United States Center for Environmental Research
Environmental Protection Information Q/^\CN l"7f^/"\f\O
Agency Cincinnati OH 45268 v^UOl N / \J\J\J£.
October 1979
V>EPA DECHNOLOGY
DRANSFER
The Bridge Between
Research and Use
ERIC NOW CERI
The EPA acronym ERIC (Environmental Research Information Center) is also a
copyrighted name for a DHEW organizational unit. To avoid confusion, we have
changed our name to Center for Environmental Research Information (CERI).
Requests for Technology Transfer material should be sent to: USEPA, Center for
Environmental Research Information, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Design Manual for Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Featured at 1979 WPCF Conference
The Technology Transfer revised "Process Design Manual for Sludge Treatment and
Disposal" is being distributed at the 52nd Annual Conference and Exhibition of the
Water Pollution Control Federation (WPCF) in Houston, Texas.
This edition of the sludge manual is a completely updated and greatly expanded
version of the manual published in 1974. Many new sections are included which
discuss sludge production, disinfection, heat drying, transportation, storage,
sidestreams from solids treatment processes, instrumentation and utilization. This
revision is an Office of Research and Development effort conducted by the Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory and the Center for Environmental Research
Information. The information compiled in the manual is intended to assist munici-
palities in meeting the solids treatment and disposal requirements as mandated
in the 1977 Clean Water Act as amended, Public Law 95-217.
This year's WPCF Conference attendance is estimated at over 12,000, the largest
ever. Forty-five technical program sessions and three preconference workshops have
been scheduled. Display space spanning over 84,000 square feet is set aside for
products and exhibits of more than 300 manufacturing firms and support organizations.
Several EPA organizations have pooled resources to form an EPA referral and display
area. The EPA exhibits feature (1) the Center for Environmental Research Information
(formerly ERIC), (2) Water Quality Management (Clean Lakes, 404 and 208
Programs), (3) National Training and Operational Technology Center, (4) Municipal
Construction and Operation and Maintenance, (5) Effluent Guidelines and (6)
Facilities Requirements Division. Key individuals will be available at each exhibit to
discuss EPA policy and answer questions. We invite you to visit the EPA displays,
meet CERI personnel at Booth 2300, and pick up a copy of the Sludge Treatment and
Disposal Design Manual. To order this Manual (#1011) return the order form at the
back of this Newsletter.
-------
Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly
Owned Treatment Works
Pilot Study Summary
Introduction
The United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has initiated a program to study the occurrence
and fate of 129 selected toxic organic and inorganic
pollutants (priority pollutants) by means of a sampling
program at 40 Publicly OwnedTreatment Works(POTW's).
The major goals of the program are to characterize the
impact of toxic pollutants on the POTW treatment process
and to study the effects of secondary treatment on priority
pollutants The data obtained from this study may impact
the pretreatment regulations for indirect dischargers.
The first phase of the program was a pilot study of two
POTW's to determine the optimum field methodologies to
be used throughout the program and to develop prelim-
inary conclusions regarding the incidence, impact and fate
of priority pollutants in POTW's which will be
substantiated as the sampling progresses through the 40
plants. Also examined in this study were the overall
removal of priority pollutants in POTW influents, the
concentration of priority pollutants in sludge and the
formation of chlorinated hydrocarbons during chlorine
disinfection
The determination of optimum field methodologies
included selecting parameters of interest and establishing
technical procedures for sampling. This involved (1) deter-
mining sampling points which best characterize informa-
tion regarding fate of priority pollutants, (2) establishing
sampling frequency for obtaining the most representative
picture of wastewater fluctuations, and (3) developing
analytical protocol for samples to assure that consistent
and accurate results are obtained throughout the study.
The Study
The two POTW's sampled (A & B) for the program are
conventional activated sludge plants but differ signifi-
cantly in size, percent industrial flow, age, operation,
sludge conditioning methodology and capacity utilized.
