EPA-440/I-74-Q20-a
 Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
 and New Source Performance Standards for the

 CATFISH, CRAB,  SHRIMP,
 AND  TUNA
 Segment of the Canned and
 Preserved Seafood Processing

 Point Source Category
                             June 1974
Q
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
      Washington, D.C. 20460

-------
               DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR
            EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS  GUIDELINES
             AND STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
                        FOR THE
     CATFISH,  CRAB, SHRIMP, AND  TUNA SEGMENTS OF
THE CANNED AND PRESERVED SEAFOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRY
                 POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
                   Russell E.  Train
                     Administrator

                     James L.  Agee
                Assistant Administrator
           for Water and Hazardous Materials
                      Allen Cywin
        Director, Effluent Guidelines Division
                   Elwood H.  Forsht
                    Project Officer
                       June  1974
             Effluent Guidelines Division
       Office of Water and  Hazardous Materials
         U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
               Washington, D.  C.  20460
          For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
                    Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $4.50

-------

-------
                            ABSTRACT
This report presents the findings of a study of  the  farm-raised
catfish, crab, shrimp, and tuna processing segments of the canned
and  preserved  seafood  processing  industry  for the purpose of
developing effluent limitations guidelines for point  source  and
and  new source standards of performance for new sources in order
to implement Sections 304, 306, and  307  of  the  Federal  Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (the Act).

The  seafood  processing plants included in this study were those
processing farm-raised catfish, crab,  shrimp  and  tuna.   Other
aquatic  and  marine species are the subject of a separate study,
which is to be published at a later date.

Effluent limitations guidelines are set forth for the  degree  of
effluent  reduction  attainable  through  the  application of the
"Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available" and the
"Best Available Technology Economically Achievable" which must be
achieved by existing point sources by July 1, 1977  and  July  1,
1983,  respectively.   The  "Standards  of  Performance  for  New
Sources" set forth  a  degree  of  effluent  reduction  which  is
achievable  through  the application of the best available demon-
strated control technology processes, operating methods or  other
alternatives.
The  effluent  limitations  to be met by July 1, 1977 and the New
Source Performance Standards are based on the best biological  or
physical-chemical treatment technology currently available.  This
technology  is  represented by aerated lagoons, activated sludge,
or dissolved air flotation.  The limitations to be met by July 1,
1983 are based  on  the  best  physical-chemical  and  biological
treatment  and  in-plant  control as represented by reduced water
use and enhanced treatment efficiencies in  pre-existing  systems
as well as new systems.

Supportative  data  and rationale for development of the effluent
limitations guidelines and standards of performance are contained
in this report.
                                  iii

-------

-------
                            CONTENTS

Section                                                     Page

     I.  CONCLUSIONS                                         1

    II.  RECOMMENDATIONS                                     3

   III.  INTRODUCTION                                        7

    IV.  INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION                             17

     V.  WASTE CATEGORIZATION                                93

    VI.  SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS                   199

   VII.  CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY                    217

  VIII.  COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER  QUALITY
           ASPECTS SUMMARY
                                                             297
    IX.  BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
           CURRENTLY AVAILABLE, GUIDELINES  AND LIMITATIONS  321

     X.  BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY  ECONOMICALLY
           ACHIEVABLE, GUIDELINES AND LIMITATIONS           329

    XI.  NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
           AND PRETREATMENT STANDARDS                        337

   XII.  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS                                     341

  XIII.  REFERENCES                                          343

   XIV.  GLOSSARY                                            367

         Appendix A:  Bibliography  - Air Flotation Use
                      Within the Seafood Industry           379

         Appendix B:  Bibliography  - Air Flotation Use
                      Within the Meat and Poultry Industry  383

         Appendix C:  List of  Equipment Manufacturers       385

-------

-------
                             FIGURES
Number

1        Source and disposition of edible fishery
           products                                         9
2        Typical seafood process diagram                    10
3        General location of fish and shellfish plants
           sampled                                          12
4        General location of fish and shellfish plants      13
           sampled
5        Catfish process                                    21
6        Catfish production rates and flow ratios           26
7        Catfish production rates and BOD5_ ratios           27
8        Catfish production rates and suspended
           solids ratios                                    28
9        Crab production rates and flow ratios              31
10       Crab production rates and BOD5 ratios              32
11       Crab production rates and suspended solids
           ratios                                           33
12       Conventional blue crab process                     36
13       Mechanized blue crab process                       41
14       King and tanner crab frozen meat process           45
15       King and tanner crab canning process               47
16       King and tanner crab section process               50
17       Alaska and west coast shrimp freezing process      62
18       Alaska and west coast shrimp canning process       63
19       Shrimp production rates and flow ratios            70
20       Shrimp production rates and BOD5 ratios            7]
21       Shrimp production rates and suspended solids
           ratios                                           72
22       Southern non-breaded shrimp canning process        79
23       Breaded shrimp process                             80
24       Supply of canned tuna                              82
25       Tuna process                                       84
26       Tuna production rates and flow ratios              go
27       Tuna production rates and BOD5 ratios              91
28       Tuna production rates and suspended solids
           ratios                                           92
29       Conventional meal plant capital costs              225
30       Continuous fish reduction plant with soluble
           recovery and odor control                        226
31       Low cost batch reduction facility                  228
32       Brine-acid extraction process                      231
33       Brine-acid extraction primary facility costs
           (excluding dryer)                                232
3U       Enzymatic hydrolysis of solid waste                234
35       Chitin-chitosan process for shellfish waste
           utilization                                      236
36       Approximate investment for extracting basic        237
           chemicals from shellfish waste
                                vii

-------
                           FIGURES (Cont'd)
Number                                                          Page
37       Increase  in waste loads through  prolonged
           contact with water                                   241
38       Typical horizontal drum rotary screen                  242
39       Typical tangential screen                              246
40       Typical screen system  for  seafood  processing
           operations                                           247
41       Typical dissolved air  flotation  system for seafood
           processing operations                                257
42       Dissolved air flotation unit                           258
13       Removal efficiency of  DAF  unit used in Louisiana
           shrimp  study -  1973  results                          265
44       Air flotation efficiency versus  influent COD
           concentration for various seafood wastewaters       266
45       Typical extended  aeration  system for seafood
           processing operations                                269
46       Removal rate of filtered BOD in  a  batch aeration
           reactor                                             270
47       Removal rate of unfiltered BOD in  a batch
           aeration reactor                                    271
48       Typical aerated lagoon system                          276
49       Catfish processing, initial treatment                  282
50       Catfish processing, oxidation  pond alternative        283
51       Catfish processing, spray  irrigation alternative      284
52       Alaska crab processing, aerated  lagoon biological
           alternative                                          286
53       Alaska physical treatment  alternative, remote
           plants  with adequate flushing  available             288
54       Tuna processing treatment                              294
55       Catfish treatment efficiencies and costs              310
56       Conventional blue crab treatment efficiencies
           and costs                                            311
57       Mechanized blue crab treatment efficiencies
           and costs                                            312
58       Alaska crab meat  treatment efficiencies
           and costs                                            313
59       Alaska crab whole and  sections treatment
           efficiencies and costs                               314
60       Dungeness and tanner crab  other  than Alaska
           treatment efficiencies and costs                    315
61       Alaska shrimp treatment efficiencies and costs        315
62       Northern  shrimp treatment  efficiencies
           and costs                                            317
63       Southern  non-breaded  shrimp treatment  efficiencies
           and costs                                            318
64       Breaded shrimp treatment efficiencies  and costs       319
65       Tuna treatment efficiencies and  costs                  320

-------
                             TABLES
Table
Number                                                    Page

1        July 1, 1977 Guidelines                            4
2        July 1, 1983 Guidelines                            5
3        New Source Performance Standards                   6
4        Total supplies of catfish in the U.S.
         1963-68, with production projection
         estimates 1969-1975                                19
5        Proximate analysis of raw catfish offal            23
6        Offal from tank-raised channel catfish             24
7        Catfish offal from cage-cultured channel
           catfish                                          24
8        Catfish processing waste water characteristics     25
9        Recent Alaska crab catches  (NOAA-NMFS)             5]
10       Typical crab waste composition                     52
11       Alaskan shrimp wastes, 1967                        50
12       Composition of shrimp waste                        55
13       Recent shrimp catches                              73
14       Shrimp products, 1970                              74
15       New England shrimp landings, 1965-1969             75
16       Catfish process material balance                   99
17       Catfish process summary  (5 plants)                 100
18       Catfish process  (plant 1)                          ]Q2
19       Catfish process  (plant 2)                          103
20       Catfish process  (plant 3)                          ]04
21       Catfish process  (plant 4)                          105
22       Catfish process  (plant 5)                          106
23       Conventional blue crab process material balance    IQQ
24       Conventional blue crab process summary  (2 plants)  109
25       Conventional blue crab process (plant 1)           -J-JQ
26       Conventional blue crab process (plant 2)           IT]
27       Mechanized blue crab process material balance      113
28       Mechanized blue crab process summary  (2 plants)    ^4
29       Mechanized blue crab process (plant 3)
30       Mechanized blue crab process (plant 4)
31       Material Balance - Alaska tanner and king crab
           sections process and Alaska Dungeness crab
           whole cooks (without waste grinding)             -joi
32       Material Balance - Alaska tanner crab frozen
           and canned meat process (without waste grinding) 122
33       Material Balance - Alaska tanner and king crab
           sections process (with waste grinding)           103
34       Material Balance - Alaska tanner crab frozen
           and canned meat process (with waste grinding)    124
35       Alaska crab whole cook and section process
           summary—without grinding  (3 plants)             125
36       Alaskan crab whole cook and section process summary
           (including clean-up water) - without grinding
           (3 plants)

-------
                            TABLES (Cont'd)
                           	*	u                          Page

         Alaska crab frozen and canned meat process summary
          —without grinding                                       127
38       Alaska crab frozen and canned meat process summary
           (Including clean-up water) - without grinding           128
39       Alaska Dungeness crab whole cook process without
           grinding (plant K8)                                     129
40       Alaska Dungeness crab whole cook process without
           grinding (plant K1)                                     130
41       Alaska king crab sections process without grinding
           (plant K11)                                              131
42       Alaska tanner crab sections process without
           grinding (plant K6)                                     132
43       Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process with
           grinding (plant K6)                                     133
44       Alaska tanner crab canned meat process without
           grinding (plant K8)                                     134
45       Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process without
         grinding (plant S2)                                       135
46       Alaska crab section process summary with
           grinding (4 plants)                                     137
47       Alaska crab frozen and canned meat process
           summary with grinding  (4 plants)                        138
48       Alaska tanner crab sections process with
           grinding (plant K1)                                     139
49       Alaska tanner crab sections process with
           grinding (plant K3)                                     140
50       Alaska tanner crab sections process with
           grinding (plant K6)                                     141
51       Alaska tanner crab sections process with
           grinding (plant K11)                                    142
52       Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process with
           grinding (plant K1)                                     143
53       Alaska tanner crab frozen meat processs with
           grinding (plant K6)                                     144
54       Alaska tanner crab canned meat process with
           grinding (plant K8)                                     145
55       Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process with
           grinding (plant K10)                                    146
56       Material Balance - Oregon Dungeness crab whole and
           fresh-frozen meat process  (without  fluming wastes)      149
57       West Coast Dungeness crab process summary
           without shell fluming  (3 plants)                        150
58       West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and
           whole cook process  (plant  1)                            151
59       West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and
           whole cook process without shell fluming
            (plant 2)                                               152
60       West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and
           whole cook process without shell fluming
            (plant 3)                                               153
61       West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and
           whole cook process with shell fluming
            (plant 2)                                               154
62       West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and                  155

-------
                             TABLES (Cont'd)
Table                                                                Page
           whole cook process  with shell fluming
            (plant  3)                                                 155
63       Canned and  frozen Alaskan shrimp  material balance          157
6H       Alaska frozen  shrimp  process  summary (plants SI 5 K6)       153
65       Alaska frozen  shrimp  process  - Model PCA
         peelers  (plant Si)  -  sea water                             159
66       Alaska frozen  shrimp  process,  Model PCA peelers
          (Plant Si)  —  seawater,  with  clean-up                      160
67       Alaska canned  shrimp  process  - Model A peelers
          (plant K2)  - fresh  water                                   161
68       Alaska canned  shrimp  process  - Model A peelers
          (plant K2)  - fresh  water,  with clean up                    162
69       Canned West Coast shrimp material balance                  165
70       West Coast  canned shrimp process  summary
            (2 plants)                                                166
71       West Coast  canned shrimp (plant 1)                          167
72       West Coast  canned shrimp (plant 2)                          168
73       Canned Gulf shrimp  material balance                        170
74       Gulf shrimp canning process summary (3 plants)              172
75       Gulf shrimp canning process (plant 1A)                      -]73
76       Gulf shrimp canning process (plant 1B)                      174
77       Gulf shrimp canning process (plant 2)                       175
78       Gulf shrimp process screened  (plant 3)                      176
79       Breaded Gulf shrimp - material balance                     172
80       Breaded shrimp process summary (2 plants)
81       Breaded shrimp process (plant 1)
82       Breaded shrimp process (plant 2)
83       Tuna process material balance                              125
8H       Tuna process summary  (9  plants)                             126
85       Tuna process  (plant 1)                                      127
86       Tuna process  (plant 2)                                      122
87       Tuna process  (plant 3)
88       Tuna process  (plant 4)
89       Tuna process  (plant 5)
90       Tuna process  (plant 6)
91       Tuna process  (plant 7)
92       Tuna process  (plant 8)
93       Tuna process  (plant 9)
9U       Percent of  total plant waste  by unit process for
            5-day BOD and suspended solids                            ig7
95       Proximate composition of whole fish, edible
            fish and  trimmings  of dover sole                         221
96       Northern  sewage screen test results                        244
97       SWECO concentrator  test results                            244
98       SWECO vibratory screen performance on salmon
            canning wastewater                                        244
99       Tangetial screen performance                                248
100      Gravity clarification using F-FLOK coagulant               251
101      Results of  dispersed  air flotation on tuna
            wastewater                                                251
102      Efficiency  of  EIMCO flotator  pilot plant on
            tuna wastewater                                           260
103      Efficiency  of  EIMCO flotator  full-scale plant
            on tuna wastewater                                        260
                                XI

-------
                             TABLES (Cont'd)

                                                                   Page
         Efficiency of Carborundum pilot plant on Gulf
           shrimp wastewater                                        262
         Efficiency of Carborundum pilot plant on Alaska
           shrimp wastewater                                        262
         Efficiency of Carborundum pilot plant on menhaden
           bailwater                                                263
         Efficiency of full-scale dissolved air flotation
           on sardine wastewater                                    263
         Efficiency of full-scale dissolved air flotation
           on Canadian seafood wastewater                           264
109      Activated sludge pilot plant results                       272
110      Efficiency of Chromaglas package plant on
           blue crab and oyster wastewater                          272
111      Equipment efficiency and design assumptions                280-281
112      Estimated practicable in-plant waste water
           flow reductions, and associated pollutional
           loadings reductions                                      298
113      Treatment efficiencies and costs                           299-303
114      1971 Seattle constructions costs                           395
115      U. S. Army Geographical index                              306
116      Operation and Maintenance costs                            307
117      July 1, 1977 Guidelines                                    324
118      July 1, 1983 Guidelines                                    330
119      New source Performance Standards                           333
                                xn

-------
                            SECTION I

                           CONCLUSIONS
For the purpose of establishing effluent  limitations  guidelines
for  existing  sources  and  standards  of  performance  for  new
sources, the farm-raised catfish, crab, shrimp and tuna  segments
of  the  canned  and  preserved  seafood  processing industry are
divided into fourteen subcategories:

    a)   Farm-Raised Catfish Processing
    b)   Conventional Blue Crab Processing
    c)   Mechanized Blue Crab Processing
    d)   Non-Remote Alaskan Crab Meat Processing
    e)   Remote Alaskan Crab Meat Processing
    f)   Non-Remote Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Section Processing
    g)   Remote Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Section Processing
    h)   Dungeness and Tanner Crab Processing in the Contiguous
        States
    i)   Non-Remote Alaskan Shrimp Processing
    j)   Remote Alaskan Shrimp Processing
    k)   Northern Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States
    1)   Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous
        States
    m)   Breaded Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States
    n)   Tuna Processing.

The major criteria for the establishment of the subcategories were:

    1)   variability of raw material supply;
    2)   variety of the species being processed;
    3)   degree of preprocessing;
    
-------
respective waste water constituents within the industry.  Because
waste treatment, in-plant waste reduction, and  effluent  manage-
ment  are  in  their  infancy in this industry, rapid progress is
expected to be made in the near future.

-------
                           SECTION II

                         RECOMMENDATIONS
Effluent limitations for discharge to navigable waters are  based
in  general  on  the  characteristics of well-operating screening
systems, dissolved air flotation units, and biological  treatment
systems.   Parameters  designated to be of significant importance
to warrant their routine monitoring in this industry,  are  5-day
biochemical  oxygen  demand  (BOD£), total suspended solids  (TSS),
oil and grease  (OSG), and pH.

The 1977 effluent limitations are presented in Table 1; The  1983
limitations, in Table 2; and new source performance standards, in
Table 3.

-------
                                  Table   1
July 1, 1977 Guidelines
      Subcategory
A    Farm-Raised Catfish
B    Conventional Blue Crab
C    Mechanized Blue Crab
D    Non-Remote Alaskan
     Crab Meat
E    Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
F    Nbn-Reraote Alaskan Whole
     Crab and Crab Sections
G    Remote Alaskan Whole
     Crab and Crab Sections
H    Dungeness + Tanner Crab
     in the Contiguous States
I    Non-Remote Alaskan
     Shrimp
J    Ranote Alaskan Shrimp
K    Northern Shrimp
L    Southern Non-Breaded
M    Breaded Shrimp
N    Tuna
Technology
Basis
S, GT
S, GT
S, GT
S, GT
Cortcninutors
S, GT
Cominutors
S, GT
S
Conminutors
S
S
S
S, DAF
Parameter (kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs liveweight processed)
BOD
Max 30-day Daily
Average Max
_ _
-
-
— —
* *
- -
* *
-
-
* *
- -
-
- -
9.0 23

Max 30-day
Average
9.2
0.74
12
6.2
*
3.9
*
2.7
210
*
54
38
93
3.3
TSS
Daily
Max
28
2.2
36
19
*
12
*
8.1
320
*
160
114
280
8.3

Max 30-day
Average
3.4
0.20
4.2
0.61
*
0.42
*
0.61
17
*
42
12
12
0.84
O+G
Daily
Max
10
0.60
13
1.8
*
1.3
*
1.8
51
*
126
36
36
2.1
          * No pollutants may be discharged which exceed 1.27 on (0.5 inch)  in any
            dimension.
            S = screen;  GT = simple grease traps;  DAF = dissolved air flotation;

-------
                                  Table  2
                  July  1, 1983 Guidelines
      Subcategory
A     Farm-Raised Catfish
B     Conventional Blue Crab
C     Mechanized Blue Crab
D     Non-Remote Alaskan
      Crab Meat
E     Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
F     Non-Remote Alaskan Whole
      Crab and Crab Sections
G     Remote Alaskan Whole
      Crab and Crab Sections
H     Dungeness + Tanner Crab
      in the Contiguous States
I     Non-Remote Alaskan
      Shrimp
J     Remote Alaskan Shrimp
K     Northern Shrimp
L     Southern Non-Breaded
      Shrimp
M     Breaded Shrinip
N     Tuna
Technology
Basis
S, GT, AL
S, GT, AL
S, GT, AL, IP
S, DAF, IP

S, GT, IP
S, DAF, IP

S, GT, IP

S, DAF, IP

S, DAF, IP

S, IP
S, DAF, IP
S, DAF, IP

S, DAF, IP
S, DAF, AS, IP
Parameter (kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs liveweight processed)
BOD
Max 30-day
Average
2.3
0.15
2.5
2.0
1.3
-
1.7
28
27
10
17
0.62
Daily
Max
4.6
0.30
5.0
5.0
3.3
-
4.3
71
68
25
43
2.2
TSS
Max 30-day
Average
5.7
0.45
6.3
0.53
5.3
0.33
3.3
0.23
18
180
4.9
3.4
7.4
0.62
Daily
Max
11
0.90
13
1.3
16
0.83
9.9
0.58
46
270
12
8.5
19
2.2
OK3
Max 30-day
Average
0.45
0.065
1.3
0.82
0.52
0.048
0.36
0.07
1.5
15
3.8
1.1
1.0
0.077
Daily
Max
0.90
0.13
2.6
0.21
1.6
0.12
1.1
0.18
3.8
45
9.5
2.8
2.5
0.27
           S = screen;  GT = simple grease trap;  Al = aerated lagoon;  IP = in-plant change;
           DAF = dissolved air flotation; AS = activated sludge system

-------
                                  Table  3
                                                     New Source Performance Standards
     Subcategory
 A   Farm-Raised Catfish
 B   Conventional Blue Crab
 C   Mechanized Blue Crab
 D   Non-Remote Alaskan
     Crab Meat
 E   Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
 F   Non-Remote Alaskan Whole
     Crab and Crab Sections
, G   Remote Alaskan Whole
     Crab and Crab Sections
 H   Dungeness + Tanner Crab
     in the Contiguous States
 I   Non-Remote Alaskan
     Shrimp
 J   Remote Alaskan Shrimp
 K   Northern Shrimp
 LU  Southern Non-Breaded
     Shrimp
 M   Breaded Shrimp
 N   Tuna
         S = screen;  GT = simple grease trap;  Al
         DAF = dissolved air flotation
Technology
Basis
Parameter

(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs
BOD
Max 30-day Daily
Average Max
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
s,
GT,
GT,
GT,
GT,
GT,
GT,
GT,
DAF
IP
IP
DAF
DAF
DAF
DAF
AL
AL
AL, IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
, I?


, IP
, IP
, IP
, IP
2.3
0.15
2.5
-
_
-
-
4.1
-
-
62
25
40
8.1
4.6
0.30
5.0
-
—
-
-
10
-
-
155
63
100
20


Max 30-day
Average
5
0
6
5
5
3
3
0
180
180
15
10
22
3
.7
.45
.3
.3
.3
.3
.3
.69





.0
liveweight
TSS
Daily
Max
11
0.90
13
16
16
9.9
9.9
1.7
270
270
38
25
55
7.5
processed)


0+G

Max 30-day Daily
Average Max
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
15
15
5
1
1
0
.45
.065
.3
.52
.52
.36
.36
.10


.7
.6
.5
.76
0
0
2
1
1
1
1
0
45
45
14
4
3
1
.9
.13
.6
.6
.6
.1
.1
.25



.0
.8
.9
aerated lagoon; IP = in-plant change;

-------
                           SECTION III

                          INTRODUCTION
Section  301(b)  of  the  Federal  Water  Pollution  Control  Act
Amendments of 1972 (the Act)  requires  the  achievement  by  not
later  than  July  1,  1977,  of  effluent  limitations for point
sources, other than publicly owned  treatment  works,  which  are
based   on  the  application  of  the  best  practicable  control
technology currently available as defined  by  the  Administrator
pursuant  to  Section  304 (b)  of  the  Act.  Section 304(b) also
requires the achievement by not  later  than  July  1,  1983,  of
effluent limitations for point sources, other than publicly owned
treatment  works,  which are based on the application of the best
available technology economically achievable which will result in
reasonable  further  progress  toward  the   national   goal   of
eliminating  the  discharge  of  all pollutants, as determined in
accordance with regulations issued by the Administrator  pursuant
to  Section  304(b)   of the Act.  Section 306 of the Act requires
the  achievement  by  new  sources  of  a  Federal  standard   of
performance  providing  for  the  control  of  the  discharge  of
pollutants  which  reflects  the  greatest  degree  of   effluent
reduction  which  the  Administrator  determines to be achievable
through  the  application  of  the  best  available  demonstrated
control   technology,  processes,  operating  methods,  or  other
alternatives, including, where practicable, a standard permitting
no discharge of pollutants.

Section 304(b)  of the Act requires the Administrator  to  publish
within  one  year  of enactment of the Act, regulations providing
guidelines for effluent limitations setting forth the  degree  of
effluent reduction attainable through the application of the best
practicable control technology currently available and the degree
of  effluent  reduction attainable through the application of the
best  control  measures  and   practices   achievable   including
treatment   techniques,   process   and   procedure  innovations,
operational methods  and  other  alternatives.   The  regulations
proposed   herein   set  forth  effluent  limitations  guidelines
pursuant to  Section  304(b)  of  the  Act  for  the  canned  and
preserved  seafoods  source  category.   Section  306  of the Act
requires the Administrator,  within one year after a  category  of
sources  is  included  in  a  list  published pursuant to Section
306(b)(1)(A) of the  Act,  to  propose  regulations  establishing
Federal  standards  of  performances  for new sources within such
categories.  The Administrator published in the Federal  Register
of  January  16,  1973  (38  F.R.  1624),  a  list  of  27 source
categories.  Publication of the list constituted announcement  of
the Administrator's intention of establishing, under Section 306,
standards of performance applicable to new sources for the canned
and preserved seafoods source category, which was included in the
list  published  January  16,  1973   (38 F.R. 1624) , a list of 27

-------
source  categories.   Publication  of   this   list   constituted
announcement  of  the  Administrator's intention of establishing,
under Section 306, standards of  performance  applicable  to  new
sources within the seafood industry category as delineated above,
which was included within the list published January 16, 1973.


Industry Background

The  seafood industry in the United States is an integral part of
the food processing industry.  The processors have been expanding
and improving methods of production from the days of  drying  and
salt   curing   to  modern  canning  and  freezing.   Per  capita
consumption of fish and shellfish in 1972 was 5.5 kg (12.2  Ibs);
totaling  1,134,000  kkg  (1,250,000  tons)  in the United States.
The source and dispositon of seafood are shown in Figure 1.   The
total  value of these products in 1972, including animal feed and
other by-products, was a record $2.3 billion,  23  percent  above
the previous year  (N.M.F.S., 1973).

Regardless  of  the  method  of  preservation,  i.e., fresh-pack,
freezing, canning, or curing, the four segments of  the  industry
considered  in  this  study  (catfish, crab, shrimp and tuna)  use
variations of a  common  seafood  processing  method.   Figure  2
schematically  shows  the general steps in this method:  harvest,
storage,  receiving,   evisceration,   precooking,   picking   or
cleaning,  preservation  and  packaging.   The  following general
industry description is expanded in detail in Section IV for each
subcategory of the industry.  This general description serves  to
introduce the reader to the basic steps in seafood processing and
to  provide  a  basic  grasp of the processes prevalent among the
subcategories.

Catfish are raised in the southeastern United States;  processing
is  concentrated  in  Arkansas,  Georgia,  Alabama,  Florida  and
Mississippi.  In 1972,  farm-raised  catfish  production  totaled
35,400  kkg   (39,000  tons);  and wild catfish totaled 21,000 kkg
(23,000 tons).  The production of farm-raised catfish is  growing
rapidly, and has increased 180 percent since 1968.

The  blue  crab  industry  is located on the Eastern Seaboard and
Gulf Coast.  It comprises the largest crab landings in the U. S.;
65,800 kkg  (72,500 tons) were landed in 1972.  Alaska  king  crab
followed the blue crab with 33,600 kkg  (37,000 tons) landed.  The
Pacific  Coast  snow  (tanner)   and  Dungeness  crab catches were
approximately 12,700 kkg  (14,000 tons) in 1972  (N.M.F.S., 1973).

Shrimp are landed and processed on all three  U.  S.  coastlines.
In  1972  the  largest  U.  S.  commerical  landings, 103,400 kkg
(114,000 tons),  were  in  the  Gulf,  followed  by  the  Pacific
fisheries,  where landings totaled 48,100 kkg  (53,000 tons).  New
England and the South  Atlantic  had  landings  of  approximately
11,340 kkg  (12,500 tons) each in 1972.

-------
       SOURCE
 BEGINNING
  STOCKS
  IMPORTS
 DOMESTIC
PRODUCTION
               BEGINNING
                STOCKS
                            BILLION POUNDS
                            EDIBLE WEIGHT   DISPOSITION

                              — 3 .2	
                IMPORTS
                    DOMESTIC
                   PRODUCTION
                         _ 2-4 —
                         — 1.6
.8
                                          ENDING
                                          STOCKS
                                    EXPORTS
                                   DOMESTIC
                                 CONSUMPTION
                                                        ENDING
                                                        STOCKS
                                                 EXPORTS
                                                      DOMESTIC
                                                     CONSUMPTION
   1971
                      1972
         1971
1972
Figure
           Source and  disposition of edible fishery  products,

-------
                     HARVEST
                       1
                        I
                  PICKS CLEAN
 PRESERVE,
CAN, FREEZE
FRESH
                        I
                     MARKET
RECEIVE
\
i
PRE-PROCESS
«

EVISCERATE
i

PRE-COOK
                                          1
BY-PRODUCTS
  Figure    2     Typical seafood process diagram.
                      10

-------
The  tuna  industry,  like  shrimp, is highly mechanized.  United
States landings for tuna in 1972 were 237,700 kkg (262,000 tons).
Over 171,000 kkg (188,500 tons) of that total was landed  in  the
Atlantic,  Gulf  and  Pacific  Coast  states,  including  Hawaii.
Puerto Rico had landings of 66,700 kkg  (73,500  tons)  in  1972.
Significant   tonnages  of  tuna  are  purchased  from  Japanese,
Peruvian, and other foreign fishermen.  As a part of  this  study
the  wastes emanating from processing plants in each of the major
commodity areas of the United States were monitored.  The  plants
selected  for monitoring were representative of the industry from
several standpoints:  including size, age, level  of  technology,
and geographical distribution.  Figures 3 and 4 locate the plants
sampled.


general Procegs Description

Harvesting utilizes some of the oldest and newest technologies in
the industry.  It may be considered a separate industry supplying
the basic raw material for processing and subsequent distribution
to  the  consumer.   Harvest techniques vary according to species,
and consist of four general methods: netting, trapping, dredging,
and line fishing.  Fishing vessels utilize the latest  technology
for  locating  fish  and  shellfish  and harvest them in the most
expedient   and   economical   manner   consistent   with   local
regulations.   Once  aboard the vessel, the catch either is taken
directly to the  processor,  or  is  iced  or  frozen  for  later
delivery.

The  receiving operation usually involves three steps:  unloading
the vessel, weighing, and transporting by  conveyor  or  suitable
container  to  the  processing  area.  The catch may be processed
immediately or transferred to cold storage.

Preprocessing refers to the initial steps taken  to  prepare  the
various fish and shellfish for the processes that follow.  It may
include  washing  of  dredged  crabs,  thawing  of  frozen  fish,
beheading shrimp at sea, de-icing shrimp, and other operations to
prepare the fish for butchering.

Wastes from the butchering  and  evisceration  are  usually  dry-
captured,  or  screened from the waste stream, and processed as a
fishery by-product.

Except for the fresh market fish, some form of  cooking  or  pre-
cooking of the commodity may be practiced in order to prepare the
fish  or  shellfish  for  the  picking  and  cleaning  operation.
Precooking or blanching facilitates the removal  of  skin,  bone,
shell,  gills,  and  other  materials.   The steam condensate, or
stick water, from the tuna precook is often collected and further
processed as a by-product.

The fish is prepared in its final form by picking or cleaning  to
separate  the  edible  portions from non-edible portions.  Wastes
                                  11

-------
 LEGEND
0 SHRIMP
  CRAB
  CATFISH
     Figure    3    General location of fish and shellfish plants sampled.

-------
          LEGEND
          0 SHRIMP
          (|)CRAB
          (S) TUNA
Figure   4    •   General location  of  fish and shellfish  plants sampled.
                                  13

-------
generated during this procedure are usually collected  and  saved
for   by-product  processing.   Depending  on  the  species,  the
cleaning operation may be manual, mechanical, or a combination of
both.  With fresh fish and fresh shellfish, the meat  product  is
packed into a suitable container and held under refrigeration for
shipment  to  a  retail outlet.  If the product is to be held for
extended periods of time before  consumption,  several  forms  of
preservation  are  used  to  prevent spoilage caused by bacterial
action  and  autolysis:  freezing,  canning,  pasteurization  and
refrigeration.

Bacterial  growth  is  arrested at temperatures below -9°C  (16°F)
(Burgess, 1967).  For  this  reason,  freezing  is  an  excellent
method  of  holding uncooked fish for an extended period of time.
Freezing is  also  advantageous  because  the  meat  remains  es-
sentially  unchanged,  in  contrast  to canning, which alters the
product form.  However, autolysis still continues  at  a  reduced
rate,  necessitating  the consumption of the meat within approxi-
mately 6 months.  Storage times vary  from  species  to  species.
Blanching  prior to freezing inactivates many enzymes and further
slows autolysis.

Preservation by canning requires special equipment  to  fill  the
can,  add  preservatives  and seasonings, create a partial vacuum
and seal the can.  A partial vacuum is  necesary  to  avoid  dis-
tortion  of  the  can  due to increased internal pressures during
cooking.   After  sealing,  the  cans  are  washed  and  retorted
(pressure-cooked)  at  approximately  115°C   (240°F) for 30 to 90
minutes, depending on the can size.   Although  the  enzymes  are
inactivated at rather low temperatures, high temperatures must be
reached  to insure the destruction of harmful anaerobic bacterial
spores.  Clgstridium botulinum, the most harmful of  these,  must
be  subjected  to a temperature of 116°C (240°F) for at least 8.7
minutes  (Burgess, 1967).  A longer cooking time  is  employed  to
achieve  this  temperature throughout the can and to insure total
destruction of the bacteria.  After the cook, the can  is  cooled
with water and the canned fish or shellfish is transported to the
labeling room for casing and shipment.


Process Summary

Catfish

Sixty  percent  of  the  catfish  harvest  is  from farm ponds or
raceways; the rest are caught wild.  They are transported   alive,
iced,  or  "dry"   (without ice), to the processing plant.  At the
plant the fish are kept in live-holding tanks until ready  to  be
processed.   They are usually stunned by electrocution.  The fish
are then conveyed into the plant where the heads and dorsal  fins
are  removed.   They  are  then eviscerated and skinned.  A final
cleaning removes adhering skin, fins, and blood.   The  fish  are
weighed  and packaged according to size; larger fish are cut into
                               14

-------
steaks or filleted; smaller fish are packaged whole.  All catfish
are marketed fresh or frozen.

Solid wastes are subjected to rendering wherever  facilities  are
available.   Otherwise, they are deposited in landfills or dumps.
Wastewater treatment is usually not practiced.

Blue Crab

Harvesting of blue crab is accomplished by dredging them from the
mud, catching them with baited traps or lines, or  scraping  them
from  grassy  shores  during  the  molt.  Transported live to the
receiving  dock,  the  crabs  are  unloaded  into  trolleys   for
immediate  steam  cooking  at 121°C (250°F) for 10 to 20 minutes.
After storage overnight  in  a  cooling  locker,  the  claws  are
removed (and saved for mechanical processing or hand picking) and
the body of the crab is picked manually.  The meat is packed into
cans  or  plastic  bags.   In  the mechanized plant the claws and
sometimes the bodies, after removal of carapace and  "back  fin,"
are run through a mechanical picker which separates the meat from
the  shell.   The  meat  is then frequently canned, retorted, and
cased for shipment.  The select "back  fin"  is  hand  packed  in
cans, pasteurized, and refrigerated.

Other Crab

Dungeness,  tanner,  and  king crab are caught in baited pots and
generally stored onboard the vessel in circulating seawater.   In
Alaska,  where larger volumes of crab are caught, they are stored
in live tanks at the processing plant.  On the lower West  Coast,
where  catches  are  much smaller and consist mainly of Dungeness
crab, they are usually dry-stored and  butchered  early  the  day
after  delivery.   Most  plants  utilize  dry  butchering;  some,
however, employ fluming to  transport  shell  and  viscera.   The
crabs  are  then  cooked,  cooled,  picked, packaged, and stored.
Meat extraction  of  "sections"   (crab  halves)   is  done  either
manually or mechanically.  Mechanical picking is practiced mainly
in Alaska, using rollers or high-pressure water.  Hand picking is
performed  chiefly  on Dungeness and imported tanner crabs in the
lower West Coast states.  Meat that has been picked from the crab
is marketed either fresh,  frozen  or  canned.   Some  crabs  are
cooked and marketed without butchering.

Waste  from  crab  processing  is  rendered,  if  facilities  are
available.  Otherwise, it is hauled to  a  sanitary  landfill  or
discharged  to  the bay or to a municipal sewer, along with plant
sanitary wastes.

Shrimp

Shrimp are caught by trawlers, vessels  which  "drag"  the  ocean
with  large nets.  The shrimp are stored in ice until delivery to
the processor.  They are then de-iced, separated from debris, and
weighed.  The shell is peeled either  manually  or  mechanically.
                             15

-------
After  being  Gleaned  of debris the shrimp are usually blanched.
They are then either frozen or canned.  Variations of the process
among Alaskan, West, Gulf, and  Atlantic  Coast  shrimp  are  ex-
plained  in  Section  IV.   The shell and larger waste solids are
sometimes screened from the waste stream and either  rendered  at
another  facility  or  removed  to a sanitary landfill.  In other
instances,  the  solids  are  discharged  to  the  bay  with  the
untreated waste water.

Tuna

Tuna  are  harvested  by line or by net.  They are frozen onboard
the vessel and thawed (usually by salt water) at  the  processing
plant.   The  tuna  are  then  butchered,  precooked, cooled, and
cleaned, before being packed in cans.  Depending on the condition
of the cleaned tuna, the meat is graded as solid, chunk, or flake
style.  The cans are subsequently retorted, labeled,  cased,  and
shipped  to  the  retailer.   Viscera,  precooker stick water and
solid  wastes  are  further  processed  into  by-products.   Some
plants,  however,  do  not  practice  press-liquor or stick water
recovery.  Such plants discharge these liquids  to  local  waters
with their untreated process waste waters, or barge them to sea.
                                 16

-------
                           SECTION IV
                     INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION
INTRODUCTION

The  initial  categorization  of  this  segment  of  the  seafood
processing industry logically fell along commodity  lines.   That
is,  four  broad groups of subcategories were involved:  catfish,
crab, shrimp and tuna.  Beyond this general  breakdown,  however,
further fragmentation was necessary to develop subcategories of a
relatively  homogeneous nature, each of which could be considered
as a unit in the process of developing (and ultimately  applying!
effluent  limitations and standards.  The following variables, in
addition to type of seafood, were considered in  the  development
of subcategories:

    1.  variability in raw material supply;
    2.  condition of raw material on delivery to the
        processing plant;
    3.  variety of the species being processed;
    H.  harvesting method;
    5.  degree of preprocessing;
    6.  manufacturing processes and subprocesses;
    7.  form and quality of finished product;
    8.  location of plant (taking into account such factors
        as climatic conditions, terrain, soil types, etc.) ;
    9.  age of plant;
   10.  production capacity and normal operating level;
   11.  nature of operation (intermittent versus continuous);
   12.  raw water availability;
   13.  amenability of the waste to treatment.


It  remained  then  to  define  and establish subcategories whose
uniqueness dictated the  consideration  of  separate  limitations
based  on  the  variables listed above.  During the course of the
study, the importance of all  but  one  of  these  variables  was
confirmed.   The  only  variable  which  was found to have little
relationship to the ultimate development of subcategories was the
"age of the plant."  In the course of the field work,  it  became
obvious   that   within  a  given  industry,  either  1)   equally
antiquated processes were being  used  by  all  processors  (with
minor   modifications);   2)  older  plants  had  been  remodeled
periodically during the life of  the  industry  so  that  similar
processes  were  being employed in both old and new plants; or 3)
(as was the case with catfish) the industry  was  so  young  that
significant differences in plant age did not exist.

On  the  following pages will be found a description of the final
subcategorization of the four segments of  the  seafood  industry
considered  in   this  study.    Included  in each discussion is a
                                 17

-------
detailed description of the industry within  the  subcategory,  a
description  of  the  raw  materials used, end products produced,
methods and  variations  of  production,  and  a  review  of  the
rationale  for  its  designation as a separate unit.  Much of the
information  contained  in  the  initial  description   of   each
subcategory  is  based  on  an  updating of the original seafoods
"state of the art" report developed for EPA in 1970  (Soderquist,
et  al.,  1970), together with supplemental material gathered on-
site and  developed  through  extensive  communication  with  the
industry.

In  each  case,  a generalized flow diagram is presented for each
major component of the subcategory.  Variations on each of  those
general themes are then discussed in the text.


FARM-RAISED CATFISH PROCESSING (Subcategory A)


Background

Since 1963, the production of farm catfish has increased steadily
(see   Table   4) .   Four  species   (channel  catfish,  Ictalurus
jnmctatus;  blue  catfish,  Ictalurus  furcatus;  white  catfish,
iSi^iiiElii catus; an<3 brown bullhead catfish, Ictalurus nebulosus)
have  been  grown and managed successfully in ponds.  Catfish are
considered a delicacy in the southern and southcentral states and
markets have been  (and continue to  be)  expanding  rapidly.   In
1969,  the  total  harvest  was  38 million kilograms  (84 million
pounds)  (Jones, 1969).  The  National  Marine  Fisheries  Service
estimated  that  the  total  farm catfish production in 1975 will
reach 51 million kilograms (112.5 million pounds)  (Jones, 1969).

Continued high demand for the  finished  product,  together  with
improvements  in  production  technology,  have  stimulated rapid
growth of the catfish  processing  industry  over  the  past  few
years.   In  the  mid-1960's,  according  to  Mulkey  and Sargent
(1972), nearly all farm-raised catfish were sold  to  local  con-
sumers  or  were offered  (at a price) to local sport fishermen in
commercial "fish-out" lakes.   In 1970, sixteen processing  plants
were   operating  in  nine  states  and  processing  2.9  million
kilograms  (6.4 million pounds) of raw material annually  (Russell,
1972).  Today at least  thirty-seven  plants  are  in  operation,
mostly in Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas.
Processing

The  science  of  raising  catfish  involves  planting  six  inch
fingerlings which are fed a commercial ration  through  maturity.
For  detailed descriptions of catfish farming schemes, the reader
is directed to Barksdale  (1968) , Grizell, et al.   (1969),  Boussu
(1969),  and  Greenfield  (1969).  Harvesting is accomplished by a
preliminary seining of the rearing pond followed by  drainage  of
                              18

-------
Table  4     Total supplies of catfish in the D. S. 1963-68,
with production projections estimates 1969-1975 (Jones, 1969).
Wild
Catfish
Year
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
(kg x 106)
21.9
21.6
20.4
19.3
18.8
18.3
19.3
20.4
20.4
21.0
21.0
21.6
21.6
(Ib x 106)
(48. 3)
(47. 6)
(45.0)
(42.5)
(41.3)
(41.3)
(42. 5)
(45.0)
(45.0)
(46.3)
(46. 3)
(47.5)
(47.5)
Catfish
Imports
(kg x 106)
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.9
1.4
1.8
2.3
3.2
3.6
4.1
4.1
5.0
6.4
(Ib x 106)
( 0.5)
( 0.8)
( 1-0)
( 2.0)
( 3.0)
(4.0)
(5.0)
( 7.0)
( 8.0)
( 9.0)
(9.0)
(11.0)
(14.0)
Farm
Catfish
(kg x 106)
1.1
1.7
3.2
5.0
7.5
12.5
19.1
26.2
32.5
35.4
41.3
44.5
50.1
(Ib x 106)
( 2.4)
( 3.8)
( 7.0)
( 11.0)
( 16.5)
(27.5)
( 42.0)
( 57. 6)
( 71.5)
( 78.0)
( 91-0)
( 98.0)
(112.5)

-------
•the  pond  (during  dry  weather)  and  manual  collection of the
remaining fish lying in the bottom mud.  The fish  are  generally
shipped  alive  in  aerated  tank  trucks to the processing plant
where they are stored in holding tanks.  Live hauling  eliminates
the  need  for  meat preservation before processing but generates
the problem of disposal of the feces-contaminated holding  water.
Alternatively,  the  fish  are  packed  in ice and trucked to the
processing plant.  Local small producers frequently deliver their
fish dry  (and without ice) to the plant.  Figure  5  depicts  the
process used in the catfish industry.  The solid line depicts the
product flow, the single dashed line depicts waste water flow and
the  double dashed line depicts primarily waste solids flow.  The
twin beheading saws (band saws)  are followed by the  evisceration
table,  skinning  machines,  the  washing-rgrading  area  and  the
automatic  weigher-sorter.   A  typical  catfish  plant   employs
twenty-four  workers   (for one shift) and processes about 5000 kg
(11,000 Ibs)  of fish per eight-hour day.

The receiving area includes the holding tanks  and  the  stunning
tank,  which  may  or  may not be distinct from one another.  The
storage tanks require a non-chlorinated  water  supply  to  avoid
toxicity  to  the  fish.   Sufficient  dissolved  oxygen  must be
provided through  mechanical  aeration  or  high  water  exchange
rates.   Prior to stunning, most processors attempt to "cull out"
and discard dead fish.

Iced storage is more popular with processors who  must  transport
their  raw material long distances to the processing plant.  When
iced storage is used, the effluent load from the  receiving  area
is reduced.

When  processing begins, the live fish are first "stunned," which
involves electrocution in water-filled tanks or dewatered  cages.
This  method  of  killing  is  claimed  to  have the advantage of
concentrating most of the blood in the head,  thereby  minimizing
blood  loss  and  discoloration  of  the  flesh during subsequent
processing (Billy, 1969).  A possible disadvantage of this method
was pointed out by Mulkey  and  Sargent   (1972).   This  was  the
assumed  tendency  for the fish to defecate during stunning.  The
specific effects, however, of shocking on  meat  quality  and  on
waste production remain to be determined.

After stunning, the fish are butchered.  This process consists of
beheading, eviscerating, and skinning and can be either manual or
mechanical.   At  this  point,  under-size  and  "trash" fish are
discarded.   Catfish  have  traditionally  been  skinned   before
marketing.   This  is  necessary  to  reduce off-flavor in "wild"
catfish, but at least one writer questions the necessity to  skin
cultured catfish  (Billy, 1969).

In  some  plants  receiving  fish  on  ice rather than alive, the
beheading is preceeded by a pre-wash step that uses a significant
amount of water.  After loading onto a conveyor  belt,  the  fish
are spray-washed as they are transported into the plant.
                              20

-------




( CULL FISH )

1
|
II
II
I
II
ll
j' (HEADS, FINS)
(* —

(VISCERA)


(SKINS)
T
SOLIDS DISPOSAL









LIVE CATFISH FROM
POND OR RACEWAY
\


\
ELECTRICAL
STUNNING
1
B E-HEAD

i f


I
SKIN
1
CLEAN
a RINSE
1
SORT BY SIZE
1
PACK
1
FREEZE
OR
REFRIGERATE
1
SHIPPED TO
CUSTOMER




(FECES, WATER) _
"*!
l
1
i
1
1
i
l
1
i
1
1
(BLOOD, WATER) ^


(SLIME, WATER) '
1
1
1
(BLOOD, SOLIDS.WATERlj
|

1
1
(BLOOD, WATER) 1
	 ^
|
1
TO CITY SEWAGE
>~- SYSTEM OR LOCAL
t STREAM.

Figure  5
Catfish process.
             21

-------
Heads  are  usually  removed with conventional band saws or table
saws.  The solid wastes, including the decomposed and  under-size
fish, are dry-captured at many plants; water is required only for
periodic equipment cleaning.

Evisceration  is  accomplished  either  manually or with a vacuum
system.  In the latter case, after  the  body  cavity  is  opened
manually,  the  viscera  are  removed  by  vacuum "guns" and dry-
captured for subsequent rendering, incorporation into  pet  food,
or  burial for final disposal.  The manual method of evisceration
is slower  than  the  vacuum  system.   Whether  evisceration  is
mechanical  or  manual,  the  majority  of  plants do employ dry-
capture of the viscera for ultimate disposal.

Skinning is done either manually or mechanically;  however,  even
the mechanical systems require considerable manual input.  Manual
skinning  involves  impaling of the carcass on a hook suspended a
few feet above the work area and stripping of the skin  from  the
carcass  using  a pliers-like tool.  Mechanical skinning involves
running the fish (manually)   over  a  planer-like  machine  three
times  (once for each side and once for the back)  and abrading and
pulling  the  skin  from  the  body  of  the fish.  Surprisingly,
mechanical skinning increases the product yield a  small  amount.
This  is  because  manual  skinning tears off the abdominal flesh
along with the skin, whereas mechanical skinning does not.  Skins
are either flumed to the main waste stream or are trapped at  the
skinner in a basket-type screen and dry-captured.

A  third  method of skinning, using sodium hydroxide, is still in
the research stage.  Development of the technique,  analogous  in
some  ways  to the "dry caustic" peeling method now being adopted
in the fruit and vegetable processing industries, is under way at
Mississippi  State   University    (Lorio,   1973).    Large-scale
acceptance of the method by the industry in the next few years is
not anticipated.

After  butchering,  pieces  of adhering skin and fins are removed
and the fish are manually or automatically washed, where the body
cavities are scrubbed with rotating brushes, and subjected  to  a
final  rinse.   From  this  point, they are graded and inspected.
After cleaning, the fish are sorted by weight and generally those
under 0.45 kg  (one pound) are packed in weight groups on ice  and
refrigerated  or frozen to await shipment.  Some plants, however,
package individual fish in trays and seal them in plastic.   Fish
over  O.U5  kg   (one  pound)  are frequently filleted or cut into
steaks.

The bulk of the product leaves the plant as fresh or frozen whole
processed fish.  A small  market  exists  for  fresh  and  frozen
fillets  and  for  frozen  breaded fish sticks.  Recently, liquid
nitrogen freezing has proven successful in  producing  meat  with
improved quality.  Pond-reared channel catfish can be kept frozen
for  as  long  as  twelve months with only small losses in flavor
 (Billy, 1969).
                              22

-------
Many plants  have  rearing  or  holding  ponds  on-site.   A  few
discharge  some  or  all  of their process wastewaters  (including
holding tank waters)  into these ponds.


Wastes Generated

Jones (1969)  estimated 45 percent of  the  whole  catfish  to  be
waste  and  the  National  Marine  Fisheries  Service   (1968), 40
percent.  Using the 45 percent value, the  total  waste  quantity
projected  for  1975  was calculated to be 23.0 million kilograms
(50.6 million pounds).

Four main methods of disposal  of  catfish  offal  are  currently
practiced.  These are:  processing for pet food and catfish feed,
rendering for fish meal, and burial  (Billy, 1969).  Catfish offal
has  been  rendered to a meal containing over 45 percent protein.
The distribution of essential amino acids in the proteins of  the
catfish offal makes it a good source of supplementary protein for
animals.    Several  proximate  analyses  of  catfish  offal  are
available in the literature.  One is detailed in Table 5.


          Table 5.  Proximate analysis of
                raw catfish offal
Constituent
Moisture
Crude fat
Ash
Crude protein
Level
58.6%
25.5%
3.1%
12.8%
The offal consists mainly of heads, skin, viscera and fat.
Tables 6 and 7 reflect the percentages of each.
                            23

-------
            Table 6.  Offal from tank-raised
          channel catfish (Beaton,  et al.,  1970)
Component
Finished product
Head
Skin
Viscera
Fat
Large Fish
63.9%
22.5%
6.5%
5.6%
1.5%
Small Fish
62.8%
23.3%
6.5%
6.1%
1.8%
Average
63.4%
22.9%
6.5%
5.9%
1.7%
      Table 7.  Catfish Offal from cage-cultured
        channel catfish (Beaton,  et al.,  1972).
              Finished product
Onlike the data available on solid wastes, very little data
have been published on the nature of liquid wastes generated
in catfish processing plants.  The sole published source of
information on catfish processing waste water characteristics
prior to the current study was the paper by Mulkey and Sargent
(1972) reporting on a three-day characterization program at a
Georgia catfish processing plant.  These investigators found
the total plant effluent to exhibit the characteristics in
Table 8.
                             24

-------
        Table 8.  Catfish processing waste water
        characteristics (Mulkey and Sargent, 1972).
                                 Level
            kg or 1   Ib or gal     kg or 1       lb or gal
Parameter  1000 fish  1000 fish  kkg raw mat1!  ton raw mat'l
Flow
BOD
COD
TSS
TVSS
Grease
7570
3.6
4.9
2.3
2.0
and Oil 0.8
(2000)
(8.0)
(10.8)
(5.1)
(4.5)
(1.7)
16,400
7.9
10.6
5.0
4.4
1.7
(3920)
(15.7)
(21.2)
(10.0)
(8.8)
(3.3)
Their data were expressed in terms of pounds or gallons per  fish
or per 10CO fish processed.  For comparative purposes, these data
were  converted  to  the  forms  shown in the table, based on the
assumption that the average catfish  processed  weighed  0.46  kg
(1.02 Ibs) (as was indicated by Mulkey and Sargent).

Figures  6,  7,  and  8 are respective plots of the catfish waste
water flow, BOD5, and suspended  solids  data  gathered  in  this
study.  Each data point represents the summary data of each plant
sampled.


Subcategorization Rationale

Subcategorization   for   the  catfish  processing  industry  was
relatively straightforward, largely due  to  the  fact  that  the
industry is in relative infancy and is much more homogeneous than
most of the other seafood processing industries.

As  is  the  case with nearly all seafood processors, the catfish
processors do  not  enjoy  a  constant  supply  of  raw  product.
Availability  is  seasonal  and a function of such factors as the
water temperatures in the immediate area, rainfall frequency  and
intensity  (affecting  harvesting),  development  of certain off-
flavors (due to algae), and priority in work  scheduling  on  the
farm.   In the Tennessee Valley region, for instance, the growing
season lasts for about 150 days.  Optimum growth  occurs  in  the
water temperature range of 28° to 31°C (82° to 88°F).  During the
winter  months,  the  fish remain virtually dormant and grow very
little.  The harvesting season begins usually  in  the  fall  and
continues  through the winter and into the spring (as the weather
                               25

-------
35,000
30,000
25,000
                       ©
                                    0
20,000
                                 ©
                                             ©
 15,000
 10,000
             I     I      I     I  	I      |	I	I	I
I     234567
              PRODUCTION kkg/day
                                                  8     9    10
                                Figure 6
                  Catfish production rates and flow ratios

                                   26

-------







I
j?
o
o
CO


10
9

8
7
6

5
4
3
2
1
—
©
O
—
0
-
0
-
-
-
-
1 1 1 1 1 1 1,1 1 1
123456789 10
          PRODUCTION  kkg/day
                Figure  7
Catfish production rates and BODS ratios
                   27

-------




£
en

CO
•H
H
o
en
•0


©


-


-



~"
-
-
-
i i i i i i i i i i
123456789 II
                  PRODUCTION kkg/day





                        Figure 8



Catfish production rates  and suspended solids  ratios
                            28

-------
permits).  Recently, as the processing industry has  become  more
organized,  the  producers have been enticed to harvest (although
on a reduced scale) through the summer months.  Some  processors,
furthermore,   have  entered  the  production  business,  thereby
assuring themselves  more  complete  control  over  raw  material
supply.   In  the  summer  of  1972,  as  a  result, most catfish
processing plants operated at about 60 percent of full production
capacity.

Another consideration in subcategorization was condition  of  raw
material  on  delivery  to  the processing plant.  In the catfish
industry, the farm-raised catfish are delivered either  alive  in
aerated  tank trucks or packed on ice or "dry."  The waste waters
from the live haul are, of course, much greater  in  volume  than
those  from  iced transportation and are contaminated mainly with
feces, regurgitated material, and pond benthos.  The ice, on  the
other  hand,  where  used  in  packing the fish for transport, is
usually bloody and contains  significant  amounts  of  slime.   A
significant amount of water is necessary for spray-washing before
the  fish are transported into the plant.  Although the two types
of wastes differ in character and concentration, it was felt that
these differences were not sufficient to  warrant  separate  sub-
categories.

A  third  consideration  in  subcategorization was the variety of
species  being  processed.   Although  the  most  common  variety
currently processed is the channel catfish, others are handled by
the plants in lesser amounts.  The results of the analyses of the
samples  gathered during the plant monitoring phase of this study
indicated that no significant difference in  the  nature  of  the
wastes from the processing of various species existed.

A  fourth  consideration  in  subcategorization was the method of
harvesting.  As  discussed  previously,  harvesting  methods  are
relatively uniform throughout the industry.

Degree   of  pre-processing,  manufacturing  processes  and  sub-
processes, and form and quality of finished product, as have been
discussed  previously,  are  relatively  uniform  throughout  the
industry and present no bases for further subcategorization.

Plant  location  and  age  were  also  considered.   The  catfish
industry is located in the central and southern states  in  areas
of  similar climatic conditions (conducive to the raising of farm
catfish) in flat to moderate rolling terrain.  The soils  present
no  severe construction problems, in general.  High water tables,
in certain localities, present problems.  Many of the plants  are
located   in   rural   areas  on  sufficient  acreage  to  permit
installation  of  adequate   treatment   systems.    Those   with
inadequate  land  in  their possession currently either:  1) have
access to other land  (at a price);  or  2)   are  reasonably  well
suited  for  incorporation  into  a  nearby municipal system.  As
mentioned previously, age of plant is not a significant factor in
this industry.
                               29

-------
The relatively unsophisticated level of  the  industry  indicates
that the production capacity, normal operating levels (percent of
capacity)    and   nature   of   operation   (intermittent  versus
continuous)   do  not  appreciably  affect  the   waste   loadings
generated by the processing plants.

The  remaining  two  factors considered in subcategorization, raw
water availability and  waste  treatability,  do  not  appear  to
present  insurmountable  obstacles  to the imposition of effluent
guidelines and the industry's successful  compliance  with  them.
Fresh  water  is  generally  available  to  all processors in the
industry  and  although  virtually   nothing   is   known   about
treatability   of   the  specific  wastes  generated  in  catfish
processing, no known toxicants are present in the waste  streams,
and  the  operations  offer sufficient continuity to sustain some
types of biological treatment systems.

For all the above reasons, the United States  catfish  processing
industry  was placed into a single subcategory for the purpose of
designing and estimating the costs of treatment systems  and  for
developing effluent standards and guidelines.
CRAB PROCESSING

The  second  segment of the seafood industry which was considered
in this study was crab processing.  Figures 9,  10,  and  11  are
plots   of  all  crab  flow,  BOD5,  and  suspended  solids  data
(respectively)   gathered  in  this  study.   The  complete   crab
industry data is presented in Section V.  An analysis of the flow
data reveals that water use in the conventional blue crab process
was  less  than  one-tenth  that  of  the  other crab operations;
furthermore the organic  loading,  in  terms  of  BOD,  from  the
mechanized  blue crab process was more than double those from the
processing of other species.  It has been  determined  that  blue
crab  should  be designated a separate subcategory from the other
species processed in the United States.

Within the blue crab industry, plants employing  a  claw  picking
machine     (mechanized   processing)    generated   waste   waters
significantly greater  in  quantity  and  in  BOD  loadings  than
conventional  (manual)   processors.   Thus separate subcategroies
were necessary.


Further review of the data indicates significant  differences  in
water  use between Alaskan and "lower U8" crab processors.  Large
differences in settleable solids were also  noted.   Whereas  the
average  settleable  solids  concentration in the Alaskan samples
was about 36 1/kkg, those from  the  Pacific  Northwest  averaged
about  1600 1/kkg.  These factors, together with others discussed
later under "Subcategorization Rationale" led to the  segregation
of  the  two industries and designation of a separate subcategory
for each.
                              30

-------
                                  CRAB
   146,000
    50,000
    40,000
§   30,000
    20,000
     JO ,000
                          D
• = Conventional blue  crab
O= Mechanized blue crab
D = Alaska crab,
    whole cook & section
•= Alaska crab,
    frozen & canned meat
A = West  Coast Dungeness,
    fresh & whole cook
                               10        15
                              PRODUCTION kkg/day
        20
25
                                  Figure 9
                       Crab production rates and flow ratios
                                    31

-------
                         = Conventional blue crab

                         = Mechanized blue crab
                         — Alaska crab,
                           whole cook  &  section
£D

20
(kg/kkg)
oi
Q
O
* 10

5
•= Alaska crab,
D
O frozen & canned
O
A= West Coast Dung
fresh & whole c
-
A
A
- • D
O
5          10         15        20

         PRODUCTION kkg/day


             Figure 10

Crab production rates and BOD5[ ratios


                32
25

-------








yl
1^1
CO
•H
O
U)
TJ

-------
A final breakdown within the crab industry was  based  indirectly
on type of final product.  Referring again to the data in Section
V,  the  Alaskan  crab industry produced two distinctly different
types of waste water streams: one from meat  operations  and  one
from   whole-and-sections  processes,  the  former  producing  70
percent more flow, 62 percent  fewer  settleable  solids  and  90
percent more suspended solids.

In  all,  five different subcategories were ultimately designated
for the crab industry:  Conventional Blue Crab  (Subcategory  B);
Mechanized   Blue   Crab   (Subcategory  C) ;  Alaskan  Crab  Meat
(Subcategories D and E); Alaskan Whole  Crab  and  Crab  Sections
(Subcategories F and G); and Dungeness and Tanner Crab Outside of
Alaska  (Subcategory H) .


Conventional Blue Crab Processing (Subcategory B)


Background

The  blue  crab,  comprising 55 percent of the United States crab
production, is harvested along the Gulf of  Mexico  and  Atlantic
coasts;  a  principal  center of processing is the Chesapeake Bay
area.  Of the 184 plants in the United States, 90 are located  in
Maryland,   Virginia,  and  North  Carolina.   These  plants  are
typically small, locally owned businesses  with  highly  variable
production schedules.

The  blue crab JCallinectes sajoidus) is a much smaller  (11-13 cm;
4.5-5 in capapace) variety than the West Coast and Alaskan  crab.
Most  crab  processed are caught locally  (within a 50 mile radius
of the plant), although during slack periods  crab  are  imported
from  remote  areas   (with  high spoilage losses) .  Transshipment
from one production area to another is often practiced when local
supplies are inadequate.

Crabs are harvested from shallow water in baited traps, on baited
lines  ("trot lines"), "scrapes," or dip nets, or they are dredged
from the bottom mud.  Rapid and careful handling is necessary  to
keep  the  crabs  alive.  Dead crabs must be discarded because of
rapid deterioration.

"Cocktail claws" are considered  prime  products  and  are  often
packed  separately.  The meat is richer, with fuller texture than
the more fibrous body meat.

Many blue crab hold eggs and are called "sponge" crab.  These are
generally accepted by most plants; personnel  from  some  plants,
however,  claim  that  during cooking the eggs impart a permanent
"iodine" flavor to the meat.  Also, it is reasoned that the  more
egg-bearing   crabs   returned   to  the  sea,  the  greater  the
possibility of sustained blue crab  yields.   For  these  reasons
                                   34

-------
some processors refuse to accept sponge crabs.  In addition, some
states periodically prohibit harvesting of sponge crabs.

In  some  areas  most of the crabs processed for meat in the blue
crab industry are the females, called  "sooks."   The  males,  or
"jimmies,"  are  usually larger than the females;  the processors
frequently segregate the largest jimmies and market them alive.
Processing

The conventional blue crab processing scheme is shown  in  Figure
12.   The  first  step  is  the cooking phase where the crabs are
steamed at 121°C (250°F) for 10 minutes.  On the Gulf Coast,  the
crabs are sometimes boiled, but boiled crab meat is prohibited in
most  states because the temperature available for microbial kill
is lower in the boiling process.  The vast majority (more than 80
percent)  of blue crab  processors  today  employ  steam  cooking.
Cooking  takes  place  in  horizontal  or  vertical  cookers.  An
average-size horizontal cooker can hold  from  820  to  1230  kgs
(1800  to 2700 Ibs)  per change.  Vertical cookers average 410 kgs
(900 Ibs)  capacity.

About 35 percent of the live weight of the crab is  lost  in  the
steam  cooking  process;  condensates  from the crab cookers have
been shown to exhibit BOD's of 12,000 to  14,000  mg/1  (Carawan,
1973).

After  cooking, the crabs are normally butchered manually and the
meat picked from the shell.  An industry average for manual  meat
picking  is 14 kg (30 Ibs)  of meat per picker per day (Paparella,
1973).

Yields in conventional blue crab processing plants vary from 9 to
15 percent (Thomas,  1973).   in the  conventional  process,  after
the  crabs  are cooked, air cooled and picked, the meat is placed
into cans or similar  containers.   Much  of  the  crab  meat  is
"sealed"  in  cans with snap-lids which are manually pressed into
place,  iced  and  sold  fresh.   In  addition  many   cans   are
hermetically  sealed,  but  are  not  retorted;  rather  they are
pasteurized in a  water  bath  at  89°C  (192°F)  for  about  110
minutes.   Some  crab  meat  is  canned  (and  retorted)  in  the
conventional fashion, but most is  not.   In  canning,  additives
such  as EDTA  (ethylenediaminetetracetic acid), alum, citric acid
and other organic acids are used in very small amounts.

One exception to the above processes is that involving soft shell
crab.  In this instance, crabs are harvested during  the  molting
process,  kept  in  the  plants in "live boxes" and checked every
four hours for progress in shedding  their  shells.   Immediately
after  the shell is discarded, the crab is marketed alive (packed
in wet grass)  as a "soft shell crab."
                                  35

-------
                                                                 : PRODUCT FLOW
           TO
     OR CLAWS TO
MECHANICAL PICKER
                                                              	= WASTEWATER FLOW

                                                              = = WASTE SOLIDS
                                            ( WATER)
                                            (OR6ANICS, HOT WATER)
                                            (WATER)
                                            (SHELL, WATER)
                                                                       EFFLUENT
      Figure  12       Conventional  blue  crab  process,
                                  36

-------
Wastes Generated

Although some exploratory work has been  conducted  in  the  blue
crab  processing industry by North Carolina State University, the
University of Maryland, and others, no comprehensive study of the
waste waters produced in the processing of  blue  crab  had  been
reported at the time this project was initiated.

In  the  conventional  blue crab processing plant (Figure 12) the
water  usage  is  small.   The  overall   pollutional   load   is
attributable  mainly  to the cooking phase and to the plant clean
up operation,  cooker condensates have a  BOD  of  up  to  14,000
mg/1,  whereas  plant  clean  up waters have organic strengths of
perhaps one-tenth of that.  Most conventional plants utilize ice-
making machines which have  a  continuous  cooling  water  stream
(having no appreciable pollutant loading)  which may flow 24 hours
per day.


The major portion of the blue crab is not edible, and as a result
is  wasted in processing.  This waste, consisting of body juices,
shell and entrails, may range up to 86 percent  of  the  crab  by
weight  (Stansby,  1963),  of  which 25 percent is liquid lost in
cooking.  The solid waste load  from  the  blue  crab  processing
industry  for  1971  was  calculated  to  be  33.6 million kg (74
million Ib)  using 51 percent as the residual solids  fraction  of
the  waste.    The  actual waste volume was somewhat less, since a
percentage of  the  total  crab  landed  was  marketed  whole  or
butchered to remove only backs and entrails.

The  composition  of shellfish waste is largely determined by the
exoskeleton,  which  is  composed   primarily   of   chitin,   (a
polysaccharide structural material), protein bound to the chitin,
and  calcium  carbonate.   While  the  major portion of the waste
generally consists of exoskeletal materials, varying  significant
amounts  of  attached or unrecovered flesh and visceral materials
are  included.   The  protein  concentration  of  crab  waste  is
considered  low  compared  to  visceral fish wastes, reducing its
value as an animal feed.  However, most of the solid wastes  from
the  blue  crab processing industry are utilized in crab meal for
eventual incorporation into animal feed.


Subcateqorization Rationale

The characterization program for this study centered  around  the
Chesapeake  Bay  area  because  of  its large number of blue crab
processors in a relatively small geographic area.   The  sampling
schedule  was  established  based  on  anticipated catches in the
Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina area.   Considerable  delay
was  experienced  when  these  harvests  did  not  materialize on
schedule.   Conferences  with  local  industrial  representatives
indicated  that  about  once  about every decade the early spring
blue crab harvest is extremely poor, and 1973 happened to be  one
                              37

-------
of those years.  The poor harvest was attributed to locally heavy
rainfall  and  subsequent  dilution  of  the estuaries with fresh
water.

Several active plants were  finally  located,  and  although  the
plants   were  operating  intermittently  or  at  reduced  levels
occasionally, the time constraints of the study forced the use of
these plants for the monitoring program.  They  were  sampled  in
depth over a period of several weeks.

The  problems  of  seasonality and inavailability of raw material
served to emphasize the need for careful consideration  of  these
factors  in the design of proposed treatment systems for the blue
crab industry.  It did  not,  however,  provide  any  substantial
basis  for  further  subcategorization of the industry because it
appeared that all segments of the blue crab industry were equally
susceptible to inavailability of raw material  at  various  times
during the processing season.

The  condition  of the raw material on delivery to the processing
plant was of considerable concern in  the  blue  crab  processing
industry, especially with respect to dredged crab.

During  several  of  the  winter months, (December through March)
most of the crabs that are processed have been dredged out of the
mud in the estuaries where they have taken  refuge  during  their
dormant  stage.   In the harvesting process these crabs sustain a
significantly greater incidence of injury  than  do  those  taken
with  other  methods.  The general condition of the crabs is poor
and, therefore, the yield at the  processing  plant  is  markedly
lower.  Furthermore, a great deal of silt and mud is carried into
the processing plant with the raw material and must be removed in
a prewash step that is not normally employed with crabs harvested
by  other  means.  These combinations of factors likely cause the
waste from the processing of dredged blue crab to be considerably
different from those harvested by alternative measures.  For  the
present, dredged crab have been included in Subcategories C and D
(depending on whether they are processed mechanically or not)  for
the   purpose   of   development  of  treatment  system  designs,
estimation  of  expected  effluent  levels  after  treatment  and
estimation of treatment system costs.  However, since no data are
yet available on the actual percentage of solid and liquid wastes
generated  in  the processing of dredged blue crab, this decision
must be considered tentative.  It remains  to  be  confirmed   (or
refuted) during some future blue crab dredging season.

The  variety of the species being processed appeared to be fairly
uniform  throughout  the  blue  crab  industry  and  was  not   a
significant  factor  in  the development of the subcategorization
schemes.

A fourth item considered  in  subcategorization  was  "harvesting
methods."  As discussed above under "condition of raw material on
delivery to the processing plant," the harvesting method employed
                                  38

-------
influences  the  raw  material  condition, which in turn probably
affects the waste water quantity and quality.

"Degree of preprocessing" was not a  consideration  in  the  blue
crab  industry  because  only  live  whole crabs delivered to the
processing plant were incorporated  into  the  finished  product.
The  "manufacturing  processes  and  subprocesses" were important
factors affecting subcategorization, as discussed earlier.

"Form and quality of finished product," while they  did  have  an
impact  on  the total levels of waste water constituents, did not
drastically alter the basic character of  the  waste  stream  and
therefore,  were  not  considered  of  sufficient  importance  to
warrant further subcategorization.

"Location of plant" might conceivably be a  significant  variable
in the blue crab industry.  Blue crab processing plants are found
from  New Jersey to Texas and certainly along that vast coastline
different  climatic  conditions,  terrain  and  soil  types   are
encountered.   Clearly,  diversities  of  site specificity are so
complex  and  so  important  that  they  would   overshadow   any
artificial  geographical subdivision established in an attempt to
define more homogeneous subcategories.  An individual  processing
plant,  faced  with  the  problem  of abating its pollution load,
might  be  hindered  by  its  location.    Most   commonly,   the
availability  of  significant  land  area with a low ground water
table, sufficient drainage, etc. would  be  the  goal.   This  is
frequently  not  the case in the blue crab industry, where plants
are often located on piers or on  land  with  high  ground  water
tables.   In  general,  blue crab processing plants are either 1)
located near small population  centers,  which  eventually  would
permit   joint  industrial-municipal  treatment  or  2)   situated
physically in such a manner that onsite treatment of their  waste
waters may be technically feasible.

Additional  considerations  in subcategorization were "production
capacity and normal operating level;" and  "nature  of  operation
(intermittent  versus  continuous)."   By  nature,  the blue crab
processing industry is an  intermittent  process  (controlled  by
product availability) and production capacity is governed by such
constraints  as number of employees available, size of production
area, size and number of cookers and  retorts  (where  used)   and
availability  of  adequate  storage.   In the monitoring phase of
this study, no evidence was found  to  indicate  that  either  of
these variables significantly affected the waste streams from the
processing  plants.   Therefore, no subcategorization along these
lines was attempted.

The last two variables considered in the subcategorization scheme
were "raw water availability" and amenability  of  the  waste  to
treatment."   Raw  water  availability was not a consideration in
the blue crab industry because no in-plant modifications or waste
treatment additions would significantly increase  the  amount  of
raw water required by the processor.  Waste treatability is not a
                             39

-------
significant  factor  for  further  subcategorization  but  is  is
partially responsible for separating the blue crab industry  into
Conventional and Mechanized.

For  all  of  the  above  reasons,  the  United  States blue crab
processing   industry   was   placed   into   two   subcategories
(Conventional  and Mechanized discussed below)  for the purpose of
designing and estimating the costs of treatment systems  and  for
developing effluent standards and guidelines.


Mechanized Blue Crab Processing (Subcategory C)


Processing

The mechanized blue crab processing scheme is shown in Figure 13.
Initial  processing is similar to that for conventional blue crab
discussed earlier.  Instead of complete manual processing a  claw
picking  machine  is  utilized.   It  consists  of  a hammer mill
followed by a brine separation chamber where the meat is  floated
away from the shell and exits the chamber via the brine overflow.
The  shell  is  removed counter-currently on an inclined belt.  A
few plants use this machine for pre-picked bodies and claws,  not
just  for claws alone.  Of the 18U plants in the industry perhaps
ten plants employ the machine for crab  claws.   Perhaps  another
two  or  three  employ  the  machine  for  complete body cavities
("cores").  Operating on claws alone, a typical mechanized  plant
utilizes the mechanical picker 5 to 10 hours per week, or more if
additional claws are purchased from other plants.

The  plants  employing the claw picking machines enjoy a slightly
higher percentage yield than the remainder  of  the  plants.   In
addition,  the  back or lump "fin" meat is separated and marketed
as a premium product.

The remainder of the processing steps is similar to those used in
conventional blue crab processing.


Wastes Generated

In those operations  employing  claw  machines,  because  of  the
nature of the process, the BOD loadings are significantly greater
than  those  of  the  conventional  plants,  and  water  usage is
increased many fold as shown  in  Section  V.   The  waste  water
includes  both the brine used in the flotation tanks and the wash
water used to remove the brine from the meat after  it  has  been
separated  from  the  shell.    Whereas  the  waste waters from a
conventional blue crab processing plant can  be  expected  to  be
biodegradable,  those  from  a  plant employing a picking machine
would likely present salt toxicity problems  to  some  biological
waste  treatment  systems.  This, in fact, has already been noted
in one location in the Eastern Shore area of Maryland, where  the
                              40

-------
          TO
REDUCTION PLANT
   OR LANDFILL
     • PRODUCT FLOW

     •• WASTEWATER FLOW

     : WASTE SOLIDS FLOW
     Figure   13  .   Mechanized blue  crab process.
                             41

-------
digesters  in  the  local  municipal  plant  (receiving blue crab
processing wastes) experience frequent upset conditions.
Subc a tegor i z at ion Rat iona 1 e

As a result of this study the blue crab industry had to be broken
down into at least two subcategories.  The first (Subcategory B) ,
encompassed conventional blue  crab  processing  and  the  second
(Subcategory  C)   included  those  blue  crab  processing  plants
employing claw picking machines for  the  removal  of  meat  from
claws or from body sections or both.

