BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

)

WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND

)

EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE

)

R08-9

CHICAGO AREA WATERWAY SYSTEM

)

(Rulemaking - Water)

AND THE LOWER DES PLAINES RIVER:

)

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO 35 Ill.

)

Adm. Code Parts 301, 302, 303 and 304

)

PRE-FILED TESTIMONY OF CHRISO PETROPOULOU

My name is Chriso

Petropoulou and I am a licensed professional Environmental Engineer

in the State of

Illinois. I earned a Bachelor of Science degree

in Chemical

Engineering from the

National Technical University in Athens,

Greece and a Doctor

of Philosophy

Degree in

Environmental Engineering

from the

Illinois Institute

of Technology in Chicago,

Illinois. I am

also a Board

Certified

Environmental Engineer

by the American Academy

of Environmental

Engineers

. I have been employed with Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. (Geosyntec) in Chicago,

Illinois for the last

9 years.

Before

that I

was employed

by Patterson

Associates

, Inc. for about 4

years and

PRC Environmental

Management

,

Inc. (now known as

TetraTech EMI) for about 4.5

years. I have over 17 years

of experience in a wide range of environmental engineering projects,

involving

design

,

schedule and implementation components

.

I also have experience in evaluating

and interpreting

laboratory analytical

results and

other

field data in order to make critical project

decisions

.

In addition, I have extensive

experience

in environmental permitting and compliance

issues.

For the last three years I have been the project manager for the Metropolitan Water

Reclamation

District

of Greater Chicago Microbial Risk Assessment

(MRA) Study.

The District

has conducted

the MRA Study

to determine health impacts

of the

recreational use of the Chicago

Area Waterways

System

(CAWS).

The main objective

of the MRA Study

was to evaluate the

---

human health impact of continuing the current practice of not disinfecting the effluents from the

District's North Side, Stickney and Calumet water reclamation plants versus initiating

disinfection of the effluent at these three plants.

I have been intimately involved with every aspect of the MRA Study. The results of the

MRA Study are summarized in the April 2008 Geosyntec Report, which is incorporated herein

by reference. The report is entitled: "Dry and Wet Weather Risk Assessment of Human Health

Impacts of Disinfection Vs. Non-Disinfection of the Chicago Area Waterways System." 1 was

responsible for the composition, assembly and production of the subject report.

My testimony today will provide a brief description of the microbial sampling, analytical

testing and results of the MRA Study.

Microbial Risk Assessment Sampling

The MRA Study included collection of dry and wet weather microbial samples from the

surface water in the CAWS and the water reclamation plant effluents. The dry weather sampling

was completed during the 2005 recreational

season

when the climatic conditions were not

suitable for wet weather sampling. The wet weather sampling took place during the 2006

recreational season. The dry and wet weather microbial results were integrated to enable an

evaluation of the potential impacts of disinfection on overall risks associated with the

recreational use of the waterway.

During dry weather, the District's North Side, Stickney and Calumet plants contribute the

majority of the flow in the CAWS. The specific objectives of the 2005 dry weather sampling

were as follows:

1.

Evaluate the impact of the treated effluent from the District's three major plants (North

Side, Stickney, and Calumet) on the microbial quality of the CAWS.

---

2.

Estimate health risks to recreational users of the CAWS due to incidental contact

pathogen exposure under dry weather conditions.

3.

Quantify any reduction of risk that would result from disinfection of plant effluents

during dry weather.

During wet weather, in addition to the reclamation plant effluents, several sources

contribute to the microbial load in the CAWS, including: combined sewer overflows, discharges

from storm drains, overland runoff, land-use activities such as agriculture and construction,

erosion, and habitat destruction. The specific objectives of the 2006 wet weather sampling were

as follows:

1.

Evaluate the impact of the reclamation plant wet weather flow on the microbial quality of

the plant outfalls.

2.

Evaluate the impact of combined sewer overflows on the microbial quality of the CAWS.

3.

Estimate health risks to recreational users of the CAWS due to incidental contact

pathogen exposure under wet weather conditions.

4.

Quantify any reduction of risk that would result from disinfecting plant effluents during

wet weather.

A total of 75 dry weather samples and 50 wet weather samples were collected at the

North Side, Stickney and Calumet waterway segments, including upstream, downstream and

outfall samples. Exhibit 1 shows the locations of the dry and wet weather locations. The wet

weather locations were spaced at significantly longer distances away from the reclamation plants

compared to the dry weather locations to account for the contributions of storm water runoff,

CSO outfalls, and pumping stations. At North Side, wet weather samples were also collected

near the North Branch Pumping Station (NBPS). At Stickney, wet weather samples were

3

---

r

collected near the Racine Avenue Pumping Station (RAPS). At Calumet, wet weather samples

were collected downstream of the 125th Street Pumping Station at Halsted Avenue.

Analytical Testing

The MRA study focused on the detection of microorganisms typically present in the feces

of humans and other warm-blooded animals as indicators of fecal pollution. Hence, a group of

U.S. EPA-approved indicator microorganisms, such as E.

coli, Enterococci,

and fecal coliform

was selected for the MRA Study. Indicator microorganisms are used as an index of the

microbial quality of water, but are not pathogenic to humans. The presence of indicator

microorganisms may be indicative of the presence of microbial pathogens, while their absence is

thought to be indicative of the absence of microbial pathogens. In addition to the indicator

microorganisms, pathogens representative of those present in the wastewater that are also of

public health concern were selected. The rationale for selecting the pathogens for the MRA

Study included the following criteria:

•

The pathogens selected are associated with documented outbreaks of disease, including

gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases and infections.

•

There are U.S. EPA-approved methods or laboratory standard operating procedures

(SOPS) available for the measurement of the selected pathogens.

Based on the rationale and selection criteria outlined above, the objective of the dry and

wet weather sampling was to determine the concentrations of the three major groups of indicator

and pathogenic microorganisms, including bacteria, protozoa, and viruses. The bacteria samples

were analyzed for fecal coliforms, E.

coli,

Enterococci, Salmonella

spp., and

Pseudomonas

aeruginosa.

The protozoa samples were analyzed for infectious

Cryptosporidium parvum

and

viable

Giardia lamblia.

The virus samples were analyzed for enteric viruses including: total

4

---

culturable viruses, viable adenovirus; and

Calicivirus

which refers to human

Caliciviruses,

specifically the genus norovirus.

Microbial Results

The microbial analytical results generated during the MRA Study were evaluated and

interpreted within the framework of dry and wet weather conditions. However, for the MRA

estimates, the dry and wet weather microbial results were integrated in a comprehensive dataset

representative of all weather conditions in the waterway. In summary, the microbial analytical

results indicate that the concentrations of bacteria, viruses and protozoa in the waterway

increased during wet weather conditions. The following sections discuss the dry and wet

weather analytical results of bacteria, protozoa and viruses.

Bacteria Results

Bacteria were the most abundant microbial species detected in the waterway, compared

to viruses and protozoa, during both dry and wet weather events. Analysis of Variance

(ANOVA) statistical tests were performed for the dry, wet and combined dry and wet weather

bacteria results to determine differences of bacteria concentrations by site

(i.e.,

North Side,

Stickney, Calumet), by location (i. e., upstream, downstream, outfall), by depth (for dry weather

only; i. e., surface and 1-meter depth), and by weather.

The dry weather results indicate that there is a significant difference between bacteria

concentrations by site (North Side, Stickney, Calumet), and by location (upstream and

downstream). Downstream concentrations are consistently greater than upstream. Bacteria

concentrations in dry weather samples did not show a statistically significant difference by depth.

The wet weather results indicate that the E.

coli

and

Enterococcus

data are significantly different

by site. Fecal coliform,

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

and

Salmonella

spp. do not differ by site or

T_7- .d ^_

-- _

f

---

any other factor. The results indicated that during wet weather there was no statistical difference

between bacteria concentrations upstream and downstream of the three reclamation plants.

The wet weather bacteria concentrations are significantly greater than the dry weather

concentrations in each reclamation plant waterway segment. Also, the wet weather geometric

means at each sampling location (upstream, downstream, outfall) at the North Side and Stickney

waterway segments indicate that most of the North Side and Stickney geometric mean bacteria

concentrations upstream and downstream of the plants are higher than the outfall concentrations.

Fecal coliform and E.

coli

wet weather concentrations are greater than the other bacteria

geometric means at each sampling location for all plants. The wet weather outfall samples have

lower levels of

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

than the corresponding upstream and downstream wet

weather samples. This suggests that the major inputs for

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

in the

waterways are sources other than the reclamation plant effluents.

The results of the combined dry and wet weather ANOVA analysis indicate that dry and

wet weather combined bacteria data for E.

coli, Enterococcus

and

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

are

significantly different by site and weather. Fecal coliform data differ by weather only (not by

site).

The fecal coliform dry weather concentrations upstream of the North Side and Stickney

plants were greater than the IEPA proposed effluent limit of 400 colony forming units

(CFU)/100 mL. Also, the wet weather fecal coliform concentrations upstream of the North Side,

Stickney and Calumet plants were above the IEPA proposed effluent limit of 400 CFU/100 mL.

The bacteria analytical results were also analyzed using correlation statistics. The results

indicate that there are no significant correlations between dry weather fecal coliform indicator

bacteria and other indicator bacteria and pathogens. The wet weather results indicate that there is

a better correlation between fecal coliform and other indicator bacteria and pathogens.

---

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

Results

The concentrations and frequency of detection of

Cryptosporidium

oocysts and

Giardia

cysts were greater in wet weather samples compared to dry weather samples. For dry weather

samples, no infectious

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected in the outfalls or the waterways.

Similarly, for wet weather samples, no infectious

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected, with

one exception. During wet weather conditions,

Cryptosporidium

oocysts and

Giardia

cysts were

detected in some of the samples collected upstream of the North Side and Stickney plants.

During dry weather, most

Giardia

cysts were non-viable. The average percentage of

viable

Giardia

cysts found in samples from the Stickney waterway segment, including outfall

and in-stream concentrations, was 21 % during dry weather and increased to 47% during wet

weather. The average percentage of viable cysts found in samples from the North Side waterway

segment, including outfall and in-stream concentrations was 26% during dry weather and

increased to 49% during wet weather. Under both dry and wet weather, samples from the

Calumet waterway contained the smallest percentage (10%) of viable

Giardia

cysts compared to

Stickney and North Side waterways.

Outfall samples at the North Side and Stickney plants contained higher levels of viable

cysts compared to the Calumet outfall. The percentage of viable

Giardia

cysts in samples from

the Calumet outfall was 10% during both dry and wet weather conditions. The percentage of

viable

Giardia

cysts in samples from the Stickney outfall was 47% during dry weather and 50%

during wet weather. The percentage of viable

Giardia

cysts in samples from the North Side

outfall was 51% during dry weather and 42% during wet weather.

Virus Results

The percentage of samples with enteric virus detections at the North Side waterway was

only 29% during dry weather and increased to 69% during wet weather. The percentage of

7

---

samples with enteric virus detections at the Stickney waterway segment was only 24% during

dry weather and increased to 88% during wet weather. The percentage of samples with enteric

virus detections in the Calumet waterway segment was only 12% during dry weather and

increased to 77% during wet weather. The concentrations of total enteric viruses detected during

wet weather sampling are generally greater than the dry weather concentrations. Also, some of

the wet weather samples collected upstream of the North Side, Stickney and Calumet plants had

detectable concentrations of total enteric viruses.

The adenovirus concentrations detected during wet weather sampling are generally

greater than the dry weather concentrations. Also, some of the wet weather samples collected

upstream of the North Side, Stickney and Calumet plants had detectable concentrations of

adenoviruses. The percentage of wet weather samples with adenovirus detections, were greater

than the dry weather detections. The percentage of samples with adenovirus detections in the

North Side waterway segment was 48% during dry weather and increased to 88% during wet

weather. The percentage of samples with adenovirus detections in the Stickney waterway

segment was 52% during dry weather and increased to 94% during wet weather. The percentage

of samples with adenovirus detections in the Calumet waterway segment was 24% o during dry,

weather and increased to 72% during wet weather.

The

Calicivirus

(norovirus) concentrations detected during wet weather sampling are

generally greater than the dry weather concentrations. Also, the percentage of wet weather

samples with norovirus detections, were greater than the dry weather detections. The percentage

of samples with norovirus detections in the North Side waterway segment was only 4% during

dry weather and increased to 44% during wet weather. The percentage of samples with

norovirus detections in the Stickney waterway segment was 12% during dry weather and

8

---

increased to 63% during wet weather. The percentage of samples with norovirus detections in

the Calumet waterway segment was only 4% during dry weather and increased to only 17%

during wet weather.

Conclusion

The microbial analytical results indicate that the wet weather samples had a higher

frequency of detection and higher concentrations of pathogens and indicators compared to dry

weather samples. The pathogen concentrations within the waterway are largely a result of non-

water reclamation plant derived wet weather inputs. The analytical results also indicate that

despite elevated levels of fecal coliform indicator bacteria, the concentrations of actual

pathogenic microorganisms in the waterway are low and many are often not detectable.

9

---

Respectfully submitted,

By:

Chriso

Petropoulou

---

Testimony Attachments

1.

Exhibit 1-Chicago Area Waterway System Dry and Wet Weather Sampling Locations

2.

Curriculum Vitae of Chriso Petropoulou

3.

Dry and Wet Weather Risk Assessment of Human Health Impacts of Disinfections

vs. No Disinfection of the Chicago Area Waterways System (CWS)

10

---

Ex

hibit 1

T-7

-TT

---

LEGEND

MAJOR WRP INFLOW

n

MINOR WRP INFLOW

- CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM SECONDARY

CONTACT

- OTHER WATERWAYS

GENERAL USE

CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM GENERAL USE

NMI OTHER WATERWAYS

SECONDARY

CONTACT

9.9 MILES UPSTREAM OF '2

LOCKPORT

•t FLOW

LEGEND

C-Y.'LMETTE

CNTgC4

. 2D-DAUEU AVENUE

I-CENTRAL STREET

CICERO AVENUE

2-S UPSON

STK

ET

11-MARLEV AVENUE

.1-CAKTON MEN_

lE

2

1-8 10 RR SRMGE

5-TCUFIY A'

JENUE

244;OTE A63

8-DEVON AUENUE

25-ROUTE X83

7. NIN21E AVE'.UE

27-RCUECWL E

B-1VLFANAVENUE

+

3-MILLCN SPFUNGE

A-4CI5(]N :T^ T

A fl

O HRIEI L I G

1[-GIVERS" PARKIN C

II-F^J

IrRTCN 44f^IIF 10

-

1A1S

TFO STREET

1?-CA'J$ION

STFlF FT

71-ASHLAND AVENUE

tYCA1SWi JU.

CTION 32-ASHI ANn AVFNLIF

tyCR Co'

3..WICFRO Au FAUF

If WF1

.13 3TRFFT

:N-uTTU F C& I;MFT

ITMM.N5oN STNCNT

35

-

NOUt* MaY

IF-W LSTCO STREET

3T-CAI I:A11-

I JI:NC: i•CN

UGt%.

49

AMMNT 1A

..O STATYIN

• 19S-- AVC CUWN31NtAM

J

I ANO WEI

NE. -FR 'i-,. I. r. ATC;

. Vab T4fA.N A, f•'.WVSTIQAY-

NRA—

SAMPL14G _OC

♦

"1043

Exhibit 1. Chicago Area Waterway System dry and wet weather sampling locations.

---

Ex

hibit 2

---

CHRISO PETROPOULOU

Geosyntec l>

consultants

Remedial Investigations

Design

Hazardous

Waste Treatment

Litigation

Support

Regulatory Interface

NPDES/

Pretreatment Permits

Treatability

Studies

Industrial

Waste

Management

Pollution Prevention

Risk Assessment

.

EDUCATION

Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago. Ph.D., Environmental Engineering, 1991

National Technical University of Athens, Greece: B.S., Chemical Engineering, 1986

PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION

Illinois

P.E. Number: 062-052874

Board Certified Environmental

Engineer

Certificate No: 04-10066

PROFESSIONAL HISTORY

Geosyntec Consultants, Chicago, Illinois, Associate, September 1999-present

Patterson Associates, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, Senior Engineer, October 1995-September

1999

PRC Environmental Management, Inc. (PRC), Chicago, Illinois, Environmental Engineer, March

1991-October 1995

QUALIFICATIONS

Dr. Petropoulou is a registered professional engineer in the State of Illinois and has over 16 years

of experience in a wide range of environmental engineering projects. She is also a Board

Certified Environmental Engineer by the American Academy of Environmental Engineers.

For the last three years Dr. Petropoulou has been the project manager for a microbial risk

assessment of the human health impacts of instituting effluent disinfection at the Metropolitan

Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC) three largest water reclamation

plants (WRPs) all of which discharge into the Chicago Waterway System (CWS).

The

MWRDGC will provide the microbial risk assessment results to the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency (IEPA), which is currently conducting a Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) on

the CWS. One aspect of the UAA is to determine whether bacterial water quality standards for

some or all of the CWS are necessary to protect the proposed designated uses of the CWS.

Exposure parameters and pathogen levels were combined in a probabilistic risk assessment to

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 2

Geosyntec

consultants

estimate primary and secondary

illnesses

associated with recreational

uses

of the CWS.

For the last eight years

,

Dr. Petropoulou has been the project manager for a $6 million dollar

remedial action project of a trichloroethylene

(TCE) plume in

Michigan

.

Dr. Petropoulou

coordinates the activities of multiple parties

involved,

including regulatory authorities, client

representatives

,

Geosyntec

staff,

subcontractors

, City, County and

community representatives.

The project

involves various components of remedial investigations

,

source identification and

remediation including the implementation of Monitored Natural

Attenuation (MNA).

Dr. Petropoulou has extensive industrial waste experience for the following categories:

pharmaceuticals; pesticides; aircraft and automotive manufacturing; battery manufacturing;

polymer manufacturing; electroplating; radio manufacturing; metal foundries; metal recycling;

organic chemicals, plastics and synthetic fibers; food industry; pulp and paper; and nuclear

laundries.

Dr.

Petropoulou prepared design calculations, plans, specifications, and

implementation schedule for various treatment systems. In addition, Dr. Petropoulou estimated

capital and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for the implementation of the design. As

part of the design, Dr. Petropoulou conducted treatability studies and was responsible for the

interpretation of the results, in order to select treatment design criteria. Dr. Petropoulou has

extensive experience in discharge permit negotiations, permit limits (including seasonal limits),

and compliance.

REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE

Remedial Investigations/Design

Aircraft Hydraulic Component Manufacturing acility (Michigan) - Project Manager for a

remedial design investigation (RDI) and Remedial Action project. The RDI was to delineate the

extent of chlorinated hydrocarbon (PCE, TCE and TCA) and Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid

(LNAPL) contamination of soil and groundwater at the site in accordance with Michigan

Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Part 201 requirements. Prepared sampling and

quality assurance plans for the various phases of the RDI. The RDI involved the use of Vertical

Aquifer Sampling (VAS), Rotosonic Drilling, Cone Penetrometer Testing (CPT) for the

delineation of the contaminant plume and monitoring well installation. Conducted indoor air

monitoring in areas where soil and groundwater concentrations of COCs exceeded the MDEQ

volatilization to indoor air criteria. Indoor air samples were collected for VOCs, PCBs, and

PNAs, using EPA methods TO-15, TO-4A and TO-13A, respectively.

Prepared access agreements in order to obtain right of way permits for drilling and monitoring

well installation at selected off-site locations. Access agreements were executed by GeoSyntec

and the following entities: (1) Kalamazoo County, (2) the City of Kalamazoo, and (3) the

Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT). In addition, Dr. Petropoulou participated in

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 3

Geosyntec'%

consultants

negotiations to obtain the access agreements with the Kalamazoo

Office of the City Attorney and

the Kalamazoo

County

Board of Commissioners.

Remedial action activities included the installation of passive and active systems for the recovery

of LNAPL at the site. In addition, the remedial action included the design and implementation of

LNAPL-impacted soil excavation as a source abatement measure.

Prepared air permit

applications and petitions for air permit exemptions during the excavation. Prepared sampling

plans for the characterization, segregation and disposal of excavated soil. Obtained temporary

hazardous waste identification numbers for the disposal of hazardous waste generated during the

excavation. Prepared biennial waste generation reports. Designed oil recovery trenches and soil

vapor extraction pipes that were installed in the excavation area to handle residual oil

contamination.

Designed the addition of fertilizer in the LNAPL-source area backfill to enhance the natural

degradation of COCs. The nutrient addition was approved by MDEQ, and commercially-

available fertilizer was added in the backfill area. The GeoSyntec proposal for nutrient addition

was the first of its kind approved by MDEQ. Designed and tested a soil vapor extraction (SVE)

system as a contingency measure for the remediation of the residual source area at the site.

Prepared a Focused Feasibility Study (FFS) for the evaluation of natural attenuation at the site.

The results indicate that chlorinated solvents in the groundwater are being actively biodegraded as

evidenced by the groundwater geochemistry. She developed and directed the implementation of a

comprehensive sampling and analysis plan to demonstrate the occurrence of MNA using

geochemical and biological parameters including the detection of

Dehalococoides ethenogenes

(DHE) using a specific 16S rRNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Dr. Petropoulou

developed and directed the implementation of long-term bio-stimulation and bio-augmentation

treatability studies. She directs the statistical analysis of several rounds of monitoring results to

determine spatial and temporal trends, using the Mann-Kendall and other statistical models. She

is currently working with representatives from the state, city, county, local community and

various other stakeholders to establish a groundwater restricted zone of about 1 square mile. She

is directing the evaluation of health risks associated with contaminant exposure of facility workers

and others in residential, commercial and industrial facilities nearby.

Dr. Petropoulou is also

directing the evaluation of risks associated with vapor intrusion and groundwater to surface water

discharges.

The results showed that MDEQ acceptance conditions are met allowing the use of natural

attenuation as the remediation technology for the impacted groundwater.

The project is in

progress.

Current project cost: $6,000,000.

Automotive Manufacturing Plant

(Illinois) -

Conducted a site investigation for the

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 4

GeosynteO`

consultants

characterization of the vertical and horizontal extent of the contamination at a facility that

manufactures pneumatic equipment

,

specializing in vacuum pollution control equipment (SIC

Code 353

).

Operations at the facility involved the use of solvents

.

Performed Resource

Conservation and Recovery

Act (RCRA)

Closure Activities at the site

,

which included: (1)

remedial investigations

; (

2) groundwater sampling and monitoring

, (

3) Tiered Approach to

Corrective Action Objectives

(TACO)

Tier 2 Analysis

, (

4) Environmental Land Use Control

(ELUC)

Application

, (

5)

Closure Documentation Report and

(

6) issuance of No Further

Remediation

(

NFR) letter.

Calculated site-specific soil remediation objectives (ROs) in accordance with the IEPA TACO

Tier 2 procedures.

ROs were calculated for the following contaminants of concern (COCs):

acetone, methylene chloride, and toluene. The TACO procedures used were based upon the Soil

Screening Level (SSL) approach of USEPA and the Risk Based Corrective Action (RBCA)

approach of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). The SSL equations were

used to address the following exposure routes: (i) inhalation, (ii) soil ingestion, and (iii)

groundwater ingestion, which has a migration from soil to groundwater component. The RBCA

approach was used to model the migration of the groundwater portion of the groundwater

ingestion route. In addition, the soil attenuation and soil saturation values for each COC were

calculated because they both factor into a Tier 2 evaluation. Based on the results of the TACO

Tier 2 analysis IEPA did not require additional remediation for the site and issued a NFR letter.

Instead, an Environmental Land Use Control (ELUC) was implemented at the site. Estimated

project cost: $250,000.

CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT (Illinois) - Managed the Chicago Region Environmental and

Transportation Efficiency Program (CREATE) project for CSXT that involved the following

activities: (1) site inspections to record visual observations of environmental conditions (oil spills

and other impacts); (2) delineation of potential wetlands and surface water bodies; (3) preparation

of applications for wetlands permits to request No Objection or Jurisdictional Determination

letters from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on behalf of CSXT. Estimated Project Cost:

$150,000.

Lead-Contaminated Site (Illinois) - Prepared conceptual design for the remediation of a lead-

contaminated site using an in-situ lead fixation treatment process. Solicited bids from various

contractors in order to perform the following tasks: (1) a treatability study, (2) in situ lead-soil

fixation, (3) fixed soil excavation and disposal, and (4) excavated soil replacement with certified-

clean soil. Estimated project cost: $30,000.

Dr. Petropoulou performed a technical review of the site remedial action plan and quality

assurance plan. Identified permit requirements for the site. Conducted field oversight of

contractor's implementation of a proprietary reagent, known as MAECTITE® REAGENT for the

in-situ lead-soil fixation.

The following design parameters were evaluated during the

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 5

Geosyntec l>

consultants

remediation

: (

1) amount of reagents

, (2) curing time, (

3) pH of treated and untreated soil, (4)

physical-chemical changes of the treated material

, (5) Toxicity

Characteristic Leaching Procedure

(TCLP

)

metal analysis before and after treatment

,

and (6

)

total

metal analysis before and after

treatment. Oversaw contractor

'

s activities to ensure that contractor made all necessary

arrangements

,

including any analytical testing required

,

and obtained all necessary permits for the

disposal of the waste at a non-hazardous waste landfill.

The site remediation was conducted in substantial compliance

with TACO

.

As part of

the TACO

compliance evaluation, Dr. Petropoulou prepared a technical memorandum to demonstrate that

the concentrations of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons at the site

,

although they were above the

TACO Tier

1 limit

,

they did not exceed the background levels in the Chicago area. After the

remediation process was implemented, a multi-story condominium unit was built on site.

Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP) site (Wisconsin)- Evaluated the performance of an existing

Groundwater Extraction System (EWES) at a former MGP site. The contaminants of concern at

the site included BTEX and PAHs due to the presence of coal tar. The GWES experienced several

O&M difficulties related to fouling with inorganic deposits that are covered with tar and

biological growth.

Designed bench-scale testing to evaluate the cleaning effectiveness of a citrus-based cleaner for

the removal of tar and mineral deposits from the well screens. Designed and implemented a pilot

test well cleaning using mineral acids and mechanical agitation.

Evaluated the performance of

ultrasonic cleaning for cleaning the tar-impacted wells.

Performed a Geoprobe® evaluation of the aquifer to assess coal tar and/or mineral deposit

impacts. The evaluation was performed utilizing Geoprobe® sampling, PAH analytical testing,

tar content using the Dean Stark Extraction Method (API PR40) and permeability testing using

ASTM D2216/135084. The existing wells were over-drilled and replaced, which restored their

original capacity.

Evaluated the feasibility of in-situ chemical oxidation technologies for the remediation of soil and

groundwater impacted with coal tar constituents, such as BTEX and PAHs.

U.S. EPA Alternative

Remedial Contracting Strategies

(ARCS

) - Served as design engineer for

the remedial action for the Peerless Plating Superfund site in Muskegon, Michigan.

Responsibilities included preparation of design calculations

,

plans, specifications

,

and schedule

for the remediation

of the

site

,

which involves decontamination and demolition of the industrial

plant on site

;

extraction and treatment of groundwater using air stripping and chemical

precipitation

;

and treatment of soils using vapor extraction and ex situ stabilization.

Responsibilities also included obtaining and evaluating equipment vendor information for the

design

.

In addition

,

Dr. Petropoulou estimated capital and operation and maintenance (O&M)

costs for the implementation of the design

,

including inflation

-

adjusted and present

-worth

values.

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 6

Estimated project cost: $1,000,000.

Geosyntec

consultants

As part of the design, Dr. Petropoulou conducted treatability studies involving chemical

precipitation, co-precipitation, and ion exchange for the treatment of groundwater from the site.

Dr. Petropoulou prepared the treatability study work plan and quality assurance plan and the

treatability study reports. The treatability studies were conducted in accordance with American

Public

Health Association (APHA) and American Water Works Association (AWWA)

procedures. The precipitation treatability studies evaluated the following design parameters: (1)

precipitating/co-precipitating agent types and dosages, (2) reaction times, (3) polymer types and

dosages, (4) filtration rates, (5) settling rates, and (6) sludge volume. During the ion exchange

experiments the following design criteria were evaluated: (1) breakthrough time, (2) ion exchange

capacity, and (3) regenerant volumes. Dr. Petropoulou was responsible for the interpretation of

the results, in order to select groundwater treatment design criteria.

Completed technical review of both the process design package and the test and evaluation plan

for the proposed groundwater treatment system at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. The

proposed system includes air stripping and carbon adsorption for the removal of VOCs from the

groundwater.

Completed technical review of the field-testing and evaluation plan for the proposed soil vapor

extraction system

(TERRA VAC

) at the Rose Township Demode Road site in Michigan.

Completed technical review of the design for the drinking water interconnection system between

the cities of New Brighton and Fridley at the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plan (TCAAP) in

Minnesota.

Provided field remediation inspection during thermal treatment of contaminated soil and sludge at

the Anderson Development Company (ADC) site in Adrian, Michigan. Also, participated in a risk

assessment study for the development of a health-based soil cleanup goal for manganese at the

ADC site.

Participated in remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA) oversight activities at the Hagen Farm

landfill site in Dane County, Wisconsin. Reviewed design documents and cost estimates for clay

capping of the landfill. Provided field construction inspection during waste excavation and

compaction.

U.S. EPA RCRA Enforcement and Permitting Assistance (REPA) - Part of a select team

reviewing QAPPs for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facility investigations.

The investigations dealt with sampling and analysis of soil, sludge, sediment, and liquid matrices

at RCRA facilities in EPA Region 5. QAPP review included data validation and compliance with

quality control (QC) requirements prescribed in the analytical methods. Estimated cost for each

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 7

project: $30,000.

Hazardous Waste Treatment

Geosyntec'%

consultants

U.S. EPA Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)-Responsibilities included

preparing QAPPs for testing and evaluation of innovative technologies designed for the treatment

of hazardous wastes. Participated in the testing of the following technologies:

(1) Low Temperature Thermal Treatment (LT3) of soil, developed by Weston Services, Inc.;

(2) PO*WW*ERTm evaporation and catalytic oxidation of wastewater, developed by

Chemical Waste Management, Inc.;

(3) Electron Beam (E-beam) advanced oxidation technology, developed by High Voltage

Environmental Applications, Inc.;

(4)

Matrix photo catalytic oxidation technology, developed by Matrix, Inc.; and

(5) EnviroMetal process, developed by EnviroMetal Technologies, Inc.

Dr. Petropoulou served as the primary author of the Innovative Technology Evaluation Reports

and Applications Analysis Reports, published by the U.S. EPA Office of Research and

Development. Developed technology vendor database. Project costs varied between $500,000

and $1,000,000.

NPDES/

Pretreatment Permits

/

Treatability Studies

Barium Treatability Studies (Illinois) - Conducted treatability study to design a treatment system

that could meet pretreatment permit requirements prior to discharge to the city's Publicly Owned

Treatment Works (POTW). Prepared a treatability study work plan and quality assurance project

plan (QAPP) for the precipitation/co precipitation of barium from ion exchange wastewater,

including regenerant, backwash and rinsate. The ion exchange treatment system was used to treat

drinking well water. Estimated project cost: 20,000.

Heave Metal Precipitation Treatability Studies (Illinois) - Developed heavy metal precipitation

treatability studies for a scrubber wastewater used at a secondary copper facility. The objective of

the study was to treat the wastewater so that it could meet National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. Conducted computer modeling to predict

optimal treatment conditions. Performed field dye studies for the identification and drawing of

the sewage system at the facility. Estimated project cost: 100,000.

Groundwater Treatability Studies (Michigan) - Developed a treatability study for the treatment of

groundwater from the Peerless Plating Superfund site in Muskegon, Michigan. Designed and

conducted treatability studies involving chemical precipitation, co-precipitation, and ion exchange

for the treatment of groundwater from the site.

The treated groundwater was to meet NPDES

permit limits, prior to being discharged into an adjacent creek. Estimated project cost: $75,000.

I

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 8

GeosynteO'

consultants

Metals Recycling Facility (Illinois) - Provided technical support to the facility in order to attain

mercury compliance with the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago

(MWRDGC) Sewage and Waste Control Ordinance (Ordinance). Designed and oversaw field

studies to identify the potential source(s) of mercury in the facility wastewater during dry and wet

weather conditions. Oversaw sewer cleaning activities to remove affected sediment containing

mercury due to historical operations. Developed and oversaw the implementation of dye studies

for sewer identification and segregation. Obtained the necessary permits and oversaw sewer and

manhole repair activities. Estimated project cost: $200,000.

Nuclear Garment Laundry (New Mexico) - Participated in pretreatment permit renewal

negotiations with the local POTW authorities. Developed conceptual design for the treatment of

low-level radioactive wastewater; developed a QAPP for sampling and analysis of low-level

radioactive wastewater; prepared a technical memorandum on Department of Transportation

(DOT) regulations for the transport of radioactive wastewater; oversaw contractor activities for

the removal of an underground storage tank. The treatment design involved settling and filtration

for the removal of low-level radioactive suspended solids. Estimated project cost: $500,000.

Organic Chemicals (Illinois) - Developed a sampling plan and QAPP for pretreatment compliance

sampling. Treated wastewater was discharged at the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of

Greater Chicago Publicly Owned Treatment Works POTW. Sampling parameters included:

volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), metals, cyanide,

pH, 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) and Flash Point. Planned and performed field

dye studies of an industrial sewer system to confirm industrial and sanitary sewer segregation.

Performed wastewater flow monitoring and designed a flow and concentration equalization tank.

Evaluated the standard operating procedures (SOP) and QAPPs of candidate compliance sampling

laboratories.

Developed a state-of-the art report on spent sulfuric acid recycling systems.

Estimated project cost: $100,000.

Pulp and Paperboard Manufacturing (Illinois) - Participated in NPDES permit renewal

negotiations with the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. Evaluated treatability study

results for the biological treatment of ammonia in an existing aerated lagoon. Evaluated the

nitrogenous and carbonaceous 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) of the wastewater.

Successfully petitioned the substitution of CBOD5 for BOD5 in the renewed permit. As a result of

the substitution the facility became compliant with its renewed permit requirements. Estimated

project cost: $40,000.

Pollution Prevention

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) - Developed pollution management

appraisals (PMA) through the industrial environmental management project sponsored jointly

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 9

Geosyntec'%

consultants

through the government of the Philippines, Department of Environmental and Natural Resources,

and USAID. PMAs were prepared for cement, sugar, and tuna fish canning industries. Estimated

cost for each project: $30,000.

Risk Assessment

MWRDGC Microbial Risk Assessment (Chicago) - Conducted a microbial risk assessment of the

human health impacts of instituting effluent disinfection at MWRDGC's three largest WRPs all

of which discharge into the CWS. The MWRDGC will provide the microbial risk assessment

results to the IEPA, which is currently conducting a UAA on the CWS. One aspect of the UAA is

to determine whether bacterial water quality standards for some or all of the CWS are necessary

to protect the proposed designated uses of the CWS.

The microbial risk assessment involves sample analysis for organisms that have the potential of

producing gastrointestinal illness including:

1)

bacteria

(Escherichia coli, enterococci,

Salmonella, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Fecal coliforms);

2) protozoa

(Giardia lamblia

and

Cryptosporidium parvum);

and 3) viruses (total enteric viruses,

calicivirus

and adenovirus).

CWS samples were collected during dry and wet weather conditions at locations upstream and

downstream of each of the three major WRP outfalls, Stickney, Calumet and North Side, within

the recreational season. Risks were calculated for five different classes of recreational use that

span the range of exposures reported in the UAA. Exposure parameters and pathogen levels were

combined in a probabilistic risk assessment to estimate primary and secondary illnesses associated

with recreational uses of the CWS. For each exposure simulation the probability of developing

illness was computed by comparing the ingested dose with potential of each pathogen to produce

illness at that dose. The project is in progress. Estimated project cost: $975,000

Industrial Waste Management/Litigation Support

Animal Antibiotics Pharmaceutical Company (West Virginia) - Dr. Petropoulou evaluated the

performance of a wastewater treatment plant at an animal antibiotic facility in Willow Island,

West Virginia.

The project is in progress and it involves the evaluation of the facility's

wastewater treatment plant performance including a thermophilic Advanced Fluidized

Composting Tank, equalization tank, and ultrafiltration unit. The evaluation involves sampling

and analysis of the waste streams, treated effluents and treatment deposits to determine the

chemical and biological properties of the wastes.

Aircraft and Automotive Manufacturing (Michigan) - Evaluated and documented manufacturing

activities and waste management practices in a facility that manufactured automobiles and aircraft

in the mid 50's; evaluated the environmental impact (PCB-soil contamination) of raw materials

used, including paints, chlorinated solvents, plating and corrosion protection baths, insulating

materials, soldering materials, cutting oils, lubricants, and hydraulic fluids. Prepared a technical

report on the chemical composition and environmental fate of PCBs. Provided technical critiques

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 10

Geosyntec'%

consultants

on the site-specific risk assessment and cost allocation scheme. Estimated project cost: $500,000.

Ammonia Removal from Groundwater (Michigan) - Evaluated sources of ammonia in wastes

disposed at a landfill site.

Evaluated various treatment alternatives and prepared conceptual

design for the removal of ammonia from groundwater. Prepared a report on human-health effects

of ammonia. Prepared a report on contaminants present in coal ash. Performed statistical

analysis of meteorological data for Lansing, Michigan. Prepared technical reports dealing with the

ammonia content of foundry wastes, oily wastes and surface coating wastes. Conducted a

CERCLIS search to identify NPL sites with ammonia contamination. Estimated project cost:

$500,000.

Battery Manufacturing (Michigan) - Evaluated the environmental impact of raw materials,

manufacturing processes and waste generation and management in a lead-acid manufacturing

facility.

Evaluated the sources of soil and groundwater contamination with lead and

trichloroethene (TCE).

Prepared a technical report on the historical usage of TCE, TCE

environmental transformations, TCE waste management practices and pertinent regulations.

Conducted interviews of several former battery-manufacturing employees. Estimated project

cost: $170,000.

Dry Cleaners (Texas) - Prepared a technical report on the effect of tetrachloroethene (PCE) on

PVC sewer pipes. Prepared a review report on environmental regulations applicable to dry

cleaners. Evaluated and documented the historical usage of chlorinated solvents, solvent waste

management practices and pertinent regulations. Estimated project cost: $170,000.

Electroplating (South

Carolina) -

Evaluated the performance of an existing co-

precipitation/membrane filtration treatment system for the removal of heavy metals; developed a

technical report on the application of membrane technologies for the treatment of plating

wastewaters. Identified technical deficiencies associated with the design of the existing system.

Estimated project cost: $50,000.

Gilbert and Mosley Site (Kansas) - Prepared a TCE and PCE source identification report for the

site.

Evaluated the site geochemistry and industrial practices and raw material usage of various

industrial operations including: (1) dry cleaning, (2) photoengraving, (3) printing and publishing,

(4) chemical storage and distribution, (5) helmet manufacturing and (6) manufacturing and

restoration of aircraft instrumentation and (7) salvage yard. Evaluated chemical and microbial

transformations of PCE and TCE. Estimated project cost: $300,000.

Hydraulic Pump Manufacturing

(

Germany

) -

Evaluated manufacturing activities and waste

management practices in a hydraulic pump manufacturing facility located in Germany; developed

a review report on the metal machining and mechanical industry

;

evaluated environmental impact

(soil, soil

-

gas, and groundwater contamination

)

of raw materials used

(TCE, TCA,

and PCE);

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 11

GeosynteO'

consultants

developed a review report on German and European Community environmental regulations;

developed a review report on U.S. and German cost allocation and cost recovery procedures;

developed a site-specific cost allocation and cost recovery scheme.

Estimated project cost:

$250,000.

Inorganic Pesticide

Manufacturing (Georgia) - Evaluated and documented manufacturing

activities and waste management practices in an arsenical pesticide manufacturing facility;

developed a technical report on the disposal of unused pesticides; developed a review report on

the evolution of inorganic pesticide regulations; developed a review report on the environmental

fate and transport of arsenic. Estimated project cost: $80,000.

Metal Foundry (Oregon) - Prepared a review report on the physical-chemical properties and

disposal practices of Electric-Arc-Furnace Dust (EAFD).

Evaluated and documented the

environmental fate and transport of heavy metals present in EAFD; prepared a review report on

the RCRA characteristics of EAFD. Estimated project cost $50,000.

Metals Recycling acility (Illinois) - Provided technical support to the facility in order to attain

mercury compliance with the MWRDGC Sewage and Waste Control Ordinance (Ordinance).

Designed and oversaw field studies to identify the potential source(s) of mercury in the facility

wastewater during dry and wet weather conditions. Oversaw sewer cleaning activities to remove

affected sediment containing mercury due to historical operations. Developed and oversaw the

implementation of dye studies for sewer identification and segregation. Obtained the necessary

permits and oversaw sewer and manhole repair activities. Estimated project cost: $150,000.

Paint Waste Disposal Site (Ohio) - Evaluated the environmental impact, including heavy metal

and chlorinated solvent soil and groundwater contamination, due to the disposal of paint waste

and thinners at a junkyard site. Prepared state-of-the art reports on the chemical composition of

metallic paints and on the chronological usage trends of chlorinated solvents (PCE, TCA, and

TCE). Provided technical critiques on the site-specific risk assessment and cost allocation

scheme. Estimated project cost: $60,000.

Pesticide Formulating (Tennessee) - Assisted the U.S. Department of Justice in a cost recovery

action by evaluating pollution sources in a pesticide formulating facility, located at a Superfund

site.

Estimated project cost: $50,000.

Polymer Manufacturing (Illinois) - Evaluated and documented manufacturing activities and waste

management practices in a facility that manufactures polystyrene and acrylonitrile-butadiene-

styrene copolymer.

Reviewed the facility regulatory records and evaluated the operation and

treatment performance of the facility's biological treatment system. Prepared a review report on

the biodegradability and environmental fate of acrylonitrile and styrene. Prepared a review report

on the limitations of BOD5 in designing biological treatment systems.

Estimated project cost:

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 12

$75,000.

Geosyntec'%

consultants

Radio Manufacturing (New Jersey) - Evaluated and documented manufacturing activities, waste

management practices and their environmental impact (soil and groundwater pollution) at a

facility that manufactured radios and other aircraft communication equipment. Estimated project

cost: $50,000.

Teaching/Technology Transfer

Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, Illinois Institute of

Technology, Instructor-"Industrial Waste Treatment" Spring 2008.

Pritzker Department of Environmental Engineering Illinois Institute of Technology Instructor -

"Fundamentals of Water and Wastewater Engineering" (Fall 1993) and Seminar on "Pollution

Prevention" (Fall 1995)

Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering Illinois Institute of Technology,

Instructor

Seminar on "Remedial Design Investigations-Case Studies" (Spring 2002)

Patterson Schafer. Inc., Instructor - "U.S. EPA Pretreatment Facility Inspection Course" at the

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (1989)

PUBLICATIONS

Petropoulou

C. and J.K. Tolson. 2006. "Risk Assessment of Human Health Impacts of

Disinfection Vs. No Disinfection of The Chicago Area Waterways System. " Presented at the

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago Seminar Series. 24 August 2007

and 17 November 2006.

Tolson J.

K., C Petropoulou

,

CP Villaroman, EM Tufariello, SR Custance, R Lanyon, TC

Granato, J Zmuda, G Rijal, and C O'Connor. 2006. Probabilistic Model for Microbial Risk

Assessment in Recreational Waters, Poster Presentation. Society of Toxicology (SOT), Annual

Meeting. San Diego California.

March 5-9.

Petropoulou

;

C., DeFlaun, M., Bodine B., and Hendron D. 2005. Bioremediation and NZVI

Bench-Scale Studies For a Hydraulic Components Manufacturing Facility, Michigan. Poster

Presentation.

CSR-1 Conference. October 23-27. Chicago.

Petropoulou

,

C., D. M. Hendron, D. Graves and M. DeFlaun. 2004. "Natural Attenuation of a

Chlorinated Solvent Plume at a Manufacturing Facility in Michigan." Accepted for presentation

at the 4th International Battelle Conference, Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant

Compounds. Monterey, California.

May 24-27.

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 13

GeosMtec l>

consultants

Gasca, E., B. Luo, J.W. Patterson,

C. Petropoulou

.

1998. "Toxicity Reduction Methodologies"

in

Toxicity Reduction: Evaluation and Control,

2nd Edition, Vol. 3, Ford, D. L. Ed. Water

Quality Management Library, Eckenfelder, W. W., Malina, J. F., Patterson, J. W. Library Eds.

Technomic Publishing Co., Inc., Lancaster, PA.

Alvarez F., K. Topudurti, M. Keefe,

C. Petropoulou

and T. Schlichting. 1998. "Field

Evaluation of High Voltage Electron Beam Technology for Treating VOC-Contaminated

Groundwater - Part I: VOC Removal and Treatment Costs."Journal of Advanced Oxidation

Technology, Vol. 3, No. 1.

Alvarez F., K. Topudurti, M. Keefe,

C. Petropoulou

and T. Schlichting. 1998. "Field

Evaluation of High Voltage Electron Beam Technology for Treating VOC-Contaminated

Groundwater - Part II: Acute Toxicity Changes and By-Product Formation." Journal of Advanced

Oxidation Technology, Vol. 3, No.l .

Patterson, J.W., R.A. Minear, E. Gasca,

C. Petropoulou

. 1995. "Industrial Discharges of Metals

to

Water," Proceedings, Jekyll Island Workshop on Metal Speciation and Contamination of

Surface Water.

Petropoulou

,

C.,

M. Johnson and T. Poy. 1994. "Groundwater Treatment by Chemical

Precipitation and Ion Exchange," Proceedings, Hazardous Materials Control Resource Institute

(HMCRI), Superfund '94, 15th Annual National Conference & Exhibition, November 28-30,

1994, Washington, D.C.

Unger,

L., C. Petropoulou

and R. Parker. 1993. "Toxicity Reduction of a Landfill Leachate,"

Proceedings, Hazardous Materials Control Resource Institute (HMCRI), Superfund '93, 14th

Annual National Conference & Exhibition, December 1-3, 1993, Washington, D.C.

Petropoulou

,

C., S. Labunski and R. Parker. 1993. "U.S. EPA SITE Demonstration of an

Innovative Wastewater Treatment Technology," Proceedings, International Association on Water

Quality (IAWQ), International Specialized Conference on Pretreatment of Industrial Wastewater,

Athens, Greece, October 13-15, 1993.

Petropoulou

,

C., R.I. Foster, and P. R. de Percin. 1992. "Low Temperature Thermal Desorption

of Organic Pollutants from Contaminated Soil," Proceedings, I&EC Special Symposium,

American Chemical Society, Atlanta, GA, September 21-23, 1992.

de Percin, P. R., R.I. Foster,

C. Petropoulou

and L. Unger. 1992. "SITE Demonstration of a

Thermal Desorption System," Proceedings, Hazardous Materials Control Resource Institute

(HMCRI), Superfund'92, 13th Annual National Conference & Exhibition, December 1-3, 1992,

I

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 14

Washington, D.C.

Geosptec'%

consultants

Phan-Mahini, X., R.I. Foster;

C. Petropoulou

and J. Hahnenberg. 1992. "Health-Based Cleanup

Goals for Manganese, an Essential Trace Element," Proceedings, Society of Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), 13th Annual Meeting, Cincinnati, OH, November 8-12,

1992.

