SPECIAL STUDY
TRA.CE METALS AI7D THE CIZYELAT.'D V.'ATES SUPPLY
EKVIKOI-^ZNTAL PSOTSCTICN AC-EZXY
WATER HYGIEIE PfiOGHAM
-------
-------
J
i]
-1
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
' 1
The completion of this study required an intensive effort by
j Cleveland water supply personnel to obtain samples as dictated by
the study criteria. Particular recognition and appreciation is
' •• expressed to Mr. C. Sandor, Commissioner of Water, who directed
1 participation of Cleveland personnel in the study; to Mr. D. V/ilrr.s
and Mr. E. Schv;arz-.;alder, who collected the grab samples and trailed
, J - all samples; and to the treatment plant personnel who assisted in the
_ collection of the composite samples.
*-* The analyses required presented a formidable task to the Cincinnati
""1 Water Hygiene Laboratory, the Gulf Coast Water Hygiene Laboratory,
and the Northeast Water Hygiene Laboratory, which was ably met.
"1 '<•
.J ,- Appreciation is expressed to the Ohio Department of Health Laboratory
^
° (Columbus), which participated in the study.
i ?x
* V-. The Region V office, Division of Water Hygiene, EPA, provided
"1 field direction and prepared the study report.
-------
J
3
:J
TABLE OF CONTENTS
:J
Page
- -3 Introduction 1
J
Methodology 6
| Results 9
Discussion of Results 23
-Ji Mercury Data - Grab Samples 25
--^ Sludge Sample Analyses - Grab Samples 26
Cadmium . 28
| Copper 28
Lead 28
"\
-J Sodium 30
-•*! Composite Sample Results 32
Turbidity - Grab Samples 33
J Other Grab Sample Analyses 35
Conclusions 36
Appendix I - Study Proposal 38
. J Appendix II - Sludge Sampling Procedure 1+7
Appendix III - Treatment Provided 56
1
-------
Introduction
__j Since mid-1968 trace metal analyses of the raw waters used by the
- * City of Cleveland have occasionally shown concentrations of- certain
trace metals exceeding Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
| Raw Water Quality Criteria.* In view of EPA's responsibility for
interstate carrier water supplies (Cleveland has such a supply)
-_| and EPA's responsibility to conduct studies to assist State and local
*-~* governments in maintaining the public health as influenced by public
water supply, the Division of Water Hygiene of EPA determined with
I the concurrence of the Ohio Department of Health (ODH) and the Cleveland
Division of Water to conduct a special study of trace metal occurrence
3'
in the Cleveland water supply. This stu4y as proposed (See Appendix I)
,-« consisted of an intensive 21 day period of both grab and composite
sampling with analyses made for mercury, cadmium, lead, copper and
| sodium.
A brief review of the history of trace metal analyses for the
"\
—j Cleveland water supply begins in mid-1968, when EPA's Lake Erie
—I Basin Office initiated a trace metal analysis program in cooperation
with the Ohio Department of Health and the Ohio public water supplies
1 which use Lake Erie water. The program consisted of'bimonthly samples
taken by the Lake Erie Basin Office and analyzed by the ODH Laboratory
- J in Columbus, Ohio. Analyses** for 1968, 1969, and 1970 have shown
__ j * Water Quality Criteria, Federal Water Pollution Control Admin., D.I.
~ April 1, 1963.
Lake Erie Ohio Intake Water Quality Summary 1969, FWPCA, D.I. June 1970
Lake Erie Ohio Iut:u:e .-.'ater Quality Summary 1968, FrfPCA, D.I. June 1969
**
-------
levels of copper, cadmium, and lead exceeding the raw water quality
'1
—J criteria. No finished water samples were taken. The maximum levels
•- ^ reported for the Cleveland water supply intakes are shown in Table 1.
-J
On July 20-21, 1970, the Lake Erie Basin Office conducted a
j mercury investigation of NASA Lewis Research Center in Cleveland.
Analyses of the Center's effluent, based on the flaneless a-omic
-J absorption method performed at the EPA National Field Investigation
~"j Center in Cincinnati, Ohio, detected the presence of mercury at 2.cppb
-J
(ug/l). Samples subsequently taken at the NASA-Lewis site of Cleveland
j tap water (September 28, 1970) and analyzed by the USGS Nuclear
Reactor Laboratory in Denver, Colorado by the neutron activation
—
-J method demonstrated the presence of mercury at a level of 1.8 ppb.
—1 Samples taken simultaneously of the Center's effluent indicated that
the mercury content of the effluent resulted from the tap water
J content. Subsequent samples taken in October by FVfQA showed a level of
less than 1.0 ppb in the tap water. Daily samples taken in November
~-~* and December 1970 of the Center's effluent and analyzed by the flameless
""~1 atomic absorption method showed no mercury in the effluent exceeding
- I
0.5 FP'a (the limits of the detection method).
I In early October a joint survey by the Division of Water Hygiene
and the Ohio Department of Health was conducted as required by the
1
"• 3 interstate carrier water supply program. Samples were collected of
""1 the raw and finished waters for each plant and were analyzed for trace
metals by the Cincinnati Water Hygiene Laboratory (see Table 2).
1 At the snme time the high trace metal results reported in the "Lake
n
-------
J
3
J
Table I - Maximum Trace Metal Concentrations, 1968-1970
3
J
Treatment Plant Year Cn Zn Ag Cu Or Cd
Crown
Division
Baldwin
Nottingham
BHW Raw Water Criteria 0.2 5.00 0.05 1-00 0.05 0.01
Analysis by Ohio Department of Health Laboratory.
Besults are for 3 to 6 samples per year.
Ni
As
Pb
1968
1969
1970
1968
1969
1970
1968
1969
1970
1968
1969
1970
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.09
0.08
0.03
0.07
0.38
0.07
0.0k
0.45
0.08
0.06
O.lS
0.30
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.0k
0.03
0.02
1.02
0.09
0.10
0.69
0.02
0.18
0.55
0.0?
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02 •
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.05
0.0*+
0.07
0.05
0.05
0.01
0.07
0.22
0.05
0.0k
0.22
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.10
0.25
0.00
0.11
0.40
O.20
0.10
0.56
0.00
0.03
0.56
0.00
0.05 0.05
3
3
n
n
1
TABLE 2 - CHEMICAL ANALYSES 10/70
Cleveland Treatment Plants
Turbidity
Color
IDS
Chloride
Sulfate
Nitrate
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Cadmium
CCE
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
M3AS
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
PBS
Drinking
Water
Standard
5
15 .
500
250
250
<*5
<.01
1.0*
1.0
0.01*
0.2
0.05*
_
1.0
0.01
1.3'
0.3
0.05«
O.C5
0.005
0.5
-
0.01 •
0.05*
5.0
Baldwin
Saw
7.9
5
184
22
26
2
<.01
<:.i
_
.004
-
.000
.006
.022
-
-13
.118
.015
.006
-
<.05
.006
.004
.000
.COS
Fin
3.*f
2
200
26
2?
1
<.1
_
.003
<,1
.000
.000
.016
-
.58
.023
.000
.000
-------
J
Erie Ohio Intake Water Quality Summaries"** were noted and the joint
j survey report recommended that the laboratory capability of the
Cleveland Division of Water Laboratory be improved and that an increased
frequency of trace metal analysis be instituted.
1 As a check of laboratory accuracy, the December samples for the
trace metal analysis program were split and sent to the EFA National
jj Field Investigation Center in Cincinnati and the EPA Water Hygiene
.« Laboratory in Cincinnati as well as the ODH Laboratory.
On January 19? 1971? the DWH Laboratory completed the trace metal
I analyses (Table 3) and reported a mercury content of 8.9 ?pb in the
Division Filtration Plant raw water sample. This high concentration
J was subsequently verified by the ODH and Field Investigation Center
-1 laboratories which reported 8.5 and 12 ppb respectively. The Lake
Erie Basin Office took samples of the finished water and raw water
| from each plant on January 27? 1971. These results showed no mercury
concentration exceeding 0.5 ppb.
-J In view of the repeated analyses showing high trace metal con-
--
-------
J
J
1
TABLE 3 - TMCE METAL ANALYSES - CLEVELAND INTAKE WATERS, 12/15/70
Cincinnati Water Hygiene Laboratory
12/15/70 - Values in PPM (Except Mercury)
"| Trace Metal
Barium
T
j Chromium
Silver
1
4 Copper
T| Manganese
J
Lead
I Iron
Cobalt
•» Cadmium
1 Zinc
I
Nickel
j Mercury
]
I
Baldwin
< 0.1
0.008
0.001
0.005
0.028
0.000
0.88
0.000
0.002
0.015
0.011
< 0.1 ppb
Crown
< 0.1
0.017
0.001
0.007
0.040
0.000
1.19
0.000
0.003
0.056
0.005
< 0.1 ppb
5
Division
< 0.1
0.017
0.001
0.015
0.030
0.000
1.38
o.ooo
0.001
0.029
0.002
8.89 ppb
Nottingham
<0.1
0.008
0.000
0.010
0.038
0.012
0.72
0.000
0.003
0.0^1
0.009
< 0.1 ppb
-------
j
j
Methodology and Laboratory Procedures
I Samples to be collected included daily grab samples of the
J
finished and raw waters (the time of sampling was from 8:00 a.m. to
1 k:QO p.m. and varied within this time period for each plant), one grab
sample from each treatment plant of the settled sludge, and weekly
1
J composite samples accumulated, by adding increments every four hours.
I These sanples were all taken in triplicate and mailed to the Cincinnati,
Gulf Coast, and Northeast Water Hygiene Laboratories for analysis.
\ Appendix I includes the study outline, sample procedures, and sample
schedule which were specified for conduct of the sampling program.
• Daily sampling instructions were also provided to the personnel charged
~1 with collecting and mailing the grab and composite samples. Sampling
points were the deep wells from which raw water is pumped to the treat-
J ment plants and laboratory taps of the finished water. Appendix II
describes the sludge sampling device and procedure used. Mr. Frank
1
-« F. Hertsch of the Regional Office collected the sludge samples.
1 Three Division of Water Hygiene Laboratories, including the
Cincinnati Laboratory, Gulf Coast Laboratory, and Northeastern Laboratory,
1 performed analyses in accordance with the specified analytical schedule
and on a split sample basis on the triplicate samples collected at each
'-* sampling. These samples included the daily grab samples of raw and
""1 finished waters for mercury and the other metals (cadmium, copper, lead,
and sodium), the weekly composite samples of raw and finished waters
1 for mercury and the other metals, and the single grab samples of settled
sludge for mercury.
-------
]
1
In addition to the above samples, daily grab samples of raw and
!
J finished waters collected on March 9i 19j and 28 were analyzed by the
I Ohio Department of Health Laboratory for mercury and the other metals.
Laboratory procedures followed by the three EWH Laboratories were
I either standard methods or presently accepted methods for the con-
stituents concerned. Minor variations in following detailed procedures
j were made among the Laboratories in performing some analyses and were
* based on the experience of the individual Laboratory. In seme instances
the analytical equipment available in the Laboratory dictated the
I analytical method to be used. However, these minor variations in
4
laboratory procedures and differences in analytical equipment utilized
-J did not significantly affect the results obtained among the Laboratories
-"1 for mercury and the other metals at the very low concentrations found
in the water samples.
