United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH, 45268
Research and Development
EPA/600/SR-92/117 Sept. 1992
i&EPA Project Summary
Inorganic Chemical
Characterization of Water
Treatment Plant Residuals
C. B. Bartley, P. M. Colucci, and T. Stevens
To achieve drinking water maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs) promulgated
by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), munici-
pal water treatment plants are using
efficient water treatment systems. The
contaminants removed by water treat-
ment technologies become concen-
trated in residuals such as chemical
sludges, brines, and wastewaters. In
order to determine the safest and most
economical way to dispose of water
treatment plant (WTP) wastes, the
chemical content of the residuals must
be characterized.
This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, to announce
key findings of the research project
that is fully documented in a separate
report of the same title (see Project
Report ordering information at back).
Introduction
Existing Regulations
Currently, wastewaters (containing non-
radioactive inorganic contaminants) dis-
charged to surface waters and storm sew-
ers are regulated under the Clean Water
Act (CWA). Sections 301 and 307 of the
CWA establish the minimum treatment
technologies required for industries that
want to discharge their wastewater into
surface waters. A permit to discharge pol-
lutants into surface waters must be ob-
tained under the National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System (NPDES). Al-
though the U.S. EPA drafted a document
establishing compliance guidelines for
drinking water facilities discharging waste-
water into surface waters and storm sew-
ers, EPA has not revised the document
nor established formal guidelines. Until the
U.S. EPA provides guidance to the water
treatment industry, the nonradioactive in-
organic effluent quality of wastewater dis-
charged from WTPs into surface waters
will continue to be regulated on a state-
by-state basis.
The disposal and recycling of WTP solid
wastes are regulated under the 1976 Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). Under RCRA, solid wastes are
defined as hazardous or non-hazardous
based on their chemical and physical
properties. Consequently, if sludges and
other solid wastes produced by water
treatment facilities have certain chemical
and physical properties, they can be de-
fined as hazardous. Because WTP wastes
are not specifically listed as hazardous
RCRA wastes, they must be tested to
determine if they possess at least one of
the following characteristics: ignitability,
corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity of leachate.
The characteristic of main concern for WTP
solids is the toxicity of leachate. Extracts
from solid wastes exceeding the concen-
trations listed in Table 1 exhibit the toxic-
ity characteristic.
In addition to nonradioactive inorganics,
there is also concern about the radium
concentrations of WTP wastes. The health
effects of radium are well documented;
the radionuclide poses the greatest health
concern when exposure occurs by inges-
tion because it replaces calcium in bones.
Once in place, radium can emit alpha
(Ra226) or beta (Ra228) particles which may
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Table 1. The Maximum Concentration of Con-
taminants for Toxicity Characteristics'
Contaminant Concentration (mg/L)
Arsenic (As)
Barium (Ba)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Cr)
Lead(Pb)
Mercury (Hg)
Selenium (3e)
Silver (Ag)
5.0
100.0
1.0
5.0
5.0
0.2
1.0
5.0
'June 29,1990 Federal Register.
increase the risk of cancer. Improper dis-
posal of radium containing wastes, aug-
mented by the long half-life of the radio-
nuciide (1,670/yr for Ra228 and 6.7/yr for
Ra228), could result in a long-term con-
tamination threat to the environment and
the accumulation of radium in the food
chain.
In 1990, the U.S. EPA published a docu-
ment "Suggested Guidelines for the Dis-
posal of Drinking Water Treatment Wastes
Containing Naturally Occurring Radionu-
clfdes." The document reviews the rel-
evant federal regulations and the corre-
sponding EPA guidelines for the disposal
of radium (and uranium) containing liquid
and solid wastes.