The  utilization  of the claw picking machine either for claws or
for  bodies,  or  for  both,  introduced  significantly   greater
quantities  of  waste  water,  BOD,  grease, etc.,  into the waste
stream and at the same time, changed the character of  the  waste
stream  through  the  addition  of  large  quantities  of  sodium
chloride.  Sodium chloride at the levels found in these blue crab
processing plants is  inhibitory  to  many  biological  treatment
systems.   Its  toxic  effect  is  increased by the fact that the
machines are operated on the average less than two days per week,
meaning that waste streams fluctuate from very  low  salinity  to
extremely high salinity from day to day throughout the processing
season.  Since the above factors would seriously affect all three
main considerations in development of subcategorization schemes:

    1.  design configuration;
    2.  expected effluent levels after treatment; and
    3.  cost of treatment;

it  was decided to subcategorize the industry based on the use of
the claw picking machines.

The other considerations  for  potential  subcategorization  were
discussed  earlier  under  Subcategory B - Conventional Blue Crab
Processing  and  the  same  conclusions  are  relevant  to   this
Subcategory.


Alaska Dunqeness^ King and Tanner Crab

The  second  major crab fishery in the United States  (behind blue
crab) is centered in the state of Alaska and is made up of  three
commercial    species,    Dungeness   (Cancer   maqister) ,   king
              camtschatica) ,  and  tanner   (Chionecetes  bairdii)
crab.   The tanner crab is also referred to as the snow or spider
crab.  The Alaskan crab industry differs from that  of  the  blue
crab  in  that  a  relatively  small  number of processing plants
handles a very large volume of product.  Furthermore, the typical
Alaska crab operation is considerably more  mechanized  than  the
typical   blue  crab  operation.   Based  on  these  reasons  and
considerations of extreme seasonality,  harsh  climate,  frequent
                               42

-------
inavailability  of  usable land, and high costs, the Alaskan crab
industry was placed in a separate category from the remainder  of
the United States crab industry.

As discussed in the introduction to this section, the waste water
characteristics  from  the  processing of sections and whole crab
differed significantly (see Section V)  from  those  of  the  meat
process  waste  stream,  leading  to  the desingation of separate
subcategories for each.


Alaskan Crab^Meat Processing  (Subcategories D and E)


Background

Until recently the major crab species processed in Alaska was the
king crab.  In 1970, for instance, of the more than 34.5 kkg  (76
million pounds)  of crab processed in Alaska, 68 percent were king
crab,  whereas  18  percent  were tanner and 12 percent Dungeness
crab.  In the ensuing three  years,  however,  tanner  crab  have
become  increasingly  important and soon will challenge king crab
for the leadership position in terms of quantity processed.

In contrast to the blue crab harvest, the  Alaskan  crab  harvest
takes  place  exclusively  through  the  use  of  baited traps or
"pots."  Upon unloading from the pots the  crabs  are  placed  in
"live  tanks"  on  board  the  fishing vessel and are transported
alive to the processing plant where, in most instances, the  crab
are  transferred to on-site live tanks to await processing.  In a
few instances, on-site live tanks  are  not  employed,  the  crab
being  processed  immediately  upon  unloading  from  the fishing
vessel.  This practice has proven, however, to be inefficient and
it is expected that the use of live tanks will continue into  the
forseeable future.

For  each  of  the  three  species  of  crab processed in Alaska,
seasonality is  an  important  factor.    Tanner  crab  enjoy  the
longest  processing  season, extending from January to May in the
Kodiak area.  The major season for king crab in the  Kodiak  area
is about one and one-half months long during the months of August
and  September  and  for Dungeness crab the two month season peak
begins in mid-June.  These seasons are a  function  of  location.
Alaska  is  an  extremely  large  state, having 58,000 km  (36,000
miles)  of shoreline (more than the total  contiguous  48  states)
and  fishing boats range as far as 1600 km  (1000 miles) from base
to take advantage  of  crab  availability  during  slack  seasons
locally.


Processing

Land-based  live  tanks are usually constructed of steel or wood.
Capacities vary from 23 to 45 cu m   (6000  to  12,000  gal).   In
                                43

-------
Alaska  as much as 7300 kg (16,000 Ib)  of live crab are stored in
a medium-sized live tank.  The salt water in the  live  tanks  is
continuously recirculated from the local harbor.  Residence times
vary  from  ten  minutes  to one hour.   In the past, in congested
areas, high mortality rates in the live tanks have resulted  from
the use of poor quality intake water.  This poor quality has been
the result of pollution of the local area with processing wastes.
Live  tank intake lines are usually located on or near the bottom
of the local waterway to prevent  interference  with  navigation.
Decomposing  detritus  on the bottom has created dissolved oxygen
deficits and generated toxicants such as hydrogen  sulfide  which
in  turn  have  led to the high product losses in the live tanks.
Live tank crab are normally processed as rapidly as possible  and
are seldom held for more than a few days.  Tanner crab seem to be
more sensitive to live tank storage conditions than the other two
species  (Hartsock  and  Peterson, 1971) .  This is because tanner
are deep water crabs and exhibit a lower tolerance to overcrowded
conditions and environmental changes.

Each of the three species handled in Alaska is processed into  at
least  three  different  forms of finished product:  canned meat,
frozen meat, and  sections  and  legs—sections  being  the  term
designating  body  halves.  In addition, Dungeness crab, and to a
very limited extent king crab, are processed for marketing whole.
The section and leg processes and the Dungeness  whole  processes
produce  the  least  waste, while the meat processes for freezing
and canning produce considerably greater quantities, although the
characteristics, of course, are similar  (see Section V).

The processes for frozen and canned meat products are depicted in
Figures 14 and 15, respectively.  All  plants  handling  a  given
product  utilize  approximately  the  same  unit  operations with
occasional small variations in the butchering, handling,  storing
and  conveying  procedures.   These  variations  generally do not
alter the waste water characteristics significantly.

Two operations common to all  processes  except  the  whole  crab
process  are  butchering and cooking.  In the butchering process,
the crab are transported from the live tanks to the butcher  area
either  on  belts  or  in  steel  tubs where they are placed in a
holding area to await butchering.  The live crab are butchered by
impaling them on a metal plate.   This  cuts  the  body  in  two,
allowing the viscera to fall to the floor while at the same time,
removing  the  carapace  (back) as a single piece.  Next the gills
are removed from the animal through the  use  of  a  rotary  wire
brush  or  paddle  wheel.  At one plant a paddle wheel is used to
both butcher and gill in  a  single  step.   Currently,  in  most
plants  in  Alaska  the viscera, carapaces, and the gills are fed
into a grinder intermittently.  Dead crab are sorted out prior to
butchering and are presently also ground.  These grinders operate
from 50 to 70 percent of  the  time  during  processing  and  the
resulting  waste  load  constitutes  a large portion of the total
solid and organic wastes emanating from the processing plant.
                            4,4

-------
Two types of cookers are used in the crab processing industry  in
Alaska.   They  are  distinguished by product flow and are termed
either batch cookers or flow-through  cookers.   Both  types  are
common.   Some  crab plants employ two cooking periods during the
processing operation—a precook  and  a  final  cook.   When  the
precook  is  used, it is designed to firm the meat, rinse off the
residual blood from the butchering operation  and  minimize  heat
shock  of the subsequent cooking step.  Precooking at 60° to 66°C
(140° to 150°F) normally lasts from one  to  five  minutes.   The
main  cook  is  conducted  at  about  99°C   (210°F)  for 10 to 20
minutes.   Salt  is  usually  added  to  the  cooker   water   in
concentrations  of  50,000  to  60,000  mg/1  NaCl   (as chloride)
(Soderquist, et al., 1972b).  Batch-type cookers  range  in  size
from  76C  to  3800  1  (200 to 1000 gal).  Makeup water is added
periodically  to  replace  losses   from   evaporation,   product
carryover,  and  water  overflow.   Steam is normally employed to
heat the tanks to  the  desired  temperature.   The  cookers  are
usually  drained and the cooking water replaced once or twice per
shift.

Flow-through cookers range in size from 1.9 to 9.5 cu m  (500  to
2500  gal).   The  crab  are  conveyed  through  the  cooker on a
stainless steel mesh belt.  Nearly all  flow-through  cookers  in
Alaska employ steam-heated hot water, although at least one plant
was  observed by the field crew using steam cooking directly.  As
was the case  with  batch  cookers,  flow-through  cookers   (also
called  "continuous cookers")  are drained and refilled one to two
times per shift (except steam cookers).

The following paragraphs discuss briefly the  process  variations
employed in the preparation of different product forms.


King and Tanner Crab Frozen Meat Process

In  the  Alaskan  plants  processing king and tanner crab for the
frozen meat market  (Figure 14), the crab are stored in live tanks
in the normal manner and transported to the  butchering  area  as
needed.   The  carapace,  viscera  and  gills  are removed in the
butchering area.  The butchering waste is  currently  ground  and
subsequently  discharged through a submarine outfall, via a flume
to a surface discharge  point,  or  is  sometimes  simply  dumped
through  a  hole  in  the floor onto the water beneath the plant.
After the crabs are butchered, the legs are  separated  from  the
shoulders  on  circular  or  stationary  saws.   Stationary  saws
consist simply of fixed saw  blades  along  which  the  crab  are
passed  to  effect the separation of the legs from the shoulders.
Next, the crab parts are precooked for four to  five  minutes  at
60°  to  66°c  (140° to 150°F).  Some processors collect the claws
after the precook, brine freeze them and market them as "cocktail
claws" much as is done in the blue crab industry.  Others  handle
the claws as additional sources of picked meat and after the pre-
cook, the meat is "blown" from the claws and shorter more "meaty"
leg  sections  with  a  strong  jet  of water.  The meat from the
                              45

-------
                                                                  •• PRODUCT FLOW
 CIRCULATING SEAWATER
 OVERFLOW TO OCEAN
                                                             	= WASTEWATER FLOW

                                                             — = . WASTE SOLIDS FLOW
                                                               (QR) = GRINDER
                                                           OUTFALL PUMPED TO
                                                           SEVEN FATHOM DEPTH
Figure   14      King  and tanner  crab  frozen meat process,
                                   46

-------
   CIRCULATING SEAWATER
                                       BUTCHER    CARAPACE^VISCERA^G!LLSJ__
                                        PRECOOK    IBLQOD,WAIER)_
                                                                              = PRODUCT FLOW
                                                                       —	= WASTEWATER FLOW
                                                                       =  -== = WASTE SOLIDS FLOW
                                                                           (GR) = GRINDER
                                                                        OUTFALL PUMPED TO
                                                                        SEVEN FATHOM DEPTH
Figure   15      King  and  tanner  crab  canning  process
                                               47

-------
larger leg sections and from -the  shoulders  is  often  extracted
with  rollers  or shaken from the shell.  In the roller operation
the parts are placed manually or hydraulically between two rubber
rollers  (looking  very  much  like  those  of  an  old-fashioned
wringer-type  washing  machine)  and the meat is squeezed from the
shell as the legs or shoulders pass  through  the  rollers.   The
shells  are  subsequently  often  flumed  from  the  rollers to a
grinder prior to entering the main waste stream.

Broken shell and other detritus are hand-picked  from  the  meat.
The  meat is then manually segregated into three categories: claw
meat, leg meat, and shredded meat.  It is next cooked at  93°  to
99°C (200° to 210°F) for 8 to 12 minutes, rinsed, and cooled with
fresh  water.   At  this  point,  the  meat is packed into trays,
usually in 6.8 kg (15 Ib)  batches and 180 to 350 ml (6 to 12  oz)
of  saline  solution  or  ascorbic acid solution is added to each
tray.  The type and volume  of  additives  employed  varies  from
processor to processor.  The trays are frozen and later boxed for
shipping.

In  at least one crab freezing operation in Alaska, no precook is
used.  The crab are simply cooked at  93°C  (200°F)  in  a  flow-
through cooker for 10.5 minutes.  This operation takes place with
the  gills  still intact on the animals.  After cooking the gills
are manually separated  and  discarded.   Legs  are  subsequently
removed from the shoulders on stationary saws.

The  major  differences  between  the freezing of king and tanner
crab legs and sections are the use of rollers almost  exclusively
for  tanner  (contrasted with their infrequent use for king crab)
and small variations in cooking time.  Wastewater characteristics
for the two species are similar.


King and Tanner Crab Canning Process

In this operation (Figure 15) the crab meat is processed in  much
the  same  way  as  crab meat in the freezing process through the
second cook.  At that point the meat is manually packed into cans
of various sizes, the most common one being 184  grams  (6.5  oz)
and a sodium chloride-citric acid tablet is added to each.  Next,
a  vacuum  is  drawn  on  each  can  and the lid is sealed with a
"double roll seamer."  The cans are then placed into baskets  and
retorted  for  50  to  60  minutes  at 116°C  (240°F).  Cooling is
normally accomplished in the retorts by flooding them  with  cold
water for 7 to 12 minutes.  The baskets are then removed from the
retorts and the cans allowed to dry prior to boxing for shipment.


Dungeness Crab

The  main  Dungeness  crab  season  begins  in mid-June and lasts
through mid-August in Alaska.  As a result, onsite  sampling  was
not  conducted during maximum Dungeness crab processing activity;
                              48

-------
however, some monitoring of Dungeness  crab  processing  was  ac-
complished  in  Kodiak,  Alaska and the data resulting from these
activities together with the data gathered previously  in  Oregon
by  Oregon State University (Soderquist, et al., 1972b)  served as
bases for the Dungeness crab recommendations in this report.

In Alaska, Dungeness crab are most frequently processed for  sale
as  whole  crab.   When  processed  into  canned  or  frozen meat
products, processing schemes similar to those in Figures  14  and
15 are employed.


Prelections

Harvesting of Dungeness crab are on the decline whereas king crab
seemed  until  recently  to  have reached a plateau.  In 1971 and
1972, however, harvests  increased.   Production  appears  to  be
determined  in  large  part  by  the  size of the previous year's
survival of offspring.  Recent catches are outlined on Table 9.

The relative stabilization of king crab  harvests  has  been  due
largely  to  stricter controls imposed on the fishing industry by
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.  The controls established
a king crab fishing season lasting from five to seven  months  in
Alaskan waters.

Tanner  crab  have  been  increasingly harvested in recent years.
Abundant stocks exist off the northern  Pacific  Coast  and  pro-
duction  which  has been accelerating rapidly, should continue to
increase  (Alverson, 1968)  until the demand exceeds the supply  or
until  stricter  controls  are  established on the fishery by the
Alaska regulatory authorities.

Wastes Generated

As is the case with blue crab, the major portion of  the  Alaskan
harvest  is  not  edible and as a result is wasted in processing.
The yield for king crab and Dungeness crab meat  operations  have
been  listed  as  20  percent   (Jensen,  1965)  and  27  pecent  ,
respectively.  Tanner crab yields are even lower than  these  two
values.   Using  an  average yield figure of 20 percent it can be
concluded that 80 percent (on the average)  of  the  Alaskan  crab
harvest  is  wasted.   For  the purpose of estimating solid waste
volumes, furthermore, this figure might be reduced by 50  percent
to  account  for  leaching of solubles during cooking and to take
into consideration the  significant  percentage  of  the  harvest
processed  as  sections  or  whole crab.  Assuming, then, that 57
percent of the total harvest in Alaska eventually  becomes  solid
waste,  it  was calculated that 23,100 kkg (25,800 tons) of solid
wastes were generated by the Alaskan crab industry in  1972.   As
tanner  crab  harvests  increase  over  the  next  few years, the
percentage wastage figure will increase proportionately in Alaska
and the total tonnages of crab waste produced will rise slowly.
                            49

-------
  CIRCULATING SEAWATER
   OVERFLOW TO OCEAN
                         	* PRODUCT FLOW


                          	= WASTEWATER FLOW


                          = = WAST SOLIDS FLOW


                          (Q) = GRINDER
                                          (CARAPACE, VISCERA.GILLS) ,
                                          (BLOOD,WATER)
                                          (LEG SHELL
                                                                  DISCHARGE
                                                                 "THROUGH FLOOR
i SHELL, MEAT,WATER)	 I
                                          (ORGANICS, WATER)
                                           (MEAT,WATER)
                                          (MEAT, WATER)
                                                                I
                                           (WATER)
                                                                  I

                                                                 (GR)
                                                                   DISCHARGE

                                                                   VIA FLUME
Figure   16        King and tanner crab  section process.


                                           50

-------
                                                 Table  9
                                 RECENT ALASKA  CRAB  CATCHES (NOAA-NMFS)
                                 1969
                          1970
                                 1971
                                 1972
          Species
kkg
(tons)    kkg
(tons)   kkg
(tons)    kkg
(ton)
Dungeness crab
King crab
Tanner crab
22
25
5
,300
,300
,080
(24
(27
( 5
,550)
,900)
,600)
26,500
23,600
6,570
(29,250)
(26,050)
( 7,240)
19,400
31,900
5,760
(21
(35
( 6
,350)
,200)
,350)
11,800
33,600
13,150
(13.000)
(37,000)
(14,500)
en

-------
As mentioned in the blue  crab  discussion,  the  composition  of
Crustacea  waste is largely chitin, protein and calcium carbonate
plus varying  amounts  of  flesh  and  visceral  materials.   The
Ketchikan   Technological   Laboratory  of  the  National  Marine
Fisheries Service listed typical  compositions  of  Alaskan  crab
waste  as  shown  on Table 10.  The protein concentration of crab
waste is considered low compared to visceral waste, reducing  its
value  as  a potential source of animal feed.  However, some work
has been done involving fortification of crab  meal  with  higher
protein sources.


  Table 1C.  Typical crab waste composition
                                         Composition
  Species          Source         Protein   Chitin   CaCO3
king crab
tanner crab
tanner crab

Picking line
Leg and claw shelling
Body butchering and
shelling
22.7
10.7

21.2
42.5
31.4

30.0
34.8
57.9

48.8
Essentially  no definitive comprehensive data on the character of
Alaskan crab processing waste waters were available prior to  the
present  study.   A thorough characterization program, therefore,
was conducted and the results are outlined in Section V.
Subcategorization Rationale

Subcategorization for the Alaskan crab  industry  was  relatively
complicated.   At the beginning of this study it was assumed that
as many as ten subcategories would be designated,  one  for  each
final product generated in the processing of each species:

      1.  frozen tanner crab meat
      2.  canned tanner crab meat
      3.  tanner crab sections
      4.  frozen king crab meat
      5.  canned king crab meat
      6.  king crab sections
      7.  whole Dungeness crab
      8.  frozen Dungeness crab meat
      9.  canned Dungeness crab meat
     10.  Dungeness crab sections

In  the course of the field work it became evident that, although
differences in the above processes  existed,  the  variations  in
waste  water  flow  and  content  noted were not significant when
                               52

-------
compared to the normal plant-to-plant and  day-to-day  variations
within  each  of  those  preliminary subcategories, except in the
general comparison of meat versus sections and whole crab.

The king, Dungeness and tanner crab processing industry in Alaska
was separated from the rest of  the  United  States  for  several
reasons.   These  reasons were all based on the assumption that a
subcategory should be  designated  whenever  differences  between
plants would seriously affect the development of:

         1.   treatment design configurations;
         2.   designation of expected effluent levels after
              treatment; and/or
         3.   estimation of costs of treatment.


The Alaskan crab industry  is  noted  for  its  large  processing
plants.   Although  the plants process crab only a few months per
year, their production  levels  are  significantly  greater  than
those  of plants in other parts of the country processing similar
crab   (tanner  and  Dungeness).    Raw   material   availability,
furthermore, is very much a function of weather in Alaska; during
periods  of  poor  weather  (which often occur even in the summer
months),  no  raw  material  is  available  at  the   docks   for
processing.

The condition of raw material on delivery to the processing plant
is  fairly uniform in Alaska and was not considered justification
for subcategorization.  Although, as  previously  mentioned,  the
tanner   crab  mortality  in  the  live  tanks  on  the  dock  is
significantly greater than that  of  Dungeness  and  king,  those
crabs  which  were  processed  (the  live  crabs)  were of fairly
uniform quality throughout the contractor's monitoring period.

This is not to say that product yield does not vary in the course
of the processing season.  Crabs  taken  during  the  springtime,
having more recently molted, contain a lower percentage of usable
meat   than   those   harvested   late   in   the  season.   This
consideration, although it affects the waste water stream in  the
processing  plant,  should  not  prove  to be a detriment to this
study because sampling took place during that part  of  the  year
when  yields  were  low and wastage was high.  It is not expected
that pollutant levels  (in terms of production, such as kg of  BOD
per  kkg  raw  material)  would  increase  over the course of the
season; rather, they  would  be  expected  to  decrease  somewhat
(although, again, perhaps not significantly).

As  mentioned  above,  the variety of the species being processed
was initially taken into account in the monitoring phase of  this
program.   The  waste water characteristics, however, (Section V)
indicate that this consideration is not sufficient to warrant the
designation of a separate subcategory for each species.
                              53

-------
"Harvesting methods" was another variable  to  be  considered  in
subcategorization.   As  mentioned in the "processing" section of
this  discussion,  crab  processing  in   Alaska   is   uniformly
restricted   to   the   use  of  "pots,"  and  therefore,  little
variability in harvesting methods exists.

Analogous to the  discussion  on  "condition  of  raw  material,"
"degree  of preprocessing" was not a consideration in the Alaskan
crab processing industry because, again, all  animals  enter  the
processing line alive.

"Form  and  quality  of  finished  product," while initially con-
sidered  to  be  possible  bases  for   subcategorization,   were
rejected,  based on the characterization data (Section V), except
for the aforementioned distinction between crab  meat  and  whole
and sectioned crab.

A  very important item in the Alaskan crab processing industry is
the plant location.  In this region of the country, perhaps  more
than  in  any  other,  site  specificity  must  be an over-riding
concern in the development of waste  management,  treatment,  and
disposal alternatives.  Most, if not all, of the king, tanner and
Dungeness  crab  processing plants in Alaska are located south of
Bristol Bay in terrain which  can  most  aptly  be  described  as
"vertical."   Virtually every plant is built on piling because of
the lack of suitable real estate.

The general location of the Alaskan  processors  in  an  area  of
limited  accessibility  and  of inflated costs  (the Army Corps of
Engineers Construction Price Index lists remote Alaska as 2.6 and
Kodiak, Alaska as  2.5  based  on  a  national  average  of  1.0)
justifies  the  designation  of  a separate subcategory for these
processors.

Furthermore, climatic conditions in the Alaska region are  unlike
those  anywhere  else  in  the United States.  Water temperatures
remain just above the freezing level  and  air  temperatures  can
remain below freezing for several months without respite.  In the
northerly  areas,  permafrost interferes with normal construction
and foundation design techniques.  In  the  non-permafrost  zones
where  top  soil exists in any quantity, the ground freezes solid
during the coldest months of the year, only to thaw in the spring
and summer causing frost heaves  and  often  producing  extremely
poor   foundation   conditions.    It  is  frequently  the  case,
especially in the gulf of Alaska and  on  the  Aleutian  Islands,
that  virtually  no  top soil exists.  The only land available is
solid  rock  and  it  is  usually  reposing  at  a  steep  angle.
Consideration  of  waste  treatment design involving equalization
basins or treatment lagoons must contend with either blasting the
basins from solid rock or constructing them of  concrete,  steel,
or similar structural material.

Another   consideration   involves   tidal  fluctuations.   Tidal
fluctuations in Alaska are  among  the  greatest  in  the  world,


                                54

-------
approaching  12  meters   (40  feet)  at  times.   This phenomenon
presents special problems when designing a waterside facility for
transportation of solid wastes.

As was the case in the  blue  crab  industry,  the  influence  of
production   capacity,   normal   operating  levels  (percent  of
capacity), and nature  of  operation   (intermittent  versus  con-
tinuous)  did  not  vary  significantly  from  species to species
within the Alaskan crab industry  and  did  not  distinguish  the
Alaskan  crab  industry  from  the  rest  of  the  United States;
furthermore, they did not appear to appreciably affect wastewater
characteristics or anticipated  design  problems  and  therefore,
were not judged bases for the designation of subcategories.

"Raw  water  availability" and "waste treatability" do not appear
to present insurmountable obstacles to the imposition of effluent
guidelines and to  the  industries'  successful  compliance  with
them.  Although fresh water is extremely expensive in the Alaskan
area  (costing  five  to  ten  times Seattle prices), and in many
areas is scarce to non-existent, the anticipated waste management
schemes  (discussed in Section VII) would not impose a significant
additional demand on water  supplies.   Furthermore,  the  wastes
from  the  processing  of  king, Dungeness and tanner crab can be
logically thought to be treatable  (under proper  conditions)  and
no known toxicants are contained in the waste waters.  Therefore,
these two factors were not considered bases for subcategorization
within the Alaskan crab industry.

As  discussed  in  the "Economic Analysis of Effluent Guidelines,
Seafood Processing Industry"  (June 1974),  there  is  substantial
evidence  that  processors in isolated and remote areas of Alaska
are at a comparative  economic  disadvantage  to  the  processors
located  in  population or processing centers in attempts to meet
the effluent limitations guidelines.  The  isolated  location  of
some existing Alaskan seafood processing plants eliminates almost
all  waste  water  treatment alternatives because of undependable
access  to  ocean,  land,  or  commercial  transportation  during
extended  severe sea or weather conditions, and the high costs of
eliminating engineering obstacles due  to  adverse  climatic  and
geologic conditions.  However, those plants located in population
or  processing  centers  have  access  to  more  reliable,  cost-
effective alternatives such  as  solids  recovery  techniques  or
other forms of solids disposal such as landfill or barging.

For  all  of  the  above  reasons the Alaskan Dungeness, king and
tanner crab meat  processing  industries  were  placed  into  two
subcategories  for  the  purpose  of designing and estimating the
costs of treatment systems and for developing effluent  standards
and   guidelines:   non-remote   Alaskan   crab  meat  processing
(Subcategory  D) ,  and  remote  Alaskan  crab   meat   processing
(Subcategory E).
                               55

-------
        Whole Crab and Crab Section Processing
(Subcategories F and G)


The  following  paragraphs discuss briefly the process variations
employed in the preparation of different product forms.

The most common method of perparation of king and tanner crab  in
Alaska for the domestic market is the sectioning process shown in
Figure  16.  After live tanking and butchering in the same manner
as in the meat process,  the legs are allowed to  remain  attached
to  the  shoulders.   The crab halves (or sections)  are placed in
wire baskets and rinsed  with  fresh  water  to  remove  residual
blood.   They  are  then precooked at 60° to 71°C (140° to 160°F)
for 2 to 5 minutes.  Following precooking, the  crab  are  cooked
for about 18 minutes at near-boiling temperatures; in addition to
cooking  the meat this process inactivates the "bluing" enzyme, a
compound which, if not inactivated in  this  manner,  causes  the
crab  meat  during  storage  to turn from white to an undesirable
blue color.  After cooking, the crab are  rinsed  and  cooled  in
either  a spray or a dip tank system with circulating fresh water
(flow- through) ,  In  the  next  step  the  crabs  are  inspected,
sections  with missing legs or with cracked shells are shunted to
the meat processing line, and  parasites  are  removed  from  the
shells  manually  with  scrub brushes.  The solid waste from this
area is  dry-collected  and  periodically  shoveled  through  the
butchering   area  grinder  or  occasionally  a  second  grinder,
specifically located in this area of the plant.   At  this  point
the  cleaned  crab  sections  are  sorted  according  to size and
quality, packed into boxes and frozen.  Freezing takes  place  in
either  blast  freezers  or  brine  freezers.   Those  processors
employing brine freezing use a dip tank subsequent to freezing to
rinse off the adhering brine and  to  glaze  the  sections.   The
sections  are  then  boxed  and  stored  in  a  freezer  prior to
shipping.

In Alaska, Dungeness crab are most frequently processed for  sale
as  whole  crab.  In this process the crab are held in live tanks
until needed.  After inspection for missing claws and  legs  they
are  cooked  in  either  batch  or flow-through cookers.  Cooking
lasts for 20 to 30 minutes at 99°C (210°F) in fresh water  or  in
water  containing  50,000  to  60,000  mg/1  sodium  chloride  (as
chloride) .  When salt is used, the main purpose is  to  impart   a
more  desirable  flavor  to  the  crab  rather than to effect any
substantial change in meat characteristics.

After cooking, the Dungeness crabs are transferred to the packing
area, usually by a  belt,  where  they  are  spray  rinsed.   The
workers  tuck  the  legs  under  the body and place the crab into
large steel baskets.  The steel  baskets  are  then  immersed  in
circulating  fresh  water  for  15 minutes to thoroughly cool the
crab.  Freezing of the crab is then accomplished by  placing  the
steel  baskets  in  a  brine freezer for 30 minutes.  After fresh
water rinsing for 5 minutes to remove the  excess  brine  and  to


                               56

-------
glaze  the crab they are packed in boxes and stored in a freezer,
ready for shipment.

Dungeness crab that are missing claws or legs are  butchered  and
processed as sections as previously described for king and tanner
crab.  The process is virtually identical for all three species.

There  is  little  organic  waste  generated  in  the  whole cook
operation.  Whenever the number of  missing  crab  appendages  is
low,  the  largest  source  of  organic  waste  in the whole cook
operation is the cooker.  The  water  usage  in  the  whole  cook
operation is similar to that in the section process, the greatest
water use taking place in the cooling and rinsing operation.

There is a significant difference in the amount of water used and
the  unit  waste  loads generated between the processing of whole
crab and sections  and  the  processing  of  meat  products  (see
Section  V).   The  discussion of subcategorization rationale for
crab meat products (Subcategories D and E)  also applies  to  this
category.   Therefore,  the  Alaskan  Dungeness, king, and tanner
crab sections and whole crab  processing  were  placed  into  two
separate  subcategories:  non-remote  Alaskan whole crab and crab
section processing (Subcategory F), and remote Alaskan whole crab
and crab section processing (Subcategory G).


Dungeness and Tanner Crab Processing in the Contiguous States
(Subcategory H)


Background

Although processing  volumes  are  small  compared  to  those  of
Alaska,  a  Dungeness  and  tanner  crab processing industry does
exist along the Pacific Coast of the contiguous 48  states.   The
predominant  species  processed in this region is Dungeness crab.
The tanner crab processed in this region are not native; they are
shipped frozen from Alaska during periods of surplus.

Most of the catch is picked  for  meat  or  cooked  whole.   Crab
processing  as practiced in the "lower 48" is virtually identical
to that practiced in Alaska.  The major  difference  between  the
two industries is one of scale.  Whereas a large plant in Oregon,
Washington,   or  California may pack 7.3 kkg (8 tons) of crab per
shift at peak capacity, its counterpart in Alaska might pack four
times that much.
Processing

The crab are removed from the  pots  and  stored  in  live  tanks
aboard  ship.  The size of the daily catch ranges from 140 to 900
kg  (300 to 2000 Ibs).  The boats usually deliver their catch each
evening, unloading and storing the crabs out of  water  prior  to


                                   57

-------
butchering  the  following  morning.   The  crab  normally are in
excellent physical shape prior to butchering for they are  stored
such  short  lengths of time and the quantity of crab is so small
that there is hardly any weakening due to crowding,  crushing  or
oxygen depletion.

The  butchering process is as previously discussed; the backs are
detached, the viscera removed and the  legs  separated  from  the
bodies.   Some  plants  flume waste solids from this process to a
central screen but most employ dry-capture  techniques.   In  the
latter  instance,  the  only  flows  from the butchering area are
clean-up waters.

The next unit operation is bleeding and rinsing.  The crab pieces
are either conveyed via belt beneath a water spray or are  packed
in  large steel baskets and submerged in circulating rinse water.
In either case, a continuous waste water flow results.  The  crab
parts  (and  whole crab) are then cooked in boiling water.  Whole
crab are usually boiled 20 to 30 minutes in a  50,000  to  60,000
mg/1   (as  chloride)  sodium chloride solution, containing 650 to
800 mg/1 citric acid.  Whereas the salt is  used  for  seasoning,
the citric acid facilitates shell cleaning (by loosening adhering
materials)  in  a  subsequent processing step.  Crab sections, on
the other hand, are simply boiled for  12  minutes  or  so.   The
waste  water  flows  from this step, of course, are intermittent,
occuring whenever a cooker is discharged.

As in the bleeding and rinsing step, the next phase, cooling,  is
accomplished  in  two ways.  The simpler method employs sprays to
cool the hot crab, resulting in  a  continuous  wastewater  flow.
Other  plants  employ  immersion  of the crab-filled baskets into
tanks through which cooling water is constantly  flowing.   After
20  minutes,  the  baskets are removed and allowed to drain.  The
resulting waste waters consist of a continuous flow  (the  cooling
tank  overflow) and a discrete flow (the cooling tank "dump" plus
crab-basket drainage).

In the plants of Oregon, Washington, and  California  picking  of
the  meat  from  the  shell  is a manual operation.  The "picking
stock" includes bodies and legs.  Yields from Dungeness vary from
17 to 27 percent.  This variation is mainly  a  function  of  the
maturity   of   the   animal.   Yields  increase  as  the  season
progresses.  No water need  be  used  in  this  operation  except
during washdown.

The  cleaned  meat is conveyed to brining tanks where loose shell
is separated from the meat by flotation, much as is practiced  in
the blue crab industry on the East Coast.  The 100,000 to 200,000
mg/1   (as  chloride)  sodium  chloride  solutions  are discharged
intermittently.

Most of the salt solution remaining on the meat is removed in the
next unit operation, the  (immersion) rinse tanks.  The discharges
                                   58

-------
from these tanks are continuous and contain  1500  to  2000  mg/1
chloride.

After  rinsing,  the meat is drained and packed.  Whether packing
the meat in  cardboard  and  plastic  for  the  fresh  market  or
canning,  this  operation  contributes  little to the waste water
system except clean-up flows.

In those instances where the meat is canned, the  final  step  is
retorting.   In  those where fresh packing is practiced, the last
step is refrigeration.  Both processes require water but  neither
appreciably contaminates it.


Wastes Generated

The  waste  water flows from Dungeness and tanner crab operations
in the "lower 48" are similar to  those  emanating  from  Alaskan
operations  with  the  singular  exception  that chloride concen-
trations are significantly higher and fluctuate  strongly  during
the processing shift and from day-to-day (see Section V).

Subcategorization Rationale

Subcategorization  for  the  Oregon,  Washington,  and California
tanner and  Dungeness  crab  processing  industry  was  developed
following much of the reasoning outlined in the discussion of the
Alaskan crab industry (Subcategories D, E, F, and G).

The   major  differences  between  the  two  regions'  processing
industries were geographical, with one exception:  the use of the
brine tank in the "lower 48," whereas, it was not generally  used
in Alaska.

The  geographical  reasons  alluded to above, of course, included
considerations of climate, topography, relative isolation of  the
processing   plants,  land  availability,  soil  conditions,  and
availability of unlimited water.  All of the these aspects  then,
together   with   the   significant  difference  in  waste  water
characteristics (chloride) between the two regions,  resulted  in
the  designation of different categories for the Alaskan industry
versus  the  Oregon,  Washington,  and  California   tanner   and
Dungeness  crab processing industry, for the purpose of designing
and estimating the cost of treatment systems and  for  developing
effluent standards and guidelines.
SHRIMP PROCESSING

Alaskan Shrimp  (Subcategories I and J)


In addition to crab, the other major Alaskan fishery monitored in
this  study  was  the  Alaskan  shrimp  processing industry.  The


                              59

-------
Alaska pink shrimp (Pandaius bprealis)  are caught commercially in
nets to a distance of approximately 80 km (50 miles) from  shore.
The  shrimp  are  taken  directly  to  a processing plant or to a
wholesale  marketing  vessel.   When  long  storage   times   are
necessary,  the  shrimp  are  iced in the holds and re-iced every
twelve hours.
Background

When commercial shrimp production began in Alaska over  50  years
ago,  hand  picking  was the basic peeling method used.  In 1958,
automatic peelers  were  introduced.   The  tremendous  expansion
experienced  by the industry in the last decade can be attributed
mainly to the introduction of these mechanical peelers.  From  45
to  180 kg  (100 to 400 Ibs) of shrimp can be hand peeled per day,
whereas the capacities of modern  shrimp  peeling  machines  vary
from 1820 to 5450 kg  (4000 to 12,000 Ibs)  per day (Dassow, 1963) .

Table  11  lists the Alaskan shrimp processing regions and wastes
generated in 1967.  The shrimp season extends throughout the year
in Alaska but the operation peaks from May  through  June.   Over
4500  kkg   (5000 tons) of wastes are generated annually in Alaska
by this industry.
  Table 11.  Alaskan shrimp wastes, 1967  (Yonkers, 1969).
         Region
         TOTAL
Canneries
(kkg)
(tons)
Aleutian Islands
Kodiak Island
Southeastern Alaska
1
3
2
410
3540
730
( 450)
(3900)
( 800)
               4681    (5150)
The Alaskan shrimp processing industry is centered around Kodiak,
where shrimp represent  the  largest  volume  of  landings.   The
shrimp  processing  waste  waters  are  said  (McFall,  1971)  to
constitute  the  major  portion  of  the  pollution  load   being
discharged  into Kodiak harbor.  Approximately 50 machine peelers
with a total capacity approaching  340  kkg   (375  tons)  of  raw
shrimp per day are located in processing plants in or immediately
adjacent  to  the  town  of  Kodiak.  Up to 230 kkg  (250 tons) of
shrimp waste were discharged into the receiving waters  each  day
during  peak  processing  periods  until the  local waste handling
plant opened in late spring of 1973.  Most of the  shrimp  plants
have  from  4  to 9 machine peelers, each of which use  about  3801
(100 gallons) of process water per minute.
                                60

-------
Shrimp are caught in large nets  called  "otter  trawls."   Large
planing  surfaces  or "doors" are used in conjunction with a lead
and float line to hold the mouth of the bag-like net open.   Once
onboard  the  boat, the shrimp are heavily iced in most instances
and remain in the hold for as long as 5  days.   The  shrimp  are
then  transported  to  port, unloaded at the plant and frequently
stored for a few days to condition them for peeling.  In  Alaska,
fish that are caught with the shrimp are brought to the dock with
the  catch  and  are later manually separated from the shrimp and
discharged.
Processing

The Alaskan shrimp process is depicted  in  Figures  17  and  18.
After  unloading  and storage, the shrimp are mechanically peeled
in one of two main types of shrimp peelers:  the  Model  PCA  and
the Model A, both of which are made by the Laitram Corporation of
New  Orleans,  Louisiana.   The  PCA  peeler employs a 1.5 minute
steam precook to condition the shrimp  prior  to  peeling.   This
facilitates   the  peeling  step  of  the  operation  and  allows
significantly greater through-put of product.  The Model A peeler
does not employ a steam precook.  In Alaska the  PCA  shrimp  are
nearly  always  subsequently  frozen,  while  the  Model  A final
product is canned or frozen.

After peeling the meats are inspected and then washed.   If  they
are  to  be canned, the meats are blanched in a salt solution for
about 15 minutes and then dried  by  various  methods  to  remove
surface  moisture.   Prior  to  final canning the shrimp are once
again inspected.

When this study was initiated, three  subcategories  for  Alaskan
shrimp were designated in a preliminary fashion:
    1.  canned, Model A peeled shrimp;
    2.  frozen Model A peeled shrimp; and
    3.  frozen Model PCA peeled shrimp.

The  resuli.3  of  the  study  (Section V) indicated that no signi-
ficant differences in the waste waters  from  the  processing  of
Model A peeled and canned shrimp versus Model A peeled and frozen
shrimp   exist.    Furthermore,  the  differences  in  the  waste
characteristics  between  the  monitored  plants  using  Model  A
peelers and those using Model PCA peelers were only quantitative,
not  qualitative.  Based on these observations, it was decided to
designate the entire Alaskan  shrimp  processing  industry  as  a
single subcategory.

With  both  Models A and PCA peelers, the shrimp are fed into the
machine on a broad belt.  This insures an  even  distribution  of
shrimp  across the width of the peeler.  The PCA shrimp are steam
precooked while on this belt.  This precook helps "condition" the
shrimp by loosening the shell, making them easier to  peel.   The
processing  rate  for Model A peelers is higher than that for the


                                61

-------
                                                        PRODUCT FLOW
                                          	= WASTEWATER FLOW


                                          = = = = == WASTE SOLIDS FLOW
           UNLOAD
        FISH PICKING
            AGE
                     (FISH)
                     (ORGANICS)
                     JUKCANICS)	l
           PEELERS    LSHELL.WATERJ.
WASHERS    -^'-±±'--1^"^" I	
                                          1



                                     	1
        SEPARATORS
                     (SHELL,WATER)
           SHAKER
           BLOWER
          ISHELL, WATER)	^
         INSPECTION    -SJ'^-Li	1
            SIZE
                     (MEAT)
            SEAM
           FREEZE
            BOX
                                           DISCHARGED TO OCEAN
                                           .DIRECTLY BELOW
Figure   17      Alaska  and west coast  shrimp  freezing  process.
                                        62

-------
                                                  = PRODUCT FLOW
           PEELERS    ISHELLJWATER)
                                             	= WASTEWATER FLOW

                                             • = = = WASTE SOLIDS FUOW
                                 OUTFALL PUMPED
                               TO SEVEN FATHOM DEPTH
Figure   13     Alaska  and west  coast  shrimp canning  process,
                              63

-------
PCA-type, but it is generally felt within the industry  that  the
PCA  peelers yield a higher quality product.  Whereas the Model A
can handle approximately 410 kg (900 pounds) of raw material  per
hour.  Model PCA capacities are limited to about 230-270 kg (500-
600 pounds)  per  hour.   These  processing  rates,  as  mentioned
earlier, vary greatly with condition of the incoming product.

On  the  peelers,  the  shrimp drop onto counter-rotating rollers
that "grab" the feelers of the shrimp and roll the shell off  the
meat.   The  shrimp are pressed against these rollers by overhead
racks.  Considerable water is used in both types  of  peelers  to
transport the product and the shell away from the machines.  This
water  may  be  either fresh water or salt water.  Both types are
used in Alaskan processing plants.

In an average plant approximately 50 percent of the  total  water
use  is  in  mechanical  peelers.    Frequently the shrimp meat is
flumed from the peelers to the next step, the washers.

Two types of washers are used for  peeled  shrimp,  one  for  raw
shrimp  and  one  for  cooked.   The  Laitram  Model  C washer is
designed for detaching "swimmerettes," gristle  and  other  waste
material  and  shell from raw shrimp, where the Laitram Model PCC
cleaner is designed to wash  peeled  precooked  shrimp.   In  the
washers, agitators vigorously mix the shrimp in the trough of the
washer,  breaking  loose  any  shell  not  removed in the peeling
process.  A few plants that use PCA peelers do not use subsequent
washers because the  violent  agitation  fragments  some  of  the
shrimp.

After  washing, the shrimp meat is flumed to separators where the
small  meat  fragments  and  remaining  shell  are  automatically
removed.   Again, two different designs are used, one for peeled,
precooked shrimp and one for peeled raw  shrimp.   After  passing
through the separators, the shrimp meat is flumed to a dewatering
belt.   Approximately  20  percent of the total plant waste water
flow comes from the washing-separating area.

After dewatering, the Model A peeled shrimp  are  blanched  in  a
salt  solution  for  15  to 17 minutes at 96°C  (205°F).  Only the
shrimp which are to be subsequently canned are blanched.  Usually
neither the PCA peeled shrimp nor the Model A peeled shrimp to be
frozen are subjected to the blanching step.  The cooker used  for
blanching is normally discharged every four hours.

The  next step is the final air-cleaning step in a "shakerblower"
operation.  This step is not universally used.  In this step, the
shrimp meats are dried and any extraneous  shell  is  blown  off.
Following  cleaning  the shrimp are inspected and any shrimp with
shell still adhering to them are removed and wasted.  The meat is
then further sized and graded either manually or by machine.

The shrimp to be canned move through  the  automatic  filler  and
into  the cans.  Before the lids are placed on the cans, ascorbic
                                 64

-------
acid is added.  As in the crab industry, the ascorbic acid serves
as a color preservative and prevents the undesirable "bluing"  of
the  meat.   In  the  next step, the cans are seamed, after which
they are retorted for 20 minutes.  Those Model  A  peeled  shrimp
which  are not to be canned but which are to be frozen are packed
without the use of additives.

PCA peeled shrimp, prior to  freezing,  are  rinsed  in  a  salt-
-ascorbic  acid  solution  in some processing plants.  In others,
this step is omitted.  The shrimp are then frozen in plastic bags
or in 2.3 kg  (5 Ib)  cans and stored to await shipment.

Wastes Generated

Jensen (1965) estimated that 78 to 85 percent of  the  shrimp  is
wasted in mechanical peeling.

The  National  Marine Fisheries Service listed the composition of
shrimp waste as shown in Table 12.

     Table 12.  Composition of shrimp waste
                                     Composition
       Source              Protein      Chitin      CaCO3_

Hand peeling                 27.2        57.5        15.3
Mechanical peeling           22.0        42.3        35.7
A specialized market for shrimp waste has developed in  the  fish
food  industry.   The  red  pigment  of  the shrimp (astaxanthin)
supplies the pink color which is characteristic in wild trout but
absent in farm trout (Mendenhall, 1971).

Crude waste from  shrimp  cannot  provide  the  major  source  of
protein  in livestock feed because the amount of calcium would be
excessive.   However,  a  simple  and  inexpensive   method   for
decalcifying  meal  has been developed (Mendenhall, 1971).  Other
uses for the  solid  waste  produced  in  the  shrimp  processing
industry are discussed in Section VII.

Little  work has been done to date on the characterization of the
waste waters generated in the Alaskan shrimp processing industry.
Crawford  (1969) reported that mechanical shrimp peeler  effluents
averaged  29,000 mg/1 total solids and 6.4 percent total nitrogen
(dry weight basis).   Recent  (and  unpublished)   work  has  been
conducted  by  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency  and by the
National Marine Fisheries Service in the shrimp plants of Kodiak,
Alaska.  The results of their studies are detailed in  Chapter  5
(McFall,  1971 and Peterson, 1973a and 1973br).
                                  65

-------
Subcategorization Rationale

The  reasoning  followed in the development of the Alaskan shrimp
subcategory paralleled in many respects the reasoning followed in
the designation of Subcategories Dr E, F, and G.  As is the  case
with   the   crab   industry,  the  Alaskan  shrimp  industry  is
characterized by large processing plants operating heavily during
the peak processing months of the year  and  only  intermittently
during  the remainder of the year.  Raw material availability, as
with crab, is very much a function of weather.  The  availability
of  raw  material  at  the docks is determined by the fishermen's
ability to set their nets  and  complete  a  "drag"  through  the
shrimp fishing grounds.

Indications are that the condition of raw material on delivery to
the  processing plant influences the character of the waste water
streams emanating from the  process.   Unlike  crab,  shrimp  are
delivered  to  the  plant  on  ice  and the age of the individual
animals in a load will vary from one day to a week.   The  degree
of natural decomposition (or degradation) varies correspondingly.
As  a  general  rule,  the older the mean age of the animals in a
load, the greater will be the  total  pollutant  content  of  the
processing waste stream.

In  addition  to  age  in  terms of numbers of elapsed days since
harvest, the biological age of the shrimp appears to  affect  the
waste   water  characteristics.   Although   this  study  was  of
insufficient duration to determine the exact effect  of  maturity
on  waste  water  characteristics,  previous investigation by the
National Marine Fisheries Service Technology Laboratory in Kodiak
and by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle  Laboratory
indicate  that  a  significant  difference in total waste loading
exists between early spring  and  late  summer   (Collins,  1973).
Indications  are that as the shrimp mature and become larger, the
organic levels in the waste streams decrease.  The difference  in
organic load from processing of mature versus immature shrimp has
been  indicated to be as much as 50 percent.  The exact effect of
maturity  on  waste  water  component  levels   remains   to   be
determined.

As  is the case with crab, the product yield tends to increase as
the season progresses.  This consideration, although  it  affects
the  waste water stream in the processing plant, should not prove
a detriment to this study because the waste water characteristics
developed  (Section V) were generated during a period of  relative
immaturity  of  the  animal and correspondingly lower yields than
might be expected with mature  animals.   Therefore,  it  is  not
expected  that  pollutant  levels,  in terms of production, would
increase over the course of the season.   Rather  they  would  be
expected   to  decrease  somewhat,  although  again  perhaps  not
significantly.   The  third  variable   to   be   considered   in
Subcategorization  was  "variety of the species being processed."
This variable was not applicable to the Alaskan  shrimp  industry
and was, therefore, not a justification for Subcategorization.


                                  66

-------
As   discussed  in  the  "Background"  section  of  this  report,
harvesting of Alaskan shrimp is carried out virtually exclusively
through the use of otter trawls.  Therefore, "harvesting  method"
was not an important variable in the subcategorization scheme.

Whereas, "degree of preprocessing" is significant in other shrimp
fisheries  where  shrimp are sometimes beheaded at sea, and where
trash fish are sometimes separated from the shrimp catch prior to
returning to the processing plant, this is not the  case  in  the
Alaskan  industry.   No preprocessing of the Alaskan shrimp takes
place prior to docking of  the  vessel  next  to  the  processing
plant.  Therefore, this variable was not considered a significant
factor in the development of subcategories.

The  variable "manufacturing process and subprocesses" does apply
to the Alaskan shrimp processing industry.  As discussed  in  the
"Processing" section, two main types of peelers are used, Laitram
Model A and Laitram Model PCA (with steam precook).  Furthermore,
those  shrimp  to  be  canned  were  subjected  to  a  subsequent
blanching step which was not a part of  the  process  for  shrimp
which  were  to be frozen.  While these variables are significant
in the Alaskan shrimp processing industry, their importance  fell
short of dictating that a separate subcategory be established for
Model A versus Model PCA peeled shrimp.

"Form  and  quality  of finished product" was a variable that was
considered in the subcategorization scheme  and  that  indirectly
has  an effect on the waste water strengths in the Alaskan shrimp
processing industry.  That is, shrimp which are to be canned  are
processed  using Model A peelers and those which are to be frozen
are peeled on both.   These  differences,  however,  are  covered
above under "manufacturing process and subprocesses" and need not
be further considered here.

"Location  of  plant"  was  a  very important item in the Alaskan
shrimp processing industry and in  large  part  justified  desig-
nation  of a separate subcategory.  The arguments appropriate for
this decision are the same arguments that are  presented  earlier
in  this  chapter  for Alaskan crab and need not be reiterated in
their entirety here.  It is  sufficient  to  mention  that  those
variables  tied  to  the  location  of the plant such as climatic
conditions, terrain, and soil types are  unique  to  the  Alaskan
region  and  severely  constrain  the  number  of available waste
management  alternatives  which  can   be   considered   in   the
development of effluent guidelines.

The  effects  of "production capacity and normal operating level"
are apparent in the  Alaskan  shrimp  industry  because  a  large
amount  of the total plant flow passes through the peelers.  That
flow remains constant whether the peelers  are  running  at  full
capacity  or half capacity.  Nevertheless, the influence of these
variables was not sufficient to warrant subcategorization.
                                67

-------
The "nature of the operation" was a consideration of  near  equal
importance  to  "location  of plant."  The intermittent nature of
the industry  precludes  the  designation  of  treatment  systems
requiring  constant  or  only  mildly  fluctuating influent waste
streams and further limits the number of  alternatives  available
to the sanitary engineer.

The  variables  "raw  water  availability,  cost and quality" and
"amenability of the waste to treatment" were of relatively  small
consequence in the designation of this subcategory.   Although the
maintenance  of  an  adequate  fresh  water supply is a continual
problem in  Alaska,  the  anticipated  waste  management  schemes
(discussed  in  Section  VII)  would  not  impose  a  significant
additional demand on present water  supplies.   Furthermore,  the
wastes from the processing of Alaskan shrimp can be thought to be
treatable   (under  proper  conditions) and no known toxicants are
contained therein.

As discussed in the "Economic Analysis  of  Effluent  Guidelines,
Seafood  Processing  Industry"   (June 1974), there is substantial
evidence that processors in isolated and remote areas  of  Alaska
are  at  a  comparative  economic  disadvantage to the processors
located in population or processing centers in attempts  to  meet
the  effluent  limitations  guidelines.  The isolated location of
some existing Alaskan seafood processing plants eliminates almost
all waste water treatment alternatives  because  of  undependable
access  to  ocean,  land,  or  commercial  transportation  during
extended severe sea or weather conditions, and the high costs  of
eliminating the engineering obstacles due to adverse climatic and
geologic conditions.  However, those plants located in population
or  processing  centers  have  access  to  more  reliable,  cost-
effective alternatives such  as  solids  recovery  techniques  or
other forms of solids disposal such as landfill or barging.

For  all  of  the  above  reasons  the  Alaskan shrimp processing
industry was placed into two subcategories  for  the  purpose  of
designing  and  estimating the costs of treatment systems and for
developing effluent standards and guidelines: non-remote  Alaskan
shrimp  processing  (Subcategory  I),  and  remote Alaskan shrimp
processing  (Subcategory J).


Non-Alaskan Shrimp  (Subcategories K, L, and M)

Of the seafood commodities studied, the  most  wide  ranging  was
shrimp.   Significant  shrimp  fisheries  are  being exploited in
waters off the coast of all the major regions  in  this  country.
In  addition to the Alaskan industry a medium size shrimp canning
and freezing industry exists on the lower Pacific Coast, a medium
to large size  canning  industry  operates  on  the  Gulf  Coast,
centering  around  the  Mississippi  River  delta  area,  a large
breading and freezing industry extends from  the  east  coast  of
Texas  to  the  east coasts of Florida and Georgia, and a growing
                                  68

-------
shrimp canning and freezing industry operates in the New  England
area.

Figures  19,  20,  and 21 are plots of all shrimp flow, BOD£, and
suspended solids data  (respectively) gathered in this  study.   A
review  of  these  plots and the shrimp data in Section V reveals
that the breaded shrimp flows and suspended solids average  about
twice   those   from  the  non-breaded  shrimp  processors.   The
settleable solids in the waste waters from  the  northern  shrimp
processors,  on  the other hand, were nearly ten times those from
southern shrimp processing, breaded or not.  As was expected, the
breaded shrimp suspended solids levels were nearly twice those of
the non^breaded shrimp.

The breading of southern shrimp nearly doubled  the  waste  water
BOD.   The northern shrimp BOD's were nearly three times those of
the unbreaded southern shrimp, a phenomenon largely  attributable
to  the  differences  in  product  size   (as is discussed later).
Paralleling this BOD relationship, the northern  shrimp  COD  and
oil  levels  were  also  considerably  higher  than  those of the
southern shrimp.

These obvious differences, together with  contrasts  in  climate,
land  availability and other factors (discussed later)  led to the
designation  of  three  subcategories  for  non-Alaskan   shrimp:
Northern  Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States (Subcategory
K); Southern Non-Breaded  Shrimp  Processing  in  the  Contiguous
States  (Subcategory  L);  and  Breaded  Shrimp Processing in the
Contiguous States (Subcategory M).


Northern Shrimp Prgcessincr in the Contiguous States
(Subcategory K)


Background

The wastes generated in the shrimp canning and freezing  industry
of the contiguous United States were found to vary from region to
region.   The variations exhibited were easily traced to two main
variables:  differences  in  product  size;  and  harvesting   or
preprocessing  techniques.  The basic shrimp process was found to
be consistent from Astoria, Oregon to Brownsville, Texas  to  New
Orleans,   Louisiana   to   Brunswick,   Georgia  to  Gloucester,
Massachusetts.

In terms of total product marketed, shrimp in the  United  States
are  second  only  to  tuna.   The  average  United States shrimp
harvest approaches 100,000  kkg   (224  million  pounds)  (Langno,
1970).  Lyles  (see Table 13) presents considerably higher values.
Table 14 shows the breakdown of the major products for 1970.

The  principal  species  harvested in the Oregon, Washington, and
California waters is the pink shrimp (Pandalus  jordani).   Prod-
                                   69

-------
§
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
• = Alaska
• •" Gulf
_ D= West Coast
o _ Breaded
0
O
D •
-
° * «
i i i i li
                              10       15       20
                                PRODUCTION kkg/day
25       30
                                    Figure 19
                      Shrimp production rates and flow ratios

                                        70

-------




IT*
tr>
X
Q
O


160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
• *• Alaska
m •= Gulf
D= West Coast
D
O= Breaded
—
D •
O
O
-
-
1 1 I 1 i l
5        10        15       20       25



          PRODUCTION  kkg/day






               Figure 20




Shriinp production rates  and BODS ratios
                   71
30

-------
     500
                                                o =
                                                Alaska


                                                Gulf


                                                West Coast


                                                Breaded
     400
tn
X

CO
T3
•H
H
O
CQ

'd

-------
Table  13
Recent shrimp catches
Year
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
Average

(kkg)
139,600
132,300
143,800
167,000
175,900
151,700
Quantity
(tons)
(153,900)
(145,800)
(158,550)
(184,050)
(193,950)
(167,250)
                  73

-------
             Table  14
Shrimp products, 1970

Product

Breaded
Canned
Frozen
Specialty products


(kkg)
46,630
12,020
41,860
140
Quantity

(tons)
(51,400)
(13,250)
(46,150)
(150)
Total
  100,650
(110,950)
                            74

-------
uction  in  this region approaches 6800 kkg (7500 tons) per year,
more than  80  percent  of  which  is  delivered  to  Oregon  and
Washington   processing   centers  (Soderquist,  et  al.,  1970).
According to the National  Marine  Fisheries  Service,  the  West
Coast  stocks  are capable of producing roughly twice that amount
under ideal  circumstances.   The  shrimp  industry  of  the  New
England  area  is relatively new and has grown dramatically since
1965.  From 1965 to  1969  harvests  doubled  yearly.   In  early
years,  the  fishery  was  confined  to the state of Maine but as
harvests  increased,  processing  spread  south   and   a   large
processing  center  is  now located at Gloucester, Massachusetts.
Practically all  Massachusetts  shrimp  landings  take  place  at
Gloucester.   On  Table  15 is a list of shrimp landings in Maine
and in Massachusetts during the 1965 to 1969 period.  The  normal
shrimp  season  in New England is from September through May with
peak catches occurring from January to April.   Shrimp  processing
techniques  in  the  region are varied.  They include canning and
freezing of both peeled and unpeeled shrimp.  The  current  trend
in   processing  is  toward  peeled,  fresh-frozen  shrimp  using
standard automatic peeling machines, in plants operating up to 16
hours per day.
Processing

As mentioned earlier, the process for canned or frozen shrimp  is
fairly  uniform  throughout the United States (see Figures 17 and
18), also the reader is directed to the processing description in
the sections dealing with Alaskan shrimp.  Variations  from  that
general scheme are discussed below.

On  the lower Pacific Coast, shrimp are brought to the processing
plant frequently (1-2 days).  Very seldom are the shrimp held  at
sea  more than a few days.  After netting, the shrimp are brought
onto the deck of the ship and the majority of the larger fish and
debris is removed at that time.  The shrimp are then stored whole
in the hold of the boat.  These shrimp are laid in a 5 to 8 cm (2
to 3 in.)  mat with about 2 cm or more of ice put over them.  This
layering is very important,  if not done properly,  spoilage  will
occur  quite  rapidly.   Although trash fish are removed from the
catch prior to returning to port, approximately  one  percent  of
the  delivered  load still consists of trash fish and debris, and
must be manually separated at the processing plant.  In  the  New
England  area,  the  shrimp  are  delivered  fresh  daily  to the
processing plant, heads on.   At the plant dock they are inspected
and foreign material is removed; then they are weighed and iced.

The remainder of the shrimp canning and  freezing  operations  on
the  lower  West  Coast,  South Atlantic, and Northeast Coast are
similar to those previously discussed in the section  on  Alaskan
shrimp.   In the shrimp canning industry of the Gulf Coast and of
the West Coast, both Model A and PCA type peelers  are  employed.
In  the New England area, the PCA type peelers are prevalent.  On
the West Coast and in the New England area, some seawater is used
                                 75

-------
Table  15      New England shrimp landings,* 1965-1969
                   (Gibbs and  Hill,  1972).
Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
Maine
(kkg)
942
1738
3147

11,110
Landings
(tons)
(1038)
(1916)
(3462)

(12,250)
Massachusetts
(kkg)
8
11
10

2040
(tons)
(9)
(12)
(11)

(2250)
(kkg)
950
1766
3171
6545
13,110
Total '
(tons)
(1047)
(1947)
(3496)
(7200)
(14,450)
  *Heads on
  **Entire New England  shrimp  fishery.
                              76

-------
in a few plants for processing.  Most plants, however, use  fresh
water exclusively.


Wastes Generated

The  discussion  of  the  wastes  generated in the Alaskan shrimp
processing industry is applicable to much of the remainder of the
shrimp industry in the  United  States,  especially  the  Pacific
Northwest  and  the  Northeast industries where the shrimp are of
comparable size to the Alaskan shrimp.

The majority of the work on shrimp wastes has been  conducted  in
the  Gulf Coast area.  A demonstration project is currently under
way at a major  shrimp  cannery  in  Westwego,  Louisiana.   This
program  is  designed  to  evaluate  the  efficacy  of  different
screening and dissolved air flotation techniques.


Subcategorigation Rationale

Subcategorization for the shrimp  industry  was  relatively  com-
plicated.   In addition to the previously mentioned factors which
differentiate between  northern,  southern  and  breaded  shrimp,
other factors distinguish these subcategories from Alaskan shrimp
and  were  discussed  in the "Alaskan Shrimp" section.  The major
difference between larger Gulf  and  South  Atlantic  shrimp  and
smaller West Coast and New England varieties are due to geography
and species diversity.

The condition of raw material on delivery to the processing plant
does vary between the northern plants and the southeastern plants
which may practice beheading at sea.


Harvesting  methods,  production  capacity  and  normal operating
levels  are  similar  in  all  areas  of  the  country   sampled.
Manufacturing  processes  and  subprocesses,  form and quality of
finished  product,  and  nature  of  operation  showed  variation
between  the  canning processes and breading processes.  Analysis
of the data (Section V) indicates that  the  West  Coast  canning
process,  the Gulf Coast canning processes and the breaded shrimp
processes  were  each  dissimilar  enough  so  they   should   be
considered separately.

Raw  water  availability, cost and quality is definitely superior
in the Pacific Northwest to that of  the  Gulf  Coast  and  South
Atlantic  regions.   However,  no  evidence has been put forth to
suggest  that  this  should  justify  consideration  of  separate
subcategories.
SOUTHERN NON-BREADED^SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE CONTIGUOUS STATES



                                   77

-------
(Subcategory L)


Background

In  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  and  South  Atlantic  area, the shrimp
industry is the most important seafood industry.  The  season  in
that  part of the country runs from April to early June and again
from August to early October.   Three  varieties  of  shrimp  are
processed  in  the  Gulf  area,  the pink (Penaeus duorarum); the
brown (Penaeus aztecus)  and the white  or  gray  shrimp  (Penaeus
jjetiterus) .   The  latter is processed most heavily.  In both the
shrimp  breading  and  shrimp  canning  industries,  considerable
importation  of  foreign  stocks  from points as distant as North
Africa and Indonesia is practiced.

Processing

As mentioned earlier, the process for canned or frozen shrimp  is
fairly  uniform  throughout the United States (see Figures 17, 18
and  22),  also  the  reader  is  directed  to   the   processing
description   in   the  sections  dealing  with  Alaskan  shrimp.
Variations from that general scheme are discussed below.  In  the
Gulf  of Mexico and South Atlantic fishery, the boats normally do
not bring their catch directly to  the  processing  plant.    They
commonly  dock  at central locations (buying stations) and unload
their catch into waiting trucks.  The shrimp are then  iced  down
and hauled to the processing plant.  Unlike other areas, the Gulf
and South Atlantic shrimp fishery behead a significant portion of
the  catch  at  sea.  This is done to minimize degradation of the
product and  permits  extension  of  fishing  trips.   In  a  few
instances,  whole shrimp are brought to the unloading point where
they are beheaded prior to  being  loaded  onto  the  truck,  for
transport to the processing plants.

In  addition  to raw waste characteristics, the subcategorization
rational follows the  discussions  presented  above  for  Alaskan
shrimp and northern shrimp processing.


BREADED SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE CONTIGUOUS STATES
(Subcategory M)


A  large  percentage  of  the shrimp landed on the Gulf Coast are
processed as a breaded product.  This  product  was  successfully
developed during the 1950's and markets are continuing to expand.


Processing

The  breaded  shrimp  industry  pays  a higher price for beheaded
shrimp due to certain types of machinery  that  can  only  handle
this type of product.


                                   78

-------
           = PRODUCT FLOW

           = WASTEWATER FLOW

           ' = WASTE SOLIDS FLOW
                                               (FISH8 DEBRIS)
                                               (CARAPACE MATERIAL,    I
                                                 HEADS 8 TAILS.WATER)]
                                               (WATER)	         i
                                                                  1

                                                                    I
                                               (CARAPACE MATERIAL.
                                                WATER)


                                               (MEAT, WATER)
                                                                -
                                               (DEBRIS)
                                               IULBKIS)               I
                                                                  1

                                                                    I
                                               (SHRIMP PIECES IN DUMP)   I
                                               (MEAT, WATER)
      WATER)      _|
(HOT WATER)
                                               (WATER)
•	1
       I
 	1


       I
                                                               EFFLUENT
Figure    22     Southern non-breaded shrimp  canning process
                                      79

-------
= PRODUCT FLOW

= WASTE FLOW
                                               (BATTER OVERFLOWJ
                                                BREADING)  ^
                                                       EFFLUENT
   Figure  23   •   Breaded shrimp process.
                         80

-------
On  the  Gulf  or  South Atlantic Coast, where the breaded shrimp
industry is prevalent, peeling is done either by machine or hand.
Most plants utilize some form of hand  peeling  of  shrimp.   The
breaded  shrimp  schemes are shown on Figure 23.  Hand peeling is
used because it gives a much nicer looking product  than  machine
peeling.   There are two different makes of machine peelers used:
Johnson (P.D.I.) peelers, and  Seafood  Automatic  peelers.   The
machines  have a capacity of 1800 to 5500 kg (4000 to 12,000 Ibs)
per day depending on the make (Dewberry, 1964).

Two types of breading usually occur  in  each  plant:   hand  and
mechanical.   Hand  breading  is  done  by  experienced women who
generally work with the  best  product.   The  shrimp  are  first
dipped in batter, then in bread until the shrimp are coated, then
they  are boxed, weighed and sealed.  Mechanical breading employs
the same process as the hand breading  and  is  sometimes  called
"Japanese  Breading."   The mechanical breading generally has two
main waste flows:  one from the holding tanks and  the  other  is
from the batter mixing tanks overflow.  Each plant also has a de-
breading  station  where improperly breaded shrimp are washed and
rerun prior to boxing.

Shrimp that have been breaded are packaged  either  as  "fantail"
shrimp  (shrimp that have the uropods portion of the tail left and
are  split  part way up the back), or as "butterfly" (split whole
shrimp with tail removed).  Butterfly and  whole  shrimp   (either
glazed  and frozen or breaded and frozen) are also packaged.  The
packages are then machine sealed and frozen.  Shrimp  are  frozen
either in blast freezers or i.Q.F. quick freezers.


The  discussion  of  the  wastes  generated in the Alaskan shrimp
processing industry is applicable to much of the remainder of the
shrimp industry in the United States.

In addition to raw waste  characteristics  the  subcategorization
rational  follows  the  discussions  presented  above for Alaskan
shrimp and northern shrimp processing.


TUNA PROCESSING (Subcategory N)

The annual consumption of tuna in the United States each year far
surpasses  any  other  seafood.    The  raw  material,  processing
methods  and  size  of  operation  clearly  distinguish  the tuna
industry from the other fisheries studied.   For  these  reasons,
tuna  is  considered  a  separate  category.  The industry may be
divided into four  main  segments:   harvesting,  processing  for
human   consumption,  production  of  pet  food,  and  by-product
recovery.  For the purpose of this  report  these  four  segments
will  be  discussed  with specific emphasis on the processsing of
human food; pet food production and by-product  utilization  will
be  treated  as  waste recovery, although each is an integral and
profitable part or the industry.  Harvesting will  be  considered


                                  81

-------
                                         SUPPLY OF  CANNED  TUNA,  1961-72
                       Million


                         600
                         450
00
ro
                         300
                         150
U. S.  pack from
imported fresh
and  frozen
                                                          U. S.  pack from
                                                         domestic landings
                                                       I
  I
I
I
                          1961   1962   1963   1964   1965   1966   1967  1968   1969   1970   1971   1972
                                                   Figure   24

-------
only  from the standpoint of a raw materials source and shall not
be dealt with in detail.
Background

The United States tuna industry began in 1903 with the production
of 700 cases of Albacore tuna packed in California.  By 1972,  it
had  grown to over 31 million cases per year worth $632.5 million
with plants located, not only in the continental  United  States,
but  also  in Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and American Samoa.  In recent
years, the industry has been increasingly dependent on imports of
fresh and frozen raw tuna to meet the demand.   As  indicated  on
Figure  2Ht  only  3U percent of the U. S. supply was packed from
domestic landings—compared with 39 percent  in  1971  (N.M.F.S.,
1973).   The  four main tuna species of interest to the tuna pro-
cessors are the yellow  fin  (Neothunus  macropterus),  blue  fin
(Thunnus  thynnus),  skipjack  (Katsuwonus pelamis), and Albacore
(Thunnus germo).  These species are divided into the  white  meat
variety, exclusively Albacore, of which there is a limited catch,
and  the  light  meat varieties of blue fin, yellow fin and skip-
jack; the latter two comprise the majority of the tuna canned  in
the  United  States.  White meat tuna is considered the "premium"
product of the industry, because of its characteristically  white
color,  firm  texture  and  delicate  flavor as compared with the
darker, fuller flavored light meat.   Harvesting 'with  pole  and
line  has  given way in the past 20 years to the use of the purse
seiner, which permits the catching of a large volume of  fish  in
about  one-fourth  the  time.   (Albacore are primarily harvested
with pole and line because they don't school).  After locating  a
school  of tuna, the fish are encircled with a large net which is
then drawn closed at  the  bottom.   The  fish  are  subsequently
crowded together and dipped out of the enclosure into the hold of
the  boat.  Fish harvested locally, i.e., near the processor, are
held in refrigerated cargo  holds  or  wells  in  the  ship.   An
alternate  method of storage has been developed for a catch which
must be  transported  from  foreign  water,  often  thousands  of
kilometers  from the processing plant.  This method entails brine
freezing the fish and then holding them in a frozen  state  until
near the plant where the fish are then thawed enough to be easily
unloaded.
Processing

The  processing  of  tuna is divided into several unit processes,
specifically:  receiving, thawing, butchering, precook, cleaning,
canning, retorting, and finally, labeling  and  casing.   Product
flow,   waste   water   flow,  pet  food  production,  and  waste
utilization is shown schematically in Figure 25.

The tuna are unloaded from the fishing boats into  one  ton  bins
and  transported  by  fork  lift  trucks  to  the scale house for
weighing.  Then, depending on the condition of  the  fish,  i.e.,


                                 83

-------
                                      RAW  FROZEN  TUNA
                                        FROM   BOATS
                                                                                      PRODUCT FLOW
                                                                     	= WASTEWATER FLOW


                                                                     •-—••——-«= — * WASTE SOLIDS FLOW
                                                        (BLOOD, JUICES, SMALL PARTICLES)
                                                        ( OILS, MEAT, BONE, ETC.)
            STICKWATER (OILS,SOLUBLE ORGANICS)

                      (HEAD, FINS,SKIN, BONE)
                                i  (VEGETABLE OIL^MEAT PARTICLES)
                                   (OILS, MEAT PARTICLES, SOAP)
                                   (ORSANICS, DETERGENT)
                                                                            	  , _ 	 	   ^1
                             (SCRUBBER WATER WITH ENTRAINED ORGANICS)
REDUCTION PLANT
 SOLUBLES PLANT —
                               (CONDENSATE WITH ENTRAINED ORGANICS)
                                                                   HUMAN
                                                                 CONSUMPTION
CONCENTRATED
 SOLUBLES
                            Figure    25
                                                 Tuna  process.
                                            84

-------
soft  or  frozen,  and  the  production  backlog, they are either
transferred to cold storage or directly to  thawing  tanks;  soft
fish which may be fresh or partially thawed are usually processed
immediately.   Imported  fish,  i.e.,  purchased  from  a foreign
country,  are  also  received  to  fill  any  gaps  in   domestic
harvesting.

The  fish  are  thawed  in large tanks which hold 8 to 10 one ton
bins.  These tanks are equipped with a moveable end plate so that
fork lift  trucks  can  place  the  bins  inside  the  tanks  and
subsequently  remove  them  after the thaw.  Once the bins are in
place, the end plate is lowered and fresh water  or  seawater  is
pumped  or sprayed into the tank.  Thawing then takes place under
either static or continuous flow conditions.  Steam  is  used  in
some cases to heat the water.

The  thaw  time  depends on three variables:  1) the condition of
the fish with respect to temperature; 2) temperature of the  thaw
water,  and 3) size of the fish.  Smaller species, e.g., skipjack
averaging 1.8 to 9.0 kg (4 to 20 Ibs) and Albacore 4.5 to  18  kg
(10  to  40  Ibs),  take  from two to three hours to thaw whereas
larger species, e.g., the yellow fin averaging 4.5 to 45  kg  (10
to  100  Ibs),  take  from  five  to  six hours.  Thawing time is
increased for fish held in cold storage at -12  to  -18°C  (0  to
10°F).   A  substantial  reduction  in  thaw  time is achieved by
heating the thaw water with the addition of steam.  After thawing
is completed, the tanks are drained into a collection ditch,  the
end  plate  is  raised, and the bins are removed and placed on an
automated dumper at the head of the butchering line.

The thawed fish are dumped onto a shaker conveyor  which  spreads
them out and transports them to the butcher table.  Equipped with
a  conveyor  belt,  wash  screen,  and  circular saw the table is
manned by 5 to 10 skilled workers who eviscerate each tuna.   The
viscera,  which comprises 10 to 15 percent of the tuna by weight,
is removed and placed in barrels along the  line.   The  tuna  is
washed   with   a   water   spray   and   checked  for  freshness
organoleptically, i.e., by a trained worker who  inserts  a  hand
into  the  cut  made  by  the butchers and smells it for signs of
putrifaction.  Workers at the end of the line place the  tuna  in
mobile racks containing 14 separate trays.  The larger species of
tuna  are cut to standard size and set into trays for the precook
process which follows.

A small water jet is usually sprayed onto the saws to  keep  them
clean.   The accumulated waste from the saw and wash screen drips
onto the floor and is collected in a drain running  parallel  to,
and  underneath  the  butcher  table.   This  drain also collects
waters used to hose down the floor periodically  during  the  day
and  the  equipment  washdown at the completion of the butchering
process.  The viscera is collected in barrels and sent to  either
the fish meal reduction plant or the fish solubles plant.
                                 85

-------
The  tuna  are precooked to facilitate the removal of edible from
inedible portions.   The  precook  process  involves  three  main
steps:  1)  the steam cooking of the fish, 2)  removal of the steam
condensate or "stickwater," and 3)  the cooling of the fish  prior
to cleaning.

