OFFICE OF  ENFORCEMENT
                     EPA-330/1-79-002
 Disposal  Alternatives  For Tuna Cannery  Dissolved

    Flotation Sludge, Stickwater,  And Press  Liquor

                   American Samoa
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER


                DENVER. COLORADO
                                               ^t0 S7^
                         AND

            REGION  IX  SAN FRANCISCO
                     MARCH  1979

-------
           Environmental  Protection Agency
                Office of Enforcement
                  EPA-330/1-79-002
DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES FOR TUNA CANNERY DISSOLVED AIR

   FLOTATION SLUDGE, STICKWATER, AND PRESS LIQUOR

                   AMERICAN SAMOA
                  Barrett E. Benson
                     March 1979
National Enforcement Investigations Center - Denver
                         and
              Region IX - San Francisco

-------
• CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION .
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
III. DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTES AND RESIDUAL MATTER .
CURRENT DISPOSAL METHODS
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH CURRENT DISPOSAL METHODS
IV. DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
SEGREGATION OF WASTEWATER STREAMS
DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
RESTORATION OF EXISTING DISPOSAL SITES
V. ODOR SOURCES AND CONTROL AT THE TUNA CANNERIES
ODOR SOURCES
ODOR CONTROL
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A . . . 33
FIGURES
1 Pago Pago Harbor, American Samoa
2 Tutuila Island, American Samoa
3 Star-Kist Samoa, Inc. Process, Flow and.Wastewater Treatment
4 Process Sequence and Wastewater Flow Van Camp Seafood
5 Wastewater Collection Channel Precooker Area - Van Camp . .
6 Schematic of Wastewater Drainage Precooker Area - Star Kist
7 Ocean Disposal Location Tuna DAF Sludge and Stickwater . .
13
16
16
19
28
30
30
30
.2
.3
10
11
• 18
20
24

-------
• I. INTRODUCTION
From June 19 to July 18, 1978, personnel from the National En-
forcement Investigations Center (NEIC) evaluated disposal alterna-
tives for the sludge generated in the dissolved air flotation (OAF)
wastewater treatment systems at the two tuna canneries in American
Samoa. The Van Camp Sea Food Company, a division of the Raison Purina
Company, and Star-Kist Samoa, Inc., a subsidiary of the H. J. Heinz
Company, each operate canning facilities on the north shore of Pago
Pago harbor [ Figure 1].
Disposal of solid waste and DAF sludge is a difficult problem in
Samoa because of limited land availability and geological conditions.
American Samoa, situated in the South Pacific ocean, about 3,540 km
(2,200 mi) southwest of the Hawaiian Islands, consists of six islands
with a total land area of 197 square kilometers (76 sq mi). The in-
habited islands include Tutuila, Tau, Olosega, Ofu, and Aunu t u. The
main island of Tutuila [ Figure 2] with an area of 137 square kilometers
(53 sq ml) rises steeply above deep inlets, the most notable of which
is Pago Pago harbor. The topography is mainly mountainous and most
of the villages are located on the coast line. Rainfall varies from
100 to 300 inches, but porous soils and rocks make water supplies
unreliable. The population of American Samoa in 1970 was 27,000; of
these 21,000 lived on Tutuilalsland.*
The two canneries currently dispose of the DAF sludge in open
pits on leased land in semi-remote areas of Tutuila Island. Star-Kist’s
* The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, Volume 16, 15th Edition, 1977.

-------
STAR -K 1ST
MAR INE
POWER STATIO
. 0
Figure i Pago Pago Harbor , American Samoa

-------
0
MUNIC IPA
0
AUNU’U ISLANZ
A FUNA
STAR-K 1ST
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
STEPS POINT
TULEI WWTP
W W T P
OUTFALL
VAN CAMP SLUDGE DISPOSAL
Figure 2 Tutuila Island, American Samoa

-------
4
disposal site is located in the area of Matauloa Ridge, about 0.8 km
(0.5 mi) from Steps Point [ Figure 2]. The disposal pits have been
excavated on the edge of the ridge. The earthen sides of one pit
failed in January 1979 and some of the sludge spilled into Larsen
Bay. The sludge from Van Camp is placed in ravines near the airport,
adjacent to the community of Tafuna. Because the disposal site is
inland, the probability of the sludge flowing into the ocean is small,
however, the disposal area lies over the freshwater aquifier used as
drinking water for the communities served by the Government of American
Samoa (GAS) water system.
The Environmental Quality Commission (EQC), the Governor’s office,
and the health department have received numerous complaints concerning
odors and vectors at the disposal areas, and the transport of the
sludge through densly populated areas. The odors are obnoxious and
are detectable several miles from the disposal areas. The EQC has
ordered the canneries to initiate procedures to eliminate the disposal
problems by alternative methods. Methods suggested by the EQC include
disposal through the Tafuna primary wastewater treatment plant ocean
outfall, barging to sea forocean disposal, and digestion and dewater-
ing the sludge followed by land disposal.
Due to the numerous and increasing citizen complaints, the prob-
lems of decreasing land availability, and the need for adequate and
proper disposal, Region IX of the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) requested NEIC to evaluate disposal alternatives for the OAF
sludge, cannery stickwater and press liquor. (Stickwater or cooker
juice is formed in the precooking process where live steam contacts
the tuna and the res u1ting wastewater contains high concentrations of
organics. Press liquor is the wastewater resulting from the compac-
tion of recovered fish waste solids in the fish meal process. The
stickwater and press liquors are normally processed in a solubles
facility at most tuna plants, however, in Samoa they are discharged

