-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
/~\
*c
0)
•H
4J
CJ
O
O
N^
m
CM
t
^»
o
r-l
cd
H
Q
•^ y
H S
^
>*
g
a
N
s
Q
^
&
a
Q]
0
1-
i
00
«
.c
(H
)
! 0
)-e
4 C
Jt.
i
CM
§co O O c^
CMCMO >OCJ>
O OOO«->OOO
ooooooo
V V
CM
O O O OOlrt O O
VOOU1OCM "OO
ooooooo
OOOOOOCM
V V V V
CM
-it o o irtmo oo
CM O U> CM CM »A t-»
f-lOOOOOi-i
ooooooo
f_t
ooomooo
o o o co in m \o
ooooooo
1
1
cj c-J a> 4J
X O
e-a
« VJ
o-o
ot)
9 B
1 o rn
« a.
707
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
vo
m en oo CM en
o -* o o -£•
o o o CM o •— o r~ m m -3-00 cnocM.
CM
-*~CM a* o oo o
enS oSo Sr. oS 0-.oiS« 3 o 2 o = S §
OOZCMOOO —inin oooo' z — CM o CM .- o o o o o o o o
CM
oooo o
S SSS 3 g2 c* 3 § § § Si
*§§ogggood o'gg iilioo -• o o o oooo
m en oo CM
,-> o ^ro o
o o o O o CM
^J3 C3 CO
B 0.^-1 O C
ra a >J= U * C
CJ X CX (U HI ^ tO
a cxf -J £ 3 o
at T3 x N c x'w f-^
jr o-C c « a. vw
JJ O) JJ tt) '
O - -
C3CMCM
o x
a ex
U ^*.
J3T3
tJ O
C I
(0 en
X CM
o
£>
a
o
o
«
•o
re
61
> CM ^o i~ CM en -
oo ,— c\ o CM en -
CM
CM
708
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
x-*\
*"O
0)
2
c
•H
•U
C
o
£J
(M
1
^^
(U
M
cd
H
W
rfff* r .
HZ
^C ^J
Q H-]
P-i
M
i-J cn
P-. M
*>** . i
^ PI
CO §
S co
§ H
h~H ^2
fi-t ^^
3*
p^ W
<3 s
|ST| £_.
M •
O
_
a
o
tU
0
u
§
CO
oom SOON
oocoooooooo o OON IN o o o oo
V V O O O CO CO
m o co so so
i— CN i—
T—
CN o m o
cO C
OC O
w o
0 C
o
ej c
^-4
x a
osi
U-IU-t
O 0
0 0
•^ c
U QJ
ox
1-1 a
4-1 1— 1
CO
a 4-1
•a o
•*•» 4J
o
M C
o o
0.
13
l-i C
O to
tu jj
*-• c
—1 CO
4-1 4J
CO 3
^^ I-l
> 0
n, °-
o
X CJ
c
1J co
O OC
CO 01
4j QJ
CO
^^
s_^
4J
c
rt
I-l
o
0-t
^7
4J
B
o
l^x
4J
c
-,
Qkl
u
X
o
EH
•»— co ^ CO ^ QO ^~ QO ^~ CO
§E
3
.-( O C
O ,-1 r-* tO C O
C TO 03 4_) N 4J
c
• CL
I-l
c
o
c
CJ
c
0
c
0
z
§
B X i-l
CO O IM
,—
-*
^^
o
g
B
o
X
V4
u
u
B
to
OC
o
I-l
4J
o
4-1
,— t
-3"
^
o
X
tu
E
cu
1
^
X
;.
I-l
CO
o
to
0
til
X
a.
-I O
tO 4J
E
3T3
HI
CO
E B
CO to
4J O
cn c
QJ
X
4J
OJ
OC
o
o
a.
01
709
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
CM
i
0
m
to
u
a
01
o
X
01
vO CTi
CM •—
O O
r-~ o\
CM T—
O O
t-» CM
vO :o CM
— 00
01
T- SO
-d-
m
vO
CO
U
frf W OT w
< S
S H
Prf jjj
&4 (^
H
.^•v
CO
v^
JJ
C
CO
ij
3
i— 1
i— 1
O
Cu
CO
co
01
c
09 Ol
[ 1 f«
C 4J
CO X
•U Q.
3 CO
•-< C
i— 1 Ol
O O
CL, CO
CO
vD
CO
Ol
C
t-t
N
CO
tJ
•o
>^
J3
i— j
>*
01
J3
CL
^4
1
CM
--"
CO
vO
CO
OJ
C
01
Xi
4J
c
CO
u
o
3
U-l
CO
CO
Ol
c
0)
r-l
CO
IJ
f
Q.
CO
C
CO
vO
CO
Ol
4-1
CO
i-l
CO
X!
u
x;
Q.
^^
i— i
ts
X
Ol
x;
t-H
5s
x:
4-1
Ol
1
CM
N-/
CO
•H
XI
CO
vO
CO
01
4-1
CO
l-l
CO
x:
u
X!
CL
i-t
5s
N
C
Ol
XI
,—1
ts
4J
XI
co
VO
CO
0)
4J
CO
1— 1
CO
x;
.u
x:
CL
i-H
5s
4-1
XI
l
C
l
.1-1
•o
CO
VO
CO
0)
u
CO
i-i
t8
x:
u
JS
Cu
!~4
5s
4-1
O
0
C
1
•o
CO
VO
CO
0)
c
Ol
CJ
CO
tJ
X!
u
c
CO
CO
s-x
O
N
C
0)
Xt
CO
VO
CO
01
c
c
O> 11
C IJ
01 0) x:
C 0 JJ
O> CO C
CO VJ CO
5s XI C
Ll 4J 0)
x: ex:
O CO O-
CO
VO
CO
OJ
c
CJ
CO
V4
,c
4_>
c
CO
^^
J2
CO
<1) s-x
c o
a> N
%J C
O Q>
3 Xi
r-< .^
M-J T3
co en
\o \o
co m
dj
c
(U
J_l
ex
TD
{J
1
rn
cs
O CU
c c
<1J QJ
T3 J-i
c >»
••-* O-
cn en
VO v£»
co en
t
c o
O -4
E C
•-J CD
4J CO
CO CO
X
o
H
m
in
vO
VO
O
ao
CN
00
CO
00
00 — —
710
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
Qj
*~^
•i-t
.u
C
o
CJ
s*--/
p^
CN
|
f*,^
*"^
i «^
3 CO
M H
^j J2J
i— ^ ^J
t_J "n
H H
pi 2
i-l H
OS <
PL, |V|
P3
H
leu!
! aa co
•n
S
O
C
to
CO
U
o
0)
o
X
0)
1— 1
fjf
*^s
01
C
o
4J
CO
4-)
C
0)
o
c
o
0
CO CO in CM ^^ vO
Ij O O O O -* CM
> o o o o •— o
<
col ^-
>J o o o o in CM
a| o o o o — o
CMI 00
co in CM vo
>J O O O O J O O O O CO •—
a| o o o o — o
m
01 O , — «— —
o o o •— -* r-.
M O O O O —
O 0 O 0 0 O
CO V V
01
—1 01
Q, 0.
E r*l CO CO CO CO »— CO
cd H
CO
g
to 0)
OI "O vo vo vo vo vo vo
14 O COCOCOCOCOCO
CO
s-^
s~\ •
to iJ
v— ' C
JJ O
C 0
co --^
±J
3 to
r— 1 4J E
i-l C 3 S
O tO -rJ g 3 0)
D-i 4J ^H 3 -^ VJ "O
3 ^ .H S 01 --I
>-< x s o a, c -a
i-l U T3 Vi Q, to c8
O 1) CO _c? O >% 0)
O-H JD O CJ O O i— 1
I
°l
X 1 1^* CO ON O •— CM
0 1 »— »— •— CM CM CM
CM
o
o
o
o
\y
CM
o
o
o
0
\/
CM
o
o
o
o
•*s
CM
0
o
0
o
V
CM
o
o-
o
o
NX
CO
vO
CO
^^
J_J
3
o
u
01
E
CO
CM
CO
CM
O
^_
CM
0
CM
CM
O
VO
CM
O
in
o
o
o
V
CO
vO
CO
•-I
O!
0
C
^f
CM
f*»
vo o m r-
0 O CO r~
o o o o
N/
oo co
f^l CO ON ^*
o o co —
0 0 0 O
V
CO vo
o o m ~&
o o co —
o o o o
^
vo — — O
— O CO M
O O O O
OO — —
O O O ~;t
o o o o
o o o o
\/ ^S V
CO CO CO CO
vo vo vo VJ3
CO CO CO CO
CO
u
c
tO
4J
3
i— i
i_4
O
CLi
^-1
E S to
3 3 C
n-l 14 ~J O
C 0) r-l -H
oi > 1-1 o u
•-i r-i « e e
0) *i~l f^ <*^ 0)
CO tO -U M >
B
O
in vo r^ OD c
CM CM CM eg O
,_
o
en o
CM o r- o o
O vO V OO
CM ON r-~
-
^_
0
-* o
CO O O O O
f^N C3 N/ *O
CM o -a-
A •
•— CM
O
CM 0
O O O O O
O O \X O
CM ON CO
^ v- *—
,^
0
CO O
CO O O O O
O O NX r>-
CM o m
* *
— CM
»— CO CO ^- CO
VO VO vo VO vO
CO CO CO CO CO
,-N
•o
o
s^ JJ
o o>
O S ^N
CJ O
-^ B-i O
<; H to
T3 < ^ JJ
C 1 C
to -3" C to
S O 4J
0) >, XI 3
•0 XI Vi ^
CO r-t
C 0 O
Ol i— 1 CM
OO tO O
X O C to
O OJ CO C
— 00 O
r-l 0) ^1 ~H
CO 0! T3 CO O J-l
e •-< i- o ^i oi
E 0) 3 0) 4J C
e .e •-< x; o o
eB cj u-i n, xj CJ
in vo
»— ^*
^.
-* o
— vO
, —
00 0
— -3"
CO O
•— CO
vO VO
CO CO
^^
CO
CO
H
m
•o
•^
—i
o
CO
•o
01 01
ro -o
CO C
01 01
VJ d.
30 CO
3
T3 CO
B
to i-l
tO
i— 1 4J
•rf O
O J_)
OO
oo
^
^1
in
^
VO
CO
j^Mt
CO
iJ
~4
E
3
•a
co
•a
E
to
IJ
CO
Q.
v
CO
c
o
4J
O
to
U-I
o
E
tO
00
u
o
o
0
4J
01
r-J
^j
4J
ft)
O
>
u
o
0)
T3
I
O
"^
CO
01
0.
T3
O
tO
0)
x;
u
o
IU
13
01
M
>^
i— 1
to
E
to
0}
u
0)
3
CO
0)
1— 1
a.
E
to
CO
o
2
^
ct!
•
}_i
0)
Xi
J->
01
00
o
•a
u
^4
o
a.
01
a
^^
ja
711
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
TABLE V-28
REPORTED PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
(From Dcp Responses)
Pollutant
Acenaphthene
Pluoranthene
1,2-benzanthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Pyrene
3,4-benzofluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzo(ghi)pe rylene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Methyl bromide
Naphthalene
Pentachlorophenol
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Known
Present
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5
6
7
16
1
1
1
1
1
0
8
Believed
Present
4
6
8
8
7
8
5
5
5
9
5
8
9
4
4
1
6
1
0
1
2
3
2
3
5
4
5
3
3
1
3
0
3
Believed
Absent
20
19
19
19
20
19
22
22
21
19
22
18
19
23
23
26
21
27
27
27
21
17
16
16
14
5
19
21
23
22
22
24
16
Known
Absent
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
4
4
4
2
1
0
2
2
0
3
1
2
—
712
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
Table V-29
SOURCE WATER CHARACTERISTICS
Parameter
Sb
CN (T)
Ni
TSS
O & G
pH (std units)
Aluminum
Calcium
Chloride
Fluoride
Iron
Total Dissolved Solids
Alkalinity (as CaC03)
Concent ration (mg/1)
0.015
<0.01
2.
1
6.95
50
36
0.34
0.80
273
198
713
-------
•PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
Table V-30
RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS — POTLINE SCRUBBER SLOWDOWN
No.
Parameter Values
Sb 10
CN (T) 10
Ni 10
TSS 10
O & G 5
pH (std units)
Aluminum ip
Calcium 9
Chloride 9
Fluoride 10
Iron 9
Total Dissolved 10
Solids (Percent)
Alkalinity 9
(as CaCOs)
Turbidity (NTU) 10
Temperature (°C) 10
Concentration (mg/1)
Average Range
4.68
38.9
1.0
130
9
24
3.7
1275
874
12.1
6.18
5300
3.8
34.5
1.1.3 - 10.0
27.4 - 47.5
0.70 - 1.40
75
6
8.0
20
1.5
1200
237
9.5
5.02
238
14
9.42
27
9
1400
1260
16
6.74
4900 - 7300
3.2
33.3
4.6
37.2
714
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
Table V-31
CONCENTRATION OF PAH IN POTLINE WASTEWATER
PAH
Napthalene
Acenapthylene
Acenapthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene &
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Chrysene &
Benzo(a)anthracene
3,4-Benzofluoranthene &
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Indeno(l,2f3-cd)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Concentration (mg/1)
Average
ND
ND
0.030
ND
ND
2.740
2.000
2.230
0.790
1.100
0.140
ND
0.310
Range
ND
ND
0.02 - 0.040
ND
ND
1.840 - 3.670
1.410 - 2.900
1.780 - 3.200
0.600 - 1.060
0.700 - 1.820
0.090 - 0.200
ND
0.220 - 0.440
NOTES:
ND - Not Detected (quantification limit = 0.010 mg/1)
All values reported in mg/1 without correction for recovery
Analysis by Method 625.
Average derived from 9 data points.
715
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
Table V-32
SAMPLE DATA SUMMARY OF PAH ANALYSIS
Potline Scrubber Liquor
Clarifier Filter
PAH Effluent Effluent
Naphthalene ND ND
Acenaphthylene ND ND
Acenaphthene 0.010 0.010
Fluorene ND ND
Phenanthrene & ND ND
Anthracene
Fluoranthene 0.170 0.114
Pyrene 0.110 0.079
Chrysene & 0.040 0.023
Benzo(a)anthracene
3,4-Benzofluoranthene & 0.020 0.010
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.020 0.010
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ND ND
Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene ND ND
Benzo(ghi)perylene ND ND
Act. Carbon
Effluent
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NOTES:
ND - Not Detected (quantification limit = 0.010 mg/1)
All values reported in mg/1 without correction for recovery
Analysis by Method 625.
Average derived from 8 clarifier data points and 9 filter
effluent data points.
716
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
Table V-33
SAMPLE DATA SUMMARY OF METALS ANALYSIS
Potline Scrubber Liquor
Parameter
Antimony
Nickel
Aluminum
Fluoride
TSS
Clarifier
Effluent
3.3
0.58
2.2
212
82
Filter
Effluent
2.99
0.57
1.9
206
15
717
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
A
t
®
i
Source
Water
(River)
Potline
Air
Pollution
Control
Treated .
Wastes
Plant
Runoff
Anode
Contact
Cooling
Water3
Pot room
Air
Pollution
Control
/Ly«\
/<^\ Lime
~~VV *" ^ *
3.4 MGD Settle
0 . 1 MGD
/9Z\
(^}
W
0.4 MGD
A
**
13.7 MGD
jf—^ UJ-i
hx>*
17.6 MGD
Discharge
- Sample Site
A-
Waste Stream
Code Number
Figure V-1
SAMPLING SITES AT PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANT A
aThis plant uses the VSS cell configuration, however, the paste
is formed into briquettes for insertion into the carbon anode.
718
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
Spent
Pot
Linings
Pot line
Air
Pollution
Control
n
. n^a w
Cryolite
Recovery
Thickener
Underflow
CT> 1V\ /
Excess
Well Water
0.29 MGD
0.37 MGD
Lime Tray
.J Thickener
I Underflow
0.022 MGD
Acid
(H2S04)
Neutrali-
zation
Pond
0.37 MGD
Non-
Contact
Cooling
Water
Contact
Cooling
Water
Slowdown
<•*•>-"! 't
A26\
f?\ »
(&) *
0.22 MGD
Y
Discharge
fc
Figure V-2
SAMPLING SITES AT PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANT B
719
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
VOA Blank
Discharge
Figure V-3
SAMPLING SITES AT PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANT C
720
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
Potroom Air
Pollution
Control Cryolite
Kiln
Sludge
Recycle
1.3 MGD
Mix Tank
&
Settling
Recycle
Storm
Water
Anode
Contact
Cooling
Anode Paste
Plant Scrubber
Liquor
Decant
Pond
0.15
MGD
Anode Bake
Plant Air
Pollution Control
To Potroom
Scrubber
Decant
Pond
Noncontact
Cooling
Slowdown
Oil
for
Reclamation
Casting Contact
Cooling Water
Surge
Pond
1.6 MGD
Emergency Overflow
Figure V-4
SAMPLING SITES AT PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANT D
721
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
146\
VGA Blank
Rectifier
Cooling
Water
Steam
Boiler
Slowdown
Anode
Paste
Plant
Cathode
Storage
Pot line Air
Pollution
Control
Refining and
Degassing
Air Pollu-
tion Control
Casting
Contact
Cooling
Water
AA fc
vV/
0.0864 MGD
A?N ^
\
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
VGA Blank
Recycle With Caustic Soda Addition
1
t
Anode Bake
Plant Air
Pollution
Control
1.03 MGD
Settling
With
Polymer
Addition
0.202 MGD
T
Sludge
to
Off-Site
Disposal
Discharge
Discharge
0.094 MGD
Figure V-6
SAMPLING SITES AT PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANT F
723
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
724
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
This section examines chemical analysis data presented in Section
V from primary aluminum plants and discusses the selection or
exclusion of pollutants for potential limitation. The basis for
the regulation of toxic and other pollutants is discussed in
Section VI of the General Development Document (Vol I) and. each
pollutant selected for potential limitation is discussed there.
That discussion provides information concerning where the
pollutant originates (i.e., whether it is a naturally occurring
substance, processed metal, or a manufactured compound); general,
physical properties and the form of the pollutant; toxic effects
of the pollutant in humans and other animals; and behavior of the
pollutant in POTW at the concentrations expected in industrial
discharges. •
The discussion that follows describes the analysis that was
performed to select or exclude pollutants for further
consideration for limitations and standards. Pollutants are
selected for further consideration if they are present in
concentrations treatable by the technologies considered in this
analysis. The treatable concentrations used for the toxic metals
were the long-term performance values achievable by lime
precipitation, sedimentation, and filtration. The treatable
concentrations for the toxic orgartics were the long-term
performance values achievable by carbon adsorption.
After proposal, the Agency re-evaluatecl the treatment performance
of activated carbon adsorption to control toxic organic
pollutants. The treatment performance for the acid extractable,
base-neutral extractable, and volatile organic pollutants has
been set equal to the analytical quantification limit of 0.010
mg/1. The analytical quantification limit for pesticides and
total phenols (by 4-AAP method) is 0.005 mg/1, which is below the
0.010 mg/1 accepted for the other toxic organics. However, to be
consistent, the treatment performance of 0.010 mg/1 is used for
pesticides and total phenols. The 0.010 mg/1 concentration is
achievable, assuming enough carbon is used in the column and a
suitable contact time is allowed. The frequency of occurrence
for 36 of the toxic .pollutants has been redetermined based on the
revised treatment performance value. As a result, naphthalene,
which was not selected at proposal, has been selected for further
consideration for limitation.
CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
This study considered samples from the primary aluminum
subcategory for three conventional pollutant parameters (oil and
grease, total suspended solids, and pH) and six nonconventional
pollutant parameters (aluminum, ammonia, chemical oxygen demand,
725
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
chloride, fluoride, total organic carbon, and total phenols).
CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT PARAMETERS SELECTED
The conventional and nonconventional pollutants and pollutant
parameters selected for consideration for limitation in this
subcategory are:
aluminum
fluoride
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
Aluminum is selected for consideration for limitation for two
reasons: (1) it is the major product of plants in this
subcategory, and (2) it was found at concentrations higher than
those achievable by identified treatment technology (1.49 mg/1)
in three of four samples from three plants.
Fluoride is found primarily in wastewaters from wet scrubbing of
gases from the primary reduction of alumina to aluminum.
Fluorides were measured above the concentration attainable by
identified treatment technology (14.5 mg/1) in 12 of 16 samples
from seven plants. Treatable concentrations ranged from 63 to
13,000 mg/1. Therefore, fluoride is selected for consideration
for limitation.
Total suspended solids ranged from 4 to 54,500 mg/1.
18 samples had concentrations above that achievable
treatment technology (2.6 mg/1). Furthermore,
technologies used to remove toxic metals do so by
the metals. A limitation on total suspended solids
sedimentation to remove precipitated toxic metals is
operating. Therefore, total suspended solids is
consideration for limitation.
Eighteen of
by identified
most of the
precipitating
ensures that
effectively
selected for
Oil and grease concentrations in the wastewaters sampled ranged
from 2 to 1,400 mg/1 in 18 samples. The processing of coal tar
pitch and coke in the anode paste and bake operations is the
principal source of these pollutants. The concentration in 12 of
the 18 samples exceeded the treatable concentration (10 mg/1).
Thus, this pollutant is selected for consideration for
limitation.
The pH values observed ranged from 5.0 to 11.0. Effective
removal of toxic metals by precipitation requires careful control
of pH. Therefore, pH is considered for limitation in this
subcategory.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the
wastewater samples taken is presented in Table VI-1 (page 735).
These data provide the basis for the categorization of specific
726
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
pollutants, as discussed below. Table VI-1 is based on the raw
wastewater data from streams 145, 194, 26, 195, 126, 127, 142,
144, 28, 150, 137, and 135 (see Section V). Treatment plant
samples and samples containing nonscope wastewater were not
considered in the frequency count.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER DETECTED
The toxic pollutants listed in Table VI-2 (page 739) were not
detected in any wastewater samples from this subcategory;
therefore, they are not selected for consideration in
establishing regulations:
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER FOUND ABOVE THEIR ANALYTICAL
QUANTIFICATION LEVEL
Toxic pollutants which are not detectable include those
pollutants whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal
detection limit. The toxic pollutants listed in Table VI-3
(page 741) were never found above their analytical quantification
concentration in any wastewater samples from this subcategory;
therefore, they are not selected for consideration in
establishing regulations.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS PRESENT BELOW CONCENTRATIONS ACHIEVABLE BY
TREATMENT
The pollutant mercury is not selected for consideration in
establishing limitations because it was not found in any
wastewater samples from this subcategory above concentrations
considered achievable by existing or available treatment
technologies. Mercury was detected at, or above, its 0.0001 mg/1
analytical quantification limit in three of 18 samples from 10
plants. All of the values are below the 0.026 mg/1 concentration
considered achievable by identified treatment technology.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS DETECTED IN A SMALL NUMBER OF SOURCES
Toxic pollutants detectable in the effluent from only a small
number of sources within the subcategory and uniquely related to
only those sources are not appropriate for limitation in a
national regulation. The pollutants listed in Table VI-4 (page
735) were not selected for further consideration for limitation
on this basis.
Although these pollutants were not selected for consideration in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permit writer to specify
effluent limitations.
Benzene was detected in four of eight samples collected from six
plants. Two of the detected concentrations were below analytical
quantification level. The other two concentrations were 0.013
mg/1 and 0.016 mg/1, which are slightly above the treatable
727
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
concentration. These two samples detected above treatable
concentrations were found at the same plant in two different raw
wastewaters. The same streams in another plant did not contain
benzene. For these reasons, benzene is not considered for
limitation.
2-Chloronaphthalene was measured above its analytical
quantification limit in just one of 19 samples collected at 10
plants. The reported value was 0.041 mg/1; this pollutant was
not detected in any of the other 18 samples. Because it was
found at just one plant, 2-chloronaphthalene is not considered
for limitation.
Chloroform, a common laboratory solvent, was detected in three of
eight samples collected from six plants. Only one concentration
was above the analytical quantification limit and this was above
the treatable concentration. This pollutant is not attributable
to specific materials or processes associated with the primary
aluminum subcategory. Sample contamination is the probable
source of this pollutant; therefore, chloroform is not considered
for limitation.
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether was found above its analytical
quantification limit in just one of 19 samples collected at 10
plants. This pollutant was not detected in 17 other samples.
Therefore, bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether is not considered for
limitation.
Methylene chloride was detected in two of eight samples from six
plants. Only one concentration was above the analytical
quantification limit and this was above the treatable
concentration. The reported value (0.055 mg/1) was from potrpom
wet air pollution control raw wastewater. Methylene chloride
from this stream at another plant was not detected. This
pollutant is not attributable to specific materials or processes
associated with the primary aluminum subcategory, but is a common
solvent used in analytical laboratories. There is a high
probability of. sample contamination. For these reasons,
methylene chloride is not considered for limitation.
N-nitrosodiphenylamine was detected above its analytical
quantification limit in only one of 19 samples taken at 10
plants. The detected concentration was 0.057 mg/1. Although
this value is above the 0.010 mg/1 considered attainable by
identified treatment technology, N-nitrosodiphenylamine is not
considered for limitation because it was found above a treatable
concentration at only one plant.
Phenol was detected above its analytical quantification limit in
only one of six samples taken from two plants. Although the
0.070 mg/1 concentration observed is above the 0.010 mg/1
treatable concentration, phenol is not considered for limitation
because it was found at only one plant.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was found above its analytical
728
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
quantification limit in 12 of 19 samples from 10 plants. The
concentrations observed ranged from 0.011 to 2.50 mg/1. The
presence of this pollutant is not attributable to materials or
processes associated with the primary aluminum subcategory. It
is commonly used as a plasticizer in laboratory and field
sampling equipment. EPA suspects sample contamination as the
source of this pollutant. Therefore, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
is not considered for limitation.
Butyl benzyl phthalate was found above its analytical
quantification limit in four of 19 samples from 10 plants. The
concentrations ranged from 0.012 to 0.085 mg/1. The presence of
this pollutant is not attributable to materials or processes
associated with the primary aluminum subcategory. It is commonly
used as a plasticizer in laboratory and field sampling equipment.
EPA suspects sample contamination as the source of this
pollutant. Therefore, butyl benzyl phthalate is not considered
for limitation.
Di-n-butyl phthalate was found above its analytical
quantification limit in three of 19 samples from 10 plants. The
concentrations observed ranged from 0.022 to 0.126 mg/1. Two of
the three samples showed concentrations above the 0.010 mg/1
treatable concentration. The presence of this pollutant is not
attributable to materials or processes associated with the
primary aluminum subcategory. It is commonly used as a
plasticizer in laboratory and field sampling equipment. EPA
suspects sample contamination as the source of this pollutant.
Therefore, di-n-butyl phthalate is not considered for limitation.
3,4-Benzofluoranthene was detected above its analytical
quantification limit in just one of 19 samples from 10 plants.
Since it was found in only one plant, 3,4-benzofluoranthene is
not considered for limitation.
Benzo(k)fluoranthene was also found above its analytical quanti
fication limit in just one of 19 samples. Therefore, benzo(k)-
fluoranthene is not considered for limitation.
Acenaphthylene was detected in six of 19 samples from 10 waste
streams sampled. This pollutant was present below the
quantification limit in five of the samples. Only one sample
contained a treatable concentration of acenaphthylene. Since it
was found treatable at only one plant, acenaphthylene is not
considered for limitation.
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene was detected above its analytical
quantification limit in two of 19 samples taken from 10 plants.
Since it was found in only two plants, indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene is
not considered for limitation.
The first group of PCB's (polychlorinated biphenyls) was detected
above its analytical quantification limit in one of three samples
taken at three plants. The group contains PCB-1242, PCB-1254,
and PCB-1221, which are reported together since they are not
729
-------
•PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
clearly separated by the analytical protocol used in this study.
Because these pollutants were detected in a small number of
sources, they are not considered for limitation.
Beryllium was found above its analytical quantification limit in
12 of 21 samples taken from 10 plants. Concentrations ranged
from 0.02 to 0.4 mg/1. Only one sample contained a concentration
above the 0.20 mg/1 considered attainable by identified
technology. Because it was found at a treatable concentration at
only one plant, beryllium is not considered for limitation.
Silver was measured above its analytical quantification limit in
10 of 21 samples. Three samples contained treatable
concentrations of silver, all measured at the same plant.
Therefore, silver is not considered for limitation.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS SELECTED FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION FOR
LIMITATION
The toxic pollutants listed below are selected for further
consideration in establishing limitations for this subcategory.
The toxic pollutants selected are each discussed following the
list.
1. acenaphthene
39. fluoranthene
55. naphthalene
72. benzo(a)anthracene
73. benzo(a)pyrene
76. chrysene
78. anthracene (a)
79. benzo(ghiJperylene
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene (a)
82. dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
84. pyrene
114. antimony
115. arsenic
116. asbestos
118. cadmium
119. chromium
120. copper
121. cyanide
122. lead
124. nickel
125. selenium
128. zinc
(a) Reported together as a combined value.
Acenaphthene was found above its analytical quantification limit
in 14 of 19 samples from 10 plants, with concentrations ranging
from 0.011 to 29.0 mg/1. Ten of those samples, representing five
plants, were above the 0.010 mg/1 concentration attainable by
identified treatment technology. Therefore, acenaphthene is
730
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
selected for further consideration for limitation.
Fluoranthene was measured above its analytical quantification
limit in 15 of 19 samples from 10 plants with concentrations
ranging from 0.073 to 32.0 mg/1. All 15 samples, representing
seven plants, were above the 0.010 treatable concentration.
Therefore, fluoranthene is selected for further consideration for
limitation.
Naphthalene was detected in 11 of 19 samples collected from 10
plants. Seven of the 11 detected concentrations were above the
treatable concentration (0.010 mg/1) attainable by identified
treatment technology. These concentrations ranged from 0.02 mg/1
to 7.7 mg/1. Seven of the 10 raw wastewater streams sampled were
found to contain naphthalene. Therefore, naphthalene is selected
for further consideration for limitation.
Benzo(a)anthracene was found above its analytical quantification
limit in 15 of 19 samples, taken from 10 plants, with
concentrations ranging from 0.014 to 14.0 mg/1. Fourteen
samples, representing seven plants, were above the 0.010 mg/1
range considered attainable by identified treatment technology.
Therefore, benzo-(a)anthracene is selected for further
consideration for limita-tion.
Benzo(a)pyrene was found above its analytical quantification
limit in 13 of 19 samples, taken from 10 plants, with
concentrations ranging from 0.017 to 11.0 mg/1. Twelve samples,
representing six plants, were also above the 0.010 mg/1
concentration considered attainable by identified treatment
technology. Therefore, benzo(a)pyrene is selected for further
consideration for limitation.
Chrysene was measured above its analytical quantification limit
in 15 of 19 samples, taken from 10 plants, with concentrations
ranging from 0.030 to 30.0 mg/1. There were 14 samples,
representing seven plants, above the 0.010 mg/1 concentration
considered attainable by identified treatment technology.
Therefore, chrysene is selected for further consideration for
limitation.
The toxic pollutants anthracene and phenanthrene are not clearly
separated by the analytical protocol used in this study; thus,
they are reported together. The sum of these pollutants was
measured at concentrations greater than their analytical
quantification limit in 12 of 19 samples, collected at 10 plants,
with concentrations ranging from 0.029 to 22.0 mg/1. Eleven of
the 12 samples, representing five plants, were above the 0.010
mg/1 treatable concentration. Therefore, anthracene and
phenanthrene are selected for further consideration for
limitation.
Benzo(ghi)perylene was found above its analytical quantification
limit in six of 19 samples, taken from 10 plants, with
concentrations ranging from 0.019 to 2.40 mg/1. Five of the six
731
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
samples, representing four plants, were above the 0.010 mg/1
concentration attainable by identified treatment technology.
Therefore, benzo-(ghi)perylene is selected for further
consideration for limitation.
Fluorene was measured above its analytical quantification limit
in nine of 19 samples, taken from 10 plants, with concentrations
ranging from 0.039 to 5.30 mg/1. All nine samples, representing
four plants, were above the 0.010 mg/1 concentration attainable
by identified treatment technology. Therefore, fluorene is
selected for further consideration for limitation.
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene was found above its analytical
quantification limit in five of 19 samples, taken from 10 plants,
with con centrations ranging from 0.012 to 1.9 mg/1. All five
samples, representing four plants, were above the 0.010 mg/1
concentration attainable by identified treatment technology.
Therefore, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene is selected for further
consideration for limitation.
Pyrene was found above its analytical quantification limit in 16
of 19 samples, taken from 10 plants, with concentrations ranging
from 0.05 to 34.0 mg/1. All 16 samples, representing eight
plants, were above the 0.010 mg/1 concentration attainable by
identified treatment technology. Therefore, pyrene is selected
for further consideration for limitation.
Antimony was measured above its analytical quantification limit
in 14 of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants, with concentrations
ranging from 0.05 to 1.5 mg/1. Since five samples, representing
three plants, were also above the 0.47 mg/1 concentration
attainable by identified treatment technology, antimony is
selected for further consideration for limitation. Selection of
antimony is further justified based on the analytical data
collected during the Agency's pilot scale treatability study.
Antimony was found in 10 of 10 samples all above 1 mg/1.
Arsenic was found above its analytical quantification limit in 17
of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants, with concentrations ranging
from 0.006 to 1.5 mg/1. Seven samples, representing five plants,
were above the 0.043 mg/1 concentration attainable by identified
treatment technology. Therefore, arsenic is selected for further
consideration for limitation.
Asbestos (chrysotile) was measured above its analytical
quantification limit in the one raw wastewater sample analyzed
for this pollutant. The measured value was 310 million fibers
per liter (MFL) which is well above the value of 10 million
fibers attainable by the identified treatment technology. At the
plant where it was detected, both the source water and the
wastewater discharge contained negligible concentrations of
asbestos. Asbestos is considered for further limitation since it
was detected above a treatable concentration in the only sample
it was analyzed for.
732
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
Cadmium was measured above its analytical quantification limit in
10 of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants, with concentrations
ranging from 0.0026 to 0.2 mg/1. Eight samples, representing
four plants, were above the 0.049 mg/1 concentration attainable
by identified treatment technology. Therefore, cadmium is
selected for further consideration for limitation.
Chromium was found above its analytical quantification limit in
17 of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants, with concentrations
ranging from 0.006 to 6.0 mg/1. Three samples, representing two
plants, were above the 0.07 mg/1 concentration attainable by
identified treatment technology. Therefore, chromium is selected
for further consideration for limitation.
Copper was measured above its analytical quantification limit in
20 of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants, with concentrations'
selected for further consideration for limitation.
Lead was . found in concentrations above its analytical
quantification limit in 15 of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants,
with concentrations ranging from 0.008 to 5.0 mg/1. Twelve
samples, representing six plants, were above the 0.08 mg/1
concentration attainable by identified treatment technology.
Therefore, lead is selected for further consideration for
limitation.
Cyanide was found above its analytical quantification limit in 20
of 22 samples, taken from 12 plants, with concentrations ranging
from 0.002 to 180.0 mg/1. Since 10 samples, representing five
plants, were also above thel.l mg/1 concentrations attainable by
identified treatment technology (refer to Section VII - Pilot
Scale Treatability Study), cyanide is selected for further
consideration for limitation.
Nickel was measured above its analytical quantification limit in
17 of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants, with concentrations
ranging from 0.014 to 4.0 mg/1. Since 11- samples, representing
six plants, were also above the 0.22 mg/1 concentration
attainable by identified treatment technology, nickel is selected
for further consideration for limitation. Selection of nickel is
further justified based on the analytical data collected during
the Agency's pilot scale treatability study. Nickel was found in
10 of 10 samples all greater than 0.22 mg/1.
Selenium was found above its analytical quantification limit in
14 of 21 samples, taken from 11 plants, with concentrations
ranging from 0.01 to 44.0 mg/1. Eight samples, representing two
plants, were above the 0.20 mg/1 concentration attainable by the
identified treatment technology. Therefore, selenium is selected
for further consideration for limitation.
Zinc was measured above its analytical quantification
concentration in 18 of 21 samples taken from 11 plants, with
concentrations ranging from 0.01 to 1.0 mg/1. Seven samples,
representing three plants, were above the 0.23 mg/1 concentration
733
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
attainable by the identified treatment technology. Therefore,
zinc is selected for further consideration for limitation.
734
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
o)
c«
H
CO
H
H
O
PL,
U
I—I
o 5 oS
H sw
. i r [
O §^
W <3 tH
CJ CO
H PSS
CD (—1
U OS
U O-i
O
HS
_ -
g 0) l_l
oooooooooooooooqooooooooooooooooooooo
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC1OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC3OC3O
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
13
H
CD
o-
w
OS
gl?
