achieve removal.

 The  major advantage  of  clarifiers and basins is that they require  less  space
 than settling ponds.  In addition,  with clarifiers and basins, closer control
 of operating parameters (e.g., retention time and sludge removal)  can be
 maintained,  while problems such as  runoff from precipitation and short-
 circuiting can  be avoided.  However,  the cost of installing and maintaining a
 clarifier or basin is substantially greater than the  cost associated with a
 settling pond.

  11-6.1.3  Chemicals  Required.  No chemicals are required in this process,
 although settling aids  such as polymers, lime, or alum may be used.
                                       11-49
  11.89.45
  0055.0.0

-------
            11-6.1.4—Residuals Generated.   Inorganic and/or organic sludge is generated.
            The quantity of sludge per unit volume of wastewater treated depends on the
            characteristics of the wastewater treated, the type of equipment,  and chemical
            conditioning agents added during pretreatment.

            11-6.1.5—Design Criteria.   Because the individual particle settling theories
            are of little practical use to  the designer,  design d'ata must be obtained by
            study of existing plants and by laboratory or pilot plant investigations of the
            waste in question.   Batch sedimentation tanks, operating on the fill-and-draw
            principle,  are used for small flow rates;  however,  continuous-flow units with
            continuous  or intermittent  removal of sludge  are commonly preferred for larger
            flow rates.   For continuous-flow sedimentation tanks,  the elemental design
            factors  to  be specified include surface area,  depth,  ratio of length to width,
            and sludge-collecting  facilities.   Detention  time,  overflow rate,  and liquid
            velocity are governed  by these  factors  (Gurnham,  1955).

            Sedimentation tank  performance  is  related  to  the  surface  hydraulic  loading,
            which is the inflow divided by  the surface area  of  the basin,  commonly ex-
            pressed  in  units  of flow per day per  unit  area (i.e., L/day/sq.ra. or gpd/
            sq.ft.).

            Therefore,  a  practical  and  economical tank depth  is  selected  for use  with the
            permissible  overflow rate,  in settling  tank design.  The  depth  should  usually
            be  at  least 5  feet  (8 to  10  feet is more common), and depths  of 12  to  14 feet
            are often used.   Common geometrical ratios  for rectangular units are
            lengthrwidth  of 3:1  or  greater;  and width:depth of  1:1 to 2.25:1.  Typical
            depths when used  as  a primary settling  tank are 2.4 to 3.0 m  (8 to  10  feet);
           and when used as  a  secondary tank, 3.0  to  4.2 m  (10 to 15 feet).

           The diameters of  circular units  range from  3 to greater than 60 m (10 to 200
           feet).  Tank side water depths,  when used  for primary settling, range from 2 to
           3 m (8 to 10 feet); and when used for secondary settling and thickening, from 3
           to 4 m (10 to 14 feet)  and greater (Water Pollution Control Federation, 1977).
           Design of sedimentation tanks as outlined herein will usually result in
           detention times of 1 to 4 hours.  For most wastes, 1 to 2 hours are sufficient;
           however, if sedimentation is the sole form of treatment provided, more thorough
           removals may be necessary (Gurnham, 1955).

           11-6.1.6—Performance.   A properly operating sedimentation system can effi-
           ciently remove suspended solids  and precipitated materials from wastewater.
           The performance of the  process depends on a variety of factors, including the
           density and particle size of the solids, the effective charge on the suspended
           particles, and the types of chemicals used in pretreatment.  The performance of
           simple settling is a function of the surface loading, upflow rate or retention
           time,  and settleable solids.  The sedimentation process preceded by chemical
           precipitation and/or coagulation and flocculation will remove colloidal and
           dissolved solids,  some  of which  could be toxic pollutants.  Performance data
           for such removal are included in the appropriate technology descriptions.
_
                                                11-50
          11.89.45
          0056.0.0

-------
11-6.2  Evaluation of Sedimentation

11-6.2.1  Effectiveness.  The efficiency of sedimentation tanks depends, in
general, on the following factors:
o    detention period

o    wastewater characteristics

o    tank depth

o    floor surface area and
     overflow rate

o    operation (cleanliness)

o    temperature

o    particle size

o    inlet and outlet design

o    weir loading rate
                                             o    velocity of particles

                                             o    density of particles

                                             o    container-wall effect

                                             o    number of tanks
                                                  (baffles)
                                                 /
                                             o    sludge removal

                                             o    pretreatment  (grit
                                                   removal)


                                             o    flow fluctuations

                                             o    wind velocity
For removal from aqueous sources, efficiencies  can be as high as 90-percent
removal of suspended solids based on design and residence  times.  Dewatering  of
sludge is normally  required.

Effluent streams from  a sedimentation  tank include the  effluent water,  scum,
and settled solids.  The treated water may require additional treatment to
further reduce  concentrations  to discharge limits.   The solids may  need to be
treated or dewatered prior to  disposal.   Influent restrictions to a sedimenta-
tion  system may dictate pretreatment prior to  settling.  Pretreatment may be
required for  wastewater streams  containing large amounts of suspended solids
and oils and  greases.

Sedimentation substantially  reduces the  toxicity of  the influent water  caused
by the solids.  The volume of  contaminated media is  reduced by  transferring  to
the solid phase.  Sedimentation  processes transfer the  potential  for mobility
of the contaminant  from the  water  to the solids.             __    -

11-6.2.2  Implementability.  Sedimentation  is  feasible  for on-site  pretreatment
when  large volumes  of  contaminated water/groundwater require treatment.
Sedimentation is  suitable  for  the  treatment  of water with  high  concentrations
of solids.  However,  solids  settled from groundwater treatment  must be  disposed
of.

Sedimentation tanks currently  process  contaminated water at hazardous waste
sites, manufacturing facilities, and municipal water treatment plants.   On-site
facilities  have proven successful  for  a broad range  of contaminants and flow
 rates.   Due  to the  nature  of the sedimentation process, a  consistent quality
                                      11-51
 11.89.45
 0057.0.0

-------
 effluent, can be obtained, provided there are no large fluctuations in influent
 concentrations.

 11-6.2.3  Cost.  Consideration of the rate of waste flow through the settling
 tank (in gallons per day) and overflow rate (in gallons per day per square
 foot) provides design data for the area of settling tank needed.   If flow is
 variable over a 24-hour period, the area must be increased to correspond with
 maximum flow rate,  except perhaps for purely momentary high rates.  If the area
 is greater than 2,500 or 3,500 square feet, a circular settling tank is proba-
 bly cheaper than a  rectangular tank.   Rectangular tanks are usually less
 expensive for smaller installations;  however,  these generalizations must be
 used with discretion, because factors of land value,  compactness  of plant,
 topography, and price quotations on specific equipment may reverse the trend
 (Gurnham, 1955).  Cost information was compiled for flow rates  ranging from 10
 to 1,000 gpm,  and two polymer addition rates:   0.5 and 10 mg/£.

 Capital Costs

      o    carbon-steel sedimentation tank

      o    polymer feed system

 O&M Costs

      o    Electricity to operate pumps is included.

      o    Labor required to  operate and maintain system is  8  hours/week for
           system  flows less  than or equal to 100 gpm,  and 16  hours/week for
           system  flows greater than 100 gpm.

      o    Disposal  costs for sludge.

      o    Chemicals  required at specified addition rates  of 0.5 and 10 mg/£.

 Capital  and O&M costs are presented in Figures  11-21  and  11-22.


 11-7   FILTRATION

 11-7.1   Description

Filtration is a physical process  used to  remove  suspended solids  from  waste-
water.   The separation is accomplished by passing  water through a  physically
 restrictive medium,  resulting in  the  entrapment  of suspended particulate
matter.   The flow pattern is  usually  top-to-bottom, but other patterns  are
sometimes  used  (e.g.,  upflow,  horizontal  flow, and biflow).  The media  used for
filtration include sand,  coal,  garnet,  and diatomaceous earth (USEPA,  1986c).
Within the  treatment  train,  the filtration process  is generally preceded by
chemical precipitation and neutralization  (see Sections 11-4 and  11-5,
respectively).  To further polish the  effluent,  filtration  can be  followed by
carbon adsorption or  ion exchange  (see  Sections  11-11 and 11-12,  respectively).
                                     11-52
11.89.45
0058.0.0

-------
                              SEDIMENTATION
                                     CAPITAL COST
           3.2
CO
                          0.2
    0.4          0.6
      (Thousands)
GALLONS PER MINUTE
0.8
                   a . LOW CHEMISE
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN ^T,,^|
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
            +   HIGH CHEM USE

                                FIGURE 11-21
                SEDIMENTATION - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
     w
     c
          1  -
                            SEDIMENTATION
 NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
    REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS
    SECTION.


    n   LOW  CHEM USE


    +   HIGH CHEM USE
                                   ANNUAL COST
          i	r

    0.4          0.6
      (Thousands)
GALLONS PER MINUTE
                                                          0.8
                                   FIGURE 11-22
SEDIMENTATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
5307-01

-------
11-7.1.1  Equipment Types Available.  Filtration equipment types range from
traditional, built-in-place, gravity granular-media design to new, compact,
pressure-filtration units.  Filter beds vary in filter mediaj backwash methods,
underdrain design, and rate and direction of flow.  A typical filtration bed is
shown in Figure 11-23.  A discussion of different filter bed types follows.

Gravity granular-media bed typically' contains one to three layers of filter
media.  The top layer is coarse (e.g., anthracite), the middle layer is sand,
and the bottom layer is fine garnet.  This grading allows particles to collect
in-depth; that is, particles are filtered throughout the media depth, not just
at the media surface.   The media is supported by an underdrain system that
collects the filtrate.  During filter operation, particles removed from the
applied wastewater clog media pores.  The filters are cleaned by backwashing in
the reverse direction of original flow.  During this scouring process, solids
are dislodged from the media, collected in a backwash trough, and discharged in
the spent wash cycle.  Water or an air/water combination is used to scour the
filter media during the backwash cycle.

Diatomaceous-earth. filters, employing a diatomite earth material as a medium,
operate on three  steps.  A support material is precoated with diatomite,
wastewater is filtered through, and finally, the dirty filter cake is disposed.,

Pressure filters  have the granular media and underdrains contained in a steel
tank.  Water is pumped through the filter under pressure.  For relatively low
flows, cartridge  filtration can be used.  Wastewater is pumped through a sealed
vessel until flow drops, indicating plugged media.  The plugged matted cloth
cartridge is disposed of a'nd replaced with a new one.

Self-backwashing  filters are sold by some filter manufacturers.  The units
divide influent equally among several filter cells.  Backwashing is automatic,
using the effluent of the remaining on-line filters.  The units often run
unattended  (Kawamura, 1987).

There are many design alternatives among these types of filters.  For example,
each filter described, except diatomaceous-earth filters, can  employ carbon as
a medium to adsorb contaminants.  Reference text, wastewater engineers, and
manufacturers can help match the wastewater with a proper filtration unit.

11-7.1.2  Advantages and Limitations.  Filtration  is a  conventional, proven
method of removing suspended solids from wastewater.  Biological  floes are also
filtered, although the floes generally plug filter media at  a  faster rate.
Filters normally  require  little  space and  can be installed easily.

-Filtration1s  limitation is  that  contaminants other than suspended  solids will
not be removed.   Filter media will  not  catch colloidal-size  particles and
dissolved solids  (coagulants can be added before  filtration  to remove these
fine particles).  Oil and grease  coat filter media and  prevent effective back-
wash; therefore,  pretreatment to  remove oil and  grease  is  required.  Pretreat-
ment  is also  necessary if the total suspended  solids  concentration is high
enough  (30  to 50  mg/£ for gravity  granular-media  filters)  to clog the media  too
quickly.
                                      11-55
 11.89.45
 OO61.0.0

-------
           BACKWASH DRAIN
                                      HEAD
                                   BACKWASH
                                    TROUGH
                                                      INFLUENT
                                                   SINGLE OR MULTIPLE
                                                   LAYER FILTER MEDIUM
                                   UNDERDRAIN

•AIR


 BACKWASH
• EFFLUENT
                                                                 FIGURE 11-23
                                          GRANULAR MEDIA FILTRATION BED
5307-83
                                      11-56

-------
11-7.1.3  Chemicals Required.  The filtration process does not require chemical
use for the removal of suspended solids.  Alum salts, iron salts, and polymers
can be added as coagulants or coagulant aids directly ahead of filtration units
for colloidal and dissolved solids removal.  This will generally improve solids
captured by the filter, but at the expense of reduced run lengths.

11-7.1.4  Residuals Generated.  The residue cleaned from surface filters
requires disposal.  Backwash water (generally 2 to 10 percent of the through-,
put) from the cleaning of granular media filters requires further treatment and
disposal; spent backwash often is returned to the head of the plant for treat-
ment by sedimentation (USEPA, 1986c).

11-7.1.5  Design Criteria.  Final quality of the filtered wastestream will
depend on how well the design criteria and operating parameters are chosen,
based on wastewater characteristics.  The wastestream should be evaluated for
the concentration of TSS, the size of these particles, and the presence of
grease and oil that may coat the media.  These characteristics and the waste-
stream flow will affect filtration performance.

Design criteria to be considered include the following:

     o    bed sizing as a function of wastewater flow and design loading rate

     o    a bed deep enough to allow relatively long filter runs

     o    filter media possessing qualities coarse enough to retain large
          quantities of floe, sufficiently fine to prevent passage of suspended
          solids, and graded to permit backwash cleaning (Viessman and Hammer,
          1985)

     o    an underdrain to .support the bed, prevent loss of media with water,
          and evenly distribute flow during backwash

Whenever possible, designs should be based on pilot filtration studies of the
actual wastewater to be treated.  Pilot tests should help determine operating
parameters (i.e., hydraulic loading rate, run time, terminal head loss, and
backwash or air scour rate) that best remove the concentration of suspended
solids to acceptable levels.

Pilot studies can also help evaluate the following:

     o    cost comparisons between different filter designs capable of equiva-
          lent performance

     o    effluent quality for a given medium

     o    adequate run times between backwashing cycles

     o    determination of the effects of pretreatment variations (USEPA,
          1987e)
                                     11-57
11.89.45
0063.0.0

-------
          As general guidance, typical operating parameters for granular, gravity flow
          filters are as follows:
               o    hydraulic loading rate
               o    backwash rate
               o    air scour rate
2 to 10 gpm/ft2
10 to 30 gpm/ft2
3 to 5  standard cubic feet/min
          11-7.1.6  Performance.  Filtration is an established, reliable method for
          suspended solids and biological floe removal.  However, the filtration process
          can be inhibited by too great a concentration of suspended solids that clog
          filter media, and excessive oil and grease that coat filter media to prevent
          effective backwashing.  In addition, collodial-size particles and dissolved
          solids will not be filtered, but will pass through into the effluent.  In each
          case, a pretreatment process to remove suspended solids, separate oil and
          grease, or coagulate colloidal and dissolved solids should be considered.

          The performance of any filtration system should be determined from pilot
          Studies on the actual wastewater or from information provided by filter manu-
          facturer services.

          11-7.2  Evaluation of Filtration

          11-7.2.1  Effectiveness.  Filtration is an effective treatment for suspended
          solids and biological floe removal.  The process will, at some point in the
          treatment cycle, produce a residual sludge for which disposal must be consid-
          ered.  Surface filters produce sludge on the medium surface.  In-depth filters,
          backwashed for regeneration, generally send residual back to the treatment
          headworks.  At some point, perhaps during clarification, the residuals will be
          collected.  Landfill and incineration are disposal alternatives; waste from a
          CERCLA site will generally require RCRA-permitted disposal.

          11-7.2.2  Implementability.  Filtration is a conventional, proven treatment
          technology.  It is rarely used as the sole method of treatment, but rather in
          conjunction with other technologies, such as precipitation and clarification.

          Filtration equipment is relatively simple to install •• and no chemicals are .
          required.  Design should be based on pilot studies performed on actual waste-
          water.  Filter manufacturers supply integrated field units.  Where filter units
          are not automated, skilled operators may be needed to monitor parameters such
          as backwash.

          11-7.2.3  Cost.  The filtration process costing is based on a vendor package
          unit.  Assumptions are listed as follows.

          Capital Costs

               o    Gravity flow with a loading rate of 5 gpm/ft2

               o    A 30-inch bed depth of multigrade sand media
                                                11-58
_
          11.89.45
          0064.0.0

-------
     o    At least two units are installed in parallel to cover unit downtime
          during backwash cycles, thus providing continuous filtering
          capability

     o    Influent pump and piping designed with 100-percent backup capability

     o    Concrete pad to support each unit

O&M Costs

     o    Electricity for influent pump and unit is included.

     o    Backwash water is recycled treated effluent.

     o    Labor is 8 hours/week for system flows less than or equal to 1OO gpm,
          and 16 hours/week for flows greater than 100 gpm.

     o    No disposal cost for the backwash stream is included.  Assume stream
          is returned to the treatment headworks.

The cost curves are presented in Figures 11-24 and 11-25.


11-8  AIR- AND STEAM-STRIPPING

Stripping, in general, refers to the removal of  relatively volatile components
from wastewater by the passage of air, steam, or other gas through the contami-
nated liquid.  Contaminants are transferred to the gas phase; therefore,
off-gas treatment is often employed.

To improve removal efficiencies  (or rates) by stripping,  the temperature  and/or
pH of the wastewater may.be adjusted.  Efficiency is  not  only a  function  of
temperature and pH, but also of size, shape, arrangement, and surface charac-
teristics of the column; its packing material; the rates  of  liquid and vapor
flowing; and various physical* properties and distribution of the vapor and
liquid  (Brown, 1950).

In most cases, air-stripping will achieve  effective  removals of  ammonia,
chlorinated solvents, monoaromatics, and other VOCs.  Steam  is used as the
stripping medium for increased efficiency,  removal of less volatile compounds,
or applications in cold weather.  Steam-stripping may also be used to remove
phenols and trace organics  from wastewater.  However, removal rates of some
compounds decrease with increasing  temperature.

11-8.1  Description

Typical stripping processes  involve surface aeration, spray  aeration, diffused
aeration, packed-tower aeration, bubble-cap trays, valve  trays,  or  sieve  trays.
This  discussion will be limited  to  packed-tower  processes involving  the  ap-
plication of steam or  air.   The  function  of the  packing material is  to  increase
the area of contact between the  air or  steam and the liquid  waste.
                                      11-59
 11.89.45
 0065.0.0

-------
                                    FILTRATION
                                       CAPITAL COST





DOLLARS
"housands)
X.X





%J*+\J —
320 -
300 -
280 -
260 -
240 -
220 -
200 -
180 -
160 -
140 -
120 -
100 -
80 -
60 -
40 -
on -
/
/
/
/
/





/
V
                           0.2
     0.4          0.6
       (Thousands)
 GALLONS PER MINUTE
a   CAPITAL COSTS
0.8
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
                                                                     FIGURE 11-24
                                                        FILTRATION - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
                                   FILTRATION
                                      ANNUAL COST
       OT
      t/)-o
      a c
      <0
      J W
      -J 3
      O O
      O.C
                           0.2
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION,
1	1	T
      0.4          0.6          0.8
        (Thousands)
  GALLONS PER MINUTE
   D    ANNUAL COST

                                   FIGURE 11-25

   FILTRATION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

-------
 The tower  consists of a cylindrical column containing a liquid inlet, a dis-
 tributing  device, and a gas outlet at the top; a gas inlet, a distributing
 space, and a liquid outlet at the bottom; and a packing material in the tower.
 The air or steam enters the distributing space below the packed section, rises
 upward through the packing, and contacts the descending liquid flowing through
 the same openings.  The packing disperses the influent water, providing a large
 area of intimate contact between the liquid and gas phase.  Figure 11-26 is a
 schematic  of the packed tower flow and characteristics.

 Many different types of tower packing have been developed and several are used
 commonly.  Packings, which usually are dumped at random in the tower, are
 available  in sizes of 3 to 75 mm, and are made of inert materials such as clay,
 porcelain, graphite, or plastic.  These packings are dumped into the tower with
 redistribution plates to prevent channeling of the liquid.

 Stacked packing with sizes of 75 mm and larger is also used.   The packing is
 stacked vertically, with open channels running uninterrupted throughout the
 bed.   Typical stacked packings are wood grids,  drip-point grids,  spiral parti-
 tion rings, and PVC films (Geankoplis, 1983).

 11-8.1.1  Equipment Types Available.   Stripping processes  differ according to
 the stripping medium and packing material chosen for the treatment system.   Air
 and steam are the most common media;  inert gases are also  used.   Air- and
 steam-stripping using packed towers are described in the following paragraphs.

 Air-stripping.   The stripping tower consists  of a cylindrical  vertical shell
 filled with packing material,  and blowers to  induce  air flow.  The towers  are
 of two basic  types:   countercurrent and cross-flow.   In countercurrent towers,
 the entire  air flow enters at the bottom of the tower,  while the  water enters'
 the top of  the tower and falls  through the packing material to the bottom.   In
 crossflow towers,  the  air is  pulled through the sides  of the tower along its
 entire height,  while water flow proceeds  down the tower  through  the packing.
 In either type  flow,  treated  effluent  is  collected in  a  sump at  the bottom  of
 the tower.

 Reflux (i.e.,  condensing a portion of  the vapors  from  the  top  of  the  column and
 returning it  to  the  column) may be  practiced if it is  desired  to  increase the
 concentration of the stripped material  derived  from  the  stripping  column.
 Introducing the  feed at  a  point  below  the top of  the column (while  still using
 the same height of packing in the  stripper) will  yield a vapor stream  richer in
 VOCs.   The  combination of  using  reflux and introducing the feed at  a  lower
 level will  further increase the  concentration of  the VOC component  in  the
 overhead.

 Steam-stripping.  Steam-stripping is fundamentally comparable  to air-stripping.
 The process is used to volatilize contaminants  from a wastewater stream.  Steam
 is  used in  cases where the volatility of  the organic constituents makes removal
 at  ambient  air temperatures difficult.  This unit operation has been applied to
 the removal of water-immiscible  compounds (i.e.,  chlorinated hydrocarbons),
 which must  be reduced to trace levels because of their toxicity.
                                     11-62
11.89.45
0068.0.0

-------
                                  GAS OUTLET
                  INFLUENT
LIQUID LEVEL





   EFFLUENT
                                      1
                                 liOiOiOiOit
                                 / i V i V i V i \/ i \
                                    LIQUID DISTRIBUTOR
                                                     PACKING SUPPORT






                                                        GAS WLET
2307-87
                                       11-63
                                                                  FIGURE 11-26

                                                               AIR STRIPPING

-------
  Steam-stripping is  usually conducted as  a  continuous  operation  in  a packed
  tower.   Figure  11-27  shows a  schematic of  a  typical steam-stripping system.
  Wastewater,  preheated by a. heat  exchanger, enters  at  the  top  of the column and
  flows by gravity down through the packing.   Steam  rises up  from the bottom of
  the  column and  volatilizes contaminants.   As the wastewater passes down through
  the  column,  it  contacts  the vapors  and steam rising from  the  lower portion of
  the  column.  Due to the  countercurrent flow  pattern,  this contact progressively
  lessens  the  concentrations of VOCs  or gases  in the wastewater as it approaches
  the  bottom of the column.   At the bottom of  the column, the wastewater is
  heated by the incoming steam  to  further reduce the concentration of VOC com-
  ponent (s)  to their  final  concentration.  Much of the  heat in the wastewater
  discharged from the bottom of the column is  recovered by the heat exchanger
  preheating the  feed to the column.

  The  contaminated  steam passes  out through the top of  the column.  Depending on
  the  contaminant,  the  steam may be condensed  to a liquid and separated from the
  contaminant  or  refluxed to the tower.  If concentrations are at permissible
  levels,  the  steam may be emitted directly into the atmosphere.  Otherwise,  the
  condensed  stream must  be treated to remove the organics or disposed' of at an
  appropriate  facility.

  11-8.1.2—Advantages and Limitations.  Advantages of both stripping processes
 are that acids and other corrosive materials  can be handled  because appropriate
 construction materials are available.  Packings can be fabricated  from ceramic,
 stainless steel, Teflon,  or chemical-resistant plastics.   Towers can be con-
 structed of polyethylene, stainless steel,  or chemical-resistant plastics.
 Also, liquids that tend to foam may be handled more readily  in packed  columns
 because of the relatively low degree of liquid agitation by  the  gas (Perry,
 1973).                                                               *

 Disadvantages are associated with the packing material of the  column.   Some
 packing  materials break easily during insertion into the  column  or  from thermal
 expansion and contraction.  Low liquid flow rates  (air-to-water  ratios up to
 5:1)  decrease the contact efficiency due  to incomplete wetting of the  column
 packing.   Packed columns  are limited to operating  ranges  narrower than other
 stripping processes  using film packings.

 A drawback of air-stripping is its  low efficiency  in cold  weather.  Also, when
 lime  is used  to  raise  the pH,  fouling problems may  occur  in  towers  and the
 efficiency of the process  is affected.  The pH also affects  the  volatility of
 compounds.  Iron and manganese can be oxidized and magnesium and calcium can be
 precipitated  by  the  process, creating scale that can cause channeling  of flow
 in the column.   High suspended solids, as well as oils and greases, can also
 accumulate in the stripper and cause fouling.
                                                                        f

 Steam-stripping  is more efficient than air-stripping in certain  applications,
 but has much  higher  operating  costs.   Also, if VOCs react with each other, as
 in refinery sour water containing hydrogen  sulfide  (H  S) and ammonia,  the vapor
 pressure  exerted by  each  component must be  experimentally developed because
 vapor/liquid  equilibrium data  do  not exist  for many specific combinations of
 water soluble components.
                                     11-64
11.89.45
0070.0.0

-------
   INFLUENT
     i
     HEAT
EXCHANGER V\
   INFLUENT
    TANK
                               TOWER
                                        REFLUX
                                               ->-OUT

                                               	IN
                                                                  COOLING
                                                                   WATER
                                           L-Q-
                                                        DISTILLATE
                                                   ACCUMULATOR
                                                       DRUM
                                                  REBOILER
                                                                   STEAM
                                                              STEAM
                                                               TRAP
                                                                    EFFLUENT
                                                                 FIGURE 11-27
                                                           STEAM STRIPPING
iS307-87
                                      11-65

-------
  11-8.1.3—Chemicals Required.  For wastewater  containing high concentrations of
  calcium, an inhibiting polymer may be added to ease the fouling problem.  Acid
  wash systems can be used to solubilize the scale in a continuous or batch-flow
  tower.

  11-8.1.4—Residuals Generated.  Stripped VOCs in the off-gas can be processed
  further for recovery or incineration.  For sites that are in areas attaining
  the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone, VOC air emissions may
  need control to meet state ARARs, risk management guidelines or other require-.
  ments of CERCLA Section 121.  In ozone nonattainment areas VOC controls are
  more likely to be required to meet state ozone attainment strategies.  The
  USEPA policy memorandum "Control of Air Emissions from Superfund Air Strippers
  at Superfund Groundwater Sites" (OSWER' Directive 9355.0-28, June 15, 1989)
 provides more guidance on VOC air emission control.

 Scale from packed towers may need to be recycled or landfilled.   Spent acid
 wash chemicals are saved for recovery.   Post-treatment of the effluent stream
 may be necessary if the effluent concentration^ ) are above discharge limits.

  11-8.1.5—Design Criteria.   Design considerations and factors important in the
 removal of organics from wastewater by stripping include temperature, pressure,
 air-to-water ratio, and surface area available for mass  transfer.

 The first design variables  to  specify for a stripping system include the water
 flow rate and  composition,  and the desired effluent concentration  of oneior
 more of the  solutes.   Next, the packing material fpr the column  should be
 selected,  and  should  offer  the following characteristics:   (1) large intersti-
 tial surface between  liquid and gas;  (2)  desirable fluid-flow characteristics;
 (3)  chemical inertness to fluids being  processed;  (4)  structural strength to
 permit  easy  handling  and installation;  and (5)  low cost  (Treybal,  1955).

 Given the packing type and  the water flow rate,  the designer must  then deter-
 mine an optimum gas flow rate  through the packed  column  to  yield the  desired
 contaminant  removal.   The practice  is to  design for gas  velocities  at 40  to
 70 percent of the flooding  velocity (Treybal,  1955), with the optimum operating
 velocity about  50 percent of flooding (Stenzel  and  Gupta, 1985;  and Perrv
 1973).

 Vendor  recommendations  can  then be  used to  determine the tower height  and
 diameter, provided  that  the tower will be operated  for the  specified  removal
 rate.  The removal  rate  dictates the  depth  of packing, which in  turn  determines
 the  air  flow rate at a given liquid  flow.   Operating pressure, the  pressure
 drop across the tower, and  the blower or  reboiler specifications can  then be
 determined CStenzel and  Gupta,  1985;  and  USEPA, 1984).

 Practical tower diameters range from  1 to  12 feet, with packing heights as high
 as 50 feet; air-to-water volumetric ratios may  range from 10  to  1,  up to 300 to
 JL. •

 11-8.1.6  Performance.  One indicator of  a compound's volatility relative to
water is the Henry's Law constant.  Other factors that affect both  the magni-
11.89.45
0072.0.0
                                     11-66

-------
tude of the Henry's Law constant and the compound strippability include molecu-
lar weight, solubility, vapor.pressure, and polarity (Michael, 1988).

Stripping has been shown to achieve removals of 90 to 99 percent for certain
VOCs (Lenzo, 1988; Stenzel and Gupta, 1985; and USEPA, 1986a).

Several researchers have published analytical techniques to predict removal
efficiencies based on mass-transfer theory and packed tower design.  However,
if a definitive prediction is required, pilot tests should be conducted rather
than relying on a theoretical method.

11-8.2  Evaluation of Air- and Steam-stripping

11-8.2.1  Effectiveness.  Removal efficiencies vary with the volatility and
concentration of the compound.  For removal from aqueous sources, efficiencies
can be as high as 99.99-percent removal.  Off-gas treatment with granular
activated carbon  (GAG) or condensation units may be required  to meet federal
and state air emission standards.

Effluent streams  from a stripping tower include the off-gas,  effluent  water,
and tower scale.  The off-gases may contain VOCs requiring treatment.  The
treated water may require additional treatment to further re?duce VOC and SVOC
concentrations to discharge limits.  The scale from the tower may need to be
treated prior to  disposal.

Influent restrictions to a stripping system may dictate pretreatment prior to
stripping.  High  influent concentrations of metals such as  iron, manganese,
calcium, or magnesium that would oxidize and  cause scaling  or fouling  of the
tower may need to be reduced before  stripping.  Pretreatment  may be  required
for waxstewater streams  containing large amounts of suspended  solids  and oils
and greases.

Stripping  substantially reduces  the  toxicity  of the  influent  water  caused by
the contaminants.   The  contaminant(s)  is transferred  to the gas phase.  Strip-
ping processes significantly  decrease  the  potential  for mobility  of the  contam-
inant  in groundwater,  but increase mobility  in the atmosphere.  The remedy  is
permanent  if  stripping  is used  in  conjunction with vapor-phase treatment.

