ENVIRONMENTALSCIENCECORPORATION 0 0 ? 0 4 8

Laboratory, Field, and Consulting Services

1DW!

FE5 28

BIOTOXICITY MONITORING TEST RESULTS

PREPARED FOR

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND

LAZY LANE

S OUTHINGTON, CONNECTICUT

JANUARY 1990

Great River Center362 Industrial Park Road, Middletown, CT 06457 (203) 632-0600

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO.

1.0 INTRODUCTION I

2 . 0 FLOW MEASUREMENTS 2

2 .1 Effluent Flow Rate 2 2.1 Table 2.1- Effluent Flow Data 2

3 . 0 SAMPLING PROGRAM 3

3 .1 Program Overview 3 3 .2 Sample Parameters 3

Table 3.1 - Aqueous Sample Information 4 Table 3.2 - List of Individual Compounds Analyzed 5

3 . 3 Sample Procedures 6

3.3.1 River Water 6 3.3.2 Effluent Sampling 6 3.3.3 Biotoxicity Analyses 6 3.3.4 Meter Readings 6 3.3.5 Summary 6,7

4.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR BIOTOXICITY MONITORING OF THE SRSNE EFFLUENT 8

4 .1 Results of Chemical Analyses 8 4 . 2 Field Meter Readings 8 4 . 3 Biotoxic Evaluation 8

5. 0 SUMMARY 9

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of the biotoxicity sampling event conducted for Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE), and summarizes the procedures utilized in the program. The biotoxicity monitoring was conducted from January 15 - 19, 1990.

The testing program was based on the approved Work Plan (dated September 8, 1987) and included the following:

* Sampling and Chemical analysis of plant effluent and water from the Quinnipiac River;

* Biotoxicity testing of effluent samples; and

* Flow measurement of the effluent.

The sampling locations were in the river upstream of the effluent and from the final effluent. The samples were analyzed for volatile organics, metals, alkalinity, hardness, conductivity, pH, and dissolved oxygen. Samples form the effluent and upstream were used in biotoxicity analyses. The upstream water was used as a control. The biotoxicity testing was performed to assess the potential toxic effects of the SRSNE effluent on stream life forms.

The procedures, protocols, and analytical data are presented in Sections 2.0 through 4.0 of this report. Section 5.0 presents the conclusions regarding the results of biotoxicity analyses.

2.0 FLOW MEASUREMENTS

The effluent flow rate was measured daily by SRSNE plant personnel. The flow was measured by recording totalizer readings each work day morning.

2.1 Effluent Flow Rate

Table 2.1 summarizes effluent daily flow rate results as recorded during the week of the in-stream testing.

TABLE 2.1 SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND

BIOTOXICITY MONITORING PROGRAM EFFLUENT FLOW DATA

24-HOUR PERIOD DATE METER READING SAMPLING PERIOD FLOW(GALLONS/ DA Y)

January 15, 1990 4447454

January 16, 1990 4453499 January 15 - 16 6045

January 17, 1990 44^0914 January 16 - 17 7415

January 18, 1990 4468929 January 17 - 18 8015

January 19, 1990 4477109 January 18 - 19 8180

3.0 SAMPLING PROGRAM

3.1 Program Overv-ew

Location of the upstream sampling station is shown in Figure 1. The upstream location was accessed from the Lazy Lane Bridge. Also shown of Figure 1 is the approximate location of the effluent sample station. The sample location, labeled discharge serial 001 on the SRSNE NPDES Permit, is located just outside the fence line, and is representative of a final combined effluent (recovered groundwater, non-contact steam, storm water, etc.) for the SRSNE site.

Sampling was initiated on Monday, January 15, 1990 at 10:00 a.m. Samples were collected from two locations (upstream, effluent) at approximately four hour intervals for a period of four days. The program was completed at 6:00 a.m. on Friday, January 19, 1990 when the final sample was collected. At each four hour interval, the SRS sampling personnel started sampling at the upstream location. Approximately 30 minutes later, the effluent location was sampled.

3.2 Sample Parameters

Table 3.1 lists general parameters which apply to the two sample stations. Analyses for metals, volatiles, hardness, and alkalinity were conducted at the Environmental Science Corporation (ESC) Laboratory. Biotoxic evaluations were performed at New England Bioassay, Inc. pH, dissolved oxygen, temperature, and conductivity readings were taken in the field using meters.