The  racks of butchered fish are wheeled into large steam cookers
with a capacity of 10 tons of fish per cook.   Depending upon  the
size of the fish or fish sections,  the cook will last from 2 to 4
hours  at  a  live  steam  temperature  of  93°C  (200°F).  Steam
condensate plus oils and moisture from the fish collects  in  the
cookers  and  the  resulting  stickwater  is pumped to a solubles
plant which concentrates this and other by—product liquids.

After the precook, the racks are moved into a  holding  room  and
cooled  about  12  hours.   The  holding  or  cooling room may be
equipped with fine spray nozzles to hasten the heat loss,  but  in
most cases cooling takes place under ambient conditions.  Because
of the time involved in the precook process,  the fish are thawed,
butchered,  and  precooked  the  day  before they are cleaned and
packed.  From the cooling room the racks of cooked tuna are moved
into the cleaning area of the packing room.

The trays of cooked tuna are wheeled to the  packing  room  where
the fish are removed from the racks and the tuna placed along the
long cleaning lines which lead the packing machine.   There may be
from  one  to ten lines in a plant, depending upon its size, with
about 100 people working each line.  The line consists of a  long
double table, with an elevated shelf separating the two sides and
a  stainless steel conveyor belt in the middle of this shelf.  At
each position  along  the  table  is  a  hopper  feeding  another
conveyor  belt  beneath  the  table.  First the head, tail, fins,
skin, and bone are manually removed from the fish and disposed of
in the aforementioned hopper, conveyor  system.   This  scrap  is
collected  at the leading end of line and by means of an auger it
is conveyed to a collection area for transport to the  fish  meal
reduction plant.  Depending on size and species, approximately 30
to  40  percent  of  the tuna by weight is comprised of this non-
edible portion.  Next, the red meat which  constitutes  6  to  10
percent  of  the  tuna  is  scraped  from the lighter meat into a
container for collection and transport to the pet food production
area.  Cleaned of all excess material, the meat is separated into
four loins along natural dividing lines, i.e., down the back  and
along  the  sides.  These loins along with broken portions of the
loins are placed on the elevated  conveyor  to  the  can  packing
machine.   Chunk  style  tuna  is  prepared  from broken sections
whereas whole loins are used  for  solid  pack  tuna.   Automatic
packing  machines  shape the tuna and fill the cans.  A spillover
of juices onto the floor from the compaction of the tuna  results
in  the  only flow of waste from what is otherwise a dry process.
The cans are then filled with soybean or vegetable oil,  a  brine
solution,  and monosodium glutamate; the oil replaces the natural
oils lost in cooking and lubricates the tuna to prevent  sticking
to  the sides of the cans during the high temperatures reached in
                                 86

-------
retorting.  The oil delivery system has  an  overflow  collection
system  which  filters the oil and recirculates it, thereby mini-
mizing loss.

After vacuum sealing in a lid seaming machine the  cans  are  run
through a can washer to remove all the particles and oil from the
outside.   The  can washers usually have three phases:  prerinse,
soap rinse, and final rinse, all utilizing hot water.  The  first
two  phases are recirculated water from which the oils and solids
are removed.  A despotting agent is  often  added  to  the  final
rinse to protect against mineral deposits on the cans as the cans
dry.

Conveyed  by  a  series  of  belts,  elevators, and wire enclosed
gravity feed lines, the packed cans arrive at the cooker room  on
one  of  several  lines,  depending  on  can size.  Retort cooker
buggies, which  are  semi-circular  in  shape  to  fit  into  the
cylindrical  cookers,  are  filled  with  cans  at  each of these
several can lines.  When enough full buggies of a particular  can
size  are  loaded  they  are  guided into the retorts on a set of
rails and the doors are bolted shut.

The retorts are essentially large pressure cookers which  measure
1.4  meters  by 11.1 meters (4-1/2 ft by 37 ft) in which the tuna
is sterilized at 121°C  (250/F)  for 1-1/2 hours.   This  procedure
insures  the  destruction  of all living organisms within the can
which could destroy the product or more seriously in the case  of
Clostridium botulinum pose a fatal danger to the consumer.  After
the   necessary  time  and  temperature  requirements  have  been
satisfied for the particular can size, the  pressure  is  reduced
and  the  cans cooled with circulating cold water.  A final water
rinse contains a despotting agent as is sometimes used to protect
against spotting when the cans dry.  The buggies are removed from
the retorts to a holding room for further cooling and drying.

Each can is coded at the time of sealing; a representative number
are sampled, tested, and then  that  code  is  designated  for  a
certain market or distributor.   After the cans have cooled in the
holding  room,  the  buggies are dumped into a bin from which the
cans are alined for the labeling  machine.   Application  of  the
label and subsequent casing in corrugated fiber containers is the
last  step  in  the  processing  plant  before either shipment or
warehousina.
Pet Food Production

The dark colored meat scraped away from the lighter meat  in  the
cleaning  process  is  collected  and packed as pet food; the in-
dustry refers to this darker meat as  "red  meat."   The  packing
process  differs  from  the  human  consumption line in that less
attention  is  given  to  the  style  of  pack.    Other   flavor
ingredients  are added and the can filling mechanisms deliver the
correct quantity of tuna to the can without the extra process  of
                                  87

-------
compaction  and  shaping.  The cans are vacuum sealed, rinsed and
conveyed to  the  same  cook  room  to  be  retorted.    As  these
processes have been previously described, no further mention will
be made of them here.
Non-Tuna Pet Food

In  conjunction with the production of red meat tuna, some of the
plants are also equipped for processing other types of pet foods.
Viscera from the beef packing industry, egg, poultry  parts,  and
other  ingredients  are  prepared  and cooked in large vats.  The
mixture is packed in cans using machinery very  similar  to  that
used  in  the  red  meat  process  and sealed, passed through can
washers, and transferred to the cook room for retorting.


By-Product Recovery

No part of the tuna which enters the processing plant is regarded
as waste by the industry.  Stickwater, the  non-edible  portions,
and  the  aforementioned  red  meat are all collected and further
processed into other products.  Red meat,  although  also  a  by-
product, is discussed separately from this section because of the
similarities and shared processes with the production of tuna for
human consumption.


Fish Meal Reduction

All  of  the scrap removed to obtain the edible portions of tuna,
the spilled scrap and meat cleaned up before washdown, and solids
screened from the waste water are collected  and  transported  to
the reduction plant for further processing.

The  waste  solids are ground, cooked, and then pressed to remove
valuable juices and oils before the  resulting  "press  cake"  is
dried  by  one  of  several methods.  Depending upon the specific
process, small amounts of wastes are  entrained  in  the  various
water  flows,  e.g., steam condensate, barometric leg waters, air
scrubber waters, associated with drying.  The resulting fish meal
is  bagged  and  marketed  for  many  different  uses,  including
fertilizer and animal feed additives.

The  juices  and  oils  collected from the pressing of the cooked
solids, termed the press liquor, are pumped to the solubles plant
which concentrates this liquor along  with  the  stickwater,  and
also  in many cases a slurry of ground viscera.  The usual method
is to heat the liquid with steam in  the  presence  of  a  vacuum
produced  by  a barometric leg.  The solubles after concentration
by 2 to 4 phases or "effects,"  are  drained  off  for  tuna  oil
removal  or  marketed  as an animal feed additive and other uses.
Wastes become entrained in the steam and aspirator waters of this

-------
process.  Further information may be obtained from the literature
regarding fishery by-product recovery.


Subcatecrorization Rationale

Consideration of the tuna industry as a subcategory of  the  sea-
food  industry  was  provisionally  segregated  prior to sampling
because of the homogeniety in the tuna  processing  methods,  ex-
tensive  by-product  recovery,  and  the magnitude of production.
This segregation was substantiated by the  data  and  information
obtained  and  subsequent  comparison to the other subcategories.
Figures 26, 27, and 28 are plots of  all  tuna  flow,  BOD5,  and
suspended solids data (respectively) gathered in this study.

Although widely distributed, the tuna processors utilize a common
technology  for  the  production  of  canned tuna and various by-
products.  The waste characteristics of  this  common  technology
does   show   geographic   variation   which,   although  obvious
internally, does not justify  further  subcategorization  of  the
tuna  industry.   This  variation is due to operational inconsis-
tencies which could be easily corrected to  minimize  differences
and  thus justify a common waste treatment technology amenable to
all plants.
                                  89

-------
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
                                          = Puerto Rico
                                          = Southern California
                                          = Northwest
                 100       200      300       400
                        PRODUCTION  kkg/day
                             Figure 26
                  Tuna production rates and flow ratios
                                90

-------
                                             • = Puerto Rico


                                             •= Southern California


                                             A— Northwest
        20
         15
Q
O
CQ
         10
                    100
  200       300


PRODUCTION kkg/day
400
                                  Figure 27

                     Tuna production rates and KZ6 ratios
                                      91

-------
tn
X
^

tn
X

tn
T3
•rl
H
o
CO
Q)
Ti
C
0)
ft
cn
3
01
                                            ~ Puerto Rico

                                            = Southern California

                                            = Northwest
15
10
                 100
                       200
300
400
                        PRODUCTION kkg/day

                             Figure 28

           Tuna production rates and suspended solids ratios
                                 92

-------
                            SECTION V

                     WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
Introduction

A  major  effort   in    this   study   involved   actual   field
characterization  of  the  waste waters emanating from processing
plants in each of the subcategories.  This was necessary  because
a  previously-completed  literature  review and interview program
concluded that very little knowledge of the character and  volume
of  canned  and  preserved  seafood  processing  waste waters was
available  (Soderquist, et al., 1970).

The waste characteristics for  the  seafood  processing  industry
were  identified  using a combination of judgment and statistical
sampling  methods.   A  preliminary  stratification   was   first
developed to define subcategories which were considered likely to
be  relatively homogeneous from the standpoint of the application
of control and treatment standards.   The  processing  plants  in
each  subcategory  were  then  treated as separate populations in
terms  of  sample  means  and  standard  deviations  for  several
important waste parameters.

In  cases  where  the  processing  plants  in  a subcategory were
located  over  a  relatively  wide   area,   consultations   with
knowledgeable  industrial  and  university  people  were held and
plants were identified which were considered to be typical of the
whole group.  Where the plants tended to be in  groups,  "cluster
sampling" was utilized as the basis for the sample design.

Temporal  averages  of  the desired parameters were obtained from
the combined effluent streams and, when possible, from  the  most
significant  unit  operations.   The  temporal averages from each
process were then averaged to obtain a combined  time  and  space
representation  for  each  subcategory.   The  spatial  range and
standard deviation of the temporal averages were  then  inspected
to verify the adequacy of the preliminary subcategorization.

Where   the  sample  coefficient  of  variation  appeared  to  be
relatively large for  some  of  the  parameters,  the  individual
process data were reviewed to determine if a further breakdown of
the  subcategory  should  be  undertaken.  In general, variations
could  be  traced  to  differences  in  unit  operations  between
processes.   Post-stratification  was  then employed and the more
typical processing operations separated from the  exceptions;  or
processors   with  the  more  similar  operations  were  averaged
together to obtain strata which were more internally uniform.  In
most cases  it  was  decided  that  the  creation  of  additional
subcategories  was  not  warranted.  The averages for these "sub-
subcategories" are included in this section to assist the  reader
in understanding the sources of variation.
                                  93

-------
Where  the  averages  of different preliminary subcategories were
similar, and review  of  the  other  pertinent  subcategorization
variables  warranted  the  decision,  all  the  plants  in  these
subcategories were combined to obtain averages for  more  general
subcategories.


Sampling Program Design

The  preliminary  subcategorization of the industry was developed
through review of all significant literature,  consultation  with
industry   groups,   related   governmental   represenatives  and
recognized experts in the areas of  fish  processing,  and  waste
treatment  and control, based on the factors discussed in Section
IV.  The processing plants in each subcategory were then  handled
as objects of separate universes.

Based on previous experience in examining wastes from the seafood
processing   industry,  the  parameters  considered  to  be  most
important from the standpoint  of  waste  control  and  treatment
were:    flow,  settleable  solids,  screened  solids,  suspended
solids, 5 and 20 day BOD, COD, grease and oil, organic  nitrogen,
ammonia,  pH,  raw  material  input rate, and food and by-product
recovery.

Most of the processing  plants  in  each  subcategory  were  then
identified  by  the  respective  trade  organizations.  Where the
processing plants in a subcategory tended to be grouped  together
in certain geographical areas, the method of cluster sampling was
adopted  as  being  the  most  efficient  in terms of information
gained per unit cost.  Cluster sampling is optimal  in  terms  of
reducing  the  sampling  error  when  a  collection  of plants is
grouped, such that the groups tend to  be  alike,  while  showing
heterogenity  within the group.  This constrasts with "stratified
sampling," where the collection of plants is  grouped  such  that
they  tend  to  be  homogeneous  witin  groups  and heterogeneous
between.

Cluster sampling is a natural choice in this industry because  of
a common organizational structure, while the variability within a
group   (or  cluster)  is  often  high  as  a result of plant age,
processing level, management flexibility, and  so  on.   In  some
cases,  however, neighboring plants may be more alike than plants
further apart, contrary to the principle  that  cluster  sampling
reduces  error  when  clusters are more heterogeneous within than
without; however, the cluster sampling method is still often  the
most  efficient   (and  the  only  practical method).  The primary
criterion used to select the clusters  was  whether  the  cluster
appeared  to  be  a scaled-down version of the entire industry in
the subcategory.  This is contrary to the principle that clusters
be selected by simple random sampling; however, it utilized prior
knowledge of the industry to better advantage and  presented  the
opportunity for valuable judgmental inputs.
                                  94

-------
An  attempt  was  made  to completely enumerate all the plants in
each cluster; however, this was modified by factors such  as  raw
material  availability  and accessibility to plant effluents.  In
some cases there was insufficient raw material to keep all plants
operating during the monitoring period.


Individual Plant Sampling

Time-averaged estimates of the important parameters were obtained
by sampling the total effluent, and  in  most  cases  significant
unit  operation contributions, over a period lasting from several
days to several weeks for each plant selected.  In most cases the
effluent was being discharged at more than one point;  therefore,
each  point  was sampled and flow-proportioned to obtain a sample
which would represent the total effluent.

Immediately after sampling, each aliquot  was  passed  through  a
standard   20-mesh  Tyler  screen  prior  to  adding  it  to  the
composite.  This serves to remove  the  larger  solids  particles
(such  as  crab  legs,  some  shrimp shell, fish parts, etc.) and
thereby greatly  reduce  the  resultant  "scatter"  of  the  data
points.   The  method  is especially valuable when one is dealing
with a limited number of samples and the development of a precise
base-line value for each parameter is the goal.  The alternatives
to this approach were essentially three-fold:
    1)    to use a larger mesh size;
    2)    to blend or grind the samples; and
    3)    to leave all solids intact and in the sample.
A larger mesh size would have been less defensible than  20-mesh,
since  the  latter  represented  the  minimum mesh expected to be
encountered in the final treatment designs.  To grind the samples
would have led to unrealistically high values for some parameters
such as BOD and grease, because  these  values  are  surface-area
dependent.   Blending a food processing waste sample can increase
its BOD by up to 1000 percent (Soderquist, et al, 1972a).   Since
the  values  obtained  through  this method  (especially those for
BOD—the single most important parameter in the guidelines)  would
be unrealistically high and would not relate to actual receiving-
water conditions, this choice was rejected.  As discussed  above,
the  third alternative was not adopted because it would introduce
unacceptable scatter into the  results  and  throw  into  serious
question the validity of the parameter averages obtained.

Although it was recognized that laboratory screening efficiencies
would  likely  be  significantly  higher  than  full-scale  field
screening efficiencies (for the same mesh),  smaller  mesh  sizes
could  be  used  in  full-scale  application  to achieve the same
results.

Adoption of  the  20-mesh  screening  method  provided  accurate,
reliable  base-line  data  for each parameter in each subcategory
for screened waste water, thereby permitting confident design  of
subsequent treatment components.


                                   95

-------
Screening  of  the  fresh  sample  rather than the composited one
minimized leaching from the solids, which would not normally be a
contributor if the waste waters were routinely screened prior  to
discharge.

For  estimates  of  removal  efficiencies for the design and cost
estimates,  the  literature  was  consulted  to   establish   the
relationship  between  screened  and  unscreened  BODI5  for  each
subcategory.  This factor was applied in full recognition of  the
inherent inaccuracies associated with the "unscreened" value.

The  flow  rates,  concentrations  and  production  rates  can be
studied from the viewpoint of time-series analysis.  An  estimate
of  the  true  time  average  over  an  infinite  interval can be
obtained by taking the  time  average  over  a  finite  interval.
Problems   arise   when   the  time  series  statistics  are  not
independent of a time translation  (time series is nonstationary).
Typical causes are daily and seasonal periodicities.  This can be
obviated satisfactorily in many cases  by  considering  the  time
series  to  be  periodically  stationary,  since samples taken at
intervals of the periodicity  may  be  approximately  stationary.
The  time  average  can  be  determined  by  considering the time
functions in each period to be  transient  pulses,  each  with  a
beginning  and  end  in the period; and then averaging the sample
mean for each period over a number of periods.

Daily periodicities were handled in the manner  described  above;
however,  the  monitoring  interval was too short to include even
one seasonal period.  This problem was handled by considering the
fact that most processing plants operate at a peak rate while the
raw material supply lasts and then terminate the work shift.   An
increasing  amount  of raw product would then increase the length
or number of shifts.  A ratio of waste  load  to  weight  of  raw
material  could  then be estimated independently of the amount of
raw  material  or  shift  length  at  the  time  of   monitoring.
Information  on seasonal variation in raw material landings which
is available from other sources can then be translated into waste
load variation.

Estimates of the averages for each day were obtained by taking  a
number  of  samples during the day and then mixing volumes of all
the samples together in proportion to the flow at the  time  each
sample  was  taken.   In  the  limit this is the same as taking a
sample from the total volume of effluent produced during the day.
Since mixing is approximately a linear operation for most of  the
parameters,  a  laboratory  analysis  of the one composite sample
gives about the same results as taking the average of a series of
separate analyses of individual samples.

The number of samples taken during the day was dependent  on  the
variability  of  the  waste  load.   For cases where the flow and
concentration were judged to be relatively constant  only  a  few
samples  were  taken.  When the flow was intermittent, but rather
constant  in  volume  and  concentration  a  random  sampling  of


                                 96

-------
intermittent  flows  was  made  and  the number of times the flow
occurred noted so an estimate of the total waste load  from  that
source  could  be developed.  Sampling effort was concentrated at
points where the flows and concentrations were judged to  be  the
most variable and significant to the study.


Data Reduction

The  raw waste concentrations and loading per unit of raw product
were estimated for each plant using the following methodology.

The time-averaged flow rate was estimated for each  plant  (where
plant  refers to an individual process at an individual plant) by
expressing the flow rate for each day in terms of an  eight  hour
day   and   then  taking  an  unweighted  average.   The  average
production time per day was determined for each process; however,
the eight hour day was used to present the water and product flow
rates for each subcategory in a uniform manner.

An estimate of the ratio of each parameter, except pH,  in  terms
of  weight or volume per unit weight of raw material was obtained
using the mean of  the  ratio's  estimator.   The  ratio  of  the
parameter  to  production  volume  based on an eight hour day was
calculated for each day  and  an  average  of  these  ratios  was
determined  over  all days.  The range shown on the tables is the
lowest and highest daily ratio.  The weight to weight ratios were
expressed in terms of kg/kkg, which is equivalent  to  1  lb/1000
Ibs.

The parameter concentrations were expressed in terms of the ratio
of  the  load  per  unit  of  raw  material  to the flow per unit
production.   This  weights  the  concentration   obtained   from
individual   daily  samples  according  to  the  daily  flow  and
production volumes.  The ranges  shown  on  the  tables  are  the
unweighted daily low and high concentrations obtained.

When  the  parameter  time averages were obtained for each plant,
all the plants in a  subcategory  were  averaged  together  using
equal weights to obtain a composite time-space representation.

A  waste  water  material balance was determined by averaging the
flows from each unit  operation  in  a  manner  similar  to  that
described  for  the  total.  The resulting average and range were
expressed as percents of  the  total  average  flow.   The  waste
characteristics  of the flow from each operation were tabularized
when data were available, or described qualitatively from on-site
observations.

Raw product material balances were determined by  obtaining  food
and  by-product production figures when possible and results were
expressed  as  percents  of  raw  material  input.    The   waste
percentages  shown  are  the differences between the raw material
inputs and the finished product outputs.
                                   97

-------
FARM-RAISED CATFISH PROCESSING (Subcategory A)

The farm-raised catfish processing  industry  is  relatively  new
(many  plants  are  less  than  5  years old)  and employs similar
techniques.  This was essentially substantiated  by  analysis  of
the  waste  loading data.  One variation was the large difference
in waste water production depending  on  whether  the  fish  were
delivered in live haul trucks, on ice, or dry.

The  samples  on  which  this  study  is based were taken at five
processing plants during April, May  and  June  of  1973.   Those
months  are some of the poorer production months in the industry.
Because the peak production  season  does  not  come  until  late
summer  and  fall, mostly small fish were being processed and the
additional amount of time required to process smaller  fish  held
the  production  volume  down.   The  major  complication was the
severe flooding throughout much of the Mississippi  Delta,  which
hindered  or  prevented  harvesting of the fish, along with other
normal industry operations.

There was some difficulty  in  obtaining  samples  of  the  total
effluent  since  the waste water sources of the processes sampled
were quite diverse and often had several exits  from  the  plant.
This  was  usually  the  case  where older buildings designed for
other purposes had been converted to catfish processing plants.

Wastewater Sources and Flows

Depending on the location of the particular plant, a well or city
water system supplied the raw water and a city  sewer  system  or
local  stream  were  called  upon  to receive the final effluent.
Figure 5 shows a typical catifsh process flow diagram, and  Table
16  gives  a breakdown of the flow sources.  The three main flows
formed the effluent and its constituent waste loads.  The average
waste water flow from the process plants sampled was 116 cu m/day
(0.031 mgd) with a moderately large variation of  about  plus  or
minus  50  percent  due  mainly  to  holding  tank  and  cleaning
differences as mentioned.  The flow from the  live  holding  tank
area  produced  the  largest  volume  of  water   (59 percent) and
contained  the  least  waste.   Conversely,  the  cleanup   flows
contributed a relatively small volume of water  (7.5 percent), but
contained the highest waste concentrations.  The processing flows
were  the  third  factor  and they contributed a medium volume of
water with a medium to heavy waste concentration.

Water reuse was limited  to  the  holding  tank  and  was  not  a
universal  practice.  Plant 4 retained water in holding tanks for
a week or more with an overflow of roughly 0.2 I/sec  (3 gpm) from
each tank, and as a partial  consequence,  had  one  of  the  the
lowest total daily flows.  Plant 2 had to drain each holding tank
completely  each  time  fish  were removed from it because of the
tank and plant design.  Plant 2 had the highest total water usage
with over two times the flow of Plant U.  The other plants reused
holding tank water in varying degrees.

                                     98

-------
      Table 16.  Catfish process material balance.



             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   116 cu m/day  (0.0306 mgd)


     Unit Operation        % of Average Flow       Range/ %

a)  live holding tanks             59               55 - 64
b)  butchering (be-heading,
    eviscerating)                  --               — - —
c)  skinning                        4                2-7
d)  cleaning                       14                9-18
e)  packing (incl. sorting)         3                1-5
f)  clean-up                        7                5-9
g)  washdown flows                 13                9-16
               Product Material Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 5.19 kkg/day  (5.72 tons/day)


       Output           % of Raw Product      Range, %

Food Product                   63              — - —
By-product                     27               0-32
Waste                          10               5-37

-------
Table 17.  Catfish process summary  (5 plants)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
116
(0. 0306)
23, 000 1
(5510)
7.8
180
140
3. 2
400
9.2
340
7.9
—
700
16
200
4. 5
27
0. 62
0.96
0. 022
6.3

79
(0.
5, 800
(3780
7.
2.
6.
5.
--
10
3.
0.
0.
5.
Range
170
021 - 0. 045)
- 31, 500
7550)
1 - 650
5 - 3.9
8 - 12
5 - 9.2
-
19
8 5. 6
51 - 0.75
0045 - 0. 045
8 - 7. 0
                        TOO

-------
Holding tank flows ran into the tanks from stationary faucets and
when the tanks were  full  the  flow  drained  through  standpipe
drains.   Clean-up  flows  came almost exclusively from hoses but
processing flows were quite diverse in origin.  Processing  flows
came  from  skinning  machines, washers, chill tanks, the packing
area, and eviscerating tables and included water  used  to  flume
solids out of the processing area.

The  by-product  solids  were removed from the processing area in
two ways.  They  were  "dry-captured"  in  baskets  or  tubs  and
removed  by  that  means  or flumed to a screening and collection
point.  All of the plants sampled used the same type of  skinning
machine,  which  was  designed  to  operate  with a small flow of
water.  The skins were washed out of the machine; there is no way
to effect dry capture of the  skins,  short  of  redesigning  the
equipment.

While  the  holding  tank flow waste was mainly made up of feces,
slime, and regurgitated organic matter, the processing and clean-
up wastes were made up of blood, fats, small chunks of  skin  and
viscera,  and other body fluids or components.  A high waste load
came from the tanks where the fish  were  washed,  and  from  the
chill  tanks.  There was no way to "dry-capture" this waste which
was  composed  of  blood,  fats,  and  some  particulate  organic
materials.
Product Flow

Table  16  shows  the  average breakdown of the raw material into
food product, by-products and waste.  The percent  recovered  for
food  depends  on  the  size  of  the fish and to a slight degree
whether manual or mechanical skinning is used.   The  average  is
about  63  percent.   Some plants in rural areas dump or bury the
waste solids; however, most save the solids and ship  them  to  a
rendering plant.

The  average  production rate is about 5.2 kkg/day (5.7 tons/day)
with a range from 3 to 7 kkg/day.  The average  shift  length  is
about  8  hours  but  is quite variable in some plants due to raw
material supply.


Raw^Waste Loadings

Table 17 gives the combined average flow and loadings.  Tables 18
through 22 list the flows and  loadings  for  each  of  the  five
processing  operations  sampled.  The average BOD loading was 7.9
kg/kkg with a range from 5.5 to  9.2  kg/kkg.   The  average  BOD
concentration was 350 mg/1.

In  developing  the  Catfish  Process Summary, Table 17, the flow
data from Plant 2 was omitted.  The excessive water use of 31,500
1/kkg was due to draining the holding tank completely  each  time


                                 101

-------
Table 18.  Catfish process  (t>lant 1) .
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids , mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
148
(0.039)
20, 900
(5020)
1.2
25
--
530
11
440
9.2
--
860
18
270
5.6
36
0.75
2.2
0. 045
5.9

136
(0.
18,400
(4400
6.
_ —
6.
3.
--
11
3.
0.
0.
5.
Range
155
036 - 0. 041 ;
- 24, 500
5880)
6 - 44
— - —
1 - 16
7 - 13
_
23
5 - 7.8
32 - 1.1
0046 - 0. 095
5 6. 3
                                        3 samples
                  102

-------
Table 19.  Catfish process  (plant 2).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N , mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
170
(0. 045)
31, 500
(7550)
0.4
14
120
3.9
270
8.5
230
7.2
--
540
17
120
3.9
20
0. 64
0. 51
0. 016
7. 0
Range
102
(0. 027 -
24,400 - 37
(5860
11
3. 2
6.4 -
6.3 -
__
12
2. 7
0.48 -
0. 014 -
6.8 -

204
0. 054)
, 000
8860)
17
4.6
10
7.9
--
28
4. 3
0. 73
0. 018
7.2
                                      5 samples
                103

-------
Table 20.  Catfish process (plant 3).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu in/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
79
(0. 021)
15, 800
(3780)
0.45
7. 1
_ _
430
6.8
570
9.0
--
1200
19
260
4. 1
42
0.66
0. 28
0. 0045
5.8

64
(0.
10, 200
(2450
6.
--
5.
7.
--
14
2.
0.
0.
5.
Range
95
017 - 0. 025)
- 17,200
- 4120)
3 - 13
_
2 - 7.9
3 - 10
-
20
2 - 6. 0
35 - 0.83
002 - 0. 005
2 6.3
                                       2  samples
                  104

-------
Table 21.  Catfish process  (plant 4).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu in/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
Range
80 76
(0. 0212) (0. 0201 -
26, 300
(6310)
25
650
--
290
7. 5
210
5. 5
--
380
10
140
3. 8
20
0. 53
0. 53
0. 014
--
23,400 -28
(5610
640
--
6.0
4. 3
--
7. 7
2.9
0.42
0. 0085 -
--

85
0. 0225)
,400
6810)
670
--
8.9
6.9
--
16
4. 6
0. 80
0. 020
--
                                       9  samples
                  105

-------
Table 22.  Catfish process (plant 5).
Parameter
Plow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
102
(0. 027)
20, 500
(4910)
9.3
190
120
2. 5
580
12
410
8.4
::
730
15
260
5.3
25
0. 51
1.5
0. 031
6.6
Range
68
(0. 018 -
12, 100 - 28
(2900
170
2. 1
5. 1
--
__
8. 7
3.2
_ _ ..
_ _ -
6. 5 -

125
0. 033)
, 000
6720)
230
3.2
18
--
--
22
8.6
— —
- _
6.7
8 samples
                  106

-------
the  fish were removed.  Common practice in the industry includes
holding tank water recycle with constant runoff and  intermittent
drainage.


CONVENTIONAL BLUE CRAB (Subcategory B)


Based  on preliminary observations of blue crab processing opera-
tions it became rather obvious that this  part  of  the  industry
should  be divided into two subcategories depending on the use of
hand or machine picking.   Subsequent analysis  of  waste  loading
data  confirmed  this  judgment.   The  only exception to the two
categories was perhaps the modern, high volume, mechanized plants
which contribute a relatively higher waste load per unit  of  raw
material.   Much  of  this  would  be avoidable, however, through
concerted in-plant water use reduction.

The conventional process using manual picking was  considered  to
be  relatively uniform; therefore, only two processing operations
were selected for sampling.


Wastewater Sources and Flows

All the plants sampled used domestic water  supplies.   The  con-
ventional  process  shown in Figure 12 produced a small amount of
waste water, averaging only 2.52 cu m/day (660  gal/day).   Table
23  gives  a  breakdown of the flow from each unit operation as a
percent of the total.  The majority of the flow (60 percent)  was
cooling   water   from  continuous  ice  making  operations,  but
contributed negligible organic waste loads.   The washdown was  an
intermittent source which contributed an average of 23 percent of
the  total  flow,  but  also contributed only a small waste load.
The cooker flow averaged 17 percent and contributed the  greatest
load to the waste water streams.

Product Flow

The  proportion of the raw material going into food products, by-
products and waste is given on Table 23.  About 14 percent of the
crab is utilized for food  (Soderquist, 1970).  Up to  80  percent
could  be  captured  for  by-products,  which would leave about 6
percent entering the waste water flow.

The maximum conventional rate is about 500 kg/hr  (1100  Ibs/hr).
The  average production rate was about two-thirds of the maximum.
During a day's operation the processing is  continuous;  however,
the length of the shift and the number of days the plants operate
is  intermittent  due to fluctuations in the raw material supply.
The average processing time was 7.2 hrs/day for the  conventional
plant.
                                 107

-------
Table 23.  Conventional blue crab process material balance.
             Wastewater Material Balance Summary
Average Flow,   2.52 cu m/day (0.000665 mgd)
       Unit Operation
a)  washdown
b)  cook
c)  ice
       % of Average Flow

               23
               17
               60
       Range, %

        17 - 26
        13 - 21
               Product Material Balance Summary
Average Raw Product Input Rate, 2.59 kkg/day (2.85 tons/day)
       Output

Food product
By-product
Waste
% of Raw Product

        14
        80
         6
Range,  %

  9-16
 79 - 86
                              108

-------
Table 24.  Conventional blue crab process  summary (2 plants).
Parameter
Plow Rate , cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
Mean
2. 52
(0.000665)
1190
(285)
4.4
5.2

620
0. 74
4400
5.2

6300
7. 5
220
0.26
760
0. 90
50
0. 06
Range
2.38
(0. 00063 -
1060
(255
4.3

0. 7
4. 8
--
7.2
0.21
0. 80
--

2. 65
0. 00070)
1310
315)
6.2
--
0. 78
5. 5
--
7.8
0. 30
1. 0
--
                                      7. 5
                                                  7.2
                                                                7.9
                               109

-------
Table 25.  Conventional blue crab process (plant 1).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
2. 65
(0. 00070)
1310
(315)
3.3
4. 3
—
--
600
0. 78
3600
4. 8

„ _
5500
7.2
230
0. 30
610
0. 80
46
0. 06
7.9
Range
2. 50
(0. 00066 -
1140
(273

1. 8
— — _
--

0.2

4. 7

~~ ]

6.8

0. 24

0. 66

0. 05
-_

6. 43
0. 001
1520
364)

6.8
«. —
--

1. 5

5. 0



7. 8

0. 37

1. 0

0. 08
--
                                             9 samples
                         110

-------
        Table 26.  Conventional blue crab process  (plant 2).
           Parameter
   Mean
         Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
           (mgd)

Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
            (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
   2.38     2.2
  (0. 00063) (0. 00058
1060
(255)

   5.8
   6.2
 660
   0. 7
 972
(233
  0.2
5200
   5.5       3.5
                 2. 8
                 0. 00073)
1270
 304)


  28
   1. 2
                 9. 0
uuij , ing/ x
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
7400
7.8
200
0.21
940
1. 0
57
0. 06
7.2
5.4
0. 14
0. 55
0. 04
6. 1
12
0. 36
1. 2
0. 07
7. 8
9 samples
                                 111

-------
Raw Waste Loadings

Table  24  gives  the  combined  average  conventional  flows and
loadings and Tables 25 and 26 list the average flows and loadings
for each parameter for each of  the  two  conventional  processes
sampled.


The waste loadings from the two conventional processes were quite
similar.   The  flow ratio ranged from 1060 to 1315 1/kkg (255 to
315 gal/ton).  The BOD ranged from 4.8 to 5.5 kg/kkg and the  COD
ranged from 7.2 to 7.8 kg/kkg.


Mechanized_Blue_Crab (Subcategory C)


The  mechanized  blue crab process using the claw picking machine
had greater variability than the  conventional  process;  ranging
from  an  essentially  conventional  operation  with a mechanical
picker used intermittently for the claws,  to  modern  facilities
employing   several   mechanical  pickers  and  a  pastuerization
operation to give longer product shelf life.  A  relatively  poor
harvest   and  time  limitations,  however,  permitted  only  two
mechanized processes to  be  sampled.   This  was  a  significant
sample  of  the  industry,  however,  because less than ten plants
fall into the subcategory.

Conventional plants which employed mechanical claw pickers on  an
intermittent basis and were considered to be mechanized plants.

Wastewater Sources and Flow

The  mechanized  process shown in Figure 13 produced considerably
more waste water than the conventional  processes.   The  average
flow  was  about  178  cu  m/day (0.047 mgd), with the mechanical
picker contributing about 90 percent of  the  volume.   Table  27
gives  a  breakdown of the flow from each operation.  The cooking
water, which had a high organic concentration, was  diluted  con-
siderably  by the water from the mechanical picker.  The mechani-
cal operation also produced brine wastes from the flotation tanks
and from the subsequent meat washing.  The brine  tanks  averaged
about  1040  liter   (275  gal) and were dumped once a shift.  The
concentrations of sodium chloride were  very  high,  being  about
100,000 to 200,000 mg/1 (as chloride).

Product Flow

The  proportion  of  the  raw  material going into food products,
by-products and waste is given in Table 27.  About 14 percent  of
the  crab  is  utilized  for  food   (Soderquist, 1970).  Up to 80
percent could be captured for byproducts, which would leave about
6 percent entering the waste water flow.
                                    112

-------
Table 27.  Mechanized blue crab process material balance.



             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,  176 cu m/day (0.0465 mgd)


      Unit Operation        % of Average Flow         Range, %

a)  machine picking                90.5                •— - —
b)  brine tank                      0.5                — - —
c)  washdown                        7.7                — - —
d)  cook                            0.2                — - —
e)  ice making                      1.1                — - —
               Product Material Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 4.8 kkg/day (5.3 tons/day)


       Output          % of Raw Product      Range, %

Food Product                  14               9-16
By-product                    80              79-86
Waste                          6              — - —
                            113

-------
Table 28.  Mechanized blue crab process summary  (2 plants)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
176
(0. 0465)
36, 800
(8830)
2. 6
94
—
330
1Z
600
22
_ _
980
36
150
5.6
98
3.6
5.4
0.20
7. 0

76
(0.
29, 000
(6960
77
- -
_ _
22
_ _
29
4.
2.
0.
6.
Range
276
020 - 0. 07:
- 44, 600
- 10, 700)
110
- - _
— « —
23
_
42
3 6. 9
7 4. 4
16 - 0.24
9 - 7.2
                               114

-------
The maximum mechanized production rate is  about  1.8  kkg/hr  (2
tons/hr)  on  a  raw material basis.  The average production rate
was about two-thirds of the maximum.  During  a  day's  operation
the  processing  is  continuous; however, the length of the shift
and the number of days the plants operate is intermittent due  to
fluctuations  in the raw material supply.  The average processing
time was 4.1 hrs/day for the mechanized plant, on operating days.

Raw Waste Loadings

Table 28 gives the combined mechanized plant averages, and Tables
29 and 30 list the average flows and loadings for each of the two
mechanized processes sampled.

The concentration of all the parameters were much higher for  the
conventional  than  the  mechanized  processes.  For example, the
average BOD5. concentration from the conventional plants was  4410
mg/1 and only 650 mg/1 from the mechanized plants.  However, this
was  due to the much greater water use in the mechanized process,
which diluted the waste.  The volume of water used  per  unit  of
raw  material  was  about 30 times greater in the mechanized than
the conventional process.   The  waste  loads  per  unit  of  raw
material   were,  therefore,  much  lower  for  the  conventional
process.  For example, the average BOD5_ ratio  from  the  conven-
tional  process  was 5.2 kg/kkg, compared to 22.7 kg/kkg from the
mechanized process.

The waste loading from the two  mechanized  processes  were  more
variable  than the conventional processes.  The flow ratio ranged
from 29,000 to 44,900 1/kkg  (6960 to 10,760 gal/ton), and the COD
ratio ranged from 29 to 42 kg/kkg.  The  reason  for  the  larger
variation  was  that  one  process, (Table 30) was a modern, high
production operation, utilizing water in many subprocesses  while
the other was a more typical older facility.
ALASKA CRAB

The  waste  characteristics  of  the  Alaska  crab  industry were
monitored during a period from  March  through  June  1973.   The
monitoring  team  attempted  to  sample  each  of  the three crab
species  (king,  Dungeness  and  tanner)   processed  in   Alaska.
However,  the  investigation  was  limited  to mostly tanner crab
because of seasonality and availability of raw product.

Plants were selected for sampling primarily on the basis  of  raw
material availability, finished product form and accessibility of
waste  discharge  points.   Sampling efforts were centered around
the three primary forms of finished product: canned meat,  frozen
meat,  and frozen sections.  Each plant marketing a given product
uses  the  same  basic  unit  operations   with   small   process
variations.   King and tanner crab data were combined because the
same equipment is used to process each and  the  waste  strengths
were found to be similar.
                                  115

-------
Table 29.  Mechanized blue crab process (plant 3).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
76
(0. 020)
29, 000
(6960)
2.6
77
-H —
410
12
790
23

1400
42
150
4. 3
150
4.4
8. 3
0.24
6.9

19
(0.
9850
(2360
33
--
8.
12
_ _
29
2.
3.
0.
6.
Range
178
005 - 0. 047)
- 50, 900
- 12, 200)
124
: ::
3 - 16
32
— _ —
65
3 8. 5
4 - 5. 2
19 - 0.29
1 - 7.8
                                             4 samples
                         116

-------
Table 30.  Mechanized blue crab process  (plant  4)
Parameter
Flow Rate/ cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammon i a -N , mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH

Mean
276
(0. 073)
44,600 36,
(10,700) (8,
2.5
110
--
270
12
490
22
--
650
29
150
6.9
60
2. 7
3.6
0. 16
7.2


273
(0
900
840
57
--
7,
14
--
12
3.
2.
0.
6.
3
Range
284
. 072 - 0. 075)
- 60, 500
- 14, 500)
160
_
.9 - 16
27
_
51
6 - 7.9
2 - 3.6
13 - 0.22
9 8.2
samples
                       117

-------
Each  process sampled used a grinder to facilitate fluming of the
solid waste from the butchering and meat  extraction  operations.
It was obvious that this method increased the wastewater load, as
opposed   to   handling   the  solids  in  a  "dry"  manner.   To
substantiate this, samples were taken with and without  grinding.
Flow  proportioned  samples  of  the  total  effluent  were taken
periodically during each sampling day.   The  individual  samples
were   combined  with  the  appropriate  quantity  of  batch  and
intermittent flow wastes to approximate the  average  waste  load
for that particular shift.

The  samples  were  screened  with a 20 mesh Tyler screen and the
screened solids weighed.   The  settleable  solids  and  pH  were
determined  in  the field.  Three aliquots of the screened sample
were sent to the laboratory where the remaining  parameters  were
analyzed.   The  relative  waste  load  was  then  determined  by
relating the  shift  length  and  raw  material  weight  to  each
parameter.


Wastewater^Sources and_Flow

Each  of the plants sampled in Kodiak, Alaska uses city water for
processing and water volumes and flow rates were easily  obtained
from water meter readings.

Plants  outside  of  Kodiak  use  mostly salt water in processing
except for the cooking operation which uses local surface waters.

Figures m through 16 show the  process  flow  diagrams  for  the
frozen  and  canned meat and section processes respectively.  The
average total  waste  water  flow  and  the  breakdown  per  unit
operation  is  given  in Table 31 for the section process, and in
Table 32 for  the  combined  frozen  and  canned  meat  processes
without  use  of  the  grinder.   This  could  be  done since the
grinders only operated on an intermittent basis, as the solids in
the butcher area accumulated to a certain point.

The water used in the sections process (Table 31)  was  about  75
percent of that used in the frozen and canned meat process.  Most
of  the  water  came from the washing and cooling of the meat (60
percent) and contributed a medium amount of waste.   The  butcher
and cooking operations contributed a high strength waste but were
relatively   low   flows.   The  sorting,  freezing  and  packing
operations contributed low flow and low-strength wastes.  Most of
the water in the frozen and canned meat process  (Table  32)  came
from  the meat extraction and cooling operations  (57 percent) and
contributed a moderate strength  waste.   The  butcher  and  cook
flows were high strength but low in volume.  The pack, freeze and
retort  operations  contributed  a  low-strength  waste which was
about 26 percent of the total volume.

Tables 33 and 34 show the water flow breakdown for  the  sections
and  combined  frozen  and canned meat processed when the grinder


                                  118

-------
was opera-ting to dispose of -the carapaces, viscera and gills from
the butcher area.  It can be seen that the water  flow  increased
about  50 percent for the sections process and 25 percent for the
frozen and canned meat processes.  A typical grinder used 170-230
1/min  (U5-60 gal/min),  Most plants processing sections used only
one grinder while almost all frozen and  canned  meat  operations
used two.
Product Floy?

Table  31  shows the estimated breakdown of the raw material into
food, by-product and waste.   "Food"  product  recovery  averaged
about  64  percent  for  the  tanner  crab sections process.  The
amount of food product ranged from 10-20 percent for  the  frozen
and canned meat plants using tanner crab.  The wide range was due
to  two  exceptional plants, one which discarded shoulder meat  (a
practice  since  changed),  thus  lowering  their  food   product
recovery  and  a second plant which employed a mechanical picker,
brine separator, and belt water screening system which  increased
their  recovery.  The other three plants sampled were typical and
had recovery ranges of between 14 and 17 percent.

Recovery varies with age of the crab as well as  species.   Yield
from  king crab varies from 25 to 36 percent (an exuviant weight)
depending on age  (Powel  and  Nickerson,  1963).   The  recovery
increases until the crab reaches a certain age and then decreases
as  it grows older.  Recovery also decreases after molting.  This
decrease in recovery means a greater percentage of  the  crab   is
wasted.

By-product  recovery  is a new phase of the Alaska crab industry.
Tangential screens are presently being installed in regions  with
solids disposal facilities.  Unfortunately only one screen was  in
operation  while  the field crew was in Kodiak and the monitoring
was completed before the screening operation was standardized.

The byproduct recovery figures listed were estimated  by  adding
the  settleable  solids and suspended solids and then calculating
the by-product as the difference between 100 percent and the  sum
of  the  waste  and  food product.  By-product recovery estimates
compare favorably with values listed by Peterson (1972).  The raw
material input rate was about the same for the  sections,  frozen
and canned meat processes  (12 to 13 kkg/day).

The  shift  length  varied from plant to plant depending on plant
policy and availability of personnel and  raw  material.   During
the  peak season most plants ran two shifts daily, each from 8  to
10 hours.  Otherwise the plants usually ran  one  8  to  10  hour
shift or until the raw material supply was depleted.


Raw Waste Loadings


                               119

-------
Comparing  the  Alaskan  crab  whole  cook  and  section  process
summary. Table 36, to the Alaskan crab  frozen  and  canned  meat
process   summary,  Table  38,  reveals  significant  differences
between the product types.  The meat process  uses  approximately
twice  as  much  water  as the whole and section process, and the
BOD5 ratio is 60 percent higher  for  the  meat  process.   These
differences can be attributed to the fact that mechanical pickers
are  used  to  extract  the meat from the shell in the canned and
frozen meat process.  In the  whole  and  section  process  after
removal of the viscera and gills the crabs are frozen whole or in
sections with the shell in place.

Tables 39 through 42 list the flows and waste loads from the four
section processes sampled without grinders.  Tables 43 through 45
list  the  flows and waste loads from the three frozen and canned
meat processes sampled without grinders.  Tables 46 and  47  show
the  combined  section  and  the  combined  freezing  and canning
processes respectively with grinding; it can  be  seen  that  the
freezing load was significantly higher than that from the section
processes.   The reason for this is that much more solid waste is
generated in the  freezing  and  canning  process  and  there  is
typically  one grinder in the butcher area and one grinder in the
meat separation area while in the section process, there is  just
one grinder in the butcher area.

Tables 48 through 51 list the flows and waste loads from the four
section  processes  sampled  with grinders.  Tables 52 through 55
list the flows and waste loads from the four  frozen  and  canned
meat processes sampled with grinders.


Alaskan Crab Meat Processing  (Subcategories D and E)


Table  37  lists the combined averages obtained from sampling one
frozen and one canned meat process.  It  can  be  seen  that  the
frozen  and canned meat process used about 100 percent more water
than the  average  whole  cook  or  sections  operation  per  kkg
processed.

Tables  43  and  44  show  the  waste loading from the frozen and
canned meat processes respectively.  The  water  flow  and  waste
loadings  per  unit  of rav; material were about the same for both
plants.  Table 45 shows the waste characteristics from  a  frozen
meat process located in a remote area. Plant S-2.  The water flow
per  unit  of  raw  material  was very high compared to the other
plants sampled.  This was due to the large amount  of  sea  water
used for fluming and cooling.  The incoming BOD5 was zero because
of the large amount of chlorine used to disinfect the salt water.
The  apparent  COD  loading  is relatively high because the water
coming  into  the  process  averaged  145  mg/1  COD.    Chloride
interference  in  the  COD  analysis  is discussed in Section VI.
Plant S-2 was omitted from  the  summary  table  because  of  its
unusually high flows.

                                     120

-------
Table 31.  Material balance - Alaska tanner and king crab
       sections process and Alaska Dungeness crab whole cooks
       (without waste grinding).
             Wastewater Material Balance Summary
Average Flow,   220 cu m/day (0.058 mgd)
     Unit Operation

a)  butcher
b)  precook and cook
c)  wash and cool
d)  sort, freeze, pack
e)  clean-up
       % of Average Flow

                5
               15
               60
               10
               10
     Range, %

       2-8
      10 - 20
      50 - 70
       5-15
       5-15
               Product Material Balance Summary
Average Raw Product Input Rate, 13.06 kkg/day  (14.40 tons/day)
       Output

Food product
By-product
Waste
% of Raw Product

       64
       34
        2
Range,  %

 57 - 69
 20 - 40
  1-15
                            121

-------
Table 32.  Material balance - Alaska tanner crab frozen
       and canned meat process (without waste grinding).
             Wastewater Material Balance Summary
Average Flow,   341 cu in/day (0.090 mgd)
      Unit Operation

a)  butcher
b)  precook and cook
c)  cool
d)  meat extraction
e)  sort, pack, freeze
f)  retort*
g)  clean-up
       % of Average Flow

               2
               5
              20
              37
              11
              15
              10
     Range, %

       1-3
       2-7
      15 - 30
      30 - 40
       8-20

       5-15
               Product Material Balance Summary
Average Raw Product Input Rate, 12.27 kkg/day  (13.53 tons/day)
       Output

Food product
By-product
Waste
% of Raw Product

       14
       84
        2
Range, %

 10 - 20
 70 - 89
  1-15
*  Canning operation only
                              122

-------
Table 33.  Material balance - Alaska tanner and king crab
       sections process  (with waste grinding).
             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   364 cu m/day  (0.096 mgd)


      Unit Operation         % of Average Flow       Range, %

a)  butcher and grinding             26               15 - 40
b)  precook and cook                 19               15-25
c)  wash and cool                    36               20 - 50
d)  sort, pack, freeze                9                5-12
e)  clean-up                         10               15 - 20
               Product Material Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 13.06 kkg/day  (14.40 tons/day)


       Output         % of Raw Product         Range, %

Food product                 64                 57-69
By-product                   21                 15-30
Waste                        15                 10 - 30
                             123

-------
Table 34.  Material balance - Alaska tanner crab frozen
      and canned meat process (with waste grinding).
             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   440 cu in/day (0.116 mgd)


      Unit Operation         % of Average Flow       Range, %

a)  butcher and grinding            30                25-45
b)  precook and cook                 3                 1-5
c)  cool                             6                 2-9
d)  meat extraction                 34                30 - 40
e)  sort, pack freeze                7                 5-10
f)  retort*                         10                 5-15
g)  clean-up                        10                 8-15
              Product Material Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 8.40 kkg/day  (9.25 tons/day)


       Output         % of Raw Product       Range, %

Food product                 14               10-20
By-product                   66               50-75
Waste                        20               10 - 30




*  Canning operation only
                             124

-------
        Table 35.   Alaska crab whole cook and section process
                   summary  - without grinding (3  plants).*
           Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
200
(0. 053)
16, 900
(4040)
2 7
tj • i
46
1300
22
210
3. 5
330
5.6
1200
21
710
12
30
0. 5
77
1.3
2. 9
0. 05
7.6
136
(0. 036 -
15,400
(3690

15

18

1. 0 -

4. 0

- - _

6.4 -

0.3

1. 1

0. 02 -
7.4
318
0. 084)
17, 800
4260)

100

25

8. 0

8. 0

_ _

19

0. 7

1. 8

0. 08
8.2
* process water only, table excludes
data from plant K8 (Table 39).
                                125

-------
       Table 36.  Alaska crab whole cook and section process -
                  without grinding (3 plants), including clean-up.*
           Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
220
(0.058)
18,600
(4440)
2.8
52
1300
24
210
3.9
320
6.0
1200
23
700
13
30
0.56
75
1.4
2.8
0.053
_
__ '
: ::
_
•- — «•
: ::
_
_
: ::
-
_
PH
  7.6
*  Clean up water is included in this table.  The values were arrived at
by adding a percentage to the flow rates and wasteload rations shown in
Table 35.  The percentages are 10, 10, 14, 10.5, 11, 8, 8, 7, 12.5, 5.6,
6 from top to bottom respectively.  The ratio was then converted to mg/1,
                                 126

-------
       Table 37.  Alaska crab frozen and canned meat process
                  summary - without grinding.*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
310
(0. 082)
32, 700
(7840)
0.49
16
3700
120
170
5.6
270
8.9
400
13
430
14
22
0. 72
73
2.4
2.4
0. 08
7.4
Range
246
(0. 065 -
__
11
79
4.4 -
8.4

12
0. 65 -
1.8 -
0. 07 -
7.4

375
0.
--
22
157
6.
9.
--
16
0.
3.
0.
7.

099)



7
4


78
0
10
5
* process water only
2 plants
                               127

-------
        Table  38.   Alaska  crab  frozen  and  canned meat  process—
                   without grinding—including clean-up.*
           Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammon i a-N , rag/ 1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
341
(0.090)
36,000
(8620)
0. 5
18
3600
130
170
6.2
270
9.6
390
14
420
15
22
0.81
69
2. 5
2.4
0.085
_
_ •. _
_
mi mt -*
_
_
- .
w m, _
mi mi mm
-
-
PH
 7.4
*  Clean up water is included in this table.  The values were arrived at
by adding a percentage to the flow rates and wasteload ratios shown in
Table 37.  The percentages are 10, 10, 14, 10.5, 11, 8, 8, 7, 12.5, 5.6,
6 from top to bottom respectively.  The ratio was then converted to mg/1.
                                 128

-------
      Table 39.  Alaska Dungeness crab whole cook process
                 without grinding (plant K8).*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu in/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
280
(0. 074)
29, 900
(7160)
1. 1
33
370
11
67
2
800
24
- _
1500
44
27
0.8
67
2. 0
6.7
0.2
8.2
Range
_ _ _ _ _
— _ —
__
_ _ _ —
	 _ 	
_ _ _ _ _
_ — _ _ _
__
--
	 _ _ _
-_
_-
process water only
1 sample
                                129

-------
        Table 40.  Alaska Dungeness crab whole cook process
                   without grinding (plant Kl).*
Parameter
Plow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Plow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean Range
144 	
(0.038)
17,400
(4160)
0.86 .. - -- -
15
1000
18
57
1.0
280 	
4.8
__
550
9.6
29
0.5
100
1.8
4.6
0.08 	
8.2
* process water only
1 sample
                                  130

-------
       Table  41.  Alaska king  crab  sections  process witnout.
                  grinding  (plant
Parameter
Flow Rate/ cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
318
(0. 084)
15,400
(3690)
1.6
24
1600
24
100
1.6
260
4. 0

--
420
6.4
19
*• /
0.3
71
1. 1
1. 3
0. 02
7.4

284
(0.
12, 600
(3010

13

7

1.

3.

--

4.

0.

0.

0.
7.
Range
356
075 - 0. 094)
- 17, 600
- 4230)

35

35

2 - 2.6

0 5. 0

-

5 - 7.5

1 0.4

8 - 1.4

02 - 0. 03
1 - 7.7
* process water only
5 samples
                                     131

-------
       Table 42.  Alaska tanner crab sections process without
                  grinding  (plant K6).*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu in/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
136
(0. 036)
17, 800
(4260)
5.6
100
1400
25
450
8. 0
450
8. 0
1200
21
1100
19
39
0. 7
62
1. 1
2. 8
0. 05
7.6

132
(0.
14, 200
(3400
36
14
5.
1.
13
13
0.
0.
0.
7.
Range
144
035 - 0. 038)
- 21, 300
- 5100)
190
43
0 - 11
0 - 19
30
35
5 - 1.0
9 - 1.4
04 - 0. 7
5 - 7.8
* process water only
4 samples
                                    132

-------
    Table 43.  Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process without
               grinding (plant K6).*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean Range
375
(0.099) 	
32,700
(7840)
0.67
22
4800
157
130
4.4
290
9.4
--
370
12 	
20
0.65
92
3.0
3.0
0.10
7.5
process water only
1 sample
                               133

-------
     Table 44.  Alaska tanner crab canned meat process without
                grinding  (plant K8).*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
246
(0. 065)
32, 700
(7840)
0. 34
11
2400
79
200
6.7
260
8.4
400
13
490
16
24
0. 78
55
1.8
2. 1
0. 07
7.4

227
(0.
29,400
(7050
0.
63
4.
7.
9.
9.
0.
1.
0.
7.
Range
272
060 - 0. 072
- 36, 100
- 8650)
6 21
98
8 9.4
0 - 11
2 - 19
8 20
24 - 1.4
5 2.2
06 - 0. 08
4 - 7. 5
* process water only
4 samples
                                  134

-------
      Table 45.  Alaska tanner crab frozen meat  process  without
                 grinding  (plant S2).*
           Parameter
    Mean
     Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
            (mgd)

Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
             (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg

Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg

Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg

Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
   1740       1620    -   2000
     (0.459)    (0.427 -      0. 528)
146, 000    125, 000
(35, 000)   (30, 000
      0.32
     46
   1400
    210
     57
      8.3
    340
     50

     11
      1.6
      7. 7
 16
140
  0. 8
 32
 0.9
  7.2
-167, 000
-  40, 000)


     76


    290


     12
     77
      2.4
      7.8
* process water only
                8  samples
                                  135

-------
Alaskan  Whole Crab and Crab Section Processing  (Subcategories F
and G)


Table 35 lists the combined average obtained from sampling  three
whole cook or sections processes.

Tables  39 and 40 show the waste loadings from the two whole cook
process sampled and  Tables  41  and  42  show  the  two  section
processes sampled.  The water flow and the BOD5 and COD loads per
unit  of  raw material are quite similar except for the one whole
cook process sample (Plant K-8) which had much higher  flows  and
waste  loads.  Plant K-8 employed a brine freezing unit operation
while the other plants used blast  freezing.   This  process  was
sampled  only  one  day  and  the  sample was not included in the
summary table.

DUNGENESS AND TANNER CRAB PROCESSING  IN  THE  CONTIGUOUS  STATES
(Subcategory H)


The  waste characteristics data used to typify the Dungeness crab
industry outside of Alaska were taken from a study  done  by  the
Department  of  Food  Science  and  Technology  at  Oregon  State
University (Soderquist, et al.,  1972).   The  major  differences
between  Alaska  and  lower  West  Coast crab plants (Washington,
Oregon, California) are waste disposal and meat picking  methods.
West  Coast  plants  do  not  grind  their waste as do the Alaska
plants and West Coast plants hand pick the meat rather than using
mechanical leg pickers as do the Alaska plants.  No  tanner  crab
processes  outside  of  Alaska  were monitored during this study;
however, the operations are the same as in Alaska except for  the
differences discussed above.

The previous study sampled three Dungeness whole and fresh frozen
meat  processes  in  Astoria, Oregon for three months starting in
November, 1971.   Two of the three plants sampled used solid waste
fluming systems.  This  was  not  considered  to  be  typical  of
"exemplary" processing plants.  Therefore, composite samples were
taken with and without the flumed waste flows.
Wastewater Sources and Flows

A general description of the steps in a Dungeness crab processing
plant  was  presented  in  Section IV.  All of the plants sampled
follow the same general steps except  for  two  unit  operations.
The first variation was in the bleed-rinse step.  After the crabs
are  butchered the crab pieces are either conveyed via belt below
a water spray or packed into large steel baskets and submerged in
circulating rinsewater.  In either case a continuous waste  water
flow  results.   There  was  no  appreciable  difference  in  the
characteristics of the  waste  streams  from  each  method.   The
second  variation  in  processing is the cooling method following


                                    136

-------
   Table 46.  Alaska crab section process  summary with  grinding
                            (4 plants).*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
331
(0. 088)
29, 000
(6960)
11
330
10, 000
300
760
22
1200
36
1600
47
2200
64
280
8.2
180
5. 1
4. 8
0. 14
7. 3
Range
155
(0. 041 -
17,600 -43,
(4220 - 10,
50
28
7
22
31
34
3
3.3
0. 09 -
7. 1

439
0. 116)
400
400)
750
470
32
44
63
80
15
6
0. 18
7. 5
process water only
                                137

-------
        Table 47.  Alaska crab frozen and canned meat  process
                summary with grinding (4 plants).*
Parameter
Flow Rate/ cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
400
(0. 106)
51, 700
(12,400)
12
640
16, 000
850
1000
54
1300
66
2300
120
1900
100
350
18
190
10
5. 0
0.26
7. 7

322
(0.
32,800
(7870
150
520
45
54
60
86
4
8
0.
7.
Range
507
085 - 0.
- 85, 500
- 20, 500)
- 1800
1200
67
89
180
140
31
13
2 - 0.
3 - 7.

134









35
9
* process water only
                                  138

-------
       Table 48.   Alaska tanner crab sections process with
                  grinding (plant Kl).*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
363
(0.096)
35, 200
(8450)
1.4
50
800
2S
200
7
620
22
880
31
960
34
85
3
94
3. 3
2.6
0. 09
7.5

_ _
28, 600
(6860
10
9
2
8
13
14
0.
2.
0.
7.
Range
_ —
-41, 000
- 9820)
90
42
9
28
49
66
2 - 5
1 - 5. 0
07 - 0. 12
4 - 7. 7
process water only
4 samples
                                139

-------
         Table  49.  Alaska  tanner  crab  sections  process  with
                   grinding  (plant  K3).*
Parameter
Flov» Rate, cu in/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
439
(0. 116)
43, 400
(10,400)
3. 0
130
7100
310
690
30
780
34
--
1800
80
340
15
140
6
4. 1
0. 18
7. 1
Range
344
(0. 091 -
28, 400 - 60,
(6800 - 14,
23
150
8
6. 1 -
--
30
5
2
0. 08 -
6.0 -

522
0. 138
500
500)
270
730
72
60
_ _
160
54
11
0.45
7. 7
* process water only
15 samples
                                 140

-------
      Table 50.  Alaska  tanner  crab  sections  process  with
                 grinding  (plant K6).*
         Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
155
(0. 041)
20, 000
(4790)
38
750
20, 000
410
1600
32
2200
44
3200
63
3200
63
400
8
250
5
8. 0
0. 16
--
148
(0. 039
15, 800
(3800

460

250

23

14

48

48

4

4

0. 1
--
159
0. 042)
- 23, 800
- 5700)

- 1100

620

40

65

77

84

14

6

0.2
_
process water only
           4  samples
                                141

-------
        Table 51.  Alaska tanner crab sections process with
                   grinding (plant Kll).*
         Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammon i a-N , mg/ 1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
367
(0.097)
17, 600
(4220)
22
380
27, 000
470
1100
20
2500
44
--
4500
80
400
7
340
6
8. 5
0. 15
--
333
(0. 088 -
14, 800
(3540
36
260
7
22
__
46
3
4
0.2
__
405
0. 107
19, 000
4560)
800
800
30
69
--
114
12
7
0. 5
--
process water only
           5  samples
                                142

-------
         Table 52.  Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process
                    with grinding (plant Kl)*
Parameter
Flow Rate , cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio/ 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio,**kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
356
(0. 094)
46, 700
(11,200)
5.8
270
11, 000
520
1000
49
1400
64
1300
60
2000
92
620
29
210
10
6.4
0. 3
7.3

318
(0.
32, 900
(7880
29
120
4
17
13
14
2
4
0.
6.
Range
409
084 - 0. 108)
- 75, 100
- 18, 000)
750
1100
130
190
97
220
140
15
1 0. 7
6 - 8. 1
* process water only
**based upon 7 observations
22 samples
                                  143

-------
       Table 53.   Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process
                   with grinding (plant K6)*
         Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammon i a-N , mg/ 1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
412
(0. 109)
41, 600
(9960)
43
1800
29, 000
1200
1600
67
2100
89
4300
180
3400
140
740
31
310
13
8.4
0.35
--
310
(0. 082
33, 600
(8060
1300
720
40
34
160
110
10
10
0.25
--
454
0. 12C
- 53, 800
- 12, 900)
- 3100
- 2200
98
170
200
210
100
17
0. 57
-
process water only
           7 samples
                               144

-------
                Table 54.   Alaska tanner crab canned meat
                     process with grinding (plant K8)*
           Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
322
(0. 085)
32, 800
(7870)
9.8
320
27, 400
900
1400
45
1600
54
3400
110
2600
86
120
4
300
10
6. 1
0.2
7. 7
246
(0. 065 -
25, 900
(6200
110
680
28
19
— — —
52
2
6
0. 1
7. 5
341
0. 090)
40, 000
9600)
1800
1700
68
71
;:
130
8
16
0. 3
7.9
* process water only
           12 samples
                                 145

-------
            Table 55.   Alaska tanner crab frozen meat process
                        with grinding (plant K10)*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
507
(0. 134)
85, 500
(20, 500)
1.8
150
9000
770
650
56
650
56
1300
110
1100
97
82
7
94
8
2. 3
0.2
7.9

431
(0.
60, 900
(14, 600
65
470
31
18
80
49
4
4
0.
7.
Range
553
114 - 0. 146)
- 123,000
- 29,500)
300
- 1100
76
92
140
160
10
11
1 - 0.3
5 8.2
* process water only
8 samples
                                 146

-------
cooking.  Some plants employ a spray cool and others  submerge  a
steel  basket  containing  the  crabs in circulating rinse water.
The waste characteristics were unaffected by the cooling method.

Table 56 gives the breakdown of the flow from each unit operation
as a percentage of the total flow  without  fluming.   The  total
average  flow  observed  for the three processes was about 120 cu
m/day (0.032 mgd).  The only water  from  the  butcher  area  was
washdown  and  contributed  a relatively low flow and waste load.
The cooking flow was low in volume but  high  in  strength.   The
flow  from the bleeding area was moderate and contributed a large
flow but very little waste.   The  cooling  water  contributed  a
large flow but very little waste.  The major source of waste came
from the brining operation which produced a high salt load.

The  use of fluming to remove solids from the butchering and meat
picking area increased the water flow by  about  70  percent  and
produced a moderately high waste load.


Product Flow

The  typical  West  Coast  plant processed 5.U to 7.2 kkg  (6 to 8
tons) of crab per day.  There is little variability in  the  crab
processed.   The  size and sex restrictions as well as closure of
the harvest season by  government  agencies  during  the  molting
season have standardized the raw material a great deal.

The  influence  of  plant size on waste water values could not be
reliably demonstrated in this  study  because  the  three  plants
monitored had similar production capacities.  Comparison of waste
water  characteristics,  however,  with  those  of Alaskan plants
indicates little effect.

Dungeness crab are prepared as whole cooked, or fresh, or  frozen
meat.   Whole  cooked  (cooked unbutchered)  crab usually make up a
small percentage of the product;  however,   the  contribution  of
BODj>  and  COD  from  the  whole cooker is relatively significant
because of the sodium chloride  and  citric  acid  added  to  the
cooking water.  The crab are only whole cooked for special orders
and/or  to  supply  the  local  retail outlets.  Unlike the whole
cooks in Alaska which are brine frozen  after  processing,  these
crab are only refrigerated prior to marketing.

Fresh  meat is also not a large commodity.   Like whole cooks, the
shelf  life  of  the  product  is  short  because  the  meat   is
refrigerated  prior to marketing.  The waste from this product is
similar to that produced by the frozen meat process.

Meat is hand picked with a food product recovery ranging from  17
to  27 percent.  This variation is a function of animal maturity,
with yield increasing as the  season  progresses.   Hand  picking
results  in  a  higher  yield than the mechanical meat extraction
methods used in Alaska, where the yield is  about 14 to 17 percent
                                    147

-------
on tanner crab.  The waste  percentage  shown  in  Table  56  was
determined  from the total solids remaining after screening.  By-
product was assumed to be the difference between 100 percent  and
the sum of waste and food product recovery.

The  shift length was fairly consistent for each plant throughout
the monitoring period.  A normal shift consisted of about four to
six hours of butchering and  cooking  and  eight  hours  of  hand
picking.   Those  crab  not  picked  by  the  end of the day were
refrigerated and picked the next morning.

Raw Waste Loading

Table 57 lists the average waste loads without  fluming  for  all
three plants sampled.  These values were influenced by both whole
cook  and  meat  picking  processes.   However,  the meat picking
process was by far the largest operation.  The time average waste
load characteristics of a typical plant would be similar to  that
generated by the meat picking process alone.

Tables  58  through  60  show the waste load for each plant.  The
water flow and loadings per unit of raw material were fairly con-
sistent from plant to plant.

Samples from the waste flumes were composited with the other unit
operations in two plants.  Table 61 shows that waste  fluming  at
Plant  2  increased the water usage 78 percent and the BOD5_, COD,
and suspended solids ratios 21 to 24  percent.   Table  62  shows
that butcher waste fluming at Plant 3 increased water usage by 24
percent.   The resultant waste loads increased for all parameters
by about 20 percent.


ALASKA SHRIMP PROCESSING  (Subcategories I and J)


An estimate of the waste characteristics  of  the  Alaska  shrimp
industry was obtained by monitoring two processes during a period
from  March through June, 1973.  The number of plants sampled was
limited by the availability of raw material during the monitoring
period.  One  plant  sampled  employs  all  new  equipment  which
includes eight Laitram Model PCA peelers in conjunction with four
Laitram  Model  PCC  washers and eight Model PCS separators.  The
plant uses seawater and is located in a remote coastal region  of
Alaska.   This plant is probably more efficient than most because
of its new equipment.  It is also larger than the  plants  around
Kodiak  where the size varies from four to nine peelers, with six
to seven being average.

The other process monitored was a typical plant in  Kodiak  which
uses  seven Model A peelers in conjunction with seven washers and
nine separators.  This plant processes with fresh water.
                                    148

-------
Table 56.  Material balance - Oregon Dungeness crab whole
       and fresh-frozen meat process (without fluming wastes)
             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   95 cu in/day  (0.025 mgd)


      Unit Operation        % of Average Flow       Range, %

a)  butcher  (clean-up)              8                 4-11
b)  bleed rinse                    25                12 - 30
c)  cook                            3                 2-4
d)  cool                           30                26 - 33
e)  pick (clean-up)                 7                 5-8
f)  brine and rinse                27                18 - 34
               Product Material Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 6.3 kkg/day  ( 7.0 tons/day)


       Output         % of Raw Product      Range, %

Food product                 22              17-27
By-product                   63              50-66
Waste                        15               7-23
                             149

-------
       Table 57.  West Coast  Dungeness crab process summary
                   without  shell fluming (3 plants)
           Parameter
  Mean
      Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
           (mgd)

Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
            (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg

Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg

Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg

Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
    95
    (0.025)

19,000     14,800
(4,560)    (3,560
    84
 1,600
   140
     2.7
   430
     I. 1
   680
    13
    84
     1.6

     5. 3
     0. 10

     7. 4
1,300
   11
          -  21,300
          -   5, 100)
2,000
2.6
6.6
2.9
11
    1. 4


    0. 075

    7. 3
   16
    2.0


    0. 14

    7. 7
                                    150

-------
    Table 58.  West Coast Dungeness crab  fresh meat
and whole cook process — without shell fluming  (plant  1)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
95
(0.025)
14, 800
(3,560)
88
1, 300
—
180
2. 7
440
6.6
--
740
11
__ _
94
1. 4
6. 1
0.09
7.3
Range
--
	 _ _ _
590 - 2,200
--
1.3 - 4.2
4.3 - 9.3
--
7. 3 16
--
0.86 - 2.1
0. 06 - 0. 14
7. 1 - 8. 5
                                                  8 samples
                              151

-------
 Table 59.  West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and
whole cook process — without shell fluming  (plant  2)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean Range
— _ _ _ 	
21,300
(5,100)
94
2,000
--
120
2.6
320
6.8
--
520
11
— — — _ — — —
66
1.4
3.5
0.075
7.3 6.9 - 8.'
                                                 4 samples
                            152

-------
Table 60.  West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat and
 whole cook process — without shell fluming  (plant 3)
    Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH

--
20,900
(5,010)
72
1, 500
— _
--
140
2.9
530
11

__
570
16
_.
__
96
2. 0
6. 7
0. 14
7. 7

--
17, 600
(4, 220
__
1, 300

--

2.0

8. 5

--

14

--

1. 5

0. 08
7. 2

-
- 25, 000
- 5,990)

1, 800

~ —

4.

13

-

20

_

2.

0.








1









4

16
8.3
                                               4 samples
                          153

-------
 Table 61.  West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and
whole cook process  —  with shell fluming  (plant 2).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
Mean
;;
38,000
(9,100)
92
3, 500
--
82
3. 1
230
8. 7
--
370
14
::
47
1.8
2. 4
0.09
7. 3
Range
--
	 - 	
- - — - -
--
— - _ -
--
— _ —
— _ —
--
- - _ _ -
--
-_
                                                 4 samples
                            154

-------
Table 62.  West Coast Dungeness crab fresh meat  and
 whole cook process — with shell fluming  (plant 3)
   Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
--
26, 000
(6,240)
69
1,800
--
120
3. 1
500
13
--
770
20

88
2. 3
5.0
0. 13
7. 6
__
22, 700 - 30, 100
(5,450 - 7,220)
1,600 - 2,200
__
2. 1 - 4. 4
12 - 15

15 - 24
— - —
1.7 2.8
0.08 - 0.18
__
                                                4 samples
                            155

-------
Wastewater Sources and Flows

Figures 17 and 18 show the process flow diagrams associated  with
frozen shrimp and canned shrimp processes respectively in Alaska.
The  Model  PCA  peeler  is  normally  associated with the frozen
product, while Model A peelers are  used  either  for  canned  or
frozen commodities.

Either  seawater or fresh water is used for processing, depending
on plant location with regard to water availability and  quality.
Seawater  is commonly used in the remote areas where good quality
water is available.  Those plants located in  high  density  pro-
cessing  areas generally use city water.  One plant in the Kodiak
area uses a salt water well.  The plants using seawater  normally
use  more water than fresh water plants because the city water is
metered.

Table 63  lists  the  percentage  of  water  used  in  each  unit
operation  of  a typical shrimp plant (either sea or freshwater).
Tables 65 and 67 list average values for the process water of two
shrimp processing plants.  Flows in the former plant were  double
those  in  the latter.  Trash fish removal and shrimp storage are
small contributors to the total plant flow, but  add  a  moderate
waste  load.  Peelers are the biggest water user in the plant and
the largest waste load source.  Washers and separators contribute
15 percent of the water and a moderate amount of the waste  load.
Meat  fluming  and clean-up make up 29 percent of the water usage
and add a low to moderate load to the  waste  stream.   Blanchers
and  retort  water  (where  applicable)  are insignificant both in
volume and total waste contribution.

Product Flow

Table 63 shows the disposition of the raw  material.   The  total
product  recovery  ranged  between  13  and  18  percent with the
estimated by-product  (solid waste) recovery estimated between  50
and  80  percent.   The  food  product recovery varies seasonally
(Collins, 1973).  Collins1  study  indicated  that  the  immature
shrimp  processed in the spring have a higher waste load than the
larger, more mature shrimp processed later in the summer.

Jensen  (1965) estimated a 15 to 22 percent  food  recovery  using
mechanical  peelers.   The  15  percent recovery average from the
Jensen study may have been influenced by the  fact  that  it  may
have been conducted in the spring.

