United States
environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(WH-556F)
EPA 842-S-92-008
June 1992
Characteristics  of Sewage
Sludge from the Northern
New Jersey-New York City
Area, August 1988

-------
                FINAL REPORT
CHARACTERISTICS OF SEWAGE SLUDGE FROM THE
 NORTHERN NEW JERSEY-NEW YORK CITY AREA,
                 AUGUST 1988
                October 19, 1988
   U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
       Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection
                 Washington, DC

                     and

                   Region II
               New York, New York
       Prepared Under Contract No. 68-03-3319

-------
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                         Page
1.0  INTRODUCTION	,	     1
2.0  METHODS	     7
     2.1  SAMPLE COLLECTION.....	     7
     2.2  QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS	     8
     2.3  ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES....	    10
          2.3.1   ORGANIC COMPOUNDS	    10
          2.3.2   METALS...	    18
          2.3.3   PHYSICAL PROPERTIES	    19
     2.4  TOXICITY TESTS.	    20
          2,4.1   TEST PROCEDURES	.	    20
          2.4.2   ACARTIA SP. TESTS.....	    23
3.0  RESULTS	    25
     3.1  ANALYTICAL RESULTS	    25
          3.1.1   ORGANIC COMPOUNDS	    2S
          3.1.2   METALS	    29
          3.1.3   PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS	    31
     3.2  TOXICITY	    34
4.0  REQUIRED SLUDGE DILUTIONS	    39
S.O  DISCUSSION	    39
6.0  REFERENCES.	    41

-------
                                LIST OF  TABLES
TABLE I.
TABLE 2.



TABLE 3.


TABLE 4.


TABLE 5.




TABLE 6,



TABLE 7.



TABLE 8.
TABLE 9.
TABLE 10,
TABLE 11,
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS SAHPLEO FOR CHARACTERIZATION
OF SEWAGE SLUDGE GENERATED BY THE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY
SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO DUMP
SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE MUNICIPAL SEWAGE
DISPOSAL SITE	

PARAMETERS MEASURED IN SEWAGE SLUDGE SAMPLES COLLECTED
FROM THE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING
FOR PERMITS TO DISPOSE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE..

SUMMARY OF SAMPLE COLLECTION DATES, TIMES, METHODS. AND
DISTRIBUTION TO ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES........	.,.<
DATA QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ANALYSIS OF NEW YORK-
NEW JERSEY SEWAGE SLUDGE SAMPLES	
ANALYTICAL METHODS USED TO DETERMINE THE CHEMICAL AND
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SEWAGE SLUDGE FROM THE
NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR
PERMITS TO DISPOSE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE.

TARGET COMPOUNDS FOR PRIORITY POLLUTANT ANALYSIS,
SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY METHOD 8270, PCBS/
PESTICIDES BY METHOD 8080, PHENOLS BY METHOD 8040	
SUMMARY OF DATES FOR TOXICITY TESTS CONDUCTED ON SEWAGE
SLUDGES COLLECTED FROM THE NINE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY
SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES IN AUGUST 1988......	
SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR PCB/PESTICIDE CONCENTRATIONS
(METHOD 8080) FOUND IN SEWAGE SLUDGE FROM THE NINE
NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES SAMPLED IN
AUGUST 1988......	

CONCENTRATIONS OF SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC PRIORITY
POLLUTANT COMPOUNDS (jtg/L) IDENTIFIED IN WHOLE SEWAGE
SLUDGE FROM THE NINE HEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE
AUTHORITIES SAMPLED IN AUGUST 1988	
RESULTS OF DUPLICATE ANALYSIS OF PHENOLS (jig/L) IN WHOLE
SEWAGE SLUDGE SAMPLES FROM THE NINE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY
SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES SAMPLED IN AUGUST 1988	
WHOLE SLUDGE METAL CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS FROM THE
NINE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING
FOR PERMITS TO DISCHARGE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE
SITE	
 6


 9


11
12
13
22
                                                                           26
                                                                           27
                                                                           28
                                                                           30

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
TABLE 12. COMPARISON OF AUGUST 1988 WHOLE SLUDGE METAL
          CONCENTRATIONS (ng/L WHOLE SLUDGE) TO THE MEAN
          CONCENTRATIONS DERIVED FROM THE PERMIT APPLICATIONS.
          MONTHLY, AND QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORTS	
TABLE 13. WHOLE SLUDGE PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS FROM THE
          NINE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING
          FOR PERMITS TO DISCHARGE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE
          SITE...	

TABLE 14. COMPARISON OF TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS IN SLUDGE
          COLLECTED IN AUGUST 1988 TO SUSPENDED SOLIDS
          CONCENTRATIONS INCLUDED IN THE PERMIT APPLICATIONS
          FROM NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING
          TO DISCHARGE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE	
TABLE 15. WHOLE SLUDGE TOXICITY RESULTS FROM THE NINE NEW YORK-
          NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR PERMITS
          TO DISCHARGE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE	
TABLE 16. COMPARISON OF AUGUST 1988 WHOLE SLUDGE TOXICITIES
          TO THOSE REPORTED IN THE PERMIT APPLICATIONS	
TABLE 17. DILUTIONS REQUIRED TO MEET WATER QUALITY CRITERIA OR
          LIMITING PERMISSIBLE CONCENTRATIONS FOR WHOLE SLUDGE AT
          THE 106-MILE SITE	
                                                                         Page
31
33
35



36


38



40

-------
                              LIST OF APPENDICES

                                                                         Page

APPENDIX A. QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR SEMIVOLATILE
            COMPOUNDS	   A-l
APPENDIX B. QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR PCB AND PESTICIDES...	   6-1
APPENDIX C. QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR PHENOLS.	   C-l
APPENDIX D. QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR METALS. ......*	   D-l
APPENDIX E. QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION	   £-1
APPENDIX F. SUMMARY RESULTS FOR TOXICOLOGY TESTS CONDUCTED
            ON THE WHOLE SLUDGE	   F-l

-------
                               1.0 INTRODUCTION

          The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA, PL 92-532) is
responsible for regulating disposal of sludge in ocean waters.  Effective
January 1, 1988, all sewerage authorities in the New York and New Jersey
region, under court order, have shifted sewage sludge disposal operations
from the 12-Mile Site in the New York Bight to the 106-Mile Deepwater
Municipal Sludge Site (106-Mile Site).  EPA recently received permit
applications from nine sludge generators in the New York-New Jersey area for
continued use of the 106-Mile Site.  EPA is in the final process of
determining whether to issue or deny permits for continued dumping of sludge.
          Prior to these applications a site monitoring program was developed
by EPA (  EPA    ,  1992a, 1992b), to assist in assessing the fate and effects
of the sludge at the 106-Mile Site.  As part of this  monitoring program,
several plumes at  the 106-Mile Site were studied in September 1987 ( EPA    ,
1992c) specifically to determine the rate of sewage sludge dilution in  the
ocean and to evaluate whether toxic chemicals in the  sludge were diluted
below marine water quality criteria (WQC)  4 h after disposal or when it
reached the site boundary, whichever occurred first.   Data obtained on  sewage
sludge plume behavior during this survey were used to determine that the
plume dispersion models used to set the court-ordered disposal  rates were
inappropriate ( EPA    , 1992d).  Results from this  survey also demonstrated
that the-current court-ordered dumping rate of 15,500 gal/min could result in
exceedance of marine water quality criteria after the 4-h initial  mixing
period (  EPA    ,  1992c) under some oceanic conditions.   Therefore, a new
formulation for calculating sludge dumping rates was  developed using data
from the September 1987 survey.  This formulation was used to determine
sludge dumping rates (  EPA    , 1992d) that would ensure marine WQC are met
at the site.
          One of the coefficients in this formulation is the amount of  sludge
dilution required  to meet water quality criteria 4 h  after disposal.  In the
formulation, the required dilution can be derived using either toxic chemical
concentrations in  the sludge or the toxicity-based limiting permissible
concentrations (LPC).  This required dilution is then used to calculate the
                                      1

-------
dumping rates specific to each permitted authority.  Therefore, estimates of
the amount of dilution required 4 h after disposal depend on accurate
measures of toxic chemical concentrations and reliable toxicity (acute) data
for the sludge.
          Sludge characteristics data for estimating the amount of sludge
dilution required after disposal are available from several sources.  These
sources include data published in the open literature, data from the
quarterly sludge monitoring reports submitted to EPA by the dumpers, and data
included in support of the permit applications for sludge disposal at the
106-Mile Sitt,  Review of the published sludge characteristics for the sewage
treatment plants using the 106-Mile Site (Santoro and Fikslin, 1987) reveals
that the concentration of toxic compounds within the sludge generated at
individual sewage treatment plants may vary by as much as 30 percent
(reported as the coefficient of variation) through time.  Between-plant
variability of individual chemical concentrations in sludge is much greater
and can range over a factor of 10 to 100.  Significant variability among
treatment plants has also been observed in the toxicity of these sludges to
mysid shrimp and Atlantic silversides (Miller et al., in press).  However,
all of these data are several years old.  Thus, although published data
provide estimates of the expected variability in sludgt characteristics, the
concentration and toxicity results may not represent the present character of
the sludges generated in the New York-New Jersey area.  Therefore, these data
are not the most appropriate for estimating the required sludge dilutions,
and thus the disposal rates at the 106-Mile Site required for each sewerage
authority.
          Recent sludge characteristics data, submitted in support of
applications for permits to dispose sewage sludge at the 106-Mile Site, and
quarterly sludge characteristics monitoring reports historically required of
the dumpers by EPA, are also available and have been evaluated for quality
and representativeness (Batten e/SAIC, in preparation).  This evaluation
determined that analytical quality control and quality assurance procedures
included with these data were inadequate to determine the reliability of the
sludge characteristics data for several of the sewerage authorities.  The
data included in the permit applications were also insufficient to allow
estimates of temporal variability in the characteristics of the sludge from

-------
each plant.  Even though a mean concentration could be derived from the data
for most authorities, a statistically based characteristic concentration or
toxicity of the sludge could not be derived with any degree of confidence.
Data submitted to IPA in quarterly monitoring reports were also reviewed and
found insufficient in completeness of the reported data and quality control
and quality assurance issues.   Thus, these data are also insufficient to
establish statistically valid estimates of temporal variability and to
determine the representativeness of the data included in the permit
applications.
          Finally, an evaluation of toxicity-based LPCs relative to water
quality criteria and toxic chemical concentrations in the sludge suggests
that using a toxicity-based LPC to determine the amount of sludge dilution
necessary to meet regulatory requirements at the site may not always provide
sufficient dilution to meet water quality criteria 4 h after disposal under
all oceanographic conditions.
          Because of uncertainties in the completeness, reliability, and
representativeness of the available sludge characteristics data,  EPA
determined that sewage sludge generated by the nine New York-New Jersey
sewerage authorities (Table 1) applying for permits to dump sewage sludge at
the 106-Mile Site should be independently sampled and characterized.
The data from this characterization will be used to evaluate the
representativeness and accuracy of the sludge characteristics data submitted
to EPA in the permit applications and to calculate the required sludge
dilution that will be used to determine sludge disposal rates for each
sewerage authority, using the newly developed formulation for determining
sludge dumping rates (  EPA   , I992d).  The characterization data generated
during this study are not intended to provide a statistical representation of
the characteristics of the sludge through time.
          Because of the narrow purpose of the study, the parameters measured
in the characterization were limited to those that may directly influence the
determination of sewage sludge disposal rates (  EPA   , 1992c) or that can
be used to evaluate settling and transport behavior in the receiving waters.
The sludge characteristics evaluated include concentrations of pesticides,
total PCB, semivolatile organic priority pollutants, selected metals, sludge

-------
TABLE 1.  SEWAGE TREATMENT PUNTS SAHPLED FOR CHARACTRIZATIOH OF SEWAGE
          SLUDGE GENERATED BY THE NEK YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES
          APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO DUMP SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE
          MUNICIPAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SITE.
Sewerage Authority
Location
 Plant Sampled
Lindtn-Roselle
Sewerage Authority

Bergen County Utilities
Authority

Passaic Valley Sewerage
Commissioners

Middlesex County Utilities
Authority

Joint Meeting of Essex
and Union Counties

Rahway Valley Sewerage
Authority

New York City Department
of Environmental Protection
Nassau County Department
of Public Works
Westchester County Department
of Environmental Facilities
Linden, NJ


Little Ferry, NJ


Newark, NJ


Sayerville, NJ


Elizabeth, NJ


Rahway, NJ
Wards Island, NY     Wards Island Water
                     Pollution Control
Bay Park, East
Rockaway, NY
Yonkers, NY
Bay Park Water of
Pollution Control
Plant

Yonkers Joint
Treatment Plant
aplant name is the same as the sewerage authority.

bSample from Wards Island is a composite of the sludge loaded onto a barge
 and represents a mixture of New York City sewage treatment plants.

-------
priority pollutants, selected metals, sludge toxicity, and various measures
of the physical characteristics of the sludge (Table 2).
          The number of parameters determined in this study was reduced from
that required of the permittees (   EPA    , 1988a), so that samples from all
authorities applying for permits could be characterized.  The specific
parameters selected for evaluation were based on information from the
September 1987 survey of the 106-Mile Site and the available characteristics
(or lack thereof) of the sludge generated by the sewerage authorities.
Sludge characteristics and field data available through July 1988 indicated
copper and lead are the only metals that are sufficiently elevated in the
sludge to affect the dumping rate requirements at the 106-Mile Site,  Survey
results for cadmium and mercury have shown that they are diluted below WQC
shortly after disposal.  However,  because the London Dumping Convention (LOG)
prohibits cadmium and  mercury in the sludge, except in trace amounts, these
metals were included in the characterization study.
          Organic priority pollutant concentrations (pesticides, total PCS,
and other organic priority pollutants such as PAH) were included in this
characterization because concentrations reported in the permit applications
were incomplete for most authorities and the reported detection limits were
too high to allow assessment of the actual concentrations in the sludge.
          Toxicity (96-h acute) tests using representative marine species
(Acartia sp., Henidia beryl!ina. and Hysidopsis bahla)  were also planned.
These tests were necessary because of identified discrepancies in the quality
control and quality assurance aspects of the toxicity data submitted to EPA
as part of the permit applications.  The ocean dumping regulations require
toxicity tests to determine applicable LPC in the receiving waters in the
absence of water quality criteria.
          Finally, because the ocean dumping regulations contain specific
requirements for testing materials containing settleable solids, the sludge
samples were evaluated for the following physical characteristics:
settleable solids, total suspended solids, total solids, specific gravity,
and density of the sludge particles.  These parameters were evaluated to
assess the settling characteristics of the sludge tested.
          The remainder of the report is organized as follows.  Analytical
methods are discussed in Section 2.  Results and estimates of the required
                                      5

-------
TABLE 2.  PARAMETERS MEASURED IN SEWAGE SLUDGES SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM THE
          NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO
          DISPOSE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE.
     A. Toxicity Tests (whole sludge only)

          1. Acartia sp.
          2. Menidia beryl Tina
          3. Mysidopsis bahla


     B. Chemical Characterization  (whole sludge only)

          1. Metals (Cu, Pb, Cd, Hg)
          2. Pesticides
          3. PCI
          4. Organic priority pollutants (base neutral and acid fractions)
          5. Phenols

     C. Other Characterization

          1, Settleable matter
          2. Total suspended solids, (residue, filterable)
          3. Total solids, (residue, total)
          4. Wet to dry weight ratio (settling character of the sludge)
          5. Sludge solids density (settling character of sludge)
          6. Specific gravity

-------
dilution are discussed in Section 3.  Section 4 summarizes required
dilutions.  Section 5 discusses the results with recommendations for use of
the data.  Quality control information for the chemical characterizations can
be found in Appendices A through E.  Appendix F summarizes the toxicity
tests.

                                 2.0 METHODS

                            2.1 SAMPLE COLLECTION

          Sludge samples were collected from the nine New York-New Jersey
sewerage authorities (Table 1) during August 1988 as planned (   EPA   ,
1988b).  For two authorities (Nassau County Department of Public Works
(NCDPW), and New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP)),
sludge is produced at more than one treatment plant, then transported to a
single location for loading onto barges.  For these authorities, sludge
samples were collected from the treatment plant where the sludge is combined
and loaded onto barges.  The treatment plant sampled is listed in Table 1 for
these authorities.  Sludge from Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority (RVSA)  is
piped to the Linden-Roselle Sewerage Authority (LRSA) for storage and
loading.  The RVSA sludge is held in separate storage tanks from the LRSA
sludge.  However,  sludge from both authorities can be and is combined during
barge loading operations for transport to the 106-Mile Site.
          Because of the manner in which the various authorities handle the
sludge and scheduling of barge loading, some difficulty was encountered  in
coordinating sample collections with barge operations.  As a result,  a single
grab sample was obtained from the Joint Meeting of Essex and Union Counties
(JMEUC).  This sample was collected during the final minutes of barge
loading.  Because the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners (PVSC) facility
holds sludge in continuously mixed tanks, a one-time grab sample was
collected from one of their holding tanks.  Sludge transfer operations for
NYCDEP are such that a single fully loaded barge was sampled using a plastic
core-type sampler ("sludge judge").  Each of the 10 compartments on the barge
were sampled and these samples composited into a single sample for
distribution and characterization.  For all other authorities, samples were
                                      7

-------
collected during barge loading operations.  Samples were collected from these
plants such that a flow-weighted composite sample was obtained*
          All sampling equipment was cleaned by the following sequence prior.
to sample collection: wash with Alconox, rinse with tap water, rinse with
ultra-pure water (deionized), rinse with methanol.  All sampling equipment
was sealed in aluminum foil until used.  Dippers, jars, and measuring cups
were cleaned after the completion of sample collection from each authority.
          Whenever possible, sample collection started shortly after barge
loading was initiated (Table 3).  Samples were obtained from a tap located on
the discharge side of the sludge transfer pump.  Samples were collected at
predetermined time intervals (Table 3) using either a 750-mL, long-handled
stainless steel dipper or a pyrex measuring cup.  The sampler used depended
on the accessibility of the tap for drawing samples from the sludge delivery
line.  The time interval between samples was established from expected
duration of barge loading.
          The samples collected at each interval were added to an 8-L I-CHEM
brown glass container for compositing.  If the 8-L container was filled prior
to the completion of barge loading, the sludge in the container was
thoroughly mixed and equal volumes (500 ml) measured into individual 1-L
I-CHEM amber glass containers designated for chemical/physical
characterization and toxicity testing.  If the time interval for sample
collections extended beyond the capacity of the B-L jar used for sample
homogenization, the procedures outlined above were repeated with a second 8-L
I-CHEM bottle.  Equal volumes of sludge from this container were then added
to each container used to distribute the samples.
          A total of 11 L of sludge from each treatment plant was distributed
to various analytical laboratories (Table 3).  Samples were stored on ice
immediately after collection and shipped to the analytical laboratories on
ice via overnight mail.  All samples were stored at 4°C prior to analysis or
toxicity testing.  Large-volume grab samples were also collected from PVSC
and NSPDW.  These samples were sent to the IPA Environmental Research
Laboratory, Narragansett, RI, for unspecified studies.
                                      8

-------
TABLE 3.  SUMMARY OF SAMPLE COLLECTION  DATES,  TIMES, METHODS, AND DISTRIBUTION TO ANALYTICAL
          LABORATORIES.
Time Sample
After Collection
Sample Saaple Loading Duration
Plant Date Method Location Started (h)
PVSC 8/04 Grab Tank 6 NA 10 rain
MCUA 8/19 Pooled Pump Tap NA 5.5 h
BCUA 8/12 Pooled Pump Tap 0 5.5 h
LRSA 8/08 Pooled Pump Tap 0 3.3 h
RVSA 8/08 Grab Pump Tap 5 min" 10 min
JMEUC 8/19 Grab Outside Tap 2 h 10 min
NYCDEP 8/02 SJC Barge Completed 45 min
NCDPH 8/02 Pooled Outside Tap 5 min 1.75 h
WCDEF 8/01 Pooled Pump Tap 2.5 h 1.5
PVSC » Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners.
MCUA * Middlesex County Utilities Authority.
BCUA = Bergen County Utilities Author ity.
LRSA = Linden-Roselle Sewerage Authority.
RVSA = Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority.
JMEUC - Joint Meeting of Essex and Union Counties,
Interval
Between
Grab
Samples
NA
0.5 h
0.5 h
0.5 h
NA
NA
NA
0.25 h
0.33 h






NYCDEP = Composite of the New York City Department of Environmental
NCDPW * Nassau County Department of Public Works.
WCDEF = Westchester County Department of Environmental
NA - Not available.
afirab sample only.
^Combined pumping with LRSA sludge prevented initiating
cpooled samples using a "Sludge Judge" (SJ); one SJ from

Facilities.




