A EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Water Engineering
Research Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA/600/M-86/021 Feb. 1987
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH BRIEF
Removal of Barium and Radium from Groundwater
Vernon L. Snoeyink, Carl C. Chambers, Candace K. Schmidt, Rick F. Manner,
Anthony G. Myers, Julie IL. Pfeffer, Sharon K. Richter, David W. Snyder
Abstract
A research project was undertaken to investigate
processes for removing barium and radium from drinking
water and to determine their suitability for treatment of
small drinking water supplies. Special emphasis was
placed on ion exchange processes that can be used without
adding large concentrations of sodium to the water. The
wastes from radium and barium removal processes were
also characterized, and processes suitable for treatment
of ion exchange brines were evaluated.
Earlier reports have evaluated the use of strong-acid and
weak-acid ion exchange resins for barium, radiium, and
hardness removal, and they have characterized wastes
from barium and radium removal processes. This report
discusses two ion exchange processes that can be used
for barium and radium removal accompanied by either
partial or no hardness removal.
The calcium-form, strong-acid ion exchange resin can be
used for barium and radium removal without significant
change in hardness or the concentration of other salts.
This resin can be regenerated with CaCI2 brine; the
optimum regenerant concentration was established as
0.8M, and the tradeoff between resin capacity and
regeneration efficiency was also determined. The resin
also gave excellent removals of radium for run lengths
of 500 bed volumes, but the length of run to radium
breakthrough was not determined. Procedures were
developed for regenerating the spent CaCl2 brine for reuse.
The Radium-Selective Complexer (RSC) will remove
radium without altering hardness or other salt
concentration. The capacity of this resin for waters with
low total dissolved solids (TDS) «1,000 to 2,000 mg/L
TDS) is in excess of 30,000 pCi/dry g; however, if the
TDS is increased to about 40,000 mg/L, the capacity drops
to 200 to 300 pCi/dry g. Thus using this resin to remove
radium from spent brine does not appear feasible.
Process schematics for various ways of using the calcium
form resin and the RSC have been presented.
The conditions for precipitating barium (as BaSCU) and
radium (coprecipitation with BaSO^from spent brine were
also established. The amount of sulfate that must be added
relative to the amount of barium in the brine is a function
of the barium concentration and the TDS of the brine.
If no barium is present in the spent brine, BaCU or BaCC>3
must be added along with the sulfate to remove the radium.
Adsorption of radium by Mri02-impregnated acrylic resin
was investigated as a removal process, but the
experiments were not successful and further research is
not recommended.
This Research Brief was developed by the principal
investigators and EPA's Water Engineering Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, to announce key findings of
the research project that is fully documented in the reports
and publications listed in the References.
Introduction
Naturally occurring barium in drinking water exceeds the
maxium contaminant level (MCL) in some areas of northern
Illinois and northeastern Iowa. In these same areas, some
parts of Florida, and other locations, the concentrations
of Ra226 plus Ra228 exceed the MCL of 5 pCi/L. Most of
the contaminated supplies are used by small communi-
ties, many of which do not presently treat their water to
reduce the concentrations of these substances. Both
radium and barium are alkaline earth metals and are found

-------
in water as divalent cations. Their chemical behavior is
very similar, and it is much like that of Ca2+ and Mg2+,
the principal components of hardness in water. Thus
processes used to soften water are very useful for
removing these contaminants from drinking water.
The objectives of this research project were to investigate
the processes for barium and radium removal to determine
their suitability for use, especially for small supplies.
Special emphasis was placed on ion exchange processes
that can be used without adding large concentrations of
sodium to the water. The wastes from radium and barium
removal processes also were characterized, and processes
suitable for treatment of ion exchange brines were evalu-
ated.
Earlier reports (1,2) have evaluated the use of strong-acid
and weak-acid ion exchange resins for barium, radium,
and hardness removal, and they have characterized wastes
from barium and radium removal processes. The purposes
of this Research Brief are: (1) to present information on
two ion exchange processes that can be used for barium
and radium removal accompanied by either partial or no
hardness removal; and (2) to summarize our research on
precipitation of barium and radium from spent ion
exchange brines and on removal of barium and radium
from water with Mn02-impregnated resin.