Cooney, E., B. Luo, J.W. Patterson and

C

.

Petropoulou

. 1992.

"Toxicity Reduction

Methodologies" in

Toxicity Reduction: Evaluation and Control,

Vol. 3, Ford, D. L. Ed., Water

Quality Management Library, Eckenfelder, W. W., Malina, J. F., Patterson, J. W. Library Eds.,

Technomic Publishing Co., Inc., Lancaster, PA.

Petropoulou

,

C. 1990.

"Discussion on Chromium Recovery from Tannery Sludge by

Incineration and Acid Extraction" in

Metals Speciation, Separation, and Recovery,

Vol. (II),

Patterson and Passino Eds., Lewis Publishers Inc. Chelsea Michigan.

Patterson, J.

W., R. E. Boice,

C. Petropoulou

,

D. Marani and G. Macchi. 1990. "Hydrolysis,

Precipitation and Ageing of Copper (Il) in the Presence of Nitrate," in

Metals Speciation,

Separation, and Recovery,

Vol. (II), Patterson and Passino Eds. Lewis Publishers Inc. Chelsea

Michigan.

Patterson, J.W. and

C. Petropoulou

.

1990. "Research Needs in Metals Speciation, Separation,

and Recovery" in

Metals Speciation, Separation; and Recovery,

Vol. (II), Patterson and Passino

Eds. Lewis Publishers Inc. Chelsea Michigan.

Patterson,

J.W.,

C. Petropoulou

,

B. Luo, E. Cooney and E. Gasca. 1989. "Differential

Precipitation Application for Metals Separation and Recovery," Proceedings, NATO Advanced

Research

Workshop on

New Developments in Industrial Wastewater Treatment,

Kluwer

Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

Patterson, J.W., B. Luo and C.

Petropoulou

.

1988. "Discussion on Destruction of Iron Complex

Cyanide by Alkaline Hydrolysis" in Conference Proceedings of IAWPRC, London, July 17,1988.

TRAINING SEMINARS

Leadership Training.

San Diego, California. 1993.

Toxicity Reduction: Evaluation and Control,

offered by the International Association on Water

Pollution Research and Control (IAWPRC), Washington, D.C., May 1992.

Treatment Technology for Contaminated Groundwater,

offered by the National Water Well

---

Chriso Petropoulou, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

Page 15

Association, Chicago, IL, August 20-22, 1991.

Geosyntec'%

consultants

Hazardous Waste Health and

Safety

Training

,

40-Hour Course of Instruction in OSHA 29 CFR

1910.120

,

April 1991 and annual refresher classes.

AWARDS

Part of a technical team that received

the Grand

Prize for Innovations in Environmental

Engineering

offered by the American Academy

of Environmental Engineers (1996)

PRC Exceptional Performance Award, July 1993

Research assistantship through the U.S. EPA Industrial Waste Elimination Research Center

(IWERC) (

1986-1990)

---

Ex

hibit

3

---

Prepared for

RISK ASSESSMENT OF HUMAN HEALTH

IMPACTS OF DISINFECTION VS. NO DISINFECTION OF

THE CHICAGO AREA WATERWAYS SYSTEM (CWS)

Prepared by

Geosy

n

tec

°

c

o

ns

ul

t

an

ts

j,III.

I

^cier

(

l^it-,

?

innvvillot%

55 West Wacker Drive,

Suite 1100

Chicago, Illinois 60601

Project Number CHE8188

April 2008

---

Geosyntec

consultants

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................IV

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... VII

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS ..........................................:................................................IX

LIST OF APPENDICES .................................................................................................. X

LIST OF ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................XI

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................

XIII

1.

INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1

1.1

PROJECT OBJECTIVE AND PROJECT TASKS ........................................................... 5

1.2

REPORT ORGANIZATION ....................................................................................... 6

1.3

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................6

2.

MICROBIAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS .......................................................

8

2.1

RATIONALE FOR INDICATOR AND PATHOGENIC MICROORGANISM SELECTION ....

S

2.2

SAMPLING OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................ 9

2.2.1

Dry Weather Sampling Objectives .............................................................. 9

2.2.2

Wet Weather Sampling Objectives ...........................................................10

2.3

FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES ..........................................................................11

2.3.1

Microbial Sampling Locations ..................................................................11

2.3.1.1

Dry Weather Sampling Locations .........................................................12

2.3.1.2

Wet Weather Sampling Locations .........................................................14

2.3.2

Sample Collection Equipment, Materials and Procedures ........................15

2.3.2.1

Virus Sampling ......................................................................................19

2.3.2.2

Bacteria Sampling ................................................................................. 20

2.3.2.3

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

Sampling ...............................................20

2.3.3

Sample Identification.. ............................................................................. 22

2.3.4

Sample Custody .........................................................................................22

2.3.5

Sample Packaging, Shipment, and Tracking .............................................23

2.3.5.1

Sample Packaging ................................................................................23

2.3.5.2

Shipping and Tracking .......................................................................... 24

2.3.6

Waste Management ...................................................................................24

2.3.7

Health and Safety .................................................................................... 24

2.4

QUALITY ASSURANCE/ QUALITY CONTROL

PROCEDURES

................................. 25

2.4.1

Microbial Methods of Analyses

................................................................ 25

2.4.2

Data Quality Objectives ............................................................................

26

2.4.3

QA/

QC Procedures

....................................................................................

26

2.4.3.1

Laboratory Internal QC

...................... ....................................... ............

27

2.4.3.2

Equipment Calibration

..........................................................................

31

2.4.3.3

Equipment Maintenance

........................................................................ 31.

2.4.3.4

Corrective Actions

.................................................................................

31

Final Wetdry

-

April 2008

i

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS (

Continued)

2.5

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 32

3.

ANALYTICAL RESULTS ...

..................................................................................35

3.1

BACTERIA RESULTS ........................................................................................... 35

3.1.1

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) ...............................................................36

3.1.2

Geometric Means ...................................................................................... 39

3.1.3

Percentile Box Plots .................................................................................. 40

3.2

PROTOZOA ANALYTICAL RESULTS ..................................................................... 41

3.2.1

Enumeration Results ......................................................:..........................41

3.2.2

Detection of Infectious

Cryptosporidium

Oocysts Using Cell Culture .... 43

3.2.3

Giardia

Viability Results .......................................................................... 44

3.3

VIRUS ANALYTICAL RESULTS ............................................................................ 47

3.3.1

Enteric Viruses ..........................................................................................48

3.3.2

Adenovirus ................................................................................................ 50

3.3.3

Calicivirus

(Norovirus) ............................................................................. 52

3.4

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 55

4.

DISINFECTION

.....................................................................................................58

4.1

CHLORINATION

/

DECHLORINATION

....................................................................

59

4.2

OZONE ................................................................................................................62

4.3

UV

.....................................................................................................................

63

4.4

DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCTS

(

DBPS

)

AND RESIDUALS

.....................................

65

4.4.1

Chlorination DBPs and Residuals

.............................................................

67

4.4.2

Ozonation DBPs and Residuals

.................................................................

69

4.5

DISINFECTION EFFECTIVENESS

......................

........................................

.....71

4.5.1

Bacteria Disinfection Efficiency

............................................................... 73

4.5.2

Protozoa Disinfection Efficiency

.............................................................. 77

4.5.3

Virus Disinfection Efficiency

.............................................................

...

81

4.6

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

...........................................................................

86

4.7

REFERENCES

.....................................................................................................

91

5.0

MICROBIAL RISK

.

ASSESSEMENT ..............................................................94

5.1

HAZARD IDENTIFICATION ...................................................................................94

5.2

EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 95

5.2.1

Waterway Use Summary and Receptor Group Categorization ................. 97

5.2.2

Exposure Inputs .........................................................................................99

5.3

DosE-RESPONSE ASSESSMENT ......................................................................... 102

5.3.1

Enteric viruses .........................................................................................104

5.3.2

Calicivirus ...............................................................................................106

5.3.3

Adenovirus .............................................................................................. 107

5.3.4

Escherichia coli .......................................................................................108

5.3.5

'Pseudornonas aeruginosa. ........................................................................

110

5.3.6

Salmonella ...............................................................................................112

5.3.7

Cryptosporidiuni ......................................................................................112

5.3.8

Giardia

................................ .................................................................114

5.4

RISK CHARACTERIZATION..........' ...................................................................... 115

Final

Wetdry-April 240$

ii

I

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(Continued)

5.4.1

Probabilistic Analysis ..............................................................................116

5.4.2

Disease Transmission Model ..................................................................120

5.4.3

Microbial Exposure Point Concentrations ..............................................121

5.4.4

Weather ...................................................................................................124

5.4.5

Simulations ..............................................................................................125.

5.4.6

Risk Assessment Calculation Results and Conclusions ..........................126

5.4.7

Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis ......................................................130

5.5

REFERENCES ......................................... ...........................................................133

Final

Wetdry-April. 2008

iii

---

Geosynte&

consultants

LIST OF TABLES

Table ES-1:

Summary of Pathogen Disinfection Efficiencies

Table ES-2:

Total Expected Primary Illnesses per 1,404 Exposures under Combined

Dry and Wet Weather Using Different Effluent Disinfection Techniques

Table ES-3:

Estimated Illness Rates Assuming Single Recreational Use with No

Effluent Disinfection

Tale ES-4:

Effect of Disinfection on Expected Recreational Illnesses per 1,000

Exposures

Table 2-1:

Major Waterborne Pathogenic Microorganisms Selected for the Microbial

Risk Assessment

Table 2-2:

Summary of Dry and Wet Weather Samples

Table 2-3:

Summary of Dry and Wet Weather WRP Flows (MGD) and Pumping

Station Discharge Volumes (MG) Provided by MWRDGC

Table 3-1 a:

Summary of the Dry Weather North Side Bacteria Results

Table 3-lb:

Summary of the Dry Weather Stickney Bacteria Results

Table 3-1c:

Summary of the Dry Weather Calumet Bacteria Results

Table 3-1d:

Summary of the Wet Weather North Side Bacteria Results

Table 3-le:

Summary of the Wet Weather Stickney Bacteria Results

Table 3-1f:

Summary of the Wet Weather Calumet Bacteria Results

Table 3-2a:

Dry Weather Geometric Mean Bacteria Concentrations (in CFU/100 mL;

Salmonella

in MPN/100 mL)

Table 3-2b:

Wet Weather Geometric Mean Bacteria Concentrations (in CFU/100 mL;

Salmonella

in MPN/ L)

Table 3-3a:

Dry Weather Indigenous

Cryptosporidium

Oocysts and

Giardia

Cysts in

Samples Collected at the North Side Waterway Segment

Table 3-3b:

Dry Weather Indigenous

Cryptosporidium

Oocysts and

Giardia

Cysts in

Samples Collected at the Stickney Waterway Segment

Table 3-3c:

Dry Weather Indigenous

Cryptosporidium

Oocysts and

Giardia

Cysts in

Samples Collected at the Calumet Waterway Segment

Table 3-3d:

Wet Weather Indigenous

Cryptosporidium

Oocysts and

Giardia

Cysts in

Samples Collected at the North Side Waterway Segment

Table 3-3e:

Wet Weather Indigenous

Cryptosporidium

Oocysts and

Giardia

Cysts in

Samples Collected at the Stickney Waterway Segment

Table 3-3f:

Wet Weather Indigenous

Cryptosporidium

Oocysts and

Giardia

Cysts in

Samples Collected at the Calumet Waterway Segment

Final Wetdry-Apf l 2008

iv

I

---

LIST OF TABLES

(Continued)

Table 3-4a:

Dry Weather Viability Results of

Giardia

Cysts Using Fluorogenic Dyes

in Samples Collected at the North Side Waterway Segment

Table 3-4b:

Dry Weather Viability Results of

Giardia

Cysts Using Fluorogenic Dyes

in Samples Collected at the Stickney Waterway Segment

Table 3-4c:

Dry Weather Viability Results of

Giardia

Cysts Using Fluorogenic Dyes

in Samples Collected at the Calumet Waterway Segment

Table 3-4d:

Wet Weather Viability Results of

Giardia

Cysts Using Fluorogenic Dyes

in Samples Collected at the North Side Waterway Segment

Table 3-4e:

Wet Weather Viability Results of

Giardia

Cysts Using Fluorogenic Dyes

in Samples Collected at the Stickney Waterway Segment

Table 3-4f:

Wet Weather Viability Results

of Giardia

Cysts Using Fluorogenic Dyes

in Samples Collected at the Calumet Waterway Segment

Table 3-5a:

Summary of the North Side Dry Weather Enteric Virus Results

Table 3-5b:

Summary of the Stickney Dry Weather Enteric Virus Results

Table 3-5c:

Summary of the Calumet Dry Weather Enteric Virus Results

Table 3-5d:

Summary of the North Side Wet Weather Enteric Virus Results

Table 3-5e:

Summary of the Stickney Wet Weather Enteric Virus Results

Table 3-5f:

Summary of the Calumet Wet Weather Enteric Virus Results

Table 3-6:

Dry Weather Cell Culture Assay and Adenovirus Results

Table 3-7:

Dry Weather Norovirus

(Calicivirus)

Results

Table 3-8:

Wet Weather Cell Culture Assay/Adenovirus Results and Norovirus

(Calicivirus)

Results

Table 3-9:

Summary of Dry Weather Virus Detections (%) and Detectable

Concentration Ranges

Table 3-10:

Summary of Wet Weather Virus Detections (%) and Detectable

Concentration Ranges

Table 3-11:

Comparison of Percent (%) Virus Detections During Dry and Wet

Weather

Table 4-1:

Summary of Disinfectant Characteristics

Table 4-2:

List of DBPs and Disinfection Residuals

Table 4-3:

Status of Health Information for Disinfectants and DBPs

Table 4-4:

Principal Known By-products of Ozonation

Table 4-5:

Ozone Disinfection Studies Involving Indicator Bacteria

Table 4-6:

Inactivation of Microorganisms by Pilot-Scale Ozonation

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

v

---

LIST OF TABLES (

Continued)

Table 4-7:

Summary of Reported Ozonation Requirements for 99% (2-Lag)

Inactivation of

Cryptosporidium parvum

Oocysts

Table 4-8:

Reduction of Selected Pathogens by Ozone in Tertiary Municipal

Effluents

Table 4-9:

Summary of CT Values for 99% Inactivation of Selected Viruses by

Various Disinfectants at PC

Table 4-10:

LOG,a Reductions Achieved for Coliphage During Disinfection of

Secondary Effluent by UV Irradiation and Chlorination

Table 4-11:

Summary of Pathogen Disinfection Efficiencies

Table 5-1:

UAA General Activity Groups and Risk Assessment Categories

Table 5-2:

Proportion of Users in Each Risk Assessment Activity Category by

Waterway

Table 5-3:

Household Size for Cook County, Illinois

Table 5-4:

Incidental Ingestion Rate Percentiles

Table 5-5:

Summary of Dose-Response Parameters Used for Risk Assessment

Table 5-6:

Summary of Secondary Attack Rates

Table 5-7:

Fold

Attenuation of Pathogen Concentration by Various Treatment

Methods

Table 5-8:

Proportion of Weather Days in Recreational Year

Table 5-9:

Total Expected Illnesses per 1,000 Exposures Using Different Estimates of

Pathogen Concentrations with No Effluent Disinfection

Table 5-10:

Criteria for Indicators for Bacteriological Densities

Table 5-11:

Proportion of Recreational User Type Contributing to Gastrointestinal

Expected Illnesses with No Effluent Disinfection

Table 5-12

Stratified Risk Estimates - Estimated Illness Rates Assuming Single

Recreational Use with No Effluent Disinfection

Table 5-13:

Breakdown of Illnesses per 1,000 Exposures for Combined Wet and Dry

Weather Samples with No Effluent Disinfection

Table 5-14:

Total Expected Primary Illnesses per 1,000 Exposures Under Combined

Dry and Wet Weather Using Different Disinfection Techniques

Table 5-15:

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Concentrations by WRP Waterway Segment

and Sampling Category

Table 5-16:

Sensitivity Analysis for Risks of Illness in WRP Segments

Table 5-17:

Parameter Sensitivity Analysis for North Side (Illnesses per 1,000

Recreational Users)

Final Wetdry-April 2008

vi

---

Geosynte&

consultants

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure ES-1:

Figure ES-2:

Figure 1-1:

Figure 2-1:

Figure 2-2:

Figure 2-3:

Figure 3-1:

Figure 3-2:

Figure 3-3:

Figure 3-4:

Figure 3-5:

Figure 3-6:

Figure 3-7:

Figure 3-8:

Figure 3-9:

Figure 3-10:

Figure 3-11:

Figure 3-12:

Figure 3-13:

Figure 3-14:

Figure 3-15:

Figure 3-16:

Figure 3-17:

Figure 3-18:

Figure 3-19:

Chicago Waterway System - Dry Weather Sampling Locations

Chicago Waterway System - Wet Weather Sampling Locations

Chicago Waterway System

Chicago Waterway System Dry Weather Sampling Locations

Chicago Waterway System Wet Weather Sampling Locations

Typical Filter Apparatus

North Side Dry Weather Bacteria Histograms

Stickney Dry Weather Bacteria Histograms

Calumet Dry Weather Bacteria Histograms

ANOVA Results: Dry Weather E.

coli

- vs. Site, Location, Depth

ANOVA Results: Dry Weather Fecal Coliform - vs. Site, Location, Depth

ANOVA Results: Dry Weather

Enterococcus

- vs. Site, Location, Depth

ANOVA Results: Wet Weather E.

coli

- vs. Site, Location

ANOVA Results: Wet Weather Fecal Coliform - vs. Site, Location

ANOVA Results: Wet Weather

Enterococcus -

vs. Site, Location

ANOVA Results: Wet Weather

Pseudomonas aeruginosa-

vs.

Site,

Location

ANOVA Results: Wet Weather

Salmonella-

vs. Site, Location

ANOVA Results: Dry and Wet Weather E.

coli -

vs.

Site,

Location,

Weather

ANOVA Results: Dry and Wet Weather Fecal Coliform - vs. Site,

Location, Weather

ANOVA Results: Dry and Wet Weather

Enterococcus -

vs. Site, Location,

Weather

ANOVA Results: Dry and Wet Weather

Pseudomonas aeruginosa-

vs.

Site, Location, Weather

Geometric Mean Dry Weather Bacteria Concentrations at North Side

Geometric Mean Dry Weather Bacteria Concentrations at Stickney

Geometric Mean Dry Weather Bacteria Concentrations at Calumet

Wet Weather Geometric Mean Bacteria Concentrations by Location (UPS,

DNS, OUTFALL) at North Side, Stickney and Calumet (cfu/100mL;

Salmonella

in MPN/L)

Final Wetdry-April 2008

Vii

---

LIST OF FIGURES (

Continued)

Figure 3-20:

Dry and Wet Weather Geometric Mean Bacteria Concentrations by WRP

(including OUTFALLS, UPS, DNS) (cfu/l00mL;

Salmonella

in

MPN/L)

Figure 3-21:

North Side Dry Weather Spatial Box Plots of Bacteria Concentrations

Figure 3-22:

Stickney Dry Weather Spatial Box Plots of Bacteria Concentrations

Figure 3-23: Calumet Dry Weather Spatial Box Plots of Bacteria Concentration

Figure 3-24: North Side Wet Weather Temporal Percentile Box Plots of Bacteria

Concentrations

Figure 3-25: Stickney Wet

Weather Temporal Percentile Box Plots of Bacteria

Concentrations

Figure 3-26:

Calumet

Wet Weather Temporal Percentile Box Plots of Bacteria

Concentrations

Figure 4-1:

Conceptual Representation of the Possible Fates of Bacteria Disinfectant

Exposure

Figure 5-1:

CWS Microbial Risk Assessment Segments

Figure 5-2:

Incidental Ingestion Rate Distribution for Canoeists (mL/hr)

Figure 5-3:

Duration Distribution for Canoeists

Figure 5-4:

Estimated Pathogen Concentration between Wet and Dry Sampling Events

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

Viii

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment A: Bacteria Correlations

Final Weidry-April 2008

ix

f

---

Geosyntec

consultants

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A-1: MWRDGC Dry Weather Field Sampling Forms

Appendix A-2: MWRDGC Wet Weather Field Sampling Forms

Appendix B-1: Dry Weather HML Analytical Results

Appendix B-2: Wet Weather HML Analytical Results

Appendix C-1: Dry Weather CEC Analytical Report

Appendix C-2: Wet Weather CEC Analytical Report

Appendix D-1: Dry Weather University of Arizona Analytical Results

Appendix D-2: Wet Weather University of Arizona Analytical Results

Final Wetdry-April 2008

X

I

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ANOVA

Analysis of Variance

AWQM

Ambient Water Quality Monitoring

BEACH

Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health

BGMK

Blue Green Monkey Kidney

BR

Backflow Regulator

CCL

Contaminant Candidate List

CDC

Center for Disease Control

CEC

Clancy Environmental Consultants, Inc.

COD

Chemical Oxygen Demand

CLHA

Cecil Lue-fling and Associates

CPE

Cytopathic Effects

CSC

Calumet-Sag Channel

CSO

Combined Sewer Overflow

CSSC

Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal

CT

Contact Time

CDF

Cumulative Distribution Function

CWA

Clean Water Act

CWS

Chicago Area Waterway System

DAPI

4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole

DBPs

Disinfection Byproducts

DIC

Differential Interference Contrast

DPR

Des Plaines River

DNS

Downstream

DQO

Data Quality Objective

E. coli

Escherichia coli

EPA

US Environmental Protection Agency

FA

Fluorescence Assay

FITC

Fading/Diffusion Of Fluorescent Isothiocyanate

FS

Flowing Stream

Geosyntec

Geosyntec Consultants

GPS

Global Positioning System

HAV

Hepatitis A Virus

HEV

Hepatitis E Virus

HML

Hoosier Microbiological Laboratory, Inc.

IDPH

Illinois Department of Public Health

IEPA

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

IPCB

Illinois Pollution Control Board

LCR

Little Calumet River

LP&L

Lockport Powerhouse and Lock

MG

Million Gallons

MGD

Million Gallons per Day

MF

Membrane Filtration

MLE

Maximum Likelihood Estimation

Final Wetdry-April 2008

Xi

I

---

Geosynke&

consultants

MPN

MS

MWRDGC

NAC

NOM

NPDES

NSC

NTU

OPR

PAC

PCR

PDF

PMF

PEC

PFU

PR

QA

QC

QAPP

QMRA

RFP

RT

SAC

SAP

SC

SF

SOP

SWW

UAA

UV

UPS

VIRADEL

WCC

WHO

WRP

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

LIST OF ACRONYMS (

Continued)

Most Probable Number

Matrix Spike

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago

Negative Assay Control

Natural Organic Matter

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

North Shore Channel

Nephelometric Turbidity Units

Ongoing Precision And Recovery

Positive Assay Control

Polymerase Chain Reaction

Probability Density Function

Probability Mass Function

Patterson Environmental Consultants

Plaque Forming Units

Regulator Module

Quality Assurance

Quality Control

Quality Assurance Project Plan

Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment

Request for Proposal

Reverse Transcriptase

Senior Advisory Committee

Sampling and Analysis Plan

Specific Conductance

Swivel Female Insert

Standard Operating Procedure

Significant Wet Weather

Use Attainability Analysis

Ultraviolet

Upstream

Virus Adsorption-Elution

Waterway Control Center

World Health Organization

Water Reclamation Plant

xii

---

Geosynte&

consultants

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Metropolitan

Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC or

District) has retained The Geosyntec Team, which includes Geosyntec Consultants

(Geosyntec) and its subcontractors, Patterson Environmental Consultants (PEC); Cecil

Lue-Ring & Associates (CLHA); Dr. Charles Gerba of the University of Arizona (UA);

Hoosier Microbiological Laboratory,

Inc.