4J 01 -
c o
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
C3C3OC3OOOOO docJdoocJoooooocJdcJdooodooo oooo
g xT
^-t (1) J_)
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
»— '—CM-* PI
•a «
a> a>
JJ >j
o H
(!)
o c
c o
CO
E-i
•o -^ £
QJ U-l J_)
jj 1-1 C
O U §3
Q) C O
aj 8 c
Q|
Zl
0)
w
C
O
O
O
PM
O
M
xs:
OI3 OS
H !S W
M H
^ W
W < E-i
O CO
z >«;
W OS C3
os <;
O OS
O PM
O
O
o
I
fa
OOCN CMOOOOOOO OO
oooooooooooooooooooooooo ooo oooooooo oo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
lOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOO
joooooooooooo oooooooooooooooo
>ooooooooooooc>oooo 0000*0000*000 oo
736
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
I1
&
1-8
CO
H
c^ •— m 10 «— 10 in *— CM *— CM »~ «— CM co c<"> •
-COCMCMCMCMCOCMCMCMCMCO
H
.
o^CT^o^o^a^o^a^
OOOOOOO
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
OOOtDOOOOOOOOOC3CSOOC5OOOOOOOOOOOOOO
CO CO PO
o
o
*
o
O C/
( -J O
w
I
Pi
fn
C8
O
OOOOOOOOOOOl
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooc
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
58
> o
O:
o<
737
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
Q
c
•H
4J
C
o
o
1
M
^>
<1>
id
H
CO
H
1
C3
H]
Q
0.
o
M
X! S
o S erf
E~* s r*n
._.„,! c_|
0 §3?
J W
o co
52 >•* ^
w erf &
fyj ^rf
fV^ ^^ |jg
!Z> W 0) U
O O ~-l 4-1
IS
| |
JJ fj
"8 S 8C
JJP C O
o H o-S
0) U4J
u S co
CU o JJi-l
T3 — t M
35 U-J AJ
4J -^ C
O JJ 41
H J.J
0
lg
P Jl N
P!
U-l
O COT?
€ cu
J4j"tfl
CO C
.
r- 1 Vi .Q
•8S KX
U CU Oi-<
01 c 4-1 at
H cS ^
gc
-co, I! -2,-,
0 CC 4J CO
•H O CO^^
ro 4-1 ffi ot
1
?
Cu
•* r-- T— »- oo ro o- o CM •— coromr^
0 .- CM^^O 0 COCO vo— I^CM,-
CMI^^- CTX ,- -* — CNJ vO in ^t l~~ ,- -£ CO
(£ S
O ^^ o C? m to co f— '
^S ^— "2 ^— Q CO CO CM cs] CO -"> »^ CM CO in CO
o>— o oooooooooo — o n
ooo^oooooooooooo
i
(
N
•H
-o
2
^s
cfl 8
J_J S—S
01
QJ e -u c
o>n*oO'>-«e8 QJ ts B § oox
ISllillllillllii^
"8
4J
1-<
4J
o
CO
1
CO
1
3
1— <
^-1
s
s
o
•r4
s
£
1
4J
2
^
U-l
1
8
g"
•H
.4. CO
C Q)
O Q>
0) CO
Q) C
4J
CO C
3 O
1-1
U-l 4J
o o
01
.to co
>, s
CO ^J
^ 1
^
QJ O
O J-1
M 2
iS "
O ^0
£ ^
Q^ ^
01 4J
"D i— 1
1 s
&*\ T3
w
4J C
E-i *»H
to
s 1
ro £
~° "§
J2
£ g"
H
4J i— 1
g g
8 i
• E 2
P B 1-1
0) i-l Q.
J5 4J -r<
4J CO CJ
cu o cu
00 •-< P
O U-l O.
4J i-l
jj cu
•pc *o
s § 1
p cr • 5)
tCT\ >^
r-4 t^ CJ
CO O">
CJ ^- C
•H 6
/^x 4J - •
eu >•,,£= -P >-,
^-- . ri-rTi cS T)
* to P co 3
^x C co co O
T3 < S CQ CO
*— '
CJ UJ 00
738
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
TABLE VI-2
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER DETECTED
2. acrolein
3. acrylonitrile
5. benzidene
6. carbon tetrachloride
7. chlorobenzene
8. I/2,4-trichlorobenzene
9. hexachlorobenzene
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
12. hexachloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
16. chloroethane
17. DELETED
18. bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
22. parachlorometa cresol
24. 2-chlorophenol
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidiene
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
30. 1,2-trans -dichloroethylene
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol
32. 1,2-dichloropropane
33. 1,3-dichloropropylene
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene
37. I/2-diphenylhydrazine
38. ethylbenzene
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
43. bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
45. methyl chloride
46. methyl bromide
47. bromoform
48. dichlorobromomethane
49. DELETED
739
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
TABLE VI-2 (Continued)
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER DETECTED
50. DELETED
51. chlorodibromomethane
52. hexachlorobutadiene
53. hexachlorocyclopentadiene
56. nitrobenzene
57. 2-nitrophenol
58. 4-nitrophenol
59. 2,4-dinitrophenol
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
64. pentachlorophenol
71. dimethyl phthalate
85. tetrachloroethylene
88. vinyl chloride
129. 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
740
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
54.
69.
70.
86.
87.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
TABLE VI-3
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER FOUND ABOVE THEIR
ANALYTICAL QUANTIFICATION LEVEL
isophorone
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
toluene
trichloroethylene
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane
4,4'-DDT
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-ODD
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC
delta-BHC
PCB-1232
PCB-1248
PCB-1260
PCB-1016
toxaphene
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a) Reported together as a combined value,
741
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
TABLE VI-4
TOXIC POLLUTANTS DETECTED IN A SMALL NUMBER OF SOURCES
4. benzene
20. 2-chloronaphthalene
23. chloroform
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
44. methylene chloride
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine
65. phenol
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
75. benzo(k)fluoranthene
77. acenaphthylene
83. indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
106. PCB-1242 (a)
107. PBC-1254 (a)
108. PCB-1221 (a)
117. beryllium
126. silver
127. thallium
(a) Reported together as a combined value.
742
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
SECTION VII
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
The preceding sections of this supplement discussed the
wastewater sources, flows, and characteristics of the wastewaters
from primary aluminum plants. This section summarizes the
description of these wastewaters, indicates the level of
treatment which is currently practiced in the primary aluminum
subcategory, and describes the treatment options considered by
EPA for this subcategory.
TECHNICAL BASIS OF BPT
As mentioned in Section III, EPA promulgated BPT effluent
limitations guidelines for the primary aluminum smelting
subcategory on April 8, 1974. In order to put the treatment
practices currently in place and the technologies selected for
BAT options into the proper perspective it is necessary to
describe the technologies selected for BPT. The BPT regulations
established by EPA limited the discharge of fluoride and TSS and
required the control of pH. The best practicable control
treatment currently available identified was the treatment of
wet scrubber water and other fluoride-containing effluents
through the precipitation of fluoride, followed by settling of
the precipitate and recycling of the clarified effluent to the
wet scrubbers. Two precipitation technologies, cryolite
precipitation and lime precipitation, were determined to be
effective and it was left to the individual operator to select
the one best suited for his specific application. Recycle of the
clarified effluent was required, but EPA recognized that complete
recycle was not practicable and made an allowance for a bleed
stream to be discharged.
CURRENT CONTROL AND TREATMENT PRACTICES
This section presents a summary of the control and treatment
technologies that are currently applied to each of the sources
generating wastewater in this subcategory. As discussed in
Section V, wastewater associated with the primary aluminum
subcategory is characterized by the presence of the toxic metal
pollutants, cyanide, toxic organics, fluoride, aluminum, oil and
grease, and suspended solids. Generally, these pollutants are
present in each of the waste streams at concentrations above
treatability, so these waste streams are commonly combined for
treatment to reduce the concentrations of these pollutants.
Construction of one wastewater treatment system for combined
treatment, in some instances, combines streams of differing
alkalinity which reduces treatment chemical requirements. Seven
plants in this subcategory currently have combined wastewater
treatment systems, eight plants operate lime and settle treatment
on at least a portion of their wastewater. One plant operates a
multimedia filter as an end-of-pipe polishing step. Four options
743
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
were considered for BAT, BDT, and pretreatment in this
subcategory, based on combined treatment of these compatible
wastewater streams.
ANODE AND CATHODE PASTE WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Preparing anode paste requires crushing, screening, calcining,
and grinding and mixing of coke and pitch. These are inherently
dusty operations requiring extensive particulate emission
controls. Twenty-two plants preparing paste use dry air
pollution control devices while only four use wet air pollution
control devices. Three plants do not use any emission control.
Wastewaters associated with the wet air pollution control devices
have treatable concentrations of suspended solids. Organic
pollutants such as fluorene, pyrene, and chrysene that are
evolved during calcining of the paste also occur in treatable
concentrations. None of the plants reporting this waste stream
recycle any scrubber water. Two of these plants use chemical
precipitation and sedimentation to treat the wastewater. One
plant uses only sedimentation, while the remaining plant
discharges without treatment.
ANODE BAKE PLANT WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Anode bake plant air emissions are more complex than paste
preparation emissions and reportedly are more difficult to
control by dry methods. This is due to the fact that bake plant
emissions contain combustion products, volatilized hydrocarbons,
tars, and oils. The fluorides present are introduced into the
bake plant as cryolite when anode butts are recycled. Dry
electrostatic precipitators (ESP) and baghouses may not
adequately control fluorides since the tars and oils emitted
cause the equipment to be susceptible to arcing and blinding,
respectively, which inhibit the performance of these systems.
Wet control systems, such as wet ESP or scrubbers, are not as
susceptible to problems caused by tars and oils. Fluidized
alumina systems are dry systems which avoid the tar and oil
blinding and arcing problems previously mentioned. Dry systems
are used by 12 out of the 17 plants which control anode baking
emissions. Three plants use only baghouses, three plants use
activated alumina, and two plants use both activated alumina and
baghouses. Of the five plants using wet control systems, four
use wet scrubbers, two use wet ESP, and two use dry ESP preceded
by wet scrubbers.
Wastewater from the wet air pollution control equipment at plants
where anode butts are recycled must be treated for fluorides,
tars, oils, and particulates. If care is taken in the removal of
fused cryolite from the anode butts before reprocessing, fluoride
emissions from the anode bake plant are greatly lowered; hence,
the fluoride concentrations in bake plant scrubber waters would
be minimized. Two of the five plants practice partial recycle of
the scrubber effluent (91 and 99 + percent). Typical treatment of
this wastewater, practiced at all five plants, consists of alkali
addition and sedimentation for suspended solids and fluoride
744
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VII
removal.
ANODE AND BRIQUETTE CONTACT COOLING
This wastewater is generated when green anodes and briquettes are
sprayed with water to accelerate their temperature loss and allow
faster handling. Eleven of the 31 .plants in the primary aluminum
subcategory reported the use of anode contact cooling and
briquette quenching water. This wastewater contains suspended
solids, fluoride, and organics. One of the four plants reporting
this effluent practices 100 percent recycle, thereby eliminating
its discharge. Another plant utilizes anode cooling water as
off-gas quench water in the bake plant. All water is consumed by
evaporation, thereby eliminating its discharge. Alkali addition
and sedimentation can be used to remove suspended solids and
fluoride. The following treatment schemes are currently in place
in the industry:
1. No treatment - five plants,
2. Settling pond - one plant,
3. Alkali addition and sedimentation - one plant,
4. 100 percent evaporation - two plants,
5. 100 percent reuse in other plant processes - one plant,
6. Cooling tower, retention pond, recycle - one plant.
CATHODE REPROCESSING
Cathodes are reprocessed to recover cryolite by a leaching
operation. The cryolite is then precipitated from the leachate
and reused. The supernatant from the precipitation step or
solids underflow is the cathode reprocessing wastewater. Four
plants generate this wastewater.
As discussed in Section V, wastewater from cathode reprocessing
contains treatable concentrations of suspended solids, fluoride,
and cyanide. Its composition is similar to that of the potline
scrubber effluent, and the treatment techniques used for potline
scrubber water are used to treat the cathode reprocessing
effluent. The pH of the cathode reprocessing wastewater is
extremely alkaline (pH of approximately 11). One plant reported
using alkaline chlorination to treat cyanide prior to discharge.
Three plants use cathode reprocessing water as potline scrubber
liquor make-up.
POTLINE AND POTROOM WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Wet and dry emission control devices are used to collect potline
air emissions that contain particulates, fluorides, hydrocarbons,
and sulfur oxides immediately above the electrolytic cell.
Gaseous fluorides are removed by dry alumina adsorption or wet
scrubbing, while particulate collection is usually performed with
baghouses.
A typical dry potline emission control system includes hoods and
ducts to collect and deliver the gases from the pots to air
745
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VII
pollution control units (the first is usually a cyclone-type
device to separate coarse particulates), a reactor section in
which the gases are contacted with the alumina, and a fabric
filter. After passing through the fabric filter, the gases are
released to the atmosphere.
Activated alumina dry collection systems allow for the subsequent
return of the alumina and sorbed fluoride compounds to the pots.
Generally high removal efficiencies for both gaseous fluoride
compounds and particulates are obtained (e.g., greater than 99
percent). This dry scrubbing process represents a significant
means of reducing effluent discharges at primary aluminum plants
since it uses no water.
Although many plants have converted from wet to dry primary
scrubbing since 1974, nine plants still practice wet air
pollution control for potline emissions. One plant reporting a
potline scrubber uses 100 percent recycle of this wastewater.
Five other plants report partial recycle ranging from 88 to 99+
per cent.
Potroom emission control systems handle larger volumes of air
than potline emissions control systems. Because there is a
larger volume of air from this process, dry scrubbing systems are
very expensive. A treated baghouse contains a limited number of
sites_for adsorption; therefore, larger volumes of gas decrease
the life of each filter which in turn increases operating costs.
Consequently, plants have typically used wet scrubbing systems to
control potroom emissions. Seven plants use secondary emission
controls (i.e., potroom emission control) consisting of spray
chambers or packed towers. One plant reported using foam
scrubbers. Six plants with potroom scrubbers reported partial
recycle rates of scrubber water ranging from 42 to 99+ percent.
Water from wet scrubbers will contain fluoride, metals, suspended
solids, and organics in treatable concentrations and is treated
to remove impurities before it is recycled. In the case of
primary potline and secondary potroom wet scrubbers, the fluoride
dissolved in the water is precipitated and settled. This
treatment also reduces the suspended solids and metals content at
the same time.
The method most commonly used to remove the fluoride from wet air
pollution control wastewaters from potlines and potrooms is
precipitation either as cryolite or as calcium fluoride. In the
first case, sodium aluminate (or caustic soda and hydrated
alumina) is added. In the second case, a lime slurry (or calcium
chloride) is used. After precipitation, the slurry is sent to a
thickener. The treatment of wet scrubber liquor to recover
cryolite results in sufficient removal of fluoride to permit
recycle of the treated liquor. The process also recovers the
fluoride in a form which can be returned to the aluminum cell
bath. The value of the recovered cryolite partially offsets the
cost of the treatment process. However, the gradual buildup of
pollutants in the scrubber liquor requires a blowdown, preventing
746
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
total recycle of scrubber liquor. (Recovery of the cryolite is
practiced at four of the nine plants reporting potline scrubbing
and by two of eight plants reporting potroom scrubbers.)
Elevated levels of suspended solids (19 to 54,500 mg/1) are
effectively reduced by the fluoride precipitation and
sedimentation process.
POT REPAIR AND POT SOAKING
Approximately every two to three years the carbon liners of the
electrolytic cells fail and must be replaced. To facilitate
removal, the carbon liners are often soaked in water to make them
soft. Reportedly, some plants use high pressure water jets to
remove the carbon liner.
Data on pot repair and pot soaking wastewater are limited. Two
of the plants reported in Table V-16 (page 688) are known to
reuse pot repair-pot soaking wastewater as potline scrubber
liquor make-up, and one plant reported discharging its wastewater
to cathode reprocessing. Two plants reported using ion-exchange
to reduce cyanide concentrations and lime to precipitate
fluoride. Since each primary aluminum plant must replace the
carbon liners (or cathodes) and very few plants report generating
or discharging this wastewater, it is assumed most plants recycle
and reuse pot soaking wastewater, or use dry removal techniques.
DEGASSING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
The method most commonly used for degassing and refining molten
aluminum is to inject the aluminum with chlorine and other inert
gases. The hydrogen is absorbed into the chlorine bubbles, and
gaseous hydrochloric acid is subsequently produced. Because of
the corrosive nature of the gas stream, it may be necessary to
use wet air pollution control devices instead of dry control
equipment to reduce the pollutant emissions. Three primary
aluminum plants reported using wet air' pollution controls for the
degassing operation.
Emphasis has been placed on examining methods for eliminating the
need for wet control devices rather than on methods of treating
the scrubber effluent.
Past emission control efforts have resulted in the development
and successful use of gas mixtures such as chlorine plus an inert
gas, or chlorine, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen. In the case of
mixed gases, gas burners or controlled combustion gas generators
are used to produce a gas of carefully controlled composition.
The following is a list of alternative in-line fluxing and
filtering methods:
1. Flotation with mixtures of chlorine and other gases,
2. Impingement, and
747
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
3. Counter flow impingement.
Since primary aluminum plants are also often aluminum formers,
degassing is often performed in conjunction with the aluminum
forming demagging operation. This can make the application of
alternative degassing methods more difficult. All of the above
listed degassing alternatives are in commercial use on a regular
basis and may be considered established practice in one or more
producing plants. The viability of each degassing alternative
varies from plant to plant. As a result, the applicability of
any specific process alternative is determined on an individual
basis.
CASTING CONTACT COOLING
All of the different aluminum casting contact cooling wastewaters
are grouped together for discussion because they differ primarily
in the volume of water used and discharged. With the exception
of oil and grease, the pollutant concentrations in the casting
contact cooling waters are expected to be similar. Oil and
grease concentrations may differ among the wastewaters depending
upon the use of lubrication agents for casting.
Of the 31 primary aluminum plants, 28 reported the use of casting
contact cooling water. Three plants achieved zero discharge
through evaporation, one plant achieved zero discharge through
spray irrigation, and one achieved zero discharge by using the
contact cooling bleed stream as makeup water for the potline
scrubber. The remaining plants discharge the cooling water.
Casting contact cooling water will contain dissolved and
suspended solids and, if a mold lubricant is used, oil and
grease. Control of wastewater from direct contact cooling is
commonly achieved by means of a cooling tower, with recycle of
the water. A bleed stream may be necessary to reduce
concentrations of dissolved and suspended solids, and oil and
grease. Eleven of the 28 plants recycle this wastewater. The
recycle rates ranged from 20 to 99+ percent.
Oil and grease concentrations in the contact cooling effluent
stream may be reduced by the use of oil skimmers. The bleed
stream may also need to be treated for oil and grease and
dissolved and suspended solids. Suspended solids may be removed
simply by sedimentation, while dissolved solids must be
precipitated from solution. Data supplied by the primary
aluminum subcategory indicate that three facilities incorporate
oil skimming into their wastewater treatment plants.
CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS
The Agency examined four control and treatment technology options
between proposal and promulgation that are applicable to the
primary aluminum subcategory. The options selected for
evaluation represent a combination of in-process flow reduction,
preliminary treatment technologies applicable to individual waste
748
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VII
streams, and end-of-pipe treatment technologies.
OPTION A
Option A for the primary aluminum subcategory requires treatment
technologies to reduce the discharge of pollutant mass. The
Option A treatment model consists of treatment with lime and
settle (chemical precipitation and sedimentation) applied to all
waste streams and oil skimming, where required. Chemical
precipitation is used to remove metctls and fluoride by the
addition of lime followed by gravity sedimentation. Suspended
solids are also removed from the process.
OPTION B
Option B for the primary aluminum subcategory consists of all
treatment requirements of Option A (lime precipitation,
sedimentation, and oil skimming) plus control technologies to
reduce the discharge of wastewater volume and chemical
precipitation with ferrous sulfate to control cyanide from
cathode reprocessing wastewaters. Water recycle and reuse are
the principal control mechanisms for flow reduction.
EPA considered cyanide treatment using chemical oxidation with
chlorine. Although the chlorine oxidation process can be used
effectively for wastewater containing predominantly free cyanides
and easily oxidizable cyanide complexes, the Agency determined
that precipitation with ferrous sulfate is more effective than
chlorine oxidation for the removal of iron-cyanide complexes
which are found in primary aluminum wastewater.
At some plants, cathode reprocessing wastewater is reused in
potline wet air pollution control systems. When this occurs, the
potline scrubber wastewater will exhibit treatable cyanide
concentrations and would require treatment for cyanide in the
same manner as the cathode reprocessing wastewater.
OPTION C
Option C for the primary aluminum subcategory consists of all
control and treatment requirements of Option B (in-process flow
reduction, oil skimming, cyanide precipitation with ferrous
sulfate, lime precipitation, and sedimentation), plus multimedia
filtration technology added at the end of the Option B treatment
scheme. Multimedia filtration is used to remove suspended
solids-, including precipitates of metals and fluoride, beyond the
concentration attainable by gravity sedimentation. The filter
suggested is of the gravity, mixed media type, although other
forms of filters such as rapid sand filters or pressure filters
would also perform satisfactorily. The addition of filters also
provides consistent removal during periods of time in which there
are rapid increases in flows or loadings of pollutants to the
treatment system.
749
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VII
OPTION E
Option E for the primary aluminum subcategory consists of Option
C (in-process flow reduction, oil skimming, cyanide precipitation
with ferrous sulfate, lime precipitation, sedimentation, and
multimedia filtration) with the addition of activated carbon
adsorption technology at the end of the Option C treatment
scheme. The activated carbon process is used to remove toxic
organic pollutants which remain after lime precipitation,
sedimentation, and filtration.
CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS REJECTED
Three additional control and treatment options were considered
prior to proposing mass limitations for this subcategory as
discussed below. Activated alumina (fluoride adsorption) and
reverse osmosis were rejected because they are not demonstrated
in the nonferrous metals manufacturing point source category, nor
are they clearly transferable. Pretreatment of certain waste
streams using activated carbon was also eliminated. A pilot
scale treatability study performed by the Agency after proposal
demonstrated that toxic organic pollutants in primary aluminum
wastewaters are substantially removed through lime, settle, and
filter treatment. The findings of this study eliminated further
consideration of activated carbon treatment.
FLUORIDE TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
In settlement agreement negotiation, the Agency re-evaluated the
variability factors for fluoride in the primary aluminum
subcategory based on petitioners claims that the presence of
complex^fluoride ions and aluminum salts increase the difficulty
of achieving the limitations promulgated in June 1984. The
Agency has retained the long-term mean but increased the
variability factors for fluoride to the pooled variability
factors computed from data for seven metal pollutants in the
combined metals data base (4.10 and 1.82 for the one day maximum
and the monthly average of daily values variability factors,
respectively). These new treatment effectiveness values for
fluoride are 59.5 mg/1, maximum for any one day and 26.4 mg/1
maximum monthly average of daily values.
TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS FOR POTLINE SCRUBBER
REPROCESSING WASTEWATERS
AND
CATHODE
The Agency evaluated industry comments after proposal and made
additional studies of the treatment effectiveness of treatment
technologies applied to potline air pollution control scrubber
wastewater^ and cathode reprocessing wastewater. These studies,
reported in Section V of this supplement, indicate that the
nature of the wastewater matrix of these wastewaters is such that
treatment effectiveness values other than those displayed in
Table VII-21 of Vol 1 should be used. The Agency has elected to
750
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VII
develop mass discharge limitations for these two wastewater
streams when they are uncomingled with any other waters based on
the results of the special treatment studies. These treatment
effectiveness values are summarized in Table VII-1 (page 735).
When these wastewaters are comingled with other waters, the
treatment effectiveness levels of Table VII-21, Vol 1 (page 248)
are used.
Spent potliner leachate may receive the treatment performance
values developed for cathode reprocessing and provided: (a) the
permit writer determines on a case by case basis that the
wastewater matrices of cathode reprocessing and spent potliner
leachate are comparable; and (b) the spent potliner leachate is
not commingled with process or non-process wastewaters other than
cathode reprocessing or potline wet air pollution control
operated in conjunction with cathode reprocessing. Spent potliner
leachate resulting from atmospheric precipitation runoff is
considered a site specific non-scope wastewater stream by the
Agency and for this reason specific limitations are not provided
in this regulation.
BENZO(A)PYRENE TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
In settlement negotiations after promulgation, the Agency revised
its statistical analysis of benzo(a)pyrene data to develop one
day maximum and monthly average treatment effectiveness
concentrations as a basis for calculating mass discharge limits.
The recalculated treatment effectiveness concentrations are
0.0337 mg/1 maximum for any one day and 0.0156 mg/1 maximum
monthly average of daily values. The Agency also restricted the
discharge allowance for benzo(a)pyrene to those streams which
actually contain this pollutant.
751
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VII
TABLE VII-1
TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS FOR SELECTED BUILDING BLOCKS
Lime Settle and Filter Technology
(mg/1)
Pollutant Mean
Acenaphthene 0.010
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.023
*Benzo(a)pyrene 0.010
3,4-Benzofluoranthene 0.010
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.010
Benzo(ghi)perylene 0.010
Chrysene 0.023
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.010
Floranthene 0.114
Pyrene 0.079
*Antimony 2.99
*Cyanide 1.1
*Nickel 0.57
*Aluminum 1.9
*Pluoride 206
*TSS 15
One-day
Maximum
0.0337
0.0337
0.0337
0.075
0.0337
0.384
0.266
12.0
4.5
2.3
7.8
840
61.5
10-day
Average
0.0337 0.0156
0.0775 0.036
0.0337 0.0156
0.0156
0.0156
0.0156
0.036
0.0156
0.178
0.123
5.4
2.0
1.0
3.5
380
27.3
30-day
Average
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
* = Regulated Pollutant
NC = Not calculated
NOTE: These values may be used only for calculating allowances
for cathode reprocessing and potline wet air pollution control
wastewaters when they are not commingled with any other
wastewaters.
752
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VIII
SECTION VIII
COSTS, ENERGY, AND NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS
This section describes the method used to develop the estimated
costs associated with the control and treatment technologies
discussed in Section VII for wastewaters from primary aluminum
plants. The energy requirements of the considered options as
well as solid waste and air pollution aspects are also discussed
in this section.
Section VI indicated that significant pollutants or pollutant
parameters in the primary aluminum subcategory are benzo(a)
pyrene, aluminum, antimony, nickel, cyanide, fluoride, TSS, pHf
and oil and grease. Metals and fluorides are most economically
removed by chemical precipitation, sedimentation and filtration.
These technologies also remove toxic polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbon's. Cyanide concentrations can be reduced by chemical
precipitation with ferrous sulfate or by ion-exchange. Activated
carbon is an effective treatment for removing organics.
LEVELS OF TREATMENT CONSIDERED
As discussed in Section VII, four control and treatment options
were considered for treating wastewater from the primary aluminum
subcategory. Cost estimates were developed for each of these
control and treatment options. Cost estimates, in the form of
annual cost curves, have been developed for each of these control
and treatment options, and they are presented in Section VIII of
the General Development Document. The control and treatment
options are presented in Figures X-l through X-4 (pages 808
811) .
OPTION A
Option A for the primary aluminum subcategory consists of lime
precipitation and sedimentation applied to combined wastewater
streams. Oil skimming is added as a preliminary treatment_ step
to remove oil and grease from all waste streams except stationary
and shot casting, potline SO2 wet air pollution control, and
degassing wet air pollution control.
OPTION B
Option B for the primary aluminum subcategory consists of all
treatment requirements of Option A (lime precipitation,
sedimentation, and oil skimming) plus control technologies_ to
reduce the discharge of wastewater volume and chemical
precipitation with ferrous sulfate to control cyanide from
cathode reprocessing wastewaters. Water recycle and reuse are
the principal control mechanisms of flow reduction. Flow
reduction measures consist of recycle of contact cooling water
through cooling towers and recycle of wet air pollution
753
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VIII
control wastewater through holding tanks.
OPTION C
Option C consists of Option B (cyanide precipitation preliminary
treatment, lime precipitation, sedimentation, oil skimming and
in-process flow reduction) with the addition of multimedia
filtration added to the end of the Option B treatment scheme.
OPTION E
Option E consists of Option C (lime precipitation, sedimentation,
oil skimming, in-process flow reduction, and multimedia
filtration) with the addition of activated carbon adsorption
technology at the end of the Option C treatment scheme.
Cost Methodology
A detailed discussion of the methodology used to develop the
compliance costs has been presented. Plant-by-plant compliance
costs have been estimated for the primary aluminum subcategory.
The total costs for the final primary aluminum subcategory
regulation are presented in Table VIII-1 (page 757).
The major general assumptions used to develop compliance costs
have been presented. Each subcategory contains a unique set of
waste streams requiring certain subcategory-specific assumptions
to develop compliance costs. Six major assumptions applicable
specifically to the primary aluminum subcaategory are discussed
briefly below.
(1) Compliance costs for oil-water separation, flow reduc-
tion via cooling towers, and lime and settle are neces-
sary to meet the previously promulgated BPT regulation
for certain waste streams. These costs are not
included in the current compliance costs if the treat-
ment is in place and of sufficient capacity,, If
additional capacity is required to treat waste streams
not considered in the promulgated BPT regulation, the
cost for this capacity is included in the compliance
cost estimate.
(2) In the consideration of activated carbon adsorption as
an end-of-pipe technology, each plant is analyzed to
determine whether separate or combined treatment of the
organic bearing and organic free waste streams is
economically justified. The least costly configuration
is then used to estimate compliance costs.
(3) Sludge generated by lime and settle treatment is
assumed a hazardous waste when polynuclear aromatics
are removed.
(4) Cyanide precipitation is included as a preliminary
treatment step on cyanide-bearing wastewaters only.
754
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VIII
These waters originate only in cathode reprocessing
facilities used by four plants. Hazardous waste dis-
posal costs were included for the sludges generated by
cyanide precipitation.
(5) Capital and annual costs for plants discharging in both
the primary and secondary aluminum subcategories are
based on a combined treatment system and were appor-
tioned to each subcategory on a flow-weighted basis.
(6) Capital and annual costs for plants discharging in the
primary aluminum subcategory and another point source
category are based on separate treatment systems since
the respective regulations are based on different tech-
nologies and control different pollutants. Segregation
costs are included to separate the wastewaters.
NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS
Nonwater quality impacts specific to the primary aluminum
subcategory, including energy requirements, solid waste and air
pollution are discussed below.
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
The methodology used for determining the energy requirements for
the various alternatives is discussed in Section VIII of the
General Development Document. Option C, which includes
filtration, is estimated to consume five; percent more energy than
the promulgated BPT technology, while activated carbon could
increase energy consumption by approximeitely 50 percent over BPT.
Option C in a typical plant represents cipproximately 0.2 percent
of the total plant electrical requirements. Therefore, it is
concluded this regulation will have negligible effects on energy
consumption.
SOLID WASTE
Sludges associated with the primary aluminum subcategory will
necessarily contain toxic quantities (and concentrations) of
toxic metal pollutants. Wastes generated by primary smelters and
refiners are currently exempt from regulation by Act of Congress
(Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)), Section 3001(b),
as presently interpreted by the Agency. Consequently, sludges
generated from treating industries' wastewater are not presently
subject to regulation as hazardous wastes.
If these wastes should eventually be identified or are listed as
hazardous, they will come within the scope of RCRA's "cradle to
grave" hazardous waste management program, requiring regulation
from the point of generation to point of final disposition. EPA's
generator standards would require generators of hazardous
nonferrous metals manufacturing wastes to meet containerization,
labeling, record keeping, and reporting requirements; if plants
dispose of hazardous wastes off-site, they would have to prepare
755
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
a manifest which would track the movement of the wastes from the
generator's premises to a permitted off-site treatment, storage,
or disposal facility. See 40 CFR 262.20 45 FR 33142 (May 19,
1980), as amended at 45 FR 86973 (December 31, 1980). The
transporter regulations require transporters of hazardous wastes
to comply with the manifest system to assure that the wastes are
delivered to a permitted facility. See 40 CFR 263.20 45 FR 33151
(May 19, 1980), as amended at 45 FR 86973 (December 31, 1980).
Finally, RCRA regulations establish standards for hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities allowed to receive
such wastes. See 40 CFR Part 464 46 FR 2802 (January 12, 1981),
47 FR 32274 (July 26, 1982).
Even if these wastes are not identified as hazardous, they still
must be disposed of in compliance with the Subtitle D open
dumping standards, implementing 4004 of RCRA. See 44 FR 53438
(September 13, 1979).
Pilot-scale work performed by the Agency since proposal
demonstrated that toxic polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
pollutants found in primary aluminum wastewaters aire removable
using lime, settle, and filter technology. As a result, the
Agency believes lime sludge from this subcategory will be toxic
due to the presence of these organic contaminants. In addition,
sludges generated during cyanide precipitation are ejxpected to be
hazardous under RCRA. Consequently, in developing plant-by-plant
compliance costs for the primary aluminum subcategory, the Agency
considered the sludges generated as hazardous. The costs of
hazardous waste disposal were considered in the economic
analysis, and they were determined to be economically achievable.
(This is a conservative assumption since these sludges are
presently subject to a statutory and regulatory exemption from
hazardous waste status). It is estimated that Options B and C
will generate approximately 730,000 tons/yr of waste sludge as 20
percent solids. Multimedia filtration technology will not
generate any significant amount of sludge over that resulting
from' lime precipitation and sedimentation.
AIR POLLUTION
There is no reason to believe that any additional air pollution
will result from implementation of cyanide precipitation, lime
precipitation, sedimentation, filtration, reverse osmosis, and
carbon adsorption. These technologies transfer pollutants to
solid waste and do not involve air stripping or any other
physical process likely to transfer pollutants to air. In those
plants using lubricants for casting, there may be organics
present in drift from cooling towers along with some particulate
matter used to recycle casting contact cooling water. However,
the Agency believes that the amount of organic constituents and
particulate matter in the drift would not be significant.
756
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VIII
TABLE VIII-1
COST OF COMPLIANCE FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
DIRECT DISCHARGERS
(March 1982 Dollars, Millions)
Proposal Cost
Promulgation Cost
Option
A
B
C
D
Capital
11.1
33.9
38.3
47.4*
Annual
5.3
21.2
24.5
24.4*
Capital
7.5
14.5
16.0
26.2**
Annual
7.9
9.8
10.5
14.7**
* Activated carbon adsorption as a preliminary treatment.
** End-of-pipe carbon adsorption.
757
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VIII
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
758
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - IX
SECTION IX
BEST PRACTICABLE TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
EPA promulgated BPT limitations for the primary aluminum
subcategory on April 8, 1974 as Subpart B of 40 CFR Part 421.
Pollutants regulated by these limitations were fluoride, TSS, and
pH. Unlike the current rulemaking, the BPT limitations were
developed for the entire aluminum smelting process, not on the
basis of individual wastewater streams. EPA is not promulgating
any modifications to these limitations.
The following limitations establish the quantity of pollutants or
pollutant properties, which may be discharged by a point source
after application of the best practicable control technology
currently available:
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - kg/kkg of product
English Units - lbs/1,000 Ibs of product
Fluoride
Total Suspended Solids
pH
2.0 1.0
3.0 1.5
Within the range of 6 to 9
at all times
759
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - IX
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
760
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
SECTION X
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
The effluent limitations are based on the best control and
treatment technology used by a specific point source within the
industrial category or subcategory, or by another category where
it is readily transferable. Emphasis is placed on additional
treatment techniques applied at the end of the treatment systems
currently used for BPT, as well as reduction of the amount of
water used and discharged, process control, and treatment
technology optimization.
The factors considered in assessing best available technology
economically achievable (BAT) include the age of equipment and
facilities involved, the process used, process changes, nonwater
quality environmental impacts (including energy requirements),
and the costs of application of such technology (Section 304(b)
(2)(B) of the Clean Water Act). BAT represents the best
available technology economically achievable at plants of various
ages, sizes, processes, or other characteristics. Where the
Agency has found the existing performance to be uniformly
inadequate, BAT may be transferred from a different subcategory
or category. BAT may include feasible process changes or
internal controls, even when not in common industry practice.
The statutory assessment of BAT considers costs, but does not
require a balancing of costs against effluent reduction benefits
(see Weyerhaueser vs Costle, 590 F. 2d 1011 (D.C. Cir. 1978)).
However, in assessing the proposed BAT, the Agency has given
substantial weight to the economic achievability of the
technology.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO BAT
In pursuing, this second round of effluent limitations and
standards, the Agency reviewed a wide range of technology options
and evaluated the available possibilities to ensure that the most
effective and beneficial technologies were used as the basis of
BAT. To accomplish this, the Agency examined four technology
alternatives prior to promulgating mass limitations, which could
be applied to the primary aluminum subcategory as BAT options and
which would represent substantial progress toward reduction of
pollutant discharges above and beyond progress achieved by BPT.
In summary, the treatment technologies considered for BAT are
presented below:
Option A (Figure X-l, page 808) is based on
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
761
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
Option B (Figure X-2, page 809) is based on
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from anode paste
plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
Option C (Figure X-3, page 810) is based on
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from anode paste
plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
o Multimedia filtration
Option E (Figure X-4, page 811) is based on
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from anode paste
plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
o Multimedia filtration
o Activated carbon adsorption for toxic organic removal
The four options examined for BAT are discussed in greater detail
on the following pages. The first option considered (Option A)
is analogous to the BPT treatment which was presented in the
previous section.
