STUDY OF WHOLE EFFLUENT ACUTE TOXICITY TEST

(DAPHNIA MAGNA) AS AN EVALUATION OF MINISTRY

OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTRY DECREE NO. 3 IN
2014 CONCERNING INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE RANK
IN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Neng Rohmah1, Dwina Roosmini2, Mochamad Adi Septiono3

1ftslnengrohmah@gmail.com, 2dwinaroosmini@yahoo.com , 3tioseptiono@gmail.com

OUTLINE
INTRODUCTION
METHODOLOGY
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
 PROPER is one of efforts Registered PROPER Wastewater quality So it needs to be
implemented by Indonesian industries in Upper measurements only measurement biological
Ministry of Environment and Citarum watershed, are in physical parameters, to determined
Forestry to pursue reaching only 15% of all parameters and the toxicity level of
compliance to industries around those chemical parameters industrial wastewater to
environmental management locations (BPLHD West aquatic biota.
regulations. Java, 2015

To determined the toxicity level of industrial

wastewater
RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 1
METHODOLOGY

RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 2
 Location Study

Figure Location Industry

RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 3
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Participant of PROPER 2014-2015
40 37
35 34
Many of Industries

30
25
20
2015 => 50
15
2014 => 51
10 8 8
5 2 3 3 4 2
0
0 for blue criteria
emas Green
hijau Blue
biru Red
merah Black
hitam
Gold In 2014 is 34 industries
PROPER Criteria
in 2015 is 37 industries
Figure The Value PROPER In Citarum Hulu

RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 4
Whole Effluent Toxicity Test
 Table LC50 Value of The Reference Test
Date of Reference
No. LC50 Value Average Deviation Standard
Test
1 12 June 2016 4.903
2 16 July 2016 5.128 4.685 0.584
3 16 August 2016 4.023

Results shows that average LC50 from three reference tests is 4.685,
which is close to the value mentioned in literatures, so it is adequate to
do the WET test.

RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 17
 Table LC50-48 Hours Test Range Finding
Left: Industry Participants PROPER 2015 - 2016 and Right: Industrial Non PROPER
No. Name of Industry LC50 48 hour (%) Range (%) No. Name of Industry LC50 48 hour (%) Range (%)
1 PT. Textile 1 12.023 6.25 12.5 1 PT. Textile 6 24.152 12.5 - 25
2 PT. Textile 2 22.054 12.5 25 2 PT. Textile 7 34.351 25 - 50
3 PT. Metal Coating 46.72 25 50 3 PT. Textile 8 20.987 12.5 - 25
4 PT. Pharmacy 19.347 12.5 25 4 PT. Paper* 35 x 109
5 PT. Textile 3 10.854 6.25 12.5 5 PT. Textile 9 43.908 25 - 50
6 PT. Textile 4 100.916 50 - 110 6 PT. Textile 10* 0
7 PT. Milk Processing 56.691 50 - 100

8 PT. Shoe 60.222 50 - 100

9 PT. Textile 5 8.652 6.25 12.5

Industry Participants PROPER 2015 2016 Industrial Non PROPER

Highest LC50-48 Hour RF : PT. Tekstil 5 (8.652%) Highest LC50-48 Hour: PT. Tekstil 8 (20.987%)
Lowest LC50-48 Hour RF : PT. Tekstil 4 (100.96% )
RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 18
 Environment
8
DO (mg/L)
6

Parameter
4
2
0
0 24 48 72 96
Hour
DO (Dissolved Oxygen)
PT. Tekstil 1 PT. Tekstil 2 PT. Pelapisan Logam
PT. Tekstil 4 PT. Tekstil 3 PT. Farmasi Range : 5.0 7.0 mg/L, for
PT. Pengolahan Susu PT. Tekstil 5 PT. Sepatu
PROPER industries
Figure Measurement Parameters DO during test Definitive. Industry Participants Range : 6.0 6.8 mg/L, for
PROPER 2015-2016 non PROPER industries
8
7 Daphnia sp. lives in condition
with DO content above 3 mg/l
6
DO (mg/L)