1 It is believed that variations in the analytical results observed
among the Laboratories are within the experimental errors at the
L ---Jj
1
limits of sensitivity of the methods employed.
A general summary of the analytical methods used for examination
of water is as follows:
I Mercury
An appropriate aliquot of the water samples was treated with
• 4 oxidizing agents (potassium permanganate and, in some instances,
•~1 potassium persulfate) to destroy organic matter and convert organo-
mercury compounds to mercuric ions. The sample was then analyzed
j by the flamelecs atomic absorption spectrophotometric method.
1
-------
j Cadmium, Copper and Lead
, Representative aliquots (100 ml or 250 ml) of the water sample were
prepared for atonic absorption spectrophotometric analysis by a 10-to-1
1 concentration of the sasnle. This was accomplished by evaporation and
J ^ '
taking up the residue with hydrochloric acid or by the addition of
! concentrated nitric acid, evaporation or overnight standing, and making
^ up to volume with deionized or distilled water.
"* Sodium
1 Sodium was determined either by the flame photometric method as
j
described in Standard Methods or by atomic absorption spectrophotometry.
j - For the latter method, the water samples were diluted 1 to 15 or 1 to
. 25 with deionized water.
The results of all water analyses were reported in mg/1 or ug/ml (ppm).
Sludge samples collected on March 25 from the settling basins of
each treatment plant were examined by the three Division of Water Hygiene
Laboratories for mercury. The analytical method used is as follows:
The sludge sample, as received by the Laboratory, was shaken well and a
T
1
_ j
. -i
portion was centrifuged. After centrifugation, the supernatant was de-
| canted and analyzed by the flameless atomic absorption spectrophotometric
method in the same manner as for v/ater samples. Results were reported
"1
- | as mg/1. The precipitate remaining after centrifugation was treated
— «t with sulfuric acid and potassium perrnangante to oxidize the organic
matter. After standing, the sample was brough to volume with distilled
- ""»
1 water. The sample was then analyzed by the flamelesn atonic absorption
spectrophotometric technique. The results v:ere reported as mg/kg
-i
- ,3 (ppro) or mg/1 (ppm).
8
' 1
-------
Results
Tables 4-8 show the results obtained for the sample analyses run
by the three Division of Water Hygiene laboratories. Table 9 shows
the results obtained by the ODH laboratory.
Table 4 is a tabulation of the results obtained for the daily
grab saaple analyses for mercury run by the three DWH laboratories.
The data is presented in a lov.', median, high format since averaging
is not possible for the very low concentrations found to be present.
The asterisks indicate a concentration present which did not exceed
.00025 parts per million (the lowest reportable level for the EWH
laboratory method used). Table 5 is a summary of the mercury data
obtained in the study for each sampling point.
The average analyses (of 3 results) for cadmium, copper, lead
and sodium present in the grab samples of raw and finished waters
taken from each of the treatment plants are recorded in Table 6.
These analyses were run on samples taken every other day. The 3
results averaged were those obtained by the Northeast, Gulf, and
Cincinnati D.-/H laboratories. For sodium high results exceeding
16 ppn were considered to be in error if not verified by the other
laboratories. This is shov:n by the asterisk which indicates the
reported result to be the average of two figures rather than three.
Table 7 shows the average analyses (of 3 results) for cadmium,
copper, lead and sodium present in the composite samples of raw and
finished waters taken from each of the treatment plants. The 3 results
averaged were those obtained by the Northeast, Gulf, and Cincinnati
EWH laboratories. The asterisk shows that for the first set of composite
9
-------
1
samples cadmium, copper, lead and sodium were not run by one laboratory.
I The Cincinnati DWH laboratory in addition to the analyses called
for in the study proposal analysed the every-other-day samples and
1
J the composite samples for chromium, silver, manganese, iron, .cobalt,
"1 zinc, and nickel. Technicians at the treatment plants ran turbidities
before mailing the grab samples and the Cincinnati EWH laboratory
, ran turbidities and/or specific conductivities upon receiving the
• samples. These results are recorded in Table 8.
1
-J In Table 9 are tabulated the results of analyses for cadmium,
**i copper lead, sodium, mercury and chromium run by the Ohio Department
of Health Laboratory on grab samples collected every 10 days during
I the study. The 0. values reported in the table for cadmium, copper,
lead, mercury, and chromium are interpreted to mean less than one
I
1
1
microgram per liter. The raw sample from the Division plant on
3/19/71 was not received by the ODH laboratory. Chromium analyses
"*"!
were not run on the 3/9/71 samples as indicated by the dash marks.
j Sludge sample analyses run by the EWH laboratories are not shown
in tabular form in this section of the report but are reported and
~a
discussed in the discussion of results section.
10
-------
TABLE k
MERCURY CONCENTRATION (ppn) IN GRAB AND COMPOSITE
WATER SAXPLES COLlicTZD FROM DIVISION
TREAT:s:rr PLANT DURING MARCH 9-30, 1971
~->,,i^ ^f
.L/a v e 0 1
Collection
"1
-i 3/09
3/10
j 3/11
3/12
1 3A3
1 3/15
~* 3/C9-15
J' 3/16
"1 3/1?
J 3/18
3A9
**«•
] 3/20
3/21
1 3/22
3/16-22
-«1
' 3/23
1 3/2^
-^ 3/25
3/26
J 3/27
3/28
1 3/2?
3/23-30
"W
*
-------
1 I
MERCURY COr.'CErrrEATIGi; (ppn) IN GRAB AND COMPOSITE
WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM BALDWIN
TREATMENT PLAI7I DURING KARCK 9-30, 1971
Date cf
, Collection
J 3/09
1 3/10
J 3/11
-, 3/12
J 3/13
-a ""
J 3/15
3/09-15
T
J
3/16
1 3A7
J 3/18
33/19
3/20
1 3/21
J 3/22
3/16-22
1
3/23
1 3/2^
J 3/25
T 3/26
-7 /pr-;
* 3/28
J 3/29
3/23-30
J
*<£0. 00025
1
J
]
P.O..- v. = ter
Low
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
41
*
*
*
*
*
*
4<
*
4>
*
*
l-.eiiar-
41
*
4>
*
*
41
*
*
*
*
*
4t
*
*
4i
0.00025
*•'
*
*
41
41
*
*
Rich.
*
4=
*
0.00050
0.00030
#
0.00050
*
*- '
"*
*
* f -
*
0.00030
. --0. 000^5
*
*
*
*
*
*
41
12
Finished V.'rx~er
Lov/
*
4t
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Median
*
*
*
*.
0.000^0
*
O.OOCifO
*
*
41
*
*
4>
*
41
*
*
*
41
*
*
*
High
4t
*
*
*
O.OOCoO
*
0.00030
0.00055
*
*
*
*
* •
*
*
0.000^5
*
*
*
*
41
*
O.OGG^tG
-------
MERCURY CONCENTRATION (ppm) IN GRAB AND COMPOSITE
WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM CROWN
TREATMENT PLANT DURING 'MARCH 9-30, 1971
J
Date of
Collection
4 3/09
3/10
] 3/11
3/12
] 3/13
3/1^
1 3A5
^ 3/09-15
"1
-4 3/16
1 3/18
3/19
J 3/20
3/21
1 3/22
3/16-22
-J 3/23
^ 3/2i*
"J 3/25
] 3/27
3/28
1 3/29
3/23-30
j j *<0. 00025
ll
n
u
Raw Water
Low
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Median
*
*
*
*
0.000^0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.00025
*
*
*
*
*
Hign
*
0.00060
*
*
0.00060
*
*
0.00060
*
*
*
*
*
0.00030
:
*
*
41
*
13
• - Finished Water
Low .
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
•
Median
#
*
*
*
*
*
0.00030
*
*
*
*
0.00035
*
*
*
*
*
*
High
*
*
*
*
0.00060
* -
o.ocov?-
0.00060
*
.*
0^0060
0.00030
0.00035
*
*
ik
*
-------
U MERCURY CONCENTRATION (rprn)IN GRAB AND COMPOSITE
WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED FROi! NOTTINGHAM
TREATMENT PLANT DURING MARCH 9-30, 1971
M
* Date of
Collection
n-
3/09
3/10
tl 3/11
J 3/12
n ^
f ] 3/15
U 3/09-15
P3/16
3/17
3/18
n 3/19
3/20
3/21
3/22
P 3/16-22
3/23
3/2^
3/25
P3/26
3/27
P3/28
3/29
n 5f~50
*tO 000^5
n
n
n
n
Raw Water
Low Median
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.00030
Ml
*
MI
ME
ME
*
ME
*
*
*
*
*
MI
MI
MI
* "
Kirh
*
*
0.000^5
O.OOOto
*
0.000^5
*
*
0.00050
MI
Ml
*
*
0.00025
MI
*
*
*
*
*
0.00030
Ik
Finished Water
Low
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
- #
*
*. '
*
*
*
-
Median
*
* .
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ME
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Hirii
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.00025
*
0.00355
*
*
*
*
*
0.000^0
*
*
*
*
*
Ml
-------
j
j
j
j
j
i
CO
Q
S
O
H
rH
'i ^>
ft i-H
LA ft
H ^ d"
OJ
-P
cO
:s
T3
CO
•H
C
•H
Pn
H
fH
07
-P
cO
3
K
A
bo
•H
w
G
•H
O
^r*
3
O
•a
•H
w
c
CO
•H
CD
2£
J
-P
G
cu
E
-P -P
cfl G
CD CO
f-l rH
EH ft
O
8
o
o
LA
OJ
8
o
•
o
V
LA
OJ
O
8
«
o
V
o
o
8
o
LA
OJ
O
•
O
V -
IA
OJ
0
O
o
CD
N/
c
•H
3
i-H
cd
a
o
VD
O
O
O
o
r\j
•
o
V
LA
OJ
g
*
O
V
o
d
LA
OJ
O
8
d
V
IA
OJ
O
O
o
o
V
G
3
O
f-l
o
o
g
o
o*
IA
OJ
8
o
•
o
V
LA
OJ
O
•
•o
M
0
oo
8
o
0*
-
LA
OJ
O
8
d
V
LA
OJ
8
o
0
\l
G
O
•H
W
•H
J>
•H
°
tA
LA
8
o
o*
IA
OJ
O
O
O
•
o
V
IA
OJ
g
%
O
V
8
o
d
LA
OJ
O
O
O
d
LA
OJ
8
O
d
V
s
cO
bb
G
•rl
-P
H->
O
•z.
(0
CD
tH
S
cO
CQ
CD
-P
cfl
3
3
ctf
M
0
-P
•H
ca
o
0
o
13
CO
"cO
50
H
OJ
G
O
CQ
G
O
•rl
-P
§
•H
0)
£*
O •
-P -P
cO C
Si CO
O 1-1
^3 ft
CO
rH -P
C
OJ O
C^ S
=H CO
O (D
Sn
H -P
05
•P ,G
O 0
-P «
C
O -P
cO
13
CU t3
co a
co -P
f> o
0)
CO rH
-P rH
CO O
« 0
rH
ft
E
cO
03
0
-P
cO
3
rrj
O
rH
I
C
•H
^
o
-P
•H
a
o
o
o
£
G
d
"co
bO
H
OJ
J-J
0
03
G
o
•H
-P
<&
•H
S
0)
f-.