Previous Studies
Previous investigators of water treatment
technologies have expressed concern
about the residuals produced and their
disposal. In 1985, Snoeyink et al. charac-
terized the sludge, brine, and backwash
water from 10 water treatment plants. The
treatment processes included in the study
were 1) iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn)
removal, 2) lime softening, and 3) ion ex-
change (IX). The data showed that back-
wash water from Fe and Mn.removal plants
had Ra22* and Ra228 concentrations rang-
ing from 21.2 to 106 pCi/L and 5.7 to 20
pCi/L, respectively. Ra228 and Ra228 in lime
softening sludges ranged (on a dry weight
basis) from <1.2 to 21.6 pCi/g and <2.4 to
11.7 pCtyg, respectively. In ion exchange
brines, Ra22* concentrations were as high
as 217 pCi/L and 1.144 pCi/L.
In 1990, a study funded by the Ameri-
can Water Works Association Research
Foundation (AWWARF) examined the is-
sue of land application of water treatment
sludges. In the study, Elliot and his staff
chemically characterized water treatment
sludges. They found that the sludges
contained, by weight, 3% organic carbon
and 6% organic nitrogen. Trace metals
were found in concentrations less than
those found in sewage sludges. Based on
results obtained from the EPA's extraction
procedure toxicity test, the trace metals
that were present in the sludge were not
readily extractable.
The disposal cost of water treatment
residuals depends significantly upon their
toxicity, reactivity, corrosivity, or radioac-
tivity. The more hazardous the waste, the
greater the cost of disposal. Disposal costs
for various water treatment technologies
have been estimated based on theoretical
removal efficiencies and calculated levels
of residual contamination (Malcolm Pirnie
Inc.,1986). Laboratory bench-scale studies
of water treatment technologies have also
been used to predict levels of contami-
nants in sludge and to estimate disposal
costs.
There is no typical treatment plant and,
therefore, no typical treatment residual
produced. All plants adjust their operations
according to raw water quality, finished
water quality, and unforeseen conditions.
All of these variables can affect the quantity
of residual produced and the concentra-
tion of contaminants in the residual. Be-
cause of these operational and environ-
mental variables, lab-bench scale esti-
mates and theoretical mass balance com-
putations are limited by their assumptions
of uniform raw water qualities and consis-
tent treatment removal efficiencies. Waste
management procedures and policies
should not be made solely on these theo-
retical estimates.
Field verification is required to charac-
terize residuals produced at actual water
treatment plants. As evidence, barium and
radium in residuals collected from water
treatment plants in Illinois were found to
vary ten-fold from plant to plant (Snoeyink,
etal., 1985).
Study Objective
The purpose of this study was to char-
acterize the inorganic composition of wa-
ter treatment plant residuals and to define
the corresponding disposal practices. A
secondary objective was to view, where
possible, the residual characterizations in
light of current waste disposal regulations
and guidelines.
Procedures
Site Visits and Plant Selection
Visiting the WTPs was a critical step in
selecting plants suitable for the study.
During the visits, National Sanitation
Foundation (NSF) investigators toured the
facilities, reviewed plant schematics,
identified all waste handling operations and
waste disposal facilities, and reviewed
records of plant removal rates and other
relevant data. Sampling locations were
identified and, when possible, NSF col-
lected the first samples and trained WTP
personnel in proper sample collection
techniques. (Subsequent samples were
collected by WTP personnel.) The infor-
mation collected during the visits was used
to develop and write sampling and ana-
lytical plans.
The WTPs selected to participate in the
study had to meet several criteria. The
first criterion was that the plant's raw wa-
ter had to contain inorganic contaminants.
Whenever possible, plants with inorganic
concentrations exceeding the MCLs de-
fined in the National Primary Drinking
Water Regulation (NPDWR) were selected
and included in the study. The plant also
had to be a well operated facility that
achieved efficient contaminant removal
rates. This particular criterion guaranteed
the concentration of contaminants in the
plant residuals. Finally, the treatment pro-
cess had to be of a technology commonly
accepted by the water treatment incustry
to remove a specific contaminant. (For
example, lime/soda softening is a common
treatment method used to remove heavy
metals from raw water.) Table 2 lists and
describes the WTPs that participated in
the study.
Sampling and Analytical Plans
A sampling and analytical plan was de-
veloped for each WTP in the study. Each
plan was designed to assure the proper
collection, handling, and analysis of rep-
resentative samples.