5
4 (Ebert, 2005).
3
2
1
0
0 24 48 72 96
Hour

PT. Tekstil 6 PT. Tekstil 7 PT. Tekstil 8 PT. Tekstil 9

Figure Measurement Parameters DO during test Definitive. Industry Non PROPER

RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 21
 Environment
28
Temperature (oC) 26
24

Parameter
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Temperature
Range : 24 26 oC, for PROPER
0 24 48 72 96
Hour
industries
PT. Tekstil 6 PT. Tekstil 7 PT. Tekstil 8 PT. Tekstil 9
Range : 24 27 oC, for non
Figure Measurement Parameters Temperature during test Definitive. Industry
Participants PROPER 2015-2016 PROPER industries
28 Optimum temperature ranges from
Temperature (oC)

26
24
22 20-30oC for phytoplankton
20
18 growth in water environment
16
14 (Effendi, 2003)
12
10
0 24 48 72 96
Hour

PT. Tekstil 1 PT. Tekstil 2 PT. Pelapisan Logam

PT. Tekstil 4 PT. Tekstil 3 PT. Farmasi
PT. Pengolahan Susu PT. Tekstil 5 PT. Sepatu

Figure Measurement Parameters Temperaute during test Definitive. Industry Non

PROPER
RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 20
 Environment
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
Parameter
3
2

pH
1
0
0 24 48 72 96
PT. Tekstil 1 PT. Tekstil 2 PT. Pelapisan Logam Range : 7.90 9.20, for
PT. Tektil 4 PT. Tekstil 3 PT. Farmasi PROPER industries
Range : 7.5 8.5, for non
PT. Pengolahan Susu PT. Tekstil 5 PT. Sepatu

Figure Measurement Parameters pH during test Definitive. Industry Participants

PROPER 2015-2016
PROPER industries
10 According to Pennak (1989),
9
8
optimum pH growth for of
7
6
Daphnia sp. ranges from 6.5 to
8.5
pH

5
4
3
2
1
0
0 24 48 72 96
Hour

PT. Tekstil 6 PT. Tekstil 7 PT. Tekstil 8 PT. Tekstil 9

Figure Measurement Parameters pH during test Definitive. Industry Non PROPER

RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 19
 Environment
2500
Conductivity (s/cm)
2000
1500
1000
500
Parameter
0
0 24 48 72 96
Hour
Conductivity
PT. Tekstil 1 PT. Tekstil 2 PT. Pelapisan Logam
PT. Tekstil 4 PT. Tekstil 3 PT. Farmasi The highest : PT. Pelapisan Logam
PT. Pengolahan Susu PT. Tekstil 5 PT. Sepatu (range :1000-2200 s/cm)
Figure Measurement Parameters Conductivity during test Definitive. Industry
Participants PROPER 2015-2016
2500
Conductivity(s/cm)

2000

1500

1000

500

0 Conductivity
0 24 48 72 96
Hour The highest : PT. Tekstile 8
PT. Tekstil 6 PT. Tekstil 7 PT. Tekstil 8 PT. Tekstil 9 (range : 700 900 s/cm)
Figure Measurement Parameters Conductivity during test Definitive. Industry
Non PROPER
RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 22
 Table Classification of Toxic Level PROPER Industries Table Classification of Toxic Level Non PROPER Industries
LC50 96 Hour Toxic PROPER No. Nama Industri LC50 96 Hour (%) CMC TUa Toxic Level
No. Name of Industry CMC TUa
(%) Level Value 1 PT. Tekstil 6 17.25 1.74 5.80 Toxic
1 PT. Tekstil 1 6,357 4.719 15.731 Very Toxic Blue 2 PT. Tekstil 7 9.96 3.01 10.04 Very Toxic
2 PT. Tekstil 2 13,555 2.213 7.377 Toxic Blue 3 PT. Tekstil 8 9.05 3.32 11.05 Very Toxic
3 PT. Pelapisan Logam 20,567 1.459 4.862 Toxic Red 4 PT. Tekstil 9 9.31 3.22 10.74 Very Toxic
4 PT. Farmasi 12,967 2.314 7.712 Toxic Blue*
5 PT. Tekstil 3 2,719 11.033 36.778 Very Toxic Blue
According to USACE (1999)
6 PT. Tekstil 4 88,399 0.339 1.131 Toxic Blue WET data interprets toxic in samples when generating
7 PT. Pengolahan Susu 45,097 0.665 2.217 Toxic Red* LC50 or EC50 value less than or equal to 100% effluent
8 PT. Sepatu 49,959 0.600 2.002 Toxic Blue concentration
9 PT. Tekstil 5 7,585 3.955 13.184 Very Toxic Blue
LC50-96 of all samples from industry wastewater effluent
was less than 100%, indicating they are not fit to be
Tidak discharged
Toksik Toksik
Sangat 0% 17%
Toksik
33% Toksik
Toksik Tidak
Toksik Sangat Toksik
Sangat Toksik 33%
Tidak Toksik
Toksik Tidak Toksik Sangat
67%
Toksik
50%

