EPA-600/2-78-016
February 1978
Environmental Protection Technology Series
CHARACTERIZATION OF REUSABLE
MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER EFFLUENTS AND
CONCENTRATION OF ORGANIC CONSTITUENTS
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-78-016
February 1978
CHARACTERIZATION OF REUSABLE MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER EFFLUENTS
AND CONCENTRATION OF ORGANIC CONSTITUENTS
by
James K. Smith
A, J. Englande
Mary M. McKown
Stephen C. Lynch
Gulf South Research Institute
New Orleans, Louisiana 70186
Contract No. 68-02-2090
Project Officers
John N. English
Wastewater Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Frederick C. Kopfler
Field Studies Division
Health Effects Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publica-
tion. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
ii
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of increasing
public and government concern about the dangers of pollution to the health
and welfare of the American people. Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled
land are tragic testimony to the deterioration of our natural environment.
The complexity of that environment and the interplay between its components
require a concentrated and integrated attack on the problem.
Research and development is that necessary first step in problem solution
and involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and searching for
solutions. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory develops new
and improved technology and systems for the prevention, treatment, and
management of wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges
from municipal and community sources, for the preservation and treatment of
public drinking water suppliers, and to minimize the adverse economic,
social, health, and aesthetic effects of pollution. This publication is
one of the products of that research; a most vital communications link
between the researcher and the user community.
The use of municipal wastewater effluents to satisfy water demands is a
viable means of conserving valuable resources. This report is concerned
with the characterization of reusable municipal wastewater effluents from
cost-effective treatment processes. Physical, chemical, and biological
parameters are used to define potable water quality. A reverse osmosis
concentration technique was evaluated and used to obtain quantities of
organic residues in the effluents for identification and toxicity testing
in other ongoing research efforts.
Francis T. Mayo
Director
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
The main thrust of this project was to collect organic concentrates from
operating Advanced Wastewater Treatment (AWT) plants for use in health effects
testing. A reverse osmosis process was employed in the first stage con-
centration; the organics were further concentrated and recovered from the
resulting brine solution via liquid/liquid extraction. The final product
was supplied to EPA for identification and toxicity testing in other on-going
research efforts. '
In addition, chemical, physical, and biological analyses of effluent
from the six AWT systems were conducted to determine how the quality of the
effluents from these systems compared with current drinking water regulations.
In spite of the fact that the AWT systems were not designed to produce
potable water, all were characterized by high quality effluents.
Pilot and fully operational plants evaluated were Lake Tahoe., California;
Blue Plains, District of Columbia; Pomona, California; Dallas, Texas;
Escondido, California; and Orange County, California. These systems were
selected primarily because of availability and because effluent quality
exceeded that of secondary treatment systems.
Spot samples taken over a six to nine month period indicated that the
parameters found to exceed drinking water regulations in most of the treated
effluents included nitrogen (ammonia and nitrate), phenol, odor, carbon
chloroform extract, turbidity, and specific heavy metals.
This report was submitted in .fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-2090 by
Gulf South Research Institute under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. This report covers the period June 25, 1974 to
March 30, 1977, and w'ork was completed as of March 1977.
iv
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword , iii
Abstract . iv
Figures .. vi
Tables vii
Abbreviations and Symbols x
Acknowledgement .... xi
1. Introduction 1
2. Method of Study 2
Selection of treatment systems.. 2
Characterization of effluents. 3
Concentrating organics 5
Viral determinations.. 6
3., Description of AWT Plants......... 7
Lake Tahoe, California ..'.... 7
Blue Plains, District of Columbia 13
Pomona, California 21
Dallas, Texas ... 24
Escondido, California 34
Orange County, California.. . — 36
4. Details of Analytical Program. ...... 42
Reverse osmosis concentration. 42
Organic solvent extractions and evaporations 49
Virus concentration 54
Collection and shipment of effluent samples 56
Analytical procedures for effluent characterization 59
5. Results and Discussion. ....; 76
Chemical analysis. ..' 76
Effluent quality and drinking water standards compliance... 92
References 110
Appendix A Ill
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Analytical, organics, and viral sampling schedule for AWT plants 4
2 Simplified schematic - South Lake Tahoe Public Utility District water
reclamation plant • 9
3 System 1 schematic, Blue Plains 15
4 System 2 schematic, Blue Plains 19
5 Flow diagram, Pomona pilot plant ,, 23
6 Process configuration—September 1974, Dallas 30
7 Process flow sequence, Escondido, California 35
8 Wastewater reclamation process flow diagram - Orange County 37
9 Theoretical model of reverse osmosis operation 43
10 Basic reverse osmosis concentrator used by GSRl 44
11 Reverse osmosis concentrator used by NISR. 46
12 Assembly for extraction of organics from water concentrate .52
13 Sample laboratory analysis flow sheet 55
14 Ammonia quality control chart 83
15 Chlorine quality control chart * 84
16 COD quality control chart 85
17 Phenol quality control chart * 86
18 Sulfate quality control chart 87
vi
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Performance Characteristics - Lake Tahoe, California ................... 8
2 Lake Tahoe Renovation Plant Effluent Quality ........................... 12
3 Effluent Quality Requirements -South Lake Tahoe ......................... 11
4 Raw Wastewater Characterization - Blue Plains .......................... 14
5 Removal Efficiencies for System 1 Operation - Blue Plains .............. 17
6 System 2 Blue Plains , May - September 1975 ............................. 20
7 Collection of Composite Samples ........................................ 22
8 Pomona Raw Waste Characterization ...................................... 22
9 Summary of Water Quality Characteristics through Treatment
Systems 1 and 2 - Pomona (September 1 - November 30, 1975)----' ...... •• 25
10 Summary of Water Quality Characteristics through Treatment
System 3 - Pomona (September 1 - November 30, 1975) .................... 26
11 Summary of Water Quality Characteristics through Treatment
Systems 1 and 2 - Pomona (December 1, 1975 - April 30, 1976)
12 Summary of Water Quality Characteristics through Treatment
System 3 - Pomona (December 1, 1975 - April 30, 1976) .................. 28
1 ' ' • v. *
13 Raw Wastewater Influent Characterization ............................... 29
1 -. .'• ?;.
14 Process Control Parameters ............................................. 31
15 Hydraulic Process Control .............................................. 31
16 Metals Removal Summary - Dallas ........................................ 32
17 Performance Summary - Dallas ........................................... 33
18 Escondido Raw Wastewater Characteristics ............................... 34
vii
-------
TABLES (continued)
Number Page
• • •—.——... i6-**—
19 Orange County Raw Waste Characteristics 36
20 Performance Characteristics - Orange County Water Factory 21 39
21 Heavy Metal Removal - Orange County Water Factory 21 ^°
*
22 Regulatory Agency Requirements for Injection Water • • • ^1
23 Organic Concentrate Sample Collection Dates ^
24 Initial Extraction Procedure for RO Concentrates 50
25 Modified Extraction Procedure for RO Concentration
26 Final Extraction Procedure for RO Concentrates • • • • ^3
27 Procedures Used in Preparation of Organic Concentrates 54
28 Experimental Results for Viral Sampling 57
29 Analytical Parameters Used to Characterize Effluent Samples 60
30 Preservation Methods Recommended for Selected Parameters 61
31 Minimum Detectable Limits for Analytical Parameters 62
32 Instrumental Parameters for AAS/AES Determinations. 69
33 Varian Instrument Settings 75
34 Summary of Averages for Selected Inorganic Parameters According
to Treatment System 78
35 Summary of Averages for Organic Parameters According to AWT Plant .... 78
36 Summary of Averages of Physical Parameters According to AWT Plant.... 79
37 Summary of Bacteriological Parameters According to AWT Plant 79
38 Summary of Average for Trace Metals According to AWT Plant 80
39 Summary of Average for Nitrogen Parameter According to AWT Plant 80
40 Analysis of Demand Standard Reference Samples 81
41 Data for In-House COD Standard 81
viii
-------
TABLES (continued)
Number Page
42 Comparison of Values Obtained by GSRI for EPA Reference Standards 88
43 Comparison of Values Obtained by GSRI for EPA Trace Metal
Reference Standards 89
44 Data for Within-Run Precision for Selected Parameters 90
45 Data for Run-to-Run Precision for Selected Parameters.. 90
46 Data for Run-to-Run Precision for Trace Metal Analysis 91
47 Drinking Water Standards 93
48 Results of AWT Plant Performance vs. Compliance to Drinking Water
Standards (Lake Tahoe) 95
49 Results of AWT Plant Performance vs. Compliance to Drinking Water
Standards (Blue Plains) 97
50 Results of AWT Plant Performance vs. Compliance to Drinking Water
Standards (Orange County) 99
51 Results of AWT Plant Performance vs. Compliance to Drinking Water
Standards (Pomona) 101
52 Results of AWT Plant Performance vs. Compliance to Drinking Water
Standards (Dallas and Escondido) 105
53 Parameters Exceeding Drinking Water Standards 107
ix
-------
LIST OP ABBREVIATIONS
AAS
:AES
BGM
BOD
CA
CAE
CAM
CCE
COD
EPA
GC
gpm
GSRI
JTU
Lahontan R.W.Q.C.B.
MBAS
mgd
MLSS
MLVSS
MPN
NISR
NTU
PFU
PMK.
RO
SRT
TDS
TH
TKN
TOG
TON
TPO
TSS4
— atomic absorption spectroscopy
— atbmic emission spectroscopy
— Buffalo green monkey
— biochemical oxygen demand
— cellulose acetate
-'-• carbon alcohol extraction
— carbon absorption method
--; carbon chloroform extraction
— chemical oxygen demand
— Environmental Protection Agency
— gas chromatograph
— gallons per minute
-- Gulf South Research Institute
— Jackson turbidity units
— Regional Water Quality Control Board
— methylene blue active substance
~ million gallons per day
— mixed liquor suspended solids
— mixed liquor volatile suspended solids
— most probable number
-- National Institute of Scientific Research
— nephelometric turbidity units
— plaque-forming units
— primary monkey kidney
— reverse osmosis
-- sludge residence time
— total dissolved solids
— total hardness
— total Kjeldahl nitrogen
— total organic carbon
— threshold odor number
— total phosphate
— total suspended solids
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to acknowledge the advice and suggestions of EPA project
coordinators Mr. J. English and Dr. F. Kopfler and the cooperation of the
individual AWT plant management and personnel. The concentrations,
collections, and analyses by employees of Gulf South Research Institute
in both New Orleans and New Iberia, Louisiana, are also appreciated.
Finally, none of this work would have been possible without the financial
support of the Environmental Protection Agency.
xi
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The indirect, unplanned reuse of wastewater for domestic purposes is
widespread. Wastewater at times represents a significant portion of the
total flow in many receiving waters. Since the typical wastewater treatment
plant does not remove all the contaminants from wastewater, there is a con-
cern about the health risk to users of these water supplies. A knowledge of
the appropriate levels of treatment is necessary to ensure the safety of water
supply intakes in the vicinity of discharges. As a first step in understand-
ing the significance of this problem, there is a need to know the types and
quantities of potentially hazardous substances in effluents produced by what
is currently the most effective wastewater treatment technology.
The objectives of this project were twofold: (1) to characterize efflu-
ents from both pilot and full scale municipal wastewater treatment systems
employing cost-effective processes with respect to physical, chemical, and
biological parameters used to define potable water quality, and (2) to obtain
samples of organic concentrates from the effluent for identification and use
in other EPA health effects testing programs, and to evaluate the concentra-
tion technique used.
-------
SECTION 2
METHOD OF STUDY
SELECTION OF TREATMENT SYSTEMS
The treatment systems selected for study employ a wide range of biologi-
cal and physical-chemical processes that are typical of the best available
technology. Each system was part of an independent, full-scale or pilot
scale project with specific, individual goals. In general, all of the
treatment systems were in stable operation with the exception of the Orange
County plant, which was in an initial start-up period when samples were
taken for this project. Effluent characterization and concentration of
organics were undertaken at the following six locations:
South Lake Tahoe, California
A 0.33 m3/s (7.5 mgd) plant processing wastewater treated by primary
clarification, activated sludge and clarification, high lime coagulation and
clarification, partial ammonia stripping, recarbonation and settling, filtra-
tion, activated carbon, and chlorination (raw sewage is predominantly of
domestic origin).
District of Columbia (Blue Plains)
Two pilot systems processing raw wastewater were investigated. System 1
operated at 3.15 1/s (50 gpm) and employed screening, low-lime clarification,
breakpoint chlorination, granular activated carbon, and dual media filtration.
System 2 operated at 2.21 1/s (35 gpm) and employed screening, low-lime clari-
fication, nitrification, denitrification, granular activated carbon, dual
media filtration, and chlorination.
Pomona, California
Three pilot systems processing 6.31 1/s (100 gpm) were investigated.
Each involved processing of wastewater treated by primary sedimentation,
activated sludge and clarification, and granular activated carbon. The
remaining treatment processes involved:
System 1 - chlorination
System 2 - chlorination followed by activated carbon
System 3 - ozonation followed by activated carbon
-------
Dallas, Texas
A 6.31 1/s (100 gpm) pilot plant processing wastewater treated by primary
sedimentation, trickling filtration, secondary sedimentation, nitrifying
activated sludge and clarification, high lime coagulation and clarification,
recarbonation, filtration, carbon adsorption, and chlorination.
Escondido, California
A 13.12 1/s (208 gpm) plant processing water by contact stabilization
with approximately 60% of the polished water further treated by mixed media
filtration followed by reverse osmosis.
Orange County, California
3,
A 0.657 m /s (15 mgd) plant processing wastewater treated by primary
clarification, trickling filtration and clarification, high lime coagulation
and clarification, ammonia stripping, recarbonation and settling, filtration,
activated carbon, and chlorination (raw sewage contains refinery and metal
plating wastes).
CHARACTERIZATION OF EFFLUENTS
Samples were obtained from on site personnel operating the designated
wastewater treatment systems at each of these, locations according to the
schedule shown in Figure 1. The samples were representative of the 24-hr
period for the sampling day shown. Before initiating the-sampling programs,
a senior analytical chemist from GSRI visited each site to coordinate sampling,
splitting of samples, and shipping. It was emphasized that all participants
should follow procedures, incorporating necessary preservation methods and
maintaining sample reliability; all shipments to GSRI were to be made under
specified conditions in an expeditious manner. Labeled containers containing
the required preservatives were shipped from GSRI to each site so that the
composite sample could be split and preserved prior to shipment to GSRI.
Detailed written procedures were forwarded to the sites prior to the initia-
tion of sampling. Routine telephone liason was established to ascertain the
status of each process operation prior to the collection of samples. This
action ensured that samples were not taken during an unusual breakdown in sys-
tem operation. The time and date of the collection of all samples are
included in the records of the program.
The parameters used to characterize the effluents, the analytical deter-
minations, and all special shipping, storage, or handling requirements are
discussed in detail in Section 4. However, in all cases, standard analytical
methods as defined in the latest "Standard Methods (1) or EPA method publica-
tions (2) were employed. Accuracy ,of the results was assured by following
the procedures outlined by the EPA quality control manual (3).
In addition to performing sample analysis, GSRI solicited other process
operating data available from site records, routine operating procedures,
and other reports from the plants to state or local agencies. The data
requested included a description of the process with flow diagrams, daily
-------
DALLAS
POMONA 1
POMONA 2
POhCilA 3
ORANGE
COU.'ITY
fAHOE
BLUE
PLAINS
fcSCOBDIDO
AU6USI
VIRUS
SAMPLING
SEPTEMBER
ANALYTICAL*
5.13
VIRUS
13
ANALYTICAL
20
ORGANIC
25
ANALYTICAL
25,27
ANALYTICAL
27
ORGANIC
5
ANALYTICAL
12,20,27
ORGANIC
19-21
VIRUS
11
SCHEDULE 1971)
OCTOBER
ANALYTICAL
1,16,21
ORGANIC**
3-5
ANALYTICAL
2.7.21
ANALYTICAL
9,23
ORGANIC
*-
ANALYTICAL
9,23
ORGANIC
2';
M1VEHBER
ANALYTICAL
11
VIRUS
11,12
ANALYTICAL
13
ViRUS
11,12
ANALYTICAL
7,21
VIRUS
16
ANALYTICAL
13
URGAM i c
10-12
VIRUS
10, 11
ANALYTICAL
6
ANALYTICAL
6
ANALYTICAL
7
SAMPLING SCHEDULE 1975
ANALYTICAL
2-4,29
ANALYTICAL
ANALYTICAL
6,21
ANALYTICAL
12
APRIL
ANALYTICAL
21
ANALYTICAL
&
VIRUS
15,16
MAY
ORGANIC
12,30
VIRUS
50
JUNE
ORGAN i c
7
ANALYTICAL
12
ANALYTICAL
13
ORGANIC
1
JULY
ANALYTICAL
2
ANALYTICAL
9
ANALYT.ICAI
7
ORGANIC
q
VIRUS
8
ANALYTICAL
ANALYT ICAL
16
ANALYTICAL
12.19, M
ANALYTICAL
23,25
\NALYTICAL
17,25
VIRUS
9
ANALYTICAL
2-J
NOVEMBER
ANALYTICAL
7
VIRUS
6
VIRUS
5,7
ANALYTICAL
•4,6
VIRUS
SAMPLING SCHEDULE 1976
JANUARY
ORGANIC
27
FEBRUARY
ANALYTICAL
11,18
ANALYTICAL
1J. 13,10,20
ORGANIC
3
MARCH
ANALYTICAL
4, 1C
ANALYTICAL
3, 10,12
*Analytical samples represent a 24-hr composite unless otherwise indicated in report.
**0rganic samples were collected as grab samples over a 48-hr period on the days indicated.
Figure 1. Analytical, organic, and viral sampling schedule for AWT plants.
-------
flow measurements, and size and characteristics of the community serviced by
the treatment plant.
CONCENTRATING ORGANICS
Almost all types of wastes contribute to the dissolved organic chemical
content of water supply sources. Improvements in techniques used to identify
such organic compounds in trace quantities in water sources have increased
awareness of potential hazards created by their presence.
In order to evaluate fully their effects on human health, dissolved
organic compounds must be isolated, identified, and measured. Firct, it is
necessary to concentrate the organic chemicals, since concentrations in most
drinking waters are too dilute to be studied with present toxicological
techniques. This concentration step must be performed without alteration
or destruction of the chemical species and with techniques that yield at least
a representative fraction of the solutes present. Ideally, the concentration
method should yield a quantitative recovery of the solutes.
This part of the project was designed to collect organics for future
identification and testing in other EPA sponsored efforts, and to evaluate
and improve concentrating techniques to develop the most practical membrane
for reverse osmosis.concentration of organic contaminants.
Evaluating Membrane Techniques
To evaluate the efficiency of membrane techniques in concentrating trace
organic solutes in water supplies, Gulf South Research Institute (GSRI), in
collaboration with the EPA Environmental Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio,
developed an analytically sound separation scheme, based on the differing
responses of membrane materials to various solute classes (4).
The concentration scheme was designed to treat both volatile and
nonvolatile organics, without causing structural or chemical alterations.
The mechanics of concentration were designed to provide concentration factors
adequate for subsequent analysis with reasonable laboratory time expendi-
tures.
The applicability of concentration schemes to real situations was inves-
tigated by measuring the interactions between selected membranes and
representative solutes. A membrane was devised which could concentrate a
wide range of unidentified organic solutes in water samples for analytical
separation and identification.
Field Testing of the Membrane
A series of field tests was conducted to evaluate the membrane concen-
tration processes, and to provide data on selected wastewater treatment
systems. During the project period, 12 samples from the 6 sites previously
described were collected and concentrated. The concentrates from these
streams were shipped to the EPA in Cincinnati, Ohio, for analytical and
toxicological evaluations.
-------
Sampling was performed during stable operational periods at each site.
Plant operators provided operational data for correlation with the quality
and quantity of dissolved organics found in the samples.
All sampling and shipments were conducted by representatives of either
the West Coast subcontractor, National Institute of Scientific Research
(N1SR) or GSRI, who performed the concentrations and documented that the
samples were taken at a time, of routine operation.
Organics in the plant effluents were initially concentrated on site by
reverse osmosis. Samples from plants on the West Coast (Pomona, Lake Tahoe,
Escondido, and Orange County) were transported to the NISR in Los Angeles to
be processed since this was more efficient than sending GSRI personnel and
equipment from New Orleans. The reverse osmosis concentration of samples
from Dallas and Washington, D.C., was performed at the pilot plants by GSRI
personnel. Standard techniques were used in these "concentrations. The
sample volumes were reduced 40 to 50 fold; and extracted with two carefully
chosen, pure organic solvents under three conditions. The procedures used in
securing samples are detailed in Section 4.
: . ' 'I ;
Improving Concentrating Techniques
Improvements in the performance and predictability of membrane separa-
tion techniques were needed to support the field effort and to extend present
technology. Investigations were conducted to support the field trials.
Further, efforts were made to improve the utility of the membrane methods and
to extend the scope of membrane applications.
VIRAL DETERMINATIONS
The obj ective of the virus sampling program was primarily to screen for
the presence or absence of the more prevalent virus groups. If positive
results were obtained, specific identifications were made for Polio 1-3; Echo
1-7, 9, 11-27, 29-33; Coxsachie A 7, 9, and 16, and Coxsachie B 1-6. All
samples were taken and prepared for shipment by Carborundum Company personnel
using the Aquella® virus monitoring apparatus. This apparatus processes
378.5 liters of water in approximately two hours; the product is a 10-ml
sample containing any virus present in the 378.5 liters. The neutralized
virus concentrate was stabilized, frozen, and shipped by air to the labora-
tory for analysis.
-------
SECTION 3
DESCRIPTION OF AWT PLANTS
LAKE TAHOE, CALIFORNIA
General Description
3
This advanced wastewater treatment plant has a capacity of 0.328 m /s
and incorporates the unit operations of primary clarification, activated
sludge and sedimentation, high lime coagulation and clarification, ammonia
stripping, recarbonation, filtration, carbon adsorption, and chlorination.
Samples of system effluent for characterization studies were composited
from 0900 of the day indicated to 0900 of the following day by on-site
personnel. Samples were mailed to GSRI, where analyses were conducted.
Samples were composited (except where indicated) on the following days:
September 26, October 8 and 21, November 21 (grab), and December 7, 1974
(grab); January 16 (grab), February 5 and 20, March 11, April 7, June 17,
and July 1, 1975, for general analysis; and on September 9 and October 24,
1974, for concentration of organics using the reverse osmosis technique.
Samples for virus analysis were taken on August 16 and November 16, 1974.
Influent Characteristics
The raw sewage entering primary treatment is mainly domestic and
relatively low in strength (5). Typical raw wastewater characteristics and
final AWT plant effluent quality observed over the study period are presented
in Table 1.
Treatment Sequence
Figure 2 illustrates the flow and process configuration during the
sampling period. Table 1 lists typical influent and effluent characteristics
for average design flow of 0.328 m-Vs.
Primary treatment for the removal of suspended solids and secondary
treatment with conventional activated sludge processes are used to reduce
the load of solid organic components of the wastewater. Excess activated
sludge is wasted to the primary clarifier.
To achieve good ammonia removals through the ammonia stripping tower,
the activated sludge system is operated in such a way as to prevent nitrifi-
cation. The food to microorganism ratio is maintained above 0.35, the mixed
liquor suspended solids at 2000 mg/1, and the sludge age at 4-6 days. The
-------
TABLE 1. PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS - LAKE TAHOE, CALIFORNIA
oo
. , ' " '
Parameter
3
Average daily flow (m /sec)
BOD (mg/1)
COD3 (mg/1)
Suspended Solids (mg/1)
MBAS (mg/1)
Turbidity (JTU) '.
pH
Chlorine Residual (mg/1)
Coliform (MPN/100 ml)
Ammonia N (mg/1)
Nitrate N (mg/1)
Nitrite N (mg/1)
Phosphorus P (mg/1)
Alkalinity (mg/1 as CaCO )
Hardness (mg/1 as CaC03)
TDS (mg/1)
Chloride (mg/1)
Sulfate (mg/1)
Raw Sewage (Typical)
Avg . Med . Range
134
232
6.1
—
—
—
—
21.0
0.34
0.08
10.7
199
106
130
204
6.0
—
—
—
—
20.6
0.28
0.08
10.6
193
106
79-229
24-608
3.1-7.8
—
—
—
—
13-30
0-2.1
0.02-0.23
3.6-20.4
114-285
60-146
AWT Effluent
(over study period)
Avg . Med . Range
0.144
1.5
16
—
0.01
0.8
—
2.8
<2
18.5
2.1
0.4
0.6
209
169
366
68
27
0.149
1.6
15
—
0.006
0.6
—
2.0
<2
18.6
1.2
0.1
0.7
215
167
356
49
27
0.122-0.175
0.7-2.0
6-21
—
0.001-0.04
0.4-2.0
6.3-8.0 '
1.7-5.6
—
6.9-29.8
0.6-7.4
0.1-1.7
0.2-0.9
86-309
108-232
234-487
23-137
21-30
-------
Rapid
Mix
Waste Water In
Recarbonation.
(Standby)
Flocculation
Chemical
Clarifer
Chlorine
Tower
Pump
Station
To
Reservoir
Final
Effluent
Pump
Station
Application
Ammonia
Stripping
Tower
Reaction
Basin
.ecarbonation*
Basins
Tertiary
Pump
Station
V
Carbon
Columns
Filters
Figure 2. Simplified schematic - South Lake Tahoe Public Utility District water
reclamation plant.
-------
mixed liquor is also periodically dosed prior to clarification with 2 mg/1
chlorine to retard nitrifying bacteria. These practices have caused very
little change in the NH -N concentration across the secondary process.
Chemical coagulation of the secondary effluent to achieve a pH of 11 is
accomplished with lime using a rapid mix flocculation basin followed by a
30.48-m diameter conventional clarifier. A dosage of 300 to 400 mg/1 of
calcium oxide is required to attain the desired pH. The flow is rapid mixed
for 30 sec and flocculated over a 4.5 min period. A polymer at a level of
0.1 to 0.3 mg/1 is added as the water leaves the flocculation chamber, tq
improve clarification. The chemical clarifier overflow rate is 39 m /m Id.
The lime coagulation system typically removes 95% of the phosphorous
received. Overflow from the clarifier normally ranges from 0.2 to 0.6 mg/1
phosphate with a corresponding turbidity level between 1 and 6 Jackson Tur-
bidity Units (JTU). The underflow from the chemical clarifier is thickened
and recalcined for reuse in a multihearth furnace.
Nitrogen from the lime clarified wastewater is removed by ammonia
stripping. A cross-flow cooling tower with 7.32 m diameter fan strips ^he
volatile ammonia from the wastewater. The designed-capacity is 11.32 m of
air per gallon of wastewater. The fill area is 36 m at a height of 8 m.
Removal efficiencies across the cooling tower for ammonia vary from 30 to
90%, depending on air temperature and the extent of calcium carbonate
buildup in the fill before cleaning. Influent to the cooling tower ranges
from 15 to 30 mg/1 of ammonia nitrogen; effluent values range from 2 to 15
mg/1.
After ammonia removal, the wastewater is processed in a two-stage
recarbonation unit. In the first stage, compressed, scrubbed stack gases
from the lime recalcining and sludge incineration systems reduce the pH from
11.0 to 9.3, which is the minimum solubility of calcium carbonate. Some 20%
additional calcium carbonate can be settled out in the reaction basin with
the dual stage system. This additional removal also decreases the deposition
of calcium carbonate in the ballast ponds and on the filter media and acti-
vated carbon. The second stage reduces the pH from 9.3 to near 7.0 with
scrubbed stack gases. Total basin detention time is 30 min with a surface
overflow rate of 98 m /m /d. A standby carbon dioxide compressor system is
available in case of failure in the recalcination furnace.
Subsequent to the secondary recarbonation step, the wastewater is
pumped to mixed media filters at a flux rate of about 3^4 1/s/m . The
patented (Neptune Microfloc, Inc.) coarse-to-fine filter medium contains
coal, sand, and garnet. Alum is injected in the filter influent at a 10 to
30 mg/1 dosage level to obtain the desired turbidity in the finished water.
Polyelectrolyte or secondary flocculants may be added as a filter aid to
control solids breakthrough. Two beds are operated in series and three
pairs of beds are operated simultaneously in parallel. Automatic backwashes
at a 10.18 1/s/m flux rate occur automatically. Phosphorous removal across
the filterbeds ranges from 50 to 99% with an average effluent level of
phosphorous at 0.1 mg/1. Effluent concentrations for suspended solids
average less than 1 mg/1 and turbidity about, 0.5 JTU,
10
-------
A carbon adsorption treatment follows filtration. The activated carbon
system includes 8 steel columns, each containing 19.958 metric tons (19,958
kg) of 8 x 30 mesh granulated activated carbon. Each column employs 50 m of
carbon at an effective depth of 4.2 m. A parallel feed,-upflow scheme is
used at a hydraulic loading of 4.4 1/s/m and a 17^min contact time.
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) concentrations in the separation bed effluent
average 20 mg/1 with approximately 50% removal across the activated carbon.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) concentrations in the separation bed effluent
range from 3 to 6 mg/1. Color removals across the unit average 50 to 70%.
A corresponding range of 12 to 15 units in the influent and 4 to 7 units in
the effluent is obtained.
The carbon is regenerated after an approximate dosage of 29.96 g carbon
per cubic meter treated by the pilot unit columns. A batch of 2700 kg of
carbon is withdrawn in sequence from each column for regeneration.
A multihearth furnace operating at near 900°C regenerates the spent
carbon. Furnace feed rates can be varied from 45.4 to 2721.6 kg per day. A
loss of 5 to 8% carbon is observed during regeneration due to attrition and
batch operation.
Filial chlorine disinfection is used before discharge from the plant.
Since the chlorine demand of the final effluent is very low, instantaneous
chlorine values of. 2, to 3 mg/1 ensure complete disinfection.