Plant A has an average daily flow of 96 to 108 mgd, 30
percent of which is industrial waste, primarily from major
industries including pharmaceutical manufacture, petro-
chemicals, plating operations, automotive foundries,
coking operations and food processing p.lanis. Sludge
conditioning methods include primary sludge thickening
by gravity thickeners, secondary by Dissolved Air Flotation
(DAF), vacuum filtration and incineration.
The flow to Plant B is primarily residential with an average
daily flow of 8 to 10 mgd, 2 percent of which is from
industries: gram elevators, oil andfueltermmals, machine
tool and metal working companies and box and insulation
companies. Plant B sludge is combined from holdingtanks
with thickened (via DAF) waste activated sludge. This
combined sludge passes to conditioning facilities and to
vacuum filtration. The filtercake is incinerated and the
decant is recycled to the sludge operation.
The wastewater treatment train at each plant is nearly
identical, consisting of grit chambers, pre-aeration,
primary settling, aeration, secondary settling and chlorin-
ation. At both POTW's, the sampling points for the study
were chosen to best represent the wastewater at particu-
lar stages of treatment. The sampling scheme for both
plants was nearly identical, and included sampling points
for the influent, the effluent before chlorination, the final
effluent, each of the various sludge conditions and the tap
water. At Plant A, however, the primary and secondary
sludge, the floatables, combined sludge and the vacuum
filtrate were sampled, while at Plant B only the combined
and secondary (before and after DAF) sludge were
sampled.
Sampling spanned one week at each plant—with an
additional week of sampling influent only at Plant A.
Sampling consisted of 7-day, 24-hour composites and
grab samples. Automatic samplers were used wherever
continuous flow existed. As an aid for comparison of plant
data, identical sampling techniques and EPA sampling
protocols' were followed.
Results
Examination of the data collected from Plants A and B can
be summarized as follows. The more industrial Plant A
influent contained a higher incidence of priority pollutants
than Plant B influent. In total, 52 organic priority pollutants
were found mthe Plant A influent(18 overdetection limits)
and only 33 in the Plant B raw wastewater (5 over
detection limits). Seven of the nine metallic priority pollu-
tants detected in the influents to both plants had higher
concentrations in the Plant A influent.
In Plant A, the metallic priority pollutants present in detec-
table amounts were removed reasonably well. Antimony,
arsenic, beryllium, selenium and thallium were never
found above detection limits in influent or effluent
samples. Chromium and copper were reduced to less than
50 /ug/l (90 and 86 percent removal, respectively).
Cadmium, nickel and zinc were removed somewhat less
effectively, averaging 59 to 65 percent. Lead and silver
were removed to below detection limits. Also, eight of nine
organic priority pollutants detected in Plant A influent,
with an average concentration of over 10j/g/l, were
reduced by a minimum of 50 percent (benzene, 1,1,1-
trichloroethylene, chloroform, ethylbenzene, bis(2-ethyl-
'Guidelmes Establishing Test Procedures for the
Analysis of Pollutants To be published in the
Federal Register Proposed Amendments to
40CFR Part 136
-------
hexyl) phthalate, tetrachloroethylene, toluene and
trichloroethylene). Only phenol was not effectively
removed. Metals at Plant B were found at relatively low
concentrations. As in Plant A, antimony, arsenic, beryl-
lium, selenium and thallium were not measured above
detection limits in either the influent or effluent Cadmium
and silver were both reduced from several micrograms per
liter to below detection limits Cadmium, copper and zinc
were reduced effectively, between 69 and 81 percent.
Lead and nickel were removed less effectively Organic
priority pollutants at Plant B occurred at such low concen-
trations that removal data were not meaningful.
Most of the metals at Plant A were present at high concen-
trations in both the primary and secondary sludge.