Figure Proportion of Classification of Toxic Level.

Left : PROPER Industries and Right : Non PROPER Industries
RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 23
 Table Recapitulation of Physical-Chemical-LC50-96 Parameter Industry Participant PROPER 2015-2016
PROPER Physical-Chemical Parameter
No. Name of Industry Toxic Level
Value COD TSS TDS Phenol Phosphate Ammonium
1 PT. Tekstil 1 Blue Very Toxic EQS EQS EQS
2 PT. Tekstil 2 Blue Toxic EQS EQS
3 PT. Tekstil 3 Blue Very Toxic EQS EQS EQS EQS
4 PT. Tekstil 4 Blue Toxic EQS EQS EQS
5 PT. Tekstil 5 Blue Very Toxic EQS EQS EQS
6 PT. Sepatu Blue Toxic EQS EQS EQS
7 PT. Farmasi Blue* Toxic EQS EQS
8 PT. Pengolahan Susu Red* Toxic EQS EQS EQS
9 PT. Pelapisan Logam Red Toxic EQS EQS EQS EQS
Jumlah 67% 100% 22% 78% 11% 22%
EQS : Exceed The Quality Standards

Table Recapitulation of Physical-Chemical-LC50-96 Parameter Non PROPER

Industry
Name of Physical-Chemical Parameter
No. Toxic Level
Industry COD TSS TDS Phosphate Ammonium
1 PT. Tekstil 6 Toxic EQS EQS EQS EQS EQS
2 PT. Tekstil 7 Very Toxic EQS EQS EQS
3 PT. Tekstil 8 Very Toxic EQS EQS EQS EQS
4 PT. Tekstil 9 Very Toxic EQS EQS EQS EQS
5 PT. Tekstil 10 Non Toxic EQS EQS EQS EQS
6 PT. Kertas Non Toxic EQS EQS EQS EQS EQS
Jumlah 100% 100% 50% 67% 100%
EQS : Exceed The Quality Standards
RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 25
CONCLUSION
1 These following physical-chemical
parameters in PROPER industries
2 LC50-96 value results from
Whole Effluent Toxicity
3 Blue-category PROPER
industries, which are 78% of
4 Several PROPER registered
industries discharged
of 2015-2016 wastewater were (WET) tests shows 100% all PROPER industries of wastewater with exceeding
exceeding the standards regulated wastewater from all 2015-2016, still discharged content of parameters
in PermenLKH No. 5/2014, industries are toxic. PT. toxic wastewater. Higher compared to the standard, as
namely COD (67% of the Tekstil 3 and PT. Tekstil 8 rank on PROPER categories regulated in PermenLKH No.
industries), TSS (100%), TDS were the most toxic did not indicate low toxicity 3/2014.
(22%), phenol (78%), ammonium wastewater with TUa of wastewater.
(22%) and phosphate (11%). value of 36.78 and 11.05.
Several non-PROPER industries of
2015-2016 had exceeding
parameters compared to similar
standard as well, namely COD
(100% of the industries), TSS
(100%), ammonium (100%),
phosphate (67%) and TDS (50%).