O •
-P 4-3
CO G
fH CS
0 rH
,a ft
cO
• | — | -4-3
G
oj 0)
!>- S
tH CO
O 0
H -P
-P A
O O
-P CB
0)
G
O -P
cC
T3
01 T3
CO CD
CO -P
^o o
CiJ
CO r-i
-P rH
C3 O
Q CJ
OJ
-------
Date
TABLE 6 GRAB SAXPLE ANALYSES RESULTS (ppm)
Baldwin Crown ' Division
Nottingham
1
1
I
4
1
4
1
-1
_
I
-*M
1
~i
Cadmium
3/9/71
3/11/71
3/13/71
3/15/71
3/17/71
3/19/71
3/21/71
3/23/71
3/25/71
3/27/71
3/29/71
3/9/71
3/11/71
3/13/71
3/15/71
3/17/71
3/19/71
3/21/71
3/23/71
3/25/71
3/27/71
3/29/71
Lead
3/9/71
3/11/71
3/13/71
3/15/71
3/17/71
3/19/71
3/21/71
3/23/71
3/25/71
3/27/71
3/29/71
Sodium
3/5/T1
3/11/^1
3/13/71
3/1 m
3/17/71
Raw
*
•
•
•
»
•
*
*
m
•
*
•
•
•
•
.
«
•
•
.
•
•
_
<
<
<
<
10
11
11
1C,
001
001
002
001
001
001
003
001
CC1
001
001
Oil
008
005
007
014
004
019
019
006
016
017
.03
.04
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
~>*
«<_
. ii
.1
11.0
3/lv/71 10.9
1
j
**
J
3/2 1/ -1
3/23/?l
3/25/71
3/27/71
3/29/71
10,
.0
10.8*
10.
10.
.1
.7
10.3
Fin
.003
.001
.002
.001
.001
.001
.003
.001
• GG'i
r* ^,1
.OUJ.
.001
.013
.009
.006
.010
.018
.016
.020
.018
.005
.013
.021
.02
.02
<.01
.01
.01
.01
«.01
*.01
*.01
<.01
.01
14.1
13.4
13-6
12.7
12.5
12.4
12.0
13.6*
12.1
13.7
13.4*
Raw
.002
.002
.002
.001
.001
.001
.002
.001
.001
.001
.001
.009
.008
.009
.011
.006
.005
.018
.018
.009
.013
.026
.03
.02
<.01
.03
.01
<=.01
.01
< .01
<• .01
.01
.01
12.3
11.6-
11.7
10.4
11.2
10.9
11.6
11. S
11.3
11.2
12.0
Fin
.001
.001
.002
.001
.002
.001
.002
.001
.001
.001
.001
.005
.007
.010
.012
.008
.013
.013
.012
.017
.010
.017
.03
.02
.01
.01
<.01
.01
<.01
<.01
-f.Ol
c.Ol
.01
11.4
11.3
11.4
11.3
11.6
ll.l
15.3
11.8*
11.3
~i ~! "*^
13.2
Raw
.001
.001
.002
.002
.002
.001
.002
.001
.001
.001
.001
.014
.007
.029
.009
.016
.013
.025
.015
.007
.012
.022
.02
.02
<.01
.01
.02
<,01
-02
.01
-f.Ol
.01
*.01
10.4*
11.4
10.8
11.6
10.9
10.8
10.1
11.5
10.0
10.7
10.4
Fin
.
,•
•
.
.
.
.
.
*
•
•
•
•
•
.
.
•
•
•
•
•
•
<
<.
<
<
<
<
<
12
,002
001
002
001
001
002
002
001
OC1
001
001
Oil
009
004
013
017
008
016
015
014
013
013
.03
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.3
n.8
13.7
12,
.0
13.6
13.
.3
10.3
14.0*
12.5
10.9
14.
.3
Raw
.002
.002
.002
• .001
.001
.001
.002
.001
.C04
.001
.001
.010
.010
.012
.013
.015
.008
.015
.018
.006
.023
.015
.03
.02
.02
.01
.01
.01
.02
<£.01
*.01
'-=.01
•tf.Ol
12.5
11.3
10.2
11.2
11.0
10.7
10.2
12.4
10.2
11.7
11.1
Fin'
.001
.002
.002
.001
.001
.001
.003
.001
.001
.001
.001
.009
.016
.007
.014
.014
.013
.016
.016
.006
.011
.018
.01
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
«.01
*.01
* .01
<-.01
10.6*
12.1
11.4
11.4
11.6
11.0
10.5
12.3
10.9
11.6
15.0
Averaf/-- of tvo I--P. r-Tult:-.
All others average of three lab results.
-------
TABLE 7 COMPOSITE SAMPLE RESULTS (ppm)
J Baldwin
]
j
1
J
-w
j
J
1
j
1
'
,_
1
Bate
Cadnium
3/9 - 3/15
3/16- 3/22
3/23- 3/29
Coprer
3/5 -~3/l5
3/16- 3/22
3/23- 3/29
Lead
3/9 - 3/15
3/16- 3/22
3/23- 3/29
Sodium
3/9 - 3/15
3/16- 3/22
3/23- 3/29
Saw
.x f^f^t *
* .OuJ.
.001
.001
.006*
.005
.029
•^ .01*
.01
*.01
10.2*
11.5
10.1
Fin
*.C01*
.001
.001
.005*
.007
.034
*.01*
<.01
<.01
14.0*
13.5
13.9
Crov;n
Raw Fin
<. 001* A 001*
.002 .002*
.001 <.001
.005* .004*
.016 .007*
.024 .019
*.01* <.01*
.02 .02*
.01 <.01
10.4* 10.7*
11.5 11.6
10.8 11.5
Division
Raw
•^.001*
.002
*.C01
.015*
.012
.046
<.01*
< .01
<-.oi
11.0*
11.5
10.4
Fin
<.001*
.002
<.001
.004*
.006
.028
^.01*
^.01
.01
11.5*
12.4
13.1
Nottingham
Raw
<-.ooi*
-C02
.001
.005*
.012
.029
.01*
.01
.01
10.1*
10.6
10.6
Fin
<.001*
^ '"I ~
• WV. —
.001
.005*
.007
.036
<.01*
<.01
<.01
10.7*
11.8
10.7
.1
Average of two sample analyses.
Other results shown as average of 3 lab. analyses.
1
j
17
1
1
-------
TABLE 8 - ANALYSES MADE BY CINCINNATI WATER ETC HNS LABORATORY CIILY
Plant Turbidity Done by Cleveland Water Supply
* Analysis
*& Date
"^ Plant Turbidity
- 3/9/71
3/1 V71
1 3/13/71
j 3/15/71
3/17/71
-, 3/19/71
-- 3/21/71
J 3/23/71
3/25/71
1 3/27/71
i 3/29/71
3/9-3/15/71
1 3/16-3/22/71
j 3/23-3/29/71
-—Sample Turbidity
J 3/9/71
* 3/11/71
3/13/71
1 3/15/71
* 3/17/71
3/19/71
-l 3/21/71
j 3/23/71
-/""/"i
- 3/27/71
1 3/29/71
* 3/9-3/^5/71
Baldwin
Raw
13
8.5
2.5
1 .4
3.5
2.5
15
9.5
8.5
3.2
2.2
13
—
-
12
9
3.2
2.5
9.0
-
15
1.2
1.4
.36
—
Fin
.25
.08
.06
.02
.01
.02
.02
.06
.20
.05
.03
.25
-
-
.14
.15
.18
.18
.15
—
.19
.'1
.18
.18
-
Specific Conductiv:
-* -/ '-•/ ' '
I 3/17/71
' 5/25/71
3/27/71
319
ri6
Crown
Raw
30
5.0
2.0
1.5
4.5
2.2
27
13
10
6.9
4.5
30
23
4.0
.75
2.6
6.5
5.0
4.0
2.4
1.5
Fin
.20
.02
.02
.07
.06
.04
.10
.11
.01
.07
.005
.20
.15
.13
.13
.10
.16
.12
.10
.11
.08
12
9
3.2
2.5
9.0
.14
.15
.18
.18
.15
23
4.0
.75
2.6
6.5
.15
.13
.13
.10
.16
10
5.5
1.9
5.4
7.5
.15
.17
.18
.20
.19
27
5-0
3-0
6.3
8.5
.1?
.19
.16
.20
.12
~- ->
~ ~,Q
Division
Raw
16
4.0
—
0.9
4.5
2.6
2-
5.5
4.0
2.1
1.1
14
10
5-5
1.9
5.4
7.5
.40
1.5
1.0
.45
~:-9
310
QK£
- ^^
roa
"~Z,f~ ~?
— . — — ,,
3C2
Fin
.08
.04
.12
.08
.04
.12
.005
.08
• 15
.09
.04
-
.15
.17
.18
.20
.19
.17
.24
.18
.-IB
312
310
306
319
~1?
~~3
312
Nottingham
Raw
13
4.0
6.0
2.2
2.0
1.6
6.5
•ic
^
8.8
6.3
4.0
13
27
5-0
3-0
6.3
8.5
6.3
12
3.7
2.0
3^2
j;i_'J
296
~~D
— —, s"
* ^, o
Fin
.09
.04
.20
."6
.02
.03
.Co
~ H
. Ws^
.17
.10
.06
.09
.1?
.19
.16
.20
.12
.22
.27
.20
. .21
250
306
~-3
s
: -o
18
-------
TABLE 8
Analysis
^& Date
Baldwin
Raw
Fin
j
Specific Conductivity
3/29/71
1 3/9-3/15/71
^ 3/16-3/22/71
3/23-3/29/71
^-^O^iua (— -)
3/9/71
, 3/H/71
1 3/13/71
"* 3/15/71
3/17/71
1 3/19/71
J 3/2V71
3/23/71
1 3/25/71
.j 3/27/71
3/29/71
*, 3/9-3/15/71
j 3/16-3/22/71
3/23-3/29/71
"ISilver (ppm)
-4 3/9/71
3/11/71
1 3/13/71
J 3/15/71
3/17/71
-, 3/19/71
j 3/21/71
J 3/23/71
3/23/71
1 3/27/71
~m -/2Q/71
3/9-3/15/71
-* V6--/22/71
j 3/23-3/29/71
» T ^ / \
^••-'icX--^ ciiitrSG V "D i-JTl y
1 -VV7' •'
-/11/71
~/1-/71
1 i^J7^
3/19/71
T 3/21/71
j 3/23/71
3/25/71
1
1
-
—
—
-
.000
.000
n^r»
* WWW
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.OGO
.000
.000
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.003
.004
.ceo
.000
.015
.004
.002
-*.rso
• -s» W >-,'
• *-'*-'^
.003
.026
.016
.002
-
—
—
-
• \_-^- W
.coo
r^n
.000
• w --f W.
