This report is the result of a
literature search.  The contents
do not necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention
of trade names or commercial
products constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.
> A ^
                                    RECOMMENDED UNIFOSM
                                    EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS
                                    EPA Region III
                                    Enforcement Division

-------
1
1
1
1

1

1

1
1

1

1

1
1

1

1

1
1
1
1


Chapter

I
II
III
IV
V i
VI <
VII
VITI i
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV 1
xv :
xvi ;
XVII i
XVIII
XIX
XX
XXI
XXII
XXIII
XXIV
xxv :
j



                           CONTENTS
                           Topic
Preface
Arsenic
Barium
Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chlorine Residual
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Fecal Coliform
Fluoride
Hydrogen lon-Acidity-Alkalinity
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Oil and Grease
Phenol
Phosphorous
Selenium
Setteable Solids
Silver
Surfactants
Turhidity
Zinc
Appendix
Page

  1
 20
 30
 75
 89
 93
115
136
155
157
167
172
189
208
219
242
254
274
299
319
334
337
352
364
370

-------
I
I
I
I

-------
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
                            PREFACE

      This report is intended to meet the immediate needs of many
programs of the Environmental Protection Agency.  The information
can be used by the professional staff of the Permits Branch in
drafting industrial wastewater permit conditions, by the professional
engineering and legal personnel of the Enforcement Division in seek-
ing solutions to clean up the industrial, municipal and combined
municipal-industrial discharges into our nation's surface waters, by
Air and Water Programs Division in establishing effluent requirements,
by the engineering staff of the Municipal Facilities Branch in approv-
ing plans and grants for municipal wastewater treatment systems, and
by the administrative personnel in accomplishing the programs and
objectives of the EPA.
      The objectives of this work are to define the sources of certain
pollutants, their effects within the aquatic environment for speci-
fied uses and the level of technology for treatment which is currently
available and ecomically within reason and to recommend a uniform
effluent level for the parameters covered.  As such, very little
dependence is made for the dilution effect.  Rather, the ability of
the waters to dilute pollutants is reserved for the many uncontroll-
able discharges such as surface runoff.  Similarly, the toxicity of
a pollutant on fish and aquatic life under a limited duration of one
hour maximum is given more consideration than the effect of the pollu-
tant during extended exposure.
      In identifying the sources of each pollutant, both natural and
manmade sources, outside and within the immediate scope of EPA programs,
have been included.  While there are many areas which need further
investigation, the reader should at least gain a feeling for the
magnitude of the problem.
      Discussions of the effects of the pollutants within the aquatic
environment include the following: a) the impact on man, domestic
animals and wild life through consumption of water and food, b) the
impact on man, domestic animals and wildlife by direct contact in

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
1
I
I
I
I
I
 surface waters, c) the impact on plants by irrigation, d) the impact
 on  fish and other aquatic life by direct contact, taking into
 account the duration of the exposure, the physical, chemical and
 biological characteristics of both the discharge and receiving waters
 as  well as the concentration effect within the food chain.
      The currently available methods of treatment have been described
 with respect to the influent loading, the achieved effluent concen-
 tration(s), and both the capital and operating cost.  The heretofore
 nebulous description of treatment efficiency, in terms of percent
 removal, has been avoided wherever possible.  The stoichiometry of
 chemical treatment processes is discussed in general terms.
      The recommended uniform effluent concentrations are based on
 currently achievable concentrations for the particular waste under
 the worst waste condition reported.  Many wasteloads are currently
 treatable to lower levels than those recommended as the uniform level.
 In  fact, almost all wasteloads including even the worst, can be
 treated so that the  average effluent concentrations will be lower
 than the recommended uniform concentration.  The uniform effluent
 concentration is defined as the arithmetic average concentration
 (weight per unit volume - milligram per liter - mg/1) over a one
 hour period.  Ideally, this should be measured by continuous composite
 sample proportional to the instantaneous flow, for a one hour period.
 Due to practical and economical limitation ,however, the following
 are considered as acceptable alternatives.
      1.   At least 50% of the grab samples, collected at evenly
 spaced time intervals during any one hour period, should be less than
 the recommended concentration.
      2.   No single grab sample should exceed the recommended con-
 centration for Hazardous Materials by more than 50 percent
      3.   No single grab sample should exceed the recommended
 concentration for any parameter by more than 100 percent.

      In all situations the uniform effluent recommendations of this
 report apply to the treated process wastewaters prior to dilution
with non-process or cooling waters.

-------

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
 I
 I
I
      Every pollution problem must be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis.  This report defines an effluent level which can be reached
now by almost all dischargers.  In many cases the discharge levels
can be much lower.  In all situations the most stringent levels must
be used, be they federal, state or local regulations.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Max. Stream Cone
Parameter*
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Barium
Copper
Iron, Total
Iron, Dissolved
Manganese
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Cyanide
Fluoride
Oil and Grease
Phenolics
Phosphorus
Settleable Solids
Surfactants
Suspended Solids
BOD5
Total Chlorine
to Protect
Water Uses
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.010
none
1.0
0.02
0.1
0.1
0.05
0.5
0.010
0.003
1.0
0.01
1.0
0.3
0.001
0.01
none
0.5
none
none
0.002
                                      Effluent

                                   Unif.Eff.Cone.

                                      0.050
                                      0.100
                                      0.100
                                      0.100
                                      0.005
                                      2.0
                                      1.0
                                      2.0
                                      1.0
                                      0.1
                                      1.0
                                      0.010
                                      0.100
                                      1.0
                                      0.025
                                      1.5
                                     10.0
                                      1.0
                                      2.0
                                      0.2
                                      1.0
                                     30.0
                                    30 - 75
                                      0.1
   Concentrations
   Max.

 0.075
 0.150
 0.150
 0.150
 0.005
 4.0
 2.0
 3.0
 2.0
 0.2
 2.0
 0.020
 0.100
 2.0
 0.050
 1.5
10.0
 2.0
 4.0
 0.4
 2.0
30.0
90.0
 0.2
  Design
   Goal
  0.030
    none
    none
  0.010
    none
< 1.0
  0.03
< 1.0
< 0.3
  0.05
< 0.5
< 0.010
< 0.010
  0.1
    none
  0.5 - 1.0
  1.0 - 2.0
  0.1
< 1.0
    none
< 0.5
 15
                                                                none
   Residual
* All units are mg/1 except ml/1 for settleable solids
                               111

-------
 I
I


I


I

I


I


I


I
•


•


I
                                     CHAPTER I-ARSENIC



                                                                              _2
                     Arsenic  is found in most natural waters as arsenate  (AsO,  )


               or arsenite  (AsO~  ), occurring in sea water mainly as arsenite.


               Mineralogically, it may occur as elemental arsenic but it  is usually


               found as the arsenides of the true metals or as pyrites.   It is oxi-


               dized and recovered as a  byproduct in the smelting of many ores.


               Table 1-1 lists some of the naturally occurring levels of  arsenic in


               the environment.  A number of industrial sources of arsenic also


               exist.  These  are summarized in Table 1-2 with the approximate con-


               centrations to be expected in the various effluents.



               ENVIRONMENTAL  EFFECTS OF ARSENIC



                     Effect on Man


                     From a review of literature dealing with the biotic  responses


               to arsenic and its pharmacology it is apparent that arsenic compounds


               can elicit a variety of responses from living organisms depending on


               its form, concentration and mode of exposure.  In general  the effects


               include chronic and acute syndromes and possible carcinogenicity.  It
M


               is a cumulative poison in most life forms due to its low excretion


•             rates.  Schneider (83) reports that the human body constantly accumu-


               lates arsenic and that normal blood levels range from 0.2-1.0 mg/1


•             of arsenic.   Lambou and Lira (55) have reported that arsenic toxicity


_             decreases in the following order depending on the mode of entry into


•
               the body-arsenides, arsenates, colloidal arsenic, atoxyl and cacodyl.


               Arsenicals (pesticides)  also act locally as mild and slow corrosives.


               They systematically relax the capillaries and increase their permea-


               bility, thus creating inflammation.

-------
                                                                             I
      The fatal dosage of arsenic compounds may vary with the

solubility of the preparation.   Table 1-3 summarizes the human tox-          •

icity data available on arsenic.     Lambou reports that trioxide is         •

toxic at 5-50 mg and is usually fatal at 0.06-0.18 g (55).   McKee

and Wolf (66) report that arsenic concentrations of 0.21 mg/1-10.0 mg/1      •

are sometimes poisonous to human beings; on the other hand concentra-

tions of 0.05 mg/1-0.2 mg/1 in drinking water can be safe for human          V

consumption.  The mortality rate of acute clinical arsenic poisoning         «

has been reported to be 50-75% (55).   Acute arsenic poisoning results

in violent gastroenteritis which resembles cholera.  It may also cause       •

skin eruptions and liver or heart damage.  The chronic or subacute

symptoms include weakness, loss of appetite, gastrointestinal dis-           f

turbances, hoarseness, coughing and laryngitis, peripheral neuritis,         «

occasional hepatitis and skin disorders.                                     *

      Schneider (83) reports that arsenic consumed in domestic water         fl

supplies would not be carcinogenic, a statement supported by Lambou

and Linn (55).  However, McKee and Wolf (66) report several incidents        •
of cancer which may be attributable to consumption of arsenic in water.
                                                                             1
It is possible that the form of the compound may be the controlling          •

factor.  Potentially recognized possible sites of carcinogenic effects       IB

in humans are the skin, lung and liver.  Other suspected sites include

the mouth, esophygus, larynx and bladder (55).                               •

      Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life

      	 	 _„ 	 	 	 _i	

summarized in Tables 1-4 and 1-5.  These tables give the toxic and           M

tolerable levels found by various researchers.  Some organisms have

been found to concentrate arsenic from the surrounding water.  Marine        •


                                                                             I

-------
1
I
1

1

1
1

1
^m
1

t

1
1


1
1
1
1
1
I
TABLE 1-1
CONCENTRATION OF ARSENIC IN NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Source Concentration Reference

Soils up to 500 mg/kg (83)
Earth crust 1.8 mg/kg (55)
U.S. surface water 0.01-0.1 mg/1 (55)
Sea water 0.003 mg/1 (6)

Normal blood 0.2-1.0 mg/1 (83)
Molluscs, Coelenterates up to 0.3 mg/kg (83)
and Crustaceans
Marine plants (highest up to 30 mg/kg (83)
in the Brown algae)
Marine animals 0.005-0.3 mg/kg (83)
Shellfish over 100 mg/kg (66)
Fish oils (15 species): Average 11.8 mg/1
Range 1.20-60-10 (33)





3

-------
TABLE 1-2
SOURCES AND SOME KNOWN CONCENTRATIONS

IN INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS
Source
Manufacture of
Parisgreen
Calcium meta-arsenate
Insecticides (Arsenical)
Industrial or municipal discharge
of pre-soak household detergent
Laundry products (currently available)
Laundry detergents discharged into Kansas
sewage system
OF ARSENIC


Concentration Reference
362 mg/1 (76)
(as anArsenious
oxide)

up to 70 mg/1 (55)

up to 36 mg/1 (55)
0.002-0.01 mg/1 (15)

1
1

|
Wf



1

I


Mineral rock; waste from industry and mining mean-0.034 (15)
activity; residues from pesticides in major
U.S. River Basins (1962-7)
Herbicides and pesticides manufacture

Glassware and ceramic products
Tannery operations
Fish processing plant
Sulfuric acid made from sulfide ores
Acid mine drainage (active and abandoned
mines)
Fly ash scrubber drainage
Storm runoff from power plant
Metallurgical industry



4
max -0.336
significant amount (61)
of arsenic compound
(76)
(76)
(76)
(55)
(55)

(55)
(55)
(61, 76, 55)




1



1

1



t
1
1
I
1
t

-------
1
1

f



1
w

I
•

1

1

1
V

















1

f
plants, specifically brown algae, have been found to contain con-
centrations up to 30 mg/1. Accumulations of up to 0.3 mg/1 have
been reported in some molluscs, coelenterates , and crustaceans. Some
reported accumulation factors are shown in Table 1-6.

TABLE 1-3

TOXIC EFFECTS OF ARSENIC ON HUMANS

Form
Undefined
Undefined






Elemental

Trioxide
Trioxide
Sodium
Arsenite
Undefined


Undefined
Undefined

Undefined


Undefined


Undefined
Undefined
Undefined




Cone (or Dose)
130 mg
130 mg






Ingest ion of un-
specified concentra-
tions
5-50 mg
60-180 mg
325 mg

Prolonged ingestion
at low cone .

Non-oral dose
Oral, drinking water

Normal exposure to
workers in arsenical
industry
0.21 mg/1


0.3-1.0 mg/1
0.4-10.0 mg/1
12 mg/1

5


Effects Reference
Lethal (59)
Severe poisoning; (59)
cumulative toxic effect;
small eruptions on hands
and soles of feet, sometimes
developing into cancer;
possible liver damage and
heart ailments, causal
factor for Hoff's disease.
Sub-acute and acute (59)
symptoms

Toxic (55)
Fatal (55)
Lethal (66)

Chronic, sub-acute symptoms (59)


positive, epidermal cancer (59)
possible carcinogen to skin (66)
and liver.
no significant increase in (59)
cancer mortality.

poisonous over a long period (66)
of time

(66)
(66)
Death (66)




-------
                                                                              I
The Green Book reports that arsenic is moderately toxic to plants and
highly toxic to animals, especially as AsH., (6).  They also report
that fish food organisms can tolerate an application rate of 2 mg/1           •
of As_0_.  A level of 15 mg/1 has been reported to be toxic to certain
                                                                              1
fish eggs, including Lepomis macrochirus and Micropterus dolomieui.           m
The eggs of these two species survived 7 and 6 days, respectively             m
following exposure.  The effluent from nuclear reactors may contain
appreciable concentrations of arsenic-76 which may be concentrated            •
somewhat in the aquatic food chain (55).

bottom muds or even in plankton (55).  Should further study confirm            «
this hypothesis it would amplify the importance of controlling arsenic
in effluents wherever the soluble phosphorous concentration is suffi-          •
cient to produce a heavy aquatic growth.

      Effect on Plants and Animals                                             ^

      Arsenic at very low concentrations appears to stimulate plant            •
growth, however, the presence of any excess soluble arsenic will re-
duce crop yields.  The mode of action appears to be the destruction            •
of chlorophyll.  McKee and Wolf (66) report that old orchard soils in          !•
the state of Washington were found to be unproductive when a concentra-
tion of 4 to 12 mg/kg of arsenic trioxide, was reached in the top soil.        •
They also reported that fruits and vegetables, however, have been
found to contain arsenic compounds due to natural conditions alone (66).       |
Table 1-7 summarizes some effects of arsenic on specific species of
plants.

                                                                                I
I
                                                                                I

-------
1
1
1
1
1



1
•V
1

1

1
m





1

1

•
*
1

1
1
Sickness and death of cattle have been reported to result
from consumption of arsenic naturally present in water supplies (66)
The lethal dose of arsenic is believed to be approximately 20 mg/lb
of animal weight. The dosages of arsenic toxic to various animals
are given in Table 1—8. Arsenic has been used in drinking water to
counteract selenium poisoning in cattle, pigs, dogs and rats.



CONCENTRATIONS OF ARSENIC
Type of
Organisms
fish
pike perch
bleak
carp
eels
crabs
bass
minnows
crappies and bluegills
minnows

Chironomus

fish food organisms
pink salmon
fish
bass
bass, bluegills, crappies
mussels
f latworms



TABLE 1-4

TOXIC TO FISH AND AQUATIC
Concentration of
Arsenic (mg/1)
1.1
1.1-2.2
2.2
3.1
3.1
4.3
7.6
11.6
15
17.8-234
Concentration of Arsenic
trioxide (mg/1)

1.96
2-4
5.3
10
10
10
16
40

7



ORGANISMS (66)
Time of
Exposure
	
2 days
3 days
4-6 days
3 days
11 days
10 days
36 hours
	
	


	
	
8 days
	
10 days
3-16 days
	



-------
CONCENTRATIONS OF
Type of Organism
pike perch
fish
bleak
fish
carp
eels
crabs
fish
bass
trout
minnows


chironomus larvae
food organisms
bass, bluegills,
fish
mayfly nymphs
some zooplankton
trout, bluegills,
sea lamprey
fish
coho salmon
fish
mussels
trout
insect larvae
minnows


TABLE 1-5
ARSENIC TOLERATED BY FISH AND AQUATIC ORGANISMS (66)
Concentration of
Arsenic, mg/1
0.7-1.1
0.76
1.1-1.6
1.5-5.3
2.2
2.2
3.1
5.3
6.0
7.6
13.0
Concentration of
Arsenic trioxide mg/1
1.9
2
crappies 2-6
2-7
3-14
5
5
5
5-10
7
8
10
10-20
17.1

8
Time of
Exposure
48 days
	
11 days
1-7 days
13 days
13 days
90 days
24-148 hours
232 hours
30 days
1 hour


~
	
1-7 days
	
	
24 hours
— _
15-30 minutes
24-148 hours
	
1 month
	
1 hour


1
1
1

*
1



1

I
•V
1

1



1

1



1

1
1
1

-------
                                        TABLE  1-6
 I
                    ACCUMULATION OF ARSENIC IN AQUATIC ORGANISMS  (55)
 I
                 Organism                              Concentration Factor
               Benthic Algae                                   2000
 ™             Mollusc (muscle)                                650
 •             Crustacean (muscle)                             400
 m             Fish (muscle)                                   700
               Various species seaweed                         200-600
 t
 I
 I
 I
 I
 t
 I
 I
I
I
f

-------
w
             vo
                              o
                             M
                                         CO
                                         0)
                                         §
                                         3
                                         a
                                         CO
                                         cd
                                         o

                                         00
 a
 0)
A!
 O
 cfl
H
pq
                                                           T)
                                                            CU
                                                            4-1
                                                            CO
O
M
00

4-1
O
O
 4J
 &
 O
 ft
 O
 4J

T)

 9
 4J
 O

 s

 o
 4J
                                                                       O
                                                                       4J
                       O
                       M
                       (30

                       ft
                       o
                       o
                       O
                                                                                  O
                                                                                  4-1

                                                                                  CJ
            O
            4-1
 CO
 3
 O
•H
 H

•i-)

•S
                       •a
CO
H

•H
4J
•H
CO
pi
cu
CO
\_x
CO
^
cu
.0
B
3
o
3
CJ
co
4J
8
rH
dJ
«\
CO
cd
cu
pq
























CO
cu
CO
CO
cd /*^
^1 4-1
60 ti
cd
* M
co a)
	 i
r-H
cd o
01 4J
M
01 >>
O i-*
CU
" >
CO i-t
P. 4J
•H CO
fi H
M 0)
3 M
4J ^

rH
g
bO
0
iH




CU
4-1
cd
c
cu
CO
s
A
01
4J
•H
c
Ol
CO
)_l

B
m











01
4-J
cd
a
01
CO
ii
<














CO
4-1
c
Cd
rH
a
c
o
a
Ol,
hJ

rH
c!
a
0
O
rH











CU
4J
•H
§
CO
Ij
^














CO
4J
0
CO
rH
ft
ti
Ol
hJ

rH
(3
M
0
rO
(M











01
4-1
n)
C
CU
0)
Lj
%















CO
4J
CU
CU
,0
M
cO
60
3
CO
                                                                      10
                                                                                                                            I
                                                                                                                            f
                                                                                                                            I
                                                                                                                            I
                                                                                                                            t

-------
1
1
•1
1




1




I
•
I

1






1




1



1
1
1

TABLE 1-8
CONCENTRATIONS OF ARSENIC TOXIC TO
Species
Laboratory
animals

Dog
Swine
Sheep, goat,
horse

Cow
Rats, Mice

Chickens
Fowl
Guinea Pigs
Mouse


Laboratory
animals
Laboratory
animals


Rats
(cancer sensi-
tive strain)






Dose Form

5-100 rag/kg arsenic


100-200 mg/kg
500-1000 mg/kg
10,000-15,000 mg 	


15,000-30,000
15.1-214 mg/kg Arsenic
Trioxide
324 mg 	
50-100 mg
14-30 mg/kg 	
5 mg/1 for life Sodium
(0.50 mg/kg/day) Arsenite

0.5 mg/kg/day 	

2.5 mg/kg/day 	



0.1 ml of 1% 	
lanolin suspension
in paranasal
sinuses (3 times) .




n


ANIMALS
Effects Reference

Lethal (66)


Toxic (55,66)
Toxic (55,66)
Toxic (55,66)


Toxic (55,66)
96hr. LD(50) (66)

Lethal in 24hr. (66)
Toxic (55,66)
Lethal (105)
Significant de- (105)
crease in survival
and longevity
Change in condi- (105)
tioned reflexes
Morphological (105)
changes in blood and
impairment of kidney
function; cumlative
in organs
11 of 20 developed (105)
a total of 15 tumors
of 7 types. Control:
8 of 20 developed
a total of 8 tumors
of 4 types





-------
TABLE 1-9
ARSENIC TREATMENT METHODS AND REMOVAL EFFICIENCY
Concentration mg/Jl
Treatment Initial Final %Removal
Lime Softening 0.2 0.03 85
Charcoal Filtration 0.2 0.06 70
Ferric Sulfide 0.8 0.05 94
Filter Bed
Coagulation with 25.0 5 or less 80 or more
Ferric Sulfate
Coagulation with 3.0 0.05 98
Ferric Chloride
Precipitation with 	 0.6
Ferric Hydroxide
Precipitation with 362 15-20 94-96
Ferric Hydroxide by (as Arsenic (as Arsenic
Ferrous Sulfate & Oxide) Oxide)
Lime Coagulation
with Settling only
Ferrous 0.8 0.05 94
Sulfide Filter
Bed, Bone Carbon &
Settling
Ferrous 0.5 trace
Sulfide Filter Bed,
followed by Sand &
Coke Filtration

Chemical 0.05-0.5 80-95
Coagulation,
Sedimentation, and
Filtration
Activated Sludge 0.0028+0.0004 0.0010+0.0005
Removal /Biomass 0.040 +0.01 0.0228+0.009
0.133 +0.023 0.056 +0.01

12

References
(55,76)
(76)
(76)

(76)

(76)

(76)

(76)



(76)


(76)



(97)


(103)



1
1
1
1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1
1




I

1

1
1

-------
  •            TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - ARSENIC REMOVAL





                      Currently available treatment technology consists of cold-lime




  |            softening and the more standard procedures of coagulation, settling




  m            and filtration.  Complexation of the arsenic compounds with heavy




                metals has been reported as a potential removal mechanism not only in




  •            the above processes, but as a third treatment method.




                      The 1970 works of Magnusen et al, reviewed and discussed by




  ^            Lambou and Lim (55)and Patterson and Minear (76) show that lime soften-




  «            ing will reduce an initial arsenic complex concentration of 0.2 mg/1




                to approximately 0.03 mg/1, thus achieving an 85% removal.  Simple




  IB            filtration through a charcoal bed can reduce arsenic from 0.2 mg/1 to




                a final effluent level of 0.06 mg/1 of arsenic (55,76).   Arsenic re-




  •             moval has also been accomplished by passage of the wastewater through




  —             a ferrous sulfide filter bed followed by bone carbon settling and




 ™             filtration (76).   Coagulation with iron salts (ferric  sulfate, ferrous




 B             sulfate, ferric chloride)  and subsequent rapid sand or multi media




                filtration of the ferric hydroxide precipitate is another arsenic




 •             removal process (76).   When the arsenic bearing wastewaters are acid,




                lime is normally used  to adjust the pH to alkaline conditions (pH = 10).




 '                   Arsenic compounds have been reported to be removed upon sedi-



 A             ments.   Lund  (61)  proposes  that arsenic may be precipitated from




                wastewaters bearing heavy metals by complexation of the  arsenic with



 •              the heavy metal ions.   He has reported approximately 90% removal of




                the initial arsenic concentration by complexation with heavy metals,




 •              when the heavy metals  were  removed by chemical precipitation.









                                                13





 I
I

-------
                                                                             I
This complexation of arsenic compounds appears to be one of the
mechanisms involved in the ferric hydroxide precipitation.                   •
      A tabulation of the currently available methods for treating           g|
arsenic compounds and their degree of removal is given in Table 1-9.
The cost of arsenic removal will be similar to that of routine water         •
treatment.  The chemical cost associated with this method will be
that of the coagulant and lime needed for precipitation.  A summary          0
of treatment processes, their effectiveness and cost, by Weston (97)         m
has shown the capital cost (in millions of dollars) to be approxi-
mately 0.3 for a one MGD facility, 1.3 for a ten MGD plant, and 4.6          W
for a fifty MGD facility.  These cost estimates do not include the
cost of sludge or lime disposal.                                             f

      Three figures illustrating the treatment cost for arsenic are          •
included here (76) .  Figure 1-1 indicates the total cost of treatment
by coagulation, sedimentation and rapid sand filtration.  Figure 1-2         •
gives the operating cost for lime neutralization and, Figure 1-3
shows the capital cost for 21.0 MGD lime neutralization plant.               •
      In summary, it has been shown that coagulation, sedimentation,         •
and filtration are the most common and effective means of treating
arsenic bearing wastes.  Where the arsenic wastewaters are acidic,           •
pH adjustment to alkaline conditions will be required for effective
removal.  The cost of treatment will depend on the volume of wastes          •
to be treated and their initial water quality parameters, especially         flj
the acidity.
                                14
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
f
                               Figure  1-1


        Total cost of treatment by coagulation, sedimentation and
rapid sand filtration.  Cost includes capital investments for 30
years at 4%, labor, power, chemicals, maintenance and repair, and
heating of building (76).
Q
W
H
3
o
o
o
w
p-l
H
tr>
o
H
o
H
    100
    10
                         Note:
        Dashed lines represent probable
        range of costs; solid line
        represents average cost.
                                                   I    I	I
      .1
            1.0

FLOW IN MILLION GAL. PER DAY
10
                                 15

-------
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                       Figure  1-2


     Operating costs for lime neutralization,
including sludge dewatering by vacuum filtration  (76)
        o
        o
        •1VO OOOT/3 'SISOD
                       16
                                         o
                                         o
                                         o
                                            00
                                            e
                                         O  SH
                                         O  M
                                         O  O
                                         O
                                         O
                                       O i-t

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                    Figure  1-3


           Capital cost for a  1 MGD  lime  neutralization
      plant, including sludge  disposal  (76).
o
o
o
o
o
o
               S,OOOT $  'ISOO IVIIdVD
                       17
                                                   a)
                                                   O
                                                   tn
                                                   cfl
                                                   B
                                                   ex
                                                   a,
                                                   P
o
o

-------

-------
               SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I
              The following conclusions can be drawn from the above data.
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
              1.    Arsenic and arsenic compounds are apparently tolerated by man
                    and other organisms at the levels found normally in the en-
                    vironment except in a few locales with high arsenic contain-,
                    ing mineralogy.
              2.    The above review indicates that arsenic compounds are cumu-
                    lative throughout the entire food chain and are possibly con-
                    centrated upon bottom sediments.  While man, fish, plants, and
                    wild life are capable of tolerating most natural arsenic con-
                    centrations all are sensitive to toxic effects at relatively
                    low dosage.
              3.    Currently available treatment for arsenic and arsenic compounds
                    is capable of maintaining an effluent concentration of 0.05 mg/1.
                     While higher effluent concentrations are reported for some
                    wastes,  filtration of the settled effluent should be capable of
                    maintaining a final concentration of 0.05 mg/1.
              4.     Further  literature review and research is needed to define the
                    best available treatment technology.
I
                     Arsenic and arsenic compounds may be contributed to the
|             aquatic environment, and to its food chains, by the precipitation of
_             arsenic-bearing atmospheric particulates.   This represents a source
~             of arsenic uncontrollable by effluent standards, and necessitates
•             the strictest possible limits on the controllable effluents.  It is
               essential that the concentration of arsenic compounds in our nation's
•             waters be kept to an absolute minimum.   Even with minimum achievable

I

I

-------
                                                                                     I
levels in receiving waters, arsenic may still be concentrated to a
certain degree upon bottom sediments.  This of itself necessitates
the use of filtration where arsenic is a potential problem in a dis-                 I
charge.
      It is, therefore, recommended that a uniform effluent limit of                 |
0.05 mg/1 be adopted at this time.  When improved treatment technol-                 «
ogy becomes available, it should be applied to maintain arsenic
levels at the lowest level possible.  An arsenic concentration of                    •
0.05 mg/1 should be safe for human consumption.
                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                     I

                                                                                      I

                                                                                      I

                                                                                      I

-------
1

1



1

1



1


Salts of barium

CHAPTER II-BARIUM
are found naturally in soils and unweathered
rock, hence, small concentrations are found in rivers and sea water.

Barium salts are used
ceramics, rubber, dye,
(66,76).
Table II-l shows
The range in drinking

as 3.0 mg/1.
Table II-2 is a

extensively in the metallurgical, glass and
explosives, concrete, and paint industries

some naturally occurring levels of barium.
water is from less than 0.0006 mg/1 to as high


list of the most commonly used barium salts in
agricultural and industrial establishments. Also listed in that
1



I
•
1

1



1
table is the maximum solubility of the salt between 10°C and 90°C
(61,66).

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Effect on Man


OF BARIUM


The alkaline earth metal, barium, and its salts are toxic to
man, animals, fish and
II-3 lists some of the
other aquatic life in varying degrees. Table
toxic levels of various salts. Unlike other
metals and toxic substances, barium has been studied extensively


with respect to toxicity levels and time of exposure. It can be seen
that a dose of 550-600
mg of barium is fatal to man.
The salts of barium are muscle stimulats, especially of the
1



1

1
heart. Barium acts by
constricting the blood vessels creating an
increase in blood pressure. Barium sulfate when aspirated may cause

granuloma of the lung




and other sites in man. It is further reported

20


-------
that deposition of insoluble forms of barium in sufficient amounts


at localized sites may cause chronic irreversible changes in tissues


(94).


      According to McKee and Wolf (66) , the fact that barium is ex-


creted more rapidly than calcium indicates that there is little


chance of a cumulative effect within the human body.  Actual studies


confirm that barium does not accumulate in the bone, muscle, kidney,


or other tissue (66,94).





                           TABLE II-1



           NATURALLY OCCURRING LEVELS OF BARIUM (59)
Source



Various River Basins


Rivers, selected


N. Atlantic Slope Basin


Drinking Water
      Cone.
0.015  -


0.009  -


0.010  -


0.0006 -
 .090 mg/1


 .152 mg/1


0.150 mg/1


3.000 mg/1
                               21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
1

1
TAB
COMMONLY USED

Lt LL-i
BARIUM SA1

Salt Solubility
1
1

|


1

|
•

1

1



1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Barium Acetate
Barium Carbonate
Barium Chloride
Barium Nitrate
Barium Sulfate
Barium Silica Fluoride

* Industry Use is defined as
588 g/.l
22 mg/1
393 g/.l
50 g/1
1.15 mg/1
260 mg/1

follows:
1. Natural rock weathering
2. Chemical industry
3. Dry and Tanning
4. Textiles
5. Paint
6. Electronic
7. Pyrotechnic
8. Petroleum
9 . Rubber
10. Glass
11 . Metal Manufacture




















22

Industry Use*





  3, 4, 5




  1, 2




  2, 3, 4, 5




  6, 7, 8




  2, 3, 4, 5,  9




  10,  11

-------
                                                                               I
      On the basis of the threshold limiting values in industrial              M
atmospheres, an estimate of the amount adsorbed into the bloodstream,
and daily consumption of two liters of water, it is estimated that             •
consumption of barium should be limited to 2.0 mg/1 (66).  McKee and
Wolf (66) and the Drinking Water Standards (94) have recommended a             |
limit of 1.0 mg/1 to provide a safety factor and to allow for possible         «
accumulation in the body.                                                      *
      Effect on Plants
      According to the data provided by McKee and Wolf, barium is
I
present in most soils, however, it is not utilized by most plants.
Barium is considered to be poisonous to them (66) .                             •

      Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life                                    ^

      The lethal concentration of barium in fish and aquatic life
varies according to the form in which it is found.  The lethal con-            •
centration limit of barium for sticklebacks is 400 mg/1 (66).   Gold-
fish have a concentration factor of approximately 150 for barium.              •
While none of the other data reviewed indicates that other fish or             •
aquatic life concentrate barium, it should be considered as a possi-
bility.                                                                        |
      A review of the effect of various barium salts on fish and
aquatic life as reported in McKee and Wolf is summarized below (66):           •
            Barium acetate at a concentration of 5 mg/1 was found              •
            to have no effect on rainbow trout, bluegill sunfish,
            and sea lamprey during a 24-hour exposure.                         •


                                                                               I

                               23                                               §

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
Barium carbonate was found to have a 96-hour TLm greater


than 10,000 mg/1 for mosquito fish.  However, it was


noted that the limiting solubility of barium carbonate


is 22 mg/1.


Barium chloride is reported to have harmed the nervous


system of young silver salmon after a 72-hour exposure


at a concentration of 50 mg/1.  Barium chloride in Lake


Erie water at 20-25°C was found to have threshold con-


centrations of 12 mg/1 for Leptodora kindtii and 29 mg/1


for Daphnia magna.  Barium chloride was also found to have


a lethal concentration of 10 mg/1 on the aquatic plant,


Elodea canadensis, and 11.1 and 14.3 mg/1 on two differ-


ent species of snails.


Barium nitrate has been found to be lethal in concentra-
•                          tions of 20 mg/1 for two species of snails,  10 mg/1 for


                            Elodea canadensis and 200 mg/1 for goldfish.   In investi-


M                          gations of Lake Huron water at 12°C, a 24-hour exposure


                            to Barium nitrate at a concentration of 5.0  mg/1 had no


*                          effect on rainbow trout, bluegill sunfish, or the sea


B                          lamprey.


                            Barium sulfide at a concentration of 5.0 mg/1 was investi-


•                          gated in Lake Huron water at 12 C and no effect on rain-


                            bow trout, bluegill sunfish, or the sea lamprey was indi-


™                          cated after a 24-hour exposure.


•                    On the basis of the above data, McKee and Wolf recommended a


                maximum concentration of 5.0 mg/1 of barium for fish and other


•              aquatic life (66).
I
                                               24

-------
                                                                                 I




TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - BARIUM REMOVAL                                            •




      While there is not an extensive amount of literature available             _



on the treatment of barium, Patterson and Minear (76) and Weston (97)            ™



have proposed the following methods for barium removal.  The most                •



likely method, according to both sources, is coagulation and precipi-



tation of barium as barium sulfate.  Weston indicates that filtration            I



may be desirable for effluent polishing.  Precipitation with sodium



and ferric sulfate have also been reported as effective.  Patterson              •



and Minear pointed out that maximum theoretical solubility of barium             •



sulfate is 1.4 mg/1 (as barium).  Ferric sulfate has been effectively



used in removing the finer non-settleable barium sulfate precipitate             •



and could eliminate the need for final filtration.



      Other methods reported by Patterson and Minear include the use             •



of adsorption by activated carbon, ion exchange, and electrodialysis.            •



While no efficiency was reported for adsorption on activated carbon,



an operating cost of 20 centsper thousand gallonswas given.  Removal             I



of barium from nuclear waste was reported as 99.99% efficient and an



efficiency of 99% removal from non-nuclear wastewaters was achieved.             •



Electrodialysis similarly was reported as 99.9% efficient in the re-



moval of barium.



      While little cost data are available, Weston has indicated that            •



coagulation and precipitation of barium with sodium sulfate followed



by settling and filtration is capable of achieving a final barium                •



effluent concentration of 1-2 mg/1 at a capital cost of $200 per                 •



thousand gallons for a 1 MGD plant; $128 per thousand for a 10 MGD



plant, and $92 per thousand gallons for a 50 MGD plant.  In relation             •








                                                                                 I
I

-------
I
             to the capital  costs  of  a typical  secondary  sewage  treatment  facil-
•           ity,  these  capital  costs range  from 3-6  times  less.

I           SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

_                 On the basis  of the data  discussed above,  the following state-
             ments can be made:
•                 1.   It is  apparent that  barium  may be found  in  the  industrial
                        wastewater from several industries  including, but  not
•                      limited  to, metallurgy, glass manufacture,  textiles and
_                      dyes,  vulcanization  of  rubber,  paints, tanning,  embalming,
*                      electronics,  pyrotechnics,  and radioactive  wastewaters.
fl                 2.   Barium is  toxic to man, animals,  fish and aquatic  life.
                   3.   Based  on the  known toxicity to man,  the  maximum allowable
•                      concentration should be 1.0 mg/1.  Based on barium's
_                      toxicity to fish  and aquatic  life,  barium should not be
*                      discharged in concentrations  greater than 5.0 mg/1.
•                 4.   Treatment  by  coagulation, precipitation, and filtration
                        has  been reported to reduce barium  concentrations  to an
I                      effluent level of 1-2 mg/1.   Treatment by activated
                        carbon,  ion exchange, and electrodyalisis has been re-
™                      ported to  have high  percentages of  removal  (over 99%).
•                      Removal  of barium from  industrial wastes by coagulation,
                        precipitation, settling, and  filtration  are achievable
•                      at capital costs  3-6 times  less than the cost of a
                        typical  secondary sewage treatment  facility.

                   On the basis  of the above statements,  it is recommended that  a

I
I
26

-------
maximum uniform effluent criteria for barium be set at a concen-


tration of 2.0 mg/1.  Where an industrial or a municipal discharge


containing barium is located immediately upstream from a domestic


water supply intake, it is recommended that treatment be employed


to maintain effluent concentration below 1.0 mg/1.





                          TABLE I1-3



       TOXIC EFFECTS OF BARIUM ON MAN AND ANIMALS (105)
Compd
Ba"
BaCO.
3
BaC03
BaC03
BaCO,,
3
BaC03
BaC03
BaC03
BaC03
BaCl_
2
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl2
Ba F0
Species
Human
Human

Rabbit
Rat
Rat

Rat
Mouse
Rabbit
Guinea Pig
Human

Rat
Dog
Mouse
Rat
Dog
Horse
Rabbit
Guinea Pig
                             Dose_


                             500-600 mg

                                 800 mg

                             170-300 mg/kg

                              50-200 mg/kg

                                 800 mg/kg

                             1,480+340 mg/kg

                                 200 mg/kg

                             170-130 mg/kg

                               1,000 mg/kg

                                 100 mg/kg

                                 250 mg/kg

                                  90 mg/kg

                                7-14 mg/kg

                             355-533 mg/kg

                                  90 mg/kg

                           800-1,000 mg/kg

                                 170 kg

                                 350 mg/kg
Effect
Lethal
LD

LD
50

50
Lethal

LD50

LD50

Lethal
LD
  50
LD50

Lethal
LD
                                                             50
                               27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
 I
I
                          TABLE II-3
       TOXIC EFFECTS OF BARIUM ON MAN AND ANIMALS (105)
Compd
Ba
Species
Human
BaCl      Rat
  C12     Rabbit
Dose
                     Chronic Effect


                     vaso-constriction
                    elevation of BP,
                    muscle stimulant,
                    especially heart

                    changes in conditioned
                    reflexes, slight
                    tissue structure
                    changes slight decrease
                    in cholinesterase
                    activity

5, 2.5, +1 mg/kg/day Decrease in
13.2 mos.            cholinesterase
                     activity at 5 mg/kg.
                     No changes at other
                     doses.
None reported
                   20 mg/kg/day
                   10 mg/kg/day
                   for 6.5 mos.
                                  28

-------
TABLE
TOXIC EFFECTS OF BARIUM ON
Salt
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl,
l
BaCl.
2
BaN03
BaN03
BaN03
BaCO
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaCl2
BaN03
BaCl2
BaCl2







Species
Silver Salmon
Silver Salmon
Plants (Elodea)
Snails
Snails
Tinea vulgaris 10
Snail
Elodea
Goldfish
Gambusia af finis 10

Daphnia magna
Daphnia magna
Gambusia affinis 3

Rana sp. (eggs) 24
Gasterosteus aculeatus

Mosquito fish
Young eels






29
II-4
FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE
Concentration, mg/1 Reference
158 72 hr LD90 (66)
282 100% kill in 23 hrs. (66)
10 Lethal threshold (66)
11.1 Lethal threshold (66)
14.3 Lethal threshold (66)
,000 Lethal threshold (66)
20 Lethal threshold (66)
10 Lethal threshold (66)
200 Lethal threshold (66)
,000 Lethal threshold (15)
83 immobilization threshold (15)
(.48 hrs)
29 immobilization threshold (15)
(64 hrs)
,200 Lethal threshold (15)
,430 Lethal threshold (15)
400 Lethal threshold (15)
1640 96 hr. TL (66)
m
2083 36 hr. TL (66)
m







1
1
|
I
•



1

1

I
•
1

•

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                          CHAPTER III


        BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS


IDENTIFICATION OF THE PARAMETERS


      Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and suspended solids (SS) are


two of the most commonly used parameters to describe effluent quali-


ties.


      The decay of organic matter washed into streams during a rain-


fall will exert a BOD.  Natural erosion may result in a suspended


solids concentration.  In addition to natural sources, domestic and


industrial wastewater discharges also contain substantial amounts of


BOD and suspended solids.  Various sources and concentrations found


in the material studied are summarized in Table III-l.


BOD


      The BOD test is a measurement of the oxygen required by living


organisms (bacteria) to decompose organic material under aerobic con-


ditions.  It is a laboratory procedure, which is intended to represent,


in a controlled environment, that which would occur under normal stream


conditions.   The oxygen demand is exerted by three classes of mater-


ials:  carbonaceous organic material, that which is utilized by


bacteria under aerobic conditions as a source of food; nitrogenous


organic material (or oxidizable nitrogen of nitrite, ammonia, and


organic nitrogen) that which serves as food for the specific


Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter bacteria; and reducible inorganic


compounds (such as ferrous iron, sulfite, and sulfide).
                              30

-------

TABLE
SOURCES OF BOD AND

Source Flow (MGD)

Domestic Waste
Strong 	
Medium 	
Weak 	
Digester 	
Supernatant
Digester 	
Supernatant
Food Industry
Cannery, Soup 	
Dairy, Cheese .0072
Dairy, Cheese .0072-. 072
Seafood
General Fish
Processing
Bottom Fish
Processing

Fish meal:
cooling water
process water
Herring Pump
Water
Stickwater 	 56
Rendering
Waste
Salmon .04 3-. 046
Cannery



III-l
SUSPENDED SOLIDS

BOD (mg/1)


300
200
100
	
	


616
840-1380
1530-2220


2700-3440

1726
192-640

621
1005
	
,000-112,000
42,000

3660-3900


31



SS (mg/1)


500
300
100
17,100
740


263
	
	


2200-3020

	


	
	
	
19,700

508-4780






Reference


(ID
(11)
(11)
(80)
(80)


(43)
(84)
(84)


(87)

(87)


(87)
(87)
(87)
(87)
(87)

(87)



1

1
1

1


1

1

1


1




1

1
1

1

1

1
1

-------
1

1

1

1

1

1
^f



1
•

1

1

1
•



1



1

1
1
1
TABLE
SOURCES OF BOD AND

Source Flow (MGD)
Salmon . 33
Cannery
Salmon .011-. 66
Curing
Transport
Flume
Water
Waste
Flume
Tuna 	
Processing
Fruits & 	
Vegetables
Citrus Plant 2.0
Cannery Waste:
(screened)
Pear 0.01-1.87
Peach 0.30-2.02
Apple 0.43-0.60
Municipal- 2.0
Cannery
Meat Processing 	
Poultry 	
Poultry
Packing House 	
Slaughterhouse 	
Slaughterhouse 0.0235
Petrochemical 	
Industry

Mixed Chemicals 	
Refinery, Detergent
Alkylate
Refinery, Butadiene,
Butyl Rubber


III-l (Cont.)
SUSPENDED SOLIDS

BOD (mg/1)
3860

173-3082
200-1150

100-2200

895

840-2400

1170


1600-2040
860-1810
950-1390
141-424

1000
150-2400
712
400-3000
200- 800
1700
10-250,000

1950
345
225


32



SS (mg/1)
2470

40-1824
400

100-2100

1091

	

	


770
830
470-540
	

	
100-1500
530
230-2000
930-3000
	
	

27-60
121
110






Reference
(87)

(87)
(87)

(87)

(87)

(61)

(53)


(35)
(35)
(35)
(46)

(98)
(61)
(25)
(61)
(61)
(50)
(44)

(45)
(45)
(45)




-------
                                                                                 I
      The five-day BOD as determined in the laboratory, generally
represents from 44%-94% of the ultimate BOD, depending on the rate               B
constant (K).  Recent investigations of pulp and paper mill waste
papers, however, have indicated that due to the extremely low rate               B
of biological attack on lignin, less than 50% of the ultimate BOD is             •
found in the 100 day period (77).
      The BOD,, test is performed at a constant temperature of 20°C,              B
which is well within the range of natucal stream temperature.  Similar-
ly, the dilution water used is enriched and buffered with potassium,             B
phosphate, calcium, magnesium and ammonium salts solutions to main-              •
tain favorable nutrient and pH conditions throughout the test.
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 I
      The 13th edition of Standard Methods (1) defines suspended solids          B
(non filtrable) as that portion of material in a liquid sample which
is retained on a filter.  In general terms, suspended solids may be              B
considered to be the colloidal material or the difference between
total solids and dissolved material.
      Standard Methods points out that the principal factors involved            B
in the analytical procedure are: the chemical and physical nature
of the material in suspension, the pore size of the filter, the area             B
and thickness of the filter mat, and the amount and physical state
of the material being retained on the filter.  Because the residue               •
determination is subject to several variables it does not have the               •
accuracy of some analytical procedures.  The temperature at which
the residue is dried is important because the weight of the sample               B
may be increased or decreased accordingly.  For example, volatili-
                                   33
                                                                                  I

-------
I
            zation of organic matter, water of crystallization and gases from


•          heat-induced chemical decomposition may be responsible for losses


_          in weight, while oxidation and absorbed atmospheric moisture may


™          cause a gain in weight.



I          ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF BOD AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS



•                The basic effect of both suspended solids and BOD discharges


            on receiving waters is (1) the reduction of the dissolved oxygen


•          level in the receiving waters through immediate and short term


            oxygen demands, (2) the deposition of solids which through decompos-


|          ition of benthic deposits exert a continuous oxygen demand and (3)


m          the concentration of toxic compounds.  Biological flocculation can


            cause solids to settle out in streams, creating sludge banks, septic


•          conditions, odors and general unsightliness.  While BOD may enhance


            the growth of some viruses and bacteria, it will have a deleterious


|          effect on other aquatic organisms, through depletion of the dis-


•|          solved oxygen in the stream.  The concentration effect of some trace


            metals such as arsenic, cadmium and mercury is discussed in other


•          chapters.





I
                  The presence of biological suspended solids and associated BODr


•          is an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens.  It is


            recommended (6) that domestic water supplies have a dissolved oxygen


•          level of 4 mg/1 on the average, and never less than 3 mg/1.  High


•          concentrations of 6005 reduce the dissolved oxygen of the stream


            and thus indicates the presence of organic pollution.  Suspended




                                          34



I
Effect on Man

-------
                                                                               I
solids are easily monitored continuously and can be used to control


possible turbidity and trace metal concentrations.                             •


      Effect on Plants
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
      There is insufficient information available on which to base



definite limits on BOD or dissolved oxygen levels for irrigation               I



water (6).  It is noted, however, that the utilization of waters               «



having high BOD or COD values are capable of aggravating conditions,           *



by further depletion of the available oxygen and by production of              I



conditions in the soil which may reduce trace metals.  When the dis-



solved oxygen level is decreased, elements such as iron and manganese          •



may be reduced to the more soluble divalent forms.  Reduced forms of



some metals are toxic.



      It is known that suspended solids are capable of interfering             H



with the flow of water in conveyant systems and other structures.



In general, suspended solids are known to precipitate and settle               •



when the velocity decreases to two feet per second.  Suspended solids



can decrease the storage capacity of reservoirs and create excessive           •



abrasion on structures, pipes and pumps.  Suspended solids can cause           •



crust formations on soils, thereby reducing the infiltration rate and



the emergence of seedlings.  The beneficial use of BOD and suspended           •



solids, however, have been well documented with respect to the



irrigation of sandy soils of low organic matter.  The effect of BOD            •



and suspended solids on soils and plants varies with respect to the            •



permeability and type of soil which receives the discharge.





                                                                               I






                                                                               I






                                                                               I

-------
 I
 I
 I
•
I
                   Effect on Domestic Animals and Wildlife
                    For animals and wildlife (as for man) , it is important to


 •            control BOD and suspended solids to maintain an adequate dissolved


              oxygen level in the water and to insure a minimum concentration of


 •            disease producing organisms.   Areas used by  waterfowl,  for example,


 •            must be kept aerobic to surpress Botulinus organisms which have been


              reported to have killed millions of waterfowl (6).
                   Effect on Fish and Aquatic Organisms
 •                  As with many pollutants,  the discharge of BOD and suspended


              solids to receiving waters has  a major impact upon the fish and


 Jj            aquatic life present in those waters.   The discharge of raw domestic


 M            sewage and certain improperly treated  industrial discharges (such


              as  from paper and  pulp and sugar industries)  have been shown to
              stimulate  growth of  Sphaerotilus  bacteria.   Heavy growths  of


              Sphaerotilus  are well  known  for fouling  fishing lines,  clogging nets,


 |            and  generating  unsightly  conditions.   The metabolic  demands  of both


 _            living  and decomposing Sphaerotilus  impose  a high BOD load on the


 *            stream.  Large  populations of  Sphaerotilus  may  render the  habitat


 B            noxious  to animals,  thereby  excluding  desirable fish and  inverte-


              brates.


 •                 Most of the research concerning  oxygen requirements  for fresh


              water organisms  deal with fish (6),  however,  it is logical to assume


 •            that a requirement for fish  would also serve  the rest of  the aquatic


 •            community.  On  the basis  of  investigations  of the various  effects  of


              low  dissolved oxygen on fish life, it  was recommended  (6)  that for


I
                                           36

-------
                                                                              I
diversified warm water biota, including game fish, the daily dis-
solved oxygen concentration whould be greater than 5 mg/1.  Due to            •
expected daily and seasonal fluctuations, a dissolved oxygen level
between 4 and 5 mg/1 can be withstood for short periods, though.              •
Similarly, for cold water biota the dissolved oxygen concentration
should be near saturation.  It is noted that this is especially               •
important in spawning areas, where the dissolved oxygen concentration         •
should not be less than 7 mg/1 at any time.  On the basis of support-
ing growth and propagation of trout, salmon and other cold water              I
species of the biota, a dissolved oxygen concentration of at least
6 mg/1 should be provided at all times.  With respect to dissolved            •
oxygen levels of small and large oligotrophic lakes, it was recommended       •
that the hypolimnion not contain less than 6 mg/1 oxygen at any time.
      Investigations of the marine environment revealed that satis-           •
factory survival and growth of marine organisms are supported by a
dissolved oxygen level ranging between 5 and 8 mg/1.  Studies on              •
marine animals have shown that a dissolved oxygen level less than 1.25        •
killed most of the marine test animals within a very few hours.  It
was therefore recommended that the surface dissolved oxygen concen-           •
tration of coastal waters be not less than 5 mg/1, except for natural
variations (6).  With respect to estuaries and tidal tributaries, it          •
was recommended that the dissolved oxygen level should not be less            m*
than 4.0 mg/1 at any time, except for natural variations.
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - BOD AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS
                                                                              I
      In reviewing current engineering text, one is readily cognizant         B
that flowing streams have an ability to recover from biological load-
                                                                              I
                              37
                                                                               I

-------
I
•                                     TABLE III-2
                    RELATIVE EFFICIENCIES OF SEWAGE TREATMENT (37)
I
                                                                 Percent Removals
              Treatment Operation or Process                     BOD           SS
              Fine Screening                                     5-10         2-20
              Plain Sedimentation                               25-40        40-70
              Chemical Precipitation                            50-85        70-90
•            Trickling filter preceded and followed            50-95        50-92
                   by plain sedimentation
•            Activated sludge preceded and followed            55-95        55-95
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                   by plain sedimentation
              Stabilization ponds                               90-95        85-95
                                             38

-------
                                                                                  I
ings.  The ability to utilize self purification of streams as a

safety factor, has been aptly discussed by Fair, Geyer & Okun (37).               |

Their report includes the following quotation: "The removal of 90-95%             •

of the suspended solids, BOD, and COD of wastewaters before the

discharge of effluents into receiving waters is not considered enough,            •

nor is a subsequent natural purification of receiving waters for reuse

by man accepted as sufficiently rigorous to assure the safety and                 |

palatability as well as the general usefulness of such waters."  We               «

are thus faced with the question of not what can the river take and

survive, rather, what can be done with currently applicable technology            •

within reasonable cost to enhance the quality of our resources.

      Removal of BOD and suspended solids from industrial and muni-               |

cipal wastewaters may be achieved by physical, chemical and biological            •

operations and/or processes or a combination of all three.  The re-

spective removal efficiencies which one can anticipate from various               •

treatment operations and processes are summarized in Table III-2 from

Fair, Geyer and Okun (37).*   As may be seen from the table the greater           J|

efficiency of both BOD and suspended solids removal is achieved                   .

through biological processes.  A report by Stewart (92) on the various            *

modifications of activated sludge indicates that biological processes             •

may be loaded over a wide range with respective degrees of removal.

A tabulation of the twelve more common modifications of the activated             •
                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I
*  One should realize, however, that when the data in this table
   were prepared, many of the newer process and operation modi-
   fications were not in use.                                                    •
                              39
                                                                                 I

-------
 •          sludge process are summarized in Table III-3.

                  In addition to  the standard procedures of Tables III-2 and 3,

 •          treatment technology  for BOD and suspended solids removal during the

 •          last several years has made substantial improvements.  Among these

            are the tube settlers, microscreens, ultrafiltration, multi-media

 •          filtration, upflow clarifiers, and moving bed filters.  A summary of

            these improvements and their effectiveness for removal of BOD and

 m          suspended solids, in  the form of additional treatment steps and as

 •          substitutes for secondary type treatment, is given in Table III-4

            from the work of Convery (26) and the EPA Technology Transfer Manual

 •          on Suspended Solids Removal (23).

                  Suspended solids are associated not only with biological process

 •          waste, but also with  chemical treatment.  As a great deal of the

 •          suspended solids are  found in the colloidal state, one should consider

            the mechanisms of removal which are described by Nemerow (72) and

 •          Rich (78,79).  Colloidal solids may be removed by chemical coagula-

            tion, neutralization  of the electrical charge, and adsorption.  Re-

 |          moval of colloidal solids by chemical coagulation requires the forma-

 «          tion and precipitation of insoluble metal hydroxides and oxides or

            interaction with organic polymers having charged sites.  Neutraliza-

 •          tion of the electrical charge involves lowering of the zeta potential

            and/or neutralization of the colloidal charges with an excess of

 |          oppositely charged ions.  In the presence of an excess of oppositely

 »          charged ions, hydrous oxides are formed which enhance both chemical

            coagulation and adsorption.  Adsorption is a surface phenomenon in

 •          which organic and/or  inorganic matter is adsorbed on a material.



 I
                                          40

I

-------

TABLE III-3

EFFICIENCY OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE MODIFICATIONS (92)

Process
Extended Aeration
Conv. Activated Sludge
Tapered Aeration
Step Aeration
Activated Aeration
Contact Stabilization
Hatfield Process
Kraus Process
High Rate
Modified Aeration
Rapid Bloc
Supra Activation







Loading Factor
Lb. BOD/Day/1000 cu. ft.
20
35
35
50+
50+
70
70+
100
100
100
150+
400 •






41
Percent Removal
BOD 5
75-85
95+
95+
90-95
80-85
85-90
85-90
85-90
60-75
60-75
90-95
55-65







1
1
1

1
I

1

1
•
•
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

-------
I
           Good adsorbents have active or activated surfaces with a high




•         surface to volume ratio.




                 In addition to the interrelationships of chemical coagulation,




|         neutralization, and adsorption processes for the removal of colloidal




M         solids, a polishing step such as rapid and/or multi-media filtration




           is beneficial.  Other methods utilized for the removal of suspended




•         solids include flotation and microscreening.




                 From the above discussion, it is apparent that BOD and suspended




           solids may be removed from municipal and industrial wastewaters.




_         Typical percentages of BOD removal range from 75-95%.  Suspended




*         solids removal in terms of percentage is found to parallel the




I         percentage removal of BOD.  Likewise, as the suspended solids are re-




           duced, so are the levels of many other pollutants.  A summary of the




I         data found in the literature with reapect to industrial waste and




_         information from "Deeds and Data" (4) is shown in Figure Ill-i.  It is




™         apparent from the data plotted in Figure Ill-i that a relationship




•         does exist between the effluent BOD and effluent suspended solids




           levels.  In a well designed and operated biological treatment system,




•         the soluble portion of the BOD in the effluent will be extremely small




           with respect to the portion of BOD which is associated with the sus-




•         pended solids.  Thus, by removal of the suspended solids after




•         biological treatment and clarification, one can expect that not only




           will the suspended solids be greatly reduced, but the BOD will also




•         be reduced.




                 By referring to Figure Ill-i it is apparent that for a biological




•         effluent with a suspended solids level of 60 mg/1, a BOD of approxi-




           mately 80 mg/1 would be expected, however, it could possibly range
I



I
                                         42

-------
1
1
1

1
1

1
1

1
-
1
1

1







1




o




RENCES:
Ul
u.
Ul
cc

in
Ul
o
c
o
 fl
* TJ
O
O -
« -1
•n —
00 •)
6 = S
u *> 2 °
ii u «> S" a
«t 0 — — ^
O w ^ V O 7
O 0_ U) 1— r- _

• U- 0. tO O K X



\
*
X.
\

\
\
\



X
X














\
\
\
K \
\
\

X
V
^k 'XX
\
O
\
x




u_


^"


t<







\
\
\
\
X \
X \
\
\"
{/) \
'S
\>

\


r- H




*











u
\ .
\
V \
N ' \
< \
A1

N. ^k

^\ " *



.

















\
\
\ >

V \

\\
\
v\\
XX^

o
a.
i
V)
Z
-S o
UJ
tc
o
It
1
* -J
.2§
I 1
eo s
EFFLUENT E
FFLUENT
Ul
(O
-? to
1
o
o
CD

o
CM




o o o o o o o
N O 00 10 7 CM
I/BUJ 'SOHOS 03aN3dSns iN3nidJ3

FIGURE m-i

43

-------
I
           between 50 and 120.   In the lower portion of the figure, the suspended

I         solids appear to vary more widely than does the BOD.  This indicates

_         that at a lower range of BOD one is speaking almost strictly of a

*         soluble BOD which has not been removed by biological treatment, rather

•         than one associated  with suspended solids.  It also appears that as

           the suspended solids approach zero, the remaining BOD is soluble and

I         not suspended.  It,  therefore, appears logical to conclude that should

_         the waste with a suspended solids level of 60 mg/1 and a BOD level of

~         80 mg/1 be further treated for the removal of suspended solids to a

•         level of 20-30 mg/1, the associated BOD will also be removed with

           only the soluble BOD remaining.  From the figure, a residual BOD of

•         10-30 mg/1 could be  expected.

                 In consideration of the data shown in Figure Ill-i, and the

'         achievable final effluent levels associated with suspended solids, the

•         soluble portion of the BOD in the effluent may be expected to vary

           with respect to the  activated sludge or other biological treatment

I         process.  For example, a treatment plant utilizing a high rate bio-

           logical system could have a substantially greater amount of soluble
I

I
BOD in the effluent than one using the contact stabilization or

extended aeration modification of activated sludge.



TREATMENT SUMMARY:


      From the above discussions, it is apparent that the technology

does exist for the removal of BOD^ and SS.  It is rather a matter of

the application of the technology.  Some industries as shown in the
 _

 •         previous  section,  have  accepted  the  challenge  and are currently


 I


 I                                       44

-------
achieving treated effluents with 8005 less than 30 mg/1 and SS less




than 30 mg/1.                                                                     I




      It is recognized that, in general, biological processes lose




their peak efficiencies during cold winter weather.  They are capable             I




of maintaining a final effluent of less than 75 mg/1, however.  As                •




streams naturally have higher D.O. levels, due to greater oxygen




transfer in the winter, slightly higher 8005 loadings may be handled              I




without creating problems.  Weather, however, does not affect the




impact of suspended solids on the receiving waters.  Therefore, the               |




suspended solids level of all discharges should be maintained below               _




30 mg/1 year around.




      It is also recognized that natural conditions such as, surface              I




runoff may add significant loads of suspended materials on the receiv-




ing waters.  This must not be an excuse to add further to the problem             |




through industrial and municipal discharges.  Rather, it is the reason            _




and need to improve management practice of agricultural lands, urban




storm runoff, etc.                                                                I






SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS                                                       •





      On the basis of the literature reviewed and the above discussions,




the following conclusions are cj^awn.                                              •





      1)  Material which exerts a biochemical oxygen demand and                   I




          suspended solids are found in surface waters from many




          natural and man-made sources.                                           I




      2)  The major impact of BOD is through the depletion of oxygen




          in the receiving waters.                                                •






                                                                                  I





                              45                                                  I

-------
I
I
 I

 I
3)   Suspended solids exert an impact on the receiving waters


    by creating sludge banks, general unsightliness,  acting


    as an adsorbent for toxic chemicals, destroying of/'fish


    spawning grounds, creating excessive wear on transport


    facilities, and by depleting the storage capacities of im-
_


*                     poundments.


I                 4)  Domestic water supplies should contain neither BOD nor SS


                       as both can be associated with disease producing organisms


I                     and virus.


                   5)  Waters used on plants should not contain excessive amounts


•                     of BOD or SS.


I                 6)  Sandy soils may be used effectively for waste disposal.


                       The extent of this use depends upon the organic content of


•                     the soil and its permeability.


                   7)  BOD and SS must be kept to a minimum to insure adequate


'                     dissolved oxygen to suppress Botulinus organisms.


•                 8)  BOD and SS must be maintained at minimum levels to ensure


                       adequate dissolved oxygen for fish and aquatic life in both


•                     fresh and marine waters.


                   9)  The technology currently exists to remove 5 day BOD and SS


•                     to effluent concentrations less than 30 mg/1, each.


•                10)  Cold temperatures may decrease the performance of biological


                       treatment processes.  However, an effluent level of 75 mg/1


•                     should be attainable by biological means during cold weather.


                  11)  Removal of suspended solids from biologically treated waste
    effluents will also remove the associated BOD of the flocculant


    solids.
                         46

-------
_
™
     12)  Effluent BOD5 below 20 mg/1 will most likely be in a dis-
          solved state and may not be further removed with SS unless
          treated further.
     13)  Removal of collodial suspended solids from chemically                    •
          treated wastewaters is often necessary to maintain low
          effluent levels of trace metals.                                         I
     14)  The removal of oil and grease residuals after biological
          treatment can be improved through better suspended solids                •
          removal .                                                                 •
On the basis of these conclusions and the text of this report, it is
recommended that the following effluent limits be adopted:                         •
          guspended Solids; Maximum level of 30.0 mg/1 at all times.
          Biochemical Oxygen Demand-5 Day: The BOD,- shall not exceed               •
a 24 hour average of 30 mg/1 for three (3) consecutive days, except                •
during winter when the 24 hour average shall not exceed 75 mg/1 for
three (3) consecutive days                                                         •
      For EPA Region III it is recommended that "winter" apply to the
months of December through February in the southern area and November              I
through March in the northern most areas.                                          •
      It is further recommended that the 6005 not exceed a concentration
of 90 mg/1 at any time.                                                            I

                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pd

pq

H
       eg
       CO
       CM
       I
       o
       CO
        ui
       Q
       O
       «
       CO
       53
       O
W
PH
O
       CO
       W
       CO
       CO
       H
       o
       O
       W
       PM
       O

       co
       W
       M
       O
       53
       Cd
       M
       ^>
       M
       W
CC
§
E
Q
p:
4—1
c
Q) 4-
0 C
l-i Q
01 "
FU i-
14-
/~\ M-
rH Pt
60
6 *-

Q
Q C £
O 0 C
M CJ r-





^
R
^
O
g
a
P:
4-1
C
QJ 4J
a c
co M a
O a) 3
M CM rH
hJ ^
0 ^ <4H
CO H W
Q 60
w g 4->
W • r
PH 0 rH
CO C MH
ED 0 C
CO C_> M

[J
rHg
pC4 g






(-1
o a
o
CO -H
CO 4J
a) td
O )-i
O CU
r< P.
PH O

O CM ^ CM oo O
                                                                                                                     oo oo CT> oo
                                                                                                                         CM  -cf CM CM
m
oo
CM
o
o
rH








in r*
. Jrt If
1 C7>
rH \D in vo CO








m
oo
rH
co r>

rH
rH O
oo oo o\ r^.
C
2




o
a\
CM
rH


















C
0
•H
4-1
M
4J
rH
•rl
MH
cd
)-i
4J
rH
ED


















C
o
•H
4-1
td
)_(
4->
rH
•H
P-H
td
•H
T)
QJ
2
1
•H
4-1
rH
rj
2
o
CM
1
o
rH


<4H
Pd

S-t
QJ
4J
rH
•iH
PH

00
C
•H
rH
^J
CJ
•H
)-J
H

0)
4-1
cd
)H
J3
60
•H
K





in
rH
1
\o



14H
U-4
W

»H
QJ
4J
rH
•rl
pL4

00
C
•rH
rH
\st
o
•H
)H
H

QJ
00
td
4-1
CO
1
CM





m
rH
1






•
<4H
14-4
Pd

r*
O
•H
4J
td
N
•H
rH
•H
f*>
td
4J
CO

4-1
o
td
4-1
pj
0
CJ





0
rH in
I I
CO rH




.
MH
4H
pq

QJ •
60 UH
T3 M-l
a w
rH
CO (3
O
T3 -rH
Q) 4J
4-1 Cd
td LI
> QJ
•H  0)
C 4J
O X
U Pd








00

o
CO
E
Pd

0)
4-1
td
rH
3
00
td
o
CJ

c£J

C
o
•H
4-1
td
r-^
0)


in





















^H
QJ
4J
rH
•H
rM
T3
cu
pq

M
C
•H
£>
O
2



P*** . I
tN rH
VOI-
in f»
rH










cu
4-1
CO 4J
td c
IS 0)

O rH
•H M-l
4-1 <4H
co pq
01
0 rl
Q td
B
> -H
td !-4




c
O



r^ in
rH
**O CD
oo m


• •
1+-I MH
f| [ ^
Pd Pd

ri M
01 0)
4-J 4-J
rH rH
•H -r(
[IH Pl4

60 00
C P!
•H -H
rH rH

O O
•H -H
H H

T3 "^
QJ Q)
rH -rl
4—1 '4^1
4J -r(
Q) (-1
co td
C rH
P U



in
rH









,
C_3

•
Q

•
<-|
CO
rd
&


• •
0)
e
•H
P i

0)
oo

4J
CO
1
CM
                                                           48

-------



























x~\
4J
G
O
O
~
1
H
M
M

W
3
H


























tO
O
6
0)
G
0) 4J
0 C
M CU
0) 3
<4-l
r-t W
00
S 4 J
CO

in o rH
P C iw
O O C
MUM
H
tO
O
CO
4-1
c
(1) 4J
0 G
CO ^4 4H
CO r-l W
~^.
P M>
w a w
g S
W • 3
PL, O rH
CO C M-l
C3 O C
CO O M


0 P
rH Ci>
rT) ^H













S-i
0 G
0
CO -H
CO 4J
0) CO
O i-i
O CO
M a.
PH O

co r^ r^ r*^
00 ON VO CO





OO-* IT) O
CM CM i-<


O\ CJ\ vO vO
co oo r^ r»
rH rH


















O rH







in u->
oo oo

O CO
CO CO vH C CO
C f-l J2 iH M
•iH CO O iH CO
iH 4J tO 4J
to to •* ^ td
*st ^ f^ (— j ^
i-H O tO
to co G a)
4J tO ,G 4->
> CO ,Q 60 CO
o to a) iH td
rH S |_J ,C I?
CO
.§
jj
>-i G M G
CO O CO 0) O
4J J3 OO 4-1 ,O
i-H M tO rH VI
•H tO 4J -iH tO
fe O CO fe cj

IS !S rH S U
49
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
CASE STUDIES OF BODS & SS REMOVAL
 •                  A.   Food  Industry
                    A new addition to the  realm of  biological  treatment  processes
 m            is  the BIO-DISC.   The BIO-DISC  system consists of  closely  spaced,
 •            round  discs mounted  on a horizontal shaft.  Functionally, it  combines
              the principles  of  trickling  filters and  activated  sludge.   It has  been
 •            reported  by Antonie  (10)  to  be  effective both in pretreatment and  as  a
              secondary treatment  process.  Treatment  efficiencies  BOD,--removal  are
                                                                     I5
              summarized in Table  III-5.   As  a  biological process it  is  capable  of
 mm            achieving a final  BOD5 effluent in the range of  17-55 mg/1.
                    In  treating  dairy cheese  waste  for a  cheese  factory  in Hilbert,
 •            Wisconsin,  in a two  stage aerobic "Cavitator" system, Schulze (84)
              reported  the following efficiencies:
 |                  1.   A BOD 5 concentration  of 840-1380  mg/1  was reduced  to an
 _                      effluent of 12-18  mg/1.  The loading was 80 Ib.  BOD/D,
 ™                      detention  20 hr. and  flow 7200 GPD.
 •                  2.   A BOD5 concentration  of 1530-2220 mg/1 was  reduced to an
                        effluent of 15-29  mg/1.  The loading was 140  Ib  BOD/D,
 |                      detention  12 hr. and  flow 7200-72,000  GPD.
 _            A report  by Soderquist,  et^ aJL.  (87) discussed the  treatment  of fish
 ™            processing wastes  by coagulation,  flotation, and activated sludge.
 •            Clarification with 4000-5000 mg/1 F-FLOK coagulant on Salmon process
              waste  reduced total  solids from approximately 2000 mg/1 to about 800
 •            mg/1.   Eighty to 92% of  the  protein was  also recovered  by  this method.
              Breaking  of fish oil emulsions  with clay, lime,  alum, and  ferric
 •            chloride  has been  reported as 75%  effective in BOD removal.   The

I

I

-------
                                                                                I
chlorination required prior to sedimentation reduced suspended solids
to about 200 mg/1 and BOD to 400 mg/1.  Flotation with coagulant aids           I
on salmon processing wastes was also reported as partially effective
in BOD and solids removal.  The results are summarized in Table III-6.          ••
An activated sludge pilot plant treating fish process waste reduced             •
suspended solids from 320 mg/1 to 12-70 mg/1, BOD5 from 1000 mg/1 to
5-27 mg/1, and Total N from 70 mg/1 to 35-51 mg/1.                              I
By utilizing spray irrigation on terraced land, Gilde (43) reports
that food processing waste from Campbell Soup Company was treated to            •

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I
the following effluent characteristics.
                            Mean Concentration, mg/1
Parameter               Wastewater              Effluent

Total Suspended Solids      263                   16

Total Organic Carbon        264                   23
BOD5                        616                    9

Total Phosphorus              7.6                  4.3                          I

Total Nitrogen               17.4                  2.8
                                                                                I
The design criteria from the Paris, California, study (43) included
a slope recommendation of greater than 2% but less than 6%, with a              •
150-175 foot zone between the sprinklers and the effluent collection
berm.  The application rate was 0.25 inch per day in winter and 0.50            •
inch per day in summer.  The plots were planted with Reed Canary grass.
In a recent report on fruit processing waste, Exvelt 35 reported                •
that raw waste loads in the range of 860-2040 mg/1 BOD^ can be reduced          •
by aerobic treatment to an effluent of less than 10 mg/1 when the
unit is loaded at 0.5 mg BOD removed/mg MLVSS-Day.                              •

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
           TABLE III-5
BIO-DISC OPERATING EFFICIENCY  (10)
WASTE WATER
Dairy :
Fresh

Septic
Brewery:
Bakery :
Septic
Combined Domestic &
Industrial
Distillery:
Piggery: Septic
BOD 5 Cone,
Influent
1000

1100
850
600
2000
1200
600

800
500
mg/1
Effluent
300
30
55
17
300
30
350
480
30

40
50
Percentage
REMOVAL
70
97
95
98
50
95
85
80
95

95
90
Residence
TIME, hr.
0.3
2.5
5.0
2.9
0.2
0.5
2.8
2.2
1.1

0.7
2.2
                 52

-------
TABLE III-6
FLOATATION WITH COAGULANT AID (87) ON SALMON WASTE WATERS

BOD TS SS
COAGULANT INF. EFF. INF. EFF. INF. EFF.