Sampling Procedures
Sampling followed the EPA procedures
and methods set forth in "Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste, Volume II: Field
Manual Physical/Chemical Methods." This
field manual was also used for guidance
in sample handling and preservation. All
sample containers and equipment were
polyethylene to assure compatibility with
inorganic analytes.
Sample Handling and Sample
Preservation
Sample handling and sample preserva-
tion followed U.S. EPA guidelines as set
forth in "Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes." Samples were
shipped by overnight delivery service to
assure that sample holding times were
not exceeded.
Sample Preparation and
Sample Analysis
Sludge samples were separated into two
aliquots. One aliquot was filtered with a
0.6-0.8 u.m glass filter. The filtrate portion
-------
Table 2. Plants Selected to Participate in the Study
Plant
Name
Cincinnati-
California
Cincinnati-
Bolton
Elgin-
Riverside
Elgin-
Airlite
Confidential
Kaukauna
Charlotte
Harbor
Arrowbear1
Water
Processed Day
235 MOD
15 MOD
16MGD
7 MOD
18MGD
2 MOD
.5 MOD
.285 MGD
Raw
Water
Source
Surface water
Groundwater
Surface water
Groundwater
Groundwater
Surface water
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Contaminants
Inorganics from
urban run-off
Hardness
Inorganics from
urban run-off
Hardness, radium
Arsenic, hardness
Iron, radium
Total dissolved
solids, radium
Uranium
Process
Alum
coagulation/
filtration
Lime
softening
Coagulation/
filtration lime
treatment
Lime
softening
Ferric sulfate
precipitation
Synthetic
greensand
with KMnO4
Reverse
Osmosis
Anion
exchange
'Date from this plant will be compiled and published in a separate report by the U.S. EPA's Drinking
Water Division located in Cincinnati, OH.
(liquid) was preserved with HNO2 to pH<2;
the solid portion was kept unpreserved.
The second sludge aliquot was analyzed
by the TCLP procedure. To obtain the
TCLP extract that was analyzed for the
TCLP metals (As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Pb, Hg, Se,
and Ag), Method 1311 was followed as
written in the June 13,1986, Federal Reg-
ister (Volume 51, No. 114). Depending on
the analytical procedure, water samples,
filtrates, solids, TCLP extracts, brines, and
treatment chemicals were digested with
the appropriate acids. To determine levels
of total recoverable metals, inorganic an-
ions, and total suspended solids, NSF
laboratories followed EPA standard pro-
cedures. In addition, NSF laboratories and
data control monitored the accuracy of
the data with QC check samples and ma-
trix spikes.
Results
Tables 3 through 9 list the inorganic
concentrations that were found at detect-
able levels in samples of raw water, fin-
ished water, wastes, and TCLP extracts
collected from each of the plants. (Analy-
ses may have been conducted that are
not summarized in the tables.)
Discussion and Conclusions
The California Water Treatment Plant in
Cincinnati, OH, uses alum coagulation/
filtration to treat raw water obtained from
a surface water. Results from this study
(Table 3), indicated that finished water
As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Pb, Hg, Se, Cu, Fe, and
Mn concentrations were below their cur-
rent U.S. EPA National Primary and Sec-
ondary Drinking Water Regulation
(NPDWR and NSDWR) MCLs. Of the met-
als tested for in the sludge filtrate (liquid
portion of the sludge), Mn was the only
element that exceeded its drinking water
MCL. The sludge solid, on the other hand,
contained detectable levels of all of the
elements except for Se. Of the metals
analyzed for in the sludge solids, the high-
est mean concentrations were Al (30,000
mg/Kg), Ca (17,400 mg/Kg), Fe (6,200
mg/Kg), Mg (3,900 mg/Kg) and Mn (1,760
mg/Kg). The sludge produced during the
treatment of water is currently being dis-
charged into a surface water under a Na-
tional Pollutant Discharge Elimination Sys-
tem (NPDES) permit.