Cadmium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc were each found
in primary sludge at concentrations over 100 times greater
than in the influent. Chromium and cyanide were found in
the primary sludge at 30 to 50 times the influent concen-
tration Antimony, arsenic, and beryllium, which were
never measured above detection limits in the influent,
were all measured in the primary sludge Several organic
priority pollutants detected at very low concentrations in
the influent accumulated in the primary or secondary
sludge. Among these were acenaphthene (0 to 1 pig/I
average in the influent and 169pig/l in the primary
sludge), 1,2-benzanthracene (<1 and 479), 3,4-benzo-
fluoranthene (not detected and 675), fluorene (<3 and
313) and pyrene (<3 and 757). Plant B data indicated the
same general trends for metals as in Plant A. Chromium,
copper, lead, nickel and zinc were found in the combined
sludge at approximately 100 times their concentrations in
the influent. Arsenic, cadmium, cyanide, mercury and
silver also accumulated in the sludge, but occurred at
overall lower levels Antimony, beryllium, selenium and
thallium, which were never measured above detection
limits in the influent were all found at concentrations
below 50/wg/l in the sludge. Several of the organic priority
pollutants which were present at very low concentrations
m influent also were more concentrated in the sludge.
They included acrylonitrile (not detected in the influent and
41 jjg/\ in the combined sludge), dichlorobromomethane
(0-1 and 74) and3,4-benzofluoranthene(notdetectedand
43).
Mass balances were analyzed at each plant to compare the
concentrations entering (influent) and leaving (effluent
and sludge) the POTW. The metallic priority pollutants at
Plant A balanced moderately well. Most of the metals
accumulated in the sludge. The concentrations of
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, silver and zinc
in the sludge were each 2 to 15 times the amounts in the
final effluent. However, copper, lead and zinc balanced
poorly. Arsenic was detected m Plant A's sludge (4 Ib/day)
but was not measured above the detection limit m the
influent. Some organic priority pollutants balanced poorly,
perhaps due to the release of volatile substances to the
atmosphere, a removal mechanism termed air stripping.
However, concentrations of other organic pollutants
which are less volatile, were found concentrated in the
sludge Accumulation of pollutants in the sludge at Plant B
was less pronounced than at Plant A due to the lower
concentrations of priority pollutants in the influent. A few
metals accumulated to a relatively small degree in the
sludge (chromium, copper, lead and zinc) and all of these
were found in greater quantity in the combined sludge
than in- the final effluent. There were insufficient data
upon which to draw conclusions regarding the organic
priority pollutant removal mechanisms or concentrations
m sludges at Plant B
Samples from the chlorine contact chambers and
receiving streams were analyzed for the possible
formation of chlorinated hydrocarbons Results from
sampling and analysis show that formation of chlorinated
hydrocarbons does occur.
Sampling frequency experiments showed that influent
metallic priority pollutant concentrations at Plant A
increased during the week and dipped during the
weekends and that high concentrations were also
observed during the 8'00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. work-day
period. This variation was not evident in Plant B's system
Organic pollutant concentrations were too low to show
significant trends.
The initial phase of study for the program has now been
completed and results from this two-plant investigation
have been published (EPA-440/1-79-300) and are
available at the Water Pollution Control Federation Con-
ference through the Effluent Guidelines Division, booth
2300, and from the Center for Environmental Research
Information
New Seminar Series: Sludge
Treatment and Disposal
The Cincinnati-based Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory and Center for Environmental Research
Information are planning a Technology Transfer design
seminar series on sludge treatment and disposal If
sufficient interest is expressed, the series would begin in
early or mid 1980. The proposed series would focus on the
effect of the 1 977 Clean Water Act as amended and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act on the design of
sludge treatment and disposal facilities The seminars
would be based on the newly revised Process Design
Manual on Sludge Treatment and Disposal (see story on
page 1) A small registration fee may be required. If you are
interested in this proposed seminar series, contact
Dr James E. Smith, USEPA—CERI, Cincinnati, Ohio
45268, (513) 684-7394.
-------
Publication Update:
Municipal Wastewater Alternatives
The brochure, "Environmental Pollution Control Alterna-
tives' Municipal Wastewater," has been updated and
reprinted. Originally written in 1976, the brochure
describes alternatives fortreating municipal wastewaters,
including primary and secondary treatment (such as
trickling filters and activated sludge), disinfection,
advanced treatment (such as carbon adsorption and
nitrogen control), flow equalization and sludge treatment
and disposal methods (such as conditioning and thicken-
ing). Figures pertaining to energy requirements and costs
for the various alternatives are significantly updated. To
receive a copy of the revised brochure (#501 2) return the
order form at the back of this Newsletter.
