ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
EPA-330/2-75-001
EVALUATION
OF
WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES
OF
ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESSORS
NATIONAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS CENTER-DENVER
DENVER,COLORADO
AND
REGION X, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
\m.
DECEMBER 1974
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
EVALUATION OF
WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES OF
ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESSORS
NATIONAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS CENTER-DENVER
DENVER, COLORADO
AND
REGION X, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
DECEMBER 1974
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES . ........... x
GLOSSARY ...... xiv
1. INTRODUCTION 1
BACKGROUND 1
OBJECTIVES ............. 2
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 5
III. RECOMMENDATIONS . 11
SANITARY WASTE TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS ....... 12
Initial Conditions . . . , 12
Final Conditions ..... 12
PROCESS WASTES 13
NON-REMOTE AREAS (SCREENING) . . 13
Initial Conditions . 13
Final Conditions 14
REMOTE AREAS (GRINDING OR GURRY SCOW) 16
Initial Conditions 16
Final Conditions (Grinding) 17
Final Conditions (Gurry Scow) 19
TV. DESCRIPTION OF AREA 21
GEOGRAPHY . 21
CLIMATE 24
POPULATION AND ECONOMY ..... ..... 25
OCEANOGRAPHY 26
V. PROCESSING SEAFOODS IN ALASKA 27
SALMON 27
General 27
Process Operations 29
Waste Characteristics 33
Waste Disposal Methods 35
111
-------
Page
CRAB ....... .... ................ 36
General ..... ................... 36
O Q
Process Operations .... ............... J0
Waste Characteristics ..... ............ 4-
Waste Disposal Methods ................. ^5
SHRIMP .......................... ^7
General ... .................... 47
• ..... • '
Waste Characteristics
Process Operations
Waste Characterist
C <~)
Waste Disposal Methods . ............... J-
VI. EVALUATIONS OF ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESSORS, 1973 ...... 53
BRISTOL BAY ..... ....... • ......... 53
ALASKA PENINSULA ........... • ........ 53
KENAI PENINSULA ...... . ............. 53
SOUTHEAST ALASKA ... ......... . ....... 56
A-l BUMBLE BEE SEAFOODS, SOUTH NAKNEK ......... 60
A- 2 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, EKUK .......... 70
A- 3 NELBRO PACKING COMPANY, NAKNEK .......... 81
A- 4 NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC., DILLINGHAM ....... 92
A- 5 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., DILLINGHAM ....... 101
B-l ALASKA PACKERS ASSOCIATION, INC., CHIGNIK ..... 112
B-2 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., FALSE PASS ....... 121
B-3 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., KING COVE ........ 132
B-4 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., SQUAW HARBOR ...... 146
B-5 WAKEFIELD FISHERIES, SAND POINT .......... 157
C-l ALASKA SEAFOODS, INC., HOMER ........... 168
C-2 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, KENAI .......... 178
C-3 KENAI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI ........ 188
C-4 WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, INC., ANCHORAGE ..... 199
D-l ALASKA GLACIER SEAFOOD COMPANY, PETERSBURG ..... 208
D-2 ANNETTE ISLAND PACKING COMPANY, METLAKATLA ..... 218
D-3 COASTAL GLACIER SEAFOODS, HOONAH ......... 224
D-4 E. C. PHILLIPS & SON, INC., KETCHIKAN ...... . 233
D-5 NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY, CHATHAM ......... 236
D-6 NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY, KETCHIKAN ........ 248
D-7 NEW ENGLAND FISH - FIDALGO PACKING CO., KETCHIKAN . 250
D-8 PETERSBURG FISHERIES, INC., PETERSBURG. ...... 254
D-9 PETERSBURG PROCESSORS, INC., PETERSBURG ...... 262
D-10 THOMPSON FISH COMPANY, HOONAH ........... 268
D-ll WARDS COVE PACKING COMPANY', KETCHIKAN ....... 270
D-12 WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, INC., PETERSBURG .... 275
VIT. REFERENCES
281
-------
Page
APPENDICES
A ALASKAN WATER QUALITY STANDARDS 283
B RATIONALE FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESSING WASTE 291
C EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE AND PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CANNED AND
PRESERVED SEAFOOD PROCESSING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY .... 297
D l/IBRIO STUDIES 321
E MATERIALS AND METHODS 327
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Page
II-l SEAFOOD WASTE DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES 7
III-l FLOW LIMITATIONS FOR ALASKA SEAFOOD
PROCESSORS. • 15
IV-1 AVERAGE SUMMER TEMPERATURES (°F) . , . 24
V-l SUMMARY OF SELECTED WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FOR
FROZEN AND CANNED CRAB MEAT PROCESSES .... 44
V-2 SUMMARY OF SELECTED WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FOR
CRAB SECTION PROCESSES . 46
V-3 SUMMARY OF WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FOR FROZEN
AND CANNED SHRIMP PROCESSES .... 51
VI-A1 SALMON CANNING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
BUMBLE BEE SEAFOODS - SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA. . 66
VI-A2 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS, BUMBLE BEE .SEAFOODS,
SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA 67
VI-A3 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - SOUTH NAKNEK,
ALASKA. ...... 68
VI-A4 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA 69
VI-A5 SALMON CANNING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, EKUK, ALASKA. ... 77
VI-A6 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS, COLUMBIA WARDS
FISHERIES, EKUK, ALASKA 78
VI-A7 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - EKUK, ALASKA .... 79
VI-A8 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
EKUK, ALASKA. 80
VI-A9 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS, NELBRO PACKING COMPANY,
NAKNEK, ALASKA. . . . . , 88
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES (CON'T)
Table No. Page
VI-A10 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY, NELBRO PACKING
COMPANY - NAKNEK, ALASKA 89
VI-A11 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM
SEDIMENTS - NAKNEK, ALASKA 90
VI-A12 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS, PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
AND NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC. - DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA 98
VI-A13 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA. 100
VI-A14 SALMON CANNING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
PETER PAN SEAFOODS - DILLINGHAM, ALASKA . . 108
VI-A15 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS, PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
AND NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC. - DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA 109
VI-A16 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA. 110
VI-A17 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM
SEDIMENTS - DILLINGHAM, ALASKA. ...... Ill
VI-B1 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM
SEDIMENTS, CHIGNIK, ALASKA 118
VI-B2 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS, PETER PAN SEAFOODS,
INC. - FALSE PASS, ALASKA 129
VI-B3 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - FALSE PASS,
ALASKA. . 130
VI-B4 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS-PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
KING COVE, ALASKA 141
VI-B5 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY- KING COVE, ALASKA. 142
VII
-------
LIST OF TABLES (CON'T)
Table No. page
VI-B6 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM
SEDIMENTS - KING COVE, ALASKA . . 143
VI-B7 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS-PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
SQUAW HARBOR, ALASKA ............ 153
VI-B8 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - SQUAW HARBOR,
ALASKA 154
VI-B9 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
SQUAW HARBOR, ALASKA ............ 155
VI-B10 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
SAND POINT, ALASKA 165
VI-C1 WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-ALASKA SEAFOODS,
INC., HOMER, ALASKA. . . . . , . 176
VI-C2 WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-COLUMBIA WARDS
FISHERIES, KENAI, ALASKA 185
VI-C3 FLUME WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-COLUMBIA
WARDS FISHERIES, KENAI, ALASKA ....... 186
VI-C4 SALMON CANNING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
KENAI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI, ALASKA. 195
VI-C5 SALMON FREEZING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
KENAI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI, ALASKA. 196
VI-C6 WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-WHITNEY-FIDALGO
SEAFOODS, INC., ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 206
VI-D1 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY, VIBRIO AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS-ALASKA GLACIER
SEAFOOD - PETERSBURG, ALASKA ........ 213
VI-D2 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - PETERSBURG, ALASKA.. 215
VI-D3 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
PETERSBURG, ALASKA . 214
VI-D4 SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL RESULTS-ALASKA
GLACIER SEAFOOD COMPANY - PETERSBURG,
ALASKA ........ 217
-------
LIST OF TABLES (CON'T)
Table No. Page
VI-D5 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY, VIBRIO AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS, COASTAL GLACIER
SEAFOODS - HOONAH, ALASKA 229
VI-D6 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - HOONAH, ALASKA . . .230
VI-D7 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
HOONAH, ALASKA . . . . 228
VI-D8 SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL RESULTS-COASTAL
GLACIER SEAFOODS - HOONAH, ALASKA 232
VI-D9 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY, VIBRIO AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS-NEW ENGLAND FISH
COMPANY - CHATHAM, ALASKA 242
VI-D10 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALIFY - CHATHAM, ALASKA. . .243
VI-D11 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - CHATHAM, ALASKA. . .244
VI-D12 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
CHATHAM, ALASKA 246
VI-D13 SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL RESULTS-NEW ENGLAND
FISH COMPANY - CHATHAM, ALASKA 247
VI-D14 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS - PETERSBURG, ALASKA. . . .259
VI-D15 SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY - PETERSBURG, ALASKA .260
VI-D16 CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
PETERSBURG, ALASKA 261
VI-D17 PETERSBURG FISHERIES, INC.-PROCESS WASTEWATER
ANALYSES 267
IX
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Page
IV-1. ALASKA 22
V-l SALMON PROCESSING SEQUENCE 30
V-2 CRAB PROCESSING DETAILS, FROZEN AND CANNED
MEATS 39
V-3 CRAB PROCESSING DETAILS - WHOLE AND SECTION . 40
V-4 SHRIMP PROCESSING SEQUENCE - CANNED AND
FROZEN MEAT ........ 49
VI-1 SEAFOOD PROCESSING PLANTS VISITED,, BRISTOL
BAY AND ALASKA PENINSULA. . . ... . . . . . 54
VI-2 SEAFOOD PROCESSING PLANTS VISITED, KENAI
PENINSULA, ALASKA . . . . . 55
VI-3 SEAFOOD PROCESSING PLANTS VISITED, SOUTHEAST
ALASKA ............. 57
VI-Al BUMBLE BEE SEAFOODS, SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS. .... . 61
VI-A2 BUMBLE BEE SEAFOODS, SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA
SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE ..... 63
VI-A3 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, EKUK, ALASKA
LOCATION MAP . 71
VI-A4 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, EKUK, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS 72
VI-A5 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, EKUK, ALASKA
SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE 74
VI-A6 NELBRO PACKING COMPANY, NAKNEK, ALASKA
LOCATION MAP. . ,. 82
VI-A7 NELBRO PACKING COMPANY, NAKNEK, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS...... 83
VI-A8 NELBRO PACKING COMPANY, NAKNEK, ALASKA
SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE 86
VI-A9 NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC., DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA-LOCATION MAP 93
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (CON'T)
Figure No. Page
VI-A10 NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN INC., DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA-PLANT LAYOUT. 94
VI-A11 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN,
INC., DILLINGHAM, ALASKA-PLANT LAYOUT -
STATION LOCATIONS 97
VI-A12 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA-LOCATION MAP. 102
VI-A13 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN,
INC., DILLINGHAM, ALASKA-PLANT LAYOUT -
STATION LOCATIONS. . 103
VI-A14 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., DILLINGHAM,
ALASKA-SALMON PROCESSING SEQUENCE. .... .105
VI-B1 ALASKA PACKERS ASSOCIATION, INC., CHIGNIK,
ALASKA-PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS. . .113
VI-B2 SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE, ALASKA PACKERS
ASSOCIATION, INC., CHIGNIK, ALASKA 116
VI-B3 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., FALSE PASS, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS 122
VI-B4 SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE, PETER PAN SEAFOODS,
INC., FALSE PASS, ALASKA 125
VI-B5 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., KING COVE, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS 133
VI-B6 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., KING COVE, ALASKA
SALMON PROCESSING SEQUENCE 136
VI-B7 CRAB PROCESSING SEQUENCE, PETER PAN SEAFOODS,
INC., KING COVE, ALASKA. . 138
VI-B8 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., SQUAW HARBOR,
ALASKA, PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS . .147
VI-B9 SHRIMP PROCESSING SEQUENCE, PETER PAN
SEAFOODS, INC., SQUAW HARBOR, ALASKA . . . .150
VI-B10 WAKEFIELD FISHERIES, SAND POINT, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS ..... .158
XI
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (CON'T)
Figure No. Page
VI-B11 WAKEFIELD FISHERIES, SANDPOINT, ALASKA
SHRIMP PROCESSING SEQUENCE 162
VI-B12 WAKEFIELD FISHERIES, SANDPOINT, ALASKA
CRAB PROCESSING SEQUENCE 163
VI-C1 ALASKA SEAFOODS, INC., HOMER, ALASKA
LOCATION MAP 169
VI-C2 ALASKA SEAFOODS, INC., HOMER, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT .170
VI-C3 ALASKA SEAFOODS, INC., HOMER, ALASKA
SHRIMP PROCESSING SEQUENCE ......... 172
VI-C4 ALASKA SEAFOODS, INC., HOMER, ALASKA
CRAB PROCESSING SEQUENCE 174
VI-C5 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, KENAI, ALASKA
LOCATION MAP ........... 179
VI-C6 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, KENAI, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT 180
VI-C7 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES KENAI, ALASKA
SALMON PROCESSING SEQUENCE 182
VI-C8 KENAI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI, ALASKA
LOCATION MAP . . . 189
VI-C9 KENAI SALMON PACKING CO., KENAI, ALASKA.
PLANT LAYOUT „ 190
VI-C10 KENAI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI, ALASKA
SALMON PROCESSING SEQUENCE . . 192
VI-C11 WRITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS. INC.. ANCHORAGE
ALASKA-LOCATION MAP. 200
VI-C12 WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, INC., ANCHORAGE,
ALASKA-PLANT LAYOUT „ 201
VI-C13 WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, INC., ANCHORAGE,
ALASKA-SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE ....... 204
xii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (CON'T)
Figure No. Page
VI-D1 ALASKA GLACIER SEAFOOD, PETERSBURG, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS 209
VI-D2 SHRIMP AND CRAB PROCESSING SEQUENCE, ALASKA
GLACIER SEAFOOD CO., PETERSBURG, ALASKA . . .211
VI-D3 ANNETTE ISLAND PACKING CO., METLAKATLA,
ALASKA-PLANT LAYOUT 219
VI-D4 SALMON PROCESSING SEQUENCE, ANNETTE ISLAND
PACKING CO., METLAKATLA, ALASKA 221
VI-D5 COASTAL GLACIER SEAFOODS, HOONAH, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - STATION LOCATIONS 225
VI-D6 NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY, CHATHAM, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT - BACTERIOLOGICAL STATIONS . . .237
VI-D7 SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE, NEW ENGLAND FISH
CO., CHATHAM, ALASKA 239
VI-D8 NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY, CHATHAM, ALASKA
HYDROGRAPHIC/SEDIMENT STATION LOCATIONS . . .241
VI-D9 SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE, NEW ENGLAND FISH-
FIDALGO PACKING CO., KETCHIKAN, ALASKA. . . .252
VI-D10 PETERSBURG FISHERIES, INC., WHITNEY-FIDALGO
SEAFOODS, INC., ALASKA GLACIER SEAFOOD CO.,
PETERSBURG, ALASKA - PLANT LAYOUT - STATION
LOCATIONS 225
VI-D11 SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE-PETERSBURG PROCESSORS,
INC., PETERSBURG, ALASKA 264
VI-D12 WARDS COVE PACKING COMPANY, KETCHIKAN, ALASKA
LOCATION MAP 271
VI-D13 SALMON CANNING SEQUENCE, WARDS COVE PACKING
CO., KETCHIKAN, ALASKA 273
VI-D14 WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, PETERSBURG, ALASKA
PLANT LAYOUT 276
xiii
-------
GLOSSARY
BOD - biochemical oxygen demand, 5-day at 2Q°C
CFR - Code o£ Federal Regulations
1
cc - volume in cubic centimeters = 0.06102 in.
or O.OOL liter
cm - length in centimeters = 0.3957 in. or 0.032bi IL.
COD - chemical oxygen demand
°C - temperature in degrees Centigrade = 5/9 ("F -32)
DO - dissolved oxygen
ft - length in feet = 0.3048 meters
-3
g - weight in grams = 2.205 x 10 pounds
gal. - volume in gallons = 3.7o5 liters
gph - flow rate in gallons per hour = 3.785 1/hr
gpm - flow rate in gallons per minute = 0.0631 liters
per second
HTH - calcium hypochlorite
JTU - turbidity as measured in Jackson turbidity units
in. - length in inches = 2.54 centimeters
kg - weight in kilograms = 2.205 pounds
kkg - weight in thousand kilograms = 2205 pounds or
1 metric ton
km - distance in kilometers = 0.621 miles
kn - velocity in knots = 1.151 miles per hour or
1.852 kilometers per hour
1 - volume in liters = 0.2642 gallons
Ib - weight in pounds = 0.454 kilograms
Ib/day - mass flow rate or load in pounds per day
xiv
-------
m - length in meters = 3.281 feet or 1,094 yards
volume in cub]
264.2 gallons
m - volume in cubic meters = 1.307 cubic yards or
3
m /day - flow rate in cubic meters per day
= 264.2 gallons per day
mgd - flow rate in million gallons per day
= 3,785 cubic meters per day
mg/1 - concentration in milligrams per liter
ml - volume in milliliters = 0.001 liters
or 1 cubic centimeter
MPN - most probable number
N - nitrogen
NH_-N - ammonia as nitrogen
NO?-N - nitrite as nitrogen
NO~-N - nitrate as nitrogen
Org C - organic carbon
Org N - organic nitrogen
OSI - organic sediment index
pH - the logarithm (base 10) of the reciprocal of the hydrogen
ion concentration given in standard units (su)
ppm - concentration in parts per million
ppt - concentration in parts per thousand
psi - pressure in pounds per square inch
TKN - total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Total P - total phosphorus
TSS or SS - total suspended solids or suspended solids
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
xv
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Background
Seafood processing is one of the major industries in Alaska.- The
number of facilities in operation (from 100 to 200 in recent years)
varies widely from year to year as the expected commercial catch of
fish and shellfish fluctuates., The 19,73 catches were expected to be
well, below average in several areas with fewer than 100 plants in
operation.
The major commercial fishery areas are along southern coastal
regions of the state. Principal areas.include Southeast Alaska,, Prince
William Sound, Kenai Peninsula,.Kodiak Island, Alaska Peninsula, Bristol
Bay,-and the Aleutian Islands.
Salmon, crab, shrimp, and halibut are the most important-fish and
shellfish processed. Salmon, the most important seafood, are caught
primarily in the areas of Bristol Bay, Alaska Peninsula, Kodiak Island,
Prince William Sound and Southeast Alaska. On the average, the largest
catch is landed in Southeast Alaska, Processing is limited to a one to
two month period at most locations. Of the shellfish, king crab is the
most important species; tanner (also known as snow or queen crab) and
dungeness crab catches have become more important as king crab catches
have declined in recent years. The largest catches of king crab are
landed in the Aleutian Islands and Kodiak Harbor. The largest dungeness
crab catches are processed in Prince William Sound and Southeast Alaska.
West Coast catches of the small shrimp have increased substantially in
recent years; the area of Kodiak Island processes the major portion of
-------
the catch while Alaska Peninsula and Southeast Alaska also process
significant amounts. Crab and shrimp processing may extend over a three
to six month period. Southeast Alaska processes the major portion of
the halibut and miscellaneous fish catch.
A substantial portion of fish and shellfish is waste material,
ranging from onethird of the whole salmon to as high as 75 to 85 percent
for crab and shrimp. In some areas, part of the waste materials are re-
covered for byproducts, but in most cases all waste materials are dis-
charged directly to adjacent waters. Some of the plants grind their
wastes before discharge, but some dump whole wastes near shore and
others barge whole wastes some distance offshore.
Water quality problems associated with seafood processing are a
direct function of receiving water conditions. In areas with high tidal
ranges and strong currents, waste materials are rapidly dispersed. In
more quiescent waters, accumulations of waste materials result in sludge
banks, shell piles, aesthetic problems and dissolved oxygen depressions.
As a result of the intermittent operations, water quality problems may
be only short-term with normal conditions returning soon after proces-
sing is discontinued.
Objectives
To determine the extent of water quality problems and provide
information to support effluent limitations for the industrial waste
permit program for the seafood industry in Alaska, the National Field
Investigations Center-Denver (NFIC-D) was requested by EPA Region X to
conduct a survey of 26 facilities in the Bristol Bay, Alaska Peninsula
-------
Kenai Peninsula, and Southeastern Alaska areas. The study, conducted
from June to August during the 1973 processing season, had the following
objectives:
1. Compare the various methods of waste disposal practiced in
different seafood processing operations.
2. Determine the effects on the marine environment resulting
from waste discharges in the vicinity of seafood processing
plants;
3. Determine the distribution patterns of solid wastes from
seafood processing operations; and
4. Determine the degree of treatment needed to protect the
receiving waters.
This report is a compilation of the results of the survey of the
Alaska seafood industries investigated. Chapters II and III discuss
the summary, conclusions, and recommendations. Chapter IV is a gen-
eral description of the study area. Characteristics of the salmon,
crab, and shrimp processing industries including processing procedures,
waste disposal methods, and waste characteristics are discussed in
Chapter V. Operational information, production data, waste loads, waste
disposal practices, and receiving water characteristics for plants sur-
veyed in 1973 are summarized in Chapter VI. To facilitate presentation
of the survey results, the plants investigated are correlated alphabeti-
cally with the areas studied: Bristol Bay (A); Alaska Peninsula (B);
Kenai Peninsula (C); and Southeast Alaska (D). Information found in the
appendices includes the Alaska Water Quality Standards (App. A), effluent
limitations rationale (App. B), effluent limitations guidelines for the
canned and preserved seafood category (App. C), a discussion of Vibrio
(App. D), and materials and methods used during the survey (App. E).
-------
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Evaluations of waste disposal practices and treatment needs were
made at 26 Alaskan seafood processing facilities. Water quality studies
were conducted at 15 of these facilities in three geographical areas —
Bristol Bay, Alaska Peninsula, and Southeast Alaska.
The results of this investigation indicated that scouring and
dispersion by tides was the determining factor in the degree of treat-
ment required. Dispersion is adequate to prevent deposits of discharged
solids, and the water quality problems associated with such deposits,
where 1) outfalls are situated in fast-moving tidal areas, 2) outfalls
are submerged below lower low water, and 3) the wastes are ground before
discharge. Bottom deposits and resultant water quality problems were
observed where wastes were discharged ground or unground in quiescent or
shallow waters, on the beaches, or unground to tidal areas. Considering
the enormous tidal volumes, the measurement of the dissolved oxygen was
of no consequence.
These conclusions are supported, in part, by the Organic Sediment
Index (OSI) that reflects the amount of decomposable organic material
present in the sediment. OSI values less than 0.5 indicate inorganic or
stable organic material; values ranging between 0.5 to 1 indicate that
the sediment contains partially stabilized material; values between 1
and 5 indicate decomposing wastes; and values greater than 5 signify
extremely active decomposition. Table II-I lists the processors, OSI
values, and disposal methods used.
-------
Domestic waste disposal practices are inadequate at many of the
facilities. The wastes are discharged directly to the receiving streams,
to septic tanks without leach fields, or to municipal sewers which
either have inoperative treatment facilities or no treatment facilities.
-------
Alaska Peninsula
TABLE II-l
SEAFOOD WASTE DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES
Processor
Location
Product
Disposal Technique
OSI
Remarks
A. Brlston Bay Area
Bumble Bee Seafoods So. Naknek
Salmon
Discharged unground through
floors directly to beach.
1.40-2.03 Fish wastes still present under
dock 48 hr after processing
ceased.
Columbia Wards
Fisheries
Nelbro Packing Co.
Nushagak Fisherman.,
Inc.
Ekuk
Naknek
Dillingham
Salmon
Salmon
Salmon
Bottom Fish
Crab
Ground and discharged above 2.17-3.43
high tide water surface.
Ground and discharged to 0.6-8.04
tidal flat above low mean
tide.
Ground and discharged above 0.25
low mean tide.
Solids deposits evident at all
discharge locations.
Solids accumulation during low
tide. Visible waste plume during
high tide.
Discharge pipe should be extended
to lower low water.
Peter Pan Seafoods,
Inc.
Dillingham
Salmon
Ground and discharged below
low mean tide.
0.025-0.19
Small waste plume visible but
dissipated quickly.
Alaska Packers
Assn., Inc.
Chignik
Salmon
Gurry scow towed into bay
and dumped.
0.04-0.49 Tides float wastes back to can-
nery; deposits in creek behind
facility. Odor problems after
end of season.
Peter Pan Seafoods,
Inc.
Peter Pan Seafoods,
Inc.
False Pass
King Cove
Salmon
Salmon
Crab
Discharged unground through
floors and at dock face.
Gurry scow towed to deep
water and dumped.
3.12 Wastes accumulated under the dock
and along beach for 50 m.
3.46-24.15 Area around scow discolored;
crab wastes evident in discharge
area.
Peter Pan Seafoods,
Inc.
Squaw Harbor
Shrimp
Discharged unground through
submerged outfall below
low tide.
2.20-7.70 Deposits accumulated within several
hundred meters of discharge had
strong H2S odor; large mats
surfaced occasionally, giving off
strong obnoxious odors.
-------
TABLE II-l (CONTINUED)
SEAFOOD WASTE DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES
Processor
Location
Product
Disposal Technique
OSI
Remarks
Wakefield Fisheries
Sand Point
Shrimp
Crab
Salmon wastes discharged un-
ground through submerged
outfall below low mean
tide. Crab wastes ground
and discharged at dock face.
0.04-5.10
Shell fragments and crab wastes
deposited in vicinity of dock.
C. Kenai Peninsula
Alaska Seafoods,
Inc.
Columbia Wards
Fisheries
Kenai Salmon
Packing Co.
Whitney-Fidalgo
Seafoods, Inc.
Homer
Kenai
Kenai
Anchorage
Salmon
Shrimp
Crab
Salmon
Salmon
Salmon
Ground and discharged through N/A—
submerged outfall at 3 ft
minus tide level.
Discharged unground above N/A
water surface at dock face.
Discharged unground through N/A
submerged outfall below low
mean tide.
Discharged ground to Ship N/A
Creek above water surface.
Tidal currents cleanse the area;
solids do not accumulate.
Solid deposits not evident.
Solid deposits not evident.
Wastes accumulate on creek bank
and bed; solid deposits next to
dock.
D. Southeast Alaska
Alaska Glacier Seafood Petersburg
Co.
Annette Island
Packing Co.
Metlakatla
Shrimp
Crab
Salmon
Ground and discharged below
lower low water at dock
face (area of poor
dispersion).
Discharged unground above
water surface.
4.18 Solid deposits dispersed with
a fishing boat.
N/A Solids visible on water surface
90 m from the dock.
-------
TABLE II-l (CONTINUED)
SEAFOOD WASTE DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES
Processor
Location
Product
Disposal Technique
OSI
Remarks
Coastal Glacier
Seafoods
E. C. Phillips &
Son, Inc.
Hoonah
Ketchikan
New England Fish Co. Chatham
New England Fish Co. Ketchikan
New England Fish-Fidalgo Ketchikan
Packing Co.
Crab
Salmon
Halibut
Cod
Herring
Salmon
Salmon
Halibut
Salmon
Discharge unground through 0.002-0.32
floors to water below and
discharged ground at dock
face.
Ground and discharged through N/A
floor.
Ground and discharged through 0.007-0.2
submerged outfall below low
mean tide.
Discharged unground through N/A
floor to water below.
Discharged unground through N/A
submerged outfall below low
mean tide.
Solids accumulation below grinder
and under facility. Sediment
at discharge location entirely
crab waste.
Floating solids under dock.
Disposal adequate.
Floating solids under dock.
Pumping of solids reduces particle
size; adequate disposal.
Petersburg Fisheries, Petersburg
Inc.
Petersburg Processors, Petersburg
Inc.
Thompson Fish Co. Hoonah
Wards Cove Packing
Co.
Ketchikan
Salmon
Salmon
Salmon
Halibut
Salmon
Discharged unground through 0.03-0.39
floors and through sub-
merged outfall.
Discharged unground through N/A
outfall under dock.
Discharged unground to bay. N/A
Discharged unground through N/A
submerged outfall below
low mean tide.
Floating solids and foam in dock
vicinity.
Floating solids under dock; water
discolored.
Fish cleaned by fisherman before
delivery to facility.
Floating solids and scum observed
near outfall.
Whitney-Fidalgo
Seafoods, Inc.
Petersburg
Salmon
Ground and discharged through
submerged outfall below
low mean tide.
0.03-0.39
Disposal adequate.
a/ N/A - Not applicable, study not made.
-------
11
III. RECOMMENDATIONS
The surveys conducted at 26 processors from June to August 1973
indicated that scouring and dispersion by the tides in the area of waste
discharge are the primary factors in determining the degree of process
waste treatment that is required. At those plants where the wastes are
discharged into fast moving tidal areas at a point submerged below lower
low water, dispersion was generally adequate to prevent solids buildup
and water quality degradation. At plants where the discharge location
was not so situated, bottom deposits and/or aesthetic problems were
observed and, with few exceptions, were associated with degraded water
quality conditions such as depressed dissolved oxygen levels and float-
ing solids. Recommendations for disposal of process wastes are based on
these conditions.
Treatment of sanitary wastes requires the wastes 1) to be totally
contained (septic tank with no discharge to surface waters), or 2) to
receive secondary treatment (as defined by 40 CFR 133) either in a
company operated treatment facility or by discharge to a municipal
treatment facility that is providing secondary treatment or that is on
an approved compliance schedule.
It is recommended that the following requirements be contained in
the permits issued to the 26 processing facilities evaluated in this
study, and that they be applied to other seafood processors in Alaska
where applicable.
-------
SANITARY WASTE TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
For those processors that discharge sanitary wastes directly to the
receiving water, to a municipal sewer which discharges the wastes un-
treated, or to septic tanks or leech fields which subsequently discharge
to the surface waters, the following permit conditions are recommended.
Initial Conditions
The permittee is authorized to discharge all sanitary wastes as
presently practiced during the period beginning on the effective date of
the permit and lasting through 1) 30 June 1976, if the permittee elects
to provide secondary treatment by means other than connection to a
municipal system, or 2) 30 June 1977, if the permittee elects to connect
to a municipal system providing secondary treatment by 1 July 1977, or
that is on an approved compliance schedule.
Final Conditions
If the permittee has not elected to convey by 30 June 1977 all
sanitary wastes to a municipal treatment facility which provides sec-
ondary treatment or that is on an approved compliance schedule, then
during the period beginning 1 July 1976, and lasting through the ex-
piration date of the permit, all sanitary wastes shall 1) be totally
contained, or 2) receive secondary treatment (40 CFR 133).
-------
13
PROCESS WASTES
The method of process waste treatment and disposal is dependent
upon plant location. Remote plants do not have access to landfills, and
barging of screened wastes may not be justifiable due to dispersion
characteristics of the receiving waters or to adverse geological and
climatic conditions. In some instances, the wastes should be trans-
ported to an area of the receiving waters with good dispersion character-
istics using a gurry scow, provided that the grid openings in the net or
bottom of the scow are equivalent to a grid spacing of 1 mm (0.040 in.)
or less. Screening of wastes with adequate disposal or resource recovery
is achievable in non-remote areas. However, if the processors in the
remote areas wish to screen the wastes, this option should be allowed in
the permits.
The following permit conditions are recommended for the treatment
and disposal of process wastes.
NON-REMOTE AREAS (SCREENING)
Initial Conditions
1. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permits and
lasting through the expiration date, the processors are authorized to
discharge cooling water, boiler water, freshwater pressure relief
discharges, water used in live tanks, and water used in fluming
fish as presently practiced.
-------
14
2. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permits
and lasting until the expiration date, the total daily average and
daily maximum discharge flows shall be limited as shown in Table III-l
or to the flows reported in the RAPP applications. To comply with
monitoring requirements, the discharge flow shall be considered as
the total intake water entering the facility. The intake water shall
be measured continuously with daily totals recorded.
3. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permits
and lasting through 30 June 1977, the processors are authorized to
discharge all process wastes. Process wastes do not include cooling
water, boiler water, freshwater pressure relief discharges, water used
in live tanks, or water used to transfer fish from fishing vessels to
the facility. All process wastes shall be collected, discharged,
disposed of, and monitored (during the operating season) by the
processors as follows:
a. All process wastes shall be collected, without loss through the
facility floors, and flumed to a grinder(s).
b. Particle size of all wastes shall be reduced to a diameter of
1.27 cm (0.5 in.) or less to insure adequate dispersion in the
receiving water.
c. Discharge shall be accomplished through an outfall(s) located
beneath the receiving water surface at mean lower low water.
Final Conditions
1. During the period beginning 1 July 1977 and lasting through the
expiration date of the permits, the processors are authorized to
discharge process wastewater, after screening, through a single outfall
or multiple outfalls. Process wastewaters do not include cooling water,
boiler water, freshwater pressure relief discharges, water used in
live tanks, and waters used to transfer fish from fishing vessels to
the facility. Process wastes discharges shall be collected, disposed
of, and monitored (during the operating season) by the processors
as specified below:
-------
15
TABLE III-l
a/
FLOW LIMITATIONS FOR ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESSORS-
Daily Average
Processor
Nelbro @ Naknek
Bumble Bee @ Naknek
Columbia Ward @ Ekuk
Columbia Ward @ Kenai
Peter Pan @ Dillingham
Peter Pan @ False Pass
Peter Pan @ King Cove
Peter Pan @ Squaw Harbor
Wakefield @ Sand Point
Alaska Packers @ Chignik
Kenai Packers @ Kenai
Alaska Seafoods @ Homer
Whitney-Fidalgo @ Anchorage
Whitney-Fidalgo @ Petersburg
Petersburg Fisheries @ Petersburg
Petersburg Cold Storage
Petersburg Processsors
Annette Island @ Metlakatla
Thompson Fish @ Hoonah
Coastal Glacier @ Hoonah
New England Fish @ Chatham
New England Fish @ Ketchikan
Nef co-Fidalgo @ Ketchikan
E. C. Phillips @ Ketchikan
Wards Cove @ Ketchikan
Nushagak @ Dillingham
m /day
1,140
1,670
492
537
1,060
1,210
1,893
1,290
681
1,500
1,360
594
303
1,510
2,080
2,270
590
2,390
57
1,893
1,360
Not
Not
163
303
57
mgd
0.30
0.44
0.13
0.142
0.28
0.32
(0.50)
0.34
0.18
0.40
0.36
0.157
0.08
0.4
0.55
0.6
0.156
0.63
0.015
0.50
0.36
Available
Available
0.043
0.08
0.015
Daily Maximum
m /day
1,890
4,920
1,590
2,200
1,060
3,785
1,893
3,785
10,220
4,500
2,720
1,030
3,030
4,540
6,250
6,810
1,180
2,390
189
2,271
2,380
Not
Not
163
1,090
76
mgd
0.50
1.3
0.42
0.58
0.28
1.0
(0.50)
1.0
2.7
1.2
0.72
0.272
0.8
1.2
1.65
1.8
0.312
0.63
0.05
0.60
0.63
Available
Available
0.043
0,288
0.020
a/
— Values were obtained from plant RAPP applications.
-------
Ib
a. All wastes shall be collected, without loss through the facility
floors, and flumed to a screening device(s) equivalent to
an efficiently operated tangential screen with a grid spacing of
1 mm (0.040 in.) or less.
b. Process wastewaters passing through the screening device(s)
shall be disposed of through an outfall or multiple outfalls located
beneath the receiving water surface at lower low water. Flows
shall be recorded, limited, and monitored as specified in the
Initial Effluent Limitations. The quality of the discharge shall
be monitored and recorded as specified below:
Effluent Characteristic
BOD
Suspended Solids
Oil and Grease
Frequency
Once/week
Once/week
Once /week
Sample Type
24 hr composite
24 hr composite
Grab
c. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than
9.0 standard units and shall be monitored once per week.
d. Seafood processing waste materials which are retained on the
screening device(s) shall be disposed of by 1) reduction,
or 2) transport (without loss of solids) to a dumping site, which
is within the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured
as provided for in the Convention on the Territorial Sea and
the Contiguous Zone (15 UST 1606; TIAS 5639), in at least 13 m
(7 fathoms) depth and so as to not cause pollution or be a nuisance,
or 3) other means approved by the Regional Administrator.
REMOTE AREAS (GRINDING OR GURRY SCOW)
Initial Conditions
1. During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and
lasting through 30 June 1975, the processors are authorized to dis-
charge process wastewater, cooling water, boiler water, freshwater
relief discharges, water used in live tanks, and water used in fluming
fish as presently practiced.
-------
17
2. During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit
and lasting through the expiration date, the total daily average
and daily maximum discharge flows shall be limited as shown in
Table III-l or to the flows reported in the RAPP applications.
To comply with monitoring requirements, the discharge flow shall
be considered as the total intake water entering the facility.
The intake water shall be measured continuously with daily totals
recorded.
Final Conditions (Grinding)
1. During the period beginning 1 July 1975, and lasting through the
expiration date of the permits, the processors are authorized to
discharge, dispose of, and monitor process wastes (during the operating
season) as specified below: (Process wastes do not include cooling
water, boiler water, freshwater pressure relief discharge, water
used in live tanks, or water used to transfer fish from fishing
vessels to the facility.)
a. All wastes shall be collected, without loss through the facility
floors, and flumed to a grinder(s).
b. Particle size of all wastes shall be reduced to a diameter of
1.27 cm (0.5 in.) or less prior to discharge to ensure adequate
dispersion in the receiving water.
c. Discharge shall be accomplished through a single outfall or multiple
outfalls located beneath the receiving water surface at least
13 m (7 fathoms) below mean lower low water.
d. Self-monitoring shall consist of bottom cores collected at floor
or ebb tide obtained from four locations within a 30 m (98 ft)
radius of each outfall taken every two weeks beginning the first
week of processing and ending the week after processing has ceased.
Depth in centimeters of material identified visually, or by
physical or chemical analysis, as seafood processing waste shall
be reported once monthly. The four approximate locations for
each outfall to be sampled are shown in Figure III-l. Flows
shall be recorded, limited and monitored as specified in the
Initial Effluent Limitations.
-------
IS
The processors may elect to use a grab sampler (dredge type) if
no seafood wastes have accumulated at the sampling locations.
Once material identified as seafood waste is observed, core samples
must be taken to determine the depth of the accumulation.
Effluent
Pipe
x = approximate sample locations
Figure III-l. Locations for outfall sampling.
e. If the required self-monitoring or such monitoring as is carried
out by the EPA shows that more than one core sample in any fourteen-
day period contains more than 7.5 cm (3 in.) depth of material iden-
tified as seafood processing waste, Requirement (f ) , below, shall
be met no later than one year following the date of such determination.
f. Seafood processing waste materials which are retained on a screening
device equivalent to an efficiently operated tangential screen with a
grid spacing of 1 mm (0.040 in.) or less shall be removed from the
process waste prior to discharge. Such solids shall be disposed of
by 1) recovery, or 2) transport (without loss of solids) to a site
within the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured as
provided for in the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Con-
tiguous Zone (15 UST 1606; TIAS 5639), in at least 13 m (7 fathoms)
depth and so as not to cause pollution or be a nuisance, or 3) other
means approved by the Regional Administrator.
g. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than
9.0 standard units and shall be monitored once per month before
discharge through the submerged outfall.
2. During the period beginning 1 July 1975 and lasting through the
expiration date of the permits, the processors are authorized to dis-
charge as presently practiced, all cooling water, boiler water, fresh-
water pressure relief discharges, water used in live tanks, and water
used to transfer fish from fishing vessels to the facility.
-------
19
Final Conditions (Gurry Scow)
1. During the period beginning 1 July 1975, and lasting through the
expiration date of the permits, the processors shall collect, dispose of,
and monitor (during the operating season) process wastes as specified
below: (Process wastewaters do not include cooling water, boiler water,
freshwater pressure relief discharges, water used in live tanks, and
water used to transfer fish from vessels to the facility.)
a. All wastes shall be collected, without loss through the facility
floors, and flumed to a screening device(s) (gurry scow) with a grid
spacing of 1.27 cm (0.5 in.) or less. The wastes shall be collected
in such a manner so as to not cause pollution or be a nuisance.
b. Process wastewaters passing through the screening device(s) shall be
disposed of as presently practiced.
c. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0
standard units and shall be monitored once per month.
d. Seafood processing waste materials which are retained on the screen-
ing device(s) shall be disposed of by 1) recovery, or 2) transport
(without loss of solids) to a site outside the baseline from which the
territorial sea is measured as provided for in the Convention on the
Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone (15 UST 1606; TIAS 5639),
in at least 13 m (7 fathoms) depth and so as to not cause pollution or
be a nuisance, or 3) other means approved by the Regional Administrator.
e. Self-monitoring shall consist of bottom cores collected at flood or
ebb tide obtained from four locations within a 30 m (98 ft) radius
of each screening device taken every two weeks, beginning the first
week of processing and ending the week after processing has ceased.
Depth in centimeters of material identified visually, or by
physical or chemical analysis, as seafood processing waste shall be
reported once monthly. The four approximate locations for each
screening device to be sampled are shown in Figure III-l.
The processors may elect to use a grab sampler (dredge type) if no
seafood wastes have accumulated at the sampling locations. Once
material identified as seafood waste is observed, core samples must
be taken to determine the depth of the accumulation.
f. If the required self-monitoring or such monitoring as is carried out
by EPA shows that more than one core sample in any fourteen-day period
contains more than 7.5 cm (3 in.) depth of material identified as seafood
processing waste, Requirement (g). below, shall be met.
-------
Seatood processing waste materials which are retained on a
screening device equivalent to an efficiently operated tan-
gential screen with a grid spacing of 1 mm (0.040 in.) or
less, shall be removed from the process waste prior to dis-
charge. Such solids shall be disposed of by 1) recovery, or
2) transport (without loss of solids) to a site outside of
baseline from which the territorial sea is measured as provided
for in the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous
Zone (15 UST 1606; TIAS 5639), in at least 13 m (7 fathoms)
depth and so as to not cause pollution or be a nuisance, or
3) other means approved by the Regional Administrator.
2. During the period beginning 1 July 1975 and lasting through the
expiration date of the permits, the processors are authorized to
discharge as presently practiced, all cooling water, boiler water,
freshwater pressure relief discharges, water used in live tanks,
and water used to transfer fish from fishing vessels to the facility.
-------
21
IV. DESCRIPTION OF AREA
GEOGRAPHY
Alaska is a land of geographical extremes. With a land area of
2 2
about 1,510,000 km (586,400 mi ), the state is about one-fifth the size
of the conterminous United States and two and one-half times the size of
Texas. Alaska contains the northernmost, easternmost and westernmost
points in the United States.
With many coastal inlets and islands, Alaska has 51,500 km (32,000 mi)
of coastland, (54 percent of the total U. S. coastland). The area of in-
terest in the Alaska seafood industry study is the southern coastal area
extending from British Columbia, Canada, west to the Aleutian Islands chain.
This area, extending about 3,200 km (2,000 air mi), contains a major por-
tion of the Alaska coastline.
A number of geographical features define characteristics of the
coastal area [Figure IV-1], Southeastern Alaska, or the Panhandle, is a
long narrow coastal strip isolated from inland British Columbia by a
mountain range with an average elevation of more than 2,800 m (9,000 ft).
Numerous waterways divide much of the area into the islands of the
Alexander Archipelago. Except for the high mountain areas covered with
ice fields and glaciers, most of southeastern Alaska is heavily wooded
with hemlock and spruce. Since land slopes are steep, little land area
is available for building towns and cities, and most communities are
strung out along shorelines. Roads are practically nonexistent outside
developed communities. Principal cities are Juneau (the state capital),
Ketchikan, Sitka, Petersburg and Wrangell.
-------
DUTCH HARBOR
Figure IV-1. Alaska
-------
23
Prince William Sound is southeast of Anchorage in southcentral
Alaska. The Sound is surrounded by mountains and numerous narrow
inlets. A number of islands partially protect the Sound from the
Gulf of Alaska. Adjacent to the Sound are hemlock and spruce forests,
while higher elevations are primarily mountain tundra and barrens.
Cordova and Valdez are the principal cities in the area.
The Kenai Peninsula extends southward from Anchorage, separating
Cook Inlet from the Gulf of Alaska. Mountainous terrain, the Peninsula
is predominantly mountain tundra on the eastern slopes and spruca and
birch forests on the western slopes. The Peninsula is the most acces-
sible coastal area with highways connecting most communities to Anchorage.
Principal communities are Seward, Kenai and Homer.
Kodiak Island, large and mountainous, is south of the Kenai Peninsula.
Much of the island is mountain tundra with the north end supporting hemlock
spruce forests. Kodiak is the only sizeable community on the island.
The Alaska Peninsula juts westward from the mainland, separating
the Bering Sea from the Pacific Ocean. Large and shallow Bristol Bay
is on the north side of the peninsula, bordered by low elevation tundra.
Part of the peninsula is mountainous and covered mainly by mountain
tundra. The Alaska Peninsula is quite remote, supporting only small fish-
ing communities of which Naknek is of most interest.
The Aleutian Islands extend westward from the Alaska Peninsula about
1,600 kra (1,000 mi). Largely uninhabited except for a few Aleut Indian
villages and naval installations, the islands are barren and windswept.
-------
CLIMATE
Temperatures in coastal Alaska are moderated by the influence of
the sea and differ markedly from the extremes that occur in interior
areas. Southeastern Alaska experiences mild weather year around, com-
parable to western Washington. The warm waters of the Japan current are
responsible for this moderation. The warm current also has a beneficial
effect on marine life, and commercial fishing flourishes.
In the Aleutian Islands temperatures rarely fall below -188C (0°F),
although fog and severe winds are common. Southcentral Alaska, including
the Prince William Sound area and the Kenai Peninsula, experiences weather
similar to upper New York State. Valdez is an ice-free port while
Anchorage is landlocked by ice in winter. Average temperature ranges
for the summer months are shown for several locations in Table IV-1.
TABLE IV-1
AVERAGE SUMMER TEMPERATURES (°F)-
May
City
Anchorage
Cordova
Juneau
Avg.
Max.
54
52
54
Avg.
Min.
38
36
38
June
Avg.
Max.
63
58
61
Avg.
Min.
43
42
44
July
Avg.
Max.
65
60
63
Avg.
Min.
50
46
48
Augus t
Avg.
Max.
63
61
62
Avg.
Min.
48
44
47
a/ Temperature in degrees Centigrade * 0.556 (°F - 32).
Because it is near the sea, coastal Alaska receives heavy pre-
cipitation. Cloudy weather is the rule with rain two days out of
three common in many areas. Southeastern Alaska receives the most rain
-------
25
with annual precipitation ranging from 2,540 mm (95 in.) at Juneau to
more than 3,820 mm (150 in.) at Ketchikan. Other coastal areas receive
lesser amounts although 1,520 mm (60 in.) is common. Fog occurs about
20 to 30 days per year.
The far north latitude causes long days in summer and lone nights
in winter. During midsummer in Anchorage, nights may be as short as
four hours,
POPULATION AND ECONOMY
With a population of slightly more than 300,000, Alaska is the least
populated of the 50 states. About 70 percent of the population lives in
the coastal areas. Sizeable communities are widely scattered with most
areas supporting only small fishing, raining or Indian villages. Many com-
munities are populated only seasonally.
Anchorage, with a metropolitan area of about 125,000 people, has more
than one-third of the state's population. All other coastal communities
have less than 15,000 population. Cities of intersst and their approximate
area populations are: Kodiak, 9,000; Ketchikan, 7,000; Sitka, 7,000: Juneau,
6,500; Kenai, 3,500; Petersburg, 3,000: Homer, 3,000; Seward, 2,500; and
Cordova, 2,000.
The economy of southeastern Alaska depends predominantly upon tourism
and the lumber, pulp and paper, and fishing industries. Until recently
the southcentral area economy rested upon fishing, mining, and tourism,
Discoveries of oil in Cook Inlet have developed a petroleum industry which
centers on petrochemical plants at Kenai. Valdez is the southern terminus
-------
2b
of the proposed Alaska pipeline to transport oil from the new North
Slope oil fields. The Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian Islands depend
heavily upon fishing and tourism.
OCEANOGRAPHY
Tides in Alaska are markedly different from typical southern United
States waters. The tides are semidiurnal with two highs and two lows daily.
Tide ranges of 4 to 6 m (12 to 20 ft) are common. This high tidal range
produces strong currents (2 to 9 kn) in many of the narrower tidal channels,
In areas of interconnected tidal channels, such as in the southeast, tide
stages strongly influence the direction of freshwater flow in such channels.
In areas with large freshwater inflows, salinities may vary sharply with the
tides. Water temperatures and other water quality parameters are also
affected.*
* The criteria covering water quality conditions in these estuarine areas
are found in Appendix A.
-------
V. PROCESSING SEAFOODS IN ALASKA
The EPA-NFIC-D survey concentrated on evaluating salmon, crab
and shrimp processors in Bristol Bay, Alaska and Kenai Peninsulas, and
southeast Alaska. Each processor was visited by EPA personnel. Plant
officials were interviewed to obtain information on plant processing
operations, production rates, water uses and the waste disposal practices
employed. The findings of the evaluations of these facilities are dis-
cussed in greater detail in Section VI, "Evaluations of Alaska Seafood
Processors, 1973."
The processing methods and waste disposal practices at most of the
Alaskan plants are similar. In this section, the discussion deals with
the general aspects of these practices for processing salmon, crab and
shrimp.
SALMON
General
Five species of salmon are caught in Alaskan waters:
1. Chinook (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha), also known as king
or spring salmon with an average fish weight of 9.1 kg (20 Ib);
2. Sockeye (0. nerka) , also known as red or blue-back with
an average fish weight of 3.0 kg (6.5 Ib);
3. Silver ((). kisutch) , also known as coho or medium red with
an average fish weight of 3.6 kg (8 Ib);
4. Pink (0. gorbuscha), also known as humpback salmon with an
average fish weight of about 1.8 kg (4 Ib); and
5. Chum ((). keta) , also called dog salmon with an average fish
weight of about 3.6 kg (8 Ib).
-------
Sockeye, pink and chum salmon are the three major species that are
caught and canned or fresh frozen. In the Bristol Bay area, all five
species are caught but the sockeye salmon catch makes up 60 percent of
the total production. In the Alaska Peninsula area, all three species
are significant with sockeye, pink, and chum constituting 25 to 30, 40
to 45, and 30 to 35 percent, respectively, of the salmon production. The
catch in the Kenai Peninsula area is predominantly sockeye salmon. In
southeastern Alaska, pink salmon make up 70 to 80 percent of the produc-
tion; chum salmon make up the major portion of the remaining catch.
Cormercial fishing is regulated by escapement. The Alaska Fish and
Game Department operates counting stations on the major spawning streams.
Fishing areas are opened or closed depending on the number of fish passing
a counting station. If the number of salmon fall below prescribed levels,
fishing is temporarily or permanently suspended.
Salmon catches in the aforementioned four areas were considerably less
during the 1973 season than in previous years. In the Bristol Bay area,
for example, the 1973 season was the worst in history. The 1973 forecast,
based on the 1972 catch, was for an estimated catch of 6 million sockeye
salmon, but the actual catch was only 2.3 million. The present plan of
the Alaska Fish and Game Department is to close the Bristol Bay area to
all salmon fishing in 1974. The primary cause for the reduced catch was
the extremely cold winters in 1970-71 and 1971-72. This affected the food
chain, caused heavier than normal ice packs on the ocean, froze salmon
eggs in the spawning streams, and killed the immature fish or stunted
their --
-------
29
Process Operations
The majority of the Alaskan salmon are canned since the distance to
markets precludes the sale of fresh salmon. However, numerous processors
freshfreeze a portion of their catch, primarily for sale in the contiguous
United States and Japan.
Because of the distance from fishing areas to the processing plants,
salmon are generally delivered to the plants by cannery tenders that ser-
vice a number of boats in a fishing area. The tenders use brine coolers
or ice to cool the fish in transport. At the cannery the fish are off-
loaded into an elevator and from there move onto a conveyor that carries
them to the fish house. Figure V-l is a schematic of the typical proces-
sing sequence. While unloading fish, small amounts of blood and slime are
discharged to the receiving waters as drainage from the elevator and pump-
age from the tender holds.
In the fish house the salmon are sorted by species into storage bins
and cooled with ice or chilled brine. The fish can be taken immediately
from the bins to the butchering sequence or can be held for processing at
a later time.
Fish are transported via conveyor or by sluicing with saltwater to
the butchering area where they are aligned manually on a conveyor belt
feeding an indexer which beheads the fish. The fish heads* are processed
in a variety of ways:
1. Direct discharge as waste solids;
* At some plants, the nape (fleshy portion right behind the head) is
reclaimed for further processing.
-------
30
OPERATION
UNLOAD SHIP
SORT,STORE AND CHILL FISH
BEHEAD FISH
REMOVE EGGS
REMOVE VISCERA,TAILS AND FINS
EQUIPMENT
FISHING SCOW
WASTES
BLOOD AND SLIME
STORAGE BINS
INDEXER
HEADS
ROE
EGG PROCESSING
OIL TO FILLER
BRINE
VISCERA
IRON CHINK
VISCERA,TAILS,FINS.BLDOJ
SCRUBBER
VISCERA,TAILS,FINS
HAND REMOVE REMAINING
FINS AND VISCERA
SLIMING TABLE
VISCERA,FINS
| EDIBLE FISH TO CANNE8V
TEMPORARY STORAGE
CUT UP FISH FILL CANS
WEIGH CANS
HAND FILL LIGHT CANS
SEAL CANS UNDER VACUUM
WASH CANS
STACK CANS IN BASKETS
COOK
COOL CANS IN RETORT
LABEL AND PACK IN CASES
FILLER BINS
FILLER
WEIGHING
STANDARD
WEIGHT
CANS
ALIGHT cans
PATCHING
MEAT FRAGMENTS
SEALING
WASHING
SOLIDS IN WASH WATER
STACKER
RETORTING
COOLING
SOLIDS IN COOLING WATER
CASE
FINISHED PRODUCT
Figure V-1 Salmon Processing Sequence
-------
31
2. Freezing whole heads, or grinding, freezing and shipping to a
byproducts plant; and
3. Cooking the whole or ground heads for oil that is added in the
canning sequence to the 1/4- and, at some canneries, 1/2-lb cans.
The standard procedure for processing fish heads is to cook them with
steam at 100eC (212°F) for 15 minutes, then at 117°C (242°F) for 40
minutes at 12 psi. The pressure is then reduced, the cooker is opened,
and cold water is added at the bottom to float the oil off the top.
After the indexer, the roe (eggs) is removed by hand and sluiced
to the egg house. Some plants also recover the milt which is apparently
marketed in Europe as a food spread. In the egg house, any viscera cling-
ing to the eggs is removed by hand and sluiced to the waste stream or dis-
charged. The eggs are cured in brine agitators before being hand-packed
in salt for subsequent shipment, primarily to Japan (approximate weight
is 10 kg or 22 Ib per case after curing). The average weight of eggs re-
covered per case of salmon packed is:
0.7 to 0.9 kg (1.5 to 2 lb)/case of sockeye (reds),
1.1 kg (2.5 lb)/case of chums, and
2.3 kg (5 lb)/case of chinook (kings).
Following egg removal, the fish move into the iron chink (processing
120 fish per minute) where the viscera, tails and fins are removed and
discharged as waste. Mechanical scrubbers are sometimes employed after
the chink to remove additional waste parts. The fish are then moved onto
sliming tables where any remaining viscera and other unedible parts are
removed manually. The fish are also inspected for bruises and damage.