11-8.2.2   Implementability.   Stripping systems are  feasible for on-site  pre-
treatment  when large volumes  of VOC-contaminated  water/groundwater require
treatment.   Stripping  is  suitable  for  the  treatment  of water with high concen-
trations of VOCs  (greater than  100  ppm).   However,  concentrated organics
extracted  from groundwater  treatment must  be disposed of,  and tower off-gases
may require treatment  (i.e.,  scrubbing,  carbon absorption or incineration)  to
meet  local and federal air  quality standards.

Stripping  towers  currently  process  VOCs,  THMs, and ammonia-contaminated water
at hazardous waste sites, manufacturing facilities,  and municipal water treat-
ment  plants.   On-site  facilities have  proven successful for a broad range of
 contaminants and flow rates.   Due to the nature of the air-stripping process, i
                                      11-67
 11.89.45
 0073.0.0

-------
 consistent quality effluent can be obtained,  provided there are no large
 increases in influent concentrations or irreversible tower fouling.

 1.1-8.2.3  Cost.   Only after the tower has been designed can the capital and
 operating costs  be estimated for treatment of the wastestream.   Information on
 process equipment costs has been published in various engineering books,
 journals, and several USEPA reports.  The cost methods presented in this
 section have been derived from these sources,  and not from vendor quotes or
 case histories.

 Capital costs are the costs of the equipment  used,  and are expressed in terms
 of purchased cost, delivered cost, and installed cost.   An installation factor,
 usually different for each type of equipment,  can be used  to determine  the
 installed capital cost.  Installation factors  are usually  based on the  pur-
 chased equipment cost.

 The capital cost of air-/steam-stripping systems can be grouped into costs  for
 the following major components:

      o    mass transfer equipment (tray and packed towers)

      o    heat transfer equipment (heat exchangers,  condensers,  and  reboilers)

      °    fluid  transfer and handling equipment (pumps,  compressors,  and tanks)

      o    installation  materials  including foundation,  structural, instrumenta-
           tion and controls,  paint,  insulation,  and  electrical  and piping, as
           well as labor

 The purchased cost for  tray and packed towers  can be divided into the following
 components:

      o    shell  cost, including heads,  skirts,  manholes, and nozzles

      o    cost for internals,  including trays  and accessories, packing,  sup-
           ports,  and plates

      o    cost for auxiliaries, such as  platforms, ladders,  handrails,  and
           insulation

The  basic  engineering design  parameters  that have primary impact on  the  cost of
 stripping  VOCs are effluent  concentrations, required system  size, and air-to-
water ratio.

Cost information  was compiled for  flow rates ranging from 10  to  1,000 gpm, and
is based on the following assumptions.
                                     11-68
11.89.45
0074.0.0

-------
Capital Cost

     o    air-stripping tower of packed-tower design

     o    tower capable of removing up to 99.5 percent of the influent tri-
          chlorethene (TCE)

     o    air-stripping tower installed on concrete pad

OSeM Costs

     o    Electricity to operate pumps is included.

     o    Labor required to operate and maintain system is 8 hours/week for
          system flows less than or equal to 100 gpm, and 16 hours/week for
          system flows greater than 10O gpm.

     o    No disposal costs for residual streams are included.

     o    No pretreatment  chemicals are. included.

Cost information is presented in Figures 11-28 and  11-29.  Cost curves were
prepared for two cases:  (1) a packed air-stripping tower to treat  100 ppb of
influent TCE; and  (2) a packed air-stripping tower  to treat influent TCE at
1,000 ppb.


11-9  ANAEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT

11-9.1  Description

The anaerobic biological treatment process  involves bacterial  reduction of
organic matter in  an  oxygen-free environment.  The  complex microbiological
process involved in anaerobic treatment utilizes many types of bacteria working
in an assembly-line fashion under favorable conditions  for growth.   In general,
certain key factors encompass a favorable  environment for anaerobic treatment
to occur efficiently,  including optimum bacterial  retention time,  adequate
bacterial-substrate contact, proper pH, proper temperature control, adequate
concentrations of  proper nutrients, the absence  or assimilation  of toxic
materials,  and proper feed characteristics  (Parkin and  Owen,  1986).  Anaerobic
treatment  is best  utilized specifically to  reduce  high  strength  organic wastes
and wastewaters  to concentrations that  can be  degraded  aerobically (VandenBerg,
1984).

The anaerobic treatment process has  traditionally been  used  to stabilize  and
reduce municipal treatment plant  sludges  and to  treat easily biodegradable
wastes and food  industry  effluents.   The  process suffers from a  reputation of
unreliability,  fostered in part by  various unknowns associated with physical,
biological, and  chemical  operational  factors,  and has had difficulty in being
applied  to a variety  of wastestreams  as an alternative  to aerobic treatment.
However,  a wide  variety of applications have been seen, generally on concen-
trated wastestreams with or without suspended solids^ (Olthof and Oleszkiewicz,
 1982).

                                      11-69
 11.89.45
 0075.0.0

-------
                                  OL-ll
 I
 zw
 00
 me
 W3J
 SI
 il
 m
 o
                               DOLLARS

                             (Thousands)
           o
           •
           fco
       o
       >
     top

     01 £
     >eu
     «z

       CO
       m
       73
      +
         M
  £§
  ZQ.

coq^
(£>;
      ui
      a?
       m
           o>
TJ
2


O
i


5
     p

     bo
O
  m
oo

-------
      to
     wo
     on c
     <0


     *°
     O O
     as:
      \-
          20
                AIR  STRIPPING  ANNUAL  COSTS

                           REMOVAL PERCENTAGE AS SHOWN
                        0.2
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
     0.4         0.6

       (Thousands)

 GALLONS PER MINUTE

D   95%      +   B9.596


                                 FIGURE 11-29

AIR STRIPPING - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

-------
 11-9.1.1  Equipment Types Available.   Essentially, there are two anaerobic
 system and reactor process types available for use.   The first is a straight-
 through, completely mixed, suspended-growth reactor system similar to the «
 sludge-digester system,  in which microorganisms are not attached to fixed or
 suspended media and the  hydraulic retention time (HRT)  equals the biological
 solids retention time (SRT).   in this type of system, the minimum SRT is
 approximately 12 days, therefore leading to the design of large reactors and a
 system generally not chosen for industrial application (Anderson et al., 1982).
 Examples of reactors within this process type include septic tanks, anaerobic
 lagoons, and sludge bed  reactors.

 The second process type  is the contact reactor (Figure  11-30),  in which  the
 biomass is retained by attachment on  fixed or suspended media to maintain a
 high SRT;  at the same time, a low HRT is allowable,  resulting in a smaller
 reactor volume.   The attached growth  systems offer advantages of a high  biomass
 concentration retained in the reactor,  increased resistance  to  adverse condi-
 tions due  to the longer  period of time the microorganism has to adapt to a
 variety of conditions, and the likelihood that natural  stratification of the
 various microorganisms will occur and allow the optimum species to prevail
 (Anderson et al.,  1982).   Examples of these reactors  include stationary  medium
 reactors (which include  upflow or downflow randomly  dumped or fixed orientation
 filter systems,  and rotating  biological disc systems) and fluidized bed  reac-
 tors in which bacteria form films around small-diameter solids  held in fluid
 suspension by recycling  a percentage  of the substrate flowthrough.

 In  general,  if easy-to-degrade organics,  high-suspended organic solids,  low
 concentrations of  toxic  compounds,  and  higher temperatures are  present in the
 wastewater,  suspended-growth  reactors have been selected over fixed growth;
 opposite characteristics  result in a  fixed growth selection  (Olthof et al.,
 1984).   Selection  of the  appropriate  process configuration and  reactor type  is
 critical and warrants detailed consideration;  each offers  varying SRTs and HRTs
 and has different  optimal operating parameters  and effluent  treatment efficien-
 cies (Switzenbaum  and Grady,  1986).   Literature searches,  treatability studies,
 and vendor contacts  should be conducted to determine  the optimum system  for  a
 particular wastestream.

 11-9.1.2  Advantages  and  Limitations.   Anaerobic  biological  treatment has
 certain advantages  over aerobic treatment,  including  (1)  reduced energy  re-
 quirements ,  due to  the lack of need for aeration  or oxygen-providing  equipment
 and the possibility of using  the resulting methane as a  fuel; (2)  reduced
 sludge  production  (10 percent of aerobic);  (3)  freedom  from  the  constraints
 that food  to  microorganism (F/M)  operational controls place  on  aerobic systems,
 allowing the  anaerobic systems  to treat the high  strength wastes  above
 1,000 mg/£ COD, which are  difficult to  treat aerobically, as  well  as  more
 dilute  wastes;  (4)  less sensitivity to  heavy metal poisoning; and  (5) reduced
 nutrient requirements (Witt et  al., 1979).

Anaerobic  systems can break down some halogenated  organic  compounds and  can
 treat the high strength organic  wastes  that cannot be treated efficiently  by
 aerobic  systems (USEPA, 1986f).
                                     11-72
11.89.45
0078.0.0

-------
     INFLUENT
                                 OFF-GASES
                        METHANE AND CARBON DIOXIDE
                                                       EFFLUENT
                                                       SUPPORT MEDIA
•530743
                                                                  FIGURE 11-30
                                                  ANAEROBIC UPFLOW FILTER
                                     11-73

-------
 The disadvantages of anaerobic systems include (1) the relative lack of
 practical experience in full-scale operations, and general lack of acceptance
 as a treatment method;  (2) the relatively long and variable start-up period
 required to allow for microorganism development (i.e., nine months for filter,
 10 weeks for sludge blanket);  (3)  the need for process optimization data  for
 various types of wastewater;  and (4) the general understanding that, to meet
 water quality standards,  anaerobic processes are limited to pretreatment
 applications prior to aerobic  or other organics-removal options (for treatment
 of low-strength COD concentrations, only 50- to 60-percent conversion is
 expected) (Obayaski et  al.,  1981).   Also, for lower-strength wastes, larger
 digester volumes are frequently required.  Because this is a biological pro-
 cess, it is subject to  toxicity failure if certain toxic levels are reached.
 Relative toxicity limits  must  be determined for the wastewater to  be treated,
 as well as whether the  toxicity is  reversible or irreversible.   Methane bac-
 teria are reportedly killed  easily by low concentrations of toxic  substances
 (Yang and Speece,  1985),  and often recover much more slowly after  toxic shocks.

 Anaerobic treatment has had unfavorable past experiences,  and is a poorly
 understood process, resulting  in a  generally negative feeling toward its  use as
 a  wastewater treatment  system.   Significant odors  may be given off if the gas
 is not collected and treated and,  if the methane is to be  stored or utilized,
 the sulfur must be removed.

 11-9.1.3  Chemicals Required.   As  in aerobic systems,  certain chemicals and/or
 nutrients may be required to ensure that (1)  toxic conditions that could
 inhibit growth and anaerobic degradation do not develop within the biological
 reactors;  (2)  the  required nutrients are present in sufficient quantities to
 ensure that efficient microbial growth and biological degradation  are occur-
 ring;  and (3)  certain other inhibitory conditions,  correctable with chemical
 addition,  do not persist  (Olthof and Oleszkiewicz,  1982).   Extensive laboratory
 bench- and pilot-scale  testing  is sometimes necessary to pinpoint  the problem
 areas  and determine the chemical additions required to efficiently operate  the
 systems.

 11-9.1.4  Residuals Generated.   The primary residuals  of the  anaerobic process
 include methane, carbon dioxide, and sludge.   Of the  amount of COD entering the
 system,  it has  been shown that  11 to 15  percent is  converted  into  biomass
 Csludge)  requiring treatment/disposal, versus  50 to 60 percent  conversion in
 aerobic systems; therefore, the anaerobic system is a  more  efficient organic
 degradation system (Suidan et al.,  1981).   It  has  been shown  that  90 percent of
 the biodegradable  fraction of organics  is converted into methane,  which com-
 prises  approximately 75 to 80 percent of the total  gas  produced, and is yielded
 at a rate  of approximately 0.350 m3/kg COD (Olthof  and Oleszkiewicz,  1982).
 Depending  on SRT,  HRT,  strength of  incoming wastes,  and operation  efficiency,
 the methane  production  rate will vary.   The methane generated can  be utilized
 as a fuel  supply and/or to heat the influent prior  to  treatment  (which allows
 for more efficient removal of organics).   However,  if  hydrogen  sulfide gas  is
 present in the  gas  stream, it must  be  scrubbed  before  it can  be  stored or used
 as a fuel.   An  iron sponge scrubber system has  been utilized  to perform this
 task and to  precipitate the H2S as  ferrous  sulfide.
                                     11-74
11.89.45
0080.0.0

-------
11-9.1.5  Design Criteria.  There are basically two approaches to designing
wastewater reactors:  (1) use of years of process-type information involving
volumetric organic loadings and expected effluent quality; or (2) use of
conceptual simulation models of processes and conditions to predict the optimum
design.  Numerous models are described in the literature of fixed film re-
actors; however, to date, none have been sufficiently refined to be used,to
design full-scale systems.  Due to the lack of many full-scale systems treating
high-strength wastes, and the relative lack of published design criteria and
research and development, treatability and pilot studies are normally required.
These studies will be useful to pinpoint problem areas and modify system design
and operation constraints, in order to determine (1) if additive, antagonistic
synergistic toxicities will result among the various chemicals in the waste-
water, and (2) the rate-limiting step.  The preferred sequential approach for
design parameter selection should include (1) toxicity testing and wastewater
analyses studies combined with a detailed literature search of available
anaerobic treatment technologies; (2) bench-scale tests in fixed film and
flowthrough reactors installed in parallel; and (3) pilot-scale tests on the
selected process to determine scale-up factors and specific reactor require-
ments (Olthof and Oleszkiewicz, 1982).

In an effort to provide an understanding of anaerobic toxicity, Table 11-3
lists a few of the reported wastewater concentrations that generally are toxic
to anaerobic wastewater treatment.  Several contaminants of concern are listed
more than once to illustrate the differences among the concentration generali-
zations made or reported by different authors.                   '      *    •

There are many published general design recommendations of which to be aware
when considering anaerobic systems.  The desirable' design will maximize the SRT
and minimize the HRT.  Sludge and flow recycling is usually required, as well
as efficient solids recapture of the recycle.  Recycle pumps and piping that
have no high shear zones, which would disperse biomass floes, are preferred.
Reactor configurations ensuring low turbulence, efficient sedimentation, and
prevention of. plugging are also recommended.  Processes resulting in a higher
biomass concentration in the reactor are generally preferred, and induced
thickening of the return sludge often will improve efficiency.  Optimal design
is also dependent on adequate bacterial and food source contact, often achieved
by active or passive mixing.  If fluctuations in flow or waste strength are
anticipated, consideration should be given to adding an equalization tank to
the process; stable, consistent operating conditions are necessary for ef-
ficient results.                              __                      -

Whether primary sedimentation is required depends on the reactor hydrolysis
rates and HRT.  Methods to remove gaseous products from early stages of bac-
terial conversion improves efficiency in the later stages of treatment and    ••
increases process stability.

11-9.1.6  Treatability of Waste/Performance.  As previously noted, anaerobic
processes are more efficient than aerobic processes in treating high-strength
biodegradable organics.  Anaerobic treatment processes have been consistently
recommended for treating wastewater stronger than 1,000 mg/A COD.  Anaerobic
systems typically handle wastewaters greater than 3,000 to 5,000 mg/£  COD,
while aerobic systems are limited to concentrations below 5,000 mg/A COD due to
                                      11-75
 11.89.45
 0081.0.0

-------
                                         TABLE 11-3
             VARIOUS CHEMICAL/LOADING-SPECIFIC TOXICITY OR INHIBITION RESPONSES
                              IN ANAEROBIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT
         CHEMICAL/PARAMETER
    INHIBITION/
 TOXICITY RESPONSE
                                                                       SOURCE
 Inorganic
     Total Dissolved Inorganics
     Nickel,  Copper, Cyanide
     Nickel

     Copper

     Sulfide
     Sulfide

     Potassium
     Magnesium

     Sodium
    Ammonia-N
    Alkalinity
    Bicarbonate Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chromium  6
    Zinc

    pH
    PH
    Arsenic
    Boron
    Cadmium
    Chloride
    Chromium  (total)
    Cyanide
    Iron
    Lead
    Mercury
    Tin
 >30,000 mg/S,
 >1 mg/£
 >2 mg/£
 2-200 mg/S.
 <0.5 mg/S.
 0.5-100 mg/S.
 >300 mg/S.
 >200 mg/S,
 50-100 mg/S.
 > 12,000 mg/S,
 >3,000 mg/S.
 1,000 mg/S,
 >8 g/S.

 3,500 mg/S,
 >3,000 mg/S.

 1,500-3,000  mg/S,
 <1,000-5,000 mg/S.
 <1,000 mg/S.
 >8,000 mg/S.
 >3 mg/S,
 >1 mg/S,
 1-10 mg/S.
 6.8 200-1,000 mg/S,
>500 mg/S,
>250 mg/S.
Parkin and Owen, 1986
Parkin and Owen, 1986
Metcalf & Eddy, 1979
     11.89.45T
     0003.0.0
                                             11-76

-------
                                        TABLE 11-3
                                        (continued)
            VARIOUS CHEMICAL/LOADING-SPECIFIC TOXICITY OR INHIBITION RESPONSES
                             IN ANAEROBIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT
        CHEMICAL/PARAMETER
                                     INHIBITION/
                                  TOXICITY RESPONSE
                                    SOURCE
Organic (continued)

    Volatile acids
    Vinyl acetate
    Vinyl chloride
    Methylene chloride
    Chloroform
    Formaldehyde
    Formaldehyde
    Phenol
    Ethylene  dichloride
    Halogenated  aliphatics

    Nitro/chlorogenic
       semivolatiles
    COD
    COD
    COD
    BOD
    BOD
    Aromatics
    Chlorinated  benzenes
    Nitrogen  compounds
    Oxygenated  compounds
    Organic acids
    Chlorophenols
    Nitrophenols
>6,OOO mg/S.
>200-400 mg/S,
>5-10 mg/S.
>3 mg/£
>0.5 mg/S.
>2.4-200 mg/£
>400 mg/S,
>2,000 mg/S.
>28 mg/S.
100-200 mg/S.
>5-7 mg/S.
>1 mg/S.
0.1-100 mg/S,
variable, in 100-mg/£
   range
<1,500 mg/S.
<2,000-3,000 mg/S,
<10,000 mg/S.
1,000 
-------
 limitations in oxygen mass-transfer.  Because no oxygen is required in
 anaerobic treatment, this limitation does not exist.   As noted previously,
 proper reactor and system configuration and careful operational control result
 in increased organics removal efficiency.  Metals removal at rates of 50 to 60
 percent have been noted in anaerobic systems .   If metals removals are a con-
 cern, treatability studies should determine if sufficient removals are possible
 in the anaerobic system.

 Chemicals normally considered inhibitory or toxic to  anaerobic bacteria can
 often be degraded or removed efficiently if the system provides high SRTs .
 Examples of chemicals that have been treated anaerobically are listed in
 Table 11-4.  As discussed previously,  attempts to extrapolate these data to
 determine treatability in a particular wastestream are generally not recom-
 mended; bench- and pilot-scale testing will likely provide the degree to which
 particular contaminants will be removed.

 11-9.2  Evaluation of Anaerobic Biological Treatment

 11-9. 2. I  Effectiveness.  Anaerobic  treatment  of wastewater for organics
 removal is a permanent remedy that reduces a significant portion of biological-
 ly degradable organics into methane  and innocuous end-products.   Under optimum
 conditions, anaerobic treatment has  removed over 98 percent of influent organic
 contaminants in wastestreams .   With  proper design,  no  significant public health
 risks would result.   However,  as discussed in  Section  11-9.1.6,  with varying
 influent concentrations, certain contaminants  are more readily removed than
 others, and the system design and operating parameters should be tailored to
 optimize treatment.   In addition,  to operate with efficiency,  the minimum COD
 in the substrate surrounding anaerobic bacteria  should be in the 600 to
 900 mg/£ range;  concentration levels lower than  these  result in reduced treat-
 ment  effectiveness ,  with expected COD  degradation of 50 to  60 percent (URS
 Company,  Inc.,  1987).   Therefore,  to decrease  effluent BOD  to acceptable
 concentrations  for  discharge to receiving waters,  it is sometimes  necessary to
 use aerobic treatment systems  after  anaerobic  systems.   Also,  depending on  the
 discharge criteria,  additional processes  to remove  residual  VOCs  and suspended
 solids  may be required.

 The methane generated is usually treated  and/or  used as a fuel,  or flared
 on-site;  these  are permanent remedies  for this by-product.   The  sludge  generat-
 ed  in the anaerobic  process  will usually  contain a  certain  amount  of the
 influent  metals  and  organics.   Therefore, "the  sludge may require  dewatering
 followed  by incineration or  further  treatment prior to  consideration for
 landfilling.

           Implementability.  Most  of the  existing  full-scale  wastewater  appli-
cations are for treatment of warm, concentrated organic wastestreams, such as
grain milling, sugar refining, food processing, fermentation, pharmaceutical,
organic chemical, textile, tanning, petrochemical, pulp and paper, coal pro-
cessing, and synfuels wastewater.  Perhaps the most suitable application is as
an organics treatment step for landfill leachate, during which storage, mixing,
and flow regulation can be accomplished.  However, before widespread use of
anaerobic systems occurs, process design information must be developed.
                                     11-78
11.89.45
0084.0.0

-------
                              TABLE 11-4
              EXAMPLES OF ORGANICS DEGRADED ANAEROBICALLY
      ORGANIC COMPOUND
                                                    REFERENCE
       Acetaldehyde
       Acetic acid
       Acetic anhydride
       Acetone
       Acrylic acid
       Adipic acid
       Aniline
       1-Amino butyric acid
       Benzoic acid
       Butanoic acid
       Butanol
       Butyraldehyde
       Butyl Benzyl Phthalate Esters
       Butylene glycerol
       Butyric acid
       Catechol
       Chloroform
       Cresol
       Crotonaldehyde
       Crotonic acid
       DDT
       Diacetone gulusonic acid
       Dieldrin
       Diraethoxy benzoic acid
       DimethyInitrosamine
       1,1-Dichloroethane
       1,1-Dichloroethene
       dichloromethane
       Ethanol
       Ethyl  acetate
       Ethyl  acrylate
       EthyIpheno1
       Ferulic acid
       Formaldehyde
       Formic acid
       Fumaric acid
       Glutamic  acid
       Glutaric  acid
       Glycerol
       Hexachloro  1,3-Butadiene
       Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
       Hexachlorbethene
       Hexanoic  acid
       Hydroquinone
        Indole
        Introhenzene
        Isobutyric  acid
                 CD
                 (5)
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 C5)
                 CD
                 CD
                 C2)
                 CD
                 C3)
                 CD
                 C4)
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 C2)
                 CD
                 C2)
                 CD
                 C2)
                 C7)
                 Cio)
                 C7)
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 C9)
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 CD
                 C8)
                 C8)
                 C8)
                 CD
                 CD
                 C5)
                 C2)
                 CD
11.89.45T
0005.0.0
11-79

-------
                                 TABLE  11-4
                                 (continued)
                EXAMPLES  OF  ORGANICS DEGRADED ANAEROBICALLY
        ORGANIC  COMPOUND
                                                      REFERENCE
         Isopropanol
         Isopropyl alcohol
         Lactic acid
         Lindane
         Maleic acid
         Methanol
         Methyl acetate
         Methyl acrylate
         Methyl ethyl ketone
         Methyl formate
         Nitrobenzene
         Pentachlorophenol
         Pentanoic acid
         P-Cresol
         P-Ni tropheno1
         Pentaerythritol
        •Pentanol
         Phenol
         Phloroglucinol
         Phthalic acid
         Propanal
         Propanol
         Propionate
         Propionic Acid
         Propylene glycol
         Protocatechuic acid
         Pyridine
         Quinoline
         Resorcinol
         Sec-butanol
         Sec-butylamine
         Sorbic acid
         Syringaldehyde
         Syringic  acid
        Succinic  acid
        Tert-butanol
         1,1,1-Trichloroethane
        Toluene
        Trichloroethane
        Trichloroethylene
        Trichloromethane
        Trihalomethane
        Valeric acid
        Vanillic acid
        Vinyl acetate
        Vinyl chloride
        Vinylidine chloride
        3,4-Xylenol
 CD
 CD
 CD
 C2)
 CD
 (1)
 CD
 (1)
 CD
 CD
 CD
 C2)
 C5)
 C5)
 (2)
 CD
 CD
 CD
 C2)
 CD
 CD
 CD
 CD
 C3)
 CD
 CD
 C9)
 C5)
 CD
 CD
 CD
 CD
 CD
 CD
 CD
 CD
 C7)
 C2)
 C2, 4)
 C4, 10)
 C2)
 C6)
 C3)
 CD
 CD
Cio)
Cio)
C9)
11.89.45T
0006.0.0
                                    11-80

-------
                        TABLE 11-4 (continued)
              EXAMPLES OF ORGANICS DEGRADED ANAEROBICALLY
       REFERENCES

       (1)  Speece, 1983
       (2)  Olthof et al., 1984
       (3)  Parkin and Owen, 1986
       (4)  Switzenbaum and Grady, 1986
       (5)  Fox et al., 1988
       (6)  Bouwer et al., 1981
       (7)  Vargas and Ahlert, 1987
       (8)  Johnson and Young, 1983
       (9)  Blum et al.,  1986
       (10) Fogel et al.,  1986
11.89.45T
0007.0.0
11-81

-------
 Various vendors  exist  and  can provide  selected microbes, nutrients, and system
 designs.   In addition, most of the  companies that offer mobile aerobic systems
 also offer anaerobic systems.  However, vendors are generally reluctant to
 recommend  the anaerobic systems  (USEPA, 1986d).  As discussed previously, to
 assess the implementability of anaerobic treatment on a particular wastestream,
 laboratory and pilot-scale treatability studies should be conducted to de-
 termine CD to what extent the wastewater is degraded; (2) what type of reactor
 should be  used;  (3) what nutrients  are required; (4) maximum loading and gas
 composition; (5) the necessity of supplemental alkalinity; and (6) whether
 there is any inhibition or toxicity.  These treatability studies can take more
 than six months to conduct, with additional time required for system design and
 construction.

 The residuals produced during treatment must be disposed of.  Sludge dewatering
 technology, gas treatment systems, and landfilling are widely used and avail-
 able.  Once the system is operating, frequent monitoring is required to ensure
 efficient treatment.  Downtime occurs during repairs to process tanks or
 piping, for removal of excess solids (which may plug the reactor), and/or for
 reseeding with microorganisms,  if necessary.  Sufficient surface area should be
 made available for the system,  process downtime  wastewater storage,  emergency
 wastewater removal, and/or additional pretreatment units,  if determined neces-
 sary during design.

 11-9.2.3  Cost.   Capital costs  for anaerobic reactors  have been shown to be
 Similar to those for aerobic reactors.   For example,  capital costs for anaero-
 bic reactors  can be approximately 10 percent greater than  those for  aerobic
 reactors (Witt et al.,  1979;  and  Olthof and Oleszkiewicz,  1982).   However,
 depending  on  design,  anaerobic  reactors can have  a  capital cost 25 percent
 below that of aerobic reactors.   Increased  costs  result in systems that require
 a  refined  flow distribution system and  added pumps,  as  required in the
 fluidized  bed systems.   These requirements  also apply  frequently to  aerobic
 systems.   Increased costs  for filter media  have added  to a  reluctance  to use
 anaerobic  systems,  with packing materials costs found  to be  comparable  to tank
 costs.   For example,  for a  large  system (assuming  10-percent annual  interest,
 1988  dollars), reactors and media each  have  been  indicated  to cost $560/m3
 (Speece, 1983):

 When  considering  anaerobic  versus aerobic wastewater treatment  systems,  the
 cost  savings most often indicated for anaerobic systems are  those  due to
 decreased O&M  (i.e.,  lower  sludge production, energy conservation, and methane
 production/use),  with savings of  $.20 to $.50/1,000 gallons  treated  (Jewell,
 1987).  Although  available  literature often  praises the O&M  costs  savings of
 anaerobic systems over  aerobic systems  ($160/metric ton COD  treated, assuming
 $.06/kWh, $4.50/106 BTU for methane  [1988 dollars], and $100/ton dewatered
 sludge disposal  [Speece, 1983]),  it  has been noted that, when COD  loading is
 below 15,000 pounds per day, there is little difference between anaerobic and
 aerobic operating costs.  It has  also been noted that anaerobic treatment may
 become cost-effective when the process generates enough methane to heat the
 system.

 To accurately estimate  costs, bench-scale tests should be used to determine  if
 biological treatment alone is sufficient to meet treatment requirements.
                                     11-82
11.89.45
0088.0.0

-------
Typical costs and cost curves have not been developed for anaerobic treatment
systems because costs are highly site-specific and therefore should be
developed on a site-by-site basis.
11-10  AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT

11-10.1  Description

Aerobic biological treatment is used'to remove biodegradable organic matter
from wastestreams through microbial degradation in the presence of dissolved
oxygen.  Oxygen acts as an electron acceptor for microorganisms, and should be
present in sufficient quantity to promote and sustain their growth.  As a
treatment technology, biological treatment is often technically more effective
and less costly  than physical-chemical treatment for control of organic
pollutants in wastewaters, especially those with complex mixtures of waste.  In
some cases, a combination of biological and physical-chemical treatment will be
the optimum treatment option (Bishop and Jaworski, 1986).

Aerobic processes can be used to significantly reduce a wide range of organic
and hazardous compounds; however, in general, only dilute wastes (i.e., less
than 1 percent) are normally treatable.  Relatively low levels  (i.e., BOD  less
than 10,000 mg/Ji) of nonhalogenated and/or certain halogenated organic waste-
streams are recommended for aerobic biological treatment, with consistent,
stable operating conditions required.

One feature that makes biological treatment practical is the retention of
biological cells in a large biomass, which fosters rapid and complete oxidation
of  organic matter within a relatively short liquid detention time.  The goal
of biological  treatment of wastewater is mineralization of the organic con-
stituents.  However, this process is never 100-percent complete, and degrada-
tion products are usually released.  These degradation products may be toxic,
depending on the influent characteristics.

11-10.1.1  Equipment Types Available.  Two general types of biological reactors
are in use:  (1) suspended, mobilized growth reactors, and  (2) ''fixed film,
immobilized cell reactors.  Suspended growth reactors are generally stirred-
tank reactors in which the microorganisms  (biomass) and substrate  (biode-
gradable organics) in the wastestream are totally or partially mixed.  In
immobilized cell reactors, the biomass is attached, or fixed, to media, and the
substrate contacts immobilized biomass by flowing over the media (URS Company,
Inc.,  1987).  Section 10 provides a brief description of five common aerobic
systems.           ,     .

