CONTROLLING DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCTS WITH ALTERNATIVE DISINFECTANTS
by
Benjamin W. Lykins, Jr.
Chief
Systems and Field Evaluation Branch
Drinking Water Research Division
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
James A. Goodrich
Environmental Scientist
Systems and Field Evaluation Branch
Drinking Water Research Division
Wayne E. Koffskey
Chief Chemist
Jefferson Parish Department of Public Utilities
Jefferson Parish, Louisiana 70121
and
Mark H. Griese
Manager
Water Quality and Research
Evansville Water And Sewer Utility
Evansville, Indiana 47740
1991 AWWA ANNUAL CONFERENCE
PHILADELPHIA, PA
JUNE 23-27, 1991
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
CONTROLLING DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCTS WITH ALTERNATIVE DISINFECTANTS
by
Benjamin W. Lykins, Jr.
Chief
Systems and Field Evaluation Branch
James A. Goodrich
Environmental Scientist
Systems and Field Evaluation Branch
Drinking Water Research Division
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Wayne E. Koffskey
Chief Chemist
Jefferson Parish Department of Public Utilities
Jefferson Parish, Louisiana 70121
and
Mark H. Griese
Manager
Water Quality and Research
Evansville Water And Sewer Utility
Evansville, Indiana 47740
INTRODUCTION
Future Federal regulations for disinfection/disinfection by-
products will potentially effect most water treatment plants in the
United States. In anticipation of proposing regulations in June
1993, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is in the process of
assessing the performance and potential health risks of several
drinking water disinfectants and their by-products. In order to
provide field data for this assessment and to more thoroughly
understand the interactions of disinfection and disinfection by-
product control regarding the advantages and disadvantages of a
selected direction, studies were done at two drinking water
utilities. This paper will discuss some of the results from these
studies which consisted of a pilot plant evaluation at Jefferson
Parish, Louisiana and bench-scale evaluations at Evansville, Indiana.
JEFFERSON PARISH. LOUISIANA PILOT PLANT
For this study, raw river water from the Mississippi River was
pumped to the full-scale plant where it was clarified with diallyl-
dimethyl ammonium chloride or dimethylamine-type cationic polymers.
After fluoridation, but before disinfection a portion of the clarified
water was filtered through pressure sand filters before going to a 10
-------
gallon-per-minute pilot plant. This pilot plant was operated in a
conventional mode with disinfection followed by sand filtration. Post
treatment consisted of granular activated carbon after sand filtration.
Figure 1 shows the flow diagram for this mode of operation.
Each disinfectant contact chamber was 12.75 inches (320 mm)
outside diameter and constructed of stainless steel. The chlorine,
chloramine, and chlorine dioxide contact chambers were 10 feet (3m)
in height, producing approximately 30 minutes disinfectant contact
time with a flow of 2 gpm (0.13 L/s). The ozone contact chamber was
11 feet (3.3m) in height, with countercurrent operation consisting of
water entering at the top of the contact chamber and ozone gas
entering at the bottom. The water and ozone gas influent lines were
oriented so that the influent water would be in contact with the
ozone gas stream for approximately 30 minutes.11'
Ozone was generated from compressed dry air using an electrically
powered ozone generator with a maximum output capacity of 0.25 Ib/d
(0.11 kg/d). Chloramine was produced by adding hypochlorous acid to
the water stream a few seconds prior to the addition of ammonium
hydroxide. Chlorine dioxide was generated using two solutions, one
containing sodium chlorite and sodium hypochlorite and the other
containing sulfuric acid. The final pH of the solution was 4. Chlorine
was added in the form of hypochlorous acid. Residual concentrations
after disinfection addition were maintained through the contact
chambers to be comparable to those found in many drinking water
utilities at the time the study was initiated. Average residuals were
1.0 mg/L chlorine, 2.1 mg/L monochloramine, 0.5 mg/L chlorine dioxide,
and 0.5 mg/L ozone. The nondislnfected process stream was identical
to the disinfected process streams except for elimination of the
contact chamber. The major objectives of this study were to evaluate:
(1) the microbiological effectiveness of the disinfectants, (2) the
control of halogenated by-products, and (3) potential health effects
associated with the use of these disinfectants.