Sample water for volatiles and metals were collected from both locations. The specific compounds analyzed were those listed in the approved Plan of Study. For biotoxicity analyses, sample water was collected from both the upstream and the effluent. The remaining parameters, used as stream indicators, were tested at the upstream location. Also listed in Table 3.1 are sample bottle type and preservative required.

A list of individual compounds that were analyzed for is shown in Table 3.2.

TABLE 3.1 SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND

BIOTOXICITY MONITORING PROGRAM AQUEOUS SAMPLE INFORMATION

Parameter Sample Locations Bottle Type

Volatiles Upstream,Effluent 40 ml. Teflon Capped Vial

Metals Upstream,Effluent 1 Liter Plastic

AlkalinityHardness

Upstream 500ml. Plastic

Biotoxicity Upstream,Effluent 5 Gallon Collapsible Polyethylene

Conductivity Upstream Meter Analyses Done in Field

PH Upstream Meter Analyses Done in Field

Temperature Upstream Meter Analyses Done in Field

DissolvedOxygen

Upstream Meter Analyses

Preservation

Cool 50 <4°C

HN03 pH <2

Cool to <4°C

Cool to <4°C

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

TABLE 3.2 SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND

BIOTOXICITY MONITORING PROGRAM LIST OF INDIVIDUAL COMPOUNDS TO BE ANALYZED

Volatile Organics (Hazardous Substance List^

Chloromethane Bromomethane Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Methylene Chloride Trichlorofluoromethane Acrolein Acrylonitrile 1,1-Dichloroethane 1,1-Dichloroethane trans-l,2-Dichloroethene Chloroform 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Bromodichloromethane 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether 1,2-Dichloropropane trans-l,3-Dichloropropene Trichloroethylene Benzene cis-1,3-Dichloropropene Dibromochloromethane 1,1,2-Trichloroethane Bromoform Tetrachloroethylene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Toluene Chlorobenzene Ethyl Benzene

Additional Oraanics

trans-l,2-dichloroethane Isopropyl Alcohol Tetrachloroethene Acetone Butyl Acetate Methyl Ethyl Ketone Methyl Isobutyl Ketone

Metals

Chromium Copper Lead Nickel Zinc Barium

Other Parameters

PH Conductivity Hardness Alkalinity Dissolved Oxygen

3.3 Sample Procedures

3.3.1 River Water

River water (upstream) was collected from the Lazy Lane bridge using a bailer and string. River Water was then transferred into a graduated glass beaker which was used to fill bottles for alkalinity, metals, volatiles and biotoxicity. Two teflon capped vials were filled at each four hour interval for volatile organic analyses. Bottles for all other parameters were filled at one-sixth the volume each interval so that they would be full at the end of six sample intervals.

3.3.2 Effluent Sampling

For the effluent location, a graduated glass beaker was used to collect a sample from the discharge at each interval. Bottles for alkalinity, metals, volatiles and biotoxicity were filled in the same manner as for the river water (described above).

3.3.3 Biotoxicity Analyses

Sample water was collected from both upstream and effluent locations. The procedure used was to collect samples at four hour intervals in 500 ml amber glass bottles. These samples were composited into a five gallon collapsible container and kept refrigerated during the collection period. The composite samples were picked up at the end of the 24 hour sampling period and transported to laboratory for analysis.

3.3.4 Meter Readings

Meter readings were taken from both upstream and effluent locations. Measurements were made at both locations at each sample interval for pH, conductivity, temperature, anc dissolved oxygen. Meters were calibrated by an SRS technician prior to each measurement.

3.3.5 Summary

At each location, bottles were stored overnight in coolers packed in ice. At the end of each 24 hour period (six samples) the coolers of composited samples for chemical analyses were transported back to ESC and logged in. Tne composite sample for the biotoxicity monitoring (upstream and effluent) were transferred to New England Bioassay, Inc's custody on the day that ESC received the samples.

The biotcxicity evaluation, as previously mentioned, was conducted by New England Bioassay, Inc. of Manchester, Connecticut. A copy of their report for the program is included as Appendix A. In addition to test results, the report includes all procedures and protocols associated with the performance of this evaluation, i.e., controls, sample collection, test chamber conditions, etc.

The primary objective of the test was to determine an LC50 for the effluent. The LC50 is the concentration at which a mortality of 50% is achieved. A high LC50 indicates a low toxicity for the solution being tested. Parallel toxicity tests were conducted for the effluent using five different concentrations (6.25%, 12.5%, 25%, 50% and 100%) and two organisms, Daphnia Pulex and Fathead Minnow. During the course of this study an LC50 of 92.4% was calculated for Day 2 while the remaining three days no LC50 could be calculated and therefore was assumed to be greater than 100% effluent.