.0-00
.000
.000
.000
.000
',000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.004
.000
.000
.000
iOOO
.000
.CC4
.000
.000
• w — w
.000
.000
.000
f-<" "*\
• W- 0
.eco
.002
.000
Crown
Raw Fin
Division
Raw Fin
Nottingham
Raw Fin
.000
.000
n^r»
» WWW
.000
.000
,000
.000
,000
,000
,000
,OGO
,000
,000
000
• \_-^- W
.coo
r^n
.000
. ceo
.0-00
.000
.000
.000
.000
',000
.000
.000
.000
• W'v- J
.000
.ceo
.000
.ceo
.ceo
.ceo
.008
.000
.000
.000
.000
.008
.000
o-^O
.C04
.000
.000
.ceo
.coo
.000
.000
.008
.000
.000
.000
_
.008
.CC4
.GOO
.ceo
.000
oo^
.000
.oco
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.004
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.008
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.008
. cce
.000
.ceo
.oco
.ceo
.coo
.ccc
.000
.000
.000
.008
.000
.000
.008
.eco
.oco
.000
.000
.ccc
.ccc
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
,000
.002
,000
.000
.000
.000
,000
,000
,000
,003
,cco
,004
.ceo
,000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.004
.000
.ceo
.000
iOOO
.000
.ccc
.CC4
.000
.ccc
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.015
.003
.005
• \- ^- ^}
.c:c
.00-
.000
.000
.005
.000
.004
.000
.000
.000
.000
.005
.000
.000
.ccc
-
.000
, .000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.ceo
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.00?
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.003
.000
,000
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.004
.000
.000
.005
.000
.000
.000
. e^^
.ceo
.coo
.000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.000
.oco
•.ceo
.000
.000
.ccc
• 7 CO'
. ce e
.ccc
.015
.004
.002
-*.rso
• -s» W >-,'
• *-'*-'^
.005
.026
.016
.002
• w — w
.000
.000
.000
. coo
f-<" "*\
• W- 0
.ceo
.002
.000
.022
.010
.015
.009
r, -jn
.'""?"
-0-5
.016
.016
.ccc
.000
.000
.000
.001
.000
.000
.002
.000
.013
.004
.000
.000
.007
.005
.047
.006
.004
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.001
.000
.002
.004
.022
.002
.005
.002
.C01
.000
.013
.028
.004
.C02
.000
.000
.000
.coo
.000
.coo
.002
.000
19
-------
.000'
.000
.001
.010
.004
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.OCS
.OC6
.022
.021
.008
.CCO
.000
.coo
_
.CCO
.coo
.000
.005
.012
.OC4
.000
.000
.000
.002
.000
.002
.002'
.001
.014
.004
.000
.000
.000
.002
.000
1 TABLE 8
Analysis Baldwin Crown Division Nottingham
-*& Date Raw Fin Saw Fin Raw Fin Raw Fin
"Manganese (pra)
, 3/27/71
' 3/29/71
- 3/9-3/15/71
3/16-3/22/71
1 3/23-3/29/71
Iron (ran)
«, 3/9/7^
\ 3/^/71
- 3/13/71
1 3/17/71
A 3/19/71
3/21/71
•^ 3/23/71
-j 3/25/71
3/27/71
-i 3/29/71
j 3/9-3/15/71
3/16-3/22/71
_ 3/23-3/29/71
.48
.11
.045
.030
,11
.044
.44
.46
.10
.06.7
-
.11
.19
.082
.017
.017
.013
.009
.009
.000
.003
.016
.019
.016
.016
.009
.013
.022
.08
.11
.050
.C5C
.CcO
.033
.66
.29
.19
.23
.089
.08
.33
.19
.C07
.084
.017
.009
.CIO
.CCO
.000
.010
.019
.010
.013
.009
—
.010
.36
.c^S
.040
.C23
.14
.C44
.69
.09
.11
.067
.055
.14
• 32
.12
.020
.22
.013
.016
.037
.006
.000
.009
.02?
.016
.022
.016
.016
.024
CQ
.e89
.093
m w -r ,
.c68
.006
.21
.64
.15
.14
.082
.11
.23
.10
.020
.010
.017
.C"6
.016
.054
.013
.019
.022
.022
.027
.020
.013
.019
"^Cobalt (ppm)
3/9/71
~1 3/11/71
J 3/13/71
3/15/71
-» 3/17/71 •
j 3/19/71
3/21/71
^ 3/23/71
1 3/25/71
A 3/2'V"i
3/2?/~'l
1 V9-~/~ V'l
J 3/i6-'-/l2/-'i
:•/ -~--~/-~?/1"<
.002
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.003
.000
.000
.CC6
.ceo
.ceo
.ccc
.002
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.003
.000
.coo
.ceo
.CCO
.CCO
.ccc
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.CCO
.000
.003
.003
.OC3
.CC5
.ccc
• CC3
.CCo
.003
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.coo
.C°3
.CCO
-
.CCO
.002
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.003
.000
.003
.CC3
.CCO
.003
• CC3
.003
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.QDO
"T\r\Tii
• \J\J^
.000
.000
0'~^~"Z
•^-' _,
.coo
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.002
.000
.CCO
.oco
.000
.000
.ccc
» ee^
• er r
,Z~J
• OC'3
.002
.000
.000
.002
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.CC3
.CC3
• ~ TC
~ ",~1
• CC ~
<_ir.c ur,my
3/9/r71 .014 .0-7 .004 .011 .011 .009 .012 .030
3/H/71 .005 .007 .003 .OC6 .OC6 .002- .007 .011
3/"T/~"' .~-~ --O5 .005 .CC8 .CCo .005 .017 .007
r-^i, ~-0 ,-^^7 /-jp-j
• - - ^ * •*. J m . - , . \J\~'C.
m'~;-J
.006 .cc6 .,::6 .017 .006 .01^- .C20
.005 .OC6 .009 .CC9 .006 .cc6 .013
20
-------
1
Analysis
•^Sc Date
""Zinc (pom)
„ 3/21/71
5 3/23/71
-* 3/25/71
3/27/71
1 3/29/71
J 3/9-3/15/71
3/i6-3/22/~"
-» 3/25-3/29/7^
TABLE 8
II
-1
1
Nickel (train)
3/9/71
/11/71
5/13/71
3/15/71
3/17/71
3/19/71
3/21/71
3/23/71
3/25/71
3/27/71
3/29/71
3/9-3/15/71
3/16-3/22/71
3/23-3/29/71
Baldwin
Raw Fin
,011
,007
,005
,007
cc8
oc8
crS
003
.002
.004
.005
.004
.004
.008
.002
.003
.007
.007
.006
.007
.005
.014
.005
.004
.006
.007
.011
.027
.005
.008
—
.005
.008
.007
.010
.010
.006
.008
.005
.004
".003
.004
.010
.006
.004
.004
.003
.003
.004
.006
.007
.011
.005
.006
.:o6
.006
.014
_
.017
.030
.040
.024
.010
.011
r^4
• V^ i
/~\i*^ /
• OuT
r\o'>
• UwT
.001
»003
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.003
.000
.000
.004
.004
.004
.001
.003
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.001
.000
.000
.000
.004
.000
.001
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.007
.000
.004
.004
.004
.002
.000
.000
.000
.004
,000
•iOOO
.000
.003
- •
.000
.004
.004
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.001
.000
.000
.oo4
.004
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.003
.000
.000
/-»/-l— \
* ^^/l^
.004
.C04,
.001
.003
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.002
.004
.004
.001
.001
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.001
.000
.000
1
21
-------
TABLE 9 - GEAB SA2CTE SESULTS
Ohio Bep-artasnt of Eesltfa. Laboratory
in-i-« 9,
$ ~~*~ ~
Analysis
1:air:iur. (pcb)
J -/a/- 1
3/19/7'
1 3/29/71
Cotrcsr C"3pb)
! 3/9/71
j 5/19/71
* 3/29/71
"I Lead Cppb}
J 3/9/71
3/19/71
1 3/29/71
Baldwin Crovvr. Division
law
C.
0.
a.
c.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Fin
Q.
0.
0.
0.
0.
10.
0.
0.
0.
Eaw
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Fin
0.
w «
0.
C.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Raw
0.
-
0.
0.
-
60
0.
—
0.
Fin
0.
0.
0.
0. .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Nottingha
Eaw
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Fi
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
«•
Sodium ' (ppta)
33/9/71
3/19/71
3/29/71
3 Mercury (ppb)
5/9/71
3/19/71
1 3/29/71
ChroniufflCppb)
** 3/9/71
j 3/19/71
A
1
1
1
1
15.00 18.00
15-00 25.00
18.00 20.00
15-00 15.00
19.00 18.00
19.00 20.00
16.00 16.00
15-00
18.00 20.00
22
14.00 14.00
15.00 18.00
18.00 19.00
G.
0.
0.
0.
c.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0."
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
. o,
0,
-------
J Discussion of Results
« The treatment provided by each of the four plants is similar as
shown by Appendix III with the exception that sodium hypochlcrite is
1 used at the Baldwin Filtration Plant as a primary disinfectant rather
than chlorine gas.
j The period of study, March 9-29, was'abnorcally cold, averaging
^ 32.k F (3.7 below normal). One day's weather was classified as
thunderstorm (one inch of snow and ice pellets fell). The following day
1 at 7:00 a.m. one inch of snow and ice pellets renained, which was j
•a ;
gone by 7:00 a.m. the second following day. Total precipitation
j for the period was 1.21 inches of water. Most of this precipitation '
^m fell as snow and ice, and remained on the ground for at least one day. J
No precipitation exceeding 0.08 inches occurred during any hour of
_ i
I the study period. Most of the precipitation during the period of
study occurred as snow on the 10th (.3 inches of-rain- equivalent)
.J and as snow on the 23rd (.24 inches of rain equivalent). The wind '
^ rose for this period (Figure 1) shows that winds were characterized f
by moderate speed (7-21 knots per hour). Although, quite variable in
"9 •
I direction, the wind was primarily from the northwest and southwest
Quadrants. Winds classified ss stronger than moderate seldctr. occurred
-j during the study period. Wind speed ax^erage v;as 11.0 miles per hour '
^ with a ca:-:ir,uc avenge daily speed of 1°.S niles per hour. The average
maximum speed was 19.6 miles per hour with a maximum of 37 miles per
1
hour.
]
-------
1
J
1
j
Figure 1 - Wind Rose - Observations at " hour intervals M=rch, ^
Cleveland Ho"i;ins International Airport, Ohio
1
J'
1
i
1
1
Key: Numbe-s in re^cent of 2^5 observsti-ns
Center number = "e:ce::t cr.ln
Each bA : First numbe" from center = % 1-6 knots -:er hour
Seco::^ ^ur.Ler = % 7;-21 knots per hour
Third number = % <21 I mots 'ei hour
-------
» In reviewing the data our primary purposes are to determine
! whether or not the Drinking Water Standards for the saraneters measured
j
were exceeded during "he period of study and to determine the effect,
; if any, of the treatment provided on the concentrations of the metals
measured in the raw waters.
