Office of Regulations     EPA-440/.;
           £ nvironnwnttl Protection    and Standards Monitoring    December 1986
           Agtncy         a"d Data Support Division    pin»!
                      IWH-553)
                      Washington, DC 20460

           Wmr
oEPA      Technical Guidance
           Manual for Performing
           Waste Load Allocations
           Book  IV
           Lakes, Reservoirs
           and Impoundments
           Chapter 3
           Toxic Substances Impact

-------
   U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
   Monitoring and  Data Support  Division
              Washington,  DC

          Under Subcontract to:

          Arthur D.  Little, Inc.
         Cambridge Massachusetts
      TECHNICAL GUIDANCE MANUAL FOR
     PERFORMING WASTELOAD ALLOCATIONS

BOOK IV LAKES, RESERVOIRS AND IMPOUNDMENTS
    CHAPTER 3 TOXIC SUBSTANCES IMPACT
               Prepared by:

             HydroQual, Inc.
             1 Lechbridge  Plaza
        Mahwah, New Jersey  07430
               December 1986

-------
                                  CONTENTS
Section                                                              2SS.

        FIGURES ..................................................      iv

        TABLES ...... • ..... ••••••••••••••••• ......................    v"

        1.0  INTRODUCTION ........ '. .................................... J
        1.1  Relacion to Other Books and Chapters ................       1
        1.2  Scope of the Chapter                                       *
        1.3  Organization of  the Chapter ................. •••

 2.0    BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CHEMICAL MODELS ......................       j>
        2.1  Chemical Partitioning- ..............................       6
        2.2  Chemical Transfers  and Kinetics ......................  10
        2.3  Transport  and Bed Sediment ..........................      |2
             2.3.1  Transport Regime .............................      1J
             2.3.2  Bed Conditions ........ ; ......................      l^
        2.4  Mass Balance for Chemicals ..........................      16

 3.0    CHEMICAL MODELS FOR LAKES /IMPOUNDMENTS ...................      22
        3.1  Simplified Steady-State Models ......................      23
             3.1.1  Sedimenting ..................................      24
             3.1.2  Interactive  Bed ..............................      35
        3.2  Time  to  Steady-State ................................      f
             3.2.1  Settling  and Sedimenting .....................      *'
             3.2.2  Bed Interacting ..............................      52
        3.3  Complex  Models ......................................      \*
             3.3.1  Steady-State Models ..........................      58
             3.3.2  Time  Varying Models ..........................      60
        3.4  Model Assumptions  and Limitations ...................      60
             3.4.1   Instantaneous Equilibrium ....................      61
              3.4.2 First Order Reactions ............... - ........      62
            •  3.4.3  Settling, Resuspension and Sedimentation .....      62
              3.4.4 Water-Bed Diffusive  Exchange .................      63
              3.4.5  Bed Characterization ........ i ................      64
              3.4.6  Particle Sizes ...............................     65
         3.5  Criteria for Model Selection ........................     66
              3.5.1  State and Dimensionality .....................     66
              3.5.2  Transport and Bed Considerations .............     67
              3.5.3  Available Data and Purpose of Analysis .......     68

-------
                                  CONTENTS
                                (continued)
Section
 4.0    MASS INPUTS TO LAKES	     JO
        4.1  Point Source Inputs	     JO
             4.1.1  Sediment Inputs	     7l
             4.1.2  Chemical Inputs	     J2
        4.2  Non-point Source Inputs	     79
             4.2.1  Non-urban Runoff	     80
             4*2.2  Urban Runofi.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••     81
             4,2.3  Phytoplankton Growth..............«»«»»«»»«»»     81
             4.2.4  Atmospheric Loadings	     82
             4.2.5  Tributary Inputs........•••••••••••••••••••••     83
        4.3  Data Sampling Requirements	     83
             4.3.1  Problem Time Scale	     84
             4.3.2  Sampling Frequency•••••••••••••••••••••••••••     8
             4.3.3  Measurements of Chemical Inputs	     87

 5.0    DETERMINATION AND ASSESSMENT OF MODEL PARAMETERS	     88
        5.1  Problem Time Scales	     89
        5.2  Location of Sampling Stations	     "
        5.3  Water Quality Measurements	     90
             5.3.1  Water Column	.-V	     H
             5.3.2  Sediment Layer	     92
        5.4  Sample Handling	     93
        5.5  Fluid Transport	-	     *4
             5.5.1 ..Flow Determinations	     95
             5.5.2  Geomorphological Dimensions	     96
             5.5.3  Evaluation of Detention Time	     97
        5.6  Particle Transport	     99
             5.6.1  Solids Concentration	     99
             5.6.2  Particle Classification	     101
             5.6.3  Particle Settling	     l°2
        5.7  Water Column-Bed Interaction	     105
             5.7.1  Sedimentation,	     l08
             5.7.2  Particle Resuspension	     HO
             5.7.3  Sediment-Water Column Diffusive  Exchange	     113
        5.8  Chemical Transfers.	••••••	     H*
             5.8.1  Adsorption and Desorption	     11*
             5.8.2  Air-Water Surface Exchange	     124
        5.9  Chemical Kinetics of Degradation	     132
             5.9.1  Photolysis.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••     133
             5.9.2  Hydrolysis......•••••••••••••••••••••	•••     139
             5.9.3  Biodegradation...••••••••••••••••••••••••••••     1*0
        5.10 Sediment Capacity  Ratio	     I*2
             5.10.1 Equal  Water  Column  and
                    Sediment Partition  Coefficient	     1*7
             5.10.2 Particulate  Ratio	     150
        5.11 Bioaccumulation of  Chemical	

                                      ii

-------
                                  CONTENTS
                                (continued)
Section
 6.0    PRINCIPLES OF MODEL APPLICATION ..........................     J52
        6.1  Evaluation of Model Inputs ..........................     J^Z
        6.2  Calibration/Validation Procedures ...................     15*
        6.3  Measures of Validation ..............................     158
        6.4  Sensitivity Analysis ................................
             6.4.1  First Order Uncertainty Analysis .............

 7.0    EXAMPLE LAKE ANALYSIS SEDIMENTING CASE ...................     167
        7.1  Chemical Partitioning ...............................     l°°
        7.2  Volatilization Rate .................................     l™
        7.3  Photolysis ..........................................     };f
        7.4  Overall Reaction Coefficient ........................     1'*
        7.5  Computation of Water Column Solids  Concentration
             m. and Sediment Solids Concentration  m, .............     175
        7.6  Computation of Water Column Concentration
             C_.  and Sediment Concentration CT2 ..................     |7jj
        7.7  Time to Steady-State ................................      7*
         7.8   Sensitivity of  Resuspension
         7.9   First  Order Uncertainty Analysis
              7.9.1   Computation of Analysis ......................    I84

  8.0     EXAMPLE LAKE ANALYSIS BED INTERACTIVE CASE.....' ..........    1J7
         8.1   Overview of Quarry Experiment .......................    fj7.
              8. 1.1.. Chronological Review of Important Events .....    la/
              8.1.2   Discussion of Water Column
                     and Sediment Data                                 °8
              8.1.3  Chemical Budget ..............................
         8.2  Evaluation of Model Inputs ..........................
              8.2.1  Model Geometry ...............................
              8.2.2  Fluid Transport ..............................
              8.2.3  Particulate Transport ........................
              8.2.4  Chemical Transfers and Kinetics ..............
              8.2.5  Chemical Inputs ..............................    209
         8.3  Results of Model Calibration Analysis ...... . .........    209
         8.4  Model Verification and Projections ..................    213

  9.0    REFERENCES ...................................... ; ......... 2l7

 APPENDIX A:  DERIVATION OF STEADY-STATE AND TIME VARIABLE SOLUTIONS
 APPENDIX B:  OCCURRENCE OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS IN
              PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS
 APPENDIX C:  A PARTICLE INTERACTION MODEL OF
              REVERSIBLE ORGANIC CHEMICAL SORPTION
 APPENDIX D:  BIOCONCENTRATION AND DEPURATION BY AQUATIC ORGANISMS
                                       iii

-------
                                  FIGURES


                                                                     Paffp
Figure                                                               £=*£•

  2-1   SCHEMATIC OF CHEMICAL SORPTION ........ - ..................       7

  2-2   EXAMPLE ISOTHERMS AND PARTITION COEFFICIENT ..............       9

  2-3   SCHEMATIC OF CHEMICAL TRANSFERS AND KINETICS .............      U

  2-4   TRANSPORT REGIMES AND BED CONDITIONS .....................      l4

  2-5  ' FINITE DIFFERENCE SEGMENTATION AND TRANSPORT .............      18

  2-6   PARTICULATE FRACTION AS A. FUNCTION OF  PARTITION
        COEFFICIENT AND  SOLIDS CONCENTRATION .....................      20

  3-1   SCHEMATIC OF SOLIDS AND CHEMICAL
        PARAMETERS - SEDIMENTING  CASE ............................      26
                   • •
  3-2   SCHEMATIC OF SOLIDS AND CHEMICAL
        PARAMETERS - INTERACTIVE  BED CASE ........................      36
   3-3    SCHEMATIC OF INTERACTIVE BED MODEL FRAMEWORK
   3-4    THEORETICAL TIME TO STEADY-STATE FOR
         INSTANTANEOUS AND CONTINUOUS INPUTS ......................     50

   3-5    NORMALIZED TIME TO STEADY-STATE
         IN WATER COLUMN SEDIMENTING CASE .........................     52

   3-6    EXAMPLE OF TIME VARIABLE BEHAVIOR
         CONSERVATIVE SUBSTANCE ...................................     56

   4-1    LAKE ILLUSTRATION SAMPLING FREQUENCY .....................     86

   5-1    EXAMPLE SAMPLING STATION LOCATIONS .......................     91

   5-2   LOG - PROBABILITY OF FLOW ................................     96

   5-3   LOG - PROBABILITY OF MEAN DEPTH ..........................     97
            *
   5-4   LOG - PROBABILITY OF DETENTION TIME ......................     98

                                       iv

-------
                                  FIGURES
                                (continued)
Figure
  5-5   LOG - PROBABILITY OF ESTIMATED
        WATER COLUMN SUSPENDED 60LIDS
  5-22   CONTOURS OF SEDIMENT CAPACITY FACTOR, B,
         VERSUS DIMENSIONLESS SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS
         FOR H/H  • 1000, »  - »
  5-6   LOG - PROBABILITY OF ESTIMATED AREAL
        HATER COLUMN SUSPENDED SOLIDS •• ••••••• ....... • ...........     100

  5-7   ILLUSTRATIONS OF SEDIMENT TRAPS ..........................     104

  5-8   SETTLING VELOCITIES BY STOKES" LAW ........................     106

  5-9   EXAMPLES SETTLING VELOCITIES FROM BENCH  SCALE  TESTS ......     107

 5-10   ADSORPTION/DESORPTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE .............     116

 5-11   LINDANE ADSORPTION/DESORPTION DATA
        WITH INDIANA QUARRY WATER AND SEDIMENT ...................     118

 5-12   VARIATION OF PARTITION COEFFICIENTS
        WITH SOLID CONCENTRATION .................................     I23

 5-13   GAS TRANSFER RELATIONS ...................................     I28
       •                                                             ,

 5-14   DIFFUSIVITY (AIR) VERSUS MOLECULAR WEIGHT ................     129

 5-15   GAS PHASE CONTROL AIR/WATER TRANSFER COEFFICIENT .........     129

 5-16   DIFFUSIVITY (AIR) VERSUS MOLECULAR WEIGHT ................     130

 5-17   LIQUID  PHASE CONTROL  AIR/WATER TRANSFER COEFFICIENT ......     131

 5-18   EFFECT  OF pH ON HYDROLYSIS  RATE ..................... •••••     I41

 5-19   DISSOLVED AND  PARTICULATE  FRACTIONS  VERSUS »,  AND o

 5-20   LOG - PROBABILTY OF SOLIDS  MASS  RATIO

  5-21   CONTOURS OF SEDIMENT CAPACITY FACTOR, 3,
        VERSUS ».  AND  m. FOR »-•!.,
         H/H  - toOO,  m  • 1007000  mg/1
   6-1   STEPS IN MODEL APPLICATION ...............................     156

-------
Figure
                                  FIGURES
                                (continued)
  7-1   HYPOTHETICAL RESULTS OF
        ADSORPTION/DESORPTION EXPERIMENT
  8-1   TEMPORAL VARIATION OF DDE IN WATER .......................     189

  8-2   TEMPORAL VARIATION OF DDE IN SEDIMENT ....................     191

  8-3   TEMPORAL VARIATION OF LINDANE IN WATER.... ...............     192

  8-4   TEMPORAL VARIATION OF LINDANE IN SEDIMENT ................    . 193

  8-5   MODEL GEOMETRY FOR ANALYSIS OF  INDIANA QUARRY ............     196

  8-6   TYPICAL DDT AND LINDANE  PARTITION COEFFICIENTS
        VERSUS SEDIMENT SOLIDS CONCENTRATION .....................     202

  8-7   LINDANE ADSORPTION/DESORPTION DATA
        WITH INDIANA QUARRY  WATER AND SEDIMENT ...................     203

  8-8   MODEL CALIBRATION  FOR DDE ................................     21°

  8-9   MODEL CALIBRATION  FOR LINDANE ............................     211

  8-10   LONG TERM MODEL VERIFICATION/ PROJECTION
        FOR LINDANE AND DDE ......................................     2l6
                                       vi

-------
Table
                                   TABLES


                                                                    Page
  1-1   ORGANIZATION OF GUIDANCE MANUAL
        FOR PERFORMANCE OF WASTELOAD ALLOCATIONS	       2

  3-1  "STEADY STATE SOLUTIONS SEDIMENTING CASE	      34

  3-2   DEFINITIONS	      43

  3-3   GENERAL FORM—CHEMICAL WATER COLUMN
        AND SEDIMENT EQUATIONS	      4°

  3-4   CHEMICAL WATER COLUMN AND  SEDIMENT EQUATIONS
        DIFFUSION - 0	      46

  3-5   TIME VARIABLE SOLUTIONS  FOR RECEIVING WATER SEGMENT	      53

  3-6   EQUILIBRIUM CALCULATIONS BED-INTERACTIVE  CASE	      57

  3-7   SUMMARY OF* STEADY-STATE  LAKE TOXICITY MODELS	      59

  3-8   SUMMARY OF TIME VARIABLE LAKE  TOXICITY MODELS	      60

  3-9   SUMMARY OF MODEL  APPLICATIONS	      67

  3-10   CONDITIONS FOR MODEL APPLICATIONS	••	      68

  4-1   WATER WITHDRAWALS FOR PUBLIC  SUPPLIES
         BY STATE  AND  BY  SELECTED MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS, 1970	      73

  4-2    MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE	      74

   4-3    TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS....      75

   4-4   SUMMARY OF CURRENT AND PROJECTED WASTELOADS
         IN ONE REGION 208 AREA	     76

   4-5   AVERAGE 1979 SUSPENDED  SOLIDS LOADINGS TO SAGINAW  BAY....     81

   4-6   ESTIMATED RANGE OF CONTEMPORARY TOTAL PCB LOADING	     83

   5-1   SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY MEASUREMENTS	      90
                                       vii

-------
                                   TABLES
                                (continued)"

Table                                                               Ml

  5-2   STATISTICAL PARAMETERS FOR LAKE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES ......      98

  5-3   SUSPENDED SOLIDS SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS  SAGINAW BAY ..........     102

  5-4   PARTICLE SIZE CLASSIFICATION AND
        WATER COLUMN SETTLING VELOCITIES SAGINAW BAY ..............    103
  5-5   SEDIMENT PARAMETERS FOR VARIOUS LAKES .....................

  5-6   SEDIMENT PARAMETERS FOR THE GREAT  LAKES ...................    H1

  5-7   SUMMARY OF LAKE PARAMETERS ................................    151

  6-1   DATA  REQUIREMENTS  FOR CHEMICAL FATE MODELING ANALYSIS .....    154

  7-1   SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM ........................    I67

  7-2   RESULTS OF ADSORPTION/ DESORPTION  EXPERIMENTS ...... . ........    169

  7-3   DISSOLVED AND  PARTICULATE CHEMICAL FRACTIONS ..............    170

  7-4   VOLATILIZATION RATE  CALCULATION  SUMMARY ...................    173
                   • .
  7-5   OVERALL REACTION  COEFFICIENTS
        KL  AND Kj  AND  COMPARISON  WITH fd^ .......................    1/5

  7-6   CALCULATED CTI AND O^ CONCENTRATIONS; W - 100 LBS/DAY....    178
   7-7    TIME TO STEADY-STATE ......................................    l79

   7-8    SENSITIVITY TO RESUSPENSION ...............................    l81

   8-1    MASS BALANCE CALCULATION FOR INITIAL CHEMICAL DOSAGE ......    197

   8-2    SUMMARY OF SOLIDS RELATED PARAMETERS
         USED IN QUARRY ANALYSIS ................................. ••    2°l

   8-3    SUMMARY OF DDE AND UNDANE DECAY COEFFICIENTS .............    204

   8-4   PROGRAM SOLAR INPUTS USED
         TO COMPUTE DDE PHOTOLYSIS RATES ...........................    205

   8-5   ESTIMATES OF LINDANE VOLATILIZATION RATE ..................    208.

   8-6   SUMMARY OF SEDIMENT DDE DATA FROM JUNE  21,  1977 ...........    214
                                      viii

-------
                             ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    This report was developed by HydroQual,  Inc.  under subcontract to JACA
Corporation in  response to Work Assignment No,  39, EPA  Contract  No.
68-03-3131 and under subcontract to Arthur D. Little Corporation, Task No.
17,  EPA Contract  No.  68-01-6951.   Charles  Oelos, Monitoring  and  Data
Support   Division,   was   the  Work  Assignment   Manager   for   the   U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.

    The  basic  simplified technology  toward  which much  of  the  report is
focused was developed by Dominic M. DiToro and Donald  J. O'Connor of
HydroQual,  who  served  as  Project Consultants  and provided  technical input
and  review.  Charles L.  Dujardin served  as  Project Manager,  organized and
prepared  the  technical material and example  cases, and wrote  most of che
report.   John  P. 'St.  John  served as  Principal Engineer,  developed  the
report outline  and provided  text.  Our office services staff  is  also
gratefully  acknowledged.  Karen J. Klein  for  her  word  processing  and Audrey
E.  Czyzewski for her editing of the report.   Joseph H.  McDonald drafted the
figures  for the  report.  Certain technical material was abstracted from the
literature  and  is  duly cited as appropriate.

     Charles Delos,  Larry  E.  Fink of Remedial  Programs  Staff, and Elizabeth
 Southerland of  Monitoring  and Data  Support  Division reviewed  the Draft
 Report  and  provided   many  detailed  and   valuable   comments   which  are
 acknowledged  and appreciated.

-------
                                SECTION 1.0
                                INTRODUCTION
    This document is one of a series of manuals whose purpose  is  to  provide
technical information  for  the  preparation of  technically sound  wasteload
allocations (WLAs).   The objective of  such allocations  is  to ensure  that
acceptable water quality conditions are achieved and/or maintained  so  that
designated  beneficial uses are practical.   The purpose  of  this  specific
manual  is  to  present  applicable technology  for analysis of  the  face  of
toxic substances when  released  to lakes and impoundments.   The methodology
incorporates   a  number   of    transport,   transfer,   and   transformation
characteristics  specific to lakes and  toxic  substances and ultimately may
be used to define the  relationship between toxic  waste  inputs  and receiving
vater  concentrations.   Once  a  target  concentration is  established  for  a
particular  toxicant,  the methodology may be used  to determine WLAs.

1.1 Relation  co  Other  Books and Chapters

    Table  1-1 summarizes various publications which make  up the set of WLA
guidance documents.   It is intended that  this  and  other  technical chapters
be used in conjunction with each other  and with  material presented in Book
I,  which  provides   general   information  applicable  to  a  variety  of
situations.  The information presented in Book  I  applies  to  all types of
water bodies  and  to all contaminants  which  must  be  addressed  by  the WLA
process.   It is not the intention of  this chapter  to reiterate  information
which has appeared  elsewhere except  when  the  principles  of certain topics
are important for comprehension of this text.

-------
BOOR I
BOOK II
BOOK III
BOOK  IV
BOOK VIII
              TABLE 1-1.  ORGANIZATION OF GUIDANCE MANUAL FOR
                    PERFORMANCE OF WASTELOAD ALLOCATIONS
                                                           procedures,   and
GENERAL GUIDANCE3
(Discussion  of   overall  WLA  processes,
considerations)
STREAMS AND RIVERS
Chapter I - BOD/Dissolved Oxygen Impacts
        2 - Nutrient/Eutrophicationalmpacts
        3 - Toxic Substance Impacts

ESTUARIES
Chapter 1 - BOD/Dissolved Oxygen Impacts
        2 - Nutrient/Eutrophication |mpacts
        3 - Toxic Substances Impacts
LAKES, RESERVOIRS, AND  IMPOUNDMENTS
Chapter 1 - BOD/Dissolved Oxygen Impacts   a
        2 - Nutrient/Eutrophication Impacts
        3 - Toxic Substances Impacts
A SCREENING PROCEDURE FOR TOXIC AND CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS'
 aBooks  or  chapters  particularly  pertinent  to this manual
 1.2   Scope  of  the  Chapter

     Chemicals   are  present  in  varying  degrees  in  all  phases  of  the
 environment.   The  benefits derived from  the use  of these  substances are
 evident in many facets  of  society, particularly with  respect to increased
 food production.   The  demand  for these  materials,  more  specifically the
 benefits derived from their use,  continuously  increases.   However, care is
 warranted to  make certain  that any undesirable  effects  of the chemicals in
 the environment are  ascertained  and  controlled.   This  concern prompts the
 use of certain chemicals which may be safely assimilated in the environment
 co such levels as to yield the benefits without deleterious effects.

-------
    This  goal  necessitates  the development  of assessment  mecaoud  —»...
permit  an- evaluation   and   ultimately  a  prediction   of   environmental
concentrations.  An  understanding  is  therefore required  of  the  transport,
transformation  and  exchange  of chemical  substances  in  and  between  the
various media of the environment and  the  incorporation of this information
into a practical assessment methodology.

    In  the water  environment,  toxic materials may  be  discharged  to  all
manner  of waterways,  streams,  rivers, estuaries,  lakes,  and reservoirs.
The purpose of  this  document is to present applicable technology by which
to  calculate  ambient water quality concentrations resulting  from the
discharge  of toxicants to  lakes, reservoirs,  and impoundments.  The manual
has been  prepared  to achieve  the following objectives.

1.  Review the  basic   principles   of  chemical  water  V««ty  modeling
    frameworks-in  sufficient  detail to  permit  physical understanding of  the
    problem  and the  fundamental basis of mathematical  representation  of
    natural systems, particularly lakes.
2.  Define the  assumptions and  limitations of such modeling frameworks  and
    indicate criteria  for  application.
3.  Specify  in detail  the type  of  information, both  field  and  laboratory,
    which is  required  for practical application of modeling frameworks  and
    how  these  data are evaluated and  prepared  for use in  the models.
4.  Illustrate  the  application  of  modeling  frameworks   in  a  step by  step
    manner through the use of examples.
    It is  noted  that  a  substantial  number  of  water  quality modeling
programs  have been  developed which  are applicable  to the analysis of  the
 fate  of toxicants  in the water  environment, many of  which can  be applied to
 lakes and impoundments.   It  is  beyond  the scope of  intent of  this document
 to review all such frameworks and  to provide  detailed guidance  on  the
 application of  specific programs  to  particular problem settings.    Those
 functions  are  properly  provided  by individual  program documentation  and
 user's guides for the individual modeling programs.   Rather,  the intent of
 this  document is to present fundamental technology so that the reader gains
 physical as well as a  mathematical  understanding  of the  behavior  of
 toxicants in aqueous systems, particularly in impounded settings.
                                       3

-------
    In order  co accomplish  this  goal,  the  emphasis  of  this  document is
placed on simplified modeling frameworks, that is, those which are obtained
by direct  solution  of basic  equations developed  from a mass  balance for
partitioning toxic substances in completely mixed systems.  It is felt  that
this  procedure,  imparts  to  the  user  a  physical appreciation  and under-
standing of the problem  at  hand which is not  easily gained by application
of  large scale  computer programs.    Further,  the  technology  presented,
though  simplified,  is  directly  applicable  to  many  practical   problem
settings.   It  is  anticipated  that  once  the  user  has  a  physical under-
standing of  the problem at hand  from  review of  the material presented  in
this  section,  the relevant  analysis  framework, whether simplified desk top
calculations   or  complex  computer   program,   can  be  selected   for   the
particular problem setting.

1.3   Organization of  the  Chapter

    The  remainder  of  this document is  organized into  seven  pares  as
summarized as  follows:
                   •.
    Section  2.0 outlines basic principles which  are  applicable  to  chemical
fate  models.   The  fundamental  transfer and  kinetic  characteristics  of
chemicals   are  reviewed  and  expressed  in  mathematical   form.     These
expressions  are then combined  with  other relationships  which account for
how a material is  transported through  an aqueous  environment.

    Section  3.0 presents the development.of simplified mathematical models
                      •
for treatment in lakes with assumptions and limitations.   Formulations are
presented  for different  types of  chemicals  (i.e., heavy  metal,  organic) and
 for  various  physical  assumptions.   These equations may be  solved through
desk  top calculations or currently available programs.  Other areas covered
 in this  section  include time  to steady-state  calculations, a summary  of
 available complex models and a discussion regarding the  criteria  for model
 selection.

-------
    Section 4.0 discusses the types of mass inputs to lakes from  pome  ana
non-point sources.'  Time scale considerations  for  evaluating mass  discharge
rates are also discussed.
          •
    Section 5.0 describes key model input variables with an emphasis on how
such values are measured or  estimated.   Sampling  procedures  and laboratory
analysis  are discussed.  Time and  spatial considerations  are  addressed for
both  water  column and  sediment measurements.   Fluid  transport,  particle
transport, water  column-bed  Interactions,  chemical  transfers,  and chemical
kinetics are  areas  covered in  this section.   Also, key  mathematical
expressions  (sediment capacity factor and chemical  particulate ratio)  are
evaluated for the purpose  of  providing guidelines  to estimate  these
parameters.

     Section  6.0  provides a  recapitulation of  the  procedures  for obtaining
model  input  data  and presents an  overview of  the general  principles of
model application.

     Sections  7.0  and  8.0   present  examples   for  analyzing  chemical  fate
 problems involving  a  sedimentating  and  interactive bed  case, respectively.

-------
                                SECTION 2.0
                    BASIC PRINCIPLES  OF CHEMICAL MODELS

    The procedure for developing realistic mathematical  models  for chemical
fate is  similar  to the  approach  used historically  for  other  measures  of
water quality such as biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and dissolved oxygen.
The fundamental  transfer  and  kinetic characteristics of a wide  variety  of
chemicals  are   reviewed  and   expressed  in   mathematical   form.     These
expressions are  then  combined with  other relationships  which account  for
how  any material  is  transported  through  the aqueous  environment.    The
principle  of  conservation  of  mass  is ' then   used  to develop  generalized
expressions of.mass balance of chemical.  These expressions are then either
solved to a direct algebraic solution which  oay be used for desk  cop
calculations  in  the  case  of  physically simple situations,  or  they  are
solved  by digital  computation  in the case of more complex problem settings.

2.1 Chemical Partitioning

    One of the  major  characteristics which  differentiates  many chemicals
from  classical   water  quality variables  is  an affinity  for  adsorption to
particulate material.   Figure 2-1 schematically illustrates the  principle.
If a mass  of soluble chemical is  placed  in a  laboratory beaker of water, an
initial concentration  of  dissolved  chemical,  c,  will result.   If parti-
culate material  is then  added to  the  beaker  and stirred, a  portion of
dissolved chemical will  be sorted  onto  the  particulates and  some of  the
 chemical  concentration will  then  be in particulate  form,  p.   If Chis
 process is monitored  with time,  as  shown  on the  diagram,  the  dissolved
 chemical  will  be reduced and particulate  chemical  will increase in  a

-------
cr
j-
z
UJ
o
z
o
o
                  EQUILIBRIUM

                     PHASE
                  REACTIVE

                   PHASE
                     TOTAL CHEMICAL
PARTICIPATE
CHEMICAL -P
                              DISSOLVED
                              CHEMlCAL-c
                                   TIME
         FIGURE 2-1. SCHEMATIC OF CHEMICAL SORPTION
reversible  reaction until an equilibrium is achieved at some  point.   The

total chemical  concentration at any time is  equal  to the sum of  the

dissolved and particulate concentrations:



            . .  ^ .                          '                    (2-1)
 in which C- is  total chemical concentration and i • 1 represents the water

 column  concentration while i  • 2 represents the concentration  in  che


 sediment*

-------
    The  race with  which  this  reaction  takes place and  the  relative
relationship between the dissolved and particulate  chemical,  that is, the
water-sediment partitioning, are  both  chemical  specific.   In most cases,
reaction between the  dissolved chemical and  participates occurs  very
rapidly, minutes to hours, and equilibrium is achieved quickly relative  to
Che  time  characteristics  of the  environmental  setting.    The tendency  to
sorb is highly chemical specific, especially in the case of materials with
low water solubility.

    The  affinity  of a  particular  chemical to  sorb' can  be  quantitatively
expressed  by  a solids-water partition  coefficient,  ».   A series  of
experiments of  the type  schematically  indicated on Figure 2-1 may  be
conducted  with differing  initial  dissolved  concentrations  of  a  specific
chemical.    After   equilibrium   is  achieved,  the   particulate   chemical
concentration,  r,   expressed  as  micrograms   of  chemical   per   gram   of
particulate  material (ug/g), may  be  plotted as  a  function  of  the  dissolved
chemical  remaining, c, expressed as microgram per  liter of  water  (ug/1).

     Figure  2-2  schematically  illustrates the  results of the  previously
described laboratory experiment.  A specific chemical will  produce one  of
the  lines shown on  the logarithmic diagram,  the relative  position of  which
determines   the  partition  coefficient.     For  a   particular   dissolved
concentracion,  greater particulate  concentrations  yield  larger  partition
coefficients as shown  schematically by   the  various  distributions.   Data
 from chemicals which can  be  plotted  and correlated, as shown on Figure 2-2,
 behave according  to the Freundlich isotherm defined as:
 in which n is a constant characterizing the slope of the relationship.  If
 the  slope is near 1 indicating a  linear relationship,  the partition
 coefficient is defined as:
              Ci

-------
 10.000
  l.OOO
o»
*^
o»
=   100
z
Ul
u
z
o
o
UJ
 cr
 <
 0.
     0 s
      c
                                   r» ire, I/B

                                   TI PARTITION COER
      I           10            '00

   DISSOLVED CONCENTRATION -C-,  ( /ig /


FIGURE 2-2. EXAMPLE ISOTHERMS

   AND PARTITION COEFFICIENT
i COO

-------
    As indicated, a  specific  chemical  will yield one of  the  relationships
indicated  schematically on  Figure 2-2 for  a specific type  of sorbing
particulate  material.    However,  different  relationships,  and  therefore
different partition  coefficients,  may be  observed for  the same  chemical
with various types of sorbants.  For example,  organic particulates or silty
materials  may  attract  a  certain  chemical  more   strongly   than   sandy
materials.   Further, different  size  classes   of  particulate material,  in
that  they  may reflect different classes  of  particulates as  sands,  silts,
clays   etc., may  exhibit  differing   affinities  and  partitioning,   for  a
specific  chemical.   In  principle,  it  is most advantageous,  therefore,  to
perform  experiments  and  determine  a chemical's partitioning characteristics
with  the  type of particulate  material  (suspended and bed  sediment) to which
it  will  come in  contact  in  the natural environment.
          •
     Another useful  relationship is the definition of particulate chemical
 concentration on a  volumetric basis:

                                                                       (2-4)
          p • rm

 in which  p is particulate chemical  concentration on a bulk  volume  basis
 (e g    iig/1).  r  is chemical sorbed to  particulate  material  (e.g.,  ug
 chemical/g  suspended  sediment)  and m is the  volumetric  concentration  of
 particulates  (e.g.,  g  of  suspended sediment/1  bulk volume).   As chemical
 concentrations  may exist in both dissolved and  particulate  form,  the
 modeling framework must track both forms of chemical, ct and PI, as well as
 the  particulates, m, to which a fraction of the chemical is sorbed.

 2.2  Chemical Transfers  and Kinetics

      The mathematical models developed  herein are  based  on  a  mechanistic
  framework  for  the  transport,  transfer  and  reaction  of  chemical  in  the
  aqueous environment.   Figure 2-3 is a  schematic diagram which shows  the
  various transfers  and kinetic decay mechanisms  (transforms)  included  in  the
  models.   The  diagram  represents  -the water  column  in  any receiving water
  body bounded  by  bed sediment  and atmosphere.    In  the water  column,  both
                           .   '        10

-------
dissolved,  Cj, and particulate,  pjf  chemical  concentration  are  considered
to exist,  each of  which may be caused by direct inputs of chemical,  either
dissolved,  Wd,  or particulate,  Wp>  from  industrial,  municipal,  and/or
diffuse sources.
K
^^^^^
a
Ul
o
Ul
CD

1
— ^4=^-
VOD
*,
DISSOLVED
DEC At
0
E
»i
DISSOLVED
DECAY
	
	 	
II
II
1TILIZATION ^
C.
K«t«
SSOLVEO
XCMANviE W,
1 | Kv. SCO
i '
*
W»

1 AIR-WATER
~=~ INTERFACE
Ki
P| PAHTICULAT6
DECAY
SETTLING
UR WATER -BED
?/WA' INTERFACE
1 * I PftflTICULATE
OCCAT

                         SEDIMENTATION
         FIGURE  2-3. SCHEMATIC  OF CHEMICAL TRANSFERS
                              AND KINETICS
     Due to the  characteristic  of  chemical  partitioning,  a  reversible
 reaction  is shown between  the  dissolved  and  particulate forms.   If  Che
 equilibrium between  these  fractions,  as  shown on Figures 2-1 and 2-2, is
 disturbed  in some manner, as by addition of dissolved  chemical or decay. of
 the particulate fraction,  for  example,  a  reaction  will commence  either
 toward sorption  or  desorption  until  a new equilibrium  is achieved between
 dissolved  and  particulate chemical.   The  rates at which sorption-desorption
 reactions  occur  are denoted by K^  and Kdeg on the diagram.

                                      11

-------
    Dissolved chemical may undergo volatilization and be exchanged from the
water column to  the  atmosphere  through the air-water  interface  at a rate,
K .  Once in the atmosphere, it may  also  be sorbed onto participates which
Jy then fall back to earth and be a source of chemical input to  receiving
waters.   Caseous chemicals in  the  atmosphere  may also diffuse back  into
solution  through the  air-water interface.    These  sources,  however,   are
likely  to  be of significance only to  the largest of  water  bodies and  for
the mes* nMnuifms of chemicals.

    In  a similar manner, the chemical  associated" with particulates may  be
removed  from the water column  to  the bed sediment by  a settling mechanism,
denoted   by  the  rate,   w^    Under   certain  hydraulic  characteristics,
particulate  chemical  in  the bed sediment  may  be resuspended  back into  Che
water  column by  scour' at a  rate,   w^.    Once a particulate  chemical  is
introduced  into  the  bed  sediment,  a  desorption may take place so that  some
chemical is  dissolved into the interstitial waters of the bed.    This  is a
reversible  reaction  as  In. the water  column  governed by the partitioning
characteristics of  the chemical and  solids.  Dissolved chemical  may also be
exchanged,  at  a rate 1^,  between  the  water  column and  bed  sediment  in
accordance with the  laws of diffusion,  that is, from  an area  of  greater
                                     •
concentration  to one of  lesser.

     In all  cases,  dissolved  and particulate  chemical forms  in both wacer
 column and  sediment  may  undergo  various decay  transformations, KJ>  and  K2,
 depending upon  the  nature of  the  compound.   Such  mechanisms  may  include
 hydrolysis,  biological   degradation,   and   photodegradation   under    the
 influence of  solar ultraviolet radiation.   This  latter  factor  is  not
 usually of significance  in the case of bed sediment.

 2.3 Transport  and Bed Sediment

     As   described   previously,   the  distribution  between   dissolved   and
 particulate  components  of the chemical, as well as  transfers   and kinetic
 interactions,  are  both  essential- factors  common to all  types  of models.
 What  distinguishes  various models,  however,  are  transport  components of  a
                                        12

-------
specific water  system and  the characteristics  of the  bed with  which  ic
interacts.   Thus, the differences of various models lie, to some degree,  in
the transport regimes of the lakes, but more significantly  they rest  on  the
transport  characteristics  of  the  bed  itself,  and  the  magnitude  of  the
water bed interaction.

    2.3.1 Transport Regimes

    Each of the general types  of natural water  systems may  be  classified in
accordance with a characteristic fluid  transport  regime and the  interaction
of  the  water  with the bed  as  shown on Figure  2-4.   The components  of  the
transport field are  the advective  (U) and  dispersive  (E) elements  which, in
general, are  expressed  in  three-dimensional space.   The transport in lakes
may be  approximated  frequently" by  one- or two-dimensions  (A) in  which  the
vertical -is  the  major component,  and by a  spatially  uniform  condition,
completely  nixed  (B), whose  transport  coefficient is  the dPtencion time,
 c
 0
     2.3.2  Bed  Conditions

     The bed conditions, which  are  relevant to the  analysis  are shown also
 on Figure  2-4.  They may be classified  as  inactive (stationary); or active
 (exchanging).    The  latter may  be  further  subdivided:  with  and  without
 horizontal transport.   A  further characteristic of  bed  conditions  relates
 to the phenomenon  of  sedimentation.  All  natural  water  bodies  accumulate,
 in varying  degrees, materials which settle  from  the water  column.    In
 freshwater systems,  reservoirs and  lakes  are  repositories  of  much of  the
 suspended sediment which are discharged by the tributary streams and direct
 drainage.   Bed conditions  in  these  systems  are  subject  to  seasonal  and
 possibly daily  variations,  but tend to accumulate  material  over long  time
 scales.  The  increase  in  bed depth and  concentration is expressed  in  terms
 of  a sedimentation  velocity,  measured  in terms  of  centimeters/year,  by
 contrast  to   the  settling velocity  of  the  various  solids  in  suspension,
 measured in terms of meters/day. .
                                       13

-------
                                               B
     WINO-ORIVgN
                                        Q-,
                                          f    MIXED
    r
     	£-/*• -€
         n
   (.AXES ANO
   COASTAL WAT2RS
U- HORIZONTAL VELOCITY
«-VERTICAL MIXING
                      0-PLOW RATE
                      V-VOLUME
                      t0» V/0-DETENTION
               (A) TRANSPORT  REGIMES
WATER
BCD
        .  \

     STAT'QNARY
   SEOiMENTiNG 3E3
> »i«eo
 u*»e»
                          MIXED LAYgfl
                                               O W
                                 unco
                                                        STATIONAMY
                                                          aeo
                                          9S3 TRANSPOR"!
                                           MIXED LAYER
                                          SEOIMENTING aea
    •CO
                   w,
    SEDIMENTATION VELOCITY
              LIST Q? SYMBOLS
                 w, SETTLING
                 W2, RESUSPENSIQN

                 W  SEDIMENTATION
                                        U8 MIXING
                  (B) BcD CONDITIONS

 FIGURE 2-4. TRANSPORT  REGIMES AND BED CONDITIONS
                                14

-------
    The different bed conditions depicted on Figure 2-4 are further defined
as follows:

    Type I;   Stationary  Bed.   A stationary  bed  is basically characterized
by  negligible  horizontal  motion.     This   condition  is  most  commonly
encountered in lakes and reservoirs of relatively great depth, with minimal
winds.

    The essential  characteristic  of this type of  system  is the relatively
low degree of vertical mixing in the fluid.   The  hydrodynamic environment
is one  which  permits the gravitational  force  to  predominate and suspended
particles of density greater  than  that  of water to  settle.   The accumula-
tion of this material in the  bed causes an increase in the  thickness  of  the
benthal layer,  the  rate  of increase  being  referred  to as a sedimentation
velocity.  The bed is also characterized by minimal or zero particle  mixing
in the  layer in contact with  the water.

    Type  II;    Exchanging Bed.   This  condition,   which   is  probably more
common, is  characterized  by  some degree  of  particle mixing  in  the  active
layer of  the  bed.   The  mixing may be due to  either physical or biological
factors; increased levels  of  shear,  associated with horizontal or vertical
velocities and  gradients  or bioturbation attributable to the  feeding
behavior of benthic  organisms.   It  exists,  therefore, in Lakes  where  the
wind effects extend  to the bottom.

    In  such cases,  the  shear exerted  on the bed  is sufficient  to  bring
about  mixing  in  the  interfacial  layer,   but  not  sufficient  to  cause
significant erosion  and bed motion.  The net flux of  material to the  bed  is
the difference between the  settling  flux and that  returned by the exchange
due  to  the mixing.  Thus,  the  bed  thickness may  increase or decrease  and
the sedimentation  velocity  nay  be  positive  or negative.   This  type of  bed
condition  is usually associated where water depths  are sufficiently shallow
to permit wind effects to be  transmitted  to  the bed.
                                      15

-------
    T— ill:   fach-T-  '«* ***  Transport.   This  bed  condicion possesses
both mixing and advective  characteristics.   The shearing stress exerted by
the fluid is of  sufficient intensity to cause  erosion  and resuspension of
the bed and the fluid velocity of sufficient magnitude  to  induce horizontal
motion of either  or  both the resuspended material  and  the interfacial bed
layer.  This  phenomenon  involves the complex  field of sediment  transport,
which has been greatly developed  in streams, but much less  in  estuaries  and
lakes.  The bed system may now  be envisioned as three  distinct  segments:  a
moving interfacial layer,  a mixed zone and a stationary bed beneath.   There
is vertical .exchange between the moving and mixed layers  and  the  vertical
transport in the  bed is  characterized by the sedimentation velocity.   This
cype  of bed condition is rarely  associated with reservoirs or  lakes.

2.4 Mass Balance  for Chemicals

    Conservation  of  mass is the  fundamental principle  which is  used  as the
basis of  all mathematical models of  real  world  processes.    All  aaterial
must  be accounted for whether transported,  transferred,  or transformed.   A
 rate equation which  conforms  to  the  requirements  of mass balances  is
 written as follows:'

          v *£ . j + rr + ZR + iw                                      (2"5)
            dt
                                                            A
 in which
     c
     J
     T
     R
     W
     V
     t
concentration of the chemical
transport through the system
transfers within the system
transformation reactions within the system
chemical inputs
volume
time
  Equation  2-5 states that the rate of change  of  mass of chemical  with time
  at  any location  in the  system is due  to the  net  effect  of  the  various
  fluxes,  transfers,  reactions,  and-inputs.
                                        16

-------
    The-various terns  on  Che right side of  Equation *-j *c*  *******	
appropriate mathematical  form as described  in  previous publications.   An
equation may  be written  for  each  of  the  chemical  forms, dissolved  and
particulate, for both water  column  and  bed  sedinent.  In physically  simple
systems,  these  four  equations may be  solved  simultaneously  to  yield  a
direct algebraic solution for each chemical form.  The spatial distribution
of chemical,  dissolved and  particulate, in water  column  and  sediment is
calculated as a function  or  chemical  input,  freshwater flow and advection,
and  the  various transfer  and decay  rates.   The algebraic  solutions  are
programmed for convenience of calculation.

     In  the  case of  physically  complex  systems,  such as large  lakes,  the
study area is  subdivided into a  series of segments,  in one-,  two- or
three-dimensions, as  schematically  indicated on Figure 2-5, as required by
the  expected  distribution of chemical.   For each water  column segment,  a
mass  balance  equation may  be written  in  finite difference  form  for  each
chemical  fraction,  dissolved and particulate.   Similar equations  are  also
written for bed sediment  segments.  The equations for each  segment  interact
with equations  written for  all adjacent segments  through physical  inter-
actions caused by" chemical  transport and transfer  among  the  various
adjacent  segments.   The result is  a matrix  of equations which are solved  by
digital  computation.  The  solution is  the  calculated chemical  concentra-
cions,  dissolved and  particulate,  for  each water  column  and  bed  sediment
segment.
                                               •
     A simplification may be made. in  the case  of those chemicals  where the
 partitioning  reaction shown  on  Figure  2-1  occurs very rapidly  compared  to
 other  time  constants in  the  system.   If  the  time to reach  equilibrium
 between dissolved and particulate  forms occurs .within minutes  or  hours,  a
 common circumstance,  it  is  possible  to write  the   foregoing  mass balance
 equations in  terms  of total chemical, CT,  rather   than   in  dissolved and
 particulate  forms.   This  reduces  the  number  of equations  which must  be
 solved -ry half.   Then,  dissolved  and  particulate  forms can  be determined
 from the  total  chemical  concentration at any .location  using the  partition
 coefficient and local suspended sediment concentration as  follows.
                                       17

-------
                                    •V7
         WATER
         COLUMN
         s EDI we NT
          LAYER.
      U_
      E
//*///
                        Us AOVECTION
                        £= DISPERSION

      FIGURE 2-5. FINITE DIFFERENCE SEGMENTATION
                      AND TRANSPORT


   The total chemical  concentration Is the  -sum of the  dissolved  and
               •.
particulate fractions:
        CT • Cl
                                                             (2-6)
The particulate chemical concentration is defined by Equation 2-4:
        Pi " ri
                                                             (2-7)
However,  the  chemical  concentration,'  r,  sorted  to  particulaces  may  be

determined from Equation 2-3, re-expressed:
        r •
                                                            (2-3a)
 Substitution of Equation 2.3a into 2.7 yields:
                                                              (2-8).
                                 18

-------
Then:

         *ri ' et * <* ci 1>                                          (2"9)


Rearranging the terms in Equation  2-9,  the  fraction of  total chemical which
is in dissolved form is then defined as:
            _ *!       1                                               (2-10)
          Ed   C     1 + n.
               Ti

 Similarly, ic can  be  shown that the fraction of  total  chemical which is in
 particulate form can be  defined as:
           pi


 Hence,  for the  conditions of  nearly  instantaneous  local  equilibrium,  the
 dissolved and particulate fraction of total chemical are determined by:
          'i ' V =1,
 where   the   fractions  are   calculated   from   the   chemical's   partition
 coefficient, », and local suspended or bed sediment concentration, m.

     Figure  2-6 shows  the fraction  of particulate  chemical -which  may  be
 calculated   from   Equation   2-11  as  a   function  of  various   partition
 coefficients and solids concentrations.
                                       19

-------
       i.O -
  z
  o
  u    as
y     o.*
a:
a.
      0-2 h"
        /
      00
                                                  NOW-
                                                 enoc'ic
                                                         sriauf
                                                   seo
                       "7"  ,'>''"  /
                     /      /"''    /
                     7  A'*//   „/
                *7     ^V/'  *j
                y        /     y     /
          -    /       >
                                  AULUVI*!.
                  X  ^ X
                                             UNITS OF TT* l
          '    '''*'    S      -"'
          \   .     ,0'        10*       "O1        10*      .  I09
                        SOLIDS CCNCSNT3ATION (mg/ I)

  FIGURE 2-6.  PARTICULATE FRACTION  AS A FUNCTION OF
  PARTITION COEFFICIENT AND  SOLIDS CONCENTRATION

    It  is  appropriate  to  note  that the local  suspended  or  bed  sediment
concentration  is required  in  the analysis.  Hence, a mass  balance  equation
is also required for suspended sediment and  is established  in a  similar
manner  as for  chemical.  In addition to  the calculation of  the local solids
concentration,  the suspended  sediment  balance,  performed independently,
helps to define the rates  of particle settling and  resuspension.

    The basic  purpose'of  the mathematical models  for chemical  fate is to
calculate  the  dissolved and  particulate chemical  fractions,  ^ and ?L in
both the water column and bed  sediment from known chemical  inputs.  The
various reaction  coefficients  specific  to  the   chemical   compound  for
sorption-desorption,  partitioning,  volatilization, and  the  various decay
transformations are  ideally determined  in the laboratory  for input to the
mathematical model.  Settling and resuspension rates are normally evaluated
                                  20

-------
using field data and a mass balance of suspended sediment,  as  subsequently
discussed.  Once  these  rates  are defined,  the  rates of chemical  discharge
are  input  to  the model  for calculation  of the dissolved and  particulate
chemical in water column and sediment.  These values  are  then  compared with
observed  data,  if  available,  and  reaction rates  may be adjusted  within
prescribed limits for fine-tuning.
                                       21

-------
                                SECTION 3.0
                   CHEMICAL MODELS FOR LAKES/IMPOUNDMENTS

    The basic principles  presented in Section 2.0 sets the format for model
development of chemicals  in lakes and reservoirs.  There are, however, many
approaches and assumptions which may  be incorporated in  the mathematical
representation of  a natural  lake system.   The  complexity  of a  final
solution  is  dependent on  the  approach  and  assumptions initiated  at  the
outset  of  the model  development.   Since  there are  many  conditions  and
variables that may be considered in a  chemical  fate model,  the complexity
and practicality of a model will vary greatly.

    The  approach  adopted for  this  manual  is to emphasize  the simplified
formulation of chemical models.  The purpose for this approach is twofold:
(1)  a detailed description of the simplified approach  gives  the non-
specialist an understanding of  the basic principles of  chemical models and
allows him  to  use  desk top  calculations  or  simplified programs  for
computation, and (2) in most  allocation studies,  the data are not  available
co  evaluate a  system using  complex  formulations   so that  the simplified
approaches may be  less time consuming and  probably  just as  useful.   It  is
also  noted that most  of the  major  complex  steady-state or  time  varying
models   currently   available   are   equipped   with   documentation  of  the
respective  formulations  and input requirements.  It would not  be  necessary
or  practical  in  the context  of this manual to discuss   in  detail each
program's   derivation.-   Rather,  summaries   are  provided   regarding  the
available  model's  structure and general application.

     The following sections discuss in  detail the  simplified  steady-state
model approach with  assumptions and limitations.   Other areas covered  in
 the  section include time to  steady-state  calculations, a  summary  of

                                     22

-------
available complex models and a discussion regarding  cue  c**.=--«  ---  	
selection.

3.1  Simplified Steady-State Models

    The  physics,  chemistry, and  biology of  lakes  is  a  subject with  an
extensive  literature  and  a  number  of   reviews   are   available  (e.g.,
Hutchinson,  1957; Wetzel,  1975).   The historical focus  has  been  primarily
biological and the chemicals of concern have been those which interact with
biological processes,  e.g.,  forms  of carbon, oxygen,  nitrogen,  phosphorus
and silica.  The fate of these chemicals is strongly affected by biological
interactions, and the  computational  frameworks  that  have been developed to
analyze  their behavior  can  be  quite complex.   These detailed analyses are
supported  by the  availability  of large data  sets  and extensive laboratory
and field  scale experimental experience.

    The  situation  is quite different for heavy metals,  organic chemicals,
and  radionuclides.   Very  few comprehensive  data  sets  exist and the
frameworks for the calculation of chemical  fate  are  necessarily simplified.
As a consequence','  Che discussions  given  below  are  limited   to  those
processes  which  are currently  believed  to be  of  principal  importance and
for which  information  is presently available.

    The   simplified   steady-state   framework   assumes   complete  mixing
throughout the water body.   It is  recognized that a  characteristic feature
of lakes  and impoundments  is  thermal  stratification  during  the  summer
months.    The vertical mixing  is   inhibited  due  to the  density gradient
between epilimnion and  hypolimnion.  Hencer distinct volume  segments
characterize the water  column (the epilimnion -and  hypolimnion).   A  more
 refined  analysis  should take this  into account. Most lakes  (the  exceptions
being very deep lakes) do mix vertically on  an annual time  scale, and the
water columns  vertically  are  homogeneous.   Hence,  the assumption  of   a
 completely mixed water column  is  reasonable on an  annual  time  scale and
 less  so  for  shorter  time  scales. ••

                                       23

-------
    Two  types  of  bed  conditions  are  considered   for   the  simplified
steady-state  approach.    They  are  classified  as  the  sedimenting  and
interactive bed.  The sedimenting bed condition assumes negligible particle
mixing between  the bed  and water  column and  thus,  offers  the  simplest
solution for calculating chemical distributions.   Only the solids settling
velocity and the bed sedimentation  velocity  are required for the transport
description.

    The bed interactive condition by contrast considers- the resuspension of
particles from the mixed layer interface  to  the water  column.   The rate of
resuspension, therefore, must also be defined for this type of evaluation.

    3.1.1  Sedimenting

    The  basic  principles  of chemical models are  discussed in Section 2.0.
One of  the  major characteristics which differentiates  many chemicals from
classical   water   quality   variables  is  an   affinity   for  sorpcion  to
particulate  material.    The total  chemical  concentration  at any  time in
either the  water; column  or  the  bed  is the sum of  the dissolved and
particulate concentrations.  The ratio of the chemical concentration  on the
particles  to  the  total concentration (f  ) is  a function of the concentra-
tion  of  particulate material -(suspended  or  fine grain sediment solids) and
the partition  coefficient.   In order to calculate  the particulate chemical
concentration   in   the  water   column,   therefore,  the   suspended   solids
distribution must  first be  evaluated.

    The  following  sections present the  mathematical  solutions  for the
expected .concentration of  suspended solids  and the chemical of concern for
 three chemical categories.  The  three categories  considered  are non-
 reactive/non-volatile, non-reactive volatile,  and reactive  volatile.    In
 general,  these categories may be associated with metals,  volatile  organic
 chemicals  and  reactive volatile  organic  chemicals,  respectively.

     Suspended Solids.   The concentration of  suspended  solids in  a reservoir
 or lake depends  on the physical characteristics  of the  incoming  sediment
                                      24

-------
and  Che hydraulic features  of Che  system and  inflow.   The  important
characteristic of  the * solids is  che  distribution of  settling velocities
reflecting their  size,  shape, and  density.   The  detention time  and the
depth of the water body are the significant hydraulic and geomorphological
features.   The following  analysis  assumes  steady-state  conditions  in  a
completely mixed system, in which the concentration of solids  is spatially
uniform*

    Consider  a body of water  whose concentration  is  spatially  uniform
throughout its volume,  V.,  receiving an inflow,  Q, as shown on Figure 3-1.
Under steady-state conditions, hydraulic inflow  and outflow  are equal.  The
mass balance of the solids  takes  into  account  the  mass input by the inflow,
that discharged in the  outflow and that  removed  by settling. The mass rate
of change of solids in  the  reservoirs  is the net of these  fluxes:
         v dr-Qni • Qrai • Vsmi                                    (3"°'

in which

    n. - concentration of solids in  inflow
    m. - concentration of solids in  water body
    w  • settling velocity of the solids (L/T)
    A  » horizontal area through which seeding occurs

The flux, Qm., equals  the  rate  of mass  input,  W.   Dividing through by  the
volume, V., the above equation becomes:

         dmi   u        i
         _i.H.-mtI_+Kl                                     (3-2)
in which
      r  • detention time • V/Q (T)
    K , - settling coefficient w /H  (1/T)
     SH • mean depth V/A  (L)    .  L
                                      25

-------
N*
             SOLIDS
                                         LEGEND*
UNITS
w
0
V
H
m
c.
10
*P
w,
wt
Ky
Kd
Kp
MASS INFLUX RATE
FLOW RATE
VOLUME
DEPTH
SOLIDS CONC.
TOXIC -TOTAL CONC.
DISSOLVED FRACTION
PARTICULATE FRACTION
SETTLING VELOCITY
SEDIMENTATION VELOCITY
EVAPORATION COEFFICIENT
DISSOLVED DECAY RATE
PARTICULATE DECAY RATE
M/T
L»/T
L»
L
M/L1
M/L"
—
—
L/T
L/T
I/T
I/T
I/T
             TOXIC
           FIGURE 3-1. SCHEMATIC OF SOLIDS AND CHEMICAL
                  PARAMETERS-SEDIMENTING CASE

-------
    Under the steady-state condition., aquation j-i *.~j -«= s.»r--=	—'


                 W/Q                                                 (3-3a)



Division by W/Q yields

         _™1       1                                                 (3-3b)
         W/Q ' I* K9lco  .

which is the  fraction of the incoming  solids  remaining in suspension  and,

with the assumption  of complete mixing,  is also  the  concentration in  the

outflow.  The fraction removed from  the water column  is  simply
                                                                       C3-4)
                       KslCo
    It  is  apparent from  the  above  development  that  conditions in  che  bed
have  no effect  on the  concentration  in  the water  body,  because, of  the
assumption  that  there  is  no  resuspension of  the  bed material.   The increase

in  bed  sediment  mass  and volume on che other  hand, is due directly  to  the
influx  of  the settling solids.   The  rate of  change  of solids mass  in  the

bed is  therefore:
          dM2                                                          (3-5)
          dT' + Vl"!