(HML); and Clancy Environmental

Consultants, Inc. (CEC) to perform a Risk Assessment of Human Health Impacts of

Disinfection Vs. No Disinfection of the Chicago Area Waterways System (CWS).

The CWS consists of 78 miles of canals, which serve the Chicago area for two principal

purposes: (1) the drainage of urban storm water runoff and treated municipal wastewater

effluents from the District's three major water reclamation plants (WRP) (North Side,

Stickney and Calumet), and (2) the support of commercial navigation (See Figure ES-1).

Approximately 75 percent of the length of the CWS includes manmade canals where no

waterway existed previously, and the remainder includes natural streams that have been

deepened, straightened and/or widened to such an extent that reversion to the natural state

is not possible.

About 70 percent of the annual flows in the CWS are from the discharge

of treated municipal wastewater effluent from the District's WRPs (MWRDGC, 2004).

Over time, there have been major improvements in water quality, altered land use and

additional public access along the CWS. Such improvements and conditions have

produced both greater opportunity and heightened public interest in environmental and

recreational uses within and along the waterways. Currently, the waterways are used for

recreational boating, canoeing, fishing and other streamside recreational activities. These

waterways also provide aquatic habitat for wildlife.

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) has conducted a Use Attainability

Analysis (UAA) of the CWS in accordance with 40 CFR 131.10(d). The IEPA and UAA

stakeholders have agreed that swimming and other primary contact recreation should not

be considered as a viable designated use of the CWS. The IEPA initially attempted to

develop water quality standards for the CWS based on the

Ambient Water Quality

Criteria for Bacteria-1986

(EPA, 1986) and EPA guidance (EPA, 2003). In order to

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

xiii

I

---

Geosyntec

consultants

assist IEPA in evaluating the proposed bacterial water quality standards, the District

commissioned qualified consultants (research scientists and water quality experts) to

conduct a peer review of the EPA's Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -- 1986, and the

November 2003 draft implementation guidance document (EPA, 1986 and 2003). The

findings of the expert review panel indicated that these EPA documents provide no

scientific basis for developing protective bacteria standards for the designated CWS

recreational uses.

One of the recommendations from the expert review panel report was

that

more science is needed before bacteria criteria can be established for effluent

dominated urban waterways. To address this recommendation, the District has conducted

a microbial risk assessment study to determine health impacts of recreational use of the

CWS.

Microbial

Risk Assessment

Objectives

The main objective of this risk assessment study was to evaluate the human health impact

of continuing the current practice of not disinfecting the effluents from the District's

Calumet, North Side, and Stickney WRPs versus initiating disinfection of the effluent at

these three WRPs. The study includes dry and wet weather microbial sampling data. The

dry weather risk assessment sampling was completed during the 2005 recreational season

when the climatic conditions were not suitable for wet weather sampling.

The wet

weather sampling took place during the 2006 recreational season. Dry and wet weather

microbial sampling results of the surface water in the CWS and the WRP effluents

formed the basis for the risk assessment. The dry and wet weather microbial results were

integrated to enable an evaluation of the potential impacts of disinfection on overall risks

associated with the recreational use of the waterway.

This study focused on the detection of microorganisms typically present in the feces of

humans and other warm-blooded animals as indicators of fecal pollution. Hence, a group

of EPA-approved indicator microorganisms, such as E.

coli, enterococci,

and fecal

coliform was selected for this study. In addition to the indicator microorganisms,

pathogens representative of those present in the wastewater that are also of public health

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

Xiv

---

Geosynte&

consultants

concern were selected. The rationale for selecting the pathogens for this microbial risk

assessment study included the following criteria:

• The pathogens selected are associated with documented outbreaks of disease,

including gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases and infections

•

There are EPA-approved methods or laboratory standard operating procedures

(SOPs) available for the measurement of the selected pathogens.

Based on the rationale and selection criteria outlined above, the objective of the dry and

wet weather microbial risk assessment sampling was to determine the concentrations of

the following indicators and pathogens:

•

Enteric viruses: i) total culturable viruses, (

ii) viable adenovirus

;

and (iii)

Calici virus

• Infectious

Cryptosporidium parmin

and viable

Ciardia lamblia

•

Salmonella

spp.

•

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

• Fecal coliforms

•

E. coli

• Enterococci

Dry Weather Microbial Risk Assessment Objectives

During dry weather, the District's North Side, Stickney and Calumet WRPs contribute

the

majority of the flow in the CWS. The specific objectives of 2005 dry weather

sampling were as follows:

1.

Evaluate the impact of the treated effluent from the District's three major WRPs

(North Side, Stickney, and Calumet) on the microbial quality of the CWS.

2. 'Estimate health risks to recreational users of the CWS due to incidental contact

pathogen exposure under dry weather conditions.

3.

Quantify any reduction of risk that would result from disinfection of WRP

effluents during dry weather.

Final

Wetdry-April 2048'

XV

---

Geosynte&

consultants

Wet Weather

Microbial Risk Assessment

Objectives

During wet weather, in addition to the WRP effluents, several sources contribute to the

microbial load in the CWS, including: CSOs, discharges from storm drains, overland

runoff, land-use activities such as agriculture and construction, erosion, and habitat

destruction.

The specific objectives of 2006 wet weather sampling were as follows:

1.

Evaluate the impact of the WRP wet weather flow on the microbial quality of the

WRP outfalls.

2.

Evaluate the impact of combined sewer overflows (CSOs) on the microbial

quality of the CWS.

3.

Estimate health risks to recreational users of the CWS due to incidental contact

pathogen exposure under wet weather conditions.

4.

Quantify any reduction of risk that would result from disinfecting WRP effluents

during wet weather.

Microbial Sampling and

Analysis

Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAPS) and Quality Assurance Plans (QAPs)

were

developed that provided a detailed sampling strategy, including sampling locations, the

number of samples and sampling frequency.

A subset of the Ambient Water Quality

Monitoring (AWQM) sampling stations employed by the MWRDGC along the 78 miles

of the CWS, was used for this study. Figures ES-1 and ES-2 show the dry and wet

weather sampling locations, respectively.

One of the components of the microbial risk assessment was to conduct water sampling

and analysis of the CWS.

Dry weather sampling was conducted between July and

September 2005. Seventy five (75) dry weather water samples were collected at the

North Side, Stickney and Calumet waterways, including upstream, downstream and

outfall samples.

Wet weather sampling was conducted between June and October 2006.

Fifty (50) wet weather samples were collected at the North Side, Stickney and Calumet

waterways, including upstream, downstream and outfall samples.

The wet weather

locations were spaced at significantly larger distances away from the WRPs compared to

the dry weather locations to account for the contributions of storm water runoff, CSO

out€alls, and pumping stations (see Figures ES-1 and ES-2).

At the North Side, wet

Final

Wetdiy-April 2008'

Xvi

I

---

Geosyntec

consultants

weather samples were also collected near the North Branch Pumping Station (NBPS) and

at Stickney, wet weather samples were collected near the Racine Avenue Pumping Station

(RAPS).

Overall, one hundred and twenty five (125) samples were collected and

analyzed during the dry and wet weather events.

Sampling and analysis of microbial samples were conducted in accordance with the

procedures described at http://epa.gov/microbes and in Standard

Methods for the

Examination of Water and Wastewater (Standard Methods, 1998). The samples were

analyzed for three major groups of indicator and pathogenic microorganisms including

bacteria, protozoa, and viruses. The microbial methods of analysis include the following:

•

Enteric viruses: i) (total culturable viruses) using the methods described in the

ICR Microbial Laboratory Manual, EPA 600/R-95/178 (EPA, 1996); ii) viable

adenovirus; and iii)

Calicivirus.

The samples for total culturable viruses were

analyzed by HML and the samples for adenovirus and

Calicivirus

were

analyzed by the UA Laboratory using the UA SOPs. There are no EPA-

approved methods for viable

Calicivirus.

The method used involves a

Poiymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) method that offers an estimate of the virus

concentration, but does not determine or confirm viability.

Calicivirus

is a

family of human and animal viruses.

For this risk assessment study

Calicivirus

refers to human

Caliciviruses,

specifically the genus norovirus.

• Infectious

Cryptosporidium parvum

and viable

Giardia lamblia

were

determined using EPA Method 1623 (EPA, 2001) in conjunction with cell

culture infectivity for the

Cryptosporidium

and viability staining (DAPI-PI)

for the

Giardia.

The samples for protozoa were analyzed by CEC.

• Salmonella

spp. using Standard Method 9260D (Standard Methods, 1998)

•

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

using Standard Method 9213E (Standard Methods,

1998)

• Fecal coliforms using Standard Method 9222D (Standard Methods, 1998)

• E. coli

using EPA Method 1103.1 (EPA, 2002)

•

Enterococci

using EPA Method 1106.2 (EPA, 2001a)

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

Xvii

7-77-11 1-'---- -

I

---

Geosynte&

consultants

Microbial Results and Conclusions

The microbial analytical results generated during this study were evaluated and

interpreted within the framework of dry and wet weather conditions. However, for the

microbial risk assessment estimates, the dry and wet weather microbial results were

integrated in a comprehensive dataset representative of all weather conditions in the

waterway.

The following sections discuss the dry and wet weather analytical results of

bacteria, protozoa and viruses.

Bacteria Results

Bacteria were the most abundant microbial species detected in the waterway compared to

viruses and protozoa during both dry and wet weather events. The results were analyzed

and evaluated statistically using the Minitab computing software and the procedures in

Helsel and Hirsch (2002) and Helsel (2005). Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) ANOVA

tests were performed for the dry and wet weather bacteria results to determine differences

of bacteria concentrations by site (i.e., North Side, Stickney, and Calumet), by location

(i.e.,

upstream, downstream, and outfall), and by depth (for dry weather only) (i.e.,

surface and 1-m depth).

Also, the geometric mean values of the bacteria concentrations were calculated as a

measure of the central tendency of the bacteria data sets under both dry and wet weather

conditions. In addition, semi-log box plots, indicating the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile

values of the data were created to graphically demonstrate the central tendencies and

variability of the various bacteria datasets.

For the dry weather results, the spatial

(upstream, downstream, outfall) percentile box plots were created. An examination of

the spatial variability of the wet weather data did not reveal any discernable trends.

Therefore, for the wet weather results, the box plots were used to evaluate any temporal

trends that may be attributable to the different weather conditions and the occurrence or

non-occurrence of discharges from the pumping stations.

Final

wetdry-April 2408'

xvi ii

77-7'7r-"--

-

I

---

GeosyntecO

consultants

Dry Weather

Bacteria Results

For dry weather

, ANOVA

analysis was only conducted on

E. coli,

fecal coliform, and

Enterococcus

data as these groups had the most statistically significant

(

by percent

detect

)

datasets

.

E. coli,

fecal coliform, and

Enterococcus

were detected at a frequency

ranging from 99 to 100%, while

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

was detected in 75% of the

samples and

Salmonella

spp

.

in only 13

%

of the samples.

The dry weather results are consistent for all bacteria groups in that there is a significant

difference between concentrations by site (North Side, Stickney and Calumet), and by

location (upstream and downstream).

This finding is consistent with a physical

understanding of the waterway system, that different sites have varying loading and

dilution

conditions

which results in varying concentrations, and that bacteria

concentrations will generally increase downstream of the WRP outfalls compared to the

upstream locations.

Dry weather downstream concentrations at North Side are generally

greater than Stickney, which are greater than Calumet. Also, downstream concentrations

are consistently greater than upstream.

All bacteria groups in dry weather samples

showed no statistically significant difference in concentration by depth.

The dry weather geometric mean results confirm that the dry weather microbial

concentrations tend to increase immediately downstream of the WRPs. For dry weather

results, the semilog box plots show concentrations increasing downstream, except for P.

aeruginosa

at Stickney and Calumet, and

Enterococcus

at Calumet.

P. aeruginosa

percentile results are highly influenced by non-detect results, therefore downstream

increases can not be seen in these box plots. Geometric mean values (generated using the

maximum likelihood method) are better indicators of this trend for significantly censored

datasets.

The fecal coliform dry weather concentrations upstream of the North Side and

Stickney

WRPs were greater than the IEPA proposed effluent limit of 400 colony

forming units (CFU)/100 mL.

Final Wetdry

-April 20

08'

XiX

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

For dry weather results, the box plots demonstrate a modest spread of the concentration

data around the median (around I log between the I" and 3rd quartiles), as well as the

occasionally significant skewedness (in log space) of these results.

Moreover, all the box

plots consistently show that downstream concentrations exhibit less variability than

upstream concentrations.

Wet Weather

Bacteria Results

The results of the wet weather

data ANOVA

analysis indicate that the wet weather E.

coli,

and

Enterococcus

data are significantly different by site

(

i.e.

North Side, Stickney

and Calumet waterway

)

only.

Fecal coliform

,

P.

aeruginosa

and

Salmonella

spp. do not

differ by site or any other factor.

The wet weather geometric means at each sampling location (upstream, downstream,

outfall) at the North Side and Stickney WRPs indicate that most of the North Side and

Stickney geometric mean bacteria concentrations upstream and downstream of the WRPs

are higher than the outfall concentrations.

Also, the wet weather upstream and

downstream geometric mean concentrations at Stickney and North Side are greater than

Calumet. Fecal coliform and E.

coli

wet weather concentrations are greater than the other

bacteria geometric means at each sampling location at all WRPs.

The results also

indicate that the wet weather fecal coliform concentrations upstream of the North Side,

Stickney and Calumet WRPs were above the IEPA proposed effluent limit of 400

CFU/ 100 mL.

The outfall samples show lower levels of

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

than the

corresponding upstream and downstream wet weather samples. This suggests that the

major inputs for

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

in the waterways are sources other than the

WRP effluents.

The wet weather results indicate that the occurrence of pumping station discharges

resulted in elevated concentrations of bacteria in the Stickney and Calumet waterways,

except for

Salmonella

spp.

The large variability of the North Side bacteria results is

probably masking the effect of the NBPS discharge.

Final

WetdryApril

2008'

XX

77 7" 1^, :_e^_

-

I

---

GeosyntecO

consultants

Comparison

of Dry and Wet Weather

Bacteria Results

The results of the dry and wet weather ANOVA analysis indicate that dry and wet

weather combined bacteria data

(E. coli, Enterococcus, P. aeruginosa)

are significantly

different by site (i.e. North Side, Stickney and Calumet waterway) and weather (dry and

wet).

Fecal coliform differs by weather only (not by site). The

Salmonella

spp. dry

weather results had statistically insignificant detections and therefore an ANOVA

analysis of both the dry and wet weather results was not performed.

The wet weather bacteria concentrations are significantly greater than the dry weather

concentrations at each WRP waterway. The most significant differences are observed at

the

North Side and Stickney waterways.

The geometric mean concentrations of

Salmonella

spp. were low in both dry and wet weather conditions. The

Salmonella

spp.

concentrations in the upstream and downstream samples were similar during wet weather

conditions at the North Side, Stickney, and Calumet segments of the waterway. The

enterococci

concentrations were lower than E.

coli

and fecal coliform concentrations

under wet weather conditions.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

wet weather concentrations

were slightly higher than the dry weather levels.

However, the effluent samples show

lower levels of

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

than the corresponding upstream and

downstream wet weather samples.

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

Results

The following sections discuss the

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

results under dry and

wet weather conditions.

Dry Weather

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

Results

At North Side, dry weather enumeration results indicate that

Giardia

cysts (cysts) were

detected in all outfall samples and in all downstream samples except two (2). Cysts were

also detected in four (4) of 10 upstream samples.

Cryptosporidium

oocysts (oocysts)

were detected in three (3) of five (5) outfall samples, one (1) of 10 upstream samples and

six (6) of 10 downstream samples.

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

xxi

I

---

Geosynte&

consultants

At Stickney, dry weather results show

Giardia

cysts detected in all outfall samples.

Cysts were detected in the upstream samples collected during the last four dry weather

sampling events. Cysts were not detected in two (2) of 10 downstream samples analyzed.

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected in three (3) of five (5) outfall samples analyzed,

in one (1) of 10 upstream samples, and in three (3) of 10 downstream samples.

At Calumet, dry weather

Giardia

cysts were detected in four (4) of five (5) outfall and in

four (4) of 10 downstream samples.

Cysts were not detected in any of the samples

upstream of the Calumet WRP.

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected in one (1) of five

(5) outfall and in four (4) of 10 downstream samples at the Calumet waterway.

Only one

upstream sample had detectable

Cryptosporidium

oocysts at the Calumet waterway.

For dry weather samples, no infectious

Cryptosporidiumn

oocysts were detected. Also, for

dry weather, most

Giardia

cysts were non-viable. The average dry weather percentage of

viable

Giardia

cysts found in each waterway segment, including outfall and in-stream

concentrations, are provided below:

• Calumet:

Giardia

viability= 10%

• Stickney

:

Giardia

viability=21 %

• North Side

:

Giardia

viability=26%

Outfall samples at the North Side and Stickney WRPs contained higher levels of viable

cysts compared to Calumet. The average dry weather percentage of viable

Giardia

cysts

found in the outfall only of each WRP is provided below:

•

Calumet Outfall:

Giardia

viability= 10%

•

Stickney Outfall:

Giardia

viability=47%

•

North Side Outfall:

Giardia

viability=5I %

Final

Wetdry

-

April 2008'

xxii

---

Geosynte&

consultants

Wet Weather

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

Results

Overall, the concentrations and frequency of detection of

Cryptosporidium

oocysts and

Giardia

cysts were greater during wet weather compared to dry weather sampling. Wet

weather enumeration results from samples collected at the North Side designated

locations indicate that

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected in one of three upstream

samples, in 10 of 12 downstream samples, and in the one (1) outfall sample collected.

Giardia

cysts were detected in all samples analyzed at the North Side.

Wet weather enumeration results from samples collected at the Stickney designated

locations indicate that

four

(4)

of six (6) upstream samples, four (4) of six (6)

downstream samples and two (2) of three (3) RAPS samples had detectable

concentrations of

Cryptosporidium

oocysts.

All

Stickney samples, except one (1)

upstream sample, had detectable concentrations of

Giardia

cysts.

Wet weather enumeration results from samples collected at the Calumet designated

locations indicate that two (2) of the three (3) outfall samples had detectable

concentrations of

Cryptosporidium

oocysts.

None of the wet weather samples collected

upstream of the Calumet WRP had detectable concentrations of

Cryptosporidium

oocysts

and

Giardia

cysts.

Two (2) of the three (3) Calumet outfall samples had detectable

concentrations of

Cryptosporidium

oocysts.

Seven (7) of 12 downstream samples had

detectable concentrations of

Cryptosporidium

oocysts.

All outfall samples at the Calumet

WRP had

Giardia

cysts. However, only four (4) of 12 downstream samples had

detectable

Giardia

cysts.

For wet weather samples, no infectious

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected with one

exception.

The average wet weather percentage of viable

Giardia

cysts found in each

waterway segment, including outfall and in-stream concentrations, are provided below:

• Calumet:

Giardia

viability= 10%

9 Stickney:

Giardia

viability=47%

+

North Side:

Giardia

viability=49%

Final Wetdry

-April 2008'

XXiii

---

Geosynte&

consultants

The average wet weather percentage of viable

Giardia

cysts found in the outfall only of

each WRP is provided below:

•

Calumet Outfail:

Giardia

viability= 10%

• Stickney Outfall:

Giardia

viability=50%

• North Side Outfall:

Giardia

viability=42%

Comparison of Dry and Wet Weather

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

Results

For dry weather samples, no infectious

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected.

Similarly, for wet weather samples, no infectious

Cryptosporidium

oocysts were detected

with one exception. Also, two (2) subsampies of the wet weather matrix spike sample of

the North Side waterway had infectious foci. Overall, the combined wet and dry weather

percentage of infectious foci is estimated to be approximately 2.4% (3 of 125 samples [75

dry weather and 50 wet weather samples]).

The Calumet waterway under both dry and wet weather contained the smallest percentage

(10%) of viable

Giardia

cysts compared to Stickney and North Side. The viability of

Giardia

cysts increased at the Stickney and North Side waterways during wet weather.

The WRP outfalls had similar

Giardia

viability under wet and dry weather conditions.

Virus

Results

The following sections summarize the analytical results for enteric viruses, adenovirus

and

Caticivirus

(norovirus) under dry and wet weather conditions.

Enteric Viruses

Dry Weather Enteric Virus Results

The dry weather results indicate that a relatively small number of samples (17 of 75

samples or 23%) had detectable concentrations of enteric viruses. Eight (8) of 25 dry

weather samples (29%) upstream, downstream and at the outfall of the North Side WRP

had detectable enteric virus concentrations.

Six (6) of 25 dry weather samples (24%)

Final

Wetdry-April 2008'

Xxiv

---

Geosyntec

consultants

upstream and downstream of the Stickney WRP had detectable virus concentrations.

There were no detectable enteric virus concentrations at the Stickney WRP outfall. Only

three (3) of 25 dry weather samples (12%), one at each upstream, downstream and outfall

location of the Calumet WRP had detectable concentrations of enteric viruses.

Wet Weather Enteric Virus Results

During the North Side wet weather sampling, 11 of 16 samples (69%) had detectable

enteric virus concentrations.

Only one (1) wet weather outfall sample was collected at

the North Side WRP; that sample had a detectable enteric virus concentration.

Due to

safety concerns, the discharge of the NBPS was sampled at the nearest downstream

location and only one (1) of the three (3) samples collected had detectable virus

concentrations.

During the Stickney wet weather sampling, 14 of 16 samples (88%) had detectable

enteric virus concentrations.

Only one (1) wet weather outfall sample was collected at

the Stickney WRP; that sample had a detectable enteric virus concentration. All three (3)

RAPS samples had detectable concentrations of total enteric viruses

During the Calumet wet weather sampling, 14 of 18 samples

(

77%) had detectable enteric

virus concentrations

.

Two (2)

of the three

(

3) wet weather outfall samples collected at

the Calumet WRP had detectable enteric virus concentrations.

Comparison of Dry and Wet Weather Enteric Virus Results

The percentage of enteric virus detections during wet weather were greater than the dry

weather detections.

The percentage of enteric virus detections at the North Side

waterway segment increased from 29% during dry weather to 69% during wet weather.

The percentage of virus detections at the Stickney waterway segment increased from 24%

during dry weather to 88% during wet weather.

The percentage of enteric virus

detections at the Calumet waterway segment increased from 12% during dry weather to

77% during wet weather. In addition, the concentrations detected during wet weather

sampling are generally greater than the dry weather concentrations.

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

XXv

---

Geosyntec

consultants

Adenovirus

Dry Weather Adenovirus

Results

Of 75 dry weather samples, 42 or 56% demonstrated the presence of detectable virus by

assay in the PCLJPRF/5 cell line.

Of 42 samples that were cell culture positive,

adenoviruses were detected in 31 or about 74% of the samples by PCR. During the North

Side dry weather sampling, 12 of 25 samples (48%) had detectable adenovirus virus

concentrations.

During the Stickney dry weather sampling, 13 of 25 samples (52%) had

detectable adenovirus concentrations.

During the Calumet dry weather sampling, six (6)

of 25 samples (24%) had detectable adenovirus concentrations. There were no detectable

concentrations upstream of the Calumet WRP during dry weather sampling.

Wet Weather Adenovirus

Results

Of 50 wet weather samples, 42 or 84% demonstrated the presence of infectious virus by

assay in the PCL/PRF/5 cell line and had adenoviruses detected by PCR. During the

North Side wet weather sampling, 14 of 16 samples (88%) had detectable adenovirus

concentrations.

Several of the upstream and downstream locations had concentrations

greater than the outfall.