Another parameter determined by this test is the No Observed Acute Effect Level (NOAEL). This is defined as the highest tested effluent concentration which causes 10% or less mortality of test organisms. The reported NOAEL concentrations ranged from 25-100% for the effluent and from 12.5 - 100% for the Quinnipiac River for the Daphnia Test, and 100% for the 48 hour and 96 hour Fathead Minnow Tests on both samples during the course of this study.

4.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR EIOTOXICITY MONITORING OF THE SRSNE EFFLUENT

4.1 Results of Chemical Analyses

The results of chemical analyses of daily samples from the twc locations (river a-.d effluent) are summarized in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. Tne concentration of volatile organic compounds in the effluent ranged from below the detection limit to 14000 ppb. Volatile compounds that were detected at least one time in the effluent included rethylene chloride; acetone; 1,2-dichloroethane; trichloroethene; isopropanol; methyl isobutyl ketone; xylenes; tetrachloroethene; toluene; ethyl benzene and styrene. There were some low levels of acetone and methylene chloride detected in upstream river samples during the four day period.

Analyses of samples for metals indicated that barium and zinc were detected in the effluent and the upgradient river samples in each of the daily composite samples. Copper was detected in both the effluent and upgradient river samples on Days 2 and 3. Chromium, Lead and Nickel were not detected in any of the samples during this period.

4.2 Field Meter Readings

Results from field meter readings for river and effluent samples are summarized in Tables 4.3 through 4.6. Dissolved oxygen concentrations in the plant effluent were equal to or lower than the river concentrations. No other clear trends were found.

4.3 Biotoxic Evaluation

The biotoxic evaluation of the SRSNE effluent was conducted to directly measure its toxic effects on life forms through laboratory representation of site specific conditions. The Quinnipiac River upstream water was also evaluated to determine the quality of the receiving water prior to the SRSNE effluent being received.

5.0 SUMMARY

The results of the January 1990 biotoxicity monitoring program indicate the following:

1) The LC50 value for the SRSNE Effluent could not be calculated for days 1, 3 and 4, and is therefore assumed to be greater than 100% effluent. The LC50 value for Day 2 was 92.4%.

2) The reported NOAEL concentrations were 25-100% for the 48 hour Daphnia Test, and 100% for both the 48 and 96 hour Fathead Minnow Test.

3) The Quinnipiac River exhibited a NOAEL concentration of 12.5 ­100% for the 48 hour Daphnia Test, and 100% for beuh the 48 hour and 96 hour Fathead Minnow Test.

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND BICTOXICITY MONITORING PROGRAM

ALL RESULTS REPORTED AS ug/1

January 15-16,1990 January 16-17,1990 Parameter Effluent River Ef_fluent River

D-luticn Factor 5 1 100

Chlcromethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Bromomethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Vinyl Chloride N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Chloroethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Methylene Chloride 250 N.D. 693 4 Acetone 2570 48 3984 108 Carbon Disulfied N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1 , 1-Dichloroethene N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1 , 1-Dichloroethane 35 2 N.D. N.D. Total-1 , 2-Dichloroethene 687 N.D. N.D. N.D.neChloroform N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1 ,2-Dichloroethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2-Butanone 13970 N.D. 2030 N.D. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 226 N.D. N.D. N.D. Carbon Tetrachloride N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Vinyl Acetate N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Bromodichloromethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroet .ane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1 ,2-Dichlorcpropane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. trans-1 , 3-Dichloropro>ene N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Trichloroethene 317 N.D. 510 N.D. Dibromochlorernethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Benzene N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. cis-1 ,3-Dichloropropeniee N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Eromcform N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2-Hexanone N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 4-Methyl-2 -Pentanone 1950 N.D. 1320 N.D. Tetrac.-Ioroethene 69 N.D. N.D. N.D.