» The Drinking Water Standards of primary interest in this study
~\ were cadmium - 0.01 milligrams per liter, copper -1.0 milligrams
per liter, and lead - 0.05 milligrams per liter. The standard on
: mercury adopted by DWE is 0.005 milligrams per liter. A limit of
20 milligrams per liter for sodium is recommended for those individuals
• on a low sodium diet due to cardiovascular disorders.
Plots of raw water quality versus finished water quality may
indicate the effect treatment has, if any, on the metal concentrations
present. If the concentrations present are not changed by the treatment
provided, all points should fall on a *f5 line from the point 0,0.
" The fact that the raw and finished waters were sampled simultaneously
1 produces a scatter of points which is dependent upon the variability
of the metal concentrations. If the metal is reaove-d or added by
"*!
I treatment the points should show a tendency to fall below or above
the -J'1 line respectively.
1
j
~^ Mercury Da'^a - Grsb Samples
The mercer;" ar.alysvs sho'.:ed that the hichcr.t mercury cor.centrntionn
| found -.-ere well below the proposed standard of 5 ?pb. The hi-rhest
concentrations found were 0.8 ppb in the raw water and 0.6 ppb in the
"1
1
-------
j
] finished water. Of 5^ mercury determinations, ^5-4 -.:ere found to
contain less than .25 ppb mercury (the limit of analytical sensitivity
1
j for the method of analyses used). During this period of lo-.: turbidity
1 with little precipitation, detectable amounts of mercury greater than
.25 P?b were found in only 8 percent of the samples taken. ITo conclusions
; regarding the effect of treatment on mercury concentrations are
possible from this data.
1
^
"1 Sludge Sample Analyses - Grab Samples
The average of the three LWH laboratory analyses of the sludge
1 M.rh
] concentrated by centrifuging were Crown - 225 ppb, ^ Division - 324 ppb,
Baldwin - 310 ppb, and Nottingham - 226 ppb. Analysis of the sample !
1 '•
-J supernatant from centrifuging did not demonstrate the presence of '
•"1 mercury in excess of 2 ppb (a range of .25 ppb to 1.9 ppb was deter-
mined by the laboratories). These data indicate that almost all of
] the mercury present in the sludge samples as received by the laboratories
was contained in the precipitate after the samples were centrifuged.
J The mercury concentrations remaining in the superaatant of the centri-
"""^ fuged samples were somewhat_ comparable to the mercury levels found in
the rav; water although the upper limits of the mercury concentrations
"1
j in the supernatants were higher than the levels in the raw water.
Mercury in the sludge is most likely to come from turbidity in
. •• the water to be treated or from the coagulation cheaicals used by the
1 ". filtration rlr.r.tc. The use of coagulation chemicals is relatevely
i ~ ""
constant from plant to plant. Turbidity consists of suspended solids
^ ] either carried from land by runoff or included in industrial, municipal
n
-------
and other waste effluents. Reference to "Mercury in the z.r.viiionr.;r.t'1
T2SGS Professional Paper 713 shows the mercury content of soils is
variable throughout the world. This document states, "The mercury
content of soils averages about 100 ppb and varies within relatively
narrow limits." "Mercury in the Envirionment - Surficial Materials of
the Conterminous United States" (Geological Survey Circular 6VO
places the geometric rean rercurj content of soil in the eastern U.S.
at ^?o ppo.
The mercury content of the sludge for all four treatment plants
is, therefore, found to be significantly greater than that expected
t from normal soil pollution. The sludges from the plant intakes
nearest the industrial areas of the city have the highest mercury
I content. Although no data is available on the mercury content of the
* flocculating chemicals used, the variability of the mercury present
in the sludges from plant to plant indicates that the mercury levels
| present are not due to the flocculation chemicals used. The mercury
M
present is apparently associated with the turbidity present in the
"j
*
j plant influent and is apparently removed by the clarification processes
~i used.
1
27
-------
Cadmium
I During the sampling period cadmium concentrations appeared to
reoain relatively constant. The average concentration of cadmium
J during the study was slightly above .001 mg/1, which is below the
^ drinking water standard of .01 mg/1. In the range of values encountered
!
in these analyses (.001 to .00^ Eg/1) no definite trends in cadmium
1 removal or addition resulting from the treatment process could be
detected. (See Figure 2)
- Copper
Copper concentrations encountered in this study ranged from .004 mg/1
I to .026 mg/1, all values being well below the 1.0 mg/1 standard.
Eaw water copper concentrations appear to vary uniformly in the
J • ,005 rag/1 to .020 mg/1 range where almost 90$ of the samples fall.
•m Finished water copper concentrations seem to -vary in much the same
way, which indicates conventional treatment as practiced in the four
1 Cleveland plants does not increase or decrease the copper content
of the finished water at these lot; concentrations. (See Figure 3)
1
•^ Lead
The naxinua concentration of lead found during this sampling
"1 period was .:4 ng/1, only .01 mg/1 less than the D.VS of .05 mg/1.
-J
It is significant to note hov.ever that more than 8Q& of the analyses
1
"1 showed lead concentrations at or below the lover detection limit
1
1
-------
1
J
1
1
j
i
i
]
1
1
l
1
1
1
-------
1
.01 mg/1. Samples which contained lead concentrations higher than
1 .01 mg/1 were, for the most part, collected on March 9th or 11th.
This indicates that the lead concentration of Cleveland's water supply*
-J may intermittently reach levels which are significantly close to the
"f mandatory limit for lead in drinking water.
j
As with cadmium, the data.generated in this study is insufficient
--*
i to indicate any definite trend in lead removal by conventional
treatment.
Tl
I
"~7 Sodium
From March 9th to March 29th the sodium content of Lake Erie
J water varied from 10 to 12.5 mg/1. The sodium content of the finished
waters of the Nottingham and Crown treatment plants varied from
1
-a 10.5 to 13 mg/1 indicating that the treatment provided increases
•~1 the sodium content slightly. This slight increase is due to the use
of Bodium silicofluoride. For the Baldwin plant Lake Erie water
I varied from 10 to 11 mg/1 of sodium while the finished water varied
from 12 to 1*t mg/1, showing the influence of the use of sodium•
j hypochlorite and sodium silicofluoride as treatment chemicals.
"•? The Division plant pattern seemed to follow that of the Baldwin
J
plant 65 percent of the time which could not be explained by the
I treatment provided. For the remaining 35 percent the analyses showed
a situation sir.ilsr to that found for the Crown and Nottingham plants.
» All levels of sodium observed were well below the reco.-r.mer.ded
maximum concentration established by the American Heart Association for
1
1
30
-------
]
]
]
1
]
1
1
1
]
1
1
1
1
-------
those individuals on a sodium-ion restricted diet due to congestive
5
| heart failure or renal and metabolic disorders.
Composite Sample Eesults
1 Those results tabulated in Table 7 generally confirm the con-
clusions reached for the grab sample analyses.
| The composite analyses show that traces of mercury, cadmium,
_ copper and lead do occur but that no concentrations exceeding the
'standards (.005, .01, 1.0, and .05 respectively) were detected in
,| either raw or finished water samples. Treatment showed no effect
on the cadmium present. Copper did appear to be quite variable,
j| ranging from .004 mg/1 to.05^ mg/1 in the finished water. The third
-» week's composite showed increases in copper levels of 5 to 6 times
I
over those present during the first two weeks. Treatment showed no
I effect on the copper levels present. The composite analyses showed
lead to be present at the 0.01 mg/1 level, below tiae .05 standard.
| Although all levels of .01 or .02 mg/1 in the Lake Erie water showed
•^ decreases in the finished water, it is not certain that these decreases
-J
are the result of treatment or sample variation.
I The composite sample analyses showed sodium to range from 10 to
11.5 mg/1 in the Lake Erie water and from 10.5 to 12 mg/1 in the
1
| finished water for the Nottingham and Crown plants. This slight
-m increase reflects the use of sodium silicofluoride for treatment.
The Baldwin plant increased sodium content from 10 - 11.5 mg/1 to
1
32
1
-------
1
1
i&is rise is dug- ta the use of sodium hypochlorite
fid gsdiura siliSQ fluoride- as trea.tns:rt chemicals. One week's composite
1 *
£&r the Civisien plant stowed an increase similar to the Baldwin
1 plant results, i?,ig increase could cut be explained by the treatment
provided. All go^ius levels found ta be present were below the recom-
1
4 meftdsd sa3£is;-^a level sf 20 mg/1. ILs- crcar t-.vo weeks for Division
w@r§ liaila? tG the Crown, and rTcttirgrsn; cocpcsite resul-s.
Iu?l5i4ity - Gr&b
Cifleifthati laboratory conducted turbidity measurements on'- a
©f itfipl§s wh-i©E wer^ tiiea. cxsurgared Csee Table 8) to the
turbidity JSfSgur£BS§fit§ mad® at the tneatrngat plant at the time of
eafflpif eeHteti©R« ffe« fcrestmgrd; pisot determinations were made using
en§ Sseh furbidiffiit©? CcsEcriexi from: plant to plant).
Elf turbiditigg ®«asungd at tfee plants far raw water were quite
lew, varying frsei 0«9 to 30« Turbidity of the samples received
sl§s lew, varyifig front G.A- to 27- Hie results of the two deter-
•-<•
minations do list e©?f«lste well as is shown by the plots of plant
ififiple turbidity, (Jigaxres 5 3Sid 6)
The fifilsMd v/atsr turbidity was lowr vsryir.g from C.CZ5 to 0.25
I ftt th§ plant Sftd from 0»CS to 0.31 at the Cincinnati laboratory. The
™« glffiglg turbidity SGcrSs to be generally higher than the turbidity
At the plnrtt for finished v.'Ster. (Fi~ure 6)
1 At the lew levels of turbidity four~J to be present (less than 15
fer th§ raw water Snd less than, G.A far the finished water) it is
1
1
-------
1
1
1
FIGURE 5 -
CINCINNATI ANALYSIS
PL.ANT
AMAUYS1S -
I
! 1 1 < I ! I ctNciM>>jL.ysi&
AMALYS1S -
O .C$
FINISHCO S
.JO
.15 .20
AK-'ALVSiS
1
1
-------
apparently very difficult to correlate results with the one to two
day time lapse and handling necessary to ship the sample to the ^
laboratory. The results do show, however, that the turbidity reduction
produced by the treatment provided was satisfactory for all plants,
bringing the turbidity well below the standard.
Other Grab Sample Analyses
The Cincinnati laboratory also conducted trace metal analyses
as shown by Table 8 for chromium, silver, manganese, iron, cobalt,
zinc, and nickel.
Cobalt and nickel occurredrin very small amounts (less than
| .01 ppm). No determinations of zinc, chromium, or silver approached
the levels (5-0, .05, and .05 mg/1 respectively) proscribed by the
I Drinking Water Standards. Although iron and manganese levels in the
raw water do sometimes approach or esceed the Drinking Water Standards
1 (.3 and .05 mg/1 respectively), the treatment provided reduces these
I levels to well within the Drinking Water Standards.
1
1
1
1
1 35
-------
Conclusions
From the data collected, the following conclusions can be derived:
*
1. As determined by four laboratories, during the month of March
trace metal concentrations in the raw and finished waters of the
Cleveland filtration plants do not exceed the Drinking Water Standards
established for mercury, cadmium, copper, or lead.