-------
32
Subsequent to this step the fish are moved to filler bins for canning,
which take* place in that portion of the plant known as the cannery.*
Canning is usually done in 1/4-. 1/2- and 1-lb cans. Most canneries
have three or more canning lines. One iron chink and butchering line
can process fish for several canning lines. In some plants, salmon
are also hand-packed in 4-lb cans for institutional use.
Fish move from filler bins to the filler machines which cut them
into the proper sires and force then into cans. Salt is then added
to the cans and, as previously mentioned, reclaimed oil from the head
cooker is added to the 1/4- and 1/2-lb cans. Meat fragments from the
filling operation fall to the floor. In canneries with solid floors
(such as concrete) these wastes are collected during washdown operations
and discharged with other process wastes. In canneries with wooden
floors the wastes generally fall through holes or cracks onto the beach
below.
The filled cans are automatically weighted. Underweight cans are
diverted to a patching area where they are manually brought to the
proper weight by adding meat pieces. The cans are then sealed, coded,
washed to remove exterior meat particles, then placed in metal baskets.
The baskets are placed on carts and rolled into the retorts. Retorting
at 12 psi and 117"C (242°F) takes eighty minutes for 1/2-lb cans and
95 minutes for 1-lb cans. After retorting, the cans pass through a
water bath for cooling and washing to remove oil or fish particles
(some canneries flood the retorts with the cooling water). Generally,
* In some plants, the egg house, the fish house, and the cannery
-------
33
the cans are labeled and mechanically cased (48 1-lb cans per case,
or the equivalent for 1/2- and 1/4-lb cans), or are bright stacked
and palletized for shipment. When bright stacked, cans are encased
with cardboard or plastic for shipment to another location for labeling
and packaging in standard cases.
Waste Characteristics
The major source of wastes in salmon processing Is the butchering
operation. About 33 percent of the whole fish is wasted with slight
variation depending on the species. The head and the collar (nape)
constitute 50 to 60 percent of that portion of the whole fish that is
wasted. The following tabulation details the constituents of salmon
processing wastes.
2/
Percent of Total Salmon Cannery Waste by Species—
Portion
Head and collar
Tail and fins
Liver
Roe
Milt
Digestive tract
Heart
Pink
57
16
5
8
5
9
0.8
Red
61
14
5
9
5
6
0.8
Chuci
54
11
5
16
6
8
0.7
Kine
50
11
3
15
4
18
0.7
Coho
60
11
4
8
6
11
0.7
The heads and collars can be recovered as discussed previously-
Other portions such as the tails, fins, and viscera can be utilized
for byproducts. The roe and, at some canneries, the milt are recovered
as standard practice.
Studies conducted on salmon processing wastes yielded the following
information on selected parameters observed in the composite waste
stream from a number of plants.
-------
Typical Salmon v:_a8_te_Cjha£a£tjrj.s_ti:£s—
a/
_ _j^raTnejter— JL*5£fL
Flow (I/kg output) 4.2 - 14.6
Flow (gal./lb output) 0.5 - 1.75
BOD " 900 - 5,400
COD 200 - 9,600
ss 500 - 4,800
Volatile Solids 1,000 - 7,300
Total Solids 1,100 - 8,400
Oil 60 - 350
Turbidity (JTU) 180 - 1,500
pH (su) 6.1 - 7.0
a/ All units are mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
The values above include those plants with varying degrees of waste
recovery and represent a combination of both dilute and concentrated waste
streams from within the plants. For example, when different waste streams
are evaluated individually, such as those from the sliming tables, iron
chink, and head cookers, the various parameters have a much greater con-
centration range.
The pollutant load from a salmon processor will vary depending -JT> the
extent of byproduct recovery that is practiced. For a cannery discharpinp
all of its wastes (no recovery of heads, etc.) the wet fish waste solid;;
would average about 12 kg (26 Ib ^ per case.* Where byproduct recovery it
practiced (recovery of heads, tails, egpe, and milt), the wet fish waste
load would be about 3.5 kg (8 Ib) per case or about 70 percent less than
when byproduct recovery is not practiced.
A case of salmon weighs 21,8 kg consisting of 48 one-lb cans. Live weight
of fish processed per case varies from 30 to 34 k.p, (67 to 75 Ib) per case.
Typical salmon waste ^keup is about 1/3 solids and 2/3 moisture.
-------
35
Wastes from those canneries that discharge all processing waste solids
contained BOD, COD, TSS, and oil loads of 2.8, 3.7, 2.6 and 0.5 kg (6.2,
8.1, 5.8, and 1.2 Ib) per case, respectively. By comparison, at the
other canneries, the BOD, COD, TSS, and oil loads were 0.6, 0.8, 0.4 and
0.04 kg (1.4, 1.8. 0.9, and 0.1 Ib) per case, respectively.
Waste Disposal Methods
Waste treatment at most Alaska seafood processing plants is practically
nonexistent. Disposal methods include the collection of all wastes at
a central system and discharging at depth, direct discharge at the face
of the dock, discharge to a gurry scow*, or discharge through the facility
floor directly to the water or beach depending on the tide. Combinations
of these methods are employed at some Alaska processing plants.
Discharge at the face of the dock can cause aesthetic problems when
the water is shallow and tidal currents are weak. Foam and floating
solids and a visible waste plume are evident when this method is used,
Moreover, if the currents are not strong the solids tend to accumulate
on the bottom and/or the beach. Disposal through an outfall discharg-
ing near the bottom into an area with better dispersal characteristics
solves some of these problems. If the water is too shallow at the point
of discharge, the wastewater, being less dense, tends to surface and
create aesthetic problems with floating solids.
The gurry scow, depending on the mesh size of the net or the opening
between the wood sides, will retain the larger fish solids. However, the
* A gurry scow is a barge with either a net bottom or slotted wood side
which allows the smaller solids and liquid wastes to escape while retaining
larger solids such as heads, tails, and fins. The scow is towed out to deep
water and dumped.
-------
36
wastes which escape while the scow is anchored at the dock are hifh in
suspended solids and oreanics. The area around the scow becomes dis-
colored: the extent of discoloration depends on the tidal action. The
scows are towed out into the bays generally about 0.4 to 0.8 km (1/4 to
1/2 mi) and dumped in water at least 28 m (90 ft) deep. These wastes,
primarily large solids, sink below the water surface. Because the cur-
rents are usually strong in the dumping area, problems with floating
solids or bottom accumulations are not generally evident.
Many of the salmon processing, plants have solid floors (concrete
or plywood covered with fiberglass) in the fish house where the major
portion of the waste is generated. This facilitates wash-down operations
and fluming the wastes to a central collection system. Numerous plants,
however, have wooden floors in the canning area. Wastes from the filler
machines, canning lines, and cleanup operations fall through holes or
open spaces between the planks into the water or onto the beach. Concrete
floors or other types of solid construction would eliminate this problem.
The waste solids that are discharged may be either whole or ground.
Grinding the solids improves the dispersal in the receiving water; however,
it also increases the amount of waste material in solution and, conse-
quently, the BOD and COD are higher than when the solids are whole.
CRAB
General
Development of the crab processing industry in Alaska has occurred
within the past 25 years with most of the growth occurring since I960.
-------
37
The major species processed is king crab (P_a£5lithp_de_s camschatica) .
Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) , and tanner crab (Chionecetes bairdii)
are also processed in significant numbers.
King crab processing is confined mainly to southwest Alaska (Aleutian
Islands and the western portion of the Alaska Peninsula) and central
Alaska (Kodiak Island and Cordova). King crab processing in southeast
Alaska is minimal. The dungeness crab catch in this area, however,
ranged from 905 to 1,810 kkg (2 to 4 million Ib) annually during the
1962-69 period. Catches of dungeness crab in the central region were
higher, ranging from 1,360 to 4,080 kkg (3 to 9 million Ib) annually
during this period. King crab processing reached a peak of 72,000 kkg
(159 million Ib) in 1966 but then declined to 27,000 kkg (59 million Ib)
by 1969; the reduction being attributed to over-harvesting. Because of
this, more restrictive fishing regulations have been imposed. In the
Aleutian Islands area, for example, the king crab season extends from 1
November to 15 February. In the Bering Sea area it lasts from 15 June
to 31 March and in the area around the Alaska Peninsula (King Cove and
Sand Point) the season begins 15 August and extends to 15 January or un-
til 24,300 kkg (5.25 million Ib) are caught, whichever comes first. These
season limitations have lead to the development of tanner crab processing.
The season for this species extends from 15 August to 1 August the follow-
ing year. Total figures for crab production in Alaska were not computed
for the past several years; however, the 1971 data for two processing plants
(King Cove and Sand Point) show that over 2,300 kkg (5 million Ib) were pro-
cessed at each plant. The King Cove plant processes mainly kine crab,
whereas the Sand Point plant processes equal anounts of king and tanner crab,
-------
38
Process Operations
All species of crab are caught in pots set on the ocean bottom
and are transported live to the plant in holding tanks or storage
vats. At the plant the crabs are off-loaded into steel bins and then
placed immediately in live tanks through which seavater is pumped
continuously. Any dead crabs taken from the boat or the live tanks
are disposed of as waste solids.
Alaska crab are generally processed into one of four forms of
finished product —• canned meat, frozen meat, sections and legs (sections
being the body halves), and whole crab. Normally only dungeness crab
are processed whole.
Processing details and wastes generated in preparing the finished
products are shown in Figures V-2 and V-3. Butchering and cookinp oper-
ations are common to all phases of crab processing, except whole crab
preparation.
In the butchering process the carapace (shell covering the body) j
removed by impaling the crab on a metal plate. This breaks the body ^
half, allowing the viscera to fall to the floor. The gills are removed
next by use of a rotary brush or paddle wheel. The viscera, gills, and
carapace are fed to a grinder for subsequent disposal. In some plants
the gills are not removed until after the crab has been cooked.
Two cooking steps are employed at some plants — a precook and a
final cook. The precook step is designed to free the meat, rinse off
residual blood and minimize the heat shock of the final cooking cycle.
Precooking lasts from one to five minutes at a temperature of 60° to 66°C
-------
SEAWATER
OVERFLOW
WASTES
WA_TE_RJ
HMEAT FRAGMENT"
fi
CAN
RETORT
[WATER __,_
IMEAT FRAGMENTS
COOL
CASE
CANNED MEAT PROCESS
TO SUMP OR DIRECT DISCHARGE
L
LIVE TANK
BUTCHER
WASTES
CARAPACE, VISCERA,
GILLS
PRECOOK
ALJL°J,'._w-iUlL _ _ — •
MEAT
EXTRACTION
COOK
W.AJEJR _ __+_
WASH
AND COOL
EAT , WATER
IOZEN MEAT PROCESS
39
SUMP
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTES
GRINDER
Figure > - 2 . (rub Pr o <• e ss i n a \)». | a i I *. Frozen and (', a n n e H >l e a 1 >
-------
SEAWATER
, OVERFLOW
1
COOK
t
COOL
t
P.CK ^
t
FREEZE
1 1
JCOLO STORAGE
WASTES
1 1
LIVE TANK
_J
COOKING WATER, SOLIDS
COOLING WATER, SOLIDS
WHOLE COOK PROCESS
t
BUTCHER
»
PRECOOK
t
COOK
t
COOL
t
INSPECT
AND SORT
t
PACK
t
FREEZE
WASTES
CARAPACE, VISCERA, GIL
(GR)*I
BLOOD. WATER
ORGANICS, WATER
JLAL JMIL11 ».
MEAT, WATER
PRODUCT FLOW -
WASTES
GRINDER (GR)
SECTION PROCESS
DISCHARGE A
•
T DOCK*
Figure V-3. Crab Processing Details - Whole and Section
-------
(140 to 150*F). The final or main cooking cycle is at about 99"C (210°F)
for 10 to 20 min.-
Frozen and canned meat preparation are similar. After butchering,
the legs are separated from the shoulder. Precooking follows, after
which the meat is removed from the claws and leg sections by a strong
jet of water. (Some processors collect the claws for subsequent freezing
and marketing as "Cocktail Claws.")— Meat is often removed from the
large leg sections and shoulders by extraction units that squeeze the
meat from the shell. Meat is also removed by shaking the legs vigorously.
Following the main cooking cycle and cooling, the meat is placed in a
strong brine solution to aid the removal of shell fragments. The meat is
then rinsed with freshwater to remove excess salts, detritus and any re-
maining shell. Prior to the freezing or canning process, the meat is in-
spected for any inedible material. Where freezing is to be employed the
meat is packed in trays that hold 6.8 kg (15 Ib) of meat. A saline solu-
tion or ascorbic acid may be added to each tray. The trays are frozen
and glazed with a water spray, then boxed for subsequent shipment.
Canning proceeds in a manner similar to that used for processing
salmon except that the cans are filled manually. The most common can
size used is 1/2-lb. Salt and citric acid are added to each can after
which they are sealed and retorted for 50 to 60 min at 116°C (2408F).
Cooling can be accomplished in the retorts by flooding or processing the
cans through a water bath. The cans are then cased (24 cans/case).
As mentioned earlier, dungeness crab are normally processed whole
[Figure V-3]. Prior to cooking, the crabs are inspected for missing
-------
claws or legs. Cooking at 99°C (210°F) for 20 to 30 rain may be done in
freshwater or in a strong sodium chloride brine (50,000 to 60,000 mg/1
as chloride); the latter cooking solution is used to impart a more de-
A /
sirable flavor to the crab.- After cooking, the whole crab is spray
rinsed, cooled in freshwater, and placed in a brine freezer. Another
rinsing with freshwater follows to remove excess brine and to glaze
the crab which are then boxed and stored for shipment,
A common method of preparing king and tanner crab is by sectioning
[Figure V-3]. Butchering proceeds in the same manner as that for the
meat processes except that the legs and shoulders are left intact. After
butchering, the crab halves are first rinsed in freshwater to remove re-
sidual blood. The next step is the precooking cycle at 60e to 70°C
(140° to 160"F) for 2 to 5 min. The main cooking cycle is about 18 min
at near boiling temperature which cooks the neat and inactivates the
"bluing" enzyme that can cause the meat to turn blue during storage.
Following the cooking cycle, the crab sections are rinsed, cooled, in-
spected, sorted by size and quality, and then packed in boxes. The
boxes are then put in blast freezers or brine freezers. In brine freezing
it is common practice to pass the sections through a rinse tank to remove
excess brine and to glaze the sections.
Waste Characteristics
Crab processing wastes consist of the inedible portions, such as-
shells, viscera, and gills, plus some meat fragments. The shell is
primarily coiaposed of chitin (a protein substance) and calcium carbonate.
-------
43
The major portion of the raw (live) crab is wasted. When the whole
crab is cooked, the wastes generated at the plant are minimal. When
the meat is extracted from the shell for freezing or canning, however,
the quantity of waste is generally 70 to 80 percent and, in some in-
stances, as high as 88 percent of the raw weight. The high waste percen-
tage generally occurs from processing king crab when the shoulder meat
is not saved.
Water usage and the amount of wastes generated are the highest in
the frozen and canned meat processes. Studies conducted at processors
3
in Kodiak showed an average water use of 352 m /day (0.092 mgd) without
3
waste grinding and 935 m /day (0.247 mgd) with waste grinding. Water
use through a grinder has been reported as 170 to 225 liters/min (45
to 60 gal./min or 245 to 325 m /day). Most frozen and canned meat opera-
tions use two grinders. When grinding is not practiced, over half the
water use occurs in the cooling and meat extraction steps. Where grinding
is employed, over 60 percent of the water use occurs in the butchering and
meat extraction steps. The highest-strength wastes are generated in the
butchering and cooking steps. Table V-l summarizes the values of selected
parameters measured during a study of frozen and canned meat processors in
LI
Kodiak.-
Water use in the crab section processing operation has been reported
to be about 75 percent of that used for frozen and canned meat processes.
The washing and cooling steps constitute 60 percent of the water use where
grinding is not employed. With waste grinding, wastewater flows increase
3 3
by about 50 percent (from about 260 m /day to 390 m /day). The washing,
cooling, butchering and grinding steps comprise over 60 percent of the
-------
TABLE V-l
4/
SUMMARY OF SELECTED WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FOR FROZEN AND CANNED CRAB MEAT PROCESSES-'
WITHOUT GRINDING^-/
Parameter
Screened
Solids-27
SS
BOD5
COD
Organic N
(mg/1)
6,400
340
363
754
77
Mean
(kg/kkg)-/ (Ib/ton)-/
228 456
11.8 23.6
12 24
28 56
2.7 5.4
Range
(mg/1)
2,410-10,400
205-476
250-415
438-1,070
54-100
(kg/kkg)
79-377
6.7-17
8.4-15
16-39
1.8-3.6
(Ib/ton)
158-754
13.4-34
16.8-30
32-78
3.6-7.2
(mg/1)
19,180
1,158
1,434
2,262
230
Mean
(kg/kkg)
853
54
66
104
10
WITH GRINDING^/
(Ib/ton)
1,706
108
132
208
20
(mg/1)
9,000-29,400
661-1,630
656-2,160
1,140-3,450
86-754
Range
(kg/kkg)
517-1,220
45-67
54-69
86-142
8-13
(Ib/ton)
1,034-2,440
90-134
108-138
172-284
16-26
a/ Average of values obtained from one frozen and one canned meat processor — Avg. flow: 320 m /day (0.082 mgd); Range: 245-396 m /day (0.065-0.105 mgd).
W Average of values obtained from 4 plants in frozen and canned meat category — Avg. flow: 400 m /day (0.106 mgd); Range: 322-507 m /day (0.085-0.134 mgd).
£/ Wastes per unit of raw product.
d/ Samples were screened using a 20-mesh Tyler screen; retained solids were weighed.
-------
45
total water use. A summary of waste load characteristics on selected
parameters measured at several section processing Kodiak plants is
shown in Table V-2.
In the whole crab process, water use is similar to that for the
section process where grinding is not employed. The greatest portion of the
water is used in cooling and rinsing operations. Organic wastes generated
in the whole crab process are low with the majority coming from the cookers.
Information on waste characteristics for this process is limited. Values
reported for two plants (one sample from each) at Kodiak, Alaska are as
follows:—
Screened Solids 360-1,020 mg/1
11-18 kg/kkg
SS 58-65 mg/1
1-2 kg/kkg
BOD,. 280-790 mg/1
5 4.8-24 kg/kkg
COD 554-1,470 mg/1
9.6-44 kg/kkg
Organic N 33.2-104 mg/1
1.8-2 kg/kkg
Waste Disposal Methods
The common method employed in disposing of crab wastes is to grind
and discharge at the face of the dock above the receiving water surface.
In some cases the wastes are discharged just below the surface or are pumped
through a closed conduit to discharge at depth (minimum of 7 fathoms). Foam
and floating solids are generally visible in the area of the surface or
near-surface discharges. Moreover, shells can accumulate on the bottom,
-------
TABLE V-2
4/
SUMMARY OF SELECTED WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FOR CRAB SECTION PROCESS-
WITHOUT GRINDING5/
Parameter
Screened
Solids-'
SS
BOD,.
5
COD
Organic N
(mg/1)
1,440
1,560
424
103
448
254
1,090
415
62.4
73
Mean
(kg/kkg)-/
25
24
8
1.6
8
4
19
13
1.1
1.1
r/
(Ib/ton)-
50
48
16
3.2
16
8
38
26
2.2
2.2
(mg/1)
720-2,040
480-2,400
332-550
70-207
30-900
185-310
900-1,400
280-600
54.8-70.6
58-87
Range
(kg/kkg)
14-43
7-35
5-11
1.2-2.6
1-19
3-5
13-30
9-15
0.9-1.4
0.8-1.4
(Ib/ton)
28-86
14-70
10-22
2-38
6-10
26-60
18-30
1.8-2.8
1.6-2.8
WITH GRINDING-
Mean Range
(mg/1) (kg/kkg) (Ib/ton) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (Ib/ton)
13,900 307 614 807-27,000 28-474 56-948
904 22 44 201-1,600 7-32 14-64
1,525 36 72 627-2,520 22-44 44-88
2,620 64 128 954-4,540 34-80 68-160
205 5 10 92-350 3.3-6.0 6.6-12
a/ Taken from data compiled for tanner and king crab section processing. First value given for each parameter is for tanner crab section processing; the
second is for king crab.
Avg. flow: 138 nu/day (0.036 mgd); Range: 132-144 nu/day (0.035-0.038 mgd).
Avg. flow: 318 m /day (0.082 mgd); Range: 284-356 m /day (0.075-0.094 mgd).
b/ Values from 4 plants investigated — Avg. flow: 330 m /day (0.088 mgd); Range: 156-439 m3/day (0.041-0.116 mgd).
cf Wastes per unit of raw product.
d/ Samples were screened using a 20-mesh Tyler screen; retained solids were weighed.
-------
47
particularly where tidal action i» not adequate to disperse then. Fine
grinding of the shells tends to preclude the waste accumulations.
SHRIMP
General
The Alaska shrimp fishery has experienced rapid growth within the
past 15 years, brought about by the introduction of Mechanical peeling
machines cos&ined with the decline of the king crab fishery. Three
species of shrimp are caught in Alaskan waters — the pink shrimp (Pandalua
borealis), the side-stripe shrimp (Pandalopsis dispar), and the coon-stripe
shrimp (Pandalug hypsinotus). Shrimp are process«d throughout most of
the year but the peak season extends frow mid-June to mid-September.
The major portion of the shrimp catch is taken in the central region
primarily at Kodiak. However, Squaw Harbor and Sa«d Point [Figure IV-1] are
also major processing points. The shrimp caught in the central region
increased from about 2,300 kkg (5 million Ib) in 1964 to 21,000 kkg
(46 million Ib) in 1969. In the southeast region it has remained rela-
tively stable, ranging between 900 and 1,800 kkg (2 and 4 million Ib) per
year.
Process Operations
Shrimp are generally processed by mechanical peeling. Only a few
hand-picking processors exist in Alaska today. About 45 to 180 kg (100 to
400 Ib) of raw shrimp can be hand peeled per day. The capacities of
mechanical peelers vary between 1,820 to 5.450 kg (4,000 to 12,000 Ib)
per day.
-------
Shrimp are either frozen or canned after processing. The processes
involved and the wastes generated in canned and frozen shrimp operations
are shown in Figure V-4.
Upon arrival at the plant, the shrimp are unloaded from the fishinp
boats, placed in storage carts and iced. Normally the shrimp have been
on the fishing boat for up to several days. Because the optimum period
for shrimp processing is about 3 days, the raw shrimp are generally stored
for another 24 to 48 hr. At the time of unloading, fish that have been
caught with the shrimp are manually removed.
At the time of processing, properly aged shrimp are conveyed to steam
cookers which facilitate the peeling operation. This cooking operation
lasts 1 to 2 min at 15 psi. Some plants, however, do not employ this cooking
step and raw peeling is practiced. Seawater or freshwater is used to convey
product, shells and heads from the peelers with the latter two going to waste.
From the peeler*, the shrimp move into washers where they are rigorously
agitated to break loose any shell not previously removed. Following washing,
the shrimp are flumed to separators where small meat fragments and any shell
remaining are removed. After the separators, the shrimp are flumed to a
dewatering belt. If the shrimp are canned, they are blanched in a salt so-
lution for about 15 min at 96°C (205*F). Shrimp which are to be frozen are
not generally subjected to this second cooking operation.
Following dewatering or blanching, as the case may be, the shrimp go to
the packing area where they pass over an upflow blower which dries them and
blows off extraneous shell. The shrimp then move onto a conveyor for
-------
BOATS
PROCESS
WASTE
SEAM
FREEZE
BOX
WASTES
STORAGE
PRECOOK
ORbANICS, FISH, DEBRIS
SHELL, WATER
PEELERS
SHELL, OFFAL, WATER
WASHERS
SHELL, OFFAL, WATER
I
SHELL, OFFAL
BLANCH
[CANNING ONLY)
i
SHAKER
BLOWER
INSPECTION
MEAT, SHELL, COOKER WATER
SHELL, WATER
MEAT FRAGMENTS
SIZE
MEAT FRAGMENTS
PACK
MEAT FRAGMENTS
INJECT
CITRIC ACID
±
CAN
RETORT
COOL
COOLING WATER
CASE
SUMP
I DISCHARGE
I TO DEPTH
Figure V—4. Shrimp Processing Sequence Canned and Frozen Meal
-------
50
Inspection, size grading, and packing for freezing or canning The
canning operation for shrimp is similar to that for s<r.on and crab.
Citric acid is added as a preservative.. After the cans are sealed,
they are then retorted for about 25 tnin ac 116eC (24QBF), cooled and
cased (24 1/2-lb can/case). Shrimp for freezing are usually hand
packed in 5-lb containers or plastic bags and fro2en« In some plants,
the shrimp are rinsed in an ascorbic acid solution before freezing.
Was t e Charac teristics
Shrimp processing wastes include soluble organics, shells, solids,
and offal. The shrimp heads comprise about 45 percent of the total
waste. Discussions with shrimp processors during the 1973 study indicated
that about 15 percent of the live shrimp weight is recovered — the amount
recovered varies seasonally.
Byproduct recovery is being practiced in Alaska. Studies show that an
average of 65 percent of the live weight can be recovered for such uses as
fish food and as a protein supplement.
Peeling operations account for about 50 percent of the total water use.
The peeling step is also the biggest source of waste. The washing and
separation steps account for about 15 percent of the water use and a mod-
erate amount of the waste. Pluming and cleanup operations account for
about 25 percent of the water. Studies at shrimp processing facilities in
=3 / *
Kodiak showed average water use figures of 1,340 tn /day (0.356 mgd).—
Waste characteristics determined at several shrimp processors using
the frozen and canned processes are shown in Table V-3. Studies conducted
-------
TABLE V-3
4/
SUMMARY OF WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FOR FROZEN AND CANNED SHRIMP PROCESSES-
Parameter
Screened
Solids-'
SS
BOD
COD
Organic N
(mg/D
5,200
570
1,000
1,740
FROZEN
Mean
(kg/kkg) (Ib/ton)
670 1,340
290 580
139 278
283 566
PROCESS-/
Range
(mg/1) (kg/kkg)
3,500-6,800 420-990
380-740 190-370
240-1,380 60-208
960-2,640 159-363
(Ib/ton)
840-1,980
380-740
120-416
312-726
(mg/1)
10,400
1,310
1,410
2,940
162
Mean
(kg/kkg)
760
90
90
196
10.8
CANNED PROCESS-
(Ib/ton) (mg/1)
1,520 3,120-18,800
180 920-1,600
180 490-3,000
392 1,370-5,780
21.6 5-271
Range
(kg/kkg)
205-1,240
70-120
30-200
130-408
1.1-18.7
(Ib/ton)
410-2,480
140-240
60-400
206-816
2.2-37.4
aj This processor used seawater at an average rate of 1,620 m /day (0.430 mgd) and a range of 1,400 to 1,780 m /day (0.370 to 0.470 mgd). The peeler used
was capable of processing 230 to 270 kg (500 to 600 lb)/hr. Eight samples were analyzed.
b_/ This processor used freshwater at an average rate of 1,066 m /day (0.282 mgd) with a range of 700 to 1,438 m /day (0.185 to 0.380 mgd). Sixteen samples
were analyzed.
£/ Wet weight.
-------
52
by EPA indicated the COD and total dry solids of shrimp wastes have been
estimated at 0.31 and 0.30 kg/kg, respectively.—
Waste Disposal Methods
Discharge of wastes is generally made at the dock face above or
below the water surface: or, in some cases, the wastes are conveyed
through a closed conduit from the dock to deeper waters. Discharge
of wastes at the dock face presents problems with foaming and floating
solids. In either case, solids buildup around the discharge points can
occur where tidal action is not sufficient to disperse the wastes.
-------
VI. EVALUATIONS OF ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESSORS, 1973
53
As previously mentioned, seafood processors were visited by EPA
personnel during the period June to August in four selected areas of
Alaska. These areas and the name, location, and seafood products pro-
cessed at each facility are tabulated below.
BRISTOL BAY (FIGURE VI-1)
Seafood Processor
A-l Bumble Bee Seafoods
A-2 Columbia Wards Fisheries
A-3 Nelbro Packing Company
A-4 Nushagak Fisherman, Inc.
A-5 Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.
Location
South Naknek
Ekuk
Naknek
Dillingham
Dillingham
ALASKA PENINSULA (FIGURE VI-1)
B-l Alaska Packers Assn., Inc.
B-2 Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.
B-3 Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.
B-4 Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.
B-5 Wakefield Fisheries
Chignik
False Pass
King Cove
Squaw Harbor
Sand Point
KENAI PENINSULA (FIGURE VI-2)
C-l Alaska Seafoods, Inc. Homer
C-2 Columbia Wards Fisheries Kenai
C-3 Kenai Salmon Packing Co. Kenai
C-4 Whitney-Fidalgo Anchorage
Seafoods, Inc.
Product
Canned Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Frozen Herring
Frozen Bottom Fish
Frozen Tanner Crab
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
Canned Salmon
Canned Salmon
Canned Crab
Canned Shrimp
Frozen Shrimp
Frozen Crab
Frozen Crab
Frozen Shrimp
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
-------
PETER PAN SEAFOODS ,INC.
PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC
IKOI TO SCALE)
Figure Vl-l. Seafood Processing Plants Visited Bristol Bay and Alaska Peninsula
-------
SCALE IN MILES
20 .0 20 40
WHITNEY - FIDALGO
SEAFOODS, INC.
0 20 40
SCALE IN KILOMETERS
KENAI SALMON PACKING CO.
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES
ALASKA SEAFOODS INC.
0
PORT LIONS
KODI AK
-N-
XKOD IAK IS LAN D
'OLD HARBOR
Figure VI-2. Seafood Processing Plants Visited, Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
-------
56
D-l Alaska Glacier
Seafood Company
D-2 Annette Island
Packing Company
SOUTHEAST ALASKA (FIGURE VI-3)
Petersburg
Metlakatla
D-3 Coastal Glacier Seafoods Hoonah
D-4 E.G. Phillips & Ketchikan
Son, Inc.
D-5 New England Fish Company Chatham
D-6 New England Fish Company Ketchikan
D-7 New England Fish-Fidalgo Ketchikan
Packing Company
D-8 Petersburg Fisheries, Petersburg
Inc.
D-9 Petersburg Processors, Petersburg
Inc.
D-10 Thompson Fish Company Hoonah
D-ll Wards Cove Packing Ketchikan
Company
D-12 Whitney-Fidalgo Petersburg
Seafoods, Inc.
Frozen
Frozen
Canned
Frozen
Frozen
Frozen
Frozen
Frozen
Shrimp
Crab
Salmon
Salmon
Halibut
Cod
Crab
Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
Canned Salmon
Canned Salmon
Frozen Salmon
A report on each of these processors follows in this section.
Officials at each Company were interviewed to obtain information such
as production rates, processing operations, water uses, types of waste,
and waste disposal practices. Waste treatment needs to protect the
receiving waters and to meet applicable state and Federal standards and
regulations are also in this section. The remoteness of some processors
from areas of major development, discharge area, and dispersion afforded
by tides were considered in determining the treatment needs. For sanitary
wastes, processors will have to provide adequate treatment by 30 June 1077
through (1) septic tanks and leach field systems proven to function properly,
or (2) connection to a municipal system providing adequate secondary treatment
(defined in 40 CFR 133) or one that is on a compliance schedule to achieve this
end, or by 30 June 1976 if the processors install a secondary treatment system
-------
WHITEHORSE
-N-
SKAGWAY
HOONAH
COASTAL GLACIER SEAFOODS
PETERSBURG PROCESSORS, INC.
PETERSBURG FISHERIES, INC.
PETERSBURG COLD STORAGE
WHITNEY - FIDALGO
ALASKAN GLACIER SEAFOOD
PETERSBURG
CHATHAM
NEW ENG LAN D FISH CO
SCALE IN MILES
201.0 0 20 40
NEW ENGLAND FISH CO.
NEFCO - FIDALGO PACKING CO.
WARDS COVE PACKING CO.
E.C. PHILLIPS & SON, INC.
KETCHIKAN
0 20 40
SCALE IN KILOMETERS
METLAKATLA
ANNETTE ISLAND
PACKING CO
PRINCE OF WALES ISLAND'
Figure VI-3. Seafood Processing Plants Visited, Southeast Alaska
-------
58
such as an extended aeration plant. The effluent limits for secondary
treatment of sanitary wastes will be in accord with those established by
the EPA.
Most processors will be required to collect all process wastes
including, where necessary, the head cooker liquor and wash down waters,
and, after grinding of the solids, discharge the wastes through a closed
conduit below low low tide, providing that at the point of discharge
adequate dispersion is afforded and the solids buildup is minimized or
precluded. If subsequent monitoring indicates solids buildup is occur-
ring, screening will be required to remove the solids prior to dis-
charge. The retained solids will then need to be transported, without
loss of solids, to a suitable dumping area or disposed of by other means,
such as in a waste reduction plant.* However, at those facilities where
findings of the 1973 survey revealed solids accumulations on the beaches
or in the water, and tidal influences were inadequate to afford dispersion,
screening will be required immediately.
Monitoring in the form of collected sediment samples will be required
routinely (one every two weeks) to ascertain the extent or lack of solids
buildup in the discharge zone at those plants where, after grinding, the
discharge goes through a closed circuit. Samples will need to be collected
at flood or ebb tide in the discharge area at a sufficient number of points
(4 minimum). Collection of these samples in an area described by a
* In this report, reduction (rendering) is used to mean the conversion
of waste solids into byproducts such as fish meal, pet food, and bait.
-------
59
30 m (100 ft) radius from the discharge point should suffice. Data
which needs to be recorded and subsequently reported monthly to the EPA
includes the date, time, description of disposal area, depth of water,
distance of sample point from the discharge point, tidal stage, person(s)
collecting and analyzing samples, character of the samples as identified
by visual or chemical analyses, and the depth of solids buildup.
Waste disposal requirements for the crab and shrimp processors will
be in accord with the effluent limitations prescribed in the proposed
guidelines [Appendices B and C].
-------
A-l RUMBLE BEE SEAFOODS, SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA
General
The Bumble Bee Seafoods, a subsidiary of Castle and Cooke of San
Francisco, Cal. has been operating a salmon cannery on the Naknek River
near South Naknek, Alaska [Figure Vl-1] since 1938. The layout of the
plant processing area is shown in Figure VI-Al. The cannery employed
190 fishermen, cannery workers, and miscellaneous personnel during the
canninp season that lasted from 22 June to 20 July 1973. The 1973
projected plant production was 60,000 to 70,000 cases* of which 98 per-
cent were sockeye, two percent were chum, and less than one percent were
chinook salmon. The annual production for the last five years at the
South Naknek Bumble Bee cannery was as follows:
1972 70,000 cases
1971 74,000 cases
1970 132,000 cases
1969 50,000 cases
1968 40,000 cases
Because of a reduced salmon catch, caused by decreased runs and
altered fishing regulations imposed by regulatory agencies, not all of
the canneries in the area could operate economically during the 1973
season. Combines, in which one cannery processed fish for other can-
neries, were formed. The Bumble Bee cannery packed salmon for Alaska
Packers, Columbia Wards Fisheries, and the Red Salmon Company, in addi-
tion to processing its own fish.
A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application was filed with the
Corps of Engineers on 18 February 1972, EPA personnel from the National
* One cs=-. consists of 21,8 k? (48 lb) of salmon.
-------
61
• 11
Ebb
Mouth Naknek River
1 •
Flood
ICE TOWER
Note: Process Wastes Discharged thru Floors into River
LEGEND
• HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
• SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/Nj
Figure V I — A 1. Bumble Bee Seafoods , S o u I h \aknek, Alaska
Plant Layout - Station Locations
-------
62
Field Investigations Center-Denver conducted an in-plant survey from
28 to 30 June 1973. Warner Leonardo, superintendent, provided assist-
ance and information.
Water Supply
Water for domestic use and cannery operations, excluding boiler
feed water, is obtained from a well with a capacity of 910 m /day
(0.24 mgd). Well water is treated with chlorine gas to produce a
1.5 to 2 ppm chlorine residual. Three water towers provide a storage
capacity of 473 m (125,000 gal.). Company officials could not estimate
the plants daily water use. However, the RAPP application shows water
3
use, excluding boiler feed water, to be 1,590 m /day (0.42 mgd) which
exceeds the plant pumping and storage capacity. Water used as boiler
feed is surface water taken from a small pond about 0.4 km (1/4 mi)
from the cannery. Boiler feed water is used without any treatment.
jJT)
Water used for cleanup is dosed with Mikroklene DF% an iodine
solution, to yield a concentration of 25 ppm. The Alaska Department
of Health and Welfare periodically makes bacteriological analysis of
water used at the cannery.
Process Operations
Salmon are processed in a manner similar to that previously described
in Section V. A processing sequence schematic for the canning operation
is shown in Figure VI-A2. Fish heads are ground and cooked with the
recovered oil added to the canned product. Eggs are recovered and pro-
cessed in the egg house.
-------
ICE
OIL/SALT
UNLOAD
1
FISH HOLDING
BINS [5]
4
1 N DP Y F D 1 1 1
1 n U C A t K [ 4 J
1 1 •
1
IRON CHINK (4)
*
SCRUBBER 131
*
SLIMING TABLE
14)
1
FILLER BINS (5)
1
Fll 1 F B ( 5 1
t
WEIGHING (5)
*
PATCHING (51
t
SEALING (5)
t
RETORT (9)
f
AIR COOL
T
CAN WASH
|
BRIGHT STACK
— • — • — - — - — h- F R R HniKF ..... _
H L A U S
1 _ . "
t HEAD COOKERS __,
1 U ^ (3) ~*
| GRINUbR 4
1 OIL
mO*
*"
>•
• • •«•• PROCESS SEQUENCE
^ WASTE
^ EGG RECOVERY
(2) NO OF UNITS
63
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
Figure VI-A2 Bumble Bee Seafoods, South Naknek, Alaska
Salmon Canning Sequence
-------
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—The RAPP application reported a domestic waste-
3
water volume of 38 m /day (10,000 gpd). At present all domestic wastes
from the cannery flow to a small stream which empties to the Naknek
River upstream of the loading docks. Chlorine crystals are dumped
daily into toilets at the upper end of the sewer lines. Restrooms on
CR}
the dock are equipped with Destroilets which use propane to incinerate
the waste. A spirator actived sludge package plant, with chlorine dis-
infection, is scheduled to be placed in operation by the 1974 canning
season.
Refuse—Company officials stated that a 3/4-ton truck is filled
daily with uncompacted refuse. This non-process waste is hauled 2.4 km
(1.5 mi) to the Borough of South Naknek dump where periodically it is
pushed into a small lake. Refuse wastes are not covered.
Process Wastes—All wastes from the fish and canning houses (i.e.,
indexer, iron chink, scrubbing table, filler, patching table, and clean-
up operations) are discharged through holes in the plant floor directly
onto the beach below the dock. After each batch of fish heads is cooked
and the oil removed, the remaining portion of the batch is discharged to
the beach. The egg house uses five brine agitators each with a capacity
of 400 liters. Brine from the agitators is discharged to the beach after
450 kg (1,000 Ib) of eggs have been processed.
Plant management stated that 20 to 30 percent of the fish that is
processed becomes waste. Based on a 21.8 kg (48 Ib) case of canned salmon
and the estimated production figures for the 1973 season, between 325 and
-------
65
635 kkg (720,000 and 1,400,000 Ib) of fish waste were deposited on beaches
and ultimately reached the Naknek River. Waste characteristics reported
in the company's RAPP application are shown in Table VI-A1.
Receiving Water Evaluation
An evaluation of the receiving water quality was conducted from 4 to
6 July 1973. The locations of sampling stations, with reference to the
plant, are shown in Figure VI-Al and described in Table VI-A2.
A summary of the results of physical and chemical measurements is
shown in Table VI-A3. Dissolved oxygen concentrations on the south shore
of the Naknek River near the cannery ranged from 6.8 to 9.6 mp/1. At high
tide, surface temperatures, pH and transparency fluctuated slightly-
Salinity levels (12.5 to 17.5 ppt) encountered on the south shore indi-
cate that the waters in the area of the cannery are influenced by the
saline waters of Kvichak Bay.
Sediment samples were obtained from the tidal flats in front of,
under, and at each end of the cannery dock at the locations Riven in
Table VI-A4. The sediment types were mixtures of sand-clay and mud-gravel.
No sample contained visual remnants of fish-waste. Samples collected
at locations near the point of fish waste discharge contained excessive
amounts of carbon and nitrogen. OSI values ranging between 0.5 to 1
indicate that the sediment contains partially stabilized wastes while
values between 1 and 5 indicate decomposing wastes. Stations C and D
(discharge areas) fall into this latter category, while the remaining
three stations fall into a category of stable conditions. Adequate pro-
cess waste disposal techniques would result in the stablization of the
sediments at the present discharge locations.
-------
cr
cr
TABLE VT-A1
SALMON CANNING WASTFVATER CHARACTERT^TTCS-
BUMBLE BEF SEAFOODS - SOUTH NAKNTK, ALASKA
a/
Parameter
F]ow, ra /day (mgd)
p", SU
Temperature, "C (°F)
BOD5e/
COD*'
Total Solids
SS
'•IF as y.
TKN as N
N09 as N
NO as N
Total Phosphorus as P
Oil and Grease
Average—
Concentration
1,500 (0.40)
6.6
13 (55)
13,000
2,710
8,020
5,040
30.9
825
0.078
1.02
42.4
617
Average
(kp/day)
19,640
4,096
12,160
7,620
47
1,250
0.118
1.55
64
934
Load
(Ib/day)
43,300
9,030
26,800
16,800
103
2,750
0.26
3.42
142
2,060
Averape
(kp/case)
6,5
1.37
4.05
2.54
0.015
0.416
0.00005
0.0005
0.021
0.312
Load— '--
(Ib/case ]
14.4
3.01
8.93
5.60
0.034
0.917
0.0001
0.001
0.047
0.687
a/ Data as reported in company RAPP application.
b/ All values reported as mg/1 except where noted.
c/ Based on daily production of 3,000 cases.
d/ Values not reported on RAPP application.
e/ The average daily COD is approximately 20 percent of the EOT. This indicates poor sampling
procedures, sample preservation, and/or analytical techniques.
-------
67
TABLE VI-A2
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS, BUMBLE BEE SEAFOODS,
SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA
Map Key^- Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 75 m NE of Station 2
2 10 m N of W end of cannery dock
3 75 m m of Station 1
A 75 m N of Station 4
5 10 m N of cannery dock mid point
6 75 m N of Station 5
7 75 m N of Station 6
8 10 m N of W end of cannery dock
9 75 m N of Station 8
10 75 m N of Station 9
11 75 m NW of Station 8
Sediment Sampling Stations
A 20 m E of E corner of cannery dock
B 10 m N of cannery dock at storage area
C Under dock at mid point of cannery
D 10 m N of cannery dock in unloading area
E 20 m W of cannery dock
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A1.
-------
68
TABLE VI-A3
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA
Parameter— Station No.—
DO, tag /I 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
High Water^-'
Surface
8.8-9.4
8.0-9.0
6.8-9.3
8.8
7.0-9.6
7.7-9.3
—
8.4-9.2
7.0-9.3
—
7.7-9.5
13.0-15.5
12.5-16.0
13.0-15.0
13.0-15.0
13.0-15.5
13.0-15.0
13.0-14.5
13.0-15.0
13.0-15.5
13.0-14.5
12.5-15.0
Parameter^ Station No.—
Salinity, ppt 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
pH 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Transparency
High Water-^
Surface
15.0-17.5
15.0-16.0
15.2-17.5
15.5-17.5
15.2-17.0
16.0-17.5
12.5-17.0
15.5-17.5
16.0-17.0
13.0-17.0
15.5-17.0
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.5-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
6 to 91.5 cm
a/ Data are reported as range of values.
b/ Station locations are shown in Figure IV-A1.
c/ No samples were collected during low water periods or from the bottom at high tide.
-------
69
TABLE VI-AA
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
SOUTH NAKNEK, ALASKA
Station— Depth
A
B
C
D
E
Tidal
Tidal
Tidal
Tidal
Tidal
Flat
Flat
Flat
Flat
Flat
Organic N
Organic C
(percent)
0
0
0
1
0
.08
.12
.52
.27
.12
0
0
2
1
0
OS I
.6
.1
.7
.6
.8
0.
0.
1.
2.
0.
05
012
40
03
10
Bottom Type
Sand
Sand
Mud,
Mud,
Sand
, Clay
, Gravel
Gravel
Gravel
, Clay
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A1.
Treatment Needs
Domestic wastes from the plant pass untreated to a small stream
flowing to the Naknek River. An activated-sludge package plant is sched-
uled for installation by the start of the 1974 season to provide treat-
ment and effluent disinfection. The plant should be installed and proper
operation should be provided.
Process wastes are discharged through holes in the cannery floor to
the beach. Forty-eight hours (4 tide cycles) after the canning process
had stopped (27 June) several hundred fish tails, some backbones, and
other fish wastes were still visible under the dock. All process wastes
should be collected without loss through the floor, flumed to a grinder,
and discharged to the river at a point below low low tide. The area
within a 30 ni (100 ft) radius of the point of discharge of the outfall
pipe should be monitored for solids accumulation.
-------
A-2 COLUIIBIA WARDS FI_SlI_ERTES_._JffUK_,_ ALASKA
rieneral
The Columbia Wards Fisheries cannery, located on an isolated shore
line of Nushagak Bay, processes and cans salmon [Figures VI-1 and VI-A3].
In addition, a freezing vessel moored at the cannery processes fish both
before and after the major canning season. The plant was originally
built in 1902 by North Pacific Salmon Company but was purchased bv
Columbia Wards Fisheries in 1959.
The cannery employed 155 people during the 1973 canning; season
(1 June to 1 August). The layout of the plant processing area is shown
in Figure VI-A4.
Salmon are processed at a maximum rate of 12,000 cases per day.
During odd-numbered years the production mix consists of sockeve (65 per-
cent), chum (25 percent) and chinook (10 percent) salmon. Durin? even-
numbered years the mix consists of sockeye (50 percent), chum (15 per-
cent), chinook (10 percent) and pink (25 percent) salmon. Due to
decreased fishing, the total projected 1973 production was 40,000 cases.
The annual production for the last five years was as follows:
1972 23,000 cases
1971 70,000 cases
1970 130,000 cases
1969 40,000 cases
1968 80,000 cases
Because of a reduced salmon catch, caused by altered fishing r<-->«u-
lations during the 1973 season, not all of the canneries in the area
could operate economically. Combines, in which one cannery processed
fish for other canneries, were formed. Columbia Wards Fisheries was
canning Fslir.on for r'uecn Fisheries and fnr Alaska Packers at f].'
-------
71
NUSHAGAK F IS H E R M A N , IN C .
PETER PAN SEAFOODS
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES
o
Figure VI-A3. Columbia Wards Fisheries, Ekuk, Alaska
Loeation Map
-------
72
e 5
• 3
* 2
• 9
• 8
&
o-
LEGEND
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES |C/N]
WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
Figure \ I - A L ('. o I u m b i a \\ a r d s Fisheries. E k u k . Alaska
Plan! Layout Slalion Locations
-------
73
A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application was filed with the
Corps of Engineers on 4 January 1972. An in-plant survey of Columbia
Wards Fisheries was conducted by EPA personnel of the National Field
Investigations Center-Denver from 30 June to 2 July 1973. Jim Ekern,
superintendent, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
Water for domestic use and cannery operations is obtained from
three sources. Wells supply about 76 m /hr (20,000 gph) under normal
conditions; during peak canning operations, the pumping draft on the
wells can be increased to 114 m /hr (30,000 gal/hr). The second source
is a lake that is used only when the cannery is operating at full
capacity. A 10 cm (4 in.) line carries water to the cannery. The third
source which supplies boiler feed water to the plant is a small pond. Total
water consumption within the plant as reported by the RAPP application is
570 m3/day (150,000 gpd).
All water is treated with chlorine gas to produce a 1 ppm residual
except for boiler feed water which is untreated. Cleanup water is treated
with Mikroklene DF^1, an iodine solution, to a concentration of 25 ppm.
Water samples are periodically sent to the State Department of Health and
Welfare bacteriological analysis.
Process Operations
The plant processes salmon in a manner similar to that previously
described in Section V. Only a portion of the heads are ground for
recovery of the oil. A processing and waste schematic is shown in
Figure VI-A5.
-------
ICE
OIL/SALT
UNLOAD
_J_
FISH HOLDING
BINS 191
GRINDER
INDEXER 131
L
HEAI
EGG HOUSE
IRON CHINK (3)
i-l
SCRUBBER (3]
SLIMING TABLE
[3]
—^
FILLER BINS 4
FILLER 4
WEIGHING (4)
PATCHING (4)
GRINDER
HEAD COOKERS
(3)
OIL
t
SEALING 4
RETORT (9)
AIR
COOL
1
L CAN WASH
| BRIGHT STACK]
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
GRINDER
(2j
TO BRISTOL BAY
SEQUENCE
WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-A5. Columbia Wards Fisheries, Ekuk, Alaska
Salmon Canning Sequence
-------
75
Waste .Sources
Domestic Wastes—Domestic wastes are discharged to the individual
septic tanks of each building with a total of about 24 tanks in use.
The RAPP application reported a total of 38 m /day (10,000 gpd) of
wastewater discharged from these tanks.
Refuse—Company officials could not estimate the amount of refuse
generated per day. All refuse wastes are landfilled on cannery
property and covered once each week.
Process Wastes—Wastes from operations within the fish house and
the canning house are collected and flumed under the dock to a bucket
elevator which transports the waste to a grinder. Those fish heads
not cooked for oil are also diverted to the grinder. The ground wastes
are discharged through a pipe connected to the underside of the dock
and fall into the water at high tide and onto the beach at low tide.
As stated previously, a portion of the fish heads are ground and cooked
for oil. After each batch of heads have been cooked and the oil removed,
the remaining material is discharged to the beach.
The egg house uses four agitators having a capacity of 400 liters
each. The brine from the agitators is discharged one to four times
daily depending on the amount of roe (eggs) processed. Wastes from the
egg house are ground and discharged below to either the beach or water
surface depending on the tide level.
Cannery officials estimated that the production of one case of
canned salmon (21.8 kg or 48 Ib) required about 35 kg (78 Ib) of raw
material with 1.4 kp (3 Ib) of byproducts (egps) , 3.5 kp (7.8 Ib) of
-------
head oil, and 7.7 kg (17 Ib) of waste. On the basis that 12,000 cases/day
are produced, the plant would have discharged 303 kkg (680,000 Ib) of
process waste to Nushagak Bay in 1973. The waste characteristics of the
plant, as reported in the RAP? application, are eiven in Table VI-A5.
Receiving Water Evaluation
VJater quality data were collected from 6 to 8 July 1973. A descrip-
tion of sampline station locations is given in Table VI-A6. The cannery
was not in operation during the field study; thus, the measured water
quality [Table VI-A7] should represent the background levels for the
receiving waters at this location. Sampling was limited to the high
tide periods because of the wide tidal range and its associated extensive
intertidal zone at low water.
No unusual variations in dissolved oxygen were observed at the
eleven sampling stations [Table VI-A7], Water temperatures were rela-
tively high (12.5 to 14.5CC) for Alaska waters, probably due to the width
and shallowness of Nushagak Bay. The influence of the Nushapak River is
still evident at this point of the Bay and as a consequence the salinities
were very low and variable with a range of 1.2 to 7.3 ppt. There were no
meaningful changes noted in pH, and transparency measurements were limited
to centimeters as a consequence of several days of high onshore winds.
Four sediment samples were obtained at low tide on the tidal flats
surrounding the cannery dock [Table VI-A8]. Although the cannery had
not been operating for several days, fish wastes were evident. Of
the four samples taken, three revealed an OSI above 2.00 indicating
-------
TABLE VT-A5
a/
SALMON CANNING VASTEVATER CHARACTERISTICS-
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, EKUK, ALASKA
Parameter
Flow, m /day (tngd)
pH, su
Temperature, °C (0T)
BOD
COD
Total Solids
SS
Ml as N
TKN as N
N0? as N
NO as N
Total Phosphorus as P
Oil and Grease
Average-
Concentration
490 (0.13)
7.1
13 (55.4)
4,740
6,520
18,600
7,290
114
1,390
0.146
1.01
91.1
1,410
Averape
(kp/day)
2,330
3,210
9,160
3,580
56
680
0.072
0.50
44.9
694
Load
(Ib/dav)
5,140
7,080
20,200
7,900
123
1,500
0.159
1.10
98.9
1,530
Averape
(kp/case)
328 1 (86.7
1.56
2.14
6.12
2.39
0.037
0.45
0.0005
0.030
0.03
0.46
Load-/
(Ib/case)
pal) /case
3.43
4.72
13.5
5.27
0.082
1.00
0.001
0.067
0.066
1.02
a/ Data as reported in company RAPP application.
b/ All values reported as mp/1 except where noted.
c/ Based on daily production of 1,500 cases. Values not reported in RAPP application.
-------
73
TABLE VI-A6
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS, COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES
EKUK, ALASKA
Map Key^- Description ^
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 10 m SE of cannery dock
2 25 m N of Station 1
3 25 m N of Station 2
4 25 m N of Station 5
5 25 m N of Station 6
6 10 m N of W end of cannery dock
7 Between onshore and offshore cannery docks W side
8 15 m NW of onshore cannery dock
9 25 m N of Station 8
10 25 m N of Station 9
11 25 m N of Station 10
Sediment Sampling Stations
A 25 m SE of cannery dock
B 10 m E of cannery approach dock
C 5 ra N of onshore cannery dock (midpoint)
D 25 m SW of onshore cannery dock
a] Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A4.
-------
TABLE VI-A7
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
EKUK, ALASKA
79
Parameter^ Station No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
High Water^
Surface
8.6-10.0
8.8-9.8
9.6
—
8.9-9.4
8.8-10.0
8.5-10.0
8.6-9.5
8.9-9.4
8.8-9.3
—
12.0-14.5
12.0-14.0
12.0-14.0
12.0-13.5
12.0-14.0
12.0-14.5
12.0-14.5
12.0-14.5
12.0-13.5
12.5-13.5
12.0-13.5
. , High Water^-'
Parameter— Station No.— Surface
Salinity, ppt 1 1.5-6.0
2 1.2-7.1
3 1.6-9.0
4 3.5-7.4
5 3.0-7.3
6 1.5-5.7
7 1.5-5.7
8 2.0-6.2
9 2.5-6.0
10 4.5-7.5
11 3.5-8.0
pH All stations 7.5
Transparency 6 to 24 cm
a/ Data are reported as range of values.
W Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A4.
c/ No samples were collected during low water periods or from the bottom during high water.
-------
80
substantial nitrogen contribution with further waste stabilization likely.
The type of sediment observed in the area was a mixture of mud, sand,
clay and gravel.
TABLE VI-A8
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
EKUK, ALASKA
Station—
A
B
r
Organic N Organic C
Depth
Tidal Flat
Tidal Flat
Tidal Flat
(percent) OSI
2.40 1.0 2.40
0.98 3.5 3.43
0.70 3.1 2.17
Bottom Type
Mud, Clay
Fish Wastes,
Mud , Gravel
Fish Wastes,
Mud, Gravel
Tidal Flat
0.17
1.6
0.27
Sand, Gravel
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A4.
Treatment Needs
Process wastes are collected and ground prior to discharge. However,
during the survey period, some problems with the plant system occurred.
At the point where the flumed wastes enter the bucket elevator before
transfer to the grinder, spillage was occurring. Although the amount of
spillage was not great, the waste disposal system could be overloaded
during peak processing seasons and significant amounts of waste overflow
could occur.
Solids deposits were evident at all of the discharge locations at low
tide. This problem could be eliminated by collecting all the wastes into
a common line and discharging them below low low tide. The area located
within a 30 m (100 ft) radius of the discharge pipe should be monitored
for solids accumulation.