 The bed  mass,  MZ, equals the  product  of  the  bed  volume  V2, and  bed

 concentration, m*  Thus:
          dM,   dCV m )      dV       dm
          _ 2      Z Z  m _    * a. «  — =• • * A w m,
          dT " "d^ -- "2 dc  * V2 dt      Vl'l
 Dividing by  the  area,  and expressing the  results  dH2/dt as  Wj,  the final

 result is:
                                                                       (3_6b)
                           "2
                                       27

-------
where:
    w- • sedimentation velocity
Ac  steady-state  (when dm2/dc - 0),  the relationship between particle
concentrations and settling and sedimentation velocities is given by:
    Non-reactive/Non-volatile  Substances  (Metals).    The distribution  of
non-reactive   toxic   substances,   such   as   metals,  is   established  by
application  of the principle of  continuity  or mass balance, in  a manner
similar  to that employed  in  the case  of  the  suspended solids.  Each phase,
the dissolved  and  participate,  is  analyzed  separately, taking into account
the adsorption-desorption interactions.   For the  dissolved  component,  che
mass  balance  includes  the  sorption  terms  in addition  to the  inflow  and
outflow.   The basic differential equation for  the dissolved concentration
is:
              .          .K   .  e  > K    D
         — "  V~ " T  *«Umlcl * Kdespl
                 1     o
 in which:

                            ,3.
V
w
c
      1
      1
     c
          reservoir volume  (L )
         rate  of  mass  input of  the dissolved component  (M/T)
         dissolved  concentration  in water^body  (M/L  )
                                           -
  x .     the adsorption  rate,  constant  (L  /l£-  .
    -     suspended  solids  concentration (T _J
         the desorption  rate coefficient (T  )   3
         particulate  chemical  concentration  (M/L )
     *
                           •
For the particulate concentration:
          d"i   \   »i
                                       28

-------
in which:

     W  • rate of mass input  of  thf  particulate adsorbed chemical (M/T)
    K J • settling coefficient  (T  )
    Adding Equations  3-7 and  3-8  cancels  the  adsorption  and desorption
terms and yields the rate of  change  of  the  total concentration  CT:

           "•*    *•    T1                                               / 0_Q \
         WT ' V Wc

    Since  the  rate at which sorption  equilibrium  is achieved between  the
two phases is very rapid by contrast to the rates of  transfer  and  decay  the
sorption coefficients. Kadg  and Kdes  are usually orders  of  magnitude
greater  than  the  decay and  transfer  coefficients  of  the  dissolved  and
particulate  concentrations.   Thus,  liquid-solid phase  equilibrium can  be
assumed  to occur  instantaneously.   The  particulate  concentration, pr  in
Equation  3-9 may be replaced by *plCT1 given in Equation 2-11.

    Under  steady-state conditions, the above may be expressed, after multi-
plying  through by  CQ  and replacing p^ith fplCT1 as:

                   V«   _                                          (3-10)
 where:
                   Vl
 Note that Equation 3-10  is  identical to Equation 3-3a  with the exception
 that the  dimensionless  settling  parameter  K§lto  is  multiplied  by the
 particulate fraction  f ..
                                      29

-------
    The bed  concentration may be  described  by constructing its  mass
balance.   Influx  is due to  the toxic substance  associated with the settling
solids and the volumetric accumulation is accounted for by the sedimenta-
tion velocity,  as  in the bed solids analysis Equation  3-6c.  Thus:
         •2
                 -' Vivn
                                                                   <3-u)
at steady-state
in which:
                                                                   (3-12)
     P2
particulate fraction in the water column
particulate fraction in the sediment
m »./(! + m »,)  '
secEling velocity
sedimentation velocity
    Since  m2 »2  ». 1 for  most metals in  bed sediments,  it  is often
 reasonable to approximate:
                      d2
 so  chat:
                               -    p,
                                 w2 pl

     Equations  3-10 and 3-12,  given  above, are  the key  solutions  for
 analysis  of a non-reactive/non-volatile substance, such as metals, assuming
 sedimentation.  The following sections  consider volatilization and decay of
 a chemical.

     Non-reactive  Volatile  Substances (Organic Chemicals).   Certain organic
 chemicals will  transfer to the atmosphere at the surface of the lake.  The
                                     30

-------
transfer of  organic chemicals  from  the water  body co  the atmosphere  is
known  as  the  volatilization.   Section  5.0 of  this  manual  discusses  in
detail the various mechanisms of the  air-water  surface  exchange.

    The  volatilization rate  coefficient,  Ky   (I/day),  only  affects  the
dissolved portion ftfl, of the chemical  concentration in  the surface layer.
The differential equation for the  total 'concentration  in the  surface layer
becomes :
                   .
         dCTl   WT _ fll. . f  C'R   _f   rv                      (3-14)
         IT"   *7   ~   fpicTiKsi   fdi SriS  .

at steady-state:

                                                                     (3-15)
                   Co
-------
    The mathematical expresions which describe the decay  process represent
the sum  of  the  first  order decay  coefficients  for  these reactions  such

that:


          K  - f   K   + f   K                                      (3-l7a)


         -   . „    + K    + K                                      (3-17b)
         Kdi   KdPi   KdHi * KdBi

         ir   .v    + K    + K                                      (3-l7c)
         Kpi ' KpPi * KpHi * *pBi


where:


    K          •  total  decay rate  (I/day)  for  dissolved  portion  in water
     di-          column (i • 1) or  sediment (i " 2)

    K          - total decay rate  (I/day)  for particulate portion in water
     P*          column (i - I) or  sediment (i -.2)

    K  ,  (K BJ- photolysis  rate  (I/day) of  dissolved  (of particulace)  in
    "SiPi   PPi;  J;acer £oiumn (i ,  l} or bed  (i - 2)

                 hydrolysis  rate-(I/day) of  dissolved  (of particuiace)  in
                              (i •  I) or bed  (i • 2).
     K     (K    )-  biodegradation  rate  (I/day)  of dissolved (of  particulace)
     dBi   pBi   in water  column (i -  I) or bed  (i  -  2).

     The  differential  equation which includes  the  degradation  processes  in

 the  water column  is:


          dCTl   WT   °T   f   CK   -frtC                      (3-18a)
          dT" ' v~ '  T   V  SAi    '
                       o

               • fdl-CTlKdl  " fplCTlV

 At steady-state,  solving for
                                                                     (3-l8b)
                    fdlco (Kv * Kdl> * fplCo (Ksl *
                                       32

-------
or
                          « In
                                                                    (3-18c)
             " l * co UplKsl * fdlKv * V

    Similarly,   the   differencial   equation   describing   the   chemical
concentration in the sediment is as follows:
         3T1 - VlCTl/H2

at steady-state, solving for
                     CT1 fol VI/H2                                  (3-19b)
               fp2  
-------
                TABLE 3-1.   STEADY-STATE SOLUTIONS SEDIMENTING CASE
                  (RESUSPENSION AND DIFFUSION ASSUMED NEGLIGIBLE)
                                  Water Column __         Sediment
                                w/q
Solids                    «!  -  i + K   c
                                     o
Metal                     C,l -
Non-reactive Volatile      CTJ  •  i + e  (f  ,K .  * fjiK.J
Organic                             °  *l 81
                               	VQ	  c     Si fPi VH2
Reactive Organic           CTJ  -  I * to U  ^  * faiKv * V    **   *p2 Ks2 * K2

where:
 ...»   +fK   (i-lfor water column, I • 2 for sediment)
 *i    pl pi   di <•!
K   • total docay rate for particulate portion
 P •                                                     '
K   • toenl decay rate for dissolved portion
llf resuspcnslo,, or diffusion Is significant, these eonntions are not applicable.  The
 general  form of cite solutions (Table  3-3) must be used.
evaluated  directly;  cogecher wich  Che solids  concencracion  ic  yields  che
dimensionless parameter m^.  Alternately, given measurements  of the  total
and dissolved concentrations of  the  toxicant (or contaminant) the term m^
may  be calculated.   With such  information,  Che removal  efficiency  is
readily computed for  those metals and  chemicals which  are  non-volatile  and
non-reaccive.

     As indicated  above, certain chemicals  may be  subjected  Co additional
transfer or  transformation.  The fundamental properties  of  the constituent
are  indicative of  Che potential magnitude  of these routes,  e.g., the  vapor
pressure  and solubility  are  properties  which permit  assessment   of  the
evaporative  transfer.   Laboratory experiments may  be  necessary  to determine
the  chemical and  biological  routes,  e.g.,  the  biodegradabilicy   of  the
substance.   In any  particular  case,  an  assessment,  either  analytical  or
experimental, should  be made  to establish  the  degree  to which transforma-
tion or transfer may  be significant.
                                        34

-------
    The  sedimenting case  analysis assumes  steady-state  conditions  in  a
completely mixed system and does not  consider  exchange  between the bed and
the water  through the interstitial water  diffusion or  particle resuspen-
sion.   For many applications,  these assumptions  may  be  adequate  for
determining the  impact  on a lake  or  reservoir.   Also,  the  data' necessary
for a  more sophisticated analysis  may not be available in many  cases so
that these types of analyses may provide the same level  of insight as other
techniques.  On the other hand, for sensitive circumstances, these analyses
may not be adequate.  The purpose,  scope,  and  the availability of data for
a particular application must all be weighed carefully and evaluated in any
investigation.

    3.1.2  Interactive Bed

    The  type of  analysis  described in this section is identical to that of
the previous,  with  the  addition of a  resuspension  term in both the solids
and toxic  mass  balance  equations.   The physical structure of  the  system  is
shown  on Figure  3-2,  from which it  is  apparent that  a mass balance equation
must  be developed  for  both the water  column  and the  bed,  since they  are
interactive.

    Suspended  Solids.   The  mass   rate of change  of  solids  in  the  water
column is:

             dm.
         Vl  dt~ " Qmi " Qml " WlAsml  * W21As°2                       (

 in which

     w,. • resuspension  velocity - L/T
      w. • settling velocity - L/T                 3
      mf • concentration of  solids in  the  bed - M/L
 and the remaining terms are as previously defined by Equation 3-1.
                                       35

-------
                             LEGEND'
UNITS
 SOLIDS
W MASS INFLUX RATE
0 FLOW RATE
V VOLUME
H DEPTH
m SOLIDS CONC.
Cf TOXIC -TOTAL CONC.
ld DISSOLVED FRACTION
Ip PARTICULATE FRACTION
W, SETTLING VELOCITY
W,, RESUSPENSION VELOCITY
W, SEDIMENTATION VELOCITY .
KM EVAPORATION RATE COEFF.
Kd DISSOLVED DECAY RATE
Ka PARTICULATE DECAY RATE
M/T
L»/T
L*
L
M/L*
M/L*
L/T
L/T
L/T
I/T
I/T
I/T
  TOXIC
FIGURE 3-2. SCHEMATIC OF SOLIDS AND CHEMICAL
     PARAMETERS-INTERACTIVE BED CASE

-------
    Expressing the  input  flux of solids Qro^  as W  and  dividing through  by
the volume V^, yields:
         dm
in which


    H. • average depth of the water column


    A mass  balance  of the bed solids  includes the  influx  of the  settling
solids from the water and mass outflow from the bed  due  to  the resuspension
and sedimentation:
         dm,   w m.   w,,»5   W2m2
             • -    - -     - -                                       °-22)
in which


    H- • average depth of the bed
    w. - sedimentation velocity - L/T
                                                                      i
    At steady-state  conditions,  doij/dt  -  0,  the  concentration  in  the  bed

may be expressed  in  terms  of the concentration  in the water  from  Equacion

3-22:
                                                                      (3-23)
in which
           Wl
        W21 * W2
Substitution of which into Equation 3-21 under steady-state  yields:
                ' B   [
                                        21    2
                                      37

-------
Solving for m., after simplification,  gives:

                    W/Q                                             (3-24b)
         ml
    The bed  concentration  follows from substitution  of Equation  3-24b in
3-23:
         "2
                   b W/Q                                            (3-25a)
Algebraic simplification yields

                 W/Q                                                (3-25b)
         B2       w
          i   1    2
              — + — *• t
              b   Hj co

    It  is noted  that  in most practical applications, the solids concentra-
tions («! and «j) are parameters that are fixed by measurement since *2 and
w,. are difficult to measure.
                   • •         •
    Chemical Substances.   The equations Cor  the toxic  substances are
developed in an identical  fashion  as in  the sedimenting  analysis.   Each
phase  In  the water column,  the dissolved, d,  and  the  particulate,  p,  is
analyzed  separately with adsorption and  desorption kinetics in addition  to
the input,  outflow  and  settling terms.  Furthermore, allowance is made for
the  exchange of  the  dissolved  component  between  the  water and  the bed,
.expressed  in  terms of  the  difference  in  the  dissolved   concentrations.
Addition  of the two equations  cancels  the  adsorption-desorption terms and
yields:

          dCTl    WT    CT1   VoICTl ,  W21  £P2CT2
          — --- — -    H
                                                                      (3-26)
                                       38

-------
where:
                                               2
    K- • diffusive mass transfer coefficient (L /T)

    Ki ' fai (Kdi * V * fPi KPi
    K    • the sum of the hydrolysis  and  photolysis and biodegradation  race
    dl   constant of dissolved chemical

    K    - the sum of the hydrolysis  and  photolysis and biodegradation  rate
    pl   constant of particulate chemical

    K  - volatilization rate constant of dissolved chemical-


    The  bed  equation is developed  in a similar fashion:
                 K  C   -.C                                        (3'27)
                 K2  CT2   H  CT2
 where:
     K
K   -  the sum  of  the hydrolysis,  photolysis and  biodegradation race
      constant of dissolved chemical
    »  the sum  of  the hydrolysis,  photolysis and  biodegradacion race
 p2   constant of particulate chemical

Adding the water column and sediment equations at steady-state gives:


                      vyQ
     CT1	
     The  results  (which are not a final solution) show  that  che general  form
 of  che solucion  can be cast  into a form  which is analogous to the simplest
 case discussed above  (Equation 3-iO).  That  is:


                                       39

-------
         .   .                                                       C3-29)
         Si   1 + C.Kj
where:
is the cocal apparent removal, and:
    An alternate expression for the total apparent  removal  rate  on  a total
mass  basis can  be obtained since  volumes  and depths  are  related  via
interfacial areas.

    K_ is re-expressed as:
                            vi Si
                   * *                 "
     Hence,  the  total  apparent removal rate is the weighted  average  of the
 water  column,  Kj,  and sediment, KZ *  Kg2,  removal rates, where  the total
 mass of chemical  in  the water  column is 'V^,  and  in the  sediment  is
 V  C_2.  The effectiveness  of  each segment's removal mechanism  is  in
 proportion  to  the  total mass  of  chemical in  that segment,  an intuitively
 reasonable  result*

     Equation 3-28  given above, gives  insight  to the  form of the solution
 and an  understanding of  the apparent total  removal rate,  but  is  not  a
 solution since CTI,  and C^2  are  contained  in the equation.   The complete
 derivation for the apparent  total  removal  rate  Kj is shown  in Appendix A
 and the solution  is given  by  the  following  equations:

                                                                      (3-31)
                                      40

-------
                                                                     (3-32)
where:
       - «i * i T: 
-------
         '1 • V
                       'PI "ri'l                               '      (>35)
As shown in Appendix A,

                                          £
                                           d2                        (3.36)
    Although this expression is somewhat formidable,  it has  some properties
that are informative and useful.   The equation for ^/^ is  determined  by
the particulate transport parameters:   the resuspension  velocity,  w21;  the
sedimentation velocity, Wj,  each of  which is  modified  by  the  particulate
fraction in  the sediment layer,  fp2;  the diffusive  exchange coefficient,
1L , modified by the fraction dissolved  in the  sediment layer, fd2;  and  the
total  sediment  decay  rate-sediment  depth product,  KjHj,  which  expresses
this  process as  an equivalent loss  velocity.   These are  all sediment
related  parameters.   (Note  that the subscripts all relate  to the  sediment
compartment.)   The only water column parameter involved  is »j,  vhich
appears  as a  ratio 'ty^.   Therefore, r^  is determined  entirely by  the
relative  magnitudes   of  the   particulate   and   diffusive   mass  transfer
coefficients, the sediment decay rate, and the partition coefficient ratio.
It  is  surprising which  parameters are  not  part   of  the expression:   the
discharge  rate  of chemical, WT;  the  aqueous decay reaction  rate,  ^ ,  and
the  hydraulic detention  time,  tQ.   Hence,  r^,  is  not  dependent upon
these  water column  parameters.

     Application of  Simplified  Steady-State Bed Interacting  Equations.  The
general  form of  the   solution  with  an  Illustration  of the  mechanisms  is
 shown  on  Figure  3-3   and the  parameters are  defined in Table 3-2.   The
 general  solution for  many cases may be reduced to a simpler  form depending
 upon the type of  chemical of concern  and  the assumptions which  may  be valid
 for a particular case.   As  in  the  sedimenting  case,  the key parameters
 within the general  form of  the solution are  defined given  three categories
 of toxics;  the  categories presented are  metals,  conservative  organic
                                      42

-------
                        TABLE 3-2.  DEFINITIONS
            Parameters
Chemical/Biological

    Loading Rate (kg/day)

    Sum of Hydrolysis, Oxidation,
    Biodegradation, Photolysis (I/day)

    Volatilization Rates (/day)

    Partition Coefficients (I/kg)

Physical

    Solids Concentration (mg/1)

    Depths (m)

    Volumes (m )

    Flow Rate (m3/day)

    Detention Time (day)

    Settling Velocity (m/day)

    Resuspension Velocity (mm/year)

    Diffusion Exchange Coefficient (cm/day)

    Sedimentation Velocity (mm/year)
      (Sedimentation Rate Coefficient (I/day)

Concentrations

    Total  Dissolved + Particulate (ug/D

    Particulate  (ug Chemical/g Solids)

Fractions
Particulate f  •
Water Column
                                               W
                                                H
                                            Ce
                                               'Pi
                                               'dl
                                                               Sediment
                      H
                                                                 '21
                                                                  •s.
                                                                  w-
                                                                  *T2
                                  43

-------
INFLOW
  MECHANISMS


  LOADING
                                        OUTFLOW
Q,[" *r[ °i
A
WATER COLUMN REACTIONS K,
ADSORPTION -OESORPTION m, IT,
SETTLING
RESUSPENS1C
SEDIMENT REACTIONS K2
AOSORPTION-OESORPTION n\2
SEDIMENTATION
W2
IN} DIFFUSION
W2.
*2
"C

                    SOLUTIONS
          '01
                                       CT2=CT1b
                                              fp. r2
           TOTAL APPARENT REMOVAL RATE
                 KTsK, + /3 -jr (K2 •*• fp2 KS2)




             SEDIMENT CAPACITY FACTOR
                     m2H2 fpl


                     m, H, f.p2
            h — —
                    m,
                    —
                    m.
                          W.
       W2I 4- W2
         RATIO OF PARTTCULATE CONCENTRATIONS
                                    d2
W
2,
            f
                                 K2H2
       FIGURE 3-3. SCHEMATIC OF INTERACTIVE

               BED  MODEL FRAMEWORK

                          44

-------
chemicals and non-conservative organic chemicals.   The  parameter rj/rl can
also be evaluated"assuming diffusion to be negligible.   Tables 3-3 and 3-4
show the equivalents  for Kp  14  and r2/rl for  the  various assumptions and
demonstrate that the solutions become considerably more manageable when the
diffusion rate is negligible.

    Many of  the  parameters contained within  the  general solution will not
have been measured and  are difficult  to  measure.   The key to  understanding
the behavior  of the  steady-state solution is  an appreciation  of the
mechanisms  which  control   the   sediment  capacity  factor,  8,  and  the
particulate concentration ratio:   r2/rr  The necessity  to understand  these
parameters should be  obvious;  if estimates of these parameters  can  be  made
using  accessible data,  the  general solution  becomes  an  easily  adaptable
tool.   The  detailed  discussions  on  the  sediment  capacity  ratio and  the
particulate  concentration   ratio, r^,   along  with methodologies   for
estimating  these factors  are  presented  in Section 5.0 of this manual.

 3.2  Tine  to  Steady-State
         •
     An assessment of  the fate of  toxicants  in  lakes must  consider the -time
 scale of the  problem.  In some cases, an  investigation  may  be initiated  as
 a  result  of  an accidental  spill or  an  instantaneous discharge   of  a
 chemical.   In  the case of a  continuous  discharge, the time scale of concern
 may be when steady-state is  reached,  which may take a significant period of
 time.  The  time to  steady-state  depends  on all  the physical and chemical
 parameters of the system.

     The simplified  approach to  the  time varying  problem presented in the
 'following  sections  assumes  complete  mixing  in  the lake.    Although this
 assumption may  seem crude  for  short time  scales, the approach  does give
 order  of  magnitude  estimates for  the  time  to steady-state.   The  critical
 aspect of these  calculations  is  to determine the time  frame  of the problem
 and  not necessarily  to  pinpoint  chemical  concentrations  at a  particular
                                       45

-------
               TABLE 3-3.   GENERAL FORM— CHEMICAL WATER COLUMN AND SEDIMENT EQUATIONS
Metal
                                                                              r2/rl
                                                                                               d2
Hon-re.cclv« Volatile     .
Organic Chemical       *» f«ll
                                                                         W.) f , * K. (",/",
                                                                               2        2  L
                                                                      <"21 * V fp2 * 'S. fd2

                                                                     . * w.) f. * K, <•,/•,)
                                              Si- Si "777
                                                                (K2 * fp2 K.2
                                                  "2     wl
                                               b • — •
                                                  •l   W2t * W2
                    TABU 3-4.  CHEMICAL WATER COLUMN  AND  SEDIMENT EQUATIONS
                                         DIFFUSION  - 0
Metals

Non-reaccive Volatile
Organic
                                                         0

                                                         0
                                                                              f2/r,
Restive Organic
Chealeal
d,
                               * Rdl> » f a  K ,    fd2  K,,2 *  '„,
                                                                          *.w J f       ll.
                                                                             «   P*    *
                                               46

-------
time.   For  example,  Che question  to  be answered  is  whether  the 'wash-cue
period for  an  instantaneous discharge  or  the time  to  steady-state  for  a
continuous discharge is on the order of days, months or  years.

    The following sections address  two  simplified  cases.   The  first,
settling and sedimentation,  assumes  that diffusive exchange and  resuspen-
sion are negligible.  The second,  includes  interaction  between the bed and
the water column through resuspension and diffusion.  In  both  cases, ic is
assumed that the solids are constant at the steady-state concentrations.

    3.2.1  Settling and Sedimenting

    Consider an  instantaneous  mass discharge (M) into  a  lake  of  volume V.
The dynamic mass balance equation  for the water column  is:

         d°Tl m  _fli . ,K  \  f    K   )  c                              (3-37)
         ~dT     ~   ( I    Pi  "I1  Tl
where:
       Kl  "  fpKp  *  fdKd  *  fdKv
      K   "  Wl/Hl * Secclin8  coefficient
       K  •  parciculate  chemical  reaction  race
       K.  -  dissolved  chemical  reaction  rate
        d
       K  -  volatilization rate
 The mass balance for the bed is  given by:
                                                                      °-38)
           dt
 where :
     K , - w_/H7 - sedimentation coefficient
      92                     '        47

-------
    The solution for an instantaneous discharge is then given by:

         CT.
and
                            /»             « *  f«.' K-'lc     "K2e
         r           £   w. /H-            o    p*   •»•         *
         CT2         *ol Wl/tt2       -          v         - e    ]      (3-40)

                  '  ll/to * fplKslJ
where:



    CL  - M/V. the initial concentration  at  t  •  0.
    To


    The solution  for  the continuous discharge  is developed similarly and is


given as follows:



                                       -[1 *  (Kj  * f !  Ksl) co]  C/Cfl

    IS..	     I           [1 -e      '          '             1(3-41)

    CTo   l *  (  1 *•  pi  al;   o


and for the bed:





         fS- A.  II  -e   ^  1 -Aj  [e       ^   "9l     °-e'  "   ]  (3-42)

           b
 where:


                   f
                    pl
          Ks2 U * CK1 * fpl
                            fpl Ksl))[i * (K! * fpl
                    fpl W1/H2
          CTo '
                                       48

-------
    The solution behavior can be understood by inspection of Equation 3-41.
At t -  0~t" the exponential  is  unity and  the  bracketed term  is  zero,  and,
therefore, so is C^ (0).   For  large  times the exponential approaches zero
and the solution approaches its steady-state value, the leading term.

    The  solution  to  the  equation  for  an instantaneous  discharge  and  a
continuous discharge are  demonstrated  on Figure 3-4.   As  shown,  the water
column  concentration  rapidly changes with time after  the  initial release
until steady-state is met.   For an  instantaneous release the chemical will
eventually settle,  react, or wash out of  the water column.   A continuous
discharge will cause  a  buildup of  the  chemical  to its steady-state
concentration.   In  the  bed,  there is  an initial  rapid  rate  of buildup
followed  by  a slow  sedimentation loss  for  an instantaneous  release  or  a
slow buildup  rate for  a continuous  release.   In the bed, the  time  to
steady-state  is. approximated by the time of the  slow buildup rate.

     The  time  to reach  steady-state  is  theoretically infinite  since  che
exponential  (Equation  3-41) never actually becomes exactly  zero.   However,
for  practical purposes,  it is  usual to  define the time to  steady-state as
 that time  for which  the  solution has  reached  a certain  percent of  the
 steady-state  solution,  say 90  percent.   It can be shown from Equation  3-41
 that:

                        -"".*«!* ',t *.!>«
 where:
     C ,  » • steady-state concentration
      TCss)
     At 90 percent of steady-state:
                              -Cl/t0 + V f i K9l
          	  _..__.   _                                       (3-44a)
          CT(ss)
                                       49

-------
     INSTANTANEOUS INPUT
     CT./CTX,

                   WATER
                        T/t,
                   BED
     CT2/CTQ
                         SLOW NATC-SCOl"CITATION
     CONTINUOUS INPUT
                                       •TO
                   WATER
                                        •T(SS)
                                        ••^

                                        •TO
                         t/t0


FIGURE 3-4. THEORETICALTIMETO STEADY-STATE

  FOR INSTANTANEOUS AND CONTINUOUS INPUTS
                       so

-------
so that

                       + K+fK)t:                             <>44b)
or
                       2.303                                        (3-44c)
         C90 '  l/co * Kj + fpl Ksl

where  2.303  - -In  (0.1).   Other percenciles  simply alter  the numerical
constant, but not the fora of the equation.

    Finally, Equation 3-43 nay be expressed as:


         ^. .  Wl + (Kl +  fpl K3l)t0] U (i . ^       )            (3-*S)
          o
so  that  the  ratio tgs/to  may be calculated for a given CT/CT(SS)  ratio  as  a
function  of  (^ +  Kfl>  Figure  3-5  shows Cg3/tQ  versus (^  * KSI)CQ  for
various  VCT(ss)  r"iOS'   Note" ChaC Che Css/Co  rati°  levels  °ff "  Che
lower values  of (Kj  *  K§I)CO-   This  Bcaas chac  Che  naximum  clme  "
steady-state can be  easily estimated.   For  example,  the  maximum  tsg/tQ
ratio with a CT/CKgg)  ratio of  99 percent is approximately 4.8.   In other
words, after 4.8 hydraulic  retention  times,  a steady-state condition  will
be  approximated in  the  water  column  for almost  any system  regardless  of
settling velocities  or  reaction  rates.
                                       51

-------
   10
                                                   LAKES » HESEBVQIUS
                                                   TIME TO STEAOV-STATE
                                                                      1000
         FIGURE 3-5. NORMALIZED TIME TO STEADY-STATE
                IN.WATER COLUMN SEDIMENTING CASE
    3.2.2   Bed  Interacting

    The cine  varying solutions which include resuspension  and  diffusion are
considerably  more complex than those  of  the sedimenting case.   The time
variable solutions for the mass balance equations for the receiving water
segment are derived in Appendix A.  The results are:
T1
           . c  (.,
             CtlC  J

                                                                    (3-46)
                                                                    (3-47)
where C..C) and C_2C) are the steady-state solutions, gt and g2  are  the
roots of the characteristic equation.  The formulas are given in Table 3-5.
                                     52

-------
       TABLE 3-5.   TIME VARIABLE SOLUTIONS FOR RECEIVING HATER SEGMENT





                                                              -g,
                                   .                         «  i
                              '2VS2
                         tl  -
where :
                i/c
         •i • Ki * (wi£pi * Vdi)/Hi

                       1*w2)  f2* Vd21/H2
         ST ' Sl * S2
and:
                     W./Q
                  Hl
 ag   is  computed using the plus sign

  g   is  computed using the minus sign
                                      53
                                                     (ST

-------
    It is easily seen that t - 0,  the  bracketed terns cancel and  Ccl(0)  -
C  (0) - Q\ the assumed initial conditions.   The form of the solutions  is
analogous to  the case  discussed above.   The  constant  terms  are  the
steady-state solutions and the  time  variable behavior is specified  by the
exponentials.   There  are  two  exponentials in each  solution,  corresponding
to the tvo coupled differential equations representing the water column and
sediment  volumes,  which  interact  to  produce the  resulting  time  variable
behavior .

    The  time  to  steady-state  is  governed  by  the  magnitudes  of  the  two
characteristic roots:  gj and g2,  which are given by the equations  in Table
3-5,  as  wen  as  the  coefficients  of the exponentials.   Hence, no  simple
expression is available for tgQ.

However, approximations  are  available which give an  insight  into the
magnitude  of  BI  and  g^   The approximation depends upon  the  observation
that  for  physically reasonable magnitudes of the parameters, the expression
in  the  radical (Table 3-5) is  small relative  to one.   This leads  co the
approximations:


                                 *

 where:
     ai  • Ki  * (wifpi  * Vdi)/Hi
          si * S2
 and K_ is the total apparent reaction rate.  The expressions Sj and  s2  are
 the sum,  respectively,  of the water  column  and sediment segment  reaction
 rates and transport  terms  expressed  as  equivalent reaction rates.   Hence,
 in this approximation, g^  is  the-sum  of  all  the water column'and  sediment
 reaction and transport rates.
                                       54

-------
    The ocher  race,  g2, Is, in  tnis  approximation,  cu.  —  - ........ —
apparent 'reaction- rate, 1^, and outflow rate,  l/tQl> modified  by  the ratio
s, (ST +  l/Col)«  «  9l is  large relative to s2, S2 is  significantly less
than ie + l/col'  Since *T iS Mually nuch smaller chan sl * S2 (the laccer
contains the sum of the transport terms), it is always  the case that:
         a  > r  +--> z
         gl > S   t   > g2
    Hence,  relative  to  the  simple  water  column example,  the  effect  of
sediment-water  interaction is  to produce  two  characteristic  roots,  one
larger and one smaller than K^ *
    The  time to  steady-state  may be  approximated through  the discussion
presented  above.   Certain practical  situations occur when  g{  » g2> i.e.,
for which:

 This  can occur if X. is small (due to small  degradation  rates,  ^ and KZ,
 and   small   sedimentation   rate,  Xs2)  or  where  sediment-water  particle
 exchange and/or  diffusive  exchange  is  large.

     In "  this  case, the  time  variable solution  behavior  has  two distinct
 phases  as  illustrated on Figure  3-6;  the  solution  rapidly  rises to  a
 plateau  concentration as e"gl  decays  to zero.

 This  occurs at  a time on the  order of t « 1/gj.   However,  the  second
 exponential is e"g2/gl which 'is  still approximately  unity since g1  » gj.
 Hence, the solution rises to  a plateau concentration  which can be  expressed
 as:
                                       55

-------
                       1 * 'ol 8I
                                                                (3-52)
                  4QO
300         1200
 TIME (days)
                                                   I6GO
                                2000
   FIGURE 3-6.'EXAMPLE OF TIME VARIABLE BEHAVIOR
                 CONSERVATIVE SUBSTANCE
Noce chac s_ Is  ehe  sum  of  all waeer column and  sediment  reaction and
transport  rates.  Hence, the solution  is  behaving  as  if  all  reaction and
transport  rates  remove chemicals from  the water  column.   The  reason for
this behavior can be  understood by considering the state  of  the  sediment
during  this time period.    For gl » g2,  the sediment  concentration  is
approximately zero since g2/g2  - gj  »  0,  e~*2e »  1,  and  g^Cgj - «2} '  l
for  t  »  1/g,  (see Equation 3-47).   Hence, transport  by  settling and
diffusion to the sediment  is  a  sink  and resuspension brings uncontaminated
solids  to the  water column which  provide a  further  sink.  The result  is
that all the transport processes are acting  as sinks  while the sediment  is
being contaminated.
                                   56

-------
    After the Initial plateau is reached, the water  column  and  the sediment
proceed toward equilibrium  at  approximately the same  rate.  This  phase  of
the process  is  controlled by the  first  exponential e"g2C  and  can be  much
longer  than  the  first  plateau  time scale.   The time  to  about 95  percent
equilibrium completion  can be estimated by  3/g2  since  e  » .05.

    Although the time varying solutions are quite  complex,  it is  shown that
the time  to  steady-state calculation  is  readily obtainable.   The  time  to
the first  plateau is estimated  as l/g1§ and  the  time to   steady-state  is
approximated by  3/gj.   Approximations of  gj arid  g2  are  functions of the
water column and sediment reaction rates  and the transport  term.   Table 3-6
summarizes  the  time  to first plateau,  the  time  to  steady-state and the
approximations of gj  and g2«

        . TABLE 3-6.   EQUILIBRIUM CALCULATIONS  BED-INTERACTIVE CASE
         Time  to  First  Plateau -
         Time  to  Steady-State (95 percent)  - 3/g2
    where :

         «1  '  Sl  * S2 * l/Col - St * 1/Col
          sl  • Kl *  fp2
          ST - 9l * S2
 3.3  Complex Models
     The  methodologies   described  in   previous  sections   simplify   the
 mechanisms and processes that effect  the  fate  of a toxic.  The application
 of these  methodologies  have a  two-fold advantage over  more  sophisticated
 analyses:   (1)  the equations  are easy  to use  and  can  be  solved  through
                                       57

-------
desk  top  calculations,  and  (2)  data  requirements  are  reduced;  the data
necessary  to  do more  sophisticated analyses  are not  available  for most
applications.

    The simplified  methodologies assume  complete mixing,  stationary bed,
equilibrium  partitioning  and  linear  transformation  kinetics.     In  an
investigation for a wide or deep lake  perhaps  the most  critical of these
assumptions is complete mixing.  These lakes may tend to have water quality
gradients over depth and width.   A completely mixed assumption,  therefore,
may  tend  to show the  results  in either  a positive or  negative  direction
depending  on  the  location in  the lake.  This  is not  to say  that the
simplified  methodologies  cannot  be used to  make  screening  or  order of
magnitude estimates, but if  a  stratified condition exists over  the problem
time  scale  or if longitudinal  gradients  are severe,  a more sophisticated
analysis may be warranted.

     Besides the  spatial  limitation  inherent  in  available  toxic models,
other  restrictions  may  also exist.   The transport,   transfer  and  trans-
formation   processes,  may be   handled   differently ' between models.   In
addition,  the  interaction between the  bed and  water  column as well  as  bed
movement  are  conditions which will vary  between  models.   The user must be
aware  of  these  differences as  well  as  the  restrictions  and  limitations
before  model  selection.

     Three  major sources  of  information  have summarized the complex  models
available.   The  reader is referred to  Book II,  Chapter  3 (USEPA,  1984);
 Book III,  (USZPA,  1984); and  Book IV,  Chapter  2  (USEPA,  1983), for  the
 detailed  discussions.    The following  sections  summarize some  of  these
 discussions which are  particularly pertinent to lake analyses.

     3.3.1  Steady-State Models

     The number  of  steady-state models  currently in the  public domain and
 applicable to  lakes  are limited  to  four.   The  four  available  models
 include:   CTAP  and SLSA  developed  by HydroQual for  the  Chemical Manufac-
                                       58

-------
curers Association,  EXAMS  aevelopea oy  c.£A ^wiiciio
Laboratory (ERL),  and MEXAMS developed  by Battelle Pacific Northwest
Laboratory  for  Athens ERL.   SLSA uses  the simplified approach  described
earlier in this section.

    Table 3-7 summarizes some  of  the key differences between these models.
The three-dimensional models  listed  all have the capability  of simulating
stratified  systems  or near-shore analyses.   The stratification  and near-
shore definition are  both  a  function  of the lake size  and  the compartment
number limits.  In  very deep  lakes, multi-layered  models  may"be desired to
reproduce  the  observed  stratification.    The  greater number of  layers,
however,  may   restrict  the   longitudinal  definition  if  the  number  of
compartments are approaching the model's 'limits.  Likewise, the compartment
definition  desired  near an outfall may  restrict  the  definition  for  the rest
of  the lake.

          TABLE 3-7.  SUMMARY  OF  STEADY-STATE LAKE TOXICITY MODELS
    Steady-State
       Model
      CTAP
      EXAMS
      MEXAMS
      SLSA
'Dimension
     3D
     3D
     3D
     CM
Maximum Number
 Compartments
Bed Type
                                                Load
425
100
100
1
S or M
S
S
S
Multi
Multi
Multi
Single
 S  • Stationary
 M  • Moving
 CM - Completely mixed
 In general, CTAP uses' first order kinetics and sums the various transforma-
 tion and degradation rates into one decay coefficient.  EXAMS is capable of
 handling  second-order  kinetics and  transformation processes  that  convert
 chemical  to  daughter  products.   MEXAMS,  linking  EXAMS  and MITEQ  can
 calculate  speciation,  and  dissolved,  adsorbed  and  precipitated  metal
 concentration.
                                       59

-------
    3.3.2  Tine Varying Models

    There  are  currently  six  eime-varying  models that  are  applicable to
lakes  or  reservoirs.'   These  include  CHNTRN,  HSPF,  TOXIC,  TOXIWASP, and
WASTOX.   The  chemical and sediment capabilities  as  well as dimensionality
and numerical  solution techniques  will  vary  for each  model.   Table 3-8
briefly summarizes some of the key aspects of  these models.

         TABLE 3-8.  SUMMARY OF TIME VARIABLE  LAKE TOXICITY MODELS
                                     •

                                                  Dimension
             CHNTRN                                3D
             HSPF                                  1D
             TOXIC                                 3D
             TOXIWASP                              3D
             WASTOX                                3D
    As  mentioned above, the  reader  is  referred  to other  EPA manuals  for
more detailed  discussions  of  these models.
                   •.
3.4  Model  Assumptions  and Limitations

    The models for  the  analyses  of organic  chemicals  and  metals  are similar
to those developed  for  constituents  which  are natural components  of
.ecological  cycles.   The  terms  relating  to  the  particular  form  and  its
interactions  with the dissolved component are  the  additional  components to
be incorporated.   The  reaction  and  transfer  mechanisms are  incorporated
with  the  transport phenomena  and input  functions  to define the temporal and
spatial distribution  of toxic substances in natural systems.  By virtue of
 their interactions with the  solids in  these  systems, it  is also necessary
 to analyze  the distribution  of  the various types  of  solids.   Furthermore,
 the exchange  between the  suspended  and  the  bed  constituents  may  be taken
 into  account.   The resulting models describe  the distribution,  accumula-
 tion, and transfer of solids  and chemicals in the water column and the bed.
                                  ••
                                      60

-------
1C Is not within  the  scope of this manual  to  describe the assumptions  and
limitations of  each  available model.  The  following sections describe  the
assumptions and limitations for the simplified  approaches  as well as  some
discussion pertaining to the uncertainties.

    3.4.1  Instantaneous Equilibrium

    Certain  chemical substances  have a  strong  affinity for  sorptiou  to
particulate  materials,  and  the subsequent transport of  such  particulate
chemical  forms may  be markedly  different  than for  the  soluble  chemical
phase.  It is  known  that -soluble  materials will be  sorbed onto  particulate
surfaces  in  a  reversible  reaction at  some rate  until  an  equilibrium  is
achieved.  Once equilibrium  is established,  the  relationship  between  sorbed
and  soluble  material  can  be described  by  various isotherms  such  as
Langmuir, Freundlich,  and  others.  In linear  portions of these  functions,
the relationship  between  particulate  and soluble forms of the material can
be  accounted  for  in  a simple  manner by  use  of a  solid-liquid  partition
coefficient.
                                            •
    The dissolved and particulate fractions may exist in  a state of dynamic
equilibrium where the rate of sorbing to particles  is equal  to  the rate of
desorbing  from particles.   The rates at  which chemicals  sorb to  or  desorb
from  particles is generally  fast  in relation  to  other phenomenon such as
lake-  detention  time or   kinetic  transformation  reactions.    Because  the
adsorption-desorption mechanisms  occur  rapidly, the basic equations  in the
simplified  approaches  assume this  phenomenon  occurs "instantaneously  and
that  soluble  and  particulate chemicals in the  water  column and sediment are
in  a  state of local  equilibrium.
                           •        •                      *

    The  validity of the instantaneous equilibrium assumption  may be  tested
by  comparing the  time  scale for chemical equilibrium to be established with
the time scales  for  the  other kinetic reactions:   photolysis,  hydrolysis,
and biodegradation.   Generally, equilibrium is  established on a time scale
of  minutes  to  hours while  the other transformation  and  removal reactions
have  time scales  on  the  order of days,  months  or  years.  As long as this
                                      61

-------
constraint  is   fulfilled,   instantaneous  equilibrium   is   a  reasonable
assumption."    For  those  chemicals  whose  sorption-desorption  mechanisms
proceed more slowly in comparison  to  their  transformation/decay reactions,
Che simplified  approaches  based on instantaneous  equilibrium, may  not be
adequate for evaluation of their environmental behavior.

    3.4.2  First Order Reactions

    In  the  simplified  modeling  frameworks,  the  reactions  which  remove
chemicals from natural water systems'are approximated as first order
kinetics as shown by Equation 3-53.

         dc m                                                        (3-53)
         dt     KC '
in which dc/dc  is the time rate of change of a chemical with concentration,
c, and  K is the decay  race.   This equacion states  chaC  Che  chemical  loss
race  is  proportional  Co  Che  amount of chemical available  in  a reaction che
speed of which  is defined  by  che  constanc,  K.   Individual values  for  K are
required  for  each  of the -transfers and  removal  mechanisms as discuss'ed  in
Section  7.0.   Values are  determined  from laboratory  and  field daca.    The
transfer mechanisms  are  discussed  in  che  following sections.

     3.4.3   Seeding.  Resuspension.  and Sedimentation

     Transfer  mechanisms  for  chemical substances  bound   to   particles  may
 involve   settling,   resuspension   and   sedimentation,   and   perhaps   bed
 transport, compaction and diffusion to the  deeper sediment.  These transfer
 processes become more  or less important depending on the  receiving  wacer
 context as  discussed  above.    In deep  lakes,  the  principal  particulace
 chemical  transport  mechanisms are  likely   to  be  settling  and  subsequent
 burial.   In  shallow lakes settling  and  resuspension may be the principal
 sediment  transport mechanisms of concern.
                                       62

-------
    In  general,   Che  simplinea  approacned
effects of'settling, sedimentation and resuspension.  The problem, however,
is  obtaining   the  measurements   representative   of   these   parameters.
Definition  of  these  transfer  mechanisms,  particularly resuspension,  are
difficult and may be critical to the evaluation.

    3.4.4  Water-Bed Diffusive Exchange

    Another  basic transfer  mechanism is  diffusive exchange  of  dissolved
substances between water column  and sediment.   To  some degree, the process
is  analagous to  the  water-air  exchange.    Once a  chemical  substance  is
introduced into the water column of a water body, a diffusive exchange will
take  place  to  transfer dissolved  substances to the  interstitial water in
bottom sediment.  The  process  will continue until  an  equilibrium is
achieved  between  dissolved  material   in  water   column   and   sediment
interstitial waters as affected  by  all  transport,  transfer,  and kinetic
processes.   If the  equilibrium  is  disturbed in any manner, for example, by
continual deposition  of  particles  with sorbed chemical which then cends co
desorb  on the bottom, diffusive exchange may continue with soluble chemical
being transported from  sediment interstitial waters to  the overlying water
column.  This  process  is  controlled by  concentration  gradients  which
develop in  thin  films at the water-sediment  interface.   The rate at which
transfer  occurs   is   a  function   of   diffusivity,   film  thickness   and
geometrical characteristics  of  water  column  and  sediment.    Therefore,
quantification of this  transfer- process requires a value  for  the molecular
diffusivity of  the chemical and  an estimate of the  film  thickness.    Each
factor may  vary  by an order of magnitude such  that the  overall process  may
have  a range of  two orders.

    At present,   the  diffusive  exchange  coefficient is a  parameter that  is
 difficult to measure by direct field testing.   This parameter  is usually
 evaluated through the model calibration analyses.
                                       63

-------
    3.4.5  Bed Characterization

    Sediment layers are  characterized  as  sedimenting, exchanging, or moving
beds.   Stationary beds are  sediments  which increase in  depth  due to
settling of solids from the water  column and virtually no resuspension of
sediment layer solids.   These sediments can  possess  significant chemical
concentration gradients over  depth.   Mixed beds  are  subject  to  both
settling and resuspension, but tend to be completely mixed over  the  top few
centimeters.  It  is  assumed  that both stationary and  mixed  sediments
undergo no movement in the direction  of  flow.  Moving  'beds  are subject to
both settling and resuspension.   They  are,  however, subject to shear forces
at  the sediment-water interface which tend to  move a dense  layer of
sediment solids along the direction of flow.
                                •

    The  simplified approaches  are designed  for  chemical  evaluations in
lakes  which  contain  either  mixed or  stationary bed.   More  complex models
would  be  necessary for provision  of  a moving bed.  CHNTRN, and HSPF are
models  that have the capability to simulate sediment  transport.

    While  much is  Known about  the fluid transport in most  natural  water
systems, the  understanding of bed  transport  is minimal.   It  is  appreciated
that while much work has  been done  in  both the  laboratory and field in
elucidating  the factors affecting  the transport of sands  and gravel,
comparatively  little has been accomplished with respect to clays,  silts and
detrital material.   Due  to  their affinity to adsorb many constituents,  it
is  this latter category which  is  of  major  importance  In the  analysis of
chemicals  in  natural systems.  Theoretical formulations as well as reliable
field  data is  particularly lacking in the littoral zones of  lakes.

     Other  questions  of paramount importance are related  to  the concentra-
tion,  depth,  velocity and dispersion  of mixed and moving bed  layers.  Rates
of  scour  and entrainment are  only  now  being  addressed.   The effect of
agglomeration and  flocculation on  the  settling  and  resuspension of  these
solids have not  been  fully clarified.
                                      64

-------
    The above considerations reiace  primarily  co  w*ic  i»«
of the chemical.  In addition,  the characteristics  of  the bed which affect
the dissolved component must  also be addressed more fully.   The diffusion
of  the  dissolved  chemical   through   the   interstitial  waters  and  the
interaction  with  other  constituents,  both  dissolved  and  particulate,
requires further study.

    3.4.6  Particle Sizes

    The total chemical concentration at any time is equal to  the sum of the
dissolved -and particulate  concentrations.   The tendency for a chemical  to
sorb  to particulate material  is highly  chemical  specific  and  will  range
from very weak  to strong.  The  amount adsorbed per unit  mass  increases with
increasing  concentration  of solute  and usually approaches  a limit as the
capacity of  the solid to  accumulate Is  reached.   The  affinity  of  a
particular  chemical   to   sorb   can  be  quantitatively  expressed  by   a
sediment-water  partition coefficient.

    The partition  coefficient  is not  only  dependent on the  cy?e  of
chemical, but different partition coefficients may be  observed for  the same
chemical with various  types of  sorbants.  For  example,  organic particulaces
or silty materials  may attract a certain chemical more  strongly than  sandy
materials.   Further,  different  size classes  of  particulate material,  in
 that  they may  reflect  different classes of  parciculates as  sands,  silts,
 clays,  etc., may exhibit  differing affinities,  and   partitioning,  for  a
 specific  chemical.   In  principle,  it  is most advantageous,  therefore,  to
 perform experiments and determine a chemical's partitioning  characteristics
 with  the  type of particulate  material  (suspended and bed sediment)  to  which
                                                     •         •
 it will come  in contact in the natural  environment.

    The simplified  steady-state and   time  variable  approaches  allow  for
 different  partition coefficients between  the water column and the  sediment.
 Partition coefficients may not vary for different  particle  characteristics
 within  the  same  system.    The.,  coefficient  must   reflect  the  overall
 partitioning  behavior  for all types   of  particles.    More   complex  models
                                       65

-------
(SERATRA, CHNTRN and HSPP)  can model three particle  sizes  and provide the
ability to vary  the  adsorption/desorption rates as a function of particle
characteristics.

3.5  Criteria for Model Selection

    Discussions  of  model  selection are  presented in  Book II,  Chapter  3
(USEPA,  1984),  Book  IV,  Chapter  2 (USEPA,  1983),  and  Book  III  (USEPA,
1984).   The  reader  is  referred  to  these reports   for  this   information.
These  discussions  are  directed towards  the  general considerations  which
must  be  evaluated.   The major concerns of model  selection are  presented;
these  concerns  are  both  technical   and  practical  in   nature.     These
discussions, however, are not  specific  to  the fate of toxics in lakes.

    The  steady-state and  time varying models represent two  levels  of
complexity  for  the modeling analysis of chemical  fate  in  receiving  waters.
At  the outset of  an analysis,  an evaluation  should  be  made   to  determine
which type of model  is  consistent with  the  problem characteristics.   The
state and dimensionality  of   chemical  distributions,  transport  character-
istics,  the purpose  of  the  analysis,  and availability of  data  are all to be
considered  in  this regard.

     3.5.1   Scate and Dimensionality

     Two basic criteria  which must  be  evaluated  in  selecting a  model  for
chemical impact analyses are  state and  dimensionality of  the  systems.  The
 state refers to the  time domain to which  a particular model  can be applied
 while dimensionality refers to  the  spatial dimensions over which the model
 can  simulate concentration gradients.   The analysis can  be  one-,  two- or
 three-dimensional with time domains of either steady-state or  time varying.
 For a proper analysis, the model  applied should be consistent  with both the
 time and space  scales of  the  chemical  concentration gradients in the water
 body.   Therefore,  before  analyses are  initiated,   it is  appropriate  that.
 in  situ chemical data are  reviewed  to  determine  both   the  temporal  and
 spatial scales  of chemical concentrations.
                                       66

-------
    In many  analyses  suincienc  cnemicsj.
directly" assess 'the  above  domains.    When  this  is  the  case,  other
conventional  pollutant data  such as  total  dissolved  solids,  chlorides,
temperature, dissolved oxygen, nitrogen,  or  phosphorus  may be available to
assess water  quality  space  and  time scales.   Other  factors such  as  the
variability of influent flow, depth, and  the variability of chemical inputs
may also help to define temporal and spatial dimensions.

    Guidelines  for  the  temporal  state  and  spatial  dimension  for which
available models  are applicable  are  presented  in Table 3-9.   In general,
SLSA, CTAP, and EXAMS  are applicable  to steady-state problems with CTAP and
EXAMS applicable for multi-dimensional   analyses.   The  SLSA  is  also
applicable  for  time  varying analyses  but  is limited  to  completely mixed
impoundments.  The more complex problem settings may require  the  use of one
of  the following  time  varying models:   HSPF,  CHNTRN, TOXIWASP,  and WASTOX.

                 TABLE 3-9.  SUMMARY  OF MODEL APPLICATIONS
           State
Dimension              	Model
       Steady-state     "   completely mixed            SLSA
                          multi-dimensional          CTAP,  EXAMS,  MEXAMS

       Time  varying        completely mixed       .     SLSA
                          one-dimensional            HSPF
                          three-dimensional          CHNTRN, TOXIWASP,
                                                     WASTOX
     3.5.2  Transport and Bed Considerations

     Water column and sediment layer  transport  should  also be considered as
 criteria for model  selection.   Transport  in  the water column  consists of
 both  advective  and/or  dispersive  transport.    Bed  conditions  include
 sedimenting, exchanging, and moving beds.  Table 3-10 presents water column
 transport and bed sediment conditions included in available models.
                                       67

-------
               TABLE 3-10.   CONDITIONS FOR MODEL APPLICATIONS
 Model
SLSA
CTAP
EXAMS


WASTOX
TOXIWASP
TOXIC
CHNTRN
 HSPF
    Water Column
Advective transport
Advective and
dispersive transport
            •
Advective and
dispersive

Advective and
dispersive
Advective and
dispersive


Advective. and
dispersive
 Advective  and
 dispersive
 Advective
                                     Bed  Condition
Completely nixed;
sedimenting;
exchanging

Completely mixed or
stationary; multi-
dimensional;
exchanging

Completely mixed;
simplified exchange

Sedimenting; three
sediment size
fractions; unequal
partitioning,
advective  sediment
process
             •
Multi-dimensional;
advective  and
exchanging

Completely mixed;
sedimenting;
exchanging

Mulel-dimensional;
sedimenting;
exchanging

Completely mixed
sedimenting;
multi-sediment  size
   Application

Completely   mixed
lakes
Steady-State

Unmixed lakes
Steady-State
Non-tidal lakes
Steady-State

General
Time Varying
General
Time Varying


Reservoirs and
impoundments
Time Varying

General
Time Varying


Unstratified  lakes
Time Varying
     3.5.3  Available Data  and  Purpose of Analysis


     Two additional factors to  be  evaluated when selecting  the model are  the

 amount of data available  and  the purpose  of the  analysis.   These factors
 help  to define  the complexity  of  the model required  for  the  impact

 analysis.
                                      68

-------
    If only limited data  exist  and no additional data are  to  be  collected,
application of  a  simple modeling  framework la recommended.   If a  complex
model  is  applied  in such  a situation, certain  model input parameters  may
remain as  unknowns  resulting in a weak technical  analysis.   A  preferable
approach in this  situation is  to  apply a simpler modeling  framework and to
recognize  that  the analysis  is  preliminary.

    Similarly,  if the purpose  of  an impact  analysis is to obtain  initial
estimates  of chemical  levels in a lake after  introduction  of  a  new source,
it is  better to use a less complex model  if applicable within the foregoing
guidelines.   If, however,  the problem under  evaluation  is  to develop  a
mixing zone for chemicals discharged to a lake then  it  may be necessary to
use multi-dimensional,  time varying models.   Finally,  if an  analysis is to
be performed for  WLA purposes, it  is  appropriate  to  collect  laboratory and
field  data;  select the  model  which  is most  physically realistic  for  the
problem  setting (simple  to  complex);  and calibrate  and  validate the model
prior  to  allocation determinations.
                                       69

-------
                                SECTION 4.0
                            MASS INPUTS TO LAKES

    Chemicals are introduced to natural water  bodies  by point sources such
as municipal  or  industrial  discharges and  by non-point  sources  such  as
combined'  sewer  overflows,  storm  sewer  inflows,  direct  urban  runoff,
tributaries, groundwater,  or non-urban overland  runoff.   The  purpose  of
this  section  is  to  introduce  these  sources  and  to  illustr.ce  data
requirements necessary to define chemical inputs.

