EPA-600/3-83-083
                                                 September  1983
EFFECTS ON TOXICTTY OF VOLATILE PRIORITY POLLUTANTS

ADDED TO A CONVENTIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
                         by
  Timothy W.  Neiheisel and William B. Homing
  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
  Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth/Mewtown
  Cincinnati, Ohio  45244

  Albert C.  Petrasek, Jr.
  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
  Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
  Cincinnati, Ohio  45268

  Vivian R.  Asberry, Debbe A.  Jones,  Ronda L. Marcum
    and Christopher T.  Hall
  Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
  University of Cincinnati
  Cincinnati, Ohio 45221
         ENVIRONMENTAL  RESEARCH LABORATORY
        U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                  DULUTH, MN  55804

-------
                                    TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
  EPA-600/3-83-083
             3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
                 PB83   0972  i
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 Effects on Toxicity of Volatile Priority Pollutants
 Added to a Conventional Wastewater Treatment  System
             5. REPORT DATE
                September 1983
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHORtS)
 T.W. Neiheisel,  W.B.  Horning, II, A.C. Petrasek,  Jr.
 V.R. Asberry,  D.A.  Jones,  R.L. Marcum, and C.T. Hall
                                                            8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 Environmental  Research Laboratory-Duluth/Newtown
 Cincinnati,  Ohio   45244
                                                            10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
1i. SPONSORING AGENCY NAJyiE AND ADDRESS
 U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
 Environmental Research  Laboratory-Duluth
 6201 Congdon Boulevard
 Duluth, Minnesota  55804
              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE

                 EPA/600/03  "
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
 Static acute,  unaerated,  toxicity tests using  fathead  minnows and Daphnia magna and  a
 bacterial toxicity assay,  Microtox™, were conducted on  samples of influent and
 ef.fluent from  two  conventional activated sludge pilot  wastewater treatment systems.
 The two pilot  treatment systems (A and B) were constructed  and operated in an identical
 manner except  that  a  mixture of 16 volatile priority pollutants was continuously added
 to the influent  of  the experimental, B system.  The common,  unspiked influent for  both
 systems was a  mixed industrial and domestic wastewater.   The volatile priority
 pollutants were  added to  system B to obtain a nominal  concentration of 50 ug/1 each.
 The toxicity tests  were performed on the influent, primary  effluent, and secondary
 effluent samples to determine the acute toxicity  of the  various samples and to compare
 the reduction  in toxicity  across the two treatment systems.   The results of these  tests
 indicated that there  was  no difference in toxicity reduction between the two pilot
 treatment systems  at  the  level of pollutants added.  Toxicity for pairs of similar
 samples, influent  A and B,  primary effluent A and B, and secondary effluent A and  B,
 was essentially  the same.   Even the influent samples,  where  the highest concentration
 of pollutants  would be expected in the B samples, were not  different.
17.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                               b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                           c.  COS AT I Field/Group
IB. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
 RELEASE TO PUBLIC
                                               19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
                                               UNCLASSIFIED
                            21. NO. OF OAGES
                                 21
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
UNCLASSIFIED
                                                                          22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77)   PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE

-------
                      NOTICE

This document has been reviewed in accordance with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication.  Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorse-
ment or recommendation for use.
                       11

-------
Introduction
     The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, P.L.  92-500 and the Clean
Water Act of 1977, P.L. 95-217 require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to
identify toxic materials discharged into the surface waters of the United States
and to promulgate regulations for control of such discharges.  Further,  the Consent
Decree (National Resource Defense Council, et al, vs. Train, 1976) specifically
identifies 129 compounds, known as the "priority pollutants", for which regulations
are to be promulgated.
     To promulgate regulations limiting the discharge of "priority pollutants"
and toxics, information is required on how well toxic pollutants are treated or
removed in waste treatment facilities,  how the pollutants affect the treatment
systems, and where the pollutants are distributed and concentrated or released in
the treatment systems.
     As part of a project by the Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory -
Cincinnati (MERL) to evaluate the behavior and fate of volatile priority pollutants
in conventional, municipal wastewater treatment systems, aquatic toxicity tests
were conducted by staff of the Environmental Research Laboratory - Duluth/Newtown
(ERL-D/N).  The primary objective of the toxicity testing was to biologically
determine toxicity and toxicity removal across conventional treatment systems.
The biological data were then to be used to supplement MERL's physical and chemical
evaluation of the treatment systems.  The volatile organic priority pollutant
study was one of a series of MERL projects designed to determine the capacity of
conventional wastewater treatment systems to treat "priority pollutants".
     Static acute toxicity tests using fathead minnows, Pimephales promelas, and
                                                                        TM
an invertebrate, Daphnia magna, and a bacterial toxicity assay, Microtox