The Bolton Water Treatment Plant, also
located in Cincinnati, OH, uses lime soft-
ening technology to treat raw water ob-
tained from wells. As indicated by data in
Table 4, the plant's finished water As, Ba,
Cd, Cr, Pb, Hg, Se, Cu, Fe, and Mn mean
concentrations were below their respec-
tive primary and secondary MCLs. The
sludge filtrate concentrations of the same
metals were also below the primary and
secondary drinking water MCLs. The solid
portion of the sludge had mean total sus-
pended solids (TSS) of 22,700 mg/L. Cd,
Cr, Hg, Ni, and Se were found at non-
detectable levels in the sludge solids. Of
the elements tested for in the sludge sol-
ids, Ca (316,000 mg/Kg), Mg (11,400 mg/
Kg), Al (910 mg/Kg), Fe (544 mg/Kg), and
Ba (224 mg/Kg) had the highest mean
concentrations. Ba was the only metal
found at detectable levels in the toxicity
characteristic leachate procedure (TCLP)
extract. The Ba concentration was not high
enough to qualify the waste as hazardous
under the Resource Conservation Recov-
ery Act (RCRA). Sludge produced by the
Bolton plant is discharged to one of two
onsite lagoons.
The Riverside Water Treatment Plant in
Elgin, IL, uses lime softening and coagu-
lation/filtration to treat raw water obtained
from a surface water source. Data in Table
5 indicates that the plant's finished water
As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Pb, Hg, Se, Cu, Fe, and
Mn mean concentrations were below their
respective primary and secondary MCLs.
The sludge filtrate concentrations of the
same metals were also below the primary
and secondary drinking water MCLs. Of
the 16 inorganics analyzed for, 13 were
found at detectable levels in the solid
portion of the sludge. Of these 13 chemi-
cals, Ca (250,000 mg/Kg), Mg (31,000
mg/Kg), Al (2,000 mg/Kg), and Fe (1,600
mg/Kg) were detected at the highest con-
centrations. The mean Ra226 concentra-
tion in the sludge solids was 4.6 pCi/L.
Although Ba (0.423 mg/L) and As (0.004
mg/L) were found in the TCLP extracts,
the waste would not qualify as hazardous
under the RCRA. Sludge from the River-
side plant is currently directed to four ex-
cavated pits five miles away from the plant.
One pit, the decant cell, receives super-
natant from the other four pits. Superna-
tant from the decant cell is discharged to
a surface water. When one of the four pits
is filled, it is left to dry and then covered
with two feet of soil to form a permanent
landfill.
The Airlite Water Treatment Plant in
Elgin, IL, uses lime softening technology
to treat raw water obtained from deep
wells. Data in Table 6 indicates that fin-
ished water and sludge filtrate As, Ba, Cd,
Cr, Pb, Hg, Se, Cu, Fe, and Mn concen-
-------
Mean Inorganic Concentrations in Samples from the California Water Treatment
Plant' (Cincinnati, OH)
Al
As
Ba
Cd
Ca
Cr
Cu
Fe
Pb
Mg
Mn
Hg
Ni
So
Ag
TSS
Raw Water
(N*18) mg/L
1.46
ND
0.09
ND
34
ND
0.019
2.47
0.002
9.8
0.54
ND
0.089
ND
0.002
NA
Finished Water
(N= 18) mg/L
ND
ND
0.049
ND
40.0
ND
0.005
0.052
ND
9.7
ND
ND
0.100
ND
0.002
NA
Sludge Filtrate
(N=18) mg/L
ND
ND
0.15
ND
38
0.003
0.004
0.050
ND
10.2
0.837
ND
0.004
ND
0.001
NA
Sludge Solid
(N=18)mg/Kg
30,000
19
180
0.84
17,400
28
38
6,200
36
3,900
1,760
0.23
54
ND
1.08
6,200
'Alum coagulation/filtration plant
ND-Mean not calculated because of frequent non-detectable results; NA-Not analyzed.