OPTION A
Option A for the primary aluminum subcategory is equivalent to
the treatment technology that is the basis of promulgated BPT
effluent limitations. The Option A treatment scheme consists of
preliminary treatment of casting contact cooling water by oil
skimming and chemical precipitation and sedimentation applied to
the combined wastewater discharges as reported in the data
collection portfolios. Although oil and grease is a conventional
pollutant, oil skimming is needed for BAT to ensure proper metals
removal. Oil and grease interferes with the chemical addition
and mixing required for chemical precipitation treatment.
Chemical precipitation is used to remove metals, toxic organics,
and fluoride by the addition of lime followed by gravity
sedimentation. Suspended solids are also removed from the
process.
762
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
OPTION B
Option B for the primary aluminum subcategory achieves lower
pollutant discharge by building upon the Option A treatment
technology of oil skimming, chemical precipitation, and
sedimentation (see Figure X-2, page 783). Option B uses
preliminary cyanide precipitation technology to reduce cyanide
concentrations and flow reduction measures to reduce the quantity
of pollutants discharged.
Cyanide precipitation, based on ferrous sulfate addition, was
applied only to wastewater generated from cathode reprocessing
and potline scrubber liquor when cathode reprocessing was
performed on-site. At some plants,, cathode reprocessing
wastewater is reused in potline wet air pollution control
systems. When this occurs, the potline scrubber wastewater may
exhibit treatable cyanide concentrations and would require
treatment for cyanide in the same manner as the cathode
reprocessing wastewater. Ion exchange has been demonstrated on a
pilot scale in the primary aluminum industry. Performance values
obtained through ion-exchange are very similar to those of the
Agency's pilot scale treatability study using ferrous sulfate.
Alkaline chlorination of cyanide is demonstrated at one primary
aluminum plant.
Flow reduction measures, including in-process changes, result in
the elimination of some wastewater streams and the concentration
of pollutants in other effluents. As explained in Section VII of
the General Development Document, treatment of a more
concentrated effluent allows achievement of a greater net
pollutant removal and introduces the possible economic benefits
associated with treating a lower volume of wastewater. Methods
used in Option B to reduce process wastewater generation and
discharge rates are discussed on the following page.
Recycle of Anode and Casting Contact Cooling Water Through
Cooling Towers
The cooling and recycle of contact cooling water is practiced by
22 of the 31 plants reporting this wastewater. The function of
contact cooling water is to quickly remove heat from the newly
formed anode or cast aluminum. Therefore, the principal
requirements of the water are that it be cool and not contain
dissolved solids at a concentration that would cause water marks
or other surface imperfections. There is sufficient experience
within the nonferrous metals manufacturing category with contact
cooling wastewater to assure the success of this technology using
cooling towers or heat exchangers (refer to Section VII of the
General Development Document). Although one plant reported it
did not discharge any anode quench water by reason of 100 percent
recycle, a blowdown or periodic cleaning is needed to prevent a
buildup of dissolved and suspended solids. (EPA has determined
that a blowdown of 10 percent of the water applied in a process
is adequate.)
763
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
Recycle of Water Used in Wet Air Pollution Control
There are six wastewater sources associated with wet air
pollution control which are regulated under these effluent
limitations:
1. Anode paste plant,
2. Anode bake plant,
3. Potline,
4. Potline SC-2,
5. Potroom, and
6. Degassing.
Table X-l (page 782) presents the number of plants reporting
wastewater use with these sources, the number of plants
practicing recycle of scrubber liquor, and the range of recycle.
The water scrubs particulate matter and fumes from the emissions,
requiring a blowdown or periodic cleaning of scrubber liquor to
prevent the buildup of dissolved and suspended solids.
skimming,
considered
technology
filtration
OPTION C
Option C for the primary aluminum subcategory builds upon Option
B by adding multimedia filtration technology to the end of the
in-process flow reduction, lime precipitation, sedimentation, oil
and cyanide precipitation with ferrous sulfate,
for Option B. A schematic of this treatment
is presented in Figure X-3 (page 784) Multimedia
is used to remove suspended solids, including
precipitates of metals and fluoride, beyond the concentration
attainable by gravity sedimentation. The filter suggested is of
the gravity, mixed media type, although other forms of filters,
such as rapid sand filters or pressure filters, would also
perform satisfactorily.
OPTION E
Option E for the primary aluminum subcategory consists of in-
process flow reduction, lime precipitation, sedimentation, oil
skimming, cyanide precipitation with ferrous sulfate, and
multimedia filtration, with the addition of activated carbon
adsorption technology. The activated carbon process is used to
increase the removal of toxic organics after lime precipitation,
sedimentation, and filtration.
INDUSTRY COST AND POLLUTANT REMOVAL ESTIMATES
As one means of evaluating each technology option, EPA developed
estimates of the pollutant reduction and the compliance costs
associated with each option. The methodologies are described on
the following page.
POLLUTANT REMOVAL ESTIMATES
764
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
A complete description of the methodology used to calculate the
estimated pollutant reduction achieved, by the application of the
various treatment options is presented in Section X of the
General Development Document. The data used for estimating
pollutant removals are the same as those used to revise the
compliance costs.
Sampling data collected during the field sampling program were
used to characterize the major waste streams considered for
Simulation? At each sampled facility, the sampling data were
production normalized for each unit operation (i.e., mass of
pollutant generated per mass of product manufactured). This
value, referred to as the raw waste, was used to estimate
the mass of toxic pollutants generated within the primary
aluminum subcategory. By multiplying the total indu^try
production for a unit operation times the corresponding raw waste
SaluS, the mass of pollutant generated for that unit operation
was estimated.
The volume of wastewater discharged after the application of each
treatment option was estimated for each operation at each plant
by comparing the actual discharge to the regulatory flow. The
smaller of the two values was selected and summed with the other
plant flows. The mass of pollutant discharged was then estimated
by multiplying the achievable concentration values attainable by
the option (mg/1) by the estimated volume of process wastewater
discharged by the subcategory. The mass of pollutant removed is
the difference between the estimated mass of pollutant generated
within the subcategory and the mass of pollutant discharged after
application of the treatment option.
The pollutant removal estimates for the direct dischargers in the
primary aluminum subcategory are presented in Tables X-2 (page
783) through X-5 (page 786). Table X-2 shows the removals for
the toxic organic pollutants. For inorganic pollutants, removal
estimates were determined based on the long-term achievable
concentration values from either the combined metals data base
(CmT) or an alternate data base developed from the pilot-scale
ireatability study (see Section VII). Treatment performance data
gathered during ?he pilot-scale study demonstrated that plants
operating cathode reprocessing operations and using the
wKtJwatlr as makeup for potline scrubber liquor cannot achieve
the performance values proposed for antimony, nickel, aluminum,
fluoride, and total suspended solids. Therefore, alternate
treatment performance values from the study (Table VI1-1, page
752) were used to estimate pollutant removals for those primary
aluminum plants that operate cathode reprocessing and commingle
the resulting wastewater with potline scrubber ljj£'- <™»e
treatment performance is discussed in greater detail below.)
Pollutant removal estimates for plants that do not commingle
cathode reprocessing wastewater and potline scrubber liquor were
calculated using thl CMDB based treatment effectiveness values in
Table" VI1-21 (Vol-1 page 248). Tables X-3 and X-4 Present the
inorganic pollutant removal estimates using the CMDB based
765
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
treatment effectiveness and the alternate treatment effectiveness
values in Table VII-1, respectively. Inorganic pollutant removal
totals for all direct dischargers are presented in Table X-5.
COMPLIANCE COSTS
Compliance costs presented at proposal were estimated using cost
curves, _which related the total costs associated with
installation and operation of wastewater treatment technologies
to plant process wastewater discharge. EPA applied these curves
on a per plant basis, a plant's costs—both capital, and
operating and maintenance—being determined by what treatment it
has in place and by its individual process wastewater discharge
(from dcp). The final step was to annualize the capital costs,
and to sum the annualized capital costs, and the operating and
maintenance costs, yielding the cost of compliance for the
subcategory. Since proposal, the cost estimation methodology was
changed as discussed in Section VIII of this document. A design
model and plant specific information were used to size a
wastewater treatment system for each discharging facility. After
completion of the design, capital and annual costs were estimated
for each unit of the wastewater treatment system. Capital costs
were developed from vendor quotes and annual costs were developed
from literature. The revised compliance costs are presented in
Table VIII-1 (page 757).
BAT OPTION SELECTION
EPA's proposed BAT was based on lime, settle, and filter
technology and flow reduction, with preliminary treatment for
organics and cyanide using activated carbon and ferrous sulfate
precipitation, respectively. Numerous comments were received on
the proposed technology stating, among other things,, that the
Agency did not account for the removal of toxic organics in lime
and settle treatment. The transfer of cyanide precipitation and
associated performance values was also contested as unachievable
on primary aluminum wastewaters. The Agency performed pilot-
scale work on potline scrubber blowdown and cathode reprocessing
wastewater at a primary aluminum facility following proposal (see
Sections V and VII). Analytical data gathered during the study
indicate toxic organic pollutants present in primary aluminum
wastewaters are controllable through lime, settle, and multimedia
filtration treatment technology. The toxic organics, present as
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, are only slightly soluble in
water, and thus are treatable using sedimentation and filtration
techniques. Removals by this technology exceed 99 percent of all
toxic organics present. In addition, the most toxic of the
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, including the carcinogen
benzo(a)pyrene, are removed to the limit of quantification by
this technology. For these reasons, the Agency does not believe
it is warranted to include the use of activated carbon to remove
the small amounts of these less toxic polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons remaining after application of lime, settle, and
filtration technology. At-the-source limitations for toxic
organic pollutants are not appropriate because toxic organics are
766
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
effectively controlled with lime, settle, and filter treatment.
Thus, the promulgated BAT mass limitations for the primary,
aluminum subcategory are based on end-of-pipe lime precipitation,
sedimentation, and multimedia filtration. Preliminary treatment
of cyanide is based on cyanide precipitation. Treatment
effectiveness values for toxic organic pollutants and for certain
toxic metals (Table VII-1) are based on data from the Agency's
pilot plant study. They apply to potline wet scrubber and cathode
reprocessing wastewaters provided these wastewaters are not
commingled with any other waters (see below). In-process flow
reduction of scrubber liquors and contact cooling water through
recycle is also included.
Data gathered through specific data, requests show cathode
reprocessing wastewaters are normally used as potline scrubber
liquor make-up. An at-the-source limit for cyanide was
considered to prevent dilution of potline scrubber liquor or
cathode reprocessing as a means of compliance. An at-the-source
limit would be appropriate if there were a risk that cyanide
could be diluted to below levels detectable at the end of the
pipe as a result of mixing with wastewaters that do not contain
cyanide. This is not likely to occur because the waste streams
containing cyanide, cathode reprocessing wastewater, and potline
scrubber wastewater have very high flows. These streams would
have to be diluted at roughly a 100 to one ratio for cyanide to
be undetected, an unlikely result., Permit writers should
investigate, however, whether this degree of dilution might occur
at an individual plant (for example, if storm water is being
centrally treated), in which case an at-the-source limit would be
needed to ensure treatment and removal of cyanide.
The final regulation states that only the potline wet scrubber
and cathode reprocessing building blocks receive a cyanide mass
limitation. This effectively precludes dilution because it does
not make economic sense for a plant to treat its entire flow when
it can pretreat these cyanide-containing streams. (The Agency
thus developed compliance costs based on cyanide pretreatment.)
In addition, a mass allowance is provided for cathode
reprocessing only if this operation is not conducted in
conjunction with potline wet scrubbing. Where cathode
reprocessing is operated along with wet potline scrubbing, an
allowance is provided only for the potline scrubber because only
a single flow is associated with both operations. In essence,
the flow from potline scrubbing is routed to the cathode
reprocessing operation for fluoride recovery, and then routed
back to the potline where a blowdown is discharged. There is no
independent flow from cathode reprocessing.
FINAL AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATION
For the Primary Aluminum Subcategory, EPA promulgated final
amendments on July 7, 1987 (52 FR 25552) to the regulation
concerning four topics, which are briefly described here.
767
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
EPA amended the BAT limitations and NSPS and PSNS for
benzo(a)pyrene in two manners: first, to incorporate variability
factors into the daily maximum and monthly average limitations;
and second, to only provide discharge allowances for
benzo(a)pyrene to those processes which generate this substance.
Further, EPA provided clarification on 2 items pertaining to
regulation of benzo(a)pyrene.
EPA amended the BAT limitations and NSPS and PSNS for fluoride to
be based upon the pooled variability factors calculated from data
for seven metal pollutants in the CMDB, instead of the
variability factors from the Electrical & Electronic Components
Phase II regulation.
EPA provided brief guidance on the treatment values that permit
writers may provide for spent potliner leachate, even though EPA
considers spent potliner leachate to be non-process and therefore
a non-scope flow.
EPA has amended the NSPS pH standards for direct chill casting
contact cooling water to a range of 6.0 to 10.0 standard units at
all times.
TREATMENT PERFORMANCE
Overall treatment performance for the cathode reprocessing waste
stream, as well as treatment performance values for three
specific pollutants, namely cyanide, benzo(a)pyrene and fluoride,
are discussed here with respect to their special circumstances in
the primary aluminum subcategory.
Treatment performance data gathered during the pilot-scale study
demonstrated that plants operating cathode reprocessing
operations and using the wastewater as makeup for potline
scrubber liquor cannot achieve the performance values proposed
for antimony, nickel, aluminum, fluoride, and total suspended
solids. The Agency believes this is due to the matrix differences
resulting from cathode reprocessing,. The cathode reprocessing
wastewater, and subsequently the potline scrubber liquor, contain
dissolved solids levels in the five to six percent range.
Therefore, the Agency is promulgating separate mass limitations
for those primary aluminum plants that operate cathode
reprocessing and commingle resulting wastewater with potline
scrubber liquor. However, to receive these alternate limitations
the plant may not dilute potline scrubber liquor blowdown or
cathode reprocessing wastewater with any process or nonprocess
wastewater source. If the potline scrubber blowdown is diluted
with other wastewaters, the Agency believes the complexity of the
matrix decreases and thus the concentrations of the combined
metals data base (as well as the transferred antimony
concentration) should be achieved.
In fact, a statistical analysis of untreated wastewater data
shows primary aluminum wastewater to be significantly less
contaminated than wastewater from the plants in the combined
768
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
metals data base.
The variability factors used to determine the mass limitations
for the alternate potline scrubber blowdown and cathode
reprocessing are transferred from the combined metals data base.
The CMDB contains more data points than the pilot-scale study and
thus is a better source for determining variability for lime and
settle treatment.
While not considered a process wastewater stream, EPA has
provided guidance to permit writing authorities that spent
potliner leachate, resulting from either the stockpiling or the
landfilling of spent potliners, may also receive the alternate
treatment performance values developed for cathode reprocessing
or potline scrubber liquor commingled with cathode reprocessing
wastewaters. This guidance is appropriate if the permit writer
determines on a case-by-case basis that the wastewater matrices
of cathode reprocessing and spent potliner leachate are
comparable and the spent potliner leachate is not commingled with
process or nonprocess wastewaters other than cathode reprocessing
or potline wet air pollution control operated in conjunction with
cathode reprocessing.
The Agency's pilot-scale treatment performance studies also
revealed performance limits for cyanide precipitation are not
transferable from coil coating to primary aluminum wastewater.
The Agency believes the cathode reprocessing operations discharge
much higher concentrations of cyanide than observed in coil
coating and impair treatment by also discharging extremely high
dissolved solids concentrations (five to six percent) that
interfere with precipitation chemistry. Therefore, treatment
effectiveness is based on the Agency's pilot study of these
wastewaters. This mean was also shown, in data submitted by a
primary aluminum facility, to be achievable by ion exchange
technology applied to cyanide-contaminated groundwater. _In
developing variability factors for cyanide precipitation
technology, the -mean variability from the combined metals data
base is used because only two data points were generated by the
treatability study.
The Agency has re-evaluated the treatment performance for
benzo(a)pyrene and has concluded that there is some variability
in treatment of this compound, and that, in addition, the model
treatment technology, lime, settle and filter also has some
associated operating variability. As such, EPA has changed the
benzo(a)pyrene effluent limitations and standards by increasing
the daily maximum from 0.010 mg/1 to 0.0337 mg/1 and by_adding a
monthly maximum average of 0.0156 mg/1. These limitations were
determined on the basis of a statistical analysis of data on the
treatability of benzo(a)pyrene obtained in the pilot study
referenced above.
As a result of these changes, the allowances for benzo(a)pyrene
are only applicable to those processes that generate it.
Therefore, no discharge allowance will be provided for
769
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
benzo(a)pyrene in the degreasing wet air pollution control,
direct chill casting contact cooling and continuous rod casting
contact cooling building blocks.
The clarification that EPA has provided is twofold: the rule
does not mandate at-the-source limitations for benzo(a)pyrene,
and analytical values at or below the detection limit for any
EPA-approved analytical method will be counted as zeroes for
purposes of determining compliance.
The Agency has re-evaluated lime and settle technology
performance for fluoride removal. The proposed treatment
performance for fluoride was transferred from the electrical and
electronic component manufacturing (phase II) lime and settle
mean performance. Because of the presence of complex fluoride
ions and aluminum salts in the primary aluminum subcategory
wastewaters, petitioners to the promulgated regulation claimed
that the fluoride limitations are not achievable. EPA is thus
retaining the long-term mean but increasing the variability
factors for fluoride (49 FR 8751, 8757). The revised promulgated
limitations are based on the pooled variability factors
calculated from data for seven metal pollutants in the combined
metals data base. The variability factors used are 4.10 and 1.82
for daily and monthly variability factors, respectively, as
opposed to the values 2.40 and 1.3 which were used for the March
1984 promulgation. These new variability factors change the one-
day and monthly treatment effectiveness values to those shown in
Table VII-21 (page 248, Vol-l).For the primary aluminum
subcategory, the one-day and monthly treatment effectiveness for
fluoride become 59.5 and 26.4 mg/1, respectively. The Agency
believes that the variability associated with the metals data
will more accurately represent the fluoride variability in this
subcategory.
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE RATES
Important production operations that precede and follow reduction
are anode paste preparation and baking, anode cooling, cathode
manufacturing, and degassing and casting of molten aluminum. At
some primary aluminum plants, spent cathodes are reprocessed to
recover cryolite. All of these operations are potential sources
of wastewater and are evaluated to establish effluent limitations
for the primary aluminum subcategory.
Specific wastewater streams associated with the primary aluminum
subcategory are discharges from air pollution emission control
devices for the paste plant, anode bake plant, potline, potroom,
and degassing and those from green anode and briquette contact
cooling, casting contact cooling, cathode reprocessing, and pot
repair-pot soaking. Table X-6 (page 787) lists the production
normalized wastewater discharge rates allocated at BAT for these
wastewater streams. The values represent the best existing
practices of the subcategory, as determined from the analysis of
data collection portfolios and data gathered through comments.
770
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
ANODE AND CATHODE PASTE PLANT WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
WASTEWATER
The BAT wastewater discharge rate at proposal for anode paste
plant wet air pollution control was 103.0 1/kkg (24.7
gallons/ton) of paste produced. This rate was allocated for the
users of wet air pollution control devices to control
particulates emanating from the handling of coke and pitch during
anode paste preparation. Of the 29 plants reporting on-site
paste preparation, 22 use dry control devices. Four plants use
water scrubbers, while one does not have any emission control
devices. All of the plants with water scrubbers are once-through
dischargers. The BAT discharge rate at proposal for this stream
was based on 90 percent recycle or reuse of the average water use
of the four plants.
Data submitted through comments and gathered through specific
data requests were used to re-evaluate the proposed anode paste
plant wet air pollution control flow allowance. The same four
plants considered at proposal are used to calculate the
flow allowance at primulgation. The promulgated BAT discharge
rate for this stream is based on 90 percent recycle or reuse of
the average water use of the four plants. Using the data
presented in Table V-l (page 653) the flow allowance is
calculated as 136 1/kkg (33 gal/ton) of paste produced.
The scope of this wastewater stream has also been expanded.
After proposal, it was demonstrated to the Agency that scrubbers
used to control particulate and gaseous emissions from cathode
paste plants are similar to anode paste plant scrubbers. Flow
and production relationships between these operations are
essentially identical.
ANODE BAKE PLANT WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL WASTEWATER
The BAT wastewater discharge rate at proposal for anode bake
plant wet air pollution control was 49.4 1/kkg (11.9 gallons/ton)
of anode baked. The rate was allocated only for those plants
with wet air pollution control devices. Of the 19 anode baking
operations reported, eight plants were thought to use water for
emission control. The BAT discharge rate used at proposal was
based on 90 percent recycle of the water used at two plants with
the lowest water usage.
After proposal, numerous data were received by the Agency
indicating that baking operations from plant to plant are not
consistent and are fundamentally different. As described in
Section III, three different types of anode bake furnaces are
used: 1) open top ring furnace, 2) closed top ring furnace, and
3) tunnel kiln. Differences in the furnaces create different air
pollution control requirements due to variations in the volumes
of air produced and organic loadings. Production normalized
water discharge, scrubber type, and furnace type are presented in
771
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
Table V-3 (page 656). As shown, water discharge varies
dramatically with furnace type and scrubber type. Therefore,
four different flow allowances are used for this waste stream:
1. Tunnel kilns (1,138 1/kkg, based on 90 percent recycle
at plant 342);
2. Closed top ring furnaces (4,324 1/kkg, based on 90
percent recycle at plant 343);
3. Open top ring furnaces with spray towers only (50 1/kkg,
based on 90 percent recycle at plant 364); and
4. Open top ring furnaces with spray towers and wet
electrostatic precipitators (730 1/kkg, based on actual
discharge at plant 354).
Plant 371 operates a wet ESP and falls between allowances three
and four. The Agency believes allowance number four is more
appropriate for this plant since allowance number three would
require the plant to increase its recycle rate to 99+. Plant 371
currently complies with allowance number four.
ANODE CONTACT COOLING AND BRIQUETTE QUENCHING WATER
The BAT discharge rate at proposal for the anode contact cooling
waste stream was 621 1/kkg (149 gallons/ton) of anode cast. This
was equivalent to 90 percent recycle at the two known discharging
plants (based upon average water use). Four of the thirty-one
primary aluminum facilities were thought to generate this
wastewater stream. Information on water discharged and recycled
was not available for one of the four plants. The two remaining
plants are direct dischargers and do not practice recycle. The
fourth plant reported 100 percent recycle of anode contact
cooling water. Wastewater rates considered at proposal are
presented in Section V of this supplement.
Data and information collected through comments and specific
requests for information have been used to re-evaluate the
proposal anode contact cooling flow allowance. Many commenters
requested the Agency provide a discharge allowance for .briquette
quenching since it is a similar operation to anode contact
cooling. In both operations, unbaked anodes and briquettes are
water cooled to facilitate handling. The principal difference
between the two is size. Production normalized water usage rates
for briquette quenching compare favorably with anode contact
cooling, and thus they are included in the flow allowance. Table
V-5 (page 665) presents the production normalized discharge rates
for the 11 plants known to use contact cooling water to cool
anodes or briquettes.
Data presented in Table V-5 indicate plants 345 and 349 use an
inordinately large volume of cooling water when compared to the
other production normalized water usage discharge rates.
Excluding these two plants yields an average water usage of 2,090
1/kkg. The promulgated BAT is based on 90 percent recycle, or
209 1/kkg (50 gal/ton).
772
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
CATHODE MANUFACTURING
EPA has determined that this operation, for which a discharge
allowance was proposed, does not exist.
At proposal, wastewater from cathode manufacturing was thought to
be the discharge from wet ball milling. The Aluminum Association
has supplied information and data to the Agency indicating this
wastewater source, as described, does not exist. For those
plants listed in the supplemental development document with this
wastewater source, the Aluminum Association has presented the
actual use of water in manufacturing cathode paste:
Plant
340
346
349
365
Water Use
Bearing cooling water
Bearing cooling water
Soaking of potliners
Cathode paste plant wet air
pollution control
Thus, only the scrubber liquor at plant 369 and pot repair
wastewater at plant 349 are considered process wastewater.
Correspondence with the corporate office for plant 365 states
that plant 369 also has a scrubbing system for the manufacture of
cathode paste.
At these two plants coal-tar paste is manufactured to seal the
seams of pre-purchased cathodes. During mixing of the paste,
hydrocarbons are emitted and captured with wet scrubbers. This
operation is very similar to anode paste manufacture and its air
pollution control systems. Because the manufacture of cathode
paste is similar to manufacturing anode paste and the water usage
rates are similar, the anode paste plant wet air pollution
control allowance is redefined as anode and cathode paste plant
wet air pollution control.
CATHODE REPROCESSING
The BAT wastewater discharge rate at proposal for cathode
reprocessing was 952 1/kkg (228 gal/ton) of aluminum reduced from
electrolytic reduction. There were five plants in the primary
aluminum subcategory thought to generate wastewater when
reprocessing cathodes. None of these plants reported their
recycle or reuse practices for this waste stream. The BAT
discharge allowance was determined from an average of the five
reported discharge rates. The discharge rates ranged from 169
1/kkg to 1480 1/kkg.
Data gathered through specific data requests after proposal
indicate the flow allowance required for cathode reprocessing
wastewaters was overstated. Plants operating potline wet
773
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
scrubbers and cathode reprocessing commingle the two streams to
recover the fluoride as cryolite. Discharge from cryolite
recovery is then returned to the potline circuit and used as
scrubber liquor. Thus, the bleed from cathode reprocessing is
accomplished with the potline scrubber bleed. There is no
independent discharge from cathode reprocessing, arid so the flow
allowance provided is for the potline scrubber bleed. Plants
with cathode reprocessing were included in determining the
potline scrubber flow allowances. A cathode reprocessing flow
allowance is provided in the regulation, but it only applies to
those plants operating dry potline scrubbers (and so not using
cathode reprocessing bleed as makeup for wet scrubber).
The Agency has also changed the production normalizing parameter
for cathode reprocessing from aluminum produced to cryolite
recovered. In this way, a plant may obtain spent potliners from
another facility and still be able to comply with the promulgated
mass limitations.
A flow allowance of 35,028 1/kkg of cryolite recovered is
selected for those plants operating cathode reprocessing and dry
potline scrubbers. This flow allowance is currently demonstrated
at one primary aluminum facility using dry scrubbing. This value
was selected because the other three plants, which reported much
larger discharge rates, reuse the blowdown in the potline
scrubber circuit.
POTLINE WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL WASTEWATER
The BAT wastewater discharge rate at proposal for the potline air
scrubbing stream was 838 1/kkg (201 gallons/ton) of aluminum
produced from electrolytic reduction. Emissions from potline
reduction operations are controlled by dry or wet processes.
Common dry methods involve sorption of fluorine gases on alumina
followed by fabric filtration for particulate removal. Since
1973, ^ significant progress has been made toward effluent
reduction through the conversion of wet emission control devices
to dry processes. Of the 31 plants surveyed at proposal, there
were still 11 plants using wet processes, including one plant
with no discharge; four plants using a recirculation or recycle
system, with discharges ranging from 592 1/kkg (142 gallons/ton)
to 1,147 1/kkg (277 gallons/ton); and 6 plants with a once-
through system with discharges ranging from 20,210 1/kkg (224
gallons/ton) to 59,200 1/kkg (14,000 gallons/ton). Zero
discharge at one plant was accomplished by complete recycle and
reuse of treated wastewater. The proposed BAT discharge rate for
the potline air scrubbing system was based on the average
discharge rate of the four plants with recycle rates ranging from
91 to 99 percent.
After proposing the flow allowance, the Agency examined water
usage as it relates to scrubber type and cell technology. No
obvious trends were apparent, so the flow allowance was not
adjusted. In addition, no data or information were received
indicating the production normalized flows used to calculate the
774
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
flow allowance had changed. Therefore, the Agency has
promulgated the flow allowance for potline wet air pollution
control as proposed.
Data and information were received indicating that two plants
have recently installed dry potline scrubbing, leaving nine
plants with wet scrubbers. Of these nine plants, two plants have
not reported sufficient data to determine water usage and recycle
practices. Six plants have recycle rates ranging from 88 to 100
percent, while the last plant does not practice recycle.
POTLINE SO2 WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
A flow allowance has been added for scrubbers used to control
sulfur emissions from potlines. Currently there are two plants
operating scrubbers to control SO2 emissions from potlines, which
are preceded by dry fluoride scrubbers using alumina. The
production normalized discharge rates for these two scrubbers are
1,430 1/kkg (343 gal/ton) and 1,250 1/kkg (300 gal/ton) of
aluminum production. Recycle rates are reported as 77 and 75
percent, respectively. The discharge allowance is based on the
average of the two values: 1,340 1/kkg (321 gal/ton).
Sulfur dioxide in these two scrubbers is transferred from the gas
phase to the liquid phase using sodium carbonate as a scrubbing
medium. Requiring 90 percent recycle for these two scrubbers is
not appropriate due to the intricate chemistry involved. Sodium
scrubbers such as these are normally designed to operate at a TDS
level of five percent. By convention, a sodium scrubbing system
is considered to be operating in the concentrated mode when the
TDS concentration in the recirculation stream is about five
percent. The two plants in the primary aluminum subcategory with
sodium scrubbers operate at a TDS concentration of 10 percent.
Increasing the recycle rate at these two plants will necessarily
increase TDS which will affect scrubber performance. At higher
recycle rates, mass transfer capabilities are reduced and
equilibrium within the scrubber liquor may shift, liberating
sulfur dioxide gas.
Makeup water is added to the scrubbing circuit to control the TDS
level. Consequently, blowdown from the circuit results from
excess water in the system.
POTROOM WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL WASTEWATER
The BAT wastewater discharge rate at proposal for the potroom air
scrubbing stream was 1,305 1/kkg (314 gallons/ton) of aluminum
produced from electrolytic reduction. This rate was allocated
only for plants using wet air pollution control devices for
potroom emissions. Of the 31 plants surveyed at proposal, eight
practiced potroom emission control either to supplement the
potline gas cleaning system or as the only means of controlling
emissions from the reduction area. All of these plants used some
form of wet scrubbing. Wastewater discharge rates varied
considerably among these plants, ranging from 0 to 227,700 1/kkg
775
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
(54,600 gal/ton). The dcp data indicated that the presence of
potline scrubbing is not a factor contributing to the large
variations of potroom scrubber water used and discharged. The
proposed BAT discharge rate was based on the average of the
discharge rates of the four plants with recycle systems.
Additional data collected and received after proposing the
potroom scrubber flow allowance have been used to re-evaluate the
allowance. The Agency has learned that plant 349 reported water
usage for experimental foam scrubbers. Water usage of the foam
scrubber and spray towers are not expected to be similar; this is
clearly demonstrated in the reported values.
Updated flow and production data were also received for plants
359 and 360. The new dcp submitted by these two plants indicate
they have installed recycle systems and use horizontal tunnel
roof scrubbers with spray systems. However, plant 360 uses an
inordinately large amount of scrubber liquor when compared to
plant 359 and the other plants. Discharge rates for potroom wet
air pollution control are presented in Table V-12 (page 674). The
promulgated discharge allowance is based on the average discharge
rates at plants 354, 359, 364, and 353 adjusted to 90 percent
recycle. Thus, the flow allowance for potroom wet air pollution
control is 1,660 1/kkg (398 gal/ton) of aluminum reduction
production.
POT REPAIR AND POT SOAKING
A flow allowance for pot repair and pot soaking water was not
provided in the proposed mass limitations because the Agency
believed this stream was site specific. The Agency has given
this stream further attention, however, due to industry
requesting a flow allowance. Data gathered through Section 308
requests found five plants discharging this wastewater. Data
submitted to support the Aluminum Association's report entitled
Aluminum Industry Wastewater Survey indicates a sixth plant
discharges this waste stream. A seventh plant has also been
identified through information supplied in the dcp. The Agency
believes this waste stream is present subcategory-wide because
each plant must repair pots and remove potliners (caithodes). The
complete recycle of this stream was reported by three plants. The
belief that this process can be operated with no discharge has
been confirmed through conversations with industry personnel.
Water is used primarily to soften the liner so thcit it can be
removed. The Agency is unaware of any water quality restraints
restricting the reuse of this water. Therefore, a zero discharge
allowance is established for this waste stream based on 100
percent reuse.
DEGASSING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
No BAT discharge allowance was provided for degassing scrubber
wastewater in the proposed mass limitation. The Agency believed
many plants had eliminated the need for degassing scrubbers by
776
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
using alternative fluxing methods. These alternative fluxing
methods reduce chlorine fumes released in the operation and
subsequently eliminate the need to remove fumes from the off-
gases to comply with opacity requirements.
However, it has been demonstrated to the Agency that extensive
retrofits would be required to install alternate in-line fluxing
and filtering. Consequently, the Agency has withdrawn the zero
discharge requirement and provided a discharge allowance based on
the average reported water usage rates. The BAT discharge rate
is 2,609 1/kkg (626 gal/ton) of aluminum refined. Flow reduction
has not been included for this stream due to the nature of the
fume being scrubbed. Essentially, chlorine water will be formed
and recycle methods reducing chlorine concentrations are not
readily available. Aeration could be used to reduce the chlorine
concentration prior to recycle; however, this would only transfer
the point source from one part of the plant to another.
DIRECT CHILL CASTING CONTACT COOLING
Direct chill casting practices and the wastewater discharge from
this operation are similar in the aluminum forming and primary
aluminum reduction plants. The data available do not indicate
any significant difference in the amount of water required for
direct chill casting in a primary aluminum or aluminum forming
plant. For this reason, available wastewater data were
considered together, regardless of the affiliated category,
establishing BAT effluent limitations.
in
In all, 27 primary aluminum plants and 61 aluminum forming plants
were considered to have direct chill casting operations at
proposal. Recycle of the contact cooling water is practiced at
30 aluminum forming and 18 primary aluminum plants. Of these, 12
plants indicated that total recycle of this stream made it
possible to avoid any discharge of wastewater; however, the
majority of the plants discharge a bleed stream. The discharge
flow for this operation was based on the average of the best,
which was the average normalized discharge flow of the 29 plants
that practice recycle greater than 90 percent. That flow was
1,999 1/kkg (479 gal/ton) of aluminum product from direct chill
casting.
Evaluation of the flow allowance user at proposal revealed a
mistake in the calculation methodology. A plant practicing only
54 percent recycle was inadvertently included in the
determination of the flow rate. In addition, several primary
aluminum facilities were contacted to clarify dcp responses on
casting methods. Data from the aluminum forming and primary
aluminum facilities were pooled together and those discharging
plants practicing 90 percent recycle or greater (but not 100
percent recycle) were averaged to determine the flow allowance of
1,329 1/kkg (319 gal/ton) of aluminum cast.
777
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
CONTINUOUS ROD CASTING CONTACT COOLING
The BAT discharge allowance at proposal for continuous rod
casting contact cooling stream was 104 1/kkg (25.0 gal/ton) of
aluminum product from rod casting. This discharge flow was a
reduction of the BPT discharge flow used in aluminum forming
based on primary aluminum and aluminum forming plants using
recycle. Two of the five primary aluminum plants thought to have
continuous rod casting reported recycle, one plant only
periodically discharges the stream, the other plant recycles 99
percent. Also, 17 aluminum forming plants, which recycle a
similar type of cooling stream from direct chill casting,
reported recycle rates of 92 to nearly 100 percent.
No information or data were received by the Agency after proposal
indicating the flow allowance is inappropriate. Therefore, the
continuous rod casting flow allowance is equivalent to that
proposed.
STATIONARY CASTING CONTACT COOLING
In the stationary casting method, molten aluminum is poured into
cast iron molds and generally allowed to air cool. EPA is aware
that spray quenching is used to quickly cool the molten aluminum
once cast into the molds; however, the water is evaporated as it
contacts the molten metal. As such, there is no basis for
providing a pollutant discharge allowance.
SHOT CASTING CONTACT COOLING
Although shot manufacture is not prevalent in the primary
aluminum subcategory, it appears there is one plant manufacturing
shot. The BAT discharge rate for shot casting is based on the
demonstrated water use in the secondary aluminum subcategory. The
shot pasting operation in the primary aluminum subcategory is
identical to those in the secondary aluminum subcategory.
Therefore, water use and discharge rates are analogous.
Through specific information requests the Agency has found zero
discharge of shot casting cooling water demonstrated at two
secondary aluminum facilities (of the four reporting this
operation). Both of these plants reported no product quality
constraints due to 100 percent recycle. Based on the
demonstrated zero discharge practices for shot casting the
flow allowance requires zero discharge of process wastewater
pollutants.
REGULATED POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
The Agency placed particular emphasis on the toxic pollutants.
The raw wastewater concentrations from individual operations and
the subcategory as a whole were examined to select certain
pollutants and pollutant parameters for consideration for
limitation. This examination and evaluation, presented in
Section VI, concluded that 23 toxic pollutants are present in
778
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
primary aluminum wastewaters at concentrations that can be
effectively reduced by identified treatment technologies.