A summary of effluent quality during the study period as obtained from
plant records is presented in Table 2.
Effluent Quality 'Goals
> >> ' - ' ' :
The Lake Tahoe advanced wastewater treatment plant is designed to pro-
duce an effluent suitable for export and use in a recreational lake, Indian
Creek Reservoir. Effluent quality requirements are given in Table 3.
TABLE 3. EFFLUENT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS
SOUTH LAKE TAHOE WATER RECLAMATION PLANT
Requirements
Lahontan R.W.Q.C.B.
> < • Percent of Time
Description Alpine. Co. 50 . 80 100
MBAS, mg/1, less than
BOD, mg/1, less than : '
COD, mg/1, less than 5
Suspended Solids, mg/1, less than
Turbidity, JTU
Phosphorus, mg/1, less than < ..
pH, units
Coliform, MPN/100 ml >
'. " ' •
a. s.
,5
30 ..;•:
2
5 , ,
N: 0 :R E
6.5 to 8 . 5 .
Adequately ••••>
Disinfected
0.3 0.5 1.0
3 5.,. >;iO
20 25 50
: 1 2 4
3 5 10
Q U. I R E M E N T S
6.5 to 9.0
Median less than 2
Max. No. Consecutive
.Samples greater than
23, 2
11
-------
TABLE 2. LAKE TAHOE RENOVATION PLANT EFFLUENT QUALITY
(September, 1974 - July, 1975)
MONTH
Average daily flow, m/s (mgd)
BOD5 (mg/1)
COD (mg/1)
Suspended .Solids (mg/1)
MBAS (mg/1)
Turbidity (JTU)
pH
Chlorine Residual (mg/1)
Coliform (MPN/100 ml)
Ammonia N (mg/1)
Nitrate N (mg/1)
Nitrite N (mg/1)
Phosphorus P (mg/1)
Alkalinity (mg/1 as CaCO )
Hardness (mg/1 as CaCO )
IDS (mg/1)
Chloride (mg/1)
Sulfate (mg/1)
9/74
0.14
(3.3)
2.0
15
0
0.04
0.4
7.1-8.0
1.8
<2
29.8
7.4
1.7
0.5
237
-
295
41
25
10/74
0.13
(2.9)
1.9
6
0
0.01
0.6
6.9-7.6
1.7
<2
24.8
4.9
1.0
0.2
215
116
234
35
30
11/74
0.12
(2.8)
1.7
11
0
Trace
0.6
7.1-8.0
1.7
<2
24.4
0.9
0.1
0.3
258
140
301
23
28
12/74
0.13
(3.0)
1.7
21
0
0.01
0.5
6.8-7.9
2.2
<2
26.2
1.8
0.1
0.9
309
140
356
40
24
1/75
0.14
(3.1)
2.0
20
0
0.03
0.8
7.4-8.0
1.7
<2
24.5
1.1
0.1
0.7
283
108
376
49
30
2/75
0.15
(3.4)
1.5
12
0
0.001
0.9
6.8-7.8
2.3
<2
18.6
1.2
0.1
0.7
246
167
350
41
28
3/75
0.15
(3.5)
1.0
20
0
0.003
0.8
6.5-7.3
5.6
<2
13.0
1.7
0.1
0.6
177
168
487
103
27
4/75
0.16
(3.6)
1.0
20
0
0.008
0.6
6.5-7.5
4.3
<2
12.1
0.6
0.1
0.8
148
232
454
96
29
•5/75
0.16
(3.6)
0.7
18
0
0.002
0.4
6.6-7.7
4.4
<2
12.2
1.2
0.1
0.8
162
230
446
91
24
6/75
0.16
(3.6)
1.2
14
0
0.005
1.6
6.3-7.8
2.6
<2
10.8
1.4
0.5
0.7
181
-
445
94
27
7/75
0.1S
(4.0)
vl-7
14
0
0.006
2.0
7.3
2.5
<2
6.9
0.9
0.1
0.3
86
223
286
137
21
AVERAGE
0.14
(3.3)
1 5
16
0
0.01
0.8
6.3-8.0
2.8
<2
18.5
2.1
0.4
0.6
209
169
366
68
27
-------
BLUE PLAINS
General Description
Two pilot wastewater treatment systems were sampled at this location.
During September 1974, System 1, which employed physical-chemical processes,
was sampled. During June through September 1975, System 2, which employed
both biological and physical-chemical processes, was sampled.
The 2.2 1/s AWT pilot plant of System 1 incorporated unit operations of
low lime clarification, breakpoint chlorination or neutralization, activated
carbon adsorption, and dual media filtration. The System 2 flow sequence of
the reuse pilot plant consisted of hydro-sieving, low-lime clarification,
dispersed growth nitrification, downflow columnar denitrification, carbon
adsorption, mixed media filtration, and chlorination.
Composite samples (except where indicated) were collected on the follow-
ing dates: September 11, 20 (grab), and 26, 1974; and June 12, July 8,
August 23, and September 13, 17 (grab), and 22, 1975. Samples taken for
organic concentration by reverse osmosis reflected operation from September
19 - 21, 1974, and from May 29 to June 1, 1975. Samples for virus analysis
were taken on September 11, 1974; and April 15, 16, and May 30, 1975.
Influent Characteristics
Almost 100% of the raw wastewater is of municipal origin from the
Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. Wastewater characteristics for the
study periods of September 1974, April through May 1975, and May through
September 1975, are summarized in Table 4. The weighted average of para-
meters indicates that this sewage can be characterized as domestic and of
weak strength (5).
Treatment Sequence
System 1, September 1974 Study—
Figure 3 illustrates the process flow configuration and operating
conditions for System 1 during the September 1974 sampling period.
Following screening of the raw wastewater by a Bauer Hydrasieve, 2.21
1/s waste is treated by a low lime clarification system. Powdered calcium
oxide is added to the flash mix tank at an average dose of 200 mg/1 as CaO,
maintaining the pH at 10.5. To improve clarification, ferric chloride is
added to effect a concentration of 15 mg/1 as Fe . Settled solids are
reapplied to the flash mix tank at 15% of the total flow. The wastage rate
from the clarifier is 2.25% of the total flow, with a concentration of 2.1%.
Backwash water from the carbon adsorption and filtration systems is returned
to the flash mix tank (8 min. retention) at a rate of 0.63 1/s. The hydrau-
lic loading to the clarifier with backwash is increased from 11.88 to 15.26
1/s/m for approximately 18 hours per day.
Effluent from the low lime clarification system is split, feeding 1.10
1/s each to Systems I and J. The parallel systems include breakpoint
13
-------
TABLE 4. RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION-BLUE PLAINS
" : Parameter Sept. 1974
PH •
Alkalinity (mg/1 as CaCO^)
Total Organic Carbon, TOG (mg/1)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, BOD *
(mg/1)
Chemical Oxygen Demand, COD (mg/1)
Phosphorus (mg/1 as'PO,) ;
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/1 as N)
Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/1 as N)
Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/1 as N)
Total Suspended Solids, TSS (mg/1)
Total Dissolved Solids, TDS (mg/1)
— -—
120
81
104
247
20
20
17
—
128
— _
j April - June -
June 1975 : Sept 1975
7.2
119
74
119
241
16
21
18
0.1
116
290
— —
—
65
82
211
13
17
16
0.1
100
—
Average
(Weighted)
7.2
120
70
98
227
15
19
17
0.1
114
290
* < . .•
Five-day BOD
-------
Backwash from Filters and Columns
Raw Water
Lime (CaO)
1
)
Jri
vJ>l —
.ash Mix Flocci
Tank Tank
Clarifier j
i*>
Lation
(H7)
«^MH
«••••••
— »
-*•
Splitter
Chlorine
System I i \\ni\u v Mixer
NaOH
reakpolnt (Jhlorinatiorl
rg
CO
-2*
Recycle
To Waste
Box
System J
teutrali
Tank
(J2)
nation
Columi
4
(J4)
Chlorine
Alum
Filter
4
CJ7)
Figure 3. System 1 schematic, Blue Plains.
(12)
Column
1
lolunn
2
(16)
i
Chlorine
Alum
Filteil
1
(I7)~|
-------
chlorination, carbon adsorption, and dual media filtration (System I) ; and
neutralization, carbon adsorption,, and dual media filtration (System J).
The breakpoint chlorination system is operated by maintaining pH between
7 and 8 and the free chlorine residual after breakpoint at 5 mg/1. Dosage
requirements are based on a 10:1 C1:NH_ ratio resulting in a Cl concentra-
tion of 100 to 120 mg/1. Approximately 70 mg/1 NaOH is added to help
maintain constant pH. The system is controlled by computer.
In the J system, a 1.22 m diameter, mechanically mixed tank is used to
neutralize the clarified wastewater to a pH of 7 by addition of carbon
dioxide. Two 1.83-m columns are operated in series for each system. The
columns are downflow with a detention time of 12.5 min/column at a loading
rate of 2.38 1/s/m . The lead carbon columns are backwashed once a day or
if the pressure drop exceeds 2.04 atm. Secondary columns are backwashed
every 48 hours. Lead filters experienced average pressure drops of 0.108
and 0.084 atm per day.
Effluent from the carbon columns is polished by dual media filtration
in both systems. The hydraulic loading rate is 2.04 1/s/m /filter. Alum at
20 mg/1 and chlorine at 5 mg/1 are added to the influent to the filters.
The dual-media filters are backwashed once a day, or if the pressure drop
across the filter exceeds 0.295 atm.
Data for this pilot plant operation for September 1974 are presented in
Table 5. Upsets were experienced with the breakpoint chlorination system.
These included a malfunction in the computer, clogging of the caustic and
chlorine feed mechanisms, and the lack of necessary maintenance of the on-
stream analytical sensors. Best operation occurred during manual operation.
The NH -N residual averaged 2.16 following breakpoint. With no upsets, NH»-
N residuals of 0.4 to 0.6 mg/1 and TKN residuals of 1.2 to 1.5 mg/1 are
possible.
Difference in the operation of the two adsorption systems was attributed
to the effect of biological activity, which is present in System J, but
minimized in System I because of the basically sterile influent.
Results indicate that the System I dual media filter was not effective
in removing organics (Table 5). The reduction in efficiency was related to
the lack of biological activity in both the activated carbon column and the
filter. The effectiveness of the filter following carbon treatment is the
extent of its ability to capture biological cells produced in and discharged
from the adsorption system. Breakpoint chlorination in effect eliminates
bioactivity; hence, soluble organics which may be converted to biological
cells and captured by the filter in the J System pass through the columns
and filters of the I System.
The effluent from the I System was sampled during this project to
characterize the effect of breakpoint chlorination and obtain a concentrate
of highly chlorinated organics.
16
-------
TABLE 5. REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES FOR SYSTEM 1 OPERATION-BLUE PLAINS
Type of Loca-
Effluent tlon
Raw
Clarified
Breakpoint
Adsorbed
Adsorbed
Filtered
Neutralized
Adsorbed
Adsorbed
Filtered
H-0
H-7
1-2
1-4
1-6
1-7
J-2
J-4
J-6
J-7
-
TOG
mg/1 %R*
81.1
22.3
21.5
13.6
8.5
7.2
21.7
14.1
8.13
5.1
__
72.5
73.5
83.2
89.5
91.1
73.2
82.6
90.0
93.8
BOD
mg/1 %R
104
29.3 71.1
28.5 72.6
16.2 84.4
9.3 91.0
8.0 92.2
24.7 76.3
12.6 87.9
8.2 92.1
3.6 96.6
COD TPO,
mg/1 %R mg/1 %R
247
56.6 77.1
60.8 75.4
34.7 86.0
21.7 91.2
18.8 92.4
53.8 78.2
28.9 88.3
18.1 92.7
11.3 95.4
20.3 —
1.42 93.0
1.53 92.5
0.51 97.5
0.43 97.9
0.32 98.4
1.23 93.9
0.40 98.0
0.39 98.0
0.23 98.9
TKN NHL
mg/1 %R mg/1 %R
20.1
12.7
3.95
3.36
3.03
2.49
13.5
12.0
12.1
10.3
16.5
36.8 11.7
80.3 2.19
83.3 2.16
84.9 2.23
87.6 1.83
32.8 11.3
40.3 11.0
39.8 10.5
48.8 9.81
..
29.1
86.7
86.9
86.5
88.9
31.5
33.3
36.4
40.5
Suspended
Solids
mg/1 %R
128
13.8
14.3
1.5
1.3
2.0
13.4
3.1
1.7
1.7
__
89.2
88.8
98.9
99.0
98.5
89.5
97.6
98.7
98.7
- Percent removal
-------
System 2, May-September 1975 Study—
A process schematic of pilot treatment System 2 is shown in Figure 4.
The low-lime clarification system operated under approximately the same
conditions as during the System 1 sampling period. Solids were wasted from
the system at 2-3% of the total flow.
Clarified flow of 2.21 1/s is introduced to a biological nitrification
basin with a detention time of 3.5 hours. Sludge is wasted from the system
at an average rate of 0.116 1/s resulting in a sludge residence time (SRT)
of about 17 days (range 10-18 days). Average volatile suspended solids
concentration in the reactor is 2000 mg/1. Influent and effluent pH y,alues
are 9.9 and 7.2, respectively. Clarifier overflow rate is 5.94 1/s/m ,
which results in a detention time of 3.6 hours.
After methanol addition of 30 mg/1, the effluent is split to parallel
denitrification columns at 1.10 1/s or 4.07 1/s/m . The columns are back-
washed every 24 hrs. Denitrified effluent is fed in a downflow mode to four
activated carbon columns operated in series at a rate of 0.5 1/s/m . Total
empty bed contact time is 26 minutes. Columns are backwashed after 4 days
of operation. Carbon column backwash includes 5 tnin of air wash at 1.5
m /m /min followed by 15 min of low flow backwash (15% bed expansion) and
7.5 min of high flow backwash (30% bed expansion) at 8.83 1/s/m .
After alum addition, the carbon column effluent is distributed between
three parallel dual media filters. Filter medium consists of 70 cm of 1.2
to 1.4 mm coal and 30.5 cm of 0.6,,to 0.7 mm sand. A flow of 1.10 1/s/filter
is treated at a rate of 0.2 1/s/m /filter. Filters are backwashed after 2
days of operation. The backwash system includes surface wash (0.945 1/s)
and low flow (4.41 1/s), high flow (7.56 1/s) backwash.
Chlorine is added to the filtered effluent at a dose of approximately 5
mg/1 for disinfection. Dosage, phosphorus, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen to 5 mg/1, 0.22
mg/1, and 2.4 mg/1, respectively. System 2 was designed to produce an
effluent suitable for reuse which approached potable water quality.
18
-------
Nitrification
Lime Clarification
Flocculation
Clar
.fication
Drain
-*•
Activated
Sludge
O
cfl
IOB
Polymer
'oiym
Alum
Filtration
iUA
Denitrification
Carbon Adsorption
Holding Tank
Flow -2.21 1/s
t
ontact
Tank
I
Chlorine
Chlorination
Final Effluent
Figure 4. System 2 schematic, Blue Plains.
-------
TABLE 6. SYSTEM 2 BLUE PLAINS, MAY - SEPTEMBER 1975
K)
O
Type of TOC
Effluent mg/1 %R*
Raw 65
Lime 20
Clarified
Nitrified 6
Denitrified 5
Adsorbed 2
Filtered 2
Disinfected 2
__
69
91
92
97
97
97
BOD
mg/1 %R
82
29
5
2
I
1
3
.*«
65
94
98
99
99
96
COD
mg/1
211
62
16
16
6
6
6
%R
__
71
92
92
97
97
97
TP04
mg/1 %R
13
1 29
0.8 94
0.3 98
0.2 98
0.1 99
0.1 99
TKN
mg/1 %R
17
11 29
0.7 96
0.8 95
0.4 98
0.3 98
0.2 99
NH — N
mg/1 %R
16
11 31
0.2 99
0.2 99
0.1 99
0.1 99
0.1 99
N0_+N0,
mg/1 ~
0.1
0.1
10
2
2
2
2
*%R
__
—
—
80
80
80
80
SS
mg/1 %R
100 —
17 83
8 92
3 97
1 99
1 99
1 99
R = Percent Removal
-------
POMONA,CALIFORNIA
General Description
The pilot scale wastewater treatment systems studied at Pomona further
treat the effluent from the Pomona wastewater renovation plant that includes
the processes of primary sedimentation, activated sludge, and final clarifi-
cation. Treatment of the full scale biologically stabilized effluent con-
sists of activated carbon adsorption followed by three treatment sequences in
parallel: (1) chlorination, (2) chlorination followed by activated carbon,
or (3) ozonation followed by activated carbon. Composite samples from each
of these three treatment systems (except where indicated) were collected
according to the schedule in Table 7.
In addition, samples were concentrated for recovery of organic materials
by reverse osmosis on September 25 and October 2, 1974, and June 17, 1975.
Virus sampling was performed on November 11 and 12, 1974; and November 4, 5,
6, and 7, 1975.
Influent Characteristics
The raw wastewater is comprised of approximately 90% municipal by volume,
and some paper product waste. Industrial contributors are diversified.
Metal plating wastes have been present due to industrial upsets, but have
not caused major operational problems. Table 8 presents the raw wastewater
characteristics reported during the study period.
Treatment Systems
A raw wastewater flow of 0.35 m /s is first treated by primary sedimen-
tation, followed by activated sludge and final clarification. This treatment
results in an effluent characterized by a COD of 35 mg/1, 10-15 mg/1 TOG, 10
mg/1 suspended solids, 10 mg/1 BOD,., and a variable level of ammonia (0-20
mg/1) depending on the degree of biological nitrification.
A downflow carbon adsorption system treats 6.31 1/s of the secondary
effluent. The hydraulic loading rate is 2.38 1/s/m and contact time is 10
min. The column is 1.83 m in diameter, 4.98 m high, and maintains a 1.52 m
bed depth.
After initial carbon adsorption, one of three unit operation sequences
completes treatment for 3.15 1/s of the waste:
System 1 - chlorination
System 2 - chlorination followed by activated carbon
System 3 - ozonation followed by activated carbon
A schematic illustrating the system configurations, effluent sampling loca-
tions, and operating conditions is shown in Figure 5.
21
-------
TABLE 7. COLLECTION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES - POMONA
System 2 System 3
System 1 (Chlorination followed) (Ozonation followed
(Chlorination) by Activated Carbon by Activated Carbon
September 20, 1974 September 25, 1974 September 23, 1974
October 1, 1974 September 27, 1974 September 25, 1974
October 7, 1974 October 9, 1974 October 24, 1975
October 21, 1974 October 23, 1974 November 4, 1975
November 11, 1974 November 23, 1974 November 6, 1975
December 6, 1974 December 6, 1974 February 11, 1976
April 24, 1975 September 12, 1975 March 12, 1976
September 16, 1975 September 19, 1975 . March 4, 1976
November 7, 1975 September 24, 1975 ; March 16, 1976
TABLE 8. POMONA RAW WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
(Sampling Period: May 1974 to June 1975)
Parameter ,; "" Average Value
Suspended solids (mg/1) „ . 200
Total COD (mg/1) 320
Dissolved COD (mg/1) 50
Total Phosphate (mg/1 as P) " 11.1
pH 7.7
Alkalinity (mg/1 as CaCO-) 217
Calcium (mg/1) 51
Magnesium (mg/1) 10.9
Potassium (mg/1) , 10.5
Sodium (mg/1) 100
Chloride (mg/1) - 104
Sulfate (mg/1) 95
MBAS (mg/1) 2.0
Phenol (mg/1) 0.17
IDS (mg/1) 573
22
-------
OJ
0.35 in /s
8 mgd
s 6.31 1/s 3.15 1/s
Activated LOO gpn Carbon 50 gpm(
Sludge Adsorption 1
1
1
1
j
L
3.15 1/s
c:
0,
L
3
L2
Chlorine
Contact
J
Ozone
Contact
(l) Carbon ©
Absorption
1
1
1
1
1
Process effluent identification
Figure 5 . Flow diagram, Pomona pilot plant.
-------
System 1 involves a 1.5 hour chlorine contact time at a dosage level of
12 mg/1 and resultant residue of 10 mg/1. Operational problems have been
experienced with periodic fluctuations of chlorine dose levels.
System 2 consists of chlorination as described above and carbon adsorp-
tion. The carbon column is similar to the first column with a 10 min contact
time and a hydraulic loading rate of 2.38 1/s/m . The system is operated
with gravity feed. No chlorine is detected in the effluent after this
adsorption step. Spent carbon is regenerated by a 6-stage multihearth
furnace (926.7°C).
System 3 involves ozonation employing six 15.25-cm diameter columns
with a total of 21 min contact time followed by activated carbon. A 30 mg/1
ozone dosage level is used for disinfection. The ozone is fed into the
bottom of each column in a parallel mode, while the liquid flows downward,
with the columns in a series configuration.
Plant personnel were comparing the performance of the three systems to
produce a virus-free effluent of low total coliform content (below 2.2 per
100 ml) as part of their on-site program objectives. Efforts were made to
monitor ammonia, chlorine, and COD data from various process units, but
inorganic characterizations were not of concern. Summarized operating data
for the periods September 1, 1975 - November 30, 1975, and December 1,
1975 - April 30, 1976, are presented in Tables 9-12 for the respective
treatment systems.
Effluent Quality Goals
Systems 1 through 3 were being studied at the Pomona pilot plant facility
to compare their respective performances in achieving a virus-free effluent
with total coliforms below 2.2 per 100 ml. Anticipated uses of the effluent
from future full-scale facilities are for irrigation and industrial purposes.
DALIAS* TEXAS
General Description
Both primary and secondary 6.3 1/s advanced wastewater treatment pilot
plants in Dallas, Texas can treat effluent from the city's trickling filter
wastewater treatment plant. The pilot system incorporates the unit operations
of activated sludge, secondary clarification, upflow high lime clarification,
recarbonation, mixed media filtration, carbon adsorption, and chlorination.
Samples of process effluent were composited over a period extending from
noon of one day to nbon of the following day. Composite samples were collected
on September 4, 1974; September 12, 1974; October 16, 1974; October 21,
1974; December 13, 1974; January 24, 1975, and January 29, 1975. A grab
sample was collected on October 4, 1974. Samples for concentration by
reverse osmosis were collected on October 3-5, 1974, and December 10-12,
1974. Virus samples were taken on September 13 and December 10 and 11, 1974.
24
-------
TABLE 9. SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS THROUGH TREATMENT SYSTEMS 1 and 2 - POMONA
(September 1 - November 30, 1975)
£1
Water Quality
Parameters
NH -N, mg/lb
N02-N, mg/1
NO--N, mg/1
PH'
Temperature, °C
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Turbidity, FTU
Color
Total COD, mg/1
Dissolved COD, mg/1
TDS, mg/1
Alkalinity, mg/1
Secondary
Effluent
0.57
0.19
10.6
7.5
23.5
7.3
3.2
29
28.8
21.3
563
148
First
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
0.81
0.11
10.2
7.4
3.0
1.0
8
13.2
9.9
161
System 1
Chlorine
Contactor
Effluent
12.3
0.08
8.7
7.5
1.7
1.0
4
12.6
10.4
546
153
^System 2
Second
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
11.4
0.53
11.5
7.3
1.4
0.9
2
6.4
4.7
547
146
First
Stage
58.9
68.8
72.4
54.2
53.5
Removal %
Chlorine Second
Contactor Stage
43.3 17.6
50.0 50.0
4.5 49.2
54.8
ro
Ln
Based on 16 hr composite samples; NH_, NO ~ NO ~ and temperature were run on grab samples.
b
Ammonium chloride was added to the chlorine contactor influent.
-------
TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS THROUGH TREATMENT SYSTEM 3 - POMONA
(September 1 - November 30, 1975)
«a
Water Quality
Parameters
NH -N, mg/lb
NOf-N, mg/1
NO:r-N, mg/1
PH3
Temperature, °C
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Turbidity, FTU
Color
Total COD, mg/1
Dissolved COD, mg/1
TDS, mg/1
Alkalinity, mg/1
Secondary
Effluent
0.21
0.26
10.9
7.5
23.7
7.6
3.4
28
30.9
21.5
551
157
First
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
0.04
0.22
10.5
7.5
1.5
0.8
10
13.7
11.2
163
Ozone
Contactor
Effluent
0.06
0.11
11.0
7.7
1.2
0.6
4
12.5
11.0
538
159
Second
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
3.7
1.1
10.9
7.4
1.0
0.7
1
5.1
3.5
529
141
First
Stage
80.3
76.5
64.3
55.7
47.9
Removal %
Ozone
Contactor
20.0
25.0
60.0
8.8
Second
Stage
16.7
75.0
59.2
68.2
Based on 16-hr composite samples; NH.,, NOr, NOT, and temperature were run on grab samples.
, -> / j
Ammonium chloride was added to the chlorine contactor influent.
-------
TABLE 11. SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS THROUGH TREATMENT SYSTEMS 1 and 2 - POMONA
- (December 1, 1975 - April 30. 1976)
. > f\
Water Quality
Parameters
NH -N, mg/lb
NO^-N, mg/1
to NO^-N, mg/1.
**' pH
Temperature, °C
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Turbidity, FTU
Color
Total COD, mg/1
Dissolved COD, mg/1
TDS, mg/1
Alkalinity, mg/1
Secondary
Effluent
7.0
1.3
4.5
7.3
17.7
6.5
3.0
30
37
28
500
2
,
First
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
6.4
1.1
3.4
7.4
1.5
1.1
13
18
16
v
188
System 1
Chlorine
Contactor
Effluent
17.2
0.9
4.3
7.3
0.9
1.0
9
16
15
484
162
System 2
Second
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
17.3
0.9
4.4
7.3
1.3
0.9
1
8
6
482
- 168
First
Stage
•'
76.9
63.3
56.7
51.4
42.9
Removal %
Chlorine
Contactor
40.0
30.8
11.1
<-•
Second
Stage
88.9
50.0
60.0
a «•_<•.
Based on 16 hr sample; ML, NO- , NO., , and temperature were grab samples,
Ammonium chloride was added to the first-stage carbon effluent.
-------
oo
TABLE 12. SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS THROUGH TREATMENT SYSTEM 3 - POMONA
(December 1, 1975 - April 30, 1976)
Q
Water Quality
Parameters
NH -N, mg/lb
NO^-N, mg/1
NO^-N, mg/1
pH
Temperature, °C
Suspended Solids, mg/1
Turbidity, FTU
Color
Total COD, mg/1
Dissolved COD, mg/1
TDS, mg/1
Alkalinity, mg/1
Secondary
Effluent
5.1
1.7
5.8
7.3
20.5
9.4
3.2
33
43
31
514
199
First
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
6.2
1.8
5.3
7.3
3.9
1.9
18
26
22
186
Ozone
Contactor
Effluent
8.7
1.0
6.2
7.5
2.4
1.3
5
24
19
513
182
Second
Stage
Carbon
Effluent
10.1
7.3
1.6
0.8
3
12
9
504
170
First
Stage
_
-
9
_
-
59
41
46
40
29
-
6
Removal %
Ozone
Contactor
_
5
-
-
-
38
32
72
8
14
-
2
Second
Stage
_
-
-
_
-
3
38
40
50
53
-
7
aBased on 16-hr sample; NH™, NO ~, NO-", and temperature were grab samples.
Ammonium chloride was added to the first-stage carbon effluent.
-------
Influent Characteristics
Raw wastewater is comprised of approximately 88% municipal waste by
volume. About 35% of the BOD and suspended solids loading result from 221
major industrial and 1700 commercial users. The industrial clientele is
very diversified; film processing, plating, and meat packing dischargers are
included. No major petrochemical industry discharges waste into the system.
Characteristics of raw wastewater received at the city's full-scale trickling
plant during the months of study (September, October, and December 1974 and
January 1975) are presented in Table 13. As indicated, the raw wastewater
can be classified as a medium strength waste (5). After undergoing primary
clarification, the wastewater served as the influent to the pilot system.
TABLE 13. RAW WASTEWATER INFLUENT CHARACTERIZATION
(Dallas, Texas)
— — •- ••'— • • • • •
Determination
Suspended Solids (mg/1)
COD (mg/1)
BOD (mg/1)
TOC (mg/1)
Total P (mg/1)
Total N (mg/1)
NH3-N (mg/1)
Org. N (mg/1)
N02, NO^ (mg/1)
pH
Average Over
Study
211
432
199
153
10.6
28.9
11.8
16.8
0-3
7.3
Sewage
Strength*
M-W
.
M
-
-
W-M
W
M-W
M
^Classified according to Babbitt and Baumann (5), where
M = medium, and W = weak.
Treatment Sequence
Figure 6 illustrates the process configuration and operating conditions
during the September 1974 sampling. During the period of this project, the
pilot plant was treating primary effluent from the full-scale plant. After
primary clarification, a flow of 10 1/s is treated by a nitrifying activated
sludge process with a mixed liquor volatile suspended solids (MLVSS) concen-
tration of approximately 2400 mg/1 and a sludge age of 14 days. Process
control and hydraulic parameters for the months of study are summarized in
Tables 14 and 15.
29
-------
u>
o
Primary
Clarifier
Effluent
10.2 I/sec
No. 1 Activated
Sludge System
CaCO-:
FeCl.