Alum 47 mg/1 - - 5400 1560
11 " 2290 1200
Ferric Chloride 60 mg/1 - - 5580 2400
" •• •• _ 2860 950
" " 133 mg/1 - - 1800 1180
F-FLOK 1000 mg/1 - - 5900 1200
Aluminum Hydroxide 75 mg/1 1775 425 2685 1505 640 1305
Zetol A 1 mg/1 1275 381 2441 1625 697 200
Alum 375 mg/1 plus 2833 633 4268 2162 1993 397
lime 75 mg/1








53
1
1
I




1

1
*
*
1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

-------
 I
 I
                   It is apparent from Exvelt's report that good solids removal


             is manditory for low BOD in the effluent.  The results of Exvelt's


             studies are summarized in Table III-7 below.  The new plant was put


 •           into operation between the 1968-69 season.  The last 3 data sets are


             the most significant.


 m           Graham and Filbert 46 have reported that a combined municipal


 •           cannery waste with a combined 8005 concentration of 141-424 mg/1 has


             been reduced to an effluent of 16 mg/1 or less, 96 percent of the time.


 •           Treatment consists of aeration basins with sludge return, clarification,


             and chlorination.  They also report an effluent of 3.2 mg/1 orthophos-


 •           phate (as PO.) which was a reduction over the influent.  The average


 •           flow was 2.0 MGD.


                   In treating slaughterhouse waste,  Hopkins and Dutterer (50)


 •           noted a BOD-j removal from 1700 mg/1-10 mg/1.  The 23,499 GPD plant


             utilized screening grease separation by air flotation and skimming,


 I           agitition, activated sludge, chlorination, and ponding.


 «                 Merrill 68 reported settleable solids removal from 3788 and 3339


             mg/1 to 561 and 38 mg/1, respectively from frozen meat packing wastes.


fl           Treatment by air flotation of grease, alum (A12(SQ ) ) coagulation


             extended aeration, clarification and chlorination yielded a final


I           effluent of 17 mg/1 (85-95% removal).


                   A poultry processing plant in West Germany is reported by
_
             Wieferig 98  to have reduced 1000 mg/1 BOD. from  its wastewater  to
I           an effluent of less than 25-30 mg/1.  Treatment consisted of surface

             aeration after removing fat, feathers and solids.

I


I


I

-------

TABLE
AEROBIC TREATMENT OF



III-7

CANNERY WASTE (35)

Screened Waste
Fruit
Processed
A. Aerated
1967 Pear
1967 Peach
NOV
1967 Apple DEC
JAN
1968 Apple FEE
Flow
MGD
Lagoon Ef]
1.03
1.36
0.60
0.52
B. Activated Sludge;
1968 Pear
1968 Peach
MAR
1968 Apple APR
MAY
1969 Peach
1969 Pear
1969 Apple
C. Contact
1969 Pear




0.21
0.30
0.40
2.02
1.87
0.43
BOD
mg/1
Eluent ;
2040
1810
1230
950
Cost
2040
1810
1390
860
1600
1190
Stabilization;
1.58




2150



c

Effluent
COD BOD COD SS
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
Cost $0.041/#BOD Removed
3050
2150
1520
1400
$0.061/#BOD
3050
2150
1830
1510
2290
1500
370 1040 770
340 - 830
190 760 540
110 620 470
Removed
250 490 375
360 - 370
130 570 470
20 120 66
9 55 15
5 28 11
Cost $0.067/#BOD Removed.
2910



IB
4 23 6




1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1

I
1
1

1
1

1
1
1
I

-------
I
_                  Camp (25) ,in  describing  in-house  changes  for  a poultry process
™            in  Florida,  reported  that  by  improving plant operating practices
flT            the average  flow rate was  decreased  from 422 gpm to 357 gpm.   The
              BOD,, was  also  reduced from 712 mg/1  to 263  mg/1.   Improvements in-
•            eluded cleaning  of traps and  separators,  reducing  spills and improv-
              ing dry clean-up procedures prior to wash down.


I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I
fl                                         56

-------
00
w
1
•H
M CO 73
4-1 4J Cd
3 a o>
s o) erf
o oo in
•H C Q
a in o >•,
co -a m cd
00 CO 73
V-l O |^
O rJ rH

B ^^
3 6^s
erf s**^

x->
rH
4-1 ~-~-
3 OD
° •£>
CO
H
CO /"*
•<3 rH
*S ^--.
C oo
hJ M £
U
M
O > o ^B,

-,
M O* CO rH M

C h4 -H -rl 4-1
•H B O iH
<4H CO CU 01 C
Q) tt fl Cb tQ
erf O u co co


CU
C -*
0 O


rH
CO 00
o o
• •
0 O

1
vo in
• •
\O CM
r~. oo
1
0 O
in o
rH CM



m
m
oo



r^. 1 in
rH •
v£> r^ in
oo oo


rH 1
0 0
^o m o
rH



!->. in
• ^J*
m co
^j>

-3- in
in ~*
CM CM



C
OJ •> -H
13 O B -^
•H -H 0) 01
M rH *"t O
"^3 ^s CJ td
>. 0 C

C rH 0) .*"!
CO J3 "4-1
O 3 •> >^ C 01
•H •> erf C jj o) 4J
rH i-l -H 01 00 CO
td O *• I-l C! M i— 1
•£3 d T3 "H *H 01 ^
4-1 0> -rl {X MH 4J ^
J3 J3 O CO 01 0) rH
P-I PM ^
CM CM




O O

O\ CTi
A *S
i-l rH

m in
rH rH



M Q)
0 C
•H 01
0) rH rH
nO cd ^i
•H f-j 4_1
I-l 4-1 3
*rj 73 rd PP
^ *rH Pi
01 0) C . -H
•H td -H O -H ,C M
^ i— 1 *T3 *H V^ cd *T3
cd ^» cd Q) cd ^j ^>
4J t-^ -U i~H B -M ,^1
3 iH ^ cd 3 0) C


























































a)
4-1
cd
rH
^
r^
l_|

-------





























/— N
4-1

"(3
O
O
N— '
oo
I
H
M
H

W
•»
£
j<
£






























1
•>-J
ri
n
4-1
3
S
U 60
•H a
P) -H
cd T3
60 0)
M O
0 HH








M
H
W
g
,_J
<
0
H
s
w
K
U
o
H
£
W
PH

PH
O

H

M
§
rS
W
PH
H

W
O
g
t—J
rJ
C/3

Q
W
H
-f4
•<3
t~H
H
O
«
Pti^



x— \
rH
4-1 •>•»
3 M
0 0
s— ^

/— N
rH
C ^
M W
0
v_x

x-x
IS P
0 O
rH g
IV. ^ X
&-M







S-l
0

-a
Pi
cd co
CO
4-1 CU
CJ U
3 0
T3 M
O PH
H
PH

CU
CJ CO  (-1 M CO 0
cu cu cu 4-1 cu cu o
CUP! rHpi •H4Jpit-i
picucucdcu «e» ,a,Nx:cdp!>,4Jcua)
xoc&i4Jcut-iT3cnxl
4-ii-icucd3xioocd4J
WPH«|Z;pHPH<3WMO


CO -*
JT{ Q
§ PH


-*
•
O


in

CS|
vO
m
rs.



O
O
CM







CM ON
ON
vO
r-«


vO O
r^ rH





o in
Is* oo
CO


r^ co
ON vO
• •
0 0


0
Q) CU "
XI Pi CU rH
u cu pi cu
CO rH CU 3
\t-i(i fx, N PM
Q O CU iH ft C
I (-j xi co o a) -
•* 4J xi cu p pq cu
•H 3 & • PH C
" a oi a • cu
CM M CU - CU rH
« •> cu xi cu pi >-,
«(UCU4->C_> PlCUXl
rH Pi Pi CO 01 -H 4J
O -H CU CU • rH T3 CU
CrHN>,O >,td^CO
CU'HpJrHCO Xi4JrHrH
XICcUO-rH 4J3O-H
Pn<|pqpHS WpqpnO


vf
O
PH

1
00
CM sr
• •
o o

1
m o
VO 00
















i
O 00
oo oo



i
in in
rH CM





in
CM
i-H

1
rH CO
in vo
• •
0 0




CO
cu
CO
CO
cu
o
o
Vi
PH

60

•rH
Pi
•H
"4H
CU
PH












oo
oo


o
vO



o
o
in







OO OO
• •
CO oo
OO ON


o in
in
CM




o o
•«* , CU
3 PH
58

-------

























/-"\
4-J
«.
(3
O
U
^-^
00
1
rH
H
I-H

W
rJ
M
^ti
H





























O
•H
C
cfl
00
M
O






C/3
W
H
CO
^fl
53
o

W
W
o
0
H
Pi

PH

(*H
o

F—l
py;
faT
§
H

ryi
Pi
H

O
C/D
g
H

>
H
U






^
*^-
••*
•O pq tfl
Cfl T3
0 .0
1-3 rH

3
Q)
&
4J
3
o


d
H






a
CU
fyj





4-J
3
O





C


.j
O
t—4
fn






M
O
**s»
T)
13
tfl
4J
O
3

O
P-4



^— ^
6s?
^
rH
"•'-•*.
00
^B,

^^
rH
M
£





X— X
6^e
*+—s



^-\
i~H
**^v.
6C
^e,



,-v
rH
'So
3

/— s
o
o
Jy
^









CO
CO
cu
CJ
o

PH






1
O\
 rH |
0 CU 0 P.rH
•H d CO | >>
rH O CU rH g
>, 4-i M >, 3
M CU U 4-1 U
0 0 1 3 -H

ON m
i~- oo




ON
ON




I
•si" ^O C^
^- \jD f\J
•* *
iH CJ) *> »H 1 »£ CO
§** M tO • *"O X M 4-J QJ
COM(3X C O O W (2
M 4J 0 -H 3 cfl g -H
o tn fn w <; cu - @ cu
P^cfllcu <1J C •> w cfl C
IrHrHpiO) CCUCOCU-H «-H
COP.O rH CUrHrHCQCON
COC>>-H rH >» O -H 1 MM
iHCOX4-> >>CXUrHCUa)CU
03 -H 0) O X ^H O >-. O S rC! CX
Olg^CXCU 4-IMrHj3CU4-»-H
Cd <£l P-i W H W P-i O O.I-H W PH

CO
P3
^


oo en"
r-» co
Q .J
J^
V~^

O
oo

0
o
m


o
o
m
CM




m

CM
ON



m
CM
rH




O

vO
i-H

rH
•
o



___
CO
cu
4J
CO
CO
13
co
tO
H &
P 1
I in *rj
*st* * *H
•st O
* ** ^^
CM CM ^-^







m
o


















1
o m
ON ON




I
in o
in I-H
rH




0
0

rH









U-l
O

C
o
•H
4J
» Cfl
00 N
13 -H
•H M
^ CU
CJ g
tO O
M U)
U M























































1

pv,
CO
Z
1

cu
(3
tfl
4-J
3






















































^
C
o
•r)
4J
cfl
rH
i-H

M
cu
C
cu
4J
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   1
                                                   I
                                                   1
                                                   1
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
                                                   I
59

-------
1


1

I


1


I


1
1


^m
^B
^H



1


1

1
1

1


1


1


•
i
•H
t-l
4-1
3
O 00
•H C
C -H
cd ""O
W) tfl
n o
0 nJ





to
W
H
CO
3
M
a
w
/-^ CJ
4J O
^ t~t
C P3
o w
O PM
N»*/
00 En
1 O
M
H H
M £5
H g
3 §
H Crf
H
O
n
!=>
I-I
Q
H
H
H




O-
5
^^

T)

0
PH
n)

o
r-i
O
a
o
M-(














•
CO T3
4J CC
m
Q
PP >>
n)
J2 13


a ^
0) B^S

4-1 r-l
M "^*^
OJ
M W
^^



a '-.
CD Js?
Drf ^-^

rH
4-1 "v>
3 (X
0 ^0
iH
M M

II
fj • , ^^X




O
T3
C
m co
CO
4-1 CU
O O
3 o
""0 M
O PI)
PH


-  « CU C O M ctt
"COO CUCCt)<|4-100
> i-Ht^a-HO
NOCO ^4-lOC^1^ •
COCU ,C!CUrH-H'H^i
M
-------
                            ro
                                           m







































CTi
1
IH
h- 1
M
W
iJ
^3
^
EH




























1 4-1 -H CU CU
•H Pi tH CO C C
•4-1 CU 4J 4-1
CU -H 3 C
Q 0 2 01

^i
Cd
T3 CO
^-- 4J
O 60 ir MH
•H a P
C -H 0 0
cd TJ « O
60 nJ O
V-J O rO **
O rH iH tH
S «^~^



C
•> -H
o e 4J
•H CU CU
rH ,G U
>> u cd
a e
•H M CU
rH CU ^G
Cd ,0 PH
3 "
" & C
iH -H
O "t-l
P! T3 -H
CU -H PX
J3 0 CO
P-i .
\
Cd N
rH fi
p_, [v]
CU
C
O
z








OV
oo





o
m
o
o
CM

0
O





o
m



m
oo


0
rH





CO
vO
0




rH
•H
" O
 O O
H ca t-i a
^ N 43 CO
CX Cl PH " CU
O Q) CU CO
tH pq " rH Cd
" CU CU 4J 4J
CU C -H -H C
a cu cd pj cu
CU -H X! 0 60
rH T3 4-1 r— 1 M
^*» ^0 i-G ^» CU
(U 4-J Q4 V*4 •)-*
x; 3 cc o  a\


1 *
in CM
CM CO
CM CM

1
o o
oo o
o oo
* *.
in m



oo
r-l
0
^
cu
(* 1
cu o
•a c
rH Cd
nj r(~i
g4J
a)
O jEj
pL|
o •>
O CO CU
4-1 C 4-1
•H -H cd
5 c o
t*~» O P-*
M O
cu g
cd cu 3
4-1 4-1 -H
pj co ""cJ
cu cd o
PH IS W
cu





























































rH
o
4-1
£
4J
M
(U
cd
4-1
£j
cu
PH
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
61

-------
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
 I
        I
    4J -H
    C  J-l  W
<4-l  CU  4-1  4J
 >


1
0)
rO
rH
Cfl
CJ
0


*.
I — 1
o
C
Q)
J3
PL,
O
0)
CO Cfl

•H
O •>
> a
4-1 <;
4-1
Cfl O
fr* -H
rH
« cfl
CU J2
13 4J
X! PH




*»
rH
0

0)
o

rH
O

«v
T)
•H
O



•*
i-H
O
4-1 CO
•H 4-1
M C
X! CU
4-1 >
^t rH
S-i O
cu co
cfl
4J •
p! U
CU •
p j prj
                                                 62

-------
H
M
co
4J T3
C 0>
0) J-l
•H -H
M nJ
4J 0*
2 ft3
ST
«<±
N"^ ^*»
CO
Q O 00 m^ T3
3 iH C Q
0 C -H O
En cd *d M CD
CO CO rJ
•^i rJ O ,0. CJ
O rH i-H <£
•<
O
>J
o Ej x~\
d) 6*S
£3 P^ s"x
o
u
4-t
W i-l
W Q 4J -^.
H 0 3 «30
eg U O 0
<3 s-'
&
H -^
2 C! M
§ H 0
*T] N^X
0
tf

W CD 6s?
P-i (4 "*-*
Pn /-s
0 rH
Q W ~^-
H O 3 00
& m 6 a
w •*•
e
 Q
Q O O
<^ rH S
tJ fx< O
Q
W
H
M (-1
^ ^
C co
cO co
CU
4J O
0 0
3 >J
O
P4



*^"
o
(Xl





o
en
«%
**




en
si-




o
en


o
i-H
VO


If)
If)



0
o
rH


in
CM
CM


H
•
Ov
rH




^
0)
.,0
CD ,0
>» C 3
H CU P3
0) -H
C TJ rH
•H cfl >-,
<4-l 4J 4J
a> 3 3
P4 « M



*^"
O






O
o
en

vO



1
r>. en
rv. co



•
0 0
m o
rH CM


m
m
oo

l
rH in
r^ oo


I
O 0
m o
H


in
*^
en

m

•
CM






•> 4->
>. G 
CU 00 Cfl
fi W H
•H 0) >»
«4-l 4J J£
0) a) H
P< Q ^ vO



m o
CM OO
i-H


o in
O VO
rH *^*

rH
in CM
• •
o o


co
H
1 •> -H
cO cd ^i O
« }-l rC CO O
Q) Cfl 4-1 H IM 00
C AJ j3 ci) C

«ar«Cfl,NTH>,OO SM
OXCCXiCOrH CU ^3
>» 1 0) -H 1 cd ^ ^33
o cxrt n-i o o a Urj
                                63
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
_           Following the  inplant  reductions  a treatment  plant  was  designed and
™           constructed  to use  segregated wastewater  collection,  surface  settling,
•           extended  aeration,  final  settling and  a four  acre polishing pond.
             Operation record  revealed a  final clarifier effluent  of 15 mg/1 BOD^
•           maximum,  8 mg/1 average  (98.5-99.5% removal)  and a  suspended  solids
_           level of  10  mg/1  maximum, 6  mg/1  average.  The  polishing pond effluent
™           showed a  BOD^  of  8  mg/1 maximum and 3  mg/1 average.
               B.  Petrochemical  Industry
•                 The treatment of various  petrochemical  wastewaters was  reported
             by Gloyna and  Ford  (44,45).  Tables 111-8,9,10  and  11 smmarize their
V           findings  on  BOD-  removal  efficiencies  by  activated  sludge, trickling
             filters,  aerated  lagoons, and waste stabilization ponds, respectively.
I
I
I
I
I
I
               C.  Pulp  and  Paper  Industry
                  A review of recent literature indicates that while activated
            sludge is the major method of treating pulp and paper wastewaters,
            chemical treatment is being tested in full scale facilities with
•          success.  In treating 125 kg/ton BOD by anerobic fermentation and
            aeration, Grishina and Izotova  (47) report that the BODq was reduced
            from 1000 mg/1 to 20 mg/1.  The effluent COD remained high, however,
«          and a BOD:M:B ratio of 100:3:0.5 was necessary.
                  Dobolyi 29 reported a final affluent of 25 mg/1 BOD and 430
•          mg/1 COD for an intergrated mill pulping straw by the Kraft process.
            The waste was pre-treated by coagulation with 400 mg/1 Fe 90, and 600
            mg/1 Ca(OH)  prior  to biological treatment.  In using activated  sludge
                                           64

-------
rH

M
M
H
      CO
      e
      co
      ^

      ^
      O
      §
      H
      H
      PM

      cS
      S
      B
      o
      PM
      O
      M
      M
      M
      3
      CO
      H
      CO
CO
4J TJ
PJ Q)
CO }-i
•H -H
rl 3
•U CT
3 Q)
53 pcj


t*.
cd
T)
0 60 "1
•H C Q
C iH O 0)
Cfl T3 M H
00 cd U
rl O & <
O rH rH
CO&5
rt~
rH
Q 4J ^
O 3 tt
O CD 0
rH
f3 W
H£
g ./""N
(D B**?
*~
i-H
Q 4J -x.
O 3 M
x-\
P* toC
H£
^
s c?
o e>
£~





o
^^^
C co
cd co
CD
4-1 CJ
O O
*t3 P-i
o
rl
PN


0)
a
o
£5



id
o

^ cd
>> 4J
rl O
JH ca
•«*S ^
H rH O
PM CTi CX
CO
**
O
O
CM
O
m
CO

0
10
o
m
o
0
rH

rH
•
rH
0)
a

•H
T)
cd
j3 M
pq co
£"(§
0)
C rH
*rl ^\
IH 4-1
Q) 3
P* r~*
*
rH



m in


„ CD
co G
H •> 0)
O CO H
rC H >>
0 0) ,C
O 4J 4J
H co W
> «
« cd cj ^i cd
Q) O 4-1 TH
C rH CO C
cd • f*> ^ o
4J 4J J3 rH g
3 cct 4-1 o a
pq a W PL, -5j


o
pi
o
ta










m


^
CM
O
CM
rH
cio
in o
rH CM

o o
m oo
0 0
CM in
d>0
in o
rH
in
«^
•
CM

CO
4-1
cd
H

t»j
•> 4-1
rl CO
0) 6D
a rl
•rl 0)
II i 1J
CO CO
fvj Q



















m
vo
o
CTi
m
rH
oo
VO
rH*



VO
00
H
VO
oo
VO

VO

rH








CO
U
-rl
4J
CO
cd
rH
PH
                                                     65
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
        CO
        4-1

        a
        •H
        M  3

        3  0!
            CO
    60 in T3
 O
tH  tip
 C  iH O
 CO  TJ M
 00 tO
 J-i  O 45
O  H rH
            01
            0
           rH

        a "oft
       Pi
        S  P
        o  o
 0)
 a
 o
 m
 CM
                  o m
                  rH CM
                  o o
                  o o
                  CM m
                  m m
 o
 o
                                            in CTI
                                            CTi Oi
                  o
                  CM
m
H
                   O
         I   i   co
        O  Q)  H
       .a  c  -. W
                  PM
                   CO
                   0)

                   CO  0) rH
                          o
            4J      W   CO
        CO      0)
                      
-------
on a Kraft mill waste, Ganczaruzyk (40) reported BOD
-------
 I
             and vegetable tanning waste contain 1000-1500 mg/1 BOD_; 2000-8000
 •           mg/1 COD, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen of 150 mg/1.  Treatment by an
             anerobic-aerobic lagoon yielded an effluent with 20-330 mg/1 BOD
 •           (200 mg/1 aver.), 300-1700 mg/1 COD (900 mg/1 aver.), and total
 •           Kjeldahl nitrogen of 100 mg/1 (aver.).  In a similar study, Parker
             (25)reported the treatment of vegetable tannery waste by activated
 •           sludge.   The results of his study are summarized in Table 111-13.
             They show the affect of different loadings and detention.
I
I
               E.  Textiles
M                 A report by the A.D.  Little Company (60) discussed the treatment
_           of textile wastes.   The SRWL for BOD5 was reported to range from 270-
™           1000 mg/1.  Very little removal of total dissolved solids is accom-
tf           plished by conventional activated sludge, extended aeration or lagoons.
             Total dissolved solids of the textile waste reported ranged from 500-
•           3000 mg/1.  The effectiveness of biological treatment on textile
             wastes is summarized in Table 14.
               F.  Steel Industry
|                 In a 1954 paper on the treatment of flue dust waste from the
^           U.S.  Steel Fairless Works,  Henderson and Baffa 49 reported that
             primary thickening, flocculation with lime, followed by clarification
V           is capable of reducing the  influent suspended solids from 2000 mg/1
             to less than 50 mg/1.
•                 In treating combined  once through cooling water and concentrated
^           coolant wastes at a 12:1 ratio, Armco (2 )f ound the following oil
™           removals with 195 mg/1 alum, 43 mg/1 lime,  32 mg/1 clay, and 1 mg/1

I
                                          68
I

-------

TABLE 111-12
*
EFFLUENT QUALITY & COST (62)

Cumulative
BOD COD SS COLOR TDS Cost
PROCESS mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 (Units) mg/1 C/1000 GAL
Influent 284 1600 440 2000 1450
Primary Eff 277 1440 38 2000 1450 3 to 4
Biological
Aerated Lagoon 63 700 50 1800 1450 902
Activated Sludge 20 410 20 1800 1450 10
Massive Lime 15 400 20 200 1200 20
Sand Filtration 10 400 1 200 1200 23
Carbon Absorption 2 10 1 10 1100 23
Ion Exchange nil 5 1 nil nil 77
*
Based on 1969 ENR Const. Cost
Example Discharge of 24.3 MGD.







69
1
1

1

1
I

I

I
•
*

1


I
1
I
1
I
1
I
1
1

-------
1
1
l^B
1
1

I

1
1

1


1

1

1
I

I
1
I
1
1
TABLE 111-13
EFFLUENT DATA FOR BLENDED BATE POOL & TANNINS FROM Parker (75)
PARAMETER
Flow, GPM
Detention, days
BOD Load, lb/1000 ft 3/D
% BOD Removed
% COD Removed
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
ORG-N, mg/1
NH~N, mg/1
j
TKN, mg/1
TS, mg/1
TDS, mg/1
TVS, mg/1
SS, mg/1
Set. S., ml/1
PH
T. Sulf., mg/1
TP, mg/1




AVE. RAW
WASTE I
15
49.6
1.8
97
76
1043 35
4470 1135
40.6 15
47.1 25
87.8 40
9190 6000
6500 5500
2710 900
539 500
15.1 20+
6.0 7.0
1.5 0
6.83 2.3



70
II
20
37
2
96
65
47
1650
30
28
59
7600
6600
1100
900
40
7
0
7




PHASE
III
33
.4 16.2
.4 4.5
84
42
187
2740
36
34
70
2500
1400
1000
500
3
.2 7.3
0
.7 5.6




IV
69
7.8
9.4
67
38
270
2930
18
18
36
2000
800
1400
500
1
7.1
0
5.8




V
127
4.2
17.3
63
37
315
3000
25
43
68
2400
1200
1200
450
2
6.8
0.4
3.6





-------
                         TABLE 111-14


BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF TEXTILE WASTE FROM A. D. Little  (60)
TREATMENT PROCESS


a) Modified Activated
   Sludge-Cotton & Polyester


b) Extended Aeration -
   Cotton & Polyester & Rayon


c) Extended Aeration -
   Printing


d) Extended Aeration -
   Cotton & Polyester & Rayon


e) Extended Aeration -
   Polyester & Synthetics


f) Extended Aeration -
   Cotton


g) Activated Sludge -
   Cotton & Synthetics

h) Extended Aeration -
   Polyester & Rayon


i) Aerated Lagoon -
   Wool


j) Aerated & Natural Lagoons -
   Average of 8 Plants Fabric
   Unknown or Cotton & Nylons
   with Dyeing and Finishing
       BOD
   SRWL - EFF


     760-120




     450-85



     650-45



     560-75



     450-65


     570-33
,.  ,  600-25,
t0 {1000-75}
     300-50



     164-64
     360-45
      SS_
  SRWL - EFF


    105-270
     50-25



    175-50



    200-75



     25-25
.   ,100-5 ,
t0 {300-70}
    112-121
                              71
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Parameter
Total Oil, mg/1
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
Suspended Solids, mg/1
SRWL
1276
893
6320
770
Effluent
76
57
441
55
                                                                        % Removal


                                                                            91


                                                                            93


                                                                            89


                                                                            93
™           cationic polymer.


I



I


I


I
             The report also concluded that the pH needed to be maintained above

•           6.0 for efficient treatment and that flow equalization was an

             absolute must.

•                 The cost of treating combined once through cooling water and

•           concentrated coolant oily waste was between $0.046-0.051/1000 gallons

             of waste.  Treatment included coagulation and air flotation.  Although

I           the recovered oil scum had no potential as fuel oil, it was sold to

             municipalities for use as road oil (2) .
               G.  General.


                The performance of surface-aerated basins on BOD- removal prior


             to clarification has been summarized by Beychok (L8).   Table 111-15


             shows some of  his data.
                                           72

-------
                        TABLE 111-15
INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT by SURFACE AERATED BASINS (18)
Industry


Pulp & Paper


Pulp & Paper


Oil Refinery


Pulp & Paper


Pulp & Paper


Petrochemical


Pulp & Paper


Pulp & Paper


Pulp & Paper


Textiles


Distillery


Fiberglass


Oil Refinery


Petrochemical


Oil Refinery


Wood Treating


Cannery


Cannery
      BOD,  mg/1
 Inf           Eff


 254            93


 239-93-33


 85.5-57-45


 225-119-78.5


 225-62-40.5


 600            90


 131            92


 526            95


 402            74


 200           100


 550            94


 933-98-78.5


 270            72


2500           200


 160-120-40


2200           200


 360            21


 980            50
          Remarks


Single Basin


Two Basins in series




 "     "   No Nutrients


 "     "   w/Nutrients


Two Basins in Parallel


Single Basin


Two Sections in Series


Single Basin


Single Basin


Single Basin


Two Basins in Series

 n      ii   n    ii


Single Basin


Two Basins in Series


Single Basin


Lit. Rev.
                             73
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
               Further treatment of effluents of this quality would be needed
•             prior to discharge.   However,  application of one of the methods de-
               scribed in the previous section could easily provide an effluent
•             with a BOD5 and SS of less than 30 mg/1 each.
•                   While BODr per se is not associated with trace metals and
               hydroxide sludges, suspended solids are.   In this regard,  filtration
I             of settled chemically treated  wasteswaters is often necessary to
               maintain desired effluent levels for the  trace metal.
I
      In treating electroplating wastes, McDonough and Steward 64
reported that the use of the Lancy Intergrated treatment system
I
               yielded a final effluent of  less than 10 mg/1 suspended solids.
•                   In testimony to the Illinois  Pollution Control Board (97)
               Weston cited  filtration as a polishing step in the removal of
W             arsenic, barium,  calcium, copper,  iron,  manganese, nickel, and zinc.
•I             As  discussed  in the chapter  on "Oil and  Grease," the removal of
               biological floe and suspended solids by  filtration from biological
•             effluents will  improve the removal  of oils.  For further details
               refer  to the  individual chapters for the parameter in question.
I

I

I

I

I

I

I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
                     CHAPTER IV-CADMIUM



SOURCES OF CADMIUM



      Cadmium, like many other metals, occurs naturally in soil,


fresh and salt waters, consequently in our food and bodies.

                                                                +2
      In the natural aquatic environment it occurs as soluble Cd


salts, soluble inorganic and organic complexes and insoluble pre-


cipitates.  At a pH of greater than 7, cadmium hydroxides and car-


bonates will precipitate.


      Friberg ej^.al. (39) report that cadmium in the environment is


particularly associated with zinc, lead and copper concentrations.


In areas not known to be polluted with cadmium, natural conditions


in the soil are reported to be less than 1 ppm.  Normal levels of


cadmium in food are reported to be less than 0.05 ppm.  Similarly,


McKee and Wolf (66) have reported that a normal concentration of


cadmium for many plant and animal tissues is about 1 mg/kg.  Table


IV-1 lists some naturally occurring concentrations of cadmium.


      While cadmium is normally present in the environment, its


concentration in water is being increased by many industrial discharges.


Since it is associated with the refining of zinc, lead, copper, and


the alloying of copper, lead, silver, aluminum, and nickel, it is


very likely that cadmium pollution started as early as the first use


of any of these metals.  Industrial activities which contribute to


increased concentrations of cadmium are shown in Table IV-2.  Friberg


ert.al. (39) also reported that the burning of oil and waste and scrap


metal treatment may contribute to the cadmium concentration.  Their


work also showed that agricultural fertilizers, either as chemicals or


as sludge from sewage treatment plants, contain cadmium which may be




                                75

-------
TABLE IV-1
NATURALLY OCCURRING CONCENTRATIONS OF CADMIUM

Source Concentration Reference
Soils* 1 mg/kg (39)
Food (normal level) 0.05 mg/kg (39)
Many plant and animal 1 mg/kg (66)
tissues
Some natural waters 0.010 mg/1 (39)
Sea water 0.08 mg/1 (6 )
Marine plants 0.4 mg/1 (6 )
Marine Animals 0.15-3mg/l (6 )
3
Air (Manhattan Yearly mean 0.023 mg/m (39)
3
Air (non-urban New York) Yearly mean 0.003 mg/m (39)









76

1
1

1



1
1

1

1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I

1

-------
1



1

1

1

1

1

1
•

1

1



1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE IV- 2
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES AND CONCENTRATIONS OF CADMIUM

Cadmium
Industrial Source Concentration (mg/1)

Alkaline accumulators
Automobile heating control 14-22
manufacturing
Ceramic manufacturing
Chemical Industries
Pigment Works
Textile printing
Plastics
Lead mining
Acid drainage 1,000
Metallurgical alloying
(on copper, lead, silver,
aluminum, and nickel)
Plating
Plating rinse waters 15 average
(large installations) 50 maximum
0.5 GPH drag-out 48
2.5 GPH drag-out 240
Plating bath 23,000
Electroplating waste <2-4





77





Reference

(39)
(76)

(61,66,76)
(61,76,66)
(76,39)
(61,76,66)
(39)

(76)
(61,66,76)



(76)



(14)








-------
released to the aquatic environment.  Lund (61) reported that cadmium        A
is a by-product of nuclear reactor operations.  Salts of cadmium
are also used in insecticides and as anti-parasitic agents.                  •

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF CADMIUM
      Effect on Man and Animals
                              78
I
I
      Table IV-3 lists the physiological effects of cadmium upon
animals.  The consumption of water containing cadmium has been found        9
to result in cumulative poisoning in mammals.  McKee and Wolf (66)
have reported that cadmium tends to concentrate in the liver, kidneys,      •
pancreas and thyroid of humans and animals.                                 _
      In general, for humans there are two principal mechanisms of          •
absorption:  respiration and ingestion (39).  For this report the           •
primary concern is the gastrointestinal mode of ingestion.  Friberg
e^.a.1^.  (39) reported that in human newborns, the total body content         I
of cadmium is small, less that .001 mg.   Their studies, and those
which they reviewed, indicated that the placenta of the mother apparent-    m
ly acts as a shield to the fetus, even for those mothers who had been       •
exposed to excessive cadmium concentration prior to the child's birth.

                                                                            I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
flj                   The concentration of calcium has been found to play an important

               role in the assimilation of metals from the intestines.  While the

I             hardness of the water itself is not the most important factor, a low

               calcium diet has been shown to allow up to 50% more concentration of

•             cadmium in the liver and kidneys of rats.  Similarly, a low protein

•             diet, irrespective of the calcium content within the diet, was found

               to give considerably higher levels of cadmium in the kidneys, livers,

•             and whole bodies of rats.

                     Friberg ^.a^. has shown that cadmium in the human body may

V             cause hypertension and arteriosclerotic heart disease, bone damage,

•             sterilization, liver, and renal damage.

                     Cadmium together with vanadium has also been correlated with

•             mortality by heart disease.  Bone damage can occur under relatively

               short periods of exposure to only moderate concentrations of cadmium

V             when the calcium content of the individual's diet is low.  The report

m             by Friberg et.aJ^.  also concluded from studies on animals that cadmium

               and cadmium compounds can give rise to malignant tumors.  With respect

•             to the potential carcinogenic effect of cadmium on man Friberg

               stated, "the carcinogenic evidence of cadmium in human beings is by

0             no means conclusive as yet but fully motivates further and intensive

m             studies in groups  exposed industrially as well as those through food

               and ambient air".

•                   Normal daily intakes of cadmium in human diets as reported

               by Friberg jet.al..  (39) varied between 0.004 and 0.06 mg in five

|             different countries studies.   Table IV-4 gives suggested maximum

M             cadmium concentration in drinking water.




I
                                             79

I

-------

TABLE IV-3
PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF CADMIUM UPON ANIMALS
Species
Human
Human
Human
Human
Rabbits
Dogs
Hamster
Dose Effect
150 mg/kg Lethal in 1.5 hrs.
14.5 mg Nausea and vomiting
From water - Disorders of renal
"High cone." function, "Itai itai"
disease
From water Hypertension linked to
and food increased retention of
Cd in kidneys
0.3-0.5 g/kg 0/16 animals with
0.1-50.0 ppm tumors
in drinking
water
0.15-0.3 mg/kg Fatal
High Positive teratogenicity
80
1
1
Reference |
(66)
(66) I
(39) *
(39) •
(39) I
1
(39)
(39) 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
1
1

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
      Friberg, et_.a\^.  (39) concluded from experiments on animals
that an absorption rate of less than 10% of the actual oral dose
would be normal and that in most cases a 2% absorption could be ex-
pected.  However, there were large individual variations.  In  con-
sidering the absorption for a "standard man" with an estimated 50
years intake, they estimated a normal absorption rate between  3 and  8%.
They recommended, however, that an absorption rate of 10%  should be
considered as quite possible until clarified by further studies.  The
research indicated that normally the highest concentration of  cadmium
will be found in the kidneys.  Based upon experiments on animals,
Friberg £t_-al_. has determined that a concentration of about 200 ppm
wet weight is a critical concentration in the renal cortex.  At an
assumed 10 percent absorption rate over a fifty year period, for
example, a daily consumption of 0.05-0.075 mg/1 cadmium would  result
in renal dysfunction.  (At a 5% absorption rate over the same period
of time a daily consumption of 0.1-0.15 mg/1 would have the same result.)
Friberg et^.al^.concluded that a concentration of 0.01 mg/1  in a water
supply would contribute little to the daily intake of man  (assuming
the standard consumption of 1-2 liters of water per day).  A con-
centration of 0.02 mg/1, however, would increase the cadmium con-
sumption from 0.02-0.04 mg per day.  This then approaches  a critical
concentration at a 10% absorption.
      In discussing the possible biological half-life of cadmium in
man, Friberg, .et_.al.. (39) concluded "...it is conceivable  that cadmium
will be retained for many years in man once it has been absorbed.
This is supported by findings in autopsies of workers which indicate
                              81

-------
a very slow decrease in liver levels after exposure ceased."                 ^

      Effects on Plants
                              82
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
      Friberg _e_t_.al_. (39) identified rice and wheat as two food
products which are capable of concentrating cadmium from the soil.
In general, they found that wheat accumulated cadmium to a slightly
greater extent but both concentrations were around 1 ppm.  Rice              •
and wheat grown in most parts of the world will normally contain less
than 0.1 ppm of cadmium in the grain.                                        9
                                                                             I
      Effects on Fish and Other Aquatic Life

      Table IV-5 shows that the acute lethal level of cadmium with
respect to fish varies from a low of 0.01-10 mg/1, depending upon            •
the organism, the hardness of the water, the temperature, and the
                                                                             •
time of exposure.  McKee and Wolf (66) and others (15) show that cadium
toxicity increases with water softness for all the forms of fish life        •
studied.  As hardness increases, thereby increasing the chance of a
higher calcium diet for aquatic life, the toxicity of the cadmium            •
compounds decreases.  Several authors have reported a synergistic            •
effect with respect to toxicity of cadmium compounds in the presence
of zinc, copper, selenium, and cyanide (6,15,66).                            •
      In investigating the concentrations of cadmium in seafood,
Friberg et..a.L (39) reported that oysters from the East Coast of the          •
United States contain 0.1-7.8 ppm (wet weight) whereas West Coast            •
oysters contain only 0.2-2.1 ppm (wet weight).
      Cadmium, like other trace metals, has been reported to be con-         •
centrated upon suspended particles and in bottom sediments  (39) .
                                                                             I
                                                                             I

-------
•             In the literature reviewed by Friberg et^.al^. (39) one particular
               case indicated that 500 meters downstream from a factory discharging
•             cadmium, only 0.004 mg/1 of cadmium was found in the water, while
               80 mg/1 (dry weight) was found in the bottom sediments.  Thus, we
I             must be aware that even the lack of detection of cadmium in the
«             surface water does not preclude the possibility of relatively high
               cadmium concentrations being available to biota of the stream.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                          TABLE IV-4

              CADMIUM STANDARDS PROMULGATED (66)
•                                                               Maximum
               Agency                                            Cone.(mg/1)
•             U S.P.H.S. Drinking Water Stds. in the U.S.-1962  Mandatory 0.01
               1961 WHO European Std. for Drinking Water         Excessive 0.05
9             USSR Max. Permissible Cone, in Reservoir Waters   General Sanitary 0.01

I
Surface Water Criteria for Public Water Supplies  Permissible 0.01
     in the U. S.
                              83

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL

Species
Daphnia
magna
Daphnia
magna
Flathead
Minnows
Flathead
Minnows
Flatworm
Goldfish


Strickleback










TABLE IV-5
EFFECTS OF CADMIUM UPON FISH AND AQUATIC ORGANISMS

Dose Effect Reference
0.10 mg/1 Threshold (66)
as CdCl0
2
0.0026 mg/1 Immobilization (66)
as CdCl2
0.90 mg/1 Toxic in Soft water (15)
as CdCl2
5.0 mg/1 Toxic in Hard water (66)
as CdCl2
2.7 mg/1 Toxic (6)
as CdN03
0.0165 mg/1 Very sensitive in (66)
as CdCl_ Soft water
in 8.5 to 18 hrs.
0.20 mg/1 Lethal (6,66)
as Cd








84

1
1
1

1

1

1
1
-
•

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1

-------
M


•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
«

•

g
«

•

I

I
      Where cyanide or other complexing agents are not present, the
cost of removing cadmium may be expected to be equivalent to that of
conventional treatment involving coagulation, settling, rapid sand or
multimedia filtration.  As with many metal wastes, filtration is very
important in removing the slow settling metal hydroxide floe.  The
total cost of treatment by coagulation, sedimentation, and filtration
has been described in the report on arsenic.
      The new system described by Patterson and Minear for precipi-
tation of cadmium, for small electroplating wastes, is the Kastone
process.  Hydrogen peroxide is added to the wastewaters, which
oxidizes the cyanide and forms an oxide of cadmium simultaneously.
The cadmium oxide is claimed to be more easily removed than the cadmium
hydroxide.  This treatment system is believed to be suitable for plants
with low flows.   Filtration is still advisable.

Ion Exchange

      The ion exchange process concentrates the cadmium, making
recovery amenable.  Patterson and Minear reported the recovery value
of cadmium to be between $1.20-$6.00 per thousand gallons for a
solution concentration of 50-250 mg/1 (as cadmium).  The recovered
value of cadmium may be capable of offsetting the additional treatment
cost within one-half to two years.  Patterson and Minear did warn,
however, that ion exchange is unsuitable for the recovery of cyanide
solutions.  No specific applications of ion exchange recovery of
cadmium cyanide solutions were found.
      On the basis of pilot plant work, reported by Patterson and
Minear, removal of cadmium by a cation exchanger was 99% efficient,
                                             85

-------
                                                                            I
and 99.9% efficient by a cation plus anion exchange column.  The
initial concentration was reported as a trace quantity.  On this            |
basis, one can only assume that the final effluent would be in the          _
zero mg/1 range prior to breakthrough.                                      ™
      In summary, it is apparent that cadmium has a significant             B
environmental impact upon man, other animals, and aquatic life.  It
has been shown that the toxicity of cadmium will vary with the presence     I
of calcium and protein in the diet of mammals and possibly that of          —
fish, and with the presence of other trace metals.  It has also been        •
shown that once cadmium is absorbed by the human body it is retained.       B
For this reason, Byerrum, as reported in McKee and Wolf (66), suggested
that cadmium concentrations should not be allowed to exceed 0.1 mg/1.       I
TREATMENT FEASIBILITY - CADMIUM REMOVAL
I
      A detailed review of current technology of cadmium removal has
been prepared by Patterson and Minear (76) and others (46,61,66).  In        B
general, cadmium may be removed by ion exchange or chemical precipi-         •
tation.  Cadmium carbonate and cadmium hydroxide are insoluble under
alkaline conditions and are therefore easily precipated.  It is also         B
technically feasible to remove concentrated sources of cadmium by
electrolytic or evaporative recovery.  A new process for low flows           |
has been discussed by Patterson and Minear (76).                             _
Chemical Precipitation
      The chemical precipitation of cadmium is dependent upon the            B
pH of 8, an effluent of 1.0 mg/1 may be expected; whereas at a pH of 10,     m


                                                                             I
                               86                                            •

-------
 f             a final effluent of 0.1 mg/1 may be expected.   In Patterson and
 «             Minear's review, they stated that when iron is present in the waste
               with cadmium,  "precipitation will yield complete removal" at a pH
 •             of only 8.5.
                     Complexing agents such as cyanide,  as found in electroplating
 |             waste, must be removed before cadmium can be precipitated.   Fortunately,
 _             cyanide may be readily removed allowing for cadmium precipitation.
 ™             Patterson and  Minear report the cost for removing complexed cadmium
I
I
can be expected to be equal to that of cyanide removal.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

      The review of cadmium as a waste, its impact, and treatment has
provided the following information:
      1.  Cadmium exists naturally in the soil and in the water but
_
*                       industrial and agricultural discharges contribute sub-
•                       stantial loads when untreated.
                     2.   Like arsenic,  cadmium is  concentrated and  becomes cumulative
•                       in man,  animals,  and plants.  Cadmium is  toxic  to animals
_                       and aquatic life.
*                   3.   Cadmium acts synergistically in the  presence of other
B                       metallic ions  increasing  its toxicity.
                     4.   Cadmium causes poor bone  mineralization in humans with low
I                       calcium diets.  Cadmium can cause liver and renal damage
                         in man and animals.   It has also been shown that with low
•                       calcium diets  cadmium accumulation in the  liver was about
•                       50% more than  in  the kidneys of test animals.   Cadmium

I

I

-------
I
causes chronic kidney damage in man under continuous exposure,
possibly as low as 0.012-0.020 mg/day.  Cadmium levels were also            •
shown to be higher in test animals when their diet was low in protein.
Cadmium contributes to cardo-vascular disease in man.                       I
      5.  Trace amounts of cadmium in water may concentrate on
          bottom sediments as much as 20,000 times the concentration        •
          in the water.                                                     •
      6.  There appear to be technically feasible methods to reduce
          cadmium levels in wastewaters to levels lower than 0.1 mg/1.      I
          However, further study and research is needed to confirm
          the actual level which is currently obtainable by these           m
          methods.                                                          •
      It is readily apparent that the effluent level of all cadmium

It is desirable that an effluent level for cadmium be set at 0.10            ^
mg/1.  Furthermore, it is recommended that literature reviews and
research in this area be supported and continued to investigate other        •
currently feasible methods of treatment, and to determine obtainable
effluent levels for all discharges.                                          |

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I
                               88                                            •

-------
I
              CHAPTER V-TOTAL CHLORINE RESIDUAL
•                  The major discussion on the effects of chlorine residuals in
              the aquatic environment is a report by Brungs (20).  It is important
•            to note that Brungs work is directed at safe total chlorine residuals
              in surface waters.  The references cited within this report are listed
•            in Brungs' report.
•                  Brungs has documented that the uniform total residual chlorine
              level in surfacfe waters should not exceed 0.002 mg/1 to protect most
•            aquatic life.  Intermittent discharges from certain facilities such as
              from power plant chlorination processes for slime removal, should
B            not cause the receiving waters to reach a total residual chlorine
•j            concentration of 0.1 mg/1 for more than 30 minutes, nor 0.005 mg/1
              for more than 2 hours.
•                  When consulted on this report, Brungs (21) stated that he is
I
I
I
continuing to document his studies.  With respect to potentially safe
effluent levels of total chlorine residuals, Brungs stated that a
reasonable maximum level would be 0.1 mg/1.   The stream, however, should
              never contain more than 0.002 mg/1.  Therefore, discharges which will
•            be diluted from a concentration of 0.1 mg/1-0.002 mg/1 within 30
              minutes could be tolerated provided the entire cross section of the
|            stream is not affected.  Brungs stressed that a channel past the dis-
_            charge must be maintained if fish life is to exist in the stream.
™            Waters containing as little as 0.001 mg/1 total residual chlorine are
•j            avoided by rainbow trout.
                    Data on the effects of chlorine residuals over continuous and
•            intermittent periods of exposure are summarized in Table V-l.
                               89

-------
RESULTS OF BRIEF EXPOSURES OF FISH TO TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE


Species
Misc

Misc
trout fry

chinook salmon

white sucker
brook trout
smallmouth bass

rainbow trout

rainbow trout

finger ling
rainbow trout
fathead minnows
fathead minnows
yellow perch

yellow perch
largemouth bass
largemouth bass
brook trout

brook trout

brook trout

brook trout


* TL50 = median



Effect Endpoint

initial kill

erratic swimming
lethal

first death

lethal
median mortality
median mortality

slight avoidance

lethal

lethal

TL50*
TL50
TL50

TL50
TL50
TL50
mean survival
time
mean survival
time
mean survival
time
mean survival
time

tolerance limit.



Time

15 min.

6 min.
instantly

2.2 hrs


Residual Chlorine
Concentration (mg/1)
0.28

0.09
0.3

0.25

30-60 min. 1.0
90 min.
15 hrs.

10 min.

2 hrs.

4-5 hrs.

1 hr.
12 hrs.
1 hr.

12 hrs.
1 hr.
12 hrs.
8.7 hrs.

14.1 hrs.

20.9 hrs.

24 hrs.




0.5
0.5

0.001

0.3

0.25

0.79
0.26
0.88

0.494
0.74
0.365
0.35

0.10

0.05

0.005





Brungs'
References

Truchan, 1971

Truchan, 1971
Coventry, et.al
1935
Holland, et.al.
1960
Fobes, 1972
Pyle, 1960
Pyle, 1960

Sprague &
Drury, 1969
Taylor &
James 1928
Taylor &
James, 1928
Arthur, 1972
Arther, 1972
Arther, 1972

Arther, 1972
Arthur, 1972
Arthur, 1972
Dandy, 1967

Dandy, 1967

Dandy, 1968

Dandy, 1967




90
1





I
•



1




1
•



1



1

1

I
•

I




1
1

-------
•                   It is fully recognized that many state agencies either recommend

               or require minimum total residual chlorine levels in treated effluents.

•i             The states in Region III which currently require chlorination and/or

               a chlorine residual in at least some of their discharges are as

               follows :


|                   (1)   Delaware - All domestic wastewaters must be chlorinated.

•j                   (2)   Pennsylvania - Effluent must be disinfected.

                     (3)   Virginia - 2.0 mg/1 chlorine residual must be maintained
                          for discharges into some waters.
I
™
                     (4)   West  Virginia - Chlorination is  required  of all dis-
                          charges 12 months  of the year.  (34)


™                   Requirements for states in other regions  are also reported in

H             a summary  of  federally approved water  quality standards.  (34).


               TREATMENT  METHODS


                     Wastewaters  are disinfected primarily to  control bacteria and

•             the organisms which are pathogenic.  Indicators such as fecal coliforms

               are used for  controlling the  efficiency of  the  disinfection process.

|             The means  of  attaining low levels of these  indicator organisms  is

M             presently  being  reevaluated and many questions  are arising as to the

               proper choice for  disinfecting, be it  chlorine,  ozone,  or  other

•             biological, physical,  or chemical processes.  Two  promising processes

               are briefly discussed below.

|                   "Closed-loop chlorination" has been reported by Thomas and

«             Brown  (93)  to be an economical  and effective  means of controlling the

               rate of chlorination.   According to  the authors, closed-loop chlorin-

•             ation  is applicable to any waste treatment  facility.   While the unit



I
                                              91

-------
costs about $5,000 it rapidly offsets the cost of manpower needed            .
to do the same job.  Thomas and Brown stated that "financially, it
is imperative that closed-loop chlorination equipment be provided to         Ij
replace the four men who otherwise would be required to give effective
chlorination.  The cost of closed-loop chlorination equipment can be         •
recovered in two to three months by payroll savings.  Obviously,             _
additional maintenance will be required; but this will be small - in         ™
the range of one hour a week to one hour a day".                             •
      The use of ozone for disinfection is also a possible alternative.
It is widely reported to be in use in Europe and is gaining acceptance       •
in the U. S.

IECOMMENDATIONS
                               92
I
I
I
      On the basis of the above discussion and the report by Brungs
(20) ,a maximum total chlorine residual in surface waters of 0.002 mg/1
is recommended.
      Where currently permissible under state and local laws and             •
regulations, it is suggested that all discharges contain not more than
0.10 mg/1 total residual chlorine, or where possible maintain a stream       |
level at less than or equal to 0.002 mg/1 after a 30 minute mixing
period.
      As an interim measure to limit the chlorine residual in a dis-
charge, it is recommended that the discharge not contain more than
0.2 mg/1 total chlorine residual above that required by state or             •
local law and/or regulation.
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
 I
                                       CHAPTER VI-CHROMIUM
                  Unlike most toxic trace elements, chromium is not commonly en-



•           countered in the natural environment.  Trace amounts of chromium have



             been found in food (66).  However, this is only expected for food



•           cooked in a stainless steel utensil.  Trace amounts found from this



             source are not known to have any physiological effects upon man.



•           Chromium has been found in trace amounts in soil and plants, however,



•           there is no evidence that this chromium level is either detrimental



             or beneficial for plant nutrition.



•                Chromium may be found, apparently due to natural conditions, in



             sea water at a concentration of 0.00005 mg/1.  Marine plants may con-



|           tain chromium at concentrations of 1.0 mg/1, and marine animals between



             0.2 and 1.0 mg/1 (6).
I


I


I
I


I
                  Chromium is found in hexavalent and trivalent forms.   The tri-


                            +3
             valent form (Cr  ) normally consists of the hydrated or complexed cation



             in water.  The prevalent forms of hexavalent chromium (Cr   ) include


                           -2                       -2
             chromate (CrO,  ) and dichromate (Cr 0   ).  Chromium trioxide,  a hexa-
.           valent  form,  is  also  referred  to  as  "chromic acid" or  "chromic  acid



™           anhydride".

                                         i ry

I                 Divalent  compounds  (Cr  ) tend  to oxidize  to the  trivalent  form.



             The hexavalent chromium  salts  of  sodium, potassium, and ammonium are



•           quite soluble.   As a  result, for  removal one normally  considers  reducing



_           hexavalent chromium to the trivalent form.  This may be done by  heat,



*           organic matter,  or by reducing agents such as sodium metabisulfite.



•           The trivalent  chromic salts  are soluble only as chloride, nitrate, and
             sulfate, and the hydroxide and carbonate chromic salts are quite
                                            93

-------
                                                                              I
insoluble.
     The industrial sources of chromium reported by Lund (61), Nemerow        I
(72), and others are shown in Table VI-1.  The most common sources are
electroplating, metal finishing, tanning of leather, and cooling tower        |
effluents.  McKee and Wolf also reported prevalent sources of hexa-           •
valent chromium to include annodizing of aluminum, the manufacture of
paints, dyes, explosives, ceramics and paper.  Hexavalent chromium is         •
more prevalent in these effluents, although some trivalent chromium may
be present.  Trivalent chromium salts are used as mordants in textile         I
dying, in the ceramic and glass industry and in photography.                  _
     The major source of chromium in our surface waters appears to be         ™
from industrial and municipal discharges which contain industrial wastes      I
rather than from natural sources.
                                                                              I
                                                                              I
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF CHROMIUM

     Effect on Man
     The toxicity of chromium compounds in man is quite high.   In 1946        •
the U.S.P.H.S. Drinking Water Standards set a maximum allowable limit
of 0.05 mg/1.  A justification for this limit at that time was that           •
it was the current limit of detection.  It was not set as a result of         •
physiological effects.  The 1962 Drinking Water Standards retained the
same 0.05 mg/1 limit.                                                         I
     Evidence indicates that man neither needs nor benefits from
chromium salts in his diet.  Chromium salts are rapidly and completely        •
eliminated when ingested orally.  It was reported that a Long Island          •
family of two adults and two children revealed no abnormalities after

                                                                              I
                                94
                                                                              I

-------
1

1

1
1

1

1
1

1



1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE VI-1

SOURCES OF CHROMIUM

Sources Type Concentration mg/1 Reference
Chrome Plating Cr03~3 4,170,000 (61)
Plating Waste Cr+6 0-555 (72)
Total 0-612
Electroplating Total 11-41 (14)
a.-}
Electroplating Cr 140 (76)
IBM Plant Cr+6 1300 (76)
Metal Finishing Total 1-700 (16)
Brass & Copper CrO 70-96.9 (96)
Wire Mill ^
Cr 27 (96)
+f\
Acid Bath Waste Cr 122-270 (76)
Cr+3 37-282 (76)
Tannery Wastes Total 30-70 (72)







95

-------
                                                                              I
consuming hexavalent chromium of 1.0 to 25.0 mg/1 in their drinking
water for a three year period.  Another investigation reportedly found        |
mild nausea from consumption of water with 5 mg/1 on an empty stomach.        «
Consumption of water with 2.5 and 3.5 mg/1, however, failed to produce
any symptoms.  McKee and Wolf concluded that man apparently may consume       •
5.0 mg/1 hexavalent chromium with no deleterious physiological effects.
However, concentrations above 1.5 mg/1 may cause color and taste              •
problems.                                                                     _
     While the salts of trivalent chromium are not believed to be physio-     •
logically harmful, large doses of chromate may lead to corrosive effects      •
in the intestinal tract and to nephritis.  Approximately 0.5 grams of
potassium bichromate has been reported to be toxic.                           •
                                 96
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
                   Effect on Plants
I                 Chromium is  shown to be toxic  to  plants  (6,66)  at  concentrations
m            of 3.4 mg/1 or above.   Table VI-2 summarizes  toxicity data.

                   Effect on Animals
I                 A limit of 0.05 mg/1 for chromium in water used for stock watering
              has been proposed, but there apparently is little justification for the
I            level (6).
                   McKee and Wolf report that the maximum non-toxic  level in the
              drinking water of white rats is 500 mg/1 as hexavalent  chromium (66).
I            They also reported that a drinking  water concentration of 500 mg/1 of
              potassium chromate would not affect the utilization of  food by rabbits
I            but that 10,000 mg/1 of zinc chromate has markedly interfered with the
•            digestion.  The concentration of 5  mg/1 of chromium in conjunction with
              11 mg/1 of selenium caused an increase in mortality among rats.
I                 In other works reported by McKee and Wolf, white rats were fed
              potassium chromate at a dosage of up to 11 mg/1 for one year.  Other
|            test rats received up to 25 mg/1 of chromium as potassium chromate
M            and 25 mg/1 as chromic chloride.  The study indicated that there was
              no significance in the difference of weight, food intake, water con-
I            sumption, or blood analysis from the experimental group.  However, the
              report did show that a concentration above 5 mg/1 chromium was detected
|            in all tissues, especially  in the spleen.  As a result, McKee and Wolf
«            recommended that  the concentration of chromium be maintained at or
™            below  5 mg/1  for  all stock  and wild life  for watering purposes.
•                 Effect on Aquatic Life
                    It  is  readily apparent  that the  lethal and toxic  concentrations  of
_

I
                                             97

-------
Form


Trivalent


Potassium
 Bichromate


Potassium
 Bichromate


Potassium
 Bichromate


Trivalent &
 Hexavalent
                              TABLE VI-2
                   CHROMIUM TOXICITY TO PLANTS (66)
Concent ration, mg/1


     3.4-17.3


     5



     10



     15-50
Plant


Various


Oat



Oat



Oat



Sensitive
Effect


Slightly Toxic


Slight Chlorosis



Marked Chlorosis



Reduced Growth



Adverse
                                98
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
              all forms of chromium vary with the species (66).   Table VI-3 summarizes


              the experimental evidence available.  McKee and Wolf report a general


              toxicity limit for fish of 5 mg/1.   [A threshold toxic concentration


              for small prawn was reported to be less than 5 mg/1.  Lower forms of


              aquatic life are much more sensitive to chromium compounds (66).]


              Under a two (2) year exposure oysters showed a chromium toxicity of
              0.01-0.012 mg/1 (6).
•                 McKee and Wolf have also reported that fish are capable of with-


              standing from 10 mg/1 to over 500 mg/1 of various chromium compounds,


|            depending on the time of exposure without detrimental effect.  They


•            noted that lower forms of aquatic life are capable of withstanding a


              chromium concentration of 5.0 mg/1 for up to one hour without detri-


•            mental effect.


                   McKee and Wolf have reported that algae are capable of concentrat-


Jj            ing radioactive chromium 100 to 500 times.  Similarly, Van den Berg and


_            Daum (95) indicated that recent studies on a cooling water chromium


              discharge showed that chromium is concentrated in fish.  Their investi-


•            gat ion showed that the concentration within the fish is increased as


              both the total chromium concentration in the water, and time increased.


H            While under continuous exposure, fish have shown detrimental effects


              to concentrations of 1.0 mg/1, while they are capable of survival


™            with no significant damage at concentrations of 10 or more mg/1 for


•            short periods of time.  Total  chromium concentrations  whould  be  maintained


              at  0.05  mg/1  for aquatic life  under continuous  exposure.   They are


I            capable  of  withstanding  short  exposures  of up  to  5.0 mg/1  for as much


              one hour.   Other factors such  as temperature,  pH,  the  species,  the

-------
                              TABLE VI-3
                     TOXICITY OF CHROMIUM TO FISH
                       AND AQUATIC ORGANISMS (66)
Target Organism

Brown Trout
Carp
Silver Salmon
Silver Salmon
Rainbow trout
Goldfish
Bluegills
Bluegills
Trout
Bluegills
Trout
Trout
Bluegills
Bluegills
Young eels
Young eels
Sticklebacks
Sticklebacks
Sticklebacks
Young eels
Minnows
Daphnia magna
Daphnia magna
Microregma
Navicula
Navicula
Daphnia magna
Scenedesmus
E. Coli
Grammarus pulex
Snail
Midge fly larvae
Snail
Polycelis nigra
Daphnia magna
Scenedesmus
Microregma
Polycelis nigra
Cr Form

 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 tri-
 tri-
 tri-
 tri-
 tri-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 hexa-
 tri-
 tri-
 tri-
 tri-
Concentration mg/1)    Effect
       5.2
       7.1
      10.0
      17.8
      20.0
      35.3
      A5.0
      50.0
      50.0
      70.0
     100.0
     150.0
     103.0
     145.0
     130
     520
       1,
       2,
       2,
       5.2
      40.0
       0.016
       0.05
       0.21
       0.21
       0.25
       0.51
       0,
       0.
       1.4
      17.3
      25.0
      40.6
     148.0
      42.0
       5.0
      37.0
      75.0
.3
.0
.4
.7
.7
toxic
unharmed
freshwater, toxic
seawater, toxic
toxic, 18°C
unharmed
tolerated 20 days
toxic limit, 30 days
killed within 33 hrs
toxic limit, 1 week
24 hr. TLm
killed in 6 hrs.
96 hr. TLm
24 hr. TLm
tolerated 50 hrs.
killed 5-12 hrs.
survived 1 week
survived 2 days
lethal limit
survived avg. of 187
survived 6 hrs.
toxic threshold
killed in 6 days
toxic threshold
softwater TLm
hardwater TLm
toxic threshold
toxic threshold
toxic threshold
total mortality
softwater TLm
unharmed
hardwater TLm
toxic threshold
toxic threshold
toxic threshold
toxic threshold
toxic threshold
                                 TOO
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 •           hardness  of  the water,  and  possibly  the valence of  chromium may also
              influence its  toxicity  (66).
 I
I
I
I
              TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY -  CHROMIUM REMOVAL
 I
                   The  currently  available methods  of  chromium  treatment  consist of
 I            a  reduction-precipitation  process,  a  modification known as  the Lancy
              Integrated  System,  and  Ion Exchange.   Other methods which have been
 B            researched  by  the Battelle Memorial Institute will be discussed, as
 •            well  as the effects of  chromium  on  biological treatment.
                   The  theory  and practice of  treating chromium bearing plating wastes
 •            is presented in  Nemerow (72) and Gurnham (48).  The basic process con-
              sists of  alkaline-chlorination,  reduction, and precipitation  followed
              by neutralization.  Control of pH is very important, as is the time of
              reaction.

              Alkaline Chlorination
                   Many chromium bearing plating wastes may also contain cyanide.
              This waste must be reduced and acidified to convert the hexavalent
              chromium to the trivalent form prior to precipitation.  As chromium
 I            cannot be reduced until all of the cyanide is removed, the alkaline
              chlorination process is used for cyanide removal.  The details of this
 •            method are discussed in the chapter on cyanide.
 •            Reduction and Precipitation
                   After removal of cyanide from combined wastes, or upon separating
 I            chromium plating wastes, the hexavalent form of chromium must be reduced

 I

 I

I
                                             101

-------
                                             I
to the trivalent form to permit precipitation.   To accomplish this,




sufficient free mineral acid is added to the waste to reduce the             I




chromium by maintaining a pH of 3.0 or lower.  After reduction of the




chromium, alkali, usually in the form of a lime slurry,  is added to           |




neutralize the acid and then precipitate the trivalent chromium.  One




of the methods used to reduce the hexavalent form of chromium to tri-




valent is the addition of ferrous sulfate.  Nemerow (72)  summarized           I




the chemicals needed to remove one mg of chromium as follows:  16 mg




of copperas (ferrous sulfate), 6 mg sulfuric acid, and 9.5 mg lime,           •




The chemical reactions will normally produce 2  mg of a chromic hydrox-       _




ide and 0.4 mg of a ferric hydroxide sludge.  In addition, about 2 mg        ™




of calcium sulfate will be produced, part of which may also precipitate.      I




Disposal of these sludges is a major unsolved environmental problem.





Neutralization                                                               •




     In many plating waste operations the oxidized cyanide and reduced       •




chromium wastes will be combined with the other wastes,  which may con-




tain metals, oil, and grease, for subsequent and perhaps  final treatment.    •




If the combined waste is still acidic, a lime slurry can be added to




neutralize and precipitate the metals.  This reaction normally produces      |




a large and heavy coagulant sludge.                                          H




     A 1968 report by the Battelle Memorial Institute (16) listed the




following two conventional methods for chromium removal:                      I




     1. Hexavalent chromium may be reduced by the addition of sulfur




        dioxide, sulfates, and ferrous sulfate.  The process is common       |




        among intermediate and large plants.  The process involves re-




        duction of the hexavalent chromium to the trivalent form under
                                             I
102
                                                                             I



                                                                             I

-------
  •                    low pH (2.0-3.0) followed by precipitation of the trivalent




                       form with alkali.   Clarification is mandatory for efficient




  •                    removal of the trivalent chromium,  copper, nickel, and iron




                       when waste pickle  liquor is used for the reduction step.