The two most common and longest  standing methods of aerobic treatment are  the
activated sludge, suspended growth reactor and the trickling  filter, fixed film
reactor.  In the activated sludge process  (Figure 11-31), microorganisms must
accumulate into relatively large aggregates known as floes. These  large masses
of cells can settle after they exit the aeration tank in a  secondary clarifier,
and are returned to the reactor  tank to allow buildup of biomass.   In trickling
filter systems, the cell mass is retained  directly in the  filter media, and is
attached to fixed, solid surfaces.  Organic contaminant and ammonia  removal,
                                      11-83
 11.89.45
 OO89.0.0

-------
i
00
-P-
          INFLUENT-
                                      NUTRIENTS
                        PUMP
                                            AERATOR
FLOCCULANTS
     I
     I

     I
                                        AERATION TANK
                                                           I
                                                           i
             SECONDARY
             CLARIFIER
                                    RETURN ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                                                       RECYCLE PUMP
                                                                    WASTED
                                                                    ACTIVATED
                                                                    SLUDGE
                                                                                       EFFLUENT
   5307-83
                                                                                          FIGURE 11-31
                                               AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT - ACTIVATED SLUDGE

-------
oxygen use, new cell mass growth, and biofilm retention all occur on and around
the media.  The wastewater moves from the trickling filter to a settler to
improve  effluent quality, but settled cell mass is not usually returned to the
filter reactor CRittman, 1987).  Detailed descriptions of these two, as well as
other aerobic treatment types, are provided in Section 10.

11-10.1.2  Advantages and Limitations.  There are various advantages when
choosing aerobic biological treatment over other wastewater treatment systems.
Depending on the system type, these advantages include the following:

     o    technology often offers the lowest cost method of treatment per pound
          of organic removed, destroying organic compounds at a much lower cost
          than carbon absorption

     o    biomass acclimates to degrade many compounds that are initially
          refractory

     o    handles fluctuating organic loading

     o    good resistance to shock loads if designed properly, and  adapts to
          many types of wastewater treatment problems

     o    operates within a limited space environment and provides  a high
          quality effluent

However,  certain disadvantages  are often noted when selecting aerobic biologi-
cal  treatment systems.  Depending on  the specific  system type, these dis-
advantages  include the  following:

     o     requires relatively  consistent, stable operating  conditions and  can
           treat wastes  with generally low levels  (i.e., BOD less  than 10,000
          mg/£) of non-halogenated organic  and/or  certain halogenated organics

     o     not suitable  for removal of many  aliphatics,  amines, aromatic com-
           pounds , and  certain heavy metals  and  other  organics

     o     relative high complexity of system operation and  equipment; high
           amount of  sludge production;  and  high energy requirements

     6     relative  sensitivity of the systems,  possibly requiring precipi-
           tation/flocculation/sedimentation to  remove metals and suspended
           solids, neutralization to bring  the pH to  near neutral, nutrient
           addition,  post-treatment  carbon  adsorption to remove nonbiodegradable
           organics,  and filtration  to remove suspended solids;  chemical ad-
           ditions may be required to  achieve the desired result

      o     start-up  time may be slow if the organism needs to be acclimated to
           the wastes

      o     hydraulic detention times  can be long for complex wastes
                                      11-85
 11.89.45
 0091.0.0

-------
       o    loss of VOCs from unit processes can pose localized air pollution and
            a health hazard to field personnel

       o    the sludge produced may be considered a hazardous  waste,  which would
            require RCRA-approved disposal

  11-10.1.3—Chemicals Required.   As discussed previously,  certain chemical
  additions may be required to bring the  wastestream to  optimum conditions before
  introducing the wastestream to  the biologically active reactor.   Oxygen  or  air
  must usually be provided and distributed in the amount and manner necessary to
  ensure efficient oxygen mass transfer within the reactor.  Regarding sludge
  settling,  inert solids  or coagulants  are sometimes  added  in  the  secondary
  Clarifier to  cause sludge to clump together,  and small concentrations of
  chlorine,  heavy metals  and/or lime may  be added to  reduce the number of  fila-
  mentous bacteria present.   Bench-  and pilot-scale treatability studies are
  especially useful to pinpoint problem areas  and determine the chemical ad-
  ditions required to efficiently operate  the  system.

  11-10.1.4   Residuals  Generated.  Sludge  production  is  a function  of the  type of
  aerobic system  selected  and  the  type  of  wastewater  entering the system.  For
  example, a  high colloid  concentration in the influent  results in  increased
  sludge production,  and use of an extended aeration  system results in low net
  sludge production.   Conversion of  at  least 40 to  60 percent of the organic
 material, as COD,  into excess sludge  is  a rule  of thumb.  The sludge will often
  require further  treatment prior  to disposal, usually through (1) direct dis-
  charge into aerobic or anaerobic digesters for volume reduction; and/or  (2)
 dewatering, through use of belt  or filter presses, or sludge drying beds.
 After dewatering, sampling and analyses are usually conducted to determine
 whether the sludge is disposed of as a hazardous waste.

 VOC releases may occur in the various treatment processes, possibly resulting
 in localized air pollution and health hazards.  In addition,  if ana,erobic
 conditions exist within the system, either through inadequate operation or
 intentional design, methane and hydrogen sulfide gases  may be released.   These
 released gases may possibly require collection and treatment.

 11-10.1.5—Design Criteria.  Several steps should be taken before deciding on a
 biological treatment system for the cleanup of a particular groundwater:
 CD  search literature for biodegradability of the compound;  (2)  run  generic
 organic concentration tests (i.e.,,  BOD,  COD,  TOC); (3)  run treatability
 studies; and (4) select and design process to be applied.

 Specific design criteria vary among the  different types of biological treatment
 systems.   For example, activated sludge  process  design  considerations include
 loading criteria, selection of the  reactor type, sludge production and process
 control, oxygen requirements  and transfer,  nutrient requirements,  environmental
 requirements,  solids separation,  effluent characteristics, settling basin
 sidewater  depth,  overflow rate,  and weir loading.  Aerated lagoon  design
 criteria considerations  include  BOD removal,  effluent characteristics, oxygen
 requirements,  temperature  effects,  energy requirements  for mixing, and solids
 separation.  Trickling  filter design  criteria  considerations include the type
 and dosing  characteristics  of the distribution system,  type and physical
                                     11-86
11.89.45
0092.0.0

-------
characteristics of filter medium to be used, configuration of the underdrain
system, provision for adequate ventilation  (either natural or forced air), and
design of the required settling tanks (Metcalf & Eddy, 1979).

Most of these criteria can be designed through use of reported design calcula-
tions, characteristics of the influent, and desired effluent, rather than
empirical derivations from treatability studies for each specific wastewater.
A partial listing of design criteria available in the literature for a specific
system (e.g., activated sludge, conventional and mechanical aeration) is
provided in Table 11-5.

11-10.1.6  Performance.  Table 11-6 a summarizes the response to biodegradation
of 10 classes of chemical species found in hazardous wastestreams.

Aerobic bacteria are usually used to treat organic concentrations between 50
and 4,000 mg/£ BOD with capabilities for treatment of 1O,000 or even 15,OOO
mg/£ for small waste flows (Nyer,  1985).  Table 11-7 provides a list of
treatment efficiencies for various systems.  As noted previously, specific
treatment efficiency will be more accurately defined after treatability results
are received for a particular wastestream.

11-10.2  Evaluation of Aerobic Biological Treatment

11-10.2.1  Effectiveness.  Aerobic biological treatment of wastewater for
organics removal is a permanent remedy that reduces a significant portion of
biologically degradable organics into carbon dioxide and water end-products.
As indicated previously, under optimum conditions, aerobic treatment has
removed over 95 percent of influent organics.  However, to achieve effluent
quality capable of discharge to receiving waters, additional treatment (often
in the form of carbon adsorption, filtration, and/or chlorination) may be
required.  Also, it is often necessary to pretreat the wastestreams before
using the biological systems that use physical/chemical treatment processes.
                                       ?
The VOCs that may be released during treatment might require treatment.  The
sludge generated will usually contain metals and organics.  The sludge can
usually be treated anaerobically, which will reduce the volume and increase  its
stability.  It may then require dewatering  followed by incineration or further
treatment prior to consideration for_landfilling.

11-10.2.2  Implementability.  Biological treatment has not been used as widely
for hazardous site remediation as activated carbon, filtration, and precipita-
tion/flocculation.  As previously indicated, the process  is well established
for treating a wide variety of organic contaminants.  It  is a broadly used
technology in industry for organics treatment.

As a general rule, biological systems will  work best under stable, consistent
operating conditions with little variation  in wastewater  characteristics.
Pretreatment units and careful monitoring may be needed to achieve this  re-
quirement.  Several clean-up contractors have used biological treatment  as  part
of their mobile treatment systems.   In addition, several  companies have
                                      11-87
 11.89.45
 0093.0.0

-------
                                   TABLE 11-5
                       PARTIAL LISTING OF DESIGN CRITERIA:
                ACTIVATED SLUDGE,  CONVENTION/MECHANICAL AERATION
      CRITERIA
                                                             VALUE
Volumetric  loading,  Ib  BOD  /day/1,000  ft3

Aeration detention time,  hours
 (based  on average  daily flow)

Mixed liquor  suspended  solids, mg/£

F/M, Ib BOD /day/mixed  liquor volatile
suspended solids

Air required,  standard  ft3/lb BOD  removed
Sludge retention time, days
                           25-50

                            4-8


                         1,500-3,000

                         0.25-0.5
                         800-1,500
                         (agitator -
                         sparger  system
                         only)

                           5-10   ,,
SOURCE:  USEPA, 1980a
11.89.45T
0008.0.0
11-88

-------
                                  TABLE 11-6
         PRIORITY POLLUTANT COMPOUND CLASS RESPONSES TO BIODEGRADATION
     COMPOUND CLASS
DEGREE OF BIODEGRADATION
     Alcohols

     Aliphatics

     Amines


     Aromatics


     Halocarbons


     Metals


     Pesticides

     Phenols


     Phthalate
     Polynuclear
     Aromatics
General removals of 75-100%

Wide range of removal efficiency

Some readily degradable with acclimated cultures;
others showing inhibition to system

Generally high removal, although removals may be
due to air-stripping or adsorption onto biomass

Generally biorefractory; removals may be due to
air-stripping

Removals at levels below toxicity threshold;
toxicity and inhibition at levels above threshold

No significant degradation

Greater than 70% removals generally reported;
toxic effects have been reported

High removals reported; may be attributed to air-
stripping or adsorption onto biomass


Generally inhibitory or refractory
SOURCE:  Venkataramani et al., 1983
11.89.45T
0009.0.0
         11-89

-------
                                  TABLE  11-7
                   PERFORMANCE  OF AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL  SYSTEM
                                                       Performance
PROCESS TYPE
Activated Sludge: Conventional;
Diffused or Mechanical Aeration
Activated Sludge: High Rate,
Diffused Aeration
(A) Modified Aeration
(B) High Rate Aeration
Activated Sludge: Pure Oxygen, Covered
Activated Sludge: Pure Oxygen, Uncovered
Activated Sludge: Extended Aeration,
Diffused and Mechanical
Contact Stabilization, Diffused Aeration
Aerated Lagoons
Oxidation Ditch
Rotating Biological Contactors
Trickling' Filter, Plastic Media
Trickling Filter, High Rate, Rock Media
Trickling Filter, Low Rate, Rock Media
BOD,. REMOVALS
5
85-90%
50-70%
85-95%
89-95%
75-95%
85-95%
80-95%
60-90%
92-94%
80-90%
80-90%
60-80%
75-90%
NH,~ REMOVALS
	 *t 	
10-20%
5-10%
5-10%
20-98%
20-98%
50-90%
10-20%
—
40-80%
up to 90%
20-30%
20-30%
20-40%
SOURCE:  USEPA, 1980a
11.89.AST
0010.0.0
11-90

-------
developed mobile biological reactors that are well-suited to treatment of
aqueous wastestreams contaminated with low levels of organics.

The main restrictions associated with aerobic biological treatment  have
limited the application of biological technology to wastestreams that can meet
those factors.  These restrictions include the need for continuous sources of
food (organics), nutrients, and oxygen; project start-up time of two to eight
weeks; and lower and upper BOD limits of 75 and 4,000 mg/Jd, respectively (Nyer,
1985).

Laboratory and pilot studies should be conducted to determine the proper system
design, nutrients and toxicity limits, and treatment efficiency.  The residuals
produced must be disposed of.  Sludge dewatering technology, gas treatment
systems (if necessary), and landfilling are widely used and available.  Once
the system is operating, frequent monitoring is required to ensure efficient
treatment.  Downtime occurs during repairs to process tanks or piping, and for
reseeding with microorganisms, if necessary.  Sufficient surface area should be
made available for the system, emergency process 'downtime wastewater storage,
emergency wastewater removals, and/or additional pretreatment units, if deter-
mined necessary during design.

11-10.2.3  Cost.  The characteristics of treatment vary from case to case, and
because factors specific to various treatment processes available from vendors
result in different effluent qualities, cost comparisons between processes are
generally not valid.  However, there have been attempts to compare costs
between systems for magnitude estimation only (Venkataramani, 1983).

Cost information was compiled for a package-activated sludge system incorporat-
ing powdered activated carbon (PAC).  Two different wastestream characteristics
were assumed to aid the costing.  A lower level concentration wastestream
contains the following:

     COD =500 mg/Jg.
     BOD = 200 mg/SL
     TSS = 200 mg/£

A relatively concentrated wastestream contains the following:

     COD = 10,000 mg/&
     BOD =  4,000 mg/£
     TSS =  3,000 mg/£

Design assumptions and the package unit description are listed as follows.

Capital Costs

     o    The vendor package unit is equipped with an aeration-contact tank,
          final clarifier, aerobic digestion tank, recycle' pump, mixers,
          blowers, and polyelectrolyte and carbon feed systems.
                                     11-91
11.89.45
O097.0.0

-------
O&M Costs
          A filter press, conveyor equipment, conditioning tanks, sludge
          storage tanks, and pressure pump system is costed to dewater the
          waste sludge to 40-percent solids.  A graph from the "Innovative and
          Alternative Technology Assessment Manual" (USEPA, 1980a), adjusted
          for 1988 dollars, provided the cost data.
                                                            j
          Pumps and piping are designed with 100-percent backup capability.

          Concrete pads support the units.

          No off-gas treatment is costed.

          No carbon regeneration systems are costed.



     o    Electricity to operate all equipment is included.

     o    Analytical testing depends on wastestream characteristics and the
          POTW local limits.  This example includes three BOD  analyses per
          week and one VOC analysis per month.

     o    Carbon dose must be determined in bench- or pilot-scale studies.  To
          cost, the easy-to-treat wastestream assumed less than 50 mg/Jtl of
          carbon use; the difficult-to-treat wastestream assumed greater than
          500 tag/SL.

     o    The unit provides polymer storage and feed systems for 0.25 to 5.0
          mg/£ of polymer addition.  The 0.25 mg/jH was assumed to apply to the
          easy-to-treat wastestream; 5.0 mg/£ applies to the difficult-to-treat
          wastestream.

     o    No nutrients are costed.

     o    Labor required was 8 hours/week for system flows less than 100 gpra,
          and 16 hours/week for flows greater than 100 gpm.

     o    Sludge wasting during operation is derived from graphs provided by
          the vendor.  The graphs are based on BOD loading and solids retention
          time.

     o    The dewatered sludge is trucked 500 miles to a RCRA landfill.

Capital and O&M costs are presented in Figures 11-32 and 11-33, respectively.


11-11  CARBON ADSORPTION

11-11.1  Description

Activated carbon adsorption is a physical separation process in which organic
and inorganic materials are removed from wastewater by sorption or the
                                     11-92
11.89.45
0098.0.0

-------
i
vO
OJ
0
               AEROBIC  BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
                                  CAPITAL COST
                        0.2
  NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
    REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
                                  i	r

                            0.4        0.6
                              (Thousands)
                         GALLONS PER MINUTE
                         D   LOW CHEM USE

                                                     FIGURE 11-32

                         AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
              AEROBIC  BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
       V)
     WO
       C
     O o
     Q.C
      I-
          800
         700 -
         600 -
         500 ~
         400 -
         300 -
         200 -
         100 -
                       0.2
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
  REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
                                 ANNUAL COST
0.8
                                                                 1
                  0.4        0.6
                    (Thousands)
              GALLONS PER MINUTE
            a  LOW CHEMICAL USE
                                           FIGURE 11-33
AEROBIC BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

-------
attraction and accumulation of one substance on the surface of another.
Traditionally, activated carbon has been used to remove undesirable odors and
colors in drinking water, or to aid in treatment of wastewater.  An important
aspect of carbon adsorption is its capability of removing organics that are not
completely removed by conventional biological treatment.  Activated carbon can
be used to (1) reduce COD, BOD, and other related parameters;  (2) remove toxic
and refractory organics; (3) remove and recover certain organics; and
(4) remove selected inorganic chemicals including some heavy metals from
wastewaters.  Most dissolved organics can be adsorbed by carbon.

Much of the surface area available for adsorption by carbon is found in the
pores within the carbon particles created during the activation process.  A
carefully controlled process of dehydration, carbonization, and oxidation of
raw materials (e.g., coal, wood, coconut shells, and petroleum-based residues)
yields the activated carbon.  As activated carbon adsorbs molecules or ions
from wastewater, the carbon pores eventually become saturated  and the exhausted
carbon must be regenerated for reuse or replaced with fresh carbon.  The
adsorptive capacity of the carbon can be partially restored by chemical or
thermal regeneration.

11-11.1.1  Equipment Types Available.  There are two forms of  activated carbon
in common use:  granular  (GAC) and powdered  (PAC).  Granular carbon is effec-
tive on dilute aqueous solutions with low suspended solids.  GAC is primarily
used in two forms:  (1) columns, where wastewater passes vertically through the
column; and (2) beds, where the wastewater passes horizontally through the bed.
Carbon columns are convenient for, flow rates below 1 mgd.  Beds are more
practical in the range of 1 mgd and greater.  The column or bed is sized to
allow enough contact time for the carbon to  reduce the  contaminant levels to a
predetermined concentration.

PAC is generally mixed with a more concentrated wastewater in  an aerated
settling chamber.  The wastewater detention  time is predetermined to allow
sufficient  contact time for contaminant removal.  PAC is removed as a  sludge
during clarification or sedimentation, and is not usually  regenerated.  When
used in combination with biological processes, PAC can  greatly increase removal
of nonbiodegradable toxic organics.  Details of the process  configurations  for
both forms  of carbon are presented in the following paragraphs.

Granular Activated Carbon.  GAC is about 0.1 to 1 mm  in diameter and  contacts
wastewater  in columns or beds.  Generally, carbon beds  are used  in  large-scale
applications; that is,  1 mgd  or greater.  The bed provides the advantage  of
easy access to  the activated  carbon  for replacement.  Columns  become  cost-ef-
fective at  lower  flow rates.   They require less design  and maintenance effort
than beds.  Therefore,  the  remainder of this section  discusses process configu-
rations related to activated  carbon  columns.

The water to  be treated either flows down  (downflow)  or up (upflow)  through the
carbon column.  Upflow  configurations  include  countercurrent operations,  in
which exhausted carbon  is  continuously  removed  from  the bottom of  the column;
fluidized bed,  in which forced flows expand  the  column's carbon  bed volume by
10 percent; and fixed bed,  in which  wastewater  flow  is  interrupted  periodically
to replace  portions  of  exhausted  carbon.
                                      11-95
 11.89.45
 0101.0.0

-------
 Dovmflow configurations use fixed beds, with complete replacement of the column
 when breakthrough has occurred.  (Breakthrough occurs when the concentrations
 of the target pollutant in the effluent are higher than the desired level.)
 Multistage operations for fixed bed configurations (upflow or downflow) provide
 more efficient use of activated carbon than single-stage configurations.

 In a typical downflow fixed bed operation, two columns are operated in series
 with a spare column.  Figure 11-34 shows a series operation of two downflow
 columns, including the sampling port between the columns used to monitor the
 exit concentration of the lead column.  When breakthrough occurs for the lead
 column, it is removed from service for carbon disposal or regeneration.  The
 partially exhausted second column becomes the lead column, and the first spare
 column is added as a second column in the series.  When breakthrough is again
 reached, the cycle is repeated.  Influent to the carbon column is normally
 filtered prior to passing into the column, to minimize clogging.   Although
 downflow configurations are more sensitive to suspended solids,  downflow fixed-
 bed columns are the most widely used form of GAC.

 In an upflow configuration,  the exhausted carbon is periodically removed from
 the bottom of the column,  and virgin or regenerated carbon is added at the top.
 Continuous addition of carbon is not widely practiced because of difficulties
 in moving solids through the active column without affecting the liquid flow.

 Powdered Activated Carbon.   PAC is  about 50 to 70 microns  in diameter  and is
 usually mixed with the wastewater to be treated.   This "slurry"  of carbon and
 wastewater is then agitated  to allow proper contact.   Finally, the spent carbon
 carrying the adsorbed impurities is coagulated,  settled,  or filtered.   In
 practice,  a multistage countercurrent process  is  commonly  used to make the most
 efficient use of the carbon's  capacity.   Often,  PAC is used in conjunction with
 aerobic biological treatment.

 Because PAC is generally used  to enhance removal  of high  concentrations  of
 contaminants  through settling,  this application  generates  large volumes  of
 sludge.  Normally,  it is not economical to regenerate this  form  of carbon.
 Spent  PAC must be landfilled (RCRA-landfilled  when hazardous) or  incinerated.

 11-11.1.2   Advantages and Limitations.   The major benefits  of carbon treatment
 include applicability to a wide variety of organics and inorganics, with high
 removal efficiencies.   The system is  compact,  and recovery  of adsorbed materi-
 als  is  sometimes  practical.  Compared  to biological systems  for removal  of
 organic pollutants,  activated  carbon offers  the following advantages:

     o    insensitivity to toxics (the  system  will  remove most toxic organics
          and  some heavy metals)

     o    reduced  sensitivity  to  temperature

     o    less  time  required for  installation  and start-up

     o    increased  tolerance  of  concentration and flow rate variations

     o    reduction  of  organics to  drinking water standards  (GAC)
11.89.45
0102.0.0
                                     11-96

-------
                               SAMPLING PORT
 INFLUENT
                PUMP
                                                               EFFLUENT
                               £- DOWNFLOW CARBON COLUMNS
                                                             FIGURE 11-34
                                                   CARBON ADSORPTION
5307-87
                                 11-97

-------
      o    higher removal of BOD, COD, and total organic carbon (TOC) for many
           wastes (PAG)

      o    effectiveness in streams with high dissolved solids

 Limitations of the process include ineffective removal of low molecular weight,
 highly soluble or highly polar organics; low tolerance for suspended solids in
 the wastewater; and relatively high capital and operating costs.   Iron concen-
 trations of 10 ppm or greater may host slime-producing bacteria which can clog
 the carbon.  In addition, concentrated aqueous solutions can result in rapid
 exhaustion of the carbon, increasing the O&M costs.

 In general, carbon adsorption is a well-proven treatment for dilute solutions
 of organics and inorganics.   Prefabricated packages  are readily available,  and
 manufacturers can provide expeditious treatability information for specific
 wastestreams.

 11-11.1.3  Chemicals Required.   Acid,may be required to wash the  exhausted  or
 regenerated carbon to remove metals,  as well as other inorganic materials,
 adsorbed on the carbon.   GAG columns  usually require periodic replacement
 and/or regeneration.  PAC will  have to be continuously or periodically supplied
 to the system.

 11-11.1.4  Residuals Generated.   PAC  will generate sludge requiring disposal.
 GAG can be landfilled,  incinerated,  or regenerated even when it contains
 hazardous constituents.   Only one RCRA-permitted facility is currently operable
 for commercial  regeneration  of  hazardous  GAC..   On-site regeneration may be
 practical if large volumes of carbon  are  used.   The  cost-effectiveness of
 regeneration versus disposal must be  evaluated  on a  site-by-site  basis.

 11-11.1.5  Design Criteria.   Design of an activated  carbon treatment system is
 difficult without bench-  or  pilot-scale information  on the treatability of  the
 particular wastewater.  The  size of the carbon  columns (GAC)  or the contacting
 and settling basins (PAG)  are both flow-  and contaminant-concentration-depen-
 dent.   Pilot-scale  tests  and laboratory bench-scale  testing (see  Section
 11-11.1.6)  can  provide the following  design criteria:

     o     performance of  different carbon types  under the  same  dynamic flow
           conditions

     o     minimum contact  time  required to  produce the desired  quality of
           effluent
                                                                        remove
pretreatment requirements to (1) reduce suspended solids; (2) remove
oil and grease; (3) adjust pH'to the optimum level; and (4) equalize
flow and organic concentrations

activated carbon dosages in terms of kilograms (kg) of carbon per
million liters of wastewater treated, kg of organic material removed
per kg of carbon, or pounds of carbon per 1,000 gallons treated

breakthrough characteristics of the system
11.89.45
0104.0.0
                                     11-98

-------
     o    hydraulic loadings, head loss characteristics, and backwash needs

     o    biological growth effects

Carbon system sizing is based on consideration of the required carbon contact
time and the breakthrough characteristics of the system.  Hydraulic loadings
and head loss (GAC only) characteristics will determine the size and type of
pumps and piping.  The other design criteria provide informa'tion on potential
complications in the full-scale system.

11-11.1.6  Performance.  Activated carbon is effective in removing various
organic and inorganic materials.  Compound-specific isotherms are useful in
assessing the adsorption ability of a wastewater with a single contaminant.
"Carbon Adsorption Isotherms for Toxic Organics" contains a compilation of
compound-specific adsorption information (USEPA, 1980b).  However, wastewater
is commonly a mixture of many compounds.  The compounds may mutually enhance
adsorption, act relatively independently, or interfere with one another.

The following generalizations regarding the relative adsorption of compounds
help to determine whether carbon adsorption can provide the appropriate level
of removal.  In general, molecules are more readily adsorbed than ionized
compounds.  The aromatic compounds tend to be more readily adsorbed than the
aliphatics, and large molecules more readily adsorb than smaller ones.  How-
ever, extremely high molecular weight materials can.be too large to penetrate
the pores in the carbon.  Less soluble organics are more readily adsorbed than
soluble organics.  Organics adsorption increases with decreasing pH; inorganic
adsorption varies with pH among compounds.  Because activated carbon is slight-
ly polar, slightly polar compounds are readily adsorbed; whereas, extremely
polar compounds are not.
                                               •
The generalizations and the information contained in the literature can be
extrapolated to use on any particular wastestream.  However, accurate quantita-
tive information can only be determined on a site-by-site basis through pilot-
testing or carbon manufacturer services.  Manufacturers provide services to
assess the•treatability of individual wastestreams.  One approach uses computer
simulation; another provides reduced-scale laboratory column-testing.  Both
methods correlate well to full-scale treatment, and can often significantly
reduce treatability testing costs.

Pilot studies can be more time-consuming and expensive than the services
provided by manufacturers.  However, pilot tests provide the most complete and
accurate information on treatability of specific wastewaters.

11-11.2  Evaluation of Carbon Adsorption

11-11.2.1  Effectiveness.  Treatment with activated carbon is a permanent
remedy.  However, carbon adsorption is a separation process that generates
either contaminated GAC or a sludge of PAC as a residual.  GAC may be land-
filled or  incinerated; however, it is sometimes feasible to reactivate it.
Thermal reactivation is considered permanent.
                                      11-99
 11.89.45
 0105.0.0

-------
PAC from a CERCLA waste generally will require disposal in a RCRA-permitted
landfill or incineration.  Landfilling is not permanent and, therefore, poses
uncertainties in the long-term scope regarding effectiveness.  Incineration in
a RCRA-permitted facility is a permanent remedy.

11-11.2.2  Implementability.  Activated carbon adsorption is well-demonstrated
full-scale as a polisher (GAC), and as an additive to primary treatment (PAC).
Both forms of activated carbon are applicable to a variety of toxic organics
and inorganics.  GAC columns are readily available from manufacturers and can
be installed quickly.  PAC is readily available for use in settling chambers.
GAC columns may require filters or silt traps on the influent.  Full-scale
designs of carbon columns require frequent monitoring to determine when break-
through occurs.  Regeneration and incineration are well-documented residual
management technologies.  However, the availability of incine-ration may be
limited by the type of waste removed.  The availability of off-site regenera-
tion facilities is currently limited to a single RCRA-permitted facility.
Landfilling of exhausted activated carbon is widely used and available, and can
be quickly implemented.

11-11.2.3  Cost.  Capital cost of treatment with activated carbon is dependent
on contaminant concentrations in the wastestream.  Capital costs are also
increased in cold weather climates where buried piping, heating, and housing
units are required.  O&M costs increase proportionally with concentration.  The
three major contributors to O&M costs are (1) replacement of exhausted carbon,
(2) management of residuals generated, and (3) monitoring effluent concentra-
tions.  The first two contributors depend on waste concentration.

Cost information on capital requirements is presented in Figure 11-35.  The
figure shows estimates for flow rates varying from 10 to 1,000 gpm for a
downflow carbon column system. ¥The capital costs were developed for five flow
rates using the following assumptions:

     o    pumps and piping installed with 100-percent backup

     o    carbon columns are sized to handle maximum flow rate possible

     o    two carbon columns are used in a series with one spare on-site

     o    all equipment is installed on a concrete pad

     o    valves are available for monitoring the effluent concentrations

Capital costs are dependent on contaminant types and concentration.  As dis-
cussed in Section 11-11.1.6, the contaminants present in a wastewater can
mutually enhance or interfere with the absorption process.  The carbon columns
chosen for costing purposes were sized for the maximum flow rate the columns
could support hydraulically (taken from the manufacturer's specifications).
Therefore, the capital cost is representative of a low carbon usage rate,
similar to what could be required of a mutually enhancing or noninterfering
mixture of contaminants.  Contaminant mixtures that increase the overall carbon
usage rate, associated with interfering contaminants, would require larger
carbon columns, increasing the overall capital cost.
                                    11-100
11.89.45
0106.0.0

-------
        900
                       CARBON  ADSORPTION
                                  CAPITAL COSTS
                       0.2
    0.4         0.6
       (Thousands)
 GALLONS PER MINUTE
a   CAPTITAL COST
NOTE- FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
                                                           0.8
                                 FIGURE 11-35
           CARBON ADSORPTION - CAPITAL COSTS

-------
 O&M costs are presented in Figure  11-36 for the same range of flow rates.  O&M
 costs were estimated for two different carbon usage rates:  0.1 and 10.0 pounds
 of carbon per thousand gallons influent.  These carbon use rates fall at the
 low and high ends of the scale provided in the literature.  O&M costs include
 operator labor, electricity, carbon purchase, and disposal.  The O&M costs will
 increase proportionally with the amount of monitoring required; disposal costs
 can vary with type of contaminant  and transport distance.


 11-12  ION EXCHANGE
 	—	                   /

 11-12.1  Description

 Ion exchange is the process of exchanging selected dissolved ionic contaminants
 in a wastewater with a set of substitute ions.   The exchange occurs on a
 synthetic or natural resin containing the substitute ions (functional ionic
 groups) and is reversible.   Undesirable ions are removed from a wastewater by
 contacting the wastewater with the resin.   Because the process is  reversible,
 backwashing with regeneration solutions can remove .the ions from the resin.
 Backwashing the resin transfers the ions to a concentrated liquid,  and leaves
 the resin ready to treat a  new volume of wastewater.   The regeneration solu-
 tions are strong or weak acids or bases,  depending on the application.