    Book  VIII,   Part  i,  Chapter  3  (USEPA,  1982)  thoroughly   outlines
wasteloading  calculations.   This .manual will  not  attempt  to  duplicate
information  in  other reports but will highlight  certain aspects which  are
pertinent to  toxic analyses.  This  section will address sediment and
chemical mass  inputs from  both point  and  non-point sources.  Data  sampling
requirements to generate mass  inputs is also discussed.

4.1   Point Source Inputs

    Mass  loadings must be developed for  each  industry  and/or municipality
discharging  a  chemical of interest to  the water body under  consideration.
In many  instances, the  discharging entity may be the  best  source  of
information  as  many  states require  dischargers  to  conduct a  self  monitoring
program.    Daily  chemical  loading  and/or  effluent chemical  concentration
data  are  usually  part of this information.  Additional  sources  of  effluent
data  for certain chemials  may be  the state  regulatory agency  and perhaps
 the  USEPA  Surveillance  and  Analysis  Division.    If  mass   input  data  are
 available from these  sources,  field  sampling  may be conducted  to  generate
 data  necessary to perform the analysis.    Section 4.3 presents  details  of
 actual field sampling.
                                       70

-------
    The  principal, parameters  of  concern for  a  toxics  analysis  are  the
suspended solids mass  discharge  rate and the chemical mass discharge  rate.
The point  sources  are categorized by municipal  and industrial  discharges.
Municipal effluent  strengths will vary  by geographic  location, degree  of
industrialization  and community  size.    Industrial effluent  strengths  is
largely dependent on the type of industry.

    4.1.1  Sediment Inputs

    The  discussion  of sediment  inputs  is   divided  into  two  categories:
municipal  and  industrial.    The  following   sections  briefly  discuss  the
information  available  and  the methodologies  used for  estimating these types
of sediment  inputs.
\

    Municipal  Suspended Solids  Inputs.   The  best available   estimate  of
municipal  suspended solids  mass  discharge  rate  is from  the  records  of  a
self  monitoring program that Is required  by most states or from  the state
or  federal  agency  which issued  the discharge permit.   If, for one reason or
another,  monitoring,  data  is not  available,  the mass  input  of  suspended
solids may be  approximated  through  literature values, treatment  type,  and
community  population.   The mass  discharge rate is given by:

          W   - Q  x P  x Ce  x  (I  - e)
           ss   xp    P    ss
 where:
     U   • mass discharge rate of suspended solids (M/T)
      S3
      Q  - flow per capita per day (L /T)
       P
      P  • population served by municipality
     C   • concentration of suspended solids in raw domestic  sewage
       c • removal efficiency based on  treatment  type.
                                       71

-------
    The concentration of suspended solids  in  raw domestic sewerage usually
ranges from  100  to  350 mg/1 with  a  median of  about  220 mg/1.   Table 4-1
shows  average  water  withdrawals  per  capita  (Qp)  of  public  supplies  by
states and selected municipal systems; the average withdrawal nationwide in
1970 was  166 gal/capita/day (Book VIII, Part  1, USEPA,  1982).   Table 4-2
gives typical treatment plant performance with removal efficiencies (e) for
various  treatment  processes.   These three  sources of  information,   along
with community population,  provides  the' data to make  a first cut estimate
of the suspended solids mass discharge rate.

    Industrial Suspended  Solids Inputs.   Industrial  waste  discharges are
extremely difficult to generalize  due  to  the  wide variety of processes and
treatment schemes.  The user is  advised  to obtain as much data as possible
from on-site measurements.   If  local data is  unavailable, the best sources
of  information  on industrial waste  characterization  is  the  "Effluent
Guidelines" series of reports by the USEPA.  A report  is  available for each
of the USEPA point  source  categories.   These reports  contain typical  waste
characteristics  for  various processes within the point  source  category  as
well as  process water usage and  are  listed in the references at  the end  of
che  chapter.   Effluent  limitations  are  also given which  can be  used  as
upper  bound concentrations  in water  quality assessments.

    Table 4-3 contains some typical  pollutant loads which might result from
the  industries  shown.  Table  4-4  also presents  loads for some  industries
with expected  treatment  efficiency from best practicable treatment.   These
wastewater  treatment processes  are  representative, though not exhaustive,
of  techniques  which  may  be used.   Values in  Tables  4-3 and  4-4 are  for
comparison  only.   They  should'  not  be used  for load  projecting in  other
areas.

     4.1.2  Chemical Inputs

     The  priority pollutants which appear  in municipal  wastewaters come from
three  main  sources:   (1)  industrial  effluents,  (2)  non-point  source  runoff,
and (3)  domestic uses.   The proportion from each  category  will  also vary
from location  to location as' well.
                                       72

-------
            TABLE 4-1   IMTEK WITHDRAWALS FOR PUBLIC SUPPLIt     STAfE AM.I BY SELECTED MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS.  1970
	 	 —
	
LI
State | til ty ***«pi • •» ••
Alabama 806
Birmingham 576
Alaska 1790
Anchorage 769
Arizona . 787
Phoenix 864
Arkansas 501
Little Rock 784
California 685
Los Angeles 686
San Francisco 1424
Colorado '46
Denver 955
Connecticut 541
Hartford 564
Delaware •• '00
Florida 617
Miami 1208
Georgia 946
Atlanta 564
Hawaii '46
Honolulu '80
Idaho 897
Illinois "2
Chicago 871
Indiana 514
Indianapolis 508
Iowa 466
Des Mo 1 nee 514
Ksnsas 587
Wichita 508
Kentucky 114
Louisville
Louisiana
Shreveport
655
5*5
519
	
Gal/
213
152
471
203
208
228
133
207
181
181
176
19'
252
143
149
85
163
319
250
149
197
206
23'
. 204
210
141
114
123
141
155
134
81
171
144
117

t /
*•/
State. Clly C«plta-d
Main
Portland
Maryland
Baltimore
Massachusetts
Boston
Michigan
Detroit
Minnesota
St. Paul
Mississippi
Jackson
Missouri
Kansas City
Montana
Billings
Nebraska
Omaha
Nevada
Los Vegas
New Hampshire
New Jersey
Elizabeth
New Mexico
Albuquerque
New York
New York City
Rochester '
North Carolina
Greensboro
North Dakota
Fargo
Ohio
Akron

553
580
515
648
510
883
616
671
473
515
507
412
485
587
826
754
616
742
1154
1018
415
526
314
772
746
609
1046
663
644
492
477
515
594
492

Gal/

L/
Caplta-d State, City Caplta-d
146
151
116
171
140
211
168
177
125
116
114
114
128
155
219
199
168
196
105
• 274
128
119
81
204
197
161
276
• 175
170
no
126
116

1 JO

Oklahoma
Tulaa
Oregon
Portland
•Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Charleston
South Dskota
' Sioux Falls
Tennessee
Memphis
Texas
Dallas
Houston
Utah
Salt Lake City
Vermont
Virginia
Richmond
Washington
Seattle
West Virginia
Morgsntown
Wisconsin
Ml Iwsukea
Wyoming
Chenne
District of Columbia
Puerto Rico A
United States



492
595
712
1129
685
485
462
916
652
549
587
488
549
587
610
947
till
523
553
420
644
1200
1091
568
549
587
659
746
841
'99
326
628



Gal/
C*plta-d
110
157
188
298
181
128
122
242
172
145
155
129
145
155
161
250
294
118
146
III
170
117
288
150
145
155
174
197
222
211
86
166



Note:  L x 0.2642 • gal.
Source:  Metcalf and Eddy. 1979.

-------
          TABLE 4-2.   MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE


Influent:   -Raw-Medium  Scrength  Domestic  Sewage"  see  Scheme  Number  0  for
           Characteristics.
                                Effluent Concentrations (mg/1^,
                                (Z Total Removal Efficiencies )
Scheme Number
Raw wastewater

        1

        2

        3

        4

        5'

        6

        7
BOD
2°°(OZ)
130(35Z)
40(80Z)
25(88Z)
18(91Z)
18(91Z)
13(94Z)
\ m *w »•••
COD
5°°(OZ)
375(25Z)
125(75Z)
100(80Z)
70(86Z)
70(86Z)
60(88Z)
SS P.*
2°°(OZ)
l°°(25Z)
3°(85Z)
12(94Z)
7(96Z)
7(96Z)
l(99'.5Z)
(mgP/1)
l°(OZ)
9(10Z)
7(55Z)
7(30Z)
l(90Z) .
l(90Z)
l(90Z)
                                                                    N_TJ (men/11
                                                                        40
                                                                           (OZ)
                                                       32

                                                       26
                                                                        (20Z)
                                                       24
                                                       22
                                                                        (35Z)

                                                                        (40Z)

                                                                        (45Z)

                                                                        '(90Z)
    S(99Z)
                             15
                               (97Z)
                             1
(99.5Z)
L(90Z)
(95Z)
      c         for  waatewater  treatment  are  for  the approximate  concentration
  range, as measured by BOD5, of 100 < BOD5 <. 400, («g/l).
Scheme No.
    0

    1

    2

    3
                 Process
                 No treatment

                 Primary

                 Primary, plus Activated Sludge (Secondary Treatment)
                                                                    Filter   (High
       5


       6


       7
Primary,   Activated   Sludge,   plus
Efficiency or Super Secondary)

Primary,  Activated Sludge.  Polishing  Filter,   plus  Phosphorus
Removal and Recarbonation

Primary,  Activated Sludge, Polishing Filter, Phosphorus Removal,
plus Mitrocen Stripping  and Reearbonation

Primary Activated  Sludge,  Polishing Filter, Phosphorus Removal,
Nitrogen  Stripping Recarbonation,  plus  Pressure  Filtration

Primary,  Activated Sludge,  Polishing Filter, Phosphorus Removal,
Nitrogen   Stripping   Recarbonation,  Pressure   Filtration,  plus
Activated Carbon Adsorption
   Source:  Meta Systems, 1973
                                           74

-------
                               TABLE 4-1.  TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL OISCHAtMIK  POLUiTANT CONCENTRATIONS


Induatry

Primary Metal £
CH. Braaa RodH
Roof Inn Material*
Steel Plate. Ulrec fc
Petroleuai (General)
Oil Production ( ID-
oil Production ('2 )c
oil Production (11)
Paiter (General)
Pupurboaril
Paper fe
Primary Inorganic
Alky Lead Fluoro
Hydrocarbon* £
Inorganic Acid*.
Prliaary Organic
Cauatlc Cheat ca la
Plant Food
PIlMJ

•g/MOO Ib*

.2-1.6
0.04
0.01
0.004
0.0115
O.OOJ
0.001
0.001
0.015
0.017
0.024
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.021
0.001

BOD
Ib/IOOO Ib

O.I
11.6
0.56
1.1
0.57
0.4S
0.4S
18
19.6
12.6
0.2-1.5
0.19
0.08
1-1.9
1.24
0.01

CO»
Ib/IOOO Ib
.
0.5
25.7
2.7
1.7
2.1
1.1
2.9
55
64.8
41
0.89
0.52
4.9
1.41

• TSS
Ib/IOOO Ib

0.02
14.2
5.1
O.5U
0.86
0.65
28
U. V
11. 1
5-10
0.15
5.37
19.9
0.01

Total N
Ib/IOOO Ib
12
0.07
0.14
0.04
0.4
0.11
0.16
0.24
"
0.05
0.01
0.01-0.7
0.01
0.04
1-7
1.27
1.17

Total P
Ib/IOOO Ib
15
-o
-0
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01

0.8-9.0
0.02
0.15-0.1
0.1
0.14
Heavy
Hetal
Ib/IOOO Ib
55-242
0.11
1.2
0.001
0.05
0.01
0.04

0.05-0.1
0.11
0.01-0.02
1.69
0.02
Oil and
Creaae
Ib/IOOO Ib
_
0.68
0.12
0.15
0.14
0.09
0.11

0.06-2
O.I
0.06
0.05-0.08
0.24
0.02
'llnlta ara nllllon galIana of pollutant par  1000  Ib. of  flnlahed product
 .liaiaer Engineer a. 1969
^Puaraun. Storm. Sal lech. 1969

-------
      TABU  4-4.  SUMMARY OF CURRENT AND PROIECTED UASTELOAOS IN ONE REGION 208 AREA (BY SIC CODE)
Bust Practicable Waste Reduction Technology
Current Loadings

U-
NO*
301
202
204
20)
208
J 211
22-
226
251
265
27-
28-
32-
35-
36-
379
9999

SIC Group
Neat Products
Dairy Products
tiraln Hill Prods.
Bakery Proda.
Soft Orlnka
Tobacco Man.
Textile Hill
Dying & Pin.
Furniture
Paperboard Con.
Print. & Pub.
Chen. 4 Allied P.
• Stone, Clay P.
Machinery
Elect. Eqlp.
Tranap. Equip.
Non-Manuf .
Hun. UUTP
HflD
(Ib/day)
Sewer
1523
973
IBO
915
130
2024
2530
0
0
245
0
64
0
32
659
100
1374
0
ss


Expected Projected
Reductions
(Ib/day)
Sewer Description
1059
40U
50
910
40
1750
2173
0
0
150
0
29
0
79
402
100
170
0
Anaerobic Lagoon to Stabilisation Pond
Anaerobic Digestion & Clarification
Oxidation Ditch 4 Clarification
Rotating Blo-Fllters 4 Clarification
Fixed Activated Sludge-
Activated Sludge (E.A.) & Clarification
Activated Sludge 4 A Inn- Aided Clarlf.
Carbon Adsorption & Clarification

Screening. Ext. Aeration. Clarification

Activated Sludge 4 Clarification
Stilling Ponds. Water Recycle
Ollt Crease Traps
Ion Exchange (for Plating Process)
Oil 6 Crease Traps
See Text
Upgrade Six Largest Plants
BOD
9O
85
85
85
84
85
85
75

35

85
30
50
10
5O
70
BUU
SS (Ib/day)
(X) Sewer
85
90
75
65
»s
/S
60

65

75
70
65
90
65
90
152
71
27
140
53
304
380


159

10

16
593
5O
412
•
Loadings

(Ib/day)
Sewer
117
40
11
119
14
418
541


51

18
oa
to
40
17
Varies for
Each Plant
Totals
10469
                             7312
                                                                                              2367
                                                                                        1690

-------
    In  1978,  the OSEPA  Initiated a  project  to  systematically  study  the
occurrence and  fate  of the 129  priority  toxic pollutants  in 40 publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs).   The scope  of the project  included  extensive
sampling  at  geographically distributed  POTWs  representing  a  variety  of
municipal  treatment   technologies,   size  ranges   and   industrial   flow
contributions.  The results  of this project are  reported in  "Fate  of
Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment Works,"  (USEPA,  1982),  and
project summaries are shown in  tables  in Appendix  B  of  this manual.

    Tables B-l  and B-2 summarize the  occurrence of  priority  pollutants  in
POTW  influents  and effluents.    A total  of   102  priority pollutants  were
measured at least once above detection limits.   However, only 40 of  these
were  detected  in  10  percent   or  more of  these samples  and  likewise,  24
pollutants were measured in SO  percent or  more.

    The  results  of  the  effluent  sampling   indicate  chat   90  priority
pollutants were detected;  30 were  detected  in 10  percent or  more 'and  only
12  were detected'in  50  percent  or  more of the  samples.   In both  the
influent  and  effluent  samples,  copper,   cyanide,  and  zinc were the  most
commonly measured pollutants.

    Table  B-3 shows  the  average  and median  influent concentrations  for che
priority  pollutants detected in more  than  50  percent of  all influenc
samples.   The  first  column is  the average of  the average from  each  of the
40  POTWs.   In  other  words, an  equal weight  is assigned  to each  POTW.   The
second  column gives  the median value from the  same data base.   In Table B-4
percent removals  are presented  for  two subgroups of  analytical data:
removals  where  the  priority pollutant  average influent  concentration was
greater than  zero,  and  removals when the  plant  average influent  concen-
 tration was  significantly above the pollutant's detection limit,,   For the
 purposes  of  Table B-4,  "significantly  above the detection  limit"  was
 defined as four times the most  frequent  detection  limit.  This minimizes
 the effect of  the  detection  limit on calculating  percent  removals.   The
 number of data  points  for each subgroup is indicated by  N.

-------
    Table B-4 shows chat 50  percent  of the POTWs sampled  achieved minimum
priority pollutant metal removals ranging  from  35  to 97 percent.   For the
selected organic  priority  pollutants 50 percent  of the  POTWs achieve
minimum  removals  of  51 percent  to over  99 percent.   Many  of  the organic
removal  rates  that  are close  to 100 percent occur  primarily  because the
average  pollutant  concentration in  the  influent was - slightly  above  that
pollutant's  detection  limit  and the  pollutant was not  detected  in the
effluent sample.  This is illustrated in Table  B-4 by cocparl«.S the number
of  sample  points between the  two different  subgroups.    For  many  of the
organic  pollutants,  there  were  an insufficient number of  meaningful  data
sets to draw accurate conclusions about pollutant removal rates.

    Table B-5 summarizes the median  removals  for selected  conventional and
priority toxic pollutants by the various types  of  treatment plants sampled
tn  the 40 POTWs study.  The  types of treatment  plants are activated sludge,
trickling  filter,  pure oxygen activated  sludge,  and  rotating biological
contactors (RBC)  plants; an  aerated  lagoon,  and four treatment plants that
have  both activated  sludge  processes and trickling  filters   in  parallel
modes.
                   • .

    Table  B-5  shows  that  among  the  treatment   plants  examined,   trickling
filters,  activated  sludge,   the  RBC,  and  the pure oxygen  systems achieved
good  removals  of conventional pollutants and most of  che   measureable
priority pollutants.  At   those  plants  that   had  activated sludge and
parallel trickling  filtration  plants,  the  activated  sludge  plants appeared
to  remove slightly more  priority pollutant metals  and organics  than the
trickling  filter  plants.  However, for some parameters the  trickling filter
plants  achieved  higher removal  rates.

    Primary  treatment was  less  effective  than  any secondary treatment for
conventional and priority  pollutant  removal.   It should be noted that the
primary effluent  samples  from  this study  may not be representative  of
primary treatment plants.   The  major  reason   is that  secondary  treatment
plants   generate  a much greater -volume  of  sludge   than  primary  treatment
plants, and  many of  the  sludge processing  side  streams are  returned to the
                                      78

-------
primary tanks.  This often  causes  the  influent  to the primary  tanks  to  be
ouch  higher  in organic  loading than  the influent  to  a  typical  primary
treatment plant.   Nevertheless,  primary treatment removed from  10  percent
to  57 percent  of priority pollutant metals,  from  0  to 57  percent  of
priority pollutant metals and  from  0  to 56  percent of  the priority
pollutant organics.   Tertiary treatment  was  slightly more effective than
average  secondary   treatment   for  removing  conventional   and  priority
pollutants based on eight plants that  had either  mixed media  filtration or
polishing ponds.

    The  mixture of priority  substances  found in municipal  influent will
depend primarily on the mixture of industries contributing flow.  Table B-2
contains 42  of the  129  priority pollutants categorized by  the industrial
effluents  in which  they  will likely  be  found.    This  table is based  on
screening data  provided by  the  USEPA (Neptune,  1980).   The 42 which  appear
are those which most frequently appeared  in the screening data.  The  intent
of  the table  is not  to  imply  that  these chemicals are necessarily the most
problematic  (i.e., carcinogenic,  toxic)  but only  that  they  are  the aosc
common.  If  data  for a particular  priority pollutant is  necessary, sampling
of  the influent  and  effluent  of  the muicipal  or  industrial plant  is
recommended.

4.2  Non-point  Source  Inputs
                               i
    There  are  many non-point  sources of  sedment and  chemicals  in both
 non-urban  and urban areas.   Suspended solids,  for  example,  may originate
 from  tributaries, phytoplankton growth,  shoreline erosion,   or  atmospheric
 loadings.   In addition,  agricultural runoff may be critical  in  rural areas
 while combined sewer overflow may be  critical in urban  areas.  Again,  the
 reader is  referred to "Water Quality Assessment, A Screening Procedure  for
 Toxic  and  Conventional  Pollutants,"  Part  I,  page  239   for  detailed
 discussion of  the non-urban and  urban processes.   The following  section
 briefly describes the major  waste sources and the available methodologies
 to evaluate non-point  source  inputs.

                                       79

-------
    In recent years, there has been  extensive  Investigations, research and
reporting"of non-point  source  waste  inputs.  These methods,  however, have
been primarily directed towards evaluation  of  conventional pollutants mass
loadings such  as BODs,  nitrogen and  phosphorus,  suspended  sediment  and
coliform  bacteria.     Limited  methodologies   have   been  developed  for
assessment  of chemical movement.

    4.2.1  Non-urban Runoff

    In  many cases,  it  may  be unlikely  that  specific  chemical compounds
exist in the non-point  sources.   Hence,  it is appropriate to evaluate the
potential  for  the chemical of concern to  be  detected  in these non-point
sources.   Where  there  is a  potential,   then  specific  field  sampling is
recommended.   Where no  potential exists,  the  analysis may  proceed using
only point source inputs.
                                                •
    Agricultural  runoff  may  be a major  source of -solids  and/or chemical.
Perhaps Che  raosc  widely known no-urban waste inpuc  equation  is  che
Universal  Soil Loss  Equation  (USLE)  (Wischmeir  and  Smith,  1960).    This
equation Is applicable to a wide  variety of land uses  and  in  many instances
data has already  been collected for  factors included in  the  equation.   This
equation is'particularly applicable  for estimating sediment  loading  through
an   agricultural   environment.      Parameter   values   for   silviculture,
construction and  mining are  less  documented and  the user may  find  the  USLE
equation more difficult to use for these environments.

    The  primary group of coxic  chemicals  that are of concern in  agricul-
tural  or forested  settings  are   the pesticides.   The  key processes which
control  the volume  of washoff  from  the field  surfaces include the  rate of
accumulation  at  the watershed  surface;   the  loss  rate  due to  leaching,
runoff or  reaction; and  the partitioning characteristics  between the
dissolved  and  sorbed phases.   One  methodology for  assessment of  chemical
movement  through  agricultural lands  is  developed by a  USEPA model,  the
Agricultural Runoff Model (ARM). .-Other models Include  Simulation  of Water
Resources  in Rural  Basins  (SWRRB),  and Hydrological  Simulation Program  -
                                       80

-------
Fortran (HSPP).  However, some of  these  models and others of the same  type

can be very complex and require a substantial committment of work resources

to use effectively.


    4.2.2  Urban Runoff


    Toxic  pollutants  and  solids  loading  rates   in  urban  watersheds  are

introduced by a variety of mechanisms.  The loading of metals and solids to

street surfaces is estimated in the same manner as conventional  pollutants.

In these cases, some' well documented stormwater runoff models,  such as  SWMM

may be utilized.


    4.2.3  Phytoplankton Growth


    Phytoplankton growth may be a  significant  source  of  solids  in  a lake or
impoundment.  As an example, Table 4-5 shows  the  estimated  suspended solids

loading to Saginaw  Bay in  1979.   In this case, the phytoplankcon  component

accounts for 44 percent of  total solids  loadings.

                   • •

      TABLE 4-5.  AVERAGE  1979  SUSPENDED  SOLIDS LOADINGS  TO  SAGINAW 3AY


                   	Source	        Kilograms/day

                    Saginaw  River                  351,500
                    Other Tributaries               89,700
                    Shoreline Erosion              129,000
                    Atmospheric                    37,800
                    Phytoplankton                  473.300

                        Total.                 1,081,300
     One method  for estimating  solids concentration  due  to  phytoplankton
 growth is  to construct  a nutrient/eutrohication   model.    This  type  of
 analysis  can  be complex  and could  require  considerable  effort.    For  a
                                       81

-------
detailed discussion of the types of methodologies  available,  the  reader is
referred to Book  IV, Lakes,  Reservoirs  and Impoundments,  Chapter  2 -
Nutrient/Eutrophication Impacts.

    An estimate of the suspended solids concentration due to algal activity
may also be made from chlorophyll-a measurements.   Typically,  in  a natural
environment, there exists a carbon to chlorophyll-a ratio which ranges from
30 to iO ug/1-c/ug/l-chl-a.  Also, typically, the ratio of suspended solids
to carbon  usually  ranges  from 1.4 to  2.5.   Therefore,. the  range  of   the
suspended  solids  to  chlorophyll-a ratio is  approximately 85  to  250.   An
easy  estimate 'of  the suspended solids  concentration due  to  algal activity
can be  calculated.   For example, if the chlorophyll-a concentration is 40
ug/1,  then the  suspended solids  concentration  due  to algal  activity is
estimated  to be between 3.4 and 12.5 pg/1.

    If  the  settling  rate  (W.)  is assumed, then a loading rate'of solids  (W)
due  to algal  activity may  also be  estimated  through  Equation  (3-3a).
Typical  phytoplankton settling  rates range from 0.5 to  1.0 meters/day.
                   * •
    4.2.4   Atmospheric Loadings

    Many organic  pollutants  are emitted into the atmosphere and eventually
settle  out  directly onto  water or  watershed  surface, where  chey become
available  for  transport.     The  mass discharge  of organic  pollutants
delivered  to the receptor is  calculated by  first  determining the  settling
velocity from the  atmosphere  to  the watershed  and then the dry deposition
 loading.

     Atmospheric loadings may be  a significant  component  of  the total
 chemical loading to  a lake.   As  an  example,  Table 4-6 shows  the  estimated
 range of  PCB  loadings  to the Great Lakes.   As  indicated, the atmospheric
 loadings range from  7 to 92  percent  of the  total load  depending on the  lake
 and assumptions.
                                       82

-------
   TABLE 4-6.   ESTIMATED RANGE OF CONTEMPORARY  TOTAL  PCB  LOADING  (kg/yr)


Lake
Superior
Michigan
Huron
Erie
Ontario

.
Atmospheric
755-7550
530-5310
340-3410
230-2290
180-1830


b
Tributary
630-1890
460-1380
680-2040
230-690
330-990
Municipal
and e
Industrial
5-60
70-700
10-130
220-2180
130-1260
Atmospheric
Load as

Total
1390-9500
1060-7390
1030-5580
680-5160
640-4080
Percent of
Total
28-92
20-91
14-83
7-84
7-80
aAtmospheric loading. ranges:   precipitation,  10-100  ng/1; dry  deposition,
 1.2*10"6 to 1.2" 10^ g/m -yr.
tributary loading <§  10-30  ng/1,  except Saginaw Bay  (#10) where  tributary
 input data were directly available.
Municipal and industrial direct point  source  loading <§ 0.1 to  1.0  ug/1 9
 municipal direct point source flows.
    4.2.5  Tributary Inputs

    Data  for tributary inputs  may be  gathered  from the  USGS or  state
agencies which  maintain  routine  monitoring stations on many  water  bodies.
As  chemical  Input  data for other  sources  are usually not  available, wich
the possible  exception of  pesticides in overland  runoff,  they must eicher
be  estimated  from desk top procedures or develped  from field sampling.

4.3 Data Sampling Requirements

    As  discussed,  effluent  sampling  should be  conducted  when  data on
chenical  nasa inputs are not available.   In addition, if  it  is suspected
that  several point  or non-point  sources  contribute significantly  to the
chemical  compound  of  interest in  the water  body, they  should  be  sampled
concurrently  with  any  water quality  field  studies.
                                      83

-------
    4.3.1  Problem Time Scale

    Before sampling  is  initiated,  the characteristics  of  the problem  must
be defined so that sampling  logistics  can be developed consistent with the
problem  time  scale.   The  problem  time  scale  is generally  related  to  the
time scale of water quality impacts.

    In  most  situations,  Ihfc effl-ant  chemical  load  should  be  specified
within and throughout a  period  of  time equal  to the time to  steady-state.
The time  to  steady-state is a  function of  the  lake's physical  properties
and the  kinetic  characteristics of  the  chemical.   Section  3.2 presents  a
simplified approach  to estimate the  time  to  steady-state which then  governs
the duration of sampling.

   .It  is  appropriate  to note, in  this regard,  that for strongly  sorbing
chemicals  which  are  refractory, the time  to steady-state in  bed  sediments'
may be quite long.   Hence,  an  analysis of an existing  situation,  estimates
of mass inputs of chemical over a  lengthy period may be required.   In  such
situations, the time scale in the sediment governs  the  problems  rather  than
                  •.
that in the water column.

    When   practical,  chemical   inputs  should  be   specified   within   the
characteristic  time  scale.   If chemical  loadings  are relatively  steady,
only a  few measurements  may be required.   If  chemical loadings  are highly
variable,  then more  samples within a characteristic time  scale are required
to develop a representative  input value.

    4.3.2  Sampling  Frequency

    The  number  of  samples to be taken within  a  given period  is  a function
of  the accuracy required for the  analysis.   It  can be shown  that  the
standard  error  of  the mean from a set of samples  is inversely proportional
to  the  square root of the  number of  samples  and  is given  by:

          a  •  a/ /n
           A
                                       84

-------
where:
    a  • standard error of the mean
     0 • standard deviation of sample set
     n • number of samples
    This means  that  for  a sample size of n -  16,  the measured  variance  of
the mean is probably within 25 percent of the  true variance (I/  15 - .25).
yor comparison  purposes,  a sample size of n - 4,  the measured  variance  is
probably within 50 percent of the true variance.

    An illustration  is presented  for  two  hypothetical lakes shown on Figure
4-1.  Lake  A and  Lake B have hydraulic retention  times  of 60 days  and 240
days,  respectively.    The same  type of  toxicant  is discharged  to  each.
Assuming conservative  behavior of the toxicant,  the problem  time  scale  as
well  as  the recommended  sampling duration is  equal  Co the  time co equili-
brium.  The  recommended  frequency of  sampling, assuming  35 percent accuracy
(n  - 8),  Is weekly  for Lake  A and  monthly for  Lake  B.    Figure  4-1
demonstrates  both  the  frequency  and duration  of the  monitoring  for the wo
lakes.   As  shown,  a discharge monitoring program  is  largely dependent upon
lake  characteristics and perhaps  less dependent on the discharge Itself.

     The  necessity of periodic monitoring of  the load with time as opposed
co  relying on  single  grab or composice  samples  Is  shown by  the effluent
load data  by Lake A.   It is observed  chat  the last  load characterization
shows an effluent chemical  load  to  the  lake  of approximately  1.2 Ibs/day,
much less  than  the daily average load of 18 Ibs/day.   If a grab sample had
been collected  during this period, the modeling analysis would  be based on
an effluent load equal  to approximately  60  percent of  the average load to
which the  majority of the lake is responding.   In addition, if  a composite
were collected over  Che entire day,  rather  than  periodic  sampling, the
 analysis would be based  on  the  correct  average daily load.   What would be
 missing, however,  is  the definition within  the day  which may  add  to the
 understanding  of   possible  receiving  water  variability   in  chemical
 conoentration data.
                                       85

-------
          LAKE A
                                        LAKES
0:
        V = I.6xl08ft3

        Q.sQgs 30cfs

        tQs 60 days
                                      V= 2.5 x I09ft3

                                      Qs 120 cfs

                                      t0s 240 days
 Q


 O —
UJ**
z
30


«0



30


20


10
                                      .SO
                                 O
                                 <
                                  UJ
                                  Z
                                  u
30


20



10
      S/l 4/1 9/1 •/! 7/1 •/!«/! IO/I
                                        3/1 */i 9/1 •/1 r/i a/i «/< 10/1
       t0= 60 days


 /. 2 MONTHS OF WEEKLY SAMPLING
                                        t0= 240 days


                                 A. 8 MONTHS OF MONTHLY SAMPLING
  FIGURE 4-1. LAKE ILLUSTRATION SAMPLING FREQUENCY
                              86

-------
    4,3.3  Measurements  of  Chemical Inputs

    During field sampling of  effluents or tributary sources, samples should
be  analyzed  for  total chemical,  including  dissolved  and  particulate
fractions and suspended solids concentration.   In addition, flow rates are
also required for calculation of mass inputs.

    Mass  input  loads  are  determined  from  chemical  concentration  and
associated flow rate data in  accordance  with the  following:

         W-QC                                                       <4'l)

in which W is the mass input  of chemical (total,  dissolved  or  particulate),
Q  is  flow  rate and  c  is  chemical  concentration (total, dissolved or
particulate) as  measured at  the indicated  flow rate.   For most model
applications, mass  inputs  are  usually expressed  as total chemical  although
dissolved and particulate forms should  be  measured.
                                      87

-------
                                SECTION 5.0

              DETERMINATION AND ASSESSMENT OF MODEL PARAMETERS


    In many  cases, it  is advantageous  to  conduct  water  quality  field
studies for  the collection  of  physical, chemical and  biological  data that
are required  for  modeling analysis.   The .basic objectives  for conducting

such field studies are:


         to determine the distribution  of  chemical  in  the water column and
         sediments of a natural water body;

         to measure existing effects of point source  loads  and background
         influences on water quality and water uses;

         to collect sufficient data  on  chemical  inputs,  water quality, and
         lake characteristics to permit the calibration and validation of a
         mathematical model for problem evaluation;
                  •.
         to  facilitace  che  projection of probable  wasteload impacts  ac
         ambient  conditions different  Chan  those  prevailing during  the
         field study with the validated model; and

         to  support the determination  of  allowable chemical discharges and
         WLAs  which  will   maintain   applicable   ambient  standards  and
         beneficial water usage.

    In order  to achieve these objectives,  a plan of study  must  be developed

which  includes the following tasks:


         definition of problem scales;

         location and magnitude of chemical inputs  (Section 4.0);

         selection of sampling stations;

         determination of measurements  to  be obtained; and

          identification of  sampling  procedures,  frequency  and  duration.

                                      88

-------
5.1  Problem Time Scales

    The appropriate cime scale of  che  problem is  again approximated by the
time  to  steady-state calculations  presented in  Section 3.2.   Sufficient
data should be collected on  inputs  and water quality responses during this
period so that reasonable  average  values can be  used  for the steady-state
analyses.

    The  time  scale of  chemical  build-up  in bed  sediments can  be highly
variable.  The chemical build-up in bed sediments is caused by diffusion of
chemical from the water column into  the bed and by the initial exchange of
particulate  chemical   between   water   column  and  bed  by  settling  and
resuspension.    In  situations where  the  chemical  has  weak partitioning
characteristics and is primarily  in the  dissolved  state  in  the water
column,  chemical build-up  in the sediment  will be controlled primarily by
diffusive exchange,  a relatively slow  process.   For strongly partitioning
chemicals,  chemical   build-up   in  the  sediment   nay  be  dominated  by
parciculace exchange  through  settling  and resuspension.

    Guidelines  for  time scales  in  sediments are approximate  at  best.  In
lakes,  time  scales  may be in the  order of  months  to  years.   From  a  water
quality  field survey standpoint,   practicality dictates  that  the  problem
time  scale as defined for  the water  column  will be  used as  a  s?uide  for nose
intensive field  work.  However,  as the time scale  for  bed  sediments may be
substantially  longer,  it  would be  desirable  to  obtain chemical  loading
information periodically over a  roughly equivalent  period of  time.

5.2  Location  of Sampling  Stations

     In lakes,  concentration  gradients are likely to be a function  of  depth
and width as  well as flow and time of  season.  Sampling  locations  in  lakes
 should therefore be  oriented around  the sources so that gradients  will  be
measured.  This usually  calls  for closely spaced sampling stations  near
 outfalls and  more  widely spaced-stations  at  distances from the  outfall.
When appropriate, it may  be  advantageous  to perform a dye or  tracer  study
                                       89

-------
to determine Che mixing  characteristics of the lake  or  Impoundment.  This
type of study win also give insight to the appropriateness of a completely

mixed assumption.


    Figure  5-1  shows  three different  lake configurations;  one  which  is
completely  mixed  throughout its volume  and two  which do not  mix  rapidly

enough to be completely mixed throughout.  Potential  sampling locations  for
each lake are also  shown on Figure 5-1.  For slowly  mixing  Lakes A and  C,

samples can be collected at each station and at various depths from  surface
to bottom.   In Lake  B,  which is mixed  over depth and  width,  samples  are

required only at a single point in the water column, .perhaps mid-depch.


5.3  Water  Quality Measurements


    For calibration purposes, water quality data  are  required in  boch  water
column and  sediment as shown  in Table 5-1  and discussed  below.


             TABLE  5-1.   SUMMARY OF WATER  QUALITY MEASUREMENTS
                                WATER  COLUMN
 I.   dissolved  chemical
 2.   particulate  chemical
 3.   suspended  sediment
 4.   particulate  organic carbon
                                        5.
                                . BED SEDIMENT
Supplemental
1.   conservative tracer
     - total dissolved solids
     - chlorides
     - conductivity
2.   temperature
3.   pH
4.   light intensity wich depth
     (ultraviolet penetration)
     particle size distribution
 Required
 1.  dissolved chemical
 2.  particulate chemical
 3.  solids concentration
     (fine fraction)
 4.  porosity
 5.  particulate organic carbon
Supplemental

1.   measure with depth
2.   particle size distribution
3.   pH
                                       90

-------
        CHEMICAL
          LOAD
          (A) NON-MIXED
             LAKE
                                 CHEMICAL
                                   LOAD
  /ybout
    Qin
Q our
                             (B)MIXED LAKE
  LffffMO'
    $ SAMPLING STA.
     LOCATIONS
                (C) NON-MIXED LAKE
                   VERTICAL PROFILE
FIGURE 5-1. EXAMPLE SAMPLING STATION LOCATIONS
                         91

-------
    5.3.1.  Water Column

    Analyses should  be performed for  che  chemical of concern in  both
dissolved and participate  form.   The concentration of  suspended  solids at
each  sampling  location  should  also  be  determined for subsequent  use to
estimate  settling and  resuspension  rates.    Particulate  organic  carbon
(f  ), which may strongly  influence  organic chemical  partitioning  should
also be measured.   in more advanced modeling applications,  the fQC should
be evaluated for various particle size  categories.   Additional data which
may be useful are measurements of conservative tracers  in the water column.
These tracers are useful to evaluate the mixing characteristics in lakes.

    Temperature  and  pH measurements may be  required  to  modify laboratory
reaction  kinetics to lake  conditions.   For photosensitive  chemical,  data
should be gathered on surface light intensity and  the depth distribution of
sunlight  in  the  water column.

    5.3.2  Sediment  Layer

    Dissolved  and particulate  chemical  measurements  are  also required in
the  sediment layer  to  perform  the  impact  analysis.    For  many chemicals,
most  of  che  chemical mass  is  adhered  co  sediment  in the bed.   In  this  case,
measurements of cocal chemical  in  che sedimenc  layer as grams of  chemical
 per  gram  dry  weight  sediment  solids,  together  with  bed  sedimenc  solids
 concentration  and porosity,  are  sufficient  to estimate  the total mass of
 chemical in  the bed.   Again,  fQC should  be  measured  to  help  determine
 organic partitioning characteristics.   The  dissolved  concentration  in the
 interstitial water, cd2»  should also be measured  for  the  purpose of
 estimating  the  partition  coefficient  in the sediment  layer.   Bed  sediment
 chemical concentrations are usually measured in  the  top  few centimeters  of
 che  bottom  material,  or  the  mixed  layer,  as  discussed  in  Section  2.0.
 However, measurements  of  chemical  at  various depths  in the  sediment (i.e.,
 core samples) may be useful  co more  accurately define  the  well mixed layer
 and total mass  of chemical in  the-sediments.   In cases where the partition
 characteristics of  the  chemical  are  dependent  on  che  size  of  each
                                       92

-------
sediment particle, particle size distributions should be developed for both
water column suspended solids and bed sediments.

5.4  Sample Handling

    Proper sample  collection,  handling,  and  preservation  of  water  column
and bed  sediment  samples  are  important  for  successful completion  of  the
chemical  impact  evaluation.   Volatile chemicals  may be  lost through  gas
transfer to the  atmosphere  while  highly partitioning chemicals will  adhere
to collection vessel walls and caps.  Light.sensitive chemicals a.ay undergo
photodegradation, while others may be lost through hydrolysis  or  biological
decay.   Chemical characteristics  and special  handling  requirements  should
be  determined  as  part of  the preparation  for the  field  programs.    The
following excerpt  from Book III  (USEPA,  1984) summarizes  some  of the  key
principles for toxic sampling.

         ...Samples  to  be  analyzed   for  coxic- substances   require
    special  qualicy  control   procedures  beyond  those   necessary  for
    conventional water qualicy parameters.  The quality  assurance plan
    for  a  toxics monitoring program, should include  a  description of
    the  following  special quality control procedures:
    1.   Extra care should  be  taken  in  sampling, handling,  and preser-
         vation  because coxics generally occur in  trace  concentrations
         and are frequently unstable.
    2.   Toxic  samples should be  stored  in Che dark Co avoid  phoco-
         chemical   decomposition   and  at   reduced   temperatures   co
         minimize  the  rate  of  chemical  reaction.
    3.   Samples  should be  exposed  to the  atmosphere  as  little as
         possible  co avoid  the loss  of  volatile compounds.
    4.    Sample  bottles must  be  clean and made of materials  that will
         not   contaminate   the  samples,   either  plastic   or  glass,
         depending upon the analyses to be  performed  on  the sample.
    5.    Replicate samples  should be taken and analyzed to  assess  the
         variability  of measurements caused by sampling technique  and
          site  heterogeneity.
                                       93

-------
    6.   One  sample spiked with  each  of the  routinely  aonicored
        •toxicants (except dioxin)  should be analyzed with  each group
         of samples.  A blank should also  be analyzed  along with each
         group of samples.
    In addition  to  this information on  sample handling and  analysis,  the
analytical detection limit  for  each toxic pollutant should  be  included in
the quality assurance plan (Book XI, Chapter 3, USEPA,  1984).

    Finally, the documentation of all  field ana  laooratory  procedures is a
necessity to  assure the defensibility of  the toxics  monitoring data.   A
sample observation  sheet  should be filled  out for each  station providing
observations on surface conditions.   For each sampling period, a sample log
book  should be  kept with a record  of  the  in  situ results  and  the  numbers
and  times  of  water column  measurements.   All  samples should  be  properly
labeled and numbered with preprinted forms and labels.   Additionally, a log
book  should be kept in the  laboratory  in order  to record  each sample as ic
arrives in  the laboratory and to document the analytical results.

    Additional  information  on quality assurance  programs  can  be  found in
the following publications:

1.  Test Methods—Technical  Additions  to Methods  for  Chemical  Analysis of
    Water and  Waste,  EPA 600/4-82-055,  USEPA  Office of  Research  and
    Development,  1982.
2.  Guidelines  and  Specifications  for Preparing  Quality  Assurance Project
    Plans,  USEPA Office  of Research  and  Development,  Municipal  Environ-
    mental  Research Laboratory, 1980.
3.   Standard  Methods  for  Che Examination  of Water  and Wastewater,  15th
    Edition,  American  Public Health Association,  1980.
4.  Methods for Chemical Analysis  of  Water and  Wastes,  EPA-600/4-79-020,
    USEPA Environmental Support Laboratory, 1979.
5.   Handbook  for Analytical Quality in Water  and Wastewater Laboratories,
     EPA-600/4-79-019,  USEPA  Environmental  Support  Laboratory, 1979.
5.5   Fluid  Transport

     The  fluid transport  for a simplified modeling approach can be  easily
defined  by the  flow rate through  the  lake  or impoundment  along  with  the
                                      94

-------
volume and depth.  The  flow race and volume define che retention  time  of
the lake whicis a'critical  physical  characteristic  that is  required.   The
flow  rate is  simply the sum of the  flows into  or out of  the  system;
therefore, it  is  determined by  data collected  from the  discharges  which
empty into the lake.

    5.5.1  Flow Determinations

    The  flow rate is  a fundamental  parameter  required  as  input  when
performing  chemical   impact  analyses   in   lakes.    Flow  and  dispersive
transport  dilute  and move  chemicals  through  the water  body.    The  basic
source of information on stream flow  to lakes is USGS, which maintains flow
measuring gages on many streams throughout  the country.  In many instances,
the USGS  will have a network  of flow gaging stations  throughout  a  study
area.   These data  can be  combined  with point  source input flows  to
construct a flow balance around an impoundment.

    In  order  to  provide a  range of  expected  flow rates  for lakes  in
general, a log-probabilty plot of lake outflow is  shown  on Figure 5-2.  The
plot  is  based on "a comprehensive  investigation  of United  States  lakes
conducted  as  part of the National Eutrophication  Survey  (NES) (USEPA,  1975,
1978).     A   total  of  approximately  400   lakes   have  been   sampled  and
characterized  physically  and chemically.    The probability  shows   che 10th
and  90th  percentile  flows  to be  8  to  3000  cfs with a median  (50ch
percentile) outflow of  160 efs.

    When  flow  information  is not available  from  the  USCS,  field  survey
                                 •
measurements -may  be  required to monitor flow during the  chemical  sampling
surveys.
                                      95

-------
I*
•
•
X
•
u
K
o
                    NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION STUDY LAKES
     1000 -
      100 -
       10
0.
                                   • *
                                 • M
                                 SO  40 90 60  TO   80    90    93
                                   PERCENTILES
                                                                    99
               FIGURE 5-2. LOG-PROBABILITY OF FLOW

    5.5.2  Geomorphological Dimensions

    Methods  for  determining   the  physical  characteristics of  Lakes  are
 discussed in other manuals (Book IV, Chapter 2, USEPA,  1983).   The  basic
 information necessary for  the  simplified analyses are the average depth and
 surface  area.   From  this  information  the  volume of  the  impoundment  is
 calculated.

    There are many  existing sources  of  information which  may possess
 physical  characteristics.   Some of these include the USCS, National Oceanic
 and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),  NES,  and State  Lake Classification
 Surveys.
                                     96

-------
    A log-probability plot  of  lake  mean depth measured as part of the NES
is shown on Figure 5-3.  The  10  to 90 percent range for the water  column
depth is 1.5 to 17  meters with a median depth of approximately  5 meters.

                     NATIONAL EUTROPHICAT10N STUDY LAKES
        IQO -
    w
    a
    z
    4
         10
           '••MM*
                             20   JO  «0 30 SO  70  80    90   99
              FIGURE 5-3. LOG-PROBABILITY OF MEAN DEPTH
     5.5.3  Evaluation of Detention Time

     The  detention time  is  the  critical  physical parameter  necessary  to
 calculate  the fate of  a chemical  using a  simplified^ technique.   The
 detention  time (V/Q) dictates  the  tocal mass accumulacion of solids to che
 bed as well  as the percent  removal  of  a chemical  through  transfer  or
 reaction.   As the retention  time increases the solids will have more time
 to settle to  the  sediment  layer and  the  chemical will  have  more  time  to
 react through photolysis, hydrolysis  or  biodegradation.   In  other words,
 water column  concentrations may be  less  with larger retention times, but
 sediment  chemical  concentrations may be greater.
                                      97

-------
    The log-probability of  detention times is  shown  on Figure 5-4.  The 10


to 90 percent range is 10 to 1000 days with a median  of about  100 days.



                         NATIONAL CUTROPHICATION STUDY LAKES
         ..  MUOOO
         •


         I
         i
100
             10.0
              1.0
                                         I  I   I
                                        I	I
             10    10
                                   10  «o so to  ro
                                    peRceNTii.es
                FIGURE 9*4. LOG-PROBABILITY OF DETENTION TIME




A  summary  of the statistical  parameters  for lake  physical characteristics

                   •

is shown on  Table 5-2.





      TABLE  5-2.  STATISTICAL  PARAMETERS  FOR LAKE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

Variable Symbol
Discharge Q,
Rate
Detention t
Time
Mean Bench H.

Unit Median 90Za
(cfs) 157.0 3170.0

(days) 144.0 1870.0

Cm) 5.22 17.2

10Zb
7.78

11.1

1.5
Ratio
902 10%
407.0

168.0

11.4
 fvalue which is not exceeded in 90 percent of the lakes.

  Value which  is  not exceeded in  10 percent of  the lake  (i.e.,  it is

  exceeded by 90 percent of the lakes).
                                      98

-------
5.6  Particle Transport

    Transport of  suspended sediment  is  an important  aspect of  an  impact
analyses as many chemicals partition strongly to suspended sediment.   It is
important,   therefore,   to  develop  information   on  the   transport   of
partlculate materials.

    5.6.1  Solids Concentration

    Although no  measurements  from  the NES  of water column solids is
available, secchi disk depth, Zs, is reported.  This can be used to roughly
estimate  water  column solids concentration.    The  extinction coefficient,
K  , is  related  to secchi  disk depth via  the empirical correlation (Beeton,
1958):

              111                                                    (5-1)
           e"Zs
and the  relationship  between  dry weight  of suspended solids, n>1  (mg/1)  and
extinction coefficient. K  is K /m. - 0.1-0.4  ng/m2  for  algae and K-/»l  -
                 1
0.05  -  0.25  ng/m  for other suspended particles (Di  Toco,  1978).  Hence  a
reasonable ratio  is:

             K_ n i _                                                   \5~Z/
             » 0.2 m,

and  water  column suspended  solids  concentration   can  be  estimated  from
secchi  disk depth.   A probability plot of  «lt  computed  in  this way,  is
shown on Figure 5-5.  The 10 to 90 percent  range  is  2.0 to- 25 ag/1,  with
readings  near  100  mg/1  at  the  99th perentile.   The variation of  total
solids  mass, m.H. is shown on  Figure 5-6.  The range  is  from.  10   to  100
g/m2, a  tenfold  variation.   This  variation  is smaller than  that observed
for  detention  time  and outflow.  It suggests that  individual  site specific
values  for  detention  time  and  outflow  parameters  are  critical for  the
analysis rather than representative values, whereas m1H1  is less  variable.
                                       99

-------
               NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION STUDY LAKES
 •

•?
o
i
                M*
                •
               I •
              a  10    to  to «o ao *o  ro  «o  «o
   FIGURE 5-5. LOG- PROBABILITY OF ESTIMATED WATER COLUMN
                    SUSPENDED SOLIDS
               NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION STUDY LAKES
I

 M

I
     WO -
 S
 I
 M
 .J
               J	1	L
                             *o  so M
                                        ao   «o
                                                       M
 FIGURE 5-e. LOG-PROBABILITY OF ESTIMATED AREAL WATER COLUMN
                    SUSPENDED SOLIDS
                             100

-------
    5.6.2  Particle Classification

    The physical characteristics of a particle of suspended sediment,  such
as its size and organic content, are  known to  affect  the  degree  to  which it
will adsorb a  chemical.   The explanation for stronger chemical  adsorption
onto finer particles is that these materials have  a higher surface  area per
unit weight than do larger particles.   The suspended  solids  concentration
and  partition  coefficient  are also  inversely  related.   Although  the
underlying cause of  this  phenomenon  is  not completely understood, it  is  a
factor which  appears  to  be a  characteristic of  the interaction  between
solids and chemicals.  Organic  carbon content also influences partitioning
characteristics.  The  combined  effects of  the particle size,  surface area,
weight fraction  and  sorption characteristics  all  define the  mass  of
chemical associated with sediment particles.

    To perform a  simplified  analysis  it  is not necessary to classify
sediment particles  by  size,  as  only  a  single  type of  sediment  particle is
considered.   Where  sediment transport  is  a significant feature of  lake
dynamics and  particle  organic  content  changes significantly  wich  particle
size,  the use of one' particle size may introduce significant error into che
representation  of  chemical fate processes.  When performing  more  detailed
chemical  fate  evaluations  for such systems,  it  is possible  and  may  be
necessary  to  include the effects of up to five different  particle types.

     Inclusion  of more  than one  sediment particle type in  an impact analysis
requires information on the  weight fractionation, settling and resuspension
characteristics and chemical  sorption  for each  different  particle  type.
Weight fractionation of  particles is generally  performed by sieve analysis
 for particles  greater  than 75 microns  and  by hydrometer evaluations for
 smaller  particles.   Particles greater than about 400 microns  are considered
 sands; between 75  and 400 microns,  fine  sands;  and  less than  75  microns,
 silts and  clays.   An example of particle  size distributions  found in
 Saglnaw Bay is shown in Table  5-3.  The following discussion is applicable
 to the various size classes of  particul'ates.   However,  the complexity and
 amount of  data necessary to perform a chemical modeling  analysis with more
                                      101

-------
than one  particle  type  Increases  substantially with  the number  of size
classes considered.   As a  result,  most  evaluations  will  consider  only a
single class or type of suspended sediment.

              TABLE 5-3.  SUSPENDED SOLIDS SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
                                SAGINAW BAY



Area
^^^^^^ •
i
2
3
4
5
Average

Number
of
Stations
3
9
3
5
5
25
Number
of
Data
Points
12
39
12
19
15
97



0.7-39
81.8
71.6
76.3
63.8
62.3
70.5


Percent
urn 37-74
'l2.3
16.3
17.2
21.6
23.0
18.0


in Each Size
urn 74-210
4.9
10.5
5.4
12.0
12.5
9.8


Class
urn 210-1000 urn
1.0
1.6
1.1
2.6
2.2
1.7
    5.6.3  Particle Settling

    The fate of particulate chemical  is  strongly  influenced  by the fate and
movement  of  sediment.   In accordance  with Figures  2-3 and  2-4, the  two
terms  which  must  be  developed  to define  particle  motion   are   the  water
column particle settling  velocity,  w^  and the sediment  layer resuspension
velocity, w...  These terms  fix the  rate  at  which particles  move from the
water column to the sediment  layer or from the sediment  layer to  the water
column.

     It  should  be  recognized that each  of  these phenomena are difficult to
measure  with a high  degree  of accuracy.   General approaches  to  establish
the  suspended  solids  settling  velocity  are to  use sediment  traps,  to employ
estimating  equations,  to evaluate quiescent   settling  rates,  and  to  use
suspended solids  data.

     Sometimes, it may be  advantageous  to  use different  settling  rates for
different particle  size  classifications.    In  an analysis  of  suspended
                                       102

-------
solids  In  Saginaw Bay,  for example,  three  particle  size classifications
were  established with  different  settling  velocities  for each category.
Table 5-4 presents the various classifications and settling velocities used
in Saginaw Bay.

                TABLE 5-4.  PARTICLE SIZE CLASSIFICATION AND
                      WATER COLUMN SETTLING VELOCITIES
                                SAGINAW BAY
                                           Settling Velocity
             Classification                      (m/day)
                light              .               0-2
                heavy                             l • 5
                organic                           °»l
    Sediment Traps.   Sediment traps are devices which are  either  suspended
in  the  water column  or set on che  lake  bottom to collect  suspended  solids
which settle  to the bottom over  a period of  time.   Traps are designed  co
collect  solids,  Co prevent solids  washout  and to permit  che flow of  lake
water across the  trap  Itself.  Examples  of  four types of  sediment  traps are
shown on Figure 5-7.   Design "of  the vessels  in the  sediment  crap  has  been
shown  (Blomquist  and Hackanson,  1981)  co influence   che amounc of  oacerial
crapped.   Figure  5-7B shows vercical cylindrical vessels  cend  uo  yield che
most accurate  results.

    The settling  velocity can be  calculated using data from sediment craps:
          w  -  -
           1   At
 where:
     wfl - settling velocity in ft/day
     M  • mass of sediment crapped (mg)
     m. « average water column suspended solids (mg/1)
      1                           2
     A  • surface area of trap (ft )
     Ac » time of trap incubation
                                       103

-------
       CAI SAMPLE TRAP SCHEMATICS
Rtf • •LOMQVlSf AND II«**NSOU
|BI TRAP EFFICIENCY
                                           lOOOf--.
                                            •00
                                         o
                                         a
                                            •00
                                         _J  400
                                         O


                                         «t

                                         b.
                                         O
                                         j?  »00



                                            100
            O


            ••90
            FIGURE 5-7. ILLUSTRATIONS OF SEDIMENT TRAPS

-------
    Scokes Equation.   Some  estimate  of the particle settling  velocity  can
be obtained using  Stokes Law.   As this  formulation  was developed  for
quiescent settling  of  discrete spherical particles, caution  must be  used
when  applying  the  velocity in  natural settings.   Because  of  turbulent
motion in most water bodies, Stokes velocity should  be  considered  an upper
limit  of  the particle  settling rate.   As  a  first  estimate, the  Stokes
velocity may be  employed directly in  deep,  non-turbulent  lakes.    When  a
Stokes velocity is  used  in  an  analysis,  it should  be considered  a
preliminary value and be subject to change through calibration of suspended
solids.  Figure  5-8  presents  information and techniques  to be  employed in
estimating the Stokes settling velocity.