Due to safety concerns, the discharge of the NBPS was sampled

at the nearest downstream location and all three (3) samples collected had detectable

adenovirus concentrations.

During the Stickney wet weather sampling, 15 of 16 samples (94%) had detectable

adenovirus concentrations.

Only one (1) wet weather outfall sample was collected at the

Stickney

WRP; that sample had a detectable adenovirus concentration.

All three (3)

RAPS samples had detectable concentrations of adenovirus

During the Calumet wet weather sampling, 13 of 18 samples (72%) had detectable

adenovirus concentrations. Only one (1) out of three (3) upstream samples at the

Calumet WRP had detectable adenovirus concentrations. Nine (9) of the 12 downstream

samples had detectable adenovirus concentrations.

All three (3) wet weather outfall

samples collected at the Calumet WRP had detectable adenovirus concentrations.

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

Xxvi

---

Geosyntee°

Comparison of Wet and Dry Weather Adenovirus Results

The percentage of adenovirus detections during wet weather were greater than the dry

weather detections. The percentage of adenovirus detections at the North Side waterway

segment increased from 48% during dry weather to 88% during wet weather.

The

percentage of adenovirus detections at the Stickney waterway segment increased from

52% during dry weather to 94% during wet weather. The percentage of adenovirus

detections at the Calumet waterway segment increased from 24% during dry weather to

72% during wet weather. In addition, the concentrations detected during wet weather

sampling are generally greater than the dry weather concentrations.

Calicivirus

(

Norovirus)

Dry Weather

Calicivirus

(Norovirus)

Results

During dry weather, norovirus was only detected in five (5) samples or about 7% of the

75 samples. At North Side, only one (1) outfall sample (one [1] of 25 samples [4%1) had

a detectable norovirus concentration. During the Stickney dry weather sampling, three (3)

of 25 samples (12%) had detectable norovirus concentrations.

During the dry weather

sampling the Stickney WRP outfall did not have any detectable norovirus concentrations.

During the Calumet wet weather sampling, only one (1) outfall sample (one [1] of 25

samples [4%]) had a detectable norovirus concentration.

Norovirus infection is most

common in the winter and that may explain the low concentration of norovirus observed

in this study (Gerba, 2006).

Wet Weather

Calicivirus

(

Norovirus

)

Results

During wet weather,

Calicivirus

or norovirus were only detected in 20 samples or 40% of

the 50 samples. The greatest concentration of norovirus was observed at RAPS, which is

located upstream of the Stickney WRP.

During the North Side wet weather sampling, seven (7) of 16 samples (44%) had

detectable norovirus concentrations.

There

were no detectable concentrations of

norovirus upstream of the North Side WRP. Only one (1) wet weather outfall sample

Final

wetdry-April 2008'

xxvii

---

Geosynke&

consultants

was collected at the North Side WRP and it did not have a detectable norovirus

concentration. Due to safety concerns, the discharge of the NBPS was sampled at the

nearest downstream location. One (1) of three (3) NBPS samples had detectable

norovirus concentration.

During the Stickney wet weather sampling, 10 of 1.6 samples (63%) had detectable

norovirus concentrations.

Two (2) upstream and five (S) downstream samples had

detectable norovirus concentrations.

Only one (1) wet weather outfall sample was

collected at the Stickney WRP; this sample had a detectable norovirus concentration.

Two (2) of the three (3) RAPS samples had detectable concentrations of norovirus

During the Calumet wet weather sampling, three (3) of 18 samples (17%) had detectable

norovirus concentrations. There were no detectable norovirus concentrations upstream of

the Calumet WRP. There was only one (1) detectable concentration downstream of the

Calumet WRP. Two (2) of the three (3) wet weather outfall samples collected at the

Calumet WRP had detectable norovirus concentrations.

Comparison of Dry and Wet Weather

Calicivirus

(

Norovirus) Results

The results indicate that the percentage of norovirus detections during wet weather were

greater than the dry weather detections. The percentage of adenovirus detections at the

North Side waterway segment increased from 4% during dry weather to 44% during wet

weather.

The percentage of adenovirus detections at the Stickney waterway segment

increased from 12% during dry weather to 63% during wet weather. The percentage of

norovirus detections at the Calumet waterway segment increased from 4% during dry

weather to 17% during wet weather. In addition, the concentrations detected during wet

weather sampling are generally greater than the dry weather concentrations.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008'

xxviii

---

GeosyntecO

consultants

Wastewater Disinfection

According to

WERF

(2005), disinfection is warranted in situations where direct human

contact in the immediate vicinity of an outfall is possible or where effluent is discharged

to areas involving the production of human food. Disinfection is warranted in situations

where its application leads to a reduction in the risk of disease transmission.

As

illustrated

by post-disinfection re-growth of bacteria, relatively poor virucidal

performance, and generation of persistent disinfection by products (DBPs), it is not clear

that wastewater disinfection always yields improved effluent or receiving water quality

(WERF,

2005).

The effectiveness of the following disinfection technologies were

evaluated for the risk assessment study:

• Ultra

Violet (UV)

• Ozonation

• Chlorination/Dechlorination

The effectiveness of disinfection is a complex function of several variables including type

and dose of disinfectant, type and concentration of microorganisms, contact time, and

water quality characteristics. In most cases, pilot-studies and other considerations guide

the selection process.

If available, published data regarding pathogen inactivation

achieved by disinfection are typically used to estimate the concentration of pathogens in

disinfected wastewater.

There is great variability in the performance and uncertainty in the efficacy of

disinfection (see Table ES-1).

There are many unanswered questions with respect to

disinfection efficiency data for microbial indicators and pathogens.

Therefore, it is

uncertain if disinfection designed to remove indicators can be effective in the removal of

pathogens and in the reduction of pathogen risks.

In applying any disinfectant, it is important to strike a balance between risks associated

with

microbial pathogens and those associated with DBPs.

DBPs are persistent

chemicals, some of which have relevant toxicological characteristics.

The inventory of

DBPs that have the potential to cause adverse health effects is large and highly variable

among publicly owned treatment works (POTW) effluents.

Final Wetdry-April 2008

XX1X

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

The human health effects associated with chemical contaminants that are influenced or

produced as a result of disinfection operations tend to be chronic in nature. Therefore,

the development of a risk assessment for exposure to chemical constituents, including

DBPs, is far more complex than the microbial risk assessment.

Risk assessments of

wastewater disinfection should consider microbial and chemical quality.

The health

effects of disinfectants are generally evaluated by epidemiological studies and/or

toxicological studies using laboratory animals

(WERF,

2005).

Microbial Risk Assessment

Microbial risk assessment techniques were used to quantitatively assess the health risks

for the use of recreational waters that receive effluent discharges. The goal of the study

was to determine the expected number of illnesses associated with designated usage of

the waterways both with and without disinfection of WRP effluent.

A probabilistic

analysis

was employed that used input assumptions drawn from site-specific and

scientific literature sources.

Risks were estimated for recreational users participating in

activities involving different levels of exposure in dry, wet, or a combination of weather

events over the course of a recreational year.

Microbial Risk Methodology

Risk assessment inputs were drawn extensively from site-specific data and were

developed using state-of-the-science methodology to accurately represent recreational

user exposure conditions and risks.

Recreational survey studies were used to provide

insight on the types and frequency of recreational exposure expected in the waterway.

For quantitative risk analysis, the UAA study was used as the primary source for

exposure use data for the CWS. As a part of the UAA, the CWS was divided into three

major waterway segments each associated with a single WRP.

Recreational use was

divided into high (canoeing), medium (fishing) and low (pleasure boating) exposure

activities.

UAA survey data was used to estimate the proportion of recreational users

participating in each receptor scenario along each waterway segment.

Final

Wetdry-April 2009'

XXX

---

Geosyntec

consultants

Exposure parameters were developed as distributional parameters for each receptor

scenario as inputs to the exposure model. These parameters include incidental ingestion

rates and exposure duration. Selection of input distributions relied on literature derived

sources, site-specific use information and professional judgment.

Dose-response parameters define the mathematical relationship between the dose of a

pathogenic organism and the probability of infection or illness in exposed persons. Dose-

response data are typically derived from either controlled human feeding studies or

reconstruction of doses from outbreak incidences. In human feeding trials volunteers are

fed pathogens in different doses and the percentage of subjects experiencing the effect

(either illness or infection) are calculated. While feeding trials can provide useful dose-

response analysis data, studies are usually performed in healthy individuals given high

levels of a single strain.

Epidemiological outbreak studies provide responses on a larger

cross-section of the population but dose reconstruction is often problematic.

Dose-

response data was developed from regulatory documents, industry white papers and peer

reviewed literature.

Concentrations of pathogens in the waterway were selected for each simulation from the

entire dataset of dry and wet weather samples collected. The proportion of dry and wet

weather samples utilized were weighted to account for the proportion of dry and wet

weather days in a typical Chicago recreational season.

Microbial Risk Results

Results of the risk assessment demonstrate that risks to recreational users under various

weather and use scenarios is low and within the EPA recommended risk limits for

primary contact exposure

.

The highest rates of illness were associated with recreational

use on the Stickney and North Side waterway segments and the lowest illness rate on the

Calumet waterway segment

.

Illness rates were higher under wet weather conditions than

under dry weather conditions

(

see Table ES

-2). The

results demonstrate that the expected

illness rates for receptors were all below the proposed EPA limit of 14 illnesses per 1000

exposure events for freshwater recreational use including immersion

/

swimming

activities.

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

XXxi

---

Geosynteco

consultants

Risks

were also calculated individually for each of the three different classes of

recreational use that span the range of exposures reported in the UAA survey in

proportion to the frequency of use for each waterway segment. The recreational activity

with the highest potential for illness was fishing while that with the lowest potential for

illness was pleasure boating. Which recreational activity results in the greatest number of

affected users, however, depends on both the proportion of users engaged in that activity

and the pathogen load in that waterway segment.

For example, in the North Side

segment, 33.7% of the gastrointestinal illnesses are predicted to result from canoeing, but

canoeing accounts for only 20% of the users of the North Side waterway. In the Stickney

and Calumet segments, the predicted illnesses were predominantly from fishing and

boating due to the low frequency of canoeists in these waterway segments. To further

evaluate the risk stratified by the recreational use activity, risk per 1000 exposure events

were computed separately for canoeing, boating, and fishing recreational uses (see Table

ES-3). As expected, the highest risks were associated with recreational use by the highest

exposure group (i.e. canoeing). However, for each waterway the risks associated with the

highest exposure use are below the proposed EPA limit of 14 illnesses per 1000 exposure

events for freshwater recreational use including immersion/swimming activities.

For the North Side and Stickney waterway segments, the majority of predicted illnesses

were the result of concentrations of viruses, E.

coli

and

Giardia.

For the Calumet

waterway the risks are generally lower with multiple organisms contributing to overall

risk.

Secondary transmission for these pathogens resulted in an approximately two-fold

increase in population illness associated with the primary recreational user illnesses.

However, secondary transmission rates are higher for the North Side and Stickney

waterway segments where the highly communicable norovirus is a dominant pathogen.

Secondary transmission considers spread from individuals who may become infected but

not ill, a common condition for a number of these pathogens.

Effect of Effluent

Disinfection on Pathogen Microbial Risks

The results of this study demonstrate that disinfection of WRP effluents will have a

negligible effect on risk for recreational users of the waterway. The effects of various

Final

Wetdry-April 2008'

xxxii

---

Geosyntec

consultants

disinfection techniques on risk reduction were estimated for combined wet and dry

weather days.

Dry weather sampling data was used to estimate the waterway load that

would be affected by disinfection.

Wet weather sampling data was assumed to

encompass both effluent loading (attenuated by disinfection) and non-point discharges to

the waterway (e.g. CSO, pumping stations, stormwater outfalls).

Disinfection of the

effluent outfall was predicted to result in a decrease in effluent pathogen loads but have a

much lower effect on overall pathogen concentrations in the waterway (see Table ES-4).

This is because the sampling data shows that a large proportion of the pathogen load

results from sources other than the WRP effluent.

Disinfection results in effluent

pathogen risk decreasing from a low level to essentially zero but has little impact in

waterway pathogen concentrations affected by current or past wet weather conditions.

These results suggest that disinfection of effluent has little impact on the overall illness

rates from recreational use of the CWS.

Non-Gastrointestinal Microbial Risks

Although

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

is

not a pathogen that is linked to gastrointestinal

illness, this pathogen has been linked to recreational illness outbreaks involving dermal

(foliculitis), eye, and ear (otitis externia) infections.

For this reason, the levels of

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

were evaluated under the sampling program for this risk

assessment.

However, quantitative evaluation of the risk for this pathogen is

problematic.

There are no published dose-response relationships for

Pseudomonas

aeruginosa.

Without a clear dose-response relationship there is no way to establish the

expected illness level associated with any particular waterway concentration. The dermal

pathway for estimating exposure to

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

is

also problematic. Ear

and eye infections associated with contact by

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

contaminated

water are typically associated with full immersion activities.

Since these types of

activities are not permitted or designated uses of the CAW the incidence of ear and eye

exposures are expected to be low and as the result of accidental or intentional misuse of

the waterway.

Pseudomonas

related foliculitis commonly requires a break in the skin

from a preexisting cut, open sore or scrape as an entry point for infection.

Immunocompetent individuals without skin abrasions rarely develop foliculitis by

Final

Wetdry-April 2008'

xxxiii

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

exposure to intact skin.

For these reasons, a quantitative evaluation of risks is not

feasible.

A qualitative review of the wet and dry weather data, however, may provide some insight

on the relative risk from

Pseudomonas

exposure.

Comparison of the waterway level to

the outfall levels may also provide an indication on the effectiveness that a disinfection

step may have on

Pseudomonas

levels in the waterway.

Wet weather levels are higher

than dry weather conditions. Perhaps more importantly, the outfall samples show lower

levels

of Pseudomonas

than the corresponding wet weather samples. This suggests that

the

major inputs for

Pseudomonas

in the waterways are sources other than the WRP

effluent. Therefore, disinfection of the WRP effluent would have minor effects on the

overall loading of

Pseudomonas

in the waterway and risks associated with recreational

exposure to this pathogen.

Sensitivity Analysis

A sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify the contribution of each input

distribution to the variance of the resulting risk estimates.

The actual pathogen dose

levels from the combined wet and dry weather assessment

were

used.

Results from the

sensitivity analysis indicate that the incidental ingestion rates and weather are the largest

contributors to the North Side waterway segment.

Recreational user type followed by

incidental ingestion rate, exposure duration and weather contributes the most to the

variance for the Stickney and Calumet waterway segments.

Conclusions

The results from this study indicate that, despite elevated levels of fecal indicator

bacteria, the concentrations of actual pathogenic organisms in the waterway are low.

Given the low pathogen levels in the waterway, there is a low probability of developing

gastrointestinal illness even in areas of the CWS in close proximity to the District's non-

disinfected

WRP effluents. For the designated recreational uses evaluated, the risks of

developing illness, both with and without disinfection for each waterway segments, are

below the EPA guideline of 14 illnesses per 1,000 exposures for fresh water recreation

Final Wetdry-April 2008'

XXXiv

---

Geosynte&

consultants

including immersion and swimming. The pathogen concentrations within the waterway

are largely a result of non-WRP derived wet weather inputs. Disinfection of the WRP

effluent would have marginal impact on CWS pathogen concentrations. These results

confirm that current health risks to CWS recreators are low and disinfection of treated

wastewater effluent would have little impact on the overall gastrointestinal illness rates.

References

Chang, J.C.H., S.F. Ossoff, D.C. Lobe, M.H. Dorfman, C. Dumais, R.G. Qualls, and J.D.

Johnson, 1985,

"UV Inactivation of Pathogenic and Indicator Microorganisms, "

Applied and Environmental Microbiology, June, p. 1361-1365.

Clancy, J.L., Linden, K.G., and McCuin, R.M., 2004,

"Cryptosporidium Occurrence in

Wastewaters and Control Using UV Disinfection", IUVA News,

Vol. 6, No. 3,

September.

EPA, 1986, Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria, EPA-440/5-84-002.

EPA, 1996, ICR Microbial Laboratory Manual, EPA/600/R-95/178. April.

EPA, 1.999,

Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual,

EPA 815-R-99-

414, April.

EPA, 2001, Method 1623:

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

in

Water Filtration/IMSIFA,

EPA-821-R-01-025. April.

EPA, 2001a, Method 1106.1:

Enterococci

in

Water by Membrane Filtration Using

membrane-Enterococcus-Esculin

Iron

Agar (mE-EIA),

EPA 821-R-02-021.

September.

EPA, 2002, Method 1103.1:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

in

Water Membrane Filtration

Using membrane-Thermotolerant

Escherichia coli

Agar (mTEC), EPA-821-R-2-

020. September.

EPA, 2003, Source Water Monitoring Guidance Manual for Public Water Systems for the

Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. EPA 815-D-03-005. June.

Gerba, 2006,

Personal Communication.

Gerba,

C.P.,

Gramos,

D.M.,

Nwachuku, N., 2002,

"Comparative Inactivation of

Enteroviruses and Adenovirus 2 by UV Light", Applied and Environmental

Microbiology",

pp. 5167-5169, Vol. 68, No. 10, October.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008'

XXXV

---

Geosynte&

consultants

Health Canada,

2004,

"Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: Supporting

Documentation--Enteric Viruses",

April.

Helsel D. R. and R.M. Hirsch, 2002, Techniques of Water Resources Investigations of

The United States Geological Survey. Book 4, Hydrological Analysis and

Interpretation. Chapter 3, Statistical Methods in Water Resources. USGS

publication available at: http://water.usgs.goyipubs/twri/twri4a3/. September.

Helsel

Dennis R., 2005, Non Detects and Data Analysis, Statistics for Censored

Environmental Data. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. PP 55 - 80,

pp. 185-196.

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC), 2004,

Description of the Chicago Waterway System, Use Attainability Analysis Study,

December.

Minitab: Copyright 2005, Minitab Inc., Minitab 14.2. Copyright 2005, The R Foundation

for Statistical Computing. Version 2.2.0 (2005-10-06 r35749). ISBN 3-900051-

07-0

Nelson, K., Sheikh

,

B., Cooper

,

R.C., Holden, R., and Israel, K., undated

,

"Efficacy of

Pathogen Removal During Full-Scale Operation

of Water

Reuse Facilities in

Monterey

,

California."

Paraskeva

,

P.

and Graham

,

N. J.D., 2002

,

"

Ozonation

of Municipal

Wastewater

Effluents",

Water Environment Research

,

Vol. 74, No.

6, November

/

December.

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1998, 201h Edition.

Method 9222D. Fecal Coliform Membrane Filter Procedure; Method 9213E.

Membrane Filter Technique for

Pseudomonas aeruginosa;

Method 9260B.

General Quantitative Isolation and Identification Procedures for

Salmonella;

Method 9260D. Quantitative

Salmonella

Procedures.

Thurston-Enriquez, J.A., Haas, C.N., Jacangelo, J., Riley, K., and Gerba, C.P., 2003,

"Inactivation of Feline Calicivirus and Adenovirus Type 40 by UV Radiation",

Applied and Environmental Microbiology,

pp. 577-582, Vol. 69, No. 1, January.

Thurston-Enriquez, J.A., Haas, C.N., Jacangelo,

J.,

Gerba, C.P., 2003a,

"Chlorine

Inactivation of Adenovirus Type 40 and Feline Calicivirus, "

Applied and

Environmental Microbiology, pp. 3979-85, Vol. 69, No. 7, July.

Thurston-Enriquez, J

.A., Haas, C.

N., Jacangelo

, J.,

Gerba, C.P., 2005,

Inactivation of

Enteric Adenovirus and Feline Calicivirus

by Ozone, Water

Resources

,

pp. 3650-

6,

Vol. 39, No. 15.

Final

Wot dry-April 2008'

xxxvi

---

Geosyntec

consultants

Water Environment Research Foundation

(WERF),

2005,

"Effects

of

Wastewater

Disinfection on Human Health

."

99-HHE-1.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008'

XXXVii

---

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

TABLES

77-7

---

Table ES-1. Summary of Pathogen Disinfection Efficiencies

Notes•

Calicivirus

Adenovirus

5 log>;{l^l'0te 2'

102 (Note 5)

4 lob (Note 9)'

4 log i Note 7)

1 logy 4 log (Note E^

2 log (Note 5)

4 log {Note t

(1)

EPA (1999)

(9)

Thurston-Enriquez et al. (2005); results obtained in

(2)

Paraskeva and Graham (2002)

buffered disinfectant demand free water at 5°C and pH 7.

(3)

Clancy (2004)

These conditions may not be representative of wastewater.

(4)

Nelson et al. (undated)

(10)

Chang et al. (1985)

(5)

Health Canada (2004)

(11)

Thurston-Bnriquez et al. (2003a)

(6)

Gerba et al. (2002)

(7)

Thurston-Enriquez et al. (2003)

(8)

WERF

(2005)

Enterococci

.Salin0'411a

Total

Enter

ic Viruses

4,109 (No to l ); 1.3109-4:51og;

2 log (Note 2)

'l log {Note 0

Not Available

0.571og-2.67

log (Note 2 )

1.57 102 71og.(Note*

4 log (Note 8)

3 4109 (

Note J.0);

Not Available

0.32 Iog 3;b 1 lqg (Tote 9

>.41109 (Notes)

> 4 log (Note 8)

Not Available

More resistant than E.

coli

(Note 8)

og-3 log (Note I

O

.

S:log^(Nrate l j

5 Iog (Note 4)

---

Table ES-2

Total Expected Primary

Illnesses

per 1,000 Exposures under Combined Dry and

Wet Weather Using Different

Effluent Disinfection

Techniques

Exposure Input

Waterway

North Side

Stickney

Calumet

Dry Weather

0.36

1.28

0.10

Wet Weather

2.78

2.34

0.36

Combined

Weather Samples

1.55

1.77

0.21

Note:

Includes all primary gastrointestinal illnesses from E.

coli,

Sabnonella,

total

enteric

viruses,

adenoviruses,

Giatdia,

and

Cryptosporidium

expected from the waterway exposures.

Waterway

concentration inputs for the simulations were randomly selected (bootstrap sampled) from datasets that

include the indicated sample sets.

---

Table ES-3

Estimated Illness Rates Assuming Single Recreational

Use with No

Effluent

Disinfection

Illnesses per 1

,

000 Exposures for Combined Wet

and Dry Weather Samples

Recreational

Use

North

Side

Stickney

Calumet

Canoeing

2.45

3.19

0.52

Fishing

1.42

1.90

0.31

Pleasure

Boating

0

.66

1.05

0.14

Note;

Includes all primary gastrointestinal illnesses from

E.

coli, Salnaon.ella,

total enteric

viruses,

adenoviruses,

Giardia,

and

Cryptosporidium

expected from the waterway exposures.

77-1

7

-

---

Table ES-4

Effect of Disinfection on Expected Recreational Illnesses per 1000 Exposures

Waterway

North Side

Stickney

Calumet

No Disinfection

1.53

1.74

0.20

UV Irradiation

1.32

1.48

0.17

Ozone

1.45

1.65

0.19

Chlorination

1.43

1.63

0.19

Note:

Estimates based on geometric mean pathogen concentrations and central tendency estimates for exposure

assumptions.

Waterway pathogen concentrations were developed by the difference in wet and dry

disinfected concentrations. Includes all primary gastrointestinal illnesses from E,

coli, Salmonella,

total

enteric viruses, adenoviruses,

Giardia,

and

Oyptosporidiurn

expected from the waterway exposures.