MICROBIOLOGICAL EFFECTIVENESS
All of the disinfectants at the dosages used, reduced the
coliforms to acceptable levels. However, with heterotrophic bacteria,
all disinfectants except chloramines reduced the levels to below 100.
However, other organisms may not have been as effectively controlled
by all disinfectants. For instance, during one study when MS2
Coliphage was spiked into the pilot plant, chloramines were ineffective
for this virus indicator as shown in Table 1. Additional studies at
Jefferson Parish will apply the concentration x time (C»t) concept
for determining disinfectant efficiency. An example of these C^t
values that have been developed for inactiyation of various
microorganisms by the major disinfectants is shown in Table 2.
HALOGENATED BY-PRODUCT CONTROL
During the one-year operation of the pilot plant, two surrogate
parameters that give an indication of organic concentrations including
halogenated by-products were evaluated: total organic carbon (TOC) and
total organic halide (TOX). The average TOC concentrations in the
disinfectant contact chamber effluents were 3.1, 2.9, 3.2, 3.2 and
3.2 mg/L for the nondisinfected, ozone, chlorine dioxide, chloramine,
and chlorine process streams, respectively. There was some indication
-------
that ozone was reducing the TOC concentration while the concentration
of TOC was fairly constant for the other disinfectants. Further in the
treatment system after the ozone sand column, the TOC was reduced an
additional 0.8 mg/L when compared to the nondisinfected system. Based
on the levels of heterotrophic bacteria in the effluents of the ozone
contact chamber and ozone sand column, the reduction of TOC across
the ozone contact chamber appears to have resulted primarily from
oxidation while that across the ozone sand column can be attributed
to biodegradation.
With an average nondisinfected influent concentration of 25 /xj/L,
TOX concentration increased significantly after 30 minutes of disinfec-
tant contact time for chlorine dioxide, chloramine, and chlorine to 86,
99, and 246 /xj/L, respectively. The same trend seen for TOC was also
observed for TOX where an average reduction of 33 percent occurred in
the ozone contact chamber producing an average effluent concentration
of 16 pg/L with a further reduction to 11 pg/L across the ozone sand
column. Treatment of the sand filtered effluents with free chlorine
followed by 5 day storage to simulate the distribution system signifi-
cantly increased TOX concentrations for all process streams (557, 540,
339, and 379 jxj/L for nondisinfected, chlorine, ozone, and chlorine
dioxide, respectively).
The trihalomethanes (THMs) reacted as expected with no significant
concentrations (1 /xj/L average) observed in the disinfectant contact
chamber and sand column effluents of the nondisinfected, ozone, and
chlorine dioxide process streams. An average THM concentration of 3
jxj/L occurred in the chloramine disinfectant contact chamber and sand
column effluents while that in the chlorine contact chamber effluent
averaged 39 /xj/L and increased to 49 /xj/L across the chlorine sand
column. By maintaining a chloramine residual for 5 days, the terminal
THM concentrations increased slightly to an average of 8.5, 3.2, 4.2,
and 9.4 /xj/L for the nondisinfected, ozone, chlorine dioxide, and
chloramine process streams, respectively. Similar treatment and
storage with free chlorine produced relatively high terminal THM
concentrations for the nondisinfected and chlorine process streams
with average concentrations of 236 and 225 /xj/L. When compared to
the nondisinfected sand column effluent, terminal THMs were 35 and 41
percent less when ozone and chlorine dioxide were used during pretreat-
ment resulting in average concentrations of 154 and 138 jxj/L, respec-
tively. As expected, granular activated carbon (GAC) reduced all
concentrations until the columns became saturated in 60 to 80 days.
