Volume I
         OCTOBER 1973
       Washington, D.C. 20460

    The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
require ihe Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to publish both criteria for vater
quality and information for the restoration and
maintenance of aquatic integrity, and the measurement
and classification of water [Section 30Ua(a)l and 2,
P.L. 92-500].

    Volume I of this two volume series contains the
criteria for water quality for the protection of
human health and for the protection and propagation
of desirable species of aquatic biota.  Volume II of
the series contains information on the maintenance
and restoration, measurement, and the classification
of waters.  Also those pollutants suitable for maximum
daily load calculations are identified.

    Both Volumes I and II are published as proposed
documents with a 180 day period provided for public
                     Russell E.  Train

                          VOLUMfe I


                 Criteria for Water Quality
              Environmental Protection Agency              Page No,

I.    Legislative Basis                                        9

I     Introduction                                            11

I     Major Uses of the Criteria                              16

 /.   Agricultural Constituents                               20

      A.  General                                             20

      B.  Irrigation                                          21

          1.  Acidity, Alkalinity, pR                         21

          2.  Biochemical Oxygen Demand  (BOD)                 22

          3.  Inorganics (Ions and Free Elements/Compounds)   23

              a.   Aluminum                                   2 3
              b.   Arsenic                                    24
              c.   Beryllium                                  25
              d.   Bicarbonates                               27
              e.   Boron                                      2 7
              f.   Cadmium                                    29
              g.   Chlorides                                  30
              h.   Chromium                                   30
              i.   Cobalt                                     31
              j.   Copper                                     32
              k.   Fluoride                                   33
              1.   Iron                                       34
              m.   Lead                                       35
              n.   Lithium                                    36
              o.   Manganese                                  37
              p.   Molybdenum                                 38
              q.   Nickel                                     39
              r.   Nitrate^                                   39
              s.   Selenium                                   40
              t.   Sodium                                     41

          4.  Pathogens                                       42

              a.   Human Pathogens                            42
              b.   Plant Pathogens                            43

     5.   Pesticides                                      45

          a.   Herbicides                                 45
          b.   Insecticides                               46

     6.   Radioactivity                                   47

     7.   solids                                          48

          a.   Solids  (Dissolved)                         48
          b.   Solids  (Suspended)                         49

     8.   Temperature                                     50

C.   Livestock                                            52

     1.   Inorganic  (Ions and Free Elements/Compounds)    52

          a.   Alumi num                                   5 2
          b.   Arsenic                                    52
          c.   Beryllium                                  54
          d.   Boron                                      54
          e.   Cadmium                                    55
          f.   Chromium                                   56
          q.   Cobalt                                     57
          h.   copper                                      58
          i.   Fluorine                                   59
          j.   Iron                                        60
          k.   Lead                                        61
          1.   Manganese                                   63
          m.   Mercury                                     63
          n.   Molybdenum                                  65
          o.   Nitrates and Nitrites                       66
          p.   Selenium                                    68
          q.   Vanadium                                    69
          r.   Zinc                                        70

     2.   Pathogens                                        71

          a.   Microorganisms                              71
          b.   Toxic Algae                                 72

     3.   Pesticides                                       73

     4.   Radioactivity                                    74

     5.   Salinity                                         76

     References:   Agricultural Constituents                79

V.  Freshwater constituents                                    93

    A.   Aquatic Life                                          93

         1.   Acidity, Alkalinity, pH                          93

              a.   pH                                          93
              b.   Alkalinity                                  93
              c.   Acidity                                     94

         2,   Dissolved Gases                                  95

              a.   Ammonia                                     95
              b.   Chlorine and Pelated compounds              96
              c.   Dissolved Oxygen                            98
              d.   Hydrogen Sulfide                           101
              e.   Nitrogen and Gas Bubble Disease            102

         3.   Inorganics  (Ions and Free Element /compounds)    104

              a.   Cadmium                                    104
              b.   Chromium                                   105
              c.   Copper                                     106
              d.   Lead                                       107
              e.   Mercury  (Inorganic)                        108
              f.   Nickel                                     109
              g.   Sulfides                                   11°
              h.   Zinc                                       HI

         U.   Organic Compounds                               H3
              a.   Cyanides
              b.   Detergents
              c.   Oils                                        116
              d.   Phthalate Esters                            118
              e.   Organic mercury                             119
              f.   Polychlorinated Biphenyls                   121
              g.   Phenolic Compounds                          122

         5.   Pesticides                                       123

              a.   General                                     123
              b.   Organochlorines                             I24
              c.   Other Pesticides                            124

     6.    Physical (Except Temperature)                    130

          a.   Color                                       130
          b.   Turbidity                                   132
     7.    Radioactivity                                    133

     8.    Solids                                           137

          a.   Total Dissolved Solids and Baroness         137
          b.   Suspended and Settleable Solids             139

     9.    Tainting Substances                              141

    10.    Temperature                                      144

B.   Wildlife                                              171

     1.    Acidity, Alkalinity, pH                          171

          a.   pH                                          171
          b.   Alkalinity and Acidity                      172

     2.    Light Penetration                                173

     3.    Solids                                           174

          a.   Salinity                                    174
          b.   Settleable Substances                       174

     4.    Specific Harmful Substances                      175

          a.   Direct Acting                               175

                (1)  Toxins (Botulism Poisoning)            175
                (2)  Oils                                   177

          b.   Acting After Food Chain Magnification       178

                (1)  DDT and Derivatives                    178
                (2)  Mercury                                179
                (3)  Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB's)      180

     5.   Temperature                                      180

     References:   Aquatic  life  and Wildlife               182

Public Water Supply Intake                           192

1.    Alkalinity, pH                 .                 192

     a.   Alkalinity                                 192
     b.   pH                                         193

2.    Dissolved Gases                                 194

     a.   Ammonia  (N)                                194
     b.   Dissolved Oxygen                           195

3.    Inorganics  (Ions and Free Elements/Compounds)   195

     a.   Arsenic                                    196
     b.   Barium                                     197
     c.   Boron                                      198
     d.   Cadmium                                    199
     e.   Chloride                                   200
     f.   Chromium                                   201
     g.   Copper                                     202
     h.   Iron                                       203
     i.   Lead                                       204
     j.   Manganese                                  205
     k.   Mercury                                    206
     1.   Nitrate-Nitrite  (N)                        208
     m.   Phosphate                                  209
     n.   Selenium                                   210
     o.   Silver                                     211
     p.   Sodium                                     212
     q.   Sulfate                                    213
     r.   Zinc                                       214

4.    Microbiological Indicators                      215

     a.   Bacteria                                   215
     b.   Viruses                                    216

5.    Organic Compounds                               218

     a.   Carbon Adsorbable                          218
     b.   Cyanides                                   219
     c.   Foaming Agents                             220
     d.   Nitrilotriacetate  (NTA)                    221
     e.   Oil and Grease                             222

          f.   Phenols                                        223
          q.   Phthalate Esters                               224
          h.   Polychlorinated Biphenyls                      224

     6.   Pesticides                                          225

          a.   Insecticides - Chlorinated Hydrocarbons        226
          b.   Insecticides - Organophosphate  and  Carbamate   227
         • c.   Herbicides - Chloronhenoxy                     230

     7.   Physical                                            231

          a.   Color                                          231
          b.   Odor                                           232
          c.   Tennerature                                    233
          d.   Turbiditv                                      234

     8.   Radioactivitv                                       235

     9.   Solids                                              239

          a.   Dissolved Solids                               239
          b.   Hardness                                       240

     References:  Public T7ater Sunnlv  Intake                  242

Marine Water Constituents   (Aquatic Life)                     250

A.   Aquatic Life                                             250

     1.   Acidit}', Alkalinity, pIT  (Buffer Capacity)           250

     2.   Dissolved Gases                                     252

          a.   Ammonia                                        252
          h.   Chlorine                                       253
          c.   Hydrogen Sulfide                               255
          d.   Dissolved Oxyqen                               256

     3.   Inorganics (Ions and Free Elements/Connounds)       257

          a.   Aluminum                                       257
          b.   Antimony                                       258
          c.   Arsenic                                        259
          d.   Barium                                         260
          e.   Beryllium                                      261
          f.   Bisrmth                                        262
          q.   Boron                                          263
          h.   Bromine                                        264

          i.    Cadmium                                    265
          j.    Chromium                                   267
          k.    Copper                                     268
          1.    Fluorides                                  271
          m.    Iron                                       272
          n.    Lead                                       273
          o.    Manganese                                  274
          p.    Mercury                                    275
          q.    Molybdenum                                 277
          r.    Nickel                                     278
          s.    Phosphorus                                 279
          t.    Selenium                                   281
          u.    Silver                                     282
          v.    Thallium                                   283
          w.    Uranium                                    284
          x.    Vanadium                                   286
          y.    Zinc                                       '287

     4.    Organic Compounds                               289

          a.    Cyanides                                   289
          b.    Oils                                       290

     5.    Pesticides                                      295
     6.   Radioactivity                                   306

     7.   Temperature                                     309

B.    Wildlife                                             315

     1.   General                                         315

     2.   Specific Harmful Substances                     316

          a.   DDT and Derivatives                        316
        / b.   Aldrin, Dieldrin,  Endrin, and Heptacnior    318
          c.   Other Chlorinated  Hydrocarbons             319
        / d,   Polychlorinated Biphenyls  (PCB's)          320

     References:  Marine Water Constituents               323


VII.   Recreational Waters                                          340

       A.   Aesthetic  Considerations                                340

           1.   Aesthetics  -  General                               340

           2.   Nutrients  (Phosphorus)                             342

       B.   Recreational Waters

           1.   Clarity                                            344

           2.   Microorganisms                                     ^45

                a.    Bacteriological  Indicators                   345

                b.    Viruses                                       347

           3.   pH                                                 348

           4.   Shellfish                                         348

           5.   Temperature                                       349

           References:  Recreational  Waters                       351

VIII.   Appendices

       A.   Fish Temperature Data Sheets                           353

       B.   Tabular  Summary of Numerical Criteria

       C.   Glossary

       D.   Conversion Tables


                          Volume I

                Criteria for Water Quality

            The Environmental Protection Agency


    Section 304(a)(1) of the "Federal Water Pollution

Control Act Amendments of 1972", hereinafter referred to as

the "Act", provides that the Administrator  (EPA) shall

within one year of enactment (by Oct. 18, 1973) publish, and

revise from time to time thereafter, water quality criteria.

The criteria shall reflect the  latest scientific knowledge

on: A) all identifiable effects of pollutants on human

health, fish and aquatic life, plant life, wildlife,

shorelines, and recreation; B) concentration and dispersal

of pollutants; and C) effects of pollutants on biological

community diversity, productivity and stability, including

factors affecting rates of eutrophication and sedimentation.


    The National Water Quality Standards Program was

initiated with the passage of the water Quality Act of 19b5,

Sec 10 (c).  The Water Quality Standards are comprised or use

designations for each water body or portion thereof, water

quality criteria to support the use designations, and

implementation plans for scheduling the construction ot rne

necessary treatment facilities.  The designations by water-

uses are protection and propagation of fish and wilulite

(fresh water and marine), makeup water for public water

supplies, recreational, agricultural, and industrial.  The

water quality standards prior  to the Act were applicaole to

only interstate waters and their tributaries.  The Act

provides  for this coverage to  be extended to intrastate

streams and the State standards have since been, or  are in

the process of being revised accordingly.

    The objective of the Act is to restore and maintain the

chemical, physical  and biological  integrity of the  Nacion's

waters.   The National goal,  Sec  101(a)(1), is to eliminate

the discharge of  pollutants  into navigable waters  by 1985,

with  an  interim goal. Sec  101 (a) (2), being to attain oy July

1983,  water quality which  provides for  the protection and

propagation of  fish,  shellfish and wildlife and  for

recreation in and on the  Nation's  water.


    In implementing the Act EPA has, as part of the National

Water Quality Standards Program, instituted a stream use

classification policy that provides for the protection of

all waters to sustain recreational uses in and/or on the

water, and for the preservation and propagation of desirable

species of aquatic biota.  Such levels of protection then

make all waters  suitable for other uses such as public water

supply, agriculture and irrigation.

    This water  quality criteria  document  is Volume  I  of  a

two-volume  publication.   The  criteria  are arranged

alphabetically  by water use,  with the  limits for each

pollutant followed immediately by the  supporting scientific

rationale.   The numerical criteria are also synopsized in  a

tabular summary (Appendix B)  for ready comparison.   Volume

II, under separate cover, entitled "Water Quality

Information".   fulfills the  requirements  of sec 30U (a) (2)  of

the Act.  It contains information on factors necessary for

the restoration and maintenance ot the integrity of the

Nation's  water; the protection of fish, wildlife and human

health; the identification of pollutants; and the


measurement and classification of water quality.

Specifically, Volume II provides information on tne sources

of polluting constituents  (manmade and natural), mean levels

in major river basins, techniques for biological and

physical measurements, methodology for bioassays, TJhe

overall classification of water quality, and the types of

pollutants suitable for maximum daily load measurements.

    Water quality criteria as compiled in this document

(Volume I) are defined as the acceptable limits of

constituents in receiving waters based upon an evaluation of

the latest scientific information by the Environmental

Protection Agency.  They are to form the datum for tae

Agency's  1983 interim goal of improving the Nation's waters

to a quality that, provides for the protection and

propagation of fish and wildlife, and for the health of

humans in their pursuit of recreation in and on these

waters.  Almost all of the criteria are taken from tne

recommendations of the National Academy of Science's report

on Water Quality Criteria  (in press)  developed under

contract to the Environmental Protection Agency.  For a more

thorough treatment of the broader aspects of water quality

the user is referred to that report.


    The criteria are based upon toxicity studies and other

field and laboratory tests which assess the effects of

pollutants on agricultural crops, domestic livestock,

aquatic life, wildlife and man.  The acceptable limits

specified in the criteria for substances which exhibit toxic

effects were derived by the application of scientific

judgement to lethal dose or lethal concentration data in a

manner that provides a margin of safety to test organisms.

For those substances whose effects are more aptly described

as undesirable such as impairing aquatic habitats, causing

taste and odor, problems in water supplies, or reducing the

aesthetic or recreational quality of a water body, limits

which minimize these effects were established on the basis

of field and laboratory investigations.  Acceptable levels

of toxic materials for which specific numerical maximum

acceptable concentrations are not prescribed are determined

by applying an application factor to locally derived LCso

data; (i.e., to the concentration of the constituent in the

water in question which causes death within 96 hours to 50

percent of a test group of the most sensitive important

species in the locality under consideration).  By basing

criteria on effects on the most sensitive important species,

a desirable degree of regional and local variation is

introduced, allowing water auality standards to depend on local


conditions.  The criteria will be revised from time to time

to reflect new scientific knowledge, as required by the Act,

    An "important  species" in the criteria is defined as an

organism that is:a) commercially or recreationally valuable;

b) is rare or endangered; c) affects the well-being of

some species within a) and b); or d) is critical to the

structure and function of the ecological system.  A "rare or

endangered'1 species is any species so officially designated

by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

    The NAS Report recommendations provided several choices

of levels of protection for such constituents as pH,

dissolved oxygen,  settleable and suspended solids.  In these

cases the recommendations that provided a level of

protection consistent with the objective of the Act,  but not

necessarily the highest levels of protection  offered  were

selected by EPA as the limits or ranges of limits that are

acceptable to this Agency.  By so doing the acceptability

datum can be established at a level that should provide the

basis for an improvement in the quality of most waters to

meet the 1983 goal, while not requiring the economic  burden

that would result  from requiring "nearly maximum levels of

protection." Water quality standards based upon these


  criteria  are  to  be  developed  en  a  local basis  to minimize


      While it  is  recognized  that  the  synergistic effects ot

  certain combinations  of  pollutants portend  greater  risks

  than the  simple  additive combination of the effects ot each

  pollutant, most  of  the criteria  are  not based  upon

  synergistic studies.  The EPA Office of Research and

  Development is presently engaged in  programs to expand our

  knowledge of  synergistic effects.  When such information

  becomes available revisions to these criteria  will  be made.

  Users should  therefore use  judgement and  apply additional

  safety factors  in cases  where there  is a  known potential for

  some specific pollutants in a water  body  to have a

  synergistic effect.

      In most cases the criteria for a given  category ot

/ water, e.g.,  irrigation  water, livestock  water, freshwater

  aauatic life  are based upon studies  of the  effects  on the

  types of  organisms  (plants, livestock, aquatic organisms).

  In some instances however,  where some constituents  such as

  molybdenum in irrigation waters, mercury  in fish, etc. are

  biologically  magnified to levels that would be dangerous to


higher order animals or man, the acceptable limits are

prescribed to provide for the protection of these consumers.

    Water Quality Standards, Toxic and Pretreatment

Standards, Water Quality Inventory  (Monitoring), Toxic and

Pretreatment Effluent Standards, National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System, and Ocean Discharge Criteria

are the key control programs under the legislation tor

improving the quality of the Nation's waters and as such

will probably be the major users of the criteria,  hater

quality criteria together with effluent limitations are the

two scientific/technical undergirders of the entire national

water quality improvement program and will provide the basis

for the 1983 interim goal and the 1985 goal of no discharge.

As such they are foundations of all water quality control

programs of the Environmental Protection Agency.

    The effluent limitations are based initially upon

control technology in relation to such varying factors as

application costs relative to benefits, equipment age.


engineering, and non-water quality environmental impact.

They are to be continually assessed to assure their non-

interference with the attainment or maintenance ot water

quality, as specified by the ambient criteria.  EPA Water

Quality Criteria will be incorporated into revised State

water quality standards under the direction of EPA Regions

by means of policy guidelines developed by the EPA Office of

Water Planning and Standards.  Those guidelines have

provisions for waters to be exempted from specific criteria

on a case-by-case basis for specified periods when naturally

occurring conditions exceed limits of the EPA criteria or

other extenuating conditions prevail to warrant such

    Some of the pollutants for which criteria are

established herein may be listed as toxic pollutants under

subsection 307 (a).  In such cases the Agency will proceed

under subsection  307(a) to examine the selected pollutants

closely and rigorously, and will consider a broad range of

data and factors  which may not have been considered in

developing the criteria set forth herein.


    The criteria are based upon current; knowledge of the

effects on health and welfare ot the presence of various

pollutants in receiving waters.  It must be emphasized,

however, that many other factors must be considered in

making decisions relative to establishing particular

standards and control measures.  Seme of the more important

considerations are:

         The nature of the environmental effect of tne

    presence of pollutants in water (e.g., long or snort

    term, temporary or permanent, localized or widespread,


         The economic and social impact of the standards and

    control measures and the impact of the environmental

    damage to be alleviated.

         The practicality and enfcrceability of the

    standards and control measures, including the

    availability ot techniques and instrumentation for

    determining whether particular standards are being met.


    Thus, this document provides availabile scientific

information to the states for the purpose of carrying out

the Federal Water Polluticn Control Act.



    A.   General

    Acceptability of water quality for generax tarmt>ucdd

uses, including drinking, other household uses, ana handling

of produce and milk, is the same as that designated by

Federal Drinking Water Standards.  Also impurities that are

offensive to sight, smell, and taste are not acceptable.

Rationale (General Agricultural Constituents):

    Farmers and ranchers usually do not have access to large

well-controlled water supplies of most municipalities.

Therefore for their protection, water of a quality at least

comparable to that intended for urban users is required.

Water of such quality is necessary for drinking and other

household uses, as well as for the handling of produce and

milk  (1) .

    B.    Irrigation
         i .    Ac^itYj^Ai ka^i ni t
         Because most of the effects of acidity and

alkalinity in irrigation waters on soils and plant cjrowth

are indirect, no specific pH values can be prescriueu which

are acceptable for irrigation.  However, waters with pH

values from 4.5 to 9.0 are acceptable for irrigation

purposes provided that care is taken to detect the

development of harmful indirect effects.

Rationale  (Acidity, Alkalinity, pH) :

    Since water  itself is unbuffered and the soil is a

buffered system  (except  for extremely  sandy soils low in

organic matter) , the  pH  of the soil will not be

significantly  affected  by the pH  of irrigation water except

in extreme  circumstances (1).


         2 •    Biochemical Oxygen Demand	(,BOp]_

         Because there is very little information regarding

the effects of using irrigation waters with high BOD values

on plant growth, it is not possible to prescribe any

specific BOD limits.

Rationale (Biochemical Oxygen Demand):

    The need for adequate oxygen in the soil tor optimum

plant growth is well recognized.  Soil aeration and oxygen

availability normally present no problem on well structured

soils irrigated with high quality water.  However, in poorly

drained soils, oxygen may become limiting and irrigation

with water having high BOD or COD  (Chemical Oxygen Demand)

could aggravate this condition by further depleting

available oxygen.  Infiltration into well drained soils can

decrease the BOD of the irrigation water, but without

seriously depleting the oxygen available for plant growth in

the soil  (1) .

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

aluminum in water for continuous irrigation is 5.0 mg/1,

The maximum acceptable concentration of aluminum in

irrigation waters for fine textured neutral to alkaline

soils for a period of not more than 20 years is 20.0 mg/1.

Rationale (Aluminum):

    Aluminum exhibits significant toxicity in acid soils but

at pH values from about 5.5 to 8.0, soils have great

capacities to precipitate soluble aluminum and to eliminate

its toxicity.  Most  irrigated soils are naturally alkaline

and many are highly  buffered vvith calcium carbonate.  In

these situations aluminum toxicity is effectively prevented.

In spite of the potential tcxicity of aluminum this is not

the basis for the establishment of maximum concentrations in

irrigation waters, because ground limestone can be added

where needed to control aluminum solubility in soils.

Nevertheless, two disadvantages remain.  One is that salts


that are the sources of soluble aluminum in water acidify
the soil and contribute to the requirements for ground
limestone to*prevent the accumulation or development of
soluble aluminum.  This is a disadvantage only in acid
soils.  The other disadvantage is a greater fixation of
phosphate fertilizer by freshly precipitated aluminum
hydroxides  (1).
              b.   Arsenic

         The maximum acceptable concentration of arsenic in
water for continuous irrigation on all soils is 0.10 mg/1.
The maximum acceptable concentration of arsenic in
irrigation waters for fine-textured neutral to alkaline
soils for a period of not more than 20 years is 2.0 mg/1.

Rationale (Arsenic):

    The most definitive work with arsenic toxicity in soils
has been aimed at determining the amounts that can £>e added
to various types of soils without reduction in yields of
sensitive crops.  On the basis of several experiments {2-4,
6-11)  it has been shown that the amounts of total arsenic


that will produce toxicity vary with soil texture and otfter

factors that influence the adsorptive capacity.  Assuming

that the added arsenic is mixed with the surface 15 cm (6

in.) of soil and that it is in the arsenate form, tne

amounts that produce toxicity in sensitive plants vary from

112 kg/hectare  (100 Ibs/acre) for sandy soil to 337

kg/hectare  (300 Ibs/acre) for clay soils.  For long periods

of time involved, such as would be the case with

accumulations from irrigation water, possible  leaching in

the soils (10) and reversion to less soluble and less toxic

forms of arsenic  (U) allow extensions of the amounts

required for toxicity.  The only effective management

practice known  for soils that have accumulated toxic levels

of arsenic  is to change to more tolerant crops.  Toxicity

studies (13) suggest that rice on flooded soils is extremely

sensitive to small amounts cf arsenic, and that trie maximum

acceptable  limits given here are too high for  this crop.
              The maximum acceptable level of beryllium in

water for continuous irrigation is 0.1 mg/1.  The maximum

acceptable concentration of beryllium in irrigation water


for neutral to alkaline fine-textured soils for a period of

not more than 20 years is 0.5 mg/1.

Rationale  (Beryllium) ;

    Some varieties of  citrus seedlings show toxicities at

2.5 mg/1 of beryllium  whereas others show toxicity at 5 mg/1

in nutrient solutions  (12).  Beryllium at 0.5 mg/1 in

nutrient solutions was reported to have reduced the growth

of bush beans (1U).  Also, 2 mg/1 or greater in nutrient

solutions was reported to have reduced the growth of

tomatoes, peas,  soybeans, and alfalfa plants (15).

Additions of soluble beryllium salts at levels equivalent to

U percent of the cation-atsorption capacity of two acid

soils reduced the yields cf ladin.o clover.  Beryllium at 2

mg/1 concentrations  in nutrient solutions was found to be

toxic to mustard whereas 5 mg/1 concentrations were required

for growth reductions  with kale (16).


              d-   BJcarbonates

              Specific acceptable limits for bicarL»onates iu

irrigation water cannot be prescribed without consideration

of other soil and water constituents.

Rationale  (Bicarbonates) :

    High bicarbonate water may induce iron chlorosis by

making iron unavailable to plants  (17).  Problems have ueen

noted with apples and  pears  (18) and with some oraaineiitcils

(19).  Although  concentrations of  10 to 20 millie^uivaleuts

(meq)/l of bicarbonate  can cause chlorosis in some  plants,

it is of little  concern  in the tield where precipitation ot

calcium carbonate minimizes  this hazard.
              e.    Boron

              The  maximum  acceptable  concentration  ot  boron

in irriaation water for  sensitive  crops  is  0.75  mg/I;  tne

acceptable  concentration  for  semi-tolerant  and tolerant

plants is 1.0 and  2.0  mg/1, respectively; and the acceptable

concentration for  sensitive crops  grown  on  neutral  and


alkaline fine-textured soils for a period of not more than

20 years is 2.0 mg/1.  However, higher concentrations are

acceptable for tolerant plants for short periods of time.

Rationale  (Boron):

    Boron is an essential element for the growth of plants;

however, at concentrations of  1 mg/1 it is toxic to a number

of sensitive plants  (1).  Lists or boron sensitive, semi-

tolerant and tolerant plants are given in USDA Hanabook

No. 60  (20).  In general, sensitive crops show toxicities  to

boron at 1 mg/1 or less, semi-tolerant crops at  1  to  2 mg/1,

and tolerant crops at 2 to 4 mg/1.  At boron concentrations

above U mg/1, irrigation water is generally unsatisfactory

for most crops.  Citrus crops, which are one of  trie most

sensitive crops to boron, show mild toxicity symptoms to

irrigation waters having 0.5 to  1.0 mg/1 boron  (21).

              f .    Cadmium

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

cadmium in water for continuous irrigation is 0.01 mg/1.

The maximum acceptable concentration in irrigation water  for

neutral and alkaline fine-textured soils for a period  of  not

more than 20 years is 0.05 mg/i.

Rationale  (Cadmium):

    Unpublished  data  (see  1) showed  that yields ot oeans,

beets and  turnips  were reduced  about 25 percent by 0.1 tng/1

cadmium concentrations in  nutrient  solutions, whereas,

cabbage and barley yields  decreased  20  to  50  percent at  1.0

mg/1.  Corn and  lettuce  were intermediate  in  response with

less than  25  percent  yield reductions  at  0.1  mg/1 and

greater than  50  percent  at 1.0 mg/1.


              9-   Chlorides

              No limit of acceptability is prescribed for

chlorides in irrigation waters.

Rationale (Chlorides):

    Maximum acceptable limits for chlorides in irrigation

water depend upon the type of crop, environmental

conditions, and management practices.  Chlorides in

irrigation waters are not generally toxic to crops; however,

certain fruit crops are sensitive to chlorides (1).  It has

been reported that iraximum permissible chloride

concentrations in soil ranged from 10 to 50 milliequivalents

(meq)/l for certain sensitive fruit crops (22).
              h.   Chromium

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

chromium in water for continuous irrigation is 0.1 mg/i.

The maximum acceptable concentration in irrigation water tor

neutral and alkaline fine-textured soils for a period of not

more than 20 years is 1.0 mg/1.


Rationale (Chromium):

    Concentrations of 10 mg/1 of chromium in sand cultures

were found to be toxic to corn and concentrations ot 5 mg/1

and 1.0 mg/1 respectively were found to cause reduced growth

and stem elongation in tobacco (23).  Chromium, as chromic

sulfate, was toxic to corn at 5 mg/1 in nutrient solutions

(24) and chromium as chromic or chromate ions produced iron

chlorosis in sugar beets grown in  sand cultures (25) .

Hunter and Vergnano  (26) found that 5 mg/1 of chromium in

nutrient solutions produced iron deficiencies in plants.

Because little  is known about the  accumulation of cnromium

in soils relative to its toxicity  its concentrations in

irrigation waters should te held to less than 1 mg/1  {see

              i.   Cobalt

              The maximum acceptable concentration cf cobalt

in water for continuous  irrigation  is 0.05 mg/1.  The

maximum acceptable concentration  in irrigation water for

neutral fine-textured  soils  for a period of not more than 20

years is 5.0 mg/1.


Rationale  (cobalt):

    A concentration of 0.1 mg/1 of cobalt in nutrient

solutions  in irrigation waters is near the threshold

toxicity level of plants, whereas a concentration of 0.05

mg/1 appears to be satisfactory for continuous application

on all soils (1).  Because the reaction of this element with

soils is strong at neutral and alkaline pH values, and since,

it increases with time (27), a concentration of 5.0 mg/1

might be tolerated by fine-textured neutral to alkaline

soils when it is added in small yearly increments  (1).
              The maximum acceptable concentration of copper

in water for continuous irrigation is 0,2 mg/1.  Tae maximum

acceptable concentration in irrigation water for neutral and

alkaline fine-textured soils for a period of not more than

20 years is 5.0 mg/1.

Rationale (Copper):

    Copper concentrations of 0.1 to 1.0 mg/1 in nutrient

solutions have been shown to be toxic to a large number of

plants  (28-32).   Copper toxicity exhibited an accumulation

in soils of 897 kg/hectare  (800 Ibs/acre) from the use of

Bordeaux sprays  (33).  It is reported that copper toxicity

in soils can  be reduced by  liming  the soil if it is acid,

using ample phosphate  fertilizer,  and adding iron salts

 (34).   Toxicity  levels in nutrient solutions and limited

data on soils suggest  a maximum concentration of 0.2 mg/1

 for  continuous use on  all  soils (1).
               k.    Fluoride

               The maximum acceptable concentration o£

 fluoride in water for continuous irrigation on all soils is

 2.0 mg/1.  The maximum acceptable concentration for

 continuous irrigation of acid sandy soils is 1.0 mg/1.  The

 maximum acceptable concentration for neutral and alkaline

 fine-textured soils for a period cf not more than 20 years

 is 15.0 mg/1.


Rationale  (Fluoride):

    Application of soluble fluoride salts to acid soils can

produce toxicity to plants  (1).  It was shown thac 404 kg of

fluoride per hectare  (360 Ibs/acre) added as sodium

fluoride,  reduced the yields of buckwheat at a pH of 4.5,

but at pH  values above 5.5 this rate produced no injuries to

the plants  (35) .
              1.   Iron

              The maximum acceptable concentration of iron

in water for continuous irrigation is 5.0 mg/1.  The maximum

acceptable concentration in irrigation water for neutral  to

alkaline soils for a period cf not more than 20 years is  20


Rationale  (Iron):

    Iron is so insoluble in aerated soils at all pH values

in which plants grow well that it is not toxic  (1).

However, Rhoads  (36) found large reductions in the quality

of cigar wrapper tobacco due to the precipitation of iron


oxides on the leaves when the plants were sprinkler

irrigated with water containing 5 or more mg/1 soluble iron.

Also, soluble iron salts in irrigation water contribute to

soil acidification and the precipitated iron increases the

fixation of such essential elements as phosphorus and

molybdenum  (1).
              m.   Lead

              The maximum  acceptable concentration of lead

in water for continuous  irrigation  is  5.0 mg/1.  The maximum

acceptable concentration in  irrigation water for neutral and

alkaline fine-textured soils for  a  period of not more than

20 years is  10.0 mg/1.

Rationale  (Lead):

    The phytotoxieity of lead is  relatively  low  (1).  Since

soluble lead contents in soils are  usually from  0.05 to 5.0

mg/kg  (37) little toxicity  can be  expected  (1).  Although

it was concluded  (38) that lead as  it  occurs in  nature is

toxic  to vegetation,  studies using  some  plant  roots and nigh

concentrations  of lead revealed it  to  be concentrated in


cell walls and nuclei and to be an inhibitor of cell

proliferation  (see 1).
              n.   Lithium

              The maximuir acceptable concentration of

lithium in water for continuous irrigation is 2.5 mg/1

except for citrus where 0.075 mg/1 is the maximum acceptable


Rationale  (Lithium):

    Most crops can tolerate lithium in nutrient solutions at

concentrations up to 5 mg/1 (39, 40); however, citrus crops

are more sensitive to lithium  (41, 42, 43).  Grapefruit

developed severe syirptcms of toxicity when irrigated with

water containing concentrations of lithium from 0.18 to  0.25

mg/1  (43).  A slight toxicity of lithium to citrus was noted

when concentrations of lithium were from 0.06 to 0.1

mg/1  (44).

              o.   Manganese

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

manganese in water for continuous irrigation is 0.2 mg/l«

The maximum acceptable concentration in irrigation water for

neutral and alkaline fine-textured soils for a period of not

more than 20 years is  10.0 mg/1.  Concentrations tor

continued application  may be increased for alkaline or

calcareous soils and also with  crops that have higher

tolerance levels.

Rationale  (Manganese):

    Manganese  concentrations at a  few  tenths  to  a  few

milligrams  per liter  in nutrient solutions  are toxic to a

number  of crops (44,  47, 48).   However,  toxicity of tnis

element is  associated with  acid soils  and  applications ot

proper  quantities of  ground limestone  successfully

eliminates  this problem.  Increasing the pH of  soils from

 5.5 to  6.0  usually reduces the active  manganese  to below

 toxic levels  (48).


              p.   Molybdenum

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

molybdenum in water for continuous irrigation on all types

of soils is 0.01 mg/1.  The maximum acceptable concentration

in irrigation water for short term application on soils that

react with this element is O.C5 mg/1.

Rationale  (Molybdenum):

    This element presents no problems of toxicity to plants

at concentrations usually found in soils and waters.

However, the problem is one of toxicity to animals ingesting

the forage that has been grown in soils with relatively high

amounts of available molybdenum (1).  It was reported that

the molybdenum concentrations in forage o± 5 to 30 mg/kg

produced toxicity to ruminants (49).  The accumulation of

molybdenum in plants was fcund to be proportional to the

amount of the element added to the soil.  Molybdenum

concentrations of 0.01 mg/1 or greater in soil were

associated with animal toxicity levels of this element in

alsike clover (51).


              q.   Nickel

              The maximum acceptable concentration cf nickel

in water for continuous irrigation on all types of soils is

0.2 mg/1.   The maximum acceptable concentration in

irrigation water for neutral fine-textured soils for a

period of not more than 20 years is 2.0 rr»g/l.

Rationale  (Nickel):

    Many experiments with plants in solution cultures nave

shown that nickel at 0.5 tc  1.0 mg/1 is toxic  (52).

Increasing the  pH of soils reduces the toxicity of added

nickel  (52, 53,  5U).  The greatest capacity  to adsorb nickel

without development of toxicity to plants was exhibited by

soils with 21 percent organic  matter  (5U).
               r.    Nitrates

               No  maximum limit of  acceptability is

 prescribed  for nitrates in irrigation waters.


Rationale (Nitrate):

    Nitrates in irrigation waters are usually an asset tor
plant qrowth, and there is no apparent evidence tnat ttiey
will accumulate to toxic levels in irrigated plants  (1).
              s.   Selenium_

                   The maximum acceptable concentration ot
selenium in irrigation water is 0.02 ma/1.

Rationale  (Selenium) :

    Selenium is toxic at lew concentrations in nutrient
solutions and small amounts added to soils increase the
selenium content in forage to levels which are toxic to
livestock  (1).  Amounts of selenium in forage required to
prevent selenium deficiencies in cattle range between 0.03
and 0. 10 mg/kg  (55);  whereas, concentrations above 3 or
« mg/kg are toxic  (5b) .


              t.    Sodium

              No limit of acceptability is prescribed tor

sodium in irrigation waters.  Acceptable sodium

concentrations should be prescribed individually oased on

its hazard to specific crops and using limits determined by

the U.S.  Salinity Laboratory.

Rationale (Sodium) :

    The complex interactions of  sodium ions with other

common ions upon various crops precludes a consideration as

an individual component for  limits in irrigation water

except where fruit crops may be  important  (1).  Soaium is

adsorbed by lemons, avocados  and stoned fruits grown in

cultured solutions and causes leaf burns to these plants
{60, 61).  It is difficult to separate the specific  toxic

effects of sodium from the effects of adsorbed sodium on

soil structure  (1).

              a.   Human Pathogens

              The maximum acceptable density of fecal

coliforms in irrigation water is 1,000/100 ml.

Rationale (Human Pathogens):

    Irrigation waters with fecal coliform densities of

1,000/100 ml are believed to contain sufficiently low

concentrations of pathogenic microorganisms that no hazards

to animals or man result frcm their use or from consumption

of raw crops irrigated with such waters (1).  Many

microorganisms pathogenic to animals may be carried in
irrigation water, particularly that derived from surface

sources.  This includes a large variety of bacteria whicn

find their way into irrigation water from municipal and

industrial wastes including fcod processing plants,

slaughter houses, poultry processing operations and teea

lots.  The diseases associated with such bacteria include

bacillary and amoebic dysentery, Salmonella gastroenteritis,

typhoid and paratyphoid fevers, leptospirosis, chlorea,


vibriosis, and infectious hepatitis.  Recent studies nave

emphasized the value of fecal coliform density in assessing

the occurrence of SaIrnone 11 a, the most common bacterial

pathoqen in irriqation water  (1).  Geldreich and Dordner

(62)  reviewed field studies involving irrigation water,

field crops and soils and stated that when the fecal

coliform density  in stream waters exceeded  1,000 organisms

per 100 ml, Salmonella occurrence reached a frequency of

96.4 percent.  Below  1,000 fecal coliforir>s per 100 ml  (range

1 - 1,000) the occurrence of  Salmonella was 53.5 percent.
               b.    gjant^ Pathogens

               In  order tc  protect plants  from disease

pathogens  in  irrigation water,  it is necessary to take

preventive measures rather than establish quantitative  assay

limits.  Disposing of diseased  plant material in lakes,

streams, or irrigation systems  should be  avoided.

Rationale (Plant Pathogens):

    Irrigation water may te assayed for plant pathogens;

however, there are thousands or perhaps millions of harmless

microorganisms for every one that causes a plant disease.

Plant infection is not considered serious unless an

economically important percentage of a crop is affected.

The real danger is that a plant disease can be spread by

water to an unaffected area,  where it can then be spread by

other means and become important.  It is unlikely that any

method of water examination or any limits in water would be

as effective in preventing this as would be prohibitions

upon the introduction of diseased material into water that

may be used for irrigation (1).

              The maximum acceptable concentrations of

dalapon, TCA and 2,4-D amine salt in irrigation warer are

0.2, 0.2, and 0.1 ug/1 respectively.

Rationale (Herbicides):

    It is reported  (1) that signiticant levels of heroicides

are likely to be found in irrigation water under the

following circumstances:  a) during their purposeful

introduction into the water to control submerged weeds or b)

incidental to herbicide  treatment for control of weeus on

banks of irrigation canals,  faater use restrictions are

usually applied when  herbicides are used in reservoirs ot

irrigation water.  Herbicides used in reservoirs are

persistent and inherently phytotoxic to plants at low

levels.  Also, the most  widely used herbicides on irrigation

ditch banks are 2,4-D, dalapon, TCA, and silvex, whicn are

readily soluble in water and not extensively adsorbed to


soil or other surfaces  (1).  Reduction in levels or residues

in flowing irrigation waters is due largely to dilution  (1).
              No  limit of acceptability is prescribed  for

insecticide concentrations  in irrigation waters.
Rationale  (Insecticides) :

    Concentrations  of  insecticides normally  occurring  in

irrigation  water  are not  detrimental to crops.  Tnere  are no

documented  cases  of insecticide residues  in  irrigation

waters  being  toxic  to  plants.  Because of this  ana  tiie

marked  variability  in  crop  sensitivities, no limits for

insecticides  in irrigation  waters are necessary (1).

         An acceptable concentration of radionuclides in

irrigation water depends on the arr.cunt of radioactivity

transferred to the foodstutts and shall be such that the

total radionuclide ingestion by the most exposed group using

the food will not exceed the daily intake prescribed in

Federal Drinking Water Standards.  If the consumption of

these foodstuffs is so widespread that it is likely tnat the

aggregate dose to the exposed population will exceeu 3000

man-rein per year, limitations on the distribution ana sale

should be considered by the relevant public healtn


Rationale  (Radioactivity) ;

    There are no generally acceptable concentration limits

for control of radioactive contamination in irrigation water

since the amount of radioactivity in the tood will vary

depending on the type cf crop, soil, and duration and methoa

of irrigation.  However, only in highly unusual

circumstances will irrigation waters meeting Federal

Drinking Water Standards for radioactivity be unsuitable for

any agricultural use.

         7.   Solids
              a-   Solids ^Dissolved)
              The maximum acceptable concentrations of total

dissolved solids in irrigation waters are 2,000 - 5,000 mg/1

for tolerant plants in permeable soils or 500 - 1,000 ing/1

for sensitive crops.

Rationale (Dissolved Solids):

    In spite of the facts that:  a)  any total dissolved

solids (TDS) limits used in classifying the salinity hazards

of waters are somewhat arbitrary; b) the hazard is related

not only to the TDS but also to the individual ions

involved; and c) no exact hazard can be assessed unless the

soil crop and accessible yield reductions are known; certain

classifications of limits of certain dissolved solids in

irrigation water are useful.  Waters with total dissolved

solids less than about 500 mg/1 are usually used by tanners

without awareness of any salinity problems, unless there is

a high water table  (1).  Without dilution from precipitation

or an alternate supply, waters with IDS of about 5,000 my/1

usually have little value for irrigation  (64).  Within tnese

limits the values of the water appear to decrease as the

salinity increases.  Where water is to be used regularly for

the irrigation of relatively impervious soils, its value is

limited if the TDS is  in the range of 2,000  mg/1 or

higher  (1) .
              b•    Solids  fSugpendedj

         No limit  of  acceptability  is  prescribed  for

suspended solids in irrigation  waters.

Rationale  (Suspended  Solids):

    Although  they  can be  detrimental to seedling  emergence

and leafy plant  development,  irrigation waters containing

sediments high  in  silt may improve  the texture, consistency,

and water holding  capacity of sar.dy soils (1).  Deposition

of colloidal  particles on the soil  surface can prouuce  a

crust  that  inhibits water infiltration and seedling

emergence,  while the  same deposition and crusting can reduce

soil aeration and  impede  plant development (1).  High


colloidal content in water used for sprinkler irriyation can

result in deposition of films on leaf surfaces that reduce

photosynthetic activity and thereby deter growth as well as

affecting the marketability ot leafy vegetable crops such as

lettuce  (1).
         8.   Temperature

         No limit of acceptability for temperature ib

prescribed for irrigation waters.

Rationale (Temperature):

    The temperature of irrigation water has both direct and

indirect effects on plant growth.  Each occurs when plant

physiological functions are impaired by excessively hign or

excessively low temperatures.  The exact water temperature

at which growth is severely restricted depends upon method

of water application, atmospheric conditions at tae time ot

application, frequency of application, and plant species.

Optimum temperatures for growth vary considerably by

species.  Direct effects on plant growth from extreme

temperatures of irrigation water occur when water is first


applied, with plant damage resulting only from direct

contact.  Excessively warir water applied through d sprinkler

system has little effect upon the plant.  hater as warm as

55 C {130 F)  can be safely applied in this manner as warm

water frequently reaches airlient temperatures by tiie time it

reaches the soil (65).  Cold water, however, applieu tnrougn

a sprinkler system may be harmful to plant growth as ambient

temperatures are not attained as rapidly with cold water as

they are with warm water  (1).

    The indirect effects of the temperature of irrigation

water on plant growth occur as a result of the influence of

the water temperature upon the soil.  It is well documented

that soil temperatures affect the rate of water ana nutrient

uptake, translocation of metabolites and other physiological

processes  (1).  The effect of the temperature of irrigation

waters upon the temperature of the soil is not weil known,

but this effect is thought to be small  (1).

    C.    Livestock
         1.    Inorganics jlpns ang^Free Elements/Compounds],
              a.   Aluminum

              The maximuir acceptable concentration of

aluminum in livestock drinking water is 5.0 mg/1.

Rationale  (Aluminum):

The occurrence of aluminum in water should not cause

problems for livestock except under unusual conditions and

with acid waters (1).
              b.   Arsenic

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

arsenic in livestock drinking water is 0.2 mg/1.


Rationale (Arsenic):

    The toxicity of arsenic depends on its chemical form.

Its orqanic oxides are considerably more toxic than trie

organic forms which occur  in living tissues or are used as

feed additives.  Differences in toxicities of the various

forms are clearly  related  to the  rate of their excretion,

the least toxic being the  most rapidly eliminated  (bb, 67).

Except in unusual  cases, arsenic  normally occurs in waters

largely as inorganic oxides  (1).   The acute toxicity of

inorganic arsenic  for tariri animals was given  (68)  as

follows:  poultry,  0.05 -  0.10 g  per animal;  swine, 0.15 -

1.0 g per animal;  sheep, goats, ana horses,  10.0 -  15.0  g

per animal; and cattle,  15.0 - 3C.O g  per animal.  Arsenic

acid at  levels up  to  1.25  mg/kg of body  weight  per aay was

fed  (68) to lactating cows for eight weeks.   This  is

equivalent to  an  intake  of 60  liters of  water containing  5.5

mg/1 of  arsenic daily by  a 500 kg animal.   Results indicated

that this form of  arsenic  is absorbed  and  rapidly  excretea

in the urine  and  that  there was  no-increase of  the arsenic

content  of the milk.   No  toxicity was  observed.


              c.   Beryllium

              No limit of acceptability is prescribed ror

beryllium concentrations in livestock drinking water.

Rationale  (Beryllium):

    The salts of beryllium are not highly toxic.  Laboratory

rats survived for two years on a diet that supplied the

element at a level of about 18 ing/kg body weight daily  (1)-

It was calculated (70) that a cow could drink almost 1,000

liters of water containing 6,000 mg/1 without harm it the

data from rats are transposable to cattle.  Little

additional data exists on the toxicity of beryllium to

livestock  (see  1).
              d.   Boron

              The maximum acceptable concentration of boron

in livestock drinking water is 5.0 mg/1.


Rationale (Boron);

    Boron has relatively low order of tcxicity to

livestock (1).   In the dairy cov,  16-20 g of boric aciu per

day for 40 days  produced no ill effects  (71).  There  is no

evidence that boron accuir.ulates to any extent  in ooay

tissues  (1).
              e.    Cadmium

              The  maximum acceptable concentration of

cadmium in livestock drinking water is 50.0 ug/1.

Rationale  (Cadmium):

    Research  to  date suggests that cadmium is not an

essential  element  but,  on the other hand, is quite toxic.

Man has been  sickened by doses as low as 15 mg/1 in

popsicles  (71).   It was found (72) that a single dose of «*.5

mg cadmium/kg of body weight produced permanent sterility in

male  rats.  At  a level of 5 mg/1 in the drinking water of

rats  (73)  or  mice (7U)  cadmium reduces longevity.

Intravenous injections of cadmium sulfate into pregnant


hamsters at a level of 2 mg/kg body weight on day eight ot

gestation caused malformaticns in the fetus (75).  It was

found  (76) that only a small part of ingested cadmium in

ruminants was absorbed, with most of that going to the

kidneys and liver.  Once absorbed its turnover rate was very

slow.  The cow was found to be very efficient in keeping

cadmium out of its milk, and it was concluded that most

major  animal products, including beef and milk, seem quite

well protected against cadmium accumulation (76).
               f.   Chromium

               The maximum  acceptable concentration of

chromium  in  livestock  drinking water is 1.0 mg/1.

Rationale (Chromium) :

     Even  in  its most soluble  forms, chromium is not readily

absorbed  by  animals, being largely excreted in the

teces  (1).   Also, it does  not appear to concentrate in  any

particular mammalian tissues  or  to increase in these  tissues

with age  (66,  77).  After  review of chromium toxicity it was

suggested (71) that up to  5 mg/1 of chromium III or VI  in


livestock drinking water should not be harmful.  While this

may be reasonable it is suggested that this level may be

unnecessarily high and the prescribed 1.0 mg/1 chromium

level was therefore recommended to provide a suitable margin

of safety (1) .
              g.   Cobalt

              The  maximum  acceptable  concentration  of cobalt

in livestock drinking  water  is  1.0 mg/1.

Rationale  (Cobalt) :

    Cobalt  is part of  the  vitamin B/z molecule and  as  such,

it is  an essential nutrient.  Ruminants synthesize  their own

vitamin B/z  if  they have cobalt in their diet.  For cattle

and sheep  a diet containing  about 0.1 mg/kg of the  element

appears to be nutritionally  adequate (1).  A wide margin of

safety exists between the required and toxic levels for

sheep  and  cattle,  which are  levels of a hundred times  those

usually  found  in diets that  are well tolerated  (1). When

vitamin  E,? is  administered  to non-ruminants in amounts well

beyond those present in food and  feeds, cobalt induces


polycythemia  (67).  This is also true for calves prior to

rumen development where about  1.1 mg of this element per kg

of body weight administered daily causes depression of

appetite and  loss of weight.   The prescribed 1.0 ing/1 cobalt

level is recommended  (1) based upon available toxicity data

as offering a satisfactory margin of safety for livestock.
              The maximum acceptable concentration ot copper

in livestock drinking water is 0.5 mg/1.


Rationale (Copper) :

    Copper is an essential trace element to animals and some

of it is required in their diet.  Swine are apparently very

tolerant of high  levels of copper and 250 mg/kg or more in

the diet have been used to improve live weight gains and

feed efficiency  (78, 79).  It does not appear to accumulate

in muscle tissues and apparently is readily eliminated upon

cessation of intake  (1).  On the other hand, sheep are very

susceptible to copper poisoning and a diet containing 25

mg/kg is considered  toxic  (67) .  About. 9 mg per animal per

day is considered as a safe level of intake  (80).  There are

little experimental data on effects of copper in livestock

drinking water,  and  its toxicity must be judged largely from

the results of test  feedings.
              i-    Fluorine

              The  maximum acceptable concentration of

fluorine in livestock drinking water is  2.0 mg/1.


Rationale  (Fluorine) :

    A level of  2.0  mg/1  in  livestock drinking water may

result  in  some  tooth  mottling; however,  it  is not excessive

from the standpoint of  animal  health or  the deposition of

this element  in meat, milk  or  eggs  (1),  Chronic fluoride

poisoning  of  livestock  has  been  observed where water

contained  10  to 15  mg/1 fluoride (67).   Concentrations of  30

-  50 mg/1  of  fluoride in the total  ration of dairy  cows  is

considered the  upper  sate limit  (81).  Fluoride  from  waters

apparently does not accumulate in  soft tissue to a

significant degree  and  it is transferred to a very  small

extent  into the milk  and to a  somewhat greater degree into

eggs  (67).  It  was  concluded (71)  that  1.0  mg/1  of  fluorine

in drinking water did not harm livestock.
               j.   Iron

               No limit of acceptability is prescribed for

 iron in livestock drinking water.


Rationale (Iron):

    Iron is essential to animal life and it has a very low

order of toxicity  (1).  Very high levels oi iron in tne diet

(4,000 and 5,000 mg/kg) were found to cause phosphorus

deficiency and to be toxic to weanling pigs  (82)j however,

lower levels  (3,000 mg/kg) apparently were not  toxic.  While

iron occurs in natural water as very soluble ferrous salts,

on contact with air they are oxidized and precipitated as

ferric oxide, rendering them essentially harmless to animal

life.  It is  therefore net considered necessary to set a

limit for this element  (1).
              The  maximum acceptable  concentration  of  lead

in livestock  drinking  water is 0.1  mg/1.

Rationale  (Lead):

     A  nutritional  need for lead by  animals has not  been

demonstrated, but  its  toxicity is well known (1).   A ratner

complete review of the matter of lead poisoning


suggested (71) that for livestock the toxicity of this

element had not been clearly established from a quantitive

standpoint.   Although a daily intake of 6 - 7 mg/kg of body

weight has been suggested as a threshold poisoning level in

cattle (89), and even with more recent data (83 - 88) , it is

difficult to clearly establish the intake level at which

lead becomes toxic.  There is agreement that 0.5 mg/1 of

lead in the drinking water of livestock is a safe level

(71).  other findings  (73, 74, 90, 91)  based upon studies

with laboratory animals are also in agreement witn this

level.  At 5 mg/1  lead in the drinking water of rats ana

mice over their life spans, the same investigators found no

obvious direct toxic effects.  They did, however, find an

increase in the death rates of elder animals,  especially in

the males.  It was observed (91)  that the increased

mortality was not caused by overt lead poisoning, but rather

by increase of susceptibility to spontaneous infections.  It

was reported  (92)  that mice treated with subclinical aoses

of lead nitrate were more susceptible to infections froni


              No limit of acceptability is prescribed tor

concentrations of manganese in livestock drinking water.

Rationale (Manganese) :

    Manganese is a required trace  element, occurring in

natural waters at only low levels  as manganous  salts, and is

precipitated in the  presence of  air as manganic oxiae  (1).

While it can be toxic when administered in livestock teed at

high levels  (67) it  is improbable  that it would be  tound at:

toxic levels in water  (1).
              m.   Mercury

              The maximum acceptable  concentration  ol

mercury in livestock  drinking  water is  1.0  ug/1.


Rationale  (Mercury):

    Concentrations of mercury in surface waters have usually

been found to be far less than 5 ug/1  (68), but metnylation

of bottom  sediment mercury in areas bordering mercury

deposits results in a continuous presence of the element in

solution  (69, 70).  The relative stability of methyimercury

together with efficient absorption of it by the qut

contributes to its increased toxicity when orally

administered  (70).  It is suggested  (1) that maintenance

levels of  mercury  in livestock blood and tissues not exceed

0.1 mq/1 and 0.5 mq/kg respectively to provide a sate level

for human  consumption.  The safe level for consumption oi

fish as prescribed by the Food and Drug Administration is

also 0.5 mq/kg.  However, the maintenance level for risn was

predicated upon the fact that there are no other sources of

mercury in the diet than from fish.  In view of tncse facts

the limits prescribed herein are reduced by a factor of ten

to reduce  the significance of levels from meat products in

comparison with those of fish.


              n.    Molybdenum

              No limit of acceptability is prescribed for

concentrations of molybdenum in livestock drinkiny water.

Rationale (Molybdenum):

    Too many factors  influence the toxicity of molybdenum to

permit the establishment of limits on concentrations in

water for livestock drinking.  It has been pointed out  (fa?)

that many of the previous studies on the toxicities of

molybdenum are of limited value because a number 01 tactors

known to influence its metabolism were not taken into

account in making these studies.  These factors inciuue  the

chemical form of molybdenum, the ccpper status and intake ot

the animal, the  form  ard amount of sulfur in  the diet,  ana

other less well  defined entities.  In spite of these, there

are considerable data to support real species differences in

terms of tolerance to this  element.  cattle seemea the  least

tolerant, sheep  a little more  so, and horses  and swine

considerably more tolerant  (1).


              o-   Nitrates and Nitrites

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

nitrates plus nitrites in livestock drinking water or in

water to be used in feed slurries is 100.0 mg/1.  Tne

maximum acceptable concentration of nitrite alone is 10.0


Rationale  (Nitrates and Nitrites):

    Nitrites are considerably mere toxic to livestock, than

nitrates.  Usually nitrite is formed through the biological

reduction  of nitrate in the rumen of cattle or  sheep, in

freshly chopped forage, in moistened feeds, or  in water

contaminated with organic matter to the extent  that it is

capable of supporting microbial  growth.  While  natural

waters often contain high levels of nitrate, their nitrite

content is usually very low  (1) .  It was concluded  (93) tnat

nitrate in cattle feed does not  appear to  constitute a

hazard to  human health, and that animals feu nitrate

continuously develop some degree of adaption to it.  The

LD-fp of nitrate nitrogen  for  ruminants was found to  be about

75  mg/kg of body  weight when  administered  as a  drencn  (94)

and about  255  mg/kg of body weight  when sprayed on torage


and feed (95) .   Assuming a maximum water consumption in

dairy cattle of 3 - a times the dry matter intake, trie

concentration of nitrate to be tolerated in the water should

be about one fourth of that tolerated in the feed  (1).  This

would amount to about. 300 mq/1 of nitrate.  Drinking water

containing 330 mg/1 nitrates fed continuously to growing

pigs and to gilts from weaning through two furrowing seasons

had no advers*3 effects  (96).  Levels of nitrate up to 300

mg/1 were addad to drinking water without adversely

affecting the growth of chicks or production of laying

hens (97) .   Losses in swine due to methoqlobinemia have

occurred only with the consumption of preformed nitrite and

not with nitrate  (98 -  100).  In special situations

involving the presence of high levels of nitrates  in aqueous

slurries of plant or animal tissues, nitrite accumulation

reached a peak of about one fourth to cne half the initial

nitrate concentration  (98 - 101).  Levels of nitrite up to

200 mg/1 were added to drinking waters without adverse

effect on the growth of chicks or production of laying nens

(97).  At 200 mg/1, nitrite decreased growth in turkey

pullets and reduced the liver storage of vitamin A in

chicks, laying hens, and turkeys.  At 50 mg/1 nitrite, no

effects were observed on any of the birds.  It appears mat

all classes of livestock and poultry which have been studied

under controlled experimental conditions can tolerate the

continued ingestion of waters containing up to 300 mg/1 of

nitrate or  100 mg/1 of nitrite  (1).
              p.   Selenium

              The maximum  acceptable concentration of

selenium  in  livestock  drinking water is 0.05 mg/1.