  I                 2. Precipitation of the hexavalent chromium may be achieved  direct-




  •                    ly by the addition of barium salts.  While this method is re-




                       portedly effective, the sludge (BaCrO.)  is highly toxic which




  •                    poses a solid waste hazard.




                    In Patterson and Minear (76), it is indicated that the reduction
 I
               of hexavalent  to  trivalent  chromium  is not always  100% complete.  The




 •             efficiency will depend  upon the  time allowed  for reduction,  the pH of




               the  reaction mixture, the concentration, and  type  of reducing agent




 I             employed.  They noted that  an  initial hexavalent concentration of 140




               mg/1 can be reduced  to  a total of 0.7 to 1.0  mg/1  as hexavalent chromium,




 |             using sodium bisulfite  as a reducing agent.   As the use of sodium bi-




 _             sulfite can cause odors and corrosion, it is  often replaced by sulfur




 ™             dioxide.  Patterson  and Minear reported that  the use of sulfur dioxide




 I             at an IBM plant achieved total removal of as  much  as 1,300 mg/1 of




               hexavalent chromium.  The pH of  the  waste was decreased to 2 with a




 •             total detention time of 90  minutes.  Other reports indicated that the




               use  of sulfur  dioxide is much more efficient  in the reduction hexavalent




™             chromium than  the bisulfite (76).




•                  In discussing the  precipitation of the trivalent form of chromium,




               it was indicated  that the most effective pH range  is from 8.5 to 9.5.




I             This  is the point of minimum solubility of the chromic hydroxide sludge




               formed by the  precipitation of trivalent chromium  (76).  The most common
I



I
                                              103

-------
                                                                             I
alkali used is calcium hydroxide or other forms of lime.
     At the previously mentioned IBM plant, a final effluent concen-         |
tration of 0.06 mg/1 as total chromium was obtained.  It  was also noted      m
that a coagulant aid (Separan NP-10) was used to improve  the precipita-
tion and sedimentation characteristics of the chromic hydroxide.             •
     In several of the plants discussed by Patterson and  Minear, it
was shown that filtration of the final effluent following sedimenta-         |
tion improved the overall removal of chromium.  For one waste, sand          _
filtration reduced the initial chromium concentration of  1.3-4.6 mg/1
to a final concentration of 0.3-1.3 mg/1 (as total chromium).  Most of       I
this chromium was reported to exist as the soluble hexavalent form
rather than the trivalent chromium.                                          I
     The efficiency of the reduction, neutralization, and precipitation
of chromium, reported in various works investigated, are summarized in
Table VI-4.


                              TABLE VI-4
                      THE REMOVAL OF CHROMIUM BY
             REDUCTION, NEUTRALIZATION, AND PRECIPITATION
I
I
I
                               Concentration, mg/1                           •
                               +6                                            ~
Source            Initial as Cr       Effluent, as Total     Reference
Electroplating           10                  0.6               (17)          I
Electroplating           140                 1.0               (76)
IBM Plant              1,300                 0.06              (76)          I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I
                                104

-------
 I                 A modification of the standard reduction precipitation process


               known as the Lancy Process has been reported by Lund (61).  Lancy's


 |            batch or continuous treatment system follows the parameters of the


 _            standard reduction precipitation process.  The one basic difference


 ~            is in automation.  A pH meter and an ORP controller are utilized to


 I            modify the quantities of the chemicals entering the reaction tank.


               The Lancy integrated system is an extension of the normal process.


 •            In the integrated system, a chemical process solution (lime) is used


               to remove the dragout film and droplets containing the harmful chemical


 •            compound prior to recycling.  The treatment solution is then recircu-


 •            lated between various wash tank stations and a reservoir where the


               metal hydroxides are precipitated.  Lund reports that effluent quali-


 •             ties from the Lancy batch treatment or continuous flow through system


               are 0.1 mg/1 chromium, and 0.01 mg/1 chromium for the integrated treat-


 I             ment system.  Mr. Ivan Whittman, of Lancy Laboratories, has indicated


 •             to this author that the integrated system has been successfully imple-


               mented in plants with design flows ranging from 25 gallons per minute


 •             (gpro) to greater than 500 gpm design flows.  McDonough and Stewart (64)


               reported that the Lancy integrated treatment system used by the S. K.


 |             Williams Co. of Wauwotosa, Wisconsin, was capable of achieving a total


 •             chromium concentration of zero during several years of operation.


               Other parameters of interest, obtained by the S. K. Williams Company,


•             are a final effluent with a pH of 6.5 to 9.5, cyanide concentration of


               none, copper less than 0.50 mg/1, nickel less than 1.0 mg/1, iron less


|             than 0.50 mg/1, and settleable solids less than 10 mg/1.  (Editorial


               Note:  The 13th edition of Standard Methods (1) does include a method
I
I
I
                                               105

-------
                                                                             I
whereby settleable solids may be reported in terms of mg/1.   This apparent-
ly is what has been used here.)                                              •

Ion Exchange                                                                 •
     The 1968 Battelle Report (16) indicated effective chromium removal
by ion exchange and evaporation in concentrated waste streams.   Similar-     •
ly, Patterson and Minear's review on the treatment of hexavalent and tri-
valent chromium indicates that cation exchange can be applied to remove      |
trivalent chromium, and an anion exchange may be employed for the re-        •
moval of hexavalent chromium (76) .  Upon exhaustion of an anion exchange
column, it may be regenerated with sodium hydroxide to elute sodium          •
chromate.  The sodium chromate may then be passed through a cation ex-
change column to recover purified chromic acid.  If recovery of the          •
chromic acid is not desired, the concentrated regeneration waste of the      _
exchange column may be treated by the reduction-neutralization-precipita-    ™
tion method.  Patterson and Minear, like the Battelle Report, indicated      •
that the ion exchange process will not only produce reusable water, but
may prove to be economically feasible where the waste is highly concen-      I
trated, and/or where the cost of water is high.
     One of the reports reviewed by Patterson and Minear indicated that      •
ion exchange was both economically and technically feasible for wastes       fl
containing chromate ion concentrations up to 200 mg/1, and that chromate
concentrations greater than 500 mg/1 were suitable for evaporative re-       •
covery.
     There are two possible alternatives in the treatment technology         •
for trivalent chromium by ion exchange.  First, passing concentrated         •
chromic acid baths through a cationic resin removes metallic contaminants

                                                                             I
                                106

-------
 I
 I
              such as iron, aluminum,  and trivalent chromium from the chromic acid,

              thus allowing reuse of the chromic acid solution.   Second,  dilute rinse

•            waters can be passed through mixed bed resins to remove both the cationic

              trivalent and anionic hexavalent forms, allowing for the complete re-

•            use and recycle of the rinse water.

                   In the testimony of Weston (97)  before the Illinois Pollution Con-

|            trol Board it was stated that an effluent of 0.03  mg/1 is currently

_            obtainable by the use of ion exchange for hexavalent chromium waste.

™            A report by Driver (30), indicates that as little  as 1 mg/1 of chromium

B            is now being discharged  in the cooling waters used by City  Service

              Company, Buttle Rubber Plant at Lake  Charles, Louisiana. This plant

•            previously had discharged significant amounts of chromium in their

              cooling water.  By the use of ion exchange, this particular City Service

B            plant is currently recovering the chromate from the rinse water.  The

              chromium is recycled to  the cooling towers for further use.
I
I
              Miscellaneous

                   Another process  reported by Patterson and  Minear  is  that  of

              evaporative recovery.   One of the references  cited  indicated  that  a
              plating waste rinse water with only a few mg/1 of chromic acid could
•            be concentrated to over 900 mg/1 by evaporative recovery (76).  Patterson
              and Minear also indicated that the evaporative recovery was suitable
|            for waste containing over 500 mg/1 of chromate.
«                 Other methods researched and reported by Battelle in 1971 (17) for
™            electroplating wastes are summarized in Table Vl-5.
•                 The final treatment method investigated for this report was that
              of biological processes.  A report by Stanley consultants (91) and a
I

I

-------
                              TABLE VI-5
                POTENTIAL METHODS FOR CHROMIUM REMOVAL
Form
Concentration,  mg/1
Initial      Effluent
  +6
Cr
K2Cr20?
Cr
  +6
                100


                100


                1000


                1000



                100


                10-100
               10


               0-10


               0-10


               0-5



               0-4


               0.04-0.70
                                             Method
Ion Floatation
                                             Carbon Adsorption,  pH 2-3,
                                             4.0 GPM/ft
                                             Carbon Adsorption,  pH 2-3,
                                             5.0 GPM/ft
Liquid-Liquid Extraction
                                108
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
              1965 PHS study (5) on the interaction of heavy metals indicate a maxi-
 •           mum reliable potential of approximately 50% removal of various trace
 •           metals.   The report by Stanley on tannery wastes indicated that aero-
              bic lagoons were capable of reducing initial total chromium concentra-
 •           tion from 11 to 9 mg/1.   Activated sludge was found capable of reducing
              an initial chromium concentration of 60 mg/1 to 4 mg/1 (91).   The PHS
 I           study (5) investigated the effects of chromium, copper, zinc,  and
 •           nickel in four full scale treatment plants receiving combined  municipal-
              industrial wastes.  This study indicated that chromium intake  levels
 •           varying from 0.8 to 3.6 mg/1 would be reduced to 0.2 amd 2.5 mg/1 re-
              spectively.  The PHS study indicated that hexavalent chromium  concentra-
 H           tions up to 0.5 mg/1 could be almost completely removed.  Concentrations
 «           of 2 mg/1 in the raw waste will show at least some small quantity of
              chromium in the effluent.  Concentrations of 5 mg/1 and higher were
 •           found to pass through the biological system.
                   In summary, it is apparent that chromium can be removed efficiently
 •            to a level of 1 mg/1 by currently available and utilized methods.  With
 _            proper control the levels may be reduced to 0.01 mg/1 or less.  It has
 ™            also been shown that ion exchange is currently functional even on large
 •            volumes of chromium bearing wastes such as cooling water.  While the City
              Service report indicated a chromium breakthrough point of 1 mg/1, it is
 •            believed that adequate control of such an operation could reduce this
              break point level to much lower levels.  The testimony of Weston (48)
 •            indicated that the more commonly practiced procedures of alkaline reduc-
 •            tion, chemical precipitation, and sedimentation are capable of providing
              an effluent of 0.06 to 4 mg/1 for trivalent chromium, and 0.7  to 1 mg/1
I
I
for hexavalent chromium.
                               109

-------
                                                                             I
Cost of Treatment
     The literature review by Patterson and Minear (76)  and the testi-       |
mony of Weston (97) provide a reasonable idea of the relative capital        _
and operational costs of treating hexavalent and trivalent chromium by       ™
the various methods.  Table VI-6 summarizes the capital  cost data pro-       •
vided in the two references.
     Similarly, the operating costs of treating both hexavalent and          •
trivalent chromium as shown in the report by Patterson and Minear are
summarized in Table VI-7.
     In summary, it is apparent that chromium is no more expensive to
remove from wastewaters than many of the other elements  and trace metals.
In fact, with a cost of about $1.00 per thousand gallons for reduction       •
and precipitation of chromium, it may be cheaper in some areas than the
cost of the water supply, making it beneficial to institute recycling,       •

                                                                             I
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following generalizations can be made on the basis of the information    •
discussed above.
                                                                             I
                                                                        I
                                                                        I
                                                                             I
1.  Chromium exists only at very low levels in nature.
2.  Industrial sources are capable of contributing up to 4.17 kg/1
   if untreated.
3.  Man reportedly can consume up to 3.5 mg/1 of chromium through        •
   his drinking water without known detrimental effects.
4.  Animals and wildlife can consume up to 5.0 mg/1 in their drink-      |
   ing water without known detrimental effects.
                                 110
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                              TABLE VI-6
                  CAPITAL COST FOR CHROMIUM TREATMENT
Form     Method            Flow


Hex      Reduction &      1 MGD
          Precipitation


Hex      Reduction 6.     10 MGD
          Precipitation


Hex      Ion Exchange   100 gpm


Hex      Ion Exchange     1 MGD


Hex      Ion Exchange    10 MGD


Hex      Ion Exchange    50 MGD


Tri      Precipitation  0.2 MGD
Capital Cost


$  200,000



   700,000



    40,000


   300,000


 3,000,000


 4,600,000


   224,000
Reference


   (97)



   (97)



   (76)


   (97)


   (97)


   (97)


   (76)
                               111

-------



Form
Hex

Hex

Hex
Hex
Hex
Hex
Hex
Tri
Tri
Tri
Tri
Hex

Hex









TABLE VI- 7
OPERATION COST - CHROMIUM REMOVAL (76)
Method Flow, gpm Cone, mg/1
Reduction & 100 120
Precipitation
Reduction & 70 50
Precipitation
Ion Exchange - 50
Ion Exchange 100 50-100
Evaporation 0.5-2
Evaporation 2.0-5
Evaporation 5.0-10
Precipitation (Lime Cost) - 2000
Precipitation (Lime Cost) - 1000
Precipitation 0.2 MGD
Ion Exchange
Reduction & 73 2300
Precipitation
Ion Exchange 73 2300






112

1

1
$/1000 Gal. •
< 1.00
I
1.00

-.„,.
0.68 •
10.00
5.00 I
2.50
2.50 1
1.25 «
0.80
0.16-0.24 1
$33. 19 /Day
1
$12. 44 /Day Net.
1
1
1
1
1
1

1

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
 5. Plants subjected to chromium concentrations below 3.4 mg/1


    showed no toxic effects.


 6. The threshold of toxicity to fish is about 5 mg/1 of chromium


    for continuous exposure.  However, ranges of 10 >.to 50 mg/1 are


    tolerable for short periods of exposure (days).


 7. The lower forms of aquatic life have a limiting toxicity of


    0.050 mg/1 or less under continuous exposure.  Under short


    periods of exposure (up to one hour), levels of 5.0 mgm/1 are


    tolerable.


 8. Both algae and fish appear to be capable of concentrating
™                 chromium, while it is reported that other life forms rapidly
    expel chromium ingested by the oral route.


 9.  Current treatment methods are capable of obtaining an average


    total chromium concentration of 0.06 mg/1 or less.  However,


    even processes such as ion exchange have breakthrough concentra-


    tions of 1.0 mg/1.


10.  The costs of construction and operation of  chromium treatment
I
                   facilities are comparable with the costs of treating other metals.


•              It was apparent in reviewing the material cited, that one of the

•         major causes for residual total chromium found in effluents is the incom-

           plete reduction of hexavalent chromium to the trivalent form, which pro-

•         hibits complete precipitation.  However, the batch-flow through system

           discussed by Lund (61) indicates that with proper monitoring and instru-

|         mentation the standard reduction precipitation process is fully capable

M         of reaching a total chromium level in the effluent of 0.1 mg/1.  Other

           reports showed that filtration may also be needed to more fully control


I

                                           113
_

-------
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
the total system.  It is, therefore, felt that with proper controls in
instrumentation, a final effluent concentration of 0.1 mg/1 as total         |
chromium is currently achievable.
     As chromium in both the hexavalent and trivalent forms has been
shown to be toxic, especially to the lower forms of aquatic life,  it is      •
recommended that a uniform effluent limit of 0.1 mg/1 be established

cognizant that processes such as the Lancy Integrated Process are current-   _
ly in full scale operation yielding effluents of 0.01 mg/1 or less as        ~
                                                                             I
total chromium.
     It is admitted that the basis for these recommendations is a
limited amount of material, particularly with respect to health hazards.      •
It is recommended that further studies be done in this area, especially
to confirm the potential concentration effect of chromium within fish        ™
and other aquatic life.                                                      •

                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I

-------
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                      CHAPTER VII-COPPER
                      Copper is found naturally in the aquatic environment in the


                form of copper salts, inorganic or organic (soluble forms) complexes


                or precipitates.  Table VII-1 shows the concentration of copper in


•              nature and industrial-domestic uses of copper and its salts.  Most


                mining of copper oxide ores is done in the states of Arizona, Michigan,


•              Montana, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah. (48)  Copper smelting and plat-


•              ing is done throughout the country, while copper and brass manufactur-


                ing takes place in the northeastern quarter of the nation.  The major


•              sources of copper as described by Patterson and Minear (76) include metal


                processing, pickle and plating bath waste, brass and copper metal work-


                ing waste, jewelry manufacturing, alkaline Benberg rayon process, and


                acid mine drainage.  Copper and its salts are also used in the electri-


                cal and plumbing fields where conductivity or corrosion resistance is


                important, in dye, printing, tanning pigment, pyrotechnic and photo-


                graphic processes, and in human and veterinary medical preparations (66).


                      A review of the literature indicates that the concentration of cop-


_              per in discharges from various industrial processes ranges to a high


™              of 44,000 mg/1.  A summary of various concentrations of copper found


•              in wastewaters has been compiled in Table VII-2.


                      Copper is also known for complexing, especially with cyanide.


•              This is discussed in greater detail in the chapter on cyanide and


                its removal.  A tabulation of copper concentrations found in complex
                cyanide plating waste is given in Table VII-3 taken from the work of


                Nemerow (72).
                                              115

-------




Source
Surface Water
Ground Water
Sea Water

INDUSTRIAL

Metallic Copper:


Copper Chloride:
CuCl2 2H20
Copper Nitrate:
Cu(NO») 3H 0
Copper Sulfate:
CuSO, &
CuSO, 5H.O











TABLE V1I-1

NATURAL SOURCES OF COPPER
Concentration mg/1 Reference
up to 0.05 (66)
12 (Av.) (66)
0.03 (Av.) (83)

& OTHER USES OF COPPER AND ITS SALTS (66)

Cooking utensils, electrical industry, pipes,
roofing, and other uses where conductivity or
corrosion resistence are important.
Electroplating of aluminum, manufacturing of
indelible inks , mordant in dyes and pringing
fabrics.
Pyrotechnics, textile dying and printing,
photography, insecticides and electroplating.
Most common salt of copper. Extensive use
for tanning, dyeing, electroplating, process
engraving, pigment manufacturing.
Human medicine as fungicide, bacteriocide.
astringent, and irritant.
Veterinary medicine as emetic, anthihelminthic ,
and treatment of anemia.





116
1

1
•
1
1

1
1

1
•

1

1










I
1
1
1
1

-------
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                       TABLE VII-2

    CONCENTRATIONS OF COPPER IN PROCESS WASTEWATERS

„                        Copper Concentration             _,  ,.
Process                    r       ,..                      Reference
	                  	"8/1	             	
APPLIANCE MANUFACTURING
  Spent Acids                   0.6 - 11.0                   (76)
  Alkaline Wastes                 0-1.0                   (76)

AUTOMOBILE HEATER
  Production                     24 - 33  (28 Ave)            (76)
BRASS INDUSTRY
  Brass Dip                       2-6                      (76)
  Brass Mill Rinse              4.4 - 8.5                    (76)
  Tube Mill                      74                          (76)
  Rod & Wire Mill               888                          (76)
  Rolling Mill                   34                          (76)
  Bichromate Pickle
    Tube Mill                  13.1                          (76)
    Rod & Wire Mill            27.4                          (76)
    Rolling Mill               12.2                          (76)
    Copper Rinse                 13 - 74                     (76)
    Brass Mill Rinse            4.5                          (76)
  Brass & Copper Wire Mill       75 - 174                    (96)
  Pickle Rinse Waters            70 @ 0.5 MGD                (48)
                                800 @ 0.02 MGD               (48)
  Pickle Bath Dump           10,000                          (48)
  Pickling Bath Waste         4,000 - 23,000                 (72)
  Bright Dip Waste            7,000 - 44,000                 (72)
BUSINESS MACHINE CORP.
  Plating Wastes                2.8 - 7.8  (4.5 Ave)          (71)
  Pickling Wastes               0.4 - 2.2  (1.0 Ave)          (71)


COPPER MILLS
  Mill Rinse                     19 - 74                     (76)
  Plating Rinse Water           5.2 - 41                     (76)
  Tube Mill Waste                70   (Ave)                  (76)
  Wire Mill Waste               800   (Ave)                  (76)
PLATING & METAL PROCESSING
  Metal Processing              204 - 370                    (76)
  Plating Wash                   20 - 120
  Plating Wash                    0-7.9                    (76)
  Rinse Waters                  up to 100  (20 Ave)           (76)
  4 Plating Operations          6.4 - 88                     (76)
  Electroplating Waste          0.2 - 10.0                   (14)
  Cyanide-Copper Waste           18                          (16)
  Plating Waste                   6 - 300                    (72)
SILVER PLATING WASTES
  Silver Waste                    3 - 900  (12 Ave)           (71)
  Acid Waste                     30 - 590  (135 Ave)          (71)
  Alkaline Waste                3.2 - 19   (6.1 Ave)          (71)
                            117

-------
                 TABLE VII-3

COMPLEXED COPPER-CYANIDE PLATING WASTES (72)
                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                         Rinse water    Copper concentration(mg/1)      •
Plating Bath           @ Dragout rate    @ Dragout rate of 2.5 gph
Cu Cone, (mg/1)           of 0.5  gph    	      fl

51,500                      107                       535               K
12,400                      2.8                        14
30,000                       62                       310               •
21,000                       44                       220


                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I
                           118                                          I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF COPPER



      While small concentrations of copper are beneficial and


actually necessary for man and animals, higher concentrations of


copper create taste and odor problems and are detrimental to various


industrial uses of water, plant life, stock and wildlife, fish and


other aquatic life.


      Effect on Man



      A review of the PHS Drinking Water Standards (94) indicates


that copper is essential and beneficial to man.  Man has a daily re-


quirement of 2.0-3.0 mg/1 for adults and approximately 0.1-2.0 mg/1


for preschool children (66,94).  It was reported, however, that a con-


centration of 1-5 mg/1 of copper will impart an unpalatable taste in


the water.  A "small" dose of copper may be non-toxic, while a "large"


dosage may produce emesis, and prolonged oral administration may result


in liver damage.  On the basis of the above, the Public Health Service


recommended a desirable level of 1.0 mg/1 of copper for domestic water


supplies.
I
                     A review of McKee and Wolf indicates that copper has a definite
physiological function in the circulatory system of man.  It is not


known to be a cumulative poison but is normally excreted through the


urine at approximately 1.0 rag/day with excess amounts being excreted


through the feces.  It is a necessary factor in the utilization of


iron by blood-forming organs.


      McKee and Wolf (66) report that "doses of 60-100 mg taken by


mouth cause symptoms of gastroenteritis, with nausea and intestinal
                                             119

-------
                                                                           I
irritation, but doses of 10-30 mg have not caused poisoning even when

as "small" and "large" in the PHS Drinking Water Standards.  Table VII-4   •
shows threshold levels for copper in drinking, agricultural and indus-
trial water supplies                                                       •
      McKee and Wolf also reported that the limiting factor of copper
in domestic water supplies is its taste.  The threshold concentration is   |
in the range of 1-2.0 mg/1 while a level of 5-7.5 mg/1 copper makes        .
the water completely undrinkable.  This latter point is also discussed
by Schneider (83).   McKee and Wolf also noted that a concentration of      •
1 mg/1 copper has been found to react with soap producing insoluble
green curds.  It has also been known to produce blue-green staining on     •
porcelain fixtures.                                                        _

      Effect on Irrigation Water and Plant Life
                                                                           I
                                                                           I
      McKee and Wolf report that minute quantities of copper are bene-
ficial and essential for plant growth.  However, concentrations in the
range of 0.17-7.20 mg/1 have been found to be toxic to sugar beets and
barley grown in nutrient solution.  Similarly a 20 mg/1 concentration      •
is toxic to tomatoes, 0.1 mg/1 to orange and mandarin seedlings, and
0.5 mg/1 or higher to flax.   Copper concentrations as low as 0.1 mg/1     |
may be toxic to plants grown in nutrient solutions (6).  A tolerance       _
limit of 0.2 mg/1 copper is recommended for water irrigated sands          *
which are very low in organic matter, for all other types of soil          •
a safe limit of up to 5 mg/1 is suggested.  Table ¥11-5 summarizes
the toxic concentrations of copper to plants.                              •
                               120
                                                                            I
                                                                            I

-------
1
1
1

1
m
1

I

1

1

1
1
1
1
•
1
1

1




1
1
TABLE VII-4
THRESHOLD LEVELS FOR COPPER IN
POTABLE, AGRICULTURAL AND INDUSTRIAL
Threshold
Level mg/1


Drinking Water 1
General Ind. Water Supplies 5
Textile Water Supplies 0.5
Beverages* (ready-to-drink 2-7
and carbonated)
Irrigation 0.1
Water Irrigated Sand Soils 0.2
Other Soil 5
Fresh Waters 0.02
Marine Waters 0.05
* British Ministry of Agriculture
TABLE VI 1-5
TOXIC
WATER SUPPLIES

References


(66)
(66)
(6)
(66)

(66)
(6)
(6)'
(66)
(66)



CONCENTRATION OF COPPER TO PLANTS (66)
Species
Sugar beets
Barley -
Tomatoes
Oranges and mandarin
seedlings

Flax

121
Concentration mg/1
0.17 - 7.20
2.0

0.1


0.5



-------
      Effect on Stock and Wildlife
I
I
I
      The Green Book reports that concentrations of iron and copper


in milk, as low as 0.1 mg/1, have been found to contribute to the


development of oxidized flavors.  However, a concentration of 1.0 mg/1


copper was recommended for stock watering (6).   On a similar note,         •


McKee and Wolf reported that small amounts of copper are beneficial


for the hemoglobin count and growth in rats.  Copper is beneficial         |


to the growth of suckling pigs and is believed necessary to prevent        _


scouring and wasting diseases in cattle and sheep.                         *


      In general it would appear that copper at a concentration of         f|


approximately 1 mg/1 is not detrimental to animal wildlife, however,


higher concentrations may be.                                              •


      Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life                                •


      The effect of copper on fish and aquatic life varies not only


with respect to various species, but also with respect to water quality.   |


Table VII-6 summarizes the toxic and synergistic effects of copper         «


with respect to various  water quality parameters.


      As summarized in Table VII-7, it is apparent that there is a         I


broad range of copper toxicity for various aquatic species (both


riarine and fresh).  Most forms of fresh water fish are capable of          •


withstanding a copper concentration of 0.10 mg/1 or greater.  Other


forms of fresh water aquatic life have substantially greater sensi-        *


tivities to copper down to approximately 0.002 mg/1.  Toxicity to          tt


marine life, on the other hand, generally falls within a range of


0.05-0.1 mg/1.  It has been reported that copper is less toxic in          •


river water than in lab tests.  In addition to being highly toxic to
                               122
I

I

-------
1



1

1



1
^•P
1
•
1

1







1



1

1



1
1


many forms of aquatic life, copper is concentrated by fish and


aquatic life. A summary of this data is shown in Table VII-8.
While one species of algae has been shown in Table
a relatively high concentration factor for copper, copper
of copper sulfate has long been utilized for the control
VII-8 to have
in the form
of algae in
farm ponds, reservoirs, etc. Table VII-9 shows that various species

of algae have a comparatively high sensitivity to copper

TABLE VII-6
SUMMARY OF SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS
AND COPPER
Parameter Effect

Hard Water toxicity decreased to range
of 0.1-1.0 mg/1 Cu.
Soft Water Cu. toxicity increased to 0.015-3.0 mg/1
range

Zinc @ 8 mg/1 alone killed fish as did copper @ 0.2 mg/1
Zinc (§1.0 mg/1 & copper @ 0.025 mg/1
also killed fish
Chlorine toxicity of Cu. increases
Cadmium toxicity of Cu. increases
Sodium nitrite toxicity of Cu. was decreased
& Sodium
nitrate
Copper toxicity of cyanide decreased
Alkalinity toxicity of Cu. decreased
Acidity toxicity of Cu. increases
Temperature toxicity of copper sulfate decreased
2.5% for each oc below 15 °C.
Mercury toxicity of Cu. increases

1?1

sulfates.




Reference

(66,83)

(66,83)


(6,15,83)


(66)
(66)
(66)


(66)
(6,66)
(66)
(6,66)

(6)



-------
TABLE VI I- 7
TOXIC OR HARMFUL COPPER
CONCENTRATIONS

Species
Barnacles
Mytilus edulis
Oys ters
Soft Clam
(Mya arenaria)

Giant Kelp
(Macrocystis
pyrifera

Red tide organism
(Gymnodinium breve)
Generally: bacteria &
Mi c roo rg ani sms
Oyster Larvae
Young eels

Blue gill sunfish
(softwater)
Rainbow Trout
(Lake Huron)
Sea Lamprey

Daphina magna, young
Cyclops vernalis

Mesocyclops leuckarti
Diaptomas oregonensis
Hemacheilus barbatulus
Nereis sp. (warm)


FOR FISH & OTHER AQUATIC
Concentration
mg/1
10-30 in 2 hours
0.55 in 12 hours
0.1 - 0.5
0.5 in 3 days


0.1 in 2-5 days


0.05

0.1 - 0.5

0.1 - 0.5
0-13 for 50 hrs. as
CuCl2 2H20
1.25 96 hr. TLm

5.0 in 10 hrs . as
CuCl2 2H20
5.0 in 12 hrs. as
CuCl0 2H00
2 2
0.027 as CuCl
2.7
1.9
0.0024
0.20 in 24 hrs.
0.1 (threshold)

124
LIFE

Reference
(6,66)
(6,66)
(6)
(6)


(6,66)


(6)

(66)

(66)
(66)

(66)

(66)

(66)

(66)
(in Lake Erie
water @ 20-25°C)


(15)
(15)


1
1
1

1
1





1








1

•
*

1
1

1


1
1

-------
1
1
1

1

1
^B


1
1

1

1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE VII- 7 (con't)
TOXIC OR HARMFUL COPPER
CONCENTRATIONS FOR FISH & OTHER AQUATIC LIFE
Concentration
Species mg/1 Reference

Carcinas maenas 1-2 (threshold) (15)
(shore crab)
Leander squilla 0.5 (threshold) (15)
(prawn)
Crayfish, young 0.125 - 0.6 (15)
Salmo gairdnerii 0.4 - 0.5 (15)

FISH MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
tolerated as CuSO,
4
Perch 0.5 (66)
Black bass and 0.8 (66)
bluegills
Sunfish 1-35 (66)
Black bass 2.00 (66)






125

-------
                                                                           I
      An additional effect of copper in surface waters, as reported by
McKee and Wolf is its interference with BOD determinations and the         |
self-purification process of streams.  A concentration as low as           «
0.01-0.5 mg/1 will interfere with BOD and self-purification rates (66).     ™
Other investigators reviewed by McKee and Wolf, however, indicated         fl
that a concentration of 0.4 mg/1 did not interfere with self-puri-
fication and that a copper concentration of 8.4-35 mg/1 might be           •
needed to cause a 50% reduction in BOD,..  In this case it appears that
                                                                           I
the water quality may have affected the results of the reported in-
vestigations.                                                              •
                                                                           I
                                                                           I
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY-COPPER REMOVAL

      Precipitation
      One of the oldest and most common methods of treatment of
copper bearing wastewater is precipitation of copper hydroxide at
alkaline pH conditions.  Copper hydroxide has a minimum solubility         |
within the pH range of 9.0-10.3.  It is also reported to have a            «
solubility of 0.01 mg/1 at a pH of 10 (76).  The theoretical level         *
is Seldom obtained due to poor settling, incomplete reactions, and         I
the influence of other ions within the solution.  Generally, lime
is utilized to maintain proper pH conditions.  Table VII-10 shows          •
the efficiency of this and other processes, with and without fil-
tration.                                                                   *

                                                                           I

                                                                           I

                                                                           I

                              126                                          I

-------
1
1
1
1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE VII-8
CONCENTRATION OF COPPER IN FISH & AQUATIC LIFE

Species C. F. Reference

Plankton 1,000-5,000 (6)
Algae (Ochromonas) 1,840-3,040 (66)

Sphaerotilus 3,890 (66)
Marine bacteria 990 (66)
Marine invertebrates, 5,000 (66)
soft parts
Fresh water fish 50 (66)









127

-------
                        TABLE VII-9

            TOXICITY OF COPPER SULFATE TO ALGAE



Species

BLUE-GREEN ALGAE                       Toxicity            Reference
GREEN ALGAE
     Arkistrodesmus
     Chlorella
     Closteriums
                              128
                                                                     I
                                                                     I
                                                                     I
                                                                     I
     Cylindrospremum              2.0-4.0 mg/1 Toxic         (15)
     Anabaena                     for 28 days
     Anacystis                                                            •
     Calotnrix                                                            ™
     Nostoc
     Oscillatoria
     Plectonema
                                                                     I

                                                                     I

                                                                     I

                                                                     I
     Oocystis

GREEN ALGAE

     Scenedesmus
     Stigeoclonium                                                        _
     Zygnema                                                              •

GREEN FLAGELLATE AND YELLOW ALGAE
                                                                          I
Chlamydomonas
Pandorina
Tribonemas                                                           M
Gomphonema                                                           •
Navicula
Nitzschia
                                                                     I
     Anabaena                      0.09 Cone, mg/1           (66)
     Beggiatoa                     5.0
     Chara                         0.2-5.0
     Cladophora                    1.0
     Cladothrix                    0.2
     Conferva                      0.4
     Nauicula                      0.7
     Oscillatoria                  0.1-0.4
     Scenedesmus                   5.0-10.0
     Spirogyra                     0.05-0.3                               •
     Ulothrix                      0.2                                    •
     Volvox                        0.25
                                                                     I
                                                                     I

                                                                     I

-------
1
1


1





1

1



1






1

1

1
1
1
1
1
TABLE VII-10
COPPER TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES


Process

Lime Neutralization and
settling




Line Neutralization settling
& Filtration
Cyanide destruction
w/ sodium hypochlorite
Coag. w/ferric chloride
w/filtration of eff
Lancy Batch Treat
Lancy Integrated
Lancy Integrated
Carbon adsorption of
copper cyanide complex
Process change -
Velco Brass & Copper Co.
Process Modification
Recovery
Ion Exchange
Electrolytic Recovery





CONCENTRATION
Initial

33
204-385
unknown
unknown
10-20
general
previous
eff 0.2-2.5
general

14-18
30

electroplating
electroplating
electroplating
98

75-124

40
unknown
1.02
26



129

mg/1
Final

less than 1.0
0.5 (ave.)
0.2-2.5
0-1.2 (0.15-.19 ave)
1-2
0.2-2.5

0.2-0.5
0.5

0.005-0.5 (Lab scale)
0.16-0.3 (full scale)

1.5-2.0
0.15
less than 0.5
less than 1.0

0.25-0.35

0.9
none
0.03
0.0 in 11 days






Ref .

(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(97)

(76)
(97)

(76)
(76)

(61)
(61)
(64)
(U)

(96)

(76)
(48)
(76)
(76)





-------
                                             I
                                             I
Copper-Cyanide Wastes


      A new method involving complexed copper cyanide wastewaters


utilizes the destruction of cyanide by sodium hypochlorite followed


by a pH adjustment and coagulation-precipitation with ferric chloride      •


and lime, and subsequent filtration.  Table VII-10 shows the processes


efficiency.                                                                •



Lancy Process                                                              •


      The Lancy Integrated System theoretically is capable of achiev-


ing an effluent of 0.15 mg/1.  Table VII-10 shows process efficiency       |


of the Lancy System.                                                       •


      In practice, McDonough and Steward (64) reported an effluent


copper concentration of less than 0.50 mg/1 with the Lancy integrated      •


system.  Lund (61) describes the Lancy system which utilizes counter-


current rinsing with a chemical solution (lime) that is then recycled      |


after sedimentation.                                                       .



Carbon Adsorption


      Battelle (14) reported complex cyanide-chromium removal from         I


electroplating waste by carbon adsorption.   Their report indicated


that carbon adsorption of complexed cyanide from electroplating waste      "


was most effective with nickel and copper complexes and at a pH of 10.     •


The cost of removing cyanide by complexing with nickel or copper by


carbon adsorption and recovery,, after previous contact with cadmium        •


or zinc, was in the range of 2C-40C per pound of cyanide treated.


                                                                           |
Recovery Processes


      Copper can be economically recovered from the wastewaters under      •


certain situations.  One of the, methods which may be utilized as a



                                                                           I
130
                                            I

-------
I
 •              recovery  step is process modification.  According  to Patterson and



                Minear  (76)  the use of counter current rinsing  for one company allowed



 •              direct  return of their rinse flow to their plating bath as evapo-



                rative  makeup water.  The counter current rinsing  for this plant re-



 jf              duced their  rinse water flow volume from 480 gph to only 16  gph.



 _              This scheme  reduced their total copper discharge from 40-0.9 mg/1.



                The Velco Brass and Copper Company, of Kenilworth, New Jersey (96)



 •              has reduced  its copper effluent by converting a former sulfuric-



                chromic acid and ammonium bifluoride-chromic acid  pickle to  a sul-



 •              furic acid,  2-5% hydrogen peroxide pickle (with stabilizing  agents).



 _              The result has been a reduction in copper in the discharge from 175-



 ™              124 mg/1  to  0.25-0.85 mg/1.  Velco (96) reports that by the  use of



 •              a neutralizing agent chemical rinse following a sulfuric acid-hydrogen



                peroxide pickle dip, the copper count content of the rinse water can



                be maintained at 0.1 mg/1.  At present, the cost of their pickling



                treatment and recovery process is $156.00 per operating day  (or $194.00



                per operating day including amortization costs).   This compares to



                their previous cost of $195.00 per operating day,  which does not in-
I



I
I
                elude cost of treatment.  Their current treatment recovery cost is
I



I



I



I



I



I
                only $46.72 per day or $.62 per ton  of copper wire produced.



                      Table VII-10 shows the efficiency of other recovery processes



                including evaporative recovery, ion exchange and electrolytic recovery.



                Evaporative recovery has been practiced for over 20 years (76).



                Patterson and Minear indicate, however, that some form of pre-concen-



                tration may be needed for this process to be economical.
                                              131

-------
                                                                     I
Ion exchange, according to Patterson and Minear,  may be an
                                                                           I
economical means of removing copper from dilute wastewaters.  One


of the articles reviewed by them indicated that ion exchange was           I


successfully used from a wastewater containing only 1.02 mg/1 copper,


at a flow rate of approximately 0.80 gallons per square foot per minute.   •


      Gurnham (48) reports that the Inspiration Consolidated Copper        •


Company of Arizona utilizes electrolytic recovery for their copper


sulfate waste to completely eliminate the discharge of copper in their     •


wastewaters.   He also reported that the rate of recovery of copper


from this facility is about 40,000 tons per year.  A pre-concentration     |


step may be necessary for this type of operation (76) .                     •


      A review of Table VII-7 indicates that while some processes


such as ion exchange and electrolytic recovery may be capable of re-       •


ducing the copper concentration to the range of 0.030 mg/1, destruc-


tion processes are currently capable of maintaining effluent levels        |


of 1.0 mg/1.  Proper pH control followed by good clarification for

removal is needed to reach a lower concentration.

      A review of the capital and operating and maintenance cost in        •

Tables VII-11 and 12 would indicate that the operation of a plant

utilizing lime neutralization and sedimentation might be more eco-         |


nomical if filters are utilized.  Further confirmation of this data        _


is necessary prior to using this as a general assumption.  It is           ™


apparent, however, in reviewing the capital and operating costs that       I


both figures are in line with the cost of removing other metals from


wastewaters.                                                               •




                                                                           I



                              132                                           I
                                                                     I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS



      After a review of the above discussions and referenced data,


the following can be stated.


1.    A concentration above 0.05 mg/1 in surface waters and above


      0.03 mg/1 in sea water is considered to be from man-made in-


      dustrial sources.  Industrial waste discharges of copper have


      been reported to vary anywhere from trace levels up to as high


      as 44,000 mg/1.


2.    Copper is an essential element in both man and animals.  While


      copper at rather high concentrations may be toxic to man and


      animals it will produce an unpleasant taste to the point of


      being completely unpalatable long before it has a toxic effect.


      The 1962 Drinking Water Standard of 1.0 mg/1, appears to be


      appropriate for human beings.


3.    Industrial water supplies may utilize waters containing copper


      up to 5 mg/1.  However, the textile industry is reported to


      have problems with waters containing as little as 0.5 mg/1.


4.    Water containing as much as 5 mg/1 copper used for plant irri-


      gation normally does not create problems.  However, for sandy


      soils very low in organic matter, copper may be damaging to


      plants at a concentration of 0.1 mg/1.


5.    The water supply for stock and wildlife has been shown to be


      beneficial if it contains some copper.  However, it is recommended


      that it not exceed a concentration of 1.0 mg/1.
                                             133

-------
                                                                           I
6.    Fresh water fish have been shown to tolerate a concentration

      as high as 0.14 mg/1.  Other fresh water organisms, however,         |

      have a toxicity to copper reportedly as low as 0.002 mg/1.           •

      Marine aquatic life has a general toxicity range starting at

      0.05 mg/1.  Various forms of aquatic life including fish and         •

      lower forms are known to have concentration factors ranging

      from 50-5000 C.F.  The toxicity of copper is known to increase       |[

      in the presence of zinc, chlorine, cadmium, and mercury in           .

      acid waters and at temperatures above 15°C.  Conversely, the         *

      toxicity of copper decreases as water hardness increases, cal-       I

      cium concentration, and alkalinity increase, and as the concen-

      trations of other previously mentioned metals decrease.  It has      •

      also been found to decrease in the presence of sodium nitrate        _

      and sodium nitrite and also when the temperature is below 15°C.      ™

7.    Copper sulfate is known to be toxic to algae and is used for         H

      their control.  Effective concentrations range from 0.07 to

      10 mg/1.                                                             I

8.    Ca rent achievable tre tment is capable of maintaining a maxi-

      mum effluent level of 1.0 mg/1.  Various recovery processes are      •

      currently capable of reducing copper cown to the 0.03 mg/1           •

      range on an average.  The cost of both initial installation

      and operation of treatment facilities.is well within the range       •

      of treating other metals.

      On the basis of the above summary, it is recommended that a

uniform effluent limit of 1.0 mg/1 be adopted for all wastewater dis-      •

charges of copper.  It is further recommended where copper is of

particular concern to the preservation of fish and aquatic life and        |

                               134
                                                                            I

-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1


where an industrial discharge will not receive dilution by other dis-
charges within the same industry or by rapid mixing or use of a
diffuser in the stream, that the industry remove copper to the best
obtainable level that is economically possible. On the basis of the

literature reviewed for this report the value of copper should offset
some of the economic problems of more complete treatment.
TABLE VII-11
CAPITAL COST FOR COPPER REMOVAL
Cost/
Process Flow Cost 1000 Gal. Reference
Lime Neutralization
and settling $9,200 (76)
" 1 MGD $ 100,000 100 (97)
10 MGD 600,000 60 (97)
50 MGD 2,600,000 52 (97)
Lime Neutralization 1.5-2.0 800,000 400-530 (76)
Settle & Filter
1 MGD 300,000 300 (97)
" 10 MGD 1,300,000 130 (97)
50 MGD 4,600,000 92 (97)

TABLE VII-12
OPERATION MAINTENANCE COST FOR COPPER TREATMENT (76)
Process Cost/1000 Gal.
Lime Neutralization and sludge dewatering $3.50 (1951)
Lime Neutralization and settling 3.59 (1957
Assumed " 1.62 Rinse waters
only
2.85 Total
Lime Neutralization 5-9C for 1 MGD
settlings & filtration 11-20C for 10 MGD
Recovery Value :
of copper waste $0.60-$3.00 @ 100-500
of brass waste $0.20-$1.20 @ 40-250

135







mg/1
mg/1



-------
I
                                      CHAPTER VIII-CYANIDE
•                    Cyanide is found in the wastes of several industries  (14,16,




                 48,61,66,67,72).  These include the extraction of ore, gold mining,
.









•









•
I
I



I



I



I
                 photographic processing, coke plants and blast furnaces, manufacture




                 of synthetics, electroplating and metal finishing, and pickle liquor




                 waste, as well as other chemical industries.  The  major source of




                 cyanide in industrial wastewaters is probably the waste from coke




                 plants, non-ferrous plating baths and plating rinse waters.  Various




                 concentrations reported in the literature have been summarized in




                 Table VIII-1.
•                    From this table it is apparent that the concentrations of cyanides




•               in plating baths may be expected to vary from 20,000-100,000 mg/1.




                 The concentration of cyanides found in plating rinse waters is highly




•               dependent upon the rate of drag-out.  Concentrations are reported from




                 10-1500 mg/1.  Nemerow (72) indicated cyanide concentrations of various




•               plating baths and rinse waters as functions of the complexing metal




                 and two different drag-out rates.  This data has been summarized in




                 Table VIII-2.




•                    In addition to hydrogen cyanide and cyanide salts, cyanide may




                 also appear in discharges as the sodium or potassium salts of cyanate,




•               thiocyanate, ferro and ferric cyanides and also as cyanogen chloride




•               (66) .  Although concentrations are customarily expressed in terms of




                 mg/1 of cyanide ion, the actual form present is a function of pH.  Be-
                 cause hydrogen cyanide  (HCN) is a weakly dissociated acid, it will be




                 present mainly in the undissociated form at a pH less than 8.  In Figure




                 VIII-1 the relative proportions of CN  and HCN are shown as a function of




                 pH.  Below a pH value of 7 less than one percent of the total is present asCN.
                                                136

-------

Above a pH value of 10, 87

percent is present as the
This relationship is important because HCN is a more
thi- Ion. Therefore, even
critically dependent on pH


CONCENTRATIONS OF

Source

Plating Baths
Plating Rinse Waste

Coke Plant Crude Liquor
to Ammonia Still
From Ammonia Still


for a given concentration,
•

TABLE VIII-1

cyanide ion (66).
toxic entity than
toxicity will be



CYANIDE IN INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATERS

Concentrations, mg/1

48,000-100,000
21,800- 57,000
10- 700
39- 1,500
28- 72
20- 100
10- 100

TABLE VI I I- 2


Reference

(76)
(72)
(76)
(16)
(14)
(48)
(48)


I

1

1
I

1
1
1

1
1


1
COMPLEXED CYANIDE PLATING WASTE
CYANIDE

Plating Bath
28,000 w/Cu
57,700 w/Cd
48,900 w/Zn
47,500 w/Cu & Zn
21,800 w/Ag




CONCENTRATIONS, MG/L (72)
(Rinse Drag-Out
0.5 gph
58
120
102
99
45


137


@)
2.5 gph
290
600
510
495
225








1

1

1
1

1

-------

 -1    -2    -3

CYANIDE CONCENTRATION-MOLE
                 137B
-6
-8
                                                        '•Z,
                                                        a
                                                        J.-H

-------
 I
 •           The relative toxicities of a nickel-cyanide complex are such that a pH




             drop from 7.8 to 7.5 increases the toxicity tenfold and a drop from 8.0




 •           to 6.5 increases the toxicity a thousand fold (6).  Adjustment to the




             optimum pH is also an important facet of the treatment of cyanide as




 •           will be discussed later.  Direct sunlight on effluents containing the




 •           otherwise less toxic ferric and ferro cyanides is also of great import-




             ance (16) .
 I



 I
I



I
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF CYANIDE
                  Effects on Man
 I                The toxicity of cyanide in man is well documented but at relative-




             ly high concentrations.  It is acknowledged in the 1962 Drinking Water




 •           Standards (94) that the 0.2 mg/1 CN standard for rejection of a water




 _           supply is based on the treatability of cyanide and a safety factor of




 *           100 rather than its toxicity to man.  Other recognized standards of




 H           0.01 to 0.2 mg/1 are based on fish toxicity rather than toxicity to




             man (94).




 •                The toxic effects of cyanide on man are summarized in Table VIII-3.




             McKee and Wolf (66) indicate the average fatal dose of hydrogen cyanide




 •           for man is 0.7 to 3.5 mg/kg of body weight.  A fatal dose for a 165 Ib.




 •           man would then be 52-260 mg of HCN.




                  The maximum safe intake level of cyanide is believed to be about
18 mg/day, part of which may come from natural and industrial exposures




(66).  An odor threshold of 0.001 mg/1 may make water unpalatable before




toxic effects are important.




     McKee and Wolf (66) also report that the body normally ingests
             small amounts of cyanide e.g., by consumption of members of the cabbage






™                                           138

-------



family. Small portions of ingested cyanide will be exhaled and the


remainder will be rapidly converted by the liver to the
toxic sulfur compound
slowly in the urine.
, thiocyanate which is eliminated

relatively non-
irregularly and
1



1
Cyanide, therefore, is a non-cumulative toxin and
small doses can be disposed of continuously by the body
toxifying mechanisms.





TABLE VIII-3

's natural de-




ORAL TOXICITY OF CYANIDE FOR MAN
Dose
0.001
2.9 - 4.7 tng/day
10 mg single dose
Response
Odor threshold
Non-injurious
Non-inj urious
<18 mg/day total intake Maximum safe ingestion

19 mg/day in water

50-60 mg single dose

Calculated from threshold
limit in air as safe
Fatal
Reference
(66)
(94)
(94)
(66)

(94)

(94)
Effect on Domestic and Wild Animals



1

1



1
1

1




1
1
With reference to stock and wildlife, McKee and Wolf indicate that
hydrogen cyanide and
animals. A hydrogen

sodium cyanide have been found to
cyanide concentration of 103 mg/1

be toxic to
has been found

to be fatal to cows and ducks. Otherwise toxic and lethal dosages of
hydrogen cyanide and
McKee and Wolf report
sodium cyanide are summarized in Table VIII-4.
that for sheep the toxic dose of
hydrogen cyanide
is 1.05 mg/kg of body weight, while the toxic concentration of sodium
cyanide is 4.15 mg/kg of body weight.



139


1



1

1


1

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
 I
I
I
                             TABLE VIII-4


           TOXIC EFFECT OF CYANIDE ON DOMESTIC ANIMALS (66)



Animal                                     Dose of__HCN



Cow                                        0.39 - 0.92 grams


Sheep                                      0.04 - 0.10 grams


Horse                                             0.39 grams


Dog                                        0.03 - 0.04 grams





                             TABLE VIII-5


     TOXIC EFFECTS OF CYANIDE ON FISH AND OTHER AQUATIC ORGANISMS


Organism
Trout
Blue gills
Bullheads
Brook trout
Rainbow trout
Fish
Rainbow trout
Bluegill sunfish
Trout
Trout
Bluegill sunfish
Rainbow Trout
Fish
Adult chub
Trout
Adult Chub
Trout
Carp
Daphnia magna
Cricotopus bicinctus
Mayorella palestinensis
(from McKee & Wolf)

CN~ Cone, (mg/1)
.02
.4
.5
0.05
0.07
0.1
0.1-0.2
0.12-0.18
.126
.15
.18
.2
.2
.33
.42
.50
1.0
10.0
.34
3.2m
130
(66)
Time of
Exposure
27 days
96 hrs.
96 hrs.
120-126 hrs.
74 hrs.
1 day
1-2 days
96 hrs. TL
170 min. m
4.8-6.4 min.
24 hr. TLm
11 min
150 min.
2.5 hr.
4 min.
141 min.
20 min.
1.5 hrs.
48 hrs.
—
—


Effect
survived
survived
survived
lethal
overturned
overturned
MLD
—
overturned
overturned
—
LD-50
lethal
lethal
overturned
MLD
lethal
MLD
lethal
survived
lethal
                               140

-------
                                                                                 I
     The literature reviewed did not contain any mention of the poten-
tial effect of toxicity of cyanide on plant life.






     Effect on Fish and Aquatic Organisms                                         •




     The major impact of cyanide on the aquatic environment is its




toxicity to fish and other forms of aquatic life.   It is again noted             •




that the effect of pH is a significant factor.   McKee and Wolf report            •




that an innocuous concentration of cyanide at a pH of 8 may become




detrimental if the pH is lowered to 6 or less.   They further report              •




"In natural streams, cyanides deteriorate or are decomposed by bacterial




action, so that excessive concentrations may be expected to diminish             •




in time." (66)  McKee and Wolf also indicated that from 90 to 95 per-            •




cent of the cyanides in waters have been found to be removed by per-




colation of wastewaters through soil columns.  Greater removal was               •




obtained in soils rich in organic matter.




     The toxicity to fish and other aquatic organisms is summarized in           I




Table VIII-5.  The Report of the Committee on Water Quality Criteria             •




indicates that the toxicity of cyanide to diatoms was found to vary very




little with respect to temperature (6).  McKee and Wolf on the other             •




hand indicate that the toxicity of cyanide to fish has been found to




increase at elevated temperatures.  They report that a rise of 10 C




produced a 2 to 3 fold increase in the toxicity of cyanide.  Other               •




factors which have an effect on the toxicity of cyanide, as reported by




McKee and Wolf, include dissolved oxygen and the presence of certain             •




metals.  McKee and Wolf and the "Green Book" (6,66)  indicate that a




low dissolved oxygen level may increase the toxicity of cyanides.                ||
I
                                141
I



I

-------
 I
 •          Trout were exposed at 17  C to a concentration of  0.105  mg/1 of  cyanide.
             This  level was  found to be toxic in 8  hours  at 95 percent  oxygen satura-
 I          tion,  in 5 hours  at 73 percent saturation, and only  10  minutes  at 45
             percent  saturation.  With respect to the  presence of metals,  nickel
             may complex with  the cyanide  decreasing  its  toxicity, especially at
             higher pH values.   Zinc and cadmium on the other  hand,  have been found
                                                                  -3 -4
             to increase toxicity. Iron cyanide complexes (Fe(CN),   '   )  are normally
 I
 I
 •           less  toxic  than  simple  cyanides  (1,66).  However, McKee and Wolf have
             reported  that under  exposure  to  direct sunlight  the previously assumed
 I           harmless  concentration  of  2000 mg/1  (under diffuse light) of potassium
             ferric  cyanide or  potassium ferrocyanide become  toxic at concentrations
 •           of  0.5  to 2.0 mg/1.   A  potassium ferrocyanide  concentration of 2.0 mg/1
 •           under direct sunlight resulted in a  cyanide  concentration of 0.36 to 0.48
             mg/1  which  killed  fish  in  0.5 to 1.5 hours.
 •                A  general recommendation of 0.025 mg/1  has  been proposed by the
             Aquatic Life Advisory Committee  of the Ohio  River Valley Sanitation
 H           Commission, according to McKee and Wolf, as  the  limit for being unsafe
 •           to  fish and aquatic  life.  They  further indicated that proper chlorina-
             tion  under  neutral or alkaline conditions is capable of reducing cyanide
•           to  a  level  far below the recommended limit.  The acute oral toxicity of
             cyanogen  chloride, which is the  product of chlorinating hydrogen cyanide,
|
I
I
I
             would be 1/20 that  of  the  hydrogen  cyanide  alone.
                                            142

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - CYANIDE REMOVAL
chromium and cyanide removal is highly dependent upon the method select-


ed, the waste volume, the concentration, the degree of recovery and the
                                143
I
I
                                                                                  I
     The 1968 report the Battelle Memorial Institute (16)  discussed


I he following live conventional methods for cyanide removal from                  B


plating waste:


     (1) Oxidation by chlorine gas - complete removal                             •


     (2) Oxidation by hypochlorites - complete removal


     (3) Conversion to cyanate by chlorine gas followed by precipita-             •


         tion and clarification


     (4) Conversion to cyanate by hypochloride


     (5) Conversion to Ferrocyanide by ferrous sulfate - effluent                 I


         obtained, 5-10 mg/1



     They also reported seven newer methods which were being investi-


gated at that time for cyanide removal.  These include:                           •


     (1) Complex formation with polysulfides to form sulfocyanates


     (2) Destruction by potassium permanganate                                    p


     (3) Oxidation to cyanate by ozone                                            _


     (4) Oxidation to cyanate by hydrogen peroxide


     (5) Complexation by nickel salts to highly stable nickel cyanide             I


     (6) Biological oxidation


     (7) Irradiation, dialysis, reverse osmosis, and electrolytic                 •


         reduction.



In the 1968 report, Battelle also reported that ion exchange and evapora-


tion have proven feasible for detoxification and recovery of cyanide in           •


more concentrated waste streams.  They indicated that the cost of
 I

 I

-------
1



1

value of that recovered, whether it is a batch or continuous opera-

tion, and the chemical cost.
According to the recent investigation by Patterson and Minear




(76),
the three most frequently employed practices for cyanide removal are
1



1

1
•
™
1




1



I



1
destruction of cyanide by chlorination, electrolytic decomposition,
ozonation. Table VIII-6 summarizes some typical treatment plant

characteristics .

TABLE VIII-6
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT EFFECTS ON CYANIDE

[CN~] mg/1
Method of Treatment Flow Influent Effluent
Chlorination 2500-3000 gals/hr - 0.1
Chlorination 2000 gals/mo 32.5 0.0

Chlorination 4- Sulfuric - 700 0.0
Acid Hydrolysis
45,000 -
Electrolytic Decomposition - 100,000 0.1-0.4
Ozonation 500 gals/min 25.0 0.0

Lancy Integrated System - - 0.02
Chlorination
Destruction of cyanide by chlorination may be accomplished by

and







Ref .
(76)
(76)

(76)

(76)
(76)

(61)

either

the direct addition of chlorine gas or by the addition of sodium hypo-
chlorite, thus saving on hydroxide. The selection of the method is
one
of economics. Chlorine gas is about half as expensive as hypochlorite
1


1
treatment. However, it is also much more dangerous to handle and the
equipment costs are higher.

144




-------
                                                                                 I
     The destruction of cyanides by chlorination may be carried out in           _




either batch or continuous operations.   In the batch operation, suffici-




ent amounts of sodium hydroxide are added to the waste to raise the pH           I




to approximately 10.5.  Chlorine is then added at a constant rate with




the simultaneous addition of more sodium hydroxide to maintain the pH            •




above 10.5.  This oxidizes the cyanide  to the cyanate which is less              _




toxic.  Continuation of the addition of chlorine will completely oxidize         ^




the cyanide to the harmless forms of nitrogen and carbon dioxide.  To            •




accomplish this, chlorination is continued without the further addition




of sodium hydroxide.                                                             I




     This may also be done by acid hydrolysis.  Acid hydrolysis however,




must take place at a pH of 2 to 3 which usually necessitates the addition        •




of sulfuric acid and then subsequent neutralization of the acidic waste          •




prior to discharge.  This method for complete destruction of cyanide




has both advantages and disadvantages.   The main disadvantage is that            I




back neutralization increases the total dissolved solids level of the




effluent.  The main advantage of this process is that cyanate will be            H




destroyed within about 5 minutes contact time.                                   •




     Complete destruction of cyanide may also be obtained as mentioned




by continuation of chlorination alone.   The rate of the reaction, how-           •




ever, is relatively slow (up to 24 hours) if the pH remains greater




than 10.  However, if the pH of the waste is reduced to between 8 and            |




8.5, the cyanate oxidation can be completed within about 1 hour.  One            •




problem encountered in the total oxidation of the cyanate by chlorine




alone is that an excess amount of chlorine must be added to prevent              •




liberation of the highly toxic cyanogen chloride gas.





                                                                                 I
                                145
I

-------
  I
  I                This  same process  may  be carried  out  on  a  automated  continuous




               system.  The feed  mechanisms  for  adding  chlorine  and  sodium  hydroxide




  •           are often  controlled by pH  meter  and an  oxidation-reduction  potential




               recorder-controller.




  H                As  reported by  Gurnham (48)  the theoretical  requirements  for  the




  •           destruction  of 1 pound  of cyanide are  2.7  pounds  of chlorine and 3.1




               pounds of  sodium hydroxide  for the first step of  the  reaction.  The




  I            total theoretical  chemical  requirement is  6.8 pounds  of chlorine and




               3.7 pounds of  sodium hydroxide per pound of cyanide.  However,  it  has




  •            been found in  practice  that approximately  8 pounds of chlorine are re-




  •            quired per pound of  cyanide destroyed.




                    As  reported by  Patterson and Minear (76) several manufacturers have




  I            developed  small package treatment systems  for the destruction  of cyanide




               by  chlorination.   They  indicated  that  the  capacity of these  units  range




 |            from 800 gallons of  waste per hour containing a maximum of 450/mgl of




 im            cyanide, to  units  capable of  handling  1,800 gallons per hour with  a




               maximum  cyanide content of  350 mg/1.   The  cost  of a unit with  the




 I            capacity of  800 gallons per hour  was reported by  Patterson and Minear




               to  be $15,000  for  the complete unit.   Patterson and Minear further re-




 |             ported that  larger cyanide  destruction units  require  individually




 _             tailored treatment systems.   They reported that one unit  utilizing a 2




               step process has been constructed to handle 1.5 MGD.




 •                  Patterson and Minear also described the  efficiency of these units.




               One unit,  treating from 2,500 to  3,000 gallons  per hour of cyanide




 •             waste, achieved a  final effluent  of 0.1  mg/1.   Similarly, an IBM plant




               utilizing  alkaline chlorination followed by acid  hydrolysis, reduced a
I
146

-------
                                                                                  I
700 mg/1 cyanide concentration to 0 mg/1 cyanide plus cyanate.
     Another plant described by Patterson and Minear was a General                •
Electric Metal Plating operation in Erie, Pennsylvania.   They had a               •
waste containing an average cyanide content of 32.5 mg/1.   It was

treated on a batch basis at the rate of 2,000 gallons per month,  and              B
obtained a final concentration of cyanide in the effluent of 0.0 mg/1
as cyanide.                                                                       |

Electrolytic Decomposition                                                        •
     Patterson & Minear reported that waste containing high concentrations
of cyanide are most effectively treated by electrolytic decomposition.             •
The concentrated cyanide waste is subjected to electrolysis at a tempera-         _
ture of approximately 200 F for several days.  When the system is first           ™

started, the cyanide will be completely broken down to carbon dioxide             I
and ammonia with cyanate as an intermediate.  However, as the process
continues, the waste electrolyte becomes less capable of conducting               •
electricity and the reaction may not be completed.  It is further stated
that the residual cyanate which may be formed will then require chlorina-         •
tion for further destruction.  They reported that this system,  with de-           •
tention of 1 to 18 days, is capable of reducing initial cyanide concen-
trations ranging from 45,000-100,00 mg/1 to final cyanide concentrations          I
of 0.1 to 0.4 mg/1.

     One of the problems which has been encountered with the electroly-           •
tic destruction process, as reported by Patterson and Minear, has been            •
the presence of sulfate in the waste.  In removing cyanide concentra-
tions of 695 to 750 mg/1, heavy scaling at the anode prevented further            I
electrolysis.

                                                                                  I
                                147
I

-------
I
•            Ozonation
                   More recent literature,  as reported by Patterson and Minear,  indi-
•            cates that ozonation might offer the cheapest method of  destroying cya-
              nide.  They reported that cyanide complexed with zinc, nickel,  and
Jj            copper was easily destroyed.   However,  a cobalt-cyanide  complex was
_            found to be resistant to treatment by ozonation.   Patterson and Minear
™            indicated that the Boeing Airplane Metal Working plant in Wichita,
I            Kansas, has reported complete destruction of cyanide from a 500 gallon
              per minute waste stream initially containing 25 mg/1 cyanide.
•            Miscellaneous
•                 As reported in Lund (61), the patented process  for  treating electro-
              plating waste known as the Lancy system is also capable  of obtaining low
•            cyanide concentrations from plating waste.  He states that a batch
              treatment is capable of obtaining a 0.5 mg/1 effluent while the inte-
•            grated system theoretically is capable of obtaining  an effluent of 0.02
•            mg/l of total cyanide.  In a report of a full scale  operation utilizing
              the Lancy integrated system,  McDonough and Stewart (69)  have reported a
•            total effluent cyanide concentration of "none" after several years of
              operation at an electroplating facility in Wisconsin.
|                 A 1971 report by the Battelle Memorial Institute (14), discussed
_            investigations of several new processes which they have  investigated
              for removal of complexed cyanide.  They reported that carbon absorption
•            of complexed cyanide from electroplating waste was most  effective with
              nickel and copper complexes at a pH of 10.  Other methods investigated
•            and reported by Battelle included flotation, liquid-liquid extraction,
_            centrifugation followed by extraction,  and carbon absorption with recovery.
I
148

-------
                                                  I
                                                  I
Their work was aimed at the recovery of the heavy metals associated
with the cyanide, and the final effluent concentrations of cyanide
obtained are substantially higher than those reported by other methods.

Cost of Treatment                                                                 |
     The cost of treating cyanide wastewaters by the various methods              •
has been summarized in Tables VIII-7 and VIII-8 below, Table VIII-7
gives the capital cost and Table VIII-8 the operating and maintenance             •
costs.  From these tables, it is apparent that the cost of treating
cyanide bearing wastewaters is dependent not only on the process which            |
is utilized, but also on the volume of waste treated, and the concen-             H
tration of cyanide in the wastewaters.  Additional cost data other than
that summarized in these tables is shown in the report by Patterson and           •
Minear  (76) and in the last chapter of this report.
     On the basis of the cost data by Weston (97), as shown in Table              |
VIII-7 the total destruction of cyanide by chlorination under alkaline            _
conditions is comparable with the cost of removing metals from industrial         ™
                                                 I
wastewaters.
     In remarks before the State of Illinois Pollution Control Board re-
garding the establishment of effluent criteria, Currie (27) stated that          •
several industrial witnesses, representing firms with cyanide problems,          _
endorsed the proposed Illinois Pollution Control Board limit of 0.025            '
mg/1 for total cyanide.  He further reported that while the work of              •
Patterson and Minear and the testimony by Weston indicated that chlorin-
ation, among other methods, is currently capable of achieving cyanide            I
effluent levels of zero, the great bulk of their evidence supported the
149
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 I

-------
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
       W
       W
       Pi
       H

       W
       P
       M
>

W
       H
       to
       O
       O
       H
       M
       PH
       
/ — s
^^
•K
••cj-
CM
1
co
0
ON
rH
•• —
O
O
o
ft
m

i




g
PJ
Jj
O
rH
pL)
CJ

0
o
oo



C
O
•H
4-1
CU O
CO
CO
CU
O
0
£_J
cu
c a
•H }-l
}-J 4-1
o en
rH CU
r^ ^
U
^s
v^
0
o
m
CM
rH
•^s
en
ro
rH
o
m
<3~






1










cu
c
•H
^
O
, — 1
J2
O

















fi
0
•H
4-1
CJ
a
^i
4J
CO
CU
T)

^\
' — ^
O
o
o
rH
o
0
O
O
O
CM

1




P
C_D
^rj

rH









CU
C
•H
>-l
O
,— |
r£
U

















C
O
•H
4-1
O
a
^4
4-1
CO
CU
T3

,^-N
vD
^-^
00
rH
S^'
0
0
o
o
CM
O
CM




•£,
P-i
0

o
rH
1
m


o
•H
4-1
>.
rH
0
^|
4-1
0
CU
rH
W















a
o
•H
4-1
•H
CO
O
ft
6
o
u
cu
•u

/~s
VD
r-.
CO
rH
O
o
o
n
o
in
CM




52
fn
O

O
o











cu
c
o
N
0















c
o
•H
4J
•H
CO
o
ft
6
0
o
cu
T3

                                                                                                        en
                                                                                                        o
                                                                                                        o
                                                                                                        c
                                                                                                        cfl
                                                                                                       rH
                                                                                                        ft

                                                                                                       T)
                                                                                                        CU
                                                                                                        M)
                                                                                                        cfl
                                                                                                       ^
                                                                                                        U
                                                                                                        cC
                                                                                                        ft

                                                                                                        co
                                                                                                       •H
                                                                                                       f.
•H
4-J
O
01
ft
CO
CU
                                                                                                        cfl
                                                                                                       -O
                                                                                                       oo
                                                                                                       T3
                                                                                                        0)
                                                                                                        3
                                                                                                        a
                                                                                                       i—i
                                                                                                        CO
                                                                                                        O

                                                                                                        cu

                                                                                                        a)


                                                                                                        C

                                                                                                        O

                                                                                                        co

                                                                                                        CO
                                                                                                       4-1
                                                                                                        CO
                                                                                                        O
                                                              150

-------


































CO
1
1— 1
M
M
>
W
,_J]
M
•^
H





























£
O
•H
4-1
cd
•H
O
/-v 01
4-J t]
CO ft
O 0)
CJ 13

C 60
O d
•H -H
^•^
^O
j —
s — '

H
25
w
$
"^
W
ffj
H

W
O
I— 1

Q
CJ
cu
*-•
en
•H

t-i
/-x 0)
i-H ft
^^- ft
60 O
g O

0 M
O 0)
O 4J
" M-l
in cd
^ ^
C2^ QJ
^ — ^ ^

CT> O
CN <^
• •
ro ^
in CN
















C
O
•H
4J
•H
CO
0
ft
0
O
0
QJ

O
•H
4J
^
-H
0
M
4-1
a
0)
iH
H
















13 ^O
c a
3 3
0 0
O- PI

M i-l
0) CU
P,, p ,

o o
m ro
r-l r~-
I
•O-
^j-
iH



























4J
cn
0
4-1 CJ
cn
o cu
0 C
•H
01 (-1
C 0
O H
N JS,
O CJ
151
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
             maximum effluent  concentration of  0.025  mg/1.   Such  an  effluent  limit
             effluent  limit.
             will give some leeway for minor operational upsets  versus  a 0.0 mg/1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                              152

-------
                                                                                   I
     On the basis of the above discussions, the following conclusions              •
arc drawn:
     (.1)  The major sources of cyanide from industries are electroplat-             •
         ing and metal finishing,  coke plants and blast furnace waste              •
         from the steel industry.   Concentrations of cyanide from in-
         dustrial waste may be expected to vary from 10 to as high as              •
         100,000 mg/1.  The higher concentrations are from plating bath
         waste of the electroplating and metal finishing industry.  Im-            •
         proved plant housekeeping and the reduction of rinse water                •
         drag-out from plating solutions can substantially reduce the
         concentration of cyanide  in the wastewater.                               •
     (2)  The toxicity of a cyanide waste is a function of its pH.  How-
         ever, at the pH of most natural waterways most of the cyanide             B
         will be present as undissociated HCN, the more toxic form.                «
         Due to its natural detoxification mechanisms, the human body
         can safely ingest up to approximately 18 mg/day of cyanide.               •
     (3)  Cyanide is reported to have an ordor threshold of 0.001 mg/1.
     (4)  The human body reportedly exhales some of the cyanide ingested            •
         and the liver converts most of the remainder to the less toxic            _
         form of thiocyanate which it then expels through the urine.               ™
     (5)  Fish appear to be the organisms most sensitive to cyanide.                flj
         The cyanide concentrations should not exceed 0.025 mg/1 for
         the preservation of fish life.                                            •
     (6)  Wastewater treatment technology, as currently practiced, is
         achieving a final effluent level of 0.0 mg/1 of cyanide by at             >•

                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I

-------
I
I
                      at least three methods.