The haloacetic acids followed the same trend as seen with THMs
except at a lower concentration. The highest concentrations were
formed using free chlorine which mainly produced dichloroacetic acid
(DCAA), trichloroacetic acid (TCAA), and bromochloroacetic acid
(BCAA). Chloroacetic acid (CAA), bromoacetic acid (BAA), and
dibromoacetic acid (DBAA) were also formed to some extent. Average
instantaneous concentrations for dichloroactic acid were 0.9, 1.7,
3.7, 1.1, and 13 /xj/L for the nondisinfected, chlorine dioxide,
chloramine, ozone, and chlorine process streams after sand filtration,
respectively. Five-day terminal values for the same process streams
with free chlorine were 60, 44, 38, and 60 /xj/L for the nondisinfected,
chlorine dioxide, ozone, and chlorine streams, respectively.
-------
Similar treatment of the sand filter effluents with chloramine
and a 5 day storage period resulted in only slightly elevated DCAA
concentrations. The slight concentration increase is similar to that
seen for THMs during similar treatment with chloramine suggesting
that both were formed by free chlorine during in-situ formation of
chloramine. GAC adsorption produced continued removals of 80% or
greater of DCAA after steady-state which was about 150 days of
operation. GAC steady-state was reached in about 250 days for DCAA
after storage for five days with a free chlorine residual. After GAC
steady-state, average removals were 48, 73, 53, 46, and 51 percent
for the nondisinfected, ozone, chlorine dioxide, chlpramine, and
chlorine process streams, respectively. Similar observations for all
unit processes were seen for TCAA and DCAA.
Relatively low concentrations of haloacetonitriles were formed
across each process stream with chlorine producing the highest levels
which averaged 3.1 A/g/L total haloacetonitriles. Less than 1 /xj/L
average of haloacetonitriles was observed across the other process
streams. The predominant haloacetonitrile (HAN) was dichloroacetonit-
rile (DCAN) followed by bromochloroacetonitrile (BCAN), dibromoaceto-
nitrile (DBAN), and trichloroacetonitrile (TCAN). Treatment of the
chlorine sand column effluent with additional free chlorine and
subsequent 5-day storage produced an average concentration of 1.9 /xj/L
of DCAN which was the same as that of the sand column effluent
suggesting that all DCAN precursors had reacted. No consistent
breakthrough of the HANs was observed through any GAC column except
that of the chlorine process stream, which was still removing over
95% of the influent HANs at the end of the one-year operational
period.
Only two haloketones, 1, 1, 1-trichloropropane (TCP) and 1, 1-
dichloropropane (DCP) were detected with the highest concentration
(1 to 2 /xj/L) being observed in the chlorine process stream. Post
chlorination of the sand column effluents followed by 5-day storage
produced similar TCP concentrations in each process stream with average
concentrations of 2.1, 2.5, 4.2, and 2.5 /xj/L for the nondisinfected,
ozone, chlorine dioxide, and chlorine, respectively. Although
consistent breakthroughs of these haloketones were observed across
the GAC columns, removals remained above 85 percent throughout the
one-year operational period.
Chloral hydrate (CH) was formed predominantly in the chlorine
process stream with an average contact chamber effluent concentration
of 2.9 /xj/L which increased to 4.5 jxj/L across the sand filter because
of an additional 30 minutes chlorine contact time. The CH concentra-
tions in the effluent of the chloramine contact chamber and sand column
were identical averaging 0.25 /xj/L. CH was detected intermittently in
the contact chamber and sand column effluents of the chlorine dioxide,
ozone, and nondisinfected process streams at average concentrations
ranging from 0.01 to 0.07 /xj/L. Post-treatment of the sand column
effluents with free chlorine and storage for 5 days produced relatively
similar CH concentrations averaging 79, 55, 45, and 75 /xj/L for the
nondisinfected, ozone, chlorine dioxide, and chlorine process
streams, respectively. Similar treatment with chloramine produced
average concentrations of 0.03 to 0.3 /xj/L. GAC adsorption removed
all of the CH throughout the project in all process streams.