Rationale (Selenium) :

     No  substantiated cases of livestock poisoning by

selenium  in  waters have  been reported, although some spring

and  irrigation waters  have been  found to contain over  1 mg/1

of this element  (102 -  10U).  As a  rule, well, surface, and

ocean waters contain less  than 0.05 mg/1,  usually

considerably less  (1).   The low  selenium content as has been

explained (105)  results    trom the  precipitation of tiie

selenite  ion with  ferric hydroxide. Another explanation  may

be that microbial  activity removes  both selenite and

selenate  from water  (106). A study with rats  (107) revealed

that selenite but  not  selenate in livestock drinking water


caused deaths at a level of 2 mg/1 and was somewhat more

toxic than selenite administered in the diet.
              q,   VanadiurTi

                   The maximum acceptable concentration of

vanadium in livestock drinking water is 0.1 mg/1.

Rationale (Vanadium):

    Vanadium becomes toxic to chicks when incorporated into

the diet as ammonium metavanadate at concentrations over

about 10 mg/kg  (108 - 111).  It was  found  (73) that wnen

mice drank water containing 5 mg/1 ot vanadium as  vanadyl

sulfate over a  life span,  nc toxic effects were  ooserved,

but this element did accumulate to some extent in  certain


              The maximum acceptable concentration ot zinc

in livestock drinking water is 25.0 mg/l»

Rationale (Zinc):

    Zinc is relatively non-toxic to animals  (1).  Swine have

tolerated 1,000 mq/kg of dietary zinc  (112 - 115), while

2,000 mg/kg or more have been found to be toxic.  Similar

findings have been reported for poultry  (116 -  11a) wuen

zinc was added to the teed.  Adding 2,320 mg/1  of the

element to water for chickens reduced water consumption, egg

production, and body weight  (119).  In a number ot studies

with ruminants, it was found (120 -123) that zinc adaed to

diets as an oxide tended to be toxic, but at levels over

500 mg/kg of diet.  While an increase of zinc intake

reflects an increase of txie levels of this element in the

body tissue, a tendency for its accumulation was not great

(124, 125, 126, 114}  and tissue levels fell rapidly after

zinc dosing was stopped (124, 117).


         2 •    Eat hocje ns

              a.   Microorganisms

              The maximum acceptable limit for livestocK

drinkinq water is 5,000 ccliforins per 100 ml or water.  The

maximum acceptable monthly arithmetic density of recal

coliforms is 1,000 per 100 ml of water.  Poth limits are to

be based upon an average of at least two consecutive samples

examined per month.  The maximum acceptable limit of any one

sample examined in any one month is a total coliform count

of 20,000 per 100 ml ot water or a fecal colitorm density of

4,000 per 100 ml of water.

Rationale (Microorganisms):

    As an index of fecal pollution the  total colirorm  ana

fecal coliform group of bacteria best  serve as an inaicaror

to the degree o.t contamination.  Transmitted to  livestock by-

water is a variety of  microorganisms associated  with  ooth

feces and urine.   However, none  of these organisms  except

the fecal coliform group are  quantifiable  or standardized to

such a degree as to  permit specific  limits  for water  Duality


criteria.  Hence the use of the recal and total coliform

              b.   Tgxig^Algae
              Heavy growths of toxic  blue-green  algae  are

not acceptable  in livestock drinking  water  supplies.

Rationale  (Toxic Algae) :

    A number of cases of algae poisoning  in farm animals in

Minnesota were  reviewed  (127) between 1882  and  1933.   All

were associated with certain  blue-green algae,  often

concentrated by the wind at one  end of the  lake.   six

species of  blue green algae have been incriminated (128) in

the poisoning of livestock.   These are:   Nodu_laria

spumigena.  Mi crocks tis  aerugincsa, Coelosghaeriurn

kuetzinqianum, Gloeotrichia e^cjlniKLata, Anabaena  flos-aguae,

and Aphanizomenon flos-aguae.  Of the previous,  it w^s

reported  (128)  that Microc^stis  and Anabaena have mcsr otten

been blamed for serious poisonings of livestock, ana  algae

blooms consisting of one or more of these species vary

considerably in their tcxicity.   This variability seems to


depend upon a number of factors, e.q., species or strains of

algae that are predominant; types and number of bacterial

associates; the condition cf growth, collection and

decomposition; the degree of animal starvation and

susceptibility; and the amounts consumed  (129).  It has been

evinced (130) that sudden decomposition of algae blooms

often preceded mass mortality of fish, and similar

observations have been made with livestock poisoning.  This

suggests that the lysis of the algae may be important in the

release of the toxicants.  But it also suggests that in some

circumstances botulism may be involved.
    The maximum acceptable concentrations of pesticides in

livestock drinking water correspond to those prescribed for

public drinking water supplies.

Rationale (Pesticides):

    Field studies indicate no deleterious effects on ttie

health of animals due to pesticide residues in  livestock

drinking water  (1).  However, inherent problems associated


with pesticide use include the accumulation and secretion of

either the parent compound or its degradation product in

edible tissues and milk  (131).  Nonpolar lipophilic  (fat

soluble) pesticides such as the chlorinated hydrocarbon

insecticides tend to accumulate in fatty tissue ana may

result in measurable residues.  Polar water soluble

pesticides are generally excreted in the urine soon after

ingestion.  Elimination of fat soluble pesticides from

contaminated animals is slew.  Urinary excretion is

insignificant and the elimination in feces is slow.  Tne

primary route of excretion in lactating animals is tnrough

milk.  Levels of pesticides tcund in farm water supplies do

not make a significant contribution to animal body burden

compared to amounts accumulated from feeds (1).
         U.   Radioactivity
         The maximum acceptable concentration of

radionuclides in livestock drinking water shall be such that

the total radionuclide ingestion by the most exposed group

using the livestock as focd does not exceed the daily intake

prescribed in Federal Drinking Water Standards.  If tne


consumption of these foodstuffs is so widespread tnat it is

likely that the aggregate dose to the exposed population

will exceed 3000 man-rem per year, limitations on tne

distribution and sale should be considered by the relevant

public health authorities.

Rationale  (Radioactivity):

    In some, but not all cases, these criteria permit the

utilization of waters unfit for direct human consumption to

be used to water livestock, discrimination and suosequent

elimination of the radionuclides  from the animals serving as

a mechanism for radionuclide removal.  Where the

radionuclide intake is relatively high or where

radionuclides are present that iray be concentrated in a

particular organ, such as the thyroid, radioassay o± the

foodstuffs may be necessary to determine that acceptable

intake limits are not exceeded.

              The maximum acceptable salinity level tot

livestock drinkinq water is 3000 mg/1 of soluble sales.

Rationale  (Salinity):

    While some minor physiological  upsets  resulting from

waters with salinity near the  prescribed limit  may be

.observed, economic losses or serious physiolooical

disturbances  should rarely, if ever, result  from their  use.

It  has been found  (132)  that natural water varying from

4,546 to 7,369 mrj/1 of  total salts, with sodium and sullate

ions predominating, caused  mild diarrhea but no symptoms  of

toxicity in dairy cattle over  a two-year period.  Also

 (133), cattle can thrive on water  containing 11,  400  mg/1 of

total salts,  can  live  under some conditions  on  water

containing  17,120  mg/1, and horses can  thrive on water

containing  5,720  my/1  and are  sustained when not  workeu too

hard on water with 9,140 mg/1.  The first  expensive  stuuies

were made  (134,  135,  136) of the effects of  saline water  on

rats and  livestock.   With laying hens,  10,000 mq/i ot  sodium

chloride  in  drinking  water  greatly delayed the  onset  or e.jg

 nroductior,  but  15,000 mg/1 or more were  required  to  affect


growth over a ten-week period.  In swine, 15,000 my/1 of

sodium chloride in the drinking water caused deatn in the

smaller animals and some leg stiffness in the larger

animals, but 10,000 rng/1 did not appear particularly

injurious once they became accustomed to it.  Sheep existed

on water containing 25,000 mg/1 of sodium or calcium

chloride or 30,000 mg/1 of magnesium sulfates, but not

without some deleterious effects.  Cattle were somewhat less

resistant, and it was concluded that 10,000 mg/1 cotal salts

should be considered the upper limit under which their

maintenance could be expected.  A  lower  limit was  suggested

for lactating animals.   It was further observed that  animals

would not drink highly saline solutions  if water with a low

salt content was available and that  animals  showing  effects

of saline water returned quickly  tc  normal when allowed

water of a low salt content.  Studies  (137)  of the eifects

of sodium chloride  in water on laying hens,  turkey pullets,

and ducklings revealed that at U,000 ma/1, the  salt  caused

some increased water consumption,  watery droppings,

decreased feed consumption and growth,  and  increased

mortality.  These  effects were more  pronounced  at  a  higher

concentration of  10,000  mg/1,  causing death  in  all the

turkey  pullets at  two weeks,  some symptoms  of dehydration in

the chicks,  and decreased egg production in  the  hens.


Experiments with laying hens restricted to water containing

10,000 mq/1 of sodium or magnesium sulfates gave results

similar to those of sodium chloride.  It has been pointed

out  (1):  a) that animals drink little, if any, hignly

saline water if waters of lew salt content are available to

them; b) unless they have teen previously deprived of water,

animals can consume moderate amounts of highly saline water

for  a  few days without being harmed; c) abrupt changes  from

water of low salinity to high saline water causes more

problems than a gradual change; and d) the depressed water-

intake  is very likely to be accompanied by a depressed  teed



     References:   Agricultural Constituents
1.   Water Quality Criteria of 1972.  NAS Report - In press.

2.   Cooper,  H. P., K. R. Paden, E. E, Hall, W, B, Albert,
      W.  B.  Rogers, and J. A, Riley.  1932.  Soils differ
      markedly in their response to additions of calcium
      arsenate.  Soil Sci.  38:36-52.

3.   Vandecaveye, S. C., G. M. Horner, and C. M. Keaton.
      1936.   Unproductiveness of certain orchard soils
      as  related to lead arsenate spray accumulations.
      Soil Sci. 42:203-215.

4.   Crafts,  A. S. and R. S. Rosefels.  1939.  Toxicity
      studies with arsenic  in eighty California soils.
      Hilgardia 12:197-199.

5,   Dorman,  c. and R. Coleman.  1939.  The effect of
      calcium arsenate upon the yield of cotton of
      different soil types.  J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 31:

6.   Dorman,  C., F. H. Tucker, and R. Coleman.  1939.
      The effect of calcium arsenate upon the productivity
      of  several important  soils of the cotton belt.
      J.  Amer. Soc. Agron.  31:1020-1028.

7.   Clements, H.F. and J. Munson.  1947.  Arsenic toxicity
      studies in soil and in culture solution.  Pac. Sci.

8.   Benson,  N. R.  1953.  Effect of season, phosphate, and
      acidity on plant growth in arsenic-toxic soils.
      Soil Sci. 76:215-224.

9.   Chisholm, D. , A. W. MacPhee, and C. R. MacEachern.  1955.
      Effects of repeated applications of pesticide to
      soil.   Can J. Agr. Sci. 35:433-439,

10.  Jacobs,  L, W., D. R. Keeney, and L. M. Walsh,  1970.
      Arsenic residue toxicity to vegetable crops grown
      on  Plainfield sand.  Agron. J. 62 (5):588-591.

11. woolson, E. A., J. H. Axley,  and P. C.  Kearney.   1971.
      Correlation between available soil  arsenic,
      estimated by six methods,  and response  of  corn  (Zea
      mays L.).  Soil Sci.  Soc.  Amer.  Proc. 35 (1) : 101-105.

12. Haas, A. R. C.  1932.   Nutritional aspects  in mottle-
      leaf and other  physiological diseases of  citrus.
      Hilgardia 6:483-559.

13. Reed, J. F. and M.  B. Sturgis. 1936.  Toxicity
      from arsenic compounds to rice  on flooded soils.
      J. Amer.  Soc. Agron.  28:432-436.

14. Romney,  E. M., J.  D.  Childress, and G. V. Alexander.
      1962.   Beryllium and  the growth of bush beans.
      Science  135:786-787.

15. Romney,  E. M.  and J.  D. Childress.  1965.  Effects of
      beryllium in plants and soil.   Soil Sci.  100 (3) : 210-217,

16. Williams,  R.  J. B.  and  H. H. LeRiche.  1968.  The
      effects  of  traces of  beryllium on the growth of
      kale,  grass,  and mustard.  Plant Soil 29 (2) : 317-326.

17. Brown, J.  W.  and  C.  W.  Walleigh.   1955.  Influence of
      sodium bicarbonate on the growth and chlorsis of
      garden beets.   Bot. Gaz. 116 (3) : 201-209.

18. Pratt, P.  F.   1966.   Carbonate and bicarbonate, in
      Diagnostic  criteria for plants and soils,
      H. D.  Chapman,  ed.  University of California,
      Division of Agricultural Science, Berkeley.
      pp.  93-97.

 19. Lunt,  O. R.,  H.  C.  Kohl, and A.  M. Kofranek.  1956.
      The  effect  of bicarbonate and other constituents
      of irrigation water on the growth of azaleas.
      Proc.  Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 68:537-544.

 20. Salinity Laboratory.  1954.  n.s. Department of
      Agriculture.  Salinity Laboratory Staff  (1954),
       Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali
       soils.  Handbook 60.   Government Printing  Office,
      Washington, C.  C.

 21. Chapman, H. D.  1968.  Mineral nutrition of  citrus,  in

         the citrus industry, w. Feuther, L. D. Batcuelox,
         and II.  J. Webber, eds.  University of California,
         Division of Agricultural Science, Berkeley, Vol. 2.
         pp. 127-289.

22.  Berstein, L.  1967.  Quantitative assessment of
         irrigation water quality.   (Special technical
         publication 416)  American  Society for Testing
         and Materials, Philadelphia.  pp. 51-65.

23.  Soane, 8. K. and D. K. Saunders.  1959,  Nickel anu
         chromium toxicity of serpentine  soils in  southern
         Rhodesia.  Soil Sci. 88:322-330.

24.  Scharrer, K. and W. Schropp.  1935.   The action oi
         chromic and chromate ions upon cultivated planes.
         Z Pflanzenernahr. Dung. Eodenk.  37:137-149.

25.  Hewitt, E. J.  1953.  Metal  interrelationships in
         plant nutrition.  1. Effects ot  some  metal toxicities
         on sugar beet, tomato,  oat, potato, and inarrowstem
         kale grown in sand  culture.  J.  L'xp.  Bot.  »+:t>9-64.

26.  Hunter, J. G. and O. Verqnano.   1953.  Trace-element
         toxicities in oat plants.   Ann.  Appl. Biol.  40:

27.  Hodgson, J.  F.  1960.  Cobalt reactions with
         montmorillonite.  Soil  Sci. Soc.  Amer.  Proc.  ^4(3):

28.  Liebig, G. F., Jr., A. P. Vanselow,  and H. D.  Chapman.
         19U2,   Effects of alurr-inuii;  on  copper  toxicity,  as
         revealed fry solution-culture and spectroyra^hic
         studies of citrus.   Soil Sci.  53:341-351.

29.  Prolich,  E. ,  A. Wallace, ana C.  K.  Lunt.   196o.
         Plant  tcxicity  resulting  trcir  solutions  of  single
         salr cations  and  their  amelioration  by  calcium.
         Curr. Top.  Plant. Kutr. 1966:120-126.

30.  Nollendorfs,  V.  1969.   i-ffect  of various  doses  of
         manganese on  the  growth of  tomatoes  in  relation to
         the  level  of  copper in  the  nutrient  medium.   i,atv.
          Padomju. Soc. Repub.  Zinat. Akaa.  Vestis.   19t>9(5):

31.  Struckmeyer, B. E., L. A. Peterson, and  F.  H.  Tai.
      1969.  Effects of copper on the composition  and
      anatomy of tobacco.  Agron. J. 61(6):932-936.

32.  Seillac, P.  1971.  The toxicity of some oligoelements
      for young maritime pine plants cultivated on a
      liquid medium.  C. R. Hebd. Seances  Acad. Sci. Ser.  D.
      Sci. Natur.  272 (3) : 411-413.

33.  Westgate, P. J.  1952.  Preliminary report  on  chelated
      iron for vegetables and ornamentals.   Soil Sci.  Soc.
      Fla, Proc. 12:21-23.

34.  Reuther, W. and C. K. Labanauskas.  1966.   Copper
      (toxicity),  in Diagnostic  criteria for plants and
      soils, H. C. Chapman, ed.  University of  California,
      Division of  Agricultural Science, Berkeley.
      pp. 157-179.

35.  Prince, A. L., F. E. Bear, E. G. Brennean,  I.  A. Leone,
      and R. H. Caines.  1949.   Fluorine:   its  toxicity
      to plants and its control  in  soils.   Soil Sci. 67:

36.  Rhoads, F. M.  1971,  Relations between Fe  in  irrigation
      water and leaf quality of  cigar wrapper tobacco.
      Aqron. Jour. 63:938-9*10.

37.  Brewer, R. F,  1966.  Lead  {toxicity,  indicator plants),
      in Diagnostic criteria for plants and  soils, H.  D.
      Chapman, ed.  University of California, Division
      of  Agricultural Science,  Berkeley.   pp.  213-217.

38.  Page, A. L., T. J. Tasaje, and  M. S. Joshi. 1971.
      Lead quantities in plants, soil and  air near some
      major highways in Southern California.  Hilgardia 41
      (In Press).

39.  Bingham, F. T., A. L. Page,  and G. R.  Bradford.  1964.
      Tolerance of plants to lithium.  Soil  Sci. 98(1).

40.  Bollard, E. G. and G. W. Butler.  1966.   Mineral
      nutrition cf plants.  Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol.

41.  Aldrich, D. G., A. P. Vanselow, and G.  R. Bradford
      1951.  Lithium toxicity in citrus.   Soil  Sci.


42.  Bradford, G. R.  1963L.  Lithium survey of California's
         water resources.  Soil Sci, 96 (2) :77-81.

43.  Hilqeman, R. H. , W. H. Fuller, L. F. True, G. G.
         Sharpless, and P. F. Smith.  1970.  Lithium  toxicity
         in "mdrsh" grapefruit in Arizona.  Proc. Amer. soc.
         Hort. Sci. 95 (2) : 248-251.

44.  Bradford, G. R.  1963a.  Lithium in California's
         water resources.  Calit. Aqr.  17{5):6-8,

45.  Brenchley, W. E.   1938.  Comparative effects  of cooaic,
         nickel and copper on plant growth.  Ann. Appi. isioi.

46.  Morris, H. D. and  W.  H.  Pierre.  1949.  Minimum
         concentrations  of manqanese necessary  for injury  to
         various lequmes  in  culture solutions.  Agron.  J.  41:

47.  Hewitt, E. J.   1965.   Sand and Vsater culture  metnods
         used in the study of plant nutrition.  Commonwealtn
         Agr. Bur.  Enqland Tech.  Ccm.  22.   2nd  Ed.

48.  Adams, F. and Wear,  J. I.  1957.   Manqanese toxicity
         and  soil acidity in relation  to crinkle  leaf of
         cotton.  Soil Sci.  Soc.  Airer.  Proc.  21:305-308.

49.  Dye, W. B. and  J.  L.  O'Hara.   1959. Molybdosis.
         Nevada Aqr. Exp.  Sta..Bull.  208.

50.  Jensen, E.  H. and  A.  L.  1971.   Molybdenum
         accumulation  by  forage  plants.  Agron.  J.  oJ{2):

51.  Kubota, J., E.  R.  Lemon, and V,.  H.  Allaway.   19t>3.
         The  effect of soil  moisture  content  upon the
         molybdenum, copper, and cobalt by alsike clover.
         Soil Sci.  Amer.  Proc.  27 (6) :679-683,
 52. Vanselow,  A.  P.   1966t.   Nickel,  in Diagnostic criteria
          for plants  and soils,
          of California, Divisio
          Berkeley.   pp. 302-309
for plants and  soils,  H.  D.  chapman,  ed.   University
of California,  Division of Agricultural  Science,

53.  Mizuno, N.  1968.  Interaction between iron and nickel
         and copper and nickel in various plant species.
         Nature 219:1271-1272.

5tt.  Halstead, R. L., B. J. Finn, and A. J. MacLean.  1969.
         Extractability of nickel added to soils and its
         concentration in plants,  can. J. Soil Sci. 49(3);

55.  Allaway, W. H., E. E. Gary, and C. F. Ehlig,  1967.
         The cycling of low levels of  selenium in soils,
         plants and animals,  in Symposium: selenium in
         biomedicine.  O. H.  Muth, J.  F. Oldfield, ana  P. H.
         Weswig, eds.  AVI Publishing  Co. , Viestport, Conn.
         op. 273-276.

56.  Underwood, E.  J.   1966.   The mineral nutrition ot
         livestock.  Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux,
         Aberdeen, Scotland.

57.  Hamilton, J. W. and O. A.  Beath.   1963.   Uptake ot
         available selenium by certain range  plants.  J.
         Range Manage. 16 (5):261-264.

58.  Grant, A. B.   1965.  Pasture top dressing witn selenium.
         New Zeal.  J. Agr. Res. 8 (3) :681-690.

59.  Allaway, W. H., P. D. Moore, J. E. Oldfield, and
         O. II. Muth.   1966.   Movement  of physiological  levels
         of selenium from soils through plants to animals.
         J. Nutr.  88:411-118,

60.  Lilleland, O., J.  G. fircwn, and C. Swanson,  194b.
         Research shows sodium may cause leaf tip burn.
         Almond facts  9(2):1, 5.

61.  Ayres, A. D., J. W. Brcwn, and C.  H. Wadleigh.  1952.
         Salt tolerance of barley and  wheat in soil plots
         receiving several salinization regimes.  Agron.
         J. 44:307-310.

62.  Geldrich, E. E. and P. H, Eordner.  1971.  Fecal
         contamination of fruits and vegetables during
         cultivation and processing for market.  A review.
         J. Milk Food  Technol. 34 (4) :184-195.

63.  Frank, P. A., R. J. Demint, and R. D. Comes.  1970.


      Herbicides in irrigation water following canal bank
      treatment for week control.  Weed Sci.  18 (6):687-692.

64.  Pillsbury, A. F. and H. F. Blaney.  1966.  Salinity
      problems and management  in river-systems.  J.
      Irr. Drain Div. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng.  92(IRI):

65.  Cline, J. F., M. A, Wolfe, and F. P.  Hungate.  1969.
      Evaporative cooling of heated  irrigation water by
      sprinkler application.   Water  Resources Research 5:

66.  Frost, D. V.  1967.  Arsenicals  in biology-retrospect
      and prospect.  Fed. Proc. 26(1): 208,

67.  Underwood, E. J.  1971.  Trace elements in  human and
      animal nutrition,  3rd ed.  Academic Press,  Inc.,
      New York.

68.  Wadsworth, J. R.  1952.  Brief outline of the toxicity
      of some common poisons.  Vet.  Med,  47:412-416.

69.  Peoples, S. A.   1964.  Arsenic  toxicity in  cattle.
      Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. Ill (2) :644-649.

70.  Pomelee, C. S.   1953.  Toxicity  of beryllium.   sewage
      Indust. Wastes 25:1424-1428.

71.  McKee, J. E. and H.  W. Wolf.   1963.   Water  quality
      criteria,  2nd ed.  California  State Water Quality Control
      Board, Sacramento.

72.  Parizek, J.  1960.   Sterilization  of the male by
      cadmium salts.  J. Reprod.  Fert.  1 (3) :294-309.

73. schroeder,  H.  A., W.  H.  Vinton,  Jr., and J.  J. Balassa
      1963a,  Effects of chromium,  cadmium, and lead on
      the growth and survival  of  rats.   J. Nutr.  80:48-54.

74. schroeder,  H.  A., w.  H.  Vinton,  Jr., and J. J. Balassa.
      1963b.  Effects  of chromium,  cadmium, and other trace
      metals  on  the growth and survival  of mice.   J.
      Nutr.  80:39-47.

75. Mulvihill,  J.  E.,  S.  H.  Gamm,  and V. H. Ferm.
      1970.   Facial formation in normal and cadmium-treated

         golden hamsters.  J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. z4 (2) :

76. Miller, W. J.  1971.  Cadmium absorption, tissue and
         product distribution, tcxicity effects and influence
         on metabolism of certain essential elements, in
         Proceedings Georgia Nutrition Conference.  University
         of Georgia, Athens.  pp. 58-59.

77. Mertz, W.  1967.  Biological role of chromium.  Fed.
         Proc. 26:186-193.

78. Nutrition Reviews.   1566a,  Copper toxicity
         Nutrition Reviews 24:305-308.

79. National Research Council.  Committee  on Animal
         Nutrition.  1968a.  Nutrient requirements of
         swine.  6th rev. ed.  The National Academy of
         Sciences, Washington, D. C.

80. National Research Council.  Committee  on Animal
         Nutrition.  196ftt.  Nutrient requirements of
         sheep.  4th rev. ed.  The National Academy of
         Sciences, Washington, D. C.

81. National Research Council.  Committee  on Animal
         Nutrition.  1971.    Nutrient requirements of dairy
         cattle, 4th rev. ed.  The National Academy of
         Sciences, Washington, D. C.

82. O*Donovan, P. B., R. A. Pickett, M. P. Plumlee, and
         W. M. Beeson.   1963.  Iron toxicity in the young  pig.
         J. Anim.  Sci.  22:1075-1080.

83. Donawick, W. J.  1966.   Chronic lead poisoning in a cow.
         J. Amer. Vet. Med. Ass. 148 (6) :655-661.

84. Link, R. P. and R. R. Fensinger.  1966.  Lead toxicosis
         in swine.  Amer. J.  Vet. Res. 27(118):759-7fa3.

85. Harbourne, J. P., C. T. McCrea,  and J. fcatkinson.
         1968.  An unusual  outbreak cf lead poisoning in
         calves.  Vet. Rec. 83:515-517.

86. Hatch, R. C. and H. S.  f'unnell.   1969.  Lead levels
         in tissues and stomach contents of poisoneu cattle:
         a fifteen-year survey.   Can. Vet. J. 10:258-262.

87.  Egan,  D.  A. and T. O'Cuill.  1970.  Cumulative lead
         poisoning in horses in a irining area contaminated
         with galena.  Vet. Rec. 86 (25):736-737.

88.  Aronson,  A. L.  1971.  Lead poisoning  in cattle  and
         horses following  Icng-terni exposure to  leau.  J.
         Amer. Vet. Med. Ass.  158 (11) : 1870.

89.  Hammond,  P. B. and A.  L. Aronson.   1964.  Lead poisoainy
         in cattle and horses  in the  vicinity of a smelter.
         Ann. N. Y. Acad.  Sci. Ill (2):595-611.

90.  Schroeder, H. A., J. J. Balassa,  and W. H. Vinton, Jr.
         1964,  Chromium,  lead, cadirium, nickel  ana  titaniuni
         in mice:  effect  on mortality, tutors and tiss-ue  levels.
         J. Nutr. 83:239-250.

91.  Schroeder, H. A., J. J. Balassa,  and W. H. Vinton, Jr.
         1965.  Chromium,  cadmiuir  and lead in rats;   effects
         on lite span, tamers  and  tissue levels.  J. Nutr.

92.  Hemphill,  F. E.,  M.  L. Kaeterle,  and W. B. Buck.  1971.
         Lead  suppression  of mouse resistance to Salmonella
         tv£h irnurium.  Science 172:1031-1032.

93.  Davison,  K. L.', W. Hansel, L.  Krook, K. McEntee,
         and  M. J. Wright.  1964.   Nitrate toxicity  in dairy-
         heifers.  J. Dairy  Sci.  47 (10):1065-1073.

94.  Bradley,  W. B.,  H. F.  Eppson,  and O. A.  Beat.h.   1940.
         Livestock poisoning  by cat hay and other plants
         containing  nitrate.   ttyo.  Agric.  Exp.  Stn,  Bull.  No.

95. Crawford,  R.  F.  and  fc. K.  Kennedy.  1960.   Nitrates
         in  forage crops and silage:   benefits,  hazaras,
         precautions  (Cornell  miscellaneous bulletin no. 37).
         New  York, State College  of Agriculture, ithaca.

96. Seerley,  R. W.,  R.  J.  Emerick, L.  P.  Embry,  ana
         O.  E. Olson.  19o5.   Effect of nitrate  or nitrite
         administered continuously in  drinking  water tor
         swine and sheep.   J.  Anim. Sci.  24(4):1014-1019.

97, Adams, A. W. , P. J. Emerick, and C. W. Carlson.   1966.
       Effects of nitrate and nitrite  in  the  drinking
       water on  chicks, poults and laying hens.   Poultry
       Sci. 15(6):1215-1222.

98.  Mclntosh, I. G., R. L. Nielson, and  W. D.  Robinson,
       1943.  Mangel poisoning in pigs.   N. Z.  J.  Agr.  66:

99.  Gwatkin, R. and P. J. G. Plummer.  1946.   Toxicity of
       certain salts of sodium and potassium  for swine.
       Can. J. Comp. Med. 10:183-190.

100. Winks, W. R., A. K. Sutherland, and  R. M.  Salisbury.
       1950.  Nitrite poisoning of pigs.   Queensland J.
       Agr. Sci. 7:1-14.

101. Barnett, A. J. G.  1952.  Decomposition  of nitrate
       in mixtures of rainced grass and water.   Nature

102. Byers, H. G.  1935.  Selenium occurrence in certain
       soils in  the United States with a  discussion of
       related topics.  U. S. Dep. Agr. Tech.  Bull.  No.  482.

103. Williams, K. T. and H. G. Byers.   1935.   Occurrence
       of selenium in the Colorado River  and  some of its
       tributaries.  Indust. Eng. Chem.,  Anal*.  Ed 7:

104. Beath, 0. A.  1943.  Toxic vegetation growing on the
       Salt Wash Sandstone member of  the  Morrison Formation.
       Amer. J.  Hot. 30:698-707.

105. Byers, H. G., J. T. Miller, K. T. Williams, and
       H. W. Lakin.  1938.  Selenium  occurrence in certain
       soils in  the United States with a  discussion of
       related topics.  III. U.S. Dep, Agr. Tech. Bull  No.  601.

106, Abu-Erreish, G. M.  1967.  On the nature of some
       selemiun  losses from soils and  waters  (M.S. thesis)
       South Dakota State University,  Brookings.

107.  Schroeder, H. A. and J. J. Balassa.  1967.  Arsenic,
       germanium, tin and vanadium in mice:  effects on
       growth, survival and tissue levels.  J. Nutr. 92:

108.  Romoser, G.  L. , W, A. Dudley, L. J.  Machlin,  and  L.
       Loveless.  1961.  Toxicity of vanadium  and  chromium
       for the growing chick.   Poultry  Sci, 40:1171-1173.

109.  Nelson, T. S.,  M. B. Gillis, and H.  T. Peeler.   1962.
       Studies of the effect of vanadium on chick  growth.
       Poultry Sci.  41 (2):519-522,

110.  Berg, L. R.  1963.   Evidence of vanadium  toxicity
       resulting  from the use  of certain commercial
       phosphorus supplements  in chick  rations.   Poultry
       Sci, 42(3):766-769.

111.  Hathcock, J. N.f C.  H.  Hill,  and  G.  Matrone.   1964.
       Vanadium  toxicity  and  distribution in  chicks and
       rats.  J.  Nutr.  82:106-110,

112. Grimmett, R. E.R., T.  G.  Mclntosh, E.  M.  Wall, and
       C.  S.  M.  Hapkirk.   1937.  Chronic zinc poisoning
       of  pigs;  results of  experimental feeding of pure zinc
       lactate.   N.  Z.  J.  Agr. 54:216-223,

113. Sampson,  J., R. Granham,  and H.  R. Hester.   1942.
       Feeding zinc  to pigs.   Cornell  Vet.  32:225-236.

114. Lewis,  P.  K.,  V,.  G.  Hoekstra,  and R. H.  Grummer.  1957.
       Restricted calcium feeding versus zinc supplementation
       for the ccntrol of parakeratosis in swine.
       J.  Anim.  Sci. 16 (3) : 578-588.

115. Brink,  M.  F.,  D.  E,  Becker, S,  W. Terrill, and A. H.
       Jensen.   1959.   Zinc toxicity in the weanling  pig.
       J.  Anim.  Sci. 18:836-842.

116. Klussendorf, R. C.  and J. M.  Pensack.   1958.  Newer
       aspects of zinc metabolism.  J. Amer. Vet Med.
       ASS.  132 (10)  :446-450.

117. Johnson, D. , Jr., A. L. Mehring, Jr.,  F.  X.  Savino,
       and H. W. Titus.  1962.  The tolerance  of  growing
       chickens  for dietary zinc.  Poultry  Sci. 41(1):

118, Vohra, P. and F. H. Kratzer.  1968.  Zinc, copper  and
       manganese toxicities in  turkey poults and  their
       alleviation by EDTA.  Poultry Sci. 47 (3):699-704.

119. Sturkie, P. D.  1956.  The effects of  excess zinc  on
       water consumption in chickens.  Poultry Sci.  35:

120. Ott, E. A., W.  H.  Smith, R.  B. Harrington, and  W.  M.
       Beeson.   1966a.  Zinc toxicity in  ruminants.   I.
       Effect of high  levels of dietary  zinc on gains,
       feed consumption and feed  efficiency of lambs.
       J. Anim.  Sci. 25:414-418.

121. Ott, E. A., W.  H.  Smith, R.  B.  Harrington, and  W.  M.
       Beeson.   1966b.  Zinc toxicity in  ruminants.
       II.  Effect of high  levels of dietary  zinc on gains,
       feed consumption and feed  efficiency of beef  cattle.
       J. Anim.  Sci. 25:419-423.

122. Ott, E. A., W.  H.  Smith, R.  B. Harrington, M. Stob,
       H. E. Parker, and W. M.  Beeson.  1966c. Zinc
       toxicity  in ruminants.   Ill,  Physiological changes
       in tissues and alterations in rumen  metabolism in
       lambs.  J. Anim. Sci. 25:424-431.

123. Ott, E. A., W.  H.  Smith, R.  B. Harrington, H. E.
       Parker and W. M. Beeson,   1966d.   Zinc  toxicity
       in ruminants.  IV.  Physiological  changes  in  tissues  of
       beef cattle.  J. Anim, Sci. 25:432-438.

124. Drinker, K. R., P. K. Thompson, and  M. Marsh.   1927.
       Investigation of the effect upon rats of long-
       continued ingestion of zinc compounds,  with especial
       reference to  the relation  ot zinc  excretion to zinc
       intake.   Amer. J. Physiol.  81:284-306.

125. Thompson, P. K., M. Marsh, and K. R. Drinker.   1927.
       The effect of zinc administration  upon  reproduction
       and growth in the albino rat, together  with a
       demonstration of the constant concentration of zinc
       in a given species, regardless of  age.   Amer. J.

       Physiol. 80:65-74.

126.  Sadasivan, V.  1951.  The biochemistry  of  zinc.   I.
       Effect of  feeding zinc on  the  liver and  bones  of
       rats.  Biochem. J. 48:527-530.

127.  Fitch, C. P., L. M. Bishop,  W. L.  Boyd,  R,  A.  Gortner,
       C. F, Rogers, and J.  E, Tilderu   1934.   "Water
       bloom" as  a cause of  poisoning in domestic  animals.
       Cornell Vet. 24:30-39.

128.  Gorham, P. R.  1964.  Toxic  algae,  in Algae and  man,
       D. F. Jackson, ed.  Plenum Press,  New York,
       pp. 307-336.

129.  Gorham, P. R.  1960.  Toxic  waterblooms of
       blue-green algae.  Canadian Vet.  Journ.  1:

130.  Shilo, M.  1967.  Formation  and  mode of action of algal
       toxins.  Eact. Rev. 31:180-193.

131.  Kutches, A.  J., D. C. Church,  and F. L,  Duryee.   1970.
       Toxicological effects of pesticides on rumen
       in vitro.  J. Agr. Food Chem.  118:430-433.

132.  Larsen, C. and D. E. Bailey.   1913.  Effect of alkali
       water on dairy cows.  S. Dak.  Agr. Exp.  Sta. Bull.
       No. 147.   pp. 300-325.

133.  Ramsay, A. A.  1924.  Waters suitable for livestock,
       Analyses and experiences in New South Wales.
       Agr. Gaz.  N.S.W. 35:339-342.

134.  Heller, V. G. and C. H, Larwood.  1930.   Saline  drinking
       water.  Science 71:223-224.

135.  Heller, V. G.  1932.  Saline and alkaline  drinking
       waters.  J. Nutr. 5:421-429.

136.  Heller, V. G.  1933.  The effect of saline and alkaline
       waters on  domestic animals.  Okla. Agr.  Exp, Sta.
       Bull. No.  217:3-23.

137. Krista, L. M. , C. W. Carlson,  and  O.  E.  Olson.   1961.
       Some effects of saline  waters  on chicks,  laying hens.
       poults, and ducklings.   Poultry  Sci.  40 (U):938-944.

    A.   Aquatic Life
         1.   Acidity^ ftj.kalinity^and_gH
              The  acceptable  range  of  pH is  6.0  to 9.0.

Changes of up to 0.5  units from the estimated  natural

seasonal minimum and  maximum  are acceptable.  For natural

waters having a pH outside the 6.0  to  9.0 range  or having

fluctuations in excess of 0.5 units from the estimated

natural seasonal minimum and  maximum,  no further variance  is


              t>»    Alkalinity

              Decreases in the total alkalinity of water of

more than  25  percent below the natural level are


              Additions of weakly dissociated acias ana

alkalies are generally unacceptable.

Rationale  (Acidity, Alkalinity and  pH) :

    Extremes of pH can exert  stress conditions  or kill

aquatic life outright.  Even  moderate  changes from

"acceptable" criteria lirrits  ct  pB  are  deleterious  to  some

aquatic species.  Non-lethal  limits are narrower ror certain

fish food organisms than they are for  fish.  Daj-ihriia njacjna

and Gammarus for example, do  not reproduce at pH levels

below 6.0.  Alkaline conditions  above  pH  8.5 i egia  to

decrease fecundity or many fish  species.  Addition  or  strong

alkalies can cause an increase in the  proportion of un-

ionized ammonia, the toxic component.   Metallo-cyaniae

complexes can increase a thousand fold  ir. toxicity  with  a

drop of 1.5 pH units.  The availability of mar.y nutrient

substances varies with the alkalinity and acidity,  i.e.,

iron becomes unavailable to plants at  hich pK values  (See


              Dissolved Gases
              a .    Ammon a

              The maximum acceptatle concentration or un-

ionized ammonia  (NH,) in water is  1/20  (0.05) the 96-hour

LC~6.  When appropriate this value will tt determinea using

the receiving water in question and the most sensitive

important species in the locality  as the test organisms.

The acceptable maximum concentration of un-ionizect ainmouia

in water is 0.02 mq/1.

Rationale (Ammonia) ;

    The toxicity of ammonia solutions  is dependent upon  the

un- ionized ammonia, the concentrations  of which  vary with

the pH of the water.  In incst. natural  water  the  pH range is

such that ammonium ions  (Kh^+) predominate,  however, in

alkaline waters  hiqh concentrations of  un-ionized ammonia  in

undissociated ammonium hydroxide  increase the toxicity or

ammonia solutions  {see 1 and 2).   In streams polluted with

sewage, up to one  half of the nitrogen  ir the sewage may be

in the form of tree ammonia, and  sewage may  carry up to  35

mg/1 of total nitrogen  (3 cited in 4).  Acute toxicity data


compiled on several species ot fish yielded mean yo-iiour L<~V

values ranginq from 0,29 tc 0.89 rrg/1  (1).  An application

factor of 0.03 applied to these data produced values in the

neighborhood of 0.02 mg/1 which is abcut one-half the values

cited  (5) as the no effect level for rainbow trout.
              b.   Chlorine^and^ Related Compounds

              The maximum  acceptable residual  chlorine

concentrations  in water  are  0.003  mg/1 for  chronic exposure.

Maximum concentrations of  residual chlorine of  O.Ob 1119/1  for

a period of up  to 30 minutes in any 24-hour period are


Rationale  (Chlorine):

    The toxicity of chlorine in water to aquatic lite

depends upon the concentration ct  residual  chlorine and the

relative amounts of free chlorine  and chloramines  (6).

Apparently the  toxicity  of free chlorine in water  is in tne

same order as that of the  chloramines, and  the  toxicity of

chlorine can generally be  estimated from a  measure of

residual chlorine (7, 8).  I.C ^ residual chlorine  levels  for


fish have been reported at 0.008 mg/1 in seven days  (8), and

0.05 -  0.19 mg/1 (9)  and 0.23 mg/1  (10)  in 96-hcmrs.  In

chronic tests, fecundity of fathead minnows was reduced by

exposure to 0.043 mg/1 total chloramines, and survival and

reproduction of Gani-DSJiJJ were reduced by exposure to O.OU -

0.0034  mg/1, respectively  (11).  It was postulated  (8) that

exposure to concentrations of O.OOU mg/1 for one year would

permit survival of one-half of the  test fish.   Apparently

aquatic organisms can tolerate short term exposure  to higher

level residues of chlorine without  harmful effects;  however,

chronic exposure tc concentrations  in excess of 0.003 mg/1

could cause chronic toxic effects.

                    (1). Minimum acceptable limits ot

dissolved oxygen for all water shall be based upon seasonal

temperatures.  Minimum acceptable  limits are presented in

the table below:
         Oxygen Levels  fcr
 °C     complete  Saturation

36            7 mg/1
27.5          8 mg/1
21            9 mg/1
16            10 mg/1
 7.7          12 mg/1
 1.5          1U mg/1
             Minimal Levels
            fcr  Protection of
            Salntonid Spawning

               6.4 mg/1
               7.1 ma/1
               7.7 mg/1
               6.2 mg/1
               8.9 mg/1
               9.3 ma/1
 Minimal Levels
for Protection of
   Aquatic Life

      5.3 mg/1
      5.8 mg/1
      6.2 mg/1
      6.5 mg/1
      6.8 rng/1
      6.8 mg/1
                    (2). As  an  exception, under  extreme

conditions for  short  periods of  not  more than  2U  hours,  a

minimum limit of  u  mg/1 is  acceptable  for  waters  auove  J1  C

 (87.8'F) .


Rationale (Dissolved Oxygen) :

    The prescribed limits of acceptability were derived trom

calculations (1)  based upcn extensive studies of the ettects

of changes in dissolved oxygen.  These dissolved oxygen

limits should provide a high level ct protection fur

freshwater aquatic life and preclude their impairment by

other necessary multiple uses ot water.  Oxygen requirements

of aquatic life have be°n the subject of numerous

investigations, and several excellent survey papers on tae

subject have been compiled and are reviewed  (1).  A^thougn

most investigations have dealt specifically with the oxygen

requirements of fish, it is generally acknowledged that the

requirements of fish and their forage oroanisms are

compatible.  That is, aquatic environments with oxygen

levels which are adequate to sustain a fish population will

also support invertebrates if other habitat requirements are

met.  In establishing criteria,  it is important to Know not

only how long an animal can resist, death by asphyxiation at

low dissolved oxygen concentrations, but also  information

must be available on the oxygen  requirements for egg

development, for newly hatched larvae, for normal growth and

activity, and  tcr completing all stages of the  reproductive

cycle.  Upon review of the  available information, one  tact


becomes clear:  any reduction of dissolved oxygen can reduce

the efficiency of oxygen uptake by aquatic animals, and

hence reduce their ability to meet demands of their

environment.  There is evidently nc concentration level or

percentage of saturation to which the dissolved oxygen

content of natural waters can be reduced without causing or

risking some adverse effects on the reproduction, growth,

and consequently, the production of fishes inhabiting those

waters  (1).  The selection of the level of protection to be

afforded aquatic life by the establishment of numerical

criteria is influenced by socio-economic as well as

biological consideration.  Consequently, the intent of the

criteria is to provide a level of protection for diversified

species rather than single limits in an effort to protect

only specific organisms.  Deleterious effects on fish deem

to depend more on '*xtreir;es than en averages  (1).  The

dissolved oxygen criteria are therefore based upon

temperature and degree of oxygen saturation.  For example,

fish occupying a habitat which is v,ell saturated with oxygen

during daylight hours may be subjected to stress conditions

in the early morning hours when the oxyaen demand has

exhausted the photosynthetic reserve.  Although there is no

single oxygen concentration which is favorable to ail

species and ecosystems, there are definite minimal


concentrations that are unfavorable to almost all a4uatic

organisms (1).  To provide for short duration physical

anomalies and for the case when lower minimum ambient oxygen

concentrations cannot be determined at higher temperature

levels,  a floor of U mg/1 is established.  Available

information indicates that below this minimal concentration

subacute or chronic damage to -several fish has been

              The maximum acceptable concentrations ot

hydrogen sulf ide in water are  0,002 mg/1.

Rationale  (Hydrogen Sulf ide):

    See sulfides.


              e-    Nitrogen_and Gas Bubble Disease

              The maximum acceptable total dissolved gas

pressure in water is 110 percent of the existing atmospnenc

pressure, and any prolonged artiticial increase or sudden

decrease in total dissolved gas pressure should be avoided.

Rationale  (Nitrogen and Gas Bubble Disease):

    Gas  bubble disease is caused  by excessive total

dissolved gas pressure  (supersaturation),  but it is not

caused by the dissolved nitrogen  gas alone  (12 -  17).

Analysis ot gases in bubbles formed in fish suffering from

the disease revealed compositions essentially identical to

air (18, 19).  Gas bubble disease is frequently associated

with supersaturated waters and Las been related to iiign

reaeration rates resulting from algal ilooms  (16), heated

effluents of steam generating plants  (20,  21) and aain

spillways  (22, 23).  Gas bubble disease results in buoble

formation on and within the tish.  Gas enboli eventually

cause hemostasis within the bleed vessels, resulting in

tissue damage and gas formation in the heart  leading to

death  (1).  Sublethal effects of  gas bubble disease include

the promotion of other diseases,  necrosis, tissue


blindness and reproductive failure  (22 - 26).  The response

of fish to gas bubble disease varies with life stages and

species,  degree of fatness, blood pressure, blood viscosity,

metabolic heat, body size, muscular activity and blood

osmolarity (1).  There are few data on the tolerance or

invertebrates to excessive dissolved qas pressure; nowever,

it has been demonstrated that certain invertebrates ueveiop

qas pressure disease (see  1).  Due  to the paucity ot data on

chronic sublethal effects of gas bubble disease on tisn, and

to the lack of knowledge of the disease in invertebrates,

safe limits must be judged from aata on mortality ot

selected fishes under conditions approximating the water of

a hypothetical littoral zone  (1).   These data indicate taat

if total gas pressures do not exceed 110 percent ot tae

existing atmospheric pressure, aquatic life should te

adequately protected.

         3 .    !G2£2sU2i£§ __ {Ions an d_Frgg E
              a.    Cadmium

              Maximum acceptable cadmium concentrations are

0.03 mq/1 in hard water (total hardness greater than 100

mg/1 as CaCO5 ) and O.OOU mg/1 in soft water  (total naraness

100 mg/1 CaCOu or less).  Maximum acceptable concentrations

in water where Crustacea ana the eggs and larva ot salmonids

develop are 0.003 mg/1 in hard water and O.OOOU in soft

water as defined above.

Rationale.  (Cadmium) :

    Cadmium is an extremely dangerous cumulative toxicant,

causing insidious, progressive chronic poisoning in mammals

(27), fish, and probably other animals because the itetal  is

not excreted  (See  1).  The eggs and  larvae of fish are

apparently more sensitive than adult fish to poisoning  by

cadmium, and crustaceans are evidently more  sensitive than

fish eggs  and larvae  (See  1).  The safe  levels ot cadmium

for fathead mirnows  (28) and Muegills in hard water are

between 0.06 and 0.03 mg/1, and sate levels  for  coho salmon

fry have been reported  between 0.004 to  0.001 mg/1 in sott


water (See 1).  Concentrations of C.0005 mg/1 were observed

to reduce reproduction of Da^hnia macjna in one generation

exposures lasting three weeks (See 1) .
              Maximum acceptable total chromium

concentrations in water are 0.05 mg/1.

Rationale (Chromium) :

    The r.oxicity of chromium toward aquatic life varies

widely with the species, temperature, p.H, valence of tne

chromium and synerqistic and antagonistic effects,

particularly that of hardness  (29) .  Pecent data inuicate

that safe concentrations cf hexavalent chromium in hard

waters are 1.0 mg/1 for fathead minnows, and in soft water

0.6 and 0.3 mg/1 for brook and rainbcw trout.  Similar

chronic no-effect levels fcr trivalent chromium were

suggested by these data (see 1).  Additional data revealed

that some lower members ot tne food web are more sensitive

to chromium than are fish.  The reported lethal limits ot

hexavalent chromium for fish are  17 and 118 mg/1 as compared


to 0.05 mg/1 for macroinvertefcrates, and 0.032 to 6.4 mg/1

for algae  (1) .
              Maximum acceptable concentrations of copper

(expressed as Cu) in water are  1/10  (0.10) of the 96-hour L

value determined using the receiving water in question and

the most sensitive important species in the  locality as the

test organisms.

Rationale  (Copper):

    The toxicity of copper varies with the chemical

characteristics of the water and with the species ct test

organism (29).  Concentrations of 0.006 mg/1 in soft water

are thought to he safe for the reproduction  and growtn of

Daghnia magna and fish, and in hard waters levels or 0.033

mg/1 are apparently safe  (See 1).  Since safe to lethal

ratios of copper in water vary  frcir, 0.1 to 0.2, an ap-

plication factor of 0.1 or the 96-hour LC^  value sriould

provide adequate protection tor aquatic species (See 1).


              d.   Lead

              Maximum acceptable concentrations  ot  lead in

water are 0.03 mq/1.

Rationale (Lead):

    The toxicity of lead in water varies with its solubility

which is a function of the hardness of the water.   In  soft

waters lead has a solubility of 0.5 ing/1, whereas in hard

water the solubility is only 0.003 mq/1  (1).  The effect of

hardness upon the toxicity of lead was demonstrated by acute

toxicity tests on several species of fish in waters ot

varying hardness.  The 96-hour LC.,-^ values in soft  waters

(20-45 mq/1 CaCOj)  were 1.0 mq/1 tor rainbow trout  (30),

4.0-5.0 mq/1 for brook trout and 5.0-7.0 mq/1 for fathead

minnows (31, also see 1).  In hard waters 96-hour LC^-^

values were 442 mq/1 fcr fcrock trout and 482 mq/1 for

fathead minnows (31).  Preliminary information on cnronic

toxicity of lead to rainbow and brook trout indicated

detrimental effects at 0.10 mq/1 in soft water  (see 1).  The

growth of  guppies was affected fcy 1.24 ma/1 of lead (32),

and concentrations  of 0.1 and 0.3 mq/1 caused chronic  or

sublethal  effects on sticklebacks (33, 34).  The safe  level


for Daphnia has been reported as 0.03 mg/1, and it nas been

suggested that this is also  the sate level for fish (1),
              e .   Mercury _ (InorganicI
                    1)   Maximum acceptable total mercury

concentration  in unfiltered  water at any time or place are

0.2 ug/1.

                    2)   Maximum acceptable average mercury

concentrations in unfiltered water are 0.05 ug/1.

                    3)   Maximum acceptable concentrations of

total mercury  in any aquatic organism is a total oody burden

of 0.5 ug/g wet weight.

Rationale  {Mercury  - Inorganic) :

    The main body of available information is on organic

compounds of mercury which are generally more dangerous to

aquatic life and man.  Since inorganic mercury is changed by

organisms in nature to the organic forms the same limits are

prescribed for both forms  (see 1) .


              f.    Nickel

              Maximum acceptable concentrations or nicKel in

water are 1/50 (0.02)  the 96-hour LC^ value determined

using the receiving water in question and the most sensitive

important species in the locality as the test organisms.

Rationale (Nickel) :

    Nickel as a pure metal does net constitute a  serious

water pollution problem; however, many of the salts  of

nickel are highly soluble in water and may present serious

hazards to aquatic life  (see 29) .  The 96-hour I.C^-^  of

nickel for fathead minnows ranges from 5 mg/1 in  scft water

to 43 mg/1 in hard water (see 31).  Chronic sate

concentrations for fathead minnows in hard water  nave ceen

reported as varying between 0,8 and O.u ing/1, and in soft

water levels of 0.030 mg/1 had no effect on Da^hrua  iM3Ii
               Maximum acceptable concentrations  or  total

 sulfides in water are 0.002 mg/1.

 Rationale (Sulfides) :

     Sulfides enter the water as constituents  of  man>

 industrial  wastes.  The addition cf  soluble sultiues ro

 water  results in a reaction with hydrogen  ions to lorifi hiS~

 or  H^S,  the proportion of  each depending upon the pH ot tne

 water.   Sulfides derive their  toxicity  from undissociatea

 TjS, which  at a  pH of 5 or 6 accounts for  about  99  percent

 of  the sulfides  present in water.  In neutral waters the

 sulfides appear  in about equal proportion  of  HS~ ana H^S,

 and at a pH of 9 most of the sulfides are  in  the term ot H5~

 (1).  Hydrogen sulfide may fce  formed by the microoiai

 reduction of  sulfates via  sulfides (35)  or from the

 decomposition of organic matter  in sediments and siuage

 beds.  Under  lew oxygen tensions or low pH, hydrogen sulrxae

 may be present in concentrations which are toxic ro aquatic

 life.  Because most H^S formation occurs at the mua-water

 interface, the invertebrates,  fish eggs and fry may oe

seriously affected by  H^S  production.  Tabulated data on the


toxicity of hydrogen sulfide to various fish species in all

stages  of development revealed 96-hour LCV0 values ranging

from 0.0018 to 0.071 mg/1 and safe values ranging trom 0.00^

to 0.015 mg/1 (1).   The data suggest that fish eggs are the

least sensitive and try the mcst sensitive to H_S exposure.

Safe levels for the scud Cjamn!aru_s ^seudojarnnaeus and the

mayfly,  Hexacjenia limbata, have teen reported between 0.002

and 0.003 mg/1 (36).  Since sulfides in water readily

combine with hydrogen to form toxic h^S, limiting the total

sulfide concentration in water to a maximum of 0.002 mg/1

should  provide adequate protection tor the most sensitive

species of aquatic life even if essentially all the sultiaes

present are in the form cf H S.
         Maximum acceptable zinc concentrations in water are

5/1000  (0.005)  the 96-hour LC^ value determined using tne

receiving water in question and the most sensitive important

species  in the locality as the test organisms.


Rationale  (Zinc):

    The acute  lethal toxicity  of  zinc  varies greatly with

the hardness of  the water,  with the  96-hour LC^o ror fatnead

minnows ranging  from 0.87 mq/1 in soft water to 33 mg/1 in

hard water  (31).  The  lethal  threshold also varies

significantly  between  fish  species,  with bluegills wore

resistant than fathead minnows (1),  and coarse tisn more

resistant than brook trout  (37).  Differences between acute

and safe chronic concentrations of zinc on fathead minnows

are great.   In hard water,  levels of 0.03 mg/1 had no efiect

on fathead  minnow reproduction, while  0.18 mg/1 causea an 83

percent  reduction in  fecundity (38) .  Using a 96-hour LCj-o

of 9.2 mg/1, and the no-effect concentration of 0.03 mg/1

yields a safe  to lethal ratio  of  about 0.0033  (1).  Owing to

the great  differences  between  the acute and safe

concentration  of zinc,  an application  factor of 5/1000

 (0.005).of  the 96-hour LC50 is required.