Ttbto4. Mean Inorganic Concentrations Found in Samples from the Bolton Water Treatment
Plant'(Cincinnati, OH)
Al
As
Ba
Cd
Ca
Cr
Cu
Fa
Pb
Mg
Mn
Hg
Ni
So
Ag
TSS
Raw Water
(N=18)mg/L
0.11
ND
0.12
ND
92
0.003
0.012
0.10
ND
28
0.20
ND
0.038
ND
0.002
NA
Finished Water
(N=18) mg/L
0.11
ND
0.048
ND
32.0
0.002
0.006
0.048
0.001
25
0.017
ND
0.065
ND
0.003
NA
Sludge Filtrate Sludge Solid
(N= 18) mg/L (N= 18) mg/Kg
ND
ND
0.11
ND
22
0.003
0.002
0.06
0.001
16
ND
ND
0.011
ND
0.001
NA
910
1.2
224
ND
316,000
ND
1.8
544
0.41
11,400
740
ND
ND
ND
0.282
22,700
TCLP Extract
(N=18)mg/L
NA
ND
0.50
0.001
NA
0.005
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
'Ume softening plant.
ND-Maan not calculated because of frequent non-detectable results; NA-Not analyzed.
trattons were below their current EPA
NPDWR and NSDWR MCLs. The solid
portion of the sludge contained the follow-
ing mean concentrations: Ca (310,000 mg/
Kg), Ba (18,000 mg/Kg), Mg (11,200 mg/
Kg), and Fe (4,300 mg/Kg). Ba (0.20 mg/
L) and Cd (0.001 mg/L) were the only two
metals detected in the TCLP extract. Nei-
ther of these concentrations qualify the
waste as hazardous under the RCRA. The
sludge produced by this plant is discharged
to two onsite lagoons, partially dewatered,
and then trucked to the same excavated
pits used by the Riverside plant.
A water treatment plant located in the
midwest uses ferric sulfate coagulation to
treat a combination of surface and well
water. One of the wells was contaminated
with As by a local industry. The data for
this plant is presented in Table 7. The
mean As concentration of six finished
water samples was 0.12 mg/L, which is
below the current primary drinking water
MCL. The mean As concentrations in the
composite sludge filtrate was 0.017 mg/L.
The mean As concentrations in the com-
posite sludge solid was 5,880 mg/Kg. Al-
though Ba and As were detected in the
TCLP extracts, their concentrations were
not sufficient to qualify the contact tank
sludge as hazardous under the RCRA.
The sludge that was analyzed is combined
with sludge produced at other points of
the treatment process. The combined
sludge is disposed of in two onsite la-
goons.
The Kaukauna Water Treatment Plant
located in Kaukauna, Wl, treats well water
with a sand/anthracite filter and a sand/
anthracite filter that has been coated with
a synthetic greensand chemical. The
coated filter and potassium permanganate
pretreatment system were installed as a
result of high radium levels in one of the
wells. Based on data collected in this study
(Table 8) and the volume of finished wa-
ter processed by each filter, the mean
total radium (Ra226 and Ra228) concentra-
tion of the plant finished water was calcu-
lated to be 5.6 pCi/L, which exceeds the
current MCL by 0.6 pCi/L. The Ra226 and
Ra228 concentrations in the backwash
samples were 52.5 pCi/L and 47.5 pCi/L,
respectively. The backwash from both
filters is discharged to a wastewater treat-
ment plant. Consequently, the total ra-
dium content of the wastewater must com-
ply with the State of Wisconsin's Radia-
tion Protection Code. The total radium con-
centration in the wastewater from the plant
did not exceed the state's radiation pro-
tection code. The synthetic greensand fil-
ter and the iron removal filter removed
27% and 25%, respectively, of the total
radium in the raw water. Both of these
percentages are considerably lower than
radium removal efficiencies achieved by
similar technologies. Higher radium re-
moval efficiencies will result in backwash
radium concentrations that are higher than
what is reported in this study.
The Charlotte Harbor Water Associa-
tion located in Harbor Heights, FL, uses
reverse osmosis (RO) to treat well water.