-------
5
to the OAF treatment systems). Subsequent to the investigaUon in
Samoa, Region IX requested that NEIC eva1uate the odor problems asso-
ciated with canneries.
This report summarizes the current disposal methods used by the
canneries, odor sources, and their associated problems. Disposal al-
ternatives which can be used in Samoa under the present constraints
were evaluated and are presented. The determination of volumes and
constituents of the wastes and the selection of disposal sites were
beyond the scope of this investigation.

-------
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
NEIC personnel conducted detailed in-plant investigations of the
wastewater sources, treatment systems, and operating procedures of
the two canneries. Meetings and discussions were held with cannery
management and Government of American Samoa personnel to ascertain
the magnitude of the problem and possible alternatives. Disposal
sites were visited to determine the adequacy of disposal.
The best method for DAF sludge disposal in Samoa utilizes the
most available and abundant resource, the ocean. The land is a limi—
ted resource and should not be used for sludge disposal; the ocean in
this remote sector of the world offers a means to dispose of a non-
hazardous and non-toxic waste which will not unreasonably degrade or
endanger human health, welfare, or marine environment. The sludge
should be barged to sea for disposal. Stickwater and press liquor
wastewater streams can be segregated from the other process waste-
waters and could also be barged to sea with the sludge. This would
reduce operating costs of the wastewater treatment facilities and
would also reduce the pollutant load discharged to the Pago Pago har-
bor. However, the disposal cost for sludge will probably increase
over the current land disposal method. Ships and barges are available
in Samoa for this disposal method. An alternative land-based.disposal
site would be required for the periods when the weather prevented
ocean disposal and tank storage capacity on the cannery sites is exhaus-
ted.
An alternative to ocean disposal is to dewater, deodorize, and
stabilize the sludge prior to landfilling. Due to vectors, odors,
safety, etc. , the sludge must be backcovered daily, thus requiring
heavy equipment. Operating costs could be minimized by operating a

-------
7
disposal site as a joint venture. If there is sufficient land avai1
able, the sludge could be mixed with the commercial and residential
refuse at the municipal landfill, as is done in southern California
landfills, thus eliminating the need for heavy equipment at a separate
site. However, land disposal is discouraged as a disposal alternative
except in cases of emergencies because eventually available sites
will be filled and ocean disposal will have to be used. The land
sites should be reserved for material which cannot be barged to sea.
Because of potential environmental damages, the existing disposal
sites should be reclaimed by removing the sludge and contouring the
areas to their natural state. The reclaimed sludge could be barged
to sea for disposal or placed in an approved disposal site if ocean
disposal is not implemented.
Odor control at the canneries will be expensive because the tech-
nology did not exist when the facilities were built. Major sources
of odors include the precookers, fish meal driers, and wastewater
treatment facilities. Technology for control includes collecting the
air emissions from the precookers and driers and scrubbing with limed
sea water, chemical oxidation with chlorine, and incineration. The
emissions from the wastewater treatment units can be controlled by
the use of masking agents or chemical oxidation.

-------
III. DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTES AND RESIDUAL MATTER
A high degree of product recovery is practiced in the tuna can-
ning industry. According to the Development Document* studies of
nine tuna plants, final waste represented about 1% of the raw input.
Food recovery averaged 45%, the rest of the tuna meat and scraps were
processed into pet food, fish meal and a solubles product. Of the
nine tuna canneries investigated, only one did not have a solubles
operation. This cannery separated the stickwater and press liquor
from other process wastewater streams and barged these high strength
wastewaters to sea for disposal. The two canneries in Samoa do not
have solubles processes but, instead of separating the stick-water
and press liquors for ocean disposal, they are discharged to the DAF
treatment system. The cannery solid wastes currently subject to
disposal are the fish solids retained on the screens in the waste-
water collection systems, the OAF cell sludge, and refuse material.
CURRENT DISPOSAL METHODS
Screening Wastes
Fish solids removed by the screens are not recovered for pro-
cessing into fish meal because they also contain grit, dirt,. nails,
nuts, bolts, and other debris from the processing areas. Approxi-
mately 0.91 m. tons (1 ton)/day of fish solids and refuse material
from each cannery are hauled in open bed, cannery-owned trucks to the
municipal landfill.
* 11 Developnient Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New
Source Performance Standards for the Catfish, Crab, Shrimp, and
Tuna Segment of the Canned and Preserved Seafood Processing Point
Source Catagory” EPA-440/1-74-020-a, June, 1974.