-------
The concentrations of chloropicrin (CP) 1n the effluents of the
disinfection contact chambers and the sand columns were the same,
averaging 0.004, 0.004, 0.015, 0.038, and 0.43 ^g/L for the nondisin-
fected, ozone, chlorine dioxide, chloramine, and chlorine process
streams, respectively. Chlorination and 5-day storage of the sand
column effluents produced concentrations averaging 1.3, 7.7, 1.4, and
1.3 pig/L for the nondisinfected, ozone, chlorine dioxide, and chlorine
process streams, respectively. Pre-ozonation appears to have produced
an increase in CP precursors. Only slight increases in CP
concentrations were observed after similar chloramine treatment and
storage of the sand column effluents with average concentrations of
0.03, 0.04, 0.11, and 0.09 jXj/L for the nondisinfected, ozone,
chlorine dioxide, and chloramine, respectively. No consistent
breakthrough of CP above 0.003 ^g/L was observed across the GAC column
of any process throughout the operational period.
HEALTH STUDIES (Jefferson Parish. Louisiana)
Sample Disinfection
For the health-related studies at Jefferson Parish, a portion of
the clarified water after fluoridation was filtered through pressure
sand filters and split into four process streams as shown in Figure
2. Three of these streams were disinfected with either chlorine,
chloramine, or ozone while the fourth stream was not disinfected and
served as a control. Chlorine dioxide was not evaluated at this time
because it appeared that chlorine dioxide would not be an acceptable
disinfectant when the disinfection/disinfection by-product regulation
was promulgated. The system used for the three disinfected streams
consisted of a contact chamber followed in series by a sand column
and a 55-gallon stainless-steel drum fitted with a spiral stainless-
steel baffle. The modified drum served as an additional contact
chamber. The system for the nondisinfected stream was similar except
that the initial contact chamber was omitted. The contact time in
the contact chamber was approximately 30 min for each of the
disinfected streams and the empty-bed contact time for the sand column
was approximately 20 min. The ozone stream was split after the sand
column and post-disinfected with either chlorine or chloramine. As a
result of stream splitting, the flow rate to the two post-disinfected
drums was decreased. Therefore, the contact time for post-disinfected
drums was approximately 150-180 min while the contact time for the non-
ozonated chlorine and chloramine streams and the nondisinfected stream
was approximately 85-100 min. The amount of chlorine and chloramine
added to the two ozonated streams was adjusted so that the residual
disinfectant concentration leaving the drums matched the corresponding
final residuals observed for the chlorinated and chloraminated (non-
ozonated) streams (0.5-1.0 ppm C12 and 0.8-1.5 ppm NH2C1).
SAMPLE COLLECTION
Macroreticular resins (Amberlite XAD-8 and XAD-2) were used to
collect and concentrate the organic compounds from the process streams
for chemical and toxicoloaical testing. The concentration procedure
described by Miller et al.^5 was used with the following modifications.
Ethyl acetate was utilized instead of acetone to elute the organic
material from the XAD resins and the ratio of sample volume to resin
volume was decreased from 760:1 to 150:1. The change in ratio was
-------
made to minimize the potential breakthrough of MX, 3-Ch1oro-4
^d-\ch1oromethyl )-5-hydroxy-2(5H)-furanone, and compounds with similar
solubilities in water. The XAD resins were cleaned by Sohxlet
extraction with ethyl acetate and methanol for 24 hr and stored in
methanol. Prior to sample collection, each column pair containing
5 L of XAD-8 and XAD-2 resin was flushed with 200 L of water to
remove the residual methanol. Fifteen hundred liters of each of the
process streams were passed through the column pairs serially at a
flow rate of 60 L/min. The pH of the column influent was maintained
at pH 2 by the in-line addition of 9N hydrochloric add.