Distribution

Battelle SAIC
6 L
6 L
6 L
6 L
6 L
6 L
6 L
6 L
6 L






5 L
5 L
5 L
5 L
5 L
5 L
5 L
5 L
5 L








ERLN
12 La
None
None
None
None
None
None
12 L«
None






Protection facilities.












sampling earlier.
each of 10
barge
compartments.


-------
                       2.2 QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS

          Because the data generated in this study will  be used to establish
the sludge dumping rates that will be included in permits for disposal of
sewage sludge at the 106-Mile Site, extensive quality control and quality
assurance were required for the analysis.  Data quality requirements for the
chemical and physical characteristics analysis and toxicity testing are
listed in Table 4.  Quality control requirements included processing of
sample equipment blanks, procedural blanks, matrix spike recoveries, and
analysis of sample replicates for all chemical parameters.  Quality control
for the toxicity tests included processing of samples in duplicate at each
level of sludge dilution for each test species, conducting control tests with
each test species in the seawater used to dilute the sludge, and testing of
each species with a reference toxicant.
          The quality assurance documentation and the quality control results
are included in Appendix A to F.  In general, quality control objectives were
met for all analyses.  All data were audited at the originating laboratory to
ensure traceability and completeness.

                          2.3 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

                           2.3.1 Organic  Compounds

          Each sludge sample was extracted and analyzed using the EPA
approved methods (EPA, 1986) listed in Table 5.  The target list of
compounds is presented in Table 6,  No analyses for volatile organic priority
pollutants were conducted.
          An aliquot of each whole sludge sample (10 ml) was Soxhlet-
extracted for nonvolatile and semivolatile organic compounds using Method
3540 (EPA, 1986).  Originally it was intended that 500-mL samples be
extracted in a separatory funnel.  However, the consistency of the sludge
necessitated use of the Soxhlet extraction of Method 3540.  After the
extractions were completed, the sample extracts were put through gel-
permeation cleanup (Method 3640) to remove lipids, polymers, and other
potentially interfering materials.  After cleanup the sample extracts were
                                      10

-------
TABLE 4.  DATA QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ANALYSIS OF NEW YORK-HEW JERSEY
          SEWAGE SLUDGE SAMPLES.
Parameter
Cu
Pb
Hg
Cd
Pesticides
PCB
Acid fraction
Base neutrals
Phenol s
Residual
Filterable
Total
Settleable matter
Specific gravity
Wet/Dry weight
Solids density
Toxicity tests

Units Detection Precision8 Accuracyb Volume
Limit * % % of actual (oL)
«/L
W/l
M9/J-
«/L
M/l
H/L
«/L
tf/i.
«/L

mg/L
mg/L
mL/L
UnHtess
Unitless
g/mL
% Whole
Sludge
20
1
0.2
10
0.05
0.5
10
10
10

10
10
10
0.001
NA
NA
NA

15
15
15
15
25
25
25
25
25

10
10
10
10
10
10
25

90
90
90
90
48
30
33
33
15

90
90
90
90
90
90
90%
of
- 110
- 110
- 110
- 110
- 136
• 125
- I28d
- 128^
- 103

- 100
- 110
- 100
- no
- 110
- no
syrvivaie
control
10QC
10QC
100
1QQC
500C
50QC
500C
500C
500C

100
100
1000
100
100
100
4000

NA * Not appropriate.
^Precision as the percent relative deviation of duplicate sample analysis.
^Accuracy is the percent recovery of surrogate or matrix spike of samples.
CA single sample may be used for these analyses.
dRange may vary depending on the specific analyte.
680% for Acartia sp. tests.
                                      11

-------
TABLE 5.  ANALYTICAL METHODS USED TO DETERMINE THE CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL
          CHARACTERISITICS OF SEWASE SLUDGE FROM THE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY
          SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO DISPOSE SEWAGE SLUDGE
          AT THE 106-MILE SITE.
Parameter
Metal digestion
Metal analysis
Cu
Pb
Cd
Hg
Organic extraction
Cleanup
Analysis
Pesticides
PCB
Base neutrals
Acid friction
Acid base partitioning
Phenol s
Method
3010

6010
6010 and 7420
6010
7470
3540
3640

8080
8080
8270
8270
3650
8040
Source
A

A
A
A
A
A
A

A
A
A
A
A
A
    Other characteristics

    Residual, Non-filterable3         160.2                  B
    Residue, Total                    160.3                  B
    Settleable solids                 209E                   C
    Wet to dry weight ratio           NA                     D
    Sludge solids density             Density bottle method  E
    Specific gravity                  213E                   C

A  EPA, 1986. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste. SW-846, 3rd
   Edition.

8  EPA, 1979. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes.
   EPA6QG/4-79-Q20.

C  APHA, 1985. Standard Methods For the examination of Water and Wastewater,
   16th Edition, American Public Health Association, Washington DC.

D  Results come from residual, total determination.

E  Head. 1980. Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing. Vol. 1. "Soil
   Classification and Compaction Tests." Pentecn Press. Plymouth, England.
   125-127.

aThis measure is equivalent to the total suspended solids content of the
 sludge.


                                      12

-------
TABLE 6.  TARGET COMPOUNDS FOR PRIORITY POLLUTANT ANALYSIS. SEMIVOLATILE
          ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY METHOD 8270, PCBS/PESTICIDES BY METHOD 8080,
          PHENOLS BY METHOD 8040.

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

     Phenol
     Bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether
     2-Chlorophenol
     1,3-Diehlorobenzene
     1,4-Dichlorobenzene
     Benzyl alcohol
     1,2-Dichlorobenzene
     2-Methylphenol
     Bis(2-ch1oroisopropyl)ether
     4-Methylphenol
     N-Nitroso-Di-N-propylaiine
     Hexachloroethane
     Nitrobenzene
     Isophorone
     2-NHrophenol
     2,4-Dimethylphenol
     Benzole acid
     Bi s(2-chloroethoxy)methane
     2,4-Dichlorophenol
     1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
     Naphthalene
     4-Chloroaniline
     Hexachlorobutadiene
     4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
     2-Methylnaphthalene
     Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
     2,4,6-THchlorophenol
     2,4-,5-Trichlorophenol
     2-Ch1oronaphthal ene
     2-Nitroaniline
     Dimethyl phthalate
     Acenaphthylene
     3-Nitroaniline
     Acenaphthene
     2,4-Dinitrophenol
     4-N1trophenol
     Dibenzofuran
     2,4-Dinitrotoluene
     2,6-Dinitrotoluene
     Diethylphthalate
     4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
     Fluorene
     4-Nitroaniline
                                      13

-------
TABLE 6.  (Continued)
     4J6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol
     N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
     4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
     Hexachlorobenzene
     Pentachlorophenol
     Phenanthrtne
     Anthracene
     Di-n-buty1phthalate
     Fluoranthene
     Pyrene
     Butyl benzyl phthalate
     3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
     Benzo(a)anthracene
     Bi s(2»ethy1hexyl)phthalate
     Chrysene
     Oi-n-octyl phthalate
     Benzo (bmuoranthene
     Benzo(k)flyoranthene
     Benzo(a)pyrene
     Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
     Dibenzi(a,h)anthracene
     Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

PCB/PESTICIDES

     Aldrin
     alpha-BHC
     beta-BBC
     delta-BHC
     gamma-BHC (Lindane)
     Chlordane
     4(4'-DDD
     4,4'-DDE
     4,4'-DDT
     Dieldrin
     Endosulfan I
     Endosulfan II
     Endosulfan Sulfate
     Endrin
     Endrin aldehyde
     Heptachlor
     Heptachlor epoxide
     Methoxychlor
     Toxaphene
     PCS-1016
     PCS-1221
     PCB-1231
     PCB-1242
     PCB-124B
     PCB-1254
     PCB-1260
                                      14

-------
TABLE 6.  (Continued)
PHENOLS
     Phenol
     2-Chlorophenol
     2-Nitrophenol
     2,4-Dimethylphenol
     2,4-Diehlorophenol
     4-Ch1oro-3-methy1pheno1
     2,4,6-THchlorophenol
     2,4-Dinitrophenol
     4-Nitrophenol
     2-Methy1-4,6-dinItrophenol
     Pentachlorophenol
                                     15

-------
split:  analyses for semivolatile compounds were conducted by gas
chromatography/mass spectrography (GC/MS) (Method 8270)j  organochlorine
pesticides and PCBs were determined by GC (Method 8080).   Even though the
Soxhlet extraction reduced the amount of sludge extracted from that
originally planned, the resulting extracts still required additional
dilution before they could be analyzed by GC or GC/MS methods.
          Phenols were determined on separate sample aliquots.  Samples were
extracted by the Soxhlet method (Method 3540) and the extract cleaned
according to the acid-base partitioning technique (Method 3650).  Phenolic
compounds were determined by gas chromatography (GC) (Method 8040) using
flame ionization detection (FID),
          Triplicate aliquots were extracted and analyzed for the PVSC and
Bergen County Utilities Authority (BCUA).  A matrix spike and matrix spike
duplicate were extracted for the PVSC sample.  Sludge from all other
authorities, except for Westchester County Department of Environmental
Facilities (WCDEF) and NCDPW, was extracted in duplicate for analysis of
semivolatile compounds.  Duplicate extractions for phenol analysis were
conducted on samples from the latter two authorities,
          All initial extractions were completed within required holding
times except for samples from LRSA and RVSA.  Completion of extraction for
these samples exceeded the holding times for pesticides and PCS by 4 days due
to an error in the surrogate spike added during the initial extractions.  The
error required extraction of new sample aliquots.
          The lower limit of detection (LLD) achieved in the laboratory was
approximately twice that listed in Table 4 for the semivolatile compounds
and pesticides (See Tables A-l, B-l, in Appendices A, and B).  The LLD for
the phenols varied with each compound and ranged from 4 to 112 times higher
than targeted LLO (Table C-l Appendix C).  The higher-than-required detection
limits for sludge samples result from a combination of matrix effects and
dilution of extracts by two- to fivefold prior to analysis.  The practical
quantification limit (PQLs) for the whole sludge matrix were «25 times higher
than the LLD for all organic compounds (Tables A-l, 8-1,  and C-l).  The
reported PQL is at least 10 times lower than required in the work/quality
assurance project plan (  EPA   , 1988b).  Analysis of method blanks did not
                                      16

-------
detect any contribution of compounds of Interest to the results from the
analytical procedures or the sample collection equipment.
          Generally, surrogate spike recoveries added prior to the GC/MS
analysis were within the required recovery windows for the analytical
methods.  Appendix A discusses the quality control results for the surrogate
spikes.  Recoveries of the surrogate (dibutyl chlorendate) used for the
PCB/pesticide analysis varied between samples (Table B-3, Appendix B) but
were within acceptable limits of the analytical nethod.  Surrogate recoveries
for phenols (Method 8040) were within acceptable ranges (Table C-3, Appendix
0.
          Recoveries of compounds spiked into the sludge matrix (matrix spike
and matrix spike duplicates) were generally within the limits specified in
the work/quality assurance project plan for the semi volatile organic
compounds, PCBs, pesticides, and phenols (Appendix Tables A-4, B-4, and C-4).
High recoveries were found for acenaphthene in the matrix spike (MS) and
pentachlorophenol in the matrix spike duplicate (MSO) for this sample,
whereas low recoveries were obtained for phenol, 4-nitrophenol, and 2,4-
dinitrotoluene.  Pesticide/PCB determinations found good matrix spike
recoveries that were well within the required recovery limits.  Only aldrin
exceeded the recommended acceptance criteria for matrix spike compounds.  The
matrix spike recoveries exhibited for phenols show erratic recoveries for 4-
nitrophenol and pentachlorophenol.  Recovery for the one of the surrogate
compounds (2,4,6,-tribromophenol) added to the two matrix spike samples was
also low, possibly contributing to the observed low and variable recoveries.
The matrix spike recoveries of phenol compounds may also reflect the
relatively low sample concentrations.
          With few exceptions, precision for the semi volatile, PCB, and
pesticide analyses was well within requirements specified for the analytical
methods.  For most compounds the relative percent difference  (RPD) was less
than 10 percent and frequently less than 5 percent.  The precision of the
phenol analysis was not as good, with RPDs ranging from 5 to  155 percent.
          The quality control data for the organic analysis indicate that,
with few exceptions, the results are within the acceptance limits for
equipment and procedural blanks, matrix spike recoveries, and analytical
precision.  Thus, the organic data is considered to be reliable and
                                      17

-------
representative of the sludge characteristics at the time the samples were
collected.

                                 2,3.2 Metals

          Methods used to determine the metal  concentrations in the sludges
are listed in Table 5.  All digestions were initiated within the required
holding times for analysis of metals*  Sludge samples were digested using
Method 3010 (EPA, 1986).  This method deviated from that listed in the
work/quality assurance project plan.  Method 3010 was substituted for Method
3050 because Method 3050 is more appropriate for solid matrices.  Analytical
results were not affected by this change.  Cadmium, copper, and lead
concentrations in the digests were determined using inductively coupled
plasma (ICP) analysis.  Lead concentrations in the sludges were also
determined by flame atomic absorption (Method 7420).  Even though lead.
concentrations were sufficiently high for quantification by ICP, flame AAS
analyses were performed because significant matrix interference problems can
be experienced during lead analysis by ICP.  Therefore, the digests were
reanalyzed to determine if matrix interferences were present.  Comparison of
the results from the FAAS analysis and ICP analysis (Table D-4, Appendix D)
show that agreement between the two methods was within 20 percent as the
relative percent difference.  This difference was applicable over a broad
range of lead concentrations.  Thus, the ICP results were determined to be
acceptable and are reported for the sludges.  Mercury was determined using
cold vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy (CVAAS),
          Quality control measures for the analysis of metals included
procedural (method) blanks, triplicate digestion and analysis of samples from
PVSC and BCUA, and analysis of matrix spike duplicates on samples from these
two authorities.  Quality control data are summarized in Appendix D.
           Detection limits achieved for cadmium and mercury were lower than
listed in Table 4, whereas those for lead and copper were higher (Table D-l,
Appendix D).  The higher-than-targeted LLD for lead and copper were caused by
dilutions required to bring sample concentrations within the measurement
limits of the instrumentation.  These higher than required detection limits
                                      18

-------
did not affect the final results because metal concentrations in all sludges
were several orders of magnitude greater than the required detection limit.
          Four method blanks were run with the samples.  With the exception
of mercury in the fourth blank, concentrations of all metals in all blanks
were below the LLD.  Matrix spike recoveries for metals added to samples were
consistent between the duplicate spiked samples.  Metal recoveries were
within the required limits for the BCUA sample (Appendix D, Table D-3) but
were slightly outside of the required limits for the samples from PVSC.
Sludge front PVSC is unique to this set of sewerage authorities in that it
undergoes a high temperature and pressure process.  Because of this
uniqueness, recovery of metals spiked into this sludge may be affected.
Further characterization of sludge from this authority may be necessary to
determine the appropriate digestion methods for complete recovery of metals
from this sludge.  Finally, the precision of the metals analysis was well
within the limits defined in the work/quality assurance project plan
(Appendix D, Table 0-3).
          The quality control data for the analysis of metals indicate the
metal concentrations reported for these sludges were reliable and
representative of the nature of the sludge at the time of sampling.

                          2.3.3 Physical Properties

          Physical property measurements (total residue, non-filterable
residue, settleable matter, specific gravity, and sludge solids density)  were
conducted using the methods listed in Table 5.  A method for determining  the
density of the sludge solids was not identified in the work plan.  Review of
available methods determined that the density bottle method (Head,  1980}  was
appropriate to determine this parameter and was applied to each of the
sludges.   The method specified in the work/quality assurance project plan
(Imhof Cone procedure, Method 160.5) for determining settleable solids was
replaced by Standard Method 209 E, 3b (ASTM, 1985) because the optical
density of the sludges prevented observation of any settling in the Imhof
cone.  Also, the method specified in the work plan for determining the solids
content of the sludge was changed from Method 160.1 to 160.2 after samples
were received at the analytical laboratory because Method 160.2 was
                                      19

-------
determined to be the more appropriate test for determining the solids content
of the sludge.  Terminology used to describe these tests in the EPA methods
manual (EPA, 1986) was found to be misleading and inconsistent with the
manner in which sludges solids (total suspended solids) content is generally
reported.  The terminology contributed to difficulties in identifying the
proper tests to measure the solids content of the sludges.
          The only other modification of physical property determinations
involved the reduction of sample volumes for non-filterable residue from 100
ml to, for certain samples, as low as 1 ml because of blockage of the
filters.  Finally, physical property characteristics were determined from
triplicate measurement of each parameter on each sludge sample.