By-product  recovery  is  a  new concept in the Alaska shrimp in-
dustry.  Tangential  screens  have  been  recently  installed  in
regions with solids disposal programs.  The by-product percentage
shown  in  Table  63  was  estimated  by  totaling the by-product
recovery as the difference between 100 percent and the sum of the
waste and food product.  Screened solids  measurements  were  not
used  in  this  determination because of the trapped water, which
often causes the wet weight of screened solids to be heavier than
                                    156

-------
Table 63.  Canned and frozen Alaskan shrimp material balance,



             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   1170 cu m/day  (0.310 mgd)


    Unit Operation          % of Average Flow       Range/ %

a)  fish picking and ageing         4                 0-5
b)  peelers                        45                40 - 50
c)  washers and separators         15                10 - 30
d)  blanchers                       2                 1-5
e)  meat flume                     19                10 - 20
f)  retort and cool*                5                 3-8
g)  clean-up                       10                 5-15
               Product Material Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 13.9 kkg/day  (15.30 tons/day)


       Output         % of Raw Product       Range, %

Food product                 15               13 - 18
By-product                   65               50 - 80
Waste                        20               15 - 40




*  Included in canning process only
                             157

-------
 Table 64.  Alaska frozen shrimp process summary  (plants SI  & K6)*
           Parameter
Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu in/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
1170
(0.310)
73,400
(17,600)
7.4
540
12, 000
860
2900
210
1800
130
2300
170
3700
270
230
17
150
11
6.8
0.50
_
—
_. _ _
-
— — —
_ _ _
_ _ _
: ::
— - -
: ::
: ::
PH
  7. 7
* Average of Tables 68 and 66 with flow from Table 66 neglected,
                                   158

-------
                                 Table  65.
                Alaska frozen shrimp process - Model PCA
                     peelers (plant SI) - sea water*
            Parameter
     Mean
     Range
Flow Rate,  cu  m/day
            (mgd)

Flow Ratio,  1/kkg
             (gal/ton)

Settleable  Solids,  ml/1
Settleable  Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened  Solids,  mg/1
Screened  Solids Ratio,  kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids  Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD,  mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio,  kg/kkg

20 day BOD,  mg/1
20 day BOD  Ratio, kg/kkg

COD, mg/1
COD Ratio,  kg/kkg

Grease and  Oil, mg/1
Grease and  Oil Ratio, kg/kkg

Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen  Ratio, kg/kkg

Ammon i a-N,  mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio,  kg/kkg
pH
  1,630       1,400     -   1,780
     (0.430)     (0.370 -       0.470)

138,000     108,000     -175,000
(33,000)    (26,000     -  42,000)

4,
2,
1,
5. 5
760
800
670
100
290
000
140
360
420
190
60
- 1, 100
990
370
210
 2,000
    280

   100
    14
160
  4. 5
360
                            18
     7.6
  7. 4
                                                                      7.8
* process water only
              8 samples
                                  159

-------
              Table 66.   Alaska frozen shrimp process,
      Model PCA peelers  (plant SI)  — Seawater, with clean-up.*
           Parameter                        Mean           Range


Flow Rate, cu m/day                       1,790
                                             (0.473)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg                       152,000
            (gal/ton)                   (36,300)

Settleable Solids, ml/1                       5.8
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg              880

Screened Solids, mg/1                     5,300
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg              ' 800

Suspended Solids, mg/1                    2, 100
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg              320

5 day BOD, mg/1                             990
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg                     150

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

COD, mg/1                                 2,100
COD Ratio, kg/kkg                           32o

Grease and Oil, mg/1                        99
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg                15

Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg

Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg

pH                                            7. 6


*  Clean up water is included in this table.  The values were  arrived at
by adding a percentage to the flow rates  and  wasteload  ratios  shown in
Table 65.  The percentages are 10, 10, 16,  20, 12,  6, 9, 14, 7,  1,  39
from top to bottom respectively.  The ratio was then converted to mg/1.
                                  160

-------
           Table 67.  Alaska canned  shrimp  process  - Model A
                 peelers  (plant K2)  -  fresh water*
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio , kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
1,070
(0. 282)
66, 800
(16,000)
2. 7
180
11,000
760
1, 300
90
1, 300
90
2, 400
160
3,000
200
270
18
160
11
5. 4
0. 36
8. 1
Range
700
(0.185 -
54, 200
(13,000
13
200
70
30
80
100
6
1. 1
0. 25 -
7.6

1,440
0.380)
100, 000
24,000)
670
1, 300
120
200
270
410
53
19
0. 54
8. 5
* process water only
                                                     16 samples
                                  161

-------
       Table 68.  Alaska canned shrimp process - Model A peelers
      	(plant K2)  - fresh water, with clean up.*	

           Parameter                        Mean           Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
1,180
(0.310)
73,500
(17,600)
2.8
210
12,000
910
1,400
100
1,300
95
2,300
170
3,100
230
260
19
150
11
6.8
0.50
8.1
--
— —
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
*  Clean up water is included in this table.  The values were arrived at
by adding a percentage to the flow rates and wasteload ratios shown in
Table 67.  The percentages are 10, 10, 16, 20, 12, 6, 9, 14, 7, 1, 39
from top to bottom respectively.  The ratio was then converted to mg/1.
                                162

-------
the raw weight of the shrimp.  The 65 percent by-products  figure
is   slightly  more  conservative  than  the  70  to  75  percent
determined in a study by Peterson (1972).

The shift length at each plant varied with  the  availability  of
the  product.   When  raw material was available, the plant would
allow the shrimp to age the desired amount and then  process  the
shrimp  as  rapidly as possible to avoid spoilage.  Two shifts of
from eight to ten hours daily were common.


Raw Waste Loadings

Table 66 summarizes the data from  the  Model  PCA  peeler  plant
using  seawater and Table 68 summarizes the data from the Model A
peeler plant using fresh water.  The water flow per unit  of  raw
material was about twice as high in the seawater plant.  The BOD5
and  COD  load  per  unit  of  raw material were 20 to 50 percent
greater at the PCA  peeler  plant  while  the  settleable  solids
(1/kkg)   were  four  times  that  of  the  Model  A plant.  It is
difficult to determine on the basis of existing data whether  the
increased load from the seawater plant was influenced more by the
use of a PCA versus a Model A peeler or by the additional fluming
used  at  this  plant.   Shrimp data for the West Coast indicated
that PCA peelers may produce less waste than a  Model  A  peeler;
however,  this  was  from a sample of one plant for each process.
Table 64 presents the Alaskan shrimp processing summary data with
the omission of the flow data from plant S-1.


SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE CONTIGUOUS STATES


Preliminary study of the shrimp processing  industry  showed  the
Gulf and South Atlantic industry to be much more diverse than the
Alaskan  or  West  Coast industry.  Further study indicated that,
while the process variations for the Gulf and  lower  East  Coast
were many, the industry could be divided into three main sections
as  discussed  in  Chapter  IV; Northern Shrimp Processing in the
Contiguous States, Southern Shrimp Processing in  the  Contiguous
States,  and Breaded Shrimp Processing in the contiguous States.


Northern  Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States (Subcategory
K)


The shrimp processing industry  in  the  Northern  United  States
including  the  New  England  ,Pacific-Northwest,  and California
areas is similar to that in Alaska.   Information from West  Coast
processes  was  available for two plants from a study done by the
Oregon State University supported by funds  from  EPA  Grant  No.
801007,   National  Canners  Association,   and Oregon Agricultural
Experiment Station.


                                 163

-------
Wastewater Sources and Flows

Figure 17 shows a typical West Coast shrimp process flow  diagram
and  Table  69  gives  a  breakdown  of  the  water  used in each
operation.

The  two  plants  studied  were  located  either  over  water  or
partially   over  water,  with  liquid  wastes  being  discharged
directly into adjacent waterways.  The average plant flow was 472
cu m/day  (0.125 mgd).  The largest percentage of  this  flow  (61
percent)  was attributed to the mechanical peelers.  Water used in
these  plants  for production was all city water.  Due to the use
of a larger number of  peelers  the  flow  from  Plant  #2  (five
peelers)   was twice as large as that from Plant #1 (two peelers).
Plant f2 used PCA peelers,  which  blanch  the  shrimp  prior  to
peeling.   Plant  #1  used  the Model A peeler.  Plant #2 recycled
approximately 10 percent of the total water flow.  The water from
the separators and washers was used to flume the incoming  shrimp
to the peelers.

Product Flow

West Coast shrimp are not beheaded at sea; the only preprocessing
done  is  to  remove  most  of the debris and trash fish from the
catch.  The debris and miscellaneous fish comprise between 3  and
8 percent of the raw weight of the freshly caught shrimp.

The  average  raw material input was about 9.0 kkg/day  (9.9 tons/
day) with the average shift length being 9 hours.  The percent of
raw material utilized for food was less than  obtained  from  the
Gulf  and lower East Coast canned and breaded shrimp and averaged
about 15 percent.  The raw  shrimp  ,  when  it  arrived  at  the
plants,  had  seldom  been  held more than three days.  The older
shrimp were processed first, and  from  qualitative  observations
there  seemed to be a definite correlation between shrimp age and
amount of waste produced.  A difference  in  waste  strength  was
anticipated  due  to the strong enzymatic action  (degradation) of
shrimp as a  function  of  time.   However,  due  to  the  plants
processing  different ages of shrimp on the same days, the effect
of age on waste water strength could not be substantiated by  the
data.   The  solid  wastes which could be utilized for by-product
totaled about 70 percent of the input.  This was captured  either
by  vibrating  screens  or  trommel  screens.   In many cases the
wastes were transported by truck to a rendering plant, where they
were dried and added to fertilizers or  used  as  supplements  to
various feeds low in calcium.
Raw Waste Loading

Table  70  shows  the summary and Tables 71 and 72 show the flows
and loadings from each of the two  processes  sampled.   The  PCA
peeler  process  had  a higher flow but lower waste load than the
Model A peeler.  This was contrary  to  the  Alaska  shrimp  case
                                        164

-------
Table 69.  Canned West Coast shrimp material balance.




             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   472 cu m/day (0.125 mgd)


    Unit Operation         % of Average Flow       Range, %

a)  de-icing tanks                 6               4-8
b)  peelers  (PCA & Model A)       61              57     - 78
c)  washer and separator          12              10     - 13
d)  blancher                       2               1-2
e)  grading line                   2               1-2
f)  can washer                     3               0.002 -  6
g)  retort and cooling             5               4-7
h)  washdown                       9               4-10
               ProductMaterial Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 9.0 kkg/day  (9.9 tons/day)


       Output          % of Raw Product     Range, %

Food Product                  15             12 - 18
By-product                    70             65-75
Waste                         15             12 - 17
                             165

-------
       Table 70.  West Coast canned  shrimp  process  summary (2 plants)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
Mean
472
(0.125)
60,000
(14, 400)
67
4,000
--
900
54
2,000
120
2, 500
150
3, 300
200
700
42
200
12
6.3
0.38

341
(0.
47, 100
(11, 300
2, 400
--
47
95
;:
160
39
--
0.
Range
602
090 - 0. 159)
- 73,000
- 17,500)
- 5, 600
-
60
140
_
230
44
-
32 - 0.45
pH
7. 4
7.3
7.6
                                     166

-------
Table 71.  West Coast  canned shrimp (plant 1)
Parameter
Flow Rate/ cu in/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
341
(0.090)
47, 100
(11,300)
120
5,600
--
1,300
60
3,000
140
3, 200
150
4,900
230
830
39
250
12
9.6
0.45
7.3

_ _
38, 200
(9, 150
1, 700
--
23
100
110
130
--
6
0.
--
Range
: ::
- 68,800
- 16,500)
- 11,000
-
96
170
190
350
— _ _
19
23 - 1.0
-
                                          12 samples
                       167

-------
          Table 72.  West  Coast canned shrimp  (plant  2)
           Parameter
    Mean
Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
            (mgd)

Flow Ratio,  1/kkg
             (gal/ton)
    602
     (0. 159)

 73,000      54,200
(17,500)     (13,000
    - 117,000
    -  28,000)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
33
2, 400 2, 100 - 2, 700
--
640
47 25 - 78
1,300
95
--
2,200
160 99 - 210
600
44
160
12 7.9 - 16
4.4
0.32 0.16 - 0.40
7.6
                                                           9  samples
                                   168

-------
where the PGA process had the higher load; however, this may have
been due to the fact that fluming was used extensively at the PCA
plant in Alaska.


Southern Non-breaded Shrimp Prgeessing_in^themContiguous States
(Subcategory L)

Three  Gulf  Coast  shrimp  canning  processes,  considered to be
representative  of  the  industry  spectrum,  were  selected  for
sampling.   The  plants  were  25  to 30 years old and most still
employed floor gutters and holes in the wall  for  drainage.   In
addition  to  the  data collected, historical data were available
from one plant  (Mauldin, 1973).

Wastewater Sources and Flows

Figure 22 shows a  typical  Gulf  or  lower  East  Coast  canning
process  flow  diagram  and  Table  73 gives the breakdown of the
water used in  each  operation.   In  two  of  the  three  plants
sampled, well water was used for de-icing, peeling and cooling of
retorted cans.  All other process waters  (for belt washers, etc.)
were  city  water.  The COD and suspended solids concentration in
the well water averaged approximately 55 mg/1 each.

The plants in metropolitan areas pumped their  waste  waters  di-
rectly  to  a  sewage treatment facility whereas the other plants
merely pumped their waste to large bodies of  water.   The  total
flow  rates averaged about 788 cu m/day (0.208 mgd) and were very
similar for all the unit processes.  The largest flows were  from
the peelers, which also caused the largest flow variations.  Some
days  flows  were reduced on peelers.  This was due to the shrimp
being too fresh (caught the night before)  which made peeling more
difficult.  Flow was decreased so the shrimp would pass over  the
rollers  at a slower rate, thereby being cleaned more thoroughly.
These peelers usually averaged 170 to 227 1/min (45  to  60  gpm)
per  peeler,  but  on days when a slow peel was desired, the flow
was sometimes lowered to 57 to 76 1/min (15 to 20 gpm).

All of the Gulf Coast  canning  operations  plants  sampled  used
Model A peelers.  The Gulf Coast and lower East Coast shrimp were
larger and easier to peel than the Alaskan or West Coast shrimp.

Product Flow

The  Gulf  Coast canning plants produced the same general type of
product, usually in the 6-1/2 oz size can.  Brine  was  added  to
all  cans at each of the plants, but a combination of lemon juice
solution and brine was  added  mainly  to  "piece"  cans  (broken
shrimp).   The  average raw material input was about 23.9 kkg/day
(26.4 tons/day).  The average shift length was  7-1/2  hours  but
ranged  from  4 to 9 hours.  The yield of the shrimp utilized for
food is only about 20 percent   (Table  73).   The  portion  which
could  be used for by-products was about 65 percent; however, not
                                    169

-------
     Table 73.  Canned Gulf shrimp material balance.




             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   787 cu m/day (0.208 mgd)


      Unit Operation        % of Average Flow       Range, %

a)  peelers  (Model A)               58              42     - 73
b)  washers                          9               8-10
c)  separators                       7               5-9
d)  blancher                         2               0.006 -  2
e)  de-icing                         4               0.005 -  7
f)  cooling and retort              12               8-20
g)  washdown                         8               7-10
               Product Material Balance Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 23.9 kkg/day  (26.4 tons/day)


       Output         % of Raw Product        Range, %

Food Product                 20                15-25
By-product                   65                58-71
Waste                        15                13 - 18
                            170

-------
all plants had an available rendering plant.  Many plants  hauled
their  solid  wastes to the local dump.  All three plants sampled
employed some form of screening to  remove  their  large  solids.
Two forms of screening were used:  vibratory and tangential.  One
of the plants sampled used a tangential screen which has a piston
drive  solids  compressor installed into the mechanism.  This ram
squeezed the shells  (eliminating 50 percent of  retained  water) ,
and  bagged  them  into 25 to 30 Ib plastic bags, which were then
transported to the city dump.


Raw Waste Loading

Table 7U gives the average flow and loadings from  all  three  of
the  Gulf  Coast  canning processes sampled.  It can be seen that
the water flow per unit of raw material  was  relatively  uniform
with  a  mean  of  about  46,900  1/kkg.  The COD loads were also
uniform with a mean of 109 kg/kkg.  BOD5 was available only  from
Plant #1 and averaged 46 kg/kkg.

Tables  75 through 78 show the waste characteristics from each of
the three plants sampled.  The data collected by the  field  crew
on  Plant  #1  are  given  in Table 75 and the data obtained from
Mauldin (1973)  are listed in Table 76.


Breaded Shrimp PrQcesging in the Contiguous States
(Subcategory M)


Two breaded shrimp processes, one on the  Gulf  and  one  on  the
South Atlantic coast were sampled during November and December of
1972.

Waste Water Sources and Flows

Figure 23 shows a typical breaded shrimp process flow diagram and
Table  79  gives a breakdown of the water used in each operation.
The two plants sampled utilized both well and  city  water.   The
average  flow  was  about  653 cu m/day (0.173 mgd).  The Johnson
(P.D.I. - peel, devein, inspect) peelers averaged 31  percent  of
Plant  #2's  flow;  this  varied  with  the  number  of  machines
operating.  The Seafood Automatic peelers averaged  12.8  percent
of Plant #l's flow for comparable production.  However, the waste
concentrations were very close between the two makes of machines,
even though three times as many Johnson peelers were in operation
as  compared  to  Seafood  Automatic peelers.  This would seem to
indicate that the Seafood Automatic peelers  generated  a  higher
waste  load.  Washdowns comprised one of the largest single daily
flows originating from these plants, averaging 51 percent of  the
total.  It appeared that this flow could be reduced significantly
with proper water management.
                                    171

-------
Table 74.  Gulf Shrimp canning process summary  (3 plants)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
787
(0. 208)
47, 200
(11,300)
11
520
—
800
38
970
46
--
2, 300
110
250
12
200
9. 5
10
0. 49
6. 7
Range
693
(0. 183 -
33,000 - 58,
(7,900 - 14,
180
__
16
__
__
65
5.4
1.9
0. 41 -
6.5

905
0.
400
000)
980
—
50
--
--
120
36
12
0.
7.
239)









60
0
                               172

-------
           Table 75.   Gulf shrimp canning process  (plant  1A)
           Parameter
   Mean
       Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
           (mgd)

Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
            (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
   855
    (0.226)

33,000
(7,900)

     5. 4
   180
   480
    16
   757
    (0. 200  -
950
  0.251)
32,100      -  45,900
(7,700      -  11,000)
   180
    16
                           190
                            17
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
2, 000
65
160
5.4
210
6.9
14
0. 46
7. 0

42

4.8

6. 1

0.42 -
--

93

6.4

8.0

0. 52
--
                                                        2 samples
                                 173

-------
          Table  76.   Gulf shrimp canning process (plant IB)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Mean
905
(0. 239)
41, 700
(10,000)
24
980
--
620
26
1, 100
46
--
2,600
110
860
36
46
1.9
Range
840
(0. 222 -
35, 500 - 58,
(8, 500 - 14,
750 - 1,
— — —
7
41
- - "*
87
22
1. 1

969
0. 256)
400
000)
100
--
30
51
--
120
53
2.9
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg

PH
                                                       6 samples
                                   174

-------
           Table 77.  Gulf shrimp canning process  (plant 2)
           Parameter
    Mean
        Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
           (mgd)

Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
            (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
    693         473     -   1,190
     (0. 183)     (0. 125  -       0. 314)
 45,900
(11,000)

     13
    580
  1, 100
     50
37,500
(9,000


   480
- 50,100
- 12,000)


     830
    28
      62
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
2, 600
120
150
6.8
260
12
13
0. 60
6.5
100
5.9
9.6
0. 47 -
--
130
8.6
13
0.67
--
                                                       4 samples
                                  175

-------
            Table 78.  Gulf  Shrimp  process - screened (plant 3)
           Parameter
    Mean
        Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
           (mgd)

Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
            (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
    787
     (0. 208)
    715
     (0.189 -
   1, 280
       0.338)
 58,400
(14,000)

     6. 8
   400
    720
    42
 50, 100
(12, 000


    320
- 66,800
- 16,000)


     900
    21
      65
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
2, 100
120
140
8. 5
200
12
7.0
0. 41
7.0
93
4. 7
8
0. 22 -
__
140
12
13
0. 54
--
                                                        5 samples
                                  176

-------
Product Flow

Since  the  breaded and fresh frozen shrimp were beheaded at sea,
the yield was substantially greater in this industry.  The  range
of the yield (Table 79) was 75 to 85 percent, depending on:  type
of breading, method of peeling, size of shrimp, etc.

The raw material was generally in very good condition on arrival;
if  caught  locally they were kept iced and in coolers until pro-
cessed.  Frozen shrimp are sometimes kept, if space is available,
until all the fresh shrimp are processed.  Most of  the  imported
shrimp  at  the time of this study came from India, Saudi Arabia,
Mexico, and Ecuador.  Some days at Plant #1 over  50  percent  of
the  shrimp processed were of foreign origin.  The actual working
day ranged from a low of seven hours to a high of  eleven  hours.
Average   raw   material   processed  totaled  6.3  kkg/day  (7.0
tons/day) .

Raw_Waste Loading

Table 80 shows the summary and Tables 81 and 82  show  the  flows
and  loadings  from  each  of  the  two  breaded shrimp processes
sampled.  The waste water flows and the loadings per unit of  raw
material  were  very  similar  for  the  two  processes and quite
similar to the Gulf and lower East Coast canned processes.


TUNA_PROCESSING (Subcategory N)


Seven tuna processing plants were monitored during May  and  June
of 1973.  Three of the plants were located in Southern California
and  the  other  four  in  Puerto Rico.  In addition, data from a
study done by Oregon State University in the fall of 1972 at  two
plants in the Northwest were included  (Soderquist, et £l., 1972).
These  nine  plants  represented a good cross-section of the tuna
industry with respect to size, age, and locality, and,  in  fact,
encompassed nearly 50 percent of the total U. S. tuna industry.

The  sampling  methods  described  in  the  introduction  to this
section   were   employed   at   each   of   the   plants.    The
"end-of-the-pipe"  total  flow  and  unit  processes were sampled
whenever possible.  Most plants monitored  included  on-site  pet
food  lines,  many  incorporated  meal  plants  and some operated
solubles plants, as well.  In each case the "tuna  process"  flow
referred  to  in  this  report  includes  all secondary processes
on-site, with two exceptions:  the barometric condensor flows and
the air scrubber flows, each representing high volumes  of  water
with   neglegible   contamination  (in  fact,  these  flows  were
frequently single-pass sea water).  If more than one outfall  was
used  a total plant effluent sample was obtained by mixing a flow
proportioned composite of all outfalls.  Samples  were  collected
at various time intervals throughout the production day.
                                   177

-------
    Table 79.  Breaded Gulf shrimp material balance.




             Wastewater Material Balance Summary


Average Flow,   653 cu m/day  (0.172 mgd)


    Unit Operation         % of Average Flow        Ranggj,  %

a)  hand peeling                    5                  3-7
b)  thawing or de-icing             4                  2-7
c)  breading area                   2                  1-3
d)  washdown                       51                29 -  73
e)  automatic peelers              38                34 -  55
               Product Material Balance^..Summary


Average Raw Product Input Rate, 6.3 kkg/day  (7.0 tons/day)


       Output          % of Raw Product        Range,  %

Food Product                  80                75-85
By-product                    15                10-20
Waste                          5                 3-6
                             178

-------
       Table 80.  Breaded shrimp process  summary  (2  plants)
Parameter
Flow Rate , cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Mean
653
(0. 172)
116,000
(27,900)
16
1,800
--
--
800
93
720
84
860
100
1, 200
140

564
(0.
108, 000
(26,000

1, 500
--
_.

76
.» _
81
_.
--
_ w

Range
742
149 - 0. 196)
- 124,000
- 29,800)
_ - -
- 2,000
-
_
- _ _
110
™ 
-------
            Table 81.  Breaded shrimp process  (plant 1)
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Mean
564
(0. 149)
124,000
(29,800)
16
2, 000
--
890
110
700
87
810
100
1, 100
140

416
(0.
91, 800
(22,000
1, 700
--
85
47
60
110
Range
746
110 - 0. 197)
- 150,000
- 36,000)
- 2, 400
_
130
120
140
160
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg

Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg

Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
44
 5.4

 0.69
 0.086

 7. 7
3. 3
0.075 -
7.9
0. 12
                                                        7 samples
                                   180

-------
            Table 82.  Breaded shrimp process  (plant 2)
           Parameter
     Mean
        Range
Flow Rate, cu in/day
           (mgd)

Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
            (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio,  1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg

Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
    742
     (0.196)
    704
     (0.186 -
     893
       0. 236)
108,000
(26,000)

     14
  1, 500
    700
     76

    750
     81
  1, 300
    140
 91,800
(22,000


   790
     70
     65
    100
- 117,000
- 28,000)


-  1,800
     130
     120
     190
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
56
6. 1
1. 3
0. 14
7.9
5.3 - 8.5
0. 098 - 0. 22
__
                                                        7 samples
                                     181

-------
As mentioned in Section IV, the techniques of tuna processing are
fairly  universal  for the industry; the flow diagram (Figure 25)
in that section applies to each of the plants  with  only  slight
variations.
Wastewater Sources and Flows

The  processing  of  tuna requires a considerable volume of fresh
water obtained from domestic sources  and  (usually)   salt  water
pumped  directly from the ocean or from saline wells.  The saline
water or domestic industrial water is used in direct contact with
the tuna in only those stages prior  to  the  precook  operation.
However, saline water may also be used in the latter stages where
contamination  of the cooked fish would present a problem.  Table
83 lists the average flow from each unit operation.

Total water use ranged from 246 cu m/day (0.065 mgd)  to 11,700 cu
m/day (3.1 mgd) with an average of 3060  cu  m/day   (0.808  mgd),
where  a day was defined as one 8 hour shift.  Flow rates and the
ratio of water  used  to  tons  of  raw  material  processed  are
summarized  for  all  plants  on Table 84.   The variation for the
flow ratio was relatively large and can be attributed to the wide
variation in the amounts of water used in the thawing  operation.
A more detailed discussion of the wastes and waste flow from each
unit operation will be presented later.


Product Flow

The  estimated  breakdown  of  the  raw  material  into food, by-
product and waste is shown on Table 83.  The average raw  product
input was about 167 kkg/day (184 tons/day)  but the plants sampled
exhibited  a wide range:  from 25 to 350 kkg/ day.  Food recovery
averaged 45 percent.  Very little of the raw material was wasted.
The red meat was utilized for pet food:  the viscera, head, fins,
skin and bone were reduced to fish meal and  the  stickwater  and
press  liquor  from  the  reduction plant were sent to a solubles
operation which produced a concentrated fish solubles product, as
discussed in Section IV.  The final waste represented only  about
1 percent of the raw input.

Production  in  Southern California and the Northwest was usually
on a one shift basis lasting 8 hours with occasional fluctuations
of from 6 to 10 hours.  Puerto Rico  plants  operated  on  a  two
shift  schedule, the last shift running somewhat shorter than the
first.  For the purpose of  data  reduction  and  interpretation,
flows and waste characteristics apply to a standard 8 hour shift.


Combined Raw Waste Loadings

Table  84  shows  average  flows  and  loadings  of  the combined
effluent from all nine processes sampled.  The  amount  of  water


                                   182

-------
used  per  unit  of  raw  material  varied considerably, as noted
earlier.

It was also noted that the  waste  loads  in  terms  of  screened
solids,  BOD5  and COD were relatively low compared to other sea-
food processing industries,  due  to  good  by-product  recovery.
Tables 85 through 93 show the average flows and waste water loads
of the combined effluent for each plant sampled.

Unit Operation Characterization

Several  unit  processes  were considered, including:  receiving,
thawing, butchering,  cleaning,  pak-shaping,  can  washing,  re-
torting, and the plant washdown.

Receiving  was normally a dry process with the exception of Plant
5 which used flumes to transport the fish to the scales and  then
to  the thawing tanks; the latter flow was separate, and was used
as the thaw water.  This fluming  water,  pumped  from  the  bay,
flowed  at  an average rate of IlO I/sec or 3168 cubic meters for
an 8 hour day and contained entrained organic wastes in the  form
of  blood,  scales,  and  juices,  with  a corresponding BOD5 and
suspended  solids  concentration  of   4.6   kg   and   2.1   kg,
respectively,  per  kkg of fish unloaded.  However, this plant is
presently in the process of converting the fluming  system  (with
its  heavy  use  of  water)  to a dry system, as is used in other
plants.

Plant 5 was also unique in that the fishing vessels pumped  water
from  the  bilges and brine holding tanks onto the docks where it
entered the plant waste stream.  The amount  of  this  water  was
highly  variable, as was the suspended solid concentration, which
varied from 20 mg/1 to 5830 mg/1.

The thawing process accounted for the largest water usage in this
subcategory, with a mean of 65 percent of the total  volume,  but
varied  depending  on whether the thaw took place under static or
continuous flow conditions.  The organic waste load picked up  in
this  process included blood, juices, and scales.  Separate flows
and corresponding waste concentrations were obtained for three of
the plants and are summarized on Table 94.

Because of the close proximity  of  the  thawing  and  butchering
processes  it  was  not  always  possible  to measure these flows
separately, although several plants did  the  thawing  at  night,
temporarily  segregating  the two flows, which allowed one or the
other to be sampled.  This temporal separation of flows was  also
helpful  in  segregating other mixed flows.  The average flow was
7389 1/kkg with  a  BOD5  of  2.96  kg/kkg,  and  2.0  kg/kkg  of
suspended  solids,  or  65  percent,  40  percent, and 24 percent
respectively, of the mean totals for these plants.

Approximately 10 percent of the flows came  from  the  butchering
areas  and  contained  blood, juices, small particles of viscera,
                                  183

-------
meat and scales.  As mentioned in Section IV, the  butcher  waste
flow arises from three sources:  the wash screen, saw washer jet,
and  the  periodic  hose down.  This water may be either fresh or
salt, depending  on  the  plant.   The  total  use  of  water  in
butchering is presently restricted to points of necessity.

Comprising  10  to 15 percent by weight, the potential waste load
from the butcher process is  approximately  21  kkg/day  from  an
average  plant  processing 167 kkg/day.  However, as mentioned in
Section IV, the viscera are saved and  processed  in  either  the
fish  meal  plant  or  the fish solubles plant.  The data for the
waste loadings occurring in the butcher room  from  three  plants
are summarized on Table 94.

For these plants the butchering process contributed 24 percent of
the  suspended  solids.   Wastage  also occurred as the butchered
fish lay in wire racks prior to being cooked;  blood  and  juices
drained  onto  the  floor  and  were  hosed  into  one of several
collection drains.  This contribution was not isolated  and  must
be  considered  under one of the unmeasured miscellaneous sources
which add to the total plant  effluent.   Leakage  of  stickwater
from  the precookers presented a problem in that it, too, was not
available for measurement, and therefore must also  be  added  to
the  miscellaneous  small  flows.  Stickwater was pumped from the
precookers for reduction or separate discharge by barging to open
sea;  the  latter  was  the  case  in  only  one  plant  sampled.
Stickwater   contains   large   amounts   of   fats,   oils,  and
proteinaceous materials  which  could  appreciably  increase  the
concentration  of  the  waste  discharged  if it were not treated
separately.  Samples of  stickwater  obtained  from  one  of  the
plants  had  an average BQD5 of 48.2 kg/kkg, COD of 123.5 kg/kkg,
and 33.7 kg/kkg of suspended solids.

After precooking, the tuna were allowed to cool for several hours
in a separate area between the  precookers  and  cleaning  rooms.
Although  cooling  was accelerated in one plant with a fine spray
of cold water, the fish were sufficiently leached of most of  the
oils  and  liquids  in  the  precook  so that a significant waste
loading did not develop at this point.  These wastes are  grouped
with the miscellaneous sources, and except for the one plant that
used  a  spray  mist,  the  air  cooling  process minimized waste
loadings at this point.

The cleaning process  which  follows  cooling   (as  discussed  in
Section  IV)  was  a dry process with over 99 percent recovery of
the wastes generated.  These collected wastes were conveyed to   a
reduction plant which further processed them into various fishery
by-products.   A quantification of the waste loading occurring in
this area is included in the washdown discussion  since  that  is
the only time water enters this process.

A  small  flow  was  associated with the pak-shaping machines and
averaged 8720 I/per 8 hour day, which is less than 2  percent  of
the  total  effluent  flow,  but  contributed  16  percent of the
                                   184

-------
      Table 83.  Tuna process material balance.
             Wastewater Material Balance Summary
Average Flow,  3,060 cu m/day  (0.81 mgd)
      Unit Operation

a)  thaw
b)  butcher
c)  pak-shaper
d)  can washer
e)  retort
f)  washdown
g)  miscellaneous
       % of Average Flow

               65
               10
                2
                2
               13
                7
                1
       Range, %

         35 - 75
          5-15
          1-3
          1-3
          6-19
          5-10
          0-2
               Product Material Balance Summary
Average Raw Product Input Rate, 167 kkg/day  (184 tons/day)
        Output
% of Raw Product
Food Product                 45
By-products
   Viscera                   12
   Head, skin, fins, bone    33
   Red meat                   9
Waste                         1
Range,  %

40   -  50

10   -  15
30   -  40
 8   -  10
 0.1 -   2
                             185

-------
Table 84.  Tuna process summary (9 plants).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N , mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio , kg/kkg
pH
Mean
3,737
(.987)
22,277
(5,338)
1.42
31.8
71
1.3
511
10.8
698.9
14.6
—
1,585.6
35
244
5.65
60.6
1.23
5.74
.145
6.75

246
(0
5,590
(1,340
7
0
3
6
—
14
1
0
0
6
Range
- 13,600
.065 - 3.59)
- 45,100
- 10,800)
.0 - 51
.95 - 1.7
.8 - 17
.8 - 20
_
64
.7 - 13
.75 - 3.0
.0052- .42
.2 - 7.2
                       186

-------
                 Table  85  .  Tuna process  (plant  1).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
f\
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH3
Mean
2120
(0.56)
25,700
(6160)
1.2
30.6
_.«_
477
12.3
777
19.9
mm — -~
1930
49.6
207
5.3
51.4
1.33
3.5
0.09
7.1
Range
2082-2158
.55-. 57
21,934-30,094
5260-7217
1.05-6.8
26.9-174.6
	
191-965
4.9-24.8
268-1097
6.9-28.2
	
1101-3155
28.3-81.1
101-393
2.6-10.1
48.6-58.4
1.25-1.50
2.7-42.8
.07-1.1
7.0-7.1
1 day = 8 hrs
2 weight of raw product
3 laboratory pH
5 samples
                                     187

-------
                 Table.  86  .   Tuna process (plant 2).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg2
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio , kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH4
Mean
4539
(1.19)
24,300
(5830)
1.8
46.8
67.1
1.66
701
17.4
421
9.98
—
1586
38.5
246
5.97
37.8
0.94
7.3
0.18
6.7
Range
3108
(.821-
19,707 -25
(4726
1.6 -
38.9 -
—
209
5.1 -
218
5.3 -
—
629
15.3 -
86.8 -
2.11 -
18.5 -
.45 -
3.7 -
.09 -
6.2 -

4542
1.20)
,616
6143)
11.0
267.4
—
1049
25.5
1008
24.5
—
3547
86.2
349
8.5
57.6
1.4
8.2
.20
7.1
1  day = 8 hrs
2  weight of raw product
3  dry weight
4  laboratory pH
12 samples
                                    188

-------
                 Table  87
Tuna process (plant 3).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day-'-
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg2
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio , kg/kkg
PH3
Mean
4560
(1.21)
23,200
(5560)
1.21
28.5
—
708
16.1
752
17.5
—
2740
63.8
576
13.2
93.8
2.18
9.75
0.23
6.8
Range
3562
(.941-

5678
1.5)
20,508 -28,476
(4918 - (6829)
.7 -
16.2 -
— _
457
10.6 -
543
12.6 -
—
1233
28.6 -
250
5.8 -
61.6 -
1.43 -
5.6 -
0.13 -
6.7 -
6.1
141
—
948
22.0
931
21.6
__
3840
89.1
711
16.5
131
3.05
11.6
0.27
7.1
1  day = 8 hrs
2  weight of raw product
3  laboratory pK
                          5 samples
                                      189

-------
                 Table  88  .   Tuna process (plant 4).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu in/day^
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg2
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N , mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH4
Mean
2270
(0.6)
16,100
(3860)
1.6
24.5
59.9
0.95
477
7.69
608
9.79
—
1860
28.4
217
3.49
46
0.75
10.1
0.16
6.5
Range
1715
(0.453-
13,406 -17
(3215
0.1 -
1.6 -
—
173
2.8 -
172
2.77 -
— _
832
13.4 -
88
1.42 -
8.7 -
0.14 -
9.3 -
0.15 -
6.0 -

2547
0.673)
,680
4240)
2.5
40.2
—
913
14.7
930
14.98
—
2441
39.3
478
7.7
50.9
0.82
14.9
0.24
6.9
1  day = 8 hrs
2  weight of raw product
3  dry weight
4  laboratory pH
9 Samples
                                     190

-------
Table 89.  Tuna  process (plant 5).
Parameter
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD , mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammon i a-N , mg/ 1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
Mean
13,600 9
(3.59)
45,100 35
(10,800). (8
0.228
10.3
—
202
9.12
428
19.3
1,060
47.6
101
4.57
26.3
1.19
9.29
0.419
6.70

,780
(2.59
,700
,550
0.377
17.0 .
—
103
4.64
236
10.6
362
16.3
53.7
2.42
20.6
0.927
6.86
0.310
6.44
Range
- 16,700
4.42)
- 53,100
- 12,700)
0.650
29.3
_
351
15.8
- 1,070
48.4
- 3,110
140
147
6.62
39.0
1.76
56.3
2.54
7.25
                                         8 samples
                 191

-------
                  Table 90.  Tuna process  (plant 6).
Parameter •
Flow Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg
Screened Solids , mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Mean
4,120 3
(1.9)
20,600 19
(4,930) (4
2.46
50.6
—
746
15.3
896
18.4
1,390 1
28.6
267
5.49

,900
(1.03
,000
,540
0.750
15.4
—
495
10.2
—
,050
21.7
144
2.95
Range
- 4,310
1.14)
- 22,000
- 5,280)
9.96
205
_
- 1,020
21.0
-
- 2,130
43.9
450
9.24
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg

Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
pH
6.46
6.27  -
6.75
                                                           5 samples
                                     192

-------
                  Table 91.  Tuna process  (plant 7).

Flow
Flow
Parameter
Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Ratio, 1/kkg
(gal/ton)
Mean
1,850 1,840
(.488) (.488
17,200 16,800
(4,110) (4,040
Range
- 1,855
.492)
- 17,500
- 4,190)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
513
8.80
1,060
18.2
869
14.9
97.7
1.68
68.2
1.17
3.13
0.054
6.90
432
7.40 -
—
1,030
17.7
90.6
1.55 -
69.8
1.20 -
18.6
0.319 -
6.88 -
594
10.2
--
1,260
21.6
105
1.80
97.6
1.67
18.8
0.323
6.91
                                                           2 samples
                                 193

-------
                 Table  92
Tuna process (plant 8) .

Flow
Flow
Parameter
Rate, cu m/day
(mgd)
Ratio, 1/kkg2
(gal/ton)
Mean
246
(0.065)
10,730
(2570)
Range
140 - 461
(.037- '.I
6105 -20,328
(1464 - 4875)
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg
5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg
COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg
Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg
Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg
Ammonia-N , mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH3
357
3.8
634
6.8
—
1310
14.1
—
80.2
0.86
2.5
0.0268
6.85
251
2.7 -
400
4.3 -
— — -
568
6.1 -
—
30.7 -
.33 -
1.86 -
.020-
6.7 -
615
6.6
755
8.1
—
2712
29.1
—
127.7
1.37
4.47
.048
7.1
1  day = 8 hrs
2  weight of raw product
3  laboratory pH
                           8 Samples
                                       194

-------
                 Table  93
Tuna process (plant 9).
           Parameter
              Mean
      Range
Flow Rate, cu m/day
           (mgd)
                 2
Flow Ratio, 1/kkg
            (gal/ton)

Settleable Solids, ml/1
Settleable Solids Ratio, 1/kkg

Screened Solids, mg/1
Screened Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

Suspended Solids, mg/1
Suspended Solids Ratio, kg/kkg

5 day BOD, mg/1
5 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

20 day BOD, mg/1
20 day BOD Ratio, kg/kkg

COD, mg/1
COD Ratio, kg/kkg

Grease and Oil, mg/1
Grease and Oil Ratio, kg/kkg

Organic Nitrogen, mg/1
Organic Nitrogen Ratio, kg/kkg

Ammonia-N, mg/1
Ammonia-N Ratio, kg/kkg
PH
              348
               (0.092)
  159
    568
    (.042-
       .150)
           17,593
            (4216)
             1671
               29.4
 7919
(1899
-28,410
-  6813)
441
7.76
676
11.9
131
2.31 -
318
5.6 -
868
15.28
835
14.7
  835
   14.7
   2916
     51.3
79.9
1.41
3.2
.052
33.9 -
.597-
.74 -
.013-
336
5.72
11.6
.204
1  day " 8 hrs
2  weight of raw product
                          8 Samples
                                     195

-------
suspended solids as calculated for one plant  which  used  repre-
sentative  packing  machines.   The  load  from the pak-shaper is
summarized in Table 94.

As described in Section IV the cans were washed in three  places:
water  from  the  first  two  was  recirculated  (solids and non-
emulsified fats being removed by  screening  and  skimming);  the
final  phase  usually  flowed  continuously.   The  holding tanks
varied from 1.9 cu m/day to 151 cu m/day and were dumped once  or
twice  per  shift;  this  washwater plus overflow and final rinse
comprised roughly  2  percent  of  the  total  plant  flow.    The
entrained  wastes  had  an average BOD5 of 0.65 kg/kkg, with 0.80
kg/kkg of suspended solids; the latter represents  9  percent  of
the  total suspended solids for the plants considered.  The waste
load from the can washing operation is summarized on Table 94.

Retort cooling water comprised approximately 14  percent  of  the
total  plant flow or 428 cu m/day for the average plant.  Because
the cans were subjected to a three-phase  rinse  prior  to  being
retorted,  the  possibility of significant pollutional loading of
this water is greatly reduced.  A sample of  this  cooling  water
contained  0.0095  kg/kkg  of suspended solids, contributing less
than 0.09 percent of the total  suspended  solids  to  the  plant
effluent.   A  correspondingly  low  BOD5 of 0.14 kg/kkg and 0.18
kg/kkg of grease and oil was obtained.

The washdown or clean-up process accounted for 7 percent  of  the
total  plant  effluent,  or  approximately  220  cu m/day for the
average plant.  The  process  occurred  after  the  cleaning  and
packing  was completed and lasted from 2 to 6 hours, depending on
the size of the plant and the  clean-up  crew.   Because  of  the
addition of caustic cleaning agents, the effluent pH was elevated
from  a  mean  value  of  6.17 to a value of 8.4.  Waste from the
cleaning operation which  had  accumulated  on  the  floors  near
machinery  was  removed  prior  to the washing down of this area.
Small pieces of bone,  skin,  meat  and  fins  which  escape  the
initial  step  were  washed  into  drains  and  were  removed  by
screening.  The resulting effluent from this process contained an
average of 1.39 kg/kkg BOD5 and 2.53 kg/kkg of  suspended  solids
or  18  percent  and  32 percent respectively, of the total waste
loading.  During the cleaning process 41 percent of the weight of
the tuna was  removed;  for  the  average  plant  processing  167
kkg/day, this represents 68 kkg of potential waste material.  The
material  entering  the  waste stream, however, totaled much less
than  this.   Most  material  was  recovered  and  used  in   the
production of pet food (red meat) and by-products.

As  indicated  in  the preceding discussion of each unit process,
segregation of these processes was not possible in  each  of  the
nine  plants  in  the  sample  group.   Separate  flow  and waste
characterization was obtainable for each unit process in  from  1
to  6  of  the  plants  depending on the process.  Therefore, the
percentage contribution of each parameter  applies  only  to  the
subsample  group  and  therefore may or may not total  100 percent
for the  sum of the process.
                                    196

-------
                            Table  94     Percent of total plant waste by unit
                                   process for BOD  and suspended solids.
                                                  5
UD
Process
Thaw
Butcher
Pack Shaper
Can Wash
Retort
Washdown
Percent Total
Flow
65
10
2
2
14
7
Percent Total
BOD
5
40
20
14
8
<0.1
18
Percent Total
Suspended Solids
24
19
16
9
<0 .1
32

-------

-------
                           SECTION VI

                SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS


WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF POLLUTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

The waste water parameters of major pollutional  significance  to
the  canned  and preserved seafood processing industry are: 5-day
(20°C) biochemical oxygen demand  (BOD5J ,  suspended  solids,  and
oil  and  grease.   For  the  purposes  of  establishing effluent
limitations  guidelines,  pH  is  included   in   the   monitored
parameters   and  must  fall  within  an  acceptable  range.   Of
peripheral or occasional importance are temperature,  phosphorus,
coliforms, ultimate (20 day)  biochemical oxygen demand, chloride,
chemical oxygen demand  (COD), settleable solids, and nitrogen.

On  the  basis  of  all evidence reviewed, no purely hazardous or
toxic (in the accepted sense of the word) pollutants (e.g., heavy
metals, pesticides, etc.)  occur in wastes discharged from  canned
or preserved seafoods processing facilities.

In   high  concentrations,  both  chloride  and  ammonia  can  be
considered inhibitory   (or  occasionally  toxic)  to  micro-  and
macro-organisms.   At  the levels usually encountered in fish and
shellfish processing waters, these problems are not  encountered,
with  one  class  of  exceptions:   high  strength   (occasionally
saturated) NaCl solutions are periodically discharged  from  some
segments   of  the  industry.   These  can  interfere  with  many
biological treatment systems unless their influence is  moderated
by some form of dilution or flow equalization.


Rationale For Selection Of Identified Parameters

The  selection  of  the  major  waste  water  parameters is based
primarily  on  prior  publications  in  food   processing   waste
characterization research  (most notably, seafood processing waste
characterization   studies)    (Soderquist,  et  al.,  1972a,  and
Soderquist, et al., 1972b).  The  EPA  seafoods  state-of-the-art
report "Current Practice in Seafoods Processing Waste Treatment,"
(Soderquist,  et  al., 1970), provided a comprehensive summary of
the industry.  All of these publications involved the  evaluation
of  various  pollutant parameters and their applicability to food
processing wastes.

The studies conducted at Oregon State University  over  the  past
two  years  involving  seafood processing wastes characterization
included the following parameters:
    1.   temperature
    2.   pH
    3.   settleable solids
    4.   suspended solids
    5.   chemical oxygen demand
                                      199

-------
    6.   5-day biochemical oxygen demand
    7.   ultimate biochemical oxygen demand
    8.   oil and grease
    9.   nitrate
   10.   total Keldahl nitrogen (organic nitrogen and ammonia)
   11.   phosphorus
   12.   chloride
   13.   coliform
Of all these parameters, it was demonstrated (Soderquist, et al.,
1972b) that those listed above  as  being  of  major  pollutional
significance  were  the  most  significant.   The  results of the
current study  (Section V)  support  this  conclusion.   Below  are
discussions   of   the   rationale  used  in  arriving  at  those
conclusions.
1.   Biochemical Oxygen Demand {BOD5)


Two general types  of  pollutants  can  exert  a  demand  on  the
dissolved oxygen regime of a body of receiving water.  These are:
1)  chemical  species  which  exert an immediate dissolved oxygen
demand  (IDOD)  on the water body due to chemical reactions; and 2)
organic substances which indirectly cause a demand to be  exerted
on  the  system  because  indigenous microorganisms utilizing the
organic wastes  as  substrate  flourish  and  proliferate;  their
natural  respiratory activity utilizing the surrounding dissolved
oxygen.  Seafood wastes do not contain constituents that exert an
immediate demand on a receiving water.  They do, however, contain
high levels of organics whose strength is most commonly  measured
by the BOD5 test.


The biochemical oxygen demand is usually defined as the amount of
oxygen   required  by  bacteria  while  stabilizing  decomposable
organic matter under aerobic conditions.  The term "decomposable"
may be interpreted as meaning that the organic matter  can  serve
as  food  for  the  bacteria  and  energy  is  derived  from this
oxidation.

The BOD does not in itself cause direct harm to a  water  system,
but  it  does  exert  an indirect effect by depressing the oxygen
content of the  water.   Seafood  processing  and  other  organic
effluents  exert  a  BOD  during their processes of decomposition
which  can  have  a  catastrophic  effect  on  the  ecosystem  by
depleting  the  oxygen supply.  Conditions are reached frequently
where all of the oxygen is used and the continuing decay  process
causes  the  production of noxious gases such as hydrogen sulfide
and methane.  Water with a high BOD  indicates  the  presence  of
decomposing  organic  matter and subsequent high bacterial counts
that degrade its quality and potential uses.
                                    200

-------
Dissolved oxygen (DO) is a water  quality  constituent  that,  in
appropriate   concentrations,  is  essential  not  only  to  keep
organisms living but also to sustain species reproduction, vigor,
and the development of populations.  Organisms undergo stress  at
reduced  DO  concentrations  that  make them less competitive and
able to sustain their species  within  the  aquatic  environment.
For  example,  reduced  DO  concentrations  have  been  shown  to
interfere with fish population through delayed hatching of  eggs,
reduced  size  and vigor of embryos, production of deformities in
young, interference with food digestion,  acceleration  of  blood
clotting,  decreased tolerance to certain toxicants, reduced food
efficiency  and  growth  rate,  and  reduced  maximum   sustained
swimming  speed.   Fish  food  organisms  are  likewise  affected
adversely in conditions with suppressed DO.   Since  all  aerobic
aquatic   organisms   need   a  certain  amount  of  oxygen,  the
consequences of total lack of dissolved oxygen due to a high  BOD
can kill all inhabitants of the affected area.

If  a  high  BOD  is present, the quality of the water is usually
visually degraded by the presence of  decomposing  materials  and
algae  blooms  due  to the uptake of degraded materials that form
the foodstuffs of the algal populations.

The BOD5  test  is  widely  used  to  determine  the  pollutional
strength of domestic and industrial wastes in terms of the oxygen
that they will require if discharged into natural watercourses in
which  aerobic  conditions  exist.   The  test is one of the most
important in stream polluton control activities.  By its use,  it
is  possible  to  determine the degree of pollution in streams at
any time.  This test is of prime importance  in  regulatory  work
and  in  studies designed to evaluate the purification capacities
of receiving bodies of water.

The BOD.5 test is essentially a bioassay procedure  involving  the
measurement   of   oxygen  consumed  by  living  organisms  while
utilizing the organic matter present in a waste under  conditions
as  similar  as  possible  to  those  that  occur in nature.  The
problem arises when the test must be standardized to  permit  its
use (for comparative purposes) on different samples, at different
times,  and  in  different locations.  Once "standard conditions"
have been defined,  as they have (Standard Methods, 1971) for  the
BODjJ  test,  then  the  original  assumption  that  the  analysis
simulates natural conditions in the receiving  waters  no  longer
applies, except only occasionally.

In  order  to  make  the  test  quantitative  the samples must be
protected from the air to prevent  reaeration  as  the  dissolved
oxygen  level  diminishes.   In  addition, because of the limited
solubility of oxygen in water (about  9  mg/1  at  20°C),  strong
wastes  must  be diluted to levels of demand consistent with this
value to ensure that dissolved oxygen will be present  throughout
the period of the test.
                                    201

-------
Since  this  is  a  bioassay procedure, it is extremely important
that environmental conditions be  suitable  for  the  living  or-
ganisms  to  function in an unhindered manner at all times.  This
requirement means that toxic substances must be absent  and  that
accessory   nutrients   needed  for  microbial  growth  (such  as
nitrogen, phosphorus and certain trace elements)  must be present.
Biological degradation of organic matter under natural conditions
is brought about by a diverse group of organisms that  carry  the
oxidation  essentially  to  completion  (i.e., almost entirely to
carbon dioxide and water).  Therefore, it  is  important  that  a
mixed group of organisms commonly called "seed" be present in the
test.   For most industrial wastes, this "seed" should be allowed
to  adapt  to  the  particular  waste  ("acclimate")   prior   to
introduction of the culture into the BOD5 bottle.

The  BOD5  test may be considered as a wet oxidation procedure in
which the living organisms serve as the medium for  oxidation  of
the  organic  matter to carbon dioxide and water.  A quantitative
relationship exists between the  amount  of  oxygen  required  to
convert a definite amount of any given organic compound to carbon
dioxide  and   water  which  can  be represented by a generalized
equation.  On the basis of this relationship it  is  possible  to
interpret  BOD5  data  in  terms  of organic matter as well as in
terms of the amount of oxygen used during  its  oxidation.   This
concept  is  fundamental to an understanding of the rate at which
BOD5 is exerted.

The oxidative reactions involved in the BOD5 test are results  of
biological  activity  and the rate at which the reactions proceed
is  governed  to  a  major  extent  by  population  numbers   and
temperature.  Temperature effects are held constant by performing
the  test  at  20°C,  which  is  more  or less a median value for
natural bodies of water.  The predominant  organisms  responsible
for  the  stabilization  of most organic matter in natural waters
are native to the soil.

The rate of their metabolic  processes  at  20°C  and  under  the
conditions of the test  (total darkness, quiescence, etc.)  is such
that  time  must be reckoned in days.  Theoretically, an infinite
time is required for complete  biological  oxidation  of  organic
matter,  but  for  all  practical  purposes  the  reaction may be
considered to be complete in 20 days.  A BOD test conducted  over
the  20  day period is normally considered a good estimate of the
"ultimate BOD."  However, a 20 day period is too long to wait for
results in most instances.  It has been found by experience  with
domestic  sewage  that a reasonably large percentage of the total
BOD is exerted in five days.  Consequently,  the  test  has  been
developed  on  the basis of a 5-day incubation period.  It should
be remembered, therefore, that 5-day BOD values represent only  a
portion  of  the  total BOD.  The exact percentage depends on the
character of the "seed" and the nature of the organic matter  and
can  be  determined  only by experiment.  In the case of domestic
and some industrial waste waters it has been found that the  BOD5
value  is about 70 to 80 percent of the total BOD.  This has been
                                    202

-------
demonstrated (Section V) to be the case for  seafoods  processing
waste  waters  as  well.  This is considered to be a large enough
percentage of the total BOD so that 5-day values are used in many
instances, (Sawyer and Mccarty, 1967).  Both the  5-day  and  the
20-day  (ultimate)  BOD  tests  were  employed in this study with
reasonable success.
2.  Suspended Solids

This parameter  measures  the  suspended  material  that  can  be
removed  from  the waste waters by laboratory filtration but does
not include coarse or floating matter that  can  be  screened  or
settled  out  readily.   Suspended  solids are a vital and easily
determined measure  of  pollution  and  also  a  measure  of  the
material  that  may  settle  in  tranquil or slow moving streams.
Suspended solids in the raw wastes from seafood processing plants
correlate well with  BOD5_  and  COD.   Often,  a  high  level  of
suspended  solids serves as an indicator of a high level of BOD5.
Suspended solids are the  primary  parameter  for  measuring  the
effectiveness   of   solids  removal  systems  such  as  screens,
clarifiers  and  flotation  units.   After   primary   treatment,
suspended  solids  no  longer  correlate  with  organics  content
because a high percentage of the BOD5 in  fish  processing  waste
waters is soluble or colloidal.

Suspended  solids  include  both organic and inorganic materials.
The inorganic components may include sand, silt, and  clay.   The
organic  fraction  includes such materials as grease, oil, animal
and vegetable fats, and various  materials  from  sewers.   These
solids  may  settle  out  rapidly and bottom deposits are often a
mixture of both organic and  inorganic  solids.   They  adversely
affect  fisheries  by  covering the bottom of the receiving water
with a blanket of material that  destroys  the  fish-food  bottom
fauna  or  the  spawning  ground  of  fish.   Deposits containing
organic materials may deplete bottom oxygen supplies and  produce
hydrogen  sulfide,  carbon  dioxide,  methane,  and other noxious
gases.

In raw  water  sources  for  domestic  use,  state  and  regional
agencies generally specify that suspended solids in streams shall
not be present in sufficient concentration to be objectionable or
to  interfere  with normal treatment processes.  Suspended solids
in water may interfere with many industrial processes, and  cause
foaming  in  boilers,  or  encrustations  on equipment exposed to
water, especially as the temperature rises.

Solids may be suspended in water for a time, and then  settle  to
the   bed  of  the  receiving  water.   These  settleable  solids
discharged with man's wastes may be inert,  slowly  biodegradable
materials,   or   rapidly   decomposable  substances.   While  in
suspension, they increase the  turbidity  of  the  water,  reduce
light  penetration  and  impair  the  photosynthetic  activity of
aquatic plants.
                                  203

-------
Solids in suspension are aesthetically  displeasing.   When  they
settle  to  form sludge deposits on the receiving water bed, they
are often much more damaging to  the  life  in  water,  and  they
retain  the  capacity  to  displease  the  senses.   Solids, when
transformed to sludge deposits, may  do  a  variety  of  damaging
things,  including  blanketing  the  receiving  water and thereby
destroying the living spaces for  those  benthic  organisms  that
would  otherwise  occupy  the  habitat.   When of an organic, and
therefore decomposable nature, solids use a portion or all of the
dissolved oxygen available in the area.  Organic  materials  also
serve  as  a  seemingly inexhaustible food source for sludgeworms
and associated organisms.

Turbidity  is  principally  a  measure  of  the  light  absorbing
properties  of  suspended  solids.   It  is  frequently used as a
substitute method  of  quickly  estimating  the  total  suspended
solids when the concentration is relatively low.

3.  Oil and^Grease

Oil  and  grease  exhibit  an  oxygen  demand.  Oil emulsions may
adhere to the gills of fish or coat and destroy  algae  or  other
plankton.  Deposition of oil in the bottom sediments can serve to
exhibit  normal  benthic  growths,  thus interrupting the aquatic
food chain.  Soluble and emulsified material ingested by fish may
taint the flavor of the fish flesh.  Water soluble components may
exert toxic action on fish.  Floating  oil  may  reduce  the  re-
aeration  of the water surface and in conjunction with emulsified
oil  may  interfere   with   photosynthesis.    Water   insoluble
components  damage  the  plumage  and  costs of water animals and
fowls.  Oil and grease in a water can result in the formation  of
objectionable   surface  slicks  preventing  the  full  aesthetic
enjoyment of the water.

Oil spills can damage the surface of boats and  can  destroy  the
aesthetic characteristics of beaches and shorelines.

Although  with  the foregoing analyses the standard procedures as
described in the 13th edition of  Standard	Methods   (1971),  are
applicable   to  seafood  processing  wastes,  this  appears  not
necessarily to be the case for "floatables."  The standard method
for determining the oil and grease level  in  a  sample  involves
multiple  solvent  extraction  of  the  filterable portion of the
sample with n-hexane  or  trichlorotrifluorethane   (Freon)  in  a
soxhlet  extraction apparatus.  As cautioned in Standard Methods,
 (1971)  this  determination  is  not  an   absolute   measurement
producing  solid, reproducible, quantitative results.  The method
measures, with various  accuracies,  fatty  acids,  soaps,  fats,
waxes,  oils  and  any  other  material which is extracted by the
solvent from an acidified sample and  which  is  not  volatilized
during  evaporation  of  the  solvent.   Of  course  the  initial
assumption is that the oils and greases are  separated  from  the
aqueous  phase  of  the  sample  in  the initial filtration step.
Acidification of the sample is said to greatly  enhance  recovery
                                  204

-------
of  the  oils  and greases therein  (Standard Methods,1971).  Oils
and greases are particularly important in the seafoods processing
industries because of their high concentrations and the  nuisance
conditions  they cause when allowed to be discharged untreated to
a watercourse.  Floating oil may reduce the  re-aeration  of  the
water   surface  and  in  conjunction  with  emulsified  oil  may
interfere with photosynthesis.  Oil emulsion may  adhere  to  the
gills of fish or coat and destroy algae or other plankton.  Also,
oil  and  grease are notably resistant to anaerobic digestion and
when  present  in  an  anaerobic  system  cause  excessive   scum
accumulation,  clogging of the pores of filters, etc., and reduce
the quality of the final sludge.   It  is,  therefore,  important
that oils and greases be measured routinely in seafood processing
waste  waters  and  that  their  concentrations discharged to the
environment  be  minimized.   Previous  work  with  seafoods  had
indicated   that  the  Standard Methods   (1971)   oil  and  grease
procedure was inadequate for  some  species.   In  a  preliminary
study the standard method recovered only 16 percent of a fish oil
sample  while  recovering  99  percent of a vegetable oil sample.
However, because alternative methods for  seafood  process  waste
waters  were  not available, the Standards Methods (1971)  oil and
grease analysis was used in this study.

Recent work  (March, 1973) by the staff of  the  Fishery  Products
Technological Laboratory of the National Marine Fisheries Service
in  Kodiak, Alaska, indicates that a modification of the Standard
Mjiihods (1971) oil and grease analysis markedly improves recovery
from crab and shrimp processing effluents (Collins,  1972).   The
method  of  Collins  was  designed  to be an improved, simplified
replacement for  the  Standard Methods  (1971)   analysis,  to  be
practicable  in  most industrial laboratories without significant
investment in facilities.  in  addition  to  improving  recovery,
Collins'  method  allows  the  filtration of significantly larger
samples, thereby increasing accuracy and reproducability  of  the
technique.   One  feature of that method apparently is the key to
its success:  the filtration step employed.   As mentioned  above,
the  oils  and greases in the seafoods waste water samples cannot
be extracted by  the  organic  solvent  if  they  are  not  first
filtered  out of the aqueous sample.  It is, furthermore, implied
above that a significant portion of the oils and greases are  not
removed  in  the  filtration  step  in  the  standard method.  To
improve  recovery,  Collins  recommended  a   simple   and   fast
filtration  technique  using  a filter aid and a slurry of filter
paper.  This method appears to hold considerable promise and  may
be  the  secret to improved recoveries in the analysis of greases
and oils in fish processing effluents.


**•  J23» Acidity and Alkalinity

Acidity and alkalinity are reciprocal terms.  Acidity is produced
by substances  that  yield  hydrogen  ions  upon  hydrolysis  and
alkalinity  is  produced  by substances that yield hydroxyl ions.
The terms "total acidity" and "total alkalinity" are  often  used
                                  205

-------
to  express  the  buffering  capacity  of a solution.  Acidity in
natural waters is caused by carbon dioxide, mineral acids, weakly
dissociated acids, and the salts of strong acids and weak  bases.
Alkalinity  is  caused  by  strong  bases and the salts of strong
alkalies and weak acids.

The term pH is a logarithmic expression of the  concentration  of
hydrogen  ions.   At  a  pH  of  7, the hydrogen and hydroxyl ion
concentrations are essentially equal and the  water  is  neutral.
Lower  pH  values  indicate  acidity while higher values indicate
alkalinity.   The  relationship  between  pH   and   acidity   or
alkalinity is not necessarily linear or direct.

Waters  with  a  pH  below  6.0  are  corrosive   to  water  works
structures, distribution lines, and household  plumbing  fixtures
and  can  thus  add  such constituents to drinking water as iron,
copper, zinc, cadmium and lead.  The hydrogen  ion  concentration
can  affect  the "taste" of the water.  At a low pH, water tastes
"sour".  The bactericidal effect of chlorine is  weakened  as  the
pH  increases,  and it is advantageous to keep the pH close to 7.
This is very significant for providing safe drinking water.

Extremes of pH or rapid pH changes can exert stress conditions or
kill aquatic life outright.  Dead fish, associated algal  blooms,
and  foul  stenches  are  aesthetic  liabilities of any waterway.
Even moderate changes from "acceptable" criteria limits of pH are
deleterious to some species.  The relative  toxicity  to  aquatic
life  of  many materials is increased by changes in the water pH.
Metalocyanide complexes can increase a thousand- fold in  toxicity
with  a  drop of 1.5 pH units.  The availability of many nutrient
substances varies with alkalinity and acidity.  Ammonia  is  more
lethal with a higher pH.

The lacrimal fluid of the human eye has a pH of  approximately 7.0
and  a  deviation  of 0.1 pH unit from the norm may result in eye
irritation for the swimmer.  Appreciable  irritation  will  cause
severe pain.

For  these  reasons  pH  is  included  as  a  monitored  effluent
limitation  parameter  even  though  the  majority   of   seafood
processing waste waters is near neutrality prior to treatment.
Of  the  minor  parameters  mentioned in the introduction to this
section, eight  were  listed:  ultimate  BOD,  COD,   phosphorus,
nitrogen,   temperature,   settleable   solids,  coliforms,   and
chloride.  Of these eight, two are considered peripheral and  six
are   considered   of   occasional   importance.   Of  peripheral
importance are ultimate BOD and  phosphorus.   Phosphorus  levels
are sufficiently low to be of negligible importance, except under
only   the  most  stringent  conditions,  i.e. ,  those  involving
eutrophication which dictate  some  type  of  tertiary  treatment
                                 206

-------
system.    The   ultimate  BOD  and  phosphorus  can  be  closely
approximated with the COD test.

1.  Chemical Oxygen^Demand^JCOD)

    The chemical oxygend demand (COD) represents  an  alternative
to  the  biochemical  oxygen  demand,  which  in many respects is
superior.  The test is widely used and allows  measurement  of  a
waste  in  terms  of  the  total  quantity of oxygen required for
oxidation to carbon dioxide and water under severe  chemical  and
physical  conditions.   It  is based on the fact that all organic
compounds, with a few exceptions,  can be oxidized by  the  action
of strong oxidizing agents under acid conditions.  Although amino
nitrogen  will be converted to ammonia nitrogen, organic nitrogen
in higher oxidation states will be converted  to  nitrates;  that
is, it will be oxidized.

During  the  COD  test,  organic  matter  is  converted to carbon
dioxide and water regardless of the biological assimilability  of
the  substances;  for  instance,  glucose  and  lignin  are  both
oxidized completely.  As a result, COD values  are  greater  than
BOD  values  and  may be much greater when significant amounts of
biologically resistant organic matter is present.  In the case of
seafood processing wastes, this does not present a problem, as is
demonstrated by the data generated in this study and presented in
Section V.  The BOD to COD ratio of seafood processing wastes  is
approximately   the  same  as  the  ratio  for  domestic  wastes,
indicating that the two types of wastes are approximately equally
biodegradable.  Another drawback of the COD test is its inability
to demonstrate the rate at which the biologically active material
would be stabilized under conditions that exist  in  nature.   In
the  case  of  seafood  processing  wastes, this same drawback is
applicable to the BOD test, because the strongly  soluble  nature
of  seafood processing wastes lends them to more rapid biological
oxidation than domestic wastes.  Therefore, a single  measurement
of  the  biochemical  oxygen  demand  at a given point in time (5
days) is no indication of the difference between these two rates.
The major advantage of the COD test is the  short  time  required
for  evaluation.   The determination can be made in about 3 hours
rather than the 5 days  required  for  the  measurement  of  BOD.
Furthermore,  the COD requires less sophisticated equipment, less
highly-trained  personnel,  a  smaller  working  area,  and  less
investment  in laboratory facilities.  Another major advantage of
the COD test is that seed acclimation  need  not  be  a  problem.
With  the BOD test, the seed used to inoculate the culture should
have  been  acclimated  for  a  period  of  several  days,  using
carefully  prescribed  procedures,  to assure that the normal lag
time (exhibited by all microorganisms when  subjected  to  a  new
substrate)  can  be  minimized.   No  acclimation,  of course, is
required in the COD test.  One drawback of  the  chemical  oxygen
demand  is  analogous to a problem encountered with the BOD also;
that is, high levels of chloride  interfere  with  the  analysis.
Normally,  O.U grams of mercuric sulfate are added to each sample
being analyzed for chemical oxygen demand.  This  eliminates  the


                                 207

-------
chloride  interference in -the sample up to a chloride level of 40
mg/1.  At  concentrations  above  this  level,  further  mercuric
sulfate  must  be added.  However, studies by the National Marine
Fisheries Service Technological Laboratory in Kodiak, Alaska,  on
seafood  processing  wastes  have  indicated  that  above certain
chloride concentrations the added mercuric sulfate itself  causes
interference (Tenny, 1972).

With  the  possible  exception of seawater samples, this does not
present a  problem  in  the  fish  processing  industry,  because
organic  levels  are  sufficiently high that dilution is required
prior to COD analysis.  This dilution,  of  course,  reduces  the
chloride  level  in  the  sample  as  well  as the organic level,
thereby  eliminating  or  reducing  the   chloride   interference
problem.

The  possibility  of  substituting the COD parameter for the BOD5
parameter was investigated  during  a  subsequent  study  of  the
seafood industry which will be published in the near future.  The
BODES  and  corresponding  COD data from industrial fish, finfish,
and shellfish waste waters were analyzed to determine if  COD  is
an  adequate  predictor of BOD5 for any or all of these groups of
seafood.  The analysis indicates tht the COD parameter is  not  a
reliable predictor of BOD5.

Moreover,  the relationship between COD and BOD5 before treatment
is not necessarily the  same  after  treatment.   Therefore,  the
effluent  limitations guidelines will include the BOD5 parameter,
since insufficient information is available on the  COD  effluent
levels after treatment.
2.  Settleable Solids


The  settleable  solids test involves the quiescent settling of a
liter of waste water in an  "Imhoff  cone"  for  one  hour,  with
appropriate  handling   (scraping of the sides, etc.).  The method
is simply a crude measurement of the amount of material one might
expect  to  settle  out  of  the  waste  water  under   quiescent
conditions.  It is especially applicable to the analysis of waste
waters  being  treated by such methods as screens, clarifiers and
flotation units, for it not only  defines  the  efficacy  of  the
systems,   in  terms  of  settleable  material,  but  provides  a
reasonable estimate of the amount of deposition that  might  take
place  under  quiescent  conditions  in the receiving water after
discharge of the effluent.


3. Ammonia and Nitrogen


Ammonia is a common  product  of  the  decomposition  of  organic
matter.   Dead  and  decaying animals and plants along with human
                                  208

-------
and animal body wastes account for much of the  ammonia  entering
the  aquatic  ecosystem.   Ammonia exists in its non-ionized form
only at higher pH levels and is the most  toxic  in  this  state.
The  lower  the  pH,  the  more ionized ammonia is formed and its
toxicity  decreases.   Ammonia,  in  the  presence  of  dissolved
oxygen,  is  converted  to  nitrate (NO2I) by nitrifying bacteria.
Nitrite  (NO2), which is an intermediate product  between  ammonia
and  nitrate,  sometimes occurs in quantity when depressed oxygen
conditions permit.  Ammonia can exist in several  other  chemical
combinations including ammonium chloride and other salts.

Nitrates  are considered to be among the poisonous ingredients of
mineralized waters, with potassium nitrate being  more  poisonous
than  sodium  nitrate.   Excess  nitrates cause irritation of the
mucous linings of the gastrointestinal tract and the bladder; the
symptoms are diarrhea and diuresis, and  drinking  one  liter  of
water containing 500 mg/1 of nitrate can cause such symptoms.

Infant  methemoglobinemia,  a  disease  characterized  by certain
specific blood changes  and  cyanosis,  may  be  caused  by  high
nitrate  concentrations  in  the water used for preparing feeding
formulae.   While  it  is  still  impossible  to  state   precise
concentration  limits,  it has been widely recommended that water
containing more than 10 mg/1 of nitrate nitrogen  (N03-N)  should
not   be   used  for  infants.   Nitrates  are  also  harmful  in
fermentation processes and can cause disagreeable tastes in beer.
In most natural water the pH range is  such  that  ammonium  ions
(NHj*+)    predominate.    In   alkaline   waters,   however,  high
concentrations of un-ionized ammonia  in  undissociated  ammonium
hydroxide increase the toxicity of ammonia solutions.  In streams
polluted  with  sewage,  up  to  one  half of the nitrogen in the
sewage may be in the form of free ammonia, and sewage  may  carry
up  to  35  mg/1  of total nitrogen.  It has been shown that at a
level of 1.0 mg/1 un-ionized ammonia, the ability  of  hemoglobin
to  combine  with  oxygen  is  impaired  and  fish may suffocate.
Evidence indicates  that  ammonia  exerts  a  considerable  toxic
effect  on  all aquatic life within a range of less than 1.0 mg/1
to 25 mg/1, depending  on  the  pH  and  dissolved  oxygen  level
present.

Ammonia  can  add  to  the problem of eutrophication by supplying
nitrogen through its breakdown products.  Some  lakes  in  warmer
climates, and others that are aging quickly are sometimes limited
by  the nitrogen available.  Any increase will speed up the plant
growth and decay process.  Seafoods processing waste  waters  are
highly  proteinaceous in nature; total nitrogen levels of several
thousand milligrams per liter are not  uncommon.   Most  of  this
nitrogen is in the organic and ammonia form.  These high nitrogen
levels contribute to two major problems when the waste waters are
discharged  to  receiving  waters.   First  the  nitrification of
organic  nitrogen  and  ammonia  by  indigineous   microorganisms
creates a sizable demand on the local oxygen resource.  Secondly,
in  waters where nitrogen is the limiting element this enrichment
could enhance eutrophication markedly.  The accepted methods  for
                                   209

-------
measurement  of  organic  and  ammonia nitrogen, using the macro-
kjeldahl apparatus as described in Standard Methods  (1971),  are
adequate for the analysis of seafoods processing wastewaters.  It
should be remembered that organic strengths of seafood processing
waste waters are normally considerably higher than that of normal
domestic  sewage;  therefore,  the  volume  of  acid  used in the
digestion process frequently must be increased.   Standard^Methods
(1971) alerts the analyst to this possibility by mentioning  that
in  the  presence  of  large  quantities of nitrogen-free organic
matter, it is necessary to allow an additional 50 ml of  sulfuric
acid - mecuric sulfate - potassium sulfate digestion solution for
each gram of solid material in the sample.  Bearing this in mind,
the  analyst  can,  with  assurance, monitor organic nitrogen and
ammonia levels in fish  and  shellfish  processing  waste  waters
accurately and reproducibly.

Nitrogen  parameters  are not included in the effluent limitation
guidelines because the extent to  which  nitrogen  components  in
seafood  wastes  is  removed  by  physical-chemical or biological
treatment, remains to be evaluated.  Furthermore,  the  need  for
advanced  treatment technology specifically designed for nitorgen
removal has not been demonstrated through this study.
U.  Temperature
Temperature is one of the most important  and  influential  water
quality  characteristics.   Temperature  determines those species
that  may  be  present;  it  activates  the  hatching  of  young,
regulates  their  activity,  and  stimulates  or suppresses their
growth and development; it attracts, and may kill when the  water
becomes  too  hot  or becomes chilled too suddenly.  colder water
generally  suppresses  development.    Warmer   water   generally
accelerates  activity and may be a primary cause of aquatic plant
nuisances when other environmental factors are suitable.

Temperature is a prime regulator of natural processes within  the
water   environment.    It  governs  physiological  functions  in
organisms and, acting directly or indirectly in combination  with
other  water  quality  constituents, it affects aquatic life with
each change.  These  effects  include  chemical  reaction  rates,
enzymatic functions, molecular movements, and molecular exchanges
between  membranes  within  and between the physiological systems
and the organs of an animal.