          4.   Organic  Compounds
               a .
               Maximum acceptable concentrations of iree

 cyanides in  water are 1/20 (0.05)  the 96-hour LC^ value

 determined  using the receivinq water in question ana the

 most sensitive important species in the area as test

 organisms in both static and flow-through bioassays.

 Maximum acceptable concentrations at any time cr place are .

 0.005 mq/1.

 Rationale (Cyanides) :

     Cyanides in water derive their toxicity primarily trom

 undissociated hydrogen cyanide  (KCN) rather than from the

 cyanide ion (CN~) (39 - 42).  HCN dissociates in water into

 H* and ON- in a pH dependent reaction.  At a pH of  7 or

 below, lass than 1 percent of the cyanide is present as CN~;

 at a pH of 8, 6.7 percent; at a pH of  9, 42 percent; and at

 a pH of 10, 87 percent of the cyanide  is dissociated  (43).

Doudoroff (44) demonstrated more than a thousand fold

 increase in toxicity of a nickelocyanide complex associated

 with a decrease of pH frcir 8.0  to 6.5, and a pH change from

                          page  114

8.9 to 7.5 is said to increase  the toxicity tenfold  (2).

The toxicity of  cyanides  is  also increased by  increases in

temperature and  reductions in  oxygen tensions.  A

temperature rise of  10°C  produced a two- to threefold

increase  in the  rate of the  lethal action of cyanide  (46,

47).  The median period of survival of  trout at 17CC exposed

to concentrations of 0. 105 mg/1 CN~ was reduced from 8 hours  at

95 percent oxygen saturation to 10 minutes at  45 percent oxygen

saturation  f45) .  West  of the  literature on the toxicity of

cyanides  and  hydrogen cyanide  expresses toxicity in terms of

the  cyanide ion.  It was  reported (48)  that free cyanide

concentrations  from  0.05  to  0.01 mg/1 as CN~ have  proved

fatal to  many sensitive species.  A level as low as 0.01

mg/1 is know  to have a  pronounced, rapid, lasting  effect on

the  swimming  ability of salmon (1).  Because safe  HCN

concentrations  and acceptable  LC^ application factors have

not  been  positively  demonstrated, conservative estimates of

safe levels of  cyanide  in waters must be made. In

determining acceptable  cyanide levels for a given  water

body, both flow-through and  static' bioassays should  be

performed.  Static bioassays may reveal much greater

toxicity  than the flow-through method because  the  partial

dissociation  of some complex metallocyanide ions may  be

slow.  On the other  hand  volatile HCN may escape from


standing cyanide solution exposed to the atmosphere in

static bioassay containers.
              k-    Detergents

              Maximum acceptable concentrations or linear

alkylate sulfonates (LAS)  in waters are 1/20  (0.05) cue 96-

hour LCj-0 value determined usinq the receiving water in

question and the most sensitive important species in trie

area as test organisms.  Concentrations ot LAS in water in

excess of 0.2 mg/1 are unacceptable.

Rationale (Detergents):

    The primary toxic component ef detergents is tne linear

alkylate sulfonates (LAS)  which since 1965 have been usea by

the detergent industry as a replacement for alkylbeazene

sulfonates (ABS).  LAS is mere readily degradable

biologically than ABS; however, it is also two to four times

more toxic (U9).   Lethal concentrations of LAS to selected

fish species have been fcund tc vary from 0.2 to 10.0 my/1

in short term studies  (50).  Chronic toxicity studies

revealed that 0.63 mg/1 LAS had no measurable effect on the

life cycle of the  fathead  minnow,  v,hil^  1.2 mg/1 were tatal

to newly hatched fry  (51).   Investigations of the effects of

LAS on invertebrates  (52)  indicated  the  no-effect level on

Garnmarus 2§eudolimnaeus  to be  0.2  to 0.4 mg/1.  The snails,

£ii2§£ iEi§9£^ an<^  £§Si§i2IES decisuir  exposed to LAS for b

week periods were  adversely affected by  concentrations

ranging from O.U to 4.U  mg/1.
              c.   Oils

              If  the  following conditions are observed

acceptable  limits regarding  the  concentrations of oils in

water will  be achieved:  a)   There  is no visible oil on the

water surface;  b)  Concentrations  of emulsified oils ao not

exceed  1/20  (0.05) of the  96-hour  LC^ value determined

using the receiving water  in question  and the most sensitive

important species in  the area; c)  concentrations or nexane

exrractable  substances  (exclusive  of elemental sulfur) in

air dried sediments do not exceed  1000 mg/kg on a ary weignt



Rationale (Oils):

    Pollution resulting from oil spills or discharges may be

in the form ot floating oils, emulsified cils or solutions

of the water soluble fractions of these oils  (1).  Floating

oils may interfere with reaeration and photosynthesis ana

prevent respiration of aquatic insects which obtain their

oxygen at the surface.  Free and eirulsified oils may act on

the epithelial surface of fish gills  interfering with

respiration, or they may ccat and destroy algae ana other

plankton.  Sedimented oils may coat the bottom destroying

benthic organisms and altering spawning areas.  Tne water

soluble fraction of oils may be very  toxic to fisn  (53).

Apparently the aromatic hydrocarbons  are the  riajcr  group of

acutely toxic compounds in oil residues  (54,  55).   Owing to

the wide range of results obtained  in toxicity tests for

oily substances, safe concentrations  for all  compounus

cannot be accurately established.   The 96-hour LC^-y

concentrations for various compounds  range from  5.6 mg/1 for

nephenic acid to  14,500 irg/1 for  no.  2 cutting oil  (see 1).

There  is eviaence that oils may persist and have subtle

chronic  effects  (5U).  Because of  the difficulties  in

establishing  safe levels, the maximum allowable


concentrations  can  only  be  determined on  a  case-by-case

basis using bioassay  procedures.
                    &•    Pijtha3.ate^£sters

               Maximum  acceptable concentrations of phthaiate

esters  in water  are 0.3  ug/1.

Rationale  (Phthalate Esters):

    Phthalate  ester residues have been found in various

segments ot the  aquatic  environment of North America.

Principal occurrences, however,  have been reported trom

industrial and heavily peculated areas (56).  In acute

toxicity tests the  96-hour LC^  of di-n-butyl phthalate to

four species of  fish and  Da^hnia rcacjna ranged between 731

and 6U70 uq/1  (see  1).  Chronic  tcxicity tests have shown

the substance  to be  highly cumulative, with a concentration

factor of 6,000 reported  for Da^hnia magna during a ten-aa>

exposure (see  1).   However, after transfer ot the organism

to uncontaminated water,  approximately 50 percent of the

residue was excreted in three days (1).  Concentrations of 3


ug/1 of di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate have been shown to

significantly reduce the growth and reproduction oi Da^huia

inagna (see 1) .
              Maximum acceptable total mercury

concentrations in water are 0.2 uq/1 and the maximum  average

total mercury concentrations are 0.05 ua/1.  The maximum

acceptable concentration cf total irercury  in any ctquatic

organism is a total body burden of 0.5 ua/q wet weiynt.

Rationale (Organic Mercury):

    Mercury is a dangerous, cumulative toxicant whicn enters

the bodies of aquatic organisms directly from the water ana

through the food chain  (57  - 60).  Although methylmercury  is

the form of mercury of primary concern as  regards toxicity,

the ability of certain microbes to synthesize metiiylmercury

from the inorganic form, renders all mercury in waterways

potentially dangerous.  The incident at Mir.emata, Japan,

during the 1950's in which  several human deaths resulted

from the consumption of mercury contaminated fish aria


shellfish focused attention  upon  the  hazards of mercury

poisoning to humans.   Since  mercury is biologically

concentrated through  the  food  web, levels of protection in

the aquatic environment must be such  that final consumers,

including man,  are afforded  adequate  protection,  fresriwater

phytoplankton,  macrophytes and fish are capable of

biologically magnifying mercury concentrations from water

1,000 times  (61).  Concentration  factors of 5,000 from water

to pike have been reported  (57),  and  factors of 1U,OJO or

more have been  reported from water to brook trout (see 1)

and to some invertebrates (58).   The chrcnic effects of

mercury upon reproduction and  growth of fish are not well

known.  The lowest levels which have resulted in the death

of fish are 0.2 ug/1,  which  killed fathead minnows exposed

for 6 weeks  (see 1).   Levels of 0.1 ug/1 decreased

photosynthesis  and growth of marine algae and some

freshwater phytoplankton  (62).  Exposure of fish for a

period of three months to concentrations of 0.05 ug/i of

mercury in water resulted in concentrations of 0.5 ug/g in

the fish (1).   This is the maximuir Food and Drug

Administration  guideline  level for edible portions.  in an

effort to maintain mercury concentrations in fish below 0.5

ug/g the limits established  above must te observed.


              f.    Polychiorinated^Biphenyls (PCBjsl

              Maximum acceptable concentrations or PCB's in

water are 0.002 ug/1 , and maximum acceptable levels of

residues in qeneral body tissues of any aquatic organism are

0.5 ug/g.
Rationale (Polychlorinated
    PCB residue levels ot  0.5 nig /I in whole salmon eggs have

been suggested as the threshold for egg mortality  (t>3) .

Such levels in eggs are associated with levels in the  body

tissue of 2.5 to 5.0 ug/g  (1).  FCP's are highly cumulative

with accumulation factors  ot up to 200,000 indicated  by long

term exposure of fisn to low PCB concentrations in water

 (1).  Consequently, in order to provide adequate projection

for egg development, and to provide an adequate satiety

factor to protec^ against  excessive accumulations  in  tissue,

the 0.002 ug/1 maximum concentration  limit in  waters  shall

be observed.


              q.   Phenolic Compounds

              Maximum acceptable  concentrations ot phenolic

compounds in water are  1/20 of  the  96-hour LC3-O determined

using the most sensitive important  species as a test

organism.   concentrations in excess of 0.1 mq/1 are


Rationale  (Phenolic compounds):

    Phenols and  phenolic wastes are derived from petroleum,

coke, and chemical industries;  wcod distillation; and

domestic and animal wastes.  Many phenolic compounds are

more toxic than  pure phenol:  their toxicity varies witii the

combinations and qeneral nature of total wastes.  Acute

toxicity of pure phenol varies  between 0.079 mg/1 in 30

minutes to minnows, and 56.0 mq/1 in 96 hours to mosquito

fish (Gambusia a_ff inis) .  A 48-hour LCj-o of 7.5 my/1 has

been reported for trout; also exposures to 6.5 mg/1 caused

damage to epithelial cells in 2 hours, and extensive damage

to reproductive  systems in 7 days.  A level of 1.0 my/I is

safe to trout; and 0.10 mg/1 was  found non-lethal to

bluegill (Legonus macrochirus)  in 48 hours (see 1) .  Tnese

studies illustrated the wide range of phenol toxicity.


There is not yet adequate documentation about chronic

effects and toxicity of mixed wastes on which to base

recommendations of safe levels for fish.  Phenolics affect

the taste of fish at levels that do not appear to aJzfect

fish physiology adversely.  Mixed wastes often have more

objectionable effects than pure materials.  For example,

2.4-dichlorphenol affects taste at 0.001 - 0.005 iiuj/1; p-

chlorophenol at. 0.01 - O.Ob mg/1; and  1-methyl, 6-

chlorophenol at 0.003 mg/1.   Pure phenol did not afreet

taste until levels of  1 - 10  mg/1 were  reached.  The taste

of fish in polluted situations is adversely affected by

phenolics before acute effects are observed  (see 1).

         5-   ££§£,icides

              a.   General

              For pesticides  on which  toxicity  data  are  not

available, maximum acceptable concentrations  in water  are

 1/100  (0.01) of  the 96-hour LCfO value determined  usin-j  the

receiving water  in question and  the  most sensitive  important

 species in the  area as test organisms.

              The maximum acceptable concentrations of

organochlorine pesticides in water are  listed in Table  1.

              c-   Othgr^Pesticideg

              The maximuir acceptable concentrations ot

pesticides other than orqanochlorines in fresh water are

listed in Table 2.

Rationale  (Pesticides) :

    The permissible maximum pesticide concentrations in

water are based upon acute toxicity values for the most.

sensitive species of aquatic life.  For permissible

instantaneous maximum concentration, an application factor

of 1/20 (0.05) of the 96-hour LC^ values was applied.  Tne

maximum permissible 24-hour average concentrations were

derived by applying an application factor of 1/100 (0.01) to

the 96-hour LCiO value.



                          TABIE 1*
Recommended Maximum Concentrations of Organochlorine
Pesticides in Whole (Unfiltered) Water Sampled at any
Time and Any Place, a/
Organochlorine                    Permissible maximum
  Aldrin                                0.01
  DDT                                   0.002
  TDE                                   0.006
  Dieldrin                              0.005
  Chlordane                             P. 04
  Endosulfan                            0.003
  Endrin                                0.002
  Heptachlor                            0.01
  Lindane                               C.02
  Methoxychlor                          0.005
  Toxaphene                             0.01
a/  Concentrations were  determined  by multiplying  the
~   acute toxicity values  for the irore  sensitive species
    by an application  factor cf  0.01.

*   Source:   (1)

                          TABLE  2*
Recommended Maximum Concentrations  of other  Pesticides
in Whole  (Unfiltered) Water  Sampled at any Time and
any Place, a/
Organophosphate                    Permissible maximum
-insecticides	                    concentration  (ug/1)

  Abate                                   (b)
  Azinphosmethyl                        0.001
  Azinphosethyl                           (b)
  Garbophenothicn                         (b)
  Chlorothion                             (b)
  Ciodrin                               0. 1
  Coumaphos                             0.001
  Demeton                                 (b)
  Diazinon                              0.009
  Dichlorvos                            0.001
  Dioxathion                            0.09
  Disulfonton                           0.05
  Dursban                               0.001
  Ethion                                0.02
  EPN                                   0.06
  Fenthion                              0.006
  Malathion                             0.008
  Methyl Parathion                        (b)
  Mevinphos                             0.002
  Naled                                 0.004
  Oxydemeton Methyl                     O.U
  Parathion                             0.001
  Fhorate                                 (b)
  Phosphamidon                          0.03
  Ronnel                                  (b)
  TEPP                                  0.3
  Trichlorophon                         0.002
a/  Concentrations were determined by multiplying the
    acute toxicity values tor the more sensitive species
    by an application factor of 0.01.

b/  Insufficient data to determine safe concentrations.

*   Source:  (1)

                      TABLE 2 (Cor.t.)*

 Carbamate                   Permissible maximum
  Aminocarb                              (b)
  Bayer                                  (b)
  Baygon                                 (b)
  Carbaryl                              0.02
  Zectran                               0.1
a/  Concentrations were determined by multiplying tne
    acute toxicity values for the more sensitive species
    by an application factor of 0.01.

b/  Insufficient data to determine safe concentrations.

*   Source:   (1)

                       TABLE 2  (COnt.)*
Herbicides, Fungicides            Permissible maximum
    and_Def pliant s
  Acrolein                                (b)
  Aminotriazole                        300.0
  Balan                                   (b)
  Bensulfide                              (b)
  Choroxuron                              (b)
  CIPC                                    (b)
  Dacthal                                 (b)
  Dalapon                              110.0
  DEF                                     (b)
  Dexorv                                   (b)
  Dicamba                                0.2
  Dichlobenil                           37.0
  Dichlone                               0.7
  Diquat                                 0.5
  Diuron                                 1.6
  Difolitan                               (b)
  Dinitrobutyl Phenol                     (b)
  Diphenamid                              (b)
  2-4, D  (PGBE)                            (b)
  2-4, D  (BEE)                            4.0
  2-4, D  (IOE)                             (b)
  2-4, D  (Diethylamine  salts)              (b)
  Endothal  (Disodium salt)                (b)
  Endothal  (Dipotassium salt)             (b)
  Eptam                                   (b)
  Fenac  {Sodium  salt)                   45.0
  Hyamine-1622                            (b)
  Hyarnine-2389                            (b)
  Hydrothal-47                            (b)
  Hydrothal-191                           (b)
  Hydro thai plus                          (b)
a/  Concentrations were determined by multiplying tne
    acute toxicity values  for the  irore sensitive species
    by an application  factor of  0.01.

b/  Insufficient data  to determine safe concentrations.

*   Source:   (1)

                      TABLE  2  (cont.)*
Herbicides, Fungicides
	and_Def gliant.s	

  I PC
  Silvex  (BEE)
  Silvex  (PGBE)
  Silvex  (IOE)
  Silvex  (Potassium salt)
                     Permissible maximum

                     Permissible maximum

a/  Concentrations were  determined  by multiplying the
    acute toxicity values  for  the more sensitive species
    by an application  factor of  0.01.

b/  Insufficient data  to determine  sate concentrations.


         6 .   Physiga l_jExcej: t TemperatureL

              a.   color

              Acceptable conditions regarding the combined

effect of color and turbidity in v,ater will be met it the

compensation point is not changed by more than 10 percent

from its seasonally established norm, and if no more than 10

percent of the biomass of photosyr.thetic organisms is placed

below the compensation point ty such changes.

         See also turbidity, settleatle and suspended


Rationale  (Color):

    True water color is a result of substances in solution

after the suspended materials have been removed.  Color may

be derived from mineral or organic sources and may be the

result of natural processes as well as manufacturing

operations.  Organic sources such as humic materials, peat,

plankton, aquatic plants and tannins impart color to water.

Inorganic sources include metallic substances, cheiricals and

dyes.  The effect of water color upon aquatic life is to


limit light, penetration, thereby restricting the de^tn or

the photosynthet ic zone and impacting upon the bentaos.  Trie

light intensity at which photosynthetic oxygen production

equals the amount of oxygen consumed through respiration is

known as the compensation point, arid the depth at which tnis

occurs is the compensation depth  (6U).  .As commonly used,

the compensation point refers to that intensity ci light

which is such that the plant's oxygen production uuriug the

day will be sufficient to balance the oxygen consumption

during the whole 24-hour period  (1).


              h.   Turbidity

              Acceptable ccnditicns regarding the combined

effect of color and turbidity in v*ater will be met if the

compensation point is not changed by more than 10 percent

from its seasonally established norm, and if nc more than 10

percent of the biomass of photosynthetic organisms is placed

below the compensation point by such chancres.
    See also color, settleable and suspended solids.

Rationale  (Turbidity):

    The light intensity at which photosynthetic oxygen

production equals the amount of oxygen consumed througn

respiration is known as the compensation point, ana the

depth at which this occurs is the comper.sation depth (64) .

As commonly used, the compensation point refers to that

intensity of light which is such that photosynthetic oxygen

production during the day will be sufficient to balance the

oxygen consumption during the whole 24-hour period  (1).

Turbidity results from the presence of suspended matter such

as sand, clay, silt, finely divided organic matter, planxton


and bacteria (2).   Agricultural runoff, construction

activities,  industrial operations, storm sewers ana

municipal wastes are man induced sources which contribute to

turbidity.  The inhibition of light penetration by suspended

matter not only restricts the zone ct primary production*

but influences the temperature patterns as well.  Heat is

absorbed rapidly near the surface in turbid waters, taus

creating density stratification which may interfere with

vertical mixing and heat and oxygen transfer.  Finely

divided suspended solids may impact upon the fisheries of a

river or lake by various means.  These include killing tne

fish directly, inhibiting growth or egg and larvae develop-

ment, interfering with natural movements, reducing the

availability of food, and reducing the fish's ability to

capture food organisms  (65).
              The acceptable  levels  of  radionuclides  in

 fresh water inhabited  by  plants  and  animals  are  those

 concentrations which are  sufficiently  small  that any

 (bioconcentrating) organisms  harvested  for human consumption

 will not cause total radionuclide  ingestion  by  the  most


exposed group using the feed to exceed those limits

prescribed in Federal Drinking Water Standards.  If the

consumption of these foodstuffs is so widespread that it is

likely that the aggregate dose to the exposed population

will exceed 3000 man-rem per year, limitations on the

distribution and sale should be considered by the relevant

public health authorities,

Rationale^Radioactivity) :

    These  criteria are based on the prudent assumption tnat

radiation  levels which are acceptable for human tood

consumption will not injure fresh water aquatic life.  When

radioactive materials enter surface waters they are uiluted

and dispersed by the same forces acting on other soluble or

suspended  materials  (99).  When first introduced into

surface waters a substantial part of materials present in

radioactive wastes becomes associated with suspended organic

and inorganic particulates that settle to the bottom, ana

many radioisotopes are eventually bound chemically to the

sediments.  Radioisotopes are passed through the various

trophic levels of the food chain and are either

bioconcentrated or released depending upon the prey-predator

organisms, physical and chemical state of the radionuclide,


and the equilibrium conditions (100).  The concentration or

a radioisotope by an organism is expressed in terms or tne

ratio of its concentration in the organism to that in trie

surrounding water or preceding link in the food chain.

Possible effects to the individual organism may include

death, inhibition or stimulation of growth, physiological

change, changes in behavioral patterns, developmental

abnormalities, or shortening of life span.  At on« time, it

was widely believed that there was a no-damage rauiation

threshold, but the consensus cf mcst radiation biologists

today is that any increase ever background will have some

biological effect,  (a linear, non-threshold theory) .  Waile

some genetic changes are reported to be the result of

primordial radioisotopes and cosmic rays, these changes

usually constitute less than cne percent cf all

spontaneously occurring mutations  (99).  A vast amount or

research on dose effect relationships cf warm-blcoaeu

animals has led to recommendations on human radiation

exposure.  Compared with these data only a meager amount of

information is available on chronic dose-effect

relationships for aquatic forms.  Since wild species

suffering radiation induced genetic damage are often removed

by natural selection or eaten by predators, aquatic

organisms affected by radiation are not readily recognized


in the field.  The natural populations of  fish that have

probably sustained the greatest exposure tc man-made

radioactive materials are those found near major atomic

energy installations.  However, stocks of  plaice in the

vicinity of the Windscale outfall have been unaffected  (102)

by doses of about  10 rads per year.  Columbia River salmon

spawning in the vicinity of Hanford outfalls are reported

(103) to have been unaffected by doses in the ranye ot 5 to

10 rads per year.  While these observations on chronic

exposure of aquatic organisms provide a subjective

assessment of radiation sensitivities in natural

populations, they are not sufficiently definitive to form

the basis for additional water quality criteria aimed at tiie

specific protection of aquatic life.  However, these

observations do suggest that even under conditions oi

significant radionuclide concentration in the effluent, the

aquatic life is not injured.


         Concentrations of total dissolved materials should

not be  changed to the extent that the biological communities

characteristic of particular habitats are significantly

changed.   When dissolved irate rials are altered, bioassays

and field studies should te conducted to determine the

limits  that may be tolerated without endangering trie

structure and function ot the aquatic ecosystem.

Rationale (Total Dissolved Solids and Hardness) :

    Total dissolved solids is the general term descrioiny

the concentrations of dissolved materials in water.  The

more conspicuous constituents cf total dissolved solids in

natural surface water include the carbonates, sulrates,

chlorides, phosphates, and nitrates.  These anicns occur in

combination with such metallic cations as calcium, sodium,

potassium, magnesium, and iron to form ionizable sales  (2) .

The quantity and quality of dissolved solids are major

factors determining the variety and abundance of plant ana

animal  life in an aquatic system.  They serve as nutrients


in productivity and as agents in csmctic stress ana direct

toxicity.  Major changes in quantity or composition of total

dissolved solids have the effect of causing attendant

changes  in the structure and function of aquatic ecosystems

(1) .  Hardness of surface waters is a component of total

dissolved solids and is chiefly attributable to calcium and

magnesium ions.  Other ions such as iron, copper, zinc,

lead, manganese, boron, and strontiurr also contribute to

total hardness, but the effect is usually minimal since

these are ordinarily present in only trace amounts.

Generally, the biological productivity of water is

correlated with the hardness, but the hardness get se has no

biological significance because biological effects are a

function of the specific concentration and combination ot

the elements present.  The term "hardness" serves a useful

purpose  as a general index of water type, buffering capacity

and productivity, but it should be avoided in determining

water quality requirements for aquatic life.  More emphasis

should be olaced on specific ions  (1).


              b.    SuSQQnded_and_Sett1eable_So1ids

              Maxiirum acceptable total concentrations of
suspended solids  in fresh water are 80 mg/1.

              Acceptable conditions regarding the combined
effect of color and turbidity in water will generally be met
if the compensation point is not changed by more than 10
percent from its  seasonally established norm, and if no more
than 10 percent cf the biomass of photosynthetic organisms
is placed below the compensation point by such changes.

    See also color and turbidity.

Rationale (Suspended and settleable Solids):

    Suspended and settleable solids include such materials
as sand, clay, finely divided organic material,
bacteria and plankton (2).  Agricultural runoff,
construction activities, industrial operations, storm sewers
and municipal wastes are the principal sources which
contribute suspended and settleable solids.  The suspended
and settleable solids and the bed of a water body must be
considered as interrelated, interacting parts.


Concentrations of suspended matter in water are found to

change rapidly with wind intensity and rainfall.  Trie

composition and concentrations of suspended particles in

surface waters are important because of their effect on

light penetration, temperature, solubility produces and

aquatic life.  The abrasive action of particulate material

affects fish and other aquatic organisms.  SettleaixLe solids

blanket animals, plants and their habitats, either killing

the organism or rendering the habitats unsuitable for

occupation.  Suspended particles also serve as a transport

mechanism  for pesticides and other toxic substances which

are readily sorbed into or onto clay particles.  It is

reported  (65) that there is no evidence that concentrations

of suspended solids less than 25 mg/1 have any harmful

effects on fisheries.  Waters containing concentrations of

25 to 80 mg/1 should be capable of supporting good to

moderate fisheries, whereas waters with concentrations in

excess of  80 mg/1 are unlikely to support good fresnwater

fisheries  (65).


         9•    Tainting Suhstances

    Substances which cause tainting of fish and other

aquatic organisms are unacceptable in water in

concentrations which lower the acceptability of such

organisms as determined by bioassay and organoleptic tests.

The values  in Tables 3 and 4 serve as guidelines in

determining what concentrations of substances in water may

cause tainting of fish and other aquatic organisms.

Rationale (Tainting Substances):

    Discharges from municipal waste water treatment plants,

a variety of industrial wastes and organic compounds, as

well as certain organisms can impart objectionable taste,

odor or color to the flesh of rish and other edible

organisms.   Such tainting can occur in waters witn

concentrations of the offending material lower than those

recognized as being harmful tc an animal.  See 3 and

Wastewater Source

2,4-D mfg. plant
Coal - coking
Coal - tar
Kraft process (untreated)
Kraft process (treated)
Kraft and neutral sulfite
Municipal dump runoff

Municipal untreated sewage
  (2 locations)
Municipal wastewater
  (4 locations)
Municipal wastewater
  treatment plant
Municipal wastewater
  treatment plant
Oily wastes
Sewage containing phenols
  (2 locations)
             TABLE 3

Wastewaters Found to Have Lowered
 the Palatability of Fish Flesh

       Concentration in Water
   Affecting Palatability of Fish

           50 - 100 mg/1
           0.02 - 0.1 mg/1
           0.1 mg/1
           1 - 2% by vol.
           9 - 12% by vol.
           11 - 13% by vol.
           20 - 26% by vol.
           0.1 mg/1
       Spe c ie s

  Freshwater fish
  Freshwater fish

  Channel catfish
(Ictalurus punctatus)

  Channel catfish

  Channel catfish
  Freshwater fish
  Freshwater fish
  Freshwater fish

  Channel catfish
Source:   (1)


                          TABLE 4

   Concentrations of Cherrical Compounds  in  Water That Can
Cause Taintina of the Flesh of Fish  and  Other Anuatic Oraanisr^s*

cresylic acid (meta para)
!>buty liner capt an
o-sec. butylphenol
p-tert. butylphenol
2,4 -d ich lo roph eno 1
2,methyl, 4-chlorophenol
2,methyl, 6-chlorophenol
o-phenyl phenol
phenols in polluted river
cl iph eny 1 ox ide
 , -dichlorodiethyl ether
o-di chl orobenz er.e
kerosene plus kaolin
dine thy lain in e
oil, enulsifiable
outboard motor fuel,  as exhaust
Estimated threshold  level
     in water  (mg/1)
       0001 to  0.015
       01  to  0.05
       001 to 0.014

       003 to 0.05
       to  10
       02  to  0.15
       09  -  1.0



        to  28
        8 to 5
         to 30
        5 to 1
        6 aa I/acre- foot
 *   Source:   (1)


         10.  Temperature

         Acceptable temperature limits  in fresh water

during any time of the year are:

              a.   A maximum weekly average temperature


                   1.   In receiving waters during the

warmer months  (i-e.r  April through October in the North and

March through November in the South) is one third ot trie

range between the optimurr temperature and the ultimate up^er

incipient lethal temperature for the most sensitive

important species  (or appropriate life stage) that is

normally found at the location at that time;

                   2.   In the heated plume during tne

cooler months  (i.e., mid-Cctober tc mid-April in tne North

and December to February in the South) corresponds to the

appropriate ambient temperature in  the nomograph in Figure

1.  in the North and December to February in the South)  is

that elevated temperature from which important species uie

when that elevated temperature is suddenly dropped to tne

normal ambient temperature, with the limit being the

acclimation temperature  (minus a 2*C safety factor), when


the lower incipient lethal temperature equals the normal

ambient water temperature (in some regions this limit may

also be applicable in summer);

                   3.   During reproduction seasons

(generally April-June and September-October in the North and

March-May and October-November in the South)  meets speciiic

site requirements for successful migration, spawning, egg

incubation, fry rearing, and other reproductive functions of

important species as presented in Table 6.

                or 4.   At a specific site is found

necessary to preserve noriral species diversity or prevent

undesirable growth of nuisance organises.

         and  b.     maximum temperature for short-term

summer and spawning exposures as developed using the

resistance time equation:

    log time = a + b(Temp.)

    where a and b respectively are intercept and slope,

    which are characteristics of each acclimation

    temperature for each species.


    Local requirements for reproduction should supersede all

other requirements when they are applicable.  Detailed

ecological analysis of bcth natural and man-modified aquatic

environments is necessary to ascertain when these

requirements should apply.  Available data for temperature

requirements for growth and reproduction, lethal limits for

various acclimation temperature levels, and various

temperature-related characteristics of many ot the more

important freshwater fish species are included in Appendix


Rationale (Temperature) :

    Living organisms do not respond to the quantity of neat;

instead, to degrees of temperature or to temperature cnanges

caused by transfer ot heat.  Organisms have upper and lower

thermal tolerance limits, optimum temperatures for growth,

preferred temperatures in thermal gradients, and temperature

limitations for migration, spawning, and egg incubation;

temperature also affects the physical environment of the

aquatic medium  (e.g., viscosity, degree of ice cover, and

oxygen capacity); therefore, the composition ot aquatic

communities depends largely on temperature characteristics

of the environment.  Because temperature changes may aftect


the composition of an aquatic community, an induceu c/iange

in the thermal characteristics of an ecosystem may be

detrimental.   On the other hand,  altered thermal

characteristics may be beneficial, as evidenced in some of

the newer fish hatchery practices and at other aquacultural

facilities.   The general difficulty in developing suitable

criteria for  temperature (which vvould limit the addition of

heat)  is to determine the deviation from "natural"

temperature a particular body of water can experience

without adversely affecting its desired biota.  wnatever

requirements  are suggested, a natural seasonal cycle must be

retained, annual spring ana fall changes in temperature must

be gradual,  and large unnatural day-to-day fluctuations

should be avoided.  In view of the many variables, it seems

obvious that  no single temperature requirement can be

applied uniformly tc continental or large regional areas;

the requirements must be closely related to each Loay of

water and to  its particular community cf organisms,

especially the important species found in it.  These saould

include invertebrates, plankton,  or other plant ana animal

life that may be of importance to food chains or otherwise

interact with species of direct interest to man.  Since

thermal requirements of various species differ, tn<= social

choice of the species to te protected allows for uirtererit


"levels of protection" among water bodies.  Although sucti

decisions clearly transcend the scientific judgments needed

in establishing thermal criteria for protecting selected

species, biologists can aid in making these decisions.  Some

measures useful in assigning levels of "importance" to

species are: (1) high yield or desirability to commercial or

sport fisheries,  (2)  large bicmass in the existing ecosystem

(if desirable),  (3) important links in food chains of other

species judged  important for other reasons, and (4)

"endangered" or unique status.  If it is desirable to

attempt strict preservation of an existing tcosystem, then

the most sensitive species or life stage may dictate tne

criteria selected.  Criteria for making recommendations for

water temperature to protect desirable aquatic lite cannot

be simply a maximum allowed change from natural

temperatures.  This is principally because a change of even

one degree from an ambient temperature has varying

significance for an organism, depending upon where the

ambient level lies within the tolerance range.  In addition,

historic temperature records or, alternatively, the existing

ambient temperature prior to any thermal alterations by man

are not always reliable indicators of desirable conditions

for aquatic populations.  Multiple developments of water

resources also change water temperatures both upwaru  (e.g..

upstream power plants or shallow reservoirs)  and downward.

(e.g.,  deepwater releases tor large reservoirs)  so that

ambient, and natural temperatures at a given point can oest

be defined only en a statistical basis.  Criteria for

temperature should consider both the multiple thermal

requirements of aquatic species and requirements for

balanced communities.  The number of distinct requirements

and the necessary values for each require periodic re-

examination as knowledge ot thermal effects on aquatic

species and communities increases.  Currently definable

requirements include:

    .  maximum sustained temperatures that, are consistent

with maintaining desirable levels of frcductivity  (growth

minus mortality);

    .  maximum levels of thermal acclimation that will permit

return to ambient winter temperatures  should artificial

sources of heat cease;

    . temperature  limitations  for  survival of briei

exposures to temperature extremes,  both upper and  lower;


    .  restricted temperature ranges for various stages or

reproduction, including (for fish) gonad growth ana gamete

maturation, spawnina migration, release of gametes,

development of the embryo, commencement of independent

feeding (and other activities)  by juveniles; and

temperatures required for metamorphosis, emergence, and

other activities of lower forms;

    .  thermal limits for diverse compositions of species of

aquatic communities, particularly where reduction in

diversity creates nuisance growths of certain organisms, or

where important fooa sources or chains are altered;

    .  thermal requirements of downstream aquatic lite whare

upstream warming of cold water sources will adversely afreet

downstream temperature requirements.

Thermal criteria must also be formulated with knowledge of

how man alters temperatures, the  hydrodynamics of the

changes, and how the biota can reasonably be expected to

interact with the thermal regimes produced.  It is not

sufficient, for example, to define only the thermal criteria

for sustained production of a species in open waters,

because large numbers of organisms may also be exposed to


thermal changes by beinq puirped through the condensers and

mixing zone of a power plant.   Design engineers need

particularly to know the biological limitations to tueir

design options in such instances.  Considerations sucn as

impingement of fish upon intake screens, mechanical or

chemical damage to zooplankton in condensers, or effects of

altered current patterns on bottom fauna in a discharge area

may reveal non-thermal impacts of cooling processes that may

outweigh temperature effects.   The environmental situations

of aquatic organisms  (e.g., where they are, when tney are

there, in what numbers) must also be understood.  Thermal

criteria for migratory species should be applied to a

certain area only when the species is actually there.

Although thermal effects of power stations are currently of

great interest, other  less dramatic causes of temperature

change including deforestation, stream channelization, and

impoundment of flowing water must be recognized.  Available

data for temperature  requirements for growth and

reproduction, lethal  limits for various acclimation

temperature levels, and various temperature-related

characteristics of many of the more desirable fresnwater

fish species are included in the Appendix.  General

temperature criteria  for these species are summarized in

Tables  5  and  6.  some basic thermal response of aquatic


organisms will be referred to repeatedly and are denned and

reviewed briefly here.  Effects of heat on organisms and

aquatic communities have keen reviewed periodically (e.g.,

66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71).  Some effects have been analyzed in

the context of thermal modification by power plants (72, 73,


mortality.  Several studies have indicated that a two degree

(centigrade) reduction of an upper lethal temperature

results in no mortalities within an equivalent exposure

duration  (8U, 85).  The validity of a two degree safety

factor was strengthened by the results of Coutant (81),

which showed that for median mortality at a given high

temperature, for about 15 to 20 percent of the exposure time

there was induced selective predation on thermally snocked

salmon and trout.  This also amounted to reduction or the

effective stress temperature by about two degrees

centigrade.  Unpublished data from subsequent predation

experiments showed that this reduction of about two degrees

centigrade also applied to the incipient lethal temperature.

The level at which there is no increased vulnerability to

predation is the best estimate cf no-stress exposure tnat is

currently available.  Occupancy of habitats by most aquatic

organisms often is limited within the thermal tolerance

range to temperatures somewhat below the ultimate upper

incipient lethal temperature.  This is the result of poor

physiological performance at near lethal temperatures (e.g.,

growth, metabolic scope for activities, appetite, food

conversion efficiency), interspecies competition, disease,

predation, and other subtle ecological factors.  This

complex limitation is evidenced by restricted southern and


altitudinal distributions of many species.  On the other

hand, optimum temperatures  (such as those producing fastest

growth rates) are not generally necessary at all times to

maintain thriving populations and are often exceeaed in

nature during sumirer months.  Moderate temperature

fluctuations can generally  te toleratea as long as a summer

maximum upper limit is not  exceeded for long periods.  A

true temperature limit for  exposures long enough to reflect

metabolic  acclimation and optimum ecological performance

must lie somewhere between  the physiological optimum and tne

ultimate upper  incipient lethal temperature.   Examination of

literature on physiological optima  (swimming,  metaLclic

rate,  temperature preference, growth, natural  distribution,

and tolerance)  of several species has yielded  an apparently

sound theoretical basis  for estimating an upper temperature

limit for  long  term exposure.  The most sensitive function

for which  data  are available appears to be growth rate.  A

temperature that is one-third of the range between the

optimum  temperature for  growth and the ultimate incipient

lethal temperature can be calculated by the formula

Optimum   *  Ultimate  incipient  lethal temp - optimum temp  tor  growth

   temp                           3

   for growth

This formula ofiers a practical method for obtaining

allowable limits, while retaininq as its scientific basis

the requirements of preserving adequate rates of growth.

This formula was used to calculate the summer growth

criteria in Table 5.  The criterion for a specific location

would be determined by the most sensitive life stage of an

important species likely to be present ir. that location at

that «rime.  Since many rishes have restricted habitats

(e.g., specific depth zones) at life staqes, trie

thermal criterion must be applied to the proper  zone.  Taere

is field evidence tha^ fish avoid localized  areas cr

unfavorably warn, water.  This has been demonstrated ooth  in

lakes where coldwater fish  normally evacuate warm snaliows

in summer and at power station heated plumes.   In most  large

bodies of water there are both vertical and  horizontal

thermal gradients that mobile organisms can  follow  to  avoid

unfavorable high  (or  low)  temperatures.  The summer maxima

must  apply  to restricted  local habitats sucb as  lake

hypolimnia  or thermoclines, that  provide important  summer

sanctuary areas  for coldwater  species.  Any  avoidance  of  a

warm  area not part  of the  normal  seasonal  habitat  of  the

species will mean  that  less area  of  the water  body  is

available to  support  the  population  and  that production may


be reduced.  Such reduction should not interfere with

biological communities or populations of important species

to a degree which is damaging to the ecosystem or other

beneficial uses.  Non-motile organisms that must remain in

the warm zone will probably be the limiting organisms tor

that location.  Any upper limiting temperature criteria must

be applied carefully with understanding of the population

dynamics of the species  in question in order to establish

both local and regional  requirements.  Although artiriciaiiy

produced temperature elevations during winter months may

actually bring the temperature closer to optimum or

preferred  temperature  for important species, and attract

fish,  metabolic acclimation to these higher levels can

preclude safe  return of  the organism to ambient temperatures

 should the artificial  heating  suddenly cease or tne  organism

 be driven  from the heated area.   The lower  limit or  tne

range  of thermal  tolerance of  important species must,

 therefore,  be  maintained at  the  normal seasonal ambient

temperatures  throughout  ccld  seasons.  This can be

 accomplished  by limitations  on temperature  elevations  in

 such areas as  discharge  canals and mixing  zones wncre

organisms  may  reside,  or ty  insuring that  iraximum

 temperatures  occur only  in  areas net accessible to  important

 aquatic life  for  lengths of  time sufficient to allow


metabolic acclimation.  Such inaccessible areas would

include the high-velocity of diffusers or screened

discharge channels.   This reduction of maximum ternperatures

would not preclude use of slightly warmed areas as sites tor

intense winter fisheries.  This consideration may be

important in some regions at times other than in winter.

The Great Lakes, for example, are susceptible tc rapid

changes in elevation of the thermocline in summer whicn may

induce rapid decreases in shoreline temperatures

(upwelling).  Fish acclimated to exceptionally hign

temperatures in discharge canals may be killed or severely

stressed without changes in power plant operations.  Some

numerical values for acclimaticn temperatures and lower

limits of tolerance ranges  (lower incipient lethal

temperatures)  for several species are given in Appendix A.

For some species such as yellow perch and lake whitefish

lower winter temperature is necessary to ensure acceptable

egg maturation prior to spawning.  Figure 1 is a nomograph

that demonstrates the relationship between the maximum

weekly average temperature acceptable in heated plumes and

different ambient temperatures.  The nomograph was

calculated on the line of lower incipient lethal temperature

data that would, after applying the 2'C safety factor,

ensure protection against partial lethality for most fish


species for which there are data  (1).  At an acclimation

(heated plume) temperature of  10° C  (50° F) or less warm water

fishes can tolerate a drop in  temperature to any lower

ambient temperature.  This means  (see  Fig.  1) that waenever

the ambient temperature is less than 2.5" C  (37"F)f tne

heated plume may be as warm as 1 0° C  (50'F).  However, trout

and salmon cannot, withstand comparable temperature declines

and the nomograph should te used dcwn  to an ambient

temperature of QC C  (32CF).  At this temperature a maximum

plume temperature of 5 C  (41^F) is  permissible.  The maximum

weekly average temperatures during  the winter months are

applicable to the heated plume rather  than  the receiving

water since the principal concern for  most  fish at that tune

is to protect against excessive rapid  decline in

temperature.  At the time that the  earliest spawning snould

occur, the appropriate maximum weekly  average temperature

for the receiving water must be applied  again.  It species

similar to yellow perch or lake whitefish are to be

protected a maximum weekly average  temperature in the

receiving water during the winters  vvould be necessary as

well as the limitation in the  plumes.  To protect aquatic

life and yet allow other uses  of the water, it is essential

to know the lengths of time organisms  can survive extreme

temperatures  (i.e., temperatures that  exceed the 7-day


 incipient lethal temperature).  The  length of time  tnat 50

 percent of a population will  survive temperature above tne

 incipient lethal temperature  can be  calculated  from a

 regression equation of experimental  data as  follows;

         log time       =  a + b  (Temp.)
                   (min)                  (*C)

 where a and b are  intercept and slope, respectively, whica

 are characteristics of each acclimation temperature ror e

 species.  In some  cases the time-temperature relationship is

 more complex than  the semilcgarithmic model given auove.

 This equation, however, is the most applicable, and is

 generally accepted by the  scientific communit}.  (70).

 Caution is recommended in  extrapolating beyond  th^  aata

 limits of the original research.  Thermal resistance may be

 diminished by the  simultaneous presence of toxicants or

 other debilitatina factors.  The mcst accurate

 predictability can be derived frcm data collected using

 water from the site under  evaluation.  It is clear  taat

 adequate data are available for only a sirail percentage or

 aquatic species, and additional research is necessary.

 Thermal resistance information should be obtained locaxiy

 for critical areas to account for simultaneous presence of

toxicants or other debilitating factors,  a consideration not


reflected in the Appendix data.  The resistance time

equation discussed earlier was used to calculate tolerance

limits for many species of fish for several time intervals

up to 10,000 minutes.  The results of these calculations

revealed a uniform relationship between these species that

would permit establishing maximum acceptable temperatures

for spring, summer, and fall that would protect fish against

lethal conditions when subjected to occasional temperature

levels exceeding the maximum weekly average temperature

during these seasons.  These limits, applicable to the

receiving water, are summarized in Tables  1 and 2 and are

based on the 24-hour median tolerance limit, minus the 2 C

safety factor discussed earlier with an acclimation

temperature equal to the maximum weekly average temperature.

Since these temperatures exceed those permitting

satisfactory, albeit sub-optimal growth, unnatural

excursions above the maximum weekly average temperature to

the maximum temperature should be permitted only in extreme

instances and then only for short time periods.  The

sequence of events relating to gonad development, spawning

migration, release of gametes, development of  the egg and

embryo, and commencement of independent  feeding represents

one of the most complex phenomena in nature, both for fish

 (86) and invertebrates  (71).   These events are generally the


most thermally sensitive ct all life stages.  The erratic

sequence of failures and successes of different year classes

of lake fish attests tc the unreliability of natural

conditions for providing optimum reproduction.  Uniform

elevations of temperature by a  few degrees during the

spawning period, while maintaining short-term temperature

cycles and seasonal thermal patterns, appear to have little

overall effect on the reproductive cycle of resident aquatic

species, other than to advance  the timing for spring

spawners or delay it for fall spanners.  Such shifts are

often seen in nature, although  no quantitative measurements

of reproductive success have teen made in this connection.

For example, thriving populations of many fishes occur in

diverse streams of the Tennessee Valley in which the aate of

spawning temperature may vary in a given year by 22 to 65

days.  Examination of the literature shows that shifts in

spawning dates by nearly one month are common in natural

waters throughout the U.S.  Populations of some species at

the southern limits of their distribution are exceptions -

the lake whitefish (Coregonus cru^eajormis)  in Lake Erie

that require a prolonged, cold  incubation period (87)  and

species such as yellow perch (Perca Jiavescens)  that require

a long chill period for egg maturation pricr to spawning

(See 1).  Highly mobile species that depend upon temperature


synchrony among widely different regions or environments for

various phases of the reproductive or rearing cycle (e.g.,

anadromous salmonids or aquatic insects) could be tacea with

dangers of dis-synchrony if one area is warmed, but another

is not.  Poor long-term success of one year class or Fraser

River  (British Columbia)  sockeye salmon (Oncorhyjricrms nerka)

was attributed to early (and highly successful) fry

production and emigration during an abnormally warn, summer

followed by unsuccessful, premature feeding activity in tne

cold and still unproductive estuary (88).  Significant

change in temperature or in thermal patterns over a period

of time may cause some change in the composition cf aquatic

communities (i.e., the species represented and the numbers

of individuals in each species).  Allowing temperature

changes to significantly alter the community structure in

natural waters may be detrimental, even though species of

direct importance to man are not eliminated.  Alteration of

aquatic communities by the addition cf heat may occasionally

result in growths of nuisance organisms provided that other

environmental conditions essential to such growths  (e.g.,

nutrients)  exist.  Data on temperature limits or thermal

distributions in which nuisance growths will be produced are

not presently available due in part to the complex

interactions with other growth stimulants.  There is not


sufficient evidence to say that any temperature increase

will necessarily result in increased nuisance organisms.

Careful evaluation of local conditions is requirea tor any

reasonable prediction cf eftect.

                          TABLE  5
Maximum Weekly Average Temperature  for Growth and Short-Term
           Maxima for Survival During the Summer*
                 (Centigrade  and  Fahrenheit)
    Species                   Growth         Maxima

Atlantic Salmon               19 (66)         23 (73)
Bigmouth Buffalo
Black Crappie                 27 (80)         32 (90)
Bluegill                      26 (79)         31 (88)
Brook Trout                   18 (64)         23 (73)
Carp                            -            34 (93)
Channel Catfish               33 (91)         36 (97)
Coho Salmon                   18 (64)         24 (75)
Emerald Shiner                28 (82)         31 (87)
Freshwater Drum
Lake Herring  (Cisco)          19 (66)         25 (77)
Largemouth Bass               30 (86)         34 (93)
Northern Pike                 28 (82)         30 (86)
Rainbow Trout                 19 (66)         24 (75)
Smallmouth Bass               29 (84)
Smallmouth Buffalo
Sockeye Salmon                18 (64)         23 (73)
Striped Bass                    -               -
Threadfin Shad
White Bass                      -               -
White Crappie                 27 (80)         32 (90)
White Sucker                  27 (80)         29 (84)
Yellow Perch                  22 (72)         29 (84)

*   Based on 24-hour  median lethal limit minus 2 C
     (3.6CF) and acclimation at the maximum weekly average
    temperature for summer growth for that month.

                          TABLE 6
Maximum Weekly Average Temperature for  Spawning  and Short-Term
Maxima  for Survival During the Spawning  Season  (Centigrade
                      and Fahrenheit)*

Atlantic Salmon
Bigmouth Buffalo
Black Crappie
Brook Trout
Channel Catfish
Coho Salmon
Emerald Shiner
Freshwater Drum
Lake Herring  (Cisco)
Largemouth Bass
Northern Pike
Rainbow Trout
Smallmouth Bass
Smallmouth Buffalo
Sockeye Salmon
Striped Bass
Threadfin Shad
I-Jhite Bass
White Crappie
White Sucker
Yellow Perch
                             Optimum  Spawning
                                                  18 (64}


                                                  22 (72)
                                                  24  (75)
                                                  22  (72)
    These maxima will  also apply during the fall.

    Based on  24-hour median lethal limit minus 2 C  (36"?) and
    acclimation at  the maximum weekly average temperature for optimum
    spawning  for that  month.

          FISH SPECIES
5(4?)            ?0(50)
         TEMPERATURES,  °C (°F).


    The nuances of developing freshwater aquatic  iiie

criteria for temperature can best he understood by  an

example (Table 7) .  Tables 5 and 6 and  Figure  1 are tne

principal sources for the criteria.  The. following

additional  information abcut the specific  environment to

which the criteria ^ill apply is needed.
    1.   Species to be protected  by  the  criteria.   (In tais

example, they are blueqill,  iargeircuth bass,  and w^iite

crappie) .

    2.   Local spawning  seasons  for  these species.

 (blueqill - May  to July;  white  crappie - April to Jun«=;

largemouth bass  - May  to July) .

    3.   Normal  seasonal rise  in  temperature during trie

spawning season.   (Since spawnirg may occur over a period or

a few months and only  a  sinale  maximum weekly average

temperature for  optimal  spawnina  is  aiver. for a species

 (Table  6), one would use that  crtirral temperature tor tne

middle  month of  the spawning season.  1 n a normal season tne

 criterion  for the  first  rronth  ot  a three-month spawning


season should be below the maximum weekly average

temperature for spawning for the species to be protected,

and the last month should be above this temperature.  Such a

pattern should simulate the natural seasonal rise),

    U.   Normal ambient winter temperature,   (In this case

it is S°C  (41^F)  in December and January and  10'C  (50'F) in

November,  February, and March.  These will be  used  to

determine  permissible  plume temperatures in the winter

 (Figure 1).

    5.   The principal growing season for these species.

 (In this example,  it is July through September.  Criteria in

Table 5 will be used).

    6,   Any local extenuating circumstances,   (If  certain

non-fish species  or food  organisms are  especially  sensitive

and thermal  requirement data are  avaialable,  these  data

should be  used  as well as the criteria  considered  for the

fish  species) .

    In some  instances  there will  be  insufficient data to

determine  each  necessary  criterion for  each  species (Table

7).   One must make estimates based on any available data and


by extrapolation from data for species for wnich there are

adequate data.   For instance, if the above example had

included the white bass for which only the maximum weeKl.y

average temperature for spawning is giver, one woulo or

necessity have to estimate that its summer growth criterion

would approximate that for the white crappie which has a

similar spawning requirement.

    The choice of desirable  fish species is very critical.

Since in this example the white crappie is the most

temperature sensitive of the three species, the maximum

weekly average temperature tor summer growth and snort-term

maxima are based on the white craj-^ie.  consequently,  the

criteria would result in lower than optimal conditions for

the bluegill and largemouth  bass.  An alternate approach

would be to develop criteria for the single most important

species even if the most sensitive is not well protected.

The choice is a socioeconcmic one.

                          TABLE 7
               Criteria Developed  for  Example
                 (Centigrade and Fahrenheit).
Maximum Weekly Average



               15  (59)
               25  (77)
               25  (77)
                         25 (77)
                         15 (59)
             Short-Term Maximum
                                             Decision Basis
Protection against temperature drop
Protection against temperature drop
Protection against temperature drop
fchite crappie spawning
Largeirouth bass spawning
Bluegill spawning and white crappie grow
Vvhite crappie growth
Vvhite crappie growtn
White crappie growth
Normal gradual seasonal decline
Protection against temperature drop
Protection against temperature drop

          Dec is i on Basis
 26  (79)
 29  (84)
 32  (90)
 32  (90)
 32  (90)
 32  (90)
 29  (8U)
     If  a species had required a winter chill pericu for gamete
     maturation or egg incubation, receiving water criteria would
     also be  required.

   B.   Wildlife
                       A Ikalini ty
         The criteria established in the section on

life are considered to be acceptable for wildlife.

Rationale (pH) :
    Few data are available on the direct effects ot fH upon

wildlife, but adequate protection would undoubtedly be

provided wildlife species and their food organisms if the yti

Of waters is maintained within the 6.0 - 9.0 range, ana

provided that a change greater than 0.5 units from the

seasonal maximum or minimum does not occur.

              In wetlands managed primarily as waterfowl

habitats, the acceptable bicarbonate alkalinity is between

30 and 130 mg/1, with fluctuations from natural conditions

not exceeding 50 mg/1.

Rationale (Alkalinity and Acidity):

    The protection extended to aquatic life as established

by the criteria in the aquatic life section provides

adequate protection for most wildlife species with the

possible exception of waterfowl.  Productivity of valuable

waterfowl pond plants generally increases with increases in

bicarbonate alkalinity.  Few waters with less than 25 mg/i

bicarbonate alkaliniry can be classed among the better

waterfowl habitats, whereas many waters productive of

valuable waterfowl food plants have a bicarbonate alkalinity

range of 35 to 200 mg/1 (see 1).


         2-    Lig,ht_Penet ration

         Acceptable conditions regarding the combined

effects of color and turbidity in water will be met it the

compensation point is not changed by nore than 10

percent from its seasonally _established norm, and it no more

than 10 percent of the bicrrass of photosynthetic organisms

is placed below the compensation point by such a change.

Rationale (Light Penetration) :

    See color, turbidity, suspended and settleable solids in

aquatic life section.

         3 ,   Solids
         Acceptable conditions regarding salinity in water

will be met if salinity levels are maintained as close to

natural conditions as possible, and if rapid fluctuations

are minimized.

Rationale  (Salinity) :

    All saline water communities froir slightly brackish to

marine produce valuable waterfowl foods.  The most important

consideration regarding the effect cf salinity upon wiialite

is the degree ot fluctuations in salinity (1).
              b«   ^g^tleable_substances

              Settleable substances should be irinimized in

order to provide acceptable waterfowl habitats.


Rationale (settleable substances):

    Accumulations of silt are destructive to aquatic plants

due primarily to the creation of a soft, semi-liquid

substance which is inadequate for the anchoring of rooted

plants (1).   In Eackbay, Virginia, and Currituck Sound,

North Carolina, for example, semi-liquid silts up to 13 cm

(5 in.)  deep cover approximately one-fifth of the total

area; this area produces only 1 percent of the total aquatic

plant production  (1).
         **-   Specific Harmful Substances

              a•   Direct Acting

                    (1). Toxins	(Botulism Po isoning^

                   The factors which affect, or are

associated with, bctulism poisoning should be managed  in

such a manner that the risks of outbreaks of the disease are

minimized.  The factors are insect die-off, water

temperature above 21 C  (70&F), fluctuating water levels and

elevated concentrations of dissolved solids.


Rationale (Botulism Poisoning):

    Botulisn is a food poisoning caused by the ingestion of

the toxin of Clostridium botulinum, a widely distributed

anaerobic bacterium.  Aquatic birds are highly susceptible

to the disease, with the greatest morbidity and mortality

rates recorded in shallow alkaline lakes or marshes in the

Western United States.  Investigation into the causes of

botulism have revealed the following possible relationship

between environmental factors and hiah incidence of the

disease in shallow alkaline marshes  (see 1): 1) Saline

waters may support higher invertebrate population levels

than relatively fresh waters.   (Comparisons, as they relate

to avian botulism, have not been made).  2) High salinity

may inhibit some of the microorganisms that compete with £._

botulinum for nutrients or those that cause deterioration of

the toxin.  3) Salinity may have no significant effect on

the invertebrates or the bacteria, but it increases the

susceptibility of the birds.  Cooch  (89) has shown that type

C botulinum toxin decreases the activity of the salt gland

in ducks, reducing its capacity to eliminate salt.  Birds so

affected succumb to smaller doses of toxin than do those

provided with fresh water.  Outbreaks of botulism poisoning

tend to be associated with or affected by insect die-offs,


water temperatures above 21°C (7C°F),  fluctuations in water

levels and elevated concentrations of  dissolved solids.
                   (2). Gils

                   Visible floating oils on waters innabited

by wildlife are unacceptable.