Following sample collection, each column was filled with
sufficient ethyl acetate to provide a standing head. The columns were
then agitated to completely wet the resin and allowed to equilibrate
for 15 minutes. Each column pair was then eluted serially with 15 L
of ethyl acetate. Residual water was removed from the ethyl acetate
extract by allowing the water to separate and then draining off the
water in a separatory funnel. Each extract was concentrated to
<1.5 L under vacuum at 40°C by rotary evaporation. The samples were
each adjusted to exactly 1.5 L with ethyl acetate before storing at
4°C. Immediately prior to chemical or toxicity testing, aliquots of
the 1000X concentrates were further concentrated by rotary
concentration at 40°C.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Three rounds of water sample concentrates were collected during
September 1989, March 1990, and July 1990. An examination of the
seasonal effects (early fall-89, early spring-90, and mid summer-90)
of finished water quality and surrogate parameters for the control
stream (non-disinfected + sand) showed that the early spring sample
had the lowest values for: pH (7.3), dissolved solids (184 mg/L), TOC
(2.8 mg/L), and TOX (15.7 ug/L). The early spring sample also had
the lowest concentrations for eight volatile organics examined. This
latter finding may simply be a consequence of the lower TOC levels-in
the spring sample that may result from a flushing of naturally
occurring organic matter from the source water over the course of the
winter. However, it should be noted that TOX values observed for the
(C12 + sand) and (NHXl + sand) samples were highest for the spring
sample. This suggested that the nature of the precursor material was
different and that more semivolatile and nonvolatile halogenated
compounds were formed. This idea Is supported by the observed increase
in the formation of haloacetic acids.
Significantly lower values were also obtained for the spring
sample with regard to brominated compounds (bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform). The most likely causes being
either a decrease in the bromide content in the source water or an
increase in the ammonia level of the source water that would result
in the formation of combined bromine rather than free bromine. As
for the effect of seasonal changes on the formation of halogenated
by-products, the differences appeared to be less well defined.
However, the over-all formation of brominated DBFs was spring <
summer < fall.
Many of the halogenated by-products of interest were analyzed
for each disinfectant stream. T6-7>8) Of special interest was the
potential concentration of these by-products when water is delivered
-------
to the customer. This was evaluated by storing samples for 5 days
with a disinfectant residual to simulate concentrations in the
distribution system. An example of the effects of using different
disinfection alternatives for the September 1989 sampling is shown in
Table 3. These data show a definite trend. For example, with
dichloroacetic acid, when chlorine is added prior to and after sand
filtration about 45 jxj/L, on average, was detected. If ozone is
added prior to sand filtration and chlorine after sand filtration,
this average concentration was reduced to 32 /xj/L. If however,
monochloramine is used prior to and after sand filtration, the
average concentration is reduced to about 8 jug/L. Further reductions
were seen when ozone was added before sand filtration and monochlora-
mine after sand filtration (4.6 pg/L average). This trend was seen
for other prevalent halogenated by-products such as trichloroacetic
acid, bromochloroacetic acid, chloral hydrate, and trichloromethane.
A similar trend is seen for preliminary health studies on samples
collected September 1989 at Jefferson Parish for bacterial mutagenicity
and DNA strand breaks as shown in Table 4. From these data, one might
conclude that ozonation prior to sand filtration and chloramination
after sand filtration will solve the halogenated by-product problem.
This is true but one also has to evaluate the total impacts of
disinfection. For instance, although ozone shows promise and may be
a viable disinfection alternative, assimilable organic carbon (AOC)
increase in the distribution system has to be controlled. This can
be done by biostabilization of the water during treatment before
distribution. An example of this is shown in Table 5. In this
example, after ozonation, 162 /xj/L of AOC is present. Sand filration
provides some biostabilization by reducing the AOC to 38 pg/L while
the GAC effuent is 4 pg/L; comparable to the AOC concentration (3.7
pg/L) in the chlorine contact chamber effluent. Ozonation by-products
such as aldehydes, ketones, and acids are also a concern. Although
chloramines may be the disinfectant of choice to provide a disinfection
residual, it may not provide the desired disinfection effectiveness and
there have been some health concerns with ingesting chloramines.