2. Copper and lead concentrations appear to vary significantly
with lead approaching the Drinking Water Standard. The copper variation
was well below the standard.
3« Mercury in excess of that expected from normal soil pollution
is received by the treatment plants. This mercury is associated with
turbidity, is highest for the Baldwin and Division plants and is
apparently removed by the clarification processes used.
J *f. As determined by the Cincinnati Water Hygiene Laboratory,
during the month of March trace metal concentrations in the raw and
finished waters of the Cleveland filtration plants do not exceed the
I Drinking Water Standards established for chromium, silver, manganese,
or zinc. Excessive levels of iron in the raw water are reduced to
I levels well below the standard for finished water by the conventional
1 treatment provided.
5. Copper concentrations do riot appear to be reduced by conventional
I treatment. Mercury, lead, and cadmium concentrations occurred at such
low levels that no conclusion regarding removal by conventional
I treatment could be made.
1
1
-------
I
1
1
1
1
6. Levels of sodium in the raw water are increased by the use
of sodium silicofluoride for fluoridation and sodium hypochlorite as
a disinfectant. The sodium content was increased by about 0.5 ppro
by the sodium silicofluoride and 2-3 ppm by the sodium hypochlorite.
No finished water analyses exceeded the maximum level of 20 ppm.
7. A repeat of this study should be done in August during the
period of maximum taste and odor problems and in "December during the
period of poorest raw water quality (due to stormy weather).
-------
APPENDIX I
STUDY PROPOSAL AND PROCEDURES
1
-------
OPTIONAL FORM NO. »
MAY ',9K EDITIO.V
USA rrMit («i am) iot-n.<
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
Memorandum
X> : Mr. Sandor, Mr. Stover, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Cofrancesco,DATE: ,.,,
Mr. McFarren, Mr. Ear low, Mr. Fishback • 3/?/ <
•ROM : Mr. F.D. Maddox
JBJECT: Cleveland Study (Mercury and Heavy Metals)
. \
Attached for your information is a copy of the outline for the study
and the field sampling instructions which we have developed for 'this '
study. Also attached are two tables showing the sampling to be done \
.and the shipping requred. j
Mr. Hertsch will assist in conducting the study during the first two j
or three days of sampling, the eleventh day of sampling and the j
twenty-first day of sampling. j
The composite samples will be accumulated by adding 100-milliliters
every k hours/ 8 AM, 12 noon, k PM, 8 PM, 12 midnight, k AM-) for
7 days.
Grab sample times will be staggered so that the samples are not taken
at the same period of time at each plant. Grab samples will be col-
lected during the 8 AM to k PM shift.
If any errors are detected in this memorandum or the attached sheets,
we would appreciate being notified by telephone of such errors at
312-353-7736. You will note that we have revised the protocol in
its first seven sections to more clearly reflect what we understand
is to be done.
I
I
I
k
<$ 38
if
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan
KIO-IO.
-------
MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS ANALYSIS OF CLEVELAND WATER SUPPLIES
I
I
I
Number of Supplies ^
Sampling Points . _ 2
Raw at Plant . _
Finished Water
Sampling Period 21 Days
7 Days Ale ek
jnpL Scheme - Mercury
A. Grab Samples (Haw and Finished - acidified) . '
DWH Labs Daily (3)
State one-week
B. Composite- Samples (acidified)
Composite raw and finished water a miniumu of k times daily, ]
7 days per week for 1 week i
DWH Labs (3) • . !
Sampling Scheme ~ Other Metals • \
DWH labs same sample as for mercury except that analysis for other metals !
will be conducted every other day.
State - one-week
Metals to be determined
Copper, Cadmium, Lead, Sodium " t
Sampling Schem-^ - Turbidity and Conductivity
Cincinnati DWH Laboratory only -(raw au-d finished not acidified)
sample collected only on the days for which other metals analyses
are to be run.
39
-------
C
1. Samples will be collected from the four Cleveland water treatment
plants that derive their water from Lake Erie. One quart of sample
•
will be adequate for both the mercury and the other metals analyses.
All grab samples will be collected by one person to be designated
by Charles Sandor, Commissioner of Water. Sample bottles and
shipping boxes will be shipped to Franklin Stoner, Superintendent,
Division Treatment Plant by the Cincinnati DWH Laboratory. The
person designated by Mr. Sandor will add the acid preservative to
the samples to be submitted for analysis for mercury and for other
metals, collect the grab samples, supervise the collection of the
composite samples, complete the ECA-9 forms, identify the samples,
and initiate shipment by air express.
2. Samples will be collected at each plant of the following:
(a) Eaw water as it enters the plant, not from a raw water tap,
if possible.
(b) Finished water as it is discharged from the plant.
Turbidity of the raw and finished water will be determined at the
time of sampling and recorded on the ECA-9- Turbidity shall also
be determined by the Cincinnati Laboratory by analysis of not
acidified grab samples taken at the sase time acidified grab
samples ?re taken. Standard methods fcr the determination of
turbidity will be followed.
3- Frequency of sampling and analysis will be as follows:
Grab' Samples (Eaw and Finished Water."- each plant)
(a) Acidified sample
For Division of Water Hygiene Labs (3) - Daily
% Analysis v/ill be made for mercury on each sample
Analysis will be made for copper, cadmium, lead and sodium
every other day beginning with the first day of sampling.
For Ohio State Laboratory once a week
(b) lion acidified sample -
For Cincinnati DV.'E Laboratory only, every other day beginning
with the i'irnt day of ecir.plinr;.
Analysis will be made for turbidity and conductivity.
ko
-------
"' - • 3
All grab sonnies vn.ll be colicC'1"'.'^ directly into one-quart
bottles provided by DV/II. A small ampoule containing 1.25 nil
of nitiric acid preservative will be added to each bottle of
grab sample (a). The bottle for each grab sample (a) will be
filled halfway with the sample, the acid added, and then the
bottle filled with more sample. '-•
k» Composite Samples
Three raw and three finished water samples will be collected at
\CO £iX
each plant by compositing .^59* ml samples "fattr times daily as a
minimum for periods of seven days. Immediately after the first
4£Q ml has been added to the 21/z gallon bottle, a large ampoule
containing 12.5 nil of nitric acid preservative will be added to
the composite sample bottle. Each composite sample will be ana-
lysed foruercury, copper, cadmium, lead, and sodium.
5« During' the second week of the survey, three samples of the sludge
in the sc ctling basin in each plant will be collected in one-
I - quart bottles by Mr. Hertsch, Eegion V. One sample will be shipped
to each I^H lab (3) for analysis for r.ercury. The sample pro-
I •. cedure wrll be developed by Mr. Her^och.
NOTE: DO NOT ADD PRESERVATIVE TO THIS SAMPLE
6. One set of EGA forms will be completed for each set of samples
and copies* of the form will be placed in a waterproof envelope
. ' and inserted into the 214 gallon boxes vsed for shipping the one-
quart and 2/2 gallon sample bottles as iollows:
^, White Original George Kent (no samples, send in
\ envelope direct)
Blue Cincinnati Laboratory
] Pink Northeast
Yellow " Gulf Coast
I Green State of Ohio Laboratory
Tan To be retained by sampler
1 The ECA-9 number will be written on the outside of the appropriate
* sample bottles, using a felt pen. After ench set of samples is
collected the bottles must be identified vath the ECA-9 number
. and the ECA-9 filled out complel-rly and accurately before the
next set of ermpleG in collected.
-------
1
*
I
7. The samples will be packed in 2# gallon boxes and shipped by air
express to the Division of Water Hygiene laboratories at Cin-
cinnati, Narragansett, Rhode Island, and Dauphin Island, Alabama.
Local arrangements will be made for shipping the samples to the
Ohio State Laboratory. Shipment of the samples should be ex-
pedited.
8. Analyses for mercury will be initiated within 2 to 4 hours after
receipt at the laboratory.
9- Field activities will be coordinated by Don Maddox, Region V
Chicago. He, or a designee, will oversee the sampling procedures
and shipment of samples during the entire period of the study,
since the ultimate value and use of the data is completely
dependent upon the sampling itself.
10. Coordination of the laboratory activities will be carried out
by C.B. Kelly.
11. Results of the analysis will be tabulated by the individual
laboratories and submitted to the Director, Division of Criteria
" • •• and Standards, Crystal Mall, Arlington, Virginia.
12. TJnusUdlly high results, (5? ppb or greater) will be reported
immediately by telephone to Mr. Kelly. He will immediately
inform Mr. Maddox and Mr. Cofrancesco. Mr. Kelly will notify
the laboratories.
13. Prpcureme it of Supplies
Requests for sample bottles, boxes, preservative, forms, and other
supplies will be filled by Mr. Earl McFarren.
-------
For mercury, cadmium, copper, lead, sodium
Grab
k supplies
/• 2 samples .x
• - 21 days
3 labs
4 x 2 x 21 x 3 50**- grab samples
Composite
k supplies
2 samples
i 1 sample/week for 3 weeks
3 labs
J *t x 2 x 3 x 3 72 composite samples
For turbidity and conductivity
1 4 supplies
• - - . 2 samples . ....... . . .
Every other day for 21 days
1 lab
k x 2 x 11 88 grab samples
For Sludge
4 s Applies
1 1 sample ....
1 day
J . 3 labs
^ x 3 12 grab samples
* * SAMPLES FOR STATE OF OHIO LABORATORY
•J For mercury, cadmium, copper, lead, sodium
Grab
I k supplies
2 samples
1 1 sample/week for 3 weeks
x 2 x 3 2k grab samples
-------
EQUIP1-EIIT FZOTJIHED
Grab 1 quart bot'tles
For mercury and other metals (incl. Ohio lab) 528
For turbidity and conductivity 88
j For sludge 12
TOTAL 1 quart bottles b2B
| .. -. -. .
Composite 2/a gallon bottles
"I • For mercury and other metals 72
•* . 2/2 gallon boxes 151
J
""1
1
1
1
AMPOLE5 OF NITRIC ACID
For Grab Samples
1.25 ml HNO, per ampule 528
For Composite' Samples
.] 12.5 ml HNO, per ampule 72
1 • MISCELLANEOUS
Labels for shipping
"I Tape for packing
ECA-9 forms . 186
Felt pens for narking bottles
-------
"
-
1
Z
3
1 4
.-5"
i 7
8
1 9
i /O
11
1 12-
-13
MS
1 '&
J9
20
~ZJ.
^— \^
*)
3te
VS>
3//o
3///
V/4-
3/iS"
3//£.
3/17
3//e
V/9
j;
3/22.
3/23
3/2.4
3/2£
t ""
3/27
3/26
• >' .'
-V- ' *' ^
•^ ^~ ~, N>
j"li-
•fA
A/, 77i
A;
A/y 77i
A/77c
A/
Af, 77c,
A-;
'M
M J-TX..