Rationale  (Oils) :

    Water birds and aquatic mammals require water tnat is

free from surface oils.  Heavy mortalities of water oirds

have resulted from the contaminating of plumages by oil.

Exposure of water birds to oil also results in excessive

heat loss which accelerates  starvation  (90), reduces the

likelihood of the eggs  hatching  (91), and may contribute to

mortality  if the oil is ingested.


         k-   Acting Atter Food Chain Magnification

               {1). DDT_and_Derivatives

                   Tne maximum acceptable total DDT

concentration  in aquatic plants and animals is  1 my/Kg on a

wet weight basis.

Rational  (DDT  and derivatives):

    DDT and itrs derivatives DDE and TDt have high  lipia

solubility and low water solubility and thus tend  to

concentrate in the living fraction of the aquatic

environment (92).  DDE is the most stable of the JDT

compounds and  has been especially implicated in prouucing

thinning of ecjq shells, increased breakage of eggs, and

reproductive failure in species occupying the apex of

aquatic food chains in areas with long histories of DDT

usage  (1) .  Concentrations of DDK compounds in Lax.e Michigan

have been estimated to be 1 to 3 parts per trillion  (93).

These levels apparently exceed the concentration which would

permit the assured survival of sensitive predatory bird

species (1).  Available data indicate that total ODT

concentrations should not exceed 1 mg/kg in any aquatic


plants  or animals in order to adequately pxotect most

species of wildlife (1).   Present unpublished data indicate

effects ot even lower levels of DDE to some species of

predatory birds (see 1).
                   (2).  Mercury

                   The maximum acceptable concentrations of

mercury in fish is 0.5 ug/g.

Rationale (Mercury) :

    The 0.5 ug/g limit is consistent with that established

for fish in the aquatic life section.  Since this level

provides little cr no margin or safety for fish-eating

wildlife, this criterion should be reevaluated as soon as


                   (3) .  PC Itchier i
                   The body burdens of PCB's in birds and

mammals should not be increased over present levels in order

to maintain acceptable levels.

Rationale  (Polychlorinated biphenyls) :

    Althouqh  PCB's are -widespread  environmental

containments,  their  biological  effects at  present

environmental  concentrations  are not  known (1).  decaube of

the persistence  of PCB's  and  their susceptibility  to

biological magnification,  the body burdens of  PCB's in  tdrds

and mammals should not be permitted to increase  ana

monitoring programs  should be instituted.
          5.    Temgerature

          Changes in natural freezing patterns and uates

 should be avoided as far as possible in order to minimise

 abnormal concentrations of wintering waterfowl.


Rationale (Temperature):

    The discharge of wartred industrial and domestic

effluents has prompted changes in the normal over-wintering

patterns of some waterfowl species in portions of certain

northern  waters.  The attraction of waterfowl to

warmed waters near industrial complexes during winter months

sometimes creates overcrcwding problems.  Pollution, tooa

shortage and low air temperature often interact to proauce

unusually high waterfowl mortalities in their areas  (see 1),


            References:  Aquatic Life and Wildlife

1.  Mater Quality Criteria of 1972.  NAS Report  -  In  press.

2.  National Technical Advisory Committee.  1968.  Water
      Quality Criteria.  Report of the Committee to the
      Secretary of the Interior. 234 pp.

3.  Winslow, C. E. A. and E. B. Phelps.  1906.   Investigation
      on the purification of Boston sewage.  U.S. Geol.
      Survey, Water Supply and Irrigation Papers No.  185,
      163 pp.

4.  Ellis, !1. M.  1937.  Detection and measurement of
      stream pollution.  U.S. Bur. Fish. Bull. No. 22:

5.  Lloyd, R. and L. D. Orr.  1969.  The diuretic response
      by rainbow trout to sublethal concentrations of
      ammonia.  Water Res. 3:335-344.

6.  Brungs, W. A.  1972.  Literature review of the effects
      of residual chlorine on aquatic life.  National Water
      Quality Laboratory, Environmental Protection Agency,
      Duluth, Minnesota.

7.  Doudoroff, P. and H. Katz.  1950.  Critical review of
      literature on the toxicity of industrial wastes and
      their components to fish.   I.  Alkalies, acids, and
      inorganic gases.  II.  Metal as salts.  Sew. Ind.
      Wastes, 22:432-458.

8.  Merkins, J. C.  1958.  Studies on the toxicity of
      chlorine and chloramines to rainbow trout.  Water Waste
      Treat. J. 7:150-151.

9.  Zillich, J. A.  1972.  Toxicity of combined chlorine
      residuals to fresh water fish.   J.W.P.C.F. 44:212-220.

10.  Basch,  R. E., M.  E.  Newton,  J.  G. Truchan, and C. M.
      Fetterolf.  1971.   Chlorinated  municipal waste
      toxicities to rainbow trout and fathead minnows.
      Environmental Protection Agency water pollution control
      research series no. 18050G22.  Government Printing
      Office.  Washington, B.C.   50 pp.

11.  Arthur J.  E.  and J.  n. Eaton,  in press.  Chlorine toxicity
      to  the amphipod,  Gammarus pseudolimnaeus and the fathead
      minnow Pimephales  promedase  Rafensegue.  Jour. Fish. Res.
      Bd.  Can.

12.  Harsh, M.  C.  and F.  P. Gorham.  1904.  The eras disease in
      fishes.   Rent. Bur.  Fish. pp.  343-376.

13.  Shelford,  V.  E.  and  W. C. Allee.  1913.  The reactions of
      fishes to gradients of dissolved atmospheric qases.
      J.  Exp.  Zool.  14:207-266.

14.  Englehorn,  0. R.  1943.  Die gasblasenkrankheit bie
      fischen.   Z. Fischerei u. Hilfswiss 41:297.

15.  Harvey, E.  M., A. A. Whiteley, W. D. McElroy, D. C.
      Pease and D. K. Barnes.  1944.  Bubble formation
      in  animals.  II.  Gas nuclei  and their distribution
      in  blood and tissues.  J. Cell. Comp. Physiol.

16.  Doudoroff,  P.  1957.  Water quality requirements of
      fishes and effects of toxic  substances.  In: The
      physiology of fishes. M. E.  Brown, ed.  Academic
      Press, Inc., New York.  pp.  403-430.

17.  Harvey, II.  H. and A. C. Cooper.   1962.  Origin and
      treatment of a supersaturated river water.  (Progress
      Report No.  9)   International Pacific Salmon Fisheries
      Commission, New Westminster, British Columbia, 19 pp.

18.  Shirahata,  S.  1966.  Experiments on nitrogen gas
      disease with rainbow trout fry.  Bull. Freshwater
      Fish. Res.  Lab. (Tokyo) 15:197-211.

19.  Renfro, W.  C.  1963.  Gas bubble mortality of fishes
      in  Galveston Bay,  Texas.  Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc.

20.  DeMont, J.  D. and R. W. Miller,  in press.  First
      reported incidence of gas bubble" disease in the
      heated effluent of a steam  electric generating
      station.   Proc. 25th Annual  Meeting.  S.E. Assoc. of
      Game and Fish Comm.

21.  Malous, R., E. Keck, D. Maurer and C. Episano.  1972.
      Occurrence of gas  bubble disease in three species of
      bivalve mollusks.   Jour. Fish. Red. Bd. Can.           ,


22. Ebel, W. J.  1969.  Supersaturation ot nitrogen in the
      Columbia River and its effect on salmon and  steeihead
      trout.  U.S. Fish Wildlife Serv. Fish. Bull. 08: 1-11.

23. Beininqen, K. T. , and W. J. Ebel.  1968.  Effect of
      John Day Dam on dissolved nitrogen concentrations
      and salmon in the Columbia River.  1968.  Trans.
      Amer. Fish. Soc. 99:664-671.

24. Westqard, R. L.  1964.  Physical  and biological aspects
      of qas bubble disease in impounded aault chinooK.
      salmon at McNary spawning channel.   Trars. Amer.
      Fish. Soc. 93:306-309.

25. Pauley, G. E. and R. E. Nakatani.  1967.  Kistopnataology
      of gas-bubble disease in salrron fingerlings.  J. Fisn.
      Res. Bd. Can.  2U:867;871.

26. Bouck, G. P., G. A. Chapman, F. K. Schneider,  Jr.  ana
      D. G. Stevens.  1971.  Gas buttle disease in auult
      Columbia River sockeye salmon  foricorbynchus  nerKd).
      Trans. Amer. Fish. Sec., submitted to  the eaitor.

27. Nilsson, R.   1970.  Aspects on the toxicity of cadmium
      and its compounds.   (Ecological Research comnittee
      Bulletin No. 7).  Swedish Natural Science Research
      Council, Stockholm,  58 p.

28. Pickering, Q. P. and f.. Cast. Manuscript, 1973.  Acute and
      chronic toxicity of  cadmium to  the fathead minnow
      (Pimephales Eroine_las Fafinesque).

29. McKee, J. E. and H. W. Wolf, eds.  1963.  Water quality
      criteria, 2nd ed.  (California.   State  Water  Quality
      Control Board, Sacramento) , 548 p.

30. Brown, V. M.  1968.  The calculation ot the acute
      toxicity of mixtures 01 poisons to rainbcw trout.
      Water Res.  2:723-733.

31. Pickering, Q. H. ard C. Henderson. 1966.  The  acute
      toxicity of some heavy netals to different species of
      warm water fishes.   Intnat. J.  Air - Water Pollution.

32.  Crandall, C. A. and C. J. Goodnight.  1962.  hfrects of
      sublethal concentrations of several toxicants on
      growth of the common guppy, Lebigtf s reticulatus.
      Limnol. Oceanogr. 7:233-239.

33.  Jones, J. R. E.  19JS.  The relation between the
      electrolytic solution pressures of the metals and
      their toxicity to the stickleback  (Gastergsteus
      aculeatus L. ) . J. Exptl. Biol. 16:U25-437.

34.  HawKsley, K. A.  1967.  Advanced water pollution analysis
      by a water laboratory.  An^lil^er  8:13-15.
35. Guarraia, L. J. and R. K. Ballentine.   1972.   Inlluences
      of microbiol. populations en aquatic  nutrient cycles and
      some engineering aspects.  U.S. Environmental Protection
      Agency, Tech. Studies Kept. TS-00-72-06.

36.. Smith, L. L.   1971.   Influence of hydrogen  sulfiae
      on fish and  arthropods.  Preliminary  completion
      report EPA project  18050.  PCG, 30  pp.

37. Ball, I. R. 1967.  The relative  susceptibilities of
      some species of  fresh-water  fish  to pioisons.  I.
      Ammonia.  Water  Res. 1:767-775.

38. Brungs, W. A.  1969.  chronic  toxicity  of zinc to  the
      fathead minnows, Pinje^hales £romelas  Ratinesque.
      Trans. Amer. Fish?  Sec. 987272-279.

39. Lose, C. R. III.   1952.  Treatment  processes  completely
      eliminate cyanide contents of  waste.   Pub.  Works,  04.

UO. Herbert, D. W. M.  and J. C. Merkons.   1952.   The toxicity
      of potassium cyanide to trout.  Jcur.  Exp.  Biox.  29:632

U1. Anon.   1960.   Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria,  Third
      Progress Report.  Aquatic Lite Advisory Commitree of
      the Ohio River Valley Water  Sanitation commission
       (ORSANCO) .   J.W.P.C.F., 32:65.

42. Doudoroff, P., C!. Leduc and C. R. Schneider.   1966.
      Acute toxicity to fish of solutions containing
      complex netal cyanides, in relation to concentrations
      of molecular hydrocvanic acid.  Trans. Amer. Fish.
      Soc. 95:6-22.

43. Anon.  1950-51.  Handbook of Chemistry and Physics.
      32nd ed., Chemical Rubber Publ. Co.

44. Doudoroff, P.  1956.  Some experiments on the  toxicity
      of complex cyanides to fish.  Sewaae Ind. Wastes

45. Southgate, R.  1955.  TTater pollution.  Chem.  and Ind. 1194

46. Lovett, M.  1957.  River pollution - qeneral and chemical
      effects.  In:  The treatment of trade waste  waters and
      the prevention of river pollution.  Kings College,
      Univ. of Durham, Newcastle-upon-Tyre, England.

47. Uuhrman, K. and H. Woker.  1955.  Influence of
      temperature and oxygen tension on the toxicity and
      poisons to fish.  Proc. Internat. Assoc. Theoret. Apnl.
      Limnol. 12,795.

48. Jones, J. R. E.  1964.  Fish and river nollution
      (Buttervrorth & Co., London), 200 p.

49. Pickering, o. IT.  1966.  Acute toxicity of alkyl
      benzene sulfonate and linear alkylate sulfonate to
      the eggs of the fathead minnow, Pimephales nromelas.
      Air Water Pollut. 10:385-391.       '

50. Hokanson, K. E. F. and L. L.  Smith.   1971.  Pome factors
      influencina toxicity of linear alkylate sulfonate (LAS)
      to the bluegill.  Trans.  Aner. Fish.  Soc. 100:1-12.

51. Pickering, p. H. and T. O.  Thatcher.  1970.  The chronic
      toxicity of linear alkylate sulfonate (LAS)  to
      Pimephales  pronelas.  J.W.P.C.F.  42(2 part  l):243-254.

52.  Arthur,  J. W,   1970.  Chronic effects of linear alkylate
      sulfonate detergent cr. Gammarus pseudoliinnaeus,
      Camjjeloma decisum, and Fh^sa int§_sra.  Water Res.

53.  Wiebe,  A.  H.  1935.  The effect of crude oil on fresh
      water fish.   Amer. Fish. Soc., Trans. 65:324-350.

54.  Blumer,  M.  1971,  Oil contamination and the living
      resources of the sea, no. R-1,  In:  Report of tne
      FAO technical conference on marine pollution ana its
      effects  on living resources and fishing.   (FAO
      fisheries report 99)  (Food and Agricultural organization
      of the United Nations, Rome), p. 101.

55.  Shelton, R. G. J.  1971.  Effects of oil and oil
      dispersants on the marine environment.  Proceedings
      of the Royal Society of London Biological Sciences

56.  Stalling,  D. L.  1972.  Analysis of organochlorine
      residues  in fish:  current research of the Fish Pesticide
      Research Laboratory.  In:  Pesticide Chemistry, Vol. 4,
      Methods in Residue Analysis, A. S. Tahari, ed.   (Gordon
      and Breach Science Publishers, New York.  pp 413-436.

57.  Johnels, A. G., T. Westermark, W. Berg, P.  I. Persson,
      and B. Sjostrand.   1967.  Pike  (Esox lucius L.) and
      some other aquatic organisms in Sweden as indicators ot
      mercury contamination of the environment.  OiKos  1W:323-333.

58.  Hannerz, L.   1968.  Experimental investigations on  tne
      accumulation of mercury in water organisms.  Rep. Inst.
      Freshwater Res.  Drcttninghclm.  No. 48:120-17o.

59.  Hasselrot,  T. B.   1968.  Report or current  field
      investigations concerning the mercury content in  fish,
      bottom sediment, and water.  Rep.  Inst. Freshwater Res.
      Drottninqholm.  No.  48:102-111.

60. Miettinen, V., E. Blankenstein, K. Bissanen, M.
      Tillander, J. K. Miettinen, and M. Valtonen.   1970.
      Preliminary study on the distribution and effects of
      two chemical forms cf methylirercury in pike and rain-
      bow trout, paper E-9.  In:  Marine pollution ana its
      effects on living resources and fishing.  (Food and
      Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome),
      pp. 171.

61. Chapman, fc. H. , H. L. Fisher, K. fc. Pratt.  1968,
      Concentration Factors of Chemical Elements in  Edible
      Aquatic Organisms.  UCRL-60564.  Lawrence Rauiation
      Laboratory, University of California; Livermore,
      California,  50  pp.

62. Harriss, R. C., D. B. White and R. E. MacFarlane.
      1970.  Mercury  compounds reduce photosynthesis by
      plankton.  Science  170:736-737.

63. Jensen, S., N. Johansson, and M. Olsson.   1970.
      PCB-indications of  effects en salmon, PCE conference,
      Stockholm, September 29,  1970.   (Swedish Salmon
      Research  Institute),  (Report LFI MEDD 7/1970).

61. Welch, P. S.   1952.   Limnology.  McGraw Hill Book
      Company,  Inc.,  New  York.  538 p.

65. European Inland Fisheries Advisory commission.
      Working Party on Water Quality Criteria  for
      European  Freshwater Fish  (1965), Report  on tinely
      divided solids  and  inland fisheries.  Air Water Pol-
      lution, 9:151-168.

66. Bullock, T. H.   1955.  Compensation for temperature  in
      the metabolism  and  activity of poikilotherms.
      fliol. Rev.  (Cambridge) 30:311-342.

67. Brett, J. R.   1956.   Some principles  in the thermal
      requirements of fishes.  Cuart. Rev.  Eiol.  31:75-87.

68. Fry, F. E.  J.  1947.  Effects of the  environment
      on animal activity.  Univ. of Toronto Stud.  Biol.
      Ser. No.  55  Publ.   Ont. Fish. Res.  Lab.  No.  b6:

69.  Fry, F. E. J.   1964.  Animals in aquatic  environments:
        fishes temperature effects Chapter 44.  Handbook
        of Physiology, Section 4:  Adaptation  to the
        Environment.   Amer. Physiol. Soc., Washington, D.  C.


70.   Fry,  F.  E. J. 1967.   Responses of vertebrate
       poikilotherms to temperature (review).   In;
       Thermobiology, A.  H. Rose, ed.  (Academic Press, New
       York,  pp. 375-409.

71.   Kinne. O.  1970.  Temperature—animals—invertebrates,
       in marine ecology, 0. Kinne, ed. (John  Wiley & Sons,
       New York), vol. 1, pp 406-514.

72.   Parker,  F. L. and P. A. Krenkel,  eds. 1969.
       Engineering aspects of thermal pollution.
       (Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville,
       Tennessee), 351»

73.   Krenkel, P. A. and F. L. Parker,  eds.  1969
       Biological aspects of thermal pollution
       (Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, Tennessee),
       407 p.

74.   Cairns,  J., Jr.  1968.  We're in hot water.  Scientist
       and Citizen 10:187-198.

75.   Clark, J. R.  1969.   Thermal pollution and aquatic
       life.   Sci. Amer.  220:18-27.

76.   Coutant, C. C.  1970.  Biological aspects of thermal
       pollution.  I. Entrainment and discharge canal
       effects.  CRC Critical Rev. Environ. Contr. 1:341-381.

77.   Kennedy, V. S.  and J. A. Mihursky.   1967.  Bibliography
       on the effects of temperature in the aquatic environment
       (Contribution 326)  (University of  Maryland, Natural
       Resources Institute, College Park).  89 p.

78.   Raney, E. C. and B. W. Menzel.  1969.  Heated
       effluents and effects on  aquatic life with emphasis
       on fishes:  a bibliography,  38th ed. (U. S.
       Department of the Interior, Water  Resources Information
       Center, Washington, B.C.)  469 p.

79.   Coutant, C. C.   1968.  Thermal pollution—biological
       effects:   a review  of the literature of  1967.
       J. Water  Pollut.  Contr. Fed. 40:1047-1052.

80.   Coutant, C. C.   1969.  Thermal pollution—biological
       effects:  a review of the  literature  of  1968.   J.
       Water  Pollut.  Contr. Fed.  41:1036-1053.


81.  Coutant, C. C.  1970.  Thernal pollution—
       biological effects:  a review of the literature
       of 1969.  J. Water Pollut. Contr. Fed. 42:1025-1057.

82.  Coutant, C. C.  1971.  Thermal pollution—
       biological effects.  Literature review.  J. Water
       Pollut. Contr. Fed. 43:1292-1334.

83.  Fry, F. E. J., J. S. Hart, and K. F. Walker.  1946.
       Lethal temperature relations for a sample of young
       speckled trout, Salvelinus fontinalis.  University
       of Toronto biology series noT54.  Th~e University
       of Toronto Press.  Toronto,  pp. 9-35.

84.  Fry, F. E. J., J. R. Brett, and O. H. Clawson.
       1942.  Lethal limits of temperature for young
       goldfish.  Rev. Can. Biol. 1:50-56.

85.  Black, E. C.  1953.  Upper lethal temperatures of
       some British Columbia freshwater fishes.
       J. Fish. Res. Board Can.  10:196-210.

86.  Brett, J. R.  1970.  Temperature—animals—fishes.
       In;  Marine Ecology.  O. Kinne, ed.  John Wiley
       & Sons.  New York.  Vol. 1.  pp 515-560.

87.  Lawler, G. H.  1965.  Fluctuations in the success
       of year-classes of white-fish populations with
       special reference to Lake Erie.  J. Fish. Res.
       Board Can.  22:1197-1227.

88.  Vernon, E. H.  1958.  An examination of factors
       affecting the abundance of pink salmon in the
       Fraser River.  Progress report no. 5.  International
       Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission.  New Westminster,
       British Columbia.

89.  Cooch, F. G.  1964.  Preliminary study of survival
       value of a salt gland in prairie Anatidae.  Auk.

90.  Hartung, R.  1967.  Energy metabolism in oil-
       covered ducks.  J. Wildlife Manag.  31:797-804.

91.   Hartung, R.  1965.  Seme effects of oiling on repro-
       duction of ducks.  J. Wildlife Manag. 29:872-874.

92.   Hartung, R.  1967.  An outline for tiologica-i. and
       physical concentrating mechanisms for chlorinated
       hydrocarbon pesticides.  Fap. Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts
       Lett.  52:77-83.

93.   Reinert, R. E.   1970.  Pesticides concentrations ir»
       Great Lakes fish.  Pest. Monit. J.  3:233-240.

94.   National Academy of Sciences—National Researcn Council.
       1957.   The effects of atomic radiation on oceanography
       and fisheries.  NAS—NRC Publ. No. 551.  Washington,
       D.C.  137 p.

95.  Friend, A. G., A. H. Story, C. R. Henderson, and
       K. A.  Busch.   1965.  Behavior of certain raaio-
       rmclides released into freshwater environments.
       Public Health Service Pub. No. 999-RH-13.

96.  Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.   19b7.
       Annual report to the Director or Fishery Research.
       1966.   Fisheries Laboratory, Lowestoft, Sufloik.
       122 p.

97.  Watson, C. G. and W. L. Teirpleton.  In £ress.   1971.
       Thermo luminescent dosirretry of aquatic organisms.
       Third National Symposium on Radioecology -
       May 10-12, 1971.  Cak Ridge, Tennessee.

    C.    Public Water Supply Intake
         1 .    Acidity, Alkalin
              No limit of acceptability is prescribed for

the alkalinity of raw water used for drinking water


Rationale (Alkalinity) :

    It is not possible to j.ut a specific limit on alkalinity

in raw water used for drinking water supplies because the

alkalinity of any water is associated with ether

constituents such as pH and hardness (1).

              The acceptable pH of raw water used for

drinking water supplies is within the range of 5.0 to 9.0.

Rationale (pH):

    It is necessary to limit pH to a range of 5.0 to ^.0 in

raw water used for drinking water supplies because the

treatment process is less expensive and the pH is easier to

adjust  (1).   Waters with a pK below 7.0 are corrosive to

water wor*s structures, distribution lines, and household

plumbing fixtures and can add such constituents to drinking

water as iron, copper, zinc, cadmium and lead  (1).  High pH

values  favor corrosion control and values above 8.0 will not

dissolve lead  (1),

         2•    Dissolved Gases

              a.    Ammonia	(Nj_

              The acceptatle concentration of ammonia  (as N)

in raw water used tor drinking water supplies is 0.5 mg/1.

Rationale (Ammonia) :

    It is necessary to limit the concentration of ammonia in

raw water used for drinking water to 0.5 mg/1 because  in

higher concentrations it has a significant effect on tne

chlorination process and is indicative of undesirable

pollution.  The effect of anrmonia en the chlorinatioa

chlorine is to form chlorairine compounds which have

considerably less disinfecting efficiency than free

chlorine.  The cost of chlorine in the treatment pzocess

increases when significant concentrations of ammonia are

present  (1).


              JD.    Dissolved Oxygen

              A condition of saturation or near saturation

of dissolved oxygen is preferred for drinking water

supplies,  but no limit of acceptability is prescribed.

Rationale (Dissolved Oxygen):

    There are both advantages and disadvantages to oxygen in

public water supplies.  Dissolved oxygen in a surface water

supply serves as an indicator of the presence of excessive

oxygen demanding waste, although there can be exceptions to

this rule.  Further, when ammonia,  iron, or manganese are

present in their reduced form, the  presence of oxygen

precipitates the iron and manganese in the oxidized torm,

induces the biological oxidation of ammonia to nitrate, ana

prevents the anaerobic reduction of dissolved sultate to

hydrogen sultide.  For these accomplishments oxygen levels

in surface waters  should be as near saturation as  possible.

On the other hand, oxygen does enhance corrosion of

treatment facilities  and distribution  systems, but the

benefits of the  sustained presence  of  oxygen  in dririKing

water supplies probably  outweigh  these disadvantages  (1).

         3.    Inorganics^/Ions and Free,Elements/Compounds^
                   a.    Arsenic

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

arsenic in raw water used for drinking water supplies is 0.1

Rationale (Arsenic):

    It is necessary to limit arsenic because of its coxicity

to humans.  Severe poisoning can result from 100 mg, and 130

mg has proved fatal (2).  Arsenic can accuirulate in the body

faster than it is excreted and can build to toxic

proportions from small amounts taken periodically through

lung and intestinal walls from air, water and food  (2).  Of

66 major drainage basins and selected water supplies

throughout the country, 44 had concentrations of 0.01 mg/1

or less, 15 over 0.01 mg/1, and 7 over 0.05 mg/1 which

indicates the relatively lew levels in most ot the country's

water supply  (3) .  Although the concentration cf arsenic ir.

most raw water supplies is naturally below dangerous levels,


hazardous concentrations can occur as a result of man's

activities.  In light cf the tact that most of the waters

sampled throughout the United states indicated levels of

0.01 mg/1 or less, it is reasonable to limit arsenic to not

more than 0.1 mg/1 in raw water  for drinking water supplies.
                   b.   Barium

              The maximum  acceptable concentration  ot  barium

in raw water used for drinking water supplies  is  1.0 mg/l.

Rationale  (Bariuir) :

    Barium should be limited  because of  its  reported serious

toxic effects on the heart, blood  vessels  and  nerves ot

humans.  The fatal dose for man  is considered  to  oe from  0.6

to 0.9 grams  (g)  (550 to  600  mg  Ba) as the chloride (1).

Barium is not known to be  cumulative  (2).  There  are no

studies available as to how much bariurr  is toleraole in

drinking water  nor have any studies been made  of  trie long-

term effects of the consumption  of barium (1).  The limit of

1.0 mg/1 was derived from  the barium in  air  of  0.5  mg/cubic

meter based upon the estimated atsorption  from the

intestines of approximately 2 mg/1  (5).
              c.   Boron

              The maximum acceptable concentration of boron

in raw water used for drinking water supplies is l.u rng/i.

Rationale  (Boron):

    A sampling of 84 major basins and water supply waters

revealed that only 6 waters sampled contained boron in

excess of  1 mg/1, only 7 in the range of 0.10 mg/i to u.50

mg/lr and  28 had less than 0.09 mg/1.  It has been reported

that 30 mg/1 are not harmful to man, which indicates a

relatively low toxicity to man and other inammals.  Boron is

very toxic to many terrestrial plants and could be a problem

in watering home gardens, fruit trees, and ornamentals with

tap water containing concentrations cf boron exceeding 1.0

mg/1 (2).  Although a much less stringent limit woula be

sufficient to protect man, such a less stringent limit inignt

encourage degradation cf many waters with boron.


              d.    Cadmium

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

cadmium in raw water used for drinkinq water supplies is

0.01 mg/1.

Rationale (Cadmium);

    The necessity for limiting the concentration of cadmium

in drinking water supplies results from its extremely higa

toxicity to humans and the fact that conventional treatment,

as practiced in the United States, does not remove caamium

(6).  There is no evidence that cadmium is biologically

essential or beneficial, and it is cumulative in trie liver,

kidney, pancreas, and thyroid of  humans and other animals

(2,  1).   It has been stated  (7) that the absolute amount

determines the acute toxicity of  cadmium.  Symptoms of

violent nausea were reported for  29 school children v»no had

consumed  fruit sticks containing  13-15 mg/1 of cauiaium

(8).  This would be equivalent to 1.3  to 3.0 mg or cadmium

ingested.  A boy was reported to  have  died within one and

one half  hours from a dose of about d.9 grams of cadmium

chloride  (9).  Itai-itai disease  syndrome, a severe endemic

illness, has been associated  with  the  ir.gestion of as little


as 600 ug/day of cadmium  (10).  The prescribed  level ot  10

ug/1 is  to  protect against  the intake by humans ot more  than

20 ug assuming a 2 liter  daily consumption  of water.

              e.   Chloride

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

chloride in raw water  used  for drinking water supplies is

250  mg/1 except in areas  where no  ether drinking water

supply  source containing  less than that concentration is


Rationale (Chloride) :

     This level was based  on the  tact that  chlorides  are  not

removed in  conventional treatment  and because of taste

preference, not toxic     to humans (1).  The median  chloriae

concentrations detected ty taste  ty a panel or  10  persons

were 182, 160,  and  372 mg/1 from  sodium, calcium,  and

magnesium salts  respectively (11).

              f.    Chromium

              The maximum acceptable concentration of total

chromium in raw *ater used for drinking water supp^^es is

0.05 mg/1.

Rationale (Chromium) :

    The necessity of restricting concentrations of total

chromium to 0.05 mg/1 or less results from its adverse

physical effects on humans and the fact that there are

insufficient data concerning the effectiveness of the

defined treatment process in removing chromium in the

chromate form.  Chromium, in its various valence states, is

toxic to man, produces lung tumors when inhaled, and induces

skin sensitizaticns.  It occurs in some foods, in air,

including cigarette smoke, and in some water supplies  (3).

No-effect levels for chromate ion on man have not been

determined  (1).  The prescribed limit of 0.05 mg/1 was

established to avoid jeopardizing the public health by  the

presence of chrcrrium in drinking water  (12).

              g.   copper

              The maxiinuir acceptable concentration of copper

in raw water used for drinking water supplies is 1.0 mg/i.

Rationale (Copper):

    Copper should be limited in raw water used tor drinking

water supplies  because it causes taste and corrosion

problems and because there is little information on the

effectiveness of the defined treatment process in removing

copper  (1).  For  1,577 surface water samples collected at

130 sampling points in the United States  1,173 showed con-

centrations of  1 to 280 ug/1 with a rrean concentration of 15

ug/1  (13).  This indicates the relatively low levels present

in the natural  waters of the United States, all of which

have less than  the 1.0 m.g/1 specified criterion.  Since

copper is an essential and beneficial element in human

metabolism and  because a normal diet barely provides an

adequate amount,  it is desirable to have sivall amounts in

drinking water.  Although small amounts of copper are

beneficial to humans, large doses rray produce emesis, or if

prolonged, result in liver damage.  The prescribed limit is


based on considerations of taste rather than hazard to

health (1) ,
              The maximum acceptable concentration of

soluble iron in raw water used for drinking water is 0.3


Rationale (Iron):

    Soluble iron in excess cf the prescribed limit begins to

be detectable by imparting undesirable tastes to dr^nKing

water,  to result in rust deposits in distribution systems

and to  stain clothes during laundering (1).  The iron intake

from food provides 7 to 35 mg per day, with an average of 1b

mg (3) .


              i.   Lead

              The maximum acceptable concentration of lead

in raw water used for drinking water supplies is 0.05 mg/1.

Rationale  (Lead):

    Lead is toxic to humans and there is little information

concerning the  effectiveness of its removal by conventional

treatment  (1).  For the 100 largest cities in this country,

finished waters were found  (14) to have a maximum lead

concentration of 0.062 mg/1 and a median of 0.0037 mg/1.  Tt

has also been found  (15) that  finished water in 969 water

supplies have lead concentrations ranging from 0 to 0.64

mg/1 with concentrations in fourteen of the supplies sampled

exceeding the prescribed limit of 0.05 mg/1.  Another study

 (6) of 74 of the major basins  found few to contain lead

concentrations  in excess of the prescribed limit, but the

excessive concentrations generally resulted from man caused

sources.  Acute toxicity is most common in children and is

manifested by anorexia, vomiting and convulsing due to

intracranial pressure.  Chronic toxicity symptoms are

anemia, weakness and weight loss  in children and vague

gastorintestinal and central nervous system complaints by


adults (16).   Daily intake of 0.5 to 0.6 ing of lead by

adults under  controlled conditions resulted in a small

retention but no detectable deviation from normal health of

the individuals.  Indirect evidence from tests on industrial

workers exposed to known amounts of lead supported these

findings (17).  The exception to the above was prevalent in

children where lead intoxication was recorded based upon

both tolerated intake and severity of symptoms  (18).  It is

reported (1)  that with a lead intake of 0.6 mg per day,

development of lead intoxication by humans is unlikely.  Tiie

prescribed limits are established to provide protection

based upon the foregoing and the combined likely exposure

from both food and water.

              j.   Manga nejse

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

soluble manganese in raw water used for drinking water

supplies is 0.05 mg/1.

Rationale (Manganese) :

    The concentration of manganese must be limited in raw

water sources for drinking water to prevent aesthetic and

economic damage, to avoid possible physiologic effects due

to excessive  intake by humans, and because soluble manganese

is not removed by conventional treatment  (3).  Manganese has

been reported to affect  the taste cf drinking water at

levels as low as 0.05 mg/1  (2),  and to  stain laundry at

levels as low as 0.1  mg/1  (19).
               k.    Mercury

               The  maximum acceptable  concentration  ci  total

 mercury in  raw water  used for drinking water supplies  is

 0.002 mg/1.

 Rationale (Mercury):

     The necessity of  limiting mercury in raw water  used for

 drinking water supplies results frcm its extreme toxicity to

 humans and other animals and tecause conventional treatment

 does not remove it.  All of the organic forms of mercury


(alkoxy,  alkyl,  and aryl)  are toxic, but the alkyl form is

the most  toxic tc man.   The accumulation and retention of

these  mercurials in the nervous system, the ease of their

transmittal across the placenta, and their effect on

developing tissue make them particularly dangerous to man

(12).   Based upon available epidemiological evidence, the

lowest whole blood concentration of methyl mercury

associated with toxic symptoms is 0.2 ug/g, which

corresponds to prolonged, continuous intake by man of

approximately 0.3 rcg Hg/70 kg/day.  To provide a safety

factor of 10, the maximum dietary intake should be 0.03 mg

Hg/person/day (30 ug/70 kg/day).  This assumes the

consumption of 420 g/wk of fish containing 0.5 mg Hg/kg and

2 liters  of water daily containg 0.002 mg/1 mercury.  If all

of the mercury is not in the alkyl  form, or if fish

consumption is limited, a greater factor of safety will



              1-    Nitrate-Nitrite

                   1.    Nitrate

                   The maximum acceptable concentration of

nitrate-nitrogen in raw water used for drinking water

supplies is 10 tng/1.

                   2.    Nitrite

                   The maximum acceptable concentration of

nitrite-nitrogen in raw water used for drinking water

supplies is 1.0 mg/1.

Rationale  (Nitrate-Nitrite):

    Nitrates in drinking water at higher levels than tne

prescribed limit have had adverse physiological effects on

infants and treatment does not remcve them.  A survey of

reported cases of nitrate poisoning found that there were no

cases of poisoning where drinking water concentrations of

nitrate-nitrogen were less than  10 mg/1.  concentrations of

nitrate-nitrogen ranging rrom  15-250 mg/1 have been reported

to cause infantile nitrate poisoning which is callea


methemoglobinemia (3).  Methemoglobinemia is largely

confined to infants less than three months old and results

from bacterial conversion of nitrate ion to nitrite which in

turn converts herroglobin to me the mog lob in (1).  Nitrite

poses a greater hazard in drinking water than nitrate, but

it seldom occurs in dangerous concentrations  (12) except

where it is introduced as an anticorrosion agent  (3).

Drinking water supplies having concentrations of nitrite-

nitrogen over 1.0 mg/1 should not be used for infant  feeding

              m.   Phosphate

              No limit of acceptability  is  prescribed  for

phosphate in raw water used for drinking water  supplies.

Rationale (Phosphate):

    Although two primary benefits  of  phosphate  (  P)  limits

would be the avoidance of problems associated with  algae and

other aquatic plants  as well  as coagulation problems due

particularly to complex phosphates, the  total complexity of

the problem does not  permit the establishment of  an


acceptable limit, for phosphates in drinking water supplies.

Critical phosphorus concentrations vary with other water

quality characteristics.  Turbidity and other factors at

times negate the algae-producing effects ot high phosphorus

concentrations, and phosphorus concentrations in lakes arid

reservoirs are often reduced to some extent by precipitation

(1).  Although most relativly uncontaminated lake districts

are known to have surface waters that contain less than JO

ug/1 total phosphorus  (20) , earlier surveillance data, from

stations sampled across the country indicated  (21) 4u

percent had phosphorus concentrations in excess ot 50 uy/i.

Some potable surface water supplies are reported to exceed

200 ug/1 (P)  without noticeable prchlems due to aquatic

growths (1) .
              n.   Seleniurr

              The maxirr.uir acceptable concentration ot

selenium in raw water used for drinking water supplies is



Rationale (Selenium) :

    This  limit is considered necessary because conventional

treatment does not remove selenium and because so little is

known of  its potential toxicity to humans when ingested in

water.   It has been reported that the intake of selenium in

food in seleniferous areas may range from 600 to 6,340

ug/day, which is close to the estimated levels at. which

symptoms of (chronic)  selenium toxicity occur in man  (23) .

If data on selenium in focds (23) are applied to the average

consumption of foods  (24) , the normal intake of selenium is

about 200 ug/day.  The toxicity cf selenium resembles that

of arsenic and can, if exposure is sufficient, cause death


              o.   Silver

              The maximum acceptable concentration of silver

in raw water used for drinking water supplies is 0.05 ing/1.

Rationale  (Silver) :

    Conventional public water supply treatment systems* are

not designed to remove silver.  The principal effect of


silver in the body is cosmetic.  It causes a condition known

as argyria whereby a gray discoloration of skin, eyes ana

mucous membranes occurs  (1).  It is calculated that the

prescribed amount, could be ingested for a lifetime without

causing argyria  (3).  Argyria is a condition resulting from

the deposition of silver in the skin of humans which causes

a permanent gray discoloration and any amount over 1 grain of

silver in the human body will result in this condition

(24, 25).  It is not known to harm individuals aftected  in

any way other than that  it is very unsightly  (3).  For these

reasons and because there is very little  information on  the

toxicity of silver to humans, it. is considered necessary to

limit silver in  raw water used for drinking water  supplies.
              P-   Sgdiurr

              No limit of  acceptability is  prescribeu tor

sodium  in  raw water  used fcr  drinking  water supplies.


Rationale (Sodium) :

    Because a healthy individual can consume sodium to fit

his food selection and seasoning without ill effect, no

limit was placed on the acceptable concentration ot sodium

in raw water used for drinkinq water supplies(1).  It is

reported (26) that the intake ot sodium may average b gr/day

without ill effects on health.  However, portions 01 the

population suffering from hypertension and edema associated

with cardiac failure are instructed by their physicians to

limit their sodium intake (1).  The cost of removing sodium

from raw water is excessive and the limited concentrations

found in most raw water are generally lower than the limits

recommended for those on a moderately restricted sodium

              q.   Suj^f ate

              The maximum acceptable concentration ot

sulfate in raw water used tor drinkinq water supplies is 2bQ

rag/1 except in areas where no other drinkinq water supply-

source containing less than that concentration is available.


Rationale (Sulfate):

    Sulfates should be limited because conventional

treatment does not remove them, and because, at levels

greater than 250 mq/1, they cause taste problems.  A

threshold laxative effect was reported at concentrations of

630 mg/1 and at lower concentrations in waters having

magnesium concentrations above 200 mg/1 in addition to trie

suit ate  (see 1).
              The maximum acceptable concentration of zinc

in raw water used for drinking water supplies is 5.0 mg/1.


Rationale (Zinc):

    Concentrations of zinc must not exceed 5 mg/1 in raw

water used for drinking water supplies because higher levels

cause an undesirable taste which survives through

conventional treatment and regains in substantial amounts in

finished drinking water.  Zinc is not a health problem, but

is essential in human metabolism as well as being a required

constituent of a number of body enzymes.  Humans taice in

from all sources a daily average cf frcrc 10 to 15 mg of

zinc (1).  One taste threshold test reported that 5 percent

of the observers were able to detect the presence of 4.3

mg/1 as zinc sulfate in distilled water  (27).
              Th-3 maximum  acceptable coliform concentration

in raw water used for  drinking water supplies is  10,000/100

ml for total coliforms and 2,000/100 ml  for  fecal coliforms.


Rationale (Microbiological Indicators):

    Presence of coliforms, and mere significantly fecal

coliforms, in water is indicative of fecal pollution.  In

general, the presence of fecal coliform organisms indicates

more recent and possibly dangerous fecal contamination.

When the count of fecal colifcrms exceeds 2,000 tnere is a

high correlation with increased numbers of both human

pathogenic viruses and huiran pathogenic bacteria  (2b, 29,

30).  A conventional water treatment plant is capable ot

removing most pathogenic bacteria at the level of 2,000

fecal coliforms per  100 ml; however, when this number of

fecal coliforms is exceeded the probability of transmitting

pathogenic organisms in finished drinking water increases.
              b.   Viruses

              No  limit of acceptability  is  prescribed for

viruses in raw drinking waters.


Rationale (Viruses):

    There is presently a lack of data indicating which viral

group provides a consistent indication of potential fecal

contamination and  threat to human health.  Also, risk

factors are not yet available.  Virological techniques have

as yet not been perfected so as to allow monitoring of

water.  For these  reasons no criterion or criteria are given

for viruses in raw drinking waters.

              a-   Carbon Adsortable

              The maximuir acceptable concentration of

organics - carbon adsorbable is 0.3 mg/1 CCE and 1.5 CAE,

both measured by the "low-flow carbon adsorption method

(CAM)" technique, in raw water used for drinking water


Rationale  (Carbon Adsorbable) :

    Limiting the concentration of crganics-carbon aasoroable

in raw water used for drinking water supplies is necessary

because they are aesthetically undesirable, may have adverse

physiological effects, and are not removed by conventional

treatment.  Organics - carbon adsorbable, as used Here,

contains two parts, carbon-chlorofcrm extract  (CC£) and

carbon alcohol extract  (CAE) both of which have an

operational definition  (32) .  Thee presence of insecticides,

acrylonitrile phenylether, polycyclic hydrocarbons,

kerosene,  and substitute- benzene compounds have oeen


demonstrated in CCF materials, while AR£ and organic fatty

acids have been identified in CAE materials.

    The toxicity of CAM. sampler extract? from rav; and

finished surface water was tested in 1963  (33).  They found

that the mixture of organics in the CCE from both the rav;

and finished water was carcinogenic to rats upon

subcutaneous injection.  Similar testing with CAF's did not

produce tumors, but their rat life-tine data was reanalyzed

to demonstrate life-shortening caused by subcutaneous

injection of CAT from both rav and finished water.  Water

having concentrations exceeding the prescribed limits may

contain undesirable and unwarranted matprials and represent

a generally unacceptable level for unidentified organic

substances (1).
              b.   Cyanides

              The* maximum acceptable concentration of

cyanides in raw water used for drinking water  supplies is

0.2 mg/1.


Rationale (Cyanides):

    It is necessary to linnit cyanides in raw water tor

drinking water supplies mainly because of its toxicity to

man.  The human body has an innate capacity to convert

cyanide to the less toxic cyanate.  Toxicity effects occur

when the intake of cyanides overwhelms this detoxiiying

mechanism.  The safe threshold toxicity liirit for human

ingest ion of water at 2 liters per day is concentrations of

19 mq/1.  A single dose of from 50 to 60 mg is reported to

be fatal to man  (16).
              The maximuir  acceptable concentrations of

foamina agents determined  as methylene blue active

substances is 0.5 mg/1 in  raw water used for drinking wat^r



Rationale (Foaming Agents):

    The most common foaming agents are synthetic anionic

surfactants, the most important being linear alkylate

sulfonate (LAS).  Foaming agents can produce unsightly

masses of foam in a stream or in tap waters.  Conventional

waste treatment reduces concentrations in waters^ however,

measurable levels are present in the nation's surface and

ground waters.  Although methyl blue active substances

(MBAS)  is a more specific measure of anionic surfactants and

does not respond to cationic or nonionic surfactants, the

MBAS values are the best available measure of surfactants in

              d*   Nit.rilotriacetate	(NTA1

              No limit of acceptability  is prescribed for

NTA at this time.


Rationale (NTA) :

    It is not possible to establish limits for NTA at tnis

time because the necessary information and data to do so are

unavailable.  The affinity of NTA for toxic metals is not

known and its toxicity to man is also unknown.
              e-   oil_and_Grease

         Oil  and  qrease  shculd  be  essentially absent  from

raw water used  for drinking water  supplies.

Rationale  (Oil  and Grease):

    Oil and grease, as defined  in  Standard Methods  (3d),  in

public water  supplies in any  amount  will cause  taste,  odor,

and appearance  problems  (3H,  35,  36,  37, 38) and may  be

hazardous to  man  (39, 2)  and  are  detrimental to conventional

treatment processes.  It is virtually impossible to express

the limits in numerical  units (U).   The smallest amounts  of

these substances  can be  the cause  of  raw water  rejection  for

drinking water  supplies  because conventional treatment aoes

not remove them all  (1).


              f.    Phenols

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

phenolic compounds in raw water used for drinking water

supplies is 1,0 ug/1.

Rationale (Phenols):

    It is necessary to limit phenolic compounds in raw water

used for drinking water suf^lies because they are not

generally removed by conventional treatment.  The^ cause

odor problems at low concentrations, and the chlorination

process may form chlorophenois which) are odor detecraijie at

lower concentrations than ether phenols.  It is reported (1)

that trace concentrations of phenolic compounds less titan

1.0 mg/1 affect the organoleptic properties of drinking

water.  The p-cresol threshold odor concentration aas been

determined to be 0.055 mg/1, the m-cresol 0.25 mg/1 and

cresol 0.26 mg/1.  Phenol has been shown to have a tnresaoid

odor concentration of U. 2 mg/1  (40) whereas the values ror

the chlorinated phenols are 2-chlorop-hencl, 2.0 uy/i and 4-

chlorophenol, 250 ug/1  (41).


              g.   Phthalate _Esters

              No limit of acceptability is prescribeo for

phthalate esters in raw water for drinking water supplies ac

this time.

Rationale (Phthalate Esters);

    Phthalates in water represent, a potential but unknown

health problem and have been implicated in growth

retardation, accumulation and toxicity.  Insufticient

information on their effects on man is available (1).
              h.   Polychlorinated
              No limit of acceptability is prescribed for

acceptable concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls in

raw water used for drinking water supplies.


Rationale (PCE's):

    Too little is known about the levels in Water, the

retention and the accumulation in humans and the effects of

very low rates of inqesticn to permit the establishment of

acceptable PCB limits.
         6.   Pesticides

         Pesticides are coir.prised cf numerous organic

compounds that are used for specific and general

Included are the chlorinated hydrocarbons and

organophosphorus compounds, as well as the chloropftcnoxy and

other herbicides.  They have been reported as generally

useful in improving agricultural yields, reducing the mass

growth of nuisance causing aquatic plants, and controlling

disease vectors.  Pesticides differ widely in chemical and

toxicological characteristics, and their biochemistry is

only partially known.  Their toxicity to man and

biodegradability vary considerably between compounds, and

because of this they will be considered separately as

follows (1) :


              a-    Insecticides - Chlorinated Hydroca

              The maximuir acceptable concentrations or

chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides in raw water used for

drinking water supplies are listed in Table 8.

Rationale  (Insecticides - Chlorinated Hydrocarbons):

    The chlorinated hydrocarbons are one ot the most

important  qroups of synthetic organic insecticides because

of their sizeable number, wide use, stability in tne

environment, toxicity  to  some wildlife and non-target

organisms, and their adverse physiological effects on

humans.  Also, there is insufficient information on tne

effects of treatment in removing these compounds  (1).  The

chlorinated hydrocarbons  are stored in fatty  tissues rather

than being rapidly metabolized.  Pegardless of how

chlorinated hydrocarbons  enter organisms, they inauce

poisoning  having similar  symptoms  but which differ in

severity.  The severity is  related to the extent  and

concentration  of the compound  in  the rervous  system,

primarily  the  brain  («2).   Mild  cases cause headacnes,

dizziness, gastrointestinal  disturbances, numbness  and

weakness of the  extremities, apprehension and


hyperirritability.   In severe cases, there are muscular

fasciculations spreading from the head to the extremities

followed eventually by muscular spasms, leading in some

cases to convulsions and death.  The maximum allowable

concentrations for chlorinated hydrocarbons in raw water

used for drinking water supplies in Table 8 were calculated

from levels considered safe tc man and other animals anu

from the known total intake by man of these substances from

all sources (1) .
              b.   Insectic_ides_-_Cr2ano£hos£hate_ana


              The maximum acceptable concentration o£

organophosphorus insecticides is 0.1 mg/1  in raw water used

for drinking water supplies.

Rationale  (Insecticides - Crganophosphcrus and Carbamate):

    It is necessary to place a  limit on the concentrations

of these substances in rav. water used  for  drinking water

supplies because of their high  mammalian toxicity and

because their fate/ during conventional treatment, is


unknown.  The use of these pesticides in the agriculture

industry to control insects has shown a steady increase.

The majority of these pesticides are somewhat similar in

chemical structure as well as in physical and biological

properties  (1).  Although different from each other to some

extent they all act by the same physiological mechanism  (1).

Ingestion of these pesticides results in a dysfunction of

the cholinesterase of the nervous system when ingested in

small quantities over a long period of time  (43).  studies

using organophosphorus compounds on human volunteers

provided indications of harmful levels.  One study estimated

that 100 mg of parathion would be lethal and that 25 mg

would be moderately toxic  (UU).  On the basis of various

studies it was concluded that 5 ing/day  (0.07 mg/kg/day) or

parathion, the most toxic substance in this group, should be

a safe level for man (1).  After application of a factor of

safety of 25 for parathion a safe limit of 0.1 mg/1 was



                                                          WBLE  3

                               Reconmended  Linits  for  Chlorinated livr'rocarbor. Insecticides
Long-Term. Levels With Calculate;
Minimal or No Effects Fror. All
ppn mo /kg/body a/ Safetv











Legend : a/

Species in die
A ss ur.e
rat -



. 5

0.05 ka
i weioht/ day Factor (X:
f rat
and of
e weioht
- 0.

3 kg and of doa
consumption of
-0.2 kc. adult - 70
^ May.irun Sa*e Levels
Sources of Exposure Intake From Diet ' Water
% of % of Recommended —
^ :~1






- 10

A o/3 ay
, 003

mo/pan/dav ^/ ma/man/day Safe Level Safe Level limit (pg/1)






,014<3/ 0.0007 5.0 20
T T 5
'.(• 0.021 3.4 20
.01427 0.0049 35.0 20
.00841/ 0.00035 4.1 20
.011227 0.00007 0.6 2
.0014d/ 0.0021 150.0 5
.042!i/ 0.0035 8.3 20
.0 T T 20
.12 T T 2











       c/   Assune averaoe daily  intake  of water for ran - 2 liters.

       d/   Chosen as basis on which  to  derive recorji-encec1 lirit.

       e_/   Adjusted for organoleptic effects.

       f/   Adjusted for interconversion to K. epoxide.

     N.A.   No data available

       T    Infrequent occurrence in  trace quantities
Source (1)


              c.   Herbicides^-_ChlorQphenQxy

              The maximum acceptable concentrations ot 2,4-

D, 2,4,5-T, and Silvex in raw water used for drinking water

supplies are 0.02, 0.002, and 0.03 respectively.

Rationale  (Pesticides - Chlorophenoxy):

    It is necessary to limit the concentrations o± tnese

substances in raw water used for drinking water supplies

because of their possible adverse physiological etfects on

man and insufficient information on the effectiveness 01 the

conventional treatment in removing these substances.

Studies of the acute oral toxicity of chlcrphenox>

herbicides upon various animal species indicate as much as a

threefold variation and toxicities  (all compounds) of aoout

the same magnitude within each species  (45, 46).  Trie LDpf>£

one species, the rat, was 500 mg/kg during a 21-day perioa

 (58).  One case of 2,4-D poisoning in man has recently been

reported  (47).  A study of  2,U-D on rats and dogs indicated

no-effect  levels of 0.5 mg/kg/day and 8.0 mg/kg/day

respectively  (48).  A 2-year study found the no-etrect

levels of  Silvex to be 2.6  mg/kg/day  in rats and  0.9

mg/kg/day  in dogs  (49).  Experiments on mice and  rats give

evidence  of teratoqenic effects and embryo toxicity effects from

2,4,5-T with the rat being more sensitive.  A dosage of 21.5 mg/kg

 produced no  harmtul  eftects in mice  but  4,6 mg/kq  caused

 minimal but  statistically significant  effects in rats (SO).
               a.    color

               Maximum acceptable limits tor color in raw

 water  used for drinking water supplies are 75 platinum-

 cobalt units.

 Rationale (Color) :

     Colored substances can cnelate metal ions thereby

 interfering with coagulation  (51), and can reduce the

 capacity of ion exchange resins  (52).  The prescribed  limit

 for color in raw water us^d for  drinking water  supplies is

 necessary to permit the production of water  meeting  urinicing

 water standards by using only moderate dosages  of coagulant

 chemicals.  Also at optimum pH the required  coagulant  dosage

 is reported to be  linearly related to the  color ci  trie raw


water  (U).   Color in finished water supplies is

aesthetically undesirable to the consumer and economically

undesirable to some industries, but can he removed by

treatment processes (53, 51).
              b.   Odor

              To be acceptable for drinking water supplies,

raw water should be essentially free of any substance

causing odor problems.

Rationale (Odor) :

    The primary means of determining the acceptability of

drinking water are odor and taste.  Above a certain

threshold level drinking water becomes objectionable and

will most likely be rejected by the users v»ho will then turn

to other sources that rray fce less safe  (1).  The

effectiveness of conventional treatment in removing odor

causing substances is highly variable, depending on the

nature of the material causing the odor, and cannot be

depended upon.  This is tne reason that it was not feasible

to prescribe odor limits in terms of a threshold Oder number


(it).   It  is  indicated (3)  that an odor in polishea drinking

water  becomes  objectionable above a threshold number of

              c.    Temperature

              Temperature changes that detract from the

potability  of  public water supplies or that otherwise

interfere with the treatment process are unacceptable.

Rationale  (Temperature) :

    Although  no limit of  acceptable temperature is

prescribed, temperature changes in raw water used tor

drinking water supplies should be held to a minimum.

Changes in  temperature can adversely affect the quality of

raw water and  interfere with conventional treatment

processes used to produce drinking water.  Temperatures

above  certain  levels intensify taste and odor through

increased volatility of the source compound and thus affect

the water(s palatability  (55).  The growth of taste anu oaor

producing organisms may be stimulated by artificially

increasing  temperatures (56, 57, 58) .  Increase of


temperature or temperature changes during the standard

treatment process can adversely affect coagulation,

sedimentation, filtration, and chlorination (59, 60, 61,  o2)

though it would be desirable, the establishment or numerical

limits on temperature and temperature change is not

              d-   Turbidity

              No limits ot acceptability are prescribed tor

turbidity in raw water to be used for drinking water


Rationale (Turbidity):

    No limits are placed on turbidity of raw watei used for

water supplies because the customary methods for measuring

and reporting turbidity are inadequate tcr quantifying those

characteristics harmful to public water supplies ana water

treatment processing.  For instance, water may coagulate

more rapidly with 30 Jackscn turbidity units than water with

5 or 10 units, or wa^er with 30 Jackson turbidity units may

sometimes be more difficult tc coagulate than water with 100


units.   It  can  be seen,  therefore, that a valid turbidity

criteria in Jackson turbidity units cannot be established.