6.3 I/sec
No. 2 Multi-
Media Filter
Chemical
Treatment
Upflow
Clarification
Chlorination
O
No. 3 Carbon
Column
13 I/sec /~V
4 I/sec
No. 4 Carbon
Column
No. 1 Mixed
Media Filter
Figure 6- Process configuration—September 1974, Dallas-
-------
TABLE 14. PROCESS CONTROL PARAMETERS
(Nitrifying Activated Sludge System, Dallas)
Control Parameter
Average Value
Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS) (mg/1) 3403
Mixed Liquor Volatile Suspended Solids (MLVSS) (mg/1) 2438
MLVSS/MLSS 0.71
F/M BOD (g BOD5 applied/day /g MLSS) 0.255
(g COD applied/day/g MLSS) 0.419
(g Soluble TOG applied/day/g MLSS) 0.062
(g NH3-N applied/day/g MLSS) .0.024
F/M TKN (g TKN applied/day/g MLSS) 0.038
Sludge Age (days) 14.1
Sludge Volume Index (SVI) 174
Mixed Liquor DO Uptake Rate (mg/l/hr) 23.6
Return Sludge DO Uptake Rate (mg/l/hr) 31.2
Aeration Basin DO (mg/1) 3.1
Average Temperature (°C) 22
F/M COD
F/M TOC
F/M NH3N
TABLE 15. HYDRAULIC PROCESS CONTROL
(Activated Sludge System, Dallas)
Hydraulic Parameter
Average Value
Flow, Q (1/s)
Recycle Flow, Q (1/s)
Detention Time, T (hours)
T with Recycle, Q+Q (hours)
Clarifier T (hours)
Clarifier T, Q+Q (hgurs)
Overflow Rate (1/s/m )
Weir Loading (1/s/m )
10.2
11.8
4.7
2.2
6.6
3.0
7.30
59.12
31
-------
The effluent is split and a flow of 6.3 1/s from the activated
sludge process is chemically treated by an Infilco Densator® upflow clarifier
with a 6-hour retention time. Lime and ferric chloride are employed as coagu-
lants. Respective concentration dosages are approximately 232 mg/1 and 15
mg/1. A single stage recarbonation basin follows the upflow clarifier. About
237 g of CCL per cubic meter results in a decrease from pH 10.9 to pH 6.4.
After recarbonation, a portion of the wastewater (2.4 1/s) is treated
by a mixed media filter (Neptune Microfloc media) for removal of suspended
solids and other associated matter. The filter is operated at«a hydraulic
loading rate of 2.31 1/s/m and a backwash rate of 12.22 1/s/m for suffi-
cient media cleaning.
Approximately 1.5 1/s of the filtered wastewater is pumped to two
carbon adsorption units operated in series. Empty bed contact time is 100
minutes and flow is in the downflow mode.
After carbon adsorption, a chlorine contact stage is employed with a 2-
hour detention time and a chlorine addition level of approximately 13 mg/1.
Effluent Quality Goals
The pilot plant is designed to produce an effluent that approaches
potable quality. Performance data for the system during the period covered
by this project are summarized in Tables 16 and 17.
i
TABLE 16. METALS REMOVAL SUMMARY - DALLAS
Metal
As*
B
Ba
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg*
Mn
Pb
Se*
Zn
Primary
Effluent
(mg/1)
30
0.30
0.19
0.015
0.068
0.139
0.566
0.21
0.068
0.078
3.43
0.109
A.S.
Effluent
(mg/1)
.17
0.35
0.10
0.009
0.026
0.030
0.44
0.19
0.042
0.033
2.03
0.067
Filter Carbon Column
Effluent
(mg/1)
4
0.37
0.16
0.004
. 0.010
0.086
0.094
0.21
0.010
0.042
0.57
0.063
Effluent
(mg/1)
2
0.39
0.16
0.003
0.010
0.043
0.087
0.13
0.01
0.032
0.50
0.050
Net
Percent
Reduction
93
—
16
80
85
69
85
38
85
59
85
54
*Micrograms/liter
During the period of study two major plant upsets were experienced.
The first of these involved the operation of the mixed media filter during
September. The backwash rate (8.96 1/s/m ) was not sufficient to properly
clear the media. A channeled filter bed resulted. Breakthrough occurred
32
-------
TABLE 17. PERFORMANCE SUMMARY - DALLAS
u>
Raw
Parameter Wastewater
Suspended Solids (mg/1)
BOD5 (mg/1)
COD (mg/1)
TOC (mg/1)
NH0-N (mg/1)
j
Org N (mg/1)
TKN (mg/1)
N02 & N03-N (mg/1)
Total N (mg/1)
Total P (mg/1)
PH
Alkalinity (mg/1 as CaCO-)
Hardness (mg/1 as CaCl-)
Turbidity (JTD)
TC/100 ml
FC/100 ml
F~ (mg/1)
Sp. Cond (pmhos)
Cl~ as NaCl (mg/1)
-2
SO, (mg/1)
4
TDS (mg/1)
Color (mg/1)
211
199
432
153
11.8
16.8
28.6
0.3
28.9
10.6
7.3
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Clarification, Mixed Media Carbon
Primary A.S. Recarbonation Filter Column
Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent
103
155
259
*
41
15.3
8.0
23.3
0.4
23.7
8.7
7.1
237
182
54
7.4xl07
2.2xl07
1.3
809
—
—
—
—
28
14
50
*
12
5.0
3.5
9.0
5.1
14.1
5.8
7.3
149
166
9
2.5xl06
S.lxlO5
1.3
710
109
98
479
—
32
2
20
*
11.6
4.4
2.0
6.4
4.9
11.3
0.44
6.9
257
287
10.7
1.4xl03
75
—
912
—
98
622
—
3,6
—
18
10.9
4.0
1.9
5.9
4.9
11.6
0.44
6.9
279
279
2.0
9.9xl03
803
1.1
916
—
94
—
14.5
1.6
2
4
6.7
3.6
0.9
4.5
5.1
10.0
0.41
7.0
271
284
1.1
590
95
1.3
905
131
—
608
0.8
Overall
Percent
Reduction
99,2
99.0
99.1
95.6
69.5
94.6
84.3
—
65.4
96.1
—
—
—
—
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Soluble TOC
-------
between September 11-18, 1974. The backwash water flow rates were increased
to 12.2 1/s/m , and no subsequent difficulties were experienced. Although a
sample for analysis was collected during this upset period (September 12,
1974), no significant affects on final effluent were apparent due to the
inherent buffer capacity of subsequent treatment processes. Effluent
suspended solids concentrations for September were not used in determining
average performance efficiency, as shown in Table 17.
Upsets with the activated sludge process were encountered in December.
A hydraulic washout of the biomass occurred because of an improperly cali-
brated flow meter. Biomass levels dropped from 3210 mg/1 to 250 mg/1 mixed
liquor suspended solids (MLSS). Addition of ferric chloride prompted recov-
ery; normal operation was attained by December 20.
ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA
General Description
Wastewater is first treated biologically by a 13.1 1/s contact stabili-
zation plant. Approximately 8.51 1/s of clarified effluent is polished by
mixed media filtration, followed by reverse osmosis. Samples of final
process effluent were collected on July 8, 1975.
Influent Characteristics
Approximately 86.5% of the raw wastewater is of domestic origin. The
remaining 13.5% is from industrial discharges; electronics is the major
industrial contributor. Table 18 illustrates the raw wastewater character-
istics as received at the secondary treatment facility.
TABLE 18. ESCONDIDO RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Parameter Average Value (July, 1975)
pH 7.6
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD ) (mg/1) 198
Suspended Solids (mg/1) 197
Total Dissolved Solids (IDS, mg/1) 1372
Temperature (°C) 23.3
Grease & Oil (mg/1) 23.4
Phenol (mg/1) 0.023
Chloride (mg/1 Cl~) 339
Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/1) 39.4
Total Nitrogen (mg/1) 52.0
Treatment Sequence
Figure 7 illustrates the process configuration and operation during the
July 8 sampling. After secondary treatment of 13.1 1/s by a biological
contact stabilization package treatment plant and subsequent clarification,
8.5 1/s of effluent is treated by mixed media filtration. Effluent from the
•
34
-------
13.1 l/s_
Contact
Stabilization
8.57 1/s / JJ|;JJ* \ 8.57 1/s
I Filter /
Tn SPWPT ^»>^^^X^
Reverse
Osmosis
I
6.36 1/s
Ul
2.21 1/s
reject
Figure 7. Process flow sequence, Escondido, California.
-------
filtration unit is characterized by a conductivity of 2190 pmhos, turbidity
of 1 JTU, pH of 5.7, and temperature of 25.5°C. A pH of 5.7 is maintained
to minimize precipitation and consequent membrane fouling and to prolong the
life of the reverse osmosis membrane. Following filtration, the wastewater
is treated by a reverse osmosis unit operating at a pressure of 22.44 attn.
Product flow is 6.36 1/s with a rejection of 2.21 1/s. Conductivity of the
feed, product, and brine are 2190, 158, and 8050 ymhos, respectively.
Effluent Quality Goals
The Escondido, California, pilot plant is designed to produce an
effluent suitable for ground water recharge.
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
General Description
3
This 0.657 m /s plants operated by the Orange County Water District and
designated Water Factory 21, processes municipal wastewater that has received
prior treatment by primary clarification and trickling filtration at the
Orange County sanitation district plant. The advanced wastewater treatment
processes include lime coagulation, ammonia stripping, two-stage recarbona-
tion, mixed media filtration, activated carbon adsorption, and chlorination.
Samples were collected during the months of January through March 1976.
Samples of AWT plant effluents were composited from 0800 of one day to 0800
of the following day and were analyzed by GSRI. Samples were collected on
the following dates: February 10, 12, 17, and 18; March 7,9, and 11, 1976.
Samples for organic concentration were taken on January 27 and February 3,
1976.
Influent Characteristics
The raw wastewater received at the Orange County sanitation district
plant contains 30% industrial wastes that are composed of pretreated metal
plating and refining wastes. Data on the raw wastewater characteristics are
shown in Table 19.
TABLE 19. ORANGE COUNTY RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Parameter Average Value (Jan-Mar., 1976)
Suspended Solids (mg/1)
Volatile Suspended Solids (mg/1)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (mg/1)
pH
Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/1)
Silver (mg/1)
Cadmium (mg/1)
Chromium (+6) (mg/1)
Copper (mg/1)
Lead (mg/1)
Zinc (mg/1)
415
307
275
7.8
60
0.019
0.023
0.360
1.10
0.45
1.10
36
-------
Treatment Sequence
A flow diagram of the reclamation process is shown in Figure 8. The
unit operations system is designed as two parallel trains, each capable of
treating one-half of the design flow.
Trickling filter effluent is treated initially in a high-lime clarifica-
tion system which is composed of separate rapid mix, flocculation, and
sedimentation basins. Retention times are 1 minute (each basin), 30 minutes,
Secondary
Effluent
Rapid
Mixing
Reclaimed
Lime
Flocculation
Settling
Slud ge Incineration
Lime Recovery
Ammonia
Stripping
Recarbonation
& Settling.
Carbon
Reactivation
Activated
Carbon
Adsorption
Filtration
Wells
Figure 8 . Wastewater reclamation process flow diagram - Orange County,
37
-------
o
and 85 minutes, respectively. Clarifier overflow rate is 17.63 1/s/m . Each
settling basin is equipped with settling tubes to obtain a lower suspended
solids level in the effluent. Lime in dosages of 425 to 540 mg/1 is added
as primary coagulant to the rapid mix basin to achieve a pH greater than
11.0. In addition, Dow A-23 polymer is added to the third stage flocculation
basin at dosages ranging from 0.1 to 0.25 mg/1 to improve settling. The
clarification process reduces COD, phosphate, and turbidity to acceptable
levels (5).
The effluent from the chemical clarification basins is pumped to the
top of the cooling/ammonia stripping towers for ammonia removal. The counter-
current towers have induced-draft airflow and a hydraulic loading rate of
0.679 1/s/m ; the air flow to water ratio is 49.11 1/s per liter of waste-
water. Packing depth is 7.62 m and fan1diameters are 5.49 m.
The high pH of the wastewater (11) is decreased to a level near 7.5 by
a two-stage recarbonation unit which incorporates intermediate settling.
This process is intended to increase recovery of calcium carbonate, thereby
reducing hardness and total dissolved solids. Carbon dioxide used to reduce
the pH is furnished by lime recalcination furnace stack gases; approximately
317.5 kg per day of C0» is added to the wastewater. Detention times in the
recarbonation and settling basins are 15 minutes (each), and 40 minutes,
respectively. Sludges generated are thickened and centrifuged prior to
recalcination at high temperature.
Recarbonation basin effluent passes through open, gravity flow multi-
media filters. The filter media beds are[76.2 cm deep and consist of
stratified coarse coal, silica, and garnet sand. The supporting medium is
layered silica and garnet with a Leopold underdrain system. The filter
system is designed to operate in parallel. Each of the four filters has a
capacity of 0.164 m /s with a throughput rate of 3.40 1/s/m . Backwash is
effected at a rate of 10.18 1/s/m . Alum and polymer are added at 15 mg/1
and 0.05 mg/1, respectively, to enhance turbidity removal.
Activated carbon adsorption follows mixed-media filtration. Seventeen
parallel carbon columns, each containing 40.82 me€ric tons of activated
carbon, operate in the pressure, upflbw mode. Carbon depth in the 3.66 m
diameter columns is 7.32 m. Contact time is 30 minutes, with a corresponding
hydraulic loading of 3.94 1/s/m . Regeneration of spent carbon is accom-
plished by a multihearth furnace having a capacity of 5443 kg of dry carbon
per day.
Polished effluent from the activated carbon columns flows by gravity to
the chlorine contact basin for disinfection and for oxidation of any remain-
ing ammonia. Contact time is 30 minutes. Effluent from the chlorination
basin flows by gravity to the blending and storage reservoir and is blended
50:50 with desalted water and/or deep well water.
'•'-'• L •
Performance of the AWT reclamation plant during the study period is
summarized in Tables 20 and 21.
38
-------
TABLE 20- PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS - ORANGE COUNTY WATER FACTORY 21
(February and March, 1976)
CO
Parameter
PH
Turbidity (JTU)
Conductivity (lamhos)
Ca (mg/1)
Mg (mg/1)
Na (mg/1)
Cl (mg/1)
S04 (mg/1)
PO.-P (mg/1)
4
OH (mg/1)
HC03 (mg/1)
Org N (mg/1)
NH3-N (mg/1)
TOC (mg/1)
COD (mg/1)
T H (CaC03)
F (mg/1)
B (mg/1)
Ammonia
AWT Clarifier Tower Filter Carbon Final Effluent
Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent Following Chlorination
7.7 11.4
22.8 1.9
1785.7
102.4 151.4
24.8 1.2
201 . 0
225.9
334.5
5.4 0.12 '•?-
1.6 91.6
0.0 230.2
284.4 0.0
2.1 1.5
47.0 22.2
- - 15.2 6.8
107.2 52.6 - 42.4 11.1
6.7
0.8
1452.1
118.3
\
239.4
—
356.1
0.0
0.0
142.0
0.85
23.6
-
-
288.4
0.68
0.62
-------
TABLE 21. HEAVY METAL REMOVAL - ORANGE COUNTY WATER FACTORY 21
(February and March. 1976)
o
Metal
Analysis (pg/1) AWT Influent Clarifier Effluent Filter Effluent Carbon Effluent
Ag
As
Ba
Cd
Cr+6
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Pb
Se
Zn
4.48
2.02
80.50
6.84
235.76
305.76
221.4
0.29
39.17
26.62
7.36
292.18
1.31
1.16
35.08
2.20
122.52
105.30
15.44
0.26
2.11
11.46
7.49
36.56
1.22
1.01
26.62
1.74
110.94
93.58
33.38
0.35
2.17
11.38
7.42
709.33
1.20
1.02
25.54
1.13
64.18
18.14
179.88
0.32
4.17
10.58
7.40
139.88
-------
Effluent Quality Goals
The Orange County AWT plant is designed to produce an effluent suitable
for groundwater injection. The injected reclaimed wastewater blended with
desalted seawater will be used to prevent seawater from flowing into the
groundwater basin. Regulatory agency requirements for the injection water
are listed in Table 22.
TABLE 22. REGULATORY AGENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR INJECTION WATER
Orange County Water Factory 21
Constituent
Ammonium
Sodium
Total hardness (CaCO_)
Sulfate
Chloride
Total nitrogen (N)
Fluoride
Boron
MBAS
Hexavalent Chromium
Cadmium
Selenium
Phenol
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Arsenic
Iron
Manganese
Barium
Silver
Cyanide
Maximum Concentration
(mg/1)
1.0
110.0
220.0
125.0
120.0
10.0
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.001
1.0
0.05
0.005
0.05
0.3
0.05
1.0
0.05
0.02
Electrical conductivity
PH
Taste
Odor
Foam
Color
Filter effluent turbidity
Carbon adsorption column
effluent COD
Chlorine contact basin
effluent
900 umhos/cm
6.5 - 8.0
None N
None
None
None
1:0 JTU
30 mg/1
Free chlorine
residual
41
-------
SECTION 4
DETAILS OF ANALYTICAL PROGRAM
The detailed discussion of the analytical program is divided into two
main areas: (1) preparation of the organic concentrate samples, isolated by
reverse osmosis, extractions, and solvent evaporations, and (2) characteriza-
tion of the treatment system effluents with respect to parameters used to
determine potable quality water.
REVERSE OSMOSIS CONCENTRATION
Reverse osmosis is one of the few processes which remove and concen-
trate organic materials from large volumes of water and at the same time
retain the major portion of organics originally present in the sample. In
reverse osmosis, a semipermeable membrane separates two isolated solution
compartments as illustrated in Figure 9. Osmosis is defined as the flow of
solvent through a membrane and results from the drive to equalize any concen-
tration difference between the solutions in the two compartments. , If the
solute concentration is greater in the concentration compartment and if the
membrane is permeable only to solvent, the solvent will flow from the per-
meate compartment into the concentrate compartment. This arrangement
dilutes the solution in the concentrate compartment and equalizes the
concentrations. The net pressure (P, - ?„) which must be exerted to stop
the osmotic flow of solvent is defined as the osmotic pressure. If the net
pressure is increased until it is greater than the osmotic pressure, the
flow of solvent will be reversed; solvent will flow from the concentrated
solution to the more dilute solution, further concentrating the sample. This
state of the system is defined as reverse osmosis (RO). A more complete
discussion of membrane separation of organics in drinking water is avail-
able (4). ^
For this project, a reverse osmosis system was designed to utilize the
broad retentive abilities of a combination of two different membranes to
concentrate the organics in effluent from advanced waste treatment systems.
By recirculating the plant effluent through the concentrate compartments at
a pressure greater than the osmotic pressure, the volume of effluent is
reduced and the sample concentrated. The basic components of this reverse
osmosis system are shown in Figure 10. The system consists of two recirculat-
ing reverse osmosis subsystems in series; the permeate from the first is
feed for the second. The effluent to be concentrated is therefore processed
twice before being run to sewer. This system is capable of concentrating
large volumes of water in a relatively short time. The sample volume reduc-
tion can be done with a typical average solute rejection of better than 90%
42
-------
Concentrate
Compartment
Permeate
Compartment
\_
Semi-Permeable
Membrane
Figure 9- Theoretical model of reverse osmosis operation,
43
-------
a Auto
Level
Control
I
1 1
I
\ t
Sump Fill ' '
Control
Valve
v v
— . TT
pH
Control
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
I*
Cellulose Acetate
Unit's Process
Drum
208 liters capacity
|
<„
Back
Pressure
Valve
UA
Module
V—
— rr~
i
j
/ \
Auto
/ \ Level
/ \ Control
/ Base\ ^
C I
v ^>
\r
1 1
r
L
t
^
•HBM
bio\
LMet(
*w
r
^ % *
1
__ _ * _
i
r
Nylon
TIni f '
pH
Control
**
r-U
o
U L1JL L L?
Process
Drum
208 liters capacity
Back \
Pressure f
Valve
Nylon
Module
— > O
;
/
'
^^••a
Sewer
High Pressure
Pump
High Pressure
Pump
Figure 10. Basic reverse osmosis concentrator used by GSRI
-------
There are two additional advantages realized with this RO system. As
with all reverse osmosis systems, the energy consumption is lower than that
of some other water purification/concentration methods involving phase
changes; e.g., distillation, freeze drying. Although energy was not a major
concern in this project, the detrimental effects of large energy inputs were
avoided. For example, the increased energy in other systems often is in the
form of increased solution temperatures which can cause a loss or transforma-
tion of certain organics. There is little temperature increase in the
reverse osmosis system. *
The second advantage of the designed system was mobility. Two complete
reverse osmosis systems were used: one by GSRI personnel, the other by NISR
personnel. The GSRI equipment was contained in a small portable trailer
which could be moved from location to location. The NISR unit was similar
except that the process drums were too large to be moved conveniently from
site to site. Therefore, the effluent water had to be transported to the
concentrator for processing. The two reverse osmosis systems are shown in
Figures 10 and 11. Samples for the concentrations were collected according
to the schedule in Table 23.
TABLE 23. ORGANIC CONCENTRATE SAMPLE COLLECTION DATES
Sample
Number
1
2
3
4
5;'
6 , ,,,
7,
8
9
10
11
12
Sampling
Code
Lake Tahoe .1
Blue Plains I
; Pomona I
Pomona II
Dallas I
Lake Tahoe II
Dallas II
Blue Plains II
Pomona III •
Escondido
Orange County I
Orange County II
Date
September 5, 1974
September 19-21, 1974
September 25, 1974
October 2, 1974
October 3-5, 1974
October 24, 1974
December 10-12/1974
May 29 - June 1, 1975
June 17, 1975
July 8, 1975
January 27, 1976
February 3, 1976
Description of Concentration Processes
Mobile System—
Figure 10 represents the GSRI portable system. There are two recirculat-
ing subsystems, each with a 208 liter (55 gallon) process drum for retaining
the two concentrates. The subsystem centered around the cellulose acetate
membrane is the first to process the plant effluent. The permeate from the
cellulose acetate membrane is reprocessed by a DuPont Permeasep® nylon based
-------
Cellulose Acetate
Unit's Process
Drum
1514 liter capacity
Back
Pressure
Valve
i
CA
Module
High Pressure Pump
Nylon Unit's
Process Drum
1" " 4 liter capacity
Back
Pressure
Valve
Nylon
Module
'v
a I
i
High Pressure Pump
Figure
-Reverse osmosis concentrator used by NISR
-------
membrane. Water permeating the nylon membrane is run to waste. In this
procedure, two concentrates are generated: one retained by the cellulose
acetate membrane and one retained by the nylon membrane. The process drums
are maintained at a full level until the total volume of water to be processed
has been taken in. At that time the sump (feed) pump is turned off. The
solution level is automatically regulated; a conductance-based level controller
and probes control the fill valve on the cellulose acetate subsystem and both
high pressure pumps on the nylon subsystem. This arrangement controls
solution levels and permits automatic system operation as long as the sump
pump is running. The only other controls are the pH and pressure controls
for each subsystem.
Because fresh effluent is being added continually to the system, and
because of possible preferential treatment of H or OH by the membranes, pH
control is necessary to maintain the cellulose acetate system at pH 5.5 and
the nylon subsystem at pH 10.0. The pH controller regulates a valve which
meters acid or base as needed.
The operating pressures for each subsystem are maintained at 13.6 atm
by manipulation of the back pressure valves.
When the total amount of water has been reduced to approximately 189.25
liters, the sump pump is shut off and the level of concentrate in the
process drum is further reduced to approximately 38 liters. At this point,
the cellulose acetate membrane subsystem is shut off, initiating the drop of
solution level in the nylon membrane subsystem. The nylon unit's concentrate
also is reduced in volume to approximately 38 liters.
Stationary System—
The samples collected from pilot plants on the West Coast were
collected by employees of NISR under direction of Dr. Paul Cantor. The
equipment used was functionally the same as the mobile unit used by GSRI
personnel, except that the process drums on the NISR system were much larger
as shown in Figure 11. Cellulose acetate processing was in one large
batch so that there was no need for level control equipment. Adjustment
of pH was manual. Water was transported from the pilot plants to NISR in
clean, stainless steel drums.
The following sections describe the sequence of steps required to
secure the aqueous concentrates from the plant effluents.
Reverse Osmosis System Flushing
The GSRI group used the following pretreatment procedure for each
concentration: Upon'arriving at an AWT plant site, the reverse osmosis
system was filled with plant effluent, run for 15 - 30 minutes, and drained.
This was repeated two times. The units were then set up to operate auto-
matically for 12-24 hours. At the end of this flush period all solutions
were drained and the system was set for automatic operation.
47
-------
Prior to the concentration of each sample the NISR group flushed the
stationary system with tap water for at least five hours, purging the
modules of preservatives.
Sample Acquisition
The GSRI group towed the reverse osmosis system to the site of the AWT
plant to be tested. After the initial flush period, the reverse osmosis
system processed fresh effluent at approximately 18.9 - 37.8 liters per
hour. This rate was maintained until the total volume, 1514 - 1892 liters,
was processed.
The NISR group visited each plant and filled eight clean stainless
steel drums with plant effluent. The drums and water were transported to
NISR and pumped into the clean cellulose acetate reverse osmosis process
drum.
Sample Concentration
The process criteria for reverse osmosis processing of the concentrates
did not vary throughout the study. The pH of the cellulose acetate subsystem
was maintained at 5.5 and the pH of the nylon subsystem at 10.0. Pressure
for both subsystems was approximately 13.6 atm.
In addition to pH and pressure, membrane rejections (based on solution
conductivities), solution temperatures, and TOC values were monitored occas-
sionally during the sample reverse osmosis concentration.
When the process drum was filled with plant effluent, the high pressure
reverse osmosis pumps were started. The pressure was adjusted by manipulat-
ing the back pressure valve. The rate of water permeation through the
cellulose acetate membrane usually ranged from 18.9 - 37.8 liters per hour.
The GSRI nylon subsystem started as soon as enough water had permeated the
cellulose acetate membrane to fill the process drum of the nylon unit. The
nylon subsystem at NISR was run intermittently at the operator's discretion.
Pressures were adjusted by the back pressure valve.
Level controllers on the GSRI system maintained drum volume at about
189 liters. This was done by automatic control of the fill valve-sump
pump combination on the cellulose acetate subsystem. On the nylon subsystem,
solution level was maintained by on-off control of the high pressure pump.
Control of pH was automatic on the GSRI system; the pH of NISR system
was controlled manually. On the GSRI system, when processing of the total
volume was complete, the sump pump was shut off, and the solution level in
the cellulose acetate process drum dropped. The unit was manually shut off
and drained when the volume was reduced to approximately 18.9 - 37.8 liters.
Volume of-the-nylon subsystem then decreased. When a level of 18.9 - 37.8
liters was attained, this subsystem was also shut off and drained.
The NISR reverse osmosis system reduced the samples from each subsystem
to approximately 151 liters. Samples were air freighted to GSRI for further
48
-------
volume reduction to 18.9 - 37.8 liters. All final aqueous concentrates were
iced down for transport and stored in a cooler at 4°C prior to laboratory
workup.
Table 23 lists the 12 AWT plants for which effluent waters were concen-
trated under this program and the dates of those samplings. Numbers have
been assigned to each sample for future reference in the report.
ORGANIC SOLVENT EXTRACTIONS AND EVAPORATIONS
The aqueous concentrates isolated by reverse osmosis contained a high
salt burden in addition to organics. Since these concentrates were to be
used in another EPA project involving toxicity studies and identification of
specific organics, the inorganic salt burden had to be reduced. Solvent
extraction was used to achieve this reduction.
The procedure used in sample workup was basically the same throughout
the project. Exceptions are noted below. The original extraction procedure
suggested by the EPA (Table 24) was used for the first seven samples listed
in Table 23. Two procedural modifications, approved by the Project Officer,
were effected after sample number 7, Dallas II.
In the first modification, the number of extraction steps performed
with each solvent was increased. The samples prepared from each solvent
extract were split into two portions: 80 percent (by volume) to be used for
toxicological studies and 20 percent for chemical characterization. The
toxicological fractions were combined before drying. This procedure (Table
25) was used on samples 8, 9, and 10.
In the second modification, a .vacuum distillation step was added to the
sample workup. This procedure, detailed in Table 26, had been adopted in a
similar project (EPA 68-03-2367), and was designed to improve retention of
organics during the removal of milliliter quantities of methylene chloride
and pentane. This procedure was used for the last two sets of samples,
Orange County I and II.
The samples are listed in Table 27 with the extraction method used for
the preparation of each organic concentrate. Six organic concentrates were
prepared from samples 1-7, three from the product of the cellulose acetate
and three from the nylon unit. An additional sample was prepared on samples
8-12 due to the 80/20 split. The 20 percent portions of the six extracts
were kept separate for chemical analysis and the 80 percent portions were
combined and dried by the procedures outlined in Tables 25 and 26.
All samples were shipped to Dr. Frederick Kopfler, EPA, Cincinnati, for
disposition. At the time of this report, portions of the samples had been
sent to Stanford Research Group for mutagenic studies, which have been
completed. Further analytical work may be performed as a result of the data
from these mutagenic studies.
49
-------
TABLE '24 . INITIAL EXTRACTION PROCEDURE FOR RO CONCENTRATES
1. If precipitated salts are present, remove by filtration. Lyophilize
salts, crush, and extract three times with pentane followed by three
extractions with methylene chloride. Concentrate extracts as described
below for concentration of extracts of aqueous phase (Note 1).
2. For each liter of concentrate add 75 ml of pentane and extract for 10
minutes. If the extraction is conducted in an Erlenmeyer flask with
a magnetic stirrer, the rate of mixing should be just fast enough to
disperse the pentane.
3. Separate the pentane from the aqueous layer (Note 2).
4. Extract the aqueous concentrate two more times with 50 ml pentane/liter
for three minutes each time. Combine all pentane extracts.
5. Dry the combined pentane extract by adding 7 g of anhydrous sodium
sulfate/500 ml pentane and allow to stand overnight (Note 3).
6. Concentrate the extract in a Kuderna-Danish apparatus to a volume of
5-10 ml.
7. Concentrate to 1 ml by placing the tube in a water bath (40-50 C) under
a gentle stream of dry nitrogen.
8. Extract the aqueous phase just as before, using methylene chloride
instead of pentane. Treat extracts as before.
9- Adjust the aqueous phase to a pH=2 with HC1.
10. Extract as before with methylene chloride.
NOTES
Note 1: All glassware should be solvent rinsed immediately before use and
the solvent discarded.