 Traditional uses of ion exchange include removal of selected dissolved metals
 as polishing or recovery steps, nitrate removal  for drinking water  purifica-
 tion,  and decreasing TDS of influents.   Ion exchange  is  frequently  used in
 water treatment to soften the water by removing  ions  (e.g.,  calcium and
 manganese).

 Industrial  applications  of  ion exchange are primarily recovery operations  for
 dilute solutions of metals,  where the value of the recovered metals makes  the
 process  economical.   Metals  can be removed as ions in solution or as  complexes.
 Organic  compounds  are generally not removed with ion  exchange.

 11-12.1.1  Equipment Types Available.   Various resin  types  are available.
 These  differences  provide systems that  are selective  to  discrete ionic  mixes.
 The generic  categories of resins  are  strong acid,  weak acid,  strong base,  and
 weak base.  The  acid exchangers replace  cations  in the wastewater with  hydrogen
 ions,  and the base exchangers  replace anions with  hydroxide  ions.   Ions  other
 than hydrogen or hydroxide can  be exchanged, depending on the  resin types  and
 functional groups  to  which they are attached.  Other  exchangeable ions  include
 sodium,  chlorine,  lithium, carbonate, and  ammonium.

 The weak acid and  base exchangers  are selective for only  the more easily
 removed ions.  The  strong acid  and  base exchangers are less selective,  and  will
 remove most ions in  the wastewater.  A typical cation removal  sequence  is as
 follows:
                                    11-102
11.89.45
0108.0.0

-------
I
I—*
o
            CARBON  ADSORPTION  ANNUAL  COSTS
                     CARBON USAGE IN POUNDS PER 1000 GALLONS
            4 -
            2 -
            1 -
                        0.2
   NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
      REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
    0.4        0.6
      (Thousands)
 GALLONS PER MINUTE
a  0.1      o  10.0
0.8
                                                          FIGURE 11-36
                         CARBON ADSORPTION - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

-------
Ra
                  +2 > Ba2+ > Pb2+ > Sr2+ > Ca2+

                     > Cu2+ > Co2+ > Zn2+ > Mn2+
        Ag+ > Cs+
                                         NH
                                           4+
                Na  > Li

 where radium is the most preferred ion, and lithium is the least preferred
 (Clifford et al. , 1986).  Similarly, a typical anion sequence is as follows:
HCrO.> CrO.
    4     4
                           2~
>SO,
   4

HAsO,
                    2-
                             > CIO
                             >Br~ >HPO
                                          2-
                                       2-
                                 C032~> CN~> N02"
                                       CHO  > OH
                >CH COO
         >F
 Weak acid and base resins  will remove the more preferred ions present  in  the
 wastewater,  while a strong acid or base resin would sequentially  remove all
 ions present in the wastewater,  including those more difficult  to adsorb.
 Advances  in  the development of synthetic resins have resulted in  numerous
 resins with  unique selectivity sequences.   Resin manufacturers  can provide
 specific  information on the applicability of the various resins.

 Several process configurations are available to contact  the wastewater with the
 ion  exchange resin.   Batch,  fixed-bed column,  and continuous column  contact
 schematics are the most widely used.   Column contact occurs most  commonly in
 fixed-bed downflow operation.   In  the fixed-bed downflow system,  wastewater is
 passed through the column  from top to bottom and periodically backwashed
 (bottom to top)  to regenerate  the  resin.   This form of column contact  requires
 minimal suspended solids,  to avoid clogging the void spaces within the resin.

 Batch operations  consist of adding resin to the wastewater, and mixing well for
 a specified  time.   This method of  contact  can be inefficient because ion
 exchange  ceases when chemical  equilibrium  is  reached.  Column operation is
 generally preferred  over batch unless:

      o    the  resin  has unusually  high selectivity for the target  compound at
          equilibrium;  or

      o    the  ion released  from the resin  precipitates or reacts with  another
          chemical so that  it  is removed from  solution.
                                    11-104
11.89.45
0110.0.0

-------
Continuous column contact consists of regenerating the resin while treating.the
wastewater.  This method of ion exchange eliminates the need to interrupt the
treatment process for backwashing.  It also allows a more complete and effi-
cient use of the resin.  Continuous column contact can be better than fixed-bed
column contact for high flows or high ionic concentrations.  However, continu-
ous column contact is not commonly used because of the complexity of the
mechanics involved in removing the solids for regeneration.

Figure 11-37 shows a typical fixed-bed column operation with anion and cation
columns in series.  Ion exchange column manufacturers have developed many
different column arrangements for treatment of specific combinations of contam-
inants.  Weber (1972) describes several available package systems; continuous
contact column diagrams are discussed in Seamster and Wheaton (1966).

The actual contact apparatus is available through a number of manufacturers.
The ancillary equipment that the process requires (i.e., pumps, flow meters,
valves, and storage tanks) is conventional chemical processing equipment.
Figure 11-39 shows a millivolt controller measuring the conductivity of the
effluent.  This controller is generally connected to a control device to
activate the backwash cycle when the conductivity of the effluent reaches a
certain point (see Section 11-12.1.5 for design details).

11-12.1.2  Advantages and Limitations.  Generally, ion exchange is used as a
polishing step.  Dissolved solids concentrations in the range of 1,000 mg/S. may
require an evaluation of the relative cost-effectiveness of other alternatives
(Weber, 1972).  Suspended solids concentration must be kept to a minimum to
prevent clogging of the resin void spaces.  Iron, manganese, calcium, and high
organics concentrations may permanently foul the resins.  The resins are
generally highly sensitive to oxidants; contact with oxidants should be avoided
to prevent degradation of the resin.  Large organic molecules can clog the void
spaces of the resin.  If a single exchange column is used, the effluent may be
basic or acidic, requiring neutralization (see Section 11-5).

Advantages of ion exchange include its versatile selectivity for specific
contaminants.  High removal efficiencies are possible for dilute wastestreams.
The systems are insensitive to variations in flow rates; and are available for
a wide range of flows.

11-12.1.3  Chemicals Required.  Ion exchange requires regeneration of the
exchange resin.  In general, regenerates are commonly used chemicals.  Examples
are sodium hydroxide, sodium chloride, sulfuric acid, calcium oxide, and
ammonia (Kunin, 1969).  The regenerate is dependent on the resin type and the
functional group required to remove the undesirable ionic contaminants in the
wastewater.

11-12.1.4  Residuals Generated.  Residuals generated during ion exchange
include waste solutions from the regeneration process and spent resins.  The
waste solution will be concentrated in the ionic contaminants removed from the
wastewater.  This liquid must be disposed of potentially as a RCRA waste or
further treated on-site.  Possible solutions are on-site precipitation, oxida-
tion, reduction, and off-site incineration.  Spent resins can be landfilled or
incinerated  (also potentially as a RCRA waste).
                                     11-105
11.89.45
0111.0.0

-------
          PROCESS
           PUMP
 INFLUENT
        r
    MILLIVOLT
   CONTROLLER
                    CATION
                     ANION
               EFFLUENT
CATION
(SPARE)
                                    r'
 ANION
(SPARE)
                        SPENT
                     REGENERATION
                      SOLUTION
                      STORAGE

\
c
REGENERATION
SOLUTION
TANK
•) -
I
             REGENERATION
                  PUMP
~l
                                                                  SPENT
                                                               REGENERATION
                                                                SOLUTION
                                                                STORAGE
)
V
f
REGENERATION
SOLUTION
TANK
•) '
t
                                                        REGENERATION
                                                            PUMP
                                                                           -I
                                                                     	I
                                                 THREE-WAY CONTROL VALVE
                                                                      FIGURE 11-37
                                                                   ION EXCHANGE
5307-87
                                         11-106

-------
11-12.1.5  Design Criteria.  A wide, variety of resins  is available  for use  in
designing ion exchange systems.  Manufacturers provide charts that  characterize
the resins they produce, including  recommendations for typical applications.
Generally, the manufacturer can suggest an appropriate resin based  on the
wastewater characteristics.  Final  decisions on which  resin is best-suited  for
a particular application can be made through laboratory testing of  the waste-
water.

Column configurations and the number of columns are a  function of the waste-
water characteristics.  As discussed in Section 11-12.1.1, resin manufacturers
have developed several configurations that decrease the need to neutralize  the
wastestream, while maximizing the efficiency of the column.  Resins release
ionic constituents (i.e., hydroxide and hydrogen ions)  during ion exchange,
which alter the pH.  Frequently, a  single column in use will require effluent
neutralization prior to discharge.  Where both anions  and cations require
removal, using acid and base columns in series can eliminate the need for
neutralizing the effluent.  Manufacturers can provide  guidance on potential •
column configurations.

The resins possess theoretical exchange capacities, defined as the number of
ionic groups per unit weight or volume of the resin.   The theoretical capacity
is expressed in equivalents per volume (e.g., eq/ft3)  of resin.  (NOTE:  an
equivalent per mole is defined as the molecular weight of a chemical species
divided by its charge:  grams/mole/charge.  Equivalents are expressed in
municipal wastewater treatment as grams of calcium carbonate, as a normaliza-
tion technique for a wastestream with several contaminants.  One equivalent is
equal to 50 grams of calcium carbonate.  The molecular weight of calcium
carbonate is 100 g/mole and the change is 2; therefore, one equivalent is 100/2
or 50.)  Theoretical capacity is not achievable during operations due to
equilibrium, time, influent concentration, and economic considerations.  The
efficiency of a column of resin is defined as the operating capacity divided by
the theoretical capacity.  Determination of the operating capacity is accom-
plished during bench tests.  Manufacturers provide samples of resins for
bench-testing purposes.

The,bench tests can be conducted using small-diameter  glass columns packed-with
resin.  By passing known quantities of wastewater through the column, measuring
the conductivity (in millivolts), and sampling the effluent for analysis every
few bed volumes, a relationship can be determined between the conductivity  of
the wastewater and the concentration of the contaminants.  The result of this
relationship is an operating capacity per unit volume  of influent (i.e., the
volume of resin required to treat a unit volume of wastewater).

The dimensions of the column are guided by several factors.  The total volume
is dependent on the desired time between backwashes (usually on the order of
hours to days):

     Total Column Volume  =  volume resin required per unit volume influent

                             X influent flow rate

                             X period of time between  backwashes
11.89.45
0113.0.0
                                    11-107

-------
A vertical cross section should allow a maximum 5 to 10 gpm/ft2 (Weber, 1972),
and most ion exchange columns are 2 to 6 feet high.

11-12.1.6  Performance.  Ion exchange, when used on wastestreams with low
suspended solids (i.e., less than 50 mg/S. [USEPA, 1987a]) and low TDS (i.e.,
5,000 mg/£ [Patterson, 1985]), can exhibit high removal efficiencies for metals
and other ionic inorganic species.  Applications to organics are infrequent
because many organics can permanently foul and degrade the resins.

Weak acid and base resins remove only strongly ionized cations and anions, but
require less Degeneration solution.  Strong acid and base resins remove both
weakly and strongly ionized species and require more regeneration solution than
the weak resins.  Table 11-8 presents work on ion exchange in industrial waste
treatment (Patterson, 1985).

11-12.2  Evaluation of Ion Exchange

1I-12.2.1  Effectiveness.  Treatment using ion exchange is a permanent remedy,
in that the selected ionic contaminants are permanently removed from the
wastewater.  Removal can be accomplished to the ppb level.  However, ion
exchange transfers the ions to a more concentrated solution.  The residual is a
waste solution highly concentrated with the exchanged ions.   This wastewater
must be further treated using precipitation, oxidation, or some other treatment
method, or it must be disposed of as a hazardous waste.  The resin, when used
properly, has a long lifetime but may require replacement if permanent fouling
occurs.  Spent resins can be incinerated or landfilled at RCRA facilities.

11-12.2.2  Implementability.  Ion exchange is in use in full-scale industrial
wastewater treatment applications where the wastewater contains valuable
recoverable metals.  Municipal water treatment plants use ion exchange full-
scale as a water softener (i.e., removal of dissolved calcium and manganese).

Full-scale exchange equipment is widely available from several resin manufac-
turers.  The manufacturers provide consulting services and brochures to aid in
selecting the appropriate resins and regenerates.  Also, laboratory quantities
of the resins are available for use in bench-testing.  The regeneration solu-
tions are generally common commercial-grade chemicals; therefore, they are also
readily available.  Periodically, the resin must be checked for degradation.
The effluent must be sampled and analyzed to ensure that no pass-through will
occur.

Several wastewater characteristics may preclude the use of ion exchange as an
effective treatment.  The wastewater must:

     o    have low suspended solids less than 50 mg/S. (USEPA, 1987a)

     o    have low total dissolved solids less than 5,000 mg/S, (Patterson,
          1985)

     o    not contain cyanide (except ferrocyanides), ferrous iron, strong
          oxidants, oil and grease, or cadmium-cyanide compounds, because these
          may permanently foul or degrade the resin
                                    11-108
11.89.45
0114.0.0

-------
           TABLE 11-8
ION EXCHANGE APPLICATION SUMMARY


ION

As5+
Ba2+
Cd2+
Cr6+
Cr3+

Cu2+
CN~

F~

Fe2+
Fe2+

Pb2+

Mn2"*"

Hg2+
O
Ni2+



WASTEWATER SOURCE

Acid mine drainage
Groundwater
__
Chromium plating rinse water
Dilute chromium plating
rinse water
(dilute)
Not applicable - cyanide
deteriorates resins
Sodium fluoride solutions

Acid mine drainage
Water treatment

Ammunition

Water treatment

Chlor-alkali plants

Nickel sulfate plating
bathwater
Nitrate/Nitrite Drinking water

Se2~

Ag+

Zn2

Sewage treatment-

Plating rinse water

Plating rinse water

SCALE OF
APPLICATION
Pilot
Full
Full
Full
Full
Full

Full


Pilot

Pilot
Full

Pilot

Full

Full

Full

Full

Pilot

Full

Pilot
MOST COMMON
TREATMENT
METHOD
Precipitation
Precipitation
Precipitation
Precipitation
Reduction
Precipitation

Lime precipitation


Activated
alumina
Precipitation
Ion exchange,
coagulation
Precipitation,
coagulation
Ion exchange,
coagulation
Ion exchange
(polisher)
Precipitation,
ion exchange
. Biological, ion
exchange
Ion exchange,
precipitation
Precipitation,
ion exchange
Precipitation
NOTE:
— = Not available from text
SOURCE
11.89.
O011.0
: Patterson, 1985
45T
.0

11-109



-------
 Additionally, large organic molecules can foul ion exchangers.  Chemical
 cleaning can reduce the problem.  Finally, other treatment equipment may be
 required to treat the residual backwash (e.g., oxidation, precipitation, or
 reduction equipment).

 11-12.2.3  Cost.  Capital cost estimates for treatment by ion exchange are
 presented in Figure 11-38.  The figure shows two cost estimates that reflect
 the extremes of the treatability of wastewaters using ion exchange.  The low
 chemical dose line on the figure represents a system using weak acid and base
 columns, with low chemical regenerant requirements.  The high chemical dose
 line represents a system using strong acid and base columns,  with high chemical
 regenerant requirements.  The following list compares the design parameters
 used in creating the capital costs.
 Design. Assumptions
High Dose
                                                             Low Dose
 Column cross-sectional area

 Column depth

 Regenerant (anion and cation)

 Resin type
5 gpm/ft2

 6 feet

20 lb/ft3 resin

macroporous
10 gpm/ft2

 3 feet

1 lb/ft3 resin

gel
 Both capital costs reflect dual columns in series  with spare columns  in paral-
 lel for continuous operation during regeneration.   Also,  both estimates include
 millivolt controllers  to activate regeneration,  with the  appropriate  valving,
 pumps,  and storage tanks contained on a concrete pad with a  retaining wall  to
 contain any leaking substances.

 OSM cost estimates for the two  systems are shown in Figure 11-39.   The costs
 include operator labor,  chemical regenerant requirements,  spent  regeneration
 solution disposal,  resin replacement,  and  electricity.

 The costs for the two  chemical  regenerant  requirements  correspond  to  low and
 high published doses  (Weber,  1972).   The low regeneration requirements parallel
 the capital  cost for the weak acid and base resins,  while the high regeneration
 requirements  parallel  the capital cost for the strong acid and base resins.
                                    11-110
11.89.45
0116.0.0

-------
                                  TIT-IT
 m
                                    DOLLARS
                                    (Millions)
0)00

-------
          100
                              ION  EXCHANGE
                                    ANNUAL COST
                         0.2
        n   LOW CHEMICAL USAGE
NOTE: FIGURE SOURCES ARE INCLUDED IN
   REFERENCES AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
     0-4         0.6          0.8          1
       (.Thousands)
 GALLONS PER MINUTE
             +   HIGH CHEMICAL USAGE

                                 FIGURE 11-39
ION EXCHANGE - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

-------
                    GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
API
ARARs

BOD

CERCLA

COD

EDTA

F/M
FS

GAC
gpm

HRT

ISP

kg

m
mm
mgd
mg/S.

O&M
ORP

PAC
POTW
ppb
ppm
PVC

RCRA

SRT
SSP
SVOC

TCE
TDS
THM
TOC
TSS
American Petroleum Institute
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

biochemical oxygen demand

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980
chemical oxygen demand

ethylene-diamine-tetraacetic acid

food to microorganism
Feasibility Study

granular activated carbon
gallons per minute

hydraulic retention time

insoluble sulfide precipitation

kilogram

meter
millimeter
million gallons per day
milligrams per liter

operation and maintenance
oxidation reduction potential

powdered activated carbon
publicly owned treatment works
parts per billion
parts per million
polyvinyl chloride

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

solids retention time
soluble sulfide precipitation
semivolatile organic compound

trichloroethene
total dissolved solids
trihalomethane
total organic carbon
total suspended solids
11.89.45
0119.0.0
                        11-113

-------
 USEPA
 UV

 VOC
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ultraviolet

volatile organic compound
11.89.45
0120.0.0
                         11-114

-------
                                  REFERENCES
Anderson, G.K., T. Donnelly, J.A. Anderson,  and  C.B  Saw,  1986.  "Fate  of  COD  in
     an Anaerobic System Treating High  Sulfate Bearing Wastewater"; in
     Proceedings of the International Conference on  Innovative  Biological
     Treatment of Toxic Wastewaters; U.S. Army Construction Engineering
     Research Laboratory;  Champaign, Illinois; pp. 505-533; June  1986.

Anderson, G.K., T. Donnelly, and K.J. McKeown, 1982.  "Application of  Anaerobic
     Packed-bed Reactors to Industrial  Wastewater Treatment"; in  Proceedings of
     the 37th  Industrial Waste  Conference; Purdue University; West Lafayette,
     Indiana; pp. 651-659; July 1982.

Apmsman, R.K., R. Musick,  J.D.  Zeff, and T.C. Crase,  1980.  "Experience  in
     Operation of an Ultraviolet-Ozone  (Ultrox)  Pilot Plant for Destroying
     Polychlorinated Biphenyls  in Industrial Waste Influent"; in  Proceedings at
     the 35th  Industrial Waste  Conference; Purdue University; West Lafayette,
     Indiana; May 1980.

Bishop, D.S.,  and R.A. Jaworski, 1986.  "Biological  Treatment of  Toxics  in
     Wastewater:  The Problems  and  Opportunities"; in Proceedings of  the
     International Conference on Innovative  Biological Treatment  of Toxic
     Wastewaters; U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory;
     Champaign, Illinois;  pp. 2-25'; June 1986.

Blum, D.J.W., R. Hergenroeder,  G.F. Parkin,  and  R.E.  Speece, 1986.  "Anaerobic
     Treatment of Coal Conversion Wastewater Constituents:  Biodegradability
     and Toxicity";  Journal of the Water Pollution  Control Federation;
     Vol. 58, No. 2; pp. 122-132; February 1986. -

Bourbigot,  M.M., R. Brunet, A.  Zeana, and M. Dore, 1985.   "The  Simultaneous  Use
     of Ozone  and Ultraviolet Rays  in Water  Treatment"; presented at  I.O.A.;
     Berlin, West Germany; April 1985.
                                                  *r
"Bouwer, E.J.,  B.E. Rittman, and P.L. McCarty,  1981.   "Anaerobic Degradation  of
     Halogenated 1- and 2-Carbon Organic Compounds";  Environmental
     Science and Technology; Vol. 15, No. 5; pp. 596-599; May 1981.

Brown, G.;  Granger & Associates, 1950.  Unit Operations;  John Wiley and  Sons,
     Inc.;  New York, New York.

Clifford, D.,  S. Subramonian, and T.J.  Sorg, 1986.   "Removing Dissolved
     Inorganic Contaminants from Water"; Environmental Science  and Technology;
     Vol. 20,  No.  11; pp.  1072-1080; November  1986.

Federal Register,  1987.  Vol. 52, No.  155; pp. 29998-30004; August 12,  1987.

Fletcher, D.B.,  1987.   "UV/Ozone Process Treats  Toxics";   Waterworld  News;
     Vol. 3, No. 3; May/June  1987.
 11.89.45
 0121.0.0
11-115

-------
Fogel, M.M., A.R. Taddeo, and S. Fogel,  1986.  "Biodegradation of Chlorinated
     Ethenes by  a Methane-utilizing Mixed Culture";  Applied and Environmental
     Microbiology; Vol. 51, No. 4; pp. 720-724; April 1986.

Fox, P., M.T. Suidan, and J.T. Pfeffer,  1988.  "Anaerobic Treatment of
     Biologically Inhibitory Wastewater"; Journal of the Water Pollution
     Control Federation; Vol. 60, No. 1; pp. 86-92; January 1988.

Geankoplis, C.,  1983.  Transport Processes and Unit Operations, 2nd Edition;
     Allyn and Bacon, Inc.; Boston, Massachusetts.

Gurnham, C.F., 1955.  Principles of Industrial Waste Treatment; John Wiley and
     Sons, Inc.; New York, New York; 1955.

Hager, D.G., 1988.  "On-site Chemical Oxidation of Organic Contaminants in
     Groundwater Using UV Catalyzed Hydrogen Peroxide"; American Water Works
     Association Award Conference; June  1988.

Jewell, W.J., 1987.  "Anaerobic Sewage Treatment"; Environmental Science and
     Technology; Vol. 21, No. 1; pp. 14-20; January 1987.

Johnson, L.D., and J.C. Young, 1983.  "Inhibition of Anaerobic Digestion by
     Organic Priority Pollutants"; Journal of the Water Pollution Control
     Federation; Vol. 55, No. 12; pp. 1441-1449; December 1983.

Kawamura, S., 1987.  "Recent Advances in Water Treatment Processes"; Public
     Works; pp. 63-65; January 1987.

Kunin, R., 1969.  "Ion Exchange for the Metal Products Finisher":  Parts I, II,
     and III; Products Finishing; pp. 66-73, 71-79, and 182-190; April, May,
     and June 1969.

Lenzo, F., 1988.  "Air-stripping -Teases VOCs from Groundwater";
     Water Engineering and Management; February 1988.

McCarty, P.L., 1964.  "Anaerobic Waste Treatment Fundamentals:   Toxic
     Materials and Their Control"; Public Works; pp. 91-94; November 1964.

McCarty, P.L., and D.P. Smith, 1986.  "Anaerobic Wastewater Treatment";
     Environmental Science and Technology; Vol. 20, No. 12; pp. 1200-1206;
     December 1986.

McShea, L.J., M.D. Miller, and J.R. Smith.  "Combining UV/Ozone to Oxidize
     Toxics"; Pollution Engineering; reprinted by ULTROX International; Santa
     Ana, California.

Metcalf & Eddy, 1979.  Wastewater Engineering:   Treatment, Disposal, and
     Reuse;  McGraw-Hill Book Co.; New York, New York.

Michael, J., 1988.  "Air-stripping of Organic Compounds"; Arizona Water and
     Pollution Control Association 1988 Annual Conference; Lake Havasu City,
     Arizona; copyright Delta Cooling Towers, Inc.
11.89.45
0122.0.0
11-116

-------
Nemerow, N.L., 1971.  Liquid Waste of Industry:  Theories, Practices, and
     Treatment; Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.; Reading, Massachusetts.

Nyer, E.K., 1985.  Groundwater Treatment Technology; Van Nostrand Reinhold
     Company, Inc.; New York, New York.

Obayaski, A.W., H.D. Stensel, and E. Kominek, 1981.  "Anaerobic Treatment of
     High Strength Wastes"; Chemical Engineering Progress; pp. 68-73;
     April 1981.

Olthof, M. , W.R. Kelly, G. Wagner, and J. Oleszkiewicz, 1984.  "Anaerobic
     Treatment of a Variety of Industrial Wastestreams"; in Proceedings of the
     39th Industrial Waste Conference; Purdue University; West Lafayette,
     Indiana; pp. 697-704; July 1984.

Olthof, M., and J. Oleszkiewicz, 1982.  "Anaerobic Treatment of Industrial
     Wastewaters"; Chemical Engineering; Vol. 89, No. 23; pp. 121-126;
     November 1982.

Parkin, G.F., and W.F. Owen, 1986.  "Fundamentals of Anaerobic Digestion of
     Wastewater Sludges"; Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division,
     Proceedings of the ASCE; Vol. 112, No. 5; pp. 867-920; October 1986.

Patterson, J.W., 1985.  Industrial Wastewater Treatment Technology, 2nd
     Edition; Butterworth Publishers; Boston, Massachusetts.

Perry, R.H., 1973.  Chemical Engineers Handbook 5th Edition; McGraw-Hill Book
     Co.; New York, New York.

Peters, R., Y. Ku, and D. Bhattacharyya, 1985.  "Evaluation of Recent Treatment
     Techniques for Removal of Heavy Metals from Industrial Wastewaters";
     American Institute of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series; Vol. 81,
     No. 243; pp. 166-172.

Rittman, B.E.,  1987.  "Aerobic Biological Treatment"; Environmental Science and
     Technology; Vol. 21, No. 2; pp. 128-135; February 1987.

Sachs, E.F., J.C. J.ennett, and M.C. Rand, 1982.  "Pharmaceutical Waste
     Treatment by Anaerobic Filter"; Journal of the Environmental Engineering
     Division, Proceedings of the ASCE; Vol. 108, No. EE2; pp. 297-314;
     April 1982.

Seamster, A.H., and R.M. Wheaton, 1966.  "A Basic Reference on Ion Exchange";
     Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology; 2nd Edition; Vol. 11; John Wiley and
     Sons, Inc.; New York, New York; pp. 871-899.

Snoeyink, V.L., and D. Jenkins, 1980.  Water Chemistry; John Wiley and  Sons,
     Inc.; New York, New York.

Speece, R.E.,  1983.  "Anaerobic Biotechnology  for  Industrial Wastewater Treat-
     ment"; Environmental Science and Technology; Vol.  17, No. 9; pp. 416A-
     427A'; September 1983.
 11.89.45
 0123.0.0
11-117

-------
Stenzel, M.H., and U.S. Gupta,  1985.  "Treatment of Contaminated Groundwaters
     with Granular Activated Carbon and Air-stripping"; Air Pollution Control
     Association Journal; Vol.  35, No. 12; December 1985.

Stuckey, D.C., W.F. Owen, P.L.  McCarty, and G.F. Parkin, 1980.  "Anaerobic
     Toxicity Evaluation by Batch and Semi-continuous Assays"; Journal of the
     Water Pollution Control Federation; Vol. 52, No. 4; pp. 720-729;
     April 1980.

Suidan, M.T., W.H. Cross, M. Fong, and J.W. Calvert, 1981.  "Anaerobic Carbon
     Filter  for Degradation of  Phenols"; Journal of the Environmental
     Engineering Division, Proceedings of the ASCE; Vol. 107, No. EE3;
     pp. 563-579; June 1981.

Sundstrom, D.W., and H.E. Klei, 1979.  Wastewater Treatment; Prentice-Hall
     Inc.; Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; pp. 241-270.

Switzenbaum,  M.S., and C.P.L. Grady, Jr., 1986.  "Anaerobic Treatment of
     Domestic Wastewater"; Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation;
     Vol. 58, No. 2; pp. 102-106; February 1986.

Switzenbaum,  M.S., and W.J. Jewell, 1980.  "Anaerobic Attached-Film Expanded-
     Bed Reactor Treatment"; Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation;
     Vol. 52, No. 7; pp. 1953-1965; July 1980.
Treybal, R.E., 1955.
     New York.
     Mass-Transfer Operations; McGraw-Hill Book Co.;  New York,
URS Company, Inc., 1987.  "Biological Treatability Study Scope of Work - Helen
     Kramer Landfill Superfund Site"; URS Company, Inc.; Syracuse, New York;
     pp. 2-2 to 2-4; October 1987.

USEPA, 1980a.  "Innovative and Alternative Technology Assessment Manual";
     USEPA/430/9-78-009; February 1980.

USEPA, 1980b.  "Carbon Adsorption Isotherms for Toxic Organics"; Municipal
     Environmental Research Laboratory; USEPA-600/8-80-023; April 1980.

USEPA, 1984.  "USEPA Project Summary:  Process Design Manual for Stripping of
     Organics1
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory;  Cincinnati,
     Ohio; USEPA/600/52-84-139; September 1984.

USEPA, 1986a.  Memorandum:  "Discharge of Wastewater from CERCLA Sites into
     POTWs"; H.L. Longest II, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response;
     R. Hanmer, Office of Water Enforcement and Permits; G.A. Lucero, Office of
     Waste Programs Enforcement to Waste Management and Water Management
     Division Directors, Regions I-X; April 15, 1986.

USEPA, 1986b.  "Mobile Treatment Technologies for Superfund Wastes"; Office of
     Emergency and Remedial Response; USEPA/540/2-86/003(F); September 1986.
11.89.45
0124.0.0
                   11-118

-------
USEPA, 1986c.  "Superfund Treatment Technologies:  A Vendor Inventory"; Office
     of Emergency and Remedial Response; USEPA/540/2-86/004(F);  September 1986.

USEPA, 1986d.  "Interim Guidance on Superfund Selection of Remedy"; OSWER
     Directive No. 9355.0-19; December 24, 1986.

USEPA, 1986e.  "A Handbook on Treatment of Hazardous Waste Leachate"; PEI
     Associates, Inc.; contracted by the Office of Research and Development;
     USEPA/68-03-3248; December 1986.

USEPA, 1986f.  "Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual"; Office of Emergency
     and Remedial Response; USEPA/540/1-86/060.

USEPA, 1987a.  Memorandum:  "Revised Procedures for Planning and Implementing
     Off-site Response Actions"; J.W. Porter, Office of Solid Waste and
     Emergency Response to Regional Administrators Regions I-X, Directive No.
     9834.11; November 13, 1987. N

USEPA, 1987b.  "Guidance Manual for Preventing  Interference at POTWs"; USEPA
     Permit Division EN-336; prepared by J.M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers,
     Inc.; USEPA/68-03-1821; Washington, DC.

Vandenburg, L.,  1984.  "Development in Methanogenesis from Industrial
     Wastewater"; Canadian Journal of Microbiology; Vol. 30, No. 8; pp.
     975-989; August  1984.