It is  also  not  possible,  in light of present knowleuge, to

establish limits  in mg/1  cf nonfilterable and undissoived

solids  because  the type  of plankton, clay, or earth

particles,  their  size and electrical charge are more

determining factors.  It  is stated that the amount of

turbidity in water must  relate to the ability of a treatment

plant  to economically remove it.  Most treatment plants are

designed to remove the turbidity existing at the time the

plant  is constructed. Any increase of turbidity over tnat

for which the plant is designed should not be alloweu  (4) ,
         Standards for radioactivity in drinking water

usually apply to finished drinking water.  Depending on tne

physical and chemical properties of the radioactive

material,  such commonly used water treatment processes as

filtration,  settling, softening, etc., may reduce tne

radioactivity present in the raw water used for input to

drinking water supplies, so that the radiological Duality of


the raw drinking water is not necessarily indicative of trie

quality of rhe finished waters.

         When raw water is consumed directly, the maximum

acceptable concentration of naturally occurrina

radionucliies having alpha ray emitting daughters, e.g.,

radium-226, -228, etc. is 5 pCi/1; and the maximum

acceptable aggregate dose tc the population  served by the

water supply is  3000 man-rem/year, unless the radium-226

activity is less than 0.5 pCi/1.

         Concentrations ot iran-made radionuclides that

result in an average dose rate to  the whole  body or any

specific organ exceeding 25 man-rem per year and/or and

aggregate dose to the population served by the water supply

exceeding 3000 man-rem/year are unacceptable.  This

aggregate dose limit shall not aptly tc strontium-90

exposures from atomic taonnb fallout.


Rationale	(Radioactivity^:

    Criteria for drinking water cannot be based on an

assumed harmless level of radiation dose.  Rather, controls

for both individual and population exposures shoulu be .oased

on the prudent assumption that there is no threshold aose

for ionizing radiation and that any health effects would be

proportional to the dose delivered by the ingested activity

(67) .   Since the absence of health effects cannot be

assumed, the radiological quality of water must meet two

criteria.  Not only must the risk to a prudent, individual

using  the water supply be so small as not be a cause of

undue  concern but the health impact on the total  population

using  the water supply also must  te limited, a criterion

best met by considering the sum total of all the  individual

doses  received by those persons using the supply.  Tnis

aggregate dose, in units cf man-rerr, should be so small that

regardless of the number of persons using the supply tnere

is a reasonable expectation of minimal health effects  in any

given year.  It is recognized  that a limit on aggregate aose

allows the dose to individuals tc vary within the limit  set

for individual risk depending  on  the size of  the  water

supply systems.  However, it also requires dose  reduction  to


be instituted as the population served by a supply


    An acceptable risk to individuals is usually not

considered in the development of criteria for drinKing

water, since it is expected that all health effects can be

averted.  Because this cannot be reasonably assumed in ttie

case of radioactive contamination, selection of an

acceptable risk depends on societal values.  The

conservative assumption maae here is that water supply users

will not  accept any level of radioactivity that would cause

a meaningful increase  in the probability that an individual

will develop cancer.   Estimates of the  increased cancer risk.

from small doses of ionizing radiation  are available, but it

must be recognized that such estimates, though rerlectiny a

mature analysis of the best available data, are stili

subject to a certain  degree of uncertainty.  Nevertheless, a

study of  the information given in reference 1 indicates a 25

mrem per  year  limit on the risk frcm drinking water,  is

small enough to  insure that any attendant  cancer  risk is not

likely  to involve mere than one in a hundred thousand

persons per  year of exposure.

     In  case  of radium contamination, dose  reductions  may be

realized  by  water treatment,  such as softening, dilution

with  less radioactive water  (usually surface waters)  or by


switching  entirely to a raw water supply containing a lower

concentration  of  radioactivity.  In all cases sucn

alternatives should consider bo-th t.he effect of such changes

on the  overall quality of the finished drinking wattr and

the most  economical means of realizing the required aose

reduction.   Because the daily intake of radium-22b trom food

usually equals or exceeds 1 pCi, the amount of radium in the

skeleton is relatively insensitive to the quantity of

radium-226 in  drinking water at concentrations less than 0,5

pCi/1.   Considering the high costs of removing radium at

such low concentrations, it is usually more effective to

control other routes of radionuclide ingestion.
         9,   Solids

              a.   Dissolved Solids

              No  limits  of  acceptability  are  prescribed  tor

 total dissolved solids in  raw  water  for drinking water


Rationale (Dissolved Sclids):

    It is not considered necessary to prescribe limits on

total dissolved solids in raw water used for drinkiny water

supplies because the two ircst troublesome salts in total

dissolved solids are limited elsewhere in the criteria.

These salts are chloride and sulfate.
              b.   Hardness

         No limit of acceptability  for hardness in raw water

used tor drinking water supplies  is prescribed.

Rationale  (Hardness):

    It is not possible tc  place a specific  limit on haraness

in raw water used for drinking water supplies  (1, U).  It  is

reported (77, 78, 79) that the metal ions which attect tne

hardness of water are o± no concern to human health,

although there are indications that they may influence trie

effect of other metal ions en scir.e  organisms.  Hardness in

water is largely a function of the  composition of yeologicai


formations of the area in which the water is located.  The

acceptability of a qiven water supply is determined by

consumer preference and is orten related to the haruness to

which the public has become accustomed  (1).


       References:  Public Water Supply Intake

1.  Water Ouality Criteria of 1972.  NAS Report - In press.

2.  McKee, J. E. and H. W. Wolf.  1963.  Water quality
      criteria.  California State Water Quality Control
      Beard, Sacramento, Publ. No. 3-A.

3.  Arthur D. Little, Inc.  1971.  Inorganic chemical
      pollution of freshwater.  Water Quality Data Book
      Vol. 2.  Environmental Protection Agency.

4.  U. S. Department of Health Education and Welfare,
      Public Health Service.  1962.  Public Health Service
      Drinking Water Standards.  PHS Publ. 956, U. S.
      Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.  61 p.

5.  Stokinger, H. E. and R. L. Woodward.  1958.  Toxicologic
      methods for establishing drinking water standards.
      J. Amer. Water Works Ass. 50(4): 515-529.

6.  National Technical Advisory Committee Report to the
      Secretary of the Interior.  1968.  Water quality
      criteria.  Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,

7.  Potts, A. M., F. P. Simon, J. M. Tobias, S. Postel,
      M. N. Swift, J. M. Patt, and R. W. Gerlad.  1950.
      Distribution and fate of cadmium in the animal body.
      Arch. Indust. Hyg. 2:175-188.

8.  Frant, S. and I. Kleeman.  1941.  Cadnium "food
      poisoning."  J. Amer. Med. Ass.  117:86-89.

9.  Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission
      Subcommittee on Toxicities.  1950.  Subcommittee
      report no. 3, Metal Finishing Industries Action

10. Yamagata, N.  1970.  Cadmium pollution in perspective.
      Koshu Eiseiin Kenkyu Hododu, Institute of Public
      Health, Tokyo, Japan 19(1):1-27.

11.  Whipple,  G.  C.  1907.  The value of pure water.
      John Wiley and Sons, N.Y.

12.  Environmental Protection Agency.  In Press.
      Drinking Water Standards.

13.  Kopp,  J.  F.   1969.  The occurrence of trace elements
      in water.   Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference
      on Trace Substances in Environmental Health edited by
      D. D.  Hemphill, University of Missouri, Columbia.
      pp.  59-73.

1U.  Durfor,  C. N. and E. Becker.  1964.  Public water supplies
      of the 100 largest cities in the United States, 1962.
      Geological Survey water supply paper 1812.  Government
      Printing Office, Washington, D. C.

15.  McCabe,  L. J., J. M. Symons, R. D. Lee and G. G. Robeck.
      1970.   Survey of community water supply systems.
      J. Amer. Water Works Ass. 62 (1) : 670-687.

16.  The Merck index of chemicals and drugs, 8th ed.  1968.
      Merck 6 Co. , Inc. , Rahway, New Jersey.

17.  Kehoe, R. A.  1947.  Exposure to lead.  Occup. Med.

18.  Chisholm, J. J., Jr.  1964.  Disturbances in the
      bio-synthesis heme in lead intoxication.
      J. Pediat, 64:174-187.

19.  Kehoe, R. A., J. Cholak and E. J. Largent.  1944.
      The concentration of certain trace metals in drinking
      water.   J. Amer. Water Works Ass. 36: 637.

20.  Gunnerson, C. B.  1966.  An atlas of water pollution
      surveillance in the U.S.  October 1, 1957 to
      September 30, 1965.  Federal Water Pollution Control
      Administration, Cincinnati, Ohio.  p. 78.

22.  Smith, M. I.  1941.  Chronic endemic selenium poisoning.
      J. Amer. Medical Ass. 116:562-567.

23.  Morris,  V, C. and O. A. Levander.  1970.  selenium
      content of foods.  J. Nutr.  100 (12) : 1385-1388.

24.  U.  S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
      Science, consumer and Food Economics Research Division,
      Food consumption of households in the United States.
      Spring 1965, Preliminary report.  Agricultural Research
      Service, Washington, D. C.

25.  Hill, W. R, and D. M. Pillsbury.  1957.  Argyria
      investigation - toxicologic properties of silver.
      American silver Producers Research Project Report
      Appendix II.

26.  Dahl, L. K.  1960.  Der mogliche einslub der salzzufuhr
      auf die entiwicklung der essentiellen hypertonie in
      Essential hypertension; an international symposium.
      P. T. Cottier and K. D, Bock, eds., Berlin-Wilmersdorf.
      pp. 61-75.

27.  Cohen, J. M., I. J. Kampshake,  E. K. Harris and
      R. L. Woodward.  1960.  Taste threshold concentrations
      of metals in drinking water.  J. Amer. Water Works Ass.

28. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water
      Quality, Region VII.  1971.   Report on Missouri
      River Water Quality Studies.  Environmental
      Protection Agency,  Kansas City, Missouri.

29. Geldreich, E. E.  1970.  Applying bacteriological
      parameters to recreational water quality.  J. Amer.
      Water Works Ass. 62(2):113-120.

30. Geldreich, E. E. and  R. H. Bordner.  1971.  Fecal
      contamination of fruits and vegetables during
      cultivation and processing for market.  A review.
      J. Milk Food Technol. 34 (4):184-195.

31. Middleton, F. M.  1961.  Nomenclature  for referring
      to organic extracts obtained  from carbon with chloroform
      or other solvents.  J. Amer.  Water Works Ass. 53:749.

32. Booth, R. L., J. N.  English and G. N.  McDermott,   1965.
      Evaluation of sampling conditions  in  the carbon
      adsorption method  CAM.  J. Amer. Water Works Ass.

33.  Hueper,  W.  C.  and W.  W. Payne.  1963.   Carcinogenic effects
      of  adsorbates of raw and finished water supplies.
      Atner.  J.  Clin.  Path. 39 (5) : 475-481.

34.  American Public Health Association, American water
      Works  Association,  and Water Pollution Control
      Federation.   1971.   Standard methods for the
      examination  of  water arid waste water, 13th Ed.
      Amer.  Public Health Ass., Washington, D. C.

35.  Braus,  H.,  F.  M.  Middleton and G. Walton.  1951.
      Organic  chemical compounds in raw and filtered
      surface  waters.  Anal. chem, 23:1160-1164.

36.  Middleton,  F.  M.  and J. J. Lichtenberg.  1960.
      Measurements of organic contaminants in the nation1s
      rivers.   Ind. Eng.  Chem. 52  (6):99A-102A.

37.  Middleton,  F.  M.   1961a.  Detection and measurement
      of  organic chemicals in water and waste.  Robert
      A.  Taft  Sanitary Engineering Center Technical
      Report W61-2, Cincinnati, Ohio.

38.  American Water Works Association.  Task Group 2500R
      1966.   Oil pollution of water supplies - Task
      Group Report.  J. Amer. Water Works Ass. 58:813-821.

39.  The Johns  Hopkins University.   Department of Sanitary
      Engineering and Water Resources.  Institute for
      Cooperative Research.  195b.  Final report to tae
      Water Quality Subcommittee of the American petroleum
      Institute.  Project FG 49.41.  The University,
      Baltimore.  mimecgraph.

40.  Rosen,  A.  A., J.  B. Peter, and F. M. Middleton.
      1962.   Odor thresnolds ct mixed organic chemicals.
      J.  Water Pollut. Ccntr. Fed. 34(i):7-14.

41.  Burtcschell, R. H. , A. A. Rosen, F. F,. Middlemen ana
      M.  B.  Ettinger.  1959.  Chlorine derivatives  of
      phenol causing taste and odor.  J. Amer. Water Works
      Ass.  51 (2) :205-214.

42.  Dale, W. E., T. B. Gaines, W. J. Hayes, and G. W.
      Pearce.  1963.  Poisoning by DDT:  Relation between
      clinical signs and concentration in rat brain.
      Science 142:1474-1476.

43.  Durham, W. F. and W. J. Hayes.  1962.  Organic phosphorus
      poisoning and its therapy.  Arch. Environ. Health

44.  Grob, L.  1950.  Uses and hazards of the organic
      phosphate antichlorinesterase compounds.  Ann. Int.
      Med. 32:1229-1234.

45.  Lehman, A. J.  1951.  Chemicals in foods:  A report
      to the Association of Focd and Drug Officials on
      currant developments. Part II.  Association of the
      Food Drug office U. S. Quarterly Bulletin 15:122-133.

46.  Drill, V. A. and T. Hiratzka.  1953.    Toxicity of
      2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and 2,4,5-trichloro-
      phenoxyacetic acid; A report on their acute and chronic
      toxicity in dogs.  A.M.A. Arch. Indust. Hyg. 7:t>l-b7.

47.  Berwick, P.  1970.  2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
      poisoning in man.  J. of the Amer. Med. Ass. 214 (6) :

48.  Lehman, A. J.  1965.  Summaries of pesticide toxicity.
      Association of Food and Drug Officials of txie U. S. ,
      Topeka, Kansas, pp. 1-40.

49.  Mullison, W. R,  1966.  Some toxicological aspects of
      silvex.  Paper presented at Scurthern Weed
      Conference, Jacksonville, Florida.

50.  Courtney, X. D. , D. Vi. Gaylor, M. D. Hog an, II. L. Faik,
      P. R. Bates, and I. Mitchell.  1970.  Teratogenic
      evaluation of 2,4,5-1.  Science 168:864-866.

51.  Hall, E. S. and R. F. Packham.  1965.  Coagulation of
      organic color with hydrolyzing coagulants.  J. Amer.
      Water Works Ass. 57 (9):1149-1166.

52.  Frisch,  N. W. and R. Kunin.  1960.  Organic foulin-j of
      anion-exchange resins.  J. Amer. Water Works Ass.
      52 (7) :875-887.

53.  Black,  A.  P., J. E. Singley, G. F. Whittle, and J. S.
      Maulding.  1963.  Stcichioiretry of the coagulation
      of color-causing compounds with ferric sulfate.
      J. Amer. Water Works Ass. 55 (10) :1347-1366.

54.  American Water Works Association.  Research Committee
      on Color Problems.  1967.  Committee report for 196b.
      J. Amer. Water Works Ass. 59 (8):1023-1035.

55.  Burnson, B.  1938.  Seasonal temperature variations in
      relation to water treatmert.  J. Amer. Water works
      Ass.  30  (5) : 793-811.

56.  Kofoid,  C. A.  1923.  Microscopic organisms in
      reservoirs  in relation to the esthetic qualities
      of potable  waters.  J. Amer. Water Works Ass.

57.  Thompson,  R.  E.  1944.  Factors influencing the growtn
      of algae in water.  Canad. Engr. 82 (10):24.

58.  Silvey,  J. K.G., J. C. Russel, D. R. Redden, and
      W. C.  McCormick.  1950.  Actinomycetes and common
      tastes and  odors.  J. Amer. Water Works Ass.

59.  Velz,  C. J.  1934.  Influence of temperature on
      coagulation.  Civil Engr. 4 (7) : 345-349.

60.  American Water Works Association.  1971,  Water quality
      and -treatment.  3rd Edition.  McGraw-Hill Book, Co. ,
      New York.

61.  Hannah,  S. A., J. M. Cohen and G. G. Robeck.  19t>7.
      Control  techniques for coagulation-filtration.
      J. Amer. Water Works Ass. 59 (9):1149-1163.

62.  Ames,  A. M. and W. W. Smith.  1944.  The temperature
      coefficient of the bactericidal action of chlorine.
      J. Bact. 47(5) : 445.

63. Cairns, J., Jr. and A. Scheier.  1958.  The effects
      of temperature and hardness of water upon tne
      toxicity of zinc to the pond snail, Physa
      heterostrapha (Say).  Notulae Naturae 308:1-11.

64. Mount, D. I.  1966.  The effect of total hardness and
      pH on acute toxicity of zinc to fish.  Air Wat«jr
      Pollut. 10 (1) : 49-56.

65. U. S. Federal Radiation Council.  1961a.  Radiation
      protection guidance for federal agencies:
      memorandum for the President, September 13, 1961.
      Fed. Reg, 26 (185):9057-9058.


66.   U.  S.  Federal Radiation Council.   1961b.   Background
      material for the development of radiation protection
      standards,  staff report.   September,  1961.  Government
      Printing Office, Washington, D. C.

67.   National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council.
      1972.   The  effects on polulation of exposure to low
      levels of ionizing radiation.  Report of the Advisory
      Committee on the biological effects of ionizing radiation.
      U.  S.  Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.  217 pp,

VI  Marine Water Constituents  (Aquatic Life)
    A.   Aquatic Life

         1«   Acidity, Alkalinity, pH  (Buffer Capacity).

         The acceptable  range of pH is  6.5 to 8.5.  Within

this range  fluctuation of  0.2 units in  either direction trom

normal  are  acceptable.

Rationale  (pH):

    Despite the great emphasis  on  the  importance of pH in

the existing literature, very little is known of its  airect

physiological  effects on marine organisms.   It  is  known,

however, that  pH changes in the marine  environment can be

extremely significant.   Even a  slight  change in pH indicates

that the buffering capacity of  sea water has been

drastically altered  and  that a  potential or  actual carbon

dioxide imbalance exists.   In addition, when the ph ot

receiving sea  water  changes, the  duration of the variation

can be  extremely  important to the  survival of organisms.

The normal  pH  range  in sea water  is considerably narrower


than that found in fresh waters.   At the surface of tue sea,

pH normally varies from 8.0 to 8.3, depending on the partial

pressure of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the

salinity and temperature of the water.  In shallow,

biologically-active waters, however, particularly in warm

tropical areas, there is a large diurnal variation in pH,

with values as high as 9.5 in the daytime and as lew as 7.3

at night or in the early morning.  Plankton and benthic

invertebrates are probably more sensitive than fish to

changes in pH.  Oysters appear to survive best in brackisn

waters when the pH is about 7.0.  At a pH of 6.5 ana lower,

however, the rate of pumping decreases notably and  the time

the shells remain open is  reduced by 90 percent  (1, 2).

Oyster larvae are damaged  at a pH of 9.0 and killed at 9.1

in a few hours, and the upper pH limit for crabs nas been

reported as  10.2  (3).


         2.   Dissolved Gases
              a.   Ammonia

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

ammonia in marine or estuarine waters is 1/10  (0.1) or tne

96-hour LCj"O value determined using the receivinq water in

question and the most important sensitive species in the

locality as the test organism.  Concentrations of un-ionized

ammonia in marine or estuarine waters in excess ot 0.4 mg/i

are unacceptable.

Rationale  (Ammonia) :

    Most of the information available on the toxicity ot

ammonia is for freshwater organisms.  However, because or

the slightly higher alkalinity of sea water and the larger

proportion of un-ionized ammonium hydroxide, ammonia may be

more toxic in sea water than  in fresh water  (U).


              b.    cniorine

              The maximum acceptable concentration of  free

residual chlorine in marine and estuarine waters is 1/10

(0.1)  of the 96-hour LC^p value determined using the

receiving water in question and the most important sensitive

species in the locality as the test organism.

Concentrations of free residual chlorine in marine or

estuarine waters in excess of 0.01 mg/1 are unacceptaole.

Rationale  (Chlorine) :

    Chlorine  is generally  present in the stable chloride

form which  constitutes about  1.9  percent of  sea water.

Elemental chlorine, which  is  a  poisonous gas  at normal

temperature and  pressure,  is  generally produced by

electrolysis  of  a  brine  solution.  When dissolved in  water,

chlorine gas  completely  hydrolizes to  form hypochlorous acid

 (HOCl)  or its dissociated  ions; at concentrations below 1000

mg/1  no chlorine exists  in solution as Cl~ .   The

dissociation  of  HOCl  to  H* and OCl- depends on the pH:  4

percent is dissociated at  pH 6, 25 percent at pH 7, and 97

percent at pH 9; the  undissociated form is the most toxic

 (5).   Although free chlorine is toxic in itself to aquatic


organisms, combinations of chlorine with ammonia, cyanide,

and organic compounds such as phenols and amines, may be

even more toxic and can impart undesirable flavors to

seafood.  Chlorine is one of the few elements for whicn

experimentation has demonstrated the specific toxicity ot

the chemical to marine organisms.  Studies of irritant

responses of marine fishes to chlorine showed a slignt

irritant activity at 1 mg/1 and violent irritant activity at

10 mg/1  (6).  Oysters are sensitive to chlorine

concentrations of 0.01 to 0.05 mg/1 and react by reuuciny

pumping activity.  At higher Cl  concentrations 01 1.0 mg/1,

effective pumping could not be maintained  (7).  Adult

mussels  (Mvtilus edulis) were killed by exposure to ^.5 mg/1

of chlorine within 5 days (8).  Two species of copepods

(Acartia tonsa and Eurvtemona affinis) showed extremely

rapid mortality to low doses of chlorine  (9).  The LD^-o for

Acartia at 10 mg/1 of chlorine was 36 seconds; the LD^ for

Eurvtemona at a similar dose was 120 seconds.


              c-    Hydrogen Sulfide

              The maximum acceptable hydrogen sulfide

concentration in marine or estuarine waters is 0.1 oi the

96-hour LC^o value determined using the receiving water in

question and the most important sensitive species in the

locality as the test organism.  Concentrations of hydrogen

sulfide in excess 0.01 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters

are unacceptable.

Rationale  (Hydrogen Sulfide):

    Sulfides are quite toxic to marine organisms, clue in

part to their fairly high solubility in water.  At 20

degrees C. hydrogen sulfide is soluble in water to the

extent of 4,000 mg/1  (3).  Further, the tcxicity of  sultxaes

to fish increases as the pH decreases  (10).   Small amounts

of hydrogen sulfide are fatal to  sensitive species such as

trout at concentrations of 0.05 mg/1, even in neutral and

somewhat alkaline solutions  (11).  Bioassays  with

salmon  (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and  sea trout  (Salmo

demonstrated toxic effects from hydrogen  sulfide at  1.0 mg/1

 (12, 13, 14).  Hydrogen sulfide in bottom sediments  can

affect benthic invertebrate populations  (15).

              d.   pjssolved Oxygen

              Minimum acceptable dissolved oxygen Levels in

marine or estuarine waters are 6.0 mg/1, except when

temporary natural phenomena cause this value to be

decreased.  Dissolved oxygen concentrations below U.O mg/1

in marine or estuarine waters are unacceptable.

Rationale  (Dissolved oxygen):

    Although information is available on the dissolved

oxygen requirements of freshwater aquatic organisms, tne

requirements of marine organisms have not been studied as

extensively, and specific  information is quite sparse.  The

larvae of  the clam  IMercenaria mercenaria) cannot tolerate

oxygen levels below 4.0  mg/1, and additional experimentation

indicates  that  it is essential to consider responses of

developing eggs and larvae of marine species,  as well as  the

juvenile and adult  individuals  (16, 17).  However,

information extrapolated from freshwater experimentation

indicates  that  it is essential to consider responses of

developing eggs and larvae of marine species,  as well as  the

 juvenile  and adult  individuals.  Further, consideration must

be  given to the distribution of  dissolved oxygen with


increasing  depth,  since even under natural conditions low

oxyqen  concentrations may be found in estuaries, where there

are a reduction  in salinity and increases in temperature

over deeper open ocean waters.
         3-    Inorganics, jIons and Free Elements/CgiMJOundgj
              a.    Aluminum

              The maximum acceptable aluminum concentrations

in marine or estuarine waters and 1/100  (0.01) of the 96-

hour LC56-; value determined using the receiving water in

question and the most important sensitive species in tne

locality as the test organism.  Concentrations of aluminum

in excess of 1.5 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters are



Rationale (Aluminum):

    Aluminum was reported  (18) to be concentrated  15,000

times in benthic algae, 10,000 times in phytoplanktori and

zooplankton, 9,000 times in the soft parts of molluscs,

12,000 times in crustacean muscle, and 10,000 times in tish

muscle.  Because it tends to be concentrated by marine

organisms, an application factor should be applied to marine

96-hour LCgo data.  Except for some nonconclusive  research

(19, 20), specific work on the toxicity of aluminum

compounds to marine organisms is sparse.  However, aluminum

hydroxide is known to have an adverse effect on boctom

              b.   Antimony

              The maximuir acceptable concentration of

antimony in marine or estuarine waters is 1/50  (0.02) of the

96-hour LCj^j value determined using the receiving water xn

question and the most important sensitive species in the

locality as the test organism.  Concentrations of antimony

in excess of 0,2 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters are



Rationale  (Antimony):

    Few  of  the salts of antimony have been tested in

bioassays,  particularly on marine organisms.  However, it is

known that  antimony can be concentrated by various marine

organisms to more than 300 times the amount present in sea

water (21).   The average values of antimony from the world's

oceans were reported to be 0.33 mg/1 (22).  Certain marine

animals  have revealed a tissue concentration of 0.2 mg/k.g

antimony (23).
              c.    Arsenic

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

arsenic in marine or estuarine waters is 1/100  (0.01) of the

96-hour l*Cco value determined using the receiving water in

question and the most important sensitive species in tne

locality as the test organism.  Concentrations  of arsenic in

excess of 0.05 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters are



Rationale (Arsenic):

    Arsenic is normally present in sea water at

concentrations of 2 to 3 ug/1 and tends to be accumulated by

oysters and other molluscan shellfish  (18, 2

Rationale (Barium) :

    All  water or acid-soluble barium ccumpounds are

poisonous.   However, in sea water the suifate and

present  tend to precipitate barium.  The concentration of

barium in sea water is generally accepted at about 20 ug/1


    Concentration factors for barium have been reported as

17,000 for phytoplankton, 900 for zooplankton, ana d tor

fish muscle (18).  Further, Russian marine radioactivity

studies  showed accumulation of radioactive barium in organs,

bones, scales, and gills of fish trom the Northeast Pacific

              e.   Beryllium

              The maximum acceptable concentration 01

beryllium in marine or estuarine waters shall not exceed

1/100 (0.01)  of the 96-hour LQ^. value determined usiny the

receiving water in question and the most  important sensitive

species in the locality as the test organism.

Concentrations of beryllium in marine or  estuarine waters in

excess of 1.5 mg/1 are unacceptable.


Rationale (Beryllium):

    An application factor is required because of the

accumulation of beryllium by marine organisms, its apparent

toxicity to humans.  The concentration of beryllium in sea

water is 0.6 ug/1  (3).  It has been reported to be

concentrated 1000 times in marine plants and animals  (27).

In addition, beryllium has been shown to inhibit

photosynthesis in terrestrial plants  (29); however, it is

unknown if the same  effect occurs in marine flora.
              f.   Bismuth

              No level of acceptability tor concentration ox

bismuth in marine or estuarine waters is prescribed.

Rationale  (Bismuth):

    There are no bioassay data on which to base criteria for

bismuth.  The concentration of bismuth in sea water is low,

about 0.02 uq/1, probably because of the insolubility of its

salts  (3).  It is unknown how much bismuth actually gets

into the sea from man-made sources, but the quantity is


probably small.   Concentrations of 0.0« to 0,3 mg/1 have

been  reported for marine animals, indicatinq concentration

factors up to 10,000 (23).
              q.    Boron

              The maximum acceptable concentration ct boron

in marine and estuarine waters is 1/10  (0.1) of trie 9o-hour

LCg£> value determined using the receiving water in cjuestioa

and the most important sensitive species in the locality as

the test organism.

Rational (Boron) :

    Boron normally occurs in mineral deposits as sodium

borate (borax) or calcium borate  (colemarite).  The

concentration of boron in sea water is  U.5  mq/1  (3).

Available data on toxicity of boron to  aquatic oryanisms are

from fresh water; however, since the toxicity is sligntly

lower in hard water than in distilled water, it is

anticipated that boric acid and borates would be less toxic

to marine aquatic life than to freshwater orqanisms  (->) .  An

uncertainty exists concerning the effect of boron on marine


vegetation.  In view of the harm that can be caused to

terrestrial plants by boron in excess of 1 mg/1 (25),

special precautions should be taken to maintain boron  at

ambient marine levels near kelp, eel grass, and other

seaweed beds to minimize damage to these plants.
              The maximum acceptable concentration ot tree

(molecular) bromine in marine and estuarine waters is 0.1

mg/1; further the maximum acceptable concentration ot ionic

bromine in the form of bromate in those waters is 100 mg/I,

Rationale  (Bromine) :

    Ionic bromine is one of the major constituents in sea

water, being present in concentrations of about 67 mg/1  (3) .

Bromination of certain organic substances, such as phenols

and amines, may impart offensive tastes and make waters  more

toxic to aquatic organisms.  In one of the few experiments

with bromine on marine  organisms, a violent irritant

response in marine fish was observed with a dose ot  10 mg/1

bromine, but no such activity was perceived at 1 mg/1  (6) .


              i.    Cadmium

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

cadmium in marine or estuarine waters is 1/100  (0.01) of the

96-hour 1>Cf  value  determined using the receiving water in

question and  the most important sensitive species in the

locality as the  test organism.  In waters known to have

concentrations of  copper and/or zinc in excess of 1 mg/1,

the maximum application factor for cadmium is 1/1000  (0.001)

of the  96-hour LC^ value.  Concentrations of cadmium in

oarine  or  estuarine waters in excess of 0.01 mg/1 are



Rationale  (Cadmium) :

    Concern exists that cadmium may enter the diet, .tike

mercury, through seafood.  Cadmium, also like mercury, couid

form organic compounds which might be highly toxic or lead

to mutagenic or teratogenic effects.  Cadmium is known to

have marked acute and chronic effects on aquatic organisms.

American oysters (Crassostrea virginica) had an LD^ of 0,2

mg/1 after 8 weeks exposure, but 0.1 mg/1 after 15 weeks

exposure (30).

    Cadmium also acts synergistically with other metals.  It.

inhibits shell growth in oysters (31), and low doses ot

cadmium (0.03 mg/1) in combination with zinc (0.15 mg/1)

will kill Chinook salmon fry (32).  Killifish (Fundulus

heteroclitus) exposed to 50 mg/1 cadmium showed pathological

changes in the intestinal tract after 1-hour exposure, ana

in the kidney after 12 hours (33).  copper and zinc, when

present at 1 mg/1 more, substantially increase the toxicit>

of cadmium (34).  Cadmium is concentrated by marine

organisms,  particularly molluscs, which accumulate caamium

in calcareous tissues and in the viscera (35).   A

concentration factor of 1000 for cadmium in fish muscle has

been reported (18), as have concentration factors ot 3000 in


marine plants,  and  up to 29,600 in  certain marine animals

              j.    ChromJLum

              The maximum acceptable chromium concentrations

in marine or estuarine waters is 1/100 (0.01)  of the 96-hour

LC^c? value determined using the receiving water in question

and the most important sensitive species in the locality as

the test organism,  concentrations of chromium in marine or

estuarine waters in excess of 0.1 mg/1 are unacceptable.

Rationale (Chromium) :

    Although most of the available information on toxicity

of chromium is for freshwater organisms, a few experiments

have been reported specifically for marine organisms.

Because of the sensitivity of lower forms of aquatic lite to

chromium and its accumulation at all trophic levels, an

application factor is required.  Chromium concentrations in

sea water generally have been reported between 0.04 and 0.4

mg/1 (3, 36), but concentration factors of 1,600 in bentaic


algae, 2,300 in phytoplanktcn, 1,900 in zooplankton, 440 in

soft parts of molluscs, 100 in crustacean muscle, and 70 in

fish muscle have been reported (18).  Chromium threshold

toxicity levels of 1 mg/1 tor the polychaete Nereis virens,

5 mg/1 for the prawn Leander squilla, and 20 mg/1 for the

crab Carcinus maenus have been reported (37).  Chromium

concentrations of 31.8 mg/1 caused 100 percent mortality to

coho salmon (Oncgrhynchus kjsutch)  in sea water, with the

time unspecified (38),   A chromium concentration o± 1 mg/1

reduced photosynthesis by 10 to 20 percent in the giant kelp

(Macrocystis pyrifera)  after 5 days exposure  (39).
              k.   Copper

              The maximum acceptable concentration of copper

(expressed as Cu) in marine and estuarine waters is 1/100

(0.01)  of the 96-hour LCjQ value determined by using the

receiving water in question and the most important sensitive

species in the locality as the test organism.

Concentrations of copper in marine or estuarine waters in

excess of 0.05 mg/1 are unacceptable.


Rationale  (Copper) :

    Copper  is  present in sea water in concentrations ranging

from 1  to 25 ug/1;  however,  the values are generally less

than 3  ug/1 (82).   In small  amounts, copper is nonlethal to

aquatic organisms;  in fact,  it is essential for some

respiratory pigments (25); however, it is accumulated by

marine  organisms,  with concentration factors of 30,000

reported in phytoplankton, 5,000 in the soft tissues of

molluscs, and  1,000 in fish  muscle  (18, 40).  Copper is

toxic to invertebrates, and  because of this property it is

used extensively in marine anti-fouling paints.  Molluscs,

particlarly,  show great sensitivity to copper compounds.

Tv?o species of West Coast molluscs, Acmaea scabra and

Haliotis fulgens,  when exposed to 0.1 mg/1 copper show 100

percent mortality within 72  hours  (41).  Another mollusc,

the mussel  Mytilus edulis, showed 100 percent mortality at

0.14 mg/1 copper within 24 hours  (42).  Work has also been

done on the sensitivity of other molluscs to copper.  Copper

is toxic to oysters at low concentrations  (25, 43,  44),

although the  toxicity apparently varies between species

(45).  Additionally, oysters exposed to concentrations of

copper  as low as 0.13 mg/1 turn green in about 21 days  (43),

and although such concentrations of copper are neither


lethal to the oysters nor harmful to man,  green oysters are

unmarketable because of their appearance.   Thus, in the

vicinity of oyster grounds, copper should  not be introduced

into areas where shellfish may become contaminated.  Other

marine invertebrates and plants have shown a sensitivity to

copper compounds.  The copepod Arcartia clausi when exposed

to a dose of 0.5 mg/1 copper, showed an Lfyc,  within 13 hours

(11).  The tubeworm Sjoirobis lamellosa, also exposed to a

dose of 0.5 mg/1 copper, had an LDj

             1,   Fluorides

             The maximum  acceptable  concentration  ot

fluorides in marine and  estuarine  waters  is  1/10  (0.1)  ot

the 96-hour LC^p value determined  using the  receiving  water

In question and the most important sensitive species in the

locality as the test  organism.   Concentrations of fluoride

in excess of  1.5 mg/1 in marine  or estuarine waters are


Rationale  (Fluorides):

   There  is  virtually no information available on the

effect of  fluorides on marine organisms.   The only data are

from  a study  which indicates that the concentration ot

fluoride in the ocean occurs in two  forms:  approximately

half  as the unbound fluoride ion, F-, with a range between

0.4  to 0.7 mg/1;  the other fluoride  component is oound as

the double ion MgF*-, which has a  similar concentration

              The maximum acceptable concentration of  iron

in marine and estuarine waters is  0.3 rnq/1.

Rationale (Iron) :

    In the marine environment, iron is most  otten present

either in organic complexes or in  the ferric form adsorbed

on particulate matter.  However,  because of  the sligntly

alkaline condition of sea water much of the  ferric term

precipitates out  (3).  Thus, ferric hydroxide floes may

contaminate marine sediments, where commercially important

invertebrate species, such as oysters, clams, scallops,

lobsters, crabs or shrimp would be affected.  Although

damage to aquatic organisms is known from the smothering ana

coating action of these floes, the evidence  is availaole

only from fresh water experimentation  (10, 51-56).  It. is

known, however, that iron is a necessary element in th«

formation of porphyrins, whose uptake ir.ay be either by

ingestion of food or directly from the aquatic environment:.


              n.    Lead

              The maximum acceptable concentration of lead

in marine or estuarine waters is 1/50  (0.02) of the ^o-hour

LCj-£> value determined using the receivinq water in question

and the most important sensitive species in the locality as

the test orqanism.  Further, the maximum acceptable 24-hour

average concentration is 1/100 (0.01) of the 96-hour LCSf'

Concentrations of lead in marine or estuarine waters in

excess of 0.05 mg/1 are unacceptable.

Rationale (Lead):

    Certain marine plants have the ability to concentrate

lead up to 40,000 times and certain marine animals up to

2,000 times (57).  Very few experiments have been performed

on the biological effects of lead on marine organisms.  It

has been found that lobsters died within 20 days when ntid

in lead-lined tanks (20); the TLm for oysters (Crassostrea

yirginica) ,  was found to be 0.5 mg/1 lead wher. exposed for

12 weeks (30) ; and the 48-hour LC^t;> for Crassostrea

yirginica eggs was found to be 2.45 mg/1 (57).

         o.   Manganese

              The maximum acceptable concentration OL

manganese in marine or estuarine waters is 1/50  (0.02)  of

the 96-hour LCso value determined using the receiving  water

in question and the most important sensitive species in tae

locality as the test organism,   concentrations of  manganese

in excess of 0.1 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters are


Rationale (Manganese):

    Manganese apparently has varying effects on lower

trophic levels of aquatic organisms.  Manganese

concentrations of 5 ug/1 have a toxic effect on certain

freshwater algae (58), whereas 0.5 ug/1 manganese   (a

decrease of only one order of magnitude) when added to

marine diatom and flagellate cultures stimulated ootn tneir

growth and reproduction rate (59).  Further, in studies on

the uptake of radionuclides in the area of the Pacitic

testing grounds at Bikini and Eniwetok, it was found that

the radionuclide Mn 5U was concentrated as much as 4,uOO

times in phytoplankton and 12,000 times in the soft tissues

of molluscs  (18, 60).


              p.    Mercury

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

mercury in  marine or estuarine waters is 1/100 (0.01) of the

96-hour LCr,o value determined using th<= receiving water in

question and the  most important sensitive species in the

locality as the test organism.  Concentrations of mercury in

excess  of 1.0 ug/1 in marine or estuarine waters are

unacceptable.  Further, intentionally adding mercury to

marine  or estuarine waters is unacceptable.

Rationale (Mercury) :

    The behavior  of mercury in the marine environment is not

completely  understood.  Organo-mercurials are more nigaly

concentrated by organisms than are inorganic mercury  (b1).

It was  found (62) that 82 percent of the mercury in Swedish

marine  fish was methylmercuric chloride.  In addition to

being biologically concentrated to a greater degree  than

inorganic mercury compounds, organo-mercurials are mucn more

toxic than  inorganic mercury to marine organisms (63).  Nine

mercuric salts and 23 organo-mercury compounds were  tested

(6U)  on the snail 

hours  at  1 ma/1.  Twelve organo-mercury  compounds,  on the

other  hand, produced significant nortalities  at  the 0.3 ng/1

level.  In many species of marine phytoplankton

photosynthetic activity has been shovm to he  inhibited bv a

variety of nercury compounds  (65).  Vertebrate marine

organisns have also experienced marked detrimental  effects

from mercury compounds.  It was reported  (6f) that  mercuric

chloride drastically alters the cytological structure of the

epithelium of the skin and gills in fish, and studies

conducted on developing salmon eggs  (Pncorhynchus nerka and

Hi. gorb.vischa) showed that concentrations of mercury at

levels e:rceedinn 3 ug/1 mercury  (derived from mercuric

sulfate) led to severe deformities  (67).  Concentration

factors have been reported to range from 200  for marine

diatoms (68) to 10,000 for marine teleosts  (69).  Further,

the acute toxicity of mercury to invertebrate marine

organisms is high.  Bivalve larvae were killed by 20 ucr/1 of

mercuric chloride (70); copepods (Acartia clausi) were

killed in 2.5 hours by 50 ug/1  (71); 1.0 mg/1 of mercuric

chloride was lethal to adult barnacles (Balanus  balanoides)

within 43 hours (42); and the I-J>5o for tubeworn  larvae

(Spirorbis lamellosa) was found to be 0.14 mg/1  in  2 hours



              q .   Mol. y.*2£!£!liiSl

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

molybdenum in marine or estuarine waters is  1/20  (0.05) of

the 96-hour LD^c value determined using the  receiving  water

in question and the most important sensitive species in the

locality as the test organism.

Rationale (Molybdenum):

    Molybdenum has been found to be a needed micronutxient

for the normal growth of phytoplankton  (72); thus, it  may

play a vital role in the balance of ecosystems because ot

its requirement in algal physiology.  Molybdenum

concentrations for coastal marine waters range between 6 and

16 ug/1 (973, 7U, 75).  It can be concentrated from 8  to 60

times by a variety of marine crganisms  including  benthic

algae, zooplankton, molluscs, crustaceans,  and teleosts



              r.   Nickel
              The maximum acceptable nickel concentrdcion in

marine or estuarine waters is 1/50 (0.02)  of the 96-hour IC

value determined using the receiving water in question and

the most important sensitive species in the locality as the

test organism,  concentrations of nickel in excess of 0.1

mg/1 in marine or estiuarine waters are unacceptable.


Rationale (Nickel) :

    Marine  toxicity  dat.a for nickel are limited.  It is

known,  however, that nickel ions are toxic, particularly to

plant life,  and may  have increased toxicity when in cue

presence of other metallic ions.  Nickel is present in

coastal and open ocean concentrations in the ranqe u. 1 - t>.G

uq/1, although the most common values are  2-3 ug/1.

Marine animals contain up to 400 -ug/1, and marine plants

contain up  to 3,000  uq/1 (22).  The lethal limit of nickel

to sticklebacks has  been reported a-s 0.8 n.g/l  (12);

concentrations of 13.1 mg/1 were reported  to cause a 50

percent photosynthesis reduction in giant  kelp  (^

E£rifera)  in 96 hours  (39); and a concentration of 1.54 mg/1

was found to be the  LC^^j value for eqqs of the oyster

(Crassostrea yirginica)  $57).
              s-   Phosphorus

              The maximum acceptable elemental  phosphorus

concentration in marine or estuarine waters  is  1/10U  (0.01)

of the 96-hour LC/p value determined using the  receiving

water in question and the most important  sensitive  species


in the locality as the test organism.   Concentrations ot  tne
elemental phosphorus in excess of 0.1  ug/1 in marine or
estuarine waters are unacceptable.

Rationale (Phosphorus):

    Phosphorus in the elemental form is particularly toxic
and subject to bioaccumulation in much the same way as
mercury  (76, 77),  Colloidal elemental phosphorus will
poison marine fish causing surface discoloration resulting
from hemolysis.  Also, phosphorus is capable of being
concentrated and will accumulate in organs and soft tissues.
Experiments have shown that marine fish will concentrate
phosphorus from water containing as little as 1 ug/1  (78).
In a series of experiments, the tissues of cod swimming in
water containing 1 ug/1 elemental phosphorus for 18 hours
were analyzed.  White muscle contained about 50 ug/kg, tat
tissue about 150 ug/kg, and the liver 25,000 ug/1  (78, 79).


              t.    Selenium

              The maximum acceptable selenium concentration

in marine or estuarine waters is 1/100 (0.01)  of the 96-hour

LCi(2  value determined using the receiving water in question

and the most important sensitive species in the locality as

the test organism,  concentrations of selenium in excess or

0.01 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters are unacceptable.

Rationale (Selenium) :

    The concentration of selenium in open oceans has

generally been reported as about 0.1 ug/1, with a range of

0,05 to 0.12 being the nominal values from the literature

(22).  In coastal waters, selenium values are generally

higher; values of 0.25 ug/1 for Puget Sound (80) ana 4-6

ug/1 (81) for the coastal areas of the Sea of Japan have

been reported.  There is no selenium bioassay information

for marine species in the literature; however, selenium is

known to be concentrated by some seaweeds  (82).


              u.   Silver

              The maximum acceptable silver concentration in

marine or estuarine waters is 1/20 (0,05)  of the 96-hour L

value determined using the receiving water in question and

the most important sensitive species in the locality as the

test organism,  concentrations of silver in excess of 0.5

ug/1 in marine or estuarine waters are unacceptable.

Rationale (Silver):

    Silver is toxic to marine organisms and has been round

to be concentrated by marine organisms by factors ranging

from 80 for marine algae up to 1,000 for marine mammals

(82).  At UOO ug/1 silver sulfate killed 90 percent or the

barnacles (Balanus balonoides) tested in <48 hours (U2) .  At

concentrations of 100 ug/1, silver nitrate caused aonormal

or inhibited development of eggs of the sea urchin

Paracentrotus (83) ; concentrations of 2 ug/1 delayed

development an 1 caused defcrmation of the resulting t/

Adverse effects occurred at concentrations below 0.2t>

and several days were required for recovery after placing

the organisms in clean water.  Detrimental effects en


development of the sea urchin Arbacia due to silver nitrate

have been reported at approximately 0.5 ug/1 (25, 83).

In a study of the effects of silver salts on marine

teleosts, it was reported (84)  and generally supported (85)

that the lethal concentration limit of silver nitrate tor

sticklebacks (Gasterostgus sp.)  was 0.003 mg/1, with 0.0048

mg/1 being the toxic threshold level.  Also reported  (66)

were adverse effects on the liver enzymes of the killitish

Fundulus heteroclitus resulting from 0.04 mg/1 of silver.

On a comparative basis, in studies on ochinoderm eggs,

silver has been found to be about 80 times as toxic as zinc,

20 times as toxic as copper and 10 times as toxic as mercury

              v.   Thallium

              The maximum acceptable thallium concentration

in marine or estuarine waters is 1/20  (0.05) of tne 20-day

LCi,-0  value determined using the receiving water in question

and the most important sensitive species in the locality as

the test organism.  Concentrations of thallium in excess of

0.1 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters are unacceptaDle.

Rationale (Thallium):

    On the basis of very few observations, the concentration

of thallium in open ocean waters is regarded as less trian

0.01 ug/1.  It is concentrated to some extent in giant Kelp

(Macrocv.stis pyrifera) (87), and there is one report of

concentration factors of approximately 100 in marine

invertebrates (88).  There is no information on trie effects

of thallium compounds on marine organisms.  It is Known from

freshwater experimentation, however, that thallium salts are

cumulative and long-term poisons, and that the mode of

action in fish and invertebrates appears to be as a neural

poison (15).  One response of fish to thallium poisoning is

reported to be a rise in blood pressure  (3).
              w.   Uranium

              The maximum acceptable uranium concentration

in marine or estuarine waters is  1/100  (0.01)  of  the  96-hr.

LC$o value determined using the receiving  water in  question

and the most important sensitive  species in the locality  as


the test organism.  Concentrations of uranium in excess of

0,5 mg/1 in marine or estuarine waters are unacceptable,

Rationale (Uranium) :

    Uranium is present at a concentration of approximately 3

ug/1 in open ocean waters (3).  Uranium salts, such as the

sulfate, nitrate, and acetate, are soluble in water, and a

significant proportion of these salts are in the form of

stable complexes.  It has been estimated that uranium

compounds have residence times on the order of 3 million

years in the oceans  (27).  This extremely slow turnover time

is due to a hydrolytic stabilization which prevents pnysico-

chemical interactions, and thus the removal of the compounds

from sea water.  There are no data on concentration of

uranium compounds by marine organisms; further, tne data on

uranium toxicity to marine lite are quite sparse.  Tne data

that are available suggest that uranyl salts are somewhat

less toxic -to marine than to freshwater organisms.


              x.   Vanadium

              The maximum acceptable vanadium concentration

in marine or estuarine waters is 1/20 (0.05) of the 96-hr.

LC/7) value determined using the receiving water in question

and the most important sensitive species in the locality as

the test organise.

Rationale (Vanadium) :

    The observed distribution of vanadium in offshore ocean

waters has ranged between 1.8 and 7.0 ug/1  (81, 89, 90).

Vanadium is known to have been concentrated by certain

marine forms during the formation of oil-bearing strata in

the geologic past, and is one of the more common elements in

organic sediments.  Consequently, vanadium enters the

atmosphere through the combustion of petroleum derivatives,

and then settles out on the oceans' surfaces  (3).  Certain

marine invertebrate forms, such as tunicates, ascidians and

several seaweeds, concentrate vanadium to a marked degree

(89, 91).  Whether any concentrations of vanadium are

actually harmful tc these marine invertebrates has not been

demonstrated.  There are no reports in the literature on the

toxicity of vanadium to marine organisms.  There is even a


suggestion, however, that vanadium may be an essential

micromitrient for all green plants (72) .
              y.   Zinc

              The maximum acceptable zinc concentration in

marine or estuarine waters is 1/100  (0.01) of the 96-hr. L

value determined using the receiving water in question ana

the most important sensitive species in the- locality as the

test organism.  concentrations of zinc in excess of O.i mg/1

in marine or estuarine waters are unacceptable.

Rationale (zinc) :
    Observed values for the distribution of zinc in ocean

waters vary widely.  Values as high as 50 ug/1 ana as low as

3 ug/1 have been reported for offshore ocean waters (92,

93).  The major concern with zinc compounds in marine waters

is not one of acute toxicity, but rather of the lon«.j- term

sub-lethal effects of the metallic compounds and complexes.

There is some information on -the former, but solid data on

the latter are sparse.  From an acute toxicity point ot

view, invertebrate marine animals seem to be the most


sensitive organisms tested.  The growth of the sea urchin

Paracentrotus llvidus was retarded by as little as 30 ug/1

of zinc  (94); it was reported (46)  that «4.9 mg/1 of zinc

citrate caused an LD^o in 2 hours for tuLeworm larvae

(Spirorbis laroellosa) , and that 5.2 mg/1 caused an LD$& in

the same amount of time for bryozoan larvae (Bugula

neritina).  It was noted (42) that 32 mg/1 of zinc nitrate

was lethal to adult barnacles (Balanus balanQides) in 2

days, and that 8 mq/1 was lethal in 5 days.  Finally, 10

mq/1 of zinc sulfate caused a 50 percent inactivation of

photosynthesis in giant kelp  (Macrpcystis pyrifera) in «*

days (39).  Concentrations ot zinc have teen reported as

high as 1.5 g/1 in marine animals  (UO), and concentration

factors for zinc have been noted as high as 100,000 times in

certain shellfish (95) .

              Qr'ganic Compounds
              a.    Cyanides

         The maximum acceptable concentration of cyanides in

marine or estuarine waters is 1/10  (0,1) of the 9t>-tiOur LC^p

value determined using the receiving water in question ana

the most important sensitive species in the locality as tne

test organism.  Concentrations of cyanides in marine or

estuarine waters in excess cf 0.01 mg/1 are unacceptable.

Rationale (Cyanides):

    The majority of the available information on tne

toxicity of cyanides to aquatic organisms is for .treshwater

species; accordingly, discussion of these compounds is

covered in the freshwater aquatic life  criteria.


              b.   Oils

              Concentrations of oil or petroleum prouucts in

marine or estuarine waters that exceed the limits described

below are unacceptable.

              a.   Detectable as a visible film, sheen,

discoloration of the surface, or by odor;

              b.   Causes tainting of fish or invertebrates

or damage to the biota;

              c.   Forms an oil deposit on the shores or

bottom of the receiving body of water.

Rationale (Oils):

    Oil is one of the most widespread and serious

contaminants of the world's oceans.  Crude oils contain

thousands of compounds, and differ markedly in their

composition and in such physical properties as specific

gravity,  viscosity, and boiling-point distribution.  The

hydrocarbons in oil cover a wide range of molecular w-eignts

from 16 for methane to over 20,000 for the more complex


compounds.   Structurally, they include aliphatic compounds

with straight and branched chains, olefir.s, and trie aromatic

ring compounds.   In spite of their many differences, crude

oils and their refined products all contain compounds that

are toxic to marine organisms.  It has been estimated that

approximately 90 million tons of oil are entering tne oceans

from all sources every year  (96).  Most of this influx takes

place in coastal regions, but oil slicks and tar ualls have

also been observed far out in open oceans  (97).  Altnouyn

accidental oil spills are often spectacular events and

attract the most attention,  they constitute less than one

percent of the oil entering  the marine environment as a

result of human activities  (96).  But when an oil spill

occurs near shore, or is washed onto the intertidal zone

beaches, extensive damage to marine organisms often occurs.

An excellent example is  a relatively small oil spill

resulting from the grounding, in September 1969, or an oil

barge off the woods Hole Oceanographic Institution at West

Falmouth, Massachusetts.  Between 650 and  7CO tons cr No. I

fuel oil were released into  the coastal waters.  stuuies of

the biological and chemical  effects of this spill are

continuing, more than two years after the  event  (98-101).

Massive destruction of a wide range of fish, shelltisn,

worms, crabs, and other  crustaceans and invertebrates


 occurred  in  the  region immediately after the accident.

 Dredge  samples taken in  10 feet of water soon after trie

 spill showed that 95 percent of the animals recovered were

 dead and  the others moribund.  Much of the evidence ot the

 immediate toxicity disappeared within a few days, either

 because of the breaking up of the soft parts of the

 organisms, burial in the sediments, or dispersal Jay -water

 currents.  Careful chemical and biological analyses reveal,

 however,  that not only has the damaged area been slow to

 recover but the extent of the damage has been expanding with

 time.  A year and a half after the spill, identifiable

 fractions of the source oil were found in organisms that

 still survived on the perimeter of the spill area,  Although

 it is known that petroleum fractions can be degraded by

marine  microorganisms,  very little is known about the

mechanism of this degradation.  However, it is known that no

 single  microbial species can completely degrade any whole

crude oil.  Bacteria are highly specific, and several

species are necessary to decompose the many types of

hydrocarbons in a crude cil.   Further, some of these

 interactions are restricted to aerobic conditions at the sea

surface, while other degradation processes are anaerobic and

occur only on those petroleum fractions that accumulate near

the ocean bottom.  In addition,  the oxygen requirement of


microbial oil decomposition is extremely large.  The

complete oxidation of only one gallon of crude oil requires

all the dissolved oxygen in 320,000 gallons of air-saturatea

sea water (102).  Further, the most readily attacked

fraction of  crude oil, the paraffins, is the least toxic;

the more toxic aromatic hydrocarbons, especially the

polynuclear  aromatics, are not digested rapidly.  There are

only a few reputable observations on the specific toxicity

of oil to marine organisms.  Testing of eleven species of

phytoplankton revealed that cell division was delayed or

inhibited by concentrations of crude oil (unspeciriea types)

as low as 0.01 mg/1  (103).  Earlier experimental results

have shown 100 percent mortality of flounder fry at oil

concentrations as low as  1 mg/1, and increased abnormal

development in concentrations as low as 0.01 mg/1  (104).   It

has been reported  (105) that the Pacific ccast sea urcnin

(Stronglycerrtrotus purpuratus) dies after a  1-hour exposure

to 0.1 percent emulsion of diesel oil.  In  addition, crude

oil adsorbed onto carbonized sand has been  shown net to  lose

its toxicity  (106).  Three marine organisms were tested:

toadfish embryos, barnacles, and a hydrozoan.  Survival  of

the toadfish embryos varied from  13 days for a 0.5 percent

concentration to  4  1/2 days tor a concentration of 5

percent.  The barnacles suffered a 90 percent  mortality


within 70 hours in a 2 percent mixture of oil in sea water,

and the hydrozoans suffered a 100 percent mortality within

24 hours after being exposed to 0.5 percent oil-sa.nci

mixture.  It should be noted that a sublethal effect, wnxle

not killing the organism directly, may render it less able

to compete with individuals of the same species, ana

therefore may be as lethal in toto as a direct, eftect.  it

has also been shown that certain petroleum fractions .block

chemoreceptors in marine crustaceans which use

chemoreception as a means of locating food (107) thereby

placing them at a competitive disadvantage.  At anotner

level,  specific petroleum fractions have been shown to

interfere with reproduction of certain marine organisms

(107).   In the lobster, for exairple, reproductive success

depends upon detection by the male of chemicals produced by

the female known as pheramones, which are necessary to

stimulate proper copulation in the species.  Petroxeum

fractions mask the chemical activity of these pheramones,

thereby preventing mating and reducing species fecundity.