Note 2: Breaking emulsions can be accomplished by passing the emulsified
extract through a 2.5 cm column (no frit) containing a 2.5 cm ball of glass
wool. After wetting the wool with fresh extraction solvent and discarding
this rinse, pour the emulsion through the glass wool. Ignore the debris that
remains. It may be necessary to force the emulsion through with a little air
pressure. After the emulsion is broken, inspect the extract. If two distinct
layers are present, separate the aqueous phase from solvent before drying the
solvent phase.
Note 3: Before using anhydrous sodium sulfate for the drying of extracts it
should be heated to 500°C for two hours and stored in a glass stoppered
bottle. !
50
-------
TABLE 25. MODIFIED EXTRACTION PROCEDURE FOR RO CONCENTRATES
1. If precipitated salts are present, remove by filtration. Lyophilize
salts, crush, and extract three times with pentane followed by three
extractions with methylene chloride. Concentrate extracts as described
below for concentration of extracts of aqueous phase (Note 1, Table 24) .
2. Add 1/10 the total volume (total volume = 7% of aqueous concentrate) of
pentane to the concentrate using the apparatus shown in Figure 12. When .
the layers have separated, draw off the solvent with a large pipette.
3. Separate the pentane from the aqueous layer (Note 2, Table 24) .
4. Extract the aqueous concentrate 9 more times using 1/10 the total
volume of pentane each time. Combine all pentane extracts.
5. Dry the combined pentane extract by adding 7 g of anhydrous sodium
sulfate/500 ml pentane and allow to stand overnight (Note 3, Table 2',).
6. Concentrate the extract in a Kuderna-Danish apparatus to a volume of
5-10 ml.
7. Concentrate to 1 ml by placing the tube in a water bath (40-50°C) under
a gentle stream of dry nitrogen.
8. Extract the aqueous phase just as before, using methylene chloride
instead of pentane. Treat extracts as before.
9. Adjust the aqueous phase to a pH =2 with HC1.
10. Extract as before with methylene chloride.
11. Split each of the six 1-ml samples' from step 7 (three from the cellulose
acetate concentrate and three from the nylon concentrate) into two
fractions: one 0.2 ml sample to be used for analysis and 0.8 ml to be
used for the toxicological sample (step 12).
12. Combine all six 0.8 ml samples along with rinses and dry with clean, dry
nitrogen gas at 40°-50°C.
51
-------
Addition Funnel Assembly
Overhead
* Mechanical Stirrer
Concentrate
Reservoir
Figure 12. Assembly for extraction of organics
from water concentrate.
52
-------
TABLE 26. FINAL EXTRACTION PROCEDURE FOR RO CONCENTRATES
1. If precipitated salts are present, remove by filtration. Lyophilize salts,
crush, and extract three times with pentane followed by three extractions
with methylene chloride. Concentrate extracts as described below for con-
centration of extracts of aqueous phase.
2. Add 1/10 the total volume (total volume = 7% of aqueous concentrate) of
pentane to the concentrate using the apparatus shown in Figure 11. When
the layers have separated, draw off the solvent with a large pipette.
3. Separate the pentane from the aqueous layer (Note 2, Table 24).
4. Extract the aqueous concentrate 9 more times using 1/10 the total volume
of pentane each time. Combine all pentane extracts.
5. Dry the combined pentane extract by adding 7 g of anhydrous sodium sul-
fate/500 ml pentane and allow to stand overnight (Note 3, Table 24).
6. Concentrate the extract in a Kuderna-Danish evaporator to a volume of
2.0 ml. Separate this sample into two portions of 0.4 ml for GC-MS •
analysis and 1.6 ml for the toxicological sample (step 11).
7. Extract the aqueous phase just as before, using methylene chloride
instead of pentane. Treat extracts as before.
8. Adjust the aqueous phase to a pH=2 with HC1.
9. Extract as before with methylene chloride.
10. Combine all 1.6 ml extract fractions from step 6 and rinses and remove
excess solvent by vacuum distillation at 21" Hg vacuum and 50°C bath.
11. Dry combined sample at 40°-50°C with clean, dry nitrogen gas.
53
-------
TABLE 27. PROCEDURES USED IN PREPARATION OF ORGANIC CONCENTRATES
Sample Number
from Table 23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
Extraction
Procedure
Table 24
Table 24
Table 24
Table 24
Table 24
Table 24
Table 24
Table 25
. Table 25
Table 25
Table 26
Table 26
Total Organic Concen-
trate Fractions Prepared
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
VIRUS CONCENTRATION
Collection and concentration of samples for virus analysis were performed
under subcontract by the Carborundum Company. The contract required that 2
samples be collected at each of 6 AWT sites for a total of 12 samples. How-
ever, Carborundum was unable to obtain samples at Orange County, California,
one of the desired sites, because of delayed start-up. A total of 23 samples
were collected from the remaining 5 treatment plants. In all cases, samples
were taken from treatment plant final effluent, except at the Pomona Research
Facility, where waters were subjected to three alternate processes prior to
sampling.
Field Sampling
® •
The Carborundum Aquella virus concentrator was used throughout the
program for field processing of water samples. Typically, 378 liters of
water was processed, and virus recovered in a 10-20 ml solution. Standard
methodology (6) was used. The virus concentrator was transported to each
sampling site, and concentration procedures were conducted in the field. A
local power source was utilized in all cases.
t
Virus concentrates (10-20 ml) were frozen at dry ice temperature (-78°C)
at the sampling station and were shipped by air freight to Carborundum's
virus assay laboratory in New Hampshire. Federal and airline regulations and
all requirements under Title 42 of the Public Health Laws were strictly
followed.
Laboratory Assays ;
-- ~ " ~~ — — • '".-
Samples were analyzed for virus content at the Jackson Estuary Laboratory,
Durham, New Hampshire. The schematic in Figure 1.3 illustrates the route taken
54
-------
Ui
Frozen Sample Received
Storage at -80 C until tests initiated
I
Sample isotonic, bacterially sterile
I
One-half sample
I
Buffalo Green Monkey Monolayers
One-half sample
Primary Monkey Kidneys*
(African Green)
Plaque development procedures initiated on each
of above species
Incubation at 37 C for 14 to 24 days
I
No plaques formed
I
Results: Negative
Plaques formed
Plaque(s) "picked" and transferred to
a fresh monolayer (same type as for
original plaque)
I
Cytopathic effect obtained.
Plaque forming probability determined by subsequent assay
I
Virus identity determination: by intersecting pool, serum neutralization tests
using Lim-Benyesh-Melnick pools.
*Monolayers inoculated with sterile diluent and overlain with overlay media are
used to control (a) monolayer integrity, (b) freedom from adventitious virus, and
(c) bacterial contaminants in inoculum.
Figure 13. Sample laboratory analysis flow sheet.
-------
by each sample within the laboratory. Until testing, each sample was main-
tained at -80°C to prevent denaturation and changes detrimental to virus
recovery. Removal of bacteria, yeast and mold was accomplished by an 8-16 hr
ether treatment using a 5-10 percent final concentration of ether.
Sample testing was split between two culture types, Buffalo Green Monkey
(BGM) and Primary Monkey Kidney-African Green (PMK), to obtain as great an
isolation sensitivity as possible. All examinations in cell cultures were
made by means of plaquing, to separate individual viruses and obtain data on
the number of viruses present. Cell culture incubation periods of up to 24
days maximized development of slow forming plaques, thus allowing recovery of
natural viruses.
Following the formation of a plaque, virus was recovered by Jieans of
"plaque picks." The identified virus was then transferred to a fresh culture
monolayer with an overlay medium. The monolayer was always of the same type
as that used for the initial recovery. Identification of isolates was made
by conventional intersecting pool serum neutralization tests carried out in
microtiter plates (Lim-Benyesh-Melnick antisera pools).
Results
Of the 23 samples collected, 5 were shown to contain virus: 1 sample at
Dallas, 3 samples at Pomona, and 1 sample at Blue Plains. The experimental
details and results are presented in Table 28.
The Blue Plains sample is labeled "unusual" due to the exceptionally
high number (153) of virus plaques isolated; this high virus concentration
finding could not be duplicated during subsequent or prior runs at the Blue
Plains site. Operational reports from the Blue Plains plant show that there
was an unusually high total bacteriological plate count on May 30, 1975. A
total plate count of 1600 organisms per 100 ml was measured in samples
collected and analyzed by Blue Plains personnel on this date.
The three virus-containing samples obtained at the Pomona site were not
virus typed (although each was positively shown to contain virus). Six virus
plaques were isolated at sample site 4A (System 2, chlorination followed by
carbon adsorption), and one virus plaque was isolated at sample site 3A
(System 1, chlorination).
The active sample collected at the Dallas site was shown to contain two
plaque-forming units, each identified as polio virus 1. Recovery of polio
virus 1 from a natural source is not surprising, since other field studies
of a number of polluted bodies of water have shown polio virus to be the most
common enterovirus encountered (approximately 60% of the time).
COLLECTION AND SHIPMENT OF EFFLUENT SAMPLES
The wastewater treatment facilities monitored in this study included
three pilot plants and two full-sized plants. Each was visited by GSRI
personnel to coordinate sample collection and shipping. Site personnel were
56
-------
TABLE 23. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS FOR VIRAL SAMPLING
Enteric
Viruses, PFU
Date
9/13/74
12/10/74
12/11/74
11/11/74
11/11/74
11/12/74
11/12/74
11/04/75
11/04/75
11/05/75
11/05/75
11/06/75
11/06/75
11/07/75
8/16/74
8/16/74
11/16/74
9/11/74
4/15/75
4/16/75
5/30/75
9/09/75
7/03/75
Location Type Water Sampled
Dallas Final Effluent
Pomona 4A System 2 Cl + C
3A System 1 Cl
4A System 2 Cl + C
3A System 1 Cl
3B System 3 0-
3B System 3 0^
4A System 2 Cl + C
4A System 2 Cl + C
3B System 3 0-
3 A System 1 Cl
4A System 2 Cl + C
Tahoe Final Effluent
Luther Pass
Blue Plains Final Effluent
Escondido Final Effluent
BGM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
89
0
0
PMK
0
2
1
0
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
64
0
0
Remarks
Identified as
Polio I
Ident. not avail
Ident. not avail
Ident. not avail
Run A: Morning
Run B: Afternoon
Run A: Morning
Run B: Afternoon
Run A: Morning
Run B: Afternoon
Run A
System 1
System 2
I!
Unusual : Total
Bacteria Plate
Count 1600 organ-
isms/100 ml.
57
-------
requested to provide operating data such as flow diagrams, daily flow measure-
ments, and other routinely assembled information. Data were also requested
for specific parameters that had to be measured immediately after sampling.
Sampling procedures and tentative schedules were sent to the appropriate
personnel following the site inspections. Scheduling changes were required
at all sites during the course of the program.
Miniature Carbon Adsorption Method (CAM) samplers were shipped to the
AWT plants in Dallas, Pomona, Blue Plains, Escondido, and South Lake Tahoe in
August 1974. Instructions for assembling and operating the CAM samplers were
sent with each unit. The Orange County, California, facility was not expected
to be operational until January 1975.
GSRI prepared the sample containers prior to shipment to the AWT plants.
The containers were washed, and the proper preservatives were added (2).
Labels included the preservative and the concentration of preservative
following addition of the water sample. On each label were spaces designated
for date and time of sampling and sample number; this information was to be
added by the sampling personnel. A typical sample set required three styro-
foam shipping cartons and the following containers: 11 plastic one-liter
bottles, 6 glass one-liter bottles, 1 four-ounce sterile bottle, 1 35-ml
bottle, 1 mini-CAM sample column, and 6 packages of reusable ice substitute.
The CAM sample column contained 70 grams of activated carbon (Filtrasorb
200). All glass containers were securely packed with foam rubber to prevent
breakage and were shipped via air freight to the AWT plants.
Sample collection was accomplished in 48 hours if no difficulties were
encountered. The mini-CAM sampler was started 24 hours prior to initiation
of the 24-hour composite sample collection since a 48-hour, controlled flow
rate sampling is required. The 35-ml container was filled in three additions
throughout the 24-hour sampling period and was shipped to the EPA labora-
tories in Cincinnati, Ohio. The bacterial sample was collected as a grab
sample at the end of the 24-hour sampling period. The remaining samples were
taken from the 24-hour composite samples routinely collected by site personnel
as part of their on-going operations. An 18.9-liter grab sample was taken in
lieu of a composite sample when samples were collected simultaneously for
viral and organic concentrates.
Following collection of samples, the cartons were repacked and shipped
to GSRI-New Orleans via air freight. Upon their arrival in New Orleans, La.,
pesticide samples were repackaged and immediately shipped by bus to the New
Iberia, Louisiana laboratories for analysis. The bacteriological sample was
shipped to a subcontracting laboratory in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. Transit
times varied from a few hours for the shipment of pesticide samples from New
Orleans to New Iberia to 1-13 days for air freight shipments. The samples
from the AWT plant at Lake Tahoe were in transit the longest since these
samples had to be trucked to an air freight office.
A variety of difficulties encountered by the AWT plants necessitated
some schedule revisions for sample collections. Minimal schedule revision
58
-------
was needed at the Dallas and Lake Tahoe facilities. The AWT plant at Blue
Plains was closed for an 8-month period following collection of. the first
three samples; however, sampling proceeded regularly when the plant was
reopened. Most scheduling difficulties were reported from the Pomona AWT
plant, where three different treatment processes were being evaluated. The
three processes, each operated for a 24-hour period, differed in the final
treatment of the effluent. Flexible scheduling was required so that repre-
sentative samples could be obtained for each of the three processes. The
Orange County AWT plant, scheduled to be operational in January 1975, suffered
several major delays. The sampling was not completed until March 12,.1976,
and a mini-CAM sampler was not provided.
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR EFFLUENT CHARACTERIZATION ,-.. :
The analytical procedures used to quantify the constituents in the
effluent of the AWT plants were selected from two sources: ,
1. Manual of Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (2).
2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 13th
Edition (1).
These sources will be referred to as the EPA Manual and Standard Methods,
respectively, in the following discussion. Quality assurance of the data was
provided by following the guidelines in the Handbook for Analytical Quality
Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories (3).
• ' • -.. i. • ..,• , - .
Parameters investigated are listed in Table 29. The information regard-
ing storage requirements and preservatives for stabilizing the samples was
obtained from the EPA Manual. The majority of the analyses required cooling
to 4°C and collection and storage in plastic or glass containers. Selected
parameters requiring additional preservatives are listed in Table 3Q. The
minimum detection limits for each parameter are presented in Table 31. A >>-
brief description of the method used, special quality control measures :.
required, and instrumentation employed for each parameter monitored in the
present is presented below.
• .'''»••
Organic Constituents
Total Organic Carbon (TOC) —
Organic carbon in the samples was converted to carbon dioxide (CO-) by
catalytic combustion. The CO- was measured directly by infrared detectioni
The amount of C0» is directly proportional to the concentration of carbon-
aceous material xn the sample. Instrumentation included Beekman 915 and 915A
Carbon Analyzers. Quality control samples analyzed as unknowns included two
samples provided by EPA containing low (4 mg/1) and high level TOC (145
mg/1).
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)—
The COD method determines the quantity of oxygen required to oxidize
organic matter in a water sample under specific conditions of oxidizing
agent, temperature, and time. Organic substances in the sample are oxidized
59
-------
TABLE 29. ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS USED TO CHARACTERIZE EFFLUENT SAMPLES
Physical
Color
Conductivity
Foaming
Odor
Taste
Temperature
Turbidity
Res idue
Dissolved Solids (TDS)
Suspended Solids
Anions
Sulfate (S04)
Chloride (Cl)
Fluoride (F)
Nitrate (NOJ
Nitrite (NOD
Cyanide (CNJ
Metals
Sodium (Na), Arsenic (As),
Boron (B), Cadmium (Cd),
Chromium (Cr), Copper (Cu),
Iron (Fe), Lead (Pb)
Manganese (Mn), Mercury (Hg),
Selenium (Se), Silver (Ag),
Zinc (Zn), Barium (Ba)
Radiation
Gross Beta
Gross Alpha
Tritium
General
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
Ammonia (NH_)
Alkalinity
Calcium Carbonate Stability
Chlorine Demand
PH
Ultraviolet Scan
Organic
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Phenol
Carbon Alcohol Extraction (CAE)
Carbon Chloroform Extraction (CCE)
Pesticides:
Aldrin, Dieldrin,
Endrin, Heptachlor,
Lindane, DDT.
Chlorodane, Methoxychlor,
2,4-D, 2,4,5-TP (Silvex), 2,4,5-T
Diazinon
Ethyl Parathion, Imidan, Methyl
Azinphos
Methyl Parathion, Carbaryl, Fluo-
menturon, Carbofuran
Biological
Coliform, Total
Coliform, Fecal
Standard Plate Count
Virus
Coxsacki
Polio
Adenovirus
Echo
REO
Salmonella
60
-------
TABLE 30. PRESERVATION METHODS RECOMMENDED FOR SELECTED PARAMETERS
Parameters
Preservative
Metals
COD
Cyanides
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrate
TOG
Phenol
HNO to pH < 2
H2S04 to pH < 2
NaOH to pH 12
H2S04 to pH < 2
H SO to pH < 2
H2SO to pH < 2
H2S04 to pH < 2
HP0 to pH < 4, 1 g/1 CuSO,
61
-------
TABLE 31. MINIMUM DETECTABLE LIMITS FOR ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS
Parameter
Total Colifora
Fecal Coliform
Plate Count
Salmonella
Chloride
Sulfate
Alkalinity
CaCO_ Stability
Dissolved Solids
Nitrate
Nitrite
.• -\
Ammonia
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Sodium
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
COD
TOC
Minimum
Units Detectable Limit
No./ 100 ml
No./lOO ml
No. /ml
D/ND*
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1 CaC03
mg/1 CaCO
mg/1
mg/1 N
mg/1 N
mg/1 N
mg/1
mg/1
ug/l
Ug/l
Mg/1
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
mg/1
Ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
Ug/l
ug/l
mg/1
mg/1
1
1
1
D/ND
0.1
1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.1
10
25
500
1
1
1
0.1
1
1
1
0.3
25
1
1
5
1
*D/ND
(continued)
62
-------
Parameter
CCE
CAE
Chlorine Demand
Residral Chlorine
Cyanide
*
Phenols
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
DDT
Chlorodane
Methoxychlor
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP
2,4,5-T
Diazinon
Ethyl Parathion
Imidan
Malathion
Methyl Azinphos
Methyl Parathion
Carbaryl
Fluometuron
Carbofuran
v~~ f— ^ %l*^^**i ^ tf^^^^W^W f
Uni ts
mg/1
mg/1
Determined
Determined
mg/i
yg/i
yg/i
yg/i
yg/i
yg/i
yg/l
yg/i
yg/l
yg/l
yg/l
yg/l
yg/l
yg/l
yg/i
yg/i
yg/i
yg/l
yg/l
yg/l
yg/i
yg/l
Minimum
Detectable Limit
0.01
0.01
on site
on site
0.005
1
0.005
0.009
0.014
0.006
0.004
0.0016
0.017
0.046
0.023
0.016
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.078
0.015
0.108
0.018
0.180
0.065
0.125
63
-------
by potassium dichromate in 50% sulfuric acid at reflux temperature. The
excess dichromate is titrated with standard ferrous ammonium sulfate using
orthophenanthroline ferrous complex as an indicator. The EPA Manual gives
both a low level and a high level method for COD determinations, while only a
general method is presented in Standard Methods. The low level method is
applicable for samples having a COD in the range of 5-50 mg/1. _The high
level technique is used for saline water samples (<1000 mg/1 Cl ) to counter-
act the positive interference due to quantitative oxidation of chloride by
dichromate. The chloride interference is removed by addition of mercuric
sulfate, which serves as an efficient complexing agent for chloride. The
high level COD procedure was used for the samples received early in the
study. Since the COD levels measured were in the 5-50 mg/1 range, the low
level method was used for the remainder of the study.
Quality control samples were analyzed using both the high and low level
methods. Two standard samples containing 10.3 mg/1 and 370 mg/1 COD were
provided by EPA. In-house standards were prepared from potassium acid
phthalate to be analyzed as unknowns with each sample set. The high level
standard contained 500 mg/1 COD, and the low level standard contained from
10-20 mg/1 COD.
Phenol—
The concentration of phenolic compounds was determined by a colorimetric
procedure at a controlled pH of 10. Phenolic materials react with 4-amino-
antipyrine (4-AAP) in the presence of potassium ferricyanide to form a stable
reddish-brown dye. The amount of color produced, measured at 500 nm, is a
function of the concentration of phenolic material. The color response with
4-AAP is not the same for all phenolic compounds; therefore, phenol has been
selected as a standard, and color produced by the reaction of other phenolic
compounds is represented as phenol (2). An in-house quality control standard
was analyzed as an unknown with each set of effluent samples.
Carbon Chloroform Extraction (CCE)—
CCE represents a mixture of organic compounds that can be adsorbed on
activated carbon under prescribed conditions and subsequently desorbed with
the solvent chloroform (7) . The carbon from the mini-CAM sampler is dried
at 40°C for 24-72 hours and transferred to a soxhlet extraction thimble.
Extraction is performed with 300 ml of chloroform for 44 hours using a 6
minute extraction cycle. The excess chloroform is distilled until the volume
remaining is less than 20 ml. The content is transferred to a tared vial and
evaporated to dryness using a gentle stream of dry, oil-free air. The vial
is further dried in a desiccator Until constant weight has been achieved.
This method is primarily for monitoring the general organic content of waters
and is not designed as a collector of organics for further identification.
Carbon Alcohol Extraction (CAE)—
CAE represents a mixture of organic compounds that can be adsorbed on
'activated carbon and desorbed with the solvent 95% ethyl alcohol after the
chloroform-soluble organics (CCE) have been desorbed under prescribed condi-
tions (7). The extraction time for CAE is 48 hours, using an initial
64
-------
extraction time of 6.5 min/cycle, for a total of 410-480 cycles. The volume
of alcohol and volume reduction procedures are identical to those cited above
for CCE.
Pesticides—
The large-scale use of pesticides has contributed to the presence of the
parent compounds and their metabolites in surface and ground waters and
ultimately in water supplies (6). The levels of pesticides and their meta-
bolites in the effluent samples were analyzed using gas chromatographic (GC)
techniques. The effluent samples were subjected to pretreatment, extraction,
and cleanup techniques, and the extracts,were injected into Micro-Tek 220
gas-liquid chromatographs equipped with suitable columns and electron capture
and flame photometric detectors.
The organochlorine pesticides analyzed for included aldrin, chlordane,
DDT, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, lindane, and methoxychlor. The sample
pretreatment procedure included extraction of 1700 ml of sample with 200 ml of
hexane (6,8). The hexane phase was passed through a funnel filled with
anhydrous sodium-sulfate and was collected in a round bottom flask. The
solvent volume was reduced to 25 ml with a Snyder column and further reduced
by vacuum to 2 ml. The sample was transferred to a 10 ml volumetric flask
and diluted to volume with hexane. The gas chromatographic analyses were
performed using a GC instrument equipped with an electron capture detector
and, a 3% OV-1 column. Confirmation of the compounds detected in the extracts
was performed on a 5% QF-1 column. ,
Organophosphate pesticides examined included diazinon, ethyl parathion,
imidan, malathion, methyl azinphos, and methyl parathion. The extracts from
the organochlorine procedure were analyzed on a GC instrument equipped with a
flame photometric detector and a 10% DC-200 column.
Three phenoxy herbicides were analyzed for in the water samples from the
AWT plants (9). These included 2,4-D; 2,4,5-TP (silvex), and 2,4,5-T. The
water samples (1700 ml) were extracted twice with 100 ml of 1:1:1 ethanol:
chloroform:diethyl ether following pH adjustment to 2 with concentrated
sulfuric acid. The extracts were drained through funnels filled with sodium
sulfate and collected in 300 ml round bottom flasks. The, sodium sulfate
funnels and separatory funnels were washed with aliquots of hexane (80 ml),
and the volume of organic solvent was reduced to less than 2.0 ml using a
vacuum water bath. The samples were evaporated to dryness in a test tube
under a gentle stream of nitrogen. The addition of 2 ml of n-butanol and 6
drops of concentrated sulfuric acid to the tubes was followed by heating in a
constant temperature bath (950-100°C) for 30 minutes. The test tubes were
placed in an ice bath for 15 minutes and extracted with 20 ml of hexane and
two 5-ml aliquots of isooctane. The organic phases were transferred to 10-ml
volumetric flasks and sodium sulfate was added to,dry the samples. The
prepared samples were analyzed by gas chromatography using, an electron
capture detector and a 3% OV-1 column. .Confirmation of the detected compounds
was performed on a 5% QF-1 column. ,, .,..
Carbaryl, carbofuran, and fluometuron contents of the carbamate classifi-
cation were determined for this study. The extraction method for isolation
65
-------
of these carbamates required 1700 ml of effluent (10). Two 200 ml benzene
extractions were performed; the extracts were passed through a funnel con-
taining sodium sulfate and were collected in a 500 ml round bottom flask.
The sodium sulfate funnels were washed with three 20-ml aliquots of benzene.
The solvent volume was reduced to approximately 2 ml in a 45 °C water bath
under vacuum and was transferred to a 10-ml volumetric flask. The samples
were diluted to 10 ml with benzene and injected into a GC instrument equipped
with an electron capture detector and a 10% DC-200 column.
Rigorous quality control measures were followed throughout the program.
Analytical Reference Standards of each compound of interest were obtained
from the EPA, Health Effects Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, and
were used to prepare analytical standards and spiking solutions. Deionized
water samples spiked with the test compounds were analyzed with each batch of
test samples to determine the percent recovery of each compound. In addition,
glassware blanks and reagent blanks were included with each set of samples to
verify the absence of interfering substances. Because the limited sample
size prevented the analysis of duplicate samples, duplicate spiked deionized
water samples were analyzed.
Anion Parameters
Chloride--
Chloride ion can be titrated with mercuric nitrate to form soluble,
slightly dissociated mercuric chloride. Diphenylcarbazone indicates the end
point of the titration in the pH range from 2.3-2.8 by formation of a purple
complex at the first appearance of excess mercuric ions. Since the applicable
pH range is limited , a mixture of nitric acid and diphenylcarbazone is added
to adjust the pH to 2.5 HH 0.1. Xylene cyanol FF is added to the mixture to
serve as a pH indicator to provide background color for improved end-point
detection.
Each set of effluent samples analyzed for chloride content included a
quality control sample. The in-house quality assurance standard analyzed as
an unknown with each determination contained 80 mg/1 chloride.
Sulfate—
A turbidimetric method suitable for the analysis of sulfate at all
concentration ranges was employed for the AWT plant effluents. The water
sample, combined with a reagent composed of glycerol, hydrochloride, and
alcohol, is placed on a magnetic stirrer. Barium chloride is added to the
solution while stirring is maintained at a constant rate. Immediately
following a one-minute stirring period, an aliquot is poured into an absorp-
tion cell and the turbidity is measured at 30-second intervals for 4 minutes
or until a constant measurement is obtained. In general, maximum turbidity
occurred within 2 minutes. A Spectronic 20 UV-Visible spectrophotometer
using a wavelength of 420 nm was employed for this determination.
In addition to calibration standards prepared from 0.0200 N H-SO,, a
quality control sample was included with each sample set. The in-nouse
standard employed for this purpose contained 90 mg/1 sulfate.
66
-------
Fluoride—
A fluoride concentration of 1 mg/1 is an effective preventive for dental
cavities and does not have harmful effects on health (9 ). Fluoride content
may be determined potentiometrically using a selective ion fluoride electrode
in conjunction with a standard single-junction reference,electrode and a pH
meter having an expanded millivolt scale. The fluoride electrode consists of
a lanthanum fluoride crystal across which a potential is developed by fluoride
ions. The method is accurate at pH values from 5 to 9.
Quality control was provided for fluoride analysis by analyzing a 1 mg/1
standard with each analytical determination. This standard was analyzed as
an unknown sample and was not part of the set of calibration standards con-
taining 0(blank), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 mg/1 fluoride.
Cyanide—
The cyanide concentration of the AWT effluent samples was measured using
a colorimetric procedure. Cyanide is defined as cyanide ion and complex
cyanides converted to hydrocyanic acid (HCN) by reaction in a reflux system
of a mineral acid in the presence of cuprous ions. The colorimetric method
requires conversion of cyanide to cyanogen chloride by reaction with
Chloramine-T (pH<8). Color is formed by the addition of pyridine-pyrazolone
reagent and the absorbance is read at 620 nm.
General Analytical Parameters
Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrite— ,,
The cadmium reduction method recommended by the EPA manual was used for
the analysis of nitrate and nitrite expressed as mg/1 nitrogen. The procedure
is based on the, reduction of nitrate to nitrite by granulated copper-cadmium.
If suspended matter is allowed to pass through the column, the sample flow
will be restricted; filtration through a glass fiber filter or 0.45 y membrane
filter is recommended for samples containing high concentrations of suspended
matter.
The nitrite content of the sample is determined by diazotizing with
sulfanilamide and coupling with N-(l-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine dihydrochloride
to form a highly colored azo dye. The absorbance of the azo dye is measured
with a Spectronic 20 spectrophotometer at a wavelength of 540 nm with a 1 cm
cell. . .,'..:. .,.- - '• :• , . .,-,. ..
"•'}• , . ' ';;'-:•-'•
The nitrate concentration is measured by difference by converting all
nitrate to nitrite and subtracting the quantity of nitrite determined as ,
described previously. Conversion of nitrate to nitrite is accomplished by
passing a filtered sample through the copper-cadmium reduction column. The
reduction column is prepared by cleaning cadmium granules with dilute HC1 and
adding a 2% solution, of copper sulfate to the granules until the color
partially fades. Completion of the copperizing is indicated by the formation
of a brown, colloidal copper precipitate.