Vargas, C.,  and  R.C. Ahlert, 1987.  "Anaerobic  Degradation of Chlorinated
     Solvents";  Journal of the Water Pollution  Control Federation; Vol. 59, No.
      11; pp. 964-968; November 1987.

Venkataramani, E.S., R.C. Ahlert, and P. Corbo,  1983.  "Biological Treatment  of
     Landfill  Leachates"; CRC Critical Reviews  in Environmental Control; Vol.
      14, No. 4;  pp. 333-376.

Viessman,  W.,  Jr.,  and M. Hammer, 1985.  Water  Supply and Pollution Control;
     Harper  and  Row Publishers; New York,  New York; pp. 322-345.
 Water Pollution Control Federation,  1977.   Wastewater  Treatment  Plant Design  -
      WPCF Manual of Practice No.  8;  Lancaster Press, Inc.
 Weber,  W.J.,  Jr.,  1972.   Physiochemical Processes  for Water Quality Control;
      John Wiley and Sons; New York,  New York.

 Witt, E.R.,  W.J.  Humphrey, and T.E.  Roberts,  1979.   "Full-scale  Anaerobic
      Filter  Treats High-strength Wastes";  in Proceedings of the  34th
      Industrial Waste Conference; Purdue University; West Lafayette, Indiana;
      pp.  229-234;  July 1979.
 11.89.45
 0125.0.0
11-119

-------

-------
                                 SECTION  12

                          ORD TREATABILITY PROJECTS
9.89.107C
0015.0.0

-------
SECTION 12 - ORP TREATABILITY PROJECTS.  The USEPA Office of Research and
Development (ORD) in Cincinnati, Ohio conducted research to support ithe
evaluation for the potential to use POTWs to treat CERC1A and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) wastes.  ORD, in conjunction with the
Engineering Department at the University of Cincinnati, performed pilot-scale
treatability studies at the EPA Testing and Evaluation Facility to generate
treatability data for toxic organic compounds.   Eight technical papers were
produced as a result of the studies.  Section 12 presents a list of the papers
with a brief description of each study.
891003B-mll
16.

-------
                           ORD TREATABILITY RESEARCH
The USEPA Office of Research and Development (ORD) in Cincinnati, Ohio, was
contracted to conduct research supporting the evaluation for POTWs'  potential
to treat CERCLA and RCRA wastes.  ORD, in conjunction with the Engineering
Department at the University of Cincinnati, performed bench and pilot-scale
treatability studies at the USEPA Test and Evaluation Facility to generate
treatability data for RCRA and CERCLA organic compounds.  Eight technical
papers were produced as a result of the studies.  Below is a list of the
papers with a brief description of the purpose of each study:

1.   "The Determination of Biodegradability and Biodegradation Kinetics of
     Organic Pollutant Compounds with the Use of Electrolytic Respirometry,"
     Tabak et al., April 1989.

This report explains in detail the methodology of electrolytic respirometry
which was used to determine acclimation periods and Monod and first-order
degradation rate constants for approximately 50 RCRA and CERCLA compounds.
This study supports the development of the treatability fate model by
experimentally determining rate constants.  The biodegradation data will also
be used to validate a University of Cincinnati modeling routine which is being
developed to estimate biological rate constants from an organic compound's
physical structure.

2.   "Biodegradation Studies With Selected Leachate Compounds Using
     Electrolytic Respirometry, Part I (September 1988), Part II
     (October 1988)," Tabak et al.

The purpose of this study was to experimentally determine biokinetic rate
constants (i.e., maximum specific growth rate, half saturation constant, and
yield coefficient) for six CERCLA compounds.  Studies were initially performed
at a concentration of 100 mg/1 for each compound and consisted of measuring
the oxygen uptake of microorganisms characteristic of an activated sludge
plant.

3.   "Prediction and Modeling of Biodegradation Kinetics of Hazardous Waste
     Constituents," Govind et al., April 1989.

The fate model being generated by ORD will have three methods to input a
biodegradation rate constant.  A user.will be able to input his own value,
select a value from an existing database, or use a submodel to estimate the
rate constant from the organic compound's chemical structure.  The
biodegradation rate constant estimation methodology compared nine predicted
values with experimentally derived values.  The average error in prediction of
the first-order degradation rate constant ranged from 13 to 85 percent for the
compounds evaluated.
                                          /
4.   "Fate and Effects of RCRA and CERCLA Toxics in Anaerobic Digestion of
     Primary and Secondary Sludge," Dobbs et al.
gs041701
001.0.0
12-1

-------
Data on the fate of selected RCRA and CERCLA compounds in pilot-scale
anaerobic digesters was presented in this paper.  Both volatile and
semi-volatile compounds did not appear to inhibit digester operation at the
low digester input concentrations.  In the RCRA study, methane and total gas
production were 13 and 6 percent less, respectively, between test and control
digesters.  In the CERCLA study, methane production was not affected and total
gas production was 12 percent less in the test digesters when compared to the
control. Data indicated that volatile compounds were removed by volatilization
and degradation while semi-volatile compounds were degraded or sorbed onto
solids.

5.   "Status Report:  Development of a Fate Model for Organics in a Wastewater
     Treatment Plant," Govind et al., April 1989.

This report provided a brief description of individual models to describe
volatilization, sorption, and biodegradation of organic pollutants discharged
to a POTW.  Flow charts were presented to describe the model process for each
mechanism.

6.   "The Effect of Carbon Tetrachloride on Anaerobic Digestion of Primary and
     Waste Activated Sludge," B.M. Wysock, March 1989.

This work studied:  (1) the effect of carbon tetrachloride on anaerobic
digestion of sludge; (2) the effect of carbon tetrachloride on various phases
of anaerobic digestion of sludge; and (3) the effect of gas recirculation on
the digester performance if carbon tetrachloride was present.  Serum bottles
and a pilot-scale digester were used in this study.  The study concluded:  (1)
in serum bottle studies, up to 14 mg/1 of carbon tetrachloride had no effect
on gas production while up to 5 mg/1 had no significant effect on digester
performance in pilot-scale studies; (2) carbon tetrachloride affected mostly
the methanogenic phase of digester operation; (3) acclimation and increased
solids concentration within the digester could be utilized to treat carbon
tetrachloride and avoid inhibition; and (4) recirculation of the gas did not
impact volatile solids or volatile acid reduction.

7.   "Treatability of RCRA Compounds in a BOD/Nitrification Wastewater
     Treatment System with Dual Media Filtration," Safferman et al.

This study utilized a pilot-scale extended aeration system to:  (1)
investigate the treatability and fate of selected RCRA pollutants in a
nitrification process under both acclimated and unacclimated conditions; and
(2) determine the effectiveness of effluent dual media filtration on the
removal of RCRA pollutants.  Pollutants were composited before addition to the
system's influent stream.  This report provided an extensive literature review
on the nitrification process and modeling the fate of organic pollutants
discharged to a POTW.  The results can be summarized as follows:

o    no inhibition effects of organic pollutants at mg/1 levels on chemical
     oxygen demand removal (supported by discussions with ORD personnel);

o    no inhibition effects of organic pollutants at mg/1 levels on.suspended
     solids removal;
gs041701
002.0.0
12-2

-------
8.
 no inhibition effects  of  organic  pollutants  at mg/1  levels  on phosphorous
 removal;

 significant  inhibition of ammonia removal  at a composite  organic  spike
 concentration of  19.2  mg/1.   Nitrification may have  been  inhibited at low
 concentrations, though ammonia reduction by  secondary treatment was not
,inhibited until an influent  concentration  of 4.8  to  19.2  mg/1 was
 reached.   This result  was supported by discussions with ORD personnel who
 provided  a reference on pollutant concentrations  and the  associated
 percent nitrification  inhibition;

 sorption  not a significant removal mechanism for  volatile compounds;

 little observed experimental difference between acclimated  and
 unacclimated systems;  and

 dual media effluent filters  were  only effective on removal  of the
 strongly  sorbed compounds.

 "Treatability of  RCRA  and CERCLA  Wastes in POTWs," Bhattacharya et al.
This report reviews the findings of the five pilot-scale research projects
completed by the USEPA Office of Research and Development.  The projects
generated data regarding:

o    pollutant concentrations that caused inhibition of POTW biological
     treatment process;

o    biodegradation of .organic pollutants.

In addition to these technical papers, ORD is currently developing a software
package entitled, "Integrated Model for Predicting the Fate of Organics in
Wastewater Treatment Plants."  The model will attempt to simulate the fate of
organic compounds in a wastewater treatment plant.
gs041701
003.0.0
                                 12-3

-------

-------
                            ;      SECTION  13

                         WERL TREATABILITY DATA  BASE
9.89.107C
0016.0.0

-------
 SECTION 13 -  WERL TREATABILITY DATA BASE.   The USEPA Water  Engineering Research
 Laboratory (WERL) developed and is  continuing to  expand  a data base  containing
 information on the treatability of  compounds  in various  types of waters  and
 wastewaters.   The data base consists of selected  published  data taken from
 government reports and data bases,  peer reviewed  journals,  and various other
 publications.   Each source was reviewed by  a  quality review committee before
 including it  in the data base.  In  addition to treatability data,  the data base
 contains chemical and physical properties,  environmental data, and adsorption
 data for specific compounds, where  available.  Section 13 contains instructions
 for loading the data base onto a computer.

 For any additional information concerning the WERL data  base contact:

           Mr.  Kenneth A.  Dostal
           Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
           Environmental Protection  Agency
           26  W.  Martin Luther  King  Drive, Rm  191
           Cincinnati,  Ohio 45268

           (513)  569-7503
891003B-mll
1.

-------
                  TO LOAD WERL TREATABILITY DATABASE PROGRAM

COPY DISK 1 TO THE COMPUTER HARD DRIVE, IN A SUBDIRECTORY.  TO DO THIS, AT THE
SUBDIRECTORY PROMPT (SUCH AS C:\DBASE\EPA\) TYPE

            COPY A:*.*   [ENTER]
COPY DISKS 2, 3, AND 4 TO THE SAME SUBDIRECTORY BY TYPING AT THE PROMPT:

            COPY A:*.*   [ENTER]
THE FILES ON THE DISKS HAVE BEEN "ARCHIVED", ALLOWING US TO USE THE DISKS MORE
EFFICIENTLY AND MINIMIZE THE NUMBER REQUIRED.  TO RUN THE PROGRAM THE FILES MUST
BE UNARCHIVED.  TO UNARCHIVE THE PROGRAMS TYPE THE FOLLOWING, AT THE SUBDIRECTORY
PROMPT, TYPE:
            EPALOAD
[ENTER]
THE FOLLOWING MESSAGES WILL APPEAR ON SCREEN:
            PKARC  FAST!	
            UNARCING   ....
            UNSQUASHING  ....
            UNCHRUNCHING ....
                      ETC ....
WHEN  UNARCHIVING OF THE  FILES IS FINISHED THE COMPUTER AUTOMATICALLY RETURNS  TO
THE SUBDIRECTORY PROMPT.  TO  RUN THE PROGRAM AT THE  PROMPT TYPE:
            MAIN    [ENTER]
THE UNARCHIVING NEED ONLY BE DONE THIS ONE TIME.  FROM THEN ON TO RUN THE PROGRAM
ENTER THE SUBDIRECTORY AND TYPE:
            MAIN     [ENTER]
                                     13-1

-------

-------
                                 SECTION 14

                                 FATE MODEL
9.89.107C
0017.0.0

-------
 SECTION 14 - FATE MODEL  - As part of the CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs study,
 a user friendly, computerized  model has been developed to evaluate the fate of
 inorganic and organic pollutants discharged to POTWs.  POTW managers and
 feasibility study writers can use the model to evaluate the fate and
 treatability of toxic pollutants discharged to POTWs by predicting the overall
 percent removal of the compounds and percent removals of organic compounds due
 to volatilization, sorption, and biodegradation.


                                   The FATE User's Manual,  provided in Section
 14, introduces the user of the model to the concepts and assumptions used in its
 development and presents simple instructions for the model's operation.
891003B-mll
18.

-------
                        \
                       FATE

FATE AND TREATABILITY ESTIMATOR FOR CONVENTIONAL
        ACTIVATED SLUDGE TREATMENT PLANTS
                   USERS' MANUAL
        OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
                   OFFICE OF WATER
          US. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                   WASHINGTON, DC
                     +JUNE 1990+

-------

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.     INTRODUCTION

2.     INSTALLATION

3.     TUTORIAL

      3.1.   Using FATE

      3.2.   Selecting a Facility

           3.2.1.    Selecting an Existing Facility

           3.2.2.    Selecting and Creating A New Facility

      3.3.   Selecting a Compound

      3.4.   Running/Printing

4.     OPERATION MODES

      4.1.   SELECTION MODE

           4.1.1.    SELECTING A FACILITY

           4.1.2.    SELECTING A COMPOUND

           4.1.3.    FUNCTION KEYS

              4.1.3.1.   HELP

              4.1.3.2.   EDIT  AND UNIT CONVERSION
                       

              4.1.3.3.   COPY 

              4.1.3.4.   ADD

              4.1.3.5.   DELETE 

              4.1.3.6.   UNMARK

              4.1.3.7.   GROUP 
1

3

4

4

5

5

5

7

9

11

11

11

12

12

13

13


14

14

14

15

15

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
              4.1.3.8.   CAS SEARCH 






      4.2.   MENU MODE 




           4.2.1.    RUN




           4.2.2.    PRINT




           4.2.3.    UTILITIES




           4.2.4.    SYSTEM ACCESS




           4.2.5.    CONTINUE




           4.2.6.    QUIT




5.     REPORTS




      5.1.   SCREEN REPORT




      5.2.   SINGLE COMPOUND REPORTS




      5.3.   MULTIPLE COMPOUND REPORTS




      5.4.   PRINTING THE FACILITY DATABASE




      5.5.   PRINTING THE COMPOUND DATABASES




      5.6.   PRINTING THE MODEL ASSUMPTIONS




ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS




APPENDIX A - Warning Errors and Messages




APPENDIX B - Technical Description of Model




APPENDIX C - Inorganic/Organic Compound List




APPENDIX D - System Database Description




APPENDIX E - FATE Model Map of Cursor Key Movements




INDEX
15




15




15




16




16




17




17




17




18




18




19




20




20




20




20




22
                                  11

-------
1.   INTRODUCTION
This manual describes the uses and com-
ponents of the EPA Fate and Treatability Es-
timator (FATE) Model.   This model was
developed to help users understand the fate
and treatability of pollutants in wastewaters
discharged to conventional activated sludge
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs).
It aids the user in evaluating whether pol-
lutants in an influent to a POTW are sorbed
onto sludge, are volatilized off into the atmos-
phere, or are biodegraded.  The software also
will estimate the amount of the pollutant in
each process end point of the  model, as well
as percent total removal from the wastewater
influent stream.

The FATE  model  has  the  capability  to
evaluate the treatability of both inorganic and
organic pollutants discharged to  a POTW.
Since inorganic and  organic compounds are
removed by different physical and chemical
processes  in a POTW,  FATE consists  of
separate models for organic fate analysis and
inorganic fate analysis.

The calibration and  validation of the FATE
model is based on actual plant data from a
recent nation-wide survey of domestic
POTWs.  Plant performance data used in the
calibration and validation was obtained from
actual measurements of the influents and ef-
fluents of the surveyed POTWs.

The major assumptions used in developing the
FATE model are:

 1)  The model is for conventional diffused
 aeration activated sludge sewage treatment
 plants only.

 2)   No  significant volatilization  or
 biodegradation occurs in the primary clarifier.
3) All reactors are completely mixed.

4)  Steady state is  assumed to exist in all
reactors (e.g., aeration basin and clarifiers) so
that pollutant concentrations in a reactor do
not change over time.  (Thus, the model may
not be as accurate for plants with pulse inputs
of pollutants).

5) Liquid inflow equals liquid outflow.

6) For volatilization, the concentration of the
organic compound of interest is assumed to be
negligible in the inlet gas used for aeration.

7) For volatilization, the partial pressure of an
individual compound in the gas exiting the
aeration basin is in equilibrium with  the in-
dividual compound concentration in the aera-
tion basin liquid.

8)  Sorption partitioning follows a  linear
relationship between concentrations in the liq-
uid and solid phases.

9)  Biodegradation follows  Monod kinetics
and the organic compound influent concentra-
tion is assumed  to  be much less than' the
Monod half-saturation coefficient (i.e., in-
fluent concentrations  are at relatively  low
levels).

 10)  For the  biodegradation model step, it is
 assumed  that a  compound is removed by
 secondary utilization.

 11) The fate of a compound is not affected by
 the presence of other compounds except as
 may  be inherent in the data used for model
 calibration.

-------
 INTRODUCTION
 12) The POTW is operating effectively and
 no inhibition of the biological process is oc-
 curring.

 13) For model calibration, measured effluent
 concentrations reported as not detected were
 assumed to equal half the reported detection
 limit.

 14) The organic model was calibrated with all
 compounds grouped together rather than by
 individual compound.

 15)  Removal mechanisms (volatilization,
 biodegradation, and sorption in the primary
 and secondary clarifiers) were estimated using
 final effluent concentration data and best en-
 gineering judgement.

 16) Data for bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, di-n-
 octyl phthalate, aldrin, and alpha-BHC were
 not used for final calibration due to inconsis-
 tencies  in  the analytical  data  compared to
 other compounds within similar classes.

 17)  Total removal of compounds primarily
removed by sorption may be slightly over-
predicted, while compounds  primarily
removed by volatilization and biodegradation
may be slightly underpredicted.
 A printout listing these assumptions may be
 obtained using the Print option, which is ex-
 plained in Section 5.6.

 Section 2.0 - Installation describes the sys-
 tem package  contents, the program's
 hardware and  software requirements, and
 steps for installing the program for use on an
 IBM compatible personal computer (PC).

 Section 3.0 - Tutorial guides the user through
 an example session.

 Section 4.0 - Operation Modes describes the
 different modes of operation and the functions
 they perform in  using the model.

 Section 5.0 - Reports discusses printed report
 options and reports of the databases, including
 single  compound and  multiple compound
 reports.

 A glossary, index, appendices with warning
 errors and messages, a technical description of
 the  model, a  list of organic and inorganic
compounds FATE is capable of modeling, a
description of the four databases which FATE
uses, and a FATE model map of cursor key
movements follow at the end.

-------
2.  INSTALLATION
When you receive the FATE diskette, the
following files should be available:
FILE NAME
FC
CO
CI
CV
HELP
HELP
HELP
FCFCL
FCSEL
COCMP
CICMP
CISEL
COSEL
CVPRM
FATE
INSTALL
EXTENSION
DBF
DBF
DBF
DBF
DBF
DBT
NTX
NTX
NTX
NTX
NTX
NTX
NTX
NTX
EXE
BAT
If any of these files are  missing or are
damaged, the program will not run.

FATE may be run on any IBM compatible or
near compatible computers with a minimum
of 384K of available memory.  Installing
FATE is a simple process using the INSTALL
program and the following directions:
1. Insert FATE diskette No. 1 into the
selected disk drive.

2. Type the following commands after the
prompt:

A: 

INSTALL A: C:^:ENTER>
              !^
If  FATE is located in a drive other than A,
type the letter of that drive instead of A in the
commands above.

The install program creates  a subdirectory
entitled EPA FATE and copies the files to this
subdirectory. After FATE has been installed,
the user is automatically in the C:\EPA FATE
subdirectory.
                                      ,NOTE
                         It is very important to backup the five
                         database files (fiies with the DBF exten-
                         tion) in case the files get damaged. You
                         should also maintain a backup copy of
                         the entire FATE diskette.  Backup the
                         files prior to attempting to run the model.

-------
 3.  TUTORIAL
In this section you will be shown how to run
the FATE model. FATE has many options,
only a few of which will be displayed in this
tutorial. Other functions are described in suc-
ceeding chapters of this manual.
3.1.  Using FATE
In order to run FATE, you must be in the
appropriate subdirectory containing  the
FATE programs. Once you are in this direc-
tory, at the prompt, simply type:

FATE

After two header screens, FATE's main data
screen will appear as below:
                                        SLCT

SIUXT rACILm: 3/3 TYPE
muse
RtBIUM .
SWLL

ri««t floo (Q) 140.0
l*ri stu4ye fluw (Qp) 40OOO®
fri sludge cunc (Xp) 4.60
Her Wtlns vol (U) 33207700
MSS (XI) 3000 i
CM riw rate (C) ZtSSUOOO i
Uvislt! El»d:jc flo(Qu) 123ZCMO
Uaste il«dac cone (Xu) 8.75




nco

ig'i
-r/d
8pd
•/.

SELECT ORGAMIC: 1/34S
l.r-Blpheniil-i.V-dlttilne
1,1, l.Z-Tctrachloroe thane
1,1,1-Irichloroetlune

l»l-Dlchlorocthanc

CftS HUHBER 119304
henry's Lau constant 1
Log or octano I/water 1
Log of hlo rate -3

TYPE ng/1 1
0.1000
0.1000
6.1809
0.1000
0,1000
0.1000

.OOE-II n
.46 n
.096 E
 «2>-rBit  -cart  -(OD  -DELIIE  -noRE KEYS
               Figure 3-1
                NOTE
No matter what function is performed,
FATE will always  return you to this
screen.
 This screen is divided into two halves: facility
 information on the left and pollutant informa-
 tion on the right.  The left section displays
 facilities and their corresponding  operating
 parameters.   Note  that the operating
 parameters displayed in the lower left section
 correspond to the specific facility highlighted
 in the upper left section.  The user has the
 option of creating his/her own facility with
 specific operating parameters. The right half
 of the screen displays information concerning
 the pollutants contained in the compound data
 bases.  The upper right section lists com-
 pounds and the lower right section displays
 the chemical constants for  the compound
 highlighted in the upper right.  At the bottom
 of the screen, the  function keys are defined.
 For more information on the function keys,
 refer to Section 4.1.3.

 In order to move between screens, you must
 use the right and left arrow keys on your
 keyboard. The arrow keys do not allow access
 to the lower half of the display for any facility
 or compound that is marked with an '*' in the
 column titled TYPE.   These facilities and
 compounds cannot be altered in any way since
 they are the default parameters. Access to the
 lower half of the display will be discussed in
 Section 4.2.
  •'   ^- .,    ,  ;NOTE   ^
 If your keyboard does  not have dedi-
 cated keys for arrows, then use the num-
 ber pad to'the right of the main key board
 with the numbers lock disabled so  that
;the arrow keys may be used.

-------
                                                                         TUTORIAL
3.2.  Selecting a Facility

In this section you will learn how to run FATE
using  a  default  facility ('SMALL,'
'MEDIUM,' or 'LARGE'), and how to run
FATE for a facility that you have created.

3.2.1.  Selecting an Existing Facility

A facility is selected by moving the cursor
with the up or down arrow keys to the desired
facility and pressing the  bar.  A
yellow '#' will appear to the left of the chosen
facility. FATE informs you that you are in the
selection mode when "SLCT" appears in the
uppermost right hand corner of the screen.
For more information on modes of operation,
refer to Section 4.0 of this manual.

                 NOTE

 Only one facility  at a time may be
 chosen.   A facility rnust be  chosen in
 order for FATE to run.

Example: Choose the 'MEDIUM' facility:
                                          SLCT

SELECT FflCILCTV:
LARGE
> HEDIUM
SMALL

Plant Tlou 

Aer basins uol (V)
HLSS CXI)
Gas riou rate CG)
Uaste sludge f loCQu)


2/3 TVPE
•M
*t

25.0 MGD

7022388 gal
3868 mg/1
47174888 cf/d
220088 gpd


SELECT QRGflN 1C: 1x345 ]
l,l'-Biphenyl-'l,4'-dlanine
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
1 , 1 , 1-Tr 1 ch loroethane

1 , 1-D ich loroethane

CflS hUTIBER 119S04
Henry's Law constant 1
Log of octanol/uater 1
Log of bio rate -3


VPE ng/1 1
8.1000 1
a.ieoo i
0.1008 1

o.iooe i

80E-11 n 1
46 B; 1
.868 E 1

  -EDIT  -COP»
                       -DELEIE  -nORE KEKS
                 Figure 3-2
The 'MEDIUM' facility has now been chosen
for a FATE run. If you press the 
bar again, the '#' will disappear, and  the
facility is no longer chosen for a FATE run.
You now have the option of selecting a new
facility.

3.2.2.  Selecting and Creating A New
       Facility

You may want to run FATE for a facility  not
included as a default.  To add a new facility
press the  function key (which is called
'ADD,' at the bottom of the screen).  Figure
3-3 shows what the screen  should look like.
Use of the function keys are described in more
detail in Section 4.1.3.

SELECT FftCILITK: 2/3
TVPE

LflBGE
StlBLL •

Plant flou (Q>
Fri sludge flou CQp)
Pri sludge cone (Xp)
fler basins uol (W)
HLSS (XI)
Gas flow rate (G)
Uaste sludge f loCQuJ
Uaste sludge cone (Xw>
8.0 ItGD
8 gpd
8.00 V.
0 gal
8 ng/1
8 cF/d
• 8 gpd
o.eo •/.
SELECT ORSflN 1C: 1/34S TYPE
l,l'-Blphenyl-J.4J-dianlnc
1,1, 1,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1',1-Irich loroethane
1 , 1 j 2 > 2-Tetrach loroethane
1 , 1 , 2-Tr i ch loroethane
1 , 1-D Ich loroethane
ng/1 1
0.1000 1
0.1008 1
0.1008 1
0.1008 1
0.1000 1
0.1000 1

CflS NUMBER 119984
Henry's Lau constant l.OOE-11 fl 1
Log of octanol/water 1.-16 fl 1
Log of bio rate -3.088 E 1

                                                   -EDIT  -COPX -ftDD  -DELETE  -HUKE KEVS
                                                                 Figure 3-3
 Now you are able  to input data from any
 POTW you wish. First, type the name of the
 POTW you wish FATE to model.  For ex-
 ample, type  'PORTLAND MAINE'  in the
 facility name box, and  press  .
 Note that you are now in the TYPE column.
 Enter a letter or symbol for your own records,
 or simply  leave  it. blank, then  press
 .  The cursor should now be blink-

-------
    TUTORIAL
    ing at the first entry for the facility parameter
    secdon, which is Plant Flow Rate. FATE now
    asks for PORTLAND MAINE'S plant operat-
    ing parameters. For the first entry, Plant rate
    (Q), assume PORTLAND MAINE'S plant
    flow rate is 50 MOD.  Type in this number,
    and press .  Follow the same pro-
    cedure for the remaining plant parameters:
 Enter this
 value:
 75000
Unit:
GPD
 10000000   GAL
 4000
MG/L
    Plant Parameter:
    Qp  (Primary
      Sludge Flow
      Rate)
    Xp  (Primary
      Sludge
      Concentration)
    V (Volume of the
      Aeration Basins)
    XI (Mixed Liquor
      Suspended
      Solids)
    G (Gas
      Volumetric Flow
      Rate)
    Qw (Wasted
      Sludge Flow
      Rate)
    Xv (Wasted
      Sludge
      Concentration)
   You should now be viewing a screen which
   looks like Figure 3-4.
 100000000  cf/d
 250000
GPD
 surer  raciim:  zxi  TYPE
     snftu
     KMR/
     LftHCE
riant floo (Q)        50,0 nCB
frf lliklgc flou (Qf)   7SOOO  gpd
Fri ilu.'jr nine (Xp)     4.00 v.
ncr Ultra vol (U)  16000000  gal
MSS (XI)          4006  «,/!
(-.I rl(M rate (G)  109000008  cf/d
  it tiu4{c rio«gu)  zsoooo  gpd
Uillc slu4|e cone (Xu)    Z,00 X
                        SELECT OKKHIC:  1x345
                                         TYPE ng/1  1
 l,l'-Slphenyl-4,4'-dlajiliic
   <1i2-Tetrach1oroethane
   »l-Trichloroethane
   •2,2-Tetrachloroethane
   «2-Trichloroethane
   -Dlchlorocthane
       0.1000 I
       0.1000 I
       o.iaoo i
       0.1000 I
       0.1000 I
      • o.ieoo i
ens nunsEn     113901
llenry'c Lau constant     l.OOE-11 H  I
Log of octanol/uater     1.46   n  I
Log of bio rate       -3.000  E  I
                   -nDD  -l)ELEn:  -MOBE KEJS
                   NOTE

 You  do not have to  use the units.
 provided. For further instruction on unit
 conversion, read on.

After  pressing  the  key  for  Xv
(Wasted Sludge Concentration), FATE asks
you if you want to accept the data shown on
the  screen  or continue to  edit the  facility
parameters. As you have all the data you need
typed in the appropriate boxes, press 'Y' and
FATE will  store PORTLAND MAINE'S
facility parameters in the database.

For more information on the aspects of creat-
ing your own facility, please refer to Section
4.1.3 of this manual.

FATE will  allow  input  of these plant
parameters  in units  of measure other than
those that appear on the screen.  For example,
while the cursor still appears in front of the
PORTLAND MAINE facility, press  to
invoke the Edit command.  This key allows
you to change information already typed in the
facility fields.   Now, arrow  down to Xp
(Primary Sludge Concentration). While hold-
ing  the  key, press   again.
Your screen should now be similar to Figure
3-5.
                                                                                                   TI7TO}
                                                       SELECT  FftCIUTy:  Z/3  TYPE
                                                                             SELECT ORGANIC:  1/34S
                                                                                              TYPE «3/l
                                   SHALL
                                  > raRTLnm MAINE
                                   LARGE
FUnt flou         50.0 ItGD
Fri sludge flou (Qp)   75000  gpd
Pri sludge cone (Xp)     -1.08  Y.
Aer basins uol (U)  10000000  gal
MLSS (XI)         4000 ng/1
Gas flou rate (G)  100000000 cf/d
Uaste sludge flo(Qu)  250000  gpd
Jaste sludge cone (Xu)    2.00  '/.
                                         l,lJ-mphenyl-4,4'-dl««!ne
                                         lil.l,2-Tetrachlopoethone
                                                          -EDIT  -COPY  -flDD  -DEL£IE  -t1DBE KEYS
                    Figure 3-4
                                                                         Figure 3-5

-------
                                                                                    TUTORIAL
   Example:  Your POTW  keeps track of the
   primary sludge concentration in units of mg/1
   and the value is 35,000 mg/1. Arrow down to
   the 'mg/1'  option, and press  .
   Type in '35000', and your screen should look
   like Figure 3-6.   Now, when^you press
   , the pop-up screen should disap-
   pear, and in place of the '4%'  you typed in
   previously, Xp will be '3.5 %'.  (Figure 3-7)
 SELECT  FACILITY:  Zx3  TYPE
     IflflGE
    8 PORTLAND I1AINE
     SHALL
                        SELECT ORSON 1C:
    i.l'-Blphenyl—4.4'-dla«lne
    1,1,1,2-Tetrach loroethane
                             PARAMETER: XP
                              4.00e«C04
Plant flew (Q)        59.0 HGD
Pri sludge flou CQp)  75099  gpd I
Pri sludge cone (Xp)     4.OO  :
Bcr basins uol W)  18000090  gal
MLSS (XI)          4000 ng/1
Gas f lou rate (6)  160000009 cf/d I
Uaste sludge f lo(Qu)  250099  gpd |
Uaste sludge cone CXv)    2.00  :
                               0.1009 I
                               0.1009 I
                               0.1009 I
                               0.1008 I
                               0.1000 I
                               0.1009 I
                    1.001-11 H  I
                    ..46    fl  I
                    3.906   E  I
    -UMnftHK  -GBOUP HARKS  -CAS SEABCH  -tlOHE KEYS
                     Figure 3-6
                                For more information on this feature of FATE
                                refer to Section 4 of this manual. In order to
                                continue with the model run press the 
                                key and, as before, press 'Y', and FATE will
                                return you  to the upper half display of the
                                facility database.