Radium and Barium Removal by Hydrogen-Form
Exchange
The sodium-form, strong-acid ion exchange resin is com-
monly used today to remove barium and radium together
with hardness. The process is effective (see Reference
1), but sodium is added to the product water. The increase
in sodium concentration can be avoided if either strong-
acid or weak-acid resins are used in the hydrogen form.
Hydrogen-form resins must be followed by a carbon dioxide
stripping process and a pH adjustment step, as shovtfn
in Figure 1. A portion of the raw water can bypass the
ion exchange and carbon dioxide removal process; the
amount of barium, radium, or hardness desired in the final
water may control the quantity of water that is bypassed.
The advantages and disadvantages of using resins in the
hydrogen-form are given in References 1, 3, and 4. The
processes are very effective, and the weak-acid resin is
especially useful if there is a need to minimize the volume
of waste brine.
Radium Removal without Hardness Removal
Calcium-Form Ion Exchange for Radium and
Barium Removal
Complete removal of hardness from water is often not
appropriate or desirable. Low-calcium waters are corrosive
to some metals, and the cost of removing the hardness
maybe excessive. The strong-acid resin has a much higher
selectivity for barium and radium compared with calcium
and magnesium, and thus a resin in the calcium-form
should selectively remove barium and radium from a water
containing these ions plus hardness. Laboratory experi-
ments were conducted to show the performance of the
calcium-form resin, and to develop a method to reclaim
the spent calcium chloride brine.
Figure 1. Flow diagrams for removal of radium, barium, and hardness with hydrogen-form resins.
Spent
Acid
Chlorine
Raw
Water
Strong-Acid
Regenerant
C02
Stripping
Adjustment
H+ - Form
Weak-Acid Resin
A. Weak-Acid Resin
Raw
Water
Spent
Chlorine

Strong-Acid
Regenerant
C02
Stripping
Adjustment
H+ - Form
Weak-Acid Resin
B. Strong-Acid Resin.
2

-------
Column runs using virgin resin showed that an empty bed
contact time (EBCT, volume of resin/volumetric flow rate)
of 2.5 min gave a run length of about 1,800 bed volumes
when water with 15 mg barium/L was applied. The
number of bed volumes that could be processed did not
increase as the EBCT increased (see Table 1 for influent
composition). The number of bed volumes that can be
processed depends on the quantity of calcium chloride
regenerant applied, as shown in Figure 2. Application of
4, 6, and 8 equivalents of calcium/L of resin resulted in
runs of 500, 900, and 1,100 bed volumes, respectively,
compared with 1,200 bed volumes for virgin resin when
the influent water contained 23 mg barium/L. The tradeoff
between resin capacity per run and regeneration efficiency
Table 1. Composition of Influent Water
Parameter
Concentration
Total Hardness
215 mg as CaCOa/L
Calcium
105 mg as CaCOa/L
Magnesium
95 mg as CaCOs/L :
Barium
15 mg/L
Sodium
—23mg/L
Chloride
—10mg/L
Total Alkalinity
250 mg as CaC03/L ,
pH
7
is shown in Figure 3. The optimum regenerant
concentration was found to be 0.8M calcium chloride.
The ability of a calcium-form resin column to remove
radium from water was evaluated through four
exhaustion-regeneration cycles. The fifth cycle consisted
of exhaustion only. Influent water was similar to that
shown in Table 1, except that 43 pCi radium/L replaced
the barium. Exhaustion in the 4.7-in. (12-cm) column was
carried out at 1.35 gpm/ft2 (3.4 m/hr)for 500 bed volumes.
Termination of the run at 500 bed volumes was arbitrary;
additional runs are needed 1:o establish the number of bed
volumes that can be processed to radium breakthrough.
Regenerant brine contained 0.85M calcium and 0.2M
magnesium. The brine-loading rate was 0.29 gpm/ft2 (0.7
m/hr), and the dose was 6 equivalents of calcium/L resin
(27.5 lb CaCl2 • 2H20/ft3 resin). The spent brine from each
cycle was reclaimed and reused in the next cycle. Rinse-
water volume was 8.5 bed volumes.
The average effluent in each of the five exhaustion runs
was <0.5 pCi radium/L (98.8 percent radium removal).