         5.   Pesticides

         The maximum acceptable concentration of pesticides

in marine or estuarine waters is 1/100  (0.01) of the 96-hour

LC^,value determined using the receivina water in question

and the most important sensitive species in the area as the

test organism.

Rationale  (Pesticides):

    The toxicity of ten chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides

and four organophosphorus insecticides to selected marine

organisms is presented in Table 9, and the concentration of

DDT found in various marine organisms is presented in Table

10.  These tables are by no means complete, but they provide

an idea of the great toxicity of the organic pesticides to

marine organisms.  For maximum concentrations of pesticides

not in these tables, consult the freshwater criteria.  In

general, the substituted urea pesticides have been found to

be the most toxic to marine organisms followed closely by

the organo-mercurials.  Although these two toxicants are not

in such common use as some others, their toxicity is

extreme.  Following these two compounds in clecreasino order

of toxicity, it has been found that the chlorinated


 hydrocarbons are more toxic than the carbamate pesticides

 which are, in turn, generally more toxic than the

 organophosphates (108, 109, 110).  In addition to the direct

 toxic action of pesticides on marine organisms, suLlethai

 concentrations increase the physiological stress on

 organisms.  This may reveal itself in decreased resistance

 to disease and parasites or decreased reproductive rates,

 longevity or general vigor.  It was reported  (111) that DDT

 interfered with the normal thermal acclimation mechanism of

 Atlantic salmon.  Although DDT is one ot the most ubiquitous

 toxicants in the marine environment, knowledge of its action

 is still quite rudimentary.  However, it is known that

 despite its very low solubility in sea water it. is

 concentrated at atmosphere-water and sediment-water

 interfaces (112, 113).  Further, because of its hign

 solubility in lipid-containing biological tissues, larye

 concentration factors are encountered as trophic levels

 increase (114).   Although it was reported (115) tnat

 concentrations of DDT occurred in the surface layers of

 Pacific coast sediments of at levels of only 0.040 my/kg,

 DDT has been found in significant amounts in mesopelagic

 teleosts from depths of 9600 feet in the open ocean  (116)

 and in concentrations of 1 part per thousand in marine

mammals from the coast of California (115).

                                              TABLE 9

                    Toxicity of various Pesticides to Selector!  Marine  Organisms
Test Organism

Sand shrinp
Crangor scptenspinosa

Crasnostrca virgir.ica

Spot (Juvenile)
Leiontomus xanthurus

I'ernit crab
Pagurus longicarpus

Grass shrimp
Palaemonetes vulaaris

 of Toxicant
   8 ug/1

  25 urr/1

   5.5 ug/1

  33 ug/1

   9 ug/1
     Effect on
                                                                               of Exnosure Reference
  9C hrn.  risler, 1969
  96 hrn.  Butler, 1964
  48 hrs.  Butler, 1964
  96 hrs..  Pinler, 19F9
  9P hrs.  Fisler, 1969
Test Organisra

Erine shrimp
Artenia salina

Sand shrinp
Crangon septenspinosa

Sheepshead minnov/  (Juvenile)
Cyprinodon variegatus

Spot  (Juvenile)
Leiostomus xanthurus

Hermit crab
Pagurus longicarpus

Grass shrimp
Palaemonetes vulgaris

Perirlinium trochoideun

 of Toxicant
  12 ug/1

   0.6 ug/1

   5 ug/1

   2 ug/1

   6 ug/1

   2 ug/1

  10 ug/1
     Effect on
  50% decrease
in photosynthesis
of Exposure Reference
   5 hrs.  Tarp.ley, 1958
  96 hrs.  Eisler, 1969
  48 hrs.  Butler, 1964
  48 hrs.  Butler, 1964
  96 hrs.  risler, 1969
  96 hrs.  Eisler, 1969
  24 hrs.  Wurster, 1968


                                           TAB LIT  9 (cont.)
                    Toxicity of Various  Pesticides  to Selected M.arino Organisms
Test Organism

Sand shrimp
Crangon septcmspinosa

Spot (Juvenile)
Leiostomus xanthurus

Ilerirdt crab
Pagurus longicarpus

Grass shrimp
Palaemonetcs vulgaris
Test Organism

Sand shrimp
Crangon septemspinosa

Spot (Juvenile)
Leiosotornus xanthurus

Hermit crab
Pagurus longicarpus

Grass shrinp
Palacmonetes vulgaris

Puffer fish
Sr>haeroides maculatus
of Toxicant
7 ug/1
5.5 uo/1
18 ug/1
50 ug/1
of Toxicant
1.7 ug/1
0.6 ug/1
12 ug/1
1.8 ug/1
3.1 ug/1
Effect on
Effect on
LD ro
of Exposure
96 hrs.
48 hrs.
96 hrs.
9P hrs.
Finler, 1969
Butler, 1964
Eisler, 1969
Eislnr, 1969
of Exposure Reference
96 hrs.
48 hrs.
96 hrs.
96 hrs.
96 hrs.
Eisler, 1969
Butler, 1964
Einler, 1969
Eislor, 1969
Eisler and
                                                                                   Edmunds,  1966


                                          TABLE 9  (cent.)

                    Toxicity of Various Pesticides  to  Selected Marine Oraanisns
Test Organism

Sand shrinp
Crangon septcnspinosa

Spot (Juvenile)
LGJostomus xanthurus

Hermit crab
Fagurus longicarpus

Grass shrircp
Palaerionetes vulgar is
of Toxicant
Effect on
of Exposure Reference
96 hrs. Eisler, 1969
48 hrs. Butler, 1964
96 hrs. Pisler, 1969
96 hrs. Eisler, 1969
Test Organism

Sand shrinp
Crangon septenspinosa

Tpot  (Juvenile)
       riun xanthurus
II err it crab
ragurus  long! carpus

Grass shrinp
Palaeraonetes vulaaris


 of Toxicant

   5 ug/1

  30 un/1

   5 ug/1

  in ug/1
Effect on      Duration

Organise      of Exposure Reference

  LDso          96 hrs.  Fisler,  10po
   ,r 50
    48 hrs.  Butler, 1964
9f hrs.  Eisler, 19P9
       hrs.  Eisler, 1969

                                          TABLE 9 (cont.)

                    Toxicity of Various Pesticides to Selected Marine Organises
Test Organism

Sand shrimp
Crangon septemspinosa

Spot (Juvenile)
Leioatomus xanthurus

Hermit crab
Pagurus longicarpus

Grass shrimp
Palaempnetes vulgaris
of Toxicant
Effect on Duration
Organism of Exposure Refnrence
IiCso 96 hrs. F.islor,
LD50 48 hrs. Butler,
LD50 48 hrs. Kislor,
LD50 96 hrs. Eisler,
Test Organism

Ghost shrimp
Callianassa californiensis
Dungeness crab  (Juvenile)
Cancer nmgister
Cockle clam
Clinocardium nuttallii
Shiner perch  (Juvenile)
Cymatogaater  aggregata
 3-spined stickleback
 Gasterosteus  aculeatus
                                             of Toxicant
                 Effect  on       Duration
                 Organism      of Exposure  Reference
LDen 24 nrs- Stewart et al
3U 1967
LDen 24 hrs- Stewart et
50 1967 ~
I,D en 24 hrs. Stewart et
1967 —
LD ,-n 24 hrs. Stewart et
LD en 24 hrs. Stewart et
50 infl 	

 Hemigrapsus  oregonensis
0.27 mg/1
LD 50
                                 24 hrs.  Stewart et al

English sole (Juvenile)
Parophrys vetulus
4.1 mg/1
24 hrs.  Ptewart et s_l
Mud shrimp
Upogebia pugettensis
0,4 n.a/1
                                  48 hrs.   Ptewart et al


                                          TABLE 9  (cont.)

                    Toxicity of Various Pesticides to Selected Marine?  Organisms
Test Organism

Ghost shrimp
Callianassa californiensis
Shiner perch (Juvenile)
Cymetogaster aggregata
3-spined stickleback
Gasterosteus aculeatus

   of Toxicant
     6.6 mg/1
     1.3 r,o/l
     3.2 rg/1
Effect on
   of Exposure Reference

24 hrs.  Stewart et al
                24 hrs.  Stewart  et  al
                ?A hrs.   Stov/art  et  al
Mud shrimp
Upogebia pugettcrsis
     4.4 ncr/1
                 48 hrs.   Stewart  et  al
Test Organism

Spot  (Juvenile)
Leiostomus xanthurus

Planktonic flagellate
Monochrysis  lutheri
Planktonic diatom
Phaeodactylurn tricornutun

   of Toxicant
     1 ug/1
Effect on
     0.015 UCT/I    22% inhibition
                      of growth
   of Exposure reference

     48 hrs.  Butler,  1964

     10 days  Ukeles,  1962
0.010 ug/1    46% inhibition     10 days  Ukeles,  1962
                      of arowth


                                          TABLE  9  (cont,)

                    TDxicity of Various  Pesticides  to Selected Marine Organisms
Test Organism

Sand shrimp
Crangon septemspinosa

Spot (Juvenile)
Leiostorous xanthurus

Hermit crab
Pagurus Iongicarpus

Grass shrimp
Palaemonetes vulgaris
Test Organism

Sand shrimp
Crangon septenspinosa

Hermit crab
Pagurus lortgicarpus

Grass shrimp
Palaenonetes vulgaris
of Toxicant
33 ug/1
55 ug/1
83 ug/1
82 ug/1
of Toxicant
2 ug/1
1 ug/1
3 ug/1
Effect on Duration
Organ is rn of Exposure Reference
LP 96 hrs.
LD 48 hrs.
LD5Q 96 hrs.
LD5Q 96 hrs.
Effect on Duration
Organism of Exposure
LD5Q 96 hrs.
LD50 96 hrs.
LD (.« 96 hrs.
Eisler, 1969
Butler, 1964
Eislor, 1969
Eisler, 1969
Eisler, 1969
Eisler, 1969
Eisler, 1969

                      TABLE 9  (cont.)
Toxicity of Various Pesticides to Selected Marine Organisms

Test Organism
Sheepshead minnow (Juvenile)
Cyprinodon variegatus
Brown shrimp
Penaeus aztecus
Test Organism
Sand shrimp
Crangon septemspinosa
Sheepshead minnow (Juvenile)
Cyprinodon variegatus
Hermit crab
Pagurus longicarpus
Grass shrimp
Palaemonetes vulrjaris
Brovm shrimp
Penaeus aztecus
of Toxicant
60 ug/1
1 ug/1
of Toxicant
11 ug/1
83 ug/1
28 ug/1
69 ug/1
250 ug/1
Effect on
Effect on
of Exposure
48 hrs.
48 hrs.
of Exposure
96 hrs.
48 hrs.
96 hrs.
96 hrs.
96 hrs.
Butler, 1964
Butler, 1964
Eisler, 1969
Butler, 1964
Eisler, 1969
Eisler, 1969
Butler, 1964


Open ITorth Atlantic
Open South Atlantic

Pennarl. Straits

Gulf of I'exico

Korthcast Pacific
Ivest Coast  of

Baltic Sea
         TABLE 10

DDT Concentrations in Pish


  Pelagic fish nuscle
  Pelagic fish liver
  f'idwater fish and Crustacea

  ridvater fish and Crustacea

  Traurcfish ruscle
  Croundf ish liver

  Fish muscle
  Pinl. shriiir

  Fish ruiscle
  Fish liver

  Herrina miscle
  Cod ruscle
  in r"g/kg

  0.6 - 3
 95 - 4800


390 - 2GOO


  2.7  (rear,)
  2.5  (moar)
 in.8  (mean)

 30 - 480
 70 - 5800

100 - 1500
  9 - 340
Source: (3)


         6.   Radioactivity

              The acceptable levels of radionuclides in sea

water are those concentrations which are sufficiently small

that the concentration in any marine organism harvested for

human consumption will not cause total radionuclide

ingestion by the most exposed group using the food to exceed

that prescribed in Federal Drinking Water Standards.  Lt the

consumption of these foodstuffs is so widespread that it is

likely that the aggregate dose to the exposed population

will exceed 3000 man-rem per year, limitations on the

distribution and sale should be considered by the relevant

public health authorities.

Rationale (Radioactivity):

    These criteria are based on the prudent assumption that

radiation levels in marine food organisms which are

acceptable for human consumption will not injure the marine

organisms themselves  (121).  Man-made radioisotopes were nor

released into the environment until 194U, when the first

atomic bomb was tested.  Prior to that time, all radiation

in marine waters occurred from natural sources.  Of tuis

naturally-occurring radiation in sea water, greater than 90


percent is from the isotope potassium-HO.  During the list

30 years, however, the principal source of radionuclides in

the oceans has been nuclear weapons testing.  While the

release of radioisotopes was drastically reduced with the

cessation by the major powers of atmospheric weapons

testing, radioactive waste continues to be released to tne

oceans from nuclear powered ships and submarines and trom

nuclear power and fuel reprocessing plants  (122).  It is

difficult to measure the amount of radiation affecting

marine organisms because they are simultaneously irradiated

by radioisotopes within their body from previously consumed

organisms, by radioisotopes adsorbed on the surface of their

body from the water, and by radioisotopes in sediments.

Nevertheless, it is known that radioisotope concentration

factors can be quite large.  Average concentration tactors

for significant radionuclides as cited in a recent NAS

monograph may be as high as 5,000 for benthic algae, 50,000

in phytoplankton, 25,000 in zooplankton, 2,500 in crustacean

muscle, and 1,600 for  fish muscle  (123).  The edible

fraction of shellfish  may bioconcentrate manganese and siinc

on the average of 12,000 and  11,000 times respectively.  The

biological effects of  radioactivity adsorbed and absorbed by

marine organisms may be damaging at both the cellular  and

molecular levels.  Damage to  the organism may include


developmental abnormalities, physiologic changes, inhibition

of growth, behavioral changes, shortening of life sj^an, or

finally, death.  In addition, synergistic biological damage

from radiation may be induced by environmental stresses such

as changes in temperature or salinity.  Furthermore,

irradiation can cause gross pathological changes whicn are

easily observed, or it can result in more subtle changes

which are difficult or impossible to detect.  In addicion to

somatic changes which affect the individual, genetic changes

also may occur which may affect the offspring for many

generations.  Bacteria and algae may tolerate doses of many

thousands of rads.  The LD^c» (lethal dose for 50 percent

mortality in 30 days)  for marine fish is one thousand to a

few thousand rads.  As expected, eggs and early

developmental stages are more sensitive than are adults.  By

comparison, the mean lethal whole-body dose from a single

short exposure to humans is about 300 rads  (3).


         7.   Temperature

              Maximum acceptable water temperature increases

are 2.2 C  {4.QCF) during the months of September through

May, or 0.8CC  (1.5CF) during the months of June through





Rationale  (Temperature):

    The single most  important variable to marine organisms

is  temperature,  and  the  literature contains  much information

on  both direct and  indirect effects of temperature  increases

on  marine  organisms,  particularly  teleosts.   Included  in the

marine temperature  rationale  that  follows are exemplary

citations  from the  literature on  the  direct  and indirect

effects of temperature changes  and maximum  temperature

levels.   A temperature increase may  affect  the marine

organism  directly,  by changing  physiologic  or behavioral

processes, or it may affect organisms indirectly,  by

changing  some aspect of  the environment  on  which the

organism depends.  The cause of thermal  death in marine


fishes has been variously attributed to synapse failure at

myoneural junctions (124) ,  thermal denaturation of body

cells, inactivation of cholinesterase (126) , and to

coagulation in the bronchial capillaries (127).  For

example, it was found (128)  that tc produce heat deatn in

the killifish (Fundulus heterocljtus) required 63 minutes at

3U*C (93.2°F), 28 minutes at 36 "c  (96.8^), 9 minutes at 37°

C (98.6*F), and only 2 minutes at U2°C  (107.6*F).  It is

recognized that consideration must be given to whether the

organism has been acclimatized to the warmer temperatures

during the experimentation or if it has been suddenly

exposed to them, resulting in heat death by shock.  It is

reported (129) that most marine teleosts do not survive

above 33°C (91.1*F).  For polar species, the median upper

lethal limit is 26°C (78.8SF) , for species inhabiting

temperate ocean waters, that same limit is 30 °C  (66°F); and

while insufficient data are available to project a median,

upper lethal limit fcr tropical marine  species, it is known

that these fish are already living so close to their thermal

death points that a rise of even a few  degrees may cause

severe mortalities  (129).  It was demonstrated, for example

(130), that tropical marine fishes have extremely small

thermal tolerances.  Experimentation showed that pelagic

larvae of ten species of tropical Indian ocean fish would


survive only between 27"c  (80.6°F) and 30 °c (86°F).  The

larvae of temperate marine fish are also sensitive to rapid

changes in temperature  (131).  As would be expected, the

eggs, larvae, and juvenile forms of marine fishes are far

more sensitive than adult forms to temperature changes.

Part of this sensitivity may be the result of a lack of

ability to metabolically compensate for the temperature

changes.  It has been found that  sea lamprey  (Petrom^zon

sp.) eggs will not hatch above 3l"c  (87°F)  (133)  and chinooK

salmon  fOncorhynchus sp.)  eggs will not hatch above lb.5°C

(61.7eF)  (13U).  These  egg mortalities were attributed to

failures  in gastrulation,  in melanophore  formation, and in

initiation of circulation.  Other experiments on  the eggs of

a Pacific marine fish  (Clinocottus) revealed  (135) that as

the temperature was increased  from 22° C  (71.6°F)  to 24°C

(75.2*F), the percentage of gastrulated eggs  dropped from

more than 70 percent to less than 5  percent,  and  the

percentage of hatched embryos  dropped from  75 percent  to

zero.   Although sublethal  temperatures may  not  kill

outright, they may  produce, through  heat  stress,  other

physiologic  aberrations,   A loss  of  swimming  ability in

fish,  due in large  part to a significant  increase in mucous

production over the body was reported  (136) .  Without  such  a

vital  ability a  fish  is likely to be unable to  capture its


food, escape its predators, or avoid environmental dangers,
either natural or man-made.  Other physiological aberrations
due to heat stress that have been reported are a partial
failure of osmoregulation in Pacific cottid fishes (137),
and increased oxygen consumption; the latter was reported in
the eel (Anouilla) (138), in the killifish (Fundulus)  (139),
and in the cunner (Tautogolabrus) (140).  Increased oxygen
consumption with increased temperatures is particularly
critical to fishes, since as water temperature increases,
oxygen solubility decreases, thereby increasing the
potential for mortality.   Temperature increases also airect
the rate of color change in marine fishes.  The ability to
change from tan to black decreased (141) in the plaice
(Pleuronectes)  at temperatures above 16*c (60.8°F) ; a loss
of pigment in Pacific killifish  fFundulus paryipinnis)  at
high temperatures was reported  (142); also reported  (143)
was the fact that the Atlantic salmon  (Salmo salar) did not
dark-adapt as well at high temperatures  (20°C)  (68 &F) as
they did at normal temperatures 5°C  (4l°F).  Though
sublethal in nature, these temperature effects could artect
the survival of the organism, since avoidance of  predators
is often dependent upon the ability to color adapt.  Hign
sublethal temperatures also exert detrimental effects on
growth rates in marine fish.  In experiments where fian were


subjected to high sublethal temperatures for extended

periods of time  (136) , the amount of food consumed by the

test organisms was several times that of the controls.

Despite this increased food consumption, the test fish

became emaciated.  In addition, increased water temperatures

offer improved media for the growth, reproduction, and rate

of infestation and infection of parasites and disease.  A

run of sockeye salmon  (Oncgrhvnchus nerka)  was nearly

obliterated due  to the combined effects of high temperature

and bacterial infection  (126).  It was reported from

examination of the literature that most fish diseases are

favored by increased water temperatures (144).  Using salmon

under experimental conditions, it was found that higher

water temperatures drastically increased the severity of

kidney disease,  vibric (a skin lesion disease), furunculosis

(a blood vessel  and muscle degenerative disease), and

columnaris  (a skin and muscle degenerative disease  (144).

In the Delaware  River estuary a high incidence of deformed

fins in striped  bass  (Roccus_sajca^ilus)  was reported  (145)

which was attributed to heated effluents from a nearby power

generating plant.  Finally, heated effluents from an

electric power plant in California were deliberately

directed toward  a nearby beach to warm the sea water for

bathers and surfers.  However, the plan has had its


drawbacks;  the beach must be closed periodically to seine

out the large sharks attracted by the warm waters.


    B.   Wildlife

         1.   General

         Except for the specific harmful substances

addressed below, the marine aquatic life criteria are

acceptable for application to coastal and marine waters

inhabited by wildlife.  The freshwater wildlife criteria are

in general acceptable for application to estuarine wildlife.

Rationale  (General):

    Marine wildlife refers to those species of mammals,

birds and reptiles which inhabit estuaries or coastal and

marine waters for at least a portion of their life span.

Although fish, invertebrates and plankton are not considered

to be wildlife, they constitute the food web upon which the

wildlife species depend for their subsistence.

Consequently, the criteria for marine wildlife necessarily

include all criteria formulated to protect the fish,

invertebrate and plant communities.


         1.   Specific Harmful Substances

              a.    DDT and Derivatives

              The maximum acceptable concentrations of JDT

in any sample consisting of a hoirogenate of 25 or more wnole

fish of any species that is consumed by fish-eating oirds

and mammals, within the size range consumed, is 50 my/kg on

a wet weight basis.  DDT residues are defined as the sum of

the concentration of p,p -DDT, p,p -ODD, p,p -DDE ana their

ortho-para isomers (3).

Rationale {DDT and Derivatives):

    DDT compounds are widespread and locally abundant

pollutants in coastal and marine environments of Nortn

America.  The most abundant of these is DDE 2,2-bis  (p-

chlorophenyl) dichloroethylenel , a derivative of tne

insecticide DDT compound, p,p -DDT.  DDE is more staoie than

other DDT derivatives, and very little information exists on

its. degradation in ecosystems.  Except for sediment

deposition, no degradation pathway has been shown to exist

in the sea  (3).  Experimental studies have shown that DDt,

induces shell thinning of eggs of birds of several families,


including Mallard Ducks  (Anas glatyrhynchos)  (146) , American

Kestrels (Falco sgarverius)  (147) , Japanese Quail  (Coturnix)

(148)  and Ring Doves  (StrejctQEelia risorial  (149).  Stuaies

of eggshell thinning  in wild populations have reported

inverse relationship  between shell thickness and

concentrations of DDE in the eggs of Herring Gulls  (Larus

argentatug) (150), Double-crested Cormorants  (Phalacrocorax

auritus) (151), Great Blue Herons  (Ardea herodias)  (152),

White Pelicans (Pelecanus crythrorhYnchos)  (151),  Brown

Pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis)  (153, 154), and  Peregrines

(£alco peregrinus)  (155)  (See 3).  Because of its  position

in the food web, the  Peregrine accumulates higher  residues

than fish-eating birds in the same ecosystem  (156), and is

considered to be the  species most sensitive to environmental

residues of DDE (3).  The most severe cases of shell

thinning documented to date have  occurred in the marine

ecosystem of southern California  (157) where DDT residues in

fish have been in the order of 1-10 mg/kg of the whole fish

(154).  In Connecticut and Long Island, shell thinning of

eggs of the Osprey  (Pandjon ha^liaetus) is sufficiently

severe to adversely affect reproductive success; over North

America, shell thinning of Osprey eggs also shows  a

significant negative  relationship with DDE concentration

(See 3) .  DDT residues in collections of eight species of


fish from this area in 1970 ranged from 0,1 to 0.5 mg/ky ot

the wet weight  (158).  Evidently this level of contamination

is higher than one which would permit the successful

reproduction of several of the fish-eating and raptorial

birds  (3).

              b-   Aldrin, pieldrin, Endrin, and^He^tachlor

              The maximum acceptable sum of the

concentrations of aldrin, dieldrin, endrin and heptacnlor

epoxide in any sample consisting of a homogenate of 2b or

more whole fish of any species that is consumed by tisn-

eatir.g birds and mammals, within the size range consumed, is

5.0 mg/kg on a wet weight basis.

Rationale (Aldrin, Dieldrin, Endrin and Heptachlor):

    Aldrin, dieldrin, endrin and heptachlor constitute a

class of closely related, highly tcxic, organochlorine

insecticides.  Aldrin is readily converted to dieldrin in

the environment, and heptachlcr to the highly toxic

derivative, heptachlor epoxide.  Like the DDT compounas,

dieldrin may be dispersed through the atmosphere  (15(J, 156).

The greatest hazard of dieldrin exists to fish-eating birds


such as the Bald Eagle  (Haliaeetus .leucoceghalus)  (160) ,

Common Egret:  (Casing rod jus albus)  (161 and to the Peregrine

(fJ-lS0. 2§.££!3J!:-iB.u§)  (162) , which may accumulate lethal

amounts from fish or birds which are not themselves harmed

(See 3).  These compounds are somewhat more soluble in  water

than are other chlorinated hydrocarbons such as the DDT

group  (163); partition  coefficients between water  and  fish

tissues can be assumed  to be lower than those of the DDT

compounds.  Equivalent  concentrations in fish would

therefore indicate higher environmental levels of  dieldrin,

endrin or heptaclor epoxide than of DDE or any of  the  other

DDT compounds.  Moreover, these compounds are substantially

more toxic to wildlife  than are other chlorinated

hydrocarbon pesticides  (3).

              c,   Other_Chlorinated Hydrocarbons

              The maximum acceptable concentration of

chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides including lindane,

chlordane, endosulfan,  methoxychlor, mirex, toxaphene  and

hexchlorobenzene, in any sample consisting of a homogenate

of 25  or more whole fish of any species that is consumed by

fish-eating birds and mammals, within the size range

consumed is 50 mg/kg on a wet weight basis,


Rationale  (Other Chlorinated Hydrocarbons):

    Other chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides include

lindane, chlordane, endosulfan, methoxychlor, mirex, and

toxaphene.  Hexachlorobenzene is likely to have increased

use as a fungicide as mercury compounds are phased out.

This compound is toxic to birds and is persistent  (164).

With the possible exception of hexachlorobenzene,

recommendations that protect the invertebrate and  fish life

of estuaries from injudicious use of these pesticides will

also protect the wildlife species.  In the light of the

experience with DDT and dieldrin, the large scale  use of a

compound such as mirex can be expected to have adverse

effects on wildlife populations.

              d.   Polychlorinated Biphenyls  (PCS*9)

              The maximum acceptable concentrations of PCB

in any sample consisting of a homogenate of 25 or  more whole

fish of any species that is consumed by fish-eating birds

and mammals, within the size range consumed is 0.5 mg/kg on

a wet weight basis.


Rationale  (PCB):

    Evidence is accumulating that PCB does not contribute to

the shell thinning that has been a major symptom of the

reproductive failures and population declines of raptorial

and fish-eating birds (3).  A PCB effect could not be

associated with the thinning of Brown Pelican  (Pelecanus

occidentalis) eggshells  (165) nor did dietary PCB produce

any effect on the eggs of Mallard Ducks  (Anas platyrhynchos)

(166) or Ring Doves (Streptopelia risoria)  (167).  PCB may

increase susceptibility to infectious agents such as virus

diseases (168) and like other chlorinated hydrocarbons PCB

increases the activity of liver enzymes that degrade

steroids, including sex hormones  (156, 169).  Laboratory

studies have indicated that PCB, with its derivatives or

metabolites, causes embryonic death of birds  (170, 171, 172,

173).  Because exceptionally high concentrations are

occasionally found in fish-eating and raptorial  species

(156, 174), it is highly probable that PCB has had an

adverse effect on the reproductive capacity of some species

of birds that have shown population declines  (3).  Median

PCB concentrations in whole fish of eight species from Long

Island Sound, obtained in 1970, were in the order of one

mg/kg (158), and comparable concentrations have  been


reported from southern California  (175).  On  the basis  of
the high probability that PCB in the environment has
contributed to the reproductive failures of fish-eating
birds, it is desirable to decrease these levels by at least
a factor of two (3).

    Marine Water constituents
1.    Loosanoff, V. L. and F. D. Tommers.  1948,  Effect
       of suspended silt and other substances on rate of
       feeding of oysters,  Science 107:69-70.

2.    Korringa, P,  1952.  Recent advances in oyster
       biology.  Quart. Revs, of Biol.  27:266-303.

3.    Water Quality Criteria of  1972.   NAS  Report  -  In  press.

4.    Doudoroff, P. and M. Katz.  1961.  Critical review
       literature on the toxicity of  industrial  wastes
       toxic components to  fish.  Sewage  and Industrial
       wastes  22:1432.

5.    Moore, E. W.  1951.  Fundamentals  of chlorination
       of  sewage  and waste.  Water and  Sewage Works

7.    Galtsoff, P. S.   1946.  Reactions  of oysters  to
      chlorinaticn.  Fish  and  Wildlife  Service,  U.S.
       Department of the  Interior. Research Report 11.

8.    TurnerrH. J., et  al.   1948.  Chlorine and  sodium
       penta-chlorophenate  as  fouling preventatives
       in  sea  water  conduits.   Ind.  Eng.  Chero.  40:450-453.

9.   Gentile,  J.   1972.   Unpublished data. Environmental
       Protection Agency,  National Marine Water Quality
       Laboratory, West Kingston, R.  I.

10.  Southgate,  E. A.   1948.   Treatment and  disposal  of
       industrial waste waters,  H.  M.  Stationery Office,

11.  Doudoroff,  F.   1957.   Water quality requirements
       of fishes and effects of toxic substances.   In:
       The Physiology  of Fishes. M. E, Brown,  Ed.
       Academic  Press, New York.  pp 403-430.

 12.  Murdock,  H. R.   1953.  Industrial  Wastes.   Ind.
       Eng.  Chem. 45:99A-102A.

13.   Dimick,  R.  E,   1952.   The effects of kraft mill
       waste  liquors and  some  of  their components
       on  certain salmonid  fishes in the Pacific
       Northwest.  National Council for Stream
       Improvement,   Technical Bulletin 51.

14.   Van Horn,  W. M.  1959.  Some biological factors
       in  pulp  and paper  mill  pollution.  National
       Council  for Stream Improvement.  Technical
       Bulletin 117.

15.   Thiede,  H.,  et al.   1969.  Studies on the
       resistance cf marine bottom invertebrates to
       oxygen deficiency  and hydrogen sulfide.
       Marine Biology 2:325-337.

16.   Doudoroff,  P. and D.  L. Shumway.  1970.  Dissolved
       oxyqen requirements of  freshwater fishes.  Food
       and Agricultural Organization.  Rome.  Technical
       Paper  No.  86.

17.   Morrison,  G.  1971.   Dissolved oxygen requirements
       shell  clam (Mercenaria n)ercenajri.a).  J. of the
       Fisheries Research Bd.  of Canada.  28:379-381.

18.   Lowman,  F.  G., et al.   1971.  Accumulation and
       redistribution of  radionuclides by marine
       organisms.  In: Radioactivity in the Marine
       Environment.  National Academy of Sciences.
       Washington, C.C.  pp 161-191.

19.   Pulley,  T.  E.  1950.  Effect of aluminum chloride in
       small  concentrations on various marine organisms.
       Texas  J. of Science 2:405-411.

20.   Wilder,  D. G.  1952.  The relative toxicity of certain
       metals tc Icbsters.  J. of Fishery Research Board of
       Canada 8:486-487.

21.   Goldberg,  E. D.  1957.   Biogeochemistry of  trace
       metals.    In:  Treatise on Marine  Ecology  and
       Paleoecolcgy.  J.  W. Hedgpeth  (Ed.).  Geological
       Society of America Memoir No.  67.  1:345-357.

22.   Schutz,  D.  F.  and K. K.  Turekian.   1965.  The
       investigation of the geographical and  vertical
       distribution of several trace  elements  in sea

       water using neutron activation analysis.  Geochem.
       Acta 29:259-313.

23.   Bowen, H, J.  1966.  Trace elements in biochemistry.
       Academic Press.  London.

24.   Sautet, J. , et al.   1964.   (Contribution  to the  study
       of the biological  fixation and elimination  of  arsenic  by £

 34.   La Roche,  G.   1972.  Biological  effects of short-term
        exposure to  hazardous materials.   In:   Control  of
        Hazardous Material Spills.   Environmental Protection
        Agency,  Houston, Texas,  pp.  199-206.

 35.   Brooks, R.  R.  and M. G. Rumtsby.   1965.   The
        fciogeochemistry cf trace element uptake by some
        New Zealand  bivalves.   Limnology and  Oceanography

 36.   Goldberg,  E. D.  1972.  A guide  to marine pollution,
        Gordon and Breach Publishing Co.,  New York.

 37,   Raymont, J. E. and J, Shields.   1964.   Toxicity of
        copper and chromium in  the  marine environment.
        In:  Advances in Water Pollution Research.   Proc.
        First Int'l  Conf., Vol. 3,  MacMillan  Company, N.Y.

 38. Holland, G.  A., et al.  1960.  Toxic effects of
        organic  and  inorganic pollutants on young salmon
        and trout,   Washington Department of  Fisheries.
        Research  Bulletin No. 5.

 39.  Clendenning, K. A. and W. J.  North.   1960.   Effect
       of wastes on the giant kelp, Macroc£stis  pyrjfera.
        In:  Proceedings of the First  International  Conference
       on Waste  Disposal in the Marine  Environment,  Pergamon
       Press.   New  York.

10.  McKee, J.   E. and H.  W. Wolf.   1963.  Water  quality
       criteria.  California State Water  Quality Control
       Board.   Publ. No.  3-A.

41.  Marks, G.   W.   193B.   The copper  content  and copper
       tolerance of some species of mollusks  of  the southern
       California coast.   Biol. Bull. 75:224-237.

42.  Clarke,  G. L.   1947.  Poisoning  and  recovery in
       barnacles and mussels.  Biol.  Bull. 93:73-91.

43.  Galtsoff,   P. s.  1932.   Lite  in  the  ocean from a
       biocchemical point of view.  J. of the  Wash.
       Academy of Sciences 22:246-257.

44.  Fugiya,  M.  1960.   studies on the effects of copper


       dissolved in sea water on oysters.  Bull. Jap. Soc.
       Sci. Fish. 26:462-428.

45.  Reish, D. J.  1964.  International conference on Water
       Pollution Research.  Pergamon Press.  New York.
       pp 283-290.

46.  Wisely, B. and R. A. Blick,   1967,  Mortality of
       marine invertebrate larvae  in mercury, copper and
       zinc solutions.  Aust. J. of Mar. Fresh. Res.

47. Sprague, J. E.   1971.  Measurement of  pollutant
       toxicity to fish.  III. Sub-lethal  effects  and
       "safe" concentrations.  Water Research 5:245-26t>.

48,  Sprague, J. B., et al.   1965.  Sub-lethal  copper-zinc

       pollution in  a  salmon  river:  a  field and  laboratory
       study.   Air Water  Pollution 9:531-543.

49.  Saunders,  R.  L. and  J.  B. Sprague.   1967.   Effects
       cf  copper-zinc  mining  pollution on  a  spawning
       migration of  Atlantic  salmon.  Water  Research

50.  Marier,  J.  R. and D. Rose.   1971.   Environmental
       fluoride.   National Research Council.  Publication
       12.  Ottawa,  Canada.

51.  Knight,  A.  P.   1901.  The  effects  of  polluted waters
       on  fish life.  Department of Marine Fisheries,
       Canada,  32nd  Annual Report, Supplement  No.  22a.

52.  Olson, R.  A,,  et  al.   1941.  Studies  of the effects of
       industrial pollution  in  the lower Patapsco River
       area.   I.  Curtis Bay  Region.  Chesapeake Biological
       Laboratory,  Solomons  Island, Maryland.   Publication
       No. 43.

53.  Minkina,  A.  L.  1946.  {On  the action  of iron and
       aluminum en fish).  Tr.  Mosk.  Zooparka  3:23-36.

54.  Bandt,  H. H-   19U6.   (Intensified injurious effects
       on  fish, especially the  increased toxic effect
        produced ty a combination of sewage poisons).
        Beitr. Wass.  Abwass., Fischereichem.  1:15.

55. ORSANCO.  1960.  Aquatic life water quality criteria.
       3rd Progress Report,  Aquatic Life Advisory Committee,
       ORSANCO. J. of the Water Pollution Control Federation

56.  Lewis, W. M.  1960.  Suitability of wellwater with a
       high iron contact for warm-water fish culture.
       Progr. Fish Culturist 22:79-80.

57.  Calabrese, A., et al.  1973.  The toxicity of heavy
       metals to embryos of the American oyster,
       cJTJL§.§o.§trejl yirginica.  Marine Biology  38:162-166.

58.  Guseva, K. A.  1939,  Water-bloom in the  Unchinskii
       Reservoir.  Bull. Soc. Nat.  (Moscow) 48:30.

59.  Harvey, H. W.  1947.  Manganese and the growth of
       phytoplankton.  J. of the Marine Biol.  Assoc. of
       the U.K. 26:562-579.

60.  Lowman, F. G.  1960.  Marine biological investigations
       at the Eniwetok test site.  In:  Disposal
       of Radioactive Wastes, Vol. 2, IAEA, Vienna.

61.  Hannerz, L.  1968.  Experimental investigations on the
       accumulation of mercury in water organisms.  Kept.
       Inst.  Freshwater Res. Drottningholm  (Sweden)

62.  Westoo, G.  1967.  Determination of methylmercury
       compounds in foodstuffs.  II.  Determination of
       methylmercury in fish, egg, meat and liver.
       Acta Chem. Scand. 21:1790-1800.

63.  Lofroth, G. and M. E. Duffy.  1969.  Birds give
       warning.  Environment 11:10-17.

64.  Bond, H. W. and M. O. Nolan.  1954.  Results of
       laboratory screening tests of chemical  compounds
       for molluscicidal activity.  II.  Compounds of
       mercury.  Amer. J. Trop. Med. and Hyg.  3:187.

65.  Ukeles, R.  1962.  Growth of pure cultures of marine
       phytoplankton in the presence of toxicants.
       Appl. Microbiol. 10:532-537.

66.  Schweiger, G.  1957.   (The toxic action of heavy

       metal salts on fish).  Archiv. fur Fischereiwissenschaft

67.  Servisis, P.  Unpublished data.  International Pacific
       Salmon Fisheries Commission Laboratory, Cultus Lake,
       British Columbia, Canada.

68.  Glooshenko, W. A.  1969.  Accumulation of mercury by
       the marine diatom Chaetocergs costatum.  J.
       Phycology 5:224-226.

69.  Klein, D. H, and E. D. Goldberg.  1970.  Mercury
       in the marine environment.  Environ. Science and
       Technol.  4:765-768.

70.  Woelke, C. E.  1961.  Bioassay—the bivalve larvae
       tool.  In:  Toxicity in the Aquatic Environment.
       U.S. Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare,
       Public Health Service.  Portland, Oregon.
       pp. 113-123.

71.  Corner, E. D. and B. W. Sparrow.  1956.  The
       modes of action of toxic agents.  I.  Observations
       on the poisoning of certain crustaceans by copper
       and mercury.  J. of the Mar. Biol. Assoc. of the
       U.K.  35:531-548.

72.  Arnon, D. I. and G. Wessel.  1953.  Vanadium as
       an essential element for green plants.  Nature

73.  Black, W. A. and R. L. Mitchell.  1952.  Trace
       elements in the common brown algae and in sea water.
       J, of the Mar. Biol. Assoc. of the U.K.  30:575-584.

74.  Bachmann, R. K. and C. R. Goldman.  1964.  The
       determination of microgram quantities of
       molybdenum in natural waters.  Limnol. and
       Oceanog.  9:143-146.

75.  Kim, Y. S. and H. zeitlin.   1968.  The determination
       of molybdenum in sea water.  Limnol. and Oceanog,

76.  Ackman, R. G., et al.  1970.  An assessment of the
       assimilation of elemental  phosphorus by
       Newfoundland marine organisms. . .etc.  Fisheries

       Research Board of Canada  (Halifax Laboratory),
       Technical Report No. 208.

77.  Fletcher, G. I.  1971.  Accumulation of yellow
       phosphorus fcy several marine invertebrates and
       sea weed.  J. of the Fisheries Research  Board of
       Canada 28:793-796.

78.  Idler, D. R.  1969.  Coexistence of a fishery and
       a major industry in Placentia Bay.  Chemistry
       in Canada 21:16-21.

79.  Jangaard, P. M.  1970.  The role played by the
       Fisheries Research Board of Canada in the "red"
       herring phosphorus pollution crisis in Placentia
       Bay, Newfoundland.  Fisheries Research Board
       (Atlantic Regional Office), Halifax, Nova Scotia.
       Circular No. 1.

80.  Byers, H. G., et al.  1938.  Selenium occurrence
       in certain soils in the United States with a
       discussion of related topics:  Third report.
       U.S. Department of Agriculture, Technical
       Bulletin 601.

81.  Ishibashi, M.  1953.  Minute elements in sea water.
       Records Oceanog.  Works Japan 1:88-92.

82.  Oregon State University.  1971.  Oceanography of the
       nearshore coastal waters of the Pacific  Northwest
       relating to possible pollution.  Vol. II.  For
       the Water Quality Office, Environmental  Protection
       Agency.  Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

83.  Soyer, J.  1963.   (Contribution to studies on the
       biological effects of mercury and silver in
       sea water).  Vie et Milieu  (France) 14:1-36.

8«i.  Jones, J. R. 1948.   A further study of the reactions
       of fish to toxic solutions.  J. of Experimental
       Biology. 7:12-29.

85.  Anderson, B. G.  1948.   The apparent thresholds of
       toxicity of Caphnia magna for chlorides  of
       various metals when added to Lake Erie
       water.   Transactions Amer. Fish.  Soc. 78:96-113.

87.   Jackin, E., et al.  1970.  Effects of metal poisoning
       on five liver enzymes in the killifish  (Fundulus
       h£t££2cii-tus) • J- °f tne Fisheries Res. Board
       of Canada 27 (2) : 383-390.

88.   Hummel, R. to. and  A. A, Smales,   1956.
       Determination of strontium in sea water by
       using both  radioactive and stable isotopes.
       Analyst 81: 110-113.

89.   Chan, K. M. and J. P. Riley.   1966.  The determin-
       ation of vanadium in sea and natural waters,
       biological  materials and silicate sediments
       and rocks.  Anal. Chem. Acta 34:337-345.

90.   Oshibashi, M., et  al.  1951.   (The determin-
       mination of vanadium in sea  water.) Bull. Inst.
       Chem. Res., Kyoto Univ. 24:68-69.

91.   Vinoqradov, A. P.  1953.  The elementary
       chemical composition of marine  organisms
       Sears Foundation for Marine  Research,
       Yale University, Memoir No.  2.

92.   Morris, A. Vi.  1968.  The simultaneous determin-
       ation of vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron,
       cobalt, nickel,  copper, and  zinc in sea water
       by x-ray flcurescence  spectrometry.  Anal.
       Chem. Acta  42:397-406.

93,   Brooks, R. R.  1965.  Trace elements  in
       New Zeland  Coastal waters.   Cocochim Cosmoch.
       Acta  29:1369-13170.

94.   Lougis, P.   1961.   {The  physiological effects  of
       zinc  in  sea water.) Rendu  (Paris)

96.   SCEP  (Study  of Critical  Environmental Problems).
       1970.  Man's  impact  on the  global environment:
       assessment  and recommendations  for  action.   MIT
       Press, Cambridge,  Mass.

97.  Horn, M.  H.,  et  al.   1970.   Petroleum lumps on the
       surface  of the sea.  Science 168:245-246.

98.  Hampson,  G.  R.  and H.  L.  Sanders.  1969.   A local

       oil spill.   Oceanus 15:8-10.

99.  Blumer, M, ,  et al.   1971.   A small oil spill.
       Environment 13:2-12.

100.  Burns, K. and J.  Teal.   1971.  Hydrocarbon
       incorporation into the salt marsh exosystem
       from the West Falmouth oil spill.  Woods Hole
       Oceanog.  Inst. , Technical Report.  pp. 71-69.

100.  Sanders, H.  S., et al.   1972.  The West Falmouth
       oil spill.. I.   Biology.  Woods Hole Oceanog.
       Inst., Tech. Report.   pp. 72-20.

102.  Zobel, C. E. 1969.  Microbial modification
       of crude cil in the sea.  In:  Proceedings
       of the joint conference on prevention and
       control of oil spills. Amer. Petroleum
       Inst., Washington, D. C.  pp. 317-326.

103.  Mironov, O. G. 1971.  The effect of oil
       pollution on the flora and fauna of  the
       Black  Sea.  In:  Report of the FAO  technical
       conference on marine  pollution.  Fisheries
       Report 99.  FOA-UN, Rome.

104.  Mironov, O. G. 1967.   (Effects of  low concen-
       trations of petroleum and  its products on  the
       development of roe of the  Black  Sea Flatfish).
       Vep.  Ikhtiol.  7(3):  577-580.

105.  North,  W. J., et a 1.   1965.  Successive biological
       changes observed  in  a marine cove  exposed  to
       large spillage of  mineral  oil.   In:   (Marine
       pollution  by petroleum  products.)   Symposium de
       Monaco.   1964.

106. Chipman, W.  A. and  P.  S,  Galtsoff.  1949.   Effects of
       oil mixed  with Carbonized sand  on  aquatic  animals.
       U.S.  Fish  and  Wildlife  Service.   spec.  Fish Pep. No.

107. International Decade of Oceanography Workshop.  1972.
       baseline  studies of  pollutants  in  the marine
       environment.   Brookhaven National Laboratory.

108. Eisler, R.   1969.   Acute toxicities  of insecticides
       to marine decapod crustaceans.   Crustaceana

       16 (3) : 302-310.

109.  Ukeles,  R.  1962.  Growth of pure cultures of marine
       phytoplankton in the presence of toxicants.
       Appl.  Microbiol. 10:532-537.

110.  Johnson,  D. W. 1968.  Pesticides and fishes -
       a review of selected literature.  Trans.
       Amer.  Fish. Soc. 97:398-424.

111.  Ogilivie, D. M. and J, M. Anderson.  1965.
       Effect of CCT on temperature selection by
       young Atlantic salmon  (Salmo salar).  J.
       Fish.  Res. Hoard of Canada 22:503-512.

112.  Seba, D.  B. and E. F. Cororan.  1969.
       Surface slicks as concentrators of
       pesticides in the marine environment.
       Pesticides Monitoring  Journal 3(3):

113.  Keith, J. 0. and E. G. Hunt.  1966.  Levels
       of insecticide residues in fish and wildlife
       in California.  Trans. North Amer. Wildlife
       Res. Conf. 31:150-177.

114.  Wurster, C. F.   1968.  DDT reduces photosynthesis
       by marine phytoplankton.  Science  159:1474-1475.

115.  IDOE Baseline Conference.  1972.  Baseline
       studies of pollutants  in the marine
       environment.   International  Decade of Ocean Exploration,  N.Y,

116.  Harvey, G. P.,  et al. 1972  Chlorinated
       hydrocarbons  in open ocean Atlantic
       organisms.   In: Proc.  on the Changing
       Chemistry  of  the  Oceans.  In Press.

117. Butler, P. A.   1964.  Commercial  fishery
       investigations.   In:   Pesticide-Wildlife
       Studies.   U.  S. Fish and Wildlife  Service,
       Dept. of  the  Interior  199:5-28.

118. Tarpley.  W.  A.  1058.   Studies  on  the use of the
       brine  shrimp  Ajrtemia_Saline  as  a  test organism
       bioassay.   J,  Economic Entomol.   51(6):

119. Bisler, R. and P. H. Edmunds.  1966.  Effects of
       endrin on blcod and tissue chemistry of a marine
       fish.  Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 95(2):153-159.

120. Stewart, N. E.t et al.   1967.  Acute toxicity of
       the insecticide Sevin and its hydrolic product
       1-napthol to some marine organisms.  Trans.
       Amer. Fish. Soc. 96 (1)  25-30.

121. National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council
       Report.  1972.  The effects on populations of
       exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation.

122. National Academy of Sciences.  1971a.  Marine
       Environmental Quality, Washington, D . C.
       pp. 24-26.

123. National Academy of Sciences.  1971b.  Radioactivity
       in the Marine Environment, Washington, D. C.

124. Fisher, D. C.  1958.  An approach to the organ and
       cellular physiology of adaptation to temperature
       in fish and small mammals.  In:  Physiological
       Adaptation, C. L. Prosser, ed.  American Physiological
       Society. Washington,  D. C.  pp. 3-48.

125. Kusakina, A. A.  1963.   Relation of muscle and
       cholinesterase thermostability in certain fishes
       to specific environmental temperature conditions.
       Proc. Soc. Fxpt'l. Biol. and Med. 22:123-126.

126. Brett, J. B.  1956.  Some principles in the thermal
       requirements of fishes.  Quart. Revs, of
       Biology 31(2):75-87.

127. Agersberg, H. P. 1930.   The influence of temperature
       on fish.  Ecology 11:136-144.

128. Orrr P. R.  1955.  Heat death. I. Time-temperature
      relationships in marine animals,  Physiol.
      zool.  28 (4) : 290-294.

129. de Sylva, D. F.  1969.   Theoretical considerations
       of the effects of heated effluents on marine
       fishes.  In:  Biological aspects of thermal pollution,
       Krenkel, F. A. and F. L. Parker, editors.  Vanderbilt
       University Press.  pp. 229-293.

130. Kuthalingham, M. D.   1959,   Temperature  tolerance
       of the larvae of ten  species  of  marine fishes.
       Current Science 28:75-76.

131. Colton, J. E.  1959.  A field observation of mortality
       of the marine fish  larvae  due to warming.   Lirnmol.
       and Oceancg. 4(2):  219-222,

132. McCauley, R. V,.  1963.   Lethal  temperatures  of
       the develcpirental stages of the  sea  lamprey.
       Petromyzon rcarinus. J. Fish.  Res.  Board of
       Canada 2o7u83-U90.

133. Seno. H. , et al.  1926.   (Effects  of temperature  and
       salinity on the development of the ova of  a marine
       fish CaJ.otomuj3_ja£Oj2icus.)  J. Imp.  Fish Inst,,
       Tokyo 21 (4) : 44-48.

134. Olson, P. A, and R. F.  Foster.   1955.  Temperature
       tolerance of eggs and young of Columbia River
       Chinook salmon.  Trans. Amer.  Fish.  Soc.
       85: 203-207.

135. Hubbs, C.  1966.  Fertilization, initiation  of
       cleavage and developmental temperature tolerance
       of the cottii fish, Clingcottus  analis. Copeia
       1966 (1): 29-42.

136. Cairns, J.  1956.  Effects of heat on  fish.   Ind.
       wastes 1 (5) : 130-183.

137, Morris, R. W,  I960.  Temperature,  salinity  and
       southern limits of  three species of  Pacific
       cottid fishes.  Limnol. and Oceanog. 5(2):

138. Brecht, H.  1961.   (Contributions  to temperature
       adaptation in eels  (Anquilla  vulgaris.)  Z.
       vergl. Physiol. 44: 451-462.

139. Kropp, B. N.  1947.   The effect of temperature on
       the rate and variation of  opercular  movement in
       Fundulus diaphanus. canad. J.  Pes.,  Series D
       25: 91-95.
140. Haugaard, N. and L.  Irving.   1943.   The  influence

       of temperature on the oxygen consumption of the
       cunner  (Tautogolabrus adspersus) in summer and
       winter. J. Cell. Comp. PhysiolT 21(1):19-26.

141, Kruppert, H. H. and M. P. Meijering.  1963.  The
       relationship between temperature and  light-dark
       color changes by the plaice Pleuronectes platessa.
       zool. Auz. 170:55-61.              ~

1*2. Wells, N. A.  1935.  Variations in the  respiratory
       metabolisir of the Pacific killifish,  Fundulus
       parvjpinuis. due to size, season and     "~
       continued constant temperature.  Physiol.
       Zool. 8:318-336.

143. Ali, N, A.  1964.  (About the influence of
       temperature on the speed of retinal reaction
       in the salmon  (Salmo salar).)   Naturwissenschaftan

144. Ordal. E. J. and Pacha, R. E.  1967.  The effects
       of temperature on disease in fish.  In: Water
       Temperature:  Influences, Effects, and Control.
       Proc. 12th Pacific Northwest Symp. on Water
       Poll. Res., FWPCA, Portland, Oregon.

145. de Sylva, C. P., et al.  1962.  Fishes  in the
       shore zone and other areas of the Delaware
       River estuary.  Inf. Ser. Univ. Delaware
       5: 1-164.

146. Heath, P. C,, J. W. Spann, and J. R. Kreitzer  (1969),
       Marked DDE inipariment of mallard reproduction in
       controlled studies.  Nature 224:47-48.

147. Wiemeyer, S. N. and R. D, Porter  (1970), DDE thins
       eggshell problem, in The biological impact^ of
       pesticides in^the environment, J. W.  Gillett, ed.
       (Environmental health sciences series no.  1) Oregon
       State University Press, Corvallis, pp. 31-35.

148. Peakall, D. E. (1970), p,p«-DDT:  effect on calcium
       metabolism and concentration of estradiol in the
       blood. Science, 168:592-594.

149. Hickey, J. J. and D. W. Anderson  (1968), Chlorinated
       hydrocarbons and eggshell changes in  raptorial and

       fish-eating birds.  Science 162:271-273.

150.  Anderson, D. W. , J. J. Hickey, R. W. Risebrough, D. E.
       Hughes, and R. E. Christensen  (1969) ,  Significance
       of chlorinated hydrocarbon residues to breeding
       pelicans and cormorants.  £§£.,_ Fiel.d_Natur, 83(2):

151.  Mermeer, K. and L. M. Reynolds  (1970) , Organochlorine
       residues in aquatic birds in the Canadian prairie
       provinces.  Canadian Field-Naturalist 8U: 117-130.

152.  Blus, L. J., C. D. Gish, A. A. Eelisle and R. M, Prouty
       (1972), Logarithmic relationship of DDE residues to
       eggshell thinning.  Nature 235:376-377.

153.  Risebrough, R. W. in press  (1972), Effects of
       environmental pollutants upon animals other
       than man.  Proceedings sixth Berkeley Symposium
       Mathematical Statistics and Probability.

15U.  Cade, T. J., J. E. Lincer, C. M. White D. C. Roseneau,
       and L. C. Swartz  (1970), DDE residues and eggshell
       changes in Alaskan falcons and havks.  Science 172:

155.  Risebrough, R. W. , R. J. Huggett, J. Griffin and
       E. D. Goldberg (1968), Pesticides:  transatlantic
       movements in the northeast trades.  Science 159;

156.  Risebrough, R. W, , J. Davis, and D. W. Anderson  (1970)
       Effects of various chlorinated hydrocarbons, in
       The biological impact of gesticides in the environ-
       ment, J/W. Gillett, ed.  (Environmental healtn sci-
       ences series no.1)  (Oregon State University Press,
       Corvallis) , pp. <*0-53,

157.  Hays, H. and R. W. Risebrough (1972), Pollutant
       concentrations in abnormal young terns from Long
       Island Sound. Auk 89(1): 19-35.

158.  Tarrant, K. R. and J. O«B. Tatton (1968b) , Organochlorine
       pesticides in rainwater in the British Isles.
       Nature 219:725-727.

159.  Mulhern. B. M. , W. L. Reichel, L. N. Locke, T. C.


       Lament, A. Belisle, E. Cromartie, G. E. Bagley, arid
       R.  M.  Prouty (1070), Orqanochlorine residues arid
       autopsy data from bald eagles.  Pesti. Monit.J.
       14 (3) : 14 1-144.

160.  Faber,  R. A., R.  W. Risebrough, and H. M. Pratt
       (1972) , Organochlorines and mercury in
       Common Egrets and Great Blue Herons.  Environ-
       mental Pollution 3:111-122-

161.  Ratcliffe, D. A.  (1970), Changes attributable to
       pesticides in egg treackage frequency and egg-
       shell  thickness in some British birds. J.
       Ecol.  7{1):67:115.

162.  Gunther,  F. A., W. E. Westlake, and P. S. Jaglan
       (1968) , Reported solubilities of 738 pesticide
       chemicals in water.  Residue Reviews 20:1-148.