Nitrogen, Ammonia—r
Ammonia was determined potentiometrically using a selective ion ammonia
electrode and a pH meter having an expanded millivolt scale. The ammonia
67
-------
electrode uses a hydrophobia gas-permeable membrane to separate the sample
solution from an ammonium chloride internal solution. Diffusion of the
ammonia alters the pH of the internal solution; this alteration is sensed by
the pH electrode. The constant level of chloride in the internal solution is
sensed by a chloride selective ion electrode which acts as the reference
electrode. Special precautions were taken to insure that the distilled water
was free of ammonia. A 10 mg/1 standard was analyzed for NH,,-N with each set
of samples for quality control purposes.
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) —
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen includes ammonia and organic nitrogen but does
not include nitrogen in either nitrate or nitrite form. The TKN is converted
to ammonium sulfate by heating the sample in the presence of concentrated
H SO,, K2S04S an
-------
may cause scaling which can be minimized by the addition of phosphates or
alum.
Residual Chlorine—
The analysis of AWT effluent samples for residual chlorine was performed
at the sampling site. Chlorine determinations must be started immediately
after sampling, avoiding excessive light and agitation.
Chlorine Demand—
The chlorine demand of a water sample is caused by inorganic reductants
such as ferrous, nitrite, manganous, sulfide, and sulfite ions. Chlorine
demand determinations established the amount of chlorine that must be applied
to water to produce a specific free, combined, or total available chlorine
residual after a selected period of contact. The measurement of clorine
demand was performed at the AWT plant sites since the determination of this
parameter is required prior to chlorination.
Trace Metals—
Several analytical techniques were used for trace metal determinations;
however, the majority of the metals of interest were analyzed using atomic
absorption spectrophotometry (AAS). Sample pretreatment was required for
most analyses. Atomic emmission spectrophotometry (AES) was used for sodium
analyses due to the increased sensitivity of emission for this metal. Both
techniques involve aspiration of the sample into the flame where atomization
occurs. AES measures the amount of light emitted at a given wavelength. AAS
measures the amount of light absorbed from a hollow cathode lamp source by
the sample in atomic form. Generally, AAS is the more sensitive of the two
techniques since the ratio of unexcited to excited atoms is very high. The
instrumental parameters such as wavelength, flame system, and slit width are
summarized in Table 32 for those metals analyzed by AAS or for AES.
TABLE 32. INSTRUMENTAL PARAMETERS FOR AAS/AES DETERMINATIONS
Metal
Barium
Boron
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Zinc
Analytical
Wavelength (nm)
553.6
249.7
228.8
357.9
324.7
248.3
283.3
279.5
253.7
196.0
328.1
589.6
213.9
Slit Width
(nm)
0.2
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.2
0.7
0.7
0.7
2.0
0.7
0.2
0.7
Flame System
N20 - C2H2
J- 1 A ^J ^^ n ii A
Air - C2H2
Air - C2BL
Air - CIK
A-IT- _ r v
Air " Lt/vCl^
/ 7
Air - C,H^
Air - C2H2
Flameless
Air - C2H2
Flameless
A -t *• r u
Air — '-'o"^
xV3.r ~* OMH.A
69
-------
Sodium determinations were made using the effluent sample in the form
received since relatively high sodium levels in the mg/1 range were measured.
Arsenic analyses were performed using the silver diethyldithiocarbamate
technique. Inorganic arsenic was reduced by zinc in acid solution to arsine,
AsEL. The arsine was passed through a scrubber containing glass wool impreg-
nated with lead acetate solution and into an absorber tube containing silver
diethyldithiocarbamate dissolved in pyridirie. The arsenic reacts with the
silver salt to form a soluble red complex suitable for photometric measurement
at 535 nm.
Mercury content was determined using flameless cold vapor atomic absorp-
tion. The mercury is reduced to the elemental state and aerated from solution
in a closed system. The mercury vapor passes through a cell positioned in
the light path of an atomic absorption spectrophotometer.
Silver content was measured using the untreated effluent samples and the
graphite furnace flameless atomic absorption. Preconcentration of the sample
was not required using this technique. Since hydrochloric ac:bd is used to
dissolve the residue during preconcentration, the formation of insoluble
silver chloride precludes silver analysis in this manner.
, -.f . . , •,-,*-
The remainder of the trace metals analyzed for this study, barium,
boron, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, selenium, and zinc,
were determined from concentrated effluent samples. A volume of 1500 ml of
water, acidified to pH 2 with nitric acid is placed in a large beaker and
more HNO,, (50 ml) is added. The solution is evaporated to dryness, making
certain that the sample does not boil. The system is cooled, HNO., is added,
and the temperature is increased until'a gentle reflux action occurs. Diges-
tion is complete when a light residue is noted. The residue was dissolved in
1:1 HC1, and the sample is filtered and,diluted to 50 ml. The possibility of
contamination of reagents or glassware with low level metal concentration was
discounted by concentrating a distilled deipnized water sample in like manner
concurrently with each set of samples. ^The accuracy of the data was examined
with each analysis set by concentrating standard reference samples for trace
metals and performing the AAS analyses. Instrumentation employed included a
Perkin-Elmer 303 AAS equipped with a HGA 2000 graphite furnace and a Perkin-
Elmer 306 AAS equipped with a HGA 2100 graphite furnace.
Physical Parameters
Odor—
Odor is recognized as a factor affecting water quality in several ways
including acceptability for preparation of food and tainting of fish. Most
organic and inorganic-chemicals contribute odor to water samples. Odor tests
may not be performed chemically; most odors are too complex to permit defini-
tion by isolation and identification of odor-producing- chemicals. Odor tests
are performed using human judgment to arrive at qualitative descriptions and
approximate quantitative measurements of odor Intensity. The effluent sample
is diluted with odor-free water until a dilution is found that is at least
perceptible to each tester. ^Panels of from 5-10 persons are recommended
since any one person will not be consistent in the concentrations detectable
70
-------
from day to day. The tester must be free from colds and allergies and,
preferably, should be a nonsmoker. Two or more blanks (odor-free water) near
the expected threshold are included with each set of samples to be tested.
Observations of each tester are recorded throughout the test and a threshold
number is determined.
Taste—
Taste and odor differ in the nature and location of the receptor nerve
sites. The tongue is the primary receptor for taste, while odor is detected
high in the nasal cavity. There are only four true taste sensations: sour,
sweet, salty, and bitter. Concentrations of inorganic salts producing taste
may range from a few tenths to several hundred milligrams per liter. The
complex sensation experienced in the mouth during the act of tasting is a
combination of taste, odor, temperature, and feel collectively called flavor.
The absence of taste is not to be considered desirable; distilled water is
less pleasant to drink than certain high-quality waters.
The same dilution system as that described for odor is employed for
taste testing. A series of samples including blanks is tested by each panel
member. Both taste and aftertaste are recorded for each taster. The indivi-
dual threshold and the threshold of the panel are determined. Taste tests
were not performed for the effluent samples from Orange County since a viral
study was in progress at this facility. Taste tests were excluded for the
other AWT samples where high total plate .counts were observed or if any
fecal coliforms were detected.
Turbidity-
Turbidity in water is caused by the presence of suspended matter such as
clay, silt, finely divided organic and inorganic matter, plankton, and other
microscopic organisms. Turbidity is an expression of the optical property
that causes light to be scattered and absorbed rather than transmitted in
straight lines through the sample. What has been the standard method for the
determination of turbidity is based on the Jackson candle turbidimeter,
however, the lowest value that can be measured directly in this instrument is
25 units (13). Turbidities of treated water generally are 0-5 units, there-
fore, indirect secondary methods are required. The first two samples in the
program were analyzed for turbidity as expressed in units of mg/1 Si02 .
Later investigations were performed with a procedure recommended by Standard
Methods and the EPA Manual using formazin as the turbidity standard. The
data were reported in Jackson Turbidity Units (JTU) or Nephelometric Turbidity
Units (NTU) which are considered comparable (4). A Hach Turbidimeter was
employed for this study (NTU).
Color—
Color in water may result from the presence of natural metallic ions
(iron and manganese), humus and peat materials, plankton, weeds and industrial
wastes. The term color, as applied to theseNstudies, is the color of the'
water from which the turbidity has been removed. Color is determined by
visual comparison of the effluent samples with known concentrations of
colored solutions. The standard employed was platinum-cobalt where one unit
of color is that produced by 1 mg/1 Pt in the form of the chloroplatinate
ion. The color of the water increases as the pH increases.
71
-------
Conductivity—
Conductivity is a numerical expression of the ability of a water sample
to carry an electric current. This number is dependent on the total concen-
tration of the ionized substances dissolved in the water and the temperature
at which the measurement is made. The specific conductance is reported in
units of micromhos and is measured directly with an instrument consisting of
a source of alternating current, a Wheatstone bridge, a null indicator, and a
conductivity cell. The cell is rinsed with one or more portions of the
sample to be tested, and the measured specific conductance and temperature
are recorded.
Residue, Suspended and Dissolved—
The total residue in an effluent sample is determined by transferring a
well-mixed aliquot of the sample to a tared evaporating dish and evaporating
to dryness at 103-105°C.' Total filterable solids are defined as those solids
which pass through a standard glass fiber filter and dry to constant weight
at 180°C. Glass fiber filter discs suitable for this study include Reeve
Angel Type 934-A and 984-H, Gelman Type A and are either 4.7 cm or 2.2 cm in
diameter. Nonfilterable solids are defined as those solids which are retained
on the glass fiber filter and are dried to constant weight at 103-105°C.
Foaming--
In lieu of a published technique, a method was devised to measure the
foaming capacity of the effluent samples. A 30-ml aliquot of sample was
vigorously shaken for exactly 30 seconds. A stopwatch was triggered with the
last stroke of the shaking sequence, and the time required for the last
bubble to disappear was recorded.
Radiological Parameters
The radiological parameters determined for this study included gross
alpha, gross beta, and tritium.
Radioactivity in water arises from both natural and artificial sources.
Primary natural sources are the decay series and cosmic radiation. Background
radioactivity usually contributes less than picocurie per liter quantities of
alpha and tens of picocuries per liter quantities of beta activity. Distribu-
tion of tritium is fairly uniform; the activity is most abundant in rain
water and least abundant in aged water due to the physical decay to helium.
There are artificial sources, such as residual fallout from weapons testing,
particle accelerators, reactors, and fusion research.
For these parameters, the amount to be sampled is governed by the residue
concentration. From the concentration and the planchet area the milligrams
per square centimeter value is calculated, and a volume which gives less than
10 milligrams per square centimeter is used. The exact amount of solids is
determined using tared planchets. The process of evaporation is carried out
on a hot plate in beakers. Methyl orange is used as an indicator, and the
sample is brought to a pH of 5 with nitric or hydrochloric acid. When
evaporation is almost complete, the residue is transferred to a tared planchet
72
-------
and drying is completed in an oven at 103-105°C. The samples are stored in
desiccators while waiting to be counted.
An internal proportional counter is used; for gross alpha the voltage
is set to the alpha plateau, and for gross beta the voltage is raised to
reach the beta plateau. The efficiency used in calculating the activity
concentration is determined by measuring the count rate at varying densities
of standard, thereby correcting for self-absorption. Calculation of the
counting error is based on sample count rate and background count rate. Both
the activity and the counting error are expressed as activity per liter.
This method is published in Standard Methods.
The procedure for tritium employs a scintillation solution which is
prepared from spectroquality dioxane, PPO(2,5,diphenyloxazole), POPOP[l,4-di-
2-(5-phenyloxazolyl)benzene], and naphthalene, and which is stored in the
dark* The sample is distilled to near dryness to remove nonvolatile radioac-
tive species and quenching agents. Four ml of each sample is mixed with 16
ml of reagent. The standard is prepared using 4 ml of solution of known
tritium activity, plus 16 ml of scintillation reagent. The solution for
background readings is prepared from tritium-free, distilled water in the
same manner. All vials are dark-adapted for at least 3 hours before counting
in an ambient temperature, liquid beta scintillation counter for a minimum of
250 minutes for the standard and samples, and from 500 to 6000 minutes
(usually 1200) for the background. The counting efficiency is calculated
from the standard, and the counting error is calculated from the sample and
background ,count rates.
Bacteriological Parameters
Total Coliform—?
Total coliform includes all aerobics and facultative anaerobic, gram-
negative, nonspore-forming, rod-shaped bacteria which ferment lactose with
gas formation within 48 hours at 35°C. The tube fermentation technique used
for this analysis is divided into three phases: (1) the presumptive test, (2)
the confirming test, and (3) the completed test.
For the presumptive test a series of fermentation tubes containing
lactose broth are inoculated with appropriate graduated quantities of sample,
and incubated at 35°C for approximately 24 hours. After 24 hours the tubes
are checked for gas formation. If no gas formation is evident the tubes are
returned to the incubator to complete the 48-hour incubation.
• /
For the confirming test the positive tubes and tubes which were dilutions
of the same sample are shaken gently. Using a sterile transfer loop, 1 to 3
loops of each tube are transferredito a tube containing green lactose bile
broth and are incubated at 35°C for 48 hours. All positive tubes are plated
out on eosin methylene blue agar plates. The plates are incubated at 35°C
for 24 hours. The resulting colonies are classified as "typical" (nucleated,
with or without a metallic sheen), "atypical" (opaque, unnucleated, mucoid,
pink after 24 hour incubation), or "negative" (all others).
73
-------
The completed test follows the confirming test and consists of the
transfer of one or more typical or atypical colonies from the eosin methylene
blue plates to a lactose broth fermentation tube and to a nutrient agar
slant. Both the fermentation tubes and agar slants are incubated at 35°C for
24 to 48 hours. If gas production is observed after 24 or 48 hours, but no
spores are noted, the colonies from the agar slant tube (which were plated
with the same colony as the lactose tube in question) are gram-stained and
examined microscopically for the presence of ;gram-negative rods. Positive
tubes show gas production, no spores, and gram-negative rods.
•
Fecal Coliform—
The procedure for fecal coliform distinguishes between organisms from
the intestines of warm blooded animals and those from other origins. With
the aid of a sterile transfer loop, a small amount of sample from each
positive, mixed, lactose bile broth tube is transferred to EC medium and
incubated at 44.5°C for 24 hours. Gas production in EC medium is accepted as
confirmation of fecal coliform. Fecal and total coliform results are given
as most probable number (MPN) from the MPN Index, according to the number of
positive tubes of each dilution.
Salmonella—
The procedures used for isolation and identification of salmonella were
obtained from the Bacteriological Analytical Manual (12) published by the
Food and Drug Administration. The procedures include concentration, enrich-
ment, selective growth, biochemical identifications, and serological tech-
niques. Concentration was performed using membrane filter techniques. The
membrane is sectioned and transferred to suitable enrichment media. Enrich-
ment is accomplished with lactose broth and tetrathionate, broth. The
pathogens are separated by selective growth on brilliant green agar and on SS
agar (salmdnella-shigella). The samples are incubated 48 hours on these
media. SS agar contains bile salt inhibitors, such as desoxycholate citrate
and xylose lysine desoxycholate, which inhibit coliform growth. Brilliant
green agar produces salmonella colonies which are pinkish white on a red
background, although a few species of salmonella do not grow well. A few
other organisms, proteous, citrobacter,- and pseudomonas, occasionally produce
pathogen resembling colonies. Colonies isolated as possible salmonella
colonies are subj ected to several biochemically selective media, such as
decarboxylase, citrate, TSI, KCN broth, and raffinose broth. In the cases in
which salmonella is still suspected at this point, agglutination studies are
performed for final confirmation.
Investigation of Ultraviolet Region
As specified in the contract, an ultraviolet scan of each effluent
sample was performed. The scan was recorded from 350 to 200 nm, which is the
lowest effective range of quartz cuvettes. Instrument settings for the
Varian Techtron Model 633 UV-visibile spectrophotometer are listed in Table
33.
The scans provide a measure of the quantities of organics present. As
such, the analysis should give an indication of variation of total organics
which absorb at above 200 nm.
74
-------
TABLE 33. VARIAN INSTRUMENT SETTINGS
Chart Speed 2 centimeters/minute
Range 20 millivolts
• Lamp Ultraviolet
Scan Rate 30 millimicrons/minute
Mode Absbrbance '
Zero Offset Zero ;
Wavelength 350 - 200 nm
Slit Width 0.5 millimicrons
75
-------
SECTION 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Data Presentation
The number of effluent samples collected for chemical and biological
analysis varied with each AWT plant. Nine effluent samples were analyzed for
each of the three treatment systems at Pomona, California. The data for
these three effluents are presented in Appendix A (Tables A-l, A-2, And A-
3). Thirteen effluent samples were taken from the treatment system at Lake
Tahoe, California {Table A-4). Eight samples were examined from the Dallas,
Texas, facility (Table A-5). There were nine samples taken for analysis
from the two treatment systems at the Blue Plains pilot plant in the District
of Columbia; three were taken from System 1 which employed only physical-
chemical procedures and six were taken from System 2 which combined both
physical-chemical and biological processes. Data for Systems 1 and 2 are
presented in Tables A-6 and A-7, respectively. Six effluent samples were
collected from the AWT plant in Orange County, California (Table A-8), while
only a single sample was examined from the Escondido, California, treatment
system (Table A-9).
The data tables include the low, high, and average values, as well as
standard deviations, a, based on a stated number, r\, of results. The para-
meters which were not present at sufficient levels for detection by the
analytical techniques employed are designated as not detected, ND, in the
data tables. The detection limits for each parameter are presented in Table
31. The units employed for each of the parameters are listed immediately
after the specific parameter.
In the pesticide analyses, some data are presented as less than a given
number, for example 2,4,5-T (<0.029), Pomona Process One, for Sample 6
(Table A-l). The analyst selected this method of reporting to indicate that
the pesticide 2,4,5-T was detectable but at a concentration too dilute for
accurate quantitative analysis. However, the indication of the presence of
2,4,5-T provides useful information for interpretation of the effectiveness
of the treatment processes.
The reporting of data for carbaryl fluometuron and carbofuran is
presented for the collective group, carbamates, since these pesticides were
not found in any of the effluent samples.
76
-------
Comparison of Treatment System Performance
The average values obtained for the various chemical, physical, biologi-
cal, and radiological parameters for each of the treatment systems are
presented in Tables 34 through 40. These data summaries permit comparisons
between the removal efficiencies of each system.
The bacteriological data summarized in Table 37 show large differences
between treatment systems. Data for individual samples were also signifi-
cantly different as evidenced by the large standard deviation for total plate
count. The reason is not clear. The number of samples taken was relatively
small and improper handling and contamination from extraneous microorganisms
may be responsible in some instances. Contamination of only one sample can
significantly affect the statistical analyses.
The average zinc concentration is variable from plant to plant. In
addition, both iron and zinc vary considerably from sample to sample for a
given treatment process. The use of zinc and iron in pipes and the presence
of industrial waste are possible reasons for the observed variations.
The turbidity results for the first two samples from Pomona Treatment
Systems 1 and 2 shown in Appendix A, Tables A-l and A-2 are presented in
units of mg/1 SiO_ and may not be compared directly to future results in NTU.
• The results of the organic analyses presented in Table 35 show a wide
range of effluent qualities and may be dependent on the type Of treatment
system employed, particularly as it relates to the degree of exhaustion of
the activated carbon processes. There does not appear to be a correlation
between CCE and COD or TOC, and the ratio of COD/TOC suggests discrepancies
in those measurements. For those reasons, it is difficult to correlate the
type treatment with the organic quality of the effluent using the data.
The stoichiometric COD/TOC ratio of water is expected to approximate the
molecular ratio of oxygen to carbon in C02 which is 2.66. Theoretically, the
ratio limits may range from 0 when the organic material is resistant to
oxidation by dichromate to 5.33 for methane or slightly higher if inorganic
reducing agents are present (14). The COD/TOC ratios for the average values
given in Table 35 are 0,9 (Tahoe), 2.55 (Blue Plains, 1), 1.35 (Blue Plains,
2), 1.28 (Pomona 1), 1.45 (Pomona 2), 1.52 (Pomona 3), 0.7 (Dallas), 1.62
(Orange County), and 0;28 (Escondido). The lack of agreement between theory
and experiment for the COD/TOC ratios was noted early in the program.
Attempts were made to determine if either of the two analytical methods was
in error or if other contributions were altering the expected ratio. EPA
provided GSRI with reference standards for BOD, COD, and TOC. The results of
the analysis of these standards are presented in Table 40 and exhibit good
agreement between experimental and true values. A low-level COD standard
prepared in-house using potassium and phthalate was examined over a five-
month interval from January to May 1975. The results of these analyses are
given in Table 41. The early COD determinations were made using the high-
level method; however, results indicated the low-level method would be
appropriate for future determinations. Precision and accuracy data were not
77
-------
00
TABLE. 34. , SUMMARY OF AVERAGES FOR SELECTED INORGANIC PARAMETERS ACCORDING TO TREATMENT SYSTEM
Inorganic
Parameter
Chloride (mg/1)
Sulfate (mg/1)
Fluoride (mg/1)
Alkalinity ..as
Tahoe
65.3
28.1
0.24
198
Blue Plains
(1) (2)
188 66.1
70 49.0
.1.23 0.75
29.8 81.8
Pomona
System 1
87.9
77.1
0.67
176
Pomona
System 2
107
85.6
_ . .. 0.79
170
Pomona
System 3
98.6
89
0.73
151
Dallas
73.1
92.1
1.34
168
Orange
County
222
309
0.74
120
CaCO
Calcium Carbonate
Stability as CaCO,
3.58
40.3
3.95
0.58
0.50
1.94
15.8
4.05
TABLE 35. SUMMARY OF AVERAGES FOR ORGANIC PARAMETERS ACCORDING TO AWT PLANT
.
Organic
Parameter
CCE
CAE
COD
TOC
(mg/1)
(mg/1)
(mg/1)
(mg/1)
Tahoe
0.8
2.3
9.0
10.0
Blue Plains Pomona
(1) (2) System 1
1.3
1.3
30.1
11.8
0.07
2.0 v
11.9
8.8
1.2
3.3
15. .9
12.4
Pomona
System 2
0.5
2.9
15.9
11.0
Pomona
System 3
0.
3.
17.
11.
8
0
9
8
Dallas
0.4
2.8
5,2
7-6
Orange
County Escondido
0.2
1.4 ,
10.3
6.4
—
—
1.9
6.9
-------
VO
TABLE 36. SUMMARY OF AVERAGES OF PHYSICAL PARAMETERS ACCORDING TO AWT PLANT
Physical Blue Plains Pomona Pomona Pomona Orange
Parameter Tahoe (1) (2) System 1 System 2 System 3 Dallas County
Dissolved 387 522 339 517 512 571 468 952
Solids (mg/1)
Conductivity 669 855 527 828 890 937 761 1770
(y mhos)
Turbidity (JTU)
Odor (No.)
Foaming (Sec.)
1.57
2
7.17
1.00
-- 25
2.7 41.4
0.89
5
63.4
0.66
2
12.2
1.15
6
25.1
0.37
14
2.9
1.06
9
13.9,
TABLE 37. SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS ACCORDING TO AWT PLANT
Bacteriological Blue Plains Pomona Pomona Pomona Orange
Parameter Tahoe (1) (2) System 1 System 2 System 3 Dallas County
Coliform
(No/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform
(No/100 ml)
Total Plate
Count
27.3
1.3
3.5
--
460
8.5
8
ND
3.2
2.
0.
0.
0
1
2
421
275
7.6
615
333
140
7
3
0
.1
.3
.018
2.0
ND
0.424
(105/100 ml)
-------
TABLE 38. SUMMARY OF AVERAGE FOR TRACE METALS ACCORDING TO AWT PLANT
oo
o
Blue Plains
Trace Metal
Chromium (yg/1)
Copper (yg/1)
Iron (yg/1)
Lead (yg/1)
Manganese (yg/1)
Sodium (mg/1)
Zinc (yg/1)
Tahoe
2.4
50.9
249.
5
12
42.3
1010
(1)
27
15
225
27
15
78.
59
(2)
16
46
61
ND
7
7 31
54
Pomona
System 1
39
48
158
6
14
99.8
84
Pomona
System 2
18.4
41
432
ND
8
104
58
Pomona
System 3
62
50
58
7
7
119
66
Dallas
12
6
125
5
5
69.6
44
Orange
County
67
40
35
13
3
165-
488
TABLE
39.
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE FOR NITROGEN PARAMETER ACCORDING
TO AWT
PLANT
Nitrogen
Form
Nitrate NO~-N
(mg/1)
Nitrite NO_-N
(mg/1)
Ammonia- N
(mg/1)
TKN (mg/1)
Tahoe
1-.7
1.0
15.3
16.4
Blue
(1)
ND
ND
0.88
3.24
Plains
(2)
2.9
ND
0.1
1.4
Pomona
System 1
6.5
0.1
4.83
13.4
Pomona
System 2
7.9
0.7
7.32
8.77
Pomona
System 3
14.7
1.1
7.69
13.1
Dallas
4.8
ND
1.32
1.92
Orange
County
— «•
ND
14.7
21.8
-------
TABLE 40. ANALYSIS OF DEMAND STANDARD REFERENCE SAMPLES
Parameters EPA Value (mg/1) GSRI Value (tng/1)
BOD 228 + 84 191
COD, low-level 10.3 9.4; 10.7
COD, high-level 370 366
TOG, low-level 4.0 4.1
TOC, high-level 145 146
TABLE 41. DATA FOR IN-HOUSE COD STANDARD
True Experimental
Date Value (mg/1) Value (mg/1)
1/29/75 20.0 19.5
2/25/75 10.0 12.9
3/25/75 12.5 12.5
5/1/75 12.5 12.1
81
-------
generated for low-level standards using the high-level method; however, the
precision would be expected to be less for this situation.
The reasons for the generally lower-than-expected COD/TOG ratios are
unknown, but may be related to a combination of changes occurring during
sampling; handling and shipping, and associated with the analytical tech-
niques used.
Quality Control
The data.generated for this program were monitored through the use of
various quality control measures. Quality control charts prepared according
to EPA specifications were maintained*throughout the study (5), As described
in the methodology section, in-house standards or standards provided by EPA
were analyzed with each set of samples. Representative portions of quality
control charts for ammonia, chloride, COD, phenol, and sulfate are presented
in Figures 14 through 18.
The quality control charts were constructed in three parts using data
obtained from a blank, standard, and quality-control standard or from a quality-
control standard in different units. The quality-control standard was a
standard obtained from EPA or prepared in-house. Since it was necessary to
use considerable amounts of the standard, it was generally prepared in-house,
in which case it was prepared separately, thus eliminating the possibility of
any error in preparation of the stock standard being carried over to the
quality-control standard or vice versa. The data used to prepare the charts
were in the form of both direct readout units and calculated concentration
units. _, . '
The ammonia chart (Fig. 14) was constructed from the calculated concentra-
tion of the quality control standard, from the. millivolt reading of the
quality-control standard and from the millivolt reading of the 20 mg/1 standard
used for the standard curve. The 2 sigma and 3 sigma control limit lines were
simply multiples of the standard deviation. A run was considered unacceptable
if it went outside the 3 sigma limits. These limits were generally calculated
for each section of the chart; however, in the case of ammonia, the rather
large variation in millivolt reading without corresponding deviation in con-
centration made it impractical.
v
Results for several standards provided;by EPA are shown in Table 42. The
values obtained by GSRI for these standards-are in good agreement with the
values issued by EPA. The data obtained for the EPA trace metal reference
standards (1171) and the mercury standards (1172) are shown in Table 43.
The GSRI value is the average of several determinations in units of yg/1 for
each metal of interest.
Precision studies were conducted for both within-run and run-to-run
conditions. The within-run precision is presented in table 44 for ammonia,
alkalinity, chloride, COD, conductivity, dissolved solids, fluoride, sulfate,
and TKN. Run-to-run precision is shown in Table 45 for the same parameters
plus phenol and in Table 46 for trace metal determinations.
82
-------
oo
OJ
60
e
c
o
•H
c
-------
oo
-e-
3a
3a
08 ml -
-------
560 --
bo
2530
500
n)
^470
-------
Co
3/10
it ill t I 1 1 U 1_ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J-
8/19 9/8 9/23 "9/30 10/2 10/23 11/3 1/19 1/21 1/28 1/30 2/6 2/9 2/25 2/26 2/29 2/3 3/4 3/8 3/9
1975 :. 1976 .• • -
O Quality Control Standard 30 mg/1
• A Optical Density of the Quality Control Standard
D Optical Density of the Blank
Figure 17. Phenol quality control chart
-------
c
o
cfl
to
4J
C
(U
o
o
100
90
3a
_»______ _«2a
3a
oo
12/31 1/2 1/3
1974 1975
1/16 1/30 3/10 6/2
7/33 Id/15 12/5 12/22 1/14 2/20 2/25
1976
O Quality Control Standards, 90 mg/1
A Optical Density of 20 mg/1 Standard
Figure 18. Sulfate quality control chart.