    Bench Scale Tests.  Laboratory bench scale  testing can also be employed
to  evaluate  discrete quiescent  settling on a  site specific  basis.   The
process used to  develop the settling  rate  on  a laboratory  scale  Involves
the  introduction  of mixed  lake water to a laboratory  settling  column
(Figure 5-9A) and the  evaluation of  percent  removal  at  various depchs with
time  (Figure  S-9B).   These data  are  then used  (Figure 5-9C)  co  develop
settling velocity as. a  function of the percent of material.
                   * •

5.7  Water Column-Bed Interaction

    The  following  simplified  cases  were developed  co  introduce different
bed conditions that may be encountered  in lakes.  The cases presented are a
stable bed, net  sedimentation  and net  scour.

     Case  I:   Stable Bed.   During periods of  stable  bed  conditions,  the
surface  of  the bed  is  neither  accumulating solids nor scouring  away.  Under
 this   condition,  particle  settling  and scour  may  be  occurring  but water
 column suspended solids  remain relatively constant,  and there is  no net
 flux of  material between  the water column  and sediment.

     Case lit    Net  Sedimentation.   This  condition frequently  occurs  in
 natural  water  bodies  and  is  characterized  by a net flux of  suspended solids
 from the water column to  the  sediment.
                                       105

-------
                      (A)
 E
 o
O
O
Ul
O
2
UJ
    10
    10
                      IO~*   10"'   I     10
                 DIAMETER (cm)
    PROCEDURE'

    STEP I-ESTABLISH i
          la I MEDIAN PARTICLE DIAMETER
          J b J PARTICLE SPECIFIC GRAVITY

    STEP2-FROM FIGURE A SELECT |W,|

    STEP3-FROM B CALCULATE
          REYNOLDS NUMBER (Rl
    STEP 4-| o ) IF R < I CONTINUE
          (b I IF R > I CANNOT USE
             STOKES VELOCITY
    STEP9-USINGC MODIFY W, FROM
          IO°C TO AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
(B)REYNOLDS NUMBER (Rl

    R>  W,-J
         V

    WHERE* R« REYNOLDS NUMBER

          W,* SETTLING  VELOCITY
              (C">/tec. )

          d« PARTICLE DIAMETER
             (cm |

          V* KINEMATIC VISCOSITY
             (C«n«/»tC.)
                                                 (C) wi AT TEMP, s W, AT IO» (
                        V AT TEMP
                        t.si«io-§
           FIGURE 5-8. SETTLING VELOCITIES BY STOKES LAW

-------
(A) LABORATORY SETTLING
   COLUMN
 T
 2'
           00.
         •  tO.
          -*v.:
   •°\\
   	1_-ana
     •%
     *.*••
     4::
'LL
                  (8) SETTLING PROFILE
        (C) DATA EVALUATION
                                  200   400  800   300    e
£ ,5
o c
* a °-'
1!
^ ^
H- &
|t I ^^
y* ^2
5

^\
\
\
\
0
N
s
s
N
>tl^-
f30% SCT1XS 4T »
— 4 .OI3J1. 0» 22 _!!_
/ mm. dot




i i i i T*— o_ .3 \ '
0 iO 20 30 *O 30 60 ?0 SO 90 'C
                    PERCENT OF PARTICLES WITH VELOCITY
                               LESS THAN
     FIGURE 5-9. EXAMPLES SETTLING VELOCITIES FROM
                     BENCH SCALE TESTS
                               107

-------
    Case III;  Net Scour.   This  condition is observed when  there  is a net
flux of  material from  the  sediment layer  to the  overlying water  and an
increase of suspended solids mass in the water column.

    The term in the chemical models which describes net bed accumulation or
scour in lakes is the net sedimentation rate, w2, the rate of change of  the
elevation of the sediment surface  per  unit time.   In principle, this  rate
is the dirierence between the  solid  fluxes  due to particle settling, m^,
and particle resuspension,  m^.   A  stable bed condition  (Case  I) means
that the net  sedimentation  rate is equal  to zero.   For  Cases  II  and  III,
the rate is non-xero and can be evaluated from direct field measurement, or
evaluation  of  instream suspended  solids  data.    The  following   sections
discuss sedimentation,  resuspension, and diffusive  exchange.

    5.7.1  Sedimentation

    The sedimencacion of lakes is  the  process  by  which  lakes  gradually  fill
with sediment.   Particles which settle, to  the sediment-water interface  and
become  incorporated  into the  sediment,  gradually  accumulate  and  fill  the
lake.  The result is a  net  flux  of particles to the sediment, Jg>  in units
of  gm  dry solids/m2/day.   The sedimentation  velocity  is defined  as  w2  -
J /•„ and  it can be  thought of as  the velocity at  which  the  sediment-water
 s  2
interface  is moving  vertically upward.  Since the  active  sediment  layer of
depth, H-,  is  fixed  relative to the sediment-water  interface,  the  sedimen-
tation velocity  is also the velocity at  which particles leave the  bottom of
the active  sediment  layer  and enter the deep  sediment.   Chemicals  adsorbed
by  these particles are  lost from the  active sediment layer and  are  presumed
to  be buried.  Hence  sedimentation provides an  ultimate sink  for  the
chemical.

     Direct field measurement  of sedimentation  is  performed by developing
 benchmarks in the  lake with marked survey  stakes driven  into the  lake  bed.
 Observation of  sediment levels  on the  calibrated  stakes  over time  will
                                       108

-------
yield a net sedimentation rate.  This method, although accurate and direct,
is time consuming,' as rates may be on the order of 0 to +50 millimeters per
year*
    Net  sedimentation rates  can also  be estimated  using tracers  in  the
sediment.   The  radiochemical methods  used  rely  either on  the naturally
occurring  radionuclide ,  lead-210,  which  is  continually  produced  in  the
atmosphere,  or the  man-made nuclide  cesium-137  from  the  atomic  weapons
tests.  For the lead-210 method, the vertical profile is measured and  using
the  known half-life  the  age of the  sediment  layers  is  obtained.    The
cesium-137 method  gives an  estimate  of  both  the depth  of  the well-mixed
layer and  the  sedimentation  rate.

     The  more traditional methods  involve finding a  layer in  che  sediment
where  the concentration  of  some  material  either abruptly  terminates  or
abruptly  begins.   'Pollen  grains associated with  the onset of  agriculture
and  the  clearing of  the  forests are  employed.    Since  the  dates of  these
events are known,  the sediment  depth  co the  transition  layer  divided by che
known elapsed  time  yields  the sedimentation  velocity.
                   • •
     The  concentration of solids in  the well-mixed sediment layer,  n>2, can
be  obtained  by direct measurement.   It is normally  expressed  as  porosicy,
*.  which is  che volume fraction of interstitial water.   If  dry solids have
a density, o , then the  solids  concentration in the  sediment layer is:
 where * is  the  average porosity of the well-mixed  layer.  Tables  5-5 and
 5-6 present examples  of  this type of  analysis with  the  solids concentra-
 tions, the active mixed layer depth and sedimentation rates.
                                       109

-------
             TABLE 5-5.   SEDIMENT PARAMETERS FOR VARIOUS LAKES
                     (After Krishnaswami and Lai, 1978)

Lake
India
Tansa
Tulsi
France
Pavin
Leman
Montcynere
Lagodiville
USA
Mendota
Trout
Tahoe
Washington
UK
Windermere
Lowe s water
Blelham Tarn
Japan
Shinji
Belgium
Mirwart
Sedimentation
Velocity
w« (mm/yr)

4.0
2.6

1.3
1.2
1.5
0.7

6.0
6.3
1.0
3.8

2.4
2.0
2.0-3.6
0.8-9.0
1.2-2.7

1.5-1.8
Sedimentation
Flux2
(J_ mjj/cra /yr)

280
160

13
72
21
13

18
60
21
— .

60
-
-
-
13-71

64-104
Sediment
Solids
nu (mg/1)
£

700 ,000
615,000

100 ,000
600,000
140,000
186,000

30,000
95,200
210,000
—

250,000 '
'
—
-
.180,000

.510,000

Porosity

0.714
0.749

0.959
0.755
0.943
0.924

0.988
0.961
0.914
* *

0.898
-
•
-
0.927

0.792
    5.7.2  Particle Resuspension
    The estimation of the resuspension velocity is a difficult  part of this
analysis.   The difficulty  is  related  to  the time  scale  implicit in  the
chemical  fate  analysis.   What  is required  is   the  resuspension  velocity
averaged over the characteristic time scale of the chemical  response to  the
input.   As discussed previously,  there are  two  time scales,  the  time  to
reach the  first plateau  (»l/g,)  and  the time to  reach equilibrium (»3/g2).
The former  can be  quite  short  (910 days) and the latter can be  quite long
(>100-1000  days).
                                      110

-------
                     TABLE 5-6.   SEDIMENT PA.  .lETERS FOR THE GREAT LAKES
Lake
                                  Sediment
Sedimentation  Sedimentation       Solid            '    Well-Mixed
   Velocity        Flux »      Concentration  Porosity    Depth^
 (w« (nn/yr)   J  (mg/cm /yr)    m. (rog/1)   •    ±
 —2    • *	  • 8                 *
Michigan
Station 11
29
31
17
100 A
103
105
Ontario
KB
UB
Erie
M32
G16
U42
Huron
14
18
— 4— 	
0.4 -1.0
2.8
0.5 -0.7
0.78-0.66
1.08-1.34
0.74-0.80
0.53-0.83

4.7 -5.2
2.3 -6.6

15.3-25.0
8.6 -9.8
1.6 -3.2

0.97
1.10
                            15.82
                           102.2
                            22.8
                            15.41
                            27.5
                            15.5
                            13.7
                          57 - 63
                          27 - 78
                          270 - 440
                           73 - 83
                           47 - 96
                             21.0
                             51.0
                                   266.000
                                   365.000
                                   .380.000
                                   214.000
                                   227,000
                                   201.000
                                   201.000
                                   122.000
                                   119.000
                                   176.000
                                    85.100
                                   296.000
                                   216.000
                                   464.000
0.891
0.851
0.845
0.913
0.907
0.918
0.918
0.950
0.951
.0.928
0.965
0.879
0.912
0.811
— — '£.
0 - 1
3.4 - 4
2.0 - 0
0.2 - 0
1.0 - 1
-
—
_
^"
—
-
™
6.0
3.0

.0
.8
.0
.0









                                                                                 Reference
                                                                             Bobbins et al. 1975
                                                                             Bobbins et al. 1978
                                                                              Bobbins  et al.  1977

-------
    Resuspeasion  In  lakes  Is  a   sporadic   process  which  occurs  when
sufficient  turbulence  is  generated  at  the   sediment-water  interface   to
resuspend bed  sediment.   This  typically occurs  during high  winds.   Some
estimates of these resuspension  fluxes  have been made.   What is  required,
however, is an  estimate  of  the average  resuspension  velocity which is  not
the same as the intermittent resuspension velocities.

    Direct  measurement  techniques  have not  beer rf«v«lop«d for  practical
application in  an impact  analysis.   A  method  to  evaluate this  coefficient
uses estimates  of  the particle  settling velocity, w^  from Section  5.6.3
and the particle sedimentation velocity, w2, from Section  5.7.1.
         „   . „ (IL\ - w                                              <5~5)
         W21    Pm.;    2
 in which w21  is  the  resuspension velocity, Wj is  the  settling  velocity, «2
 is" the sedimentation  velocity,  mj  is  the average  water column  suspended
 solids  concentration,  and  m2  is  the  sediment  layer solids concentration.  A
 limitation  of this  technique is  that  the method is  not independent  and
 depends on  two other  particulate transport rates.

     A method  of  estimating the upper bound for  resuspension  velocity is co
 employ  the  following  reasoning:   the settling velocity  of particles in the
 water column can be  estimated  from Stokes Law.   It  can  be  shown  that the
 Stokes  settling  velocity will be greater than the  actual settling velocity,
 w.,  in lakes  due to vertical dispersion.   If  the  sedimentation velocity is
 assumed to  be zero,  the maximum resuspension  velocity is given by:
              « /«  - w
           21 B2/ml   wi
 Stokes settling velocities for natural particles  range  from 1 to 20 m/day.
 If m./m. is on  the  order  of  10,000,  then the maximum w21  is approximately
 750 mm/year.  A reasonable range  for  the resuspension velocity, therefore,
 is about 0 to 750 mm/year.
                                       112

-------
    5.7.3  Sediment-Water Column Diffusive Exchange

    The diffusive exchange  of  dissolved chemical between  che  wacer column
and  Che  sediment  interstitial water  can  provide  an Important  .transfer
mechanism either to  or from the sediment.   The  rate of  transfer  is
formulated as a mass  transfer  coefficient, 1^ (cm/day),  by  analogy co the
volatilization transfer coefficient, Ky.  It can be shown  that:
where the numerator is the apparent sediment diffusion coefficient, DL, and
the  denominator accounts  for  the length  of  the  vertical  concentration
gradient in the sediment, *2'

    The  apparent  sediment  diffusion  coefficient  may   be  estimated   by
empirical .correlations  found   for natural  sediments.    The   relationship
between  the  molecular diffusion coefficient,  0,  and the  apparent  sediment
diffusion, D^,  is:
          B.  -
           u
 where 8  is  che tortuosity: .  the ratio  of  the length of the actual diffusion
 path to  the linear length of Che  sediment.   It has been  found  empirically
 that:
 where F  is  the formation factor:   F - R/%,  the ratio of  the  electrical
 resistivity of the bulk  sediment  to  the  pore fluid and *  is  the porosity.
 Analyses of actual sediments yield the relationship:
                                                                      (5-10)
                                       113

-------
where n  - 2.8.  .If n  • 2,  this  relationship is  known  as Archie's  law
Thus:
         DT - D t'
          L

Unfortunately, the diffusion  coefficient  is  difficult to  measure  directly
so that the magnitude of K,  itself  is only known  from calibration results
(HydroQual, 1981 and 1982) or empirical relationships.   It appears that 1^
» 10-100 cm/day is the reasonable range.

5.8  Chemical Transfers

    This section presents some of the methods and procedures for evaluating
the rates  and  magnitudes  of chemical transfers between  dissolved  chemical
and  (1) suspended particles (adsorption and desorption);  and  (2)  the
atmosphere (air-water transfer).

    Chemical  transfers refer  to mechanisms  that  transfer chemical  mass
between various phases in the environment.  The phases to be considered are
suspended  particles  and the  atmosphere.   Chemical  transport  via  particle
exchange between  the  sediment and the water  column is discussed in Section
5.7.   The  following  sections only highlight  some of the key considerations
pertaining  to  these mechanisms.   The reader  is referred  to Book VIII
(USEPA,  1982),  for more detailed discussions and information.  Also,  USEPA
documents  entitled,  "Water-Related   Fate  of  129 Priority  Pollutants,"  and
"Aquatic Fate  Process for Organic Priority  Pollutant,"  present laboratory
rates  and  field measurements  for various transfer mechanisms.

5.8.1   Adsorption  and  Desorption

     All chemicals, to a greater or  lesser degree,  tend  to associate with
 suspended  particles.   The  extent   of  this association  depends  upon  the
 nature of the  chemical,  principally its   solubility, and  the  physical and
 chemical  properties  of  the  particles,  primarily  their  surface  area  and
 organic carbon content.
                                       114

-------
    The mechanism, is  conceived  of as  a reversible  reaction between  the
dissolved chemical concentration:  ^  (mass  of chemical/ liter of  water)  and
sediment-bound chemical, r (mass of chemical/leg of particles).  That is:
                                                                     (5-12)
where K  .   is  the rate of adsorption  and  Kdes is the  rate  of desorption.
       AO3                                                •
If these reactions are first order, then the kinetic equations are:
          Cl    K    e  + K    r
         dl --- Kads Cl * Kdes r

         dr m _     e  _ .         '                                    (5-14)
         dT   Kads  Cl
 At  equilibrium,  dc^dt  and  dr/dt  are  zero  and:

                                                                      (5-15)
where
          -  K/K    (liters  of water/kg  of  particles)  is  the  partition
            adsdes
              S
             as
 coefficient? S A  number  of  studies  have  been completed which develop
 empirical relationships for partition  coefficients.   The  reader is referred
 co Book  II. Chapter 3 (USEPA,  1984),  and Book VIII (USEPA,  1982)  for
 elaboration of these relationships.

     Experimental  Procedures.     The   experimental  procedure   for   basic
 adsorption-desorption  measurements  are  illustrated  on Figure  5-10.   The
 aqueous  phase, sediment,  and chemical  stock  solutions  are  combined  to
 achieve  the  desired  concentrations  in the reaction vessel.  The vessel is
 capped and  agitated  until adsorption  equilibria is achieved.   A sample of
 the  sediment-aqueous phase mixture  is removed  and  analyzed  for chemical
 concentration, cT(ads).   After centrifuging,  a sample  of the aqueous phase
 is  removed  and analyzed yielding the  dissolved concentration at adsorption
 equilibrium,   cl(mda).     The   particulate   concentration  at:  adsorption
                                        115

-------
AQUEOUS PHASE
                    (A) "ADSORPTION

         SEDIMENT (ADSORBENT)

                               CT {ad's)
       CHEMICAL
       (AQSORBATEl
                  SHANE
                   'ads
                              CENTRIPUGE
ci laai)
 REMOVE AQUEOUS
   PHASE
~l
                     (Bl OESORPT10N
                  AOO UNCONTAMiMATED
                   AQUEOUS PHASE
                                        SHAKE
                                        des
                                                     cT(ats)
                           EXTRACT CLASS
CSMTRIPUGS
••
,
k

•

REMOVE AQUEOUS
ft SEDIMENT

V

A
                                       MASS BALANCE
         FIGURE 5-10. ADSORPTION/OESORPT10N
               EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
                              116

-------
equilibrium  is  calculated  by  difference:   r(adg)  -  ^T(ads)-ci(ads)]/m>
where m is  the  adsorbent  concentration.    This  completes  the  adsorption
step.
    For  the  desorption step,  the  contaminated aqueous  phase  is carefully
removed  leaving  the  sedimented  solids in  the vessel,  and uncontaminated
aqueous  phase  is  added (to achieve  a  total volume  that  produces the  same
adsorbent  concentration as initially  present  at adsorption).   The  capped
tube  is  agitated until  desorption equilibrium  is  achieved.   A sample  of
sediment-aqueous  phase mixture  is  removed and  analyzed yielding cT(deg).
After  centrifuging  an aqueous  phase  sample  is  removed and  analyzed  for
c          The particulate  concentration  is  obtained by  the  difference:
rl(deS . [-        - c1(des)]/m.   The  remaining sediment and  aqueous  phase
issuer  discarded or sa^ed for further analysis.  The  centrifuge  tube is
extracted,  and  the  chemical which was  adsorbed  to  the  tube  itself  is
measured.   A  mass  balance  calculation is. made  to  insure the  integrity of
 the experiment.     '  '

     Various  quantities  of  chemical stock solution and  aqueous phase  are
 employed  so  that  'a  range  of  dissolved   and   sediment-bound  chemical
 concentrations are  observed.   Ideally, these  concentrations  should  be at
 environmentally  realistic levels so that minimal extrapolation is required.

     The data  are displayed in terms of an isotherm: a plot of the sediment-
 bound chemical  concentration, r, versus  the  dissolved  concentration,  cr
 An example is shown for lindane on Figure 5-1i.  Log-log plots are normally
 used  in order  to  check the  linearity of  the isotherm  (the line  on the
 figure  has unity slope).   The partition coefficient is  calculated by
 choosing  any  dissolved  concentration,  c, and  using  the diagonal  line to
 obtain   a  sediment-bound   concentration,   also   called  a   particulate
 concentration, r,  and forming the  ratio r/c - » as shown.   Deviations  from
 unity slope  isotherms (Freundlich isotherms) are  sometimes observed.  The
 data  in the  concentration  region of  interest  is  approximated  by  a unity
 slope  line  and  the  partition coefficient is  evaluated  as  shown on  Figure
 5-11.
                                        117

-------
    10.000
     1.000 -
Ul
z
4
a
Z
UJ


-------
and the   particl.es  being considered.   The properties that  govern  the
partitioning of  inorganic metal  and  other ions  are  different  chan  those
that apply  to  organic  chemicals.   For heavy  metals  there exist models  of
sorption to pure oxide phases  (Westall,  1980) but a general  theory  of  the
partition coefficient for  naturally  occurring particles is not  available.
Thus,  partition  coefficients  are either  measured  for  each  situation  or
representative values can be used (USEPA, 1984).

    For  organic  chemicals  the  important distinguishing  feature  is whether
the chemical  ionizes in water.   If  it  does  not then  the  partitioning  is
dominated by hydrophobic  effects  only and a  general model  for  sorption is
available.   For  organic  acids  and  bases,  both the  hydrophobic  and  the
electrostatic  forces can  be  important (Bailey and White,  1970).   For this
reason,  no  general model  is available,  although as a  first  approximation
the methods presented  below for  neutral  hydrophobic chemicals  can be used
(Lyman ec al., 1982).

    Reversible  Equilibrium  Partitioning.    The partitioning  of  neutral
hydrophobic chemicals  to  natural  soils and sediment particles has been the
focus  of numerous investigations.   A useful  synthesis and  review  of  the
major  features  of  neutral  organic   chemical  sorption  (Karickhoff,  1984)
indicates  that  the  partition  coefficient can be  calculated,  from  the
octanol-wacer  partition  coefficient  of  che  chemical,  KQW,  a  property chac
has been  measured  or can  be estimated (Lyman et  al.,  1982}  for most
chemicals  of environmental interest, and the organic carbon  concent  of  the
particle.   The degree  of  hydrophobicity  of  the  chemical  is  parameterized by
K   and the  quantity  of  sites available  for sorption  on  the  particle is
 proportional to  the  organic  carbon content.

     Karickhoff et al.  (1979) examined the sorption  of  aromatic  hydrocarbons
 and chlorinated hydrocarbons  in  natural systems.  They  found it convenient
 to relate  the partition  coefficient  directly to organic carbon content of
 the solids as follows:

          , - K  f                                                    <5-16>
               oc oc
                                       119

-------
where :
    K   - partition coefficient expressed on an organic carbon basis
     oc
    f   » mass fraction of organic carbon in fine solids fraction
     oc

    A number  of  equations have been  proposed  for  the  relationship of  KQC
to K   .   Karickhoff  et al.  (1979)  were also  able to  relate KQC to  the
octanol-water  partition coefficient  and to  the water  solubility  by  the
following relationships:

         it    - 0 63 K                                                 (5'17)
         K    - 0.63 K
where:

     K    - octanol-water  partition  coefficient  (concentration  of  chemical in
     ow   octanol   divided   by   concentration   of   chemical   in   water,   at
          equilibrium)
 and
          KQC • -0.54 log Stf + 0.44                                   (5-18)
 where:
      S  » water solubility of sorbate, expressed as a mole fraction,
       w
     The water solubilities of  the  compounds examined ranged  from  1  ppb to
 1000 ppm.

     Thus,  for  organic hydrophobic compounds which obey a  linear  isochenn
 relationship, the partition coefficient » can  be  predicted.  First,  KQC is
 predicted  based  on  either water solubility or  the octanol-water partition
 coefficient.  Then  based  on  an estimate of organic  carbon  fraction, i can
 be estimated from Equation 5-16.
                                       120

-------
    This empirical relationship appears to extend from essentially entirely
organic  carbon  particles  (sludges)  to  particles  with greater  than  0.5
percent organic carbon (fQ<. >0.005).

    This  remarkably  simple  and  powerful model  of  hydrophobic  chemical
sorption is,  unfortunately,  not a complete  description of  the  phenomena.
As shown below,  however,  it is entirely  descriptive  of the  reversible or
labile component of sorbed chemical at  low suspended  solids concentration.
The  two factors  that complicate the  sorption  problem are kinetic  and
particle concentration effects.  These are discussed below.

    Reversiblity of Sorption.  It is a common finding (Karickhoff, 1984 and
the review in Appendix C) that the partition coefficient found from a short
time  (hours)  desorption  is  larger than  the adsorption  partition coeffi-
cient.  This  suggests  that  the  kinetics of desorption are  slow.   Thus, the
assumption  that  the particulate and dissolved  chemical concentrations are
ac  Che   equilibrium  determined   by  the  partition  coefficient,  Equation
(5-11)  may not be  the  case in all situations.

    A two  component' model has  been  proposed (Di Toro  and  Horzempa, 1982;
see  Appendix  C)  which  separates the  sorbed  chemical into  a   reversible
component which  achieves  equilibrium rapidly and  a  resistant  component  chat
does not appreciably desorb during  the time scale  of  most  laboratory
experiments  (hours co  days).   It  has been shown  through the  use  of gas
purging experiments that  all  the  sorbed chemical  can  be removed  eventually,
but  the desorption time  scale  for hydrophobic chemicals  can be months  to
years (Karickhoff and Morris,  1985).

     From a  practical  point  of view,  the question  of the  impact  of  the
 extent  of  short  term reversibility  on WLAs  is  best approached using
 sensitivity  analysis.   At one extreme the  chemical  can  be  assumed to  be
 entirely reversible sorbed.  At  the other extreme  a  large fraction can  be
 assumed to  be entirely  associated  with   the  particles.   In  this way  the
 importance of this phenomena can  be  investigated.
                                       121

-------
    Particle Concentration Effects.  Ie has  been  found experimentally that
the  sediment   concentration,   .. . can   affect  the   observed  partition
coefficient.  An .experimental design which eliminates isotherm nonlinearity
effects is to manipulate the initial mass  of chemical  employed so that  the
dissolved concentration at equilibrium is  constant  for each concentration,
m, of  suspended particles employed.   Typically  the  partition coefficient
decreases  as  adsorbent  concentration  increases.     Ie  has  been   found
(O'Connor and Connolly, 1980) that a relationship of che form:
               «b
              o
describes  the data  in which »Q  is  some  reference  value  and  b  is  an
experimental constant.  Figure 5-12 presents examples of  chis  relationship.
While  Che  mechanism which  is  responsible for  this  behavior  is a matter  of
speculation at  present, ic is consistently observed and must  be  taken  into
account .

     A number  of  mechanisms  have  been  suggested  to explain  the  particle
concentration  effect.   One  class  of  suggested  mechanisms  ascribes  che
observation  to  the  chemical  complexing  to  some   particle   associated
component, either dissolved organic carbon (Voice and  Weber,  1983) or  some
other unspecified  component  (Curl and Keolelan,  1984) desorbing  from the
particles, or  the colloidal fraction of  the  particles  which is  not
separated during the particle separation procedure (Gschwend and Wu,  1985).
All  these  "third  phase"  explanations depend  on  the  assumption  that the
operationally measured dissolved  concentration,  whether in  the laboratory
 or  the  field,  cannot distinguish  between  the   truly dissolved  chemical
 concentration, whose  partitioning  is  not dependent on particle concentra-
 tion,  and the  chemical  complexed  to  the  third  phase  (dissolved  organic
 carbon or  colloids),  which increases  with  particle concentration since the
                                                    •»
 third phase  is  assumed  to be present  in proportion to  the  particles  that
 are present.  Thus, when  the operationally measured dissolved concentration
 is  divided into  the  particulate  chemical  concentration to  calculate  the
 partition  coefficient, Equation (-5-11),  it appears to  decrease as particle
 concentration  increases .
                                       122

-------
     10"
           DATAi O'CONNOR AND CONNOLLY
z
bJ
O

U.
U.
1U
O
H
tt
     I0a
     10*
     I01
     10'
                                                                  LEGEND:
                                                                   • -DOT
                                                                   O - HEPTACMLOR
                                                                   A -LINOANE
                                                                   A-KEPONE
                                                                   • -MANGANESE
                                                                   0-CADMIUM

                                                                   A-COBALT

                                                                   0- CALCIUM

                                                                   «--STRONTIUM
                                                                     I03
                                                                                 10'
                              SE OJ ME NT CONCENT.RAT SON, m. (mg/l)
              FIGURE 5-12. VARIATION OF PARTITION COEFFICIENTS
                           WITH SOLID CONCENTRATION

-------
    There  is  no .doubt  chat these  mechanisms  would appear to  make che
partition coefficient decrease with  increasing particle concentration.  The
question is  whether this  is  the  explanation for  all or most  of the
observations of  this  phenomena.   A series  of  experiments  have been
conducted  for which  the  third  phase  mechanism  cannot  be   invoked  as  an
explanation.   These  resuspension and  dilution  experiments  (Di'Toro and
Horzempa,  1983; Mcllory et  •!.. 1986; Di  Toro  et al.,  1986) continue  to
exhibit  a  decreasing in partition  coefficient  with  increasing  particle
concentration.  In addition, experiments  with particles (2 micrometer glass
spheres) that cannot  introduce  a  third phase clearly  show  the effect (Di
Toro et al.,  1987).  Hence,'the  experimental information  appears  to suggest
that the effect is real and is  independent  of whatever third phase effects
are present.

    A model has been  proposed (Di Toro,  1985, Appendix C) which  attributes
che effect  to particle-particle interactions that  cause  a desorption. The
resulting model  fits  the  available  laboratory  data for  six  orders  of
magnitude  in  partition coefficient  (Appendix  Cf  Figure  5).  At  the  low
solids  concentration  limit  the  Kow-foc relationships apply  as given above.
However,  as  the  solids  concentration  increase   the particle concentration
becomes  the dominant parameter  that determines  the partition coefficient.
A  recent   variation  of  the  model  which  assumes  a  specific  type  of
particle-particle  interaction:    complete   desorption  upon   collision,  can
explain the observed constancy  of  the particle  interaction parameter (v»x)
(Mackay and Powers,  1987).  Thus, for neutral hydrophobic organic chemicals
the reversible  component  partition  coefficient can estimated  from KQW, foc,
and the particle  concentration, m (Equations 14  and 15, Appendix C).

     5.8.2  Air-Water Surface Exchange

     All chemicals, to some  degree,  are transferred between  the surface of a
 water  body  and the  atmosphere.   This  process  is variously described  as
 volatilization,  evaporation,  and  reaeration.    For   the   applications  of
 chemical  fate  in  natural waters 'considered in  this  report   the atmospheric
 concentration of chemical is negligible and  the process is  a one-way
                                       124

-------
transfer of chemical from  the water  body to  the  atmosphere, which is
assumed to"be an infinite sink.  The  rate  at  which this process occurs, K,
(I/day), must be evaluated for  each setting and chemical  of  concefn.  The
volatilization  rate,  Ky,  is  related  to  the  mass   transfer coefficient,
if           bv K  - K         /H, , where H. is the water depth.
 air-water'   y  v    air-water' 1'         1
    The conventional methods employed are  based  upon  the two  film theory of
air-water surface  exchange.   Two mass  transfer  coefficients  are required:
the liquid  phase mass  transfer coefficient, K£l and  the gas  phase  transfer
coefficient,  Kg.    These  are  related  to  the  overall  mass  transfer  rate,
K         . via the reciprocal  relationship:
 air-water*

               1     m I_ + _L_                                       (5-20)
          air-water     *     g
where  H is Henry's  constant  for  the  chemical.   The  units  of  these  mass
transfer coefficients  are typically meters/day.

     One method of  measuring Henry's constant  is  to  perform an experiment
 using  filtered water  from the  location  in question  and enclosing it within
 a vessel which has a gas phase overlying the  liquid phase.    If  Cj is the
 measured liquid phase dissolved chemical  concentration (mass of chemical/-
 liter  of liquid phase) and cg  is the measured gas phase concentration  (mass
 of chemical/liter  of  gas phase)  at  equilibrium  then  the Henry's  constant
 is:
H . _i (1 Of water/1 of gas)
    cl
                                                                       (5'21)
 which is referred  to as  the  -dimensionless"  form of  the  constant.   Note  its
 similarity  to  the  partition coefficient » - r/Cj.   In  fact,  it is  the  gas
 phase-liquid phase partition coefficient.

      Another reliable method  of  estimating Henry's  constant  is to  use  the
 water  solubility and vapor pressure of  the  chemical.   Since both  of  these

                                        125

-------
concentrations represent equilibrium concentrations between a pure chemical
phase  (solid  or liquid)  and  an aqueous  or gas  phase respectively,  they
should also  represent  the equilibrium condition  in the tvo  phase experi-
ments described above.  Unfortunately  it  is usually not clear  what  is the
reference state of  the  pure  chemical phase for these  measurements so that
care must be taken in their use.

    If p  is  the vapor pressure (in  mm Hg)  and cg  is  the  water solubility
(mg/1) and I is temperature (°C), then it  is  convenient  to  convert  cg to
units of mg/1:

               o (mm Hg)    1 mole gas _  MX IP3 mg   ^ 273 *  (°C)   (5_22)
         cg " 760 (mm Hg)   22.4 1 gas   mole chemical      273

where  p/760  Is  the saturated partial  pressure which, for  ideal  gases, is
the mole  fraction of chemical in the gas phase.  At 0°C and I atmosphere of
pressure, a mole of gas occupies  22.4  liters.   Finally,  M is the  molecular
weight (gm/mole) of chemical and  103 converts  to milligrams.  An  equivalenc
calculation  giving  the  same  answer uses the gas  constant, R,  and assorted
conversions.   Note" that  this  calculation  assumes that  the  solubility is
measured  at  25°C.   For  different  temperatures  both the  solubilicy,  the
vapor  pressure,  and the  volume of ideal  gas/mole  changes (the latter  via
the  Ideal gas  law).    The  importance  of  these corrections  depend  on  che
relative  magnitude of  the gas  and liquid phSase  transfer coefficients.
henry's  constant,  in dimensionless form, is then  calculated  by:
                                                                      (5-23)
              cs
     It is useful to delineate three basic cases:  (1) when K£  «  Hkg,  then
 K           in Equation 5-20  is essentially equal  to K   (liquid phase
  air-water     ^                                         *
 controlled); (2) when  ^  » Hkg,  then  fcair.wacer  t» essentially  equal  to
 HK   (gas phase  controlled);  and  (3)  when  Kt and  Hkg are  of  the  same
 magnitude, then both contribute-significantly to Kair_water'
                                       126

-------
                                   A
    As the  chemical-to-chemical variability  of H is  greater  than the
site-to-site variability of Kt and Kg,  the value of  the H is generally more
important  than  the  environmental conditions  in  determining  whether the
liquid  or gas  phase resistance controls  the volatilization  rate.
graphical presentation of Equation 5-20 is shown on  Figure 5-13 for  various
ratios of the transfer  coefficients.   For substances with-Henry's constant
greater than 1, the liquid film controls and less than 0.001,  the gas  film
controls.

    Gas Phase.  The movement of air causes a mixing  of  the air surface film
which results  in  an increase in Kg.   Because  the evaporation of water  is
controlled  by  K ,  and  because this process  has  considerable  engineering
importance, data are available relating Kg (for water vapor)  to the  ambient
windspeed.  Such data  are  presented by O'Connor (1980) and HydroQual
(1982).   By including theoretical effects of diffusivity and  viscosity,  the
result  is:

          K  - 0.001 WI  (D 7v  )°'67                                   (3-24)
          g              &  &

where:

     D  •  diffusivity  of substance in air (cm /sec)
      K                                        2
     v  »  kinematic  viscosity  of air (a 0.15 cm  /sec)
      g
     WI  -  wind  speed (L/T)

     As   the  expression  is dimensionally  correct,   consistent units  will
 result  in kg having the same  units  as  WI.   Average  windspeeds  tend  to be in
 the  neighborhood of  5  m/sec.  Although  transient  periods of  no wind are
 common  in many localities, such periods  are not long.  Consequently, use of
 a steady-state condition of little or no wind  may  not produce a realistic
 result.  Figures 5-14 and 5-15 show the  empirical relationships between the
 diffusivity in air, D  , with molecular weight  and gas  transfer coefficient,
 K ,  as a function of windspeed.
127

-------
-I
o
£

-------
    0,20
    aio
    COS
OT
    ao2
    aoi
   10     20
                                         AIM, 29*C
                                  I
                                     ©CALCULATED
                                     .   I	I
                     90     100    200
                      MOLECULAR WEIGHT
                                       900
                                                1000
       FIGURE 5-14. DIFFUSIVITY (AIR) VERSUS
                MOLECULAR WEIGHT
   e
   x
   6
   2
   u
   U.
   UJ
   8
vt
2
       90OO
    400O
       3000
   ~   2000
   
                                • -CMAM86RLAIM (1966)
                10      20     30     '0
                    WX-WI'NOSPEEO  (m
                                        90
                                                 60
     FIGURE 5-15. GAS PHASE CONTROL AIR / WATER
               TRANSFER COEFFICIENT
                             129

-------
    Liquid Phase.   In  Impounded waters and other slow moving water bodies,
water turbulence"may be  generated  by wind.   O'Connor (1980) and HydroQual
(1982) summarized data relating K^ to windspeed, WI.  These data suggest a
relationship:
  - 0.17
                     WI
                     ,2/3
                                                                   (5-25)
where:
    r  m Drag coefficient  (unitless), and        2
    «  - Kinematic viscosity of water (-0.0100 cat /sec.)
    The units of all other parameters must be chosen  to  be compatible.
also appeari  to. vary with  windspeed, WI,  but may maintain a value  around
0.001  for WI  less  than  10 m/day.   As with using Equation. 5-21,  sustained
periods of  little  or no wind are not common; k^Oj)  values  substantially
less than about 0.5 m/day are not usually expected.   Figures  5-16  and 5-17
     6
     u
     i
     O
     tf)
     a
           0.1
                                                     WATER,29°C
          2.0 -    &
           1.0
           0.9
0129
 0.2
                             O
                                                     & EXPERIMENTAL
                                                     O CALCULATED
             10
          20
90      100     200
  MOLECULAR WEIGHT
                                                       900
                                                    (000
              FIGURE 5-I6.-DIFFUSIVITY (AIR) VERSUS
                         MOLECULAR  WEIGHT
                                      130

-------
   .004
K  .003 -
UJ

3
O


(9
<
IT
O
   .002 —
    .001 -
   .000
              3       iO       '3
                 WI-WINOSPEEO (m/sec)
 2


 O
 O
 u

 e
 IU
 u.

 2
 O


 a
                      10       19

                  WI-WINOSPEEO (m/sec)
       FIGURE 5-17. LIQUID PHASE CONTROL
       AIR/WATER TRANSFER COEFFICIENT
                       131

-------
show  the  empirical relationships  between  the  diffusivity  in  water  as  a
function of molecular weight and the liquid  transfer  coefficient (Kt) as a
function of windspeed.

    Equation 5-20 can be examined in light of the observed relationships of
Kt and K  versus windspeed.   If  H  < 10"4," then Kg  will control ^r^atar
in all  aquatic  environments, even  standing waters.   This  is  because HKg
will increase much more slowly than ^ as a function of windspeed.  In this
case, the  analyst  need not  consider  the turbulence  of the water  body at
all.   Furthermore,  surface  transfer will be  slow  for substances  of this
type, and the rate will decrease as H decreases.
    If H >  1,  then  Kt will control Kalr_wacer  *n a*1 aquatic environments
except  possibly those  with extraordinarily  turbulent  flow.    Under  this
condition the analyst need not consider the air phase.
                           •
5.9 'Chemical Kinetics of Degradation

    The rates  at  which a chemical  transfers  between various phases  in  the
environment  controls  ics relative  distribution within  the  water body  and
sediment  layers.    In previous sections,  chemical  transfer and  transport
have  been  discussed.    Chemicals,  however, may degrade  in  Che  envirorimenc
through physical or biological processes.   The  predominate processes, which
are  addressed  in  this  section,  are  photolysis,   hydrolysis and  biodegra-
dation.

    These  kinetic processes have been extensively discussed in  other USEPA
manuals  (Book II,  Chapter 3,  USEPA. 1984 and Book VIII, USEPA,  1982).   The
 reader  is   referred   to  these  documents  for  detailed   discussions  and
 information.  The following sections  will  highlight  the  basic  principles of
 each  process  and  discuss  available  techniques  for  measuring the  key
 reaction  rates or coefficients.
                                      132

-------
    5.9.T  Photolysis

    One  of  Che  Important  mechanisms  by which  organic chemicals  may  be
transformed in  the  environment is  by photolysis.   It is  defined  as  the
chemical degradation or disassociacion of a  compound by the action of  the
radiant energy of light.  Only light  that  is absorbed, which is  a  quantum
process,  can  produce  a photochemical  change.    A  significant  number  of
organic chemicals absorb sunlight  most strongly  in the ultraviolet region.

    The  photolytic  decomposition  of  a  chemical  is  brought  about by  the
absorption of  the light energy,  which may be acquired by  the molecule in
any  one  of  the  three  following  ways:     direct  absorption,  indirect
(sensitized)  adsorption  or   reaction  with  a   photochemicalljr  excited
molecule.  The  first,  as  the  name implies, refers  to the  decomposition of
the  organic chemical  by direct  absorption of  light.  The  second  is a
photolytic reaction, which  is  accelerated  by the  presence  of other organic
compounds  which transfer the  energy to the  chemical.  The third  is   the
reaction  of  the  organic chemical  with a  photosensitized  compound.    All
mechanisms may  be effective in natural waters.    Direct photolysis  is most
significant  in  systems with low  concentrations  of photosensitizes such as
humic  acids.

     In view of the presence of phocosensitizers  in  all natural  wacer
 systems,  it  is probable that most  organic  chemicals are subjected to  both
 direct and  sensitized  reactions.    Furthermore,  adsorption  to suspended
 solids may alter the maximum  absorption  wavelength  and photoreactivity  of a
 molecule, thus  changing  the energy  required  for  photodecomposition.   At
 this stage in  the development of  the field, it  is difficult to  distinguish
 between the  various mechanisms.   Although  it is  possible and desirable to
 conduct  laboratory experiments to do so, the extrapolation  of  these
 findings  to   prototype  conditions  is  tenuous.     Consequently,   it  is
 preferable to  carry on such experiments in water  samples  from  the  actual
 system  under  study using  various  concentrations  of  solids  to cover  the
 range encountered in the actual  system.
                                      133

-------
    The kinetic expressions,  presented in the following sections, describe
the suggested framework for evaluating laboratory data and for correlating
the rate coefficients.  The means, by which  the reaction coefficient thus
determined, may be extrapolated to prototype  conditions is described.  The
extrapolation is presented taking  into account  the relative significance of
direct and photosensitized photolysis.

    Kinetic Expression.  The rate of  photochemical reaction may  usually be
expressed as a first-order reaction

         *£.-*<•                                                   (5'26>
         dt     p

    The  reaction  coefficient,  Kp,  is a function of  the quantum yield and
the light  absorbed in the reaction.  The quantum yield,  *, a characteristic
quantity  of  a photochemical reaction,  is the ratio  of  the  number of
molecules  changed  to  number  of light quanta  absorbed.  The light  absorbed
depends on  the available light  in  direct  photolysis and on  the lighc
absorbed by  the intermediate sensitizers.
                   • .
    The   most  direct  determination   of   photolysis  is  through   field
measurements.   Ultraviolet transparent vessels and dark vessels as  controls
are  suspended at  various  depths.   The  first order degradation of  chemical
is observed  in  each container.   The overall photolysis   race  can  be
calculated by depth  averaging  the  various  rates.  This  procedure yields  an
unambiguous estimate  of  field  photolysis  rate  and  requires  no  further
 assumption.

     Laboratory experiments can also  be performed in  which  the chemical  is
 irradiated • in  an  ultraviolet  transparent  vessel   and  degradation  is
 observed.   The  first order rate  at which  degradation  occurs  is  the
 laboratory photolysis  rate, Kp  (lab).  If  Kp (lab)  reflects the  same
 ultraviolet solar radiation  as the field site, then the site specific rate
 can be  computed using the expression:
                                     134

-------
         K- (field)  -    (Rab)  t1  •  ex*  ('Ke  ' H)lf                  (5"27)
          P             *aH               e
where K   is  the  diffuse attenuation coefficient  of ultraviolet radiation,
H is the water column depth and f  is the fraction of daylight hours.
    The  extinction  coefficient   can  be  measured   directly  using  an
ultraviolet irradiance meter, or it  can  be  estimated  from the secchi disk
transparency depth, Z^t and an empirical  relationship
         K Zm - 5 to 42
          e s
                                                                     (5-28)
with  a  median value of 9.2.   Note that  this  relationship correlates  the
secchi disk depth to the extinction of ultraviolet light which is  the most
significant  catalyst of photolysis.   Since this  coefficient  is quite
variable  accurate  estimates  require in  situ  measurements  of  the  vertical
distribution  of  ultraviolet  radiation for the wavelengths  chat cause
photolysis.

    Light  and Quantum Yield.   The reaction coefficient,  Kp,  may also  be
expressed  as:

          K -  K I                                                    (5-29}
          Kp    Va

 in  which K  is a  functon on  the light  absorption characteristics  and  the
           o
 quantum yield of  the chemical  and Ia is the average available light.   The
 rate  of change of  light per unit depth is proportional to its  intensity  and
 may be  expressed as:

          4! . -K  I                                                   (5-30)
          dZ   V

 which integrates  to

                      Ke  ' Z)                                         (5-31)

                                     135

-------
in which

    I  • intensity at  depth, Z
    I  - intensity at  the  surface, z-o
     o                           -i
    K  • extinction coefficient, L

    The average value of light in the  vertical  is obtained by integrating
over the depth and dividing  b«  the depth:
         <.-f "-«•>
If the magnitude of KeH » 1,  as in deep  turbid  systems, which is represen-
tative of many natural waters, Equation 5-30  reduces  to:
         T  .  «_                                                    (5-33)
          *   KeH
Conversely  if KftH  «  I,  as  in  clear  shallow  systems  representative of
laboratory conditions, Equation 5-30 becomes:
                                                                     <5-34)
 and  obviously approaches I  as a limit.
                          o
     The   extinction  of   light,   as  measured   by   the   magnitude   of   the
 coefficient,  K , is  due to the physical  processes  of absorption  and
 scattering.  The  first component, absorption, occurs when a photon  of light
 is taken  up  by the compound.   The energy  induces  excitation and  either
 transformation of the  molecular structure or decay back to the ground state
 by liberation of  heat arid  light.   Both dissolved and  particulate  matter
 absorb light.   Scattering occurs when a photon of  light  has  its  direction
 of propagation changed due  to collision with a particle in the water.
                                     136

-------
    In order  Co  characterize  Che extinction coefficient completely,  it  is
also necessary to know  the  angular  distribution of the light  scattered  by
the particles.   The volume  scattering  function  specifies  the angular
distribution of scattering as a  function  of  the  angle  between  incoming and
outgoing photons.  It is composed of forward and isotropic components.  The
former, expressed as a  fraction, T,  is  scattered in the incident: direction
and the latter, 1 - y» ia the isotropically scattered fraction.

    For a  wide  range of conditions  in  natural  water systems,  it  has been
demonstrated  Chat the extinction coefficient may be approximated by:
Ke - a
                  (i-r)b                                             <5-35)
 in which:
       a •  absorption coefficient
       b •  scattering coefficient
     1-T •  isotropically  scattered  fraction

 It  is  possible  to estimate  the  magnitude  of  T  from  readily measurable
 quantities.   From  a'series  of such measurements, its  range  is 0.91  Co 0.98,
 with a reasonable  average of 0.95.  Thus, (i-Y)  • 0.05.

     Similarly,  the absorption  and scactering coefficiencs, a and b, may  be
 correlated to the  concentrations of both dissolved and oarticulace  solids.
 The particulate solids,  in Cum, may  be  subdivided  into  the  organic  and
 inorganic  components,  each  of which have distinct effects  on  the absorption
 and scattering.   Since the majority of  the  light attenuating components  in
 natural systems are in  particulate  form,  Che cocal  extinction  coefficient
 may  generally  be expressed  as  the "sum  of the  organic and  inorganic
 fractions  of the parciculace  solids  plus the absorpcion due co  che  chemical
 undergoing photolysis:

          K  - oc + 3m  + 6m                                          (5-36)
           e          o     i
                                      137

-------
in which:
       m  • concentration of organic particulate solids
        o
       m. • concentration of inorganic particulate solids
        c • dissolved concentration of chemical
    a,8,9 • constants
In the vast majority of cases, the first term is insignificant with respect
to light extinction, due  to  the  relative concentrations of particulate and
chemical.

    The  dependence  of the  rate of  reaction  on  characteristics  of the
chemical is specified by KO  in Equation  5-29.   This constant is a function
of the quantum yield, *, which is the fraction  of the light absorbed by the
chemical that produces  a  photoreaction  and the extent of light absorption,
a  .  Assuming that the  concentration of  chemical is small, as is  the common
condicion  in natural  water systems,  the coefficient,  KO,  is  defined  as
follows:
                                                                      (5-37)
 in  which
     +  » quantum yield at  wavelength \
     a.  • extent of light absorption
    1  J • a conversion factor to transform light to concentration units

          _ 2.6 X 104 _  .langleys,
          X (nm) X HCgrms molecular weight)  mg/l-m

 The sum is taken over all active wavelengths.  Values for  $x  and  *x may be
 obtained from laboratory experiments.
                                      138

-------
    Substitution of Equations  5-29 and 5-32 in 5-26 and integration yields:
                                                                    (5-38)

K  and K  are further identified  by  Equations  5-36 and 5-37, respectively.
 e      o

    The  above  relations  are  most  appropriate  for  direct   ohotolytic
reactions.  They may also be used as a preliminary framework for  sensitized
photolysis in many cases.  Zepp (1980),  provides  a more  complete  discussion
of this process.

    Since many  chemicals absorb  most strongly in  the ultraviolet  region,
the factors affecting penetration in natural waters  of light  in this
wavelength  region  deserves  particular attention.    Fresh  inland  waters
contain various  quantities  of  dissolved  and particulate maccer.  The
dissolved organic matter,. which  is derived from  detrital  or decaying
vegetative natter,  appears  to  have  a  substantial effect on  the attenuation
of ultraviolet  light.   The  necessity  of measuring prototype  condicions  and
using  samples from'these waters in conjunction with  pure water  is evident.

    5.9.2  Hydrolysis

    Hydrolysis  is  a reaction in which a cleavage of  a molecular bond of  the
compound  occurs and  the formation  of  a new bond   with  the  hydrogen  and
hydroxyl  components of  the  water molecule  results.   Hydrolytic reactions
are  usually catalyzed by an acid or base  and are  identified  in that
 fashion.   To a more  limited  degree,  there  may also  be a  neutral  reaction
with  water.   By its  nature,  the  rate of  the reaction is a  function  of  pH
 and,  as with most  chemical  reactions, temperature.

    The reaction  equation  is fundamentally  second  order,  containing  the
 product of  the  concentration of  the chemical  and either the hydrogen ion or
 hydroxide ion concentration,  and  in general,  may be expressed ass

                                     139

-------
in which:
    K - K [Hj* for acid hydrolysis
      - Kv [OH]" for alkaline  hydrolysis
         B
      • K [H-0]  for neutral hydrolysis

    The effect  of  pH on the  reaction  may be quite  pronounced.  ' Data  are
available  from  laboratory  experiments   at  relatively   low  chemical
concentrations,  representative  of natural  water  systems.   These data
demonstrate the effect of pH  on the  first order rate coefficient as  shown
on  Figure 5-18.   On  the  upper figure,  the  more  pronounced  effects  are
presented  and  on the  lower,  the  less  pronounced.    For  those  pesticides
whose rates  are pH  dependent,  the  patterns appear to  be  reasonably
consistent and  in accord with theoretical hypothesis.  Due to  the acid  and
base  catalytic  action, greater  reaction  coefficients  are  observed  at  the
acid  and  alkaline  pH extremes and minimum values  in the  neutral zone,  as
shown on  the' figure..

    For most substances  there is no  alternative to  a direct  measurement of
this   rate  since   at  present,   theoretical  methods  for  estimating  the
hydrolysis rate constant  do not exist.  A straightforward laboratory
experiment in which the. rate  of degradation of  the  chemical  is observed at
various  pH levels  is  the conventional  method.   The hydrolysis  rate  appears
 to  be dependent  upon the  composition  of the aqueous  phase so  that site
 specific measurements are  preferable.   The laboratory experiment should be
 performed within the  range  of pH observed  in the system.

     5.9.3 Biodegradation

     Microbial  degradation  of organic  chemicals  is a  common  occurrence in
 many  situations.    Classical  dissolved oxygen  depletion  problems  are
 associated  with  this  mechanism".   The  degree  of persistence of many
                                     140

-------
    10
    10
>
<
a
UJ
o
O
     10
     10
UJ
2

-------
chemicals is ultimately controlled by this rate.   Initially the biodegrada-
bility of a chemical is investigated in laboratory experiments in which the
chemical is exposed to large  concentrations of  bacterial biomass  and
degradation is monitored.   If no  significant  degradation is observed, then
it is assumed that  no  degradation will occur in  the  environment since the
biomass  of  degradation organisms  Is certain  to  be  less than  that  used in
the laboratory reactors.  If degradation does occur, then the rate at which
it can be expected  to occur in the field must be estimated.

    Essentially  there  is  no alternative to  well  conceived experimental
•procedures  that evaluate the rate of microbial degradation  In situ for both
the water  column  and  sediment.   General designs are  difficult  to suggest
and site specific  factors  often dictate  the  required  experiments.   It has
been   suggested   that   the   rate   of  microbial   degradation  is  directly
correlated  to the  biomass of  bacteria  as measured via plate counts.  While
evidence exists  that  this  relationship  can be  used' for certain chemicals
that  undergo  degradation  mediated by enzymes that  are common  co many
microorganisms,  it is  aot  known a  priori  that  the  relationship will apply
to a  specific .setting for  a specific chemical.  Thus,  some experimental or
                   • ,
field calibration  work is required.

5.10   Sediment  Capacity Ratio

     The effectiveness of sediment removal mechanisms  (decay  and sedimenta-
 tion) as sinks  of  chemical  is  determined to a large extent by the magnitude
 of the sediment capacity factor,  B.  Therefore,  its variation as a function
 of the  relevant physical and chemical parameters is  an important component
 in the understanding of chemical  fate.  The capacity factor is given by the
 expression:

              _ »   £
                                                                      (5-40)

 where  m  and m.  are  the  particle  concentrations  in  the  water  column and
 sediment respectively;  H.  and  H2 are  the water  column and sediment depths;
                                      142

-------
f   and f -  are  the  partlculate fractions of total  chemical  concentration
in the water column and sediment.   These latter  fractions  are  given by:
         e          l                                                (5-41)
         rpl   I + rnT
         c   	                                              (5-42)
         Cp2   I + mjij
Hence the sediment capacity factor is a linear function of the depth ratio
H /H ; and  a more complicated  function  of the  water column  and  sedimen
solids concentrations, m^ and m2, and partition coefficients, »j and »2.
    Consider first the  sediment  parameters, m2  and  »2,  which determine the
particulate fraction f  -.  The relationship is  shown  on Figure 5-19.   With
the  exception  of weakly partitioning  chemicals,  »2  <  10   I/kg,  and
unrealistlcally  low  sediment  solids  concentrations, ra2 <' 10  mg/L,  fp2 is
approximately  one and  »2  is  not  a  significant  factor in  determining 3.
Note,  however,   that  m2, the  sediment solids  concentration,  is  directly
involved: 6 is linear with respect to m2.