163.  Vos,  J.  C., H. A. Breeman and E. Eenschop  (19t>tt) , Tne
       occurrence of the fungicide hexachlorobenzene  in
       wild  birds and its toxicological importance.  A
       preliminary communication.  Mededlinqen Pijkstakuteit
       Landbouw-wetenschappen Gent 33(3):126J-126b.

164.  Risebrough, F. cW., D. B. Menzel, D. J. Martin,  and
       H.  S.  Olcott in press  (1972), DDT residues
       in  Pacific marine fish.  Pesticides Monitorirw J.

165.  Heath,  R. G., J.  W. Spann, J. F. Kreitzer, and
       C.  Vance in gress  (1972), Effects of poly-
       chlorinated biphenyls on birds.  Proceedings
       XV  International Crnitholocjical Congress.

166.  Peakall,  D. B. (1971), Effect of polychlorinated
       biphenyls  (PCB's) en the eggshells of ring doves.
       Bull,  Environ^ contain. Toxicol. 6 (2) : 10C-101.

167.  Friend,  M. and D. O. Trainer  (1970)b, Polychlorinated
       biphenyl:  interaction with duck hepatitis virus.
       Science 170:1314-1316.

168.  Street,  J. C., F. M. Urry, D. J. Viagstaff and A. D.
       Blau  (1968), Comparative effects of polychlcrinatea
       biphenyls and organochlorine pesticides in induction
       of  hepatic microsomal enzymes,  American cnemical
       Society,  158th National meeting, Sept. 8-12,  19b6.

169.  Vos, J.  G. , J. H. Koeman , H. L. van der Maas, K. C.
       ten Noever de Braiiw, and H, J. de Vos  (1970),
       Identification and toxicological evaluation or
       chlorinated dibenzofuran and chlorinated na£.thalene
       in two commercial polychlorinated biphenyls.
       Food^Cosmet ,. Toxicgl . 8:625-633.

170.  Vos, J.  G. , and J. H. Keoman (1970), Comparative
       toxicologic study with polychlorinated bipnenyls
       in chickens with special reference to porphyria,
       edema formation, liver necrosis, and tissue residues.
171. Vos, J. C. , in £ress  (1972), Toxicity of PCB on
       non-human mammals and birds.  Environmental
       Health in Perspective 1.

172. Peakall, D. B. , J. L. Lincer, and S. E. Bloom
       iQ press  (1972), Effect of Aroclor 125U
       on Ring Doves and Kestrels.  Environment a l^Healtn
       Perspective 1 .

173. Jensen, S. , A. G. Johnels, M. Olsson, and G. Otterlino
       (1969), DDT and PCB in marine animals from Swedish
       waters.  Nature 224:247-250.

174. Risebrough, R. W. (1969), Chlorinated hydrocarbons in
       marine ecosystems in Chemical Fallout, M. W. Miller
       and G. C. Berg, edsc. (C. C. Thomas, Springrieid) ,
       pp. 5-23.


    A.   Aesthetic considerations
         1.   Aesthetics„-_Geneza1

              a.   All surface waters should  be  capable  or

supporting life forms of aesthetic value,

              b.   surface waters should be "free"  of

substances attributable to discharge or wastes as  follows:

                   (1). Materials that will settle  to  form

objectionable deposits;

                   (2). Floating debris, oil, scum, ana

other matter;

                   (3) . Substances producing  objectionable

color, odor, taste, or turbidity;

                        Materials, including radionuclides,

in concentrations or combinations  (which are toxic or)  which

produce undesirable physiological res[>onses in humans,  fish

and other animal and plant life; and

                    (5). Substances and conditions or

combinations thereof in concentrations which produce

undesirable aquatic life.

Rationale (Aesthetic considerations):

    Aesthetic criteria are to be applied in the context of

local conditions and are intended  in general terms to

provide for the protection of surface waters from substances

which tend or miqht tend to degrade the aesthetic quality ot

water.  The use of the term "free" recognizes the practical

impossibility of complete absence and inevitability of  tne

presence of potential pollutants tc some degree.


         2.   Nutrient_.(Phosphorus)

         No limit of acceptability is prescribed tor

phosphorus (P) in recreational waters.

Rationale (Phosphorus):

         Acceptable limits for phosphorus in receiving

waters where it is a limiting constituent for nuisance

aquatic plant growths are believed to be:

    Water Body               Majcimum Phosphor us ^JJP) Concentration

Within lakes and reservoirs               25 ug/1

At a point where a river
  enters a lake or reservoir              50 ug/1

Flowing streams                          100 ug/1

    Reducing phosphorus in lakes and reservoirs is the

single most important step that can be taken in the control

of eutrophication at this time (1, 2, 3, 4).  It is

recognized that the phenomenon of eutrophication is complex

and that there may be waterways wherein higher

concentrations of total phosphorus do not produce eutro^hy,

as well as those waterways wherein lower concentrations of

total phosphorus may be associated with populations ot


nuisance organisms.  Waters now containing less than the

specified amount of phosphorus should not be degraded by the

introduction of additional phosphates.  Exceptions to the

above stated limits need to be recognized in any water

management program.  Because of naturally occurring poor

quality or because of technological limitations in the

control of introduced pollutants, some waters may not meet

the desired levels.  This determination must be made on a

case-by-case basis following an analysis of available data

and conditions associated with each such area.  There are

situations where  higher levels of phosphorus than those

above can be tolerated by the waterway without developing

biological nuisances or increasing the threat of

eutrophication.   Often naturally-occurring phenomena limit

the development of such nuisances.  Examples include those

waters  highly  laden with natural  silts or colors which

reduce  the penetration of sunlight needed for plant

photosynthesis, these waters whose morphemetrie features of

steep banks, great depth, and substantial flows contribute

to a history of no plant problems, or those waters  that are

managed primarily for waterfowl  or other wildlife.

B.  Recreational Waters

    1.   Clarity

    For bathing and swimming waters, clarity should be

such that a Secchi disc is visible at a minimum depth of 4

feet and visible on the bottom in areas designated as "learn

to swim".  Acceptable clarity in diving areas the clarity is equal

to the minimum required by safety standards depending upon the

height of the diving board or platform.

Rationale (Clarity):

    Clarity is important for recreational waters for a

variety of reasons among which are safety, visual appeal and

recreational enjoyment.  Absolute criteria are impossible

since local conditions vary.  However, turbidity due to

human activities should be controlled in recreational areas.


         2.   Micreorganises

              a.   Bacteriological Indicators

                   1).  The indicator organises for

contamination of surface waters by potential human pathogens

are the fecal coliform group of bacteria.

                   2).  Without reference to official

designation of recreation as a water use, surface waters

are, as a minimum, to be suitable for human recreation where

there is little significant risk of ingestion.  In the

absence of local epidemological experience an average of

2000 fecal coliforms per 100 ml and a maximum of 4000 per

100 ml, except in specified mixing zones adjacent to

outfalls, shall not be exceeded for such waters.

                   3).  In waters designated for recreation

where the whole body may be completely submerged or there is

significant probability of ingestion, the maximum acceptable

limit for fecal coliform content is the log mean of 200 per

100 ml, and not more than 10 percent of total samples during

any 30-day period are to exceed 400 per 100 ml.  This is to

be determined by multiple-tube fermentation or membrane


filter procedures and based upon a minimum of not less than

five samples for any 30-day period of the recreation season,
Rationale  (Bacteriological Indicators):

    Fecal coliforms are used as an indicator group since

they have been shown to originate from warn•blooded animals

and their presence in water indicates the potential presence

of human pathogenic bacteria and viruses.  The use of fecal

coliforms as the indicator group is supported by the fact

that approximately 95 percent of the total coliform

organisms in the feces of birds and mammals yield positive

fecal coliform tests and a similar portion of the total

coliform organisms in uncontaminated soils and plant

material yield negative fecal coliform tests  (5).  A fecal

coliform level of 2000 per 100 ml is intended to provide for

the enjoyment of limited contact users in relative safety.

Such use includes boating, fishing and other non-whole-body

imersion activities incident to shoreline usage.  KTiole-

body immersion recreation refers to those activities such as

bathing, swimming and water skiing in which there is

prolonged and intimate contact with the water with

considerable risk of ingesting water in quantities


sufficient to pose a significant health hazard.  As fecal

coliform levels increase, there is a greater probability

that hunan pathogens, such as Salmonella, also increase.

The fecal coliform level of 200 was chosen since this nuinber

is compatible with data which indicate low probability of

enteric pathogen concentrations (6, 7, 8).

              b.   Viruses

              No limits are prescribed for viruses in

recreational waters.

Rationale (Viruses):

    Although considerable progress in the area of

virological methodology has been made in the past years, no

method useful in routine monitoring has been perfected.

Also, data on die-off rates, correlation with existina

indicators and selection of a significant indicator virus

are not available.  For these reasons no indicator virus or

limits are prescribed, even though it is clearly recognized

that viruses of fecal or other human origin may present a

health hazard when contaminating recreational waters.

         In bathing and swimming waters,  the acceptable

range of pH is 6,5 to 8.3 except where due to natural causes

and in no case less than 5.0 or more than 9.0.

Rationale (pH) :

    Natural waters are usually alkaline or acidic and may

cause eye irritation because the pH is unfavorable.  Hence

special requirements for whole-body submersion recreation

waters are more strict than those established for other

areas.  In light of its coordinate effect, the buttering

capacity requires considerations in criteria to prevent eye

irritation.  The lacrimal fluid of the human eye is

approximately 7.0 (9) and a deviation of 0.1 pH unit from

the norm may result in eye irritation  (1C).  Appreciable

irritation will cause severe pain  (9) .
         4.   Shellfish

         Species available for harvest by recreation users

are to be fit for human consumption.  In areas where taking

of mollusks is a recreational activity, the criteria are to


be consistent with the current edition of the U.S. Public

Health Service Manual, "Sanitation of Shellfish Growing


Rationale  (Shellfish) :

    The intent here  is to protect persons engaged in

recreational shellfishinq.  consideration shall be yiven to

factors affecting shellfish growing such as; microbiological

quality, pesticides, marine biotoxins, trace metals and

radionuclides.  The  recreation harvester shall be afioruea

the same level of protection  as the consumer of commercial

products and therefore the criteria of the U.S. Public

Health Service is governing.
          5.    Temperature
     Except  where caused by natural conditions,  water

 temperatures of bathing and swimming waters in  excess  or  30

 C*(86*F)  are not acceptable.


Rationale (Temperature):

    Excessively high temperatures are damaging to aquatic

biota and present a risk to the swimmer  (6).  High

temperatures limit body heat dissipation and may, tarouga

elevation of the deep body temperature, produce

physiological disturbance (5).


      References:  Recreational Waters
1.   vollenweider, R. A.  1968.  Scientific Fundamentals
      of the eutrophication of lakes and flowing waters
      with particular reference to nitrogen and phosphorus
      as factors in eutrophication.  O.E.C.D., DAS/CSF/68/27,
      Paris, 182 pp.

2.   Keup, L. E.  1967.  Phosphorus in flowing waters.
      Water Res. £: 373-386.

3.   Hutchinson, G. E.  1973.  Eutrophication.  American
      3cience 61:269-279.

4.   Mackenthun, K. M.  1968.  The phosphorus problem.
      Jour. Amer. Water Works Assoc.  60:1047-1054.

5.   water Duality Criteria of 1972.  HAS Report - In Press.

6.   Geldreich, E. E. 1970.  Applying bacteriological
      parameters to recreational water quality.
      J. Am. Wat. Wks. Ass. 62:113-120.

7.   Dutka, B. J. and J. B. Bell.  1973.  Isolation of
      Salmonella from moderately polluted waters.
      J. Wat. Poll. Contr. Fed. 45;316-324.

8.   Van Donsel, D. J. and E. E. Geldreich.  1971.
      Relationships of Salmonella to fecal coliforms
      in the bottom sediments.  Wat. Res.  5_; 1079; 1087.

9.   Water Quality Criteria, report of the National
      Technical Advisory Committee to the Secretary of

10. Hood, E. W.  1968.  The role of some physio-chemical
      properties of water as  causative  agents  of eye
      irritation in swimmers.   In;  Water Quality
      Criteria:  report to the  Secretary of Interior.
      G.P.O., Wash. D.C.

            APPKvDIX A


Species  in Alphabetical Order

                           Fish  Temperature Data Sheet
Species  (cordon & scientific  name)  Atlantic salmon  (Salmo  salar)
                                                                          Data g/
Lethal threshold:  Acclimation   embryo   larvae    juvenile   adult   source^
       Upper           5                              22.2                   1
23.5 '
*30 days after hatch

Growth :~
. ?-/
Preferred (final) :
Gonad d cve.uopj.ient :
Spawning : Op tirauni

14°* (2)

*when acclimated
Requires (x)
Low winter temp.
Some 'winter decrea
No winter decrease
' : Range^'
Hatch of normal larvae: Optimum

17(5) . 13
to 4°C .
X* Tenip. 	
33 ' Tonip.

adult . * •-••?-
.6-16.2(6) 2,5,6

Period • 7
*12°C precludes gonad development
U.V5.S (9^ates Oct-Dec -: > 8.9
Range^ 0.5
- 7.2°C. -.".-.-. 3
Migration:  adults 23  C  or less,  smolt 10 C'or less

     Spawning   Stream riffles
                          Substrate    gravel
     Larvae:   Planktonic
     Juvenile ^Freshwater  lakes (landlrtr.keH si-rain)
                Ocean  and tributary streams
     Ac'ult      Freshwater lakes (landlocked strain)
                Ocean and_trj.b,utarY_s t reams
 --L/  1'o.t. r,rov:th  -  Cro^?t.h in \)t..'mnus vt.  o2  mortality
 ^/  AH r.': nor t^c! 01:  to 50" uC opt:i::;^:: If c!:>t •  p.-Tr.iit
 3/  list sources  on Lack OL ya<:n in ^:q':ence,r_

                                 Atlantic salmon

1.  Bishal, H. M.  1960.  Upper lethal temperatures for larval  salmonids.
        Jou. Du Conseil 25(2) :129-133.

2.  Fisher, Kenneth C. and P. F. Elson.  1950.  The selected temperature  of
        Atlantic Salmon and Speckled Trout and the effect of temperature  on  the
        response to an electrical stimulus.  Physiol. Zoology 23:27-34.

3.  Dexter, R.  1967.  Atlantic salmon culture.  U.S. ESFW  (mimeographed) .
        In:  DeCola, J.N.  1970.  Water Quality Requirements for Atlantic
        Salmon.  U. S. Dept. of the Interior, Federal Water Quality Administration
        Report COT 10-16.

4.  Markus, H. C.  1960.  Hatchery reared atlantic salmon smolts  in ten
        months.  Prog. Fish. Cult. 24:3.

5.  Javoid, M. Y. and J. M. Anderson.   1967.   Thermal  acclimation and tempernrure
          selection in Atlantic  Salmon,  S_a]_Do  salar and  rainbow  trout, S.  gairOneri.
          J. Fish. Res. Hd.  Canada 24(7)'."
6.  -FpTouRoii j R. n.  ]958-   T]t(". preferred trrmeratnre of fish and> ir
        dislribution in temperate, lakes and streams.  J. Fish. Res.  Bd.  Canada

7.  Meister, A.. 1970.   Atlantic Salmon Cor.nn ssion, Univ. of Maine (personal
        communication).  In:  DeCola, J.M. 1970.  Water Quality Requirements  for
        Atlantic Salmon.  USD1, Fed. Water Qual . Admin.  Report CWT  10-16.

8.  Carlander, K. D.  1969.  Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology.  Vol.  1.
        Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, Iowa.

9.  DeCola, J. N.  1970.  Water quality requirements for atlantic  salmon.   U.S. D.I.
        Fed. Water Qual. Reucrt CWT 10-1 6.

                           Fish  Temperature Data Sheet-
.Species  (common & scientific name)
                                              buffalo  lctiqbus cyprinellus)
                                                                          a    r
Lethal  threshold:  Acclimation    embryo    larvae   juvenile   adult   source-
        Upper       _ _

Preferred  (final):
    Spawnin^ in shallow calm,  mud-bottomed areas with vegetation,
                         Substrate    mud and  vegetation
    Eggs  randomly broadcast,  adhesive,  4-14 days to hatch
    Larvae:    Planktoaic 	  Pelagic 	  Demersal
    Juvenile   Same as  adult    	
Gonad dev
Hatch of
e.lopment: Requires (x)
Low winter
Some winter decrease
No winter decrease
7 /
Optimum 16.7 , . Ranger^ U
normal larvae: Optimum
. Terap .
Tenp .
.4-26.7 Dates
Ranged 13
late April
into June-' - '1,2,3,4,
.9-16.7 ."•"---• 2,7,8
    Adult      Shallow,  turbid,  overflow ponds ,  oxbows ,  lowland lakes ,
              — deep— pools-oi— rivets. ~aHd— st&eams - - --
-i /
.y Net. grov/l :li - Grcvih in v.'t. r-iuuj wt.  o2 mortality
.?./ A:>  reported or to 50~< of optr.r;i::.-. jf da. r.-:  pernj t
3/ list so--rcei on b:;ck of pc.rc. in ni;r--ricnl ;;-qi.:cnc2'.r.

                                 Bigmouth buffalo


1.  Johnson, R. P. . 1963.  Studies on the life history and ecology of the
        bigmouth buffalo, Ictiobus cyprinellus (Valenciennes).  J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada

2.  Eddy, S. and T. Surber.  1947.  Northern fishes.  Univ. of Minn. Press.

3.  Walburg, C. H. and W. R. Nelson.   1966.  Carp, river carpsucker, smallinouth
        buffalo and bigmouth buffalo  in Lewis and Clark Lake,.Missouri
        River.  Bur. Sport Fish, and  Wildl. Research Report 69.

4.  Harlan, J. R. and E. B. Speaker.   1956.  Ibwa Fish and Fishing, State
        Conservation Commission.

5.  Trautman, M. B.  1957.  The fishes of Ohio.  Ohio State Univ. Press.

6.  Breeder, C. M., Jr.  and D.  E.  Rosen.   1966.  Modes of reproduction in
        fishes. Natural  History Press.

7.  Walker,  M. C.  and P. T.  Frank. 1952..  The propagation of buffalo.  Prog.
        Fish. Cult. 14:129-130.

8.  Swingle, H. S.   1955.  Experiments on commercial fish production in ponds.
        Proc. S. E. Assoc. Game and Fish  Commission for 1954, pp. 69-74.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species  (ccnnmon  &  scientific name)   Black crappie (Promoxis nigrpmaculatua)
Lethal threshold:  Acclimation   embryo
       Upper       	'	   	
                                                                        Data 3;
                                           larvae   juvenile   adult   source^
                                                    *upper incipient lethal

*limits of
zer.o growth
median 28
        .  2/
Preferred (final)
                       *surface water temp, when larvae appeared in limnetic waters
Gonad development:   Requires (x)   in Wis.
                     Low winter tejnp.
;nge— 14.4-17
Temp. Period
Temp. Period
Temp. Period
Mar (4)-
.8(4)fiates July (3) ~:

- 3.4
*begin soawnift^
Spawning:  Optimum	 R;
Hatch of normal  larvae:   Optimum

    Spawning  Nests in  shallow water 1-2' on sand or gravel (3);
              sometimes pn muddy bottoms  (5^	.	
                         Substrate  See spawning^
    Larvae:    Planktonic
    Juvenile    	-
              Lakes, reservoirs,-slow streams; in areas containing
              vegetation and  submerged objects; less tolerant__to___
              turbidity Than  white crappie
I/ Nat  growth - Cro-./th in wt. niniia wt. of mortality
.?./ As reported or to 50% of oj!ti:au:r; if daM permit
3/ list sources on back of pag^ in nur-oricnl sequouce'.?.

                                  Black  crappie


1.  Neill, W. H., J. J.  Magnuson and G.  G.  Chipman.   1972.   Behavioral thermo-
         regulation by fishes - new experimental approach.   Science 176 (4042:1443)

2.  Hokanson, K.E.F. and C.  F. Kleiner.   1973.   Effects of  constant and diel
        fluctuations in temperature on growth and survival  of black crappie;
        Unpublished data, National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota.

3.  Breder, C. M. and D. E.  Rosen.  1966.  Modes of reproduction in fishes.
        Nat. History Press.

4.  Goodson, L. F.  1966.  Crappie.  In:  Inland Fisheries  Management.
        A. Calhoun, Ed., Calif. Dept. Fish and Game.

5.  Eddy, S. and T. S. Surber.  1947. Northern fishes.  Univ. Minn. Press.

6.  Faber, D. J.  1967.  Limnetic larval fish in northern Wisconsin lakes.
        Jour. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada.  24:927-937.

7.  Trautinan, M. B.  1957.  The fishes of Ohio.  The Ohio State Univ. Press.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species (common  &  scientific name)  Bluegill (j^g£omis_ macrochirus^
Lethal threshold: Acclimation embryo larvae juvenile adult
Upper 15(2), 12.1(8) 27.5(8) 30.5(2)
20 32
25(2)T 26(8) 36.1(8) 33C2J
30 • 33.8
32.9*8) 37.3(8)
Lower 15(2), 12.1(8) 3.2(8) 2.5(2)
20 • 5.0
2S(2), 2fi(f?) 9.8(8) 7.5(2)
•W 11
r ,v I/ 32.9(8) . .. 15.3(8) ,
Growth:— larvae juvenile adult
optimum 22
ranger^ 15.6-26.7
Preferred (final): larvae juvenile " adult
05 o
summer ~>*.-j
Data £i
2, 8
3,4 .
Gonad development: Requires (x)
Low winter temp. Temp. Period
Some winter decrease "Temp. Period
No winter decrease pr° a ^emp. Period
. - 19.4(5)- April, June -
Spawning: Optimum 28(7) _: Range^ '32.2(6) Dates late Aug. -
..... . .... , . ... .....
Hatch of normal larvae: Op timum 22.2-23.9(8) Ranger^- 21.9-33.9(8)-- <
Habitat :
Spawning Nest in sand» gravel, dead leaves, sticks or •
mud. in shallow water (2-6* depth common)
Substrate see spawning
Larvap: Planktonic Pelagic x Demersal days
Juvenile See adult -

* in
. 1
. 1-


Adult Ponds, lakes, sluggish streams with vegetation and
sand , gravel or muck bottom
I/ Hat growth - Growth iii v.'t. minus v:t. of mortality
2J As reported or t:o 50% of optii.uim if data permit
~\l H<:<- r:,Tin-r^^ on 1vi,-V n f n.T.'p in nu:?,T i r/> 1 SfTliPnr.P'.r .


                                  Bluegill  sunfish


 1.  Emig, J. W.  1966.  Bluegill sunfish.   In:  Inland Fisheries Mgt.
         A. Calhoun  ed. ,  Calif. Dept.  Fish and Game.

 2.  Hart, J. S.  1952.  Geographical variations of some physiological  and
         morphological characters in certain freshwater fish.   Univ.  Toronto
         biology series No.  60.

 3.  Anderson, R. 0.   1959.   The influence  of season and temperature  on growth
         of the bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus).  Ph.D.  Thesis, Univ.  Mich.

 4.  McComish, T. S.   1971.   Laboratory  experiments on  growth and food  conversion
         by the bluegill.  Ph.D. Thesis,  Univ. Missouri, Columbia.

 5.  Snow, H., A. Ensign and John Klingbiel.   1966.  The bluegill, its life
         history, ecology and management.  Wis. Cons. Dept. Publ. No. 23*0.

 6.  Clugston, J. P.   1966.   Centrarchid  spawning in the Florida Everglades.
         Quart. Jour.  Fla.  Acad. Sci., 29:137-143.

 7.  Recommended bioassay procedure  for  bluegili, Leopmis macrochirus (Rafinesque),
         partial chronic tests.   National Water Quality. Laboratory,  Duluth,
         Minnesota,  1972.

 8>  Banner,  A. and  J. A. Van Annan.   1972.  Thermal effects on eggs, larvae and
         Juvenile of bluegill sunfish.   Report, EPA Contract No. 14-12-913.

 9.  Ferguson, R. G.   1958.   The preferred  temperature  of fish and their midsummer
         distribution in temperate lakes and streams.  J. Fish. Res.  Bd. Canada.

10.  Hubbs, C. L. and E. R.  Allen.  1944.  Fishes of Silver Springs,  Florida.
         Proc. Fla.  Acad. Sci.,  6:110-130.

11.  Toetz, D. W.  1966. The change in  endogenous to exogenous sources of energy
         in bluegill sunfish larvae.   Invest. Indiana Lakes and Streams,

                           Fish Temperature  Data  Sheet-

Species  (common & scientific name)  Brook trout  (Salvelinus fontinalis)
Lethal- threshold: Acclimation embryo larvaB juvenile adult
temperature ' .
Upper 3 23.5


. 2/
Preferred (final) :
Gonad development:
25 -

7-18 (2)

Requires (x)
Low winter tejno.
20.1* 24.5**(2)
*Newly hatched 25"3
jfc j(f S wilHUD

fljear freezing

juvenile adult
. ' 16 (1)
10-19 (1)
jmrenile ' «4ttl-fc
Age not stated
Teiap. Period
Data 3;
, .-^ . ...


1,2 -

Some winter decrease . Temp. Period
Spawning: Optimum
No winter decrease
<9 - Range-
Hatch of nonaal larvae: Optimum 6
Temp. Period
? - 11.7 Dates Sept-Nov ~
Range^/ -12 .7
' i
    Spawning   Rivers and streams;  when  these are not available springs	

               have been reported as  satisfactory alternatives.

                         Substrate Gravel in riffles ,and heads or trails
    Larvae:    Planktonic
   ot pools

    Juvenile   Streams  with  temperatures not exceeding 20 C and lakes

               a little warmer,  but with cooler water available
i' Net growth - Growth iu we. ninus wt. of mortaliLy

JJ As reported or v.o 50% of optiv.-.ur.; if data permit
3/ list sources on back of paga in n-r.arical suquor.ce.f_


1.  Hokanson, K.E.F., J. H. McCormick, B. R. Jones, and J.  II.  Tucker.   1973.
        Thermal reauirements for maturation, spnvning, and  embryo survival of
        the brook trout, Sa_lv_elinuis fontinalis  (Mitchill).   J.  Fish.  Res.  Bd.
        Canada, 30(7):975-984.

2.  McCormick, J. H., K.E.F. Hokanson, and B. R. Jone's.  1972.   Effects of
   	  temperature on growth and survival of young brook trout,  Salvelinus
        fontinalis.  J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada.  29:1107-1112."

3. -Fry, F.E.J., J. S. Hart, and K.F. Walker. .  1946.  Lethal  temperature
        relations for a sample of young speckled trout, Salvelinns fontinalis.
        Univ. Toronto Studies, Biol. Scr. 54, Publ. Ontario Fish  Res.  Lab.

4.  I.aRivers, Irr..  1962.  Fishes and fisheries of Nevada.   Nev.  Fish and  Game

5.  Carlander, K.  D.  1969.  Handbook of freshwater fishery biology,  Vol.  1,
        3rd PA.   The Iowa State Univ. Press, Anes, Iowa.

6.  Fry, F.E.J., 1T3.    1951.  Some environmental relations of  the speckled
        trout (S:j_lvj}_limis font inalis).  Proc. N. E. Atlantic  Fisheries Conf.
        May 1951.

                           Fish Tcr.perature Da La Sheet
Species  (common  &  scientific name)  Carp (Cyprinus carpio)
Lethal threshold:
                                  embryo   larvae   juvenile   adult
              Data g/
                                                    31-34  (24 far. TL,.-)
                                                    35.7  (24 hrr~TL5Q)
        .  2/
Preferred (final):
Gonad development:   Requires (x)
                                        juvenile     '.    adult
                                        31-32 (Ace.  25-35)	
                                        17 (Ace. 10)
                     Low winter tejap.
                     Some winter decrease
                     No winter decrease
                          l6(5)-26(2)Dates Mar-Aug(6)'
                                              Range-16.7 - 22
Spawning:  Optimum    20*
Hatch of normal  larv;
Abnormal larvae  after 35°C shock of embryos
    Spawning   Adhesive eggs broadcast in shallow areas usually less
               than 1 ft. deep                         	
                                          association, with vegetation
    Larvae:    Planktonic
low gradient, warm streams;  lakes,  reservoirs or
overflow sloughs, oxbows that  contain  an  abundance of organic
matter; shallow water in summer,  deeper water in winter.
Same as juveniles '		
I/  Hat. growth - Growth in wt. rcinus vt. of mortality
Zf  As  reportod or to 50% of optimum if data
3/  list sources on back of page in nvi.T.arical snqucr.cci'.r.


1.  Frank, M. L.  1973.  Relative sensitivity of different stages of carp to
        thermal shock.  Thermal Ecology Symposium,  May 3-5, 1973, Augusta, Ga.

2.  Swee, U. B. and H. R. McCriranon.  1966.  Reproductive biology of the carp,
        Cyprinus carpio L., in Lake St. Lawrence, Ontario.  Trans. Amer.
        Fish. Soc.  95:372-380.

3.  Trautman, M. B.  1957.  Fishes of Ohio.  Ohio State Univ. Press.

4.  Black, E. C.  1953.  Upper lethal temperatures of some British Columbia
        freshwater fishes.  J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can.  10:196-210.

5.  Sigler, W. F.   1958.  The ecology and use of carp ill Utah.  Utah Agric. Exp,
        Sta., Bull. 405.

6.  Carlander, K.   1969.  Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology, Vol. 1,
        Iowa State Univ. Press,  p. 105.

7.  Pitt, T. K. , E. T. Garside, and R. L. Hepburn.  19-56.  Temperature
        selection of the carp (Cyprinus carpio Linn.).  Can. Jour, Zool.

8.  Burns, J. W.  1966.  Carp.  In:  Inland Fisheries Management.  A. Calhoun,
        ed., Calif. Div. Game and Fish.

                           Fish Temperature  Data Sheet

Species  (common & scientific name)  Channel  catfish (Ictalurus  punctatus)
Lethal threshold:
Preferred (final) :
. summer
Gonad development:
Spawning: Optimum
Hatch of normal lar
Acclimation embryo larvae juvenile adult source^
15°C 31.0(3)* 30.4(2) 2,3
25 35.
30 ^37.
' 35 • 38.
* temperature

larvae juvenile
29-30 (3) 30(4)
27-31 (3) = 22-34 (4)
larvae juvenile
Requires (x)
Low winter temp. Temp.
Some winter decrease - Temp.
No winter decreastProbable Tem>. 22
26.7 (5) : Range^ 29. 4 (5) Dates
vae: Optimum 21.7 (9) Range— 18
5 (1) 33.5(2)
0 (1)
0 (1)
o f max . survival
not given



.8 Period in Fla
Mid April -
late July-; (7)

; acclimation

3,4 .

. 'Constant

temp . springs
- 5,7


    Spawning   Usually semi-dark nests under  logs,  rocks

               overhanging banks and other protected  areas

                         Substrate	_j	-

               Planktonic 	  Pelagic 	  Demersal
    Juvenile   Bottom waters,  riffles
          bottom waters, deep holes and riffles for feeding
i' 'Ie,t p.rowdi  - Growth in wt. minus v:t. of mortality

27 As reported or to 507. of optimum, if dr-.'.a permit
3/ list sources on back of pa^c. in rui.T.erical s-jqunnc

                                 Channel catfish

 1.  Allen, K. 0. and K. Strawn.   19b8.   Heat tolerance of channel catfish,
         Ictalurus punctatus.   Proc.  Conf.  of S.  E.  Assoc. of Game and Fish
         Comm.  1967.

 2.  Hart, J. S.  1952.   Geographical variations  of  some physiological and
         morphological characters  in  certain freshvjater fish.  Univ.  Toronto
         Biological Series No.  60.

 3.  West, B. W.  1966.   Growth,  food conversion, food consumption and survival
         at various temperatures  of the  channel" catfish, Ictalurus punctatus
         (Rafinesque) .   Master's  Thesis, Univ. Ark..

 4.  Andrew, J.  W. and R.  R.  Stickney.   1972.  Interaction of feeding rate and
         environmental temperature of growth, food conversions and body
         composition of  channel catfish.  Trans.  Amer. Fish. Soc.. 101:94-97.

 5.  Clemens, H. P. and  K. F.  Sneed.   1957.   The  spawning behavior of the channel
         catfish, Ictalurus punctatus..   USFWS, Special Sci. Rept, Fish No. 219.

 6.  Miller, E.  E.  1966.   Channel catfish.   In:   Inland Fisheries Mgrat.
         A. Calhoun (ed.), Calif.  Dept.  Fish and  Game.

 7.  Brovm, L.  1942.  Propagation of the spotted channel catfish, Ictalurus
         lacustris punctatus.   Kan. Acad. Sci. Trans., 45:311-314.

 8.  MeClellan,  W. G.  1954.   A study of southern spotted channel catfish,
         Ictalurus punctatus  (Rafinesque).   M.S.  Thesis, N. Texas St. College.
         Cited in:  Carlander,  K.  D., 1969.   Handbook of Freshwater Fishery
         Biology.  Vol.  1, Iowa State Univ.  Press, Ames, Iowa.

 9.  Hubbs, C. L. and E. R. Allen.  1944.  Fishes of Silver Springs,  Florida.
         Proc. Fla. Acad.  Sci., Vol.  6,  1943-44.

10.  Wojtalik, T. A.  1968 (approx.).  Summary of temperature literature  on
         largemouth bass,  smallmouth  bass,  carp,  channel catfish and  bluegill.
         Unpublished Ms.,  TVA,  Chattanooga.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species  (common & scientific name)  Cisco  (lake herring)  (Coregonus artedii)
Lethal threshold:
Acclimation embryo.
~ 1 r>° r
temperature - J.u L,
2 ni
5(3} <10(5)
larvae juvenile adult
19.8(3) 20(4, 6)*
21.8(3) <24(5)
. 26.0 *no
26.3 acclim.
Data 3;
. 1
25 *ultimate upper lethal 25.8 temp, given 3
Preferred (final) :
. avoidance
Gon'ad development:
Spawning: Optimum
Hatch of normal lai
Hatching period Apt
- 3.0
larvae juvenile adult

larvae juvenile ' adult

Requires (x)
Movement onto spawnin
Low winter temp.
Some winter decrease
No winter decrease
-35- •' Range— 1-
rvae: Optimum -10
r-May, Lake Ontario (9)

>15.5 - >17
g grounds =5 C
Temp. Period
' Temp. Period
Temp. Period
Mid Nov.-
1-5.0 Dates Mid Dec. ~
Range^ 2-8 . -.•' •<
, -Early May Lake Superior (10)


• 7,8,9

              Over shoals and along shore, from 1 to 160 m of water
                      Usual1y.Oil mgome say substrate not important; others
                         Substrate say over flat stones, fine rubble  	7.,8,9

                    to boulders, free of vegetation
Planktonic   X     Pelagic 	  Demersal 	
In protected bays
               Below the 20°C isotherm and above the 2.5-3.0 ppm
               P.O. isoplettu-
!/  Net. growLh - Growth  in  vt.  minus wt. of mortality
2J  A.«j  reported or t:o  r)02 of  optiv.aini If data pi»r;
_3/  list source on l>;ick o!' paj;fi in nuincirical su(ju.>!r,cqi.r_



 1.  Colby, P. J.  and L.  T.  Brooks.  1970.  Survival and  development of the
         herring (Coregbnus  artedii) eggs at various incubation temperatures.
         In:  Biology of  Coregonids, C. C.  Lindsay  and  C.  S.  Woods,  ed.,
         Univ. Manitoba,   pp.  417-428.

 2.  >fcCormick, 3. H., B.  R.  Jones  and R. F. Syrett.   1971.   Temperature requirements
         for growth and survival  of larval  ciscos  (Corogonus  artedii).  J.  Fish.
         Res. Bd.  Canada   28:924-927

 3.  Edsall, T. A. and P.  J.  Colby.  1970-.  Temperature tolerance of young-of-
         the-year  Cisco,  Coregonus  artedii.  Trans. Amer.  Fish. Soc.  99:526-531.

 4.  Frey, D. G.   1955.   Distributional ecology  of  the  Cisco  (Coregonus artedii).
         Investigations of Indiana  Lakes and Streams.   4:177-228.

 5.  Colby, P. J.  and L.  T.  Brooke.  1969.  Cisco  (Coregonus  artedii) mortalities
         in a Southern Michigan lake, July  1968.  Limnology  & Oceanog. 14:958-960.

 6.  Dryer, W. R.  and J.  Beil.  1964.  Life history of  lake herring in Lake
         Superior.  U. S.  Fish. Bull. 63:493-530.

 7.  Cahn, A. R.   1927.   An  ecological study of  southern  Wisconsin fishes,  the
         brook silversides (Labidesthes sicculus) and  the cisco (Leucichthys
         artedii,  LeSueur).   111. Biol. Monogr.  11:1-151.

 8.  Carlander, K. D.  1969.   Handbook of Freshwater  Fishery  Biology.  Vol. 1,
         Iowa State Univ.  Press,  Ames, Iowa.

 9.  Pritchard, A. L.  1930.   Spawning habits  and  fry  of  the  cisco  (Leucichthys artedii)
         in Lake Ontario.  Contr. Canad. Bioi. Fish. N.S., 6:227-40.

10.  McCormick, J. H.  1973.   Personal observations.

11.  Van Oosten, J.  1929.  Life  history of the  lake  herring (Leucichthys nrtedii
         LeSueur)  of Lake Huron as  revealed by its  scales, with critique of
         the scale method.  U.  S. Bur. Fish. Bull.  44:265-428.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species  (common  &  scientific name) Coho salmon  (Oncorhynchus kisutch)
Lethal threshold':   Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile   adult   source^
                      5                              22.9                  1
                      in  '                           _21^2_      21*(3)


Preferred (final):
Gonad development:
Spawning: Optimum
Hatch of normal lar



Requires (x)
Low winter
Some winter decree:
No winter decrease
- ' Range—
vae: Optimum
juvenile adult
*maximum with excess food
juvenile ' adult
Temp. Period
se Temp. Period
Temp. Period
7.2-12.8(3)Dates Fall -:
Range— -.".•"<
temp . unknown


• 3

 Migration and maturation range 7.Z-l5.fcH.:>.>
 Rearing areas:  range 10.0 - 15.6(3)
 Habitat:                   .
              Migrates up streams, spawns typically near the .head
     Spawning			—	

              of riffles	       	—
                          Substrate   gravel

               Planktonic  	  Pelagic 	
Larvae:   Planktonic 	  rciagit; 	  Deniersal

Juvenile Rivers, migrating  to  ocean  or  lake
                      1arp;e lakes-;  rivers  during migration  and  spawning
 I/ Nat r>-°\oth - Growth in vL. ninu.s wt. of mortality

 U As reported or to 50% of optiu-ur, if c.aia  pern-it
 3/ list  sources on back ot pnge in nurr..-rical sequence.?.

                                  Coho salmon

1.  Brett, J. R.  1952.   Temperature  tolerance in young pacific salmon, genus
        Oncorhynchus.   J.  Fish.  Res.  Bd.  Can.  9:265-323.

2.  Griffiths, J.  S.  and D.  F. Alderdice.   1972.   Effects of acclimation and
        acute temperature experience,  on the swimming speed of juvenile coho
        salmon.  J.  Fish.  Res. Bd.  Can.  29:251-264.

3.  Anonymous.  1971.   Columbia  River thermal effects study.  Vol. 1,
        Environmental  Protection Agency.

4.  Edsall, T.  1970.   Personal  communication to  J.  H. McCormick, National
        Water Quality  Laboratory, Duluth,  Minnesota.

5.  Burrows, R. E.   1963.  Water temperature requirements for maximum
        productivity of  salmon.   Proceedings of the  12th Pacific N. W. .
        Symposium  on Water Poll. Res.

6.  Breeder, C. M. and D.  E.  Rosen.   1966.  Modes of reproduction in fishes.
        Hat. Hist. Press.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet

Species  (common & scientific name)   Emerald Shiner (Notrop_ls__at.herir>oides')
                                                                         Data  gy
Lethal threshold:  Acclimation    embryo    larvae   juvenile   adult    sourcer-
Growth:- .
. 2/
Preferred (final) :
Gonad development:
Spawning : Op tiraum
Hatch of normal la
25 ' __ .
Ill l-imal-p
= 31 '':


_. 30.7
24 hr TL 32.6°C(2)


juvenile adult
29 (2)
24-31 (2)
larvae -jtwenite- ' ad-ait
(unknown age)
25 (31

Requires (x)
Low winter temp.
Some winter de'crea;
No winter decrease
23* : Range—
ftom Eieid reports
rvae : Optimum
27 m
Temp. ' Period
se Temp. Period
Temp. Period
20 (3) - (
77.5 CT) Dates Mav-Aup ("h (51
' 21 	




     Spawning Open water  near  surface over 2 to 6 meters of water (3)
                 At  surface  in warm water (5)
     Larvae:   PirnA-ton-ie-	  Peiagie 	
                                      whprp warmar.t w.itor ic prooont
                                                                         •  o
I/  Nat. f.rowth - Growth  in wr..  minuu wt. of mortality
I/  As reported or  to  SO/I of  optir,,am if data permit:
 3/  list sourcos on brick oC pngf! in namarica], r.oqucjiicp'.v.

                                 Emerald shiner


1.  Carlander," R. D.  1969.   Handbook of freshwater fishery biology.  Vol.  1,
         Icwa State Univ. Press,  Ames, Iowa.

2.  McCormick, J. H. and C.  F.  Kleiner.   1970. Effects of temperature on growth
         and survival of young-of-the-year emerald shiners (Notropis atherinoides)
         Unpublished data, National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota.

3.  Campbell, J.  S. and H. R. Mac Crimmon.  1970.  Biology of the emerald  shiner
         Notropis atherinoides  Rafinesque in Lake Simcoe, Canada.  J. Fish.  Biol.
4.  Wapora, Inc.  for the Ohio Electric Utilities Inst.  1971.  The effect  of
         temperature on aquatic life in the Ohio River.  Final Report.

5.  Flittner, G.  A.  1964.  Korphometry and life history of the emerald shiner,
         Notropis atherinoider.. Rafinesque.  Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Mich.

6.  Commercial Fisheries Review.   1961.   Lake Erie fish population survey  for
         1961 season begins.- Commer. Fish. Rev., 23(6):23-24.
7.  Gray, J. W., 1942.   Studies on J^oU;op_i_s iiiJ^rjliToidej? athernoides  Rafinesque
         in the Bass Islands Region of Lake Erie.  MasterTs Thesis, "Ohio State

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet

Species  (common  & scientific name) Freshwater drum (A.p^Lodinotus_ grunniens)	
                                                                         Data  3i
Lethal threshold:  Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile    adult    source—
        .   2/
Preferred  (final):
Gonad development:   Requires (x)
                     Low winter temp.     	-  Temp.
                     Soir.e winter decrease 	  Temp.
                     No winter decrease   	  Temp.
                                       ,                 early May-
Spawning:  Optimum  21.1  -    Range^- 18.9(l)-24.&ates late June~: (1)    <
Hatch of norraal  larvae:   Optimum	  Range- 22.2-25.6(1).• "-•• <-    1,4.8
    Spawning  Probably open water
    eggs — pelagic, hatch  in Aout  24-36 hrs.
    Larvae:    Planlitonic 	  Pelagic   x . .  Demersal    '
    Juvenile   On bottom  of  lakes and deep pools of rivers and
               large reservoirs	
    Adult      Same as juveniles	
I/ Kcit  growth - Growth in wt. ninur, wt. of mortality
•^' A;j  j:yportt;cl or to 50'I ol"
3/ list  sources on b-ick ol
         L::-u;n if $<>.!;*•  porntt:
         :i is nurr.o.rical .T.'.cju^nce'.r.

                                 Freshwater drum

1.  Wrenn, B. B.  1969.   Life history aspects of smallmouth buffalo and
        freshwater drum in Wheeler Reservoir, Alabama.  Proc. 22nd Ann.
        Conf. S. E. Assoc. Game and Fish Comm.,  1968.  p. 479-495.

2.  Butler, R. L. and L.  L. Smith, Jr.  1950.  The age and rate of growth of
        the she.epshead,  Aplodinotus Rrunniens Rafincsque, in the upper
        Mississippi River navigation pools.   Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc.

3.  Daiber, F. C.  1953.   Notes on the spawning population of the freshwater
        drum, Aplodinotus Rrunniens (Rafinesque) in western Lake Erie.
        Amer. Mid.  Nat.  50:159-171.

4.  Davis, C. D.  1959.   A planktonic fish egg from freshwater.  Limn. Ocean

5.  Edsall, T. A.  1967.   Biology of the freshwater drum in Western Lake Erie.
        Ohio Jour.  Sci.   67:321-340.

6.  Eddy,  S. and T. Surber.  1947.  Northern Fishes.  Univ. Minn. Press.

7.  Trautman, M. B.  1957.  Fishes erf Ohio.   Ohio State Univ. Press.

8.  Swedberg, D. V. and  C. H. Walburg.  1970.  Spawning and early life history
        of the freshwater drum in Lewis and Clark Lake, Missouri River.
        Trans. Am.  Fish.  Soc.  99:560-571.

                          Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Lethal threshold: Acclimation embryo
Upper 20°C

Data 3/
larvae juvenile adult sources
32.5 1
34.5 1
36.4 1
36.4 1


. 2/
Preferred (final):
Gonad d evelopnent :
SpaxvTiing: Optimum

20 - 30

Requires (x)
Low winter tejnp.
Some winter decrea;
No viinter decrease
21(4) Range— 1
.,».-, ~ • r\r\1~ -i TnilTTl 7O (
5.2 1
7.0 1
10.5 1

juvenile adult
juvenile ' adult " "* ~
30 - 32.2*. 8
* Sea son not given
TV^p. Period •"
	 l 	 	 Atrg^— •
se ' X Temp. to 15. 6 Period Nov. 4 (Florida)
" 	 	 ^ Oct.-
X Te^p- ^1>(^ Period ^px^ " 7
"' Apr-Junei^North) (3)
5 . fi-26 . 7 f 4") Dates Nov-May-fiiorida)(4iLJl*A 	
s^ Ran^.f— 12.8-73.9 (fi) '" < 5,6
Habitat:                   -
    Spawning    Six  inches  to  6  feet  depth,  usually 2-2  1/2'
                Nests  often inconspicuous^		_	

    Juvenile   Non-
                         Substrate  Sand,  gravel,  detritus,  vegeta-   .
                                    tion,  roots
               Planktonic _ Pelagic _JL_  Desaersal lsj:_5_-8 days.
                Inactive below 10°C,_do_jiat^^eed_at_5_C_
 I/ Hat. growlh - Growth in wt.  tainus wt. of laortality
 2/ As reported or  to  50% of optimum if data ppnnJt
 I/ list Lurccs on back of: png^ in ^,^:n,a.r.

                                  Largemouth bass


 1.   Hart, J. S.  1952.   Geographic variations of some physiological and
         morphological characters in -certain freshwater fish.  Univ. Toronto
         Biological 'Series No.  60.

 2.   Strawn, Kirk.  1961.  Growth of largemouth bass fry at various temperatures.
         Trans. Amer.  Fish. Soc., 90:334-335.

 3.   Kramer, R. H. and L. L.  Smith, Jr.   1962.  Formation of year class in
         largemouth bass.  Trans. Amer.  Fish. Soc., 91:29-41.

 4.   Clugston, J.  P.   1966.  Centrarchid spawning in the Florida Everglades.
         Quart. Jour.  Fla. Acad.  of Sci., 29:13.7-143.

 5.   Badenhuizen.   1969.   Effect  of incubation temperature on mortality of
         embryos of largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (Lc.'cej>cde) . Master's Thesis,
         Cornell University.

 6.   Kelley, J. W.  1968.  Effects- of incubation temperature on survival of
         largemouth bass  eggs.   Prog.  Fish.  Cult.  30:159-163.
 7.   Jones, B. R. and R.  E. Syrett.  1973..  Unpublished data, National
                Quality Lab, Duluth, Minnesota
 8.  Ferguson, R.  G.   1958.   The preferred temperature of fish and their
         midsummer distribution in temperate lakes and streams.  J. Fish. Res.
         Bd. Canada  15:607-624.

 9.  Simon, J. R.   1951.   Wyoming fishes.  Wyoming Game and Fish Department,
         Bull. No. 14.

10.  Breder, C. M. and D. E. Rosen.  1966.  Modes of reproduction in fishes.
         Natural History Press.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet

                                     Northern pike  (Esox lucius)
species tccm'Um fc £
Lethal threshold :
op timum
. 2/
Preferred (final) :
Gonad development '
Spawning : Op tinuia
Hatch of normal la;
icientinc name;

Acclimation embryo larvae juvenile adult
17.7 25,28.4*


18 - 25.6

Requires (x)
Low winter temp.
Some winter decrea
No winter decrease
• ' - = • Range—
rvae: Optimum 12
*At hatch and free swimming,
**Uitit"3iate incipient lethal

*At hatch and free swimming
juvenile adult

juvenile ' adult
24, 26* .

Data 3;


*Grass pickrel and musky, respectively
Temp. Period
se • Temp. Period
Temp. Period
4.4(4)-18.5Dates Feb-June t5)
Range^7 6.9 - 19.2 .-'<

' 3r4.5
    Spawning  Marshy areas along lakes and streams or connected
              sloughs  (6); shallow water, usually <12 inches (4)
                         Substrate Vegetation
    Larvae:    Planktonic
Demersal days
    Juvenile ^pawning areas  (temporarily) and shallow water
    Adult    Lakes and streams with vegetation
!/ Nat growth - Growth in wt. ninus \;t. of mortality
2/ As reported or to 50% of if data permit:
_3/ list  sources on back of page in nurc-ario.iil

                                  Northern pike

1.  Scott, D. P.  1964.  Thermal resistance of pike (Esox lucius L^)
        muskellunge (E^_ maj;<^njionj>y_, Mitchell) and their F^ hybrid.
        J. Fish. Res.  Bd. Canada" , 21:1043-1049.

2.  Hokanson, K.E.F., J. H. McCormick and B. R. Jones.   1973.   Temperature
        requirements for embryos and larvae of the northern  pike,  Esox lucius
        (Linnaeus).  Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc.  102:89-100.

3.  Fabricus, E. and K. J.  Gustafson.  1958.  Some new observations on the
        spawning behavior of the pike, Esox lucius L. Rep. Inst.
        Freshwater Res., Drottningholra  39:23-54.

4   Threinen, C. W. , C. - Wistrom, B.  Apelgren and H. Show.  1966.  The  northern
        pike, its life history, ecology, and management.  Wis.  Con. Dept. Publ,
        No. 235, Madison.

5.  Toner, E. D. and G. H.  Lawler.  1969.  Synopsis of biological data on
        the pike EPO_X J_UCJLUS (Linnaeus 1758).  Food and  Ag.  Org.
        Fisheries synopsis No. 30. Rev. 1.

6.  Franklin, D. R. and L.  L. Smith.  1963.  Early life  history of  the
        northern pike, Esox lucius L. , with special reference  to the
        factors .influencing the numerical strength of year classes.
        Trans. Araer. Fish.  Soc.  92:91-110.

7.  Ferguson, R. G.  1958.   The preferred temperature of fish  and  their
        midsummer distribution in temperate lakes and streams.  J.  Fish.
        Res. Bd. Canada  15:607-624.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species (common. &  scientific name) Rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri)

Lethal threshold:   Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile    adult

       Upper	   	   	   	    _____
                                       Data */
       Lower .
. 21
Preferred (final):
Gonad development:
Spawning: Optimum
Hatch of normal lar

larvae juvenile
larvae juvenile
13.6* .
*seaspn not
Requires (x)
Low winter temp. . Temp
Some winter decrease Temp
No winter decrease Temp
-. . RanRe2/ 5. 5-13. 016) D
vae: Optimum Range


adult " •--••?-

Nov. -Feb. (7)
fii-p><; Feb. -June~ (7) '6,7
?/5. 6-13. 3(4) . •• < 4
     Spawning _Streams,  rarely in lakes
                         Substrate    gravel
     Larvae:   Planktonic
                                                 Demersal in part (7)
     Juvenile  Streams, lakes
     Adult            L
 2-7 Hat p.rowth - Growth  ir. vr.  minus v;t.  cl r.ortality

 2/ As voportocl or  fo  30/i  of  o;.»ti:-.!Lim if d,i:;a pcrnit
 3/ list nourcos on b-ick ol' "i;,r in mur.orical noq^-nr-.

                                  Rainbow trout

1.  Alabaster, J.S. and R. L. Welconrae.  1962.  Effect of concentration of
        dissolved oxygen on survival of trout and roach  in  lethal  temperatures.
        Nature, Lond. 194(4823), 107-.

2.  Coutant, C. C.  1970b.  Thermal stress of adult coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch)
        and jack chinook (C. tshr-v:ytscha) sa]r,on, and the adult  steelhead
        trout  (S aliTiO p.airdnerii) fio;n the Columbia Ri'ver.   AEC BNWL 1508.

3.  Ferguson, R. G.  195S.  The preferred temperature of fish  and  their
        distribution in ter.perate lakes and streams.  J.  Fish. Res.  Bd.
        Canada, 15:607-624.

4.  McAfee, W. R.   1966.  Rainbow trout.  In:  Inland Fisheries  Management,
        A. Calhoun_j cd,  , Calif. Dept. Fish & Game, pp. 192-215.

5.  Hokansou, K.R.F. and C. F. Kleiner.  1973.  Unpublished data,  National
        Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota.

6.  Kayner, H. J.   1942.  The spa-..-ninp, migration of rainbov: trout  at
        Skanonfples l^k»-; N.-wYork.  Trans. Amer. Fish.  Soc.   71:180-83.
        In:  Carlancler,  K. D.  IQo0.  Handbook of Frechv.iter Fishery Biology.
        Vol. 1.

7.  Carlander, K.  D.  1969.  Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology, Vol. 1,
        The Iowa State Univ. Press, Ancs, Iowa.

                          Fish  Temperature  Data Sheet
Species (common & scientific  name)  Sauger.( Sfizostedion canadense)
Lethal threshold:  Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile   adult
       Upper       9-2'  '         	  75-92**   	   	
                                                                        Data 3/
        .   2/
Preferred  (final):
 Gonad  development:  Requires  (x)
                     Low winter temp.     	  Temp.
                     Some winter decrease	.  Temp.
                     No winter decrease   	  Temp.


_ Period _
- i»»        —
. Spawning:  Optimum   10(7)*-'"^ Range^'j4 .4(5)    Dates Apr-May (3?( 1 )
 Hatch of normal larvae:  Optimum   12-15*      Range-—10-16*	 ."
                                                                          I .  3. 7
                                   *Max. egg
                                    surviva I
                                                      egg survival
     Spawning  Shallow grave My'or  sandy areas along shore or
               in tributary  streams	
     Larvae:   Planktonic 	  Pelagic
               Large clean "lakes-and streams preferred  in  Mn(5)
                              iiLinA^lj^^^                      6)
 1' K'o.'c r,rov.'th  -  Growth in wt. minus wt. of mortality
 -?V A:: rrnortcd or  to 50% of optir.un if dr.ln permit:
 '}/ l-i.-.t >-....,--.^  »» i..-:r> nf nnt'p. in minerical iu-.qnenca.v.


1.  Nelson, W. R.  1968.  Reproduction and early life history of sauger,
        Stizostedion canadcnse, in Lewis and Clark lake.  Trans. Amer.
        Fish. Soc~.~~97:167-rM.

2.  Ferguson, R. G.  1958.   The preferred temperature of fish and their midsummer
        distribution in temperate lakes and streams.  J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada.

3.  Hall, G. E.   1972.   Personal communication, TVA.

4.  Fish, M. P.   1929a  and  1929b.  In:  Breder, C. M. and D. E. Rosen, 1966.
        Modes of reproduction in fishes.  Natural History Press.

5.  Eddy, S. and T. Surber.  1947.  Northern fishes.  Univ. Minn. Press.

6.  Trautman, M. B.  1957.   The fishes of Ohio.  Ohio State Univ. Press.

7.  Hass.ler, W.  U.   1956.  The influence of certain environmental factors on
        the growth of Morris.Reservoir sauger Sj^izostedion £an;jdense canadejise
        (Smith).  Proceedings of Southeastern Assoc. of Game and Fish
        Commissioners Meeting, 1955.  p. 111-119.

8-.  Smith, L. L.  1973.  The effect of temperature on the early life
        history stages  of the Sauger, Stizostedion canadense  (Smith}.
        Preliminary data, EPA Grant.