-------
9
The beds of trucks are lined with paper to prevent dripping during
transport to the landfill and sprayed with an industrial deodorant,
Otaban #5l8B, to reduce odor. The landfill is located near Tafuna
[ Figure 21. All refuse collected on the island is deposited in this
landfill or in a temporary site on the north side of the island. The
temporary site was in operation during the NEIC inspection, but Govern-
ment of, American Samoa (GAS) off icals stated that disposal in the
temporary site would cease in the near future. Due to the lack of
available land, all future disposal would be.in the landfill near
lafuna. The landfill is operated only during daylight hours because
there are no lights at the site or on the bulldozer usedto backfill.
The refuse deposited in the landfill is covered daily.
DAF Sludge
Each cannery treats its process wastewater prior to discharge to
the Pago Pago harbor; the wastewater treatment facilities are similar
and differ only in sizes and operating procedures [ Figures 3 and 4].
After in-plant screening to remove coarse solids and debris, the raw
wastewater is pumped to the surge tank. Aluminum sulfate (alum) and
a polyelectrolyte coagulant aid are added to the wastewater, air is
introduced and the wastewater is pressurized before it enters the DAF
cell. High concentrations of solids, oil and grease (O/G) and organic
material are removed as floating sludge from the DAF cell. The sludge
is continuously removed from the cell surface and held in a sludge
tank before being hauled to the disposal site. Settled material in
the cell is periodically removed to the sludge tank.
Storage capacity in the sludge tank is minimal. Each full pro-
duction day generates approximately 30 m (8,000 gal) of sludge. At
Star-Kist, the sludge is pumped from the sludge tank into a 7.6 m
(2,000 gal) tank truck and transported to land leased by Star-Kist in
the area of Matauloa Ridge, about 0.8 km (0.5 mi) from Steps Point
[ Figure 2]. During the June-July, 1978 inspection, the disposal

-------
Salt
Liver to Pet Food Line
Fish Meal
Direct Contact
Cooling Water
Fish
Box
Brine Water From
Purse Seiners
Solids
Recycle
Valve
001 ———
Flume
Water
—-- --r-
Shipping
Land Disposal
Polymer
Bagging and
Palletizing
Figure 3, Star-Kist Samoa, Inc. Process Flow and Mastewater Treatment Diagram
June 1978
To
Landfill
Clean Up
tiater
I-
U
U)
C
I -
Process
————— Wastes
Scraps, Viscera
-J

-------
Viscera Viscera
r 1
“ I 1 Fish Boxes ( w j j j ‘ ] FiSh j _ Conveyor Butcher ‘ Precookers h nderSump
Cold Storac FI 2 S!0 4 . .. .. Dock Water verflow Fresh Water
Acid Caustic Fresh _ I I I ] I I L1C v I
I [ iners F:::::::::::::::::::::t::::: 3 ... ... .1... ,...
1 r L J Roto Li Cooker .. I . .....
iStralner Juice I ______________
__________ I Sunip Sum I L 4__L-Shaped
Ut11 • _________ Light Cleanino
_______ ___________ Can ________ iieat Iia s I
Alum__________ Can Retorts I • I sh ( 10)
1 coollng J ( 13) r 1 I ..
[ Tank i ah L 11 _]. a Sea1in (pet food)
(1)
Air ____
Scrap
__________ Pit • ..Sunp
__________________ Condenser I I .. . .. . . . _ I
I RetenUon I Water — ume . .“. . .rn— - . —U. .. . .-
Tank iPolymer ______________
i I _________ lOutfall Desludner piL)J21fl2.I_Cooker team
OAF F + Sump
L... . ___J i Lsea Water
Br1t j ludo .* .4 Sludge lasher
Tank 1 L. Storage water bottom ‘-1 ______________
_________________ 0 Continuous
Prod t - Trucked to Fish Oil ...J Driçr (21
UC Land Disposal Tanks (2 ) _____________
Water and Wastewater F rmnder I
— . — . Scraps, Viscera Figure 4 Process Sequence and Wastewater Flow
VanCamp Seafood, American Samoa s
,June-July , 1978 (Fish Meal)
-a