    The effect of water column parameters, m^ and »l§ can be highlighted as
follows.  The capacity  factor can be expressed as:
 and  by cancelling  the o^,  the  result  is:


          • • % v. %
 where
          f        *                                                  (5-45)
          zdl   I •»• m
                                     143

-------
    10001—
                                  1,000,000
  i,000.000 E
   100,000
    10,000 =
     l,00'0
           i i  imm   i i M i
                 tO         ICO
                   m, (mq/I)
1000
FIGURE 5-19. DISSOLVED AND PARTICULATE
       FRACTIONS VERSUS IT,  AND m
                  144

-------
The water  column  solids  concentration  enters  into the expression  ror  cne
dissolved fraction, £dl,  and its variation as a  function  of  mL and  »L  is
also shown on Figure 5-19.   If m^ <  0.1, then  fdl  « 1.   That^is  fdl  is
approximately one for ^  < 105 I/kg and n^ - 1 mg/1, or Vj <  10   I/kg  and
m.  »  10  mg/1.   Therefore,  for  the  intermediate  range of partition
coefficients and water  column  solids concentration, fdl • 1 and 6  becomes:
         .-Vi                    10 and g  becomes:
         , .                           fp2 .  I.  Vl >  10            (5-7,

 and  the  partition coefficients are not involved  at  all  but  the water column
 solids concentrations now assume a role in determining  3.

     Since  sediment  data are  not  available that complement  the available
 water  column data ic is not  possible  to  construct  a  probability plot for
 the   sediment   capacity  ratio  which   takes  the  variation  of  sediment
 properties  into account.   However, if  constant  values  are assigned to &2
 and H-, then  an estimate  of the probability can be  constructed.   The
 probability  is illustrated on  Figure  5-20 for  the ratio  m^/m^.   The
 range  of m-Hj/m.Hj  is about 10  to 100 for an assumed  value of m^ -  1000
 g/m .

     It  must  be  emphasized  that   the  probability  plot  presented  (Figure
 5-20),  is  constructed  only to  give  insight  to  the  solids mass  ratio.
 Since,  the m2H2 value is assigned  arbitrarily,  the  results  are not
 necessarily representative  of actual conditions.
                                     145

-------
                 NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION STUDY LAKES
    1000
CM


M

E

-------
    Additional guidelines for estimating the  sediment  capacity factor are
given  in  the  following  sections.    The  first  section assumes  the water
column partition  coefficient  to  equal the  sediment  partition coefficient
while  the  second investigates  the effect  of variable  partition  coeffi-
cients.

    5.10.1  Equal Water Column and  Sediment  Partition Coefficient:

    A number- of  relationships  can  be developed if »j  is  assumed equal  to
»,.  The sediment capacity factor for ^  -  TZ becomes:

         B.!l  "*V>                                           „-*•>
         8   Hj  (1 + m^)

    The first  relationship shown on Figure  5-21 assumes typical  values  for
both H./H, and m2 of  1,000 and 100,000,  respectively.  The  figure presents
the  sediment  capacity factor as a function of. m^  and ».   Note thac  the
partition coefficient  Is  the  dominant  factor  for  Low solids  concentrations
m   <  10  mg/1.   For  the  intermediate range  (10-100  mg/1)  the  partition
coefficient  controls  for t, <  10*  I/kg  and the  solids  concentration
                    4        l
controls for  v1 > 10   1/kg.

    Since  the sediment  capacity  factor,  S,  is  inversely  proportional  to
H./H-, the contours shown on Figure 5-21 can easily be  transposed for other
values of H./Hj.  If,"for  example,  the  Hj/Hj  ratio is  100,  a  tenfold
decrease, the values  of  B would simply increase by a factor of ten.

    The  magnitude of 6  is  also  proportional  to the  sediment  solids
concentration,  m2<   Since  this  concentration is  directly related  to
sediment  porosity,  its probable range is i^  - 50,000  to 500,000 mg/1,  so
 that  B can vary  over  another  order of  magnitude.  Hence  the magnitude  of S
 is quite  variable and should be calculated  for each  location of interest.
A dimensionless  plot  of  B  versus m^^  and m^ is shown on  Figure 5-22 for
 the case that ».  • »..   This  figure  can  be  used  to  estimate  B directly
 since for any other depth  ratio, t^/Hj, B changes linearly.
                                     147

-------
                         SEDIMENT CAPACITY FACTOR CONTOURS
OB
         o
         oc
         H
         z

         a
         z
         o —
         o —
o  _
Ul g

z
2
         o
         o

         DC
              1000 pr
      100 -
                IO
                          IOO
                          I.OOO       IO.OOO

                              Vt (I/kg)

                 WATER COLUMN PARTITION COEFFICIENT
                                                       lOO.OOO
I.OOO.OOO
FIGURE 5-21  CONTOURS OF SEDIMENT CAPACITY FACTOR, £. VERSUS

                t FOR1T2= fti H^Hg- 1000, m2= 100,000 mq /I
                irtAND

-------
                  SEDIMENT CAPACITY FACTOR CONTOURS
   10'
    10'
   io'          io-          io'

SEDIMENT SOLIDS CONCENTRATION-PARTITION COEFFICIENT
FIGURE 5-22. CONTOURS OF SEDIMENT CAPACITY FACTOR, 0, VERSUS
DIMENSIONLESS SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS FOR Hj/Hp" 1000, irg= Uj

-------
    5.10.2  Particulace Ratio

    The ratio r2/rl is  the  ratio of particulate chemical  concentration  in
the sediment, r2 to that in  the  overlying  waters,  ^ in units  of  chemical
per unit mass of solids.  The  particulate  ratio r2/rL has -a  direct effect
on  the  sediment removal  mechanisms of  sediment  decay  and  sedimentation
since :

              Kl + 8  (K2 * fp2 Ks2>     -                     <5
Through mass balances, the ratio can be shown  to  be a function of sediment
decay,  sediment depth,  diffusive  exchange,   sedimentation,  resuspension,
water column and sediment partition coefficients and. solids concentrations.
The full algebraic expression is given as follows:
         r?   <«,.*».> go2 * ~L *-2'-I' -dl                        (5.30)

 Estimates   for   all  these  mechanisms  have   been  approximated  in   the
 appropriate  sections of  this  manual.   These estimates  are  summarized  in
 Table 5-7.

     Based  upon  these results it appears  that  the probable range  for  rj/^
 is O.I  -  1.0  for  K2 < O.I/day.   Combining  this  information  with  the
 probable range  of 8 - 0.01 - 100 suggests that the range of  8  r2/rlt  which
 is  the  parameter  group  that  directly determines  the  importance  of  the
 sediment removal mechanisms, Kj + KS, is in the range Br2/rl  - .001  to 100,
                                      150

-------
                   TABLE 5-7.  SUMMARY OP LAKE PARAMETERS
      Variable
Water Column Solids
Concentration

Water Column Depth

Sediment Solids
Concentration

Active Sediment Layer
Depth

Sediment Capacity
Factor

Interstitital Water
Diffusion Coefficient

Characteristic
Diffusion Length

Diffusive Exchange
Coefficient
                   • •
Sedimentation Velocity

•Resuspension Velocity

Particulate
Concentration
Ratio
 Symbol
Hl

"2


H2

3
VYV
W21

r2/rl
Probable Range     Information Base

2.0-20.0 (mg/1)  Good
0.5-20.0 (m)

50,000-500,000
    (mg/1)
0.01-100.0
            0.3r3.0
            (on /day)

            0.1-1.0 (cm)
 1-100 cm/day
   (mm/yr)

 0.5-50  (mm/yr)

 1-750 (mm/yr)

 0.1-1.0
Excellent

Good
0.1-10.0 (cm)    Fair
Strong Function of
H./H-* 1*2' ff 1

Good


Poor


Poor


Good

Poor

This  Is  Che likely
for all  but very
reactive chemicals,
K2>0.1/day
 5.11  Bioaccumulation of Chemical

           •
     The bioconcentration  and  depuration of  chemical by  aquatic  organisms

 can' be a primary factor for formulating the guidelines of  a WLA.   That is,
 the  desired  level of  chemical  may  be  a  function  of the impacts  on the
 aquatic food chain.  However, it  is  not the intention of  this  document to
 develop chemical criteria or guidelines.  Therefore, the reader is referred
 to Appendix D for a technical discussion of bioconcentration and depuration

 by aquatic organisms.
                                      151

-------
                                SECTION 6.0
                      PRINCIPLES OF MODEL APPLICATION

    Sections  4.0 and 5.0 of  this  manual  describe  in  decail  the daca
requirements for  performing  an evaluation of  chemical fate,  including  a
review of techniques  of analyzing the data  to  extract the requisite model
input information.  The actual application of the model to the analysis  of
field data requires the systematic utilization of this information  in  such
a way as  to obtain  an  improved  understanding of  the  problem being
investigated.  This section includes  a recapitulation  of  the  procedures  for
obtaining  the  model  input data  and  presents  an overview of  the  general
principles of model application.

6.1 Evaluation of Model Inputs

    The previous  sections described in detail the procedures  for  collecting
data  and estimating chemical loading rates,  fluid and  particulate transport
parameters,  and  chemical  transfer and decay rates.    Each  of these  icesis
represents  an  essential aspect of  the model calibration analysis  and  the
reliability  associated with  the  various  parameter estimates  will have  a
direct bearing on the credibility of the  analysis as  a whole.

     The  importance of  reliable measures of the  upstream,  tributary  and
wastewater chemical loading  rates both before  and during  the period of the
 field surveys is  emphasized.   At a minimum, waste  samples  should  be
 collected  for a  period approximately equal  to  the  detention  time  of  the
 system.   Further, some estimates  of the  long term (three to six month and
 yearly average) chemical loading  rates  should also  be  available,  as
                                     152

-------
sediment concentration  levels are  probably  more  closely  related  to  long
tern average  loading  rates than  the  short  term  values measured  during a
survey period.

    The  transport characteristics  of  the  receiving  water  must,  also  be
determined for the model analysis.  Stream flow rates to a lake are usually
obtainable from  a nearby OSGS  gaging station.   The volume  and  retention
time are  also required.   This  information  is  available  from a  number of
sources, but  may be most readily obtainable from  the USEPA  as part of  the
NES.

    An   important  element   in   the   calculation   of   the   environmental
distribution  of  those chemicals moderately or strongly  absorbed to sediment
is  the  settling and resuspension  rates  of particulates.   The  effective
particle  settling velocity  can  be  measured with sedimentation  traps or
bounded  by either  Stokes Law  or  settling ' test  data.   Resuspension  and
sedimentation rates are then determined  from an analysis of'observed
suspended  solids distributions.
                   •.
     The final information which  must  be obtained for  problem analysis  and
WLA is  concerned with  reactions and  transfer rates.    Certain  of  these
 reaction rates are  characteristic of  the chemical by its  nature  and  can be
 determined in  the  laboratory and  modified  to  field  conditions..   Solids-
 water partition  coefficients should be determined for  the  wide  range of
 solids concentrations  to  be expected  in  water column  to sediment.   Such
 tests are best  performed with samples  of  the  particulate  material obtained
 from  the  study  area.   Hydrolysis is  a  characteristic of  the chemical
 substance and can  be  determined in  the  laboratory using  samples of  the
 receiving water.   Photolysis  and  volatility  are similarly  determined in
 calibrated   laboratory   experiments  and  converted   to   field    conditions
 observed  or  expected during  surveys.   Biodagradation,  if  any,  should be
 assessed  in  laboratory experiments using samples from the  site  containing
 acclimatized  organisms  as a first approximation.
                                      153

-------
   .Table 6-1 presents  a summary of information required  for the modeling

analysis.


     TABLE 6-1.  DATA REQUIREMENTS FOR CHEMICAL FATE MODELING ANALYSIS


                                 FIELD DATA

    Water column concentrations (dissolved and particulate)
    Sediment concentrations (diaswl^cd and particulate)
    Suspended solids concentration and de.pth of penetration
    Sediment -solids concentration and porosity
    Chlorides or conservative tracer for flow balance
    Light intensity and penetration (for photolytic chemicals)

                                LOAD INPUTS

    Dissolved and particulate mass discharges from point sources
    Upstream, tributaries and non-point sources
    Suspended solids mass discharges from all sources

                           TRANSPORT INFORMATION

    Flow balance
    Volume  and depth
    Active-sediment depth
    Suspended sediment  settling  rate
    Sediment resuspension rate
    Sedimentation rate

                          REACTIONS AND TRANSFERS

    Solids-water partition coefficients for  range  of  solids  concentrations
    Hydrolysis data
    Photolysis rate
    Volatilization  rate
    Biodegradation  rate
    Sediment diffusion rate
 6.2  Calibration/Validation Procedures


     The  calibration  and verification  of  a water  quality model  should be

 performed in a systematic manner  in  order to achieve all  of  the potential

 benefits of the modeling effort.  Although  it  is  not possible to prescribe

 a  detailed  step by  step  approach  that  is  applicable to  all  problem


                                      154

-------
settings,  there  are   certain   features  of   the   calibration/validation
procedure which are common  to most  situations.   The preferred  approach is
to calibrate the model with one  or more sets of  data, and then validate the
resulting calibrated model  by applying it  to an independent set  of  data.
The purpose of the calibration step is. to evaluate the parameters  which are
included in the  model formulation.   The model is then  applied to  the
validation data  set  using  a  consistent set of  model  parameters.  If  the
calculated model results are in good  agreement  with  the  independent set of
data,  the model  is  validated and can  be considered  for  use  in evaluating
alternative control strategies which are proposed and making WLA analyses.

    The  initial  attempt at model  validation often  identifies  areas  where
the model calibration  was  inadequate  and adjustments are made accordingly.
In such  a case, where  feedback  from the model validation is used  to  refine
the  results of  the  original  calibration  of  the  model,  the  distinction
between the  two steps is less  rigorous.  In any event,  the  ultimate
objective Is to arrive at  a consistent set of parameters which will  result
in  acceptable  agreement between the  calculated  model  results and- observed
data  for a  range  of.environmental conditions.

     A schematic  diagram  which summarizes   the  principal  features  of  the
model calibration procedure is  presented on Figure  6-1.  First,   the model
segmentation and  system  geometry  must  be  specified.    With simple,
completely  mixed  models,  this step  of the  analysis defines  the  water  column
and  sediment volumes, ^ and Vj, and depths, ^ and HZ,  for constant
 geometry reaches of the receiving water.   Other complex models may provide
 greater flexibility and  the  study  area may be  segmented into a  number  of
 compartments.  Additional  segments should  also  be established  at locations
 where point source loads  or tributaries enter the lake.

     The flow balance  is determined  on the basis of the gaging  station and
 plant flow records, or from  field  measurements  of  flow  at the time  of the
 survey.  The flow balance  should be checked by modeling  the distribution of
 a conservative  substance,  such as total dissolved  solids  or chlorides, to
 insure  that a reasonable flow balance has been  determined.
                                      155

-------
MODEL —
CALIBRATION
                           DEFINE LAKE GEOMETRY
                                  AND
                             DETENTION TIMg
                       DETERMINE FLOW DISTRIBUTION
                       AND CHECK WITH CONSERVATIVE
                           SUBSTANCE ANALYSIS
                      ANALYZE SUSPENDED SOLIDS DATA
                      TO EVALUATE PARTICLE SETTLING
                         ANO RSSUSPENSION RATES
                      ANALYZE CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTION
                      IN WATER COLUMN ANO SEDIMENT
                       APPLY MODEL TO VERIFICATION
                                 DATA  SET
                            USE OF MODEL AS AN
                              EVALUATIVE TOOL
POSSIBLE
RESVAUUATIQN
OP ANALYSIS
            FIGURE 6-1.  STEPS IN  MODEL APPLICATION
    Once  the model  geometry  and  flow  balance have  been established,
 suspended solids  data should  be  analyzed  Co evaluate che  parameters
 controlling  the  solids  concentration  profile  in the lake.   The  particle
 settling  velocity, Wj, should be assigned the basis of  field  measurements
 with  sedimentation traps or, if such measurements are unavailable, it may
 be  bounded  using  estimates  based   on  Stokes Law  and   particle  size
 distributions.   The net  flux o-f  solids  between  the  water  column and
 sediment, which is directly related to  the change in mass of solids in the
                                    156

-------
water column, establishes  the magnitude  of the sedimentation velocity, w^
The particle  resuspension  velocity, w2l,  can then be  directly determined
from the water  column suspended solids  profile,  BI,  provided the sediment
solids concentration, m^t is also known.

    The total chemical  profile  can  be  modeled using estimates of  the  total
chemical loading  rate,  WT. 'from each  of the known sources  of chemical  to
the  receiving  water.   Preliminary  estimates  of  the  water c«iuo.n anH
sediment partition  coefficients,  ^ and «2  respectively, are specified  at
this time  on the basis of  field  observations or  values  obtained from  the
literature.   Chemical  decay rates  are also assigned.   If  there  are  no
losses  of  chemical  from  the  system,   the partition  coefficient  will  noc
affect  the calculated spatial distribution of total chemical, but only  the
partitioning  of total chemical betw.een  the dissolved and  particulate
phases.  If  chemical is lost from the  system, however, such  as by decay or
sedimentation,  the  partition coefficient would have an effect on  the  total
chemical concentration  in  the water column,  and  an iterative approach would
be  required.   A comparison of calculated results and  observed  data will
indicate whether or not it  is  necessary to  make adjustments  to  jny of  che
model  parameters, 'if  adjustments  are required, they should  be  Limited  to
 che range  of uncertainty associated with the various  inputs.

     Once   the  model  has   been  calibrated,  it  should  be  validated  by
 calculating che receiving water and sediment response during an alternative
 set of environmental conditions.    Chemical  inputs  would  also be  changed to
 reflect the  load which preceded the  verification survey  period..  Kinetic
 coefficients  used   in  the  model  calibration  should   be  adjusted  for
 differences in  temperature or  light  intensity,  as appropriate,  but  should
 otherwise  be  consistent  with  the  values used  for  calibration  purposes.
 After making the necessary input modifications, the  computed model results
 are  compared  with the   verification   data  set  and,  if  agreement  is
 acceptable, the  model  can be considered  to  have been verified.   Inconsis-
 tent  results,  however, may indicate  aspects of  the data  analysis which
 should be reviewed,  and where  modifications should be made.  The intent of
 the  analysis  should be  to arrive  at  a  reasonable  and  consistent set of
                                     157

-------
model  parameters  which will  allow  the  model  to  calculate  the  essential
features of  the  water column and  sediment distributions.   Within limits,
differences  between  calculated  model results  and  observed data  are  to be
expected  and  are not  necessarily unacceptable.   The extent of  such
discrepancies will affect  the measure of  validation,  which is described in
Section 6.3.

    In  certain   instances  data   limitations  may  prevent   a  rigorous
calibration  and/or verification  analysis.  When this is  so, the available
data  may  still be utilized  to  arrive  at a  preliminary  model 'calibration
which may be useful  for planning  and assessment purposes.  The preliminary
model calibration will also  aid  in the  rational design of subsequent water
quality field surveys which are performed  for  the  purpose  of obtaining  daca
                            *
for validating the model.

    .The  methodology  of model calibration and verification  which has  been
described  represents a  generalized approach  which  can   be  followed  when
evaluating  almost  any receiving  water  system.  Although  the details  of Che
analysis will undoubtedly vary  with  the  specific problem  setting and
availability of  data,  the  general  direction  is to  proceed with  the analysis
in  a systematic  manner.    Each  step in  the  analysis  should  eliminate  an
additional  degree of freedom and,  as  much  as possible,  be independent  of
subsequent   tasks.   This  will  facilitate  the achievement  of  a  realistic
model for chemical fate.

6.3  Measure of  Validation

     Measure of  validation  refers  to  the  degree  to which the  calibrated
 model is capable of  reproducing  observed water quality  data over a range of
 environmental conditions.   It  addresses questions concerning  the  validity
 and utility of  the  water  quality  model  and will  directly affect  the level
 of  confidence  placed  in  the  accuracy  of  water  quality  projections.
 Numerous measures of  validation  have  been  proposed.   Qualitative  measures
 are  probably  the most  direct  and  readily  understood  indication of model
 performance,  and  are generally obtained  by comparing  data  and  calculated
                                      158

-------
model results by eye.   Other measures make use  of  more formal statistical
techniques  such  as regression  theory,  calculation  of  relative  error,  or
comparison  of  means to  quantify the goodness  of fit  of  the  data  by  the
model.  Each of these  approaches has  its  advantages and disadvantages.  At
present,  no  single measure of  validation  is  generally  agreed  upon as  the
best  measure  of  a model's  credibility.   A detailed review  of  model
verification in  general and measures of validation is  presented  elsewhere
(USEPA, 1980).

6.4   Sensitivity Analysis

    The   sensitivity  analysis  is  an  important   aspect   of   the   model
application.   It provides  a sense of those model parameters which are most
important in determining the  fate  of  the  chemical  being investigated,  and
leads to a  better understanding  of  the  significance  of  the  interactions
between   the mechanisms which  are  included  in  the model.   A sensicivicy
analysis  is performed  by  independently  or concurrently adjuscing selected
model parameters  of  interest over a  reasonable range of  values.   If  Che
computed  chemical  distribution is insensitive  to   the  perturbations of  a
 particular  model   parameter,  it  is  an indication chat  the   parameter  is
 adequately defined for  modeling purposes.  Alternatively, if  che computed
 results  are very  sensitive  to changes in a  particular  model  parameter, it
 focuses  actention on  Chat  particular parameter  in subsequent   investiga-
 tions.

     The  model  sensitivity  analysis also  provides  a means  of  assessing Che
 degree of  confidence which  should  be placed in model  projection results.
 For  example,  consider  a  hypothetical situation where a  model  projection
 shows  that a  proposed  permit  load will  result  in a  maximum  water  column
 concentration  that is 25  percent less than the maximum allowable receiving
 water  criterion.    The volatilization rate  of  the  substance is not  well
 defined, however,  and thus  the projection may or may not be accurate.   If a
 sensitivity analysis  shows that the criterion would still be  achieved  even
 with the  conservative assumption of  a zero  volatilization  rate,  the
 uncertainty  in  Che  volatilization  rate  would  be of much  less  concern.
                                      159

-------
Alternatively, if  the  standard was exceeded when  the volatilization  rate
was decreased by 50 percent, the importance of  an accurate determination of
the volatilization rate would be evident and future efforts  could be
directed to this area of study.

    Another  type  of uncertainty analysis  which  may be applicable,  is the
First Order  Uncertainty Analysis.   This  type of  analysis differs  from a
sensitivity analysis in that it provides the ability to combine sensitivity
functions.   The  idea is to  characterize the  parameter  uncertainty in
probabilistic  terms.   If  the  variability  of a  state variable  can be
expressed as  a linear function of the uncertainty parameters, a propagation
of  variance  formula can be applied.   The  major impediment  to  using First
Order Uncertainty  Analysis,  is the fact that  it results  from a lineariza-
tion of  the  state  equations.   Thus, if  the  equations are outside che region
of  reasonably linear behavior,  inaccurace  results might be expected.

    There  is another  method,  the Monte Carlo,  technique, chac dispenses  che
need  for linearization, but  at the expense of  greatly increased computa-
 tional  burden.   The  Monte  Carlo method randomly  selects parameter values
 from  parameter probability  density functions to  solve a  series  of  scace
 variable equations.   An estimate  of  the uncertainty covariance  is   Chen
 computed.

     Monte  Carlo  methods  can  be  quite  powerful   since   they  
-------
computational demand, but  it  is unlikely to result  in rawer  ca-n
simulations.  This, then,  sets the bound of practicality for  this  method.

    Di  Toro   ( 1984)   reviews  statistical  methods  for  estimating -  and
evaluating  the uncertainty  of  water quality  parameters.   The  reader  is
referred  to this  reference  for further  information  concerning  the  First
Order Uncertainty  Analysis  and the Monte Carlo technique.   The  following
section  discvsses  the  theory  and framework  for  performing  first  order
uncertainty analysis.

    6.4.1   First Order Uncertainty Analysis

    Water quality  and  ecological  models are normally  formulated as sees of
mass  conservation equations for the  concentrations of concern.   They
express the interrelations between transport, kinetics, and mass discharges
to  the  system  being  considered.  Let c(t)  be  the  vector of   concentrations
ordered in  some  convenient  way.  For example,  let  c  be the  vector ordered
by  location and   concentration  type:    c^x^t),   c^x^e),....  c^xn» = );
C2(xl§t)f   C2
-------
    The parameters of  I,  W  and  the reaction  expressions, r,  are usually
functions of  time 'as  well.    In  accordance with  normal  systems analysis
notation, we win express  this equation in state variable form:

            -g (x.e.u.t)                                               (6-2)
where :

    x(t) • vector of state variables
    8    • vector of all uncertain parameters
    u    - vector of all forcing functions
    g    - vector function  expressing the relationships  In  the right  hand
           side of Equation (6-1)

    Two  alternate  forms of this differential  state  variable equation  will
be  used  subsequently.   Numerical integration  schemes  for che  differencial
equations result in difference equations  of  the  form:

         x(t *  1) -.F(x

where  x(t +  i)  is the  state vector at  time  t •»• 1, as a function,  F,  of che
state  and forcing functions at time  t.   The notation t +  I  is  used  instead
of  the more  precise  t  + At  for convenience.

     Since  numerical  integration of  the  differential equations  produce the
solutions, x(t), at  any time, we  can adopt  the point of view that the state
vector  is given as a function  (actually  a  functional) of  the forcing
 function,  u, from. t  -  0 to t,  the parameters,  8, and time so that:

          x(t)  - f(9,u,t)                                              (6-4)

 where   f  is   now   some  complicated  expression   involving   the  initial
 conditions,  x(o),  the parameters,  8,  the  forcing  function history  up to
 time  t, and time itself.   This  point of view is quite  useful  since varia-

                                      162

-------
tlons in f due to  changes  in  parameters can be computed  by  Just rerunning
the computer  program  that  integrates the model equations  with the altered
parameter values.   Thus, although  f is not expressible  analytically, its
behavior can be easily computed.

    These  three  state  equations   correspond  to,  within  the  numerical
accuracy of  the  integration  schemes,  the  same  system viewed  from  three
points of  view,  the differential,  difference,  and integrated  form of the
fundamental state  variable  equation.  As shown subsequently,  the point of
view  adopted  affects  the  form  of  the  methods  available  for  quantifying
uncertainty.

    The  difficulties with  sensitivity analysis  can be greatly mitigated by
combining  the sensitivity  functions together  with an estimate of parameter
uncertainty to  obtain  directly the  resulting model  uncertainty.  The  idea
Is  to characterize the parameter uncertainty  in  probabilist Lc terms.
Consider  two  parameters,  e^  and  9^  as  random  variables with  means at
their calibrated  values, and with  variances, V^] and  V[«2K   If -^  and J2
are  two  nonrandom functions, and if 6 l  and  9 2 are  uncorrelated,  then:

         VtVl  * J292]  -  Jl2  V[ei1 * V VI92]                        (6"5)

Thus,  If the  variability of a state  variable can  be expressed  as  a  linear
function of  the uncertain parameters,  the  propogation of variance  formula
can be  applied  directly.  Again, the different system  points  of /lew yield
different  computational  methods.

     Let 6* be the calibrated  parameters which yield  the model  solution:
          »*
-------
and expanding the first term in a Taylor series yields:
         «x(t) - f(8*,u,t) + |f |
If only ehe first order term is retained, then:

         «x(t) « |j  | * «8

It is for  chis reason chat  the analysis  is  termed  "first  order" uncertainty
analysis.   Mote  chat the  Jacobian matrix,  af/ae  is  just  che matrix  of
sensiCivicy coefficienes compuced using  ehe calibrated  parameters,  6 :

         j .11.  [J (t)]                                            C6"10)
              38      ij
which is  the  reason  we used the  notation Jy  as the sensiCivicy coefficient
 inscead of che  more convencional Stj.  Hence,  che  firsc  order uncertainty
 equation  is:

          «x(t) - J(t) 48                                              (6"L1)

 We now calculace the uncertainty cbvariance matrix of the states:

          I (c) - Cov

 where  the prime denotes .the  transpose.   Note that the diagonal elements  of
 I (t)  are the variances of  the states, which is  ultimately of  interest.
 That is,  for  the first state, element 1.1 of IgCt)  is:

           Ux(t))u  - E Ctejf-* *" '-''I                               (6'13)
                            i
                     - E Ux ,
                     -  V  (x
                           t
                                       164

-------
Computing tfte scace uncertaincy
(6-12) and Che first order approximation Equation (6-11)  yields:

         ECi.Ce)      '                 -«8Jt«e')         (6-14)
                                       - EU(t)  «8  68'
                                       - J(t) E{68  58'}  J(t)1
so that, in covariance notations:

         r(t) - J(t) r  J'(t)
          x
where  I9 is  the parameter  uncertainty covariance  I9  -  EU8  68'}.   The
fundamental roles played  by  the  sensitivity functions  J(c).  which we shall
now  call the  Jacobian matrix, and the  parameter  uncertainty covariance is
clear.   Methods  of computing J(t) have been discussed above.  The parameter
covariance  is  more difficult  to  obtain .the available methods are discussed
below.

     The   common   approach  is  to  specify  the  diagonal  elements  using
intelligent guesses 'of the probable parameter  variability.   The parameter
coefficient of variation:

          v(9t) - a(81)/61                                            (6'16)

expressed as  a percent is specified and it  is  used  to compute a'C^).  the
diagonal elements of I,.  Since  there  is  no obvious  way to  guess  the
off-diagonal  elements, they are  invariably set to  zero.   Thus, with  only
 che diagonal  elements of  Z9  nonzero,  the state  variance  is:

          VCx^t)} - I J*k a2(8k)                                     <6-l7>

 which is the  direct  analogue of  the propagation  of  error formula,  Equation
 (6-5).   The  covariance Equation (6-15) is the generalization  of  this
 formula  for general parameter covariance,  Zg.
                                     165

-------
    The uncertainty variance  of the individual  states,  VCx^t)),  are  the
quantities of  interest  and  they  can be used together with  the  state
solution Itself, x^t), to quantify  the  state  uncertainty due to parameter
uncertainty.  A common form is to  use  the standard error  formulation  and
express the state uncertainty as:
More  precise  probabilistic  statements  require additional  assumptions  or a
different approach as discussed below.

    The real  value of uncertainty  analysis  is to assess the uncertainty of
projections made wich the model.   Let  up(t)  be the forcing functions under
projected conditions.  The projected states are:

         XpCt) - f(9,t,up)                      '                    (6'19)

Evaluating  Che Jacobtan matrix  tor  these conditions  by  che difference or
differential  mettiod yields J (t).  The model  projection uncertainty  is:
                   ...
 from which che  standard  errors  of  the  projection  follows:

          x (t)  + [diag elements of  Cov(x  (t))ll/2                    (6-21)
           p    —                       P

     Applications of this technique have also been made to  the  analysis  the
 effect  of instrument  errors  on  the uncertainty of  evaporation models
 predictions  (Coleman  and  DeCousey,   1976).  for  groundwater  flow  models
 (Fluhler  et  al.,  1976)  and dissolved oxygen  balance models  for  streams
 (Chadderton  et al., 1982).    A detailed discussion  of  the  use of  these
 methods  tn designing experiments  is  also  available (Moffat,  1982).   An
 interesting analysis of  total  lake mass  balance  errors  and the  design  of
 sampling  programs  using  first  order  uncertainty  is  available  (Lettenmaier
 and Richey, 1979).
                                      166

-------
                                SECTION 7.0

                   EXAMPLE LAKE ANALYSIS SEDIMENTINC CASE


    The  impacts of  DDT, pyrene,  naphthalene and carbon  tetrachloride

discharges'to a  hypothetical  lake  are  to be  evaluated.  Resuspension  and

diffusion are  considered negligible.   The  hypothetical  results of  field

studies, laboratory  experiments  and  physical  characteristics are shown  in

Table 7-1.  The  following sections step'through the various  components  of
                                       t
the computation.


               TABLE 7-1.  SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM
A.  Physical Characteristics  -   3
         Volume, V  - 1.3 x 10  ft
         Water Column Depth, Hj • 5 meters
         Plow, Q -150 cfs
         Wind Speed, WI - 5 ra/sec.  2
         Drainage Area, D.A. - 40 mi
         Sediment Yield "1.22 tons/acre-yr

B.  Field  Measurements
         Settling Velocity, v{ -  1.0 m/day
         Sedimentation Velocity, w2 - 3.7 cm/yr
         Percent Organic Carbon Content, £   - 10 percent
         Sediment Active Later Depth, HZ - T cm
         Secchi Disk Depth, Zg • 0.7 m

 C.   Laboratory  Experiments  Results  (biodegradation,  photolysis,  hydrolysis)
             .        •

            Chemical                K^Q          KpHOT          *HYD

      DDT                           "
      Pyrene                        0.5            0.105
      Naphthalene                    0.2            10.5
      Carbon Tetrachloride          0.5
                                      167

-------
7.1
             Partitioning
    Adaorption/desorpcion  laboratory analyses  were  performed on che four
chemicals using lake water as  the media.   Figure 7-1 shows the  results of
napthalene and carbon tetrachloride  experiments.
 iSOO
   100
u

-------
Table 7-2 summarizes the results of all four chemicals analyzed.


          TABLE 7-2.  RESULTS OF ADSORPTION/DESORPTION EXPERIMENTS
                                            Partition Coefficient:
                    Chemical                      <*
              DDT                                  100,000
              Pyrene                                12,000
              Naphthalene
              Carbon Tetrachloride
    It  is noted  that  the partition  coefficient can  also  be  approximated

from  the octanol-water  partition coefficient,  KQW,  and the  fraction  of

organic  carbon  in the  solids,  f^.  Karlckhoff  et  al. (1979), relates  the

partition coefficient  to  organic  carbon  content  of  solids as  follows:

 and
                   • .

          K   » 0 63  K                                                 (7"2)
          KQC - 0.63  KQW


 where K    Is  the partition  coefficient expressed  on  an organic  carbon

 basis.  °FCor example,  if the KQW for DDT is 106'2 or 1,550,000,. ::hen:



     KQC - 0.63 (106-2)

         « 975,000


 and for £Qe - 0.1:


     » - 0.1 (975,000)

       - 97,500


     This  type  of analysis  should  only be  used when no  other  data is

 available.  When  planning  the  sampling program and laboratory analysis  for

                                      169

-------
a  WLA study,  the adsorption/desorption  experimental  analyses  should be
included*

    The next step is  to  calculate  the fraction of dissolved chemical  (fdl>
and fraction of particulate chemical  in both the water column  (i - .1)
and sediment (i - 2) from the following relationships:
          di
          pi
so that for DOT in  the water column
    f.. -  i/Cl +  W -  100,000  '  10"6)
     dl
        -  0.5
The  results  are  shown  in  Table  7-3.
           TABLE 7-3.   DISSOLVED AND PARTICULATE CHEMICAL FRACTIONS
                                                          (7-3)

                                                          (7-4)

DDT
Pyrene
Naphthalene
Carbon Tetrachloride
gpi
.50
.11
.001
0.0

-------
and
              1      _ 1   . _L.                                       (7-6)
          r"^™"™™~™"~""~"   IT    if H
          'air-water    *l    g
where:
            K  • volatilization  rate  (I/day)


    v          m mass  transfer coefficient  (a/day)
     air-water

            K  • liquid  phase mass  transfer coefficient (m/day)


            K  - gas  phase  mass  transfer coefficient (m/day)


             H - Henry's constant  (dimensionless)




    The  liquid phase  mass transfer  coefficient, KI§ may be approximated by:




          Kt - 0.17 C0 (Dt/vt)2/3 WI                                   <7-7>




 where:
                   •.


     (I.  - drag  coefficient (dimensionless)


     v   - kinetic  velocity of water (.01 cm /sec)

                                           2
     D   - chemical diffusivity in water  (cm /sec)


     WI - wind speed



     The  chemical  diffusivity,  Ot,  may.be  approximated from Figure  5-19  or


 the following empirical  relationship:
          Dt - 22 (MW)'2/3 dO'5)                                       (7-8)




 so that for DDT with a molecular weight  of  355:
                                      171

-------
    Dt - 22 (355f 2/3 00~5)


                 -6   2,
       - 4.4 x 10   on /sec



and Chen from Figure 5-20:


                             -A     2/3
    Kt - 0.17 (.001X4.4 x i
-------
    Henry's constant  for  DDT is given as 3.9 x  10*   atm-m /mole.  At 20°C





         H(dimensionless) • 41.6 H(atm-« /mole)                       (7~1]
so that:
         - 41.6  (3.9  x 10'5)


         - .0016




    For  DDT.  the volatilization rate  is  calculated from  Equations 7-5  and



7-6:




          1         1,1

    K~~   0.42   172C.0016)
      air-water



    Kair-«ater ' °-17


    Ky  - 0.17/5



        • 0.033/day





    Table 7-4 summarizes  the volatilization  rates  of  the four  chemicals of



concern.





                   r.ABLE 7-4.  VOLATILIZATION RATE CALCULATION SUMMARY

J»  *.*«lo"t   -*2   .0378   171  .0016     .2732  .17   .03
 DBT                  J»  *.*«       -     .           .         .

 7.3  Photolysis
     The laboratory photolysis rates  are  given in Table  7-1.   From Equation


 5-25, the site  specific rate can be computed  as  follows:
                                       173

-------
         Kp(field)  - -%*₯*• Cl  * -'---"*                           <7"12)
where K  U/m) is the diffuse  attention  coefficient and f is  the  fraction
of  daylight  hours.    Normally, Kg  should be  measured  directly  using  an
ultraviolet irradiance meter.  However, Ke can be estimated from the secchi
disk depth, Za, and  the empirical relationship:
      Z  - 5 to 40
       9
with  a median value of 9.2.   For  a secchi disk depth  equal  to  0.7 meters
and using  the median  value,  K. - 13.1.   the field  photolysis  rate  is thus
calculated for pyrene.
        « .0008 /day  for  pyrene

         •
 and for naphthalene •
     K  • 0.08/day
      P
 7.4  Overall Reaction Coefficient
     Assuming  the  particulate  reactions   are   equal  e»   the   dissolved
 reactions, the overall reaction coefficient reduces to  the  following
 equations:
          K2

                                      174

-------
Table  7-5  summarizes  the  overall coefficients,  ^ and  1^,  for  the  four
chemicals.-   For 'comparison  purposes,  the  effective  volatilization  rate
f  jr  is also shown in the table.

            TABLE 7-5.  OVERALL REACTION COEFFICIENTS  Kj  AND Kj
                         AND  COMPARISON WITH  fd^
^^•^^^H
^
DDT
Pyrene
Naphthalene
Carbon Tetrachloride
7.5
Computation of Water
and Sediment Solids
BY
0
0
0
0
D
.0
.0
.0
.0
s
0
0
0
0
10 !
.0 0
.5
.2
.5 0
PHOT
.0
.0008
.08
.0
^^M
0
0
0
0
mm^^^^
.0
.5008
.28
.5
fdl*v
.015
.004
.12
.12
K
^^•M
0
0
0
0
2
^MMM
.0
.5
.2
.5
Column Solids Concentration m^
Concentration nu
     Since   resuspension  and  diffusion  are  considered   negligible,  che
 equations  to solve for  m]>  and m2 are  found  in  Table 3-1  and  are given as
 follows :
                  U/Q                                                 (7-14)
                   K   c
               -I "1/-2
                        o
 where

          C  . v/Q
               1.3 x 109/150 . 86400
               100 days
                                      175

-------
    and





             • 1.0/5.0
             • 0.2 /day


    The average daily solids loading race w is calculated  from che sediment

yield and basin drainage area as follows:
        171,100 Ibs/day
    The  water .column  solids  concentration,  n^,  and  the sedimenc  solids

concentration, i»2,  are  then  calculated
   •
          171. 000/150. S. 4
      l "    I •»• 0.2(100)


       •  10 mg/1
         • 100,000 mg/1

 7.6  Computation of Water Column Concentration
      C.. and Sediment Concentration C^


     The  equations  to solve for CTI  and CTZ  are  found in Table  3-1.   For

 reactive organic chemicals the equations are:
                    Co(fplKsl * fdlKv * Kl
                                       176

-------
                       VH2                                         (7-19)
where:

    e   - 100 days
    Kgl - 0.2/day

a»d rearranging Equation 7-15

         -2 ' -, -1/-2                                                C7-M)
            • 1.0  10/100,000
            - .0001 m/day

and

         K   - w /H                                                   (7-21)
         Ks2   W2/H2
             • .00017.01
             • 0.01 I/day

     Since  the  loading  rate,  WT,  is  directly  proportional  to  the  water
column and  sediment  concentrations, 100 Ibs/day of chemical  mass  discharge
rate  is  arbitrarily  assumed for the computation.  Then  substitution  of  the
proper parameters  for DDT  into Equations 7-18 and  7-19 yields:

         ,        	1007(150 *  5.4)	
     CT1  Cmg/1) "  1 + 100[0.5(0.2)  * 0.5(0.03) + 0.0]
               •  .0099  mg/1 DDT in water column
 and
         ....    .0099(0.50) (1.07.01)
      T2 lBg/l'  "    l.O(.Ol) + 0.0

                • 49.4  mg/1 DDT in sediment
                                      177

-------
    Although 100 Iba/day of DDT is not a practical loading  rate,  it  is  used
for comparison  purposes  with the  other  three chemicals  evaluated.   Table
7-6 summarizes the results for the four chemicals.

     TABLE 7-6.  CALCULATED CTI AND C^ CONCENTRATIONS; W • LOO  LBS/DAY
         DDT                        '                     49'4
                                    -0023                  0.05
                                    -0030                  0.0
         Carbon Tetrachloride       .0020                  0.0


    Note  that  for' DDT with  a  high partition  coefficient and  low reaction
 rate,  there  is a  large  build-up of chemical in the  sediment.   On the other
 hand,  naphthalene  and  carbon  tetrachloride  with  very  low  partitioning
 characteristics  and high reaction  rates  have negligible  concentrations in
 Che sediment.  Pyrene,  with  a  relatively  high reaction race, still has some
 build-up  in  the  sediment due to a moderately high partition coefficient.
 7.7   Time to Steadv-Stace
     The time Co reach 90 percent  steady-scate  in the water column assuming
 negligible tnceraction between the bed  and  water column is estimated  using
 Equation 3-44c given by:

                       2.303 _                                    ( 7-22 )
          C90 ' l/to * Kt * fpl
 and:
          Kl * £pl Kp * fdlKc * fdlKv

     Assuming  the  particulate  chemical reactions are equal  to  the  dissolved
 chemical reactions, K,  becomes:
                                      178

-------
                    «,»*•     *•"•                            (7'24)
Thus for naphchalene:
    K  - 0.0 •«• 0.2 +  .08 + .12
       - 0.4/day
and
    f , K .  - tt.OOl (0.2)
     pi  s i
            - .00027day



The time to reach 90 percent  steady-state for naphchalene  is:



         	2.303	
    Ce " I/100 * 0.4 * .0002


       • 5.6 days


The results for the. four chemicals  are shown in Table 7-7.



                      TABLE 7-7.  TIME TO STEADY-STATE

                                           ^^^M^^^^^^^^^^

                                           Time to 90 Percent
                    Chemical
                                              Steady-State
              DDT                                    «
              Pyrene                                *••[
              Naphchalene                           5.6
              Carbon Tecrachloride                  3»7
     MOM  that  the time to  reach steady-state  U shorter  lor the more

 reactive substances.
                                     179

-------
7.8  Sensitivity of Resusnension
    In order to evaluate  the  effect  of  resuspension on chemical concentra-
tions,  the equations developed for  the bed interactive  case must  be
utilized.  The equations are shown In Table 3-3 and are given by:
                                                                     (7-25)


                                 «. f   K  )                          <7'26)

         .   "2 H2 fpl                                               (7-27)
             BlHlfp2

                 (W21 * W2} V * *L (*2/T^ £
-------
    The total reaction rate in the water column, KI§ is expressed by:


         *1 ' fpl Kp * fdlKc * fdl*v                                 (7

    For DDT, the only reaction in the water column is due  to volatilization

so that:


    Kj • 0.5 (.03)
       - ,015/day


    Since  the  reaction  rate  for  DDT in the sediment,  14,  is ecual  to 0.0,
the total  apparent reaction rate  is calculated  as follows:


    1^ • .015 *  10 (1X0.0 +  .01)

       - .115/day
then:


           1007(150  x  5.4)
    Si "  1 +  ,115-UOO)

        -  .0099 mg/I

    Table  7-8  compares  the  calculated concentrations  in  the water  column

for  the case with  resuspension  co  the  case wichouc resuspension.


            TABLE  7-8.  SENSITIVITY TO  RESUSPENSION (*2/ri  " U0)


                                                       Si          CT1
                                                   Resuspension Sedimenting
       Chemical
Kl     K2    *T	Case	Case
 DDT                   10     0.015    0.0   0.115    0.0099     0.0099
 PvTene                 2.2   0.5004   0.5   1.62     0.0008     0.0023
 Naphthalene            0.021 0.4      0.2   0.404    0.0030     0.0030
 Carbon Tetrachloride   0.0   0.62     0.5   0.620    0.0020     0.0020
                                      181

-------
    NotB.ehae for.chree of the four  chemicals,  the  concentrations have not
changed.   Examination  of  Equations  7-20 through  7-23  can explain  this
phenomenon.    Naphthalene  and carbon  tetrachloride have  low partitioning
characteristics  such that fpl  approaches  0.0, and  the  total apparent
removal rate, fcy, is approximately equal  to  the  water  column reaction race
K .  Bed interaction, therefore,  has a small effect on  chemicals with low
partitioning  characteristics.    DDT,   on  the  other   hand,   is   highly
partitioning, hut  in this case  resuspension stili had  no effect  on the
water column  concentrations Cjj.   Examination of Equation  7-24  shows that
if diffusive exchange is negligible and the decay rate In the sediment, KZ,
is  0.0, then  the particulate ratio r^  equals  1.0  regardless   of the
resuspension  velocity.   Therefore,   the  calculated  total  apparent  removal
rate, 1^, does not change.  The water column concentration, C^,  for pyrene
decreases with increasing bed interaction because of the decay of pyrene in
the bed, itself.

7.9  First Order Uncertainty Analysis

    A   simplified .first   order  uncertainty  analysis   is  presented  co
demonstrate  the  nethod of  application.    The  theory  presented  in   Section
6.4.1 will be the basis for the calculation.  The state  variables (x)  co be
evaluated  are CTI  and  C^ calculated  for pyrene  in  Section 7.5  and the
uncertain  parameters (9) are assumed  to be KL and K2-

    The quantity to be  evaluated  is the  standard  error of  the  state
variables  (x ) given  by  Equation (6-21).   At  steady-state the projected
conditions for CTI  and  GJJ, plus  or  minus the standard error is  given  as

          x  •»• [diagonal elements  of  Cov  
-------
so that Che parameters to be evaluated are the Jacobian matrix,  Jp,  the
transpose of  the Jacobian matrix,  Jpf,  and the  parameter uncertainty
covariance, Zg«
    If x is  the vector of state  variables, and e  is the vector of uncertain
parameters,  then:

         "(§g)

         •-(Si)
The Jacobian,  J  is given by:

              l£ m(   **   *
            " 39  "\ 3C_2/3K.
and the transpose of the Jacobian, J '  is
        JP
    A common  approach  to obtain the parameter covariance  3^  is co compute
the variance  of  the uncertain parameter  (V^  (the diagonal elements of I.,)
from the parameter coefficient  of  variation v9  ^0    V
                      2              183

-------
 therefore:
 and
JV
                                                                    \
                                                                    '
 Only the diagonal elements  are  presented since they  are  the only elements
'of concern.  From Equation (7-31) the standard error of Crl  is equal  Co  the
 first element of the diagonal and the standard error of CT2  is equal  to  the
 second element  of the diagonal.
     7.9.1  Computation of Analysis
     The products to be  evaluated  in  order to calculate the standard  errors
 of CTI and ^ are as follows:
     2.   ^ (SCTI/3K2)2

     3.   Vicl

     4.   7K2

     The variances C7^ and VK2) are  calculated  from Equations  (7-37)  and
  (7-38).  If the coefficient of variation of  the  uncertainty parameters  are
  assumed to be  50 percent  (0.5)  and  from Table  7-5  ^  •  0.5008 and K2  -
  0.50, then:

      VKt - [0.5008 (0.5)]2

          • 0.0627
                                       184

-------
and
    VK2 - [0.50 (0.5)]2
        • 0.0625
The  partial  differentials  (i^/H^.  aC^/ai^,  etc.)  are  estimated  by
calculating the state variables at incremental changes with  the uncertainty
parameters.  For example; the differential 3CTl/3Kl may be estimated by:
          icn/3K

where:

    CTI
    CT1
    *i
    Ki
           concentration  calculated  at K^
           concentration  calculated  at Kj
           best  estimate  of  KI  or  calibrated
           K. ^ an  incremental  change  in Kj
     If K.  is incremented by 10 percent,  then:
     Kj - 0.5008 -f .5008 (0.10)
        - 0.5509
 and
               0.05008
     In the example case for pyrene, ^ is calculated as follows:
     CT1
                     (1007(150.5.4)
           1 + 100(0.11X0.2) * .004 + 0.5509
           0.0021
                                      185

-------
Thus, the. approximation for

               0.0021 - 0.0023
                  0.05008


             • 0.004

In  a similar  fashion,  the other  differentials  are  estimated  given, the

example conditions:
     3CT2/3K1 " °*0877
 The projected concentrations and  standard  errors of  C^  and C^  are  Chen

 calculated  as follows:
     C   p • 0.0023 vVo.0627(-.004)2 * 0.0625(0.0)
     •Tl


           • 0.0023 +   0.001
     CT2
p - 0.050 ±-/0.0627(-0.0877)Z •»• 0.0625(0.106)


  • 0.050 * 0.0344
                                      186

-------
                                SECTION 8.0
                           EXAMPLE LAKE ANALYSIS
                            BED INTERACTIVE CASE

    The data which will be  analyzed  in this section is  from an experiment
in  an  Indiana  quarry.    The  quarry  experiment  was initiated  in  1972  by
Waybrant  and  Hamelink  as  part  of  a  research  study  of  the  factors
controlling the  distribution  and persistence of DDE and  lindane  in lentic
environments.  An abandoned flooded  limestone  quarry was  used to  trace the
time history of spike releases of DDE and lindane in the biotic and abiotic
sectors  of  the flooded  quarry.   The experiment was performed  under
relatively controlled conditions, not subject to the usual complications of
a variable  inflow,  outflow, or loading history.   Measurements  of chemical
levels in  the  water, sediment  and  biota were  made  for a period  of.
approximately one year after the  initial spike release.

8.1  Overview of Quarry Experiment

    The  following  sections  review the application of DDE and lindane  along
with  significant rainfall  events  and sampling frequency.   The results of
the sampling program are  also  presented.

    8.1.1   Chronological  Review  of Important Events

    The  quarry  experiment was  conducted from May 29, 1972 through June  22,
 1973.    During  this  period of  time several  events  transpired  which  are
 pertinent  to  the interpretation of  the quarry data.   Equal mass inputs of
 2.77  grams of  both DDE  and   lindane  were  uniformly distributed  over  the
 surface  of the quarry on June 27,  1972, and on  the  following  day  samples
                                  ••
 were  collected  for analysis of the post release  "initial  conditions"  in  the
                                      187

-------
water column, sediment  and  biota of the  quarry.   Subsequent  samples  were
collected'on days 3. 10, 21, 42  and  at  progressively longer intervals over
the course of the next year.

    An intense rainfall of  3.5  cm in 45 minutes occurred  on the day after
the  addition of chemicals  to  the quarry.   Based  on the  accumulation of
solid material in  sedimentation traps between  days  0 to  21,  it  was
estimated  that  2.9i x  103  kilograms  of  solids  (dry weight)  entered the
quarry and  settled  from the water column as  a result of  runoff from  this
storm.  The  observed rapid  rate  of decrease of DDE  in the water column was
attributed  to  the  adsorption of DDE  onto these  solid  particles which
settled to  the  bed.   Undane,  which has  a much lower affinity  for  solids,
was  not nearly as sensitive to the influx of solids,  and hence  it  persisted
In the water column  for a much longer period of time.

     At  the  start of the quarry  experiment  the  water body  was  thermally
stratified,  and hence  .nixing  between  the  epilimnion and hypolimnion was
significantly impaired.   The fall overttfm occurred  on  about day. 144, and
after this  time vertical concentration gradients -in the water  column  were
effectively  eliminated.    The  experimental  monitoring  was  terminated  on
about June  22,  1972, 360 days  after che initial input  of chemical  to  che
system.

     8.1.2  Discussion of  Water  Column  and Sediment  Data

     As part of the  quarry experiment data  collection  program,  the  water
 column  and  sediment  were sampled with  depth in order to  detect  the
 existence of vertical gradients  of  chemical.   A  qualitative review of this
 chemical data prior to a discussion of the modeling analysis is included  as
 a preview to the model application.

      Figure  8-1 summarizes  the  water  column DDE  data  that  was  collected
 during the  quarry experiment.   As shown  on  the upper chronological plot of
 DDE concentration,  the initial  input of  2.77  grams of DDE on day 0  resulted
 in a depth averaged concentration on day  1  of about 44  ng/1  in  the water
                                      188

-------
  _  lOOO
   z
 ui O


 §5
   K
   H

   Ul
   — OH
1 1 '
.1 i.O iO 'CO 1C
ION ( pp'r )




too
0



DATA:
WAT8RANT, 1973
0
20

40
60
0
OAT 81
Mi
— M0»
H3t
— m
\ \ \
0
20

40
an
OAT 173

- KH
HM
- K*
HD<
1 [ 1
i iQ >0 "GO 1000 0.1 I.O '0 '00 'G
OOE CONCENTRATION (pprr)




00
FIGURE 8-1. TEMPORAL VARIATION OF DOE IN WATER

                       189

-------
column.  -This concentration was reduced  to  less  than 10 ng/1 by day  10  and
then gradually  decreased to  1  ng/1 by  day 100.   A DDE  concentration  of
about l" trg/1 persisted  for  the  duration of the monitoring effort,  although
an increase to 3 ng/1 was reported on day 360.

    The lower graphs on  Figure  8-1  illustrate  the DDE water  column profile
with depth  on "selected  days during  the experimental  monitoring  program.
Some  vertical   stratification   is   exhibited  on   day  1,   with   average
concentrations of 50 ng/1 up  to a. depth  of  30  feet  and about 10 to 20  ng/1
at depths of  40'and SO feet." Even though, the  fall  overturn did not occur
until day 144, a relatively homogeneous  vertical water  column concentration
profile developed by  day 21, when  Che  average  concentration was 3.5 ng/1.
The uniform  vertical  profile was also  prevalent  on days  81  and 173,  when
the average concentration was at or near 1  ng/1.

    Sediment DDE data  for the upper 1.5 cm of  bottom sediment,  In  units of
ug DDE/kg  wet sediment, are  summarized  on the upper  panel  of  Figure  8-2.
The sediment concentration  on day I was  quite low, but  Increased sharply co
about  20  to  30  ug/Vcg by day 5 and  this  concentration'persisted   for  the
remainder  of the first  year.  DDE sediment concentrations  for depths  of
0  to  1.5,  1.5  to 3.5,  and 3.5 to 5.5 cm, presented  for  selected days on che
lower  graphs  of Figure 8-2,  show that  the  DDE  did not generally  penetrate
beyond  the upper  1.5  cm of  the  bottom  sediment.