-------
81
A-3 NELBRO PACKING COMPANY, NAKNEK, ALASKA
General
Nelbro Packing Company, a subsidiary of B. C. Packers in Richmond,
British Columbia, operates a salmon cannery on the Naknek River near the
Borough of Naknek, Alaska [Figures VI-1 and VI-A6]. The plant, built in
1960 by the American Packing Company, was purchased by the Nelbro Pack-
ing Company in 1963. The layout of the plant processing area is shown
in Figure VI-A7.
During the 1973 season between 150 to 200 employees, including
fishermen, worked at the plant. In peak production years, the number
may be as high as 400. The cannery usually operates from 22 June to 20
July with the actual number of processing days varying with the catch for
the year. About 95 percent of the salmon produced are sockeye, two to four
percent chum, and the remainder are chinook. Salmon are processed at a
maximum rate of 10,000 cases per day with a projected 1973 production
of 30,000 to 50,000 cases. The annual production for the last five years
was as follows:
1972 37,000 cases
1971 67,650 cases
1970 113,000 cases
1969 50,150 cases
1968 27,000 cases
Because of a reduced salmon catch, caused by decreased runs and
altered fishing regulations during the 1973 season, not all of the
canneries in the area could operate economically. Combines, in which
one cannery processes fish for other canneries, were formed. Nelbro
Packing Company processed and canned salmon for Whitney-Fidalgo Sea-
foods, Inc. and the New England Fish Company, both in Naknek.
-------
82
-N-
so
JT
o
ir
NELBRO PACKING CO
SOUTH NAKNEK
BUMBLE BEE SEAFOODS
Figure VI-A6. Nelbro Packing Company , Naknek, Alaska
Location Map
-------
83
LEGEND
. WASTE DISCHARGE LINES
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/N)
-N-
20 cm Sanitary Sewer
10cm Cannery Waste Sewer
• 3
Flood
• 7
• 2
Figure VI— A7. Nelbro Packing Company Naknek, Alaska
Plant Lav out - Station Locations
-------
84
A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application was filed with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in June 1972. EPA personnel from the
National Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X conducted an
in-plant survey from 25 to 27 June 1973. Trevor Beeston, superintendent,
provided assistai?ce and information.
W;ater Supply
Water for the Nelbro Packing Company operations and domestic use is
obtained from a clear, sand-bottom lake approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi)
from the plant. Although water use varies depending on the amount and
rate of fish production, company officials estimated it to be about
3
1,100 m /day (0.30 mgd). The RAPP application listed water usage at
3
1,900 m /day (0.50 mgd). Water samples are sent periodically to the
State Department of Health and Welfare for bacteriological analysis.
Water is pumped to the plant through a 20 cm (8 in.) aluminum line.
A portion of this water is diverted for use in the living area and is
treated with a 12 percent sodium hypochlorite solution to produce a
chlorine residual of 1 ppm. Water is also diverted for use without
treatment as boiler and power plant makeup water. The remaining portion
of the water is used in the cannery for brine water makeup, cooling
retorts, washing salmon during processing, and cleanup. During oper-
ations process water is treated with chlorine gas at a rate of 5 to 7
ppm; during cleanup the dosage is increased to 40 to 50 ppm.
Process Operation
Salmon are processed at this cannery in the same general manner as
discussed in Section V. A specific process flow diagram for Nelbro
-------
85
Packing Company is shown in Figure VI-A8. Fish heads are ground and
cooked for oil only during periods of high salmon production.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—All domestic wastes are discharged without treat-
ment through a 20 cm (8 in.) sewer to the Naknek River. The RAPP applica-
3
tion listed domestic wastewater discharge at 76 m /day (20,000 gpd).
Refuse—Company officials estimated that two 2-1/2 ton truckloads
of uncompacted refuse were generated daily. This waste is hauled 6.5
km (4 mi) to the Naknek Borough landfill. Dirt is hauled to the landfill
from another location; however not all of the refuse is completely covered.
Process Wastes—The fish house has concrete floors which facilitates
collection of the wastes from the indexer, iron chink, scrubbing table and
cleanup operations. These wastes are flumed to a sump with a volume
3
of 3.8 m (1,000 gal.). At the sump wastes are ground and pumped 46 m
(150 ft) beyond the dock face into the Naknek River. The discharge is
above low mean tide level. The canning house has wooden floors with
slits that allow wastes to drop directly onto the beach. The cooling
water from the retorts is discharged directly to the beach.
Fish heads are ground and cooked for oil which is removed. The
material that remains is discharged to the beach. During years of high
salmon production, excess ground fish heads are discharged directly to
the beach. Four brine agitators are used in the egg house. Each agitator
has a capacity of 530 liters (140 gal.) and discharges brine to the beach
once every two days.
-------
86
BRINE
UNLOAD
FISH HOLDING
BINS 16)
1
INDEXER 3
EGG HOUSE
GRINDER
HEADS
IRON CHINK [31
SLIMING TABLE
[3]
FILLER BINS (4)
HEAD COOKERS
131
OIL SUMP
GRINDER
OIL/SALT
FILLER [4
I Iff
TO NAKNEK RIVER
w
EIGH
NG
(4)
i I
PATCH
NG 4
..I
I
SEALING (4) I
COOLING WATER
I
RETORT 19'
COOLING WATER
CASE
PROCESS SEQUENCE
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
RECOVERY
(2) NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-A8. Nelbro Packing Company
!N a k n e k , Alaska Salmon Canning Sequence
-------
87
Plant management stated that the production of one case of salmon
(weighing 21.8 kg or 48 Ib) required 30.6 kg (67.5 Ib) of raw material
with 5 kg (11 Ib) of waste and byproduct recovery consisting of 0.45 to
0.9 kg (1 to 2 Ib) of eggs and 3 kg (6.7 Ib) of head oil. The waste load
generated in the production of salmon at this cannery would correspond
to 150 to 250 kkg (330,000 to 550,000 Ib) of waste material being
discharged to the Naknek River during the 1973 season.
Receiving Water Evaluation
An evaluation of the receiving water quality in the area of Nelbro
Packing Company was conducted from 1 to 3 July 1973. The location of
sampling stations, with reference to the plant, are shown in Figure VI-A7
and described in Table VI-A9.
A summary of the results of physical and chemical measurements is
given in Table VI-A10. Extreme tidal variations occur in the area of
the cannery (Figure VI-1); thus, measurements were made only under high
tide conditions. Dissolved oxygen levels in this area were the lowest
recorded during the survey. One value at station 5 was recorded at
5.9 mg/1.* At high water tide, surface and bottom temperatures,
salinity, and pH showed only minor changes. Transparency was variable
and reflected the sediment load in the river at the time of measurement.
Sediment samples for OSI measurements were obtained at four stations
along the dock face while the river bottom was exposed [Figure VI-A7],
Bottom sediments were composed of a mixture of mud, sand, and gravel
* The receiving water standard for dissolved oxygen in Alaska
is 6.0 mg/1.
-------
88
TABLE VI-A9
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS, NELBRO PACKING COMPANY
NAKNEK, ALASKA
Map Key^ Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 60 m SW of W end of cannery dock
2 50 m S of Station 3
3 50 m S of Station 4
4 10 m S of W end of cannery dock
5 10 m S of midpoint of cannery dock
6 50 m S of Station 5
7 50 m S of Station 6
8 50 m S of Station 9
9 50 m S of Station 10
10 10 m S of E end of cannery dock
11 60 m SE of E end of cannery dock
Sediment Sampling Stations
A 15 m SW of W end of cannery dock
B 10 m S of dock at cannery midpoint
C 10 m S of dock at W corner of warehouse
D 15 m SE of E end of cannery dock
a_/ Station locations are shown on Figure VI-A7.
-------
TABLE VI-A10
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
NELBRO PACKING COMPANY
NAKNEK, ALASKA
Parameter— Station No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
/
High Water-
Surface
6
6
6
5
7
6
8
6
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
.5-9.3
.8-9.3
.5-9.2
.9-9.1
.1-9.3
8.4
8.8
.1-9.4
.0-9.3
.5-9.3
.5-14.0
.5-14.0
.5-14.0
.5-14.0
.5-15.5
.5-14.5
.5-14.0
.5-14.5
.5-14.5
.5-14.5
.5-15.0
/
Bottom Parameter— Si
8
-
8
8
9
9
-
-
9
8
.5 Salinity, ppt
—
.6
.4
.1
.1
—
—
.1
.6
6.7-9.1
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
14
13
13
.0 pH
.5
.5
.5
.5
.0
.5
.0
.5
.5
14.0-14.5
Transparency
b;
tation No.—
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
/
High Water^'
Surface
9
12
11
9.
10
11
11
11.
11
11.
11
8
8.
8,
8,
8.
8
8
8
8
8
8
.5-13.0
.0-14.0
.5-13.0
.5-13.0
.5-16.0
.5-14.0
.5-14.0
.5-14.5
.0-14.0
.5-13.0
.5-13.5
.5-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
.0-8.5
15 to 36
Bottom
12.
14.
13.
13.
13.
12.
13.
14.
13.
13.
5
0
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
14.5-15.0
8.
8.
8.
8.
—
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
. 5 cm
5
5
5
5
-
0
0
5
5
0
5
£/ Data are reported as range of values.
b_/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A7.
c/ No samples were collected during low water periods.
-------
90
[Table VI-A11]. The sample from Station B obtained at the midpoint of
the cannery dock near the area where fish wastes are discharged contained
traces of fish waste and had an OSI of 8.04. OSI values exceeding 5.0
indicate that the sediment is unstable and contains actively decomposing
sludge.
TABLE VI-A11
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
NAKNEK, ALASKA
. a/
Station—
Organic N
Depth
Organic C
(percent)
OSI
Bottom Type
A
Tidal Flat
Tidal Flat
Tidal Flat
Tidal Flat
0.08
2.87
0.08
0.05
0.6 0.05 Mud, Sand,
Gravel
2.8 8.04 Fish Wastes,
Mud, Gravel
0.7 0.06 Mud, Sand,
Gravel
0.1 0.005 Mud, Sand,
Gravel
aj Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A7.
Treatment Needs
Presently, domestic wastes are collected and discharged directly to
the Naknek River. Nelbro Packing Company should either 1) provide sub-
surface treatment of all sanitary wastes (such as a septic tank with leach
field), 2) discharge to a treatment facility that is providing secondary
treatment or is on an approved compliance schedule, or 3) provide secon-
dary treatment (40 CFR 133) using a package plant.
-------
91
The process wastes that are collected and discharged to the river
through a 10 cm (4 in.) pipe displayed a visible waste plume during high
tide, and a solids buildup was observed near the discharge point during
low tide. After processing stopped, one tide cycle removed this deposit.
Wastes from the canning operation, retorting, head cooking and egg process-
ing that are now dumped directly on the beach should be collected and
flumed to the existing disposal system.
During peak processing years when the cannery will be discharging
much larger quantities of waste, solids deposition may occur resulting in
water quality problems. To protect water quality, process wastes should
be collected, ground and discharged below lower low mean water level. The
area within a 30 m (100 ft) radius of the discharge pipe should be monitored
for solids accumulation.
-------
92
A-4 NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC., DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
General
Nushagak Fisherman, Inc. operates a seafood processing and freezing
plant on the Nushagak River in Dillingham, Alaska [Figures VI-1 and VI-A9].
The plant, completed in May 1973, was leased to Nushagak Fisherman, Inc.,
a co-op fishery, on 25 May 1973 for a 40-year period. Plant construction
was funded jointly by the city of Dillingham and the U.S. Government
Economic Development Administration. The plant, employing between 55 and
80 people, processes fish throughout the year, operating 20 hours per day
during peak processing days. Frozen salmon is the principal product;
however, herring, bottom fish, and tanner crab are also processed. The
layout of the plant processing area is shown in Figure VI-A10. The plant
has a salmon processing capacity of 227 kkg (0.5 million Ib) in cold
storage, 45 kkg (100,000 Ib) in brine storage and 18 kkg (40,000 Ib) in
sharp freezing. The projected salmon production for 1973 was 910 kkg
(2 million Ib).
A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application through the Army
Corps of Engineers was not filed due to the opening date of the plant.
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
conducted an in-plant survey from 3 to 5 July 1973. Ray Parks, general
manager, provided assistance and information.
Water Supply
Water for domestic purposes and the processing plant is purchased
from zhe city of Dillingham. Water obtained from a company well (1.25 I/sec
•'- -- tV'~i; ^r~ '•-'-: ': --"' ;-lifc ^gy hous'r ;.>PKrations , The city wacer supply is
chlorinated, but the water obtained from the well is used untreated.
-------
93
NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN INC.
PETER PAN SEAFOODS
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES
J-
Figure VI-A 9.
~
Nushagak Fisherman, Inc., Dillingham. Alaska
Location Map
-------
SEWAGE LIFT STATION
COLD STORAGE
FACILITY
Ebb
Current
Flood
NUSHAGAK BAY
BRINE TANKS
ICE HOUSE
DOCK AREA
WASTE DISCHARGE LINES .
Figure VI - A10 . Nushagak Fisherman Inc., Dillingham, Alaska
Planl Layout
-------
95
3
Company officials estimated the total water usage between 57 and 76 m
(15,000 and 20,000 gal.) per week.
Process Operations
Fish, which are delivered to the plant in scows and by individual
fishing boats, can be stored in brine tanks or processed immediately.
The fish are taken into the plant in bins and hand-butchered. Heads and
viscera are removed from chinook salmon; gills and viscera are removed
from other salmon. Butchered fish are quick frozen in the sharp freezer
(-40°C for 6 hr) and placed in cold storage until shipped. Eggs are
taken in baskets to the egg house and cured in brine agitators, further
cured in cedar boxes, and hand-packed for shipment to Japan.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—Domestic wastes from the cannery flow to the city
sewer system. Mr. Parks stated that the city does not treat domestic
wastes because of the high cost of operating their existing wastewater
treatment plant. Therefore, all domestic wastes from the city and plant
are by-passed to the Nushagak River. The wastewater treatment plant
appeared abandoned inasmuch as no maintenance of equipment was evident.
Refuse—Dillingham Refuse Service collects a 1.5 m dumpster
of refuse waste twice weekly. This waste is taken to the city
landfill for disposal.
Process Wastes—Process consist primarily of viscera, slime,
blood and gills. (Heads are recovered and given to the local residents
and do not contribute to the plant waste load.) Process wastes are
-------
96
flumed to a grinder and then discharged to the river about 20 m beyond
the face of the dock. The discharge location is above the low mean tide
level. The egg house uses three brine agitators for egg curing with a
total capacity of 1,100 liters. These brine agitators are discharged to
the river every two days.
Company officials estimated that from 12 to 15 percent of the
incoming fish weight becomes a waste product. Based on the estimated
salmon production between 113 and 136 kkg (250,000 and 300,000 Ib) of
waste fish were discharged to the Nushagak River during the salmon pro-
cessing season of 1973.
Receiving Water Evaluation
The City of Dillingham is situated at the head of Nushagak Bay,
a large estuary connected to Bristol Bay. The salmon cannery is on
the shore at the confluence of Nushagak Bay and the Nushagak River.
The tidal range is approximately 519 m (19.5 ft) and leaves a 0.6 m
(2 ft) depth at the cannery wharf at low water. Current velocities
reach 4 kn at certain stages of both flood and ebb tides.
The receiving water evaluation was conducted from 9 to 13 July 1973.
Because of the mean proximity [Figure VI-A11] of the Nushagak Fisherman
plant to the Peter Pan Seafoods plant [see Section VI, A-5], the receiving
water evaluation was applicable to both operations. During the evaluation
neither plant was operating; thus, water quality data reflect normal
conditions. Sampling station locations for the evaluation are shown in
Figure VI-A11 and described in Table VI-A12.
-------
-N-
97
PETER PAN SEAFOODS
NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC.
WWTP
I
i
EGG HOUSE
10
LEGEND
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/H)
WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
V0"
Figure VI-A11. Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.,_ Nushagak Fisherman, Inc., Dillingham, Alaska..
Plant Layout Station Locations
-------
TABLE VI-A12
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS, PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
AND NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC.
DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
Map Key— Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 60 m SW of W end of cannery dock
2 10 m W of W end of cannery dock
3 20 m S of midpoint of cannery dock
4 50 m S of Station 3
5 50 m S of Station 4
6 75 m E of Station 4
7 25 m SE of fuel dock
8 25 m S of midpoint of Nushagak dock
9 50 m S of Station 8
10 50 m S of Station 9
11 50 in SE of Station 8
Sediment Sampling Stations
B 10 m S of cannery dock at egg house
C 50 m S of marine railway
F 50 m E of Nushagak dock
aj Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A11.
-------
99
Sampling was limited to high tide conditions because of extreme
tidal fluctuation. Dissolved oxygen and temperatures data revealed
little variation between surface and bottom points [Table VIA13]. The
effect of the Nushagak River was reflected by the salinity content (0.0
ppt at all stations and depths), and the pH level (7.0 to 7.5). Sedi-
ment load was heavy as indicated by the low transparency readings (15 to
30.5 cm).
Treatment Needs
Process wastes are ground and discharged to the Nushagak River above
low mean tide level. To insure adequate dispersal of these wastes, this
discharge line should be extended to a level below low low tide. In
addition, the area within a 30 m (100 ft) radius of the discharge pipe
should be monitored for solids accumulation.
The egg house wastes are discharged to the river via the city sewer
by-pass. To insure adequate dispersal, these wastes should be dis-
charged below low mean tide. This could be accomplished most easily by
diverting the wastes to the process waste grinder and discharge line.
-------
100
TABLE VI-A13
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
Parameter— Station No.-
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
/
High Water^
- Surface
10.
10.
9.
9.
10,
10,
10
9,
10
12.
12,
12
12
12
12,
12
12,
12.
12.
12.
.3-10.
4-10.
8-10.
.8-10.
,0-10.
.5-11
.5-10
.9-10,
—
.1-10,
.0-14
.0-12.
.0-12
.0-13
.0-13
.0-13
.0-12
.0-12
.0-12,
.0-12.
5-13.
.7
.8
,7
7
.5
.0
.8
.4
.7
.0
.5
.5
.0
.5
.0
.5
.5
, 5
.5
,0
Bottom
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
9
10
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
.9-10,
.5-10.
.5-10,
.0-10.
.1-10.
.6-10.
.7-10.
.6-10,
.4-10,
.0-13,
.0-13,
.0-12.
13.0
.0-13,
.0-12.
.0-12,
.0-12,
.0-12,
.5-13
12.5
, b, High Water^7
Parameter5-' Station No.—' Surface Bottom
.4 Salinity, ppt 1-11 0.0
.7 pH 1 7.0-7.5 7.0-7.5
,7 2 7.0 7.0
,2 3 7.0-7.5 7.0
4 7.0-7.5 7.0
.4 5 7.0-7.5 7.0
.9 6 7.0 7.0
.8 7 7.0 7.0
,3 8 7.0 7.0
9 7.0 7.0
.5 10 7.0 7.0
.5 11 7.0 7.0
.0 Transparency 15 to 30.5 cm
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.0
&l Data are reported as range of values.
W Station locations are shown in Figure VI-All.
c/ No samples were collected during low water periods.
-------
101
A-5 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
General
Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc., owns and operates a salmon cannery next
to Nushagak Fisherman, Inc. on the Nushagak River in Dillingham, Alaska
[Figures VI-1 and VI-A12]. The layout of the plant processing area is
shown in Figure VI-A13. In addition to canning, chinook salmon are
fresh frozen and shipped to Seattle, Wash. The plant was originally
built in 1913 by Portland Packers and was purchased by Peter Pan Seafoods
in 1964. During 1973, the cannery had 75 employees for the season lasting
from 16 June to 16 July. Each year, sockeye (71 percent) and chum (20
percent) salmon are processed. The remaining 9 percent of the production
mix is composed entirely of chinook salmon during odd numbered years. In
even numbered years, 3 percent is chinook and the remaining 6 percent is
pink salmon. The projected 1973 production was 30,000 cases. The annual
production for the last five years was as follows:
Year Annual Production (cases)
1972 47,000
1971 76,000
1970 82,000
1969 41,000
1968 70,000
Because of a reduced salmon catch, caused by reduced runs and altered
fishing regulations during the 1973 season, the canneries in the area
operated more economically using combines, in which one cannery pro-
cessed fish for other canneries. Peter Pan Seafoods canned salmon
for the New England Fish Company.
-------
02
NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN. INC
PETER PAN SEAFOODS
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES
O
Figure VI-A12. Peter Pan Seafoods, lac., Dillingham, Alaska
Location Map
-------
1 O
LEGEND
• HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
• SEDIMENT SAMPLES [C/Nj
WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
-N-
103
EGG HOUSE
a, FOO DS
CD
Z
V
u
Q.
_1
DOCK
UJ
Z
Z
<
0
r
/
UJ
CO
D
O
I
LL
ka
PI a n I L a \ (i u I SI a I i o n Locations
-------
104
A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application was filed with the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers on 19 June 1971. An in-plant survey was
conducted by EPA personnel from the National Field Investigation Center-
Denver from 3 to 5 July 1973. Jack Gillis, superintendent, provided
information and assistance.
Water Supply
Water for domestic use and cannery operations is supplied from
three wells and two lakes. Water is supplied to the kitchen from one
of the small wells but receives no treatment. All other water is treated
with chlorine gas to yield 5 to 6 ppm residual. During cleanup operations,
the chlorine dosage is increased to produce a 9 ppm residual in the can-
3
nery water. The RAPP application reported water usage of 1,097 m /day
(0.29 mgd). The Alaska Department of Health and Welfare periodically
analyzes water used at the cannery.
Process Operations
Fish are processed in a manner similar to that described in
Section V. Salmon canning is done in two 1/2-lb and two 1-lb lines.
Most of the fish heads are cooked for recovery of oil which is used in
the 1/2-lb cans. Eggs from the egg house are cured in brine agitators,
hand packed in boxes, salted, and shipped to Japan for sale. A schematic
diagram of the processing and waste stream sequence is shown in Figure
VI-A14.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—Peter Pan Seafoods plans to treat domestic wastes in
two septic tanks, that have been converted from salvaged boilers. One of
-------
105
t ICE
BRINE _^
TANKS (4)
L.
OIL/SALT
D
UNLOAD
. ,
FISH HOLDING
BINS (61
^-
INDEXER (41
1 I
t '
IRON CHINK (4)
1
SCRUBBER (4)
t
SLIMING TABLE
(41
}
FILLER BINS (4]
}
FILLER (41
I
WEIGHING (4)
t
PATCHING (4)
I
SEALING (41
f
RETORT [81
t
AIR COOL
f
IASE OR BRIGHT S
». c T n D i p r /CLJIPUPUT
I * J lUKnht/onlrMtBI
FRESH
rRLLZING }
. _+~ EGG HOUSE __>-
HEADS ^i
I • i
t HEAD COOKERS _^,
— ^ D *- (61 ^
GRINULR |
OIL
— -
J
1
-^-DISINTEGRATOR . ».
„ _ „ TO NIISHAfiAK
RIVER
_^J
* RBnr.FSS SFnilFHCF
^^^^-.—^ WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
rukl ' ' ' "*""
t
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
12)
NO. OF UNITS
Figure V 1 — A14. Peter Pan Seafoods.Ini'..Dillingham. AI a > k a
Salmon Processing Sequence
-------
106
the tanks is located under the dock, and plans have been made for a drain
field under the dock. The second tank is located on a creek which flows
to the Nushagak River about 150 m (500 ft) downstream from the cannery.
No drain field is planned for the second tank; the effluent will dis-
charge into the creek. All domestic wastes are presently discharged
to the Nushagak River without treatment. The RAPP application reports
domestic wastewater flow as 24 m /day (6,300 gpd) .
3 3
Refuse—About 4.6 m (6 yd ) of uncompacted refuse waste are generated
daily except during canning periods when the volume may increase to 9 m .
Dillingham Refuse Service collects this waste and transports it to the
city landfill.
Process Wastes—The major portion cf the process wastes originate
in the fish house and the cannery, with a small amount from the unloading
dock. The unloading dock wastes consist of blood and slime and flow
directly to the Nushagak River.
The fish house and cannery have concrete floors that facilitate easy
waste collection. All wastes from these areas, the head cookers, and
the egg house are collected and flumed to a disintegrator prior to dis-
charge through a 15 cm (6 in.) line at a point about 60 m (200 ft) beyond
the dock face. The point of discharge is below low mean tide. A small
waste plume was visible but dissipated quickly.
Company officials stated that production of one case of canned
salmon (21.8 kg or 48 Ib) required about 32.7 kg (72 Ib) of raw material
with 1.1 kg (2.5 Ib) of eggs, 3.3 kg (7.2 Ib) of head oil, and 6.3 kg
(14 Ib) of waste materials. On this basis, 190 kkg (420,000 Ib) of
fish waste would have been discharged to the Nushagak River in 1973.
-------
107
Waste characteristics reported in the RAPP application are shown in
Table VI-A14.
Receiving Water Evaluation
The receiving water evaluation was conducted from 9 to 13 July
1973. Because of the near proximity [Figure VI-A12] of the Peter Pan
Seafood plant to the Nushagak Fisherman plant [see Section VI, A-4],
the receiving water evaluation is applicable to both operations.
Because of the extreme tidal range and th^ resulting exposed river bot-
tom at low water, the sampling was limited to high slack water periods.
During the receiving water evaluation the cannery was not operating,
therefore the data obtained were for normal estuarine conditions for
this season of the year.
The sampling station locations during the study are shown in
Figure VI-A13 and described in Table VI-A15. Dissolved oxygen and
temperature indicated little variation in data values [Table VI-A16].
The effect of the Nushagak River on the estuary is reflected in the
salinity measurements (saline content of 0.0 ppt for all samples),
pH values which ranged between 7.0 and 7.5, and transparency readings
[Table VI-A16].
Although the cannery had not been operating since 6 July, three
sediments samples were obtained at low water from the tidal flats to
determine the contribution of organic waste made from past operations.
Sediment samples were a combination of mud and clay with the OSI below
0.5 [Table VI-A17]. This OSI level indicates aged stabilized organic
-------
108
TABLE VI-A14
WASTEWATER Ct
PETER PAN SEAFOODS-DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
a/
SALMON CANNING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-
Parameter
Flow, m /day (mgd)
pH, su
Temperature, °C (°F)
BOD
COD
Total Solids
SS
NH as N
TKN as N
NO as N
NO as N
Total Phosphorus as P
Oil & Grease
Average-
Concentration
1,060 (0.280)
6.61
7 (45)
37,500
65,000
26,820
12,660
0.85
2,106
1.18
1.18
181
10,289
Average Load
kg /day
39,630
68,700
28,345
13,400
0.9
2,225
-1.2
1.2
191
10,336
(Ib/day)
87,375
151,450
62,490
29,564
1.9
4,906
2.6
2.7
422
22,787
a./ Data as reported in company RAPP application.
b/ All values reported as mg/1 except where noted.
-------
109
TABLE VI-A15
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS,
PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC. AND NUSHAGAK FISHERMAN, INC.
DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
a/
Map Key— Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 60 m SW of W end of cannery dock
2 10 m W of W end of cannery dock
3 20 m S of midpoint of cannery dock
4 50 m S of Station 3
5 50 m S of Station 4
6 75 m E of Station 4
7 25 m SE of fuel dock
8 25 m S of mid-point of Nushagak dock
9 50 m S of Station 8
10 50 m S of Station 9
11 50 m SE of Station 8
Sediment Sampling Stations
B 10 m S of cannery dock at egg house
C 50 m S of marine railway
F 50 m E of Nushagak dock
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A13.
-------
1 10
TABLE VI-A16
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
Parameter— Station No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
/
High Water^
Surface
10.
10.
9.
9.
10.
10.
10.
9.
10.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
3-10.
.4-10.
.8-10.
.8-10.
—
.0-10.
.5-11,
.5-10.
.9-10.
—
.1-10.
.0-14.
.0-12.
.0-12.
0-13.
0-13.
0-13.
0-12.
0-12.
0-12.
0-12.
5-13.
7
.8
.7
.7
.5
.0
.8
.4
7
.0
5
5
0
5
0
5
5
5
5
0
Bottom
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
9
10
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
.9-10
.5-10
.5-10
.0-10
—
.1-10
.6-10
.7-10
.6-10
—
.4-10.
.0-13
.0-13.
.0-12
13.0
.0-13.
.0-12.
.0-12.
.0-12.
.0-12.
.5-13.
12.5
L , High Water^-7
Parameter^-' Station No.—' Surface Bottom
.4 Salinity, ppt 1-11 0.0
.7 pH 1 7.0-7.5 7.0-7.5
.7 2 7.0 7.0
.2 3 7.0-7.5 7.0
4 7.0-7.5 7.0
.4 5 7.0-7.5 7.0
.9 6 7.0 7.0
.8 7 7.0 7.0
.3 8 7.0 7.0
9 7.0 7.0
.5 10 7.0 7.0
.5 11 7.0 7.0 /
. 0 Transparency 15 to 30.5 cm
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
5
0
b/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-A13.
£/ No samples were collected during low water periods.
-------
Ill
deposits, and that grinding and discharge of wastes below low low tide
in an area of adequate dispersion is an efficient, economical disposal
method.
TABLE VI-A17
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
DILLINGHAM, ALASKA
a/
Station—
B
C
F
Depth
Tidal
Flat
Tidal
Flat
Tidal
Flat
Organic
0.16
0.05
0.19
N Organic C
(Percent)
1.2
0.5
1.3
OSI
0.19
0.02
0.25
Bottom Type
Mud, Clay
Mud, Clay
Mud , Clay
a_/ Station locations are shown on Figure VI-A13.
Treatment Needs
Domestic wastes were receiving no treatment at the time of the
survey. This waste discharge should be connected to the Dillinghatn
wastewater treatment plant as soon as the city resumes operation of
the plant. The cannery plans to use two surplus boilers as septic
tanks. These tanks could be an effective means of treatment if the
effluent is contained (i.e., in leach field). If the effluent is dis-
charged to the receiving water, Peter Pan Seafoods must provide secon-
dary treatment of domestic wastes (40 CFR 133).
-------
112
General
The Alaska Packers Association (APA) , Inc., a subsidiary of Del
Monte Foods, Inc. owns and operates a salmon cannery on the Alaska
Peninsula at Chignlk [Figure VI-1]. Constructed between 1900 and 1910,
the cannery is located on the southern end of Anchorage Bay, an arm of
Chignik Bay, Immediately south of the cannery, mountains rise to about
900 mecers elevation. Numerous small creeks drain the area surrounding
tbe cannery. The layout of the plant-processing area is shown in
Figure VI-B1.
The cannery is open from mid-June to mid-August with 40 days of
actual processing durine a typical season. APA does some packing for
and has a joint tendering operation with Columbia Wards Fisheries, Inc.
During the 1973 season. 53,000 cases* had been packed by 17 July, of which
about 97 percent were red salmon. This is greater than the 26,000 cases
of red saLiiOR originally estimated for the 1973 season. The pink salmon
pack generally makes up about 25 to 30 percent of the total salmon pro-
duction at this cannery. However, as of 30 July the pink salmon run had
not started and was considered late,.
The cannery employs about 125 people. During the operating season
the plant normally operate-: 10 to 11 hours per day, although at peak
production 15 hours per day is not uncommon. Average plant production
is 2,000 cases per dav wicK a capacity of about 5,000 cases per day,
* One ca~e of salmon weighs 21, S ke; consisting of 48 one-pound cans.
-------
-N-
Egg House Wastes
Discharged Through Floor
F is h House Wastes Discharged
Through Flume to Gurry Scow
LEGEND
SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/N
M ESS HALL
figure VI-B1. Alaska Packers Assoe ialion , Inc., Chignik , Alaska
Plant La you! - Station Locations
-------
114
The annual production since 1969 has varied with the availability of
salmon and with fishing restrictions imposed by regulatory agencies.
Recent production history is tabulated as follows:
Year Annual Production (cases)
1973 53,000 (to 17 July 1973)
1972 41,000
1971 135,000
1970 170,000
1969 95,000
Over the last ten years (1962-1972) the annual production has averaged
110,000 cases.
An Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) appli-
cation for the plant was filed 19 June 1971.
EPA personnel of the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
visited the plant 16, 17, 24, and 30 July 1973. Harold Lahtonen, plant
superintendent, and Thomas T. Takeoka, technical services and production
planning manager, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All water is obtained from a glacial-fedlake located about one mile
south of the cannery at an elevation of approximately 135 m (450 ft).
There is no domestic habitation in the drainage area tributary to the lake.
o
The RAPP application indicates a plant water usage of 1,515 m /day
o
(0.40 mgd). Of this total, 1,325 m /day (0.35 mgd) is used for process
water, 150 m /day (0.04 mgd) for boiler feed water, 26 m3/day (0.007 mgd)
for domestic water and 4 m /day (0.001 mgd) for cooling water. Recent
information, however, indicates that about 38 m /hr (10,000 gal./hr) are
used during peak canning operations. Based on this rate, the use for an
-------
115
operating day would be about 380 m (100,000 gal.), considerably less
than the level indicated on the RAPP application.
Gas chlorination is provided for process water only. The chlorine
feed rate allows a 3 to 5 ppm residual to be maintained in the process
water throughout the plant. Samples are sent periodically to the Alaska
Department of Health and Welfare in Anchorage for bacteriological analysis.
Process Operations
Salmon processing is accomplished in a similar manner to that
employed elsewhere in Alaska [Figure V-l]. Modification to the een-
eral processing methods are shown on Figure VI-B2. The plant has two
1-lb and one 1/2-lb canning lines. No oil is added to the pack, thus,
fish heads are not cooked for oil. The finished product is bright
stacked and palletized for shipment.
The only expansion anticipated at this plant is the installation
of cold storage facilities for halibut.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—The ma^or portion of the cannery is on collection
systems that discharge to seepage pits. These are generally 2.5 to 3.0 m
(8 to 10 ft) square, 2 to 2.5 m (7 to 8 ft) deep and lined on the sides
with corrugated metal plates. The bottom is gravel. The seepage pits
are covered with heavy planks. According to the superindendent it has
never been necessary to pump out the pits. A chemical (tradename
Septonic) is added to the collection system weekly to improve treat-
ment action in the pits. There is no direct discharge from the nits.
-------
UNLOAD
CHILLED FISH STORAGE
RBIMF
SALT
INDEXERS [2J
I
IRON CHINKS [2
SCRUBBER AND
SLIMING TABLE
FILLER
BINS
FILLERS |3)
WEIGHING
PATCHING
SEALING
RETORTING
WATER COOL
BRIGHT
STACK
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
BLOOD AND SLIME TO BAY
BRINE TO BAY
GURRY
SCOW
MEAT FRAGMENTS TO BEACH
OR WATER BELOW
_ PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
|2) NO.OF UNITS
figure AI-B2. Salmon (anning Sequence. Alaska Packers Association. Inc.. Chignik, Alaska
-------
117
Raw wastes were being discharged to Deer Creek from the barracks
area south of the creek during the EPA visit. Construction of a seepage
pit was underway to receive these wastes.
Plant officials reported that the local residents use seepage pits
for sanitary waste disposal.
Refuse—Solid wastes such as boxes, waste paper, and cans are col-
lected and incinerated. The remaining refuse is dumped into a pit which
is covered periodically. The beaches appeared relatively clean of trash
and debris, more so than at other canneries visited on the peninsula.
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock, fish
house, and cannery. Most of the fish house wastes are conveyed from
the iron chink and indexer to a flume which discharges into a gurry
scow (see Section V for discussion of gurry scow). However, the fish
house and the cannery have wooden floors. Wastes spill from the sliming
tables, iron chink, etc., dropping to the beach or water surface below
depending on the tide. The plant superintendent indicated that during
down periods, workmen spray the underside of the fish house and cannery
with chlorinated water to remove waste accumulations from the piling
and flooring. During the EPA visit (30 July) numerous fish heads were
noted along the shoreline under the docks.
The superintendent reported that the scow holds wastes from
about 30,000 fish. The scow is towed out into the bay (about 0.8 km)
usually once each day after processing operations have ceased. During
heavy processing periods, the scow mav also be emptied at noon when
cannery operations are shut down for mealtime. The denth of the bay
in the dumping area varies between 36 and 40 m(120 and 130 ft).
-------
118
Sediment samples were collected from three selected areas on
30 July for chemical analyst® [Table VI-B1].
TABLE VI-B1
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS, CHIGNIK, ALASKA
Map
, Station D
-------
119
tides water may flow into Deer Creek from the southeast carrying fish
heads from the bay. He stated that prior to the EPA visit, the gurry
scow had been dumped about 300 m (1,000 ft) off the northeast corner of
the dock instead of the middle of the bay as company officials reported.
Numerous fish heads were observed in Deer Creek between the cannery and
the barracks area. The local citizen also stated that problems with fish
wastes occur during periods of peak production at the cannery, i.e., the
scow cannot handle all the wastes. Moreover, fish wastes return to shore
after the processing season ends, creating an odor problem.
Another source of process wastes is the canning operation. Wastes
from the filler and washdown operations drop through the wooden floors
to the beach or water below. On 24 July the plant was canning on the
1/2-lb line. The beach area beneath the filler was cluttered with
fish parts. As mentioned above, these wastes are flushed out by
tidal action.
The superintendent of the cannery estimated that the production
of one case of canned salmon (21.8 kg or 48 Ib) required about 32.7 kg
(72 Ib) of raw material with 1.1 kg (2.5 Ib) of byproducts (eggs) and
9.5 to 10 kg (21 to 22 Ib) of waste materials. On the basis of 2,000
cases produced per day, the plant would discharge from 19,000 to 20,000 kg
(42,000 to 44,000 Ib) of fish wastes daily into Anchorage Bay.
Treatment Needs
The present method of process waste disposal via the gurry scow
and the loss of solids through the fish house and cannery floors create
water quality problems that are primarily aesthetic in nature with minor
-------
120
accumulations of solids near the scow and the accumulation of fish
solids in Deer Creek and along the shore under the decks. All process
wastes must be collected, screened to remove solids (or the grid spacings
in the gurry scow must be 1 mm (0.040 in.) or less), and discharged below
mean low low tide. Solids which are retained on the screening devices
(or in the gurry scow) can be disposed of by reduction or transported
(without loss of solids) to a proper dumping area.
Domestic waste treatment by disposal to seepage pits is satisfac-
tory providing no discharges to surface waters occur.
-------
121
B-2 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., FALSE PASS, ALASKA
General
Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc. owns and operates a salmon cannery at
False Pass, Alaska. False Pass is located on the east end of Unimka
Island which is the first island in the Aleutian chain [Figure VI-1].
Isanotski Strait, separating Unimak Island from the Alaskan Peninsula,
experiences almost continual flushing action due to tidal currents.
The cannery was originally constructed in 1919. The current plant
layout is shown in Figure VI-B3.
The canning season in the False Pass area lasts from about 10 June
to 15 August. During this time period processing takes place about 55
days or approximately 75 percent of the time. Normal employment at
the cannery is about 100 people; however, due to the low catch of fish
expected during 1973, the crew was only 60 to 70 persons. According
to Mr. Rawlinson the maximum production capacity of the plant is ap-
proximately 5,000 cases/day. The maximum number of cases processed at
time of the EPA visit was 1,500/day. The superintendent thought this
would go to 2000 cases/day during the pink salmon run.
During the period 17 to 20 July 1973 the cannery operated only
one-half day on 19 July (Thursday) at which time 925 cases were processed,
Through 17 July 1973 almost 29,000 cases of salmon had been packed. Of
this total, 69 percent were red salmon, 30 percent were chum salmon, and
one percent was pink salmon. The superintendent estimated that the
1973 production including the pink salmon pack would be about 40,000
-------
22
1O
FLOOD
EBB
Domestic\Waste Discharge
LEGEND
• HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
• SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/N)
' —— ~ FISH WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
— HIGH WATER LINE
Figure VI-B3. Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc., False Pass, Alaska
Plant Layout - Station Locations
-------
123
cases. The annual production since 1967 is tabulated as follows:
Year Annual Production (cases)
1973 29,000 (to 17 July 1973)
1972 33,000
1971 103,000
1970 159,000
1969 129,000
1968 81,000
1967 48,000
A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAP?) application dated 17 June
1971 was filed with the Army Corps of Engineers.
Personnel from EPA'8 National Field Investigations Center-
Denver visited the plant during 17 to 20 July to evaluate waste
disposal practices and process operations. Don Rawlinson, plant
superintendent, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
The Peter Pan cannery at False Pass has three separate water
supplies. Salt water is used for fish handling and processing
through the butchering step (i.e. cleaning). Intake pumps for the
salt water system are located near the face of the dock [Figure VI-B3],
The system supplies water for brine coolers, fish holding tanks, flu-
ming, and sliming tables. Salt water used at the sliming tables is
chlorinated at a rate between 5 and 10 mg/1. Mr. Rawlinson could not
provide figures on the quantity of water used in the plant. The RAPP
application is inconsistent inasmuch as it lists no surface water
body as a supply source.
Fresh water from a shallow (2 m) well is also used in processing.
-------
124
This water is chlorinated and used in canning operations. The super-
intendent could not provide water use figures; however, the RAPP appli-
3
cation indicates a ground water usage of 835 m /day (220,000 gpd).
The domestic water supply is taken from a spring-fed reservoir
located in the mountain foothills west of the cannery. This water sup-
ply is not chlorinated. The RAPP application indicates the water use
3
of the domestic system is 25 m /day (6,200 gpd).
Samples are collected from all water sources and sent monthly for
bacteriological analysis to the Alaska Department of Health and Welfare
in Anchorage. To date the superintendent indicated he has not received
unsatisfactory results.
Process Operations
Processing at Peter Pan Seafoods at False Pass [Figure VI-B4] is
typical of the general procedures employed in salmon processing in
Alaska. The False Pass cannery has 5 filler lines - two 1/2-lb, two
1/4-lb, and one 1-lb.
When red salmon are processed, the heads are ground, cooked and the
oil rendered. When other species are processed, the heads are ground
but discharged to waste. The oil is used as an additive to one-quarter
pound cans of red salmon that are sold primarily in the Eastern United
States. Eggs are removed by cannery personnel under the direction of
Western Alaska Enterprises personnel.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—The entire cannerv is on collection systems.
-------
25
UNLOAD
BLOOD AND SLIME
RED SALM°N
OIL
L_^ HEADS
THICK RED LIQUID
TO WATERS BELOW
I ^
DISCHARGED ON SURFACE
AT DOCK FACE
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
Figure VI-B I. Salmon Canning Sequence, Peter Pan Seafoods. Inc..False Pass. Alaska
-------
126
However, there is no treatment and all domestic wastes are discharged
to Isanotski Strait. Two small outfall pipes and a small open ditch
discharged raw sewage onto the beach near the cannery [Figure VI-B3].
The pipes are submerged at high tide but are exposed at low tide.
Intake pumps for the salt water that is used in processing are located
approximately 75 m (250 ft) from the points of raw sewage discharge.
Refuse—Handling of refuse at this cannery was accomplished in
a poor manner. Large amounts of trash (cans, paper, etc.) and debris
were strewn along the beaches. The problem created is mainly one of
aesthetics. The superindendent indicated that incinerators are to be
installed for combustible wastes, and non-combustible wastes are to go
to a "landfill."
Process Wastes—Process wastes originate from the unloading,
butchering and canning operations. Most of the process wastes result
from the butchering operation. All the fish heads from the indexing
operation are ground. The thick red liquor from the head cookers
(during processing of red salmon) is discharged to the water below
the cannery. When processing other types of salmon, the ground heads
go into a flume that discharges at the face of the dock. Tails, fins,
and viscera from the iron chink and sliming table are also discharged
to the face of the dock via the flume.
Blood, miscellaneous fish parts and meat fragments are washed
from the concrete floors of the fish house at the end of a processing
day. This washing operation accounts for appreciable quantities of
-------
127
wastewater. The material is washed into the flume. Meat fragments
from the can filling operation drop through holes in the floor to
the water below the cannery.
On 19 July during cannery operation, it was noted that ground fish
wastes were being discharged to the beach under the fish house (low
tide). Wastes accumulated to a depth of about one meter. The super-
intendent later related that the flexible discharge line from the
grinder had not been placed into the flume as is the general practice.
Observations after several tide cycles showed the wastes had been dis-
tributed along the beach for about 50 m. Prior to departure of EPA
personnel from False Pass the wastes had either been flushed out to
the Strait or eaten by the seagulls.
The flume which reportedly carries the fish wastes to the face
of the dock is about 0.9 m wide, 1.0 m deep and lined with galvanized
metal. About 3 m from the discharge end the flume was warped, creating
a barrier for any wastes it carried. Thus, wastes were spilling over
the flume side rather than at the face of the dock. During actual
processing on 19 July only a small portion of the wastes were
discharging at the dock face.
The estimated waste load that would result from the production
of a case of salmon is 9.8 kg (21.5 Ib). At an average daily produc-
tion of 1500 cases the cannery would discharge 14,700 kg (32,250 Ibs)
of waste.
-------
128
Receiving Water Evaluation
Hydrographic and chemical data were obtained daily from selected
receiving water stations located in the vicinity of the cannery dur-
ing both high and low tides and at the surface and near bottom depths
[Table VI-B2 and Figure VI-B3]. Measurements were made at each sta-
tion for DO, pH, salinity, temperature, and transparency. No signifi-
cant changes and differences were observed in the DO, temperature and
pH at the sampling locations during high and low tides or before, dur-
ing and after processing [Table VI-B3]. Unfortunately, processing was
limited to about 1/2 day (19 July) because of the minor fish catch. Thus,
the impact of day-after-day processing,could not be ascertained. The
freshwater creek that enters the Strait northwest of the cannery in-
fluenced the surface salinity levels at some stations during high slack
water [Table VI-B3].
Sediment samples collected 18 July back from the front of the dock
[Station A - Figure VI-B3] revealed large accumulations of partially
decomposed fish wastes. Chemical analysis of the sample showed organic
carbon and nitrogen contents of 12.0 and 0.28 percent, respectively. (OSI
of 3.12) which indicates that these wastes contained decomposing organic
materials with the attendant high nitrogen release and oxygen demand.
Sediment samples were also collected in the vicinity of Stations 1, 2,
3 (near main discharge), 4, 6, 8, and 10 that revealed bottom materials
composed primarily of sand-gravel and rock. Near the fuel dock, trash
consisting of cans and paper were evident on the bottom. Obviously,
-------
129
Table VI-B2
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS
PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
FALSE PASS, ALASKA
Map Key— Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 50 m SW of Station 2
2 Dock face at the W end of the cannery dock
3 Dock face at the midpoint of the cannery dock
4 Dock face at the E end of the cannery dock
5 25 m N of the pier
6 Dock face off the fuel dock
7 50 m NE of Station 2
8 50 m NE of Station 3
9 50 m NE of Station 4
10 50 m NE of Station 8
Sediment Sampling Stations
A Center of the NW side of the fish tender slip
a_/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-B3.
-------
TABLE VI-B3
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
FALSE PASS, ALASKA
Staa/
Parameter No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Transparency
HiRh
Surface
10.3-10.9
10.0-10.7
10.3-10.9
10.7
10.6-11.8
9.8-11.5
10.5
10.1-11.7
10.0-10.6
10.0-10.5
7.0
7.0
7.0-7.5
7.0-8.0
7.0-8.0
7.0-7.5
7.0-8.0
7.0-7.5
7.0-8.0
7.0-7.5
3 to 9.5
Range of Values
Water Low Water
Bottom
10.
8.
10.
9.
10.
8.
9.
10.
10.
10.
6.
6.
7.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
.3-10.8
8-10.5
.0-10.3
2-10.7
,0-10.4
0-10.7
9-10.0
0-11.0
0-10 . 3
0-10.3
7.0
7.0
5-7.5
5-7.5
0-7.5
5-7.5
5-7.5
5-7.5
5-7.5
5-7.5
meters
Surface
10.4-11.7
10.0-10.8
10.3-10.6
10.0-11.5
10.7-11.3
10.3-10.7
10.0
10.2
10.2
10.0
8.0
7.5
7.5-8.0
7.5-8.5
7.0-7.5
7.0-8.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
2 to 8.5
Bottom
10.1-10.8
10.0-10.1
10.1-10.5
10.0-10.1
10.1-11.0
10.0-10.2
9.8
9.9
10.1
9.7
7.5-8.0
7.5
7.5-8.0
7.0-7.5
7.0-7.5
7.0-7.5
6.5
7.0
7.0
6.5
meters
Sta. .
Parameter No.—
Salinity, ppt I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
pH 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Range of
High Water
Surface
12.0-20.0
13.0-17.0
18.0-20.0
13.0-22.0
9.0-10.0
14.0-16.0
19.0-21.0
16.0-18.0
19.0-20.0
20.0-23.0
8.2-8.4
8.2-8.3
8.3
8.3
8 . 2-8 . 4
8.3
8.3-8.5
8.3-8.4
8.3-8.5
8.3-8.6
Bottom
21.0
21.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
21.0-23.0
21.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
8.4-8.6
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4-8.5
8.4-8.5
8.4-8.6
8.4-8.6
oo
0
Values
Low Water
Surface
19.0-20.0
22.0
21.0-23.0
16.0-22.0
12.0-14.0
20.0-21.0
21.0
21.0
19.0
21.0
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.4
8.3-8.4
8.3-8.4
8.3-8.4
8.4
8.3
8.3
8.4
8.4
Bottom
22.0
22.0
22.0-23
21.0-22
20.0-22
21.0-22
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
8.3-8.
8.3-8.
8.4-8.
8.4-8.
8.4-8.
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
.0
.0
.0
.0
4
4
5
5
5
a/ See Table VI-B2 for station descriptions.
-------
131
it had been dumped from fishing boats that had docked there. The lack
of fish waste deposits out from the face of the dock would indicate
that these wastes are being; adequately dispersed into the Strait by
the tidal currents.
Treatment Needs
Secondary treatment (40 CFR 133) will be required for the domestic
wastes. Because of the high water table, subsurface disposal methods
such as septic tanks and leach fields or seepage pits are impractical.
The superintendent indicated that an extended aeration system has been
purchased. The piping for the system will be laid above ground. Wastes
will then be pumped to the system. Disinfection of the final effluent
will be required because the receiving waters are used as the source
for processing waters. The discharged effluent must meet the limits
outlined for secondary treatment.
Process wastes will need to be discharged after grinding through
a closed conduit to Isanotski Strait. Better housekeeping practices
for disposal of refuse wastes are needed. All combustible wastes could
be incinerated. Non-combustible wastes could be disposed of in a land-
fill area.
-------
132
B-3 PETER PAN SEAFOODS. INC., KING COVE. ALASKA
General
The Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc. cannery at King Cove, Alaska pro-
cesses salmon and crab (primarily king crab). King Cove is on the
south shore of the Alaska Peninsula [Figure VI-1] on a narrow spit
at the mouth of King Cove Lagoon. The plant, constructed in 1911, has
the layout shown in Figure VI-B5. A RAPP application dated 19 June 1971
was filed with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The plant employs about 80 to 85 people. Salmon processing
occurs from 12 June to 10 August and king crab are processed begin-
ning 15 August and lasting until the quota for the area is caught.
Crab from other areas are also brought to the Peter Pan King Cove
cannery for processing. In 1972 the quota for king crab was filled
during November for the fishing area that encompasses King Cove.
The plant capacity for canning salmon is 5,000 to 6,000 cases/day
(two 1-lb lines operating) and for crab 1,600 cases*/day. The average
daily production for salmon is about 2,000 cases. During the crab
processing period an average of 1,100 to 1,200 cases/day are packed.
Typically the season production of salmon consists of 25 to 30 percent
red salmon, 30 to 35 percent chum salmon and 40 to 45 percent pink sal-
mon. The 1973 production was estimated to be 110,000 cases. A large
production of pink salmon was anticipated during, this year.
*0ne case of crab weighs 5.4 kg consisting of 24 one-half pound cans.
-------
133
KING COVE LAGOON
HIGH WATER LINE /
LOWER LOW
WATER LINE
SEA WATER PUMPS
CRAB CANNERY
WASTE DISCHARGE
\
1—POINT OF SALMON
WASTE DISCHARGE
INTO SCOW
\
\
LEGEND
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES |C/M]
APPROX. LOCATION
GURRY SCOW DUMPING
11*
SCALE: 1" = 15O M./5OO FT
Figure VI-B5. Peler Pan Seafoods, Inc. , King Cove, Alaska
Plant Layout Station Locations
-------
134
The annual production of salmon and crab over the past six vears is
tabulated below.
ANNUAL PRODUCTION (cases)
Year Salmon Crab
1973 40,000 (to 20 July 1973)
1972 96,300
1971 175,000 38,800
1970 228,000 103,000
1969 128,000 18,300
1968 146,000 36,600
1967 43,000 39,200
During the period 20 to 23 July 1973, EPA personnel from the
National Field Investigations Center-Denver inspected the plant dur-
ing the processing of salmon and king crab and conducted water quality
studies on the receiving water. Lloyd Guffy, plant superintendent,
provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All fresh water used at the cannery is purchased from the City of
King Cove. The city diverts water from Ram Creek, a small stream that
discharges at the east shore of Kine Cove about one mile south of the
city. A 5,680 m (1.5 million gal.) reservoir is located near the di-
version point and supplies peak demands in the city. Peter Pan offi-
cials estimated the fresh water usage to be 1.5 to 1.9 m /min (400 to
500 gpm) during plant operation. The company pays $10,800/year for the
delivery of up to 3.8 m /min (1,000 gpm).
The city water supply is chlorinated at a point near the reservoir.
However, chlorination at a rate sufficient for normal domestic, use does
-------
135
not result in the necessary residual for use as cannery process water.
Therefore, the plant provides supplemental chlorination to maintain a
chlorine residual of 5 mg/1 at the sliming tables and 1 mg/1 at the
lye wash (washing after retorting lust prior to casing).
Freshwater is used in both the salmon and crab processing at
Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc. In salmon processing, freshwater is used
from the butchering step through canning. In crab processing fresh-
water is used for all operations except the initial cooking where salt-
water is used. Freshxvater is also used for boiler feed, domestic and
washdown purposes.
The plant uses saltwater for salaon and crab handling [Figure
VI-B5 shows the location of saltwater intake pumps]. Salmon are
typically held in mechanically chilled seawater prior to processing.
Seawater is also pumped through the live crab tank. Plant officials
provided no figures on the quantity of seawater used. However, the
RAPP application indicates a total water usage of 450 in /day (0.09 mgd)
from the municipal supply.
Process Operations
Salmon Processing—A processing and waste source schematic for the
salmon sequence at King Cove is shown in Figure VI-R6. Salmon are pro-
cessed in a manner similar to that previously described in Section V.
Milt is also removed from the salmon in this plant. Only the heads
of the red salmon are cooked whole for oil which is then added to
the 1/4-lb can (4 cc/can). The King Cove cannery has two 1-lb lines,
one 1/2-lb line and one 1/4-lb line.
-------
136
BRINE
UNLOAD
FISH HOLDING
j ,__-^ BR|N[ SOLUTION TO KING COVE
INDEXERS (2)
EGG HOUSE
IRON CHINK [21
SLIMING TABLES
I
FILLER BINS
OIL/SALT
I
L
HEAD COOKERS
OIL
BLOODY WATER AND
SMALL SOLIDS
GURRY SCOW
FILLERS [4
TOWED TO DEEP
WATER 30 M.
AND DUMPED
WEIGHING
[4)
PATCH NG [41
SEALING (4)
I
RETORTS
CHLORINE
12
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTES
EBG RECOVERY
NO. OF UNITS
>__„.
-* WASTE WATER TO COVE
CASE
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
Figure VI-B6. Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.. King Cove, Alaska
Salmon Processing Sequence
-------
137
Eggs are brine cured and marketed by Western Alaska Enterprises.