                                Select the PORTLAND MAINE facility as
                                described previously. If FATE tells you that
                                a facility has already been selected, simply
                                arrow up or down to the facility which has a
                                '#' in front of its facility name, and press the
                                 bar.  Be sure that a '#' appears in
                                front of the  PORTLAND MAINE  facility
                                before continuing.
                                        3.3.   Selecting a Compound

                                        In this section you will learn how to choose a
                                        compound for a FATE run. FATE allows you
                                        to choose an organic or an  inorganic com-
                                        pound. The upper right section of the screen
                                        displays the organic compound list.  If you use
                                        the right arrow key, the inorganic compound
                                        listing will appear in the upper right corner of
                                        the screen.
 SELECT  FACILITY:   4/4   TYPE
                         SELECT ORGANIC:  V345
     LARGE
    a PORTLAND MAINE
     MEDIUM
Plant f lou (q>
Pri sludge flou (Qp)
Pri sludge cone CXp)
Acr basins val (U>
rtLSS (XI)
HGD
gpd
    59.9
  75800
    3. SO
10909003   gal
   4000  ngxl
Gas flou rate (G)  100800009  cfxd
Uaste sludge, flo(Qu)  256000  gpd
Uaste sludge cone (Xu>    2.60
                                                   I
     l,l'-Biphenyl-4,4'-diamine
     1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
     1,1,1-Trlchloroethane
     1.1.2, 2-Tetrach loroe thane
     1,1,2-Trichloroethane
     1,1-Dich loroe thane
                                e.iooe i
                                e.ioee i
                                0.1090 I
                                e.iooe i
                                0.1090 I
                                0.1090 I
   CAS NUMBER     119904
   Henry's Lau constant     l.OOE-11 H  I
   Log of octanol/Mater     1.46    H  1
   Log of bio rate       -3.090   E  I
             00-HEHU  -*1ELF  -HORE KEKS
                     Figure 3-7
Using the right arrow key, move the cursor
from the PORTLAND MAINE facility over
to the organic compound list.   For further
information on the separate databases please
refer to Appendix D.  Selecting a compound
is accomplished in the same manner as select-
ing a facility; move the cursor to the desired
compound using the up or down arrow key,
press the  bar and a '#' will appear
to the left of the compound name. FATE now
asks you to enter the influent concentration of
the compound you have  chosen. You may
either choose the default concentration (0.100
mg/1) or input  some other  concentration.
Press  and FATE asks you to ac-
cept what is on the screen; press 'Y'.

-------
 TUTORIAL
                 NOTE

  If physical/chemical  constants are not
  available for a compound, FATE will not
  allow you to select it for a model fun/

 If you do not wish to run a compound you have
 already selected, press the   bar
 again, and the '#' will disappear. There is no
 limit to the number of compounds FATE can
 run at one time.

 FATE has a few special features which will
 make selecting a compound easier.  If the
 compound you wish to  choose is not shown
 on the immediate screen, you may press the
 first letter or number of the compound you
 wish to choose, and FATE will take you to the
 area in its database where that compound is
 listed.  The compounds are listed  in  the
 database in numerical and then alphabetical
 order.

 Example 1:   Suppose  you  wish  to choose
 'Benzene'. Simply press the letter 'B', and
 FATE will take you  to the  first compound
 beginning with the letter 'B' - 'Benzanthrone'
 (Figure  3-8).  FATE tells you  which com-
 pound is highlighted in the bottom center of
 the screen, just above the Function Key Menu.
 In our case, 'Benzathrone' is written.  Now,
 arrow down  to 'Benzene', and  press the
  bar. FATE now asks you to enter
 the influent concentration of the compound
 you have chosen. You may either choose the
 default concentration  (0.100 mg/1) or input
 some concentration of benzene.  Press
  and FATE once again asks you to
 accept what  is on the screen; press 'Y'.
 'Benzene,' at the selected influent concentra-
 tion, is now chosen for a FATE run.

Another way to choose a compound is  by
performing a CAS number search.  FATE al-
lows you to do this by pressing the  key,

SELECT FACILITY: 4x-i TYPE
MEDIUM .
« FOHILAND MAINE
SHALL ' «

Plant f loo (Q) 50.6 IKD

Her basins uol (U> 10000009 gal
HLSS (XI) 1000 ng/1
Gas flou rate (G) 160000030 cf/d
Haste sludge floCQu) Z50000 gpd


SELECT ORGANIC: 268/345 IYPE
Azlnphas-methtjl s Guthloh
Benzanihrane
Benzenafilne

Benzene

CAS NUttDEB D6500
Henry's Lau constant 3.80E
Leg of octanol/^Mter 0.00
Log of bio rate -2.000


«g
0.
0.
e.

0.

-6



10
10
10

10

n
u
E

                Azinphos-nethyl s Guthion

            c/>-ntnu  -HELP  -nonE KEYS
                   Figure 3-8


 as indicated at the bottom of the screen in the
 Function Key Menu. FATE asks you for the
 CAS number of the compound you wish to
 choose.

 Example 2: Choose bis(2-ethylhexyl) phtha-
 late which  has a  CAS number of '117817'.
 Press.  ,   type  <117817>, press
 , and FATE will bring you to the
 section  of  its database where bis(2-ethyl-
 hexyl) phthalate is listed. Once again, press
 the  bar and input the concentration
 of bis(2-ethylhexyl)  phthalate,  say  0.100
 mg/1; press  again to  accept the
 screen.

 Example 3: Use the right arrow key to obtain
 the inorganic compound  list.  To choose
 'nickel' you may arrow down until this com-
pound is highlighted on the screen, or you may
simply press 'N' and FATE will take you to
the portion  of the database where the inor-
ganic compounds beginning  with 'N'  are
listed.  Press the space bar and  a '#' will
appear to the left of the compound name.

As with the  facility database, compounds can
be added or copied for editing of, the default
                                         8

-------
                                                                           TUTORIAL
parameters. For more information see Section
4.1.3, Function Keys, of this manual.

A facility (PORTLAND MAINE) and three
compounds  (benzene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, and nickel  have been  selected).
FATE is now ready to run.
3.4.  Running/Printing

In this section you will learn how to run the
FATE model and how to print the results.

In order to run the FATE model, you must
access the Menu Mode by pressing the 
(forward slash) key. The menu will appear at
the top of the screen (Figure 3-9). Use the left
or right arrow key to work your way across the
menu options, and highlight the 'Run' option.
Press  and FATE runs for the first
selected organic compound.

SELECT FflCILlTY: 4x4 TYPE
IIEDIUH
8 Foniuttffl MAINE
• StlflLL •

Plant flou  50. 8 nGD

Her basins uol CU) 10000000 gal
HLSS (XI) 4008 ng/1
Gas flou rate (G) 16O600000 cf/d
Unste sludge f lotQu) 250000 gpd


SELECT ORSdNIC: 1Z9/34S UPE
nzlnphos-nethyl N Guthlon
fienzanthrone
Benzenanine
enzenanine, -c or°7
tt Benzene

CflS NUNBER 7143Z
Henry's Lau constant ° 5.55E
Log of octanolxwater Z.'13
Log of bio rate -2.096


«g^l
0.1003
0.1008
0.1099
0 1008
0.1008

-3 H
n
E


1
1
1
|
1

1
1

                  Benzene
  -ED1T  -COPV  -ftI)B -DELEIE  -flORE KEVS

                 Figure 3-9


 Figure 3-10 is an example of the screen dis-
 playing the results  for  the  PORTLAND
 MAINE facility and benzene.  Note the total
 percent removal and  the effluent concentra-
 tion (labeled overall  removal and  sec. eff.
 cone, respectively) are reported in the lower
right hand corner of this pop-up screen. Also
note that the mechanism removals [primary
sorption  (pri.  sorbed), secondary  sorption
(sec. sorbed),  volatilization (volatized) and
biodegradation (biodegraded)] are  rounded
off to the nearest integer, and therefore do not
exactly total to the reported overall percent
removal.  (For further information on screen
Reports, refer to-Section 5.1 of this manual.) -
To run FATE for the second and third com-
pounds, successively press  or any
other key, and the results for bis(2 ethylhexyl)
phthalate and then nickel will appear, respec-
tively.  When FATE has finished running all
the compounds  selected, press 
and the cursor will return to the menu.
foj COMPOUND: Benzene
| FflCILlTY: PORTLflND MftIHE
pri. influent cone.
™ pri. sorpt. re*, rate
pri. cUr. eft. coiic.
uo 1 . rcM . .rate
bio. ren. rate
~ sec . sorpt . re* . rate
Flout flou CQ) 58
Pri sludge flou  75069
Fri sludge cone CXp> 3
fter basins uol tU) 10000090
HLSS -UltttRK  -CflS SEftRCH  -nORE KEVS
                                                                 Figure 3-10
 In order to obtain a printout of the FATE
 results, press the  key to return to the menu,
 arrow over to the 'Print' option of the menu,
 and press . You are now allowed
 to select a single compound report or a sum-
 mary report for multiple compounds. A single
 report prints an extensive FATE analysis, the
 compound information and the facility
 parameters for one compound only. If more
 than one compound is selected, a single report

-------
    TUTORIAL
    will be generated for the last  compound
    selected.   A multiple report prints  facility
    parameters, effluent concentrations and per-
    cent removals for all compounds chosen.
    Arrow over to 'Single', and press .
    Your printer will give you a report which will
    be similar to Figure 3-11.  Once FATE returns
    you to  the menu,  arrow over to 'Multiple',
    and press .  Now, your printer will
    give you  a report which  will be similar to
    Figure 3-12.

    These  are the report  options you  have  for
    obtaining printouts of FATE results. For fur-
                     rate And Treatability Estimator
                   for Conventional Activated Sludge
                     Publicly Owned Treatment Works

                            Version 1.05
                             05/22/90

                     ABI Environmental Services, Inc.
                           Portland, Maine

                   U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
               Industrial Technology Division, Washington, DC
 COHPOMO: Nickel
    Primary coefficient	RU  «      130.00  mg/l
    secondary coefficient	Ml  *     1000.00  «ig/l
    plant influent concentration	Si  «       0.1000  ng/l

 FACILITY: Portland Mine
    plant flow	o «         50 HGO
    primary sludge flow rate	Op «       75000 gpd
    primary sludge concentration	Xp         3.5 X
    total volume of aeration tanks	V      10000000 gal
    temperature of aeration basins	T           20 C
    mixed liquor suspended solids	XI        4000 ng/l
    total gas volumetric flow rate	G     100000000 ft3/d
    secondary wasted sludge flow rate... Ou =      250000 god.
    concentration of uasted sec. sludge. Xv *        2.0 X

HOOEL JESUITS:
    Removal  in Primary Clarifier(s):
    primary  removal rate........	   =       9.23 Its/day
    primary  clarifier effluent cone	 So »       0.08 mg/l

    Removal  In Aeration Tank(s) and Secondary Clarifier(s):
   secondary removal rate	'  *       1.31  Ibs/day
   Overall removal rate.........

   Final effluent concentration.

   Overall percent removal......
                     ther information and discussion of the results
                    . obtained, see Section 5 of this manual.

                     You  have now seen  what  FATE  can  ac-
                     complish. This tutorial was meant to be only
                     an  introduction  to the  FATE model.   The
                     model  has many options which are  not dis-
                     cussed in this  tutorial, but are discussed in
                     detail in  other sections  of this manual.   In
                     addition, Appendix E contains a FATE model
                     map of cursor key movements for quick and
                     easy reference.
                                     Fate And Treatability Estimator
                                    for Conventional Activated Sludge
                                     Publicly Owned Treatment Works

                                            Version 1.05
                                              05/22/90

                                     ABB Environmental Services,  Inc.
                                         t  Portland, Maine

                                    U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                Industrial Technology Division, Washington, DC
                  FACILITY: PORTLAND MAINE
                     plant flow	0
                     primary sludge flow rate	Op
                     primary sludge concentration........ Xp
                     total volume of aeration tanks...... V
                     temperature of aeration basins	T
                     mixed liquor suspended solids	XI
                     total gas volumetric flow rate	G
                     secondary uasted sludge flow rate... Qu
                     concentration of wasted sec. sludge. Xv
     50  HGO
   75000  gpd
     3.5  X
 10000000  gal
     20  C
    4000  mg/l
100000000  ft3/d
  250000  gpd
      2  X
                  Influent     Effluent     	i	Percent Removals	-_-	
                  Cone, mg/l    Cone, mg/l    Total    Sorption  Volatilization Biodegradatitj

                  Benzene
                      0.1000     0.0328   67.1    1.2 / 10.2     43.0        12.8
                  bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
                      0.1000     0.0000   100.0   70.5 / 29.5      0.0         0.0
                  Nickel
                        0.10       0.08   25.3
                                           Figure 3-12
10.55  Ibs/day

 0.0752 ng/l

25.3   X
                      Figure 3-11
                                                        10

-------
4.  OPERATION MODES
The FATE model is composed of two modes ,
of operation:  the Selection Mode and the
Menu Mode.  This section describes the two
modes of operation in detail.
 4.1.   SELECTION MODE

 When the user starts the FATE model pro-
 gram, the Selection Mode is automatically
 displayed.  The Selection Mode is indicated
 by the letters "SLCT" in the upper right hand
 corner of the display screen. From the Selec-
 tion  Mode the user can  view the default
 parameters of the facility database, the organic
 compound database, and the inorganic, com-
 pound database. Two of the three databases
 will, be displayed on the screen at the same
 time: either the facility and organic compound
 database or the facility and inorganic com-
 pound database.
                 NOTE
  If your keyboard does  not'have dedi»
  cated keys for arrows, then use the num-
  ber pad to the rigtit of the main keyboard
  with the numbers lock disabled so that
r the arrow keys may be used,

 4.1.1. SELECTING A FACILITY

 This section provides instructions for select-
 ing a facility to perform a FATE run..

 The upper left of the facility screen displays
 the names  of all facilities contained in  the
 facility  database.  Those facilities marked
 with an  asterisk (*) in the TYPE column are
 defaults and cannot be altered  in any way.
 The asterisk facilities are named 'SMALL',
'MEDIUM',  and  'LARGE'  and contain
operating plant parameters which are repre-
sentative of a range of plant flow rates.

The user may view plant parameters for any
facility; these are listed in the lower left sec-
tion of the screen:
Plant flow (Q)
Pri sludge flow (Qp)

Pri sludge cone (Xp)

Aer basins vol (V)

MLSS (Xi)

Gas flow rate (G)
 Waste sludge flo
 (Qw)
 Waste sludge cone
 (Xv)
Plant Flow Rate
Primary Sludge
Flow Rate
Primary Sludge
Concentration
Total Volume of
Aeration Basins
Mixed Liquor
Suspended Solids
Gas Volumetric
Flow Rate to
Aeration Basins
Secondary Wasted
Sludge Flow Rate
Secondary Wasted
Sludge Concentration
A facility is selected by moving the cursor
with the up or down arrow key to the desired
facility and pressing the  bar.  A
yellow '#' will appear to the left of the chosen
facility.

                 NOTE

 Only one facility ata time maybe chosen.
 A facility must be chosen to run FATE.

If you  press the  bar again, the  '#'
sign will disappear; the facility is no longer
chosen for a FATE run, and you have the
option of selecting a new facility.  For further
information on adding/editing a user  added
facility refer to Section 4.1.3, Function Keys.
                                           11

-------
 OPERATION MODES
 4.1.2. SELECTING A COMPOUND

 FATE allows the user to select either organic
 or inorganic compounds. The upper right sec-
 tion of the screen displays the organic com-
 pound list.  Using the right arrow key while
 the organic compound list is  displayed will
 move the user to the inorganic compound list.

 In the lower right hand corner of the screen,
 FATE displays chemical information on the
 pollutant that is highlighted.

 Chemical information for a highlighted or-
 ganic compound includes the Chemical
 Abstract System (CAS) Number, the Henry's
 Law Constant, the log octanol/water partition
 coefficient constant and the biodegradation
 rate constant. The values of these constants
 are either measured, estimated, or unavailable
 and FATE indicates this with 'M', 'E', or 'U'
 written after the constant's values.

 When an inorganic compound is highlighted,
 the lower right hand corner of the screen dis-
 plays the inorganic  CAS number and the
 primary and secondary removal coefficients.
 For a description of these coefficients and
 their relation to the inorganic  FATE model,
 refer to the technical report included as Ap-
 pendix B of this manual.

 Appendix C  lists all organic and inorganic
 compounds with their respective CAS num-
 bers, constants and coefficients, and Appen-
 dix D explains in more detail the contents of
 the organic and inorganic databases.

 Selecting a compound is accomplished in the
 same manner as selecting a facility: move the
 cursor to the desired compound using the up
 or down arrow key, press the  bar
 and a yellow '#' will appear to the left of the
 compound name. FATE will then ask you to
enter the influent concentration of the com-
pound you have chosen. You may choose the
 default concentration  (0.100 mg/1)  or input
 some other concentration.  Press 
 and FATE asks you to accept what is on the
 screen.  To  unmark a compound already
 selected, press the  bar (after ac-
 cepting a compound concentration) and the
 '#' will disappear.  There  is no limit to the
 number of compounds FATE can run.

 FATE has a special feature which will make
 selecting a compound easier. If the compound
 you wish to choose is not shown on the imme-
 diate screen, you may press the first letter or
 number of the compound you wish to choose,
 and FATE will take you to the area in  its
 database where that compound is listed. The
 compounds  are listed in  the  database  in
 numerical and then alphabetical order.

 EXAMPLE: You wish to select Toluene. Go
 to the organic compound database and type in
 the letter "T". Then, use the down arrow key
 to select toluene.  Once the cursor is next to
 toluene you will be able to view the informa-
 tion in the database on toluene. To use toluene
 in either  a  single or multiple  compound
 analysis press the space bar. A pound sign (#)
 will appear to indicate that toluene  was
 selected for the model run.  Enter the desired
 compound concentration, press ,
 and press 'Y' to  accept* the concentration.
 Press the  bar again and toluene
 will no longer be selected.

 4.1.3.  FUNCTION KEYS

 When you are in the Selection Modes you may
 define your own facility or change the chemi-
 cal parameters of any compound from the
 default parameters provided 'in  the model.
 This option gives you the flexibility to use the
 model  in specific real-life  situations.   The
mechanics of defining your own facility and
changing the parameters for a compound are
discussed in the following descriptions of the
various function keys.
                                         12

-------
                                                               OPERATION MODES
4.1.3.1.    HELP 

The Help function is activated by pressing the
 key.  While using the Help function, a
message referring to the specific mode or vari-
able currently being used is displayed. The
Help  Mode provides immediate on-line
guidance to the user and can be activated in
every mode of the FATE program. Use the
up or down arrow keys to scroll through the
help message. Press  to return to the
program.
4.1.3.2.   EDIT  AND UNIT CON-
          VERSION 

The Edit command allows you to change the
facility operating parameters (e.g., plant flow
rate, primary sludge concentration,  etc}
and/or  the chemical constants for a specific
compound (e.g., Henry's Law Constant.)

By editing different parameters and then run-
ning the model, the user may evaluate the fate
of compounds under different plant condi-
tions.   In addition, if the user has obtained
chemical properties for a compound that differ
from the default values, or has measured
values from studies performed at his/her plant
(e.g., plant specific biodegradation rate con-
stants from treatability studies), then these
may be entered in the EDIT Mode.
                 NOTE
 You may not  edit the  operational
 parameters of a facility or chemical con-
 stants of  a compound if the facility or
 compound is followed by an asterisk.  If
 this is the case, see the directions for the
 Copy Mode .
To actually edit a facility or compound, select
the facility or compound to be edited and press
the   key. The items which you will be
able to  edit will be highlighted; select the
parameter to be  changed, type in the new
entry, press , and move on to the
next entry. To obtain an explanation of the
specific parameter you wish  to edit, press
 for help.

UNIT CONVERSION

FATE will allow input of plant parameters in
units other than those that appear  on the
screen.  For example, highlight a facility,
press  to invoke the EDIT command,
and arrow down to a facility parameter of your
choice.  While holding the    key,
press , and a pop-up screen will appear
to the right. This pop-up screen contains a list
of units for which  that parameter may  be
recorded in a POTW. You may enter a value
for that parameter in  any of  the units dis-
played.  By pressing  over the unit
you  wish to select, inputing your value and
pressing  again, FATE converts
.your entered value to  standard FATE units.
After you have altered all of the parameters
you wish, press the  key. The follow-
ing message will appear:
                                                   :  to Accept,  to continue edit, or  to Abort changes I
                                                                    -»ELEIE  -nOBE KE»S
                Figure 4-1

Press the appropriate key for your situation.


Remember that pressing the escape key again
while this message still appears on the screen
will mark this record for deletion.  See the
instructions on Delete for further guidance.
For record removal, see Section 4.2.3.
                                          13

-------
 OPERATION MODES
 4.1.3.3.   COPY 

 The Copy command is  used when the user
 wishes to edit a default facility or compound
 (shown by an asterisk). Once you have iden-
 tified the facility or compound you wish to
 edit (copy), move the cursor to that facility or
 compound and press the  key.  The fol-
 lowing message will appear when the copy
 has been successfully accomplished:
one data field to the next, and the right or left
arrow key will move the cursor within the data
field. Once you are in a data field, pressing
the  key  (Help key) will display  a
description of the data requirements for that
field. Refer to Section 4.1.3.2. for a descrip-
tion of the unit conversion option which al-
lows you to enter facility parameters in units
other than what appear in the lower left of the
screen.   Also, refer to  Appendix D for  a
description  of the facility and compound
database contents.
   Record has been copied;  ready for editing

   Press any key to continue...
                Figure 4-2

Press any key to remove this message from the
screen.  When the message is removed, the
copied data is highlighted. This data is now
available to be edited; use  the up or down
arrow key to go from data field to data field,
and the right or left arrow key to move the
cursor within a data field.  For more informa-
tion on the contents of the  facility or com-
pound databases, refer to Appendix D.

                NOTE

 It is a good idea to edit the name field of
 the facility or compound (e.gk, change
 Toluene to Toluene"!) to identify any
 records that you have created.

4.1.3.4.   ADD 

The Add command allows the user to add a
new facility or compound record to a selected
database by pressing the  key.  The data
fields  that need to be filled to complete the
new record will be highlighted. The database
is now ready for you to add data to it. The up
or down arrow key will move the cursor from
4.1.3.5.   DELETE 

The deletion of a facility or compound record
is a two step process.  Use of the Deletion
command is the first step.  It may more ac-
curately  be  called the "Mark-for-Deletion"
command.   Use the arrow keys to move to
the desired record and press the  key
once. A "D" in the "SLCT" column indi-
cates a record marked for deletion. To actual-
ly    delete     the     record    the
Utilities-Maintenance function in the Menu
Mode is used and is described in the Menu
Mode, Section 4.2.3. To remove the mark-
for-deletion press the   key once again.
The record is not actually deleted, however,
until you perform the Utilities-Maintenance
function in the Menu Mode.
                 NOTE
             '                     ''" ' '"j"
 Facilities or compounds followed by an
 asterisk {*} cannot be deleted. Because
 these records are defaults, they have
 been protected against any changes.

You may overwrite the mark-for-selection (a
# sign) with a mark-for-deletion (a 'D'), how-
ever, you may not overwrite a mark-for-dele-
tion with a mark-for selection.
                                          14

-------
                                                             OPERATION MODES
4.1.3.6.    UNMARK

The purpose of the Unmark command is to
clear selection markings in the organic and
inorganic compound databases between runs
of the model. Using the Unmark  func-
tion prevents compounds that were selected
for a previous model run from being inadver-
tently included in subsequent model runs.
4.1.3.7.    GROUP 

The Group command option searches for all
compounds that have been selected for a
model run and groups them at the bottom of
the database. By pressing  you activate
the search and can view the resulting list of
compounds that have been selected together
as a group.                        *
4.1.3.8.   CAS SEARCH 

The CAS SEARCH command allows you to
search for a particular compound by  its
Chemical  Abstract System (CAS) number.
The option is especially useful for a com-
pound with  several names that you cannot
seem to find in the database.
                 NOTE
 When you type in the CAS number, do
 not  use hyphens.  For example, the
 CAS number for acetic acid, 10-80-54,
 would be entered as "108Q54",	

 4.2.   MENU MODE 

 In the Menu Mode a user may access several
 primary commands.  Pressing  the forward
 slash  key (as indicated in the lower left-
 hand corner of the screen) activates the Menu
Mode. The top line of the screen should read
as follows:
  Run  Print  Utilities  Systen   Continue  Quit
Bun the node I for the current parameters	
               Figure 4-3


To return to the  Select Mode, press the
 key.

Options are selected and activated in the
Menu  Mode by moving the arrow keys to
highlight the desired menu choice and press-
ing . You may also type the first
character of the option to make a selection
(e.g. type  for RUN).

The following sections describe the different
options available while in the Menu Mode.
These are:

RUN

PRINT

UTILITIES

SYSTEM ACCESS

CONTINUE

QUIT
 4.2.1.  RUN

 After you  have marked the desired  com-
 pounds  (in both the organic and inorganic
 database) activate the Menu Mode, while in
 the Selection Mode, by typing .  In the
 Menu Mode, the Run  menu option will run
 the FATE model for each selected compound.
                                         15

-------
 OPERATION MODES
 The system runs the program for the organic
 compounds first and then for the inorganic
 compounds.

 The Run command can be used to recalculate
 removal rates of pollutants  in the plant in-
 fluent after you have copied the records and
 changed various operating parameters.

 4.2.2. PRINT

 To use the Print option, make sure you are in
 the Menu Mode. The Print option 

dis- plays the Print Menu; the top line of the screen should read as follows: Figure 4-4 The print option consists of six sub options: Single, Multiple, Facility, Compound, Page and Line. Single - Prints a report of the results for a FATE run for one compound. Multiple - Prints a report for a FATE run for any number of compounds selected. Facility - Generates a report of all facilities in the facility database. Compound - Generates a report listing all organic and inorganic compounds in their respective databases. Assumptions - Generates a report listing the major model assumptions. Page - Sends a form feed command to the printer. Line - Sends a line feed command to the printer. For more information concerning content of the various reports, refer to Section 5. ~NOTE^ * , All reports in this version of the, FATE^ model are set up for 80 column output * 4.2.3. UTILITIES The Utility option is used for maintenance of the databases. It is composed of three sub-op- tions: Maintenance, Rebuild, and Backup. Maintenance Selectfng Maintenance deletes blank records (where no facility or compound name has been given) and those records which are "marked for deletion." (Refer to Section 4.1.3.5 for instructions on deletion of records.) The Maintenance option also updates index files that are used to sort records according to compound name, selection, or some other at- tribute. Rebuild The Rebuild option is used to rebuild index files that have become damaged, possibly during a power outage. ' ; ^ '-/ ,„ JNOTE ; ! {itfA ^ ^5 jtj,v ^ ,. v It is very important "to 'backup the live database files on a regular basis'in case -the files get damaged. You should also" maintain a backup copy of the origmal FATE model program and databases. 16


-------
                                                          OPERATION MODES
Backup

The Backup option copies the database files
to a diskette.

4.2.4. SYSTEM ACCESS

The System option allows you to exit to DOS
while still running the FATE model program.
You can perform other tasks in DOS, such as
checking disk space, formatting diskettes, or
locating a file program, and then return to the
FATE model program by typing 'EXIT' and
pressing .

4.2.5.  CONTINUE

The Continue option allows the user to con-
tinue using the FATE model program after the
model results are obtained for all selected
compounds.

4.2.6. QUIT

The Quit option ends the modeling session
and exits from the FATE model program.
 Each time you exit to DOS  using this
 option and then reenterthe FATE model
 program, additional computer memory is
 used- You Should not use this option on
 a regular basis since the computer may
 run out of memory. If this occurs, it will
 not be possible to access DOS.
                                        17

-------
  5.   REPORTS
  The FATE model program allows you to print
  reports for single or multiple compound for-
  mats and to print  the facility or compound
  (organic and inorganic) databases .

  Step-by-step  instructions for generating
  reports are as follows:

  •  Begin in the Selection Mode.

  1. Select the desired facility using the space
  bar  (e.g., small, medium, large, or user-
  created facility.)

  2. Use the right arrow key to  move to the
  organic or inorganic compound database.

  3. Use the space bar to select the  desired
  compound(s).

 • Press the forward slash key (/) to obtain
    the Menu Mode. Make sure the printer is
    on-line and the paper is aligned.

 1. If you wish to view the results on the screen
 before you print them, select Run from the
 Menu Mode. The run results for the selected
 compound(s) will appear at the top  of the
 screen (this report is discussed in Section 6.1).
 When you are finished viewing the results,
 press any key to continue.

 2. If you don't wish to view the results  before
 printing them, select Print from the  Menu
 Mode and select a report option: Single, Mul-
 tiple,  Facility, or Compound. These reports
 are described in the following sections.

 When the report has finished printing the pro-
gram will return you back to the main level of
the Menu Mode. From there, you may Quit
the program, Continue to use the program,
  Run the current model again, or print another
  report.
  Printing may be terminated by pressing
  the  key.
           «. ,  ==:

 5.1.  SCREEN REPORT

 When you choose the Run option from the
 Menu Mode, FATE provides an on-screen
 report as shown in Figure 3-10.  The values
 shown on this report are defined below:

 Organic Compounds:

 pri. influent cone, is the influent concentra-
 tion (mg/1) that you entered in the compound
 database at the upper right hand side of the
 screen.

 pri. sorpt. rem. rate is the sorption removal
 rate (Ib/dy) from the primary clarifier.

 pri. clar. eff. cone, is the effluent concentra-
 tion (mg/1) from the primary clarifier.

 vol. rem. rate  is the volatilization removal
 rate (Ib/dy) from the aeration basins. .

 bio. rem. rate is the biodegradation removal
 rate (Ib/dy) from the treatment system.

 sec. sorpt. rem. rate is the sorption removal
 rate (Ib/dy) from the'secondary clarifier.

 pri. sorbed is the percent sorbed to the sludge
 in the primary clarifier.

sec. sorbed is the percent sorbed to the sludge
in the secondary clarifier.
                                          18

-------
                                                                          REPORTS
volatilized is the percent of the compound
which will volatilize in the treatment system.

biodegraded is the percent of the compound
which will biodegrade in the treatment sys-
tem.

overall removal is the total percent removal
of the compound through the POTW.

sec. eff. cone, is the effluent concentration
(mg/1) from the secondary clarifier.