    Several  distinctly  different  characteristics  were  observed   in  the
temporal  distributions  of   water  column  and   sediment lindane which  are
presented  on Figures 8-3 and 8-4.   Significantly higher  concentrations of
lindane were observed  throughout the  study, with the  minimum  water column
concentration approaching  10 ng/1, an  order of  magnitude higher  than the
corresponding DDE concentration,  at the end of the  study.   The wide ranges
 in the water  column  results in the chronological  graph,  and  prior  to the
 fall overturn at day 144,  reflect the vertical gradient of chemical  between
 the epilimnion and hypolimnion of  the  stratified  water" body.   The ranges
 are reduced after day 144, when the  water  body  was mixed  by  the  fall
 overturn.
                                      190

-------
     UJ
     2 0>
     uu 3.
     UJ
60
40

20
0
—
^B
^m
_
— ,
^;
•
10 a
m

1
[I
«
. 1
MOTS
SAMPLE DEPTH
FPQM 0-i.Scm

i
(
t
•
1

i
i
<
•
i


L 2
I 1
•

1




SO 100 -SO 200 230 300 35O «oo
TIME AFTER RELEASE (days )
      g
      u
      v-
      Z
      O
      UJ
      V)
                OAT

                NO OA7A
  NO DATA

	r	r
                                         OAT 21
               NO DATA

             |	,	r
                  ,0   iQ    iGO  • 1000   O.I   '-0   "0   'CO   .000
                         SEDIMENT OOE, r,
DATA:
WAY8R ANT, 1973
                OAT 81
                 > I
                 > I

              h- - T ~ ~ 1
 . I
   "00  lOOO
SEDIMENT DOE, r, (JLOOO
  FIGURE 8-2. TEMPORAL VARIATION OF DOE IN SEDI MENT
                              191

-------
7
*
UlZ
ZO
< —
§S
-cr
z
UJ
(J
z
o



IOC


10

I.O



•
— 1


"
1
_

l><


«•
i
•
1 <


• <
»
nO T ^P
•• d ^5 ^y ^P TP
J-
•>
w • 2.77 qramt



,1-11111










*' o 0 SO «00 "SO 200 2SO • 500 320 «CO
TIME AFTER RELEASE Uays )
OATAi
0
. 20
r ^o
(X
LJW $C
i- -o
z
z
V-
0.
UJ
0 0
2C

«c
NT, 1973 *C
OAT 1
~ >— OH ^
H^H
— 1 0 1
Kl
1 1 1
i i.O 10 100 1C
LINOANE CONC
OAT 81
u
— B
Id
— tei
I 1 1
>.l iQ IQ iOO 1C
c
20
40
30 C
• ^*H • '
0
20

4Q
100 C
OAT 21
KH
KH
— 101 -
1 1 1
I 10 <0 iGO ICC
ATlON (pptrl
OAT ira
H-^ ^
— B
B
- B
D4
1 1 1
).t i.O "0 iOO * 10
                    LINOANE CONCENTRATION ( ppfr)
 FIGURE 8-3. TEMPOR.ALVARIATION OF LINOANE IN WATER
                         192

-------
8
Z
o— *
Z 0»
« J«
J X.
K 0» 4
Z Jt.
5 w" 2
UJ
09

MB


•V

-







EDy
i






•
i
-so o s

/vorr
SAMPLE DEPTH
FROM 0-1.3 em
_.

•
<

•
(
I
I .
•
> {
. 1 .
»
|
. 1 >o-»" I i
0 100 ISO 200 220 300 3SO *C
                     TIME AFTER RELEASE (days
     E
     u
     a
     UJ
     en
     vu
     a
0
i
4
6
0
OAT i
	 	 	 	 sooxx
••
NO DATA
	 1 — -r — r 	
0
2
4
tf
OAT 21

••>
NO DATA
- - -I- -T - "I 	

SEDIMENT LiNOANE, r, (^.g/hg)
DATA:
WAY BRANT, 1973
              OAT 81
O.i   >0   10   iOO  lOOO
         SEDIMENT LINOANE, r,
0
2
4
0
OAT 173
>— O.S
	 1 	 I--T ~ ~

., |.0 10 100 1000
FIGURE 8-4 TEMPORAL VARIATION OF LINDANE IN SEDIMENT
                           193

-------
    Sediment data for lindane are shown on Figure 8-4.   Wich the exception
of  the  sediment concentration  of about  7 ug/kg  on day  1,  the  sediment
concentration averaged 1 to 2 ug/kg,  an order of magnitude  lower  than the
sediment levels of DDE.  Aa shown by  the data  on  the lower graphs, lindane
did penetrate  to  the deeper  sediment  layer of  3.5 to  5.5  cm, and the
profile did not exhibit a strong vertical gradient.  This is in contrast co
the DDE results which were  an  order of magnitude  higher in  the surface
layer,  but  at  generally  negligible levels at  sediment  depths  greater than
1.5 cm.

    8.1.3  Chemical Budget

    The data   analysis  previously   performed  (Waybrant,  1973)  included
estimates of  the  masses  of  DDE and lindane associated  with the  water
column,  sediment,  quarry walls,  water surface  film,  fish, microcrustaceans
and plankton.   Based on these  results,  it was concluded  that essentially
all of  the  chemical  which was recovered  was  in  the water column and
sediment,  while only a relatively  small fraction was  associated  with che
other  compartments.   Thus, it was considered  valid  to  neglect these  other
compartments for the'purpose of  the model testing analysis.
         I
8.2  Evaluation of Model Inputs

    The model  analysis  for the quarry  is  considerably  simplified  since
 there  was no  continuous  inflow or outflow, a known mass  of  chemical was
 applied and the quarry has a relatively regular geometry.  As  is  generally
 the case, however, there  were  also  certain aspects  of  the analysis  where
 data  were lacking requiring the use of engineering Judgment.   This  section
 will  review the evaluation  of  model  inputs and  summarize the  assumptions
 which were required  to calibrate the  model.

     8.2.1  Model Geometry

     The  initial step  In  the application  of  a chemical  fate  model   is  the
 specification  of  the  geometric  configuration  of  the receiving water.   The
                                      194

-------
model geometry which was used for Che quarry analysis  is  illuscraced  on  the
upper panel  of  Figure 8-5.   The water column volume, V^  and depth,  Ep
were readily determined from the reported data which are  shown  on  the lower
panel of the diagram.  The quarry is rectangular in shape,  91.5 meters long
and 41.2 meters wide (300 ffeet x 135 feet), and has a total volume of Vj  -
5.23 X  104 m3.   These measurements  correspond to  an average depth of HX  •
13.9 meters (45 feet) which  is  in reasonably  good  agreement with  the depth
profiles of Figure 8-5 which were measured at  the tine of the  quarry
experiment .

    The depth of  the active  sediment  layer, H2>. was a more difficult
parameter to evaluate.   Fortunately,  the chemical  concentration data which
were measured with  depth (Figures 8-2 and 8-4) provided some guidance about
Che selection of  an appropriate value  for  Hj.   DDE was  observed to
penetrate at most  the upper  1.5  cm of sediment, while lindane  penetrated to
a  depth of at  least 5.5  cm.   On this basis, chemical specific active layer
depths  of H2 -  1.5  cm  and  5.5  cm were  used to characterize DDE and  lindane
respectively.   The use of different active layer depths is necessitated by
the simplified  representation  of diffusive  exchange and  che assumption  oc a
completely  mixed  sediment  layer which  are  incorporated  in  the  modeling
framework.

     Host modeling studies  include  the  analysis  of  a conservative substance,
 such as IDS  or chlorides,  as a means of verifying hydraulic balances where
 tributary or point source loads enter  the system.   Although confirmation of
 a  flow balance  is not applicable here,  the initial  concentrations of
 lindane and DDE,  ^(o).  <=an be used to  confirm  the quarry  geometry, Vj,
 from the relationship

     Table  8-1  summarizes  the calculated initial concentrations  of  lindane
 and  DDE and the measured  day  I concentrations of  both chemicals.   Since
            *
                                      195

-------
       (A) SCHEMATIC OF MODEL SEGMENTATION
0= 0
                      M,= 13.9 m
          V, a 3.23 x 10 m'
                                     WATER
                                     COLUMN
                                           ACTIVE
                                           LAYER
                                           OEE?
                                         ,  SEDIMENT


                         H2= 1.9 cm FOR DOS

                         Ms 3.5cm FOR LINOANE
       (B) DEPTH MAP OF QUARRY T
DATA:
     ,1973


FIGURE 8-5. MODEL GEOMTRY FOR ANALYSIS

            OF INDIANA QUARRY
                         196

-------
equal mass loads of each chemical .were  input  co Che same volume  of  water,
the quarry,  the  initial  concentrations  of both chemicals should  have  been
equal.   Using MT -  2.77 grams and  ^ -  5.23  x 10   m3,  the initial
concentration of both DDE and lindane was  estimated to be 53.0 ng/L.   The
calculated   initial  concentrations  of   both   chemicals  are   higher   but
reasonably  close to  the  measured day  1  concentrations,  and  the  lindane
concentration is less than the concentrations on days  5  to  21, thus it was
concluded  that  the  water  column volume of ^ - 5.23 x 10   .  ,  provides a
reasonable estimate of the quarry geometry.

      TABLE  8-1.  MASS BALANCE CALCULATION FOR  INITIAL CHEMICAL DOSAGE
Lindane
DDE
vu "r
(m ) (grams)
5.23 x 10* 2.77
5.23 x 10 2.77
Calculated
CT1(o) - MT/V1
53.0
53.0
Measured
cT1tn
47.3
44.4
     8.2.2  Fluid Transport
     The only  inputs  to  the quarry  are direct  precipitation and  runoff,
 while water  loss  occurs  as a  result  of evaporation.   There Ls no  infor-
 mation available concerning quarry groundwatar inflow or  oucflow,  and  chas
 it has been neglected in this analysis.  Since the average precipitation in
 this  region  of  the country  is  slightly  more  than  100  cm/year,  and
 evaporation is  approximately 85 cm/year,  the  net input  to  the  quarry
 (neglecting  runoff)  over  the course of a one year period  is  only  about 15
 on  of water.'  This  amount is  insignificant  in  comparison to  the overall
 volume of water  in the quarry, which has an average depth of  13.9 m.  Thus,
 on  a time scale  equal  to the duration  of  the quarry  experiment,  the net
 inflow of water  can  be neglected.
                                      197

-------
    8.2.3  Participate Transport

    The analysis of  particulate  transport in the quarry was  complicated by
few field measurements of «l and m2,  the  solids  concentrations in the water
column and  sediment, respectively.   The  limited data which  are available,
however, do provide  some basis for characterizing  the  temporal variation of
01 .  The key to solving the  problem  is the estimated mass  of solids, MSS -
2\92 T  106  grams,  which settled from  La*  qu-rry as a result of the influx
of solids at the time of the intense  rainstorm.   The mass  of  solids settled
can be represented by:
         Mss
where  the Initial suspended  solids  concentration, mu,  is the  sum of  the
concentration  which  preceded  the  storm,  *lb,  and the concentration  increase
resulting the  influx of  solids during the storm,  d.p  and  c*  Is che period
of  sedimentation.  Solving  for the  settling velocity, Wj, yields:
                                                                        (8-3)
     The background  concentration  may be  estimated  empirically  from  Che
 extinction coefficient (8-3) as:

                                                                        (8'4>

 where K  is given by the approximate relationship

          Ke - 1.7/1.                                                   (8-5)

 For a  secchi depth of Zs -  6.1 m, Kg • 0.28/m and  from  Equation  8-4,  «lb >5
 mg/1.   The increase in BI  due  to the  influx  of  solids  with the  storm is
 obtained from
                                      198

-------
such that for a water  column  volume of Vj - 5.23 x 10*  a3,  Arn^ .'56 mg/1.
Thus, «lt - mlb + *«! - 61 mg/1.

    Although no suspended  solids  concentration data was available for  this
analysis, it was  assumed  that the relatively  rapid decrease of DDE in  the
water column and  buildup  in  the sediment (Figures  8-1  and 8-2) was due  to
the adsorption of DDE  on  the  solid particles which settled  to  the sediment
layer.   Inspection  of the DDE  data would therefore  indicate  that  t* -  10
days.  Using this value in Equation 8-3  with the  other  previously estimated
parameters, yields Wj  • 3.2 m/d.

     Assuming  that removal of water  column suspended  solids  is  proportional
to  the  solids  concentration  BI. then  the average  concentration during days
1  to 10  is  given  by  (HydroQual, 1982):
          •l
                                                                       (8-7)
 For „! -  3.2  m/d,  HI -  13.9 ..  «u - 61  mg/1  and t*  -  10 days,  ^  « 24
 mg/1.

     The secchi disk readings after day 21 were generally 6  to 7 oieters, and
 aside from some initial variability which were attributed to algal  effects,
 che  readings  were  essentially constant  in time.   From Equations  8-4 and
 8-5,  these  readings  indicate  that  ^ -5 «g/l  characterized conditions in
 Che  quarry  during  this period of  time.   Since  this low  level  of ^
 persisted  for  the  duration  of   the  study,  resuspension  was   probably
 negligible, and as there were  no other sources of  solids to the quarry,  the
 data  indicate that «L  was  much lower than  the  3.2 m/d which was estimated
 for  the  first 10  days.  In view of  these  considerations,  i^ - 0.1 m/d  was
 assigned  for t > 10 days.   This  settling velocity essentially  eliminates
 particulate   transport as  a mechanism of  chemical  transfer  after  day  10.
 Use  of a  variable  settling velocity is not unreasonable since it is  likely
                                      L99

-------
that relatively  coarse  particles entered  the  quarry-  as  a  result  of the
intense storm on day 1,  and  these would  settle  rapidly.   The remaining
particles  are either settling  much acre  slowly  or  not at all.

    It  is important  to. realize that  the  preceding  estimates of suspended
solids  concentrations from secchi  disk  depth readings  by use of Equations
8-4 and 8-5  were made  by necessity, since direct measurements  of  BI were
not available.   When planning  field surveys, however,  BI should always  be
measured,   since  these  empirical  correlations  provide   only  approximate
estimates of m. •

    The sediment solids concentration is also  required in order  co  perform
ehe modeling analysis.   As  reported, the 200  to 300  ml of  wacer was
centrifuged  from SOO to 600 ml of  wet sediment.   Using a liquid volume  of
250 ml in a total  sediment  volume  of  550  ml,  the sediment porosity  is
estimated eo be  * - 250/550 - 0.45.  Ic  was also  reported  chat <>b,  the bulk
density of  Che  sediment, was  1.2  g/cc.  This information  can  be used  to
estimate m_  from the following expression:

         •,-•>-*.

in  which  the density of  water,  Pa is  close. to  unity.  Thus  Equation  8-8
results in an estimate of m^ " 750 g/1.

    To complete the specification  of  the  requisite  solids  related  para-
meters, ehe  sedimentation velocity, w^  was set to zero for the calibration
analysis.    This was done because the  net chemical  transfer to  the  deep,
 inactive  sediment was not considered as a loss of chemical from the system.
 The solids  related parameters which  have been estimated  thus far  are
 summarized in Table 8-2.
                                     200

-------
  TABLE 8-2  SUMMARY OF SOLIDS RELATED PARAMETERS USED IN QUARRY ANALYSIS
Dl
m.
t,
w.
5"
"2
(mg/1)
(g/D
(m/d)
(nnn/yr)
(mm/yr)
Days
0-10
24 '
750
3.2
0
0
Days
10-365
5
750
0.1
0
0
    8.2.4  Chemical Transfers and Kinetics

    The  following  sections describe  the  chemical  partitioning,  diffusive
exchange  and  chemical  decay  characteristics  for lindane  and DDE  in the
quarry experiment.

    Chemical Partitioning—DDE.  A  limited  amount of data was available  to
characterize  the partition  coefficient  for  DDE.   Estimates  of  the DDE
partition coefficient were therefore based on the partition coefficienc for
DDT.   This  is  justified by  the  similarity of  the  octanol-water partition
coefficients of  DDE  and DDT and by  the correlation between adsorption and
octanol-water partition coefficients (USEPA, 1979).

    Figure 8-6  shows the  DDT partition coefficients  as a function  of
suspended  solids  concentration  for  DDT on montmorillonite and illite  clays
(O'Connor  and Connolly,  1980).  At  solids concentrations  on the order  of  10
mg/1,  as  in the  quarry,  the data  indicate a range of 50,000 I/kg on illite
clay  to 275,000  I/kg on  montmorillonite  clay.   Since  DDE is  a  daughter
product  of DDT,  it  would  be  expected to  have  a somewhat lower range  of
partition  coefficients  than  this   range  of  DDT  partition   coefficients.
Figure 8-6 also illustrates  the  inverse  relationship  between partition
coefficient,  », and  the  suspended  solids  concentration.  It is  expected
that  this trend would also occur in the  quarry,  although the slope may  be
different as  a  result of differences in the characteristics of the  solids.
                                     201

-------
 1.000.000
— 100.000
U

fc  10.000


o
U

z
o
oc
£   1.000
     IOO
                   10
                                           ODDT-ILLI1E •
                                           • DOT- MONIMORILLONIIE

                                           • LINDANE-LAKE SEDIMENTS
                                          J.
                               J.
REF.
O'CONNOR AND CONNOLLY
       too         1.000         10.000

SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION (mg/l)
                                                                100.000
        FIGURE 8-6. TYPICAL DDT AND LINDANE PARTITION

    COEFFICIENTS VERSUS SEDIMENT SOLIDS CONCENTRATION

-------
    Lindane.   The  partition  coefficient  for  lindane  is  also  shown as  a
functloTrf' solids  concentration on Figure 8-6.  The  data, which range from
i . 500 to 285  I/kg over a range of solids concentrations of approximately
500 to 20,000 .f/L.  was  measured using lake sediments.  This difference in
solids cype  may partially explain  the less sensitive  inverse relationship
with  solids  concentration  of  lindane in  comparison  to  DDT.   It  is  not
evident  from these  data whether or not  the lindane  partition coefficient
would increase  at  suspended solids  concentrations  less than 500 mg/1.

    Figure 8-7  shows the  lindane  Isotherm data  for water'and solids  from
 the quarry (Dickson, 1981).   If a  linear isotherm is assumed, a line having
 a  slope  of  unity on the log-log plot  determines  the partition  coefficient.
 As  observed, an average partition  coefficient of  »  - 250  I/kg provides  a
 good  fit of  these data.  The difference  between  this value  and  those  of
 Figure 8-6  could readily be accounted for by  differences  in  the character-
 istics of the adsorbent materials which were used.
               lOiOOO
            X   '•00° T
                     CI»CIMMC»fAl MSUlM USIMO INOUNAOUAMT
                     WftTt* »«0
                      • «OSO*'TIOM
                      a ocio«»"0«
                                ousouveo LINOANC
                                                  / • >
               FIGURE 8-7. LINOANE ADSORPTION /OESORPTION DATA
                  WITH INDIANA QUARRY WATER AND SEDIMENT
                                       203

-------
    The  previously  reviewed  DDE and  lindane  partition coefficient  data
suggests that it will be difficult to estimate »2 at the estimated sediment
solids concentration in the quarry of  »2 - 750 g/1.  Thus,  »2  Is not well
defined and should be viewed as a calibration parameter.

    niffusive Exchange.  Microcosm experiments  (Dickson, 1981) with  lindane
provided an alternate  means  of estimating ^   The data analysis resulted
in  a  value of  K,  - 50 cm/day.  Since DOE and lindane  have  comparable
«olecular weights  (352 and 291, respectively),  a value of  ^  - 50  cm/day
has been used for both compounds.

    Chemical Decay.   The  DDE and lindane  decay rates  which have been  used
in  the  modeling analysis  of the quarry experiment  are summarized in  Table
8-3.   As  shown in  this  table, consideration  was  given  to the  following
types of chemical decay: oxidation, biolysis,  hydrolysis,  photolysis,  and
volatilization.  A brief  description  of  the basis for assigning the  race
coefficients  in Table 8-3  follows.

       TA8LZ 8-3  SUMMARY  OF DDE AND  LINDANE DECAY COEFFICIENTS  (I/DAY)


Hydrolysis
Oxidation
Biolysis
Photolysis
Volatilization

Water
.0018 to .0257
.0
0.0 .
.00026*
.000 18C
Lindane

a .0018 to .0257a
On
0.0

Water
d
0.0
0.0
0.013!
0.0201
DDE
Sediment
0.0
0.0
0.0
 *7 < pH < 9, (Dickson, 1981)
 bQuIrry K (lab)  - .00045/hr,  Kex - US/.. ^ - 13.9 ..  f - 0.5,  (Dickson,
   1981)   P
 ^Average of 2 estimates in Table  10-5                  .5
   (1)  £     aegr -  1.5 x  10 3 m/day using H  -  1.5  x 10  ) and Kg  -  100)  HL
   (ii) K^l^ej -  3-6 *  l0"3 m/day (ItadMy, 1975)
 dUSEPA,  1979
 eProgram SOLAR  (After Zepp)
 fBased  on  lab data  (Singmaster,  1975)
                                     "204"

-------
    DDE.  The estimation of photolysis rates  for DDE  have  been  based  on  the
methods developed" by  Zepp  et  al.  (1977).  This  analysis  makes use of  the
USEPA  computer  program SOLAR to calculate site specific, seasonal,  depth
averaged photolysis rates.  Using the inputs which are  summarized  in  Table
8-4, SOLAR was used to compute seasonal depth averaged DDE photolysis  rates
for  the quarry  which ranged  from .0034/day in winter to  .0239/day  in
Bid-summer  and  averaged .0130/day  overall.   The  annual  average  rate  was
used in the model calibration analysis.

    TABLE 8-4  PROGRAM SOLAR INPUTS USED TO COMPUTE DDE PHOTOLYSIS RATES'

              Quantum Yield                 •           J'j|
              Depth (meters)                          «-°
              Refractive Index                         J«8*
              Latitude                                 *°0
              Longitude                                85
     UaV(S                  Water Extinction              Molar  Extinction
                         Coefficient  (Ke.Q)               Coefficient
                               ( I/cm)                   ( liter /nole-en)


                                §                         I

                                3                         -S
                                -0078
     320.0                      -0078
     S:S                      SS
     volatilization  rates for  DDE were  based on  laboratory  studies  by
 Singmaster, 1975.  For  these experiments, 900  ml  of  water  containing  about
 I  ng/1  of  DDE was placed in a  5  liter  flask.   Air was  passed  through  the
 unoccupied volume  (4.1  liters)  overlying the water  at  a flow rate of  4.5
 1/min.   This  corresponds  to a wind  velocity  of  10 «/hr  which is  quite
 small.   Fortunately,  however,  the  quarry is  shaded on all sides and  a  low
 velocity is probably  realistic.  'The half life of DDE ranged from 1.2  hours

                                      205

-------
to 1.9 hours, for three water samples from different  natural  systems.   For
a half  life  of 1^3 hours,  the" corresponding volatilization  rate is  \ -
11.I/day.  Assuming an approximate depth of  water in the flask  of  2.5 cm,
this  rate  Is equivalent  to a surface  gas  phase transfer coefficient  of
r          -  0.28 meters/day.   The effective  volatilization rate  in the
 air-water
quarry can be estimated as

         K  -K                                                        C8"9)
         S    air-water

Thus, for Hj - 13.9 m, 1^ - 0.020/day.

    Although  DDE is  a product  of  the  hydrolysis  of  DDT,  DDE  itself  is
difficult to hydrolyze.  Wolfe et al. (1977) reports a half-life of greater
than  120 years at a pH of  5  and 27°C.  Other  investigators  (Eichelberger
and Lichtenberg,  1981)  have observed less  than a 2.5  percent  decrease in
the inicial DDE concentration of  10  ppb  over an eight week period of  time.
This  corresponds  to a first order hydrolysis rate of K^ < 4.5 x 10*  /day.
Since decay  rates of DDE due to photolysis and volatilization were found co
be  several  orders of  magnitude higher  than  this, the  effects  of DDE
hydrolysis have been neglected in this analysis.

    No  information could  be found on  the oxidation or biolysis rates of  DDE
in  natural water  systems,  although  it  appears  reasonable to  assume  chac
they are  small relative to the other decay  rates considered,  and  can
therefore be  neglected  for  the purposes of  this  analysis.

     Lindane.  The decay  rates for  lindane, which were  considered in  the
model analysis,  are  also  summarized in Table 8-3.  As  shown, oxidation  and
 biolysis rates were  neglected.   The range of hydrolysis rates in Table  8-3
 were estimated from laboratory  studies  (Dickson, 1981).   The measurements
 were made over  a pE  range of 5.0 to 9.3  and at lindane concentrations of
 about  0.2  to  8.0  mg/1.   These  lindane   concentrations  are considerably
 higher  than the observed  levels  during the quarry experiment.  Since the pH
 of  the quarry  water  was approximately  8.3,  the  test  data  which  was
                                     206

-------
considered was  limited  Co  Che pH  range of  7.0 to  9.0 and  to lindane
concentrations of" less  than  0.5 mg/1.   The  resulting range  of  hydrolysis
rates was K    - 1.8 x 10'3 to 25.7 x 10'3/day.
    The volatilization rate of lindane was  estimated  in two ways, as shown
in Table 3-5.  The first approach makes use of Henry's constant for lindane
of H - 1.5 x 10"5 (dimensionless) and results in an estimate of the overall
.ass transfer coefficient of K^.^ - 1.5 *  lO'3  m/day.  This value is
in  reasonably  good agreement  with  the value  of Kalr_wacer  ' 3'6  x 10
«/day which was  reported  by Jorgenson (1979).  Using  the  average value of
ic          - 2 5 x 10~3 m/d and  a water  column  depth  H. -  13.9 m, Equation
 air-water                      .4,
8-9 yields Kair^,ater - 1-3 x  10  /day.

    The measured photolysis rate for  lindane  in quarry  water  is reported  to
be K  - .00045/hr.  This  value must  be corrected to field  conditions using
    P
che expression:
          K (field)
           P       ..    el

 where f is  the  fraction of daylight  hours,  Hj is  the  depth of  che  water
 body and  Ke is  the diffuse  attenuation coefficient  for the  range  of
 ulcraviolec Radiation  responsible  for  photolysis.   From the discussion  of
 DDE photolysis presented previously, Kfl -  1.5/meter (base  •).   Using  HI -
 13.9 meters and  f  - 0.5, Equation 8-10 yields a lindane  field  photolysis
 rate of K.  - 2.6 x 10* /day.
          P
     The photolysis  and volatilization  rates  which have  been estimated are-
 more than an order of  magnitude lower  than the estimates of the hydrolysis
 rate which ranged from  1.8 x 10'3 to 25.7  x 10~3/day.  Since the hydrolysis
 rate was  assumed  to effect  both  water column  and   sediment chemical
 concentrations,  it was  clearly the dominant sink of lindane.
                                      207

-------
        TABLE 8-5.  ESTIMATES OP LINDANE VOLATILIZATION RATE
i.   Liquid phase transfer coefficient
          K02 - 0.3/day (NTSU 3/6/81)
          B1  • 0.333 a
          Therefore K, - .333 a x 0.3/day - 0.1 a/day
     Gas phase transfer coefficient
          *H.O not measured as yet
          Use *H20 @ wind speed - 0
          Therefore K  -  100 a/d
     Henry's Constant H -  1.5 x  10~5  (dimensionleas)
          1       -  1   ^ _

     *air-water'   Kl   H
                    _
                   *l   lOOxl.Sxlo"5
                 " Tools

      Therefore K	 l.SxlO'3 a/day
15xJO_
  L3.(
H. • 13.9' a in Quarry thus
                                                  1.1 x I0"4/day
   .  R          - i.SxlO"4 a/hr - 3.6xlO"3 a/d
       air-water
                            2.6 x
      Using average of above estimates: Ky - 1.8x10  /day
                                  .208

-------
    8,2.5  Chemical Inputs

    The 'chemical mass loading rates of DDE and lindane to the quarry may be
well  represented by  an instantaneous  release.   At  the start of  the
experiment, Mj  -  2.77 grams of both  DDE  and lindane  were  added uniformly
over  the  surface  of  the quarry and  there were  no  other  loads  of either
chemical before or after this initial dosing.

8.3  Results of Model Calibration Analysis

    The   quarry  geometry,  particulate   transport   parameters,   chemical
transfer  rates, and chemical decay rate  coefficients  which were  discussed
in  the "previous sections of this report  were used  to compute the  temporal
variation of  DDE and  lindane in  the water column  and  sediment of che
quarry.   The model results  and  observed  data are compared on Figures 8-8
and  8-9 for DDE  and  lindane, respectively.   The calculated  and  observed
total  chemical concentrations  in  the  water  column and  sediment, Cri and
C  , are  presented.   The observed  total  sediment  concentrations were
obtained  by multiplying  the reported  sediment  chemical concentrations  in
units  of  ug  chemical/kilogram wet  solids  by Che bulk  density of  1.2  kg wee
solids/liter of  sediment.   Computed concentrations  are  also presence*  in
cerms  of  the equivalent mass of chemical in  the water column and sediment
in the upper panel of each diagram.

     The DDE. calibration results  of Figure 8-8 were  obtained using partition
 coefficients of  ^  -  50,000  I/kg and *2 - 10,000  I/kg.   The  calculated
water column DDE  concentrations are  in very good agreement with the data.
 During the  first 10  days of the  experiment  the  calculated and observed
 water  column  concentration decreased  from approximately  53  tig/1  to  less
 than  10   ng/1,  while  the total  sediment concentration  of DDE increased
 sharply  to more  than 25 ug/1.   The rapid decrease in  the  water column DDE
 and the  corresponding  increase in  the  sediment  DDE  is due to adsorption of
 DDE onto  the  water  column solids  which settle  to the  active  layer.   After
                                      209

-------
      CO
            -30
          1000
      —   100 -
      C    10 -
      tu
      o
      o
       o
       o
DATA'         0
W At 8R ANT, 1973  -30
                  WATER COLUMN

                     f. -0.20
      0    9Q    100   ISO   200   230300   330

            •TIME AFTER RELEASE (days)
i-O I—





°^9P    0



ao
                       90   100   190
                        TFME AFTER RELEASE (days)
            90    IQO   ISO   200   290   300

             TIME AFTER RELEASE  (days)
•
— •
y. .9.77,,.... WATER COLUMN
L
fiSUjLT, T T
1 1£ \ 3. *•
1 1 1 1 I I 1
                                        SEDIMENT LAYER
3 90   «00
        FIGURE 8-8. MODEL CALIBRATION FOR DOE
                              210

-------
                     WATER COLUMN
                        fp,s.OOI
                      SEDIMENT LAYER, fP2v988
      -90


    1000



-    ioo
       UJ
       Z
             10
             0.1
             -30
              8
       6 —
        o»

        ,3     4
DATA:          0
WAY9RANT.I973   -SO
                        SO    100   190   200   250   300
                         TIME AFTER RELEASE (doys )
                                            WATER COLUMN
                    WT» 2.77gronn
                                                    I
                 90    100   190   200   290   300
                  TIME AFTER RELEASE ( days 1
3SO
             •0(8.9)
            SEDIMENT LAYER
                                           MEAN » STANDARD OEV
                                             • O-i. S cm
                                             O 1.9 -3.3 cm
                                               3.9-5.5 cm
                  90    <00   <90    200   290   300
                   TIME AFTER RELEASE  (days)
 390   «00
       FIGURE 8-9. MODEL CALIBRATION FOR LINDANE
                                211

-------
day  10,  there is  a ouch  more gradual  decrease in  the water  column DDE
concentration, since  the  net  flux  of  solids  to the sediment  is substan-
tially reduced*

    The calculated  sediment DDE concentration is a maximum of 34.5  ug/1  by
approximately day  40,  at  which time a  local equilibrium condition  between
Che water column and sediment  concentrations  is  approached.   After day 100,
.he  calculated  water column concentration  of 1.3  ng/1  begins to decrease
slowly,  while the  sediment concentration  of slightly  more  than  30  ug/1
begins  to  decrease at a  rate  which is  in proportion to  the water  column
concentration.   All of the removal of DDE occurs  in the water column  as a
result of decay  due to photolysis and  volatilization.  As the water column
concentration  decreases,  DDE diffuses from  the  sediment (the  resuspension
rate is  zero)  into the overlying water,  and hence  the  sediment  concentra-
tion decreases as well.   As  long as there  is water column  decay,  equili-
brium conditions between   the  dissolved  concentrations  in the water column
and interstitial water cannot  be established and  the decrease  of water and
sediment  concentrations will  continue  until the  DDE  is depleted from the
system.

     1C is of  interest  to  note that on day  100, 70 percent  of  che  inicial
 2.77 grams of  DDE remains in  the  water column  and sediment layer of  che
 quarry.   This  is  so in spice of  che  water  column  decay race  of .033/day.
 The  persistence  of DDE is  due  to  the  relatively  high percentage  of  che
 remaining chemical mass which is stored  in the sediment layer, and  hence
 not  available  for photolysis  or volatilization.   The  model  calculations
 show  that more  than 96 percent of  the  remaining 1.93 grams of  DDE in  Che
 system at day 100  is in the sediment layer.

      Lindane  model calibration results are  compared to  the  observed  water
 column  and  sediment data on Figure 8-9.   The  water column  partition
 coefficient of  ^  - 250 I/kg, which was determined  from laboratory  studies,
 was used  in conjunction with a  sediment  value  of  »2  -  50 I/kg.   A
 hydrolysis  rate of  K^  - .0025;day,  near  the  low end  of  the  range  of
 laboratory measurements  in Table 8-3,  was  also assigned.   In  contrast  to
                                      212

-------
the water  column  DDE concentration,  the  calculated and  observed  lindane
concentrations decrease at a much slower  rate.  The sediment lindane
concentration again increases sharply during the first  10 days as  a  result
of  adsorption  onto  and  net deposition  of water  column solids,  but  the
increase to between 2 and 3  ug/1  In  ehe  sediment  is an order of:  magnitude
lower  than it  was for  DDE.  This  is due  to the much lower  partition
coefficient of lindane in comparison  to DDE.

    The mass of lindane in the quarry on day 100 of 2.07  grams,  75 percent
of  the  original dosage,  was similar  to the mass  of DDE which remained  at
this same  point in  time.   In sharp contrast  to DDE, however, more than  75
percent of the remaining lindane was  in the wacer column.  This  observation
has important  implications with'regard  to the  fate of  each chemical,
lindane,  which  has  a total effective  removal rate  coefficient  of K,  -
0.0036/day Is removed from the system over the  next  100 days  at  an average
rate  of  5.2 og/day.   In  comparison,   DDE  has  a  total  removal  rate
coefficient of K_ -  0.0330/day, an order of  magnitude  higher  than the rate
coefficient  for lindane,  but is  removed at the significantly lower average
rate  of 1.9  mg/day.  Thus by day  200,  there is more  DDE  than  lindane
remaining  In the  quarry, and as  time goes  on,  DDE  will continue  to be che
more persistent of  the two chemicals.

8.4 Model Verification  and  Projections

     During the  course of conducting  the analysis of the quarry data, it was
discovered that several  quarry sediment samples were collected and analyzed
for DDE approximately five  years  after the initial dosing  of  the  quarry.
Although this followup  sampling  and  analysis was of limited scope,  it does
provide a suitable  basis  for what  can  be considered   to be  a preliminary
verification of the model.   Thus, the calibrated model was used  to  project
 the DDE and  lindane levels in the  quarry for the 12  year period of time
 from June 27, 1972 to June 27,  1984.

     The followup  sampling of the .quarry sediment was  performed on June  21,
 1977-.   The results are  summarized in Table 8-6.   As shown,  two nethods were
                                      213

-------
used  for - sampling.   In each  case the depth  of sample  was only  known  to
within a rough approximation.  The reported DDE concentrations  on a solids

mass basis were converted to volumetric concentrations and then adjusted to
a concentration range which reflects  the  uncertainty  in  the sampling depth

and which  corresponds  to an  assumed  depth of  DDE  penetration of  1.5  cm.
These DDE concentration ranges, shown in  the  last column of Table 8-6,  are

3.4 to  11.2 ug/1 for  Sample  A and 2.9  to 4.2  ug/1  for Sample  B.   These
concentrations  represent  almost  an  order of  magnitude  decrease  in  the

sediment DDE  concentration  since  the time  of the quarry  experiment.   The

DDE  level  in water column samples  collected at the  same  time  as  the

sediment samples was less  than the  detection limit  of  the analytical

technique which was employed.


        TABLE 8-6.  SUMMARY OF SEDIMENT DDE DATA FROM JUNE  21,  1977
   Sample
 Designation
                         Approximate '
            Description     Depth      DDE Concentration
            of Sampling   of Sample    Reported    CT
             Technique      (cm)
(ug/\cgw)

   2.8
(ugh)

  3.4
   Depth
Adjusted DDE (
Concentration
    (ug/1)

   3.4-11.2
                                                               2.9-4.2
   A       Composite of   £ 5 cm
            3  samples
            with an Ekman
            dredge from
            different
            sites  in
            quarry
    B       Sample was      2-3 cm          1.8        2.2
            manually
            "scooped" from
            sediment  in
            shallow gently,
            sloping area  of
            quarry

*Based on previous  sampling experience and visual observation

bSame analytical technique  as  original thesis  data; may be used to  make
 direct comparison  with Uaybrant  data
CcT2 - [ug/(kg wet  sediment)]  x 1.2 kg wet sediment/liter

*Assumes DDE all in top  1.5 cm of sediment layer
Note:  Water column DDE concentration was less than detection limit  of  30
       ng/1
                                      214

-------
    Model projections for DDE and lindane are  shovn  on Figure 3-10.  These
projections are  simply a continuation  of  the model  calibration runs with
kinetic and transport  parameters held  constant in time after  day 10.  The
initial sharp decrease of DDE  in the water  column  occurs during the  first
year and  is  followed by an exponential  rate of decrease over  the  next  11
years.  The sediment concentration  time history parallels the water  column
profile, and at the  time of the June 1977 sampling,  the calculated  sediment
concentration is 5.6 ug/1.   Considering all of the  simplifying;  assumptions
in  the modeling  framework,  the uncertainty  associated  with many of the
parameter  estimates, and  the  precision  of the  data, the  calculated and
observed  concentrations  at  t - 5 years  are considered to  be in excellent
agreement.  The  fact that  the  calculated water column concentration  of 0.2
ng/1 is  less  than  the detection limit of  the  analytical  procedure used  to
measure  the  1977 water column  DDE concentration, gives further  credence  to
the validity of  the  modeling analysis.  The  model results also  indicate  the
projected  DOE levels  in  the  quarry sediment  10 years  after the  original
dosing,  in June  1982,  will be  approximately  1  ug/1.

    It is unfortunate that no  attempc was made  to  measure lindane  at  the
cime of  the  1977 sampling.   The  model  projections  indicate  that  the lindane
concentration  in the water was finally reduced to the same  concentration as
DDE at about  t - 5 years, while  the  sediment lindane concentration  was 2 to
3  orders of  magnitude lower  than  the sediment  DDE concentration at  chac
time.   The  estimated mass of lindane remaining in the quarry of 0.014 grams
is less than 5  percent of  the  mass  of  DDE in the system at  that time (0.330
grams), even though the estimated water column decay rates  for  DDE were an
order  of magnitude higher than  the decay rates  for  lindane.  This  is
surprising considering that the lindane  concentration in  the  water  column
was much higher  than the concentration  of DDE during  the  first  year,
 thereby  giving  the  appearance  that  lindane  was  the  more  persistent
 chemical.   These  model  results underscore  the  significance  of  chemical
 partitioning on chemical fate  and  highlight the importance and utility of a
 modeling framework which incorporates realistic mechanisms for water column
 and sediment interaction.
                                      215

-------
Ok
           100
                          DOE
                                                                LINOANE
                       SAMPLE DESCRIPTION-
                          A. EKMAN COMPOSITE
                            "SCOOP"
                024    6   8   10   12
             UUNE'T2I              IJUNEBZ'I
                TIME AFTER RELEASE (YEARS)

        DATA*
        ZEPP AND STACEY, UNPUBLISHED
                                                ~ IOO
                                               ZUI
                                               UJZ
                                               UJ -
                                               cn-J
2
o
Ctt»O.I  Ol
                     OOI
                                                                       h   ti	L
    "02    4    6   6   10   12
    UUNE'721               |JUNE'B2I
       TIME AFTER RELEASE (YEARS)
            FIGURE 8-10. LONG TERM MODEL VERIFICATION / PROJECTION
                                 FOR  LINDANE AND DDE

-------
REFERENCES

-------
                               SECTION 9.0

                                REFERENCES
                                     ^
1970.
A.M.  Beecon,  "Relationship  Between  Secchl   Disc   Readings  and  Light
Penetration in Lake Huron,"  Trans  A«er.  Fish Soc., pp 73 to 79, 1958.

R.A. Berner, "Early Diagenesis,"  Princeton  University Press, Princeton, New
Jersey, 1980.

Blomquist,  S.  and  L.  Hakanson.  "A  Review on  Sediment Traps  in  Aquatic
Environments," Arch. Hydrobiol.,  Vol. 91, No.  1,  pp  101  to  132,

Curl,  R.L. and  C.A. Keolelan,  "Implicit-adsorbate  model  for .apparent
anomalies  with organic  adsorption  on natural  adsorbents,   Environ.  Sci.
Technol.  18(12): 916-922,  1984.                         • .
 Dickson, K.L..  Rodgers, J.H.  and  R.H.  Saleh,  "Measuring  ^  tenseuu  for
 Chemicals  in Simple  Model  Aquatic  Laboratory  System,   *«pared. *or /^
 Aquatic Research Task Group by North Texas State University (HBO),  1981.

 D.M.  Di Toro,  "A particle  interaction  model  of  reversible organic chemical
 sorption,  Chemisphere 14(10); 1503-1538, 1985.

 D  M  Dl Toro,  "Statistical Methods  for Estimating and  Evaluating  the
 Sncertainty  of Water Quality Model Parameters  and  Predictions,"  Environ-
 mental Engineering  and Science, Manhattan College, 1984.

 D.M.  Di  Toro,  "Optics  of Turbid  Estuarine Waters:    Approximations  and
 Applications, -   Water Research, Vol  12, pp 1059 to 1968,  1978..

 D.M. Di Toro, "Statistical Methods  for Estimating and  Evaluating  the
 uncertainty  of Water Quality  Model Parameters and  Predictions ,   Environ-
 mental Engineering and Science, Manhattan College, 1984.
 Di Toro, D.M. and L.M. Horzempa, 'Reversible and Resistant C°»P°nenc Mod«1
 of Hexachlorobiphenyl Adsorption-Desorption:  Resuspension «* Diction, In
 Physical Behavior of PCBs  in the Great Lakes,  p. 89. Editors D. *«*£•»•
 Pater son, S.J. Eisenreich and M.S.  Simmons,  Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor,
 Michigan, 1983.
                                      217

-------
Di Toro, -D.M.  and L.M. Horzempa,  "Reversible  and  Resistant Components of
Hexachlorobiphenyl Adaorpeion-Desorption:  Isotherms. Environ. Sci. Technol.
16: 594-602, 1982.

Di Toro, D.M.,  Mahony, J.D., Blakeney, S.J.,  Comerford,  E.  and P.R.
Kirchgraber, 'An  examination  of  partition coefficient particle  concentra-
tion  effects  using  microspheres ,   Immobile  surfaces  and  assured  ionic
chemical concentrations,"  Environ.  Sci.  Technol.,  in press,  1987.
Di Toro,  D.M.,  Mahony, J.D., Kirehgraber. P.R..  O'Byrne, A.L.,  P"^8'
L.R.  and  D.C.  Piccirilli,  "Effects   of   Nonreversibility,   Particles
Concentration and  Ionic  Strength on Heavy Metal  Sorption,  Environ.  Sci.
Technol., 20: 55, 1986.

Di Toro,  D.M.,  Jeris,  J.S.  and D. Ciarcia, "Diffusion and Partitioning  of
Hexachlorobiphenyl  in  Sediment,"  Environmental Engineering  and  Science,
Manhattan College, 1984.

Eichelberger,  J.W. and  J.J. Lichtenberg,  "Persistence   of  Pesticides  in
River Water," Environmencal Science and Technology, Vol 5, No.  6,  pp 541  to
544  (as quoted  in USEPA, 1979), 1981.
 Gschwend,  P.M.  and S.  Wu,  "On  the  Constancy of  Sediment-Water
 Coefficients  of  Hydrophic  Organic  Pollutants,"  Environ.  Sci.  Technol.,
 19(1):  90,  1985.

 C.E.  Hutchinson,  "A Treatise on Limnology," Vol. 1, Geography, Physics, and
 Chemistry,  John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1957.
 HydroQual,  Inc..  "Analysis  of  Fate of Chemicals in Receiving «*«»-?h5"
 I,"  Prepared for  Chemical  Manufacturers  Association, Washington,  DC,  May
 1981.

 HydroQual,  Inc.  "Testing  of CMA-HydroQual Model with Organic Chemical Field
 Oat""  Prepared  for  Chemical  Manufacturers  Association  Aquatic Research
 Task Group, 1982.

 In-stitute  in  Water  Pollution Control,  "Mathematical  Modeling  of  Water
 Quality Toxic  Substances," Manhattan  College, 1986.

 S.E. Jorgenson,  (Ed.).  Handbook of Environmental Data and  Ecological
 Parameters, International Society for Ecological Modeling.   (As quoted in
 HydroQual, 1 98 1 A, Appendix Table  5),  1979.

 S.W. Karickhoff,  "Organic Pollutant Sorption  in Aquatic Systems," J.
 Hydraulic Div. ASCE 110(6):  707-735,  1984.

 Karickhoff,  S.W.  and  K.R.   Morris,  "Sorption   Dynamics  of   Hydrophobic
 Pollutants  in  Sediment Suspensions,"  Environ.  Toxicology and Chemistry 4:
 469-479, 1985.
                                      218

-------
Karlckhoff,  S.W.  Brown,  D.S.  and  T.A.  Scott
Pollutants on Natural Sediments ,"  Water Research,

Krishnawami, S. and  D.  Lai,  "Radionuclide Limnochronology,"   Chapter 6  in
LatesT Chemistry,  Geology, Physics.  Ed.  A.  Lerman,  Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1978.

Lyman.  W.J.,  Reehl, W.F.  and D.H.  Rosenblatt, "Handbook  of  Chemical
Property Estimation Methods," Environmental Behavior of  Organic  Chemicals,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1982.

Mackay,  0.  and P.J.  Leinonen,  "Rate   of  Volatilization  of Low  Solubility
Contaminants  fro. Water  to  Atmosphere,"   Environ.  Sci.   Tech.,  9:1178  to
1180, 1973.

Mackay, D.,,Paterson, S.,  Eisenreich,  S. and  M.S.  Simmons,  "Physical
Behavior of PCSs in the Great Lakes,"  Ann Arbof Science,  1983.

Mackay,  tt...and B.  Powers,  "Sorption of hydrophobic  chemicals  from water: A
hypothesis  for  the  mechanism  of  the  particle  concentration  effect,
Chemo sphere, in press,  1986.

F.T. Manheim,  "Earth Planet Science Letters," Yolume 9, p. 307-309, L970.

Mcllroy. L.M.,  DePinto, J.V., Young, T.C. and S.C. Martin, "Partitioning of
heavy  metals  to suspended  solids in   the  Flin-t  River,  Michigan,   Environ-
mental  Toxicology  and Chemistry 5: 609-623, 1986.
 D.   Neptune,   "Priority   Pollutant   Frequency  Listing  J^"1™^
 Descriptive  Statistics,"   Internal   Report  co  R-B.  Schaffar,  Direc.or
 Effluent Guidelines  Division,  USEPA,  November .4, 1980.

 D.J. O'Connor, "Physical Transfer  Processes,'  In:  Modeling of  Toxic
 Substances in Natural Water Systems,  Manhattan College (Summer  Institute),
 1980.

 O'Connor. D.J. and  J.  Connolly,  "The Effect qf Concentration of Absorbing
 Solids on the  Partition Coefficient," Water  Research,  Vol.  14,  pp 1517 to
 1523, 1980.

 Robbins,  J.A.  and  D.N.  Edgincon,  "Determination  of Recent' Sedimentation
 Rates in  Lake  Michigan Using  Pb-210  and Cs-317,"   Geochimica et Cosmochi-
 mica Acta, Vol. 39,  pp 285 to 304,  1975.

 Robbins.  J.A., Krezoski, J.R. and S.C.  Mozleyi "Radioactivity in Sediments
 of  the  Great Lakes:   Post-Depositional Redistribution by  Deposit-Feeding
 Organisms,"  Earth Planet. Sci.  Lett. 36,  pp 325  to 333,  1979.

 Robbins,  J.A., Edgington, D.N. and A.L.W.  Kemp, "Comparative  2 lOPb,  137Cs,
 and  Pollen  Geochronologies  of   Sediments  from  Lakes  Ontario  and  Erie,
 Quaternary Res. Vol. 10, 1978.
                                      219

-------
J.A.  Singmaater,  ."Environmental- Behavior  of  Hydrophobic  PollatuH  in
Aqueous Solutions,- Ph.D. Thesis,  University o£  California  ac  Davis  (as
quoced in USSPA, 1979), 1975.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  National   Eutrophication  Survey
W«kin« Paper  Series, Compendium  of Lake  and Reservoir  Data,  No  s.  474
a975)  475 (1978), 476  (1978),  and 477 (1978), Corvallis  Env.  Res. Lab.,
Cor^aiiis, Oregon, and Env.  Monitoring and Support Lab., Las Vegas, Nevada.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency•?*£*'**££  Environmental Fate of
129 Priority Pcllutaits,- Volume I, EPA 440/4-79-029a, 1979.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  'Workshop  on Verification  of Water
Quality Models," EPA-600/9-80-016, 1980.

U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency  -Aquatic  Pate Process  Data for
Organic Priority Pollutants," EPA 440/4-81-014, 1981.

U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency. "A Screening  Procedure for Toxic and.
Conventional Pollutants," Part I, EPA-600/6-82-004a,  1982.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.  "Fate  of  Priority  Pollutants  in
Publicly  Owned Treatment Works," Volume  II, EPA-440/1-82/303. 1982.

U.S.   Environmental   Protection  Agency,  "Technical  Guidance  Manual  for
Performing  Wasteload  Allocations,"  Book  IV,  "Lakes  and   Impoundments
Chapter 2. -Eutrophication,"  Office of  Water Regulations  and  Standards,
Washinngton, DC,  1983.

U.S.   Environmental   Protection  Agency,  "Technical  Guidance  Manual  for
Performing  Wastelo-d  Allocations,"  Book III. "Streams and ^ers,   Chapter
3,   -Toxic  Substances,"  Office  of   Water  Regulations  and  Standards,
Washington, DC,  1984.

U.S.   Environmental  Protection   Agency,  "Technical  Guidance  Manual  for
Performing  Wasteload Allocations," Book  III,  "Estuaries,"  Office of  Water
 Regulations and Standards,  Washington,  DC,  1984.

 Voice, T.C.,  Rice, C.P. and W.J.  Weber, Jr., "Eff.cC of Solids Concentra-
 tion  on  the  Sorptive  Partitioning of  Hydrophobic  Pollutants  in  Aquatic
 Systems," Environ. Sci.  Technol.  17: 513-518. 1983.

 Ronald Waybrandt, "Factors Controlling  the Diseribution and  Persistence  of
 SSane  and DDE  in Lentic  Environments,- Ph.D. Thesis  Purdue  University,
 University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Order No. 74-15 256,  1973.

 Westall, J.  and H.  Hohl,  "A Comparison  of Electrostatic  Models  «or  eh.
 Oxide/Solution Interface." Adv. Colloid Interface Sci», 12: 265-294, 1980.

 R. Wetzel, Limnology. W.B. Saunders Co.. Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania. 1975.
                                      220

-------
Wischmeier, V.I.  and  D.D.  Smith, 'A Universal  Soil-Loss  Equation to Guide

Conservation  Farm  Planning,"   Seventh   International  Congress  of  Soil

Science, Madison, Wisconsin, I960.


Ualfa   M L.   Zepp,  R.G.,   Paris,  D.F.,  Baughman,  C.L.  and  R.C.  Hollis,
nu.fc.kB,  M.M ,     rr?         __.j,..««...  in  Hater*    Races  and   Products,
-Methoxychlour  and  DDT  Degradation  in  w««r'    V? "1077 to  1081
Environmental Science and  Technology,  Vol II,  No. 12,  pp  1077 to  IOBL,

1977.


Zepp,  R.G.  and  D.M.  Cline,   "totes  of  Direct  Photolysis   in  Aquatic

Environment," Environmental Science  and Technology,  Vol.  11,   No.  4,  pp

359-366,  1977.


RC.  Zepp, -Assessing the  Photochemistry of  Organic Pollutants  i.a  Aquatic

Environs,-  In:   Dynamics,  Exposure  and  Hazard  *••••""' °f  To*ic

Chemicals, R. Hague (ed.),  Ann  Arbor Press, pp. 69 to  110,  1980.
                                       221

-------
                            APPENDIX A





      DERIVATION OF STEADY STATE AND TIME VARIABLE  SOLUTIONS



                                                    i


    The mass balance equations  for the  water column and  sediment



segments are:








                          -             -     =>
           Wl m         W21  £D2  CT2   i
            *         + ^^"^~~J^~~~~^~"  * ^^
     dt
            W21
           f    e   .f   c

     ' — "f P2 CT2   H  f P2 CT2

      H
            H2              2
The  tollowing  definitions  express  the  transport  velocities  in


terms  of  equivalent first order reactions rates (I/unit time)
     „   .f

     Ksl    H.  Cpl
M
K
          =
      s21   H     p2
     K   -     f                                               (A5)
     KS2    H  £P2

-------
                                                             (A6)
   The  following  ratios occur frequently:

                                                             (A7)


          f  /f                                              (A8>
          £dl/cd2
    8  *  »lHlfp2

The latter equation defines the sediment capacity factor  that  has
been discussed previously in the body of the report.
                                               •
    The sum of all- water column reaction rates  is denoted by:
                                                             (A10)
       a Kl * Ksl *

and  if the outflow term  is  included  a  prime  is  used:
     •
 Similarly,  the sum of all sediment reaction rates is denoted by:
     -2 ' *2 *

-------
              KS21
The complete suras  are  denoted by:
         s
    ST  " Sl  + S2


The solution of  the differential equations  is found using  La

Place transform methods.   Let
    cT1- /«„<«.-* dt                                      is  the La Place  transform  of  CT]> (t).   The La Place

transform for the derivatives are:

     '  ~-      dt - PCT2                                    a  °'

 cT2(0) » 0.  The -input load (actually a step function  starting  at

 t » 0) becomes:
1
                        WT                                  (A18)

-------
Use these expressions in the mass balance Equations (Al,A2)
yields:
                             + zKd)CTi                       (A20)

The  use  of La  Place  transforms converts  differential equations
into  algebraic equations  thus simplifying  their solution.    Ir
particular the  sediment layer  equation has the solution:
                + zKd „                                      (A21
    CT2   ~  p * S    CT1
                   •
and using  this  result  in  the water column equation  yields:
     (p + s1) -  ("*s21 * "^dM^sl7" •*•  ***d) C-,  •   T          (A22
           1               P + S2P°lcol

 so  that the  water column  concentration  becomes:


        w                 P * s.
 r    a    T    	         2                             (A23^
 Tl  TS-S	  ,„ *  -•!/„  * s  i  -  h(Kg21"-  Kd)(Kgl/H + ZKd)
     In order  to find  the  solution  in  the  time domain it  i«
 necessary  to  simplify   the   denominator  of  Equation   (A23)
 Expanding the terms in  the denominator yields:


     p2 + (s'  + S2)p * S'S2 - h(Kg21 * Kd)(Ksl/h *  2Kd)       (A24^


 The coefficients of p2 and p.. are in their simplest form; however
 the"constant term can be further simplified as follows:
                         *

     31S2- h(Ks21 * Kd)(Ksl/h * 2Kd>

-------
              KS21 * K»2*
The complete sums are denoted byi
    ST - Sl
    ST  ' 4  * S2
The  solution of  the  differential  equations  is  found using  La

Place transform methods.  Let
    CT1-  =T1(t,e-     =  °'

 cT2(0)  *» 0.   The input load  (actually  a step function starting  at

 t * 0)  becomes:
     1
WT                                  (A18)

-------
Use these expressions in the mass balance Equations (Al,A2)
yields:
                                                            (A19)
           - S  C   + (Ksl/h+ ZKd)CTl
             '2

The use  of  La Place  transforms converts  differential equations
into  algebraic  equations  thus  simplifying  their  solution.   In
particular the sediment layer equation has the solution:


          Kal/h + zKd c                                      (A21)
    CT2 9 ~  P * S2   CT1

and using this result in the water column  equation yields:

    ,  ^ g.j . (hK321 * hKdHKsl/h * ZKd)  CT1 -  UT	      (A22)
          1                P * S2                 P0!^!

so  that  the water column concentration becomes:

                              ^2		_	_     (A23)
                                          Kd)(Ksl/h *  ^d'
     in order  to  find the  solution  in the  time domain  it  is
 necessary  to  simplify   the   denominator  of   Equation   (A23).
 Expanding the terras in the denominator yields:
            ^ * S2)p * S'S2 - h(K321 * Kd)(Kgl/h * «d)
                                                             (A24)
 The coefficients of p2 and p.. are in their simplest form; however
 the constant term can be further simplified as follows:
                         *

     Sis2- h(Ks21 * Kd)(Ksl/h * 2Kd)

-------
        (K1 * Ksl+ zhKd * '1/t:ol)(K2 * Ks21 *  Ks2*  Kd}


        - h(Ks21* Kd)(Ksl/h *  2Kd)


      (K1 + l/tcl] S2 * Ksl(K2  *  Ks21J *  KslKs21  *  V^d     (A25)
                      Kg2)
                    -  KdKsl  -  zhKdKs21  •
         - S2(K1 * a/tQ1)


where the  underlined terras cancel.   The denominator  can now  be
factored  using  the  solution  for  the  roots  of  a   quadratic
equation.  That is:
                • •
    p2  + S.J.P  + S1(K1 * l/tol)

                                                             U26)

         * (K2 * Rs2)(s1 - KX) •  (p + gL)  (P  + 92)

where

      ,        -
          tl(
     s,       -* l»2(Kl * l/t01> * (K32 * Ks)(sl " K1)1.1/21(A27)
               — -
     2
The" plus sign is used for g^ the minus sign for g2.  Using  these
roots the solutions  for  the  water column  and sediment concentra-
tions become:


           W       ^ * 32   •-
    CT1 - Q^I p(p + gi)(p * 92)                            (A28)

-------
    f*   «•
    CT2   Qt    P


-------
    The key to the simplified  solution  is to compute the ratio of
the particulate concentrations  in  the  sediment, r2,  to  that in
the water column,  r..   These  concentrations are defined  as the
mass 'of  chemical  on the  particles  per unit mass  of particles.
The volumetric  particulate- concentration  in  the  water  column,
c ,,  is found  from the  total concentration  by  applying the
fraction of total  chemical  in  the  particulate phase,  fpl«   Then
dividing by  the  concentration of  particles,  n^,  yields the
particulate concentration:
    r  ,                                                    (A34)
     1     "I
    -  ,                                                    (A35)
     2     n»
The  ratio,  r2/r^  is  found  using  these equations and the  steady-
state solutions Equations (A32,A33).   The result is:
         £P2 CT2/m2 * £P2 mi .  (Ksl/h + 2Kd)                 (A36)
    Cl
 where  Equation  (A9)  has  been used for 8.  Note  that  the  loading
 term  (WT/01tQl)  and  the root  product  (g1g2)  cancel  in  the
 expression  for  the ratio: r2/r^.