The amount of radium placed on the column during
exhaustion was 45 pCi/g dry resin (0.02 ji/Ci/L resin).
Radium capacity at breakthrough was not determined.
The spent CaCU brine can be reclaimed for reuse. Addition
of 10 percent molar excess solid CaSCU relative to the
barium in the brine resulted in reduction of the barium
Figure 2. Barium breakthrough curves at different regenerant dosages.
2.5
Virgin Resin
8 equiv. Ca/L Resin
6 equiv. Ca/L Resin
4 equiv. Ca/L Resin
2.0
a
1.0
UJ
0.5
0
200
400
1000
600
800
1200
1400
1600
Bed Volumes of Water Treated
3

-------
Figure 3. Regeneration efficiency and column capacity at various regenerant dosages.
Regenerant Dosage, eq. Ca^/L Resin
concentration to about 100 mg/L. The CaS04 dissolved,
and BaSCU precipitated. Use of a very soluble sulfate salt
such as sodium sulfate was not successful because high
localized concentrations of sulfate caused CaS04 as well
as BaS04to precipitate. Reuse of brine was possible after
removal of the precipitate by filtration. The concentration
of magnesium in the brine increased through successive
cycles until a plateau value was reached. This resulted
in a column that was partially in the magnesium form
at the beginning of an exhaustion run, but this does not
pose a problem because barium and radium can replace
magnesium more easily than calcium. If the brine contains
radium as well as barium, the radium will coprecipitate
on the BaSCU and thus also be removed. However, a barium
salt such as BaCl2 will have to be added along with the
CaS04 to spent CaCI2 brine containing only radium to
achieve radium removal.
Additional research is needed to refine the process. In
particular, the best procedure to precipitate and separate
barium and radium needs to be established. A procedure
is also needed to control the precipitation process to ensure
that the barium and radium have been removed and that
too much sulfate has not been added. The brine
reclamation process should significantly reduce the brine
disposal problem, but ways of disposing of the precipitate
must be found, and the cost involved in using the process
must be established.
Radium-Selective Comp/exer for Radium Removal
The Dow Chemical Company has available a synthetic
resin called the Radium-Selective Complexer* (RSC) that
has a high affinity for radium. Previous information on
this material has been published by R. E. Rozelle and K.
W. Ma (5), T. D. Boyce and S. Boom (6), Melis Consulting
Engineers (7), and R. E. Rozelle et al. (8). The findings
of these studies include the high capacity of the resin
for radium when treating water with low TDS, the need
to remove iron before the resin because particulate iron
can foul the bed, and the desirability of isolating the resin
bed to minimize exposure to employees.
The purpose of our work with the RSC resin was to
determine its capacity for radium removal from brines
compared with typical groundwaters to assess whether
it can be used to remove radium from spent ion exchange
brines.
*Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
4

-------
The compositions of two of the waters used in the capacity
studies are given in Table 2, the column operating
parameters are listed in Table 3, and the radium capacity
data appear in Table 4. The 22,000-mg/L TDS and the
9,700-mg/L solutions were made diluting the 40,000-
mg/L TDS solution with deionized water and then
adjusting the radium concentration. The 11,200-mg/L
TDS solution is approximately the same as the 9,700-mg/
L TDS solution except that the calcium concentration has
been reduced from 1,000 to 400 mg/L. Data from the
Melis study are shown in Table 4 for comparison.
Table 2. Influent Composition for RSC Experiments
450 mg/L
Parameter	TDS Water	Brine
TDS (mg/L)
272-630
40,000
Hardness
(mg/L as CaCOs)
81-109
15,472
Calcium (mg/L)
14-17
3,802
Magnesium (mg/L)
10-15
1,455
Sodium (mg/L)
40-120
-10,000
Ra226 (pCi/L)
817-1139
668
(avg. of 4 samples)
pH
7.1-8.2
5,85
Alkalinity
(mg/L as CaC03)
84-106
i—
Chloride (mg/L)
—
-17,250
Table 3. Operating Parameters for RSC Experiments
Parameter
450 mg/L
TDS Water
Brine
Column Length
16.3 cm (initial),
12 cm (after
shrinking)
25 cm (water),
16.2 cm (after
shrinking)
Column Diameter
2.45 cm ID
2.45 cm ID
Bed Volume
76.8 cm3 (initial)
76.4 cm3 (after
shrinking)
Mass of Dry Resin
(Na+form)
16.3 g
27.8 g
Flow Rate
(Downflow)
1.28 gpm/ft2
1.25 gpm/ft2
EBCT
2.3 min (after
shrinking)
3 min (after
shrinking)
Several observations can be made from Table 4. The
capacity of RSC resin for radium in ~450-mg/L TDS water
is about 200 times greater than its capacity for radium
in ~40,000 mg/L TDS brine, and even higher capacities
were determined by Melisfor RSC in 600-mg/LTDS water.