However, the cost associated with analysis for toxic metal
pollutants has prompted EPA to develop an alternative method for
regulating and monitoring toxic pollutant discharges from the
nonferrous metals manufacturing category. Rather than developing
specific effluent mass limitations and standards for each of the
toxic metals found in treatable concentrations in the raw
wastewater from a given subcategory, the Agency is promulgating
effluent mass limitations only for those pollutants generated in
the greatest quantities as shown by the pollutant removal
estimates. The pollutants selected for specific limitation are
listed below:
73. benzo(a)pyrene
114. antimony
121. cyanide
124. nickel
By establishing limitations and standards for certain toxic
pollutants, dischargers will attain the same degree of control
over toxic pollutants as they would have been required to achieve
had all the toxic pollutants been directly limited.
This approach is justified technically since the treatment
performance concentrations used for lime precipitation and
sedimentation technology are based on optimized treatment for
concomitant multiple metals removal. Thus, even though metals
have somewhat different theoretical solubilities, they will be
removed at very nearly the same rate in a lime precipitation and
sedimentation treatment system operated for multiple metals
removal. Filtration as part of the technology basis is likewise
justified because this technology removes metals non-
preferentially.
The performance values used for toxic organic pollutants were
determined in pilot scale treatability tests performed at a
primary aluminum- plant. Data from the study indicate toxic
organic pollutants can be reduced to concentrations equal to or
below the quantification limits for those pollutants. The Agency
has selected benzo(a)pyrene as the only organic for limitation.
Benzo(a)pyrene is the most toxic of the polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons selected in Section VI. Each toxic organic
pollutant selected in Section VI was found removable in the pilot
scale treatability study using lime, settle, and filtration
treatment. Therefore, limiting benzo{a)pyrene will effectively
control the other toxic organic pollutants present at treatable
concentrations. Those pollutants effectively controlled by the
limitation of benzo(a)pyrene include:
1. acenaphthene
39. fluoranthene
55. naphthalene
779
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
72. benzo(a)anthracene
76. chrysene
78. anthracene (a)
79. benzo(ghi)perylene
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene (a)
82. dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
84. pyrene
(a) — reported together
The discharge allowance for benzo(a)pyrene applies only to those
processes that generate it. For those processes where
benzo(a)pyrene is not present, no discharge allowance has been
provided for benzo(a)pyrene. This means that in calculating
effluent limitations at the end of a combined treatment system,
no allowance for benzo(a)pyrene may be included for these
processes. In addition, monitoring of benzo(a)pyrerie from these
processes (at-the-source) will not be required. However,
monitoring could be required at the discretion of the permitting
or control authority. EPA has also amended the specialized
definition in 8421.21 to state that if a permittee chooses to
analyze for benzo(a)pyrene using any EPA - approved analytical
method, any non-detected values will be counted as zeros for the
purpose of determining compliance. This approach is consistent
with the methodology outlined in Section V for developing the
benzo(a)pyrene limitations. The methodology used to develop the
limitations treated the non-detected values from the pilot plant
study as zeros. The detection limit for the approved EPA methods
of GC/MS and gas chromatography are 0.0025 and 0.01 mg/1,
respectively.
The toxic metal pollutants selected for specific limitation in
the primary aluminum subcategory to control the discharges of
toxic metal pollutants are antimony and nickel. Cyanide is also
selected for limitation since the methods used to control
antimony and nickel are not effective in the control of cyanide.
The following toxic pollutants are excluded from limitation on
the basis that they are effectively controlled by the limitations
developed for antimony and nickel:
115.
116.
118.
119.
120.
122.
125.
128.
arsenic
asbestos
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
selenium
zinc
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The treatment effectiveness concentrations achievable by
application of the BAT treatment technology are discussed in
Section VII of this supplement. The achievable concentrations
780
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
(both one-day maximum and monthly average values) are multiplied
by the BAT normalized discharge,flows summarized in Table X-6
(page 787) to calculate the mass of pollutants allowed to be
discharged per mass of product. The results of these
calculations in milligrams of pollutant per kilogram of product
represent the BAT effluent limitations and are presented in Table
X-7 (page 789) for each individual waste stream.
Daily maximum and monthly average treatment effectiveness
concentrations are provided for eleven toxic organic and seven
metallic pollutants that are effectively controlled by the
control of benzo(a)pyrene, antimony and nickel. These values are
displayed in Table VII-1 (page 752) for the convenience_of permit
writers. While these pollutants are not specifically limited by
the primary aluminum limitations and standards, permit writers
may elect to include some or all of these pollutants in specific
permits.
781
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-l
CURRENT RECYCLE PRACTICES WITHIN THE
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
No. of Plants
No. of Plants Practicing
With Wastewater Recycle
Anode Paste Plant
Anode Bake Plant
Potline
Potroom
Degassing
4
5
9
8
4
0
2
6
6
0
Range of
Recycle
Values (%)
91 - 99
88 - 100
42 - 99
782
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
CM
t
X
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
OO
1
1
Sc?
?S
Q)
r-l
•3
tH
CO
02
U
O
S
JTP*
O
CO
f— (
^•N
H«
00
WS
OH O
t~t ^^
Q
ll
s; PQ
M
s <$
I=> H
3$
>•< co
2) jrj
M M
erf is
CM
PS W
o 2;
fo )-l
pa
co s
W O
H O
S i
M
H co
co o
W M
^5
[rr*! "^
PS
00
S 2;
M i_j
S
P-J
£__!
»
1
cu
O Q^-x
M*.
M
z> >,
i-i s"eo
CU OS'-'
O
O Cls-^
Z O X
O OS ~^
r-l < 00
O4 O "—^
O CO
r-l
a
taa^-.
Z > >N
O O1--
i-< E 00
a! os^
o
CQ Q S"N
Z O >N
O QS--.
1-1 <; M
Ht^I .1
EG J&
O CO
t— 1
o
rJU^
H CO >N
o <•--
HIS 00
JlJ
^J
O2
t-*
2
H
O
Ou
00-3--3--3-COVOCOOCM
•* o mm ino ON-* oco
co oco O-3- or-- P-
-3" T— VO COON CM*— OO
CO CO— r-.
co
OO-3-CO -3-vD COVO — —
COCM CO-3- mcM CMvo ONO
— co coo invo r-m — co
r— OOCM-3'CM-3'CM- -*CO
CM— CM — — —
ON ^3 co m CD^J -3° m o O*N
COO O-* OONCMvOOON
in O O O ON ON
r- in P-
CO
^— O COCO COO -31 ON T— -3°
COCM coin o-* ONtO e E 1J-O —1 E E O
C-< 33 cuco (usgq
O C T-4~J D.0> J£-*< i-l -H
E 0) E E CUJ O C — 1 t-J
•rfCO-OOO -rHOIr-l
UVJCObO Zr-J
g
H
CO
vo
o
CO
CO
•3-
oo
m
^_
CM
,_
CO
VD
o
CO
CO
-3-
CO
in
CM
—
—
CM
CM
in
-3-
3 O E -4 +
t^ 3 »p4
+ + c o co
r-l^ O
C 13 W 3 C $4
OiJ Qr-l CO O
E i— ^ H ^ H
•Hr-l CO
4-> « + II COr-<
v-i <;
< OH ZCO
H Z OH
2 > H<
coz zH
S S8^3
X XS S-J
o oo oo
H HS OC^
»— 3 »-3 O »-3 •— ^
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
H HH HH
O OO OO
H HH HH
Ed
H
O
Z
01
•u
•r-l
G
CO
o
•v
e
5
c
o
o
3
•o
01
a;
o
r-4
[H
m
CO
CJ
0
M
Ob
1
B
r-l
00
E
CO
^
-H
O C
Q
C XJ
O CO
i-l U
CO r-<
4_) <*^
B fa
Ol
E co
•r-4 >r-4
•O 13
01 01
CO E
1-4
» -IJ
B r-l
03
•J
4J
CO CO
•" C 3
•H O»-l
O CJ i-4
E 01 U
i-l U CX
rJ 0-, O
II II
CQ O
OPTION
OPTION
784
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
*xt"
1
1
X
o>
r-l
rQ
CO
H
CO
ptj
W
O
1.5
o
CO
p-H
Q
f_|
o
w
OS
M
Q W
2 *v| F-H
^3
03
O I
CO
co o
tyi i — j
H Z
<») I"|?
l*Srf N^
H.(—\
O
W M
_
*"^-!
^C
^^
9
s
Cd
S
^E
EH
CD
rJ
P-4
O Q.~N
Z > >•%
O O^-
1-4 2 00
a! ojci-
o
O Q'— •
ZO >->
O QS^
r-i <; oo
H re ^
OM O'-'
O CO
r-4
O
ra O'-N
Z> >S
O ^3 *^*"
-<2 00
r"* W r*^
0°*^
en Q^X
z o >-,
O 03 -~
r-l >
H 3 00
3^
•5
OS
H
^
g
CM
o in m o OCM o —
O-3- T-O Oin OCM 30O t— ON •—
ON CO ON T— ^f CM P^
CM co ui
p~ p-
T— T—
CO vO CM P^ CO P~ CM CM vO CM r- vD P~
171 "^ ^ *~ CO T- -3
Of- OO O-3- OOO OO ON CN O
O ON O O O ON O f-- O O vO -cf *—
VD CN P*- P-* in co
r- r- CO
f— r—
co in p~ P^ co in CM oo p~ CN ON oo r-
p^-33O»— T— P^OOCOP--O o m vo
*~*~ "~ CO CO P-
COCM r^r- coo CMVD r»-eM oo o oo
p~ •* oo r- r- vo oo *— P- o P~ o r—
r- ^- m -a- o
r— oo
>,cJEEV4Tir- t-J
C
II
CO
t ^
^
H
[d
2
i
H
J
<
H
O
H
• •
Cd
H
O
Z
CO
r-4
CO
C
0
1-4
4J
C
01
P
o
0
CO
4-1
o
H
-f.
CO
r-l
CO
C
o
4_i
01
£
0
CJ
Ol c
•0 0
i-4 Z
C vU
CO CO--I
K*N CO CO
O 41 4-1
1- 0
+ OH
m 0) uS 4-
i—4 *O
qj ^j _i en
4J 1-4 -r4 O
41 O O i-l
^T1 *5 b£
s-3+ o
O fa H
-r4 CO
^ II C/3 ""^
0 H CO
H CO 4J
rJ II O
CO Z CO
4-1 O J II
O r-4 <
H H Z CO
Z OH
II Cd M Z
> H <
CO Z Z H
U O M O
r-l O > 1-3
X Z Z J
OO OO
H 2S O CM
J J JJ
H HHH
O O O O
H HHH
01
•D
C
CO
t*s
0
"O
c
CO
c
o
i-4
o
3
TJ
Ol
0!
S
0
fa
CO
CO
QJ
0
0
"-1
o<
1
c
r-4
*
00
c
•«-4
E
E
T4
^
CO
i— t
•r4
O
e
c o
O 1-4
-r4 4J
4-1 CO
CO IJ
4J 4-1
C i"-'
41 i-4
E fa
•O «
01 TJ
CO *t3
41
E
C -J
O ju)
4-1 3
« £
40 C
i-l O CO
&-T4 3
O CO a
41 4J
CM O,C
TJ O
41 Oi-l
E 01 4-1
— I VJ O.
II «
oa o
z z
0 0
t-l r-l
H H
CM CU
0 0
785
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
m
i
X
0)
&
t-4
2
ED
Pi
M
PS
D-4 nJ
PSH
PO
CO I
H co
< o
co o
W fn^
O
PS
H
H
I
O
PM
CJ dx-x
Z > >s
§*^
DC
£"* Ed *•"
O
00~
z a >*
o as---
i-l < 00
E-* "^ *s
a, rjv-'
O CO
»— i
O
CO Q/-s
Cx3 tj
z > >>
o o-~-
£| 2: OC
cu oi —
O
03 0,-.
Z O >N
O o- "--
piif
[Y, CJ ^i— ^
O to
»-t
o
5- Si!'
H C/5 >v
O < --.
H 3 OC
S^-'
<
OS
H
£;
o
Cu
OinONststO vo CM — CM
st st vo in invo ON r— so co
OOON o eo or— o vo — r—
st — vo enON CM csl co
so oo— P—
en
envo in in P— en moor— en
in* — ovovost omcoo
»— en ON o VOP— T— co VD st
COON cMStcMst en— sten
CM— CM — — —
ONP— omooo stenooN
enoNOstooo cMstooN
tnvo o en OP— ON
— vo r— CM vo CM
r— in P—
en
stst m in — m vof— covo
invo t— - P— CM— P— oo vo co
st m ON oo r— — — P— co —
T— ON enst mp- cnp-stON
st— CM st— —
CM— tno — en oocovo
ON vo P— CM CM o oenvooo
ON CM CA cy* p— in CM m oo *—
cMoenomst mststoi
— CM —CM— ONCM Oi
— en
>,O E E IJT3 i— 1 E E U
E Ol 1" E D. J 0 ~C 3 "£>
—^ 0? TJ O O iJ Ol i— '
c< o .c 01 j:
<: o co H
en
in
CM
O
CO
in
CM
o
ON
st
CM
— •
in
en
T_
m
—
CM
r—
r-
oo
T—
VO
m
r—
m
o
p—
co
E-i
CJ
t-H
X
O
H
r-J
»—
c^
00
o
o
"~
00
oo
0
st
CM
en
P-
P^
CM
m
CM
en
—
CO
CJ
1— 1
o
H
J
g
H
— —
CM en
st en
O st
co en
O CM
vo vO
»— en
p— in
VO ON
— CM
VO ON
oo en
i—
v—
00 —
o in
p— in
en CM
O CM
vO vO
— en
ON m
en m
in o
ON 00
CM st
i — , —
i —
OO vO
OO CM
in vo
vo en
vo r—
— en
vo P-
— en
E o>
3 ID
n i-(
1-1 l-i
E 0
3 3
i-l i-l
E C
•0 0
CO 01 O
cj 01 T; c
•a -j 01 o
+ 1-4 V4 0) Z
C 0 CO
O CO 3 0) ^
1-1 >N~< 1-1 «
C CJ b- C5 JJ
Oi ej o
w c -i- + "a H
*i K W E ^ -P
'—I 3
+ + CO C --I 05
JJ ^4 iM CJ
>N E 0) E O --I
C 3 2£ 3 X
O i-l i-l + O
E-< 0 < H
— I -^ -^ CO
JJ (C ^ II CO ^**
c jr o H ce
H <
CO 2 2 H
CJ O O Id ID
H-4 1— 1 CJ E> J
X X Z 2 J
O O O O O
H H Z CJ CU
H EH H H H
O O O O O
H H H H H
Ed
H
0
Z
Ol
•o
c
CO
^
CJ
T3
C
eO
c
o
1-1
JJ
o
3
T3
Ol
o;
ij
Q
,__<
fT.
n
n
QJ
o
o
u
i
c
(-1
_
00
e
"E
E
CO
•-I
O
„
c
o
ij
JJ
eo
jj
C
01
E
1-4
TT
Ol
CO
fc
c
o
JJ
CO
4J C
TJ 0
•*-( 4J
0 CC
QJ J->
LJ *>-<
CU CL
(1) O
C QJ
•*-( t-(
II
CO
§
(—1
cu
o
c
o
jj
CB
l-i
JJ
^4
ti-
eo
Oi
E
jj
_^
3
z:
CC
3
-j
p
fc
CO
c
o
JJ
a
II
CJ
o
i— i
H
CL
O
786
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
oo
C
•r-l
N
cO
e n
}-< 01
O 4J
53 QJ
O J-i
•H CO
•PEL,
O
T3
O
0)
O
13
O
0)
4->
CO
CO
4J
eo
cO
O
co
QJ
4J
4->
QJ
2
cr
•H
J-I
X>
C
cC
CD
QJ
"O
O
C
QJ
CO
CO
QJ
T3
O
C
T3
QJ
CO
OJ
O
C
cu
cO
rQ
co
O
C
0)
co
0)
T3
O
C
0)
-a
o
x:
o
o
QJ
T5 00
O C
rJ .H
CX co
co
QJ QJ
4J O
•H O
r-l rJ
o ex
^ QJ
u n
o
T5
O
XI
1J
CO
O
e
o
a;
o
3
T3 00
O C
l-i .,-1
CL, co
co
^ 0)
^ K
o
o
C/D
I— I
a
as
w
H
H
CO
-I
C
o
t3 QJ 4J
QJ 4-1 -^
N CO —t
-r-l pi CO
r-l OC
co
CO
cd QJ
E 0£
S-i S-i
O co
E2 XI
O 00
E-i co ^
<3} «H .i*J
PQ Q ^
-H
v£>
co
^ —
c
QJ O
4-1 -H
CO 4-1
E
cO
QJ
S-i
4-1
cn
J_(
QJ
4J
CO
[5
QJ
4-J
CO
CO
S
cO 3
exr— i
T-l
QJ O
TD ex
o
XI ^
4-1 M-l
CO CO
O
4-1
r0 QJ
C*> 1
w> t— 1
cO O
4J VJ
QJ C 4J
-0 CO £
O r-l O
C CX CJ
QJ
T3
O
C
,,
S-I CO
S-I
CX CX;
O CO
4-J
XI
C ti
QJ -H
CX £
o
•
CN
If)
p-^
^
o
oo
p^x
QJT3
0 C
cO CO
C
3 Q)
M-l S
O
00 *->
•t-l >->
}-i CO
S-i
cxcx
O co
4J
XI
C 4-J
QJ-H
O
•
co
O
•H
4J
CO
4-1
CO V-l
O O
4J CO
O 4-1
QJ -r-l
r-l CX
QJ -H
0
4-1 QJ
QJ VJ
S CX
CO
ps^
CN
OO
CO
,
-
C
T-l
•H
v^
, — |
QJ
C
C
H
•
^~
O
O
»
oo
oo
CN
O
CO
C
QJ co
XI -H
^ 00
c
OO-r-l
C Xi
•rH ^Q
co rJ
CO Vl
QJ O
O CO
o
ex c
0 -H
rJ r-l
4-1
QJ O
'O P)^-^
O TD
XI >, QJ
4J }-i CO
CO T3 3
0
O
c
QJ co
XI -H
^ oo
c
OO'T-I
C Xi
"-< X!
CO 3
co S-J
QJ O
O co
O
rJ QJ
CX C
QJ T-l
VJ r-l
4-1
QJ O
TD Cux^x
O TD
XI 4-J QJ
4-1 QJ CO
cO & 3
0
787
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
S
o
C5
W
5
O
PQ
D
CO
S
o
23
g
O
3
00
•H
N
•r-l
I-l
cO
E r-l
r-l 0)
O 4-J
S3 CD
E
C cO
O r-l
•r-l CO
4JP-I
O
13
O
PM
from electro-
13
QJ g
0 0
3 •!-!
T3 4J
0 0
VJ S
OJ
E ^
^
C 0
•i-l T-l
E 4J
r-l r-l
c
E 0
O -r-1
r-l 4-1
4-1 O
13 13
CD -,
r-l
E 0
S 4J
•r-l CJ
E .
r-l r-l
from electro-
13
0) c
CJ 0
£3 "i—l
*"O J-)
O O
^ 0
CUTD
0)
C It
^
C 0
•r-l •!-!
E4-)
1-1 r-l
from degassing
4-J
0
£5
13
o oo
r-l C
CL.T-1
X
E 3
3 r-l
•I-l
3 C
r-l CO
4J
o
0)
r-l
•H
13
B
O
S-i
4->
O
3 00
T3 C
O--I
S-I 4-}
tX CO
CO
E 0
^
Cr-l
•i-l r-l
E-r-l
r-1 O
13
O
1
S-i
4-1
4->
O
*J
'O
O
r-l
tx
E
d
c
••-I
E
r-1
00
C
•H
4_)
CO
cC
O
from station-
4-)
o
JUJ
"O
0
}-(
ex
E
^
c
<>r^
3
00
P2
•r-l
4-J
CO
cfl
o
fr
CO
from station-
4-J
O
JUJ
13
O 00
V-i C<
pU-r-l
4-)
E w
3 cO
C ^
•r-l
E r*^
r-l CO
'O
0)
Jj
C
•r-l
4-J
c
o
o
vO
1
X
S-i
CO
t_j
0)
cO
.p
CO
cO
IS
r-1
r-1
O
}_,
•H
cfl
4J
^
Q) O
P 5-1
•r-l 4->
r-l C
4-) O
O O
Pu
S-I
•i-l r-1
cfl o
tj
4-J 4-5
Q) C
£ O
O
CM
O fi
CO O
•r-l
Q) 4->
C 3
•r-l r-l
r-1 r-l
4J O
o tx
CM
C
O
•I-l
I—I
r-l
O
tx
S-i
•r-l
CO
4J
O
S-i O
•H O
Q
00
c
•r-l
4-1
co
cfl
o oo
c
13 *H
O r-l
V-j O
o
co CJ
O 4-J
3 w
C cfl
•i-l 4-1
•P C
c o
0 0
o
oo
c
•r-i oo
4-1 C
CO -H
cfl i— 1
CJ 0
o
^** o
r-l
CO 4->
C 0
O cfl
•i-l 4_>
4-J C
cfl O
4-1 O
CO
4_>
o
cfl
4J
c
0
o
00
£
•r4
CO 00
cfl C
O -r-l
1— 1
4J O
0 0
rC O
CO
788
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-7
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode and Cathode Paste Plant Wet Air. Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of paste produced
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of paste produced
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.005
0.011
0.005
0.005
0.011
0.005
0.053
0.036
0.831
0.262
0.189
0.027
0.050
0.174
8.092
0.038
0.075
0.112
0.139
0.002
0.005
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.002
0.025
0.017
0.369
0.117
0.084
0.011
0.020
0.083
3.590
0.018
0.050
0.050
0.057
789
-------
•PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Contact Cooling and Briquette Quenching
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum fo-r
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes cast
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.007
0.016
0.007
0.007
0.016
0.007
0.082
0.056
1.277
0.403
0.291
0.042
0.077
0.268
12.440
0.059
0.115
0.171
0.213
0.003
0.007
0.003
0.003
0.007
0.003
0.038
0.026
0.566
0.180
0.130
0.017
0.031
0.127
5.518
0.027
0.077
0.077
0.088
790
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Bake Plant Wet Air Pollution Control (Closed Top
Ring Furnace)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes baked
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes baked
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.146
0.335
0.146
0.146
0.335
0.146
1.690
1.151
26.420
8.345
6.010
0.865
1.600
5.535
257.300
1.211
2.378
3.546
4.410
0.067
0.155
0.067
0.067
0.155
0.067
0.782
0.533
11.720
3.719
2.681
0.346
0.349
2.638
114.200
0.562
,600
1,
1,
600
1.816
791
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Bake Plant Wet Air Pollution Control (Open Top
Ring Furnace With Spray Tower Only)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes baked
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes baked
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a, h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.020
0.013
0.306
0.097
0.070
0.010
0.019
0.064
2.975
0.014
0.028
0.041
0.051
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.009
0.006
0.136
0.043
0.031
0.004
0.008
0.031
1.320
0.007
0.019
0.019
0.021
792
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Bake Plant Wet Air Pollution Control (Open Top
Ring Furnace With Wet Electrostatic Precipitator and
Spray Tower)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes baked
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes baked
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo (a) py r-ene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.025
0.057
0.025
0.025
0.057
0.025
0.285
0.194
,460
409
1.015
0.146
0.270
0.934
43.440
0.204
0.402
0.599
0.745
4,
1,
0.011
0.026
0.011
0.011
0.026
0.011
0.132
0.090
1.978
0.628
0.453
0.058
0.110
0.445
19.270
0.095
0.270
0.270
0.307
793
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Bake Plant Wet Air Pollution Control (Tunnel Kiln)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes baked
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes baked
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.038
0.088
0.038
0.038
0.088
0.038
0.445
0.303
6.953
2.196
1.582
0.228
0.421
1.457
67.710
0.319
0.626
0.933
1.161
0.018
0.041
0.018
0.018
0.041
0.018
0.206
0.140
3.084
0.979
0.706
0.091
0.171
0.694
30.040
0.148
0.421
0.421
0.478
794
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Cathode Reprocessing (Operated With Dry Potline Scrubbing
and Not Commingled With Other Process or Nonprocess Waters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cryolyte recovered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs c>f cryolite recovered
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
1
2
1
1
2
1
13
9
273
420
48
7
12
44
157
29,430
9
80
28
35
.180
.715
.181
.180
.715
.180
.450
.326
.200
.400
.690
.006
.960
.840
.600
.000
.808
.570
.720
.730
0.546
1.257
0.547
0.546
1.257
0.546
6.235
4.317
122.600
189.200
21.720
2.802
5.254
21.370
70.060
3,310.000
4.554
35.030
12.960
14.710
795
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Cathode Reprocessing (Operated With Dry Potline Scrubbing
and Commingled With Other Process or Nonprocess Waters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cryolite recovered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of cryolite recovered
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
1.180
2.715
1.181
1.180
2.715
1.180
13.690
9.326
214.000
67.610
48.690
7.006
12.960
44.840
157.600
2084.000
9.808
19.270
28.720
35.730
0.546
1.257
0.547
0.546
1.257
0.546
6.339
4.317
94.930
30.120
21.720
2.802
5.254
21.370
70.060
924.800
4.554
12.960
12.960
14.710
796
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Cathode Reprocessing (Operated With Wet Potline Scrubbing)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cryolite recovered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of cryolite recovered
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi Jgerylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000,
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
797
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline Wet Air Pollution Control (Operated Without Cathode
Reprocessing)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.028
0.065
0.028
0.028
0.065
0.028
0.328
0.223
5.120
1.617
1.165
0.168
0.310
0.073
49.860
0.235
0.461
0.687
0.855
0.013
0.030
0.013
0.013
0.030
0.013
0.152
0.103
2.271
0.721
0.520
0.067
0.126
0.511
22.120
0.109
0.310
0.310
0.352
798
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline Wet Air Pollution Control (Operated With Cathode
Reprocessing and not Commingled With Other Process or
Nonprocess Waters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.028
0.065
0.028
0.028
0.065
0.028
0.328
0.223
5.120
10.060
1.165
0.168
0.310
0.073
3.771
703.900
0.235
1.928
0.687
0.855
0.013
0.030
0.013
0.013
0.030
0.013
0.152
0.103
2.271
4.525
0.520
0.067
0.126
0.511
1.676
318.500
0.109
0.838
0.310
0.352
799
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline Wet Air Pollution Control (Operated With Cathode
Reprocessing and Commingled With Other Process or~Nonprocess
wastewaters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.028
0.065
0.028
0.028
0.065
0.028
0.328
0.223
5.120
1.618
1.165
0.168
0.310
0.073
3.771
49.860
0.235
0.461
0.687
0.855
0.013
0.030
0.013
0.013
0.030
0.013
0.152
0.103
2.271
0.721
0.520
0.067
0.126
0.511
1.676
22.130
0.109
0.310
0.310
0.352
800
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potroom Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo{a)py"rene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Coppe r
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.056
0.129
0.056
0.056
0.129
0.056
0.649
0.442
10.140
3,
2.
204
307
0.332
0.614
2.125
98.770
0.465
0.913
1.361
1.693
0.026
0.060
0.026
0.026
0.060
0.026
0.300
0.205
,499
,428
,029
,133
4,
1,
1,
0,
0.249
1.013
43.820
0.216
0.614
0.614
0.697
801
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline SO? Emissions Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
* Regulated Pollutants *
0.045
0.104
0.045
0.045
0.104
0.045
0.524
0.357
8.194
2.588
1.864
0.268
0.496
1.716
79.790
0.375
0.738
1.100
1.368
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.243
0.165
3.634
1.153
0.831
0.107
0.201
0.818
35.400
0.174
0.496
0.496
0.563
802
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Degassing Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.088
0.202
0.088
0.088
0.202
0.088
1.020
0.695
15.940
5.035
3.627
0.522
0.965
3.340
155.200
0.731
1.435
2.139
2.661
0.041
0.094
0.041
0.041
0.094
0.041
0.472
0.322
7.070
2.244
1.618
0.209
0.391
1.591
68.880
0.339
0.965
0.965
1.096
803
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Pot Repair and Pot Soaking
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
^Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
804
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from direct chill
casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from
direct chill casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.045
0.103
0.045
0.045
0.103
0.045
0.520
0.045
0.354
8.120
2.565
1.847
0.266
0.492
1.701
79.080
0.372
0.731
1.090
1.356
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.240
0.021
0.164
3.602
1.143
0.824
0.106
0.199
0.811
35.090
0.173
0.492
0.492
0.558
805
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Continuous Rod Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from rod casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from rod
casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.004
0.008
0.004
0.004
0.008
0.004
0.041
0.028
0.635
0.201
0.145
0.021
0.038
0.133
6.188
0.029
0.057
0.085
0.106
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.019
0.013
0.282
0.089
0.064
0.008
0.016
0.063
2.746
0.014
0.038
0.038
0.044
806
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-7 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Stationary Casting or Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from starionary casting
or shot casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from
stationary casting or shot casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
807
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
I
X
00
•r-l
80S
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
4J QJ tt} (A 1-r
0) Ol
*o c
O -H
.e IH
3 a -
•U *C' J-1
•
CQ
CM
1
X
Q)
5.1
jj
c>0
•i~(
Pn
><
2! OH
a o
t-) O
H ta
Pu H
0
w tn
X
u g
CO 5
B
H M
t5 j*!(
w 5
S^4
H<|
<
pi pi
H <£
H M
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
CO
I
X
0)
>-i
S,
•r-l
O
H
P-i
O
tel
O
w
H
O-il
S g
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
• i
I iis,l\t
si s i?*:
•i 11 i;it
f If Hit
•5 S -Z S
00
S3 Pi
O O
H W
PH H
o
W
W
W
O
C~^ ^^
§i§
w >-•
H M
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
812
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The basis for new source performance standards (NSPS) under
Section 306 of the Act is the best available demonstrated
technology (BDT). New plants have the opportunity to design the
best and most efficient production processes and wastewater
treatment technologies, without facing the added costs and
restrictions encountered in retrofitting an existing plant.
Therefore/ Congress directed EPA to consider the best
demonstrated process changes, in-plant controls, arid end-of-pipe
treatment technologies which reduce pollution to the maximum
extent feasible.
This section describes the control technology for treatment of
wastewater from new sources, and presents mass discharge
limitations of regulated pollutants for NSPS based on the
described control technology.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO BDT
All of the treatment technology options applicable to a new
source were previously considered for the BAT options. For this
reason, four options were considered for BDT that were identical
to the BAT options discussed in Section X except for Option B.
Option B eliminates three sources of wastewater through the use
of dry air pollution control: anode paste plant wet air
pollution control, anode bake plant wet air pollution control,
and potline wet air pollution control. Degassing wet air
pollution is also eliminated based on alternate in-line fluxing
and filtering methods. For all other waste streams, BDT Option B
is identical to BAT Option B. The treatment technologies used
for the four BDT options are:
OPTION A
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
OPTION B
o
o
o
o
Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water
Dry alumina scrubbing of gaseous emissions from anode
paste plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
Alternate in-line fluxing and filtering techniques
813
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
OPTION C
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water
o Dry alumina scrubbing of gaseous emissions from anode
paste plants, anode bake plants, potlines, arid pot rooms
o Alternate in-line fluxing and filtering techniques
o Multimedia filtration
OPTION E
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water
Dry alumina scrubbing of gaseous emissions from anode
paste plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
Alternate in-line fluxing and filtering techniques
Multimedia filtration
End-of-pipe treatment with activated carbon adsorption
Partial or complete reuse and recycle of wastewater is an
essential part of each option. Reuse and recycle can precede or
follow end-of-pipe treatment. A more detailed discussion of
these treatment options is presented in Section X.
BDT OPTION SELECTION
EPA proposed that the best available demonstrated technology for
the primary aluminum subcategory be based on BAT plus additional
flow reducbion. Additional flow reduction was based on the use
of dry air pollution scrubbing on potlines, anode bake plants,
and anode paste plants and elimination of potroom and degassing
scrubber discharges. Potroom scrubbing discharges are eliminated
by design of efficient potline scrubbing (eliminating potroom
scrubbing completely) and the use of center worked prebake cells
and side worked Soderberg cells. Zero discharge of potline
scrubbing is also demonstrated through the reuse of casting
contact cooling water as scrubber liquor makeup. Degassing
scrubbers are eliminated through the use of alternate in-line
fluxing and filtering methods.
These flow reductions are demonstrated at existing plants, but
were not included in BAT because they might involve substantial
retrofit costs at other existing plants. However, new plants can
include these reductions in plant design at no significant
additional cost. Dry scrubbing also prevents the contamination
of scrubbing discharges with toxic,organics.
814
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
Although this technology is demonstrated, information submitted
through comments and gathered by specific data requests indicates
that two possible problems for new sources could be created by
the proposed NSPS, one with respect to continued utilization of
certain cell technologies, the other regarding ability to produce
certain high purity alloys.
Dry potline scrubbing and elimination of potroom scrubbing for
new sources would effectively require center-worked prebake or
horizontal stud Soderberg cell technology. This is because the
other major cell technologies, the side-worked prebake and
vertical Soderberg cell, must use wet scrubbers to control
fluoride emissions due to hooding constraints. EPA's NSPS for
new "green field" primary aluminum sources are based on these
facilities using center-worked prebake and horizontal stud
Soderberg cells, or achieving the effluent limitations that are
associated with the use of dry scrubbing. This is an
environmentally more acceptable process (particularly in terms of
net effluent reductions) because fluoride emissions can be fully
contained without the use of wet scrubbers while capturing and
returning the fluoride to the manufacturing process. See Senate
Committee on Public Works, A Legislative History of the Clean
Water Act, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., Vol. 1 at 172 (new source
performance standards are to reflect "levels of pollution control
which are available through the use of improved production
processes)."
Ah issue arises, however, as to whether major expansions of
capacity at existing Soderberg plants are to be classified as new
sources or as major modifications subject to BAT. Dry scrubbing
on vertical Soderberg potline or potroom emissions may not be
feasible, as a practical matter. However, use of horizontal stud
Soderberg technology with dry potline and not potroom scrubbing
is demonstrated. Therefore, construction of new sources or major
expansions do not receive a discharge allowance for potline or
potroom scrubbing.
It appears dry potline scrubbing may result in product quality
constraints due to iron and silicon contamination when recycled
alumina from scrubbers is used as potline feed. Industry
personnel report high purity alloys can be manufactured if only a
small proportion of the plant's capacity is dedicated to the
manufacture of these alloys. Thus, it appears new sources
producing high purity alloys would be at a competitive
disadvantage if they must install dry scrubbing technology
because of a requirement to use more virgin alumina per ton of
product.
The Agency believes this problem to be hypothetical and unlikely
to occur in actuality. Plants with dry scrubbing can avoid
contamination of these alloys by segregating production of metal
produced from virgin ore from metal produced from alumina
recycled from dry scrubbers. Although this may allow only a
relatively small (10 to 20) percentage of a plant's production to
be dedicated to certain high purity alloys, EPA is unaware of any
815
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
plant that devotes large percentages of its production capacity
to these specific alloys. Thus, all existing plants that produce
these high purity alloys and have dry scrubbers appear to be
operating without competitive constraint. Therefore, new sources
will not suffer adverse competitive impact as a result of a dry
scrubbing requirement. If a prospective new source is able to
demonstrate that (1) it will dedicate too much capacity to _high
purity alloys to utilize all of its recyclable alumina; (2) it is
unable to market its excess recyclable alumina; and (3) the costs
of purchasing excess virgin ore and reprocessing alumina through
the Bayer process are so high as to pose a barrier to entry, the
Agency will entertain rulemaking application to amend NSPS. Since
no demonstration has been made, and the possibility appears very
remote, this proposed NSPS is not altered.
The promulgated NSPS will eliminate discharge of toxic organics
and metals associated with potline and potroom scrubber
discharge, but will not require any significantly different cost
of compliance for new or existing sources. The incompatible
alloys with dry scrubbing are listed below:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1080
1085
1180
1188
2124
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
5252
5657
7029
A356
A357
Alternate in-line fluxing and filtering is demonstrated
throughout the subcategory. However, industry representatives
claim alternate in-line fluxing and filtering is not capable of
manufacturing all alloys, and therefore, a degassing scrubber
allowance is necessary so that furnace fluxing can be used for
new sources. Each facility known to use alternate in-line
methods was contacted to determine if any of these alloys are
currently manufactured or capable of being manufactured with
alternate in-line fluxing. Table XI-1 (page 818) presents the
results of this survey. As shown in the table, manufacture of
these alloys with alternate in-line fluxing techniques is
possible. Therefore, NSPS is based on alternate in-line fluxing
and filtering, which eliminates the need for wet degassing
scrubbers.
REGULATED POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
The Agency has no reason to believe that the pollutants that will
be found in treatable concentrations in processes within new
sources will be any different than with existing sources.
Accordingly, pollutants and pollutant parameters selected for
limitation under NSPS, in accordance with the rationale of
Sections VI and X, are identical to those selected for BAT. The
conventional pollutant parameters TSS, oil and grease, and pH are
also selected for limitation.
