Effluent testing

The biological approach (whole effluent) to toxics control for the protection of aquatic life involves the use of acute and chronic toxicity tests to measure the toxicity of wastewaters. Whole effluent tests (WET) employ the use of standardized, surrogate freshwater or marine (depending on the mixture of effluent and receiving water) plants (algae), invertebrates, and vertebrates. 

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) reporting requirements for effluent testing allow alternate methods of analysis to be substituted for the prescribed methods if prior approval has been obtained from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) regional administrator having jurisdiction where the discharge occurs. 

There are a number of full-scale activated sludge plants that are in operation in countries such as the United States, Canada, and Finland, which treat effluents from Kraft, sulfite, TMP, CTMP, and newsprint mills [22]. SchneU et al. [70] reported the effectiveness of a conventional activated sludge process operating at an alkaline-peroxide mechanical pulping (APMP) plant at Malette Quebec, Canada. The full-scale plant achieved 74% reduction in filterable COD and nearly complete elimination of BOD5, resin acids, and fatty acids in the whole mill effluent. The treated effluent tested nontoxic as measured by a Microtox assay. Saunamaki [71] reported... 

Johnson, I. (2000) Criteria-based procedure for selecting test methods for effluent testing and its application to Toxkit microbiotests, in G. Persoone, C. Janssen and W.M. De Coen (eds.), New Microbiotests for Routine Toxicity Screening and Biomonitoring, Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York, pp. 73-94. 

The 30 effluents are representative of various industrial sectors and were provided by different French water agencies. Their origin was kept confidential. Care was taken to use a set of effluents from diverse origin in order to ensure that the results from this study could be extrapolated to a large number of effluents. Table 1 lists the effluents tested, the type of industry and activity they represent, their pH and... 

Initial test Untreated effluent test started when sample is received by test laboratory. 

Baseline test Each day a sample manipulation is performed, an untreated effluent test (or baseline test) is set. The results from each manipulation are compared to the untreated effluent to assess the effectiveness of the manipulation on reducing toxicity. 

Vaajasaari, K., Ahtiainen, J., Nakari, T. and Dahlbo, H. (2000) Hazard assessment of industrial waste leachability chemical characterization and biotesting by routine effluent tests, in G. Persoone et al. (eds.), New microbiotests for routine toxicity screening and biomonitoring, Kluwer Academic Plenum Publishers, New-York, USA, pp. 413-423. 

There are various types of issues for unknown mixtures. An assessor might first wish to know that effects do occur. An example of an approach to address such a problem is the internationally common whole-effluent testing approaches (Chapman 2000) or the Dutch pT-monitoring approach (De Zwart and Sterkenburg 2002), both of which attempt to quantify impact. 

A related general weakness in WET testing schemes involves the natural variability of effluents, and whole-effluent tests, which may be unrelated to the actual effluent toxicity but related to short-term spatial, temporal, and seasonal variation at a site. Interpretation of WET data is therefore complicated, as one may not be able to easily compare to the reference values like one can with chemical analyses. More frequent effluent testing may identify these atypical toxicity responses. 

In terms of the statistical methods of the partial life cycle whole-effluent tests, survival, growth, and reproduction data from the 7 day cladoceran or fish exposure are often analyzed using hypothesis testing to determine acceptable concentrations. In order to determine the appropriateness of using parametric statistical methods, the data are first tested for normality of distribution and homogeneity of variance, for which the US EPA recommends the use of Shapiro-Wilk s test and Bartlett s test, respectively. Kolmogorov test for normality and Levine s test for homogeneity can be also used for these purposes. Dunnett s anova test is typically used for a... 

Effluent test results support the use of Microtox as part of a test battery. Uniform response of sublethal effects to 50 effluents from pulp and paper mills was obtained with the Microtox test compared to the results with fish and algae, which varied greatly with age and genetic variation within the population. Microtox has also been used to detect other sublethal effects (e.g., chronic toxicity). For example, the bacterial response can be used to quantify the stress on the immunological defense systems of mussels exposed to toxins in polluted rivers or wastewaters. In... 

Assuming negligible bias in the effluent testing, what is the best estimate of... 

Europe Belgium The use of bioassays for effluent testing is not well established although currently being considered. There is no regulatory requirement for such testing. 

In all cases, the tests were originally developed for the regulatory approval of single compounds (usually plant protection products) and occasionally for effluent testing. This means that they were not intended for use in assessing contaminated soils. Despite this, these tests are now being more widely used for this purpose. Some of the tests are more readily adaptable than others. In particular, those that use the response of an aquatic animal or plant require sample manipulation that limits their relevance for contaminated soils. 

State regulatory agencies are required to integrate whole effluent tests, chemical-specific water quality criteria and bioassessment in the receiving environment into NPDES permit writing. 

The results of the oyster embryo test were expressed as the percentage net risk (PNR) based on the percentage abnormality at each effluent test concentration. These were calculated as follows ... 

This Is a compilation of articles from WEFJournals and 1992 conference. The 20 articles cover testing methods, toxicity reduction evaluations, policy, industrial effluent tests, test procedures, and false positives. 

Recently, a new method was developed for characterizing ammonia toxicity in interstitial water [42]. The method involves the use of the natural mineral zeolite, as described in the Whole Sediment TIE section. In the method, rather than adding the zeolite directly to the sample, the interstitial water is charged through a chromatography column composed of zeolite. As in the whole sediment application, ammonium adsorbs to the zeolite resulting in an overall reduction in ammonia concentrations. Following the manipulation, the zeolite is discarded and the post-column effluent tested for toxicity. 

Assuming negligible bias in the effluent testing, what is the best estimate of the effluent BOD concentration and what is the range within which the inspector can be 95% confident that the true BOD occurs ... 

---