The milt, sold primarily in France, is used as a food spread. The
superintendent estimated that an average of 1.1 ke (2.5 Ib) of eggs
are obtained per case. He had no exact figures on the weight of the
milt, but estimated it would also average about 1.1 kg/case.
Crab Processing—Crabs are delivered live to the cannery. Crabs
are off-loaded from the fishing boats in steel bins which hold approxi-
mately 180 kg (400 Ib) each. The crabs are immediately placed in live
tanks and seawater is continuously cycled through the tanks until proces-
sing begins. All crabs are canned (Section V provides typical proces-
sing details and Figure VI-B7 shows the processing sequence for this
plant).
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—-All wastes from the housing area and the kitchen
are discharged to the city sewer system. Domestic wastes from the
plant itself are presently discharged to seepage pits, but the company
plans to connect to the municipal system,
The city uses an Imhoff tank for treating domestic wastes. The
plant was inspected by EPA personnel during the survey and found
to be poorly operated and maintained. The plant was constructed in
1968 with Native Aid from the Public Health Service. However, the
system has never been properly operated. The concrete-lined sludge
beds have never been used, nor has the clarifier received any main-
tenance. Sludge had increased in depth to the point that the influ-
ent was short-circuited directly across the surface to the outfall.
-------
138
SEA WATER
CHLORINE
UNLOAD
DEAD CRABS
SEA WATER TO KING COVE
DEAD CRABS
CARAPACE
n.UM_E_
DISCHARGE AT
DOCK FACE
WASTES FROM CANNING OPERATIONS TO GURRY SCOW
WASH WATER TO COVE
-*- PROCESSING SEQUENCE
*- WASTE LINES
(1) NO, OF UNITS
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
l-igurc VI-B7. (rab Processing Sequence. Peler Pan Seafoods, Inc.. King Cove, Alaska
-------
139
Discussion with a community official revealed that neither he or
anyone else employed by the city had the knowledge of how the sys-
tem operates.
Refuse—Handling of refuse wastes at this cannery and within
the community of King Cove (estimated population of AOO) are in-
adequate. The beach surrounding the Cove and the lagoon [Figure
VI-B5] was strewn with trash and debris creating an extremely
unsightly appearance. Trash was dumped from the boats anchored at
the docks which could easily be avoided. The community is planning
to construct a sanitary landfill, but no definite time schedule was
provided.
Process Wastes—The wastes originate from the fish house and
the cannery (both have concrete floors). Those heads not cooked for
oil, plus the viscera, fins, and tails, are discharged to a central
flume which in turn discharges to a wood barge (gurry scow). The
cooker wastes (thick red-orange liquid) including the remainder of
the heads are also discharged to the scow. The scow retains only
the larger solids. During operation of the cannery the area around
the scow becomes discolored. The area discolored depends on tide
conditions.
Another major source of waste is the crab processing area. All
crab wastes, including the dead crabs from the boats and storaee tanks,
are ground prior to discharge at the dock face. The discharge is to
the surface (depth is about 9 to 12 m) [Figure VI-B5]. Crab wastes were
visible in the immediate vicinity of the discharge. Crab canning
-------
takes place in the same building as does salmon processing. At this
plant a substantial portion of the crab canning requires manual pro-
cessing, i.e., filling, weighing and patching. Cannery wastes such
as fillers and cleanup operation wastes are collected and discharged to
the gurry scow.
The gurry scow is towed to a deepwater area that is approximately
5.2 km (3.25 miles) from the cannery [Figure VI-B5]. Dumping generally
occurs at the end of the processing day. EPA personnel observed that
a large amount of trash was dumped with the fish wastes from the scow.
Most of the trash was carried back to shore with the tide, i.e., card-
board boxes, paper, cans, etc.
The superintendent stated that the production of one case of salmon
weighing (21.8 kg or 48 Ib) required 32.7 kg (72 Ib) of raw material
with 1.1 kg (2.5 Ib) of milt and eggs and 8.6 kg (19 Ib) of waste.
Similarly, the production of one case of crab weighing 5.4 kg (12 Ib)
required from 31 to 34 kg (68 to 75 Ib) of raw material with 25.4 to
28.6 kg of waste materials.
Receiving Water Evaluation
Water and sediment samples were collected at selected stations
around the cannery [Table VI-B4 and Figure VI-B5J. The results
showed only minor changes in the pH, salinity, and temperatures during
high and low tides [Table VI-B5]. The dissolved oxygen level was
consistently above 6.0 rag/I* during both high and low tides and at
*This is the dissolved oxygen standard applicable to Alaska Marine Waters,
-------
141
TABLE VI-B4
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS
PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
KING COVE, ALASKA
a/
Map Key^- Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 5 m E of scow
2 Cannery dock face
3 Crab cannery dock face
4 Face of fuel dock
5 100 m SE of Station 1
6 150 m S of Station 3
7 100 m SW of Station 4
8 Mouth of King Cove lagoon
9 Middle of South Cove
10 400 m SE of Station 1
11 450 m S of Station 3
Sediment Sampling Stations
A 5 m E of scow dock
B Cannery dock face of Station 2
C Crab waste disposal area (dockside)
D Midpoint of South Cove
E 400 m SE of Station 1 (dump area)
F 450 m S of Station 3
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-B5.
-------
TABLE VI-B5
SUMMARY OF HATER DUALITY
KING COVE, ALASKA
Sta. .
Parameter No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Transparency
Range of
High Water
Surface
8.1-11.3
4.9-10.8
10.2-11.0
9.8-10.8
9.8-10.7
7.1-10.6
6.7-10.8
9.6-10.7
8.9-10.6
9.1-10.5
9.7-12.2
9.0-10.0
8.5-9.5
8.5-10.0
9.0-9.5
9.0-9.5
8.5-9.5
8.5-9.5
8.0-9.0
8.5-9.0
7.5-9.0
8.0-10.0
Bot torn
6.5-9.5
6.5-10.8
8.5-10.3
9.0-10.1
7.6-9.7
7.0-9.8
4.6-10.1
9.5-10.4
8.0-10.3
7.7-9.2
6.0-9.5
8.0-9.5
7.5-9,5
7.5-9.5
7.5-8.0
7.0-8.0
7.0-8.0
7.5-8.0
7.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
7.0-7.5
7.0-7.5
6.0 to 9.0
Values
Low Water
Surface
9.3-10.0
9.5-10.2
9.8-10.3
10.0-10.3
9.6-10.1
9.9-10.3
10.1-10.4
9.9-10.4
10.0-11.0
10.1-10.4
9.9-11.2
9.0-11.0
9.0-9.5
9.0
9.0-9.5
9.0-9.5
9.0-9.5
9.0-10.0
9.0-9.5
9.0-10.0
9.0
9.0
meters
Bot torn
8.
9.
8.
8.
8.
7.
7.
8.
9.
6.
7.
9.
8.
8.
8.
7.
7.
7.
8.
7.
7.
3-9.
0-9.
8-9.
5-10
2-9.
9-9.
7-9.
7-10
1-9.
1-8.
7-8.
0-9.
0-9.
0-8.
0-8.
5-8.
5-8.
5-8.
9.0
0-9.
5-8.
5-8.
1
7
8
.1
6
0
9
.0
6
9
8
5
0
5
5
0
0
5
5
0
0
Sta. .
Parameter No.—
Salinity, ppt 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
pH 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Range of
High Water
Surface
20.0-22.0
21.0-22.0
21.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
21.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0
21.0-23.0
20.0-23.0
22.0-24.0
7.9-8.3
8.1-8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3-8.4
8.2-8.4
8.2-8.4
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.5
8.3
8.3-8.4
Bottom
22.0-24.0
22.0-23.0
20.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
21.0-23.0
20.0-23.0
20.0-23.0
20.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
21.0-23.0
21.0-22.0
8.1-8.4
8.3-8.4
8.4
8.4
8.3-8.5
8.4
8.3-8.4
8.3-8.4
8.3-8.5
8.4-8.6
8.5
Values
Low Water
Surface
15.0-24.0
21.0-24.0
21.0-23.0
19.0-22.0
20.0-23.0
18.0-22.0
17.0-23.0
17.0-23.0
18.0-23.0
21.0-23.0
20.0-24.0
7.5-7.7
8.1-8.3
8.3
7.9-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.1-8.3
8.2-8.3
7.7-8.5
8.1-8.3
8.2-8.4
8.1-8.3
Bot torn
21.0-24.0
22.0-24.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-24.0
22.0-23.0
20.0-22.0
22.0-23.0
22.0-23.0
7.9-8.2
8.3-8.4
8.3-8,4
8.3-8.4
8.3-8.4
8.2-8.4
8.3-8.4
8.2-8.5
8.1-8.4
8.3-8.5
8.3-8.5
a/ See Table VI-B4 for station descriptions.
-------
143
surface and bottom depths with two exceptions - Station 2 on the
surface and Station 7 on the bottom. Both violations occurred the
same date during high tide. Station 2 was near the dock and in
proximity to the point of waste discharge, whereas Station 7 was
over one hundred meters from the discharge point.
The sediment samples were analyzed for organic carbon and or-
ganic nitrogen content [Table VI-B6].
TABLE VI-B6
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
KING COVE, ALASKA
. Depth
Station— (meters)
A
B
C
D
E
E
F
1.5
9.8
9.1
11.0
30.5
30.5
27.0
Organic N
Organic
(Percent)
0.17
1.41
1.61
0.44
0.98
1.35
0.25
0.4
6.0
15.0
4.0
2.4
2.0
1.0
C
OSI
0.07
8.46
24.15
1.76
2.35
2.70
0.48
Bottom Type
Fish Wastes
Crab Waste,
, Sand, Gravel
Sand, Gravel
Garbage, Trash, Sand,
Gravel
Mud, Sand,
Detritus
Mud
Mud
Mud
Organic
a/Station locations are given in Table VI-B4.
Station A, located in the immediate vicinity of the gurry scow,
showed a very low OSI which indicates that the sand-gravel bottom con-
tains little organic material. The fish waste solids which were obser-
ved with the sample are apparently being flushed out with the outgoing
tides. As mentioned previously, the area around the scow becomes dis-
colored during processing because the blood and small solids are not
-------
144
retained in the scow. At Stations B and C which were near the face
of the dock, the OSI of the sediments indicate that active decompo-
sition is taking place. These types of sediments, however, were
confined to the area near the dock and crab waste discharge. The
trash and garbage found in the sediment at Station C apparently
comes from the numerous boats which tie up along the cannery dock.
Sediments taken from Station E (scow dumping area) had a hydrogen
sulphide odor. The OSI numbers indicate these muds are in a state
of decomposition; however, no fish wastes were evident in this area.
The OSI for Station F (outside the dumping area) indicates that the
muds are nearly stabilized.
Treatment Needs
Secondary waste treatment plus disinfection is required in the
community of King Cove. The present system is providing essentially
no treatment, and even if properly operated it would provide only pri-
mary treatment. The Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc., will need to insure
that the domestic wastes from its plant receive adequate treatment
as described earlier.
The collection and proper disposal of refuse wastes are required
for both the cannery and the community. The proposed sanitary land-
fill will provide a partial solution to this problem.
The use of the gurry scow for salmon processing wastes and the
discharge of crab wastes at the dock face are not adequate. Collection
of all process wastes with discharge below mean low low tide in the
-------
145
area where adequate dispersion is afforded will be required at the
King Cove cannery to prevent solids accumulation and to preclude
unaesthetic conditions.
-------
146
B-4 PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC., SQUAW HARBOR, ALASKA
General
Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc., owns and operates a shrimp processing
plant at Squaw Harbor, Alaska. Squaw Harbor is located on the north
shore of Baralof Bay on Unga Island, a large island just south of the
Alaska Peninsula [Figure VI-1], The shoreline is very steep and rugged.
The entire cannery as well as bunkhouse and dining facilities are con-
structed on pilings. The plant was constructed in 1967 and beean pro-
cessing shrimp in 1968. A plant layout is shown in Figure VI-B8.
A Refuse Act Permit Program Application (RAPP) dated 19 June 1971
has been filed with the Army Corps of Engineers. The fishing season
for shrimp is regulated by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
During 1972 the season was open from 15 April 1972 until 15 February
1973. A normal operating day lasts 10 hours and shrimp are usually pro-
cessed 22 to 25 days per month.
About 45 people are employed at the plant of which 38 are directly
involved with processing shrimp. The processing capacity of the plant
is 36.3 kkg (80,000 lb) of raw shrimp per day. On a normal 10-hour pro-
cessing day 27.2 kkg (60,000 lb) of raw shrimp are processed. Production
history for the oeriod 1968 to 1972 is tabulated as follows:
Year Annual Production (cases*)
1972 169,600
1971 150,000
1970 140,000
1969 105,000
!96« 140,000
* One case of shrimp weighs 5.4 kg consisting of 24 one-half pound cans.
-------
UNG A ISLAND
Septic tank
serving cannery leach field
WASTE
SUBM
n t a k e
pump station
FLOOD
EBB
LEGEND
• HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
• SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/N)
WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
Figure VI-15)!. IVler I'an Seafoods, Inc., Si|uaw Harbor, Alaska
Plan! I a\onI - Slat ion Locations
-------
148
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
visited the plant from 27 to 31 July 1973. Reuben Evans, plant super-
intendent, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
Two sources, freshwater and saltwater, supply the plant water
requirements. Freshwater is obtained from a spring located to the
north of the plant and about 75 m (250 ft) higher in elevation. An
earth dam has been constructed to store the spring water, creating in
effect a surface water supply. It is estimated that during canning
operations about 19 I/sec (300 gpm) of freshwater is used. A small
fraction of this would be for domestic use.
Freshwater used for processing is chlorinated at the rate of
3 to 4 mg/1 in order to maintain a chlorine residual of 2 to 2.5 mg/1
at the water spray immediately following the cooker. All process water
used after the cooking operation is freshwater. Chlorine is introduced
to the freshwater at the point where it enters the plant piping system.
All freshwater used for domestic purposes is not chlorinated. Periodi-
cally water samples from the domestic water system are sent to the
Alaska Department of Health and Welfare in Anchorage for bacteriolo-
gical analysis.
Saltwater (estimated at 19 I/sec or 300 gpm) is used solely for
processing and is obtained at a pumping station located on the east end
of the plant complex [Figure VI-B8]. The major portion of salt water is
used in the mechanical peeling step. However, saltwater is also used
in canning.
-------
149
Process Operations
Shrimp processing [Figure VI-R9] at the plant involves raw peeling,
i.e., prior to blanching. The shrimp are first washed in a large tank
of seawater. Loose shells float to the surface and are skimmed off
by a weir-type outlet. Some of the small fish are manually removed as
the washed shrimp move by conveyor belt to the peelers. After the
peeled shrimp are washed, they pass through a separator which removes
more shells. Then the shrimp are again washed with more shells and
small fish are manually removed. Blanching (65 seconds at 97°C) com-
pletes the processing in the peeling area of the plant.
In the packing area shrimp pass over an upflow air blower which
removes any remaining shells. Subsequent processing operations are si-
milar to those described in Section V. Large cans for institutional
use are hand packed and frozen. The half-pound cans are mechanically
packed. All mechanically packed shrimp pass over another blower
prior to canning to insure complete shell removal. After the cans are
sealed they are retorted for 25 min at 116°C (240°F). Processing
is completed when the cooled cans are cased for shipment.
Company officials indicated that they would begin processing fresh
frozen shrimp during the 1973 season. In addition, management is con-
sidering future expansion of the plant to facilitate processing of tan-
ner and dungeness crab.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—There are no facilities for the collection,
treatment, and disposal of domestic wastes oripinating from the
-------
UNLOAD
1
PUMPED THROUGH SUBMERGED OUTFALL
AND DISCHARGED AT 14 M. DEPTH
20 M. OUT FROM DOCK FACE
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
Kigurp \I-BM. shrimp Processing .Sequence. Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc. S(|ua« Harbor. Alaska
-------
151
bunkhouse, mess hall and office area. Domestic wastes from various build-
ings are discharged through the building floors into the water at high
tide or onto the beach at low tide. Raw waste discharges from the
kitchen and bunkhouse area were evident during the survey.
A small package aeration plant will be installed at this cannery.
Refuse—Refuse including wastepaper, boxes, cans, and bottles are
collected and dumped approximately 60 m (200 ft) west of the plant area.
Combustible solids are burned and remaining trash is periodically covered
with dirt. The beach and surrounding area were relatively clean.
Process Wastes—Process wastes are derived primarily from the
peeling area with additional wastes generated in the packing area.
Several washing, peeling and separating steps [Figure VI-B9] account
for the vast majority of waste in the form of shells, viscera, heads
and small fish. These shrimp processing steps require a continuous
flow of water. This water is then used to flume the wastes out of
the processing area. During packing operations additional shell
wastes enter the process waste stream from the blower and inspection
operations.
All process wastes are conveyed from the cannery in a single flume
and discharged to a sump. From the sump, wastewater is pumped through
a submerged outfall line and discharged about 20 m (65 ft) from the
face of the dock at a depth of 14 m (45 ft) [Figure VI-B8].
Plant officials indicated that about 18 percent of the original
raw shrimp are recovered as a final product. Therefore, on an average
-------
152
processing day when 27.2 kkg (60,000 Ib) of raw shrimp are processed,
about 22.3 kkg (49,200 Ib) of waste solids are discharged and 4.9 kkg
(10,000 Ib) of marketable shrimp produced. During the plant visit 28
and 29 July 1973 the plant was operating at the average production rate.
Receiving Water Evaluation
The quality of receiving waters was evaluated 27 to 29 July both
during and after plant processing. Water and sediment samples were col-
lected at selected stations in Baralof Bay [Figure VI-B8 and Table VI-B7].
There were no meaningful changes noted in salinity, temperature, and pH
measurement [Table VI-B8]. The dissolved oxygen levels were above 6.0
mg/1, the applicable standard for Alaska Marine Waters, at all but Station
7 which is near the vicinity of the waste outfall line. At this station
the oxygen levels near the bottom measured well below 6 mg/1.
The sediment samples showed that shrimp wastes were accumulating on
the bottom within a radius of several hundred meters of the waste discharge
point (Station E). Chemical characterization of the bottom sample [Table
VI-B9] from Station E shows that very active decomposition was taking place,
This would account for the lower DO values generally observed near the
bottom at this location. Analysis of samples from Stations A, B, and C
show the presence of decomposing waste materials. All samples had a
strong hydrogen sulphide odor; however, those samples from Stations F
and C, showed that sediments were partially stabilized. These results
would indicate that adequate dispersion of the wastes was not taking
place.
-------
153
TABLE VI-B7
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS
PETER PAN SEAFOODS, INC.
SQUAW HARBOR, ALASKA
a/
Map Key— Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 E end of fuel dock at dock face
2 E end of cannery dock at dock face
3 Midway of cannery dock at dock face
4 W end of cannery dock at dock face
5 Center of messhall at dock face
6 30 m SW of cannery dock
7 30 m E of Station 6
8 30 m S of cannery dock at "D"
9 60 m SSW of Station 7
Sediment Sampling Stations
A 30 m SW of cannery dock near Station 6
B W end of cannery dock near Station A
C 25 m S of cannery dock between "E" and "D"
D 30 m S of cannery dock at Station 8
E 30 m S of dock at Station 7
F 30 m SSW of Station 7
G 30 m SSW of Station 7
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-B8.
-------
TABLE VI-B8
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
SQUAW HARBOR, ALASKA
./ High
Parameter Station No.— Surface
DO, mg/1 1 9.2-10.7
2 9.4-10.5
3 9.8-10.4
4 10.0-10.5
5 9.8-10.4
6 10.0-10.5
7 9.4-10.9
8 9.8-10.5
9 10.2-10.8
Temperature 1 9.5-10.5
°C
2 9.5-10.0
3 9.5-10.0
4 9.5-10.0
5 9.5-10.0
6 9.0-9.5
7 9.0
8 9.5-10.0
9 9.5
Transparency 3.4 to 5.5. m
Range
Water
Bottom
9.0-9.9
9.0-9.8
8.0-10.1
6.8-10.2
8.3-10.0
7.2-9.8
3.4-6.8
6.0-10.1
9.0-10.1
9.0-10.0
9.0-9.5
9.0
9.0
9.0-9.5
9.0
9.0
9.0-9.5
8.5-9.0
of Values
Low
Surface
8.8-10.2
8.4-10.4
8.6-10.2
8.4-10.3
9.2-10.4
8.6-10.4
8.8-10.6
9.0-10.4
9.9-10.6
8.5-10.0
8.5-10.0
8.5-10.0
8.5-9.5
8.5-9.5
8.5-9.5
8.5-9.5
8.5-9.5
8.5-9.5
Water
Bot tom
8.4-10.0
8.0-10.1
6 .4-10 . 2
8.0-10.4
8 . 0-10. 2
7.8-10.0
8 . 0-10 . 0
8.2-10.3
9 o 0-10. 2
8.5-9.5
8.5-9.0
8 .5-9 .0
8.5-9.0
8.5-9.0
8.5-9.0
8.5-9.0
8.5-9.0
8.0-9.0
Parameter Ststion No. —
Salinity, ppt 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
pH 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Higl
Surface
21.0-24.0
22.0-24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0
24.0
24.0
8.2
7.9-8.2
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.2
8.0-8.3
8.1-8.2
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
Range of
i Water
Bottom
24.0
24.0-25.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
8.3
8.1-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.3
7.9-8.3
8.3
8.3
Values
Low
Surface
22.0-24.0
17.0-24.0
22.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
22.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
22.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
8.1-8.2
7.8-8.2
8.1-8.2
8.1-8.3
8.1-8.2
8.1-8.2
7.9-8.2
8.1-8.2
8.1-8.3
Water
Bottom
23.0-24.0
23.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
23.0-24.0
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.1-8.3
8.2-8.3
8.3
-------
TABLE VI-B9
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
SQUAW HARBOR, ALASKA
, Depth Organic N Organic C
Station— (meters) (percent)
OS I
Bottom Type
8.0
8.0
15.0
13.0
0.21
0.48
0.71
0.70
11.0 2.31 Shrimp Wastes,
Organic Sludge
9.0 4.32 Shrimp Wastes,
Organic Sludge
3.1 2.20 Organic Sludge,
Sand, Gravel,
Rock
11.0 7.70 Shrimp Wastes,
Organic Sludge
F
G
19.0
24.0
0.58
0.28
1.3
1.6
0.75
0.45
Mud
Mud
a/ Station locations are given in Table VI-B7.
During plant operations process wastes were also visible in the
receiving water. Occasionally large mats of shrimp wastes, up to one
meter in diameter, would rise to the surface giving off strong obnoxious
odors. These mats were broken up by wave action in a matter of minutes
allowing the wastes to settle. With this exception, the receiving water
and shoreline areas were essentially free of process wastes.
Treatment Needs
Adequate secondary treatment of domestic wastes is required. All
untreated domestic waste discharges should be collected and given
treatment to meet the required secondary level. If properly operated
-------
156
and maintained, a package extended aeration plant, such as that pro-
posed for installation, should provide adequate treatment.
Waste disposal for process waters at this plant will be in accord
with the effluent guidelines being developed for the shrimp
processing industry.
-------
157
B-5 WAKEFIELD FISHERIES, SAND POINT, ALASKA
General
Wakefield Fisheries operates a crab and shrimp processing plant at
Sand Point, Alaska on the northwest side of Popof Island [Figure VI-1].
The parent company of Wakefield Fisheries is Hunt Wesson Frozen Foods,
headquartered in California.
The original plant was constructed in 1947 by the Alaska Cold
Storage Company. They maintained a fresh frozen operation for halibut
and salmon from 1948 until 1954 when Wakefield Fisheries began a frozen
king crab operation. In 1967 a new plant was constructed for processing
king and tanner crabs (snow crabs). In addition, shrimp processing fa-
cilities have Just been installed. The layout of the present plant fa-
cilities is shown in Figure VI-B10. About 70 people are employed in
both crab and shrimp processing operations.
Crab production generally consists of 50 percent king crab and 50
percent tanner crab. In a normal day (10 hours), about 16 to 18 kkg
(35,000 to 40,000 Ib) of raw crab are processed. Crab processing occurs
throughout the year. The king crab season for this area begins 15 August
and extends through 15 January or until 2,380 kkg (5.25 million Ib) are
caught. King crabs are also brought from the Bering Sea and the Dutch
Harbor areas which have seasons extending from 15 June to 31 March and
1 November to 15 February, respectively. The tanner crab season lasts
throughout the year except from 1 to 15 August. Tanner crabs are not
generally processed during the king crab season.
-------
Ul
oo
DISCHARGE ON BOTTOM
SANITARY DISCHARGE
PROCESS
WASTE DISCHARGE
LEGEND
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/N)
— WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
Figure VI-B10. Wakefield Fisheries, Sand Poinl, Alaska
Planl Layout - Station Locations
-------
IV
Production figures for the amount of raw crab processed during the
past several years are as follows:
1972 3,175 kkg (7,000,000 Ib)
1971 2,315 kkg (5,100,000 Ib)
1970 2,315 kkg (5,100,000 Ib)
It was estimated that 1,235 kkg (2,720,000 Ib) of king crab, and 2,130
(4,700,000 Ib tanner crab) were processed as of 30 June 1973.
Shrimp processing occurs throughout the year except from 14 February
to 15 April. The Wakefield Fisheries plant can process about 16.3 kkp
(36,000 Ib) of raw shrimp in a 9-hour day. The company plans to expand
to two 9-hour shifts per day when shrimp become available. After several
months, operation the plant had processed about 290 kkg (640,000 Ib) of
shrimp by 30 June.
On 26 and 27 July, EPA personnel from National Field Investigations
Center-Denver visited the plant to observe processing operations and
evaluate current waste disposal practices. Robert Halovin, superinten-
dent, provided information and a plant tour.
Water Supply
Freshwater—Wakefield Fisheries owns and operates the freshwater
supply system for the City of Sand Point (population 380) as well
as its own processing needs. Water is obtained from Huraboldt Creek and
3
pumped through a 20 cm (8 in.) pipeline to a 570 m (150,000 sal.) wood
storage tank. It then flows by gravity through a 20 cm wood stave
pipe to the plant. The supply system was installed in 1960 to serve
the plant. Since that time additional connections for city residences
-------
160
have made the system inadequate in terms of treatment, storage capacity,
and pressure.- The only treatment being provided is chlorination which
takes place at the main pumping station prior to pumping to the storage
tank. Chlorine is added with the objective of maintaining 0.5 mg/1 re-
sidual after passing through the pump. No additional chlorination of
the freshwater is made at the plant. On 26 July the chlorine residual
of the freshwater supply measured 0.1 mg/1 at the plant.
Freshwater is used within the plant for cooling, ice making, washing
down equipment and floors, and domestic purposes. Estimates on fresh-
water use are as follows:
Season Average Peak
(1/min) (gpm) (1/min) (gpm)
Summer 945 250 1,325 350
Winter 340 90 795 210
Cooling water usage accounts for about 795 1/min (210 gpm) in the summer
and 190 I/rain (50 gpra) in the winter.-^
Seawater—In addition to the freshwater use, Wakefield Fisheries
also uses approximately 5,700 1/min (1,500 gpm) of seawater in processing
operations. However, with the addition of the shrimp processing facilities,
this level of usage has increased by several hundred liters per minute.
Seawater is pumped from directly below the cannery. Chlorine is added
to the process water with the objective of maintaining a residual of
2.0 to 2.5 mg/1. A test on 26 July showed a chlorine residual of 2.5 mg/1.
Samples are collected and sent periodically to the Alaska Department
of Health and Welfare for bacterial analyses on the water supplies. Results
-------
161
of these analyses are available in the main office in Bellingham, Wash.
Process Operations
Shrimp—This is the first year of operation for processing shrimp
at this plant. Processing occurs in a manner similar to that described
in Section V, and depicted by Figure VI-B11.
The processed shrimp are placed in 2.3 kg (5 Ib) containers, vacuum
sealed, frozen, and then shipped to Bellingham, Wash, where additional
processing and packaging takes place.
Crab—Crab are processed [Figure VI-B12] in a manner similar to that
employed at other plants in Alaska. All crab meat is packaged in 6.8 kg
(15 Ib) blocks. Freshwater is used for freezing and glazing the blocks
that are packaged (4 per case) and then stored for shipment to Bellingham,
Wash, for additional processing and packaging.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—A septic tank is used to treat the domestic wastes
of the cannery. The effluent from the system is discharged directly into
the harbor at the edge of the dock [Figure VI-B10]. The superintendent
indicated that when it is necessary to pump sludge from the tank it is
their practice to wait for an outgoing tide and the right wind conditions,
and then dump the sludge directly into Humboldt Harbor. A sediment sample
collected near the point of discharge revealed a few shells but no
sludge deposits.
-------
162
UNLOAD
FISH (LARGE]
STORAGE
COOK
F_I_SH_ [SMALL]
SHRIMP"'
PEEL 18
CLEANER 14]
EXCESS CARRIAGE
WATER "*"
SHELL
SEPARATERS (8]
FREEZE
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
SHELLS
FOOD PUMP
i
r
BLOWER (1)
i
r
INSPECTION
i
F
SEPARATION
BY SIZE
i
r
HAND PACK
& VAC SEAL
SHELLS
SHELLS
SUMP
HUMBOLDT BAY
(2)
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTES
NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-B11. Wakefield Fisheries, Sandpoint, Alaska
Shrimp Processing Sequence
-------
UNLJAD
DEAD CRABS
WATEI^
STORAGE
i
•
BUTCHER
1
7
COOK
i
COOL
1
r
CLEAN
i
1
WASH
i
f
EXTRACT MEAT
SEA WATER
DEAD CRABS
CARAPACE
INSPECT
PACK
FREEZE
GLAZE
CASE
t
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
GRINDER
63
HUMBOLDT BAY
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTES
Figure VI-B12. Wake field Fisheries, Sand point, Alaska
Crab Processing Sequence
-------
164
Sand Point has no community-wide sewerage system. Present sewage
disposal is accomplished on an individual or a small group basis.
Disposal practices include the use of septic tanks with the effluent
discharged into Humboldt Harbor or the direct discharge of raw sewage to
3
the Harbor. A small aerobic package plant with a capacity of 9.5 m /day
(2500 gpd) gives treatment to the wastes from 8 trailers and a motel.
The effluent from this system is discharged without disinfection into
Humboldt Harbor. In the past, several outbreaks of diarrhea in the
community were attributed to improper sewage disposal practices.
The engineering report by Linck-Thompson— concludes that all
domestic wastes from the plant community should receive a minimum of
secondary treatment with disinfection. The report proposes that the
community construct an adequate collection system, sewerage lagoons,
and a chlorination basin to accomplish the required treatment. The
treatment facilities would not receive cooling or process wastes
from industry.
Refuse—Disposal of refuse wastes at this plant appears adequate.
All refuse wastes are transported to a city landfill site located north-
east of the cannery. This material is periodically covered according
to the superintendent.
Shrimp Process Wastes—The floors and walls of the shrimp-processing
facilities are covered with fiberglass to allow collection of process
wastes. All wastes from processing and cleanup operations discharge into
two floor drains that connect to a 20 cm pipe which subsequently dis-
charges to a holding tank about 2.5 m long and deep, and 1 m wide
-------
[Figure VT-B10], Wastes are pumped from the tank through a discharge
line, submerged about 11 tn, to a distance about 150 m from the dock.
One pump will empty the holding tank in less than 60 sec. The super-
intendent related that when pumping starts, air entrapped in the dis-
charge line raises it to the water surface. The company plans to
anchor the pipeline to the Harbor bottom with concrete blocks.
A sediment sample collected near the end of the discharge pipe
[Station B, Figure VI-B10] indicated a mud-sand bottom with no shrimp
wastes present. This would indicate that these wastes were being dis-
persed by tide action. The OSI of 0.20 [Table VI-B10] indicates that
the sediments were in a stable condition. Samples collected in the near
vicinity of the point of discharge were similar in character.
TABLE VI-B10
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
SAND POINT, ALASKA
, Depth Organic N
Organic C
Station— (meters) (percent) OSI Bottom Type
A 6.0 0.85
B 10.0 0.17
C 11.0 0.08
6.0 5.10 Crab shell, Mud, Sand
1.2 0.20 Mud, Sand
0.5 0.04 Mud, Sand
a/Station locations are shown in Figure VI-B10.
The estimated daily waste load from shrimp processing is 13.2 to 13.6
kkg (29,000 to 30,000 Ib). This waste load is based on the processing of
16.3 kkg (36,000 lb)/day of raw shrimp. The final product recovered is
about 2.8 kkg (6,000 Ib) or 17 to 18 percent. If the plant goes to the two
9-hour shifts per day as nlanned, this waste load will double.
-------
166
Crab Process Wastes—The crab processing plant has concrete
floors to facilitate waste collection. All crab wastes from the
butchering, cleaning, and related processes pass through a Red Goat
Grinder to a central flume that discharges at the face of the dock
[Figure VI-B10] where the water depth is about 10 m. During the EPA
visit, a portion of the crab process wastes was spilling under the
dock. Dredge samples taken at the face of the dock [Station A, Figure
VI-B10] revealed a large buildup of shell fragments. The OSI of 5.10
indicated that the bottom deposits ware not stable but were actively
decomposing. However, the buildup of bottom solids did not extend
more than a couple of meters from the face of the dock. Saraples taken
about 45 m directly in front of the dock [Station C] contained no shells
and indicated that sediments were in a stable condition.
No figures were provided for the amount of waste generated per
kilogram of live crab processed. Howev®r, based on statistics collected
from other plants, this waste load is estimated to be about 82 to 8A per-
cent of the total crab weight processed, i.e., 16 to 18 percent of the
live crab weight is processed as a marketable product. With this assump-
tion the daily waste load from Wakefield Fisheries for crab processing
varies from about 13.2 to 15.4 kkg (29,000 to 34,000 Ib), based on a live
crab weight processing rate of 15.9 to 18.1 kkg (35,000 to 40,000 lb)/day.
Future disposal plans of the company call for the crab processing
wastes to go to the holding tank now receiving only shrimp process wastes.
-------
167
Treatment Needs
Adequate secondary treatment (40 CFR 133) for the plant domestic
wastes and those from the community of Rand Point is necessary. The
proposed treatment system outlined in the preliminary engineering report
by Linck-Thompson should solve the problem of raw and inadequately
treated domestic wastes. These wastes are now being discharged to
waters of Popof Strait and eliminate or decrease the potential for con-
tamination of the seawater used for processing.
Disposal of process waste for this plant must be in accord with the
effluent guidelines being developed for the crab and shrimp industry.
-------
168
C-l ALASKA SEAFOODS, INC., HOMER, ALASKA
General
Alaska Seafoods, Inc. owns and operates a crab and shrimp processing
facility at the end of the Homer Spit in Homer, Alaska [Figures VI-2 and
VI-C1]. In 1964 the company was incorporated and the plant was built. The
plant employs about 150 people and operates on two 8-hr shifts per day.
The number of processing days each season varies with the quantity of
seafood caught. The plant layout is shown in Figure VI-C2. A Refuse Act
Permit Program (RAPP) application was filed with the U.S. Army Corns of
Engineers.
The canning process ceased in 1970; freezing is now the only operation.
Although no definite commitments have been made, the company plans to expand
its freezing operations in the near future, and may return to canning if the
market becomes attractive. The company distributes crab and shrimp under
its own brand name, Hi-North Brand, with brokers in New York, Hawaii, and
on the West Coast.
Anticipated production in 1973 was 1,130 kkg (2.5 million Ib) of
snow crab, 680 kkg (1.5 million Ib) of king crab, 91 kktr (200,000 Ib)
of dunpeness crab, and 2,270 kkp (5 million Ib) of pink shrimp. Although
production figures were not made available for past years, the company
estimates that production has increased about 15 to 20 percent per year.
At maximum capacity, the plant can process 18 kkp (40,000 Ib) of shrimp
and 22.7 kkp (50,000 Ib) of crab per day. This year, the plant also
processed 4.5 kkp (10,000 Ib) of fresh-frozen sockeve salmon.
-------
ANCHORAGE
KENA I PENINSULA
ALASKA SEAFOODS INC
Figure VI-C1. Alaska Seafoods, Inc., Homer, Alaska
Location Map
-------
70
4
/
CITY DOCK
PLATE FREEZERS
CRAB
BOXING
SHRIMP PACKING
SHRIMP
PROCESSING
h
__J
t- uj
c/> ^
•X 1*1
OQ en
Lk.
CRAB
PROCESSING
^^^^
""
SHRIMP1
KACHEMAK
BAY
^ WASTE DISCHARGE LINES
Figure VI-C2. Alaska Seafoods, Inc., Homer , Alaska
Plant Layout
-------
171
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
visited the facility and conducted an in-plant survey on 25 July 1973.
However, receiving water quality evaluation was not conducted. Bill
Miller, president, and Harry Greporie, plant superintendent, provided
information and assistance.
Water Supply
Water for domestic purposes is purchased from the city of Homer.
In June 1973, 9,840 m /day (2.6 tngd) were used: however, the quantity
varies each month. Process water used for the shrimp peelers, live-crab
tanks, and cleanup is obtained from four saltwater wells: two wells
are 21 m (70 ft) deep and two are 34 m (110 ft) deep. Each of the four
peelers uses about 3 I/sec (50 gpm); the amount used in cleanup and
live-crab tanks which are operated on a flow-through basis is unknown.
3
According to the RAPP application about 500 m (132,600 gal.) of salt-
water and 90 m (23,800 gal.) of freshwater are used daily for proces-
sing and domestic purposes.
Process Operations
Shrimp—Shrimp are received at the Homer City dock and transferred
by brailler net from the fishing boat to open bed trailers for transport
to the plant. A scale is attached between the hoist line and the brailler
net to determine live-shrimp weight. At the olant, the shrimp are un-
loaded by hand onto a conveyor which carries the shrimp to the processing
area. Processing [Figure VI-C3] is accomplished in a manner similar to
-------
172
UNLOAD
*••
WHOLE SHRIMP
COOK
(4)
i
MECHANICAL PEEL
14]
DEWATEB
M)
BLOWER (1
SHELL, OFFAL
SOLIDS
SHELL, MEAT
INSPECTION
ID
c
ITR
1C
A
C
ID
D
IP
ID
DRAIN
(D
INSPECTION (1
HAND PACK I
VAC SEAL
FREEZE
(D
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
SHELL
SHELL
COOK INLET
SUMP
PROCESSING SEQUENCE
— WASTE
(2) NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-C3. Alaska Seafoods, Inc.,Homer, Alaska
Shrimp Processing Sequence
-------
173
that detailed in Section V. After processing, the shrimp are placed in
plate contact freezers which can process 545 kg (1,200 lb)/hr.
Crab—The final product of the crab processing operation is either
whole crabs or crab meat [Figure VI-C4]. The general process is accom-
plished in a manner similar to that detailed in Section V. After cooking
and spray cooling, some of the crab are selected for processing whole and
the remainder are processed as packaged crab meat in 18 kg (40 Ib) cartons.
After processing, both types of crab product are shipped with the frozen
shrimp.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—All domestic wastes from the plant flow to a septic
tank that is cleaned once every six months. The effluent from the septic
tank discharges into Kachemak Ray without disinfection.
Refuse—Cartons, paper, and other combustible refuse material are
burned in the company incinerator. Garbage and non-combustible materials
are collected once a week and hauled to the city landfill.
Process Wastes—Shrimp wastes originate from the cookers, peelers,
dewatering process, inspection and unloading areas in the plant. Waste-
waters from the unloading area contain solids and whole shrimp (spilled).
The cooking and peeling wastes include soluble organics, shells, solids,
and offal. In the dewatering process, shrimp are air dried with a blower;
shells and meat fragments are spilled into the waste stream. At the
inspection areas, the wastes consist of shells and damaged meat.
-------
WHOLE COOK LINE
UNLOAD
t
CRAB MEAT LINE
LIVE STORAGE
I
| COOK 14) I
SPRAY COOL
I 1 1 ' COOLING WAT
CLEAN (1
SOLIDS
h iULIUi ,
_ VISCERA
BRINE FREEZE (1
COLD STORAGE
1
ER SOLIDS
SHELLS
BUTCHER (1
SOLIDS
S H_E_L_L_S
MEAT
CLEAN (1
EXTRACT MEAT (1
PREFREEZE (1
— •
i I
SUMP
BLAST FREEZE (1
KACHEMAK BAY
"L
PACK
SHIPMENT
PROCESSING SEQUENCE —
WASTE —
NO. OF UNITS (2]
Figure VI-C4. Alaska Seafoods, Inc. Homer, Alaska
Crab Processing
-------
The whole-cooked crab process produces small amounts of wastes
consisting mainly of solids from the cleaning operation. In the
crab-meat process, wastes occur from the butchering, cleaning, and
meat extraction operations.
Additional wastewater is generated during the plant cleanup. Salt-
water from the wells is used to wash equipment every two hours. During
R*
the final cleanup, a chemical solution, CHEM-PROCIDE, is used to wash
floors and walls.
All waste flows within the plant are collected in flumes, conveyed
to a sump (3m x 3 m x 2 m deep), and pumped untreated 90 m (300 ft) into
the bay at the 0.9 m (3 ft) minus tide contour. According to the RAPP
application, the discharge is located at the 3 m (10 ft) minus tide con-
tour. This discrepancy between discharge locations probably occurs be-
cause the company has removed sections from the end of the discharge
pipe. The extreme end of the pipe was cut because it became clogged and
the pump pressure could not break the obstruction. A second discharge
line from the pit serves as an emergency bypass if the pump fails. The
Parma Lifter pump, (12.6 I/sec or 200 gpm) chops all material in the waste-
water prior to discharge, except for king and snow crabs wastes which
are ground before entering the pit.
As reported in the RAPP application, the total amount of wastewater
discharged to Homer Spit is about 590 m /day (0.156 mgd). The character-
istics of this wastewater are listed in Table VI-C1.
* Pace Chemical Corporation, Seattle, Washington.
-------
176
TABLE VI-C1
TER GHARACTEI
ALASKA SEAFOODS, INC., HOMER, ALASKA
WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-
Parameter
pH, su
Temperature (summer) *C
Temperature (winter) °C
BOD5
COD
Total Solids
ss
NH3 as N
TKN as N
N02 as N
N03 as N
Total Phosphorus as P
Oil /Grease
Average Concentration—
6.8
(6F) 7(45)
(°F) 3(37)
313
1,840
27,079
2,435
14
1,680
140
£/
38.5
180
Average
kg/day
186
1,090
16,030
1,441
8
995
83
23
107
Load
Ib/day
409
2,401
35,338
3,177
18
2,192
183
50
235
a/ Data as reported in the company RAPP application,
W Values reported as mg/1, except pH and temperature.
c/ Not determined due to interference in sea water.
-------
Plant officials estimate about 15 percent of the orieinal raw
shrimp weight and 25 percent of the crab meat is recovered as an edible
product. Hence, based on the estimated production fieures for 1973,
the resulting waste load discharged to the Bay would be about 1,450 kkf
(3.2 million Ib) of crab and 1,950 kkg (4.3 million Ib) of shrimp.
Treatment Needs
Company management anticipates the installation of shaker screens
to recover shells from shrimp and crab processing operations. About
55 percent of the recovered material will eventually be used for fertilizer
and fish food. Presently no plant on the Kenai Peninsula can utilize
this material.
There was no evidence of waste deposits on the beaches of Homer Spit.
At the water's edge, small amounts of pulverized shrimp shells were evident
At low tide some floating solids wash toward the shore from the discharge
pipe. Tidal currents cleanse the area and solids do not accumulate.
However, the effluent pipe should be extended below mean low tide to
prevent the solids from floating back to the beach.
Domestic wastes should be discharged to the municipal sewer system
when this service becomes available on the Spit. In the interim, the
effluent from the septic tank should receive adequate disinfection.
-------
178
C-2 COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, KENAI, ALASKA
General
Columbia Wards Fisheries owns and operates a salmon canning and
freezing plant at Kenai, Alaska. The plant is on the south bank, near
the mouth of the Kenai River [Figure VI-2 and VI-C5]. The cannery,
constructed in 1922 and operated by Libby-McNeil-Libby, was purchased
by Columbia Wards Fisheries in 1959. The layout of the plant area is
shown in Figure VI-C6. A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application
was filed on 30 December 1971 with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Plant management and maintenance personnel arrived from Seattle,
Wash, in mid-May to prepare the cannery for operation. The processing
period begins in late June and continues through mid-August with about
35 days of actual plant operation during this period. During the normal
processing day. the average working shift is 8 hr: the longest shift
during the 1973 season was 14 hr. The cannery employs about 110 people,
excluding fishermen.
The plant freezes about 14 percent of the total salmon processed:
the rest are canned. Of the salmon processed, about 40 percent are
sockeye, 40 percent are chum and the remaining 20 percent consist of
silver, pink, and chinook. The estimated salmon production for 1973 was
30,000 cases.* The 1971 and 1972 production was 16,000 and 37,700 cases.
respectively: the largest annual production was 93,000 cases.
* One case of salmon weighs 21.8 kg consisting of 48 one-nound cans.
-------
179
-N-
KENAI PEN INSULA
V-
ui
O
O
o
Q
Z
w
_1
<
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES
Figure VI—C5. Columbia Wards Fisheries. Kenai, Alaska
Location Map
-------
V
X
WASTE DISCHARGE
LINES
SEPTIC TANK O
00
o
To Mouth -^-
KENAI RIVER
MAIN DISCHARGE
TO RIVER
SHOP
o
CARPENTER SHOP
D
O
n n
BUNK HOUSE ""
LLJ
GO
CD
CD
CONVEYOR
'Discharge of Fresh Water
from Pressure Relief Valve
Discharge from Flume
f Carrying Heads to Grinder
POWER HOUSE
D
O
BUNK HOUSE
^L
\
O
J
0
D°
MESS HALL
Figure VI— C6. Columbia Wards Fisheries, Kenai, Alaska
Plant Layout
-------
181
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
conducted an engineering survey of the facility on 26 July 1973. A re-
ceiving water quality evaluation was not conducted. Harold Brindle,
plant superintendent, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All water used at the plant is obtained from three freshwater
wells, of which two are about 18 m (60 ft) deep and the third is 55 ra
(180 ft) deep. According to the RAPP application the quantity of water
3 3
used is 606 m /day (0.16 ragd), which includes 38 m /day (0.01 mgd) ob-
tained from surface sources. Water use was determined by personnel from
Bumble Bee Seafoods in 1971. Chlorine gas is used to disinfect the water:
the chlorine residual ranges between 0.1 and 0.2 mg/1. Since the water
is used for domestic purposes, samples are routinely sent to the Alaska
Department of Health and Welfare in Anchorage for bacteriological analysis.
Process Operations
About 90 percent of the salmon processed by the plants are caught by
ocean-going boats; the remaining 10 percent are caught by shore nets in
the Kenai River. After the fish are unloaded from tenders, scows, or
trucks, they are conveyed by water flume to any of 10 fiberglass holding
bins, iced, and stored until time for processing. Salmon are pro-
cessed by either freezing or canning operations [Figure VI-C7].
Salmon selected for freezing are separated from those to be canned,
and transported to the freezing area. Eggs are recovered by hand before
the viscera is removed. Heads, fins, and tails are not removed. The
-------
182
UNLOAD
t
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
i ^
lut .,1 FISH HOLDING
•5 BINS 110
t
SALT/OIL
INDEXER (3)
11
IRON CHINK (3)
t
SLIMING TABLE
13)
(
FILLER BINS (4)
t
FILLERS [4)
t
WEIGHING (4)
1
PATCHING (4)
_ rn ro u rn rn lu P
HEA
--^-
..,. »-
— •— l
T
o _„_
1
OIL
1
_ ^— ^ —^BP.
^
— ,
1
1
*
TO KENAI
1
RIVER
SEALING
(4)
RETORT
(6)
AIR
COOL
PROCESS SEQUENCE
BRIGHT
STACK
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
^ WASTE
^ EGG RECOVERY
(2) NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-C7. Columbia Wards Fisheries
Kenai. Alaska Salmon Processing Sequence
-------
183
processed salmon are then placed in one of two Freze Gel plate freezers
before shipment. The canning process is conducted in a manner similar
to that described in Section V. Fish heads, except for pink salmon,
are processed for recovery of oil. Eggs are recovered, cured in brine
agitators, hand-crated, and shipped to Japan.
The cannery uses two 1-lb, one 1/2-lb, and one 1/4-lb can lines
for processing salmon.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—Domestic wastes are treated by septic tanks. Seven
septic tanks discharge to drainage fields, whereas the tank that services
the cannery area discharges directly to the river. Disinfection of septic
tank effluents is not practiced; however, chlorine is introduced into the
toilets during cleaning. The quantity of wastewater discharged, as repor-
ted in the RAPP application, is 45 m /day (12,000 gpd).
Refuse—The superintendent could not estimate the amount of refuse
wastes generated. He stated that this material was hauled daily to a
landfill on the company property. Although the area is described as a
landfill, the wastes are not covered each day.
Process Wastes—Process wastes originate from the unloading dock,
fish house, and cannery. The floors in the fish house are concrete
which facilitates collection of waters from salmon processing and clean-
ing operations. The cannery floor is constructed of wood, but flumes
deliver the wastes to the central discharge pipe. Most of the process
-------
184
waste is created during butchering. Viscera, tails and fins are flumed
to a central trough that continuously discharges the waste inside the
dock face through the main 2.5 cm (10 in.) diameter outfall pipe. The
point of discharge is in the tidal stream above high tide. The byproduct
from the oil recovery process, a red liquor, is discharged from the cook-
ers to the Kenai River.
The characteristics of the process wastes were determined by Bumble
Bee Seafoods in 1971 and reported in the RAPP application [Table VI-C2].
The river water used to flume the fish from the scows to holding bins
was also characterised and reported in the application [Table VI-C3].
Plant management estimates that from 33 to 34 kg (72 to 75 Ib) of
fish are required to produce one case (21.8 kg or 48 Ib) of canned salmon.
Of the 11 kg (25 Ib) of waste material generated, about 1.1 kg (2.5 Ib)
of eggs are recovered, and 3.4 kg (7.5 Ib) are recovered as heads, leaving
about 6.8 kg (15 Ib) of waste discharged per case of canned salmon. The
estimated wasteload that will be discharged from the plant during 1973
is 204 kkg (450,000 Ib) or 5.8 kkg (12,850 Ib) per day of actual processing,
Treatment Needs
Process wastes are discharged under the dock directly into the Kenai
River. Observation of the river at low tide revealed that wastes were
dispersed with no visual evidence of solids within 25 m of the outfall.
Beaches were clean and no deposits of solids were evident. Since water
quality studies were not conducted, the fate of the solid matter in the
-------
185
TABLE VI-C2
WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, KENAI, ALASKA
Parameter
Flow, m /day (mgd)
pH, au
Temperature, °C (°F)
BOD-
COD
Total Solids
SS
NH3 as N
TKN as N
N02 as N
N03 as N
Total Phosphorus as
Oil /Grease
Average Concentration—
492 (0.13)
7.4
8 (46)
2,080
3,240
9,450
5,900
37.9
833
0.31
1.31
P 220
2,530
Average
kg /day
1,025
1,590
4,670
2,910
18.6
410
0.15
0.64
108
1,240
Load
Ib/day
2,260
3,510
10,300
6,410
41.1
904
0.33
1.42
239
2,740
a/ Data as reported in the company RAPP application.
b_/ Value reported as rag/1, except flow, pH and temperature.
-------
186
TABLE VI-C3
FLUME WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-''
COLUMBIA WARDS FISHERIES, KENAI, ALASKA
Parameter
Flow, m /day (gpd)
pH, su
Temperature, °C (eF)
BOD
COD
Total Solids
SS
NH3 as N
TKN as N
N02 as N
NO as N
Total Phosphorus as P
Oil/Grease
Average Concentration—
45 (12,000)
7,5
11 (51)
16
601
30,900
52
0.37
2
0.006
0.18
6.0
710
Average
kg/day
0.71
27
1,406
2.4
0.017
0.09
0.00031
0.008
0.27
32
Load
Ib/day
1.6
60
3,100
5.2
0.037
0.2
0.0006
0.018
0.6
71
_. __r__ « *...» wa.u>f*u«*jr J-ut-K. i «*p-p J. Jt4^C» H. &.\JV,H *
bj Values reported as mg/1 except flow,, pH, and temperature.
-------
187
discharge was not determined. Some of the waste matter is eaten by
seagulls. However, most of the material either settles to the bottom
of the river or is carried out to sea. During peak processing periods
and daily cannery operations, water quality problems may occur. Tidal
currents may not be sufficient to adequately disperse the waste load
and localized areas of solids buildup may develop on the beaches and
river bed.
To ensure adequate disposal of process wastes during peak operating
periods, two options are available. The process wastes could either be
screened, using a 1 mm (0.040 in.) grid spacing, and the solids that are
retained hauled to the landfill and covered daily; or, the solids could
be ground and discharged into the river below the low mean tide level at
a point where adequate dispersal will occur. Under the first option, the
waste flow passing the screen should also be discharged below the low low
tide level.
Due to the short processing season (about 4 months) and the fact that
the cannery is located across the river from the city of Kenai and sewer
service is not available, the septic tank system presently used to treat
domestic wastewaters should be adequate. However, the effluent from the
septic tank which discharges directly to the Kenai River should receive
adequate disinfection.
-------
183
C-3 KENAI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI, ALASKA
General
The Kenai Salmon Packing Company of Seattle, Wash, has owned and
operated a cannery in Kenai, Alaska since 1949 [Figures VI-2 and
VI-C8]. The cannery, built in 1926 as a saltry, was converted to a
canning facility in 1946. The layout of the plant is shown in Figure
VI-C9. A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application was filed with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in June 1971.
The company processes about 30 days a year from 5 June to 10
August. About ten percent of the salmon produced are fresh frozen; the
rest are canned. The fresh-frozen salmon are sent to Japan, except for
chinook which are sent to Seattle. Canned salmon are distributed as
Company brands—Royal Red and Royal Pink. During peak processing periods,
the company employs 100 people. During the normal processing day the
average working shift varies between 8 and 14 hr. There are times, how-
ever, when the shift is less than 8 hr/day.
About 60 percent of the processed salmon are supplied by fishing
boats; the remaining portion is taken from shore nets. Of the salmon
orocessed, about 67 percent are sockeyes, and the remaining 33 percent
are distributed equally among chinooks, chums, pinks, and cohos. Plant
production capacitv is 75,000 fish/day or 204 kkg (450,000 lb)/day. The
anticipated production for 1973 was 40,000 cases; the 1972 production was
48,000 cases.
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
-------
189
KENA I PEN INSULA
V-
ui
KENAI SALMON
PACKING COMPANY
O
0
O
Q
Z
(0
Figure VI—C8. Kenai Salmon Packing Company , Kenai, Alaska
Location Map
-------
SEPTIC TANK
n
CD
CO
/ \! & GRINDER*\
\
\
OIL HOUSE
WAREHOUSE
CANNERY
FISH HOUSE
''QO
X
FISH
/
HOLDING BINS
BRINE HOLDING TANKS
Mouth
KENAI RIVER
w
AREHOUSE
WAREHOUSE
SEPTIC TANK
— WASTE DISCHARGE LINES
Figure VI—C9. Kenai Salmon Packing Co.,Kenai, Alaska
Plant Layout
-------
191
conducted a survey of the facility on 25 July 1973. A receiving water
quality evaluation was not conducted. The owner, Harold Daubenspeck,
and plant superintendent, Fred McGill, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
Processing and domestic water used at the plant is obtained from
seven wells that range in depth from 24 m (80 ft) to 30 m (100 ft).