-------
TABLE 42. COMPARISON OF VALUES OBTAINED BY GSRI
FOR EPA REFERENCE STANDARDS
Analytical
Measurement
Alkalinity (mg/1 CaC03
Ammonia (mg/1)
Chloride (mg/1)
COD (mg/1)
Nitrate (mg/1)
PH
-
Specific Conductivity
Sulfate (mg/1)
TKN (mg/1)
TOC (mg/1)
EPA
Standard
Sample
) -L
II
I
I
II
I
II
(ymhos) I
II
I
II
I
II
III
I
II
EPA
Value
17.9
55.8
1.47
18.46
70.08
308.3
0.17
7.32
7.75
115
535
8.4
86.0
0.35
5.4
6.33
4.0
145
GSRI
Value
17.6; 16.4
52.8
1.4; 1.6
17.4
69.5
300
0.17
7.4
7.6
102
520
10.0; 9.2
87.3; 89.2
0.35; 0.27
5.2
7.8
4.1
146
88
-------
TABLE 43. COMPARISON OF VALUES OBTAINED BY GSRI
FOR EPA TRACE METAL REFERENCE STANDARDS
Trace Metal
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Selenium
EPA Standard
Sample
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
I
II
III
I
II
III
EPA Value
(ug/D
22
73
278
1.8
16
73
9.2
83
406
9.0
67
314
28
92
350
13
0.42
2.4
7.0
5.0
16
48
GSRI Value
(yg/D
19
74
259
2.6
17
64
8.4
81
336
8.4
66
317
32
92
324
13
0.52
2.5
7.0
4.2
18
46
89
-------
TABLE 44. DATA FOR WITHIN-RUN PRECISION FOR SELECTED PARAMETERS
Parameter
Ammonia (mg/1)
Alkalinity (mg/1 CaCO-)
Chloride (mg/1)
COD (mg/1)
Conductivity (ymhos)
Dissolved Solids (mg/1)
Fluoride (mg/1)
Sulfate (mg/1)
TKN (mg/1)
True
Value
10
300
80
250
700
500
1
90
50
Number
n
10
7
7
7
10
7
7
7
7
Average Standard
x Deviation 0 Minimum Maximum
10
294
81.6
251
720
467
1
100
66
0.5
0.4
0.2
1
4
10
0
2
1
9.5
293
81.2
250
700
464
1
98
6
11
295
81.6
253
730
481
1
101
70
TABLE 45. DATA FOR RUN-TO-RUN PRECISION FOR SELECTED PARAMETERS
Parameter
Ammonia (mg/1)
Alkalinity (mg/1 CaCO,)
Chloride (mg/1)
COD (high level)
COD low level)
Conductivity (umhos)
Fluoride (mg/1)
Phenol (mg/1)
Sulfate (mg/1)
TKN (mg/1)
True
Value
10
300
80
500
20
717.8
0.8
30
90
50
Number
n
27
16
25
23
17
8
6
26
17
24
Average Standard
x Deviation a
10.2
290
79
497
20
726
0.8
28
90
54
0.8
6
1
12
1
17
0.05
1
4
7
Minimum
8.6
274
77
474
19
711
0.7
26
84
33
Maximum
10.9
301
82
538
23
756
0.8
30
97
67
90
-------
TABLE 46.. DATA FOR RUN~TO-RUN PRECISION FOR TRACE METAL ANALYSES
True
Trace Value
Metal (yg/1)
Average
Number x Standard Minimum Maximum
n (ug/D Deviation a (ug/1) (vg/D
Arsenic 22
73
278
Cadmium 1 . 8
16
73
Chromium 9 . 2
83
Copper 9
67
314
'' ' ' n j
Lead 28
/
92
350
Mercury 0.42
'.
2.4
7.0
Selenium 5.0
16
48
5
3
6
4
5
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
4 '•'.'.,
3
10
*
14
11
7
5
6
19
74
259
2.6
17
64
8.4
81
8.4
66
317
32
92
324
0.52
2.5
7.0
4.2
18
46
6
8
7
0.8
3
13
1.3
9
2.5
13
19
2
13
48
0.2
0.5
1
1.6
4
8
13
67
.251
1.8
14 .::
50
7
71
8.2
55
296
31
..- . 78
270
'-•'"'•0.27
: "''I
2.0
6.1 "'••
2.2
12
17
27
82
268
' 3.4
22
76
10
89
11
80
333
35
HC
363
0;80
"'.-,'-•
3.2, ..-
7.7 ;'••
6.6
22
60
91
-------
EFFLUENT QUALITY AND DRINKING WATER STANDARDS COMPLIANCE
The effluent quality observed for each treatment system during the
sampling program was compared with quality standards set for drinking water
by the 1975 Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, the 1962 Public
Health Service Standards, and the U.S. EPA Quality Criteria for Water guide-
lines (Table 47). These comparative data are summarized in Tables 48 through
53. The mean, median, and exceedance ratio are tabulated for each pertinent
parameter. The term "exceedance ratio" is used to describe the relationship
between the number of samples which surpass prescribed drinking water limita-
tions and the total number of samples evaluated. When used with the median,
this ratio should give some indication as to the parameters of most concern.
Table 53 summarizes these parameters in decreasing order of exceedance ratio
for each treatment system evaluated.
The results indicate that as a rule the AWT facilities produced water
of exceptional quality. None of the effluent samples exceeded drinking
water standards with respect to pesticides, herbicides, radioactivity,
color, and most chemical parameters. Bacteriological results were not
included because of the small number of samples taken and the significant
variations in the data. It should be noted that in almost all cases, plant
operating records indicated total coliform counts less than 2/100 ml.
Variations in parameter values were noted for each of the effluents. These
variations may be influenced by changes in the raw wastewater composition
and by the small number of samples taken, by possible errors in sampling,
recording, and analytical procedures.
Parameters which were found to exceed drinking water standards in most
of the effluents from the treatment systems included total dissolved solids$
nitrogen (ammonia and nitrate), phenol, odor, CCE, turbidity, and specific
heavy metals. These are discussed briefly below.
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
By the nature of the treatment processes, accumulation of mineral
content is inherent in water reuse. It has been estimated that one municipal
usage of water can increase the concentration of TDS by 300 mg/1 (18).
Escondido, which employs reverse osmosis, was the only location where exces-
sive TDS content was not a problem. Orange County product water exhibited
excessive sulfate concentrations. These results stress the importance of
suitable blending water sources.
Nitrogen
Nitrogen in the form of ammonia and nitrate was excessive in most
effluents on occasion. Ammonia stripping towers at Lake Tahoe experienced
operating difficulties with CaCO- scaling, and removal efficiency was parti-
cularly low during cold weather operation. The Orange County plant receives
unusually high concentrations of ammonia (approximately 60 mg/1) due to
industrial waste discharges. Orange County's ammonia stripping process
reduces these concentrations by an average of 60%. The Blue Plains Treatment
System 2 maintains residual ammonia concentrations within acceptable limits
92
-------
TABLE 47. DRINKING WATER STANDARDS*
Physical
Parameters
pH
Color
Odor
Turbidity
Source**
1
1 JTU
2
15 CU
3 Ton
5 JTU
Microbiological
Chemical
Pesticides
Coliform Organisms
Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate
(ABS)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Carbon chloroform
extract (CCE)
Chloride
Chromium (+6)
Cyanide
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrates (as N)
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Zinc
(mg/1)
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endr;in
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Lindane
Methyoxychlor
Toxaphene
1/100 ml
(mg/1)
0.05
1
0.01
0.7**
0.05
0.*2
1.4 - 2.4 0
0.05
0.002
10
0.01
0.05
0.001**
0.003**
0.05**
0.001**
0.0002
0.0001**
0.0001**
0.004
0.1
0.005
(mg/1)
0.5
0.01
1
0.01
0.2
250
0.05
0.2
1
.8 - 1.7
0.3
0.05
0.05
10
0.001
0.01
0.05
250
500
5
*1975 limits were used for exceedance ratios where available; otherwise 1962
criteria were employed.
**See references, next page. -continued-
93
-------
TABLE 47. (Continued)
Parameters
Herbicides (mg/1)
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Radioactivity (yyc/1)
Gross beta
Radium - 226
Strontium - 90
Source**
1 2
0.1
0.01
1000
3
10
*References
1. National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, Federal Register,
Volume 40, No. 248, 59565, December 24, 1975.
2. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards, U. S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, 1962.
**Proposed, but omitted in final standards.
94
-------
TABLE 48. RESULTS OF AWT PLANT PERFORMANCE VS.
COMPLIANCE TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Parameter
LAKE TAHOE
Drinking Water
Standard
Mean Median
Exceedance
Ratio *
Physical
Color
Odor
Turbidity
Microbiological
Total Coliform
15 CU
3 TON
1 JTU
1/100 ml
4
2
1.35
27,3
3
1
0.96
0/13
1/13
9/12
7/12
Chemical
Amtnonia (as N)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Carbon Chloroform
Extract (CCE)
Chloride
Chromium (-1-6)
Cyanide
Gopper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrates (as N)
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids
Zinc
* *
0.5 mg/1
50 yg/1
1000 yO/1
10 yg/1
700 vig/1
250 mg/1
50 yg/1
200 yg/1
1000 yg/1
1.4 to 2.4
300 yg/1
50 yg/1
50 yg/1
2 yg/1
10 mg/1
1 yg/1
10 yg
50 yg/1
250 mg/l
500 mg/1
5000 yg/1
15.3
27,8
25
2.7
830
65.3
2.4
11
50.9
mg/1 0.24
249
5
11.5
0.39
1.65
5.8
*152
1
28.1
387
1010
10
25
1
650
43.0
I
5
39
0.22
140
1
8
0.3
0.7
5.0
165
1
27.8
414
280
13/13
2/13
0/13
1/13
3/8
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
3/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
7/12
12/13
0/13
0/13
1/13
0/13
of samples (based
on Drinking Water Standard indicated).
**Permissible Criteria for Public Water Supplies from Water Quality
Criteria-.April 1, 1968, Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.,
Washington, D. C.
-continued-
95
-------
TABLE 48. Continued
LAKE TAHOE
Parameter
Pesticides
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
Methyoxychlor
Drinking Water
Standard
i yg/i
3 yg/1
50 yg/1
1 Ug/1
0.2 yg/1
0.1 yg/1
4 yg/1
100 yg/1
Mean Median
ND***
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Exceedance
Ratio
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
Herbicides
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Radioactivity
Gross alpha
Gross beta
Tritium
100 yg/1 ND
10 yg/1 ND
15 yyc/1 1.6
1000 yyc/1 8.9
20,000 yyc/1 499
1.1
7.9
552
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
0/13
***ND - none detected
96
-------
TABLE 49. RESULTS OF AWT PLANT PERFORMANCE VS.
COMPLIANCE TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Drinking Water
BLUE PLAINS SYSTEM 1
Exceedance
BLUE PLAINS SYSTEM 2
Exceedance
Parameter
Physical
Color
Odor
Turbidity
Standard
15 CU
3 TON
1 JTU
Mean
2
8
5
Median
2
9
.5
Ratio*
0/3
2/2
0/2
Mean Median
2.5 2.5
25 15
1.0 0.99
Ratio*
0/6
5/6
2/6
Microbiological
Total Coliform
1/100 ml 1200 1200
2/2 8
4/6
Chemical
Ammonia (as N)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
0.5 mg/1**
50 yg/1
1000 vig/1
10 yg/1
0.88
19
100
1
0.65
10
25
1
2/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0.1
1.0
41
1.3
0.04
10
28
1
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
Carbon Chloroform
Extract (CCE)
Chloride
Chromium (+6)
Cyanide
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrates (as N)
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Sulfate
Total Dissolved
Solids
Zinc
700 yg/1
250 mg/1
50 yg/1
200 yg/1
1000 yg/1
1.4 to
2.4 mg/1
300 yg/1
50 yg/1
50 yg/1
2 yg/1
10 mg/1
1 ug/1
10 yg
50 yg/1
200 mg/1
500 mg/1
5000 yg/1
1300
188
27
43
15
1.2
225
27
15
0.3
0.5
5
10
4.3
70
522
59
1300
183
19
40
13
1.3
255
19
10
0.3
0.5
5
10
4
69
524
64
2/2
0/3
1/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
1/3
0/3
0/3
0/3
1/2
0/3
0/3
0/3
3/3
0/3
68
66.1
11
5
45.5
0.75
61
1
6.9
0.63
2.90
7.5
37
0.71
49.0
339
54
60
69.8
9
5
38
80
50
1
5
0.53
0.50
5
10
0.40
49.6
341
51
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
1/6
1/6
1/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
*Number of samples exceeding limit/total number of samples (based on
Drinking Water Standard indicated).
**Permissible Criteria for Public Water Supplies from Water Quality
Criteria April 1, 1968, Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.,
Washington, D. C. -continued-
97
-------
TABLE 49. Continued
BLUE PLAINS SYSTEM 1 BLUE PLAINS SYSTEM 2
Drinking Water Exceedance . Exceedance
Parameter Standard Mean Median Ratio Mean Median Ratio
Pesticides
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Herbicides
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Radioactivity
Gross alpha
Gross beta
Tritium
1 yg/1
3 yg/1
50 yg/1
1 yg/1
0.2 yg/1
0.1 yg/1
4 yg/1
100 yg/1
100 yg/1
10 yg/1
15 yyc/1
1000 yyc/1
20,000 yyc/1
ND***
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.4 1.4
6.2 5.9
183 150
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/2
0/3
0/3
0/3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.5
9,9
266.8
-i
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.6
277
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
***ND...- none detected
98
-------
TABLE 50. RESULTS OF AWT PLANT PERFORMANCE VS.
COMPLIANCE TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Parameter
Physical
Color
Odor
Turbidity
Drinking Water
Standard
15 CU
3 TON
1 JTU
ORANGE COUNTY
Mean
9
1.1
Median
9
1.1
Exceedance
Ratio*
6/6
3/6
Microbiological i
Total Coliform 1/100 ml 2 0 2/6
Chemical
Ammonia (as N)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Carbon Chloroform
Extract (CCE)
Chloride .
Chromium (+6)
Cyanide
Copper
Fluoride
Irbti
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrates (as N)
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Sulfate
Total Dissolved
Solids
Zinc
0.5 mg/1**
50 yg/1 ,
1000 yg/1
10 yg/1
700 ygVl
250 mg/1
50 yg/1
200 yg/1
1000 yg/1
1.4 to 2.4 mg/1
300 yg/1
50 yg/1
50 yg/1
2 yg/1
10 mg/1
1 yg/1
10 yg
50 yg/1
200 mg/1
500 mg/1
5000 yg/1
14.7
10
25
1.8
200
222
67
5,., ..
40
0.74
35
13
2.7
0.53
7.5
10
36.4
309
952
488
14.2
10
25
1
205
225
57
5
44
0.73
34
12
3
0.43
5
10
33.9
310
937
298
6/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/4
0/6
5/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
1/6
0/6
6/6
6/6
0/6
*Number of samples exceeding limit/total number of samples (based on
Drinking Water Standard indicated).
**Permissible Criteria for Public Water Supplies from Water Quality
Criteria April 1, 1968, Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.,
Washington, D. C.
-continued-
99
-------
TABLE 50. Continued
Parameter
ORANGE COUNTY
Drinking Water
Standard Mean
Median
Exceedance
Ratio
Pesticides
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Herbicides
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Radioactivity
Gross alpha
Gross beta
Tritium
1 yg/1
3 yg/1
50 yg/1
1 yg/1
0.2 yg/1
0.1 yg/1
4 yg/1
100 yg/1
100 yg/1
10 yg/1
15 yyc/1
1000 yyc/1
20,000 yyc/1
***
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
4.8
14.7
333
5.0
12.7
820
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
***ND - none detected
100
-------
TABLE 51. RESULTS OF AWT PLANT PERFORMANCE VS.
COMPLIANCE TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Parameter
Drinking Water
Standard
POMONA SYSTEM 1 POMONA SYSTEM 2
Exceedance Exceedance
Mean Median Ratio* Mean Median Ratio*
Physical
Color
Odor
Turbidity
*
15 CU
3 TON
1 JTU
2
5
0.9
2
4
0.73
0/9
6/9
3/7
3
2
0.7
3
1
O.i,
-
0/9
2/9
1/7
Microbiological
Total Coliform
Chemical
Ammonia (as N)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Carbon Chloroform
Extract (CCE)
Chloride
Chromium (+6)
Cyanide
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrates (as N)
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Sulfate
Total Dissolved
Solids
Zinc
1/100 ml
0.5 mg/1**
50 yg/1
1000 yg/1
10 yg/1
700 yg/1
250 mg/1
50 yg/1
200 yg/1
1000 yg/1
1.4 to
2.4 mg/1
300 yg/1
50 yg/1
50 yg/1
2 yg/1
10 mg/1
1 yg/1
10 yg
50 yg/1
200 mg/1
500 mg/1
4.8
25
67
2
1200
87.9
39
5
48
0.7
168
6
14
3.1
6.5
5.7
10
0.65
77.1
517
5000 yg/1 84
2.0
24
25
1
650
81.5
30
5
48
0.56
79
1
8
0.31
4.5
5
10
0.9
79.0
513
62
3/9
5/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
4/8
0/9
2/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
2/9
0/9
1/9
2/9
2/9
3/9
5/9
0/9
0/9
7/9
0/10
174
7.3
31
25
1.2
520
106
130
7.0
10
25
1
340
93.3
18.4 17
5
40
5
27
0.79 0.71
432 40
4.4 1
7.8 7
0.51 0.3
7.9 2.7
4.6 5
.10 10
2 0.081
85.6 86
512 538
58.4 48
8/9
9/9
2/9
0/9
0/9
1/8
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
1/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
3/9
3/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
6/9
0/9
*Number of samples exceeding limit/total number of samples (based on
Drinking Water Standard indicated.)
**Permissible Criteria for Public Water Supplies from Water Quality Criteria
April 1, 1968, Federal Water Pollution Control Adm., Washington, D. C.
-continued-
101
-------
TABLE 53. Continued
, ,
POMONA
SYSTEM 1
Drinking Water
Parameter Standard
Pesticides
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Herbicides
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Radioactivity
Gross alpha
Gross beta
Tritium
1 yg/1
3 yg/1
50 yg/1
1 Pg/1
0.2 yg/1
0.1 yg/1
4 yg/1
100 yg/1
100 yg/1
10 yg/1
15 yyc-/l
1000 yyc/1
20,000 yyc/1
SYSTEM 2
Exceedance Exceedanee
Mean Median Ratio Mean Median. Ratio
ND***
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.023
0.016
2.3
J6.9
528.6
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.2
13.5
450
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.095
0.083
2.9
15.6
428
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.0
17.4
400
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
••
0/9
0/9
0/9
***ND - None detected
-continued-
102
-------
TABLE 51. Continued
Drinking Water
Parameter Standard
Physical
Color
Odor
Turbidity
Microbiological
Total Coliform
Chemical
Ammonia (as N)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Carbon Chloroform
Extract (CCE)
Chloride
Chromium (+6)
Cyanide
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrates (as N)
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Sulfate
Total Dissolved
Solids
Zinc
15 CU
3 TOM
1 JTU
1/100 ml
0.5 mg/1**
50 yg/1
1000 yg/1
10 ug/1
700 yg/1
250 mg/1
50 yg/1
200 yg/1
1000 yg/1
1.4 to 2.4
300 yg/1
50 yg/1
50 yg/1
2 yg/1
10 mg/1
1 yg/1
10 yg
50 yg/1
200 mg/1
500 mg/1
5000 yg/1
POMONA SYSTEM 3
Mean Median
7
1.2
615
7.7
10
25
1
800
98.6
62
6
50
mg/1 0.7
58
7
7
0.63
14.7
6.5
10
43.3
89.0
s 571
66
4
0.99
17
4.7
10
25
1
400
97.3
55
5
44
0.71
46
7
8
0.54
8.0
5
10
40.9
83
582
52
Exceedance
Ratio*
4/8
4/8
8/9
9/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
3/9
0/9
5/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
4/9
3/9
0/9
2/9
0/9
8/9
0/9
*Number of samples exceeding limit/total number of samples.(based on
Drinking Water Standard indicated).
**Permissible Criteria for Public Water Supplies from Water Quality Criteria
April 1, 1968, Federal Water Pollution Control Adm., Washington, D. C.
-continued-
103
-------
TABLE 51. Continued
Parameter
Pesticides
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Herbicides
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Radioactivity
Gross alpha
Gross beta
Tritium
POMONA
Drinking Water
Standard Mean
l yg/1
3 yg/1
50 yg/1
1 yg/1
0.2 yg/1
0.1 yg/1
4 yg/1
100 yg/1
100 yg/1
10 yg/1
15 yyc/1
1000 yyc/1
20,000 yyc/1
ND***
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5.9
21.8
207
SYSTEM 3
Median
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5.8
22.6
160
Exceedance
Ratio
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
0/9
***ND - None detected.
104
-------
TABLE 52. RESULTS OF AWT PLANT PERFORMANCE VS.
COMPLIANCE TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
DALLAS
Parameter
Physical
Color
Odor
Turbidity
Drinking Water
Standard
15 CU
3 TON
1 JTU
Mean
13
0.2
Median
8
0.13
Exceedance
Ratio*
111
0/8
ESCONDIDO
Mean
1
14
0.8
Exceedance
Ratio*
0/1
1/1
0/1
Microbiological
Total Coliform
1/100 ml
3/7
0/1
Chemical
Ammonia (as N)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Carbon Chloroform
Extract (CCE)
Chloride
Chromium (+6)
Cyanide
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrates (as N)
Phenols
Selenium
Silver
Sulfate
Total Dissolved
Solids
Zinc
0.5 mg/1**
50 yg/1
1000 yg/1
10 yg/1
700 yg/1
250 mg/1
50 yg/1
200 yg/1
1000 yg/1
1.4 to
2.4 mg/1
300 yg/1
50 yg/1
50 yg/1
2 yg/1
10 mg/1
i yg/1
10 yg
50 yg/1
200 mg/1
500 mg/1
5000 yg/1
1.3
36
158
1
400
73.1
12
5
6
1.3
125
5
5
0.3
4.8
6.5
63
0.53
92.1
468
42
0.08
21
25
1
200
74.9
4.5
5
4
1.3
93
1
5
0.3
4.6
7.2
35
1
90.5
478
24
2/8
2/7
0/8
0/8
1/7
0/8
1/8
0/8
0/8
0/8
1/8
0/8
0/8
0/6
0/8
6/8
5/8
0/8
0/8
3/8
0/8
1
ND***
ND
ND
24.3
ND
0.06
10
0.3
20
ND
ND
0.3
9
7.4
180
0.2
1.6
82
20
1/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
1/1
1/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
*Number of samples exceeding limit/total number of samples (based on
Drinking Water Standard indicated).
**Permissible Criteria for Public Water Supplies from Water Quality Criteria
April 1, 1968, Federal Water Pollution Control Adm., Washington, D. C.
***ND - None detected.
105
-------
TABLE 52. Continued
Drinking Water
Parameter
Pesticides
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Herbicides
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Standard
1 yg/1
3 yg/1
50 yg/1
1 Pg/l
0.2 yg/1
0.1 yg/1
4 yg/1
100 yg/1
100 yg/1
10 yg/1
Mean
NB
0.039
ND
ND
ND
0.007
ND
ND
0.032
DALLAS
ESCONDIDO
Exceedance Exceedance
Median
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Ratio
0/8
0/8
0/8
0/8
0/8
0/8
0/8
0/8
0/8
Mean
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Ratio
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
Radioactivity
Gross alpha
Gross beta
Tritium
15 yyc/1 1.4 1.2 0/8
1000 yyc/1 -10.1 10.4 0/8
20,000 yyc/1 581 630 0/8
106
-------
TABLE 53. PARAMETERS EXCEEDING DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Exceedance Exceedance Exceedance Exceedance
Parameter Median Ratio Parameter Median Ratio Parameter Median Ratio Parameter Median Ratio
H-1
Q
TAHOE
NH3-N 15.0 mg/1 13/13
Selenium 16.5 yg/1 12/13
Turbidity 1 JTU 9/12
Phenol 5 yg/1 7/12
CCE 650 yg/1 3/8
Iron 140 yg/1 3/13
As 10 yg/1 2/13
TDS 414 mg/1 1/13
Odor 1 TON 1/13
Cd 1 yg/1 1/13
BLUE PLAINS SYSTEM 1
TDS 524 mg/1 3/3
Odor 9 TON 2/2
CCE 1300 yg/1 2/2
NH3-N 0.65 mg/1 2/3
Phenol 5 yg/1 1/2
Cr 19 yg/1 1/3
Pb 19 yg/1 1/3
BLUE PLAINS SYSTEM 2
Odor 15.0 TON 5/6
Turbidity 0.99 TU 2/6
N03-N 0.5 mg/1 1/6
Phenol 5 yg/1 1/6
Se » 10 yg/1 1/6
DALLAS
Odor . . 8 TON 7/7
Phenol 7.2 yg/1 6/8
Se 35 yg/1 5/8
TDS 478 mg/1 3/8
As 21 yg/1 2/7
NH3-N 0.08 mg/1 2/8
GC£ . 200 yg/1 1/7
Cr 4.5 yg/1 1/8
Iron 93. yg/1 1/8
POMONA SYSTEM 1
TDS
Odor
NH,-N
Se3
CCE
Turbidity
Phenol
Cr
NOQ-N
Fe3
Hg
Mn
513 mg/1
4 TON
2.0 mg/1
10 yg/1
650 yg/1
0.73 TU
5 yg/1
30 yg/1
4.5 mg/1
7.9 yg/1
0.31 yg/1
8 yg/1
7/9
6/9
5/9
5/9
4/8
3/7
3/9
2/9
2/9
2/9
2/9
1/9
POMONA SYSTEM
NH3-N
TDS
Phenol
NO,-N
As3
Odor
Turbidity
CCE
Iron
7.0 mg/1
538 mg/1
5 yg/1
2.7 mg/1
10 yg/1
1 TON
0.40 TU
340 yg/1
40 yg/1
2
8/9
6/9
3/9
3/9
2/9
2/9
1/7
1/8
1/9
POMONA SYSTEM 3
NH3-rN
TDS i '
Cr
Odor
Turbidity
NO--N '
Phenol
CCE
Ag
4.7 mg/1
582 mg/1
55 yg/1
4, TON
0.99 TU
8.0 mg/1
5 yg/1
400 yg/1
40.9 yg/1
9/9
8/9
5/9
4/8
4/8
4/9
3/9
3/9
2/9
ORANGE COUNTY
NH3-N 14.2 mg/1 6/6
TDS 937 mg/1
Sulfate 310 mg/1
Odor 9 TON
Cr, 57 yg/1
Turbidity 1.1 NTU
Phenol 5 yg/1
ESCONDIDO
Odor 14 TON
Phenol 7.4 yg/1
Se 180 yg/1
NH3~N 1 mg/1
6/6
6/6
"6/6
5/6
3/6
1/6
1/1
1/1
1/1
1/1
-------
by biological nitrification-denitrification. Upsets with the breakpoint
chlorination process in System 1 accounted for the median value of 0.65
mg/1. Blue Plains plant personnel, however, indicated that residuals of 0.4
to 0.6 mg/1 and TKN residuals of 1.2 to 1.5 mg/1 are possible with no upsets.
Phenol
Phenolic compounds in levels exceeding the 1 ug/1 standard were found
in all effluents studied. Biological-AWT methods as currently employed
appear to be inadequate in removing phenol to the 1 yg/1 requirement.
Odor
The threshold odor numbers (TON) of all the samples are higher than
would be expected for the relatively low levels of organic materials in all
the effluents sampled. Chlorination for disinfection was practiced in most
of the treatment systems monitored and the presence of residual chlorine may
be responsible for the high TON values. Also, it is best to determine TON
on fresh samples. Repeated handling, transporting, and storage of samples
such as that which occurred in this project can cause changes in samples
that produce very slight, but to the sense of smell, significant changes
that alter the sample odor characteristics. Since the test is subjective,
differences in the make-up of the odor panel and testing procedure can
affect results. The inability of waste treatment processes to remove phenol
to the recommended limit may contribute to the high exceedance ratios
observed for odor. However, this explanation appears unlikely in view of
the high TONs reported.
Turbidity
Effluent turbidity concentrations were for most samples at or below 1
JTU. This standard was exceeded on occasion. Turbidity values were, how-
ever, always less than 5 units, which is specified as the limit by the 1962
Drinking Water Standards, and is allowed under some conditions by the 1975
standards.
Carbon Chloroform Extract (CCE)
Presence of CCE surpassed recommended levels for all facilities except
Escondido and Orange County. However, the determination of CCE is influenced
by many variables which may effect these results. For example, sterile
carbon is employed in the determination of sample concentration, whereas in
practice, bioactivity can greatly affect the adsorptive properties and hence
efficiency of field carbon adsorption columns.
Heavy Metals
In general, median values for selected heavy metals did not exceed
allowable drinking water limits. Removal efficiency of heavy metals is
dependent upon the specific metal, influent concentration of the metal,
redox potential, pH, carbon bioactivity, coagulant addition, ionic strength
of carrier water, and other operating and environmental factors. Chemical
108
-------
treatment with lime, for example, results in a reduction of many heavy metal
concentrations due to insoluble hydroxides formed at high pH. Pomona, which
did not employ lime treatment, experienced the highest diversity of specific
heavy metal exceedance ratios. It has been observed that as the influent
concentration of the heavy metal decreases, so does AWT removal efficiency.
Selenium appeared to be the most persistent trace metal, characterized by
exceedance ratios for effluents from all facilities except Orange County.
Comments on Effluent Quality and Drinking Water Standards Compliance
In general, the treatment systems sampled in this project were not
designed to produce water of potable quality. Each system was part of an
independent, full-scale or pilot scale project with specific, individual
goals. The systems were selected primarily because of availability and
because effluent quality exceeded that of secondary treatment systems. All
the systems, however, were characterized by high quality effluents and
produced water approaching potable quality. It is apparent that by effec-
tively sequencing selected processes used in these systems, a treatment
system can be designed that will consistently meet Drinking Water Standards.
All of the treatment systems had been in stable operation prior to
initiating the sampling program with the exception of the Orange County
Water District's Water Factory 21. This facility was just entering a period
of initial start-up when samples were taken for this project. None of the
water being treated during this period was injected into the ground and the
plant was being operated to optimize operations prior to actual injection in
October 1976. For this reason some of the effluent constituents were present
in higher concentrations than would be allowed if optimum operation and
injection were underway.
109
-------
REFERENCES.
1. Standard Methods for the Examination of;Water and Wastewater, 13th edi-
tion, American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C., 1971, 874 pp.
2. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Waste. EPA-625/6-74-003,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Technology Transfer,
Washington, D.C., 1974. 298 pp.
3. Quality Criteria for Water. EPA-440/9-76-OJ3, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, B.C., 1976. Handbook for Analytical
Quality Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories, published for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by the Analytical Quality Control
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,, June 1972.