Inorganic Compounds:

primary inf. cone, is the influent concentra-
tion (mg/1) that you entered in the compound
database at the upper right hand side of the
screen.

primary rem. rate is the removal rate (Ib/dy)
from the primary clarifier.

secondary rem.  rate is the  removal rate
(Ib/dy) from the secondary clarifier.

overall rem. rate is the overall removal rate
(Ib/dy) from the treatment system.

primary eff. cone, is the effluent concentra-
tion (mg/1) from the primary clarifier.

primary rem. is the percent removal from the
primary clarifier.

secondary rem. is the percent removal in the
secondary clarifier.
        t
overall rem. is the overall percent removal
from the treatment system.

final eff. cone, is the effluent concentration
 (mg/1) from the secondary clarifier.
After viewing the results press  to
view other selected compounds, or press any
key to continue.
5.2.  SINGLE COMPOUND
      REPORTS

A 'Single' report not only generates a detailed
FATE analysis of the selected compound, but
also reports the selected facility's parameters
and compound chemical information. Figure
3-11 is an example of a single report.  The
report format is as follows:

Compound information  - This section
presents chemical information on the selected
compound - Henry's Law Constant, log oc-
tanol/water partition coefficient, biodegrada-
tion rate constant, and the plant influent
concentration.   For  more  information on -
specific chemical data refer to Appendix D.

Facility information - This section prints all
the plant parameters of the selected facility.
For more information on facility parameters,
refer to section 4.1.1.

FATE analysis -  The removal rates,  con-
centrations and percent removals are reported
in this section. Refer to Section 5.1 for defini-
tions.

Notes: These notes are the assumptions of the
model  as  explained  in Section 1 of this
manual.
                 NOTE
  If more than one  compound  was
  selected, only the last compound run
  may be printed by selecting Print and,
  then Single.
                                          19

-------
  REPORTS
  When the report has finished printing the pro-
  gram will return to the main level of the Menu
  Mode.
 5.3.  MULTIPLE COMPOUND
       REPORTS

 Multiple compound reports present the
 facility operating parameters and the percent
 removals of each compound selected. Figure
 3-12 is an example of a Multiple Compound
 Report.  The format is described as follows:

 Facility - As for the single compound report,
 the selected facility's plant parameters are
 reported here. For a more detailed description
 of these parameters refer to Section 4.1.1.

 Results - The results of the.FATE analysis for
 every compound selected are reported here.
 Unlike the single report option, only the ef-
 fluent concentration and percent removals are
 reported. For more  detailed FATE analysis,
 you have the option of  generating single
 reports for all compounds of interest or choos-
 ing the Run option from the Main Menu, and
 viewing  detailed analysis for each selected
 compound.

 When printing is complete, the program will
 return you to the Main Menu.
5.4.  PRINTING THE FACILITY
      DATABASE

To generate a complete printout of all the
parameters in the facility database, you need
to perform the following steps:

Press the forward slash key  to get to the
Menu Mode.

Select Print from the Menu Mode.
 Make sure the printer is on-line and the paper
 is aligned.  Select Facility from the Print
 Menu and the complete facility database will
 begin printing.

 When the printout is complete, the program
 returns you back to the main level of the Menu
 Mode.  You  may then Quit the program,
 Continue using the program, or Run the cur-
 rent model again.
 5.5.  PRINTING THE
       COMPOUND DATABASES

 The procedure for printing the organic com-
 pound database and the inorganic compound
 database is exactly the same as the procedure
 for printing the facility database.

 After you have selected Print and verified the
 printer is on-line and the paper is aligned,
 select  Compound  from the Print Menu,
 rather than Facility.

 A complete list of both the organic and the
 inorganic compounds  will begin printing.
 The compound database is attached as Appen-
 dix C.

 When the report is finished printing you will
 be at the  main level of the Menu Mode! As
 before, you may Quit, Continue, or Run the
 model again.
5.6.  PRINTING THE MODEL
      ASSUMPTIONS

The procedure for printing the list of model
assumptions used during the development of
FATE is the same as the procedure for printing
the facility and compound databases.
                                        20

-------
                                                                          REPORTS
After you have selected Print and verified the
printer is on-line and the paper is aligned,
select Assumptions from the Print Menu.

A complete list of the model assumptions will
begin printing.  The list of assumptions  is
presented in Section 1.0.
When the report is finished printing, you will
be at the main level of the Menu Mode. As
before, you may Quit, Continue, or Run the
model again.
                                          21

-------
 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
 Aer basins vol
 total volume of the aeration basins
 bio. rem. rate
 biodegradation removal rate
 CAS number
 cf/d
 cfm
 cone.
 CU.FT
 CU.FT/D
 CU.FT/HR
 CU.M
 CU.M/D
 CU.M/HR
 Chemical Abstract System Number
 cubic feet per day
 cubic feet per minute
 concentration
 cubic feet
 cubic feet per day
 cubic feet per hour
 cubic meters
 cubic meters per day
 cubic meters per hour
D
DOS
when present to the left of a compound or facility, this record is
marked for deletion
Disk Operating System
E
effluent cone.
EPA
ESC
indicates a value has been estimated using an accepted method
effluent concentration
Environmental Protection Agency
The escape key
FATE
final eff. cone.
Fate And Treatability Estimator
effluent concentration reported after the secondary clarifier
                                        22

-------
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
G
G/CU.M
gal.
Gas flow rate
gpm
                           gas volumetric flow rate to the aeration basins
                           grams per cubic meters
                           gallons
                           gas volumetric flow rate to the aertion basins
                           gallons per day
                           gallons per minute
H '
influent cone.
                                                      •j
                           Henry's law constant (atm - m /mole)
                           influent concentration   ,
L
L/D
LB/CU.M
LB/DY
LB/GAL
LK1
LKOW
Log of bio rate
Log of octanol/water
                           liters
                           liters per day
                           pounds per cubic meters
                           pounds per day
                           pounds per gallon
                           log (base 10) of the biodegration rate constant
                           log (base 10) of the octanol/water partition coefficient
                           log (base 10) of the biodegration rate constant
                           log (base 10) of the octanol/water partition coefficient
 M
 MCU.FT/D
 mg/1
 MGAL
 MOD
 ML
                           a measured value taken from the literature
                           millions of cubic feet per day
                           milligrams per liter
                           million gallons
                           millions of gallons per day
                           coefficient that predicts removal of an inorganic compound in the
                           secondary clarifier
                                           23

-------
                                              ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
MLSS
mixed liquor suspended solids
overall rem
overall rem. rate
overall removal of the compound
overall removal rate of the compound
plant flow
POTW
ppm
pri. clar. eff. cone.
pri. influent cone.
pri. sludge cone.
pri. sludge flow
pri. sorbed
pri. sorpt. rem. rate
primary coefficient
primary eff, cone.
primary rem.
primary rem. rate
plant flow rate of wastewater into POTW
publicly owned treatment works
parts per billion
parts per million
primary clarifier effluent concentration
primary clarifier influent concentration
primary clarifier sludge concentration
sludge flow rate from the primary clarifier
amount of the compound sorbed in the primary clarifier
the sorption removal rate in the primary clarifier
coefficient (RW) that predicts removal of an inorganic compound in
the primary clarifier
primary clarifier effluent concentration
percent removal of compound from the primary clarifier
removal rate of compound from the primary clarifier
Q
OP
Qw
plant flow rate
primary sludge flow rate
wasted secondary sludge flow rate
RW
coefficient that predicts removal of an inorganic compound in the
primary clarifier
sec. eff. cone.
secondary clarifier effluent concentration of compound
                                         24

-------
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
sec.sorbed
sec. sorpt. rem. rate
secondary coeff.

secondary rem.
secondary rem rate
Si

SLCT
So
percent of the compound sorbed in the secondary clarifier
removal rate of the compound in the secondary clarifier
coefficient (ML) that predicts the removal of an inorganic compound
in the secondary clarifier      ._ ,
percent removal of compound in the secondary clarifier
removal rate of compound from the secondary clarifier
concentration of contaminant in the raw  wastewater (influent to
primary clarifier)
indicates the SELECT MODE
concentration of contaminant in the primary clarifier (also equal to
primary clarifier effluent concentration)
                           temperature of the aeration basins (assumed to be 20° C)
 U
 ug/1
 the value is unavailable and must be supplied by the user
 micrograms per liter
 V
 vol. rem.
 volume of the aeration basins
 volatilization removal rate
 waste sludge cone.
 waste sludge flo
 sludge concentration from the secondary clarifier
 sludge flow rate from the secondary clarifier
 XI
 Xp
 Xv
 mixed liquor suspended solids
 primary sludge concentration
 secondary sludge concentration
 .#
 if present to the left of a facility or compound, it is selected for a
 FATE run
 indicates a default facility or compound
                                           25

-------
 APPENDIX A



 Warning Errors and Messages


 The following list of error and warning messages may appear in a window if an operation attempted
 by a user does not meet certain conditions. The messages typically appear in a pop-up window at
 the bottom-center of the screen and require the user to respond with a keystroke to clear the message.

 Warning #1:  "The printer is not ready."

 The printer is not. attached to the computer, is not on-line, or some other printer error has occurred.

 Error #100:  "Cannot edit deleted or marked (*) record"

 A field marked with an asterisk (*) has been provided by EPA and the values are protected from
 alterations. You may copy a record  which automatically removes the asterisk and allows
 parameters to be edited.

 Error #101:  "Cannot delete a marked (*) entry."

 See Error #100

 Error #102:  "More than one  facility selected."

 The user interface allows  only one facility to be run at a time.

 Error #103:  "No compounds selected."

 The user has attempted to run the model before selecting any compounds.

 Error #104: "No facility selected."

 The user has attempted to run the model before selecting a facility.

 Error #105: "User cannot use an asterisk for this entry."

The asterisk (*) character  is reserved for the default database records.
                                        A-l

-------
APPENDIX A



Error #106: "Type must be Measured, Estimated, or Unavailable."

Each organic compound chemical parameter is qualified based on the source of the information.
The data represented is a measured value when the type field contains the capital letter 'M'.
Similarly 'E' and 'U' are used to qualify data is estimated or unavailable.  When adding or editing
records the user should follow this convention.

Error #107: "Select is other than inorganic or organic."
                                                     *
Error #108: " Select is other than facility, inorganic or organic."

Error #109: "Scientific notation demands this field to be 1 or greater."

Error #111: "Cannot select deleted record."

A record which has been marked for deletion may not be selected for a model run. To select a record
marked for deletion the user must first undelete the record (using )  and then select it (using
the space bar).

Error #112: "This entry cannot begin with blank."

Name fields may not begin with a blank since they are used as Key fields in the index which controls
the order of the database.

Warning #113: "This entry should be between-13 & 2."

Warning #114: "This entry should be between -3 & 10."

Warning #115: "This entry should be between -5 & -1 (or 0 if U)."

This biodegradation rate constant is entered as the log(K).

Warning #116: "This entry should be between 0 & 100."

 Warning #117: "This entry should be between 0 & 1000."

 Warning #118: "This entry should be between 1000 * Q & 9000 * Q."

 Q is the plant flow rate in units of MGD.

 Warning #119: "This entry should be between 3 & 8%."

 Warning #120: "This entry should be between 74,000  * Q & 372,000 * Q."

 Q is the plant flow rate in units of MGD.
                                          A-2

-------
                                                                      APPENDIX A



 Warning #121: "This entry should be between 1500 & 7000."

 Warning #122: "This entry should be between 2,000,000 * Q & 40,000,000 * Q."

 Q is the plant flow rate in units of MOD.

 Warning #123: "This entry should be between 500 * Q & 20,000 * Q."

 Q is the plant flow rate in units of MOD.

 Warning #124: "This entry should be between 0.5 & 2%."

 Warning #125: "This entry should be between 0 & 35."

 Warning #126: "This entry should be between 'N'."

 Warning #127: "Cannot run this compound, Henry's or log type is U."

 An organic compound must have an 'E' or an 'M' qualifier for the Henry's Law Constant and Log
 Kow in order to be run. The 'U' qualifier indicates that the data is currently unavailable.

 Error #200: "Select inorganic or organic database for CAS number search."

 Error #201: "CAS number not found."

 Error #202: "No results to print. Run model first."

 For single run printouts the model must be run first using'/R'.

 Error #203: "Printer is not ready."

 Error #204: "Not enough memory to run a DOS shell."

 The fate model requires that 60K of memory be available before it will attempt to run a DOS shell.

 Error #207: "Cannot change K for an asterisked (*) entry with U or M."

 Error #208: "No more records marked for run."

The following errors indicate that an internal error  has taken place and is probably beyond the users
control:

Internal Error #900: "Unknown error number."

Internal Error #901: "Unknown mode."
                                       A-3

-------
APPENDIX A



Internal Error #902: "Database empty."

If this error occurs reinstall the database and index files from the distribution diskette or backup
copies by using DOS to copy all .DBF, .DBT and .NTX files to the appropriate disk or directory.

Internal Error #903: "dspfk mode other than 1,2,3."

Internal Error #904: "Missing record or corrupt CV.DBF, CVPARM.NTX files."

The user should rebuild the indices using the rebuild utility in the Menu Mode.            <   ! *
                                         A-4

-------

-------
       APPENDIX B





FATE Model Technical Report

-------

-------
SECTION
                         FATE MODEL TECHNICAL REPORT
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                     TITLE
                                                                       PAGE NO.
   1.0    INTRODUCTION.	    B1~1

   2.0    LITERATURE REVIEW OF FATE IN POTW MODELS.'	    B2-1

          2.1  ORGANIC MODELS	    Z^
          2.2  INORGANIC MODELS	    B2"1

   3 .0    FATE MODEL DEVELOPMENT	    S3'1

          3.1  ORGANICS MODEL	    B3'J-
               3.1.1 Mass Balance About the Primary Clarifier	    B3-1
               3.1.2 Secondary System	    B3 " 3
          3.2  INORGANICS MODEL	 .	    B3-6
               3.2.1   Mass Balance About the Primary Clarifier	    B3-7
               3.2.2   Secondary System	    B3 " 9
          3.3  MODEL ASSUMPTIONS	   B3-12

   4.0    DEFAULT VALUES AND INPUT VALUE RANGES	,	    B4-1

   5.0    MODEL COEFFICIENTS AND CONSTANTS	    B5-1

          5 .1  OCTANOL/WATER PARTITION COEFFICIENTS		    B5-1
          5.2  HENRY'S LAW  CONSTANTS	•	    fi5-l
          5 . 3  BIODEGRADATION  RATE CONSTANTS	    B5-2

    6 .0    MODEL CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION	• • •   B6-1

           6 .1  SENSITIVITY  ANALYSIS	•	   B6-1
           6 .2  DATA COLLECTION/SELECTION	   B6-3
           6.3  ORGANIC MODEL CALIBRATION	   B6-4
               6.3.1   FATE Model  Predictions	   B6-4
               6.3.2   Actual Observations	•	   B6-4
               6.3.3   Calibration	••	   B6-4
               6.3.4   Calibration Model  Runs	   B6 - 6
               6.3.5   Statistical Evaluation	   B6-9
                        6.3.5.1 Method	   B6-9
                        6.3.5.2 Results  - Uncalibrated Model	   B6 -10
                        6.3.5.3 Results  - Calibrated Model	   B6-10
           6.4  INORGANIC MODEL CALIBRATION	   B6-17
                6.4.1   FATE Model Predictions	   B6-17
                6.4.2   Actual Observations	   B6-17
                6.4.3   Calibration	   B6-19
 900513-mil

-------
                          FATE MODEL TECHNICAL REPORT
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                  (continued)
 SECTION
                           TITLE
                                                                        PAGE NO.
                6.4.4   Calibration Model  Runs	
                6.4.5   Statistical Evaluation	
                        6.4.5.1  Method	
                        6.4.5.2  Results  - Calibrated Model	,
           6.5   VALIDATION	
                6.5.1   Results - Organic  Model	
                6.5.2   Results - Inorganic Model	
           6.6   MODEL PRECISION	
                6.6.1   Precision Evaluation  Procedure	
                6.6.2   Precision Evaluation  Results - Organic Model.
                6.6.3   Precision Evaluation  Results - Inorganic
                        Model	
    7.0
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.
B6-19
B6-19
B6-19
B6-20
B6-26
B6-26
B6-28
B6-28
B6-28
B6-29

B6-31

 B7-1
ATTACHMENT A  - BIODEGRADATION RATE  CONSTANT ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES
ATTACHMENT B  - MODEL  CALIBRATION PLOTS
900513-rail

-------
                                LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO.
                                     TITLE 	   PAGE NO.
   4-1    DEFAULT PLANT PARAMETERS	• •    B4'2

   4-2    PLANT PARAMETER RANGES	•  •; •    B4'3

   5-1    RULES OF THUMB FOR BIODEGRADABILITY	    B5'4

   6-1    SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS - COMPOUND CLASSES SENSITIVE TO INPUT
          PARAMETER	    B6'2

   6-2    FATE ORGANIC MODEL INPUTS AND OUTPUTS	    B6-5

   6-3    COMPOUNDS USED IN FATE CALIBRATION		    B6-7

   6-4    FATE INORGANIC INPUTS AND OUTPUTS.	  B6-18

   6-5    INORGANICS MODEL CALIBRATION FACTORS	•  B6-27

   6-6    ORGANIC MODEL PRECISION	  B6-30

   6-7    INORGANIC MODEL PRECISION	  B6-32
  900513-mll

-------
                                LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE K
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
6-1
6-2
6-3
6-4
6-5
6-6
6-7
6-8
6-9
6-10
FO . TITLE
FATE ORGANIC MODEL PRIMARY CLARIFIER 	
FATE ORGANIC MODEL AERATION BASIN AND SECONDARY CLARIFIER. .
FATE INORGANIC MODEL PRIMARY CLARIFIER 	
FATE INORGANIC MODEL AERATION BASIN AND SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 	 	
BOX PLOTS OF FATE RESIDUALS BY COMPOUND CLASS 	
PERCENT OF MASS REMOVED BY EACH REMOVAL MECHANISM 	
PROBABILITY PLOT OF FATE RESIDUALS 	 	
BOX PLOTS OF FATE RESIDUALS BY COMPOUND CLASS 	
PERCENT OF MASS REMOVED BY EACH MECHANISM 	
PROBABILITY PLOT OF MEASURED EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION 	
PROBABILITY PLOT OF PREDICTED EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION 	 »
PROBABILITY PLOT OF FATE RESIDUALS 	
BOX PLOTS OF FATE RESIDUALS BY COMPOUND 	
PERCENT OF MASS REMOVED BY EACH CLARIFIER 	
PAGE NO.
B3-2
B3-4
B3-8
B3-10
B6-11
B6-12
B6-14
B6-15
B6-16
B6-21
B6-22
B6-23
B6-24
B6-25
900513-mll

-------
                         FATE MODEL TECHNICAL REPORT
                               1.0  INTRODUCTION
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),  Industrial Technology
Division (ITD) has supported the development of a user friendly, computerized
model, "Fate and Treatability Estimator" (FATE), to evaluate the fate of various
inorganic and organic pollutants discharged to conventional activated sludge
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs).  FATE was designed to assist POTW
operators and feasibility study writers in evaluating the fate and treatability
of pollutants discharged to POTWs.  FATE users will be able to estimate the
overall percent removal of a pollutant discharged to a plant, and percent
removal attributed to the three principal mechanisms for removal included in the
model (i.e., volatilization, sorption, and biodegradation).  USEPA's guidelines
for use of mathematical models for regulatory assessment and decision making
(USEPA, 1989) were followed wherever applicable during the development of FATE.

The purpose of this report is to present technical considerations and
methodologies used in the development of FATE.  Topics addressed in this report
are:  1) review of various fate models available in the literature, 2)
development of the inorganic and organic mathematical submodels which compose
FATE, 3) selection of default plant parameter values and ranges used to check a
user's input values, 4) methodology to obtain Henry's Law constants,
octanol/water partition coefficients, and biodegradation rate constants,
5) sensivity analysis conducted on FATE's organic compound removal algorithms,
and 6) calibration and validation of FATE.
 900513-mll
                                      Bl-1

-------
                 2.0  LITERATURE REVIEW OF FATE IN POTW MODELS
 The literature reviewed in the development  of the  organic  and inorganic  FATE
 models is  described in subsequent sections.


 2.1  ORGANIC MODELS

 Several models were available  in the  literature  for  estimation of overall fate
 of organic pollutants  discharged to a treatment  facility.  Blackburn et  al.
 (1985) developed an overall fate model which  included parameters such as
 hydraulic  residence time,  biomass concentration, air flow  volumes, and chemical
 and physical properties of the pollutant  to estimate fate  of  organics discharged
 to an activated sludge treatment process.  Blackburn et al. (1985) and Blackburn
 (1987) presented a fate model  which predicts  overall removal  of organic
 pollutants.   This model has been validated against laboratory and bench-scale
 studies for seven organic  compounds.   Namkung and  Rittmann (1987) and Rittmann
 et al. (1988)  have presented overall  fate models developed from performing a
 mass balance across an aeration basin and secondary  clarifier.  Namkung  and
 Rittmann (1987)  used this  model to estimate volatile organic  compound (VOC)
 emissions  of eleven VOCs from  two POTWs,  and found  that a comparison of the
 total VOC  removal rate estimated from the model  to actual  data from two  plants
 resulted in estimated  overall  removals within 10 percent of the actual removal
 rate.   Barton (1987) developed a model which  included similar  biodegradation and
 sorption removal equations as  in the  models of Blackburn,  and  Namkung and
 Rittmann;  however,  removal due to volatilization included  both stripping due to
 surface or subsurface  aeration and volatilization.   All of these models  had the
 ability to model the aeration  basin and secondary  clarifier.   Clark (1986)
 developed  a  model which included the  primary  clarifier, aeration basin,   and
 secondary  clarifier to estimate overall removal and  removal due to a specific
 removal mechanism.   This model has been computerized, unlike the o'ther models
 reviewed.

 Due  to the lack  of sufficient  data for model  calibration and validation  and the
 variability  associated with actual plant performance as indicated in USEPA's
 evaluation of  toxic treatability by POTWs (USEPA,  1982), a complicated model was
 not believed to  provide more reliable  estimates of plant performance.   As a
 result,  most of  the models  reviewed were eliminated  as a basis for the FATE
 organic  model.   The advantages  in user understanding, computational simplicity,
 and minimal  amount of  easily obtained  plant-  and chemical-specific input
 parameters, however, made  the model of Namkung and Rittmann a  solid basis for
 development  of the  FATE organic model.


 2.2 INORGANIC MODELS

After  an extensive  literature search and personal  communication with researchers
 in this  area, only  three models predicting the fate of inorganic compounds in
 POTWs were identified.   Neufeld  (1975) used batch  studies to develop an
 expression to describe  the  accumulation of metals on biological sludge.   The
900513-mll
                                     B2-1

-------
resulting expression was used to generate isotherm equations that could
represent kinetic and equilibrium  relationships for six metals (lead, cadmium,
mercury, chromium,  zinc, and nickel).  Neufeld predicted that there,was a
maximum attainable value of metal that could be associated with sludge.  Nelson
et al. (1981) also performed batch experiments to generate adsorption isotherms
that could represent equilibrium of metals between bacterial solids  and
solution phases.  Three metals were modeled (zinc, copper, and cadmium).  Nelson
emphasized that the adsorption constants generated were valid only at the pH and
chemical composition of the water used in the experimental system.  Patterson
and Kodukula (1984) used data from extended pilot studies to develop models to
predict the distribution of metals in activated sludge processes.  A correlation
was found between percent removal of metals and percent suspended solids
removal; the total concentration of metals in the effluent increased as the
effluent suspended solids increased.  Using this correlation, Patterson and
Kodukula proposed models for eight metals (aluminum, cadmium, chromium, copper,
iron, lead, nickel, and zinc).

Based on the inorganic  literature review, the Patterson and Kodukula approach
was chosen as the basis for the FATE inorganic model.  The approach was selected
for a number of reasons:

      1)   Patterson and Kodukula modelled the most metals;

      2)   pilot plant  studies as opposed to adsorption isotherm studies were
          used  as  the  basis for the  model;                          /

      3)   constants developed to estimate removal in the  primary  and  in the
          secondary clarifiers  were  given for the eight metals; and

      4)    the model is based  on the  relationship between  the volatile  suspended
           solids  and metal  concentrations of  the process  streams  rather than
           only  the metal  concentrations.
  900513-mll
                                       B2-2

-------
                          3.0  FATE MODEL DEVELOPMENT
FATE has the capability to estimate the treatability of both inorganic and
organic compounds discharged to a POTW.  The following two subsections describe
development of the separate models which estimate removal of orgariics and
inorganics.


3.1  ORGANICS MODEL

The organics portion of the fate model uses a mass balance approach to describe
removal of an organic compound in a conventional activated sludge treatment
facility.  Significant removal of organic compounds is assumed to occur in only
the primary clarifier(s) and aeration basin(s)/secondary clarifier(s).  Removal
mechanisms are assumed to be only sorption in the primary system and
volatilization (by stripping), sorption, and biodegradation in the secondary
systems.  The model of Namkung and Rittmann (1987) served as the basis for the
aeration basin(s) and the secondary clarifier(s), except for a change to the
organic partitioning to solids relationship.

3.1.1  Mass Balance About the Primary Clarifier
Figure 3-1 presents a schematic of the primary clarifier.  The mass balance
equation for removal in the primary clarifier(s) can be written as:
            dS0/dt - QSin -
                                        - Rsorpi
(1)
where:  V,
         pr  -
        Sin  -

        t
        Q
        Qoub
               the total plant primary clarifier(s)  volume,  m3;
               the individual compound concentration in the  influent to
               the primary clarifier(s), gm/m3 or mg/1;
             — the time, days;
             — the influent  flowrate, m3/day;
             - the primary clarifier(s)  effluent flowrate, m3/day;
             -  the primary clarifier(s)  sludge removal rate,  m3/day;
             — the individual compound concentration in the primary
               clarifier(s), which also exits to the aeration basis(s),
               gm/m3 or mg/1; and
             — the rate of  compound removal in the primary clarifier(s)
                 due to sorption onto organic solids, gm/day.

By assuming steady state conditions  (dS/dt - 0) and liquid outflow equal to
liquid inflow (Qout + Qpw ~ Q) , Equation (1)  reduces to:

            0 - Q (Sln  - S0)  -
                                                                             (2)

The sorption removal rate assumes that the compound partitions according to  a
linear relationship between the liquid and solid phase, and this can be
described by an empirical relationship relating partitioning to a compound's
octanol/water partition coefficient, Kow.  The empirical relationship relating
900513-mll
                                     B3-1

-------
cd
w
I
ho
                                                                                            Qout,S0
               KEY
               Q   - Totaf Flow
               Qm -Primary Effluent Flow Rate
               Qpa, -Primary Wasted Sludge Flow Rale
               Sin  - Influent Compound Concentration
               $   -Steady State Compound Concentration
                  1 - Compound Removal Rate due to Primary Adsorption
                                                                                                         FIGURE 3-1
                                                                                           FATE ORGANIC MODEL
                                                                                              PRIMARY CLARIFIER
   6098-81

-------
 partitioning of an organic compound onto the organic fraction of primary sludge
 to Kow was obtained from an experimental study which examined the sorption of
 organic compounds onto wastewater solids (Dobbs et al., 1989).  Data for
 sorption of six organics (methylene chloride, chloroform, 1,1-dichloroethylene,
 carbon tetrachloride,  chlorobenzene, and tetrachlorethylene) onto primary sludge
 was used to obtain a relationship between the partition coefficient, Kp (units
 of m3/g VSS)  and Kow.   This relationship is written as:
              Kp - 5.9 x 1(T5 (Kow °-35)
                                                                (3)
 The statistical measure, R2,  for this relationship was determined to be 0.72.
 The rate of compound removal due to sorption can then be written as:
Raorpl - Qpw
                             (0.000059*Kow°-35) So
                                                                (4)
 where Xp* is the concentration of organic solids present  in  the primary
 clarifier sludge (gm VSS/m3)  and is assumed to be  70 percent of the total solids
 concentration,  Xp  (Viessman and  Hammer,  1985).

 The individual  compound concentration within and exiting the primary clarifier
 can then be calculated by substituting Equation (4) into Equation (2),  and
 including the assumption of 70 percent VSS  in the primary sludge, to give:
So - (Q
                          / (Q + Qp« Xp (4.1xlO-5*Kow°-35))
                                                                (5)
where  S0 is the concentration of an organic  pollutant entering the aeration
basin(s) in gm/m3 or mg/1.

3.1.2   Secondary  System

Figure 3-2  presents a  schematic of the aeration basin and secondary clarifier.
The mass balance  for the aeration basin(s)/secondary clarifier(s) can be written
as:

             V dS/dt - QS0  -  QeS  - QWS - Rbio - Rsorp - Rvol                    (6)

where:  V - the aeration basin(s) volume,  m3;
        S — the individual  compound concentration in the aeration
            basin(s)/secondary clarifier(s)  system,   which also
            is the plant effluent concentration,  gm/m3  (mg/1);

       Q, — the effluent  flow rate, m3/day;

       Qw - the wasted sludge  flow rate, m3/day; and

        Rbioi Rsorp i and RVoi  •" the rates of compound removal due to
                               biodegradation,  sorption,  and volatilization,
                               respectively,  gm/day.

By assuming steady state  conditions  (dS/dt - 0)  and  the liquid outflow equal to
the liquid inflow (Qe + QH - Q) , Equation (6) reduces to:
900513-mll
                                     B3-3

-------
                 Q.So
                                                                                     Qe.S
                                              Qw.S
                                                           sorp
           KEY
           Q   - Totat Flow
           Qe  - Effluent Flow Rate
           Qw  - Wa$ted Sludge Flow Rate
           S o  - Influent Compound Concentration
           S   - Steady State Compound Concentration
           fit*,, - Compound RernovaT Rates due to
           8 sorp, Blodegration, Sorption, and Volatilization
           "vd
                                                                                                  FIGURE 3-2
                                                                                     FATE ORGANIC MODEL
                                                           AERATION BASIN AND SECONDARY CLARIFIER
6098-81

-------
0 - Q (S0 - S)  -
                              -  R80rp -  Rvol
(7)
 The biodegradation removal rate is assumed to follow Monod kinetics and the
 compound influent concentration is assumed to be much less than the Monod half
 saturation coefficient.  The organic compound is assumed to be removed by
 secondary utilization;  therefore,  the active'cell concentration,  Xa,  of the
 system can be assumed to equal some fraction of the total biomass in the system.
 The biodegradation removal rate can be written as:

         Rblo - ki Xa SV                                                       (8)

 where ki is  the  apparent  first-order biodegradation rate  constant,  m3/gm VSS-
 day,  and Xa  is assumed to be 0.64  of the mixed liquor  suspended solids
 concentration (MLSS)  (Namkung  and  Rittmann,  1987).