3
As reported in the RAPP application the plant water use is 545 m /day
(0.144 mgd). The water use was later changed in the application to
3
1,360 m /day (0.36 mgd). According to Mr. Daubenspeck, the average plant
consumption is 795 m /day (0.21 mgd). The plant can pump about 7,570
3
m /day (2 mgd). Water uses within the plant, based on the RAPP data, are
5 percent for cooling, 7 percent for boiler water, 85 percent for proces-
sing, and 3 percent for sanitary purposes. Except for the addition of
1 mg/1 chlorine to the water used to cool the cans after retort, the water
supply is not disinfected. Samples are routinely sent to Alaska Department
of Health and Welfare in Anchorage for bacteriological analysis.
Process Operations
Salmon are unloaded from brine tenders, scows or trucks and con-
veyed to one of four Gunite holding bins, or two round wooden tanks
(total capacity 250,000 to 300,000 fish). Fish are stored in a brine
solution at -1.7°C (29°F) until processed. Salmon are processed by
either fresh freezing or canning [Figure VI-C10].
Processing in the fresh-freezing area includes egg recovery and
hand butchering to remove heads, tails, fins, and viscera. The salmon
-------
192
UNLOAD BRINE SOLUTION
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
INE SOLUTION
OIL/SALT
OLING WATER
f
FISH HOLDING
BINS (6)
INDEXER (3)
IRON CHINK (3)
|
SLIMING TABLE
13)
1
FILLER BIN (5)
|
ILLcKS |b]
I
WEIGHING (5)
1
PATPHINft 1 R 1
i
SEALING (5)
1
RETORT (9)
\
BRIGHT STACK
'I1
J t
HlAUi __ |
"I
ri— -
1 fiB|!rj)FB HEAD COOKERS •*"
!
t
1 0 L
t
SUMP MI
I
*"
1
WASTE COOLING WATER y
TO KENAI RIVER VIA UNNAMED CREEK
PROCESS SEQUEN
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
(2)
WASTE
E6G RECOVERY
NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-C10. Kenai Salmon Packing Company,
Kenai, Alaska Salmon Processing Sequence
-------
193
are then frozen in 5 Freze Cel plate freezers. Except for chinook,
which are shipped loose, all frozen salmon are packed in cartons for
shipment to Seattle or Japan.
The canning operation uses two 1/4-lb, two 1/2-lb, and one 1-lb
can lines for processing salmon. The cannery processing operation is
conducted in a manner similar to that described in Section V. Only
sockeye salmon heads are recovered and cooked for oil; the remainder
are discharged to the Kenai River. Eggs are recovered by hand, conveyed
to the egg house, cured in brine agitators, hand packed in boxes (10 kg
or 22 Ib per box), and shipped to Japan.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—Domestic wastes are treated by two septic tanks
that discharge directly to the Kenai River. The smaller septic tank
receives domestic wastes from the egg house; all other wastes flow to
the second septic tank located upstream of the cannery [Figure VI-C9].
Based on the water use figures estimated by plant officials, the domestic
wastewater flow is about 24 m /day (6,300 gpd). The RAPP application
reported this flow as 16 m /day (4,320 gpd). The septic tank effluents
are not disinfected.
Refuse—Although the quantity of refuse was not known, plant offi-
cials state that during peak processing periods two truck loads are
hauled to the city landfill each day. Under normal operating conditions,
one truck load is hauled each day. Since the waste is not compacted and
the truck is an open-bed G.I. vehicle, the amount of refuse cannot be
estimated.
-------
19-
Process Wastes—A small portion of the process wastes are gen-
erated at the unloading dock and include blood and slime in varying
amounts. The floors in the fish house and cannery are concrete and
allow all wastes from salmon processing and cleanup operations to
be collected in flumes which flow to a pit (about 1.2 m cu). The
major portion of the process wastes originates from the butchering
operation in the fish house. Viscera, tails, fins, and about one-third
of the heads are flumed to the pit. The unground wastes flow by gravity
from the pit through a 20 cm (8 in.) diameter outfall pipe. The pipe
extends between 24 and 36 m (80 and 120 ft) from the dock face into the
Kenai River to a point below the minimum low water level. The waste
discharge is continuous throughout the processing day.
Wastes that originate from the egg house (eggs, washwater, and
brine solution from the agitators) are discharged without grinding to
the river through another outfall pipe.
Waste loads and concentration reported in the RAPP application
for the canning and freezing processes are listed in Tables VI-C4 and
VI-C5, respectively. Plant management estimated that it requires about
34 kg (75 Ib) of fish to produce one case (21.8 kg or 48 Ib) of canned
salmon. Of the 12 kg (27 Ib) of waste material generated per case,
about 1.3 kg (2.5 Ib) are recovered as eggs and 3.4 kg (7.5 Ib) as heads,
leaving about 7 .7 kp (17 Ib) of waste material discharged per case of
canned salmon. Based on the 1973 estimated production of 40,000 cases.
-------
195
TABLE VI-C4
SALMON CANNING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-
KEN AI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI, ALASKA
Average .
Parameter Concentration-
Flow, m3/day (mgd) 1136 (0
pH, su
Temperature, °C (°F) 8
BOD,. 92
COD 138
Total Solids 257
SS 44
NH3 as N
TKN as N 1
N02 as N
NO as N
Total Phosphorus as P
Oil/Grease 29
.30)
7.0
(46)
,500
,000
,700
,200
170
,447
3.2
0.5
420
,000
Average Load
kg/day
105,000
156,500
292,600
50,350
193
1,640
3.63
0.57
476
32,900
Ib/day
231,400
345,000
645,000
111,000
425
3,620
8.01
1.25
1,051
72,558
Average Load—
kg/case Ib/case
17.5 38.5
26.1 57.5
48.8 107.5
8.4 18.5
0.03 0.07
0.27 0.60
0.0004 0.001
0.00009 0.0002
0.079 0.175
a/ Data as reported in the company RAPP application.
b/ All values reported as mg/1 except flow, pH, and temperature.
c/ Based on daily production of 6,000 cases. Values not reported in RAPP
application.
-------
196
TABLE VI-C5
SALMON FREEZING WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-'
KENAI SALMON PACKING COMPANY, KENAI, ALASKA
Parameter
3
Flow, m day (gpd)
pH, su
Temperature, °C (
BOD5
COD
Total Solids
SS
NH as N
TKN as N
N02 as N
N03 as N
Total Phosphorus
Oil/Grease
Average fe.
Concentration—
227 (60,000)
7.0
°F) 8 (46)
6,950
9,600
10,000
2,800
127
949
0.5
8.45
as P 134
775
Average
kg/day
1,577
2,179
2,270
635
29
215
0.11
1.92
30
153
Load
Ib/day
3,477
4,803
5,004
1,401
63
475
0.25
4.23
67
338
Average Load (froze
kg/kg
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.02
0.001
0.008
0.001
0.006
_ t r _, RAPP application.
b_/ Values reported as mg/1 except flow, pH, and temperature.
£/ Based on daily production of 27.2 kkg (60,000 lb)/day. Values not reported
in RAPP application.
-------
197
the waste load that will be discharged to the Kenai River during the
year is 308 kkg (680,000 Ib) of organic solids and solubles. According
to the RAPP application, about 272 kkg (600,000 Ib) of waste is dis-
charged over the processing period, based on a daily salmon production
of 6,000 cases.
Treatment Needs
Observation of the Renal River at low tide during periods of salmon
processing shoved that the wastes were being effectively dispersed as
there was no evidence of solids in the river or on the beaches. Since
receiving water quality studies were not conducted, the effect of the
wastes on the environment was not determined. The RAPP application
states that process wastes are "deposited into the bottom of the river
over a period of 90 to 100 days. With the flow of the river at mil-
lions of gallons per minute the discharge would be insignificant."
Since process wastes are not ground, the solid material settles on the
bottom of th« river. During peak processing periods when the cannery
is operating dally, water quality problems could occur. The tidal cur-
rents may not be sufficient to disperse the waste and solids may be
deposited in localized areas on the river bottom and on the beaches.
To ensure adequate disposal, process wastewater should either be
screened, using a 1 mm (0.040 in.) grid spacing, and the solids that
are retained hauled to the landfill and covered immediately; or the
solids should be ground before discharge to the river. The latter
option appears to be the more feasible at this time.
-------
198
Due to the short processing period (4 months) and the fact that
municipal sewer service is not available, the present septic tank
system for domestic wastewater should be adequate. The effluent from
the septic tanks should receive adequate disinfection to prevent patho-
genic bacteria and viruses from reaching the fish unloading area. If
municipal sewer service becomes available, the plant should connect
its domestic wastewater flow to the city sewer.
-------
199
C-4 WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, INC., ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
General
Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods operates two salmon processing facilities
in Anchorage, Alaska [Figure VI-2]. The canning plant is located on
Ship Creek [Figure VI-C11] near the downtown metropolitan area and the
fresh-frozen facility is adjacent to the Anchorage International Airport.
The cannery, built in 1933, was purchased by Whitney-Fidalgo in 1967.
The freezing operation, originally a U. S. Government facility built in
1966, was purchased in 1970. The layout of Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods
is shown in Figure VI-C12.
The cannery operates from June through August and processes on an
average of 5 days/week for 10 to 12 hr/day. There are 95 people em-
ployed at the plant. Fish are obtained from the upper and lower areas
of Cook Inlet and from Prince William Sound. They are also hauled by
truck from Valdez, Homer, Kenai, and Seward. Of the salmon processed
about 33 percent are sockeye, 10 percent chinook, 33 percent chum, and
23 percent pink. In addition, herring are processed for the eggs during
April. The estimated total production for 1973 was 35,000 cases (762
kkg or 1.68 million Ib). In 1971 and 1972, the annual production was
50,000 and 27,000 cases, respectively.
The freezing facility operates 8 hr every day from mid-April through
September. The facility employs about 30 people. Fish are hauled to
the freezing facility by truck from Valdez, Homer, Kenai, Seward, and the
Whitney-Fidalgo cannery. The estimated 1973 production is 907 kkg
-------
200
ALASKA MAINLAND
KENA I PEN INSULA
COOK INLET
Figure VI-C.ll. Whilney-Fidalco Seafoods Inc., Anchorage, Alaska
Location Map
-------
WOOD FRAME BLDG
FISH HOUSE
MAIN WASTE LINE
Figure VI-(12. Whitney - Fidalgo Seafoods inc.. Anchorage, Alaska
Plant Layout
ro
O
-------
202
(2 million Ib) consisting of 680 kkg (1.5 million Ib) of salmon and
227 kkg (500,000 Ib) of halibut. The production capacity of the
freezing facility is 18 kkg (40,000 Ib) per day.
A Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application was filed with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the canning plant. The freezing
facility was not required to file an application inasmuch as all wastes
are discharged to the municipal sewer system.
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
conducted an engineering survey of the cannery and freezing operations on
24 July and 27 July 1973, respectively. A receiving water quality evalua-
tion was not conducted. The cannery manager, Dan Bonney, and the freezing
facility manager, Robert Scott, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
Water supplies for both facilities are obtained from the city of
Anchorage. The cannery purchases 4,730 m (1.25 million gal.) per season,
of which 65 percent is used in processing and 35 percent for cleanup and
sanitation. The freezing facility personnel did not have figures available
for water quantities or uses; Mr. Scott stated that very little water is
used. The city water meter indicated that the plant was using about 55
m3/day (14,400 gpd).
Process Operations
Salmon to be frozen are sent to the freezing facility. At this fa-
cility salmon are cleaned by removal of viscera, and eggs are recovered
-------
203
and then processed at the cannery. Heads are removed from 25 percent of
the fish. The plant has three freezers that can hold 18.1 kkg (40,000 Ib)
at one time, with a total cold storage capacity of 680 kkg (1.5 million Ib).
Frozen fish are shipped to Seattle via Alaska Railroad Hydrotrain from
Whittier, Alaska.
In the canning operation, salmon are received at the unloading dock,
or by truck, and mechanically conveyed to eight metal holding tanks where
they are either iced or stored in a brine solution at -1.7°C (29"F) [Figure
VI-C13], The cannery uses one 1/2-lb and one 1-lb can lines for proces-
sing salmon. The salmon canning sequence generally follows that described
in Section V. No salmon heads are processed for oil; rather, they are
either ground and discharged, or frozen and sold as crab bait.
Chum eggs are rubbed in brine, placed in plastic 19 liter (5 gal.)
containers (21.8 kg of eggs/container), and shipped to the United States.
Eggs from other salmon species are either cured in a brine solution and
packaged for shipment to Japan, or sold for bait (Atlas Bait Company-
Seattle, Wash.).
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—Both the canning and freezing facilities discharge
all domestic wastes to the municipal sewer system.
Refuse—About one ton of refuse is hauled each day by the freezing
facility to the Greater Anchorage Borough sanitary landfill. The cannery
also hauls all of its refuse (quantity unknown) to the Borough sanitary
landfill.
-------
204
INE SOLD Ml) N
OR ICE
SALT
niiyc w 1 1 r D
ULIIlb IV A 1 t K
UNLOAD
FISH HOLDING
BINS (81
t
JNDEXER 121
t
BBfkU PUIUtf f 9 1
IRON 1 H INK \i\
t
SLIMING TABLE
ID
t
FILLER BIN [2]
t
ILLER [ 2 I
t
WEIGHING [2]
t
plTpuiyc [71
i
SEALING (2j
t
ETORT 1 4 J
t
CASE
1 FROM FREEZING PLANT
f
j ' •*- EGG HOUSE
i t
— IU SHIP URIEK
GRINDER i
^J
^
... .... ^
^^
fcJ
PnnDiyQ WATTD T ft CUID oiarrv
lUULmb WABtn 10 SHIP OREEK
^ PRrtRFSS 5FQIIFNnF
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
^ WASTE
^ EGG RECOVERY
(2) NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-C13. Whitney - Fidalgo Seafoods ,Inc.
Anchorage, Alaska Salmon Canning Sequence
-------
Process Wastes—The concrete floors In th.r frc-erinc; facility rob-
tain flumes that flow to drains connected to the city sewer. Grates
with 1 cm (0.5 In.) openings on top of the flume? rct.iin solid wastes.
Smaller screens cover the drains to catch additional material not pre-
viously caught. The freezing facility generates frnm 1.8 to 2.7 kkg
(4,000 to 6,000 lb)/day of solid fish wastes (mostly viscera and heads)
that are hauled to the cannery for disposal.
The major portion of the process wastes occurs in the butchering
(fish house) and can filling (cannery) operations. All washwater and
solids are fluraed to the grinder at the dock face. The cannery dis-
charges all process wastes from the fish house, cannery and freezing
facility to Ship Creek which flovs into Cook Inlet several hundred
meters downstream from the cannery. Solids are ground in an Audio Model
801 grinder and discharged through a 7.5 CHI (3 in.) diameter pipe above
high tide. Washwater and process water are discharged through a 25 cm
(10 in.) diameter pipe. The waste loads and wastewater characteristics
reported in the RAPP application are listed in Table VI-C6.
Company officials estimate that between 34 and 36 kg (75 to 80 Ib)
of raw fish are required to produce one 21.8 kg (48 Ib) case of salmon.
Eggs are essentially the only material recovered, weighing about 3,9 kg
(8.5 lb)/case. Based on the estimated production of 35,000 cases, the
annual waste load would be about 544 kkg (1.2 million Ib) which includes
2.3 kkg (5,000 Ib) per day from the freezing facility. Assuming a 5-day
week for a period of three months, the estimated average waste load would
be 9.1 kkg (20,000 lb)/day.
-------
206
TABLE VI-C6
TER CHARACTET
WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, INC., ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS-
Parameter
3
Flow, m /day (gpd)
pH, su
Temperature, C" (°F)
BOD5
COD
Total Solids
SS
NH as N
TKN as N
NO as N
Total phosphorus as
Average fo.
Concentration—
170 (45,000)-'
6,9
15.5 (60)
6,500
8,900
7,800
3,400
24
819
1.75
P 125
Average
kg /day
111
152
133
58
0.45
14
2.3
Load
Ib/day
244
334
293
128
1
31
5
Average
kg/case
0.23
0.32
0.27
0.11
0.0009
0.027
0.005
Load-'
Ib/case
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.25
0.002
0.06
0.01
b_/ Values reported as mg/1 except flow, pH, and temperature.
£/ Based on daily production of 500 cases. Values were not reported
in RAPP application.
d_/ Calculated from average concentration and average load.
-------
Treatment Needs
The cannery wastes that are discharged to Ship Creek flow into
the Cook Inlet. At lov tide the wastes accumulate on the creek bank
and in the creek bed. The outgoing; tidal current removes the majority
of the wastes, primarily because they have been ground and they there-
fore disperse well. During the survey solids were observed next to the
dock below th« grinder that were not being carried away by the tide.
Because the cannery is adjacent to other business establishments at the
city dock, general nuisance conditions can occur. Water quality condi-
tions were not measured so the actual effects on Ship Creek are not knovn.
The waste stream should be screened to recover the solid material,
and the liquid passing through the screen should be discharged through a
submerged outfall extended into Cook Inlet below low mean tide. Whitney-
Fidalgo Seafoods is considering the recovery of heads for pet food next
year. Heads would be frozen and shipped to Anacortes, Wash. The remain-
ing waste-fish solids could also be recovered, froren, and shipped to
either a reduction plant or the pet food operation. The company has also
experimented with milt recovery. Although now discontinued, last year
the milt was quick-frozen and sent to Europe.
-------
D-l ALASKA GLACIER SEAFOOD COMPANY. PETERSBURG, ALASKA
General
Alaska Glacier Seafood Company operates a shrimp and crab plant in
Petersburg, Alaska [Figure VI-3]. The present plant was built in 1943
after the original plant was destroyed by fire. The plant layout is
shown in Figure VI-D1. The plant is one of two remaining shrimp proces-
sing facilities in Alaska that hand pick shrimp. A U.S. Array Corps of
Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) application for this plant
has not been filed.
The Company, which employs between 25 and 30 people, operates an av-
erage of 6 hr/day, 6 days/week. Shrimp are processed from 1 May to 1
February; king crab are processed between 1 September and 30 December;
tanner or snow crab from 15 October to 1 June; and dungeness crab April
through December. Average production during 1973 was 295 kg (650 lb) of
finished product per day. The maximum plant capacity was estimated to be
159 kkg (350,000 lb)/yr. During 1971 and 1972, 82 and 107 kkg (180,000 and
235,000 lb) of finished product, respectively, were processed. Company of-
ficials estimated that the 1973 production would be about 102 kkg (225,000 lb)
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver
and Region X, Seattle, visited this plant on 2 and 4 August 1973. Water
quality studies were conducted by NFIC-D during the periods 6 to 9 and 21 to
25 August 1973. Dave Ohmer, owner, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All process and domestic waters are obtained from the city of Peters-
burg. Water is used for cooking, cooling, boiler feed and cleanup. Company
-------
LEGEND
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES [C/N)
209
• 6
,0
£
u
0
a
o
_j
CD
D
Q.
1
•a 'D
• B
1(»
[ DOCK
ALASKA
GLACIER
SEAFOOD
/I
_u_ *
• c
• A
1 a n
d i
Below water crab
and shrimp waste
discharge
U
Z
o:
Ld
I
Ul
0
IT
D
CD
(0
o:
UJ
I-
111
Q.
Figure V1-D1. Alaska Glacier Seafood , Petersburg, Alaska
Plant Layout Station Locations
-------
officials estimate that 380 m3 (100,000 gal.) of water is used during each
processing day. Saltwater that is pumped from the bay is used in live-crab
tanks and to flume crab and shrimp shell wastes back to the bay.
City water receives liquid chlorination with a feed rate that maintains
a 5 ppm residual.
Process Operations
Both shrimp and crab are processed in a manner similar to that des-
cribed in Section V. They are off-loaded from the fishing boats during
late afternoon. Crab are placed in live tanks until processing, and shrimp
are cooked immediately. Cooked shrimp are cooled using spray nozzles.
The following morning shrimp are hand picked, and shells and bodies are
discarded into trash containers. The shrimp meat is washed, salted, air
tumbled to remove shell remnants, and packed in 1 Ib containers. The
containers are frozen for shipment [Figure VT-D2].
Crab are removed from the live tanks and hand butchered. The legs
and body meat are cooked and sent to the shakers (people that remove the
meat by hand). The meat is sorted to remove shell fragments, salted,
packed in 5 Ib containers, and frozen for shipment [Figure VI-D2].
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—Domestic wastes are collected and discharged without
treatment to the bay. The Company plans to connect to the municipal sewer
after 1 January 1974 at which time the city plans to have a new wastewater
treatment facility in operation.
Refuse—Waste materials, including paper, boxes and cans, are col-
lected and disposed of at the Petersburg city dump.
-------
211
UNLOAD CRAB
UNLOAD SHRIMP
SALT^
WATER
LIVE TANKS
t
BUTCHERING
t
COOKING
t
SHAKING
t
CANNING
t
FREEZING
1
TO BAY^
_ SHELLS^
U-.
_ SHELjj^ .
-^
SHELLS
GRINDER
1
1
1
1
1
ST
COOKING
t
WATER COOL
t
HAND PICK
t
CANNING
t
FREEZING
ORAGE/SHIPME
TO BAY
TO BAY
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
TO BAY AT FACE OF DOCK
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
FTgure VI-D2. Shrimp and Crab Processing Sequence.
Alaska Glacier Seafood Co., Petersburg, Alaska
-------
212
Process Wastes—Process wastes include cooking, cooling, and cleanup
waters, shells and bodies. The cooking, cooling and cleanup waters are
discharged through the floor of the cannery to the beach or water directly
below. Shrimp shells and bodies are hand carried to a grinder, ground
and flumed via saltwater to the face of the dock. The discharge line is
about 2.5 m (8 ft) below low water.
Crab wastes are similar to those originating from the processing of
shrimp. Disposal of crab wastes is accomplished in the same manner except
that the shells removed during the shaking operation are flumed via fresh-
water to the grinder.
While the plant was operating, waste solids in the immediate vicinity
of the discharge line accumulated but soon dispersed. If a solids accumu-
lation is observed by Company officials, a fishing boat is used to disperse
the pile.
Company officials estimated that 82 and 75 percent of the original
raw shrimp and crab weight, respectively, are sent to the grinder for
disposal. Based on the estimated 1973 production of 102 kkg (225,000 Ib)
of finished product, at least 454 kkg (1,000,000 Ib) of shrimp and crab
waste will be discharged into the bay.
Receiving Water Evaluations
Hydrographic and chemical data were obtained during 6 to 9 August
1973 in the vicinity of the plant [Figure VI-D1 and Table VI-D1].
Dissolved oxygen, pH, salinity, temperature, and transparency were meas-
ured at each station; bacteriological data were also obtained at selected
stations. Data were collected at both high and low tides and at the surface
-------
TABLE VI-D1
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY,
VIBRIO AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS
ALASKA GLACIER SEAFOOD
PETERSBURG, ALASKA
a/
Map Key— Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 Shrimp and crab waste discharge
2 Inside corner of N public dock
3 S corner of Petersburg Fisheries cold storage
facility dock
4 Green flashing buoy #49
5 E shore, Wrangell Narrows, off old mink farm
6 End of N public floating dock
Vibrio Sampling Stations
A (1) Shrimp and crab waste discharge
E (5) E shore, Wrangell Narrows, off old mink farm
Sediment Sampling Stations
A Shrimp and crab waste discharge
B 25 m SW of Station A
C 20 m WNW of Station A
D 30 m W of Station A
a./ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-D1.
-------
214
and near the bottom with no significant difference in these parameters
observed at any sampling location [Table VI-D2],
Sediment samples collected at the face of the dock (Station A)
contained large accumulations of shellfish wastes. Chemical analyses
of the samples yielded an organic carbon and nitrogen content of 4.7
and 0.89 percent, respectively (OSI 4.18). This would indicate that
these wastes contained decomposing organic materials resulting in a
high oxygen demand and release of nitrogen. Sediment samples collected
at other stations were stabilized mud [Table VI-D3]. The lack of shell-
fish waste deposits away from the face of the dock indicates that the
wastes are being adequately dispersed into the Wrangell Narrows by tidal
currents.
TABLE VI-D3
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
PETERSBURG, ALASKA
Depth Organic N
Organic C
Station— (meters) (percent) OSI Bottom Type
A 6.0 0.89
B 6.0 0.01
C 6.0 0.15
D 6.0 0.16
4.7 4.18 Shellfish
Waste, Mud
0,7 0.01 Mud
1.3 0.20 Mud
0.8 0.13 Mud
a/ Station descriptions are given in Table VI-D1.
-------
215
TABLE VI-D2
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
PETERSBURG, ALASKA
Station
Parameter No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
Salinity, ppt 1
2
3
4
5
6
pH 1
2
3
4
5
6
Transparency
Range of
High Water
Surface
8.4-9.0
8.5-9.9
8.5-8.9
10.0-11.5
9.7-11.4
8.4-8.9
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
8.5-10.0
8.0-10.0
9.5-10.0
18.6-19.8
16.0-20.2
18.5-20.0
18.5-21.0
18.5-20.2
19.1-20.5
8.2-8.5
8.4-8.5
8.3-8.5
8.5-8.7
8.5-8.7
8.5-8.5
3 to 4 m
Bottom
8.3-8.5
8.4-9.6
8.7-8.9
9.2-9.7
9.2-9.5
8.7-9.5
8.5-9.0
8.5-9.0
8.5-9.0
7.5-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
19.5-20.5
19.9-20.0
19.5-20.0
19.0-20.5
20.1-20.5
20.0-20.0
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.5
8.5-8.5
8.0-8.7
8.5-8.7
8.5-8.5
Values
Low Water
Surface
8.7-9.9
8.2-9.9
8.9-9.8
9.0-10.0
9.1-11.7
9.0-10.2
9.0-10.0
9.5-10.0
9.5-10.0
9.5-10.0
10.0-10.0
9.0-9.5
17.0-20.0
16.5-19.0
16.7-20.0
19.0-20.2
19.0-20.3
18.0-18.8
7.7-8.5
8.0-8.7
8.0-8.6
7.8-8.6
8.0-8.6
8.5-8.7
Bottom
7.5-9.6
8.6-9.9
8.2-9.7
9,1-9.8
8.6-9.8
8.4-10.0
9.0-9.0
9.0-9.5
9.0-9.5
8.5-10.0
8.5-9.0
8.5-9.0
18.1-19.8
19.0-19.2
18.8-20.0
19.0-19.5
19.0-20.0
19.0-19.5
8.0-8.5
8.0-8.6
8.0-8.7
8.0-8.7
8.0-8.7
8.5-8.6
a/ See Table VI-D1 for station descriptions.
-------
216
Bacteriological analyses showed that the effluent contained lop; mean
total- and fecal-coliform densities of 800 and 170/100 ml, respectively
[Table VI-D4]. Low colifonn densities were also obtained at all receiving
water stations which would indicate that the wastes contribute very little
bacterial contamination to the area.
The shrimp and crab wastes and receiving water in the vicinity of
the discharge contained both Vibrio parahaemolyticus and V. alginolyticus
in two of ten samples.* The density of each organism was 36/100 g in the
waste discharge and 4/100 ml in the adjacent receiving waters [Table VI-D4]
Background samples of water and sediment collected from remote areas and
sediment samples collected from stations immediately adjacent to the waste
discharges did not contain Vibrio. The low densities of Vibrio detected
in this area would not be considered a hazard to commercial marine species.
Treatment Needs
Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. is constructing a waste reduction plant
that has the capacity for processing all solid fish, crab, and shrimp
wastes generated in the Petersburg area. To eliminate the buildup of crab
and shrimp shells in the vicinity of the outfall, Alaska Glacier Seafood
Company is planning to send crab and shrimp shells to the Petersburg
Fisheries plant for processing. The manner in which these solids will be
transported had not been determined at the time of the survey. However,
removal of these solids will eliminate the buildup observed during the
water quality investigation.
*For a discussion on Vibrio see Appendix D.
-------
SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL RESULTS
ALASKA GLACIER SEAFOOD COMPANY
PETERSBURG, ALASKA
6 to 9 AUGUST 1973
Coliforms MPN/100 ml
Map Key
4
1
2
3
6
a/
— Station Description Minimum
Background station at #49 green 17
flashing buoy
Shrimp and crab waste discharge 330
Inside corner of N Public floating 3,300
dock
S corner of Petersburg Fisheries cold 14
storage facility dock
End of N public floating dock 130
Total Coliforms
Maximum Logarithmic Mean
79 35
2,300 800
24,000 6,000
490 84
2,400 470
Fecal Coliforms
Minimum Maximum Logarithmic Mean
4 8
17 790
110 2,800
2 330
11 2,400
6
170
730
26
150
E(5)
A(l)
A(l)
A(l)
Background station, E shore,
Wrangell Narrows, adjacent to
old mink farm
Below waste discharge
Waste discharge
Waste discharge
Sample Type Date
Sediment 6 Aug
Water 6 Aug
Sediment 6 Aug
8 Aug
9 Aug
Crab & shrimp 6 Aug
waste 8 Aug
9 Aug
Water 6 Aug
8 Aug
8 Aug
Vibrio
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
MPN/100 ml or g_
Isolate
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
V. parahaemolyticus
V. alginolytiaus
No Vibrio Isolated
V. parahaemolyticus
V. alginolyticus
Density
—
—
—
—
—
36/100 g
36/100 g
—
4/100 ml
4/100 ml
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-D1.
-------
218
D-2 ANNETTE ISLAND PACKING COMPANY, METLAKATLA, ALASKA
General
Annette Island Packing Company, a salmon cannery and cold storage
facility, is owned as a city enterprise of the Metlakatla Indian com-
munity [Figure VI-3]. The layout of the present plant facilities is
shown in Figure VI-D3.
The cannery employs over 100 people. It processes salmon from July
to September each year. The cannery has been operating less than 8
hr/day, 4 days/week this year. Company representatives estimated that
they were processing about 90 percent pink, 8 percent chum and 2 percent
other species of salmon. Average production capability of the plant
was estimated to be 2,000 cases/day with a maximum plant capacity of
4,500 cases/day. As of 9 August about 20,000 cases* had been packed in
the 1973 season. Salmon production for 1968, 1970 and 1972 was 98,000,
60,000 and 54,000 cases, respectively.
The cold storage facility employs 30 people. The facility operates
from April to November, processing halibut, salmon, black cod and herring.
Production figures furnished by company personnel estimate that during
1973 the facility will process 1,135 kkg (2,500,000 Ib) of fish. This
figure is considerably higher than the production for 1971 and 1972, when
the plant processed 365 and 570 kkg (800,000 and 1,250,000 Ib) of fish,
respectively.
* One case of salmon weighs 21.8 kg consisting of 48 one-lb cans.
-------
J
\
219
^
\
-I
«l
CANNERY
WAREHOUSE
COLD STORAGE
^WASTE DISCHARGE LINES
Figure VI-D3. Annette Island Packing Co., Metlakatla, Alaska
Plant Layout
-------
220
A U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) ap-
plication for this plant was filed 16 June 1971. EPA personnel from
National Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle,
visited the plant on 9 August 1973. Fred Gunderson, plant foreman, pro-
vided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All industrial and domestic waters are obtained from the city of
Metlakatla. The cannery provides no additional treatment to the water.
The RAPP application reports that 2,400 m /day (640,000 gpd) is used by
this plant. Of this total 1,970 m /day (520,000 gpd) is used for process
3 3
water, 380 m /day (100,000 gpd) is used for cooling water, 38 m /day
3
(10,000 gpd) is used for boiler feed water, and 38 m /day (10,000 gpd) is
used for domestic water. Company officials indicated that the RAPP ap-
plication figures were still realistic at the time of the EPA visit.
Process Operations
Salmon are processed in a manner typical of that described in
Section V. Heads are neither recovered nor processed. Canning operations
are carried out on three lines operating in parallel. A processing and
waste source schematic of the plant is shown in Figure VI-D4.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—All domestic wastes from the cannery and the cold
storage facility are discharged to the Metlakatla city sewer.
-------
UNLOAD
221
SALT
FISH HOLDING
BINS
INDEXER |2)
i
IRON CHINK [2]
I
SLIMING TABLE
in
FILLER BIN |3)
FILLER (3)
WEIGHING
[3]
PATCHING
13)
SEALING 13)
RETORT
[3)
AIR
COOL
CASE
COLD STORAGE
EGG HOUSE
DISCHARGED AT
FACE OF DOCK
CITY SEWER
DISCHARGED AT FACE OF DOCK
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
NO. OF UNITS
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
Figure VI - D 4. Salmon Processing Sequence. Annette Island Packing Co.. Metlakalla. Alaska
-------
Refuse—Wastes such as paper, boards, cans, and boxes are hauled by
the company to the city dump for disposal.
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock, from
cannery operations (butchering and canning) , and in the cold storage
facility. As fish are unloaded, wastewaters that contain blood and
slime enter the bay as drainage from both the fish conveyor and pumpage
from the boats. The majority of the process wastes originate in the
butchering operation. All wastes (e.g., heads, viscera, and blood)
from the indexer, iron chink and sliming table are collected and flumed
to the face of the dock. Canning operation wastes and all floor drain
flows from the cannery are also collected and flumed with the other
processing wastes to the dock face where they are discharged above the
water surface. Wastes from the butchering operations at the cold storage
facility are placed in containers that are emptied over the face of the
dock when full. Wastewaters collected by the floor drains empty into
the Metlakatla city sewer.
Observations at the time of the EPA in-plant visit showed that scum
and solids were visible on the surface of the bay at least 90 m (300 ft)
from the dock. This condition could be eliminated by grinding and subsur-
face discharge of process wastewaters in the bay.
Company officials estimate that the waste material generated from pro-
cessing salmon that have been caught by seining and trolling methods to be
25 and 8 percent, respectively. About 10 percent of the original halibut
weight is discharged as waste material.
-------
Treatment Needs
Process wastes from the cannery and cold storage facility should
be ground and discharged into the bay. The discharge line should be
located on the bottom, at least 15 m (50 ft) from the face of the dock,
to help prevent scum and floating solids from occurring on the surface.
-------
D-3 COASTAL GLACIER SEAFOODS, HOONAH, ALASKA
General
Coastal Glacier Seafoods [Figure VI-3], a crab processing plant
built in 1950, processes king, snow (also known as tanner or queen)
and dungeness crab from April to November each year. The plant operates
an average of 5 days/week, 7 hr/day, and employes about 55 people. Av-
erage production is 4.5 kkg (10,000 lb)/day with a plant capacity of
5.4 kkg (12,000 lb)/day. Production figures for 1971 and 1972, and esti-
mated figures for 1973 are tabulated below:
Production
Species 1971 1972
(kkg) (Ib) (kkg) (Ib)
King Crab None None 16 35,000
Snow Crab 45 100,000 136 300,000
Dungeness Crab 136 300,000 215 457,000
1973
(kkg) (Ib)
23 50,000
113 250,000
340 750,000
The company plans to modernize the plant which will increase production
by 20 percent. The layout of the present plant facilities is shown in
Figure VI-D5.
A U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) appli-
cation for this plant was filed 29 June 1971. EPA personnel from National
Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle, visited the plant
on 5 and 7 August 1973. Water quality studies were conducted 11 through 14
August. Mr. Cal Boord, president, and Mr. Peterson, plant manager provided
information and assistance.
-------
225
FUEL DOCK
Wash Down Waste
Thru Floor
LEGEND
• HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
• SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/Nj
Figure VI-D5. Coastal Glacier Seafoods. Hoonah. Alaska
Plant Layout Station Locations
-------
226
Water Supply
Water is obtained frotn the city of Hoonah and used for domestic
purposes and crab processing. Saltwater is pumped from the bay and
used in live tanks. During plant cleanup chlorine is added to the water
obtained from the city at a rate of about 200 ppm. Company officials
estimated a chlorine use of 200 Ibs each season.
The RAPP application reports that the plant uses 945 m /day
3
(250,000 gpd). The major portion of this water, 925 m /day (245,000 gpd),
is used for crab processing; the remainder is used for cooling and
domestic purposes. Company officials did not have recent water use
figures for the plant.
Process Operations
Crab are off-loaded from fishing boats into two live tanks until
processed. Crab are processed in the manner described in Section V
[Figure V-2]. About 5 percent of the crabs are whole cooked and pack-
aged for shipment; the remaining portion are hand butchered. The bodies
are discarded and the legs and body meat are placed in a cooker. The
cooked body parts are cooled in a water bath, the meat is removed by
hand, and the shells are discarded on the floor. The meat then passes
through a brine water rinse to add salt and through ultraviolet light
for workers to remove shell fragments. After rinsing, the meat is
packaged in 5 Ib containers and frozen.
-------
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes--The cannery domestic wastes are discharged di-
rectly into the bay without treatment. Company officials stated that
later this year those wastes will be collected in a 10 cm (4 in.) line
and discharged at the face of the dock. As soon as the city constructs
its new wastewater treatment facility, the line will be connected to
the city sewer.
Refuse—-Waste materials, including paper, boxes, and cans, are
collected weekly by the city and taken to the city dump for disposal.
The refuse waste generated each week usually fills two 115 liter
(30 gal.) containers.
Process Wastes—Wastes from processing operations are generated
primarily during cooking and cooling of the crab and cleanup at the end
of the day. The wastewater from the cooking and cooling operations, as
well as from the brine and freshwater rinses, is discharged through the
cannery floor to the water. Cleanup water, dosed at 200 ppm of chlorine,
flows through several floor drains to the water underneath.
Crab shells and bodies are ground on the dock and allowed to fall
into the water below. Visual observations showed that a large buildup
of crab shells existed below the grinder. This pile of shells is exposed
at low mean tide. According to company officials 80 percent of the crab,
in the form of body and shell, becomes waste material.
Receiving Water Evaluation
Hydrographic and chemical data were obtained from 11 through 14 August
-------
223
1973 in the vicinity of the crab processing plant [Figure VI-D5 and
Table VI-D5]. Sediment samples and bacteriological and Vibrio data
were also obtained at selected stations. Measurements for dissolved
oxygen, pH, temperature, salinity and transparency were made at each
station during high and low tides at the surface and near the bottom
[Table VI-D6]. With the exception of salinity, none of these para-
meters varied significantly at the sampling locations. Salinity meas-
urements were influenced at some stations during low slack tide as a
result of freshwater river discharges to the bay.
Sediment samples collected at the point of discharge were com-
pletely composed of crab wastes. All other samples were of stabilized
mud and sand [Table VI-D7].
TABLE VI-D7
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
HOONAH, ALASKA
Station-'
A
B
C
D
Depth Organic N Orgjmic C
(meters)
7.5
10.5
Tidal Flat
1.5
(percent)
0.06 0.2
0.29 1.1
0.01 0.2
- -
OSI
0.02
0.32
0.01
—
Bottom Type
Mud , Sand
Mud
Mud , Sand
Total Crab Waste
a/ Station descriptions are given in Table VI-D5.
-------
TABLE VI-D5
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY, VIBRIO AND SEDIMENT
SAMPLING STATIONS, COASTAL GLACIER SEAFOODS
HOONAH, ALASKA
a/
Map Key— Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 20 m inshore of crab waste discharge
2 At public floating dock, adjacent to cannery
3 30 m offshore of cannery dock
4 Adjacent to seaplane dock
5 Background station, adjacent to ferry dock
Vibrio Sampling Stations
A (5) Background station, adjacent to ferry dock
C (1) 20 m inshore of crab waste dischrge
D Crab waste discharge
Sediment Sampling Stations
A (5) Background station, adjacent to ferry dock
B End of cannery dock
C (1) 20 m inshore of crab waste discharge
D Crab waste discharge
Station locations are shown in Figure VI-D5.
-------
230
TABLE VI-D6
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
HOONAH, ALASKA
Station
Parameter No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
Salinity, ppt 1
2
3
4
5
pH 1
2
3
4
5
Transparency
Range of
High Water
Surface
9.5-10.3
9.8-10.1
9.7-10.6
9.8-10.5
9.4-10.5
11.0-11.5
11.0-11.5
11.0
11.0
11.0-12.0
16.0-22.0
17.0-22.0
17.0-22.0
17.0-22.0
18.0-22.0
8.5-8.7
8.5-8.8
8.7-9.0
8.5-8.7
8.5-8.7
2 to 4 m
Bottom
9.0-10.4
7.9-10.2
7.9-8.4
7.9-10.5
8.0-8.4
9.0-11.0
8.5-11.0
8.5-9.0
8.5-11.0
8.5-9.0
21.0-23.0
21.5-22.5
21.5-22.5
20.5-22.5
21.5-22.0
8.0-8.7
8.5-8.7
8.5
8.0-8.7
8.5
Values
Low Water
Surface
9.2-9.5
9.0-9.6
9.2-9.9
8.6-9.2
9.2-9.6
9.0-10.5
9.0-10.5
9.0-10.5
9.5-10.5
9.0-11.0
11.5-16.5
8.5-15.5
4.4-16.0
13.0-14.5
13.0-16.5
8.5
8.5
8.0-8.7
8.5
8.5-8.7
Bottom
9.3-9.8
9.2-10.2
7.9-8.8
9.3-9.9
8.6-9.5
10.0-10.5
9.5-10.0
8.5
10.0-10.5
8.5-10.0
18.5-21.5
17.0-21.5
20.5-22.5
20.4-22.0
21.0-22.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5-8.7
8.5-8.7
-------
231
The lack of crab waste deposits away from the point of discharge in-
dicates the wastes are adequately dispersed into the bay by tidal
currents.
Bacteriological analyses showed the receiving water to be of mod-
erate to good quality [Table VI-D8]. The station, 25 m (75 ft) in-
shore of the crab waste discharge, was influenced by the raw sewage
discharge from the plant. Vibrio* was isolated from the crab wastes
discharged to receiving water and found in the sediment [Table VI-D8].
The very low densities of Vibrio that were isolated from the cannery
indicate a minimal health threat to marine species in the area.
Treatment Needs
The Company plans to construct a new treatment system that will in-
clude a grinder, holding tank, pump and outfall line. The outfall line
will be about 15 m (50 ft) long and extend into the tidal area. The
end of the line will be about 8 m (25 ft) below low low water. This
proposed treatment system is needed to eliminate the existing buildup
of crab shells near the dock.
* For a discussion on Vibrio see Appendix D.
-------
TABLE VI-D8
SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL RESULTS
COASTAL GLACIER SEAFOODS
HOONAH, ALASKA
11-14 AUGUST 1973
ro
OJ
ro
Coliforms MPN/100 ml
, Total Coliforms
Fecal Coliforms
Map Key2-' Station Description Minimum Maximum Logarithmic
5
1
2
4
Mean
Minimum Maximum Logarithmic Mean
Background stations, adjacent
to ferry dock 790 4,900 2,300
20 m inshore of crab waste
discharge 4,900 92,000 13,000
At public floating dock,
adjacent to cannery 790 3,300 1,400
Adjacent to seaplane dock 460 3,300 980
330 790
490 22,000
230 1,300
170 490
570
1,700
620
300
Vibrio MPN/100 ml or g
A
C
D
D
Sample Type
Background station, adjacent to ferry block Sediment 11
Water 11
20 m inshore of crab waste discharge Sediment 11
13
14
Crab waste at grinder discharge Crab Waste 11
13
14
Crab waste discharge Water 11
13
Date
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
No
No
No
V.
V.
No
No
V.
No
V.
Isolate
Vibrio Isolated
Vibrio Isolated
Vibrio Isolated
algino ly tious
alginolytious
Vibrio Isolated
Vibrio Isolated
alginolytious
Vibrio Isolated
a Igino lyticus
Density
—
—
—
36/100 g
36/100 g
—
—
36/100 g
15/100 ml
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-D5
-------
D-4. E. C. PHILLIPS AND SON, INC., KETCHIKAN, ALASKA
General
E. C. Phillips and Son, Inc. operates a cold storage plant in
Ketchikan, Alaska. The plant was constructed in 1950 on the Tongass
Narrows [Figure VI-3]. Salmon, halibut, herring and black cod are the
major fish processed. The plant is open the entire year and the majority
of the fish are processed from May to September.
The plant employs from 10 to 60 people. It operates 9 hr/day
during the summer, with winter operation on an as-needed basis. The
annual production of fish for 1971 and 1972 is tabulated below:
Species
Halibut
Sablefish
Salmon-king
-sockeye
-silver
-pink
-chum
-steelhead
Herring
Miscellaneous
Total
(kg)
490
26
117
100
131
119
107
0.27
171
0.27
1,262
Delivery
1971
(lb)
1,080,910
58,136
258,753
219,535
288,179
262,213
234,877
603
377,500
592
2,781,298
Weight
(kg)
182
21
111
53
249
132
183
0.50
207
4
1,142
1972
(lb)
400,571
47,212
244,881
116,390
549,472
290,430
402,534
1,108
457,200
8,833
2,518,631
Company officials estimated the total fish weight processed during 1973
will be less than that in 1972.
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP)
application for this plant was filed in 1972. EPA personnel from National
Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle visited the
plant on 8 August 1973. Paul Ohashi, bookkeeper, and Phil Jeans, plant
manager, provided information and assistance.
-------
234
Water Supply
All industrial and domestic water is obtained from the city of
Ketchikan and chlorinated before use. Information obtained from the
Q
RAPP application indicated that 163 m /day (43,000 gpd) is used by the
plant. Of this total, 110 m3/day (30,000 gpd) is used for cooling water
and 53 m3/day (13,000 gpd) for process water.
Process Operations
Fish are off-loaded from fishing boats. Herring and cod are received,
frozen and shipped without generating waste. Salmon and halibut are
hand butchered, cleaned, frozen and shipped. The heads, eggs and milt
of the salmon are saved. The remaining wastes are ground and discharged
to the bay.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—All domestic wastes are collected and discharged
into the bay without treatment. The location of the discharge line
allows the wastes to enter the bay below low tide water.
Although the city has wastewater collection lines, the company has
not connected to the municipal sewer since the city also discharges
untreated wastewater into the bay. It was reported that the city plans
to construct a new wastewater treatment facility.
Refuse—Waste materials such as paper, boxes and cans, are collected
in 50 gal. barrels and hauled to the city dump for disposal. About 5
barrels are filled during each week of operation.
-------
235
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock and in
the butchering area. Fish are washed as received and the wastewater
containing blood and slime enters the bay through the wooden floor of
the butchering area.
Blood, fish parts, and viscera from all process operations are
collected, ground, and discharged through an opening in the floor into
the water under the plant. The level of waste generated was estimated
to be 5 percent of the incoming weight. This would amount to about
57 kkg (125,000 Ib) of fish wastes per year.
Treatment Needs
The fish wastes are ground and discharged into the water under the
plant. Although wastes were not being discharged during the plant visit,
it can be assumed that floating solids result from this method of disposal.
These wastes should be screened to recover the solid material; the liquid
passing through the screen should be discharged into the bay below low low
tide in an area where adequate dispersion occurs.
-------
236
D-5. NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY, CHATHAM, ALASKA
General
The New England Fish Company owns and operates a salmon cannery
at Chatham, Alaska [Figure VI-3]. Constructed in 1898, the cannery
is the second oldest in Alaska. The plant layout is shown in Figure VI-D6.
The cannery is open from mid-July to mid-August. It employs
140 people and has been operating less than 8 hr/day, 3 to 4 days/week.
Average production in 1973 ranged from 1,000 to 2,000 cases/day. The
plant capacity is 4,000 cases/day. As of 7 August 1973, 31,000 cases
had been packed, of which about 85 percent were pink and 15 percent
chum salmon. The Company estimated 50,,000 cases would be packed during
the 1973 season. The annual production since 1968 has varied as a result
of fishing restrictions imposed by regulatory agencies and the availability
of salmon. Production figures for 1968 to 1972 are listed below.
Year Annual Production (cases)
1968 140,000
1969 79,000
1970 83,000
1971 70,000
1972 62,000
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) appli-
cation for this plant was filed 18 June 1971. EPA personnel from
National Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle
visited the plant on 7 August 1973. Water quality studies were con-
ducted by NFIC-D personnel from 26 to 28 June and 16 to 18 August.
-------
237
IA- CONTROL
o.
<$>
BUNK HOUSEv^ o
SEAPLANE DOCK
LEGEND
Qtrs
WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
SEDIMENT
WATER
CONFORM
Figure V 1—D6 . New England Fish Company , Chatham , Alaska
Plant Layout - Bacteriological Stations
-------
238
Al O'Leary, plant manager, Don Freeman, foreman, and Rick Button, quality
control (Seattle), provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All industrial and domestic water is obtained from a manmade lake
near the cannery. There is no domestic habitation in the area of the
lake. About 3.6 kg (8 lb)/day of chlorine is used to maintain a 3 ppm
residual in the water supply. Samples are sent weekly to Juneau, Alaska
for bacteriological analysis.
The RAPP application indicates that 1,440 m /day (380,000 gpd) is
3
used by the plant. Of this total 1,325 m /day (350,000 gpd) is used for
3 3
process water, 75 m /day (20,000 gpd) for boiler feed water and 40 m /day
(10,000 gpd) for domestic water.
Process Operations
A processing and waste source schematic for the New England Fish
Company plant is shown in Figure VI-D7. Salmon are processed in a manner
similar to that described in Section V. Milt is not recovered and heads
are not cooked to recover the oils. The cannery uses four filling lines.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—Domestic wastes from the cannery and office are
treated in a 4.7 m (1,250 gal.) package wastewater treatment unit.
Wastewaters from the dormitories, kitchens and houses are treated in
3
a 19 m (5,000 gal.) package unit. The effluent from each unit is
chlorinated, then discharged at the bottom of the bay.
-------
239
UNLOAD
WASH WATER
CHLORINATED f FISH HOLDING
SALT WATER | BINS
I
TO BAY
INDEXER
[2]
IRON
CHINK
(2)
EGG
HOUSE
BRINE TO BAY
SLIMING TABLE
(2)
FILLER
BIN
(4)
SALT
FILLER
(4)
WEIGHING
(4)
PATCHING
(4)
SEALING
[4)
RETORT
[9)
AIR
COOL
BRIGHT
STACK
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
I H
GRINDER
PUMPED 1 40 M. OUT
INTO BAY AND DISCHARGED
ON THE BOTTOM
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
NO. OF UNITS
Figure V1-D7. Salmon Canning Sequence, New England Fish Co., Chatham. Alaska
-------
240
Refuse—All combustible materials such as paper, boards and card-
board are burned. Materials such as cans and wire are compacted and
disposed of in a landfill.
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock and in
canning operations. As fish are unloaded and washed with fresh water,
the washwater carries blood and slime into the bay.
All fish processing wastes (heads, viscera, blood, fins, and tails)
are conveyed to a flume that empties into a grinder. The wastes are
ground and pumped out 135 m (450 ft) into the bay. The 10 cm (4 in.)
flex-discharge line is anchored to the bottom of the bay. The end of the
line is submerged in about 60 m (200 ft).
Receiving Water Evaluation
Hydrographic, sediment, and chemical data were obtained from selected
receiving water stations in the vicinity of the cannery [Figure VI-D8]
from 26 to 28 June (before canning operations) and 16 to 18 August 1973
(after canning operations). Biological and Vibrio studies were also con-
ducted during the latter period. Descriptions of the sampling station
locations are given in Table VI-D9. Dissolved oxygen, pH, salinity, tem-
perature and transparency measurements were made at each station [Tables
VI-D10, VI-D11]. No significant changes in parameters occurred at sampling
stations or between the two sampling periods. Two freshwater streams in-
fluenced the surface salinities at selected stations during high slack tide.
Sediment samples collected at the face of the dock [Station B,
Figure VI-D8] prior to the canning season had organic carbon and nitrogen
-------
241
• 2
<$>
J-
• 11
FUEL DOCK
1 3
SEA PLANE FLOAT
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/N]
WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
Figure VI-D8. New England Fish Company „ Chatham, Alaska
Hvdrographic / Sediment Station Locations
-------
242
TABLE VI-D9
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY, VIBRIO
AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS
NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY
CHATHAM, ALASKA
a/
Map Key- Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 150 m NW of fuel dock
2 75 m NE of Station 1
3 50 m NE of fuel dock
4 75 m NE of Station 3
5 75 m NE of Station 4
6 50 m NE of W corner of cannery dock
7 75 m NE of Station 6
8 75 m NE of Station 7
9 50 m NE of E corner of cannery dock
10 75 m NE of Station 9
11 75 m NE of Station 10
12 75 m E of seaplane dock
13 75 m NE of Station 12
Vibrio Sampling Stations
A 500 m NW of fuel dock
B Inside main cannery dock
C Inshore of seaplane dock
D Adjacent to public dock
F At seaplane dock
Sediment Sampling Stations
A Adjacent to fuel dock
B NW corner of cannery dock
C At seaplane dock
D NE of cannery on opposite shore (control)
a/ Station locations are shown in Figures VI-D6 and VI-D8.
-------
TABLE VI-D10
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
CHATHAM, ALASKA
(26 to 28 JITNE 1973)
Sta. .
Parameter No.—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
a/ See Table VI-09 for
Range of Values
High Water Low Water
Surface
10.7
10.8
10.8
10.8
10.8
10.9
10.6
10.9
11.
9.
8.
8.
9.
9.
8.
9.
9.
9
9
9
9
,5-11
.5-10
,5-10
.0-10
.5-11
.5-10
.5-10
.5-10
.0-10
.0-10
.5-10
.5-10
.5-10
station
.5
.0
.5
.0
.0
.0
.0
.5
.0
.5
.5
.5
.0
Bottom
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.9
9.8
9.9
9.7
10.2
7.0-9.0
7.5-8.5
7.0-8.5
7.0-8.0
7.0-8.0
7.5-8.5
7.0-8.5
7.0-8.5
7.0-8.5
7.5-8.0
7.0-8.5
6.5-8.5
7.0-8.5
Surface
11.6
11.0
10.7
10.8
10.7
11.0
11.0
11.2
10.
11.
10.
10.
11,
10.
11.
11.
10.
11.
10
10,
10,
,5-12.
,0-11.
.5-11.
,5-10,
.0-11.
,0-11.
,0-11.
,0-11,
.5-11.
.0-11,
.5-11.
.5-10
.5-11.
.0'
,5
,0
,5
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.5
.0
Bottom
10.3
9.4
11.1
10.1
9.6
9.8
9.7
9.8
9.5-10
8.0-8.
8.0-8.
8.0-9.
7.5-8.
Range of Values
Sta. , High Water Low Water
Parameter No.— Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
Salinity, ppt 1 4.5-5.0 21.0-23.0 22.0 24.5-24.5
2 6.0-10.5 21.0-23.0 18.5-21.0 22.5-22.5
3 7.5-8.5 21.0-23.0 20.5-21.0 22.5-22.5
4 3.0-5.5 20.5-22.5 18.0-19.5 22.5-23.5
5 4.0-13.5 22.5-22.5 19.0-21.2 20.0-22.5
6 7.0-13.5 21.5-23.0 18.0-21.0 22.0-23.0
7 4.0-7.5 21.0-23.0 16.0-22.0 21.8-22.0
8 6.5-14.5 21.0-22.5 15.0-22.0 22.0-22.5
9 12.0-12.5 21.0-22.5 16.0-21.2 22.0-22.2
10 5.5-8.0 21.2-22.5 15.5-22.0 21.0-22.5
11 10.5-13.5 21.0-23.0 15.0-23.0 22.0-22.5
12 5.5-12.8 20.8-22.5 15.0-21.2 21.5-23.0
.0 13 4.0-11.0 21.0-22.5 16.0-22.5 22.0-22.5
5 pH All Stations - 8.5
5 Transparency 6.0 to 6.5 m
0
0
8.0-9.0
7.5-7.
7.5-8.
7.5-8.
7.0-8.
7.5-8.
7.5-8.
7.5-8.