                              2.4 TOXICITY  TESTS

                            2.4.1 Test Procedures

          The toxicity of the sludge* was determined with two representative
marine species, Menidia beryllina (fish) and Hysidopsis bahia (mysid).
Tests were conducted using 96-h acute toxicity tests.  Tests using the marine
zooplankton species Acartia sp. (copepod) were not successfully completed
(see Section 2.4.2).  The methods for testing the toxicity of the sludge to
the fish and mysid were adapted from "Methods for Measuring the Acute
Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms/ (EPA,  1985).  Each
toxicity test was conducted on whole sludge.  The upper limit for the sludge
dilution was determined using a 24-h screening test for both the mysid and
fish.  Sludge dilutions used for the screening tests were based on data
included in the permit applications submitted to EPA by each authority
tested.  Sludge dilutions for these tests were between 0.6 and 10 percent
whole sludge and depended on the origin of the sludge being tested.
          Toxicity test conditions and any changes in protocols from the
work/quality assurance plan are summarized below.  Complete details of each
test series are included in Appendix F.  Test organisms were purchased from
commercial suppliers and received at the analytical laboratory within
1 to 2 days of testing, except for one test series (repeat tests for WCDEF
and LRSA and original tests for MCUA and JMEUC) where mysids from a Battelle
                                      20

-------
Ocean Sciences culture were used.  All organisms were acclimated to the
prescribed test conditions for 24 h (mysid) or 48 h (fish) prior to testing.
In some cases, extreme hot weather affected the shipping conditions and thus
the requirements for acclimation of the test organisms.  The sequence in
which sludge samples arrived at the laboratory also caused delays in
initiating testing of several sludges.  As a result, prescribed holding times
for initiating tests were slightly exceeded for some sludge samples
(Table 7).
          Each toxicity test consisted of exposure to five sludge dilutions,
with the least dilute treatment (highest concentration of sludge) based on
the results of the screening test.   Each dilution series was conducted in
duplicate.  Sludge dilutions were performed using filtered (20 fan) natural
seawater collected from Duxbury Harbor, Massachusetts prior to the tests.
Sludge from two or three authorities was tested simultaneously depending on
the sequence of arrival and number of retests required.  A control treatment
consisting of Duxbury Bay dilution water was included with each sludge sample
and test organism.  This test was used to verify the health of the test
animals and determine the acceptability of the testing conditions.  Control
vessels were treated identically to all other test treatments.  In addition,
a reference toxicant was concurrently tested for each species in the test
array.  Initially it was planned to aerate the test series only if dissolved
oxygen fell below 40 percent of saturation.  However, loss of oxygen observed
during the first test series indicated that aeration was necessary.  Aeration
was started 24 h after test start-up for the first test series.  All
subsequent tests were conducted using aeration throughout the test.
          Each test was examined every 24 h for water quality parameters and
to determine mortality.  Hater quality parameters (temperature, salinity, pH»
and dissolved oxygen) in each test series were determined on representative
treatments.  Mortality checks were conducted on each test chamber as follows.
If no viable animals were observed in a treatment, the test solution was
decanted and checked for live animals.  No live animals were found when this
procedure was followed.  Due to the amount and color of the sludge material,
final counts of surviving animals could only be obtained at the termination
of the test.  This procedure did not affect the final determination of the
LC50.
                                      21

-------
TABLE 7,  SUMMARY OF DATES FOR TOXICITY TESTS CONDUCTED ON SEWAGE SLUDGES
          COLLECTED FROM THE NINE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES IN
          AUGUST 1988.
Authority3
PVSC
MCUA
BCUA
LRSA
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCDEP
NCDPW
WCOEF
Date
Sampled
8/04
8/19
8/12
8/08
8/08
9/19
8/16
8/02
8/01
Date
Test Successful
Type Test Started
Mysidopsis
Mamdia
Mysidopsis
Me nidi a
Hysidopsis
Menidia
Mysidopsis
Menidia
Mysidopsis
Menidia
Mysidopsis
Menidia
Mysidopsis
Menidia
Mysidopsis
Menidia
Mysidopsis
Menidia

8/05
8/05
8/23
8/23
8/18
8/18
8/23
8/11
8/18
8/11
8/23
8/23
8/18
8/18
8/4
8/4
8/23
8/04
Days from
Collection
1
1
4
4
6
6
15
3
10
3
4
4
2
2
2
2
22
3
i of
Retests
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
^Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.
                                      22

-------
          The timing of sample receipt and the delays discussed above also
affected the age of the fish used in two tests (MCUA and JMEUC).  For these
tests, animals between 28 and 36 days old were employed rather than animals
whose age was between 14 and 28 days as required in the work/quality
assurance project plan.  Use of these older animals had no effect on the
toxicity test results because the results for the controls with older
animals and also the reference test LC50 were found to be the same as those
found for younger animals.
          For several tests, the criterion for acceptance of the test results
(>90 percent survival of the control animals) was exceeded, requiring
retesting of the sample.  These samples were retested within a week of
completion of the unsuccessful test.  The retesting caused holding times of
the sludge samples to be exceeded for completion of those tests.  Examination
of data from all samples that were retested for mysid toxicity (Linden-
Roselle twice; Westchester County and Rahway 1 time each) indicate that the
LC50 for the retested samples was within 15 to 40 percent of that  LC50
obtained for the unaccepted tests.   There also was a trend of increasing
toxicity with each subsequent test.
          The LC50 for each sludge and test species was determined using the
trimmed Spearman-Karver method.   When control mortalities were observed the
Abbots correction was applied.  The  toxicity of the sludge is reported in
terms of percent whole sludge.

                           2,4,2 Acartia sp. Tests

          The method for the Acartia sp.  (copepod)  test was adapted from EPA
(1987).  Tests were conducted as follows.   Acartia were received from a
commercial supplier.  Acclimation was completed under the conditions
described in the method and within the prescribed 48-h acclimation period,
however, increments used to adjust salinity were larger than specified.
Thus, these animals may have experienced excessive stress prior to testing.
After acclimation, a 15-ml sample of sludge from each dilution level was
added to each of five 20-mL glass scintillation vials.  Two animals were then
added to each test vial and a cover loosely placed on the vial.  The
zooplankton tests were aerated using an orbital shaker rather than bubble
                                     23

-------
aeration to avoid damage to the animals (personal communication, Don Miller,
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory, Narragansett, RI, July 28, 1988).
Water quality measurements were conducted at the beginning and end of the
test sequence.
          Successful tests results were not obtained for the first series of
sludge samples tested.  Because 100 percent mortality was observed in all
treatments, including the controls and reference toxicant, tests were
suspended after the first set of samples.
          After this test, several attempts were made to obtain a
zooplankton culture with which to continue the toxicity testing.  Additional
animals were purchased from commercial suppliers and animals were also
collected from Duxbury Bay.  These animals were carefully cultured, but
could not be maintained for longer than 2 weeks.  Recommendations from
scientists (Dr. Ann Durbin, University of Rhode Island, August 17, 1988; Dr.
Al Barker, New England Aquarium, August 16, 1988; Mr. Tim Word, ENSCO,
Marblehead, Ma., August 18, 1988} who have or are actively culturing Acartia
sp. indicated that cultures should remain viable for 30 days prior to testing
to ensure that the animals could survive in the toxicity tests.  Because
cultures could not be maintained for this time period, no zooplankton tests
could be conducted.  Additional options pursued for the zooplankton testing
included using indigenous zooplankton species collected from the vicinity of
the 106-Mile Site in mid-September 1988.  However, these animals also did not
survive sufficiently long for determining the toxicity of the sludges.  In
addition, the sludge holding times had been exceeded by at least 3 weeks by
the time these animals became available.
          There are currently no options that will allow completion of
zooplankton toxicity tests within the time frame of the permitting process
for the 106-Mile Site on the sludge samples collected in August 1988.  The
experience with the Acartia tests clearly indicates that toxicity testing
with this organism is difficult and not in the realm of "routine" toxicity
testing.   Future "routine" testing with Acartia sp. and related species must
carefully consider the requirements and objectives of the testing from
several perspectives  including regulatory requirements, practicality of the
tests, use of the LC50 data, and time and costs involved in ensuring
successful completion of the tests.
                                      24

-------
                                 3.0 RESULTS

                           3.1  ANALYTICAL RESULTS

                           3.1.1  Organic Compounds

          Organics compound results were characterized by the absence of
detectable PCB and pesticides in the sludges (Table 8).  Because
quantitative results were not available, the amount of dilution required to
meet WQC for specific compounds at the 106-Mile Site cannot be calculated.
However, an upper limit can be determined based on the PQL listed in Appendix
B, Table 1.  Dilutions on the order of 6,000 to 25,000 would ensure WQC are
met, if the pesticides or PCB were at the PQL in the sludge.  Lower
concentrations would require lower dilutions.  The upper limit for the
required dilution of these organic contaminants is within the range
determined for the metals.  Thus, dilution of the metals to acceptable WQC
will ensure that these organic compounds are also diluted to acceptable
levels.
          Only 11 of the 63 target semivolatile organic compounds were
identified in the sewage sludges (Table 9).  For the majority of the
authorities sampled, only one or two semivolatile compounds were found at
concentrations that could be quantified using standard EPA methods.  Sludge
from MCUA, PVSC, LRSA, and RVSA contained six to seven identifiable
semivolatile compounds.  The concentrations of these compounds were highly
variable between the authorities when a common organic contaminant was
identified in each authority's sludge.  Most of the compounds identified (the
phthalates) are common contaminants and are of low concern in the
environment.
          A total of four phenols were identified in the sludges (Table 10).
Two of these were found in the MCUA sample.  One, pentachlorophenol, is
highly toxic and may be of concern environmentally.  The acute marine WQC for
this compound is 13 M9/L, which requires a initial dilution of only 1,100 for
the MCUA sludge to meet WQC upon disposal.
          The absence of measurable amounts of environmentally significant
organic priority pollutant compounds is consistent with information
                                      25

-------
TABLE 8.  SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR PCS/PESTICIDE CONCENTRATIONS (METHOD 8080)
          FOUND IN SEWAGE SLUDGE FROM THE NINE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE
          AUTHORITIES SAMPLED IN AUGUST 1988.
Concentration (pg/L)
Aythoritya
WCDEF
NCDPW
MCUA
PVSC (Rep 1)
PVSC (Rep 2)
PVSC (Rep 3)
LRSA
RVSA
NYCDEP
JMEUC
BCUA (Rep 1)
BCUA (Rep 2)
BCUA (Rep 3)
PCBs
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Ptsticides
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND  » Not detected at the Reporting Limit listed  in  Table  B-l  in Appendix  B.

^Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.
                                     26

-------
ro
     TABLE 9.  CONCENTRATIONS OF SBtl-VOLITIUE ORGANIC PRIORITY POUJUTANT OHOHS (^/L)  IDENTIFIED  IN WHOLE SBWGE SLUDGE FROM THE NINE NEW
               YORK-NEW JERSEY SfflERAfiE AUTHORITIES SAWLED IN AUGUST 1968.
Sewerage Authority*
Coifxxm) NCDEF
Phenol 520
Benzyl alcohol
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
4-ftethylphenol
2,4-Dimethyl phenol
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
24fethy1naphthalene
Diethylphthalate
Di-n-butylphthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)p*ithalate 3,420
Di-n-octylphthalate
NCDFM MOUAb
502(5.2)
503(6.6)

3,600(4.3)



650
529(77)
3,500 50,900(8.3)

PVSCb
6,200(16)
3,000(53)
1,900(86)
U$Ab
1,830(2.5)

13,500(6.7)
RUSAb
1,790(5.9)

11,200(4,5)
47,600(20) 55,600(11)

660(8.0)
560(8.6)

1,400(52)
2,700(18)

626(12)



6,260(48)
56,400(21)

641(11)




44,200(60)
14,100(80)
NYCDEPb JMQJC^ BUCftb



1,470(10)





7,110(62) 10,500(2.9) 2,980(26)

     ^Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.

           of duplicate analysis.  Percent relative deviation in parentheses.

-------
TABLE 10. RESULTS OF DUPLICATE ANALYSIS OF PHENOLS (pg/L) IN WHOLE SBWGE SLUDGE SWLES FROM THE NINE NEM YORK-NEW
          JERSEY SEHBWSE AUTHORITIES SNfLB) IN AUGUST 1988.
Sewerage Authority*
Compound
Phenol
2-Chlorophenol
2-Nitropter»l
2,4-Oimethylphenol
2,4-DidhJoruphenol
4-Chlon>"3-methylphenol
2,4,6-THchlorqphenol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
2-Hethyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
Pentachlofophenol
HCDEF
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NOW
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MOUC
ND
ND
16,000
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
15,000
WSC
6,700
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
USA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1,100
RVSA
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
HYCDEP
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
JNEUC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
BOW
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND * Not detectable above the reporting limits shown in Appendix C, Table C-l.

Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.

-------
included in the permit applications.  Generally, dilution of the sludge on
disposal will decrease organic compound concentrations to levels that are
below any marine water quality criteria, as observed to date on the surveys
of the 106-Mile Site (   EPA   , 1992c).  Determination of the concentrations
of specific compounds in the sludges at lower detection limits will probably
require application of more sophisticated extract cleanup steps than provided
in the EPA methods (EPA, 1986) used for this characterization.

                                3.1.2  Metals

          Of the four metals determined in the sludge, copper consistently (8
of the 9 authorities sampled) had the highest concentration (Table 11).   Pb
was highest in the ninth plant (PVSC).  Hg and Cd concentrations were present
in the lowest concentration in the sludges.   Cd, Cu» Hg,  and Pb
concentrations in the sludges displayed large differences among the various
plants sampled.  Cu showed the least variability among the plants.  The
difference between the authority with the highest Cu concentration and the
one having the lowest concentration is only a factor of 6.6.  The
concentration range for the other metals varied by at least a factor 20,  with
Cd showing the greatest differences among the authorities tested.
          Hg concentrations were consistent among the authorities tested
(concentration range less than a factor of 4) except for the sludge from
BCUA, which had a Hg concentration of 2 mg/L.  This concentration was higher
than found for the other plants by at least a factor of 6.  Repeated
analysis of the sludge from the sample bottle used for the initial analysis
and also from the other sample containers gave the same result.  Thus, the
high Hg level was not the result of laboratory contamination nor the sampling
procedure.  Because this Hg concentration was anomalous relative to
concentrations in sludge from the other authorities and to concentrations
reported previously by BCUA, repeated sampling of this plant is recommended
to confirm that the high result is representative of this sludge.
          With few exceptions, metal concentrations in August 1988 were
lower than the mean concentration calculated from recent data (permit
application process, monthly reports or quarterly reports) submitted to EPA
since 1986  (Table 12).  The deviation from the mean depends upon the metal
                                      29

-------
TABLE 11.  WHOLE SLUDGE METAL CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS FROM THE NINE NEW
           YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO
           DISCHARGE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE.  SAMPLES WERE
           COLLECTED IN AUGUST 1988.
Authority3
PVSCC
MCUA
BCUAC
LRSA
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCDEP
NCDPW
WCDEF

Cd
1.20
1.90
1.50
0.59
0.08
0.67
0.20
0.14
0.19
Beta! (ng/L
Cu
42.0
68.0
25.0
80.0
16.0
36
38.0
12.0
56.0
whole
Pb
53.0
6.3
4.0
10.0
2.6
9.1
13.0
3.9
9.2
sludge)
Hg
0.29
0.07
2.00d
0.31
0.23
0.17
0.17
0.13
0.11
Required
Dilution**
14,500
23,450
80,000
27,590
5,520
12,410
13,100
4,140
19,310
Metal
Cu
Cu
Hi
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.

^Dilution based on the metal  requiring the greatest amount  of  dilution  to
 meet water quality.

cMean of triplicate analyses  reported.

^Sample analyzed several times with the same result obtained.
                                     30

-------
TABLE 12.  COMPARISON OF AUGUST 1988 WHOLE SLUDGE METAL CONCENTRATIONS («g/L WHOLE SLUDGE) TO THE
           MEAN CONCENTRATIONS DERIVED FROM DATA SUBMITTED IN THE PERMIT APPLICATIONS. MONTHLY. AND
           QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORTS.  THE COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (*) IS INCLUDED IN
           PARENTHESIS.



Cd
Authority* 1988
PVSC
MCUC
BCUA
LRSA
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCDEP
NCDPW
WCDEF
1.
1.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
20
90
50
59
08
67
20
14
19
4
2
2


2
0
0
0

MEAN
.40(b)
.95(48)
.18(100)
NA
NA
.12(42)
.16 to 8.5(c)
.30(b)
.61(89)

1988
42.0
68.0
25.0
80.0
16.0
36.0
38.0
12.0
56.0
Cu
MEAN
57 (b)
92(45)
42(100)
NA
NA
77(54)
33 to 103 (c)
84(b)
94(73)

1988
53.0
6.3
4.0
10.0
2.6
9.1
13.0
3.9
9.2
Pb
MEAN
187 (b)
17.8(121)
4.1(85)
NA
NA
26.3(90)
2.3 to 113(c)
8.6(b)
17.4(165)


1988
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
.29
.07
.00
.31
.23
.17<1
.17
.13
.11
Hi
MEAN
0.45(b)
0.18(394)
0.13(131)
NA
NA
0.17(35)
0.04 to 0.37(c)
0.04(b)
0.14(71)
NA = Mot available.
a Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.
b Single analysis available.
c Range reported for 14 NYC treatment plants.
d Range reported for 13 NYC treatment plants,  results from one plant not included due to extreme
  variability in results (219 % as the CV).

-------
and the authority.  For Cd, the August 1988 concentrations were from 1.5 to 3
times less than the mean of the available data, and Pb was 2 to 3 times
lower.  Hg closely matched the mean concentrations but Cu varied within a
factor of 0.1 to 5 of the mean.  Only Hg in the BCUA sludge was higher than
the average concentration and was well outside of the 95th percentile (0.41
mg/L) for this authority.  This result suggests that the Hg value in August
1988 may have been unique to this sample set.
          A single mean concentration for all NYCOEP plants was not derived
for comparison due to uncertainties in the amount of sludge contributed by
each plant to the barge sampled in August 1988.  For comparison, the range
in mean metal concentrations for all NYCDEP plants is included in Table 12.
Generally, the metal concentrations in the barge sampled August 1988 fell
near the lower end of the range and were consistent with the concentrations
found for most of the NYCDEP treatment plants.
          Calculation of the amount of sludge dilution that will be required
for each of the authorities (Table 11) indicated that the dilutions are
driven by the copper content of the sludge, except for BCUA, which has its
required dilution driven by the Hg content of the sludge.  Generally, the
August 1988 data indicate that the amount of sludge dilution required to
meet WQC at the 106-Mile Site is lower than calculated in   EPA    (I992d),
which used historical data from Santoro and Fikslin (1986).  The amount of
sludge dilution required at the 106-Mile Site is discussed further in
Section 4.0.