4. Cabasso, I., C.S. Eyer, E. Klein, and J.K. Smith. Evaluation of Semi-
permeable Membranes for Concentration of Organic Contaminants in Drinking
Water. Final Report, EPA-670/1-75-001, National Environmental Research
Center, Office of Research and Development, U, . Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, April 1974.
5. Babbitt, H.E. and E.R. Baumann. Sewerage and Sewage Treatment. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., London, 1965.
6. Bacteriological Analytical Manual for Food. Third edition, Food and
Drug Administration, Washington, D.C., 1972.
7. Buelow, R.W., J.K. Carswell, and J.M. Symons. An Improved Method for
Determining Organics by Activated Carbon Adsorption and Solvent Extrac-
tion. J. Amer. Water Works Assn., 3:195-199, 1974.
8. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Appendix A, Federal
Register, Part II, 38:75, April 19, 1973. p 9740-9785.
9. McKone, C.E. and R.J. Hance. J. Chromatog., 69:204-6, 1972.
10. Bunch, R.L. and M.B. Ettinger. Water Quality Depreciation by One Cycle
of Municipal Use. J. Water Pollution Control Federation, 36, 1964.
110 ,
-------
APPENDIX A
CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, AND BIOLOGICAL ANALYTICAL DATA
ON EFFLUENT SAMPLES TAKEN FROM EACH ADVANCED
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
111
-------
TABLE A-l. ANALYTICAL DATA, POMONA PROCESS ONE
1
9/20/74
Total Coliform (No/100 ml)
Fecal Coliforra (N.-7 100 ml)
Total Plate Count (No/ml)
Salmonella (D/ND)
Chloride (ppm)
Sulfate (ppm)
Alkalinity (ppm CaCO )
CaCO Stability (ppm 'CaCO
Sodium (ppm)
Dissolved Solids (ppm)
Nitrate NO -N (ppm)
Nitrite NO^-N (ppm)
Ammonia N tppm)
TKN (ppm)
COD (ppm)
TOC (ppm)
CN (ppm)
Phenol (ppb)
Fluoride (ppm)
CCE (ppm)
CAE (ppm)
Chlorine Demand (ppm)
Chlorine, Residual (ppm)
As (ppb)
Ba (ppb)
B (ppb)
Cd (pp.b)
Cr (ppb)
Cu (ppb)
Fe (ppb)
Pb (ppb)
Mn (ppb)
Hg (ppb)
Se (ppb)
Ag (ppb)
Zn (ppb)
Aldrin (ppb)
Dieldrin (ppb)
Endrin (ppb)
Heptachlor (ppb)
Lindane (ppb)
DDT (ppb)
Chlorodane (ppb)
Methoxychlor (ppb)
2,4-D (ppb)
2,4,5-TP (ppb)
2,4,5-T (ppb)
Diazinon (ppb)
0
0
125
ND
80.4
87.0
211
) -3.5
78
549.0
1.7
ND
2.00
11.5
ND
1.0
ND
ND
1.30
0.3
ND
1.8
9.2
ND
300
8000
ND
124
21
322
15
65
18
ND
ND
300
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
10/2/74
0
0
2.0(10
ND
73.0
83.0
218
0
72.7
434.0
ND
ND
8.60
10.05
37.2
35.1
ND
ND
1.10
1.0
0.3
#
It
ND
ND
ND
ND
39
53
172
8
15
5
ND
ND
15
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.093
ND
ND
ND
3
10/7/74
0
s o
)200
ND
68.5
82.0
179
-1
97.5
505.0
4.5
ND
5.50
6.33
15.2
17.2
ND
7.5
0.53
1.8
1.8
2.6
12.4
39
ND
ND
ND
10
41
ND
ND
7
ND
105
ND
67
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.078
ND
ND
ND
4
10/21/74
2
0
25
ND
67.5
79.0
180.5
0
93.2
477.5
6.0
0.06
4.80
5.19
14.3
26.1
ND
5.0
0.41
0.2
2.0
5.8
9.2
43
ND
ND
4.2
8
48
552
ND
5
ND
129
ND
88
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5
11/11/74
8
1
10
ND
86.8
64.0
152.8
+5.7
200
529.5
7.4
ND
0.44
0.86
11.5
8.3
ND
ND
0.42
0.2
3.1
It
#
39
ND
ND
1.0
5
37
157
ND
5
ND
250
1.5
17
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.333
0.345
ND
ND
6
12/5/74
0
0
100
ND
81.5
63.2
215.8
+0.3
107
513.0
0.7
ND
0.26
58.9
17.0
6.8
ND
ND
0.66
2.9
11.3
3.4
11.6
43
ND
ND
1.0
49
56
28
ND
8
HD
280
1.5
27
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.237
0.289
<0.029
ND
7
4/24/75
11
0
100
ND
90.7
73.2
172.0
+0.2
52.5
502.5
12.4
0.48
0.04
3.05
15.9
5.3
ND
ND
0.56
-
1.2
if
2.4
24
47
ND
ND
30
40
90
ND
10
1.7
230
ND
130
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
9/16/75
0
0
35
ND
84.5
95.2
127.8
+4.4
96
535.0
25
ND
0.02
1.30
7.7
4.1
ND
ND
0.48
2.6
7.8
It
9.72
ND
100
ND
7.0
6
80
55
ND
2
1.61
ND
1.6
62
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
' ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
9
11/7/75
0
0
100
ND
158.5
67.2
130.0
-2.7
101
608.0
0.7
0.32
21.8
23.1
19.7
7.3
ND
8.8
0.60
0.1
2.5
u
f.'
2.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
77
55
45
3
9
0.31
ND
ND
54
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Low
0
0
10
ND
67.5
63.2
127.8
0
52.5
434.0
ND
ND
0.02
0.86
ND
1.0
ND
ND
0.41
0.1
ND
1.8
2.4
ND
ND
ND
ND
5
21
ND
ND
2
ND
ND
ND
15
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
High
8
1
2.0(10
ND
158.5
95.2
218
5.7
200
549.0
25.0
0.48
21.8
58.9
37.2
35.1
'ND
8.8
1.30
2.9
11.3
5.8
12.4
43
300
8000
7
124
80
552
15
65
18
280
1.6
300
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.333
0.345
_n
9
9
)9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
5
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
4
7
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
<0.029 9
ND
9
x o.
2
—
0.2(105)0.7(105)
ND
87.9 27.7
77.1 11.0
176.3 34.6
0.6
99.8 41.2
317 48.2
6.5
0.10
4.83 7.04
13.4 18.4
15.9
12.4 11.5
0.005
5.7
0.67 0.31
1.2 1.1
3.3
3.4 1.7
8.1 4.07
25
67
5300
2
39 40
48 16
158
6
14 20
3.1
110
1.2 0.65
84 89
0.005
0 . OOP
0.014
0.006 -
0.004
0.0016 -
0.017
0.046
•0.095
0.083
0.013
0.011
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. ANALYTICAL DATA, POMONA PROCESS ONE (continued)
1
9/20/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0-5
4.0
§
ND
ND
25
6.9
is) 863
2.0
<1.3
<3.4
2
10/2/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND ^
0-5
3.47
3.13
ND
ND
if
#
662
3.5
<1.4
<5.3
530+310 590+280
3
10/7/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.36
4.6
4.0
ND
ND
24
7.1
800
2.4
<1.0
<22.5
450+260
4
10/21/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.39
2.0
1.32
ND
ND
24
7.2'
760
11.1
<1.0
<13.5
350+250
5
11/11/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.30
16.0
6.06
ND
ND
#
#
814
79.8
<0.7
<7.3
200+350
6
12/5/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.73
5.28
4.59
ND
7
23.5
7.4
907
261.8
<1.2
<21.4
940+260
7
4/24/76
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.8
1.6
1.5
0.5
3
#
#
843
80.4
<0.5
<3.7
640+250
8
9/16/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.08
1.7
2.3
3.0
3
#
#
908
24.3
<6.8
<29.4
<400
9
11/7/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.58
5.28
5.28
3.0
4
28
7.2
891
105
<4.3
<28.4
<390
Low
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.30
1.6
1.32
ND
ND
23.5
6.9
662
2
<0.5
<3.4
200
High
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.58
16.0
6.06
3.0
7
28
7. 4
908
261.8
<6.8
<29.4
940
_n
9
9
9
9
9
9
7
9
8
9
9
5
5
9
9
9
9
7
X
0.012
0.078
0.015
0.108
0.018
-
0.89
4.88
3.52
0.8
2
24.9
7.2
828
63.4
2.0
15.0
528
a
_
-
-
-
-
-
0.61
4.42
1.75
-
-
1.82
0.2
80
84.4
-
-
235
U)
Ethyl Parathion (ppb)
Imidan (ppb)
Malathion (ppb)
Methyl Azinphos (ppb)
Methyl Parathion (ppb)
Carbaramtes (ppb)
Turbidity (NTU)
Odor (No.)
Taste (No.)
Suspended Solids (ppm)
Color(Pt-Co units)
Temperature (°C)
PH
Conductivity (Micro mhos) 863
Foaming (sec.)
Gross a (pCi/1)
Gross B- (pCi/1)
Tritium (pCi/1)
ND - Not detected
* ppm SiO
? On-site determination; data not supplied to GSRI
§ Data not available
-------
TABLE A-2. ANALYTICAL DATA, POMONA PROCESS TWO
_1_
9/25/74
Total Coliform (No./lOO mB
Fecal Coliform ftJo./lOO mj)
Total Plate Count (Mo. /ml)
Salmonella 2400
>2400 ,
12.0(10 )
ND
85.4
112.0
139-7
-1.1
94
627
23
1.6
2.34
0.55
73.7
12 ~7
ND
ND
0.61
0.1
6.2
it
7.3
ND
ND
ND
2.7
6
44
28
ND
7
1.71
ND
ND
44
RD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT)
ND
ND
8
9/19/75
2
0 5
14.0(107
ND
207.4
90.8
126.4
-2.4
100
641
19
2.4
8.2
6.28
6.0
5.3
ND
ND
0.71
0.1
1.8
#
5.9
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
7.1
40
ND
5
ND
ND
ND
31
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
9
9/24/75
0
0 5
35.0(10 )
ND
159.4
91.6
116.8
+8.3
95
356
17
1.4
12.1
12.03
8.6
5.8
ND
19.8
0.70
0.3
0.9
if
0.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
117
54
ND
11
ND
ND
ND
56
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Low
0
0
0.07(10
ND
67.5
64.2
116.8
0
78
337
ND
ND
1.58
0.55
3.8
Nil
ND
ND
0.52
0.1
0.9
1.4
0.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
11
6
ND
3
ND
ND
ND
13
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
High
>2400
5>2400
7 55. 0(101
NI!
207.4
112.0
214
+8.3
158
641
23
2.4
12.1
32.1
73.7
29.0
ND
19.8
1.05
1.8
6.2
9.4
13.6
86
ND
ND
2.7
33
117
3309
18
16
1.71
ND
5
131
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.123
< 0.024
0.081
ND
n
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
6
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
X
421
275 5
7 . 7( 10}
ND
106.6
85.6
169.5
0.5
103.9
511.7
7.9
0.73
7,32
8.77
15.9
11.0
0.005
4.6
.79
.5
2.9
5.6
7.8
31.2
25
500
1.2
18.4
41
432.2
41
.4
7.8
0.51
10
2
58.4
0.005
0.009
0.014
0.006
0.004
0.0016
0.017
0.046
0.023
0.013
0.011
0.011
0
_
12.0(10?
_
46.3
14.0
37.4
3.3
23.8
105.7
-
3.6
10.02
22.0
-
-
.21
.6
1.8
3.3
3.9
-
-
-
-
—
-
1082
~
4.1
-
-
-
39.8
-
~
-
—
—
—
-
-
—
-
-
-
(continued "1
-------
TABLE A-2. ANALYTICAL DATA, POMONA PROCESS TWO (continued)
Ethyl Parathion(ppb )
Imidan(ppb)
Malathion(ppb)
Methyl Azinphos(ppb)
Methyl Parathion(ppb)
Carbamates(ppb)
Turbidity(NTU)
Odor(No)
Taste(No.)
Suspended Solids(ppm)
Color(Pt-Co Units)
Temperature(°C )
PH
Conductivity(Micro mhos)
Foaming(sec.)
Gross a(pCi/l)
Gross g(pCi/l)
Tritium(pCi/1)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND A
0-5
<1.00
<1.26
13
ND
24
7.25
808
2.3
<2.0
<8.5
640+280
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND A
0-5
<1.14
<1.74
13
ND
25
7.10
940
2.3
<2.8
<6.2
300+250
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
UD
0.34
<1.32
<1.32
ND
ND
24
7.05
910
1.5
<1.4
<9.3
650+260
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.25
1.10
2.30
ND
ND
25.5
6.90
860
1.8
<1.0
<17.4
150+250
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.4
1.52
2.00
ND
5
24
7.20
800
2.8
<0.6
<3.7
67+350
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.34
5.72
S
ND
5
23.5
7.40
810
48.8
<2.0
<25.1
810+280
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.92
2.60
3.03
6
4
#
#
900
10.0
<5.3
<27.8
<400
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.72
1.70
2.3
7
3
27
7.10
950
20.0
<5.6
<17.9
410+390
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.63
4.59
§
1
3
31
7.60
1030
20.3
<5.5
<24.4
395+390
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.25
<1
-------
TABLE A-3. ANALYTICAL DATA, POMONA PROCESS THREE
1
9/23/75
Total Coliform (No/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (no/100 ml)
Plate Count (No. /ml)
Salmonella (D/ND)
Chloride (ppm)
Sulfate (ppm)
Alkalinity (ppm CaCO )
CaC03 Stability (ppm TaC03
Sodium (ppm)
Dissolved Solids (ppm)
Nitrate NO -N (pptn)
Nitrite NO^-N (ppm)
NH -N (ppmj
TKN (ppm)
COD (ppm)
TOC (ppm)
CN (ppm)
Phenol (ppb)
CCE (ppm)
CAE (ppm)
Chlorine Demand (ppm)
Chlorine Residual (ppm)
As (ppb)
Ba (ppb)
B (ppb)
Cd (ppb)
Cr (ppb)
Cu (ppb)
F (ppm)
Fe (ppb)
Pb (ppb)
Mn (ppb)
Hg (ppb)
Se (ppb)
Ag (ppb)
Zn (ppb)
Aldrin (ppb)
Dieldrin (ppb)
Endrin (ppb)
Heptachlor (ppb)
Lindane (ppb)
DDT (ppb)
Chlorodane (ppb)
Methoxychlor (ppb)
2,4-D (ppb)
2,4,5-TP (ppb)
2,4,5-T (ppb)
Diazinon (ppb)
460
0
3.4(10°
ND
102.4
96.8
145.1
) +9.8
98.0
582
16
ND
5.80
4.85
7.6
5.8
0.01
ND
0.3
2.8
#
0.9
ND
ND
ND
ND
33
49
0.68
83
7
6
0.73
ND
40.3
30
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
3
9/25/75 10/24/75
2
0 ,
1.7(105
ND
112.4
94.0
112.8
+14.3
97.0
597
20
0.03
2.55
0.67
11.5
30.5
ND
ND
2.9
5.3
it
0.7
ND
ND
ND
ND
46
68
0.65
78
ND
8
ND
ND
40.4
33
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0
0 ,
0.4(10
ND
97.3
99.2
141.8
+3.2
116.7
733
0.9
0.02
12.5
5.49
13.4
5.9
ND
ND
0.1
2.7
If
0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
48
67
0.70
45
7
16
ND
ND
43.8
94
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
4
11/6/75
' 17
11 ,
) 0.3(10 :
ND
84.6
80.0
134.3
-4.3
63.0
598
0.7
0.29
1.14
5.84
19.4
6.2
ND
5.5
0.1
2.7
#
0.3
ND
ND
ND
ND
55
44
0.66
93
12
9
1.35
ND
41.3
52
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5
11/9/75
>2,400
>2.400,
O
"^"Cl
109.5
124.4
64.6
-0.1
104.1
618
0.8
0.17
19.8
41.4
14.1
7.0
ND
ND
0.3
2.4
II
0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
49
43
0.82
45
ND
9
0.29
ND
40.3
42
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
6
2/13/76
13
0 ,
0.1(10)
ND
81.9
82.8
247.1
-7.52
89.3
477
5.0
3.18
17.2
33.7
23.9
9.7
ND
ND
0.4
2.0
a
0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
59
42
0.73
48
7
10
1.50
ND
50.7
87
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
7
2/23/76
>2,400
540 ,
+c7 (10'
93.8
77.8
228.7
-6.3
112.0
501
8.0
5.9
4.70
18.1
32.5
15.7
ND
ND
0.6
1.6
it
0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
127
66
0.82
40
7
8
ND
ND
52.0
89
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
3/5/76
230
50
3.0(10 )
ND
113.6
74.0
124.6
+3.88
58.0
516
42.9
0.03
3.40
5.34
18.5
10.5
ND
10.2
0.9
3.0
a
0.9
ND
ND
ND
ND
74
48
0.78
41
4
7
0.54
ND
40.9
52
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
9
3/17/76
14
0 ,
0.5(10)
ND
91.8
72.8
158.6
-4.49
281.2
514
36.8
0.15
2.10
2.39
20.4
14.6
ND
12.8
1.4
4.3
it
1
ND
ND
ND
3
64
22
0.71
46
17
ND
0.32
ND
40.1
112
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
n x
9 615
9 333 ,
9 1.4(10)
9 ND
9 98.6
9 89
9 150.8
9 1.94
9 118.8
9 571
9 14.7
8 1.1
9 7.69
9 13.09-
9 17.9
9 11.8
9 0.006
9 6.5
9 0.8
9 3.0
I' It
9 0.644
9 10
9 25
9 500
9 1.2
9 62
9 50
9 0.73
9 58
9 7
9 7
9 0.63
9 10
9 43.3
9 66
9 0.005
9 0.009
9 0.014
9 0.006
9 0.004
9 0.0016
9 0.017
9 0.046
9 0.023
9 3.016
9 0.011
9 0.011
a
1023
794
1.2( 10 )
_
11.7
15
56.3
7.31
68.5
79
15.9
-
7.00
14.83
7.4
7.94
-
-
0.9
1.2
1?
0.240
-
-
-
-
27
15
0.06
21
-
-
0.52
-
4.7
30
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Low High
0 >2,400
0 , >2,400
0.1(10 ) 3.4 10'
ND +C}
81.9 113.6
73 120
64.6 247.1
-0.1 +14.3
58.0 281.2
477 733
0.7 42.9
ND 5.9
1.14 19.8
0.67 41.4
7.6 32.5
5.8 30.5
ND 0.01
ND 12.8
0.1 2.9
1.6 5.3
ir it
0.3 1
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND 3
33 127
22 68
0.65 0.82
41 93
ND 17
ND 16
ND 1.50
ND ND
40.1 52.0
30 112
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-3. ANALYTICAL DATA, POMONA PROCESS THREE (continued)
1 2
9/23/75 9/25/75 1
ND
ND
ND
ND
i ND
ND
1.2
4.00
3.48
I 2
//
7.7
nhos) 960.0
14.2
<8.3
<26.7
16+390
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.15
2.30
3.50
6
//
7.8
920.0
27.4
<4.8
<12.1
199+390
3
0/24/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.95
3.03
6.06
4-
t
7.1
954.5
23.4
<8.6
<22.5
710+410
4
11/6/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.97
2.29
3*
8
#
7.6
891.8
50
<5.9
<10.4
160+395
5
11/9/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.99
§
f
2
#
7.3
958.8
66
<2.4
<22.6
29+390
6 7
2/13/76 2/23/76
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.99
<9.19
10.56
4
#
§
918.0
7.6
<4.7
<29.7
107+387
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.10
12.13
j
1
#
7.7
938.4
22.5
<8.7
<17.3
81+386
3/5/76
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.94
4.00
t
3
f
7.3
979.2
6.4
<4.0
<29.2
160+387
9
3/17/26
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.10
2.63
5*
1
f
7.1
910.0
8.8
<5.8
<26.1
<400
H
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
4
9
#
8
9
9
9
9
8
X
0.012
0.078
0.015
0.108
0.018
-
1.15
6.58
5.9
3
t
7.5
936.9
25.1
5.9
21.8
183
£
_
-
-
-
-
-
0.4
6.71
3.33
2
#
0.28
28.6
20.5
-
-
223
Low
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.94
2.30
3.48
1
#
7.1
891.8
6.4
2.4
10.4
16
High
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.10
13.9
6.06
8
#
7.8
979.2
66
8.7
29.7
710
Ethyl Parathion (ppb)
Imidan (ppb)
Malathion (ppb)
Methyl Azinphos (ppb)
Methyl Parathion (ppb)
Carbamates (ppb)
Turbidity (NTU)
Odor (No.)
Taste (No.)
Suspended Solids (ppm)
Temperature (°C)
PH
Conduc tivity (Mil
Foaming (sec.)
Gross a (pCi/1)
Gross 8 (pCi/1)
Tritium (pCi/1)
* Carbaryl, fluometuron, and carbofuran
§ Data not available
? Analysis riot possible - high fecal coliform count
t On-site determination; data not supplied to GSRI
ND - Not detected
-------
TABLE A-4. ANALYTICAL DATA, LAKE TAHOE
00
1
9/26/74 .
Total Coliform (No/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (No/100 ml)
Total Plate Count (No. /ml)
.Salmonella (D/ND)
Chloride (ppm)
Sulfate (ppm)
Alkalinity (ppm CaCO )
CaCO.Stability (ppm CaCO-)
Sodium (ppm)
Dissolved Solids (ppm)
Nitrate NO -N (ppm)
Nitrite NO^-N (ppm)
Ammonia N fppm)
TKN (ppm)
As (ppb)
Ba (ppb)
, B (ppb)
Cd (ppb)
Cr (ppb)
Cu (ppb)
F (ppm)
Fe (ppb)
Pb (ppb)
Mn (ppb)
Hg (ppb)
Se (ppb)
Ag (ppb)
Zn (ppb)
COD (ppm)
TOC (ppm)
CCE (ppm)
CAE (ppm)
2
0 ,
6.5(10 )
ND
35.2
26.0
205.0
-10.0
41.0
293.0
ND
ND
19.5
21.2
14
ND
ND
ND
14
22
0.37
292
9
8
ND
ND
5
134
8.3
17.7
0.6
2.0
2
10/8/74
0
0 .
85.0(10 )
ND
48.1
32.0
193.5
+2.5
50.7
282.0
1.6
3.30
17.0
19.4
110
ND
ND
20.8
ND
39
0.31
1000
ND
5
ND
350
ND
794
ND
11.3
§
§
3
10/22/74
46
14 .
80.0(10 )
ND
41.0
29.0
188.0
+20.0
49.0
308.0
ND
0.15
24.0
21.2
100
ND
ND
2.1
ND
42
0.22
377
ND
5
ND
258
ND
481
1.6
30.5
§
5
4 j
11/6/74
49
0 -, ,
80.0(10 )
ND
29.9
27.0
192.0
+26.5
47.5
306.1
ND
0.55
10.3
21.2
39
ND
ND
ND
ND
26
0.23
556
ND
5
ND
57
ND
280
5.7
11.1
0.5
1.5
5'
11/21/74
0
0 ,
20.0(10 )
ND
33.3
22.3." ..,
200.2
+2.3
47.3
315.0
0.7
0.33
10.3
0.81
36
ND
ND
1
2.5
18
0.28
109
ND
5
ND
210
ND
107
5.1
7.2
0.3
1.1
6
12/7/74
0
0
0.005(10
ND
36,1
25.7
278.8
-1.6
44.7
387.0
0.7
0.20
10.3
27.3
43
ND
ND
1.0
2.5
18
0.37
52
ND
7
ND
52
ND
46
3.5
ND
0.7
3.1
7
1/16/75
5
0
') 4.5(10
ND
0.3
27.8
328
-4.9
37.9
416.5
5.5
ND
24.0
0.79
21
ND
ND
ND
ND
19
0.22
111
ND
4
0.66
150
ND
ND
19.1
12.5
§
0.2
8
2/13/75
2
4 °
)30.0(10
ND
57.1
33.3
236.2
-0.2
238.1
505
1.71
ND
18.5
29.7
47
ND
ND
ND
ND
32
0.21
43
ND
14
ND
200
ND
202
15.6
6.4
1.6
4.1
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-4. ANALYTICAL DATA, LAKE TAHOE (continued)
9
2/21/75
Total Coliform (No/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (No/100 ml)
220
0
Total Plate Count (No./ml)3.0(10"
Salmonella (D/ND)
Chloride (ppro)
Sulfate (ppm)
Alkalinity (ppm CaCO )
CaCO,Stability (ppm CaCO.j)
Sodium (ppm)
Dissolved Solids (ppm)
Nitrate NO -N (ppm)
Nitrite NO^-N (ppm)
Ammonia N Xppm)
TKN (ppm)
As (ppb)
Ba (ppb)
B (ppb)
Cd (ppb)
Cr (ppb)
Cu (ppb)
F (ppm)
Fe (ppb)
Pb (ppb)
Mn(ppb)
Hg (ppb)
Se (ppb)
Ag (ppb)
Zn (ppb)
COD (ppb)
TOC (ppm)
CCE (ppm)
CAE (ppm)
Chlorine Demand (ppm)
Chlorine Residual (ppm)
ND
43
33.0
254.2
-0.08
34.7
414.0
0.50
ND
21.0
27.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
56
0.28
66
ND
12
ND
160
ND
58
26.1
16.5
0.5
1.0
#
t
10
11
3/12/75 4/8/75
4
2 ,
HS.OCUT)
ND
109.4
25.3
152.5
+3.7
37.3
470.5
3.70
ND
10.3
15.2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
120
0.19
210
ND
20
ND
70
ND
2090
8.2
2.5
§
2.1
#
It
0
0
5.0(104
ND
115.9
28.8
148.0
-0.9
30.6
415.5
0.60
ND
13.8
5.78
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
90
0.21
150
ND
20
ND
190
ND
2650
7.5
3.6
§
2.7
#
#
12
6/18/75
0
0
)35.0(10 )
ND
114.0
26.9
155.7
-3.2
43.0
445.0
10.00
4.0
15.0
17.5
ND
ND
ND
2
ND
70
0.11
140
40
20
0.99
100
ND
3610
6.1
5.8
1.6
2.2
#
•#
13
7/2/75
§
5
§ 0.
ND
186.2
28.4
39.7
+20.5
44.0
474
2.20
0.3
4.97
5.82
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
110
0.07
130
ND
20
0.49
170
2
2700
5.2.
4.3
0.8
5.1
t -•'
It
Low
0
0
005(10*
ND
0.3
22.3
39.7
-0.08
30.6
282
ND
ND
4.97
0.79
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
18
0.07
43
ND
4
ND
ND
ND
46
1.6
ND
0.48
0.2
-
—
High
220
14 ,
) 80. 00-0
115.9
33.3
328
+26.5
238.1
505
10
4.0
24.0
27.5
100
ND
ND
20.8
14
120
0.37
1000
40
20
0.99
350
2
3610
26.1
30.5
1.6
4.1
-
—
n
12
12
)12
13
13
13
13
13
12
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
:..13
Sitl?
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
8
11
—
—
X
27.33
1.33 ,
35.50.0 )
ND
65.34
28.11
197.8
3.58
42.3
387.0
1.65
IP
15.3
16.41
27.8
25
500
2.7
2.4
50.9
0.24
248.85
5
11.5
0.39
152
1
1010
9.0
10.0
0.8
2.3
-
-
a
63.25
4.03 ,
33.1(10 )
_
50.99
3.20
70.51
11.54
6.2
77.50
-
-
5.94
10.04
-
-
-
-
-
35.8
0.09
268.90
~
6.78
-••
-
-
-
-
-
0.5
.1-4
—
-
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-4. ANALYTICAL DATA, LAKE TAHOE (continued)
Chlorine Demand (ppm)
Chlorine Residual (ppm)
CN (ppm)
Phenols (ppb)
Aldrin (ppb)
Dieldrin (ppb)
Endrin (ppb)
Heptachlor (ppb)
Lindane (ppb)
DDT (ppb)
Chlorodane (ppb)
Methoxychlor (ppb)
2,4-D (ppb)
2,4,5-TP (ppb)
2,4,5-T (ppb)
Diazinon (ppb)
Ethyl Parathion (ppb)
Imidan (ppb )
Malathion (ppb)
Methyl Azinphos (ppb)
Methyl Parathion (ppb)
Carbamates (ppb)
Turbidity (NTU)
Odor (No.)
Taste (No.)
Color (Pt-Co units)
Suspended Solids (ppm)
Temperature (°C)
PH
1
9/27/74
f
it
0.03
2.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0-5
2.52
2.00
ND
ND
1
7.55
Conductivity (Micro mhos) 575
Foaming (sec.)
Gross 6 (pCi/1)
Gross a (pCi/1)
Tritium (pCi/1)
17.
<7.9
<4.4
<250
2
10/8/74
It
It
0.02
7.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.00
1.41
ND
2.5
i
7.2
590.0
1.6
<9.3
<1.1
500 +
3
10/22/74
t
it
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.149
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.96
<1.15
2.64
ND
4.0
it
it
550.0
1.7
<3.4
ND
260 700 + 260
4
11/6/74
it
it
0.03
ND
ND
ND .
ND
ND
ND '
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.94
<1.15
<1;15
4
4.5
it
it
494
0.9
<4.4
ND
<350
5
11/21/74
#
it
ND
5.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.551
0.375
<0.024
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.20
<1.52
1.52
5
ND
it
it
567
1.5
<7.5
ND
140 + 340
6
12/7/74
g
it
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND' *
ND-
ND'
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.60
1.15
1.00
5
ND
f
it
728
1.3
<17.0
3.1
800 + 260
7
1/16/75
It
it
ND
6.4
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.04
1.32
2.64
3
ND
it
it
813.2
1.6
<8.1
ND
8
2/13/75
it
it
ND
§
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
§
<1.15
ND
1
ND
it
it
735.0
3.59
<11.9
ND
847 + 243 678 + '.