Trickling Filter
Sludge Drying Bed
Activated Sludge Aeration Tank
Aerated Lagoon
-------
New Capsule Report: Bahco FGD and
Particulate Removal System
A new Technology Transfer capsule report, "Bahco Flue
Gas Desulfunzation and Particulate Removal Systems,"
describes a Research — Cottrell/Bahco scrubber module
for S02 and participate emission control, at the central
heat plant of Rickenbacker Air Force Base near Columbus,
Ohio The capsule report describes flue gas desulf unzation
technology using any fuel, including high sulfuroilorcoal
Fuel is burned m conventional equipment in a manner both
cost effective and environmentally acceptable The
capsule report (#2022) can be ordered by returning the
form at the back of this Newsletter
The Bahco System at Rickenbacker Air
Force Base
New Environmental Assessment
Report on Short-Term Testing
A copy of this report (#9003) can be ordered by returning
the order form at the back of this Newsletter
The Center for Environmental Research Information has
published the first of a new series of Technology Transfer
reports on "Environmental Assessment." This series is
somewhat different from other Technology Transfer publi-
cations in that the topics, rather than focusing on control
technology or environmental engineering, will deal with
issues involving toxic substances and their effects on
human health and the environment Since much of the
Agency's effort and resources are now directed to regula-
ting the release of toxic chemicals into the environment,
the "Assessment" series was developed to provide a
means for collecting and disseminating the information
evolving from this effort. These reports are intended for an
audience whose chief concern is protection of human
health.
The first report in the series is entitled, "Short-Term Tests
for Carcinogens, Mutagens and Other Genotoxic Agents "
Short-term tests are techniques developed to serve as
rapid and relatively inexpensive predictors of a chemical's
potential to alter genetic material The report describesthe
way in which short-term tests contribute to toxic material
effects assessment The scientific basis for and techniques
used in the tests, as well as current applications and
research activities are also described.
SHORT TERM TESTING IN SUPPORT OF VARIOUS EPA PROGRAMS
-------
New Design Seminars for Small
Wastewater Treatment Systems
To date, five Technology Transfer Seminars on "Waste-
water Treatment Facilities for Small Communities"have
been presented in 1979: Phoenix, Arizona, July 17-19;
Portland, Oregon, July 31 - August 2; Omaha, Nebraska,
August 14-16; Indianapolis, Indiana, August 28-30; and
New Orleans, Louisiana, September 18-20.
Nationwide, in years past, a total of 20 seminars have been
presented on this topic; however, the five 1979 seminars
included two new technical sessions: "Management of
On-site and Alternative Wastewater Systems," and "Plan-
ning Wastewater Management Facilities for Small
Communities." The management session, presented by
Peter Ciotoli and Kenneth Wiswall of Roy F. Weston, Inc ,
West Chester, Pennsylvania, included discussions of
management needs, functions and dimensions (various
types of institutional approaches which can be utilized).
Actual case studies were used to illustrate the manage-
ment session. These studies, which involved extended
field trips by planners and engineers, evaluated actual
administrative and operational practices utilized in several
communities and states. Among the case studies
discussed are Fairfax County, Virginia, Lake Meade,
Pennsylvania; Otter Tail County, Minnesota; Stinson
Beach, California; and the State of Maryland.
The planning session, presented by James Hudson,
Patricia Deese and Robert McMahon of Urban Systems
Research and Engineering, Inc., Cambridge, Massachu-
setts, and James Lake and Robert Williams of the National
Association of Conservation Districts, Washington, D.C.,
included information designed to aid engineers and the
small communities th-ey serve in applying and evaluating
various methods for wastewater management This
information is intended to impact the early steps in the
planning process, particularly the preapplication and
facility planning (step 1) stages of the construction grants
program. Major topics addressed at the seminar were
institutional and regulatory setting; the application pro-
cess, development of a community profile; technical
problem identification and generation and evaluation of
systems for the community as a whole.