816
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The NSPS discharge flows for anode paste plant, anode bake plant,
potline air scrubbing, and potroom air scrubbing will be zero as
a result of the use of dry air pollution controls. Degassing wet
air pollution control is eliminated through alternate in-line
fluxing and filtering techniques. The remaining stream discharge
flows are the same for all options and are presented in Table XI-
2 (page 819). The mass of pollutant allowed to be discharged per
mass of product is calculated by multiplying the appropriate
effluent concentration (Table VIII-21, Vol-l,page 248) by. the
production normalized wastewater discharge flows (1/kkg). New
source performance standards for the primary aluminum subcategory
waste streams are shown in Table XI-3 (page 821).
EPA amended the pH standard for new sources for direct chill
casting contact cooling water to a pH range of 6.0 to 10.0
standard units provided this stream is not commingled with other
process wastewaters. If direct chill casting contact cooling
water is •commingled with other process waters, it is still
subject to a pH range of 7.0 to 10.0 at all times.
817
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
I
M
X
vU
cd
H
O PS
53 W
M H
OS f-q
O M
H fe
O
li
M
faXJ
O tz>
w£
eg w
PM M
3*?
psg
o
O E-i
53
CM
o
m
vo
m
m
co
m
CM
m
CM
m
CO
o
m
CM
m
o
m
o
m
o
m
m
o
o
m
X X!
X! X!
X! XJ
X! X!
X! X!
X! X!
X
X! X!
X; X!
XI X!
X! XJ
X! X!
X!
X!
X! X! XJ X!
X!
X! X!
o co T- T- r^.
m m vo o m
co co co t— co
818
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
O
o
PQ
S3
CO
Pi
oo
.,_!
N
••-1
r-l
CO
E 5-1
5-4 0)
O 4-J
a cu
E
C CO
O 5-4
•r-4 CO
4-J P-i
cj
0
PH
13
CU
O
13
O
CX
4J
CO
CO
PH
4J
CO
cO
o
CO
CU
4-J
4-J
CU
0
cr
•r-i
5-4
X>
»-Q
s-
co
(U
13
0
s 0)
V-I r-l
CJ
ectro-
r-l
0)
B
0
4-1
13
0) C
0 O
rj »H
13 4-J
0 0
J-I 3
CX13
0)
E to
3
G cj
•H -r-l
E 4-J
J3 r^»
r— 1 r— 1
•^
1
O
0)
1-1
Ol
B
0
J-I
4-1 pj
0
13 -r-l
CU 4-J
O O
•3 J3
13 13
O Ol
J-i J-i
CX
O
P3 *T-I
3 4J
C l^*
•r4 I-I
B 0
i-l 4-J
<£
ectro-
r-i
CU
B
O
V-I
4-4
13
(U C
O O
rj •!-!
13 4-J
0 0
V-t f3
cx*"o
0)
3 ^"*
c o
•r-l -r-l
B 4-J
rj ^
i-l r-l
<3
ectro-
r-l
0)
B
O
V-i
4-1
13
CU C
0 0
73 «rH
13 4-J
0 0
V-l 0
P ,1T^
xj
r**
CU
I— 1
o
cO
H
C
W 13 O
tr) 0) 0) 4-J
G N 4-J ^^*
•r-l CO -1
pi r-i pi co
O cO M
o
fe E O)
!-i OC
CO O 5-1
w a co
H X!
^ o
cO .1-1
Xi •«-»
CU i— 1
13 r-l
O O
r-l C
4-> O
O 0
CM
CM
CO
, —
•^~
CO
*
T—
J-I
•r-l r-l
CO O
5-4
4-1 4->
cu c
£ o
O
CM
o c
CO O
• r-l
0) 4-J
C 3
•r-l r-l
r-l r-l
4J O
o cx
P-I
o-
o
c
o
•r-l
4-J
^J
i — I
r-l
O
J-I
•1-1
cO
4-J
CU
fe
r-l
E 0
0 5-i
0 4-J
J-l C
4J O
0 CJ
P^
O
o
00
c
•i-4
r^b
cO
0
co
4-J
o
ex
i
5-4
•r-l
cO
CX
CU
Jj
4-J
O
P-i
O
0
1
0
I— 1
r—4
O
cx
V-I
•r-l
cO
4-J r-l
0) O
& 5-4
4-J
ood
C 0
•r-l 0
CO
co C
CO 0
QO-r-l
CU 4-J
o
**D
CN
VD
O\
CM
CO
•*
T—
00
c
•H
4-J
CO
cO
O
1— 1
r-4
•r-4
X!
O 00
C
4-J-r-l
CJr-l
CU O
5-4 0
•H O
O
819
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
o
o
w
H
u
PQ
CO
S
23
00
c
•H
cO
e
O 4J
C cO
O 1-4
•TD
o
J-I
CM
e
o
4-1
O
O
OH
0 00
3 C
•H 4J
e to
T-) O
TJ
0)
C
4J
C
O
O
Nta>"
CM
1
1-4
X
0)
i-i
,0
cO
H
4J C
C O
o o
o
4J O
o o
CO
J-4
CO OJ5
C C
O-H
•H 4J
4J CO
cO cO
•P O
CO
820
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE XI-3
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode and Cathode Paste Plant Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of paste produced
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of paste produced
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000 0.000,
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
821
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Contact Cooling and Briquette Quenching
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes cast
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a, h)anthracene
Pluoranthene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Pluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.007 0.003
0.016 0.007
0.007 0.003
0.007 0.003
0.016 0.007
0.007 0.003
0.082 0.038
0.007 0.003
0.056 0.026
1.277 0.566
0.403 0.180
0.291 ' 0.130
0.042 0.017
0.077 0.031
0.268 0.127
12.440 5.518
0.059 0.027
0.115 0.077
0.171 0.077
0.213 0.088
2.090 2.090
3.135 2.508
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
822
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Bake Plant Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes baked
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes baked
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(afh)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 ' 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
823
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Cathode Reprocessing (Operated With Dry Potline
Scrubbing and Not Commingled With Other Process or
Nonprocess Waters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cryolite recovered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of cryolite recovered
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
1.180
2.715
,180
,180
2.715
1.
1,
1,
,180
13.690
9.326
273.200
420.400
48.690
7.006
12.960
44.840
157.600
29,430.000
9.808
80.570
28.720
35.730
350.300
2172.000
Within the range of 7
at all times
0.546
1.257
0.546
0.546
1.257
0.546
6.339
4.317
122.600
189.200
21.720
2.802
5.254
21.370
70.060
3,310.000
4.554
35.030
12.960
14.710
350.300
945.800
, 0 to 10.0
824
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE XI-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Cathode Reprocessing (Operated With Dry Potline
Scrubbing and Commingled With Other Process or
Nonprocess Waters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cryolite recovered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of cryolite recovered
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
1.180
2.715
1.181
1.180
2.715
1.180
13.690
9.326
214.000
67.600
48.690
7.006
12.960
44.840
157.600
2084.000
9.808
19.270
28.720
35.730
350.300
2172.000
Within the range of
at all times
0.546
1.257
0.547
0.546
1.257
0.546
6.339
4.317
94.930
30.120
21.720
2.802
5.254
21.370
70.060
924.800
4.554
12.960
12.960
14.710
350.300
945.800
7.0 to 10.0
825
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Pluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Pluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Within the range of
at all times
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
7.0 to 10.0
826
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potroom Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Within the range of 7.0
at all times
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
to 10.0
827
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline SO2 Emissions Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo{a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Pluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Pluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil -& Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.045
0.104
0.045
0.045
0.104
0.045
0.524
0.357
8.194
2.588
1.864
0.258
0.496
1.716
79.790
0.375
0.738
1.100
1.368
13*410
20.120
Within the range of 7,
at all times
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.243
0.165
3.634
1.153
0.831
0.107
0.201
0.818
35.400
0.174
0.496
0.496
0.563
13.410
16.090
0 to 10.0
828
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Degassing Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo{a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(afh)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Within the range of
at all times
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
7.0 to 10.0
829
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Pot Repair and Pot Soaking
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
refining
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Within the range of 7
at all times
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0 to 10.0
830
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from direct chill
casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from
direct chill casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium '
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.045
0.103
0.045
0.045
0.103
0.045
0.520
0.354
8.120
2.565
1.847
0.266
0.492
1.701
79.080
0.372
0.731
1.090
1.356
13.290
19.940
Within the range of 7.0
at all times
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.240
0.164
3.602
1.143
0.824
0.106
0.199
0.811
35.090
0.173
0.492
0.492
0.558
13.290
15.950
to 10.0
831
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Continuous Rod Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from rod casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from
rod casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.004
0.008
0.004
0.004
0.008
0.004
0.041
0.028
0.635
0.201
0.145
0.021
0.038
0.133
6.188
0.029
0.057
0.085
0.106
1.040
1.560
Within the range of 7
at all times
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.019
0.013
0.282
0.089
0.064
0.008
0.016
0.063
2.746
0.014
0.038
0.038
0.044
1.040
1.248
0 to 10.0
832
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT -.XI
TABLE Xl-3 (Continued)
NSPS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Stationary Casting or Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from stationary casting
or shot casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from
stationary casting or shot casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo (a) py'r ene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
*Aluminum
*Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Oil & Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Within the range of 7
at all times
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0 to 10.0
833
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
834
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
SECTION XII
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
Section 307(b) of the Act requires EPA to promulgate pretreatment
standards for existing sources (PSES), which must be achieved
within three years of promulgation. PSES are designed to prevent
the discharge of pollutants which pass through, interfere with,
or are otherwise incompatible with the operation of publicly
owned treatment works (POTW). The Clean Water Act of 1977
requires pretreatment for pollutants, such as heavy metals, that
limit POTW sludge management alternatives. Section 307(c) of the
Act requires EPA to promulgate pretreatment standards for new
sources (PSNS) at the same time that it promulgates NSPS. New
indirect discharge facilities, like new direct discharge
facilities, have the opportunity to incorporate the best
available demonstrated technologies, including process changes,
in-plant controls, and end-of-pipe treatment technologies, and to
use plant site selection to ensure adequate treatment system
installation. Pretreatment standards are to be technology-based,
analogous to the best available technology for removal of toxic
pollutants.
This section describes the control and treatment technologies for
pretreatment of process wastewaters from new sources in the
primary aluminum subcategory. Mass discharge limitations of
regulated pollutants are presented based on the described control
technology.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO PRETREATMENT
Before proposing and promulgating pretreatment standards, the
Agency examines whether the pollutants discharged by the industry
pass through the POTW or interfere with the POTW operation or its
chosen sludge disposal practices. In determining whether
pollutants pass through a well-operated POTW, achieving secondary
treatment, the Agency compares the percentage of a pollutant
removed by POTW with the percentage removed by direct discharger
applying the best available technology economically achievable. A
pollutant is deemed to pass through the POTW when the average
percentage removed nationwide by well-operated POTW, meeting
secondary treatment requirements, is less than the percentage
removed by direct dischargers complying with BAT effluent
limitations guidelines for that pollutant. (See generally, 46 FR
at 9415-16 (January 28, 1981).)
This definition of pass through satisfies two competing
objectives set by Congress: (1) that standards for indirect
dischargers be equivalent to standards for direct dischargers,
while at the same time, (2) that the treatment capability and
performance of the POTW be recognized and taken into account in
835
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
regulating the discharge of pollutants from indirect dischargers.
The Agency compares percentage removal rather than the mass or
concentration of pollutants discharged because the latter would
not take into account the mass of pollutants discharged to the
POTW from non-industrial sources nor the dilution of the
pollutants in the POTW effluent to lower concentrations due to
the addition of large amounts of non-industrial wastewater.
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
There are no indirect discharging primary aluminum plants in the
United States. Consequently, the Agency has elected to not
promulgate pretreatment standards for existing sources.
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
Options for pretreatment of wastewaters are based on increasing
the effectiveness of end-of-pipe treatment technologies. All in-
plant changes and applicable end-of-pipe treatment processes have
been discussed previously in Sections X and XI. The options for
PSNS, therefore, are the same as the NSPS options discussed in
Section XI. Although oil and grease is a conventional pollutant
compatible with treatment provided by POTW, oil skimming is
needed for the PSNS treatment technology to ensure proper
removal. Oil and grease interferes with the chemical addition
and mixing required for chemical precipitation treatment
A description of each option is presented in Section X, while a
more detailed discussion, including pollutants controlled by each
treatment process and achievable treatment concentrations is
presented in Section VII of Vol-1.
Treatment technology options for the PSNS are:
OPTION A
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
OPTION B
o
o
o
o
Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water
o Dry alumina scrubbing of gaseous emissions from anode
paste plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
o Alternate in-line fluxing and filtering
836
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
OPTION C
o
O
o
O
o
o
Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water .
Dry alumina scrubbing of gaseous emissions from anode
paste plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
Alternate in-line fluxing and filtering
Multimedia filtration
OPTION E
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of cathode reprocessing wastewater
with ferrous sulfate precipitation
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water
o Dry alumina scrubbing of gaseous emissions from anode
paste plants, anode bake plants, potlines, and potrooms
o Alternate in-line fluxing and filtering
o Multimedia filtration
o End-of-pipe treatment with activated carbon adsorption
PSNS OPTION SELECTION
The technology basis for promulgated 3PSNS is identical to NSPS
(Option C). The treatment scheme consists of preliminary
treatment with ferrous sulfate precipitation and oil skimming
(where required), followed by lime precipitation, sedimentation,
in-process flow reduction, dry alumina scrubbing, and filtration.
EPA knows of no demonstrated technology that provides more
efficient pollutant removal than NSPS and BAT technology.
New plants have the opportunity to design and use the best and
most efficient nonferrous metals manufacturing processes and
wastewater treatment technologies without facing the added costs
and restrictions encountered in retrofitting an existing plant.
The additional flow reduction proposed for new sources can be
achieved by the use of dry air pollution scrubbing. The Agency
believes that the installation of dry scrubbing instead of wet
scrubbing in new facilities reduces the cost of end-of-pipe
treatment by reducing the overall volume of wastewater
discharged.
REGULATED POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
Pollutants and pollutant parameters selected for limitation_ in
accordance with the rationale of Sections VI and X, are identical
to those selected for limitation for BAT with one exception. EPA
is promulgating PSNS for benzo(a)pyrene, cyanide, nickel, and
837
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
fluoride to prevent pass-through. Limitations for antimony have
not been established because it was shown that a well-operated
POTW removes 60 percent and the Agency estimates the model BAT
treatment technology will remove 55 percent. The conventional
pollutants are not limited under PSNS because they are
effectively controlled by POTW. Aluminum is not regulated
because POTW often use it as an aid to enhance settling.
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
The PSNS discharge flows are identical to the NSPS discharge
flows for all processes. These discharge flows are listed in
Table XII-1 (page 839). The mass of pollutant allowed to be
discharged per mass of product is calculated by multiplying the
achievable treatment concentration (mg/1) (Table VII-21, Vol-1,
page 248) by the normalized wastewater discharge flow (1/kkg).
Pretreatment standards for new sources, as determined from the
above procedure, are shown in Table XII-2 (page 841) for each
waste stream.
Mass-based standards are promulgated for the primary aluminum
subcategory to ensure that the standards are achieved by means of
pollutant removal rather than by dilution. They are particularly
important since the standards are based upon flow reduction;
pollutant limitations associated with flow reduction cannot be
measured by any other way but as a reduction of mass discharged.
838
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - "XII
w
H
3
CQ
CO
g
a
g
1
on Normalizing
rameter
•r-i cO
4-> fit
cj
'O
o
i-l
CM
-o
CU
o
rj-J
o
cx
CU
CO
cO
iquettes cast
i-i
,0
TJ
§
CO
CU
rQ
O
q
-o
CU
CO
42
CO
cu
-o
o
q
CU
o
cO
o
E
O
14-1
CU
o
-o
o
i-l
cx
.-.
r-t r-l
uced from electro-
ion
rQ 4J
O O
^ 3
CVO
-,
r-4 r-i
jd
uct from degassing
*O
O W)
vj q '
CX-r-4
X
rj f— 1
q "•*-!
•r-l
E T3
d c
r-l CO
^4
4-)
O
CU
i-l
•r-l
TD
E
O
i-i
"4-1
4J
CJ
3 00
'O q
O -i-l
i-l 4->
Cu co
CO
E 0
£3
CrH
•r-l i— 1
E '"-i
0 45
r-l CJ
h-l
(*
fit
w
t-1
03
O
CO
w
^
CM
H
O
TJ
CU CU
M 4->
•r-l CO
r-4 Prf
CO
E cu
0 i-i
"Z. CO
CO 0
& CO
CO -H
PM Q
C
0
4-1
• —
r-4
CO
or
OC
r^
V*
"^s.
r-l
CTv
O
CN
O
O
oo
OO
CN
O
CO
CN
CN
CO
CO
VO
CN
CO
CU
4->
0]
cO
is
•r-l
CO
4-1
CU
r-4
4-) O
q v-i
CO 4J
r-i q
Cu O
CJ
CU
co O
CO -H
CX4->
d) r-l
T3 r-4
00
.rf
•o
§
oo
q
r-4
0
o
4J
o
cO
4J
q
o
o
CU
-o
o
q
oo
q
•H
rj
O
q
CU
cT
CU
4J
4-)
CU
C71
•r-l
i-l
i-l
•H
CO
4J
CU
!^ * — '
O
4-) i-l
C -t-1
cO C
r-4 O
cuo
cu q
y O
CO -r-l
,£3 4J
<1) i— 1
T3 i — 1
O O
Q
oo
c
•I-l
4-1
CO
cO
o
I— 1
r- 1
•r-l
43
O 00
C
4-1 ••-<
O r-4
CU O
i-l O
•r-l O
Q
839
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
0)
bo
C
•H
N
•H
«
i— ^
rt
B Vi
Vi 0)
04J
•a o)
B
(3 rt
O Vi
•^ Co
CJ
13
0
j_i
PM
T3
O
Vi
B
0
l-i
4J
O
3
O
Vi
B 00
3 C
13 "-<
•i-l 4-)
B w
r-l O
<:
I
C
o
•I-l
4-)
rt
4J
CO
B
0
V-J
4-1
4-)
O
2
O
cL
s
C
•H
E
i— I
!
rt
.H
4J
P
O
0
T—
1
M
M
X
01
r-l
,Q
rt
E-i
OH
PM
W
£— {
Prf
O
CO
W
H
PM
H
O
HD
CD QJ
N 4-)
•r-l rt
r-l prf
rt
B QJ
Vt M
0 Vi
y?^ rt
i~l
CO 0
•a co
CO -i-l
PM Q
C o
o
4-) m
•~~ CM
-1
rt
bC
cxfl
J3
O
O
bO
0
•H'
r-l
O
o
o
4J
O
rt
4-J
(3
O
O
4->
O
r;
CO
-o
C3
rt
>i
Vi
rt
fU
o
•i-i
4->
rt
4->
CO
bO
13
•rl
i~H
o
o
0
4J
CJ
rt
4->
g
Q
CJ
bO
•r-i
4J
CO
rt
o
840
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode and Cathode Paste Plant Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of paste produced
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of paste produced
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(afh)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
841
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Contact Cooling and Briquette Quenching
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes cast
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.007
0.016
0.007
0.007
0.016
0.007
0.082
0.056
0.403
0.291
0.042
0.077
0.268
12.440
0.059
0.115
0.171
0.213
0.003
0.007
0.003
0.003
0.007
0.003
0.038
0.026
0.180
0.130
0.017
0.031
0.127
5.518
0.027
0.077
0.077
0.088
842
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Anode Bake Plant Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of anodes baked
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of anodes baked
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.oop
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
843
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Cathode Reprocessing (Operated With Dry Potline
Scrubbing and Not Commingled With Other Process or
Nonprocess Waters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cryolite recovered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of cryolite recovered
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Pluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Pluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
1.180
2.715
1.181
1.180
2.715
1.1BO
13.690
9.326
67.600
48.690
7.006
12.960
44.840
157.600
2084.000
9.808
19.270
28.720
35.730
0.546
1.257
0.547
0.546
1.257
0.546
6.339
4.317
30.120
21.720
2.802
5.254
21.370
70.060
924.700
4,554
12.960
12.960
14.710
844
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Cathode Reprocessing (Operated With Dry Potline
Scrubbing and Commingled With Other Process or
Nonprocess Waters)
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cryolite recovered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of cryolite recovered
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)py"rene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Cyanide
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
1.180
2.715
1.181
1.180
2.715
1.180
13.690
9.326
67.600
48.690
7.006
12.960
44.840
157.600
29,430.000
9.808
80.570
28.720
35.730
0.546
1.257
0.547
0.546
1.257
0.546
6.339
4.317
30.120
21.720
2.802
5.254
21.370
70.060
3,310.000
4.554
35.030
12.960
14.710
845
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
Table XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
846
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBGATEGORY SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potroom Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper .
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.045
0.104
0.045
0.045
0.104
0.045
0.524
6.357
2.588
1.864
0.268
0.496
1.716
79.790
0.375
0.738
1.100
1.368
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.243
0".165
1.153
0.831
0.107
0.201
0.818
35.400
0.174
0.496
0.496
• 0.563
847
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Potline SO? Emissions Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Pluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
d.ooo
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
848
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
Table X1I-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Degassing Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi Jperylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
849
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Pot Repair and Pot Soaking
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum produced from electrolytic
reduction
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum produced from
electrolytic reduction
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(afh)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
850
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
TABLE XII-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from direct chill
casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from
direct chill casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene :
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.045
0.103
0.045
0.045
0.103
0.045
0.520
0.354
2.565
1.847
0.266
0.492
1.701
79.080
0.372
0.731
1.090
1.356
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.021
0.048
0.021
0.240
0.164
1.143
0.824
0.106
0.199
0.811
35.090
0.173
0.492
0.492
0.558
851
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
Table Xll-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Continuous Rod Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum product from rod casting
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum product from
rod casting
Acenaphthene 0.004 0.002
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.008 0.004
*Benzo(a)pyrene 0.004 0.002
Benzo(ghi)perylene 0.004 0.002
Chrysene 0.008 0.004
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.004 0.002
Fluoranthene 0.041 0.019
Pyrene 0.028 0.013
Antimony 0.201 0.089
Arsenic 0.145 0.064
Cadmium 0.021 0.008
Chromium 0.038 0.016
Copper 0.133 0.063
*Fluoride 6.188 2.746
Lead 0.029 0.014
*Nickel 0.057 0.038
Selenium 0.085 0.038
Zinc 0.106 0.044
*Regulated Pollutant
852
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
TABLE XI1-2 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Stationary Casting or Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kkg of aluminum product from stationary casting
or shot casting
English Units - Ibs/billion Ibs of aluminum product from
stationary casting or shot casting
Acenaphthene
Benzo(a)anthracene
*Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
*Fluoride
Lead
*Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
853
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
854
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XIII
SECTION XIII
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
EPA is not promulgating best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT) for the primary aluminum subcategory at this
time.
855
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XIII
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
(Pages 857 and 858 are omitted)
856
-------
NONFERROUS METALS MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT SUPPLEMENT
for the
Secondary Aluminum Smelting Subcategory
William K. Reilly
Administrator
Rebecca Hanmer
Acting Assistant Administrator for Water
Martha Prothro, Director
Office of Water Regulations and Standards
Thomas P. O'Farrell, Director
Industrial Technology Division
Ernst .P. Hall, P.E., Chief
Metals Industry Branch
and
Technical Project Officer
May 1989
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Office of Water Regulations and Standards
Industrial Technology Division
Washington, D. C. 20460
859
-------
860
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
II
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
III INDUSTRY PROFILE
Description of Secondary Aluminum Production
Raw Materials
Preliminary Treatment
Smelting and Refining
Process Wastewater Sources
Other Wastewater Sources
Age, Production and Process Profile
IV SUBCATEGORIZATION
Factors Considered in Subdividing the Secondary
Aluminum Subcategory
Other Factors
Production Normalizing Parameters
V WATER USE AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Wastewater Sources, Discharge Rates and
Characteristics
Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control
Scrap Screening and Milling
Dross Washing
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
Ingot Conveyer Casting
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling Water
Shot Casting Contact Cooling Water
Stationary Casting Cooling
VI SELECTION OF POLLUTANTS
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant
Parameters
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant
Parameters Selected
Toxic Pollutants
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their
Analytical Quantification Limit
Page
867
871
889
889
889
889
891
893
894
894
901
901
901
903
903
905
906
909
909
909
909
910
910
910
911
911
943
944
944
945
945
945
861
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
VI
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations
Achievable by Treatment
Toxic Pollutants Detected in a Small Number
of Sources
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Consideration for
Establishing Limitations
VII CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Technical Basis of Existing Regulations
Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control
Scrap Screening and Milling Wastewater
Dross Washing Wastewater
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling
Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Control and Treatment Options Considered
Option A
Option C
Control and Treatment Options Rejected
VIII COSTS, ENERGY AND NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS
Treatment Options Considered
Option A
Option C
Cost Methodology
Nonwater Quality Aspects
Energy Requirements
Solid Waste
Air Pollution
IX
X
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE
Page
946
946
951
959
959
960
960
960
960
961
961
962
962
962
962
963
965
965
965
965
966
967
967
967
968
973
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE 975
Technical Approach to BAT 975
Option A 977
Recycle of Casting Contact Cooling Water 977
Recycle of Water Used in Wet Air Pollution Control 977
Option C
862
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
X Industry Cost and Pollutant Removal Estimates 978
Pollutant Removal Estimates 978
Compliance Costs 979
BAT Option Selection 979
Wastewater Discharge Rates 981
Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control Wastewater 981
Scrap Screening and Milling 981
Dross Washing Wastewater 981
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control 982
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control 983
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling Water 983
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling Water 984
Stationary Casting Contact Cooling Water 984
Shot Casting Contact Cooling Water 985
Regulated Pollutant Parameters 985
Effluent Limitations 986
XI New Source Performance Standards 997
Introduction 997
Technical Approach to BDT 998
BDT Option Selection 998
Regulated Pollutant Parameters 998
New Source Performance Standards 999
XII PRETREATMENT STANDARDS 1007
Technical Approach to Pretreatment 1007
Pretreatment Standards for Existing and New Sources 1008
Option A 1008
Option C 1008
Industry Cost and Pollutant Removal Estimates 1009
PSES and PSNS Option Selection 1009
Regulated Pollutant Parameters 1009
Pretreatment Standards 1010
XIII BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY 1025
863
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
LIST OP TABLES
Table
III-l
III-2
III-3
V-l
V-2
V-3
V-4
V-5
V-6
V-7
V-8
V-9
V-10
V-ll
V-l 2
V-13
Title
Page
Initial Operating Year Summary of Plants in 895
the Secondary Aluminum Subcategory by
Discharge Type
Production Ranges for Smelters and Refiners 896
of the Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
Summary of Subcategory Processes and 897
Associated Waste Streams
Water Use and Discharge Rates for Scrap Drying 912
Wet Air Pollution Control
Water Use and Discharge Rates for Scrap 913
Screening and Milling
Water Use and Discharge Rates for Dross Washing 914
915
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Dross
Washing Raw Wastewater
Water Use and Discharge Rates for 913
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Demagging 919
Scrubber Liquor Raw Wastewater
Water Use and Discharge Rates for 923
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
Water Use and Discharge Rates for 924
Ingot Conveyer Casting
Water Use and Discharge Rates for 925
Shot Casting
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Ingot 926
Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling Water,
Raw Wastewater
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Demagging 927
Wet Air Pollution Control and Casting Contact
Cooling Combined Raw Wastewater
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Treatment 929
Plant Samples, Plant A
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Treatment 931
Plant Samples, Plant B
864
-------
i
Table
V-14
V-15
VI-1
VI-2
VIII-1
VIII-2
X-l
X-2
X-3
X-4
XI-1
XI-2
XII-1
XII-2
XII-3
XI I- 4
XII-5
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
LIST OF TABLES
Title Page
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Treatment
Plant Samples, Plant D
Secondary Aluminum Sampling Data - Treatment
Plant Samples, Plant E
Frequency of Occurrence of Toxic Pollutants
Secondary Aluminum Raw Wastewater
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected
Cost of Compliance for the Secondary
Aluminum Subcategory Direct Dischargers
Cost of Compliance for the Secondary
Aluminum Subcategory Indirect Dischargers
Current Recycle Practices Within the Secondary
Aluminum Subcategory
Pollutant Removal Estimates for Secondary
Aluminum Direct Dischargers
Raw Wastewater Discharge Rates for the
Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
BAT Effluent Limitations for the Secondary
Aluminum Subcategory
NSPS Wastewater Discharge Rates for the
Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
NSPS for the Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
Pollutant Removal Estimates for the Secondary
Aluminum Indirect Dischargers
PSES Wastewater Discharge Rates for the
Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
PSNS Wastewater Discharge Rates for the
Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
PSES for the Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
PSNS for the Secondary Aluminum Subcategory
933
936
953
957
970
971
987
988
989
990
1000
1001
1011
1012
1014
1016
1020
865
-------
Table
III-l
III-2
V-l
V-2
V-3
V-4
V-5
X-l
X-2
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
LIST OF FIGURES
Title
Secondary Aluminum Smelting Process
Geographic Locations of Secondary Aluminum
Plants
Sampling Sites at Secondary Aluminum Plant A
Sampling Sites at Secondary Aluminum Plant B
Sampling Sites at Secondary Aluminum Plant C
Sampling Sites at Secondary Aluminum Plant D
Sampling Sites at Secondary Aluminum Plant E
BAT Treatment Scheme Option A, Secondary
Aluminum Subcategory
BAT Treatment Scheme Option C, Secondary
Aluminum Subcategory
Page
898
899
938
939
940
941
942
995
996
866
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - I
SECTION I
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
On April 8, 1974, EPA promulgated technology-based effluent
limitations guidelines and standards for the secondary aluminum
smelting subcategory of the nonferrous metals manufacturing point
source category. These included BPTf and BAT, effluent
limitations and NSPS and PSNS (standards). The purpose of these
effluent limitations and standards was to limit the quantities of
total suspended solids, chemical oxygen demand, fluoride,
ammonia, aluminum, and copper, and the range of pH discharged in
secondary aluminum smelting wastewaters. On December 15, 1976,
EPA promulgated technology-based pretreatment standards for
existing sources (PSES) in the secondary aluminum subcategory.
The purpose of these standards was to limit the quantities of
ammonia, oil and grease, and the range of pH introduced into
publicly owned treatment works in secondary aluminum smelting
wastewater discharges.
Under the settlement agreements, EPA was required to develop BAT
limitations and pretreatment and new source performance standards
for pollutants discharged from twenty one specific industrial
point source categories, including secondary aluminum smelting
taking into account a specific list of 65 pollutants and classes
of pollutants. The list of 65 classes was subsequently clarified
by expanding to a list of 129 specific toxic pollutants. Congress
amended the Clean Water Act in 1977 to encompass most provisions
of the settlement agreements, including the list of 65 classes of
pollutants. As a result of the settlement agreements and the
Clean Water Act Amendments, EPA undertook an extensive program to
develop technology-based BAT limitations and pretreatment and new
source standards for the toxic and other pollutants in the twenty
one categories.
EPA promulgated modifications to BAT, NSPS, PSES and PSNS for the
secondary aluminum subcategory pursuant to the provisions of the
Settlement Agreement and Sections 301, 304, 306, and 307 of the
Clean Water Act and as amended. Consideration must be given to
incorporation of limits on priority pollutant levels in
discharges in these modified standards. This supplement provides
a compilation and analysis of the background material used to
develop these effluent limitations and standards.
After promulgation of amendments substantially revising BAT, NSPS
and pretreatment for this subcategory, the Aluminum Association,
Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Core., Reynolds Metals Company, The
Aluminum Recycling Association, and others filed petitions for
review of the amended regulation.
In November, 1985 the aluminum parties entered into two
settlement agreements which resolved issues raised by petitioners
related to the primary and secondary aluminum subcategories. T"
In
867
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - I
accordance with the settlement agreements, EPA published a notice
of proposed rulemaking on May 20, 1986 and solicited comments.
EPA promulgated final amendments for the Secondary Aluminum
Smelting Subcategory on July 7, 1987 (52 FR 25552). The flow
basis for two building blocks, ingot conveyer casting and
demaggxng wet air pollution control, were revised based on a
re-evaluation of data available in the administrative record of
this rulemaking
The secondary aluminum subcategory is comprised of 47 plants. Of
the 47 plants, 10 discharge directly to waters of the U.S.
(rivers, lakes, or streams); 14 discharge to publicly owned
treatment works (POTW); and 23 achieve zero discharge of process
wastewater. ^
EPA first studied the secondary aluminum subcategory to determine
whether differences in raw materials, final products,
manufacturing processes, equipment, age and size of plants, water
usage, required the development of separate effluent limitations
and standards for different segments of the subcategory. This
involved a detailed analysis of wastewater discharge and treated
effluent characteristics, including (1) the sources and volume of
water used, the processes used, and the sources of pollutants and
wastewaters in the plant; and (2) the constituents of
wastewaters, including toxic pollutants.
EPA also identified several distinct control and treatment
technologies (both in-plant and end-of-pipe) applicable to the
secondary aluminum subcategory. The Agency analyzed both
historical and newly generated data on the performance of these
technologies, including their nonwater quality environmental
impacts (air quality impacts and solid waste generation) and
energy requirements. EPA also studied various flow reduction
techniques reported in the data collection portfolios (dcp) and
plant visits.
Engineering costs were prepared for each of the control and
treatment options considered for the subcategory. These costs
were then used by the Agency to estimate the impact of
implementing the various options on the subcategory. For each
control and treatment option that the Agency found to be most
effective and technically feasible in controlling the discharge
of pollutants, the number of potential closures, number of
employees affected, and impact on price were estimated. These
results are reported in a separate document entitled Economic
Impact Analysis of Effluent Limitations and Standards for the
Nonferrous Smelting and Refining Industry (EPA number).
Based on consideration of the above factors, EPA identified
various control and treatment technologies which formed the basis
for BPT and selected control and treatment appropriate for each
set of limitations and standards. The .mass based, production
related limitations and standards for BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES and
PSNS are presented in Section II.
868
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - I
For BAT, the Agency has built upon the BPT basis of lime
precipitation and sedimentation by adding in-process control
technologies, preliminary treatment of ammonia by steam
stripping, preliminary treatment of phenolics by activated carbon
adsorption, and multimedia filtration. In-process control
technologies include recycle or reuse of process water from wet
air pollution control and metal contact cooling. Filtration is
added as an effluent polishing step to further reduce metals and
suspended solids concentrations. To meet the BAT effluent
limitations based on this technology, the secondary aluminum
subcategory is estimated to incur a capital cost of $1.1 million
(1982 dollars) and an annual cost of $0.64 million (1982
dollars).
The best demonstrated technology (BDT), which is the technical
basis of NSPS, is equivalent to BAT with the addition of dry
milling to eliminate the discharge from dross washing. In
establishing BDT, EPA recognizes that new plants have the
opportunity to implement the best and most efficient
manufacturing processes and treatment technology. Treatment of
toxic metals is based upon lime precipitation, sedimentation, and
filtration. Oil skimming for the control of oil and grease and
preliminary treatment of phenolics by activated carbon adsorption
are also included.
Pretreatment standards for existing sources are based on the same
technology as BAT. The technology basis is in-process flow
reduction, ammonia steam stripping preliminary treatment,
activated carbon adsorption preliminary treatment, lime
precipitation, sedimentation, and multimedia filtration. To meet
PSES, the secondary aluminum subcategory is estimated to incur a
capital cost of $2.3 million (1982 dollars) and an annual cost of
$1.4 million (1982 dollars).
For pretreatment standards for new sources, the technology basis
of in-process flow reduction, preliminary treatment, and end-of-
pipe technology is equivalent to NSPS. As such, PSNS are
identical to NSPS for all waste streams.
869
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - I
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
870
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
This section contains a summary of the effluent limitations and
standards which apply to the secondary aluminum subcategory
taking into account the promulgated amendments of March 8, 1984
and July 1, 1987.
1. EPA has divided the secondary aluminum subcategory into
nine subdivisions or building blocks for the purpose of effluent
limitations and standards. These building blocks are:
(a) Scrap drying wet air pollution control,
(b) Scrap screening and milling,
(c) Dross washing,
(d) Demagging wet air pollution control,
(e) Delacquering wet air pollution control,
(f) Direct chill casting contact cooling,
(g) Stationary casting contact cooling,
(h) Ingot conveyer casting contact cooling, and
Shot casting contact cooling.
(i)
2. EPA promulgated BPT effluent limitations for the secondary
aluminum subcategory on April 8, 1974, as Subpart C of 40
CFR Part 421. EPA has not promulgated any modifications
to BPT effluent limitations., The BPT effluent
limitations apply to discharges resulting from magnesium
(demagging using either chlorine or
and wet residue processes. BPT was
on the performance achievable by the
application of chemical precipitation and sedimentation
(lime and settle) technology. The following BPT effluent
limitations were promulgated for existing sources:
removal processes
aluminum fluoride)
promulgated based
(a) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties, which
may be discharged by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart and which uses water for
metal cooling, after application of the best
practicable control technology currently available:
There shall be no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants to navigable waters.
(b) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties which may
be discharged by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart and which uses aluminum
fluoride in its magnesium removal process ("demagging
process"), after application of the best
practicable control technology currently available:
There shall be no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants to navigable waters.
