Miscellaneous water conditioning agents.-One other category of organic materials which should be mentioned as functioning gas detergent builders in nonphosphate detergents are the gluconates and heptogluconates. These materials are generally used only in special applications and function effectively only in the range of highly alkaline pH.

REMOVAL OF PHOSPATES AND OTHER NUTRIENTS IN SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS

Another approach to the eutrophication problem is removal of undesirable nutrients as a step in sewage treatment. One such study has been conducted by the Ontario Water Resources Commission at Richmond Hill. The most effective and economical method in laboratory scale experiments proved to be the lime treatment system. Lime addition was made to the raw sewage inlet channel. The lime dosage necessary to provide an effluent low in phosphorus was independent of the incoming phosphorous concentration. In subsequent studies under plant conditions, the activated sludge process, operated with lime addition, successfully removed 92 percent of the phosphorous and 50 percent of the total nitrogen. The process also enhances removal of organic matter and suspended solids. It reduces oxygen demand and air requirements in the secondary biological process and prepares the effluent for a one-step nitrogen removal process. Annual operating cost for phosphorous removal in the Lake Erie-Ontario basins is estimated at $1.85 per capita which could be considerably less than cost of replacement of phosphates in detergents which other compounds. It is true that capital equipment costs for sewage treatment facilities would be high (estimated cost per capita $15.50), but it should be acknowledged that such treatment facilities are critically needed now for sanitary environmental reasons regardless of the phosphate situation in this country and Canada. They will have to be constructed sooner or later and better sooner.

A second example of a phosphate and nitrogen removal system is the model Lake Tahoe waste-water purification plant.' The plant cost $8.1 million to design and construct. It receives sewage from a 20 square mile area and will handle 7.5 million gallons daily for a city of 100,000 population. The process includes primary and secondary treatment to remove 90 percent of the solids and BOD. Then follows addition of lime, flocculation and filtration of effluent through microflox pressure filters consisting of anthracite coal, sand and garnet. Phosphates and up to 95 percent of the nitrogen are removed at a cost of approximately nine cents 1,000 gal. This successful system again emphasizes the feasibility of removal of phosphorus and nitrogen at the sewage treatment plant. The above are only two of a number of examples of what can be accomplished by proper, complete sewage treatment.

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

1. Area needs throughout the country should be assessed in terms of adequate sewage treatment requirements and eutrophication problems and efforts directed where necessary toward construction of facilities that would reduce phosphorus and nitrogen or other undesirable elements in waste water effluent.

A fact not always appreciated is that there are waters throughout the world where eutrophication is desirable for required production of fish and other aquatic life. Cultural eutrophication simply cannot be controlled or prevented by excluding one element such as phosphorus, but rather requires a massive effort by this and other countries in developing necessary sewage treatment facilities. The sanitary and esthetic aspects alone demand this move in order to avoid complete deterioration of our environment. The supporting arguments for this rationale face us at every turn throughout the world-not only Lake Erie and Ontario and the Potomac, but many other rivers, estuaries and lakes for example, San Francisco Bay, Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, the Ohio, Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, the Hudson River, the Rhine and Danube and vast expanses of the beautiful Mediterranean beach areas and others too numerous to mention. 2. Simultaneously, research efforts should be expanded toward development of suitable replacements for phosphates in detergents but, and this is of particular importance, environmental impact of replacements must be well-established before permitting their large scale use in detergents and sanitizers. The impact of replacement chemicals must be thought through to consider all of their possible environmental effects with a thoroughness that has not characterized many chemicals and processes-pesticides, for example.

3. Removal of phosphates from detergents at this time, without suitable replacements, will work an unjustified sanitation hardship on the home, on food production, food processing, and focd handling industries, as well as hospitals and institutions. Sanitation standards cannot be sacrificed in the face of increasingly more rigid public health standards.

4. Another aspect of this situation is that many users of detergents who do not specifically contribute to problems in our environment, such as eutrophication, will be affected by higher costs through phospshate replacement measures. One good example of this would be the dairy farmer who is essentially disposing of used detergents over a large land mass and, therefore, basically is contributing a negligible amount to the problem. Yet, he will be faced with a considerably higher cost if laws are promulgated with regard to phosphate replacement. In fact, cost of sanitation for the food industry and institutions and hospitals will generally increase based upon present technology in terms of phosphate replacement.