5
0
5
0
0
5
0
descriptions .
i^
-P-
CO
-------
Station
Parameter No .—
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Tempera ture? 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
High
Surface
9.8
—
9.6
9.8
_
9.6
9.7
—
9.7
9.8
—
9.8
12.0-12.0
11.0-11.5
11.0-12.0
10.5-11.0
10.5-11.0
11.0-12.0
11.0-11.5
10.5-11.0
10.5-11.5
10.5-11.5
10.5-11.0
11.0-12.0
11.0-11.5
Range of
Water
Bottom
9.0
—
9.6
9.1
—
9.1
9.0
—
8.9
9.1
—
8.6
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.5
9.5-11.5
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.5
9.0-10.5
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
9.0-10.0
Values
Low
Surface
9.8-9.9
—
9.7-9.8
9.8-9.8
—
9.8-9.8
9. 7-9.9
-
9.7-9.8
9.6-9.8
—
9.7-9.8
10.5-11.0
10.0-11.0
9.0-10.0
9.5-10.5
9.5-10.5
9.5-10.5
9.5-10.0
9.5-11.0
9.5-10.5
10.0-10.5
9.5-10.0
9.5-10.0
10.0-10.0
Water
]
9
9,
9,
9.
9.
8.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
TABLE VL-D11
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
CHATHAM, ALASKA
(16 to 18 AUGUST 1973)
Range of
Station High Water
Bottom Parameter No.—' Surface Bottom
.2-9.7 Salinity, 1 22.0-25.0 23.0-23.5
ppt
2 21.5-24.5 22.0-24.0
.0-9.4 3 19.0-24.5 21.5-23.0
.3-9.7 4 19.0-23.0 22.5-23.5
5 22.0-24.0 22.5-23.0
,0-9.4 6 19.5-24.0 22.0-23.0
2-9.5 7 20.5-23.5 23.0-23.0
8 20.0-23.0 22.5-24.0
.1-9.5 9 20.5-23.0 22.5-24.0
5-9.9 10 21.0-22.5 22.5-23.0
11 21.0-22.5 23.0-23.0
2-9.7 12 21.0-23.5 22.5-23.0
5-10.0 13 21.0-23.5 22.5-23.0
0-9.5 pH All stations - 8.5
0-9.5 Transparency 4 to 5 m
0-9.5
0-9.5
0-9.5
0-10.0
0-9.5
0-9.5
0-10.5
5-10.0
0-10.0
0-9.5
r-o
-P-
Values
Low Water
Surface Bottom
16.5-17.5 20.0-22.5
10.0-17.5 22.0-23.0
15.0-18.0 22.5-23.0
16.5-21.0 22.0-23.0
11.0-20.5 22.5-23.0
17.5-23.0 23.0-23.5
16.0-19.5 22.5-23.5
7.0-21.5 22.5-23.5
17.0-19.0 22.5-23.0
12.0-22.0 20.5-23.0
16.5-21.5 22.5-23.0
14.0-19.8 23.0-23.5
13.0-22.0 22.0-23.0
a/ See Table VI-D9 for station descriptions.
-------
contents of 7.0 and 1.68 percent, respectively (OSI 11.80), indicating
an actively decaying material [Table VI-D12]. The other stations had
OSI values ranging from 1.56 to 2.45 which also indicate decaying ma-
terial. During the survey period following the canning season, the
sediment samples were organically stable at all but one station which
had OSI values of less than 0.50. Station A had an OSI value of 4.18.
The sediment data reflects the influence of organic sources other than
the cannery on the bay. The decrease in OSI at all but one station
(Station A) indicates adequate dispersal of fish wastes by tidal action.
Bacteriological data show that the area around the public dock
was highly contaminated (fecal-coliform log mean of 9,000/100 ml [Table
VI-D13]. The source of this contamination is probably from boats dis-
charging raw sewage in the area.
Vibrio* was isolated in sediment samples in the area of the cannery
with densities varying from 91 to 430/100 g. Vibrio was not isolated in
any water samples. Vibrio isolations at these densities are not a hazard
to marine species in the area.
Treatment Needs
Based on field observations, water quality studies, and the disposal
technique currently used for domestic and process wastes, the treatment
being employed is generally adequate. Some fish heads are discharged from
the cannery without being ground.. The source of these unground heads
should be located and eliminated.
* For a discussion on Vibrio see Appendix D.
-------
TABLE VI-D12
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
CHATHAM, ALASKA
a/
Station—
Depth
(meters)
Organic N
Organic C
(percent)
June Aug. June
OSI
Aug. June Aug,
Bottom Type
21.0
12.0
12.0
15.0
0.52 0.89 3.0
1.68 0.01 7.0
0.60 0.15 3.4
0.98 0.16 2.5
4.7 1.56 4.18
0.7 11.80 0.01
1.3 2.04 0.20
0.8 , 2.45 0.13
Sand, Gravel,
Organic Mud^Oil
Sand, Gravel,
Organic Mud, Cans
Sand, Gravel,
Organic Mud
Sand, Gravel,
Shell
aj See Table VI-D9 for station descriptions.
-------
TABLE VI-D13
SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL RESULTS
NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY
CHATHAM, ALASKA
16 TO 17 AUGUST 1973
Coliforms MPN/100 ml
Total Coliforms
Map Key— Station Description Minimum
G Background station, 200 m 330
S of WWTP discharge
A 500 m NW of fuel dock 1,300
B Inside main cannery dock 4,900
C Inshore of seaplane dock 2, 300
D Adjacent to public dock 24,000
F At seaplane dock 490
Max imum
1,700
1,700
35,000
13,000
>240,000
79,000
Logarithmic Mean
750
1,500
13,000
5,500
>76,000
6,200
Fecal Coliforms
Minimum Maximum
23 80
490 700
230 940
41 170
2,300 35,000
79 1,100
Logarithmic Mean—
43
590
460
83
9,000
290
G Background station, 500 m
N of gasoline dock
B Inside main cannery dock
C Inshore of seaplane dock
Sample Type
Sediment
Water
Sediment
Water
Sediment
Water
Date
16 Aug
16 Aug
16 Aug
17 Aug
16 Aug
17 Aug
16 Aug
17 Aug
16 Aug
17 Aug
Vibrio
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
MPN/100 ml or g
Isolate
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
V. alginolytious
V. alginolytiaus
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
V. alginolytiaus
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
No Vibrio Isolated
Density
—
430/100 g
91/100 g
—
91/100 g
—
a/ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-D6
b/ Log mean of two samples.
-P-
-------
248
D-6. NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY, KETCHIKAN, ALASKA
General
The New England Fish Company owns and operates a cold storage
facility south of Ketchikan, Alaska [Figure IV-3]. The plant, located
on the Tongass Narrows, processes halibut and salmon from March through
September. Company officials estimated that about 68 kkg (150,000 Ib)
of halibut and 635 kkg (1,400,000 Ib) of salmon would be processed
during the 1973 season.
The plant employs about 14 people. Fish are processed five days per
week, 8 hr/day. Average production of salmon is about 68 kkg (15,000 lb)/day
with a maximum plant capacity of 454 kkg (100,000 lb)/day.
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP)
application for this plant was filed 18 June 1971. EPA personnel from
National Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle visited
the plant on 10 August 1973. Mike Cusack, plant manager, provided infor-
mation and assistance.
Water Supply
All industrial and domestic waters are obtained from Ketchikan.
The total water supply is chlorinated before use. Process water in-
cludes that used for washing, cleaning, and glazing operations as
well as cleanup of the plant. Company personnel did not know the vol-
ume of water used.
-------
249
Process Operations
Salmon and halibut are off-loaded from fishing boats, hand butch-
ered, cleaned, frozen and shipped. Salmon heads are ground and used
for pet food; eggs are recovered for processing elsewhere.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—The domestic wastewaters are discharged to the
Tongass Narrows without treatment. These wastes are to be connected to
the municipal sewer as soon as Ketchikan has a wastewater treatment
facility in operation.
Refuse—Waste materials such as paper and boxes are collected and
disposed of by company employees at the city dump. No estimate of the
volume generated was available.
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock from
washing fish. Halibut heads and salmon heads (when they are not re-
covered for pet food) are ground and discharged to the bay. Blood,
fish parts, and viscera are discharged to the bay through a hole in
the plant floor.
Treatment Needs
Process wastes should be collected, screened to recover the solid
material, and the liquid portion passing through the screen should be
discharged below low low tide to insure dispersion and to prevent the
occurrence of floating solids.
-------
250
D-7 NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY - FIDALGO PACKING COMPANY. KETCHTKAN, ALASKA
Generaj^
The New England Fish Company and The Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods, Inc.
jointly operate a salmon cannery in Ketchikan, Alaska [Figure VI-3].
Built in 1965, the cannery receives and processes salmon from fishing boats
that are under contract either with New England Fish Company or Whitney-
Fidalgo. The finished product is divided according to percentage of fish
delivered to the cannery by each company.
The cannery employs a maximum of 165 people and has been operating
12 to 18 hr/day, 5 days/week from July to September. Average produc-
tion and plant capacity was given as 5,000 cases/day. Plant production
records* for 1970 and 1972 showed that 169,000 and 134,000 cases, respec-
tively, were produced. The cannery production for 1973 was estimated to
be between 100,000 and 150,000 cases.
An Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) appli-
cation for this plant was filed 24 June 1971. EPA personnel from National
Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle, visited the plant
on 10 August 1973. John Lynn, manager (Fidalgo) and Don Franett (New
England) provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All industrial and domestic water is obtained from Ketchikan. The
total water supply is chlorinated at a rate that maintains a 3 to 5 ppm
* The plant did not operate in 1971
-------
251
residual. Company officials could not provide an estimate of the
volume of water used.
Saltwater from the bay is used for chilled storage of fish: HTH
is added to the saltwater.
Process Operations
Salmon are off-loaded, sorted by species into either chilled brine
tanks or to bins for immediate processing. Salmon processing occurs in
a manner similar to that described in Section V [Figure V-l]. A proces-
sing and waste source schematic is shown in Figure VI-D9. The cannery
uses two tall lines (15 1/2-oz canning lines).
Fish heads are recovered, ground sacked, frozen, and used for pet
food. Company officials stated that about 14 percent of the live weight
of fish processed are recovered in this manner.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—All domestic wastes are collected and discharged
about 15 m (50 ft) into the bay. The water surface is about 14 m
(45 ft) above the end of the line at the point of discharge.
Refuse—All refuse wastes are collected and hauled to the city dump.
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock and
during the canning process. As fish are unloaded into the mechanical
conveyor, blood and slime wastes drain into the bay. Process wastes
(viscera, blood, fins, tails) are collected and flumed to a holding tank.
-------
152
UNLOAD
SALT
_
FISH HOLDING
BINS
t
INDEXER |2|
Y
IRON CHINK [2)
t
SLIMING TABLE
12)
Y
FILLER BIN |2|
f
FILLERS ( 2 1
*
WEIGHING [2j
Y
PATCHING [2]
1
SEALING 2
i •
RETORT (9)
t
AIR COOL
Y
CASE
,-..-». EGG HOUSE ____
j
."-Til'-—*. GRINDER __+-
SACKED T
-»-J
._ ... „,,, . ., »_| «- GRINDER
t
HOLDING TANK
f
PUMPED 15 M INTO BAY
AND DISCHARGED ON BOTTOM
„ PROCESS SEnilFMHE
_. ^ WASTE
_^ EGG RECOVERY
NO. OF UNITS
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
Figure M-D9. Salmon Canning Sequence. >ew England Fish-Fidalgo Packing Co., Kelchikan, Alaska
-------
253
The tank is emptied periodically by pumping the waste (this reduces
the size of the solids) out to a point about 18 m (60 ft) into the bay.
The discharge point is on the bottom of the bay, under water about 14 m
(45 ft).
Treatment Needs
Based on observations made during the in-plant visit, the present
process waste treatment system and practices are adequate; however, the
company should investigate the feasibility of solids recovery. Domestic
wastewaters should be discharged to a municipal sewer system.
-------
254
D-S_PETERSBURC^J^HERIES^JNC_._^PE1^RSBURG_,_ ALASKA
General
The Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. operates a salmon cannery and cold
storage facility [Figure VI-3], in Petersburg, Alaska. The cannery was
constructed in 1897 and is the oldest canning facility in Alaska. The
plant layout of the processing area is shown in Figure VI-D10. The can-
nery employs 150 to 200 people during peak season and 30 to 50 during
the winter months. The cannery operates 5 to 6 days per week, 16 to 18
hr/day. The normal operating season for the plant extends from June
through October. This year the season ran from July through September.
The cannery processes about 60 percent pink and 20 percent each of chum
and red salmon; herring and crab are also processed at this facility.
Plant production capacity is 100,000 fish or 318 kkg (350 tons) per day*.
Average cannery production for 1973 ranged between 1,200 to 2,000 cases
per day. The cannery production for recent years is tabulated below:
Y_ear Annual Production (cases)
1973 100,000 (est.)
1972 123,000
1971 40,000
1970 84,000
1969 17,000
196S 123,000
1967 37,000
The cold storage facility, formally Petersburg Cold Storage, oper-
ates year around and employs about 50 people. This facility processes
fish seven Jays a week fron June through October and five days a week
* This includes production from cold storage facility which is
approximately 109 kke (120 tons)/day.
-------
255
8
Grinder
H
AGS
Brine Bins
Scallop & Fillet
Process ing
g g House
Floor Discharge
(D
a:
3
CO
V)
£
LU
I-
UJ
a.
LEGEND
WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
HYDROGRAPHIC STATIONS
SEDIMENT SAMPLES (C/N)
Figure VI-D10. Petersburg Fisheries, Inc.,(PFI), Whitney - Fidalgo
Seafoods, Inc.,(WFS), Alaska Glacier Seafood Co.,(AGS), Petersburg, Alaska
Plant Layout - Station Locations
-------
256
the remaining eight months of the year. During the summer months the
cold storage facility operates 8 to 12 hr/day. Seafoods that are
processed include salmon (consisting of 40 percent each of chum and
red, 10 percent cohos, and 5 percent each of king and pink), halibut,
black cod, red snapper, and crab. The plant capacity is 4,535 kkg
(10 million lb)/year. Production for 1973 was expected to reach the
plant capacity.
An Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) appli-
cation was filed on 29 June 1971 for both the cannery and the cold stor-
age facility. Personnel from National Field Investigations Center-Denver
and Region X, Seattle, visited the plant on 1 August 1973. Water quality
investigations were conducted by NFIC-D from 21 to 25 August 1973. Bob
Thorstenson, president, T. E. Thompson, vice president, and Wally Swanson,
plant manager provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
As reported in the RAPP application, the city municipal water supply
system provides 2,080 m /day (550,000 gpd) to the cannery and 2,270 m /day
(600,000 gpd) to the cold storage facility. The water usage within the
two plants was estimated as follows:
o
Facility In-plant Water Usage m /day mgd_
Cannery cooling water 227 0.06
boiler feed water 19 0.005
sanitary system 9.5 0.0025
other 1,830 0.4830
Cold Storage cooling water 945 0.25
sanitary system 1315 0.347
other 9.5 0.0025
-------
257
In addition, saltwater is used in fish storage bins to flume fish
eggs from the indexer to the egg house, and flume the fish from boats to
mechanical conveyors. Water used for all other processing is obtained
frora Petersburg. No chemical or bacteriological analyses of the water
supply are made. In-plant chlorination of all water that is used is
provided.
Process Operations
Salmon are off-loaded frora tenders or fishing boats into a mechani-
cal elevator. Fish are sorted by species and grades with the choice
grades processed (butchered, frozen, and shipped) in the cold storage
facility. The remaining fish are processed at the cannery in a manner
similar to that discussed in Section V. The cannery has five filler
lines: 1/4 Ib, 1/2 Ib, two 1 Ib, and 4 Ib can sizes. Any two lines can
be run at the same time. Eggs are recovered and processed from both the
cannery and cold storage operation. Heads are used for fish bait or
ground and made into pet food.
Future plant expansions are planned to increase the crab line capacity
and construct a waste reduction plant for recovery of oil and solids from
fish waste materials. Crab are processed as outlined in Section V.
WASTE SOURCES
Domestic Wastes—Domestic wastes originating from the cannery and
cold storage facility are being discharged into the city sewer system.
Petersburg discharges all domestic wastes into the bay without treatment.
-------
258
Refuse—Refuse wastes generated consist of paper and cans, which are
hauled to the city dump for disposal.
Process Wastes—The process wastes constitute 25 to 30 percent of
the incoming weight of the salmon. Wastes are generated at the unloading
dock, fish house and cannery. During unloading from the tenders or fish-
ing boats, a small amount of blood and sliae reach the bay as drainage
from the fi»h conveyor and as pumpaRe frow the fish holds. In the fish
house, wastes from the iron chink (tails, fins, and viscera), sliming
table, and floor drains are collected in a central flume and pumped out
into the bay, a distance of 30 m (100 ft) from the dock face. Crab shells
are discharged into the bay at the face of the dock.
In the cold storage facility all butchering waste® (tails, fins,
and viscera) are dropped through floor drains directly into the bay area
beneath the plant. Floating solids and foam observed around the dock area
were believed to originate from the cold storage operation.
Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. is building a waste reduction plant.
Upon completion of this plant, all process wast* solids will be rendered.
Receiving Water Evaluation
Hydrographic, sediment and chemical data were obtained from selected
receiving water stations [Table VI-D14] in the vicinity of the processing
operations (Petersburg Fisheries, Inc., Whitney-Fid®!go Seafoods, Inc. and
Alaska Glacier Seafoods Co.). Saaplss were collected both at high and low
tides at the surface and near the bottom. Measurements for dissolved
oxygen, pH, salinity, temperature and transparency were made at each station
-------
259
TABLE VI-D14
DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY AND
SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS
PETERSBURG, ALASKA
Map Key^- Description
Water Quality Sampling Stations
1 At buoy No. 60
2 75 m S buoy No. 60
3 10 m N of N corner of Petersburg Fisheries, Inc.
dock
4 Inside between Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. docks
5 Off Blue Star cruise dock
6 N corner of Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods, Inc. dock
7 Between buoy No. 49 and Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods,
Inc. dock
8 100 m NW of Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. dock
9 75 m W of buoy No. 60
S ed imen t S amp1ing S ta t i ons
E W corner of Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods, Inc.
dock
F Midway off Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods, Inc.
dock
H W corner of Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. dock
J 10 m W of Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. dock
a./ Station locations are shown in Figure VI-D10.
-------
260
TABLE VI-D15
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
PETERSBURG, ALASKA
Parameter Station No
DO, mg/1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Temperature 1
°C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Salinity, ppt 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
pH 1-8
9
Transparency
a/
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
10
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
19
18
19
18
18
18
18
18
18
8
Q
''
High
Surface
11.3
.3-9.
.5-10
.3-10
.3-10
.3-10
.6-10
.3-10
.0-10
.5-10
.0-9.
.0-9.
.0-9.
.5-9.
.0-9.
.5-10
.5-10
.5-10
.0-20
.5-20
.0-20
.5-20
.5-20
.5-20
.0-20
.0-20
.4-19
.5
.5-9.
ra
4
.0
.3
.3
.4
.5
.5
.1
.5
0
0
0
5
0
.0
.0
.5
.5
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.5
0
Range of
Water
Values
Low
Bottom
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
19.
19.
19.
19.
18.
18.
19.
18.
19.
9.6
2-9.3
1-9.5
4-10.0
4-10.0
3-10.0
2-9. S
1-10.3
7-10.0
5-9.0
7-9.0
7-8.5
7-9.0
7-9.0
5-9.0
5-9.0
7-10.0
3-9.0
5-20.5
0-21.0
0-20.5
0-20.5
5-21.0
5-21.0
0-21.0
5-21.0
0-20.5
10
9
10
9
10
9
10
9
10
9
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
19
18
18
18
18
18
18
19
18
Surface
.0-10.3
.8-10.4
.2-10.3
.8-10.6
.1-10.3
.8-10.4
.1-10.4
.7-10.5
.2-10.6
.3-10.0
.0-9.5
.4-9.5
.0-9.5
9.5
.0-10.0
.4-9.5
.3-9.5
.0-9.5
.1-20.4
.5-20.0
.8-20.0
.5-19.7
.5-19.7
.4-20.4
.4-19.7
.3-20.0
.4-20.0
Water
Bottom
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
9
8
9
9
8
8
19
19
19
19
18
18
19
19
19
.8-10
.3-10
.8-10
.6-10
.6-10
.6-10
.6-10
.5-10
.5-10
.5-9.
.5-9.
.7-9.
.0-9.
.7-9.
.0-9.
.0-9.
.3-9.
.3-9.
.0-21
.0-20
.0-19
.0-19
.7-20
.5-20
.0-20
.0-20
.3-20
.3
.2
.4
.4
.4
.2
.0
.0
.4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
.0
.5
.7
.7
.0
.0
.0
.0
.5
aj See Table VT-D14 for station descriptions.
-------
261
[Table VI-D15]. No significant differences were noted in these parameters
Sediment samples collected at selected stations showed a stable
mud, sand material; OSI values ranged from 0.03 to 0.39 [Table VI-D16].
The lack of fish waste deposits indicate the wastes are being adequately
dispersed in Wrangell Narrow.
None of the processors operated consistently during the study r»er-
iod 21 to 25 August 1973.
TABLE VI-D16
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
PETERSBURG, ALASKA
a/ Depth
Station— (meters)
E
F
H
J
10
9
9
9
.6
.0
.0
.0
Organic N
Organic
(percent)
0
0
0
0
.02
.15
.01
.05
2
2
2
0
.3
.6
.5
.6
C
OSI
0
0
0
0
.05
.39
.03
.03
Bottom Type
Mud,
Mud
Mud,
Mud,
Sand
Sand
Sand
a/ Station descriptions are given in Table VI-D14.
Treatment Needs
All process wastes from the cannery, egg house, fillet house, and cold
storage wastes should be screened to recover the solid material, and the
liquid passing through the screen should be discharged to the bay below
low low tide.
-------
262
D-9 PETERSBURG PROCESSORS, INC., PETERSBURG, ALASKA
General
The Petersburg Processors, Inc., a salmon cannery at Petersburg,
Alaska, is on Mitkof Island [Figure VI-3]. The cannery was constructed
in 1957 and employs about 40 people.
The cannery generally operates from the first of July to the middle
of September. During the 1973 season the plant processed 3 days/week 10
hr/day. The average annual production from 1957 to 1973 was 25,000 cases.
Average annual production for 1973 was estimated to be 20,000 cases
(700 cases/day). The plant capacity is 50,000 cases/year. Since 1970,
the annual production has been controlled by the availability of salmon
and fishing restrictions imposed by regulatory agencies. Recent salmon
production history is tabulated below.
Year Annual Production (cases)
1973 20,000 (est.)
1972 25,100
1971 Not in operation
1970 25,000
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAP?) appli-
cation for this plant was filed 25 June 1971. EPA personnel from National
Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X visited the plant on 3
August 1973. Ray Wood, plant supervisor, provided information and
assistance.
Water Supply
Petersburg supplies water for both processing and domestic uses.
-------
263
In addition, saltwater is used to flume fish from the tenders to the
unloading elevators, from the brine tanks to the processing area, and
fish eggs from the indexer to the egg house. Both freshwater and salt-
water are chlorinated. Approximately 136 kg (300 Ib) of gas chlorine
are used each season.
Company officials estimated a maximum freshwater and saltwater use
rate of 680 m /day (180,000 gpd). This estimate is similar to that in the
RAPP application which reports total use of 590 m /day (156,000 gpd),
3 3
including 182 m /day (48,000 gpd) of saltwater and 408 m /day (108,000
gpd) of freshwater. Freshwater is used as follows: 73 m /day (19,200
gpd) for cooling water, 18 m /day (4,800 gpd) for boiler feed water,
3 3
300 m /day (79,200 gpd) for process water, 18 m /day (4,800 gpd) for
3
domestic water and 180 m /day (48,000 gpd) for unspecified usage.
Process Operations
During periods of maximum production, the cannery operates about 10
seine and 20 gill net boats 5 and 2, respectively, were in operation at
the time of the survey). Fish are off-loaded from the boats and taken
by mechanical elevator to the storage bins until time for processing.
Salmon are processed in a manner similar to that described in Section V.
The specific processing sequence for this cannery is depicted in Figure
VI-D11. Oil from fish heads is not recovered, but eggs are a byproduct.
The cannery has two filler lines: one 1 Ib, and one 4 Ib can size. Only
one line operates at a time. Salmon are canned at the rate of 130 and
80 cans/hr for the 1 and 4 Ib lines, respectively. The latter are packed
manually.
-------
264
UNLOAD
I
FISH HOLDING
BINS
INDEXER
(1)
I
IRON CHINK
[1]
SLIMING
TABLE [1
HAND
PACK
WE
IGH
ING
(2)
SEALING
(2)
RETORT
15)
t
AIR COOL
CASE
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
EGG
HOUSE
J"
T" TO PETERSBURG
FISHERIES
t1
TO BAY AT FACE OF DOCK
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
NO OF UNITS
Figure VI-D11. Salmon Canning Sequence
Petersburg Processors, Inc., Petersburg, Alaska
-------
165
WASTE SOURCES
Domestic Wastes—These wastes are collected and discharged without
treatment into the estuary. The cannery plans to connect the domestic
wastes to the city sewer before the end of September, 1973.
Refuse1—Wastes including boxes, cans, and waste paper are collected
and sent to the city dump. The beaches in the area of the cannery
appeared relatively free of trash and debris.
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock, fish
house, and cannery. While unloading the tenders or fishing boats, a
small amount of blood and slime enters the bay as drainage from the fish
conveyor and as putnpage from the fish holds. Heads that are removed at
the fish house are discharged unground through the dock into the bay.
Wastes from the iron chink and sliming tables (tails, fins, viscera) are
collected in a central flume and discharged through a 10 cm (A in.) pipe
to the bay immediately under the dock. As a result of these discharges,
during the in-plant visit the water under the dock was red and floating
solids were observed.
A waste reduction plant is being built by Petersburg Fisheries, Inc.
Upon completion of the plant, wastes from Petersburg Processors will be
pumped to a location on land where the solids will be removed and delivered
to Petersburg Fisheries for treatment. Heads were to be collected and sent
there for processing starting approximately 1 September 1973. Company
officials estimated that 30 percent (including eggs and heads) of the in-
itial fish weight becomes waste material.
-------
266
Food, Chemical and Research Laboratories, Inc., prepared analyses
on the process wastewater from Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. This data
summary is presented in Table VI-D17.
Treatment Needs
All wastes should be collected, screened to recover solid material,
and the liquid passing through the screen should be discharged to the
bottom of the bay at least 15 m (50 ft) from the face of the dock. As
noted earlier, Petersburg Fisheries is constructing a waste reduction
plant with sufficient capacity to process all solid salmon, shrimp and
crab wastes that are generated by the seafood processors in the Petersburg
area. As soon as this plant is in operation, the solids from Petersburg
Processors should be recovered and delivered to Petersburg Fisheries for
processing.
-------
TABLE VI-D17
PETERSBURG FISHERIES, INC.
PROCESS WASTEWATER ANALYSES
a/
Parameter Analyzed
Results
pH
Total Solids - ppm
SS - ppm
Dissolved Solids - ppm
Volatile Solids - ppm
Alkalinity - ppm CaCO
BOD - ppm
COD - ppm
Turbidity - JTU
Color - color unit
Specific Conductance - umhos
Oil and Grease - ppm
Hardness - ppm CaCO_
Chloride - ppm
Calcium - ppm
Magnesium - ppm
Zinc - ppm
Total nitrogen - ppm
Ammonia - ppm N
NO- - ppm N
NO - ppm N
Phosphate - ppm P
Coliform - MPN
6.6
77,060
47,560
29,500
66,900
6,183
58,000
120,800
>10,000
not applicable
9.45 x 10"3
12,000
1,050
3,376
40
231
none detected
7,965
145
not applicable
30
1,500
12
a/ Analyses were prepared by Food, Chemical and Research
Laboratories, Inc.
-------
268
D-10 THOMPSON FISH COMPANY, HOONAH, ALASKA
General
Thompson Fish Company, Hoonah, Alaska, operates a cold storage
plant that was constructed in 1964. Salmon, caught by trolling, and hali-
but are processed at this plant. The company employs about 15 people. The
plant normally operates 7 to 9 hr/day, A to 5 days/week during the process-
sing season. While the plant is open year around, the majority of the work
is done from April to October. During 1972, 72 kkg (600,000 Ib) of salmon
and 16 kkg (35,000 Ib) of halibut were processed. An estimated 340 kkg
(750,000 Ib) of salmon and 61 kkg (135,000 Ib) of halibut will be processed
during 1973. The plant is large enough to freeze 45 kkg (10,000 Ib) of
fish per day.
A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) application
for this plant was filed on 1 May 1973. EPA personnel from National Field
Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle, visited the plant on 4
August 1973. Mike Thompson, owner, provided information and assistance.
Water Supply
All industrial and domestic water used at the plant is obtained from
Hoonah. Additional treatment of the water is not provided by the plant
and the amount of water used was not available.
Process Operations
Salmon and halibut are off-loaded from fishing boats. The fish are
usually dressed by the fishermen when they are caught. The fish are
-------
269
slimed, washed and, except for sockeye and chum salmon, heads are
removed before freezing. The frozen fish are shipped by barge and
ferry.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—All domestic wastes are discharged directly into
the bay without treatment. A new wastewater treatment plant is beinp
constructed by the city. The domestic wastes will be discharged to the
municipal sewer system upon completion of the treatment plant.
Refuse—Wastes Including papers, boxes, and cans, are collected and
hauled to the city dump for disposal. The volume of refuse generated was
considered by the company to be small.
Process Wastes—The majority of the process wastes results from
cleaning fish. As noted earlier, both salmon and halibut are cleaned
by fishermen before delivery to the cold storage plant. Process
wastes, including some heads, blood, slime, and viscera, are collected
and discharged to the bay without treatment.
Treatment Needs
Domestic wastes should be discharged into the municipal sewer system
upon completion of the wastewater treatment facility. Fish heads should
be ground and pumped, along with other process wastes, into the tidal
area of the bay.
-------
270
D-ll WARDS COVE PACKING COMPANY, KETCHIKAN. ALASKA
General
Wards Cove Packing Company operates a salmon cannery at Ketchikan,
Alaska [Figure VI-3]. Built in 1912, the cannery is located on Wards
Cove adjacent to the Tongass Narrows [Figure VI-D12].
Salmon are processed from the middle of July to the end of August.
The cannery employs about 115 people and operated 8 hr/day,4 days/week
in the 1973 season. Plant processing capacity is 550 cases/hr and
232,000 cases/season. As of 9 August 1973, 33,000 cases of salmon
had been packed, of which 70 percent were estimated to be pink salmon.
Plant production records* for 1970 and 1972 show that 58,000 and
89,000 cases, respectively, were canned.
A U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP)
application for this plant was filed 28 June 1971. On 9 August 1973,
EPA personnel from the National Field Investigations Center-Denver and
Region X, Seattle visited the plant. Winn Brindle, president, provided
information and assistance.
Water Supply
All industrial and domestic water is provided by the Company and is
chlorinated to maintain at least 1 ppm residual. The RAPP application
indicates 380 m /day (100,000 ppd) is used by the plant. Of this total,
303 m /day (80,000 gpd) is used for process water, 38 m3/day (10,000 ppd)
•J
for boiler feed water, and 38 m /day (10,000 ppd) for domestic water.
* The cannery did not operate in 1971.
-------
271
o
REVILLAQ IGEDO
WARDS COVE
PACKING CO
Peninsula Pt.
Figure VI-D12.Wards Cove Packing Company, Ketchikan, Alaska
Location Map
-------
272
Process Operation
The canning processing operation is conducted in a manner similar
to that described in Section V [Figure V-l]. Heads are not processed
for recovery of oil, but eggs are recovered and transported to the egg
house for processing. The cannery operates three filler lines. A
processing and waste source schematic for this plant is shown in
Figure VI-D13.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—All domestic wastes are collected and treated in a
septic tank. The effluent from the septic tank is discharged into the bay.
Refuse—Combustible wastes consisting of paper and boxes are burned.
Noncombustible wastes, such as cans, are collected and disposed of at the
city dump.
Process Wastes—Wastes are generated at the unloading dock and in
the cannery. As fish are unloaded, blood and slime enter the bay as
drainage from the fish conveyor and as pumpage from the fish holds.
The majority of the process wastes, however, originate from the butch-
ering operation. Wastes (heads, viscera, fish parts, and blood) from the
indexer, iron chink, sliming tables and floor drains are conveyed to a
flume which discharges into the bay at the edge of the dock at a depth of
18 m (60 ft). At the time of the survey, floating solids and scum were
observed on the water surface in the vicinity of the outfall line.
-------
CHLORINATED
SALT WATER
SALT
UNLOAD
FISH HOLDING
BINS (3)
INDEXER
(4]
IRON CHINK (4)
SLIMING TABLE
FILLER BIN 13]
FILLER (3J
WEIGHING (31
PATCHING
(3)
SEALING
(3)
RETORT
(9)
AIR
COOL
CASE
STORAGE/SHIPMENT
273
TO BAY
EGG
HOUSE
DISCHARGED TO BAY
AT 20 M. DEPTH
[1)
PROCESS SEQUENCE
WASTE
EGG RECOVERY
NO. OF UNITS
Figure VI-D13. Salmon ('.aiming Sequence, Wards Cove Packing Co., Ketchikan. Alaska
-------
Treatment Needs
Process wastes should be screened to recover the solid material and
the liquid passing through the screen should be discharged into the bay
at a depth that will ensure adequate dispersal of the wastes and eliminate
floating solids and scum.
-------
275
D-12 WHITNEY-FIDALGO SEAFOODS, INC., PETERSBURG, ALASKA
General
f
Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods, Inc., owns and operates a salmon proces-
sing cannery at Petersburg, Alaska [Figure VI-3]. The layout of the
cold storage and canning facilities, built in 1946, is shown in Figure
VI-D14.
The operating season for the complex begins in April and ends in
October. During peak season, 100 people are employed. At the time of
the survey, the cannery and cold storage facility had been operating 6
and 10 hr/day, 3 and 4 days/week, respectively. The plant production
capacity is 3,200 cases per 18 hr day and the average production is
2,000 cases/day. The pre-season production estimate for 1973 was 45,000
cases; however, Company officials estimated the actual production would
be from 25,000 to 35,000 cases. Recent production history is tabulated
below.
Year Annual Production (cases)
1972 27,000
1971 88,000
1970 30,000
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP)
application for this plant was filed 30 June 1971. EPA personnel from
National Field Investigations Center-Denver and Region X, Seattle, visited
the plant on 2 August 1973. Water quality investigations were conducted
during the period 21 to 25 August 1973. John Enge, plant superintendent, and
Eilert Holbeck, plant manager, provided information and assistance.
-------
276
WRANGELL
1 N
ARROWS
DOCK
CANN ERY
GRINDER
FLOATING DOCK
_J
SHOPS AND
FISH HOUSE
COLD STORAGE
LEGEND
WASTE DISCHARGE LINES
FLOOR DISCHARGE POINT
Figure VI-D14. Whitney - Fidalg* Seafoods, Petersburg, Alaska
Plant Layout
-------
Water Supply
According to the RAPP application, the city municipal system
3
provides 1,515 m /day (0.4 mgd) of freshwater to the cannery which
is used as follows:
3
In-Plant Water Usage m /day mgd
cooling water 755 0.2
boiler feed water 190 0.05
process water 550 0.146
sanitary system 15 0.004
Some process water is used through freshwater sprayers that have been
installed on the unloading elevator at the dock to wash fish as they are
unloaded.
Saltwater is used in fish storage bins and to flume fish eggs from
the indexer to the egg house. The total estimated saltwater usage is
3
380 m /day (0.1 mgd). A metering system to determine the exact quantity
of saltwater that is used does not exist.
All water is chlorinated at the cannery through the use of three
gas chlorinators. A chlorine residual of 9 ppm is maintained for wash-
down and fluming water. Company officials estimated that 91 kg (200 Ib)
of chlorine is used every nine operating days.
Process Operations
Salmon are off-loaded from tenders or fishing boats into a mechanical
elevator. The fish are then sorted by species and graded with the choice
grades processed by the cold storage facility. The remaining fish are
processed in the cannery in a manner similar to that described
in Section V [Figure V-l]. The cannery has two filler lines (one 1 Ib
line and one 1/2 Ib line).
-------
278
About 15 percent of the salmon heads are ground, frozen, and shipped
to Anacortes, Wash, to be used in pet food. The remaining heads are
wasted. The Company plans on installing screens next year to remove
solids that will be sold to Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. for processing.
Waste Sources
Domestic Wastes—The domestic wastewater is discharged without
treatment into the bay at the edge of the dock. A problem that compli-
cates the evaluation of the cannery domestic discharge into the Narrows
is the city wastewater discharge just south of the Whitney-Fidalgo
plant. At present there is no disinfection of either the city or can-
nery wastewater discharges.
Refuse—Waste materials including boxes, cans and waste paper are
collected and sent to the city dump for disposal.
Process Wastes—All wastes from the iron chink, sliming table and
filler area, as well as fish heads that are not processed, are ground,
pumped through a pipe, and discharged on the bottom of the bay at a
point 18 m (60 ft) beyond the face of the dock. Solid deposits are not
noticeable in the bay area because of the extreme tidal action. Whitney-
Fidalgo estimated that 36 kg (80 Ib) of raw fish are processed for every
case of salmon; this gives an estimated 30 percent waste material.
On 7 August 1973 the Company had an oil spill while filling a
storage tank under the dock. The company reported the spill to the
Coast Guard and initiated definite and obvious cleanup procedures.
-------
279
Receiving Water .Evaluation
The results of the 21 to 25 August water quality investigation are
discussed in this section under Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. (Section VI-
D8). Hydrographic, chemical, and sediment data, collected at selected
stations, showed no water quality problems and stabilized bottom materials.
Treatment Needs
The cannery should connect the domestic wastewater discharge to the
city sewer system. Petersburg Fisheries, Inc. is constructing a
waste reduction plant with the capacity for processing all solid fish,
crab and shrimp wastes generated in the Petersburg area. Whitney-Fidalgo
Seafoods is planning to screen their waste streams and send the solids
to Petersburg Fisheries for processing. The exact method of transporting
these solids had not yet been determined. Eliminating the discharge of
these solids will ensure that no solids buildup occurs in the bay.
-------
281
REFERENCES
1. "Fisherman to Accept Closure?", Anchorage Daily News,
Vol. XXVII, No. 78:1-2. Anchorage, Alaska, 31 July 1973.
2. "Current Practice in Seafoods Processing Waste Treatment,"
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control
Research Series No. 12060 ECFOA/70, Washington, D. C., Apr. 1970.
3. Cornell, Rowland, Hayes, and Merryfield, Inc. "Seafood Cannery
Waste Study, Phase 1 - 1971," prepared for National Canners, Inc.,
Northwest Research Laboratory, Seattle, Wash., Dec. 1971.
4. "Draft Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards of Performance for the Canned and Preserved Fish
and Seafoods Processing Industry," prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency by Environmental Associates, Inc., Washington,
D. C., July 1973.
5. "Alaska Seafood Processing," Environmental Protection Agency
Working Paper No. 83 (Draft), Region X, Seattle, Wash., Nov. 1971.
6. "Water and Sewerage Systems, City of Sand Point, Alaska,"
Linck-Thompson, Engineers-Planners, Anchorage, Alaska, Dec. 1972.
-------
283
APPENDIX A
ALASKA WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
-------
Register 47, October 1973
TITLE 18. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
CHAPTER 70. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
ISAAC 70.010
18 AAC 70.020
SECTION
010. Water Quality Standards
020. Establishment of Water Use Classifications and Criteria
030. Procedure for Determining Water Quality Criteria
040. Natural Conditions
050. Classification of State Waters
060. (Repealed)
070. (Consolidated into Sec. 20)
080. Minimum Treatment
081. Certificate of Reasonable Assurance
082. Public Notice of Application
083. Public Hearing
081. Notice of Public Hearing
085. Action Upon Application
090. Implementation and Enforcement Plan
100. Penalties
110. Definitions
18 AAC 70.010. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS, (a) The water quality
standards set forth in this chapter apply to all waters of the state.
(b) Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards
shall be maintained at that high quality unless it has been affirmatively demon-
strated to the department that a change is justifiable as a result of necessary
economic or social development and that change shall not preclude present
and anticipated use of such waters. Any industrial, public or private
project or development which would constitute a new source of pollution or
an increased source of pollution to high quality waters shall provide the
highest degree of practicable treatment to maintain the high water quality.
In implementing this policy, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency will be kept advised in order to be able to discharge his responsi-
bilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended. (In
effect before 7/28/59; am 5/24/70, Register 34; am 8/28/71, Register 39;
am 10/22/72, Register 44).
AUTHORITY: AS 46.03.010
AS 46.03.020 (10)
AS 46.03.070
AS 46.03.080
18 AAC 70.020. ESTABLISHMENT OF WATER USE CLASSIFICATIONS
AND CRITERIA, (a) There are established seven water use classifications
which are designated by the letters "A" through "G", inclusive. The water
use classifications are as follows:
(1) Class A. Water supply, drinking,-culinary, and food pro-
cessing without the need for treatment other than simple disinfection and
simple removal of naturally present impurities.
(A)
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
18 AAC 70.020
(2) Class B. Water supply, drinking, culinary, and food pro-
cessing with the need for treatment equal to coagulation, sedimentation,
filtration, disinfection, and any other treatment processes necessary to
remove naturally present impurities.
(3) Class C. Water contact recreation.
(4) Class D. Growth and propagation of fish and other aquatic
life, including waterfowl and furbearers.
(5) Class E. Shellfish growth and propagation, including
natural and commercial growing areas.
(6) Class F. Agricultural water supply, including irrigation,
stock watering, and truck farming.
(7) Class G. Industrial water supply (other than food processing).
(b) The water quality criteria applicable to each water use classi-
fication are as follows.
CO
Ul
-------
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
Notes:
18 AAC 70.020
1. Organisms of the coliform group shall be determined by Most
Probable Number or equivalent membrane filter technique.
2. Wherever cited in these standards, the National Shellfish Sanita-
tion Program, Manual of Operations, Part 1, means Sanitation
of Shellfish Growing Areas, 1965 revision,~U .S . Department
of Health , Education and Welfare, Public Health Service Publication
No. 33, Part 1, obtainable from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 20402
(Price 45 cents) , or in any regional office of the Department
of Environmental Conservation, and which is on file in the office
of the lieutenant governor.
3. Induced variation of pH conditions naturally outside this range
may not exceed 0.5 pH unit and the pH change shall be only
in the direction of this range. pH conditions naturally within
this range shall be maintained within 0.5 pH unit of the natural
pH.
4. Wherever cited in these standards, USPHS Drinking Water Stan-
dards mean the Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards^
1962 revision, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Public Health Service Publication No. 956, obtainable from the
Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington D. C. 20402 (Price 30 cents) or from any regional
office of the Department of Environmental Conservation, and
which is on file in the office of the lieutenant governor.
5. Wherever cited in these standards, National Bureau of Standards
Handbook 6£ means the handbook entitled "Maximum Permissible
Body Burdens and Maximum Permissible Concentrations of Radio-
nuclides in Air and Water for Occupational Exposure", U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards Handbook
69, June 5, 1959, obtainable from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 20402, or
in any regional office of the Department of Environmental Conser-
vation, and which is on file in the office of the lieutenant governor.
6. Wherever cited in these standards, Radiation Protection Guides means
the guidelines recommended by the former Federal Radiation Council and
published in the May 18, 1960 Federal Register, and published in the
September 26, 1961 Federal Register, obtainable from any Regional Office
of the Department of Environmental Conservation and which are on file
in the office of the lieutenant governor.
(c) The analytical procedures used as methods of analysis to deter-
mine the quality of waters shall be in accordance with the 13th edition of
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, published
by the Water Pollution Control Federation, the American Water Works Asso-
ciation and the American Public Health Association, (publication office:
American Public Health Association, 1740 Broadway, New York, New York
10019) , or in accordance with other standards mutually approved by the
CO
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
18 AAC 70.020
18 AAC 70.050
department and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (In effect before
7/28/59; am 5/24/70, Register 34; am 8/28/71, Register 39; am 10/22/72,
Register 44; am 8/12/73, Register 47).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
AS 46.03.070
AS 46.03.080
18 AAC 70.030. PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING WATER QUALITY
CRITERIA. In determining the appropriate water quality criteria for any
waters or portion of waters, the department shall adhere to the following
procedure:
(1) if waters have more than one classification, the most stringent
water quality criterion of all the classifications shall apply; and
(2) if a tributary water either receives a sewage waste discharge
or industrial waste discharge, or has a lower classification than the con-
fluence water, and the tributary water affects the quality of the confluence
water, the most stringent water quality criteria applicable to either the
tributary water or the confluence water shall apply to the tributary water;
and
(3) waste discharge permits will define a mixing zone outside
of which violations of the criteria will be determined. The mixing zone
will be limited to a volume of the receiving water that will
(A) not interfere with biological communities or populations
of important species to a degree which is damaging to the ecosystem ,
and
(B) not diminish other beneficial uses disproportionately.
In effect before 7/28/59; am 5/24/70, Register 34; am 8/28/71,
Register 39; am 10/22/72, Register 44; am 8/12/73; Register 47).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
AS 46.03 070
AS 46.03.080
18 AAC 70.040. NATURAL CONDITIONS. Waters may have natural
characteristics which would place them outside the criteria established by
this chapter. The criteria established in this chapter apply to man-made
alterations to the waters of the state. (In effect before 7/28/59; am
5/24/70, Register 34; am 8/28/71, Register 39; am 10/22/72, Register 44).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (10 (A)
AS 46.03.070
AS 46.03.080
18 AAC 70.050. CLASSIFICATION OF STATE WATERS. (a) Waters of
the state that have been classified after public hearing, and their designated
classes according to the Water Quality Standards are as follows:
(1) Ship Creek - near Anchorage, Alaska - from the Ship Creek
diversion structure at river mile 11.5 to the confluence with the Knik Arm
of Cook Inlet - Classes B, C, D, & G.
-------
18 AAC 70.070
Water Uses ^""^-^
ng, culinary and food
jrocesslng without the
ised for treatment
ither than staple disin-
fection and slople re-
icvjl of naturally
present Inpurltles.
ng, culinary and food
processing with the need
'or treatment equal to
coagulation, sedlmenta-
'ectlon and any other
uturally present
lipurfcles.
C. Uater Contact
Recreation
D. Growth and propa-
gation of fish and
Including waterfowl
and propagation in-
cooirierclal growing
TTTgTI cultural water
supply, Including Ir-
supply (other than
food processing).
1
111
rganlsns (see note 1)
*nples In any rronth
.ay not exceed 50 per
water shall contain
zero per 100ml.
may not exceed 1000 per
00 ml. and not more
than 201 of samples
during one month nay
exceed 2100 per 100 ml,
ier 100 ml.
tect associated
recreational
specified In National
1000 per 100 ml with 201
2400 per 100 ml for
livestock watering, for
Irrigation of crops foi
present.
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOB WATERS OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
(?) (11 (41 Kl
xygen mg/1
r I Satura-
ion
mg/1.
01 satura-
5 mg/1.
6ng/l In
water.
mg/1 In the
mg/1 in the
3 mg/1 .
5 mg/l for
surface wate
pH
see note 3]
nd 6.5
Between 6.5
nd 8.5
Between 6.5
and 8.5
and 8.5 for
salt water
Between 6.5
and B.5 for
fresh w» Isl-
and B.5
and 6.5
and B.5
Jackson Turbidity Units
(JTU)
ceed this figure efflu-
the turbidity.
Less than iS JTU "hen
which result from other
than natural origin.
that may Interfere with
esUbl ished levels of
water supply treatment.
ed In degrees
Fahrenheit (°F)
applicable.
temp, by rwr than 2°
over 60°F Maximum
rate of change per-
shocrto^iants09 "
18 AAC 70 020 WATFR QUALITY CRITERIA FOR MATERS OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
ffil (7) (B) ?9l (10) (11) [171
IMssolved Inorganic
substances
not exceed SOO mg/1.
Numerical value Is
inapplicable.
applicable.
chronic tonlcity or
Change.
Si'""'1'"'0''1"
750 iRicrwihos at 25°C
than 1.25 me/1, and
boron less than 0.3 mg/1.
scaling, or process
problems.
"esidues Including Oils,
loating Solids. Sludge
eposlts and Other Wastes
or the uses of this clas i-
umn, on the bottom or upon
o(her organisms and less
problem levels as determined
by bioassay
5aroe as 0-7
uspended solids
Includes sedi-
ment i dredge
Below normally
Ho Imposed
established
Mo visible
which adversely
habitat.
wnlcn'adversely
of shellfish.
irrigation, wa-
ter free of par-
ceed 200 mg/1
for an extended
that will inter-
fere with es-
tablished levels
of treatment.
Toxic or Other Deleterious
Substances, Pesticides and
Inorganic Materials
less than 0.1 mg/1 and
other chemical constituents
may not exceed USPHS Drinking
Hater Standards.
Water Standards.
to be of public health
Concentrations shall be less
than those levels which cause
tainting fish, less than acute
revealed by bioassay or other
concentrations affecting thi
ecological balance.
Same as D-9
consumption by humans.
to be of public health
significance.
easured
nits
ess than
5 color
-10
Seech:
disc vis-
ble at
S*me as
C-10
C-ia
Irjppll-
CJble
--10
Radioactivity
adloactivity shall nof
) Exceed l/30th of the
sure in the National Bureau
of Standards Handbook No.
69.
tions specified In the 1962
U.S Public Health Service
IMnking Water Standards
tic supphes" ^ °nl"
c) Have a demonstrable
detrimental effect on
aquatic life.
d) The concentration of
these waters shall be less
Radiation Council in the
case of foodstuffs harvest-
traMon of radioactivity
in these waters shall be
practicable level .
Aesthetic
Hay not be irapalr-
their ef ects
sive to he sight,
smell, taste or
Saroe as A-1Z
S^ire as M2
Same as A-1Z
Saae as A-12
Same as fl-12
Same as ft-12
Water Quality ^^~-
Water supply, drinking, <•
culinary and food pro-
cessing without the
need for treatment
other than simple dlsln-
noval of naturally
Water supply, drink- '
ing, culinary and food
processing vith the need
for treatment ec.ua! to
coagulation, sedimenta-
tion, filtration, disin-
fection and any other
treatment processes
naturally present
impurities.
Water Contact C
Recreation
Growth and propagation '
of fish and other
aquatic life, inclu-
ding waterfowl and
furbearers.
Shellfish growth '
eluding natural and
commercial growing
agricultural water 1
supply, including ir-
rigation, stock watering
and truck farming
Industrial water 1
supply (other than
ho
oo
-------
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
18 AAC 70.050
18 AAC 70.081
(2) Chena River - near Fairbanks, Alaska - from the confluence
of the Chena River and Chena Slough to the confluence of the Chena River
and Tanana River - Classes C 81 D .
(3) All other marine and estuarine waters - Classes C, D, E & G.
(4) The ground waters of the state
(b) The other fresh waters of the state
Classes A, B, F, & G.
ginal and natural conditions and as such are considered suitable to serve
all classifications established in sec. 20 of this chapter and are so classi-
fied, until rcclassified. (In effect before 7/28/59; am 5/24/70, Register
34-, am 8/28/71, Register 39; am 10/22/72, Register 44; am 8/12/73,
Register 47 ) .
AUTHORITY;
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
AS 46.03.070
AS 46.03.080
18 AAC 70.060. PERMITS. Repealed 10/22/72. (In effect before
7/28/59; am 5/24/70, Register 34; am 10/22/72, Register 44).
18 AAC 70.070. TABLE - WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR WATERS OF
THE STATE OF ALASKA. Consolidated into sec. 20 (b) 10/22/72. (In
effect before 7/28/59; am 5/24/70, Register 34; am 8/28/71, Register
39; am 10/22/72, Register 44).
18 AAC 70.080. MINIMUM TREATMENT. Secondary treatment is
required for all domestic sewage wastes. All industrial waste discharges
are required to have treatment equivalent to best practicable control tech-
nology currently available as shall be defined for each industrial waste.
If secondary treatment for domestic sewage and best practicable control
technology currently available for industrial wastes is inadequate to achieve
water quality criteria as defined in sec. 20 of this chapter, higher levels
of treatment will be required. (Eff. 8/24/70, Register 34; am 8/28/71,
Register 39; am 10/22/72, Register 44; am 8/12/73, Register*? ).
AUTHORITY: AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
AS 46.03.070
AS 46.03.080
AS 46.03.710
18 AAC 70.081. CERTIFICATE OF REASONABLE ASSURANCE. The
department may issue certification that there is a reasonable assurance,
as determined by the department, that a proposed activity will comply
with the requirements of section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
\ct Amendments of 1972, 86 Stat. 816. (Eff. 12/16/70, Register 36; am
10/22/72, Register 44; am 8/12/73, Register 47).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (9)
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
l-o
CO
CO
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
18 AAC 70.082
18 AAC 70.084
18 AAC 70.082. PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION. (a) When
certification pursuant to sec. 81 of this chapter has been requested, the
department shall cause to be published a public notice of the application.
The public notice shall invite interested parties to submit to the department
comments regarding the proposed certification. Such comments shall
be received by the department until 30 days after the publication of the
public notice provided for in this section. The public notice may be
issued jointly with the federal permitting agency.
(b) The public notice of application shall contain the name and
address of the applicant, the activity sought to be certified as in compliance
with the water quality standards, the location of the affected waters, and
the location and type of discharge.
(c) The public notice of application shall be published at least
once in a newspaper having general circulation within the borough in
which the proposed activity will take place; however, if the proposed
activity will take place in the unorganized borough, or if there is no news-
paper of general circulation within the borough, then the newspaper
shall be one of general circulation within the judicial district in which
the proposed activity will take place. (Eff. 12/16/70, Register 36; am
10/22/72, Register 44; am 8/12/73, Register 47).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (9)
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
18 AAC 70.083. PUBLIC HEARING. In addition to the notice of
application provision of this chapter, the department may hold public
hearings on certification applications. (Eff. 12/16/70, Register 36; am
10/22/72, Register 44).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (9)
AS 46.03.020 (10)
(A)
18 AAC 70.084. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING. (a) If a public
hearing is to be held, the department shall cause to be published a notice
of public hearing in the manner set forth in sec. 82 (c) of this chapter.
The notice shall contain the time and place of the public hearing, a summary
of the certification application and all other information specified in sec. 82
of this chapter. The department may combine the notice of application
provided for in sec. 82 of this chapter with the notice of public hearing
provided for in this section.
(b) If a public hearing on the application for certification is to be
held, it shall be held no sooner than 30 days after publication of the notice
of public hearing. At the hearing, the department may receive comments
from the public and other individuals, entities, or governmental agencies
involved, together with comments from the applicant. Such comments
may be filed with the department in writing at or before the time of the
hearing, and reasonable oral comments shall be permitted.
-------
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATIONN
18 AAC 70.084
18 AAC 70.100
(c) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the consideration of more
than one application at any public hearing when proper public notice has
been given. (Eff. 12/16/70, Register 36; am 10/22/72, Register 44).