608 3 564 N.D. Chlorobenzene N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Ethylbenzene 102 N.D. N.D. N.D. Styrene 17 N.D. N.D. N.D. Total Xylenes 200 N.D. N.D. N.D. Triohlorofluoromethane> N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Aorolein N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Acrylonitrile N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

Lower Limits of Detection With No Dilution

10 10 10 10 2

10 2

2 2

20 2 2

10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

10 10 2 2 2 /

2 2 2

50 50

N.D. = None Detected < Detection Limit

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND BICTCXICITY MONITORING PROGRAM

All Results Reported as ug/1

Parameter January 15-16,1990 January 16-17,1990Effluent River Effluent River

Lower Limits of Detection

With No Dilution

Dilution Factor 100 1

Butyl Acetate Isopropanol

N.D. 12300

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

All Results Reported as mg/1

No No No No Dilution Dilution Dilution Dilution

Barium 0.77 0. 21 0. 81 0.22 0.10 Chromium N .D. N. D. N. D. N .D. 0.01 Copper N .D. N. D. 0. 06 0.03 0.01 Lead N .D. N. D. N. D. N .D. 0. 01 Nickel N.D. N. D. N. D. N .D. 0.01 Zinc 0.04 0. 02 N. 7- N .D. 0.01 Alkalinity 148 74 180 78 1.0 Hardness 256 124 224 130 1.0

N.D.=Not Detected

Analytical Protocols

Volatile Organics - Purge and Trap - Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry per U.S. EPA Methods.

Inorganics - Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EPA 600/4-79-020.

7 Laboratory Director Date

TABLE 4.2

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND BIOTOXICITY MONITORING PROGRAM

ALL RESULTS REPORTED AS uq/1

Parameter January 17-18,1990 January 18-19,1990Effluent River Effluent River

Lower Limits of Detection

With No Dilution

Dilution Factor 100 1 100 1

Chlorcmethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 10 Bromomethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 10 Vinyl ChlorideChloroethane

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

10 10

Methylene ChlorideAcetone

1400 5450

9 40

1260 2460

7 75

2 10

Carbon Disulfied N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2 1, 1-Dichloroethene1, l-DichloroethaneTotal-1, 2-DichloroetheneChloroform

N.D. N.D.

795 N.D.

N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D. 720 N.D.

N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

2 2 2 2

1 , 2-Dichloroethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2 2-Butanone 8670 108 N.D. N.D. 20 1 , 1, 1-TrichloroethaneCarbon Tetrachloride

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

2 2

Vinyl AcetateBromodichloromethane

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

10 2

1 , 1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 1 , 2-Dichloropropane N.D. trans-1, 3-Dichloropropene N.D. Trichloroethene 2480

N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D. N.D. 445

N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

2 2 2 2

Dibromochloromethane N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2 1,1, 2-TrichloroethaneBenzene

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

2 2

cis-1, 3-DichloropropeneBromoform

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

2 2

2-Hexanone N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 10 4-Methyl-2-PentanoneTetrachloroethene

1480 N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

10 2

Toluene 469 N.D. 635 N.D. 2 Chlorobenzene N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2 EthylbenzeneStyreneTotal XylenesTrichlorof luoromethane

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.

2 2 2 2

Acrolein N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 50 Acrylonitrile N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 50

N.D. = None Detected < Detection Limit

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND BIOTOXICITY MONITORING PROGRAM

All Results Reported as ug/'l

Lower Limits of Detection

January 17-18,1990 January 18-19,1990 With No Parameter Effluent River Effluent River Dilution

Dilution Factor 100 100

Butyl Acetate N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2 Isopropanol N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 100

All Results Reported as mq/1

No No No No Dilution Dilution Dilution Dilution

Barium 0. 81 0. 19 0. 80 0. 18 0.10 Chromium N. D. N. D. N. D. N. D. 0.01 Copper 0. 05 0. 02 N. E. N. D. 0.01 Lead N. D. N. D. N. D. N. D. 0.01 Nickel N. D. N. D. N. D. N. D. 0.01 Zinc 0. 04 0. 02 0. 06 0. 02 0.01 Alkalinity 166 74 128 62 1.0 Hardness 228 114 400 114 1.0

N.D.=Not Detected

Analytical Protocols

Volatile Organics - Purge and Trap - Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry per U.S. EPA Methods.

Inorganics - Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EPA 600/4-79-020.

Laboratory Director Date

l~

w i-h i-h DD S

r-l ^

O 00

n> 1-3 3ft

O X X ~

XI

(C S O IT. 2 ~

a O

O

O o

a i—i.