---

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FIGURES

---

FIGURE ES-1

CHICAGO WATERWAY SYSTEM

-

DRY WEATHER SAMPLING LOCATIONS

METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO

LOA E-

Vt

LMETTE PUMPING

STATION

ass

NORTH

BRANCH PUMPING STATION (NBPS)

LAKE

MICHIGAN

LEGEND

0 MAJOR WRP INFLOW

n

MINOR WRP INFLOW

- CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM SECONDARY

CONTACT

- OTHER WATERWAYS

GENERAL USE

NNNr CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM GENERAL USE

--- OTHER WATERWAYS

SECONDARY CONTACT

9.9 MILES UPSTREAM OF 124

LOCKPORT

f FLOW

CONFLUENCE WITH THE

DES PLAINES RNER

-I. JomT

OCKPORT POWERHOUSE

AND LOCK

0.0

Jw.

CL'ET•E

[cw^a0.

^Y.K;^_q.

avFwE

r'n'NAt s

'url

I

Jam!'+C n':"M.f

+rcwc

iKl.rr1. ^r,

i--

>.nanwe lntxr

V'.t

vpJe! h)

^cln)T AIY V

..f

Cvt..t

Y^rl

SCV nrtME

}

rrtl^tvSwlVa]

A]O/. 5•aEE 1

lY0 MCV,! C

K.t:r Kt

;

Y S(rnll

^]^Cr.O V. ;'FEET I

AvCWE

>r^l3ti ^n_IYY

a45M AV^AVEnLE

>Y;H:lNO n]kMlk

call C

r.ryC

<

i.;VriiaCC"

fuAH^, itt

!

KA:wR AnLTDn

LEGEND

SCALE wA.As

II

UPSTREAM ANO OOWNSTREAMORYMEATHER

SA APLEM LOCATION

0 AMBENT

SAMPLEIG STATION

NORM

BRANCA!

CANAL.

RACNE AVENUE PUMPING

STATION (RAPS)

T' T

---

FIGURE ES-2

CHICAGO WATERWAY SYSTEM - WET WEATHER SAMPLING LOCATIONS

METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO

LEGEND

• MAJOR WRP INFLOW

n

MINOR WRP INFLOW

CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM SECONDARY

CONTACT

- OTHER WATERWAYS

GENERAL USE

«^+ CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM GENERAL USE

-- OTHER WATERWAYS

SECONDARY

CONTACT

9.9 MILES UPSTREAM OF 12-?

LOCKPORT

f FLOW

11-

]ULA^LN AKN]!

3'-:iCf VOA All

A^E'AA

t-Ywr(ry AKN^]t

<

nrv AKNVE

_

^.E

SfwOU^E!)

].Nr

3

^lE!1LE

SAL SOH A

'hNth.

]

:^"N 51N1 E

I

3lpYYEN'. f D-

iaor.E:aEr rAweNC

B.raww AKAI.t

-_

-v.c

w..A

.siLO SrwcfT

:XD A.LY-E

r ^.PCn ^^ ^^

11-C[Eao+LV.E

rN0[SON BIREE i

N-IdI'E Rl

r^u .NC..ial fT

1Ni'A .M' AME^pI

LEUEND

$ME W MLES

If

•

-EMT SAMPLING STATNNN

UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM WET WEATHER

SAMPLING LOCATION

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

1.

INTRODUCTION

The Metropolitan

Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC or

District) has retained The Geosyntec Team, which includes Geosyntec Consultants

(Geosyntec) and its subcontractors: Patterson Environmental Consultants (PEC); Cecil

Lue-Ring & Associates (CLHA); Dr. Charles Gerba of the University of Arizona (UA);

Hoosier Microbiological Laboratory, Inc.

(HML); and Clancy Environmental

Consultants, Inc. (CEC) to perform a Risk Assessment of Human Health Impacts of

Disinfection Vs. No Disinfection of the Chicago Area Waterways System (CWS).

The CWS consists of 78 miles of canals, which serve the Chicago area for two principal

purposes: the drainage of urban storm water runoff and treated municipal wastewater

effluents from the District's three major water reclamation plants (WRP) (North Side,

Stickney and Calumet), and the support of commercial navigation (see Figure 1-1).

Approximately 75 percent of the length of the CWS includes manmade canals where no

waterway existed previously, and the remainder includes natural streams that have been

deepened, straightened and/or widened to such an extent that reversion to the natural state

is not possible (MWRDGC, 2004).

The CWS has two river systems: the Calumet River System and the Chicago River

System. The Calumet Raver System is 23.

1

miles in

length and includes the Calumet-Sag

Channel (CSC) and the Little Calumet River (LCR). The Chicago River System consists

of 55.1 miles of waterways and includes the Chicago River, Chicago Sanitary and Ship

Canal (CSSC), North Branch, North Branch Canal (NBC), North Shore Channel (NSC),

South Branch and South Fork (MWRDGC, 2004).

By 1972, most states had adopted bacterial water quality standards, and beginning with

the early enforcement of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

most municipal sewage treatment facilities were required to meet effluent bacterial

standards.

These effluent bacterial standards were generally met through effluent

disinfection by chlorination.

In 1972, the Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB)

adopted year-round effluent and water quality bacterial standards of 400 (effluent) and

Final Wetdry-April 2008

1

---

Geosynte&

consultants

200 (water quality) fecal coliform colony forming units (CFU) per 100 mL, respectively

(MSDGC, 1984).

In 1973, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) incorporated a 400 CFU per

100 mL fecal coliform secondary effluent standard for all municipal wastewater

treatment facilities.

The fecal coliform standards in both the effluents and receiving

water bodies were clearly intended to prevent or minimize the transmission of pathogens

to persons ingesting or coming in contact with waters which receive the treated

wastewater (MSDGC, 1984). In

1976,

EPA deleted the fecal coliform standard from its

definition of secondary treatment, stating that the benefits achieved by disinfection

should be weighed against the environmental risks and costs (MSDGC, 1984).

In 1977, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) proposed revisions to the

existing IPCB fecal coliform effluent and water quality standards. The IEPA submitted

these changes to the IPCB for approval. The IPCB held administrative public hearings

(designated R77-12D) to gather testimony regarding these proposed revisions. In 1984,

the Illinois

Appellate

Court affirmed the IPCB in its revised regulations, which

eliminated chlorination of effluents discharged to secondary contact waters (MSDGC,

1984).

In 1986, EPA published

Ambient

Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria-1986.

This

document contains EPA's recommended water quality criteria for bacteria to protect

bathers in recreational waters.

The EPA (1986) document identifies the maximum

concentrations of

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

and

enterococci

allowable in fresh and marine

recreational waters. In 1997, EPA established the Beaches Environmental Assessment

and Coastal Health

(BEACH)

Program to reduce risks to human health caused by

exposure to pathogens in recreational waters

. The BEACH Act of 2000

amended the

Clean Water Act (CWA)

by adding Section

303(i)(1)(A), which

requires that:

Not later than

[April 10, 2004]

,

each State having coastal recreation waters shall

adopt and submit to the Administrator water quality criteria

and standards for the

coastal recreation

waters of

the State

for those

pathogens and pathogen indicators

for which the Administrator

has published criteria under

§304(a).

Final

wetdry-Aprit 2008

2

---

Geosynte&

consultants

Furthermore, the BEACH Act added Section 502(21) to the CWA, which defines "coastal

recreation

waters" to include the Great Lakes and marine coastal estuaries that are

designated by States under CWA Section 303(c)

for swimming

,

bathing

,

surfing, or

similar water contact activities

.

The requirements of the BEACH Act do not apply to

the CWS.

The IEPA has conducted a Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) of the CWS in accordance

with 40 CFR 131.10(d). The UAA report has proposed water quality standards for the

CWS based on the

Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria-1986

(EPA, 1986) and

EPA guidance (EPA, 2003). In order to assist IEPA in evaluating the proposed bacterial

water quality standards, the District commissioned qualified consultants (research

scientists and water quality experts) to conduct a peer review of the EPA's Water Quality

Criteria for Bacteria - 1986 and the November 2003 draft implementation guidance

document (EPA, 1986 and 2003). The findings of the expert review panel indicated that

there is no scientific basis for developing protective bacteria standards for the designated

recreational uses of the CWS (MWRDGC, 2006). One of the recommendations from the

expert review panel report was that more science is needed before bacteria criteria can be

established for effluent dominated urban waterways (MWRDGC, 2006). To address this

recommendation, the District proposed a microbial risk assessment study to determine

health impacts of recreational use of the CWS assuming disinfected and non-disinfected

effluents from the North Side, Stickney, and Calumet WRPs.

The results of this microbial risk assessment will be evaluated and compared against the

EPA-proposed bacteria standards for the CWS. The following bacteria standards were

proposed by the UAA report to protect identified uses of the CWS effective 1 March

2010:

• The incidental contact recreational waters shall not exceed a 30-day

geometric mean for E.

coli

of 1,030 CFU/100 mL, which is applicable

to the CSSC from its junction with the South Branch of the Chicago

River to California Avenue, and North Side and Calumet waterways.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

3

T-77-

---

Geosynte&

consultants

•

The non-

contact recreational

waters shall

not exceed a 30-day

geometric

mean for

E. coli

of 2,740 CFU/100 mL, which is applicable

to the Calumet River and Lower

Des Plaines

River from

its confluence

with the CSSC locations.

•

Currently, there are no bacteria standards for the non-recreational

waters applicable to the CSSC from California Avenue to the

confluence of the Des Plaines River location.

The IEPA rejected these proposed standards and instead proposed WRP effluent fecal

coliform standards of 400 CFU/100 mL. The 1EPA also required effluent disinfection in

order to achieve this standard.

Over time, there have been major improvements in water

quality,

altered land use and additional public access along the CWS.

Such

improvements and conditions have produced both greater opportunity and heightened

public interest in environmental and recreational uses within and along the waterways.

Currently, the waterways are used for recreational boating, canoeing, fishing and other

streamside recreational activities. These waterways also provide aquatic habitat for

wildlife.

About 70 percent of the annual flows in the CWS are from the discharge of

treated municipal wastewater effluent from the District's WRPs (MWRDGC, 2004).

The IEPA along with other federal, state and local agencies has initiated a multi-year,

comprehensive evaluation of the waterways known as the UAA, to identify future uses of

the waterways for commercial and recreational activities.

Treated, but non-disinfected

wastewater effluent is one of several sources that contribute to the presence of indicator

bacteria and pathogens in the waterways. Other pathogen sources include the following

(hU://www.ChicagoAreaWaterways,or

• Faulty sewage disposal systems

•

Combined and sanitary sewer overflows

• Wild and domestic animal waste

•

Illegal discharges to drains and sewers

• Storm water runoff

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

4

---

Geosyntec

consultants

• Treated, but non-disinfected wastewater effluent

The UAA Stakeholders evaluating the CWS have agreed that swimming and other

primary contact recreation should not be considered as a viable designated use for the

CWS because of physical limitations due to the configuration of the embankments and

safety hazards. The Geosyntec Team has relied on UAA existing recreational use survey

data for the CWS.

Where possible, The Geosyntec Team supplemented the data with

information presented in the technical literature.

1.1

Project Obiective and Project Tasks

The main objective of this risk assessment study was to evaluate the human health impact

of continuing the current practice of not disinfecting the effluents from the District's

Calumet, North Side, and Stickney WRPs versus initiating disinfection of the effluent at

these three WRPs. This Risk Assessment Study includes two phases: Phase I dry weather

risk assessment and Phase II wet weather risk assessment.

The dry weather risk

assessment sampling was completed in the summer of 2005. The climatic conditions

during the 2005 sampling period were not suitable for conducting wet weather sampling.

The wet weather sampling took place between June and October of 2006. Dry and wet

weather microbial sampling results of the surface water in the CWS and the WRP

effluents formed the basis for the risk assessment. The dry and wet weather microbial

results were integrated to enable an evaluation of the potential impacts of disinfection on

overall risks associated with the recreational use of the waterway.

To accomplish the main project objective, The Geosyntec Team completed the following

project tasks:

1.

Prepared Dry and Wet Weather Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAPS) and Quality

Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) to generate microbial analytical results that

formed the basis of the microbial risk assessment

2.

Provided field training to the District's sampling personnel

3.

Completed a Microbial Risk Assessment, including:

a.

Literature review of pathogen disinfection effectiveness

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

5

7

7

-

7

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

b.

Microbial exposure assessment by literature review

c.

Microbial infection dose-response analysis by literature review

d.

Microbial risk characterization of three waterway segments: North Side,

Stickney and Calumet

Geosyntec prepared Dry and Wet Weather SAPs and QAPPs in collaboration with the

District and the Geosyntec team of experts.

The SAP documented the sampling

locations,

procedures and acceptable wet weather sampling criteria and triggers,

including but not limited to rainfall depth, duration, intensity and antecedent dry period.

The dry weather QAPP was applicable to the samples collected during wet weather,

because the same pathogens were analyzed by the same laboratories both for dry and wet

weather.

However, the wet weather QAPP specified additional requirements for pathogen

samples regarding sample dilution, filtration volume, and reporting requirements.

1.2

Reuort Organization

This report summarizes the results of the microbial risk assessment based on dry and wet

weather sampling and analytical results.

Section 2 discusses microbial sampling and

analysis.

Section 3 presents microbial analytical results. Section 4 discusses wastewater

disinfection.

Section 5 presents the dry and wet weather microbial risk assessment

results.

1.3

References

EPA, 1986, Bacteriological Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Marine and Fresh

Recreational Waters. EPA 440/5-84-002. January.

EPA, 2003, Implementation Guidance for Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria.

EPA-823-B-03-xxx. November. DRAFT.

Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) Proceedings, Rule 77-12D, Docket D, Exhibit

15, Letter of G.F. Mallison, Dated January 20, 1977.

Metropolitan Sanitary District

of Greater

Chicago (MSDGC), 1984, Wastewater

Disinfection: A Review of Technical and Legal Aspects in Illinois.

Department

of Research and Development. Report No. 84-17. July.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

6

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

Metropolitan

Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC), 2004,

Description of the Chicago Waterway System, Use Attainability Analysis Study,

December.

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC), 2006, Expert

Review Report Regarding United States Environmental Protection Agency's

Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986: Application to Secondary Contact

Recreation. July.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

7

---

SECTION I

FIGURES

---

METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO

CHICAGO WATERWAY SYSTEM

.« to

b,

wi

SuTm

re

MIM

I

41

4

9

^ Ey

y

LAKE

f

{

y

ia

WOMAN

"n3airxeRAxra

• MAJOR WRP INFLOW

n

MINOR WRP INFLOW

"

-•-• CHICAGOWATERWAY

f

x

MC

c

[

0AW"

VVQP

XS

SYSTEM SECONDARY

E

- OTHER

CONTACTWATERWAYS

I

+

oaµ

+

a^

,yrmGO

H.rq4

GENERAL USE

vt"^

x+«+ CHICAGO WATERWAY

•

O

O

M

SYSTEM GENERAL USE

t--- +

i

Ck1CAro

^- OTHER WATERWAYS

SECONDARY CONTACT

4.9 MILES UPSTREAM OF 03

sAC^uxctloN

i

uiwir

-0- FLOW

LOCKPORT

^0M1

.

+

r

.

^

2$•

_ uu+n

RQN LOCK

J

• UAU

RONEO

W

LU L%=

!

iSA

STAT10NOm6m

N _

wm

LOCKPORTAOW

[

RNOUSE

(

GiW(T

Mot

NCE WFTN THE

A

NDtOOK

CONFLUE

SCALIMM t

AE571FSRMR34Y

OA

F E

tf t S

a.1 ,eOL^T

FIGURE NO: 1-1

Ge

us

y

ntec

t,

un:s R:+st;

CHICAGO. IUM40IS

PRtTJF

.CT N4.:

NF:P2 0036OO

.

t

FIGURE NO:

1

DATF;

11 N6V

9007

FR.B NO

.:

FIG I •CYIS

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

2.

MICROBIAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS

One of the components of the risk assessment was to conduct sampling and analysis of

the CWS. This section discusses the field sampling procedures used to ensure the

collection of representative data during dry and wet weather sampling.

Dry weather

sampling was conducted between July and September 2005 in accordance with the

procedures in the SAP and QAPP for the CWS (Geosyntec, 2005). Wet weather sampling

was conducted between June and October 2006 in accordance with the procedures in the

Wet Weather SAP and QAPP for the CWS (Geosyntec, 2006).

Dr. Charles Gerba of the University of Arizona provided on-site training to the District

personnel on sample collection procedures.

MWRDGC personnel collected the samples

using the District's boats at the designated sampling locations using the procedures in the

SAP and QAPP.

2.1

Rationale for Indicator and Patho

e

enic Microorganism

Selection

The primary objective of the microbial examination of the CWS was the detection of

fecal pollution that may be excreted in the feces of humans and animals. The direct

detection of pathogenic bacteria, viruses, and protozoa requires costly and time-

consuming procedures and well-trained technicians. In addition, there are no standard

methods available to detect each pathogen possibly present in the CWS.

This study focused on the detection of microorganisms typically present in the feces of

humans and other warm-blooded animals, as indicators of fecal pollution.

Hence, a

group of EPA-approved indicator microorganisms, such as E.

coli, enterococci,

and fecal

eoliform was selected. In addition, pathogens representative of those present in the

wastewater that are also of public health concern were selected.

Some of these

microorganisms were identified by Mead et al. (1999) and WERF (2004).

Table 2-

1

presents a summary of the microorganisms selected for this microbial risk

assessment study

.

The rationale for selecting the pathogens for this microbial risk

assessment study included the following criteria:

Final Wetdry-April 2008

8

---

Geosyntec

consultants

•

The pathogens selected are associated with documented outbreaks of disease,

including gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases and infections

+

There are EPA-approved methods or laboratory standard operating procedures

(SOPS) available for the measurement of the selected pathogens.

2.2

Sampling Objectives

The objective of the sampling was to determine the concentrations of the following

indicators and pathogens during the 2005 (dry weather) and 2006 (wet weather)

recreational seasons:

+

Enteric viruses: i) total culturable viruses, (ii) viable adenovirus; and (iii)

Calicivirus

+

Infectious

Cryptosporidium parvum

and viable

Giardia lamblia

•

Salmonella

spp.

•

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

•

Fecal coliforms

• E. coli

+

Enterococci

2.2.1

Dry Weather

Sampling

Objectives

The specific objectives of dry weather

sampling were

as follows:

1.

Evaluate the impact of the treated effluent from the District's three major WRPs

(North Side, Stickney, and Calumet) on the microbial quality of the CWS.

2.

Estimate health risks to recreational users of the CWS due to incidental contact

pathogen exposure under dry weather conditions.

3.

Quantify any reduction of risk that would result from disinfection of WRP

effluents during dry weather.

During the 2005 dry weather sampling, samples were taken at locations upstream,

downstream and at the outfalls of the Stickney, Calumet and North Side WRPs (see

Figure 2-1).

The sampling plan provided a detailed sampling strategy, including

sampling locations, the number of samples and sampling frequency. Five dry weather

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

9

---

Geosyntec v

consultants

sampling events took place over a 5-week period, which began the week of 26 July 2005.

Seventy five (75) samples were collected (five events at each of the three [3] WRPs; 5

samples per event at each WRP). The number of samples collected during dry weather

sampling at each location is summarized in Table 2-2.

2.2.2 Wet

Weather Sampling Objectives

The specific objectives of wet weather sampling were as follows:

1.

Evaluate the impact of wet weather flow on the microbial quality of the WRP

outfalls.

2.

Evaluate the impact of combined sewer overflows (CSOs) on the microbial

quality of the CWS.

3.

Estimate health risks to recreational users of the CWS due to incidental contact

pathogen exposure under wet weather conditions.

4.

Quantify any reduction of risk that would result from disinfecting WRP effluents

during wet weather.

It

has been established in the technical literature that wet weather contributes

significantly to the microbial load in surface water due to surface runoff and CSOs.

Several sources contribute to the microbial load in the waterway during wet weather:

CSOs, discharges from storm drains, overland runoff, land use activities (such as

agriculture and construction), erosion, and habitat destruction.

A total of nine (9) sampling events took place during the 2006 wet weather recreational

season between the months of June and October 2006. Three (3) sampling events took

place at each of the North Side, Stickney and Calumet WRPs. The sampling plan

provided a detailed sampling strategy, including sampling locations, the number of

samples and sampling frequency. Based on the sampling locations outlined in Section

2.2.1, the number of samples collected during wet weather sampling at each location are

summarized in Table 2-2.

The wet weather sampling program included fifty (50)

samples for each of the pathogens discussed above.

Final Wetdry-April 2008

10

---

Geosyntec O

consultants

Sampling protocols and methods of analysis were specified according to EPA-approved

methods where possible.

When EPA-approved methods were not available, laboratory

SOPs were used.

2.3

Field

Sampling

Procedures

This section discusses: (1)

microbial sampling locations; (2) sample collection

equipment, material and procedures; (3) sample identification; (4) sample custody; (5)

sample packaging, shipment and tracking; (6) waste management; and (7) health and

safety procedures.

2.3.1 Microbial Sampling Locations

Samples were taken at locations upstream, downstream, and at the outfalls of the

Stickney,

Calumet, and North Side WRPs. In selecting the sampling locations the

following factors were also considered: 1) locations of pumping stations for combined

sewer outflows; 2) recreational navigation; and 3) commercial navigation (barge traffic).

Boat traffic, especially commercial barge traffic, can have a significant effect on the

water quality in the CWS through re-suspension of sediment containing attached

microorganisms. In accordance with MWRDGC sampling procedures, when there was

barge traffic during the sampling events the sampling stopped and commenced 30

minutes after the barge passed. The sampling personnel recorded traffic of recreational

boats and barges during sampling.

The Stickney WRP discharges to the CSSC; the Calumet WRP discharges to the LCR

that in turn discharges to CSC, and the North Side WRP discharges to the NSC (see

Figure 2-1).

The following sections present the physical description of the above-

mentioned waterways and the sampling locations.

Physical Description

of the CSSC

This 31.1 mile long man-made channel has many different shapes and sizes. Its

alignment is straight throughout its length, except for four bends near Harlem Avenue,

LaGrange and Romeoville Roads, and in Lockport (see Figure 2-1). Downstream of the

Final Wetdry-Apri12008

11

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

Lockport Powerhouse and Lack (LP&L), a reach of 1.1 miles, the depth is 10 feet and the

width is 200 feet. Upstream of the LP&L, the depth varies from 20 to 27 feet. The reach

immediately upstream of the LP&L, 2.4 miles in length, varies in width from 160 to 300

feet.

The east bank of this reach is a vertical concrete wall. The west bank varies from a

vertical rock wall to a steep rock hill embankment. The next 14.6 miles of the CSSC

have vertical concrete or rock walls 160 feet apart. The last 13.0 miles have a trapezoidal

shape, 220 feet wide, with steep earth or rock side slopes. There are several areas with

vertical rock walls in this last reach.

Physical Description

of the CSC and LCR

The Calumet WRP discharges to the LCR. The LCR, 6.9 miles in length, has been

deepened and widened from its original natural condition. It has few vertical rock walls

and most of the banks are earthen side slopes. There are several changes in alignment,

with one full 180-degree bend west of Indiana Avenue. LCR's width varies from 250 to

750 feet and its depth is generally 12 feet in the center part of the channel. The width of

LCR at the point of the Calumet WRP outfall discharge was measured by the District to

be 750 feet, but it diminishes rapidly to 375 feet.

A man-made channel, the CSC is 16.2 miles long with a generally trapezoidal shape, 225

feet wide and approximately 10 feet deep. In some sections, the north bank is a vertical

wall. The alignment is generally straight with three bends near Crawford, Ridgeland and

Western Avenues (see Figure 2-1).

Physical Description

of the NSC

This man-made channel is 7.7 miles in length and is straight throughout except for four

bends in alignment near Devon and Central Avenues and Emerson and Linden Streets

(see Figure 2-1). It has steep earthen side slopes and a width of 90 feet. The depth varies

from 5 to 10 feet.