-------
                                                                        2.
 (Beckman Instruments, Inc., Microbics Operations, Carlsbad, California) were con-
 ducted on the influents and effluents from two conventional activated sludge pilot
 treatment systems.  The treatment systems were identical except that a mixture
 of 16 volatile organic priority pollutants was continuously added to one of the
 systems.  The pilot treatment systems were designed, constructed and operated by
MERL at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Test and Evaluation, (T&E
Facility), Cincinnati, Ohio.

Materials and Methods
     Pilot treatment systems.  The treatment systems consisted of two 133 l/nin.
conventional, plug flow, activated sludge systems.  A schematic diagram of the
systems is given in Figure 1. and the operating characteristics of the systems are
given in Table 1.  The control system (A) received a mixed domestic and industrial
waste influent.  The experimental system (B) received the same influent as A except
a mixture of 16 volatile priority pollutants dissolved in methanol was continuously
added to give a nominal concentration of 50 yg/1 each in the influent (Table 2.).
A concentration of 50 yg/1 each was chosen because it was measurable and at the
high end of concentrations of the pollutants typically found in municipal treatment
plant influents.  The detailed description of the operation of the pilot system and
the methods for chemical evaluation are given in Petrasek .
     Sampling and sample handling.  Grab samples for toxicity tests were collected
from sampling ports on the treatment systems.  Primary and secondary effluent
sampling was scheduled, based on calculated and measured detention times of the
treatment systems.  In that way, the primary and secondary effluent samples were
taken from the same plug of waste water from which the influent sample was taken.

-------
                                                                        3.
All samples were collected in stainless steel containers.  Toxicity tests were

begun on the samples within two hours of collection.  Samples for the fish and

Daphnia tests were not treated or modified except for a temperature adjustment.

                    TM
Samples for Microtox   tests were adjusted for both temperature and salinity.

     Dilution water.  Dilution water for the fathead minnow and Daphnia tests, as

well as for culture and holding, was a mixture of dechlorinated, deionized Cincinnati

tap water and Newtown Laboratory spring water made, to an approximate hardness of

200 mg/1 (as CaCCO.  The water was made up at the ERL-Duluth/Newtown Laboratory and

transported to the T&E facility.  At the T&E facility, the water was held at

23 + 3°C and aerated in a covered 2000 liter fiberglass storage tank until used.
                                                  ryiur
Dilution water for the microtox assay was Microtox   Reagent Diluent from Beckman

Instruments, Inc.  Prior to use, the diluent was stored at 2 C.

     Test organisms.  Fathead minnows were obtained from a culture unit at the

EKL-Duluth/Newtown laboratory and Daphnia magna were from a culture maintained at
                                                                             rr*jf
the T&E facility.  Luminescent bacteria, Photobacterium phosphoreum, Microtox

Reagent, were obtained from Beckman Instruments, Inc.  The fathead minnows were

transported to the T&E facility three days before being tested.  They were held at

the T&E facility in a static renewal system in which 9070 of the holding water was

replaced once every 24 hours.  Culture temperatures and holding and acclimation

temperatures were maintained at 23 + 3°C for both fish and Daphnia.  Prior to use

the Microtox   Reagent, bacteria, was refrigerated at 2°C.

     Fish were not fed for 48 hours before use.  Daphnia, however, were fed until

placed in test containers.  The fish used for testing were from 18 to 42 trm in

length and 0.08 to 0.32 gm.  The Daphnia were first instars.

     Toxicity tests.  The fish and Daphnia static acute toxicity tests were
                                                        2
conducted using the basic guidelines outlined by Peltier .  The choice of alter-

native, static, unaerated procedures were dictated by conditions unique to the

-------
                                                                        4.
 study.  Microtox   toxicity assays were conducted according to an assay procedure

                                                        o
 with duplicate determinations, Beckman Instruments, Inc. .