New Capsule Report: Particulate
Control by Fabric Filtration on Coal-
Fired Industrial Boilers
Conversion of oil- and gas- to coal-fired boilers and the
promulgation of more stringent particulate emission
regulations, have sparked a renewed interest in the use of
fabric filtration for boiler particulate control. A new
capsule report, describing theory, applications, perfor-
mance and economics of fabric filtration, is available. To
order this report (#2021) return the form at the back of this
Newsletter
"Stacks, baghouse and duct system at
typical coal-fired boiler plant"
-------
REQUEST FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
The publications listed on this form are the only ones available through the Office of Technology Transfer
(Check appropriate boxes)
PROCESS DESIGN MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (ApnM 976) . ... 1001D
Carbon Adsorption (Oct 1973) . .... .1002D
Suspended Solids Removal (Jan 1975) 1003D
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants (Oct 1974) 1004D
Sulfide Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems (Oct 1974) 1005D
Nitrogen Control (Oct 1975) . . .1007D
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct 1977) 1008 D
Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Sewered Small
Communities (Oct 1977) 1009D
Municipal Sludge Landfills (Oct 1978) 1010 d
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (Oct 1979) 101 id
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORTS
Recycling Zinc in Viscose Rayon Plants by Two Stage Precipitation 2001 D
Color Removal from Kraft Pulping Effluent by Lime Addition . . 2002 d
Pollution Abatement in a Copper Wire Mill ... . . . 2003 d
First Progress Report Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility .. 2004 D
Pollution Abatement in a Brewing Facility ... . 2006 CD
Flue Gas Desulfunaation and Sulfunc Acid Production via
Magnesia Scrubbing . ... 2007 D
Second Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2008 d
Magnesium Carbonate Process for Water Treatment 2009 d
Third Progress Report Lime/Limestone Wet-Scrubbing Test
Results at the EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 201 Od
First Progress Report Wellman-Lord S02 Recovery Process — Flue
Gas Desulfunzation Plant 2011 d
Swirl Device for Regulating and Treating Combined
Sewer Overflows ... 201 2 d
Fabric Filter Particulate Control on Coal-Fired Utility Boilers
Nucla. CO and Sunbury.PA 2013d
First Progress Report Static Pile Composting of Wastewater Sludge . 2014 d
Efficient Treatment of Small Municipal Flows at Dawson, MN 2015 d
Double Alkali Flue Gas Desulfunration System Applied at the
General Motors Parma, OH Facility 2016 d
Recovery of Spent Sulfunc Acid from Steel Pickling Operations .... 201 7 d
Fourth Progress Report Forced-Oxidation Test Results at the
EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility 2018 d
Control of Acidic Air Pollutants by Coated Baghouses 2020 d
Particulate Control by Fabric Filtration on Coal-Fired Industrial Boilers 2021 d
Bahco Flue Gas Desulfunzation and Particulate Removal System... . 2022 d
INDUSTRIAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Poultry Processing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols ).. . 3001 d
Upgrading Metal Finishing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols ) . .. . 3002 d
Upgrading Meat Packing Facilities to Reduce Pollution (3 Vols ) . .. .3003d
Upgrading Textile Operations to Reduce Pollution (2 Vols ) 3004 d
Choosing the Optimum Financial Strategies for Pollution Control
Systems 3005 d
Erosion and Sediment Control — Surface Mining in the
Eastern U S (2 Vols ) 3006 d
Pollution Abatement in the Fruit and Vegetable Industry (3 Vols ) .. . 3007 d
Choosing Optimum Management Strategies ......... .... 3008 d
Controlling Pollution from the Manufacturing and Coating of
Metal Products (3 Vols) . .......... 3009 d
MUNICIPAL SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Upgrading Lagoons . . ..... . 4001 d
Status of Oxygen Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment .... 4003d
Nitrification and Demtnfication Facilities .. ...... . . 4004 d
Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants— Case Histories 4005 d
Flow Equalization. . , 4006 d
Wastewater Filtration . . . . ... 4007 d
Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal . 4008 d
Air Pollution Aspects of Sludge Incineration . . 4009 d
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents (3 Vols ) 4010 d
Alternatives for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems (3 Vols ) 401 1 d
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (2 Vols ) ............... 401 2 d
Benefit Analysis for Combined Sewer Overflow Control .... 401 3 d
BROCHURES
Logging Roads and Water Quality . . . ,
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives Municipal Wastewater
Forest Harvesting and Water Quality .