                       3.1.3  Physical Characteristics

          The physical characteristics of the nine sludges tested are
compiled in Table 13.  Only one plant (LRSA) had a fraction of the sludge
that settled during the standard settleability test.  The settleable fraction
was »25 percent of the total solids content of the sludge.  The concentration
of non-filterable solids (equivalent to total suspended solids (TSS)) ranged
from 13,100 mg to 83,900 mg/L.  This is equivalent to a solids content of 1.3
to 8.4 percent and is within the expected range for these sludges.  The
solids content of the sludge from six of the nine authorities fell in the
                                      32

-------
TABLE 13.  WHOLE SLUDGE PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS FROM THE NINE NEW
           YORK-NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO
           DISCHARGE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE.  SAMPLES WERE
           COLLECTED IN AUGUST 1988.  THE AVERAGE CONCENTRATION AND
           COEFFICENT OF VARIATION (%) FOR THE TRIPLICATE ANALYSIS OF EACH
           SLUDGE ARE REPORTED.
Non-
Filterable
Residual a
Authori tyb (mg/L)
PVSC
MCUA
BCUA
LRSAC
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCOEP
NCDPW
HCDEF
76,500(5.0)
27,800(17)
18,500(19)
83,900(13)
53,300(17)
19,400(21)
20,700(2.0)
13,100(11)
22,100(4.4)
Total
Residual
(«g/U
83,700(6.2)
41,100(1.40
25,700(1.7)
61,600(8.9)
63,900(7.9)
32,200(3.7)
26,200(2.0)
18,000(3.3)
21,500(4.4)
Set tl cable Specific
Solids Gravity
(•g/L) (g/c*3)
<4(-) 1.030(0.22)
<4(-) 1.013(0.04)
<4(-) 1.000(0.29)
21,700(36) 1.013(0.99)
<4(-) 1.016(0.12)
<4(-) 1.003(0.22)
<4(-) 1.006(0.08)
<4(-) 0.989(0.11)
<4(-) 1.020(0.22)
Sol Ids
Density
1.62
1.59
1.63
1.61
1.64
1.59
1.74
1.63
1.62
^Non-filterable residue is equivalent to the total  suspended  solids.

bAbbreviations are defined in Table 3.

cSample was heterogeneous and exhibited inconsistent behavior during
 processing.
                                     33

-------
range of 13,000 to 30,000 mg/L.  The remaining plants had solids
concentrations of >50,000 mg/l.
          The total residual (solids plus dissolved constituents remaining
when the sludge is dried) was 10 to 50 percent higher than the non-
filterable residue.  The percentage increase in the total residual varied
between tht plants.  The specific gravity of the sludges ranged from 0.989 to
1.030 g/cm3 with most sludges having a specific gravity of less than 1.016,
Sludge from PVSC sewerage treatment facility, which uses the Zimpro method of
sludge digestion, had the highest specific gravity, reflecting the high
solids content of this sludge.  The specific gravity of all sludges except
that from PVSC was lower than that of seawater typically found at the 106-
Mile Site (M 1.024 g/cm3 at a salinity of 32 o/oo and a temperature of 108C).
Generally, higher the solids content of the sludge corresponds with higher
specific gravity.  The sludge from WCDEF appears to have a high specific
gravity relative to the solids content of the sludge, whereas that from LRSA
is low relative to the very high solids content.  Sludge from LRSA was also
found difficult to work with and exhibited behavior that was not consistent
with the other sludges.
          The physical characterization data for the August 1988 samples were
compared with mean results compiled from recent data (permit application
process, monthly reports or quarterly reports)  submitted to EPA.  The
specific gravity of the sludge in August 1988 was higher than the 95th
percent!le derived from recent data submitted by the sewerage authorities.
On average most plants are reporting their sludge to have a specific gravity
between 0.99 and 1.03 g/cm3, with most reporting a specific gravity of 1,00
g/cm3.  Total solids content and non-filterable residual (TSS) were found to
be similar to those reported by the authorities and were within 2 standard
deviations of the mean of the available concentrations (Table 14).

                                3.2  TQXICm

          The results of the toxicjty testing are summarized in Table 15.
LC50 results for Menidia beryl!ina ranged from 0.49 to 5.95 percent of tht
whole sludge.  For Hysidopsis bahia, the LC50 ranged between 0.06 and 2.25
percent of the whole sludge.  Of the two species successfully tested,
                                      34

-------
TABLE 14.  COHPARISON OF TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS («g/L) IN
           SLUDGE COLLECTED IN AUGUST 1988 TO SUSPENDED SOLIDS
           CONCENTRATIONS INCLUDED IN THE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM NEW YORK-
           NEW JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING TO DISCHARGE SEWAGE
           SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE.  THE MEAN CONCENTRATION AND
           COEFFICENT OF VARIATION (%) FOR THE DATA AVAILABLE FOR EACH
           AUTHORITY ARE SHOWN.
                           August 1988            Total Suspended Solids
                         Non-Filterable           in Recent Data Froa the
      Authority«           Residualb              Applicants
PVSC
MCUA
BCUA
LRSA
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCDEP
NCDPW
WCDEF
76,500
27,800
18,500
83,900
53,300
19,400
20,700
13,100
22,100
35,300 to 113.000C
32,900(11)
19,000(69)
19,100 to 24,900
22,000 to 44,000
32,900(21)
12,400 to 52,300d
13,150
24,000(101)
^Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.

bNon-Filterable residue is equivalent to the total  suspended solids.

cFrom permittee applications only.

dRange of individual plant means.
                                     35

-------
TABLE 15.  WHOLE SLUDGE TOXICITY RESULTS FROM THE NINE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY
           SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO DISCHARGE SEWAGE
           SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE.  SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED IN AUGUST
           1988. THE MAXIMUM TOXICITY BASED SLUDGE DILUTION REQUIRED FOR EACH
           MUNICIPALITY ARE LISTED.

Authority*

PVSC
MCUA
BCUA
LRSA
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCDEP
NCDPW
WCDEFW
LC50 (%
Henidia
beryl Una

0.49
5.95
1.55
0.53
1.49
1.92
1.59
2.33
0.91
whole sludge)
Mysidopsis
bahia

0.17
2.11
2.10
0.06
0.88
1.68
2.25
0.92
1.17
Toxicity
Required
Dilutionb

58,800
4,740
6,450
166,700
11,360
5,950
6,290
10,870
10,990
^Abbreviations are defined in Table 3.

bThe species with the lowest LC50 and an application factor of 0.01 were used
 to determine the required dilution.
                                     36

-------
Mysidopsis was the most sensitive to the sludge from six of the nine
authorities characterized.  The sludges from Westchester County, NYC, and
Bergen County were more toxic to Henidia than to Hysldopsis.  No
correspondence was found between the ranking (highest to least toxic) of the
toxicity of sludge to the two test species.  Thus, the toxicity of the sludge
to one species cannot be used to indicate the toxicity that will be
experienced by other test species.
          The LCSOs for both Menidia and Mysidopsis were within a factor of 1
to 3 of the results reported in the permit applications (Table 16), except
for Mysidopsis in the RVSA sludge.  Hysidopsis in the August 1988 sample was
i times less sensitive than reported in tht permit application for this
plant.  The LC50 for Menidia in sludge from three authorities (MCUA, NYCDEP,
JMEUC) was higher (less toxic) in the August 1988 characterization than
reported in the permit applications.  The other plants had lower Menidia
LCSOs (more toxic) than reported in the permit applications.  These
differences were generally within a factor of 1.5 of the value included in
the permit application, except for MCOA and LRSA sludges.
          The LC50 for Mysidopsis in the August 1988 sampling was higher
(less toxic) than reported in the permit applications for four authorities,
lower (more toxic) for three authorities,  and within 10 percent of the
reported results for two authorities.  Authorities with higher LCSOs were
PVSC, RVSA, NYCDEP, BCUAj those with the same LCSOs were JMEUC and WCDEF.
Differences were generally within a factor of 2 of the pirrait applications
except at LRSA (3 times more toxic) and RVSA (5 times less toxic).
          Given that sludge quality (TSS,  toxic compound concentration,
ammonia, etc.) may vary by 30 to 50 percent due to operational factors in the
treatment plants, differences in the toxicity reported in the permit
applications and for the August 1988 sampling are not unexpected.
Furthermore, small differences (2 to 3 times) in toxicity observed from
those found in August 1988 should be expected in future tests.  Therefore,
until a more complete time series of sludge toxicity is available, no
specific meaning should be attached to the observed differences.
                                      37

-------
TABLE 16.  COMPARISON OF AUGUST 1988 WHOLE SLUDGE TOXICITIES TO THOSE
           REPORTED IN THE PERMIT APPLICATION.  LC50 RESULTS ARE REPORTED
           AS THE PERCENTAGE OF THE WHOLE SLUDGE.
Menidia beryl! ina
Authority*
PVSC
MCUA
BCUA
LRSA
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCOEP
NCDPW
WCDEFW

August
1988
0.49
5.95
1.55
0,53
1.49
1.92
1.59
2.33
0.91

Remit
Application
0.63
1.95
1.95
0.96
1.60
1.35
1.30
2.87
1.47
Mvsidopsis bah ia

August
1988
0.17
2.11
2.10
0.06
0.88
1.68
2.25
0.92
1.17

Pet-wit
Application
0.09
2.80
0.66
0.20
0.11
1.50
1.41
1.40
1.16
^Abbreviations are defined  in Table 3.
                                     38

-------
                        4.0  REQUIRED SLUDGE DILUTIONS

          For each sewerage authority, the maximum dilution required to meet
WQC for metals (Table 11) or the toxicfty based limiting permissible
concentration of sludge (Table 15) was calculated*  For each authority, the
results of these two dilution calculations were compared to determine the
maximum dilution that be will required in order to set sludge disposal rates.
This maximum required dilution is listed in Table 17 along with the parameter
dictating the dilution.
          The required dilution that was determined in    EPA   ,  (1992d)  is
tlso listed in Table 17 for comparison.  For six of the nine authorities,  the
maximum required dilution decreased from the required dilution determined
from historical data (  EPA   , 1992d).  For these authorities, the dumping
rate can be expected to increase.  Howtver, for most of these authorities the
increase will be no more than a factor 2 or 3.  For two authorities (LRSA and
BCUA), the required dilution increased as a result of the August  1988
characterization study thus dumping rates will decrease from those calculated
in   EPA    (1992d).  No change in the dilution required to meet  water
quality criteria was found for MCUA,  The largest impact from the newly
determined required dilutions will be realized by NYCDEP (8-fold  decrease),
WCOEF (4-fold decrease), and USA (4-fold increase).

                               5.0  DISCUSSION

          One objective of this sludge characterization was to evaluate the
representativeness and accuracy of the sludge characteristics  data submitted
to EPA by the New York and New Jersey municipal sewerage treatment
authorities in their applications to dispose sludge at the 106-Mile Site.
The second objective was to use the most recent sludge data to establish  the
amount of sludge dilution required to meet water quality criteria 4 h after
disposal.  This required dilution is one of the primary coefficients used to
establish dumping rates (   EPA  , 1992d).  These results are to  be used  to
determine sludge dumping rates that will be included in any permits Issued
for sludge disposal at the 106-Mile Site.
                                      39

-------
TABLE 17.  DILUTIONS REQUIRED TO MEET WATER QUALITY CRITERIA OR LIMITING
           PERMISSIBLE CONCENTRATIONS FOR WHOLE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE SITE.
           RESULTS ARE BASED ON THE SLUDGE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS FROM
           SAMPLES COLLECTED IN AUGUST 1988 FROM THE NINE MUNICIPALITIES
           APPLYING FOR PERMITS TO DISCHARGE SEWAGE SLUDGE AT THE 106-MILE
           SITE.
Authority a
PVSC
MCUA
BCUA
LRSA
RVSA
JMEUC
NYCDEP
NCDPW
WCDEF
Required
Dilutionb
58,500
23,450
80,000
166,700
11,360
12,410
13,100
10,870
19,310
Test
Mysdopsis bahia
Cu
Hgc
Mysdopsis bahia
Mysdopsis bahia
Cu
Cu
Mysdopsis bahia
Cu
Dilution in
Battelle (1988d)
100,000
21,100
58,800
50,000
91,000
20,000
107,600
28,830
69,700
aAbbreviations are defined in Table 3.

bDilution based on the test requiring the greatest amount of dilution to
 meet water quality criteria.

    concentration was not consistent with historical  data.
                                      40

-------
      The sludge characteristics determined In August 1988 are generally
comparable to those submitted to EPA by the nine sewerage authorities in the
form of permit applications and quarterly monitoring reports.  The physical
characteristics of the sludge from each authority were found to be similar to
those reported by the authorities.  In August 1988, organic compounds were
found at notably low concentrations (relative to the method detection limits
for the EPA methods used for the analysis).  Metal concentrations in August
1988 were generally lower than mean concentrations calculated from the
characteristics data available over the previous 2 years.  Although not
discussed in detail in this report, the metal concentration data available
prior to August 1988 are highly variable (EPA. 1989).  This longer term
variability may represent changes in sludge characteristics that occur during
normal plant operations, results from lower inputs to the treatment plants, or
results from analytical imprecision and inaccuracies in the laboratory data.
Regardless of the cause, the August 1988 characterization data will serve as a
baseline against which sludge variability and changes in characteristics can
be determined over the next several years.
      As previously found, the amount of sludge dilution that is required for
each authority to meet regulatory guidelines is different.  The basis for
setting the required dilution also varies from authority to authority.  From
the August 1988 data, metal concentrations establish the required dilution for
sludge from MCUA, BCUA, JMEUC, NYCDEP, and WCDEF.  Toxicity-based dilutions
drive the disposal rates for the other treatment authorities.

                                6.0 REFERENCES

ASTM.  1985.  Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
      Wastewater.  American Public Health Association. 16th edition,
      Washington, DC.

EPA.  1985,  Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to
      Freshwater and Marine Organisms, 3rd Edition, (EPA/600/4-85-013).

EPA.  1986.  Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste.  U.S.
      Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and
      Emergency Responses, SW 846, 3rd Edition, Washington, DC.

EPA.  1987.  Bioassay Procedures for the Ocean Disposal Permit Program,
      March 1987.  (EPA/600/9-78-010).

EPA.  1988a.  Permittee Monitoring Requirements: 106-Mile Deepwater
      Municipal Sludge  Site Monitoring Program.  Environmental
      Protection Agency Oceans and Coastal Protection Division (formerly
      OMEP), Washington, DC.

EPA.  1988b.  Operating Program for the  106-Mile Site, Sewage Sludge
      Characterization  Study.  Work/Quality Assurance Project Plan for
      WA  l-lll, Amendment  1.  Environmental Protection Agency Oceans and
      Coastal Protection Division  (formerly OMEP),  Washington, DC.
                                       41

-------
EPA.  1989.  Summary of Characteristics of Municipal Sludges Dumped at the
      106-Mile Site.  Environmental Protection Agency Oceans and Coastal
      Protection Division (formerly OMEP), Washington, DC.

EPA.  1992a.  Final Draft Monitoring Man for the 106-Mile Deepwater
      Municipal Sludge Site.  Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 842-
      S-92-009.

EPA.  1992b.  Final Draft Implementation Plan for the 106-Mile Deepwater
      Municipal Sludge Site Monitoring Program.  Environmental
      Protection Agency. EPA 842-S-92-010.

EPA.  1992c.  Final Report for Nearfield Monitoring of Sludge Plumes at
      the 106-Mile Deepwater Municipal Sludge Site; Results of a Survey
      Conducted August 31 through September 5, 1987.  Environmental
      Protection Agency.  EPA 842-S-92-004.

EPA.  1992d.  Determination of Sludge Dumping Rates for the 106-Mile
      Site.  Environmental Protection Agency.  EPA 842-S-92-006.

Head, K.H,  1980.  Soil classification and compaction tests.  In; Manual
      of Soil Laboratory Testing, Vol 1.  Pentech Press, Plymouth,
      England.

Miller, D.C., M, Marcy, W. Berry, C. Deacutis, S. Lussier, A. Kuhn, M.
      Heber, S. Schimmel, and E. Jackim.  In press.  The acute toxicity
      of sewage sludge to marine fish, mysids, and copepods.  In: D.A.
      Wolfe and T.P". O'Conner (eds.), Wastes in Coastal Marine
      Environments. Robert Krieger Pub. Co. Malabar, FL.

Santoro, E.D. and J.J. Fikslin.  1987.  Chemical and lexicological
      Characteristics of Sewage Sludge Ocean Dumped in New York Bight.
      Mar. Poll. Bull. 18(7):3S4-399.
                                      42

-------
                        APPENDIX A
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

-------
          Quality control results for the semi volatile organic priority
pollutants are listed in the following tables.  Table A-l lists lower limits
of detection and practical limits of quantification for the target analytes.
Table A-2 presents the method blanks. Table A-3 lists surrogate spike
recoveries, and Table A-4 details the natrix spike recoveries.
          Recoveries of semi volatile surrogate compounds were outside of the
limits specified in EPA (1986) for 2,4,6 tribromophenol for several samples
(MCUA, Replicates 1 and 2; JMEUC. Replicates 1 and 2).  In addition, for the
sample from NCDPW no semi volatile surrogate compounds were found, indicating
that the spike solution was inadvertently left out during extract
preparation.
          Generally, precision of analysis was acceptable, as were the matrix
spike recoveries.  High recoveries were experienced for acenaphthene for one
sample {PVSC, matrix spike) and pentachlorophenol (PVSC, matrix spike
duplicate).  Low recoveries were obtained for phenol, 4-nitrophenol and 2,4-
dinitrotoluene in these samples.

EPA, 1986.  Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Haste.  U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Responses,
          SW 846 3»"d Edition, Washington, DC.
                                     A-l

-------
TABLE A-l.     REPORTING LIMITS FOR SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC PRIORITY POLLUTANTS
               ANALYZED BY NETHOD 8270.
Compound
Phenol
8is(2-Chloroethy1)ether
2-Chlorophenol
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
Benzyl alcohol
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
2-Mtthyl phenol
Bis(2-Chloroisopropy1) ether
4-Methyl phenol
N-Nitroso-Di-N-propylamine
Hexachloroethane
Nitrobenzene
Isophorone
2-N1trophenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Benzole acid
Si s (2-Ch1oroethoxy)methant
2,4-Dichlorophenol
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
4-Chloroaniline
Hexachl orobutadi ene
4-Chloro-3-methyl phenol
2-Methylnaphthalene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
2,4,6-THchlorophenol
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2-Ch 1 oronaphthal ene
2-Nitroaniline
Dimethyl phthalate
Acenaphthylene
3-Nitroanilint
Acenaphthene
2,4-Dinitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
Oibenzofuran
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Diethylphthalate
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Fluorene
4-Nitroaniline
Reporting
Limit
MD
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
2,500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
2,500
500
2,500
500
500
2,500
500
2,500
2,500
500
500
500
500
500
500
2,500
Lower Limit
of Detection
G*/L)
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20 .
20
20
100
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
100
20
100
20
20
100
20
100
100
20
20
20
20
20
20
100
                                     A-2

-------
TABLE A-l. (Continued)
     4,6-D!nitro-2-methy1phenol             2,500                 100
     N-Nitrosodiphenylamine                   500                  20
     4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether               500                  20
     Hexachlorobenzene                        500                  20
     Pentachlorophenol                      2,500                 100
     Phenanthrene                             500                  20
     Anthracene                               500                  20
     Di-n-butylphthalate                      500                  20
     Fluoranthene                             500                  20
     Pyrene                                   500                  20
     Butyl  benzyl phthalate                   500                  20
     S.S'-Oichlorobenzidine                 1,000                  40
     Benzo(a)anthracene                       500                  20
     Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phtha1ate               500                  20
     Chrysene                                 500                  20
     Di-n-oetyl phthalate                     500                  20
     Benzo(b)f1u§ranthene                     500                  20
     Benzojkjflyoranthene                     500                  20
     8enzo(a)pyrene                           500                  20
     Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene                   500                  20
     Dibenzi(a,h)anthracene                   500                  20
     Benzo(g,h,i)perylene                     500                  20
                                     A-3

-------
TABLE A-2. SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND SURROGATE RECOVERIES FOR SEMI-VOLATILE
           (METHOD 8270) ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN METHOD BLANKS.
Surrogate Recoveries (V)
Compound
All target analytes
dS-Nitrobenzene
2-Fluorobiphenyl
d!4-p-terphenyl
d5-Phenol
2-Fluorophenol
2,4, 6-Tri bromophenol
Concentration HB-1
NDa
37
43
62
41
34
27
HB-2
-
81
62
174
67
64
230
MB-3
-
63
51
167
53
46
245
aNot detected at levels provided in the Reporting Limit Table (Table A-l).
                                     A-4

-------
     TABLE A~3.  SUNW» OF SURROGATE RECOVERIES (%) RR  SMVOLATILE ORGANIC OMOJNDS IN SOME SLUDGE USING KTHOO 8270.  RESULTS OF EMM
                 ANALYTICAL REPLICATE ARE INCLUDED.