-------
12
location consisted of three rectangular basins with the following
dimensions: 27 m x 5.1 ni x 3.7 m deep (90 ft x 17 ft x 12 ft); 30 rn
x 3.7 m x 3 ni deep (100 ft x 12 ft x 10 ft); and 91 m x 30 rn x 7.6 m
deep (300 ft x 100 ft x 25 ft). The two smaller basins had been filled
to capacity and the third was almost full. A fourth basin was being
constructed, 91 m x 46 m x 7.6 m deep (300 ft x 150 ft x 25 ft) for
immediate use. At a rate of sludge production of 30 m 3 /day, there is
sufficient capacity for about 1,000 production days. The basins were
excavated on the side of the ridge and if overflow occurs as the sludge
is discharged into the pits, or during heavy rainfall, or if the earth-
en sides of the basins fail, the waste material will flow down into
Larsen Bay. The pits are not backcovered.
The sludge from the Van Camp OAF cell is hauled in a tank trailer,
originally used to transport gasoline to service stations, to a semi-
remote disposal area. The disposal site, leased from private land-
owners, is near the airport and the Lava Lava golf course and is adja-
cent to the community of Tafuna. The Samoa Bible Institute is located
within 0.8 km (0.5 ml) of the disposal area. The OAF sludge is dis-
charged into ravines, or ravine-like depressions and is not backcovered.
Because the disposal site is inland; the probability of the sludge
flowing into the ocean is small, however the disposal area lies over
the fresh water aquifer used as drinking water for the communities
served by the GAS water system. According to GAS personnel, chemical
analyses of the groundwater indicate that the aquifer has not been
contaminated, but they are concerned that this could occur.
Van Camp has backcovered one disposal pit nearest the Bible
Institute. An inactive site, between the backcovered site and the
active site has not been backcovered. Star-Kist has not backcovered
any of its inactive disposal pits. Although the disposal areas are
in remote of semi-remote areas, access is not controlled-and a poten-
tial hazard to the public exists.

-------
13
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH CURRENT DISPOSAL METHODS
The Environmental Quality Commission, Government of American
Samoa, has received numerous complaints regarding odors associated
with the operation of the tuna canneries and the disposal of OAF sludge.
Similar complaints have also been received at the Govenor’s office.
In a May 1978 letter, the Commission advised the personnel at each
cannery to immediately increase their efforts to control and reduce
the odors associated with the OAF sludge, particularly at the disposal
sites. It was suggested by the Commission that additional chemicals
such as oxidizing agents (hydrogen peroxide or chlorine dioxide),
lime for pH control, and the continued use of deodorants, odor masking
compounds and insecticides might be required to assist in the effort.
Because of the problems associated with the disposal of raw sludge on
land, cannery personnel were also urged to continue efforts in evaluat-
ing and implementing alternate sludge handling, treatment and disposal
procedures. The commission established December 1, 1978 as the deadline
for submitting evidence that an alternative procedure has been selected
and that action has been initiated to implement the selected process
by January 1, 1979. The Commission delineated the following three
alternatives, or a combination of them, which could be implemented to
correct the disposal problems.
1. Disposal of raw sludge through the Tafuna sewage treatment
plant outfall under a permit form the Environmental Protection
Agency.
2. Disposal of raw sludge to marine waters by barging under a
permit from the Environmental Protection Agency.
3. Anaerobic or aerobic digestion and dewatering of the sludge
followed by land disposal.

-------
14
As a followup of the Commission’s letters, a meeting was held
June 22, 1978, at the Star-Kist Samoa office to discuss the problems
and alternatives. Representatives of Star-Kist, Van Camp, Government
of American Samoa, and EPA were present [ Appendix A]. The sludge
disposal problems were defined at the meeting to be:
1. Odors and vector control at the OAF sludge disposal sites
2. Land availability -
3. Transport of the DAF sludge from the canneries to the disposal
sites
The odors from the Van Camp disposal site near Tafuna are readily
detectable at the villages of Pa vaiai and Faleniv (total polulation
between 400 and 500). The odors are also detectable at the Community
College. Three villages on the sea side of Leone, [ Futiga, Taputimu,
and Vailoatai (total population about 500)] have complained about the
odors from the Star-Kist disposal pits. The odors are very offensive
and, although wind dependent, were always detected by NEIC personnel
when in the Tafuna area.
Flies, rodents, and mosquitoes are the vectors associated with
sludge disposal. There are two mosquito borne diseases on the island,
Filariasis and Dengue Fever; the Department of Public Health is
trying to control the mosquitos and feels that the disposal sites
should be closed and covered as one of the control methods.
The GAS also receives numerous complaints about the OAF sludge
trucks and the open-bed trucks which haul the refuse and screenings
to the municipal landfill. The trucks must pass through Pago Pago on
the route to the disposal sites. Although the trucks are washed and
deodorized with Otaban at the canneries before each trip, the odors
are noticeable during transport. NEIC personnel detected the odors
from the Van Camp sludge truck from a distance of approximately 15 m.
(50 ft) as it passed through Paga Pago.

-------
15
Both Star-Kist and Van Camp stated that the sludge problem was
being investigated at their respective offices in California and that
they would try to meet the December response date. However, except
for the use of the Tafuna sewage treatment plant outfall, representa-
tives from each cannery were not prepared to comment on alternatives
being studied in California. Both canneries feel that the outfall
is the best solution and disposal could begin immediately. Star-Kist
also stated that barging of the sludge was feasible and that several
people on the island were interested in providing the service, but
require a long-term commitment from the canneries.