      The  toxicity tests were conducted in two series.  In the first series, only


 influent  and secondary effluent samples were tested for toxicity with fathead


 minnows and  Daphnia.  In the second series influents, primary effluents, and


 secondary effluents were tested with fathead minnow, Daphnia, and Microtox  .


 Test solution volumes for the two series of tests were, respectively, 16 and 8 liters


 for  the fathead minnows and 200 and 100 ml for the Daphnia tests.  Test containers


 for  the fish test were 19.6 liter wide mouth glass jars.  Test containers for the


 Daphnia for  the  two series of test were, respectively, 250 and 150 ml glass beakers.


 Ten  fish were used  per test concentration and control in both series without


 replication.  Eighteen Daphnia were used per test concentration and control, 6 per


 replicate with three replicates.  Duplicate test concentrations and controls were

                    riTiir

 run  for the Microtox   assay as described in the operations manual.  Test tempera-


 tures were nominally 23 + 3°C for die fish and the Daphnia tests and 15°C for the


Microtox   assay.'   Fish test solutions were volume to volume, proportional dilutions


 of sample with diluent water.  Test solutions for the Daphnia were made by taking


 aliquots of  the fish test solutions.  For the fish and the Daphnia, six test


 concentrations and  a control were used.  For Microtox  , four test concentrations


 and  a control were  set up using a serial dilution procedure.  Each test concentration


 for  the fish and Daphnia tests and the Microtox   assay was 0.5 of. the next higher


 concentration.  Fifty percent was usually the high influent and primary effluent


 test  concentration  and 1007o was the high secondary effluent concentration for the

                                   TM
 fish and Daphnia tests and Microtox   assay.  In the second series of tests,


 only 10070 or 100 and 5070 concentrations and a control were usually set up for the


 secondary effluent  samples.

-------
                                                                        5.
     Test duration for the fish, Daphnia, and Microtox was,  respectively, 96 hours,



48 hours, and 15 minutes.



     Chemical and physical measurements.  A multiparameter U-7,  Water Quality Checker



 (Horiba Instrument Corporation, Irvine, California.) was used to measure dissolved



oxygen, pH and temperature initially and every 24 hours during the fish test in all



concentrations.  The same measurements were made for the Daphnia at the end of the



48 hour test period.  The initial fish test measurements were also used as the initial



Daphnia measurements since the Daphnia test solutions were aliquots of the fish test



solutions.  No measurements were made on the Microtox test concentrations because of



the small volume, 1 ml.  Alkalinity and hardness measurements were also made on the



high, medium, and low fish test concentrations and control water at the beginning of



each test using American Public Health Association, et al  procedures.



     Data analysis.  Ninety-six hour LC50 and 48 hour EC50 values with 95% confidence



limits for the fathead minnow and Daphnia tests were calculated using a conputer-



adapted, moving average-angle procedure of Harris .  Microtox   15 min-EC50 values



without confidence limits were calculated using the gama decrease method in the



Microtox   Manual.  Fish and Daphnia LC50 and EC50 values were considered different



when their 957o confidence limits did not overlap.  Microtox values were considered



different if their EC50 values differed by a factor of two.






Results



     Dilution water for the two test series ranged in hardness from 180 to 210 mg/1



(as CaC03), alkalinity from 156 to 182 mg/1 (as CaC03), pH from 8.0 to 8.6, and



dissolved oxygen from 8.4 to 9.3 mg/1.



     Test concentrations for fish and Daphnia during the two series of tests



ranged in hardness from 180 to 308 mg/1, alkalinity from 156 to 232 mg/1, pH from



7.1 to 9.0, dissolved oxygen from <1 to 9.3 mg/1 and temperature from 22 to 27°C.