Compound
d5-Nitrobenzene
2-Fluorobiphenyl
dl4-p-Terphenyl
d6- Phenol
2-Fluorophenol
2,4,6-TribrcniDphenol


tCDEF
33
42
76
37
30
47
*
MOUA
NCDFW 1 2 1
0* 62 73 42
Oa 182 148 42
Oa 30
Oa 40
Oa 26
Oa - - 56
Authority
PVSC
2
43
42
25
45
28
57
3
43
42
23
44
28
60
LRSA
I
73
76
71
72
62
57
2
79
84
108
71
65
122
RVSA
1
64
77
79
66
49
83
2
67
73
53
69
52
159
KYTDEP
1
51
50
97
45
38
142
2
58
58
156
58
46
188
JMEUC
1
70
78
158
75
55
261
2
67
67
148
63
53
265
1
67
68
139
62
54
228
BCUA
2
68
72
177
65
58
186
3
60
74
176
56
52
144
*»   PVSC  -  Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners.
     MCUA  =  Middlesex County Utilities Authority.
     BCUA  *  Bergen County Utilities Authority.
     LRSA  =  Linden-Rose! le Sewerage Authority.
     RVSA  =  Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority.
     JCUC =  Joint Meeting of Essex and Union Counties.
     NYCDEP=  Conposite of the New York  City Department of Environmental  Protection facilities.
     NCDPW =  Nassau County Department of Public Works.
     WCDEF =  Westchester County Department of Environmental Facilities.
     ^Surrogate spike not added to sanple.

-------
TABLE A-4. RECOVERIES AND ANALYTICAL PRECISION FOR MATRIX SPIKE  (MS) AND
           MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATES (USD)  FOR SEMIVOUTILE (METHOD 8270)
           ORGANIC COMPOUNDS AND ASSOCIATED ANALYTICAL SURROGATE RECOVERIES
           FROM PASSAIC VALLEY SEWAGE SLUDGE.
Matrix Spike
Recoveries (%)
Compound
Phenol
2-Chlorophenol
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
n-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
1,2, 4-Tri chl orobenzene
4-Chl0ro-3-methyl phenol
Acenaphthene
4-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Pentachlorophenol
Pyrene
dS-Nltrobenzene
2-Fluorobiphenyl
d!4-p-Terphenyl
dS-Phenol
2-Fluorophenol
MS
84
75
69
ii
81
90
240
15
ND
120
63
-
-
-
-
-
MSD
ND
80
73
93
84
95
94
ND
100
200
61
-
-
-
•
-
Precision of
Duplicate
Recovery
(RPD)
-
3.2
2.8
1.1
1.7
2.7
44
-
-
25
1.6
-
-
-
-
-
Recoveries of
Surrogate (%)
MS MSD
•• «
«* mi
_
.
-
-
-
.
-
•* —
-
45 48
41 45
29 28
46 15
30 33
RPD = Relative percent diference.
                                     A-6

-------
                  APPENDIX B
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR PCB AND PESTICIDES

-------
          Quality control results for the analysis of PCB and pesticides are
reported in this appendix.  Table B-l reports the lower limits of detection
and practical quantification limits; Table B-2 presents the method blanks;
Table B-3 lists surrogate spike recoveries; and Table 8-4 details the matrix
spike recoveries.
                                     B-l

-------
TABLE B-l.     REPORTING LIMITS FOR PCS/PESTICIDE PRIORITY POLLUTANTS
               ANALYZED BY METHOD 8080.
     Compound
                                           Reporting
                                             Li«U
                  Lower limit
                 of Detection
PCB/PESTICIDES

     Aldrin
     alpha-BHC
     beta-BHC
     delta-BHC
     gararaa-BHC (Lindane)
     Chlordane
     4,4'-DDD
     4,4'-DDE
     4,4'-DDT
     Dieldrin
     Endosulfan I
     Endosulfan II
     Endosulfan Sulfate
     Endrin
     Endrin aldehyde
     Heptachlor
     Heptaehlor epoxide
     Methoxychlor
     Toxaphene
     PCB-1016
     PCB-1221
     PCB-1231
     PCB-1242
     PCB-1248
     PCB-1254
     PCS-1260
 25
 25
 25
 25
250
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
 25
250
250
250
250
250
250
250
250
 1
 1
 1
 1
10
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
                                     B-2

-------
TABLE B-2.     SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND SURROGATE RECOVERIES FOR PCB/PESTICIDES
               (METHOD B080) IN EQUIPMENT AND METHOD BLANKS.
Location
Westchester
Nassau
SAIC
SAIC
SAIC
Sample
Type
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Method Blank
Reagent Blank 1
Reagent Blank 2
Concentration
to/0
PCB Pesticides
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Surrogate*
Recovery (%)
95
96
96
87
91
ND = Not Detected( see Reporting Limit Table (B-l) for detection limits.

aDibutyl chlorendate
                                      B-3

-------
  TABLE B-3.   SUMMARY OF SURROGATE RECOVERIES OF DIBUTYL CHLOREHDATE FOR
               PCB/PESTICIDES IN SEWAGE SLUDGE USING METHOD 8080.
                  Authority                          Recovery (%)

                  WCDEF                                  64
                  NCDPW                                  82
                  MCUA                                  122
                  PVSC (Rep 1)                           77
                  PVSC (Rep 2)                           91
                  PVSC (Rep 3)                           79
                  LRSA                                  233
                  RVSA                                   43
                  NYCDEP (Ward Is.)                      68
                  JMEUC                                 111
                  BCUA (Rep 1)                           86
                  BCUA (Rep 2)                           86
                  BCUA (Rep 3)                           87

See Table A-3 for defination of abbreviations.
                                     B-4

-------
TABLE B-4.        SUWARY OF RESULTS FOR MATRIX SPIKE (HS)  AND MATRIX  SPIKE
                  DUPLICATE (MSD)  FOR PCS/PESTICIDES  USING  METHOD 8080.
                              Recovery (%)
       Compound              MS       MSD             RPD  (%)
gamma-BBC
Heptachlor
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
4, 4 '-DDT
113
104
132
91
88
71
115
106
137
95
91
73
2.1
2.1
3.7
3.9
4.4
2.5
       Oibutyl  chlorendatea   80       82                1.2
^Surrogate spike.
                                     B-5

-------
             APPENDIX C
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR PHENOLS

-------
          Quality control results for the analysis of phenols are reported in
this appendix.  Table C-l reports the lower limits of detection and practical
quantification limits,' Table C-2 presents the method blanks; Table C-3 lists
surrogate spike recoveries; and Table C-4 details the matrix spike
recoveries.  With the exception of low recoveries on 2-fluorophenol for
Replicate 1 of the WCDEF sample and 2,4,6-tribromophenol for Replicate 3 of
PVSC, these appear acceptable.

WCDEF«Westchester County Department of Environmental Facilities.
                                     C-l

-------
TAILE C-l.     REPORTING LIMITS FOR PHENOL ORGANIC PRIORITY POLLUTANTS
               ANALYZED BY METHOD 8040.
                                           Reporting           Lower Limit
                                             Limit             of Detection
     Compound                                Gm/L)              (09/L)
     Phenol                                   1000                  40
     2-Chlorophenol                           3000                 120
     2-Nitrophenol                            4000                 160
     2, 4-Dimethyl phenol                       3000                 120
     2,4-Dichlorophenol                       3000                 120
     4-Chloro-3-methy1 phenol                  4000                 160
     2,4,6-Trichlorophenol                    4000                 240
     2,4-Dinitrophenol                        6000                 520
     4-Nitrophenol                           28000                1120
     2-Methy1-4,6-dinitrophenol              16000                 640
     Pentachlorophenol                        7000                 280
                                     C-2

-------
TABLE C-2.  SIWARY OF RESULTS FOR PHENOLS (METHOD 8040)  IN EQUIPMENT/METHOD
            BLANKS.
Location
SAIC
SAIC
SAIC
WCDEF
NCDPW
Sample
Method Blank 1
Reagent Blank 1
Reagent Blank 3
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Phenol
(*g/i)
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
Surrogate
2-Fluorophenol
18
28
77
38
30
Recovery (*)
2,4,6-TribroiDOphenol
53
58
137
47
34
ND=None detected at levels provided in the Reporting Limit  Table (Table C-l).
                                     C-3

-------
TABLE C-3. SURROGATE RECOVERIES FOR PHENOL IN SEWAGE SLUDGE USING METHOD
           8040.
Authority*
WCDEF
WCDEF
NCDPW
NCDPD
MCUA
PVSC
PVSC
PVSC
LRSA
RVSA
NYCDEP (Ward Is.)
JMEUC
BCUA
BCUA
BCUA
Replicate
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
Surrogate
2-Fluorophenol
14
27
23
23
36
42
26
23
39
35
37
43
34
30
37
Recovery (%)
2,4, 6-Tr t bromophenol
27
49
47
45
75
19
26
10
65
87
89
67
75
76
82
    Table A-3 for definition of abbreviations.
                                    C-4

-------
TABLE C-4.    SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR MATRIX SPIKE (MS) AND MATRIX SPIKE
              DUPLICATE (MSD) FOR PHENOLS USING METHOD 8040.
       Compound
Recovery (%)

MS       MSD
             Precision of
             Duplicate
             Recovery
              (RPD)
Phenol
2-Ch1orophenol
4-Chloro-3-methyphenol
4-Nitrophenol
Pentachlorphenol
46
70
40
22
108
77
98
42
3
30
51
33
5
155
113
       2-Fluorophenol            23
       2,4,6 - Tribromophenol    10
37
18
                           23
                           29
RPD « Relative percent diference.
                                    C-5

-------
            APPENDIX D



QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR METALS

-------
          Quality control results for the analysis of metals are reported in
this appendix.  Table 0-1 reports the lower limits of detection and the
method reporting limit.  Table 0-2 presents the method blanks.  Table 0-3
lists the matrix spike recoveries and analytical precision.  Table D-4
compares the Pb analysis usin§ Inductively Coupled Plasma (1CP) and flame
atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS) analysis methods.
                                      0-1

-------
TABLE D-l.  AVERAGE SAMPLE DETECTION AND REPORTING LIMITS FOR METALS MEASURED
            IN SEWAGE SLUDGES FROM THE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY AREA, AUGUST 1988.
   Element (Method)
                          Sample Detection
                              Li nit
Method Reporting
     Linit*
Cadmium
Copper
Lead f!CP)
Lead (flame)
Mercury
2.3
75
50
200
O.OS6
25
830
550
NR
28
NR « Not reported.

*The sample detection limit is based upon an initial sample volume
of 0.1 liters and a final digestate volume of 0.1 liters.  Actual sample
reporting limits may increase due to further sample dilutions which
must be made in order to place samples of high concentrations within the
linear range of the instruments.
                                     D-2

-------
TABLE D-2. SUMMARY OF METHOD BUNKS FOR METAL DETERMINATIONS  IN  SLUDGES
           SAMPLED FROM THE NEW YORK-NEW JERSEY AREA IN AUGUST 19S8.
Method
Blank 	
f Cadsriim
1 NO
2 ND
3 ND
4 NO
Metal (ji

Copper
ND
NO
ND
ND
fl/U

Lead
ND
ND
ND
ND


Mercury
ND
ND
ND
2.5
ND=Not detected at concentrations  greater than reported In Table D-l
                                     D-3

-------
TABLE 0-3.  RECOVERIES OF METALS FOR A NATRIX SPIKE (MS) AHD MATRIX SPIKE
            DUPICATE (MSD) ADDED TO SEWAGE SLUDGE FROM PASSAIC VALLEY AND
                   COUNTY.
    Metal
  Recovery (%)
                         MS
            MSD
                Precision of
                 Duplicate
                 Recovery
                  (RPO)
Passaic Valley

    Cadmi urn
    Copper
    Lead
    Mercury

Bergen County

    Cadmium
    Copper
    Lead
    Mercury
 80
 78
 77
124
 95
 93
 SO
107
 78
 78
 77
124
 95
112
 90
107
2.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.0
8.0
0.0
RPD « Relative percent diference.
                                     D-4

-------
 TABLE D-4.  COMPARISON OF LEAD RESULTS IN SEWAGE SLUDGE DIGESTATES USING
             INDUCTIVELY COUPLE PLASMA (ICP) AND FLAME ATOMIC ABSORPTION
             (FAAS) ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES,
Authority8
HCDEF
NCDPW
PVSC
PVSC
PVSC
PVSC
PVSC
LRSA
RVSA
BCUA
BCUA
BCUA
BCUA
BCUA
NYCDEP (Ward Is.)
MCUA
JMEUC
Sample
Designation


Rep 1
Rep 2
Rep 3
MS
MSD


Rep 1
Rep 2
Rep 3
MS
MSD



ICP
9200
3900
50000
55000
53000
130000
130000
20000
2600
4000
3700
4200
12000
13000
13000
6300
9100
FAAS
to/0
9500
3700
39000
48000
52000
130000
130000
9800
2200
4700
4200
5100
14000
14000
12000
7400
11000
RPD
3
5
25
14
2
0
0
2
17
16
13
19
15
7
8
16
19
RPD * Relative percent diference.

MS = Matrix spike,

MSD » Matrix spike duplicate.

aSee Table A-3 for definition of abbreviations.
                                     D-5

-------
                      APPENDIX E
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS FOR PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION

-------
          Table E-l presents the equipment blanks for the determination  of
the sludge physical properties of the sludge.
                                     E-l

-------
      TABLE E-l.  SUMMARY OF EQUIPMENT BUNKS FOR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES.
Authority 3
WCOEF
NCDPW
MCUA
LRUA
RVUA
Total Non-filterable
Residue Residue
(ag/L) (t*g/L)
<10 <4
<10 <4
<10 <4
20 <4
80 <4
Set tl cable
Hatter
(»9/0
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
Specific
Gravity
1.000
1.000
.999
.997
1.000
a$ee Table A«3 for definition of abbreviations.
                                     E-2

-------
                            APPENDIX F
SUMMARY RESULTS FOR TOXICOLOGY TESTS CONDUCTED OH THE WHOLE SLUDGE

-------
          Thest tables summarize the conditions of the toxicology tests
conducted on the whole sludges.  The test conditions, organism history and
acclimation, water quality parameters, significant test deviations and
observations, and final results are included within each summary.  Test
summaries for Mysidopsis bahia for each authority are included in Tables F-l
through F-9.  Test summaries for Henidia beryllina are included for each
authority in Tables F-10 through F-18,
                                     F-l

-------
       TABLE F-l.  WESTCHESTER COUHTY (001) MYSIO TOXICITY TEST REPORT
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J, Williams

I*      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   001-1009/Yonkers (Hestchester County)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC-08-0I-88/1430
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-02-88/1000
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:   Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  dark brown/black "pudding-like"  consistency
   Sample Modifications:  1° stock*5% of sludge in seawater.   Salinity
                          adjusted to 30°/oo with seawater brine.   pH
                          adjusted to 7.9 with ION NaOH

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay stawater
   Dilution Hater Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,   20 im filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbons  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Lin-ionized Ammonias  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCB:  NO (<2.5 pg/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Mysid shrimp
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Mysidopsis bahia
   Test Organism Source:  Battelle Ocean Sciences
   Test Organism Age:  approximately 24 h at time of test start
   Test Organism Size:  juvenile, lengths not measured
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes, hatched at 30°/oo
                                                 salinity
       If Yes, Acclimation period:  24 h (hatching period)
                                     F-2

-------
TABLE F-l. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systeu (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay, seawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia sajina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's       Organochlorine Pesticides
                Concentration!  ND(<1.0 ppm)    NO (<4.0 ppb]
        Fed During Test (Yes, No);  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rate:  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to each chamber
                               at least oncedaily

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted Byi  Russ Winchell/Battelle
   Test End Point*.  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through,  Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleablt solids hampered direct
                       observation of mysids
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.31%, O.i2%, 1.25%, 2.5%, 5.0%
                                 whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1145/08-23-88
   Test Completion:  1030/08-27-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C)t 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (°/oo):3D * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  90x50 mm glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 mL
   Test Solution Volume:  200 mL
   Number of Concentrations  (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfitt:  LC50 13.7 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 12.8-14.6 mg/L
                                     F-3

-------
TABLE F-l.  (Continued)
        Deviations froa Work/QA Plan

    1.  Sample storage time (at 4°C) was 21 days because initial test
        conducted with Sample 001 was invalid (control mortality >10%).   The
        sample was received on 08-02-88 and retested on 08-23-88.

    2.  All test chambers were aerated from the time of test initiation
        because previous testing with this and other samples demonstrated
        that dissolved oxygen concentration dropped to near 40% of saturation
        within an 8-10 h period.

    3.  The number of test organisms per chamber was not counted within  two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity of the sample in the
        chambers prevented direct observation of test organisms.

    4.  Mysids were fed at least once daily.
                                     F-4

-------
TABLE F-l. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
{% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
Water Quality Data Sunmary
Range Mean s
19.0 - 21.2 19.9 0.
29.0 - 30.5 30.0 0.
6.0 - 7.2 6.8 0.
7.81- 8.23 8.02 0.
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms Observed
24 h 48 h 72 h
000
mm * "*»
mm tm *•
10 20
20 20 20
68
34
28
21

Dead*
96 h
0
5
1
11
20
20
n
20
14
20
10



            Number of test organisms at time of test start - 20.