                  (7) The cost of achieving these levels is within the range of
•                    the equivalent cost of removing trace metals from the waste-
I
I
                      waters.
                  On the basis of the above conclusions and discussions, it is recom-
             mended that a uniform effluent limit be established at 0.025 mg/1 for
             cyanide.  It is felt that such a limit is immediately achievable.  It
•           is one which will allow for minor operational difficulties, and it is
             within economic reason.  This limit is recommended on the basis of the
|           preservation of fish life.  It is also recognized that if chlorination
•           is utilized for the destruction of cyanides then adequate controls will
             be needed to meet the criteria which is set forth under a separate
V           chapter on maximum total chlorine residuals.

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I
                                             154

-------
I
m
 I


 I


 I


 I


 I
I
I


I
                                    CHAPTER  IX-FECAL COLIFORM





                      As defined  in the Drinking Water  Standard  (94),  fecal  coliforms



                ar"  considered an indicator  of recent fecal pollution.   The  fecal



                coliform group consists of Escherichia  cp 11 .  E_. coli  are  character-
 M



                 istically found  in both human and animal  intestines.  As  such,  they



 •              are  an  indicator of  the presence of disease producing organisms.



                      The sanitary significance of fecal  coliforms has been  aptly  dis-
               cussed in the work of Geldreich (41) and in other literature (1,6,



               66,94).  Therefore, no general discussion will be presented in this



               report.



                     As the most immediate effect of fecal coliforms in surface



               waters is on recreational use, the recommendation of this report is



               for the preservation of this use.



                     With respect to the treatability of wastes containing fecal



               coliform, substantial reductions will be obtained by biological,



               chemical and physical treatment.  Assurance of low levels is normally
 I
                achieved by  some  form of disinfection.
               RECOMMENDATION
 •                    To preserve  the recreational utilization of  surface waters,  it



                 is recommended  that during  the months of May  through October  all dis-



 •               charges not contain more  than 400 fecal coliform bacteria per 100  ml



                 sample at any time.  This level  is set to assist the maintenance of



 |               stream standards of200/100  ml for contact recreational  use.



 —                    It is recommended that during  the remainder  of the year,  November



 *               through April,  that discharges not contain more than 2000/100 ml
               fecal coliform.  This level is set to assist maintenance of stream






                                             155

-------
                                                                               I
standards of 1000/100 ml for non-contact recreational use.
      Lower levels are not recommended at this time for the                    •
following reasons:                                                             g|
      (1)  Fecal coliform are found in surface waters due to
           natural, urban, and agricultural runoff.  Therefore,                •
           municipal and industrial discharges are not the
           only contribution and in some cases not the major                   0
           contributor.                                                        •
      (2)  The chapter on chlorine shows that excessive amounts of
           residual free and/or combined chlorine are not                      •
           beneficial.
      Our objective, therefore, is to remove the disease producing
organisms through more complete biological, chemical, and physical             •
treatment rather than re]ying upon disinfection by chlorination.
                                                                               I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I
                              156                                               •

-------
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
I
                                      CHAPTER X-FLUORIDE
                       Fluorine,  the most  reactive non-metal,  is never  found  free  in


 •              nature,  but  occurs as  the univalent  anion,  fluoride, in  sedimentary


                 rocks  as fluorite or fluorspar  (calcium  fluoride),  and in  igneous


 •              rocks  as cryolite  (sodium aluminum fluoride).


 _                    Major  industrial fluoride discharges  are from electroplating,


 ™              insecticides,  steel and aluminum manufacture, glass and  ceramics


 fl              manufacture  and  fertilizer wastes (76) .  Disinfection  of brewery


                 apparatus, wood  and mucilage preservation and fertilizer manufacture


 •              contribute additional  fluoride.  (61,66,76).


                       Fluoride as HF is now scrubbed  from stack gases  as a result of


 ™              tighter  air  pollution  control laws.   Fluoride effluent discharges occur


 •              from stack effluent scrubbing in phosphoric  acid production,  steel


                 mills, and chemical plants among other industries  (6).   Fluoride  is


 •              added  to drinking water and therefrom eventually discharged  in domestic


                 wastewater.


 •                     Concentrations of fluoride found in industrial discharges,  vary


 •               from a low of  trace levels to 107-145 mg/1  for aluminum  reduction


                 plants to a  high of 1000-3000 mg/1 for glass manufacture (76).
                ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF FLUORIDE
                      A  low concentration of fluoride is beneficial  to man and


                 animals  and possibly even fish.  Beyond the  fine line denoting bene-


A               fit,  fluoride  can be damaging,  toxic or, in  high enough concentra-
                 tions  even  lethal.
                                              157

-------
      Effect  on Man
ized in Table X-2.
                                                                                I
                                                                                I
                                                                                I
                                                                                I
      Concentrations of the fluoride ion between 0.8 and 1.5 mg/1


have been shown to be beneficial in reducing tooth decay (1,66).                •


Concentrations of up to 5 mg/1 are reported not to produce any harm-


ful effects other than occasional mottling (66).  A comparison of               •


mortality rates has failed to show any increase in nephritis, heart


disease or cancer to be associated with low fluoride levels.  Sodium


fluoride does have a slight salty taste, but less so than sodium                •


chloride (66).


      Higher concentrations of fluoride are reported to be detrimental          m


to man.  The concentrations and effects are summarized in Table X-l.


      Fluoride also affects industrial uses of domestic water.  It is


reported that 1 mg/1 fluoride in water used for wet milling corn can            •


be concentrated to 6 mg/1 in steep water, and 5 mg/1 in corn syrup.


Malt syrup made with similar water may contain up to 8 mg/1 fluoride.           0


Fluoride concentrations from 1-5 mg/1 also seem to stimulate yeast              «


activity in the fermentation of malt (66).



      Effect on Plants                                                          •


      Fluoride uptake from water is restricted by a combination of


elements in soil, a soil pH above that required for uptake, and by              ™


plant root discrimination against fluoride.  Concentrations up to               B


10 mg/1 in irrigation water have been found to cause no direct damage


to various plants.  Concentrations of 100 mg/1 and more have caused             •


plant damage, however  (66).  Some of the reported research  is summar-
                               158
                                                                                I

                                                                                I

-------
I
•
1

1



1

Effect on Domestic Animals and
The toxic threshold for animals
The effects on animals are analogous
in fighting tooth decay but damaging

Wildlife
is reported to be 1.0 mg/1 (66).
to those on man, ie., beneficial
at higher concentrations.
Table X-3 gives some typical dose response relationships for a number

of species.


Wolf and McKee also reported that for cows consuming water with
500/mg/l fluorides, their milk only contained 0.5 mg/1
1
1

1



n
•



1


1

•
•
1
1
1

1
TABLE X-l
EFFECTS OF EXCESSIVE FLUORIDE IN

Concentration, mg/1
0.8 - 1.5
1.7 - 1.8
1.0 - 2.0
2.0

3 to 6
4.4 - 12

6.0
8-20
11.8

20 (rag/day)

115
180
2000


159


DRINKING WATER (1,66)

Effects
Threshold for mottling of teeth
50% of children have mottled teeth
Mild to moderate mottling
Dental mottling and weakening of
teeth structure
Severe dental mottling
Chronic fluorosis and skeletal
system damage
Tooth enamel pitted and chipped
Bone changes expected
Chronic fluorine intoxication
in adults
Crippling fluorosis after
20 years
Sub - lethal in drinking water
Toxic to man in drinking water
Lethal dose in drinking water





-------

FLUORIDE
Species
Peach, tomato, buckwheat
Peach and buckwheat
Sprouting of beans
Buckwheat
TABLE X-2


1
EFFECTS ON PLANTS (66) |
Cone of F

10
100
100
180
, mg/1



- 150

Peach, tomato and buckwheat 200
Buckwheat and peach
Large bean plants


FLUORIDE EFFECTS

Species

Cattle
Sheep
Mice
Cattle
Cattle, Rats
Cattle
Hogs
Cattle
Young Cattle
Hamsters

Sheep
Sheep
Rabbits




360
1000

TABLE X-3
IN DRINKING

Cone . of

1.0
1.0
1.4 - 4.5
0.4
1.
3
6-16
18
25 - 100
50

60
120
200


160





WATER OF

F~, mg/1

mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1

mg/day
mg/day
mg/kgm




Effect

No injury
Severely injured in
three days
Inhibited
Did not injure at pH 5.5
Killed in a short time
Injurious even at pH 6.5
Stunted growth


ANIMALS (66)

Effect

Harmless
Fluoride poisoning
Teeth mottling
No mottling
Mottling of teeth
Bone damage and death
Severe mottling
Increasing fluorosis
Teeth lesions
Dental fluorosis in 10
weeks
Affected teeth and bones
Threshold for general
health
Lethal




VM
1

1

1

I

1

1



1



1

•
™


1

1
1
1



-------
  I
 I
                     Effect on Fish and Aquatic Life
 I
                     Fluorides, like many other elements, are most damaging at lower
 •            concentrations on fish life.   Wolf and McKee reported direct toxic
               effects of fluoride ions toward fish life.  They also noted a relation-
               ship between fluorides and fish teeth condition.  Whether it is bene-

               ficial or detrimental was not indicated, however.  The levels toxic

               to fish are summarized in Table X-4.  The fluoride concentration toxic

 •            in soft water was found to be approximately 75% of that toxic in hard

               water in a study reported in the Water Quality Data Book, Volume III

 V            (15).  Salmo gairdnerii exhibited a 21 day LD^Q of 8.5 mg/1 fluoride

 •            (15).

                     A 1966 study postulated that rainbow trout are more sensitive

 V            to fluoride ions at higher temperatures.  The LC,-,. were given as

               follows: 5.9-7.5 @ 45°F and 2.6-6.0 @ 55°F. (15).

 fj                   Other forms of aquatic life, including lobsters, Daphnia,

 H             protozoa and rotifers among others, are apparently less sensitive to

               fluoride than are fish.  The toxic levels ranged from greater than 4.5

 fl             mg/1 for lobsters to 270 mg/1 for Daphnia, and up to 1000 mg/1 for

               protozoa and rotifers (66).

 m             TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - FLUORIDE REMOVAL

M                   Excessive concentrations of natural fluoride ions have been re-

               moved successfully for many years in the water treatment industry.

•             The three most common methods of reducing low (less than 10 mg/1) con-

               centrations of fluoride to the 1.0 mg/1 range are:
I

I                                            161

-------
                          TABLE X-4


             EFFECTS OF FLUORIDE ON FISH (15,66)
Species


Eggs


Trout
Minnows


Unspecified


Carp


Goldfish

it


Rainbow Trout


Mosquito Fish


Tinga vulgaris


Goldfish
Cone, of F , mg/1


      1.5


      2.3 - 7.3


      2.6 - 6.0


      2.7 - 4.7


      5.9 - 7.5


      7.7


     64


     75 - 91


    100


    120


    358


    419


    678


   1000



   1000
              Effect
Slowed and poorer hatching
TL  at 18°C in soft water
  m

TL  at 13°C in soft water
  m
                                            TL
                                              m
                                            TLm at 7.5°C in soft water
Unharmed in one hour


10 day TLm
Survived over 4 days


Killed in 4 days


Toxic in soft water


96 hr TLm in turbid water


lethal


Killed in 12-29 hrs. in
soft water


Killed in 60-102 hrs. in
hard water
                               162
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
                     (1)   Coprecipitation,  magnesium in lime - soda softening

 M                  (2)   Coagulation with  alum and lime in low magnesium hardness
                          waters
 •                  (3)   Adsorption on activated alumina (76).





 H                  For  industrial wastes having fluoride concentrations up to




               3000 mg/1, Patterson and Minear (76)  report that  lime coagulation at




 fl            a pH of 11 is normally used.   The calcium fluoride precipitate has a




               theoretical maximum solubility of about 8 mg/1 at a pH of 11, but is




 I            noted for  its slow formation.   As a result long detention periods are




 _            required.   Addition of excess  lime followed by settling,  recarbonation,




 ™            and resettling are often needed to obtain a 10-20 mg/1 effluent with




 •            a pH suitable for discharge (61,76).




                     Other technically feasible treatments include fluoride removal




 •            on synthetic and natural (processed bone and bone char) hydroxy apatite,




               and ion exchange on natural and synthetic zeolites.  While both Weston




 •            (97) and Patterson and Minear  report obtainable effluent  levels of




 M            0.5-1.5 mg/1 with hydroxy apatite, Patterson and  Minear report that




               this method has been abandoned in most plants due to the  excessive cost.




 •                  Similarly, while an effective strong cation exchange resin has




               been developed for fluoride removal,  overall treatment and chemical




 •            costs are  reported as excessive (76).




 •                   The  effectiveness of the various treatment  processes for fluoride




               removal are shown in Table X-5.  In general, the  capital  costs for lime




 •             treatment, alum coagulation and magnesium softening will  follow general




               water treatment costs.  Weston reports the capital costs  for an alum




I







t



                                              163
I

-------

TABLE X-5

EFFECTIVENESS OF FLUORIDE REMOVAL (76,97)
Fluoride Concentration, mg/1

Process Initial Final

Lime Addition 1000 - 3000 20
Lime Addition 1000 - 3000 7 - 8 *
Lime Addition 500 - 1000 20 - 40
Lime Addition 	 - 10
Alum Coagulation 3.6 0.6-1.5
Alum Coagulation 1
Hydroxy apatite
Beds
Synthetic 12-13 0.5-0.7
Synthetic 10 1.6
Bone char 6.5 1.5
Bone char 9-12 0.6
Unspecified 	 0.5-1.5
Alumina Contact Beds 8 1
Alumina Contact Beds 20-40 2-3
Alumina Contact Beds 9 1.3
Magnesium softening 3-4 0.8-0.12





164






Reported
Application
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Municipal
Industrial


Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Industrial
Municipal
Industrial
Industrial
Municipal







1

I
•
1

1

1

1

I

11
*
1





1
1
1
1
1
t

1

-------
  I
  I
  I
                 coagulation plant yielding a final fluoride effluent of 1.0 mg/1


                 as $100,000 for 1 MGD, $600,000 for 10 MGD, and $2,600,000 for 50 MGD.



                 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
                       (1)  Fluoride is found naturally in sedimentary and igneous rock


  •                       formations.  These contribute to natural fluoride ion con-


                           centrations found in surface waters of  those areas.


  «                   (2)  Fluoride ions are added to surface waters by a number of


  M                       industrial discharges.   The use of water scrubbing due to


                           air pollution controls  of gaseous discharges of fluoride


  •                       has added more industries to the list of aqueous fluoride


                           dischargers.


  W                   (3)  Fluoride ions at a concentration of 0.8-1.5 mg/1 in water


  m                        are beneficial to man,  some industries, and animals.


                       (4)  Fluoride concentrations above 2.0 mg/1  may be detrimental


 •                        to man,  while fluoride  concentrations above 10 mg/1 in


                           water are definitely damaging to man, industrial uses and


 |                        plant life, and presumably to animals.


 »                    (5)  Fluoride concentrations above 1.5 mg/1 are damaging to fish


                           eggs and fluoride concentrations above 2.3 mg/1 are toxic


 V                        to trout and other species of fish.


                       (6)  High levels of fluoride ion in industrial wastes can be


 •                         reduced  from 3000 mg/1  to 10-20 mg/1 by lime coagulation


 _                         and precipitation.


 ™                     (7)  Industrial wastes bearing less than 40 mg/1 fluoride can


IB                         be treated by one of the more economical processes to a


                           final effluent level of 0.5-1.5 mg/1.  Other technically

V                         feasible treatment methods exist but are reported to be



                                               165
I

-------
                                                                            I
      less economical.
      On the basis of the present information, a uniform effluent           |
criteria is difficult to justify at this time.  It is recommended,           ^
however, that an effluent level of 1.5 mg/1 be adopted for fluoride
where justified on the basis of water use.   It is recognized that           B
two stage treatment will be necessary for industries with wastes con-
taining high levels of fluoride to maintain a 10 mg/1 effluent.              ^
Attainment of 1.5 mg/1 level will not damage the use of water for man,      —
animal, plants, industry uses, fish or other aquatic life.                  ™

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I

                                                                            I
                               166                                          g

-------
^                       CHAPTER XI-HYDROGEN ION - ACIDITY - ALKALINITY

f                     Acidity and alkalinity are quantitative measures of the respec-
_               tive abilities of a water to neutralize strong bases and strong acids
~               to an arbitrarily designated pH or indicator endpoint.  The pH is an
H               expression of the intensity of the acid or alkaline condition of a
                 solution.   It is defined as the negative of the logarithm (base 10)
I               of the hydrogen ion activity.
^                     The  most commonly chosen titration endpoints are the methyl
™               orange (pH of 4.5)  and phenolphthalein (pH of 8.2-8.4) although in
•               special cases a potentiometric titration may be performed to a pH of
                 particular interest (1).   The method of determining a particular acid-
•               ity or alkalinity is to titrate with .02N NaOH or .02N H SO,  respec-
                 tively. Table XI-1 lists the various parameters obtained by the
•               titrations.   For unpolluted natural waters relatively simple relation-
M               ships exist  between the parameters of Table XI-1 and the concentrations
                 of hydroxide,  bicarbonate,  carbonate and hydrogen ion.  The relation-
•               ships are  handled by Sawyer and McCarty (81).
                       By the classifications in Table XI-1, the methyl orange acidity
•               consists chiefly of mineral acids, and some neutralization of weak
•               organic and  inorganic acids.  Phenolphthalein acidity is attributed  to
                 the bulk of  the weak acids  in solution,  especially carbon dioxide and
•               bicarbonate  in addition to  the methyl orange acidity.   Similarly, the
                 phenolphthalein alkalinity  may be taken as the neutralization of free
I
I
I
I
hydroxyl ions and some weak bases.  The methyl orange alkalinity will
be the sum of the phenolphthalein alkalinity and the major portion of
                               167

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
O
                                                                            00
                   fO
                    I
oo
 I
O
•H
 I
                  LOG  CONCENTRATION  DIAGRAM FOR CARBONATE


                                FIGURE  XI-1



                                        168
                                                                                   C
                                                                                   o
                                                                                   •H
                                                                                   4J
                                                                                   Cfl
                               C!
                               (U
                               O
                               C
                               O
                               CJ>

                               c
                               o
                                                                                   c
                                                                                   Q)
                                                                                   CO
                                                                                   O

-------
1

1












1



1

1



1

1






1

1

1

the alkalinity due to weak organic and weak inorganic bases.

TABLE XI-1

Parameters Manner Obtained

Methyl-orange acidity (mineral) Titration to methyl orange end-
point with 0.02N NaOH

Phenolphthalein acidity (total) Titration to phenolphthalein end
point with 0.0 2N NaOH

Methyl orange alkalinity (total) Titration to methyl orange end-
point with 0.02N H SO
Phenolphthalein alkalinity
(Hydroxyl plus one-half carbonate) Titration to phenolphthalein end'
point with 0.02N H0SO.
2 4

In clean natural waters simple sum and difference relationships
between hydroxyl, bicarbonate, carbonate and hydrogen ion can be
written to express the various free and total acidities and alkalini-

ties (81). Their relationships to pH are illustrated in Figure XI-1.
In polluted waters and in domestic and industrial wastes these re-
lationships no longer hold. These discharges will contain large
amounts of non-carbonate acidities and alkalinities, including weak
organic acids (e.g. acetic, p^ opionic and humic) and their salts,

weak inorganic acids and theii salts (borates, phosphates), ammonia,
i 	 i j i i
and hydrated heavy metals (Fe , Al ) . In these cases the acidity

and alkalinity indicate how w>^ may expect a particular water to react
to acid or alkaline influences, but tell us little of the chemical
composition of the solution itvolved.

169


-------
specific ions at various pH concentrations are treated in the indi-


vidual chapters.


RECOMMENDATIONS
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
      Both acidity and alkalinity are expressed as mg/1 of CaCO,.,  imply-


ing that the acidity would be neutralized by this amount of CaCO  or


that the alkalinity is equivalent to this amount of CaCO.,.


      Effects of Hydrogen lon-Acidity-Alkalinity                               •


      The literature more than adequately supports the need to main-           _


tain pH levels in surface waters between about 6.0-9.0 for the pro-            ™


duction and well-being of aquatic organisms.  Due to the interde-              •


pendence of pH, acidity and alkalinity, it is desirable to maintain


a minimum buffering capacity.  In particular, the pH of primary con-           •


tact recreation water should be between 6.5 and 8.3 (6).  When the pH


is outside this range the buffering capacity (i.e., balance between            •


acidity and alkalinity) becomes more important.  A brief computation          •


of pH requirements is shown in Table XI-2.


      Within the pH range of 6-8, toxicities are attributable to the          •


specific anions or cations involved.  The synergistic effects for
                                                                              I

                                                                              I

                                                                              I
      The pH of all discharges shall not be less than 6.0 nor more than

9.0.  An exception to this ruling will be permitted if the receiving

water has a natural pH outside of this range.  In this case, the pH of


the discharge shall not be less than that of the receiving water, when       •


the natural pH is less than 6.0 nor greater than that of the receiv-


ing water when the normal pH is higher than 9.0.                             •

      It is further recommended that in the interest of maintaining a


minimal carbonate-bicarbonate buffering capacity, no discharge shall         ™



                                                                             I

                              170

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
contain less than 20 mg/1 of alkalinity as CaCO_.
                          TABLE XI-2

                  DESIRABLE pH RANGES (6,66)
      REMARKS
MAN
      Drinking Water
      Primary Contact Recreation
ANIMALS

      Farmstead Water Supplies

INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES

      Brewing
      Confectionary
      Food Canning and Freezing
      Laundering
      Oil-well Flooding
      Rayon Manufacturing
      Steel Making
      Tannery Operations

PLANT LIFE

      Irrigation water, Permissible
      Irrigation water, Desirable
      Aquatic Plants
      Plankton Production, Optimum
FISH, MARINE, AND ESTUARY ORGANISMS

      Most Resistant Species
      Trout, Tolerance Range
      Trout, Toxic Limit
      Perch, Toxic Limit
      Most Fresh Water Fish, Tolerance
      Optimum for Fish Eggs
      Marine and Estuary Organisms
      Marine and Estuary Limits
      Shellfish
 pH RANGE
6.0 - 8.5
6.5 - 8.3
5.5 - 9.0
6.5 - 7.0
7.0 minimum
7.5 minimum
6.0 - 6.8
7.0 minimum
7.8 - 8.3
6.8 - 7.0
6.0 - 8.0
4.5
5.5
7.0
7.5
      9.0
      8.5
      9.2
      8.4
4.0 -10.1
4.1 - 9.5
4.8 - 8
4.6
6.5
      9,
      8.4
6.0 - 7.2
Ambient + 0.
6.7 - 8.5
7.0 - 9.0
                              171

-------
  I
  I
 I
I
I
I
I
                                          CHAPTER XII-IRON
                                                      +3                        +2
  H               Iron is found in both the ferric (Fe  ) and in the ferrous (Fe  )


             forms in the environment.  The form in which iron is found depends upon


  m          the pH, dissolved oxygen concentration and complex forming agents pre-


             sent in the water.  At a pH of approximately 7.8, and in the presence


  •          of oxygen, the soluble ferrous iron will be oxidized to ferric iron


  _          which will then be readily hydrolyzed to form an insoluble precipitate,


  ™          ferric hydroxide.  Table XII-1 shows some naturally occurring concentra-


 •          tions of iron.


                  There are several industrial sources of iron which are of signific-


 I          ance.  Table XII-2 summarizes concentrations from primary sources of


             iron-bearing industrial wastewater.  Steel mill pickle liquor is the


 •           largest source of high concentrations of iron.   Acid mine drainage,


 •           while not yielding as high a concentration as waste pickle liquor, may


             add substantially greater volumes of iron to surface waters.  Other in-


 •           dustrial wastewaters containing significant iron concentrations are the


             chemical, dyeing, ceramic, ink, printing, metallurgical, cannery,


 •           tannery and textile industries.  Paint pigments contain iron salts and

             iron salts are wasted after use as coagulants in water and wastewater


             treatment processes.


I
                                              172

-------
                             TABLE XII-1
                    CONCENTRATION OF IRON IN NATURE

Source                                   Cone.(mg/1 as Fe)    Reference
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
Surface water in U. S.                       0.0-0.4              (99)               ^
98 U. S. Rivers                              0.02-3.0             (99)               •
Dissolved mineral matter                     0.01-0.950           (99)               •
Weathering of rock, acid waters, etc.        0.001-1.67           (99)
Surface waters in coal mining area           3-1520               (72)               •
                                                                                   I
                                                                                   I
                                                                                   I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 I
                                173                                              •
                                                                                 I

-------
1
1

1



1

1



1

1

1
1

1

1

1
1

1

1
1
TABLE XII-2
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES &

Industry
Steel Mills
Waste pickle liquor

Waste (Continuous) Liquor
Waste (Batch) Liquor
Pickle bath rinse
Pickle bath rinse
HC1 pickle liquor

Mine Drainage
Ferrous iron
Total iron
West Virginia
Motor Vehicle Assembly
Body assembly
Vehicle assembly
Metal Processing
Appliance manufacture
Automobile heating controls
Appliances :
Mixed waste
Spent acids
Alkaline waste
Chrome plating
Plating waste
Brass pickle liquor
Brass bright dip waste
Metal Plating
174
CONCENTRATIONS OF IRON

Concentration
mg/1 (form)
70,000 (Total Fe)

130,000-160,000 (FeSO,
150,000-220,000 (FeS04
200-5,000 (Total Fe)
300-4,500 (FeSO.)
4
210 (Fe"1"1")


36
0.2-22,360,126-157
3-1,520

4
3

0.09-1.9
1.5-31

0.2-20
25-60
Trace
40
4_i-
3.58 (Fe )
100-210 (Total)
30-360 (Total)
1.2-21


Reference

(76)

) (48)
) (48,72)
(76)
(72)
(3)


(76)
(72,76,99)
(72)

(76)
(76)

(76)
(76)

(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(14)
(72)
(72)
(72)


-------
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF IRON


     The concentration of iron in waters is significant to man,
                                                                                I
                                                                               I
industry, stock, wildlife, fish and aquatic life.


     Effect on Man                                                             •

     Current limits for iron in domestic water supplies are based on           •

taste considerations rather than toxicity (94).  As little as 0.1 mg/1

may impart an unpalatable taste depending upon the form in which it is         •

found (66).  Aesthetically, iron is known to stain laundry at a con-

centration of only 0.3 mg/1 (94).                                              |

     The Drinking Water Standards states that the iron permitted in            «


public water supplies (after control to prevent objectionable taste

or laundry staining) "...constitutes only a small fraction of the              •


amount normally consumed and is not likely to have any toxicological

significance."  The normal daily nutritional requirement for man is 1-2        |

mg.  Man's normal diet contains from 7-35 mg per day.                          ^


     Effect on Industrial Water Supplies

     Table XII-3 shows that more stringent iron requirements have              M

been set for several industries than for domestic water supplies.

     Effect on Irrigation, Stock and Wildlife Watering                         •

     The presence of iron in irrigation waters is reported to be of            •

little importance.  Iron is an essential constituent in the diet of

animals.  If the iron concentration is too high, however, cows may             •

not consume enough water, which adversely affects their milk production
 (66).
                                                                               I


                                                                               I
                               175

-------
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
                              TABLE XII-3
IRON TOLERANCES FOR INDUSTRIAL USE
CONCENTRATION ,

Camp (24)
0.5*
0.5*
0.2*
0.1*
-
0'.2*
;es 0.2
Industries
0.2*
0.1*
-
0.2*
0.2*
0.2*
-
-
issing
0.2*
1.0*
0.2*
0.1*
0.1*
0.005*
0.0
0.2*
0.25
0.25*
1.0*
0.2*
mg/1

McKee & Wolf (66)
_
0.5
0.2
0.1-1.0
-
-
0.1-0.2

0.1-0.2
-
trace
0.2
0.2
0.2-1.0
0.1
-
0.1
-
0.3
0.2-1.0
0.1
0.1
_
0.0-0.05
0.1-2.0
0.1-1.0
-
-
-

Water Quality
Criteria (6)
.
0.5-14
-
-
0.01-1.0
-
0.3
0.1
-
-
-
0.2
-
-
1.0
1.0
-
-
1.0-0.3
0.1-1.0
-
-
__
-
0.1-50
0.1-0.3
0.1
0.1
-
Industry

Air Conditioning
 Cooling Water
Baking
Breweries
Boiler Feed
Canneries
Carbonated Beverages
Chemical & Allied
Confectionery
Distilling
Electroplating
Food, General
Ice
Laundry
Oil Well Flooding
Petroleum
Photographic Processing
Plastics, Clear
Pulp & Paper
 Ground Wood
 Kraft Pulp
 Soda & Sulfite
 Highgrade Papers
Rayon (Viscose)
 Pulp Production
 Manufacture
Tanning
Textiles
 General
 Dyeing
 Wool Scouring
 Cotton Bandage
*Applies to iron and manganese individually or to their sum.
                                176

-------
                                                                               I
     Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life
     Iron can have a major impact on fish and other aquatic life.  The         •
toxicity of iron to fish is dependent upon the pH and the buffering            •
capacity of the water.  Very little iron normally remains in solution
in buffered water, or a water with a pH above 8.  As a result iron hydrox-     •
ides are deposited on the gills of fish, which is believed to irritate
and block their respiratory channels.  In addition, the heavy ferric           •
hydroxide precipitate is believed to smother fish eggs on the stream           •
bottoms.  At a lower pH and in unbuffered waters, iron may have a direct
toxic effect on fish and other aquatic life (66).                              •
     Table XII-4 reveals that iron may be toxic and interfere with fish
life at concentrations as low as 0.2 mg/1 in unbuffered, low pH waters         •
over extended periods.  Table XII-5, however, shows that well buffered         •
waters with higher pH (high hardness) may support fish life at iron con-
centrations as high as 10-50 mg/1 for exposure times ranging from 1 hour       •
to 96 hours.  Most fish are capable of surviving longer periods of ex-
posure at an iron concentration of 0.7-1.0 mg/1, provided that the water       |
is well buffered and has a pH near neutrality (66).                            «
     An iron concentration exceeding 0.2 mg/1 has been found to create
problems due to the growth of the iron bacteria Crenothrix, Gallionella,       •
and others.  These iron bacteria utilize iron as a source of energy and
store it in their microbial protoplasm  (66).  It is also apparent from         p
the works of McKee & Wolf that fish and other aquatic life are capable         _
of concentrating iron.  Investigations utilizing radioactive iron Fe-59        "
have been reported to have concentration factors ranging from 720 to           JB
200,000.  The concentration factors reported by McKee & Wolf are

                                                                               I
                                 177
I

-------
1


1

1

1

1
•
1

1


1
1
^^H
1

1

1
1
1
1
1

summarized in Table XII-6.

TABLE XI I- 4

TOXIC OR HARMFUL CONCENTRATIONS (mg/1) OF IRON FOR FISH LIFE (66)
Form of Iron Concentration Species of Fish Type of Time of
mg/1 Water Exposure
Iron 0.2 three types of-
fish
Iron 0.9 carp pH 5.5
or less
Iron 1-2 pike, tench, pH 5.0-6.7
Fed 0.6 goldfish tap
Iron 10 rainbow trout 5 min.
FeCln 1.2 stickleback tap 6 days
J
FeCl 4.35 goldfish tap 3 days
Fe90_ 2.0 trout , salmon,
roach
FeK (S0,)2 14 young eels
Fe (SOJo 0.716 shiners, carp, distilled 12-24 hrs
FeCl 13 young eels 50 hrs.
FeSO 2.9 shiners, suckers, distilled 4-24 hrs.
carp
Iron 1.28 fish distilled 24 hrs.




178

-------




Form of Iron

Iron

FeC13
FeCl3
Ke2(s04)3

FeCl2
FeS04

FeSO.
4
FeSO.
q.










TABLE XII-5

IRON CONCENTRATIONS FOUND NOT HARMFUL
TO FISH LIFE (66)

Concentration Species of Fish Type of Time of
m^/l Water Exposure

0.7 good fish fauna supported
in 95%
waters
1.0 sticlebacks taps 10 days
5.0 young eels - 50 hrs.
5.0 rainbow trout, Lake Huron 24 hrs.
bluegill sunfish,
sea lamprey
10 goldfish hard water 96 hrs.
5 carp, shiners, - 24 hrs.
suckers
17.1 minnows - 1 hr.
50 bass, bluegills - 7 days
50 trout - 24 hrs.






179

1
1

1



1
I

1

I
|

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1



-------
1
1

1

1

1



1

1
••

1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE XII-6
CONCENTRATION FACTORS FOR RADIOACTIVE IRON (Fe-59)
IN FISH & AQUATIC LIFE (66)

Organism C.F.
Phytoplankton 200,000
Invertebrates, skeleton 100,000
Filamentous algae 100,000
Insect larva 100,000

Algae, non-calcareous 20,000
Invertebrates, soft parts 10,000
Fish 10,000
Flagellate, Rhodomanas 7,500
Flagellate, Ch 1 amy d omona s_ 6,000
Diatom, Nitzschia 5,533
Vertebrates, skeleton 5,000
Diatom, Navicula conf . 4,220
Alga, Ochromonas 1,550-4,480

Vertebrates, soft parts 1,000
Flagellate, Platymonas 720-1,030





180

-------
                                                                                    I
Treatment Technology for Iron Removal
     The primary method for iron removal is the conversion of ferrous               ™
iron to the ferric state, followed by precipitation of ferric hydroxide             •
n( n pll of approximately 7.8, where the solubility of ferric hydroxide
is at a minimum.  This method of iron removal has been used for many                •
years in treatment of municipal water supplies.  As reported by Patterson
and Minear (76), waters with a high concentration of iron are usually               •
found to have a high concentration of carbon dioxide.  In the removal               •
of carbon dioxide by aeration, the ferrous iron is converted to ferric
iron.  Lime is  frequently utilized to maintain the pH at the desired                •
level for maximum precipitation of the ferric hydroxide.
     Fair, Geyer and Okun (37), and Patterson and Minear (76) note that             •
insoluble iron  oxide frequently exists in suspension as a fine colloidal            •
dispersion which resists sedimentation due to its small particle size,
when precipitated at a pH of 9.  A very Io\> specific gravity makes it               •
difficult to remove by sedimentation without prolonged detention times
or filtration.  A summary of iron removal efficiencies currently obtained          B
in various industries is given in Table XII-7.  While greater than                  H
than 1 mg/1 total iron remained in the effluents noted in Table XII-7
for sedimentation only, a filtration step held other effluents to less             •
than 0.5 mg/1.
     It is also worth noting that some companies are capable of recover-           |
ing byproducts  from waste sulfuric acid pickle liquor.   Byproducts re-            _
covered by some companies include copperas with ferrous sulfate; copperas          *
with sulfuric acid; ferrous sulfate with sulfuric acid; ferric sulfate             •
with sulfuric acid; ferric iron with sulfuric acid;  iron powder; ferric
oxide,; ferric  oxide with aluminum sulfate.  Nemerow also stated that              •
                                181
I

-------
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I


























u
w
u
M
r-» pn
1 £*-4
M W
M
X iJ
W >
r4 0
« s
 ^-s
1 — • CO
x_x v-^




00
R
•rl
M i-l
X! 4-1
4-1


/ — ^
rH
/-^ rt
CN 4J
+ 0
Ol H
[V, N«^
N.^'
oo oo
oo ro
• •
o o m


CN
H-
01
Si
o o
vO i — 1
n csi


f-i
o

C71
•rt
? 0)
O rH

fc/ cj
B -rl
P P-i
ON
          CN
                              VD
                                   vD



00
B
•H
rH
4J
4J
CU
to

*
0)
B
O

to
01
B
•H
^
B
00
r^
CN
•






in
*^-
rH


CU
00
rt
B

rt
rl
Q

Ol
B
•H









00
c
•H
rH
4J
4J
Ol
CO

CU
B
•rt
^
B
P.
00
oo
in
•
rH


SO
•
rH

in
rH


















00
B
•H
rH
4-1
4-1
0)
CO

•*
r\
tn
^

rt
T)
O

H
oo
rH
CT»
•
CN


ro
•
CN
vO
CN
H















Q)
B
•H
rH

^
B
O
•rf
4J
rt
4_t
0
rH
14-1

»B
4-1
O
rl

B
&.
00

in
CN
CN
O
•
rH
1
0
rH
m
m



00
B
•H
^
CO
«


rH
rt
o

00
B
•H
rH
4-1
4-1
CU
CO

**
B
O
•H
4-1
rt
rH
3
00
rt
0
0














cu
00
rt
B
•H
rt
^4
TJ

Ol
B
•H
B






X)
01
4-1
rt
rl
00
cu
4-1
0
M

**
K**»
a
B
rt








o
m
•
o



00
B
•rt

to
•H
C
•H
fe

rH
«
4J
CU


Ol
B
•rt
rH

*\


rH
rt

*i
cu
B
•H
M
O
rH
(-1.
O







m
o
•
0

•
rH


tn
3
o
0)

rt
rH
rH
Cl)
CJ
tn
•H








CU
rH
4J
4-1
CU
tn

r>
B
3
•H

O
tn




























rl
CU
4J
rH
•H

}*4
01
00 4-1
B rH
•H -H
rH 14-1
4-1
4-1 «
cu B
co o
•H
« 4J
cu rt
B rl
•H Ol
rJ <







o cn
O rH
• •
O O

-------
 fi
 o
u
X

w
hJ
PQ
<:
H
 0)
 a
 c
 cu
 M
 cu
u-t
 0)
Pi
                    O

                    4-1
                    cu
                    o
                   rH
                   M
                 o
                •H
                 o
                 c
                 o
                     w
                     H
        C
        o
        •H
        4-1
        Cfl
    T3  4-1
<^J  C  O
    CN  rH
 CU      MH

•H  CU    •>
          " 4J  rH
         60  01   nj
         C   cn
        •H      ^)
        iH
         4-1   6   CD
         4->36
         CU  rH  -H
        CO   CO  rH
                            CO
                            CO
                            CO
                             o
                                           C
                                           O
                                          •H
 3  H
 oo cu
 Cfl  4-1
 O  rH
 a  -H
    M-l
rH
 cfl    «
 CJ  CU
•H  ^
 e  j->
 CU  -U
,c  cu
o  cn
                                           CO

                                           o
                          (U

                         .-)
                          O
                          U)
                          en
                         •H
                         P
                                                     -JO
                                                     r--
                                                       cn
                                                       cn
                                                       cu
                                                       o
                                                       o
                                                       M
                                                      PM
                                    01
                                      •
                                    O
                                                        i
                                                       LO
                                                       (N
                             r-l
                             O
                             CD
                             CO
                             •H
                             P
                                                                183


-------
I
              regeneration is  possible  when  hydrochloric  acid  is  used  as  a pickle
•









•
•









•
•









I
             liquor.   The Braw-Knox-Ruthner process is one such recovery method (72).




                  An  additional method of treatment reported in both Nemerow (72)




             and Patterson and Minear (76)  is  the use of deep well disposal.   However,




             as this  does not reportedly enter surface waters, it is not considered
•




              here  as  a treatment  process  for  setting  an effluent  criteria.
                  One other process  described by Patterson and Minear (76)  is the




             "Walker Process".   The  system consists  of distributing the wastewater,




             after restabilization,  over graded anthracite coal which accomplishes




             aeration of the wastewater.   The bed surface is reported to contain
•




              residual  iron hydroxide which  acts  as  a  catalyst  for  the  oxidation of




•            the  ferrous  iron  to  the ferric form, followed  by  precipitation of  ferric




              hydroxide.   The units  need  periodic back washing  with subsequent solids




•            removal and  disposal.




im                 The  final method  of  iron  treatment  reported  in the literature is




              that of combining waste sulfuric  acid  pickle liquor with  chromate  waste-




•            waters from  cleaning operations.  Combinations of the acid  pickle  liquor




              with the  chromate waste are utilized to  reduce the chromium hexavalent




|            form to the  chromium trivalent form.   Then both the iron  and  the chromi-




H            urn are precipitated  by lime.   Effluents  of 0.5 mg/1 total soluble  iron




              and  0.05  total chromium have been reported (76).




•                 A summary of the  capital  costs reported in the literature reviewed




              for  iron  removal  is  summarized in Table  XII-8  below.




|                 As indicated from this tabulation,  the costs vary substantially




_            according to the  process  utilized and  the capacity of the facility.




              Similarly, a summary of the operating  and maintenance costs for various
             methods  of  iron  removal  and neutralization  is  given  in  Table  XII-9.
                                              184

-------

TABLE XII-8
CAPITAL COST FOR IRON REMOVAL
Capital Cost
Method Flow MDG Million Dollars
Chemical Coagulation
Settling & Filtra-
tion 1.0 0.3
Settling & Filtra-
tion 10.0 1.3
Settling & Filtra-
tion 50.0 4.6

Neutralization, coag- 0.06 0.1
ulation , settling
(HC1 Pickle Liquor) 0.1 1.0
HC1 Pickle Liquor 0.1 4.0
w/ Recovery)
Walker Process 2.7 0.05

Total Iron: Foundry
Waste by Coagulation &
Filtration 7.5 134






185





$/1000 Gal Ref.


300 (97)

130 (97)

92 (97)

1670(8 hr. (76)
flow)
10,000 (72)
40,000 (72)

18.5 (76)


0.0178 (76)








1
1



I


1

1

|
•

1

1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1

-------
1
1

1

1




1
1

1

1
1
••
1
1

1

1

1
mf



1





TABLE XII-9




OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST FOR IRON REMOVAL & NEUTRALIZATION


Method Flow,

Neutralization (w/Lime
Equalization, and
Sludge Dewatering
0
0
1
1
1
10
10
50
0.
W/Limestone
Neutralization w/Lime -
W/Limestone
W/Soda Ash
Neutralization ($5-$10
Neutralization W/Lime
or Limestone 0.

Regeneration of HC1 0.
Pickle Liquor
Total Iron: Foundry 7.
Waste by Coagula-
tion & Filtration




MGD $/1000 Gal

assumed) ,

.5 15
.5 29
.5 108
.0 25
.0 26
.0 103
.0 12.5
.0 20
.0 11
06 0.02
20
0.032
0.0591
0.268
per 1000 Ib. acid)

1 20

1 8800

5 23.28


186


C/tng/1
Acidity ,mg/l Acid/1000 Gal



500 3.0
1000 2.9
20000 0.5A
500 5.0
1000 2.6
20000 0.51
500 2.5
1000 2.0
500 2.2
	 	
Steel Mill
pickle liquor
0.0052
0.010
0.0486


HC1 Pickle
liquor
Gross Cost








Ref .



(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(99)
(99)
(99)
(72)

(72)

(72)

(76)





-------
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
 I
 I
(1)  Iron exists in both ferric and ferrous forms in nature.   The ferrous           B


    iron may be rapidly converted to the ferric state at a pH greater


    than 7.                                                                         •


(2)  The sources of iron from industrial waste are numerous.   Their concen-


    trations range from trace quantities to 220,000 mg/1 as ferrous sul-           •


    fate.                                                                          •


(3)  The effect of iron on man is basically aesthetic.  Water with an iron


    concentration greater than 0.3 mg/1 will stain domestic laundry.               I


(4)  Many industrial uses require water containing less than 0.1 mg/1


    of iron in order to maintain product quality.                                  •


(5)  Iron is directly toxic to fish life through precipitation of ferric            •


    hydroxide within the respiratory system of the fish and on the


    stream bottoms, smothering fish eggs.                                          •


     The toxic concentration will depend upon the pH and the buffering             «


capacity of the waters.  As the water hardness, the buffering capacity


and pH decrease, and the toxicity has been found to increase.                     •


     The concentration of iron by fish and other aquatic life ranges


from 700 to 200,000 times the external aqueous level.                             •


(6)  Present technology is capable of removing dissolved iron from waste-          _


    water to concentrations of 1.0 mg/1 or less and removing total iron           ™


    from wastewater to concentrations of 2.0 mg/1.                                •


(7)  Capital costs for facilities needed to remove iron are generally


    equivalent to or below the cost of secondary treatment facilities.            •


    However, the cost may be substantially increased when neutralization


    is involved for efficient conversion of the ferrous iron to the
                                187
I

I

-------
 I
 •                ferric  state.
               (8)  The operating  costs  for  the  removal of  total  iron  from  foundry
 •                wastewater  are expensive.  However, they  are  comparable with  the
                   operating costs  of neutralizing  other acid  iron-bearing wastewaters.
                   On the  basis of  present  information, it is  recommended  that a uni-
 •            form effluent criteria of  1.0 mg/1 be  adopted for dissolved iron  and
               2.0  mg/1 be adopted  for  total iron.
 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

I

•                                             188

-------
                                     CHAPTER XIII-LEAD
   I




                       Lead occurs naturally in the environment as a primary metal and


   I            in limestone and galena (PbS)  deposits,  Table XIII-1.   The aquatic

                                             I |
                 forms of soluble lead are Pb   or its complexions. At basic pH,


   |            hydroxide and carbonate precipitates are readily formed.


   _                   Lambou and Lim (56) report that while there are  500 companies


   *             in the United States which mine, smelt,  and refine lead,  65% of the


   I             total output is by seven companies.   In  addition, 96%  of all domestic


                 lead mines are located west of the Mississippi River.   The industries'


   •             statistics for 1964 through 1968, as reported by Lambou and Lim,


                 indicate that 89% of the lead  is mined in Missouri, Idaho, Utah,  and


  ™             Colorado - 47% being mined in  Missouri alone.   Tables  XIII-2 and  3 show


                 the United States lead production from 1964-1968 and lead consumption


                 in 1968 and 1969.


  •                    Secondary production from the recovery melting and smelting of


                 scrap lead is done by 200 companies within the United  States.   However,


  •I              over 50% of this production is done by the American Smelting and


  •              Refinery Company and the National Lead Company.   Gurnham (48)  has in-


                 dicated that the secondary lead recovery production is as large in

 •              tonnage as is the primary lead production.   Its  potential, however,


                 from the industrial waste viewpoint, is  much greater.   He reported


 •              that 50 of the largest plants  are located on the seacoast and near


 •              the Great Lakes.  Recovery of  lead from  storage  batteries, for example,


                 has the potential problem of antimony and antimonial lead alloys,


 •              the discarding of unwanted waste products by burning,  as  well as  the


                 high toxicity of the lead itself.


I
I
I
                                             189

-------
                         TABLE XIII-1

                   NATURAL SOURCES OF LEAD


Source                         Concentration                Reference
                         TABLE XIII-2

                  U. S. LEAD PRODUCTION* (56)
                             1964    1965    1966    1967    1968 5 Yr.Avg.

Domestic Ores (recoverable   286.0   301.1   327.4   316.9   359.2  318.1
             lead content)

Primary Lead (refined)       449.4   418.2   440.7   379.9   467.3  431.1
Secondary Lead (lead         541.6   575.8   572.8   553.8   550.9  559.0
                content)    1285.6  1301.7  1352.1  1259.7  1396.9 1319.2
       Thousands of tons
                                                                                 I
      Industrial effluent concentrations, commercial uses and common

lead alloys are shown in Table XIII-4.                                            •
                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I
Limestone & Galena Deposits    0.4-0.8 mg/1                     (66)            •
Surface & Ground Water         Trace to 0.04 mg/1, 0.01 avg.    (66)
Sea Water                      0.003-0.03 mg/1                  (6)             |

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I
Antimonial Lead (primary       8.6     6.6    11.2     9.1    19.5   11.0
           lead content)
                                                                               I
NOTE:  Lower figures for 1967 reflect the results of an industry-wide
                                                               strike.         •
                                                                               I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I
                              190

-------
1
•
1



1

1

1
•i
1

1



1

1
•



1






1
1
1

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF LEAD
A review of the tabulated data indicates that while lead may
be present to some extent in our natural environment, the basic impact

on the environment is from its utilization in numerous commercial
products, particularly in leaded gasoline. Lead may enter the environ-
ment in liquid, or solid waste discharged from industrial production
or in exhaust from consumption of leaded fuel. It then can be returned
to the earth by rain or snow.

McKee and Wolf (66) have reported that lead is foreign to the
human body and has no known nutritional value. The total intake of
lead must be considered in evaluating its impact on man as it may
enter the body through food, air, tobacco smoke, water, and other
beverages . While the exact level at which the human body accumulates

lead over the amount excreted has not been definitely established,
McKee and Wolf report that it is probably between .3 and 1.0 mg/day.
Table XIII-5 gives the effect of different lead concentrations on man.

Effect on Man
Lead is a cumulative poison which tends to be concentrated in

the bone. McKee and Wolf reported that since the sensitivity to lead
differs considerably with individuals, a safe level of lead cannot
be definitely stated. "Typical symptoms of advanced lead poisoning

are constipation, loss of appetite, anemia, abdominal pain, tender-
ness, pain, and gradual paralysis in the muscles, especially of the

arms. A milder and often undiagnosed form of lead poisoning also
occurs in which the only symptoms may be lethargy, moroseness,

191

-------
                         TABLE XII1-3                                            —
     LEAD CONSUMPTION IN THE UNITED STATES BY PRODUCT (56)                        ™

                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                               I

                                                                               I
    Includes lead content of leaded zinc oxide and other pigments.             _
(Short
Product
Metal Products:
Ammunition
Bearing Metals
Brass & Bronze
Cable Covering
Caulking Lead
Casting Metals
Collapsible Tubes
Foil
Pipes, Traps, & Bends
Sheet Lead
Solder
Storage Batteries:
Battery grids, posts, etc.
Battery Oxides
Terne Metal
Type Metal

Pigments:
White Lead
Red Lead and Litharge
Pigment Colors
Other *

Chemicals:
Gasoline Antiknock Additives
Miscellaneous Chemicals

Miscellaneous Uses:
Annealing
Galvanizing
Lead Plating
Weights and Ballast
Total
Other, unclassified uses
Grand Total**
tons)
1968

82,193
18,441
21,021
53,456
49,718
8,693
9,310
6,114
21,098
28,271
74,074

250,129
263,574
1,427
27,981
915,500

5,857
86,480
14,163
3,234
109,734

261,897
629
262,526

4,194
1,755
389
16,768
23,106
17,924
1,328,790

1969

79,233
17,406
21,512
54,203
44,857
9,918
12,484
5,881
19,407
25,818
72,626

280,386
302,160
1,583
25,660
973,134

6,617
79,898
14,670
1,201
102,386

271,128
602
271,736

4,252
1,797
406
17,368
23,813
18,287
1,389,358
**  Includes lead which went directly from scrap to fabricated products.
                              192
I

I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
                         TABLE XIII-4


     CONCENTRATION OF L£AD IN INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER (56)



   Source                                    Concentration


Engine Parts Plant                        2.0 - 140.0 mg/1

Plating Bath Rinse Water                        0- 30 mg/1

Lead Mining Operations                          0-.04 mg/1



                 COMMERCIAL USES OF LEAD (56)


Compound	Major Commercial Uses


1.  Lead Metal, Pb:  Found chiefly alloyed with antimony, tin, or copper.

2.  Litharge, PbO: Used especially in storage-battery manufacturing.

3.  Red lead, Pb.,0.: Used in paints and storage batteries.

4.  Lead dioxide, PbO?: Used in chemical industry.

5.  Lead carbonate,  2PbCO Pb (OH)2: White lead, used in paints.

6.  Lead sulfate, PbSO,: A paint pigment.

7.  Lead titanate, PbTiO :  A paint pigment.

8.  Lead acetate, Pb(C?H-0_)9:  The most common water-soluble compound
                      ^- J *— i-   f -|  -.
                               of lead.

9.  Lead arsenate, Pb_(AsO_): A common insecticide.

10. Lead chloride, PbCl: Probably formed when fluxes are used with
                         heated lead.

11. Lead silicate, PbSiO :  Present in glasses and vitreous enamels.

12. Lead chromate, PbCrO,:  Used in yellow and green pigments.

13. Lead borate, Pb  (BO ) : Employed in certain plastics.

14. Lead sulfide, PbS: Occurs naturally as galena.

15. Lead tetraethyl, Pb(C2H ) : Used in gasoline.




                    COMMON LEAD ALLOYS  (56)


Solder:    lead and  tin; 50 - 80% lead.

Type metal:lead, tin, antimony; 60 - 90% lead.

85 - three 5 bronze: copper, tin, lead, zinc; 5% lead.

Bearing bronze: copper, lead, zinc; 15  - 20% lead.
                               193

-------
constipation, flatulence, and occasional abdominal pains".  (66)
Continuous consumption and exposure to low concentrations of lead
create a cumulative toxicity of greater significance than exposure to
occasional small doses.                                                           •
                         TABLE XII1-5

                 EFFECTS OF LEAD ON MAN  (66)

Form           Concentration                 Remarks
               0.1  mg/1                Chronic poisoning for
                                        hypersensitive persons
      The pharmacological and physiological mechanisms of lead
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 I
I
I
I
Lead, Total    0.33  mg/day             Avg. American Intake
"               .01-0.03 mg/day       Avg. Am. Intake from water
"              0.1-0.6   mg/day       Dangerous over lifetime
"              0.042-1.0   mg/1         Reported Pb poisoning                    I
"              0.01 -0.16  mg/1         Reported non-poisonous
                                                                                 I
                                                                                I
                                                                                I
                                                                                I
poisoning have been reported by Lambou and Lim (56) .  They reported
that the salts of lead are known to precipitate proteins, thereby               •
acting as local astringents.  While their acute toxicity is low, they
are absorbed over long periods of time to produce cumulative effects.           •
Lambou and Lim also report, "Chronic lead poisoning is especially               •
dangerous because it develops insidiously, and is often not recognized
until it is far advanced.  The symptoms involve the nutrition, the              •
blood, the nervous and muscular structures, apparently independently.
                                                                                I
                              194

-------
 I
 •           Eventually there may be degradation of the kidneys and other organs."


              The physiological mechanisms involved with lead toxicity include a


 •           paroxysmal phenomena resembling flocculation and the alteration of the


              calcium level of the blood.


 ™                 Lambou and Lim (56)  also reported the toxicity of lead compounds


 •           to be influenced by the solubility of lead within body fluids,  the time


              of contact with the body fluids, the quantity ingested, inhaled, or


 •           absorbed,  and the quantity present within the circulatory system at


              any given  time.


 •                 The  degree of toxicity of various lead compounds, as consumed


 •           through oral ingestion, in decreasing order are as follows:   lead


              arsenate,  lead carbonate,  lead monoxide,  and lead sulfate.  Other lead


 •            compounds  of similar but lower degrees of toxicity,  again in descend-


              ing order  are metallic lead, lead chromate, red lead,  lead dioxide,


 |            lead phosphate, and lead sulfide.   Lambou and Lim indicated that


 m            there is definite evidence,  from experiments with both man and  animal,


              that lead  has injurious effects on the germ cells of both male  and


•            female. The effects may be passed maternally through the fetal blood


              during gestation.  A report of Cantarow and Trumper  (1945),  reviewed


              by Lambou  and Lim, indicated that it has  been repeatedly demonstrated


              that lead  will pass through the placenta  into the fetal tissues.


              This has been reported to increase the incidence of  epilepsy, muscular


              spasms, convulsions, and other nervous disturbances  in the child (56).


                    In conjunction with the effects on  humans, Lambou and Lim re-


              ported an  investigation of persons working in a Japanese storage


              battery plant with the following two conclusions:
 I
 I
 I
I
I

-------
                                                                                 I
      1.  The rate of sterility was approximately twice as high
          among those exposed to industrial lead concentrations.                 •
      2.  8.2% of the group had pregnancies ending in premature                  •
          or stillborn births while the control group, not exposed
          to the industrial lead poisoning, averaged 0.2%.                       •
      The present lead standards based upon physiological effects on
humans are shown in Table XIII-6.

      Effect on Plants and Animals
                                                                                 I
      Available data on the effects of lead on non-aquatic plants                _
and animals are summarized in Table XIII-7                                       ™
      Lambou and Lim comment that "animals and birds are also subject            H
to chronic lead poisoning, and show practically the same symptoms as
man.  An interesting effect of lead pollution can be demonstrated in             •
water fowl mortality due to lead poisoning.  Twelve million  pounds
of lead shot are expended annually over the nation's best water fowl             •
habitats.  The shot remains there relatively unchanged.  Water fowl              •
frequently ingest these shots and die of lead poisoning.  Annual
mortality has been estimated at roughly one million birds.  For                  •
aquatic fowl ingestion of lead shot is doubly dangerous because approx-
imately 0.5% of arsenic is added"  (56).                                         I

      Effect on Fish and Aquatic Life                                            •
      The toxicity of lead to fish and other forms of aquatic life
has been well documented by McKee and Wolf.  While the toxicity of               jj
lead may vary with respect to the lead salt considered, it may                   ^
definitely be stated that it is very toxic and is concentrated within            ™
                              196
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
the fish flesh.  The degree of toxicity has been reported to vary


with respect to the total hardness, the calcium ion concentration,


the concentration at which it is present in the water, and the level


of dissolved oxygen.



                         TABLE XIII-6


PRESENT LEAD STANDARDS PROMULGATED BASED ON HUMAN EFFECTS  (94)
A. Physiologically Safe


    (1)  Lifetime


    (2)  Short period, few weeks



B  Harmful


    (1)  Borderline


    (2)  Toxic


    (3)  Lethal
                     Concentration


                     .05  mg/1


                    2-4 mg/1
                    2-4 mg/1, for 3 mo.


                    8 -10 mg/1, several weeks


                    Unknown, probably
                    15 mg/1, several weeks
                          TABLE XIII-7


           EFFECTS OF LEAD ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS  (66)


Species                  Concentration                    Remarks


Oats, Potatoes       1.5 - 25 mg/1 (lead nitrite)    Growth stimulation


Oats, Potatoes             50 mg/1 (lead nitrite)    Detrimental


Sugar beets         51.8      mg/1 (lead)            Injurious
Cattle


Farm animals
      18 mg/1 (soft water)


0.5      mg/1
Lead Poisoning


Maximum safe limit
                              197

-------
The toxicity of lead as total lead and as various salts has
                       198
                                                                            I
                                                                                 I
been summarized in the work of McKee and Wolf, and is shown in
Table XII1-8.  It is apparent that toxic effects are observed at                 •
concentrations as low as 0.01 mg/1.
                                                                           I
      Lambou and Lira reported the investigations of Pringle et al.

on the concentration effect of lead in shellfish.  The concentration

in the shellfish increases with the concentrations in water on a 1:1

ratio.  The depletion rates for lead in oysters increased as the ex-             I

posure decreased below a level of 0.05 mg/1.  Above the level of
                                                                          I
0.05 mg/1, the depletion rate remained relatively constant.  A summary

of investigations of lead concentrations in shellfish from Atlantic

coast waters and Pacific coast waters is shown in Table XII1-9.

      The work of Lambou and Lim indicates that lead is concentrated            •

in various species of the aquatic environment (56).  A compilation

of concentration factors for various organisms is summarized in                 |

Table XIII-10.                                                                  g

      McKee and Wolf reported an investigation of water hardness
                                                                          I
versus the concentration of lead in solution.  It was found that with

a total hardness of 14 mg/1 (CaCO ), that precipitation of the lead
                                                                               •
by calcium carbonate occured as the lead concentration reached 9 mg/1.         •

When the total hardness was increased to 53 mg/1  (as calcium carbon-           _

ate), the maximum concentration of lead which would remain in solution         ™

was approximately 1.6 mg/1.  Schneider (83) reported a similar low             H

toxicity for lead in waters containing 50 mg/1 hardness as calcium

carbonate.  High concentrations of calcium carbonate are therefore             •
                                                                               I

                                                                               I

-------
1
1
«•
1
1
•

1

1

1
1
1
•1
1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE XIII-8
TOX1CITY OF LEAD TO AQUATIC LIFE (66)

Species Form Concentration,
Aerobic bacteria Lead, Total 1.0
ii it n 5
Flagellates U'J
ii ii 05
Infusoria
Bacterial Decomposition " " 0.1-0.5
" " 0 1 - 0.2
Fish
Sticklebacks " " °'1 ~ °'2
Trout, 48 hours " " °'62
Daphnia magna " Chloride 0.01- 1.0
Fresh water fish " " °'33
Stickleback " Nitrate 0.16
Minnows, Stickleback " " °-53
& brown trout
ii ii i ?5
Microregma
Escherichia coli " " lt3
Bluegill sunfish " Tetraethyl 0.20
(Lepomis Macrochirus)





199


me/ 1 Remarks

Toxic
Toxic
Toxic

Inhibition
Toxic or
Lethal
Toxic or
Lethal
No visible
Harm
Deleterious
ii
Death
ii

Deleterious
11
Min. Safe
Cone.







-------
                         TABLE XIII-9



         LEAD IN SHELLFISH FROM ATLANTIC COAST WATERS


            (MAINE THROUGH NORTH CAROLINA) AND IN


            THE PACIFIC OYSTER (WASHINGTON)  (56)
                                          Lead Concentration in Tissue
                                             (mg/kg, wet tissue*)	
Species and Location



Atlantic Coast (Maine through North
                          Carolina)
      Eastern Oyster


      Northern Quahaug


      Softshell Clam


      Surf Clam


      Blue Mussell (Narragansett Bay,
                         R. I.)
      Common Rangia (Pongo River,
                         N. C.)
      Channeled Whelk (Narragansett Bay
                         R. I.)

Pacific Coast (Washington)


      Pacific Oyster
  Range
0.10 - 2.30


0.10 - 7.50


0.10 -10.20
Average





 0.47


 0.52


 0.70


 0.20


 0.20


 0.20


 3.20





 0.20
      Shucked, drained meats were homogenated, lyophilized, wet
      digested, diluted, and read by atomic absorption.
                              200
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I

-------
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
                         TABLE XI11-10
        CONCENTRATION FACTORS FOR ORGANISMS STUDIED (56)
Organism



Phytoplankton

Mollusk (Whole animals)

Zooplankton

Ocean Fish: Hard Tissue
            Soft Tissue

Fresh Water Fish: Hard Tissue
                  Soft Tissue

Clams & Oysters:  Soft Tissue

Channeled Whelk

Brown   Algae

Softshell Clam

Northern Quahaug

Eastern Oyster

Common Rangia

Surf Clam

Blue Mussel

Mo Husk-Muscle

Pacific Oyster
Concentration Factor


      40,000

       4,000

       3,000

       5,400
          35

       1,400
          15

       1,050

       1,100

         700

         230*

         170*

         160*

          70*

          70*

          70*

          40

          70*
    Assumed dissolved lead concentration of 3 ug/1 in seawater.

    Hard Tissue on basis of ash weight of bone.

    Soft Tissue on basis of live weight.
                              201

-------
capable of reducing the toxicity of lead by removal of the lead from
                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I
solution.                                                                        I




      McKee and Wolf also reported that investigations by the Cali-




fornia Water Pollution Control Research Board indicated that the




toxicity of lead on rainbow trout increased with a reduction of the




dissolved oxygen.   A factor of 1.0,  0.95, 0.85, or 0.71 should be




applied to the lethal or toxic concentration of lead as the percent              •




of saturation for dissolved oxygen decreases as follows: 100%, 80%, 60%




and 40%.                                                                         |




      In summary, it has been shown that lead is toxic at low levels             _




to man, animals, fish, and other aquatic life.  As even low concen-              ™




trations of lead are concentrated within the blood system and bone               •




structure of man, animals, fish, and other aquatic life, it is imper-




ative to control any discharge of lead into the aquatic environment.             •





TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
                                                                                I
      In the previous sections it has been noted that the carbonate




and hydroxide forms of lead are relatively insoluble.  It has also              •




been shown that a total hardness of 53 mg/1 (as calcium carbonate)




alone is capable of reducing the soluble lead to a concentration of             •




approximately 1.6 mg/1.  Lime precipitation is therefore as one process         •




by which lead may be removed from solution.  This is supported by




Weston (97) who states that chemical precipitation and sedimentation            •




is currently capable of producing an effluent concentration of 0.1-




1.4 mg/1.  As described by Patterson and Minear (76), precipitation             |




of lead as lead carbonate or lead hydroxide yields tremendous savings




in the overall cost of treatment.  Table XIII-11 outlines the treatment






                                                                               I



                              202
                                                                               I
                                                                               I

-------
1
1

1

1

1
1
^^B
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
TABLE XIII-11
TREATMENT OF LEAD IN INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS

Method Initial Cone. Effluent Cone. Reference
Total Hardness 1.6 mg/1 (66)
53 mg/1 (CaCO ) (soluble Pb)
C.P.S. * 0.1-1.4 mg/1 (97)
2.0 - 140 mg/1 Trace (76)
(Lime) 0.31 mg/1 0.1- mg/1 or less (76)
" 66.1 mg/1 (Pb Tetraethyl) Trace (76)
(FeS04)
(pH 10.4-10.3 45 mg/1 (Inorganic Pb) 1.7 mg/1 (76)
Lancy Batch Process - 0.5 mg/1 (61)
Lancy Integrated Process - 0.01 mg/1 (61)
Ion Exchange .055 mg/1 0.0015 mg/1 (76)
126.7-140.8 mg/1 0.02-.53 mg/1 (76)
* Chemical Precipitation and Settling.







203


-------
                                                                                   I
of lead in industrial wastewater.




      Patterson and Minear reported that the cost of removing lead                 I




by chemical precipitation is similar to that of removing other metals.




The cost of treating lead is shown in Table XIII-12.  While direct                 |




cost figures were shown in the literature reviewed for ion exchange,               •




it was felt that the net cost would be based on the recovery of the




lead.  Otherwise the construction and operating cost would be similar              •




to that for hexavalent chromium removal.




      In summary, it has been shown that lead is readily treatable                 I




by precipitation to a final effluent level of 0.1 mg/1 provided that               _




proper controls are available and the plant is efficiently operated.               ™




It is recognized that filtration might be required to control the sus-             •




pended solids which could contain a substantial concentration of lead.




It is also apparent that ion exchange, and processes such as the Lancy             I




Integrated System are capable of reaching final effluent levels of




0.01 mg/1 or less.  The Lancy Integrated System is currently an                    •




achievable treatment process for plants with a total discharge in the              •




range of 25-500 gpm.  It is difficult, however, to estimate its




economic feasibility for larger facilities.  It is felt that ion ex-               I




change is currently more in the realm of "best available treatment"




than "currently applicable treatment."  In the utilization of a                    •




process such as ion exchange, one must remember that the regeneration              •




brines must ultimately be disposed of.
                              204
I



I



I



I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
                         TABLE XIII-12
          COSTS FOR TREATMENT OF LEAD BY PRECIPITATION
Type



Metal Plating Ind.


Metal Plating Ind,


1  MGD


10 MGD


Precipitation
by FeSO.
Capital
Operations
$l,108/thousand gal. $.80/thousand gal


$1.62/thousand gal.* $.62/thousand gal.