Melis was of the opinion that the difference in capacity
at Panel Mine and Key Lake may have been caused by
the calcium concentration, which was 400 and 38 mg/
L, respectively. More extensive competition between
calcium and radium in the Panel Mine water would result
in a lower capacity for radium; a similar effect of calcium
was observed by us for the 9,700- and 11,200-mg/L TDS
solutions. Further studies are needed to better establish
the effet of calcium and other ions on capacity. The data
also show that capacity increases regularly as TDS
decreases. However, it is not possible to reach a firm
conclusion about the effect of TDS until the effect of EBCT
is better determined. The 11,200-, 9,700-, 22,000-, and
44,000- mg/L TDS samples were run using a 0.7-min
EBCT. Because the RSC resin shrinks 20 to 30 percent
as it changes from the sodium to the calcium form and
because the resin rapidly converts to the calcium form
after the column run is started, the actual contact time
was even less than the 0.7 min. Higher capacities might
be experienced for the 11,200-, 9,700-, and 22,000-mg/
L TDS samples if a longer contact time were used, but
additional tests are. required to determine this. The 0.7-
and 4.6-min EBCT's used for the 44,000- and 40,000-
TDS samples, respectively, did show the same low
capacity, however.
Process Schematics
As shown in Figure 4, the calcium-form resin can be used
in several ways to obtain the desired effluent quality. Treat-
ment of 100 percent of the water flow should selectively
remove radium and barium. Use of this resin in parallel
with a strong-acid, sodium-form resin permits a desired
level of hardness removal in addition to radium and barium,
but sodium is added to the product water. However, this
resin can be used in parallel with a strong- or weak-acid
resin in the hydrogen-form followed by carbon dioxide
stripping if sodium addition is to be avoided.
The RSC resin can be used in place of the calcium-form,
strong-acid resin in the schematics in Figure 4 for removal
of radium and varying amounts of hardness. Presumably
the resin would be used on a throw-away basis and thus
no regenerant would be used. Further studies are
necessary to determine whether the RSC resin can be
regenerated, however.
Precipitation of Barium and Radium from Brines
Ion exchange treatment of waters containing barium and
radium results in brines with high concentrations of these
elements. In anticipation of restrictions on the disposal
of these brines to surface waters, experiments were con-
ducted to show the effectiveness of precipitation of these
ions (9). Addition of a sulfate salt such as Na2SC>4 to a
brine containing barium results in precipitation of BaS04,
and if radium is present, it will coprecipitate with the
BaSC>4. To remove radium from a brine that does not
contain barium, a barium salt such as BaC03 or BaCh
must be added together with a sulfate salt; the BaSO*
that forms will remove the radium by coprecipitation.
Barium concentrations of 20 to 5,000 mg/L were
effectively treated in solutions with TDS up to 30,000 mg/
L{9). Below 100 mg barium/L large sulfate-to-barium mole
ratios (—90 for 20 mg barium/Lin 27,000 mg/L TDS brine)
were required to reduce the barium concentration to 0.5
mg/L in 30 min. However, as the initial barium increased.
5

-------
Table 4. Summary of RSC Radium Capacity
Total Dissolved
Solids (mg/L)
Influent
Radium
(pCi/L)
% Removal at
Termination of Run
EBCT
(Before Shrinking)
(min)
Capacity
(pCi/dry g)
11,200 (low Ca)*
560
10
0.7
2,210
9,700*
390
10
0.7
1,300
22,000
810
10
0.7
1,200
44,000 (Run #1)
480
10
0.7
200
40,000 (Run #2)
670
10
4.6
300
-450
1,000
90
3.1
51,000
2,500 (Melis Study, Panel Mine)
180
80
2.6
32,400
600 (Melis Study, Key Lake)
1,620
95
3.8
¦110,000
600 (Melis Study, Key Lake)
1,620
0
3.8
187,000
(est.)