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-4. ANALYTICAL DATA, LAKE TAHOE (continued)
9
2/21/75
ND
9
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.40
9.18
4.59
7
3.5
t
^
1 752.4
72.5
<6.0
<1.1
552+240
10
3/13/75
ND
5.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.40
<1.00
<1.15
4
5.0
*
#
671.0
1.8
<7.1
<1. 7
613+241
11
4/8/75
ND
9.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.20
<1.00
§
4
4.0
t
#
681.0
1.3
<3.2
ND
613+241
12
6/18/75
0.02
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.50
1.51
3.48
3
2.5
#
f
780.5
2.3
<17.4
<1.2
220
13
7/2/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.48
1.74
2.30
2
1.0
t
If
785.5
1.4
<12.7
<2.6
140
Low
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.96
1.15
ND
ND
ND
-
-
494
0.9
<3.4
<0.5
140
High
0.03
9.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.551
0.375
< 0.024
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.4
9.18
4.59
7
5.0
-
-
813.2
72.5
<17.4
<4.4
880
Jl
13
12
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
10
13
12
13
13
-
-
13
1
13
13
13
x a
0.011 -
4.4
0.005 -
0.009 -
0.014
0.006
0.004
0. 0016 -
0.017
0.046 -
0.075 -
0.046 -
0.012 -
0.011 -
0.012 -
0.078 -
0.015
0.108 -
0.018 -
- -
1-57 0.53
2.03
2.07
4
2.1
-
_
668.8 102.78
7.17 19.64
8.9
1.6
499
CN (ppm)
Phenols (ppb)
Aldrin (ppb)
Dieldrtti (ppb)
Endrin (ppb)
Heptachlor (ppb)
Lindane (ppb)
DDT (ppb)
Chlorodane (ppb)
Methoxychlor (ppb)
2,4-D (ppb)
2,4,5-TP (ppb)
2,4,5-T (ppb)
Diazinon (ppb)
Ethyl Parathion (ppb)
Imldan (ppb)
Malathion (ppb)
Methyl Azinphos (ppb)
Methyl Parathion (ppb)
Carbamates (ppb)
Turbidity (NTU)
Odor (No.)
Taste (No.)
Color (Pt-Co units)
Suspended Solids (ppm)
Temperature (°C)
PH
Conductivity (Micro mhos)
Foaming (sec.)
Gross B (pCi/1)
Gross a- (pCi/1)
Tritium (pCi/1)
§ Data not available
# On-site determination; sample not supplied to GSRI
ND - Not detected
-------
Total Coliform (No/100 ml) 0
Fecal Coliform (No/100 ml) 0
Total Plate Count (No/ml)
Salmonella (D/ND)
Chloride (ppm)
Sulfate (ppm)
Alkalinity (ppm CaCO )
CaCO Stability (ppm CaCO-j
Sodium (ppm)
Dissolved Solids (ppm)
Nitrate NO -N (ppm)
Nitrite NO^-N (ppm)
Ammonia N fppm)
TKN (ppm)
COD (ppm)
TOC (ppm)
CN (ppm)
Phenol (ppb)
Fluoride (ppm)
CCE (ppm)
CAE (ppm)
CCE (extra)
CAE (extra)
1^3 Chlorine Demand (ppm)
N> Chlorine Residual (ppm)
AS (ppb)
Ba (ppb)
B (ppb)
Cd (ppb)
Cr (ppb)
Cu (ppb)
Fe (ppb)
Pb (ppb)
Mn (ppb)
Hg (ppb)
Se (ppb)
Ag (ppb)
Zn (ppb)
Aldrin (ppb)
Dieldrin (ppb)
Endrin (ppb)
Heptachlor (ppb)
Lindane (ppb)
DDT (ppb)
Chlorodane (ppb)
Methoxychlor (ppb)
2,4-D (ppb)
2,4,5-TP (ppb)
2,4,5-T (ppb)
Diazinon (ppb)
TABLE A-5. ANALYTICAL DATA, DALLAS
1
9/5/74
ml) 0
ml) 0
nl) 7.30.01
ND
78.7
85.5
90.7
i03) +9
53.0
356
2.7
ND
0.043
0.32
15.2
3.7
ND
ND
1.70
§
§
0.1
1.1
II
)jt
IF
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
4
225
10
5
ND
ND
ND
65
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
9/13/74
0
° 2
2.0(10 )
ND
75.7
87.0
100.0
+48.5
62.0
424
4.5
ND
0.10
0.45
3.8
0.5
ND
ND
1.75
S
§
0.1
3.0
it
if
ND
625
ND
ND
60
17
338
14
6
ND
ND
ND
87
,ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
10/4/74
0
30.0(102)
ND
89.3
100.0
133.0
+18.5
78.0
405
6.7
ND
0.064
0.36
8.3
7.4
ND
7.4
2.00
0.2
0.4
-
-
9
ND
250
ND
ND
10
4
136
7
7
-
ND
ND
116
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.109
ND
0.062
ND
ND
ND
4
10/16/74
23
23
20.0(10 )
ND
79. /
90.5
127.0
-1
-
461
6.5
ND
0.040
1.10
0.4
6.4
ND
7.5
1.30
1.4
§
-
-
9
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
49
ND
ND
-
38
ND
21
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.099
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5
10/20/74
0
0 2
0.15(10)
ND
.62.5
89.5
236.0
-15
89.0
563
10.0
ND
0.080
0.87
0.4
18.7
ND
8.0
1.00
S
S
-
-
•It
53
ND '
ND
ND
3
5
165
ND
3
ND
69
ND
11
ND
ND
ND
0.014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
6
12/9/74
23
0.30(10^
ND
71.5
75.0
257.0
-0.4
74.0
515
0.5
ND
7.8
6.8
2.7
ND
0.005
11.2
O.SO
0.3
4.3
-
-
9
100
100
ND
1
5
4
32
ND
4
ND
31
ND
25
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
<0.058
ND
<0.024
ND
7
1/24/75
§
§
5
5
74.0
113.2
164.9
+66.3
73.1
484
2.9
ND
2.40
5.28
3.3
8.6
ND
7.0
1.3.5
0.2
4.3
-
-
t
a
if
47
190
ND
ND
4
4
28
ND
6
-
140
0.66
23
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
1/29/75
4
0.30(10^
ND
53.6
96.4
239.4
-0.2
57.9
537
4.6
ND
0.031
0.15
7.9
14.6
ND
5.0
O.F.O
0.5
3.8
-
-
9
21
ND
ND
ND
4
7-
24
ND
5
ND
150
0.57
6
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Low
0
0.15(10^
ND
53.6
86
90.7
-0.2
53.0
356
0.5
ND
0.04
0.15
0.4
ND
ND
ND
0.80
0.1
0.4
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND.
3 ..
24
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
6
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
High n
23 7
23 7
n. 0(10^7
ND
89.3 8
113 8
257 8
+66.3 8
89.0 7
563 8
10.0 8
ND 8
2.40 8
6.8 8
15.2 8
18.7 8
ND 8
11.2 8
2.00 8
1.4 7
4.3 6
-
-
-
100 7
625 8
ND 8
1 8
60 8
17 8
338 8
14 8
7 8
0.06 6
150 8
4 8
116 8
ND 8
ND 8
ND 8
0.014 8
ND 8
ND 8
0.019 8
ND 8
0.062 8
ND 8
ND 8
ND 8
x a
7 11
18.0(102)27.C(10^
73.1 11.0
92.1 11
168.5 66.7
15.8 27.8
69.6 12.6
468 70
4.8 2.9
0.01
1.32 2.74
1.92 2.60
5.24 4.99
7.6
0.005 -
6.5
1.34 0.45
0.4 0.5
2.8 1.7
-
-
-
36
158
500
1
12 ,.
6 5
125 114
5
5
0.3
57
0.53 -
44 40
0.005
0.009 -
0.014 -
0 . 007 -
0.004 -
0.0016 -
0.039 -
0.046 -
0.032 -
0.016 -
0.013 -
0.011 -
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-5. ANALYTICAL DATA, DALLAS (continued)
Ethyl Parathion (ppb)
Imidan (ppb)
Malathion (ppb)
Methyl Azlnphos (ppb)
Methyl Parathion (ppb)
Carbamates (ppb)
Turbidity (NTU)
Odor (No.)
Taste (No.)
1 Suspended Solids (ppm)
Temperature(°C)
PH
Conductivity (micro mhos) 601
Foaming '(see. )
Gross a (pCi/1)
Gross B (pCi/1)
Tritium (pCi/1)
1
9/5/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND*
<48.60
<2.00
ND
It
it
) 601
1.7
<1.3
<6.0
.750+290
2
9/13/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND*
<5.32
1.74
ND
it
It
700
2.2
<1.0
<2.1
590+310
3
10/4/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND*
<5.28
3.03
ND
It
It
600
1-9
<3.2
<2.7
480+310
4
10/16/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.35
<9.19
2.64
ND
It
it
740
1.7
<0.8
<19.2
350+250
5
10/20/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.13
12.13
4.59
ND
It
It
845
2.3
<0.8
<17.2
400+260
6
12/9/74
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.23
4.00
1.99
ND
//
It
906
4.4
<1.6
<15.8
670+260
7
1/24/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.71
*
*
ND
It
It
806
3.9
<1.2
<14.8
730+230
8
1/29/75
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.39
8.00
3.03
ND
It
It
886
4.9
<1.1
<2.8
680+237
Low
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
4.0
1.7
ND
._
•
600
1.7
<1.0
<2.1
350
High
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
48.6
4.6
ND
_
-
906
4.9
<3.2
<19.2
750
n
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
8
-
-
8
8
8
8
8
x a
0.012 -
0.078 -
0.015 -
0.108 -
0.018 -
_
0.37 0.12
13.22 -
2.72 - .
0.1
-
-
761 120
2.9 1.3
1.4
lO.'l -
581 153
N)
CO
ND - Not detected
§ Data not available
it On-site determinations; data not supplied to GSR1
* JTU
-------
TABLE A-6. ANALYTICAL DATA, BLUE PLAINS - SYSTEM 1
1 2
9/11/74 9/20/74
Total CoHform(No./100 ml)*
Fecal Coliform(No./100 ml)*
Plate Count(No./ml) *
Salmonella(D/ND ) *
Chloride(ppm) 183.4
Sulfate(ppm) 76
Alkalinity(ppm CaCO ) 15.0
CaCO Stability(ppraJCaCOJ +57.0
Sodium(ppm) 82
Dissolved Solids(ppm) 524
Nitrate NO.(Ppm) ND
Nitrite NO^PP™) ND
Ammonia N(ppm) 0.25
TKN(ppra) 1.85
As(ppb) 37
!_• Ba(ppb) ND
N> B(ppb) ND
** Cd(ppb) - ND
Cr(ppb) 10
Cu(ppb) 20
F(ppm) - 1.30
Fe(ppb) 255
Pb(ppb) 10
Mn(ppb) 10
Hg(ppb) ND
Se(ppb) ND
Ag(ppb) 3
Zn(ppb) 86
COD(ppm) *
TOC(ppm) *
CCE(ppm) §
CAE(ppm) §
Chlorine Demand (ppm) //
Chlorine Residual (ppm) If
2
0
240
ND
202.5
69
27.7
+43.0
83
531
ND
ND
0.65
2.68
ND
ND
ND
ND
51
13
1.10
255
51
28
ND
ND
6
64
30.1
11.3
1.1
0.3
#
3
9/26/74
>2,400
920 ,
1.7(10")
ND
177.7
64
46.7
+20.8
71
512
ND
ND
1.75
5.2
ND
250
ND
ND
19
13
1.30
165
19
8
ND
ND
4
28
30.1
12.3
1.5
2.4
Low
2 •••'-
0
240
ND
177.7
64
15.0
+20.8
71
512
ND
ND
0.25
1.85
ND
ND
ND
ND
10
13
1.1
165
10
8
ND
ND
3
28
-
-
-
_
High
>2,400
920 ,
1.7(106
ND
202.5
76
46.7
+57.0
83
531
ND
ND
1.75
5.2
37
250
ND
ND
51
20
1.3
255
51
28
ND
ND
6
86
-
-
-
_
n
2
2
)2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3t
1,200
460
0.85(10°
ND
187.9
70
29.8
40.3
78.7
522
0.5
0.01
0.88
3.24
19
25
500
1
27
15
1.23
225
27
15
0.3
10
4.33
59
30.1
11.8
1.3
1.3
£
_
650 ,
) 1.2(10")
-
13.0
6
16.0
18.3
6.7
10
-
-
0.77
1.74
-
-
-
22
4
0.12
52
22
11
_
-
1.58
29
0.0
0.7
0.3
1.4
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-6. ANALYTICAL DATA, BLUE PLAINS-SYSTEM 1 (continued)
NJ
CN(ppm)
Phenols(ppb)
Aldrin(ppb)
Dieldrin(ppb)
Endrin(ppb)
Heptachlor(ppb)
Lindane(ppb)
DDT (Ppb)
Chlorodane(ppb)
Methoxychlor(ppb)
2,4-D(ppb)
2,4,5-TP(ppb)
2,4,5-T(ppb)
Diazinon(ppb)
Ethyl Parathion(ppb)
Inidan(ppb)
Malathion(ppb)
Methyl Azinphos(ppb)
Methyl Parathlon(ppb)
Carbamates(ppb)
Turbidity(JTO )
Odor(No.)
Taste(No.)
Color(Pt-Co units )
Suspended Solids(ppb)
Temperature (°C )
PH
CouductivityCMicro mhos)
Foaming (Sec (3> )
Gross Betc(pCi/l )
Gross Alpha(pCi/1)
Tritium (pCi/1)
* Glass container broke in shipping
§ Data not available
1
9/11/74
0.03
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ND
*
*
ND
ND
It
A
1 860
2.3
<7.6
<0.4
300+250
2
9/20/74
0.06
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
7
_
ND
13.0
t
A
880
3.0
<5.9
<2.5
100+250
3
9/26/74
0.04
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND j,
0-5
10.56
_
ND
5.0
t
a
If
825
2.9
<5.2
<1.4
150+250
Low
0.03
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
7
_
ND
ND
-
825
2.3
<5.2
<0.4
100
High
0.06
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10.56
_
ND
13.0
-
880
30
<7.6
<2.5
300
.n
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
_
3
3
-
3
3
3
3
3
X
0.043
'5
0.005
0.009
0.014
0.006
0.004
0.0016
0.017
0.046
3.023
0.016
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.078
0.015
0.108
0.018
5
8.8
"; _
j i
6
-
855
2.7
6.2
1.4
183
q
0.015
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
„
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
1.8
—
_
_
-
28
0.4
104
# On-site determination; data not supplied
to GSKL.
+ ppm SiO,
-------
TABLE A-7. ANALYTICAL DATA, BLUE PLAINS- SYSTEM 2
0>
4
5
6
7
6/13/75 7/9/75 8/14/75 8/24/75
Total Coliform (No./ 100 ml)
Fecal Coli£orm(No./100 ml)
Total Plate Count (No/ml)
Salmonella(D/ND)
Chloride (ppm)
Sulf ate (ppm)
Alkalinity (ppm)
CaCO- Stability(ppm CaCO.)
Sodium(ppm)
Dissolved Solids(ppm)
Nitrate NO. (ppm)
Nitrite NO^ppm)
Ammonia N(ppm )
TKN(ppm)
COD (ppm)
TOC(ppm)
CN(ppm)
Phenol ppb
Fluoride (ppm)
CCE (ppm)
CAE(ppm)
Chlorine Demand (ppm)
Chlorine Residual (ppm)
As (ppb).
Ba(ppb)
B(ppb)
Cd(ppb)
Cr(ppb)
Cu (ppb )
Fe(ppb)
Pb(ppb)
2
0 .
8UCT)
ND
70.5
44.0
100.6
-1.1
38
342.0
11
0.7
0.042
0.86
9.2
5.0
ND
ND
0.79
ND
2.1
//
It
ND
25
ND
ND
ND
10
50
ND
11
0
200 :
ND
69.1
45.7
85.9
+2.2
34
322
5.0
ND
0.078
1.97
9.1
6.5
ND
ND
0.74
0.1
2.3
#
#
ND
30
ND
ND
ND
10
50
ND
33
0
ND
73.3
52.4
67.1
+7.2
39
348
0.18
ND
0.38
0.70
16.0
12.8
ND
ND
0.86
0.1
3.2
It
It
ND
56
ND
1.7
4
113
72
ND
0
0
100
ND
64.0
50.8
75.5
+3.5
33
339
0.65
ND
0.04
1.33
7.3
8.9
ND
ND
0.72
0.02
1.3
It
It
ND
85
ND
1.9
13
62
97
ND
8
9A7/75"
2
0
4(103)
ND
71.9
52.4
77.1
+3.3
37
337
0.25
ND
0.028
1.75
15.5
12.6
ND
ND ,
6.80
Oil
1.3
It
It
ND
ND
ND
ND
22
50
48
ND
9
Low
9/23/75
0
0
35
ND
47.9
48.4
84.6
+8.6
34
344
0.34
ND
0.029
1.96
14-1
6.9
ND
19.8
0.86
0.1
1.9
It
it
ND
ND
ND
ND
27
28
49
ND
0
0
35
ND
64
44.0
67.1
-1.1
33 ':'•
322
0.18
ND
0.028
0.70
7.3
5.0
ND
ND
0.72
ND
1.3
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10
48
ND
High
"
33
0
8(105)
ND
73.3
52.4
100,6
+8,6
39
348
11
0.7
0.38
1.97
16.0
12.8
ND
19.8
0.86
0.13
3.2
-
-
ND
ND
ND
1.85
27
113
97
ND
n
••iL
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
6
-
-
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
X
8
0
2.7(105)
ND
66.1
49.0
81.8
3.95
31
339
2.90
0.1
0.100
1.43
11.9
8.8
O.005
7.5
0.745
0.068
1.98
-
-
10
41
500
1.3
11
45.5
61
• s'vrm^^ mif
a
12.9
-
3.3(105)
9.48
3.54
11.45
3.50
10.87
9.03
4.38
-
0.139
0.56
3.8
3.3
-
-
0.058
0.055
0.65
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
39.2
19.86
»j\
-------
TABLE A-7. ANALYTICAL DATA, BLUE PLAINS-SYSTEM 2 (continued)
NJ
4
6/13/75
5
0.2
100
0.37
50
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.03
48.5
12.1
ND
3
If
«
) 551
15
<5.6
<1.4
<220
5
7/9/75
5
0.36
ND
0.05
30
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.1
64
16
0.5
3
If
it
534
10.7
<16.4
<5.0
277+389
6
8/14/75
4.7
0.93
ND
0.18
94
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.03
3.03
2.30
ND
3
#
#
510
20.3
<13.1
<1.3
277+388
7
8/24/75
18.5
1.27
ND
1.56
70
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.99
9.19
6.73
0.5
2
9
If
505
70.8
<22.1
<3.0
8
9
Low
9/23/75 9/23/75
7
0.70
ND
1.57
52
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.97
1.99
1.99
1
2
#
f
540
30.2
<6.6
<2*6
395+390 16+385
1
0.31
ND
0.52
26
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.87
21.11
10.08
1
2 ~
It
it
520
101.2
<15.0
<1.9
269+390
1
0.20
ND
0.05
30
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.87
1..99 t
1.99 '
ND
2
-
-
5.05
10.7
<5.6
<1.3
16
High
*J
18.5
1.27
ND
1.6
94
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
.1.1
64
16
1
3
.-
-
5.51
101.2
<22.1
<5
395
n
^^
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
6
-
-
6
6
-
-
5
X
6.9
0.63
25
0.71 '
54
0.005
0.009
0.014
0.006
0.004
o
6.0
0.42
-
0.68
25
-
-
-
-
_
0.0016 -
0.017
0.046
0.023
0.016
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.078
0.015
0.108
0.018
-
0.998
24.63
8.32
0.8
2.5
-
-
526.6
41.4
9.9
1.5
266.8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"-
-
-
-
0.08
25.88
5.62
0.27
0.55
-
-
17.9
36.5
-
-
150.0
Mn(ppb)
Hg(ppb)
Se(ppb)
Ag(ppb)
Zn(ppb)
Aldrin(ppb)
Dieldrin(ppb)
Endrin(ppb)
Heptachlor (ppb)
Lindane(ppb)
DDT (ppb)
Chlorodane(ppb)
Methoxychlor(ppb)
2,4-D(ppb)
2,4,5-TP(ppb)
2,4,5-T(PPb)
Diazinon(ppb)
Ethyl Parathion(ppb)
Imidan(ppb)
. Malathion(ppb)
Methyl Azinphos(ppb)
Methyl Parathion(ppb)
Carbamates(ppb)
Turbidity(NTU)
Odor(No.)
Taste (No.)
Suspended Solids(ppm)
Color(Pt-Co units)
Temperature(°C )
pH
Conductivity(Micro mhos)
Foaming (Sec.)
Gross Beta(pCi/l)
Gross Alpha(pCi/1)
Tritium _
ND - Not detected
# On-site determination; data not supplied to GSRI
-------
TABLE A-8. ANALYTICAL DATA, ORANGE COUNTY
1 234
2/11/76 2/10/76 2/17/76 2/20/76
Parameter
Total Coliform(No./100 ml)
Fecal Coliform(No./100 ml)
Plate Count (No. /ml)
Salmonella (D/ND)
Chloride (ppm )
Sulfate(ppm)
Alkalinity(ppm CaCO )
CaCO Stability( ppm CaCO )
Sodium (ppm)
Dissolved Solids(ppm )
Nitrate(ppm )«
Nitrite (ppm) x
Ammonia N(ppm)
TKN (ppm)
COD (ppm)
TOC (ppm)
CN(ppm)
Phenol (ppb)
CCE(ppm)
CAE(ppm)
Chlorine Demand (ppm)
Chlorine Residual (ppm)
As (ppb)
Ba(ppb)
B(ppb)
Cd(ppb)
Cr (ppb)
Cu(ppb)
F(ppm)
Fe (ppb )
Pb (ppb )
0
0 ,
1.25(10 )
ND
226.8
340
130.5
+9. 82
4969
1122
3D
18.0
23.6
8.3
5.4
ND
ND
0.1
1.4
#
t
ND
ND
ND
ND
12
41
0.74
21
9
0
0 ,
8.5d/T)
ND
215.8
320
111.0
+7.2
372
928
ND
16.5
20.8
9.6
5.2
ND
11.2
0.4
1.9
t
it
ND
ND
ND
ND
61
46
0.70
15
12
0
0
300
ND
222.6
310
129.0
+9.0
95.3
970
ND
13.2
18.3
10.1
5.9
ND
ND
0.2
1.7
#
t
ND
ND
ND
ND
54
59
0.72
29
9
0
0
1.2(10
ND
228.3
305
128.3
+8.2
105
945
ND
12.7
31-9
14.8
8.1
ND
ND
0.2
0.8
t
It
ND
ND
ND
ND
82
53
0.86
38
12
5
3/8/76
5
, 0
3)15
ND
204.5
270
107.8
-17.2
108
820
ND
12.8
14.5
10.5
8.5
ND
ND
5
§
It
It
ND
flD
ND
3
111
15
0.62
63
21
6
3/12/76
5
0
4.3(10 )
ND
234.8
309
116.4
+7.2
142
924
ND
15.2
21.7
8.3
5.4
ND
14
§
§
It
It
ND
ND
ND
4
51
25
0.82
46
16
i
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
-
-
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
X
2
0
4-2TKT)
ND
222.1
309
120.5
4.05
965
952
0.01
14.7
21.8
10.3
6.4
0.005
7.5
0.2
1.4
-
_
10
25
50
1.8
67
40
0.74
35
13
Low
0
0
15 1
NO
204.5
270
107.8
+7.2
95.3
820
ND
12.7
14.5
8.3
5.2
ND
ND
0.1
0.8
-
_
-
-
-
ND
42
15
0.62
15
9
High
5
6
.25 CUT)
ND
234.8
340
130.5
-17.2
4969
1122
ND
18.0
31.9
14.8
8.5
ND
14
0.4
1.9
_
_
-
-
-
4
111
59
0.86
63
21
£
3 -
-
5.3(104)
10.7
23
10.0
18.8
1954
98
_
2.2
5.86
2.4
1.5
-
_
0.1
0.5
_
_
-
-
-
_
25
17
0.09
18
5
-------
TABLE A-8. ANALYTICAL DATA, ORANGE COUNTY (continued)
Mn(ppb)
Hg(ppb)
Se(ppb)
Ag(ppb)
Zn(ppb)
Aldrin(ppb)
Dieldrin(ppb)
Endrin(ppb)
Heptachlor (ppb)
Lindane(ppb)
DDT(ppb)
Chlorodane (ppb)
Methoxychlor (ppb)
2,4-D(ppb)
2,4,5-TP(ppb)
2,4,5-T(ppb)
Diazinon(ppb)
Ethyl Parathion(ppb)
Imidan(ppb)
Malathion(ppb)
Methyl Azinphos(ppb)
Methyl Parathion(ppb)
Carbamat es ( ppb)
Turbidity (iJTU)
Odor(No)
Taste(No.)
Suspended Solids (ppm)
Temperature(°C )
pH
Conductivity(Micro mhos)
Foaming(Sec.)
Gross Beta(pCi/l)
Gross Alpha(pCi/l)
Tritium(pCi/l)
§ Data not available
1
2/TT776
3
-------
Parameter
TABLE A-9. ANALYTICAL DATA, ESCONDIDO
1
Total Collforra '(No/100 ml) 0
Fecal Collform (No/100 ml) 0
Total Plate Count (No/ml) 700
Salmonella (D/ND) ND
Chloride (ppm) 24. 3
Sulfate (ppm) 1.6
Alkalinity (ppm CaCO ) 6.1
CaCO_ Stability (ppm CaCO,) +97.7
Sodium (ppm) 27.0
Dissolved Solids (ppm) 82
Nitrate (ppm) 9.0
Nitrite (ppm) ND
Ammonia N (ppm) 0-.967
TKN (ppm) 1.83
As (ppb) NO
Ba (ppb) ND
B (ppb) ND
Cd (pyb) ND
Cr (ppb) ND
Cu (ppb) 10
F (ppm) 0.262
Fe (ppb) 20
Pb (ppb) ND
Mn (ppb) . ND
Hg (ppb) 0.26
Se (ppb) 180
Ag (ppb) 0.23
Zn (ppb) . 30
COD (ppm) 1.9
TOC (ppm) 6.9
CCE (ppm) 5
CAE (ppm) 5
Chlorine Demand (ppm) it
Parameter
Chlorine ResiduaX .(ppm)
CN (ppb) " -
Phenols (ppb)
Aldrin (ppb)
Dieldrin (ppb)
Endrin (ppb)
Heptachlof (ppb)
Lindane (ppb) ',
DDT (ppb) '-•*'
Chlorodane (ppb)
Methoxychlor (ppb)
2,4-D (ppb)
2,4,5-TP (ppb)
2,4,5-T (ppb)
Diazinon (ppb)
Ethyl Parathion (ppb)
Imidan (ppb)
Malathion (ppb)
Methyl Azinphos (ppb)
Methyl Parathion (ppb)
Carbamates (ppb) -
Turbidity (ppm SiO )
Odor (No:)
Taste (No.)
Color (Pt-Co units)
Suspended Solids (ppm)
Temperature (°C)
pH
Conductivity (Micro mhos)
Foaming (sec.)
Gross 6 (pCi/1)
Gross a (pCi/1)
Tritium (pCi/1)
#
0.06
7.4
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND ^
m\-.
ND "'
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.83
13.9
3.5
ND
ND
156.1
2160
<3.9
<0.4
116 + 213
ND-Not detected
§ Data not available
# On-site determination; data not supplied to GSRI
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
fftease read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-78-016
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Characterization of Reusable Municipal Wastewater
Effluents and Concentration of Organic Constituents
5. REPORT DATE
February 1978 (Issuing Date")
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
James K. Smith, A.J. Englande, Mary M. McKown
and Stephen C. Lynch
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Gulf South Research Institute
P.O. Box 26500
New Orleans, Louisiana . 70186
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BC611
11.
68-03-2090
12. SP.ONSOR1NG,AGENCY NAME AJMQ ADDRESS, , ,
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory--Cm.,OH
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West St. Clair Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final 6-74 to 3-77
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/14
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Project Officer: John N. English 513/684-7613
is. ABSTRACT
The j^n thrust of this project was to collect organic concentrates from
operating Advanced Wastewater Treatment (AWT) plants for use in health effects testing.
A reverse osmosis process was employed in the first stage concentration; the organics
were further concentrated and recovered from the resulting brine solution via
liquid/liquid extraction. The final product was supplied to EPA for identification
and toxicity testing in other on-going research efforts. In addition, chemical,
physical, and biological analyses of effluent from the six AWT systems were conducted
to determine how the quality of the effluents from these systems compared with current
drinking water regulations. In spite of the fact that the AWT systems were not
designed to produce potable water, all were characterized by high quality effluents.
Pilot and fully operational plants evaluated were Lake Tahoe, California; Blue Plains,
District of Columbia; Pomona, California; Dallas, Texas; Escondido, California; and
Orange County, California. These systems were selected primarily because of
availability and because effluent quality exceeded that of secondary treatment systems,
Spot samples taken over a six to nine month period indicated that the parameters
found to exceed drinking water regulations in most of the treated effluents included
nitrogen (ammonia and nitrate), phenol, odor, carbon chloroform extract, turbidity,
and specific heavy metals.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. cos AT I Field/Group
Waste Treatment
*Water Reclamation
Nutrients
Viruses
Organic Compounds
Concentrating
Potable Water
Chemical Composition
Microorganisms
Heavy Metals
Advanced Wastewater
Treatment
Reuse
13B
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
143
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
131
------- |