     It remains to simplify the  terms  in Equation  (A36).   The
 settling  velocity term becomes:

     fsl   .  ^   f    I'l'    -  i !l t                    (A37)
                r

-------
The expression zh/s simplifies to:
                QI   n».,H..c |
                 1    2 2 pi



with the depth ratios cancelling.  The ratios fp2/fd2 and fpl/fdl

are found from their expressions:
                                                            (A39)
    f    3     1                                            (A40)
so  tnat:
              l
     cdl     A A


and, similarly,



    '!*  -»2.2                                             (A42)
     Cd2     *


Using these Equations (A41,A42)  in Equation (A38) yields  the

remarkable  simplification:



    .zh.Il                                               (A43)



 And,  finally,  using  Equations  (A37,A43)  in  the  expression  for

      f Equation (A36);  yields:

-------
    The key to the simplified  solution  is  to compute the ratio of
the particulate concentrations  in  the  sediment, r2,  to  that in
the water  column,  r,.   These  concentrations are defined  as the
mass 'of  chemical  on the  particles  per unit mass  of particles.
The volumetric  particulate- concentration  in  the  water  column,
c  ,,  is found  from the  total  concentration  by  applying the
fraction of total  chemical  in  the  particulate  phase,  fp]>.    Then
dividing by  the  concentration of  particles,  n^,   yields the
particulate concentration:
                                                            (A34)
       . £P2 CT2                                            (A35)
     2     m2


The  ratio,  r2/ri  is found using these e2  mH«       H  m2  p2
      sl  =1  .         o2   •      lf                    (A37)
       ~    —  £

-------
           ii« ,  *  3lfd. ("2/'l)
   '2  -   •«"»  P2     "2  "	                  (M4)
where all the equivalent reaction rates have been replaced by the
actual mass and decay transport parameters.

    The  properties  of  this  simplified  expression  have  been
discussed in the  body of the report.  As  noted there,  if the
particle mass balance condition is used:

    wlml * (W21 * W2J m2       '
                                             •
this  ratio is further simplified to:
                     -w

     The  steady-state  solution  for the water column  concentration
 can  now  be simplified as follows.  The solution, Equation  (A32) ,
 becomes
               WT    _ *2 __ _ _ ! -  (A47)
     CT1  '  0       .l    + lAol) *  (K2  +  Ks)  Ua *
 where the- product g^ is replaced by  its  equivalent  expression,
 Equation (A25) since g^ is  the  constant  term in  the  quadratic
 Equation (A24).  Alternately" the product can be computed directly
 using Equation (A.27).  Dividing by s2 yields:

-------
    CTI
                                              S2
At this  point it is  necessary  to make  the  key observation  from
Equation (A36) that:
    a  _Z
       rl
       r2    Ksl +    d                                      (A49)
                 ^— •"•-•
so  that  the  expression   for   the   water   column  concentration
becomes :

    CT1   '  Q         1   +  1A    *  8    /rL IKS1 * K,2)       (A50)
 or:
               WT         i
     CT1   S    0      1  * t   K                              (A5i)
 where
 whicn is  the  final  working form of  the  solution.   Note that  the
 particle flux balance, Equation (A45), is not required  to be  true
 for this solution to be valid.  The general case, Equation  (A46),
 can be used for *2/rl in the solution-
                •
     The  dissolved  and particulate fractions  in the water  column
 follow from the expressions:
                         *
           =, f    c                                            (A53)
     cdl    fdl  CT1

-------
                                                            (A54)
    cpl  " fpl  ^1

The particulate concentration in the water column is:

              .                                              (ASS)
    rl  a cdl/nl

And using either Equation (A44) or (A46)  for r2/r;, yields r2.

    The dissolved  concentration  is the sediment  segment  follows
most directly by observing that:
                                                            (A56)
    rl     '1 cdl

 so  that  the dissolved concentration  ratio follows from  the
 particulate  concentration ratio:
                • •

    Cd2   a   Ii  II                                          (AS7)
    Cdl      '2  Cl

 Finally/

                                                            (ASS)
    Cp2   '•   W2r2

 and:




 Hence all  the  relevant  steady-state  concentrations  follow  from

 the key expressions for CTI and ^2/'rl*

 Time variable Solution - Approximation

     NO useful  simplified" exact expressions  have  been found  for
 the  time variable  solutions,  for  cT1(t)  and c^U),  Equations

-------
(A30,A31).  The difficulty  is  that the characteristic  roots,  g]>
and g   are given  by  a complicated  expression,  Equation  (A27).
However,  for  most  practical  applications  the  magnitude  of  the
terms is  such  that a  useful and quite  accurate approximation is
available.   Consider  the  terms  in the  square  root  of Equation
(A27) repeated here for convenience:
       m
           f32(*l + Xtan + (2 +  .2)(l -  l)l}l/2      (A60)
The denominator of the fraction is (s£) - (s{ + «2) , which  is  the
square  of  the sum of  all the  equivalent  reaction  rates  in  the
water  column  and sediment segments,  including  the outflow  term,
1/t      Hence if any  of  these terras  is -large, then  s^ will be
larye  and  its square will be  larger still.  This suggests  that
the  fraction  will  be small  relative  to one, thus  the  square  rooc
can be  approximated  as:

     (1- c)1/2 .1-$                                      (A61)

     A  numerical example illustrates this  approximation:   1  -
 (U.l)1^2 » 0.9487  whereas the approximation yields  0.9500,  which
 is  an  error of » 14%.  Hence  in this  approximation:
      1 m  ^r  [1 * (1 - -y)l                                  (A62)
      4

 where
             s  K    1/t  v.   ,K,   K ,i,K ,  _,_ zhK,.
          4 t32(Kl * i/col)^ (R2 *  32) (  si  +	dj.         (A63)
     c

-------
Since t  is  assumed to be  small, the large  root, g^  becomes

(using the plus sign):


    «1-  ST  a   Si +  S2a  Sl  *  S2  *  1Xtol            U64)


i.e.,  gx is  approximately  the sum  of all  water column  and
sediment equivalent decay rates and outflow rate.


    The small root, g2, is  found using the minus  sign:
         ST
KK
           32(K1 + l/tol)  *  <2 *  s2)(sl >    d)          (A65)
                            ST
 using the definition  of  c.   Further, g2  can  be simplified  to

 give:
             ,„ . ,.„,.                       ,

 Again,  the  key expression for Br2/rlf  namely, Equation (A49), can
 be used to  express g2 as:
                                01^.K2>KS2)1



 which yields the  final form:



                                                            (A68)

-------
These Equations, (A64,A68) give  the  approximations  that express
the  characteristic  roots as  useful  and  comprehensible expres-
sions.

The First Plateau

    The fact that g,  is usually much  larger  than g2, since

    £2      c                                               (A69)
    gl  "   7

and  c  is usually  small, leads  to  the  following  observation.
Consider a time, t ,  such that

     t   ,  !_                                               (A70)
     P     91

After  this  time 'has  elapsed,  the  first  exponential term in  the
time variable  solution exp .1-Sj.tp)  is  quite small  (exp(-3)  =
0.05)  whereas  the  second  exponential  term,  exp   (~(32t?)   =
exp(-3e/4) » 1  is still approximately one for c small.   Hence  the
time variable solution, e.g. (A30), becomes:
       ,          2
     e    * o,  e     • 1.
 and
     CTi.plateau  .          (_|.  +         -,,


 Since y2 «  glf  (g2 - g^) • - g± so that this expression becomes:
                         0
     cT1-plateau  -                -        * --,

-------
Using the approximation  for gx, Equation (A64), yields

                      W               1
    cT1-plateau  =  g-                                 (A73)
or
    cT1-pla»aU  .   Jjfc  ^r^;


Hence after a  time  such  that t » 3/g^ the solution has reached
this  plateau  concentration.  The  rate at  which  the  solution
approaches  steady-state  is then  determined by  the magnitude of
g  , the small  root.

-------
                                         Table  B-l.
                      OCCMBEMCE OF Miami POILUIAMIO IN paiu INFIUCNIO
                                          PIANIO i 10 40
 PABAMMSO.

 IIHC
 CfAMIPE
 coma
 lOlUIHf
 Cll» ON I UN
 1C 1KACIU-OOOE IHVLEME
 NflHIIfNC CMIOOIOC
 M8I2-CIHILHCKVLI PNIMALAII
 CHLOIIOFOkll
 IftlCIUOMOCIMIlfNC
 Ifl.l-HUCHlOROEINANf
 CIIIUkfNICNE
 NICKEL
 PllfNOl
 NEHCUfcV
 OI-M-kUIIL PMIHAIAIE
 I (All
.1.2- IfcANO-eiCUlOOOEIimCNE
 •f Nil IIC
 •UIVI  ftEMIU PMIHAIAII
 CAtMlUN
 OIIIIIU rUIMAiAlf
 HAFHIHALEMC
 I . I -lUCHLOBOf IIIANC
 PEMIACIILOROPIICNOL
 OAHMA- SIIC
 I . I -lilCHLOftOEIHIlENf
 1.2-MCIIlOltatfMlCNE
 PlirHAHIIIfcENC
 4MIIM.ACENE
 |.4-PICIILaROBCMIENE
 AhSCHIC
 1.2-MCIIlOROf INANE
 ANIINOMV
 ClllOKOHCMIfME
 lllHfllllL PIIIHAIAlf
 MCIIHL CIU.Ot.lliE
 1.2.4- IMCULOhOkE NIf HC
 1.4-PIMEIIIVLPIIENOL
 CAEfcOM ICIfcACIILORIliE
 I* Kill OaOFLUOROHCIIIAMf
 6CICHIUH
 P I CHI OfcOthONONC IHANC
 I.I.2-IKICIUOBOCIHANC
 |.2-l>ICIILOkpfkOfAMf
 DI-M-OCIVL flllllALAlf
 FlUOf.AHIIICHC

• POllUfANia NOI  1 1 Sift" MEM NEVCA PCIfCICB
i occuKimcra  AI.E aABtn ON Ait maiicm  BAHi-iEa
^ P01IUIAHIB ftCPORlEP AB LEfia IMAM Ilir KCIECIIOM IINII
  • HI. nurnHriBHld fraflfllifB AKF A8SIIHCP HOI l-fllCiri<
NUNOEU OF
OAHPLEO
ANAim*
202
10 «
101
lao
IBI
laa
IBS
1B7
1BO
IBO
lao
100
102
200
101
101
202
iao
iao
2B7
101
1B7
IBO
107
200
280
207
207
207
207
201
100

101
207
200
207
200
200
200
202
200
200
200
200
207
207
NUNtC* OF
lines
OflfClEO
202
201
201
274
240
271
24A
243
211
140
114
111
124
120
100
1*4
IBS
174
I7ff
173
143
137
131
142
0*
04
73
74
47
37
32
4*
41
42
jf
14
11
11
20
20
23
23
24
24
22
21
21
20
20
PCRCCMI OF
BANPIEO UHEO.E
PCICCICO
100
100
100
•4
• 3
• 3
• 1
• 1
• 1
•0
03
00
7*
7*
71
70
44
Al
41
41
37
34
31
4*
11
Iff
14
14
11
20
10
17
13
13
14
11
II
II
10
10





7
7
7
7
MINIMUM
VALUE HAIIMUN
UNI 10 miEcico VALUE
UO/L 22
UO/l
UO/l
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/l
UO/l
UO/L
UO/l
UO/l
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
NO/I 20
UO/L
UO/L 1
UO/l
UO/l
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/l
UO/L
UO/L
NO/L 2
UO/L
UO/L
UO/l
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/l
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/l
MO /I
UO/l
UO/l
UO/l
110 /I
• 230
7300
2100
11000
1100
9700
4*000
470
410
1000
30000
710
3*70
1400
120
4000
140
1340
100
1340
340
1000
41
ISO
14
440
1*00
111
440
• 1
• 1
100
BO
74000
1*1
1300
110
1*00
4100
33
1*00
1*0
10
22
4400
1)3
2400
110
3

-------
                                Table B-l.   (Continued)
                     occuumi or
                                                            roIM
2.4-lilCUlOCOrHfNOl
PIMM
1.1-PICIUOfcOkCMICMC
VlHll
rc»-iata
a .«. « - 1 a i cut oaorMCNOL
MflllVL
afftULIUH
ACCMAtUIIKNC
(III. V if Hi
|.a-MMIAMIIIftA«MC
»f||A-ailC
rAtACllLOIONCU
2-ctiiflLariiCMOL
.IIUtllUH
 llfMAClliatOUNliNf
 INOCMOII.3.1-C.OI
 IkMIO
 AIIUA-(Nl>0(UirAM
 Clll flKOi IIIAHC
 • Qill-ClltaHOCIMVOIVI  MIUAHE
 l.«-»lNtOflUOI>«NIIUHC
 11.12-bfNIOflUOkAMlllfNC
 •If kAClllOI.On MANE
 2 -Clll OfcOHAl IIIIUICNC
 llflACIIiaiflbUIABUNf
 3.<-|i|HlIfi010IUCMC
HUMtCa Or MUHIfO Of f(
g Ann fa IIMIB a
	 	
aoa ••
aa> I*
aaa '•
}ftg 19
2 ft!) 1 *
aaa H
aov H
aaa ••
aaa
ao»
aa>
aoa
aaa
aaa
aaa
aoa
aao
aaa
aaa
aa>
aa>
aa>
aav
aa*
aao
aa«
aa*
aaa
aaa
aaa
a?A
aao
aao
884
aa*
aa>
aa>
aa>
aaa
aaa
aaa
aa?
2fl»
307
207
aaa
lacfNi or
uirica UIICOE •
iifcico uMiia
UO/L
bO/L
UO/L
UO/L
ua/L
MO/L
NO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
« V
ua/L
UO/L
ua/L
MO/L
UO/L
ua/L
UO/L
ua/L
ua/L
UO/L
UO/L
UO/L
ua/L
UO/L
ua/L
MO/L
ua/L
UO/L
ua/L
MO/L
Ufi/L
MO/L
ua/L
• UO/L
ua/L
UO/L
ua/L
UO/L
ua/L
MO /I
MO /I
NO/I
MO /I
i | ua/i
| | UOVL
| | UQ/l
I | ' na/L

IBB
MINIMUM
VALUE MAMMIII
BCICCIfO VALUf
	 i aa
1 04
a a»o
i aa
ao atoo
•o aoo
aaoo 4tAoo
i n
i •
10 IA4
i «
i ai
I •»
I i«
100 1400
1 41
I a
i it
i a
1 01
4a 1000.
a too
a ai
1 H
• i ao
i ao
10 aaoo
a a
a 10
a o
4»o ' avoo
1 10
«ao aaoo
a &
a ia
a a
a a
a • a
A 11
1 >
110 "0
10 1000
10 40
310 aao
a a
a >
a »
a o
ai »>

               101
                       D II
                               IfWI
                                        rci

-------
                                Table B-l.   (Continued)
                      OCCIMMMCC or Miomir roiiuiANis  IN ioiy
                                        ftAMI9 I  10  «•

                                  NUMMM or  NUN*!*  or  risciMi or            •IHIHUN
                                  SAHPlfC    IIHCS      SAHrLCS HIICM         VALUC     MAI I MUM
                                  AMALVII*   MlfCIf*   ftCIICHk  -     ONUS  •II(CII»  VALUE

               VINI1 ilHfk         >••          I        HI           V»ft         I*        I*
                                  aas          i        il I           UO/L         41        4«
                                  ass          i        il I           UO/L          i         f
  «.«•-frill                         3M          I        il I           MO/L       IIO«
            NO I ilBKU Ufhf NfVM PCIfClfD
t OCCUMfcCNCfl ARf MSIO OH All  INftUfNI SANPLfe  IAI>fN
• roiiiiiAMif Mroaiio AS uss HUM HIE MirciiOH IIHII
  AHIi UNCOHriKhCO IISIICIMS AM ASCUNrii HOI  l
-------
                                        Table  B-2.
fABANfUR
1INC   •
corrco
MCIHUCNC CHLOMOf
 UHUCHIOROCIMVICNK

 MICKCL
 101UIMC
 IIIICIIlOIIOCIHVLfNC
 OAHMA-IHC
 rHCNOl
 CAdHlUN
 SILVCR
 (IHVlMNICNf
 •fNICHI
 LEAD
 rtNlACHlOBOrMCMOL
 PICMOHOIROHONCIMANC

 OlflHVL fHIMAl»K
 ANllHONI
 ARSCHIC
 •UIVL MNIVL PHIHALAlf
 iClCNIUII
 l.l-OICIUOROdHfLCNC

 CHI 0*OI> I mOMOWt IHANC
  AlPHA-illC
  HflHVL  CULOIIIDC

  CAtBOM
  NAFIIIHAlfMC
   .

  M-N-OCIIL rillHAlAlf
  U ICHl OKOriUOfcOHf I HANK
  CHtOKOfrfHlfHf
                                MUHBfR Of
                                •ANPlfB
                                AMAIV1CB
aoi
ait
loa

101
101
101
aii
101
101
101
101
101

101

aai
loa
 101
 aii
 101
 101
 101
 101
 an
 aii
 loa
 aii
 101
 101
 101
 141
 101
 101
 101
 101
  101
  loa
  loa
  loa
  loa
  101
  loa
  loa
  101
  loa
  101
  101
                                             •UNBCR Of

                                             US!..*
                                                        fMMMI Of
                                            »>•
                                            1
                                              li
                                              »
                                              JJ
                                              ''
                                               14
                                               ai
                                               ai
                                               ai
                                               ii
                                               17
                                               11
                                               ia
                                               13
                                               ii
                                               ii
                                               it
                                               to
                                               10
                                                I
                                                t
                                                       ;
                                                       "
                                                       «
                                                       •»
s

i
!•
a"
a«
11
ai
ai
 M
 it
  o
 SI
               UMIIi


               UO/L
               UO/L
               06/L

                                                                        06/t

                                                                        M0/t
oo/t

s

M
U0/t
U0/t
ua/t
uo/t
uo/l
UO/L
U0/t
 uo/l

                                                                         uo/l
 UO/l
 UO/l

 UO/l
 UO/l
 UO/l
 UO/L
 NO/I
 UO/L
 UO/l
 UO/L
 UG/l
 UO/l
 ua.'i
 UO/l
 UO/l
 UO/L
 UO/L
  UO/L
  UO/L
  UO/L
  U«/l
MAKIHUH
VALUE

    ai«o
    1140
     ass
   A1000

     170
       07
     iaoo

     1100
       • 7
     1100
      a 10
     l«00
     iaoo
       01
       oa
       10

        71
        17
        At
        71

       ISO
        II
         a
        a7
     11000
         A
       7«0
       940
        11
                                       110
                                         II
                                         14
                                         10


                                         11
                                         11
                                          S
                                          1
             KOI
              Ait *A«*
« PnillllAHIS
                      AB IfiB
                                          fiieiiiiii LIHI.
                                        . »..ni nrifflfD

-------
                                  Table B-2.   (Continued)
                                   or luonii rouuiAMio IN roiu
                                                    ia «o
   lild-IMICHlDMUIIMM
   1.1.3.3-IEfftACIIlOftOEIHAHE
   I • 4 • ft I CIU. OfcOM Mtf Nf
   2-NIUOfHEHOL
   4LI4.IN
   MtlA-tllC
  MMCtllVt FHIHALAIE
  viHu nil at i PC
  • •2-MHIAHIHftACENE
  I • 1-MCII1 OfcOfrCMZEME
  »EIA-»HC
  IIIAItlUM
  ACEMAMIIIIENE
  IIEflACHLOfc
  iiEriACiiia* froiinc
  4-NllfcOf HfNOL
  •SMItlUH
  HIIHU MOMIM
  rVftENE
  rc»-i2«2
  riUOfcANIIUHE
  HEKACIILOfcOUNIENE
                 CkCSOl
  3 ClllUlkOflllNOl
  l.J'-MClllOfiOKNlllilHf
  I>I3 MNIOfffKlCNI
 CIU OfcOf IIIAHI
 l«3-|>IIIICUVtllf|iMAIIIIf
NUNkiA or NUN»IA or rcRCtNi or
•AHfiCS IIHC* SAHfiCI HUCRf
AHAlVUIt MUCIC* »CIICIC» UHIII
109
10>
101
101
•101
101
109
103
109
103
101
101
3it
103
101
101
109
20t
109
109
101
103
109
103
103
102
101
2*4
102
103
103
103
103
2»S
9»«
101
103
102
101
101
101

































UO/L
ua/L
ua/t
uo/t
NO/t
NO/t
uo/t
uo/t
ua/t
ua/t
uo/t
MO/t
ua/t
ua/t
MO/t
NO/t
uo/t
ua/t
ua/t
ua/t
NO/t
uo/t
ua/t
ua/t
ua/t
uo/t
NO/t
ua/t
uo/t
ua/t
ua/t
ua/t
ua/t
11 ua/1
1 1 ua/t
1 1 UC/l
1 1 00 /I
1 1 ua/t
i 1 HO /I
i 1 NO /I
1 1 HO /I
NININUN
VALUE
OCICCICft
1
1
1
a
1000
20
1
1
2
1
a
40
1
1
10
to
a
i
11
a
7SO
a
a
i
i
i
«o
«
ao
i
i
i
a
«
a
3
s
9
200
«0
300
NAHIMUN
VALUE
0
a
. t
i«
4000
1100
II
a
200
II
a
l>00
2
7
iaoo
aoo
230
12
220
a
2400
a
a
10
12
«
200
a
30
a
a
2
a
«
a
2
a
2
200
40
aoo
I fOIIUIAMIS NOI IISIIH HIM  HI VIM PCIfClfK
t ocruMCNcrs AKE »ASEO ON  AH  SCCOHDAIH irriuiHi BANI-IIO
I fOUUIAHIS ICrOfclffi AS IliS IHAN HIE I'fllCIIOH IIHII
  ANH UNCOMrikHEIi IfSIICIMS  AftE ASSUIIfb MOI MIECICO

-------
                                                                    Table  B-3.


                                                BUHMARV Or OBLBCTIO IMPUIIMT IOLUITAMT OONCntTRATIOH*

                                                                tOt fOIUa I THROUGH <0
  •no 1.,/u
  TSS
  Cldalue
  ChicMlua
  Coppef
  Cyanide
  uad
  Mercury |ng/||
  Michel
  Silver
  Slno

 Btniena
  l.i;i-Tflchloio«tlMMM
 dilorofofa)
  I.I-trana-Dlcltloroatkylan*
 Ethylbentena
 Methylana  Oi|ocl4«
 Tolucn*
 Tr Ichlor o«thy l«n«
 Phenol
 N*phlb*l*n«
 •!•  |l-«lhyl hciyl)
 Bulyl Baoiyl Vhihalak*
 Ol-M-Bulyl Hilhlai*
 OUthyl FhthaUta

 Total Mela)*!*)

 Total VblatlUa

 Total Ac Ida

Total Baaa Heutrala
         Avaraga o(
Haul Avaiaga Concanttatlona

           III
           III

            II
           III
           ni
           SIT
           101
           SSI
           110
             »
           III

            10
           110
            II
             I
            11
           SOI
           IIS
           lit
           It
           SI
            1
           «s
           II
            t
            I

         IIM
          Median of
»lant Avaraga ConcanltBHona

            IIS
            ISI

              I
            IOS
            III
            lit
             SI
            SII
             S4
              •
            III
              I
              1
              •
             II
             11
             II
             II
            1
                                           III
                                          III

                                           II

                                           II
   MOM Malytttad Awaiaqa of
ttant Avaiaga Concantiationa

            111
            aoi

             II
            Ml
            as i
            410
            III
            SII
             •1
              I
            140

             II
            141
             II
              4
             11
          •  Hi
            III
            an
             •«
             10
             •
             SI
             u
             10
             1

          1161

          III!

            1C

            101
UTAH  imlta In 09/1 unlaea othacnUa noted.
HI  Excluding Cyanide.

-------
                                            Table B-4.

              flUHHARY OF HINIHUH PBBCBHT REMOVALS*1» ACHIBVBD BV
                                                                 SECONDARY TREATMENT
Paraaatar

BOD
TSS

Toluene
Tetrachloroethylena
Methylena Chloride
Bia |2-ethylhe«yl| Phthalata
Chloroform.
Trlchloroethylene
1,1 ,l-Trlchloroethana
Ethylbenzene
Phenol
Di-N-Butyl Phthalata
1,2-trana-Dlchloroethyiana
Benzene
Butyl  Benzyl  Phthalate
Diethyl  PhthaUte
Napthalena

Zinc
Cyanide
Copper
Chromium
Nickel
Silver
Mercury'
 Lead
Cadmium
Percent of
Mill
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
38
39
38
38
32
32
35

29
40
40
40
40
36
36
35

29
50
91
88
96
65
56
58
62
97
94
99*
99
51
99*
99*
99*
99*
99*
77
59
82
76
35 .
95
86
97
9)
75
82 .*
84
88
67
29
34
40
87
as
91
93
13
96
81
97
8i
99*
64
36
sa
66
ia
82
65
74
46 .
Planta
80
81
78
86
56
27
32
23
as
84
90
89
5
94
74
95
74
98
55
33
56
64
17
79
61
58
39
90
77
72
70
30
3
15
II
72
80
a6
46
4
79
66
40
67
85
. 44
5
46
48
a
66
25
35
4

N
40
»••
40
25
21
24
27
a
25
23
12
9
4
4
5
1
1
4
40
40
40
35
22
2
•
9
3
12
percent
of Planta
50
91
88
97
87
55
63
62
97
91
97
99
97
97
99
97

'99
77
59
82
76
• 32
94
86
81
92

Lower
Ll.lt lug/!)111
Nona
Nona
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
80
4
a
20
40
20
800
200
a
<,) ~,movala baaed on average  Influent  and •{""^K"?"'10'11
t      •    »»«     I    ta     M1    *e           '.. '    ..-,     4    ea
                                                                              me
                                                                                         .cl

-------
                                                                  Table  B-5.

                                                      MUlkM MOCOIff MMMUU Of OOLBCnO tatUlttMM
                                                            iMHMKMI iOtU BSSAmaUT KOCUOtt
•BOQMBUY OBOOMD
tABAMBTBO MIMAOV
000
VOTAL OUOr. OOtlH
CAONIIM
ClIIUMIIM
COrtCB
CIANIOB
UAO ,
MOHCUlf
MICKBL
OILVEB
• IMC
BIMIKMB
•io(i-nn«iJ»B>i.| otfiuALAn
BUTVI BBMIVL nmUlATB
CMLOBOfOAN
Di-M-Burri. IUIMAUTB;
OIBTHVI. nRHLATB
MBI1IVLBMB QIUIBIOO

ruunk
VBIUCMUUOBTMVLIMB
TBICUUDKOmlVLBMB
1 . 1 . 1 -TBiaiUlBOniUMB
1.1-VBJUU-DICUtOBOKnlVUNi,
on
on
on
on
on
•in
(41
01
on
on
in
HI
HI
on
on
141
• ••
on
on

in
10
IS
IS
ii
ii
ii
si
10
II
10
II
IS-
0
41
14
14
S4
• II

If
1
1
10
10
14
ACT. OU10GB •
on
on
HI
on
on
on
HSI
(SI
on
' HI
HI
HI
on
(41
HSI
on
KM
HOI
10
10
OS
14
04
01
11
14
01
01
11
11
01
41
10
01
00
40
11
10
01
II
10
10
00
IB*
IB. tlLIU
(M
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
HI
(M
(01
HI
HI
|0|
(01
(M
(M
HI
HI
l«l
11
10
II
40
40
SI
10
14
II
IS
41
40
14
10
IS
so
•0
14
_
_
01
00
II
11
11
BBOOMOBBV
0, ACT,
in
in
HI
in
in
in
in .
IM
HI
in
in
HI
in
IM
HI
01
IM
HI
|0|
IM
IM
IM
in
IM
in
oiiinu
01
ll
01
11
II
10
11
II
II
10
II
•1
II
41 '
10
•0
II
11
-
II*
IS
II •
41
40
It
OBOOI
UDABV OBOONOAOff tAMIUL Al/fff flAMM •
MC AM lAOOOtf
in
in
III
HI
(0|
(01
HI
HI
(0|
(01
(0|
(o|
IM
HI
HI
IM
(01
(01
01
SO
01
01
01
04
-
I
-
-
Ol»
so
01*
01
~
HI
HI
in
HI
IM
IM
III
IM
IM
IM
' IM
(01
IM
III
HI
HI
IM
|0|
IM
HI
IM
IM
IM
IM
10
11
44
40
11
1
II
II
II
II
10
01
14
—
SO
II
10
11
•1
10
A.I. 0100
01
141
01
01
OI
OI
(01
in
III
01
IM
HI
III
HI
IM
(0|
01
OI
|0|
01
HI
OI
HI
HI
(01
•I
•4
•1
IS
00
44
•1
14
11
01
01
01
00
IS
01
•1
SI
—
00
11
01
01
01*
—
f.ff.
01
HI
in
HI
141
HI
in
HI
in
(M
HI
(41
(M
(41
Ml
(01
IM
(41
HI
(41
HI
(0|
•IM
01
01
04
41
IS
00
10
01
11
11
11
II
10
SO
00
11
• •
04
41
• 1
IS
01
"
nniABt
N.M. tlLt. 0
ML.
in.
HI
in
HI
HI
in
in
HI
HI
in
HI
HI
HI
in
in
|0|
in
HI
|4|
HI
HI
HI
in
in
in
BOMBI
• oi
•1
10
01
00
81
•1
10
• II
IS
04
•I
4S
01
41
—
04
10

OS •
01
01
01
II

       • K»M 0. Oilcb U
101
                                         witt  •atl«Bt«4
                                                                     .  «•• Iaolu4«l U U>» Mtlv«t*4 •tu«««
M0t*l
Mi»b«f !• I | I* •»ttlM« ol 01cat• Milk Mloulata4 «««ov»l».
Only f>l«al« HUk •«•!•«• lollu.nk oooc.nlf •tlon* «««.l»« U>» Ox«* !!••• lh« matt lf«*Mnt d«l«ollan ll.lt  oC  ••<* fotlutMt  urn  Iiuilu4*4- U ••*o««l
       a»loal>iloo«.

-------
          A PARTICLE INTERACTION MODEL OP REVERSIBLE ORGANIC CHEMICAL
                                    SORPTION
                               Dominie H. Di Toro
                  Environmental Engineering and Science Pr°9««»   ,,
     Manhattan College, Manhattan College Parkway, Bronx, H.Y. 10471, U.S.A.
INTRODUCTION
     The sorption of hydrophobic organic chemicals  onto soils,  suspended, and
sediment particles is the reaction which distinguishes  the environmental fate
of these chemicals from more conventional pollutants.  The usual parameteriza-
tion of this reaction involves the use of  a  partition or distribution coeffi-
cient that determines the fraction of  total  chemical concentration that is in
the'particulate  and dissolved  phases.  The typical assumption  is  that the
reaction is completely reversible.
     Unfortunately there is a large body of experimental adsorption-desorption
data (1-54) which,  in almost  all cases,  illustrates that complete reversibil-
ity  is  not commonly observed.  Rather  it  is found  that,  for  the  usual time
scales  of  these  experiments (hours-days)  an apparent desorption  steady state
occurs  that is not in conformity with the particulate and dissolved concentra-
tion distribution predicted from the adsorption steady state partition coeffi-
cient,  we employ an empirical model  to quantify  the partition coefficient of
the  reversibly sorbed component and attempt  to  relate it to chemical and par-
ticle properties.
     The most surprising and controversial of these  is the particle concentra-
tion  itself,  whose effect  on the adsorption  partition coefficient  has been
stressed by  O'Connor  and Connolly (55).  He attempt to reconcile this  effect
for  reversible  component  partitioning by  proposing  a particle interaction
model  that posits  an additional  desorption reaction.  This model  is  shown
below  to be in  conformity  with observations for a large  set  of adsorption-
desorption data  (1-54).  However the mechanism responsible for this desorption
reaction is still uncertain.

-------
METHODS
     The  reversible  and resistant  component model  of sorption  (38)  assumes
that  adsorbed  chemical concentration,  ra,  is  composed of  two  components; a
resistant component, rQ, that does not appreciably, desorb under the conditions
of the experiment, and a reversible component, rx-  The key  assumption is that
reversible component adsorption  and desorption are both  governed by the same
linear isotherm:
                              •xc
                                                                      (1)
where c  is' the aqueous phase concentration at either adsorption or desorption
steady state.
     Consider  an  adsorption experiment which yields an adsorbed concentration
r  at aqueous  concentration cfl.  Then  since  ra "  ro * rx*
                                    *xca
                                                                      (2)
 If,  for. a desorption  into  uncontaminated aqueous phase, the  resulting  sorbed
 concentration  is  rd  at aqueous  concentration,  cd,  then
                rd - ro
                                    *xcd
                                                                      (3)
 since only the reversible  component  is affected.  Thus  the  reversible  compo-
 nent partition coefficient  can  be estimated by  subtracting  eq.  (3)  from  eq.
 (2)  yielding:
                                                                      (4,


 Consider,  now, an  adsorption isotherm comprised of  i-l,...,Ma concentrations
 r(i,o), c(i,o), the zero denoting the  adsorption cycle.   If,  for each adsorp-
 tion vessel a  sequence of  desorption  cycles,  J-l,...,Hd are  performed,  yield-
 ing r(i,j), c(i,J), then  the component model predicts that  the slopes  of  the
 consecutive desorption isotherms:
            4i
           '3'
                          c(i,3  -
                                                                      (S)
 are  all  constant,  independent  of the  isotherm index,  i,  or  the desorption
 cycle index,  j.   Measurement errors  and the  idealized  model  assumptions will
 yield variations  in each  estimate.   The geometric mean, ignoring any negative
 values of  «  (i.J),  is  used as the best estimate of «x  for  each isotherm ana-
 lyzed.
 tion:
Resistant component concentrations,
r0(i),
                                                     are  estimated by subtrac-
                                                                       (6)

-------
and  for  each  isotherm  the geometric  mean  la  used as  the beat  estimate  of
r (i).  The component model equation for the complete isotherm is:
 o
                                  r0(i)
with t  and r0(i) aa the fitted constants.
     Two examples are presented in fig. 1.  The top panela illuatrate  the  iso-
therm data and  the  conformity to the model eq.  (7)  using the indicated value
of  t  .   The  middle panela  compare  the  calculated resiatant  component  data
r (i,*j)  (aymbola)  from eq.  (6)  together with  the eatimates  of the  presumed
constant  resistant  component  concentration.  rQ(i)  (horizontal  lines).    The
bottom panel  illustrates,  in  these cases  at least, that the adsorption of the
resistant component follows a linear lunity log-log slope) isotherm
                               . * C          '                        <8>
                                  o a
     For  parathion,  the  model  provides  an  excellent  fit to  the  data.   For
atrazine  some  deviations  are present - the  reaiatant component estimates  are
not  exactly eonatant - but  the fit  to  the  experimental  data  (top panel)  is
reasonable  and parsimonious  since only  two  parameters  are  necessary:   »x  and
•  .  Fig. 2 presents other adsorption-consecutive desorption  isotherms  and  the
reversible-resistant  component  model isotherms  (eq. 7) ,  fit  to  ttte  data  as
described above.   These"'examples  are chosen to illustrate  that the model  is
applicable  to  isotherms  from a  wide  range of organic  and inorganic  sorbates
and  sorbents:  soils,  lake sediments,  and  inorganic  particles.
     The  division of  sorbed chemical  into  two  components  -  reversible  and
resistant - can  be  viewed  as  a  convenient operational  method that  distin-
guishes  between  the rapidly  sorbed,  labile  component,  which  also  rapidly
deaorba;  and  a nonlabile slowly deaorbing component.  In fact a kinetic des-
cription  of the sorption  process is more  fundamentally  correct.  The gas purge
experimenta of Karickhoff (56)  are  a direct  examination of these  phenomena.
He finda  both  a labile (rapidly adsorbing and desorbing)  component  and a non-
 labile component  with  slower  desorption rates.   The  separation  we  ptopose
essentially isolates the 'labile  component  partitioning  behavior  within  the
context of  available consecutive desorption  experimental data.
     A substantial portion of the reversible component  partition  coefficients
analyzed  below are  computed  from  reported adsorption and consecutive  desorp-
 tion data  using  the average slope  method  (Table  1) .   Unfortunately  not  all
 reported  desorption  experiments  include the actual data.   For these  cases
 estimates of  •  are made in  various  ways, depending on  the  reported  results.
 The estimation equations  are based upon  the definition  of *x , eq.  (4), and a
 mass balance  requirement:
                          Bra * oca - mrd + cd                         (9)

-------
P4/?/1 T/-//CW  -  ACID SULPHA TF


            m • 0.1  tcg/L



      CONSECUTIVE DESORPTION

           «x - 30.7 L/KQ
  s
  CO
  ac
  o
  (0
      10-K
                           10-1
        PESISTANT COMPONENT

              OESOBPTION

     t0ic	
   o
   M
                       •ecacP
       10
         •e
                            10-1
                                        ATRAZINF-SANDY  LOAM


                                                m - 0.4
                                          CONSECUTIVE DESORPTION

                                               rrx • 0.194 L/KO
                                     |

                                     I 10«


                                     S
                                               10«
                                                          10*
                                           PES1STANT COMPONENT

                                                 DESORPTION
                                      i

                                      o
                                      at
                                      o
                                      m
                                        10«
                                                     a a a
                                                    A
                                                 X
                                                io«
                                                           to*
        RESISTANT COMPONENT

              ABSORPTION

     10°
     1
          «0 - 68.7
                            10
                              -l
            DISSOLVCD (mcj/UJ

                                            RESISTANT COMPONENT

                                                  AOSOPPTION
                                              «0 - 0.0525 L/kQ
                                                 10°        101

                                                DISSOLVED (mg/U
,.  1.   components model fit to consecutive desorption datn  for  Pu •«'•> >"


        121 and Aerazine (61.

-------
   PICLORAM  - NORGE LOAM
            m  - o.i
      CONSECUTIVE DESOPPTION
           rtx -  0.129 L/kg
  I

  g 10-1
           -I
         10

     DIURON-LAKE SEDIMENT
             m - 0.2 kg/L

       CONSECUTIVE DESOPPTION
            icx • 8.86 L/kg
    a
    (0
          STRONTIUM -90
        CALCAREOUS  SAND
             m  • 0.1
        CONSECUTIVE DESOPPTION
             XX - 1.7
   3 10-*
   I
   a
   CO
Pig.  2.
                          DtURON-CaMON TMORILL ONI TE
                                    m  - 0.1 kg/L

                               CONSECUTIVE DESORPT10N
                                    ffx - 4.3 L/kq
                           *
                           I
                                    S 10*
                                 10°        101

                          FLUOMETURON-NORGE LOAM
                                     m - 1
                               CONSECUTIVE DESORPTION
                                   irx - 0.234
                                      10-
                           a
                           
-------
         RSEo£te^D.i.	     	Foriaula gffip.ovsd
                                   TABLE I.   METHODS FOB CALCULATING  X



                                                             '*'                      References
Adsorption and  Single
Desorption Isotherm data
 Single Point Adsorption   •                  «   . n   fc|—i  _ -Ar
 and  Desorption i Sorbed data  only             «    lcT-mra»  - m»r
 Adsorption  Isotherm Partition Coeffl-                 , _
 cient  Single  Point Desorptlons Data        *K -  j _ a - roo«
 as fraction desorbed                                 __
 Aqueous concentrations                     "x " m|c -c^l
Adsorption and Consecutive                	~-  -n    -.11  \<
Desorption Isotherm data                  ^ .  rjl^j -  ^}^jn)                      -
                                                                               3,13.16".21.41
                                                                               18.26.28,37,51,54
Single Point Adsorption. Single or
Consecutive Desorption data	
	—	;	'                         ,   _ ..                    . 20.23,27.28.30.35
Adsorption and Single                                 a     d                   38.39,40,43,44
Desorptjon Partition                        "x   i  - a  + •I1a~f«l
Coefficients	.	_	
                                                         Ar  '                   22.24.32.34
                                                     A.                         19.25.29,31
 Single Point  Adsorption and. Desorption t         cd " °ca                       2B
 Single Point Consecutive Desorptionsi      Least Square  fit of.  j_,            45.46.48
 Data reported as sorbed fraction   r|ij|   ro  .     i      .	«•    ,|	2»
 remaining at cycle j               —fJT~ " *>   » * m'x  I*BI"K          rT
 Ca| See Notation list for definitions
  *  Data reconstructed from reported Freundlich  constants  and  mass  balance equation (9)

-------
where . is the p-rticl- concentration  and -  is tha volu-a fr.ction of aqueous
phase not  removed before  uncontaminated  aqueous  phase  ia added  to initiate
daaorption.  This equation requires  that  the chemical remaining in the vessel
both  on the  particles,  mra,  and  in  the  remaining  aqueous  phase, «ca. be
accounted  for  after desorption  aa either  on the  particles,  «rd,  or  in  the
aqueous phase c,.   This  ia equivalent to assuming that  no significant vessel
adsorption or desorption occurs during desorption  equilibration.  Only experi-
ments  for  which  essentially  the  same  particle concentration  was  maintained
throughout are considered.  Where  possible the standard deviation of  the  esti-
mated '  is also  computed.  Tha  result is  over 200 estimates of ',  from  these
reporteS experiments for a wide variety of sorbates and sorbents.  For neutral
hydrophobic chemicals,  the estates are  listed in Table 2, together with the
octanol-water partition coefficient  to be used subsequently.

REVERSIBLE PARTITION COEFFICIENTS ! NEUTRAL ORGANIC CHEMICALS

      The  adsorption partitioning  of neutral  organic chemicals  to soils  and
 sediment  particles has been shown to be a  function of the weight  fraction of
 sediment  organic  carbon,  foc,  and  the octanol-water partition  coefficient,
 K  , of the chemical  (see Ref .  57 for an excellent  review) .  The  basic  rela-
 tSnahip  ia  that the  organic carbon  normalized adsorption partition  coeffi-
 cient X   - • /f   ia  aediment independent  ao long as the swelling clay  weight
 fraction"^ t'ha /'sediment ia not  large and  that a relationship  exists  between
 KQC and Kw of the form:
                                         al l°9 Kow
 Fig. 3 examines  this  relationship  for  both  the adsorption,  *a/foc' and rever-
 sible component,  •  /£„.  carbon normalized partition  coefficients.   The data
 has  been  stratified  into  two  groups,  low particle  concentration experiments
 with m f  K    <  1 and high particle  concentration experiments: m focKQW *  1°-
 The  ratiwaJe  for this choic. will become clear subsequently.  Fig. 4 examines
 the  expected linearity between partitioning and fQC.  Mote that for m focKQW
 <  1, the data support both organic carbon normalization  and linearity with
 respect  to  1C..  However  at high particle concentrations,  the  relationships
 break  down,  indicating that the particle concentration itself influences  the
 extent of sorption.
      The observation  that  particle concentration  affects  the adsorption parti-
  tion coefficient has been  suggested previously by O'Connor and  Connolly  (55)
  who noted that  certain chemicals  strongly  exhibited the effect  whereas other
  chemicals were less affected.   Significant particle  concentration effects  have
  been observed for  hexachlorobiphenyl  (HCBP)  sorption  (39).   In  particular it
  has been observed that «x  is inversely related to • via %  -  V"1 and  that the
  values of »  observed for  various  particle  types, to within a  factor of  four

-------
     REVEHSIBLE COMPONENT
                             RELATIONSHIP  OF Koc  TO Kow
                                                                   ADSORPTION
I >
     Q •!••••••
       £•*••••»••
       tlMM
       • •••••I'M
       »!••••
    - K •«••>.
     H ••* •••
           a   a    «
             log* KOW
  •

  r
  •

 8§

^
 S*
                            <=\
        «-..;/ 0A  ^  {    Of
        •i.../       ^  |      |
            2   3   4   >   6
             •OV«KOW
                                      m  '
                                           oc
                                      m  f
                                           oc
                                                          8s
. K !«>•<>•

 f\ ••••••
                                                               Q •!•»••
                                                                                  x^
                                                                                        *
                                                                 i«*lMM«
                                                                 ••••!••••»  ^"
    • ••••••'•^  Q  Q.
    *»Ml«r ||f«    *•
                                                                    2    a   4    s    a
                                                                     log. KQM
        Fig.  J-    Organic carbon normalized adsorption C-a/ioc» and  reversible compo-
                   nent  (• It   \  partition coefficient  versus octanol-water partition

                   coefficient.   Top: m f  K    «  •:  bottom: m fQcl(ow  *  >°-

-------
                          ORGANIC CARBON NORMALIZATION
      REVERSIBLE COMPONENT
                                                              ADSORPTION
                                   m  Inn Krtyu< 1
                                        oc "ow
  -I

«-»
F

*.,
                                                     -I
                                             I..
                                             S  -:
                                                     -4
   •4
          -a
                  -a
                         • 1
                                                       -4
                                                                     -a
                                                                            -1
                                   m  I
                                       OC  *OW
 * •>
 p"

 a-a
      o
      A
      O
      o
      v «.•.••<•
      f> MO.-MCB

      U IwtotM
      P »„...
O ,..L
8 ::::::
                         o


                        a


                         o
        S»Ml*r lit*     <«
        »• tn    o a
      II •!»«.        tX
      a ^..
    -4
           •I
                  -I
                          - I
                                                       -4
       Fia. 4.
Octanol-Matur  normaltieil adsorption  I* /K  } and reversible compo-

                                     rsuj

                                   >  10.
                 nent  l|x/KQul partition coefficient versus organic carbon fraction.
                 Top:  m f  K
                   1     oc ow
                          1;  butturn: m f  K
                                 •     oc ow

-------
                         TAB I
          ADSORPTION (>a) AND REVERSIBLE (i^)
COMPONENT PARTITION COEFriCIENTS AND STANDARD  ERRORS  (SE)


Ret
•

(ja/ki
AUtca'rb 	





2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
Carbofuran—
.16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
Honu
54
20
4.00-2
4.00-1
4.00-1
4.00-1
4.00-1
4.00-1
4.00-1
4.00-1


2.00-2
5.00-2
Llnuron 	
20
1.00-2
Fluonetron —
32
9
33
33
9
Carl
48
Olui
11
13
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
74
1.25-3
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
_

2.50-2


1.00-
1.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
f • 1
Ac *
<*> "•/"•> -
__«»_«_»»••• f
"" " —«•«— — ————1^4
5.10-1
1.07
2.64
3.80
1.84*1

»»••
4.61*1
1.13
1.50
1.64
1.83
2.07
4.17
1.10*1


4.47*1
2.15*1
.46-1
.84-1
.85-1
.78-1
.01


.92*1
.32-
.48-
.97-
.73-
.37-
.64
OR,.

SE 	
,
s
(L/kg)
toil..

SE
»g,. Kow - 1.13 |78|
.26-
.06-
.31-
.42-
.03-
og,«
.70-
.37-
.13-
.43-
.47-
.57-
.20-
.43 4.93-


.57*1
.63*1
U)g,.
- —
	
. • __
	 	 — — 	 — LOg, .
2.15*1 1.14*2

__«_»»«...—•_
— — — — — «— « _•_
5.40*1 3.94*2
2.90-1 1.36-1
7.54-1 8. 82-1
7.50-1 8.81-1
9.86-1 3.74-1


1.45


4.06-1 1.59
1.22 5.87
4.00-2 7.20-1
8.00-2 2.18
1.90-1 7.70-1
2.20-1 9.11-1
2.60-1 5.80-1
3.00-1 1.03
4.00-1 1.75
4.60-1 2.09
	
Log,.

6.53-2
3.68-2
2.82-1
4.65-1
2.10
1.22-
1.75-
8.87-
1.26-
9.78-
Kow - 1.63 (78
1.86*1
1.76-1
2.61-1
4.40-1
2.19-1
3.86-1
1.21
2.20
Kow • 2.
5.46*1
1.30*1
Kow - 2.
9.08*1
Kow • 2.
• 3.82*2
1.24-1 1.41-1
5.71-2 5.26-1
	
5.26-1
1.18-2 2.84-1
Log,.
	
Log,.
Kow - 2.
6.74
Kow - 2.
2.51-2 1.40
1.29-1 2.01
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
3.15-1
2.24
4.10-1
4.00-1
4.20-1
5.15-1
1.58
1.91
4.93-
2.29-
3.40-
5.20-
3.47-
7.80-
4.04-
8.47-
12 |67|
1.68-1
	
19 |68|
- —
20 |7||
3.00-2
1.96-1
2.49-1
2/28-1
2.94-1
31 |78|
	
81 |67|
2.2I-.
2.85-2
	
	
- —
	
	
	
	
	
                                     Ret   (kg/I)
                                     Dluron (continued)
                                                                                     i*
(L/kg)   SE
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-1
9.10-1
1.80
1.90
2.30
3.60
6.20
9.30
1.90*1
9.36
7.17
6.04
1.83*1
1.91*1
4.50*1
5.66*1
1.02*2
Hethyl Parithlon 	
28
1.21-2
1.40
5.00*1
N«propaalde 	
14
r4
14
14
14
Dial
48
Cam
30
30
48
5
5
19
19
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
• A
Idrln-—
2.50-2
_ ••*.»•
••-nCn—
1.00-3
1.00-3
2.50-2
1.00-1
1.00-1
1.00
1.00
3.48-1
6.96-1
9.28-1
1.04
1.22


1.45
.

1.33
1.34
1.45
4.36-1
1.67
4.30-1
3.17
Parathlon 	
48
18
17
17
17
17
17
17
2
4.
2.50-2
3.11-2
5.00-2
5.UO-2
5.00-2
5.00-2
5.00-2
5.00-2
1.00-1
I. 00- I
1.45
5.10-1
7.00-1
1.13
1.23
2.16
2.64
2.81
4.16-1
3.20
1.92
3.68
U07*l
8.84
2.45*1


_ —
4.60-2
8.81-2
4.62-2
1.15-1
9.80-2
1.56-1
8.34-2
6.1B-2
7.82
3.89
s.oa
7.86
8.83
1.38*1
1.04*1
2.01*1
7.46-2
9.27-2
6.79-2
8.31-2
6.26-2
1.55-1
1.71-1
1.77-1
-Log,, Kow - 2.94 |78|
- —
1.51*1
— — —
-Log,, Kow -3.10 |70|
7.08-
7.02-
7.96-
1.58-
1.20-
8. 85-1
1.68
2.20
1.58
2.65
1.59-1
8.37-2
I. 01-1
1.64-1
2.64-1
-Log,. Kow - 3.69 |67|
	
4.83*1
	 --—log,, Kow - 3.
3.35*2
2.08*2
_ —
1.21*1
4.37*1
2.37
2.58*1
2.42-1
1.18-1
—
6.85-2
9.10-3
	
	
1.62*2
8.77*1
3.26*1
2.47
1.98*1
1.17-1
1.40
	 Log,, Kow »3.
	
	
2.17*1
6.15*1
5.71*1
4.16*1
1.17*2
7.13*1
7.43
11.00*2
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
1.57-2
1.27-2
1.48*1
1.94*1
2.69*1
4.31*1
4.37*1
3.83*1
6.34*1
6.06*1
4.18
3.07H
—
72 |69|
3.30-1
1.35-1
—
1.96-1
6.46-1
	
- —
76 |78|
—
1.10-
2.84-
2.67-
9.89-
2.05-
1.49-
2.91-
2.29-
3.00-

-------
                                                       TABLE  2
                                                     (continued)
                                                                     (fc«/D    (X)   (L/kg)
Parachion (continued)
Kepone (continued)
1.00-
1.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
2.00-
• • II/MI •••••_••
t_-nai— —
1.00-1
I.OO-I
pha-HCII 	
I.OO-I
I.OO-I
lasloon— —
B-. 2.50-2
ho race — - —
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
rbufoa — —
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
2.00-1
:hlorpyr!foa
.8 2.50-2


14 2.00-2


18 2.50-2


il 1.00-5
,1 7.00-5
; i i .00-4
il 1.00-4
11 4.90-4
.1 5.00-4
13 5.00-4
4.77
1.41+1
5.10-1
1.07
2.64
3.80
1.84*1


4.36-1
1.67


4.16-1
1.67
1.88*2
4.62*2
5.16
1.10*1
3.75*1
5.23*1
4.23*2
•••^•M
8.2.
5.46*1
-».--»—
•*•"• ~«" ~~f™~
7.04
3.42*1
.82-2 5.62+1 1.97-1
.57-2 8.17+1 1.02-1
.01-1 1.67 6.46-2
.64-2 7.66 5.57-2
.22-2 1.10*1 1.48-1
.29-1 1.94*1 7.42-2
.88-2 1.51*1 1.41-1
-08it Kow - 1.80 (69 |
.45-2 4.90 2.25-1
.14-2 2.25*1 1.96-1
og,« Kow - 1.81 |69|
.28-2 2.78 1.77-1
.90-3 1.08+1 4.41-1
	 Log,, Kow - 1.81 (78|
1.45


5.10-1
1.07
2.64
3.80
1.84*1


5.10-1
1.07
2.64
3.80
1.84*1


1.45


2.34


1.45


5.44
5.44
2.91*1
2.91*1
2.91*1
5.44
5.44
	


7.95
Log,. Kow -3.81 |78|
2.11 3.17-2 1.68 1.58-
4.89 4.96-2 3.63 1.17-
8.89 4.39-2 5.08 1.51-
1.49*1 7.15-2 8.01 2.60-
7.13*1


3.17
1.06*1
8.48
2.22*1
5.61*1


—
!