Chemical reaction  rates  vary  with  temperature  and  generally
increase  as  the  temperature  is  increased.  The solubility of
gases in water varies  with  temperature.   Dissolved  oxygen  is
decreased  by  the  decay  or  decomposition of dissolved organic
substances and the decay rate increases as the temperature of the
water increases reaching a maximum at  about  30°C   (86°F).   The
temperature  of  stream  water,  even during summer, is below the


                                  210

-------
optimum for pollution-associated bacteria.  Increasing the  water
temperature  increases the bacterial multiplication rate when the
environment is favorable and the food supply is abundant.

Reproduction cycles may be  changed  significantly  by  increased
temperature  because  this  function takes place under restricted
temperature ranges.   Spawning  may  not  occur  at  all  because
temperatures  are too high.  Thus, a fish population may exist in
a heated area only by continued  immigration.   Disregarding  the
decreased  reproductive  potential,  water  temperatures need not
reach lethal levels to decimate  a  species.   Temperatures  that
favor  competitors, predators, parasites, and disease can destroy
a species at levels far below those that are lethal.

Fish  food  organisms  are  altered  severely  when  temperatures
approach  or  exceed  90°F.   Predominant  algal  species change,
primary production is decreased, and bottom associated  organisms
may   be   depleted   or   altered  drastically  in  numbers  and
distribution.  Increased water  temperatures  may  cause  aquatic
plant nuisances when other environmental factors are favorable.

Synergistic actions of pollutants are more severe at higher water
temperatures.  Given amounts of domestic sewage, refinery wastes,
oils,   tars,  insecticides,  detergents,  and  fertilizers  more
rapidly deplete oxygen in water at higher temperatures,  and  the
respective toxicities are likewise increased.

When  water  temperatures increase, the predominant algal species
may change from diatoms to  green  algae,  and  finally  at  high
temperatures  to blue-green algae, because of species temperature
preferentials.  Blue-green algae can cause serious odor problems.
The number and distribution of  benthic  organisms  decreases  as
water  temperatures  increase  above  90°F, which is close to the
tolerance limit for the population.  This could seriously  affect
certain fish that depend on benthic organisms as a food source.

The cost of fish being attracted to heated water in winter months
may be considerable, due to fish mortalities that may result when
the fish return to the cooler water.

Rising   temperatures  stimulate  the  decomposition  of  sludge,
formation of sludge gas, multiplication of  saprophytic  bacteria
and  fungi   (particularly in the presence of organic wastes), and
the  consumption  of  oxygen  by  putrefactive  processes,   thus
affecting the esthetic value of a water course.

In general, marine water temperatures do not change as rapidly or
range  as  widely  as those of freshwaters.  Marine and estuarine
fishes, therefore, are less tolerant  of  temperature  variation.
Although  this  limited tolerance is greater in estuarine than in
open water marine species, temperature changes are more important
to those fishes in estuaries and  bays  than  to  those  in  open
marine  areas, because of the nursery and replenishment functions
                                  211

-------
of  the  estuary  that  can  be  adversely  affected  by  extreme
temperature changes.

Temperature  is  important  in  those  unit  operations involving
transfer  of  significant  quantities  of  heat.   These  include
evaporation, cooking, cooling of condensers, and the like.  Since
these  operations  represent  only  a  minor  aspect of the total
process and their waste flows are generally of minor  importance,
temperature  is  not  considered  at  this  time  to  be  a major
parameter to be monitored.
5.  Chloride
The presence of the chloride ion in  the  waters  emanating  from
seafood  processing  plants  is  frequently  of significance when
considering  biological  treatment  of   the   effluent.    Those
processes   employing   saline   cooks,   brine  freezing,  brine
separation tanks (for segregating meat from  shell  in  the  crab
industry,  for  instance)   and  seawater for processing, thawing,
and/or  cooling  purposes,   fall   into   this   category.    In
consideration  of  biological  treatment the chloride ion must be
considered,  especially   with   intermittent   and   fluctuating
processes.   Aerobic  biological systems can develop a resistence
to high chloride levels, but to do this they must  be  acclimated
to  the  specific  chloride level expected to be encountered; the
subsequent chloride concentrations should remain within a  fairly
narrow range in the treatment plant influent.  If chloride levels
fluctuate  widely, the resulting shock loadings on the biological
system will reduce its efficiency at best, and will  prove  fatal
to  the  majority  of  the microorganisms in the system at worst.
For this reason, in  situations  where  biological  treatment  is
anticipated  or  is  currently  being  practiced,  measurement of
chloride ion must be included in the list  of  parameters  to  be
routinely  monitored.   The  standard methods for the analysis of
chloride ion are three fold:  1) the argentometric method, 2) the
mercuric nitrate method and 3) the  potentiometric  method.   The
mercuric  nitrate  method  has been found to be satisfactory with
seafood processing waste  waters.   In  some  cases,  the  simple
measurement  of conductivity  (with appropriate conversion tables)
may suffice to give the analyst an indication of chloride  levels
in the waste waters.
                                    212

-------
6.  Coliforms
Fecal  coliforms  are  used  as  an  indicator  since  they  have
originated from the intestinal tract  of  warm  blooded  animals.
Their  presence  in  water  indicates  the  potential presence of
pathogenic bacteria and viruses.

The presence of coliforms, more specifically fecal coliforms,  in
water is indicative of fecal pollution.  In general, the presence
of   fecal  coliform  organisms  indicates  recent  and  possibly
dangerous fecal contamination.  When  the  fecal  coliform  count
exceeds  2,000  per  100  ml  there  is  a  high correlation with
increased numbers of both pathogenic viruses and bacteria.

Many microorganisms, pathogenic to humans  and  animals,  may  be
carried in surface water, particularly that derived from effluent
sources  which  find  their way into surface water from municipal
and industrial wastes.  The  diseases  associated  with  bacteria
include    bacillary    and    amoebic    dysentery,   Salmonella
gastroenteritis, typhoid and paratyphoid  fevers,  leptospirosis,
chlorea, vibriosis and infectious hepatitis.  Recent studies have
emphasized  the  value of fecal coliform density in assessing the
occurrence of Salmonella, a common bacterial pathogen in  surface
water.   Field studies involving irrigation water, field crops and
soils  indicate  that  when  the fecal coliform density in stream
waters exceeded 1,000 per 100 ml, the  occurrence  of  Salmonella
was  53.5  percent.   Fish,  however,  are  cold  blooded  and no
correlation has yet been developed between contamination by  fish
feces and effluent  (or receiving water) coliform levels.

In a recent study undertaken by the Oregon State University under
sponsorship  of  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency, coliform
levels  (both total and fecal) in fish processing waste water were
monitored routinely over a period  of  several  months.   Results
were  extremely inconsistent, ranging from zero to many thousands
of coliforms per 100 ml  sample.   Attempts  to  correlate  these
variations  with in-plant conditions, type and quality of product
being  processed,   cleanup   procedures,   and   so   on,   were
unsuccessful.   As  a result, a graduate student was assigned the
task of investigating these problems and identifying the  sources
of  these large variabilities.  The conclusions of this study can
be found in  the  report;  "Masters  Project—Pathogen  Indicator
Densities   and   their  Regrowth  in  Selected  Tuna  Processing
Wastewaters" by H. W. Burwell, Department of  Civil  Engineering,
Oregon   State   University,   July   1973.   Among  his  general
conclusions were:

    1.    that coliform organisms are not a part  of  the  natural
         biota present in fish intestines;
    2.    that the high suspended  solid  levels  in  waste  water
         samples   interferes   significantly   with   subsequent
         analyses for coliform organisms and, in  fact,  preclude
                                    213

-------
         the  use of the membrane filter technique for fish waste
         analysis;
    3.   that the analysis must be performed  within  foru  hours
         after  collection  of  the  sample  to obtain meaningful
         results  (thus eliminating the possibility of the use  of
         full-shift  composite  samples  and also eliminating the
         possibility of  sample  preservation  and  shipment  for
         remote analysis);
    4.   that considerable evidence exists that coliform regrowth
         frequently occurs  in  seafood  processing  waste  water
         processing  wastes)  and that the degree of regrowth is a
         function of retention, time, waste water  strength,  and
         temperature.

The  above  rationale  indicated  that it would be inadvisable to
consider further the possibility of including the  coliform  test
in either the characterization phase of this study or in the list
of parameters to be used in the guidelines.


7.  Phosphorus

During the past 30 years,  a formidable case has developed for the
belief that increasing standing crops of aquatic  plant  growths,
which  often  interfere with water uses and are nuisances to man,
frequently are caused by increasing supplies of phosphorus.  Such
phenomena  are  associated  with  a  condition   of   accelerated
eutrophication  or  aging  of waters.  It is generally recognized
that phosphorus is not the  sole  cause  of  eutrophication,  but
there  is  evidence to substantiate that it is frequently the key
element in all of the elements required by fresh water plants and
is generally present  in  the  least  amount  relative  to  need.
Therefore, an increase in phosphorus allows use of other, already
present,  nutrients  for  plant  growths.   Phosphorus is usually
described, for this reasons, as a "limiting factor."

When a plant population is stimulated in production and attains a
nuisance status, a large number  of  associated  liabilities  are
immediately  apparent.   Dense  populations  of  pond  weeds make
swimming dangerous.   Boating  and  water  skiing  and  sometimes
fishing  may be eliminated because of the mass of vegetation that
serves as an  physical  impediment  to  such  activities.   Plant
populations  have  been  associated with stunted fish populations
and with poor  fishing.   Plant  nuisances  emit  vile  stenches,
impart  tastes and odors to water supplies, reduce the efficiency
of industrial and municipal  water  treatment,  impair  aesthetic
beauty,   reduce  or  restrict  resort  trade,  lower  waterfront
property values, cause skin rashes to man during  water  contact,
and serve as a desired substrate and breeding ground for flies.

Phosphorus  in  the  elemental  form  is  particularly toxic, and
subject to bioaccumulation in  much  the  same  way  as  mercury.
Colloidal  elemental  phosphorus will poison marine fish  (causing
skin tissue breakdown and discoloration).   Also,  phosphorus  is
                                  214

-------
capable  of  being concentrated and will accumulate in organs and
soft tissues.  Experiments  have  shown  that  marine  fish  will
concentrate phosphorus from water containing as little as 1 ug/1.
                                  215

-------

-------
                           SECTION VII

                CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY



IN-PLANT CONTROL TECHNIQUES AND PROCESSES

The  concept  of  utilizing in-plant changes to reduce or prevent
waste and pollution requires a major change in  thinking  on  the
part  of  industry and the consumer.  Present waste and pollution
comes from the fishing boats (where soluble components accumulate
in the bilge and are often subsequently discharged  into  harbors
adjacent  to  the  plants)  as  well  as the discharge water from
plants,  containing  both  solids  and  solubles.   Not  only  do
solubles  create  an  unacceptable  pollution  problem,  but they
represent a valuable proteinaceous food material that  should  be
recovered.   Likewise,  much  of  the solid waste currently being
reduced to low-grade animal food or discarded as a waste  product
can  and  should  be upgraded to human foods or high-grade animal
feed components.

The seafood industry must rapidly reorient its efforts  toward  a
"total  utilization  concept,"  wherein much of the current waste
materials  are  viewed  as  "secondary  raw   materials."    This
reorientation is not only necessary for maintaining and improving
environmental  quality,  but  for utilization of the food that is
now being wasted.  Many phases of the industry are not compatible
with the requirements of today's world and, even less, with those
of tomorrow.  The current industry allows the majority of the  70
million  metric  ton   (77  million  ton)  world catch to be either
reduced to low-grade animal feed or wasted, in the presence of an
ever-expanding protein-hungry world that  needs  the  nutritional
components in the liquid and solid wastes.

One  of  the key points in trying to introduce conceptual changes
into the seafood industry is to increase our horizons to maintain
a broad  perspective  in  terms  of  world  fish  production  and
consumption.   Considering  that  approximately 100 grams of fish
per day contains an adequate amount of animal protein to  balance
a man's protein diet in many areas of deficiency, there is enough
animal protein in world seafood production to satisfy the protein
requirements  of  1.8 billion people or approximately one-half of
the world's population.

At the present time more than two-thirds of the harvested seafood
is not being directly utilized as human  food  and  approximately
one-half  of  this amount is being discarded.  From a nutritional
point of view, this wasted portion is comparable to  the  portion
being  marketed  for  human  food  and  represents  a  tremendous
potential for increasing the supply of animal protein  needed  by
the  world's  population.   Furthermore, effective utilization of
food materials requires familiarization  with  the  world  eating
habits.   For  example,  ten years ago salmon eggs, which account
                                   217

-------
for about five percent of the total weight of the fish, presented
a waste disposal problem.  Today the Japanese are paying as  much
as  $6.00  per  kg  ($2.70 per Ib)  for salmon eggs to be used for
caviar.  On the other hand, people in the United States will  not
eat   salmon  egg  caviar.   Hence,  waste  from  one  nation  is
considered a delicacy by another.

Maintaining the theme of "total utilization," it is the object of
this discussion  to  analyze  the  various  factors  involved  in
"closing  the  processing  cycle" so that raw material is used to
the fullest extent possible with the subsequent  minimization  of
environmental  pollution.  The implementation of in-plant changes
to accomplish this goal is certainly more logical  than  spending
large  amounts of money to simply treat food processing wastes at
the end of the effluent pipe.


Interdependence of rHarvestinq and Processing

The harvesting of fishery products can be divided into two  broad
classifications,  namely  those  involving  the catching of large
masses in a single effort and those  of  catching  or  harvesting
individual  animals.  Mass harvesting of fish ordinarily requires
expensive and sophisticated equipment compared to the catching of
individual animals.  Hence,  the  practice  of  mass  harvesting,
particularly as applied to the high seas fisheries, is limited to
countries  which  can  afford the expensive vessels and gear that
are required.  On the other hand, many fisheries of the world  do
not  lend themselves to mass catch techniques, since the fish are
not concentrated in accessible  areas.   With  the  exception  of
certain  high seas longline operations that are used for catching
individual fish such as  halibut  or  tuna,  small  vessels  with
rather simple pole-and-line type fishing gear can be used in many
parts of the world for harvesting individual specimens.

Even marketing of highly desirable seasonal fish, such as salmon,
has  been  somewhat  restricted by the gluts of raw material that
are available during a short period of the  year.   Although  the
market demand and processor's profit are greater for quick-frozen
salmon, he has continued to can much of the pack because adequate
freezing   and  handling  facilities  have  not  been  available.
Furthermore, if a company cannot diversify into  other  fisheries
and  operate over a major portion of the year, capital investment
versus profit greatly limits the degree to which new freezing and
cold  storage  facilities  can  be  purchased  to  handle  larger
portions  of  the  seasonal  catch.  Hence, extensive efforts are
being made by companies handling seasonal fish to diversify  into
other  fisheries  to  justify  their  capital  investment.   This
diversification should be beneficial to  the  environment  in  at
least  two  ways.   First,  the  longer  processing season should
justify increased capital expenditures on waste treatment systems
(as well as processing facilities); and  secondly,  more  regular
and continuous processing schedules should increase the number of
options  available to the waste treatment system design engineer.
                                218

-------
Furthermore, a  constant  supply  of  solid  wastes  may  justify
installation  of  fish  meal  plants  in  areas  where  they  are
currently economically infeasible.

Companies processing  and  marketing  seafoods  caught  in  small
quantities  sometimes  face the problem of labor costs being more
important than capital investment.  Therefore, the fisheries that
involve greater harvesting effort and/or that require more manual
labor  in  processing  generate  products  more  costly  to   the
consumer.   Unfortunately,  many  of the most desirable products,
such as shrimp, crabs, oysters, clams, and troll  caught  fishes,
fall  into  this  category.  In many cases, these species are not
only expensive to obtain, but represent dwindling resources.


Nutritiye_yalue and Total Utilizatign

Protein Foods

Meat, fish, and fowl are  commonly  placed  in  the  category  of
"animal  protein"  foods.  Meats from these creatures, regardless
of origin, have similar nutritional properties.  They contain  15
to  20  percent  protein,  which  has  significant amounts of all
essential amino acids.

Cereals and grains all contain protein.  However, these proteins,
called "vegetable proteins," are all lacking in certain essential
amino  acids.   A  large  segment  of  the  world's   population,
obtaining essentially all of its proteins from vegetable sources,
suffers  from  various  protein  deficiencies.  Furthermore, many
people subsisting on vegetable protein not only are deficient  in
essential  amino  acids,  but  have a general low intake of total
amino acids, due to the low level of protein found in cereal  and
grain products.

In  general,  areas of the world that consume animal protein as a
normal part of their diet seldom are afflicted with  the  disease
"kwashiorkor,"  caused  by  lack  of  protein   (particularly  the
essential amino acids).

Although the protein content of fish ranges from 6 to 28  percent
(on a wet basis), it usually lies between 12 and 18 percent.  The
amino  acid  content of fish is very similar to that in mammalian
flesh.  Hence, consumption of fish  proteins  represents  a  most
effective  way  to  supply all amino acid requirements of man and
other animals.  In the human diet, it  is  necessary  to  furnish
those  amino  acids which cannot be synthesized by the tissues or
organs of  human  beings.   These  essential  amino  acids  occur
abundantly in fish.

Fish  lipids  consist  of  saturated, mono-unsaturated, and poly-
unsaturated fatty acids.  Polyunsaturated fatty acids  constitute
the major portion.  A large part of the twenty-carbon fatty acids
of fish lipids is made up of pentenes (5 double bonds), whereas a
                                   219

-------
large  portion  of  the twenty-two carbon fatty acids consists of
hexenes (6 double bonds).  The latter are present in considerably
greater amounts than the former in the phospholipids,  a  pattern
which appears to be typical of fish flesh.  Hence, it can be seen
that  fish  flesh  is  not  only highly desirable as a completely
balanced protein food, but has fats or lipids that are  currently
in demand, since they are highly polyunsaturated.

A  major  problem in the marketing of fish as a protein food lies
in the fact that the desirable unsaturated lipids tend to oxidize
quite rapidly, resulting in rapid fish degradation.  This problem
is minimized by filleting, since the  trimmings  usually  have  a
considerably  higher lipid content and lower protein content than
does  the  edible  portion.   These  differences  can  be   quite
pronounced.   Table  95  shows  the  approximate  composition  of
various portions of dover sole.  Although it can be seen that the
edible flesh  (the fillet) has a relatively  small  lipid  content
and  will probably be much more stable to oxidation than the non-
edible portion, it must also be pointed out that  the  non-edible
portion  accounts for as much as 70 percent of the original whole
fish and contains almost as much protein as the original fish.

Hence, although  fish  is  a  highly  desirable  animal  protein,
marketing  techniques  in  the  future  must not only improve the
distribution and consumption of the so-called "edible  portions,"
but  must develop markets for the portions now being discarded or
reduced to animal feed supplements.

Supplementary Additives

The fact that such a large portion of  the  world  seafood  prod-
uction  is  being  either  discarded  or used for animal feed has
directed much recent research work into developing techniques for
utilizing all portions of a fishery resource.  One  of  the  most
promising methods for utilizing whole fish or waste portions lies
in removing the lipid and water fractions, thus obtaining a high-
protein  dried  "flour"  that can be used for supplementing diets
deficient in protein.
                                     220

-------
  Table 95.  Proximate composition of whole fish, edible
     flesh and trimmings of dover sole [Microstomus
     pacificus (Stansby and Olcott, 1963) ]
                                          Non-Edible
               Whole    Edible             Portion
Constituent
Moisture
Lipid
Protein
Ash
Fish
81.9%
3.5%
12.7%
2.7%
Portion
83.6%
0.8%
15.2%
1.1%
/all parts
81
4
11
3
except
.2%
.4%
.7%
.5%
flesh)




The production of a concentrated fish protein has many advantages
in areas where animal protein supplementation is desired: 1)  the
product  can  be inexpensive on a protein unit basis, thus making
it more attractive to developing countries; 2) removal  of  water
and  lipid  stabilizes  the  product  so  that  it  can be stored
indefinitely under many different climatic  conditions;  3)   many
populations  of  fish  now  considered  to be scrap or industrial
fishes can be diverted into the human food  market.   The  latter
not only utilizes a new source of protein, but expands or creates
harvesting and processing industries in the countries concerned.

Most  discussions  regarding the utilization of concentrated fish
proteins as food additives center around their use in  developing
countries having severe protein shortages.  On the other hand, it
is predicted that by 1980, of approximately one billion kilograms
(2.2 billion Ibs) of protein additives used in the United States,
0.86  billion kilograms (1.9 billion Ibs) will come from proteins
other than milk  (Hammonds and Call, 1970).  This means that  soy,
egg,  cottonseed,  certain  nut,  chicken, and fish proteins will
become increasingly  important.   Since  eggs  and  chickens  are
strongly dependent on fish meal to keep their prices down and the
vegetable  proteins  are  deficient  in certain amino acids, fish
will undoubtedly play a most  important  role  in  filling  these
future  requirements.   In fact, the processing of whole fish, as
well as fish waste, will be a major source of protein in the more
developed   countries   where   this   tremendous   increase   in
concentrated  proteins will be needed to support fortified cereal
grain products, as well as prepared foods.
                                 221

-------
Non-Edible Products

Protein portions of fish and shellfish have high nutritive  value
and  should  be  used  in  the totality for human or animal food.
Another major fraction of the various shellfish harvested is  the
shell.   The  shell  in  several types of shellfish, particularly
crab and shrimp, has a chemical composition containing  materials
that  have  potential  as  non-edible products for many phases of
commerce.

Shells from Crustacea, depending on species  and  time  of  year,
contain  25  to  40  percent  protein,  40  to 50 percent calcium
carbonate, and 15 to 25 percent chitin.  Chitin is  an  insoluble
polysaccharide that serves as the "binder" in the shell.  Chitin,
or   the   deacytelated  form,  chitosan,  has  many  outstanding
properties for  use  in  flocculating,  emulsifying,  thickening,
coagulating,  improving  wet  strength  of  paper, and many other
uses.  The protein that can be reclaimed from the shell  is  high
quality and does not exhibit the amine odor found in fish flesh.

Another  use  for Crustacea  (i.e., shrimp and crab)  shell is as a
meal for animal feed.  It is especially desirable for fish  diets
since  the  pigment  imparts a pink color to the flesh of captive
grown fish, increasing their market appeal.  If  effective  means
of  collecting  shell  from all Crustacea processed in the United
States were available, in excess  of  U5CO  kkg  (5000  tons)   of
chitosan  could  be  produced  yearly.   Even  this  amount would
satisfy  only  a  small  portion  of  the  overall  world  demand
(Penniston, 1973) .

In-Plant Changes Directed Toward Total Utilization

The  previous  discussion  points out the need for maximizing the
utilization of fishery products.  Therefore, the optimal approach
to solving the  waste  and  pollution  problems  in  the  seafood
industry  is to utilize the raw material fully, rather than waste
most of it and subsequently treat that waste.

There are relatively few unit operations and unit processes  used
in   seafood  processing.   Furthermore,  there  are  even  fewer
components in the residual solids and liquids.   Essentially  all
fish  waste  components  have  desirable  nutritional properties.
Based on this analysis, the approach to in-plant  changes  is  to
analyze the various steps in each processing cycle, determine the
form  and  amount  of  material  available in each step, and then
apply recovery techniques to produce marketable products from the
secondary raw material.

In general, all processing results in  visceral  protions  having
essentially  the  same  nutritive  value  and  composition and in
effluent streams that vary  primarily  in  suspended  solids  and
dissolved  solids content.  The dissolved solids vary from highly
nutritious proteins to low molecular weight degradation  products
from  the  proteins.   The  breakdown products have limited or no
                                     222

-------
nutritional value and increase, at the expense of  the  proteins,
with the age of the raw material and the severity of the process.

The  solids  and effluents from all fish and shellfish operations
consist of:

1.  Hot and cold water (fresh or seawater)   solutions  containing
dissolved  materials  (proteins and breakdown products), suspended
solids consisting of bone, shell or flesh,  and  foreign  material
carried into the plant with the raw material.

2.   Solid  portions consisting of flesh, shell, bone, cartilage,
and viscera.   From  the  biological  standpoint,  all  of  these
materials  are either inert or have sufficient nutritive value to
make them valuable as a food or food additive.

The in-plant  changes  that  can  be  made  to  solve  waste  and
pollution problems do not involve extensive study and development
of each type of seafood processing procedure, but conversely, the
development  of a few basic techniques that will be applicable to
any process.  These include:
    a.  minimizing the use of  water  (thus  minimizing  loss  of
         solubles);
    b.  recovery of dissolved proteins in effluent solutions; and
    c.  recovery of solid portions for use as edible products.

Effective  use  of  these three procedures would reduce pollutant
levels in effluents from seafood plants.

Minimizing Water Use

Without  question  the  first  step  in  improving  the  loss  of
nutritive  material  in  a fish processing plant is to reduce the
use of water.   There  are  many  areas  in  which  this  can  be
accomplished at once.

Prior  to  the  heat  denaturation of proteins  (cooking), a water
soluble fraction can be dissolved that can remove as much  as  15
percent  of  the total protein.  As will be discussed later, this
protein can be recovered as a marketable product, but it is  more
costly and produces a less desirable product than that originally
intended.   The  amount of protein loss by leaching is a function
of the amount or volume of water used per unit weight  or  volume
of seafood processed.

One  of  the  first water-saving techniques employed should be to
eliminate the extensive use of flumes for in-plant  transport  of
product.   There  are  few  areas  where dry handling of products
could not replace flumes with, incidental,  significant  increases
in  product  yields.  Cleaning a dry belt or container requires a
small fraction of the water that would be used for fluming.  Many
plants are now using  pneumatic  ducts  rather  than  flumes  for
moving  small  particles  -  dry  material such as shell, and wet
screened solids.
                                 223

-------
Another water-saving technique would be the use of  spring-loaded
hose  nozzles  which  automatically shut off when released by the
user.  Much more water is being used in  the  average  butchering
operation  than  is  necessary.   It  is  a  common practice in a
butchering line to open the valve and let it run without  control
even when no one is actively using the table position.  Steam and
water  valves  are  frequently not repaired, allowing the loss of
water and steam, and the discharge of condensate onto the  floor.
Water  commonly  is  allowed  to  run  through  unused  machines,
overflow cleaning or cooling tanks, or pass through empty flumes.

Educating plant personnel to minimize water  consumption  is  the
first  step  in  the  process of reducing the industry's environ-
mental impact.

Protein Recovery

Several techniques are available for reclaiming protein from  the
portions  of  the  products now being wasted.  The protein can be
recovered in the wet form and made into high quality frozen items
or it  can  be  recovered  as  a  meal  or  flour,  ranging  from
tasteless-odorless  fish flour to fish meal for animal feed.  The
market for these items is virtually unlimited, and the choice  of
process  to  be  installed  in a plant depends on such factors as
initial  capital  investment,   length   of   operating   season,
availability  of  transportation  facilities and many other items
peculiar to the specific operation.  Four types of processes  are
either  currently  available or will be developed to the point of
commercial  feasibility  in  the  near  future.   These   warrant
consideration  in  overall in-plant control programs and each are
discussed briefly below.

1.  Conventional Reduction Processes

The conventional reduction process for converting whole  fish  or
fish  waste  to  fish meal for animal feed has been used for many
years.  Plant capacities range from the massive  plants  of  1450
kkg/day  input   (1600 ton/day) for processing anchovy in Peru and
Chile to the small package units for processing fish viscera  and
trimmings  from  a  fish  canning or freezing plant.  As shown in
Figure 29, a basic large production plant with  a  18.2  kkg   (20
ton)  per hour input capacity costs about $600,000 for equipment,
while the essential facilities for batch-processing  0.9  kkg  (1
ton)  of  waste  in  H  or 5 hours is around $15,000.  Of course,
there is a large variation in any plant investment  depending  on
the  building  and  associated  facilities  required  for a given
location.   Frequently,  the  capital  investment  for   a   meal
operation  in an existing plant could be greatly reduced if there
were building spaces, docks, steam and other items available  for
the addition.

In  general,  the cost of producing meal depends on the number of
days per year in which the plant can be continuously operated.
                                   224

-------
ro
ro
tn
                 800
               8
              •"600
               UJ
               2


               CO
400|-
               3
                                                         15
                                                   (T/HR)

                                                    20
                                                i

                                               10
                                            J.
                 5             10            15

                 INPUT  WASTE CAPACITY ( KKG/HR)
                          Figure  29
                        Convential meal  plant  capital  costs

-------
                 INCINERATOR
                                                                                       DRYER
                                                                                       DISCHARGE
ro
ro
en
                                                                                                 DRY MEAL
                                                                                                 FROM SCREW
                                                                   VAPOR
                                                                   CONDENSING
                                                                   TOWER
                                                       STICKWATER
                                                       HOLDING
                                                       TANK
                                                               TRIPLE EFFECT EVAPORATOR
                                                                                              SOLUBLES
                                                                                              TANK
      Figure   30
Continuous  fish  reduction plant with soluble recovery and odor control.

-------
Of the categories currently under consideration, only large  tuna
plants,  such  as those in Terminal Island, California and Puerto
Rico have sufficient waste material to  justify  continuous  meal
plants  with  the required odor control and stickwater processing
facilities  (Figure 30) where operating costs can be as low as $66
to $88 per kkg ($60 to $80 per ton) of product.  Meal from  these
plants  is also in greater demand since the small batch plants do
not press the cooked fish to remove oil and the resulting product
has an extremely high  oil  content.   The  oil  content  is  the
limiting  factor  in  adding  fish meal to an animal feed ration.
The limit for conventional fish meal is 15% of the ration.   More
oily  meals  must  be restricted to a lower level because the oil
flavor is carried over into the flesh of the animal.

Unfortunately, with the possible exception of areas like  Kodiak,
Alaska, where some 14 plants can send both crab and fish waste to
a  central  reduction  plant,  there  is not sufficient volume in
individual plants, especially those processing crab or shrimp, to
justify installation of conventional reduction  facilities.   For
example,  the  lowest  cost  batch  reduction  facility using the
simple  three-step  process  shown  in  Figure  31  would  handle
approximately 0.9 kkg (1 ton) of raw material producing about 182
to  200  kg   (400  to  44C pounds) of meal in 4 to 5 hours.  This
unit, weighing approximately 5000 kkg (11,000  pounds)  would  be
about 4.0 m  (13 ft) long by 1.5 m  (5 ft) wide by 2.0 m  (6-1/2 ft)
high  and cost $15,000 to $20,000.  Steam equivalent to that from
a 7.5 kw (10 horsepower)  boiler  would  also  be  required.   The
waste  from 15.9 kkg  (17.5 tons) of dressed fish or 5.7 kkg  (6.25
tons) of shellfish  could  be  processed  in  24  hours  yielding
perhaps  0.9 kkg  (1 ton)  of fish meal and slightly more shellfish
meal.  The  three  mandays  required  for  operation  would  cost
considerably  more than the sales price of crab or shellfish meal
which is approximately $55-$165 per kkg ($50-$150 per ton).  With
the  continuing  high  price  of  fish  meal,  however,   prudent
selection of a small meal plant for catfish and other finned-fish
operations  may  be a less expensive means of waste disposal than
other methods.   It  is  almost  impossible  to  accurately  cost
estimate  fish  meal  operations at the present time since prices
are  at  an  unrealistically  high  level.   Peru,  normally  the
producer  of  one-half  of the world's fish meal, has had greatly
reduced output in 1972 and 1973 due to an unusual  ocean  current
condition.    Hence,  there  is essentially no fish meal available
today (i.e., imports from Peru in January through April  were  55
kkg  (60.5  tons)  in 1972 and 5.4 kkg  (5.9 tons) this year), and
the small stocks are selling up at to three  or  more  times  the
1971 prices.  If this shortage continues, production of meal from
waste  will  be practical, but at normal prices, the operating of
small package plants to handle fish waste is marginal.   It  will
be  late  1973  or early 1974 before ocean stock assessments will
allow accurate predictions of fish meal prices.  However, the low
value  of  shellfish  meal  offers  little  hope  for  economical
disposal of crab and shrimp waste.
                                    227

-------
         SEAFOOD
          WASTE
ro
ro
CO
BATCH
DRYER
                                                    GRINDING
BAGGING
                                               BATCH  REDUCTION
                                               OF SEAFOOD WASTE
                  Figure  31
       Low cost  batch  reduction  facility.

-------
Since  the  batch  process does not remove any oil from the fish,
the process makes a rather undesirable product  from  oily  fish.
In  this  case the continuous or semi-continuous equipment should
be used whereby the cooked fish is pressed to remove some of  the
oil.  This approximately doubles the cost of a small plant.

Another  drawback to a conventional meal plant is the odor caused
by the  drier.   In  areas  where  large  processing  plants  are
located,  the  odor problem has never been solved.  Scrubbing has
been the most successful technique, but is expensive.   Air  from
the  drier  is  frequently  introduced into the furnace supplying
heat to the dryer, where the temperature is  approximately  760°C
(1400°F), thus partially burning the malodorous materials left in
the  process air.  This air is then exhausted to the stacks.  One
small plant might be acceptable in an area, but where  there  are
many  reduction plants the cumulative effect, even under the best
control conditions, is quite obnoxious.

2.  Aqueous Extraction

The only way that protein waste can  be  processed  into  a  high
grade  flour  for human consumption is to remove the oil from the
product, thus preventing the development of a rancid  flavor  and
odor.   Over the past ten years, considerable research effort has
been expended by government and industry  to  develop  extraction
techniques  for  removing  oil  and  other  components  from fish
proteins prior to drying them into flours.  An excellent  product
can be generated by some of the methods but they are all based on
organic  solvent  extraction, which is much too sophisticated and
expensive for installation  in  a  seafood  plant,  especially  a
seasonal one.

A recent development in oil extraction has involved changing from
an organic solvent to salt water or brine  (Chu, 1971).  The first
phase  of  this  process  can  be carried out in small as well as
large processing plants with no highly  skilled  plant  operators
required.   In  order to be practical for commercialization, this
process should be capable of handling any portion of  fish  scrap
as  well  as  whole industrial fish.  This would make the process
applicable to low grade fertilizer products,  high  grade  animal
feed  and  fish  protein  concentrate for human consumption.  The
process should also require only the low cost  facilities  avail-
able  to  small  companies.   It should, furthermore, not require
highly trained operating personnel and should not produce a waste
that will contribute to the pollution problem.

Figure 32 shows the general brine-acid process used for  treating
the  fish waste or raw fish which is presently being studied on a
pilot plant scale.  The material is  ground  and  homogenized  in
various  concentrations  of water or brine and hydrochloric acid.
The sodium chloride tends to decrease the solubility  of  various
constituents  and  the  acid  minimizes  the  protein solubility.
After varying incubation times the material is  then  centrifuged
so  that  the  lipid  and water fractions separate from the solid
                                  229

-------
residue.  For animal feed this solid residue can  then  be  dried
and  ground  to the necessary particle size.  Further washing and
extracting  is  necessary  if  it  is  to  be  used   for   human
consumption.   In fact, a high quality product can be obtained if
it is further extracted with an organic solvent to  remove  final
traces  of  taste and odor-causing components.  The pre-extracted
product is much easier to extract with an organic solvent than is
fresh fish because there is no problem with water  dilutions  and
subsequent   emulsions  and  loss  of  solubles  in  the  solvent
fraction.

One distinct possibility for utilizing  this  process  in  remote
areas  having  limited drying capacity is to extract and separate
the solids for subsequent shipment to other  areas  where  drying
facilities  and  refining  equipment  are available.  It has been
found that the brine-acid press cake can be stored for some  time
without  serious  degradation.   Thus,  it  would  be possible to
transfer  damp  press  cake  from  many  plants  to  one  central
finishing area.

A  major  advantage of this process is that it can be adapted for
the output from any size plant that  has  an  extremely  variable
load.   Since  the  major  limitation  to  processing capacity is
drying, the extracted press cake can be bulk stored  and  shipped
to  the  central  drying  and  finishing  plant by normal surface
transportation.  The primary  extraction  equipment  consists  of
stirred  tanks,  centrifuges  and  filters.   Figure 33 indicates
approximate equipment costs  for  the  extraction  phase  of  the
process.

A relatively small volume of concentrated effluent, approximately
0.43  liter  per kg of waste extracted (0.25 gal per pound), must
be treated to remove the high BOD5_ load that ranges  from  40,000
mg/1  in  stream  1  (Figure 32) to 5000 mg/1 in streams 2 and 3.
Much of the BOD5_ from stream 1 is solubilized protein  which  can
be removed almost stoichiometrically by precipitation with sodium
hexametaphosphate.    A   study  of  the  complete  chemical  and
bi'ological treatment of the effluent streams will be completed by
the end of this year (Pigott, 1973).

Preliminary cost estimates from pilot plant studies indicate that
the operating cost for producing meal from the brine-acid process
will be between 11 and 18 cents per kg (5 and 8  cents  per  Ib).
This  will  be  a  high-grade meal that will not have many of the
present limitations of conventional fish  meal.   The  lower  oil
content  will  allow  incorporation into animal and fowl diets at
higher levels  than  are  currently  possible  without  adversely
affecting the flesh flavor.

3.  Enzymatic Hydrolysis Process

The use of enzymes to hydrolyze fish protein has been reported by
several   laboratories.    Tryptic   digestive   enzymes,  pepsin
hydrolysis, papain, and many other enzymatic processes have  been
                                   230

-------
                                WATER
BRINE     ACETIC ACID
ro
CO
                   WHOLE FISH
                          PRODUCT FLOW


                          WASTEWATER FLOW
                      Figure  32      Brine-acid extraction process,.

-------
ro
GO
ro
               125-
             ^ ^

             8
              -DO
H-

UJ
s

fc
UJ
                75-
             0.

             < 25
                                25
                               	I
                                 50
                                  i
 75
	i
                                  25               50              75

                                  WASTE EXTRACTION CAPACITY  (KKG/DAY)
(T/DAY)

   100
                                                                      100
               Figure  33
                 Brine-acid extraction primary facility costs (excluding dryer)

-------
tried  in  an  effort  to  produce  a  highly  functional protein
concentrate.  In general, pepsin  digestion  with  continuous  pH
control  at  2.0  has proven to be one of the best procedures for
producing a high quality bacteria-free product (Tarky and Pigott,
1973).

The basic procedure consists of adding pepsin  to  a  homogenized
fish  waste  substrate  to which equal volumes of water have been
added.  The pH is lowered to 2.0 with hydrochloric acid  and  the
mixture is then continuously stirred at 37°C (99°F).  In general,
this  procedure  yields about 12 percent product based on the raw
material.  The product has essentially no fat content  and,  when
spray  dried,  is a highly functional powder which is low in only
tryptophan.  However, when added  to  vegetable  proteins  having
sufficient  tryptophan,  the  total  protein is extremely high in
quality.

The enzymatic hydrolysis process should be well developed  within
the  next  decade  and  will  yield  a valuable product from fish
waste.  If the FDA ever permits the use  of  waste  portions  for
human   food,   then  a  large  portion  of  the  future  protein
supplements in prepared food dishes may come  from  this  source.
The  material  is cheaper to produce than milk [current estimate,
40 to 55 cents/kg (18 to 25 cents/lb)] and  equal  or  better  in
protein value when added as a supplement.  The process flow sheet
is shown in Figure 34.

This  process  will  probably  never be as effective as the brine
acid extraction technique  for  handling  the  large  volumes  of
seasonal  protein waste in the seafood industry since it requires
longer  times  for  the  hydrolysis  reaction  and  is   a   more
sophisticated  technique.   However,  the  future  will see large
volumes of both fish waste and whole industrial fish processed in
this manner for high quality functional protein derivitives.

4.  Protein Precipitation from Effluent Streams

Some streams of plant processing water and the effluent from  the
brine-acid process have high concentrations of dissolved protein.
As  previously discussed, laboratory work has shown protein to be
recoverable  almost  stoichiometrically  by  precipitation   with
sodium  hexametaphosphate.   The  protein  phosphate  complex  is
highly nutritional and can be used as a high  grade  animal  feed
supplement.

This  process  may have application in some streams of sufficient
concentration to warrant the treatment.  This is especially  true
for  concentrated  cooking and blanching solutions that have high
levels of proteins which have  been  solubilized  during  contact
with the product.
                                   233

-------
ro
oo
                  FISH WASTEWATER
                                          ACID
OIL AND SLUDGE

   I
                                                                                           HEAT
           HOMOGENIZER
            ALKALI
             NEUTRALIZER
                                SLUDGE
                                                                        SPRAY DRYER
                                                                                       FUNCTIONAL

                                                                                          FPC
                                                 ULTRA FILTRATION PERMEATE
                             Figure   34       Enzymatic hydrolysis of  solid  wastes.

-------
Solids Recovery

As  previously  mentioned,  shellfish waste consists of the shell
portion (which is  a  three  component  material)  and  the  soft
portion  which  includes  the  meat  and soft waste material that
adheres to  the  shell.   The  previously  discussed  methods  of
recovering  dried protein material are all applicable to the soft
portions which can be washed or  mechanically  removed  from  the
shell.   However,  the meal from the shell portion has relatively
little value and, in the forseeable future, it is not going to be
economically feasible  to  process  shell  into  meal.   This  is
particularly the case in remote areas.

During  the  past  two  years  a process for producing chitin and
other by-products from shellfish  waste  has  reached  the  semi-
commercial  pilot  plant  scale.   As  shown  in  Figure  35, the
chitosan process consists  primarily  of  caustic  extraction  to
remove  the  proteins  from the shell, followed by a hydrochloric
acid extraction to produce a  calcium  chloride  brine  from  the
calcium  salts  normally  found  in  the  shell.   The  remaining
material, commonly called chitin, is the structural material that
holds the shell together.

The  pilot  plant  is  capable  of  processing  several   hundred
kilograms  of  shell per day, producing a chitosan product of the
following properties:  less than ?  percent  ash;  8  percent  or
greater  nitrogen  (dry basis); soluble in acetic acid, viscosity
of 12 centipoises (0.00025 Ib-sec/sq ft) in 1 percent solution of
0.5 N acetic acid at 25°C (77°F) .

The process begins when the incoming shell  is  conveyed  from  a
hopper  into  a  grinder.   This  results  in  a  coarsely ground
material of the proper  size  for  further  extraction  and  pro-
cessing.   The ground shell is extracted in sodium hydroxide in a
trough screw conveyor.  This solubilizes the protein so that  the
resulting  solid  contains  only  calcium  salts and chitin.  The
solid  is  then  placed  in  a  wooden  tank  where   the   added
hydrochloric  acid  extracts  the  calcium  chloride as a soluble
brine, leaving only chitin as a residue.  Following  washing  and
basket  centrifugation,  the  chitin  particles  are  dried  in a
rotating drum dryer.   This primary product is then ground to  the
desired   particle  size  and  packaged  for  market  or  further
processed to produce chitosan by deacetylation in hot caustic.

Through a cooperative effort with  industry,  the  University  of
Washington Sea Grant Program has made available sample quantities
of  chitin and chitosan to research laboratories and industry for
their experimental use.  A wide interest has  developed  for  the
product  which  is  stimulating  the  commerical  demand  for the
material in many areas.  In addition, a good  market  exists  for
calcium chloride and the protein derived from the shell.

On  the  near  horizon  are  package units that can be put into a
large or small seafood plant for the purpose of pretreating shell
                                    235

-------
                                       HYDROCHLORIC
                                       ACID STORAGE
00
                CRAB SHELL
                                                                       WATER
                                                                                            -^SODIUM ACETATE
                                           WASTE TREATMENT
                Figure   35
Chitin^chitosan process  for shellfish waste utilization.

-------
ro
oo
                 500 -
                                                      1

                                          468

                                       PLANT CAPACITY (1000 KKG/YR)**
                   *  Below 2,500 T/YR it is not economical for a complete processing plant.
                      Waste must be hauled to a central facility.
                   **
                      Based  on  full production for 3 to 4 months per year.
            Figure   35
Approximate plant investment for extracting basic  chemicals

   from shellfish waste (Peniston,  1973)

-------
and then sending the partially extracted product to  a  centrally
located  plant  for  final extraction and finishing.  Selling all
three of the products produced from shell may prove a  profitable
venture  for both the packer and the owner of the central plants.
Although the  data  are  preliminary.  Figure  36  indicates  the
estimated costs of producing chitin in various size plants.


Deboning and Extruding

One  of  the most successful developments in the seafood industry
in many  years  is  the  carcass  deboning  technique  that  will
effectively  debone any piece of fish, leaving the meat separated
from a dry mixture of bone,  scales,  skin  and  cartilage.   The
principle  of  the  operation  is  to  extrude  the  meat through
extremely small openings inaccessible to the unwanted  components
in  the  carcass.   A  machine capable of producing up to 0.9 kkg
(one ton)  of product per hour costs about $20,000.

Although processes utilizing the deboning machines are now  being
used  on  fish,  current  developments  will  result, in the near
future, in techniques for processing shellfish waste, as well  as
carcass  waste,  to  yield  ground meat often equal in quality to
that now being extracted from the  raw  material.   This  process
also stimulates the desire -for a processor to minimize the use of
water while handling his waste because dry raw material is easier
to  debone  than  solids  suspended in water.  The waste from the
deboning operation is a  dry  material  that  is  quite  easy  to
dispose of in conventional landfills or other acceptable disposal
methods.  Also, the material can be dried and added to fish meal.

The deboned meat can be used in:
    a.  portion controlled extruded products;
    b.  battered and breaded items; and
    c.  molded and power-cleaved steaks.

Not  only  will  deboning techniques improve the profitability of
many  fish  processors,  but  it  will  be  a  major  factor   in
alleviating  waste  disposal  problems.   For  example,  up to 25
percent of the total  weight  of  fin  fish  is  currently  being
discarded  in  the  waste  since  the  meat is so located that it
cannot be removed from the carcass.   Using  deboning  equipment,
this meat can be be removed and sold for a price approaching that
of the normal finished product.


Summary,   and  Conclusions  -  In-Plant  Control  Techniques  and
Processes

It has been the purpose of this discussion to outline several  of
the  major in-plant developments that are either ready for use by
seafood processors or will  be  available  within  the  next  few
years.   These  techniques,  combined  with  good  management  to
minimize water use and product wastage, should reduce most of the
                                   238

-------
waste disposal problems now  encountered  by  industry  and  will
utilize  a  much  greater  portion  of  raw material entering the
plants.

END-OF-PIPE CONTROL TECHNIQUES AND PROCESSES

Historically, seafood plants  have  been  located  near  or  over
receiving  waters  which  were  considered to have adequate waste
assimilative capacities.  The nature of the wastes  from  seafood
processing  operations  are  such that they are generally readily
biodegradable and do not  contain  substances  at  toxic  levels.
There  are  even several instances where the biota seem to thrive
on the effluent, although there  is  generally  a  shift  in  the
abundance   of   certain  species.   Consequently,  most  seafood
processors have little, if any, waste treatment.

Increasing concern about the  condition  of  the  environment  in
recent  years  has  stimulated  activity  in  the  application of
existing waste treatment technologies to  the  seafood  industry.
However,  to  date  there  are few systems installed, operational
data are limited and many technologies which  might  find  appli-
cation  in  the  future  are  unproved.   The  following  section
describes the types of end-of-pipe control techniques  which  are
available,  and  discusses  case  histories  where each have been
applied to the seafood industry on either a pilot plant or  full-
scale   level.    Several   techniques  or  systems  are  closely
associated with trade names.  The mention  of  these  trade  name
systems, however, does not constitute endorsement; they are cited
for information purposes only.


Waste Solids Separation, Concentration and Disposal

Nearly  all fish processors produce large volumes of solids which
should  be  separated  from  the  process  water  as  quickly  as
possible.   A  study  done on freshwater perch and smelt  (Riddle,
1973)  shows that a two hour contact time between  offal  and  the
carriage  water can increase -the COD concentration as much as 170
percent and increase suspended solids and BOD  about  50  percent
(see  Figure 37).  Fish and shellfish solids in the waste streams
have  commercial  value  as  by-products  only  if  they  can  be
collected   prior   to  significant  decomposition,  economically
transported to the subsequent processing location, and marketed.

Many processors  have  recognized  the  importance  of  immediate
capture  of solids in dry form to retard biochemical degradation.
Some end-of-pipe treatment systems generate further waste  solids
ranging from dry ash to putrescible sludges containing 98 to 99.5
percent  water.   Sludges  should  be  subjected to concentration
prior to transport.   The  extent  and  method  of  concentration
required  depends  on  the  origin  of the sludge, the collection
method, and the ultimate disposal  operation.   The  descriptions
which follow are divided into separation, concentration, disposal
(including recycling and application to the land), and wastewater
treatment.


                                     239

-------
Separation methods

Screening   and   sedimentation   are  commonly  used  separation
techniques employing a combination of physical chemical forces.

Screening is practiced, in varying degrees, throughout  the  U.S.
fish  and  shellfish  processing  industries for solids recovery,
where such solids have marketable value,  and  to  prevent  waste
solids  from  entering  receiving  waters  or  municipal  sewers.
Screens may be classified as follows:

     a.  revolving drums (inclined, horizontal, and vertical
         axes) ;
     b.  vibrating, shaking or oscillating screens (linear
         or circular motion);
     c.  tangential screens (pressure or gravity fed);
     d.  inclined troughs;
     e.  bar screens;
     f.  drilled plates;
     g.  gratings;
     h.  belt screens; and
     i.  basket screens.

Rectangular holes or slits are correlated to mesh size either  by
geometry  or  performance  data.   Mesh  equivalents specified by
performance can result in different values for the  same  screen,
depending  on  the  nature  of  the  screen feed.  For example, a
tangential screen with a 0.076 cm  (0.030  in.)  opening  between
bars may be called equivalent to a UO-mesh screen.  The particles
retained  may be smaller than 0.076 cm diameter, however, because
of hydrodynamic effects.

Revolving drums consist of a covered cylindrical frame with  open
ends.  The screening surface is a perforated sheet or woven mesh.
Of  the three basic revolving drums, the simplest is the inclined
plane  (drum axis slightly inclined).  Wastewater is fed into  the
raised  end of the rotating drum.  The captured solids migrate to
the lower end while  the  liquid  passes  through  the  screening
surface.

Horizontal  drums usually have the bottom portion immersed in the
wastewater.  The retained solids are held by ribs on  the  inside
of the drum and conveyed upward until deposited by gravity into a
centerline conveyor.  Backwash sprays are generally used to clean
the  screen.   A  typical  horizontal drum is  shown in Figure 38.
F.G. Claggett  (1973) tested this type rotary screen using a  size
34-mesh  on  salmon canning wastewater and also on bailwater from
herring boats.  The results are listed in Table 96.


Inclined and horizontal drum screens have been used  successfully
in  several  seafood  industries,  such  as  the whiting, herring
filleting, and fish reduction plants.
                                     240

-------
 w
 3
      200
      100
           x SMELT WASTE WATER

           O PERCH WASTEWATER
            COD
 H
 EH
 H
 W
 CO
       50
       25
           BOD5
55
H




W


W
      100
      50
            SUSPENDED SOLIDS
                  20     40      60     80


                          TIME - MINUTES
                                              100
120
Figure  37 Increase in waste  loads throuah prolonged
           contact with  water. (Riddle,  1973).
                         241

-------
                    BACKWASH

                   WATER SPRAY
ro
-F*
ro
                                                                           ROTARY SCREEN
                             Figure 33   Typical horizontal drum  rotarv  screen.

-------
At least  one  commercial  screen  available  employs  a  rapidly
rotating  (about  200  rpm)   drum  with  a  vertical  axis.   The
wastewater is sprayed through one portion of  the  cylinder  from
the  inside.   A  backwash  is provided in another portion of the
cycle to clear the openings.   Woven fabric  up  to  400-mesh  has
been  used  satisfactorily.   This unit is called a "concentrator"
since only a portion of the impinging wastewater passes  through.
About  70 to 80 percent of the wastewater is treated effectively,
which necessitates further treatment  of  the  concentrate.   The
efficacy  of  this,  and other systems, in treating shellfish and
seafood wastes have been investigated on a  pilot  scale  in  the
Washington  salmon  industry,  and  the  Alaskan  crab and shrimp
industries  (Peterson, 1973b)  with some success.  The  results  of
these studies are shown in Table 97.

Vibratory  screens are more commonly used in the seafood industry
as unit operations rather than wastewater treatment.  The  screen
housing is supported on springs which are forced to vibrate by an
eccentric.   Retained solids are driven in a spiral motion on the
flat screen  surface  for  discharge  at  the  periphery.   Other
vibratory-type   screens  impart  a  linear  motion  to  retained
particles by eccentrics.  Blinding is a  problem  with  vibratory
screens  handling seafood wastewaters.  Salmon waste is difficult
to screen because of its fibrous nature and high  scale  content.
Crab  butchering  waste,  also  quite  stringy,  is somewhat less
difficult to screen.

Table 98 shows the results of the  National  Canners  Association
study  on salmon canning wastewaters which included tests using a
vibrating screen.  It can be seen that the  removal  efficiencies
are  lower  than  for  the  horizontal  drum  screen or the SWECO
concentrator.  The vibratory screen was also  more  sensitive  to
flow variations and the solids content of the wastewater.
Tangential  screens  are finding increasing acceptance because of
their inherent  simplicity,  reliability  and  effectiveness.   A
typical  tangential screen is shown in Figure 39.  It consists of
a series of parallel  triangular  or  wedgeshaped  bars  oriented
perpendicular  to  the  direction of flow.  The screen surface is
usually curved and inclined about 45 to 60 degrees.  Solids  move
down  the  face  and  fall  off  the  bottom as the liquid passes
through the openings ("Coanda effect").  No moving parts or drive
mechanisms are required.  The feed to the screen face  is  via  a
weir  or  a  pressurized  nozzle  system impinging the wastewater
tangentially on the screen face  at  the  top.   The  gravity-fed
units are limited to about 50 to 60-mesh  (equivalent)  in treating
seafood  wastes.   Pressure-fed screens can be operated with mesh
equivalents of up to 200-mesh.

Tangential screens have met with considerable acceptance  in  the
fish  and  shellfish industry.  They currently represent the most
advanced waste treatment concept  voluntarily  adopted  by  broad
segments  of  the  industry.  One reason for this wide acceptance
                                243

-------
             Table  96    Northern sewage screen
                        test results.
           Wastewater
             Source
           Percentage Reduction
              In Total Solids
             (34-mesh screen)
             (Claggett, 1973)
        Salmon canning

        Herring bailwater
                    57

                    48
        Table  97   SWECO concentrator test results.
Wastewater Source
    Parameter
Percentage Reduction
165-mesh325-mesh
Salmon
       . 1972c)
Shrimp peeler
(Peterson, 1973b)
Settleable solids


Suspended solids      53

COD                   36

Settleable solids     99


Suspended solids      73

COD                   46
             100


              34

              36
       Table  98  ,  SWECO vibratory screen performance
       on salmon canning wastewaters
           Parameter
                   Percentage
                   Reduction
                (40-mesh screen)
       Settleable solids

       Suspended solids

       COD
                       14

                       31

                       30
                               244

-------
has been the thorough testing history  of  the  unit.   Data  are
available   (although  much  is  proprietary)   on  the  tangential
screening of  wastewaters  emanating  from  plants  processing  a
variety  of  species.   A  summary of some recent work appears in
Table 99

Large solids should be separated before fine screening to improve
performance and prevent damage to equipment.   One  method  is  to
cover  floor  drains  with  a  coarse grate or drilled plate with
holes approximately 0.6 cm (0.25 in.) in diameter.   This  coarse
grate  and a magnet can prevent oversize or unwanted objects such
as polystyrene cups, beverage cans, rubber  gloves,  tools,  nuts
and  bolts  or  broken  machine belts from entering the treatment
system.  Such objects can cause serious damage to pumps  and  may
foul the screening system.

Salmon canneries utilize a perforated inclined trough to separate
large solids from the wastewater.  The wastewater is fed into the
lower  end  and  conveyed up the trough by a screw conveyer.  The
liquid escapes through the holes while the solids are  discharged
to  a  holding  area.   Inclined  conveyors  and  mesh  belts are
commonly used throughout  the  fish  and  shellfish  industry  to
transport and separate liquids from solid wastes.

A  typical  screening  arrangement  using  a tangential screen is
shown in Figure 40.  A sump is useful in maintaining  a  constant
wastewater  feed  rate  to the screen.  It also helps to decrease
fluctuations in the wastewater solids load such as occur in batch
processes.  Some form of agitator may be  required  to  keep  the
suspended solids in suspension.  Ideally, the sump should contain
a  one-half  hour  or  more storage capacity to permit repairs to
downstream  components.   The   pump   used   is   an   important
consideration.   Centrifugal  trash  pumps,  of the open impeller
type, are commonly used, however, this  type  of  pump  tends  to
pulverize  solids  as they pass through.  During an experiment on
shrimp  wastes  the  level  of  settleable  solids   dramatically
increased  after  screening (30-mesh screen)  when the waste water
was passed through a centrifugal pump (Peterson, 1973).  Positive
displacement   or   progressing   cavity   non-clog   pumps   are
recommended.   Screens  should be installed with the thought that
auxiliary cleaning devices may be required later.

Blinding is a problem that depends, to some extent, on  the  type
of  screen employed, but to a greater extent on the nature of the
waste stream.  Salmon waste is particularly difficult to  screen.
One cannery has reduced plugging by installing mechanical brushes
over the face of their tangential screen.

Many  of  the  screen  types  mentioned above produce solids con-
taining considerable excess water which must  be  removed  either
mechanically  or  by  draining.   A  convenient place to locate a
screen assembly is above the storage hopper so  that  the  solids
discharge directly to the hopper.  However, hoppers do not permit
good drainage of most stored solids.  If mechanical dewatering is
                                  245

-------
SURGE  FLAP
    OVERSIZE
                                                       TANGENTIAL
                                                        SCREEN
             Figure 39  Typical tangential  screen.
                            246

-------
                                                                                                      WASTEWATER
                                                                                                      SOLIDS
               INFLUENT
              WASTEWATER
IM
     M
POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT
  NON-CLOG PUMP
                                          SOLIDS FROM PLANT
SCREENED WASTEWATER
 TO NEXT TREATMENT SYSTEM
 OR TO RECEIVING WATER
 OR TO MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS
                                                                      TO SOLIDS
                                                                        DISPOSAL
                                                                      OR BY- PRODUCT
                                                                       RECOVERY
                        Figure 40  .Typical screen  system  for  seafood processing  operations,

-------
         Table  99 .   Tangential screen performance.
Percentage Reduction
Wastewater
Source
Sardines
(Atwell,
et at. ,
1972T

Salmon
(
1972)


Shrimp
(Peterson,
1973b)

Parameter
SS

BOD

Set. solids

SS

COD
Set. solids

SS

COD
30
mesh
26

9

_«

—

"™ ""
88

46

21
40 50
mesh mesh
w •• — —

— —

*• _ «_

— —

~ — "•" ~
93

43

18
100
mesh
^ ^

—

35

15

13
83

58

23
150
mesh
^m ^

—

86

36

25
^ ^

—

—
Salmon
(Peterson,
1973b)
Set. solids   50

SS            56

COD           55
King Crab
(Peterson,
1973b)
Set. solids   83

SS            62

COD           51
Salmon
(Claggett,
1973)
Total
solids
56
Herring
(Claggett,
1973)
Total
solids
48
                              248

-------
necessary,  it may be easier to locate the screen assembly on the
ground and convey dewatered solids to the hopper.

Processing wastewaters from operations  in  seafoods  plants  are
highly  variable  with respect to suspended solids concentrations
and the size of particulates.  On-site testing  is  required  for
optimum selection in all cases.

Some  thought  should  be given to installing multiple screens to
treat different streams  separately  within  the  process  plant.
Some  types  of screens are superior for specific wastewaters and
there may be some economy in  using  expensive  or  sophisticated
screens only on the hard-to-treat portions of the waste flows.

Microscreens  to effect solids removal from salmon wastewaters in
Canada have been tried.   They  were  found  to  be  inferior  to
tangential   screens  for  that  application.   Microscreens  and
microstrainers have not, however,  been  applied  in  the  United
States.

Screens of most types are relatively insensitive to discontinuous
operation  and flow fluctuations, and require little maintenance.
The presence of salt water  necessitates  the  use  of  stainless
steel  elements.   Oil  and grease accumulation can be reduced by
spraying the elements with a fluorocarbon coating.

Screens of proper design are  a  reliable  and  highly  efficient
means  of  seafood  waste  treatment, providing the equivalent of
"primary treatment."  The cost of  additional  solids  treatment,
approaching  95  percent solids removal by means of progressively
finer screens in  series  must,  in  final  design,  be  balanced
against  the  cost  of  treatment  by  other  methods,  including
chemical coagulation and sedimentation.


Sedimentation

Sedimentation,  or  settling  of  solids,  effects  solids-liquid
separation  by means of gravity.  Nomenclature for the basins and
equipment employed for this process includes terms such  as  grit
chamber,  catch  basin,  and clarifier, depending on the position
and purpose of the particular unit in the treatment  train.   The
design  of each unit, however, is based on common considerations.
These  include;  the  vertical  settling  velocity  of   discrete
particles  to be removed, and the horizontal flow velocity of the
liquid stream.  Detention times required in the  settling  basins
range  from  a few minutes for heavy shell fragments to hours for
low-density suspensions.  Grit chambers to remove sand and  shell
particles  are common in the clam and oyster industries, however,
the current absence of settling basins or clarifiers in the  fish
industries  indicates the desirability of simple on-site settling
rate studies  to  determine  appropriate  design  parameters  for
liquid  streams  undergoing  such  treatment.   Section V of this
study presents the results of settleable solids tests, which were
                                  249

-------
determined using the Imhoff cone method, for each seafood process
monitored.

Removal of settled solids  from  sedimentation  units  is  accom-
plished  by  drainoff,  scraping,  and suction-assisted scraping.
Frequent removal is necessary  to  avoid  putrefaction.   Seafood
processors using brines and sea water must consider the corrosive
effect   of   salts   on  mechanism  operation.   Maintenance  of
reliability in such cases may  require  parallel  units  even  in
small installations.

Sedimentation  processes can be upset by such "shock loadings" as
fluctuations in flow  volume,  concentration  and,  occasionally,
temperature.   Aerated  equalization  tanks  may  provide  needed
capacity for equalizing and mixing  wastewater  flows.   However,
deposition  of  solids  and waste degradation in the equalization
tank may negate its usefulness.

Sedimentation tests run on a combined effluent from a fresh water
perch and smelt plant produced an  average  of  approximately  20
percent  BOD  and  9  percent suspended solids removal after a 60
minute detention time (M.J. Riddle, 1972).  The  nature  of  most
fish and shellfish wastewater require that chemical coagulants be
added  to  sedimentation processes to induce removal of suspended
colloids.

A partially successful gravity clarification system was developed
using large quantities of a commercial coagulant  called  F-FLOK.
F-FLOK  is a derivative of lignosulfonic acid marketed by Georgia
Pacific Corporation.  In a test on salmon wastewater, reported by
E. Robbins (1973), the floe formed slowly but,  after  formation,
sedimentation  rates  of four feet per hour were achieved.  Table
100 shows the results of the test.

Properly designed and operated sedimentation units  incorporating
chemical   coagulants   can   remove   most  particulate  matter.
Dissolved material, however, will require  further  treatment  to
achieve necessary removals.

It  is  important  to  note that the gravity clarifiers described
above, when operated with normal detention  times,  may  lead  to
strong  odors  due  to  rapid  microbial action.  This could also
produce floating sludge.

Major disadvantages of sedimentation  basins  include  land  area
requirements  and  structural  costs.   In  addition, the settled
solids normally require dewatering prior to ultimate disposal.


Concentration methods

Although  screenings  from  seafood  wastewater  usually  do  not
require  dewatering;  sludges,  floats,  and  skimmings from sub-
sequent treatment steps must usually be concentrated or dried  to


                                 250

-------
               Table 100 .   Gravity clarification
            using F-FLOK coagulant (Robbins, 1973).
Coagulant
Concentration
(mg/1)
5020
4710
2390
Total
Solids Recovery
(%)
68
60
47
Protein
Recovery
(%)
92
80
69
   Table 101   Results of dispersed air flotation on tuna
         wastewater (Jacobs Engineering Co., 1972).


 Chemical                          Influent        Reduction
 Additive         Parameter         (mg/1)             %
                           (Average of five runs)

Treto lite           BOD             4400             47
7-16 mg/1            O&G              273             68
                      SS              882             30

                           (Average of eight runs)

 Drew 410            BOD              211             47
3-14 mg/1            O&G               54             50
                      SS              245             30
                             251

-------
economize   storage   and   transport.   The  optimum  degree  of
concentration and the equipment used must be determined in  light
of  transportation  costs and sludge characteristics, and must be
tailored to the individual plant's location and production.

Sludges, floats, skimmings, and other  slurries  vary  widely  in
dewaterability.   Waste  activated sludges and floated solids are
particularly difficult to dewater.   It  is  probable  that  most
sludges  produced in treating fish processing wastes will require
conditioning  before  dewatering.   Such  conditioning   may   be
accomplished  by means of chemicals or heat treatment.  Anaerobic
digestion to stabilize sludges before dewatering is not  feasible
at  plants  employing  salt  waters or brines.  Aerobic digestion
will produce a stabilized sludge, but not one which  is  easy  to
dewater.   The  quantity  and  type of chemical treatment must be
determined in light of the ultimate fate of the solids  fraction.
For  example,  lime  may be deposited on the walls of condensers.
Alum has been shown to be  toxic  to  chickens  at  0.12  percent
concentrations,  and should be used with care in sludges intended
for feed byproduct recovery.

A large variety of equipment is available for  sludge  dewatering
and concentration, each unit having particular advantages.  These
units   include  vacuum  filters,  filter  presses,  gravity-belt
dewaterers,  spray  dryers,  incinerators,  centrifuges,  cyclone
classifiers, dual-cell gravity concentrators, multi-roll presses,
spiral  gravity concentrators, and screw presses.  Such equipment
can concentrate sludges from 0.5 percent  solids  to  a  semi-dry
cake  of  12 percent solids, with final pressing to a dry cake of
over 30 percent solids.   Units  are  generally  sized  to  treat
sludge  flows  no  smaller  than  38  1/min   (10  gpm).   Because
maintenance  requirements  range  from  moderate  to  high,   the
provision   of   dual   units  is  required  for  continuity  and
reliability.

In the seafood industry  only  fish  meal  plants  currently  use
solids   dewatering   and   concentration   equipment.    Smaller
installations with flows under about 757  cum/day   (200,000  gpd)
probably cannot utilize dewatering equipment economically.


Disposal methods

A  high  degree of product recovery is practiced by industries in
locations where solubles and meal plants are available.  The  pet
food,  animal  food  and  bait industries also use a considerable
amount of solids from some industries.  Where such facilities  do
not  exist,  alternative  methods  of  solids  disposal  such  as
incineration, sanitary landfill and deep  sea  disposal  must  be
considered.

Incineration  of seafood solids wastes has not been tried in most
fish  industries.   Incineration  by  means  of   multiple-hearth
furnaces  has  been  effective with municipal wastes and sludges,


                                 252

-------
when operated on a continuous basis.  Intermittent  start-up  and
shut-down  is  inefficient  and  shortens  the useful life of the
equipment.  A technique for incinerating solid wastes in a molten
salt bath is under development, with one unit in operation.   The
by-products are CO2, water vapor, and a char residue skimmed from
the  combustion  chamber.   This device may prove to be viable in
reasonably small units (Lessing, 1973).

Both types  of  incineration  waste  beneficial  nutrients  while
leaving  an ash which requires ultimate disposal.  Fuel costs are
also high and air pollution control equipment must  be  installed
to minimize emissions.

Sanitary  landfill  is  most  suitable  for stabilized (digested)
sludges and ash.  In some  regions,  disposal  of  seafood  waste
solids in a public landfill is unlawful.  Where allowed and where
land  is available, private landfill may be a practical method of
ultimate disposal.  Land application of unstablized,  putrescible
solids  as  a  nutrient  source may be impractical because of the
nuisance  conditions  which  may  result.   The  application   of
stabilized   sludges   as   soil   conditioners  may  have  local
feasibility.

The  practicality  of  landfill  or  surface  land  disposal   is
dependent  on the absence of a solids reduction facility, and -the
presence of a suitable disposal site.  The nutritive value of the
solids indicates that such methods  are  among  the  least  cost-
efficient currently available.

In  addition  to placement in or on the land and dispersal in the
atmosphere  (after incineration), the third (and  only  remaining)
ultimate  disposal alternative is dispersion in the waters.  Deep
sea disposal of fish wastes can be a means of recycling nutrients
to the ocean.  This method  of  disposal  does  not  subject  the
marine  environment  to  the  potential  hazards  of toxicity and
pathogens associated with the dumping of  human  sewage  sludges,
municipal  refuse  and  many  industrial wastes.  The disposal of
seafood wastes in deep water or in areas subject to strong  tidal
flushing  can  be  a  practical and possibly beneficial method of
ultimate disposal.  In some  locations,  the  entire  waste  flow
could  be  ground  and  pumped  to a dispersal site in deep water
without adverse effects.   The U.S. Congress recognized the unique
status  of  seafood  wastes  when,  in  1972,  they  specifically
exempted  fish  and  shellfish processing wastes from the blanket
moratorium on ocean dumping contained  in  the  so-called  "Ocean
Dumping Act."

Grinding  and  disposing of wastes in shallow, quiescent bays has
been practiced in the past, but should be discontinued.  Disposal
depths of less than 13 m (7 fathoms), particularly in the absence
of vigorous tidal flushing, may be expected to have a detrimental
effect on the marine environment and the local  fishery,  whereas
discharge into a deep site generally would not.
                                  253

-------
The  identification  of  suitable  sites  for  this  practice un-
doubtedly demands good judgment and detailed knowledge  of  local
conditions.  Used in the right manner, however, deep sea disposal
is  an  efficient  and  cost-effective  technique, second only to
direct solids recovery and by-product manufacture.

Wastewater Treatment

Wastewater  treatment  technology  to  reduce   practically   any
effluent  to  any  degree  of  purity  is  available.   The  cost
effectiveness of a specific technology depends  in  part  on  the
contaminants  to  be  removed, the level of removal required, the
scale of the operation, and most importantly  on  local  factors,
including  site  availability and climate.  Because these factors
vary widely  among  individual  plants  in  the  fish  processing
industries,  it  is difficult to attempt to identify a technology
which may prove superior  to  all  others  within  an  industrial
subcategory.

The  following  general  description  is  divided  into physical-
chemical and biological methods for the removal of contaminants.


Physical-chemical treatment

Physical-chemical treatment is capable of achieving high  degrees
of  wastewater  purification  in significantly smaller areas than
biological methods.  This space advantage is often accompanied by
the  expense  of  high  equipment,  chemical,  power,  and  other
operational  costs.   The  selection  of  unit  operations  in  a
physical-chemical or biological-chemical treatment system  cannot
be  isolated  cost-effectively from the constraints of each plant
site.   The  most  promising  treatment  technologies   for   the
industries  under  consideration are chemical coagulation and air
flotation.   There  is  yet  little  practical  application   for
demineralization    technology    including    reverse   osmosis,
electrodialysis, electrolytic treatment, and ion exchange, or for
high levels of organic removal by means of carbon adsorption.


Chemical Oxidation

Chlorine and ozone are  the  most  promising  oxidants,  although
chlorine  dioxide, potassium permanganate, and others are capable
of oxidizing organic matter found  in  the  process  wastewaters.
This  technology  is  not  in  common  use  because  of  economic
feasibility restrictions.

Chlorine could be generated  electrolytically  from  salt  waters
adjoining  most  processors  of  marine  species, and utilized to
oxidize the organic material and  ammonia  present   (Metcalf  and
Eddy,  1972).   Ozone  could be generated on-site and pumped into
de-aerated wastewater.  De-aeration is  required  to  reduce  the
build-up  of  nitrogen  and  carbon  dioxide  in  the recycle gas


                                  254

-------
stream.  The higher the COD, the higher the unit  ozone  reaction
efficiency.   Both  oxidation  systems  offer  the  advantages of
compact size.  The operability  of  the  technology  with  saline
wastewaters, and the practicability of small units, have not been
evaluated in the seafood processing industry (McNabney and Wynne,
1971) .


Air Flotation

Air  flotation  with  appropriate chemical addition is a physical
chemical treatment technology  capable  of  removing  heavy  con-
centrations  of  solids, greases, oils, and dissolved organics in
the form of a floating sludge.   The  buoyancy  of  released  air
bubbles  rising  through  the  wastewater lifts materials in sus-
pension to the  surface.   These  materials  include  substantial
dissolved  organics  and  chemical precipitates, under controlled
conditions.  Floated, agglomerated sludges are skimmed  from  the
surface,  collected  and dewatered.  Adjustment of pH to near the
isoelectric point favors the removal of  dissolved  protein  from
fish  processing  wastewaters.   Because  the  flotation  process
brings partially reduced  organic  and  chemical  compounds  into
contact with oxygen in the air bubbles, satisfaction of immediate
oxygen  demand is a benefit of the process in operation.  Present
flotation equipment  consists  of  three  types  of  systems  for
wastewater  treatment:   1)   vacuum  flotation;  2) dispersed air
flotation; and 3)  dissolved air flotation.

1.  Vacuum  flotation:   In  this  system,  the  waste  is  first
aerated, either directly in an aeration tank or by permitting air
to  enter  on  the  suction side of a pump.  Aeration periods are
brief, some as short at 30 seconds, and require only about 185 to
370 cc/1  (0.025 to 0.05 cu ft/gal)  of  air  (Nemerow,  1971).   A
partial  vacuum  of  about  0.02 atm (9 in. of water) is applied,
which releases some air  as  minute  bubbles.    The  bubbles  and
attached  solids rise to the surface to form a scum blanket which
is removed by  a  skimming  mechanism.   A  disadvantage  is  the
expensive air-tight structure needed to maintain the vacuum.  Any
leakage from the atmosphere adversely affects performance.

2.   Dispersed  air flotation:  Air bubbles are generated in this
process by the mechanical shear of propellers, through diffusers,
or by homogenization of gas and liquid streams.  The results of a
pilot study on  tuna  wastewater  are  shown  in  Table  101  and
indicate   that   a  dispersed  air  flotation  system  could  be
successful.  The unit was a WEMCO HydroCleaner with  five  to  10
minute detention time.  The average percent reduction of five-day
BOD, grease and oil, and suspended solids was estimated using two
types  of  chemical  additives.   Each  run consisted of one hour
steady state operation with flow proportioned samples taken every
five minutes.  It should be noted that the average of  five  runs
with  different  chemical additions are presented rather than the
optimum.


                               255

-------
3.  Dissolved air flotation:  The dissolved air can be introduced
by one of the methods:  1)  total flow pressurization; 2)   partial
flow  pressurization;  or  3)   recycle  pressurization.   In this
process, the wastewater or a recycled stream  is  pressurized  to
3.0  to  U.H  atm  (30 to 50 psi)  in the presence of air and then
released into the flotation tank which is  at  ambient  pressure.
In  recycle  pressurization  the  recycle  stream  is held in the
pressure unit for about one minute before being  mixed  with  the
unpressurized  main  stream  just  before  entering the flotation
tank.

The flotation system of choice depends on the characteristics  of
the  waste  and  the necessary removal efficiencies.  Mayo  (1966)
found use of the recycle gave best results for  industrial  waste
and  had  lower  power  requirements.   Recycling  flows  can  be
adjusted to insure uninterrupted  flow  to  the  flotation  cell.
This  can be very useful in avoiding system shutdowns.  A typical
dissolved air flotation system is  shown  in  Figure  m,  and  a
typical dissolved air flotation unit is shown in Figure 42.