As indicated in Table 9, the mean con-
centration of Ra226 in the raw water was
14.3 pCi/L. The finished water produced
by the plant had a mean Ra226 concentra-
tion of 1.2 pCi/L. The percent of Ra226
rejected by RO at the plant was calculated
to be 91.6%, which indicates that the plant
was efficiently removing Ra226 from the raw
water. The reject water produced by the
plant is discharged to an adjacent canal.
Based on the data collected in this study,
the Ra226 concentration (not including the
corresponding Ra228 concentration) in the
backwash water would exceed EPA (and
NRC) suggested guidelines.
Recommendations
Additional WTPs need to be studied.
Only eight WTPs were included in this
study, and they are not necessarily repre-
sentative of all WTPs. The selection crite-
ria tended to include those WTPs that
produced residuals with very concentrated
-------
Tables.
Mean Inorganic Concentrations Found in Samples from the Riverside
Water Treatment
Plant' (Elgin, IL)
Al
As
Ba
Cd
Ca
Cr
Cu
Fe
Pb
Mg
Mn
Hg
Ni
Se
Ag
TSS
fla«s
pd/L
Raw Water
(N=19)mg/L
0.27
ND
0.08
ND
81
0.002
0.006
0.37
0.001
38
0.05
ND
0.003
ND
0.004
NA
0.23
Finished Water
(N= 18) mg/L
ND
ND
0.052
ND
35
0.002
0.003
0.053
ND
10.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.003
NA
0.25
Sludge Filtrate
(N=18)mg/L
0.18
ND
0.25
ND
27
0.002
0.004
0.04
ND
37
0.03
ND
0.002
ND
0.002
NA
.69
Sludge Solid
(N=14)mg/Kg
2,000
1.8
590
ND
250,200
2.8
5.3
1,600
1.5
31,000
250
ND
4.5
ND
0.39
43,000
4.6
TCLP Extract
mg/L (N=19)
NA
0.004
0.423
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
'Lime softening and coagulation/filtration plant.
ND-Mean not calculated because of frequent non-detectable results; NA-Not analyzed.
Table 6.
Al
As
Ba
Cd
Ca
Cr
Cu
Fe
Pb
t,Mf.
Mg
Mn
LJr*
Hg
Ni
Se
Ag
TSS2
Ra22*
pCi/L
Mean Inorganic Concentrations Found in Samples from theAirlite Water Treatment Plant'
(Elgin, IL)
Raw Water
(N=19)mg/L
0.12
ND
10
ND
60
ND
0.014
0.20
0.001
25
0.013
ND
0.078
ND
0.003
NA
3.2
Finished Water
(N=18)mg/L
ND
ND
0.74
ND
14
0.003
0.004
0.08
ND
20
ND
ND
0.08
ND
0.002
NA
0.57
Sludge Filtrate
(N=18)mg/L
0.15
0.003
0.43
ND
24
0.004
0.003
0.06
ND
54
0.05
ND
0.065
ND
0.001
NA
0.23
Sludge Solid
(N=14)mg/Kg
340
ND
18,000
ND
310,000
3.1
13.0
4,300
0.51
11,200
52
0.07
ND
ND
0.38
27,000
7.1
TCLP Extract
(N= 18) mg/L
NA
ND
0.2
n nm
\j.\j\j i
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
Elliott, H.A., Dempsey, B.A., Hamilton,
D.W., and DeWolfe, J.R. Land Appli-
cation of Water Treatment Sludges:
Impacts and Management. Denver,
CO: AWWA Research Foundation,
[1990].
Malcolm, Pirnie, Inc. "Draft: Technologies
and Costs for the Treatment and Dis-
posal of Waste By-Products from
Water Treatment for the Inorganic and
Radioactive Contaminants." Wash-
ington, DC: 1986 (Prepared for the
U.S. EPA, Science and Technology
Branch, Criteria and Standards Divi-
sion, Office of Drinking Water).
EPA. Test Method for Evaluating Solid
Waste Volume II: Field Manual
Physical/Chemical Methods. 3rd Ed.
Washington, DC: U.S. EPA, Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sponse, 1986.
EPA. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste Volumes IA, IB, and 1C: Labo-
ratory Manual Physical/Chemical
Methods. 3rd Ed. Washington, DC:
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, 1 986.