$100,000


$600,000


4.2% of Total
Treatment of
Wastewater
Reference


 (76)


 (76)


 (97)


 (97)


 (76)
*   Amortized Capital Cost, interest rate and period of amortization
    were not reported.
                              205

-------
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I
I
      In general the following statements can be made relative to


lead in the environment:                                                         •


      1.  Lead occurs naturally in the aquatic environment up to                 _


          concentrations of 0.8 mg/1 with average levels of 0.01 mg/1            ^


          in surface and ground waters.                                          I


      2.  Lead is cumulative in man, animals, fish and wildlife.


      3.  A total intake of 0.1 mg/1 in water or a total of 0.6                  •


          mg/day may cause lead poisoning for hypersensitive persons


          although man excretes lead to a degree.                                •


      4.  Fish and aquatic life are capable of concentrating lead                •


          from 40-40,000 times the background aquatic levels.  Fish


          and aquatic life are sensitive to lead concentrations in               I


          the range of 0.01-0.1 mg/1.  Lead toxicity may be reduced


          in hard waters and/or in the presence of high dissolved                •


          oxygen.                                                                •


      5.  Lead is currently treatable by available means to an


          effluent level of 0.1 mg/1 for all discharges at a cost                •


          comparable to the removal of other trace metals.  Current


          achievable treatment will remove lead from some wastewaters            |


          with flows up to 1 MGD at final effluent concentrations                •


          of 0.01 mg/1 at a reasonable cost.  Ion exchange may


          yield final effluent concentrations as low as 0.0015 mg/1.             •


          Implementation of this process on a full scale, however,


          needs to be proven prior to its adoption as a best available          •


          method.                                                               _






                              206                                               •

-------
I                    On the basis of the above review, it is recommended that a
mm              uniform effluent criteria of 0.10 mg/1 be adopted.  It is further
                recommended that an average effluent concentration of 0.01 mg/1 of
I              lead be the objective of all wastewater bearing lead up to a flow
                rate of 1 MGD.
|                    It is recognized that the recommended, presently obtainable
_              effluent level of 0.1 mg/1 lead may not protect all of the aquatic
                life under continued exposure.  It has been shown, however, that
I              even the more sensitive aquatic life species are capable of withstand-
                ing higher concentrations in the 0.1 mg/1 range for short durations.
•              It has further been shown that this level would at least meet the
                recommendation of McKee and Wolf for maximum levels in the drinking
™              water for man's consumption.  It is also noted that this is below the
•              level recommended for short periods of exposure in man's drinking
                water by the U. S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards.
I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I                                            207

I

-------
 I
 I
CHAPTER XIV-MANGANESE
                       Manganese ores are very common and are widely distributed,  in
 	                                     I o                   | *•>
 I               both the  manganous,  Mn  ,  and manganic,  Mn   forms.   The oxides,


                 carbonates,  and  hydroxides of manganese  are  only sparingly soluble in


 •               water and,  therefore,  manganese ions  are not  found in natural surface


 _               waters above 1.0 mg/1  (66).


 ™                     Common industrial uses  of manganese are in steel alloy, dry


 •               cell battery,  glass  and ceramics,  paints and  varnishes,  ink and dyes,


                 match and fireworks  industries. The  manganous form of manganese  is


 •               generally used in dyeing operations,  disinfection, linseed oil driers,


                 electric  batteries,  dyeing porcelain, glazing, varnishes,  and in


 B               special fertilizers.   The  permanganate ion (MnO.)  is used  as a strong


 •               oxidant which  is normally  reduced  to  insoluble manganese dioxide  (66).


                       Due to their similar chemical properties, manganese  is often


 •               found in  the presence  of iron.   Gurnham  (48)  reports that  clarified


                 wastewaters  of the iron mining industry  after milling, flotation, and


 •               agglomeration, contain as  much as  27.6 mg/1  of manganese.   Another


 •j               similarity between iron and manganese is that manganese oxides are


                 known for creating brown or black  stains on  porcelain fixtures,


 •               laundry items, and fine papers. In contrast  to iron, however, Fair,


                 Geyer and Okun (37) , report that the  manganous form of manganese


 |               oxidizes  rather  slowly to  the insoluble  manganese  dioxide  form, while


 M               iron is rapidly  oxidized from the  ferrous to  the ferric state. Oxi-


                 dation of manganese  requires  approximately 90 minutes at a pH of  9.3


 •               and  approximately 60 minutes  at a  pH  of  9.5.





I


_                                             208

-------
                                                                                I
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF MANGANESE
      Manganese is an essential nutrient for man, animals and plants.           •
In general, manganese is not toxic to aquatic life except in concen-            _
trations exceeding 25 mg/1 (66).  The main objection of high concen-            ™
trations of manganese in surface waters is aesthetic and economic               •
damage by staining and forming of deposits.  The presence of manganese
has been found to hinder many industrial water uses.                            •

      Effect on Man
toxicity to humans near Tokyo and Manchukuo  (66).  However, they point
out that in these isolated circumstances the concentration of manganese
                                                                                I
      The 1962 Drinking Water Standards (94) reports two reasons for
limiting the concentration of manganese in drinking water.  These are:          I
(1) to prevent aesthetic and economic damage and (2) to avoid any
possible physiological effects from excessive intake.  A domestic con-          |
sumer may find a brownish color imparted to laundered goods, and an             •
objectionable taste to beverages such as coffee and tea by waters con-
taining manganese.                                                              •
      With respect to the possible physiologic effects, the Drinking
Water Standards reported hepatic cirrhosis in rats treated with very            |
large dosages however, neurological effects of manganese have not been          _
reported to result from oral ingest ion by man or animal.  McKee and
Wolf indicated that slight toxic effects to high concentrations of              fl
manganese have been reported (66).  For example, manganese may be toxic
in a concentration of 0.5-6.0 g/kg body weight when administered to             I
rabbits daily.  McKee and Wolf cite a few instances of manganese
                              209
I
I
I

-------
 I
 I
             was  far  higher  than  the  amount  that would normally be  tolerated
             aesthetically in drinking water.
                    The Drinking Water Standards  (94)  indicate  that  the  average
 ™            consumer  could  tolerate  concentration  of  manganese  of  0.01-0.02  mg/1
 •            for  aesthetic reasons.   However,  a  recommended  drinking  water  standard
              of 0.05 mg/1 was  set.
 •                 McKee and Wolf  (66)  reported  that manganese salts  will impart
              a metallic taste  to water  at  concentrations  ranging from 0.5-20  mg/1.
 •            They also indicated that manganese  in  excess of 0.15 mg/1 has  been
 •            found to  cause  turbidity problems.  Manganese has also been known to
              promote growth  of  some microorganisms  in  reservoirs filters, and dis-
 •            tribution systems.  It will also  coat  the sand  particles in rapid sand
              filters in water  treatment plant, promoting  the formation of mudballs
 •            and  clustered sand particles,  reducing the overall  efficiency  of the
 •            filter.

                   Effect on Industrial Water  Supplies
                    In  general,  manganese  ±s undesirable  in water  used  for  many
              industries.   Table XIV-1  indicates  the  limit of  tolerance of  manganese
              in  certain  industries.

                    Effect  on  Plants
I

I
                   McKee and Wolf  (66) reported that manganese is essential  for  the
•           growth of plants, apparently as an enzyme activator.  Manganese has
•           been used to enrich soil which stimulates plant  growth  (6,66).  On  the
             other hand, manganese has also been  found to be  toxic under  some
•           conditions.  Manganese  toxicities have been reported at a concentration
             of  0.5 mg/1  (6).  The toxicity depends upon the  various plant species
I
              and  conditions of nutrient  imbalance.
                                           210

-------
                          TABLE XIV-1
  INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY LIMITS FOR MANGANESE AND IRON, mg/1
Industrial Use

Air Conditioning
Baking
Brewing, Light & Dark
Canning
Carbonated Beverages

Confectionary
Cooling Water

Distilleries
Dyeing
Food Processing
Ice
Laundering
Milk Industry
Pulp & Paper
  Groundwood
  Kraft pulp
  Soda & Sulfite
  Highgrade paper
  Fine paper
  Kraft paper, Bleached
    "     "    Unbleached
Photography
Plastics (clear)
Rayon & Viscose
  Pulp production
  Manufacturing
Tanning
Textiles, General
  "       Dyeing
  "       Wool Scouring
  "       Bandages
Mn
Mn & Fe
References
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.1
0
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.03-0.1
0
0.1-0.5
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.5
0
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.2
0.1 -0.25
0.25
1.0
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2, 0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.1
0
0.2
0.2
0.2

0
1.0
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1


0
0.02
0.05
0
0.2
0.1 -0.25
0.25
1.0
0.2
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24)
(45,66)
(66)
(45,66)
(24)
(66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(66)
(24)
(24)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24)
(24)
(24)
(24)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
(24,66)
                              211
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
                     McKee and Wolf (66)  have also reported that manganese injury




•             has been found to be intensified in the presence of molybdenum,




               vanadium,  and nitrate and  diminished in the presence of cobalt, iron,




•             molybdenum, aluminum, a phosphorus  deficiency, ammonium and ammonium




               nitrate.  It is believed that nearly all species of plants are capable
I



I
I



I



I
               of tolerating up to 2 mg/1 of manganese (6).





                     Effect on Domestic Animals and Wildlife




                     Manganese has been found to be an essential nutrient for




               animals.   McKee and Wolf (66) reported that  a deficiency in manganese




               produces  ovarian disfunction, testicular degeneration, poor lactation,
               lack of growth, bone abnormalities, and disturbance  of  the  central




•             nervous system.  Manganese may have been partly  responsible for  the




               occurrence of infectious enemia  in horses at a concentration far above




M             what would be expected in a normal water supply.





•                   Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life




                     McKee and Wolf (66) report  that manganese  and  its  salts are




•             generally toxic to fish and aquatic life at a concentration greater




               than 25 mg/1.  Permanganates, are much mora toxic  to  fish than the




B             manganous salts, however.  They have been found  to kill  fish at  con-




•             centrations of 2.2-4.1 mg/1 as manganese.  Fortunately,  the per-




               manganates are readily reduced to insoluble manganese dioxide under




•             natural water conditions.




                     The conclusions and recommendations of McKee and Wolf (66)




I
               summarizing the limits of manganese in different types of water




               supplies are given in Table XIV-2.
                                            212

-------
                          TABLE XIV-2


    RECOMMENDED LIMITS OF MANGANESE IN WATER SUPPLIES (66)
Water Supply


Domestic

Industrial

Irrigation

Stock Watering

Fish & Aquatic Life
             Concentration (mg/1


                      0.05

                      0.05

                      0.50

                     10.00

                      1.00
                          TABLE XIV-3


             PROCESSES FOR MANGANESE REMOVAL (76)


Process                        Comments
Aeration

Chlorine and Hypochlorite
  Oxidation

Adjustment of pH
Catalysis

Ion Exchange




Chlorine Dioxide


Manganese Dioxide or
  Potassium Permanganate
Direct Potassium Permanganate
  Addition
Slow and ineffective below pH 9.

Not particularly effective for
organically bound manganese.

Lime soda type treatment gives
removal at pH 9.5.

Copper ion enhances air oxidation.

Effective for small quantities of
iron and manganese.  Resins quickly
fouled by iron and manganese oxides.

Rapidly oxides manganese to the
insoluble form, but expensive.
Regeneration, green sand and filter
process. Economic disadvantage of
requiring excess permanganate.

Requires sand filtration
                              213
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
 I
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - MANAGANESE REMOVAL


      Drinking Water Standards (94) indicate that manganese is


difficult to remove to residual concentrations of much less than 0.05
               mg/1.  Manganese  removal  has  been practiced  for many years  in the treat-


 •             ment  of municipal water supplies  and  industrial process  waters.   In


               general,  the  technology consists  of the  removal of  the soluble manga-


 £             nous  ion  as an  insoluble  precipitate.  Since many wastewaters contain


 _             both  manganese  and iron,  the  methods  utilized in iron removal are


 *             appropriate for the removal of  manganese.  The one  difference is  that


 •             a  pH  of 9-9.5 is  needed for removal of manganese while a pH of 7.5-8.5


               is needed for the removal of  iron (37,66).   Patterson and Minear  (76)


 •             have  summarized the effective processes  for  removal of manganese  in


               Table XIV-3.


 •                   As  reported in Patterson  and Minear  (76) , chemical oxidants to


 •             assist conversion of the  manganous ion to  insoluble manganese have


               been  used although this has also  caused  problems with filtration.  The


 •             formation of manganese floes  with strong oxidants has been  found  to


               clog  slow sand  filters.   They indicated  that utilization of chlorine,


 •             followed  by lime  coagulation, and rapid  sand filtration  was effective


 •             in the removal  of manganese,  at an initial concentration as high  as


               5.7 mg/1.  They also reported that for effective oxidation  of manganese,


 •             a  free chlorine residual  of 0.5 mg/1  was required.   The  oxidation


               utilized  1.29 mg  of chlorine  per  mg of manganese oxidized.


•                   The use of  ion exchange for iron and manganese removal was  also


mm             reported  by Patterson and Minear  (76) .   They indicated that the






I

                                            214

-------
                                                                              I
advantages of ion exchange process are:  s smaller capital investment
than for coagulation filtration, up to 4 times greater flow rates,            ™
smaller plant requirements, and simpler operation.  A disadvantage            •
of this process is that the brine utilized to regenerate the ion
exchange unit creates a major disposal problem since the manganese            I
is found to remain in a soluble form in the brine.  An additional
drawback is that an absolute anaerobic condition must be maintained           •
in the ion exchange unit to prevent the manganese being oxidized by           •
the air and forming a precipitate which will clog the ion exchange bed.
      In summary, it has been reported by both Patterson and Minear           •
(76) and Weston (97) that it is possible to obtain a final effluent
concentration of 0.05 mg/1 of manganese.  Table XIV-4 summarizes the          |
efficiencies of various units.  Table XIV-5 indicates the capital             •
costs and Table XIV-6 shows the operation and maintenance costs.  The
operation and maintenance cost and the capital investment for the             •
removal of manganese is well within the range of the cost for removing
other metals.                                                                 |

                                                                              I

                                                                              I

                                                                              I

                                                                              I

                                                                              I

                                                                              I
                              215                                             •

-------
1

1
••
1
1
1

1

1



1
•
1


1
1
1
1
1
1

1

TABLE XIV- 4


TREATMENT EFFICIENCY FOR MANGANESE REMOVAL

Process

Chlorination and lime coagulation
and filtration
Permanganate oxidation and
filtration
Permanganate oxidation plus
sodium alginate
Permanganate oxidation and
filtration
Lime coagulation, settling and
filtration
Greensand filter
Ion exchange


* Iron - mg/1 in parenthesis (however







216

Concentration, mg/1

Influent Effluent Reference

5.7 split flow (76)
used
1.0 0.05 (76)

0.35 0.02 (76)
0.05 (97)
0.05 (97)

1.7 0.0 (76)
1.7(37)* 0.1(0.5)* (76)
1.0(53) 0.0(0.3)* (76)
1.3(52)* 0.0(0.1)* (76)
, unspecified)










-------

TABLE XIV-5
CAPITAL COST FOR MANGANESE REMOVAL

Process Flow Cost
Chemical coagulation, settle 1.0 MGD 300,000
and filter 10.0 MGD 1,300,000
50.0 MGD 4,600,000
Chlorination, settle and 1.0 MGD 300,000
filter 10.0 MGD 1,300,000
50.0 MGD 4,600,000
Aeration, lime coagulation, * 75,000
settle filter and recarbonate
Greensand filter * 26,000



Reference
(97)
(97)
(97)
(97)
(97)
(97)
(76)

(76)
* Treating the same flow and wastes (however, unspecified).

TABLE XIV-6
CHEMICAL COST FOR MANGANESE REMOVAL (76)
Process Cost/1000 Gallons
Lime coagulation and 2.1
-------
I
I
                 SUMMARY  AND  RECOMMENDATIONS
flj               (1)    Manganese is normally iround with iron in the nature.
                 (2)    Manganese is found in several industrial wastewaters.
•               (3)    Manganese is a basic and essential nutrient to man, plant and
                       animal life.  Manganese damages plants only at concentrations
                       above 2 mg/1.  Manganese at a concentration below 10 mg/1 has
                       no adverse effect on animals.
I
                 (4)   Manganese  is  not  toxic  to  fish  and  aquatic  life  until the
•                    concentration approaches the  1-2 mg/1 range in the stream.
                 (5)   Current  technologies  are capable of removing manganese to less
                       than  0.05 mg/1 with reasonable  costs.
                 (6)    The major problem of manganese  in  surface  waters  is aesthetic.
•                     Based on the above summary,  it is recommended that a uniform
                 effluent criteria be established at concentration of 0.10 mg/1 for
I
                manganese.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I                                             218
I

-------
 I
 I
CHAPTER XV-MERCURY
                    Mercury was not widely  recognized as a water pollutant until

 •             1966 when  Irukayama reported  on  the  1953 mercury pollution  incident


               in Japan.   Since that date, mercury  has moved  to the  forefront  as one


 B             of the most closely watched pollutants being discharged  into our


 _             nation's waters.  The major sources  of mercury discharges are summar-


 ™             ized in Table XV-1.  All of these sources are  discussed  in  a recent


 •             publication by Selikoff  (85).


                    Chlor-alkali plants are reported to discharge from 51-85  grams


 I             of mercury per ton of chlorine produced.  It was also noted that prior


               to the recognition of mercury as an  important  pollutant  this figure


 ™             may have been much higher (85).


 •                  The  use of mercurial catalysts to convert acetylene to acet-


               aldehyde resulted in losses of mercury estimated at 300  kg/yr for one

 •             plant in Sweden (85).  Discharge concentrations for mercury slimicides


               utilized in the pulp and paper industries have not been  reported in the

 I             literature although their usage  is extensive.


 •                  The  agricultural usage  of mercury in pesticides has been  re-

               ported to  amount to not less  than 2100 metric  tons per year.  Of this

 V             amount, 400 tons per year have been  attributed to use within the

               United States.


 I



 I



I



I

                                            219

-------
                          TABLE XV-1



        MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF MERCURY POLLUTION
Mercury pigments and impregnating agents
                                                                              I
                                                                              I
                                                                              I
Chlor-Alkali Plants


Slimicide Treatment of Distribution Systems                                   •


Fungicide Treatment of Seed Grains


Combustion of Fossil Fuels                                                    ™


Disposal of mercurial antiseptics (hospital, laboratories, dental
clinics)


Disposal of mercury containing switches, rectifiers and measuring             •
devices (thermometers, barometers fluorescent tubes, mercury lamps,           •
batteries, etc.)
                                                                              I
                                                                              1
Processing of some raw materials (e.g.  coal,  carbon, chalk,
phosphates, pyrites).                                                         •



                                                                              I


                                                                              I


                                                                              I


                                                                              I


                                                                              I


                                                                              1


                                                                              I


                                                                              I
                              220

-------
 I
                     Coals in the United States contain mercury in concentrations




 •             from a few parts  per billion to several parts per million.   Based on




               an  estimated average of one part per million, the annual consumption




 •             of  500 million tons of  coal per year would  contribute 1,000,000 pounds




 •             of  mercury per year to  the environment.  This value does not include




               mercury contributed from the refinement and use  of crude oil products




 •             which may contain even  higher concentrations of  mercury (85).




                     Mercury occurs naturally in the form  of the mineral cinnabar,  a




 I             mercury sulphide, and rarely, as the free element.  These forms may




 *m             be  leached or volatilized into the water and air environments,  pro-




               viding a low but  constant background (66).




 •                   Both air pollution and natural sources of  mercury must be con-




               sidered in evaluating the total exposure of man  and animal.   Table




 J|             XV-2 summarizes both the total world consumption of mercury  and United




 »             States trends (85),




                     Lambou reports that mercury is usually discharged in one  of the




 •             five forms listed in Table XV-3 (54).  The  reactions and inter-




               conversions these forms may undergo are illustrated in Figure XV-i.




 £             Experimental work has confirmed that metallic mercury can be easily




 _             oxidized to divalent mercury under the conditions often found at the




 *             bottoms of lakes  and streams.  Under reducing conditions, metallic




 fl             mercury is stable and remains in the sediment as a reservoir which
I



I



I



I
               may be converted years later to the divalent form.

-------
                          TABLE XV-2

TOTAL WORLD PRODUCTION OF MERCURY AND TRENDS IN THE U. S. (85)
Total world production
Trends in uses of mercury
  in U. S.
    Agricultural use
    Amalgamation
    Catalyst manufacture
    Dental (c)
    Electrical equipment
    Chlor-alkali plants
    Laboratory use (b)
    Industrial controls (b)
    Paints
    Paper and pulp
    Pharmaceuticals
    Other uses (d)
    Not accounted for (e)
1968 (a)
 (tons)

 9,836
   130
    10
    73
   116
   746
   663
    75
   202
   401
    16
    16
   302
    12
  2863
Sources and export of
  Mercury in U. S.

    U.S. domestic mines         1097
    Imported                     910
    GSA sales to industry ( :)    745
    GSA transfers to govt.
        agencies                  68
    GSA transfers to inter-
        National redevelopment    91
    Redistilled (g)              316
    Secondary recovery (h)       402
    GSA stock                     86
    Exported                     289
1969 (a)
 (tons)

10,885
   102
     7
   112
   116
   710
   788
    78
   265
   370
    21
    27
   368
    42
  3006
                    1090
                    1164
                     117
                     380
                     402
                     539
                      19
                                                              Estimated
                                                              1974-1975 (b)
                                                                (tons)
 101
   9
  89
 144
 863
 869
  79
 351
 407
   9
  25
 226

3172
NOTE:   These values do not include any mercury held by General Services
        Administration or Azomic Energy Commission.
a.      U.S.D.I. Bureau of  lines, USGS 1968  1969  (Mercury).
b.      Trends in Usage of  fercury, National Materials Advisory Board,
        National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
c.      Includes redistilled mercury.
d.      Includes purchases  for expansion and new chlor-alkali plants.
e.      Mercury, chiefly from secondary recovery - uses not specified.
f.      General Services Administration
g.      This mercury is from other sources and is  given additional
             purification.
h.      This mercury is recovered from battery scrap, dental amalgrams
             and other reprocessed sources.
                              222
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 1
 I
 I
 I
I
I

-------
                                            TABLE XV-3


                      THE FORMS OF MERCURY PRESENT IN INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES
I
I
I
^                       L.   Inorganic divalent mercury - Hg
I
                          2.   Metallic mercury           - Hg°


                          3.   Phenyl mercury             - C,H Hg
 •                       4.   Methyl mercury             - CH Hg
 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

I

I

I                                             223
                         5.   Alkoxy-alkyl mercury       - CH 0-CH2CH-2Hg+

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 1
 I
 I
 1
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
FIGURE XV- i
              POSSIBLE INTERCONVERSIONS OF MERCURY COMPOUNDS

              IN NATURAL AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTS  (102) _
Hg
                                                             Hg
                                          Removal and retention by
                                          living systems
                           224

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                          TABLE XV-4



     MERCURY RESIDUES IN GRAIN AND FRUIT UNTREATED AND

       TREATED WITH PHENYL MERCURY FOLIAM SPRAY (85)



                                                Mercury (ppb)


Commodity                              Untreated             Treated



Rice                                     20-100              100-700
Mandarin orange
    Skin                                 10-50                30-240
    Pulp                                                      10-40
Apple
    Skin                                 10-50                70-310
    Pulp                                 10-50                30-130
                          TABLE XV-5



                    MERCURY IN FOODS (85)
                                                      Nanograms/gram
Food                       Country                      (range)(pp+)
Haddock                  United States                     17-23
Herring                  Baltic states                     26-41
Apples                   United Kingdom                    20-120
Apples                   New Zealand                       11-135
Pears                    Australia                         40-260
Tomatoes                 United Kingdom                    12-110
Potatoes                 United Kingdom                     5-32
Wheat                    Sweden                             8-12
Rice                     Japan                            227-1000
Rice                     United Kingdom (imports)           5-15
Carrots                  United States                        20
White bread              United States                      4-8
Whole milk               United States                      3-10
Beer                     United States                        4
                              225

-------
                                                                                 I
      Both phenyl and alkoxi-alkyl mercury have been reported to under-          _
go conversion to methyl mercury through inorganic divalent mercury               •
(54).                                                                            •
      Divalent mercury has a strong affinity for organic muds and
has been shown to be biochemically methylated in the benthic sediments.          •
Two products are possible from this reaction, monomethyl and dimethyl
mercury.  The monomethyl form is accumulated by aquatic organisms,               •
while the dimethyl form is apparently lost through evaporation to the            •
atmosphere.  High pH favors the formation of the dimethyl form.  The
methylation of mercury is not only rapid but is also reported to be              •
enhanced by anaerobic conditions (85) .
      In Sweden, regardless of the nature of the mercury pollutant,              |
only methyl mercury has been found in fish, indicating that a methyl-            •
ation of mercury compounds also takes place in the fish itself (54) .
Jernelov (102) found that the mucus on pike is able to convert inor-              •
ganic bivalent mercury almost completely into methyl mercury within
a short period of 2-4 hours.                                                      |
      Mercury in natural aquatic systems is apparently converted to               «
the methylated form regardless of the form in which it was intro-
duced.  In reviewing the impact of mercury on the environment it will             •
be seen that not only is this form the most toxic, but it is also the
form most easily retained by living creatures.
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF MERCURY
      Effect on Man
I
      Prior to 1963, it was reported that adults could safely consume             •
water containing from 4-12 mg of mercury per day and that a fatal
                               226
I
I

-------
  I
  I
dose of mercury from such water would be about 75-300 mg/day (66).


It is now believed that water is not the critical mode of ingestion


For man.  Exposures of the general populace to toxic concentrations
  I
                ol mercury is likely to result from the consumption of contaminated


  •             fish and possibly other food and not directly through water or air.


                The tragic outbreaks of the so-called Minanata disease in Japan have


  ™             been attributed to the long term consumption of fish which had con-


  •             centrated methyl mercury from polluted waterways (85).  Such a mech-


                anism is extremely important in nations like Japan where the normal


  •             diet of the population contains a high percentage of fish and sea-


                food.


 m                   There have been other incidents of mercurial poisoning in Iraq,


 •             Pakistan and Guatemala where farmers receiving fungicide treated


                seed grain ate the seed instead of planting it.  Table XV-4 illus-


 •             trates the variation of mercury content between treated and untreated


                food stuffs.  Table XV-5 gives the mercury residues found in a number


 |             of food products from a variety of world markets.


 •                   The potential contamination of fish and shellfish is obviously


                critical in determining the hazards associated with mercury dis-


 •             charges.  Recognition of the natural methylation of mercury in the


                environment and the concomitant biological magnification in success-


 J|             ive predators requires setting criteria at the lowest feasible level


 _              if we are to maintain the safety of commercial fisheries.


 *                    It is difficult to calculate threshold levels for toxic effects


 •              on humans due to the intermittent nature of the exposure in the re-


                ported cases of chronic mercury poisoning.  For acute, single dose


I
I
                             227

-------
                                                                                 I


exposures mercuric chloride and all the organomercurials tested                  _



fell into the extremely toxic catagory, (LD,_n,  are between 5 and                ™
                                           J \J S


50 mg/kg).   The levels of mercury contamination necessary to induce              •



chronic poisoning have not been reported in the literature.  This



is due to the difficulty of ascertaining the eating habits of the                •



affected individuals and problems inherent in relating mercury con-



centrations ingested to mercury concentrations in fish caught after              9



the incident.  The situation is further complicated by the fact that             •



there can be several weeks delay between the ingestion of the critic-



al amount of mercury and the onset of symptoms.  This could result               •



in acute cases being diagnosed as chronic.  The symptoms of alkyl



mercury poisoning are indicative of damage to brain tissue and are               •



in many cases irreversible.                                                      •



      Prenatal and postnatal exposures are also of importance.



Acute and chronic exposures can be readily passed through the pla-               •



cental barriers to the fetus and also to infants through the mother's



milk.  Studies in both man and animals indicated a concentration of              ||



mercury within the fetal blood about 20% higher than that in the                 •



mother (54).  Silikoff reports that the concentration may be 30%



higher in the fetal red blood cells than in the red blood cells of               •



the mother (85).



      Children born of mothers exposed to methyl mercury have been               j|



found to suffer from symptoms approaching a cerebral palsy like                  «



disease.  The disease varies in severity from mild to moderate spas-             *



ticity and ataxia, to severe intellectual retardation, seizures,                 B



and evidence of generalized brain damage.
                              228
I



I

-------
 I
                       Lambou reports that about 15% of the total body accumulatin




 •               of methyl mercury is found within the brain cells.   It was found




 _               that neurological symptoms begin to manifest themselves when the




 *               brain cells contain about 0.020 rag/gram (20ppb)  of  mercury in the




 B               wet tissue in the brain.




                       The threshold mechanism appears to be due  to  the number of




 •               damaged brain cells rather than the methyl mercury  threshold.  Rapid




                 damage of many brain cells could clinically be reported erroneously




 •               as the methyl mercury threshold (54).




 •                     The alkyl mercury compounds have also been reported to damage




                 gametes prior to fertilization and to increase the  frequency of




 •               chromosone breaks in Swedish fishermen whose blood  levels of methyl




                 mercury were higher than the general population. These elevated




 W               levels were attributed to their high dietary intake of fish (102).





 I                     Effect on Mammals and Birds




                       Reports indicate that many mammals and birds  are affected by




                 mercury poisoning through the consumption of contaminated fish.




                 Study of the Minanata incident shows that cats had  been dying before
I
                 humans were noticably affected.   Experimentally,  cats have been killed
I



I



I



I



I



I
                 by  feeding  them  fish  and  shellfish  containing  5.7  ppm mercury.   Both




                 acute  and chronic  toxic concentrations  of  methyl mecuric  chloride




                 have been reported for cats  and rats.   The toxic concentrations  for




                 cats have been found  to be between  10-50 mg/kg.  Most acute  cases




                 of  poisoning had received a  20 mg/kg  oral  dose and chronic effects




                 were noted  at a  concentration of  1  mg/kg per day.   Similarly,  rats
                                              229

-------
                                                                                 I
have been shown to be acutely poisoned at concentrations of 20 mg

mercury per 100 grams delivered orally and to show chronic effects               •

of poisoning after oral dosages of 1-2 mg/100 gm/day (85).                       •
      The retention time of methyl mercury in the tissues of various

species tested varied widely.  The experimental half-lives are shown             •

in Table XV-6.

      The toxic concentrations of methyl mercury to birds have been              |

found to be about the same as those for laboratory mammals, approx-              m*

imately 12-20 mg/kg.  The mercury residue found in the liver and

kidney of birds killed experimentally with treated seed ranged from              •

30-130 ppm for pheasant, 70-115 ppm for jackdaws, and 50-200 ppm for

magpies.  In pheasants, it was also found that the level in the mus-             g

cles ranged from 20-45 ppm.  Liver and kidney residues of approxi-               «
mately 30 ppm seemed to be associated with the onset of critical                 *

symptoms in the subject birds.  A normal level would be less than                •

1 ppm (85) .
      Toxicity to secondary consumers is also of concern.  It was                •
found that goshawks and ferrets died within 2-3 weeks after eating               _
hens which had fied from methyl mercury poisoning.  It was also                  ™
found that hawks and owls which had eaten seed-eating prey with con-             •

centrations up to 140 ppm had died with levels of 300 ppm.  Deaths

of secondary  consumers can be expected as the result of successive               •

concentration of mercury levels through lower trophic levels  (85).
      Methyl mercuric chloride has been placed in the acute toxicity             •

ranking of organic  chemicals found in fresh water as determined by               •
the LD,.,, in mammals using oral administration.  It ranks number 2
                              230
I
I

-------
 I
 I
                                           TABLE XV-6



                       BIOLOGICAL HALF TIMES OF METHYL-MERCURY RESIDUES
                Species                                 Approximate Half-Times  (days)
  |                                IN VARIOUS SPECIES (101)


  I


  I


  I
               Mouse                                                   8


               Rat                                                     16


               Young dogs                                              20


•             Squirrel Monkey                                         65
               Man                                                     70


               Seal                                                    500


               Poultry                                                 25


               Molluscs                                                700


               Crab                                                    400


               Pike                                                    700


               Flounder                                                1000


               Eel                                                     1000
 I


 I


 I


 I


 I

 B              (a)    Half-Times  is  the  Time  for  excretion  of  1/2  body  burden.


 I


 I


I


I

•                                            231

-------
                                                                                  I
with the concentration of 099 mg/kg, and as number 11 in the range


of 100-199 mg/kg.  Two other organic mercury compounds have also                  •


been listed in the ranking of acute toxicity of potential organic


pollutants as determined by the LD _ in mammals using oral admin-                 •


istration.  They are ranked as number 55th Diethyl mercury at a                   •


concentration of 50-99 mg/kg; and, as number 96th ethyl mercuric


chloride at a concentration of 200-299 mg/kg (59).                                •


      Effects on Fish and Other Aquatic Life                                      _


      McKee and Wolf report that mercuric ions are considered to be


highly toxic to all forms of aquatic life (66).  A concentration of               •


mercury within the range of 0.004-0.02 mg/1 (as mercury) has been


reported to be harmful to fresh water fish.  Table XV-7 summarizes                •


the toxic concentrations of the various forms of mercury to various               _


species of fish and aquatic life.                                                 ™


      A concentration of 1.0 mgl of mercury, as mercuric chloride,                tt


has been found to reduce the rate of oxygen utilization in BOD tests


by 80%.  Mercuric chloride has also been shown to increase in tox-                •


icity from 0.02-0.2 mg/1 for sewage organisms.  The mecuric metals


which form the most insoluble sulfides have been found to be the


most toxic (15).  Mercuric compounds were found in a study in Denmark


to be concentrated by pike.  A mercury content of 0.07 ppb was found


to be concentrated within pike as much as 3,000 times  (102).                      •


      Concentrations of methyl mercuric chloride in waters receiving


acetaldehyde plant wastes have been reported at 14.4 mg/1 and con-                V


centrations of mercury in fish varied from 9-88 mg/kg of dry weight


(60).



                                                                                  I
I


I
I
                              232
I

-------
1
1
1
1
•P
1

1

1

1
^v

1

1

1
•
1

1

1
1
1
1
1
TABLE XV- 7
TOXIC CONCENTRATIONS OF MERCURY
Adapted From McKee and

Form Conc.,mg/l

Mercury Chloride 0.008
(as Hg) 0.01
" 0.01
0.011
0.02
0.15
0.2
0.03
0.03
Mercuric Cyanide 0.02
(as Hg)
0.15
" " 0.20
0.16
Mercuric Nitrate 0.015
(as Hg(N03)2
0.015
1.00
Mercuro-Organics 0.02-1.4
0.02-1.4
Phenylmercuric acetate 0.01
Mercuric acetate 0.02-0.05
Phenylmercuric acetate 0.005-0.01



233
ON AQUATIC LIFE
Wolf (66)

Species Remarks

Sticklebacks Injury or kill
Sticklebacks " "
Minnows " "
Sticklebacks Threshold
Guppies Injury or kill
Microregma Threshold
Escherichia coli "

Scenedesmus "
Daphnia magna "
Daphnia magna "

Scenedesmus "

Escherichia coli "
Microregma "
Isopod 1st Response

Fish (Stickleback) "
Polychaete " "
Minnows Fatal
Shiners "
Young Salmon Max. Safe Cone
" " " " "
Daphnia pulex " " "





-------

A temperature effect on mercury toxiclty has also been reported
by Lambou (54) . An investigation of the toxicity of various organic
mercury compounds to fingerling channel catfish is summarized in the
Table XV-8.

TABLE XV-8
TOXICITY OF ORGANIC MERCURY COMPOUNDS ON
FINGERLING CHANNEL CATFISH (54)
TLm in mg/1
Chemical Temperature 24 hrs. 48 hrs. 72 hrs 96 hrs.
°C
Phenylmercuric 19 4.1 3.4* 3.3 3.3
acetate
Pyridylmercuric 24 3.8 	 0.49 	
acetate
Ceresan M (a) 19 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6
Lignasan (b) 19 2.0** 2.2 1.7 1.3
Tag 10% solution (c) 20 1.5 0.78 0.60 0.58
* At 45 hours
** At 28 hours
(a) Ethyl mercury p-toluene sulfonanilide, 7.7 percent (total
mercury as metallic, 3.2 percent)
(b) Ethylmercuric phosphate, 6.25 percent
(c) Phenylmercuric acetate, 10 percent.



910.
I
1

1


I
1
I

1




I

1
1
1


1
1
1
1

-------
I
 I
                       Effect on Plants
•                     It has been reported that a concentration of 0.5 mg/1 mercury




                 added as mercuric chloride caused a 50% inactivation of photosyn-




•               thesis in giant kelp during a four day exposure, and that a concen-




•               tration of 0.1 mg/1 decreased photosynthesis by 15% in one day, with




                 complete inactivation after four days (6).  A minimum lethal concen-




•               tration of mercuric salts has been reported in the range of 0.9-60




                 mg/1 for phytoplankton.




I                     Selikoff reported that the organic compounds of mercury may




M               produce genetic mutations and chromosomal aberrations in certain




                 systems of plants (85).





£               TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY




_                     A review of current literature in the field of industrial waste




™               treatment (48,61,72) indicates that very little is known or reported




•               on the treatment and control of mercury waste discharges.  The report




                 by Lelikoff (85) and more recent works indicate that control of a




•               mercury discharge is feasible at least from the production of chlor-




                 alkali.




m                     Selikoff reported on nine process and housekeeping changes that




•               were able to produce a tenfold decrease in mercury discharges from




                 chlor-alkali plants in Sweden (85).  These procedures, current and




•               planned, are listed below.




                       1.  Cooling the hydrogen gas to less than 0° at 2 atm of




•I                         pressure and returning condensate to decomposer




                       2.  Returning condensate obtained by cooling chlorine gas to




                           the brine solution.






I
                                               235
 I

-------
                                                                                 I
      3.   Separating waste streams and using epoxy on concrete floors
          to prevent entrapment of mercury
      4.   Enlarging and improving sedimentation basins.                           •
      5.   Filtering wastewater through activated charcoal.
      6.   Treating wastewater with disulfide and subsequent                      |
          coagulation,  sedimentation and filtration.                              .
      7.   Treating waste by means of ion exchange,  probably after
          pre-treatment by another method.                                       I
      8.   Improving procedures for reactivating cell anodes.
      9.   Recirculating all water used in production.                            •

      A summary of the  improvements made in the mercury discharge                •
from a chlor-alkali plant in Sweden is presented in Table XV-9.
      In testimony presented to the Illinois Pollution Control Board,            |
R. F. Weston indicated  that total mercury could be reduced by ion                M
exchange to a total effluent level of 0.002-0.005 mg/1 (97).  He also
estimated the capital cost to be $1.2 million for a 10 MGD treatment             •
facility, or $120/1000  gallons.
      A recent report (9) indicates that mercury may be reduced in               J|
the atmosphere at chlor-alkali plants to a level of one ppb or as                ^
low as 6 mg/metric ton  of chlorine produced.  One of the techniques             *
developed by B. P. Chemical Company consists of a process which                  I
washes the mercury laden vent gases in hydrogen with a solution of
sodium hypochlorite and sodium chloride at a pH of about 9-10.5.                 •
It was reported that the chloride ion keeps the mercury in solution
as a complex salt.  Mercury is then recovered by blending of the                 •

                                                                                 I
                              236

-------
 I
I



I
                scrubber solution with a brine, which then enters an amalgam cell,
                or electrolytic or chemical reduction process.




 •                   The B. P. Chemical Company process was reported to have an




                installation cost of approximately $665,000 for a 60,000 metric ton




 |             facility in England.  The operating costs were reported not to ex-




 _             ceed $250 per year for the scrubbing chemicals used and an annual




                maintenance cost of $7,000 per year.




 •                   A second process has been developed by Monsanto Company Enviro-




                Chemical Division.  Their process utilizes the adsorption of mercury




 •             onto a specially formulated adsorbent.  After complete utilization




 _             of the adsorbent, Monsanto Envir-Chem states that the canisters




 ™             containing the adsorbent may be returned to them for disposal.  Re-




 B              portedly, they have two processes for disposing of the mercury con-




                taining adsorbents which do not contribute to environmental pollution.




 •                    A review of the report prepared for EPA by General Technology




                Corp. (42) on the waste of the inorganic chemical alkali and chlorine




 •              facilities indicates an average wastewater discharge of 20,000 gallons




 •              per ton of chlorine produced in a chlor-alkali plant.  This flow fac-




                tor of 20,000 gallons per ton of chlorine produced can be applied to




 •              the data shown above in Selikoff's report.  The data then indicate




                that mercury concentration for the new plant at Stenungsund, 1969,




 •              would equal 0.0362 mg/1 and technically possible mercury levels by




 •              1970 would range from 0.0070-0.01466 mg/1.  This data compares




                favorably with that of Weston who indicated an achieveable level of
                                              237

-------

0.002-0.005 mg/1.
Mr. Frank Hall of the Enforcement Division of EPA, Headquarters
has indicated that an effluent level of 0.1 pounds of mercury per
day has successfully been obtained through various legal actions on
several chlor-alkali plants in recent years. This maximum effluent
criteria of 0.1 pounds per day can not be applied indiscriminately
to other types of mercury discharges. However, it has been defined
as technically feasible for plants utilizing either the B. P. or
Monsanto processes as discussed above (9) .

TABLE XV-9
MERCURIAL DISCHARGE FROM CHLOR-ALKALI PLANTS IN SWEDEN (85)

Loss of mercury (g/ton of chlorine)
Range New plant at technically
Loss to Aug. 1967 Stenungsund, 1969 possible in 1970
Water 30-40 0.55 0.01-0.1
H2 gas 5-10 0.4 0.01
Alkali 1-10 0.8 0.01-0.5
Ventilation 15-25 1.0 0.5
Total 51-85 2.75 0.53-1.11




238
I
1

1

1
1

1

1
1

1

1
•
•
*


1
1
1
1
1
1

-------
I
I
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
                1.     The  largest  single  man  made  source  of  mercury is  the production


•                    of chlorine  in chlor-alkali  plants.  There are, however,


                      numerous  other industrial  and  commercial  sources  of  mercury


I                    pollution.


«              2.     Mercury  is toxic  in all forms,  but  in  the aquatic environment


                      it is  converted to  its  most  toxic form, methyl mercury.   In


•                    the  form of  methyl  mercury it  may be rapidly absorbed by  fish


                      and  other forms of  aquatic life.  Mercury is subject to biolog-


•                    ical magnification, that is, increasing residue concentrations


_                    in the higher  trophic levels.


™              3.     The  principal  danger to man  is  from the ingestion of mercury


B                    contaminated fish and foodstuffs.   Such ingestion may cause


                      genetic,  nerve, or  barin damage and/or death. An additional


•                    concentration  effect in fetal  blood and tissues is noted.


                      Methyl mercury accumulates so  well  that repeated  minute  intake


™                    during a prolonged  period  can  kill  or  create permanent dis-


•                    ability.
I

I

I

I

I

I
4.    The fatal dose of mercury for man could range from 75-300


      mg/day.


5.    Mercury has been found to be 20% higher in the fetal blood


      of mammals than in the mother


6.    A mercury concentration of 0.5-0.9 mg/1 has been reported as


      the lethal concentration to plant life.


7.    Organic mercury may produce genetic mutations and chromosomal


      aberrations in plants.
                              239

-------
                                                                                  I
8.     Secondary poisoning by mercury in birds and mammals if of                   •




      importance.




9.     Harmful concentrations of mercury for fresh water fish have                 f




      been found to be within the range of 4-20 ug/1                              —




10.   Methyl mercury chloride ranks as the second most toxic                      ™




      organic chemical to animal life through injection by the                    B




      oral route.




11.   Chlor-alkaLi plants are capable of achieving effluent levels                I




      below 0.1 Lb/day with existing technology, and levels of 0.002-




      0.005 mg/1 are feasible in treated discharges.                              •





      It is the public policy of the Environmental Protection Agency              •




as stated by the Administrator, Mr. William Ruckelshaus, that there




should be no man-made discharges of mercury.  An appropriate inter-               •




pretation of Mr. Ruckelshaus1 statement would mean a non-detectable               •




concentration of mercury.




      On the basLs of the above conclusions, it is readily apparent               •




that mercury should be maintained at an absolute minimum level.  It




                                                                                  I
                                                                                 I
is recognized that for some industries this may necessitate a change




of product, or of materials and/or processes utilized.  It is recom-




mended that an interim maximum uniform effluent criterion of 0.005




mg/1 be adopted for all discharges.  It is further recommended that              •




a maximum total discharge of 0.1 pounds/day be adopted for all chlor-




alkali plants.                                                                   f
                              240
                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I

-------
  I
  •                    It  cannot  be  overstressed  that  our objective  is  to  reach  a
                 total  non-existent  discharge  of  mercury into  the  aquatic  environment.
  |              Therefore,  our objective  is a non-detectable  concentration of mercury
  •              in  all surface and  ground waters.   Currently,  the limit of detection
                 of  mercury  by flameless atomic adsorption,  as  described in W.Q.O.
  I              Methods for Chemical  Analysis of Water and  Wastes,  April  1971 is
                 ten nanograms per liter  (0.000010 mg/1).
  I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

I

I
•                                             241

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                        CHAPTER XVI-NICKEL
                       Natural  aquatic  concentrations  of  nickel  are  found  as  the


•                divalent  nickel  ion  or its  complexes.  Nickel is  leached  from its


                  ores  and  minerals.   Nickel  salts  are  noted  for  their  solubility  and


B                characteristic green color.   Table XVI-1 gives  the  concentrations


                  of nickel found  in nature.
                 INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
                       The primary source of nickel pollution  in surface waters is


_               the metal plating and metal finishing industry.  The second major


*               source is the manufacture of nickel-copper alloys known as monels.


•               Most monels consist of 63-67% nickel and 30%  copper.  Other nickel


                 copper alloys known as cupro nickel consist of more than 50% copper


•               (24).  Various concentrations found in these  industrial wastewaters


                 are summarized in Table XVI-2.  Other industrial uses of nickel are
                 in the manufacture of synthetic ink, brown ceramic colors and the


•               dyeing and printing of fabrics.


                       In discussing the disposal of nickel bearing wastewaters,


•               Nemerow (72), reported that nickel concentrations discharged to


                 municipal sewers should not contain Tiore than 2-5 mg/1 nickel.  He
                 reported that 2.0 mg/1 will be toxic to the bacteria utilized in


                 sludge digestion.



                 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF NICKEL


                       Effects on Animals and Plants


                       Tables XVI-3 and XVI-4 summarize the toxic concentration of


                 nickel to certain plants and animals.  While the U. S. Public Health
                                              242

-------
                                                                                 I
Drinking Water Standards (94) do not have a limit on nickel, Water
Quality Criteria Data Book Volume 2 (105) indicates that the



Russians have placed a maximum permissible concentration at 0.1 mg/1
                          TABLE XVI-1



             CONCENTRATION OF NICKEL IN NATURE (6)






      Sources*                                  Concentrations
      *  Nickel sources as their salts.
McKee and Wolf report that while there is no data on the toxicity
                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I
      Seawater                                     0.0054 mg/1



      Marine Plants                               Up to 3 mg/1                  •



      Marine Animal                                0.4025 mg/1



      Serpentine Rocks                          400-5,000 mg/kg                 •



      Natural Soil                                5-100   mg/kg                 •
                                                                                I



                                                                                I
                                                                                I
of nickel to man, it is believed to be Jow.  They did indicate,


however, that nickel in the water supply  may hinder the growth of               •


the liver in amphibia, reptiles, birds, and mammals (66).







                                                                               I




                                                                               I




                                                                               I

                              243

-------
1

1
1

1
w


1
1
1

1



TABLE XV I- 2
CONCENTRATION OF NICKEL IN CERTAIN INDUSTRIAL
Source

Plating wastewaters

Plating and pickling
operation
Metal finishing waste
Electroplating waste
* Flow of 100 gpm
** Flow of 50 gpm



Concentration (mg/1)
11.3 mg/1 avg.
5.0-35 mg/1 range*
12.6 mg/1 avg.
6.0-32 mg/1 range**
30-300 mg/1
5.0-58 mg/1


TABLE XVI-3

TOXIC CONCENTRATION OF NICKEL TO CERTAIN
1
•
1

1
1



•

Plants
Flax (water culture)
Horse beans and corn
Citrus plants
Sugar beets
Tomatoes
Potatoes
Oats
Kale
* with molybdenum,

Toxic Level
0.5 mg/1*
any cone .
unspecified
injurious level
15.9-29.4 mg/1**



symptoms were reduced


WASTEWATERS
Reference

(72)

(72)

(16)
(14)




PLANTS

Reference
(66,6)
(66)
(66)
(66)




** grown in a nutrient solution sand culture
1
1

1






244






-------
                          TABLE XVI-4

      TOXIC CONCENTRATIONS OF NICKEL TO CERTAIN ANIMALS

Animals            Cone.                   Effect              Reference
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
Biological Sludge  2.0 mg/1                toxic                 (72)
Rats               5.0 mg/1*               increased mortality   (66)             m
Cats & dogs        (4-12 mg of Ni(Ac)  or  non toxic             (59)             •
                   NiCl2 per kg of body                                           •
                   weight) over 200 days                                          _
*   Nickel in drinking water with a selenium solution (11 mg/1
    cone.) - Synergism suggested.                                                 B
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                               245                                                 I

-------
 I
 •                    Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life


                       One study reviewed by McKee and Wolf indicated that nickel


 I              may be more toxic to fish than iron or manganese.   However, they


                 also reported that fish were found living in waters polluted with


 |              mine effluent containing 13-18 mg/1 of nickel.  In general, McKee


 mm              and Wolf report the nickel is less toxic to fish and river crabs


                 than copper, zinc, brass, or iron.


 •                    McKee and Wolf reported that nickel readily combines with


                 cyanide to form a nickel cyanide ccmplex which is relatively stable.


 •              One Ni-CN complex with a concentration as high as 100 mg/1 (as cyanide)


 _              was found to be not harmful to fish life if moderately alkaline


 *              conditions prevailed.  A review of the data presented in the Water


 fl              Quality Data Book, Volume 3 (42) indicates that nickel, as nickel
 I

 I
I

I

I
chloride, is much more toxic to fish and aquatic life in soft water


than it is in hard water: 4-5 mg/1 nickel chloride is toxic in soft


water while 24-42 mg/1 is toxic in hard water.


      With respect to marine plant life, a nickel concentration of


2.0 mg/1 has been found to cause a 50% reduction of photosynthesis
I
                 in kelp (15).   On a similar note, McKee and Wolf report that a con-

•               centration of  2.5 mg/1 of nickel oxide from nickel sulfate in a

                 water culture  has caused plants to wilt and die.

•                     As noted in Table XVI-4, Nemerow (72) indicated that 2.0 mg/1

•               of nickel is toxic to the sludge digestion process.  McKee and Wolf

                 report that a  nickel concentration of 3.6 mg/1 as nickel sulfate
                              246

-------
                                                                                I
has caused a 50% reduction in the oxygen utilization in synthetic
sewage.                                                                         m
      In summary, little is known about the toxicity of nickel to               •
man.  Nickel's toxicity to plant life has been noted as well as its
effect on certain animals and wildlife.  The presence of nickel, for            •
example, may have a hindering effect on the growth of the liver but
the actual toxic concentration has not been reported.  Sticklebacks             •
are known to have a lethal limit of 0.8 mg/1 of nickel while other              •
forms of fish and aquatic life appear to have greater resistance to
nickel toxicity.  In general, it has been found that nickel is more             I
toxic to aquatic life in soft water than in hard water.
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - NICKEL REMOVAL
                                                                                I
      Process modification and good housekeeping to reduce accidental           fl
spills and to reduce dragout loss of nickel from plating bath solu-
tions have been recommended by both Nemerow (72) and Patterson and              •
Minear (76).  After waste reduction and in plant process changes,               _
an economical treatment system can be utilized for nickel destruction           •
(i.e., precipitation and disposal) or recovery of higher concentra-             •
tions of nickel, possibly followed by destruction of diluted wastes.

      Destructive Treatment                                                     •
      Nickel forms an insoluble precipitate, nickel hydroxide, which            •
is effectively removed at a pH of about 9.5 or above.  Nickel
hydroxide has a minimum theoretical solubility of 0.01 mg/1 at a                I
pH of 10.  While the removal of nickel as nickel hydroxide is most
effective at a high pH, little efficiency is gained above a pH of               |
10 (76).                                                                        -

                              247
                                                                                I

-------
I
•                    Both Patterson and Minear (76)  and Weston (97)  report that

                the addition of lime is effective in  raising the pH to the desired

I              level for the precipitation of nickel hydroxide.  They indicate
I

I

I

I
I

I
that the nickel in most wastewaters can be effectively reduced to

a final effluent of less than 1.0 mg/1.

      A modification of the normal lime coagulation, precipitation,

sedimentation process is the Lancy Process as reported by Lund (43).

As mentioned in other reports on electroplating wastes, the Lancy

system (integrated process) utilizes a chemical solution (lime) to

rinse the dragout plating solution from the material.  The chemical

solution is allowed to precipitate the metals which are then recycled,
I
                      Recovery Processes

•                    Patterson and Minear report that the processes currently used

                for the recovery of nickel are countercurrent rinsing,  direct reuse,

•              ion exchange,  evaporative recovery,  electrolytic recovery,  and re-

•              verse osmosis.   The more usually employed methods are countercurrent

                rinsing and direct reuse both of which reduce the total volume of

•              the flow,  concentrating the nickel within the waste thereby reducing

                the cost of nickel recovery.   Patterson and Minear reported that

I              nickel bearing wastes ranging in concentrations from 100-900 mg/1

•              have an estimated recovery value of  $.80-$7.00 per thousand gallons.

                      Patterson and Minear gave one  example where the use of counter-

H              current flow with multiple rinse tanks allowed for direct reuse of

                the nickel plating solution dragout  and resulted in a final nickel

I              concentration of only 0.9 mg/1 in the final rinse (76).
                              248

-------
                                                                      I
      As reported by Patterson and Minear, the other most commonly    I
utilized means of recovery which does not necessitate further treat-
ment, is the use of ion exchange.  Their data indicated that the      B
additional cost of ion exchange was rapidly offset by the value of    •
the nickel recovered.  However, they did not discuss the treatment or
further disposal of the regeneration waste from the ion exchange unitfl
      The remaining three recovery processes reported by Patterson
and Minear, evaporative recovery, electrolytic recovery, and reverse  I
osmosis, all necessitated further nickel removal from the diluted     •
wastewaters following nickel recovery prior to disposal.  In general,
it would appear that these processes are feasible for recovering highH
concentrations of nickel.  The wastewaters from these facilities
with a residual nickel concentration of approximately 20-30 mg/1,     |
can be treated by lime coagulation, precipitation, and sedimentation  mt
to a final effluent of less than 1.0 mg/1.
      A summary of the various treatment piocesses and their effi-    I
ciencies is given in Table XVI-5.  The initial installation cost of
various methods of treating nickel for either destruction or re-
covery are summarized in Table XVI-6 and the chemical and operating   _
costs for the treatment units are given in Table XVI-7.               ™
      From the standpoint of treatment feasibility and economics,     I
both recovery of concentrated nickel bearing wastes and destruction
of lower concentrations of nickel bearing wastes are achievable.      •
Selection of the most appropriate method of destruction and/or
recovery naturally needs to be evaluated on an individual basis by
                              249
I
I

-------
1
1

1
1

1

1

1





1








1
1
1
1
1
1


the industry. The value of recycled nickel, however, will be an
incentive to reduce the volume of nickel bearing
facilitating nickel recovery and/or destruction.
TABLE XVI-5
REMOVAL EFFICIENCY OF NICKEL FROM INDUSTRIAL

Nickel Concentration, mg/1
Process Initial Final

Lime coagulation
100 1.5 @ ph
with filtration 	 0.1 - 1.9
with filtration 21 0.09- 1.9
35 0.4
w/Separon NP-10 39 0.17
(Plating Waste) 15 0.5
Lancy Batch Electroplating 3-4
Lancy Integrated " 0.5
Lancy Integrated " Less than
Ion Exchange 870 Complete
60,000 Reclaimed
Recovery & Destruction
Evaporative recovery High
Electrolytic recovery,
& Reverse Osmosis 20 - 30
followed by Lime
coagulation 20-30 1.0





250
wastewater thereby


WASTEWATERS


Reference


= 9.9 (76)
(97)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(66)
(66)
1.0 max (64)
Removal (76)
(76)


(76)










-------
TABLE XVI-6
I


Process

Lime Coagulation


Evaporation
Recovery
Reverse Osmosis


CHEMICAL


Process

Lime Coagulation
Recovery Value

Ion Exchange
Evaporation
Recovery








1
Capital Cost/
Flow Cost 1000 Gal. Reference
1
0.45 MGD 187,000 $1,108 (1966) (76)
1.0 MGD 300,000 300 (1971) (97)
10.0 MGD 1,300,000 130 (1971) (97) •
50.0 MGD 4,600,000 92 (1971) (97) •
400 GPH 45,000 _
50 GPH 5,000- 6,000 6.42 - 7.71 •
500 GPD 10,000-20,000 •
1
TABLE XVI-7 |
COST FOR NICKEL REMOVAL OR RECOVERY (76) __
1
Initial Operation Recovery
Ni cone, (mg/1 Cost Value B
1
35 SOc/1000 gal @ 0.45 MGD •
150 - 900 $0.80-7.00/1000 _
gal. J
52«?/lb. nickel
recovered •
— (400 GPH $100,000/yr.
1
1
1
1
1
1
251 -
1

-------
I
I
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS


    On the basis of the literature reviewed and the above discussions,

the following can be stated:
              1.   Nickel is found in natural soils at concentrations ranging from


•                5-100 mg/kg and in serpentine rock at concentrations of 400-


                  5,000 mg/kg.


              2.   Nickel is present in several industrial wastes,  predominately


mm                from metal finishing and plating industries.


              3.   Little is known of its toxicity to man and no limit has been set


•                for nickel in the 1961 Drinking Water Standards.   In general,


                  the toxicity of nickel to man is believed to be  very low.


•            4.   Nickel is toxic to plants,  and naimals.  The lowest toxic  level


_                reported was  C.5 mg/1 (water culture) to flax.


              5.   Nickel may hinder the growth of the liver in animals; the  con-


•                centration has  not been reported in the literature reviewed.


              6.   Nickel complexes with cyanide, however, it is reported as  not


•                toxic to fish life at a concentration of 100 mg/1 (as cyanide)


                  in alkaline waters.   The lowest toxic concentration to fish has


•                been reported for the stickleback fish at 0.8 mg/1.  The toxicity


•                of nickel decreases  by a factor of approximately 7-10 in soft


                  water as compared to hard waters.


I            7.   Nickel is economically recovered from concentrated waste streams,


                  sometimes at  a  profit.   Therefore, treatment cost of nickel may


I                be substantially less than that for treating and removing  other


•                metals.


              8.   Nickel is removed from solution by precipitation with lime to a


•                final effluent  concentration of less than 1.0 mg/1.



•                                         252

-------
                                                                       I
    While nickel is substantially less harmful to most forms of life
than many of the other trace metals, it is toxic to plants and po-
tentially toxic to animals and fish life.   On the basis of the above   •
review it is recommended that a uniform effluent concentration be
set at 1.0 mg/1 as nickel.  Should future studies indicate nickel to   |
be more toxic than is currently reported,  it is recommended that the   •
effluent level be adjusted.
                                                                       I

                                                                       I

                                                                       I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        f

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I
                               253                                       •

-------
 I
I



I
                                CHAPTER XVII-OIL  AND  GREASE
                     Oil  and  grease  covers  a  broad  spectrum of  substances.   In this




 |             report we  are  speaking  not only  of lubricating oil,  vegetable oils




 _             and  grease but the  large  group known as  hexane extractables.




                     There are many  definitions of  what constitutes oils  and




 I             greases.   Patterson and Minear (76)  define  oil and  grease  as  that




               material extracted  from wastewaters  using hexane.   Hexane  solubles




 I             include such materials  as waxes, fats, soaps,  fatty acids,  lubricants,




               cutting fluids and  other  light and heavy hydrocarbons.   Other sub-




 ™             stances extracted in  hexane  include  primary petrochemicals such as




 •             ethylene and propylene, and  such intermediates as xylene,  ammonia,




               methanol,  ethanol,  butanol,  ethyl-benzene and some  chlorinated hydro-




 •             carbons.




                     The  American  Petroleum Institute  (API)  classifies  oil waste as




 •             follows:   (1)   light  hydrocarbons including light fuels,  (2)  heavy




 •             hydrocarbons,  crude oils  and tars,   (3)   lubricants and  cutting fluids,




               (4)   fats  and  fatty oils  originating from food processing  (76).




 •                   The  sources of  oils and  grease are primarily  industrial and are




               listed in  Table XVII-1.  The volume  of industrial discharges  contain-




 •             ing  oil may vary from small  trickles to  millions of gallons per day




 •             discharged from steel mills, for example.  Similarly, the  concentra-




               tions may  vary from minute traces up to  24,400 mg/1 reported  for sea-




 •             food stick water.




                     The  presence  of oils and greases in water  is  of great




 B             aesthetic  concern to  man. Oils  and  their soluble products are also




               of concern because  of their  toxicity to  fish and other aquatic life.
254

-------
                                         I
                                         I
Concentration, mg/1                      •
'*"» t~ o 1      TT-mii 1 o -I -f- -i arl      J?^-frO'VOTtr»tS      ^™
                         TABLE XVI1-1

                    INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER
           OIL & GREASE SOURCES AND CONCENTRATIONS
                     PRIOR TO TREATMENT
Source                       Total       Emulsified      Reference

Oil Refinery:               4-13           —               (44)        •
 Refinery, Detergent        73             —               (45)        |
  Alkylate

Petro Chemical:             42-8,000       —               (44)        I
 P.C. Sour Water            500            —               (44)
 P.C. Mixed Chemicals       547            —               (45)
 P.C. Phenols, Cresols      Trace          —               (45)        •

Steel Mills:                1276           —               (2)
 Coolant Water              14,600        3,494             (2)         •
 Cold Rolling               700             200             (76)        |
 Hot Rolling                                20             (76)
 Cooling Waters                             100-5,000      (76)        _


Meat Packing:               600-2000      (1200  typical)   (48)
 Catch Basin effluent       420            ~               (48)        •
 Slaughter, cut, cook       2180           —               (48)        •
 Bacon                      370            --               (48)
 Salami                     320            —               (48)
 Ham, Pork, Sausage         200            —               (48)        •
 Beef, lard                 2350           —               (48)        •
 Vat Wash, etc.             240            —               (48)
 Sausage grind & mix        330            —               (48)        •
 Smoked meat                970            —               (48)        |
Seafood;
 Herring Pump Water          4,500          —              (87)
 Stick Water                 4,200-24,400   —              (87)
 Sardine Rendering           5,700          —              (87)
 Salmon Cannery              250            —              (87)
 Tuna Processing             287            —              (87)
                               255
                                         I
                                         I
                                         I
                                         I
                                         I
                                         I

-------
I
I
I
I
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF OIL AND GREASE



      Effects on Man
•                   The basic  objection  to the presence of  oily material  centers


_             around one of aesthetics and safety.  As noted  in McKee  and Wolf


™              (66), the immediate  impact of  oil  is: "a)   spoiling of beaches, and


fl|             coastal  resorts;  b)  destruction  and injury  of  seabirds;   c)   the


               fouling  of boats, fishing  gear  and quays;   d)   the risk  of  fire in


•             harbors  and other enclosed areas;  and e)  damage to marine  flora


               and  fauna''.  Recently,  incidents have been  reported of oil  spills


•             causing  not only aesthetic damage  but damage  to  fish  and other


•             aquatic  life, plus potential damage  to  the  entire area if oil-covered


               waters become ignited.  Some specific problems  caused by oil  and


•             grease are turbidity, films, irridescence,  and  increased difficulty


               in the treatment for potable water.  With respect to  toxicity, Mckee


•             and  Wolf reported, "It  appears, therefore,  that  hazards  to  human


•             health will not  arise from drinking  oil polluted x^aters  for they will


               become aesthetically objectionable at concentrations  far below  the


•             chronic  toxicity level."


•                   Effects on Industrial Water  Supply


                     Oil in industrial water  supplies  becomes  important from two


•             aspects.  First, serious damage has  been reported when boiler feed


               water contains only  a few  parts per  million of  oil.   Oil deposits


•             within the boiler tuve  surfaces may  prevent proper heat  transfer,


_             and  cause overheating and  failure  of the metal.  Second, the  taste


™             and  odor from oily materials within  the water supply  have a noxious
                              256

-------
effect on products which are prepared for human consumption.   Oil in
tremely low.
                                                                        I
                                                                        «




the water used for the manufacture of paper and cement has also been




reported to detract from the quality of the product.                     •





      Effects on Animal and Birds
                                                                         I



                                                                         I
      Effects on animals and livestock are both scant and inconclu-



sive.  However, consumption of oily water may produce some laxative



effect (66).   Anyone who has ever had any association with an oil




spill, will be well aware of the detrimental effects of oil on birds.    •



There are many well documented attempts to save birds from the pit-



falls of oil spills.  Once a bird comes into physical contact with       •



oil, the oil penetrates the bird's plumage, resulting in the bird los-   •



ing its natural insulation to cold and, for those birds which normally



fly, its ability to take flight.  Even with the desperate attempts       •



of many volunteers to save water fowl, the rate of survival is ex-




                                                                         I
                                                                         I
      Effects on Plants



      McKee and Wolf report that aromatic solvents, of petroleum



origin at concentrations up to 300 mg/1 have been used to control         |



weeds along irrigation ditches with no detrimental effect on crops        _



subsequently irrigated from the ditches.  However, they also report       ™



that oil pollution may be partially responsible for the loss of large     B



areas of eel grass along the American and European coasts.  They



concluded, "Where large areas of eel grass have disappeared there         •



has been a great decrease in mollusks and crustaceans, wild fowl



have moved elsewhere, and coastline erosion has often followed."          •






                                                                          I





                              257                                         I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
      Effects on Fish


      The discharge of oily wastes to receiving waters has its major


impact through its effect upon fish life.   McKee and Wolf report that
I
               free  oils or emulsion have been  found  to adhere  to  the  gills  of  fish


I             reducing oxygen  transfer  (See Table XVII-2.)   They  also note  the coat-


               ing of algae and plankton with oily waste which  removes them  from


•             the food web.  Settled deposits  may coat the bottom destroying the


•             benthic organisms  and interfering with spawning.  Oxygen  transfer


               at the air-water interface is hindered and photosynthesis may be


•             affected by a  surface coating of oil.   Lastly, McKee  and  Wolf report


               a toxic effect of  oils directly  on fresh water fish at  concentrations


•             as low as 0.3 mg/1  (6).  Toxic reactions to petrochemicals  are reported


•             at concentrations  from 12-97 mg/1.


                    To repeat, discharge of oily wastes has  been  shown  to be of


•             significance in  the production of tastes and odors  in drinking water.


               It has also been shown of even greater significance to  the  fish  and


|             aquatic life,  through direct toxicity, reduction of oxygen  transfer,


               reduction of photosynthesis, and deleterious affect on  the  food  chain


               balances.


•                  Oils and greases are also  a matter of aesthetic concern,


               accounting for the destruction of beaches and  tidal areas.  Oils


•             foul  boats and fishing gear and  cause  fire damage and property losses.
                              258

-------

TABLE XVI I- 2
EFFECTS OF OIL AND GREASE
Waste Receptor
Source Affected Effect
Petroleum Man Taste
Raw Petroleum Man Odor
Mineral Oil Man Taste
Mineral Oil Man Odor
Gasoline Man Taste
Gasoline Man Odor
Aromatic Solvents Grasses Weed
Control
Crude Oil Fish Toxic
Petrochemicals Man Toxic








259
1

1
Cone, (mg/1) Reference
1.0 - 2.0 (66) •
0.1 - 0.5 (66)
2.5 (66) §
5.0 (66) _
0.005 (66) •
0.010 (66) •
300 (66)
0.3 (6) |
12.97 (44,45)
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1

-------
I


•             TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - OIL AND GREASE REMOVAL


                     A review of current literature on the removal of oils and


•             grease, from various industrial waste sources, indicates the use of


               several levels of treatment.   Primary treatment, consisting basically


•             of gravity separation with skimming, is normally capable of achieving


m             effluent levels of 10-250 mg/1 of oils.  Secondary treatment, consist-


               ing of chemical and physical  separation, is capable of achieving


•             effluent levels of 5-150 mg/1.  Biological treatment is capable of


               producing a final effluent level of less than 2 mg/1, provided the


|             waste has been pre-treated by either physical or chemical-physical


•             means and depending upon the  characteristics of the oil or grease.


                     The primary treatment of oil wastes takes advantage of the dif-


•             ference in specific gravity between oils and greases and that of water.