*Ca = 400 mg/L
+Ca = 1,000 mg/L
the sulfate-to-barium mole ratio decreased. For example,
a mole ratio of 1.5 was required to reduce the barium
from about 1,700 mg/L to 0.5 mg/L in 30 min. As the
TDS of the brine decreased, the required mole ratio also
decreased. Other factors may also affect the amount of
sulfate required.
The radium concentration in a brine can be reduced to
less than 1 pCi/Lbycoprecipitation with BaSC>4. In 40,000-
mg/LTDS brines, 30 mg barium/L was sufficient to reduce
a 1,000-pCi radium/L concentration to less than 10 pCi/
L. The adsorption capacity of the BaS04 was approximately
35,000 pCi/g. The adsorption capacity of the BaS04
decreased to 5,000 pCi/g when the final radium concen-
tration in the brine was reduced to 1 pCi/L. Also,
adsorption capacity increased as the TDS of the brine
decreased.
After the barium and/or radium are precipitated, the solids
must be removed from the brine. Alternatives are filtration,
possibly preceded by coagulation and sedimentation.
These processes have been used in the mining industry,
but additional studies are needed to determine the best
design for small systems and the means of ultimate
disposal that should be used.
Mn02-Impregnated Resin and Fiber
Previous studies by others have established the ability of
Mn02 to adsorb various divalent ions, and Mn02-
impregnated acrylic fiber has been used to remove radium
from solution. In this study, acrylic resin beads were
impregnated with Mn02 and then used in a column to
adsorb radium and barium from simulated groundwater
and brine.
An Amberlite XAD-7 acrylic resin (Rohm and Haas,
Philadelphia, PA), which has a surface area of 450 mz/
g, was loaded with Mn02 by bringing it into contact with
hot permanganate solution. A loading of 6 to 10 of
manganese/ 100 g of resin was achieved; similar
treatment of acrylic fiber (Monsanto Textiles Co., Decatur,
AL) gave a loading of 10 g of manganese/100 g. The
adsorption capacity for barium was very sensitive to ionic
strength. Capacity at an ionic strength of 0.03 (typical of
groundwater) was —0.2 g of barium/g of manganese and
decreased to 0.005 g of barium/g of manganese at an
ionic strength of 0.93 (typical of a spent ion exchange
brine). The capacities for radium at the same ionic
strengths were 140 and 12 nCi/g of manganese,
respectively.
The treatment cost was $1.80 per 1,000 gal of
groundwater if the impregnated resin is used on a throw-
away basis. This cost was for chemicals and resin only,
using a 0.5-mgd system. The impregnated resin could be
regenerated with HNO3, however. Based on the unverified
assumption that the resin culd be used six times before
it was replaced, chemical and resin costs were $0.36/
million gal. The additional cost of disposal for the
neutralized, spent HNO3 remains to be determined,
however. The cost of using fiber is estimated to be
somewhat cheaper, although disposal of the spent fiber
remains a problem, and thus further research on the resin
is not recommended.
References
Publications 1 to 4 under Literature Cited and 1 to 7 under
Bibliography contain the findings of this research project
in their entirety. The Master's theses are available from
the University of Illinois Library or Vernon L. Snoeyink,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois, 208
North Romine Street, Urbana, IL 61801. The articles that
are in press are also available from Vernon L. Snoeyink
until they appear in journals.
Literature Cited
1. Snoeyink, V. L„ J. L. Pfeffer, D. W. Snyder, and C.
C. Chambers. "Barium and Radium Removal from
Groundwater by Ion Exchange." Report to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, 151
pp. (1983), available from the National Technical
Information Service, Order No. PB 84-189810.
6

-------
Figure 4.
Raw ,
Water
Process schematics for removing barium, radium and varying amounts of hardness.
