This utility's goal of 90 percent arsenic removal was attained through treatment with 6.5 mg/L ferric chloride. This study evaluated the removal of naturally occurring arsenic in a full‐scale (106‐mgd) conventional treatment plant. When the source water was treated with 3–10 mg/L of ferric chloride or 6, 10, or 20 mg/L of alum, arsenic removal was 81–96 percent (ferric chloride) and 23–71 percent (alum). Metal concentrations in the sludge produced during this study were below the state's current hazardous waste levels at all coagulant dosages. No operational difficulties were encountered.

No abstract

Integrated oceans management (IOM) is an attempt to respond to the deficiencies of a zonal/sectoral, fragmented approach to oceans governance and has been widely endorsed at national, regional, and global levels. This chapter explores IOM as a concept and assesses the extent to which it has been implemented at all levels of oceans governance. It identifies the key components of IOM, their relationship to one-another, and their role in supporting an integrated approach to oceans management. It assesses the applicability of IOM — both actual and potential — to areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). The chapter concludes with observations regarding the future development of IOM and its role in driving forward a new frontier in marine environmental protection and oceans governance more generally.

This chapter assesses the future of the law of the sea in light of the analysis of the past and present development of the law of the sea provided in the preceding chapters. It looks at key themes emerging from this Handbook, with particular attention to the future of maritime limits and zones, law of the sea actors and institutions, substantive regimes under the law of the sea, and regional seas. It considers the future for the UN Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), the ‘Constitution of the Oceans’.

This article provides a critical overview of the current international legal framework for the designation of area-based protection beyond national jurisdiction as well as selected examples of global and regional practice to date. It highlights some of the legal and other challenges in employing spatial management tools in a three dimensional and highly dynamic environment that lies beyond the jurisdiction of states or of any one overarching institution. The article concludes with a brief assessment of the various proposals that are currently under discussion as part of the negotiations for an instrument to support the conservation of biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (the BBNJ negotiations) to create a global framework for the designation of MPAs and other area-based measures beyond the jurisdiction of states.