               The basic principle involves  gravity separation in a container of
I
I


I
sufficient size to allow the free oils and greases to rise to the


surface where they are skimmed off.  Three factors which determine
               the efficiency of gravity separation are: (1)  the rate of rise of


•             the oil and grease,  (2)  the type and concentration of emulsion and


               (3)  the hydraulic loading of the separator.  Patterson and Minear


m             (76) reviewed the work of Wallace et.al. who indicated that from 60-


_             70% of the free oil and grease may be removed in a 30-40 minute time
span.  From this work, it appears that the maximum efficiency by


gravity separation would be approximately 75% removal, over a two


hour or longer detention time.  A 1967 report on the Cost of Clean


Water for the Petroleum Industry (7) indicates that the American


Petroleum Institute (API) separator is capable of removing from
I
                                             260

I

-------
                                                                        I
60-99% of the free floating oil, but it is not applicable to emul-
sified oil removal.                                                     |
      Similarly, the work of Gloyna and Ford (44,45) reported the       ^
efficiency of four common methods for physical removal of oily wastes
from the petrochemical industry.  These are summarized in Table XVII-3.  IB
      While the gravity separation of oils and grease is directed
only at the free floating portion, chemical and physical separation     •
is directed at total removal.  Oily emulsions may be broken by chem-    ^
ical, physical, or a combination of chemical and physical means.        ™
According to Patterson and Minear, chemical methods are most exten-     l|
sively used in the treatment of oily wastewaters.  The Cost of Clean
Water report (7) noted that chemical and physical treatment of API      •
separator effluent can remove from 60-95% of the floating oil, and
from 10-90% of the emulsified oil.  It was reported (7) that chemical   •
coagulation and sedimentation are capable of removing 60-95% of the     •
floating oil and 50-90% of the emulsified oil.
      In treating combined wastewater consisting of once through        •
cooling water and concentrated coolant waste at a 12:1 ratio, ARMCO
(2) found the oil removals listed below using 195 mg/1 of alum,         •
43 mg/1 of lime, 32 mg/1 clay, and 1 mg/1 of a cationic polymer.        m

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I

                                                                        I
                               261
                                                                        I

-------
1
1
1
1

1
1
^^v

1
1
I
I
1
1
1
I
1
I
1

1
TABLE XVI I- 3
REMOVAL OF OIL FROM PETROCHEMICAL WASTE
BY GRAVITY SEPARATION (44,45)
Oil Concentration, mg/1
Process Influent Effluent
Circular Clarifiers 7,000-8,000 125
108 20
108 50
Impounding 3,200 10-50
Parallel 200-400 10-40
API Separator 220 49
90-98 40-44
50-100 20-40
42 20










262


-------
Parameter         SRWL*(mg/l)    Effluent        % Removal             _





Total Oil            1276          76                91
BOD5                  893          57                93
I
COD                  6320         441                89




Suspended Solids      770          55                93                •







                                                                       I



      The report concluded that pH values must be maintained above     «




6.0 for efficient treatment, and that flow equalization is an abso-




lute must.                                                             •




      Emulsion breaking of fish oils with clay, lime, alum, and




ferric chloride has been reported by Soderguist, e.t_.al^(87) to be      Jj




75% effective in the removal of BOD.  This reference also indicated    _




that chlorination was required prior to sedimentation of the emulsion  *




to control a rather pungent odor condition.                            9




      In treating concentrated coolant waste ARMCO  (2) reported that




cationic polymers were found to be effective in breaking oil emul-      •




sions at total oil concentrations of 14,600 mg/1, and emulsified oil   —




of 3,494 mg/1.  Emulsions were, however, found to be very sensitive     *P




to dosage and temperature.  The optimum temperature was found to be    4




between 100 and 150°F.  Batch treatment of the concentrated coolant




water reduced the total oil level to 730 mg/1, and  the emulsified       •




oil concentration to 175 mg/1.




      Acidification of oily waste has also been found to be bene-       •




ficial in breaking oil emulsions.  Soderguist, ej^.a^. reported that     •




the acidification of oil fish waste followed by flotation was




capable of reducing the fish oil from over 24,000 mg/1 to an effluent   •





* SRWL = Standard Raw Waste Load                                        g






                              263




                                                                        I

-------
1
1

1

1



1








1

1
•
1
I
I

I

1



1
1

concentration of 80 mg/1 total.
Other treatment efficiencies reported in the literature for
the removal of emulsified and total oil from various effluents are
given in Table XVII-4.

TABLE XVII-4

REMOVAL BY CHEMICAL COAGULATION

Waste Influent Effluent
Chemical Source mg/1 mg/1 Reference-

Alum, lime, Steel mill
clay, polymer coolant 1276 76 (2)

Alum, lime, Fish oils (75% BOD (87)
ferric chloride Removed)
Lime, alum Oil refinery (95% BOD (76)
Removed )
Soda ash, lime Ball & Roller 302 28
polymer Bearing Plant
Alum, Meat packing 1944 142 (76)
Air flotation

As reported in Patterson and Minear, coagulation with iron
salts has been generally effective for de-emulsifying oil waste.
However, breaking of emulsions by acidification has generally been
found to be more effective wince a Tiassive hydroxide sludge will not
be formed. In addition, emulsion breaking by the addition of alum
and iron salts also adds large quantities of inorganic salts to the

effluent, which may creat an additional pollution problem by increas
ing total dissolved solids.
264

-------
                                                                           I
The physical emulsion breaking methods commonly used include
                                                                                 I
heating, centrifugation, filtration, and air flotation.  Patterson


and Minear report that centrifugation is normally most efficient                 •


when applied to oily sludges, rather than to typical dilute oil waste-

waters.                                                                          9


      Filtration has been found to be effective in treating steel                •>


mill waste containing up to 230 mg/1 of emulsified oil (76).  The re-
                                                                           I
moval efficiency of high rate filtration and diatomaceous earth fil-


tration is summarized along with the capital operating cost in Table


XVII-5 as reported in Patterson and Minear (76).                                  •


      The third type of oil and grease removal is the combination of             -m


chemical coagulation and/or acidification with air flotation.  In a


review of Patterson and Minear's work, it is readily apparent that               •


flotation has been used predominately as a method of removing emulsi-


fied oils from petroleum and petrochemical industrial wastewaters.               Jg


The report on the Cost of Clean Water for the petrochemical industry             «


(7) has indicated that air flotation, both with and without chemicals,


is a standard procedure for manu refinery and petrochemical industries.           •


Air flotation without chemicals effectively removes 70-95% of the


floating oil and 10-40% of the emulsified oil.  Flotation with chem-             •


icals yields efficiencies of 75-95% and 50-90% for floating and emul-            _


sified oils, respectively.  In summary of the works reported by                  ~


Patterson and Minear,  Table XVII-6 indicates  the improved efficiency            •


of flotation with coagulants, over flotation without them.


      While not as widely used as gravity separation and chemical-               •


physical means, biological treatment is also applicable to the removal
                         265
                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 f
 1
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
of oil and grease from wastewaters.  Patterson and Minear report that


oil and grease laden waters from food processing plants have been


treated bidogically.  Further works reviewed by Patterson and Minear


indicated that an anaerobic lagoon achieved an 84% removal of grease


during one 4 day sampling period.  The grease in the raw waste


ranged from 425-1,270 mg/1 while an effluent grease concentration was


reported at 69-147 mg/1.  Another article also reviewed by Patterson


and Minear indicated an 99% reduction of oil from a refinery waste


oxidation pond which had initial and final oil concentration of 154


and 18 mg/1 respectively.


      In a report of the treatment of oily materials by activated


sludge, Hydro-science (51) concluded that a system continuously ex-


posed to oily wastes is capable of handling a load of 0.1 Ib of hexane
I
               extractables  per  pound  of mixed  liquor  suspended  solids  (MLSS).   This
corresponds to an oil concentration of 50 mg/1 for MLSS or 2,000 mg/1


and 75 mg/1 for the MLSS of 3,000 mg/1, etc.  Barnhart (of Hydro-


science) (13) stated that a well operated activated sludge system is


capable of reducing oil and grease from 50-75 mg/1 to a 1-2 mg/1
               effluent.  He  stressed  that  good  operation  and  uniform sludge wasting


V             was  essential.   Filtration of  the effluent  may  be  needed  to  maintain


               the  1-2 mg/1 oil level  due to  sludge  carry  over.


|                  Gloyna and Ford  (44,45)  remarked  on the ability  of  activated


M             sludge  to maintain  low  oil levels in  the treatment  of  petrochemical


               waste.  An activated sludge  treatment of refinery,  natural gas,


•             liquids, chemical specialities, and sanitary sewage had an effluent


               oil  concentration of 0.5 mg/1.  In the  treatment of refining process
                              266

-------


Treatment

HRFb
Coagulant
HRF & DE°
TABLE XV I 1-5
FILTRATION OF EMULSIFIED OILY WASTE (76)

Effluent3 Capital Operating
Oil, mg/1 Cost, $ Cost, $/Day

20 750,000 300
& HRF 10 775,000 372
5 1,000,000 440
aRaw Waste: 230 mg/1 Emulsified Oil @ 3,000 gpm
K
HRF -.High
rate sand and gravel filter
CDE: Diatomaceous earth filtration of HRF effluent




Floation
62%
70%
79%
70-80%






TABLE XVII-6
PERCENT REMOVAL OF OIL & GREASE BY
COAGULATION AND AIR FLOTATION
FROM REFINERY WASTE (76)
Alone Float .W/Coagulants Dosage
94% 25 mg/1 Alum
95% Polymers & Clay
87% 25 mg/1 Alum
up to 90% 30-70 mg/1 Alum




267

1
1
1

I
1
1

1
1

•
*
I
1

1
I
1
1
I
I

1

-------
  I
  •            waste, they reported an oil removal of 75-85% efficiency, with the




                effluent containing only 1-2 mg/1 of oil.  Similarly, a final effluent




  0            concentration of 1 mg/1 was reported in the activated sludge plant




  M            greating waste from methylene and acetylene production.




  ^                  ARMCO (2) reported the cost of breaking the emulsified oils




  •            by batch treatment with a cationic polymer at $2.24-$7.70 per thousand




                gallons of waste depending upon the characteristic of the oil treaied.




  f|            They also reported that if the recovered oil was of fuel oil quality,




  ^            the net cost of oil removal was only 4.8-8.5 cents per gallon of oil




  *             recovered.  ARMCO also reported the cost of treating the combined




  •             once through cooling water with concentrated coolant oily waste.




                They found that for this combined waste the operation cost ranged




 I             from $0.046-$0.051 per thousand gallons of waste.  The treatment in-




 _             eluded floculation and air flotation.  Although the recovered oil had




 ™             no potential as fuel, it was utilized by local municipalities as road




                oil.  Other cost data available in the literature are summarized in




                Table XVII-7 and XVII-8.




 •             In summary, petroleum refinery wastes are likely to contain much




                more free oil than emulsified oil.  Industrial waste sources such as




 •             steel mills, metal finishing, electroplating, food production,




 JV             tanneries, textiles will contain more emulsified oils.  As a result




                the large producers of refined oils and other petrochemicals are




 •              able to achieve a 1-2 mg/1 total effluent oil concentration much




                more readily than are some of the smaller processes which have to
I
1



1
                handle emulsified oils.  One should not infer, however, that low oil
                                             268

-------
                    TABLE XVII-7


CAPITAL COSTS FOR REFINERY OILY WASTE TREATMENT (7)
Process
API Separator
Air Flotation
Flow, MGD
3.0
7.5
15.0
3.0
7.5
15.0
Capital Cost-, $
46,500
105,000
210,000
111,500
222,750
371,250
Cost $/MGD
15,500
14,000
14,000
37,167
29,700
24,750
ANNUAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING COSTS FOR REFINERY
OIL WASTE TREATMENT (7)
Process
API Separator
Air Flotation
Flow, MGD
3.0
7.5
15.0
3.0
7.5
15.0
M & 0 Cost $/Yr.
23, )00
36, )00
55, )00
37, )00
74, )00
117, 750
Cost $/MGD
7,667
4,800
3,667
12,333
12,333
7,850
                         269
I
I
1
I
I
I
t
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
t
I

-------
1
1

1
1
1
IV
1
^^w

I
I
1

1
1

I
I

I

1
1
1
1

TABLE XVII-7 (Con't)
CAPITAL COSTS FOR 'TREATMENT OF MEAT PROCESSING OILY
WASTES (8)

Process Flow, MGD Capital Cost, $ Cost, $/MGD

Gravity Separator 0.125 12,000 96,000
0.54 35,000 64,815
1.68 250,000 14,881
Air Flotation 0.125 *
0.54 60,000 111,111
1.68 150,000 89,285

* Not Reported

ANNUAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING COSTS FOR TREATMENT
OF MEAT PROCESSING OILY WASTES (8)

Process Flow, MGD M & 0 Costs, $/Yr. Cost $/MGD

Gravity Separator 0.125 1,000 8,000
0.54 10,000 18,519
1.68 18,000 10,714
Air Flotation 0.125 *
0.54 13,000 24,074
1.68 30,000 11,905

* not reported .



270

-------



































00
1
M
M
p>
r*$

W

pq
<^
H



























































CO
H
£r
, •]
PM

H
25

§
H
3
prf
H

W
H
CO
<
3

1

CO
H
CO
o
U

O
a
M
H
<]1
C-M
W
PM
O










































in
~*
-d-
^x

CO
W
H
M
r-l
M
C_>

Pn
ij
5


CO
4-1
CO ,£>
0 .H 4-J
CJ d
O CO
M O 4-1
d o 3
•H -i-H
4-1 rH rH
cO ~-~. O
Vi -co- PM
0)
P-
0

K^
i-H
•H 0
cO 2














4-1
d

0
4->
CO
0)
^_j
H

U-l
0

CD
ft
^1
H
Vi
•U
cn
3
T3
d
M



M
0)
iJ
r-H
•rH
fH I-H
r-H
0 -H
3 MH
3 T3
cj d
CO CO
> rJ




^





























1
CO
ft
0)

d
i-H 0
•iH -H
O 4-1
cO
CO r-H
QJ 3
13 bO
3 cfl
rH 0
O 0
pj
•rH *•
i d
K*1 O
M -H
eg 4J
p cO
•H Vi
Vi
PM
Vi
QJ
£
•H
M-l
CU
Prf




pj
O
•H
4-1
CO
Vi
01
c
•H
O
(2
I-H











p"
O

N»^

O

71
l^Q
CN




O
vO
f— ^
1
V*D
C~xJ
iH



1
d
cu
e
•H
T3
0)
CO

TJ
d
CO

W
d
o
•H
4-J d
CO 0
4-> -H
O 4-J
i-H CO
M-l 4-J

















!-H
! 	 j
•H
MH
T)

CO
1-1




rH






O1
O
U
^^^

CM

CM






, — |
^O
, — |














0)
bO
T3
3
iH
CO

T3
01
>> 4J
Vl CO
cO >
-a -H
d 4J
0 0
O 




rH
>H




-^
CO
•
cn
•*— ^

0

1
CO






0
x^-
^n
•N
rH
1

rH
bO
d
'H
T3 1 1
33 cO 1
t-H OO Vi -H
0 03 4-1 rH
do 3 co
•H O d Q) 3
o d cr
cn - -H , -H 4-J 0 d
4-J 4-J O -H Cfl
CO rH 4-J
rH Vl MH Cfl ^
rH Cfl 4-J C
cd ft « d o

£*i Cfl O S 4-J O
Vl -H -H cfl -H
grH 4-1 ^ N 4-1
•rl CO Q) -H CO
•H O rH M rH N
Vl
PM
rH
CO
o
•H
6
0)
r-;
O
d
0
o
bo
CO
j_4

«\
rH rH
rH rH
•H -H
m i {H
"T..5 'O
p* C
ai cfl
KJ K4




o- rH m






p no
o o o
ea PQ PQ


r^* c^ *^
r~- o co
*d~ i — l r^
\O r^^





O o *-o
v^ co r^-
i-H in CM
— ^ i
rH rH rH
1 (N
i-H CM
CO








d
0
•H
£ d) 4-J
O bO cfl
O T3 rH Vl
W) 3 CO QJ
CO rH C <
hJ CO O
•H 13
P^> t3 *T3 4-1 QJ
Vi CJ CU d ^3
Cfl 4-1 4-1 QJ d
T3 cfl cfl £> CU
d Vl r* d 4-*
o a) -H o X
O << 4-1 U W
0) O
co <;














bO
-H d
rH -H OC
•H d d

T3 O C
p^ tiO M
CO cd 3
nJ ,J PQ




CM CNI rH






OOP
O O O
PQ pq PQ
N^ *^s ^^

*^D O CT>
o in co
1
ro co
CM 1

^3-


i — 1 O CO
rH U™1 **&
CM O rH
1 "
"••Q CM
rH 1
O
OO




d
o
•rH
4-1
Cfl
N
•H
i— 1 ^j 1^3
•H CU d
f*l 4J Q
cfl i-H PM
4-1 -H
CO pL4 QJ
[>
4-1 00 -H

cfl *H cfl
4J rH 4J
d ^ rH
003
U -H O
Vl cfl
H Pn















iH
rH
•H
M-l
r-rj
C

^




0]






p"

PQ
\ — '

m

C O -H
.,_( ,,_H) j_j
XI M 0
S H CO
0
U







271
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
t
I

-------
 I
               concentrations  cannot  be  achieved  in wastewaters  containing  a  large
 9             percentage  of emulsified  oils.   From the  above  data,  it  is apparent
 •I             that  even some  of  the  worst  emulsified  oils  may be  broken down by
               acidification or coagulation followed by  a physical treatment  step
 •             which would lend them  to  further reduction by biological treatment.
               SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
 I
                     The  following  conclusions  are drawn  on  the  basis  of  the  liter-

 •             ature  reviewed:

               1.     Oil  and grease are  found naturally but  only in very  low  con-

 |                   centrations, and  only  in marine waters.  A  large  potential
 .                   exists for  adding oil  and  grease  through discharges  to sur-

                     face waters from  many  industries, and the concentrations  range

 •                   from trace  amounts  up  to 24,4000  mg/1.

               2.     Large concentrations of emulsified oils are found in steel

 •                   mills, meatpacking, seafood handling, textile mills  and

                     tannery wastes.

 ™             3.     The  major hazard  of oily wastes in the  aquatic environment

 W                   is to fish  and other aquatic life.   Concentrations of 0.4 ml/1
                     (about 0.3  mg/1)  of crude  oil have been found to  be  toxic to
 •                   some fresh  water  fish.  Waters containing oil and/or  grease

                     become aesthetically objectionable to man long before they
9                   become health  hazards.  Minute concentrations of  oil wastes

 •                   may  conglomerate  or precipitate and  form oily sludge on  the

                     bottoms of  receiving waters and smother benthic life.  At a
•                   later time  the sludge may  be released to the water environment.
I
I
272

-------
I
                                                                                  I
4.    Oils and grease may be removed progressively by gravity
      separation, chemical and physical means and biological treat-               0
      merit.  The degree of treatment necessary to reach any given                 m
      level will depend upon the degree of emulsification and the
      individual characteristics of the hexane soluble material.                  •
5.    Capital costs for oil removal appear to approximate the cost
      for unit processes of standard design, e.g. clarifiers,                     ||
      oxidation ponds, flocculators, etc.  Chemical costs will vary
      with the waste characteristics.
      On the basis of treatment technology it appears that oily                   •
waste can be removed to an average effluent concentration of 1-2 mg/1.
Varying degrees of emulsification reduce the efficiency and the                   •
reliability of chemical and biological processes.  It is therefore '               •
recommended that a maximum uniform effluent criteris of 10 mg/1 be
adopted for all wastewaters containing oil and grease.                            I

                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I
                               273                                                 •

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
1
I
                     CHAPTER XVIII-PHENOLS



      As noted by Patterson and Minear (76), phenols includes a


wide range of organic compounds.  According to "Standard Methods",


(1) phenolics include phenol, chlorophenols, both ortho-and-meta-


substituted, and parasubstituted phenols, in which the substitution


is a carboxyl, halogen, methoxy or sulfonic acid group.  In terms of
 I
                 effluent quality, the term phenolics includes a general group of

 •              similar compounds which have been derived from or include "phenol",

                 the monohydroxy derivative of. benzene.  Discussion of phenols in this

 I              report includes those phenolics which evidence characteristic proper-

 M              ties of phenol when in solution.  Phenol (known as carbolic acid) is

                 somewhat soluble in water.  Most other phenols are insoluble in water.

 •              Phenols are colorless, but are easily oxidized and can be colored by
oxidation products.


      The major industrial sources of phenolic waste are listed in


Table XVIII-1, along with typical concentration values.  It is evident
                 from Table XVIII-1 that industrial affluent concentration of phenolics

•               can vary from very low concentrations of 17 mg/1 to extremely large

                 concentrations of 12,000 mg/1


I
                 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PHENOL
                       Effect on Man
                       One of the major concerns to man from phenolics in the aquatic


•               environment is the taste and odor problem found in drinking water.


                 When phenolic compounds are present in chlorinated waters a strong
medicinal odor is often present.  This odor results from the formation


of a series of chlorophenols.  For example, phenol can combine with
                               274

-------
                                                                                 I
chlorine to form 2 or 4 chlorophenol, 2,4-dichlorophenol and 2,4,6-              «|
trichlorophenol.   These compounds can cause taste and odor problems
in drinking at trace concentration (less than 1 mg/1).   It was                   •
shown by McKee and Wolf (66) that taste and odor threshold concen-
trations for non-chlorinated phenols can vary from 0,01-60 mg/1                  £
with the general threshold value of 1 mg/1, while chlorinated phenols            M
have taste and odor threshold concentrations ranging from 0.002-1.0
mg/1 with a general threshold level of 0.002 mg/1.  See Table XVIII-2            I
for threshold value of the different chlorophenols.
      Because of the above values, in 1962 USPHS established a drink-            •
ing water standard of 0.001 mg/1 based on taste and odor threshold               ._
levels rather than on toxicity.  These low threshold concentrations              ™
make phenolic compounds undesirable by both domestic and industrial              Ift
users of water, since the unpalatable taste is passed on to food and
beveragess.                                                                      I
      Man has little to fear from toxicity related problems in drink-
ing water due to the large amounts needed to produce harmful effects.            ™
McKee and Wolf (66) report that ingestion of concentrated solutions              •
of phenol will result in severe pain, renal irritation, shock and
possible death.  A total dose of 1.5 grams is needed to be fatal.  It            I
is unlikely that this large quantity could be consumed in drinking
water because such concentration are much higher  than taste consider-            9
ations will allow.                                                               •
      Table XVIII-3 lists the characteristics of  phenolic waters.
The BOD and COD data for many phenolics are presented along with the             •

                                                                                 I
                               275                                               •

-------
1

1

I
1





1
I
M
1

1



1

1


I

1

1
1
1

TABLE XVIII-1
PHENOL CONCENTRATIONS REPORTED
IN
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS




Source Concentration, mg/1
Coke Ovens

Weak ammonia liquor ,
without dephenolization 400-12,

Weak ammonia liquor,
with dephenolizer 4.5 -
Wash oil still wastes 30 -
Final cooler water
Pure still
Combined waste 6.4
Oil Refineries
Sour water 65 -
General wastewaters 40 -

Detergent alkylate
Butadiene, Butyl rubber
Post - stripping
General (catalytic cracker) 40 -
Mineral Oil wastewater
Petroleum products
Petrochemical

General petrochemicals 50 -
Mixed organics 10 -
Benzene refineries
Nitrogen works
Tar distilling plants
276


000


332
150
105
72


185
80

160
17
80
50
100
25

600
• 50
210
250
300





Reference


(48,71,76)


(76)
(48)
(71)
(71)
(71)

(44,45,76)
(76)

(44,45)
(44,45)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(44,45)

(76)
(44,45)
(76)
(76)
(76)


-------

TABLE XVIII-1 (Con
I
't)
PHENOL CONCENTRATIONS REPORTED |
IN
••
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS
Source Concentration, mg/1 Reference 11
Synthetic resins, Phenol 4,
Formaldehyde, Fatty Acids
Glycerol, Phtholic acids,
Maleic acids, Pentacrythritol,
H. C. solvents
Aircraft maintenance 200 -
Other
Rubber reclamation 3 -
Orion manufacture 100 -
Plastics factory 600 - 2,
Fiberboard factory
Word carbonizing
Phenolic resin production 1,
Stocking factory 6,
Nylon
Phenol, Cresols production 280 -





277
500 (44,45) J




400 (76) •

10 (76) 1
150 (61,76) m
000 (76)
150 (76) |
500 (76)
600 (71,76) |
000 (76) •
(44,45)
500 (44,45) J
I
I
1
1
I
1

-------
 I
                 theoretical oxygen demand.   Taste and odor and human toxicity data




 ™              are presented where known.





 I                  Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life





 •                    McKee and Wolf report  that fish are affected two ways:  (1)  by




                 direct toxicity, and (2)  by  tainting of  the fish flesh.   They point




 •              out that there are many difficulties in  determining the detrimental




                 effects of phenolic compounds.   "The reported lethal concentrations




 M              vary widely not only because of the  common variables such as  species,




 _              temperature, time of contact,  dissolved  oxygen and mineral quality




 ™              of water but also because of synergistic and antagonistic effects of




 H              other substances in the water."  It  was  also reported that a  combin-




                 ation of phenolics in a waste is generally more toxic than pure




 •               phenol along.




                       A review of the literature (15,45,59,66) on the toxicity of




 •               phenols indicates that each  phenolic has its own lethal limit which




 •               has little relation to the time of exposure.  There is a wide spectrum




                 of toxic levels and considerable overlapping between the lethal




 I               or damaging concentration among species.  McKee and Wolf report that




                 the24, 48, 96 hour TLm concentration for fish is in the range of  10-




 •               20 mg/1 at 20°C.  Generally  speaking, the threshold level for fish




 •               however, is in the range of  1.0 mg/1. Selected phenolic TLm's are




                 shown in Table XVIII-4.




 •                     In conclusion the toxicity of  phenol and related compounds
I
toward fish varies with respect to several important parameters.




Toxicity increases when the D.O. or hardness of the water decreases,




the temperature increases and when there is a combination of the
                 preceding effects.




I
                              278

-------
       TABLE XVIII-2


 TASTE AND ODOR THRESHOLD
CONCENTRATION AT 25°C (66)
Geometric Mean Threshold mg/
Compound
Phenol
2-chlorophenol
4-chlorophenol
2 ,4-dichlorophenol
2 ,6-dichlorophenol
2 ,4 ,6-trichlorophenol
Taste
1.0
0.004
1.0
0.008
0.002
1.0
Odor
1.0
0.002
0.25
0.002
0.003
1.0
             279
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
 I
I
 I
 I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                         TABLE XVII1-3



             CHARACTERISTICS OF PHENOLIC WASTES (61)



                         BOD     COD    Theoretical   T&O*  Toxic**
PHENOLIC                 Ib/lb   Ib/lb  P.P. Ib/lb    mg/1  mg/1



Phenol                   1.6                2.4       0.15  0.1 - 1.5

Acetophenone                                          0.17

Catechol                         1.89       1.89

o-Cresol                 1.6     2.4        2.52      0.65  0.5

m-Cresol                 1.7     2.3        2.52      0.7   0.5

p-Cresol                 1.45               2.52            0.5

p-Cumylphenol                    2.6        2.8

Dibutylphthalate         0.43               2.24

Methylphenylketone       0.5                2.5

Morpholine               Nil                2.6

Naphthalene              0                  3.0

1, 4-Naphthaquinone      0.8                2.1             0.3

2-Naphthol               1.7                2.55

B-Naphthol               1.8     2.5        2.55      1.3

Pyridine                         0.02       3.03      0.8   1,000

Quinoline                                             0.7

Resorcinol               1.15               1.89

2,4,6-Trinitrophenol             0.92       0.98

Xylene                     0                3.16      2.2      22

1,3,4-Xylenol            1.5                2.62

1,3,5-Xylenol            0.82               2.62
   *  Taste and odor threshold is tentative
 * *  Toxicity threshold based on fish, species not specified
                              280

-------


































^
1
M
M
M
£>
XI


PQ
<£
H
























































,-. s
in
o-

5
m
H
t-J
an
§
SH
fTl
V)
^
O
pq

£?-H
H
M
O
M
X
o
H

(_}
M
i—3
o
w
K
PH






















r-l M
cu cu
^ cfl cfl
j_i £2 IS
M
B 4-> 13
CU MH M
pd O cfl
CO K






, — (
frt
£3
•H CO CO
Cd 13 13
•~^ *^
^ H^ t-^ »•&
rH 3 CD
r-l -H 60 4J TJ 4-) 4J
fd ^rj ^ 14-1 ^| 14^ 4_|
B CU cd O cfl O O
CO g i-4 CO 33 CO CO




X!
CO
•H
MH

rH OrHrHrH CO CQrH,C
iH4-lrHrHrHl3rdrH CO
•H -H -H -H -H cfl cfl -H -H
603 606060CU 01 OOMH
0) CTOI 0) CUX1.C CUT)
3C03334J4-)3rH
rH OrHrHrH Ctf CflrH O
pQSpqpqpqriipLipqo
in CM oo m
vo ON o in *^t" r*^ CN
 o) u
1 r-l 1
o cj o





}_,
0)
cfl
^z

4-1
MH
o
CO









rH
CO rH
CU -H
•H 60
a. cu
a 3
3 rH
O pq
in
oo
00
rH




rH
CO CO SO
in SO rH
CM -* m











CO
rH ON
ON SO
*3" SO





rH
0
e.
0)
XI
Pu
o
^_l
4J
•H
&
1
o













CO
•^-i
r^
13
c
tfl
60X1
CO
CU -H
Xl MH
o
>i O
CO 4-1
a. -H
0 3
4-1 a1
CJ CO
r-l O
< s
rH SO
o m
o
0






CM
SO CM
m CM












r-
rH CN
SO CM












rH
o
a
01
,£2
PL,
^••N a
a cj
o
ON
oo o
oo •
• SO
CO ^**^
"""' a
rH 3
rH -H
cfl 13
a cu
c/i S









H H H
rH iH rH
•H -H -H
60 60 60
cu o) a)
333
rH rH rH
pq pq pq

m o
CO O
rH CM









































a
CJ

^~
CM
•
-*
i~H

01
60

cfl









H
H
•H
60
0)
3
rH
pq

in
rH
rH














































r-l r-l
CU OJ
j 1 1)
cfl cfl
£2 [j5

4-1 13
MH M
O Cfl
en 3d









rH CO M
rH 13 13
•H cfl cd
60 0) Ol
OJ X> X>
3 4-i 4-1
rH Cfl Cd
pq PK fe
r- 0

in 
*• — •*

rH
0
£3
cu
XI
P-l





S-l S-l
01 O)
11 J 1
+-" 4->
cfl tfl


4-> 4-1
M-l MH
O O
CO CO









rH X!
rH CO
•H -H
60 M-4
O) 13
3 rH
rH O
PQ 0
00 ON

CO 
-------
 I
                       The second major effect of phenolic waste on  fish and  other




 •              aquatic life is tainting of the flesh.  McKee and Wolf report that




                 mixed phenolic substances are the most troublesome.  The chloro-




 •i              phenols are known to produce bad taste in fish flesh at concentra-




 •              tions which are far below the lethal or toxic dosages.  Mineral oils,




                 carbolated oils, and other light oils which are usually part of the




 I              phenolic waste, reportedly have a great bearing on  the tainting of




                 fish flesh.




                       A report by Gloyna & Ford (45) indicates that phenols  and




 M              other nonchlorinated phenolic compounds have been found to taint




                 fish flesh at concentration of 1.0-10.0 mg/1.  However, their report




 •              also indicates that chlorinated phenols may taint fish flesh at con-




                 centrations as low as 0.005 mg/1.




 B                    McKee and Wolf report that phenolic compounds are less toxic




 •|              toward lower forms of aquatic life  (fish food organisms) than they




                 are towards fish.  A review of their data indicates that a concen-




 •              tration of 1 mg/1 has been found to limit photosynthesis in  the




                 Platymonas organism, and threshold effects on several other  organ-




 jf              isms including Daphnia have been observed at concentrations  greater




 «              than 1 mg/1.  Toxicity of some selected phenolics to Chlorella




                 pyrenoidosa is shown in Table XVIII-5.
I



I



I



I



I
      In summary McKee & Wolf indicated that the following concen-




trations of phenol would not interfere with the respective beneficial




uses of water:
                              282

-------


TOXICITY OF
TO

Organic Chemical




Phenol
Phenol
Cresol
Cresol's (ortho,meta,
o-Bromophenol
m ,p-Bromophenol
o-Chlorophenol
m , p-Chlorophenol
2 ,4-Dichlorophenol
2 ,4,5-Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Xylenols
Nitrophenols
o-Aminophenol
m , p-Aminophenols
Hydro quinone


TABLE XVII 1-5
SOME SELECTED PHENOLICS (44,45)
CHLORELLA PYRENOIDOSA

Toxic Cone.
(mg/1)*




1,060
233
800
para) 148-171
78
36
96
40
21
1.5
0,001
49-81
9-14
47
140
178






Ref. (as desig-
nated in the
work of
Gloyna & Ford)


84
50
84
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50

1
1



1






I

1

1



1

1

1
* Based on 50% REduction in Chlorophyll Content









283





1
1
1
I
1

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                       (1)  Domestic water supply - 0.001 mg/1


                       (2)  Irrigation - 50.0 mg/1


                       (3)  Stock watering - 1000.0 mg/1


                       (4)  Fish and aquatic life - 0.2 mg/1



                 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY-PHENOL REMOVAL
^                     A review of the current literature (45,48,71,76) indicates


*               that methods are available for removing phenolic wastes from a wide


•               range of concentrations to almost any level desirable.  For some of


                 the more difficult wastes, however, several steps of treatment may


•               be necessary to reach a given level.  The matter of practical eco-


                 nomics, rather than technical capability, is the limiting factor and


™               may have some bearing on the so-called currently achievable level.


•               Patterson and Minear (76)  indicate that the method of selection for


                 phenolic removal and its efficiency may depend on the overall com-


•               position of the wastewater.   They report that it is normally necessary


                 to remove both oil and heavy metals prior to removal of phenolics


w               from the wastewater.  In general, however,  currently available tech-


•               nology is being successfully utilized for efficient phenolic removal.


                       As shown in Table XVIII-1 the industrial waste loading of


•               phenolics varies from low to extremely high concentrations.  As a re-


                 sult, the treatment technology discussed below will be under the


•               categories of recoverable phenolics, biological and other processes


                 for intermediate phenolic removal, and polishing steps.


                       Recoverable Phenolics


•                     Patterson & Minear report that high concentrations of phenol
                 in a waste stream allow for economical recovery.   The phenolic
                                               284

-------
                                                                                I
recovery value reported by Patterson and Minear is 20c/ton of coal

process, for coke plant ammonia liquor, as of 1969.  There are cur-             0

rently many methods available for the removal of up to 99% of the               •

phenol from high concentration wastewaters.  However, even at this

high level of removal, a substantial amount of phenolic compounds re-           •

main in the effluent.

      In discussing phenolic removal from phenol resins, Nemerow                I

(71) stated that single stage phenol extraction will remove approx-             —

imately 96% of the phenols and 100% of the formaldehyde present.                ™

Other methods discussed by Nemerow include lagooning and thermal in-            fl|

cineration.  No efficiencies were reported.

      Gurnham's (48) review of phenolic waste treatments discussed              •

the use of liquid extraction, vapor-phased dephenolization, and bio-

logical treatment.  Countercurrent liquid-liquid extraction, on a               ™

coke plant's waste, was said to reduce the phenolic content of the              •

crude ammonia liquor from 1500-2000 mg/1 to a 10-30 mg/1 level.

Gurnham also reported that the use of two stage Podbielniak centri-             •

fugal extractors on ammonia liquor yielded an efficiency of 99% re-

moval and that with vapor phased dephenolization processes followed             W

by  treatment with 10% caustic solution efficiencies of 95-98% removal

were obtainable.

      Table XVIII-6 gives a summary of currently available phenolic             •

recovery processes from concentrated wastewaters.  While the effluent

data presented below represents well over 95% removal, in most cases            |

the final effluent concentration still remains  substantially high.
I
                              285
I

I

I

-------
1
1
1

1



1

1



1

1
w
1
1

1
I
1
1
1
1

TABLE XVIII-6
PHENOLIC RECOVERY FROM
CONCENTRATED WASTES
Phenol Concentration, mg/1 Percent*
Process Influent Effluent Removal Ref.

Benzene-Caustic
Dephenolization process 3,000 210-240 93 (76)
Counter-Current Podbielniak
Extractors 2,000 100 95 (48,76)
Single-stage Phenolic
Extraction 1.600 64 96 (71)
IFAWOL Dephenolization
Process (Carl Still) 4,000 40 99 (76)
Pulsed Column
Extractors 2,200 30 98.6 (71)
Steam Evaporation 1,500-2,000* 30-100* 98.5 (48)
Liquid-Liquid Extractors 1.500-2,000* 10- 30* 98.5 (48)
Caustic Recovery 1,500-2,000* 30-100* 99.5 (76)
Keppers Light Oil Extraction 1,500-2,000* 10- 30*
* Influent load assumed from Table XVIII-1 and Effluent based
on referenced percent removal.





286

-------
      Gloyna and Ford (45) have reported that phenols may be removed




by solvent extraction with the efficiency depending on the solvent              •




used as shown in Table XVIII-7.





      Biological and Other Processes for Intermediate Level Treatment




      From an economic standpoint it is expensive to recover phenolics          •




from industrial wastes which contain phenolics in concentrations of




less than 500 mg/1.  As a result, biological processes including                M




lagoons, oxidation ditches, trickling filters, and activated sludge             _




have been reported for this level of treatment (48,76).                         ™




      In Gurnham's (48) discussion of phenolic treatment, he reports            tt




that activated sludge and trickling filters individually have reduced




phenolic waste from 800 mg/1 to effluents containing 1 mg/1 or less.            •




Certain precautions are recommended for satisfactory operation, such




as a wastewater feed of nearly constant composition, a temperature              ™




above 70;  a pH near neutrality, a storage capacity of 5 or more days,          •




the addition of nutrient phosphorus, and the absence of tars and oils.




On a similar note, Patterson and Minear have indicated that the                 •




success of biological treatment of phenolic wastes depends on the




toxicity of other contaminants in the water to micro-organisms used             V




in the biological process.                                                      •




      While it has been reported that biological processes are ami-




able to phenolic wastes at corcentrations of 5-500 mg/1, Table XVIII-8          •




from the works of Patterson ard Minear indicates that biological




processes have been used successfully for concentrations up to twice            |




this value in full scale plants, and up to the 4000 mg/1 range on  a
                              287
I



I



I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
W
nJ
m
<
H
       Pi
       W
       H
       w
       H
       CO
       g
       o
       Pi
O
JS
w
M
P-i

H
CJ
       H
       X
       W

       O
       H

       Q
       W
       CO
       £3

       CO
       H
       S
       W
       >
       i-J
       O
       CO


cn

S-l
cd
e
0)
ed












T3
0)

cd
M
0)
d
cu
60
CU
Pi

4-1
d
0)
j>
rH
O
CO
3
4-J
CO

ir~i
Cfl
rJ
1
O
•H
4-J
cn
3
cfl
U

X!
4-1
•H
Is
illation
4-1
cn
•H
O

j>^
XI

13
CU
4-J
cfl

0)
C
CU
60
0)
Pi
!*.
i-rj
0)
4J
Cfl

CU
d
0)
60
cu
Pi

4-J
d
cu
£>
rH
O
W
d
o
•H
4-1
cO
1— {
rH
•H
4-1
cn
•H
n








d
o
•H
4J
CO
S-i
CU
d
01
60
01
Pi

CJ
•H
4-1
m
3
cd
CJ
o
cn
rH
d
o
•H
4-J
O
cfl

4-1
X
w

CJ
•H
4-1
Cfl
4J
cn
o
£_i
4-J
CJ
cu
rH
W
Cfl
CO
4-1
0)
4-J
cO
£2

e
o
S-i
U-l

rH
•H
O

cn
cu
[>
o 01
e e
0) -H
pi H
d
o
•H
4-1
CJ
Cfl
S-i
4-1
X


1— \
cfl
60
3

•H
j_j
4-J
d
0)
CJ
d
o
•H
4-J
cfl

CU
d
0)
60
0)
Pi

o
•H
4J
cn
3
cfl
CJ
n
d
o
•H
4-1
O
cO

4_)
X
w

rH
cO
60
3
U-l
•H
1-1
4J
c
CU
CJ
generation,
01
Pi

o
•H
4-1
cn
3

U

S-I
o

e
CO
01
4-1
CO
n Coefficient
o
•H
4J
O
cfl
S-i
4-J
X
w

r;
60
•H
X

J>->
J_J

 cu  o
x!  e
P-I  cu
    Pi
    4-J
    d
    01
    3
                                     60
                         W
                      o
                      d
                      01
                      PM
                          0) rH
                          3 --.
                         rH  60
                         V4-I  e
                          d N-'
                                             ON
ON
ON
CN


O
O
o
CN
in     in
       ON
OO      I
ON     O
       ON
                                                 o
                                                 o
                                                 o
in
ON
                                                                         CO
                                            o
                                            m
m
i —
^
CO
CJ
4-J
d
01
j>
rH
O
C/3
•H
4-1
crt
£§
O
^_)
<£
m
CN
cn
d
•H
<4H
M-l
cfl
S-i
cfl
CL|



c Esters
•H
4-J
Cfl
^t~l
ft
-H
rH
— )
rH
*rH
o

cO
S-i
4-1
CO

cn
0)
4-J
cfl
p..
cn
O
rC
PH
rH
cn
cu
o
•H
r4
H
                                                            288

-------


























00
1
M
M
M
£>
X

W
J 1
pp

td

o
ON
o\










CU
4J
CO
tO
£2

rH
tfl
•H
^
4-1
CO
^3
"XJ
i3
I-H

UH
O

co
o
5H
£)
O
en

















c
0)
K*
o
a)
^
o
CJ


r^ oo
v •
O ro
1 1
in VD
. •
0 0






o m
O" CM
1 1
o o*^
rn






















I>t >>**
V-i J-i
CU OJ
d a
•rH -H
1 1 i i|- |
CU 0)
l-i P
i — | r— 1
•H -H
O O
 £>
0 0
cu cu cu
^ v| ^ ^
o o o
CJ CJ CJ





in i — f
^O i — 1
I
0 0






0 0
ON O
OO CM
1
O
rH
rH






















CO
C ft
CU 01
£> f>
0 0
0) 0)
vl ^
0 0
CJ CJ





r*x.









in
ro
i~H






c
0
•H
4-J
tO
N
•H
rH
0
C
CU

d.
cu


f]
4-1
•H
Jj

rj
0)
£>
0
01
vj
O
CJ





in
rH








O
O
^j-
*i
rH














ft
O
•H
4-J 4J
3 tO
O N
fl -iH
4-J rH
•H 0
»3 ft
cu

01 CL
> 0)
O T3
01

o
CJ
 en
 CO
 cu
 CJ
 O

PH
 ft

 g
 4-J
 td
 cu
 1-1
H
 O
4J
•1-1
p

 (3
 O
"O
•rH
 X
O
•H
PH

 60
 (3
                                O>
                                00
CO


 CU
 4-)
 tfl
                                            289
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
  I
  I
  I
  I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                             Ml
































,. — s
•
4J
C
O
CJ
N^

00
1
M
M
h- 1
£>
X

w

CQ
 !
O

H

[jl
§
H

W
Pi
H
W
JT"!
H

Z
i— i

CO
^rj
W
H
CO
J>-l
en

( •}
<^
u
i— i
O
o
hJ
o
M
pq

PM
O

W
O
^
> C >.

0) J*H M £2 QJ
COO C
•H 3 3 60 -H
14H CT CT P* >4H
CU -H -H -H CU
J-4 rH rH ,il! M
CJ
iH CD CO O rH
•H nj a) 4-i -r-t
O O O CO O








CO
CO
0)
CJ
o
jj
PH

4J
a

g*
4-1
CO
CU
J_l
H

CU
60
t3
3
rH
CO

•o
CU

cfl
>
•H
4J
CJ







00
•
o
m 1
C*O CM
• •
0 0











0 0
oo o
t cy\
o
-<}• en
1
o
in
CO
f\
en




















£*•>
j_j
CU
C C
•H CU
t4~t K*
0) O
^J
CU
1 — 1 V{
•H O
O U




CO
3
rH
P.
^c
cu cu
60 60
""O i-i *"O
3 CU 3
t-H 4-1 rH
CO rH C/l
•H
13 ta T3
CU 01
4-1 CJ 4-J
cfl cfl cfl
K* PH t-*
•H 1 -H
4-J U 4-1
O O O
<^ Q ^










O
•
rH











O
m
, — i































C
0)
^
o

CU
^i
0
U







/-^x
CU
M 60
O T3
4-1 3
cfl i — 1
M CO
CU
i — 1 T3
cu cu
CJ 4-1
O CO
<^ [>
•H
O 4-1
V-i O
0) ^
^
-a
C
3
O
pz^









CO
CO
CU
CJ
o
J^
P4

cfl
•rl
T)

cfl
CJ
o
Z










•H
CO
O
rH
P,
X
w

























cfl
rH >
• O
o e
CU
1 !-i
CO r-H
CU O
CJ C
3 0)
TIJ r£j
O Pi
t-l
PH S-J
o
>-. 4H
	 i
4J CU
C M
0) 3
4J 4J
CO rH
•n 3
(0 U
C
o e
CJ W
•H
CO C
60 cfl
C 60
•H V
T3 O
tfl
O t3
r— 1 CU
4-J
r-l Pi
CU CO
!3 T)
O cfl
>-.
r{ rH
4J i-H
•H cfl
5 "H
CJ
0 CU
O p<
•H CO
4-1
cfl ,C
t f j_J
CU -H
p! JJ
O
CU
C 60
-iH T3
^J
4-1 rH
Cl C/}
cfl
rH "O
a, cu
4J
CU CO
i — 1 i>
Cfl -H
U 4J
CO O
<£j
iH
i~H *"•
3 rH
U-J CVj
£>
1 O
a
4-J 0)
C r-4
Cfl

Cu O"\
•
-U O^
O O^
rH
•H M
PH O


•X
290

-------
pilot plant scale.  The affectiveness of biological treatment on




phenolic bearing petroleum wastewaters is summarized in Table XVIII-9.           •




      Other methods which have been utilized for moderate level




phenolic waste streams include chemical coagulation, chemical oxida-            |




tion, and gas stripping followed by incineration.  In Patterson &               M




Minear's review on phenolic treatment, it was indicated that coagula-




tion with alum and iron salts has been utilized.  It was also found             •




that 10-20 percent of the phenolics starting at an initial concentra-




tion of 100-125 mg/1, were removed.  One piece of literature reviewed            £




by Patterson and Minear, however, suggested that chlorination plus              ^




coagulation with lime would result in almost 100% removal of phenolics,




at a cost of $1.25-$1.50 per thousand gallons of waste treated.                 •




      In Nemerow's (71) discussion of phenolic removal from rubber




waste, he stated that chlorination is very effective if sufficient              I




time is given for the reaction.  Similarly, Patterson and Minear                ^




have reported that extremely high concentrations of chlorine must               ™




be added to effect complete removal of phenolics.  In addition, it              flj




was found that this must be done at a pH of 7 or less, to prevent




the formation of toxic chlorophenols.                                           •




      Patterson & Minear reported on the use of ozone and chlorine




dioxide for successful oxidation of phenol.  Although ozone was re-             •




ported as being an efficient treatment process, operating and cap-              •




ital costs are extremely high.  It was reported that 1.5-2.5 parts




of ozone are required per part of phenol for effective removal, but             •




effluents of down to 0.003 mg/1 were obtainable.
                               291
I



I

-------
I
                      Patterson & Minear also reported on the use of hydrocarbon
|              stripping, followed by incineration for the removal of phenol.  The
a              cost of this operation will be discussed later in this section.
                      Polishing Steps in Phenolic Removal
•                    As shown above, biological treatment is generally capable of
_              reducing phenol concentrations down to 1-2 mg/1, or less.  While
™              not reported in any of the recent text reviewed for phenolic waste
•              treatment, Patterson and Minear report that Phenol removal is cur-
                rently achievable to below the 0.1-1.0 mg/1 level.
•                    The ozone treatment previously disregarded for higher levels
                of phenolic waste is much more effective and economical as a polisher
•              process.  Another process utilized in polishing is activated carbon.
•              The work of McPhee and Smith, as discussed by Patterson and Minear,
                indicates that a good grade of activated carbon should have the capac-
I
I
I
I
I
ity of removing 0.09 mg phenol for every 20 mg of activated carbon.
By utilizing activated carbon, phenolic waste concentrations of 0.020
mg/1 can be reduced to a final effluent level of 0.005 mg/1.
      On the basis of the above treatment processes, from the recover-
                able range of phenolic waste, to the intermediate range, to the polish-
•              ing process, it becomes apparent that a phenolic effluent anywhere
                from 100 mg/1 down to 0.005 mg/1 is currently, technically obtainable.
I
                COST OF PHENOLIC TREATMENT
•                    As reported in Patterson & Minear the cost associated with the
                treatment of phenolic waste appears to be well within the range of
equivalent cost for water and wastewater treatment processes.  Table
XV1II-10 has been prepared from the various data reviewed by Patterson
                               292

-------

TABLE XVI I 1-9
SUMMARY OF BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
OF PHENOLIC - PETROCHEMICAL
WASTE (44)

Product and/or FLOW Phenol Cone, mg/1
Process MGD INF. EFF. Treatment

Refinery, Natural Gas
Liquids, Chemical Activated
Specialities, Domestic wst. 4.87 0.05 Sludge
Sour Waters 0.43 65 0.065 TF & AS
Refining Process 0.51 33 0.5 Activated
83 Sludge
Petroleum Products 0.27 25 1 A,S.
Synthetic Resins 4,500 1.5 Two Stage
Phenol, Formaldehyde, Trickling
Organic Acids, H. C. Solvents Filter








293
1

|



1
1

1
I



1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

-------
I
I
I
I
and Minear.  As noted in Table XVIII-10 the costs for the individual


treatment processes and their respective flows have been compared


to what has been termed by Weston (97) a typical secondary treatment
                facility.  While the costs for some of the recovery processes appear


•              to be high, one must remember the value of recovered phenol.


                      As summarized in Table XVIII-11 the recovery value of phenols


B              by the Barrett recovery process has been reported to be in the range


M              of $400,000 per thousand gallons (76).  Patterson and Minear further


                state that "capital costs decrease from lower removals.  Assuming


•              an inflow of 5,000 mg/1 and allowing an effluent concentration of
50 mg/1 lowers the capital cost of $150,000 for a 1 MGD plant and


$70,000 for a 0.01 MGD plant.  Increasing effluent phenols concen-


tration to 500 mg/1 (90% removal) reduces the 0.01 MGD cost to $60,000.
                Reduced recovery value is associated with decreased recovery."  Phenol


•              recovery from this process offsets any operating costs.  A quick


                estimate of multiple treatment facilities including a recovery step


•              followed by activated sludge, and possibly even a polishing step,


_              would indicate that the total operating costs could be very close to


*              zero.  The total capital costs appear well within the realm of the


fl              equivalent secondary treatment facility.


                      Operational costs from the works of Patterson & Minear have


•              also been summarized and shown in Table XVIII-12.  These data indi-


                cate that the typical operating costs, with the exception of the two


•              chlorination steps, are well below the equivalent costs of removing


•              trace metals.


                      In conclusion, it is apparent that the technology currently


•              exists to remove phenols to very low residual levels at costs which
                              294

-------
























0
1
M
M
M
^
Pd
,")
m


















































s~ v
*>o
r>*.
v-'
t-\
g
§
j
o
a
w
P-I
pi
o
EH

H
CO
o
u
H
1 |
PM

u























ct)
O

0
0
rH
~-^
•CO-
IJ
CO
o
0





•CO-
n
4J
w
0
u











s
„
5s
o
rH





















CO
CO
0)
o
0


O OOO
0 OOO
O OOO
0 OOO
,
mo t-i
^~4 »rH OJ
C X fl 0
o w -u ^jj j-i o
•H C U) CO O 0)
U Q , — | o "H 4-1 I"**]
m -iH -H t-i C3 O
(-1 4J O 4-J tH m 4-1
CU O O CD Li 4-1
d m 4-1 CU *rH 4-J CU
•H M (~j rH Q ^ V4
o 4-i oo rd TIJ r i ^H
d !«! -H O CO

o
o
0
o
Q
o
CM





0
o
o
0

CM













0
rH
o






















CO
CO
0)

o
J_l
p 1


o
o
o
o
CO
m
rH





o
o
o
o
\^
CM













r-~.
rH
o


















d
'H
iH
^•^
w
E

Q
£^
c^
•<
m

0
o
o
o

CO
rH





o
o
o
o
r*>.
^o













o
m
o



















±>
•3


iH
*^^,
OJ[
^

LO


0 0
o o
0 0
o in
CM rH
OO •*
CM



CM m
ON ON
0 0
0 0
o o
0 0

CO 00













rH CM
rH ON
O rH
















CU
60
T3 _
rH ~
CO

•a
cu
4-1
m
£> ~.
•H
4_J
o

o
o
~*
m
!— ^







o
o
o
o
o
o

rn"












m
^o





M
d
•H
1 — 1
N^
o
•H
J_t
H

T)
C
cfl

d -H
O CO
•H CO
4-1 PQ
m

0 C

IM "Tj
M r— 4
•H O

0 O
O VD
ON CO
co r--
rH







0 0
0 0
o o
in rH
CM OO














OO

O rH







*"O
CU

a.
•H
5-4 d
4J O
CO -H
1 1
CO CO
m 3
o ^
V4 0
CU O
4J
i — i 'O
•H d







CM in CM
in co VD
CO rH









CM in o
un in rH
CO CO CM
rH VO
















OOO
rH O O
rH O
rH














d
o
,0 _
cd "
0

rtd
cu

cd
> = =
•H
4J
o
                                                000
                                                OOO
                                                OOO
                                                  f,   f,   *\
                                                OOO
                                                O OO  csj
                                                CM ~*  CM
                                                000
                                                OOO
                                                OOO
                                                  »t  #\   •%
                                                OOO
                                                OOO
                                                CM  00 O
                                           4J
                                           m
                                           Q)
                                           M
                                           H
                                            C
                                            O
                                            U
                                            Q)
                                            o
                                           •rl
                                            CX
                                                    o o
                                                O  rH in
                                                 C
                                                 o
                                                 4-J
                                                 CO
                                                 PQ
295
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 cfl
O

O
o
o
0000
o  o o  o
o  o o  o
  #1  f\   n  »\
o  o o  o
LO  O rH  O
LO  -d" -*  
rH O
1 0
L 1 fT-|
M P3
r— 1
> H
X H
W S
, 1 rv|
pT) <^
<; M
H
pq
Pi
W
O
u
w
Pi
hJ
o
w
ffi
P-I






0)
3
rH O O O O
cfl O O O O
> LO O O O
>i LO o o o
)-j <}• r^ O
a) CN
j>
o
a
0)
a!






















































CN
rH
M
H
H
£>
X
w
rJ
pq

0

w
Pi

en
£_}
M


W
*TJ
P-I

0

H
to
O
0
i-l
0
1 [
H
W
P-i
O













CO
en
01
o
o

P-I


















•
rH
cfl
0

O
0
~- —
rH











rH
cO
•H


c
0
•H
4— '
cfl
13
a) -H
60 X
"O O
3
0 rH 01
O tO 4-)
•rl Cfl
4-J *~O C
cfl 01 cfl
M 4-> 60
a) co c
d > cfl
•H -H 0
cj 4-i t-i
d o a)
M 
vO
•
rH

1

O
0
rH














O
o
o
c
O
4J
M
3
g
O
O

t^Q

TJ
0)
p.
Pu
•H
^
4J
to

0)
Cfl
O









CO
r^
O
.
O

1

r^.
O
O
0














o
rH







rH
^ —
60
e

0
0
0
rH




^


^

O
T-H


M
O
MH

00

0
o













0)
60
C
(2


























^


~

O
o
rH

Vj
O
U-l

LO
ro
O
O

















        rH     r~~ o
        O rH  rH LO
       O O  O O
60
e
d
0
•H
cfl
S-i
4-1 rH
C cfl
a) -H
U 4-1
a -H
0 C
CJ> M







o o to LO
O CO CN CN
O rH rH
•s
r^.


                                                                                   O

                                                                                    I
                                                                            LO
                                                                               LO O
                                                                                  cfl
                                                                                  a.
                                                                                 •H
                                                                                  o
                                                                                 •H
                                                                                  C

                                                                                 £
 cfl  C
Tj  QJ
 C  3
 O rH
 O 14-1
 O> 4-1
CO W
                                                 296

-------
                                                                                 I
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
are comparable to those of equivalent secondary treatment facilities.




It is of particular significance that a two stage process, consisting            |




of a recovery stup for initial phenol reduction followed by a bio-               M




logical system, should be capable of achieving a final effluent con-




centration of less than 1 mg/1.  It is also apparent that where                  •




needed, technology exists to reduce phenol levels even lower.





                                                                                 I




      On the basis of the above, the following conclusions have been             flj




drawn:




1.    Phenolics include a broad group of organic compounds and are               •




      prevalent in many industrial discharges.  Industrial waste




      phenolic sources range in concentration from a few mg/1 to                 9




      12,000 mg/1.                                                               •




2.    Phenolic compounds are responsible for taste and odor




      problems and tainting of fish flesh.  The> can also be toxic               •




      to certain fish at low concentrations.




3.    A stream criterion of 0.001 mg/1 is based upon the threshold               V




      odor concentration in domestic water supplies for chlorinated              •




      phenolics.  A stream criterion of 0.2 mg/1 is needed to pro-




      tect fish life.                                                            •




4.    Current  technology is capable of removing phenolics from




      industrial and municipal discharges  to a level of 1 mg/1 or                0




      less by  biological treatment or a combination of recovery                  •




      steps  followed by biological treatment.  Polishing  steps on




      biological treatment effluent are capable of producing a                   •




      final  effluent with a phenolic concentration of 0.003-0.005 mg/1.
                              297
                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I

-------
  I
  •                 On  the basis of  the above  statements, it  is recommended  that
                a uniform effluent criterion of  1.0 mg/1 be adopted  for all
  •I            phenolic  waste discharges.  This recommendation recognizes that data
  •            provided  within this report indicates  that some biological treatment
                plants are not currently meeting this  condition.  However, as  has
  •            been discussed and documented above, biological treatment processes
                are capable of reaching much lower levels.  It  is also recognized
  |            that the  recommended discharge criterion of 1.0 mg/1 could cause
  M            some taste and odor problems if  a discharge is  located immediately
                (within a 1000: 1 dilution zone) above a domestic water supply intake,
  •                  It  is further recommended  that,  where the local situation in-
                dicates that the stream water quality  criterion of 0.001 mg/1
 •             phenolics would be violated by a current industrial  or municipal dis-
 _             charge, an effluent level of 0.010 mg/1 be adopted.  In addition, an
                average operating condition for  a typical process day should be in
 B             the range 0.003-0.005  mg/1 on the basis of current technology.
                     It  is further recommended  that any new  industrial discharge,
 •             on the basis of current technology alone, should meet an effluent
                criterion of 0.010 mg/1.
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
298

-------

-------
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
I
I
                                   CHAPTER XIX-PHOSPHORUS
                     Due to the present interest in phosphate as  a possible limit-
  I
               ing nutrient in algal blooms and concomitant eutrophication problems,
               sources of phsophorus have been well delineated in the literature.


               Elemental phosphorus does not occur in nature, but rather is found


               as phosphates in several minerals and as the soluble, inorganic


               anion in water.  Because of its important role in energy transfer


               in biochemical cycles, it is also found in a wide variety of


               organic compounds.


                    McKee and Wolf  (66) state "...it is a constituent of fertile


               soils, plants, and the protoplasm, nervous  tissue and bones of


               animal life.  It is an essential nutrient for plant and animal
                growth,  and like nitrogen,  it  passes  through cycles of decomposi-
               tion and photosynthesis.  It combines directly with oxygen, sulfur,


               hydrogen, the \ alides, and many metals."


                    Naturally occurring inorganic forms of phosphorus are listed


 _             in Table XIX-1.  Phosphate minerals are formed by the precipitation


 ™             of ions from super-saturated solution or, in the case of carbonate-


 •             apatite, by the active replacement of carbonate with phosphate in


               previously formed minerals.  These minerals represent the natural


 I             reservoir of phosphate in the environment.


                    The form of phosphate in solution is controlled by the pH.


•             The log concentration of phosphate versus pH is shown in Figure


•             XlX-i.  It can be readily seen than at normal pH levels (6-8) the


               greatest percentage of the phosphate will be present as H«PO   or
                                             299

-------
HPO  .   This relationship is controlling regardless of the "form
   Chlor Apatite                         Ca, (pOJ3
   Hydroxy Apatite                       Ca  (P°A)O OH



   Carbonate-Apatite (Francoilite)       Ca  (PO , CO , OH)  F
        Anion Forms
   Monbasic Phosphate                    H?POA



   Dibasic     "                         H P0.
                                             4


   Tribasic    "                         PO"
                                           4
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
in which the phosphate is introduced, except for the tripoly and



pyrophosphates.   In these cases, the kinetics of conversion to



orthophosphate are low enough to permit residual concentrations



of the compounds.  It is the fully dissociated P0,~ form which                    •





                           TABLE XIX-1
                                                                               I
   NATURALLY OCCURRING INORGANIC FORMS OF PHOSPHORUS (66,73)



       Mineral Forms                     Chem-Formula                             •



   Fluor-Apatite (Apatite)               Ca
                                                                               I


                                                                               I


                                                                               I


                                                                               I


                                                                               I
Pyrophosphate                         P?^-,                                     •


Hexametaphosphate                     (P0n),

                                                                               I
Tripolyphosphate                      p^°in                                    •




                                                                               I



                                                                               I



                                                                               I



                                                                               I



                                                                               I
                              300

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
ill      ii      ill       lit


    LOG CONCENTRATION  DIAGRAM DESCRIBING PHOSPHATE EQUILIBRIA


                        FIGURE XIX - i
                                301
                                                                   CO
                                                                         o
                                                                        •H
                                                                        4-1
                                                                         n)
                                                                         S-i
                                                                        4-1
                                                                         a
                                                                         a)
                                                                         o
                                                                         o
                                                                        M

                                                                         d
                                                                         
-------

-------
1
1

1



1

1



1





1

1



1

1



1
1

is reported to be the most readily available for biological utili-
zation (72,73).
Phosphorus is found in untreated domestic wastewaters at con-
centrations ranging from 5 to 40 mg/1 with typical wastes averaging

about 10 mg/1 (as P) (19,67). Typical secondary treated municipal
effluents contain from 1 to 12 rag/1 (as P) (19,26,67). Phosphorus
removal in secondary plants depends upon the type of treatment .
Industrial sources of phosphorus are listed in Table XIX-2.
Other sources of phosphorus in surface waters include agricultural

runoff from feed lots, fertilized acreage and natural organic
decayed matter found in general erosion materials.
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PHOSPHORUS

Effects on Man

For many years polyphosphates have been used in low concentra-
tions in boiler waters to reduce corrosion and control scale. At
these low concentrations phosphorus is not known to have any physio-
logical significance. Phosphorus compounds are, however, undesirable
in high concentrations (450 mg/1) in water used to prepare foods.

They have a buffering action on the stomach acids (6) . Hexameta-
phosphates are converted to phosphoric acid in the low pH environ-
ment of the stomach (see Figure XIX-1) . High concentrations can
cause both vomiting and diarrhea. The safe oral dose is recommended
not to exceed 50 mg/1. Other detrimental effects of phosphorus in-

clude interference with coagulation and f locculation. As noted in

302

-------
              TABLE XIX-2
SOURCES OF PHOSPHORUS IN WASTEWATERS
           Industrial Source
                                                           I
                                                           I
                                                           I
                                                           I
           Potato Processing                                          I


           Fertilizer Manufacture


           Metal Finishing Wastes                                     •


           Flour Processing                                           _


           Dairy Wastes (PO°IO)


           Commercial Laundries  (PO ~   (PO.),)                        •
                                   4      j D                         •

           Slaughterhouse Wastes  (P 0 _)


           Cooling Water (P0,=)                                       I
                                                                      I

                                                                      I
Boiler Slowdown (H2PO   , PO, )


Petrochemical Plants


Detergent Manufacture  (PO,~, P70 )


Textiles (PO,~)


Tanneries (P(l,~)                                           •


Baking Powder Manufacture (H^PO. )


Medicine (Laxative)(HPO ~)                                 •


Photography  (PO ~)                                         •


Paper Mills  '~" =^
           Water Treatment  (PO   , P  0  ,  P.,0   )                         •

           Oil Well Drilling  (P00 )

                                                                       I


                                                                       I

                    303                                                _

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the section on surfactants, tripoly-and pyrophosphate concentra-


tions of 0.5 to 1.5 mg/1 are known to have interfered with water


treatment (66).


     Phosphates are also noted for affecting the aroma of beer


and its resistance to bacterial action (66).



     Effect on Irrigation


     Phosphorus is an essential nutrient for plants.   Because of


this phosphorus has a generally beneficial effect at levels normal-


ly found in treated effluents or in surface streams.   However,


waters having a phosphorus concentration of 6C mg/1 can contribute


to iron chlorosis in blueberry plants (66).
fl                    Effect on Fish and other Aquatic Life


                      Phosphate is of little importance as a compound directly toxic


•               to fish and aquatic life.   Levels necessary to produce a direct


                 toxic effect are several orders of magnitude higher than the levels


•               which would produce severe eutrophication problems.  Once phosphorous


•               enters the eco-system, however, it may theoretically exert an oxygen


                 demand of 160 mg per 1 mg of organic phosphorous prior of complete


•               oxidation (6).


                      Elemental phosphorus is quite toxic.  McKee and Wolf report
that colloidal phosphorus (as P ) has a 48-hour TLm of 0.105 mg/1


for bluegill sunfish.  However, this form represents a relatively


minor percentage of normally encountered wastes.


     Because phosphate is actively incorporated into the tissues


and protoplasm of all living creatures, concentration factors of


4,900-13,600 for algae, 30,000-165,000 for fish and up to 850,000
                              304

-------
for spirogyra are routinely found above the background level.


For this reason the release of radio-active phosphorus must


be strictly controlled regardless of form.





                         TABLE XIX-3





             DIRECT TOXIC EFFECT OF PHOSPHORUS
Target Organism   P-Form    Cone. Level     Test
                                    Effect    Ref
Man
Man
Food Crop
(Blueberry)
PO,
(P°3>4
PO,
Bluegill
450 mgm/1     Used in     Buffers   (6)
              food prep.  stomach
                          acid


 50 mg/1      Ingestion   Vomiting, (66)
                          diarrhea


 60 mgm/1     Used as     Complexed (66)
              irrigation  iron re-
              water       suiting in
                          iron chlor-
                          osis


Colloidal     Immersion   48 hr.  TLm=(66)
Dispersion                [0.105 mgm/1]
     A more widely recognized effect is the role of phosphorus as


a contributing nutrient in algae blooms.  Massey and Robinson (63)


report that phosphorus is one of 15 elements which may limit growth


of algae.  Other elements noted in the literature include iron,


sodium, nitrogen, carbon, potassium, magnesium, calcium, manganese,


silicon  (for diatoms), sulfur (as sulfates) , and oxygen (6,63).


     Of the elements listed, phosphorus and carbon are the two most


significant (63).
                             305
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
•
I
While nitrogen is significant in discharges, some algae can fix
atmospheric nitrogen, making its control as the limiting element
highly questionable.
 I
                     It was not until works by Kuenzel , King, and Kerr and
 •              associates were known that carbon was openly considered a limit-
                ing element (63).  This is an additional reason for the effluent
 •              criteria recommended for BOD and SS  (see Chapter III of this
 •              report) .
                     Phosphates still must be considered one of the possible
 •              limiting elements in algal blooms due either to their threshold
                values or synergistic effects which  are neither known or fully
 •              understood.  As such, it is reported that from 0.009 mg/1 to
 •              0.015 mg/1 phosphorus can be the limiting concentration (6,63).
                In addition, it is stated (6) that detention of waters has been
found to reduce phosphorus concentrations.  It is theorized that
this may be due to phosphorous uptake by organisms and/or by
precipitation.  On the basis of data available in 1967-68 it was
recommended (6) that total phosphorus concentrations not exceed
•
                0.10 mg/1 in flowing streams or 0.05 mg/1 in ponds or reservoirs
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY-PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL

     Treatment technology for the removal of phosphorus has re-
cently been reported in the literature in substantial volume.  The
_
                EPA has commissioned the compiling of a "Process Design Manual for
H              Phosphorus Removal" by Black & Veatch, Consulting Engineers  (19).