(D

W H)'-h

C

rt

S3

n

O

O O 2

O a c o

3

o­ :o — a­ ro — 33

o '̂ c

"""'

2 .̂

i

X

-~~~

r

5 < 0)

t-5

= ^

"2 - 1 T i— i—. 3

1

o~ '­ — M —

•"• •~ - -^ C

c; ^

C ~ £ i 2 = =

z; rt

— — — —

— i- 33

_-^ w *" —' O

" \

o f

_ M "—*

' -> ~^

—~

—

~~ "̂

—A —* -O

Mi Mi DD

w Z

^ M H —i

^>J

^n [ C •^n

o J> CO C (D 3

O to_3

6 x rt X M

-H O n o-i <

oc~}

•̂ 01

O -—s

O O

-J o

n ^ Oc^,

D '"I

H"

m̂ W 3 13M

c^ o

c^ ^ •

01

Orj

3C • O o

r^

CC

01 O

^~j

o o

^

^> o

w J

M Ml Mi ^__i p

0) 3

H3

a33

n

O M33 n r— f: r:D o 13

rt 33 ~

^ t-o

,̂

^j

^

t-o ^

-vj

-0

^ ^J

33 (-•

. 33 > K 3U 'Z.

^

M co cc Mi

-O Lj *̂ J ON 0 OJ Mi 1—' C (D 3 rt

•̂* %_/! 01 OV - 4^ ^** 33

ON 01

^/l

CO

4> -O

t-o co

CO

"^ ^J 0

_ -0

W O H

33 5 en 3 in CO )̂

M n n

2 CO Co

CO

0

CO CO

CO co 01

M M, Mi 1—'

o •2, O G

CO M § w en C. £

3

O

rt

cr N; 3% N- — ?3 r^

^

^^

0 O

"~"'

^

O

^^

O •—\

"""

'O o

<'

(D RJ

L 2

= - - •3

a

-^ ^ ™. — tr

~

^

"

CZ­ ^

C

3 ~

Q

~

5 ~

k-j

c ro D

r--J I 1

— ~ —" — rt

? — - - -H"

X ro a

o

o .e­

-

L> 0

0

__i

-o

o o

-•

ts3

wHIHI H-'

13 Of w

03 2 H 1-5

c O W (D H

O » rt X HH n

o o D

n > cc

0

X o o

n O

n 53 H­

(D

W

M < 1-3 n K 53

K;

O en 3M

53 o (""; o

^

!̂

^o o

-1 0 • ^J\

o ^O

171

L!J C

G » W

O H53 n M 173

O O ~ (D

D n Tl

rt 53 Z O PI O •£.

•̂ 53 > M

^ Ni o CO

CO ^ H­

0)

2Z O

^ VC

^j

—J

^J

^ ^J 0

co to

X

ji M Hi Hi

C a 0) 3

0 5 o

_ tN3

.0

CO

-t> H­

en T3 n

„

03

_

M ^ /-­

CO

^

M c 03

ro n

H O

o r-o

co CO co

O 5

^ M H)HI

o

I ,-* ^

r— ^_ ^ c o

03 w in 03 03 03 (D 3 rt

r rr — CN ro

K­

X ._/ X

~ 5

^^J

(D it

~ = ~ = S ^

_^

• ~ i

-

—^

• ~

_

"

P3 m i-h t—^

c ~.

^

o ...

=

~̂~̂

;̂

~

=

j

^ —

§

^

—

E

(D 3 <T

rr

— — — —

t-" IO I o

(D o it

o cnO

"0 W

t-c . iO

—1 . t o

[NJ . \_n

^ .

—1

oo • 00

O . o

i-h H) I—1

03 R

C 0) 3 O S3 rt X 73

H ;*"}

n O M <

_n .

•»~n

n̂

—iO "̂"}

Q̂

^

oc . on o

n

oo c

n

--j O

C~i

» H­

(̂D it

w '•O w

^

3 O •2.

K

M >

_^ O

n 0> •

\_n Q

^

• ̂ *-*s\ 0

^

__

^^O C~^

L-i

fsj

o n

. . ^-^

o ^

H t-h i-h h-1

C (t)

s ^G ?0 M

O

H

O V M 2 O

S3 ^ M K 0 M ->

1

0 ^ 1~«H

13 <*-*

O ^^ra C ^ ~J

'- o -O o H­ 3 z o

^ ro

^ »-̂

0

M

ON '̂ wO LJ ON t"O i-h

c (D 3

a > K

CO £

•~n £̂•j^

0 J>

-O 0 o

5;o

i-1-

CD M O

M̂ M̂ 03 ^ J3 c 03 0̂3

it M •n H n o

^ ~̂1

^ O^ [S3

O3 O i—>

^ 3^ *~n

N3 CO o

r—' •̂ J

^> OJ

W i-h Ml r— 1

o z: o c

M 03 M in 03 C 03

(D 3

o

n-M

APPENDIX A TOXICOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF TREATED

EFFLUENT IN SUPPORT OF AN NPDES PERMIT