-------
                                                                        6.
 The high alkalinity and hardness values, the extreme pH and temperature values, and
 the low dissolved oxygen values all occurred in high wastewater concentrations.
     The toxicity test  results for the two series of tests are given in Tables
 3  and 4.  The data in Tables 3 and 4 show that influent and effluent toxicity varied
 and that for both test  series toxicity was reduced both between the influent and
 secondary and between primary and secondary effluents for tests with all species.  In
 general,  the secondary  effluents from both treatment systems A and B were not very
 toxic,  they had LC50 or EC50 values of 50% or greater.  The results, except for
 three tests, essentially show no difference in toxicity between paired influent
 samples (A and B),  primary effluent samples (A and B), and secondary effluent samples
 (A and  B) collected on  the same date.  Paired samples from the two treatment systems
 for the same date give  toxicity test results which might be expected from duplicate
 samples collected from  the same system.  The data also show no significant difference
 in toxicity between influent and primary effluents collected on the same date.
 Control survival was excellent for the two test series with all fathead tests
having  >9070 and rarely  <10070 survival and Daphnia tests having >84?0 survival.
     Additionally,  data for the fathead minnow and for the Daphnia show no
 significant difference  between results for the two species for the same test sample
 or for  similar samples  between treatment system A and B collected the same date.
MLcrotox test data, however, indicate greater toxicity for influent and primary
 effluent  than that shown by the fathead minnow and Daphnia tests.  The results
 for the toxicity  tests  for secondary effluents are essentially similar for all
 species  tested.   Since  50% was the highest test concentration in some of the early
Microtox  tests and since it was not toxic, the EC50 for those tests was greater
 than 507..

-------
                                                                        7.
Discussion



     The alkalinity, hardness, pH, and dissolved oxygen (DO) values of the test



concentrations varied considerably.  The low dissolved oxygen levels associated



with the high test concentrations of influent and primary effluent would be expected



on the basis of the high BOD and ODD of the mixed industrial and domestic waste



which was the influent to .the pilot treatment systems (Table 5).   Although the low



dissolved oxygen in wastewater concentrations above 10% probably added to the



stress of the fish and Daphnia in the influent and primary effluent static tests,



aeration of the samples to raise DO was not considered.   It would have significantly



modified the samples and would have constituted additional treatment of the samples.



Furthermore, volatile toxicants, if present,-would have been stripped by the amount



of aeration required to maintain 607= saturation or greater dissolved oxygen levels



in samples with such high BOD and GOD.  Changes in pH due to aeration might also



have changed anraonia toxicity.  Acmonia was potentially one of the major toxicants



in the influent and primary effluent, as can be seen in the data for Table 5.



Temperature varied more than desired during some of the tests.  However, this



would not invalidate the conclusions within a set of tests for the same date



because conditions would have been similar.



     Overall, the trend of the toxicity data indicated that the spike of volatile



pollutants at the level-dosed caused no added toxicity as seen in the lack of



differences in toxicity between control and spiked influents and effluents.  From



data in the cited literature, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency , for 12



of the 16 compounds, the level of toxicant even for the combination of compounds



(Water Quality Criteria, 1972)  would probably not be expected to cause



acute toxic effects in fathead minnow or Daphnia tests.   The Microtox assay data



would also indicate no effect of the spike, but no literature is available to

-------
                                                                        8.
suggest whether the spike of pollutants at the concentration added should affect



the bacteria used for the test.



     In terms of test sensitivity, the Microtox assays showed lower EC50 values



for the influent and primary effluent tests than comparable fathead minnow and



Daphnia tests.  Some of this difference may be caused by the different diluent



water used for the Microtox test and the fact that it measures sublethal effects,



while the fathead minnow and the Daphnia acute test measure lethal effects.

-------
                                                                        9.
Conclusions



     A spike of 16 volatile priority pollutants,  continuously added at 50 yg/1



each, did not affect the acute toxicity of influent or effluents of an experimental,



conventional activated sludge, pilot wastewater treatment system compared to



a control system which received no addition of toxicants.   The spike of volatile



priority pollutants at the concentration added was apparently not high enough



to significantly increase influent toxicity or affect treatment based on the



toxLcity of the effluent of the spiked system compared to the unspiked control.



     There was not a significant reduction in toxicity between influent and primary



effluent, although there was a significant reduction in toxicity between influent



and secondary effluent and between primary and secondary effluents for both systems.



     Fathead minnow and Daphnia toxicity tests results for the same samples of


                                                                         IM
influent and primary effluent were not significantly different.  Microtox   test



values for the same influent and effluent samples were, however, lower than the


                                                                         TM
Fathead minnow and Daphnia values.  Fathead minnow, Daphnia,  and Microtox   test



values, however, were similar for the secondary effluents and indicated low or no



toxicity.