AUTHORITY: AS 46.03.020 (9)
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
18 AAC 70.085. ACTION UPON APPLICATION. The department may
take action upon an application for certification any time after a 30 day
period has elapsed from the date of publication of the notice provided for
in sec. 82 of this chapter. However, if a public hearing is held as provided
in sec. 83 of this chapter, the department may act upon the application
any time after the public hearing. (Eff. 12/16/70, Register 36; am
10/22/72, Register 44).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (9)
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
18 AAC 70.090. IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT PLAN. The
plan for implementing and enforcing sec. 80 of this chapter shall be based
upon achieving the minimum levels of treatment specified in that section at
the time of construction for new discharges and as soon as possible but
not later than July 1977 for existing discharges, and the plan shall consist
of the following elements:
(1) waste discharge permits issued by the department and those
federal permits issued within the state and certified by the state pursuant
to sec. 81 of this chapter;
and
(2) the Water Pollution Control Program Plan of the department;
(3) plans developed by the department while implementing
the "continuing planning process" required by sec. 303 (e) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, 86 Stat. 816. (Eff. 8/28/71,
Register 39; am 8/12/73, Register 47).
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
AS 46.03.060
AS 46.03.070
18 AAC 70.100. PENALTIES. A person who violates any provision of
this chapter is punishable by the appropriate penalties contained in AS 46.03.760
and AS 46.03.790. These penalties include the possibility of a punishment
by fine of not more than $25,000 or by imprisonment for not more than one
year or both. (Eff. 10/22/72, Register 44; am 8 A2/73 , Register 47) .
AUTHORITY:
AS 46.03.020
AS 46.03.710
AS 46.03.760
(10) (A)
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
18 AAC 70.110
18 AAC 70.110. DEFINITIONS. Unless the context indicates other-
wise , in this chapter
(1) "commissioner" means the commissioner of the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
(2) "contact recreation" means any form of recreation involving
deliberate or accidental contact with water, including but not limited to
swimming, water skiing, fishing, and commercial and recreational boating.
(3) "department" means the Department of Environmental Conser-
vation.
(4) "dredge spoil and fill" means unpolluted solid material
including but not limited to sand, silt, clay and rock which may be placed
in the waters of the state, provided that it is placed in the water in a
manner such that it does not interfere with any designated water use.
(5) "ground water" means water in the zone of saturation, which
is the zone below the water table in which all interstices are filled with
water.
(6) "primary treatment" means the method of removal of settleable,
suspended and floatable solids from water by the application of mechanical
forces or gravitational forces, or both and may include processes such as
sedimentation, flotation, screening, centrifugal action, vacuum filtration,
dissolved air flotation, and others designated to remove settleable, suspended
and floatable solids.
(7) "secondary treatment" means that method of removal of
dissolved and colloidal materials that in their unaltered state, as found
in water, are not amenable to separation through the application of mechani-
cal forces or gravitational forces or both. Secondary treatment may include
processes such as bio-absorption, biological oxidation, wet combustion,
other chemical reactions, and adsorption on surface-active media, change
of phase, or other processes that result in the removal of colloidal-and
dissolved solids from waters.
(8) "sheen" means an iridescent appearance on the surface of
the water.
(9) "sludge" means a combination of solids and liquids including
but not limited to an aggregate of oil or oil and matter of any other kind
having a combined specific gravity equivalent to or greater than that of
water. Sludge does not mean dredge spoil and fill.
ho
Co
-------
Register 47, October 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 18 AAC 70.110
(10) "waters" means lakes, bays, sounds, ponds, impounding
reservoirs, springs, wells, rivers, streams, creeks, estuaries, marshes,
inlets, straits, passages, canals, the Pacific Ocean, Gulf of Alaska,
Bering Sea and Arctic Ocean, in the territorial limits of the state, and
all other bodies of surface or underground water, natural or artificial,
public or private, inland or coastal, fresh or salt, which are wholly or
partially in or bordering upon the state or under the jurisdiction of the
state. (am 5/24/70. Register 34; am 8/28/71, Register 39; am
10/22/72, Register 44; am 8/12/73, Register 47).
AUTHORITY: AS 46.03.020 (10) (A)
AS 46.03.070
AS 46.03.080
-------
291
APPENDIX B
RATIONALE FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESING WASTE
Prepared by
National Field Investigations Center - Denver
Denver, Colorado
-------
293
APPENDIX B
RATIONALE FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ALASKA SEAFOOD PROCESSING WASTE
There are three basic methods of disposal of seafood wastes to the
receiving waters practiced by the Alaskan processors; wastes are 1)
collected, flumed, and discharged to the receiving waters either ground
or unground, 2) collected and flumed to a gurry scow for transport to a
disposal area away from the plant, and 3) directly discharged through
holes in the floor to the beaches and waters below the facility.
The results of water quality studies and in-plant evaluations of
twenty-six seafood processors, conducted from June through August, 1973,
indicated that scouring and dispersion by tides is the overriding factor
in the degree of treatment required for process wastes. Where outfalls
are situated in fast moving tidal areas, and are submerged below lower
low water, dispersion is generally adequate to prevent bottom deposits
of discharged solids, and the water quality problems that are almost al-
ways associated with such deposits. Where outfalls are not so situated,
bottom deposits and/or esthetic problems were observed and were, with
few exceptions, associated with water quality problems, i.e., depressed
dissolved oxygen, floating solids, presence of Vibrio.
Permit conditions for the Alaska seafood processing Industry are rec-
ommended based on the above considerations. Permits will be written for
three separate categories; 1) salmon processing plants which were deter-
mined to cause water quality problems, 2) shrimp and crab processors,
and 3) the remaining salmon processing plants which do not fall under
the first category.
CATEGORY 1 - WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS
Criteria used for water quality considerations were accumulation of
solids, either on the beach or in the water, depressed DO, and tidal
influences. Processors which discharged through the floors, especially
in the Naknek River area, caused numerous solids deposits which were not
removed by the tides. Processors in Cordova discharged into an area
where tides either did not flush the wastes away, or carried them into
the small boat harbor. Processors on the Alaska Peninsula discharged to
areas where solids were not dispersed or to areas where the solids were
washed back to the beach.
-------
294
To protect water quality, the method of disposal is either collec-
tion, grinding, and discharge below mean lower low water or by screening
all process wastes with subsequent disposal of solids by either reduc-
tion, or transport without loss of solids to a specified area within the
baseline, or disposal by other approved method. In the case of the for-
mer, the area within a 100 ft radius of the outfall pipe is to be moni-
tored to determine if solid deposits are accumulating. If solids are
accumulating then the process wastes must be screened prior to discharge,
and the retained solids must be disposed of by reduction, or by. transport
to a specified area within the baseline, or by other approved method. The
screening is to occur no later than one year following the date when solids
are found to be accumulating. Various researchers feel that the discharged
solids are beneficial to the fishery. The first approach allows the pro-
cessors to dispose of wastes without unnecessary, perhaps intolerable, ec-
onomic hardships caused by screening and barging and requires only that ec-
onomic impact necessary to attain adequate dispersal. However, if water
quality problems do occur, then the screening and barging requirement will
be implemented.
Numerical limits, such as the 5 ml/1 (max) to 2 ml/1 (average) settle-
able solids limitation in the Kodiak permits, could not be expected to pre-
vent bottom deposits in sheltered water, while adequate dispersion of much
greater concentrations of solids can be attained in fast moving tidal wa-
ters. The sizes of screening devices to be used are the same as those spec-
ified in the Kodiak permits.
Because most of the processors do not know what quantity of water is
used, flow recording devices will be specified to be installed and moni-
tored daily. This will give the EPA and the processor needed information
of process water requirements.
The initial permit conditions allow the permittee to discharge as pres-
ently practiced until July 1, 1975 (grinding) or July 1, 1977 (screening).*
After this date, all wastes must meet the final effluent limitations. The
only numerical limits imposed were the daily average and daily maximum
flows reported in the Refuse Act Permit Program application, and the pH
range of 6.0 to 9.0. The requirement for effluent limitations in terms of
weight of pollutant is simply irrelevant to the Alaskan seafood industry
for the reasons set forth previously for settleable solids. Dispersion is
the key factor and dispersion is contingent upon tidal action. There can
be no viable justification for imposition of an unnecessarily restrictive
weight limit upon processors located where tidal action provides adequate
dispersion.
*
If screening is required, then the processors must grind the wastes
to a particle size of 1.27 cm (0.50 in.) or less for initial permit
conditions.
-------
295
The schedule of compliance is based on what is believed to be reason-
able time periods for the planning and construction of facilities to meet
the initial and final effluent limitations dates.
The monitoring and reporting schedule for all processors discharging
through the submerged outfall was established as sampling once every two
weeks and reporting the data monthly, postmarked no later than the fifth
day of the following month. This was done because the processing season
is short, one to three months, and water quality problems could go un-
reported through the season if a three month reporting schedule was used.
Monitoring was not required in the discharge area specified for disposal
of screened solids by barges. The areas were selected from navigation
charts to provide adequate depth and dispersion.
CATEGORY 2 - SHRIMP AND CRAB
Permits for this category will contain conditions prescribed in the
interim guidelines.
CATEGORY 3 - REMAINING SALMON PROCESSORS
All remaining permits for salmon processors will be developed using
the collection, fluming, grinding and deep water disposal method with
subsequent monitoring for solids accumulation. If solids accumulate, then
screening and barging (or reduction or other approved method of disposal)
will be required.
SANITARY WASTES
Most processors discharge raw sanitary wastes to the receiving wa-
ters. Some have package aeration plants, some have septic tanks or seep-
age pits, and others will have or do have access to municipal sewers. The
Alaska Water Quality Guidelines require that sanitary wastes receive
secondary treatment (Alaska does not define secondary treatment).
All processors will be required to 1) totally confine (subsurface
treatment) all sanitary wastes (septic tank with leach field), 2) dis-
charge to a treatment facility that is providing secondary treatment or
is on an approved compliance schedule, or 3) provide secondary treatment
(40 CFR 133) using a package plant, etc., if discharged by the facility.
-------
297
APPENDIX C
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE AND
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR THE
CANNED AND PRESERVED SEAFOOD
PROCESSING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
-------
299
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[40 CFR Part 408]
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE AND
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR THE
CANNED AND PRESERVED SEAFOOD
PROCESSING POINT SOURCE CATE-
GORY
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Notice is hereby given that effluent
limitations guidelines for existing sources
and standards of performance and pre-
treatment standards for new sources set
forth in tentative form below are pro-
posed by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) for the farm-raised cat-
fish processing of more than 908 kg (2000
Ibs) of raw material per day subcategory
(Subpart A), farm-raised catfish proc-
essing of 908 kg (2000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day subcategory (Subpart
B), conventional blue crab processing
subcategory (Subpart C), mechanized
blue crab processing subcategory (Sub-
part D), Alaskan crab meat processing
subcategory (Subpart E), Alaskan whole
crab and crab section processing sub-
category (Subpart P), dungeness and
tanner crab processing in the contiguous
States subcategory (Subpart G), Alaskan
shrimp processing subcategory (Subpart
H), Northern shrimp processing in the
contiguous States of more than 1816 kg
(4000 Ibs) of raw material per day sub-
category (Subpart I), Northern shrimp
processing in the contiguous States of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw material
per day subcategory (Subpart J), South-
ern non-breaded shrimp processing in
the contiguous States of more than 1816
kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material per day
sobcategory (Subpart K), Southern non-
breaded shrimp processing In the con-
tiguous States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or
less of raw material per day subcategory
(Subpart L), breaded shrimp processing
in the contiguous States of more than
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material per
day subcategory (Subpart M), breaded
shrimp processing in the contiguous
States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of
raw material per day subcategory (Sub-
part N), and tuna processing subcategory
(Subpart O) of the canned and preserved
seafood processing category of point
sources pursuant to sections 301, 304 (b)
and (c), 306(b) and 307(c) of the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended (33 U.S.C. 1251, 1311, 1314 (b)
and (c), 1316(b) and 1317(c); 86 Stat.
816 et seq.; Pub. L. 92-500) (the "Act").
(a) Legal authority.
(1) Existing point sources.
Section 301 (b) of the Act requires the
achievement by not later than July 1,
1977, of effluent limitations for point
sources, other than publicly owned treat-
ment works, which require the applica-
tion of the best practicable control tech-
nology currently available as denned by
the Administrator pursuant to section
304 (b) of the Act. Section 301 (b) also
requires the achievement by not later
than July 1, 1983, of effluent limitations
PROPOSED RULES
for point sources, other than publicly
owned treatment works, which require
the application of best available tech-
nology economically achievable which
will result in reasonable further progress
toward the national goal of eliminating
the discharge of all pollutants, as deter-
mined in accordance with regulations
issued by the Administrator pursuant to
section 304(b) of the Act.
Section 304 (b) of the Act requires the
Administrator to publish regulations
providing guidelines for effluent limita-
tions setting forth the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the appli-
cation of the best practicable control
technology currently available and the
degree of effluent reduction attainable
through the application of the best con-
trol measures and practices achievable
including treatment techniques, process
and procedure innovations, operating
methods and other alternatives. The
regulations proposed herein set forth
effluent limitations guidelines, pursuant
to section 304 (b) of the Act, for the farm-
raised catfish processing of more than
908 kg (2000 Ibs) of raw material per
day subcategory (Subpart A), farm-
raised catfish processing of 908 kg (2000
Ibs) or less of raw material per day sub-
category (Subpart B), conventional blue
crab processing subcategory < Subpart C >,
mechanized blue crab processing sub-
category (Subpart D), Alaskan crab meat
processing subcategory (Subpart E),
Alaskan whole crab and crab section
processing subcategory (Subpart F),
dungeness and tanner crab processing in
the contiguous States subcategory (Sub-
part G), Alaskan shrimp processing sub-
category (Subpart H), Northern shrimp
processing in the contiguous States of
more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw ma-
terial per day subcategory iSubpart D,
Northern shrimp processing in the con-
tiguous States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or
less of raw material per day subcategory
(Subpart J3, Southern non-breaded
shrimp processing in the contiguous
States of more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs)
of raw material per day subcategory
(Subpart K), Southern non-breaded
shrimp processing in the contiguous
States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day subcategory (Subpart
L), breaded shrimp processing in the
contiguous States of more than 1816 kg
(4000 Ibs) of raw material per day sub-
category (Subpart M), breaded shrimp
processing in the contiguous States of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw material
per day subcategory (Subpart N), and
tuna processing subcategory (Subpart O)
of the canned and preserved seafood
processing category of point sources.
(2) New sources.
Section 306 of the Act requires the
achievement by new sources of a Fed-
eral standard of performance providing
for the control of the discharge of pol-
lutants which reflects the greatest de-
gree of effluent reduction which the Ad-
ministrator determines to be achieve-
able through application of the best
available demonstrated control tech-
nology, processes, operating methods, or
other alternatives, including where
practicable, a standard permitting no
discharge of pollutants.
Section 306(b) (1) (B) of the Act re-
Quires the Administrator to propose reg-
ulations establishing Federal standards
of performance for categories of new
sources included in a list published pur-
suant to Section 306(b)(l)(A) of the
Act. The Administrator published in the
FEDERAL REGISTER of January 16, 1973,
(38 PR 1624) a list of 27 source categor-
ies, including the canned and preserved
seafood processing source category. The
regulations proposed herein set forth
the standards of performance applicable
to new sources for the farm-raised cat-
fish processing of more than 908 kg (2000
Ibs) of raw material per day subcategory
(Subpart A), farm-raised catfish proc-
essing of 908 kg (2000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day subcategory (Subpart
B), conventional blue crab processing
subcategory (Subpart C), mechanised
blue crab processing subcategory (Sub-
part D), Alaskan crab meat processing
subcategory (Subpart E), Alaskan whole
crab and crab section processing slibcate-
gory (Subpart F), dungeness and tan-
ner crab processing in the contiguous
States subcategory (Subpart G). Alaskan
shrimp processing subcategory (Subpart
H >, Northern shrimp processing in tb
-------
300
easing subcategory (Subpart E), Alas-
kan whole crab and crab Section proc-
essing subcategory (Subpart P), dunge-
ness and tanner crab processing in the
contiguous States subcategory (Subpart
G), Alaskan shrimp processing subcate-
gory (Subpart H), Northern shrimp-
processing in the contiguous States of
more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw
material per day subcategory (Subpart
I), Northern shrimp processing in the
contiguous States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs)
or less of raw material per day subcate-
gory (Subpart J), Southern non-breaded
shrimp processing in the contiguous
States of more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs)
of raw material per day subcategory
(Subpart K), Southern non-breaded
shrimp processing in the contiguous
States of 1816 kg (40001bs) or less of
raw material per day subcategory (Sub-
part L), breaded shrimp processing in
the contiguous States of more than
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material per
day subcategory. Subpart M), breaded
shrimp processing in the contiguous
States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of
raw material per day subcategory (Sub-
part N), and tuna processing subcate-
gory (Subpart O) of the canned and pre-
served seafood processing subcategory of
point sources.
Section 304(c) of the Act requires the
Administrator to issue to the States and
appropriate water pollution control
agencies information on the processes,
procedures or operating methods which
result in the elimination or reduction of
the discharge of pollutants to implement
standards of performance under Sec-
tion 306 of the Act. The Development
Document referred to below provides,
pursuant to section 304(c) of the Act,
information on such processes, proce-
dures or operating methods.
(b) Summary and basis of proposed
effluent limitations guidelines for ex-
isting sources and standards of perform-
ance and pretreatment standards for
new sources.
(1) General methodology.
The effluent limitations guidelines and
standards of performance proposed
herein were developed in the following
manner. The point source category was
first studied for the purpose of deter-
mining whether separate limitations and
standards are appropriate for different
segments within the category. This anal-
ysis included a determination of whether
differences in raw material used,
product produced, manufacturing proc-
ess employed, age, size, geographic loca-
tion, waste water constituents and other
factors require development of separate
limitations and standards for different
segments of the point source category.
The raw waste characteristics for each
such segment were then identified. This
included an analysis of (1) the source,
flow and volume of water used in ths
process employed and the sources of
waste and waste waters in the operation;
and (2) the constituents of all waste
water. The constituents of the waste wa-
ters which should be subject to effluent
limitations guidelines and standards of
performance were identified.
PROPOSED RULES
The control and treatment technolo-
gies existing within each segment were
identified. This included an identifica-
tion of each distinct control and treat-
ment technology, including both in-
plant and end-of-process technologies,
which are existent or capable of being
designed for each segment. It also In-
cluded an identification of, in terms of
the amount of constituents and the
chemical, physical, and biological char-
acteristics of pollutants, the effluent level
resulting from the application of each
of the technologies. The problems, limita-
tions and reliability of each treatment
and control technology were also identi-
fied. In addition, the non-water quality
environmental impacts, such as the ef-
fects of the application of such technolo-
gies upon other pollution problems, in-
cluding air, solid waste, noise and radia-
tion were identified. The energy require-
ments of each control and treatment
technology were determined as well as
the cost of the application of such tech-
nologies.
The information, as outlined above,
was then evaluated in order to deter-
mine what levels of technology constitute
the "best practicable control technology
currently available," "best available
technology economically achievable" and
the "best available demonstrated con-
trol technology, processes, operating
methods, or other alternatives." In iden-
tifying such technologies, various factors
were considered. These included the to-
tal cost of application of technology in
relation to the effluent reduction bene-
fits to be achieved from such applica-
tion, the age of equipment and facilities
involved, the process employed, the en-
gineering aspects of the application of
various types of control techniques, proc-
•ess changes, non-water quality environ-
mental impact (including energy require-
ments) and other factors.
The data on which the above analysis
was performed included sampling data;
consultant reports; EPA research, devel-
opment, and demonstration grant proj-
ects; permit application data; the open
literature; and other sources.
The pretreatment standards proposed
herein are intended to be complementary
to the pretreatment standards proposed
for existing sources under Part 128 of 40
CPR. The basis for such standards is
set forth in the FEDERAL REGISTER of July
19, 1973, 38 FR 19236. The provisions of
Part 128 are equally applicable to sources
which would constitute "new sources,"
under section 306 if they were to dis-
charge pollutants directly to navigable
waters except for § 128.133. That section
provides a pretreatment standard for
"incompatible pollutants" which requires
application of the "best practicable con-
trol technology currently available," sub-
ject to an adjustment for amount of
pollutants removed by the publicly owned
treatment works. Since the pretreatment
standards proposed herein apply to new
sources, §§408.15, 408.25, 408.35, 408.45,
408.55, 408.65, 408.75, 408.85, 408.95,
408.105, 408.115, 408.125, 408.135, 408.145,
and 408.155 below amend section 128.133
to require application of the standard
of performance for new sources rather
than the "best practicable" standard ap-
plicable to existing sources under sec-
tions 301 and 304(b) of the Act.
(2) Summary of. conclusions with re-
spect to the farm-raised catfish process-
ing of more than 908 kg (2000 Ibs) of raw
material per day subcategory (Subpart
A), farm-raised catfish processing of
908 kg (2000 Ibs) or less of raw ma-
terial per day subcategory (Subpart
B), conventional blue crab processing
subcategory (Subpart C), mechanized
blue crab processing subcategory (Sub-
part D), Alaskan crab meat processing
subcategory (Subpart E), Alaskan whole
crab and crab section processing sub-
category (Subpart F), dungeness and
tanner crab processing in the contiguous
States subcategory (Subpart G), Alas-
kan shrimp processing subcategory (Sub-
part H), Northern shrimp processing in
the contiguous States of more than 1816
kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material per day
subcategory (Subpart I), Northern
shrimp processing in the contiguous
States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day subcategory (Subpart
J), Southern non-breaded shrimp proc-
essing in the contiguous States of more
than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material
per day subcategory (Subpart K), South-
ern non-breaded shrimp processing in
the contiguous States of 1816 kg (4000
Ibs) or less of raw material per day sub-
category (Subpart L), breaded shrimp
processing in the contiguous States of
more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw
material per day subcategory (Subpart
M), breaded shrimp processing in the
contiguous States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or
less of raw material per day subcategory
(Subpart N), and tuna processing sub-
category (Subpart O) of the canned and
preserved seafood processing category
of point sources.
(i) Categorization.
For the purpose of studying waste
treatment and effluent limitations, the
farm-raised catfish, crab, shrimp and
tuna segments of the canned and pre-
served seafood processing category were
divided into fifteen discrete subcatego-
ries. Eleven were based primarily on a
consideration of the variety of species
being processed, manufacturing processes
and subprocesses utilized, location of
plant, and nature of operation (inter-
mittent versus continuous) as outlined in
the Development Document for the farm-
raised catfish, crab, shrimp and tuna
segments of the canned and preserved
fish and seafood processing industry.
Consideration of the economic impact
of the proposed guidelines required an
additional four subcategories based on
the size of the processing facility. Differ-
ent limitations were established for small
plants within the farm-raised catfish,
Northern shrimp, Southern non-breaded
shrimp, and breaded shrimp segments of
the industry due to unequal economic im-
pacts created by diseconomies of scale.
(1) Subpart A—Farm-Raised Catfish
Processing of More than 908 kg (2000 Ibs)
of Raw Material Per Day Subcategory:
The farm-raised catfish processing in-
dustry is relatively new (many plants are
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
PROPOSED RULES
301
less than five years old) and employs
processing techniques which are more
homogeneous than most of the other seg-
ments of the seafood processing indus-
try. The industry is concentrated prin-
cipally in the Southern and Central
United States.
(2) Subpart B—Farm-Raised Catfish
Processing of 908 kg (2000 Ibs) or Less
of Raw Material Per Day Subcategory:
Due to the disproportionate economic
impact on the smaller farm-raised cat-
fish processor, this subcatesory adjusts
the recommended guidelines to account
for the diseconomies of scale in the ap-
plication of waste treatment technology.
With the exception of size, the descrip-
tion of Subpart B is identical to Sub-
part A.
(3) Subpart C—Conventional Blue
Crab Processing Subcategory: Conven-
tional blue crab processing plants, con-
centrated along the Gulf of Mexico and
Atlantic coasts, are usually small opera-
tions utilizing manual picking of the
crab meat. The waste water streams ex-
hibit similar characteristics and low flow
volumes. The majority of the pollutional
load is attributable mainly to the cook-
ing phase and to the plant clean up
operation.
(4) Subpart D—Mechanized Blue Crab
Processing Subcategory: Mechanized
blue crab processing utilizes picking ma-
chines to separate the crab meat from
the shell, a procedure which causes
significant differences in waste water
characteristics and volumes when com-
pared to conventional blue crab proc-
essing. For example, the water use per
kilogram of crab processed using me-
chanical pickers is 30 times the water use
of the conventional process; the total
suspended solids ratio is nearly 10 times
greater; and the 5-day biochemical oxy-
gen demand (BODS) ratio approaches 4
times that of the conventional blue crab
process.
(5) Subpart E—Alaskan Crab Meat
Processing Subcategory: The Alaskan
crab processing industry consists of a
relativley small number of processing
plants producing a large volume of prod-
uct. The mechanical picking machines
employed by Alaskan crab meat proces-
sors result in significantly different waste
water characteristics and volumes when
compared to the Alaskan whole crab and
crab section process. For example, the
crab meat process uses twice as much
water as the whole crab and crab section
process, and the 5-day biochemical oxy-
gen demand and total suspended solids
are almost 50 percent higher for the crab
meat process.
(6) Subpart F—Alaskan Whole Crab
and Crab Section Processing Subcate-
gory: The whole crab and crab section
process does not separate the meat from
the shell before preservation. As dis-
cussed above, this processing technique
results in significantly different waste
water characteristics and volumes when
compared to the Alaskan crab meat
process.
(7) Subpart G—Dungeness and Tan-
ner Crab Processing In the Contiguous
States Subcategory: Dungeness and tan-
ner crab processing plants in the con-
tiguous States are relatively small com-
pared to Alaskan plants. Unlike Alaskan
processing, the plants utilize manual
picking for crab meat production. More-
over, geographical differences based on
considerations of climate, topography,
relative Isolation of the processing plants
in Alaska, land and water availability
and soil conditions further justify a dis-
tinction between Alaskan processing and
processing in the contiguous States.
(8) Subpart H—Alaskan Shrimp Proc-
essing Subcategory: The Alaskan shrimp
processing industry is similar to the
Northern shrimp processing industry in
the contiguous States in terms of proc-
essing technology and waste water char-
acteristics. However, geographical dif-
ferences such as those listed in the previ-
ous section justify a distinction between
Alaskan processing and processing in the
contiguous States.
(9i Subpart I—Northern Shrimp Proc-
essing of More Than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs)
of Raw Material Per Day in the Con-
tiguous States Subcategory: The North-
ern shrimp processing Industry in the
contiguous States includes the New Eng-
land and Pacific Northwest as well as the
California shrimp processors. Significant
differences In waste water characteristics
exist between this subcategory and the
Southern non-breaded shrimp and
breaded shrimp subcategories. For ex-
ample, the settleable solids in the waste
waters from Northren shrimp processors
were nearly ten times those from South-
ern non-breaded and breaded shrimp
processing. The Northern shrimp 5-day
biochemical oxygen demand was nearly
three times that of the Southern non-
breaded shrimp and 1.4 times that of
the breaded shrimp, a phenomenon
largely attributable to the differences in
product size. Paralleling this BODS rela-
tionship, the Northern shrimps' grease
and oil level was also higher than those
levels of the Southern non-breaded and
breaded shrimp.
HOi Subpart J—Northern Shrimp
Processing in the Continguous States of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or Less of Raw Mate-
rial Per Day Subcategory: Due to the dis-
proportionate economic impact on the
smaller Northern shrimp processor, this
subcategory adjusts the recommended
guidelines to account for the diseco-
nomies of scale in the application of
waste treatment technology. With the
exception of size, the description of Sub-
part J is identical to Subpart I.
(11). Subpart K—Southern Non-
Breaded Shrimp Processing of More
Than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of Raw Material
Per Day in the Contiguous States Sub-
category: Southern shrimp processing,
concentrated in the Gulf of Mexico and
South Atlantic areas, utilizes a larger
species of shrimp than either the
Alaskan or Northern shrimp processing
industries. This difference in raw ma-
terial processed is responsible for the
significant differences in waste water
characteristics as described in section 9.
Moreover, the BCDS and water consump-
tion for Southern non-breaded shrimp
are almost half of that for breaded
shrimp.
(12) Subpart L—Southern Non-
Breaded Shrimp Processing in the con-
tiguous States of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs.i or
Less of Raw Material Per Day Subcate-
gory: Due to the disproportionate eco-
nomic impact on the smaller Southern
non-breaded shrimp processor, this sub-
category adjusts the recommended
guidelines to account for the disecono-
mies of scale in the application of waste
treatment technology. With the excep-
tion of size, the description of subpart L
is identical to Subpart K.
(13) Subpart M—Breaded Shrimp
Processing of more than 1816 kg '4000
Ibs) of Raw Material Per Day in the
Contiguous States Subcategory: The
addition of a breading operation to the
processing of shrimp causes significant.
increases in certain waste water param-
eters such as biochemical oxygen de-
mand and total suspended solids as
previously discussed in Subparts I and
K above.
(14) Subpart N—Breaded Shrimp
Processing in the Contiguous States of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or Less of Raw Ma-
terial Per Day Subcategory: Due to the
disproportionate economic impact on
the smaller breaded shrimp processor.
this subcategory adjusts the recom-
mended guidelines to account for the
diseconomies of scale in the application
of waste treatment technology. With the
exception of size, the description of sub-
part N is identical to subpart M.
(15) Subpart O—Tuna Procer-^mg
Subcategory: Although widely dis-
tributed geographically, the tuna proc-
essing industry utilizes a common tech-
nology for the production of canned
tuna and various by-products. Waste
water characteristics are thus fairly
uniform from region to region regard-
less of plant size. The tuna processing
industry is the only segment of the sea-
food processing industry examined in
the Development Document which has
a relatively continuous year-round
operation.
(ii) Waste characteristics.
Pollutants contained in waste v>ater.=
resulting from seafood processing are
measured by biochemical oxygen de-
mand, chemical oxygen demand, settle-
able solids, total suspended solids, oil
and grease, total Kjeldahl nitrogen
(organic nitrogen arid ammonia >, nitrate,
phosphorus, oil and grease, coliform bac-
teria, pH and temperature. Of the fore-
going pollution parameters, biochemical
oxygen demand, total suspended solids,
and oil and grease have been selected as
significant parameters for the establish-
ment of effluent limitations. The pH
parameter is included also as an effluent
limitation which must fall within an
acceptable range of values. The remain-
ing parameters are so closely related to
those selected as to be influenced by
their limitations, or present at levels that
are not significajit.
(iii) Origin of waste water pollutants
in the canned and preserved seafood
processing category.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO, 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
302
Generally, waste water flows within
the seafood processing Industry originate
at the receiving, preprocessing, eviscera-
tion, pre-cooking, picking and cleaning,
preserving, canning, freezing, plant
cleanup and by-product operations of
the manufacturing process.
(iv) Treatment and control tech-
nology.
Present control and treatment prac-
tices are uniformly inadequate within
the farm-raised catfish, crab, shrimp
and tuna processing segments of the
canned and preserved seafood process-
ing industry. Processors employ few if
any waste water treatment facilities at
the full scale plant operational level.
Consequently, with the exception of
screening and solids recovery, the ma-
jority of the waste water treatment
alternatives are based on pilot plant
studies, transferable technology from
the meat processing industry, municipal
waste treatment systems, or other seg-
ments of the seafood as well as the food
processing Industry.
The available alternatives include in-
plant controls such as water conservation
and dry capture of solids to minimize raw
waste loads from processing. The end-of-
process physical and chemical treatment
technologies include screening, sedi-
mentation, air flotation, and concentra-
tion. The end-of-process biological treat-
ment alternatives include activated
sludge, extended aeration, rotating bio-
logical contactors, high-rate trickling
niters, stabilization ponds, and aerated
lagoons.
(v) Treatment and control technology
within subcategories. Waste water treat-
ment and control technologies have been
studied for each subcategory of the in-
dustry to determine what is (a) the best
practicable control technology currently
available, (b) the best available tech-
nology economically achievable, and (c)
the best available demonstrated control
technology, processes, operating methods
or other alternatives.
(1) Treatment for the farm-raised
catfish processing of more than 908 kg
(2000 Ibs) of raw material per day sub-
category: The best practicable control
technology currently available involves
efficient in-plant water and waste water
management, partial recycle of live fish
holding tank water, solids or by-product
recovery, and aerated lagoons and oxida-
tion ponds. The best available technology
economically achievable includes effluent
treatment through an extended aeration
system. The best available demonstrated
control technology, processes, operating
methods or other alternatives for new
sources is based on spray irrigation of
process waste water and partial recycle
of live fish holding tank water with
overflow and discharge to fish holding
ponds which occasionally overflow to
navigable waters.
(2) Treatment for the farm-raised
catfish processing of 908 kg (2000 Ibs)
or less of raw material per day subcate-
gory: The best practicable control tech-
nology currently available involves effi-
cient in-plant water and waste water
PROPOSED RULES
management, partial recycle of live fish
holding tank water, solids, or by-product
recovery, and oxidation ponds. The best
available technology economically
achievable includes effluent treatment
through an extended aeration system.
The best available demonstrated con-
trol technology, processes, operating
methods or other alternatives for new
sources are based on spray irrigation of
process waste water and partial recycle
of live fish holding tank water with over-
flow and discharge to fish holding ponds
which occasionally overflow to navigable
waters.
(3) Treatment for the conventional
blue crab processing subcategory: The
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available consists of efficient in-
plant water and waste water manage-
ment, solids or by-product recovery, and
aerated lagoon systems. The best avail-
able technology economically achievable
includes effluent treatment through an
extended aeration system. The best avail-
able demonstrated control technology,
processes, operating methods or other al-
ternatives for new sources are met by the
requirements for the best practicable
control technology currently available.
(4) Treatment for the mechanized blue
crab processing subcategory: The best
practicable control technology currently
available consists of efficient in-plant
water and waste water management,
solids or by-product recovery, and
aerated lagoon systems. The best avail-
able technology economically achievable
includes effluent treatment through an
extended aeration system. The best
available demonstrated control tech-
nology, processes, operating methods or
other alternatives for new sources are
met by the requirements for the best
practicable control technology currently
available and appropriate process design
to provide more efficient water and waste
water management.
(5) Treatment for the Alaskan crab
meat processing subcategory: 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. The unique physical situa-
tion of Alaskan processors includes ex-
treme seasonality, harsh climate and
frequent Inavailability of usable land.
This precludes consideration of more
sophisticated waste-management tech-
nologies which are readily transferable
to seafood processing in the contienous
States. The best available technology
economically achievable includes treat-
ment by dissolved air flotation systems.
The best available demonstrated control
technology, processes, operating methods
or other alternatives for new sources are
met by the requirements for the best
practicable control technology currently
available and appropriate process design
to provide more efficient water and waste
water management.
(6) Treatment for the Alaskan whole
crab and crab section processing sub-
category. 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 discussed
in the previous section, the unique phys-
ical situation of Alaskan processors pre-
cludes consideration of more sophisti-
cated waste-management technologies
which are readily transferable to seafood
processing in the contiguous States. The
best available technology economically
achievable includes treatment by dis-
solved air flotation systems. The best
available demonstrated control technol-
ogy, processes, operating methods or
other alternatives for new sources are
met by the requirements for the best
practicable control technology currently
available and appropriate process design
to provide more efficient water and waste
water management.
(7) Treatment for the dungeness and
tanner crab processing in the contiguous
States subcategory: The best practicable
control technology currently available
consists of efficient in-plant water and
waste water management, solids or by-
product recovery techniques, and dis-
solved air flotation systems. The best
available technology economically
achievable includes treatment by aerated
lagoon systems In addition to dissolved
air flotation systems with chemical co-
agulation. The best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods or other alternatives
for new sources are met by the require-
ments for the best practicable control
technology currently available and ap-
propriate process design to provide more
efficient water and waste water
management.
(8) Treatment for the Alaskan shrimp
processing subcategory: The best prac-
ticable 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 discussed previously in sec-
tions (5) and (6) above, the unique phys-
ical situation of Alaskan processors
precludes consideration of more sophisti-
cated waste-management technologies
which are readily transferable to seafood
processing in the contiguous States. The
best available technology economically
achievable includes treatment by dis-
solved air flotation systems. The best
available demonstrated control technol-
ogy, processes, operating methods or
other alternatives for new sources are
met by the requirements for the best
practicable control technology currently
available and appropriate process design
to provide more efficient water and waste
water management.
(9) Treatment for the Northern
shrimp processing of more than 1816 kg
(4000 Ibs) of raw material per day in
the contiguous States subcategory: The
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available consists of efficient in-
plant water and waste water manage-
ment, solids or by-product recovery
techniques, and dissolved air flotation
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26 WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
303
systems. The best available technology
economically achievable Includes treat-
ment by aerated lagoon systems in addi-
tion to dissolved air notation systems
•with chemical coagulation. The best
available demonstrated control technol-
ogy, processes, operating methods or
other alternatives for new sources are
met by the requirements for the best
practicable control technology currently
available and appropriate process design
to provide more efficient water and waste
water management.
(10) Treatment for the Northern
shrimp processing of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs)
or less of raw material per day in the
contiguous States subcategory: The best
practicable control technology currently
available consists of efficient in-plant
water and waste water management and
solids or by-product recovery through
the use of screening systems. The best
available technology economically
achievable includes treatment by dis-
solved air flotation systems in addition to
screening. The best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods or other alternatives
for new sources is based on dissolved air
flotation systems in addition to screening
and appropriate process design to pro-
vide more efficient water and waste
water management.
(11) Treatment for the Southern non-
breaded shrimp processing of more than
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material per
day in the contiguous States subcategory:
The best practicable control technology
currently available consists of efficient
in-plant water and waste water manage-
ment, solids or by-product recovery tech-
niques, and dissolved air notation sys-
tems. The best available technology eco-
nomically achievable includes treatment
by aerated lagoon systems in addition to
dissolved air flotation systems with
chemical coagulation. The best available
demonstrated control technology, proc-
esses, operating methods or other alter-
natives for new sources are met by the
requirements for the best practicable
control technology currently available
and appropriate process design to pro-
vide more efficient water and waste water
management.
(12) Treatment for the Southern non-
breaded shrimp processing of 1816 kg
(4000 Ibs) or less of raw material per day
In the contiguous States subcategory:
The best practicable control technology
currently available consists of efficient
in-plant water and waste water manage-
ment and solids or by-products recovery
through the use of screening systems,
The best available technology economi-
cally achievable Includes treatment by
dissolved air flotation systems in addi-
tion to screening. The best available dem-
onstrated control technology, processes,
operating methods or other alternatives
for new sources are based on dissolved
air flotation systems in addition to
screening and appropriate process design
to provide more efficient water and waste
water management.
(13) Treatment for the breaded shrimp
processing of more than 1816 kg (4000
PROPOSED RULES
Ibs) or raw material per day in the con-
tiguous States subcategory; The best
practicable control technology currently
available consists of efficient In-plant
water and waste water management,
solids or by-product recovery techniques,
and dissolved air flotation systems. The
best available technology economically
achievable includes treatment by aerated
lagoon systems in addition to dissolved
air flotation systems with chemical coag-
ulation. The best available demonstrated
control technology, processes, operating
methods or other alternatives for new
sources are met by the requirements for
the best practicable control technology
currently available and appropriate proc-
ess design to provide more efficient water
and waste water management.
(14) Treatment for the breaded shrimp
processing of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of
raw material per day in the contiguous
States subcategory: The best practicable
control technology currently available
consists of efficient in-plant water and
waste water management and solids or
by-product recovery through the use of
screening systems. The best available
technology economically achievable In-
cludes treatment by dissolved air flota-
tion systems in addition to screening. The
best available demonstrated control
technology, processes, operating methods
or other alternatives for new sources are
based on dissolved air flotation systems
in addition to screening and appropriate
process design to provide more efficient
water and waste water management.
(15) Treatment for the tuna process-
Ing subcategory: The best practicable
control technology currently available
consists of efficient in-plant water and
waste water management, solids and by-
product recovery techniques, and dis-
solved air flotation systems. The best
available technology economically
achievable includes dissolved air flotation
systems with chemical addition, high
rate trickling filters followed by acti-
vated sludge biological treatment sys-
tems. The best available demonstrated
control technology, processes, operating
methods or other alternatives for new
sources are met by the requirements for
the best practicable control technology
currently available and appropriate
process design to provide more efficient
water and waste water management.
(vi) Establishing daily maximum lim-
itations: Because there are no existing
waste water treatment facilities at the
plant level, the 30-day and the daily
maximum limitations are based on en-
gineering judgment and the considera-
tion of the operating characteristics of
similar treatment systems within the
meat processing industry, municipal
waste treatment systems, or other seg-
ments of the seafood as well as the food
processing industry. The daily maximum.
limitations for the screening systems are
3 times the thirty day limitations; for
air flotation systems, 2.5 times the thirty
day limitation; for aerated lagoon sys-
tems, 2 times the thirty day limitation.;
for extended aeration systems, 3 times
the thirty day limitation; and for acti-
vated sludge systems, 3.5 times the thirty
day limitation. An exception was made
for the total suspended solids after
screening in the Alaskan shrimp process-
ing subcategory due to the high Initial
level of the parameter. The daily maxi-
mum limitation of total suspended solids
for the Alaskan shrimp processing sub-
category is 1.5 times the 30 day limitation.
The proposed effluent limitations guide-
lines and standards of performance are
expressed in terms of a ratio between the
weight of pollutants which may be dis-
charged and the weight of raw material,
i.e., fish and seafood processed.
When a plant is subject to effluent lim-
itations covering more than one subcate-
gory; the plant's effluent limitation shall
be the aggregate of .the limitations ap-
plicable to the total production covered
by each subcategory.
(vii) The cost and energy require-
ments associated with the control and
treatment technologies have been con-
sidered. The costs for in-plant controls
are largely those associated with capital
investment for process and equipment
modifications. Realization of values ob-
tained from product loss reduction, by-
product recovery, and reduced treatment
costs may well result in a net gain. Tor
example, in 1973 fish meal supplies are
selling up to three or more times the
1971 prices. Peru, normally the producer
of one-half of the world's fish meal, has
had greatly reduced output in 1972 and
1973. Hence if this trend continues, the
production of meal from waste will be
economically profitable for many plants.
The costs associated with end-of-pipe
treatment include amortization of capi-
tal expenditures over a ten-year period,
debt servicing, and operation and main-
tenance. Added energy requirements are
those associated with operation of treat-
ment facilities and constitute only a
small fraction of the total plant
consumption.
(viii) Economic impact analysis.
A precise study of the economic im-
pact is difficult due to numerous other
forces at work within the seafood in-
dustry, and because of the plant-to-plant
variability of such factors as pollution
control costs, profitability, arid return
on investment.
There may be a significant economic
impact due to diseconomies of scale with-
in the catfish, Northern shrimp, South-
ern non-breaded shrimp, and breaded
shrimp segments of the industry. Be-
cause of this, four proposed subcategorles
are based on economic considerations
alone in order to alleviate the plight of
the smaller processor. The determina-
tion of the subdivision for smaller proc-
essors is based on limited information
and is subject to revision before promul-
gation hi final form of the proposed
effluent limitations guidelines.
The report entitled "Development Doc-
ument for Proposed Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and New Source Performance
Standards for the Catfish, Crab, Shrimp,
and Tuna segments of the Canned and
Preserved Pish and Seafood Processing
Industry" details the analysis undertaken
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
304
in support of the regulations proposed
herein. The report is available for in-
spection in the EPA Information Center,
Room 227, West Tower, Waterside Mall,
Washington, D.C., at all EPA regional
offices, and at State water pollution con-
trol offices. A supplementary analysis
prepared for EPA of the possible eco-
nomic effects of the proposed regulations
is also available for inspection at these
locations. Copies of both of these docu-
ments are being sent to persons or in-
stitutions affected by the proposed regu-
lations, or who have placed themselves
on a mailing list for this purpose (see
EPA's Advance Notice of Public Review
Procedures, 38 FR 21202, August 6, 1973).
An additional limited number of copies
of both reports are available. Persons
wishing to obtain a copy may write the
EPA Information Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
20460, Attention: Mr. Philip B. Wisman.
On June 14, 1973, the Agency pub-
lished procedures designed to insure that,
when certain major standards, regula-
tions, and guidelines are proposed, an ex-
planation of their basis, purpose and
environmental effects Is made available
to the public (38 FR 15653). The pro-
cedures are applicable to major stand-
ards, regulations and guidelines which
are proposed on or after December 31,
1973, and which prescribe national
standards of environmental quality or
require national emission, effluent or per-
formance standards and limitations.
The Agency determined to implement
these procedures In order to insure that
the public was apprised of the environ-
mental effects of Its major standards
setting actions and was provided with
detailed background information to as-
sist it in commenting on the merits of
a proposed action. In brief, the proce-
dures call for the Agency to make public
the information available to it deline-
ating the major nonenvironmental fac-
tors affecting the decision, and to explain
the viable options available to it and
the reasons for the option selected.
The procedures contemplate publica-
tion of this information in the FEDERAL
REGISTER, where this is practicable. They
provide, however, that where, because
of the length of these materials, such
publication is impracticable, the mate-
rial may be made available in an alter-
nate format.
The report entitled "Development Doc-
ument for Proposed Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and New Source Perform-
ance Standards for the Catfish, Crab,
Shrimp, and Tuna Segments of the
Canned and Preserved Seafood Process-
ing Industry Point Source Category"
contains information available to the
Agency concerning the major environ-
mental effects of the regulation proposed
below, including:
(1) the pollutants presently discharged
into the Nation's waterways by proces-
sors of canned and preserved seafood
and the degree of pollution reduction
obtainable from the implementation of
the proposed guidelines and standards
(see particularly sections IV, V, VT, IX, X,
and XI);
PROPOSED RULES
(2) the anticipated effects of the pro-
posed regulation 011 other aspects of the
environment including air, solid waste
disposal and land use, and noise (see
particularly section VITI) ; and
(3) options available to the Agency in
developing the proposed regulatory sys-
tem and the reasons for its selecting the
particular levels of effluent reduction
which are proposed (see particularly
sections VI, VII, and VTII).
The supplementary report entitled
"Economic Analysis of Proposed Effluent
Guidelines Seafoods Processing Indus-
try" contains an estimate of the cost of
pollution control requirements and an
analysis of the possible effects of the
proposed regulations on prices, produc-
tion levels, employment, communities in
which canned and preserved seafood
processing plants are located, and inter-
national trade. In addition, the above
described Development Document de-
scribes, in section VIII, the cost and
energy consumption implications of the
proposed regulations.
The two reports described above in the
aggregate exceed 500 pages in length and
contain a substantial number of charts,
diagrams, and tables. It is clearly im-
practicable to publish the material con-
tained in these documents in the FEDERAL
REGISTER. To the extent possible, signif-
icant aspects of the material have been
presented in summary form in foregoing
portions of this preamble. Additional
discussion is contained in the following
analysis of comments received and the
Agency's response to them. As has been
indicated, both documents are available
for inspection at the Agency's Washing-
ton, D.C. and regional offices and at State
water pollution control agency offices.
Copies of each have been distributed to
persons and institutions affected by tfee
proposed regulations or who have placed
themselves on a mailing list for this pur-
pose. Finally, so long as the supply re-
mains available, additional copies may be
obtained from the Agency as described
above.
When regulations for the processors of
canned and preserved seafood are pro-
mulgated in final form, revised copies
of the Development Document will be
available from the Superintendent of
Documents, Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402. Copies of the
Economic Analysis will be available
through the National Technical Infor-
mation Service, Springfield, Virginia
22151.
(3) Summary of Public Participation.
Prior to this publication, the agencies
and groups listed below were consulted
and given an opportunity to participate
in the development of effluent limitations
guidelines and standards proposed for
the ^nned and preserved fish and sea-
food processing category. All participat-
ing agencies and groups have been in-
formed of project developments. An ini-
tial draft of the Development Document
was sent to all participants and com-
ments were solicited on that report. The
following are the principal agencies and
groups consulted: (1) Effluent Standards
and Water Quality Inf ormation Advisory
Committee (established under section
515 of the Act) ; (2) all State and U.S.
Territory Pollution Control Agencies; (3)
the National Marine Fisheries Service,
U.S. Department of Commerce; (4) U.S,
Department of the Interior; (5) U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare; (6) the Water Resources Coun-
cil; (7) the American Society of Me-
chanical Engineers; (8) Hudson, River
Sloop Restoration, Inc.; (9) the Conser-
vation Foundation; (10) Environmental
Defense Fund, Inc.; (11) Natural Re-
sources Defense Council; (12) the
American Society of Civil Engineers;
(13) the Water Pollution Control Fed-
eration; (14) the National Wildlife Fed-
eration; (15) the American Frozen
Food Institute; (16) the National Can-
ners Association; (17) the National Fish-
eries Association; (18) the Catfish Farm-
ers of America; (19) the American
Shrimp Canners Association; (20) Tuna
Research Foundation, Inc.; (21) the
Chesapeake Bay Seafood Industries As-
sociation; and (22) the Kodiak Seafood
Processors Association.
The following organizations responded
with comments: National Canners Asso-
ciation; American Shrimp Canners As-
sociation; Catfish Farmers of America;
Chesapeake Bay Seafood Industries As-
sociation; Kodiak Seafood Processors
Association; American Society of Civil
Engineers; National Marine Fisheries
Service, U.S. Department of Comme'rce;
State of Georgia, Department of Natural
Resources; State of Alaska. Department
of Environmental Conservation; Govern-
ment of American Samoa, Environmen-
tal Quality Commission; and the Cali-
fornia Water Resources Control Board.
The comments were highly variable,
ranging from full approval to total re-
jection of the conclusions and recom-
mendations contained in the draft De-
velopment Document.
The primary issues raised in the devel-
opment of the proposed effluent limita-
tions guidelines and standards of per-
formance and the treatment of these
issues herein are as follows:
(a) A number of commentors ques-
tioned the validity of the sampling
method of screening the raw waste waters
with a 20-mesh Tyler sieve prior to lab-
oratory analysis. They contended that
the data contained in the Development
Document are In reality screened waste
loads and may not be used as a valid base
for establishing further reductions
through employment of subsequent waste
water treatment under commercial plant
operating conditions.
Immediately after sampling, each ali-
quot was passed through a standard 20-
mesh Tyler screen prior to adding it to
the composite sample. This practice has
been used in previous waste water char-
acterization research in both the seafoods
and the fruits and vegetable fields. It
serves to remove the larger solid particles
(such as crab legs, some shrimp shell,
fish parts, etc.) and thereby greatly re-
duce the resultant "scatter" of the data
points. The method is especially valuable
in developing a precise base-line value
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
305
for each parameter from a limited num-
ber "f sam Dies.
The alternatives to this approach were
to use a larger mesh size, to blend or
grind the samples, or 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 encoun-
tered in full scale treatment designs. To
grind the samples would have led to un-
realistically high values for some param-
eters such as BOD5 and grease and oil,
because these values are surface-area
dependent. Grinding a food processing
waste sample can increase its BODS by
up to 1000 percent. This choice was re-
jected because the values obtained
through this method (especially those for
BODS—the simple most important pa-
rameter in the guidelines) would be un-
realistically high. The third alternative
was not adopted because it would intro-
duce unacceptable scatter into the re-
sults and cast serious doubt on the valid-
ity of the parameter averages obtained.
It was recognized that laboratory
screening efficiencies would likely be
higher than full-scale field screening
efficiencies (for the same mesh). How-
ever, the same or better results could
be obtained by using smaller mesh sizes
in full-scale plant application.
Adoption of the 20-mesh screening
method provided accurate, reliable base-
line data for each parameter in ea<;h
subcategory for screened waste water,
thereby permitting confident selection of
subsequent treatment alternatives.
For estimates of removal efficiencies
for the design and cost estimates, the
literature was consulted to establish the
relationship between screened and un-
screened BODS for each subcateg
-------
306
PROPOSED RULES
shrimp processing waste or similar
Tra-stes,
Interested persons may participate in
this rulemaklng by submitting written
comments in triplicate to the EPA In-
lormaton Center, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460,
Attention: Mr. Philip B. Wisman. Com-
ments on all aspects of the proposed
regulations are solicited. In the event
comments are in the nature of criticisms
as to the adequacy of data which Is
avaOable, or which may be relied upon
by the Agency, comments should iden-
tify and, if possible, provide any addi-
tional data which may be available and
should Indicate why such data is essen-
tial to the development of the regula-
tions. In the event comments address
the approach taken by the Agency in
establishing an effluent limitation guide-
line or standard of performance, EPA
solicits suggestions as to what alterna-
tive approach should be taken and why
and how this alternative better satisfies
the detailed requirements of sections 301,
304(b), 306 and 307 of the Act.
A copy of all public comments will be
available for Inspection and copying at
the EPA Information Center, Room 227,
West Tower, Waterside Mall, 401 M
Street, SW, Washington, D.C. A copy
of preliminary draft contractor reports,
the Development Document and eco-
nomic study referred to above and cer-
tain supplementary materials support-
Ing the study of the industry concerned
will also be maintained at this location
for public review and copying. The'EPA
information regulation, 40 CPR Part 2,
provides that a reasonable fee may be
charged for copying.
All comments received within thirty
days of publication of this notice in the
FEDERAL REGISTER will be considered.
Steps previously taken by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency to facilitate
public response within this time period
are outlined in the advance notice con-
cerning public review procedures pub-
lished on August 6. 1973 (38 PR 21202).
Dated: January 25, 1974.
JOHN QCARLES,
Acting Administrator.
PART 408—EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GUIDELINES FOR EXISTING SOURCES
AND STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
AND PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
NEW SOURCES FOR THE CANNED AND
PRESERVED SEAFOOD PROCESSING
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
Subpsrt A—Farm-Raised Catfish Processing of
More Than 908 kg (2000 Ibs) of Raw Material
Per Day Subcategory
Sec.
408.10 Applicability; description of the
farm-raised catfish processing of
more than 608 kg (2000 Ibs) of
raw material per day Subcategory.
408.11 Specialized definitions.
408.12 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
Sec.
408.13 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent re-
duction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable,
408.14 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.18 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart B—Farm-Raised Catfish Processing of
9O8 kg (2000 Ibs) or Less of Raw Material Per
Day Subcategory
408.20 Applicability; description of the
farm-raised catfish processing of
9O8 kg (2000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day Subcategory.
408.21 Specialized definitions.
408.22 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408.23 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent re-
duction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
408.24 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.26 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart C—Conventional Blue Crab Processing
Subcategory
408.30 Applicability; description of the
conventional blue crab processing
Subcategory.
408.31 Specialized definitions.
408.32 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the
application of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
4O8.33 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent re-
duction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
408 34 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.35 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart D—Mechanized Blue Crab Processing
Subcategory
408.40 Applicability; description of the
mechanized blue crafo processing
Subcategory.
408.41 Specialized definitions.
408.42 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the
application of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408.43 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent re-
duction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
408.44 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.45 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart E—Alaskan Crab Meat Processing
Subcategory
408.50 Applicability; description of the
Alaskan crab meat processing sulb-
category.
408.51 Specialized definitions.
Sec.
408.52 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the
application of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408.53 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent re-
duction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
4O8.54 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.55 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart F—Alaskan Whole Crabs and Crab
Section Processing Subcategory
408.60 Applicability; description of the
Alaska whole crab and crab sec-
tion processing Subcategory.
408.61 Specialized definitions.
408.62 Effluent limitations guidelines re-
presenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408.63 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the ap-
plication of the best available
technology economically achiev-
able.
408.64 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.65 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart G—Dungeness and Tanner Crab
Processing In the Contiguous States Subcategory
408.70 Applicability; description of the
dungeness and tanner crab proc-
essing in the contiguous States
Subcategory.
408.71 Specialized definitions.
4O8.72 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the ap-
plication of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408.73 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the ap-
plication of the best available
technology economically achieva-
ble.
408.74 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.75 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart H—Alaskan Shrimp Processing
Subcategory
408.80 Applicability; description of the
Alaskan shrimp processing sub-
category.