LC50 Value:  1.17% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  0.88-1.56% sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of organisms at 24 h,  48 h,  and 72  h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods,  only organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.   When it was suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions were decanted  to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96 h all surviving organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approval:
Date: Qc^
                                                               g
                                     F-5

-------
          TABLE F-2.   NASSAU COUNTY (002)  MYS1D TOXICITY TEST REPORT
Testing Laboratory:
Battelle Ocean Sciences
397 Washington Street
Duxbury, MA  02332
(617) 934-0571
Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test--Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   002-2009/Nassau County
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC-08-02-88 (Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-03-88/1000
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4«C
   Sample Characterization:  dark brown/black "pudding-like" consistency
   Sample Modifications:  5% dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted
                          to 290/00, pH adjusted to 7.95 w/250 jA. ION NaOH.

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 IISR filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  NO (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 Ǥ/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCI:  ND (<2.5 /tg/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Mysid shrimp
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Hvsidopsis bahia
   Test Organism Source:  MultiAqua Culture Systems, Amagensett, NY 08-03-88
   Test Organism Age:  approximately 72 h at time of test start
   Test Organism Sizes  juvenile, not measured
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes, received at 29.5Q/oo
                                                 salinity, tested at 30°/oo
       If Yes, Acclimation period:  24 h
                                     F-6

-------
TABLE F-2. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systai (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay, seawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type;  Artearia salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis(Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCS's       Organochlorine Pesticides
                Concentration?  ND (<1.0 ppm)    NO (<1.0 ppb)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rate:  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to each chamber
                               at least once daily

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed;  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Russ Winchell/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of mysids
   nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.31%, Q.62%, 1.25%, 2,5%, 5.0%
                                 whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1700/08-04-88
   Test Completion:  1425/08-08-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (0/00):30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light  Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Types  50x50 m glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 mL
   Test Solution Volume:  200 mL
   Number of Concentrations  (including control(s)):  &
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 20 mg/L, not calculable by
                                            Spearwan-Karber method within
                                            dosing range tested.
                                      F-7

-------
TABLE F-2.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations froa Hork/QA Plan

    1.  Test chambers were aerated beginning approximately 10 hours after
        test initiation because dissolved oxygen was observed to be dropping
        to near 40% saturation.  A decision was made not to wait until
        solutions dropped below 40% saturation as specified in the Work/QA
        Plan.

    2.  Mysids were fed at least once daily.

    3.  The number of test organisms per chamber was not counted within two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity of the sample in the
        chambers prevented direct observation of test organisms.

    4.  Adjustment rates for temperature during the acclimation period  were
        exceeded because organisms were shipped during hot weather resulting
        in elevated temperature.  The acclimation period was not extended in
        this case because of the specification for minimizing sample holding
        time.
                                     F-8

-------
TABLE F-2. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (°/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludae)
Seawater Control
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
Hater Quality Data Stannary
Rancre Mean s
19.2 - 21.7 20.1 0.
29.5 - 30.5 30.0 0.
5.6 - 7.3 6.5 0.
7.93- 8.10 8.00 0.
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms Observed
24 h 48 h 72 h
022
*• MM
1 10
10 20

81
26
53
05

Dead*
96 h
2
3
7
14
19
20
n
20
12
20
8




             Number of test organisms  at  time of test start - 20.

LC50 Value:  0.92% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  0.72-1.16% sludge
Methods  Trimmed Spearman-Karber with Abbott's Correction for control
         mortality.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of organisms at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods, only organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.   When it was suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions were decanted  to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96 h all surviving organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approval;J
-—;   Date: £
                                     F-9

-------
        TABLE F-3.  MIDDLESEX COUNTY (003) MYSID TOXIC1TY TEST REPORT
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample;   003-3009/Middlesex County
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC-08-18-88 (Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-19-88/1000
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material  Storage Location:   Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  very liquid—grey/black
   Sample Modifications:  10% dilution as 1* stock.  Salinity
                          adjusted  to 30°/oo,  pH
                          adjusted  to 7.96 using 50 itl in ION NaOH

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Mater Character iz at ion

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 /mi filtered
             If filtered. Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  NO (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 rag/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (<0,005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.2S ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCS:  ND (<2.5 pq/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test System

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Mysid shrimp
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Mysidopsis bahia
   Test Organism Source:  Battelle  Ocean Sciences
   Test Organism Age:  approximately 24 h
   Test Organism Size:  juvenile, not measured
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes, hatched at  30°/oo
                                                 salinity
       If Yes, Acclimation period:   24 h (hatching period)
                                     F-10

-------
TABLE F-3. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Ouxbury Bay, seawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia sailna nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No);Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's       Organochlorine Pesticides
                Concentrations  NO (<1.0 ppm)    NO (<1.0 ppb)
        Fed During Test (Yes, NO)J  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rate:  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to each chamber
                               at least once daily

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater ani Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description);  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Russ Hinchell/Batttlle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through,  Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of mysids
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.62%, 1.2S%, 2.5%, 5.0%
                                 10,00% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1105/08-23-88
   Test Completion:  1000/08-27-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo):30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  90x50 ram glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 fflL
   Test Solution Volume:  200 mL
   Number of Concentrations  (including control($)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodiura dodecyl sulfate*.  LC50 13.7 rog/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 12.8-14.6 mg/L
                                     F-ll

-------
TABLE F-3.  (Continued)
V,      Deviations froa Work/QA Plan

    1.  Sample storage time (at 48C) was approximately 96 h at 4°C.

    2.  All test chambers were aerated from the time of test initiation
        because previous testing with other sludge samples demonstrated that
        dissolved oxygen concentration dropped to near 40% of saturation
        within an 8-10 h period.

    3.  Dissolved oxygen dropped below 40% of saturation in one test chamber
        (highest test concentration).  Air flow had stopped to this single
        chamber.  In the other replicate of this treatmean the dissolved
        oxygen concentration remained acceptable.  Air flow was restarted
        (valve adjustment) when restricted flow was observed. 100% mortality
        was observed in both replicates of this treatment, thus it appears
        that this did not affect the test results.

   4.   The number of test organisms per chamber was not counted within two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity of the sample in the
        chambers prevented direct observation of test organisms.

   5.   Mysids were fed at least once daily*
                                     F-12

-------

-------
TABLE F-3. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results  (Raw data attached)
Water Quality Data Summary
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (°/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludge)
Seawater Control
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
10.00
Range Mean
18.9 - 21.5 19.8
29.0 - 30.0 29.8
*2.2 - 7.2 6.4
7.86- 8.12 7.92
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms
24 h 48 h
0 0
10
S R
0.80 23
0.30 16
1.16 23
0.15 12

Observed Dead**
72 h 96 h
0 0
1
6
12
16
20 20
             Number of test  organisms  at  time of test start  * 20.

LC50 Value:  5.95% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  5.16-6,85% sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber

VII.  Comments:
      *Aeration in one chamber (24 h observation)  restricted.   Readjusted
       flow.

      **Counts of organisms at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods, only organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.  When it was suspected that all organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions were decanted to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96 h all surviving organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approval:.
Date:
                                     F-13

-------
         TABLE F-4.  PASSA1C VALLEY (004) MYSID TOXICITY TEST REPORT


Testing Laboratory!              Bittelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   004-4009/Passaic Valley County)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC-08-G4-88 (Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-05-88/1024
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:   Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4«C
   Sample Characterization;  dark black slurry
   Sample Modifications:  2% dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted to
                          290/00, pH adusted to 7.9 with 450 ftl ION NaOH


II.     Toxieity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 ftm filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  HD (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  NO (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCB:  NO (<2.l /*g/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systeo

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Mysid shrimp
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Mysidopsis bahia
   Test Organism Source:  MultiAquaculture Systems, Amagansett, NY/08-03-
   Test Organism Age:  approximately 96 h
   Test Organism Sizej  juvenile, not measured
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions  (Yes, No):  Yes
       If Yes, Acclimation period:   48 h
                                     F-14

-------
TABLE F-4. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—test System (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method?  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay, seawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type:  Artemis salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's       Oroanochlorine Pesticides
                Concentrations  KD (<1.0 ppm)    ND (<1.0 ppb)
        Fed During Test (Yes, Ho):  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rate:  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to each chamber
                               at least once dally

IV*     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description);  No, definitive test initiated
                                               on day of sample arrival.
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Russ WincheU/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal)}  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of raysids
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.03%, 0.06%, 0.12%, 0.25%,
                                 0.50% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1415/08-05-88
   Test Completion:  1400/08-09-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (6C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)s>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo):30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  90x50 mm glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 ml
   Test Solution Volume:  200 ml
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 20 mg/Lf not calculable by
                                            Spearman-Karber method within
                                            dosing range tested.
                                     F-15

-------
TABLE F-4.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations froa Kork/QA Plan

    1.  All test chambers were aerated from the time of test initiation
        because previous testing with other samples demonstrated that
        dissolved oxygen concentration dropped to near 40% of saturation
        within an 8-10 h period.

    2.  Dissolved oxygen dropped below 40% of saturation in one test chamber
        (highest treatment).  Air flow had diminished in a single chamber.
        In the other replicate of this treatment, the dissolved oxygen
        concentration remained >40% saturation.  Air flow was restarted
        (valve adjustment) when flow was observed to be restricted.   100%
        mortality was observed in both replicates of this treatment,  thus it
        appears that this did not affect the test results.

    3.  The number of test organisms per chamber was not counted within two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity of the sample in  the
        chambers prevented direct observation of test organisms.

    4.  Mysids were fed at least once daily.
                                    F-16

-------
TABLE F-4. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)

Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH
•
Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludge)
Seawater Control
0.03
0.06
0.12
0.25
0.50
Hater Quality Data Summary

Ranee Mean s
18.5 - 20.9 20.1 0.
29.5 - 31.0 30.5 0.
*2.8 - 7.2 6.4 0.
7.87- 8.06 7.98 0.
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms Observed
24 h 48 h 72 h
1 1 1
1 1 1
74
55
95
06

Dead**
96 h
1
1
1
4
18
20

n
20
16
21
12



             Number of test organisms at time of test start - 20.

LC50 Value:  0.17% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  0.14-0.19%  sludge
Method: 'Trimmed Spearman-Karber with  Abbott's  Correction  for control
         mortality.

VII.  Comments:

      *Aeration in one chamber (24h observation)  restricted.   Readjusted
       flow.

      "Counts of organisms at 24 h, 48 h,  and  72 h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At  these periods, only  organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.   When it  was  suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions  were decanted  to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96  h all surviving  organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approval :_j
Date:
                                     F-17

-------
         TABLE F-5.  LINDEN ROSELLE (DOS) MYSID TOXICITY TEST REPORT
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   005-5009/Linden Rosalie
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC-08-08-83 (Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Timt):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-09-88/0930
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions;  4°C
   Sample Characterization*,  dark ooze/odorous
   Sample Modifications:  3% dilution as 1® stock.  Salinity
                          adjusted to 30°/oo,  pH adusted to 7.9 ysing
                          200 ill of ION NaOH

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 im filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Hater Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Hater Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 fltg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (<0,005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  HD (<0.2S ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCB:  NO (<2.5 pg/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test System

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Mysid shrimp
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Hysidopste bah la
   Test Organism Source:  Battelle Ocean Sciences
   Test Organism Age:  approximately 24 h
   Test Organism Size:  juvenile, not measured
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No)f  Yes
       If Yes, Acclimation periods  24 h (hatching period)
                                     F-18

-------
TABLE F-5. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay, seawater, 3QQ/oo
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCi's       OrganochTorine Pesticides
                Concentration:  ND (<1.0 ppm)    NO (<1.0 ppb)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rate:  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to each chamber
                               at least once tfaily

IV,     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test plus two
                                               definitive tests
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Russ Hinchell/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered
direct
                       observation of mysids
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0*02%, 0.03%, 0.06%, 0.12%,
                            0.25% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1205/08-23-88
   Test Completion:  1100/08-27-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo):30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  90x50 mm glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 mL
   Test Solution Volume:  200 ml
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s))t  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 13.7 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 12.8-14.6 mg/L
                                     F-19

-------
TABLE F-5.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations froa Work/QA Plan

    1.  All test chambers were aerated from the time of test initiation
        because previous testing with this sample demonstrated that dissolved
        oxygen concentration dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10
        h period.

    2.  The number of test organisms per chamber was not counted within two
hours of test initiation because turbidity of the sample in the
chambers prevented direct observation of test organisms.

    3.  Mysids were fed at least once daily.
                                    F-20

-------
TABLE F-5. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)

Parameter
Temperature (*C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.12
0.25
Water Quality Data Summary

Range Mean s
19.0 - 21.4 19.8 0.
29.5 - 30.5 30.0 0.
6.8 - 7.2 7.0 0.
7.81- 8.01 7.95 0.
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms Observed
24 h 48 h 72 h
0 00
• • •
^ • ™
20
20 20
72
24
14
07

Dead*
96 h
0
0
0
11
20
20

n
21
14
21
11



             Number of test organisms at time of test start « 20.

LC50 Value:  0.06% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  0.05-0.07% sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of organisms at 24 h,  48 h,  and 72 h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods,  only organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.   When it was suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions  were decanted  to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96 h all surviving organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approval:_
Date:
                                     F-21

-------
          TABLE F-6.   RAHWAY  VALLEY  (006) MYSID TOXICITY TEST REPORT


Testing Laboratory;              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-OS71

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxieity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample,*   006-6009/Rahway
   Shipped by  (Date, Time):  SAIC-Q8-08-88 (Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):   Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-09-88/0930
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  black liquid
   Sample Modifications:  5% dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted
                          to 300/00, pH adjusted to 7.88 w/280 jd- ION NaOH.

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:   Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 im filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  HO (<1 tng/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  NO (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.2S ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCS:  ND (<2.5 pg/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Syste»

   Test Organisms  (Common Name):  Mysid shrimp
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Mysidopsls bahia
   Test Organism Source:  Mu Hi Aqua Culture Systems, Amagensett, NY 08-17-1
   Test Organism Aget  approximately 72 h at time of test start
   Test Organism Size:  juvenile, not measured
   Acclimated  to Test Lab Conditions  (Yes, No):  Yes, received at 31Q/oo
       If Yes, Acclimation period:  24 h
                                     F-22

-------
TABLE F-6. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Ttst—Test Syste» (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay, stawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type:  Arteiia salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, NoJ:Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's       Organochlorine Pesticides
                Concentration:  ND (40% saturation
   Test Salinity (°/oo):30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type;  90x50 mm glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 mL
   Test Solution Volume:  200 ml
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 24.2 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 20.8-28.2 mg/L
                                     F-23

-------
TABLE F-6.  (Continued)
        Deviations froa Work/QA Plan

    1.  Sample storage time (at 4°C)  was 9 days because the initial  test
        conducted on Sample 006 was invalid (control  mortality >10%).   The
        sample was received on 08-09-88 and retested  on 08-18-88.

    2.  All  test chambers were aerated from the time  of test initiation
        because previous testing with other samples demonstrated that
        dissolved oxygen concentration dropped to near 40% of saturation
        within an 8-10 h period.

    3.  The  number of test organisms per chamber was  not counted within two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity of the sample in  the
        chambers prevented direct observation of test organisms.

    4.  Mysids were fed at least once daily.
                                    F-24

-------
TABLE F-6. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)

Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.15
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
Water Quality Data Susoary
Range Mean s
20.0 - 21.3 20.4 0.32
29.0 - 31.5 30.2 0.77
6.1 - 7.0 i.6 0.28
7.91- 8.20 8.04 0.09
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms Observed Dead*
24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h
0 11 1
1
1
13
20
10 20

n
20
13
20
9



             Number of test  organisms  at  time of test start * 20.

LC50 Value:  0.56% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  0.48-0.65% sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber with Abbott's Correction for control
         mortality.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of organisms at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods, only organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.  When it was suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions were decanted  to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96 h all surviving organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approvalt
Date:
                                    F-25

-------
          TABLE  F-7,  MEW YORK CITY  (007) HYSID TOXICITY TEST REPORT
Testing Laboratory;              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Quxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U»S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J, Hi 11 lams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   007-7009/NYC
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC-08-16-88 (Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-17-88/1050
                              Ouxbyry, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4<>C
   Sample Characterization:  black slurry
   Sample Modifications:  5% dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted
                          to 30°/oo, pH adjusted to 7.91 using 2QQ^L ION
                          NaQH.

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 /m filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (
-------
TABLE r-7. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Ttst System (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method?  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium;  Duxbury Bay, seawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type:  Artenna sajina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes7 No);Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's       Organochlorine Pesticides
                Concentration:  H§ (<1»0 ppm)    ND (<1.0 ppb)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rates  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to  each chamber
                               at litst once daily

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1585
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Russ Winchell/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of rays ids
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.31%, 0.62%, 1.25%,  2.5%,  5.0%
                                 whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1445/08-18-88
   Test Completion:  1530/08-22-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40%  saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  90x50 ram glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 mL
   Test Solution Volume:  200 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s))t  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate;  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 24.2 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 20.8-28.2 mg/L
                                     F-27

-------
TABLE F-7.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations frc* Hork/QA Plan

    1.  All test chambers were aerated from the time of test initiation
        because previous testing with other sludge samples demonstrated that
        dissolved oxygen concentration dropped to near 40% of saturation
        within an 8-10 h period.

    2.  The number of test organisms ptr chamber was not counted within two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity associated with the sample
        prevented direct observation of test organisms.

    3.  Mysids were fed at least once daily.
                                    F-28

-------
TABLE F-7. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Water Quality Data Summary
Paraneter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
PH
Ranqe
19
29
6
7
.8 -
.0 -
.1 -
.93-
20
31
7
8
.9
.0
.1
.33
Mean
20
29
6
8
.2
.2
.6
.10
0
0
0
0
s
.33
.66
.34
.11
n
21
14
21
10
Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludge)
                               Mortality Data

                               Number of Organisms  Observed  Dead*
                            24  h         48  h         72  h      96  h
Seawater Control
0.30
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
0
—
-
-
«•
-
0
^
•
.
.
10
1
^
-
»
•
20
1
0
0
3
11
20
            Number of test organisms at time of test start « 20.