-------
                                                                        10.
References
1.  Petrasek, Jr., A. C., "Removal and Partitioning of Volatile Priority Pollutants
    in Conventional Wastewater Treatment Plants.  - A Capsule Report of Preliminary
    Findings."  U.S. EPA, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
    Ohio.  In-house Report, (1982).
2.  Peltier, W., "Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to
    Aquatic Organisms."  EPA-600/4-78-012, U.S. EPA,  Environmental Monitoring
    and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.   (1978)
3.  (Beckman Instruments, Inc.), "Operating Instructions Microtox Model 2055
    Toxicity Analyzer."  Microbics Operations,  Carlsbad, California, Interim
    Manual.  (1980).
4.  American Public Health Association, American  Water Works Association  and
    Water Pollution Control Federation, "Standard Methods for the Examination
    of Water and Wastewater", 15th ed., Washington, D.C.
5.  Harris, E.  K., "Confidence Limits for the  ID    Using the Moving Average-
    Angle Method."  Biometrics 15, 243 (1959).
6.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Water  Quality Criteria Documents",
    Federal Register 45, 79313 (1980).
7.  "Water Quality Criteria 1972."  A Report of the ConraLttee on Water Quality
    Criteria, Environmental Studies Board, National Academy of Sciences,
    National Academy of Engineering, Washington,  D.C., U.S. Printing Office,
    5501-00520,  (1972).

-------
                                                             11.
        TABLE 1.  NOMINAL OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR THE
                  A AND B SYSTEMS USED ON THE VOLATILE
                  PRIORITY POLLUTANT PROJECT
  I.  Design Flow, Qd = 204.39 m3/d (133L/min)

 II.  Primary Clarifiers -
                       Diameter = 2.97 m
                       Weir Diameter = 2.77 m
                                 SWD = 3.66 m
                        Surface Area = 0.68 m2
               Surface Overflow Rate = 27.99 m3/m2d

III.  Aeration Basins -
                               L:W:D = 5.34:3.05:3.66 m
                        Surface Area = 16.33 m2
                              Volume = 59.76 m3
                Residence Time (Qd)  = 7.5 h

 IV.  Secondary Clarifiers -
                           Diameter  = 3.63 m
                                SWD  = 3.66 m
                        Surface Area = 10.36 m2
               Surface Overflow Rate = 18.41 m3/m2d
      Modified from Petrasek

-------
     Raw Wastewater
       Head Tank
     Static
     Screen
                         Primary
                       Clarlfier
                          Waste
                Splitter  Primary
                  BO*    Sludge
Feed
Pumps
     Metering
      Pump
      Spike
     Solution
 Primary
Clarifier
                          Waste
                        Primary
                         Sludge
                           System A - Control
                                                     Aeration Basin
                               WAS
                                                    System B - Spiked
                                                     Aeration  Basin
                              WAS
 Return
Activated
   Sludge
   Pump
  Return
Activated
  Sludge
   Pump
                                     3.
                            Figure 1.     Simplified  Schematic Diagram of Systems A and  B.
                                           From Petrasek

-------
                                                                    13,
         TABLE 2.  COMPOUNDS ADDED AND THEIR ACUTE TQXICTTY VALUES

                                  Fathead Minnow           Daphnia magna
                                96-hr LC50 in yg/La     48-hr EC50 in  ug/La
Methylene Chloride                    310,000                 224,000
1,1-Dichloroethene                    169,000                  11,600
Chloroform                            	c                 28,900
Carbon Tetrachloride                   43,100b                 35,200
1,2-Dichloropropane                   139,300b                 52,500
Trichloroethylene                      66,800                  43,000
1,1,2-Trichloroethane                  81,700b                 18,000
Dibromochloroinethane                  	                  	
Benzene                                32,000                 203,000
1,1,1-Trichloroethane                 105,000                 	
BromodichlorocQethane                  	                 	
Chlordbenzene    "                     29,120                  86,000
Tetrachloroethylene                    21,400                  17,700
1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloroethane             20,300   .                9,320
Toluene                                34,270                  60,000
Ethylbenzene                           42,330                  75,000
Static acute toxLcity values, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980.
^Flow-through acute toxicity values, static values not available.
    values available.