871
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(c) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties
controlled by this section, which may be discharged by
a point source subject to the provisions of this
subpart and which uses chlorine in its magnesium
removal process, after application of the best
practicable control technology currently available:
Effluent Limitations
Effluent
Characteristic
Average of daily values for 30 consecutive
days shall not exceed
Metric units (kilograms per 1,000 kg
magnesium removed)
English units (Ibs per 1,000 Ibs
magnesium removed)
TSS
COD
pH
175
6.5
Within the range of 7.5 to 9.0
872
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(d) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties which
may be discharged by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart and which processes residues
by wet methods, after application of the best
practical control technology currently available:
Effluent Limitations
Effluent
Characteristic
Average of daily values for 30 consecutive
days shall not exceed
Metric units (kilograms per 1,000 kg
of product removed)
English units (Ibs per 1,000 Ibs
of product removed)
TSS
Fluoride
Ammonia (as N)
Aluminum
Copper
COD
pH
1.5
0.4
0.01
1.0
0.003
1.0
Within the range of 7.5 to 9.0
873
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
3. EPA is modifying BAT effluent limitations to take into
account the performance achievable by the application
of chemical precipitation, sedimentation, and
multimedia filtration (lime, settle, and filter)
technology, along with preliminary treatment consisting of
ammonia steam stripping and activated carbon adsorption for
selected waste streams. The following BAT effluent
limitations are promulgated for existing sources:
(a) Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
(b) Scrap Screening and Milling
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap screened and milled
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap screened
and milled
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
874
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(c) Dross Washing
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of dross washed
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of dross washed
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
3.043
11.090
66.410
1,449.000
1.413
4.565
29.450
636.900
(d) Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum demagged
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum demagged
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.216
0.786
4.711
102.800
0.100
0.324
2.090
45.180
(e) Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Total Phenols
(4-AAP Method)*
*At the source
0.022
0.082
0.489
10.670
0.001
0.010
0.034
0.217
4.688
875
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(f) Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.372
1.356
8.120
177.200
0.173
0.558
3.602
77.880
(g) Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is Not Practiced
Site)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Chlorine
On-
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.019
0.068
0.409
8.931
0.009
0.028
0.182
3.926
(h)
Demagging
Site)
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine
Wet Air Pollution Control is Practiced On-
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
876
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(i) Stationary Casting Contact Cooling
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
(j) Shot Casting Contact Cooling
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One E>ay
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
877
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
4. EPA^ is modifying NSPS based on the performance
achievable by the application of chemical
precipitation, sedimentation, and multimedia
filtration (lime, settle, and filter) technology, along
with preliminary treatment consisting of activated
carbon adsorption and oil skimming for selected
waste streams* The following effluent standards are
promulgated for new sources:
(a) Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
878
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(b) Scrap Screening and Milling NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap screened and milled
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap screened
and milled
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
(c) Dross Washing NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of dross washed
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of dross washed
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
(d) Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum demagged
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum demagged
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
0.216
0.786
4.711
102.800
7.710
11.570
0.100
0.324
2.090
45.180
7.710
9.252
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
879
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(e) Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Total Phenols
(4-AAP Method)*
TSS
Oil and Grease
pH
*At the source
0.022
0.082
0.489
10.670
0.001
0.010
0.034
0.217
4.688
1.200 0.960
0.800 0.800
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
(f) Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
0.372 0.173
1.356 0.558
8.120 3.602
177.200 77.880
13.290 13.290
19.940 15.950
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
880
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(g) Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling NSPS (When
Chlorine Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is Not
Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
TSS
Oil and Grease
PH
0.019 0.009
0.068 0.028
0.409 0.182
8.931 3.926
1.005 0.804
0.670 0.670
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
(h) Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling NSPS (When
Chlorine Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is
Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
TSS
Oil and Grease
pH
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
881
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(i) Stationary Casting Contact Cooling NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
(j) Shot Casting Contact Cooling NSPS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia (as N)
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
5. EPA is modifying PSES based on the performance achievable
by the application of chemical precipitation, sedimentation,
and multimedia filtration (lime, settle, and filter)
technology, along with preliminary treatment consisting of
ammonia steam stripping and activated carbon adsorption for
selected waste streams. The following mass-based
pretreatment standards are promulgated for existing sources:
882
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(a) Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control PSES
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
(b) Scrap Screening and Milling PSES
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Deiy
0.000
0.000
0.000
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap screened and milled
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap screened
and milled
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
(c) Dross Washing PSES
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of dross washed
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of dross washed
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
3.043
11.090
1,449.000
1.413
4.565
636.000
(d) Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control PSES
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum demagged
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum demagged
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.216
0.786
102.800
0.100
0.324
45.180
883
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(e) Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control PSES
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Lead 0.022
Zinc 0.082
Ammonia (as N) 10.670
Total Phenols 0.001
(4-AAP Method)*
*At the source
(f) Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling PSES
0.010
0.034
4.688
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/billion Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.372
1.356
177.200
0.173
0.558
77.800
(g) Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling PSES (When
Chlorine Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is Not
Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.019
0.068
8.931
0.009
0.028
3.926
884
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(h) Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling PSES (When
Chlorine Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is
Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
(i) Stationary Casting Contact Cooling PSES
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
(j) Shot Casting Contact Cooling PSES
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
0.000
0.000
0.000
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
7. EPA is modifying PSNS based on the performance achievable
by the application of chemical precipitation, sedimentation,
and multimedia filtration (lime, settle, and filter)
technology, along with preliminary treatment consisting of
activated carbon adsorption for the delacquering wet air
pollution control waste stream. The following mass-based
pretreatment standards are promulgated for new sources:
885
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(a) Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
(b) Scrap Screening and Milling PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
0.000
0.000
0.000
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap screened and milled
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrcip screened
and milled
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
(c) Dross Washing PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
0.000
0.000
0.000
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of dross washed
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of dross washed
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
(d) Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kkg of aluminum demagged
English Units - Ibs/billion Ibs of aluminum demagged
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.216
0.786
102.800
0.100
0.324
45.180
886
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(e) Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
Total Phenols
(4-AAP Method)*
0.022
0.082
10.670
0.001
0.010
0.034
4.688
*At the source
(f) Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.372
1.356
177.200
0.173
0.558
77.880
(g) Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling PSNS
Chlorine Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is
Practiced On-Site)
(When
Not
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
,Monthly Average
mg/kg (Ib/million Ibs) of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.019
0.068
8.931
0.009
0.028
3.926
887
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - II
(h) Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling PSNS (When
Chlorine Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is
Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(Ib/million Ibs) of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
(i) Stationary Casting Contact Cooling PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
(j) Shot Casting Contact Cooling PSNS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
0.000
0.000
0.000
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Lead
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
888
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
SECTION III
INDUSTRY PROFILE
This section of the Secondary Aluminum Supplement describes the
raw materials and processes used in producing recycled aluminum
and presents a profile of the secondary aluminum plants
identified in this study.
DESCRIPTION OF SECONDARY ALUMINUM PRODUCTION
Secondary aluminum production involves two basic process steps:
pretreatment and smelting and refining. A pretreatment step is
required before smelting and refining operations can be under
taken because this industry uses scrap aluminum (much of which is
contaminated) for its raw material. The two processes, their
components, and variations are discussed below. Figure III-l
(page 898) represents a general flow diagram of the two process
steps.
RAW MATERIALS
The secondary aluminum subcategory uses aluminum-bearing scrap to
produce metallic aluminum and aluminum alloys. Much of the scrap
used is purchased from scrap dealers of industrial plants. There
are six primary classifications of scrap processed: aluminum
cans, old sheet and castings, new clippings and forgings, borings
and turnings, residues, and high iron.
New scrap is produced during the manufacture of a finished
product and originates from the aircraft industry, aluminum
formers, and other manufacturing plants. Old scrap (sheet and
castings) is comprised of worn out, damaged or obsolete articles
and includes automobile parts, household items, and airplane
parts. Borings and turnings are by-products of the machining of
castings, rods, and forgings by the aircraft and automobile
industry. Residues- consist of drosses, skimmings, and slags which
are obtained from primary reduction plants, secondary smelting
plants, casting plants, and foundries. Foil from discarded
packaging constitutes a minor source of raw material for this
subcategory. High iron aluminum scrap which is to be reused in
the secondary aluminum subcategory require more extensive
treatment before smelting than other classifications scrap
aluminum.
PRELIMINARY TREATMENT
Preliminary treatment of scrap involves preparing the material
for further processing and removing contaminants. As Figure III-
1 (page 898) indicates, the scrap pretreatment process varies
depending on the source and type of raw material being handled.
There is also variation in the degree to which scrap is
pretreated among facilities. There are three general methods of
889
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
pretreating: mechanical, hydro-metallurgical, and
pyrometallurgical, with the method used being dependent on the
type of scrap. The mechanical method involves shredding and
classifying, baling, and milling and screening.
Hydrometallurgical treatment involves leaching with water, and
pyrometallurgical processing involves burning and drying, and
sweating. Depending on the type of raw material, pretreatment
may consist of a combination of these methods before smelting and
refining is effected.
Old sheet, castings, and clippings preparation is a dry process
that can vary from no pretreatment to crushing and screening that
compacts the scrap. New clippings and forgings usually require
little^ preparation other than sorting; however, they may be
contaminated with cutting oils, and may require crushing and
drying to remove the oils. Can scrap is often pretreated by
burning the lacquer from the cans prior to smelting or remelting.
Organic fumes emitted during this process are an air pollution
source. Wet scrubbers are normally chosen over afterburners and
baghouses to control emissions because of the explosion hazard
that exists. Cable, which is not considered a major source of
aluminum scrap requires shredding and classifying to remove the
insulation and ferrous portions from the aluminum. The borings
and burnings are also often contaminated by cutting oils and
require burning or drying to remove that contaminant. The entire
procedure consists of (1) crushing the borings and turnings to
compact the scrap, (2) heating the scrap in an oil or gas-fired
rotary dryer to remove organic material and water, (3) screening
to remove aluminum fines, and (4) magnetically removing the tramp
iron.
Aluminum and other metals from junked automobiles are recovered
in a water elutriator system where scrap auto body parts are
separated from light waste materials based on specific gravity
differences. Water, or other flotation media, flow upward and
separate the lightweight materials from the metal which continues
to sink. Metal collected at the bottom of the system is removed
with a perforated conveyer, and the water drains into a holding
tank for settling and then returns to the system.
Residues, such as drosses, skimmings, and slags, contain 10 to 30
percent aluminum, as well as oxides, carbides, nitrides, fluxing
salts, and other contaminants. Metallic aluminum can be
liberated from the impurities using either dry or wet processes.
The dry process consists of milling, screening, and magnetic
separation for iron removal. The wet process involves milling
and leaching with water to remove the contaminants. The washed
material is then screened, dried, and passed through a magnetic
separator. Heavy metallic skims, a minor source of aluminum,
require little pretreatment.
Foil, which is another minor source of raw material for the
subcategory, is usually pretreated by roasting to remove paper or
wax backings. High iron content scrap often is subjected to
sweating treatment to remove impurities. This process involves
890
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
placing the iron-contaminated aluminum in a sweating furnace.
This furnace has sloped sides and the molten aluminum flows down
the slope, leaving the higher melting point materials such as
iron behind. Alternately, the high iron scrap also can be
purified by crushing it and removing the iron magnetically.
SMELTING AND REFINING
The second step of the manufacturing process for the secondary
aluminum subcategory is smelting and refining. This step
actually consists of five substepss charging scrap to the
furnace; addition of fluxing agents; addition of alloying agents;
demagging or degassing; and skimming.
Charging of scrap into the furnace can be a batch process or a
continuous process. Each cycle, called a "heat", will vary in
length depending on the process. Charging wells are often
designed to permit the introduction of chips and scrap below the
surface of a previously melted charge called a "heel." This
design not only minimizes oxidation, but provides for more
efficient application of pollution control systems.
The next step is fluxing the molten charge. There are two
general types of fluxes: cover fluxes that are used to reduce
oxidation of the melt by air, and solvent fluxes that react with
contaminants such as nonmetallics, residues from burned coatings,
and dirt to form insolubles which float on the surface of the
melt as slag.
Next, alloying agents are added to the melt in varying amounts
according to production specifications. Copper, silicon,
manganese, or zinc are typical alloys added. Mixing the furnace
contents is necessary to assure uniform composition. Nitrogen or
other inert gases may be injected to aid in the mixing.
Magnesium is another alloying agent used. However, scrap
aluminum, received by the secondary aluminum smelters averages
about 0.3 to 0.5 percent magnesium, while the product line of
alloys produced averages about 0.1 percent. Therefore, after the
furnace is fully charged and the melt brought up to the desired
chemical specification, it is usually necessary to remove the
excess magnesium (known as "demagging").
Demagging is accomplished with chlorine or chlorinating agents,
such as anyhdrous aluminum chloride or with aluminum fluoride.
Magnesium chloride or magnesium fluoride is formed and collected
in the fluxing agents on top of the molten melt. As the
magnesium is depleted, chlorine will consume aluminum and the
excess aluminum chloride or aluminum fluoride present volatilizes
into the surrounding air and is a source of air pollution.
Magnesium is the only metal removable from the alloy in this
manner. Other metal alloy levels must be adjusted by the
addition of either more aluminum (dilution) or more of the metal.
Chlorination is performed at temperatures between 760 and 815°C.
891
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
As a rule of thumb, the reaction requires 3.5 kilograms of
chlorine per kilogram of magnesium removed. Elemental chlorine
gas is fed under pressure through tubes or lances to the bottom
of the melt. As it bubbles through the melt, it reacts with
magnesium and aluminum to form chlorides, which float to the melt
surface where they combine with the fluxing agents and are
skimmed off. Because magnesium is above aluminum in the
electromotive series, aluminum chloride will be reduced by anv
available magnesium in the melt. At the beginning of the
demagging cycle, the principal reaction product is magnesium
chloride. As magnesium is removed and there is less available
for ^reaction with chlorine, the reaction of chlorine with
aluminum becomes more significant, the reduction of the aluminum
chloride by magnesium becomes less likely, and the production of
aluminum chloride, a volatile compound, becomes significant. The
aluminum _chloride escapes and considerable fuming results from
the chlorination, making ventilation and air pollution equipment
necessary. Control of fumes is frequently accomplished by wet
scrubbing and, thus, is a source of water contamination.
Aluminum fluoride as a demagging agent reacts with the magnesium
to form magnesium fluoride, which in turn combines with the flux
on top of the melt, where it is skimmed off. In practice, about
4.3 kilograms of aluminum fluoride are required per kilogram of
magnesium removed. The air contaminants exist as gaseous
fluorides or as fluoride dusts and are a source of air pollution.
The fluorides are controlled by either dry or wet methods. When
dry scrubbing is used, a solid waste is generated. When wet
scrubbing is used, both water pollution and solid waste are
generated.
Some facilities in the secondary aluminum subcategory are not
limited by a magnesium content in their product, particularly the
deoxidant manufacturers, and they make no attempt to remove
magnesium. Therefore, these plants do not generate the magnitude
of fumes produced by demagging, and as a result, do not require
extensive air pollution control equipment and related water
usage.
In the skimming step, the dross or slag, with
impurities, is skimmed from the molten aluminum.
is stored for shipment to a residue processor,
discarded.
its associated
The cooled slag
recycled, or
The ^product line(s) of each smelter can be categorized as
specification alloy ingots, billets, hot metal, notched bar,
shot, _ and hardeners. Specification alloy ingots, used by
foundries for casting, are the most important products of the
secondary aluminum subcategory. Cooling can be done with either
contact or noncontact cooling water, and air cooling is also
USfv j In9ot conveyer casting is the most predominant casting
method used in the secondary aluminum subcategory. Molten
aluminum is poured into ingot molds traveling on a conveyer
system._ The aluminum is allowed to briefly air cool prior to
contacting the metal surface and mold with water. This allows
892
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
the metal surface to solidify so that the aluminum surfaces are
not water marked. Enough heat is extracted from the aluminum for
solidification and to prevent breaking when the aluminum is
removed from the mold. Notched bar, RAI, and redox casting are
three variations of ingot conveyer casting.
Direct chill casting is characterized by continuous
solidification of the metal while it is being poured. The
length of an ingot cast using this method is determined by the
vertical distance it is allowed to drop rather than by mold
dimensions. Molten aluminum is tapped from the melting furnace
and flows through a distributor channel into a shallow mold.
Noncontact cooling water circulates within this mold, causing
solidification of the aluminum. The base of the mold is attached
to a hydraulic cylinder which is gradually lowered as pouring
continues. As the solidified aluminum leaves the mold, it is
sprayed with contact cooling water to reduce the temperature of
the forming ingot. The cylinder continues to descend into a tank
of water, causing further cooling of the ingot as it is immersed.
When the cylinder has reached its lowest position, pouring stops
and the ingot is lifted from the pit. The hydraulic cylinder is
then raised and positioned for another casting cycle.
Plants using contact cooling water recycle systems generate
intermittent discharges (accompanied with sludge removal).
Billets, manufactured for use in extrusion plants, are cooled
with noncontact water that is recycled. Sometimes the molten
metal is poured directly into preheated crucibles, then shipped
while still in a molten form. No water is used. Notched bar
molds may be air or water cooled with either contact or
noncontact water.
Aluminum shot is also used as a deoxiclant in the steel industry.
Molten metal is poured into a vibrating feeder, where droplets of
molten metal are formed through perforated openings. The
droplets are cooled in a quench tank. Water is generally
recycled, and periodic sludge removal is required.
PROCESS WASTEWATER SOURCES
The primary areas of water use and wastewater production in the
secondary aluminum subcategory are as follows:
Scrap drying wet air pollution control,
Scrap screening and milling,
Dross washing,
Demagging wet air pollution control,
Delacquering wet air pollution control,
Direct chill casting contact cooling water,
Ingot conveyer casting contact cooling, 8. Stationary
casting contact cooling water, and 9. Shot casting contact
cooling water.
1,
2,
3.
4,
5
6
7
893
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
OTHER WASTEWATER SOURCES
There are other wastewater streams associated with the production
of secondary aluminum. These include but are not limited to:
1. Maintenance and cleanup water, and
2. Stormwater runoff.
These wastewaters are not considered as part of this rulemaking.
EPA believes that the flows and pollutant loadings associated
with these streams are insignificant relative to the wastewater
streams selected, or are best handled by the appropriate permit
authority on a case-by-case basis under the authority of Section
402 of the CWA.
AGE, PRODUCTION, AND PROCESS PROFILE
Figure III-2 (page 899) shows the location of 47 secondary
aluminum reduction plants. Most of the plants are located in the
eastern United States, and most are in urban areas near raw
materials and markets. The notations within the states indicated
the type of discharge the facilities use, direct (D), indirect
(I), or zero (Z).
The data in Table III-l (page 895) indicate that the majority of
facilities (34) are less than 35 years old, reflecting the
relatively recent development of this industry.
In addition, most facilities practice zero discharge with only 21
percent (10 facilities) discharging directly to waters of the U.S.
The data in Table III-2 (page 896) indicate that the majority of
facilities produce between 5,000 and 20,000 kkg per year of
secondary aluminum. Table III-3 (page 897) provides a summary of
the plants having the various secondary aluminum processes; the
number of plants generating wastewater from the processes is also
shown.
894
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
1
t— (
1— 1
01
1-)
a
W
i w
§ 1
p^ j5cj
o
fo CO
O (-1
Q
IX
P4 >-"
a w
S S
o
r^p3
H
x_x CO
11
1
i— i vo
ON ON in
o eg T— | co
i m
OO ON m
CO Cxi 1
ON ON in
o »- o] i-
i m
OO ON m 1
ON O\ in
i— T— r-
i m
CO ON ^~
ON ON f**^
^— Y— ~ ^™
<}• co ool m
1 t—
t— CO r-| IO
1
CO —
ON ON 1
o »— m| vo
,- ^- O
P-i co
Q
•y
4-1 0)
0 l-t r-t
Q) -rl O Ctj
V-l T3 >-J 4-1
•r-l C CU O
Q M M H
895
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - III
TABLE III-2
PRODUCTION RANGES FOR SMELTERS AND REFINERS
OF THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
(kkg/yr)
Production Ranges
0 - 2500
2501 - 5000
5001 - 10000
10000 - 20000
20001 - 30000
30000 - 4-
No Data
Total Number of
Plants in Survey
Number of Plants
4
4
16-
8
3
3
6
47
896
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
TABLE II1-3
SUMMARY OF SUBCATEGORY PROCESSES AND ASSOCIATED WASTE STREAMS
Process
Raw Material Preparation
Number of
Plants With
Process
Scrap drying air pollution 23
control
Scrap screening and milling 18
Dross washing 3
Dust air pollution control 13
Delacquering 5
air pollution control 5
Demagging
air pollution- control 17
Casting 40
Ingot conveyer casting 14
Shot casting 4
Number of Plants
Generating
Wastewater
1
3
0
17
14
4
897
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - III
ALUMINUM SCRAP
SHIP MOLTEN ALUMINUM SHIP ALUMINUM INGOTS
Figure III-1
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SMELTING PROCESS
898
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
CO
H
13
g
CD
a
CM
QJ
00
•r-l
O
o
w
CO
CO
13
O
l-l
H
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - III
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
900
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - IV
SECTION IV
SUBCATEGORIZATION
This section summarizes the factors considered during the
designation of the secondary aluminum subcategory and its related
subdivisions. Secondary aluminum was identified as a subcategory
in a final regulation promulgated in 1974 and BPT, BAT, NSPS, and
PSNS effluent limitations and standards were established for the
secondary aluminum subcategory. The purpose of this study is to
support modifications to the BAT, NSPS, and PSNS regulations.
FACTORS
CONSIDERED IN SUBDIVIDING THE
SECONDARY
ALUMINUM
SUBCATEGORY
The factors for general subcategorization were each evaluated
when establishing the secondary aluminum subcategory and its
subdivisions. In the discussion that follows, the factors will
be described as they pertain to this particular subcategory.
Subcategorization of the entire nonferrous metals industry and
evaluation of the factors used in this process are discussed in
Section IV of the General Development Document.
The rationale for dividing the secondary aluminum subcategory
into segments or building blocks considers the diversity in
source of raw materials, the use of certain manufacturing
processes by only a few facilities, and the differences in
available technologies for final product processing (i.e.,
contact cooling water, air cooling, and noncontact cooling
water).
The raw materials used by secondary aluminum plants are either
solid scraps (clippings and forgings, borings and turnings, and
old sheet and castings) or residues from aluminum reduction and
smelting. Since all secondary smelters use the various types of
scraps at one time or another, the type of scrap cannot be used
as a basis for subcategorization. However, many plants have
scrap drying operations. Most of these plants use air pollution
control devices in this process. A few plants use wet scrubbers
which produce wastewater. Some facilities also use water in
scrap screening and milling, generating wastewater. Therefore,
scrap drying wet air pollution control and scrap screening and
milling should be considered segments.
Can scrap is normally heated prior to melting to burn the lacquer
contained on the cans. Wet scrubbers are normally used to
control air pollution rather than afterburners and baghouses
because of the explosion hazard. Explosion potential is
increased if the scrap is shredded due to aluminum fines that
would collect in dry scrubbing systems. Five plants operate wet
scrubbers, indicating that delacquering wet air pollution control
should be considered a segment.
901
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - IV
Furnace residue processing to recover aluminum can produce a
wastewater stream with treatable pollutant concentrations. Five
facilities process furnace residues, and four of these use water
for the processing. Since this process produces a potentially
contaminated waste stream it has been identified as a segment.
Plants practicing magnesium removal (demagging), use either a
chlorine or aluminum fluoride process. The demagging process
requires air pollution control devices to minimize fuming. Wet
scrubbing can be practiced with both types of demagging and the
resulting scrubber water is usually treated by pH adjustment and
settling.
Thirty-four plants demag, 20 generate wastewater from fume
scrubbing. Because the demagging process can produce a
contaminated wastewater, it has been identified as a segment
within the secondary aluminum subcategory.
The final secondary aluminum process s.tep is casting. The
technique for cooling the aluminum into various shapes varies
within the subcategory and with the product. Air cooling, water
contact cooling, and water noncontact cooling are all used. When
water contact cooling is used, the cooling water is frequently
recycled. However, a blowdown stream may be necessary to
dissipate the build-up of dissolved solids. This blowdown stream
may have, in addition to treatable dissolved solids, oil and
grease and phenolics, depending on whether lubricants are used in
casting. This manufacturing process has also been considered to
be segment within the secondary aluminum subcategory.
Within the secondary aluminum subcategory the processes that
produce the wastewaters discussed previously, residue processing
wastewater, demagging fume scrubber liquors, and contact cooling
water, are not all present at all facilities. Some facilities
may have one, others combinations of two, and still others all
three. The building block approach used in this regulation
accommodates these differences by establishing limitations and
standards for each wastewater stream.
Limitations will be based on specific flow allowances
following subdivisions:
1. Scrap drying wet air pollution control,
2. Scrap screening and milling,
3. Dross washing,
4. Demagging wet air pollution control,
5. Delacquering wet air pollution control,
6. Ingot conveyer casting,
7. Direct chill casting contact cooling,
8. Stationary casting contact cooling, and
9. Shot casting contact cooling.
for the
902
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - IV
OTHER FACTORS
The other factors considered in this evaluation were shown to be
inappropriate bases for further segmentation. Air pollution
control methods, treatment costs, nonwater quality aspects, and
total energy requirements were each shown to be functions of the
selected subcategorization factors — metal product, raw
materials, and production processes. As such, they support the
method of subcategorization which has been applied. Certain
other factors, such as plant age, plant size, and the number of
employees, were also evaluated and determined to be inappropriate
as bases for subcategorization of nonferrous metal plants.
PRODUCTION NORMALIZING PARAMETERS
The effluent limitations and standards developed in this document
establish mass limitations on the discharge of specific pollutant
parameters. To allow these regulations to be applied to plants
with various production capacities, the mass of pollutant
discharged must be related to a unit of production. This factor,
the production normalizing parameter (PNP), is developed for each
segment in conjunction with subcategorization.
In general, the amount of aluminum processed or produced by the
respective manufacturing process segments is used as the PNP.
The PNP's for the nine secondary aluminum segments are:
Segment
1. Scrap drying wet air pollution
control
2. Scrap screening and milling
3. Dross washing
4. Demagging wet air pollution
control
5. Delacquering wet air pollution
control
6. Ingot conveyer casting contact
cooling
7. Direct chill casting contact
cooling
8. Stationary casting contact
cooling
9. Shot casting contact cooling
PNP
kkg of aluminum scrap
dried
kkg of scrap screened or
milled
kkg of dross washed
kkg of aluminum demagged
kkg of aluminum
delacquered
kkg of aluminum cast
kkg of aluminum cast
kkg of aluminum cast
kkg of aluminum cast
903
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - IV
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
904
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
SECTION V
WATER USE AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
This section describes the characteristics of wastewater
associated with the secondary aluminum subcategory. Data used to
quantify wastewater flow and pollutant concentrations are
presented/ summarized, and discussed. The contribution of
specific production processes to the overall wastewater discharge
from secondary aluminum plants is identified whenever possible.
Two principal data sources were used in the development of the
effluent limitations and standards for this subcategory; data
collection portfolio (dcp) responses and field sampling results.
Data collection portfolios, completed for each of the secondary
aluminum plants, contained information regarding wastewater flows
and production levels. An additional source of data used in this
document is information and data gathered through comments and
Section 308 requests (used to obtain supporting documentation for
the comments). Additional data were gathered from six plants not
considered at proposal.
Since gathering dcp information for this subcategory, the Agency
has learned that 15 plants have closed. EPA believes that the
data from these plants provide useful measures of the
relationship between production and discharge. In light of this
conclusion, the Agency is using these data in its consideration
of BPT and BAT performance.
In order to quantify the pollutant discharge from secondary
aluminum plants, a field sampling program was conducted. A
complete list of the pollutants considered and a summary of the
techniques used in sampling and laboratory analyses have been
presented previously. samples were collected in two phases:
screening and verification. The first phase, screen sampling,
was to identify which toxic pollutants were present in the
wastewaters from production of the various metals. Screening
samples were analyzed for 128 of the 129 toxic pollutants and
other pollutants deemed appropriate. (Because the analytical
standard for TCDD was judged to be too hazardous to be made
generally available, samples were never analyzed for this
pollutant. There is no reason to expect that TCDD would be
present in secondary aluminum wastewater.) A total of 10 plants
were selected for screening sampling in the nonferrous metals
manufacturing category, one of those being a secondary aluminum
plant.
In general, the samples were analyzed for three classes of
pollutants: toxic organic pollutants, toxic metal pollutants,
and criteria pollutants (which includes conventional and
nonconventional pollutants).
As described in Section IV of this supplement, secondary aluminum
905
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
plants have been categorized into nine segments. Differences in
the wastewater characteristics associated with these building
blocks are to be expected. For this reason, wastewater streams
corresponding to each segment are addressed separately in the
discussions that follow.
WASTEWATER SOURCES, DISCHARGE RATES, AND CHARACTERISTICS
The wastewater data presented in this section were evaluated in
light of production process information compiled during this
study. As a result, it was possible to identify the principal
wastewater sources in the secondary aluminum subcategory. The
result of this analysis is summarized in the following
discussion.
Sources of process wastewater within the secondary aluminum
subcategory include:
1. Scrap drying wet air pollution control,
2. Scrap screening and milling,
3. Dross washing,
4. Demagging wet air pollution control,
5. Delacguering wet air pollution control,
6. Ingot conveyer casting contact cooling,
7. Direct chill casting contact cooling water,
8. Stationary casting contact cooling, and
9. Shot casting contact cooling.
Data supplied by data collection portfolio responses were
evaluated, and two flow-to-production ratios were calculated for
each stream. The two ratios, water use and wastewater discharge
flow, were differentiated by the flow value used in calculation.
Water use was defined as the volume of water or other fluid
(e.g., emulsions, lubricants) required for a given process per
mass of aluminum product and was therefore based on the sum of
recycle and make-up flows to a given process. Wastewater flow
discharged after pretreatment or recycle (if these are used) was
used in calculating the production normalized flow — the volume
of wastewater discharged from a given process to further
treatment, disposal, or discharge per mass of aluminum produced.
Differences between the water use and wastewater flows associated
with a given stream resulted from recycle, evaporation, and
carry-over on the product. The production values in calculations
correspond to the production normalizing parameter, PNP, assigned
to each stream, as outlined in Section IV. The production
normalized flows were compiled by stream type. Where
appropriate, an attempt was made to identify factors that could
account for variations in water use. This information is
summarized in this section. A similar analysis of factors
affecting the wastewater values is presented in Sections X, XI,
and XII, where representative BAT, BDT, and pretreatment
discharge flows are selected for use in calculating the effluent
limitations and standards. As an example, casting cooling water
wastewater flow is related to the casting production. As such,
the discharge rate is expressed in liters of cooling water per
906
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
metric ton of casting production (gallons of cooling water
wastewater per ton of aluminum reduction production).
In order to quantify the concentrations of pollutants present in
wastewater from secondary aluminum plants, wastewater samples
were collected at five plants. Diagrams indicating the sampling
sites and contributing production processes are shown in Figures
V-l to V-5 (pages 938 - 942)
The reported water use and discharge rates for the nine
identified secondary aluminum wet operations are given in Tables
V-l, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 9 (pages 912 to 925). The raw wastewater
sampling data for the facilities sampled are presented in Tables
V-4T V-6, and V-10 (pages 915, 919, and 926). Table V-ll (page
927) shows combined raw wastewater data from demagging scrubbing
and casting contact cooling.
The treated wastewater data are shown in Tables V-12 through V-15
(pages 929 through 936). The locations and stream codes of the
samples taken are identified on the process flow diagrams in
Figures V-l through V-5 (pages 938 through 942). Where no data
is listed for a specific day of sampling, the wastewater samples
for the stream were not collected. If the analysis did not
detect a pollutant in a waste stream, the pollutant was omitted
from the table.
The data tables include some samples measured at concentrations
considered not quantifiable. The base neutral extractable, acid
extractable, and volatile organics are considered not
quantifiable at concentrations equal to or less than 0.010 mg/1.
Below this concentration, organic analytical results are not
quantitatively accurate; however, the analyses are useful to
indicate the possible presence of a particular pollutant. The
pesticide fraction is considered not quantifiable at
concentrations equal to or less than 0..005 mg/1. Nonquantiflable
results are designated in the tables with an asterisk (double
asterisk for pesticides).
These detection limits shown on the data tables are not the same
as published detection limits for these pollutants by the same
analytical methods. The detection limits used were reported with
the analytical data and hence are the appropriate limits to apply
to the data. Detection limit variation can occur as a result_of
a number of laboratory-specific, equipment-specific, and daily
operator-specific factors. These factors can include day-to-day
differences in machine calibration, variation in stock solutions,
and variation in operators.
The statistical analysis of data includes some samples measured
at concentrations considered not quantifiable. Data reported as
an asterisk are considered as detected but below quantifiable
concentrations, and a value of zero is used for averaging. Toxic
organic, nonconventional and conventional pollutant data reported
with a "less than" sign are considered as detected, but not
further quantifiable. A value of zero is also used for
907
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
averaging. If a pollutant is reported as not detected, it is
excluded in calculating the average. Finally, toxic metal
values reported as less than a certain value were considered at
not detected, and a value of zero is used in the calculation of
the average. For example, three samples reported as ND, *, and
0.021 mg/1 have an average value of 0.010 mg/1.
In the following discussion, water use and field sampling data
are presented for each operation. Appropriate tubing or
background blank and source water concentrations are presented
with the summaries of the sampling data. Figures V-l through V-5
(pages 938 through 942) show the location of wastewater sampling
sites at each facility. The method by which each sample was
collected is indicated by number, as follows:
1 one-time grab
2 24-hour manual composite
3 24-hour automatic composite
4 48-hour manual composite
5 48-hour automatic composite
6 72-hour manual composite
7 72-hour automatic composite
In the data collection portfolios, plants were asked to specify
the presence or absence of any of the toxic pollutants in their
effluent. All of the plants that responded to this portion of
the questionnaire indicated that they believed the toxic organic
pollutants to be absent. One exception, hexachloroethane, was
reported believed to be present by two plants. This compound was
not detected in any sample taken in the subcategory.
Although most of the plants indicated that the toxic metals were
believed absent from their effluent, some plants did report that
specific pollutants were known present or believed present. The
responses for the toxic metals are shown in the tabulation below.
Pollutant
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Thallium
Zinc
Known
Present
-
1
5
11
1
7
2
5
-
-
9
Believed
Present
_
1
—
1
5
-
6
2
2
-
-
6
Believed
Absent
23
22
22
17
7
21
10
18
16
22
22
8
Known
Absent
_
_
—
_
1
_
1
_
1
1
908
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
SCRAP DRYING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Some scrap may require drying to remove cutting oils and water.
The scrap drying procedure consists of crushing the scrap and
heating in an oil or gas-fired rotary drier. Explosions are
possible in the melting furnace if the scrap is not completely
dried prior to charging. Twenty-nine secondary aluminum plants
control air emissions from scrap drying operations. Three plants
reported the use of scrubbers, while 26 used baghouses. Scrap
drying wet air pollution control water use and discharge rates
are shown in Table V-l (page 912) in liters per metric ton
(gal/ton) of aluminum scrap dried. Plants 427 and 4102 have
either installed a dry system or discontinued the use of the
scrubber, and plant 640 has ceased operations.
The Agency did not sample raw wastewater from scrap drying
scrubbers, however, this wastewater should contain total
suspended solids and treatable concentrations of aluminum. Toxic
organic pollutants should not be present at measurable
concentrations.
SCRAP SCREENING AND MILLING
Only two plants reported using water in scrap screening and
milling. The discharge rates from these plants are presented in
Table V-2 (page 913) in liters per metric ton of aluminum scrap
screened or milled. The Agency did not sample scrap screening
and milling wastewater but this waste stream should contain total
suspended solids and treatable concentrations of aluminum, as
well as toxic metals.
DROSS WASHING WASTEWATER
Sources of aluminum for the secondary aluminum subcategory are
residues such as drosses, skimmings, and slags. These residues
must be pretreated before charging them into the smelters. Both
wet and dry processes are available for this pretreatment. Of
the facilities surveyed, four used the wet process to prepare
their residues for smelting. The quantities of water used and
discharged, expressed as a function of dross processed, are
presented in Table V-3 (page 914).
The data in Table V-4 (page 915) indicate that this wastewater
contains treatable concentrations of suspended solids (aluminum
oxide and hydrated alumina), ammonia, and metals such as
aluminum, copper, and lead.
DEMAGGING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
As discussed in Section III, demagging consists of injecting
chlorine or aluminum fluoride into the molten aluminum to remove
magnesium. During this process, heavy fuming can result. Of the
26 facilities supplying data, 17 reported using a wet process to
control emissions from this process, while nine reported using a
dry process. The flow rates used and discharged, expressed in
909
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
liters/metric ton of aluminum demagged, for those plants with wet
air pollution control are shown in Table V-5 (page 918).
The wastewaters associated with this scrubbing operation may
contain treatable concentrations of suspended solids and
chlorides or fluorides, and of heavy metals. Table V-6 (page
919) summarizes the wastewater sampling data associated with
demagging scrubber wastes.