EVANSVILLE. INDIANA STUDIES
Another potential disinfectant for controlling halogenated by-
products, is chlorine dioxide which was further evaluated beyond the
scope of the Jefferson Parish project. At a drinking water utility
on the Ohio River, a pilot plant was used to compare chlorine dioxide
disinfection with chlorine disinfection1 '. The addition of chlorine
dioxide to the raw water with delayed chlorination permitted coagula-
tion/settling/filtration and oxidation to remove trihalomethane precur-
sors, thereby reducing the amount of trihalomethanes formed during
post-treatment chlorination. A comparison of the average trihalo-
methane concentrations for the two disinfectant modes showed a
reduction of approximately 60 percent when chlorine dioxide was used.
Although chlorine dioxide disinfection can reduce trihalomethane
concentrations, control of the metabolites (chlorite and chlorate) is
essential before chlorine dioxide can be considered a viable
disinfection alternative. Equipment is now available to produce
chlorine dioxide that is virtually free of chlorine and chlorate.
Bench-scale studies have recently been completed which evaluated the
reduction of chlorite and chlorine dioxide by a reducing agent.U0)
-------
All of the samples used for these studies were collected from
the effluents of pilot plant secondary setting basins after approxi-
mately 200 minutes of chlorine dioxide contact time.(11) These grab
samples were analyzed immediately for residual chlorine dioxide (C102),
chlorite (CIO,), and chlorate (C103), treated with the respective
reducing agent for a variety of contact times, and reanalyzed for the
same chlorine dioxide species.
The major reducing agents considered for these studies consisted
of sulfur dioxide, sodium thiosulfate, sodium metabisulfite, and
ferrous iron. For sulfur dioxide, complete reduction of residual
chlorine dioxide and chlorite ion was achieved but a marked increase
in chlorate ion concentration was consistently observed as shown in
Figure 3. This same phenomenon occurred with sodium metabisulfite.
The degree of C102 reduction with sodium thiosulfate depended on pH
and contact time. Removal of chlorite ion was demonstrated with
little or no chlorate formation. However, the dosages required for
complete reduction appear to make this reducing agent impractical.
Ferrous iron appears to be an effective methodology for the removal
of chlorine dioxide and chlorite ion residuals. Both of these
undesirable finished water residuals were eliminated in minutes at pH
6.0 to 7.0 and preliminary results indicate that excess reductant may
be easily controlled by pre-filter chlorination.
Bacterial mutagenicity was evaluated using the same procedures
that were used at Jerfferson Parish, Louisiana. Table 6 shows the
results of these tests using the TA 100 strain. Regardless of whether
chlorine dioxide or ozone is used as a predisinfectant, when GAC is
incorporated into the treatment scheme, the mutagenicity is low when
compared to the non-disinfected stream. Otherwise, when chlorine is
used as a post-disinfectant the mutagenicity is high with both chlorine
dioxide or ozone predisinfection.
SUMMARY
Regulations to control contaminants in drinking water in the
United States are expected to become more stringent and more prevalent.
Forthcoming disinfection and disinfection by-product regulations will
effect virtually every community water system. There are various ways
to control disinfection by-products, one of which is to use an alter-
native to chlorine. However, when this is done, one should consider
various aspects of each disinfectant. There appears to be no single
disinfectant that is applicable for all situations.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors acknowledge the assistance of Robert Miller, Paul
Ringhand, and Ron Dressman for their help in sample collection,
analyses, and data interpretation. The authors also thank Kathy
Schenck and other members of the former Health Effects Research
Laboratory. Lastly, the authors thank Sandra Dryer, Susan Campbell,
Cathie Krekeler, and the CSC staff for helping prepare this paper.
This paper has been reviewed in accordance with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's peer and administrative review
policies and approved for presentation and publication. Mention of
trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use by the USEPA.
-------
REFERENCES
1. Lykins, Jr. B.W., Koffskey, W.E., and Miller, R.6., "Chemical
Products and Toxicologic Effects of Disinfection", Journal AWWA,
78:11, 66-75, 1986.