-------
TABLE. 3.  FATHEAD MINNOW AND DAPHNIA MAGMA ACUTE TOXICITY VALUES FOR VPP INFLUENTS AND EFFLUENTS.

Date
6/1/81

6/8/81

6/15/81

6/22/81

6/29/81
7/6/81

7/13/81

Species
. Fathead minnow
Daphnia magna
Fathead minnow
Daphnia magna

Fathead minnow
Daphnia magna
Fathead minnow
Daphnia magna
Fathead minnaw
Daphnia magna
Fathead minnow
paphnjLa magna
Fathead minnow
Daphnia magna
Influent^
LC50a and EC506
in 7.
Control-A
28.7
(34.7-24.5)
>50
(NC)
>50
(NC)
NT
48.3
(69.1-36.8)
20.4
(27.0-15.9)
9.7
(13.2-7.4)
9.8
(21.3-5.3)
17.7
(23.6-13.2)
17.7
(21.3-14.7)
9.7
(13.2-7.4)
5.3
(6.3-3.3)
17.7
(23.6-13.2)
20.9
(27.8-16.3)
values
Spiked-B
27.5
(33.6-23.1)
46.2
(73.4-36.3)
>50
(NC)
NT
50
(62.1-40.3)
17.7
(22.8-13.7)
12.5
(16.4-8.6)
11.4
(17.2-8.3)
8.8
(11.8-6.6)
16.6
(20.1-13.6)
9.7
(13.2-7.4)
8.6
(10.4-7.0)
17.7
(23.6-13.2)
20.0
(25.7-15.9)
Secondary Effluent
LC50 and EC50 Values
• ot
in /»
Control-A Control-B
>100
(NC)C
>100
(NC)
>50
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NO
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
NA
NA
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>50
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
NT
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)

-------
TABLE 3. FATHEAD MINNOW AND DAPHNIA MAGNA ACUTE TOXICITY VALUES FOR VPP INFLUENTS AND EFFLUENTS (cont'd)
Date Species
7/20/81 Fathead minnow
Daphnia magna
7/27/81 Fathead minnow
Daphnia magna
Influent
LC50a and EC506 values
in 7.
Control-A Spiked-B
35.2
(49.2-28.7)
41.9
(67.2-32.9)
25.0
(31.0-20.1)
17.0
(22.9-12.5)
35.2
(49.2-28.7)
39.8
(56.2-32.5)
28.7
(34.7-24.5)
43.1
(99.8-29.7)
Secondary Effluent
LC50 and EC50 Values
in 7o
Control-A Control-B
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(HC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
         fathead minnow 96-hr LC50 and 9570 confidence limits.
          Daphnia magna 48-hr EC50 and 9570 confidence limits.
         °(NA)- test not acceptable.  Excessive control mortality and/or mortality not concentration related.
          (NC) - not calculable,
         e(NT) - not tested.

-------
TABLE 4.  FATHEAD MINNOW AND DAPHNIA- MAGNA ACUTE TOXICITY VALUES AND MICRQTOX
BIOASSAY VALUES FOR
Date
8-11-81



Species
Fathead

Daphnia

Minnow

magna

TM
Microtox
8/19/81.



Fathead

Daphnia

Minnow

mapna

Microtox
8/25/81



Fathead

Daphnia

Minnow

magna

'ill
Microtox
9/1/81



Fathead

Daphnia

Minnow

magna

TM
Microtox
9/7/81



Fathead

Daphnia

Minnow

magna
- L^,_ 	
TM
Microtox
VFF
Influent
LC50a and EC50D values
Control-A Spiked-B
23.6
(33.6-18.0)
15.9
(20.5-12.2)
<6.3
26.8
(32.8-22.3)
16.4
(28.8-8.5)
4.3
23.6
(33.6-18.0)
31.6
(38.0-27.5)
11.1
38.7
(61.9-30.4)
>50
(NC)
19.5
50.8
(62.9-41.2)
66.3
(78.6-58.1)
13.6
22.3
(31.2-17.
14.2
(18.5-10.
<6.3
20.9
(28.9-15.
16.1
(22.2-11.
5.6
23.6
(33.6-18.
40.5
(55.6-33.
6.6
>50
(NC)
38.2
(51.7-31.
21.9
48.1
(73.9-35.
54.9
(76.1-44.
12.8

0)

3)


9)

2)


0)

4)




6)


2)

9)

INFLUENTS AND
Primary
LC50 and
Control-A
28.7
(34.7-24.
NAd
-
<6.3
23.6
(33.6-18.
24.0
(34.5-18.
<6.3
26.8
(32.8-22.
34.7
(42.3-30.
<6.3
>50
(NC)
45.0
(83.7-34.
5.2
53.5
(65.7-44.
72.6
(91.2-62.
23.9

5)




0)

3)


3)

0)




6)


6)

1)

EFFLUENTS.