LC50 Value:  2.25% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  1.88 - 2.70 sludge
Method: "Trimmed Spearman-Karber with Abbott's  Correction for control
         mortality.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of organisms at 24 h, 48 h,  and 72  h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods,  only organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.   When it was  suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions  were decanted  to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96  h all surviving organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approval:^
                                                Date:
                                     F-29

-------
TABLE F-8.  JOINT MEETING OF ESSEX AND UNIO COUNTY (008) HISID TOXICITY TEST
            REPORT.
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617)  934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   008-8009/Joint meeting
   Shipped by  (Date, Time):  SAIC-08-19-88 (Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-20-88/0943
                              Duxbury,  Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  liquid grey/black
   Sample Modifications:  10% dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted
                          to 300/00, pH adjusted to 7.94 using 750/
-------
TABLE F-8. (Continued)
HI.    Toxicity Test—Test System (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method?  static
   Test Organism Culture Mediums  Duxbury Bay, seawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type;  Artemia salina nauplii (<4& h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, NojlYes
          If Yes, Specifications  PCB'j       Organochlorine Pesticides
                Concentration?  ND (<1.0 ppm)    NO (<1.0 ppb)
        Fed During Test (Yes, Ko):  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rate:  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to each chamber
                               at least once daily

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Russ Hinchell/Battelle
   Test End Point*.  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through,  Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range,  settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of mysids
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (SW control),  0,62%, 1.25%, 2.5%, 5.0%,
                                 10% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1300/08-23-88
   Test Completion:  1115/08-27-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved  oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (0/00)2 30 * 2, pH:   8.0 *  0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  90x50 mm glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test- Container Size:  250 ml
   Test Solution Volume:  200 ml
   Kumber of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 13.7 rag/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 12.8-14.6 rag/L
                                     F-31

-------
TABLE F-8.  (Continued)
        Deviations from Work/QA flm

    1.  Sample storage time was 75h from the time of delivery,  exceeding the
        specification by 3 hours.   The excess time was  required for  sample
        preparation.

    2.  All test chambers were aerated from the time of test  initiation
        because previous testing with  other samples demonstrated that
        dissolved oxygen concentration dropped to nttr  40* of saturation
        within an 8-10 h period.

    3.  The number of test organisms per chamber was not counted within two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity associated with the sample
        prevented direct observation of test organisms,

    4.  Mysids were fed at least once  daily.
                                    F-32

-------
TABLE F-8. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
10.00
Water Quality Data Summary
Ranqe Mean s
19.0 - 21.6 20.0 0.
29.0 - 30.0 29.6 0.
5.3 - 7.2 6.8 0.
7. 88- 8.19 8.04 0.
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms Observed
24 h 48 h 72 h
000
— ^ •
— m- ™
20 20
20 20 20
63
41
48
09

Dead*
96 h
0
1
5
16
20
20
n
20
14
20
11



             Number of test organisms at time of test start * 20.

LC50 Value:  1.68% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:   1.37 - 2.05% sludge
Method:" Trimmed Spearman-Karber

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of organisms  at  24 h, 48 h,  and  72  h  were impeded  by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods,  only  organisms  visibly
      swimming were counted.   When it was  suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions were decanted  to  confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96  h all surviving  organisms  were
      accurately counted.
Approval:    J/K //, l-J.   \
Date:
/-? //e?S
                                     F-33

-------
         TABLE F-9.  BERGEN COUMTY (009)  KYSID TOXICITY TEST REPORT.
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617)  934-OS71

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader;   J. Williams

1.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample;   009-9009/Bergen County
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SA1C (Date/time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time),'  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-13-88/1030
                              Duxbury,  Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  grey/black fluid
   Sample Modifications:  5* dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted
                          to SQO/oo, pH adjusted to 8.12 using SOOjiL ION
NaOH.

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Hater Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 im filtered
             If filtered, Siie of filter
   Dilution Hater Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  NO (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbont  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PC8:  ND (<2.5 ?g/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms  (Common Name):  Mysid shrimp
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Mysidopsls bahia
   Test Organism Source:  MuitiAquaculture Systems, Inc., Amagansett, NY,
                          received 08-17-88
   Test Organism Age*  approximately 72 h at time of test start
   Test Organism Sizf:  juvenile, not measured
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No)i  Yes, received at 31°/oo,
                                                 25.6aC
        If Yes, Acclimation period:  24 h
                                     F-34

-------
TABLE F-9. (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Ttst—Ttst Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay, seawater, 30°/oo
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia salfna nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, lo):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's       Orqanochlorine Pesticides
                Concentration:  ND (<1.0 ppm)    ND (<1.0 ppb)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, feeding rate:  2-4 drops Artemia suspension to each chamber
                               at least once daily

IV.     Toxicity Test-Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  IPA/6DO/4-B5/D13, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Russ Hinchell/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through. Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range,  settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of mysids
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (SH control),  0.31%, 0.62%, 1.25%,  2.5%,
                                 5.0% whole  sludge
   Test Initiation:   1210/08-18-88
   Test Completion;   142Q/G8-22-S8
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved  oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (°/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 *  0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:   ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  90x50 mm glass crystallizing dish, covered
   Test Container Size:  250 ml
   Test Solution Volume:  200 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s))s  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 24.2 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 20.8-28,2 mg/L
                                     F-35

-------
TABLE F-9.  (Continued)
V,      Deviations froo Hork/QA Plan

    1.  Sample storage time was 75h from the time of delivery,  exceeding the
        specification by 3 hours.  The excess time was required for sample
        preparation.

    2.  All test chambers were aerated from the time of test initiation
        because previous testing with other sludge samples demonstrated that
        dissolved oxygen concentration dropped to near 40% of saturation
        within an 8-10 h period.

    3.  The number of test organisms per chamber was not counted within two
        hours of test initiation because turbidity associated with  the sample
        prevented direct observation of test organisms.

    4,  Mysids were fed at least once daily.
                                    F-36

-------
TABLE F-9. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)

Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludge)
Seawater Control
0.30
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
Water Quality Data Summary
Range Mean s
19.6 - 20.8 19.2 0.35
29.5 - 31.0 30.0 0.41
6.2 - 7.0 6.6 0.28
8,03- 8.18 8.10 0.04
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms Observed Dead*
24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h
0 000
0
1
2
12
20 20

n
21
14
21
10



            Kumber of test organisms at time of test start * 20.

LC50 Value:  2.10% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits;  1.74 - 2.54% sludge
Method?  Trimmed Spearman-Karber

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of organisms at 24 h, 48 h,  and 72 h were impeded by presence
      of solids in test chambers.  At these periods,  only organisms visibly
      swimming were counted.   When it was  suspected that all  organisms were
      dead (none observed swimming), solutions were decanted  to confirm
      absence of living organisms.  At 96  h all surviving organisms were
      accurately counted.
Approval:
                                                Date:
                                     F-37

-------


-------
      TABLE F-10.   HESTCHESTER COUNTY (001)  MINNOW TOXICITY TEST REPORT,
Testing Laboratory;              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 39? Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study;   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader;   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   001-1009/Yonkers (Westchester County)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-01-88/1430
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-02-88/1000
                              Duxbury,  Massachusetts
   Test Material  Storage Location:   Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  dark brown/black "pudding-like"  consistency
   Sample Modifications:  1° stock = 5% of sludge in seawater.  Salinity
                          adjusted to 30% w/seawater brine.   pH adjusted to
                          7.9 w/ ION NaOH.

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution  Wateri   Ouxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,   20 /ui» filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical  Analysis (Date):   08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual  Chlorinei  ND (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCS:  ND (<2.5 ng/l)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Syste«

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Silverside minnow
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Menidia beryllina
   Test Organism Source:  Cultured Aquatics, Northport, NY
   Test Organism Age:  hatched 07-11-88/received 08/02/88,* 24 days old
   Loading Rate:   0»04 g/L
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No)i  Yes
If Yes, Acclimation  period:  48 h
                                    F-38

-------
TABLE F-10.  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia salina naupHi (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yts
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's. Pesticides
                Concentration:  NO (<1.0 ppm), <1.0 ppb pesticides)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  No
        If Yes, feeding rate:  N/A

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Tom Angel1/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static,  Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of minnows
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.31%, 0.62%,  1,25%,  2.5%,
                                 5,0%, whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1430/08-04-88
   Test Completion:  1500/08-08-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  1 Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  9 x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 6.60 mg/L,  95% confidence
                                            limits 6.01-7.24 mg/L
                                     F-39

-------
TABLE F-10.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations frtn Hork/QA Plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12.5.3, p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period, when
        not aerated.

    3.  Mortality in minnows received from a commercial supplier was
        greater than 10 percent during the acclimation period {Section
        12,5.3, p. 30).  Shipping stress and possibly accelerated
        salinity adjustment resulted in 12% mortality in the minnow culture
        during the acclimation period.  In the judgement of the Task Leader,
        this deviation did not affect the results of the test, because
        minnows used for testing were apparently healthy and vigorous.  Also
        control survival was acceptable (>90%) during the test and the
        reference toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.  At the time,
        minimizing sample holding times was considered a priority and a
        replacement shipment of minnows was not available.

    4.  Adjustment rates for salinity were exceeded (Section 12.5.3, p. 30).
        The specification was for adjustment at <2 o/oo per 12h period.  The
        minnows received for testing were received at 20 °/oo salinity
        despite requests from the Task Leader to receive them at a higher
        salinity.  No other sources of minnows were available during the
        testing program.  Minimizing sample storage time was considered a
        priority so acclimation periods were not extended.  In the judgement
        of the Task Leader, this deviation did not affect the results of the
        test because mortality in the SW controls was acceptable(>90%), and
        the reference toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.
                                     F-40

-------
TABLE F-10. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
Water Quality Data Sunoary
Ranqe Mean s
19.4 - 22.0 20.4
30.0 30.0
5.8 - 7.4 6.J
7.92 - 8.09 8.04
Mortality Data
Number of Organisms
24 h 48 h
0 0
1
1
1
1 20
20 20
0.
0.
0.
0*

Observed
72 h
0
1
1
7
20
20
89
00
55
08

Dead*
96 h
2
2
3
IS
20
20
n
18
11
18
8



             Number of test organisms at tine of test start * 20.

LC50 Value:  0.91% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits;  0.81 - 1.02 % sludge
Hethod: * Trimmed Spearman-Karber with Abbott's  Correction for control
         mortality.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test Organisms prior to 96 h were impeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h test solutions were decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead minnows was made.
Approval:
                           A/
                                                Dates ,
                                     F-41

-------
        TABLE F-1U  NASSAU COUNTY (002) MINNOW TOXICITY TEST REPORT.
Testing Laboratory?              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   OQ2-2009/(Nassau)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-02-88/(Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-03-88/1000
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material  Storage Location:   Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4«C
   Sample Characterization:  dark brown/black "pudding-like"  consistency
   Sample Modifications:  5% dilution as 1° stock.   Salinity  adjusted to
                          29.0% w/seawater brine.   pH adjusted to 7.95
                          w/250/*L ION NaOH.

II*     Toxicity Test—Dilution Mater Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 /tm filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Oate)t  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 ng/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  NO (
-------
TABLE F-ll.  (Continued)
111.    Toxieity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Ouxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artetm'a sallna nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis {Yes, No)!Yes
          If Yes, Specification;  PCB's. Pesticides
                Concentration:  ND^40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/Oo): 30 * 2, pHs  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  I Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  i x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 fflL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s))j  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 6,60 mg/L,  95% confidence
                                            limits 6.01-7.24 mg/L
                                     F-43

-------
TABLE F-ll.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations from Work/QA Plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        Immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12.5.3, p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period, when
        not aerated.

    3.  Mortality in minnows received from a commercial supplier was greater
        than 10 percent during the acclimation period (Section 12.5.3, p.
        30).  Shipping stress and possibly accelerated salinity adjustment
        resulted in 12% mortality in the minnow culture during the
        acclimation period.  In the judgement of the Task Leader, this
        deviation did not affect the results of the test, because minnows
        used for testing were apparently healthy and vigorous.  Also control
        survival was acceptable (>90*s) during the test and the reference
        toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.  At the time,
        minimizing sample holding times was considered a priority and an
        replacement shipment of minnows was not available.

    4.  Adjustment rates for salinity were exceeded (Section 12,5.3, p. 30).
        The specification was for adjustment at <20/oo per 12h period.  The
        minnows received for testing were received at 20°/oo salinity despite
        requests from the Task Leader to receive them at a higher salinity.
        No other sources of minnows were available during the testing
        program.  Minimizing sample storage time was considered a priority so
        acclimation periods were not extended.  In the judgement of the Task
        Leader, this deviation did not affect the results of the test because
        mortality in the SW controls was acceptable (>90%), and the reference
        toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.
                                     F-44

-------
TABLE F-ll. (Continued)

VI.  Toxlcity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Water Quality Data Summary
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
PH
Ranqe
19.2 - 21.7
30.0
5.7 - 7.4
7.89 - 8.04
Mean
20.2
30.0
6.7
7.99
s
0.84
0.00
0.56
0.06
n
20
11
19
8
Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludge)
   Hortality  Data

   Number of Organisms Observed Dead*
24 h         48 h        72 h      96 h
Seawater Control
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
20
0
0
0
0
2
20
0
0
1
1
10
20
             Number  of test organisms  at  time of test start * 20.

LC50 Value:  2.33% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  1.94 - 2.80 % sludge
Hethod:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test organisms prior to 96 h were impeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.  At 96h test solutions were decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead minnows was made.
Approval:
Date:
                                   /8
                                     F-45

-------
       TABLE F-12.   MIDDLESEX COUNTY (003) HINNOW  TOXICITY TEST REPORT.
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Titlt of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   003-3009/(Middlesex)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-18-88/(Tirae not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  iatttlle Ocean Sciences  08-19-88/1000
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterizations  very liquid—grey/black
   Sample Modifications: 10% dilution as I* stock.   Salinity adjusted  to
                         30.0%«  pH adjusted to 7.96 using 50 jtL  ION NaOH

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,   20 im filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (O.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0,25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCB:  ND (<2.5 ng/l)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Silverside minnow
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Menidia beryllina
   Test Organism Source:  Cultured Aquatics, Northport, NY
   Test Organism Age:  hatched 7/18/88 and 7/26/88j  28-36 days old
   Loading Rate:  0.22 g/L
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes
If Yes, Acclimation period:  48 h
                                     F-46

-------
TABLE F-12.  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Syste» (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Ouxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's. Pesticides
                Concentration:  NO (40% saturation
   Test Salinity (°/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory 1e¥e1
   Test Container Type:  1 Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  9 x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 6.37 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 5.71-7.12 mg/L
                                     F-47

-------
TABLE F-12.  (Continued)
V*      Deviations fron Work/QA Plan

    1,  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of txposurt.  (Section 12.5.3, p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these tiies.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within in 8-10 hour period, when
        not aerated.

    3.  Sample holding time exceeded 72 h (Section 7.3.1, p. 8).  Sludge
        sample 003 was delivered on a Friday and stored until the following
        Tuesday (98 h) when testing could be initiated.

    4.  The age of minnows used for testing exceeded specification (Table 6,
        p.25).  The age of minnows used for testing sludge sample 003 was 28-
        36 days.  This deviation resulted from difficulties in coordinating
        sample deliveries with the availability of minnows 14-28 days old.
        In the judgement of the Task Leader, this did not affect the results
        of the test because control survival was acceptable (> 90%),  loading
        rates were not violated (<0.4 g wet weight per liter), and the
        reference toxicant test result (LC50) was nearly identical to the
        LC50 obtained for the specified age group.
                                     F-48

-------
TABLE F-12. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Hater Quality Data Summary
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
10.00
Ranqe
19.0 - 20.9
29.0 - 31.0
5.7 - 7.3
7.90 - 8.05
Mortality
Number of
24 h
0
0
0
0
0
20
Mean
19.9
29.9
6.9
7.97
Data
Organisms
48 h
0
0
0
0
1
20
s
0.65
0.70
0.38
0.05

Observed Dead*
72 h 96 h
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
1 4
20 20
n
20
13
20
9



             Number of test organisms at time of test start • 20.

LC50 Value:  5.95% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  5.16 - 6.85 % sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test organisms prior to 96 h were impeded by  the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h test  solutions were  decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead minnows was made.
Approval:

Date:
                                    F-49

-------
        TABLE F-13.   PASSAIC VALLEY (004)  MINNOW TOXICITY TEST  REPORT.


Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 39? Washington Street
                                 Duxbury,  MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Samples   004-4009/(Passaic Valley)
   Shipped by (Date, Timt)*.  SA1C 08-Q4-88/(Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences   08-05-86/1024
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  dark brown slurry
   Sample Modifications:  2% dilution as 1° stock.   Salinity adjusted to
                          29.0%*  pH adjusted to 7.90  using 450 pi ION
                          NaOH.

II„     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered, 20 im  filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matters  NO  (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon: 0.73 rag/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonias  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  NO (O.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCB:  ND (<2.5 /ig/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  SiIverside minnow
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Menidia beryl!ina
   Test Organism Source:  Cultured Aquatics, Northport, NY
   Test Organism Age:  hatched 7/11/88,- 24 days old
   Loading Rate:  0.08 g/L
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, Acclimation period:  72 h
                                     F-50

-------
TABLE F-13»  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's. Pesticides
                Concentration:  NO (<1,0 ppffl), <1.0 ppb pesticides)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  No
        If Yes, feeding rate:  N/A

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed!  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  No
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Tom Angell/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of minnows
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.12%, 0.25%, 0.50%,
                                 1.00%, 2.00% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1510/08-05-88
   Test Completion:  1630/08-09-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  1 Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  9 x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 6.60 rog/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 6.01-7.24 mg/L
                                     F-51

-------
TABLE F-13.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations froa Hork/QA plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12.5.3, p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period, when
        not aerated.

    3.  Mortality in minnows received from a commercial supplier was greater
        than 10 percent during the acclimation period (Section 12.5.3, p.
        30).  Shipping stress and possibly accelerated salinity adjustment
        results in 12% mortality in the minnow culture during the acclimation
        period.  In the judgement of the Task Leader, this deviation did not
        affect the results of the test, because minnows used for testing were
        apparently healthy and vigorous.  Also control survival was
        acceptable (>9Q%) during the test and the reference toxicant LC50 was
        within the expected range.  At the time, minimizing sample holding
        times was considered a priority and a replacement shipment of
        minnows was not available.

    4.  Adjustment rates for salinity were exceeded (Section 12.5,3, p.30).
        The specification was for adjustment at <2°/oo per 12 h period.  The
        minnows received for testing were received at 20°/oo salinity despite
        requests from the Task Leader to receive them at a higher salinity.
        Mo other sources of minnows were available during the testing
        program.  Minimizing sample storage time was considered a priority so
        acclimation periods were not extended.  In the judgement of the Task
        Leader, this deviation did not affect the results of the test because
        mortality in the SW controls was acceptable (>90%), and the reference
        toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.
                                     F-52

-------
TABLE F-13. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Hater Quality Data Sunoary
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.12
0.25
0.50
1.00
2.00
Range
19.2 - 21.7
29.5 - 30.0
3.1 - 7.3
7.86 - 8.06
Mortality
Number of
24 h
0
0
0
2
20
20
Mean
20.3
29.8
6.3
7.85
Data
Organisms
48 h
0
0
0
7
20
20
s
0.
0.
1.
0.

Observed
72 h
0
0
2
9
20
20

74
25
27
26

Dead*
96 h
0
1
2
9
20
20
n
18
15
18
12



            Number of test organisms at time of test start * 20.