I

I
                             306

-------
                                                                               I
As this manual adequately reviews the current state of the art ,




the individual mechanisms of the various processes will not be                 |




discussed in this report.  Rather, the efficiencies and costs                  _




of the various methods will be emphasized with respect to achieve-




ment levels.  In general, the methods which have been reported as              •




effective include the following:




     (1)  Coagulation prior to primary clarification, utilizing                •




          alum and/or lime, generally known as Phosphate Extrac-               _




          tion Process (PEP) .                                                  '




     (2)  Utilization of an up-flow clarifier filtration  (solids               •




          contact) with coagulation either before or after




          biological treatment and filtration.                                 I




     (3)  Post biological coagulation with alum and/or lime.




     (4)  Moving bed filters with coagulation.                                 B




     (5)  Activated sludge and other biological processes.                     •




     (6)  Biological - Chemical treatment, i.e., the addition of




          coagulants directly to the activated sludge system.                  •




     (7)  Coagulation and precipitation with metallic salts and




          polyelectrolyte.                                                     H




     (8)  Reverse osmosis.                                                     •




     (9)  Adsorption on activated bentonite.




    (10)  Ion exchange.                                                        •




    (11)  Adsorption and uptake by "Activated Algae".




     Removal efficiencies reported for the various procedures and              |




capital costs, operation costs and amortized operation costs are               •




summarized  in Tables XIX-4 and XIX-5 respectively.
                              307
I



I

-------
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
CO
w
CO
CO
w
u
o

£L(

1
X
M
X
w
FQ

H

<3
j>
o

2
CO
!3
tf
O
Pn
CO
o
33
PM
rH
^^
00
S
v_x

rH
cd
fi
•H
PH



^^

M
S
^^
rH
n)
•H
4-1
•H
C
QO
QO
00
OO
             00
00
OO
CNI
oo
00
ro
                                               CN
o
iH
 I
       m

       o
m

oo
 cd

•H
 J-i
 CX

m

CT>
+

o
CO
rH

00
                          in
                           I
                          m
                           C
                           •H
                           e

                           CO

                           O

                           CM
                                               I
                                              CO
                          O
                          in
CO
             

                                                                      ON I—I C
                                           1—
                                           o  
Cfl 0 -rl
O) cfl 4-1
U h -H
O 4J M
)-i X! cd
O< W rH
U
4-1 Ol
C *-> f*.
Q) Cd S-i
B .c cd oi
•u ex 6 H
cd 0) -H -H
a; o n ^4
M ,G P-, -~.
H PH ^-^ S





01
60
TJ
3
rH
CO

-d
O)
4-J
cd
£>
•H
4-1
Sj
<^

^
n

13
Ol
!s 0)
0 B
i — 1 *M
rH rH
0 -»-

C
O
•H
4-1
cfl
N
•H
rH
•H
&
cd
4-1
CO

4J
O
cd •
4-1 CO
C
O , 01

4-1
rrj CO
0)
S o) 01 01 o>
o _B B 6 S

rH ,-J _1 ^J J

PM |2 IS 13 J5








^
Ol
4-J
r-\
•H
U-J

- C
0) O
i — 1 ^
4-1 S-l
H 4-1 Cd
CJ 0) O
 4-i nj
cd >
CO rH -H
Q d 4-1
M 60 O
>~3 cd CO
o o
CO O t-3

-------
C
O
o
X
w
h-i
CO
<
H
                           00
                           00
                                  00
                                   ro
CO
oo
00
OO
                                         en
oo
00
                                                       ON

                                                       o
                                                              co

LT>
•
o
r- 1











a
0
•rl
4J
cd
M
1—1
•H
n [

o
4->
}_,
o
•H
S-i



C
o
•H
4J
cd
1-1
4J
1— 1
•H
4-1
S-i
0)
4-1
4-1
C
0
3
!— 1
O
o
C
o
n
S-i
cd
o
S-l
0)
4-1
4-1
0
o
•H
4-1
cd
M
4— '
i— 1
•H
M-(

0
4J
>_,
0
•H
V4
                      4-1
                      tn

                      §
                      o
                      o
O
o-l
                                                              CM
                                   LO


                                   CN
                                                                                  ro
                            CM
                            CXI      ro
                            CM      CO
                             I
                            LTI      CM
                                                                                          0)
                                                                                          r-l
                                                                                          01
                                                                                          •H
                                                                                          4-1
                                                 in

                                                 o
                                                 CO

                                                 O
                                                309
vD
CM
o

H

j i
to
O

o
CD
CO
0)
u
o

(X,
4-j
a
CU
B
4-1
cd
0)
ki
H
CJ

t 1
^
QJ
M
8

o
M
PQ

H
OT
O
PH










4J
a
cu
•r-)
0
a,

o
rH
1-1
•H
^-1
cd

<2






^
^j
iH

6
•H
, — j

0)
60
cd
4J m
CD <4-(
w
CM
Td
1 CU
cu
U 4-1
i-H
•H
f-^ P-l

^
CD
rt






C
O
PQ
^_j
cd
o

i-i
cu
4J
4-1
cd

TJ
C
cd





I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
 OJ
Cd
 CO
 CO
 QJ
 O
 O
 M
PM

 4-1
 C
 QJ
 a
 4-1
 Cfl
 0)
 M
H
           vD
                   CM
M

4-1
O
O
1
X
t I
XJ
tJ
, "]
5
H
V 	 '
rH
CO
C
•H







rH
W)
e^
• — ^
rH
CO
•H
4-J
•H
C




00
•
oo



            QJ
            B
           •H
            QJ
            bO
            CO
 O
•H
 C
 O
 G
 cO
                C
                O

                t-i
                cO
                O
        QJ
        4J
C
tO
                                 OO
                                 00
                                  4J
                                  tfl
                                  c
                                  o
                                  JD
                                  S-l
                                  n)
                                  a
                                  OJ
                                 oo

                                 o
                                  o
                                  •H
                                  4J
                                  W
                                  0)

                                  O
                                  O
                                  QJ

                                  •H
       QJ
       W)
       CO
       4J
       CO

       CM

        I

       QJ
       O

       cfl
       H
                       a
                       o
                       CO
                                 00
                                 00
                                  rt

                                  O

                                  QJ
                                 Pi
tn

S,

Pi
w
H
Q
W
PP

O
23
                         \O
                         CM
               VO
               CM
                  00
                  00
                                         CM

                                         CM
                                 00

                                 O
                                         CM
                                                CTs
Pn
M
a
                                          e












0
H
I
\*O







0
CM



















W
o
Q
}~1
h-J
CO

Q
W
H

£>
M
H
U

3 OJ
ft. PH













O
«
CO






CM
u^
rH










G
O
•H
4-1
CO
r-l
Q)
to

T3
QJ
J_j
Q)
a,
4-1 05
C w
CO
rH T3
ft QJ
CO
4-1 Sn
O OJ
rH >
•H QJ
P-. PH
c
•H
CO
CO
QJ
4-1
O
-d
C
QJ
4-1
C
0)
3
rH
m
<4H
Q)
QJ
4-1
cn
QJ
4—)
crj
0
•rH
4-1
cO
M
QJ
03
S-l
QJ
00
•H
CO
cfl
C
O
•H
4-1
cO
^
QJ
cO

TJ
QJ
^
QJ
ft
CO
4J

-d
QJ
CO
^
QJ
£>
QJ
05
*
                                        310

-------
Pi
                vO
                CN
CO
CO
01
o
0

P-I

4J
C
cu
s
4-1
nj
01
^J
EH
c/3
C3
2!
rH
, "]
H
H
W
C/)

j>-*
^
rS
M
fYJ
P-I
Cw
Pd
H

M
fe

O

M
^
O
M
p^
H
U
W
O


I-"J
cn

P
W
E~*
>
H
H
O

M
g
W
3:
CJ
1
f-J

O
e
/— -.
T~i
60
S
*^

^^ i — 1
•U cfl
C C
0 -H
O Fn
•^_x
01


B~«
m
rH
1
in


1
X
h- 1 x~*
X rH
W bO
>H e
PQ *•— ^
EH rH
CO
•H
•U
•rH
c
M










rH rH
CO CO
> >
O O
§g
CU


B^S S^S
O 0
ro in
1 1
o o
CN m





















in
o
0 0

CN O









m m
ro



                                                               LO
                                                6
                                                3
                                                    CO
                                                            CN
                                                          O
                  §
                              311
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I

-------
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
 I
I
 0)
PS
M
B

X~N
a
o
o
i
X
1 j
X
w
pp
H
>• — '
-H
cfl
c
-H


oo
CM





^-N
1 	 1

^B,



"1
iH
 cfl
•H
•H
 C
 cfl
 0)
 
 Cfl

•H
4-1
 U

-------
         PS
e
o
o
XI
w
           bd
           cfl
          •H
           4J
          •H
           C
          H
                             oo
 I
st

O
                              LO

                              CTv
                                      oo
                                      00
                                        0)
                                        0)
 n)
•H
 J-l
 c
 0)
 CO
 to
 w
w
H
CO
CO
a;
o
o
^
p-i

j-i
C
0)
E
4-1
tfl
0)
M
H
M
53
CO
M
CO
O
g
CO
o

w
CO
prf
w
>
W
Prf
O
H
2
W
PQ

O
W
H
<3
>
H
H
O

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                                 o-.
                                                                       OO
                                                                       oo
       o
       o
t>  C O
 CU  O rH
 N  -H --v.
•H  4J  O-
4J  rt

 o  cu  en
 a  ex  o
<2  o o
 o
o   •
   rH
 C  "3
 O O

4J O
 cd O
 rJ O
 CU rH

O 
      m
      CM
      o
                            ON
                            -d-
                                                         in
                                                         o
                                                                       O

                                                                       o
                                                                                          00
                                                                                          I—
CO
CO
CD
o
o
           X
           w

           OJ
           4J
           cd

           a,
           Cfl
           o

           PM
              cu

             1?
rH
CM
g
P4

1 CO
in rs
1 O
X P4
M EC
X CM
w o
r4 PC
W PM
r ^ r-r ^
o

H
CO
O
C_)
rt)
4-)
•ri 4J
& Cfl
CO O
0 U












P
O

o
( — (
[JL4
g

O
rH

0
, — I
CO
«
0
CM






P
O
g

rH


0
vj-
r~-
f
rH
r--






P
0
g

O
rH

0
0
o
*1
r--.
OS
V.Q





P
O
g

o
o
rH
o
0
vD
#*
r^.
in






P
o
g

rH


O
o
o
n
rH

^D
CN
ON





Q P
O CJ
g g

O rH
O
rH
O
o
o
»\
m
r^
CO





P
O
g

O
rH













POP
O O O
g g g

rH 0 0
rH 0
rH












Q
o


O

CM

CO
rH CU CU CU
o a e e
CU -H -rl -H
fX4 >_3 |_J t "]
•^^ -^^ — ^ ^ 	
J5 J3 [5 ^



E - ~ -







— « ~ b






c
G
O
•H
4J
ca

4J
rH
•H
PH
^
4J

-------
           o
           o
   T3   C  O
    a)   o  r-t
    N  TH  --^
   •H
       4->  O
    rJ   (-4  4-J
    o   a)  to
    S   P. o
        ^	'
                  00
                                  O
                                 4-1
                             OO     fO     CN     CN
                              I      rH     rH
                                                              CN
                                                               1
                                                              oo
                      CN

                      oo
 cd  ca
 >  >
 o  o
 0  0
 CD  0)
LO  O
o^  oo
           O
                                        O

                                        O
                                                oo
                                                o
O

O
              O
              O
              O
c
0
CJ
1
X
Capital
Cost
0
o
0
o
o
in
O
o
o
0
OO
CN
O
o
o
CN
                                                                                               O
                                                                                               o
                                                                                               o
O
o

0
rH

m
•
r^-
Q
O
g
rH


O
o

rH


O
o
s
rH


Q

s
o
rH

Q Q
O O
S
0
g
O
O rH
rH
Q

g
rH


                                                    d
                                                    o
                                                  315
                             00
                             OO
                                                                                    •-O
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     O
                                                                                       f\
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     o
                                                                                                       O
                                                                                 0

                                                                                 -
O O
to g

QJ
00
t3
;J
i — I
in
— ~
T?
CD
4J
cd
^ -• t^
•H
4J
CJ

•iH
4J
CJ
<3
cd
^J
4J
rH
•H
M-l
OJ
J_(
OJ

C
c«

a
X
w

c
0
M
(X

^


£ —





r r








C
O
•H
4-J
a
Q)
•1 — i
£
HH

1 — 1
1 — 1

-------
I
I
       SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
•                   In General  the  following  statements  can be made  relative  to


                phosphorus  and phosphates  in the  environment.


•                   1.   There are both natural and man contributed sources  of


_                       phosphate in  nature.  There  can  be no zero background


™                       for  phosphorus because it is  an  essential nutrient  of


•                       all  plant life.   In Those areas  where the water  is  devoid


                         of phosphorus little  aquatic  life will be present.


•                   2.   The  largest contributors of  phosphorus to surface and


                         ground  waters are domestic wastewaters and agricultural


™                       runoff.  Domestic wastewaters contain between  5  and 40


•                       milligrams  per liter  and average about 10 milligrams  per


                         liter.   Concentrations of phosphorus in  agricultural


•                       runoff  can  be several hundred milligrams per liter.


                     3.   In the  normal pH  range of most streams  (6 to 8)  the major


•                       ionic forms are dibasic  phosphate and monobasic  phosphate,





                         form in which the phosphate  was  introduced into  the water.


•                   4.   Phosphate concentrations are  of  more significance to  fish


                         and  aquatic life  than to man, animals and plants.   Fish


|                       have demonstrated a 48 hour  TLm  to 0.105 mg/1  of elemental


•                       colloidal phosphorus. On the other hand, phosphate concen-


                         trations below 50 mg/1 do not appear to  have any significant


•                       effects on  man, animal or plants.  Some  forms  of aquatic





I



I                                            316
that is, H?PO,   and HPO   .   This is irrespective of the

-------
                                                                                 I
         life are capable of  concentrating phosphorus up to
         850,000 times the background concentrations of the                      |
         aquatic environment.                                                     mm
     5.   High concentrations  of phosphate may interfere with
         water treatment.  Concentrations as low as 0.5 to 1.5                   •
         milligrams per liter have been demonstrated to inter-
         fere with treatment.                                                     |
     6.   The nature of algal  blooms is still being investigated                  _
         and debated.   Phosphorus and carbon are widely recognized
         as being important limiting elements with respect to                    II
         algae blooms.  Concentrations as low as 0.009 milligrams
         per liter of  phosphate have been reported as limiting to                I
         algal growth.  Other studies indicate somewhat higher
         concentrations to be the limiting level of phosphate.                   •
     7.   Current technology can effect a reduction of phosphorus                 •
         to 1-2 mg/1 as phosphorus.  The cost of removing phosphorus
         varies with the process and the size of the plant.  Several             •
         processes have been shown to be effective.
     On the basis of the present information, a unifrom effluent                 •
criterion is difficult to justify at this time.  It is recommended,              •
however, that where stream and impoundment levels are at or above
0.10 or 0.050 milligrams per liter respectively that all municipal               •
and industrial discharges in the zone of influence uniform effluent
criterion of 2.0 mg/1 as phosphorus.                                             0

                                                                                 1

                                                                                 I
                             317
                                                                                 I

-------
I
                    When the EPA adopts a policy that all municipal discharges,
               as well as industrial discharges, must meet a uniform effluent
•             criterion for phosphorous, a 2 mg/1  (as P) concentration is
               recommended.  Until such  a policy is developed, it is preju-
|             dicial to levy an effluent criterion on either industry or domestic
M             discharbes alone.  The phosphorus limitation, like all criteria,
               must be equally applied to all effluents.
I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I
                                             318

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
                          CHAPTER XX-SELENIUM





     Selenium is primarily found in soil as elemental selenium, ferric


selenite Fe?(SeO_)_, calcium selenate Ca~ (SeO,).,, and organic selenium


compounds.  Selenium is often found in association with sulfur.  Con-


centrations as high as 30 mg/kg of selenium have been found in the


soils of South Dakota and Wyoming.


     Lakin (104) states that, "The selenium content of surface waters


is a function of pH of the waters as well as its presence in the drain-


age system	Selenium is quantitatively precipitated as a basic ferric


selenite at pH 6.3-6.7.  At a pH of about 8, selenite may be oxidized


to the soluble selenate ion."  Table XX-1 shows the naturally occurring


forms of selenium in the environment with some indication of the magni-


tude of their abundance.


     Selenium is used industrially in its elemental form and as several


salts.  Table XX-2 shows the industrial sources of selenium.  Selenium


may also be expected in trace quantities from municipal sewage contain-


ing industrial wastes, as well as directly from industrial waste dis-
              charges.   A review of the literature has indicated only a few concentra-

•            tions of  selenium which may be found in various  wastewaters.   A secondary

              sewage effluent  has shown 0.023 mg/1 of selenium (104).


I
                                319

-------
                              TABLE XX-1
      NATURAL SOURCES OF SELENIUM IN THE ENVIRONMENT   (104)
Sources
Crustal Abundance
Soil
Sea Water (ave.)
River Water (ave. of 9)
Goal
Petroleum
Air (U.S.A.)
   Form


elemental
ferric selenite (pH 4.5-6.5)
calcium selenate (pH 7.5-8.5)
organic
H Se (Bacterial Action)
Diethyl Selenide Gas
Se and SeO,, particulate
 from (coal & oil uses)
                                  320




Quantity
0 . 5 ppm

0.1-1,200 ppm

0.00009 mg/1
0.0002 mg/1
3 ppm
0.2 ppm

8 million
released/yr.







1
1
1
1

1
1
1

1
1
I

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

-------
 I
 I
•


fl|
I
                                          TABLE XX- 2
                              INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF  SELENIUM
                  1)  paint manufacturing


                  2)  dye manufacturing



                  3)  glass production


 •                A)  rectifier and  semiconductor manufacturing


                  5)  photoelectric  cells  and  other  electrical apparatus  production


 •                6)  supplement  to  sulfur in  the rubber  industry


 •                7)  component of alloys


                  8)  insecticides manufacturing
                 9)  wastewaters from copper ore refineries
                10)  incinerator  quench water used  to  cool  fly  ash when paper is
1i                    burned  (0.005-0.023 mg/1)  [76]

                11)  incinerator  residue quench water.   (.003 mg/1)  [76]


I


I


I


I


I


I


I
                                             321

I

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SELENIUM
municipal waste discharges.


     Effect on Man
I
I
I
     Selenium is an essential nutrient to man and other animals in trace


quantities but it is detrimental and toxic at higher concentrations.


Selenium tends to concentrate in plants and lower forms of aquatic life-           •


possibly without immediate toxic effects.  However, when it is ingested


by fish, man or animals, it can have toxic effects.  Since the concentra-          j|


tion of selenium in the soil is relatively difficult to control, it is             —


important to regulate the amount of selenium in all industrial and                 ^
I

I

I
     The Drinking Water Standards (94) report that selenium is now


recognized as being toxic to both man and animals.  They also report


that selenium, like arsenic, may have permanent effects.  For example,


selenium is noted for increasing the incidence of dental caries in man,            •


and is a potential carcinogen.  As a result, in 1962 the Drinking Water


Standards' criteria for selenium was reduced from its previous value of            H


0.05 mg/1 to 0.01 mg/1.  Concentrations in excess of this amount were              tm


determined to be grounds for rejection of the water supply.  The World


Health Organization European Drinking Water Standards (1961) state an              •


excessive limit of 0.05 mg/1.  The USSR maximum permissible concentra-


tion for drinking water is set at 0.01 mg/1.                                       |


     McKee and Wolf (66) report, "Proof of human injury by selenium is             »


scanty and definite symptoms of selenium poisoning have not been identi-


fied; but it is widely believed that selenium is highly toxic to man."             •


Table XX-3 reviews the effects of selenium on man.  McKee & Wolf reported


                                                                                   I

                               322                                                 ^

-------
1
1

1
1
^H

1

1

I

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


TABLE XX-3
THE EFFECT OF SELENIUM OF MAN (105)

Selenium Form Cone. Level Effect
undefined 2-4 rag/kg minimum lethal dose
undefine 5-7 mg/1 in food harmful to liver
5-7 mg/1 in water increased suscept-
ability to dental
caries, Gastro-
intestinal distur-
bances, icterus
undefined from seleniferous high rate of dental
areas caries ; tendency for
increased malocclu-
sion and gingivitis









323

-------
                                                                                  I
that mild chronic selenium poisoning has been observed in humans living
in areas where the selenium concentration of the soil is relatively high.          •
They also reported that selenium,  as hydrogen selenide (H_Se),  at a con-
centration of 0.2 ppm, has caused  toxic symptoms as an air pollutant.              m
Nevertheless, it is interesting to note in the McKee and Wolf  report
I
that selenium in trace amounts is known to be an essential nutrient

for animals including man although very little is known about the                 •

mechanisms of its beneficial action.

     McKee and Wolf report that selenium salts are rapidly and efficient-         £

ly absorbed through the gastrointestinal tract, and are largely excreted          w

in the urine.  The highest retention of selenium within the human body

is found in the liver and kidneys.  Selenium appears to act by maintain-          •

ing the catalytic properties of the enzyme glutathione peroxidase which

catalyzes the decomposition of hydrogen peroxide.  The intake of selenium         |

through food rather than water appears to be the basic problem for man.           _

The extreme tolerance limit of selenium in foodstuffs is reported at              ™

4.0 mg/kg with a safer limit of 3 mg/kg.  The U. S. Food and Drug Ad-             9

ministration, however, has placed a "zero" tolerance limit on selenium

in fruits and other edible crops for human consumption.                           I

     Selenium has been found to be capable of protecting rats against

mercury poisoning, a fact which is potentially encouraging to humans              •

since high concentrations of selenium have also been found along with             •

high concentrations of mercury in foods such as tuna fish (100).

     Effect on Animal Life
     As noted above, the presence of selenium in trace amounts is bene-           •

ficial to animals.  It is reported that a deficiency of selenium in

animal diets may result in white muscle disease, while an excess amount           •


                                324                                               I

-------
I
I
             of selenium has been known to cause "blind staggers" and "alkali disease'

I           (6).   A concentration of up to 24 mg/kg in the vegetation consumed by

^           livestock will produce the "alkali disease".  This involves a lack of

™           vitality, a loss of hair, sterility, lameness, and possibly death from

             anemia and malnutrition.  Table XX-4 reviews the effects of selenium on

             animal life.

•                McKee and Wolf reported that any vegetation containing 5.0 mg/kg

             of selenium has been found to be dangerous to livestock, while fodder

4B           has been found to cause selenium poisoning with concentrations as little

IB           as 1 mg/kg.  They report that the tolerance limit for livestock is about

             4 mg/kg in their feed.

•                Chronic and acute selenium poisoning has been reported to occur

             naturally among cattle, sheep, horses, pigs, and poultry where the

•           selenium concentrations in the soil were naturally high.  While McKee

«•           and Wolf report that water containing 0.4-0.5 mg/1 of selenium is

             generally non-toxic to cattle, this concentration of selenium in the

•           water may contribute to selenium poisoning initiated through the feed.


                  Effect on Plants
I

I
                  It has been reported that plants containing 4 to 5 mg/kg of selenium


             are considered to induce toxic symptoms in animals (6).  They indicated


             that this level of selenium could result in many crops due to a selenium

•           level of 0.05 mg/1 in irrigation waters.


                  Plants may be affected by selenium due to its presence in the soil


             as well as its presence in water.  Concentrations ranging from 1-6 mg/kg


             have been found in the top eight inches of soil in many areas (66).
I

I

1

I
                                             325

-------

Species
Rat
Sheep



Livestock

Mouse

Rat
Mouse

Rat











TABLE XX-4
THE EFFECT OF SELENIUM ON ANIMAL LIFE (105)

Selenium Form Cone. Level Effect

Undefined 0.012 rag/kg Near sub-threshold
Undefined 0.4 mg/kg Stimulated the inhi-
bitory process of brain
cortex up to 10-20 days

Undefined 	 Anemia, liver damage &
icterus
Se (SeO^) 3 mg/1 for life Significant increase in
growth rate
Se (SeOl) 3 mg/1 for life Most animals died young
Se (SeO~) 3 mg/1 for life Significant decrease in
growth rate
Se (SeO°) 3 mg/1 for life Significant increase in
longevity. Increase in
serum cholesterol; no
effect on serum glucose,
blood pressure or on
aortic plaques






326

1
1
1
1

1





I

1



1

1
1
1
1
1
1
I

1

-------
I
I
I
I
              The ability of plants to concentrate selenium depends on the species,
             the age of the plant, the season of the year,  and the concentration of


 •           the soluble selenate ions in the root zone of  the plant the pH and


             electrode potential of the soil.  In soils of  pH 7.5 to 8.5 selenium


 |           exists in the form of the selenate ion which is readily available to


 _           plants (104).


                  McKee and Wolf report that plants under certain circumstances can


 •           absorb relatively high concentrations of selenium without apparent


             damage to the plant itself.  For example, a weed (Astragulus) can con-


 •           tain as much as 4,500 mg/kg of selenium.  Other plants grown in selenif-


 ^           erous soils have been found to contain as much as 1,610 mg/kg of


 ™           selenium.  Plants reported to have high concentrations of selenium in-


 •           elude wheat, up to 63 mg/kg, and onions, up to 17.8 mg/kg.  Wheat has


             been directly damaged by a concentration of 30 mg/kg of sodium selenate


 •           in the soil.  The presence of chemically similar sulfates have been


             found to diminish both the uptake of selenium and its toxicity to the


 •           plant itself.



 •                Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life

                  While McKee and Wolf report that generally selenium has been found


 ||           to be toxic to fish and aquatic life in concentrations of 2.0-2.5 mg/1,


•           they also report that concentrations considered to be safe for human


             beings, over a period of weeks have been found toxic to fish.  While


 •           no concentration was specified, one would assume that this concentra-


             tion is in the range of 0.01 to 0.05 mg/1.  Barnhart, as cited by
Battelles' Columbus Laboratories' report (15), indicated that selenium


(possibly acting in synergism with other ions such as uranium or zinc)
                               327

-------
                              TABLE  XX-5
                    EFFECTS OF SELENIUM ON PLANTS  (66)
Selenium Concentration (mg/1)


 0.00 - 0.10


 0.11 - 0.20
 0.21 - 0.50
 Over 0.50
Remarks


No plant toxicity anticipated.


The water would be usable, how-
ever, long-term accumulations
should be carefully monitored.


Toxic accumulation within plants
is probable.


Water would be unsuitable under
any condition for plants.
                                 328
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 1
  I
  I

-------
 I
 —           was believed  to be responsible for a fish kill in Colorado.  The fish




 *           killed included black bullhead, bluegill, channel catfish, large-mouth-




 flj           ed bass, rainbow trout, white crappie, and yellow walleye.  This work




              indicated that arsenic was also found in the lake.  Samples of the




 •           flora and fauna in the lake were found to contain greater than 300 ppm




              of selenium.  The report concluded that it was believed that selenium




 •           has been passed up through the food chain to the fish which then




              accumulated the element to lethal concentrations.
I
 I            TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY FOR THE REMOVAL OF SELENIUM





 ^                 As noted by Patterson and Minear  (76) very little has been report-




              ed in the literature on the levels of  selenium in industrial wastewaters




 •            or its treatment.  A review of the literature (58,76) and personal dis-




              cussions with Dr. O'Connor (74) indicate that the most logical and




 ||            efficient means of removal of selenium is by ion exchange.  The litera-




 ^            ture, reviewed by Patterson and Minear, indicated that selenium is




              most likely to occur in the anionic form in an aqueous solution.




 •            Linstedt (58) reported that only 0.9 percent of the selenium was re-




              moved by a cation exchange column while a cation and anion exchange




 •            column removed 99.7 percent of the selenium concentration.  Linstedt,




              et al. concluded their work by stating  that the most effective removal




 '            method for selenium, which they had investigated on a bench scale, was




 •            the use of a strong acid-weak base ion exchange unit.  The removal
I



I



I
              efficiencies  of  the  processes  investigated  by  Linstedt   et  al  are




              summarized  below in  Table  XX-6.
                                             329

-------
                              TABLE XX-6


     BENCH-SCALE REMOVAL OF SELENIUM BY ADVANCED WASTE TREATMENT (58)
Process


Initial Feed


Lime Coagulation &
 Settling


Cation Exchange


Cation & Anion Exchange
Cumulative Removal by


     Sand Filtration


     Activated Carbon


     Cation Exchange


     Anion Exchange
% Removal




  16.2



   0.9


  99.7
   9.5


  43.2


  44.7


  99.9
Concentration mg/1


Approx. 0.0128


        0.0107



        0.0127


        0.00009
        0.0116


        0.00727


        0.00708


        0.00001
                                  330
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
     Similarly Weston (97) recommended to the Illinois Pollution Control


Board a combined cation and anion ion exchange unit for the removal of


dissolved selenium.  However, no cost data or achievable effluent con-


centrations were provided.  Patterson and Minear included within their


report two figures showing the chemical and amortization costs of a


weak base ion exchange system.


     Currie, in his summary, commenting on the adoption of an effluent


criteria for selenium for the Illinois Pollution Control Board (27),


made the following comment:


     Because of the toxicity of selenium, it it desirable to adopt an
     effluent standard, even in the absence of conclusive evidence as
     to the removal technology, in order to protect legitimate water
     uses.


     Dodge testified that the very strict 0.01 unit standard was obtain-
     able.  Since a somewhat higher level is acceptable for aquatic life,
     Dodge suggested the standard of 1.0 units, recognizing both that
     higher control may sometimes be necessary to protect public water
     supplies and that we may later discover, in a variance proceeding,
     more information as to the treatability that may result in a re-

     examination of the standard.


     As reported in Patterson and Minear, the work of Linstedt and his


co-workers indicated that the common method of lime coagulation, settling,


and sand filtration was found to be ineffective in removing selenium


from the wastewaters investigated.  On the other hand, discussions with


Dr. O'Connor (74) indicate that one of the co-authors of the original


work, Carl P. Houck, reported that the precipitation of selenium has been


effective.  According to O'Connor, Houck's article reported the recovery


of selenium by its adsorption on a ferric hydroxide sludge at a pH of 8,


and by the utilization of ferric alum as a coagulant.  Other methods
                                331

-------
                                                                                  I
proposed by O'Connor, which bear investigation for selenium removal               ^




include:  precipitation with a ferric salt, ion exchange on duplicate             *




matter such as clay, reverse osmosis, and distillation.                            V




     It is apparent that little full-scale work on selenium removal has




been reported in the literature.  On the basis of the bench-scale work,           I




the question remains as to what final effluent level can be obtained at
higher initial concentration.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
                               332
I



I



I
     1. It is apparent that selenium is both an essential nutrient to




        man and other animals in trace quantities, and is detrimental




        and toxic at higher concentrations.




     2. Selenium is found naturally in the soil and in water and                  V




        artificially in industrial and municipal discharges.  It is




        capable of being concentrated in plants and lower forms of                •




        aquatic life, possibly without immediate toxic effects.  How-             ^




        ever, upon ingestion and accumulation in fish, man and animals,           ~




        toxic concentrations are reached.  This is a major hazard of              •




        selenium toxicity to man.




     3. Selenium is also toxic to plants and fish directly, but at                •




        higher concentrations.




     4. Bench-scale treatment has reduced selenium from an initial con-




        centration of approximately 0.012 mg/1 to a final effluent of




        less than 0.1 ug/1 by anionic ion exchange.
I



I
I



I



I

-------
  I
  •                 5.  While effluent levels have not been reported,  it appears that
                        selenium may also be removed from wastewaters  by coagulation
  fl                    with ammonia hydroxide or ferric alum at a pH  of approximately
  M                    8.   The selenium ion is removed with the ferric hydroxide pre-
                        cipitate.
  •                 6.  As  the concentration of selenium in the soil is difficult to
                        control, especially when it is due to natural  causes,  it is
  |                    of  extreme importance to control the amount of selenium in all
  •                    industrial and municipal waste discharges.
                     It  is  recommended that a uniform effluent criteria of 0.01 mg/1
  •             be adopted  at this time.  It is further recommended that the investiga-
                tions and literature review of the treatment technology for the removal
 I
 I
 1
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
                of selenium from wastewaters be continued.
333

-------
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
I
                               CHAPTER XXI-SETTLEABLE SOLIDS
                     At one time settleable solids were discharged to waters
                mostly because no treatment was provided.   Today,  any plant


 •              providing primary treatment will remove most of the settleable


                fractions.   More insidious than the deliberate discharges of


 £              untreated wastes is the uncontrolled discharge of  urban and


 M              farm runoff resulting from a myriad of projects.   Table XXI-1


                is a compilation of the sources of settleable solids.


 •                   Settleable solids may be contributed  in discharges from


                both municipal and industrial waste treatment facilities.  They


 |              include inorganic and organic materials.  Inorganic components


 _              may include but will not be limited to:  sand, silt, and salts


                from natural runoff and mining operations; gravel  washing, dust,


 I              and fines from coal washeries; and loose soils, from agricultural


                land, highway runoff, and construction projects.   The organic


 •              fraction would normally be expected to include settleable


 ^              materials such as grease, oils, tars, fats, fiberous material


 ™              such as you might expect from paper mill,  and synthetic plastic


•              production; saw dust, hair, grease, and other various settleable


                materials from sewers.  In addition, any treatment process utiliz-


                ing clarification and precipitation of metallic hydroxide or


                carbonate sludges, will also contain settleable solids if not


                properly clarified.
                                             334

-------
                                                                               I
                       TABLE XXI-1
                                                                               I
                SOURCES OF SETTLEABLE SOLIDS
                                                                               I
               1.   Natural Runoff
               2.   Mining Operation                                            •
               3.   Sand and Ground Quarries                                    •
               4.   Highway and Construction Projects
               5.   Combined and Storm Sewer Discharges                         I
               6.   Untreated Industrial Wastes
               7.  Untreated Municipal Wastes
               8.  Filter Backwash
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SETTLEABLE SOLIDS
I
     Settleable Solids have also been shown to contain high con-               •

centrations of trace metals which, if not removed, can be very

toxic to the beneficial uses of the water.  Various investigations             •

reported in other sections have shown that some of these trace                 •

metals once absorbed upon settleable solids, and particulate

matter, may at a later date be leached from the solids by changes              •

in water quality and/or by the benthic aquatic life or the biota

of the receiving water.                                                        |
I
     Effects on Fish and Aquatic Organisms                                     •
     Settleable solids have adverse effects on fisheries by cover-
ing the bottom of streams or receiving water with a blanket of                 •
material that destroys both the bottom flora and fauna, and the


                              335                                               .

-------
 I
 •              strata necessary for the spawning of fish.   These deposits may
                 contain organic material which depletes the oxygen supply,
 •              creating an anaerobic condition which causes production of
                 hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, methane,  and other gases (6).

                 TREATMENT TECHNQLOGY-SETTLEABLE SOLIDS REMOVAL
 I
                      It has been well documented that adequate clarification will
 I               remove settleable solids from both industrial and municipal waste
                 treatment facilities.  The clarification process has also been
                 considered to be a basic primary step of treatment and, therefore,
                 can be considered as a minimum step in treatment well within
                 economic means.
                      It is recommended that a uniform effluent criteria for
                 settleable solids, as specified in "Standard Methods", not exceed
I               0.2 ml/1.  This  criteria will meet the minimum guidelines as
                 established in Water Quality Criteria (6).
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
                                              336

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                       CHAPTER XXII - SILVER
                   Silver is found naturally in its metal state, combined with ores,

              or as a salt.  As an ore, silver appears as Argentite, Ag^S; Horn silver,


              AgCl; Proustite, Ag^AsS  ; and Pyrargyrite, Ag3SbS3 (66).  Silver is

 •           also reported to be a by-product in the mining of lead, copper and


              zinc (74).  The nitrate salt is the most soluble form followed by the


 J[           sulfate.  The chloride, sulfide, phosphate and arsenate salts are


              practically insoluble.  Table XXII-1 lists some natural and industrial

              sources of silver.


                   Table XXII-2 lists industrial uses of silver.  Silver has been


              used as a disinfectant, especially in Europe.  While 0.015 mg/1 of AgO


 •            was reported as effective on some bacteria, it reacts slowly and is ex-


              pensive (37).  Concentrations of 20 mg/1 had no effect on some viruses


 ™            and 1000 mg/1 was non toxic to Endameoba histolytica.  It was reported

 •            as ineffective and hazardous for swimming pool use (24,37).


                   Nemerow (14) indicated that due to the value of silver most in-


 •            dustries will utilize complete recovery processes t3 remove the silver

              from the waste prior to discharge to any receiving waters.  He cited

 ™            the examples of one silver plating plant spending $120,000/year to re-

 •            cover $60,000 worth of silver by evaporation.  Eastman Kodak companies


              recover 100% silver by the common methods of metallic replacement,

 •            electrolysis and chemical precipitation.




I



I


•                                            337

-------


KNVI KONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SILVER

As diacuased in the Drinking Water Standards (94) , the intention-
al addition of silver to water as a disinfectant is of primary
concern. The chief effect on man is cosmetic, consisting of a per-
manent blue-grey discoloration of the skin, eyes and mucous membranes
(argyria) . It has been shown that plant and marine life are capable
of concentrating silver above the ambient concentrations found
TABLE XXII-1
NATURAL SOURCES OF SILVER

Source Concentration Reference
Sea Water 0.0003 mg/1 (66)
Fresh Water, N.E. Basin 0.0019 mg/1 (mean) (59)
Municipal Water Supplies Up to 0.05 mg/1 (66)
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF SILVER
Source Concentration Reference

Industrial Waste Water 130 - 564 mg/1 (76)
Silver Plating 51 mg/l(@0.5 gph)* (14)
Rinse Waters 255 mg/l(@2.5 gph)* (14)
* Drag-out rates



338

1
1

1
•
1

I


1



1

1
1



1

1
1
1
1

1

-------
I
I
I
                             TABLE XXII-2
                            USES OF SILVER

Form                              Use                      Reference
Ag, metallic                    Jewelry                       (66)
                                Silverware
                                Alloys
H
                                             Electroplating
•                                           Food  &  Beverage Industry
             AgNO_                            Photographic Industry         (66)
                                             Ink Manufacturing
»                                           Electroplating
*                                           Coloring of  Porcelain
I                                           Antiseptic
             Agl                              Cloud Seeding                 (74)
I           AgO                              Disinfectant                 (24,37)

I

I

I

I

I

I
•                                           339

-------
                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I
in the water (6).   Vegetables cooked in silver bearing waters have
also been found to concentrate silver (6).   Silver is also toxic to




fish and aquatic life.






     Effect on Man
I



I
     The chief effect on man is argyria.   While the amount of colloi-



dal silver required to produce argyria is not precisely known, the                 •



amount of silver from injected Ag-arsphenamine which produces argyria



is any amount greater than 1 gram of silver or 8 grams of Ag-                      •



arsphenamine.  The Drinking Water Standards point out that most common             _



salts of silver may produce argyria when ingested by the mouth or                  ™



through injection.  It was also noted that individuals concurrently                •



receiving bismuth medication have been found to develop argyria more



readily.                                                                           •



     The Drinking Water Standards state that silver has an affinity



for elastic fibers.  It is primarily excreted from the body by the                 ™



liver.  Silver within the body is chiefly transported by the blood                 •



stream in which it is carried by plasma proteins in the red blood



cells.  Once silver is fixed in the body tissue, negligible excretions             •



will occur through the urine.  Table XXII-3 shows the effects of



silver on animals.                                                                 m



     On the assumption that all silver ingested is deposited in the                •




integument, the authors of the Drinking Water Standards calculate



that a concentration of 0.01 mg/1 could be ingested for a life time                •








                                                                                   I



                                340                                                •

-------
I

              at a rate of two liters o>  water per day without reaching the concen-
•            tration of 1 gram of silver.  Similarly, they stated that 0.05 mg/1
              of silver could be consumed for 27 years without exceeding the silver
•            deposition of 1 gram.  McKee and Wolf point out, however, that this
•            does not allow for the consumption of silver through foods such as
              mushrooms, or for concentration in cooked foods as discussed above.
I
I
I
I
I
I
                   Effect on Plants
•                 Both the Drinking Water Standards and the work of McKee and Wolf

              indicate that silver is concentrated within food.  In particular,

•            McKee and Wolf note that mushrooms are known to have a very high con-

              centrations of silver.  The Drinking Water Standards report that any

^            vegetable belonging to the family Brassicaceae such as cabbage, turnups,

•            cauliflower and onions is capable of concentrating silver which might

              be  found in the cooking water.  As a result, the silver content of

•            several liters of water could be ingested through the consumption of

              these vegetables when cooked.   It was also pointed out that there is
              a probably increase  in  the absorbtion rate of silver in the presence

              of sulfur compounds  in  food.
                    Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life
                    The  toxicity  of  silver,  silver nitrate, and  silver sulfate has
               been  reported  in  the  literature.   It has been  summarized  in  Table
               XXII-4.
I
                                               341

-------
In general, silver salts are reported as toxic to fish
and aquatic life at concentrations ranging from 0.003 to 0.4 mg/1.
It appears that most forms of fish and aquatic life are capable of
surviving a concentration of less than 0.1 mg/1 for at least one
day. Some species
of marine animals and plants are capable of con-
centrating silver as much as 1-3 mg/1 from a
of 0.0003 mg/1. (6)
It, therefore, appears
silver may be concentrated in fish and other
sea water concentration
logical to assume that
aquatic life. If this
is true, man and other mammals can then receive silver not only by
direct consumption
grown or cooked in



Species
Man
Man
Rat


Rabbit







of water, but also through the ingestion of food
silver bearing water.

TABLE XXII-3
EFFECTS ON ANIMALS

Concentration (or Dose)

1 g Ag, injected
10 g Ag, ingested
400-1000 ug/1


0.25 mg/kg/day (11 mo.)






342




Remarks Reference

Argyria (66)
Lethal (105)
Pathologic changes (94)
of kidneys, liver &
spleen
Effect on immunologi- (105)
cal capacity, condi-
tioned reflexes,
vascular , nervous fie
glial tissue of
encephalon & medulla



1
1
1
1
1

1
1

1

1

1
1

1



1




1
1
1

-------
1
1

1
1
1
•1
1
1
^•P
1

1
1


1



1
1
1
1



TABLE XXII-4
SILVER TOXICITY TO FISH AND

Species Ag Concentration Form
mg/1
Salmon fry 0.04 AgNCL
Salmon fry 0.44 AgNO.,
Young eels 0.2 AgNO_
Guppies 0.0043 Ag
Sticklebacks 0.003 AgNO
Sticklebacks 0.004 AgNO_
Sticklebacks 0.01 AgNO.,
3
Sticklebacks 0.1 AgNO
Daphnia magna 0.1 Ag
Daphnia magna 0.03 Ag
Daphnia magna 0.0051 AgNOQ
- — - — • 	 •- — ,3
Tadpoles 0.1 Ag
Lebistes retiolatus 0.01 Ag

Adult barnacles 0.04 Ag SO,




343



AQUATIC LIFE

Remarks

Some killed
Killed
Max tolerated
24 hour
LD50
Lethal @ 15-18°C
1 wk survival
4 days survival
1 day survival
Killed
Med. threshold
Immobilization
Killed
Killed

90% killed









Reference

(66)
(66)
(66)
(66)
(15,66)
(66)
(66)
(66)
(15)
(15,66)
(15,66)
(15)
(15)

(15)







-------
behind.
                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY - SILVER REMOVAL





     Due to the value of silver, most of the treatment technology for            |



its removal from waste waters is centered around its recovery.   In               «



addition to the previously mentioned recovery value of silver noted



by Nemerow (14), Patterson and Minear (76) report that even dilute               tt



wastewaters ranging from 50 - 250 mg/1 of silver have a net recovery



value of $1.60 to $9.00 per thousand gallons.  The basic methods for             I



the recovery of silver fall into the four broad categories of precipi-           _



tation, ion exchange, metallic replacement,  (reduction exchange) and             ™



electrolytic recovery.  Their respective efficiencies are summarized             B



in Table XXII-5.



Precipitation                                                                    I



     Precipitation of silver from solution normally utilizes the low




solubility of silver chloride.  Patterson and Minear report that                 •



silver chloride has a maximum solubility of  1.4 mg/1 (as silver ion)             •



provided silver chloride complexes are not formed.  As most other metal



ions in conjunction with chloride are soluble, it allows for silver              •



recovery from mixed metal waste without prior waste stream segrega-



tion.  Under alkaline conditions, the precipitation of hydroxides of             •



other metals occurs along with silver chloride.  Patterson and Minear            •




report that acid washing other precipitates  allows for the removal



of the contaminating metal ions, leaving the insoluble silver chloride           •








                                                                                 I






                                                                                 I






                                                                                 I
                                344

-------
I

I
                  As reported by Nemerow, silver is often found in cleaning wastes
•           in conjunction with cyanide.  Cyanide must be removed prior to the
             precipitation of silver as a silver chloride.  This may be achieved
•           by oxidation of cyanide with chlorine which then releases chloride
•           ions into solution allowing for the precipitation of silver chloride
             directly.  Patterson and Minear pointed out, however, that in the
•
             event that cyanide concentrations greatly exceed that of silver, high

             chlorine concentrations may result from the cyanide oxidation, there-

I           by greatly reducing the effectiveness of this removal procedure.

mm                With respect to recovery of silver from photographic solutions,

             Patterson and Minear described the use of magnesium sulfate and lime

•           in solutions containing high levels of organic acids, the use of sul-

             fide to precipitate silver in the form of silver sulfide, and the use

|           of hydrosulfide to precipitate both free silver and silver sulfide.

m           Ion Exchange

"                As one would expect due to the selective solubility of various

B           silver salts, ion exchange has been found very useful in the recovery

             of silver from dilute photographic wash waters and plating rinse

|           waters. (See Table XXII-5)

                  Patterson and Minear reported the use of a series of cation and

»•           anion exchange columns for the recovery of silver cyanide from plat-

•           ing rinse waters.  While no final effluent levels were given, they

             did report that for one plant approximately 280 mg of silver were re-

•           covered for each liter of wastewater passed through the ion exchange

             columns .


                                             345

-------
 Method
           TABLE XXII-5


TREATMENT FOR SILVER IN WASTEWATER


        CONTAINING CYANIDE



           Silver                Silver
      Concentration mg/1   Effluent Concentre-   Ref,
                              tion mg/1	
*Chl & P, bench scale


 Chi & P, full scale


 Chi & P, full scale


 Chi, pH to  6.5,coag.
  with ferric chloride
  & lime,   settle,pH to
  8.0 & resettle)


 Chi & pH (coag. with
  ferric chloride &
  lime & settle)


 Ion Exchange


      (a) Cation


      (b) Anion & Cation


 Ion Exchange


 Metallic Replacement




 *Chl - Chlorination


  P   - Precipitation
            105-250


            130-585




            0.7 - 40
            0.055


            0.055
1-3.5


0.0-8.2


1-3


0.1 or less
                               0.1
0.0078


0.0046


Trace


95% Removal
 (76)


 (76)


 (97)


 (76)






(26,97)
 (58)


 (58)


 (59)


 (76)
                                 346
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
•




•


•




•
I

I
I

I

I
                 One work reviewed by Patterson and Minear indicated that there


            may be problems in recovering silver from resins, making the re-


            covery of silver by ion exchange uneconomical for photographic waste.


            Another author indicated the use of an electrolytic process to re-


            move silver from the ion exchange resin regenerant. (76)
I
            Metallic Replacement
                 Metallic replacement, otherwise known as reductive exchange,


            consists of the precipitation of silver onto another metal.   In order


            to form the silver precipitate, the silver ion must be substituted


            by another metal ion.  Iron and zinc are common substitutes.   Nemerow


            (72) reported that this is one of three methods recommended by the


            Eastman Kodak Company for the recovery of silver from photographic


            waste.  Similarly, Patterson and Minear report the use of metallic


            replacement by silver plating plants.  However, as the silver is re-


            placed, the zinc and iron released must be removed from the waste-
ap


            water by further treatment
            Electrolytic Recovery


                 Nemerow also reported electrolytic recovery as a recommended


            method by Eastman Kodak for the recovery of silver.  Patterson and


•          Minear report that hagh wastewater concentrations are needed for the


            method to be effective.  They indicated that most silver bearing
            wastewaters do not have sufficient concentration of silver to make


            the process feasible.  They stated that while some units have been
                                            347

-------
                                                                                 I

effective at  silver concentrations ranging from 100 to 500 mg/1,
they have only noted consistent success in reducing silver from                  •
concentrations ranging from 5000 mg/1 down to 500 mg/1.  The cost
of such a unit has been estimated to be as little as 400 dollars.                •
     In summary, it is apparent that the value of silver makes it                •
amenable to recovery processes at a net gain for the industry.  Due
to the low capital cost, it would appear that electrolytic recovery              j§
would be a first step for very high concentrations of silver waste-              M
waters.  Thereafter, the use of ion exchange, or precipitation with
the chloride ion, would appear to be more feasible.  While the effi-             •
ciency of full scale ion exchange unit has not been reported in the
literature reviewed, it has at least been shown in bench scale tests             j[
that very low effluent levels are obtainable.  One must consider,                _
however, the additional treatment steps which may be necessary for
the destruction of the regenerate.  This also appears to be the majbr            I
problem for the metallic exchange treatment process.  Generally, the
recovery of silver by precipitation with chloride ion would appear               I
the most feasible and it has been shown on the full scale process to             _
achieve a final effluent concentration of less than 0.1 mg/1.  Table             ™
XXII-6 reviews the costs for treatment of silver in wastewater.                  •

                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I

                                348
                                                                                 I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
Method
                             TABLE XXII-6
           COST FOR TREATMENT OF SILVER  IN WASTEWATER
                        CONTAINING CYANIDE
Cost in $10QO/mgd
P & S (chloride)
Chls P & S (ferric
 chloride and lime)
Ion Exchange
Electrolytic Re-
 covery
P  = Precipitation


S  = Sedimentation


Chl= Chlorination
    $1000


    $ 610


    $210


    $710



$.18/lb Ag recovered


$1.75


$400 capital cost


(rate of flow not specified)
Reference


   (97)


   (97)


   (97)


   (97)



   (76)


   (76)


   (72)
                                 349

-------
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
                                 350
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
     On the basis for the above discussion and literature review,                   I


the following conclusions are drawn:


     (1) Silver is found in the marine environment due to natural                   •


         causes.  Marine plants and animals contain silver above


         the ambient concentration of their water environment.


     (2) Considering only the consumption of silver in drinking                     •


         water, the safe concentration of silver should be less


         than O.lmg/1.                                                              |


     (3) Some vegetables are capable of concentrating silver from                   M


         water in which they are cooked, thereby providing an


         additional source of silver to man.  Mushrooms concen-                     •


         trate silver during growth.


     (4) A silver concentration above O.lmg/1 is toxic to fish                      £


         even for short durations.  A silver concentration as                       .


         low as 0.003 mg/1 is toxic to stickleback fish under                       ™


         extended exposure.                                                         I


     (5) While industrial waste concentrations may be relatively


         high, the value of silver makes removal by recovery                        I


         economically attractive.  Silver may be recovered by


         precipitation with the chloride ion, ion exchange, metallic                •


         ion exchange, and electrolytic recovery.  Due to its low                   •


         capital cost, electrolytic recovery is most advantageous



                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I

                                                                                    I

-------
I

I
                     for concentrations of silver in the range of 5000 mg/1.
|                   For silver bearing wastewaters with a silver concentra-
•                   tion from less than 5 to 600 mg/1 the most effective
                     treatment process appears to be precipitation and re-
I                   covery by the chloride ion.  At concentrations in the
                     range of 50  to 250 mg/1 silver has a net recovery value
|                   in the range of $1.60 to $9.00 per thousand gallons of
_                   wastewater.
                  (6) Treatment of silver bearing wastewaters by chlorination,
•                   ferric chloride coagulants, pH adjustment, and settling
                     is capable of obtaining a final effluent concentration
|                   of less than 0.1 mg/1.
_                (7) Due to the value of the recovered silver, the next cost
                     of silver recovery and treatment is substantially less
•                   than that of treating any other metal.

I

I
                 On the basis of the above conclusions, it is recommended that an
            interim effluent level be adopted at 0.1 mg/1.  It is recognized
            that this level is above the maximum level for drinking water of 0.050
•          mg/1 and that, possibly, ion exchange is capable of obtaining a 0.050

            mg/1 effluent level as a maximum condition.  On the basis of the current
•          data available however, the interim level should be adopted immediately.

•          As soon as a methodology is available for a 0.050 mg/1 effluent level,

            such a level would be recommended.  In all cases, a final objective of
•          0.010 mg/1 should be kept in mind.

I

-------
 I
 I
CHAPTER XXIII SURFACTANTS
 H             Surfactants are synthetic organic chemicals which have a high


               residual water affinity at one end of the molecule and a low


 •             residual affinity at the other.   In discussing surfactants it


               is actually the methylene blue-active substances to which this


 9             chapter is addressed.  These include not only the well known


 •             alkyl benzene sulfonates (ABS) and linear alkyl sulfonates


               (LAS), but many inorganic and organic compounds which may


 •             interfere with methylene blue.  According to the 13th Edition


               of Standard Methods  (1), "Organic sulfonates, sulfonates,


 •             carboxylates, phosphates , phenols - which complex methylene


 •             blue - and inorganic cyanates, chlorides, nitrates, and thiocyan-


               ates - which form ion pairs with methylene blue - are among the


 •             positive interferences.  Organic materials, especially amines


               which compete with the methylene blue in the reaction can cause


 I             low results.  Positive errors are much more common than negative


 •             when determining anionic surfactants in water."


                    Common sources of ABS and LAS are shown in Table XXIII-1.


 •             While many major industrial sources exist, municipal sewage


               contains a significant amount of surfactant.


 |                  In 1965, industry responded to the pressure to improve the


 _             treatability of surfactants by switching from ABS to LAS.  The


*             basic difference between ABS and LAS is the organic structure


H             and, thereby, the biodegradability.  ABS consists of a branched


               alkyl group generally attached to a non-terminal carbon which is


•             more difficult to decompose through biological means than LAS


                                            352
I

-------

which has




a straight chain alkyl group.

TABLE XXIII-1

MAJOR SOURCES OF SURFACTANTS AND REPRESENTATIVE CONCENTRATIONS (59)

A. Major










Sources
Laundries
Car washes

Textile industry
Tanneries
Canning operations
General industrial clean-up operations
Municipal wastes

B. Commonly Found ABS Concentrations in Water
AGENT

ABS
ABS

ABS
ABS
ABS



ABS

LAS




Source Location Concentration

Detergent - industrial waste 0.6 mg/1
Surfactants Italy-surface 3.5-100 mg/1
waters
Anionic detergent Czechoslovakia .5 mg/1
Synthetic detergent Wisconsin well 10 mg/1
Synthetic detergent River and water 0.14 mg/1
supplies in 32 (average)
U. S. cities

Sewage In various U.S. 4-45 mg/1
cities
Sewage U.S. Cities 1-15 mg/1


353

1

1



1

1



1

1



1

I

1

1





1
1
1



-------
 I
 I
 I
I
I
                ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS  OF SURFACTANTS
                     Effect  on Man
                     With respect  to effects  on man,  Borneff  (as  reported in


 •             McKee and Wolf (66)) indicates  that water supplies containing


                synthetic detergents are capable of dissolving carcinogenic


 •             compounds.   Borneff concluded,  "Drinking water obtained  from


 _             rivers subject to  contamination with  wastewater containing


 ™             detergents must be considered injurious  to health" (66).


 •             Volume 1 of the Water Quality Data Book  (59)  states that  the


                maximum ABS concentration which produces no harmful effect in


 •             mammals over long  periods is  0.5 mg/1.   This  concentration also


                produced no organoleptic effects when administered for long


 •             periods.  The major difficulties created by detergents and other


 •             surfactants in domestic water supplies include those of  foaming,


                turbidity,  interference with  treatment,  and the production of


 •             tastes and odors.   Under favorable conditions a concentration of


                0.5-1 mg/1 of surfactants may cause a light foaming condition.


 •              It is interesting  to note that  the tendency of ABS to cause foam-


 •              ing is greatest in clean water and decreases  progressively as


                the pollutional load is increased. Similarly, the foaming power


 •              and stability of the foam are greater at a pH of  3 and of 9 than


                near neutrality (66).
                     Synthetic  detergents  in general,  at  a  concentration of 3 to

•|              5 mg/1,  have  been found to interfere with coagulation and floe

                formation at  water treatment plants  (66).


I
                                             354

-------

With respect to taste and odor conditions, an off taste in
clean water has been reported in the ABS range of 1 to 40 mg/1.
The work of Filicky et al . is summarized in Table XXIII-2 indicates
the minimum perceptible (taste and odor) concentrations for various
surface active agents. It is apparent that the minimum perceptible

concentration varies with chemical compositions of the surfactants
in solution. Chlorination of waters containing detergents may
accentuate the unpleasant tastes and odors (66) .

TABLE XXIII-2

MINIMUM CONCENTRATION OF A DETERGENT REQUIRED TO PRODUCE A PERCEP-
TIBLE TASTE AND ODOR, ALSO, TASTE AND ODOR THRESHOLD VALUES OF A

5 mg/1 DETERGENT CONCENTRATION (AFTER FILICY , et al.) (66).

Minimum Threshold
Concentration Value of Type of
Surface-Active Perceptible 55 mg/1 Taste or
Agent (mg/1) Concentration Odor
Taste Results
Alkyl aryl sulfonate 0.6 8 Limey, chemical

Alkyl aryl sulfonate 0.6 13 Chemical, soapy
Alkyl sulfate 3.0 2 Solvent
Alkyl sulfonate 1.4 4 Bitter, soapy
Sulfonated amide 2.5 2 Chemical, soapy
Odor Results

Alkyl aryl sulfonate 0.7 7 Limey, chemical
Alkyl aryl sulfonate 0.3 I/ Soapy

Alkyl sulfate 0.2 25 Aromatic, solvent
Alkyl sulfonate 0.3 21 Kerosene, soapy
355
1
•
1

1



1

1






1

1

1



1

1






1
1

-------
1

1




1
1

1

1



1

1



1



1

1



1

1

TABLE XXIII-2 (cont)

Minimum Threshold
Concentration Value of Type of
Surface-Active Perceptible 55 mg/1 Taste or
Agent (mg/1) Concentration Odor
Sulfonated amide 2.0 3 Chemical, soapy

Effect on Domestic Animals and Wildlife
McKee and Wolf indicate that water containing surfactants has
been found to dissolve the protective oil coating on water-fowl, there-
by causing the feathers to become water-logged. They report that
livestock will refuse to drink water containing surfactants. Small

doses of surfactants put in the water supply of poultry is believed
responsible for a rapid weight gain or loss; for example, a concen-
tration of 5 mg/1 sodium oronite was reported to give a 5 percent
increase in the weight of baby chicks. Water Quality Data, Volume 1,
lists surfactants within the acute toxicity ranking of organic

chemicals found in fresh water. These values are tabulated in
Table XXIII-3 according to their effect upon mammals.
Effect on Plant Life

McKee and Wolf found there were conflicting opinions as to
the effects of surfactants on plants. One report they studied
noted that a coating of LAS has a harmful effect upon the develop-
ment of spinach, carrots, endive, lettuce and tomatoes. This was
reportedly caused by a disturbance of the humidity balance within

the soil, which allowed the soil to drain too rapidly. However,

356


-------
a second report showed that surfactants are believed to promote


water retention and retard penetration.  On the basis of this


conflict, no immediate conclusions can be drawn regarding the


effects of surfactants on plant life.


     Water Quality Criteria (6) indicates that within the marine


environment detergents have been found to be more toxic in saline


waters than in either fresh waters or tidal estuaries.  The


photosynthesis of marine kelp has been reported to be decreased


by 50 percent after a 96 hour exposure to a surfactant concentra-


tion of 1.0 mg/1.





                        TABLE XXIII-3


           SURFACTANT TOXICITY TO MAMMALS (66)
Species


Human


Human


Dog


Pigs, young


Pigs, young


Pigs, young


Rats


Guinea pig


Guinea pig


Rat


Mice
Substance  Cone.  Level (or Dose)


   LAS     100 rag/day (4 mo.)


   ABS     100 mg/day (4 mo.)


   ABS     1000 mg/day (6 mo.)


   ABS     .1% in water (79 days)


   ABS     .2% in water (79 days)


   ABS     .4% in water (79 days)


   ABS     500 mg/1 (2 years)


   ABS     2000 mg/1 (6 mo.)


   LAS     2000 mg/1 (6 mo.)


   LAS     1.4-1.5 gm/kg


   LAS     2.8 gm/kg






                357
         Effect


no toxic effect on 6 men


no effect


no effect


no effect


stimualted growth


no effect


no effect


slight toxic effect


slight toxic effect


LD50 (single dose)


LD50 (single dose)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
  I
  I
     Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life


     The effects of surfactants on fish and aquatic life are


relatively well documented (6,66,59).  The presence of surfactants
                 in concentrations up to 0.14 mg/1 are generally not toxic to fish


  •              and other aquatic life for short periods of time (66).  However,


                 trout reportedly have avoided waters containing as little as


  |              0.001 mg/1 (59).


  im                   Most of the earlier works in the literature dealt primarily


                 with the effects of soaps and the ABS type surfactants, while the


  •              recent references include the effects of LAS surfactant as well.


                 In general, McKee and Wolf show that the toxic concentrations of


  |              various ABS type surfactants, in either hard or soft water, vary


 «              from 3.6 to 5.6 mg/1 as a 96 hour TLm.  They also indicate that


 ™              while the toxicity of ABS type surfactants is greater in hard


 •              water than in soft water, a decrease in the water temperature can


                 make the surfactants just as lethal in soft water as in hard water.


 H              McKee and Wolf report concentrations of 5 mg/1 of various detergents


 _              as having a lethal effect upon tadpoles, stickleback, roach, carp,


 '              and Daphnia.  A concentration of 3 mg/1 of well oxygenated clean


 fl              water was found to produce a 50 percent mortality for rainbow


                 trout within a 12 week period.


 •                   Table XXIII-4 indicates the varying degrees of toxicity of


                 alkyl aryl sulfonates including ABS for different time exposures


 ™               to various aquatic organisms.  In comparison, Volume I of the new


 •               EPA Data Book has indicated a 96 hour TLM concentration for linear


                 ABS (LAS) for three species:  bluegill fingerling, 0.6 to 3.0 mg/1;


 I               flathead, 3.5 mg/1; and flathead (eggs), 3.4 mg/1 in 24 hours.
I
                             358

-------
Recommended stream criteria for surfactants are summarized in


Table XXIII-5.  While these are applicable as stream criteris,


one must not consider the appropriateness of a unilateral


application as effluent criteria without considering the current


treatability of surfactants found in today's discharges.





                       TABLE XXIII-4


EFFECT OF ALKYL-ARYL SULFONATE, INCLUDING ABS, ON AQUATIC ORGANISMS (6)
Organisms


Trout



Bluegills
Fathead minnows
Fathead minnow fry
Pumpkinseed sunfish
Salmon
Yellow bullheads
Emerald Shiner
Bluntnose minnow
Stoneroller
Silver jaw
Rosefin
Common shiner
Carp
Black bullhead
"Fish"
Trout sperm
Daphnia
Concentration

   (mg/D
Time
5.0
3.7
5.0
4.2
3.7
0.86
16.0
5.6
17.0
2.3
13.0
11.3
3.1
9.8
5.6
1.0
7.4
7.7
8.9
9.2
9.5
17.0
18.0
22.0
6.5
10.0
5.0
20.0
7.5
26 to 30 hours
24 hours

24 hours
48 hours

30 days
90 days
96 hours

96 hours
96 hours
7 days
3 months
3 days
10 days
96 hours
96 hours
96 hours
96 hours
96 hours
96 hours
96 hours
96 hours


96 hours
24 hours
96 hours
    Effect


Death

TLm
Gill pathology
TL
TLm
Sa?e
TL
Gill damage
                                                         Reduced spawning

                                                         TLm
                                                         TLm
                                  Gill damage
                                  Mortality
                                  Histopathology

                                  TLm
                                  TLm
                                  TLm
                                  Min. lethality
                                  Damage
                                  TL
                             359
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
                      TABLE XXIII-4 (cont)
                     Concentration
Organisms

Lirceus fontinailis

Crangonyx setodactylus

Stenonema ares

Stenonema heterotarsale

Isonychia bicolor
Hydropsychidae (mostly
     cheumatopsyche).
Orconectes rusticus

Goniobasis livescens

Snail

Chlorella
Nitzchia linearis

Navicula seminulum
(mg/1)
10.0
.s 10.0
8.0
16.0
le 8.0
16.0
8.0
.y 16.0
32.0
16.0
32.0
16.0
32.0
18.0
24.0
3.6
5.8
Time
14 days
14 days
10 days
10 days
10 days
10 days
9 days
12 days
12 days
9 days
9 days
12 days
12 days
96 hours
96 hours


23.0
           Effect

6.7 percent survival
(hard water)
0 percent survival
(hard water)
20-33 percent survival
0 percent survival
40 percent survival
0 percent survival
0 percent survival
37-43 percent survival
20 percent survival
100 percent survival
0 percent survival
40-80 percent survival
0 percent survival
TLm
TLm
Slight growth reduction
50 percent growth re-
duction in soft water
50 percent reduction in
growth in soft water
                        TABLE XXIII-5
       CRITERIA FOR SURFACTANT CONCENTRATION CONTROL
Concentration
(1)  0.5 mg/1 ABS
(2)  3.6 to 5.6 mg/1
(2b) 0.6 to 3.5 mg/1
            Effects

   Max.  dosage which produces no
   long term effects in mammals.
               Ref.
               (59)
   TLm, LAS threshold limit for 96 hrs.(66)
   96 hr TLm for LAS on Bluegill       (59)
   fingerling flatheads, flathead eggs.
(3)  ABS - 1/7 of 48 hr. TLm Recommended stream cone.
     LAS - .2 mg/1 or 1/7
     of 48 hr. TLm
(4)  1.0 mg/1


(5)  0.5 mg/1
   Taste and odor and foaming
   problems.

   Max. desirable cone, for human
   consumption.

    360
                (6)



                (66)


                (66)

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY-SURFACTANT REMOVAL
I
I
     As the form of detergents and synthetic surfactants has changed

over time, so has the reason for treatment.  The early approach to               •


treating wastes containing soaps was to handle them as other wastes              _


with high BOD.  In time, soaps were replaced by the ABS synthetic                ™


type which reduced BOD levels from industrial processes substantially.           I


As mentioned previously, the pressure has been applied to the


detergent industry to convert to the more readily degradable LAS                 I


type surfactants.  At this time the state-of-the-art is centered


around what form of soft detergents and what type of builders are                •


most appropriate.  Should the builder be high or low in phosphates?              •


If phosphates are not used, what is a suitable substitute which is


still effective as a cleansing agent, but is not toxic or harmful                I


in some other means?


     While the type of soap or detergent has been varying with time,             •


the  basic treatment processes remain biological treatment and                   •

chemical coagulation.  Nemerow  (71) indicates that chemical coagula-


tion with alum yields a 90 percent removal of soap BOD from textile              •


mills.  He also states  (72) that theoretically detergents may be


removed to a level of approximately 0.2 mg/1 by a combination of                 |


coagulation, filtration and adsorption.  Table XXIII-6 lists the                 «


approximate efficiency of various treatment methods for mixed ABS-


LAS and only LAS type detergents.                                                I




                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I

                               361                                                .

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                      TABLE XXIII-4  (cont)
                     Concentration
Organisms

Lirceus fontinailis

Crangonyx setodactylus

Stenonema ares

Stenonema heterotarsale

Isonychia bicolor
Hydropsychidae (mostly
     cheumatopsyche).
Orconectes rusticus

Goniobasis livescens

Snail

Chlorella
Nitzchia linearis

Navicula seminulum
(mg/1)
10.0
.8 10.0
8.0
16.0
le 8.0
16.0
8.0
y 16.0
32.0
16.0
32.0
16.0
32.0
18.0
24.0
3.6
5.8
Time
14 days
14 days
10 days
10 days
10 days
10 days
9 days
12 days
12 days
9 days
9 days
12 days
12 days
96 hours
96 hours


23.0
           Effect

6.7 percent survival
(hard water)
0 percent survival
(hard water)
20-33 percent survival
0 percent survival
40 percent survival
0 percent survival
0 percent survival
37-43 percent survival
20 percent survival
100 percent survival
0 percent survival
40-80 percent survival
0 percent survival
TLm
TLm
Slight growth reduction
50 percent growth re-
duction in soft water
50 percent reduction in
growth in soft water
                        TABLE XXIII-5
       CRITERIA FOR SURFACTANT CONCENTRATION CONTROL
Concentration
(1)  0.5 mg/1 ABS
(2)  3.6 to 5.6 mg/1
(2b) 0.6 to 3.5 mg/1
            Effects

   Max. dosage which produces no
   long term effects in mammals.
               Ref.
               (59)
   TLm, LAS threshold limit for 96 hrs. (66)
   96 hr TLm for LAS on Bluegill       (59)
   fingerling flatheads, flathead eggs.
(3)  ABS - 1/7 of 48 hr. TLm Recommended stream cone.
     LAS - .2 mg/1 or 1/7
     of 48 hr. TLm
(4)  1.0 mg/1
(5)  0.5 mg/1
   Taste and odor and foaming
   problems.