DELACQUERING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Five plants reported using wet scrubbers to control air pollution
from delacquering operations. Aluminum can scrap is charged to a
furnace where paint and lacquers are burned from the metal
surface. Aluminum fines emitted during shredding prior to
delacquering may also be controlled by the delacquering scrubber.
Delacquering wet air pollution control water use and discharge
rates are shown in Table V-7 (page 923) in liters per metric ton
(gal/ton) of aluminum delacquered.
Analytical data supplied to the Agency show treatable
concentrations of total phenolics (0.346 mg/1 to 26.8 mg/1),
suspended solids (9 mg/1 to 60.8 mg/1), and the presence of zinc,
lead, and copper. Zinc was reported in treatable concentrations
in three of five samples with one sample reported as 7.3 mg/1.
GC/MS data supplied to the Agency show phenol, isophorone,
naphthalene, and phenanthrene at 5.4, 0.045, 0.011, and 0.012
mg/1, respectively. The remaining toxic organics were all
reported at less than 0.010 mg/1.
INGOT CONVEYER CASTING
The predominant method of casting in the secondary aluminum
subcategory is ingot conveyer casting. There are 17 reported
plants in the Agency's data base that use contact cooling water
in ingot conveyer casting. There are additional plants that may
use ingot conveyer casting; however, noncontact cooling water is
used. Water use and discharge rates obtained from the dcp are
presented in Table V-8. Three plants reported recycling cooling
water, while 14 plants indicated they do not incorporate any
recycle. One plant reported using ingot conveyer casting contact
cooling water as demagging scrubber liquor makeup.
Table V-10 presents casting contact cooling water sampling data
from a secondary aluminum plant utilizing ingot conveyer casting.
Extensive sampling data of direct chill casting is presented in
the aluminum forming point source category development document.
These data, which are not expected to be significantly different
than ingot conveyer casting, indicate suspended solids, oil and
grease, and toxic metals may be present in both types of cooling
waters.
DIRECT CHILL CASTING CONTACT COOLING WATER
The Agency is unaware of any secondary aluminum plants in the
910
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
United States using direct chill casting. There are, however,
several plants that remelt aluminum scrap for forming operations
that use direct chill casting. Casting of aluminum scrap for use
in a forming plant is covered by the aluminum forming point
source category. Water use and discharge rates for direct chill
casting are presented in Section V of the primary aluminum
subcategory supplement.
SHOT CASTING CONTACT COOLING WATER
Four secondary aluminum plants reported casting shot for
subsequent use as a deoxidizer in the iron and steel industry.
Water use and discharge rates for shot casting are presented in
Table V-9. Temperature of the cooling water severely affects the
quality of the aluminum shot. It is reported that the
temperature of the quench bath must be maintained between 80F and
85F in the inlet and the outlet. Temperatures should not exceed
105F. Two plants used fresh make-up water to maintain the
correct temperature. The other two plants, however, reported
using cooling towers with no blowdown. Pollutant loadings of
shot casting contact cooling water are expected to be very
similar to ingot conveyer casting and direct chill casting, since
all of these processes use water to cool and cast the molten
metal. Oil and grease should not be present because mold
lubrication is not required for shot casting.
STATIONARY CASTING COOLING
In the stationary casting method, molten aluminum is poured into
cast iron molds and the generally allowed to air cool. The
Agency is aware of the use of spray quenching to quickly cool the
surface of the molten aluminum once it is cast into the molds;
however, this water evaporates on contact with the molten
aluminum. This operation is similar throughout the secondary
aluminum and primary aluminum subcategories, and the aluminum
forming category, and no discharge of process water has been
reported.
911
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
TABLE V-l
WATER USE AND DISCHARGE RATES FOR
SCRAP DRYING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
(1/kkg of aluminum scrap dried)
Plant Code
00427
04102
00640
Percent
Recycle
0
100
100
Production
Normalized
Water Use
1057
5111
567.6
Production
Normalized
Discharge Rate
1057
0
0
912
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
TABLE V-2
WATER USE AND DISCHARGE RATES FOR
SCRAP SCREENING AND MILLING
(1/kkg of aluminum scrap dried)
Plant Code
00296
00301*
Percent
Recycle
100
100
Production
Normalized
Water Use
13827
NR
Production
Normalized
Discharge Rate
0
0
* — HEAVY MEDIA SEPARATION
NR — DATA NOT REPORTED
913
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
TABLE V-3
WATER USE AND DISCHARGE RATES FOR
DROSS WASHING
(1/kkg of dross washed)
Plant Code
04104
04101
04102
04103
Percent
Recycle
67
100
100
67*
Production
Normalized
Water Use
32993
78840
58408
NR
Production
Normalized
Discharge Rate
10868
0
0
0
* — Wastewater is all evaporated
NR — Data not reported
914
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
in
I
cu
CO
rs co
M CO 12
S co
!=> 0 S
iJ OS "33
<1 Q OS
^H
PS
o
o
o
w
CO
^^ cu
T3 6C
CU CO
1 i \ t
o cu
co
CO
4J
Cu co
cu
CJ !>•
X! cO
0) Q
i-l
-— CM
60
^/ cO
Q
co
c
o
4-) i—
cO
4-> CO
C Q
CU
o
c
o cu
0 0
0
CO
-(-
CU
r-l CU
Q- P.
fcs p*"
cO H
CO
CO CU
CU TD
V-J O
4-1 O
CO
^"•^
CO
^/
4J
i-l
i-l
O
ON
m
o
•
o
^
m
0
•
o
vO
O
*
O
CN
CN
O
•
O
CM
O
r>»
CO
4-1 B
cO O
1 i I4_j
3 o
i-l 5-i
r-l O
O i-l
PM XI
O
o
O CO
H CM
f^ OO CM
m CM co cTi CM
o o o o o
• • • • •
O O CM O O
^
m
o
•
o
OO OO CM
m CM co cy> CM
o o o o o
• • • • •
O O CM O O
OO
CO
O
Q • Q
a * ° a *
CM CO CO CO CO
o o o o o
I—-. i r^- t-~ f^-
o
0 ^
XI X
o cu
•r^ CU J2 I—I
""o c *™^ ^*
1 CU >-, N i— '
CO XI XlCU CCU >-,CU
CO) 4-J 4->4J CU-P 4->4J
COS C CUCflXicO ^JcO
M CU CO 1 i— 1 -i— 1 X> i-4
4-)i-l S-) CNCO i-ICO ICO
i >^ O ^-'Xl !=^Xl C X!
CNXl 3 C04J 4J-P 14-1
-4-J i-l -r^xl 3 X! ---iXl
O vTi vO l~«- OO
CO CO VO vO vO
vO vO
co m
o o
o o
vO vO
co in
o o
o o
o
Q
o a
CO CO
0 0
t-~ p^
cu
4J
cO
I-l
cO
rd
4-J
XI
r-t O.
4-1 4J r-t
O cO >,
o>— i xi
1 CO 4J
C 43 CU
1 4J E
•i-l X "H
*o ex ^
cr. »—
vo r--
00
ON
•<—
0
00
•<—
0
•*:
CO
0
f"~
cu
c
cu
CO
•g
VO
f^-
oo
i— CM
0 0
0 0
V
in
' —
o
•
0
V
,
CM CM
o o
0 0
NX-
CM
CM T-
0 0
• •
o o
V
CM CO
0 0
r~» r-~
cu
p
cu
I-l
^*>
t~]
4J
CO
o
p
0 0
r-l .H
•g 8
•r^ CO
5-i S-i
4J CO
r^ in
OO T-
m
.0
o
m
o
0
o
o
•
o
NX
CO
0
**"•
g
• r-l
l—(
r-l
>-
cu
x>
r-^
^~
915
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
•5*
0)
*3
C
4J
c
o
o
v»^
»sf°
1
t*"
0)
i-H
,0.
0)
H
«3j
H
<3
CO
(^
cO
Q
CM
•>.
cd
O
T—
>-
Q
01
O
V-i
£)
o
CO
+
0)
rH Q)
cxa
E >•
cO E-i
CO
E
CO Q)
Q)T3
V-i O
4J C_J
CT
4J
CO
4J
0
! — (
p^
O
PM
VO
O
C^ P"^-
-^oooooooo
• ••••••••
OCMOOOOt— Oi— OO
T—
vO
O
0 01^
~> 3
^J -H )-l V) rH J-l T-l
•i-t E Q> ^ r-)O
rO>jD4CO>-iOi— IcOC
cO X! O 01
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
<;
^*4
3
Q
x-s O
CU 1-1
-4 (Continui
^IINUM SAMPL:
3S WASHING
> Co O
cu <3 Q
i
X) >^
cO Prf
H <3
Q
O
u
W
CO
,
WASTEWATER
-i
0>
>
cu
0 C
m O
• CO
<)• o • co cO
CM > O
d o c
Cn
r*1
eO
Q
r-l Xl
r-l CO •-
O CO
CU^O pQ
QJ U
O 4J PL,
•H O
C CU 5-<
CM
>-
CO
' Q
CO 4-1 O
O ^ 00. OJ M-l
e • 5-1 T3
O"s CT\ O *"O
CM CO CU
O CO N
•i-l S ^*»
X i— l
O CU CO
,
>*
cO
Q
4-1 C 'C
O O CO
0) C
O O i— 1 CO
CM -tf J3 •- CO
r- CO C 5
e
+ Source
r-l CU
Cu p.
cO H
CO
4J 0
O O -i-l QJ
CM CO 4J r-l
S-l O Cu
4-> CO g
X rJ CO
CU 4-1 co
13 CU CU
•r-n3 C
O --I O
cO CJ
CM CM -i— «i-l
CU 4-) •
,c; co 4J
4J CU -r-l
eu g
g
cO CU
QJT3
5-1 O
4-> CJ
CO
rJ -H
0 QJ r-l
O O O <4-l rC
13 O
QJ P '•-*
N O 4J
t^U-l CO
r-l O
cO 'O -ft
S3 QJ <4-l
CO N -H
>>i 4-)
QJ r-l C
^ 5-i cO cO
co QJ C 3
4.) S cO cr1
C
CO
4J
r5
r-l
o
P-i
•r-l
T3 C CO CO r-l
QJ QJ/-S 3 QJCOcC*
CO CO T3 CO r-l & OT3
i— 1 CO CcO T3 (X •<-! -, O
O 00 CO T3 CO CUi— 1 QJ
•H 3 CO C g CO 4J
4J T3 CO 13 CO O CO C! QJ
C C -H 4-> £3 CO CO "O
CU CO r-l r-l CO
> CO 0 ^
C r-l 4-) CO s~^
O -H O K CO
CJ O 4J CU v-x
CO
0)
I—I
^Q
cO
4J
cO
4->
cO
13
00
C
••-I
t— 1
CU
g
CO
CO
4J
C
cu
£j
cr
QJ
CO
,0
rJ
CO
0
4J
r-l
CU
&
O
co
r-l
cO
co
r-l
cu
rO
g
g
CU
co
QJ
X!
H
..
QJ
4J
0 •
^J f2
O
• -r-l
QJ 4-)
CU O
>•> QJ
H CO
QJ co
r-l -H
Cu,£3
g 4J
cO
CO C
+ 'i-l
CU
4J
•H
CO
0
CU
g
o
o
XI cO
cO S
00 g
QJ
g Vj
'4-1 0
1 xl
0 1
C -^l"
O CM
, ,
r-l CM
CU
4J
•H
CO
O
CU
g
o
o
r automatic
o
rC
o-
CM
,
en
QJ
4-)
••-1
CO
0
Cu
g
r manual co
§
X*
1
oo
^}"
1
j- r^-
, i
m^>
QJ
4-)
•H
m
o
CU
g
0
0
r automatic
o
Xl
1
CM
r^.
,
r~-
r-l
00 g
g
in
r-l 0
0 0
O 0
o o
4J 4->
r-l r-l
CO CO
rj £ 3
crcr
Q) QJ
5-1 JJ
o o
§§
c^ rf^
4J 4J
CO CO
CO CO
QJ CU
r-l r-l
CO CO
cu cu
_[ i 4_j
cO cO
o o
•H -i-l
T3 T3
C C
1— 1 (— 1
•K
•K *
917
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT
TABLE V-5
WATER USE AND DISCHARGE RATES FOR
DEMAGGING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
(1/kkg of aluminum demagged)
Plant Code
296
4104
332
532
37
660
330
4209
320
329
48
427
333
313
628
326
6202
313
319
625
Percent
Recycle
100
0
0
100
0
86.9
0
0
NR
0
28.6
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
NR
0
Production
Normalized
Water Use
43059
6885
1867
1740
1289
997
680
596
547
518
456
447
361
313
283
223
132
NR
NR
NR
Production
Normalized
Discharge Rate
0
6885
1867
0
1289
131
680
596
547
518
326
447
361
313
283
223
0
NR
NR
NR
NR — Data not reported
918
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
0)
4-1
O
C
CU
Ml
cO
J-4
CU
U-l
O
o*
r- CO
O O
ON
O
o
o-
•
o
CO
o
ON
o
o
OO ON
CM 00
CM *-
0*
O
ON OO
OO O
• •
O O
V V
4-1
0-
0)
O
X
cu
oo
oo
o
o *
-*• cr>
VO r-
O O
• •
O O
Q Q
2: a
CTN
•}« O
Q Q
25 25
Q Q
25 25
00 CO
0 0
• •
0 0
V V
H
cS os
o
O ED
25 O*
eu os
<3 CdH
oO
E
CM
CO >-i
C ^
O Q
• r-l
4.)
CO
4J
c
<1) r-
O
e >•
o n5
U Q
CO
T—
O
o*
\s
vO
CO
0 *
o o
• •
0 O
Q Q
25 Z
co
o
Q •
25 O
Q Q
25 25
ON
O
O •
25 O
Q
25*
CTi
O O
O
CO
O
\s
ON
O
• o
0 25
r--.
o
Q «
25 0
c^
CO
• Q
0 25
O Q
25 25
00 00
CM r-.
CM CO
O •
250 0*
t~-
CO OO
r- o
• •
O 0
N. /
cu
r-l
43 r-l
CO S
H O
OSH
OOS
C5
OS
r-- CM
»— CM
0 O
• a
0 0
cu
r-l CU
O t O
E >•
CO H
CO
CSJ <>} CM CN
E co oo co oo
co cu
a) T:
J-i 0
CO
v^ \o
cO
4J
4J
r-l
O
PM
Pollutants
CJ
•H
O
H
e
j-i
0
CU <4-l
e o
CU J-4
CJ O
C r-l
CU 43
43 0
• •
1
O
J-i
O
r-l
f«
O
•H
T*
1 ,2-trans-i
ethylene
o
co
Q
25
CM CM
CO CO
VO
CU
TD
M
o
(-|
O
CU
cu
rH
43
4J
CU
e
^
1
0
e
o
dichlorobr
methane
oo
~*
00
oo
0
o
r-r--
co oo
VO
X-V
t— 1
>•>
X
CU
r*
r-l
bis(2-ethy
phthalate
^>o
vjp
Q
25
CM CM
co co
vO
CU
e
cu
I—I
£>•>
r*.
4J
CU
O
tetrachlor
in
CO
CM
CM
o
o
CM CM
00 00
^O
cu
e
cu
1— 1
£*•>
43
4J
trichloroe
r-.
00
919
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
/->>
tinued
c
o
o
V.X
\O
1
CU
CO
H
^3
H
^C
Q
0
M
^J
C/D
s
2!
2
*
p**
£
23
o
o
w
CO
on
o
O"
M
PS
« <:
CQ i*^
3 W
PS EH
O CO
CO <
O OS
O
w
Q
X-N
0)
4J
0
c
co
CO
4-J
d,
CU
o
X
0)
r-T
00
^
O
•i-l
JJ
cO
V-i
C
0)
o
c
o
o
CU
1— 1
0.
1
CO
E
cfl
-
cfl
Q
CM
^
CO
Q
,_
CO
Q
o in i —
CM CM T- ,_
°-* °* ^Q ^ o CM m
o* o* 02:00-^000
N/ V V V V
0)
O
»^
O
CO
CU
p.
H
,, i— O CM
* * o "• ° °. °.
* a o o o o
V V V
r^»'^- r^r^ i-~-i — i — ^r--i — r^-r^r^
CU
O
O
coco cooo cooo cooo cooo oo ao
^" ^O vO vO vo vO vO
m o
O CM O
o o o
V \/
0
o
o
V
o
o
o
V
m o
O CM O
o o o
V V
O CM
0 0
0 O
r-- r-. r^
CO
o
0
o
co
o
o
o
^.
OO 00 CO OO
vO vO vo
O O O O
4J
c
CO
4-1
I-l
o
PM
CM -^ r-
O
OOO vO
•>
C
O
•iH
4-)
C
CO
•
i
O
*
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
4J
C
O
O
CO
H
Q 03
O
O O
a o-
< o
Q pq
a Q
o
o
CO
^^
rQ
CO
4->
O
c
CO
Ou
CO
o
X
CO
M
r-l
oo
£
co
c
o
•I-l
4J
CO
VJ
4J
c
CO
o
d
o
U
CO
or
cO
(-1
CO
f£
.^
\O -r—
o o m T— en
O O O CN O T- vO
• • • • • • •
cNioooooen oooooo
\/ v o v -
fO
Q
CN
' — ^3°
Q • •
a o o
\s
•^
T—
K*I
cO
Q
vO i-
o o in t—
cO H
CO
E
cO CO
CO TD
S-< O
•U U
CO
ooooo o
V V V \/ V
f~^ i~».i--» i — r-»r^ p^ CNCN ^— CN CNCN
oo enoo oo enoo oo enoo enoo enoo
v^> vOvO vO^O v£> vO vO
-
4-) CO
c
re
4-
r^
rH
0
P-l
rH C
E cO CO x-s
^ 3 C ooQ
L^ i— 1 »iH O ^> CO
r) CO C -r4 !x; U
t3 CJ ^ CO O 4J O^-'
CO M O i-H C C
3 efl cOC
C C "H 0 CO
O -r-l C -^E
0 E 0 E co
cNcn -4- tn oo c 3 E cot3
CNCN CNCN CN O r-l E 43
fry ert prt f\
m i —
CN O
0 O
• •
O r- O O
O
j_) CO
co ^E
T3 CO 0-1
•H i — 1 <3$
\-> O <
0 C I
i-H CO
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
CO
d
•H
4J
C
O
o
vO
t
0)
r-l
,0
CO
H
CJ
E3
O"
M
CM PS
co
S3
M
PQ
o
C
co
4J
cu
0)
o
X!
(1)
oo
co
d
o
4J
cO
4J
d
co
o
o
CO
Q
cO
Q
>i
cO
Q
O
CO
QJ
r-l CO
P-. P-
B >
03 H
CO
B
cO OJ
CO T3
Vi O
4-J O
CO
oo r-.
a\ CM
oo oo
o
CM
r-
LO
in ,—
• •
CM VO
vo
VO
d
o
CJ)
CO
03
CO
5^
00
*"O
d
03
r-l
•rl
O
'O
CO ^~.
TD CO
d co
CO H
P,N '
CO
J3 CO
CO TJ
•t-l
r-l r-l
CO O
S-l CO
O
4J
CO
4-1
•H
d
-o
CO
pj
03
4J
CO
~^-f
EC
P-i
c
03
00
O
O
o
4J
CO
03
4->
CJ
03
S-l
CO
•r-l
O
rt
CO
4J
V-l
o
4-1
-o
CO
N
r-l
CO
C
cO
CO •
03 T3
S OJ
4-1
0 0
CO OJ
CO 4J
5-1 CO
CO
co
CO CO
C &
0
CO
B d
O 0
s-i d
4-1
«•*
OJ CO
rH 4_J>
P.C
B o)
CO 4J
co 3
t
t— i
OJ r-l
C 0
O p.,
^
CO
r|
1 t
CO
oo
o
4->
-o
CO
4J
V-l
O
Pu
CO
PS
^
o
N— '
cO
922
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
TABLE V-7
WATER USE AND DISCHARGE RATES FOR
DELACQUERING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
(1/kkg of aluminum scrap dried)
Plant Code
340
342
505
313
4101
Percent
Recycle
0
NR
98
97
98
Production
Normalized
Water Use
296
NR
10010
8170
25366
Production
Normalized
Discharge Rate
296
NR
167
221
610
923
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT -V
TABLE V-8
WATER USE AND DISCHARGE RATES FOR
SCRAP DRYING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
(1/kkg of aluminum scrap dried)
Plant Code
14
18
37
307
309
312
313
326
327
328
329
335
427
624
626
628
6202
Percent
Recycle
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
96
0
85
0
0
0
Production
Normalized
Water Use
362
543
685
496
4347
76
906
2824
110
1139
366
500
76
109
319
502
227
Production
Normalized
Discharge Rate
181
543
685
496
4347
76
906
2824
110
1139
366
20
76
16
319
502
227
924
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -V
TABLE V-9
WATER USE AND DISCHARGE RATES FOR
SCRAP DRYING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
(1/kkg of aluminum scrap dried)
Plant Code
51
326
634
4501
Percent
Recycle
100
0
100
NR
Production
Normalized
Water Use
NR
10578
NR
175
Production
Normalized
Discharge Rate
0
10578
0
NR
925
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
o
T""
I
Ql
rH
cO
HH
53 O CO
^-v Ol
*o toe
0) CO
4-J H
O 0)
C >
T— vD m
m CM r—
000
o o o
CO
cO
0)
o oo
cy >•
cO
o
rH
00
^B
CM
CO
C £*
O cO
•H p
4-J
CO
M
4->
C T-
O>
0 >
C CO
0 P
i— VD m
m CM r^
000
000
U
(U
o
r4
rj
O
CO
0)
rH QJ
P, P-
B r*-
cO H
CO
B
CO 0)
0> T3
V-l O
4-J U
CO
Q
* IS *
CM CM CM
000
OO OO 00
01
C
Ol ^-x
N t-1
C r^
Ol X
43 01
O 43
H rH
co g O !>>
^ 4-i J.) rH 43 Ol
CO (3 O 43 4-> 4->
"^ CO 4-1 O 0) CO
4J
C
cO
4->
i
r— 1
I-l
O
PM
4-J C -i-l 1 rH
3 5-4 T3 CM CO
rH O 1 — '43
iH rH
O 43 •> -H 43
O
•H • • .
^ co r*^» VD
O CM CM VO
^~
i —
o
0
0
•-,
4-1 rH
S3 SO O)
CO q 43
4-1 CO 4-J
r-l CO &
rH 4-1 O
O -i-1 rH
P- O>
01 43
O >
•H O T3
m
o
o
r- CM
O O
m
o
o
o
o
o
CM
o
00
01
cO
rH
cO
CM
o
00
CM
o
00
CM
o
oo
CM
o
00
CM
o
oo
I
c
I
•H
-o
oo
Ol
Ol
43
4-J
43
&
C
Ol
O
CO
0)
O)
OO
•O
•H
C
cO
£
CM
co
rH
cO
O
•H
4J
C
CU
13
O
O
£
r-l TJ
01) O
4.J 43 rH
O 4-) CO
4J 01 C
^ B O
CO
CO PM
rH <£
O
O CO 4->
4-1 O
TJ Ol
Ol 0) 4-J
rH 4J 0)
43 O TJ
CO 0)
4J 4JT3
O 01 f3
Cfl TJ CO
4J CO Vl
X cO O
oi 15 m
TO 0) ^O
•H c Q)
O O N
CO C^
Ol .. CO
43 M (3 •
4-J O CO OJ
0> (X
"O fc 6
01 Ol PS
N S CO
O
IH
TJ
0)
N
cO
(3
CO
4-1
O
$3
CO
cO
P-
§
CO
co
43
H
cO
-* en v
cO PQ p
c u o
cO PM
C
•H
4J 4-1
C B B
O -H -H
•H iH rH
O C C
CO O O
}-l 'H «H
vH 4-> 4.J
cO ctj
CU O C)
•H >4-i IH
O -H .H
•H 4-> 4.J
4J S3 C
co cO 03
01 S ;3
O C^ CT*
926
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
,_
, —
1
cu
r-)
fO
cO
H
0
P-I
O
o
o
H
O
H
0
0
• H M
PS ^ S
-
errl
co
>fc_x ^^
co
c
o
•i-l CN
4J
cO >
j-i cO
_l_\ £^
o
cu
o
c
0 T-
C_3
cO
Q
cu
CJ
J-I
o
CO
0)
i— 1 CU
!•£
cO H
CO
E
CO CU
CU T3
J-i 0
4-> CJ
CO
^_^
cO
N •
4-J
c
cO
4J
r- 1
r-l
O
Qj
CO
,
O
o
m
o
o
•>
Cu E
/C0 -H
\^/ |
O !-<
N t>~.
pt J^
CU CU
rO rQ
. .
co r —
r-- T-
CM
m o >^ c
3 J-t T3 V< O
•H 0) -i-l 0 "-I
E a c ^ " o 4->
-a o- co co J-i c c
CO O >-, CU CU -t-l
pi
o
CJ
OO O i— CM CO OO C
i— CM CM CSl CM CM O
O
o O
CT, t— V
O
0
O r- O
r~~ i— v
o
•
c*
in
^*
CO CO CM
>^ "-3" *
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
o
tH
43
g°0
i-4 23 W
< OS
M M
>-< EH P5
S 3s
^J t-J O
Q H4CJ
23 O
O O-i
o
W OS
CO HH
o
rH
O
P
QJ
4J
O
c
CO
cO
4->
Pu
QJ
O
QJ
W
CO
QJ
^^
T3
H
4J
C
0)
O
C
o
u
CO
>-
cO
Q
CM
^"
CO
Q
t —
K*~
CO
Q
O
CO
QJ
r-l QJ
P- a
e >-
cO H
CO
CO QJ
QJ -O
JH O
4J CJ>
CO
m
CO
OO
v£>
CO
in
vD
vO
m
O
vD
OO
vO
m
CO
CX3
T- CO
OO
OO
/^x
0 U
•HO
cO1^^
4J
c
CO
4J
rH
i-H
O
OH
ac
i^ G
0 0
43
rH rl
cO cO
4-> O
O
4-)
QJ
CO
rH
C
O
•rH
4-)
C
QJ
>
C
o
o
CO
CO
^
5-i
OC
T3
C
CO
rH
•H
O
CO
CO
EH
co
T3
CO
4->
O
4J
oo
CO
4->
TJ
VJ
CO
'O
C
CO
4-1
CO
QJ
o >
S o
H & S
CO O
co
QJ
o
•H
QJ
C CO TJ
CO QJ QJ
4J V-l 4J
3 CX O
rH QJ
rH T3 4-)
O QJ QJ
CX4-) T3
l-i
o-o
. . c
C QJ CO
CO i-i
OC 5-i
!H CO O
O CO UH
O T3
••H QJ QJ
X C N
O O >-,
QJ •- C
rH C CO
42 O
CO -iH OJ
4-1 4-J VJ
O O QJ
CO co £
4-1 <4H CO
X PQ •
QJ QJ U CO
T3 PM QJ
T3 -H rH
•tH CJ • CX
O -H 4J g
CO 4-> -iH CO
CO p CO
QJ QJ -iH
42 O-rH O
4J ^
QJ C 4-J
!-i 42 O
O 4-) -H C
l^.[ ^ 1 ,^
V-i cO
T3 O O 4J
QJ 14_| -H .H
i—I OJ 4J rH
CO N P
P ^-i CO £3
CO rH 3 O
CO CT'H
QJ C 4-1
)H CO rH CO
QJ cO O
S QJ O .rl
CO QJ 4-1 -r-l
QJ S >-. 4-1
rH rH (3
CX co cO cO
E 0) P 3
CO rH CO CT
CO CX
g CO QJ
O CO 4J xi
2 CO vH 4-1
cO
928
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
CM
1
0)
i— i
Pi
CO
E-i
^C
H
G
CO
O Cd
1— ( PJ
r-3 2u
eu <;
S co
co H -i
o
C
CO
CO
4J
ex
<1)
CJ
^)
1
r"H
OC
B
^-/
CO
C
O
.,-1
4-1
cO
4-1
C
0)
0
p
O
U
0)
or
cO
j-i
r- ^ r- o
cfl
a
a a o ^-oo
O T- O O
0)
o
£
o
CO
•X •»« * i— O
• •
0 0
V V
0)
1— 1 <1>
P- p.
cO E-i
CO
,_ ^_ r- r^- r^ r^
B
CO Ci)
0) T3
S-i O
4-1 CJ
CO
oo co oo oo oo co
^0
o
<)• o
• •
»- o
*«sj
O
o
•
o
r^
o
o
•
o
00
0
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
0)
4J
O
c
CO
CO
CM
CN
0)
0
X
oo
oC CM
T3
C
4J
O
O
CM
I
0)
CO
H
H
Q
CO
O W
CO
CO
co
C
O
4->
C
0)
O
G
O
O
cO
Q
OO
CM
4J
CO i-
|
O
O
w
CO
CO
Q
O
CO
Q)
i-H QJ
0-0-
e
cO
CO
CM
CM
cd
O
CJ
CO
CO CO
OO
CO
4->
•r-l
0)
co
I— 1
ctj
C
4J O
CO 4J
•U C
0 0)
r-l >
r~- 1 CH
o o
P-i 0
co
cO
0)
j_i
60
'O
C
cO
,__!
•H
O
TD
0) x-x
T3 CO
(3 CO
CD £-1
p Tv — '
CO
0 CO
CO 13
•r-f
r-l I-l
CO O
4J CO
o
4J
C
0
'O
J-J
CO
T3
C
CO
4J
co
^^
w
PJ
930
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
CO
cu
cO
E-i
EH
O
O CO
13 W
<; co
CO
_ E-i pa
H
z
P4 -t
cu
J>
-,
M <~1
4J 4J
1 CU
CN O
*-
•
O
CO
VD CN
m oo •r- T— T—
CN O O O O
T- O * O O O
V
OS vD CN
in oo »— •<— »—
CN O O O O
T- O # O O O
V
OO OO
oo oo T- «—
00 00
o o * * o o
w
CO r— CO ^~ ^O ^~
O^ CO CT> OO 0s* CO
VD CO VO CO "O CO
,— ^ T-
t
x~x i~H
rH CO
(^"1 rdl
X 4-1
o) ,e
43 P,
rH
!>•. CU rH
43 4-1 t>~>
4J CO 4-1
CU rH ^ O
1 CO 43 -H
CN 43 1 C
v_x- 4_j C CU CU
CO JZ 1 4J CO
•H fX -H CO 5-1
43 T3 CO
• e •
vo 00 m
VD vO ^""
T—
cvi m ONI m T—
O O O OO O O
o o o o o o
V V
CN m CN m o-v
O O O OO O O
00 00 00
V N/
1 T OS CT>
O O CN CN O O
O O O O O O
00 00 0 O
w
OO T— OO T— OO t—
OS OO Os OO OS OO
vD CO vD CO vD OO
•r- ,— T—
B
S B
•H B 2
rH 0 .H
rH -H B
>s B 0
W ""O 5-4
CU cO Jc
43 O O
• • •
r~^ oo os
T ' T
* T '
931
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
0)
g
<
I
O co
13 W
M ,4
rJ Oj
PJ jEj
]y, ^j
< co
CO
co
,£>
CO
H
pa
23 vJ 2=
M PL,
O
G
CO
CO
4-1
P-.
QJ
O
X
QJ
,.
i-l
W>
g
*v_x
CO
G
o
•r-4
4->
CO
H
4->
c
QJ
O
G
o
o
QJ
M
cO
>-i
QJ
>
<
CO
>•
CO
Q
CM
>
cO
O
T"
r-
CO
Q
QJ
O
O
CO
QJ
i-l QJ
/*^ ; o
g fx
CO E-i
CO
B
CO QJ
QJ T3
J-l O
4-> O
CO
CM v£>
CM O O
VO O CM O O
O O O O O
• • • • •
O CM O O CM O O
\/ \s
^— t***"*
0 0
CM CM Ol CM O O
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
CO-"— COT— CO*— COr—
CJ\ CO O^ CO CJ*i CO C^i CO
vOCO vOcO vOCO vOcO
T — 1 — T — T —
in vo
O CM O
• • •
o o o f~) vO vO
o o o o
o o o o
\S \S V V
co T— co ,—
C^ CO CTi CO
vO CO VO CO
1 — T —
CO O
CM O
CM
CO
CM
CO O
CM O
CM
m m
o o
• •
o o
CM *— CM
CT\ CO
VO CO
ON
CO
4J
r-l
O
PM
J-l
QJ
(X
CX
O
O
o
CM
QJ
•r-l
c
CO
CM
CO
QJ
CM
CM
O
r-l
QJ
CO
CM
QJ
O
C
o-
CM
O
G
•r-l
N
CO
CM
CO
CO
G
O
•H
4-)
QJ
G
O
o
G
O
52
I
c
•r-l
I
r-1
CO
cO
•r-l
C
O
e
E
to
932
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
0)
4J
O
CO
cO
4-)
CU
O
CU
00
E
01
wj
CO
CU
>
co
>
cO
Q
CM
CO
Q
m
O i—
O ON
m vo
in co
i O
CM
vD
CM O
O O
O O
CO T-
O CM
-J- CO
CM »—
CM
O
CO
in
C
•H
4-)
O
CJ>
CO
CU
r-l
CO
H
H
Q
CO
O H
Sd
C
(1)
o
C
o
u
o
o
cO
Q
O
CO
CU
r-l CU
CU &
E >-
cO H
CO
LH
O T-
O ON
m vo
m co
ON o
CM
o CM
CO
CO
C
CO
E
CU
TJ
p
C
cO
4->
r-l
r-1
0
P-I
C
CU
00
X
0
r-l
cO
O x-s
•r-l Q
E 0
CU CJ
(-* v^_x
o
CU
T)
•r-l
V-4
o
r-l
^
0
carbon
o
•r-l
C
CO
00
J_l
o
X-N
r-l U
CO O
P H
P
£
1 ^_^^
CO TO
4-) O
O rj
4J P
N-' (U
E
CO
r-l pj
0 <
C <
CU |
4-<
C
O
C_>
CO
CO
CU
r-l
oo
'O
C
cfl
r-l
•r-l
O
•H
r-l
O
CO
"0
CU
TD
C
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
I
CU
P-t
0)
o
a
co
cO
4J
0)
0
X
CU
r-T
"oO
CO
O
•H
4->
CO
4-)
C
O
c
o
CU
CO
{-i
0)
cO
1
1— 1
cO
4J
,£
Cu
iH
4-1
1
1
TJ
OO
vO
r-.
oo
CO
0
o
o
o
*
*
o
13
CO
ON
ON
CU
4J
CO
I
I 1
CO
"5
&
Cu
rH
4J
O
1
c
1
•H
ON
VO
CN
O
o-
o
o
oo
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o
o
oo
ON
ON
cadmium
00
m
o
m
0
vO
o
^
o
o
0
oo
ON
ON
chromium
ON
oo
oo
o
o
vO
o
0
\/
oo
o
o
CM
o
o
vO
o
o
0
\y
oo
ON
ON
copper
•
o
CM
i —
O
^D *sl"
0 0
o
o oo
0 0
\/
o
O ON
0 0
V
CO
O CM
0 0
0 0
V
CM
O
0
\/
oo oo
ON ON
ON ON
CU
T5
•H
C *XHJ
cO cfl
^ CU
0 r-l
• •
T- CN
CM CM
OO
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT -
co co
r-~ co co
,- o o
co
r-
o
o
CN
tn
0)
4->
O
c
CO
cO
Pu
cu
O
X
0)
^
1— 1
co
^"
cO
O
o
c
o
o
co
T-l 0 r-
•
H 0 0
CO] V
ol
QJ
o
i-l
o
C/3
01
.-H <1)
a, P.
6 >•
rt H
B
cO (1)
QJ T3
\-> O
4-) O
W
m
o
O T-
0 0
V V
co co
ON ON
ON ON
T —
•
O
vO
O
o
v
CO
ON
ON
m
o
CO
co
ON
CM
CM
O
m
CM
CO
CO
co
ON
cr\
4J
C
Polluta
r-H
OJ
3
•i-4
C
•
1
p-
f!j
o
cO
^
total organic
(TOG)
0)
Conventionals
co
cO
QJ
V-i
oc
T3
CO
r-l
•r-l
O
UJ
•rH
i— 1
O
co
T3
0
C
(1)
Pu
co
co
cO
O
CO
935
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
0)
r-4
43
CO
EH
Q
O W
S3 rJ
CO
CO
S1-4^
25 CM -
cfl cfl
Q
«— CM
0 -r-
0 0
V
4-1
0)
0 00
X CM
QJ
r^
^ cfl
i-l Q
1 —
o
Q
0 23
V
OC
oo r--
CO
{2 v-
O
•H >~
4-) CO
cO Q
o o
O 0
4J
C
QJ
O
C
O Q)
O O
3
O
CO
CM
O
0
^
O
O
V
Q
m
CM
o
o
CM
^.
QJ
QJ
r-l
42
4J
QJ
o
O
t— 1
42
O
cfl
M
4J
QJ
4J
m
oo
co
co
o
o
^
1^^
o
o
V
oo
ON
O
o
OO
ON
O
0
CM
j.
QJ
QJ
r-l
42
4-1
QJ
0
(-1
O
r-l
42
O
•H
>-l
4-1
r-
oo
vO
0
o
vO
0
0
CM
J.