Air  bubbles usually are negatively charged.  Suspended particles
or colloids may have a significant  electrical  charge  providing
either  attraction  or repulsion with the air bubbles.  Flotation
aids can be used to prevent air bubble  repulsion.   In  treating
industrial  wastes  with large quantities of emulsified grease or
oil, it is usually beneficial  to  use  alum,  or  lime,  and  an
anionic  polyelectrolyte  to  provide  consistently  good removal
(Mayo, 1966).

Emulsified grease or  oil  normally  cannot  be  removed  without
chemical  coagulation   (Kohler,  1969).   The emulsified chemical
coagulant should be provided in  sufficient  quantity  to  absorb
completely  the  oil  present  whether  free or emulsified.  Good
flotation properties are characterized by a tendency for the floe
to  float  with  no  tendency  to  settle  downward.    Excessive
coagulant  additions  result  in  a heavy floe which is only par-
tially removed by air flotation.  With oily wastewaters  such  as
those  found  in  the  fish  processing industry, minimum emulsi-
fication of oils should result if a recycle stream  only,  rather
than  the entire influent, were passed through the pressurization
tank.  This would insure that only the stream  (having  been  pre-
viously treated) with the lower oil content would be subjected to
the  turbulence  of  the  pressurization  system.   The increased
removals achieved, of course, would be at the expense of a larger
flotation unit than that which would be needed without recycle.

The water temperature determines the solubility of the air in the
water under pressurization.   With  lower  water  temperature,  a
lower  quantity  of  recycle  is  necessary  to dissolve the same
quantity of air.  The viscosity of the  water  increases  with  a
decrease  in  temperature  so  that  flotation units must be made
larger to compensate for the slower bubble rise velocity  at  low
temperatures.   Mayo   (1966) recommended that flotation units for


                                  256

-------
                                                                                                           WASTE WATER

                                                                                                           SOLIDS
                                    CHEMICAL
                                      FEED  AIR
           SCREENED
           WASTEWATER
ro
cn
                                           o
                                                   PUMP

                                       CENTRATE (IF USED)
                  FROM SCREENED
                  SOLIDS HOPPER
SCREENED WASTEWATER
TO NEXT TREATMENT SYSTEM
OR TO RECEIVING WATER
OR TO MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS
                                       TO SOLIDS
                                       DISPOSAL
                                     OR BY-PRODUCT
                                       RECOVERY
            Figure  41  Typical dissolved  air  flotation system  for seafood processing operations.

-------
       SCREENED
       WASTEWATER
O1
00
               SURGE TANK
                                                                                                •DRAIN
                                                                        FLOTATION  CELL
                      Figure  42  Dissolved  air flotation unit (Carborundum Company)

-------
industrial application be sized on a  flow  basis  for  suspended
solids  concentrations  less  than  5000  mg/1.  Surface loadings
should not exceed 81 1/sq m/min (2 gal./sq ft/min).  The  air-to-
solids ratio is important, as well.  Mayo (1966) recommended 0.02
kg of air per kg of solids to provide a safe margin for design.

Flotation  is  in  extensive use among food processors for waste-
water  treatment.   Mayo  (1966)  presented  data  showing   high
influent BOD and solids concentrations, each in the range of 2000
mg/1.  Reductions reached 95 percent BOD removal and 99.7 percent
solids  removals,  although most removals were five percent to 20
percent  lower.   The  higher  removals  were  attainable   using
appropriate   chemical   additions   and,   presumably,   skilled
operation.   A  full  scale  dissolved  air  flotation  unit  was
recently   installed   at   a  tuna  plant  on  Terminal  Island,
California.  Table 102 shows the results of the pilot plant study
that preceeded the full  scale  unit  and  Table  103  gives  the
percent reductions calculated from the samples collected in 1973.
Operational   difficulties   are  thought  to  have  reduced  the
effectiveness of the unit.  The pilot plant treated a flow of 0.5
to 1.0 I/sec (7.5 to 15 gpm) with a constant recycle of 0.5 I/sec
(7.5 gpm).  The full scale plant treated a flow of 28 I/sec  (450
gpm) with no recycle.

Two more full scale dissolved air flotation units for tuna plants
have been ordered and are due to start in early 197 U according to
Robbins of Envirotech Corporation.

At  least two significant pilot plant studies have been performed
on shrimp wastewater, one in Louisiana and the other  in  Alaska.
Table  104  and  Table  105  list  the  results of the respective
studies.

The Louisiana shrimp study was conducted by Region VI E.P.A.  and
Dominique,  Szabo,  and  Associates,  Inc.  using  a  Carborundum
Company  dissolved  air  flotation pilot unit which treated a 3.1
I/sec (50 gpm)  flow using 1:1 recycle, and 170 1/hr (6 cu  ft/hr)
air at a pressure of 2.7 atm  (40 psig).

The  Alaska  shrimp  study  was  conducted by the National Marine
Fisheries Service Technology center, using a Carborundum  Company
dissolved air flotation pilot unit, which treated a 3.1 I/sec  (50
gpm) flow using 10 percent recycle.

Preliminary  indicators  from the Louisiana shrimp show that alum
at 75 ppm and a polyelectrolyte at 0.5 - 5.0 ppm produce the best
removal efficiencies (see Figure 43) .

Various chemical  additives  and  concentrators  were  tested  in
Alaska  with inconclusive results.  All flocculants worked better
than no additives but none were significantly  better  than  alum
alone  at  around  200  mg/1.   Sea water apppeared to reduce the
effectiveness of the polyelectrolyte used during the test.
                                259

-------
Table 102 .   Efficiency of EIMCO flotator pilot plant on tuna
          wastewater (Jacobs Engineering Co., 1972).
Chemical
Additive

Lime (pH 10.0 -
Polymers :
Cationic, 0.05
Anionic, 0.10
Lime, 400 mg/1
Ferric chloride,

Influent Reduction


10.5)

mg/1
mg/1

45 mg/1

Parameter
(Based
BOD- 5

O&G
SS
BOD- 5
O&G
SS
(mg/1)
on one run)
3533

558
1086



%

65

66
66
22
81
77
Table 103    Efficiency of EIMCO flotator full scale plant
on tuna wastewater  (Environmental Associates, Inc., 1973).
Chemical Influent Reduction
Additive Parameter (mg/1) %

Sodium Aluminate 120 mg/1
Polymer

Alum
Polymer
(Based on two runs)
COD 2850
SS 1170
(Based on one run)
COD 5100
SS 667

37
56

58
65
                             260

-------
During the summer of 1972 a study was conducted by  the  National
Marine  Fisheries  Service to investigate means of reducing waste
discharge problems as a result of fish meal and  oil  production.
Bailwater used to unload menhaden was treated using a pilot scale
dissolved  air  flotation unit.  This treatment allowed increased
recirculation of bailwater, decreasing the  soluble  plant  load.
The  removal  efficiencies  are  listed  in Table 106.  The plant
treated U.I I/sec (65 gpm) with 50 percent recycle and  50  psig.
The  results showed that dissolved air flotation units can extend
bailwater re-use, but that sludge disposal must be resolved.


A full scale dissolved air flotation unit has also been installed
in  the  sardine  industry,  however,  mechanical  problems  have
hindered operation thus far.  Results are shown in Table 107.

The   Canadians   have  constructed  a  demonstration  wastewater
treatment plant capable of handling  the  estimated  flow  of  47
I/sec  (750  gpm)  from a salmon and ground fish filleting plant.
It was later modified to treat herring bailwater and roe recovery
operations as well.   Results  of  the  study  by  The  Fisheries
Research  Board  of  Canada  on this operation are shown in Table
108.

The previous  air  flotation  case  studies  have  shown  various
removal efficiencies depending on species, chemical additives and
effluent  concentrations.   One  reason  for  the various removal
efficiencies reported appears to be due to the efficiency being a
function of influent concentration.  Figure U4 plots the  percent
removal  versus  COD  concentration  using  the  results  of  the
sardine,  menhaden. Gulf shrimp and tuna  air  flotation  studies.
The  removals  are  probably  a  function  of  the  species being
processed; however, there appears to be a strong tendency for the
efficiency to increase as the concentration increases.  The  tuna
and  shrimp  concentrations  and  removal efficiencies were lower
than  the  sardine  and  menhaden  concentrations   and   removal
efficiencies.    This   relation   also  holds  for  the  sardine
wastewater where the efficiency  appears  to  increase  about  25
percent  as  the COD concentration increases by a factor of four,
from 5000 to 20,000 mg/1.  The case studies  documented  in  this
report  indicate  that  air  flotation  systems  can provide good
removal of pollution loads from  seafood  processing  wastewater,
however,  the results are highly dependent on operating procedure.
In  most  cases,  optimum  removal  efficiencies  are  yet  to be
established, but it is expected that the technology should become
standardized over the next few years as an increasing  number  of
units   are  tested.   It  also  appears  that  the  COD  removal
efficiency is a function  of  concentration,  increasing  as  the
influent concentrations increase.

The  air  flotation  technology  can  also  be  operated at lower
efficiencies to serve as "primary"  treatment  in  advance  of  a
                                  261

-------
     Table 104   Efficiency of Carborundum pilot plant
         on Gulf shrimp wastewater (Mauldin, 1973).
  Chemical
  Additive
Parameter
Influent
 (mg/1)
                                Reduction
Acid (to pH 5)
Alum 75 mg/1
Polymer
                      (Average of five runs, one each with
                        5, 4, 2, 1, and 0.5 mg/1 polymer)
  BOD-5
   COD
    SS
  1428
  3400
   559
70
64
83
                      (Average of two runs, one each at 75
                       gpm and 25 gpm with 2 mg/1 polymer)
Acid (to pH 5)
Alum 75 mg/1
Polymer
COD
SS
O&G
3400
440
852
51
68
85
     Table  105   Efficiency of Carborundum pilot plant
        on Alaska shrimp wastewater
  Chemical
  Additive
                                Reduction
         Parameter
                                (Average of twenty-two runs)
Alum 200 mg/1
Polymer
            COD
             SS
                  73
                  77
                             262

-------
     Table  106   Efficiency of Carborundum pilot plant
      on menhaden bailwater (Baker and Carlson, 1972).


  Chemical                          Influent       Reduction
  Additive           Parameter        (mg/1)            %
                           (Average of five runs)

Alum or                 COD          94,200           80
Acid pH 5-5.3            SS            —             87
Polymer                 O&G            —      near  100

Note:  SS and O&G determined by volume change.
     Table  1^7   Efficiency of full scale dissolved air
       flotation on sardine wastewater (Atwell, 1973).
Chemical
Additive

Alum
Polymer


Parameter
(Average of seven runs)
COD
O&G
SS
Reduction
%

74
92
87
                              263

-------
     Table 108   Efficiency of full scale dissolved air
   flotation on Canadian seafood wastewater (Claggett, 1972).


Chemical                                    Removal Percentage
Additive              Species                BOD    Oil    SS
                     Salmon                   84     90    92
Alum                 Herring                  72     85    74
Polymer              Groundfish               77     —    86
                     Stickwater               —     95    95

Comments:  Sludge represents about three percent of flow.
                               264

-------
    en
    CO
    o

    Ul
      100 ..
       75  --
       50 ..
       25 ..
    K>
    O
    O
    00
       75 •
       50 .
o
2
UJ
*  25
                                             —-O
                                               KEY

                                            A 50 ppm  ALUM
                                            © 60 "   "
                                            • 75 "   »
                                            D 100 "   "
                                            O 150 "
                                                   10
                                                       12
                      PPM  POLYMER  (AMERICAN  CYANAMIDE 835A)


 Figure  43   Removal efficiency of  DAF unit used in Louisiana
shrimp study - 1973  results  (Dominique, Szabo Associates,  Inc.)
                                265

-------
ro
cr>
o
             O


             UJ
             Q

             8
             UJ
             o
             £T
             UJ
                 90-
                 80.
                 70 .
so
                 50
                                D
                                           A
                                        A  A
                                                  x  X
                                                         A  MAINE SARDINE

                                                         X  MENHADEN BAILWATER

                                                         •  GULF SHRIMP

                                                         D  TUNA
                   }|000        5000  10,000      50,000  100,000      500,000



                                  COD  INFLUENT CONCENTRATION  (mg/l)
                        Figure  44   Air flotation efficiency versus influent COD

                             concentration  for various  seafood wastewaters.

-------
physical-chemical  or  biological  polishing  step,  if that mode
proves advantageous from the standpoint of cost-effectiveness.

Appendices  A  and  B  contain  selected  bibliographies  of  air
flotation  use  within  the seafood industry and meat and poultry
industry, respectively.


Biological treatment

Biological treatment is not practiced in U.S. seafood  industries
except  for  a  small  pilot  project  in Maryland at a blue crab
processing plant and full-scale systems at two shrimp  plants  in
Florida.   Sufficient  nutrients  are  available  in most seafood
wastewaters, however,  to  indicate  that  such  wastewaters  are
amenable to aerobic biological treatment.

Primary  stage  removal  of  solids  and  oil  and greases should
precede biological treatment.  Without this pretreatment, several
problems can develop:  1)  oil  and  grease  can  interfere  with
oxygen  transfer in an activated sludge system; and 2)  solids can
clog trickling filters.

The salt found in nearly all  wastewaters  discourages  the  con-
sideration  of  anaerobic  processes.  Salt is toxic to anaerobic
bacteria, and although a certain tolerance to higher salt  levels
can   be  developed  in  carefully  controlled  (constant  input)
systems, fluctuating loads continue to be inhibitory or toxic  to
these  relatively  unstable systems.  Aerobic biological systems,
although  inhibited  by  "shock  loadings"  of  salt,  have  been
demonstrated  at full scale for the treatment of saline wastes of
reasonably constant chloride levels.  The  effectiveness  of  any
form of biological oxidation, however, remains to be demonstrated
under  the  extreme  variations  common  in  the  fish processing
industry.


Activated Sludge

The activated sludge process consists  of  suspending  a  concen-
trated  microbial  mass  in  the  wastewater  in  the presence of
oxygen.  Carbonaceous matter is oxidized mainly to carbon dioxide
and  water.   Nitrogenous  matter  is  concurrently  oxidized  to
nitrate.  The conventional activated sludge process is capable of
high  levels  of  treatment when properly designed and skillfully
operated.  Flow equilization by means  of  an  aerated  tank  can
minimize  shock  loadings  and  flow variations, which are highly
detrimental to treatment  efficiency.   The  process  produces  a
sludge which is composed largely of microbial cells, as described
above.   Oily  materials  can  have  an adverse effect.  A recent
study concluded the influent (petroleum-based)  oil levels  should
be limited to 0.10 kg/day/kg MLSS (0.10 Ib/day/lb MLSS).
                                  267

-------
The  nature of the waste stream, the complexity of the system and
the  difficulties  associated  with  dewatering  waste  activated
sludge  indicate  that for most applications the activated sludge
system of choice would be the extended aeration modification.

A typical extended aeration system which  could  be  used  for  a
seafood processing operation is shown in Figure 45 and is similar
to  conventional  activated  sludge,  except  that the mixture of
activated sludge and raw materials is maintained in the  aeration
chamber for longer periods of time.  The common detention time in
extended  aeration  is  one  to  three  days,  in contrast to the
conventional six  hours.   This  prolonged  contact  between  the
sludge  and  raw waste provides ample time for the organic matter
to be assimilated by the sludge and also  for  the  organisms  to
metabolize the organics.  This allows for substantial removals of
organic  matter.  In addition, the organisms undergo considerable
endogenous respiration,  which  oxidizes  much  of  the  cellular
biomass.   As  a  result,  less  sludge is produced and little is
discharged from the system as waste activated sludge.

In extended aeration, as in  the  conventional  activated  sludge
process, it is necessary to have a final sedimentation tank.

The  solids resulting from extended aeration are finely dispersed
and settle slowly, requiring a  long  period  of  settling.   The
system  is  relatively  resistant to shock loadings, provided the
clarifier has sufficient surface area  to  prevent  the  loss  of
biomass  during  flow  surges.   Extended  aeration,  like  other
activated sludge systems, requires a continuous  flow  of  waste-
water  to nurture the microbial mass.  The re-establishment of an
active biomass in the aeration tank requires several  days  to  a
few weeks if the unit is shut down or the processing plant ceases
to operate for significant periods of time.

Riddle   (1972)  studied  the  efficiency of biological systems on
smelt and perch wastewater.  He found a  90  percent  removal  of
unfiltered  BOD-5  after 10 days aeration, and 90 percent removal
of filtered BOD-5 after two days aeration in a batch reactor  (see
Figures 46, 47).  Tests  in  a  continuous  reactor  showed  that
maximum   BOD-5  removal   (80  percent  soluble  and  45  percent
unfiltered) could be achieved with a  7.5  hour  detention  time,
sludge recycle and a three day sludge age or a five day detention
time with no sludge recycle.

Robbins   (1973)  reports  that an activated sludge plant in Japan
has been especially designed for  fish  wastes.   The  wastewater
flow  is  approximately  0.27 mgd and the 5 day BOD concentration
ranges from 1000 to  1900  mg/1.   The  results  of  pilot  plant
studies conducted using a 10 hour separation time and the organic
and  hydraulic  loadings  listed are shown in Table  109.  Bulking
occurred when  the  organic  loading  rate  exceeded  0.31  Ib/cu
ft/day.
                                   268

-------
CT>
10
SCREENED
WASTEWATER
V
EQUALIZATION
TANK


• BOILER -

OPTIONAL
HEAT EXCHANGER
                                                                HI-SPEED FLOATING
1 	 1 — fc
p
V i — i
AERATION
TANK

X
RETURN SLUDGE ,^,
          TREATED WASTEWATER
          TO RECEIVING WATER
          10' BELOW MEAN TIDE
SECONDARY
 CLARIFIER
                                                      WASTE SLUDGE TO
                                                             •4	
                                                      FLOATATION UNIT
                                                      HOLDING TANK
                                                      OR DISPOSAL
                 Figure   45   Typical  extended  aeration  system for seafood  processing  operations,

-------
        100
        90
         80
         70
      io  60
      o
      O
      00
      ui
         50
      o  40
      UJ
      z
      Ul
      o
      (T
         30
         20
         10
          0
                          COMBINED  WASTEWATER  A

                          SMELT  WASTEWATER     *

                          PERCH  WASTEWATER    ©
                246
                         SMELT
                         a
                       COMBINED

                         PERCH


8   10   12  14  16  18  20   22


 TIME- DAYS
Figure 46   Removal rate of filtered BOD in a  batch aeration

            reactor.
                              270

-------
      10
     Q
     O
     CO


     Q
     UJ
     OH
     UJ
z
13

0
Z
Z

2
111
a:
     UJ
     O
     DC.
     UJ
     a.
         100
          90
          80
     70
     60
          50
          40
          30
          20
          10
                          COMBINED WASTEWATER  4
                          SMELT  WASTEWATER     X
                          PERCH WASTEWATER    o
                      till
                     4   6   8   10   12   14   16  18   20  22

                           TIME - DAYS
Figure  47   Removal  rate of unfiltered BOD in  a  batch aeration
            reactor.
                               271

-------
                Table       Activated sludge
            pilot plant results (Robbins, 1973).
                  Raw          BOD Loading (Ib/cu ft/day)
Parameter        Waste      0.075     0.14     0.21     0.26
BOD-5 (mg/1)      1000      5        10       13       27

% Removal          --      99.5      99.0     98.7     97.3
     Table  110   Efficiency of Chromaglas package plant
     on blue crab and oyster wastewater
    Parameter        Influent        Percentage Reduction


BOD                400-1200 mg/1           80 - 90%

Suspended Solids       —          Effluent level =160 mg/1
                              272

-------
Although  treatment units are available in all size ranges, it is
unlikely activated  sludge  will  prove  to  be  the  most  cost-
effective  treatment  where  processing is intermittent, or plant
flows are so large that alternative systems of suitable scale are
available.  The wide variation in quality of  the  small  package
extended   aeration   systems   now  available  dictates  careful
selection of the equipment, if the process  is  to  approach  the
removals now achieved by well-operated municipal installations.

Table 110 shows the effectiveness of a package unit on wastewater
from a plant processing Atlantic oysters and blue crab.  The flow
from  this  plant  was quite low, averaging only 0.09 I/sec (2000
gpd) .


Rotating Biological Contactor

The  Rotating  Biological  contactor   (RBC),  or  Biodisc   unit,
consists  of  light-weight  discs  approximately 1.3 cm (0.5 in.)
thick and spaced at 2.5 to 3.8 cm (1 to 1.5 in.) on centers.  The
cylindrical discs, which are up to 3.U m  (11 ft) in diameter,  are
mounted on a horizontal shaft and placed on a  semicircular  tank
through  which the wastewater flows.  Clearance between the discs
and the tank wall is 1.3 to 1.9 cm  (0.5 to 0.75 in.).  The  discs
rotate  slowly,  in the range of five to 10 rpm, passing the disc
surface through the incoming wastewater.   Liquid  depth  in  the
tank  is kept below the center shaft of the discs.  Reaeration is
limited by the solubility of air in the wastewater  and  rate  of
shaft rotation.

Shortly  after  start-up,  organisms  begin  to  grow in attached
colonies on the disc surfaces, and  a  typical  growth  layer  is
usually  established  within  a  week.  Oxygen is supplied to the
organisms during the period when the disc is rotating through the
atmosphere above the  flowing  waste  stream.   Dense  biological
growth  on  the  discs  provides a high level of active organisms
resistant to shock loads.  Periodic  sloughing  produces  a  floe
which settles rapidly; and the shear-forces developed by rotation
prevents disc media clogging and keeps solids in suspension until
they  are  transferred  out  of  the disc tank and into the final
clarifier.   Normally,  sludge  recycling  shows  no  significant
effect  on  treatment  efficiency because the suspended solids in
the mixed liquor represent a small fraction of the total  culture
when compared to the attached growth on the disc.

Removal  efficiency  can be increased by providing several stages
of discs in series.   European  experience  on  multi-stage  disc
systems indicates that a four stage disc plant can be loaded at a
30 percent higher rate than a two stage plant for the same degree
of  treatment.  Because the BOD removal kinetics approach a first
order reaction, the first stage should not be loaded higher  than
120 g BOD/day/sq m disc surface.  If removal efficiencies greater
than  90  percent  are  required,  three or four stages should be
installed.  Mixtures of domestic and food  processing  wastes  in
                                   273

-------
high  BOD  concentrations  can be treated efficiently by the RBC-
type system.

Because 95 percent of the solids are attached to the  discs,  the
RBC  unit  is less sensitive to shock loads than activated sludge
units, and is not  upset  by  variations  in  hydraulic  loading.
During  low  flow periods the RBC unit yields effluents of higher
quality  than  at  design  flow.   During  periods  of - no  flow,
effluents  can  be  recycled  for  a  limited  time  to  maintain
biological activity.

Both the Rotating Biological Contactor and the  trickling  filter
systems  utilize an attached culture.  However, with the rotating
disc the biomass is passed through  the  wastewater  rather  than
wastewater  over  the biomass, resulting in less clogging for the
RBC unit.  Continuous wetting of the entire biomass surface  also
prevents fly growth, often associated with conventional trickling
filter operations.

The  RBC  system  requires  housing  to  protect the biomass from
exposure during freezing weather and from  damage  due  to  heavy
winds and precipitation.

A  pilot  RBC system has been studied in Canada on salmon canning
wastewater, which had previously been treated by an air flotation
system (Claggett, 1973).   The  pilot  plant  was  obtained  from
Autotrol  Corporation  and was rated at about 0.44 I/sec (7 gpm).
The pilot system consists of a wet well, a three stage  treatment
system  and  a  secondary clarifier with a rotating sludge scoop.
In general, the unit performed quite  well,  with  reductions  of
over  50  percent  in COD being obtained two days after start-up.
The discs reached a steady state condition in one week.  The unit
operated satisfactorily at loadings up  to  20  Ibs  COD/1000  sq
ft/day,  showing good stability in the face of fluctuating loads.
Under  light  solids  loading  algal  growth  developed  in   the
clarifier  and the last disc section.  Consequently, all effluent
samples were filtered prior to COD analysis.  Under moderate flow
conditions the clarifier functioned well,  but  occasionally  the
suspended  solids  level  rose  about  50  mg/1,  indicating some
problems in this area.  This carry-over  became  very  pronounced
under  heavy solids loading.  About 80 percent removal of applied
COD was obtained for loadings of up to 20 Ibs COD/1000 sq ft/day.
Removal of COD at each stage is highly  variable,  and  does  not
appear  to  be a function of the applied load.  In general, up to
one-half of the COD removal was achieved in the first section, up
to 20 percent was removed in the  second  stage,  and  up  to  15
percent removed in the third stage.


High-Rate Trickling Filter  (HPTF)

A  trickling  filter  consists  on  a  vented  structure of rock,
fiberglas, plastic, or redwood media on which a  microbial  flora
develops.   As  wastewater flows downward over the structure, the


                                   274

-------
microbial flora assimilates and metabolizes the  organic  matter.
The  biomass  continuously  sloughs and is readily separated from
the  liquid  stream  by  sedimentation.   The  resulting   sludge
requires further treatment and disposal as described previously.

The  use of artificial media promotes air circulation and reduces
clogging, in contrast to rock media.   As  a  result,  artificial
media  beds  can  be  over twice as deep as rock media beds, with
correspondingly longer contact times.  Longer contact  times  and
recirculation  of  the  liquid flow enhance treatment efficiency.
The recirculation of settled sludge with  the  liquid  stream  is
also claimed to improve treatment.

The  system is simple in operation, the only operational variable
being recycle rate.  The treatment efficiency of a  well-designed
deep-bed  trickling  filter  tower  of  14  ft  or more with high
recycle  can  be  superior  to  that  of  a  carelessly  operated
activated   sludge   system.   The  system  is  not  particularly
sensitive  to  shock  loadings  but  is  severely   impaired   by
wastewater  temperatures  below  73°C  (45°F) .  Below 2°C (35°F),
treatment efficiency is minimal.  The effect of grease and oil in
trickling filter influent has not  been  evaluated.   They  would
likely be detrimental.


Ponds and Lagoons

The  land  requirements for ponds and lagoons limit the locations
at which these  facilities  are  practicable.    Where  conditions
permit, they can provide reasonable treatment alternatives.

Lagoons  are  ponds  in which wastewater is treated biologically.
Naturally aerated lagoons are termed oxidation ponds.  Such ponds
are 0.9 to 1.2 m (3 to 4 ft) deep, with  oxidation  taking  place
chiefly  in  the  upper  0.45  m   (18 in.).  Mechanically aerated
lagoons are mixed ponds over 1.8 m  (6 ft) and up to 6.1 m (20 ft)
deep, with oxygen supplied by a floating  aerator  or  compressed
air  diffuser  system.  The design of lagoons requires particular
attention to local  insulation,  temperatures,  wind  velocities,
etc.  for critical periods.  These variables affect the selection
of design parameters.  Loading rates  vary  from  22  to  112  kg
BOD/day/ha  (20  Ib to 100 Ib/day/acre), and detention times from
three to 50 days.  A typical aerated lagoon system which could be
used for a seafood processing operation is shown in Figure 48.

Although not frequently used in  the  fish  processing  industry,
lagoons  are  in  common use in other food processing industries.
Serious upsets can occur.  The oxidation  pond  may  produce  too
much  algae,  the  aerated  lagoon  may  turn  septic in zones of
minimal mixing, etc.; and recovery  from  such  upsets  may  take
weeks.   The  major  disadvantage  of  lagoons  is the large land
requirement.  In regions where land is available  and  soil  con-
ditions  make excavation feasible, the aerobic lagoon should find
application in treating fish wastes.  Where the plant  discharges
                                   275

-------
no
                                                                                WOODEN BAFFLE
                                                              ^ HI-SPEED  ^
                                                             FLOATING AERATORS
                                                        PLAN VIEW AT WATERLINE
                                                                               SLOTTED
                                                                             f BAFFLE
              INFLUENT
              WASTEWATEi
TO R.W.
                       PUMP
                                                              LONGITUDINAL SECTION
                                Figure  48.    Typical aerated  lagoon system.

-------
no salt water, anaerobic and anaerobic-aerobic types of ponds may
also  be  utilized.   Aerated  lagoons are reported to produce an
effluent suspended solids  concentration  of  260  to  300  mg/1,
mostly  algae,  while anaerobic ponds produce an effluent with 80
to 160 mg/1 suspended solids (Metcalf and Eddy, 1972, p. 557).  A
combined activated sludge lagoon system in Florida is reported to
remove 97 percent of the BOD and  94  percent  of  the  suspended
solids from shrimp processing wastewater.


Land disposal

"Zero-discharge"   technology   is   practicable  where  land  is
available upon which the processing wastewaters  may  be  applied
without  jeopardizing  groundwater quality.  The site, surrounded
by a retaining dike, should sustain a  cover  crop  of  grass  or
other  vegetation.  Where such sites exist, serious consideration
can be given to land application, particularly spray  irrigation,
of treated wastewaters.

Wastes are discharged in spray or flood irrigation systems by: 1)
distribution  through  piping  and  spray nozzles over relatively
flat terrain or terraced  hillsides  of  moderate  slope;  or  2)
pumping and disposal through ridge-and-furrow irrigation systems,
which  allow a certain level of flooding on a given plot of land.
Pretreatment for  removal  of  solids  is  advisable  to  prevent
plugging  of the spray nozzles, or deposition in the furrows of a
ridge-and-furrow system, which may cause odor  problems  or  clog
the soil.

In  a  flood  irrigation system the waste loading in the effluent
would be limited by the waste loading tolerance of the particular
crop being grown on the land.  It may also be limited by the soil
conditions or potential for vector or odor problems.   Wastewater
distributed  in either manner percolates through the soil and the
organic matter in the  waste  undergoes  biological  degradation.
The  liquid  in  the waste stream is either stored in the soil or
discharged into the groundwater.  A variable  percentage  of  the
waste  flow  can  be  lost by evapotranspiration, the loss due to
evaporation to the atmosphere through the leaves of  plants.  The
following factors affect the ability of a particular land area to
absorb wastewater: 1) character of the soil; 2) stratification of
the  soil  profile;  3) depth to groundwater; 4) initial moisture
content;  5)   terrain  and  groundcover;  6)  precipitation;   7)
temperature;  and 8) wastewater characteristics.

The  greatest  concern  in  the  use  of irrigation as a disposal
system is the total dissolved solids content and  especially  the
sodium  content  of the wastewater.  Salt water waste flows would
be incompatible with land application technology at  most  sites.
Limiting  values  which may be exceeded for short periods but not
over an entire  growing  season  were  estimated,  conservatively
(Talsma  and  Phillip, 1971) , to be 450 to 1000 mg/1.  Where land
application is feasible it must be  recognized  that  soils  vary
                                 277

-------
widely  in their percolation properties.  Experimental irrigation
of a test plot is recommended in  untried  areas.   Cold  climate
systems  may  be  subjected  to additional constraints, including
storage needs.

The long-term reliability of spray or  flood  irrigation  systems
depends  on  the  sustained  ability  of  the  soil to accept the
wastewater.  Problems in  maintenance  include:   1)   controlling
salinity  levels  in the wastewater; 2)  compensating for climatic
limitations; and 3)  sustaining  pumping  without  failure.   Many
soils are improved by spray irrigation.


Multi-Process Treatment Design Consideration

Waste  characterization  studies  reveal  the  general ranges and
concentrations of each specific processing subcategory;  however,
for  design purposes it may often be necessary to know the nature
of the combined  waste  stream  from  several  commodities  being
processed   simultaneously.    Short   term   on-site  waste  and
wastewater investigations are suggested so that  any  synergistic
and/or  antagonistic  interactors  can be determined.  A combined
waste stream could conceivably be more amenable to treatment than
a single source because of possible smoothing of  peak  hydraulic
and/or  organic  loading,  neutralization  of  pH  or dilution of
saline conditions.

Each stream may individually dictate the  design  considerations.
For  instance,  the  fibrous  nature of salmon canning waste will
likely dictate the screening method used or a waste  stream  with
high flow will likely dictate hydraulic loading of the system.

Another  design  problem  is  caused  by sequential seasonal pro-
cessing  of  different  commodities.   This  condition  is   also
prevalent  in  the  seafood  industry.   Optimum  waste treatment
design conditions for one effluent will normally not be identical
to those for the next.  As an example, the sequential  processing
of  shrimp  and  oysters would cause problems.  Even though their
effluent concentrations are similar, the wastewater  flow  volume
is  approximately  eight  times  higher  in  the  typical  shrimp
processing  plant.   Problems  such  as  this  will   necessitate
adaptations  to  normal  design procedures or perhaps even demand
the use of more than one treatment train.

During on-site waste management studies consideration should also
be  given  to  segregation  of  certain  unit  process   streams.
Significant  benefits  may  be  realized by using this technique.
For example, treatment of a high concentrated waste flow  can  be
more   efficient   and   economical.    In  addition,  by-product
development normally centers on the segregation and concentration
of  waste  producing  processes.   Uncontaminated  cooling  water
should  remain  isolated from the main wastewater effluent.  This
water could either be reused or discharged directly.
                                   278

-------
                  TREATMENT DESIGN ALTERNATIVES


A summary of the equipment efficiencies  and  design  assumptions
for the technology alternatives is presented in Table 111.


Farm-Raised Catfish

Figures 45, 49, 50, and 51 depict the proposed treatment schemes,
screening,  aerated lagoon-oxidation pond, extended aeration, and
aerated lagoon-spray irrigation alternatives for  final  disposal
of the treated catfish processing waste waters.  The designs were
based  on  the  waste  water  characteristics  and  volumes for a
typical well-controlled catfish processing  plant.   Other  bases
included:

    1)  8  hours  per  shift,  2  shifts per day, 5 days per week
    operation;

    2) production volume of 13.6 kkg per day (15 tons per day);

    3) further growth experienced during the  design  period   (10
    years)  would  be balanced partially by anticipated water use
    reduction realized through increased in-plant control;

    4) availability of adequate land area; and

    5) availability of adequate labor.

The basis for the designs and the estimates  of  effluent  levels
from  the  lagoons  for  catfish  were 100 mg/1 BOD5 and 250 mg/1
suspended solids.  These numbers were chosen in consideration  of
the  fact  that under the climatic conditions in that part of the
country large  concentrations  of  algae  will  be  a  continuing
problem, and also many of the lagoons will contain catfish.

The  design  for  the  extended  aeration  alternate  assumed  an
effluent quality of 60 mg/1 BOD5 and 60 mg/1 suspended solids.

An obtainable 25 percent reduction of grease and oil was  assumed
through  the  use of simple grease traps.  A 90 percent reduction
was assumed for grease traps coupled  with  subsequent  treatment
systems.


Conventional Blue Crab

Figures  40,  45,  and  48 depict the proposed serening, extended
aeration, and aerated lagoon alternative  treatment  schemes  for
conventional blue crab processors.  The designs were based on the
waste   water  characteristics  and  volumes  for  typical  well-
controlled processing plants.  Assumptions included:
                                  279

-------
                                        TABLE 111

                       EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY AND DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS
  Segment and Technology
       Alternatives
                Effluent Concentration or Percent Induction
                          of Screened Sample Data


Catfish
Screen (2)
Stabilization Ponds
Lagoon System
Extended Aeration
Land Irrigation (7)
Conventional Blue Crab
Screen (2)
Lagoon System
Extended Aeration
Mechanized Blue Crab
Screen (2)
Lagoon System
Extended Aeration
Alaskan Crab Meat
Screen (2)
Air Flotation (4)
Lagoon System
Extended Aeration
Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab
Screen (2)
Air Flotation (4)
Lagoon System
Extended Aeration
BPCTCA + NSPS
BOD TSS O&G (1)

25%
100 mg/1 150 mg/1 90%
100 mg/1 250 mg/1 90%

— — —

25%
125 mg/1 375 mg/1 75%


25%
80 mg/1 200 mg/1 75%


25%



Section
25%




BOD



100 mg/1
60 mg/1



125 mg/1
100 mg/1


80 mg/1
60 mg/1


40%
80 mg/1
60 mg/1


40%
80 mg/1
60 mg/1
BATEA
TSS



250 mg/1
60 mg/1



375 mg/1
100 mg/1


200 mg/1
60 mg/1


70%
200 mg/1
60 mg/1


70%
200 mg/1
60 mg/1

O&G (1)



90%
90%



75%
90%


75%
90%


(3)
5 mg/1
5 mg/1


(3)
5 mg/1
5 mg/1
Dungeness & Tanner Crab in the
Contiguous States
     Screen  (2)
     Air Flotation  (5)
     Lagoon System
     Extended Aeration
                 40%
70%
25%
(3)
75%       90%       (6)
80 mg/1  200 mg/1  5 mg/1
60 mg/1   60 mg/1  5 mg/1
Alaskan Shrimp
     Screen
     Air Flotation
     Lagoon System
(4)
                  40%
                  80 mg/1
                  70%
                 200 mg/1
                    (3)
                   5 mg/1
                                              280

-------
                                      TABLE 111 (cont.)

                     EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY AND DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS
Segment and Technology
     Alternatives
Effluent Concentration or Percent reduction
          of Screened Sample Data


Northern Shrimp
Screen (2)
Air Flotation (5)
Lagoon System
Extended Aeration
Southern Non-breaded Shrimp
Screen (2)
Air Flotation (5)
Lagoon System
Extended Aeration
BPCTCA + NSPS
BCD TSS O&G (1)
!!•
- - -
40% 70% (3)



_ _ _
40% 70% (3)



BCD


75%
80 mg/1
60 mg/1


75%
80 mg/1
60 mg/1
BATEA
TSS


90%
200 mg/1
60 mg/1


90%
200 mg/1
60 mg/1

O&G (1)


(6)
5 mg/1
5 mg/1


(6)
5 mg/1
5 mg/1
Breaded Shrimp
     Screen  (2)
     Air Flotation  (5)
     Lagoon System
     Extended Aeration
Tuna
     Air Flotation  (5)
     Roughing Filter
     Activated Sludge
  40%
  40%
70%
70%
(3)
(3)
 75%       90%       (6)
 80 mg/1  200 mg/1  5 mg/1
 60 mg/1   60 mg/1  5 mg/1
 75%
260 mg/1
 40 mg/1
 90%       (6)
100 mg/1  5 mg/1
 40 mg/1  5 mg/1
       (1)   The numbers include removals due to in-plant recovery such as sumps and
            grease traps coupled with the end-of-pipe technology.

       (2)   The design assumptions are based on the summary of sampling data which
            were screened prior to analysis.  No further reduction was assumed for
            plant scale screening.

       (3)   Eighty-five percent (85%) removal or the level of detection (5 mg/1)  of
            the oil and grease test, whichever is higher.

       (4)   Reductions are based on operation as a non-optimized chemical  system.

       (5)   Reductions are based on operation as a non-optimized chemical system for
            1977, and an optimized chemical system for 1983.

       (6)   Ninety percent (90%)  removal or the level of detection (5 mg/1) of the oil
            and grease test,  whichever is higher.

       (7)   The assumptions for catfish are based on spray irrigation of process
            wastewater and partial recycle of live fish holding tank water with
            overflow and discharge to fish holding ponds.

                                              281

-------
                          FISH HOLDING TANK OVERFLOV^
                                                                      TO RECEIVING WATER
ro
00
ro
INFLUENT
                                 SETTLEABLES
SCREENED WASTEWATER <

    4" 0 CONC     '
                                                                                     SOLIDS TO RENDERING

                                                                                     OR ANIMAL FOOD PLANT
                               Figure   49
                             Catfish processing,

                                  initial  treatment,

-------
ro
CO
GO
                     SCREENED
                   WASTEWATER
                                        AERATED LAGOON
                                      WITH SETTLING CHAMBER
                                        O
O
                                          2-10 tf AERATORS

                                          FLOATING HI-SPEED

    WOOD
    BAFFLE
                                                                                          OXIDATION POND*2
                                                                                   SEALED W/ CLAY IN PERVIOUS SOILS

                                            NO SCALE
                                 Figure  50      Catfish processing,
                                                  oxidation pond alternative,

-------
INS
CO
                                    AERATED LAGOON

SCREENED
WASTE WATER _

- ^1
WITH SETTLING CHAMBER
O "• » O
a-IOH5 AERATORS
FLOATING HI -SPEED
N. ,

WOOD
BAFFLE
V
                                                                                                     BORROW DITCH
                                                                                                    BERN RUNOFF PROTECTION
1/2
SUMP

-c
5H>
HP M.H.
PUMP
I
\
J
PUMP

SOLID SET IRRIGATION SYSTEM TOO
r^

7



c




y




^ ^ —
i^,"1 /




















^-i

K
XI
,
f

|
1'
1
"J-« 	 DITCH DRAINAGE
K. .
                                                                                5-1 ACRE AREAS
                                                                               W/IOO FT BUFFER STRIP
                                        NO SCALE
                          Figure  51  -    Catfish  processing,
                                         spray  irrigation alternative.

-------
    1) 8 hours per shift, 2 shifts  per  day,  5  days  per  week
    operation;

    2) a production volume of 5.5 kkg/day  (6 tpd)

    3)  further  growth  experienced during the design period  (10
    years) would be partially balanced by anticipated  water  use
    reductions realized through increased inplant control; and

    4) skilled treatment system operators would be available.

With  the aerated lagoon system it was assumed that BOD5 would be
about 125 mg/1 and  suspended  solids  375.   With  the  extended
aeration  process  and  the  difference in the basic biota of the
systems   and   the   prevalence   of   endogenous   respiration,
concentrations  of  100  mg/1  BOD5 and 100 mg/1 suspended solids
were assumed.

The grease and oil removal due to sumps and simple  grease  traps
was  assumed  to  be 25 percent.  A total reduction of 75 percent
was assumed for the aerated lagoon system and 90 percent for  the
extended aeration system.


Mechanized blue^crab

Figures  40,  45  and  48  depict the proposed serening, extended
aeration, and aerated lagoon alternative  treatment  schemes  for
mechanized  blue  crab processors.  The designs were based on the
waste  water  characteristics  and  volumes  for  typical   well-
controlled processing plants.  Assumptions included:

    1)  8  hours  per  shift,  2  shifts per day, 5 days per week
    operation;

    2) a production volume of 10.9 kkg/day (12 tpd);

    3) further growth experienced during the  design  period   (10
    years)  would  be partially balanced by anticipated water use
    reductions realized through increased inplant control; and

    4) skilled treatment system operators would be available.

Water use reduction was first considered in the design basis.  It
was assumed that a 15 percent reduction in  water  use  could  be
effected  for  the  1983  and  new source guidelines, which would
result in about  a  5  percent  overall  BOD5  reduction.   Then,
considering  the  aerated  lagoon alternative for mechanized blue
crab, it was assumed that an aerated lagoon could  achieve  about
80  mg/1  BOD5  and 200 mg/1 suspended solids.  Extended aeration
was assumed to achieve an effluent concentration of 60 mg/1  BOD5
and 60 mg/1 suspended solids.
                                     285

-------
ro
co
                         5 STEEL
                       TO TIE WITH
                     OUTFALL LINE
       2-40K>
  LOW PRESSURE
      POSITIVE
  DISPLACEMENT
AIR COMPRESSORS
                         2-5 H=
              EFFLUENT FROM:
               FLOTATION UNIT
                                       SUBMERGED DIFFUSED AJR
                                                        DISTRIBUTO
 1
3"STEEL
                                                                                               2" STEEL
                                                                                                                 5 STEEL
                        Figure   52        Alaska crab processing,   aerated lagoon alternative

-------
The  grease  and oil removal due to sumps and simple grease traps
was assumed to be 25 percent.  A total reduction  of  75  percent
was  assumed for the aerated lagoon system and 90 percent for the
extended aeration system.

Alaskan Crab^Meat^PrQcessing

Figures 40, 41, 45, 52, and 53  depict  the  proposed  screening,
dissolved  air  flotation, extended aeration, aerated lagoon, and
grinding alternative treatment  schemes  for  Alaskan  Dungeness,
tanner  and  king  crab  processors.  Assumptions for the designs
included:

    1)  8 hours per shift, 2 shifts  per  day,  5  days  per  week
    operation;

    2)  a production volume of 45.4 kkg/day (50 tpd);

    3)   further  growth  experienced during the design period (10
    years)  would be partially balanced by anticipated  water  use
    reductions realized through increased inplant control; and

    4)  skilled treatment system operators would be available.

Alaskan  crab  processing plants are larger-scale operations than
those in the "lower 48" states, but the waste  waters  are  still
intermittent, seasonal and of relatively high strength.

The  design  basis  assumed  complete  retention  of  the 20-mesh
screenable solids on a screen  in  a  full-scale  operation.   As
discussed  in Section V, the plant samples were screened on a 20-
mesh sieve in order to create a base  level  for  comparing  data
among  plants.   It  was assumed that 90 percent of the remaining
suspended solids would be removed in the flotation unit and  that
the  BOD5  removal would be 75 percent.  This assumes significant
removals on a screen prior to flotation, so overall BOD5 removals
would be considerably higher.


For the 1983 and new source guidelines the in-plant modifications
were assumed to effect  a  50  percent  water  reduction  with  a
commensurate 15 percent BOD5_ reduction.

The  extended  aeration  alternative  design was based on the re-
search  and  development  efforts  of  the  U.S.  Army  Corps  of
Engineers  Anchorage,  Alaska.   Their experience with biological
waste treatment was limited to domestic waste only,  as  was  the
case throughout Alaska.  It was assumed that, with proper design,
concentrations of 60 mg/1 BOD5 and 60 mg/1 suspended solids could
be achieved.

The  aerated lagoon alternative in Alaska is not going to perform
as well as an extended aeration system.  This is  due  mainly  to
two  factors:   one  is  algae  growth,  because  of  the  longer
                                     287

-------
                 RAW PROCESSING
               WASTES HOLDING TANK
                          DRY CAPTURED
                          SHELLS 8 VISCERA
GR
                                                      2 GRINDERS OR
                                                      COMMINUTORS
                            8" » HD POLYETHYLENE
                           DEEP WATER DISCHARGE OF
                           COMMINUTED PROCESSING  WASTES
                           PUMPED TO 15  FATHOM  DEPTH AT
                           MEAN LOW TIDE.
    Figure  53     Alaskan physical  treatment alternative, remote
              plants with adequate flushing available.
                             288

-------
retention time in the system, the exposure to the  long  days  of
sunlight during the summertime; and the poor settleability of the
type  of  floe that is developed in an aerated lagoon as compared
to an extended aeration system.  It was assumed that the  aerated
lagoon   alternative   for   Alaska  would  produce  an  effluent
concentration of 80 mg/1 BOD5 and 200 mg/1 suspended solids.

The grease and oil removal was assumed to be 25 percent due to  a
sump  prior  to  screening,  an  overall  85  percent  after  air
flotation, and removal to the level of detection for  the  grease
and oil test, 5 mg/1, after the biological systems.

An  alternative  for  the  remote,  isolated  processor  includes
grinding and discharge to deepwater where  adequate  flushing  is
available.
Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Section Processing

Figures  40,  ttl,  45,  52, and 53 depict the proposed screening,
dissolved air flotation, extended aeration, aerated  lagoon,  and
grinding  alternative  treatment  schemes  for  Alaska Dungeness,
tanner and king crab processors.  All of the  design  assumptions
are  the  same  as  in the pervious section for Alaskan Crab Meat
Processing.


Dungeness and Tanner Crab Processing in^the^Contigugus^States

Figures 40,  41,  45,  and  48  depict  the  proposed  screening,
dissolved  air  flotation,  extended aeration, and aerated lagoon
alternative treatment  schemes  for  Dungeness  and  tanner  crab
processors  in the contiguous states.  Assumptions for the design
included:
    1) 8  hours  shift,  2  shifts  per  day,  5  days  per  week
    operation;

    2) a production volume of 12.7 kkg/day (14 tpd) ;

    3)  further  growth   (if  any)  experienced during the design
    period  (10 years) would be partially balanced by  anticipated
    water  use  reductions  realized  through  increased in-plant
    control; and

    4) skilled treatment system operators would be available.

The effluent design assumptions  are  the  same  as  in  previous
sections.   For  dissolved  air  flotation the assumed reductions
were 40 percent for BOD5 and 70 percent for suspended solids  for
the  1977 and new source guidelines.  It was assumed for the 1983
guidelines that the operation of the flotation unit between  1977
and  1983  would  be  significantly  improved  due  to  increased
operator skill, optimization of chemical  type  and  dosage,  and
development  of  new chemical coagulants and flocculents.  It was


                                   289

-------
estimated that  by  1983,  a  75  percent  BOD5  removal  in  the
flotation  unit, and 90 percent suspended solids removal would be
obtainable.  The  extended  aeration  process  assumed  a  design
effluent  quality  of  60 mg/1 BOD5 and 60 mg/1 suspended solids;
the effluent quality for aerated lagoons was  assumed  to  be  80
mg/1 BOD5 and 200 mg/1 suspended solids.

The  1983  and  new source in-plant modifications were assumed to
effect  a  40  percent  waste  water  flow   reduction   with   a
commensurate 15 percent BOD5 reduction.

The  grease  and  oil removal was assumed to be 25 percent due to
sumps and simple grease traps, on overall 85 percent or the level
of detection of the grease and oil test, (5 mg/1), whichever  was
higher  after  the  flotation  systems and the level of detection
after the biological systems.


The historical data for Dungeness and tanner crab processing  did
not  include  the  oil  and  grease  parameter.   Because  of the
similarity  of  the  waste  water  characteristics  for   similar
processing  techniques  of  the  Alaskan  and  Pacific  Northwest
Dungeness and tanner crab operations, the value for the  oil  and
grease   parameters   of   the   Pacific  Northwest  process  was
extrapolated from the Alaskan process.


Alaskan Shrimp Processing

Figures 40, 41, 45, 48, and 53  depict  the  proposed  screening,
dissolved  air  flotation, extended aeration, aerated lagoon, and
grinding treatment alternatives for  Alaskan  shrimp  processors.
The  designs were based on wastewater characteristics and volumes
for  a  typical  medium-size  plant.   Assumptions   for   design
included:

    1)   8  hours  per  shift,  2  shift  per day, 5 days per week
    operation;

    2)  a production volume of 31.8 kkg/day  (35 tpd);

    3)  further growth experienced during the  desgin  period   (10
    years)  would  be partially balanced by anticipated water use
    reductions realized through increased inplant
         control; and

    4)  skilled treatment system operators would be available.

The effluent design assumptions  are  the  same  as  in  previons
sections.  For disolved air flotation the assumed reductions were
75  percent  for BOD5_ and 90 percent for suspended solids for the
1983 guidelines.  The extended aeration process assumed a  design
effluent  quality  of  60 mg/1 BOD5 and 60 mg/1 suspended solids;
                                  290

-------
the effluent quality for aerated lagoons were assumed  to  be  80
mg/1 BOD5 and 200 mg/1 suspended solids.

The  1983  and  new source in-plant modifications were assumed to
effect  a  40  percent  waste  water  flow   reduction   with   a
commensurate 13 percent BOD5 reduction.

The  grease  and oil removal due to sumps and simple grease traps
was assumed to be negligible because of the emulsified nature  of
the shrimp processing greases and oils.  A 90 percent removal was
assumed for the air flotation effluents, and removal to the level
of detection, 5 mg/1, after the biological systems.


Northern Shrimp Processing in^the Contiguous States

Figures  40,  41,  45, and 48 depict the screening, dissolved air
flotation, extended  aeration,  and  aerated  lagoon  alternative
treatment  schemes.   The  designs  were  based  on  waste  water
characteristics and volumes for typical medium-size plants.   (The
same treatment train is applied to  northern  shrimp  processing,
southern  shrimp  processing and breaded shrimp processing in the
contiguous  states.   Only  the  sizes  of  the  systems  require
changing.)  Assumptions included:

    1)   8  hours  per  shift,  2  shifts per day, 5 days per week
    operation;

    2)  a production volume of 18.2 kkg/day (20 tpd) for  northern
    shrimp processing;

    3)   further  growth  experienced during the design period (10
    years) would be partially balanced by anticipated  water  use
    reductions realized through increased in-plant control; and

    4)  skilled treatment system operators would be available.

The  design  basis  assumed  complete  retention  of  the 20-mesh
screenable solids on a screen  in  a  full-scale  operation.   As
discussed  in  Section  V,  the  plant samples were screened on a
20-mesh sieve in order to create a base level for comparing  data
among  plants.   It  was assumed that 90 percent of the remaining
suspended solids would be removed in the flotation unit.  At  the
same  time  that  the  flotation  unit  will reduce the suspended
solids by 90 percent, it was estimated that the BODJ5 removal will
be 75 percent.  This assumes significant  removals  on  a  screen
prior   to   flotation,   so   overall  BOD5  removals  would  be
considerably higher.

The 1983 and new source in-plant modifications  were  assumed  to
effect   a   20   percent  waste  water  flow  reduction  with  a
commensurate 10 percent BOD^ reduction.
                                   291

-------
The extended aeration process assumed a design  effluent  quality
of  60  mg/1  BOD£  and  60  mg/1  suspended solids; the effluent
quality for aerated lagoons was assumed to be 80  mg/1  BOD5  and
200 mg/1 suspended solids.

An  overall  grease and oil removal of 90 percent was assumed for
the flotation system and reduction to the level of detection  for
the  biological systems.  The grease and oil removal due to sumps
and simple grease traps was assumed to be negligible  because  of
the emulsified nature of the shrimp processing greases and oils.


Southern Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States

Figures  WO,  41,  45  and  48  depict  the  proposed  screening,
dissolved air flotation, extended aeration,  and  aerated  lagoon
treatment  schemes.   The  designs  were  based  on  waste  water
characteristics  and  volumes  for  typical  medium-size  plants.
Assumptions included:

    1)  8  hours  per  shift;  2  shifts per day; 5 days per week
    operation;

    2) a production volume of 36.4 kkg/day  (40 tpd)  for  southern
    shrimp processing;

    3)  further  growth  experienced during the design period (10
    years)  would be partially balanced by anticipated  water  use
    reductions realized through increased in-plant control; and


    4) skilled treatment system operators would be available.

The  effluent  design assumptions are the same as in the previous
section  on  northern  shrimp  processing   for   the   treatment
alternatives.

The  1983  and  new source in-plant modifications were assumed to
effect  a  20  percent  waste  water  flow   reduction   with   a
commonsurate 10 percent BOD5 reduction.


Breaded shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States

Figures  40,  41,  45,  and  48  depict  the  proposed screening,
dissolved air flotation, extended aeration,  and  aerated  lagoon
treatment  schemes  for  breaded  shrimp processing.  The designs
were based on waste water characteristics and volumes for typical
medium-size plants.

    1) 8 hours per shift; 2 shifts  per  day;  5  days  per  week
    operation;
                                    292

-------
    2)   a  production volume of 12.7 kkg/day (14 tpd) for breaded
    shrimp processing;

    3)  further growth experienced during the  design  period  (10
    years)  would  be partially balanced by anticipated water use
    reductions realized through increased in-plant control; and

    4)  skilled treatment system operators would be available.

The effluent design assumptions are the same as in  the  previous
section   on   northern   shrimp  processing  for  the  treatment
alternatives.

The 1983 and new source in-plant modifications  were  assumed  to
effect   a   50   percent  waste  water  flow  reduction  with  a
commensurate 2C percent BODj> reduction.

No data was available for the  grease  and  oil  content  of  the
breaded   shrimp   processing  waste  water  effluent.   However,
considering the fact that similar species are  processed  in  the
southern  shrimp  subcategory  the same level was assumed for the
breaded shrimp grease and oil summary.


Tuna Processing

Figure  54  depicts  the  proposed   screening,   dissolved   air
flotation,   roughing  filter,  and  activated  sludge  treatment
schemes for the  tuna  processing  1977,  1983,  and  new  source
guidelines.  The designs were based on wastewater characteristics
and  volumes  for  a typical medium-to-large size plant.  Because
production levels of  this  order  are  currently  found  in  the
industry,  the  size  was  designated  a  "full  size"  plant for
purposes of  design  and  cost  estimation.   Design  assumptions
included:

    1)   8  hours  per  shift,  2  shifts per day, 5 days per week
    operation;

    2)  a production volume of 340 kkg/day  (375 tpd);

    3)  further growth experienced during the  design  period  (10
    years)  would  be partially balanced by anticipated water use
    redution realized through increased in-plant control; and

    4)  skilled treatment system operators would be available.

The 1983 and new source in-plant modifications  were  assumed  to
effect   a   30   percent  waste  water  flow  reduction  with  a
commensurate 10 percent BOD5 reduction.

The effluent design assumptions  are  the  same  as  in  previous
sections.   For  dissolved  air  flotation the assumed reductions
were 40 percent for the 1977 and new source guidelines.   It  was
                                   293

-------
ro
                                              FLOTATION  TANK  EFFLUENT

TUNA PROCE
SANITARY RETURN
SEWER FLOW
(NON
PROCES
SALT
WATER
L
ca


' 	 *- FILTER
RECIRCULAT
,_ SUMP
IL

•* KOUGHIN
FILTER
44,000 Cl.
WASTE
SLUDGE ACTIVATED

2 SOLIDS
CONCENTRATORS 1^
SOLIDS LIQUIDS
-ss RAW PROCESS 6 TANGENTIAL SCREENED SUMP
SUMP SCREENS 1 I20.0OOGAL
, - I20.0COGAL — /f^V*- 6 	 V "TTV
I ^ SCREW t *=*•
PHOCtSb CONVEYOR
WASTEWATER
TUNA AND I SOLIDS 1
PETFOOD k^^mx1
S ^^.s^
SCREW ^_ \-. o
CONVEYOR II ' Q
SOLIDS TO REDUCTION "to
EVEL PLANT OR LANDFILL

1
ION SPyJvTER AERATION SPLITTER
Bm BASINS BOX
— — ^ — 	 ^ 	 ^- 	 •
WR)
58tf>
G
)FT
i SLUDGE
3 SLUDGE TANKS
30,000 GAL

FLOW EQUALIZATION
. TANK
4 1.6 MG


2 CLARIFIERS
40' DIA
^
6

i
FLOTATION UNIT
FLOTATION TANK
26' DIA

V PRESSURIZATION
1 CELL
Q^ ^
18" 6 CONC
8' PVC
i
OUTFALI
DIFFUSI
SECTIOh
                   Figure    54
Tuna  processing

-------
assumed  for  the  1983  guidelines  that,  the  operation  of the
flotation unit between  1977  and  1983  would  be  significantly
improved   due  to  increased  operator  skill,  optimization  of
chemical type and dosage, and the  development  of  new  chemical
coagulants  and flocculents.  It was estimated that by 1983, a 75
percent BOD5 removal  in  the  flotation  unit,  and  90  percent
suspended solids removal would be obtainable.

The  roughing  filter  was  assumed  to  effect a 40 percent BOD5
reduction and the clarifier about a 15 percent  suspended  solids
reduction  to  reach  260 mg/1 BODJ5 and 95 mg/1 suspended solids.
The activated sludge system was assumed to produce an effluent of
about 40 mg/1 BOD5 and 40 mg/1 suspended solids.

The overall grease and oil removal was assumed to be  85  percent
for  the  flotation  system  and  90  percent  for the biological
systems or the level of detection, whichever was higher.
                                   295

-------

-------
                          SECTION VIII

       COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS SUMMARY


The waste waters from seafood processing plants are, in  general,
considered  to  be amenable to treatment using standard physical-
chemical and biological systems.  Wastewater  management  in  the
form  of  increasing  by-product  recovery,  in-plant control and
recycling is not practiced uniformly throughout the industry.  Of
all the types of seafood processing monitored during this  study,
the  most  exemplary  from  this viewpoint was the tuna industry.
Even in this case there was a relatively wide range in the amount
of water used per unit of raw material.  The  concepts  of  water
conservation  and by-product recovery are at early stages in most
parts of  the  industry.   Therefore,  in  addition  to  applying
treatment  to  the  total  effluent,  there  is much room for the
improvement of water and waste management practices.  These  will
reduce  the  size  of  the  required treatment systems or improve
effluent quality, and in many cases, conserve or yield a  product
that will help offset or often exceed the costs of the changes.

Typical  in-plant  control  costs  and  benefits in terms of BOD5
reduction and waste water flow are summarized in Tables  112  and
113  for  each subcategory.  It can be seen that for some cases a
relatively  moderate  investment  can  result  in  a  significant
reduction  in  water  used.   The  BOD5  reduction represents the
amount of BOD5_ input avoided by reducing the  product-water  con-
tact time through decreased water use.

Typical  treatment  costs and benefits in terms of BOD5 remaining
in the effluent per unit of product are listed in Table  113  and
shown  in  Figures  55  through  65.  It is possible, using these
figures, to get an indication of the marginal costs and  benefits
associated  with each level of treatment.  Depending on the value
placed on the quality of the  effluent,  the  marginal  cost  and
benefit  curves  can be used to determine the most cost-effective
treatment alternative.

The operation and maintenance costs (O  and  M  costs)   for  each
treatment  level for each subcategory are listed with the capital
costs in Table 113.  The O and M  costs  tend  to  increase  with
level  of  treatment  but  are  also  dependent  on  the  type of
treatment selected.  O and M costs are from 50 percent to 300  to
100  percent  higher  for  the  1983  alternatives  than the 1977
alternatives depending on the industry and the alternative.

Energy costs are included in the  O  and  M  costs  and  are  not
considered  to  be a significant factor except in remote areas of
Alaska where  biological  systems  may  require  heat  inputs  at
certain  times  of  the  year.   The cost of electrical energy in
Kodiak, Alaska is about 10 times the cost in the "lower  48"  and
in remote areas of Alaska it is 20 times as much.
                               297

-------
  Table 112       Estimated practicable in-plant
wastewater flow reductions and associated pollutional loadings
                     reductions
Subcategory
Catfish
Conventional blue crab
Mechanized blue crab
Alaskan crab meat
Alaskan whole crab and sections
Other Dungeness and tanner crab
Alaskan shrimp
Northern shrimp
Southern canned, frozen and fresh shrimp
Breaded shrimp
Tuna
Wastewater Flow
Reduction,
% of Total
0
0
15
50
50
40
40
20
20
50
30
BOD
Reduction,
% of Total
0
0
5
15
15
15
13
10
10
20
10
                        298

-------
TABLE
113
TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS


EFFLUENT
BOD
TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES KG/KKG
Farm-Raised (Processing Rate)
Catfish Present
S, GT
S, GT, AL
S, GT, AL, LI
S, GT, EA
ro Conventional (Processing Rate)
to Blue Crab Present
S, GT
S, GT, AL
S, GT, EA
Mechanized (Processing Rate)
Blue Crab Present
S, GT
S, GT, AL
S, GT, AL, IP
S, GT, IP, EA

9.9
7.9
2.3
0.1
1.4

7.5
5.2
0.15
0.12

33
22
3.0
2.5
1.9
COSTS 1971 $



CAPITAL COSTS
(lOtpd)
0
13,000
71,300
98,000
72,900
(12tpd)
0
$5,900
9,100
44,000
(24tpd)
0
8,900
23,000
26,800
181,000
(5tpd)
0
8,000
47,100
65,100
48,100
(8tpd)
0
$4,600
7,100
34,500
(12tpd)
0
5,900
15,200
17,700
119,500
(3tpd)
0
6,000
34,600
47,400
35,400
(4tpd)
0
$3,000
4,700
22,700
(6tpd)
0
3,800
10,000
11,700
78,000



DAILY O & M COSTS
(lOtpd)
0
5
24
26
27
(12tpd)
0
3
9
20
(24tpd)
0
5
14
14
36
(5tpd)
0
3
16
18
18
(8tpd)
0
2
7
15
(12tpd)
0
3
9
9
24
(3tpd)
0
2
11
12
13
(4tpd)
0
2
5
10
(6tpd)
0
2
6
6
16

-------
             TABLE  113  (cont.)  TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS
EFFLUENT


Alaska Crab
(meat process)








Alaska Crab
(whole + sec-
tions processes)






TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
(Processing Rate)
Present
S, GT
S, GT, barge solids
S, GT, reduce solids
S, GT, IP
S, GT, IP, DAF, barge
S, GT, IP, DAF, AL, barge
Grind and deep outfall
(1500 ft. of pipe)
(Processing Rate)
Present
S, GT
S, GT, barge solids
S, GT, reduce solids
S, GT, IP
S, GT, IP, DAF, barge
S, GT, IP, DAF, AL, barge
BOD
KG/KKG

19
9.6
9.6
9.6
8.1
2.0
1.4

"~

12
6.0
6.0
6.0
5.1
1.3
0.74


COSTS 1971

CAPITAL COSTS
(18tpd)
0
102,000
273,000
730,000
135,000
1,168,000
2,648,000

96,000
(25tpd)
0
84,000
225,000
408,000
124,000
961,000
2,178,000
(12tpd)
0
80,000
214,000
572,000
106,000
916,000
2,076,000

75,000
(lltpd)
0
51,000
137,000
249,000
75,000
587,000
1,330,000
(8tpd)
0
63,000
168,000
449,000
83,000
718,000
1,628,000

59,000
(5tpd)
0
32,000
86,000
155,000
47,000
366,000
829,000
$





DAILY O & M COSTS
(18tpd)
0
100
248
567
100
372
809

33
(25tpd)
0
84
204
324
84
306
665
(12tpd)
0
80
194
445
80
292
634

25
(lltpd)
0
51
125
198
51
187
406
(8tpd)
0
63
152
349
63
228
497

20
(5tpd)
0
32
78
123
32
117
253
Grind and deep outfall
    (1500 ft. of pipe)
117,000
71,000
45,000
40
24
15

-------
                                 TABLE  113  (cont.)  TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS
GO
O
EFFLUENT


Dungeness &
Tanner Crab (in
the contiguous
states)


Alaskan Shrimp










TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
(Processing Rate)
Present
S, GT
S, GT, IP,
S, GT, IP, DAF
S, GT, IP, DAF, AL
(Processing Rate)
Present
S
S, barge solids
S, reduce solids
S, IP
S, IP, DAF, barge
S, IP, DAF, AL, barge
Grind and deep outfall
(1500 ft. of pipe)
BCD
KG/KKG

13
8.1
6.9
1.7
0.9

212
130
130
130
113
28
3.5

-


COSTS 1971

CAPITAL COSTS
(15tpd)
0
26,000
68,000
153,000
210,000
(44tpd)
0
297,000
652,000
1,238,000
343,000
2,182,000
3,307,000

220,000
(6tpd)
0
15,000
39,000
88,000
121,000
(20tpd)
0
185,000
406,000
771,000
214,000
1,360,000
2,061,000

137,000
(2tpd)
0
8,000
20,000
45,000
63,000
(lOtpd)
0
122,000
268,000
509,000
141,000
897,000
1,360,000

90,000
$





DAILY O & M COSTS
(15tpd)
0
6
6
35
45
(44tpd)
0
298
502
995
298
8
870

94
(6tpd)
0
4
4
20
26
(20tpd)
0
186
313
620
186
542
542

57
(2tpd)
0
2
2
11
13
(lOtpd)
0
123
207
408
123
357
357

39

-------
TABLE  113 (cont.)  TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS
EFFLUENT



BCD
TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES KG/KKG
Northern Shrimp
(in the contigu-
ous states)


CO
o
ro
Southern Non-
Breaded Shrimp
(in the contigu-
ous states)



(Processing
Present
S
S, IP
S, IP, DAF
S, IP, DAF,
S, IP, DAF,
(Processing
Present
S
S, IP
S, IP, DAF
S, IP, DAF,
S, IP, DAF,
Rate)




AL
EA
Rate)




AL
EA

145
120
108
27
3.8
2.9

58
46
41
10
3.0
2.3

COSTS 1971


CAPITAL COSTS
(70tpd)
0
93,000
114,000
311,000
382,000
969,000
(lOOtpd)
0
107,000
124,000
351,000
433,000
1,109,000
(35tpd)
0
62,000
76,000
206,000
252,000
639,000
(SOtpd)
0
71,000
82,000
232,000
286,000
591,000
(20tpd)
0
44,000
54,000
147,000
180,000
457,000
(25tpd)
0
47,000
55,000
154,000
186,000
422,000
$

DAILY O
(70tpd)
0
11
11
40
61
76
(lOOtpd)
0
12
12
46
71
88


& M COSTS
(35tpd)
0
7
7
27
41
50
(SOtpd)
0
8
8
31
47
50



(20tpd)
0
5
5
19
29
36
(25tpd)
0
5
5
20
31
34

-------
                     •TABLE  113  (cont.)  TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS


TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Breaded Shrimp (Processing Rate)
Present
S
S, IP
S, IP, DAF
S, IP, DAF, AL
S, IP, DAF, EA
Tuna (Processing Rate)
Present
S, DAF
S, DAF, IP
S, DAF, IP, HRTF, AS
EFFLUENT
BOD
KG/KKG

105
84
67
17
4.6
3.5

15
2.25
2.0
0.52
COSTS 1971



CAPITAL COSTS
(22tpd)
0
104,000
183,000
407,000
476,000
599,000
(450tpd)
0
471,000
537,000
1,653,000
(8tpd)
0
56,000
99,000
222,000
259,000
326,000
(ISOtpd)
0
244,000
279,000
855,000
(2tpd)
0
25,000
44,000
97,000
113,000
142,000
(40tpd)
0
110,000
126,000
387,000
$





DAILY :O & M COSTS
(22tpd)
0
26
26
104
127
153
(450tpd)
0
178
178
547
(8tpd)
0
14
14
56
69
84
(ISOtpd)
0
92
92
283
(2tpd)
0
6
6
25
30
36
(40tpd)
0
42
42
128
S = screen;  GT = grease trap;  AL = aerated lagoon;   IP =  in-plant changes;   LI = land irrigation;
EA = Extended aeration;  DAF = dissolved air flotation;  HRTF = high rate trickling filter;
AS = activated sludge

-------
Since solids disposal can be a significant problem in some areas,
several  of  the  treatment levels have different solids disposal
alternatives.  The costs of each of these is shown in Table  113.
The  use of biological treatment systems, such as aerated lagoons
and oxidation ponds can cause problems, if not operated properly.
It is important that trained personnel be associated  with  these
installations.

Typical Plant

Hypothetical  system  engineering designs were developed for each
alternative of each treatment level for each  seafood  processing
subcategory.   Each  design  was  based on a two shift production
rate  using  waste  parameters  determined  from  the  monitoring
program.   The  waste  water  characteristics  of  each  industry
subcategory were reviewed in  order  to  estimate  the  treatment
efficiency  of  various  technological  systems, at each level of
application.  Where operating  data  or  published  results  from
other seafood waste facilities were absent, the probable effluent
reductions   were  estimated.   The  assumptions  were  based  on
engineering experience with industrial waste treatment, practical
familiarity  with  alternative  treatment  operations   and   the
variables  which  affect their performance, and extensive working
knowledge of seafood processing methods and  systems.   Schematic
drawings  of each treatment design are presented and discussed in
Section VII.

The capital costs of each of these  designs  were  then  computed
based  on  1971 Seattle construction costs as shown in Table 114.
The costs were then scaled for different geographical areas, such
as Alaska, using the U. S. Army corps of  Engineers  Geographical
Index   (Table  115).   Operation  and maintenance costs given for
each design include labor, power, chemical, and fuel  prices  and
are  based on the costs shown in Table 116.  Costs for other size
facilities were computed using an exponential scale factor of 0.6
and listed in Table 113.

For reference, the raw material processing rates in tons per  day
are listed for each subcategory.  These rates are an index of the
scale  of  production  assumed  for  design  and  cost estimation
purposes.  The costs, however, are suitable chiefly for comparing
the cost-efficiencies of alternatives.  Their use for  estimating
construction  costs  of a proposed treatment facility, referenced
to a known raw production scale, is not recommended.  The  actual
costs  of  construction  are intimately tied to terrain, climate,
transport, labor, land availability, and other site  constraints,
which  are  best  evaluated on an individual basis by experienced
professionals in the field.  Every precaution has been  taken  to
gear  the  design  costs to representative conditions within each
subcategory,  yet  each  plant  has  unique   constraints   which
distinguish it from the hypothetical, average plant.

To   aid   in  visualizing  the  relative  cost-effectiveness  of
alternatives, the tabulations of Table 113 are shown in graphical
                                   304

-------
  Table  114
1971 Seattle construction costs.
           Item
                      1971 Seattle Cost
Earthwork

Piers
   300 PSF Loading
   1000 PSF Loading

Concrete (linear sliding scale)
   Less than 1 cu yd
   Over 50 cu yd

Buildings

Process piping

Metal work and equipment
   1.  steel tanks
   2.  hoppers and package units
       motors, pumps, mechanisms

Outfall lines

Electrical
Land
                     $  1.75/cu yd
                       20.00/sq yd
                       32.00/sq yd
                      500.00/cu yd
                      200.00/cu yd

                        9.00/sq ft

                       18.00/sq ft


                        0.25/gal

                      from manufacturers

                       20.00/ft

                      8% of concrete
                      buildings, process
                      piping, metal work,
                      and equipment

                      Not included in
                      the estimate
                          305

-------
          Table  115      U. S. Army Geographical Index*
                  Area                 Index
         Washington, D. C.              1.0
         Seattle, Washington            1.15
         Kodiak, Alaska                 2.5
         Remote Alaska                  2.6
         Texas                          0.96
         Louisiana                      0.96
         Los Angeles, California        1.7
         San Francisco, California      1.2
         Delaware and Maryland          1.06
         Maine                          0.95
*Relative Prices Around The World.  Civil Engineering,
October, 1971, pp. 91, 92.
                         306

-------
         Table
       Operation and maintenance costs,
   Item
    Cost
  Location
Power
Labor
Treatment
chemicals

Equipment
maintenance
$0.01/kwh
 0.10/kwh

 0.20/kwh

 7.00/hr
 5.00/hr

 0.10/1000 gal
 0.20/1000 gal
48 states
Kodiak, Alaska;
Hawaii; Samoa
Outside Kodiak

Alaska
48 states

48 states
Alaska
 5% of equipment capital cost/year
                         307

-------
form in Figures 55 through 65.  The marginal cost is indicated by
the slope of the curve.  An attempt has been made  to  illustrate
the  point that improved effluent quality is achieved in discrete
steps as opposed to a smoothly increasing cost as a  function  of
treatment  level  desired.   The convex line attempts to indicate
that a large incremental investment is usually required in  order
to  move  to  the  next  "quantum"  level  of  performance.   The
treatment system, when operating  properly,  should  achieve  the
removal rates indicated at the point where the next level starts.
However,  it  is  possible,  when  the  system is not operated or
maintained correctly, that it will operate off the curve  to  the
left.

BOD5  was  selected  as  the  parameter of greatest environmental
significance  for  most  wastes  and   receiving   waters.    The
percentage  removal  of  solids  and  grease in most technologies
listed is roughly (but not  consistently)   parallel  to  that  of
BOD5.   Other  common  contaminants such as phosphate, pathogens,
total dissolved solids, and toxins are not present in  sufficient
concentrations to be of concern in the seafood industry.

Such  parameters  may  require  attention  where  water recycling
within a processing plant is contemplated.  Processors  have  not
yet   found   such   recycling  to  be  cost-effective  for  most
operations.   Furthermore,  federal  regulations  (FDA)   restrict
movement in this direction.