M
M, 77^
M
/"'I; 77Z-
M
A/' ~r~i^
M
<^.'":r
4 . X -"i H
J .^'^ ^ -^
A/y 77^
A/, 7/2,
A/. 7/o
y
'>x . ^N • "^
x V>
T c-
T,C
^
~rc
T;C
^^
r~/-
r^
i •> ' " '2 >v' '
B
££-
£?L
££-
«
^ ^ 6
C&
££.
£&.
C#L
^
£>e ^ ^
^/e
CXL
(L£.
°^
,\
•'I •> *"" ^-i'j
-re
re
Tf
TP
rp
TP
TP
TP
TP
TP
TP
TP
TP
TP
TP .
TP
TP
TP
TP
77^
!
& /*i fit— fi .' t-;
r?t S«^>
~/Z> I'tSL- AK./-cf, .
/fe/ £•<-
fl 'si: A' : '"''"
/ i
77i- Cc.iL,-: \
C0r?£~i-j j-z'.
7^-7x^^V
^- ^«/«ty' •.
77P_. 7^-^''
^r;Ei
/t>/ /S/-
^•.vr/>,.'.,/';
/?-^7^.
^"/-l^i-:;1
<-X^c/ .
>?
-------
I
t,
3
4
$
7
&
Q
to
M
13
IS
ib
17
\9
20
zi
2Z
S/((
3//z.
•3/4
3/iG
3/7
3/2Z
Vi
-r
•j •»
'/)
C G ''JO ^r
(3)
CD
P)
0)
(3)
(?)
:.^ro (3)
CG-
C1G M (?)
c (0
CO
C (0
CL (0
0)
(i)
CD
Ml
-v- 1 i-i '"-<--
o -
e>r\ "il-\e-
pa.r£wlt'V..s
re.^Ltirv
-------
APPENDIX II
SLUDGE SAMPLING PROCEDURE
1
-------
1 Sludge Sampling Procedure used in Cleveland, Ohio, March 1971
• The sampling device which was constructed consisted of a nine foot
length of galvanised downspout supported by a handle made of six
four-foor lengths of 2"x2" lumber (see fig. 1&2). The lower end of the"
] device was fitted with a free swing vertical check valve as shown in
figure 3. "^
I •
Disassembled, the sampler consists of six four-foot lengths of
I 2"x2" and tv/o ^' lengths of downspouting which fit easily in the
J '
trunk of a car. When assembled, the device is twenty- five feet long
| and weighs approximately 15 pounds.
, In order to use this type of device, 2 persons are required. The
procedure is as follows:
I 1. Assemble the sampler near the sampling point, an adjustable
wrench and a screw driver are required (fig. 4).
4 2. Have two clean buckets, into which the sampler will be emptied.
I 3- Immerse the sampler in the settling basin and allow it to
sink through the sludge bed (fig. 5)-
I k. When the sampler is resting on the bottom, ;jerk it back up.
; The check valve can be felt closing.
• 5- Quickly pull the sampler up out of the basin, holding it in
1 the vertical position.
6. Have the second person place the end of the sampler in the
j bucket and release the chsck valve. Use the secor.d bucket
^ if necessary (fig. 6).
The materials required to build the sar.pler cost about $6.00. However,
1
or.e special tool, a "pop riveter," sold by Montgomery Ward or Sears
-------
which cost3 approximately $5*00, was used.
Although the sampler as used in Cleveland appeared to be fragile,
it held up well, and with minor modifications to strengthen it, the •
device could be used indefinitely.
V
1
1
i
-------
J
Bill of Materials
I '
6 - *f' 2x2 pieces of wood
12 - #"x4" stove bolts
2 - J£"x2" spaces (copper tubing) . •
{
* 2^ - v/ashers *
1-10' 2nx3" downspout • • i
Tape |
I
I 1 - 3"xV' heavy polyethylene
1^ - pop rivets
^ 1 . i-3/if"x2-3A" sheet metal
- 1 - 1"x3" sheet metal
-------
1
1
* ZxZ-
]
M 2^2- ~~
/"
x^.
'f
1 »«•-
1
1
&•
1 .' . , ' .S*
(
1
2X2 —
I . (
1 " ' ,
*v.
f
/^
k
"X
.y
>•
^•^•H
•^x
>• '
"~N
^'^
Je '
DOVMN'SPQ'JT
rr*i:_ t>
VALVE:
Pi
•Z.-ZT.
— 2*2
'-?
f1
\ \
WASHE*. 2* 4
1
\
i*
A '
2*i
DETAIL. B
'C
SECTIOAJ ,AA
-------
$£TTLlM
^Z- ZAf-iPLB.fi.
•• i
wend x^
•• f-ef^
sr e,J
01=
SlPZS
C
I z."
C'JT Z
T5
JOlMT
2XZ
r
STOVS
\
OF TOP or 2"
Car i"
3
1
1
1
1
(MAPS.
SCALE '/&" -I'
\fflLVf
52
I
/*.«•:.
X'- _
-------
i- lrT-f'MrL_'-nifc
Figure 1
Figure 2
-------
X* - - t V ' * ';
-*•.:• ,^-r . - -
Figure 3
Figure
-------
1
1
1
J
r>
,T^ „_ JS^5
\
'V*Sirf-
^ T
Figure 5
i-*,
-r*6*^.
s ,
Figure 6
-------
APPENDIX III
TREATMENT PROVIDED
-------
I
I
I
Appendix T?T
«• ' Baldwin Treatment Plant
As shown by the schematic drawing, water flows by gravity from the
crib to the Kirtland pump station from which' it.is pumped to the
Twin Fairmont Reservoirs. Six ^0 mgd pumps move -the water through two
60 inch mains to the chemical house. Alum is stored in the chemical
house basement. From the basement a conveyor carries the alum to the
third floor where six solution tanks are used to dissolve the alum. The
alum solution is then added prior to the hydraulic jump rapid mix by
a pipe and valve arrangement. Carbon is stored on the third floor with
no lorovision fo^ fir-** TirotTti ~" , Durin~ "ceriods of tafte snd odor
problems one of -'?.-• alum solution tanks is used for preparing a carbon
solution. The carbon solution is then fed by a pipe and valve arrangement,
Chlorine is added to the water after the jump. Hypochlorite is
presently applied from a 8,SCO gallon fiberglass tank by five BIF
triplex pumps (72 gallon per hour e-ach)._ Two banks.of three one ton
containers using two 8,000 pound per day evaporators and two 6,000
pound per day chlorinators are used for standby. Mine containers are
kept in storage. The evaporators are constantly kept heated to operating
temperature.
The floe is allowed to form and settle in four 700 foot long coagulation
basins. Mixing -\.s accomplished with, over and under baffles but no
mechanical aerita".ion is nrovided. The detention time is about 6.^-
hours for a production of 120 mgd.
There are forty 1,^57 square foot filters. These filters were converted
to the use of anthracite in 1562-1966. They are rated at k mgd each
at 2 gal./ft.2/min. Fluoride is applied after the filters by an Omega
gravimetric feeder (5,000 pound capacity). As much as 150,000 pounds of
sodium silico fluoride is stored by piling the 1QO pound bags -in open
areas of the bason.snt. The water then flows to the 135 mg Baldwin
Reservoir from which water flows by gravity to tfa-e low-service system
and is pumped to the- high-service systems by the Fairmont pump station.
Relocation and redesign of the- chemical feed systems are planned for
the near future. Present plar.s arc to convert th.e old alum storage
building adjacent to the Fairmont ru.cp station to, a chemical feed
house. Carbon is to bo added prior to ti.o Twin Fairmont Reservoirs
and alum, chlorine, sr.d fluori-d^ will be added in the transmission
line to the hydraulic jump.
Post chlorination is planned for location in the filter building.
57
-------
r.'
2
0
O v)
Sa
O
o
r>
U. CL
P2 f
Uo. I
O
2
U
X 3
v ^* «t
J-tU
I
CQ
CM-
01'.
1
1
1
ui
0
aG
2 £
5?
u i*-
feg
iT a
0
Z
f»
I ^ ! I
=±Lj_J=zi r"
••••\"'f <~ » ••• -M, , •* ,'-r -•l•-^i^»l
;.. ^.^( ' -•-• - ••• •'.' i • - •• / !—•- - —..-.•! > \j
O
LJ
o?
fci "2
tv r-
s^
i2
il
>d
«
I
C C4
o
•x.
O
£?© E
U I O
"*"*"
i ^; -*
2 i J
o " <
pg1^3
^ i«l °
its
^ J XT
«c « *-*
«> h o
«j I ,.]
v UJ *i
^- vj G:-
tf
/j
tl
o
«
)
.
1
i
-\
_l
11
1
o
d
(2'
3
D
O
«^»
_t
«-*
>3
0
I*-
i
V-
Q.
^:
o
b
LL
•z.
O
-J
(S
-------
,. - Crown Filtration Plant
As shown by the schematic drawing, water flows by gravity from the
submerged crib .to the suction well where it is screened and pumped by •
four pumps with a total capacity of 104 mgd to the treatment plant.
Potassium permanganate is added by two small BIF feeders to the suction
well during periods of high taste and odor. Fixed .sprays are used to
clean the screens. Fish and other large debris are buried on the plant
grounds.
At the chemical feed house chlorine is applied from a 55 ton tank car
through
2 - 6,000 pound per day evaporators,
1 - 1,000 pound per day chlorinator,
2 - 2,000 pound per day chlorinators, and
1 - 8,000 pound per day chlorinator.
A • solution feed system is now is use. Chlorine is" fed in amounts
adequate to attain a 1.5 ppm residua-l leaving the plant. A gas vacuum
system is being installed parallel to this system and will be used for
prechlorinaticn and intermediate chlorination. Post chlorination
capacity will continue to be provided by the solution system. A bank of
five one ton containers is used for standby. Thirty minute capacity self-
contained and cannister masks are in easy reach near the chlorination
equipment. Positive ventilation is provided xor the chlorine storage
and feed rooms. Chlorine leak detectors and alarms have been obtained
but are not installed.
Three 250 ton bins provide storage for alum («_") and lime (1). One
additional bin is available but not in use. The alum is fed by two
dry chemical feeders with a capacity of 300 pounds per hour each.
Alum dosage is varied based upon the turbidity of the finished water.
The lime is fed by a 900 pound slaker unit.
One 180 pound per hour O.r.ega Gravimetric feeder provides adequate
fluorication. This fluoridator is equipped with a 3»000 pound hopper.
Storage is available for over 100 tens of fluoride which is purchased *
in 100 pound bags. Powdered activated carton is stored in individual f
bags placed in four rooms. Fire control is provided by six four i
cylinder CC£ banks. The carbon is e;r.ptied by hand to a 900 pound per i
hour dry feeder equipped with a 3,000 pour.d hoprer. Fluoride dosage- j
is based upon the rate of flow (to obtain 1 ppn at all times) and - -]
carbon doc.ar;o arid permanganate dosare are based upon taste and odor ••' ;
determinations. Eye and face wash units are provided in the chemical
feed, unloading, ruid laboratory aroa:;. Breakpoint prechlorination is
practiced with.gaseous chlorine fed into a ventori prior to the flash
mix, which is two parallel units of three co:"paitr.cn*s serviced by tvo
electric mixers per unit. Lime and alum are adSed to the first compartment '
and carbon is applied to the third compartment o>f the flash mix units.