2.3.1.1

Dry

Weather Sampling Locations

A subset of the District

'

s Ambient Water Quality Monitoring

(AWQM)

sampling stations

employed by the MWRDGC along the 78 miles of the CWS was used for this study.

Final Wctdry-April 2008

12

---

Geosynte&

consultants

Three monitoring stations were chosen for each of the WRPs, one upstream of the outfall,

one downstream, and the WRP outfall itself. The sampling locations were surveyed by

MWRDGC sampling personnel using the GPS system available on the District's boat.

Upstream

Sampling

Locations

The upstream locations at each WRP were situated at the nearest

AWQM

sampling

station upstream

of the WRP.

These locations are as follows:

NSC-Oakton Avenue, also known as WW-102 (see Sampling Location 3 on

Figure 2-1) - 8,200 feet or 1.6 miles from the WRP.

2. CSSC-Cicero Avenue, also known as WW-75 (see Sampling Location 21 on

Figure 2-1) - 6,300 feet or 1.2 miles from the WRP.

3.

CSC-Indiana Avenue, also known as WW-56 (see Sampling Location 29 on

Figure 2-1) - 2,800 feet or 0.53 miles from the WRP.

Downstream Sampling Locations

The downstream locations were selected to be the nearest established District monitoring

station that are no less than 10 to 15 waterway widths from the outfall. For the CSSC, the

waterway width downstream of the outfall is 220 feet, resulting in 15 waterway widths of

3,300 feet or 0.625 miles. For the CSC, the waterway width downstream of the outfall

ranges from 750 feet at the point of discharge to LCR to 375 ft. This results in 15

waterway widths ranging from 11,250 feet (-2 miles) to 5,625 feet (-l mile). For the

NSC the waterway width downstream of the outfall is 90 feet, resulting in 15 waterway

widths of 1,350 feet or 0.225 miles. The approximate downstream locations were as

follows:

1.

NSC-Touhy Avenue,

also known

as

WW-

36 (see Sampling Location 5 on

Figure 2-1

) --

2,800 feet or 0.53 miles

from the WRP.

2.

CSSC-

Harlem Avenue

,

also known

as

WW-

41 (see Sampling Location 22

on Figure 2-1) - 9,500 feet or 1.8 miles from the WRP.

3.

CSC-

Halsted Street

,

also known as WW

-

76 (see Sampling Location 32 on

Figure 2

-

1) - 5,800 feet or 11 miles from the WRP.

Final Wetdry-Agri12009

13

---

Geosynte&

consultants

2.3.1.2

Wet Weather Sampling Locations

A subset of the District's AWQM stations employed by the MWRDGC along the 78 miles

of the CWS was used for wet weather sampling. Nine wet weather sampling events

(three at each of the North Side, Stickney and Calumet WRPs) were conducted during the

recreational period between 6 June and 17 October 2006. During each sampling event,

samples

were collected by District personnel at several locations upstream and

downstream of the Stickney, Calumet and North Side WRPs (see Figure 2-2). Outfall

samples were also collected during each sampling event at the Calumet WRP.

One

sample was also collected at the outfalls of North Side and Stickney WRPs during the last

sampling event at each of these WRPs. The sampling locations were situated at the

nearest

MWRDGC AWQM sampling station. At the North Side, samples were also

collected near each of the North Branch Pumping Station (NBPS) or Wilson Avenue

sampling station, depending on the level of turbulence near the NBPS. In addition, at

Stickney, samples were collected near the Racine Avenue Pumping Station (RAPS). The

exact sampling location proximal to the pumping stations was decided by the boat captain

based on the level of turbulence and other logistical and safety considerations..

A larger number of sampling locations was used during wet weather sampling. The wet

weather locations were spaced at significantly larger distances away from the WRPs to

account for the contributions of storm water runoff, CSO outfalls, and pumping stations.

In summary, wet weather

samples

were collected at the following locations:

Upstream of Stickney WRP at

the CSSC

1.

CSSC-Damen Avenue, also known as WW-40 (see Sampling Location 20 on

Figure 2-2)-29,400 feet or 5.6 miles from the WRP

2.

CSSC-Cicero Avenue, also known as WW-75 (see Sampling Location 21 on

Figure 2-2)-8,200 feet or 1.6 miles from the WRP

3.

RAPS outfall (the sample was collected from Bubbly Creek at 35th Street)-32,800

feet or 6.2 miles

from

the WRP

Final Wetdry-April 2008

14

---

GeosyntecO

consultants

Downstream of Stickney WRP at

the CSSC

1.

CSSC-Harlem Avenue, also known as WW-41 (see Sampling Location 22 on

Figure 2-2)-9,500 feet or 1.8 miles from the WRP.

2.

CSSC-Route 83, also known as WW-42 (see Sampling Location 25 on Figure 2-

2)-61,500 feet or 11.7 miles from the WRP.

Upstream of the Calumet

WRP at the LCR

1.

Little Calumet-Indiana Avenue, also known as WW-56 (see Sampling Location

29 on Figure 2-2)-6,300 feet or 1.2 miles from the WRP.

Downstream of the Calumet WRP at

the LCR and CSC

1.

Little Calumet-Halsted Street, also known as WW-76 (see Sampling Location 30

on Figure 2-2)-5,800 feet or 1.1 miles from the WRP

2.

CSC-Ashland Avenue, also known as WW-58 (see Sampling Location 32 on

Figure 2-2)-11,400 feet or 2.2 miles from the WRP

3.

CSC-Cicero Avenue, also known as WW-59 (see Sampling Location 33 on Figure

2-2)-33,800 feet or 6.4 miles from the WRP

4.

CSC-Route 83, also known as WW-43 (see Sampling Location 35 on Figure 2-2),

37,500 feet or 7.1 miles from the WRP.

Upstream of the North Side WRP at the NSC

1.

NSC-Oakton Avenue, also known as WW-102 (see Sampling Location 3 on

Figure 2-2)-2,800 feet or 0.53 miles from the WRP

Downstream of the North Side WRP at the NSC and Chica

g

o River

1.

NSC-Touhy Avenue, also known as WW-36 (see Sampling Location 5 on Figure

2-2)-2,800 feet or 0.53 miles from the WRP

2.

NBPS or North Branch-Wilson Avenue, also known as WW-37 (see Sampling

Location 8

on Figure

2-2)-21,600 feet or 4.09 miles from the WRP

3.

North Branch-Diversey Parkway, also known as WW-73 (

see Sampling

Location

10 on Figure 2-2)-36,400 feet or 6.9 miles from the WRP.

4. South

Branch

-Madison Street, also known as WW-39 (see Sampling Location 17

on Figure 2-2)-52,600 feet or 9.96 miles from the WRP.

2.3.2 Sample Collection

Equipment

,

Materials and Procedures

At each location during both dry and wet weather sampling, field parameters such as pH

and temperature were measured and recorded in the field sample collection forms, which

Final Wetdry-April 2008

15

---

Geosynte&

consultants

are included

in

Appendix A-1 (dry weather

sampling forms

)

and Appendix

A-2 (wet

weather sampling forms

).

In addition

,

the following information was recorded on the

sample collection

form

(see Appendices

A- I and A-2):

• WRP name

• WRP address

• Sampler name

•

Sample ID

•

Sample location ID

•

Sample location name

• Sample collection date/time

• Sample volume

•

Requested analysis

•

Observations

The District used disinfected and sterilized sampling equipment at each sampling location

and for each sampling event.

The equipment was sterilized by scrubbing with warm

detergent solution and exposing to bleach (minimum of a 0.5% solution of bleach and

water) for at least 30 minutes at ambient temperature. The equipment was rinsed with

sterilized deionized water and placed in an area free of potential pathogen contamination

until dry.

Deionized water was sterilized by autoclaving at 121°C.

The details of dry and wet weather sampling are discussed in the following sections.

Dry Weather

Sample Collection Equipment

,

Materials and Procedures

At each sampling station a total of six samples were taken at three locations across the

width of the waterway. Sampling was conducted upstream of the boat (at the bow). At

each location a sample was taken at the surface and another at one-meter depth. The

samples from the three locations at the surface were combined to make a composite

sample. Also, the samples from the three locations at one-meter depth were combined to

make a composite sample. For virus and protozoa samples that require filtration, the

following procedure was followed: At each location upstream and downstream of the

WRP, the three samples at the surface were eomposited by filtering 1/3 of the required

volume at each location. Similarly, at each location upstream and downstream of the

Final Wetdry-April 2008

16

---

GeosyntecO

consultants

WRP, the three samples at I-meter depth were composited by filtering 1/3 of the required

volume at each location.

The exception to this protocol is the outfall samples. Four grab samples were taken over

a period of six hours at the WRP outfall. These four grab samples were combined to

make one composite sample. The composite sample was used as the source of samples

for bacteria by pouring the collected water into the appropriate sample containers. For

protozoa and virus samples, the composite sample was filtered using the procedures

described below.

During each sampling event, 15 samples were collected. Each sample was analyzed for

bacteria, viruses and protozoa. For the five sampling events a total of 75 samples were

collected.

Wet Weather Sample Collection Equipment

,

Materials and Procedures

The District and Geosyntee developed a strategy for determining which rain events were

appropriate for wet weather sampling. Samples were collected during the wet weather

event or immediately after. The following criteria were evaluated to develop the strategy

(EPA, 1999):

1. Minimum amount of precipitation

2.

Duration of precipitation

3.

Antecedent Period (minimum 72 hours of dry weather)

The District monitored pending wet weather using the Internet, public media and the

District's

Waterway Control Center (WCC). Each business day that wet weather was in

the forecast, at approximately 10:00 a.m., the designated District personnel conferred by

conference call regarding the potential for significant wet weather (SWW) over the

following 24-hour period.

SWW was defined as a forecast with 0.5 inch or greater

rainfall. In addition to discussing the forecast, the location, status and work schedule of

the two boats required for sampling was reviewed.

District notified Geosyntec of the

potential for sampling following the daily conference calls when appropriate.

Final Wetdry-April 2008

17

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

When there was the potential for SWW, the District contacted the WCC for wet weather

updates.

When rainfall of more than 0.1 inch had fallen at any WCC rain gauge within

the CSO service area and the 0.5 inch or greater expectation remained, the boat crew

supervisor was notified of the situation by the designated District person.

When 0.3

inches of rainfall had fallen at any WCC rain gauge in the CSO service area, the

designated District person contacted the appropriate treatment plant operator to determine

if any CSO outfall tide gate alarms had occurred or if there had been pumping to the river

at either the 125t1' Street Pumping Station, NBPS or Racine Avenue RAPS.

After the decision was made to call out the boat crew, the District's laboratory sampling

manager contacted Geosyntec to inform them that a sampling event had been initiated.

Grab wet weather samples were collected at the center of the channel because during the

2005 dry weather sampling good mixing conditions were visually observed across the

relatively narrow channel. Therefore, no significant differences were expected across the

channel during wet weather.

Wet weather samples were collected only at the surface of

the CWS. There was no statistical difference between samples collected at the surface

and at 1-meter depth as shown by the 2005 dry weather sampling results (see Section 3

for details).

In addition, effluent (outfall) samples were collected during wet weather sampling to

evaluate whether the increased flow through the WRPs during wet weather may affect the

pathogen concentrations in the effluent of the District's North Side, Stickney, and

Calumet WRPs. Four grab samples were taken over a period of six hours at each WRP

outfall.

These four grab samples were combined to make one composite sample. The

composite sample was used as the source of samples for bacteria by pouring the collected

water into the appropriate sample containers.

For protozoa and virus samples, a

composite filtered sample was collected using the procedures described below.

Table 2-3 summarizes the dry and wet weather WRP flows (million gallons per day

[MGD]) during the 2005 and 2006 sampling events. The table also summarizes the

pumping station discharge volumes (million gallons [MG]) during the wet weather

sampling events.

The data in Table 2-3 indicate that the effluent discharge flows are

Final Wetdry-April 2008

18

---

Geosyntec O

consultants

significantly higher during wet weather at each WRP. The data also indicate that the

CSO volumes are significantly higher at the RAPS (near the Stickney WRP) than the

NBPS (near the North Side WRP) and the 125`1i Street Pumping Station (near the Calumet

WRP). In addition, the data indicate that during the 2006 wet weather sampling, the

NBPS and the RAPS discharged CSOs during two of the three sampling events at each

WRP. At the Calumet WRP the 125th Street Pumping Station discharged during one of

the three sampling events, which is a very unusual occurrence. Based on the District's

experience, the 125th Street Pumping Station discharges about once every ten years.

The following sections discuss (i) virus sampling in accordance to EPA (1996); (ii)

bacteria sampling according to EPA (1986; 2002; 2003; 2003a) and the Standard

Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (1998); and protozoa sampling

according to EPA (2001; 2003).

2.3.2.1

Virus

Sampling

Sampling for viruses was conducted according to EPA (1996) using the virus adsorption-

elution (VIRADEL) method for recovering human enteric viruses from water matrices.

Positively charged cartridge filters (Virosorb° I MDS cartridge, Cuno Inc. Meriden, CT)

were used to concentrate viruses from water.

Figure 2-3 presents a typical filter

apparatus (EPA, 1996).

Gloves were changed if they touched human skin or handled

components that may be contaminated (i.e. boat surfaces).

Procedures for sample

packaging and shipment are discussed in Section 2.3.5.

During the 2005 dry weather sampling, at each location upstream and downstream of the

WRP, the three samples at the surface were composited by filtering 1/3 of the required

volume at each location.

Similarly, the 1-meter depth samples were composited by

filtering l/3 of the required volume at each location. Approximately 300-L of upstream

and downstream samples were filtered at each location during dry and wet weather

sampling. In addition, approximately 100-L samples were filtered at the outfall.

The

outfall samples were composited over a six hour period by filtering 1/ of the required

volume every 1.5 hours.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

19

---

Geosyl ite&

consultants

During the 2006 wet weather sampling at each location upstream and downstream of the

WRP, virus samples were collected by filtering the required volume near the center of the

channel.

Because of the relatively high turbidity of the surface water, pre-filter modules

were used routinely during wet weather sampling,

2.3.2.2

Bacteria Sampling

During dry weather sampling, at each location upstream and downstream of the WRP, the

three samples at the surface were composited by collecting 1/3 of the required volume at

each location. Similarly, the samples at 1-meter depth were composited by collecting 113

of the required volume at each location. The samples were collected using a sampling

pump and attaching a weight to the sampling tubing to lower it to the surface and 1-meter

depth, respectively.

The sample container was filled using an aseptic technique and

leaving at least 1 inch of head space to allow for mixing of the sample before analysis.

The container was closed immediately after the sample was collected.

During wet weather sampling, two sample containers were used for bacteria samples. A

10-L cubitainer was used for

Salmonella

spp. and one 10-L cubitainer was used for the

other bacteria analyzed. The sample container was filled using an aseptic technique and

leaving at least 1 inch of head space. The container was closed immediately after the

sample was collected.

Immediately following sample collection, the sample container lid was tightened, labeled

with water-proof ink and clear tape was placed over the sample label.

The sample

container was then placed in a zipiock bag, wrapped with bubble wrap or paper towels (to

prevent freezing) and placed upright in the cooler with ice. Fresh ice was placed in the

cooler immediately prior to shipment. Procedures for sample packaging and shipment

are discussed in Section 2.3.5.

2.3.2.3

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

Sampling

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

sampling was performed by EPA Method 1623 using field

filtration.

Method 1623 has been validated only for laboratory filtration.

However,

recent guidance in EPA (2003), entitled "Source Water Monitoring Guidance Manual for

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

20

---

Geosyntec

consultants

Public

Water Systems for the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.

EPA 815-D-03-005. June," indicates that field filtration is acceptable.

Field filtration

was performed using Pall Gelman EnvirochekTm HV capsule filters, which are acceptable

filtration systems.

During the first dry weather sampling event at the Calumet Waterway

System, 10-L samples were field filtered for protozoa analysis. During the retraining dry

and wet weather events, 20-L samples were field filtered for protozoa analysis.

During dry weather, four bulk water matrix spike (MS) samples were collected for

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia,

which were spiked in the laboratory and analyzed. The

matrix spike (MS) test in EPA method 1623 entails analysis of a separate sample aliquot

spiked with 100 to 500 oocysts to determine the effect of the matrix on the method's

oocyst recovery. One MS sample was analyzed for every 20 samples (or 5% of the total

samples) as required by the method. The MS results were used collectively to assess

overall recovery and variability for EPA Method 1623. The MS sample results were not

used to adjust

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

recoveries at any sampling location.

During wet weather, two bulk water MS samples for

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

were

collected, spiked in the laboratory and analyzed.

MS samples were collected near the

NBPS at Wilson Avenue and at RAPS. During dry weather sampling, four MS samples

were

collected: one at each of the WRPs and one downstream of the Calumet WRP.

Before collection of the bulk MS sample, temperature and pH were measured. Turbidity

and specific conductance or conductivity (SC) of field samples were also measured at the

District's laboratory.

The MS samples were collected immediately after the field-filtered

samples by filling two 10-L cubitainers directly from the pump tubing.

The cubitainer cap was tightened, labeled (see Section 2.3.3) and placed in the shipping

cooler with ice. The ice was replaced with fresh ice before shipping. Sample packaging,

shipment and tracking procedures are discussed in Section 2.3.5.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

21

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

2.3.3 Sample Identificatlon

Samples were identified on the sample container with a separate identification label. All

labeling was done in indelible/waterproof ink. Each securely affixed label included the

following information:

•

Sample ID, which included:

o

WRP identification (Stickney, North Side, Calumet)

o Sampling location (upstream, downstream, outfall)

Sampling depth (surface or 1-meter)

o Date of sample collection

In addition, the sample label included the following:

• Time of sample collection

• Sampler's name or initials

•

Required analytical method

• Sample type (i.e., composite, grab)

• Preservation requirement (i.e. ice)

2.3.4

Sample Custody

After collection and identification, samples were maintained under chain-of-custody

procedures.

Proper sample custody procedures were used to ensure that samples were

obtained from the locations stated and that they reached the laboratory without alteration.

A sample was considered to be in a person's custody if the sample was:

•

in a person's actual possession;

•

in view after being in a person's possession;

locked so that no one can tamper with it after having been in physical custody;

or

•

in a secured area, restricted to authorized personnel.

Final

Watdry-April 2008

22

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

The District sampling personnel were the field sample custodians and were responsible

for ensuring sample custody until the samples were transferred to a courier or to the

laboratory.

All samples were accompanied by a Chain-of-Custody Record.

When

transferring samples, the individuals relinquishing and receiving the samples signed and

dated the record. Shipping bills were kept as receipt of shipment. Airbills were retained

as part of the permanent documentation. Before shipping the samples, one of the three

Chain-of-Custody carbon copies was kept as part of the permanent documentation.

When the samples were received by the laboratory, a designated laboratory person

checked all incoming samples for integrity and noted any observations on the original

Chain-of-Custody Record. Each sample was logged into the laboratory system by

assigning it a unique laboratory sample number.

This number and the field sample

identification number were recorded on the laboratory report.

The laboratory maintained a file of all the documents (e.g., Chain-of-Custody forms)

pertinent to sample custody and sample analysis protocols. For Chain-of-Custody forms,

the laboratory maintained a file copy, and the completed original was returned to the

project manager as a part of the final analytical report.

2.3.5

Sample Packaging

,

Shipment

,

and Tracking

After labeling, all samples were stored in ice-filled coolers until shipment to the

laboratory.

Af the end of each day the samples were packed for shipment.

2.3.5.1

Sample Packaging

Two large plastic trash bags were inserted into the shipping cooler to create a double

liner. Immediately before packing the cooler, flesh ice was put into several Zipioc bags.

The Ziploc bags were sealed by expelling as much air as possible and securing the top

with tape.

The samples were placed into the shipping container with ice around the

sample bag.

A temperature sample was also placed in the cooler (e.g., extra sample

bottle) for measuring sample temperature upon receipt at the laboratory. The liner bags

were closed by twisting the top of each bag and tying it in a knot.

Final Wodry-April 2008

23

---

Geosynte&

consultants

The chain of custody form was completed, signed and dated, before being placed and

sealed inside a Ziploc bag, which was taped under the cooler lid. A copy of the sample

collection form was faxed to the laboratory the day after sample collection. The cooler

lid near the horizontal joints was sealed with duct tape. The lid was also secured by

taping the cooler at each end, perpendicular to the seal. The coolers were also affixed

with security labels taped over opposite ends of the lid.

2.3.5.2

Shipping and Tracking

The protozoa samples were shipped to CEC on the day of collection or on the morning of

the following day using United Parcel Service.

The bacteria and virus samples were

hand-delivered to HML. Due to the relatively short holding time of bacteria samples it

was decided to hand-deliver the samples to ensure that they would be analyzed within the

holding time requirements.

The District Field Sampling Managers kept track of the CEC sample shipment by using

the airbill number on the shipper's copy of the airbill, using the shipping company's web

page, or by contacting the shipping company over the phone.

2.3.5

Waste Management

Each laboratory was responsible for complying with all federal, state and local

regulations governing waste management, particularly the biohazard and hazardous waste

identification rules and land disposal restrictions, and to protect the air, water, and land

by minimizing and controlling the releases from fume hoods and bench operations.

Compliance with all sewage discharge permits and regulations was also required.

Samples, reference materials, and equipment known or suspected to have viable

pathogens attached or contained were sterilized prior to disposal.

2.3.7

Health and Safety

The sampling was performed in accordance with MWRDGC health and safety

procedures.

Final Wetdry-April 2008

24

---

Geosynte&

consultants

2.4

Quality Assurance

/

Quality Control Procedures

This section discusses the quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures that

were used for the analysis of surface water and outfall samples. The QA/QC procedures

discussed are in accordance with the requirements of the analytical methods specified in

Section 2.4.1.

2.4.1

Microbial Methods of Analyses

Sampling and analysis of microbial samples were conducted in accordance with the

procedures described at http://epa.gov/microbes and in Standard

Methods for the

Examination of Water and Wastewater (Standard Methods, 1998).

The microbial

methods of analysis include the following:

•

Enteric viruses: i) (total culturable viruses) using the methods described in the

ICR Microbial Laboratory Manual, EPA 600/R-95/178 (EPA, 1996); ii)

adenovirus; and iii)

Calicivirus.

The samples for total culturable viruses were

analyzed by HML and the samples for adenovirus and

Calicivirus

were

analyzed by the UA Laboratory. Adenovirus and

Calicivirus

were determined

using the UA SOPs. There are no EPA-approved methods for viable

Calicivirus.

The method used involves a Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)

method that offers an estimate of the virus concentration, but does not

determine or confirm viability.

Calicivirus

is a family of human and animal

viruses.

For this risk assessment study

Calicivirus

refers to human

Caliciviruses,

specifically the genus norovirus.

• Infectious

Cryptosporidium parvum

and viable

Giardia lanzblia

were

determined using EPA Method 1623 (EPA, 2001) in conjunction with cell

culture infectivity for the

Cryptosporidium

and viability staining (DAPI-PI)

for the

Giardia.

The samples for protozoa were analyzed by CEC.

•

Salmonella

spp. using Standard Method 9260D (Standard Methods, 1998)

•

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

using Standard Method 9213E (Standard Methods,

1998)

•

Fecal coliforms

using

Standard Method 9222D (Standard Methods, 1998)

•

E. coli

using EPA Method 1103.1 (EPA, 2002)

•

Enterococci

using EPA Method 1106.2 (EPA, 2001a)

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

25

---

GeosyntecO

2.4.2 Data Quality Objectives

Data quality objectives

(

DQO) are qualitative statements that specify the quality of the

data required to generate valid data for the risk assessment calculations. DQOs are based

on the ultimate use of the data to be collected; therefore

,

different data uses may require

different levels of data quality (EPA, 1998

;

EPA, 2002a). Two analytical levels address

various data uses and the

QA/QC effort

and methods required for this project to achieve

the desired level of quality. These two levels are discussed below:

1)

DQO Level 2 (On-site Analyses): DQO Level 2 provides rapid results and a

better level of data quality than Level 1. This level is used for on-

site

analytical

measurement data using the District's YSI Datasonds Model 6600 and includes

pH and temperature.