In  general,  the  total  cost curves show that the marginal cost
curves resemble a series of peaks with the  height  of  the  peak
generally  increasing  as the level of treatment increases.  This
is in agreement with published data   (e.  g.  Metcalf  and  Eddy,
1972).  The highest levels of treatment have the highest marginal
costs  requiring  that  a  higher  value be put on the benefit of
improved water quality in order to have a cost-effective system.

Solids

The  costs  of  solids  disposal  are  frequently   regarded   as
supplemental  costs  and  estimated separately.  In the estimates
given in  Tables  112  and  113,  however,  solids  volumes  were
calculated and their handling costs are included.  The reason for
this is that the solids handling costs can be extremely variable.
For  example,  the  costs  of barging solids to a reduction plant
from a remote point in Alaska  would  be  much  higher  than  the
typical  costs.  In some cases the location of a solids reduction
process near the food processing plant can be an alternative  for
solids disposal.

The  nutritive  value  of seafood solids, and their importance in
the world food balance, have been discussed in Section  VII.   It
is  estimated  that  solids  disposal at Koiak, Alaska can be ac-
complished  at a profit of $ .70 per kkg  ($ .75 per ton).
                                  308

-------
Air^Quality

The maintenance of air quality,  in  terms  of  participates,  is
unaffected  by  waste  water  treatment  facilities  except  when
incineration is practiced.  To reduce solids the alternative  for
solids  disposal  is  not  consistent  with  the  conservation of
valuable nutrients and is also  not  cost-effective  on  a  small
scale with suitable effluent control.

Odor  from  landfills, from lagoons, and from oxidation ponds can
be a problem when these systems are not  operated  or  maintained
properly.   Covers  or  enclosures  can  be used in some cases to
localize a problem installation.

Noise

Principal noise sources at treatment  facilities  are  mechanical
aerators, air compressors, and pumps.  By running air compressors
for  the  diffused air system in activated sludge treatment below
their rated critical speed and by  providing  inlet  and  exhaust
silencers,  noise  effects  can  be  combated effectively.  In no
proposed installation would noise levels  exceed  the  guidelines
established  in  the  Occupational Safety and Health Standards of
1972.
                                    309

-------
    70
                                                                 S, GT, AL, LI
    60
o   50
§
HI


fe   40
  c
  re
o. Si
<   30

in
>

<
    20
u
    10
      9.9
               10
                                               S, GT,,
                       'S,GT
                            I
                I	1
                     I
     20



     I
30   40  50    60   70

    PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL
80
                                                       I
                                                  S, GT, EA
90
100
                                                 II
    7.9                               2.3

      BOD5 REMAINING (KG BOD5/KKG PROCESSED)



                Figure 55


Catfish  treatment efficiencies and  costs
                                                                 1.4
                                              0.100
                                      310

-------
    40
«   30
LU —
II
it
(- +*
1£
o
2
20
    10
      7.5
                                                              S. GT, EA
                                       I    I   I    I    I
                               30  40  50  60   70  80  90
                               PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL
                                I	
                           5.2
                                                                 S, GT, AL
                                                            I	I
          100

          _J
.15   .12
                      BOD5 REMAINING (KG BODg/KKG PROCESSED)
                             Figure  56
           Conventional blue crab treatment efficiencies and  costs
                                      311

-------
    120
     110
     90
     80
£    70
ULI
5
co
  ~  60
o
III
>

]    «
u

     30
     20
     10
       I
                                                            S,GT, IP. EA,
                                                              S, GT. AL. IP
I
 40   50    60   70  80  90
PERCENT BOD5REMOVAL
                        I
                                                                      95   100
I
       33                 22                           3    2.5
                       BOO5 REMAINING (KG BODg/KKG PROCESSED)
                                Figure 57
     Mechanized  blue crab treatment efficiencies  and costs
                                          1.9
                                     312

-------
    2000
I
    1000
    900
    800
    700
    600
? -2 500
5 -400
u
01
>
<   300
D
D
0   200
    100

     75

     50

     25
                S, GT.REDUCE SOLIDSO
                 S,GT, BARGE SOLIDS <
         GRIND & DEEP OUTFALL
                   I
I	I
                                    I
                                                       S, GT, IP. DAF, AL
                                                           BARGE
                                                      S, GT, IP, DAFj
                                                        BARGE
                                                 (S.GT, IP
I    1   I
            10     20    30   40     50               60   70 80     90        100
                                PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL
               	         I             I	I     I      I
       19                        9.6           8,1
                        BODg REMAINING (KG BODg/KKG PROCESSED)
                                 Figure  58
         Alaska crab meat  treatment efficiencies  and costs
                                                                2.0   1.4
                                       313

-------
1500
1000
o
o    500
  /vyv
>
<

S
o
 150
 100
  50
                 S, GT, REDUCE SOLIDS
                  S, GT, BARGE SOLIDS
     GRIND & DEEP
        OUTFALL
                                                 S, GT, IP. DAF, AL
                                                      BARGE
                                            S, GT, IP
                                         S, GT
                                             I	I
                                                            SGT, IP, DAF
                                                               BARGE
          10
                     20
                       30
40
50
60   70
80
                            PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL
    I
                                         I
                                           I
90
                              I	I
   12
                                                                   .74
                                     6    5.1              1.3
                    BOD5 REMAINING (KG BODg/KKG PROCESSED)

                               Figure  59

Alaska crab  whole and sections  treatment efficiencies  and costs
100
                                    314

-------
130
       10   20
30
   I
  40          50    60    70    80
    PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL
I	        I
                                         I
I
     100
I
   13                  8.1          6.9                      1.7     0.9     0
                    BOD5 REMAINING (KG BOD5/KKG PROCESSED)
                            Figure   60

 Dungeness  and tanner crab other than Alaska treatment efficiencies and  costs
                                     315

-------
   GRIND & DEEP
     OUTFALL
                            40
50
60  70
80
90
                        PERCENT BODg REMOVAL
                                   I
                   I
212                        130      113                   28
                BODg REMAINING (KG BOD5/KKG PROCESSED)
                         Figure   61

    Alaska shrimp  treatment efficiencies and costs

                              316
100
                       I  I
                           3.5 0

-------
t-
ui

1
    650


    600


    550


    500


    450


    400


-.   350


£   300


    250


  — 200

      /%
      +•

    100
£    90
<
3    80
     70
     60
     50
     40
                                                           S, IP, DAF, EA.
        (_

       145
                                                                  S, IP, DAF, AL
                                      I    1   I    I   I   I
                           20         30  40  50  60  70 80

                                PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL

                         I        I	I
                                                            90
I	I
100

 I
                        120      108                    29        3.8  2.9

                        BOD5 REMAINING (KG BOD5/KKG PROCESSED)

                             Figure   62

              Northern shrimp treatment efficiencies and costs
                                       317

-------
600
 40
                     20      30    40   50    60
                          PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL
                      1     I	
                               70
80
90
100
                                      I
         I	LJ
  58
   46   41                            10
BOD5 REMAINING (KG BOD5/KKG PROCESSED)
          Figure   63
        3.0  2.3 0
    Southern non-breaded  shrimp treatment efficiencies  and costs
                                    318

-------
350
 40
                                                  80
90
100
                          PERCENT BOD_ REMOVAL
                                     o
L
105
1
84
1
67
1
17
1 1 (
4.6 3.5 0
                 BOD5 REMAINING (KG BODg/KKG PROCESSED)



                           Figure   64


          BREADED  SHRIMP TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS


                                319

-------
   900

   850

   800

   750

   700

   650

   600

   550

_  500
UJ g
> I
z a
I?
o
UJ
>
<
S
u
     450
   350

   300

   250

   200

   150

   100

    50
                                                              S, DAF. IP
                                                              HRTF, ASj
                                                    > S, DAF, IP
                 I	I
                       I	I
        0 10 20  30 40   50
                          60  70  80
                               PERCENT BOD5 REMOVAL
90
100
        15                                   2.25   2.0
                       BOD5 REMAINING (KG BODR/KKG PROCESSED)
                             Figure   65
            Tuna  treatment efficiencies and costs
                                    320
                                                                  0.52

-------
                           SECTION IX

          BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
              AVAILABLE, GUIDELINES AND LIMITATIONS


For each subcategory within  the  canned  and  preserved  seafood
processing  industry,  the  "best  practicable control technology
currently available"  (BPCTCA)  must be achieved by all plants  not
later  than  July  1,  1977.  The 1977 technology is not based on
"the average of  the  best  existing  performance  by  plants  of
various   sizes,   ages   and   unit   processes  within  each...
subcategory,"  but,  rather,  represents  the  highest  level  of
control  that  can be practicably applied by July 1, 1977 because
present control and treatment practices are generally  inadequate
within  the  farm-raised catfish, crab, shrimp, and tuna segments
of the canned and preserved fish and seafood processing industry.

Consideration of the following factors has been included  in  the
establishment of BPCTCA:
    1)    the total costs of application of technology in relation
         to the effluent reduction benefits to be  achieved  from
         this application,
    2)    the age of equipment and facilities involved,
    3)    the processes employed,
    1)    the engineering aspects of the  application  of  various
         types of control techniques,
    5)    process changes, and
    6)    non-water quality environmental impact.
Furthermore, the designation  of  BPCTCA  emphasized  end-of-pipe
treatment  technology, but included "good housekeeping" practices
which  are  considered  normal  practice   within   the   seafood
processing  industry,  such as turning off faucets and hoses when
not in use or using spring-loaded hose nozzles, and do not assume
significant equipment changes.   The  large  variation  in  water
usage  for  the same process configuration among different plants
indicated that there was ample opportunity for the  reduction  of
water  usage  without  adversely  affecting  the  quality  of the
product.

An important consideration in  the  designated  process  was  the
degree  of  economic  and  engineering  reliability  required  to
determine the technology to be "currently  available."   In  this
industry,  the  reliability  of  the recommended technologies was
established based on pilot plants,  demonstration  projects,  and
technology  transfer,  the  latter  mainly  from the meat packing
industry, municipal waste treatment systems and other segments of
the seafood as well as the food processing industries.

Because there are little or no  existing  waste  water  treatment
facilities  at  the plant level, the 30-day and the daily maximum
                                  321

-------
limitations  are  based   on   engineering   judgment   and   the
consideration   of   the  operating  characteristics  of  similar
treatment systems as mentioned in the  previous  paragraph.   The
daily maximum limitation for the screening systems is three times
the  thirty  day limitation; for air flotation systems, 2.5 times
the thirty day limitation; for aerated lagoon systems, two  times
the  thirty  day  limitation; for extended aeration system; three
times  the  thirty  day  limitation;  and  for  activated  sludge
systems,  3.5  times the thirty day limitation.  An exception for
the total suspended solids for screening in  the  Alaskan  shrimp
processing  subcategory was made due to the high initial level of
the parameter.  The daily maximum limitation of  total  suspended
solids for the Alaskan shrimp processing subcategory is 1.5 times
the thirty day limitation.

Application of the effluent limitations to the single product and
the   multiproduct   processing   plant:  A  primary  reason  for
establishing effluent limitations  guidelines  on  the  basis  of
production  of  raw material, is to provide the means to consider
the single product as well as the multiproduct seafood  processor
without  setting  separate  guideline  numbers for every possible
combination of species and processing rates.

When a plant is subject to  effluent  limitations  covering  more
than  one  subcategory,  the plant's effluent limitation shall be
the  aggregate  of  the  limitations  applicable  to  the   total
production  covered by each subcategory.  For example, if a plant
processes several species concurrently, then the plant's effluent
limitation may be the sum of the products of the volume  of  each
species  processed  and the respective effluent limitation.  If a
plant processes several species  in  series,  then  the  effluent
limitation  may be based on the subcategory classification of the
individual species while it is beging processed.  In other words,
the aggregate effluent limitation guideline number may vary as  a
function of the product mix at any particular point in time.

Since  publication  of  the  proposed effluent limitations in the
Februay 6, 1974 Federal Register (39 F.R. 4708), the  Agency  has
received substantial economic and financial data.  A reevaluation
of  the  economic  impact  of  the  proposed regulations produced
changes in the final effluent  limitations  which  are  based  on
economic  consideration  discussed  in  detail  in  the "Economic
Analysis of Effluent Limitations Guidelines For Selected Segments
of the Seafood Processing Industry - Catfish,  Crab,  Shrimp  and
Tuna," June, 1974.

The  proposed 1977 regulations for large shrimp processors in the
contiguous states were based on dissolved air  flotation  as  the
best practicable control technology currently available.

After  careful  reevaluation  of  available data and consultation
with recognized seafood waste water treatment experts, the Agency
believes that dissolved air flotation can  be  regarded  as  best
practicable  control  technology  currently  available for shrimp


                                  322

-------
processing facilities in the contiguous States.   The  technology
is  "available"  and  "transferrable" as evidenced by pilot plant
work discussed in Section VII.   However,  several  organizations
question  whether  the  total  number of shrimp processing plants
affected  can  design,  secure,  construct,  and  line-out   this
particular  equipment  alternative  by  July   1,  1977.  For this
reason,  the  Agency  has  combined  the   respective,   proposed
subcategories  for  the  large and small shrimp processors in the
contiguous States and based  the  final  July  1,  1977  effluent
limitations  guidelines on screening systems instead of dissolved
air flotation systems.

Ea£H!~Bli§§^ Catfish Processing (Suhcategory A]_

The  effluent  limitations  for  farm-raised  catfish  processing
facilities  are  presented  in  Table  117.  The best practicable
control technology currently  available  includes  efficient  in-
plant  water  and waste water management, partial recycle of live
fish holding tank water, solids or by-product recovery, screening
of the waste water effluent, and simple grease traps as discussed
in Section VII and illustrated in Figure 49.


CONVENTIONAL BLUE CRAB PROCESSING (Subcategory B)

The effluent limitations for conventional  blue  crab  processing
are  presented  in  Table  117.   The  best  practicable  control
technology currently available includes efficient in-plant  water
and waste water management, simple grease traps, screening of the
waste  water  effluent,  and  solids  or  by-product  recovery as
discussed in Section VII and illustrated in Figure 40.
MECHANIZED^BLUE CRAB PROCESSING  (Subcategory C)

The effluent limitations for mechanized blue crab processing  are
presented  in Table 117.  The best practicable control technology
currently available includes efficient in-plant water  and  waste
water  management  simple  grease  traps,  screening of the waste
water effluent, and solids or by-product recovery as discussed in
Section VII and illustrated in Figure 40.


NON-REMOTE ALASKA CRAB MEAT PROCESSING (Subcategory D)

The  effluent  limitations  for  non-remote  Alaskan  crab   meat
processing  are  presented  in  Table  117.  The best practicable
control technology currently available consists of efficient  in-
plant  water  and  waste water management, by-product recovery or
ultimate disposal of solids, simple grease traps,  and  screening
of  the  waste water effluent as illustrated in Figure 40.  It is
important, in considering "best practicable"  treatment  schemes,
                                  323

-------
     Subcategory
A    Farm-Raised Catfish
B    Conventional Blue Crab
C    Mechanized Blue Crab
D    Non-Remote Alaskan
     Crab Meat
E    Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
F    Non-Remote Alaskan Whole
     Crab and Crab Sections
G    Remote Alaskan Whole
     Crab and Crab Sections
H    Dungeness + Tanner Crab
     in the Contiguous States
I    Non-Remote Alaskan
     Shrimp
J    Remote Alaskan Shrimp
K    Northern Shrimp
L    Southern Non-Breaded
M    Breaded Shrimp
N    Tuna
Table

Technology
Basis
S, GT
S, GT
S, GT
S, GT

Comminutors
S, GT

Comminutors

S, GT

S

Comminutors
S
S
S
S, DAF
 July  1,  1977  Guidelines

Parameter (kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs liveweight processed)

Max 30-day
Average
_
-
-
-
*
-
*
-
-
*
_
-
-
9.0
BOD
Daily
Max
_
-
-
-
*
-
*
-
-
*
_
-
-
23

Max 30-day
Average
9.2
0.74
12
6.2
*
3.9
*
2.7
210
*
54
38
93
3.3
TSS
Daily
Max
28
2.2
36
19
*
12
*
8.1
320
*
160
114
280
8.3

Max 30-day
Average
3.4
0.20
4.2
0.61
*
0.42
*
0.61
17
*
42
12
12
0.84
0+G
Daily
Max
10
0.60
13
1.8
*
1.3
*
1.8
51
*
126
36
36
2.1
           * No pollutants may be discharged which exceed 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) in any
             dimension
             S = screen;  GT = simple grease traps;  DAF = dissolved air flotation;

-------
to  strongly  emphasize  the  unique  physical  situation  of the
Alaskan processor when recommending effluent levels.

Alaskan crab processing plants are larger-scale  operations  than
those  in  the  "lower 48" states, but the waste waters are still
intermittent, seasonal, and of relatively  high  strength.   Many
processing  plants  are  located  along  very rugged, mountainous
coasts, frequently with no level land available.  Thus, treatment
facilities would have to be located on dock area  constructed  on
piling over water.

Foundation  conditions  often  involve  solid rock—adding to the
expense of dock facilities or excavation for basins  or  lagoons.
Shipping costs for construction materials, chemicals and fuel are
high.   The  rigorous  climate, particularly the low temperatures
(including   the   waste   water   temperatures)   inhibits   the
applicability of biological treatment, especially when compounded
with  the intermittent and highly seasonal flows.  High winds and
large  tidal  fluctuations  contribute  to  the  difficulties  of
constructing and operating treatment facilities.

Neither  solids reduction plants nor suitable sites for landfills
or lagoons are generally available for solids disposal;  and  the
number of technically qualified personnel is severely limited.

REMOTE ALASKAN CRAB MEAT PROCESSING (Subcategory E)

The  effluent limitations for remote Alaskan crab meat processing
are  presented  in  Table  117.   The  best  practicable  control
technology  currently available consists of physical treatment of
the pollutants to  reduce  particle  sizes  through  the  use  of
comminutors   or   grinders  as  discussed  in  Section  VII  and
illustrated in Figure 53.

NON-REMOTE  ALASKAN  WHOLE  CRAB  AND  CRAB  SECTION   PROCESSING
(Subcategory F)

The  effluent  limitations  for non-remote Alaskan whole crab and
crab section processing are presented in  Table  117.   The  best
practicable  control  technology  currently available consists of
efficient in-plant water and waste water  management,  by-product
recovery or ultimate disposal of solids, simple grease traps, and
screening  of  the  waste water effluent as illustrated in Figure
40.

As  discussed  in  previous  sections,  it   is   important,   in
considering  "best  practicable"  treatment  schemes, to strongly
emphasize the unique physical situation of the Alaskan  processor
when recommending effluent levels.

REMOTE ALASKAN WHOLE CRAB AND CRAB SECTION PROCESSING
(Subcategory G)
                                   325

-------
The  recommended  effluent  limitations  for remote Alaskan whole
crab and crab section processing are presented in Table 117.  The
best practicable control technology currently available  consists
of  physical treatment of the pollutants to reduce particle sizes
through the use of comminutors  or  grinders  as  illustrated  in
Figure 53.
DUNGENESS	AND  TANNER	CRAB	PROCESS	IN  THE	CONTIGUOUS STATES
(Subcategory H)                                                 ~

The effluent limitations for Dungeness and tanner crab processing
in the contiguous states are presented in Table  117.   The  best
practicable  control  technology  currently available consists of
efficient in-plant  water  and  waste  water  management,  simple
grease  traps,  solids  or  by-product  recovery  techniques, and
screening of the waste water effluent as discussed in Section VII
and illustrated in Figure 40.


NON-REMOTE ALASKA SHRIMP PROCESSING (Subcategory H)

The effluent limitations for non-remote Alaskan shrimp processing
are  presented  in  Table  117.   The  best  practicable  control
technology  currently  available  consists  of efficient in-plant
water and waste water management, by-product recovery or ultimate
disposal of solids, and screening of the waste water effluent  as
illustrated in Figure 40 and discussed in Section VII.

As discussed in the previous sections on Alaskan crab processing,
it  is  important,  in  considering  "best practicable" treatment
schemes, to strongly emphasize the unique physical  situation  of
the Alaskan processor when recommending effluent levels.

REMOTE ALASKAN SHRIMP PROCESSING (Subcategory J)

The  effluent limitation for remote Alaskan shrimp processing are
presented in Table 117.  The best practicable control  technology
currently   available   consist  of  physical  treatment  of  the
pollutants  to  reduce  particle  sizes  through   the   use   of
comminutors or grinders as shown in Figure 53.

NORTHERN  SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE CONTIGUOUS STATES  (Subcategory
K)

The  effluent  limitations   for   northern   shrimp   processing
facilities  in  the contiguous states are presented in Table 117.
The best practicable control technology currently  available  for
this  subcategory  consists of efficient in-plant water and waste
water management, and screening systems  for  removal  of  solids
from the effluent stream as illustrated in Figure 40.
                                     326

-------
SOUTHERN  NON-BREADED  SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE CONTIGUOUS STATES
(Subcategory L)

The effluent  limitations  for  southern  non-breaded  processing
facilities  in  the contiguous states are presented in Table 117.
The best practicable control technology currently  available  for
this  subcategory  consists of efficient in-plant water and waste
water management and screening systems for removal of solids from
the effluent stream as shown in Figure 40.

BREADED SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE CONTIGUOUS  STATES  (Subcategory
M)

The effluent limitations for breaded shrimp processing facilities
in  the  contiguous  states are presented in Table 117.  The best
practicable  control  technology  currently  available  for  this
subcategory  consists of efficient in-plant water and waste water
management, and screening systems for removal of solids from  the
effluent  stream  as  shown in Figure 40 and discussed in Section
VII.

The effluent limitations for tuna  processing  are  presented  in
Table  117.   The  best  practicable control technology currently
available consists of efficient in-plant water  and  waste  water
management,  solids  and by-product recovery techniques screening
of the waste water effluent and dissolved air  flotation  systems
as shown in Figure 54.

Tuna  processing  is a very large scale operation compared to the
other  seafood  processes  studied.    Generally,   tuna   plants
incorporate  a  high  degree  of  in-plant  by-product processing
whereby much of the otherwise undesirable meat, other solids  and
oils are recovered.  As a result these waste waters tend to be of
medium strength though large in volume.
                                  327

-------

-------
                            SECTION X

             BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY
             ACHIEVABLE, GUIDELINES AND LIMITATIONS
For  each  subcategory  within  the  canned and preserved seafood
processing industry, the "best available technology  economically
achievable" (BATEA)  must be realized by all plants not later than
1 July 1983.  The 1983 technology is, for this industry, not ". .
   the  very  best control and treatment technology employed by a
specific  point  source  within  the   industrial   category   or
subcategory  .  .  .,"  but  represents technology based on pilot
plants, demonstration projects, technology transfer,  the  latter
mainly  from the meat packing industry, municipal waste treatment
systems, and other segments of the seafood as well  as  the  food
industry.  This was necessary because present waste water control
and  treatment  practices  are  generally  inadequate  within the
farm-raised catfish, crab,  shrimp,  and  tuna  segments  of  the
canned and preserved seafood processing industry.

Consideration  of  the following factors has been included in the
establishment of BATEA:
    1)    equipment and facilities age,
    2)    processes employed,
    3)    engineering  aspects  of   various   control   technique
         applications,
    4)    process changes,
    5)    costs of achieving the effluent reduction resulting from
         the application of BATEA, and
    6)    non-water quality environmental impact.

Furthermore, much greater emphasis in  the  designation  of  1983
technology   was  given  to  in-plant  controls,  than  has  been
considered as BPCTCA.  Those in-process and end-of-pipe  controls
recommended for 1983 were subjected to the criterion that they be
demonstrated at the pilot plant, semi-works, or other level to be
technologically and economically justifiable.  This is not to say
that a complete economic analysis of each proposed system and its
relationship  to  one  or more subcategories has been undertaken.
Rather, sound  engineering  judgment  has  been  applied  in  the
consideration  of  all  alternatives  and those with a reasonable
chance of "viability" in application to a significant  number  of
actual   processing   plants   within  a  subcategory  have  been
considered in detail.

The waste water treatment technology and in-process changes which
serve as the basis for the effluent limitations  represents  only
one  of  many  treatment  alternatives  open  to  the  processor.
Innovations  in  by-product  recovery,  water  and  waste   water
management,  and  treatment  technology during the interim before
July 1, 1983 may eliminate the necessity of employing  biological
treatment in order to comply with the 1983 effluent limitations.
                                   329

-------
                                  Table  118
                                                       July 1,  1983 Guidelines
o
      Subcategory
A     Farm-Raised Catfish
B     Conventional Blue Crab
C     Mechanized Blue Crab
D     Non-Remote Alaskan
      Crab Meat
E     Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
F     Non-Remote Alaskan Whole
      Crab and Crab Sections
      Remote Alaskan Whole
      Crab and Crab Sections
H     Dungeness + Tanner Crab
      in the Contiguous States
I     Non-Remote Alaskan
      Shrimp
J     Remote Alaskan Shrimp
K     Northern Shrimp
L     Southern Non-Breaded
      Shrimp
M     Breaded Shrimp
N     Tuna
                                    Technology
Parameter (kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs liveweight processed)
Basis
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
S,
GT,
GT,
GT,
DAF
GT,
DAF
GT,
DAF
DAF
IP
DAF
DAF
DAF
DAF
AL
AL
AL, IP
, IP
IP
, IP
IP
, IP
, IP

, IP
, IP
, IP
, AS, IP

Max 30-day
Average
2.3
0.15
2.5
2.0
_
1.3
-
1.7
28
_
27
10
17
0.62
BOD

Daily
Max
4.
0.
5.
5.
_
3.
-
4.
71
_
68
25
43
2.
6
30
0
0

3

3





2


Max 30-day
Average
5
0
6
0
5
0
3
0
18
180
4
3
7
0
.7
.45
.3
.53
.3
.33
.3
.23


.9
.4
.4
.62
TSS
Daily
Max
11
0.90
13
1.3
16
0.83
9.9
0.58
46
270
12
8.5
19
2.2


Max 30-day
Average
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
15
3.
1.
1.
0.
45
065
3
82
52
048
36
07
5

8
1
0
077
O+G
Daily
Max
0.90
0.13
2.6
0.21
1.6
0.12
1.1
0.18
3.8
45
9.5
2.8
2.5
0.27
           S = screen;  GT = simple grease trap;  Al = aerated lagoon;
           DAF = dissolved air flotation; AS = activated sludge system
                                                                          IP = in-plant change;

-------
This  section  of  the  report sets forth the 1983 guidelines and
limitations  as  developed   from   studies   and   consultations
conducted, data developed and literature available.  The material
is presented below by subcategory, as was done in Section IX.

The  operating  characteristics  of the specific treatment system
which provided  the  basis  for  the  effluent  limitations  were
considered  in  establishing  the daily maximum limitations.  The
factors are the same as in the previous chapter.


FARM-RAISED CATFISH PROCESSING (Sutcategory A)

The effluent limitations for farm-raised catfish  processing  are
presented   in   Table   118.    The  best  available  technology
economically achievable includes  efficient  in-plant  water  and
waste water management, partial recycle of live fish holding tank
water, solids or by-product recovery as illustrated in Figure 49,
and aerated lagoon systems as illustrated in Figure 50.

Those catfish processors employing live hauling and holding tanks
should  consider  the use of iced delivery and storage.  A recent
study, soon to be published by Boggess, et al.   (1973),  indicates
that  iced  storage  causes skinning problems not encounterd with
live-tank stored fish; however, the  water  consumption  decrease
realized  (40  to 50 percent) may justify the action.   It must be
noted that little, if any, BOD5 reduction would accrue from  this
change,  since  the BOD5 contribution of the holding tanks to the
total plant effluent is only about 5 percent.  It should  further
be  mentioned  that  a large number of processors now employ iced
storage, so this recommendation will not have a  profound  effect
on the industry.

Few  specific  further  in-plant  water  reduction techniques can
reasonably be expected  of  the  catfish  industry,  because  the
average  plant  processing  and  clean  up  water  consumption is
already extremely low.  Installing  squeeze-nozzles  and  turning
off  water  flows  during  work  breaks should reduce waste water
flows by at least 1900 1  (500 gal) per shift.


CONVENTIONAL BLUE CRAB PROCESSING (Subcategory B)

The effluent limitations for conventional  blue  crab  processing
are  presented  in  Table  118.   The  best  available technology
economically achievable is based on solids or by-product recovery
and on aerated lagoon systems as illustrated in Figures 40 and 48
and discussed in Section VII.

The conventional blue crab process uses less water than any other
industry subcategory reviewed in this study.  Average plant flows
are  well  under  3.8  cu  m   (1000  gal)   per  shift.   Although
inadvertently, the industry is a model of water conservation.
                                  331

-------
MECHANIZED BLUE CRAB PROCESSING (Subcategory C)

The  effluent limitations for mechanized blue crab processing are
presented  in  Table  118.    The   best   available   technology
economically   achievable   is  based  on  solids  or  by-product
recovery, in-process modifications which promote efficient  water
and  waste  water  management,  and  an  aerated lagoon system as
illustrated in Figures 40 and 48 and discussed in Section VII.

The mechanized blue crab process uses  water  freely—in  product
fluming,  in shell separation, and in spray-washing of brine from
the meat.  Redesign  of  the  meat-shell  separation  system  and
subsequent  spray  washing  network,  plus elimination of the few
flumes existant in the industry  should  effect  the  15  percent
water  use  reduction (with concomitant 5 percent BOD5> reduction)
reflected in the 1983 effluent limitations guidelines  listed  in
Table  118.   An  ultimate  goal should be the elimination of the
brine flotation system entirely; perhaps through replacement by a
pneumatic system such as is used as a final loose peel remover in
some shrimp plants, or another suitable device.
ALASKAN CRAB MEAT PROCESSING

The effluent limitations for non-remote and remote  Alaskan  crab
meat processing, subcategories D and E respectively are presented
in   Table  118.   The  best  available  technology  economically
achievable is based on by-product recovery or  ultimate  disposal
of solids, in-process modifications which promote efficient water
and  waste  water  management,  and  an  air  flotation system as
illustrated in Figures 40 and 41 and discussed  in  Section  VII.
Air  flotation   offers  the  possibility  of effective treatment
while still being able to cope with the problems of  intermittent
and  variable waste water flows and rigorous climatic, geographic
and isolation conditions.  Secondary treatment processes (Figures
41 and 52) could not be  expected  to  perform  adequately  under
these limitations.

The Alaskan crab meat industry is a large water user, compared to
the  other  industries  in   this study.  Elimination of fluming,
additional employment of  dry  capture  techniques,  redesign  of
process  flow  patterns  and  general  in-plant emphasis on water
conservation should effect the 50  percent  water  use  reduction
(with  resulting 15 percent BOD5 reduction)  reflected in the 1983
effluent limitations guidelines.
ALASKAN WHOLE CRAB AND CRAB_SECTION PROCESSING

The effluent limitations for Alaskan whole crab and crab  section
processing,  subcategories F and G respectively, are presented in
Table  118.  The best available technology economically achievable
is based on by-product recovery or ultimate disposal  of  solids,
in-process  modifications which promote efficient water and waste
                                 332

-------
water management, and an air flotation system as illustreated  in
Figures 40 and 41 and discussed in Section VII.

As  discussed  in  the previous section, air flotation offers the
possibility of effective treatment while still being able to cope
with the problems of intermittent and variable waste water  flows
and   rigorous  climate,  geographic  and  isolation  conditions.
Elimination of fluming,  additional  employment  of  dry  capture
techniques,   redesign  of  process  flow  patterns  and  general
in-plant emphasis on water  conservation  should  effect  the  50
percent  water  use  reduction  (with  resulting  15 percent BOD5_
reduction) reflected in the 1983 effluent limitations guidelines.
listed in Table 118.
DUNGENESS AND TANNER CRAB PROCESSING
IN THE CONTIGUOUS STATES  (Subcategory H)


The Dungeness and tanner  crab  industry  outside  of  Alaska  is
somewhat  more  conservative  in  water  use practices than their
northern counterpart.  Nonetheless, considerably  more  attention
could  be  paid  to water conservation in the industry, along the
same lines as outlined for  the  Alaskan  crab  industry  in  the
previous  subsections.  Employing good water management in-plant,
the industry should be capable of effecting a 40  to  50  percent
reduction  in  water  consumption, and thereby reduce waste water
BODjj loadings by at least 15 percent.  These reductions, together
with  the  expected  improved  treatment  efficiencies   due   to
optimization  of  dissolved air flotation as a chemical treatment
system as discussed in Section VII  ,  were  the  bases  for  the
development  of  the 1983  effluent limitations guidelines listed
in Table 118.

It should be mentioned that the majority of  processors  in  this
subcategory  are  located  in  or near population centers of suf-
ficient size  to  justify  construction  of  municipal  treatment
facilities.   In  such  cases the processors will likely elect to
cooperate with the municipalities in a  joint  treatment  scheme.
These  industrial  wastes  are  expected  to  be  compatible with
domestic biological treatment systems.


ALASKAN SHRIMP PROCESSING

As proposed for Subcategories D, E, F,  and  G  -   Alaska  crab,
above;  for  non-remote and remote Alaska shrimp, Subcategories I
and J respectively, proposes flotation as the process  of  choice
(see  Figures  40 and 41). Rationale for this selection parallels
that for Alaskan crab meat and whole crab section processing.

The Alaska shrimp industry, like their counterpart crab industry,
is a heavy water user.  In  fact,  even  a  moderately  well-con-
trolled  shrimp  plant in Alaska uses about three times the water
                                  333

-------
per pound of raw material that a crab plant does.   This  is  at-
tributable  largely  to  the fact that the shrimp process is con-
siderably more mechanized, especially in the peeling phase.  From
40 to 70 percent of the total plant flow passes over the Model  A
or PCA peelers.

As  a  consequence, shrimp plants have not the opportunity to cut
water consumption as dramatically and drastically as crab plants.
Nevertheless, reduction  of water use by 40 percent (and more, in
plants which employ considerable fluming)  are achievable by 1983.
Concomitant BOD5  reductions  of  at  lease  13  percent  can  be
expected.   These  values,  plus  the  improvements  in flotation
systems efficiency mentioned earlier,  form  the  bases  for  the
effluent limitations guidelines outlined in Table 118.
NORTHERN SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE CONTIGUOUS STATES

The  effluent  limitations  for northern shrimp processing in the
contiguous states (Subcategory K)  are  presented  in  Table  118.
The best available technology economically achievable is based on
solids  or  by-product  recovery,   in-process modifications which
promote efficient water and waste water management, and dissolved
air flotation systems as illustrated in Figures  40  and  41  and
discussed in Section VII.
Even  though the northern shrimp processor uses considerably less
water, on the average, than the typical Alaskan processor,  water
use reductions of 20 percent are achievable by 1983.  Concomitant
BODJ5  reduction  of  at  least 10 percent can be expected.  These
reductions,  together  with  the  expected   improved   treatment
efficiencies  due to optimization of dissolved air flotation as a
chemical treatment system, were the bases for the development  of
the 1983 effluent limitations guidelines.
SOUTHERN NON-BREADED SHRIMP PROCESSING
IN~THE CONTIGUOUS STATES

The  effluent  limitations  guidelines  for  southern non-breaded
shrimp processing in the contiguous states (Subcategory L), Table
118, are based  on  the  same  technology  and  follow  the  same
rational as presented in the previous section for northern shrimp
processing.


BREADED SHRIMP PROCESSING IN THE
CONTIGUOUS STATES

The  effluent  limitations  guidelines  for breaded shrimp in the
contiguous states (Subcategory M), Table 118, are  based  on  the
                                   334

-------
same  technology and follow the same rational as presented in the
section for northern shrimp processing.

The breaded shrimp industry is  a  heavy  water  user,  employing
twice  as  much  water  per pound of raw material as northern and
southern non-breaded shrimp processors.  A water use reduction of
50  percent   (and  more,  in  plants  which  employ  considerable
fluming)   is  achievable by 1983.  Concomitant BOD5 reductions of
at least 20 percent can be expected.


TUNA PROCESSING (Subcategory N)

Tuna was  the  only  high  seas  species  covered.   The  typical
processing plant is several orders of magnitude larger than those
found  in  the  blue  crab or catfish industries.  Tuna companies
were found to operate more like  the  large  industrial  concerns
they  are,  rather  than  in  the provincial manner in which some
small processors were managed.  Accordingly, their waste  streams
flowed  more  continuously,  broadening  the  scope  of available
treatment alternatives.

BATEA (see Figure 5t)  for the tuna processing  industry  proposes
roughing  trickling  filters combined with conventional activated
sludge because  this  combination  of  biological  processes  can
result   in  compactness,  flexibility,  and  ability  to  handle
variable loads.

On a relative scale  the  tuna  industry  is  clean.   By-product
development  in  the  form  of  pet food, fish meal, solubles and
stick water recovery have been developed to a high degree.

Areas in which improvements could be made (in  some  plants)  in-
clude  adoption of dry receiving, rather than fluming of the fish
from the boat to the plant, installation of bilge water  handling
systems  to  prevent the pumping of bilges into the local waters,
adoption of air cooling of the tuna following  the  precook,  and
development of recirculating  (immersion) thaw tank water systems.

Utilization  of  some  or  all  of  these concepts, together with
conservation programs, could lead to water consumption savings of
30 percent, with concomitant BOD5 reductions of 10 percent.

Realization of these goals, together  with  the  progressive  im-
provement  of  treatment  system efficiencies, provides the basis
for the  effluent  levels  listed  in  Table  118  for  the  tuna
industry.
                                   335

-------

-------
                           SECTION XI

                NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The effluent limitations that must be achieved by new sources are
termed  "Performance  Standards."   The  New  Source  Performance
Standards apply to any source for which construction starts after
the publication of the proposed regulations  for  the  standards.
The  standards  were  determined  by  adding to the consideration
underlying the identification of the  "Best  Practicable  Control
Technology  Currently  Available"  a determination of what higher
levels of pollution control are  available  through  the  use  of
improved production processes and/or treatment techniques.  Thus,
in  addition  to considering the best in-plant and end-of-process
control technology, New Source Performance Standards are based on
an analysis of how the  level  of  effluent  may  be  reduced  by
changing  the  production process itself.  Alternative processes,
operating methods, or  other  alternatives  were  considered.   A
further  determination  made was whether a standard permitting no
discharge of pollutants is practicable.

Consideration must also be given to:

    1)  operating methods;
    2)  batch as opposed to continuous operations;
    3)  use  of  alternative  raw  materials  and  mixes  of  raw
    materials;
    4)   use  of  dry  rather  than  wet  processes  (including a
         substitution of recoverable solvents for water); and
    5)  recovery of pollutants as by-products.

With the exception of the Alaskan crab and shrimp  subcategories,
the  new  source  performance  standards  are based on a level of
technology above screening.   Aerated  lagoon  systems  form  the
basis   of   the   effluent   limitations  for  the  catfish  and
conventional  and  mechanized  blue  crab  subcategories.   "Non-
optimized"  dissolved air flotation systems form the basis of the
effluent limitations of the Dungeness and tanner  crab,  northern
shrimp,  southern  non-breaded  shrimp,  breaded  shrimp and tuna
subcategories.    Optimization   of   dissolved   air   flotation
performance  is not required until 1983 because the technology is
relatively new for most of the seafood  processing  industry  and
requires  careful  selection of chemicals and dosages, as well as
skilled operation for optimum pollution  abatements.   These  new
source  performance  standards  which  are based on dissolved air
flotation reflect the Agency's best engineering assessment of the
effluent reduction attainable by this technology without chemical
optimization.   Because   of   the   unique   physical   problems
encountered  in  Alaska,  discussed in previous Sections, the new
source performance standards are based on screening  systems  for
the  remote  and non-remote Alaskan crab and shrimp subcategories
rather than on a higher level of technology.


                                  337

-------
                            Table  119
                                                       New Source Performance Standards
  A
  B
  C
  D

  E
  F
CO LI
CO *•*
00

  I


  J
  K
  L

  M
  N
Subcategory
Farm-Raised Catfish
Conventional Blue Crab
Mechanized Blue Crab
Non-Remote Alaskan
Crab Meat
Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
Non-Remote Alaskan Whole
Crab and Crab Sections
Remote Alaskan Whole
Crab and Crab Sections
Dungeness + Tanner Crab
in the Contiguous States
Non-Remote Alaskan
Shrimp
Remote Alaskan Shrimp
Northern Shrimp
Southern Non-Breaded
Shrimp
Breaded Shrimp
Tuna
Technology
Basis
S, GT, AL
S, GT, AL
S, GT, AL, IP
S, GT, IP
S, GT, IP
S, GT, IP
S, GT, IP
S, DAF, IP
S, IP
S, IP
S, DAF, IP
S, DAF, IP
S, DAF, IP
S, DAF, IP
Parameter

Max 30-day
Average
2.3
0.15
2.5
-
-
4.1
-
62
25
40
8.1
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs liveweight processed)
BOD
Daily
Max
4.6
0.30
5.0
-
-
10
• -
155
63
100
20

Max 30-day
Average
5.7
0.45
6.3
5.3
5.3
3.3
3.3
0.69
180
180
15
10
22
3.0
TSS
Daily
Max
11
0.90
13
16
16
9.9
9.9
1.7
270
270
38
25
55
7.5

Max 30-day
Average
0.45
0.065
1.3
0.52
0.52
0.36
0.36
0.10
15
15
5.7
1.6
1.5
0.76
O+G
Daily
Max
0.90
0.13
2.6
1.6
1.6
1.1
1.1
0.25
45
45
14
4.0
3.8
1.9
     S = screen;  GT = siirple grease trap;
     DAF = dissolved air flotation
                                                    Al = aerated lagoon;  IP = in-plant change;

-------
The new source performance standards are presented in Table 119.

Pretreatment

No constituents of the effluents discharged  from  plants  within
the  farm-raised  catfish,  crab, shrimp and tuna industries have
been found which would  (in concentrations found in the  effluent)
interfere   with,   pass   through   (to  the  detriment  of  the
environment) or otherwise be incompatible  with  a  well-designed
and  operated publicly owned activated sludge or trickling filter
waste water treatment plant.  The effluent, however, should  have
passed through the equivalent of "primary treatment" in the plant
to  remove  settleable  solids and a large portion of the greases
and oils.  Furthermore, in a few cases, it should have been mixed
with sufficient wastewater flows from other sources to dilute out
the inhibitory effect of any sodium chloride concentrations which
may have been released from the seafood  processing  plant.   The
concentration  of pollutants acceptable to the treatment plant is
dependent on the relative sizes of the treatment facility and the
processing  plant  and  must  be  established  by  the  treatment
facility.
                                    339

-------

-------
                           SECTION XII
                        Acknowledgements


The  Environmental  Protection  Agency  wishes to acknowledge the
contribution to this project by Environmental  Associates,  Inc.,
Corvallis,  Oregon.   The  work  at  Environmental Associates was
performed under the  direction  of  Michael  Soderquist,  Project
Manager,  assisted by Michael Swayne, Electrical Engineer.  Other
contributing  Environmental  Associates  staff  members  included
Edward  Casne,  Chemical  Engineer,  Bruce  Montgomery, Fisheries
Scientist,  William  Hess,  Chemist,  David  Nelson,   Biologist,
William   Parks,  Fisheries  Scientist,  Joan  Knowles,  Chemist,
Margaret  Lindsay,  Nurtirionist,  Charles  Phillips,  Electrical
Engineer,   James   Reiman,   Food   Scientist,  William  Stuart,
Metallurgical Engineer, Joan Randolph, Leith Robertson, Lily  To,
and John Gorman.

Appreciation   is   expressed   to  those  in  the  Environmental
Protection Agency who assisted in the performance of the project:
K.A. Dostal, OR&D, NERC, Corvallis; Brad Nicolajsen,  Region  IV,
Robert  Hiller, Region VI; Allen Cywin, Ernst P. Hall, and George
R. Webster, Effluent  Guidelines  Division;  Ray  McDevitt,  OGC,
Headquarters  and  many  others  in  the EPA regional offices and
research  centers  who  assisted  in  providing  information  and
assistance  to the project.  Special appreciation is expressed to
Jane Mitchell, Barbara Wortman, Karen Thompson, and others on the
Effluent Guidelines Division secretarial staff who contributed to
the completion of the project.

Acknowledgement is made  of  contributions  .by  consultants  Dale
Carlson, George Pigott, and Wayne Bough.

In  addition,  the advice of many experts in industry, government
and academia was solicited.  Major contributors  from  government
included  Jeff  Collins  and Richard Tenney of the Kodiak Fishery
Products  Technology  Laboratory,   National   Marine   Fisheries
Service;  Bobby  J.  wood  and  Melvin  Waters  of the Pascagoula
Laboratory of the National Marine  Fisheries  Service  and  David
Dressel of the Washington Office of the National Marine Fisheries
Service.

University  personnel  who were consulted on the project included
Michael Paparella, University of  Maryland;  Roy  Carawan,  Frank
Thomas, and Ted Miller of North Carolina State University; Arthur
Novak, Samuel Meyers, and M.R. Rao of Louisiana State University;
and  Ole  Jocob Johansen of the University of Washington; Kenneth
Hilderbrand and William  Davidson  of  Oregon  State  University;
Gerald  Rohlich  of  the University of Texas; and Thomas Boggess,
and J.R. Russell of the University of Georgia.
                                341

-------
Industry representatives who made  significant  contributions  to
this  study  included  A.J.   Szabo  and Frank Mauldin of Dominque
Szabo and Associates, Inc.  Of particular assistance in the study
were Roger DeCamp,  Walter  Yonker,  and  Walter  Mercer  of  the
National  Canners  Association,  Charles  Perkins  of the Pacific
Fisheries Technologists; and Charles Jensen of the Kodiak Seafood
Processors Association.  Other industrial  representatives  whose
inputs  to  the project were strongly felt included Roy Martin of
the National Fisheries Institute; Ken Robinson and Vic Blearo  of
the  American  Shrimp  Canners Association; Everett Tolley of the
Shellfish Institute of  North  America;  Jim  Barr  of  the  Tuna
Research   Foundation;  Richard  True  of  the  American  Catfish
Marketing Association;  Porter  Briggs  of  the  Catfish  Farmers
Association;  and  Robert  Prier  of  the  Chesapeake Bay Seafood
Industries Association.

Of particular value was the advice provided by Ed Pohl,  Research
Director,  U.S.  Army  Corps  of  Engineers, Alaska District, and
Leroy Reid, Senior  Sanitary  Engineer,  Arctic  Health  Research
Laboatory.

Several  Canadian  experts  were  also consulted on the study and
their cooperation is  greatfully  acknowledged.   These  included
Fred  Claggett,  Martin  Riddle,  and Kim Shikazi of the Canadian
Environmental Protection Service.

It goes without saying that the most valued contributions of  all
in  this  endeavor  came from the cooperating industrial concerns
themselves.   Although  listing  all  of  their  names  would  be
prohibitive, their assistance is greatfully acknowledged.
                                  342

-------
                          SECTION XIII

                           REFERENCES

"Operations  Involved in Canning" Commercial Canning of Fisheries
Products,  Research  Report  No^  T_J.  Fisheries  Leaflet  No^  79
Washington :"~Fish S~~Wildlife Service, USDI, 1944

Commericial Fisheries Review, 12:9, 12, 1950.

"Fish    Baits:   Their   Collection,   Care,   Preparation   and
Propagation."  Fishery  Leaflet  No,.,  28.   Washington:,  Fish   &
Wildlife Service^ USDI, 1950.

"Fish  Oil  in  Sprays  for  Citrus  Trees." Commercial Fisheries
Reviews, 18:3, 9, 1956

"Fish Roe  and  Caviar".   Report  No...  7.   Washington:  Fish  &
Wildlife Service, USDI, 1956.

"Commercial  Uses for Menhaden Oil." Commercial Fisher j eg Review,
19:4a, 1957

"How About the New Marine Oils." Fishery Leaflet 528. Washington:
Fish & Wildlife Service, USDI, 1957.

"Improved Fish Glue."  Trade_News, 12:5 1959

"Menhaden Industry -  Past  and  Present."  Commercial  Fisheries
Review, 21:2a, 1959.                        ~"

"Visceral Meal." Trade News, 12:12, 1959.

"Fish Flour is Primarily A Protein Concentrate - Not A Substitute
For Grain Flour."  Commercial^ Fisheries^ Review, 22:6, 1960.

"Report  of  the  International Conference on Fish  in Nutrition."
FOA Fisheries Report No^ J..  Washington, D.C. , 1961.

"The U.S. Tuna Industry."  Good Packaging, 24:7 1963.

"Fishmeal Plant Development."  World Fishing, 13:51 1969.

"Increased Use of Fish Meal in South Seas: Layers,  Pet  Food  Use
Adds to Consumption." Feeds tuffs, 36:1, 63-64 1964

    £i  22  Waste Disposal in Pacjo Pago Harbor^ Tutuila, American
        San Francisco: Kennedy Engineers, 1964.
"Salmon Waste Utilization." Commercial Fisheries __ Review,  26:10,
13 1964

Atlas-Stord __ Package __ Meal_Plants Bergen: Stord Barty Industries,
1965.
                                  343

-------
"Salmon  Caviar  Industry  Developing  in  Alaska. "    Commercial
Fisheries Review^ 27; 21 JL965...                              "~

"Marine  Protein  Concentrate. "  Fishery^Leaflet^584. Washington:
Fish & Wildlife Service, USDI, 1966.

Packaged __ Fish _ Meal ___ ^ Plants .   Esbjerg:   Chemical   Research
Organization 1966.

"Canned  Fishery  Product."  C^^S.. __ No_.._^42 4JJ . Washington: Fish  &
Wildlife Service, USDI 1968.

"Fish Paste Product, Japanese Patent 15-779-68." Food Science and
           Abstracts,  1:1, 104  (No. 1-R-19) . 1968         "~
MsL§ter £i§S£ for Fisheries: Cultural Catfish Fishery.   Region   4
Catfish  Committee,  Bureau  of  Commercial Fisheries, Ann Arbor:
Fish & Wildlife Service, USDI, 1968.  Preservation and Processing
of Fish and Shellfish - Quarterly Progress Report.  Technological
Fisheries, USDI, 1968.

"Reverse Osmosis Units Dewater Solution."   Chemical __ Engineering ,
75:2, 115-116 1968

h Surve_Y of Waste Disposal Methods for the Fish Processing Plants
on the Oregon Coast.  Portland, Oregon: State Sanitary Authority,
1969.

ABCOP Membrane Ultrafiltration. Cambridge: Abcor, Inc. , 1969

"Computer  Projects  73%  Frozen  Food  Poundage Rise During  Next
Decade.  QuiQkFrozen Foods, 31:11, 45-46 1969

"Fish Protein Joins War on  Hunger."   Chemical _ Week,  104:61-63
1969

"Fish Protein Plant in Canada." Food Manufacture, 44:8, 53 1969

"Fish Protein Plant in Canada." Food Manufacture, 44:8, 53 1969

"Freezes  Catfish with Liquid Nitrogen." Food Engineering, 41:12,
66-67
Industrial Fishery Products, J.^6^  Annual  Summary^   C.F. S.   No.
4950.  Washington: Fish & Wildlife Service, USDI  1969

Marine  Sardine  Waste Survey^ Research Report  2-69.., Washington,
2i^ix Washington Research Laboratory^. National  Association,  ^969

"Osmosis is Key to Whey-out Unit".  Chemical __ Engineering,   75:5,
20.  1969

"Protein  Recovery  from  Fish  Filleting  Wastewaters. "  Effluent
Water Treatment Journal, 9:46-47 1969.
                                    344

-------
         - Complete self -Contained Fish  Meal  Pi ants .   Bulletin
674, Los Angeles: Standard Stell Corporation, 1969

"Station  Experiments  with  Catfish  By-products."   Feedstuff s,
41:19, 1969.

"Turning Wastes Into Feed." Chemical Week. 107:24, 1970.

A Program of Research for _ the __ Catfish _ Farming __ Industry.   Ann
Arbor:  Bureau  of Commercial Fisheries, Fish & Wildlife Service,
USDI, 1970.

Economic Aspects of Solid Waste Disposal at_Sea .  R eport  No.  PB .
195-22^.  Virginia:  National Technical Information Service, U.S.
Department of Commerce. 1970

Evaluation of an Experimental Figh Reduction  Process  Applicable
to  Small  Fisheries.  Final Report^ Technical Assistance Project
No,. JJ9-6- £9 OJ2J3 .  Washington: Economic Development Administration.
Bureau of Commercial  Fisheries,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,
1970.

"Extracts  Crabmeat  Automatically."  Food Engineering, 42:2, 36,
1970.

"FPC Plant Becomes Canadian Property". Qce angl gqy I n.t er pat i onal  ,
2:1, 13, 1970.

Fisheries  of_ the, JJnited _ States.  .  . .1969. c,F.S., Np^ J5300 .
Washington: Bureau  of  Commercial  Fisheries,  Fish  &  Wildlife
Service,   USDI,  1970.   Micro  Straining  and  Disinfection  of
Combined Sewer Overflow^ Program JLU 023 JEUOX Contract $lit-12-_1 367
Washington! FWQU USDlT 1970.

"$5 Million contract Awarded  for  construction  of  FPC  Plant."
Ocean Industry , 5:1, 16, 1970.

"Process for Waste Water Developed by Danish Firm." FisBoat - New
Orleans _______ , 15:11, 25,32, 1970.

"Shrimp   Factory   Waste   Reduced   to   Meal."  Fishing^ News
Internation al. 9:10, 34-36, 1970.

"Tuna and Tuna-like Fish Received by California Canneries, 1969."
Western Packing News Service, 65:9 5, 1970.

"Turning  Waste  Into  Feed."  Chemical   Week,   107:24.   1970.
Canned Fishery Products  -  1969. __ C.F.S.  No.  5254. Washington:
National Marine Fisheries Service, USDC, 1971. "~

       Fishery Products - 1970.,  C.F.S.  No^  5560.   Washington:
National Marine Fisheries Service, USDC,  1971.
                                  345

-------
"Frozen  Fish  Value  up  14%;  Hits  $1.5 Billion in  1970." Suck
Frozen Foods . 34:86-89, 1971.

Industrial  Fisher Y  Products   -   1970.    C. F._S A    No,.,   5561.
Washington: National Marine Fisheries USDC, 1971.

"OSU  Mechanizing  the  Crab  Industry." Corvallis Gazette Times,
1971.

Packaged Fishery Products - 1969. C.F..SJ. _ Nor __ 5556.   Washington:
National Marine Fisheries Service USDC,  1971.

Packaged ^Fishery __ ^Products _ -1960. C.F.S. No^ 5562.  Washington:
National Marine Fisheries Service USDC,  1971.

Pollution Abatement, and  By-Product  Recovery.  In  Shellfish   and
Fisheries  Processing.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Project
No.  12130FJQ, Chemical and Research Laboratories, 1971.
Prggggsed FisherY^PrgductsA_Annual Summary _ - __ .1.96> 9 .  C^F^S^ _Noi
5723.   U.S.  Department  of  Commerce, National Marine Fisheries
Burbank, N. C. , Jumagai, J.S., "A Study of  a  Pineapple  Cannery
Waste. "  Proceedings  of  the  20th  Industrial Waste Conference.
Lafayette: Purdue University, 1965.  p. 365 "(1965) .


Burrows, R. E. and Karrick, N.L.,  "A  Biological   Assay  of   the
Nutritional  Value  of  Certain  Salmon  Cannery Waste Products".
HJjili-zation 9.H ^i^SlS,3£ SSIffifiQ Cannery Waste^  Special  Scientific
          Fisheries  No,..  109.   Washington:  Fish  and  Wildlife
                  ~
Service, U.S. D.I. ,1953   pp.  49-65.

Butler, C. and  Miyauchi, D. ,  1953.  "The Preparation  of  vitamin
Oils  from Salmon Cannery Offal by the Alkali Digestion Process".
Utilization of Alaskan Salmon  Cannery Waste..   Special Scienctic
Report No. JK)9.t Washington:  Fish and Wildlife Service.  U. S.D.I.,
1953.

Buzzel,  J.  C.,  Jr., Caron,  A.L.J., Rykman, S.J.,  Sproul,  O.J.,
"Biological Treatment of Protein Water From Manufacture of  Potato
Starch — Part I and II."  Water and Sewage Works,  1964.

Calson, C. J. , "Preparation  of  Smoked  Salmon   Caviar   Spread".
Commercial Fisheries Review^  27:21. 1955

Camin,  K.  Q. ,   .   "Cost of  Waste Treatment in  the Meat Packing
Industry . "  Proceedings of the 2 5th Industrial Waste  Conference.
Purdue   University,  Engineering  Extension  Series^  Part  One,
Lafayette: Purdue University,  1970.
Camin, K. Q. ,  .  "Cost of Clean Water" Vol^  IIIX  Industrial  Waste
Profile No.  8.. Meat Products FWPCA,  1968.
                                  346

-------
Camn, W. L., 1969.  Waste  Treatment  and  Control  at  Live  Oak
Poultry.  Processing  Plant.  Raleigh: North Carolina State Univ.,
18th Southern Water Resource And  Pollution  Control  Conference,
1969.

Carawan, R. , Personal Communication, 1973.

Carbine, W. F. , Personal Communication, 1969.

Carlson,  C., Knudson M. , and Shanks, H. , Personal Communication,
1969.

Carlson, D. A. , .  Summaryj.  Food Wastes Research — Where Do We Go
From Here?   Proceedings,  Third  National  Symposium  Corvallis:
NERC, EPA, 3rd National Symposium on Food Processing Waste, 1972.

Carlson, D. A. , .  Personal Communication, 1973

Carlson,  D.  A.,   Guttormsen,  K.   "Current Practice in Potato
Processing Waste Treatment," E.P.A. DAST-14, 1969.

Carpenter, G. A.,  Olley, J.  Preservation of Fish and Fish Offal
f°£ Oil and Meal  Manufacture.   Terry  Technical  Pager  No,  2..
Aberdeen:  Great  Britain Department of Scientific and Industrial
Research, 1960.

Caudill, H. ,  Application of the Anaerobic  Trickling  Filter  to
                  and  Potato  Wastes^   Seattle:  University  of
Washington, 1968.

Chu,   Total Utilization of Hake Merluccius pr oductgs ,  1971

Chittenden, J. A., Wells, W.J., "Rotating Biological  Contractors
Following  Anaerobic  Lagoons."  Journal Water Pollution Control,
Federation Volume 43^. No^ 5t.

Chu, C., Pigott, G.M. , A Process for Total Utilization  of Fish by_
Agueous  Extraction.   Chicago:  Winter  Meeting  of  the   Amer.
Socieity of Agricultural Engineers, 1960.

Chun,  M.  J. ,  et_ al^,,    "A  Characterization of Tuna Packing
Waste".  Water and Sewage Works. 117:10, 3-10, 1970.

Claggett, F. G,,   A Proposed Demonstration  Plant  for Treating.
£ish  Processing  Plant  wastewater.   Technical  Report No_._ JJ97.
Fisheries Research Board, Canada,  1970.

Claggett,  F.  G. ,    Clarification  of  Fish  Processing   Plant
       ii5.  by_  Chemical  Treatment  and Air Flotation.  Technical
       No^ 34 3 .  Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1972.
Claggett, F, G.,   Clarification of Waste Water Other Than  Stick
Water from British Columbia Fishing Plants.  Technical Report 14.
Vancouver: Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1967.
                                  347

-------
Claggett,  F.  G.,  "Demonstration  Wastewater  Treatment  Unit."
Interim Report 1971 Salmon Season.  Fisheries Research  Board  of
CanadaT 1971

Claggett, F. G., Secondary Treatment of Salmon Canning Wastewater
£y.  Rotating  Biological  Contractor  (RBC).  Technical Report No.
366.  Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1973.

Claggett,   F.   G.,   Wong,   J.   Salmon   Canning   Wastewater
Clarification.   Part !•.  Flotation by. Total Flow Pressurizatign^
Circular No. 3,8.  Vancouver: Fisheries Research Board of  Canada,
1968

Claggett,   F.   G.,   Wong,   J.   Salmon   Canning   Wastewater
Clarification.   Part  I  and  11^  Salmon   Canning   Wastewater
Clarification?    Part   I  and  II,  Circular  No.  33  and  U2^
Vancouver:  Fisheries  Research  Board   of   Canada^   Vancouver
Laboratory^ 1968.
Claggett,   F.
Clarification.
                 G.,    Wong,   J.  Salmon  Canning
                Part III,.  A Comparison of  Various
Wajjte  Water
Arrangements
for  Flotation and Some Observations Concerning Sedimentation and
Herring Pump Water Clarification.  Circular  No.  42.  Vancouver:
Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1969.

Claggett, F. G., A Proposed Demonstration Plant for Treating Fish
Processing Plant Waste Water Technical Report No... 197. Vancouver
Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1970.
Claggett,  F.
               G. ,  Demonstration  Waste  Water  Treatment  Unit.
                1971  Salmon  Season  Technical  Report  No^  286
Vancour: Fisheries Research  Board of Canada, 1971.

Claggett, F. G. , Personal Communication, 1973.

Clark, Sidney E. , et al. , June, Biological Waste Treatment in the
Far  North. Department of Interior Prelect No^ 1610.  Washington:
Federal Water Quality Administration, USDI, 1970.

Clark and  Groff  Engineers,  Evaluation  of  Seafood  Processing
Plants in South Central Alaska.  Contract No_..  ED-EDA-2.  Juneau:
Branch  of  Environmental  Health,  Division  of  Public  Health,
Department of Health and Welfare, State of Alaska,  1967.

Clemens, H. B. , Status of the Fishery for Tunas of  the  Temperate
W-ltejJz  of  the  Eastern North Pacific.  Circular 6_5  Washington:
Bureau  of  Commercial  Fisheries,  Fish  and  Wildlife  Service.
U. S.D.I., 1959.

Collins,  J. , Tentative Oil and Grease Analysis for Fishing Waste
Effluents.  Unpublished technical report (No.  102) ,"~1973.

Collins, J. , Personal Communication, 1973.
                                   348

-------
Combs, G. F. , "The Role of Fish for Animal  Feeding.   Paper  No.
  R/l . 5 . "    ESE2££   2£   £225   and   Agriculture  Organization
International Conference on Fish in Nutrition^ Washington,  1971.

Cooke, N. E. ,  Carter, N.M. "Is Our  Fish  Waste  Being  Explored
 Fully?"   Progress  Report  of  Pagific  Coast Station^  NoA 71L
Vancouver: Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1947.

Graver, J. H. and King, F.J.  "Fish  Scrap  Offers  High  Quality
Protein".  Fo£d_Ejjqj.neerirvg, 43:75-76, 1971.

Crawford, D. , Personal Communication, 1973.

Crawford, D. L. , Personal Communication, 1969.

 Crawford,  D. L. , Babbitt, J.K. Law, D.K.  Utilization of  Fillet
Waste from Demersal Species of Food Fish.  Nutritional Up-Grading
of Fillet  Plant  Waste  with  Deponing  and  Skinning  Machines.
Astoriba:  O.S.U.   Science  and Technology, Seafoods Laboratory.
Sea Grant Project No. 013, 1971.

Cronan,  C.  S.,  "Claim  Shells  Kill   Waste   Acid.   Chemical
Engineering 67:12, 78, 1960.

Cyrus,  Wm. , Projected Wastewater Treatment Costs in the Organic
Chemical Industry.  E.P.A. 12020, 1971.

Czapik, A. , "Fauna of the Experimental Sewage Works  in  Krakow".
      Hvdrobiolj, 3:63-67, 1961.
Dassow,  J.  A.,  "The  Crab  and  Lobster Fisheries." Industrial
Fishery. Technology.  New York: Reinhold  Publishing  Corporation,
1963.

Dassow,  J.  A.,  "The  Halibut  Fisheries."  Industrial  Fishery
Technology New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1963.

Davis, H. C., "Disposal of Liquid Waste from Fish Canneries, from
the Viewpoint of the Fishing Industry".   Sewage  Works  Journal ,
17:514-515, 1944.

deSollano,  C. D. , .  "Mexican Firm Introduces Shipboard Fishmeal
Plant".  The Fishing Gazette and Sea Angler, 150:6, 63-64,  1967.

Dewberry, E. B. ,  "How  Shrimps  are  Canned  at  a  New  Orleans
Factory".  Food Manufacture. 39:7, 35-39, 1964.

Dewberry,  E. B. , "Tuna Canning in the United States." Food Trade
Review, 39:1, 37-39, 1969.

Deyoe, C. W. , Personal Communication, 1969.

Dostal, K. A.,  Secondary Treatment of Potato Processing
E.P.A. 12060, 1969
                                     349

-------
Drangsholt,  C. ,    "Proceeds  and  Apparatus  for the Continuous
Treatment of Waste  Waters  from  the  Extraction  of  Oils  from
Herrings or Whales." Chim._et_Industr.  60:574, 1948.

Dresoti,  G. M. ,   "Fish Solids from Factory Effluents".  Fishing
News International , 6:11, 53-54, 1967.                         ~"

Duggan, J. R. , Personal Communication, 1973.

Dyer, J. A., Personal Communication, 1967.

Eckenf elder, W. W. ,  Water  Quality  Engineering  for  Practicing
Engineers.  New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 1970.

Edwards,  L.  E. , "Fishery Resources of the North Atlantic Area".
Thg Future of the Fishing Industry of  the  United  ,§tates._   New
SerieSjt Volume IV. Seattle: University of Washington, 1968.

Ehlert,  H.  M. , Treating Oil-Containing Animal Material, Such as
Fish and Fish Offal .  U. S. Patent No. 3-041-174, 1962

Emerson, D. B. , Nemerow, N. L. , "High Solids, Biological Aeration
of Unneutralized, Unsettled Tannery Wastes." Proceedings  of  the
2Jith  Industrial  Waste Conference^ Lafayette: Purdue University,
Engineering Extension Series, Part Two, 1969.

Technical Proposal .  Effluent  Guidelines — Canned  and  Preserved
Z±sh  and  Seafood  Processing Industry. Corvallis: Environmental
Associates, Inc., 1973.

Eyck, R. , Ten, N. , Magnussion, H.W. , and Bjork, J.E., "  A  Brief
Study  of the Alkali Process for Recovery of Oil from Pink Salmon
Cannery Waste.  Technical Note  No.  14".   Commercial  Fisheries
Review, 13:11, 39-43, 1951.
Fair,  G.  M. , Geyer, J. , Element of Water Su^EiY and Waste Water
Disposal. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1958

Finch, R., "The Tuna Industry".  Industrial  Fishery  Technology.
New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1963.

Finsberg,  H. ,   Johanson,  A.G.,  Industrial  yse  of Fish Oils^
Circular 278.  Washington: Bureau of Commercial  Fisheries,  Fish
and Wildlife Service.  U. S.D.I., 1967.

Fladmark, M. , "Manufacture of Oil and Food Products from Herring,
Whales,  and  other Sea Animals.  United States Patent No. 2-590-
303". Chemical Abstracts, 46jj5.855cx 1952.

Foess, J. , Industrial and Domestic Waste Testing Program for  the
City  of  Bellingham  ^unpublished^ .   Seattle: Cornell, Rowland,
Hayes and Merryfield, Inc., 1969.
                                    350

-------
Freeman, H. C., Hoogland,  P.L.,  "Acid  Ensilage  from  Cod  and
Haddock  Offal".  Progress Report of the Atlantic Coast Stations^
No. 65. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1956.

Gaffney, P.  E.,  Heukelekian,  H.,  "Oxygen  Demand  Measurement
Errors  in Pure Organic Compounds, Nitrification Studies." Sewage
and Industrial Wastes^ No. 15^, 1958.

Gallagher, F.  S.,  "Fish  Meal  Fertilizer  Wastes."  Industrial
Wastes, 4:5, 87-88, 1959.

Gilbert, W. S., Personal Communication, 1969.

Grau, C. R., Ousterhout, L.E., Lundholm, B.C., and Karrick, N.L.,
"Progress  on  Investigation  of  Nutritional.  Value of Fishmeal
Protein". Commercial Fisheries! Review, 1959.

Green, J. H., Schisler, L.C., New Methods Under Investigation for
the Utilization of Fish Solubles,  a  Fishery  By-PrgductT  as  a
Means  of  PoJLlution  Abatement.  Abstract to be submitted to the
Committee for the fourth National Symposium  on  Food  Processing
Wastes.  Syracuse, New York, March, 1973.

Greenfield,  J.E.,  Some  Economic Characteristics of Pond-Raised
Catfish Enter prise s^.  Working paper No. 2,3.  Ann Arbor:  Division
of  Economic  Research, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, U.S.D.I.,
1969.

Griffen, A.E., "Treatment with Chlorine  of  Industrial  Wastes".
ES2iHSS£iB3 SSStOSi E££2£.Qi 63:74-80, 1950.
Grizzell,  R.A.,  Jr.,  Sullivan,  E.G.  and  Dillion, O.W., Jr.,
£.S3=JLi§j5 Z^J-ffliuSl  A.D AcfriculturaJL Enterprise.  Soil  Conservation
Service, U.sTD.A., 19687

Groninger,  H. S., Jr., "Better Utilization of Fisheries Products
Through Improved  and  New  Handling  and  Processing  Concepts".
Journal of Milk and Food Technology, 35:8, 479-481,  1972.

Gruger,  E. H., Jr.,   "Methods of Separation of Fatty Acids from
Fish Oils with Emphasis  on  Industrial  Applications".   Fishery
Industrial Research, 2:1, 31-40, 1960.

Gunther,  J.  K.,  L.  Sair,    "Process  for Treating Fish Press
Water.  U. S. Patent No. 2-454-315". Chemical Abstracts, 43:2342,
1947.

Guttman, A., Vandenheuvel, F.A. , "The Production of Edible  Fish
 Protein from Cod and Haddock."  Progress Reports of the Atlantic
Coast Stationsx No.. 67. Saint Andrews, 1957.

Hag, S. A., Siddiqui, I.H.,  Khan,  A.H.,  "Studies  on  Blanched
Water - A Waste Product of the Shrimp Canning Industry." Pakistan
                                 351

-------
Journal  of  Scientific  and  Industrial Research, 12:1/2, 49-51,
1969.

Hammonds and Call, L. Utilization of Protein Ingredients  in  the
SiS-s.  Food  Industry, Part 11^  Ithaca: Cornell University, 1970.
University, 1970.

Hannewijk, J., Use of Fish  Oils  in  Margarine  and  ShorteningA
Circular  279.  Washingtion: Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Fish
and Wildlife Service, U.S.D.I., 1967.

Hansen,P.,  "Ensilage  of  Fish  and  Fish  Offal".   FAQ   World
Fisheries Abstracts, Jan/Feb 1960, 1959.

Harrison,  R.W.,  Anderson,  A.W.,  Holmes,  A.D.,  Pigott,  G.M.
Vitamin Content of Oils from Cannery Trimmings of Salmon f.ro_m the
Columbia River and Puget Sound Regions.   Inyestigational  Report
No^  36.  Washington:  Bureau  of  Fisheries, U.S.  Department of
Commerce, 1937.

Hart, J.  L.,  Marshall,  H.B.,  Beall,  D.  The  Extent  of  the
Pollution   Caused   by.  Pilchard  Reduction  Plants  in  British
Columbia.  Bulletin 39.  Ottawa: The Biological Board of  Canada,
1938.

Hartsock,   F.   B.,   Peterson,  P.  L.  Crab  Live-Tanking  and
Suggestions for Improved Methods with Special Reference to Tanner
CrgbSj.  Technical Report No. 9.6.  Alaska: N.M.F.S.  Technological
Laboratory, 1971.

Heaton,  E.  L.,  Boggess,  T.S.  Jr., Hill, T.K. and Worthington
R.E., Dressing Percentage  and  Waste  from  Albino  and  Regular
CJlilB.!!8.!  Catfish  Raised  in  Cages.   Unpublished data.  Georgia
Experiment Station, Experiment Georgia, 1972.

Heaton, E.K., Boggess, T.S.,Jr., Hill, T.K. and Worthington, R.E.
Quality Comparison of Albino and Regular JGrayl  Channel  Catfish
of Varying Size.  1973.

Heaton, E.K., Boggess, T.S., Jr., and Landes.  "Some Observations
of  Tank  Cultured Channel catfish".  Proceedings of Confernce of
High Density Fish Culture. 1970

Heukelekian,J., Gellman,!.  "Studies of Biochemical Oxidation  by
Direct  Methods, 11.  Effects of Certain Environmental Factors on
Biochemical Oxidation of Wastes."  Sewage and Industrial  Wastes,
1951.

Hovions,  J.C.,  Fisher, J.A., Conway, R.A., "Anaerobic Treatment
of Synthetic Organic Wastes." E.P.A. 12020 DIS,  1972.

Holt,  S.  J.,"The  Food  Resources  of  the  Ocean".  Scientific
American, 221:3, 178-179, 1969.
                                    352

-------
Hopkins, E.S., Einarsson, J.  "Water Supply and Waste Disposal at
a  Food  Processing  Plant".  Industrial Water and Wastes, 6:152-
154, 1961

Idler, D. R., Schmidt, P.J, "A  Soluble  Fertilizer  from  Shrimp
Waste".  Progress  Report  of  the  Pacific  coast  Station  103.
Vancouver: Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 1955.

Idyll, C.P., "The Shrimp Fishery". Industrial Fishery. Technology*
New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York, 1963.

Pollution Abatement  Studj£  for  the  Tuna  Research  Foundation,
Inc._Jacobs Engineering Co., 1971.

£!§.££  Flotation  Tests  for  Waste Treatment Program for the Van
Camp Seafood CoA Jacobs Engineering Co., 1972.

Jaegers, K., Haschke, J., "Waste Waters from the Fish  Processing
Industry".  Wasserw.._Wass._.^Techn^, 6:311, 1957.

Jensen,  C.  L»,    "Industrial Wastes from Seafood Plants in the
State of Alaska".  P£oceedinc[sx 20th Industrial Waste Conference.
Lafayette: Purdue Univeristy Engineering  Extension  Series,  No.
118, 1965.

Jones, E. D., Personal Communication. 1958

Jones,  G.I., Carrigan, E.J., Dascow, J.A. "Utilization of Salmon
Eggs  for  Production  of  Cholestrol,   Lipids   and   Protein".
Commercial Fisheries Review, 1950.  8-14.

Jones,  G.I.,  and Carrigan, E.J., "Possibility of Development of
New Products  from  Salmon  Cannery  Waste:  Literature  Survey".
Utilization  oj:  Alaskan Salmon Cannery Wastef Special Scientific
Reggrt,;  Fisheries No.  109  .   Washington:  Fish  and  Wildlife
service. "u.sTo.I. 1953.

Jones,  W. G. The Use of Fish in Pet Foods^  Fishery Leaflet J501.
Washington: Bureau of Commercial  Fisheries,  Fish  and  Wildlife
Service.  U.S.D.I. Washington, 1960.

Jones,  W.  G.,  Market  Prospects  for  Farm Catfish Production.^
Athens:  the Commercial Fish Farming  Conference,  University  of
Georgia, 1969.

Jordan, G., "Fish Meal Factories and Their Waste Waters".  Kleine
Mitt. Ver. Wasser, Boden-u. Lufthyg. 13:308.
Jordan,  R.M.   Personal  Communication,  Unversity  of Colorado,
Boulder, Colorado, 1973.