2.82+1


	


1.75+4
4.17*1
5.bO*J.
5.52*1
4.49*1
10.00*2
7.10+2
1.09-2 1.26+1 3.51-
Log,. Kow - 4.48 (78
3.01-2 2.52 1.88-
1.42-1 6.60 5.15-
1.88-2 2.81 4.10-
2.46-2 5.99 4.84-
2.34-2 4.01 8.59-2
Log,. Kow - 4.96 |78|
7.89*1
Log,. Kow - 5.18 |44|
2.80-2 8.16*2 1.86-1
Log,. Kou - 5.14 |68|
1.09*2
Log,. Kou - 5.50 |41|
I.S6t4
4.06+1
4.J2»1
4.2itl
2.12+1
a.m2
6.67*2
41 5.00-4 2.91*1
41 6.50-4 5.44
41 5.00-1 5.44

11 1.00-1 8.40-1
48 2.50-2 1.45
Pa rae t hr 1 n-— —
25 2.61-2 2.49*1

La pc ophos— ——————
12 1.25-3 5.40*1
48 2.50-2 1.45
Beni( a) Anthracene 	
28 9.70-5 4.00*1
B-n_(_)Pyrene 	
28 3.20-5 3.80
28 9.60-5 4.00*1
Arochlor 1254 	
27 7.50-2 6.00-1
27 7.50-2 3.00

pp Buy——1 ---«
21 1.00-4 6.00-1
21 1.00-4 1.10
21 1.00-4 2.50
21 1.00-4 2.70
21 1.00-4 5.70*1
21 1.00-4 5.70*1
H 1 rax 	
28 6.00-6 4.00*1
jm _.

40 1.00-5 4.40
40 2.50-5 4.40
18 5.50- 4.42
18 2.20- 4.42
19 I. 10- 4.40
19 1.10- 4.42
19 1.10- 5.05
J9 1.10- 5.19
19 1.10- 5.57
19 1.10- 5.74
19 1.10- 8.70
19 2.20- I. 74-1
1.99*1 	 2.04+1 	
1.14*1 	 1.27*1
9.70*2 	 8.51*2 	
	 to,,, KoM . 5.57 |67 1
9.98*3 	 3.51*2 	 .
	 	 2.03*2 	
	 Log,, Kow - 5.70 (80 1
3.89*2 	 .4.24*1 1.75-1
— — -----l.nff Knu » 5 flfl I7AI
•»— — — *— itOij | Q ffJhUlV "•" ^ • «••* I * V I
4.47*3 	 |7.27*2 2.04-1
	 	 3.31*2 	
______ _l na Vnu • S 91 I7&I
•»— -- —LOg,, KOW • J.»l |«*|
1.16+5 8.10-2 8.00*4 5.91-1
	 Log,. Kow - 6.00 |79l
1.82*4 9.70-2 1.82*4 9.70-2
3.11*4 8.20-2 3.11*4 8.20-2
	 log,. Kow • 6.03 |73|
5.70*2 3.00-1 5.97 3.00-1
2.55+1 3.00-1 1.48 3.00-1
_ -.—.--t.ncr KAU » 6 19 1671

1.20*4 3.60-2 10.00*3 1.01-
1.80*4 4.80-2 1.13*4 1.63-
4.50*4 1.90-2 3.75*4 3.15-
4.80*4 3.60-2 3.41*4 3.02-
3.00*5 1.65-1 6.38*3 3.08-
2.45*5 8.60-2 1.28*4 2.71-
	 Log|i Kow - 6.89 |74
3.98*5 1.00-1 3.98*5 1.00-
._________! o~ ir«.. _ & an ID

5.55*4 	 4.24+4 1.60-
3.17+4 	 2.76*4 2.24-
1.71*4 1.10-1 1.19*4 1.00-
1.21*4 6.00-2 1.08*1 2.10-
7.01*1 7.30-2 4.51*2 2.12-
7.05+1 5.00-2 5.02*2 4.10-
1.12*4 1.00-2 1.07*1 1.98-
I.O7*4 9.00-2 5.94*> 2.61-
9.61+1 5.20-2 6.18+2 1.79-
1.21*4 7.80-2 5.71+2 1.61-
1.48*4 6.50-2 8.12*2 1.81-
1.60*1 1.15-1 2.48*1 1.15-

-------
                                                                           ana
(0.3-1.2), are  independent of  sediment particle  properties such as  tQC
particle identity (clay, silica etc).  The experimental range of particle con-
centration was in • 10-22,000 rag/L.
     This puzzling finding prompted  the present analysis of available adsorp-
tion-desorption data  for other  chemicals in order to assess the generality  of
the finding.
       .  INTERACTION MODEL
     One immediate  problem is that the relationship  »x - Vm cannot  Persist
indefinitely  as  » * 0  since  one is left with  the  absurd prediction that,  in
the limit, a  single particle  can  reversibly  sorb  the  same- quantity  of chemical
as can collectively be  sorbed by  many particles.
     we have  recently suggested  a model for  reversible  component  sorption (58)
which relies  upon the hypothesis  that, in addition  to the usual adsorption and
desorption reactions:
                                  •   c-                            <»•»
                                     c * m
                                                                    Cllb)
 where c  is  dissolved - chemical , m  is the particle  concentration, and  c-m is
 sorbed chemical concentration, there exists  an  additional desorption reaction
 for the reversible component:
                                  k
                                   p-d
                          c«m + m   •  c + 2m                        (12)
 which occurs  as particles interact,  possibly via close  encounters  or colli-
 sions.  At steady state these reactions imply that:
                ,  _ ^^	.	_^	=	r=-             (13)
                 X
 where  »    -  k  A  /It  d,  the classical reversible partition coefficient, and *x
 .  k    /kC  ,,  the r'a'tio of  adsorption  to particle interaction induced desorp-
 tiondrate7  Mote that at  low particle  concentrations  'x - »xc which predicts
 that  at  sufficiently low particle concentration, there should be no effect on
 the  extent of  reversible  sorption. but  that at large particle concentrations,
 *  *  v /m  so that  m» *  »,.  This suggests  that the  reason »x/fQC  is systemat-
 ical^" less than  K0* for certain chemicals  (fig. 3)  is that additional  par-
 tiele induced  desorption is lowering »x.
       This  model  provides a  framework  within  which to  analyze  the  «x  data
 presented  in Table 2.  Following conventional adsorption theory  we expect that
 the  classical  partition coefficient  *xc to  be linear with respect  to particle

-------
organic carbon, and log linear with respect to KW.  Thusi
                          xc    oc oc
where
                         lo9lOKoc • ao * allo9lOKow                 (14b)

The result from eq. (13) is that »x is a function of m,  fQC, and KQ^  via:

                                  f  KX
                         ,         oc oc	                         (1.5)
The superscript  x  is used to emphasize that  K*^.  applies to reversible  compo-
nent partitioning.   The  idea is that »x *  »xc  at low particle concentrations
and  In this  limit  the  classical  reversible  partition coefficient,  »xc/  is
given  by  the  usual organic carbon, octanol-water relationships:  »xc *  eoc**c
with Kx  given by eq.  (14b).  However at larger particle concentrations,  m fQc
Kx  » v , only  the  particle concentration  is important  so  that »  * v  /m.   In
 OC     X                            .                            xn
this region particle induced desorption is  overwhelming  spontaneous desorption
and only the  particle  concentration,  m, and the ratio «x » ka
-------
           in
           M
           s
                      mvcnsiau coMPoneNT PARTITION



                      COMPAMSON TO PAPTICLB INTWACTIOM MQOKL



                                   ORCAMC CMCMKALS
                      r.ai.4o'    ^jK^.o.oooaa+o.aaa  lo,  K^
 s



 4



 3



 a



 i



 o



«r
                       -t   .  o   i    a    3


                            CALCULATED lo«n IT,
                •a
                   •3
                        •a
                                   m
                                 «  .•

Fiq.  S.  .  Comparison  of eq.  114-15)  to data:  observed versus calculated

           •   (top)  and in nprmalized form  (bottom).

-------
                                             -3-1-10133*
    -3   -2   -1    0    1    2    3    «
                                                       10123*
•
    2


    1


    0


   -1
3


1


0
                                            -3
              If-
§<&»x
   . Q rm
                                                 X MM
                                                 O NP»
                                                         IWJ

                                                         11*1
  -a   -2
                                                            e    i    J
                Fl«.  ».   »ow»llM* plots of individual  ch.-ic.l  d*e-.

-------
     -3-1-10123*
                                                        B.3«< <04|g KOWS3.99
                                            -3-2-10123*
                                            -3  -a   -1    01    234
      .3-2-1   01    234
     2


     1



     0


     -1
 I   •«
*fe,
 /  •'
. o
       .3-2-101994
              fitj. 7.   NerHlisad pleta o< Individual ch««lc»l  data.

-------
           TABLE 3.  NONLINEAR LEAST SQUASES PIT  OP
                                 
-------
                           LOG10
10

 5

 3
 2
              •  O
          0.5

          0.3
          0.2

          0.1
                   »l«ro«
                   KIMM
                   ••' DDT
                                  ,
                                  i
                                              t

                               LOG10Kow

Fig.  8.    Parameters obtained from individual  fits of eq.  (14)  to chemical
          data versus oetanol-water partition  coefficient.

-------
EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL AND PARTICLE PROPERTIES AND CONCENTRATION

     The  proposed  reversible component  partitioning model  has  two distinct
regions in which particle concentration either does or does not have an effect
on V  For mfocKjc  «  vx,  »x . f^K*^ which is a  linear function^ of fQC and
Kxc.  The upper panels of Figs.  3 and-4 present the data for mfoc.Koc < 1. ^The
expected relationships: *x/foc Ver9us Kow with the line corresponding to KQC -
X  , and « /K*  versus  fQC with the  line  corresponding  to the expected linear
relationship are shown.  There are no apparent systematic deviations.
     Conversely for  »*ocxjc  »  »x only particle  concentrations determine the
magnitude of «x.  Fig.  9 presents the  data for  mf0<.xjc  >  10.   Again no syste-
matic deviations are apparent.  It is interesting to note that even  for chemi-
cals with  fairly  low KOW'S  the  particle  concentration  can dominate »x  if  it
and f   are large enough.   In addition chemicals  with large KQW"s can exhibit
extremely  low  reversible partitioning  at high particle  concentrations   (e.g.
HCBP, DDT, and Aroclor  1254).
     Me  illustrate  these  effects  on  reversible  partitioning  using  actual
adsorption-desorption data in fig. 10 which are plots of adsorption  and single
or  consecutive desorption isotherms.   Only one  of the  isotherms   (there are
typically  4  or 5,  e.g. fig. 1-2) are plotted for each  sorbent for clarity.
For  Diuron (logloXQW. -  2.81) we expect  xjc  -  635 and  for  m -  0.2 kg/L the
breakpoint in  fQe  above which fQC should not influence »x is f   - vx/(mKSc)
 (Table  31  i.e.  f    -5.5%.   Note that the slope of the consecutive  desorption
 isotherms, «x, is  increasing from fQC - 1.9  to  2.3%  but that  it  slows its
 increase  at  fQC -  6.2% and  is  essentially constant as  fQC increases to  9.3%.
For  Terbufos  at the same  particle concentration,  since  KQW is  more than  an
order  of  magnitude  larger than  for  Diuron,  the breakpoint  in  fQC  is corres-
 pondingly  less:  fQC - 0.24%  (Table 3).  And, in fact, as shown in fig. 10 the
 slopes  for f    -0.51-18.4% are all  essentially equal as predicted.
     Conversely for  large X^  chemicals, varying  the  particle  concentration
 for the same  particle  type  strongly affects the slope.   For both Xepone and
 HCBP at-f   »  5%,  the particle concentration breakpoint m •  gx/l*ocKoc'is m "
 84  mg/L and m  « 5 mg/L respectively  (Table 3)   and  as m increases beyond  these
 values  indeed  the  slope of  the  desorption isotherms decrease.
      The  predicted  relationships:  both  the  absence of  «x  increases  as  fQC
 increases at  constant m  (Terbufos),  as  well  as  the  particle  concentration
 effect  (Kepone and  HCBP) can be directly seen in  these examples.  Thus  they
 are not artifacts  of the data reduction techniques  used to generate  «x but are
 real features  of  reversible  component partitioning.

-------
6
            3     -2    -1
                                                           Diuron
                                                           Hopropomde
                                                        <> Ganna-HCH
                                                           Parathion
                                                           Bcto-HCH
                                                           Alptut-HCH
                                                        Anth
                                                        Q  Benr
-------
                          EFFECT Of PARTICLE ORGANIC CARBON
                 DURON (17)
                                                             TERBUFOS (3)
    200
    160
  iiao
  u  so
     40
      • ADSORPTION
      •foBSORPTION
04     •     12     10

     AOUIIOUS CONC (mg/U
                                                10
                                              i
                                      U  4
                                      2

                                      I  a
                                                      • ADSORPTION
                                                      4- OUORPTION
                                                 0.0  .  0.3    0.4    0.8    0.8

                                                        AQUEOUS CONC (m«/U
                                                                                i.O
                                  PARTKU CONCENTRATION
lo«lw Kw»
  REPONI (431

S SJO       I
                                                              NCBP (401
                                3.4*
                                                                             4.4%
  aoo



  soo

 ?
 X
 ?400

 U

 U300

 w
 a
 oioa
 M


  too
               . ADSORPTION
              4>OMORPriON
                                   v
                                             300
                                     290
                                     JOO
                                     tse
                                                                               Tf
             10      20      30
            AQUEOUS CONC (uo/k)
                                   40
                                              2     4     a     •     10
                                                  AOUIOUS CONC. (n«/O
Tig.  10.   Consecutive  desorption  data for varying  f    (top)  and  parci(cle  con-
            centration  (bottom).

-------
REVERSIBLE PARTITIONING - ORGANIC ACIDS. BASES AND INORGANIC SORBENTS

     The particle  interaction model  can only be directly  tested  if,,  for each
chemical of  interest,  the  data  span a  large enough  range  in mfQC so that »xc
and v  can both be estimated.  Alternately an independent method of estimating
.   can be utilized  such as  that employed in the previous section for neutral
organic chemicals  and  organic  carbon containing particles  where  »xc •  fQCKoc
and Kx  is  estimated from KQW.   For  ionizable  organic chemicals  or for  sorp-
tion  onto  inorganic particles 'no analogous methods are  available.   Thus no
direct test  is possible.
      However the model  (eq.  IS)  does make one prediction that  is not. dependent
upon  the magnitude of  »xc:
                                        -
                          M«V  w         Y
                                   l * mT5-
                                      m xc
 namely  that "  should be  less  than vx/m regardless  of  the magnitude of  «xc.
 Hence  plots of "   versus m should either exhibit values below  «x/m correspon-
 ding  to insignificant particle interaction induced  desorption,  or along  the
 line  •  -  v /m corresponding  to  desorption being  dominated by the  particle
       xx        « .
 interaction desorption mechanism.
      Fig.   11  presents  the observations  for  neutral organic  chemicals  and
 inorganic  sorbents  (nearly  all clays).  With  rare  exceptions the  points  are
 either below or on the  line corresponding to ^ a l.   Fig. 12 presents similar
 results for organic acids  and  bases and the few available  inorganic  chemical
 data.   Without an independent or at least generally applicable method of esti-
 mating « •  ,  no  further  test is possible.   However the substantial  number of
 observed *«C  that are near vx/m suggests that the particle concentration effect
 on reversible  partitioning is not  limited  to  just neutral  organic chemicals
 and organic carbon containing particles, but is a ubiquitous feature of rever-
 sible component partitioning.
      A large  set  of metal  sorption  data: Mi, Co as sorbates with montmorillo-
 nite and quarts:  as  sorbents that has  the requisite  range in particle concen-
 tration are also  in conformity with the same reversible component partitioning
 model  (58)  employed above, eq.  (15), thus supporting this view.

 ALTERNATE  POSSIBILITIES - A THIRD PHASE

      The most popular  explanation  ((50-62,81)  for  the  particle concentration
 effect  is  that,,  in addition to  the  aqueous  and particle phases, there exists a
 sorbing  (third)  phase which is  not  removed  from  the supernate by the  particle

-------
        REVERSIBLE PARTITION COEFTCENT

NEUTRAL ORGANIC CHEMICALS-INORGANIC SORBENTS
   Q «*«••«*hr«It"« tO
   + Homron C293
             C3O
   X Olwoii C133
   a nti«*i»M«
      64MM-MCM C3M
   A DOT C313
   X ••' DOT C233
           C4«3
fl«.  II.  Coav«rl.on of d.t.  to eh. pr.dlction
         inorganic »otb«nta.
                                    ., •  .,/• for socptvon to

-------
                  REVERSIBLE PARTITION COEFFICIENT
                       INORGANIC CHEMICALS
t"
 *
       -t
                     C193
             +  Sr-9« CIU
             £  riuandt C123
             X  Annoni* C2J3
                                              -I
X
O
O
V
             X
             O
             O
             7
                      ORGANIC AGIOS AND BASES
          a
Oie«i»ba C323
2.4 0 C2I3
2.« 0 CS4J
Tpicycltzait C2I3
PU1o»«n £73
Ptdortn C-MJ
   ler.fi C333
        C3S1
1.4.3 T C«93
2,4.: T C383
       C133
                                   .IT. <
                        -4      .3      -2      -1


                      ORGANIC ACIDS AND BASES
         CI33
         C293
         C2S3
         C323
        CC3
        C29I
        C«'.3
        C4«J
                           CJ33
                         C493
                         C4«J
                         C943
                                     T. <  -?r
                                              •1
.  12.   Conp«rison of d«e« to th« prtdietien th«c •| < «|/» for serption  of
       inari|«nie eA«mteals (topi  and orqanie jeidi. Jnd bases '(middle and

-------
separation technique  (usually centrifugation) employed to operationally  mea-
sure the "dissolved"  concentration.   This third  phase  is identified  as  being
either dissolved organic  matter or colloidal  particles.   To apply  this  hypo-
thesis to  reversible component  partitioning  we  assume  that the  "dissolved"
concentrations at adsorption  and desorption steady  state,  cfl and cd»  are the
sum of  the truly dissolved concentrations,  c^  and  cd,  and  that  sorbed (or
complexed)  to the nonseparateH third phase, m^r^ and m£rd, where  m^  and m^ are
the nonseparated third  phase  aqueous concentrations  (kg/I)  and  r^  and  r£ are
the sorbed chemical  concentrations (mg/kg-third  phase)' at adsorption  (a)  and
desorption (d) steady states.  Thus
                    ed • ed * ndrd
and *x (eq. 4) becomes:
                    »  •
                     x    •*•   "Va' "  tcd * mdrd'
or
                                  r_ -  ^
                       "
                         c(l * «£«J) - cdu
                                                                     (20)
where  «'  and »i  are the adsorption  and single  desorption partition  coeffi-
        3       O
cients  for  the  nonseparated phase.  To convert this  expression to  that  found
to be descriptive of the data, eq.  (151, a number of  assumptions are required:
(1)  that  the  concentration  of  nonseparated  third  phase  at  adsorption  and
desocption  steady states (for each  consecutive deaorption step) are  equal:   m^
• mi •  m1 and  (2) that  the  partitioning to this phase is reversible:   "^  • "^
• «• in which case eq.  (20) becomes:

                     f   , .  .  '• "  '«	_                         121)
                     x   (el  - cij U *  m'»')
                            •    **                 t
Defining:
                         r  - r,
                                                                     (22)
 as  the  "true"  partition coefficient  the  result  is:
                            t
                     V   •
                      x    1  *  mf«
                             xe	..                                (23)
 In order to convert this equation to eq.  (IS), -which describes  the  data,  mul-
 tiply m't'  by "1IXC/»1IXC " l  so

-------
                              rxe                                   (24)
                              *xc  m«^_
from which v  in eq. (IS) is:
            *
                       m n*xc                                        (25)

The empirical finding that vx - 1 requires that

                         •'••-",.

     For  neutral organic  chemical and  organic "carbon containing  particles:
.    .  f  K*  and if we  assume  (3)  that  the same normalization  applies  to the
BSseparaCte°dC phase:  .' - f^,  then  eq.  (26)  requires that

                         m'f1   .  mf                                 (27)

that is,  that the quantity of organic carbon associated with the nonseparated
phase   (m'f )  is  approximately  equal  to  that  contained .in   the  separated
particles °m  fo<.) .  Alternately  if  specific  surface area,  ,
-------
     If, on the other hand, the third phase is assumed to be dissolved organic
carbon  that  desorbs  from  the  particles,  then  the  requirement  (eq.  27)  that  ,
.T  t-«f   forces the  conclusion that there  is  as much  dissolved organic
carbon in the aqueous phase as there is particulate organic carbon in the par-
ticulate phase, per unit  aqueous phase  volume,  at both adsorption and at each
desorption.   In  facfm'f',.  -  »*oc  requires  that desorable  particle organic
carbon  has  a partition coefficient of - 1  L/kg-organic carbon  which  is ex-
tremely small.  Even liquid octanol which has an aqueous solubility of ^  10   M
and  therefore a partition  coefficient of -  103 L/«ole-octanol  - 10.4  L/kg-
organic  carbon which  is  ten-fold larger  than that  required  for  desorable
                        with such a low partition coefficient  isthat  substan-
tial  organic carbon  would be  removed at each  desorption cycle.   Hence  at
adsorption  equilibrium,  one-half of  the  original  particulate organic  carbon
nass  must  desorb and be in solution.  Since  this is discarded before  desorp-
tion  is initiated, it  is  difficult  to see how «;  - »d.   Rather  m'  -  ma/2
where j is the desorption cycle index.   It would further suggest  that  simply
washing particles in water should  remove substantial quantities of particle-
bound organic- carbon.  Finally  it  is difficult  to  see how dissolved  organic
carbon coulrf be  implicated with  Inorganic sorbents.
      Perhaps the most convincing experiments which  appear  to  preclude nonsep-
arable third phase as an  explanation are resuspension experiments  (58,63)  :n
which, instead of desorption  into  new uncontaminated aqueous phase,  the par-
 ticles are  resuspended into  a  reduced volume  of  the aqueous phase  remamir.c
 after adsorption and  centrifugation.   For this experimental design  the concen-
 tration of the nonseparated  third  phase  in the supernatant must  be  the same at
 both adsorption and resuspension equilibration.  Only the concentration of the
 separated particles is increased by  resuspension into  a  reduced  aqueous phase
 volume.   For  these  experiments  the  partition coefficienc  is observed  to
 decrease as particle concentration increases from the adsorption to the resus-
 pension equilibrations.  If  a desorbing third phase  (dissolved organic carbon)
 is involved  then  the problem of explaining the decreased partitioning is just
 transferred  to explaining why there is increased desorption of the third phase
 into the original supernatant when only particle concentration is increased at
 the  resuspension  equilibration.
       Dilution experiments (59,63)  dispense with centrifugation  of  the experi-
 mental vessel  completely  and decrease particle concentration by adding either
 uncontaminated  aqueous  phase (63)  or equivalently  contaminated aqueous phase
 from a parallel  vessel   (58).  These experiments  yield increasing  partition
 coefficient with decreasing particle  concentration.
       Thus  nonseparable  third phase .models require  that  the nonseparable phase
 has  properties that are both ubiquitous,  very specialized and, for  desorbing
 organic carbon,  not  chemically, realistic.   Further  they  appear  to  be  precluded
 by resuspension and dilution experiments  designed expressly  to strongly  disr
  criminate against such models.

-------
n—^nnti Kinetics and Particle Aggregation
	In examination of desorption kinetics using an air stripping
remove dissolved  chemical  from the sorbent suspension (56, precludes the  need
f" consecutive particle  separations by centrifugation that characterizes   he
desorption data analyzed above.  The results of a  series of  these  experiments,
          by  Karickhoff  and Morris  (64,, indicates that there exists a  labile
      ncnt that desorbs rapidly «  1  h*>  «* a .nonlabile or resistant  componen
      desorption  rate they correlate to the equilibrium partition  coefficient
R   .  f   K      This result and square root of time dependence  of deSorption of
tne non°fab°ne fraction  strongly  suggest intraoarticle diffusion  as the  kinetic
mechanism controlling nonlabile  component desorption.
      "or the  labile component,  Karickhoff and   Morris   (64,  found  that  the
 labile   fraction  of total  sorbed  chemical. Xff   decreased  as n*p  increased.
where m is  the particle concentration.   Their  data analysis  suggested:
                     Xl ' 2.5
                                                                     (29)
 If we i-d.nti.fy ^ - rx/ra, consistent with the component model, eq.  (1-2) then
            __., :< .a, .«.«*.ion aauilibrium ». • K_ • t^Jt>--t then:
X  . • /«  and if at sorption equilibrium «a • Kp
 m    A  O
                                                                      (30)
 Using eq.  (IS)  for «x and assuming KQC - Kjc yields:
                                       *  «focKoc/vx
                                                                      (31)
  which is the same functional form as that suggested by  Karickhoff  and Morris,
  eq  (29,.   The results of a fit of their data to eq.  (14,,  is shown below.
                        Least Square Fit
  Chemical
  Trifluralin
  Pyrene
  Pentachlorobenzene
  Kexachlorobenzene
                                              lo*10Kow
•••
3
4
4
5
-*i
.94
.64
.97
.50
:_
(0
(0
(0
(0
2S 	
.18)
.22)
.37,
.39,
^^^^^^^^^
3
4
4
5
.06
.88
.94
.23
M
,
,
,
,
••
5
5
5
5
.34
.18
.19
.50
^m^^^~^**
[67J
[77]
[76]
(681
,[68]
,168]
,[68]
,[751
     Parameter  (Standard error of estimate)
     «(log.~ *-) • 0.302
         '10 V
     Karickhoff  and Morris  (64,

-------
                                   ^ 22) is  found  as  well as the expected log
                                   T.M J        ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ larger %


                                      P          related  in  aome  way  to the

i, unclear  at  present  -  l» f"^1" . but the refflarlcable  result Ls that
completely different experiment.  design              ^  ^  ^  ^

the same  functional  for.. eq.  (311 .             iinent we take this to be fur-
                          .
A significantly larger % -

linearity between KQC and K  .
„«». of

b.
              p«tlcl. ecne.ntr»tlon •"•«*

                    -iero.«pie.llY
                                                                    . ......
                                                             Mtheu,h  this ~y
                                                        -«tlel. ,u.pen»lons »t
                                                           (lBd nc
 Ur,.r
                   th.
                                  of
                       th.
                                                       „. Jolely ln
              o<.Koe-
                                                                             ==
                                                    the  patticU concentration.

                                                         that ,l.ld. this f««-
 r.ther 6h.n

 .„<, th. orc.ni=  carbon

 It is difficult to imagine a

 tional dependence.



 Discussion                                 particle interaction' model which  is
                                   t
  ,.sc it may "=' *«  constant  but ratn.r
  L  ,=.cu,at.  th.t  =oth  th.  adacrptxon
  de,orption  rat.  are  ohy.io.UY  »th.r
                                                            interaction  induced

                                                             d.t.™ined  by.   for

                                                                «hll. «•-  «*"-
  ienc. level
                   be  q»i»




       on.  pl.c. of evidence  th« .«PP=«,  the

   th«.  in  th.
                                                         to „.  cOn,«nt and  th.
                                                                           ^


                                                                         -in,.,
   p.rticl« are  stationary  and.                                        „,„.  the

-------
actions that  enhance deaorption if  particle  concentrations "are  large  enough
and, as  a consequence,  particle  interactions  are  frequent enough  for  this
reaction to be significant.
     Finally  we  observe  that partition  coefficients  (actually  distribution
coefficients)   inferred  from field measurements  of  dissolved  and particulate
chemical- concentrations also display an  inverse  relationship to particle con-
centration  (39,66)  so that the  effect  is an important  factor in determining
the  partitioning of  chemicals between  particulate  and  dissolved  phases  in
natural waters.
     The most significant shortcoming of the model presented above is the lack
of  a mechanistic explanation for  the particle  interaction induced desorption
reaction,  eq. (12).  One would  surely  like  to know  what, exactly,  is the
physics and chemistry of  this  reaction.   Or,  more critically, if the reaction
itself is  the correct explanation for what appears  to  be the correct result,
eq.  (15).  The success of eq.  (IS) in correlating large amounts of adsorption-
desorption data  is  undeniable, fig.  5-7, but its  derivation via the reaction
scheme, eq. (11-12) must be regarded as speculative.
     From  a  practical point of  view,  the correlative power of  the model for
neutral  organic  -chemicals  and organic  carbon  containing  particles  is  quite
useful  since  a  knowledge  of the  chemical's  KQW,  the particle's  fQC and its
concentration, «•. suffices  to  determine  fx, the  reversible  component  partition
coefficient.   For inorganic sorbents and ionizable  or  inorganic chemicals an
upper bound to the  expected  partition coefficient,  tx <  vx/m,  is  available.
     From  a  theoretical  point of view,  the  most  surprising and  intuitively
disturbing  result is the observation that  vx is of  order  one (± one half an
order  of  magnitude)  for all chemicals and particle  types examined.   This gen-
erality  suggests either  that  there  exists a  universal feature of  reversible
sorption  which  has  heretofore been unsuspected or  that  the entire analysis
Itself  is flaw«sd in  some  subtle way.   The  author prefers  to believe that the
former  is  the case  and  that its explanation  is via  a particle  interaction
induced  desorption  reaction.

Acknowledgements
     The participation of our research associates  and  assistants at Manhattan
College:  Joanne  Guerriero. Michael Labiak,  Salil Kharkar in the  laborous task
of  assembling  and  reducing  the  data  employed  in  this  paper  is  gratefully
 acknowledged.  Alan  Felsot  kindly provided the data from his useful  experi-
ments,  as  did John  Connolly  and Samuel Karickhoff.  Conversations with  the
members  of our research groupi Donald O'Connor,  Robert  Thomann,  John Connolly,
John Jeris,  John Mahony, and  Richard  "infield were,  as always, helpful  and
 stimulating.   Other  colleagues  have  also endured discourses on  this subject,
 and their  patience and insights  are appreciated.   The continuing  support  of.
 the EPA Large Lakes  Research Station,  CR807853 and  CR810799  and particularly
 Nelson Thomas (EPA-Duluth) and William  Richardson  (EPA-Grosse He)  is  greatly
 appreciated.

-------
                                    NOTATION

rli.jl  - sorbed concentration (mg/kg); i^ isotherm, J** desorption  cycle
c(i,-|)  - aqueous concentration  (mg/L), ith isotherm, Jth desorption  cycle
         adsorption (single desorption) sorbed concentration  log/kg)
         reversible (resistant) component sorbed concentration  (mg/kg)
         adsorption (single desorption) aqueous concentration (mg/L)
c(i,j)
Vrd>
*x"o>
£  I £  1 w aM0w*» |» ««^«  »— »- j	  •
t*U  ) - adsorption  (single desorption) partition coefficient  (L/kg)
/     - reversible  component partition coefficient  tL/kg),  eq.  4
 x     . k   /lc    dimensionless reaction rate  constant  ratio,  eq.  (13)
 X     . k  V   classical reversible component partition  coefficient  IL/kg)
*xc       ads  s~d
         adsorption  reaction rate constant
         spontaneous desorption reaction rate constant
       - particle interaction  induced  desorption rate constant
 fP~d   - particle organic  carbon weight  fraction (kg/kg)
         particle concentration  (kg/L)
 i«     • "third" phase  concentration (kg/L)
       . -third" phase  organic carbon  weight fraction (kg/kg)
 °C      particle  specific surface  area  (m /kg)
 „•     - "third" phase  specific surface  area Ira /kg)
 c      . mr  * c   • initial total chemical concentration (mg/L)
 rT    -  initial  sorbed chemical  concentration  (rag/kg)
 Aj    .  r  . r.,  desorbed chemical concentration (mg/kg)
 4      »  Ar/r .  fraction chemical desorbed
        -  volume fraction of aqueous phase not removed before desorption
 r      - resistant component sorbed chemical concentration  (mg/kg)
 K°     . ,a/foe,  organic carbon normalized adsorption partition coefficient
          (L/kg-organic carbon)
 Kx     . .  /f  .  organic carbon normalized classical reversible component
  °C      partition  coefficient (L/kg-organic carbon)
 m
 0
  I
 K      - octanol-water partition coefficient  (L/L)
  ow

-------
                                   REFERENCES



L.    Bowman,  B.T.  and w.W.  Sans,  "Adsorption of Parathion,  Fenitrothion,^

     Methyl Parathion, Aminoparathion and Paraoxon by Na ,  Ca  ,  and Fe

     Montmorillonite Suspensions",  Soil Sei. Anu J...  Vol.  41, p.  514, 1977.

2.    Wahid, P.A.  and N. Sethunathan, "Sorption-Desorption  of Parathion in
     Soils," £. Agrie. Food Chem.,  Vol. 26, Ho. 1, 1978.

3.    Felsot, A., and P.A. Oahm, "Sorption of Organophosphorus and Carbamate
     Insecticides by Soil,' Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Vol. 27, No. 3,
     p. 557, May/June 1979.

4.    de Bussetti, S.G., E.A. Ferreiro and A.1C. Helmy, -Adsorption of'l.lO-
     Phenanthroline by Some Clays and Oxides,' Clays and Clay. Minerals, Vol.
     28, No. 2, pp. 149-154, 1980.

5.    Wahid, P.A. and N. Sethunathan, "Sorption-Oesorption of «. B, and Y
     Xsomers of tiexachlorocyclohexane in Soils," Agricultural and Food Chem-
     istry, Vol. 27, No. 5, p. 1050, Sept./Oct. 1979.

6.    Swanson. R.A. and G.R. Dutt, "Chemical and Physical Processes that Affect
     Atrazinc and Distribution in Soil Systems,' Soil Science Society oE
     America Proceedings, Vol. 37,  No. 6, Nov./Dec. 1973.

7.    van Genuchten, M.Th., J.M. Davidson and P.J. wierenga,  'J" E™Ju"j°" of
     Kinetic and Equilibrium Equations for  the  Prediction of Pesticide Move-
     ment Through Porous Media," Soil Sei.  Soc. of America  Proc.. Vol. 38,
     1974.

8.   Xoskinen, w.C.,  G.A. O'Connor  and H.H. Cheng, "Characterization of
     Hysteresis in  the  Oesorption of 2,4,5-T from Soils,' Soil Science Am.. J..,
     Vol.  43,  1979.

9.   Davidson, J.M.,  G.H. Brusewitz, O.R.  Backer, and A.L.  Wood.  "Use of Soil
     Parameters  for  Describing Pesticide Movement Through Soils,  Environmen-
     tal Protection  Technology Series  EPA-660/2-75-009, May 1975.

10.  Elrashidi, M.A.  and G.A. O'Connor,  "Boron  Sorption and Desorption in
     Soils," Soil Sei.  Am.  JN, Vol.  46,  p.  27,  1982.

11.  Gavraud,  J.P.,  "Etude, A L'Aide du  Tritium de L'iode 131  et  du  Strontium
     90. de  la  Dispersion  et  des Echanges  Physico-Chimiques en Milieu  Poreux
     Sature,"  Academic de  Montpeilier, Oniversite des Sciences et Techniques
     du Languedoc.,  1973.

12.  Fluhler,  H.,  J.  Polomski, and  P.  Blaser,  "Retention and Movement  of
     Fluoride  in  Soils," J. Environ. Qual.. Vol.  11, No. 3, 1982.

13.  Mukhtar.  M.,  "Desorption of Adsorbed  Ametryn and Diuron from Soils  and
     Soil  Components in Relation to Rates,  Mechanisms,  and  Energy of Adsorp-
     tion  Reactions," Ph.D. Thesis, University of Hawaii,  1976.

 14.  Wu, C-H., N.  Buehring, J.M. Davidson  and P.W. Santelmann, "Napropamide
     Adsorption,  Desorption,  and Movement  in  Soils," Weed  Science,  vol.  23,
     No.  6, Nov.  1975.

 15.  Murray. D.S.,  P.W. Santelmann, and  J.M.  Davidson,  "Comparative Adsorp-
      tion, Desorption, and Mobility of Dipropetryn and  Prometryn in Soil,'  Jj.
     Agric. Food Chem., Vol.  23, No. 3.  1975.

-------
    1,  p. 101, Jan.-Mar. 1980.



    Adsorption
    Nov. 1979.
1*  Wahid  P.A. and M. Sethunathan, •Sorption-Desorptionof ^;dan«byi980
"'  XJiribic and Aerobic Soils," Aoric. and Food Chemistry, 28,  623, 1980.
20.  Moyer,
    eides
    1972.
"•
     SOC.,  p. 121, 19/.

 »'  ^h'^S^^^
     Soil," J.. Aoric. Food Chem. , 30, 384-588, 198Z.

 "•  U-Si.^'pi^cS!;^1^,"4^-!:/:^' fc^Ig^S
     Aeta.  Vol. 38, pp. 1061-1073, 1974.

'»•  saa 2d                                     sH .-s.: P.
     S61, 1972.
     1122-1125, 1981
     Civil Engineers, p.

     ^^^SiJ-i^
     Contam. Toxicol. 24, 20-26,  1980
              ^.ii.
     cali in Frelhwiter Systems, Part II: Laboratory Studies
     EPA-600/7-78-074, Nay 1978.
 -
      1981.
  31.  Picer,
      p«nded
      429.

-------
32.  Carringer, R.D., J.B. Weber, and T.J. Monaco, "Absorption-Desorption of
     Selected Pesticides by Organic Matter and Montmorillonite," Agrie.  and
     Food Chemistry, Vol. 23, No. 3, p. 568, May/June 1975.

33.  Savage, K.E. and R.D. Wauchope, "Fluometuron Adsorption-Desorption
     Equilibria in Soil," Weed Science, Vol. 22, Ho. 2, pp. 106-110, March
     1974.

34.  Appelt, I!., N.T. Coleman, and P.P. Pratt, "Interactions Between Organic
     Compounds, Minerals, and Ions in Volcanic-ash-derived Soils: I.  Adsorp-
     tion of Benzoate, p-OH Benzoate, Salicylate, and Phthalate Ions, Soil
     Sci. Soc. o£ Amer. Proe., Vol. 39, p. 623, 1975.

35.  Fusi, P., S. Cecconi, M. Pranci et C. Vazzana, "Adsorption et desorption
     de la pyrazone par quelques colloides organiques et ninreaux,  Weed
     Research, Vol. 16, pp. 101-109, 1976.

36.  Bowman, B.T. and W.W. Sans, "Influence of Methods of Pesticide Applica-
     tion on Subsequent Desorption from Soils," J. Agrie. Food Ghent. 30, p.
     147, 1982.

37.  Saltzman, S., L. Kliger, and B. Yaron, "Adsorption-Desorption of Para-
     thion as Affected by Soil Organic Matter," J.. Agr. Food Chem., Vol. 20,
     NO. 6, p. 1224, Nov./Dec. 1972.

28.  Oi Toro,  0.  M.  and L.M. Horzempa.   1982.   Reversible and Resistant Com-
     ponents of Hexachlorobiphenyl Adsorption-Desorption: Isotherms.  Environ.
     Sci. Technol. 16,. p. 594-602.

39-.  Oi Toro,  0.  M.  and L.M. Horzempa.   1982.   Reversible and Resistant Com-
     ponents-of PCS Adsorption and Desorption: Adsorbent Concentration Effects.
     J. Great Lakes Res. 8(2):336-349.
                     0 .
4.0.  Di  Toro.  0.  H.,  L.M.  Horzempa  and M.C.  Casey.    1982.   Adsorption and
     Oesorption  of Hexachlorobiphenyl.   A.  Experimental  Results  and  Discus-
     sions   B.   Analysis  of  Exchangeable  and  Nonexchangeable  Components.
     EPA-600/53-83-088.

41.  Farmer,  W.J.,  Aochi, Y.   1974.   Picloram Sorption by  Soils..   Soil Sci.
     Soc. Amer.. Proc. 38, p.  418-423.


-------
                                                              1
    March-April  1977.
     309-324.

»•   ss±s- j
     Quality 2(4), p.  428-433.
                                             Ad"rption  aBd  °"ctptlon
     ssss
     1517-1523.
                                                                       ef
     Ann Arbor Sci. Publ.  Ann Arbor,

57.  Karicfchoff, '•.«.  1984.  Organic Pollutant Sorption in Aquatic Systems
     J. Hydraulic Oiv. ASCE, Vol. 110, Mo.  6,  pp. 707-735.
     for Publication, Environ.  Sci. Technol.
     p. T5TI

 "•  Sffi.'i-i£- WJR;
     Systems.  Environ. Sci. Technol.  17, p. 513-518.

 62.  Benes, P..V. Majer.  1980.  Trace Chemist^ a* Aqueous Solutions.
     Elsevier Sci. Publ. Co., H.Y..  P« 203.
                                       Reversible and Resistant Component
al.,  Ann
                           , p.
 64   Karickhoff. S.W. and K.R« Morris.   1984.  Sorption Dynamics of Hydro-
      phobic  Pollutant in Sediment Suspensions.  US EPA Env. Res. Lab.,
      Athens, Ga.

 6S.  Di Toro. D.M., J.S.  Jeris. 0. Ciarcia.   1985.  Diffusion  and pf"itionin«
      of Hexachlorobiphenyl  in Sediments.  To  appear, Environ.  Sci. Technol.

 66   Eisenreich. S.J., P.O. Capel, B.B. Looney.  PCS Dynamics  in Lake Superior
      5-^2  in  Physical Behavior of PCB's in  the Great Lakes,  ed. 0. Mackay et
      al., Ann Arbor Science, p. 181.

-------
67.

    600/3-82-060, p. 23-25.
•••  S2«.is. irt-srajSis1^^^ &SRS n.rr
    833.
70.  Min,.Urin. «.. I. fcnjta.  "ijj»3£«g1£ijj "f'SS^'WlitJ
    Mechanism  of  Nonionic  Chemicals  Adsorption  eo  aoixa.  «*.*«»•>«    t
    12(1).
7JL.  veith, G.   1983.  Personal Communication. EPA Duluth Res.  Lab., Dulutn,
    Minn.
 72.


 73.  water Related Environmental Fate of 129  Priority Pollutants, EPA.  1979.


     Solubili
     701-711.

 715.  Chiou, C.T.  and D.W. Schmedding.  1982.   '"?itioniB« o* Jj»%lc4f
     pounds in Octanol-Mater Systems, Environ. Sci. Technol., 16, p.  4

 74.
     p. 1227-1229.

 77.  Mackay, 0.  1982.  Correlation of Bioconcentration  Factors.  Environ.
     Sci.  Technol.  16, p.  274-278.
     J. Environ. Sci. Health 818(6), p. 667.
 •.o  M.M**  B 3   Harrison. P.L.  1984.  The Octanol-Water Partition Coeffi
 79> SiiSif 8en«H(" J?«nl; Measurement, Calculation, and Environmental
     Implications, Bull. Environ. Contain.  To*. 32(3), p.

 "• BS: Viii^S^ -'SS=Wi!:;BS
     Permethrin by Chironomus Tentans Larvae in Sediment  and
     Tox. Chem. 4, p. 51.
      Technol.  19(1) ,  p. 90.

      (Received in Germany  2O June  1985;  accented 16 Auoust 1985)

-------
                                 APPENDIX D
           BIOCONCENTRATION AND DEPURATION BY AQUATIC ORGANISMS
D. 1  INTRODUCTION-
    The presence  of  hazardous substances  in Che aquatic  food chain  is  a
problem of rapidly  developing  dimensions and magnitude.   New produce
production and the ever  present  potential  for  insect and pest infestations
with attendant effects  on man and  animal  result in  continuing  demand for
product development.  Considerable  effort  has  been  devoted in recent years
to  the  development of  predictive schemes  that  would  permit an  a  priori
judgment of the effects  of a chemical on• the environment.

    An  important .distinction  is  to be1 made  between  Che  fate  of  the
substance  and its effects  as  shown on  Figure D-l.  The  substance  raay be
accumulated   at   various  locations  in   the  ecosystem   and  at   various
concentrations may produce  effects  that  limit growth  or reproduction.   Such
effects in turn feed back to  the fate of  the substance  in  terms of altering
the basic  biomass distribution.   The  explicit  inclusion of  the effects  of  a
toxicant  ia not included in this review  and emphasis is on Che fate of the
substance.

     Figure D-2 shows  the general framework and indicates  the  interaction  of
 laboratory and field data with  the modeling  framework.   As with  all  water
 quality problems, specification of  the  inputs  of  the  toxic substance  is
 1R.V. Thomann, Mathematical Modeling  of Water Quality -  Toxic  Substances,
  31st Institute  in  Water  Pollution Control, Manhattan College,  Bronx,  New
  York, June 1986.

-------
                          BIOMASS
                      (PHYTOPLANKTON,
                        ZOOPLANKTON,
                          FISH, ETC.)
INPUT
  LAKE, BAY, ESTUARY,
RIVER (FLOW, GEOMETRY)
CONCENTRATION IN
  FOOD CHAIN
     (WEB)
                      DISTRIBUTION AND FATE
                     OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE
EFFECT OF CONCENTRATION
 ON AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM
                                                              EFFECT ON MAN AND
                                                               MAN'S ACTIVITIES
                                                  EFFECT AND CONSEQUENCE
                                                 'OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE
                        FIGURED-8  INTERACTION OF FATE
                       r\    -1    c    /i i!     n   nc   i Q   i fc

-------
   LABORATORY AND CONTROLLED
       FIELD EXPERIMENTS
HAZARDOUS^
SUBSTANCE f^WATER BODY
                                      SUB-SYSTEM
                                  COMPARTMENT MODELS
                               ADSORPTION,
                                SETTLING
 KINETIC BEHAVIOR
(UPTAKE,CLEARANCE,
TROPHIC TRANSFER)
                                                 CONCENTRATION IN
                                                    FOOD CHAIN
                                                      (WEB)
       FIGURE D-2 PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS OF MODEL FRAMEWORK
                  FOR FATE OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE

-------
essential.  The Inputs Include all sources such as municipal and industrial
discharges, urban and  agricultural  runoff and atmospheric  inputs.   In the
vater column, Che principal  physical  and  chemical phenomena to be included
are:
-   adsorption and desorptlon between dissolved and particulate  forms,
         chemical interactions,
         deposition and resuspension of particulate forms,
         diffusion of dissolved forms from bed sediment, and
         volatilization, photo-oxidation, biodegradation.

    These  phenomena describe  the concentration  of  the  substance  in  the
water  column.   Various  sectors  of the  ecosystem may  then accumulate  the
substance  from one or both of two  principal routes:

         direct   uptake,   I.e.,   absorption  and/or  adsorption   from   the
         -available"  form  In the water  ("available"  may include  dissolved
         form   and  toxicant  adsorbed   on  microparticulate   organic   or
         inorganic  particles), and •
         ingestion  of  the  substance  through predation of  contaminated prey.

     It should be  noted  that the  first  route,  i.e.,  direct  uptake  of  the
 substance  from the water,  separates  models of  the  fate of  toxicants  from
 models of  other  water  quality  variables.   For  example,  in   analysis  of
 nutrient  enrichment problems, it  is  assumed  that upper levels  of the  food
 chain  receive  nutrients  only  from  predation  and  not  directly from  the
 water.

     The toxicant may then be excreted from the  food  chain by physiological
 processes, released upon  death,  egested as  uneaten  or undigested  food or
 metabolized as part of the chemical processing  by the organism.

     As  shown  on  Figure  D-2,  data  from laboratory  and  controlled field
 experiments can be used with  sub-system compartment models  to  obtain
 estimates  of  kinetic  behavior  including  values of  uptake,  clearance or

-------
transfer between  trophic levels.   These sub-system  models  are  generally
composed 'of  single  or at most  four to  five  discrete compartments,  i.e.,
discrete units of the aquatic ecosystem  such  as  phytoplankton,  zooplankton
and  fish.    Analysis using compartments of  the ecosystem permits  the
determination of bioconcentration factors, i.e.,  the ratio of the substance
in the  organism  to  that in  the  water.   Accordingly,  it is well  to  begin
analysis of  the  fate of a  toxicant by -a simple mass balance  of  a single
ecological compartment (say, fish; exposed to a controlled environment in a
laboratory aquarium.

0.2  BIOCONCENTRATION AND DEPURATION

     The uptake of a  chemical  directly from water  through transfer across
the  gills  as in fish or through surface sorption  and subsequent  cellular
incorporation as in  phytoplankton  is an  important route  for  transfer of
toxicants.   This uptake is  often measured  by laboratory experiments where
 cest  organisms   are  placed  in aquaria  with   known  (and. fixed)  water
 concentrations of  Che chemical.  The  accumulation of  the chemical  over  time
 is  then measured  and   the  resulting equilibrium concentration in  che
 organism divided by' the water concentration is  termed che bioconcencration
 factor (BCF).  A simple representation of this mechanism is  given  by  a  mass
 balance equation around a  given  organism.   Thus,
          dt
 where  >»' la  the whole  burden  of  the chemical (ug),  ku is  the uptake
 sorption and/or  transfer  rate  (l/d-g(w)). w  is  the  weight of  the  organsm
 (g(w)),  c is  the available  water concentration  (ug/1), K is the desorption
 and  excretion rate (d'1)  and t  is  time.   This  equation  indicates  chat if
 the  mass input (wg/d) of toxicant given by Kw is greater than by the mass
 lost due  to  depuration (ug/d) given  by KM',  then  the chemical  will
 accumulate  in the  organism.  At  an equal mass of uptake and depuration, che
 chemical win have reached  an equilibrium level.  It is assumed in the mass
 balance  thai:  the rate of uptake  of the chemical is directly proportional to

-------
the concentration  of the  chemical in  the  water.   For most  chemicals at
normally'encountered  concentrations in  water this  is  a  good assumption.
For example, the studies of  PCS by Vreeland  (1974)  for oysters and Hansen
et al. (1974) for pinfish, show that the resultant PCB  concentration in the
test animal was linear to  the exposure water  concentration.

    The whole body burden  v1 is given by:

                                                                       (D-2)
         V* • VW

where  v is  the  concentration  of  the  chemical  (ug/g(w)).   Substition  of
Equation (D-3) into  Equation (D-l)  gives:
                     - Kvw
 Expanding the derivative and grouping terms yields:
          £ - ^ - (g/v * «v
         	K c- ,*£/- - w.                                       (D-4)

Letting
 where :

     G(d~l) -.the net growth rate of the organism, and

     V - K * C                 •

  then
          $ - kuc - K'v                                                <°-7>

  It is seen  that  the loss term on the concentration  includes the  loss  (or
  gain) due  to  the changing weight of  the organsm during  the test and  aay
  therefore be termed an apparent depuration.   The solution to Equation (D-7)
  is:

-------
         v . V (1 . cxp(.K.t)) + VQ exp<-K')t                       CD-6)
             n

where v  is the initial concentration of the chemical in the test organism.
Note  that  this expression  indicates that  the  rate  of  accumulation  is  a
function of K', the sum of the depuration rate and the net growth rate.

    At equilibrium or steady-state,


             kuc                                                       (D-9)
         * 'IT"

     In  order  to  standardize  this  equilibrium  concentration,   the  BCF  is
defined as  the ratio  of the steady-state concentration to  the water
concentration  at  zero growth rate of the  organism.
form
 The ratio NW,  the BCF,  is  shown here  in  unit's ug/g  * ug/1.   In  a
 representative of a' pseudo dimensionless ratio, the BCF is -in typical units
 of wg/kg(w)  * ug/1, i.e., ppb/ppb and then
               1000
 The  BCF under  actual field conditions,  i.e.,  the accumulation  of  the
 chemical from the water only (excluding food intake) would be less than the
 Ntf given  by Equation (D-10) when growth  is positive and  would, be  greater
 than  Equation (D-10) when growth is negative (i.e., a net weight loss).
  D.2.1   Bioeoneentration Equations
      For organic  chemicals,  various  equations  have  been  suggested  that
  relate  the* BCF  to the  octanol  water  partition  coefficient, KQW,  on  the
  grounds that  the lipophylic nature of the organic chemicals will  result in
  partitioning  exclusively to the lipid compartments of the organism.   Thus,

-------
Veith et al. (19790 as a  result  of  uptake experiments with fathead  minnows
(and green sunfish and rainbow trout) suggested the following:
log M  - 0.85 log K
                            ow
                               - 0.70                                 <°-l2)
    However, if  one  assumes a partitioning  into  the lipid pool,  the  slope
of Hf versus KQW should be unity.  That  is:
         »•  -K    -                                                  (D"13)
         NwA   Kow   K

where  N'   is  the  lipid based BCF (ug/kg(lipid) *  wg/D and ^  is  a lipid
        w&
based  uptake rate.

     Makay  ( 1982)  reviewed data on BCF versus KQW  and  concluded chat a good
approximation  indeed was  that  the  slope was one  if  it is assumed  that ac
 the higher KQtf values  the tests for BCF may  not  have  been  conducted  long
 enough to  rea°ch equilibrium. (Growth rate at  the  higher level of KQW could
 also reduce the  BCF.)    For  preliminarV estimates of  .the BCF  for  organic
 chemicals  we may assume then that the lipid based BCF is equal to  the Xotf.
 Again, it should  be  noted that the Nwt  is  defined for  zero  growth of  che
 organism.   This is explored further below.

 0.3  CHEMICAL DEPURATION

     in depuration experiments, the organism  is transferred  to a tank  with
 zero  toxicant  concentration  and  the  time  history of  the loss of  the
 chemical  is measured.  Equation (D-8) then becomes for c-0:

           v-voexp<-K')t

 or in terms of whole body burden:

           »••-«'  exp<-K)t

-------
Again,  the weight  change of .Che organism  must be  properly  taken into
account.  'Equation  (D-14) can  be used  to estimate  Kf  and  from the  net
growth rate, the depuration  rate  K can be obtained.   Or, Equation  (D-15)
can  be  used directly where the  whole body  burden  is  plotted  and  the
depuration rate obtained from such data.

    Two examples of  uptake  and  loss due to  excretion are shown  on  Figure
D-3.  For the PCB case (Figure D-3a), the BCF (for pinfish),  NW is 17 ug/gm
f ug/1  (Nf  - 17,000) (assuming C-0).   If  the  excretion rate  Is  estimated
from the uptake it is found to be 0.045/day or approximately four tines  the
depuration rate of 0.012/day.  Growth of the pinfish and storage in various
body compartments may  account  for the difference.  For malathion  in carp,
N  • .006 (M1 - 6), an indication of the lower tendency for malathion to be
accumulated.   Depuration  is rapid  at an  excretion  rate  of  1.23/day  or
approximately  two orders  of  magnitude faster than the PCB.   The excretion
rate  calculated from  the. uptake  experiment  is  approximately  0.6/day  or
approximately  half  that calculated from the depuration experiment.  Results
of  the  type  shown on Figure D-3a  and D-3b  provide estimates of  the key rate
parameters  and equilibrium conditions for a  variety of  organisms  and
substances.

-------

-------