EPA. Test Method for Evaluating Solid
Waste Volume II: Field Manual
Physical/Chemical Methods. 3rd Ed.
Washington, DC: U.S. EPA, Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sponse, 1986.
EPA. Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes. Cincinnati, OH:
U.S. EPA, Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory, 1 983.
EPA. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste Volumes IA, IB, and 1C: Labo-
ratory Manual Physical/Chemical
Methods. 3rd Ed. Washington, DC:
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, 1 986.
This report was submitted in fulfillment
of Contract No. CR-81 4538-01-0 by NSF
International under the sponsorship of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
'Lime softening plant.
ND-Mean not calculated because of frequent non-detectable results; NA-Not analyzed.
contaminants. A study is recommended
that is more representative of typical WTP
operations.
Additional research should be conducted
to further characterize the residuals pro-
duced from WTPs that use IX, greensand,
and RO to treat raw waters containing
radium.
A mass balance study of a water treat-
ment plant using coagulation/flocculation
should be conducted to assess (quantify)
the role that treatment chemicals play in
the inorganic contamination of WTP re-
siduals.
References
Snoeyink, V.L, Jongeward, C.K., Meyers,
A.G., and Richter, S.K. Barium and
Radium in Water Treatment Plant
Wastes. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. EPA,
Water Engineering Research Labora-
tory, Office of Research and Devel-
opment, [1985].
5
-------
Ttbla 7. Mean Arsenic Concentrations Found in Samples from the Arsenic Removal
Treatment Plant'
Arsenic Units
Well r Raw Water
Raw Water from other Wells
Raw Wafer from Creek
Finished Water
Contact Tank1 Effluent
Contact Tank
Sludge Filtrate
Contact Tank
Sludge Solid
Ferric Sulfata
(Treatment Chemical)
TCLP Extracts
0.93 (N=6)
0.13(N=1)
0.004 (N=1)
0.012 (N=6)
0.42 (N=6)
0.017 (N=6)
5,880 (N=6)
ND (N=3)
0.016 (N=6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/L
'Ferric sulfate precipitation plant.
"Contact tank designed and built for the coagulation and settling of Well 7 raw water.
ND-Mean not calculated because of frequent non-detectable results.
Table 8. Mean Radium Concentrations Found in Samples from the Kaukauna Water Treatment Plant'
(Kaukauna, Wl)
Units
Won 8 Raw Water
Walls 4/5 Raw Water
Finished Water from the
Synthetic Greensand Coated Filter2
Finished Water from the Iron Removal Filter3
Synthetic Greensand Filter Backwash
Iron Removal Filter
Backwash
5.9 (N=6)
3.7 (N=6)
4.6 (N=6)
2.9 (N=6)
52.5 (N=24)
33.5 (N=24)
4.3 (N=2)
2.8 (N=3)
2.8 (N=1)
2.0 (N=3)
47.5 (N=4)
1 7.8 (N=7)
pd/L
pd/L
pCi/L
pd/L
pd/L
pd/L
'Synthetic greensand coated filter and iron removal filter plant.
'The synthetic greensand coated filter is used to treat water from Well 8.
3The iron removal filter is used to treat water from Wells 4/5.
T*blo 9. Mean Radium Concentrations Found in Samples from the
Charlotte Harbor Plant1 (Harbor Heights, FL)
Ra™
Units
Raw Water
Finished Water
Reioct Water (Brine)1
14.3 (N=4)
1.2 (N=12)
46.1 (N=9)
pd/L
pd/L
pCi/L
'Reverse osmosis plant.
'Flow weighted average.
•U.S. Government Printing Office: 1992— 648-080/60069
-------
-------
C. B. Bartley, P. M. Colucci, and T. Stevens are with NSF International, Ann
Arbor, Ml 48105.
T. Sorg is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "The Inorganic Chemical Characterization of
Water Treatment Plant Residuals," (Order No. PB92-198 563/AS; Cost:
$26.00, subject to change) will be available only from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
EPA/600/SR-92/117
------- |