-------
IV. DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
Only one of the nine tuna canneries studied •in the development
of effluent limitations did, not have a solubles process to reduce
stickwater and press liquor into a saleable by-product. This can-
nery, located in Puerto Rico, barged the stickwater and press liquor
for disposal at sea. Van Camp and Star-Kist dischargethe stickwater
and press liquor to the wastewater treatment facilities. These high-
strength wastewaters increase the raw-waste load over the values repor-
ted in the Development Document, requiring more efficient operation
of the treatment facilities than reported in the Development Document
to comply with the effluent ‘limitations for total suspended solids
and oil! grease. During the NEIC inspection, the feasibility of physi-
cally separating stickwater and press liquor from the raw wastewaters
was evaluated along with alternative sludge disposal options.
SEGREGATION OF WASTEWATER STREAMS
Van Camp
In the fish meal process, the press liquor and waste streams
from the thermal cooker and,desludger are sent to three heated oil-
water decantation tanks, operated in series, before being sent to the
waste water treatment facilities via the “L-shaped sump [ Figure 4].
The wastewater from the fish meal process can easily be segregated by
intercepting the pipe carrying the wastewater to the “L-shaped sump,
and routing the wastewater to another location for disposal.

-------
17
The stickwater is discharged to the floor beneath the precookers,
f lows by gravity to the collection channel and mixes with wastewaters
from the butchering area. These combined wastewater mix with the
cooling area wastewaters before discharging to the cooker-juice sump.
The wastewaters from the butchering operation flow through a channel
on the periphery of the precooker area. The bottom of the channel is
approximately 36 cm (14 in) below floor level. The precooker area is
about 15 cm (6 in) below the floor level and 20 cm (8 in) above the
bottom of the channel [ Figure 5]. The stickwater, when released from
the precookers, flows by gravity into the collection channel. The
stickwater can be segregated from the other wastewaters by construct-
inga concrete wall or barrier on the precooker floor adjacent to the
collection channel. A sump could be built inside the wall to collect
the stickwater and it could then be pumped to any location in the
plant for treatment or disposal.
An alternative method of segregation would be to intercept the
wastewaters from the butchering and cooling areas and send them to
the roto screens instead of the cooker juice sump. This would be
more difficult than the first method and could present problems in
plant cleanup operations as all floor washings flow into the collec-
tion channel:
Star- 1 (1St
The fish meal plant is located between the large freezer and the
warehouse, outside the main processing building. Wastewater from the
meal flows by gravity to the rotary screen on the dock [ Figure 3].
Press liquor and other wastewaters from the meal plant could be
collected in a sump and pumped to another location.

-------
17
OOR ELEVATION Wastewater Collection Channel
/
I __ _______
PRECOOKER FLOOR ELEVATION
/
72?Y/77 ;
Eiev tioq View of C e io FChø neI
Wastewater Collection Channel
_• \ •
_____________
UJ
4 PRECOOKER AREA
in
I-. •
• To Cooler
L1J
I Juice Sump
0 -
I-
D —
cOOLtNc3
AREA
P1 View of Butc erii9, Preco ki an C o15a’g Ar s
Figure 5 Schematic of Wosfewqter Collection Channei-Precooker Area
Van Camp Seafood Company, American Samoa
‘June-July, 1978

-------
19
The configuration of the processing •areas is such that waste-
waters flow toward the dock. Because most of the wastewaters flow
toward the precooker area on the route to the dock, separation of
stickwater would be difficult. The precooker area floor is below the
plant floor level of the plant. •Stickwater flows.towards the dock,
is collected and mixed with other wastewaters from the cooling and
packing areas in a gutter before flowing to the rotary screen [ Figure 6].
To physically segregate the stickwater, a concrete barrier would have
to be constructed on the precooker floor, leaving a channel or gutter
outside the barrier to collect the stickwater so that it could be
pumped to another location for disposal or treatment.
The other alternative for segregating the stickwater is to inter-
cept the other wastewaters before they enter the precooker area and
reroute the flow to the rotary screen. The pipe connecting the pre-
cooker area with the rotary screen would have to be plugged. This
second alternative would require major modifications to the plant’s
wastewater collection system.
DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
The Government of American Samoa has informed the canneries that
the current method of sludge disposal will be prohibited in the near
future and that alternative disposal methods will be necessary. Three
options are being evaluated by the canneries; bargingand ocean disposal,
dewatering the sludge and using sanitary landfills (if permitted by
the GAS), and discharging the sludge to the ocean through the Tafuna
sewage treatment plant outfall. If the stickwater and press liquor
wastestreams are separated from the other process wastewaters, the
canneries will have to stabilize these high strength wastes prior to
land disposal.. . The addition of the stickwater and press liquor to
the DAF sludge would not only increase odors due to degradation, but
the extra volume would require more land for disposal.