Irrigated Agriculture and Water Quality Management .
Forest Chemicals and Water Quality
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives Economics of Wastewater
Alternatives for the Electroplating Industry . .
HANDBOOKS
Monitoring Industrial Wastewater (1973) .
Industrial Guide for Air Pollution Control (June 1978)
Continuous Air Pollution Source Monitoring Systems (June 1979)
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLLUTION CONTROL MANUALS
Pulp and Paper Industry Part 1 , Air (Oct
Textile Processing Industry (Oct 1978).
SUMMARY REPORTS
1976)
501 1 d
501 2 d
5013 d
5014 d
501 5 d
5016 d
6002 d
6004 d
6005 d
7001 d
7002 d
Sulfur Oxides Control Technology Series FGD Wellman Lord Process 8001 d
Control Technology for the Metal Finishing Industry Series Evaporators 8002 d
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Environmental Considerations of Energy - Conserving Industrial
Process Changes . ... . . 9001 d
Environmental Sampling of Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process . 9002 d
Short-Term Tests for Carcinogens, Mutagens and Other Genotoxic
Agents ... .... .... 9003 d
ATTENTION PUBLICATION USERS
Due to the increasing costs of printing and mailing, it has become necessary to institute positive management controls over distribution of Technology Transfer
publications Although these publications will be distributed on a no-cost basis, any request for more than five documents total, or for more than one copy of a single
document must be accompanied by written justification, preferably on organization letterhead In the event your order cannot be filled as requested, you will be
contacted and so advised
If you are not currently on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added? Yesd Nod
*Name
Employer-
Street
City, State, Zip Code.
*lt is not necessary to fill in this block if your name and address on reverse are correct
i Publication listed for the first time
Note Forward to CERI, Technology Transfer, U S Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
Where to Get Further Information
In order to get details on items appearing in this publication, or any other aspects of the
Technology Transfer Program, contact the EPA Regional Technology Transfer Committee
Chairman in your region
REGION CHAIRMAN
ADDRESS
REGION CHAIRMAN
ADDRESS
Lester Sutton Environmental Protection Agency
John F Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2313
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
617 223-2226
(Maine, N H , Vt , Mass , R I , Conn )
Robert Olson Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
212 264-1867
|NY,NJ,PR,VI)
Albert Montague Environmental Protection Agency
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
215 597-9856
(Pa , WVa, Md, Del , DC, Va )
Asa B Foster, Jr Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N E
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404 881-4450
(N C , S C , Ky , Tenn , Ga , Ala , Miss .
Fla )
Clifford Risley Environmental Protection Agency
230 S Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
312 886-4625
(Mich , Wis , Minn , III , Ind , Ohio)
6 Mildred Smith Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
First National Building
Dallas, Texas 75270
214 767-2697
(Texas, Okla , Ark , La , N Mex )
7 Charles M Hajmian Environmental Protection Agency
324 East 1 Hh Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
816 374-2921
(Kansas, Nebr , Iowa, Mo )
10
Elmer Chenault
Fred Hoffman
John Osborn
USEPA — OR&D
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
513-684-7394 - 7398 (Inc.)
Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
303 837-2277
(Colo , Mont , Wyo , Utah, N D , S D )
Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
415 556-6925
(Calif , Ariz , Nev , Hawaii)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
206 442-1296
(Wash , Ore , Idaho, Alaska)
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
------- |