RESULT AND
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 26
REFERENCES
1. Davraz, Metin., Koru, Murat., dan Akdag, Ali Ekrem. The Effect of Physical Properties on Thermal Conductivity of Lightweight Aggregate. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 15 (2015) 85 92. Suleyman
Demirel University, Turkey. 2015.
2. Ebert, D. Ecology, Epidemiology and Evaluation of Parasitism in Daphnia. National Liblary of Medicine (US)-National Center for Biotechnology Information, Bethesda. 2005.
3. Effendi, H. Telaah Kualitas Air Bagi Pengelolaan Sumberdaya dan Lingkungan Perairan. Kanisius. Yogyakarta. 258 p. 2003.
4. Habibi, B.J. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 18 Tahun 1999 Tentang Pengelolaa Limbah Berbahaya dan Beracun. Jakarta. 1999.
5. Kambuaya, Balthasar. Peraturan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup Republik Indonesia Nomor 3 Tahun 2014 Tentang Program Penilaian Peringkat Kinerja Perusahaan dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup.
Jakarta. 2014.
6. KLHK. Program Penilaian Peringkat Kinerja Perusahaan dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup. Kantor Sekretarian PROPER. Jakarta. 2015.
7. KLHK. Hasil Evaluasi Kinerja Pengelolaan Lingkungan Proper 2015 2016 Rapor Sementara PT. Industri Susu Alami Murni. Jakarta. 2016.
8. KLHK. Hasil Evaluasi Kinerja Pengelolaan Lingkungan Proper 2015 2016 Rapor Sementara PT. Sanbe Farma. Jakarta. 2016.
9. Mokoginta, I. Budidaya Pakan Alami Air Tawar. Direktorat Pendidikan Menengah Kejuruan Direktorat Jendral Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Jakarta. 2003.
10. Ningrum, Sri Rahayu Widiya. Validasi Uji Toksisitas Akut Metode Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 425 pada Mencit Betina Menggunakan Tembaga (III) Sulfat Pentahidrat.
Universitas Indonesia. Depok. 2012.
11. Nurbaya, Siti. Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan Republik Indonesia Nomor : SK.557/Menlhk-Setjen/2015 Tentang Hasil Penilaian Peringkat Kinerja Perusahaan daalam Pengelolaan
Lingkungan Hidup Tahun 2014-2015. Jakarta. 2015.
12. Pennak, R.W. Freshwater Invertebrate of The United States (3rd ed). John Wiley & Sons. New York. 1989.
13. Pratiwi. A. D. Syah., Hardjito., L. Goreti. Fatty Acid Syntetys by Indonesian Marine Diatom. Hayati Journal of Biosciences. 16(4): 151-156. 2009.
14. Salmiyatun. Panduan Pembuangan Limbah Perbekalan Farmasi. Buku Kedoketaran EGC. Jakarta. 2003.
15. Tongur, Suheyla. dan Yildirim, Rifat. Acute Toxicity Assessment of Antibiotics in Water by Luminiscene Bacteria and Lepidium Sativum. World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium, WMESS 2015.
Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 15 (2015) 468 473. Selcuk University, Department of Enviromental Engineering, Konya. 2015.
16. Tyagi., Chopra., Durgapal., dan Kumar. Evaluation of Daphnia magna as an Indicator of Toxicity and Treatment Efficacy of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant. JASEM ISSN 1119-8362. Vol. 11 (1) 61 67.
Delhi, India. 2007.
17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, 5th ed. EPA/821/R-02/012. Final Report. Office of
Water, Washington DC. 2002.
18. William PL, Burson JL. The Basic Science of Toxicity. Ed ke-3. Macmillan Publ. Co, New York, 54. 1995.
19. Wolfe, D., Schorr, M., Hanson, M., Nelson, C.H. dan Richards, S.M. Hazard Assessment for a harmaceutical Mixture Detected in The Upper Tennessee River Using Daphnia magna. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manage.,
RESULT AND
1 (1): 1 14, Winter 2015. DOI : 10.7508/gjesm.2015.01.001. Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, USA. 2015.
INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES 28