                            Fish Temperature Data Sheet

 Species (common & scientific  name)  Smallmouth bass  (Micropterus dolomleui)
 Lethal threshold:  Acclimation   embryo    larvae   juvenile   adult   sources
        Upper	   	   38.0(9)*
                                           *acclimation temperature not given
        Lower          15  (3)                4.0(9)*  1.6(3)                3,9
                       26	  	          iQ.i      	      3
        I/   •                              ^acclimation temperature not given
Growth:—               larvae          juvenile           adult
      optimum          28-29  (2)          26.3  (3)                         2,3
                       30 = best  swimming speed  (9)                        9
Preferred  (final) :      larvae          juvenile     ' ,   adult          • - -^ '
      summer           		.       highest 28.0(4)* 4.6
      winter           	      	             >7.S**           1
                                                        *season & life stage  unknown
Gonad  development:  Requires  (x)                      **life stage unknown
                     Low winter temp.     _ . Temp. _ Period _ '.'..__.
                     Some winter decrease __;   Temp. _ Period _ __       •
                     No winter decrease   _  Temp. _ Period _   -_ ' _
                                   •  •>!
Spawning:   Qptimua 16-7-17,8(5)Range£/13(8)-21.1(Sktes May-July (Ontario.)   5.7.8
                                                          . -
Hatch of normal larvae:  Optimum _ : _  Range— _ -.-"-<
    Spa\7ning  Shallow water; slight current, if any; near shore
or stream bed^ durins day
Substrate gravel, rock
Deserts nests on sharp drop to below 15 (7)
Planktonic Pelagic Demersal X
Streams with riffles and pools
Lakes with moderate vegetation
Same as juvenile •

I7 I'o.t growth  -  Growth in wt. minus x-:t. of mortality
2.' A:J reported or  t:o 50/; of optimum if data permit
3/ list sources'on b:ick on page in sequence',-

                                 Smallmouth bass

1.  Munther, G. L.  1968.  Movement and distribution of smallmouth bass
        in the Middle Snake River.   Master's Thesis, Univ* Idaho.

2.  Peek, F. W.  1965.   Growth studies of laboratory and wild population
        samples of smallraouth bass.  Master's ihesis, Univ. Arkansas.

3.  Horning, W. B. and  R. E. Pearson.  1973.  Temperature requirements for
        juvenile smallmouth bass (.Micropterus dolomieui) :  growth and lower
        lethal temperatures.  J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada (in press).

4.  Ferguson,'R. G.   1958.  The preferred temperature, of fish and their
        midsummer distribution in temperate lakes and streams.  J. Fish.
        Res. Bd. Canada.   15:607-624.

5.  Breder, C. M. and D.  E. Rosen.   1966.  Modes of reproduction in fishes.
        Natural History Press.

6.  Emig, J. W.  1966.   Smallmouth bass.  In:  Inland Fisheries Mgt., A. Calhoun,
        ed; Calif. Dept.  Fish nnd Game.

7.  Hubbs, C. L. and R. M. Baily.  1938.  The s'raallmouth bass.  Cranbrook
        Inst. Sci. Bull.  10.

8.  Surber, E. W.  1943.   Observatio'ns on the natural and artifical propagation
        of the smallmouth black bass, Micropterus dolomieui.  Trans. Amer.
        Fish. Soc.  72:233-245.

9.  Larimore, R. W.  avid M. J. Duever.  1968.  Effects of temperature
        acclimation on  the swimming ability of smallmouth bass fry.  Trans.
        Amer. Fish.  Soc.   97:175-184.

                           Fish Temperacura Data Sheet

Species (common  &  scientific name)  Sroallmouth buffalo^. (Ictiobus bubalus)
                                                                         Data 3/f
Lethal threshold:   Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile   adult    source-

       Upper        	'_..,__      	   	   	  .	   	
Growth:—               larvae          juvenile           adult
     optimum          	       	'_      	
        .   2/
Preferred  (final):     larvae          juvenile      '     adult

     summer	       	•     	
Conad development:  Requires  (x)

                     Low winter tejnp.     	  Temp.  	  Period 	 _• '  _  ...

                     Some winter decrease 	  Terap.  	  Period 	  '
                     No winter decrease   	  Temp.  	  Period 	  _j	
                                                         late Mar (1)
Spawning:   Optimum 16.7(1)(5) • Range^.3.9Q>23.9Dates thru June":       '   1'4'5
Hatch  of  normal larvae:  Optimum	  Range- 13.9(1)-21.1 .-• ..,r-  .,,  1»5	


            ,  in shallow, calm, mud bottomed areas with vegetation,'       1,2,6

               ditches, small streams   		
                         Substrate  mud and vegetation.	    _
     egg:  randomly broadcast, adhesive
     Larvae:    Planktonic 	  Pelagic  	  Demersal  ;/ ' _.       _

     T    -i   Shallow overflow ponds, oxbows, lowland lakes,
     Juvenile	..	—.	—   	    —
              deep pools o£_riyers and streams, less turbid waters than_
              that frequented by bigmouth buffalo
     Adult    Same as j uv_eniles___	'	;      	    _
I-/  Ucit growth - Grcv/t:h  in vt.  ninuo wu.  of mortality
7J  -\u rruorled or to  50%  of  opr.i:; if data permit.
3/  list r.ourct-s on back oi: page in :,-;.T.arical si-quuncc'.*

                                Smallmouth buffalo

1.  Wrenn, W. B.  1969.  Life history aspects of smallmouth buffalo and
        freshwater drum in Wheeler Reservoir, Alabama.  Proc. 22nd Ann.
        Conf. S. E. Assoc. Game & Fish Coma., 1968. pp. 479-495.

2.  Harlan, J. R. and E. B. Speaker.  1956.  Iowa Fish and Fishing.  State
        Conservation Commission.

3.  Trautman, M. B.  1957.  The fishes of Ohio.  Ohio State Univ. Press.

4.  Walburg, C.  H.  and W.  R. Nelson.  1966.  Carp, river carpsucker, smallmouth
        buffalo  and bigmouth buffalo in Lewis and Clark Lake, Missouri River.
        Bur. Sport  Fish, and Wildl. Res. Rep. 69,

5.  Walker, M. C. and P. T. Frank.  1952.  The propagation of buffalo.  Prog.
        Fish. Cult. 14:129-130.

6.  Martin, R. E. ,  S. I. Aucrbach, and D. J. Nelson.  19"64.  Growth and
        movement of smallmouth buffalo, !£t_iobujs_ ^u_^alu_s_ (Rafinesque), in
        Watts Bar Reservoir, Tennesses.  ORNL Publ. 3530.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species  (co-jnon & scientific name)  Sockeye s.alir.ou _(pncorhynchus nerka)	
Lethal  threshold:   Acclimation   embryo    larvae    juvenile    adult    source
        Upper           5		     22.2__    	   	1
                       10                    	     23.4    	      1
                       15         •               .     24.4
                     .  20    •                      '   24.8
                       20                               4.7
      range?-7          .	       10-15
              spawns in shallow waters of lakes and in tribj.itary_s±reams
                          Substrate	Gravel         -	   	
     Larvae:    Planktonic _  Pelagic _  Demersal - ; -
         _  .; i    Start sea-ward migration before temperatures reach
     Adult      Sea> rivers and lakes[.^during migratiQn_and._sp_awning
a/  Data pertains to sea-run sockeye, notkokanee
~~J Ho.t  growth - Growth in wt. v-imn wl:.  of iv.^rtality
  ?-/ As '-i-porto.1 or to 50% of optimum if dr.t'i  permit
  3/ lisVscureos on bad: of paCo in nur^ri^l s^oacc
                       10             •                  3.1     	   	1.
                       15                           '    4.1              	1
        I/          "  23                .     -,         6-7  T  i.           1
Growth:—                larvae           juvenxle          adult
                        15(6)            15*C2)                             2,6
                                         ^maximum with .excess  food
 Preferred (final):      larvae          juvenile          adult
      surfer	       14.5	      	     _	3.
      winter              	   .       _   	      .	:	     	
 Gonad development:  Requires (x)
                     Low winter temp.      	  Temp. 	  Period ^	  j	
                     Some  winter decrease	leap. 	  Period	  ;	
                     No winter decrease   	  Tenp. 	  Period 	  _j	
                                      2/                          -in
 Spawning:  Optimum  	''_-  ; Range- 7.2-12.8   Dates  Fall  __.'•	    /...1Q-
 Eatch of normal larvae:   Optimum	  Range-_5.8-12.8   .'"'  <	|_
 Migration and maturation:   7.2 —- 15.6      •   .                          .5
 Migration halted:   21                                            •          9
 Habitat:                   -                                     ,           .
              Migrates only up streams having lakes in the system,   	   7
     Spawning	-—.	•-	

                                   Sockeye-  salmon

 1.  Brett, J. R.  1952.  Temperature tolerance in young pacific salmon,
         genus, Oncorhynchus.  J. Fis. Res. Bd. Can. 9:265-323.

 2.  Griffiths, J. S. and D. F. Alderdice.  1972.  Effects of acclimation
         and accute temperature experience on the sxvinraing speed of
         juvenile coho salmon.  J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can.' 29:251-264.

 3.  Ferguson, R. G.  1958.  The preferred temperature of fish and their
         midsummer distribution in temperate lakes and streams.  J. Fish.
         Res.  Bd. Can.  15:607-624.

 4.  Combs, B. D. and R. E. Burrows.  Iy57.  ihreshold temperatures for the
         normal development of chinook salmon eggs.  Prog. Fish. Cult. 19:3-6.

 5.  Borrows,  R.  c..   19t>3.  Water temperature requirements for maximum
         productivity of salmon.  "Proceedings of the iZth Pacific N. W.
         Symposium on Water Poll. Res.

 6.. -Shelbourn, J. F. . J. K. Brett and S. Shirakata.  1972.  Growth rate in
         sockc-ye saimoa fry, Oncorhynchus nerkn, in relation to temperature.
         Ms. for J.  Fish. Kes. lid. Can.

 7.  Breder, C. >!. and D. E. Rosen.  1966.  Modes of reproduction in fishes.
         Nat.  History Press.

 8.  Novotny,  A.  J.   1964.  Importance of water temperature in the main stems
         of the Columbia and Snake Rivers in relation to the survival of
         salmon.   Report No. 59.  U. S.  Bureau of Commercial Fisheries,

 9.  Major, R. L.  1966.  Influence of the Rock Reach dam and the temperature
         of the Okanogan River on the upstream migration of sockeye salmon.
         Fish. Bull.  66:131-147.

10.  Anonymous.  1971.  Columbia River thermal effects study.  Vol. 1,
         Environmental Protection Agency.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet'-

Species (common & scientific  name)   Striped bass (Morone  saxatills)
Lethal threshold:  Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile
                                                                       Data 3;
        .   2/
Preferred  (final)
     v inter
 Goned  development:  Requires  (x)
                     Low winter  temp.
                     Soiae winter decrease
                     No winter decrease.
                                              • Temp.
Spawning:  Optimum 16.7 - 19.4-  Ranged/12.8-21.7  Dates .Apr-July-:
Hatch of. normal  larvae:   Optimum 	  Range-15.6-23.9    .

             In freshwater rapids in association with rocks and
    Swni   boulders.  Eggs are semi-buoyant_and must be
     p  '  6 suspended by currents or other Turbulence fo"r
             •W-Sfl d^yg rpqin'-rpfT fnr hafrhing	—	
               Planktonic   X    Pelagic 	  Demersal
     Juvenile  In rivers and estuaries until 2_j^ears old  and then,
               migrate to ocean.
                                                    .   Ana_dromous_
 I/ Hat  Rrowth - Growth in t:t. ninus wt. of mortality
 2/ As rc-portod or to 50Z of if data^p^nit
 3/ list sources on back ot page in nurr.«iic;,j. .,-;u,.n^.

                                   Striped bass

1.  Shannon, E.  H.   1970.   Effect  of temperature changes upon developing
        striped  bass eggs  and fry.   Proc.  23rd Conf.  S.  E.  Assoc.  Game
        and Fish Coirnn.   October 19-22,  1969,  pp. 265-274.

2.  Goodson, L.  F.,  Jr.  1966.   Landlocked striped bass.  In:  Inland
        Fisheries Mgmt,  A.  Calhoun,  ed.j  Calif.  Dept. Fish  & Game.

3.  Talbot, G. B.  1966.   Estuarinc  environmental requirements and
        limiting factors for striped bass.  In:   "A Symposium on Estuarine
        Fisheries,"    Amer. Fish.  Soc.  Special Publ.  No. 3>
        pp. 37-49.

4.  Pearson, J.  C.   1938.   The life  history of the striped  bass or rockfish.
        Bull,  of the Bureau of Fisheries  48 (28):825-851.

5.  Raney,  E.  C.  1952.  The life  history of  the striped bass.  Bull.
        Bingham  Oceanogr.  Coll. 14:5-97.

6.  Orsi,  J. J.   1971.   The 1965-1967 migrations of the Sacramento-San
        Joaquin  estuary  striped bass population.  Calif. Fish and Game

                           Fish Temperature Data  Sheet
Species  (common  £  scientific name)  Thread fin shad (Dorosoma
Lethal threshold:   Acclimation   embryo.   larvae  \^uvenile
       Upper        _ •   _   _  _
                                                                         Data 3y
                                                                adult   source-
                                                      Winter \field)
                    Chronic exposure below 9 C detrimental — •
        .   2/
Preferred  (final):
     summer	^
     winter           	._
Gonsd development:  Requires  (x)
(age nut given) •
Low winter  tcpp.
Some winter decrease
Ko winter decrease
     •'-•'•'  Range—14-S
                                               • Temp.
Spawning:   Optimum 	;___
Hatch  of-normal larvae:  Optimum
                                                   Dates Apr-Aug(6-)(ll)  /  5.6.11
                                                    y 23-26(8)   -.-.••-,<•    8,9
                                                       16.7-26.7 (.9)
               Under brush and floating logs  (6); also in open .water..  •  •   6  .'
               Repeated spawnings throughout  the summer with  a  2nd  pulse in fall
                                    when conditions are right              H>7
               Age of fish
I/  Net nr^vih - G:-o\:t:h  in v;t.  ninits v;t. of mortality
 2/  Afi r.-portod or  to  507  of  f-pr.iv.».'.v- i: ds.i*ji«rwi.t
 3/  list r-ources ou back ov j>n-o in •.v.:r:.--ric..'j. sf.-.:n-^,-,ce.r.

                                   Threadfin shad


 1.  Koss, R. W.j Ed.    1971.   Environmental responses to thermal discharges
         from Marshall Steam Station,  Lake Norman,  North Carolina, Cooling
         Water Studies for Edison Klectric Institute.   Research Project RP-49.
         p. 1-58.

 2.  Strawn, K.  1963.  Resistance of  threadfin shad to low temperatures.
         Proc. 17th Ann.  Conf.  Southeastern Assoc.  of Game and Fish Coram.
         pp. 290-293.

 3.  Miller, R. V.   1961.   The  food habits and some aspects of the biology
         of the threadfin shad,- Dorosoma  petencnse  (Gunther).   Master's Thesis
         45 pp.

 4.  Adair, W. D. and D.  J.  DeMont.  1970.  hffacts of thermal pollution upon
         Lake Norimn fishes.  N.  Carolina Wildlife  Res. Comm., Div. Inland
         Fisheries.  Summary  Report, Fed.  Aid Fish  Restoration Project F-19-2.  14 p.

 5.  Maxwell, R.  and A.  R. Essbach.  1971.  Eggs of threadfin shad successfully
         transported and  hatched  after spawning on  excelsior mats.  Prog.
         Fish. Cult.  33:140.

 6.  Coriander, K.  D.  1969.  Handbook of freshwater fishery biology.  The
         Iowa State Univ.  Press,  Ames, Iowa.

 7".  Kirasey, J. B.   1958.   Possible effects of introducing threadfin shad
         (Dorosona  petcnense) into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.  Inland
         Fisheries  Admin.  Report  No. 58-16, Calif.  Dept. of Fish & Game.

 8.  Shelton, W.  L.  1964.  The threadfin shad, Dorosoma petenense (Gunther):
         Oogenesis, seasonal  ovarian changes and observations  on life history.
         Master's Thesis,  Oklahoma State  Univ.  49  p.

 9.  Breder, C. M.  and D.  E.  Rosen.  1969.  Modes of reproduction in fishes,
         Natural  History  Press.

10.  Burns, J. W.  1966.   Threadfin shad.   In:  Inland Fisheries Management
         A. Calhoun, ed.,  Calif.  Dept. Fish and Game.

11.  Swingle, H.  A.  1969.  Production of the threadfin shad,  Dorosoma petcnense
         (Gunther).  23rd Annual  Conf. S.E. Assoc.  Game and Fish Comm.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet

Species (common &  scientific name)  White, bags Qforone. chxysops)
                                                                        Data ^i
Lethal threshold:   Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile   adult   source--
       Upper        	   	   	    	   ,	
       Lower          17-2                  14.4*
       I/                               .  * %.mortality
Growth:—    •           larvae          juvenile
     optimum          	       22.6-23.6*      	     	
        .  2/
     range—	,_		     	
                                        *good growth in S. Dak. reservoir
Preferred  (final):      larvae          juvenile      '    adult
     summer            '  	       	•     	     —
     winter           	       		     —
Gonad development:   Requires (x)
                     Low winter tenp.     	  Temp. J	 Period
                     Some winter decrease 	  Temp. 	 Period
                     No winter decrease   	  Temp. 	 Period
Spawning:  Optimum         -   •  Range- 11. T-Qrenn)
            t-      ___ -
Hatch of normal larvae:   Optimum 15.6 - 16.7 Range—
                                     2/14.4-,23c9  CNorth) April-July (North)
                                     - 11. T-Qrenn) Dates  Mar-May tTenn.) 4 —
Habitat:                   .
     Spawning  Tributary streams  or  shoals  of  lakes; shallow water
               (<10 feet) ;  eggs adhesive		
                         Substrate   gravelly  or  rocky bottom, usually.
     Larvae:   Planlctonic 	  Pelagic   X     Demersal 	.
     Juvenile   Shallows near shore		

     Ad,,-!t      Rivers and lakesjj:olerate  wide ^ange_of	.
                physical_-and__chemical condjLt^ons	
 I./ "e.t nrovuh - Growth  iii wt.  minus wt.  of mortality
    As report pel or  to  50%  oC  option?, if  data
 3/  list  scurcos on brick ot pa^
                                e in m;mencal scqu^ncR...

                                   White bass


1.  Webb, J.  F.  and D.  D.  Moss.   1967.   Spawning behavior and age and
        growth of white bass  in  Center  Hill reservoir, Tennessee.
        Master's Thesis, Tenn. Tech.  Univ.

2.  Yellayi,  R.  R.   1972.   Ecological life  history and population dynamics
        of white bass,  Morone chrysops  (Rafinesque) in Beaver Reservoir.
        Part  2,  Report  to  Arkansas  Game and Fish Commission.

3.  Duncan, T. 0. and K. R. Myers.   1969 (approx.).  Artificial rearing of
        white bass,  Roc.cus chrysops,  Rafinesque.  Unpublished data,
        South Central Reservoir  Investigations,  BSFW, Fayetteville, Ark.

4.  Chadwick, H. K., et al.   1966.   White bass.   In:  Inland Fisheries Mgt,
        A. Calhoun,  ed., California Dept. Fish & Game.

5.  Ruelle, R.  1971.  Factors influencing  growth of white bass in Lewis
        and Clark Lake.  In:   Reservoir Fisheries and Limnology, G. Hall,
         ed.  , pp.  411-423.

6.  Noble, R. L.  1968.  Mortality  rates of the pelagic fry of the yellow
        perch, ?er ca flavcscens  (Mitcisi.ll)  in Oneicia Lake, New York, and
        an analysis of  the sampling problem.  Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell Univ.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet

Species (common  &  scientific name) White crappie (Pomoxis_ annularig)
                                                                        Data g
Lethal threshold:   Acclimation   embryo   larvae   juvenile   adult-   source-
                                                     32.6*    	  	I
                                                    *upper incipient lethal
        .  2/
Preferred (final):
Gonad development:
Spawning:   Optimum
Hatch of normal la:.       .       	
Hatch in 24-27-1/2 hrs.  at 21.1-23.3

larvae juvenile

larvae juvenile
22-27 1
Requires (x)
Low winter temp. Temp.
Some winter decrease • Temp.
No winter decrease Temp.
- : Ran^/17.8-20(4)*DateS
Mar (4)-
July (3) - / 3,4,6
*begin spawning 2/ ...
rvae: Optimum Range— •. ' ~-V . .
    Spawning  Nests  near  brush,  stumps,  rock,  often  on  plant
    Larvae:    Planktonic
    Juvenile           '	
     Adult     _j£J5ef^JLg£g£Y£J:?-ga-l:L-ow streams,  in areas  containing
               vegetation and_subjngrggd_obj^cts;  more tole_rant_of
               turbTdity than the black crappie
I/  Nat. growth - Grov.n.h  in wt. niuus  vt.  of mortality
2J  A;J  rr-ooruocl or to 50"; o£ optimum  if d^La permit
 3/  list fiourcor. on hack ot  page in atiqiuince..

                                  White crappie

1.  Gammon, J. R.   ly71.   The response of fish populations in the Wabash River
        to heated effluents.  Preprint given at 3rd Nat. Symposium on
        Radioecology,  Oak Ridge, Tenn.

2.  Breder, C. M.  and  D.  E.  Rosen.   1966.  Modes of reproduction in  fishes.
        Nat. History Tress.

3.  Morgan, G. D.   1954.   The life  history of the white crappie  (Pomoxis
        avmularis) of  Buckeye Lake, Ohio.  J. Sci. Lab. Denison Univ.,
        Granville, Ohio.        43:113-144.

4.  Goodson, Lee F.  1966.   Crappic.   In:  Inland Fisheries Management
        A. Calhoun, Ed.,  Calif.  Dept.  Fish & Cane.

5.  Kleiner, C. F. and K.E.F. Hokanson.  1973.  Effects of constant  temperature
        on growth and  mortality rates  of juvenile white crappie, Pcv:T_ox2_s_
        ann_uliirj_s Rafinesque.  Unpublished data, National Water Quality
        Laboratory, Duluth,  Minnesota.

6.  Siefert, R. E.  1968.  Reproductive behavior, incubation and mortality
        ol eggs and post  larval food  selection in the White crappie.  Trans.
        Amor.  Fish. Soc.  97:252-259.

7.  Trautman,  M. B.  1957.   The fishes of Ohio.  The Ohio I'niv. Press.

                            Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species  (common & scientific name) White sucker (Catostomus commersoni)
Lethal threshold: Acclimation embryo
Upper 10
15 21(1)
20(2). 21(1}

Data 37
adult sourcerr
                                            *7-day TLj..  for  swimup
Preferred  (final)
Gonad development:  Requires  (x)


TL50 f°r a^ftuP
24-2 /
Hatch of
Low winter tcjnp.
Some winter decrease
No winter decrease
• Optimum ^ 10(5) Range-^ ^4
normal larvae: Optimum 15
.5-18(5, 6fcates
Mar -June (2)
8-21 -.'••<

- 2,5,6
                                        *field estimates,
                                         limits not known
    Spawning  Along wave swept shores^ or when available, up
              tributary streams over gravel riffles.	
                         .Substrate sand and/or gravel
              At  surface in quiet water until the mouth becomes inferior
              whereupon .demersal 1,4-fe begins.
    Larvae:    Platiiitaiiic-	 -i-e-Ri-g-nS	
    Juvenile   Over sandy shoals, near shore, on the bottom
                                                                   7,  8
     Pools of streams and rivers ;off  shore  above thermocline	9,  10,11
     in lakes, bu£jlem£rsj.l,_jnay^g_J^jigre__during the evening and	
   Ko.t  Hi~ov;::a - Ccov/rls  in  wt.  v.iiaua wt . of mortality
2-J A;: re
orted or  t:o  50% o
                                      if tla'.:--
   list  fiourcos on b-ck or  p-":^1' in viumeri

                                    White sucker

 1.   McCormick, J. H., B. R. Jones, and K.E.F. Hokanson.   1972.   Effects of
         temperature on incubation success and early  growth and  survival of the
         white sucker, Ca tos t ojnius coTnuier soni  (Lacepede) .   Unpublished data,
         National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota.

 2,   Carlander, K. D.  1969.  Handbook of freshwater  fishery biology.  Vol. 1,
         3rd Ed., The Iowa State Univ. Press., Ames,  Iowa.

 3.   Brett, J. R.  1944.   Some lethal temperature  relations of Algonquin Park
         fishes.  Pub]. Ont. Fish. Res. Lab., 63:1-49.

 A.   Horak, D. L. and H.  A. Tanner.  1964.  The use of vertical  gill nets in
         studying fish depth distribution, liorsetooth Reservoir, Colorado.
         Trans. A-er. Fish. Sue., 93:137-45.

 5.   Webster, D. A.   1941.  The life history  of sone  Connecticut fishes..
         Conn. Gool .  and ;\\u . ':'st. Surv.-y Bull. No.  63.'  A Connecticut
         fishery survey,  S<--:' \ a III, pp. 122-227.

 6.   Ram-y, E. C.  1943.   Unusual spawning habitat for  the common white sucker,
         ?Qi.1§JLf:lrtLiL2. T-i ^9JinL9IlponIl}-.i'  Copeia.  4:256.
 7.   Huntsman, A. G.  1935.  The sucker  (Cn tost OTTO us  cqTRmersoniJ ) in relation to
         salnon and trout.  Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc.,  65:152-156.

 8.   Rerghard, J;  1913.  An ecological  reconnaissance of  the fishes of Douglas
         Lake, Cheboygan County, Michigan, in midsummer.   Bull.,  U. S. Bur. of
         Fish., 33:215-249.

 9.   Lariiuore, R. VI. and P. W. Smith.  1963.  The fishes  of Champaign County, Illinois
         as affected by 60 years of stream changes.   111.  Nat.  Hist. Survey
         Bull 28(2):299-376.

10.   Adams, C. C. and T. L. Hankinson.   1928.  The  ecology and  economics of
         Oneida Lake fish.  Roosevelt Wildlife Annals 1 (4a) :241-542.

11.   Spoor, W. A. and C. L. Schloeracr.   1938.  Diurnal activity of the common
         sucker Cal_os_i:oinus cc' i  (Lacepede),  and the rock bass
         AjglvloplTtJs Vupcptris (Ratintsque)  in Huskellunge Lake.   Trans. Amer.
         Fish. Soc". :v'.7il-226.

                           Fish Temperature Data Sheet
Species (common &  scientific name) Yellow perch  (Pgrgaflavescens)
Data g/
Lethal threshold: Acclimation embryo larvae juvenile adult source-
Upper 5




                            *swim-up    *winter  incipient
                                      **sunirtier  incipient
                                       <~> y /
        .  2/
Preferred (final):
Gonsd development:   Requires (x)
                                        	22.2* (11)
                                          =13(9)  -  *
      Low winter tejap.       X   Temp. 4-0    Period 6 mo.  -5
      Some winter decrease	  Temp.
      No winter decrease

Spawning:  Optimum  11.9 (5)    Range^7 7.2-12.8(7)Dates Mar-June "(5)     ^ 5,7
Hatch of normal  larvae:  Optimum 10.0 rising  Range- 6.8-19.9*(6)
                                  « n" I i   '.   *~i r\ f\ / S \   JLmT    _ A-  — n	 ,-1 *-

                   P7day to-20.0(6)  *TL5Q at constant temp.
    S  "W-'in"  Shallow water usually <6 feet on vegetation,  sand,
              gravel t rnr^s nr	—	_	
                         Substrate  nearly any substrate available
    Larvae:    Planlctonic 	  Pelagic hatch   Deaersai AtjT length_
     T     . -,    Shallow water near shore                              •
    Juvenile            •	——
Lakes ajid_sluggish__strgams with open water and
moderate vegetation	
U  Ne,t Rrowth - Growth in wt. ninus  wf.  of  mortality
 2/  A;;  rcportc'd or to 50" of optimum  if dr.ta pernif.
 3/  list sources on back of pn}jo  in luirr.arical saqu^nr.c..-.

                                    Yellow perch-


 1.  Hart, J. S.  1947.  Lethal temperature relations of certain fish in
         the Toronto region.  Trans. Roy. Soc. Can., Sec. 5  41:57-71.

 2.  Ferguson, R. G.  1958.  The preferred temperature of fish, and tlieir
         Eiidsuruiaer distribution in temperate lakes and streams.  J, Fish.
         Res. Bd. Canada  15:607-624.

 3.  >faloney, J. E. and F.  H.  Johnson.   1955.  Life histories and interrelation-
         ships of walleye and yellow parch, especially during their first summer
         of life, in two Minnesota lakes.  Trans.  Amer. Fish. Soc.  85:191-202.

 4.  Mackay, H.  H.  1959.  Yellow perch.   Sylva 15:25-30.

 5.  Jones, B. R., K.E.F. Hokanson and J. H. McCormick.  1973.  Winter
         temperature recjuirer.iants of yellow perch.  Unpublished data.
         National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota

 6.  Hokanson, K.E.F.   and  C.  F.  Kleiner.  1973.   The effect of constant and rising
         temperature on survival and development rates of embryonic
         and larval yellow perch, Perca flavescons (Matchill).  Submitted
         for publication at International Symposium on the early life
         history of fish, Oban, Scotland, 1973.

 7.  Breder, C.  M. and D. E. Rosen.   1966.  Modes  of reproduction in fishes.
         Natural' History Press.

 8.  Noble, R. L.  1968.  Mortality rates of the pelagic fry of the yellow
         perch,  Perca  flavescens (Mitchill) in Oneida Lake, New York and
         an analysis of the sampling problem.  Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell

 9.  Coble, D. W.  1966.  Dependence of total annual growth in yellow perch
         on temperature.  J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada.  23:15-20.

10.  Weatherley.  1963.  Thermal stress and interrcnal tissue in the perch,
         ££.?"-£? fluviatilus (Linnaeus).   Proc. Zool. Soc., London,
         Vol. 141:527-555.

11.  Mildrim, J. W. and J.  J.  Gift.   1971.  Temperature preference, avoidance
         and shock cxpeiiments with esuuarine fishes.  Ichthological Associates,
         Bulletin 7, 301 Forest Drive,  Ithaca, N.Y.

                                                            Appendix  B
                                              Tabular Summary of Numerical  Criteria
              Agriculture      Agriculture
Constituent   (Irrigation)      (Livestock)
                                 (Aquatic Life)
(Public Supply)
 Marine V7ater









Ho linit

5.0 mg/1
20.0 mg/1
(20 yrs.)
0.10 mg/1
2.0 mg/1
(20 vrs.)
0.1 ng/1
0.5 mg/1
(20 yrn.)
0.75mg/l Sen.
l.Omg/1 Snmi-
2.0ing/l Tol.
5.0 mg/1
0.2 ng/1
                 No limit
5.0 mg/1
                                 75% natural level  30-130 mq/1

                                 Addition of acids

                                                   No limit*

                                                   Uo limit
                                                1/20  (0.05)
                                                0.02  mg/1
                                                                    0.5 mq/1
0.1 mg/1
                                                                     1.0 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
                                                                                                       Must  be -
                  1/100 (0.01)
                  1.5 mg/1
                  1/10 LP50

                  0.4 mg/1
1/50 (0.02)
96-hr.  LCso
0.2 mg/1

1/100 (0.01)
96-hr.  LCso
0.05 mg/l

1/20 (0.05)
1.0 mg/1

1/100 (0.01)
96-hr.  Lr50
1.5 mq/1

Uo limit

1/10 (0.1)
96-hr.  LC50
                                                                                       0.1 mg/1(free)
                                                                                       100 mg/1(ionic)
     "No limit",  where it appears in this  table,  refers  to constituents that were addressed but for which it was indicated
     that insufficient data existed  for prescribing limits.

I Jo limit
0.01 mg/1
0.0% nq/1
(20 yrn.)
No Unit
tto limit
0.1 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
(20 yrs.)
0.05 mg/1
5.0 mg/1
(20 yrs.)
0.20 mg/1
5.0 mg/1

2.0 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
(Sandy soil)
15.0 mg/1
(20 yrs.)
5.0 mg/1
20.0 mg/1
(20 yrs.)
5.0 mg/1
10.0 mg/1
2.5 mg/1
0.075 mg/1
(J.ivostoc) )
50 uq/1
1.0 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
0.5 mg/1

2.0 mg/1
~ —
No limit
0.1 mg/1
(Aquatic I.ifo)
0.03 tnq/1
hard H2O
0.004 mq/l
soft 1120
0.003 mo/1
0.05 mq/l
(30 min.)
0.03 mg/1
1/10 (0.1)
06-hr. I£50
1/20 (0.05)
96-hr. I,C50

SOB sulfidfts
— —
0.03 mg/1
Trnnhv/ator rr«>shwat<»r 'iarino Water
(t-Uldlifo) (Public Supply) (Aquatic r,ifo)
o.oi mg/1 vino (o.oi)*
96-hr, LCtjo
0.01 mq/l
1/10 (0.1)
96-hr. LCgo
0.01 mg/1
250 mo/1
0.05 rnn/1 1/100 (0.01)
96-hr. LC5Q
0 . 1 mq/l
-- -- __
1 mg/1 1/100 (0.01)
96-hr. ljC$Q
0.05 mg/1
0.2 mq/l 1/10 (0.1)
96-hr. Lr50
0.01 mg/1
1/10 (0.1)
96-hr. LC50
1.5 mg/1
1/10 (0.1)
96-hr. IjCtjQ
0.01 mg/1
".3 mg/1 0.3 mg/1
0.05 mg/1 1/50 (0.02)
96-hr. LC50
o.oi Lr>50
0.01 LDSO
24-hr, ha::.
0.05 mg/1


*   If copper or zinc is present  >1 mg/1,  then AF  =  0.003  LCr,



0.20 mq/1
10.0 mq/1
(20 yrs.)


0.01 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
2.0 mg/1
(20 yrs.)
No limit


0.02 mg/1
No limit
Agriculture Fronhwator Freshwater
(Livostoc)-) (Anuatic I.ifo) (Wildlife)
No limit

1.0 ug/1 0.2 ug/1 0.5 ug/g
Tot. cone. in fir.h
0.05 ug/1
Avg. cone.
0.5 ug/g
Kody burden
Cone. Tot. Hg
0.2 ug/1
Tot. cone.
0.05 ug/1
Avg. cone.
0.5 ug/g
Body burden
Cone. Tot. Hg
Ho limit

1/50 (0.02)
96-hr. LC50

100 mg/1
10 mg/1

0.05 mg/1
(Public ?u
0.05 mg/1

0.002 ma/1
Tota 1




10 mg/1

1 ma/1
To lirit
0.0 3 na/1
I'o limit
0.05 mg/1
1/20  (0.05)
96-hr. LCso

1/50  (0.02)
0.1 mq/1
                                                                                                       1/100 (0.01)
                                                                                                       96-hr.  LC50
                                                                                                       0.1 ug/1
l/loo  (n.oi)
96-hr. LC5Q
0.01 ng/1
                                                                                                       1/20  (0.05)
                                                                                                       96-lir.  I.C50
                                                                                                       5.0 un/1
                   25  ug/1
                    Lakes  &  res.
                   50  ug/1
                    At confluence
                   100 ug/1

              Agriculture       Agriculture
Constituent    (Irrigation)      (T.ivestocl.)
                                  (Aquatic  J.ifp)
                 (Public F'
                   Marino V'ator
                   (Amiat.ic T.ife)

1000/100 nl
Dissolved     2000-5000 mg/1
Solids  (tot)  (Tolerant)
              500-1000 ng/1


Suspended &   No  limit

Temperature   Mo  limit
                 0.1 mg/1

                 25 rg/1
5000 coli-
forns/100 ml*

1000/100 ml*
4000/100 nl**
                3/1100  (0.003)
                9C-hr.  T/C'

                                  (Sno  T.D.S.)

                                  80  mg/1

                                  Poc Text
                                                     2nno/l"0 ml
2000/100 n]
                                    maintain nat-
                                    ural  oattrrn
5 mc/1

I'o lirit

10,000/100 nl

2000/100 nl
                                                    I'o limit
                                                    I'o linit
                                                                     not to detract
                                                                     from potability
                                                                                        1/20  (0.05)
                                                                                        9f-hr.  r,C5Q
                                                                                        0.1 nn/1

                                                                                        1/100  (0.01)
                                                                                                      96-hr. LC
                                                                                                      0.5 mg/1
                                   1/20  (0.05)
                                   9*-hr.  T,C5Q

                                   1/100  (0.01)
                                   ip-hr.  r
                                   0.1 mg/1
                                   1.0 (1.8F)6-8
2000/100 ml avg.
<1000/100 ml may.
log moan 2n
  200/100 nl
     samples in
  30-days to
  400/100 ml
                                     86  P
*   Average of a minimum  of  2  samples per month
**  Individual sample

              Agriculture       Agriculture
Constituent    (Irrigation)      (LivontocV)
                                  (Aquatic Lifp)
                                    (Public f.upply)
'larJnr Water
(Aquatic Life)
0.2 ug/1
                 Heavy growth of
                 1'luo-groen not
                 Hoe Pul>] ic
                 Wat or fitndr,.
1/100 (0.01)
                                                96-hr. UV
                                                Tliono for wliich
                                                no toxicity  data
                                                availahlo. See
                                                also Tables  1&2
                                                                    f'jninjzer, fac-
                                                                    torr, v;hicb
                                                                    promote disease
                                    Pilvc:: 0.03
1/100 (0.01)
9(5-hr. LCr;o
0.2 ug/1
                                                                                    2,4,5-T 0.002
2,4-D          0.1  ug/1

Insecticides   No limit






                                      chanae in
                                                ("omp. pt. not
                                                changed by
                                    0.02 no/1

                                    '"able 5
                                    pliates  0.1 mg/1

                                    'io limit
                                                                     0 . 3 ng/1  CD'
                                                                     1.5 CAE

                                                                     0.5 mg/1

                                                                     IIo lirit

                                                                     1 ug/1

                                                                     71 platinum-
                                                                     cobalt units
                                                                         Clarity  -
                                                                         4  ft.  Seccchi

(Aquatic  I.ifo)
                                    (Public Supply)
 Harinr; Water
(Aquatic T.ifo)








Sac Federal
Drinking Uater
See Federal
Drinking Water

3000 mg
See Federal
Drinking V'ater

                   llo rapid
                                  See  Table
                                  Section v
                                  0.002 mg/1

                                  1/20  (O.OS)aAS)
                                  96-hr.  I,C50
                                  0.2 mg/1  max.

                                  flo visible oil      tlo visible
                                  1/20  (0.05)         floating oils
                                  96-hr.  LP 0
                                  Ilexano  oxtractable
                                  1000 mg/kg

                                  0.3 ug/1
                                 0.002 ug/1
                                  (in water)
                                 0.5 ug/g
                                  (in tissue)

                                 Tables  3S4
                                                                   llo increase
                                   flee Federal
                                   Drinking Water
                                                    llo limit
                                                    saturation pre-

                                                    2SO mq/l
                                                    Ito limit

                                                    Tlo limit
                                   See Federal
                                   Drinking Water
                                                      6.0 mg/1
                                                                                                      Mo  filn or odor
                                                                                                      llo  tainting of fish
                                                                                                      Ho  onohore oil deposit
                                                                   in r.P.

                         Appendix C
absorption   penetration of one substance into the body of

acclimation   the process of adjusting to change, e.g.,
temperature, in an environment.

acute   involving a stimulus severe enough to briny auout a
response speedily, usually within  four days.

adsorption   the taking uf of one  substance at the surface
of another.

advanced_j[tert_iaryj _ treatment   any wastewater treatment
process other than conventional physical settling  (primary)
and biological treatment  (secondary) .
          the condition associated with the presence of
oxygen in an environment.
         an organism that  can live and grow only in tne
presence of free ocygen.

           transported and deposited by running water.
anadrotnous _ fish   fish that typically  inhabit seas or lakes
but ascend streams at. more or  less  regular intervals to
spawn; e.g., salmon, steelhead, or  American shad.

anaerobic   the condition associated with the lack of free
oxygen in an environment.
           an organism  for whose  life  processes a complete
or nearly complete absence of oxygen  is essential.

SH22Si£   depleted of free oxygen;  anaerobic.
               causing  reduction of  toxicity of another
chemical, interactions  of organisms  growing in close
association, to the detriment of at  least one of them.

agplica t ion^f actor   a  factor applied to a short-term or
acute toxicity test to  estimate a  concentration of waste
that would be safe in a receiving  water.

assimilation   the transformation and incorporation  of
substances  (e.g., nutrients) by organism or ecosystem.

benthos   aquatic hot torn- dwell ing organisms including;   (1)
sessile animals, such as the sponges, barnacles, mussels,
oysters, some worms, and many attached algae;  (2) creeping
forms, such as insects, snails, and certain clams; ana  (3)
burrowing forms which include most clams and worms.

b ioa cum mu 1 a t i on   uptake and retention of environmental
substances by an organism from its environment, as opposed
to uptake from its food.

bioassay   a determination of the concentration cr aose or
given material necessary to affect a test organism under
stated conditions.

                      treatment)   wastewater treatment oy
controlled biological processes, such as trickling  tilters
or activated sludge.

b^omass   the living weight of a plant or animal population,
usually expressed on a unit area basis.

bj.o^j,c^i,Q<|gx   a numerical index using various aquatic
organisms to determine their degree of tolerance to
differing water conditions.

biotoxin   toxin produced by a living organism  (e.g.,
biotoxin which causes paralytic shellfish poisoning is
produced by certain species of dinof lagellate algae.

bloom   an unusually large number of organisms per  unit or
water, usually algae, made up of ore or a few species.

body burden   the total amount of a substance present in the
body tissues and fluids of an organism.

buffer ^capacity   the ability of a solution to maintain its
pH when stressed chemically.

carrying capacj.'ty   the maximum Liomass that a system is
capable of supporting continuously; the number of user-use
periods that a recreation resource can provide in a jiven
time span without appreciable biological or physical
deterioration of that resource, or without appreciable

impairment of the recreation experience tor the majority of
the users.

catadromgus^fish   fishes  that  teed and grow in fresn water
but return to the sea to spawn, e.g., the American eel.

chelate   to combine with  a metal  ion and hold it. in
solution preventing it  from forming an insoluble salt.

chemotaxis   orientation or movement of a living organism in
response to a chemical  gradient.

chronic   involving a stimulus  that lingers or continues tor
a long period of time,  cften one-tenth of the life span or

climax^community   the  stage of ecological development at
which a community becomes  stable,  self-perpetuating, aua at
equilibrium with the environment.

coagulation   a water treatment process ir. which cnemicais
are added to combine with  cr trap  suspended and colloxuai
particles to form rapidly  settling aggregates.

coliform^bacteria   a genera of gram-negative peritrichously
flagellated or immotile, rod-shaped bacteria with trie
physiological ability to use either aerobic respiration or
the fermentation of sugars as a source of energy; in a
restricted sense the group includes Escherichia and
Aerobacter, but in the  broader  coverage this Report also
includes the genera, Erwinia, Salmonella, Shicjela, Serratia,
Proteus, and Paseurella, usually of fecal origin.

colloid   very small particles  (10 angstroms to 1 micron)
which tend to remain suspended  and dispersed in liquids.

conservative pollutant   a pollutant that is relatively
persistant and resistant to degradation, such as PCB ana
most chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides.

cumvilative   brought about or increased in strengtn o>
successive additions.

demersal   living or hatching on the bottom, as fish
that sink to the bottom.

detritus   unconsolidated sediments comprised of both
inorganic and dead and decaying organic material.

diurnal   occurring once a day, i.e., with a variation
period of 1 day; occurring in the daytime or during a day.

diversity   the abundance in numbers of species in a
specified location.

dredge spoils   the material removed from the bottom during
dredging operations.

dystrophj  dystrophic   brcwnwater lakes and streams usually
with a low lime content and hiah organic content^ oftiwn
lacking in nutrients.

enteric   of or originating in the intestinal tract.

epilimnion   the surface waters in a thermally stratified
body of water; these waters are characteristically well

epiphytic   living on the surface of other plants.

euphotic^zone   the lighted region that extends vertically
from the water surface to the level at which photosynthesis
fails to occur because of ineffective light penetration.

eutrophication   the addition of nutrients to bodies of
water and the effects of such nutrients on aquatic

evapotranspiration   the combined loss of water from a given
area during a specified period of time by evaporation from
the soil or water surface and by transpiration from plants.

exchange^capacity   the total ionic charge of the adsorption
complex active in the adsorption of ions.

external treatment   passage of water through equipment sucn
as a filter or water softener to meet desired quality
requirements prior to point of use.

finfish   that portion of the aquatic community made up of
the true fishes as opposed to invertebrate shellfish.

 flQcculatign   the process by which suspended  colloidal  or
 very  fins  particles are assembeld into larger  masses  or
 floccules  which eventually settle out of suspension;  tne
 stirring of  water after coagulant chemicals have been adaed
 to  promote the formation of particles that  will  settle
 (Section II) .
              tne transfer of food energy from plants or
 organic  detritus through a series of organisms,  usually  four
 or  five,  consuming and being consumed.

 food_web   the interlocking pattern formed  by a  series of
 interconnecting food chains.

 free^residual chlor ination   chlorination that maintains the
 presence of hypochlorous acid (HOCl)  or hypochlorite ion
 (OCl~) in water.
       tne  stage in the life ot a fish between the  hatching
 of  the  egg and the absorption of the yolk sac.

grqundwood     the raw material produced from both  logs  ana
 chips,  used mainly in the maufacture of newsprint,  toweling,
 tissue,  wallpaper, and coated specialty papers.

 half-life    the period of time in which a substance loses
 half of  its active characteristics (used especially in
 radiological work);  the time required to reduce 'tne
 concentration of material by half.

 £Y.§r.9£tlY£l£   growing in or in close proximity to  water;
 e.g.,  aquatic algae and emergent aquatic vascular  plants.

 in ternal_ treatment   treating water by addition  ot  chemicals
 to  meet  desired quality reguirements at point of use or
 within  a process.

 kraft  process   producing pulp from wood chips in  the
 manufacture of paper products; involves cooling  the chips in
 a strong solution of caustic soda and sodium sulfide.
         unstable and likely to change under certain

 LC5()    see median lethal concentration.

 LD50    see median lethal dose.

lentic^Qr^lenitic_enyironjnent   standing water ana its
various intergrades; e.g., lakes, ponds, and swamps.

lethal   involving a stimulus or effect causing deatn

life cycle   the series of life stages in the form ana mode
of life of an organism, i.e., between successive recurrences
of a certain primary stage such as the spore, fertilized
egg, seed, or resting cell.

limnetic zone   the open-water region of a lake, supporting
plankton and fish as the principal plants and animals.

lipophilic   having an affinity tor fats or other lip-ids.

littoral^zone   tne shoreward or ccastal region 01 a oody or

iQtic^enyxronment   running waters, such as streams or

macronutrient   a chemical element necessary  in large
amounts, usually greater than 1 mg/1, tor the growth and
development of plants.

macrophyte   the larger aquatic plants, as distinct trom  the
microscopic plants, including aquatic mosses, liverworts  ana
larger algae as well as vascular plants; no precise
toxonomic meaning;  generally usea  synonymously with aquatic
vascular plants in  this Report.

make-up water   water  added to boiler,  cooling tower,  or
other  system to maintain the volume of  water  required.

marl   an earthy, unconsolidated deposit formed in
freshwater  lakes, consisting chiefly of calcium carbonate
mixed  with  clay or  other  impurities in  varying proportions.

med_ian_lethal concentration  (LC5Q)   the concentration or a
test material that  causes  death  to 50  percent of  a
population  within a given  time period.

median tolerance  limit (TL5QI    the concentration of  a test
material  in a'suitable diluent  (experimental  water)  at WHICH
 just 50  percent of  the test  animals are able  tc  survive tor
a specified period  of  exposure.

mesotrophic   having a  moderate nutrient load resulting in
moderate productivity.
              products of metabolic processes.

2££hy_latign   combination with the methyl radical  (CH ).

mho   a unit of conductance reciprocal to the ohm.

micelle   an aggregation or cluster of molecules, ions, or
minute submicroscopic particles.

micronutrient   chemical element necessary in only small
amounts for growth and development; also known as trace

mouse^unit   the amount of paralytic shellfish poison that
will produce a mean death time of 15 minutes when
administered intraperitoneally to irale mice of a specific
strain weighing between 18 and 20 grams.

necrosis   the death of cellular material within tne boay of
an organism.

ngphro sclerotic   a hardening of the tissues of tae Kianey.

nit rilotri acetate __ (NTA^   the salt of nitrilotriacetic acid;
Ras'the ability to complex metal ions, and has been proposed
as a builder for detergents.

nonconseryatiye_pollutant   a pollutant that is quickly
degraded and lacks persistence, such as most, organophospuate

non foul ing   a property of cooling water that allows it to
flow over steam condenser surfaces without accumulation or

nonpglar   a chemical terir for any molecule or liquid that
has a reasonable degree of electrical symmetry sucn tnat
there is little or no separation of charge; e.g., beuz<=n=,
carbon tetrachloride, and the lower paraffin hydrocarbons.

nutrients   any of a group of organic or inorganic chemicals
that tend to increase the productivity of the primary food
chain organisms.

oligotrophic   lakes having a small supply of  nutrients and
thus supporting little organic production.

organgleptic   pertaining to or perceived by a  sensory

parr   a young fish, usually a salmonid, between  tne  larval
stage and time it begins migration to the sea.

partition_coefficient   the ratio of the molecular
concentration 01 substance in two solvents.

pCi - picocurie   a measure of radioactivity equivalent to
3.70 x 10~2 atoms disintegrating per minute.

pelagic   occuring or living in the open ocean.

perighyton   associated aquatic plants attached or  clinging
to stems and leaves of rooted plants or other  surfaces
projecting above the bottoir of a water body.

pesticides   any substance used to kill plants, insects,
algae, fungi, and other organisms; includes herbicides,
insecticides, algalcides, fungicides, and other suostances.

plankton   plants (phytoplankton) and animals  (zooplankton)
floating in aquatic systems such as rivers, ponds,  lakes,
and seas.

pgint^of^supply   the location at which water  is  ODtdiaad
from a specific source.

point of^use   the location at which water is  actually used
in a process or incorporated into a product.

process^water   water that comes in contact with  an end
product or with materials incorporated in an end  proauct.

productivity   the rate of storage of organic  matter  in
tissue by~organisms including that used by organisms  in
maintaining themselves.

pynocline   a layer of water that exhibits rapid  changes in
density, analogous to thermocline.

psychrophilic   thriving at relatively low temperatures,
usually at or below 15°C.

recharge   to add water to the zone of saturation, as in
recharge of an aquifer; the term may also be applied  to the
water added.

refractory   resisting ordinary treatment and difiicult to

rip- rapping   covering stream hanks and dam faces witn rock
or other material to prevent erosion from water contact.
     i— £^£t2£   a numerical value applied to short -term aata
from other organisms  in order to approximate the
concentration of a substance that will not harm cr impair
the organism being considered.

secchi disc   a device to measure visibility deptns in

secondary  (biological) _ treatment   see biological treatment

§£ssj.le__orc[anism   motionless organisms that resiue in a
fixed state, attached or unattached to a substrata.

sestio  particles between 0.0002 and  1 mm including
suspended  inorganic and organic particles as well as
plankton and bacteria.

shellfish   a group of mollusks usually enclosed in a
secreted shell; includes oysters and  clams.

shoal water   shallow water.

         a solid waste fraction precipitated by a water
treatment process.

snjolt   a young  fish,  usually  a  salmonid,  as  it begins and
during the time  it  makes  its  seaward  migration.

sorption   a general  term tor  the  processes of absorption or

spec ieg_diver sit y   a  number which relates the density o£
organisms of each type present in  habitat.

standing crop_biomass   the total  weight  cf organisms
present at any one  time.

sf-.rat ifi.cati.on   the phenomenon occurring when a body of
water becomes divided into distinguishable layers.

subacute   involving a stimulus not severe enough to
about a response speedily.

sublethal   involving a stimulus below the level that causes

sublittoral^zone   the part of the shore from the lowest
water level to the lower boundary of aquatic plant growth.

succession   the orderly process of community change in
which a sequence of communities replaces one another in a
given area until a climax community is reached.

sullage   waste materials or refuse; sewage.

supeschiQrination   chlorination wherein the doses are large
enough to complete all chlorination reactions and tc prouuce
a free chlorine residual sc large as to require

surfactant   surface active agent, usually refers to
components of detergents.

SYnerqistic   interactions of two or more substances or
organisms producing a result that neither was capable of

tailwater   water, in a river, or canal, immediately
downstream from a structure; in irrigation, the water that
reaches the lower end of a field.

teart   a disease of cattle caused by excessive molyDdenum
intake characterized by profuse scouring, loss of
pigmentation of the hair, and bone defects.

teratogen   a substance causing birth defects.

teritiarv (advanced)_treatment   see advanced treatment.

thermocline   a layer in a thermally stratified bouy of
water in which the temperature changes rapidly relative to
the remainder of the body.

TLm   see median tolerance limit.

trophic^accumulation   passing of a substance through a food
chain such that each organism retains all or a portion of
the amount in its food and eventually acquires a higher
concentration in its flesh than in the food.

trophic level   organisms whose food is obtained trom
primary producers or organic detritus by the same number ot
intermediate steps.

true_color   the color of water resulting from suostances
which are totally in sclution.  Not to be mistaken tor
apparent, color which may result frcm colloidal or suspended






Multiplied By


C x




(°P - 32)



Multiplied  By






1.646  x  10-*

1.89**  x  10-*




3.785  x  103


2.31 x 102

3.785  x  lO-3

4.951  x  10-3






8. 345

5.570  x  10-3


8. 021

2.228  x  lO-3

6.308  x  1C-2

 MILEb (Nautical)

 MILES (Statute)





 CUiilC irEET





 PINTS (Liquid)

 QUARTS  (Liquia)



 POUNDS  (water:  39.2°F)









Multiplied  By





3.527 x 10-2

2.205 x 10-3


TONS  (Water:39.2  F)/DAY



LITERS/TON  (Metric)



            (assumes  density of 1 gram/milliliter)


8.345 x 10-3

6.243 x 10-z




1.102 x 10-3

9.842 x 10-*

3.281 x 103

3.937 x 10*



1.094 x 103

1.000028 x 103





 TONS  (Short)

 TONS  (Lonij)



 MILES  (Statute)

 MILES  (Nautical)




MILES  (Nautical)
Multiplied By

3.532 x 10-2


1.000028 x 10-3

1.308 x 10-3





5.400 x 10-*

6.214 x 10-*




3.281 x 10-*

3.937 x 10-s



6.076 x 103


1.852 x 103


2.027 x 103









MILES (Nctutical)

MILES (Statute)











MILES (Statute)


Multiplied  Ey
MILES  (Statute)
5.280 x 103

6.336 x 10*


1.609 x 103


1.760 x 103

3.527 x 10-*

2.205 x 10-*


6.102 x 10-2

3.381 x 10-2

3.281 x 10-3

3.937 x 10-2



1.094 x 10-3






4.464  x 10~*




MIL.ES  (Nautical)

















TONS (Lony)



Multiplied By

4.536  x  10-*

5.0 x  10-*




6.805  x  10-3



6.895  x  10*




7.031  x 102
       x 102

 2.296 x 10-s

 1.44 x 102

 9.290 x 1C-2

 3.587 x 1C-8

TONS  (Metric)

TONS  (Short)

KI LOGRAi-lS/ ri EC'i'AR E





WATER (4'vJ)


                                                   INCHES  OF WATER

                                                   INCHES  Or  MERCURY







Multiplied By
TONS (Metric)
TONS (Short)
2.471 x 10-*




1.550 x 103

3.861 x 1C-'


6.aO x 102

2.590 x 10*

2.788 x 10'


3.098 x 10*


3.527 x 10*

2.205 x 103



8.897 x 10«

9.072 x 102

3.2 x 10*

2 x 103
















TONS  (Long)

TONS  (Short)





TONS  (Long)

Multiplied By



1.341  x 10-3

1.434  x 10-2

91. 44




4.934  x 10-*

5.682  x 10-*
                                                     TONS (i-ietric)
                                                     FOCI - POUNDS/HI NOTE



                                                         E^  (Nautical)

                                                     MILiS  (Statute)
 «OA GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973 546-312/148 1-3