2)

DQO Level 3 (Off-site Analyses using EPA-approved Methods, Standard

Methods (1998) or laboratory SOPs):

DQO Level 3 provides data that will be

used in the risk assessment calculations.

Off-site analyses of viruses, bacteria,

and protozoa are subject to Level 3 DQOs.

The following sections discuss the QA/QC procedures of the analyses to be performed

off-site.

The on-site analyses met Level 2 DQOs. On-site analyses were conducted in

accordance with the manufacturer's operations and maintenance manual.

The overall QA objective was to implement procedures for sampling, chain-of-custody,

laboratory analysis, and reporting that would provide valid and complete data results.

The following sections discuss specific requirements for QA/QC procedures: laboratory

internal QC checks; equipment calibration; equipment maintenance; corrective actions;

data reduction, validation, and reporting; and archiving examination results.

2.4.3

QA/

QC Procedures

Implementation of the QA/QC procedures was established through the following steps:

The District Project Manager ensured that each field team member was

familiar with the SAP and QAPP prior to implementation of field activities.

Final Wetdry-April 2008

26

7T7

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

•

The District Project Manager and Geosyntec QA Manager regularly provided

a QA review of field activities, field notebooks and forms to ensure that all

procedures were followed.

•

Both the Geosyntec Project Manager and QA Manager identified laboratories

with national certifications that routinely analyze for the pathogens specified

in the sampling plan.

•

The Geosyntec Project

Manager and QA Manager verified that the

laboratories have a written description of their QA activities, a QA plan

describing the QA management of day-to-day routine operations. In addition,

The Geosyntec Team conducted telephone interviews and on-site visits to

audit the laboratories for this project.

•

The laboratories were required to adhere to defined quality assurance

procedures to ensure that generated analytical data are scientifically valid and

are of known and acceptable precision and specificity.

The latest EPA-approved methods and Standard Methods were used to perform the

analyses for this project.

2.4.3.1

Laboratory Internal QC

The laboratories performed all QC procedures that were required by the analytical

methods. The dry and wet weather analytical reports of HML, CEC and UA are included

in Appendices: B-1 and B-2; CA and C-2; and D-1 and D-2, respectively. The

laboratories

were also required to comply with the requirements in EPA (1978) as

required

by the analytical methods.

In

addition, the

University

of Arizona

Microbiological Laboratory was also required to comply with the requirements in EPA

(2004).

The laboratories were also required to implement the corrective actions required

if the QC criteria were not met.

Data that did not meet the internal QC criteria was

flagged and the laboratory documented the reason(s) for the nonconformance.

All

samples

were

analyzed within holding time requirements.

Bacteria QC

The dry and wet weather bacteria analytical results are included in Appendices B-1 and

B-2, respectively.

Bacteria sample results met the QC specifications set forth in the

Final

wetdry-April 2008

27

---

Geosynte&

consultants

approved methods described above.

Each batch (or lot, if commercially prepared) of

dilution/rinse water was checked for sterility by adding 50 mL of water to 50 mL of a

double-strength non-selective broth (e g., tryptic soy, trypticase soy, or tryptose broth).

The water was incubated at 35°C ^ 0.5°C and checked for growth after 24 hours and 48

hours (or for the longest incubation time specified in the method).

To test sterility of newly prepared media prior to the analysis of field samples, one plate

per each media batch was incubated at the appropriate temperature for 24 and 48 hours

(or for the longest incubation time specified in the method) and checked for growth. For

each new lot or batch of medium, the analytical procedures and integrity of the medium

was checked before use by testing with known positive and negative control cultures.

Preparation blanks were analyzed to detect potential contamination of dilution/rinse water

during the course of analyses.

A membrane filtration (MF) preparation blank was

performed at the beginning and the end of each filtration series by filtering 20-30 mL of

dilution water through the membrane filter and testing for growth. For the most probable

number (MPN) technique, a volume of sterilized, buffered water was analyzed exactly

like a field sample each day samples were analyzed.

The preparation blank was

incubated with the sample batch and observed for growth of the target organism.

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

QC

The following QC samples were analyzed for

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia:

MS,

ongoing precision and recovery (OPR), and method blanks; the results are presented in

Appendices C-1 and C-2. The method blank test in EPA Method 1623 consists of

analysis of an unspiked reagent water sample to test for contamination. The OPR in EPA

Method 1623 entails analysis of a reagent water sample spiked with 100 to 500 oocysts to

demonstrate ongoing acceptable performance. The MS test in EPA Method 1623 entails

analysis of a separate sample aliquot spiked with 100 to 500 oocysts to determine the

effect of the matrix on oocyst recovery.

For dry weather samples, four MS samples were analyzed for the 75 samples collected

(or 5% of the total samples). One MS sample was collected at each of the three WRP

Final Wetdry-April 2008

28

---

Geosynte&

consultants

outfalls.

One MS sample was collected downstream of the Calumet WRP that was

sampled during the first sampling event.

For wet weather samples, two MS samples were analyzed for the 50 samples collected

(or about 5% of the total samples).

One MS sample was collected near the NBPS at

Wilson Avenue. A second MS sample was collected at RAPS. MS results were within

the acceptance criteria specified in EPA Method 1623. The MS sample results were not

used to adjust

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

recoveries at any sampling location.

During dry weather, cyst and oocyst recoveries for the surface water MS samples were

52% and 61%, respectively. The

Giardia

cysts recovery for the outfall MS sample was

29.8% and the

Cryptosporidium

oocysts recovery was 27.7%.

During wet weather, the recovery rates of seeded

Giardia

and

Cryptosporidium

in the

Stickney RAPS MS sample (Stickney - RAPS-MS-080306) were 46.5% and 89.1%,

respectively.

For the North Side MS sample (North Side -DNS-WW-37 - 062606 -

MS), the

Giardia and Cryptosporidium

recovery rates for the matrix spike were 151%

and 77.7%, respectively.

During dry weather, no oocysts or cysts were detected in method blanks analyzed

indicating no contamination in the spiking or sample processing procedures.

Mean cyst

recovery for OPR samples was 51.0 ± 27% (n=5) with recoveries ranging from 24.6 to

96.4%.

The mean oocyst recovery for OPR samples was 61.1 ± 17% with recoveries

ranging from 40.4 to 84.3%.

All recoveries were well within the acceptance criteria

specified for OPR samples in Method 1623 (EPA, 2003).

During wet weather, no oocysts or cysts were detected in method blanks analyzed

indicating no contamination in the spiking or sample processing procedures. The cyst

recoveries for OPR samples ranged from 33.5 to 84.4%. The oocyst recoveries for OPR

samples ranged from 33.2 to 89.1%. The lowest OPR recoveries for cysts (33.5%) and

oocysts (33.2%) were measured during the analysis of the 26 June 2006 North Side

samples.

A calculation error when preparing the oocyst working suspension resulted in a

tenfold reduction in the concentration of oocysts used in the spiking trials.

While the

Final Wctdry-April 2008

29

---

Geosynte&

consultants

OPR recoveries for the 26 June 2006 North Side analysis were relatively lower than the

ones typically obtained by CEC, they were still within acceptance criteria established by

EPA validation trials.

Overall, all recoveries were well within the acceptance criteria

specified for OPR samples in Method 1623 (EPA, 2003).

Virus QC

The dry and wet weather analytical results for viruses are presented in Appendices B-1

and B-2, and D-1 and D-2, respectively. For the determination of total culturable viruses

the laboratories run a negative and positive assay control with every group of subsamples

inoculated into cell cultures. The laboratories performed a negative assay control (NAC)

by inoculating Blue Green Monkey Kidney (BGMK) cell culture with a volume of

sodium phosphate buffer (pH = 7 to 7.5) equal to the inoculation volume. This culture

served as a negative control, The laboratories performed a positive assay control (PAC)

by diluting attenuated poliovirus type 3 (from the high titered QC stock) in sodium

phosphate buffer (pH = 7 to 7.5) to give a concentration of 20 Plaque Forming Units

(PFU) per inoculation volume. The laboratories inoculated a BGM culture with a volume

of diluted virus solution equal to the inoculation volume. This control provided a

measure for continued sensitivity of the cell cultures to virus infection.

University of Arizona

QA/QC

Physical Measures

:

Two PCR workstations, with non-

circulating air and ultraviolet (UV) light were used to ensure clean areas.

All the areas

for the analysis were physically separate.

All the reagents were prepared in a separate

room from the samples. Both rooms had positive pressure from the main laboratory to

reduce contamination.

Each room has a workstation, the reagents were only opened in

the workstation, and the samples were opened only in their respective workstations. The

workstations were cleaned with 10% bleach solution and the UV light was turned on for

at least 30 minutes prior to sample handling. Different equipment was used in each room

and not used in other areas (e.g. pipets, pipet tips and lab coats were exclusively used for

each room).

The PCR thermocyclers are contained in another room outside the main

laboratory.

The PCR product was only open in the workstation designated for samples

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

30

---

Geosyntec

consultants

and in the electrophoresis room (negative pressure isolates this room from the main

laboratory).

RNA free water was used as a negative control. The Reverse Transcriptase (RT) and

PCR reagent was mixed in the workstation in the room for reagents. The lab coat, pipet

tips, pipet aid, coolers and tubes used were exclusively for this room. The samples for

RNA extraction were opened in a biological type II hood. The tube with RNA extracted

from the samples was opened only in the workstation located in the sample RNA

extraction room. All the equipment for RNA extraction and for handling the samples was

used exclusively for this function. The samples were centrifuged before opening in order

to reduce the potential for aerosol formation.

One negative control for each 5 samples

was performed for the RNA extraction; also one negative control was run for the PCR.

2.4.3.2

Equipment Calibration

Each instrument was calibrated following the specific manufacturer's recommendations.

Laboratory instruments were calibrated prior to each use or on a scheduled, periodic basis

as specified in the analytical methods.

2.4.3.3

Equipment Maintenance

Equipment maintenance and repair was performed as required for each instrument.

Preventive maintenance for all equipment included inspection before use, cleaning as

necessary during use, and thorough cleaning and inspection after use.

2.4.3.4

Corrective Actions

Corrective

actions for the analytical laboratories included the following:

•

Re-analyses of

Calicivirus

and adenovirus samples to verify the results; the

relatively long holding times of the virus samples permitted the reanalysis.

•

Re-sampling and re-analysis of samples took place for the second dry

sampling event because UPS failed to deliver the original samples on time.

•

Evaluation and amendment of sampling procedures for protozoa samples after

the first dry sampling event to increase the sample volume to 20 L, instead of

10 L as originally planned.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

31

---

GeosyntecO

consultants

•

The first wet weather MS sample collected at RAPS on 10 June 2006 was not

used because only 10 L of sample was collected. The correct volume of MS

sample (20 L) was collected at RAPS during the 3 August 2007 sampling

event.

•

Flagging the results of certain bacteria samples as "estimated" because they

were based on a number of colonies outside the ideal or preferred range.

However, the uncertainty of the results in the risk assessment is acceptable

and the flagged results are usable.

Data Reduction

,

Validation

,

and Reporting

Reduction of analytical results was done by reviewing the calculations recorded on

analytical data sheets.

The laboratory QA manager verified that the appropriate

analytical methods were followed and the data were calculated properly. The laboratory

QA Managers validated the data. by comparing the raw data to the reported

results.

In

addition, the results of calibration and internal QAIQC checks were compared with the

project acceptance criteria to assess the usefulness of the data.

The dry and wet weather analytical reports of HML, CEC and University of Arizona for

both dry and wet weather sampling are included in Appendices: B-1, B-2; C-1, C-2; and

D-1 and D-2, respectively.

The laboratory analytical reports contain the following

information:

•

raw data, including results of calibration and internal QC checks;

•

analytical data results;

• units of measurement;

• client and sample identification;

•

sample analysis dates;

• summary of any problems encountered;

•

QC data (MS, blanks, OPRs); and

• QA reviewer's signature

2.5

References

Center for Disease Control (CDC),

Microbial

Contaminant

Candidate

List

(www.epa.govlsafewaterlccl/ccl2.html#microbial)

Final Wetdry-Aphl 2008

32

---

Geosyntec

consultants

EPA,

Undated,

Microbial

Contaminant

Candidate

List

(www.epa.gov/safewater/ecl/ccl2.ht-tnl#microbial)

EPA, 1978,

Microbiological

Methods for Monitoring the Environment

;

Water and

Wastes

.

EPA-600/8-78-017.

December.

EPA, 1986, Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria, EPA-440/5-84-002.

EPA, 1996, ICR Microbial Laboratory Manual, EPA/600/R-95/178. April.

EPA, 1999, Combined Sewer Overflows, Guidance for Monitoring and Modeling, EPA

832-B-99-002, January.

EPA, 1998, Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA/600/R-98/018. February.

EPA, 2001, Method 1623:

Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia

in

Water Filtration/IMS/FA,

EPA-821-R-01-025. April.

EPA, 2001a, Method 1106.1:

Enterococci

in

Water by Membrane Filtration Using

membrane-Enterococcus-Esculin Iron Agar (mE-EIA),

EPA 821-R-02-021.

September.

EPA, 2002, Method 1103.1:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

in

Water Membrane Filtration

Using membrane-Thermotolerant

Escherichia coli

Agar (mTEC), EPA-821-R-2-

020. September.

EPA, 2002a, Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process (QA/G-4).

EPA, 2003, Source Water Monitoring Guidance Manual for Public Water Systems for the

Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. EPA 815-D-03-005. June.

EPA, 2003a, Implementation Guidance for Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria,

EPA-823-B-03-xxx. November. Draft.

EPA, 2004, Quality Assurance/Quality Control Guidance for Laboratories Performing

PCR Analyses

on Environmental Samples

.

October.

Geosyntec, 2005, Sampling and Analysis Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan for the

Chicago Area Waterway System, July.

Geosyntec, 2006,

Wet Weather Sampling Plan and Analysis and Quality Assurance

Project Plan for the Chicago Area Waterway System, May.

Final Wetdry-April 2008

33

---

Geosyntec°

consultants

Mead, P.S., Siutsker, L., Dietz, V. McCaig, L.F., Bresee, J.S., Shapiro, C., Griffin, P.M.,

and Tauze, R.V. (1999). Food Related Illness and Death in the U.S. Emerg.

Infect. Dis. (5)5, 607-625

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1998, 201h Edition.

Method 9222D. Fecal Coliform Membrane Filter Procedure; Method 9213E.

Membrane Filter Technique for

Pseudomonas aeruginosa;

Method 9260B.

General Quantitative Isolation and Identification Procedures for

Salmonella;

Method 9260D. Quantitative

Salmonella

Procedures.

Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF), 2004. Evaluation of Microbial Risk

Assessment Techniques and Applications.

World Health Organization (WHO), 1993, Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality,

Second Edition, Volume 1 Recommendations.

Final

Wetdry

-April 2008

34

---

SECTION 2

TABLES

---

Fable 2

-

1.

Major

W

aterborne Pathogenic Microorganisms Selected for the Microbial Risk Assessment

Bacteria

E. coli

Human/animal feces

Gastroenteritis

Salmonella

Human/

animal

feces

Typhoid, Paratyphoid fever, Salmonellosis

Pseudomonas

Water/wastewater/sail

Otitis externa and infections of open skin wounds

virus

Adenoviruses

Human feces

Gastroenteritis, pharyngitis, eye and nose infections

Enteroviruses

Human feces

Gastroenteritis,

meningitis

, rash, febrile illness, respiratory infections

Calicivirus

Human feces

Gastroenteritis

Protozoa

Giardia

Human/animal feces

Giardiasis

Cryptosporidium

Human/animal feces

Cryptosporidiasis

Note:

The information presented

in the

table was obtained from the following sources:

Center for

Disease

Control (CDC), Microbial

Contaminant

Candidate List

Mead, P.S., Slutsker, L., Dietz, V., McCaig, L.F., Bresee, 7.S., Shapiro, C., Griffin, P.M., and Tauze, R.V. (1999)_ Food Related

Illness and Death in

the U.S. Emerg.

Infect

.

Dis. (5)5, 607-625.

World Health Organization (WHO), 1993. Guidelines for drinking Water Quality, Second Edition, Volume I recommendations

---

Table

2-2. Summary

of Dry

and Wet Weather Samples

DRY WEATHER

Stickney

2

2

0

5

5

25

Calumet

2

2

0

5

5

25

North Side

2

2

0

5

5

25

Total Number Of Dry Weather Samples

75

WET WEATHER

Stickney

2

2

1

3

1

16

Calumet

1

4

0

3

3

18

North Side

1

3

1

16

Total Number Of Wet Weather Samples

50

---

Table 2-3. Summary of Dry and Wet Weather WRP Flows

(

MGD) and Pumping Station Discharge

Volumes (MG) Provided by MWRDGC

Dry Weather

Sampling

Date

""14ry

W0

Flow

(NI

WeM'eather

Sampling Dat

;:

^

Pumping

Station

^

e

Discharge V

olume

(MG)

w

„et'RP Flow

ft .(MGD) }

North Side

7/28/2005

210

6/26/2006

331

397

8/4/2005

226

8/3/2006

1152

386

8/18/2005

270

9/23/2006

No Pumping

Station

Discharge

388

8/25/2005

219

9/1/2005

201

Stickney

8/ 1 /2005

544

6/10/2006

2383

1261

8/3/2005

627

8/3/2006

6554

1160

8/17/2005

566

10/11/2006

No Pumping Station Discharge

939

8/24/2005

659

8/31/2005

447

Calumet

7/26/2005

221

8/24/2006

No Pumping Station Discharge

294

8/2/2005

157

8/29/2006

375

473

8/16/2005

159

10/17/2006

No Pumping Station Discharge

461

8/23/2005

178

8/30/2005

164

Notes:

1.

The pumping station discharged 33 MG in 2 hours and 45 minutes

2.

The pumping station discharged 115 MG in 11 hours and 15 minutes (between 2 and 3 August 2006)

3.

The pumping station discharged 238 MG in 7 hours and 25 minutes

4.

The pumping station discharged 655 MG in 14 hours and 55 minutes (between 2 and 3 August 2006)

5.

The pumping station discharged 37 MG in 3 hours and 23 minutes

Final Wetdry-April 2008

1

---

SECTION 2

FIGURES

-7.111 --

---

FIGURE 2-1

CHICAGO WATERWAY SYSTEM

-

DRY WEATHER SAMPLING LOCATIONS

METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO

LEGEND

• MAJOR WRP INFLOW

n

MINOR WRP INFLOW

- CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM SECONDARY

CONTACT

- OTHER WATERWAYS

GENERAL USE

CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM GENERAL USE

OTHER WATERWAYS

SECONDARY CONTACT

9.9 MILES UPSTREAM OF 12

LOCKPORT

f FLOW

nNr".•r!T k

'.M Z.

,rlu

r oiu:

:w ^r r>,

rwnz^_

w^u=

.aaun mE

-c

•+rr..

•: A;ASLr s

:

E _:

eN4MNN ^t':l l..

^-rA^LA

'_

N atJlr•

_

]

irA.T'^. STI_°'

1MV•rlsrw

--

^

>ivS

anW

w]!1_

-

^rt.-1-TI

N

•

l^a AYU ^: Yl^.

w.us^.lcu-

nrA^rz ey

e••T

rN-.'E

JC.LL.E 1N NI_E!

LE6[W

UPfT11 L

ANA ACII/NSTR[AM DRY YIEATNEfl

EAYPLNO LOCATKIN

AY/ENT

SAIIPLNG STATION

---

FIGURE 2-2

CHICAGO WATERWAY SYSTEM - WET WEATHER SAMPLING LOCATIONS

METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO

L.Et t.

X

J14ILMETTE PUMPING

STATION

W.S

LEOENO

NORTH

BRANCH PUMPING

STATION (NBPS)

LAKE

MICHIGAN

LEGEND

• MAJOR WRP INFLOW

n

MINOR WRP INFLOW

CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM SECONDARY

CONTACT

- OTHER WATERWAYS

GENERAL USE

CHICAGO WATERWAY

SYSTEM GENERAL USE

-^ OTHER WATERWAYS

SECONDARY

CONTACT

9.9 MILES UPSTREAM OF 12.

LOCKPORT

f FLOW

CONFLUENCE WTR1 THE

DES PL AXNEa RW-R

•1.1 JOLIET

1 _-

7'F rcNlw

:a

AS.WEF

♦KNLt

^vlv

,V 3M^

l'^CLLP^•Ja.i

vc

♦1

S.'M :A''t

IrUJ1t

EN ANAtf

vG y

♦veHA

nT^:

a^

Avf11J5

)VRtlTe/O

Y.^tiC •M'9E4

JV+'WJ'FD SINE Gl

+t'M ri

]iWIAADa MC

I)•f: CE9D arM P

wRr

a

SCALE

IN MILES I

• AMlIEN1 SAM-0 SlAIION

RII1t

. ."INLAY AN.O STREAM~W 11-

NORTH ORAMCM

CAMAL

CHICAGO RIVER

ONTROLLINO WORKS

35.0

OSGGO

RNCR

RACNE AVENUE PUMPING

STATION (RAPS)

---

BR - Backflow Regulator

SF-Swivel Female

BT - Braided Tubing

HC - Hose Clamps

HE - Hose Fitting

PR - Pressure Regulator

PN - PVC Nipple

TE - PVC TEE

RB - Reducing Bushing

PG - Pressure Gauge

RA - Reducing Adaptor

MQl --Male Quick Connects

FQI -Female Quick Connects

RNI - Reducing Nipples

CH - Cartridge Housing

FC - Filter Cartridge

MQ2 - Male Quick Connects

HF2 - Hose Fitting

WM - Water Meter

HF3 - Hose Fitting

FV - Flow Control Valve

PC--Prefilter Cartridge

Figure 2-3. Typical Filter

Apparatus

Prefilter Module

FQ1

CH

MQZ

Insertion Point for Additional Modules

r

- - - - - - - - -

(tfrequired)

PG

BT

---

Geosyntec

consultants

3.

ANALYTICAL

RESULTS

Five (5) dry weather samples were collected at each designated location upstream,

downstream and at the outfall of each of the North Side, Stickney, and Calumet WRPs

between 28 July and 1 September 2005. Three (3) wet weather samples were collected at

each designated location upstream and downstream of each of the North Side, Stickney,

and Calumet WRPs between 10 June and 17 October 2006. In addition, three (3) wet

weather outfall samples were collected at the Calumet WRP and one (1) wet weather

sample was collected at each of the North Side and Stickney WRPs. Section 2 discusses

in detail the sampling locations at each WRP.

During dry weather, both surface and 1-meter depth samples were taken at the upstream

and downstream monitoring locations. During wet weather, all samples were collected

near the surface of the waterway. The samples were analyzed for three major groups of

indicator and pathogenic microorganisms including bacteria, protozoa, and viruses. The

dry and wet weather laboratory reports summarizing the analytical results are included in

the following Appendices:

•

Appendices B-1 and B-2 include the HML reports documenting the results of

bacteria and total enteric viruses for dry and wet weather, respectively.

• Appendices C- I and C-2 include the CEC reports documenting the results of

protozoa

(Cryptosporidium

and

Giardia)

for

dry and

wet weather,

respectively.

• Appendices D-1 and D-2 include the UA reports documenting the results of

Calicivi_rus

and adenovirus for dry and wet weather, respectively.

3.1

Bacteria Results

Bacteria samples were analyzed for the following microorganisms:

•

Enterococci

•

Escherichia soli

•

Fecal coliforms

•

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

•

Salmonella spp.

Final

Wetdry-April 2008

35

---