5. Legislators should be aware that the detergent industry in mid-1965 completed more than a decade of research and expenditure of more than $150,000,000 to replace the hard ABS (alkyl benzene sulfonate) surfactants by the soft or readily biodegradable LAS (linear alkylate sulfonate) material. This voluntary response should demonstrate the sanitation industry's good faith and interest in a desirable environment.

6. If there is any forced reduction of phosphorus in detergents, it should be done reasonably and selectively so that detergents not contributing to eutrophication can be returned to maintain present high sanitation standards. For example, phosphates in detergents used for the dairy farm, dairy and food plant, restaurant, hospital and institution do not contribute enough phosphates to water supplies to seriously affect eutrophication. Any ban of phosphates in detergents used for these applications would represent gross disregard of sanitation standards carefully developed over many years. It would not be in the public interest and would be poor public health practice to insist that such detergents and sanitizers be included with laundry detergents in such a ban.

FOOTNOTES

1 Culp, Russell L. The World's Most Advanced Wastewater-Purification Plant. The American City. 1968. 2 Elliker, P. R., E. L. Sing, L. J. Christensen and W. E. Sandine. Psychrophilic Bacteria and Keeping Quality of Pasteurized Dairy Products. J. Milk and Food Tech., 27(3):69-75. 1964. 3 Epstein, Samuel S. Statement before the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Committee on Public Works. May 6, 1970.

Harrison, M. J. M. S. Thesis-Bacteriaphosphate interactions in upper Klamath Lake sediments. Oregon State University. 1970.

House of Representatives Report No. 91-1001, 91st Congress, 2nd Session. Phosphates in Detergents and the Eutrophication of America's Waters. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1970.

Joint Industry Government Task Force on Eutrophication. Provisional Algal Assay Procedure. February, 1969.

7 Lijinsky, Williams and Samuel S. Epstein. Nitrosamines as Environmental Carcinogens. Nature 225. 1970.

Ontario Water Resources Commission Preliminary Statement. Phosphorus Removal Process for Sewage Treatment Plants.

Provasoli, Luigi. Algal Nutrition and eutrophication. Proceedings of a Symposium. Eutrophication: Causes, Consequences, Correctives. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D. C., 574-593. 1969.

10 Rawson, D. C. Some Physical and Chemical Factors in the Metabolism of Lakes. A.A.A.S. Bull. 10: 9-26, 1939.

11 Rohlich, G. A. Eutrophication. Paper presented at 41st Annual Convention of the Soap and Detergent Association, New York City. 1968.

12 Sawyer, C. N. Fertilization of Lakes by Agricultural and Urban Drainage. Jour. NEWWA, 61: 109. 1917.

13 Shapiro, J. and R. Riberio. Algal Growth and Sewage Effluent in Potomac Estuary. Jour. Water Poll. Cont. Fed. 37: (7) 131 43. 1965.

14 Sing, E. L., P. R. Elliker, L. J. Christensen and W. E. Sandine. Effective Testing Procedures for Evaluating Plant Sanitation. J. Milk and Food Tech., 30: (4) 103-111. 1967.

15 State of California. The Resources Agency, State Water Quality Control Board. Eutrophication-A Review. Publication No. 34. 1967.

CHAMPAGNE FOUNTAIN COOLED HOLIDAY FETE

Eighteen out of 40 persons who drank punch served from a chrome plated, copper, punch fountain became ill with vomiting, diarrhea, and cramps during a

Christmas party last December in Mt. Clemens, Michigan. Several became ill after drinking fruit punch and before eating: therefore, a member of the party became suspicious of the drink and called the Macomb County Health Department.

The punch bowl was a three-tiered, fountain server which features a recirculating pump which carries the liquid to the top level. The beverage then drops to the second level and through small tubes which form spouts from which cups and glasses are filled.

Results of the laboratory analysis showed approximately 55 ppm of copper in the beverage. Evaluation of the fountain showed that the chrome plating was visibly eroded, exposing a copper base in both the top and bottom levels. In addition, it was found that the fountain type punch bowl was difficult to disassemble and to clean. Electric shock was also found to be a hazard, since it was necessary to disconnect the electrical wiring to clean the fountain, resulting in poor electrical connections. In addition, the unit's electrical system was not grounded and several persons received shocks during testing of the unit. The Macomb County Health Department, the Food Service Sanitation Section of the Michigan Department of Public Health, the New York City Health Department (the unit was made in New York), the Ingham County (Michigan) Health Department all worked to locate the fountain and similar fountains and to inform the manufacturer, the Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Public Health Service, and the public through news releases to the press, and all local departments of health, of the dangers associated with the fountains. Their diligent action can be credited with saving holiday party goers from further incidence of copper poisoning.