-------
20
Dock Collecflon Channel Rotary Screen and Sump
NEW THAW AREA I THAW AREA
I BUTCHER TABLE
Gutter
________________________________________I
PRECOOKER AREA
Wastewater Drainage from Processing Area
Plon View of Dock, B itdiering anti Precooking Areas
Figure 6. Schematic of Wasfewater Drainage Precooker Area
Star-Kist Samoa, Inc., American Samoa
June-July, 1978

-------
21
Ultimately, something must be done with the DAF sludge, press
liquor, and sticlcwater if recovery as a saleable by-product is not
feasible or with the residua’ matter after the material is processed.
There are only two alternatives !available for the long-term disposal
of the wastes or residual matter:- disposal on or in the land, and
disposal in the ocean. In the continental United States, land disposal
in the form of a sanitary landfill has proved to be the most economical
and acceptable method of disposal: Open dumping, which is currently
used by the canneries, does not provide controls to prevent contamina-
tion of the air or nearby surface and groundwater. Ocean disposal is
acceptable if the Environmental Protection Agency determines “that
such dumping will not reasonably degrade or endanger human health,
welfare, or amenities, or the marine environment, ecological systems,
or econmic potentialities” (PL92—532, Sec. 102 (a)).
- In Samoa, if recovery is not feasible, there are only two viable
disposal methods available for the DAF sludge, and only one method
appears to be feasible. Barging to sea will allow for disposal of
the sludge, stickwater, and press liquor. Landfilling should only be
used for stabilized DAF sludge and only in an emergency. Land disposal
should be reserved for solid wastes not amenable to ocean disposal.
Ocean Disposal via Barging
Barging to sea is the best solution for the Samoa canneries for
disposal of sludge, stickwater,.and press liquor. The land is a
limited resource while the ocean in this remote sector of the world
offers a means to dispose of a non-hazardous and non-toxic waste -
which will not unreasonably degrade or endanger human health, welfare,
or the marine environment. The disposal site can be selected to
incorporate wind direction, current, tides, and ocean floor topography
to insure that the wastes disperse adequately. Star-Kist personnel
have stated that there are ships and barges available from private

-------
22
individuals who are interested in transporting the wastes for ocean
disposal. Additional benefits include reduced operating costs of the
wastewater treatment facilities by eliminating the high strength
wastewaters and a reduction in the amount of. sludge generated in the
DAF treatment system. The pollutant load discharged to Pago Pago
harbor would also be reduced. However, the disposal cost for sludge
will probably increase, over the.current land disposal method.
An Ocean Dumping permit may be issued by the EPA after the
cannery (or canneries) application has been reviewed and after a
public hearing. The appiication’must contain data supporting the
following:
1. Need for the proposed dumping.
2. The effect of dumping on human health and welfare, including
economic, esthetic, and recreational values.
3. The effect of dumping on fisheries resources, plankton,
fish, shellfish, wildlife, shore lines and beaches.
4. The effect of dumping on marine ecosystem, particularly
with respect to:
a. the transfer, concentration, and dispersion of such
material and its byproducts through biological, physical,
and chemical processes,
b. potential changes in marine ecosystem diversity, produc-
tivity, and stability,
c. species and community population dynamics.
5. The persistence and permanence of the effects of the dumping.
6. The effect of dumping particular volume and concentrations of
such materials.
7. Appropriate locations and methods of disposal or recycling,
including land-based alternatives and’ the probable impact
of requiring use of such alternative locations or methods
upon considerations affecting the public interest.

-------
23
8. The effect on alternate uses of oceans, such as scientific
study, fishing, arid other living resource exploitation, and
non-living resource exploitation.
In discussions with Star-Kist and Van Camp personnel and with
representatives of GAS and Environmental Quality Commission, the best
disposal site appears to be outside of the barrier reef, adjacent to
the area where the Tafuna wastewater treatment plant outfall terminates
[ Figure 7]. At this location the prevailing winds are offshore, the
site is about 183 m (600 ft) deep approximately 800 m (1/2 mi) offshore,
the currents and tides will not transport the wastes back to shore as
the water column is generally transported southwest, parallel to the
coast and following the topography of the shoreline. Surface currents
are away from the shoreline.*
A major problem associated with ocean disposal is the rough seas
which occur during inclement weather. Land area for sludge storage tanks
is negligible at each cannery. Temporary storage may have to be located
off the canneries’ premises. The DAF tanks currently used to hold the
sludge prior to being hauled to the disposal pits only have one to two
days storage capacity. If temporary storage is not feasible, a backup
disposal site on land will be necessary.
Land Disposal
If ocean disposal is not feasible; and if the sludge cannot be
recovered as a food supplement or fertilizer, landfilling is the only
alternative. The method requires rigorous waste management because of
the following factors:
* “Water Circulation Studies of Proposed Ocean Outfalls Tutuila Islands,
American Samoa”. Prepared for Government of American Samoa Department
of Public Works, CH 2 M Hill, February 1976.