59
-------
The v.ater passes through 10 flocculation basins equipped with two
four-speed flocculators each. These basins are designed for five ragd
each, with a detention time of ^5 minutes. Five sedimentation basins
give a detention of three hours with a design flow of 50 mgd.
The basins are cleaned twice each year (in the spring and autumn),
Twelve dual media filters rated at a total of 50 mgd provide filtra-
tion. All the filters were rebuilt in the last five years.
The water flows to a 15 nig clear well which is divided into two sections.
Water is pumped from the clear well to a 500,000 gallon back wash tank,
to the first high service area by three 25 mgd pumps and to the lov;
service area by three 10 mgd pumps.
-------
s
V,
"V"
*"
1
I
1
•
Q-
^ n i 5"
•° P ^ 1
tO Q £ *
4^"* f\ ^J
Jt f J
AV LMM •"
fe§
r\ *"*
ot
* I
¥*%
• v\
f f **"
r* ' 0 JM ,< K
-v . * •> *-» **-« * k'
v.- * V ' ** «. » ^ -»
/ (
^m;,;.^) •;
^
1
^
t
)
••
' x
i
i
i x
U
^
0
n
V?
*w
J "
t:
v? i
\/
;:-.;j.
I^M .
J -
J I
r"
4
•^ •
J
- f r
t
- <
") I
**.*
K
X
}
3
^ --M
. -
j
t
3 U3
- * •
6
• 5
o
c* *^
p H *&
3 ^2
3 <3 -
g Q 2
3 o w
II - V
w
1:
«£
O
I
VJ
I/
';•:,-..•«•<.•. via
«.
<
U
C
e
c
G
G
K
•
a.
x
3 ^
v> *^
r K
»l
> <
> 2f
> x
i ^j*
^
i >
— ?
UI
o
cr
o
~~i- -
I.-.: V-
O
S
U
^J
.
X
U
§ f
U
V)
5
H
_
«:—
•S^y
IL!
O
5>
V3 ^x^
6 ^ V
«,! J\ '^ JT'
^ ** n
^ ij
j.} «L (--v
f 0 ^
«Q Fj
!—
—i
01
j S
J t3 <•
^ ^ %* C^
> < *" ^-c !
c* fi c* - '
vf «.•* v_
.•*•*• "^
d b j ^ «
§«i
w
*£
3
•^ , -
_^
2
; P, ^
vT 5s*
^ fT
S ••: f i '^
^2ji^
a li f- r ':•
i
-------
• Division Filtration Plant
As shown by the schematic drawing, v/ater flows by gravity from the
submerged crib to the shore well where it is screened and pumped by
three 100 mgd steam turbine pumps through a. six- foot diameter pipe to .
the chemical feed house. Hoses are used to clean the screens period-
ically.
At the chemical feed house chlorine is applied from a 55 ton tank car
through three Fisher Porter chlorinators (2-6,000 lb., 1-4,000 lb.) and
two Wallace and Tiernan 8,000 lb', _ evaporators. A gas vacuum system
for feeding chlorine directly to the trains is being installed. A
bank of six one ton containers is used for standby. Twelve containers
are kept in standby storage. Thirty minute capacity self-contained
masks are in easy reach near the chlorination equipment. An automatic
chlorine alarm is in use.
Alum is fed by two BIF Gravimetric (belt type) Feeders, each with a
capacity of 180 to 1,800 pounds per hour. Eight storage bins, five of
which are usable, have a capacity of 1&0-200 tons each. One Omega
Gravimetric Fluoride Feeder with a 3,000 pound feed hopper provides
adequate fluoridation. The hopper is fed by emptying 100 pound bags
into it and is provided with a dust collector. A lean-to structure
adjacent to the chemical house, houses carbon storage and a carbon
feeder. Automatic fire protection is not provided for this area.
Chlorine is fed in amounts adequate to attain a 1.5 ppra residual
leaving the plai t. Alum dosage is varied based upon the turbidity
of the finished '.-:ater. Fluoride dosage'is based on the rate of flow
to maintain 1.0 ppm in the plant effluent at all times and carbon
dosage is based upon taste and odor determinations. The water passes
through .four flooculator units designed to give a. 1.75 hours detention
for a flow of 100 mgd. Five sedimentation basins give a dete'ntion
of four hours with a design flow of 1CO rngd. The basins are cleaned
tv/ice a year. Thirty-six dual media filters rated at five mgd each
provide filtration. All of the filters were rebuilt within the last
five years. T',;o 10 ir.gd electric pumps or main pressure can be used
to fill a 250,CC3 gallon wash water storage tank. The waste wash
water is drained to the lake. Auxiliary post chxorir.ation is available
at th-3 clear well throarh a 1,000 Ib/dsy Wallace and Tier-an V Notch
chlorinator uring s one ton contain;-1'. A Eell Jar unit is available but
is not immediately oirc-rable for Gt.ar.aby use. Storage of about .12 one
ton containers is alco placed in this building. ' L.
62
-------
1
3
J
]
3
1
1
The filtered water passes through two five foot square tubes 600-
700 feet long to the 22 r.g clear well from which it is puirrccd to the
low service or first high service systems by the pumps listed below:
Low Service
2 - Allison Triple Expansion-Steam 25 mgd each
1 - Steam Turbine _ . ........ ___ 25 rr.gd _ _
1 _ Electric 2,CCO h.p. yj mgd - — .....
1 - Electric 2, COO h.p. J.O rr.rd
ragd
1st High Service
1 - Allison Triple Expansion-Steam 25
1 - Steara Turbine 25 mgd
. 1 - Electric 2,500 h.p. ' 35 mgd
2 - Electric 1,750 h.p. 25 mgd each
•-t~-Electric 1,OOO h.p. • — - -10 mgd
63
-------
< 0
— O
I
1
j
3
3
3
J
1
1
i
h
u.
1 <
J c
f>_
.
3
3
1
-i
j
1
]
1
j
i
i
•i
b
«
si
U
1
i
i
(
4
•i
a
3
**
•v
fl
I
&
"V
6
*%
3
§
fi
s^
1
n
~
<
f
tn.-
£
**
£
%
r**
p*
v>
•MM
rJ
I'
Ci
f^
r* fc
•
i
T ' "i
A
£•
•3
11
t/i
j -Z
« ^ -J
K Q b'
IB H w
o ?• £
X P >
Oh
SN
•
r > | ^•^
2 t l:-
— — , ' - f ' 1
c ' «"i '• ' _..
f » d — --
if £ •
& ^ a M
t *') s
i? ,r o
f' ~ t •!
"CM
" -? '': ',5 "
t«i *-^ i~~ *
r> o ^: ,. ^
V 1 *^^ ** r
f
...
U
_'
. -
• \
\~s
!^
t'i
, .
.
'.
lii
i
4. -
U
•2
it.
C
„
«•
J
(J
"^
"""
-*•
•J v
\
i
<
•
1
I
i
i
1
k
*
^4
*?
rj u
J C
< c
r
^
u
4
£./V
dS
ii £
^f ^
Ct c**
u.» -
J x ^
k \3 i
. „
1 !?
> C *
«• Vf
ci
U
^
*•!•
^^ f^\
^* f * i ^i
^5 *** *^* Vj
^ I a ^
g^- 2 5
*T 7"7 •
*x, \J ^/
*•* _,,,»* »*•
t>'< ^j lff r> P
«•» • * f*? *
(•5 i"4" 'C^-*
Q"% ,
•^ 3: d-
t! in ^ u
i
(
c^i. iU?v.y.T <:
,
cj ^-*
151 ^g ^
*£.*£• ^7
^ ^ 0 -t)
1 0 J
4 "Vl
J .rr r- 1 c(
ft V* t V-
o'
5 5 «
j *•"•
3
U
^ '
-n r — ^- " ~
O ' ' S
L*^ * i c* c/ i
i h d 4 ^
« —•» Xi CJ
_J «-i 0,1 ^
... _ . _ *& li ^ {-
• IL r-t L~i \-i IL
/-•i/rrjtv/jr
-------
-. Nottingham Filtration Plant
As shown by the schematic drawing, water flows by gravity from the
submerged crib to the two compartment suction well where it is screened
and pumped by eight 35 rcgd pumps to the treatment plant.
Chlorine is applied from a tank car through
three 6,000 pound por day evaporators,
one 6,000 pound per day chlorinator (F & P),
one ^,000 pound per day chlorinator (F & P), and
four 3iCOO pound per day bell jar chlorinators (W & T)
A bank of three one ton containers is used for standby. Six full
containers are kept in storage normally. Thirty minute capacity self-
contained masks are in easy reach near the chlorination equipment.
Chlorine storage and application areas, are exhausted to the outside ?
by a manually operated positive ventilation system._ Chlorine can f
be applied at a number of points in the treatment process. When the
use of carbon is necessary the application of chlorine prior to the
rapid mix chambers is discontinued and chlorine is applied at a point
between the settling basins and the filters to prevent carbon-chlorine
interference. A residual of 1.5 ppra is maintained leaving the plant.
Five 21 *f ton bin'5 provide storage for alum (3)-and lime (2). No
lime is present!/ used or stored at this plant. The alum is fed by
three dry chemical feeders with a capacity of 2,OOO pounds per hour.
Lime can be fed ':>y two 200 pound per hour lime slakers. Carbon is
fed by two 750 j3und per hour dry chemical feeders. The carbon is
stored in 35 pcu.id bags in six rooms each with a capacity of 175
tons and each equipped with a fire detection-extinguisher system
(carbon dioxide). The extinguisher system consists of 12-5 cylinder
(50 pound) group.; of carbon dioxide cylinders. Alum dosage is varied
based upon the turbidity of the finished water.. Fluoride dosage is
based upon the rate of flow (to obtain 1 ppm at all times) and carbon
dosage is dependent upon taste and odor determinations.
The water passes through 12 motorized rapid mix chambers to 12^floc-
culator units. It then passes through four parallel flow two-
story settling basins : which provide 3«75 hours of detention at a flow
of 100 r.gd. The settling basins are cleaned once a year.
The filter gallery consists of 2^-'r.2 mgct rapid sand filters which
were converted to anthracite in 1967. . '
The water then passes to a 25 '~E clear well. V/ater is pumped from
the clear well to a JOO,COO gallon v;ach water tank, to the low service
area by four ^0 :. ~1 pur.r.;, to the'fir^t high service by four mgd pumps
and to the second high service by four 27 nigd pumps.
-------
Due
Protection
,. yy ' , T.
-------
l_
a§
£ n
6 r.;
t? '--
3 u l:5 ^
t> U' SJ ^
U -' r: -/
3 fe' sS
-J •- -* "i
U. c-'..;,:ri
(J ^ U ^
" U
.,-<*-, I
j r. c i-
i i r, u >:
i i!.} .-4 > i ~
I*
EU3
/ "r^iv'7 VL ';:•.-.•::•:.•:;
a
LJU
a,
U)
7
f~"""L. ----- 1 cj i
66
Ob'i
^ -^
<> V ,J
O -f t!
O -J h
o < M
{•i O >
------- |