Attached graph redrawn from 23rd report by the Committee on Government Operations; Phosphates in Detergents and the Eutrophication of America's Water, 91st Congress, 2nd Session, House Report No. 91-1004, April 14, 1970. Additional Views of Hon. Clarence J. Brown, Hon. John N. Erlenborn, and Hon. Edward A. Garmatz.

[From the Washington Sunday Star, Sept. 5, 1971]

SLEEPWEAR WARNING-NONPHOSPHATE AGENT CUTS FLAMEPROOFING

(By Betty James, Star Staff Writer)

Sears, Roebuck and Co., pioneer in flameproofing for safer children's sleepwear and nonphosphate detergent for a safer environment, now is warning customers that nonphosphate detergent will impair the flame retardant on the sleepwear. Sears' warning refers specifically to use of nonphosphate detergent in hard water. The moderately hard water of the Washington area falls in the range the Sears warning refers to.

A spokesman for the executive offices in Chicago said this warning slip is being inserted in merchandise sold over the counter and through the catalogue:

“IMPORTANT: Do not launder this product with soap. Use a detergent. In areas with hard water DO NOT use a nonphosphate detergent. Soap in hard or soft water and nonphosphate detergents used in hard water will impair the flame retardancy of this product."

The spokesman said Sears also will attach a cautionary label to the sleepwear but it will be several months before garments will carry the tag.

Harry Keeton, manager of the textile division of Sears' laboratory in Chicago, said Sears learned that a masking or coating effect is produced on the flame retardant when calcium and magnesium salts in hard water combine with the carbonates in nonphosphate detergents.

A mild acid rinse of vinegar and water will remove the coating from the surface of the fabric and it once again will have the benefit of the flame retardant finish, Keeton said.

Keeton said Sears' tests were made in Chicago where water, considered on the low side of hardness, is eight grains of hardness per gallon. The water in the Washington area is five to 10 grains per gallon. Keeton said four grains or less is considered soft.

The impact of nonphosphate detergents on flameproofed sleepwear was revealed at Senate Commerce Committee hearings in July by Richard O. Simpson, a Commerce Department official.

Simpson commented on the apparent conflict between two "desirable social objectives."

EFFECT OF PHOSPHATES IN DETERGENTS ON GERM REMOVAL IN THE HOME LAUNDRY

Water Used: Princeton, N.J. tap water, 155 ppm as CaCO hardness Flammability Test: Federal Standard DOC-FF-3-71 "Standard for the Flammability of Children's Sleepwear"

Fabric Specimen: "Firegard" 100% Cotton Flannel, mfg. by
J.M. Lowenstein, Inc.

Test Standards: Maximum Char Length, Average 5 specimens = 17.8 cm (7 inches)

No specimen with char of 25.4 cm (10 inches)

Maximum residual flame time, any specimen = 10 seconds Specimen Size: 8.9 cm x 25.4 cm (3.5 in. x 10 in.)

STATEMENT BY JESSE L. STEINFELD, M.D., SURGEON GENERAL, USPHS Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to appear before the Federal Trade Commissi concerning a proposed rule that would require that all detergents package display a list of the principual ingredients and a warning if phosphates were used.

The proposed action comes at a time when our society is deeply concerne with the preservation or restoration of the environment and, in this particular case, protection of the environment from dangerous and harmful rates eutrophication of many of our lakes and streams. I am concerned not only with this danger but also with another danger which deserves our attention, dang that the national outcry over the levels of phosphates in detergents will bec so great as to obscure the health of environmental impact of alternatives phosphates.

Although the rate of eutrophication of our surface waters is affected varying factors, and varies widely from one geographical location to anoth it is generally agreed that a strong factor contributing to eutrophication is excess of phosphates entering the waters by various routes. It has also be generally agreed that the principal controllable source of those phosphates sewage and that the principal source of phosphates in sewage is detergents