-------
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
I ,
I
, (0
/
1
I
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
— .— —
ITAFUNA WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SITE
FACILITIES PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
GOVERNMENT OF AMERICAN SAMOA. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
WASTEWATER
FOR AMERICAN SAMOA
N-3
0 925’ 1850’
OJ
CH2M HILL P8564.0
‘I ..
24
I -
/
/
,
EXISTING OUTFALL
I
— —--- —--
/
/
/
(
)
/
-I
— -. -
,
,
,
/
/
/
/
Figure 7
Ocean Disposal Location
Tuna DAF Sludge and Stickwater

-------
25
1. Limited land area
2. Encroachment of residential development as semi-remote areas
become accessible
3. Limiting access to disposal area
4. Vector control
5. Odor control
6. Groundwater contamination
7. Need for heavy equipment at landfill
8. Transport through densely populated areas
9. Large sludge volume involved
10. Gas production in landfill
The canneries can eitheruse the current leased sites for sludge
disposal, can operate a disposal area as a joint venture, or use the
municipal sanitary landfill facilities. The use of open pits will be
banned in the near future under the provision of the PL94 - 580 the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The existing disposal pits
will have to be closed and possibly recovered as the need for land
for residential and recreational purposes increases.
There are very few acceptable disposal sites on the island. The
sludge must be dewatered to conserve area. Star—Kist has studied
dewatering filters and centrifuges on sludge at their Terminal Island,
California facility and have tentatively concluded that the sludge can
be effectively dewatered. The dewatering system can be adapted for the
Samoa cannery.
Because of the concerns of GAS officials and the fact that the
contamination of the island’s limited potable groundwater supply could
occur, Van Camp should be required to locate another disposal area
and reclaim the current site before contamination occurs from the
sludge already deposited.

-------
26
The best land disposal alternative would be the joint operation
and proper management of a site by the canneries. A suitable land
disposal site on the north or east side of the island is preferable
to eliminate transport through Pago Pago. The access to the site
should be controlled. The dewatered, deodorized sludge would require
daily backfilling to control odors and vectors. This would require
that heavy equipment be located on site. Operating costs could be
minimized through joint operation of the site.
A second alternative site is the municipal landfill near Tafuna.
The existing heavy equipment already on site could be used to backcover.
Two conditions must be evaluated before this alternative is used.
The first is remaining land area and projected active life, and the
second the volume and continuous supply of commercial and household
refuse. If there is insufficient land available, the site cannot be
used. If land is available, the sludge could be mixed with the refuse
or buried separately. In southern California, sludges are mixed with
rubbish on a 2 to 1 ratio, compacted, and backcovered. A cavity or
depression is created in the refuse with a bulldozer; the sludge is
deposited in the depression and then mixed with the refuse as the
bulldozer pushes the refuse into the depression. This method of dis-
posal would also provide an acceptable alternative whenever weather
prevented ocean disposal.
Tafuna Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall
Stickwater, press liquor, and OAF sludge can be discharged from
the transport trucks directly.to the Tafuna primary wastewater treat-
ment plant’s ocean outfall. The outfall terminates about 106 m (350
ft) from the shore at a depth of 20 m (65 ft). Representatives from
both canneries stated that this was the best method of disposal from
their viewpoint and could be implemented immediately. While this
alternative is economically attractive, especially in the remote area

-------
27
of the South Pacific, the discharge of sludge and untreated waste
material from an ocean outfall is prohibited by Federal regulations.
Treatment in the GAS Primary Wastewater Treatment Plants
The possibility of sending the process wastewater or a portion
of the wastewater to the GAS primary wastewater treatment plants was
raised by cannery and GAS personnel. Treatment of process wastewater
or OAF sludge at the Utulei or Tafuria facilities is not recommended.
The Tafuna plant is inactive and raw wastewaters bypass the clarifier
and flow to the ocean outfall. •The Utulei plant consists •of sediment
and digestion in a clarigester (a two story, separate sludge—digestion
tank with a clarifier mechanism in the upper compartment and a digester
mechanism in the ldwer compartment — the installation of the second
clarigester was never completed), followed by chlorination prior to
discharge. The sludge from the clarigester is hauled to the Tafuna
plant for disposal. The cannery wastewaters could not be treated
effectively at either facility. Technology for tuna wastewaters has
prayed that dissolved air flotation is the most efficient treatment
method. Chemical addition is required to remove the pollutants.
Gravity sedimentation would not produce an acceptable effluent and
with the increased detention times in the clarifiers, strong odors
could be produced due to rapid microbial action.
Placing the stickwater, press liquor, and DAF sludge in the head-
works of either treatment plant is not recommended. The primary treat-
ment systems are designed to remove solids (and biochemical oxygen
demand associated with the solids) through sedimentation. Introducing
the OAF sludge into the headworks does not comply with best engineering
principles which dictate that once a pollutant is removed, it is not
returned to the wastewater unless it is an integral part of the process.
The sludge would be partially removed in the clarifier and the remaining
fraction would be discharged. It is probable that the effluent would
not comply with the NPDES permit limitations for solids.