   Max. desirable cone, for human
   consumption.

    360
                (6)



                (66)


                (66)

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY-SURFACTANT REMOVAL
I
I
     As the form of detergents and synthetic surfactants has changed


over time, so has the reason for treatment.  The early approach to               I


treating wastes containing soaps was to handle them as other wastes              _


with high BOD.  In time, soaps were replaced by the ABS synthetic                *


type which reduced BOD levels from industrial processes substantially.           I


As mentioned previously, the pressure has been applied to the


detergent industry to convert to the more readily degradable LAS                 I


type surfactants.  At this time the state-of-the-art is centered


around vrtiat form of soft detergents and what type of builders are                •


most appropriate.  Should the builder be high or low in phosphates?              •


If phosphates are not used, what is a suitable substitute which is


still effective as a cleansing agent, but is not toxic or harmful                •


in some other means?


     While the type of soap or detergent has been varying with time,             I


the  basic treatment processes remain biological treatment and                   •

chemical coagulation.  Nemerow  (71) indicates that chemical coagula-


tion with alum yields a 90 percent removal of soap BOD from textile              •


mills.  He also states  (72) that theoretically detergents may be


removed to a level of approximately 0.2 mg/1 by a combination of                 |


coagulation, filtration and adsorption.  Table XXIII-6 lists the                 •


approximate efficiency of various treatment methods for mixed ABS-


LAS and only LAS type detergents.                                                •




                                                                                 I



                                                                                 I

                               361                                                -

-------
                 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

                      On the basis of the literature review,  the following conclusions
•               have been drawn:
                      (1)  The term surfactants for this report includes all methylene
I                         blue-active substances which would be included by the
_                         Standard Method.   While LAS is more prevalent in today's
™                         wastewaters,  ABS  is till used in some industrial operations.
I                    (2)  The major effect  of surfactants in water is their
                           tendency to cause foaming, taste,  and odor problems.
•                         Foaming has been  found to decrease as the pollution load
                           in the stream is  increased and as  the pH approaches
•                         neutrality.
•                    (3)  Any taste and odor problem is usually found at and above
                           a surfactant concentration of 1.0  mg/1 and chlorination
•                         of surfactant bearing wastewaters  accentuates the taste
                           and odor.
•                    (4)  The maximum desirable concentration of surfactants in
•                         water for human consumption is 0.5 mg/1.
                      (5)  Some plants have  been found to be  sensitive to surfactant
•                         concentrations in excess of 1.0 mg/1.  For fish and other
                           aquatic life toxicity of ABS ranges from approximately
I                         3.0 to 6.0 mg/1.   For fish and other aquatic life toxicity
•                         of LAS ranges from 0.6 to 3.5 mg/1.


I

I
_                                              362

-------
                                                                                 I
     (6)  Theoretically, detergents may be removed to a level
          of approximately 0.2 mg/1 by coagulation, filtration                   I
          and absorption.                                                        •
     (7)  Biological treatment or sand filtration is capable of
          removing 85% of the surfactants, measured as BOD.                      •
     On the basis of the foregoing, it is recommended that a
uniform effluent criterion of 1.0 mg/1 be established for all                    |
surfactants, as measured by the methylene blue technique, provided               »
that no foaming is observed at the discharge or immediately down-
stream.  It is further recommended that all dischargers be                       •
informed that their average surfactant concentration should be
in the range of 0.5 mg/1.
                        TABLE XXIII-6
                                                                                 I
         TREATMENT METHODS FOR SURFACTANTS (57)                                  •

Method                     ABS AND LAS Efficiency      Efficiency                |
Biological:                ( % removal as BOD)     ( % removal as BOD)
     Trickling Filter                52                     77                   •
     Activated Sludge                67                     86                   •
     Lagoon                                                 71
Sand Filtration                                             85                   I
Note:  The softer LAS surfactant is easily degraded biologically while           •
       the harder ABS is not easily treated.                                     •

                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I
                              363

-------
 I
 I
 I
                   CHAPTER XXIV-TURBIDITY
SOURCES OF TURBIDITY
 _                 Turbidity  is  a physical  parameter which  expresses  the  optical


 *            properties  of fine suspended  matter  in solution.  This  matter may


 I            be  suspended material  such  as clay and silt,  or organic matter,


              bacteria, plankton or  similar organisms.


 •                 The analytical procedures  for measuring  turbidity  vary from


              a crude visual  comparison to  comparisons with standard  solutions


 "            of  a  kaolinite  suspension using sophisticated light scattering


 •            measuring devices.   The nepthelometric method consists  of measur-


              ing the intensity  of light  scattered at 90° to the light source.


 I            The Jackson candle method uses  a standardized bees wax  candle


              to  measure  the  image of the flame as it passes vertically through


 •            a sample.   It is the standard against which all other methods are


 •            based.  Results are given in  Jackson Turbidity Units  (JTU).


                   To further confuse the issue the Nephelometric method  uses


 •            turbidity free water to dilute  samples having a turbidity greater


              than  40 Jackson Turbidity Units  (JTU) (1).  By now it should be


 I            apparent that the  measurement  of turbidity is subject to several


 •            variables.  The procedures, however,  are not  the only source of


              variations.  All methods of measuring turbidity are subject  to


 •            false readings by  the  presence  of debris, coarse sediments,


              gas bubbles, vibrations, "true  color" and the individual


 I            optical properties  of  the particular material in suspension.




I




•                                         364

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF TURBIDITY
     Effect on Man
     Effect on Man
                                                                                I
Colloidal mica, for example will give highly erroneous readings

in comparison to many other materials.                                          I

     Turbidity is present in most municipal and industrial                      _

discharges.  Of particular note, however, are industries which                  *

use or manufacture large quantities of starch; clays; mineral                   flj

substances such as zinc, iron, and manganese; fibers and sawdust;

and eroded soils.  Of special interest are the pulp and paper,                  •

mining, dredging, and logging industries (66).
I
I
     The primary influence of turbidity in water used for human                 •

consumption is aesthetics.  Turbidity, however, may be due to

toxic trace metals, or disease producing bacteria and virus.                    I

Therefore, the turbidity limit has been set at 5 JTU in the                     •

Drinking Water Standards (94).
                                                                                I
     The presence of turbidity in water used for food preparation,              B

beverages, and high quality products is noted in the literature (66).

Certain industries where turbidity is likely to have a deleterious              I

effect are:  ice making, laundries, beverage, and brewing, textiles,

pulp and paper, steam boilers, and turbine operations.                          •

     A summary of the water quality needs of several industries is

shown in Table XXIV-1.

                                                                                I
I
                                                                                I
                             365                                                _

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                        TABLE XXIV-1
   TURBIDITY LIMITS FOR INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLIES (66)
          INDUSTRY


Beverages


Food Products


Breweries


Boiler Feed Water



Pulp and Paper


     Alkaline Pulps


     High Grade Paper


     Fine Writing and Book Paper


     Unbleached Kraft Paper


     Bleached Kraft Paper


     Groundwood Paper


Textiles


     Nitrocellulose


     Rayon


     Cotton


     Cotton (Callaway mills)


Baking


Cooling Water


Ice Making


Tanning
   JTU


   1-2


  10


   1-10


   1-20 (Lowest for high
                pressure)




  25


   5-25


  10


 100


  40


  50




0.5


  1


 25


0.3-0.5


 10


 50


  1-5


 20
                              366

-------
                                                                               I
                       TABLE XXIV-2
       AVERAGE FATAL TURBIDITIES FOR FISH (66,6)                               •

                                                                               I
Species of Fish          Ave. Exposure, Days    Turbidity, JTU
Rock Bass                       3.5                 38,250                     g
Channel catfish                 9.3                 85,000
Pumpkin seed sunfish           13.0                 69,000                     •
Largemouth                      7.6                101,000                     •
Golden shinner                  7.1                166,000
Black bullhead                 17.0
222,000                     I

                            I
                            I
     Effect on Fish and Other Aquatic Life
     Turbidity may affect fish and aquatic life in four ways:   (1)
light penetration is decreased thereby decreasing photosynthesis
and productivity of fish food organisms;  (2) high concentrations               •
of particulate matter can damage sensitive organs (e.g. gills);
(3) it may interfere with normal predation and feeding patterns;               |
and, (4) by excluding light, turbidity can modify the temperature              _
structure of impoundments (66).
     Direct reduction of fish productivity occured as the turbidity            •
exceeded 25 JTU, and bottom organisms decreased from 249/sq  ft  to
36/sq ft due to silting  (66).  Aquatic insect productivity dropped             g
by 85% below drag line operations.   Studies have demonstrated a               _
41.7% drop in fish yield as turbidity increased above 25 JTU.   When            •
turbidity reached 100 JTU, the fish  yield was only 18.2% of  that in            ij


                                                                               I
                              367

-------
I
                  clear ponds (less than 25 JTU).  Similar reductions were found
•                in plankton volumes.  (Buck as reported in 6 and 66).
im                     While Wolf and McKee report that fish thrive in waters with
                  turbidities of 200 to 400 JTU, direct lethal effects to eggs are
•                found above 1000 JTU within 6 days.  Some of the average
                  turbidities found to be fatal to fish are summarized in Table
|                XXIV-2.  In general, as turbidity approaches 20,000 JTU, harmful
mm                effects are observed even in adult fish (66).
                       It is recommended that turbidity in the receiving water due
•                to a discharge should not exceed 50 JTU in warm water streams,
                  25 JTU in warm water lakes and 10 JTU in cold water streams, cold
•                water or oligotrophic lakes (66).
I
                  TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY-TURBIDITY REMOVAL
I
                       The removal of turbidity is closely associated with the removal
•                of suspended solids.  When the turbidity of a particular wastewater
•                is due to colloidal material, it can be removed by coagulation,
                  sedimentation, and filtration.
                  SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
•                     On the basis of the above discussion, the following statements
                  can be made:
•                     1.  Turbidity is a readily observable physical characteristic
                  (not a pollutant itself) and the analytical procedures for turbidity
•                are subject to internal and external variables.

I

I
•                                              368

-------
                                                                                I
     2.  Materials which cause turbidity are found in both
naturally occuring and industrial discharges.  Turbidity is                     •
objectionable in domestic water supplies for aesthetic reasons                  •
above a level of 5 JTU and is generally objectionable in water
supplies because it is an indication of possible toxic and                      •
disease producing materials.
     3.  Many industries require waters with low turbidities                    •
(less than 10 JTU) for product quality reasons.                                 •
     4.  Materials which have turbidity in surface waters reduce
fish and aquatic life production, water temperatures, and light                 •
penetration.  Materials causing a turbidity above 1000 JTU begin
to have direct lethal effects on fish reproduction, and above                   |
20,000 JTU begin to harm adult fish.                                            _
     5.  Turbidity levels in surface waters should be maintained
at or below 50 JTU in warm water streams; 25 JTU in warm water                  I
lakes, and, 10 JTU in cold water streams, and cold or oligotrophic
waters.                                                                         |
     On the basis of the review it is recommended that a uniform                •
maximum effluent level of 50 JTU be adopted.  It is further recommended
that lower effluent levels be adopted when necessary to maintain the            •
desirable receiving water quality of Summary No. 5 above.                       m

                                                                                I

                                                                                I

                                                                                I
                              369

-------
I
I
I
I
 I
 I
 I
 I
                                  CHAPTER XXV-ZINC
                                                                        +2
             Zinc  occurs  in  the natural  aquatic environment  as  soluble Zn
             salts,  soluble  inorganic  and  organic  complexes  and  insoluble


             precipitates.   At basic pH's,  the hydroxides and  carbonates


             are  readily  formed.   Zinc occurs naturally  and  is abundant in


•           rocks and  ores  in some areas.  Table  XXV-1  outlines  several


             naturally  occuring  zinc levels in the environment.   The  litera-


B           ture contains references  to zinc in the  ores of lead,  copper and



-------

Water Standards that several enzymes are dependent upon zinc (62) .
Zinc deficiency has cuased growth retardation that is overcome
only by an adequate daily intake through the consumption of food

and water. Pre-school age children have been found to require
0.3 milligrams of zinc per kilogram of body weight as a daily
requirement. The daily adult intake is reported to be 10-15
milligrams, with an excretion averaging about 10 milligrams
daily through the feces and 0.4 milligrams through the urine (94).

Table XXV-2 shows other zinc concentrations that affect man.
McKee and Wolf reported that zinc bearing water should not be used
in acid drinks, such as lemonade, due to the possible formulation
of zinc citrate and other organic zinc compounds that may be
poisonous.

TABLE XXV- 1

NATURAL OCCURRING ZINC LEVELS IN THE ENVIRONMENT

Source Zn Concentration Reference

Most Plants 1-10 mg/kg (66)
Cereals as high as 140 mg/kg (66)
Sea Water 0.01 mg/1 (6)
Marine Plants as high as 150 mg/1 (6)
Marine Animals 6-1500 mg/1 (6)



371
1

1



I

1



I

1


1

1



1

1

1
1
1
1

-------
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                        TABLE XXV-2
          INDUSTRIAL ZINC BEARING WASTE WATERS
Process


Zinc Mining


   Mine drainage


Metal Processing


   Pickle bath waste
   Bright dipwastes
   Copper Mill Rinse Waters
   Brass Mill Rinse Waters
   Brass Mill Pickle Waste
   Brass Mill Rinse Waste


Plating


   General @ 100 gpm discharge
           @  50 gpm discharge
w/CN complex
Plating bath
@ 0.5 gph drag-out
@ 2,5 gph drag-out


Plating waste
General
General
General
Zinc
Brass
Zinc
Brass
General


Silver Plating


Silver bearing wastes
Acid waste
Alkaline


Rayon Wastes


   General


Automotive Ind.


   General
              Average
                 1450
0.25              9
   5-220         65
 0.5-5.1          2.2
 250-1000
1-12 16/100 cars
Reference
(45)
4300-41,400
200-37,000
0.8-13.0
2.6-10.7
36-374
10-20


3.1
7.4


(71,72)
(71,72)
(65)
(65)
(96)
(48)
7.0-215
1.0-1.7



39-82
2.4-13.8
55-120
15-20
70-150
11-55
70-350
10-60
7.0-215
46.3
1.0
33,800
70
350

8.2

15




46.3
(71,72)
(71,72)
(71,72)
(71,72)
(71,72)
(72)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(76)
(71 per 76)
(71 per 76)
(71 per 76)
(76)
(72)
                              372

-------



TABLE XXV- 3



ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT OF ZINC UPON MAN

Effect Zinc
Gastrointestinal
irritant
Milky appearance to
drinking water
Greasy film on
drinking water
(after boiling)
Taste threshold in
spring water
Taste threshold in
distilled water
No known detrimental
effects
ii it

Nausea & fainting

Zinc may be eroded from

Concentration (mg/1)
675-2280

30

5.0

27.2 (as ZnSO )

17.6

11.2 to 26.6
23.8 to 40.8

30


Reference
(62)

(66)

(66)

(66)

(66)

(66,94)
(66,94)

(66,94)

1



1

I

I

1

I

•

1

I

1
zinc plated galvanized pipes and may
appear in high concentrations in domestic water supplies. The
Drinking Water Standards state that a dissolution

produce a concentration of 5

rag/1. This would be
of zinc could

accompanied
by a cadmium concentration of approximately 0.01 mg/1, and a
lead concentration of approximately 0.05 mg/1. As
1946 Drinking Water Standard
desirable level of 5 mg/1.



a result , the
of 15 mg/1 was reduced to a maximum
This level allows for


373
the provision



1



1

1


1
1

-------
I
                 of zinc, needed for the daily  intake, while minimizing taste
•               problems and the format ion-'"d€  an oily, filfii on. boiled water.
I
I
I
I
                      Effect on Plants
I
                     McKee and Wolf reported that while  small amounts of zinc






                They reported that  a deficiency of  zinc has been found to cause
                |t-   -".,>.... i                                                 , „,
                poor growth and dwarfing of the leaves of fruit trees and causes
                 are needed for nutrition by most crops,  zinc is found to be  toxic
                               \«.                                                   „ f s ,
                                                                                  t* ' „' -I
                 when the nutritional value is  exceeded by a very snail amount.

                               01                                      -    '
                ilttorosis in- c'drn.  Zinc' is' present in most plants at a, ,cpi)
                tion  of  1  to  10 mg/kg and as high as  140 mg/kg in ;pe,rea^&i, ^•;<\^-..\i


M              Table XXV-1.   Table XXV-4 outlines other environmental effects of


                -zvLr^c  on  plants ,and algae..                       '; ..' •.-•',•:  ?H.:- ~ r ': **
                      Effect  on Domestic Animals and Wildlife


                      Animals,  like man, require-small amounts of zinc in their daily


                diets.   The  acidic effects of '^inc ini.the  drinking;wager for animals


                is apparently  of little concern.  Table XXV-5 summarizes the effects


                of zl^dl^i animals.
                      Effect on Fish and Other  Aquatic Life
_          .O'ji.lM/i... :<,  %-n,  .'••.:>,'.    .      ,.  i,,. ':;        ^    _             T _ (,
•          ,.-,...:3,",rn/;?ii' The*"'s^h-§itJivity of fish  and aquatic life to zinc has been  found
•              ••';. :a\- -.;,..:  .>>,.-...

                 to vary v;ith the species, age  and condition of the fish  as well as
^B                - • * - • ' ' -'  ;  ,.i>;,,       > . '  j -   ' ,^ -  -      -                     .

•               the physical characteristics  significant in determining  the  toxic


•               effects of zinc are the hardness of  the water, the calcium and


                magnesium concentrations, the  pH,  the temperature, and the concentra-


•               tion of dissolved oxygen.




I

                                               374

-------
                        TABLE XXV-4
                  TOXIC EFFECTS ON PLANTS
Type of Plant (66)


Orange & Mandarin seedlings


Flax


Water hyacinths


Oats



Plankton (6)


Nitzchia cinearis
(soft water, 44 mg/1 CaCO-


Navicular seminulum
(soft water, i.e. 44 mg/1 CaCO_
                     Zinc Concentration (mg/1)


                                 3


                                 5


                                10


                                25-100 (as ZnSO,)
                    22°0
                    4.29
                    4.05
   27°C
   1.59
   2.31
30°C
1.32
3.22
                         TABLE XXV-5


            EFFECTS ON ANIMALS AND WILDLIFE  (66)
Type of Animal


Pigs


Laying hens




Rats
Zinc Concentration (mg/1)


  1,000 (in milk)
        Effect
lameness and malnutrition
 10,000 (in drinking water)  Reduced egg production,
                             less water consumption,
                             loss of body weight


     50 (in drinking water)  No harmful effect
                               375
 1
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I

-------
  I
                       From the toxicity data in Table XXV-6 it is apparent that
  •              the toxicity of zinc to fish life is substantially reduced as the
                  hardness of the water is increased.  It is also apparent  that the
  •              toxicity may decrease slightly with an increase in temperature.
  •              There is some discrepancy as to whether it is water hardness, as
                  CaCO , or whether it is the concentration of calcium and magnesium
  •              (reported CaCO ) which controls the toxicity of zinc.  While most
                  of the studies on the toxicity of zinc on fish life report varia-
  •              tions in relation to water hardness, a report (15) on the toxicity
 fli               of zinc to plankton referred to the concentration of calcium and
                  magnesium as the critical factors.  Results of the study are
 •               summarized in Table XXV-4.  It is interesting to note from this
                  study that the toxicity of the zinc increased rather than decreased
 |H               with an increase in temperature for plankton rather than decreased
 M               as shown in most of the fish studies.
                       A review of the literature indicates that copper may have a
•
                  synergistic effect on the toxicity of zinc.  McKee and Wolf reported
                  that 1 mg/1 of zinc in the presence of 0.025 rag/1 of copper was as
 £                toxic to fish life as 8 mg/1 of zinc alone.  Similarly, the work of
 _                Sigler et al. , as reported in the water Quality Criteria Data Book
                  Volume 3 (25) indicates that a concentration of 0.6 mg/1 of zinc in
 I                the presence of 0.048 mg/1 of copper was toxic to salmon in soft
                  water.  In hard water, McKee and Wolf reported that the threshold
 •                concentration of a mixture containing 0.56 mg/1 of zinc and 0.44
 _                mg/1 of copper was about that which was to be expected assuming no
™                synergism.  One is therefore lead to conclude that copper may have

I
                                               376

-------

a synergistic effect with zinc only in soft waters (15-20 mg/1
CaCO,).
3
TABLE XXV-6


as




TOXICITY OF ZINC ON FISH LIFE AND EFFECT OF HARDNESS, TEMPERATURE
& pH CONCENTRATIONS, mg/1

Temperature °C
Species Water 18-20 30

Lepomis Soft 2.9 - 3.8 1.9 - 3.6
Macrochirus Hard 10.1 - 12.5 10.2 - 12.2
" Soft 2.86 - 3.75 0.9 - 2.10
" Hard 6.60 - 9.47 6.18 - 9.50
Physa Soft 0.79 - 1.27 0.62 - 0.78
Heterostropha Hard 2.66 - 5.57 2.36 - 6.36
(pond snail)
Pimephales Soft 0.96
Prumelas Hard 33.4
Zepomis Soft 5.46
macrochirus Hard 40.9 -
Bluegill Sunfish Soft 2.9 - 3.8 1.9 - 3.6
" Soft 4.2
" Hard 10.1 - 12.5
11 Hard 12.5 - 12.9

Flathead Soft (50 mg/1) 4.9 @ pH = 8
Minnow Hard (200 mg/1) 32.3 @ pH = 6




Ref.

(15)
(15)
(15)
(15)
(15,66)
(15,66)

(15)
(15)
(15)
(15)
(66)
(66)
(66)
(66)

.0 (15)
.0 (15)
According to McKee and Wolf, the toxicity of zinc salts is also
increased as the concentration of dissolved oxygen decreases.

effect of dissolved oxygen on zinc toxicity is the same found
copper, and phenols. They reported a lethal concentration at
The

for lead,
60%
1
1

1






1




1
•

1

|
•I
1




I
1



1
saturation to be about 85% the lethal concentration at 100% saturation.

377


1
1

-------
                     McKee and Wolf reported that zinc may also be dangerous to
•
oysters in small concentrations.  In large amounts, it has been

known to impart a blue-green color.  They reported that snails

have a toxic limit of 1.0 mg/1 zinc in natural waters.  McKee and

Wolf report that zinc, like several other metals, has been found to
mm

                be concentrated by various forms of aquatic life.   Studies with

•              radioactive Zn  , indicate concentration factors to range from a

                low of 290 to a high of 200,000.


                TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY- ZINC REMOVAL


                     Removal of zinc from industrial wastewater, plating wastes in

V              particular, may be greatly enhanced by good housekeeping, spill

                prevention plans, recycling, and countercurrent rinsing.  Zinc wastes

•              are more amenable to treatment following concentration of wastewater

                and a reduction of total flow.  The removal of zinc from industrial

™              wastewaters is normally carried out either by chemical coagulation

•              and precipitation, or by a recovery step.


•                   Precipitation

                     As zinc hydroxide has a limited solubility above a pH of

•              approximately 8.8, it may effectively be removed from wastewaters

                under alkaline conditions.  Lime is normally used to raise the pH,

H              due to its availability and low costs.  In acidic industrial wastes,

_              which may be high in sulfates, calcium sulfate will also be precipi-

                tated with the zinc hydroxide, forming large volumes of sludge.  As

I              a result, the cost of treating wastes with high sulfate concentrations



I
                                              378

I

-------
may be substantially greater due to sludge disposal.
     Since zinc bearing wastewaters also often contain substantial                I
concentrations of cyanide and chromium, the cyanide must be oxidized
following reduction of the chromium from the hexavalent to the                    |
trivalent form prior to precipitation of zinc and other trace metals.             «
The efficiency of zinc removal by chemical precipitation is summarized
in Table XXV-7.                                                                   •
     The works of Patterson and Minear (76) discussed a new process
by DuPont which utilizes hydrogen peroxide, catalyst and stabilizers              •
to oxidize cyanide and promote the formulation of metal oxide in lieu
of the hydroxide.  As the oxide of metals are most amenable to filtra-            •
tion, lower final effluent levels might be obtainable.  A full-scale              V
changeover of this type has been described in the literature  (96).  The
Velco Brass & Copper Company of Kennelworth, New Jersey, converted a              •
former sulfuric chromic acid or ammonium bifluoride-chromic acid pickle
to a sulfuric acid-hydrogen peroxide pickle with stabilizer agents.  As           •
a result, their previous zinc discharges of 36-375 mg/1 have been re-             •
duced to their current level of 0.08-1.6 mg/1.  This process has re-
duced their previous costs of $195 per day without treatment to $194              •
per day for total operating cost plus amortized installation costs.  A
summary of the capital costs for zinc removal by lime coagulation and             •
precipitation is summarized in Table XXV-8.  With respect to the operat-          •»
ing costs, Patterson and Minear reported that for the General Electric
plant referred to in Table XXV-7, treating 30,000 gallons per day the             •
cost was $3.79 per 1,000 gallons.  Other operational costs reported by
Patterson and Minear were as low as $.34 per 1,000 gallons.                       •

                                                                                  I
                               379

-------
1
1
1
I




1

1
1BI
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I

1
TABLE XXV- 7
EFFICIENCY OF ZINC REMOVAL BY CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION

Zinc Concentration
Process Initial mg/1 Effluent
Zinc coag. & precip. General 0.5-2.5
& settle 20 Less than 1.0
10-20 1-2
55-120 Less than 1.0 (av.)
Copper Brass 0.5-2.5
fabrication
Plating wastes 3-4
Lancy integrated Plating wastes 0.5
Zinc coag. & Precip. General 0.1-0.3
Settle & Filter Copper-Brass 0.1-0.5
fabrication
2.2-6.5 (16 ave.) 0.02-0.23










380


Reference
(97)
(76)
(48)
(76)
(76)
(61)
(61)
(97)
(76)
(76)













-------

TABLE XXV-8

CAPITAL COST OF ZINC REMOVAL

Cost,
$/1000
Process Flow Cost, $ Gal. Ref.

Lime coag. & precip. 1 MGD 100,000 100 (97)
& settle 10 600,000 60 (97)
Lime coag., precip. 1 MGD 300,000 300 (97)
settle & filter 10 MGD 1300,000 130 (97)
50 MGD 4600,000 108 (97)
(1957) 0.3 MGD 276,000 9200* (76)
*Includes vacuum filter cost of $30,000
Recovery Process
While precipitation, ion exchange, evaporation, and simple

process modifications may be utilized for the recovery of zinc,
Patterson and Minear have indicated the following: "Unless other
process modifications are necessary, or extremely high levels of
zinc are present and minimal purification of recovered material is
required, zinc recovery is generally not economical."

In contrast with the report of Patterson and Minear, the works
of McGarvey, et al. (65) state, "the recovery and disposal of copper
and brass alloy metals from washwaters prior to discharge in the
stream might be accomplished successfully by employing high capacity
ion exchanges such as Amberlite, IR-120. Either the sodium or

hydrogen cycle may be used..." Further analysis of this study


381

I



1




1




1
1



1

I



1

1



1
I

I

-------
                   indicated that copper, zinc and chromium could be precipitated
•                 from the chloride regenerate and recovered by chemical means,
                   or they could be wasted.  While Patterson and minear report that
V                 recovery of zinc is generally not economical, or as economical
•                 as lime precipitation, they report that recovery by evaporation
                   resulted in substantial savings for one plant.  Evaporative
•                 recovery preceded by process modifications reduced a total of
                   3,000 gallons an hour to 50 gallons an hour.  It also resulted
|                 in chemical savings of more than $18,000 a year.  By following
«                 the breakpoint formula presented in the report of Patterson and
                   Minear it is apparent that zinc recovery might be beneficial for
•                 large operations with concentrated zinc wastes.  It is also
                   questionable whether Patterson and Minear had compared the cost
J|                 of recovery with simple precipitation and sedimentation or
«                 whether they hac. included the additional cost of filtration.  The
                   reports by McGa'/vey and Patterson and Minear do agree on one point.
•                 Zinc may be recovered from precipitates by dissolution with acid.
                   It is also apparent that the total cost of treatment facilities
£                 may be recovered from precipitates by dissolution with acid.  It
_                 is also apparent that the total cost of treatment facilities may
*                 be substantially reduced by a reduction in the volume of waste-
B                 water to be discharged.
                        In summary, zinc concentrations in waste waters can be reduced
•                 by lime coagulation precipitation and sedimentation to a final

I

I
                                                 382

-------
                                                                     I
effluent concentration of up to 2.5 rag/1 and may be further reduced  •




to a maximum concentration of 0.5 mg/1 by filtration.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
                                                                     I
                                                                     I



                                                                     I
     On the basis of this discussion the following statements can    I




be made about zinc:




     1.  Zinc is abundant in rocks and various metal ores.  The




marine environment contains 0.01 mg/1 of zinc in water, up to




150 mg/1 in marine plants, and from 6 to 1,500 mg/1 in marine




animals, apparently due to natural causes.                            •




     2.  Major industrial sources of zinc bearing wastewaters are




mining and smelting of zinc, metal alloys,  and plating operations.   |




     3.  Zinc is a necessary nutrient to man, animals, and plants    •




in limited amounts.  Surface waters used for irrigation of plants




should not contain more than 5 mg/1 zinc due to damaging effects.    •




Zinc concentrations in surface waters should be less than 50 mg/1




for animal and wildlife watering.




     4,  Domestic water supplies should not contain more than 5 mg/1




zinc for aesthetic reasons.




     5.  Zinc toxicity varies with respect to the species, age, and  •




condition of fish as well as the water hardness, pH, dissolved




oxygen, and other trace metal concentrations.  The presence of       •




copper will increase the toxicity of zinc in soft waters.  Most




forms of fish and aquatic life can withstand short exposure (at      •




least one hour) to a zinc concentration of 1.0 mg/1 in both soft     •










                                                                     I





                              383                                    •
                                                                     «

-------
I
•                   and hard waters.   Reductions in the dissolved oxygen of surface
                     waters will increase the toxicity of zinc.
I                        6.  Zinc bearing industrial wastewaters can currently be
                     treated by lime coagulation, precipitation, settling, and possible
^                   filtration to a maximum effluent level of less than 1.0 mg/1.  The
•                   cost to reach an effluent level of 1.0 mg/1 is within a reasonable
                     economic range, compared to removing other pollutants.
•                        On the basis of the above discussion,  it is recommended that
                     a uniform effluent level for zinc be established at 1.0 mg/1.  In
V                   applying this effluent limit to industrial and municipal dis-
•                   charges, consideration must be given to the concentration of other
                     trace metals such as copper and their synergistic effects.  With
•                   respect to average operating conditions, of a zinc removal treat-
                     ment process, the effluent should only contain a zinc concentra-
•                   tion in the range of 0.1 to 0.5 mg/1.

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I
384

-------

-------
   I
   I
   I
   1
   I
   I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
                          APPENDIX
A:  References                                   A-l — A-9
                  B:   Water  Quality  Criteria Recommendations       B-l  — B-9
  •                   for  Total Residual  Chlorine  in Receiving
                      Waters  for  the Protection  of Freshwater
                      Aquatic Life  by W.  A.  Brungs and  Staff


                  C:   Capital and Operating  Costs                   C-l


 I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                               REFERENCES
 1. American Public Health Association, 1971.  STANDARD METHODS;  for
      the Examination of Water and Waste Water.  APHA, AIWA, WPCF.
      New York, N. Y. 13th ed. 874p.


 2. Armco Steel Corporation, 1970.  Treatment of Waste Water-Waste Oil
      Mixtures.  WPCRS 12010 EZV 02170.


 3. Armco Steel Corporation, 1971.  Limestone Treatment of Rinse Waters
      from Hydrochloric Acid Pickling of Steel.  EPA, WPCRS 12010
      DUL 02/71.


 4. Anom. "Deeds and Data."  JWPCF.  40:7:1358, 40:11:1953, and 41:5:836.


 5. Anom. 1965.  "Interaction of Heavy Metals and Biological Sewage
      Treatment Processes."  USDHEW, PHS.   Environmental Health Series
      999-WP-22.  1965.


 6. Anom. 1968. Water Quality Criteria:  Report of the National Technical
      Advis o ry Commi 11ee.   FWPCA.  1968.  Pub. No. 0-287-250.  234pp.


 7. Anom. 1967.  The Cost of Clean Water:   Vol III. Industrial Waste
      Profiles, No. 5.  Petroleum Refining.  U. S. Department of the
      Interior, Washington, D. C., 1967.


 8. Anom. 1967.  The Cost of Clean Water:   Vol. Ill Industrial Waste
      Profiles, No. 3.  Meat Products.  U.  S. Department of the
      Interior, Washington, D. C., 1967.


 9. Anom. 1972.  "Technology:  Cell Systems Keep Mercury from Atmosphere.'
      Chemical and Engineering News.  February 14, 1972.  (Also February
      21, 1972 issue.)


10. Antonie, R. L., 1971.   "The Bio-Disc Process News Technology for the
      Treatment of Biodegradable Industrial Waste Water."  In Water-1970;
      Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series 107:  Vol 67:1971
      pp 585-588.


11. Babbitt, H. E., and E.  R. Baumann, 1958.  Sewerage and Sewage Treat-
      ment .   John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.  790p.
                             A-l

-------
21. Brungs, W.  A., 1972.   Personal Communication.

22. Bunch, R.  L.,  1971.   "Factors Influencing Phosphorus Removal by
      Biological Treatment."  IN: Water-1970:  Chemical Engineering Pro-
      gress Symposium Series 107:  Vol 67:1971.  L. K. Cecil, ed. pp 90-94.
                                                                                      I
                                                                                      I
                           REFERENCES (CONT.)

12. Barker, J. E.,  Foltz, V. W.,  and R.  J.  Thompson, 1971.  "Treatment of
      Waste Oil:  Waste Water Mixtures."  IN:  Water-1970:  Chemical
      Engineering Progress Symposium Series 107;  Vol 67:1971.   L. K.
      Cecil, ed. pp 423-427.

13. Barnhart, E.,  personal communication, January 1972.  (Hydroscience                •
      Inc., 363 Old Hook Road, Westwood, New Jersey.)

14. Battelle Columbus Laboratories, 1971.  An Investigation of Techniques             •
      for Removal of Cyanide from Electroplating Wastes.  EPA,  WPCRS                  *
      12010 ELE: 11/71:87 pp.

15. Battelle's Columbus Laboratories, ed.,  1971.  Water Quality Criteria              |
      Data Book Volume 3:  Effects of Chemicals on Aquatic Life.  EPA, WPCRS
      18050GWV 05/71.                                                                 _

16. Battelle Memorial Institute,  1968.   A State-of-the-Art Review of Metal            *
      Finishing Waste Treatment.   WPCRS  12010 EIE 11/68.

17. Battelle Memorial Institute,  1971.   An Investigation of Techniques                •
      for Removal of Chromium from Electroplating Wastes.  EPA:WPCRS
      12010 EIE 03/71:91 pp.                                                          •

18. Beychok, M. R., 1971.  "Performance  of Surface-Aerated Basins."  IN:
      Water-1970:   Chemical Engineering  Progress Symposium Series 107:                _
      Vol 67:1971.   L. K. Cecil,  ed. pp  322-339.                                      •

19. Black and Veatch, Consulting  Engineers, 1971.  Process Design Manual
      for Phosphorus Removal.  EPA, Program No. 17010 GNP, October 1971.              •

20. Brungs, W. A.,  1971.  "Water  Quality Criteria:  Recommendations for
      Total Residual Chlorine in  Receiving Waters for the Protection of               •
      Freshwater Aquatic Life."   Submitted to Francis T. Mayo,  Regional               •
      Administrator, EPA, Region  V, December 20, 1971.
                                                                                      I
23. Burns and Roc, Inc., 1971.  Process Design Manual Jror Suspended Solids            M
      Removal.   EPA, Program No. 17030  GNO,                                          •

24. Camp, T. R.,  1963.   Water and its Impurities.  Reinhold Publishing
      Company,  New York.  1963.  355p.                                                 I
                               A-2
                                                                                      I

                                                                                      I

                                                                                      I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
                           REFERENCES (CONT.)


25.  Camp, W. S., 1969.  "Poultry Processor Meets Challenge of Increased
      Waste Load."  Water and Sewage Works.  116:9IW 24-26 September 1969.


26.  Convery, J. L. ,  1970.  Treatment Techniques for Removing Phosphorus
      from Municipal Waste Waters.  EPA, WPCRS:17010 01/70.  35pp.


27.  Currie, D.  P., 1971.   "Effluent Criteria:  Opinion of the Board."
      Newsletter #36, 11-15-71.   State of Illinois Pollution Control
      Board.


28.  Datagraphics,  Inc., 1971.  Projected Waste Water Treatment Costs in
      the Organic  Chemicals Industry (updated).  EPA, WPCRS.  No. 12020
      GND 07/71, 161p.


29.  Dobolyi, E., 1970.  "Laboratory Model Experiments on the Chemical
      and Biological Purification of Waste Water from the Dunary'varos
      Paper Mill."  Papiripar (Hung.) 14:2:39; Bull. Inst. Paper Chem.,
      41:4:3345.  (1970)   TJS[:  "Annual Literature Review" JWPCF 43:6
      June, 1971.


30.  Driver, W.  J., 1971.   "Where We Stand."  Carrints, MCA March-April,
      1971.


31.  Eberhordt,  W.  A., and J. B.  Nesbitt, 1968.  "Chemical Precipitation
      of Phosphorus  in a  High-Rate Activated Sludge System."  JWPCF:
      40:7:1239-1267.  July 1968.


32.  Eckenfelder, W.  W., and D. J. O'Connor, 1961.  Biological Waste
      Treatment.  Pergamon Press.  New York.  299p.


33.  Ellis, M.  M.,  Westfull, B. A., and M. D. Ellis, 1941.  "Arsenic in
      Fresh-Water  Fish."   Ind. En&. Chem. 33:10:1331-1332 October, 1941.


34.  EPA, 1971.   Disinfection.  EPA, OWP, Division of Water Quality
      Standards, Washington, D.  C., May 1971.


35.  Esvelt, L.  A., 1970.   "Aerobic Treatment of Liquid Fruit Processing
      Waste.  IN:   Proceedings:   First National Symposium on Food Pro-
      cessing Wastes.  FWQA, WPCRS 12060:04/70:119-143.


36.  Eye, J. D., 1970.  Treatment of Sole Leather Vegetable Tannery Waste.
      WPCRS 12120  WPD-185  09/70.
                              A-3

-------
                           REFERENCES (CONT.)

37.  Fair,  G.  M.,  Geyer,  J.  C.,  and D. A.  Okun,  1968.   Water and Waste
      Water Engineering.   Volume 2, "Water Purification and Waste Water
      Treatment  and Disposal."   John Wiley and  Sons,  Inc., New York.
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
38.  Ferguson, J.  F.,  Jenkins, D.,  and W.  Stumm, 1971.   "Calcium Phosphate           m
      Precipitation in Waste Water Treatment."  IN:   Water-1970:                    I
      Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series 107:  Vol 67:1971.
      L.  K.  Cecil, ed. pp 279-287.

39.  Friberg, L.,  Piscator, M., and G. Nordberg, 1971.   Cadmium in the               »
      Environment.  EPA,  Nat. Tech. Inf.  Serv. No.   PB 199 795.  April,
      1971.                                                                          •

40.  Ganczarczyk,  J.,  1968.  "Protection of Surface  Waters in Poland
      Against Pollution by Effluents from Pulp and  Paper Mills."  Centre            ^
      Beige Etude Doc. Eaux. (Belg.) (CEBEDEAU),  21:291:23; Bull. Inst.              •
      Paper Chem.  40:10:9045 (1970) "Annual Literature Review" JWCPF               *
      43:6 June,  1971.

41.  Geldreich, E. E., 1966.  Sanitary Significance  of Fecal Co11forms               •
      in the Environment.  U. S.  Department of the  Interior, FWPCA,
      Pub. No. WP-20-3  122p.                                                       •

42.  General Technology Corporation, 1971.  "Industrial Waste Study of
      Inorganic Chemical, Alkalies and Chlorine."  (EPA Draft Report-               _
      Unpublished.)                                                                  •

43.  Glide, L. C., 1970.  "Food Processing Waste Treatment by Surface
      Filtration."  IN:  Proceedings:  First National Symposium on Food             •
      Processing Waste.  FWQA, WPCRS 12060:04/70:311-326.                           |

44.  Gloyna,  E. F. and D.  L. Ford,  1970.  The Characteristics and Pollu-             g
      tional Problems Associated with Petrochemical Wastes, Summary                 •
      Report, FWQA,  WPCRS 12020:  2/70.

45.  Gloyna,  E. F. and D.  L. Ford,  1970.  The Characteristics and                    B
      Pollutional Problems Associated with Petrochemical Wastes, Detail-            B
      ed Report,  FWPCA, WPCRS 12021:2/70.

46.  Graham,  J. L. and J.  W. Filbert, 1970.  "Combined Treatment of                  |
      Domestic and Industrial Waste by Activated Sludge."  IN:  Proceed-
      ings :   First National Symposium on Food Processing Wastes.  FWQA,              _
      FWQA,  WPCRS 12060:04/70:91-117.                                               •
                               A-4
                                                                                    I

                                                                                    I

                                                                                    I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
                           REFERENCES (CONT.)


47. Grishina, E. E. and K. M. Izotova, 1969.  "Anaerobic Fermentation
      of Waste Waters from the Production of Wood-Fiber Board."  Ochistka
      Proizved.  Stachnykh Vod (USSR), 4:165, Chem. Abs. 73:6:28625p


48. Gurnham, F. C., 1965.  Industrial Waste Water Control, Academic
      Press, New York.  1965  476p.


49. Henderson, A. D. , and J. J. Eaffa, 1954.  "Wt.ste Disposal at a Steel
      Plant Treatment of Flue Dust Waste."  JSED, ASCE 80:494:9-54:1-8.


50. Hopkins, E. S., and G. M. Dutterer,  1970.  "Liquid Wastes Disposal
      from a Slaughterhouse."  Water & Sewage Works, 117:7:lW-2.  July,
      1970.


51. Hydroscience, Inc., 1971.  The Impact of Oily Materials on Activated
      Sludge Systems.  EPA, WPCRS 12050  DSH:03/71:110pp.


52. Johnson, E. L. , Beeghly, J. H., and  R. F. Wukasch, 1969.  "Phosphorus
      Removal with Iron and Polyelectrolytes."  Public Works.  100:11.
      pp 66-67 and 142.  November 1969.


53. Jones, R. H., 1970.  "Lime Treatment and In-Flant Reuse of an Activated
      Sludge Plant Effluent in the Citrus Processing Industry."  IN:  Pro-
      ceedings:  First National Symposium on Food Processing Wastes.
      FWQA, WPCRS 12060:04/70:177-188.


54. Lambou, V., 1970.  "Hazards of Mercury in the Environment with
      Particular Reference1 to the Aquatic Environment."  Unpublished.


55. Lambou, V., and B. Lim, 1970.  "Hazards of Arsenic in the Environment
      with particular reference to the Aquatic Environment."  Unpublished.


56. Lambou, V., and B. Lim, 1970.  "Hazards of Lead in the Environment
      with particular reference to the Aquatic Environment."  Unpublished.


57. Lawton, G. W., 1967.  "Detergents in Wisconsin Waters."  Jour. AWWA.
      59:10:1327-1334.  October 1967.


58. Linstedt, K. D., Houck, C. P., and J. T. O'Connor, 1971.  "Traces
      Element Removals in Advanced Waste Water Treatment Processes."
      JWPCF 43:7:1507-1513:1971.


59. Arthur D. Little, Inc., ed.  Water Quality Criteria Data Book
      Volume 1 Organic Chemical Pollution of Freshwater.  EPA, WPCRS;
      18010DPV.


60. Little, A. D., 1971.  Draft copy of  - Industrial Waste Studies
      Program Textile Mill Products.  WOO, EPA.  May 1971.
                                             A-5

-------
                                                                              I

                           REFERENCES (CONT.)

61.  Lund, H.  E.  ed.,  1971.   Industrial Pollution Control Handbook.             "
      McGraw-Hill 1971.  26 Chapt.

62.  Lyons, D. N., and W.  W. Eckenfelder, Jr., 1971.  "Optimizing a Kraft      •
      Mill Water Reuse System."  IN:  Water-1970;  Chemical Engineering
      Progress Symposium Series 107: Vol 67:1971.  L. K. Cecil, ed.           g
      pp 381-387.                                                             •

63.  Massey, A.,  and J. Robinson, 1971.  "A Review of the Factors Limit-
      ing the Growth of Nuisance Algae."  Water _& Sewage Works.  118:11:      •
      352-355.  November 1971.                                                 •

64.  McDonough, W. P., and F. A. Steward, 1971.  "The Use of the Integrated    •
      Waste Treatment Approach  in the Large Electroplating Shop."  IN:        •
      Water-1970:  Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series 107:
      Vol 67:1971.   pp 428-431.                                               ^

65.  McGaruey, F. X.,  Tenhoor, R. E., and R. P. Nevers, 1959.  "Brass          *
      and Copper Industry:   Cation Exchanges for Metals Concentration
      from Pickle Rinse Waters."  Ind. & Engr. Chem.  44:3:534-541.           •
      March 1952.                                                             •

66.  McKee, J. E. , and H.  W. Wolf, ed.  Water Quality Criteria, 2nd ed.,       tm
      1963.  State Quality Control Board, California.  Pub. No. 3-A.          •
      548pp.

67.  Menar, A. B., and D.  Jenkins, 1970.  "Fate of Phosphorus in Waste         •
      Treatment  Processes:   Enhanced Removal of Phosphate by Activated        •
      Sludge."  Environ.  Sci^ & Tech. 4:12:1115-1121.  December 1970.

68.  Merrill,  W.  H., 1970.  "Treatment Plant Designed for Frozen Meat
      Wastes."  Water & Waste Eng.,  7:5:C-5, May 1970.

69.  Michel, R. L., 1970.   "Cost and Manpower for Municipal Waste Water        I
      Treatment Plant Operation and Maintenance, 1965-1968."  JWPCF.
      42:1883 (1970).

70.  Mulbarger, M. C.  and D. G.  Shifflett, 1971.  "Combined Biological         •
      and Chemical Treatment for Phosphorus Removal."  IN:  Water-1970:
      ChemicalEngineering Progress Symposium Series 107:Vol 67:1971.
      L. K. Cecil, ed. pp 107-116.
                                A-6
I
I
71. Nemerow, H. L., 1963.  Theories and Practices of Industrial Waste         ^
      Treatment.   Addison-Wesley Publication Company, Inc., Reading,          •
      Massachusetts, 557p.
I

I

I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
                           REFERENCES (CONT.)


72. Nemero^, H. L.,  1971.  Liquid Waste of Industry:  Theories, Practices,
      and Treatment.  Addison-Wesley 1971.  584pp.


73. Nesbitt, J. B.,  1969.  "Phosphorus Removal the State of the Art."
      JWPCF.  41:5:701-713.  May 1969.


74. O'Connor, J. T., 1972.  Professor of Sanitary Engineering, University
      of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois.  (Personal Communication)


75. Parker, C. E., 1970.  Anaerobic-Aerobic Lagoon Treatment for Vegetable
      Tanning Wastes.   EPA, WPCRS 12120 DIK  12/70.


76. Patterson, J.  W.,  and R. A. Minear, 1971.  Waste Water Treatment
      Technology.   Illinois Institute of Environmental Qaulity, August
      1971.  279pp.


77. Raabe, E. W.,  1968.   Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Degradation of
      Lignin in Natural Waters."  JWPCF, 40:R145-R150, May 1968.


78. Rich, L. G., 1961.   Unit Operations of Sanitary Engineering.  John
      Wiley & Sons,  Inc., New York.   308p.


79. Rich, L. G., 1963.   Unit Processes of Sanitary Engineering.  John
      Wiley & Sons,  Inc., New York.   190p.


80. Salutsky, M. L.  Et  al., 1971  "Ultimate Disposal of Phosphate from
      Waste Water  by Recoveiy as Fertilizer."  IN:  Water—1970:
      Chemical Engineering Progress  Symposium Series 107:Vol 67:1971, L.
      K. Cecil, ed.  pp  44-62.


81. Sawyer, C. N., and  P. L. McCarty, 1967.  Chemistry for Sanitary
      Engineers.  McGraw-Hill, New York.  518p.


82. Schmid, L. A.  and R. E. McKinney, 1969.  "Phosphate Removal by a
      Lime-Biological Treatnent Scheme."  JWPCF, 41:7:1259-1276.
      July 1969.


83. Schneider, R.  F.,  1971.  "The Impact of Various Heavy Metals on
      the Aquatic  Environment."  EPA, WQP.  Tech. Report No. 2,
      February 1971.


84. Schulze, K. L.,  1955.  "Experiences with a New Type of Daily Waste
      Treatment."   JSWS, ASCE 81"847:12-55:1-3.
                                  A-7

-------
                           REFERENCES (CONT.)
I
I
85.  Selikoff, I.  J.,  ed.,  1971.   Hazards of Mercury.   Environmental
      Research, Academic  Press,  New York.  Vol 4:1  March 1971.   69p.              •

86.  Smith, R. ,  1968.   "Cost of Conventional and Advanced Treatment of.
      Waste Waters."   JWPCF, 40:9:1546.   September 1968.

87.  Soderguist, M.  R.,  Et al., 1970.  Current Practice in Seafood                  ™
      Processing Waste  Treatment.   EPA,  WQO, WPCRS 12060 ECF 04/70 120pp.

88.  Spiegel, M. and T.  H.  Forrest, 1969.  "Phosphate Removal:  Summary of          |
      Papers."   Jour.  SED, ASCE, SA5:6807:803-815. October 1969.

89.  Spohr, G. and A.  Talts, 1970.   "Phosphate Removal by pH Controlled             I
      Lime Dosage."  Public Works.  101:7,  pp 63-67.   July 1970.

90.  Stanier, R. Y., Doudoroff, M., and E. A. Adelberg, 1963.  The                  ft
      Microbial World,  2nd ed.  Prentice-Hall, Inc.,  Englewood Cliffs,             ft
      N.  J.  753p.

91.  Stanley Consultants,  Inc., 1971.  Draft copy of-Effluen t Requirements          |
      for the Leather Tanning and Finishing Industry.  WQP, EPA,
      September 1971.                                                               _

92.  Stewart, M. J., 1964.   "Activated Sludge Process Varations:   The               *
      Complete  Spectrum."  W & SW, Reference Number - 1964:  R-241-262.

93.  Thomas, A.  A. and W.  H. Brown, 1968.  "Closed-Loop Chlorination for            ft
      Waste Waters."   JWPCF, 40:4:684, April 1968.

94.  U. S. Public Health Service.  Drinking Water Standards.  Revised               I
      1962.  Pub. No.  956.  Washington,  D.  C. 1962.
95. Van Den Berg, L.  A., Personal communication, January 1972.                      •

96. Volco Brass and Copper Company, 1971.  Brass Wire Mill Pro cess
      Changes and Waste Abatementv Recovery and Reuse.  EPA, WPCRS                  •
      12010 DPF 11/71:44 pp.                                                        ft

97. Weston, R. F., 1971.  "Testimony Presented to the Illinois Pollution            £
      Control Board."  October 1, 1971.                                             I

98. Wieferig, T., 1969.  "Practical Experience with the Purification of
      Sewage from Poultry Slaughterhouses."  Muechner, Beitr. Abwasser              I
      Fish. Flussbiol.  (Ger.), 16:282:  Chem. Abs. 72:47182n (1970)                ft
                                                                                    1

                                                                                    I

                                                                                    I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
                          REFERENCES (CONT.)


 99.  Wilmoth, R.  C., and R. D.  Hill, 1970.  Neutralization of High
       Ferric Iron Acid Mine Drainage.   WPCRS 14010 ETV 08/70.


100.  Anom.  Current Events, "Biochemical Role of Selenium described"
       C & E News  May 1, 1972  p.16.


101.  Clarkson, T. W.  "Recent Advances  in the Toxicology of Mercury
       with Emphasis on the Alkylmercurials"  CRC Critical Reviews in
       Toxicology 203-234, March 1970.


102.  Jernelov, A. "Conversion of Mercury Compounds", (in Miller, M. W.,
       ed., Chemical Fallout, Thomas, Illinois, 1969, Chapter 4, p.68).


103.  Johnson, W.  F. and Hindin, E. 1972  "Bioconcentration of Arsenic
       vy Activated Sludge Biomass"  Water and Sewage Works, Vol 119
       No.  10 pp. 95-97 (Oct. 1972).


104.  Lakin, H. W. 1971  "The Geochemical, Cycle of Selenium in our
       Environment", (ACS Meeting, Washington, D.C., Sept. 1971, un-
       published) .


105.  Little, A. D., Walter Quality Criteria Data Book, Vol. 2., Inor-
       ganic Chemical Pollution of Freshwater.
                                 A-9

-------

-------
1
1


WATER QUALITY CRITERIA RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TOTAL RESIDUAL
CHLORINE IN RECEIVING WATERS FOR THE PROTECTION OF
1
1
•

1

1

1

1





1








1
1

1

1
1

1
FRESHWATER AQUATIC LIFE
by
William A. Brungs ,Ph.D.
and Staff (20)
National Water Quality Laboratory
Duluth , Minnesota
The recommendations are:
RECOMMENDATION FOR TOTAL
TYPE OF CRITERIA RESIDUAL CHLORINE

continuous 0.01 mg/liter






continuous 0.002 mg/liter



intermittent A. 0.1 mg/liter not
to exceed 30 minutes
per day.

B. 0.05 mg/liter not
to exceed 2 hours
per day.








LEVEL OF PROTECTION

This level would pro-
bably not protect trout
reproduction, some im-
portant fish food organisms
and could be partially
lethal to sensitive life
stages of sensitive fish
species.
This level should pro-
tect most aquatic
organisms.

These levels should not
result in significant
kills of aquatic organ-
isms or adversely
affect the aquatic ecology.

The above recommendations in clean water require the use of the

amperometric titration method that is among the most
determination of free or combined available chlorine

accurate for the
. The method is
largely unaffected by the presence of common oxidizing agents , temperature


B-l






-------
                                                                              I





variations, and turbidity and color, which interfere with the accuracy        •



of the other methods.  Simpler methods, such as orthotolidine, are



best suited for the routine measurement of total residual chlorine,           •



but are commonly affected by the above interferences and provided appre-      •



ciably lower values than actually occur (Standard Methods, 1971).



These colorimetric methods may provide a measure as low as 10% or less        •



than the real level depending upon interferences.



     Despite the fact th.it there are several significant studies in           |



progress to evaluate the effects of total residual chlorine in waste          M



and cooling waters, theri are available sufficient data to make rather



accurate estimates of criteria to protect freshwater aquatic life.  Studies   •



are being conducted by the National Water Quality Laboratory on sewage



plant effluent, the City of Wyoming, Michigan on domestic and combined        |



sewage plant effluent (EPA Demonstration Grant, 17060 HJB), the Michigan      _



Water Resources Commission on chlorinated power plant condenser cooling



waters, and the University of California, Berkeley, on the toxicity of        •



treated municipal effluents.  It is probably that the results of these



studies will either confirm or necessitate more stringent criteria re-        |



commendations.



     The recommendations for continuous total residual chlorine levels



are based on the maximum levels that would provide for the successful         •



completion of life cycles, including reproduction, of aquatic organisms



and the relative persistence of total  residual  chlorine in the environ-       •



ment  (Table 1).  Obviously the persistence of chlorine is greater  than
I
                                  B-2
I



I



I

-------
  I
  I
commonly thought and it clearly does not disappear in minutes as is


often stated.  The Michigan Water Resources Commission observed fish


mortality in cages up to one mile below a sewage outfall (Basch, 1971).
 «


                 In other studies  by the same organization,  during which  total residual


 •              chlorine was  not  measured,  fish were  killed in cages  up  to  4 miles


                 downstream (Fetterolf,  1970).


 |                   Many of  the  recent investigations  of  chlorine  toxicity have  in-


 M              eluded analytical determinations of total  residual  chlorine to which


 "              the test organisms were exposed.  These more recent studies have  also


 •              utilized continuous flow procedures which  alleviate the  problem of


                 gradually declining total residual chlorine concentrations  characteris-


 I              tic of static, or  standing volume,  bioassays.   Despite the fact that


 ^              nearly 120 publications, reports,  etc., were read and evaluated prior


 *              to making the above recommendations,  15-20  of these papers  provided


 B              the basis for the recommendations.  A summary of  these data is shown


                 in Table 2.


 •                   Trout and salmon appear to be the  most sensitive fish  species


                 (Holland, et  al. , 1960; Merkens, 1958;  Arthur, 1971;  Basch, 1971; Conventry


 ™              et al.,  1935; Sprague and Drury, 1969;  Taylor and James, 1928; and


 •              Tsai, 1971).   Some fish food organisms  such as scuds, cladocerans, and


                 protozoans are also rather sensitive  (Arthur, 1971; Arthur  and Eaton,


 •               1972; Hale,  1930; Biesinger, 1971).   Smallmouth bass  are almost as


                 sensitive as  trout (Tasi, 1971 and Pyle, 1960) while crayfish, snails,


 •               mussels, bullfrog tadpoles,  oligochaetes ,  algae,  and stoneflies are




 I



I

-------
                                                 I
                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I
generally more resistant (Sinclair, 1964; Kott, et al, 1966; Learner
and Edwards, 1968; Panikkar, 1960; Arthur, 1971; and Coventry, et al,              •
1935).
     The recommendations for discontinuous total residual chlorine
in fresh water are on less firm ground due to the scarcity of data on              •
toxic effects during a few minutes to a few hours of exposure.  Pro-
bably the most pertinent data, again developed by the Michigan Water               •
Resources Commission, observed in a power plant discharge canal erratic            •
swimming by fish of several within 6 minutes of the initiation of
chlorination by the plant.  At this time the total residual chlorine               •
was 0.09 mg/liter (Truchan, 1971).  After 15 minutes there were dead
fish at a total chlorine residual of 0.28 mg/liter.  Other studies have            £
shown rainbow trout killed in 2 hours at 0.3 mg/liter (Taylor and James,           •
1928), brook trout median mortality was 90 minutes at 0.5 mg/liter
and smallmoutn bass median mortality was 15 hours at 0.5 mg/liter (Pyle,           •
1960).  Trout fry were killed instantly at 0.3 mg/liter  (Coventry, et al,
1935).  Chinook salmon, which have been introduced into Lake Michigan,             ||
started to die in 2.2 hours at 0.25 mg/liter in salt water  (Holland, et al,        _
1960).  Arthur (1971) has shown that the 1-hour median tolerance limit             *
was slightly above 0.7 mg/liter for fathead minnows, yellow perch, and             •
largemouth bass although the 12-hour median tolerance limits for these
species is between 0.3 and 0.5 mg/liter.  Unfortunately, no extensive              |
studies have been conducted to determine the fate of aquatic organisms             _
upon returning to water containing no total residual chlorine following            *
B-4
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I

-------
 I
              a brief exposure to lethal concentrations.   Preliminary studies with




 •           Daphnia Magna, a cladoceran, indicate that  they did not recover from




              a 4-hour exposure to what would have been a lethal concentration




 |           (0.125 mg/liter), after being returned to uncontaminated water (Natlon-




 M           al Water Quality Laboratory, 1971).   In this latter study some fathead




              minnows were killed in 2 hours at 0.45 mg/liter and 20% were killed in




 I           7 hours at 0.2 mg/liter.




                   These data indicate the chlorination of cooling water should be




 |           avoided whenever possible to reduce undue stress or risk to the aquatic




 «           environment resulting from commonly-occuring excessive use of chlorine.




                   When chlorine is added to water for the purposes of disinfection,




 •           reduction of biochemical demand or antifouling, the dissolved materials




              in the water acted upon are oxidized or combine with chlorine.  The




 •           addition of chlorine to compounds slows the degradation rate of the




 _           compound and is in part responsible for lower or reduced biochemical




 ™           oxygen demand of a chlorinated waste.  Chlorine residual is commonly




 •           stabilized by the addition of ammonia and the resulting chloramines




              persist for much longer periods of time than does the hypochlorite ion.




 I            Chlorine is known to combine with organoamines , phenols, lipids, thio-




              cyanate, aromatic hydrocarbons, several perticides and carcinogens,




 •            terpenes and humates.




 •                 Experiments are currently underway in  several laboratories to assess




              the extent of the hazards of these organochlorine compounds and to
•            identify them.





I




I
B-5

-------
Decline in Total Residual Chlorine with Time in Static
Bioassay Chambers*
TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
(mg/liter)
INITIAL
2.10
1.02
0.50
0.26
0.13
2HOURS
1.90
0.96
0.41
0.18
0.07
7 HOURS
1.66
0.83
0.32
0.15
0.035
24 HOURS
1.09
0.42
0.18
0.04
0.001
48 HOURS
0.47
0.12
0.001
0.001
0.001
72 HOURS
0.10
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
secondary sewage plant effluent and the mixture was split and then
chlorinated to the initial concentrations.
                                                                           I
                                                                           I
                                                                           I
     We further realize that our recommendations run counter to the
minimal recommendations for total residual chlorine in municipal
seqage effluent (usually 0.5 to 1.0 mg/liyer).   For this reason it is
advisable that our Agency seriously consider the feasibility of al-          •
ternate disinfection procedures to avoid the problem of toxicity and
the formation of potentially harmful organochlorine compounds.                |

                             TABLE 1                                         |

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I
* Nine volumes of Lake Superior water were mixed with one volume
                               B-6
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
                                                                             I

-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1



TABLE II


Selected Summary of Toxic Effects of Total Residual Chlorine
on Aquatic Life.
SPECIES
trout fry
rainbow trout
rainbow trout
rainbow trout
rainbow trout
brook trout
coho salmon
pink salmon
coho salmon
pink salmon
coho salmon
brook trout
brown trout
fathead minnow
fathead minnow
walleye
black bullhead
white sucker
yellow perch
largemouth bass
smallmouth bass
scud
scud
cladoceran
fish species
diversity
protozoa
fathead minnow
aTLSO = median

RESIDUAL CHLORINE
CONCENTRATION ,
EFFECT ENDPOINT MG/LITER
lethal (2 day) 0.06
96-hr. TL50 a 0.14-0.29
7-day TL50 0.08
lethal (12 day) 0.01
avoidance 0.001
7-day TL50 0.083
7-day TL50 0.083
100% kill (1-2 day) 0.08-0.10
100% kill (1-2 day) 0.13-0.20
max. non-lethal 0.05
max. non-lethal 0.05
not found in streams 0.015
not found in streams 0.015
96-hr. TL50 0.05-0.16
7-day TL50 0.082-0.115
7-day 0.15
96-hr. TL50 0.099
7-day TL50 0.132
7-day TL50 0.205
7-day TL50 0.261
not found in streams 0.1
safe concentration 0.0034
safe concentration 0.012
0.001
50% reduction 0.01
lethal 0.1
safe concentration 0.0165
tolerance limit
B-7
BRUNGS '
REFERENCES
Coventry et al, 1935
Basch, 1971
Merkens, 1958
Sprague & Drury, 1969
Sprague & Drury, 1969
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Holland et al, 1960
Holland et al, 1960
Holland et al, 1960
Holland et al, 1960
Tsai, 1971
Tsai, 1971
Zillich, 1969 & Zillich
& Wuerthele, 1969
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Tsai, 1971
Arthur & Eaton, 1972
Arthur, 1971
Biesinger, 1971
Tsai, 1971
Hale, 1930
Arthur & Eaton, 1972



-------
                                            I
                                            I
                         CITED REFERENCES

American Public Health Association, 1971.  Standard methods for the
     examination of water and wastewater.  13th Ed., APHA, New York,          •
     N.Y., pp. 874.                                                           I

Arthur, J.W., 1971.  Quarterly Progress Reports.  National Water              _
     Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota.                                   I

Arthur, J.W., and J.G. Eaton, 1972.  "Toxicity of Chloramines to the
     Amphipod, Gammarus Pseudolimnaeus Sousfield, and the Fathead             I
     Minnow, Pimephales Promelas Rafinesque".  Accepted for publica-          •
     tion in J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada.

Basch, R.W., 1971.  "In-situ Investigations of the Toxicity of Chlori-        I
     nated Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluents to Rainbow
     Trout  (Salmo Gairdneri) and Fathead minnows (Pimephales Promelas)"       _
     Bureau of Water Management, Michigan Department of Natural Re-           I
     sources, Lansing, Michigan 48926, pp. 50.                                •

Biesinger, K.E., 1971.  Personal communication.  National Water Quality       •
     Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota.                                           |

Coventry, F.L., V.E. Shelford, and L.F. Miller, 1935. "The Conditioning       «
     of a Chloramine Treated Water Supply for Biological Purposes".           I
     Ecology 16: 60-66.

Fetterolf, G., 1970.  "Summary of Staff Investigations into the Toxicity      I
     of Chlorine to Fish".  Presented to the Water Resources Commission,      •
     June 25-26, 1970.  Muskegon, Michigan, pp. 5.

Hale, F.E., 1930.  "Control of Microscopic Organisms in Public Water          |
     Supplies with Particular Reference to New York City".  New England
     Water Works Asjsociation 44: 361-385.                                    g

Holland, G.A., J.E. Lasater, E.D. Neumann, W.E. Eldridge, 1960.  "Toxic      •
     Effects of Organic and Inorganic Pollutants on Yound Salmon and
     Trout".   State of Washington, Department of Fisheries, Research         I
     Bulletin No. 5, pp. 186-214.                                            •

Kott, Y., G. Hershkovitz, A. Shemtob, and J.B. Sless, 1966.  "Algicidal      •
     Effect of Bromine and Chlorine on Chorella Pyrenoidosa".  Appl.         |
     Microbiol. 14  (1): 8-11.

Learnei, M.A., and R.W. Edwards, 1968.  "The Toxicity of Some Substances     I
     to Nais  (Oligochaeta)".  Society for Water Treatment and Examina-       •
     12  (3): 161-168.
B-8
                                                                             I

                                                                             I

                                                                             I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
Merkens, J.C., 1958.  "Studies on the Toxicity of Chlorine and Chlora-
     mine to the Rainbow Trout".  Water and Waste Treatment Journal
     7: 150-151.


National Water Quality Laboratory, 1971.  Unpublished data.


Panikkar, B.M., 1960.  "Low Concentrations of Calcium Hypochlorite as
     a Fish and Tadpole Poison Applicable for Use in Partly Drained Ponds
     and Other Small Bodies of Water".  Progressive Fish-Culturist
     22: 117-120.


Pyle, E.A., 1960.  "Neutralizing Chlorine in City Water for Use in Fish-
     distribution Tanks".  Progressive Fish-Culturist 22: 30-33.


Sinclair, R.M., 1964.  "Clam Pests inTennessee Water Supplies".  JAWWA
     56 (5): 592-599.


Sprague, J.B., and D.E. Drury, 1969.  "Avoidance Reactions of Salmonid
     Fish to Representative Pollutants".  Advances in Water Pollution
     Research, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference.
     pp. 169-179.


Taylor, R.S., and M.C. James, 1928.  "Treatment for Removal of Chlorine
     from City Water for use in Aquaria".  U.S. Bur. Fish  Doc. #1045.
     Rept. U.S. Comm. Fish App. 7: 322-327.


Truchan, J., 1971.  Personal communication.  Michigan Water Resources
     Commission.


Tsai, C., 1971.  "Water Quality and Fish Life Below Sewage Outfalls".
     University of Maryland.


Zillich, J.A.  "The Toxicity of the Wyoming Wastewater Treatment Plant
     Effluent to the Fathead Minnow , December 8-12, 1969". 7 p.


Zillich, J.A., and M. Wuerthele. "The Toxic Effects of the Grandville
     Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent to the Fathead Minnow, Pimep-
     hales Promelas". November 17-21, 1969.  pp. 4.
                                 B-9

-------

-------
                                       CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS
 I

 I

 I
                     Indiv dual cost data are presented in the individual sections
 •             when such data exist.  However, in the treatment of municipal and
 •             industrial effluents, a finite number of unit operations are
                required for the treatment of the wastewater.
 •                  Cost data have been prepared by Burns and Roe (23), Datagraphics
                Inc. (28), Smith (86) and Mitchel (69).  These published data include
 •             capital, operation, and maintenance costs for the individual processes.
 •             Also the total costs, including debt service for the process, are
                presented.  Most of the data were prepared over a different period
 •             of time.  Hence the cost index is not the same for all of the
                charts.  When the costs for a plant are compared, care must be
 •             taken to assure that the same cost index is used for all comparisons.

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

I

I
                                              C-l
I

-------