Effluent
EC50 values
in 7.
Spiked-B
25.0
(31.0-20.
23.5
(29.5-19.
<6.3
25.0
(31.0-21.
21.7
(31.9-15.
<6.3
20.9
(28.9-15.
35.6
(45.4-30.
<6.3
>50
(NO
>50
(NC)
4.3
47.3

1)

4)


1)

9)


9)

2)







(67.3-36.1)
61.2

(74.2-52.7)
16.5



Secondary Effluent
LC50 and EC50 values
in 7c
Control-A Spiked-B
>100
(NC)C
NT6
-
>50
>100
(NC)
NT
-
>50
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>50
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
>100
(NC)
NT
-
>50
>100
(NC)
NT
-
>50
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>50
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
> 100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100

-------
         TABLE 4.  (CONTINUED)  FATHEAD MINNOW AND DAPHNIA MaGMA ACME K3XICDTY VALiJES AND1MJECR0IX5X
                                B10ASSAY VALUES FOR VPP INFLUENTS AND EFFLUENTS..
                                       Influent
                                             Primary Effluent
                                            LC50 and EC50 values
Date
Species
 LC50a and EC50b values

Control-A     Spiked-B      Control-A    Spiked-B
 Secondary Effluent
L€50 and EC50 values
         in %
 Gontrol-A  Spiked-B
9/14/81 Fathead Minnow

Daphnia magna

TM
Microtox
29.1
(39.3-21.7)
22.3
(27.7-18.4)
7.2
26.4
(34.7-18.6)
22.3
(27.7-18,4)
6.3
35.4
(47.2-26.5)
22.9
(28.6-18.9)
6.3
26.4
(34.7-18.6)
21.8
(27.0-18.0)
<6.3
>100
:(NC)
NA

>100
>100
(NC)
>100
(NC)
>100
             fathead minnow   96-hr.  LC50 and 95% confidence limits.

              Daphnia magna    48-hr.  EC50 and 9570 confidence limits.   Microtox 15-min.   EC50
                               without confidence limits.

             C(NA) - test not acceptable.   Excessive control mortality and/or mortality not concentration,
                     related.

             d(NC) - not calculable.

             e(NT) - not tested.

-------
                  TABLE 5 a    PERFORMANCE SUMMARY OF VOLATILE PRIORITY POLLUTANT

                              TREATMENT SEQUENCES; JANUARY-JUNE 1981
Parameter
TSS
COD
Total-P
TKN
Organic N
NH3-N
N02 & N03-N .
Total-N
Turbidity (NTU)
UCOO*
Inf.
(mg/1)
447.0
577.0
9.3
43.5
20.4
23.1
0.2
43.7
-
683.0
Pri.
Eff.
(mg/1)
214.0
317.0
6.0
36.7
14.2
22.5
0.2
36.9
-
421.0
Rem.
by
Pri.
Clar.
U)
52.0
45.0
35.0
16.0
30.0
3.0
-
16.0
-
38.0
Activ. SI
	 	 	 ( mn
\my
udqe Eff.
/I) 	
Control Spike
30. Q
91.0
3.1
19.4
5.7
13.2
6.4
25.8
12.0
i
152.0
23.0
87.0
2.8
18.4
5.2
13.2
6.3
24.7
10.0
148.0
Overall Removal
---(percent)---
Control Spike-
93.0
84.0
67.0
55.0
72.0
43.0
• -'
41.0

78.0
95.0
85.0
70.0
58.0
75.0
43.0
-
43.0

78.0
* UCOD = Ultimate Combined Oxygen Demand
    a_            1
    €Trom Petrasek
                                                                                                       CD

-------