 Secondary utilization is  the process whereby an organic substrate at low
 concentrations  is utilized by  a microorganism, but  does not supply the growth
 and energy requirements  of the microorganism.  The  microorganism  uses another
 individual substrate  or  combination of substrates for  its energy  and maintenance
 requirements and,  in  the  process,  mineralizes the compound at low concentration.
 In  this  situation,  it is  assumed that  the  primary substrate is the large volume
 of  varied organic carbon  entering  the  plant  which is measured as  the plant's
 influent biological oxygen demand.  Namkung  and Rittman provide a more detailed
 description of secondary  utilization.

 The sorption removal  rate assumes  that the compound partitions according to a
 linear relationship between the liquid and solid phase and this partitioning  can
 be  described by  an empirical relationship  obtained  experimentally by Matter-
 Muller (1980).   This  empirical relationship  relating partitioning to Kow was
 developed for the  sorption of  several  chlorinated organics onto activated sludge
 solids.   The sorption removal  rate in  the  secondary clarifier(s)   can then be
 written  as:

         R.orp2 - 3.06 x 10'6 QH Xv (Kow)  °-67   S                               (9)

 where Xv is the wasted secondary sludge concentration  in mg/1.

 The volatilization removal  rate assumes that the  individual compound is
 negligible in the  inlet gas and the partial  pressure of the gas exiting the
 aeration tank liquid  is in equilibrium with  the compound  concentration.

         Rvol  - GHS/RT                                                        (10)

where:   G -  the  total gas volumetric flow  rate, m3/day;

        H -  the  compound's Henry's Law constant,  atm-m3/mole;

        R -  the universal gas  constant, 8.206  x 10"5 m3atm/°K-mole;  and

        T -  the  temperature of the aeration basin in °K.
900513-mil
                                     B3-5

-------
The steady state concentration  exiting  the  secondary clarifier(s)  can be
calculated from substituting Equations  (8),  (9), and (10)  into  Equation  (7)  and
solving for S:
(Q S0)/(Q + GH/RT +
                                          x 10'6) (Kow)0-67 + kjXaV)
(11)
For organic compounds, FATE first calculates a steady state concentration  in  the
primary clarifier(s) .  This concentration  is used as the influent concentration
to the aeration basin(s) /secondary clarifier(s) system where a second steady
state concentration  is calculated.  The mass removal rates of sorption  in  the
primary and secondary clarifier(s) , and volatilization and biodegradation  in  the
aeration basin(s) are then calculated, as  is the percent removal due to each  of
these particular removal mechanisms.  Finally, FATE calculates an overall  plant
percent removal.


3.2  INORGANICS MODEL

The data available for inorganics removal , primarily metals , was extremely
limited during initial formulation of the  FATE model.  The only approach that
appeared to be reasonable based on that data was to attempt to relate total
removal as a function of the_entire treatment system and the initial
concentration.  The  resultant model was calibrated to the available data through
linear regression based on the simple model:
     where:
   a*>?n(Sin)" + b

   Sout - the  plant effluent concentration,  mg/1;
   Sin  — the plant influent concentration,  mg/1;  and
   a,b  — the linear  regression coefficients.
                                                                            (12)
The correlation coefficients resulting from this analysis were extremely poor.
Also evaluated, but with no more reliable results, was a model that considered
that the removal was dependent on influent concentration, with a and b assumed
to have different values for two specified concentration ranges.

In view of the inadequacy of both this model and the data base for calibration,
the literature was searched for a more reliable model with the anticipation of a
larger data base for inorganics removal by POTWs.  Based on a review of the
literature as described in Section 2.2, the model of Patterson and Kodukula
(1984) was selected as appropriate for purposes of the FATE model.

Patterson and Kodukula proposed models that related total metals removal in a
wastestream to the organic volatile suspended solids removal in that unit.
While it was recognized that other parameters such as pH might affect sorption-
solubility relationships , these parameters were not well defined for typical
plant operation, and if the plant was operating within normal ranges, the
effects of these other parameters would not be significant when compared to the
mechanism of sorption to organic volatile suspended solids (VSS) , and the
900513-mll
                                     B3-6

-------
removal of these solids in the clarifier(s) .  They obtained fair to mostly good
and excellent correlation of the model predictions with actual EPA pilot plant
survey data for eight metals.

The form of Patterson's and Kodukula's (PK) model as used in this version of
FATE is referred to in their article as Model I .  They modified their model to
calculate removals across treatment trains  as follows :
Mt/Delta(Ms)
B/Delta(VSS)
                                                                            (13)
     Where:    Mt — the total metals influent concentration;
               Delta  (MB) — the change in the solids -bound metal across
                            the clarifier;
               Delta  (VSS) - the change in the VSS concentration across
                             the clarifier; and
               B •• the correlation coefficient for the settleable portion
                   of the influent VSS to the clarifier.

This model may be applied about the primary and secondary systems to yield
estimates of metals removed in each unit.  This is accomplished by formulating a
mass balance about the each of the primary and secondary units (as described in
the following sections)  in order to express the PK model in terms of data input
to the FATE model.

3.2.1  Mass Balance About the Primary Clarifier

Figure 3-3 presents a schematic of the primary clarifier.  In applying the PK
model about the primary  clarifier, the streams are identified as RW for raw
waste, PE for primary effluent, and P for primary system.  The model may then be
manipulated as follows to arrive at an expression for removal rate in the
primary clarifier as  a function of the FATE model required input parameters .

Patterson and Kodukula define the changes in concentration across the clarifier
as
       .pE ~ Mt,Rw - Delta (Ms (P)
                                                    (14)
into which the model  (Equation 13) solved for Delta(MB>p) can be  substituted  and
rearranged to get
            Mt. RH (Bp/(Delta(VSSp) +  Bp))
                                                    (15)
Some removal efficiency for VSS is assumed in the primary clarifer to satisfy
the model and is referred to as EI.  This efficiency value is currently
defaulted to 0.5 in the model.  If the sludge removal volume rate is small
compared to the total flow, which is usually the case, and the efficiency does
not vary much from the default value, then the removal rate is relatively
insensitive to the actual efficiency, as will be seen in the following
development.
900513-rail
                                     B3-7

-------
                        Q
                      M,RW-
                     VSSnw
•Ji
u)
I
00
  Q-Qp
I* Mf p£
  VS'SPE
                                                          WASTED
                                                          SLUDGE
               KEY
               Q   - Total flow
               QP  - Wasted Primary Sludge Flow Rate
               VSS -Volatile Suspended Solids
               X p  - Wasted Sludge VSS Concentration
               RW  -RawWaste
               PE  -Primary Effluent
               M (  »Total Metals Concentration
                                                        QP
                                                        XP
                                                                                                     FIGURE 3-3
                                                                                      FATE INORGANIC MODEL
                                                                                           PRIMARY CLARIFIER
    6098-81

-------
As with the organics model, and based on EPA studies,  the organic portion of the
volatile suspended solids  in  the primary system is  taken as 70% of the total
suspended solids.  Thus the mass balance for VSS is:
         - (Q - Qp)(VSSPE) + .7QpXp

where: Q — the  influent  flowrate;
       VSSRw - the VSS raw waste VSS concentration;
       Qp — the sludge withdrawal rate;
             - the VSS primary effluent concentration; and
                                                                            (16)
            Xp — the total volatile solids concentration in  the
                 sludge waste  stream.

Patterson and Kodukula take  the  change  in concentration across the clarifier to
be:

     Delta(VSSp) - VSSRW  - VSSPE                                             (17)

Equation (16) can be solved  for  VSSpE and substituted into Equation (17) :

     Delta(VSSp) - VSSRH  -  (Q(VSSRW) - .7QPXP)/(Q -  QP)                       (18)

Since

     EI - .7QpXP/(Q(VSSRW))                                                  (19)

rearrangement gives,

     Delta(VSSP) - .7QpXP(l  - Qp/Q(E!)/(Q  - Qp)                              (20)
which, as noted previously,  is  relatively insensitive to values of EI close to
the default when Q » Qp.

The rate of removal  in  the primary clarifier (ratei)  is  given by:

     ratei - Mb.RH(Q - Qp) (Bp/(Delta(VSSP) + BP)                              (21)

and the percent removal (% removali) is  the  removal rate divided by the  influent
rate:
     % removali - 100(rate1/Q(Mt(RH))

3.2.2  Secondary System
                                                                        22)
Figure 3-4 shows a schematic  of the  aeration basin and secondary clarifier.  The
derivation of equations  for the secondary removal parallels that for the primary
clarifier.
900513-mll
                                      B3-9

-------
1-0
I
                                                                                          Q-Qp-Qw
                                                                                          M..SE
                                                                                          VSSsE
                   RR (Q-q,)
                      MI.RR
                                                                                           Qw
                                                                                           Xv

                                                                                           MI.RR
               KEY
                   - Total Flow
                   - influent Mixed Liquor stream
                   - Secondary ClarK ier Effluent
                   - Wasted Secondary Sludge Rate
                   - Total Suspended Solids Concentration
                   - Total Metals Concentration
                   - Primary Effluent
               VSS - Volatile Suspended Solids
               RR  -Recycle Flow Rate
Q
ML
SE
Qw
Xv
M*
PE
                                                                                                        FIGURE 3-4
                                                                                        FATE INORGANIC MODEL
                                                                AERATION BASIN AND SECONDARY CLARIFIER
    6098-81

-------
 For these expressions, we use ML to  indicate  the  influent mixed liquor stream,
 SE as the secondary clarifier effluent,  and S to  indicate the secondary system.
 An equation similar to Equation (15)  can be written as:
           - Mfc>ra,(B8/(Delta(VSSs) + Bs)
                                                                             (23)
 A balance around the secondary clarifier  can be written and an expression,  E2,
 for the efficiency of the secondary clarifier  incorporated:
      1 - E2 - VSSS(Q -  Qp  - QK)/((Qp) (1

      Where:  RR - the recycle rate; and
              QW - the wasted secondary sludge rate.
                                                                             (24)
 The recycle ratio (RR) represents the ratio of the recycle stream  to  the
 influent stream.  It is defaulted in this version of the model  to  0.5.  For  the
 secondary system, the fraction of organic settleable solids is  taken  as 0.64 of
 the total mixed liquor suspended solids (Namkung and Rittman, 1987).  Also,  the
 efficiency can be expressed as:
      E2 - QwXv/CQ - Qp) (1 + RR)

      Where:  Xv - the concentration of the total suspended solids; and
              Xi - concentration of mixed liquor suspended solids.
                                                                            (25)
 Again paralleling the development of the equations for the primary, Equation
 (23)  can be written upon substitution and rearrangement:
      Delta(VSSs)  - VSSm.(l - (1 - E2) (Q - Qp)(l + RR)/(Q -  Qp  - Qw))
                                                                            (26)
 Next,  calculation of MtfML is required.   This cannot be passed along from the
 calculations about the primary since there are large amounts of solids generated
 in the secondary system.   Due to the recycle stream, it is necessary to write an
 extra  mass  balance equation around a component of the system in order to be able
 to solve  for the removal  in terms of the input parameters.
First, the balance about  the  aeration basin is written as:

     (Q - QP)d + RR)Mt.ML - (Q - Qp)Mt,PE -I- RR(Q-Qp)MttfRR

and, by cancelling the common term  (Q-QP) ,

                L - Mt,pE + RRMt,RR
                                                                            (27)
                                                                            (28)
900513-mil
                                     B3-11

-------
Taking the mass balance about  the  entire  system yields:

     (Q - Qp)Mt.PE - (Q - Qp -Qw)Mt.SE + Q«Mt,RR

or solving for Mt.RR:

     Mb.HR - «Q - Qp)Mt,FE - (Q - Qp -  Qw)Mt,SE)/Q*

Substituting Equation (30)  into  Equation (28):

     (1 + RR)Mt>ML - Mt.sE +  RR«Q - QP)Mt.pE - (Q  - QP -
(29)
(30)
(31)
Next Equation (23)  can be substituted into Equation (31) ,  rearranged, and solved
for MbML:
     Mt ML - Mt red + RR(Q -  Qp)/Qw)/(d + RR) +  (RR  (Q  - QP - Q«>
              (Bs/(Delta(VSSs) + BS)))/QM)

 Equation (32)  can be  substituted back into Equation (23) to give:

     Bt SE - Mt ^(1 + RR(Q -  Qp)/Qw)(B8/(Delta(VSS8) + B8))/((l  + RR)
              ('RR(Q -  Qp - Qw)(Bs/(Delta(VSSs) + BS)))/QW)

 The secondary removal rate is then:

             ratez -  (Q - QP)Mt,PE  -  (Q - QP -

 and the percent removal  is:               .

             % remova!2 - 100(rate2/QMtfRW)
(32)
(33)
 (34)
 (35)
 Since both individual removal rates are based on the  total influent (raw waste
 stream) contaminant mass, the total removal  rate and  total percent removals are
 simply sums of those of the individual units.

 Note that the final removal in  the secondary system does not appear to depend
 directly on the secondary clarifier efficiency,  E2, since the  efficiency is
 completely determined in Equation  (25) by the  input variables (RR is defaulted
 to 0 5)   The user should check, using Equation (25), that the variables input
 for concentrations (i.e., Xv and Xi)  are appropriate  for  the system simulation.
 Note that while Equation (26) would appear to  indicate that the removal in the
 secondary is more sensitive to  changes in the  clarifer efficiency than is the
 primary, the probable ranges  in efficiency are much smaller for the secondary
 clarifier than for the primary.
 3.3  MODEL ASSUMPTIONS

 A number of  assumptions were used in developing the FATE model.  It is  important
 that the user be  aware  of these assumptions in order to understand the
  900513-mil
                                       B3-12

-------
 limitations and basis of the model results.  The major assumptions are as
 follows:

      1)   The model is for conventional diffused aeration activated sludge
           sewage treatment plants.

      2)   No significant volatilization or biodegradation occurs in the primary
           clarifier.

      3)   All reactors are completely mixed.

      4)   Steady state exists in all reactors (i.e.,  aeration basin and
           clarifiers) which implies that pollutant concentrations in a reactor
           do not change over time.  (The model may therefore not be accurate for
           plants with pulse inputs of pollutants).

      5)   Liquid inflow equals liquid outflow.

      6)   For volatilization,  the concentration of the organic compound of
           interest is assumed to be negligible in the inlet  gas used for
           aeration.                                                      «

      7)   For volatilization,  the partial pressure  of an individual compound in
           the gas exiting the aeration basin  is in  equilibrium with the
           individual compound concentration in the  aeration  basin liquid.

      8)   Sorption partitioning follows a linear relationship  between
           concentrations  in the liquid and solid phases.

      9)   Biodegradation  follows Monod Kinetics and the  organic compound
           influent concentration is assumed to  be much less  than the  Monod half-
           saturation coefficient (i.e.,  influent concentrations are at
           relatively low  levels).

    10)   For the biodegradation model step,  it is  assumed that,a compound is
           removed by secondary utilization.

    11)    The fate of a compound is not affected by the presence  of other
           compounds  except  as  may be inherent  in the  data used for  model
           calibration.

    12)    The  POTW is  operating effectively and no  inhibition  of  the  biological
           process  is  occurring (i.e.,  the  POTW  is acclimated to the compounds
           and concentrations present in the influent),

     13)   For model calibration, measured  effluent  concentrations reported as
          not detected were assumed to  equal half the  reported detection limit.

     14)  The organic  model was calibrated with  all compounds  grouped together
          rather than  by individual  compound.
900513-mll
                                     B3-13

-------
    15)  Removal mechanisms (volatilization,  biodegradation,  and sorption in
         the primary and secondary clarifiers)  were estimated using final
         effluent concentration data and best engineering judgement.

    16)  Data for bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, di-n-octyl phthalate, aldrin,  and
         alpha-BHC were not used for final calibration due to inconsistencies
         in the analytical data compared to other compounds within similar
         classes.

    17)  Total removal of compounds primarily removed by sorption may be
         slightly over predicted while compounds primarily removed by
         volatilization and biodegradation may be slightly underpredicted.
900513-mll
                                    B3-14

-------
                   4.0 DEFAULT VALUES AND INPUT VALUE RANGES
 FATE users can either input their own plant-specific  parameters  or  select
 default values for three POTWs spanning a range  of size.   Default influent  flow
 values of 3.3, 25,  and 140 million gallons per day are  available to FATE users.
 MLSS concentration was obtained from standard reported  practice  (WPCF and ASCE,
 1977) and temperature (20°C)  was obtained from plant  operating experience
 (Lovejoy,  1989).   The remainder of the plant  default  values were obtained from a
 USEPA report which evaluated the cost of POTW construction (USEPA,  1984).
 Default values for all plant-specific operating  parameters required for FATE are
 presented in Table 4-1.

 If the default values are not used,  FATE was  designed so that a  warning message
 will appear if the user inputs a plant or compound parameter that is either
 outside of a standard acceptable range or is  inconsistent  with previous plant
 inputs.   Ranges for log Kow and Henry's Law constants were obtained from Lyman
 et al.  (1982)  and expanded to include known log  Kow and Henry's  Law constant
 values in FATE's  organic data base.   Ranges and  relationships for plant
 conditions were obtained from Viessman and Hammer  (1985) and WPCF and ASCE
 (1977).   Sludge flow rates,  aeration basin(s) volumes,  and air flow rates were
 related to the plant influent flow.   Concentration levels  of various organic and
 inorganic  pollutants that result in biological inhibition  were obtained from a
 number of references (Anthony and Breimhurst, 1981, Russell et al., 1983, Tabak
 et al.,  1981,  USEPA,  1987a, USEPA,  1987b,  and Volskay and  Grady, 1988).  The
 user will  be warned if an influent concentration exceeding the inhibition level
 is entered.  For  organic compounds where inhibition data is unavailable, an
 influent concentration of 10,000 ug/1 was  used.  This level was  set so that
 inhibition effects  would not  affect  the biodegradation  removal rate and the
 secondary  utilization,  and so that first-order kinetics assumptions would be
 followed.   Table  4-2 lists parameters,  ranges, and associated references for all
 FATE plant input  values.
900513-nll
                                     B4-1

-------
        TABLE 4-1
DEFAULT PLANT PARAMETERS
l*arameter
Q (Plant Flow Rate, MGD)
Qp (Primary Sludge Flow
Rate, gpd)
Xp (Primary Sludge
Concentration, %)
V (Total Volume of
Aeration Basins, gal)
XI (Mixed Liquor Suspended
Solids, mg/l)
G (Gas Volumetric Flow
Rate, ft*3/d) *
Qw (Secondary Wasted Sludge
Flow Rate, gpd)
Xv (Secondary Wasted Sludge
Concentration, %)
Large
140.0
400,000

4.00

39,287,700

3.000

245,514,000

1,232,000

0.75

Medium
2&.0
72,000

4.00

7,022,300

3,000

47,174,000

220,000

0.75

Small
3.3
9,500

4.00

931,900

3,000

6,359,000

29,000

0.75

            B4-2

-------
                                       TABLE 4-2
                            PLANT PARAMETER RANGES
          Parameter
           Range
     Reference
Q   (Plant Flow Rate, MGD)
         0 < Q < 1,000
    Lovejoy, 1989
Qp  (Primary Sludge Flow
      Rate, gpd)
    1,000*Q
-------
                     5.0 MODEL COEFFICIENTS AND CONSTANTS
Measured values of octanol/water partition coefficients and Henry's Law
constants for compounds in FATE's organic compound data base were obtained from
a number of sources.  Sources included data from chemical manufacturers (e.g.,
material safety data sheets), USEPA resources (USEPA manuals and data bases),
and journal publications.

Experimentally-determined values of octanol/water partition coefficients and
Henry's Law constants were not available for many compounds.  In addition,
biodegradation rate constants for all compounds in the data base in an activated
sludge treatment plant are not available.  Thus, some octanol/water partition
coefficients and Henry's Law constants and all data base-stored biodegradation
rate constants had to be estimated..  Estimation of octanol/water partition
coefficients and Henry's Law constants was conducted from knowledge of a
compound's molecular structure and other physical/chemical properties of the
organic compound.  Estimation of biodegradation constants was generally
performed by relating rate of degradation to degree of degradation associated
with biological processes.


5.1  OCTANOL/WATER PARTITION COEFFICIENTS

Unknown octanol/water partition coefficients were estimated from knowledge of a
compound's molecular structure.  The Universal Quasi-Chemical Functional Group
Activity Coefficient (UNIFAC) approach was used to estimate a compound's
activity coefficients in water and in octanol. The UNIFAC approach computes
activity coefficients from knowledge of  the compound's molecular structure, heat
of fusion, and melting temperature.  Compound heats of fusion and melting point
temperatures were obtained from Verschueren (1977).

The computer program, AROSOL  (Fu et al., 1986), was used to estimate activity
coefficients of a compound in octanol and water.  This program was developed
through the support from EPA's Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
to estimate organic solute solubility in a mixed  solvent system.  Row  can be
estimated from the  approach of Arbuckle  (1983) as:
         Kow - 0.151  sigmaw/sigma°
(36)
 where  sigma" is the compound's activity in the water phase and sigma0 is the
 compound's  activity  in the octanol  phase.  During  estimation of  a compound's
 activity coefficients  in water and  octanol, AROSOL was programmed to allow for
 the  solubility of water in octanol  (2.6 M) and  octanol in water  (0.0178M).


 5.2  HENRY'S LAW  CONSTANTS

 Henry's Law constants  (atm-m3/mole) were estimated from knowledge  of the
 compound's  activity  in pure water and the  compound's vapor pressure as  follows
 (Arbuckle,  1983):
 900513-mll
                                      B5-1

-------
        H -  (ISxlCT6) sigmaw B
                              vp
                                                              (37)
where sigma" is the activity of the compound in pure water (provided by AROSOL)
and Pvp  (atra)  is the compound's vapor pressure as estimated from knowledge  of
its boiling point  (Lyman et al., 1982).
5.3  BIODEGRADATION RATE CONSTANTS

No large data base of biodegradation rate constants for secondary utilization of
an organic compound in an environment similar to an activated sludge system was
available.  In addition, actual biodegration rate constants for individual
compounds are facility specific. Therefore, a methodology was developed to
assign compound-specific biodegradation rate constants based on the compound's
relative biodegradability for input into FATE's data base.

A sensitivity analysis conducted on FATE's organic compound removal algorithms
indicated that a biodegradation rate constant of 0.1 m3/gm VSS-day resulted in
overall removals in the low 90-percent range which were typical of removals
observed in the field for highly biodegradable compounds (USEPA, 1982).  The
sensitivity analysis also indicated that a biodegradation rate constant of
0.0001 resulted in insignificant compound biodegradation removal for compounds
which were removed mostly by volatilization or biodegradation.  This conclusion
is also supported by sensitivity analyses performed by Namkung and Rittmann
(1987).  From the sensitivity analysis performed on the biodegradation rate
constant, a highly biodegradable compound would have a rate constant of about
0.1 mVgm-day  while a compound resistant to biodegradation would have a rate
constant of 0.0001 or lower.

The biodegradability of compounds was first estimated based on three different
sources of information.  The first source was obtained from a study in Lyman et
al. (1982) where it was reported that a highly biodegradable compound would have
a BOD/COD ratio of 1 while a resistant compound would have a value of 0.
Reported ratios spanned three orders of magnitude and were assigned rate
constants according to the compound's BOD/COD ratio.  The BOD/COD ratios and
corresponding rate constants assigned were as follows:
          Reported
          BODs/COD ratio
                         Assigned
                         Biodegradation
                         Rate Constant
           0
           0.
- 0.01
01 -
           0.05 -
           0.10 -
           0.25 -
           >0.60
0.05
0.10
0.25
0.60
1
1
5
1
5
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
10-*
ID"3
ID-3
ID-2
lO-2
10'1
900513-mll
                                     B5-2

-------
Another study reported in Lyman et al. (1982) listed average rates of
biodegradation in mg COD/gm-hr.  These data were also used to estimate the
biodegradability and subsequently, the rate constant.  The average rate and
corresponding rate constant assigned were as follows:
          Average
          Rate of Removal
          (mgCOD/g-hr)
Assigned
Biodegradation
Rate Constant
                0
               1-9
               10-25
               > 25
 1 x 10'4
 1 x 1(T3
 1 x ID"2
 1 x ID"1
Finally, the relative biodegradability of compounds in aerobic treatment systems
was obtained from a USEPA guidance manual (USEPA, 1987b) that based the
biodegradability on USEPA's Best Professional Judgement.  The rate of
biodegradation was judged to be "Rapid, Moderate, Slow, or Resistant".  A rate
constant of 1 xlO'1,  IxlO"2, IxlCT3,  and lx!0'4 was respectively assigned to
compounds where a rate was predicted.

All three of the previously described sources of  information were considered  in
assessing the biodegradability of a  compound.  If a compound was listed in more
than one reference, an average was used.

If a compound was not listed in any  of the  sources above, a number of  "Rules  of
Thumb  of Biodegradability11  (Lyman et al, 1982) were used to aid in estimating
values and are presented in Table 5-1.  Next, rate constants were assigned by
attempting to interpret  particular biodegradability patterns based on  a
compounds functional groups by using all of the information described  above.  For
example chlorinated compounds were assumed  to have a  rate constant of  IxlO'3
since  these compounds are more resistant to degradation; acids, alcohols, and
esters were given values of IxlO"2 while ethers and ketones (mostly chlorinated)
were assigned values from IxlO'4 to IxlO'3;  dioxans and furans (mostly
chlorinated) were assigned values of IxlO'4;  functional groups (i.e.  benzo-,
fluoro-, chloro-, nitro-, etc.) were grouped with similar compounds, and  if a
pattern could be established from estimates or assumptions already made,  the
pattern was followed  (i.e., chlorobenzene with benzene, ethylbenzene,  toluene,
etc.).

Finally, compounds  that  could not be assigned a value using any of the
previously described methods were given values based  on compounds within  the
same class  (e.g., dioxins,  pesticides,  semi-volatile  organics, volatile
organics, etc.).  Values assigned based on  such a ranking were conservatively
estimated since  little  is known  about  the compound's  characteristics and  its
susceptibility  to biodegradation.

The  ITD list of 345  organic compounds,  their estimated biodegradation  rate
constants, and  the method  of estimation is  presented  in Attachment A.  The  full
 900513-mil
                                      B5-3

-------
                                   TABLE 5-1

                      RULES OF THUMB FOR BIODEGRADABILITY
          Sulfate-reducing bacteria more rapidly degrade long length carbon
          chains than  short-length carbon chains.

          Alcohols, aldehydes, acids, esters, amides, and amino acids are more
          susceptible  to biodegradation than the corresponding alkanes, olefins,
          ketones, dicarboxylic acids, nitriles, amines, and chloroalkanes.

          Functional groups on aromatic rings:  benzoic acid is quickly
          degraded; monochloro - and monofluoro - benzoates are more resistant
          to biodegradation but can be degraded; di-, tri-, and tetra-
          functional groups are quite resistant.  The more chlorines, the more
          resistant the compound.

          For naphthalene compounds, nuclei bearing simple small alkyl groups
          (methyl, ethyl, or vinyl) oxidize at a more rapid rate than those with
          a phenyl substitute.

          ether functions are sometimes particularly resistant to
          biodegradation.
Source:  Lyman, W.J. and D.H. Rosenblatt, Handbook of Chemical Property
Estimation Methods. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York, New York, 1982.
900513T-mll
                                   B5-4

-------
ITD list of organic and inorganic compounds is presented in Section 9 of this
Treatability Manual.
900513-mil
                                     B5-5

-------
                     6.0 MODEL CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION
Model calibration/validation Is the process that adjusts the overall
theoretically based FATE model to more accurately predict effluent
concentrations and percent removals that are observed in actual plant processes.
The process of calibration/validation, including a sensitivity analysis, is
described in subsequent sections.


6.1  SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Prior to actual calibration/validation, Jordan performed a sensitivity analysis
on the FATE model.  The detailed report summarizing the methodology, results,
and conclusions was submitted to EPA in February 1990.  A brief summary is
presented here.  The sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate how
sensitive output parameters (i.e., percent removals for volatilization,
biodegradation, and sorption) are to changes in input parameters (e.g., plant
flow, temperature, primary sludge concentration, etc.).

A number of compounds and all of the FATE model input parameters were chosen for
the analysis.  The compounds were divided into four different categories
according to their primary mechanisms for removal (i.e., compounds that
primarily sorb to sludge, volatilize, biodegrade, or both volatilize and
biodegrade).  An overall summary of the results of the FATE Model Sensitivity
analysis is presented in Table 6-1.  The four compound categories and the list
of parameters analyzed are presented with a mark in the appropriate box to
indicate If the compound In a particular category showed some level of
sensitivity to a specific plant or compound parameter.

After performing the sensitivity analysis on the FATE model, the following
conclusions were made:

     1.   Parameters the model was not sensitive to included compound input
          concentration (relative to percent removals) and temperature in the
          aeration basin.

     2.   FATE predicts that the following removal mechanisms may contribute
          significantly to removal of a compound in a POTW:

               Primary Adsorption
               Secondary Adsorption
               Volatilization/Stripping
               Biodegradation

          In all cases, except for changes in compound concentration and
          temperature, one or more of these mechanisms contributed to compound
          removal when a parameter was changed.  However, of the mechanisms,
          primary adsorption was the least sensitive to changes in input
          parameters.  This is partly due to the non-linear dependence on the
900513-mil
                                     B6-1

-------
ON

N3
                                            TABLE 6-1
                                       SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

                                  COMPOUND CLASSES SENSITIVE TO
                                        INPUT PARAMETERS













INPUT PARAMETER
COMPOUND CONCENTRATION
PLANT FLOW
PRIMARY SLUDGE CONCENTRATION
PRIMARY SLUDGE FLOW RATE
AERATION BASIN VOLUME
MIXED LIQUOR SUSPENDED
SOLIDS CONCENTRATION *
TEMPERATURE OF AERATION BASIN
TOTAL GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE
WASTE SLUDGE FLOW RATE
WASTED SECONDARY SLUDGE
CONCENTRATION
HENRY'S LAW CONSTANT
Kow CONSTANT
BIO RATE CONSTANT
COMPOUND CLASSIFICATION
SORB

+
+
+

-


•f
+

+
+
BIODEGRADE

+


+
+






+
VOLATILIZE

+




-
+


+ •

+
BIODEGRADE/
VOLATILIZE

+


+ •
+

+


+

+ '
4- Compound classes sensitive to changes in input parameters
<












   6098-81

-------
rate of removal with Kow while being directly proportional to sludge
concentration and sludge flow rate.

          Input parameters that affected primary adsorption included plant flow,
          primary sludge concentration, primary sludge flow rate,  and Kow.


     3.   Based on the results of the sensitivity analysis, data collection
          efforts for calibration/validation were not prioritized except that
          emphasis was not placed on collection of data for temperature of the
          aeration basin since the model indicated that predicted removal is not
          sensitive to this parameter.  Further, temperature was defaulted in
          the model to 20°C and no input for temperature is required of the
          user.


6.2  DATA COLLECTION/SELECTION

Analytical data and plant operating parameters for calibration and validation
were obtained from the following sources:

     o  USEPA, 1982.  "Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment
        Works," USEPA/440/1-82/303, Washington, D.C.

     o  Contacts with additional conventional activated sludge
        POTWs to obtain plant operational data and chemical
        concentration for the plant influent and effluent.

The USEPA study involved sampling the influent,