Chlorine
Ca - Form
Strong-Acid Resin
I,
CaCI2 Regenerant
a. Schematic for Barium and Radium Removal Without Hardness Removal
Chlorine
Raw
Water
CaCI2 Regenerant
NaCl Regenerant
Ca - Form
Strong-Acid Resin
Na - Form
Strong-Acid Resin
b. Schematic for Barium, Radium and Partial Hardness Removal with Sodium Addition
Regenerant
Chlorine
Raw
Water
CaCI2 Regenerant

Adjustment
C02
Stripping
Ca - Form
Strong-Acid Resin
H- Form
Strong-Acid or
Weak-Acid Resin
c. Schematic for Barium, Radium and Partial Hardness Removal with No Sodium Addition
2.	Snoeyink, V. L., C. K. Jongeward, A. G. Myers, and
S. K. Richter. "Barium and Radium in Water Treatment
Plant Wastes." Report to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, 50 pp. (1984),
available from the National Technical Information
Service, Order No. PB 85-165777/AS.
3.	Snyder, D. W., V. L. Snoeyink, and J. L. Pfeffer. "Weak-
Acid Ion Exchange for Removal of Barium, Radium
and Hardness." Journal American Water Works
Association, 78, 98 (Sept. 1986).
4.	Snoeyink, V. L., C. C. Chambers, and J. L. Pfeffer.
"Strong-Acid Ion Exchange for Removal of Barium,
Radium, and Hardness." Submitted for publication
(1986).
5.	Rozelle, R. E., and K. W. Ma. "A New Potable Water
Radium/Radon Removal System." Proc. AWWA Sem-
inar on Inorganic Contaminants, June 5-9, 1983,
American Water Works Association, Denver, Co.
6.	Boyce, T. C., and S. Boom. "Removal of Soluble
Radium from Uranium Minewaters by a Selective
7

-------
Complexer." Soc. of Mining Engineers of AIME,
272:82-83 (Feb. 1982).
7.	Melis Consulting Engineers. "Radium Removal from
Canadian Uranium Mining Effluents by a Radium-
Selective Ion Exchange Complexer." Saskatoon, Sask.
(1984).
8.	Rozelle, R. E. et al. "Potable Water Radium Removal
Update on Tests in Missouri, Iowa and Wyoming by
the Dow Chemical Company." Internal Report, Dow
Chemical Company, Midland, Ml.
9.	Jongeward, C. K. "Radium and Barium Precipitation
from Ion Exchange Brines." M.S. thesis. Department
of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign, Urbana, IL (1984).
Bibliography
1.	Chambers, C. C. "Hardness, Barium and Radium
Removal from Groundwater by Strong-Acid Exchange
Resins." M.S. thesis. Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana,
IL (1984).
2.	Myers, A. G. "Calcium Cation Exchange with Brine
Reuse for Barium and Radium Removal." M.S. thesis,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL (1984).
3.	Myers, A. G., V. L. Snoeyink, and D. W. Snyder.
"Removing Barium and Radium Through Calcium
Cation Exchange." Journal American Water Works
Association, 77, 60 (May 1985).
4.	Pfeffer, J. L. "Equilibrium Studies of Barium Removal
from Groundwater by Weak-Acid and Strong-Acid Ion
Exchange Resins." M.S. thesis. Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Cham-
paign, Urbana, IL (1984).
5.	Richter, S. K. "Radium and Barium Removal from
Water with MnO2" Impregnated Resin and Fiber." M.S.
thesis. Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL (1984).
6.	Snoeyink, V. L., C. K. Jongeward, A. G. Myers, and
S. K. Richter. "Characteristics and Handling of Wastes
from Groundwater Treatment Systems." Proc.
Seminar on Experiences with Groundwater
Contamination, American Water Works Association,
Dallas, TX (June 10-14, 1984), Denver, CO (1984).
7.	Snyder, D. W. "Column Studies of Hardness, Barium
and Radium Removal from Groundwater by Weak-
Acid Ion Exchange Resins." M.S. thesis. Department
of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign, Champaign, IL (1984).
United States	Center for Environmental Research	BULK RATE
Environmental Protection	Information	POSTAGE & FEES PAIE
Agency	Cincinnati OH 45268	EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

-------