2. Hoff, J.C., "Inactivation of Microbial Agents by Chemical
Disinfectants", U.S. EPA, EPA/600/2-86/067, 1986.
3. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, Final Rule, Federal
Register, 40 CFR Parts 141 and 142, Vol. 54, No. 124, Thursday,
June 29, 1989.
4. Korich, D.G., Mead, J.R., Madore, M.S., Sinclair, N.A., and
Sterling, C.R., "Effects of Ozone, Chlorine Dioxide, Chlorine,
and Monochloramine on Crvptosporidium parvum Oocyst Viability",
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Vol.56, No.5 1423-1428,
1990.
5. Miller, R.G., et al, "Results of Toxicological Testing of
Jefferson Parish Pilot Plant Samples", Environmental Health
Perspectives, Vol. 69, 129-139, 1986.
6. Lykins, Jr., B.W., et al "Ozone for Trace Organic Contaminant
Removal", Proceedings of 1990 International Ozone Association
Conference, Shreveport, Louisiana, March 27-29, 1990.
7. Lykins, Jr. B.W., Moser, R., and DeMarco, J., "Treatment
Technology in the United States: Disinfection and Control of
Disinfection By-Products", the 2nd Japan - U.S. Governmental
Conference on Drinking Water Quality Management, Tokyo, Japan,
July 24-26, 1990.
8. Lykins, Jr. B.W., "Disinfection of Drinking Water and Control of
Disinfection By-Products in the United States", U.S./U.S.S.R.
Bilaterial Project, Cincinnati, Ohio, October 15, 1990.
9. Lykins, Jr. B.W. and Griese, M.H., "Using Chlorine Dioxide for
Trihalomethane Control", Journal AWWA, 78:6, 88-93, 1986.
10. "Disinfection Byproduct Control Using Chlorine Dioxide", U.S.
EPA Cooperative Agreement No. CR-816837, 1990.
11. Griese, M.H., et al., "The Use of Reducing Agents For the Total
Elimination of Chlorine Dioxide and Chlorite Residuals in
Drinking Water", Journal AWWA, 83:5, 56-61, 1991.
10
-------
TABLE 1. JEFFERSON PARISH MICROBIOLOGICAL DATA
MS2
RESIDUAL COLIPHAGE COLIFORM HPC
STEAM (mg/L) (mL) (100 ml) (mL)
NONDISINFECTANT - 400,000 640 43,000
OZONE 0.3 <1 0 14
CHLORINE DIOXIDE 0.5 1 0 57
FREE CHLORINE 1.0 <1 0 44
CHLORAMINE 1.9 46,000 0 270
11
-------
TABLE 2. SUMMARY. OF C-t VALUE RANGES FOR INACTIVATION OF
VARIOUS MICROORGANISMS BY DISINFECTANTS (2-3-4'
Disinfectant
Free Preformed Chlorine
Micro- Chlorine Chloramine Dioxide
orqanism oH 6 to 7 oH 8 to 9 oH 6 to 7
£». Coll 0.
Polio 1
Rotavirus 0
Phage f2 0
(L. lamblia
cysis
JL. muris
cysts
Crvptosporidium
parvum
NOTE: All C-t
Giardia
034-0.05
1.1-2.5
.01-0.05
.08-0.18
47->150
30-630
7200(b)
values are
lamblia and
95-180
768-3740
3806-6476
ND
2200(a)
1400
7200(c)
0.4-0.75
0.2-6.7
0.2-2.1
ND
26(a)
7.2-18.5
78(0
for 99% inactivation at 5°C
CrvptosDoridium parvum.