Jorgensen, G. "Trials with Redfish  (Sebastes	njarinus)  for  Young
Mink".  World Fisheries Abstracts, 15:Jan-March, 41-42, 1964.
                                353

-------
Jorgensen,  S.E.   "Ion Exchange of Wastewater from the Foodstuff
Industry.  pollution Abstracts, 2:2, 163 (No.  71-2TF-0274) .

June,  F.  C. ,  "The  Menhaden   Fishery".    Industrial   Fishery
Technology.  New York: Feinhold Publishing Corporation, 1963.

Kamasastri,   P.V.   and   Prabho,  "Preparation  of  Chitin  and
Glucosamine  from  Prawn  Shell  Waste."  Journal  of  Scientific
Industrial Research (India), 1961.

Karrick,  N.L.,  Nutritional  Value  of Fish Oils as Animal FeecU
Circular 28J.  Washington: Bureau of Commercial  Fisheries,  Fish
and Wildlife Service, U. S.D.I., 1967.

Karrick,  N.  L. , M. A. Edwards, "Vitamin Content of Experimental
Fish Hatchery  Foods".  Utilization  of  Alaskan  Salmon  Alaskan
§Si2J2H  Cannery  WasteA  S2ecia_l Scientific Rej2ortx Fisheries No...
I09_7  Washington: Fish and Wildlife Service, U. S.D.I., 1953.

Karrick, N.L. , Stansby, M.E., "Vitamin  Content  of  Fishery  By-
Products". Commercial Fisheries Review, 16:2, 7-10, 10 54.

Karrick,  N. L. , Clegg, W. and Stansby, M.E., "Vitamin Content of
Fishery By-Products".  Commercial Fisheries, 19: 5a, 14-23, 1954.

Kato, K., Ishikawa, S, "Fish Oil and Protein Recovered from  Fish
Processing Effluent".  Water and Sewacje Works, 116:412-416, 1969.

Kawada,H. ,  Kataya,  K. , Takahashi, T. ,  Kuriyama, H, "Studies on
the Complete Utilization of Whole Fish.  Part  4.   The  Chemical
Composition  of  Some Fish Viscera and the Fish Soluble Feed Made
from Cuttlefish Liver."  Bulletin  of  the  Japanese  Society  of
Scientific Fisheries, 21:7, 503-511, 1955.

Keil,R.,  Randow,F. ,  "Chemical  and  Bacteriological  Results in
Waste Waters of the Rostack Fish Works. " Wasserw. _Wass.^ Techn. ,
12:291-393,  1962.

Kempe,L. L., Lake, N.E., Scherr, R.C. Disposal of F_ish Processing
Wastes.  Ann Arbor: Office of Research Administration, University
of Michigan, 1968.
        of  Waste  Disposal in Pago Pago Harbor. Tutuila: Kennedy
Engineers, Inc., 1972.

Updated Report on Wastewater Disposal, Pago Pago Harbor, Tutuila:
Kennedy Engineers, Inc., 1972.

Khandker, N.A. , "The Composition of Shrimp Meal Made  From   Fresh
and  Spoiled  Shrimp  Heads". Commercial Fisheries Review,  19:5a,
14-23, 1962.
                                   354

-------
King, F.J., Carver, H.J. . and Prewitt, R. , "Machines for Recovery
of Fish Flesh from Bones."  American Fish  Farmer,  2,  11:17-21,
1971.

Knobl,  G.M.,  Jr.,  "World Efforts Toward FPC.  The Fish Protein
Concentrate Story."  Food Technology, 21:1108-1111, 1967.

Knowlton, W. T. , "Effects of Industrial Wastes from Fish Canneries
on Sewage Treatment Plants."  Sewage Works  Journal,   17:514-515,
1945.

Kohler,R. ,  "Das  Flotationsverf ahren  und seine Anwendung in der
Abwassertechnik."  Wasser_luft_und Betrieb. Vol. 13, No. 9,  1969.

Kornberg,  W. ,  "Extraction  Process  Wins  Protein  from  Fish".
Chemical Engineering, 73:4, 98-100, 1966.

Krishnaswamy,  M.  A.,  Kadkol,S.B., Revankar, G.D.  "Nutritional
Evaluation of an Ensiled Product from Fish." Canadian  Journal  of
Biochemistry. 43:1879-1883, 1965.

Kyte, R. M. , "Enzymes as an Aid in Separating Oil from Protein in
Salmon Eggs".  Commercial Fisher ies^Review, 19: 4a, 30-34, 1957.

Kyte,  R.  M. ,   "Potential  By-Products  from  Alaska Fisheries:
Utilization  of  Salmon  Eggs  and  Salmon  Wastes."   Commercial
Fisheries Review, 20:3, 1-5, 1958.

Landgraf, R. G. , Jr., Miyauchi, D.T., Stansby, M.E. , "Utilization
of  Alaska  Salmon Cannery Waste as a Source of Feed for Hatchery
Fish".  Commercial Fisheries^Review, 13:lla, 26-33, 1951.

Landgraf,  R.G.,Jr.  "Alaskan  Pollock:  Proximate  Composition".
Commerc ial Fisheries Revi ew , 15:7, 20-22, 1953.

Langno,  R.  D.   Relationships  of  Shrimp,  Width  and Weight to
Mechanical Sizing...  Studies  in  Marine  Economics.    Report No.
308., 1970.
Lantz,  A.  W. ,    Pii.lization of Freshwater Fisjjx. Trinunings^ and
                 Report of the  Pacific  Coast  Station  No...
Vancouver:  Fisheries  Research Board of Canada,  1948.  B.C., pp.
78-80.

Larsen, B. A., Hawkins, W.W., "The Quality of Fish  Flour,  Liver
Meal and Visceral Meal as Sources of Dietary Protein." Journal of
Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 18:1, 85-91,  1961.

Lassen,  S.,  "The  Sardine,  Mackerel  and  Herring  Fisheries."
Indus-trial Fishery Technology.   New  York:  Reinhold  Publishing
Corporation, 1963

Lassen,  S. ,  "Fish  Solubles".   Fish  as FoodA Volume III.  New
York: Academic Press, 1965.  281-299.
                                   355

-------
Lee, A. W. , "Continuous  Dissolved- Air  Flotation  of  Emulsified
Mineral   Oil.    Thesis,   Illinois  Institute  of  Technology."
Dissertation Abstracts, 30:13, 1727, 1968.

Lee, C. F.  "Chemistry of Menhaden:  Report on Literature Study".
Commercial Fisheries Review, 13:lla, 11-20, 1951.

Lee, C.F. ,   "Report  on  Development  of  Fungicides  from  Fish
Oils".  Commercial Fisheries Review, 20:6, 20, 1958.

Lee,  C.  F.,  "Industrial  Products  Trends.  .  .Developments."
        Gazette  (New York) , 78:13, 130-132, 1961.
Lee, C.F. and Sanford, F. B. , "Handling  and  Packing  of  Frozen
Breaded  Shrimp  and  Individually  Peeled  and Deveined Shrimp."
Commercial Fisheries Review, 25:11, 1-10, 1963.

Leekley, J.  R. ,  Landgraf,  R.G. ,  Bjork,  J.E.,  Hagevig,  W.A.
Salmon  Cannery  Wastes  for Mink Feed.  Fishery Leaflet No... 405.
Washington: Fish and Wildlife Service.  U. S.D.I., 1952.

Leong, K. C., Knoble, G. M. Jr.,  Snyder,  D.G.,  Gruger,  E.  H.
Jr. ,   "Feeding of Fish Oil and Ethyl Ester Fractions of Fish Oil
to Broilers", Poultry Science, 43:1235-1240, 1964.

Lessing,  L. ,  "Assault of the Earth Joins the War on Pollution."
Fortune, 1973.

Limprich, H. ,    Abwasserprobleme  der  Fisghindustrie   (Problems
         from  Waste  Waters  from  the Fish Industry.  IWL- Forum
66/IV, 1966.

Listen, J. , Pigott, G. M. , Limb, G.R., Manickan, B. , "Studies  in
the  Rational  Total  Utilization  of  Fishery  _12£.§  Research in
Fisheries.  Seattle: Univeristy of Washington, 1969.

Longnecker, O. M., Jr.,  "The Place of the Shrimping Industry  in
the United States Fisheries".  The Future of the Fishing Industry
of  the  United  States.,   Publication in Fisheries^ New Stories ,
Volume IVi Seattle: University of Washington, 1968.

Lopez,  J.L.  G. ,  Fish  Meal  Manufacturing  M^cjiises  on  Board
Shrimpers   Ann  Arbor:  Bureau of commercial Fisheries, Fish and
Wildlife Service, U. S.D.I.,  1967.

Lorio, W.J., "Catfish Research at Mississippi State." The Catfish
Farmer , 1973.

Luneburg, H. , "Investigations of Waste Water  from  the  Fishmeal
Industry". Wasser and Abwasser, 1943.

Lyles, C. H. ,  Fisheries of  the United States .. ._ ± 1968.  C. F._s ._
No^  5000.   Washington: Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Fish and
Wildlife Service, U. S.D.I.,  1969.
                                   356

-------
Magasawn, "The Achievement of Waste  Water  Treatment  in  Public
Nuisances Prevention Corporation".  Water and Waste, 10:66, 1968.

Magnusson,  H.  W. and Hagevig, W. H., "Salmon Cannery Trimmings.
Part  I.   Relative  Amounts  of  Separated  Parts".   Commercial
Fisheries Review, 12:9, 9-12, 1950.

Mahoney,  J.  G.,  Rowley,  M.E.,  West,  L.E., "Industrial Waste
Treatment Opportunities for Reverse Osmosis".   Membrane  Science
and  Technology.   Industrial,  Biological  and  Waste  Treatment
Processes."  New York: Plenum Press, 1970.

Majewski, J.,  Liguid  Feed  Concentrate  from  Fishes  and  Fish
Wastes.  Centraine Laboratorium Przemysto Rybnego,  1959.

Malick,   J.   G.,   et_ al_.,   Salmon  Cannery  Waste_..   Study.
Seattle:Fisheries Research Institute, University  of  Washington,
1971.

Marvin,  J.  and  Anderson,  E.E.,  Animal  Food from Clam Waste.
United States Patent No... 3-017-273., 1959.

Mattei,  V.  and  Roddy,  W.T.,  "The  Use  of  Fish   Oils   for
Fatliguoring Leather.  III.  Suitability of Ocean Perch, Herring,
Salmon,  and  Menhaden  Oils  in  Fatliquoring".    Journal of the
American Leather Chemists Association, 54:640-653,  1959.

Matusky, F.E., Lawler, J.P., Quirk,  T.R.,  and  Genetelli,  E.J.
"Preliminary  Process  Design  and  Treatability  Studies of Fish
Processing   Wastes".    Proceedings,   20th   Industrial   Waste
Conference.   Layfayette: Purdue University Engineering Extension
Series, No. 118, 1965.

Mayo,  W.E.,    "Recent  Developments in Flotation  for Industrial
Waste Treatment."  13th Ontario  Industrial  Waste  Treatment,   ,
1966.

Mauldin,  F.,   Personal Communication.  Unpublished data, Canned
Shrimp Industry.  Waste  Treatment  Model  in  Louisana  Sampling
Plant, 1973.

McFall, W.T.,  A Batch Screening Study of Shrimp Processing Waste
and   Tanner   Crab   Ground   Butchering  Waste^   First  Draft.
Environmental Protection Agency, Alaska Operations,. 1971.

McFall, W. T., "Personal Communication. 1971

McGauley, T.C., Peterson, L., Report on a Waste Treatment  System
for.  £he  ProjDoise  Harbour  Fish  Cannery.  Pullman:  Washington
State University, 1971.  Pullman, Washington, 8 pp.

McKee, L.G.,  Planting  and  Marketing  Oysters  j.n the  Pacific
Northwest.   Fishery  Leaflet  52.  Washington: Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S.D.I., 1948.


                                    357

-------
McKee, L.G.,  "The Oyster, Clam, Scallop and Abalone  Fisheries."
Indus-trial  Higher^  Technology..   New  York: Reinhold Publishing
Corporation, 1963.

McNabney, R., Wynne, J., "Ozone The Coming Treatment." Water  and
Waste Engineering. 1971.

Meade,   T.   L.,   "Recent  Advances  in  the  Fish  By-Products
Industry".  CRC Critical Reviews in Food Technology,  2:1,  1-19.
1971

Meinhold,  T.F.,  Thomas,  P.C., "Chitosan - Useful Chemical from
Shrimp Shells".  Chemical Processing, 21:4, 121. 1958

Meiske, J. C., Goodrich, R. D, "Minnesota Reports Results of Beef
Cattle Experiments - Value of Oyster Shells and Alfalfa-Breme Hay
in Finishing Rations for Yearling  Steers".   Feedstuffs,  40:42,
63. 1968

Mendenhall,  M.  A.,  Utilization and Disposal of Crab and Shrimp
Wastes.  Marine Advisory Bulletin No^  2._   Pu^liSSiiSD  i?2i  lj>.
Anchorage, Alaska, 1971.

Metcalf  8  Eddy,  Waste Water Engineering Collection, Treatment^
Disposal.  McGraw-Hill Company, 1972.

Meyer, F., Personal Communication. 1973

Meyers, P., Rutledge, J.E., "Economic  Utlization  of  Crustacean
Meals".  Feedstuffs, 43:43, 16.  1971

Meyers,  S.  P.,  Rutledge, J. E. "Shrimp Meal - A New Look at  an
Old Product".  Feedstuffs, 43, 49:31.  1971

Michaels,A.S., "New Separation Technique for the  CPI."  Chemical
Engineering Progress, 64:12, 31.  1968

Miller, J., Personal Communication.  1973

Miller, J. National Effluent Standards.  San Francisco: ADA Water
Quality Seminiar, E.F.G.C., EPA, 1973.

Mulkey,  L.A., Sargent, T. N., Catfish Processing Waste Lands; and
Hilt6.?. Management.  Unpublished Report.  Athens:  E.P.A. Southeast
Environmental Laboratory,  1972.

Muzzarelli, R.A.A. "Uptake of Nitorsyl 106 - Ruthenium on  Chitin
and  Chitosan from Waste Solutions and Polluted Sea Water." Water
Research,  4:451-455. 1970.

Nachenius, R. J. "Stickwater  Evaporator  Fundamentals."   Fishing
News International, 3:3, 53-54. 1964
                                       358

-------
Nakatani  R.E.,  et  alif  The Effects of Salmon Cannery Waste on
Water Quality, and Marine Qrcjanisms at Petersburg^  Alaska*  1971,.
Seattle: Fisheries Research Institute.  University of Washington,
1971.

National  Marine  Fishery  Service,    Fisheries  of  the  United
States^ 1972^  C^F^S. NOj,  61CK).   Washington:  National  Oceano-
graphic Atmospheric Administration.  U.S. Department of Commerce.
1973

Needier,  A.  B.,   The  Haddock.   Bulletin No^ 25.  Ottawa: The
Biological Board of Canada.  1931

Nelson, D. J., Rains, T. C., Norris, J. A., "High-Purity  Calcium
Carbonate  in  Freshwater  Clam  Shell".  Science, 152:1368-1370.
1966

Nemerow, N. L., "Liquid Waste of Industry^   Theories,  Practices
and Treatment^  Addison - Wesley Publishing Company, 1971

Novak, A.,  Personal Communication. 1973

Nunn,  R.  R.  "Fish Protein Concentrate is on the Rise.  Part 2:
The VioBin Process and How it Works"  Ocean Industry, 4:1, 36-40.
1969

Nunnallee, D., B. Mar, A guantatiye Compilation of Industrial and
£2IDIDS£SiSi W-SSt6.8, is £hg State of Washington.  1967-69  Research.
Project   Study.  3F.   Olympia:  State  Water  Pollution  Control
Commission.  1969

Olden, J.H., "Fish  Flour  for  Human  consumption".   Commercial
Fisheries Review, 22:1, 12-18. 1960

Olden,  J.  H.,  "Good  Prospects  for  Fish Oils as PreFlotation
Agent.  The Fish Boat, 5:5, 45.  1969

Oldfield, J.E., Anglemier, A. F., "Feeding of Crude and  Modified
Menhaden  Oils in Rations for Swine".  Journal^ of Animal Science,
16:4, 917-921.  1957

Olley, J., Ford, J. E.,  Williams, A. P., "Nutirtional  Value  of
Fish  Visceral  Meals"   Journal  of  the  Science  of  Food  and
Agriculture, 19:282-285.  1968        ~~

Ousterhout, L.E., Snyder, D. G., "Effects of  Processing  on  the
Nutritive  Value of Fish Products in Animal Nutrition.  Paper No.
R/IV.l."    ReEOrt   of   Food   and   Agriculture   Organization
International  Conference on Fish in Nutrition.  Washington, 1961
2.18.1-2.18.11.

Paessler, A. H., David, R. V., "Waste Waters From  Menhaden  Fish
 Oil and Meal Processing Plants".   P£2£S®dings x llth Industrial
                                  359

-------
Waste  Conference,  Purdue  University.   Engineering   Extension
Series, No. 91. Layfayette: Purdue Univeristy, 1956

Pallasch, O.,  Behn - und Handbuck der Absassertechnik.  Berlin -
Munchen: Verlag Von Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn.  1960

Paparella, M. W., Personal Communication*  1973

Patterson,  W.  L., Banker, R. F.   Estimating Costs and Manpower
Requirements for Conventional Waste Water  Treatment  Facilities.
EPA 17090 DAN. 1971

Pearson,   B.F.,   Cjun,   M.J.,   Young,   H.H.,  Burbank,  N.C.
"Biological Degradation of Tuna Waste".  Proceedings of the  25th
Industrial   Waste   Conferencef   Part  II.   Lafayette:  Purdue
University, 1970.

Peniston, Q. P., Personal Communication.  1973

Peniston, Q.P., Johnson, E. L., Turrill, C. N.  Hayes, M. E.,   A
New  Process  .for  Recovery  of By-Products from Shellfish Waste.
Lafayette:  Purdue  University,  24th  Annual  Industrial   Waste
Conference, 1969

Perkins, C.f Personal Communication.  1973

Peterson,  P. L., Treatment of Shellfish Processing Wastewater b^
Dissolved Air Flotation.  Seattle: N.M.F.S., 1973

Peterson, P.L., The Removal  of  Suspended  Solids  From  Seafood
Processing Plant Waste by Screens.  Seattle: N.M.F.S., 1973

Pigott,   G.M.,   "Fish   Waste  for  Profit  -  Not  Pollution."
Proceedings  of  26th   Pursue   Industrial   Waste   Conference.
Lafayette: Purdue University, 1971

Pigott, G. M., Personal Communication.  1973

Pilney,  J.P.,  Erickson,  E.E.,  Halversen,  H.W.   "Results  of
Industrial Waste Study."  The National Provisioner.  Volume  166,
No. 8, February, 1972.

Pottinger, S. R., Baldwin, W. H.,  "The Contnent of Certain Amino
Acids in Seafoods"  Commercial Fisheries Review, 8:8, 5-9. 1916

Power,   H.   E.,  A  Report  of  the  Fishing  Industry  on  the
Characteristics of Fish Protein Concentrates  Made  From  Various
Raw  Materials.   New  Series  Circular  15.   Halifax: Fisheries
Research Board  of  Canada,  Technological  Research  Laboratory.
1963

Prater,   A.   R.   and  Montogomery,  W.A.   "Fish  Preservation
Inquiries.  III.  Fisheries By-Products.  1.  The Liquid Ensilage
                                  360

-------
of Fish for Animal Feedstuff s".  Fisheries  News-letters,  22:10,
16-18. 1963
Quigley,  J.,  et al.,   i^ste Water Treatment in Commercial Fish
Processing;  Re due ing Stick Water Loadings .  Sea  Grant  Advisory
       No.  .  November.  1972            ~              ~~
Rails,  J.W. ,  Mercer, W. A., Fose, W. W. , Lamb, C. L. , "Research
on Waste Reduction in Food Canning  Operations."  Proceedings  of
the   23rd   Industrial  Waste  Conference.   Purdue  University.
             Extension  Seriesx  Part  Two_._   Lafayette:   Purdue
University, 1968

Rasekh,  J.,  Stillings,  B. R. , Sidwell, V.  "Effect of Hydrogen
Peroxide on the Color, Composition and Nutritive Quality of FPC".
Journal of Food Sciences, 37:423-425, 1972.

Rasmus sen, D.H., Pollution Abatement  Study.   Project  No.  747.
Terminal Island:  Tuna Research Foundation, Inc., 1971

Reid, L. , Personal Communication.  1973

Riddle,  M.J.,  et_ al_., An Effluent Study of a Fresh Water Fish
Processing Plant^  Reprint EPS G-WP-7J21-  Canada: Water Pollution
Control Directorate, 1972

Riddle, M. J. , Shikazi, K. Characterization and Treatment of  Fish
Processing  Plant  Effluents  in Canada.  Syracuse: 1973 National
Synposium on Food Processing Wastes.  1973

Robbins, E.  Personal Communications. 1973

Robinson, R. Personal communication.  1969

Rodale, R.  (ed.) "Fish  Protein  Concentrate".   Rodale^s  Health
Bulletin, 8:2,  1. 197C

Rogers,   T.   G.   "Salmon   Cannery   Pollution   -  Solution"?
Eny ironmental Law, 2:1, 116-144.

Rousseau,  J.E.  Jr.,  "Shrimp- Waste  Meal:   Effect  of  Storage
Variables  on  Pigment  Contents."   Commercial Fisheries Review,
8:8, 5-9.  1970

Runnels, J.L. Disposal of  Industrial  Wastes  in  the  Brunswick
River.  Miami: University of Miami, 1970

Russell,  J. R., Catfish Processing - A Rising Southern Industry^
Agricultural  Economic  Report  No.  224 .   Washington:  Economic
Research Service, U.S.D.A., 1972

Sanford,  F.  B. ,   "Utilization of Fish Waste in Northern Oregon
for Mink Feed".  Commercial Fisheries Review, 19:12, 40-47. 1957
                                   361

-------
Sanford,  F.B.,  Lee,  C.F.,  U...lls.  Fish  -  Reduction  Industry^
Commercial  Fisheries  TL14.   Washington:  Bureau  of Commercial
Fisheries.  Fish and Wildlife Service, U. S.D.I., 1960

Sanford,  T. ,  "Waste  Problems  in  Seafood  Processing".    Pro-
ceedings,  Workshop  on  Food  Processing Wastes . ESR-15 Raleigh:
North Carolina State UniversityT 1970

Saucier, J.W., "Anaerobic or Aerated Lagoons?" Water  and  Wastes
lS2i2eerinc[, Vol. 8, No. 5, May, pp. 610-628. 1971

Sawyer,  C.  N.,  Biological  Treatment  of Sewage and Industrial
Wastes.  Volume 1^ New  York,  Reinhold  Publishing  Corporation,
1956

Sawyer,  C.N.,  McCarty,  P. L. , Chemistry for Sanitary Engineer.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967

Schultz, G. , "Purification of  Waste  Waters  from  Fish  Ponds".
Wasserwirtsh.  63:74-80, 1956

Seagran,  H.  L.,   "Amino Acid content of Salmon Roe.  Technical
Note No. 25". Commercial Fisheries Rev Jew, , 15:3, 31-34, 1953

Seagran, H. L. , Morey, D. Dassow, J., "The Amino Acid Content  of
Roe  at  Different  Stages  of  Maturity from the Five Species  of
Pacific Salmon".  Journal of Nutrition, JLLLlt 139-JUli  1954

Seagran, H.L. , "Lake and River  Fisheries.  Industrial  Fisheries
Technology .  New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1963

Sewage  Treatment  Plant  Construction Cost Index...  Public Health
^S£Yi£S  Publication  NOj.  ,1PJL2»   Washington:  U.S.   Government
Printing Office, 1963.

Scyfried,  G.F.,    "Purification of Starch Industry Waste Water"
Proceedings of the  2 3rd  Industrial  Waste  Conference.   Purdue
University,  Engineering Extension Series, Part Two.x  Lafayette:
Purdue University, 1968

Shaw, A. J., B. H. Levelton,   Utilization of Shellfish and   Fish
Cannery.   Wastes  at  Kodiak^  Alaska.   Preliminary  Feasibility
BSEorti   Project  J_0-3.4J).   Vancouver:  B.   H.   Levelton   and
Associates Ltd. 1971

Shearon,  W.H.  Jr.,    "Oyster-Shell  Chemistry."  Chemical  and
            News, 29:21, 3078-3081. 1951
Shifrin,  S.M.,  Pensenson,  I.E.,  Zabborov,  A.N. ,   "Mechanical
Cleaning  of Waste Waters from Fish Canneries." Ryb.  Kho_z. ,  2:60,
5.  1972
                                  362

-------
Sidhu, G.S., Montgomery, W. A., "Current Trends in Fish  Handling
and  Processing."  Food Technology in Australia.  21:10, 510-515.
1969

Simon, B., Personal Communication.  1969

Slavin, J. W., Peters, J. A., "Fish and Fish Products" Industrial
Wastewater Control.  Academic Press, 1965

Smith, J.G., Thoughts  on  the  Future!  California's  Commercial
Fishery Resource.  1966

Smith, R.,  "Cost  of Conventional and Advanced Treatment of Waste
Water." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation.  1968.

Smith, R. M. R., Personal Communication.  1970

Snyder,  D. G. and Nilson, H. W., Nutritive Value of Pollock Fish
Scales as Determined by Rat Feeding  Tests...   Special  Scientific
Report^   Fisheries  No.  260.   Washington:  Fish  and  Wildlife
Service, U.S.D.I.7 1959

Soderquist, M.R., A Survey of  Oregon* s  Food  Processing  Wastes
Problems.   Seattle:  Annual  Meeting  of  the  Pacific Northwest
Pollution Control Association, Seattle,, 1969

Soderquist, M.  R.,  Williamson,  K.  J.,  Blanton,  G.  I.  Jr.,
Phillips,  D.  C., Law, D. K.,  Crawford, D. C., Current Practice
iD  Seafoodg  Processimj  Waste  Treatment.   Washington:   Water
Quality Office, E.P.A., 1970

Soderquist,    M.R.,    Blanton,    G.I.,    Jr.   Taylor,   D.W.
"Characterization  of Fruit and Vegetable Processing  Wastewater."
Proceedings,  Third National Symposium on Food Processing Wastes.
Corvallis: E.P.A., 1972 409-436.

Soderquist, M. R., et al., "Progress Report:  Seafoods Processing
Wastewater  Characterization".    Proceedings^   Third   National
Symposium on Food  Processing Wastes.  Corvallis: E.P.A.  1972

Sorensen, K. , "Fishmeal".  Commercial Fishing, 4:8, 11-12. 1966

Spinelli,  J.,  Stablization  of  F_ish  Wastes  Yakima:  Meeting,
Pacific Fisheries Technologists, 1973

Sproul, O.J., Keshavan, K.,  Hall,  M.W.,  Barnes,  B.B.,  "Waste
Water  Treatment from Potato Processing." Water and Sewage Works,
February. 1968

Sripathy, N. V., Sen,  D.  P.  Lahiry,  N.  L.,  "Preparation  of
Protein  Hydrolysates  from  Fish  Meal".  Research and Industry,
9:9, 258-260. 1964
                                   363

-------
Stansby, M.  E.,  Composition  of  Fish..,   Fishery  Le_JLlLi§£  JJ.6.
Washington:  Seattle Technological Laboratory.  Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S.D.I., 1917

Stansby, M. E., "Introduction".  Utilization  of  Alaskan  Salmon
Cannery  W§steA   Special  Scientific Regort.;  Fisheries No.. 109.
Washington: Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S.D.I., 1953

Stansby,  M.  E.,  "The  Processing  of  Tuna."   Tuna   Industry
Conference Pagersx Circular 65.  Washington: Bureau of Commercial
Fisheries, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S.D.I., 1953

Stansby,  M.  E.,  "Possibilities  for  Applying Fish Oil to Air-
Flotation".  Commercial Fisheries Review, 22^2X 17-21. 1969

Stansby, M. E.,    "Processing  of  Seafoods".   Food  Processing
Operations.  Westport: AVI Publishing Company.  1963

Stansby,  M.E., Holcott, H. S., "Composition of Fish." Industrial
Fishery Technology.  New York: Reinhold  Publishing  Corporation,
1963 New York, pp. 339-349.

Steffen,  A.J.,    "Waste Disposal in the Meat Industry 1." Water
and Wastes Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1970

Streebin, L. E., Reid, G. W. Hu, A. C., Demonstration of a  Full-
Seal e  Waste  Treatment System for a Cannery^  E^P.A. 12060 DSB..
September," 1971                    ~               ~          ~~

Stenzel, R. W., "Treating Oily Wastes Water Such  as  Those  from
Fish-Canning   or  Vegetable  Oil  Plants".  Chemical  Abstracts,
37:2500.  1943

Talsma, T. and Phillip, J. R., Salinity and Water Use.  New York:
Wylie-Interscience, 1971

Tangier,  K.  H.,  "Waste  Waters  from  Fish   Meal   Factories"
Gesundheitsing, 65:157. 1942

Tarkey,  W.  and  Pigott,  G.,  "Protein  Hydrolysate  From  Fish
Wastes," Journal of Food Science, Volume 38, No. 4. 1973

Tarr, H. L. A. and Deas, C. P.,  "Bacteriological  Peptones  from
Fish  Flesh"   Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada,
7:9, 552-561, 1949

Taylor, W. H., Personal Communication. 1970

Tenney, R.D.,  Chemical  Oxygen  Demand.   Unpublished  Technical
Report  10.1«   Kodiak:  Fishery  Products  Technology Laboratory.
N.M.F.S., 1972

Tenney, R. D., Personal Communication.   1973
                                  364

-------
Terney,  R.  D.,  Shrimp  Waste  Streams  and  COD^   Unpublished
Technical  Report  No.  .1V4.  Kodiak: Fishing Products Technology
Laboratory.  N.M.F.S., 1973

Tetsh, E.r  "Separators  for  Light  Mateiral  in  Waste  Waters,
Technique  with  Special  Reference to Waste Waters from the Fish
Industry". Ber Abwass. Techn. Verein., 9:278-286. 1954

Thomas, F. B., Personal Communication. 1973

Thurston, C. E. and MacMaster, P. P., "The Carbonate  Content  of
Some  Fish  and  Shellfish  Meals." Journal of the Association of
Official Agricultural Chemists, 42:699-702. 1959

Thurston, C. E., Ousterhout, L. E. and  MacMaster,  P.  P.,  "The
Nutritive  Value  of Fish Meal Protein:  A comparison of Chemical
Measurements  with  a  Chick  Feeding  Test."  Journal   of   the
Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, 43:760-762. 1960

Thurston,  C.  E., "Proximate Composition of Nine Species of Sole
and Flounder".   Journal  of  Agricultural  and  Food  Chemistry,
9:313-316. 1961

Tomiyama,  T.,  et  al_.,  "Studies  on  Utilization of Wastes in
Processing Shellfish".   Bulletin  of  the  Japanese  Society  of
Scientific Fisheries. 22:6, 374. 1956

Torgersen,  G. E., "Treatment of Mink Food Manufacturing Wastes."
Proceedings of the 2.3rd Industiral waste ConferenceM  Engineering
Extension   Series   No^   132.   Lafayette:  Purdue  University,
Lafayette, 1968

Tryck, Nyman Hayes, Kodiak Metropolitan Area.   Interim  Regional
Water Quality Management Plan, 1971

Tschekalin,  P.  M.,  "Production  of  an Adhesive Substance from
Waste Waters from Processing Plants".   Chem.  Zb.^.,  1228,  II;
1382-1383. 1951

Tsuchiya,  H.,  "Treatment  of  Waste  Waters  from Fish and Meat
Processing Plants."  Chemical Abstract, 75:260. 1941

Varge, C. R., Personal Communication. 1968

Venkataraman, R., "Fishery By-Products  and  Their  Utilization".
Indian Farming. 1969

Ventz, D. and Zanger, G. "Contribution to Biological Purification
of  Effluents  from  Fish  Processing  Plants."  Fisch  Forchung.
Wissen^ Schriften, 4:91-97. 1966

Vilbrandt, F. C. and Abernethy,  R.  R.  "Utilization  of  Shrimp
Waste.  Report of Commissioner of Fisheries^  Bureau of Fisheries
Document 1C78, 1930
                                   365

-------
Wells,  J.  W.,  Jr.,  "How Plants Can Cut Rising Waste Treatment
Expense." National Provisioner, 163, 1, 82. 1970

Willoughby, E. and Patton, V. D.  "Design of Modern  Meat-Packing
Waste   Treatment   Plant."    J°J3£D.§i  $$££.§£  Pollution  Control
Federation^ NoA _40, January, 1968

Wheaton, F., Engineering Approach  to  Oyster  Processing.   West
Lafayette: Annual Meeting of the American Society of Agricultural
Engineers, Purdue University. 1969

Wheeland,  H.  A.,  Fishery Statistics of the United States ^969.
Statistical  Digest  No..  .63.  Washington:  U.S.  Department   of
Commerce.  National Marine Fisheries Service. 1972

Wigutoff,  N.  B., "Potential Markets for Salmon Cannery Wastes."
Commercial Fisheries Review, 12:8, 5-14., 1952

Wilcke, H. L., "Potential  of  Animal,  Fish  and  Certain  Plant
Protein Sources".  Journal of Dairy Science.  52:409-18.  1969

Winchester,   C.   F.,   "Choice  Sea  Food  for  Farm  Animals".
Feedstuffs, 35:7, 18. 1963

Yonker, W. V., Personal Communication, 1969.

Young, J. C. and Mccarty, P.L., 1969.  "The Anaerobic Filter   for
Waste  Treatment."   Department  of  Civil  Engineering   Stanford
            Technical Report NoA 87, March
                                   366

-------
                           SECTION XIV
                            GLOSSARY

Activated Sludged/Process ;  Removes organic matter from sewage  by
saturating it with air and biologically active sludge.

Aeration Tank ;  A chamber for injecting air or oxygen into water.

Aerobic _ Organism:   An  organism that thrives in the presence of
oxygen.
Algae __ jAlga^ ;   Simple  plants,  many  microscopic,   containing
chlorophyll.   Most  algae are aquatic and may produce a nuisance
when conditions are suitable for prolific growth.

Ammonia^ Stripping;  Ammonia removal from  a  liquid,  usually  by
intimate contacting with an ammonia-free gas such as air.

Anaerobic :  Living or active in the absence of free oxygen.

Anexuyiant;   With  reference  to crab, meaning without the backs
(after "backing") .

Bacteria:  The smallest living organisms  which  comprise,  along
with fungi, the decomposer category of the food chain.

Bar ome tr ic_Leg :  Use of moving streams of water to draw a vacuum;
aspirator.

Batch _ Cooker ;   Product  remains  stationary in cooker  (water is
periodically changed) .

Benthic Region:  The bottom of a  body  of  water.   This  region
supports the benthos, a type of life that not only lives upon but
contributes to the character of the bottom.

Benthos ;   Aquatic bottom-dwelling organisms.  These include: (1)
Sessile  Animals,  such  as  the  sponges,  barnacles,   mussels,
oysters, some of the worms, and many attached algae:  (2) creeping
forms,  such  as  insects,  snails  and  certain  clams;  and (3)
burrowing forms, which include most clams and worms.

Bi furcation :  A site where a single structure  divides  into  two
branches.

Biological _ Oxidation:  The process whereby, through the activity
of living organisms in an aerobic environment, organic matter  is
converted to more biologically stable matter.

Biological __ Stabilization :   Reduction in th  net energy level of
organic  matter  as  a  result  of  the  metabolic  activity   of
organisms, so that further biodegradation is very slow.
                                  367

-------
Biological	Treatment:  Organic waste treatment in which bacteria
and/or  biochemical  action  are  intensified  under   controlled
conditions.

Blood  Water (Serum):  Liquid remaining after coagulation  of the
blood.

Slowdown:  A discharge of  water  from  a  system  to  prevent  a
buildup of dissolved solids in a boiler or clarifier.

BOD	(Biochemical  Oxygen Demand};  Amount of oxygen necessary in
the water for bacteria to consume the organic sewage.  It is used
as a measure in telling how well  a  sewage  treatment  plant  is
working.

BODJ5):  A measure of the oxygen consumption by aerobic organisms
over  a  5-day test period at 20°C.  It is an indirect measure of
the concentration of biologically degradable material present  in
organic wastes contained in a waste stream.

Botulinus Organisms:  Those that cause acute food poisoning.

Breaded^Shrimp:  Peeled shrimp coated with breading.  The product
may  be  identified  as  fantail   (butterfly)  and round, with or
without tail fins  and  last  shell  segment;  and  as  portions,
sticks,  steaks, etc., when prepared from a composite unit of two
or more shrimp pieces, whole shrimp, or  a  combination  of  both
without fin£ or shells.

Breading:   A  finely  ground mixture containing cereal products,
flavorings and other ingredients, that is applied  to  a  product
that has been moistened, usually with batter.

Brine:   Concentrated  solution which remains liquid down to 5°F;
used in freezing fish.

Btu:  British thermal unit, the  quantity  of  heat  required  to
raise one pound of water 1°F.

Building	Drain:   Lowest  horizontal part of a building drainage
system.

Building Drainage System:  Piping provided  for  carrying  waste-
water or other drainage from a building to the street sewer.

Bulking	Sludge:  Activated sludge that settles poorly because of
low-density floe.

Canned	Fishery	Product:   Fish,  shellfish,  or  other  aquatic
animals  packed  singly  or  in  combination  with other items in
hermetically  sealed,  heat  sterilized  cans,  jars,  or   other
suitable  containers.  Most, but not all, canned fishery products
can be stored at room temperature for  an  indefinite  period  of
time without spoiling.
                                    368

-------
Carbon^ Adsorption:   The separation of small waste particles and
molecular species, including  color  and  odor  contaminants,  by
attachment  to  the  surface  and  open  pore structure of carbon
granules or powder.  The carbon  is  "activated,"  or  made  more
adsorbent by treatment and processing.

Case:  "Standard" packaging in corrugated fiberboard containers.

Chemical	Precipitation;   A  waste  treatment  process  whereby
substances dissolved in the waste water stream are  rendered  in-
soluble and form a solid phase that settles out or can be removed
by flotation techniques.

Clarification;   Process of removing undissolved materials from a
liquid.  Specifically, removal of solids either  by  settling  or
filtration.

Clarifier:   A  settling  basin  for separating settleable solids
from waste water.

Cluster	Sampling:   A  method  that  is  useful  for  increasing
sampling  efficiency  and reducing error when the universe can be
partitioned into groups such that the objects in a group are more
heterogeneous within than between.

Coagulant;  A material, which, when added  to  liquid  wastes  or
water,  creates  a  reaction which forms insoluble floe particles
that adsorb and precipitate colloidal and suspended solids.   The
floe  particles  can be removed by sedimentation.  Among the most
common chemical coagulants used in sewage  treatment  are  ferric
chloride, alum and lime.

Coagulation:  The clumping together of solids to make them settle
out of the sewage faster.  Coagulation of solids is brought about
with  the  use  of  certain  chemicals  such  as  lime,  alum, or
polyelectrolytes.

COD  (Chemical Oxygen Demand^;  A measure of the  oxygen  required
to  stabilize that portion of organic matter in a sample that can
be oxidized by a strong chemical oxidizing agent.

Coefficient^of Variation:   A  measure  used  in  describing  the
amount  of  variation in a population.  An estimate of this value
is S/X where "S" equals the standard deviation and X  equals  the
sample mean.

Coliform:  Relating to, resembling, or being the colon bacillus.

Comminutor:   A  device  for  the catching and shredding of heavy
solid matter in the primary stage of, waste treatment.

Concentration:  The total mass (usually  in  micrograms)  of  the
suspended particles contained in a unit volume (usually one cubic
meter)  at  a  given  temperature  and  pressure;  sometimes, the
                                 369

-------
concentration may be  expressed  in  terms  of  total  number  of
particles  in  a  unit  volume  (e.g.,  parts  per million); con-
centration may also be called the "loading" or the "level"  of  a
substance;  concentration  may  also pertain to the strength of a
solution.

Condensate;  Liquid residue  resulting  from  the  cooling  of  a
gaseous vapor.

Contamination:   A  general term signifying the introduction into
water of microorganisms, chemical, organic, or  inorganic  wastes
or sewage, which renders the water unfit for its intended use.

Cook:   May  be  referred  to  as  the  second cook of a two cook
operation.

Crustacea:  Mostly aquatic animals with  rigid  outer  coverings,
jointed  appendages,  and  gills.   Examples are crayfish, crabs,
barnacles, water fleas, and sow bugs.

Dentrification;  The process involving the facultative conversion
by anaerobic bacteria of  nitrates  into  nitrogen  and  nitrogen
oxides.

Deviation,	Standard	Normal:   A measure of dispersion of values
about a mean value; the square root of the average of the squares
of the individual deviations from the mean.

Digestion;  Though "aerobic" digestion is used, the  term  diges-
tion commonly refers to the anaerobic breakdown of organic matter
in water solution or suspension into simpler or more biologically
stable  compounds  or  both.  Organic matter may be decomposed to
soluble organic acids or alcohols, and subsequently converted  to
such  gases  as methane and carbon dioxide.  Complete destruction
of organic solid materials by bacterial  action  alone  is  never
accomplished.

Dissolved  Air^Flotation;  A process involving the compression of
air and liquid, mixing to  super-saturation,  and  releasing  the
pressure to generate large numbers of minute air bubbles.  As the
bubbles  rise  to  the surface of the water, they carry with them
small particles that they contact.

Dissolved Oxygen JD.Q.):  Due  to  the  diurnal  fluctuations  of
dissolved  oxygen  in streams, the minimum dissolved oxygen value
shall apply at or near the time of the average  concentration  in
the stream, taking into account the diurnal fluctuations.

Ecology:   The  science  of  the  interrelations  between  living
organisms and their environment.

Effluent:  Something that flows out, such as a liquid  discharged
as a waste; for example, the liquid that comes out of a treatment
plant after completion of the treatment process.
                                 370

-------
ElectxodialYsis:   A  process  by  which  electricity attracts or
draws the mineral salts from sewage.

Environment:  The physical environment of the world consisting of
the  atmosphere,  the  hydrosphere,  and  the  lithosphere.   The
biosphere  is  that  part  of the environment supporting life and
which is important to man.

Estuary._:  Commonly an arm of the sea  at  the  lower  end  of  a
river.   Estuaries  are  often enclosed by land except at channel
entrance points.

Eutrophication;  The intentional or unintentional  enrichment  of
water.

Eutroghicu-Waters:  Waters with a good supply of nutrients.  These
waters  may  support  rich  organic  productions,  such  as algal
blooms.

Extrapolate:  To project data into an area not  known  or  exper-
ienced, and arrive at knowledge based on inferences of continuity
of the data.
                                                               an
Facultative	Aerobe:   An organism that although fundamentally
aerobe can grow in the presence of free oxygen.

Facultative TAnaerobe:  An organism that although fundamentally an
anaerobe can grow in the absence of free oxygen.

Facult_atiy e _Decompos jit ion:  Decomposition of  organic  matter  by
facultative microorganisms.

FishFillets:  The sides of fish that are either skinned or have
the skin on,  cut lengthwise from the  backbone.   Most  types  of
fillets are boneless or virtually boneless; some may be specified
as "boneless fillets."

Fjsh	Meal:   A ground, dried product made from fish or shellfish
or parts thereof, generally  produced  by  cooking  raw  fish  or
shellfish  with  steam  and  pressing  the material to obtain the
solids which are then dried.

Fish_Oil:  An oil processed from the body  (body  oil)  or  liver
(liver  oil)   of  fish.   Most  fish oils are a by-product of the
production of fish meal.

Zish_Solubles:  A  product  extracted  from  the  residual  press
liquor   (called  "stick  water") after the solids are removed for
drying (fish meal)  and the oil extracted by  centrifuging.   This
residue  is generally condensed to 50 percent solids and marketed
as "condensed fish solubles."
                                   371

-------
Filtration;  The process of passing a  liquid  through  a  porous
medium  for  the  removal  of  suspended  material  by a physical
straining action.

Floe:  Something occurring in indefinite masses or aggregates.  A
clump of solids formed  in  sewage  when  certain  chemicals  are
added.

Flocculatjon:  The process by which certain chemicals form clumps
of solids in sewage.

Flpc  Skimmings:   The flocculent mass formed on a quieted liquid
surface and removed for use, treatment, or disposal.

Grab Sample;  A sample taken at a random place in space and time.

Heterotrophic Organism:  Organisms that are dependent on  organic
matter for food.

Identify:   To determine the exact chemical nature of a hazardous
polluting substance.

Impact:  (1) An impact is a  single  collision  of  one  mass  in
motion  with  a  second  mass which may be either in motion or at
rest.  (2)  Impact is  a  word  used  to  express  the  extent  or
severity of an environmental problem; e.g., the number of persons
exposed to a given noise environment.

Incineration:   Burning the sludge to remove the water and reduce
the remaining residues to a safe, non-burnable ash.  The ash  can
then be disposed of safely on land, in some waters, or into caves
or other undergound locations.

Influent;   A  liquid which flows into a containing space or pro-
cess unit.

Ion Exchange;  A reversible chemical reaction between a solid and
a liquid by means of which ions may be interchanged  between  the
two.    It  is  in  common  use  in  water  softening  and  water
deionizing.

Kg;  Kilogram or 1000 grams, metric unit of weight.

Kleldahl Nitrogen:  A measure of the total amount of nitrogen  in
the ammonia and organic forms in waste water.

KWH:   Kilowatt-hours,  a  measure  of  total  electrical  energy
consumption.

Lagoons:  Scientifically constructed  ponds  in  which  sunlight,
algae, and oxygen interact to restore water to a quality equal to
effluent from a secondary treatment plant.
                                    372

-------
LandincjSLt	Commercial;   Quantities  of fish, shellfish and other
aquatic plants and animals brought ashore and sold.  Landings  of
fish  may  be  in terms of round  (live) weight or dressed weight.
Landings of crustaceans are generally  on  a  live  weight  basis
except  for shrimp which may be on a heads-on or heads-off basis.
Mollusks are generally landed with the shell on but in some cases
only the meats are landed  (such as scallops).

Live Tank;  Metal or wood tank with circulating seawater for  the
purpose of keeping a crab alive until processed.

M;  Meter, metric unit of length.

Mm;  Millimeter = 0.001 meter.

Mg/1;   Milligrams  per  liter;  approximately  equals  parts per
million; a term used to indicate concentration  of  materials  in
water.

MGD:  Million gallons per day.

Meruis:  Largest section of crab leg closest to crab body.

Microstrainer/microscreen;   A  mechanical filter consisting of a
cylindrical surface of metal filter fabric with openings of 20-60
micrometers in size.

Mixed Liquor;  The name given the effluent that  comes  from  the
aeration  tank  after  the  sewage  has been mixed with activated
sludge and air.	Mortality The  ratio  of  the  total  number  of
deaths  to  the  total  population, or the ratio of the number of
deaths from a given disease to the total number of people  having
the disease.

Municipal  Treatment;   A city or community-owned waste treatment
plant for municipal and, possibly, industrial waste treatment.

Nitrate, Nitrite;  Chemical  compounds  that  include  the  NO(3)
(nitrate)  and  NO (2)   (nitrite)  ions.   They  are  composed  of
nitrogen and oxygen, are nutrients for growth of algae and  other
plant life, and contribute to eutrophication.

Nitrification;  The process of oxidizing ammonia by bacteria into
nitrites and nitrates.

Organic	Content;   Synonymous  with  volatile  solids except for
small  traces  of  some  inorganic  materials  such  as   calcium
carbonate   which  will  lose  weight  at  temperatures  used  in
determining volatile solids.

Organic	Detritus:   The  particulate  remains  of  disintegrated
plants and animals.
                                   373

-------
Organic	Matter:   The  waste  from homes or industry of plant or
animal origin.

Qrganpleptic;  Involving the employment of the sense organs.

Oxidation Pond:  A man-made lake or body of water in which wastes
are consumed by bacteria.  It is used most frequently with  other
waste  treatment  processes.   An oxidation pond is basically the
same as a sewage lagoon.

Peeler:  Removes the greatest portion of the shell from shrimp.

Percolation:  The movement of water through the soil profile.

Per C§pita Consumption:  Consumption of edible  fishery  products
in the United States, divided by the total civilian population.

]DH:   The pH value indicates the relative intensity of acidity or
alkalinity of water, with the neutral point at 7.0.  Values lower
than 7.0 indicate the presence of alkalies.

Plankton (Plankter^;  Organisms of relatively small  size  mostly
microscopic,  that  have  either relatively small powers of loco-
motion or that drift in that  water  with  waves,  currents,  and
other water motion.

Pollutant;  a substance which taints, fouls, or otherwise renders
impure or unclean.

Pollution:    Results   when   something—animal,  vegetable,  or
mineral—reaches water, making it more difficult or dangerous  to
use for drinking, recreation, agriculture, industry, or wildlife.

Polishing:  Final treatment stage before discharge of effluent to
a water course, carried out in a shallow, aerobic lagoon or pond,
mainly  to  remove fine suspended solids that settle very slowly.
Some aerobic microbiological activity also occurs.

Ponding: #A waste treatment technique involving the actual holdup
of all waste waters in a  confined  space  with  evaporation  and
percolation  the  primary  mechanisms operating to dispose of the
water.

Ppm:  Parts per million, also referred to as milligrams per liter
(mg/1).  This is a unit for expressing the concentration  of  any
substance  by  weight,  usually as grams of substance per million
grams of solution.  Since a liter of water weighs one kilogram at
a specific gravity of 1.0, one part per million is equivalent  to
one milligram per liter.

Press	Liguor:   Stick  water  resulting  from  the compaction of
recovered fish waste solids.
                                 374

-------
Primary Treatment:  Removes the  material  that  floats  or  will
settle  in  sewage.  It is accomplished by using screens to catch
the floating objects and tanks for the heavy matter to settle in.

Process Water:  All water that comes into direct contact with the
raw  materials,  intermediate  products,  final   products,   by-
products, or contaminated waters and air.

Processed ^Fishery	Products:   Fish, shellfish and other aquatic
plants and animals, and products thereof, preserved  by  canning,
freezing, cooking, dehydrating, drying, fermenting, pastuerizing,
adding  salt  or  other chemical substances, and other commercial
processes.  Also, changing the form of fish, shellfish  or  other
aquatic  plants  and animals from their organic state into a form
in which they are not  readily  identifiable,  such  as  fillets,
steaks, or shrimp logs.

Pur_se	Seiner;   Fishing  vessel  utilizing a seine (net) that is
drawn together at the bottom forming a trap or purse.

Receiying_Waters:  Rivers, lakes, oceans, or other water  courses
that receive treated or untreated waste waters.

Recycle:   The  return  of a quantity of effluent from a specific
unit or process to the feed stream of that same unit.   This would
also apply to return of treated plant  waste  water  for  several
plant uses.

Regression:   A trend or shift toward a mean.  A regression curve
or line is thus one that best  fits  a  particular  set  of  data
according to some principle.

Retort:   Sterilization  of  a food product at greater than 248°F
with steam under pressure.

Reuse:  Water reuse, the subsequent use  of  water  following  an
earlier use without restoring it to the original quality.

Reverse	Osmosis:   The  physical separation of substances from a
water stream by reversal of the  normal  osmotic  process,  i.e.,
high pressure, forcing water through a semi-permeable membrane to
the  pure  water  side  leaving  behind  more  concentrated waste
streams.

Rotating Biological Contractor;  A  waste  treatment  device  in-
volving  closely  spaced  light-weight  disks  which  are rotated
through the waste water allowing aerobic microflora to accumulate
on each disk and thereby  achieving  a  reduction  in  the  waste
content.

Round   (Live)   Weight:   The  weight  of fish, shellfish or other
aquatic plants and animals as taken from the water; the  complete
or full weight as caught.
                                375

-------
Samplef  Composite:  A sample taken at a fixed location by adding
together small samples taken frequently during a given period  of
time.

Sand  Filter;  Removes the organic wastes from sewage.  The waste
water is trickled  over  the  bed  of  sand.   Air  and  bacteria
decompose the wastes filtering through the sand.  The clean water
flows  out  through  drains in the bottom of the bed.  The sludge
accumulating  at  the  surface  must  be  removed  from  the  bed
periodically.

Sanitary Sewers;   In a separate system, are pipes in a city that
carry only domestic waste water.  The storm water runoff is taken
care of by a separate system of pipes.

Secondary	Treatment:   The  second  step is most waste treatment
systems in which  bacteria  consume  the  organic  parts  of  the
wastes.   It  is accomplished by bringing the sewage and bacteria
together in trickling filters or in the activated sludge process.

Sedimentation Tanks;  Help remove solids from sewage.  The  waste
water  is  pumped  to  the  tanks  where the solids settle to the
bottom or float on top as scum.  The scum is skimmed off the top,
and solids on the bottom  are  pumped  out  to  sludge  digestion
tanks.

Seine:  Any of a number of various nets used to capture fish.

Separator;  Separates the loosened shell from the shrimp meat.

Settleable  rMatteri^(solids);  Determined in the Imhoff Cone Test
will show the quantitative settling characteristics of the  waste
sample.

Settling Tank:  Synonymous with "Sedimentation Tank."

Sewers:   A  system of pipes that collect and deliver waste water
to treatment plants or receiving streams.

Shaker Blower;  Dries and sucks the  shell  off  with  a  vacuum,
leaving the shrimp meat.

Shock  Load;  A quantity of waste water or pollutant that greatly
exceeds the normal discharged into a  treatment  system,  usually
occuring over a limited period of time.

Sludgg;   The  solid  matter  that settles to the bottom of sedi-
mentation tanks and must be disposed of  by  digestion  or  other
methods to complete waste treatment.

Slurry.;  A solids-water mixture, with sufficient water content to
impart fluid handling characteristics to the mixture.
                                 376

-------
Species  (Both	Singular ^and	Plural)_:   A natural population or
group of populations that transmit specific characteristics  from
parent to offspring.  They are reproductively isolated from other
populations  with  which  they  might breed.  Populations usually
exhibit a loss of fertility when hybridizing.

Stationary;  Process with statistics which are independent  of  a
time translation.

Stick Water:  Water which has been in close contact with the fish
and has large amounts of organics entrained in it.

sioichiometric__Amount:   The amount of a substance involved in a
specific chemical reaction, either as a reactant or as a reaction
product.  Stratification;  A partition of the universe  which  is
useful when the properties of sub-populations are of interest and
used  for  increasing  the  precision  of  the  total  population
estimation when stratum means are sufficiently different and  the
within  stratum  variances are appreciably smaller than the total
population variance.

Suspended_SQlids:  The wastes that will not  sink  or  settle  in
sewage.

Surface	Water;   The  waters  of the United States including the
territorial seas.

Synergism;  A situation in which the combined action  of  two  or
more agents acting together is greater than the sum of the action
of these agents separately.

Tertiary  Waste Treatment;  Waste treatment systems used to treat
secondary  treatment  effluent  and  typically  using   physical-
chemical technologies to effect waste reduction.  Synonymous with
"Advanced Waste Treatment".

Total	Dissolved ^Solids	[TDS].:  The solids content of wastewater
that is soluble and is measured as total solids content minus the
suspended solids.

Trickling Filter;  A bed of  rocks  or  stones.   The  sewage  is
trickled  over the bed so the bacteria can break down the organic
wastes.  The bacteria collect on the stones through repeated  use
of the filter.

Universe;  The collection of objects or a region of time or space
of  which it is desired to determine the collective properties or
attributes.

Viscus (pi. Viseera);  Any internal organ within a body cavity.

Washer;  Shrimp are vigorously agitated to loosen  the  remaining
shell and wash the shrimp meat.
                                 377

-------
Zero Discharge;  The discharge of no pollutants in the wastewater
stream  of  a  plant that is discharging into a receiving body of
water.
                                   378

-------
                           Appendix A
                      Selected Biblography

          Air Flotation Use Within the Seafood Industry


1.  Atwell, J.S., R.E.  Reed  and  B.  A.  Patrie.    1972  "Water
Pollution  Control  Problems  and  Programs  of the Maine Sardine
Council." Proceedincj! of the 27th  Industrial  Waste  Conference.
Lafayette: Purdue University, 1972

2.  Baker,  D.W.  and  C.  J.  Carlson.   1972.   "Dissolved  Air
Flotation  Treatment  of Menhaden Bail Water." Proceedings of the
.12 £h Annual Atlantic_  Fisheries  Technology  Conference   (AFTQ .
Annapolis, Maryland.

3.  Claggett, F.G.,  and  Wong,  J.,  Salmon  Canning  Wastewater
Clarification^  Part  I.   Vancouver: Fisheries Research Board of
Canada, Laboratory, 1968

4.  Claggett, F. G., and  Wong,  J.,  Salmon  Canning  Wastewater
Clarification,  Part  II.  Vancouver: Fisheries Research Board of
Canada, Laboratory, February 1969.

5.  Claggett,  F.  G.,  A  Proposed  Demonstration  Waste   Water
Treatment Unit...  Technical RejDort No,. J.97_0.  Vancouver: Fisheries
Research Board of Canada, Vancouver Laboratory, 1970

6.  Claggett, F. G., Demonstration Waste  Water  Treatment  Unit,
Interim  Report  J.^7_1  Saj.mon  Season.   Technical Report No^ 286
Vancouver: Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 1972

7.  Claggett, F. G.,  The  Use  of  Chemical  Treatment  and  Air
Flotation  for  the  Clarification of Fish Processing Plant Waste
Water.  Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Vancouver Laboratory,
Vancouver, British Columbia, 1972.

8.  Claggett, F. G., Treatment Technology  iQ  Canada,   Seattle,
Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Technology  Transfer Program,
Upgrading Seafood Processing Facilities to Reduce Pollution, 1974

9.  Jacobs Engineering Co.  Pollution  Abatement  Study  for  the
Tuna Research Foundation, Inc. 120 pp.  May 1971.

10. Jacobs Engineering  Co.   Plant  Flotation  Tests  for  Waste
Treatment  Program  for  the  Van  Camp Seafood Co.   27 pp.  June
1972.

11. Mauldin, A. Frank.  Treatment of Gulf Shrimp  Processing  and
C^SBisa   WasteA    Seattle,   Environmental  Protection  Agency7
Technology  Transfer  Program,   Upgrading   Seafood   Processing
Facilities to Reduce Pollution, 1974
                                    379

-------
12. Mauldin, Frank A.,  Szabo, A. J.  Unpublished  Draft  Report-
Shrimp Canning Waste Treatment Study, EPA Project No. S 800 90 4,
Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, February 1974.

13. Peterson, P.L.  Treatment of Shellfish Processing  Wastewater
fey.   Dissolved  Air  Flotation.   Unpublished  report.   Seattle:
National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S.B.C. 1973

14. Snider, Irvin F. "Application of Dissolved Air  Flotation  in
the  Seafood  Industry."  Proceedings of the 1.7th Annual Atlantic
Fisheries Technology  Conference   (AFTC[.   Annapolis,  Maryland,
1972.

15.   Kato, K., Ishikawa, S. "Fish Oil and Protein Recovered From
Fish Processing Effluent" S.. Wat... Sewage Wks^ 1969.
    "At a fish processing plant in Shimonoseki City,  Japan,  two
flow  lines   (for  horse  mackerel,  scabbard  fish,  and  yellow
croaker) produce waste waters amounting to 1800 tons  daily  from
which  purified  oil  and  protein  are  recovered.   Oil,  first
separated by gravitational flotation, passes through a heater and
is then purified by two centrifugal operations.   Underflow  from
the  oil  separator  is  coagulated  and  transferred to pressure
flotation tanks to separate proteins which are finally  dewatered
by  vacuum  filtration.   Data  on  the  characteristics  of  the
effluent,  results  of  tests,  and  design  specifications   are
described  fully.   The  process  removes about 86 percent of the
suspended solids and  about  77  percent  of  the  BOD."   ("Water
Pollution  Abstracts"  1970,  (43), Abstract No. 787, London:  Her
Majesty's Stationery Office).

16. Vuuren, L.R.J., Stander, G.J., Henzen, M.R.,  Blerk,  S.H.V.,
Hamman, P.F.  "Dispersed Air Flocculation/Flotation for Stripping
of Organic Pollutants from Effluent" Wat^. Res. 1968.
    "The  principles  of the dispersed air flotation system which
is widely used in industry are  discussed.   A  laboratory  scale
unit  was  developed to provide a compact portable system for use
in field investigations, and tabulated results are given  of  its
use  in  the treatment of sewage-works effluents and waste waters
from fish factories, pulp and paper mills, and abattoirs  showing
that their polluting load was greatly reduced." ("Water Pollution
Abstracts, 1968  (41)).

17.  E.S. Hopkins, Einarsson, J. "Water Supply and Waste Disposal
At a Foot Processing Plant... J. Industrial Water and Wastes.., 1961
    "The water  supply  system  and  waste  treatment  facilities
serving  the  Coldwater  Seafood  Corporation plant at Nanticoke,
Md., are described.  Waste  waters  from  washing  equipment  and
floors,  containing  fish  oil, grease and dough pass to a grease
flotation tank, equipped with an "Aer-o-Mix" aeration unit.   The
advantages  of  the  facilities are discussed." ("Water Pollution
Abstracts," 1961  (34), London:  Her Majesty's Stationery Office).
                                   380

-------
18. Shifrin, S.M. et al., "Mechanical Cleaning  of  Waste  Waters
From Fish Canneries" Chemical Abstracts 76 1972
    "Shifrin  et  al  presented  the  results  of studies on fish
cannery waste  treatment  in  the  U.S.S.R.  using  impeller-type
flotators.  With a waste containing 603 mg/1 of fats, 603 mg/1 of
ssf  and  2,560  mg/1  of COD, mechanical flotation reduced these
values  by  99.8,  86.5  and  59.8  percent,  respectively.   The
flotators  were  claimed  to  be  more  effective  than  settlers
operating with or without aeration.   ("Journal  Water  Pollution
Control Federation," 1973,  (45), No. 6, p. 1117.)
                                   381

-------

-------
                            APPENDIX B

                      Selected Bibliography

     Air Flotation Use Within the Meat and Poultry Industry


1.  Wilkinson,  E.H..P.  "Acid  coagulation  and  dissolved   air
flotation."  Proc.  13th  Meat  Ind.  Res. Conf., Hamilton, N.Z.,
1971, M.I.R.I.N.Z. No. 225,
    "A process developed by the Meat Industry Research  Institute
of  New Zealand for removal of colloidal proteins from meat trade
waste waters comprises  cogulation  with  acid  followed  by  air
flotation.   Pilot-plant  trials  have achieved removals of 85-95
percent suspended solids, 70-80  percent  BOD  and  COD,  and  99
percent  coliform  organisms." ("Water Pollution Abstracts" 1972,
(45),  Abstract  No.  478,  London:   Her  Majesty's   Stationery
Office) .

2.  Woodard, F.E., Sproul, O.J.,  Hall,  M.W.,  and  Glosh,  M.M.
"Abatement of pollution from a poultry processing plant." J^. Wat.,
Pgllut. Control Fed^, 1972, (44), 1909-1915."
    "Details  are  given  of  the  development of waste treatment
scheme for a poultry processing plant, including studies  on  the
characteristics  of  the waste waters, in-plant changes to reduce
the  volume  and  strength  of  the  wastes,  and  evaluation  of
alternative  treatment  methods.   Dissolved  air  flotation  was
selected as the best method, after coagulation with soda ash  and
alum,  and  the treated effluent is chlorinated before discharge;
some  results  of  operation  of  the  plant  are  tabulated  and
discussed."  Typical  operating data from a full-scale plant show
removals of 74-98 percent BOD, 87-99  percent  suspended  solids,
and  97-99  percent  grease.   ("Water Pollution Abstracts" 1972,
(45),  Abstract  No.  1788,  London:   Her  Majesty's  Stationery
Office) .

3.  Steffen, A.J. "The new  and  old  in  slaughter  house  waste
treatment processes." Wastes Engng., 1957,  (28).
    "Methods   of   treating   slaughterhosue   waste  waters  by
screening, sedimentation, the use of septic  tanks,  intermittent
sand filtration, biological filtration and chemical treatment are
discussed.   Brief descriptions of the newer methods of treatment
including  the  removal  of  solids  and  grease  by   flotation,
anaerobic digestion, and irrigation are given."  ("Water Pollution
Abstracts," 1957, (30), Abstract No. 2414, London:  Her Majesty's
Stationery Office).

4.  Meyers, G.A. "Meat packer tucks wastes unit in abandoned wine
cellar." Wastes Engng., 1955,  (26)
    "At a plant of the  H.H. Meyer  Packing  Co.  at  Cincinnati,
Ohio,  processing  pork products treatment of the waste waters by
dissolved air flotation reduces the amount of grease in the waste
waters by about 80 percent and  the  concentration  of  suspended
solids  by 90 percent." ("Water Pollution Abstracts," 1955, (28),
Abstract No. 1123, London:  Her Majesty's Stationery Office).
                                    383

-------
5.  Farrell, L.S. "The why and how of  treating  rendering  plant
wastes." Wat. 6 Sewage Wks., 2953, (100).
    "In  a  paper  on  the  treatment of waste waters from plants
rendering meat wastes, preliminary treatment by  fine  screening,
sedimentation,  and  pressure flotation is considered.  Screening
is economical if recovery of  fats  is  not  required.   Pressure
flotation, which is described fully, is the most efficient method
of  treatment  as  judged  by  the  recovery  of  by-products and
conservation of water.  Air and coagulants are added to the waste
waters in a tank maintained under pressure for  solution  of  air
and  the  waste  waters  then  pass  to  the  flotation  unit  at
atmospheric pressure where dissolved air  is  liberated  carrying
solids  to  the  surface.   In  a  typical plant, a removal of 93
percent of the  BOD  and  93-99  percent  of  the  total  fat  is
achieved.  If sedimentation is combined with flotation 93 percent
of  suspended  solids  is  removed."  ("Water Pollution Abstracts"
1953,  (26), London:  Her Majesty's Stationery Office).

6.  Hopkins, E.S., Dutterer, G.M. "Liquid Waste Disposal  from  a
Slaughterhouse." Water and Sew.. Works^ 117, 7, (July 1970).
    "Hopkins and Dutterer reported the results of treating liquid
slaughterhouse wastes in a system consisting of screening, grease
separation  by  air flotation and skimming, fat emulsion breaking
with aluminum sulfate  (26 mg/1) and  agitation,  oxidation  in  a
mechanical surface oxidation unit provided with extended aeration
(24-hr detention time), overflow and recycle of activated sludge,
and  a  final  discharge to a chlorination pond  (30-min contact).
For an average discharge of 23,499 gpd (88.9 cu m/day),  the  BOD
of  the  waste  was  reduced  from  1,700  to 10.1 mg/1, and most
probable  number   (MPN)  coiform  counts  averaged  220/100  ml."
("Journal Water Pollution Control Federation," 1971,  (43), No. 6,
p. 949) .

7.  Dirasian,  H.A.  "A  Study  of  Meat  Packing  and  Rendering
Wastes."  Water  8  Wastes  Eng,  7,  5,   (May  1970).  sides and
quarters delivered  from  slaughterhosues,  Dirasiar  found  that
pressure flotation assisted by aluminum sulfate as a flocculation
aid removed grease effectively.
    "In  a study of a plant that processes finished beef and pork
from A recirculation ratio of 4:1 and a flotation  period  of  20
min were used in these studies.  The final effluent showed a 98.5
percent  removal of suspended solids  (SS)  (including grease) with
the exception of influent samples containing less than  140  mg/1
of  SS.   In  all  cases  the SS in the effluent was less than 35
mg/1.  ("Journal Water Pollution Control Federation," 1971,  (43),
No.6, p. 949.)
                                     384

-------
                           APPENDIX C

                 List of Equipment Manufacturers


Automatic Analyzers

Hach Chemical Company, P. O. Box 907, Ames, Iowa  50010.

Combustion Equipment Association, Inc., 555 Madison Avenue
      New York, N.Y. 10022.

Martek Instruments, Inc., 879 West 16th Street, Newport
     Beach, California 92660

Eberbach Corporation, 505 South Maple Road, Ann Arbor,
     Michigan 48106

Tritech, Inc., Box 124, Chapel Hill, North Carolina  27514

Preiser Scientific, 900 MacCorkle Avenue, S. W., Charleston,
     West Virginia 25322

Wilks Scientific Corporation, South Norwalk, Connecticut  06856

Technicon Instruments Corporation, Tarrytown, New York 10591

Bauer - Bauer Brothers Company, Subsidiary combustion
     Engineering, Inc., P. O. Box 968, Springfield, Ohio 45501

Centrifuges

Beloit-Passavant Corporation, P. O. Box 997, Jonesville,
     Wisconsin 53545

Bird Machine Company, South Walpole, Massachusetts 02071

DeLaval Separator Company, Poughkeepsie, New York 12600

Flow Metering Equipment

Envirotech Corporation, Municipal Equipment Division,
     IOC Valley Drive, Brisbane, California 95005

Laboratory Equipment and Supplies

Hach Chemical Company, P. O. Box 907, Ames, Iowa 50010

Eberbach Corporation, 505 South Maple Road, Ann Arbor,
     Michigan 48106

National Scientific Company, 25200 Miles Avenue, Cleveland,
     Ohio 44146
                                    385

-------
Preiser Scientific, 900 MacCorkle Avenue S.W. , Charleston,
     West Virginia 25322

Precision Scientific Company, 3737 Cortlant Street, Chicago,
     Illinois 60647

Horizon Ecology Company, 7435 North Oak Park Avenue, Chicago,
     Illinois 60648

Markson Science, Inc., Box NPR, Del Mar, California 92014

Cole-Parmer Instrument Company, 7425 North Oak Park Avenue,
     Chicago, Illinois 60648

VWR Scientific, P. O. Box 3200, San Francisco, California
     94119

Sampling EguiEment
Preiser Scientific, 900 MacCorkle Avenue S.W. , Charleston,
     West Virginia 25322

Horizon Ecology Company, 7435 North Oak Park Avenue, Chicago,
     Illinois 60648

Sigmamotor, Inc., 14 Elizabeth Street, Middleport, New
     York 14105

Protech, Inc. , Roberts Lane, Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355

Quality Control Equipment, Inc., 2505 McKinley Avenue,
     Des Moines, Iowa 50315

Instrumentation Specialties Company, P. O. Box 5347,
     Lincoln, Nebraska 68505

N-Con Systems Company, Inc., 410 Boston Post Road, Larchmont,
     New York 10538

Screening EQuipment

SWECO, Inc., 6033 E. Bandine Boulevard, Los Angeles,
     California 90054

Bauer-Bauer Brothers Company, Subsidiary Combustion
     Engineerina, Inc. , P. O. Box 968, Springfield, Ohio
     45501

Hydrocyclonics Corporation, 968 North Shore Drive, Lake
     Bluff, Illinois 60044

Jeffrey Manufacturing Company, 961 North 4th Street,
     Columbus, Ohio 43216
                                 386

-------
Dorr-Oliver, Inc., Havemeyer Lane, Stamford, Connecticut
     06904

Hendricks Manufacturing Company, Carbondale, Pennsylvania
     18407

Peobody Welles, Roscoe, Illinois  61073

Clawson, F. J. and Associates, 6956 Highway 100, Nashville,
     Tennessee 37205

Allis-Chaliners Manufacturing Company, 1126 South 70th Street,
     Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53214

DeLaval Separator Company, Poughkeepsie, New York 12600

Envirex, Inc., 1901 South Prairie, Waukesha, Wisocnsin 53186

Liak Belt Enviornmental  Equipment, FMC Corporation,
     Prudential Plaza, Chicago, Illinois  60612

Productive Equipment Corporation, 2924 West Lake Street,
     Chicago, Illinois 60612

Simplicity Engineering Company, Durand, Michigan 48429

Waste Water Treatment Systems

Cromaglass Corporation, Williamsport, Pennsylvania 17701

ONPS, 4576 SW 103rd Avenue, Beaverton, Oregon 97225

Tempco, Inc., P. O. Box 1087, Bellevue, Washington 98009

Zurn Industries, inc., 1422 East Avenue, Erie, Pennsylvania
    16503

General Environmental Equipment, Inc., 5020 Stepp Avenue,
     Jacksonville, Florida 32216

Envirotech Corporation, Municipal Equipment Division,
     100 Valley Drive, Brisbane, California 95005

Jeffrey Manufacturing Company, 961 North 4th Street,
     Columbus, Ohio 43216

Carborundum Corporation, P. O. Box 87, Knoxville, Tennessee
     37901

Graver, Division of Ecodyne Corporation, U. S. Highway 22,
     Union, New Jersey 07083

Beloit-Passavant corporation, P. O. Box 997, Janesville,
     Wisconsin 53545
                                3S7

-------
Black-Clawson Company, Middletown, Ohio 54042

Envirex, Inc., 1901 S. Prairie, Waukesha, Wisconsin 53186

Environmental Systems, Division of Litton Industries, Inc.,
     354 Dawson Drive, Camarillo, California 93010

Infilco Division, Westinghouse Electric Company, 901 South
     Campbell Street, tuscon, Arizona 85719

Keene Corporation, Fluid Handling Division, Cookeville,
     Tennessee 38501

Komiine-Sanderson Engineering Corporation, Peapack, New
     Jersey 07977

Permutit Company, Division of Sybron Corporation, E. 49
     Midland Avenue, Paramus, New Jersey 07652
                                      388

-------
                                                         Conversion Table
              MULTIPLY (ENGLISH UNITS)

                     English Unit
                             Abbreviation
       by                        TO OBTAIN (METRIC UNITS)

   Conversion       Abbreviation          Metric Unit
CO
00
vo
acre                         ac
acre - feet                  ac ft
British Thermal Unit         BTU
British Thermal Unit/pound   BTU/lb
cubic feet/minute            cfm
cubic feet/second            cfs
cubic feet                   cu ft
cubic feet                   cu ft
cubic inches                 cu in
degree Fahrenheit            °F
feet                         ft
gallon                       gal
gallon/minute                gpm
horsepower                   hp
inches                       in
inches of mercury            in Hg
pounds                       Ib
million gallons/day          mgd
mile                         mi
pound/square inch  (gauge)    psig
square feet                  sq ft
square inches                sq in
tons (short)                 ton
yard                         y d


* Actual conversion, not a multiplier
    0.405
 1233.5
    0.252
    0.555
    0.028
    1.7
    0.028
   28.32
   16.39
0.555(°F-32)*
    0.3048
    3.785
    0.0631
    0.7457
    2.54
    0.03342
    0.454
 3785
    1.609
(0.06805 psig+1)*
    0.0929
    6.452
    0.907
    0.9144
ha          hectares
cu m        cubic meters
kg cal      kilogram - calories
kg cal/kg   kilogram calories/kilogram
cu m/rcin    cubic meters/minute
cu m/min    cubic meters/minute
cu  m       cubic meters
1           liters
cu cm       cubic centimeters
°C          degree Centigrade
m           meters
1           liters
I/sec       liters/second
kw          kilowatts
cm          centimeters
atm         atmospheres
kg          kilograms
cu m/day    cubic meters/day
km          kilometer
atm         atmospheres  (absolute)
sq m        square meters
sq cm       square centimeters
kkg         metric tons  (1000 kilograms)
m           meters

-------