-------
28
Stickwater and press liquor would receive marginal treatment if
these two high-strength wastewaters were discharged to the primary
treatment plants. Some solids removal would occur, but the emulsified
O/G would not be removed and could cause operating and maintenance
problems. Additional treatment would be required to reduce the efflu-
ent pollutant load to acceptable levels.
The majo.r benefit for discharging process wastewater to the GAS
treatment plants is to remove the waste sources from the inner harbor
area. Only process wastewater treated in the OAF system should be
discharged to the GAS treatment plants; secondary treatment would be
required to significantly reduce pollutants.
The tuna cannery process wastewaters at Terminal Island, California
are discharged after DAF treatment to the municipal secondary treatment
plant.
RESTORATION OF EXISTING DISPOSAL SITES
The location currently used for sludge disposal by both canner-
ies are situated in areas where significant environmental damange
could occur. An earthen side of one of the pits at the Star-Kist
site on top of Matauloa Ridge failed in January, 1979 and sludge
entered Larsen Bay. Additional failures or overflows can be expected
-if the sludge disposal occurs. The Van Camp disposal site is poten-
tially more damaging because it overlies the fresh water drinking
source. Since liners were not installed in the pits, the leachate
can percolate through the porous soils to the water table. Once con-
tarnination occurs, treatment and decontamination will be expensive.

-------
29
Both -sites should be closed and the area restored. Two methods
of restoration are feasible if ocean disposal of the DAF sludge is
implemented. The sludge should be pumped back into the-transport trucks
from the pits, hauled to the canneries and placed in a barge for ocean
disposal. The empty pits should then be backcovered and returned to
their natural contours. A second method would be to remove a portion
of the sludge for ocean disposal, then mix earth in with soil and
compact the mixture with heavy equipment. This second method has a
major -disadvantage in that the mixture may have to be removed at a
later date if building occurs on the sites.
Once the disposal sites are restored, the area should be sprayed
with an industrial deodorant to destroy residual odors. Proper res-
toration should prevent odors from being emitted.
If ocean disposal of DAF sludge is not implemented, then the
sites should still be reclaimed and restored as stated above. The
recovered sludge should be placed in the new disposal area selected
by the canneries and approved by the Government of American Samoa.

-------
V. ODOR SOURCES AND CONTROL AT THE TUNA CANNERIES
ODOR SOURCES
In the processing of tuna and fish meal, strong and obnoxious
odors are emitted in the forms of H 2 S, NH 3 , mercaptans, and amines.
These odors are detectable next to the canneries and across the Pago
Pago harbor under certain wind conditions. Citizen complaints have
been made to the Governor’s office.
Because odors are emitted from various processes and locations
in the canneries and have a masking effect, all of the sources cannot
be identified. However, the major sources of odor include the precooker
area when the cookers are opened and drained, the steam driers in the
fishmeal processes, and the surge tank and DAF wastewater treatment
units. Control of odor emissions from these sources would significant-
ly reduce the overall odor problems.
ODOR CONTROL
When the tuna plants were originally built, control technology
did not exist. Therefore, retrofitting the canneries to control odor
with existing equipment will be expensive. However, technology is
available which can partially control odors emitted from the precookers
and control most of the odors from the fish meal process. Odor control
at the wastewater treatment facility is limited to masking agents or
chemical oxidation.

-------
31
The canneries can exhaust the inside air through fans to the
atmosphere. The exhaust vents could be connected to a collection system
and passed through a scrubbing system. The technology exists to remove
SO 2 , NH 3 , NH 3 , soluble mercaptains, and aniines, using limed sea water
as the scrubbing media. Control of the insoluble inercaptans and less
odorous compounds is accomplished by reacting the air stream after
scrubbing with chlorine gas, sparged into a reaction section. The
air stream could then be incinerated to remove refractory odors. -
Van Camp personnel stated that a packed-bed, cross-flow water
scrubber will be installed to control the exhaust air from the fish
meal driers. This technology is available to Star-Kist. Additional
odor control in the fish meal process can be accomplished by processing
fish scrap as soon as possible. This scrap should not be accummulated
for processing several days later, but should be processed on a daily
basis.

-------
APPENDIX
ATTENDANCE AT CONFERENCE ON SLUDGE DISPOSAL

-------
33
NAME
APPENDIX A
ATTENDANCE AT THE CONFERENCE ON SLUDGE DISPOSAL PROBLEMS
June 22, 1978
AFFI LIATION
Barrett Benson (Chairman)
Dr. Nofo Siliga
Randy Morris
Abe Malae
Pati Faiai
Bill Perez
Orley Bennett
Ken Miller
Steve Spangler
Ed Stockwell
John Broughton
Jack Holland
Jack Kuijis
National Enforcement Investigations
Center, EPA
Director of Public Health, GAS
General Manager of Solid Waste, GAS
Manager for Water Utilities, GAS
Special Assistant to the GOvernor, GAS
General Manager, Van Camp Samoa
Plant Engineer, Van Camp Samoa
Quality Control Manager, Van Camp Samoa
Environmental and Energy Conservation
Engineer, Van Camp San Diego
General Manager, Star-Kist Samoa
Environmental Engineer, Star-Kist Samoa
Plant Engineer, Star-Kist Samoa
Quality Control Manager, Star-Kist Samoa

-------