408.81 Specialized definitions.
408.83 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of. the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408.83 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the ap-
plication of the best available
technology economically achleva-
able,
408.84 Standards of performance for new
sources,
408.86 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
No 26—Pt.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
PROPOSED RULES
307
Subpart I—Northern Shrimp Processing of Mor»
Than 1816 kg (2000 Ibs) of Raw Material Per
Day in the Contiguous States Subcategory
Sec.
408.90 Applicability; description of the
Northern shrimp processing at
more than 1818 kg (4000 Ibs) of
raw material per day In the con-
tiguous States subcategory.
408.91 Specialized definitions.
408.92 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408 93 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the ap-
plication of the best available
technology economically achiev-
able.
408.94 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.95 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart J—Northern Shrimp Processing of 1816
kg (4000 Ibs) or Less of Raw Material Per Day
in the Contiguous States Subcategory
408 100 Applicability; description of the
Northern shrimp processing of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day in the contigu-
ous States subcategory.
408.101 Specialized definitions.
408.102 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the ap-
plication of the best practicable
control technology currently
available.
408 103 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
senting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the ap-
plication of the best available
technology economically achiev-
able.
408.104 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.105 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart K—Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp Proc-
essing of More Than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of Raw
Material Per Day in the Contiguous States
Subcategory
408.110 Applicability; description of the
Southern non-breaded shrimp
processing of more than 1816 kg
(4000 Ibs) of raw material per day
in the contiguous States sub-
category.
408.111 Specialized definitions.
408.112 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent re-
duction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology ctirrently available.
408.113 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the ap-
plication of the best available
technology economically achiev-
able.
408.114 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.115 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart L—Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp Proc-
essing of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or Less of Raw
Material Per Day in the Contiguous States
Subcategory
408.120 Applicability; description of the
Southern non-breaded shrimp
processing of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs)
or less of raw material per day
in the contiguous States subcate-
gory.
Sec.
408.121 Specialized definitions.
408.122 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently avail-
able.
408.123 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction of obtainable by the
application of the best available
technology economically achiev-
able.
408.124 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.125 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart M—Breaded Shrimp Processing of More
Than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of Raw Material Per
Day in the Contiguous States Subcategory
408.130 Applicability; description of the
breaded shrimp processing of
more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of
raw material per day in the con-
tiguous States sxibcategory.
408.131 Specialized definitions.
408.132 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently avail-
able.
408.133 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
408.134 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.135 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart N—Breaded Shrimp Processing of 1816
kg (40OO Ibs) or Less of Raw Material Per Day
in the Contiguous States Subcategory
408.140 Applicability; description of the
breaded shrimp processing of 1816
kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw ma-
terial per day in the contiguous
States subcategory.
408.141 Specialized definitions.
408.142 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently avail-
able.
408.143 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
408,144 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.145 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart O—Tuna Processing Subcategory
408.150 Applicability; description of the
tuna processing subcategory.
408.151 Specialized definitions.
408.152 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently avail-
able.
408.153 Effluent limitations guidelines rep-
resenting the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the appli-
cation of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
408.154 Standards of performance for new
sources.
408.155 Pretreatment standards for new
sources.
Subpart A—Farm-Raised Catfish Process-
ing of More Than 908 kg (2000 Ibs) of
Raw Material Per Day
§ 408.10 Applicability; description of
the farm-raised catfish processing of
more than 908 kg (2000 Ibs) of raw
material per day subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
farm-raised catfish by facilities which
process more than 908 leg (2000 Ibs) of
raw material per day on any day during
a calendar year.
§ 408.11 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1971,
Environmental Protection Agency, Ana-
lytical Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean
the raw material, including freshwater
and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
processed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BOD5" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3>
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "Ib"
shall mean pound (s >.
§ 408.12 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a. point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 4.6
kg/kkg of seafood (4.6 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days; 2.3 kg/
kkg of seafood (2.3 Ib/
1.000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 11.4
kg/kkg of seafood (11.4
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 5.7 kg/
kkg of seafood (5.7 Ib./
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 0.90
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (0.90
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.45 kg/
kkg of seafood (0.45 Ib/
1,000 Ib)
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
308
§ 408.13 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 42
kg/kkg of seafood (4.2 lb/
l.OOO lb).
Maximum average of daily
value for any period of 30
consecutive days: 1.4 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.4 lb/
1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 4.2
kg/kkg of seafood (4.2 lb/
l.OOO lb).
Maximum average of daily
value for any period of 30
consecutive days: 1.4 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.4 lb/
1,000 lb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 1.4
grease. kg'kkg of seafood (1.4 lb/
1.000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.45 kg/
kkg of seafood (0 45 lb/
1 000 lb) .
pH Within the range of C.O to
90.
§ 408.14 Standar:!* «:f performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting tiie greatest degree
of effluent reduction achievable through
application of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes, op-
erating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a stand-
ard permitting no discharge of pol-
lutants at a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent Effluent
characteristic • limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day:
0.20 kg/kkg of seafood
(020 lb'1.000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.10
Kg 'kkg of seafood (0.10
lb."1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
0.40 kg/kkg of seafood
(040 Ib/l.OOO Ita).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.20
kg, kkg of seafood (0.20
lb'1,000 Ita).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.20 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.20 lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.10
kg-'kkg of seafood (0.10
lb/1,000 lb).
pH Witliln the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
PROPOSED RULES
§ 408.15 Prelrealmenl standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under sec-
tion 307(c) of the Act, for a source with-
in the farm-raised catfish processing of
more than 908 kg (2000 lb) of raw mate-
rial per day subcategory, which is an in-
dustrial user of a publicly owned treat-
ment works (and which would be a new
source subject to section 306 of the Act,
if it were to discharge pollutants to navi-
gable waters), shall be the standard set
forth in Part 128, of this title, except that
for the purposes of this section, § 128.133
of this title, shall be amended to read as
follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
in section 128.131, the pretreatment stand-
ard for incompatible pollutants introduced
into a publicly owned treatment works by
a major contributing Industry shall be the
standard of performance for new sources
specified in § 408.14, 40 CPU,, Part 408, pro-
vided that, if the publicly owned treatment
works which receives the pollutants is com-
mitted, In its NPDES permit, to remove a
specified percentage of any incompatible pol-
lutant, the pretreatment standard applicable
to users of such treatment works shall be
correspondingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart B—Farm-Raised Catfish Process-
ing of 908 kg (2000 Ibs) or Less of
Raw Material Per Day Subcategory
§ 408.20 Applicabilily; description of
the farm-raised catfish processing of
908 kg (2000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day siibcalegory.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
farm-raised catfish by facilities which
process 908 kg (2000 Ibs) or less cf raw
material per day.
§ 408.21 Sped;,Used ilcfiiiilions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
iner.ii those components o.f a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1971, En-
vironmental Protection Agency, Analyt-
ical Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean the
raw material, including freshwater and
saltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-
essed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2> "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "lb"
shall mean pound(s).
§ 408.22 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology eurrenlly available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
4.6 kg/kkg of seafood (4.6
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 2.3
kg/kkg of seafood (2.3 lb/
l.OOOlb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
11.4 kg/kkg of seafood
(11.41b/l,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 5.7
kg/kkg of seafood (5.7 lb/
1,000 lb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.90 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.90 lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of' daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0,45
kg/kkg of seafood (0.45
lb/1,000 lb).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.23 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
quantity or quality of pollutants or pol-
lutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day.
4.2 kg/kkg of seafood (4.2
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 1.4
kg/kkg of seafood (1.4 lb/
1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
4,2 kg/kkg of seafood (4,2
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any - period of
30 consecutive days: 1.4
kg/kkg of seafood (1.4 Ita/
l.OOOlb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day
grease. 1.4 kg/kkg of seafood (1.4
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 045
kg/kkg of seafood (0,45
Ib/l.OOOlb).
pH Within the range of 6 0 to
8.0.
§ 408.24 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
309
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day:
0.20 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.20 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.10
kg/kkg of seafood (0.10
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
0.40 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.40 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.20
kg/kkg of seafood (0.20
lb/1,000 ID).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.20 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.20 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.10
kg/kkg of seafood (0.10
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.25 Pretreatment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307 (c) of the Act, for a, source
within the farm-raised catfish processing
of 908 (kg (2000 Ibs) or less of raw ma-
terial per day subcategory, which is an
Industrial user of a publicly owned treat-
ment works (and which would be a new
source subject to section 306 of the Act,
if it were to discharge pollutants to navi-
gable waters), shall be the standard set
forth in Part 128 of this title, except that
for the purposes of this section, § 128.133
of this title, shall be amended to read as
follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
in § 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
incompatible pollutants introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
§408.24, 40 CPB, Part 408: Provided, That,
if the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
centage of any incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart C—Conventional Blue Crab
Processing Subcategory
§ 408.30 Applicability; description of
the conventional bine crab processing
subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
blue crab in which manual picking or
separation of crab meat from the shell
is utilized.
§ 408.31 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
i a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Anolysis of Water and Wastes," 1971,
PROPOSED RULES
Environmental Protection Agency, An-
alytical Quality Control Laboratory,
page 217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean the
raw material, including freshwater and
saltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-
essed, in the form in which it is received
at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oyxgea demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids,
(3) "kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4)
"kkg" shall mean 1000 kilograms, and
(5) "Ib" shall mean pound(s).
§ 408.32 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
0.30 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.30 lb/l,OOO Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.15
kg/kkg of seafood (0.15
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any one day:
0.90- kg/kkg of seafood
(0.90 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.45
kg/kkg of seafood (0.45
lb/1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.13 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.13 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.065
kg/kkg of seafood (0.065
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.33 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the
best available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
0.36 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.36 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.12
kg/kkg of seafood (0.12
lb/1,000 Ib).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
0.36 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.36 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.12
kg/kkg of seafood (0.12
lb/1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.078 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.078 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.026
kg/kkg of seafood (0.026
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.34 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through
application of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic
BODS
TSS
Oil and
grease.
pH
Effluent limitation
Maximum for any 1 day:
0.30 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.30 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.15
kg/kkg of seafood (0.15
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum for any 1 day:
0.90 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.90 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.45
kg/kfcg of seafood (0.45
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum for any 1 day:
0.13 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.13 lb/1.000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.065
kg/kkg of seafood (0.065
lb/1,000 Ib).
Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.35 Pretrcalmcnt standards for
now sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act, for a source
within the conventional blue crab proc-
essing subcategory, which is an indus-
trial user of a publicly owned treatment
works (and which would be a new source
subject to section 306 of the Act, if it
were to discharge pollutants to navigable
waters), shall be the standard set forth
in Part 128 of this title, except that for
the purposes of this section, § 128.133 of
this title, shall be amended to read as
follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
In § 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
Incompatible pollutants introduced into a
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY1, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
310
PROPOSED RULES
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
5 4O8.34, 40 CFR, Part 4O8, provided that, if
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified percent-
age of any incompatible pollutant, the pre-
treatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be- correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart D—Mechanized Blue Crab
Processing Subcategory
§ 408.40 Applicability: description of
die mechanized blue crab processing
subcalegorr.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
blue crab in which mechanical picking
or separation of crab meat from the
shell is utilized.
§ 408.41 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes." 1971, En-
vironmental Protection Agency, Analyti-
cal Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
(b> The term "seafood" shall mean
the raw material, including freshwater
and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
processed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: <1>
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, '31
"kg" shall mean kilogram's!. (4> "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and <5i "Ib"
shall mean pound (s >
§ 408.42 Effluent limitations euidelines
representing the decree of effluent
reduction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent liinitarion
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day: 6.0
kg kkg of seafood (6 0 Ib/
1.000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 3.0 kg/
kkg of seafood (3.0 Ib/
1.000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 15
kg-kkg of seafood (15 Ib/
l.OOOlb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 7A
kg'kkg of seafood (7.4 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 2.8
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (2.8 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: IA
kg 'kkg of seafood (1.4 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.43 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5__.- Maximum for any 1 day: 5.7
kg kkg of seafood (5.7 Ib/
1.000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 1.9
kg kkg of seafood (1.9 Ib/
1.000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 5.7
kg kkg of seafood (5.7 )b/
1.000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days- 1.9 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.9 Ib -1 000
Ib).
grease. Maximum for any 1 day: 1.6
Oil and kg kkg of seafood (1 6 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0 53 kg/
kkg of seafood (0.53 Ib/
l.OOOlb).
pH "Within the range of 6.0 lo
9.0.
§ 408.44 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a, standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 5.0
kg/kkg of seafood (5.0 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 2.5 kg/
kkg of seafood (2.5 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 13
kg/kkg of seafood (13 Ib/
l.OOOlb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 6.3 kg/
kig of seafood (6.3 Ib/
l.OOOlb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 2.6 kg/kkg of seafood (i"6
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 1.3 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.3 Ib/
l.OOOlb).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.45 Prelrcalment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act, for a source
within the mechanized blue crab process-
ing subcategory, which is an industrial
user of a publicly owned treatment works
(and which would be a new source sub-
ject to section 306 of the Act, if it were
to discharge pollutants to navigable
waters), shall be the standard set forth
in Part 128 of this title, except that for
the purposes of this section, § 128.133 of
this title, shall be amended to read as
follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
in 5 128.131, the pretreatment standards for
incompatible pollutants introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
§ 408.44, 40 CFR, Part 408, provided that, if
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
centage of any incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart E—Alaskan Crab Meat Processing
Subcategory
§408.50 Applicability; description of
the Alaskan crab meat processing
Subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing, in
Alaska, of dungeness, tanner, and king
crab meat.
§ 408.51 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chgmical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1971, En-
vironmental Protection Agency, Analyti-
cal Quality Control Laboratory, page 217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean the
raw material, including freshwater and
saltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-
essed, in the form in which it is received
at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
311
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "Ib"
shall mean pound(s).
§ 1-08.52 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day: 29
kg/kkg of seafood (29
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 9.6
kg/kkg of seafood (9.6
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 19
kg/kkg of seafood (19
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 6.2
kg/kkg of seafood (6.2
lb/1,000 Ib).
OH and Maximum for any 1 day: 1.8
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (1.8
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.61
kg/kkg of seafood (0.61
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 108.53 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants
or pollutant properties which may be
discharged after application of the
best available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
12 kg/kkg of seafood (12
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 4.9
kg/kkg of seafood (4.9
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
4.0 kg/kkg of seafood (4.0
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 1.6
kg/kkg of seafood (1.6
lb/1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
Grease 0.25 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.25 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.10
kg/kkg of seafood (0.10
lb/1,000 Ib).
PROPOSED RULES
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.54 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes, op-
erating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
25 kg/kkg of seafood (25
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 8.2
kg/kkg of seafood (8.2
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
16 kg/kkg of seafood (16
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 5.3
kg/kkg of seafood (5.3
lb/1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
Grease. 1.6 kg/kkg of seafood (1.6
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.52
kg/kkg of seafood (0.52
lb/1.000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.55 PrelrealmciU standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under sec-
tion 307(c) of the Act, for a source within
the Alaskan crab meat processing sub-
category, which is an industrial user of
a publicly owned treatment works (and
which would be a new source subject to
section 306 of the Act, if it were to dis-
charge pollutants to navigable waters),
shall be the standard set forth in Part
128 of this title, except that for the pur-
poses of this section, § 128.133 of this
title, shall be amended to read as follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth in
§ 128.131: the pretreatment standard for in-
compatible pollutants introduced into a pub-
licly owned tre-atment works by a major con-
tributing industry shall be the standard of
performance for new sources specified in
§ 408.54, 40 CPR, Part 408, provided that, if
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
centage of any incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart F—Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab
Section Processing Subcategory
§408.60 Applicability; description of
the Alaskan whole crab and crab sec-
tion processing subcalegory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing, in
Alaska, of dungeness, tanner and king
whole crab and crab sections.
§ 408.61 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1971,
Environmental Protection Agency, Ana-
lytical Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean
the raw material, including freshwater
and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
processed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogramOs 1, (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "Ib"
shall mean pound(s).
§ 408.62 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
18 kg/kkg of seafood (18
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 6.0
kg/kkg of seafood (6.0 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
12 kg/kkg of seafood (12
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 3.9
kg/kkg of seafood (3.9 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 1.3 kg/kkg of seafood (1.3
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.42
kg/kkg of seafood (0.42
lb/l,0001b).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.63 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
312
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 daY:
7.8 kg''kkg of seafood (7.8
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 3,1 kg/
kkg of seafood (3.1 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
2 5 kg 'kkg of seafood (2.5
Ib'1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
valties for any period of
30 consecutive clays: 0.99
kg-'kkg of seafood (0.99
Ib 1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease 0.22 kg-kkg of seafood
(0 22 lb/1,000 Ib),
Maximum average of daily
values lor any period of
30 consecutive days: 0072
>g kkg of seafood (0.072
Ib -1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6 0 to
9.0.
§ 108.64 Standards of perform.mcc for
new sources.
The following liiiiitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through
application of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a, point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
char act erotic
BODS
TSS
Oil and
grease.
pH
Effi u?nt limitation
Maximum for any 1 day
15 kg kkg or seafood 115
Ib'1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 5.1
kg'kkg of seafood (51
Ib 1.000 Ib).
Maxmium for any 1 day:
9.9 kg. kkg of seafood (9'.9
Ib'1.000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 3.3
kg kkg of seafood (33
Ib 1.000 Ib).
Maximum for any 1 day:
1.1 kg kkg of seafood (1.1
Ib '1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 036
kg kkg of seafood (0.36
Ib 1.000 Ib)
Within the range of 6 0 to
9 0
§ 408.65 Pretrealmcnt standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under sec-
tion 307 (c) of the Act, for a source within
the Alaskan whole crab and crab section
subcategory, which is an industrial user
of a publicly owned treatment works
iand which would be a new source sub-
ject to section 306 of the Act. if it were to
discharge pollutants to navigable
waters i, shall be the standard set forth
PROPOSED RULES
In Part 128 of this title, except that for
the purposes of of this section,~§ 128.133
of this title shall be amended to read as
follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
in § 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
Incompatible pollutants introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
5 408.64, 40 CFB Part 408, provided that, if
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in
Its NPDES permit, to remove a specified
percentage of any incompatible pollutant,
the pretreatment standard applicable to
users of such treatment works shall be cor-
respondingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart G—Dungeness and Tanner Crab
Processing in the Contiguous States
Subcategory
§ 408.70 Applicability; description of
the dungcness and tanner crab proc-
essing in llie contiguous Stales sub-
category.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
dungeness and tanner crab in the conti-
guous States.
§ 408.71 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
ia> The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Waste," 1971. En-
vironmental Protection Agency, Analyt-
ical Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
The term "seafood" shall mean the
ran' material including freshwater and
saltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-
essed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
ic i The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, <2> "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "Ib"
shall mean poundfs;.
§ 408.72 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by tlie applica-
tion of the best practicable contro!
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 12
kg/kkg of seafood (12
lta/i,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 4.8
kg/kkg of seafood (4.8
lb/l,0001b).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
2.0 kg/kkg of seafood
(2.0 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.81 kg/
kkg of seafood (0.81 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.30 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.30 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 0.12
kg/kkg of seafood (0.12
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.73 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent lirmtation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day:
1.8 kg/kkg of seafood (1.8
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.92
kg/kkg of seafood (0.92
lb/l,0001b).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
4.6 kg/kkg of seafood (4.6
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 2.3 kg/
kkg of seafood (2.3 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.11 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.11 lb/1,000 Ita).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.057
kg/kkg of seafood (0.057
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.74 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives,
Including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
313
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
10 kg/kkg of seafood (10
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 4.1 kg/
kkg of seafood (4.1 lb/
1,000 Ib).
TS3 Maximum for any 1 day:
1.7 kg/kkg of seafood (1.7
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.69 kg/
kkg of seafood (0.69 lb/
1,000 lb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.14 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.141b/l,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.05?
kg/kkg of seafood (0.057
lb/l,0001b).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.75 Prelreatment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307 (c) of the Act, for a source
within the dungeness and tanner crab
processing in the contiguous States sub-
category, which is an industrial user of
a publicly owned treatment works (and
which would be a new source subject to
section 306 of the Act, if it were to dis-
charge pollutants to navigable waters),
shall be the standard set forth in Part
128 of this title, except that for the
purposes of this section, § 128.133 of this
title shall be amended to read as follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
In 5 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
incompatible pollutants Introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the stand-
ard of performance for new sources speci-
fied in § 408.74, 40 CPB, Part 408 provided
that, If the publicly owned treatment works
which receives the pollutants is committed,
in its NPDES permit, to remove a specified
percentage of any Incompatible pollutant,
the pretreatment standard applicable to users
of such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart H—Alaskan Shrimp Processing
Subcategory
§ 408.80 Applicability; description of
the Alaskan shrimp processing sub-
category.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
shrimp in Alaska.
§ 408.81 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the meth-
od described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Waste," 1971, En-
vironmental Protection Agency, Analyti-
cal Quality Control Laboratory, page 217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean
the raw material, including freshwater
and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
processed, In the form in which It Is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
PROPOSED RULES
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended nonfllterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1,000 kilograms, and (5) "lb"
shall mean pound (s).
§ 408.82 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction altainahle by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
achievable by a point source subject to
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
360 kg/kkg of seafood (360
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 120
kkg of seafood (66 lb/
kg/kkg of seafood (120 lb/
1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
320 kg/kkg of seafood (320
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 210
kg/kkg of seafood (210
lb/1,000 lb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (5.5 lb/
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 13
kg/kkg of seafood (13 lb/
1,000 lb).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.83 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants
or pollutant properties which may be
discharged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 160
kg/kkg of seafood (16O
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 64 kg/
kkg of seafood (64 lb/
1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 140
kg/kkg of seafood (140
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 56 kg/
kkg of seafood (56 lb/
1,000 lb).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 5.5
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (5.5 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 2.2 kg/
kkg of seafood (2.2 lb/
1,000 lb).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.84 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants
or pollutant properties which may be
discharged reflecting the greatest de-
gree of effluent reduction achievable
through application of the best avail-
able demonstrated control technology,
processes, operating methods, or other
alternatives, including, where prac-
ticable, a standard permitting no dis-
charge of pollutants by a new point
source subject to the provisions of this
subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 300
kg/kkg of seafood (300 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 100 kg/
kkg of seafood (100 lb/
1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 270
kg/kkg of seafood (270 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 180 kg/
kkg of seafood (180 lb/
1,000 lb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 33
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (33 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 11 kg/
kkg of seafood (11 lb/
1,000 lb).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.85 Pretreatment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under sec-
tion 307(c) of the Act, for a source with-
in the Alaskan shrimp processing sub-
category, which Is an industrial user of
a publicly owned treatment works (and
which would be a new source subject to
section 306 of the Act, if it were to dis-
charge pollutants to navigable waters),
shall be the standard set forth in Part
128 of this title, except that for the pur-
poses of this section, § 128.133 of this
title, shall be amended to read as follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
In 9 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
incompatible pollutants introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing Industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
§ 408.84, 40 CFB, Part 408, provided that, if
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in Its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified percent-
age of any incompatible pollutant, the pre-
treatment standard applicable to users of
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
314
PROPOSED RlrtES
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart I—Northern Shrimp Processing
of More Than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of
Raw Material Per Day in the Contiguous
States Subcategory
§ 408.90 Applicability; description of
the Northern shrimp processing of
more than 1816 kg (4000 Its) of
raw material per day in the contigu-
ous Stales subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
shrimp in the Northern contiguous
States; including Washington. Oregon,
California, Maine. New Hampshire, and
Massachusetts. The effluent limitations
contained in subpart I are applicable to
facilities which process more than 1816
kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material per day
on any day during a calendar year.
§ 408.91 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the meth-
od describing in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Waste," 1971, En-
vironmental Protection Agency, Analyt-
ical Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall-mean the
raw material, including freshwater and
saltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-
essed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BOD5" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, <2> "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogramisi, (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "Ib"
shall mean pound(s).
§ 408.92 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction attainable by the applica-
tion of the best practicable control
technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day:
180 kg'kkg of seafood (180
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days:
70 kg/kkg ol seafood (70
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
40 kg/kkg of seafood (40
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
SO consecutive days:
16 kg/kkg of seafood (16
lb/1,000 Ib).
Effluent
characteristic
Oil and
grease.
pH.
Effluent limitation
Maximum for any 1 day:
16 kg/kkg of seafood (16
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days:
6.3 kg/kkg of seafood (6.3
lb/1,000 Ib).
Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.93 Effluent limitations guidelines
representing the degree of effluent
reduction obtainable by the applica-
tion of the best available technology
economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the
best available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day: 7.6
kg/kkg of seafood (7.6 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 3.8 kg/
kkg of seafood (3.8 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 19
kg/kkg of seafood (19 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 9.6
kg/kkg of seafood (9.6 Ib/
1,000 Ib").
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 0.48
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (0.48
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.24
kg/kkg of seafood (0.24
lb/1,000 Ib).
PH Within the range of 60
to 9.0.
§ 408.94 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through
application of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes, op-
erating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day: 155
kg/kkg of seafood (155 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 62 kg/
kkg of seafood (62 lb/1,000
Ib).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 38
kg/kkg of seafood (38 lt>/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 15 kg/
kkg of seafood (15 lb/1,000
Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 14
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (14 Ib/
1,000 1'b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 6.7 kg/
kkg of seafood (5.7 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0
to 9.0.
§ 408.95 Pretreatment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act, for a source
within the Northern shrimp processing
of more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw
material per day in the contiguous States
subcategory, which is an industrial user
of a publicly owned treatment works
(and which would be a new source sub-
ject to section 306 of the Act, if it were to
discharge pollutants to navigable
waters), shall be the standard set forth
In Part 128 of this title, except that for
the purposes of this section, § 128.133 of
this title shall be amended to read as
follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
in § 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
incompatible pollutants introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
5 408.94. 40 CFB, Part 408, provided that, if
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, In its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
centage of any incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart J—Northern Shrimp Processing of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or Less of Raw
Material Per Day in the Contiguous
States Subcategory
§408.100 Applicability; description of
the Northern shrimp processing of
1816 kg (4,000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day in the contiguous
States subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
shrimp in the Northern contiguous
States, Including Washington, Oregon,
California, Maine, New Hampshire, and
Massachusetts. The effluent limitations
contained In Subpart J are applicable to
facilities which process 1816 kg (4000 Ibs)
or less of raw material per day.
§ 408.101 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described to "Methods for Chemical
Ko. 26—Pt n-
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
315
PROPOSED RULES
Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1971,
Environmental Protection Agency, Ana-
lytical Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean the
raw material, including freshwater and
saltwater fish and shellfish, to be proc-
essed, in the form in which it is received
at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BOOS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids,
(3) "kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4)
"kkg" shall mean 1000 kilograms, and
(5) "Ib" shall mean pound(s).
§ 408.102 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of efflu-
ent reduction attainable by the ap-
plication of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
360 kg/kkg of seafood
(360 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 120
kg/kkg of seafood (120 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
160 kg/kkg of seafood (160
lb/l,000'lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 54
kg/kkg of seafood (54 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 96 kg/kkg of seafood (96
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 32
kg/kkg of seafood (32 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.103 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of efflu-
ent reduction obtainable by the ap-
plication of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent Effluent limitation
characteristic
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
155 kg/kkg of seafood (155
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 62
kg/kkg of seafood (62 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Effluent
oharacteriitie Effluent limitation
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
38 kg/kkg of seafood (38
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 16
kg/kkg of seafood (15 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 14 kg/kkg of seafood (14
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 5.7
kg/kkg of seafood (5.7 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.104 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes, op-
erating- methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
155 kg/kkg of seafood (155
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 62
kg/kkg of seafood (62 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
38 kg/kkg of seafood (38
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 15
kg/kkg of seafood (15 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 14 kg/kkg of seafood (14
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 6.7
kg/kkg of seafood (5.7 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.105 Prelrealnient standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under sec-
tion 307 (c) of the Act, for a source within
the Northern shrimp processing of 1816
kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw material per
day in the contiguous States subcategory,
which is an industrial user of a publicly
owned treatment works (and which
would be a new source subject to section
306 of the Act, if it were to discharge
pollutants to navigable waters), shall be
the standard set forth in Part 128 of this
title, except that for the purposes of this
section, § 128.133 of this title, shall be
amended to read as follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
in § 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
Incompatible pollutants Introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing Industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified In
§ 408.104, 40 CFB, Part 408, provided that, If
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, In Its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified percent-
age of any incompatible pollutant, the pre-
treatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart K—Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp
Processing of More Than 1816 kg (4000
Ibs) of Raw Material Per Day in the
Contiguous States Subcategory
§ 408.110 Applicability; description of
the Southern non-breaded shrimp
processing of more than 1816 kg
(4000 Ibs) of raw material per day
in the contiguous States subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
non-breaded shrimp in the Southern
contiguous States, including North and
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Ala-
bama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas.
The effluent limitations contained in Sub-
part K are applicable to facilities which
process more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of
raw material per day on any day during
a calendar year.
§408.111 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amendable to measurement by the
method described in "Methods for Chem-
ical Analysis of Water and Wastes,"
1971, Environmental Protection Agency,
Analytical Quality Control Laboratory,
page 217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean
the raw material, including freshwater
and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
processed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "Ib"
shall mean pound(s).
§408.112 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of efflu-
ent reduction attainable by the ap-
plication of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently available.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants
or pollutant properties which may
be discharged after application of the
best practicable control technology cur-
rently available by a point source subject
to the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
70 kg/kkg of seafood (70
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 28
kg/kkg of seafood (28 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
316
PROPOSED RULES
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
28 kg/kkg of seafood (28
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 11
kg/kkg of seafood (11
lb/1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 4.6 kg/kkg of seafood (4.5
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dany
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 1.8
kg/kKg of seafood (1.8
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.113 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of
effluent reductio'n obtainable by the
application of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically achiev-
able by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day: 6.0
kg/kkg of seafood (6.0 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 3.0 kg/
Ktcg of seafood (3.0 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 15
kg/Meg of seafood (15 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 7.6 kg/
kkg of seafood (7.6 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
OH and Maximum for any 1 day: 0.38
grease, fcg/kkg of seafood (0.38
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.19 kg/
kSg of seafood (0.19 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.114 Standards of performance
for new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes, op-
erating methods, or other alternatives,
Including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effl u-ent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 63
kg/kkg of seafood (63 Ib/
1.000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 25 kg/
y.kg of seafood (25 lb/1,000
Ib).
Effluent
e&aracterls&o
TB3
Effluent Umitation
for any 1 day: 35
Sg/kkg of seafood (35 BV
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 10
kg/kkg of seafood (10 H>/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 4.0
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (4.0 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 1.6 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.6 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.115 Pretreatment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act, for a source
within the Southern non-breaded shrimp
processing of more than 1816 kg (4000
Ibs) of raw material per day In the con-
tiguous States subcategory, which is an
industrial user of a publicly owned treat-
ment works (and which would be a new
source subject to section 306 of the Act,
if it were to discharge pollutants to
navigable waters), shall be the standard
set forth In Part 128 of this title except
that for the purposes of this section,
I 128.133 of this title shall be amended to
read as follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
In § 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
Incompatible pollutants Introduced Into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing Industry shall be the standard
erf performance for new sources specified In
§ 408.114, 40 OFR, Part 408, provided that, If
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in Its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
centage of any Incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users
of such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart L—Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp
Processing 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or
Less of Raw Material Per Day in the
Contiguous States Subcategory
§ 408.120 Applicability; description of
the Southern non-breaded shrimp
processing of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or
less of raw material per day in the
contiguous States subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
non-breaded shrimp in the Southern
contiguous States, including North and
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Ala-
bama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas.
The effluent limitations contained in
Subpart L are applicable to faculties
which process 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less
of raw material per day.
§ 408.121 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes", 1971,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Analytical Quality Control Laboratory,
page 217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean
the raw material, Including freshwater
and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
processed, In the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BOD5" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "Ib"
shall mean pound(s).
§ 408.122 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of ef-
fluent reduction attainable by the
application of the best practicable
control technology currently avail-
able.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 140
kg/kfcg of seafood (140 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 46 kg/
kkg of seafood (46 lb/1,000
Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 110
kg/Kkg of seafood (110 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 38 kg/
kkg of seafood (36 Bb/1,000
Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 27
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (27 lib/
1,000 lib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 9 kg/
kkg of seafood (9 lb/1,000
Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.123 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of ef-
fluent reduction obtainable by the
application of the best available tech-
nology economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be
discharged after application of the
best available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 63
kg/kkg of seafood (63 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 25 kg/
kkg of seafood (25 lb/1,000
Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 26
kg/kkg of seafood (25 W
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 10 kg/
kkg of seafood (10 lb/1,000
Ib).
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
317
Effluent
characteristic
Oil and
grease.
PH
Effluent limitation
Maximum for any 1 day: 4.0
kg/kkg of seafood (4.0 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 1.6 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.6 lb/
1,000 lb).
Within the range of 6.0
to 9.0.
§ 108.124 Standards of performance
for new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes, op-
erating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 63
kg/kkg of seafood (63 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 25 kg/
kkg of seafood (26 lt>/l,000
lb).
T3S Maximum for any 1 day: 25
kg/kkg of seafood (25 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 10 kg/
kkg of seafood (10 lb/
1,000 lb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 4
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (4 lb/
1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 1.6 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.6 lb/
1,000 lb).
pH - -.. Within the range of 6.0
to 9.0.
§ 408.125 Prelrcalment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307 (c) of the act, for a source
within the Southern non-breaded shrimp
processing of 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of
raw material per day in the contiguous
States subcategory, which is an indus-
trial user of a publicly owned treatment
works (and which would be a new source
subject to section 306 of the Act, if it
were to discharge pollutants to navigable
waters), shall be the standard set forth
in Part 128 of this title, except that for
the purposes of this section, § 128.133 of
this title, shall be amended to read as
follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
In § 128.131, the pretreatment standard lor
incompatible pollutants Introduced Into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing Industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
§ 408.124, 40 CFB, Part 408, provided that. If
the publicly owned treatment works which
PROPOSED RULES
receives the pollutants Is committed, tu Its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
centage of any Incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart M—Breaded Shrimp Processing of
More Than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of Raw
Material Per Day in the Contiguous
States Subcategory
§ 408.130 Applicability; description of
the breaded shrimp processing of
more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of
raw material per day in the contigu-
ous States subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to dischargse of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
breaded shrimp in the contiguous States
facilities which process more than 1816
kg (4000 Ibs) of raw material per day on
any day during a calendar year.
§ 408.131 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a) The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the method
described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1971,
Environmental Protection Agency, Ana-
lytical Quality Control Laboratory, page
217.
(b) The term "seafood" shall mean
the raw material, including freshwater
and saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
processed, in the form in which it is re-
ceived at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" shall mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids, (3)
"kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4) "kkg"
shall mean 1000 kilograms, and (5) "lb"
shall mean pound (s).
§ 408.132 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of ef-
fluent reduction attainable by the
application of the best practicable
control technology currently avail-
able.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
125 kg/kkg of seafood
(125 lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of dally
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 50
kg/kkg of seafood (50 lb/
1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
70 kgAkg of seafood (70
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 28
kg/kkg of seafood (28 lb/
1,000 lb).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 4.5 kg/kkg of seafood (4.5
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 1.8
kg/kkg of seafood (1.8 lb/
1,000 lb).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.133 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of ef-
fluent reduction obtainable by the
application of the best available
technology economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
9.2 kg/kkg of seafood (9.2
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 4.6
kg/kkg of seafood (4.6
lb/1,000 lb).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 24
kg/kkg of seafood (24
lb/l,0001b).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
3O consecutive days: 12
kg/kkg of seafood (12 lb/
l.OOOlb).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 0.58 kg/kkg of seafood
(0.58 lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
mines for any period of 30
consecutive days: 0.29 kg/
kkg of seafood (0.29 lb/
l.OOOlb).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.134 Standards of performance
for new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree
of effluent reduction achievable through
application of the best available demon-
started control technology, processes, op-
erating methods, or other alternatives,
including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants
by a point source subject to the provi-
sions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day: 10O
kg/kkg of seafood (100
lb/1,000 lb).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 40 kg/
kkg of seafood (40 lb/
1,000 lb).
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
318
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 55
kg/teg of seafood (55 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 22
Sg/Ttkg of seafood (22 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 3.8
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (3.8 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days- 1.5
kg/kkg of seafood (1 5
lb/1.000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.135 Pretrealment standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act, for a source
within the breaded shrimp processing of
more than 1816 kg (4000 Ibs) of raw ma-
terial per day In the contiguous States
subcategory, which is an industrial user
of a publicly owned treatment works
(and which would be a new source sub-
ject to section 306 of the Act, if it were
to discharge pollutants to navigable
waters), shall be the standard set forth
in Part 128 of this title, except that for
the purposes of this section, § 128 133
of this title, shall be amended to" read
as follows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
In 5 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
incompatible pollutants introduced into a
publicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
i; 408 134, 40 CPK, Part 408. provided that,
if the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
centage of any incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works shall be correspond-
ingly reduced for that pollutant."
Subpart N—Breaded Shrimp Processing of
1816 kg (40OO Ibs) or Less of Raw Ma-
terial Per Day in the Contiguous States
Subcategory
§ 408.140 Applicability: description of
the breaded shrimp processing of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw
material per day in the contiguous
Stales subcategory.
The provisions of this subpart are ap-
plicable to discharges of process waste
water pollutants from the processing of
breaded shrimp in the contiguous States
by facilities which process 1816 kg (4000
Ibs) or less of raw material per day.
§ 408.141 Specialized definitions.
For the purpose of this subpart:
(a i The term "oil and grease" shall
mean those components of a waste water
amenable to measurement by the meth-
od described in "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1971,
Environmental Protection Agency, Ana-
htioal Quality Control Laboratory, page
'1 7
'b> The term "seafood" shall mean
''"'? raw material, Including freshwater
-'d saltwater fish and shellfish, to be
PROPOSED RULES
processed, in the form in which it is
received at the processing plant.
(c) The following abbreviations shall
have the following meanings: (1)
"BODS" srin.li mean 5-day biochemical
oxygen demand, (2) "TSS" shall mean
total suspended non-filterable solids,
(3) "kg" shall mean kilogram(s), (4)
"kkg" shall mean 1000 kilograms, and
(5) "Ib" shall mean pound(s).
§ 408.142 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of ef-
fluent reduction attainable by the
application of the best practicable
control technology currently avail-
able.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
practicable control technology currently
available by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day: 250
kg/kkg of seafood (250 Ib/
l.OOO Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 84 kg/
kkg of seafood (84 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day: 280
kg/kkg of seafood (280 Ita/
l.OOO Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 93 kg/
kkg of seafood (93 Ib/
1.000 Ib).
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day: 27
grease. kg/kkg of seafood (27 Ita/
1,000 Ib).
Maxinrum average of daily
values for any period of 30
consecutive days: 9 kg/
kkg of seafood (9 Ib/
1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.143 Effluent limitations guide-
lines representing the degree of ef-
fluent reduction obtainable by the
application of the best available
technology economically achievable.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged after application of the best
available technology economically
achievable by a point source subject to
the provisions of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic. Effluent limitation
BODS Maximum for any 1 day:
100 kg/kkg of seafood
(100 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 40
kg/kkg of seafood (40
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
55 kg/kkg of seafood
(55 lb/1,000 Ita).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 22
kg/kkg of seafood (22
lb/1,000 Ib).
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 3.8 kg/kkg of seafood
(3.8 lb/1,000 lt>).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 1.5
kg/kkg of seafood (1.5
lb/1,000 Ib).
pH Within the range of 6.0 to
9.0.
§ 408.144 Standards of performance for
new sources.
The following limitations constitute
the quantity or quality of pollutants or
pollutant properties which may be dis-
charged reflecting the greatest degree of
effluent reduction achievable through ap-
plication of the best available demon-
strated control technology, processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives,
Including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants by
a point source subject to the provisions
of this subpart:
Effluent
characteristic Effluent limitation
BOD5 Maximum for any 1 day:
100 kg/kkg of seafood
(100 lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 40
kg/kkg of seafood (40
lb/1,000 Ib).
TSS Maximum for any 1 day:
55 kg/kkg of seafood (55
lb/1,000 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of
30 consecutive days: 22
kg/kkg of seafood (22
lb/1,000 Ib) .
Oil and Maximum for any 1 day:
grease. 3.8 kg/kkg of seafood (3.8
lta/1,00 Ib).
Maximum average of daily
values for any period of SO
consecutive days: 1.5 kg/
kkg of seafood (1.5 Ib/
1.000 Ita).
pH Within the range of 6 0 to
9.0.
§ 408.145 Pretrcalnient standards for
new sources.
The pretreatment standards under
section 307(c) of the Act, for a source
within the breaded shrimp processing of
1816 kg (4000 Ibs) or less of raw material
per day in the contiguous States subcate-
gory, which is an industrial user of a
publicly owned treatment works (and
which would be a new source subject to
section 306 of the Act, if it were to dis-
charge pollutants to navigable waters),
shall be the standard set forth in Part
128 of this title, except that for the pur-
poses of this section, § 128.133 of this
title, shall be amended to read as fol-
lows:
"In addition to the prohibitions set forth
in § 128.131, the pretreatment standard for
incompatible pollutants introduced into a
putalicly owned treatment works by a major
contributing industry shall be the standard
of performance for new sources specified in
§ 408.144, 40 CPB, Part 408, provided that, if
the publicly owned treatment works which
receives the pollutants is committed, in its
NPDES permit, to remove a specified per-
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 39, NO. 26—WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974
-------
PROPOSED RULES
oentoco of any Incompatible pollutant, the
pretreatment standard applicable to users of
such treatment works sliall be correspond-
-ly reduced for U»at pollutant."
;part O—Tuna Processing Subeategory
§400.150 Applicability; description of
Uic luiia pro
-------
321
APPENDIX D
VIBRIO STUDIES
-------
323
APPENDIX D
VIBRIO STUDIES
Vibrio species as indicators of pollution from seafood processing
wastes have received very little attention in water quality surveys.
V. parahaemolyticus is pathogenic to man. In Japan, where seafood
is eaten raw, it is the major bacterial cause of epidemic gastroenter-
1 2/
itis, accounting for 40 to 50 percent of the food-borne infections,—'—
In the United States, V. parahaemolijticus has been implicated in uncon-
firmed and confirmed outbreaks of food-borne illnesses associated with
consumption of seafood. Between August 1969 and October 1972, there
were eight separately confirmed outbreaks of vibriosis and five uncon-
3/
firmed episodes of this disease.— Additionally, some strains may
4/
cause localized tissue infections in humans.—
V. parahaemolytieus and other vibrios have been found to be asso-
ciated with moribund crab, numerous types of diseased fish, clams,
, . j 5,6,7,8,9,107 „., . - ,
oysters, shrimp and eels.— — — — — — Vibrios are also known to occur
in high densities in marina environments which contain chitinous materi-
als such as exoskeletons of marine life.—
Because of the limited use of this parameter in the past, no
restrictive limits have been placed on Vibrio species as an indicator
of a health hazard to either man or marine commercial species. Restric-
tions for V. parahaemolyt-icus densities imposed by the U. S. Food and
Drug Administration on marketable seafood products are forthcoming.
These criteria will be concerned only with the health hazards resul-
ting from consumption of contaminated seafood. The adverse effects on
-------
324
marine commercial species is another matter entirely. Establishment
of a criterion in this area will require much more information on the
ecology, distribution and role of these microorganisms in the marine
environment. It is logical to predict that high densities of these
organisms in a particular area would impose a threat to marine commer-
cial species. To date there is no information in the literature on
the densities of Vibrio that would endanger marine life. However, con-
ditions that caused the bacteria to be concentrated in the hundreds of
thousands per 100 ml in water or sediment would, no doubt, be hazardous
and grounds for abatement procedures.
Vibrio densities below one thousand per 100 ml in water or sedi-
ment would be considered doubtful as a possible threat to marine com-
mercial species. Therefore, no attempt is made to apply a definite
limit as standard to Vibrio species. At this time, and until additional
data become available, speculation regarding the levels of concern of
Vibrio species constituting hazardous conditions becomes a matter of
common sense and conjecture.
This investigation was initiated to determine if vibrios were
associated with the wastes and surrounding marine environment adjacent
to seafood processing plants in Southeastern Alaska, and to ascertain
if a hazard to marine commercial species may result from these processes.
-------
325
REFERENCES
1. Zen-Yoji, H., Vibrio parahaemolyticus symposium, June 12, 1968,
Department of Agriculture, Consumer and Marketing Service,
Baltimore, Md., 1968.
2. Bacteriological Analytical-Manual, Department of Health, Education
and Welfare, Division of Microbiology, Food and Drug Administration,
3rd ed., Washington, D.C. , 1972.
3. Morbidity and Mortality, Surveillance Summary, Vibrio parahaemolyticus
Gastroenteritis - United States, 1969-1972, Center for Disease
Control, U. S. Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare, Washington,
D. C., Vol. 22, No. 27, July 7, 1973.
4. Twedt, R. E. , R. E. Novelli, P. L. Spaulding, and H. E. Hall,
"Comparative Hemolytic Activity of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and
Related Vibrios," Infection and Immunity, Vol. 1, No. 4 (p. 394-
399), 1970.
5. Krantz, G. Z., et al., "Vibrio parahaemolytiaus from the Blue Crab,
Callineotes sapidus, in Chesapeake Bay," Science, Vol. 164 (p. 1286-
1287), 1969.
6. Pacha, R. E., and E. D. Kiehn, "Characterization and Relatedness of
Marine Vibrios Pathogenic to Fish: Physiology, Serology and
Epidemiology." J. Bacteriol, Vol. 100 (p. 1242-1247), 1969.
7. Rucker, R. R., Vibrio Infectious Among Marine and Freshwater Fish,"
The Progressive Fish-Culturist, p. 22-24, Jan. 1959.
8. Tubiash, H. S., R. R. Colwell, and R. Sakayaki, "Marine Vibrios
Associated with Bacillary Necrosis - A Disease of Larval and Juvenile
Bivalve Mollusks," J. Bacteriol, Vol. 103 (p. 272-273), 1970.
9. Vanderzantz, C. R., R. R. Nickelson,and J. C. Parker, "Isolation of
Vibrio parahaemolyticus from Gulf Coast Shrimp," Journ. Milk and Food,
Vol. 33 (p. 161-162), 1970.
10. Bergman, A. M., "Die rote Beulenkramkheit des Crabs. Bes. a.d. Kgl.
Bayes," Biol. Vers. Statt, Munchen, Vol. 2 (p. 10-54), 1909.
11. Kaneko, T. and R. R. Colwell, "Ecology of Vibrio parahaemolyticus
in Chesapeake Bay," J. Bacteriol, Vol. 113 (p. 24-32), 1973.
-------
327
APPENDIX E
MATERIALS AND METHODS
-------
329
APPENDIX E
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RECEIVING WATER QUALITY DATA
Water quality was determined at stations established on the basis
of general water movement and the points of discharge of cannery wastes.
At each station the following parameters were measured: dissolved
oxygen content, temperature, salinity, transparency, and pH.
Water samples were taken at each station from near the surface and
bottom during high slack and low slack water. In localities where low
tides exposed extensive mud flats sampling was limited to only high
slack water. In instances of considerable depths (e.g. Chatham - 60
meters) the deeper samples were obtained from standard depths of 30
meters. At least one or two stations at each cannery site were selected
to serve as controls.
Water samples for dissolved oxygen determinations were collected
with a Van Dorn sampler, transferred to standard 300 ml BOD bottles and
chemically fixed in the field. Upon completion of the field sampling DO
measurements were made by the azide modification of the Winkler method.—
Temperature of the water sample from near the bottom was determined
immediately when it reached the surface. Surface water temperature was
obtained from a grab sample. A bimetallic dial thermometer with a 0.5
percent accuracy over full range was used during the entire survey.
Salinity measurements were made at all water quality stations with
hydrometers, calibrated to National Bureau of Standards (NBS) requirements,
-------
330
The majority of pH measurements were obtained with a pH kit, having
an accuracy of + 0.50 standard units. However, on the Alaska Peninsula
pH was measured with a pH meter accurate within +0.10 standard units.
Transparency of the water was determined using a standard 20 cm
diameter Secchi disc.
A series of sediment samples were obtained at each cannery using
either a Peterson or "snapper" grab to ascertain the distribution
pattern of solid wastes from the seafood processing operations and the
2/
resulting carbon/nitrogen ratio of the sediments [Figure 1].— The
carbon/nitrogen ratio was used to compute an "organic sediment index"
(OSI) that reflects the amount of decomposable organic material present
in the sediment. OSI values from 0.0 to 0.5 indicate inorganic or
stable organic materials; between 0.5 and 1 indicate sediment containing
partially stabilized material; between 1 and 5 indicate decomposing
materials; and values above 5 indicate extremely active decomposition
[Figure 2].-7
The samples were first dried at 50°C for approximately 16 hr, then
ground with a mortar and pestle to pass a Tyler #40 sieve. For the
organic carbon analysis, triplicate aliquots of each sieved sample were
accurately weighed on a Cahn G-2 electrobalance and transferred to a
glass ampule. The digestion reagents, 0.25 ml of 6 percent H PO and
0.2g of K2S?Og, were then added to each ampule and the volume of the
mixture was made up to 10 ml with distilled water. After purging with
oxygen to remove the inorganic carbon components, the ampules were
-------
331
1 9 —
1 8 —
1 7 —
1 6 —
1 5 —
1 4 -
1 3 —
1 2 -
1 1 -
1 O -
9 —
8 —
7 —
6 -
5 -
4 —
3 —
—
1 —
TYPE II
HIGH CARBON,
LITTLE NITROGEN
CONTRIBUTION,
SLOW OXYGEN
DEMAND
TYPE 1
INORGANIC OR
AGED, STABILIZED
ORGANIC
DEPOSITS
1
O.I O
TYPE IV
ACTIVELY DECOMPOSING SEDIMENTS,
HIGH POTENTIAL NITROGEN RELEASE
AND HICN OXYGEN DEMAND
TYPE III
NITROGENOUS, SUBSTANTIAL NITROGEN CONTRIBUTION,
FURTHER STABILIZATION LIKELY
1 1 1 I 1 i 1
2 O.3 O.4 O.5 O.6 O.7 O.8 O.9
PERCENT ORGANIC NITROGEN
Figure 1.Bottom Sediment Classification
1 O
9 —
7 —
4 —
O.5
ACTIVELY DECOMPOSING SLUDGE, FRESH SEWAGE,
MATTED ALGAE, PACKINGHOUSE WASTE
SEWAGE SLUDGE, DECAYING VEGETATION,
PULP AND PAPER WASTES, SUGAR BEET WASTES
ORGANIC DETRITUS, PEAT, PARTIALLY STABILIZED SLUDGE
SAND, CLAY, OLD STABLE SLUDGE
Figure 2.Organic Sediment Index for Typical Bottom Deposits
-------
332
sealed and digested in an autoclave for 12 hr. Distilled water sucrose
standards were taken through the same procedure and analyzed concur-
rently with the sediment samples on an Oceanography International Model
0524 Carbon Analyzer. Organic nitrogen in the sediment samples was de-
termined by the micro Kjeldahl procedure after the samples had been
pretreated to eliminate ammonia.
Although no concerted effort was placed on determining the presence
or absence of benthic organisms in the vicinity of canneries, visual
observations were made of exposed intertidal zones and occasional
bottom grabs.
BACTERIOLOGY
Sampling
All water and wastewater samples were collected according to
procedures prescribed in the 13th edition of "Standard Methods for the
2/
Examination of Water and Wastewater."— Seafood waste samples
(approximately 200 grams) were collected in sterile 6 oz "Whirlpak"
plastic bags. Bottom sediments were collected using a Peterson or
"snapper" grab which was thoroughly rinsed and air dried prior to
resampling. Sterile tongue depressors were used to scrape approximately
200 grams of the top 0.50 to 1.0 cm of mud which was asceptically placed
in the sterile plastic bags. Where possible, bottom samples consisting
of the uppermost layer (0.5 to 1.0 cm) of mud were collected at the in-
tertidal zone. Background samples of water and sediment were collected
from remote areas uninfluenced by seafood processing operations.
Coliform and Vibrio samples were collected during low slack tides.
-------
333
Sample Storage and Handling
Samples for coliform determinations were stored in ice chests con-
taining "slush ice" and were held at less than 5°C until analyses.
Vibrio samples were held until analyses in styrofoam insulated containers,
which retained their original temperature within 1.0°C. All samples
were analyzed within 6 to 8 hr after collection.
Culture
Cultures of V. parahaemolyticus, V. alginolyticus and V. anguiliarium
used for control purposes were furnished by R. R. Colwell, University of
Maryland; Morris Fishbein, U. S. Food and Drug Administration; and R. E.
Weaver, National Center for Disease Control.
Isolation Procedures
Total and fecal coliform analyses were performed using the five-
2/
tube Most Probable Number technique (MPN).—
Samples for Vibrio analyses were prepared by blending 50 gram
portions of sediment or seafood waste with 450 ml (1:10) of sterile
saline solution for one minute at 8,000 rpm. A three-tube MPN series
was prepared according to procedures described in the Bacteriological
3 /
Analytical Manual— by innoculating three 10 ml portions of the 1:10
dilution into three tubes containing 10 ml each of double strength
glucose-salt-teepol broth (GSTB). Additional decimal dilutions were
innoculated into appropriate banks of three tubes of single strength
GSTB. After 20 to 24 hr incubation at 35°C, all GSTB tubes were
streaked onto duplicate plates of thiosulfate-citrate-bile salts-sucrose
-------
334
agar (TCBS). Colonies suspected to be Vibrio were innoculated into
triple sugar iron agar (TSI) and motility media, each containing 3 per-
cent NaCl. TSI reactions showing acid-butt alkaline or acid slant,
negative gas, negative H.S and positive motility were subjected to
cytochrome oxidase testing using Pathotec strips. If cultures were
oxidase negative, biochemical testing was terminated; if they were
oxidase positive, cultures were further tested biochemically (as des-
cribed below) for confirmation of Vibrio.
For water samples the above procedure was performed as described
except that 10 ml of sample was used as the maximum volume of the three-
tube MPN series.
Confirmation of Vibrio
All suspect isolates that conformed to the screening procedures
described above were tested for the following biochemical patterns.
V. parahaemolyticus = (-) arginine dihydrolase, (+) lysine decar-
boxylase, (-) methyl red, (-) Voges-Proskauer, (-) indole, acid form-
ation in glucose both aerobically and anaerobically, (-) cellobiose, (-)
sucrose, (+) maltose, (+) mannitol, (+) trehalose, [(+) growth in broth
containing 0% NaCl, (+) 6% NaCl, (+) 8% NaCl, (-) 10% NaCl], (+) growth
at 42°C, pleomorphic, Gram-negative bacilli.
V- alginolyticus = (-) arginine dihydrolase, (+) lysine decarboxylase,
(+) Voges-Proskauer, (-) methyl red, (+) indole, acid formation in
glucose both aerobically and anaerobically, (-) cellobiose, (+) sucrose,
(+) maltose, (-) mannitol, (+) trehalose [(-) growth in broth containing
0% NaCl, (+) 6% NaCl, (+) 8% NaCl, (+) 10% NaCl]; (+) growth at 42°C,
pleomorphic, Gram-negative bacilli.
-------
335
REFERENCES
1. Standard Methods For the Examination of Water and Wastewater,
American Public Health Association, 13th Ed. New York, 1971.
2. Ballinger, D. G. and G. D. McKee, "Chemical Characterization of
Bottom Sediments," Journ. of Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 43, No. 2., Feb. 1971.
3. Bacteriological Analytical Manual, Department of Health, Education
and Welfare, 3rd Ed., Division of Microbiology, Food and Drug
Administration, Washington, D.C., May, 1972.
GPO 857-519
------- |