LC50 Valuei  0,4i% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:   0.40 -  0.60 % sludge
Method: " Trimmed Speiman-Karber.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test organisms prior  to 96 h were iipeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h  test  solutions were  decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead  minnows was made.
Approval ; v.    /tU

Date:
                                     F-53

-------
        TABLE F-14.   LINDEN ROSELLE (005)  MINNOW TOXICITY TEST REPORT.
Testing Laboratory;              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Samples   005-5009/(Linden Rosellt)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-08-88/(Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences   08-09-88/0930
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:   Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  black ooze/odorous
   Sample Modifications:  3% dilution as I0 stock.  Salinity adjusted to
                          30.00/oa.  pH adjusted to 7.90 using 200 0L ION
                          NaOH.

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Ouxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered, 20 jan filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1,3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCS:  ND (<2.5 /tg/L)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Silverside minnow
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Henidia beryl!ina
   Test Organism Source:  Cultured Aquatics, Northport, NY
   Test Organism Age:  hatched 7/18/88; 24 days old
   Loading Rate:  0.09 g/L
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, Acclimation period:  48 h
                                     F-54

-------
TABLE F-14.  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continytd)

   Test Organism Culture Methods  static
   Test Organism Culture Mediunu  Quxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia sallna nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification!  PCB's, Pesticides
                Concentrations  NO (40% saturation
   Test Salinity (a/oo): 30 * 2, j>H:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14ilO
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  1 Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  9 x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 6.60 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 6.00-7.26 mg/L
                                     F-55

-------
TABLE F-14.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations froa Hork/QA Plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12.5,3, p. 30),  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period,  when
        not aerated.

    3.  Adjustment rates for salinity were exceeded (Section 12.5.3,  p.30).
        The specification was for adjustment at <20/oo per 12 h period.   The
        minnows received for testing were received at 20°/oo salinity despite
        requests from the Task Leader to receive them at a higher salinity.
        No other sources of minnows were available during the testing
        program.  Minimizing sample storage time was considered a priority so
        acclimation periods were not extended.  In the judgement of the Task
        Leader, this deviation did not affect the results of the test because
        mortality in the SW controls was acceptable (>90%), and the reference
        toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.
                                     F-56

-------
TABLE F-U. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.19
0.38
0.75
1.50
3.00
Hater Quality Data Summary
Ranqe Mean
19.5 - 21.4 20.0
29.5 - 30.0 29.8
5.7 - 7.5 7.0
7.83 - 8.09 8.00
Mortality Data
s
0.64
0.34
0.45
0.08

n
18
12
18
8

Number of Organisms Observed Dead*
24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
2 20
20 20
0 0
1 2
0 1
10 19
20 20
20 20


             Number of test organisms at time of test start * 20.

LC50 Value:  0.53% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:   0.51  -  0.56 % sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test organisms prior  to 96 h were impeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h  test  solutions were decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead  minnows was  made.
Approval;
Date:
                                    F-57

-------
        TABLE F-15.  RAHWAY VALLEY (006) MINNOW TOXICITY TEST REPORT.
Testing Laboratory?              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Ouxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client;      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Samples   006-6Q09/(Rahway Valley)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-08-88/(Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:   Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  black liquid
   Sample Modifications:  5% dilution as la stock.  Salinity adjusted to
                          300/00-  pH adjusted to 7.88 using 250  /*L ION
                          NaOH.

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Water:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 ion filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 rag/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  HD (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  HD (<0.25 ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCB:  ND (<2.S p$/L}

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  SiIverside minnow
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Henidia beryllina
   Test Organism Source:  Cultured Aquatics, Northport, NY
   Test Organism Age:  hatched 7/18/88; 24 days old
   Loading Rate:  0.06 g/L
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, Acclimation period:  48 h
                                     F-58

-------
TABLE F-15.  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method;  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia sallna nauplii (<4S h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, NojlYes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's, Pesticides
                Concentration:  ND (<1.0 pprn), <1.0 ppb pesticides)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  M§
        If Yes, feeding rate:  N/A

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description*.  96 h acyte
   Test Conducted By:  Tom Angel1/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of minnows
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.31%, 0.62%, 1.25%,
                                 2.50%, 5.00% whole slydge
   Test Initiation:  1155/08-11-88
   Test Completion:  1230/08-15-88
   Test Oyration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  1 Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  9 x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfatt:  LC50 6.60 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 6.00-7.26 mg/L
                                     F-59

-------
TABLE F-15.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations fro* Work/QA Plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12.5.3, p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period,  when
        not aerated.

    3*  Adjustment rates for salinity were exceeded (Section 12.5.3,  p.30).
        The specification was for adjustment at <2°/oo per 12 h period.   The
        minnows received for testing were received at 20°/oo salinity despite
        requests from the Task Leader to receive them at a higher salinity.
        No other sources of minnows were available during the testing
        program.  Minimizing sample storage time was considered a priority so
        acclimation periods were not extended.  In the judgement of the Task
        Leader, this deviation did not affect the results of the test because
        mortality in the SW controls was acceptable (>90%),  and the reference
        toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.
                                     F-60

-------
TABLE F-15. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Water Quality Data Summary
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (0/00)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH
Range
19.4 - 21.2
28.5 - 30.0
5.2 - 7.5
7.10 - 8.15
Mean
19.9
29.5
7.0
8.02
s
0.60
0.54
0.49
0.08
n
18
12
18
8
Sludge Dilution
   Whole Sludge)
   Mortality Data

   Number of Organisms Observed Dead*
24 h         48 h        72 h      96 h
Seawater Control
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
0
0
0
0
12
20
0
0
0
1
20
20
0
1
0
1
20
20
1
1
0
6,
20
20
            Number of test organisms at time of test start « 20.

LC50 Value;  1.49% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:   1.30  -  1.70  % sludge
Method: * Trimmed Spearman-Karber with  Abbott's  Correction  for control
         mortality.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test organisms prior  to 96 h were impeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h  test solutions were  decanted  from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead  minnows was made.
Approval:
                  /
           V   /*/'  >   --I /A
           V/.is.   •'/ l ••
  -f/~\
                    Date:
                                    F-61

-------
        TABLE F-16.  NEW YORK CITY (007) MINNOW TOXICITY TEST REPORT.
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Clients      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

I.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   007-7009/(Middlesex)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-16-88/(Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-17-88/1050
                              Ouxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4*C
   Sample Characterization:  black slurry
   Sample Modifications: 5% dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted to
                         30.0%-  pH adjusted to 7.91 using 200 /
-------
TABLE F-16.  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Types  Arteroia salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCS's. Pesticides
                Concentration:  ND (<1.0 ppm), <1.0 ppb pesticides)
        Fed During Test (Yes,  No):  No
        If Yes, feeding rate:   N/A

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yts, Description);  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Tom Angell/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance;  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of minnows
   Nominal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.31%, 0.62%, 1.25%,
                                 2.50%, 5.00% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1150/08-18-88
   Test Completion:  1440/08-22-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (*C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Silinity (o/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  1 Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  9 x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfatet  LC50 6.37 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 5.71-7.12 mg/L
                                     F-63

-------
TABLE F-16.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations froa Work/QA Plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12,5.3, p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period,  when
        not aerated.

    3.  The age of minnows used for testing exceeded specification (Table  6,
        p.25).  The age of minnows used for testing sludge sample 007  was  24-
        31 days.  This deviation resulted from difficulties in coordinating
        sample deliveries with the availability of minnows 14-28 days  old.
        In the judgement of the Task Leader, this did not affect the results
        of the test because control survival was acceptable (> 90%),  loading
        rates were not violated (<0.4 g wet weight per liter)7 and the
        reference toxicant test result (LC50) was nearly identical to  the
        LC50 obtained for the specified age group.
                                    F-64

-------
TABLE F-16.  (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Water Quality Data Summary
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (®/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
{% Whole Sludael
Seawater Control
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
Range
19.7 - 20.7
30.0 - 31.0
6.3 - 7.2
7.99 - 8.12
Mortality
Number of
24 h
0
0
0
0
2
20
Mean
20.1
30.2
6.8
8.06
Data
Organisms
48 h
0
0
0
0
4
20
s
0.32
0.33
0.30
0.06

Observed Dead*
72 h 96 h
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 2
7 20
20 20
n
19
12
19
9



             Number of test organisms  at time of test start * 20.

LC50 Value:  1.59% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  1.42 - 1.79% sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber,

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test organisms prior to 96 h were impeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h test solutions were decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead minnows was made.
Approval:
-J
Date:
                        ,/g
                                     F-65

-------
TABLE F-17.  JOINT MEETING OF ESSEX AND UNIOM COUNTY (008) MINNOW TOXICITY
             TEST REPORT.
Testing Laboratory:              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader;   J. Williams

I.      Toxfclty Ttst—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   008-8009/(Joint Meeting)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-16-88/(Time not  documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-20-88/0943
                              Duxbury, Massachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tax Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4«C
   Sample Characterization:  liquid, grey/black
   Sample Modifications: 10% dilution as I6 stock.  Salinity adjusted to
                         30.00/00-  pH adjusted to  7.94 using 7SO /rt. ION
                         NaOH

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Water Characterization

   Type of Dilution Hater:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 >*m filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Paniculate Matter:  ND (
-------
TABLE F-17.  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:  static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia salina nauplii (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:  PCB's. Pesticides
                Concentrations  NO (<1.0 ppm), <1.0 ppb pesticides)
        Fed During Test (Yes, No):  No
        If Yes, feeding rate:  N/A

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:  EPA/600/4-85/013, Methods for Measuring Acute
                            Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
                            Organisms, March, 1985
   Preliminary Testing (If Yes, Description):  Screening test
   Test Description:  96 h acute
   Test Conducted By:  Tom Angel1/Battelle
   Test End Point:  Mortality
   Test Dosing Method (Flow-through, Static, Renewal):  Static
   Sample Appearance:  Within dosing range, settleable solids hampered direct
                       observation of minnows
   Noiinal Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.62%, 1.25%, 2.50%,
                                 5.00%, 10.00% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:  1205/08-23-88
   Test Completion:  1255/08-27-88
   Test Duration:  96 h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 * 2, Dissolved oxygen (mg/L):>40% saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo): 30 * 2, pH:  8.0 * 0.2
   Photoperiod During Test:  14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  1 Liter glass jars
   Test Container Size:  9 x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume: 800 ml
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:  2
   Number of Organisms per Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl sulfate:  LC50 6.37 mg/L, 95% confidence
                                            limits 5.71-7.12 mg/L
                                     F-67

-------
TABLE F-17.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations froa Hork/QA Plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution, nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12.5.3,  p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period,  when
        not aerated.

    3.  The age of minnows ysed for testing exceeded specification (Table  6,
        p.25).  The age of minnows used for testing sludge sample 008  was  24-
        31 days.  This deviation resulted from difficulties in coordinating
        sample deliveries with the availability of minnows 14-28 days  old.
        In the judgement of the Task Leader, this did not affect the results
        of the test because control survival was acceptable (> 90%), loading
        rates were not violated (<0.4 g wet weight per liter)7 and the
        reference toxicant test result (LC50) was nearly identical  to  the
        LC50 obtained for the specified age group.
                                    F-68

-------
TABLE F-17. (Continued)

VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (°/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH-

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludae)
Seawater Control
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
10.00
Hater Quality Data Summary
Ranqe Mean
19.0 - 20.8 19.8
29.0 - 31.0 30.0
5.5 - 7.4 6.8
7.93 - 8.04 8.01
Mortality Data
s
0.66
0.50
0.51
0.06

n
18
12
18
10

Number of Organisms Observed Dead*
24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 5
20 20
20 20
0 0
1 1
0 0
15 17
20 20
20 20


            Number of test organisms  at time of test start - 20.

LC50 Value;  1.92% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limits:  1.71 - 2.16% sludge
Hethod:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber.

VII.  Comments:

      *Counts of test organisms prior to 96 h were impeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h test solutions were decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead minnows was made.
Approval;
Dates
t<$
                                     F-69

-------
        TABLE F-18.  BERGEN COUNTY (009) HINNOW TOXICITY TEST REPORT.


Testing Laboratory;              Battelle Ocean Sciences
                                 397 Washington Street
                                 Duxbury, MA  02332
                                 (617) 934-0571

Title of Study:   Sewage Sludge Characterization

Client:      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Task Leader:   J. Williams

!.      Toxicity Test—Compound and Test Identification

   Description of Sample:   Q09-9009/(Ber§en County)
   Shipped by (Date, Time):  SAIC 08-12-88/(Time not documented)
   Received by (Date, Time):  Battelle Ocean Sciences  08-13-88/1030
                              Duxbury, Hassachusetts
   Test Material Storage Location:  Tox Lab Refrigerator
   Storage Conditions:  4°C
   Sample Characterization:  grey/black fluid
   Sample Modifications:  5% dilution as 1° stock.  Salinity adjusted to
                          30.00/00-  pH adjusted to 8.12 using 500 nL ION
                          NaOH

II.     Toxicity Test—Dilution Mater Characterization

   Type of Dilution Hater:  Duxbury Bay seawater
   Dilution Water Treatment:  Filtered, Unfiltered,  20 im filtered
             If filtered, Size of filter
   Dilution Water Chemical Analysis (Date):  08-26-88
   Dilution Water Particulate Matter:  ND (<1 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Organic Carbon:  0.73 mg/L
   Dilution Water Un-ionized Ammonia:  1.3 mg/L
   Dilution Water Residual Chlorine:  ND (<0.005 mg/L)
   Dilution Water Total Pesticides:  ND (<0.2S ng/L)
   Dilution Water PCB:  NO (<2.5 ftg/l)

III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea

   Test Organisms (Common Name):  Silverside minnow
   Test Organism (Taxon):  Menidia beryllina
   Test Organism Source:  Cultured Aquatics, Northport, NY
   Test Organism Age:  hatch dates 07/18/88 and 07/26/88,' 24-31 days old
   Loading Rate:  0.19 g/L
   Acclimated to Test Lab Conditions (Yes, No):  Yes
        If Yes, Acclimation period:   minimum of 48 h
                                     F-70

-------
TABLE F-18.  (Continued)
III.    Toxicity Test—Test Systea (Continued)

   Test Organism Culture Method:   static
   Test Organism Culture Medium:   Duxbury Bay seawater
   Organism Food Type:  Artemia salina nauplii  (<48 h)
   Food Chemical Analysis (Yes, No):Yes
          If Yes, Specification:   PCB's. Pesticides
                Concentration:   ND (<1.0 ppm),  <1.0 ppb pesticides)
        Fed During Test (Yes,  No):  No
        If Yes,  feeding rate:   N/A

IV.     Toxicity Test—Specifications

   Test Protocol Followed:   EPA/600/4-85/013,  Methods  for Measuring  Acute
                            Toxicity  of Effluents  to Freshwater and  Marine
                            Organisms,  March,  1985
   Preliminary Testing (If  Yes, Description):   Screening test
   Test Description:   96 h  acute
   Test Conducted By:   Tom  Angel1/Battelle
   Test End Point: Mortality
   Test Dosing Method  (Flow-through,  Static,  Renewal):   Static
   Sample Appearance:   Within  dosing  range,  settleable  solids hampered  direct
                       observation of minnows
   Nominal  Test Concentrations:  0 (control), 0.31%, 0.62%,  1.25%,
                                 2.50%,  5.00% whole sludge
   Test Initiation:   1320/08-18-88
   Test Completions   1500/08-22-88
   Test Duration:  96  h
   Test Temperature (°C): 20 *  2,  Dissolved  oxygen (mg/L):>40%  saturation
   Test Salinity (o/oo):  30 * 2,  pH:   8.0 *  0.2
   Photoperiod During  Test: 14:10
   Light Intensity:  ambient laboratory level
   Test Container Type:  1  Liter  glass jars  "
   Test Container Size:  9  x 13 cm
   Test Solution Volume:  800 mL
   Number of Concentrations (including control(s)):  6
   Number of Replicates per Treatment:   2
   Number of Organisms per  Replicate:  10
   Reference Test, Sodium dodecyl  sulfate:   LC50 6.37 mg/L,  95% confidence
                                            limits 5.71-7.12 mg/L
                                    F-71

-------
TABLE F-ia.  (Continued)
V.      Deviations fro* Work/QA Plan

    1.  The number of test animals in test chambers was not checked
        immediately after distribution,  nor were they checked for mortality
        after 2 hours of exposure.  (Section 12.5.3, p. 30).  The turbidity
        of the sludge sample prevented direct observation at these times.

    2.  Gentle aeration was provided to all test chambers because experience
        with sludge samples demonstrated that dissolved oxygen concentration
        dropped to near 40% of saturation within an 8-10 hour period,  when
        not aerated.

    3.  The age of minnows ysed for testing exceeded specification (Table  6,
        p.25).  The agt of minnows used for testing sludge sample 009  was  24-
        31 days.  This deviation resulted from difficulties in coordinating
        sample deliveries with the availability of minnows 14-28 days  old.
        In the judgement of the Task Leader, this did not affect the results
        of the test because control survival was acceptable (> 90%), loading
        rates were not violated (<0.4 g wet weight per liter), and the
        reference toxicant test result (LC50) was nearly identical to  the
        LC50 obtained for the specified age group.

    4.  Sample holding time exceeded 72h (Section 7.3.1, pfl)«  Sludge  sample
        009 was delivered on a Saturday and test organisms were not available
        until 5 days later.

    5.  Adjustment rates for salinity were exceeded (Section 12.5.3, p.30).
        The specification was for adjustment at <2°/oo per 12 h period.  The
        minnows received for testing were received 20°/oo salinity despite
        requests from the Task Leader to receive them at a higher salinity.
        Ho other sources of minnows were available during the testing
        program.  Minimizing sample storage time was considered a priority so
        acclimation periods were not extended.  In the judgement of the Task
        Leader, this deviation did not affect the results of the test  because
        mortality in the SW controls was acceptable (>90%), and the
        reference toxicant LC50 was within the expected range.
                                     F-72

-------
TABLE F-18. (Continued)
VI.  Toxicity Test—Results (Raw data attached)
Hater Quality Data Summary
Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Salinity (o/oo)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)
pH

Sludge Dilution
(% Whole Sludqe)
Seawater Control
0.31
0.62
1.25
2.50
5.00
Ranqe
19.8 - 20.8
29.5 - 30.5
6.3 - 7.1
8.00 - 8.23
Mortality
Number of
24 h
0
0
0
0
0
20
Mean
20.2
30.1
6.8
8.11
Data
Organisms
48 h
0
0
0
0
4
20
s
0.25
0.29
0.27
0.06

Observed Dead*
72 h 96 h
0 0
1 1
0 1
0 4
20 20
20 20
n
mmmmmmmm
18
12
18
9



             Number of  test organisms at time of test start « 20.
LC50 Valuet  1.55% sludge.
95 Percent Confidence Limitst  1.34 - 1.78% sludge
Method:  Trimmed Spearman-Karber.
VII.  Comments:
      *Counts of test organisms prior to 96 h were impeded by the turbidity
      of the sample.   At 96h test solutions were decanted from the rest
      chambers and an accurate count of living/dead minnows was made.
Approval;
Date : /^
/_$ /?S8
                                     F-73

-------