Ozone
oH 6 to 7
0.02
0.1-0.2
0.006-0.06
ND
0.5-0.6
1.8-2.0
5-10(b)
except for
(a) Values for 99.9% inactivation at pH 6-9
(b) 99% inactivation at pH 7 and 25°C
(c) 90% inactivation at pH 7 and 25°C
ND - no data
12
-------
TABLE 3. JEFFERSON PARISH DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCT FORMATION
POTENTIAL FOR SELECTED STREAMS (SEPTEMBER 1989)
Concentration in jtg/L
BY-PRODUCT
Chloroacetic
Acid
Dichloracetic
Acid
Tri chloro-
acetic Acid
Bromoacetic
Acid
Dibromoacetic
Acid
Bromochloro-
acetic Acid
Dichloro-
acetonitrile
Trichloro-
acetonitrile
Dibromochloro-
acetonitrile
Bromochloro-
acetonitrile
1,1-Dichloro-
propane
1,1,1-Trichloro-
propane
Chloropicrin
Chloral Hydrate
Trichloromethane
Bromodichloro-
me thane
Dibromochloro-
methane
Tribromo-
methane
TOX
NONDIS.
0.
0.5
0.2
0.
o.
0.2
0.1
0.
0-
0.
0.1
0.
0.
0.
1.0
0.4
0.1
0.1
27.
SAND-
16.0
44.9
39.8
1.2
0.8
28.7
1.6
0.1
0.3
0.7
0.1
1.8
0.9
37.5
156.
35.0
8.
0.
505.
OZONE -
SAND-
Cl,
17.0
32.3
19.0
1.0
1.2
20.2
1.3
0.
0.4
0.7
0.1
1.7
4.2
32.6
121.
29.0
.10.0
1.0
328.
NH2C1- OZONE-
SAND- SAND-
_NH2C1_ NH,C1
0.4 0.6
8.2
1.7
0.1
0.1
3.8
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.1
5.3
1.2
0.1
0.
55.
4.6
0.7
0.1
0.1
1.4
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.8
0.5
0.1
0.1
29.
13
-------
TABLE 4. PRELIMINARY HEALTH STUDY RESULTS ON JEFFERSON PARISH
CONCENTRATES (SEPTEMBER 1989)
TREATMENT
Non Disinfect
C12
03 + C12
NH2C1
03 + NH2C1
BACTERIAL
MUTAGENICITY
(REVERTANTS/L)
142 ± 18
4185 ± 181
2152 ± 78
1420 ± 31
972 ± 36
DNA STRAND
BREAKS
f BREAK/CELL-LI
44.5 ± 0.2
680.9 ± 5.0
311.3 ± 7.0
201.8 ± 3.0
76.0 ± 4.0
14
-------
TABLE 5. AVERAGE AOC CONCENTRATION
AT JEFFERSON PARISH, LA
TREATMENT AOC.ug/L
NON DISINFECT 13.5
03CONTACT CHAMBER 162.
03-SAND 38.2
03-SAND-6AC 4.0
ClCONTACT CHAMBER 3.7
C12-SAND-GAC 2.6
15
-------
TABLE 6. BACTERIAL MUTAGENICITY RESULTS ON
EVANSVILLE CONCENTRATES
TREATMENT REVERTANTS
PER LITER
Nondisinfect 505 ± 24
C102 + Fed, + Cl, +
dual media + CT2 3437 + 64
C102 + GAC + C12 771 ± 26
03 + dual media + C12 3770 ± 47
03 + GAC + C12 867 ± 24
16
-------
CC UJ
!M S^2
£C u! IJQQC
UJ \ ^ cnzill
1 < 8$S
"y ?* S "•
\
\
l
A
t
O
04
I
Z
f
T
M
O
A
T
O
A
T
-------
UJ
>
CC
/
\
o
o
O t
. V
-I 2
9.5
Xm
—
O<
He
\
/
l
,
r
J
L
c
0
CC
UJ
U.
CC
<
_l
l)
5
D
CC
Q
t
t
•
<
<
t
(
)
LI
r »
DQO
/>zu
/3 3C <•*
OO 0
o
Ul
UL
zo
t
X
CO
DC
Z
O
CO
CC
LJLJ
IL
LL
LLJ
UJ
2
LLJ
X
O
CO
G
CO
o
O
O
_J
O
o
X
o
o
UJ
o:
~D
O
LL
18
-------
i_ O
_ O
_ O
------- |