^
C
o
B
4-1
cfl
^
t—
T —
936
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
T3
CU
C
•i-l
4->
P
O
O
m
cu
co
H
H
Q
O W
<
CO
CO
hJ W
H
Pi fd
Q H
O
w
CO
cO E-i
cO CU
CU T3
Vi O
4J O
CO
CM CM
<)" -*
CM
O
•
O
CM
-J-
O
s/
o
o
o
o
m
o
o
CM
CM
o
m
OO
OO
o
/\
OO
•
I--
O
V
CM
O
O
CN
CM
o
m
ON
CNI
CM
CM
CM
CN
CM ••—
4J
C
cO
4J CU
3 T3
i-l -H
r-l C
O CO
P^ t^
O
.
,
CM
^
5-1
3
O
5-i
CU
g
•
en
CM
•H
C
cu
i— i
CU
CO
.
m
CM
CO
r-l
CO
C
O
•H
4J
C
CU
>
C
o
o
c
o
!3
cO
•r-l
C
0
e
e
CO
c
cO
B
cu
T)
£
CU
00
^
X
O
cO
O s~^
•r-l O
B 0
CU O
rC ^'
O
CU
-o
•H
5-1
O
r-l
O
^
' — ! /~**
cO 13
4-> O
O 43
4J 4J
**-s CU
e
CO
•-t Pn
o
C
o
CJ
co
cO
CU
J_i
00
T3
p
cO
^-1
•H
O
CO
r-l
O
co
TJ
0)
T3
C
01
P-
CO
^
CO
/— s
i— I c/D
CO CO
4J H
o -^
4-)
CO
•i-l
0
T3
5-1
cO
'O
C
cO
4-)
CO
•— '
PC
PL
937
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
078 VGA BLANK
DEMAGGING
SCRUBBER
WATER
SETTLING
031
0.005
MGD
080
—&
DISCHARGE
0.005 MGD
Figure V-l
SAMPLING SITES AT SECONDARY ALUMINUM PLANT A
938
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
066 VOA BLANK
0.0140 MGD
RECYCLE TO BALL MILL
133
069
DISCHARGE
Figure V-2
SAMPLING SITES AT SECONDARY ALUMINUM PLANT B
939
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
SOURCE
WATER
VOA BLANK
DEMAGGING
SCRUBBER
WATER
IKGOT
CASTING
COOLING
WATER
SHOT
CASTING
COOLING
WATER
1 084 I
1.65 MGD
Figure V-3
SAMPLING SITES AT SECONDARY ALUMINUM PLANT C
940
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - V
097 I VOA BLANK
SOURCE
WATER
x\
098
DEMAGGING
SCRUBBER
WATER
(NaOH ADDED DURING RECYCLING)
PRIMARY
SETTLING
SECONDARY
SETTLING
0.0052 MGD
DISCHARGE
Figure V-4
SAMPLING SITES AT SECONDARY ALUMINUM PLANT D
941
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - V
SOURCE WATER
DEMAGGING
SCRUBBER
WATER
72A
INFLUENT
PIT
0.036 MGD
MIXING
TANK
SODA ASH
ADDITION
004
.036 MGD
V
DISCHARGE
Figure V-5
SAMPLING SITES AT SECONDARY ALUMINUM PLANT E
942
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VI
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANTS
This section examines the chemical analysis data Ped in
section V and discusses the selection or exclusion of
(i
or exclude pollutants for further consideration in the
limitation for this subcategory.
further considered if they are Present in o . Th
i-rpatable bv the technologies considered in this analysis. "»*
achievable by carbon adsorption.
total phenols ?by 4-AAP method) is 0.005 mg/1, which is below the
0 010 mq/1 accepted for the other toxic organics. However, to be
raised treatment performance value. No Joxic organic pollutants
£awa h<=Pn selected for further consideration for limitation as a
rlsSlt Sf the revised treatment performance. However, sampling
i
limitation.
943
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
This study examined samples from the secondary aluminum subcate-
gory for three conventional pollutant parameters (oil and grease,
total suspended solids, and pH) and seven nonconventional pollu-
tant _parameters (ammonia, chemical oxygen demand, chloride,
fluoride, aluminum, total organic carbon, and total phenols).
CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT PARAMETERS SELECTED
The conventional and nonconventional pollutants or pollutant
parameters selected for consideration for limitation in this
subcategory are:
aluminum
ammonia
total phenols (4-AAP)
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
Aluminum was found above the 1.49 mg/1 concentration attainable
by identified treatment technology in four of six samples in
three plants. Because it is the major product of plants in this
subcategory and was found at treatable concentrations, aluminum
is selected for consideration for limitation.
Ammonia was measured at three sites at two plants. The
concentration of ammonia in these samples varied widely,
depending on the stage and type of manufacturing process. Those
plants that produce treatable concentrations of ammonia will be
considered for limitation for that pollutant.
Total suspended solids ranged from 60 to 20,140 mg/1 in six
samples. All of the measured concentrations are we]1 above the
concentration achievable by identified treatment technology.
Furthermore, most of the technologies used to remove toxic metals
do _so by converting these metals to precipitates, and these
toxic-metal-containing precipitates should not be discharged.
Meeting a limitation on total suspended solids also ensures that
sedimentation to remove precipitated toxic metals has been
effective. For these reasons, total suspended, solids is
considered for limitation in this subcategory.
Data solicited by the Agency through data collection requests
have demonstrated the presence of 4-AAP phenols in delacquering
scrubber liquor. Five sample analyses were submitted to EPA with
phenolics concentrations ranging from 0.346 mg/1 to 26.8 mg/1
Three concentrations were greater than 3 mg/1. The toxic
pollutant phenol (number 65) was found at 5.4 mg/1 in one sample.
Based on this concentration and its frequency in delacquering wet
air pollution control wastewater, total phenols (4-AAP) is
selected for consideration for limitation.
944
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
Oil and grease was found above its treatable concentration (10
mg/1) in six of seven samples with concentrations ranging from 16
to 157 mg/1. Sampling data from direct chill casting raw
wastewater taken at aluminum forming plants show oil and grease
present at treatable concentrations in 15 of 23 samples. The
treatable concentrations range from 15 to 226 mg/1. Therefore,
oil and grease is selected for consideration for limitation.
The pH of a wastewater measures its relative acidity or
alkalinity. In this study, the pH values observed in raw
wastewater ranged from 2.8 to 9.6. Effective removal of toxic
metals by precipitation requires careful control at pH.
Therefore, pH is considered for limitation in this subcategory.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the
wastewater samples taken is presented in Table VI-1 (page 953).
These data provide the basis for the categorization of specific
pollutants, as discussed below. Table VI-1 is based on the raw
wastewater data from streams 3, 68, 70, 80, and 84 (see Section
V). Treatment plant sampling data were not considered in the
frequency count.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER DETECTED
The toxic pollutants listed in Table VI-2 (page 957) were not
detected in any wastewater samples from this subcategory;
therefore, they were not selected for consideration in
establishing limitations.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER
QUANTIFICATION LIMIT
FOUND
ABOVE
THEIR
ANALYTICAL
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification level in any wastewater samples from
this subcategory; therefore, they were not selected for
consideration in establishing limitations.
91. chlordane
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
102. alpha-BHC
103. beta-BHC
104. gamma-BHC
106. PCB-1242 (a)
107. PBC-1254 (a)
108. PCB-1221 (a)
109. PCB-1232 (b)
110. PCB-1248 (b)
111. PCB-1260 (b)
945
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
112. PCB-1016
113. toxaphene
121. cyanide
(b)
(a),(b) Reported together.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS PRESENT BELOW
TREATMENT
CONCENTRATIONS ACHIEVABLE BY
The pollutants listed below were not selected for consideration
in establishing limitations because they were not found in any
wastewater samples from this subcategory above concentrations
considered achievable by existing or available treatment
technologies. These pollutants are discussed individually
following the list.
114. antimony
117. beryllium
123. mercury
125. selenium
126. silver
Antimony was found above its analytical quantification limit in
one of six samples collected at four plants. The concentration
found was 0.3 mg/1, which was below that achievable by
identified technology. Therefore, antimony was not considered
for limitation.
Beryllium was found above its analytical quantification limit in
three of four samples. The maximum concentration measured was
0.20 mg/1. The concentration achievable by identified treatment
technology are 0.20 mg/1. Therefore, beryllium was not
considered for limitation.
Mercury was detected above its analytical quantification limit in
all five samples of this subcategory, ranging from 0.0002 to
0.0064 mg/1. All of the values were below the 0.036 mg/1
concentration achievable by identified treatment technology.
Therefore, mercury was not considered for limitation.
Selenium was found above its quantification concentration in one
of three samples collected at three plants. The concentration
found was 0.20 mg/1, which was. the concentration achievable by
identified treatment technology. Therefore, selenium was not
considered for limitation.
Silver was found above its analytical quantification limit in one
of three samples with a value of 0.07 mg/1. This concentration
was equal to that achievable by identified treatment technology.
Therefore, silver are not considered for limitation.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS DETECTED IN A SMALL NUMBER OF SOURCES
The following pollutants were not selected for consideration for
limitation on the basis they were detectable in the effluent from
946
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
only a small number of sources within the subcategory and it is
uniquely related to only those sources.
4. benzene
23. chloroform
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
39. fluoranthene
44. methylene chloride
48. dichlorobromomethane
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
71. dimethyl phthalate
73. benzo(a)pyrene
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
84. pyrene
85. tetrachloroethylene
87. trichloroethylene
115. arsenic
119. chromium
120. copper
124. nickel
127. thallium
Although these pollutants were not selected for consideration in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the permit writer to specify effluent
limitations.
Benzene was found above its analytical quantification limit in
one of 12 samples collected at four plants. The concentration of
0.136 mg/1 was above the concentration achievable by identified
treatment technology. Also, all secondary aluminum plants
indicated in the. dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent
or believed to be absent from their wastewater. Because it was
found above a treatable concentration at only one plant, benzene
was not considered for limitation.
Chloroform, a common laboratory solvent, was found above its
analytical quantification limit in 10 of 12 samples collected at
four plants. The 10 samples ranged from values of 0.019 to 0.410
mg/1 which were at concentrations above that achievable by.
treatment. All secondary aluminum-plants indicated in the dcp
that this pollutant was known to be absent or believed to be
absent from their wastewater. Because the possibility of sample
contamination is likely, chloroform was not considered for
limitation.
1,4-Dichlorobenzene was found above its analytical quantification
concentration in only one of six samples collected from three
plants with a concentration of 0.026 ing/1, which was treatable by
947
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
identified technology. However, all secondary aluminum plants
indicated in the dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent
or believed to be absent from their wastewater. Since it was
detected in only one plant, 1,4-dichlorobenzene was not
considered for limitation.
1,1-Dichloroethylene was detected in only one of 12 samples
collected at four plants. Its concentration was 0.099 mg/1,
which was above the concentration achievable by available
treatment (0.010 mg/1). Because it was found at only one plant,
indicating the pollutant is site-specific, 1,1-dichloroethylene
was not considered for limitation.
1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene was found above its treatable
concentration (0.010 mg/1) in five of 12 samples. All five
samples were taken at the same plant, including three from
demagging scrubber wastewater. However, this pollutant was not
detected in six samples from three other plants. Five of these
six samples were taken from demagging scrubber wastewater or
combined wastewater including demagging scrubber wastewater.
Also, all secondary aluminum plants reporting in the dcp
indicated that this pollutant was believed to be absent from
their wastewater. Since this pollutant was found in treatable
concentrations at only one plant, indicating it is site-specific,
1,2-trans-dichloroethylene was not considered for limitation.
Pluoranthene was detected above its analytical quantification
limit in only one of six samples collected at three plants. The
reported fluoranthene concentration, 0.020 mg/1, was above the
concentration achievable by available treatment. However, all
secondary aluminum plants indicated in the dcp that this
pollutant was known to be absent or believed to be absent from
their wastewater. Because it was found at. only one plant,
indicating the pollutant is site-specific, fluoranthene was not
considered for limitation.
Methylene chloride was found above its analytical quantification
limit in one of 12 samples. The measurable concentration was
0.370 mg/1. This pollutant was not attributable to specific
materials or processes associated with the secondary aluminum
subcategory; however, it is a common solvent used in analytical
laboratories. Also, all secondary aluminum plants indicated in
the dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent or believed to
be absent from their•wastewater. Since the possibility of sample
contamination was likely, methylene chloride is not considered
for limitation.
Dichlorobromomethane was detected in only one of 12 samples
collected at four plants. Its concentration was 0.019 mg/1,
which was above the concentration achievable by available
treatment (0.010 mg/1). Because it was found at only one plant,
indicating the pollutant was site-specific, dichlorobromomethane
was not considered for limitation.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was found above its analytical
948
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
quantification limit in three of six samples. The concentrations
measured were 0.075, 0.28f and 2.03 rag/1. The presence of this
pollutant was not attributable to materials or processes
associated with the secondary aluminum subcategory. It is
commonly used as a plasticizer in laboratory and field sampling
equipment. EPA suspects sample contamination as the source of
this pollutant. Also, all secondary aluminum plants indicated
in the dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent or believed
to be absent from their wastewater. Therefore, bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate was not considered for limitation.
Butyl benzyl phthalate was found above its analytical
quantification limit in two of six samples collected from three
plants. The measured values were 0.014 and 0.098 mg/1. The
presence of this pollutant was not attributable to materials or
processes associated with the secondary aluminum subcategory. It
is commonly used as a plasticizer in laboratory and field
sampling equipment. EPA suspects sample contamination as the
source of this pollutant. Also, all secondary aluminum plants
indicated in the dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent
or believed to be absent from their wastewater. For these
reasons, butyl benzyl phthalate was not considered for
limitation.
Di-n-butyl phthalate was found above its analytical
quantification limit in two of six samples, with concentrations
of 0.022 and 0.045 mg/1. The presence of this pollutant was not
attributable to materials or processes associated with the
secondary aluminum subcategory. It is commonly used as a
plasticizer in laboratory and field sampling equipment. EPA
suspects sample contamination as the source of this pollutant.
Also, all secondary aluminum plants indicated in the dcp that
this pollutant was known to be absent or believed to be absent
from their wastewater. Therefore, di-n-butyl phthalate was not
considered for limitation.
.Di-n-octyl phthalate was found above its analytical
quantification limit in only one of six samples collected at
three plants, at a concentration of 0.036 mg/1. The presence of
this pollutant was not attributable to materials or processes
associated with the secondary aluminum subcategory. It is
commonly used as a plasticizer in laboratory and field sampling
equipment. EPA suspects sample contamination as the source of
this pollutant. Also, all secondary aluminum plants indicated in
the dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent or believed to
be absent from their wastewater. For these reasons, di-n-octyl
phthalate was not considered for limitation.
Dimethyl phthalate was detected at a concentration greater than
its analytical quantification limit in only one of six samples
collected at three plants. The measured concentration of this
toxic pollutant was 0.056 mg/1. Also, all secondary aluminum
plants indicated in the dcp that this pollutant was known to be
absent or believed to be absent from their wastewater. Because
it was found at just one plant, dimethyl phthalate was not
949
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
considered for limitation.
Benzo(a)pyrene was detected at a concentration above its
analytical quantification limit in only one of six samples
collected at three plants. The 0.012 mg/1 concentration measured
was above the concentration achievable by identified treatment
technology. However, all secondary aluminum plants indicated in
the dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent or believed to
be absent from their wastewater. Because it was found at only
one plant, benzo(a)pyrene was not considered for limitation.
Chrysene was detected at a concentration above its analytical
quantification limit in only one of six samples collected at
three plants. The 0.017 mg/1 concentration measured was above
the concentration achievable by identified treatment technology.
However, all secondary aluminum plants indicated in the dcp that
this pollutant was known to be absent or believed to be absent
from their wastewater. Because it was found only at one plant,
chrysene was not considered for limitation.
Acenaphthylene was detected at a concentration above its
analytical quantification limit in only one of six samples
collected at three plants. The 0.017 mg/1 concentration measured
was above the concentration achievable by identified treatment
technology. Also, all secondary aluminum plants indicated in the
dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent or believed to be
absent from their wastewater. Because it was found at only one
plant, acenaphthylene was not considered for limitation.
Pyrene was measured at a concentration greater than its
analytical quantification limit in only one of six samples
collected at three plants. The concentration of this toxic
pollutant was 0.024 mg/1. Also, all secondary aluminum plants
indicated in the dcp that this pollutant was known to be absent
or believed to be absent from their wastewater. Because it was
found at just one plant, pyrene was not considered for
limitation.
Tetrachloroethylene was found above its analytical quantification
limit and above the concentration attainable by available
treatment in only one of 12 samples collected from four plants,
indicating the pollutant was site-specific. The measured
concentration was 0.378 mg/1. Also, all secondary aluminum
plants indicated in the dcp that this pollutant was known to be
absent or believed to be absent from their wastewater.
Therefore, tetrachloroethylene was not considered for limitation.
Trichloroethylene was found above its analytical quantification
limit and treatable concentration in one of 12 samples collected
from four plants. The sample concentration was 0.787 mg/1. Also,
all secondary aluminum plants indicated in the dcp that this
pollutant was known to be absent or believed to be absent from
their wastewater. Since this pollutant was found at only one
plant, trichloroethylene was not considered for limitation.
950
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
Arsenic was found above its treatable concentration in one of
three samples collected at four plants. The concentration of
arsenic was 4.0 mg/1. Since it was found at a treatable
concentration only one plant, arsenic was not considered for
limitation.
Chromium was found above its treatable concentration in one of
three samples collected at two plants. This sample contained 2.0
mg/1 of chromium. Since a treatable concentration of chromium
was collected at only one plant, chromium was not considered for
limitation.
Copper was found above its treatable concentration in one of four
samples, with a value of 10.0 mg/1. Since copper was found at
only one plant, it was considered specific to that site and was
not considered for limitation.
Nickel was detected above its treatable concentration in one of
three samples (1.0 mg/1). Since it was found in only one plant,
nickel was not considered for limitation.
Thallium was detected above its treatable concentration in one of
three samples collected at three plants. Because it was found at
only one plant, thallium was not considered for limitation.
TOXIC POLLUTANTS SELECTED FOR CONSIDERATION FOR ESTABLISHING
LIMITATIONS
The pollutants listed below were selected for further
consideration in establishing limitations and standards for this
subcategory. The toxic pollutants selected are each discussed
following the list.
65. phenol
118. cadmium
122. lead
128. zinc
Phenol was detected in one of three samples above treatable
concentrations. Delacquering wet air pollution control
wastewater, based on data from one sample submitted to the
Agency, contains phenol. Also, the data show that delacquering
wet air pollution control wastewater contains total phenolics in
concentrations up to 26.8 mg/1. In five analyses submitted to
the Agency, total phenolics was above treatable concentrations in
all five samples. Therefore, phenol was selected for
consideration for limitation.
Cadmium was detected above its analytical quantification limit in
four samples collected at two plants. The values ranged from
0.020 to 0.500 mg/1. Three of the concentrations were above the
concentration of 0.049 mg/1, which is achievable by the
identified treatment technology. Data supplied to EPA by an
industry representative showed cadmium at 0.64 mg/1 in one sample
from delacquering wet air pollution control. Therefore, cadmium
951
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
was selected for consideration for limitation.
Lead was detected present above its analytical quantification
limit in all four samples collected at two plants. The reported
lead concentrations ranged from 0.060 to 8.0 mg/1. A lead
concentration of 0.08 mg/1 is achievable by identified treatment
technology. Data supplied to EPA by industry representatives
showed lead above treatable concentrations in two of five samples
(0.1 and 2.1 mg/1) for delacquering wet air pollution control.
Therefore, lead was selected for consideration for limitation.
Zinc was detected above its analytical quantification limit in
all four samples collected at two plants. The concentrations of
zinc reported ranged from 2.0 to 8.0 mg/1. The concentration of
zinc achievable by identified treatment technology is 0.23 mg/1.
Data supplied to EPA by industry representatives showed zinc
above treatable concentrations in three of five samples (0.824,
0.898, and 7.3 mg/1) for delacquering wet air pollution control.
Therefore, zinc was selected for consideration for limitation.
952
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
JJ C
•o eo 55
QJ 0) O
0) > 0) l-i
O O «—< JJ
O f-t o •<-!
QJ O JJ
jj s IB
(y o Q> 1-*
Q -i i-t "
CO
H
-
jj —« C
SJJ Of
o;
O
CM
U
"-• S
X 5
H M W
S H
W H
o >•< en
!3 OS
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
"8 SS
V£B
S o0
S |.3
CM csj »- i— «—
J-l C
Q cu o
luf *-*
3 rt
O O IJ
CO
H
- -^
CC CD 4-1
O
TJ~<
o> u-> -
JJ—' C
O AJ 5J
SiS
&3-S
TJ
Qj
S3 EX
o o oo o(
oo ooo <
1-1 at o>
ai u je: 5
%-5"-5
0) X-K QJ
>-4 i-4 E
ll?!^,,
^ C S !?•§
•^-S-g-Jta
73 JU O *D 0)
(Hii-si-s n§§ir
fi OTJ JS C !
N j: e- JB ^i t-5 41 .e C
C XJ O QjJZ f j*- Tl n
cueuiotSoO
XI s>^
J2 3UJZO3 OJJj'u'uo'u-^Ui-f X
^1*—tt lw4>*4CJCUf-{.Cm
Suj,"«" 'to H
ll-'U'^x-ll-iUWUi—>.£ ^-^ *^ CO
954
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
01 CU O I
JJ & «
gj o
- CM CM <)• en tn
~s
|S g£
4J Q> •*-*!—1
tO O JJ-^-
-SB !
« jj f-i/-^
O EC JJ OJ
^ 0 oj^x
O
O
O
• • • •_;_; — — ^«^^X^XX(-?(-»moo o o ooooooooooooooo
S,
-^
— &>S!^'
ILJ r* C *^
>; Q) t3 C jd
^g-s aS
i&
3*0
QJ -Cvl
JJ RJ -
) j ^-^^-
iSo-.
t
SB
al
S1^
i
II
II sgBBglll ^11
••3 -ci^-g£??':? i?
"H Q-. -. -. -S ?!
S u:
1%'
owtsCowScccSC^^-s^
ll 11lllll«l1tll^^i111tl3-«
J "S.-D -<
TSS-S*-.
3 S S^
-O »O "tJ QJ 0> Q>
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
•p CO
w
01 01
•s s.
£ I
w
Pi
-Is
to JJ *^^-,
^ gi#^
ro JJ
£§!
-0^3
QJ C
§
I
I
^
•ef
3^ tf
^£ g>
le- S
^ TO
H O
J?
Sr^
o^
4J *"
>%jr
•sf
956
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
TABLE VI-2
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER DETECTED
1. acenaphthene
2. acrolein
3. acrylonitrile
5. benzidine
6. carbon tetrachloride
7. chlorobenzene
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
9. hexachlorobenzene
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
12. hexachloroethane
13. ifl-dichloroethane
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
16. chloroethane
17. DELETED
18. bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
20. 2-chloronaphthalene
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
22. parachlorometa cresol
24. 2-chlorophenol
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol
32. If2-dichloropropane
33. 1,3-dichloropropylene
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene
37. lf2-diphenylhydrazine
38. ethylbenzene
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
43. bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
45. methyl chloride
46. methyl bromide
47. bromoform
49. DELETED
50. DELETED
51. chlorodibromomethane
52. hexachlorobutadiene
53. hexachlorocyclopentadiene
54. isophorone
55. naphthalene
56. nitrobenzene
57. 2-nitrophenol
957
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VI
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
70.
72.
74.
75.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
86.
88.
89.
90.
94.
95.
96.
97.
105.
116.
129.
TABLE VI-2 (Continued)
TOXIC POLLUTANTS NEVER DETECTED
4-nitrophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
diethyl phthalate
benzo(
3,4-be
benzo(
anthra
benzo(gh
)anthracene
benzofluoranthene
o(k)fluoranthene
anthracene (a)
fluorene
. Jperylene
phenanthrene (a)
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
toluene
vinyl chloride
aldrin
dieldrin
4,4'-ODD
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
endosulfan sulfate
delta-BHC
asbestos
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
(a) Reported together
958
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - VII
SECTION VII
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
The preceding sections of this supplement discussed the
wastewater sources, flows, and characteristics of the wastewaters
from secondary aluminum plants. This section summarizes the
description of these wastewaters and indicates the level of
treatment which is currently practiced by in secondary aluminum
subcategory for each waste stream. Since gathering data through
data collection portfolios, the Agency has learned that 15 plants
have closed. Treatment methods used by these plants are still
presented in this section because they play an integral part in
BAT technology selection.
This section presents a summary of the control and treatment
technologies that are currently being applied to each of the
sources generating wastewater in this subcategory. As discussed
in Section V, wastewater associated with the secondary aluminum
subcategory is characterized by the presence of the toxic metal
pollutants and suspended solids. The raw (untreated) wastewater
data are presented for specific sources as well as combined waste
streams in Section V. Generally, these pollutants are present in
each of the waste streams at treatable concentrations, so these
waste streams are commonly combined for treatment to reduce the
concentrations of these pollutants. Construction of one
wastewater treatment system for combined treatment allows plants
to take advantage of economies of scale and, in some instances,
to combine streams of differing alkalinity to reduce treatment
chemical requirements. Three plants in this subcategory
currently have combined wastewater treatment systems, one has
lime precipitation and sedimentation, and no plants have lime
precipitation, sedimentation and filtration. As such, two
options have been selected for consideration for BAT, BDT, and
pretreatment in this subcategory, based on combined treatment of
these compatible waste streams.
TECHNICAL BASIS OP EXISTING REGULATIONS
As mentioned in Section III, EPA promulgated ^BPT effluent
limitations guidelines for the secondary aluminum smelting
subcategory on April 8, 1974. In order to put the treatment
practices currently in place and the technologies selected for
BAT options into the proper perspective, it is necessary to
describe the technologies selected by EPA for BPT, BAT, and
pretreatment standards. The BPT regulations established by EPA
limited the discharge of aluminum, copper, ammonia, chemical
oxygen demand, fluoride, and total suspended solids and required
the control of pH (refer to Section IX). The BAT regulation
required zero discharge based on in-process changes which
eliminated the need for demagging wet air pollution control and
dross washing. Zero discharge of metal cooling water was based
on 100 percent recycle. Pretreatment for existing sources
959
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT
VII
required oil skimming, pH adjustment, and ammonia air stripping.
SCRAP DRYING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Wet and dry control devices are used to control air emissions
from scrap drying operations. Three plants use scrubbers; 26
plants use baghouses. Two plants practice 100 percent recycle,
resulting in zero discharge. One plant discharges this
wastewater, which may contain suspended solids and aluminum.
Alkali addition and sedimentation can be used to remove suspended
solids and some metals. The one plant producing this wastewater
reported no treatment before discharging to a municipal sewer
system.
SCRAP SCREENING AND MILLING WASTEWATER
Two plants operate scrap screening and milling operations. Both
plants practice 100 percent reycle of this wastewater, which may
contain total suspended solids, toxic metals, and aluminum at
treatable concentrations. Alkali addition and sedimentation may
be used to reduce suspended solids and some metals.
DROSS WASHING WASTEWATER
Of the four plants that practice wet dross processing, two
practice 100 percent recycle and one attains zero discharge by
solar evaporation. Two plants recycle 67 percent of this
wastewater, which contains toxic metals, aluminum, ammonia, and
suspended solids.
The only currently practiced reduction of primary aluminum
residues * and secondary aluminum slags uses wet milling with a
countercurrent flow process to reduce or possibly eliminate salt
impregnation of runoff and ground water from discarded solid
waste. Such salt recovery installations are operating in England
and Switzerland, and the salts recovered assist in pciying for the
operation since they are reusable as fluxing salts in the
secondary aluminum subcategory. By using a countercurrent
milling and washing approach, two advantages are realized. The
final recovered metal is washed with clean water, providing a
low-salt feed to the melting furnaces. The wastewater, with the
insolubles removed, would be of a concentration suitable for
economical salt recovery by evaporation and crystallization.
Heat for evaporation could be supplied by the waste heat from the
furnaces. The process would have to contend with the ultimate
disposal of dirt, trace metals, and insoluble salts not removed
from the dross during milling. Sedimentation with recycle is the
treatment method currently used at the one discharging facility.
DEMAGGING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
During the smelting process it is often necessary to remove
magnesium from the molten aluminum. This process of demagging
can be performed with chlorine or aluminum fluoride. Most
960
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
facilities (25 of the 37 that demag) use chlorine to accomplish
the demagging. Aluminum fluoride is more expensive than^chlorine
and is not regarded as effective in removing magnesium. In
addition, the furnace refractory lining life is shorter when
aluminum fluoride is used since residues resulting from its use
in the demagging process are more corrosive than chlorine
generated residues.
However, demagging with chlorine complicates emissions control
because of the formation of hydrochloric acid in the smelting
emissions, due to the hydrolysis of aluminum and magnesium
chloride when wet scrubbing is used. Emissions from aluminum
fluoride demagging are usually controlled with dry processes.
Demagging scrubbing wastewater contains toxic
total suspended solids, and oil and grease.
metals, aluminum,
Of the 58 facilities surveyed, 20 use some form of wet process
control of demagging air emissions. Four of the 20 practice 100
percent recycle. Four of the facilities discharge (either
directly or to a POTW) with no prior treatment, and one facility
only settles the waste stream before discharging it. The six
facilities that treat this waste stream all neutralize the stream
(often with soda ash) before discharge. This neutralization step
is usually followed by a settling procedure since pH adjustment
to 5.0 to 7.0 will precipitate most of the aluminum and
magnesium.
DELACQUERING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Wet scrubbers are used to control air pollution from delacquering
operations at five plants. Two plants report using
sedimentation, one plant neutralizes with caustic, and one plant
uses lime and settle treatment. The fifth plant did not report
its treatment method. Three plants reported recycle rates of 97
percent and above.
Analytical data submitted to the Agency show delacquering wet air
pollution control wastewater to contain total phenolics and
treatable concentrations of zinc. The pH of the scrubber liquor
is approximately 6.5 and TSS concentrations are typically below
70 mg/1.
INGOT CONVEYER CASTING CONTACT COOLING
Ingot molds traveling on conveyers are sprayed with water to cool
and solidify the molten metal.
Oil and grease, used•to lubricate mold conveyer systems, is
washed from the equipment as the product is sprayed with water.
The quantity of ingot conveyer wastewater can be reduced _by
recycle or the reuse of the water in demagging wet air pollution
control.
Casting contact cooling water contains treatable concentrations
961
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
of aluminum, oil and grease, and suspended solids.
Of the 17 facilities known to have ingot conveyer casting, only
one plant uses any sort of treatment prior to discharge.
Wastewater treatment at this plant consists of flotation and grit
removal. Recycle is practiced at three plants.
SHOT CASTING CONTACT COOLING
The manufacture of deoxidizer shot involves allowing molten
aluminum to flow through a mesh screen and fall (forming a
spherical shot product) into a quenching tank. There are four
plants known to manufacture shot, two of them are zero discharge
through holding tanks and cooling towers. Chemical treatment of
the wastewater is not practiced at any of the four plants.
CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS CONSIDERED
Based on an examination of the wastewater sampling data, two
treatment technologies that effectively control the pollutants
found in secondary aluminum wastewaters were selected for
evaluation. These technology options are discussed below.
OPTION A
Option A for the secondary aluminum subcategory is analogous to
BPT treatment with a few modifications. Option A requires
control and treatment technologies to reduce the discharge of
wastewater volume and pollutant mass. Recycle of casting contact
cooling water is the control mechanism for flow reduction.
The_ Option A treatment model consists of ammonia stream
stripping pretreatment applied to the dross washing wastewater
stream, activated carbon adsorption pretreatment for total
phenolics, pretreatment of casting cooling water with oil
skimming, and lime and settle technology (chemical precipitation
and_ sedimentation) applied to the combined stream of steam
stripper effluent, demagging air pollution scrubbing wastewater,
delacquering air pollution scrubbing wastewater, and casting
contact cooling wastewater. Chemical precipitation is used to
remove metals by the addition of lime followed by gravity
sedimentation: Suspended solids are also removed from the
process. Option A varies slightly from the promulgated BPT
technology in that the existing BPT requires zero discharge of
metal cooling water. Data submitted to the Agency (see Section
IX) have demonstrated the need for a blowdown from ingot conveyer
casting when demagging scrubbers are not operated. Therefore,
Option A includes 90 percent recycle of cooling water when
demagging wet air pollution control is not practiced, and 100
percent reuse when demagging wet air pollution control is
practiced.
OPTION C
Option C for the secondary aluminum subcategory consists of
962
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
preliminary treatment with ammonia steam stripping, oil skimming,
activated carbon adsorption, in-process flow reduction, and the
chemical precipitation and sedimentation technology considered in
Option A plus multimedia filtration end-of-pipe technology.
Multimedia filtration is used to remove suspended solids,
including precipitates of metals, beyond the concentration
attainable by gravity sedimentation. The filter suggested is of
the mixed media type, although other forms of filters such as
rapid sand filters or pressure filters would perform
satisfactorily. The addition of filters also provides consistent
removal during periods in which there are rapid increases in
flows or loadings of pollutants to the treatment scheme.
CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS REJECTED
Prior to proposing mass limitations for the secondary aluminum
subcategory, the Agency evaluated reverse osmosis as an end-of-
pipe treatment technology. However, reverse osmosis was rejected
because it is not demonstrated in the nonferrous metals
manufacturing subcategory, nor is it clearly transferable. The
Option F treatment scheme is discussed below.
Option F for the secondary aluminum subcategory consisted of
preliminary treatment with ammonia steam stripping and oil
skimming in-process flow reduction, chemical precipitation,
sedimentation, and multimedia filtration technology considered in
Option C with the addition of reverse osmosis and evaporation
end-of-pipe technology. Option F is used for complete recycle of
the treated water by controlling the concentration of dissolved
solids. Multiple-effect evaporation is used to dewater the brines
rejected from reverse osmosis.
963
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VII
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
964
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
SECTION VIII
COSTS, ENERGY, AND NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS
This section describes the method used to develop the costs
associated with the control and treatment technologies discussed
in Section VII for wastewaters from secondary aluminum plants.
The energy requirements of the considered options, as well as
solid waste and air pollution aspects, are also discussed in this
section.
TREATMENT OPTIONS CONSIDERED
As discussed in Section VII, two control and treatment options
are considered for treating wastewater from the secondary
aluminum subcategory. Cost estimates, in the form of annual cost
curves, have been developed for each of these control and
treatment options. The control and treatment options are
presented schematically in Figures X-l and X-2 (pages 995 and
996) and summarized below.
OPTION A
Option A for the secondary aluminum subcategory requires control
and treatment technologies to reduce the discharge of wastewater
volume and pollutant mass. The recycle of ingot conveyer casting
contact cooling water through cooling towers or 100 percent reuse
in demagging scrubbers and the recycle of scrap drying and
delacquering scrubber water through holding tanks are the control
mechanisms for flow reduction. The Option A treatment technology
consists of ammonia steam stripping preliminary treatment applied
to the dross washing wastewater stream, and oil skimming
preliminary treatment applied to the casting contact cooling
water stream. Activated carbon adsorption preliminary treatment
is required for phenolics in delacquering scrubber liquor.
Preliminary treatment is followed by lime precipitation and
sedimentation applied to the combined stream of steam stripper
effluent, casting contact cooling water, delacquering scrubber
blowdown, and demagging scrubber water.
OPTION C
Option C for the secondary aluminum subcategory consists of all
the control and treatment technologies of Option A (in-process
flow reduction through holding tanks and cooling towers, ammonia
steam stripping and oil skimming preliminary treatment, and lime
precipitation and sedimentation end-of-pipe treatment) with the
addition of multimedia filtration to the end-of-pipe treatment
scheme.
965
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
Cost Methodology
A detailed discussion of the methodology used to develop the
compliance costs is presented in Section VIII of the General
Development Document. Plant-by-plant compliance costs have been
estimated for the secondary aluminum subcategory and are
presented in the administrative record supporting this
regulation. A comparison of the costs, developed for proposal and
the revised costs for the final regulation are presented in
Tables VIII-1 and VIII-2 (pages 970 and 971) for the direct and
indirect dischargers, respectively.
Each of the major assumptions used to develop compliance costs is
presented in Section VIII of the General Development Document.
Each subcategory contains a unique set of waste streams requiring
certain subcategory-specific assumptions to develop compliance
costs. Seven major assumptions are discussed briefly below.
(1) Annual costs (except for amortized investment) for lime
and settle treatment were incurred to comply with the
promulgated BPT regulation. These coiists were not
included in the current regulation if lime and settle
treatment is in place.
(2) Chemical precipitation costs were based on lime addi-
tion except for plants that currently utilize sodium
hydroxide or soda ash. In these cases, sodium
hydroxide addition was assumed for cost estimation.
(3) Activated carbon adsorption was included as a prelimi-
nary treatment step for delacquering scrubber blow-
down to control phenolics. Analytical data supplied to
the Agency indicate TSS concentrations were small enough
not to cause plugging, so pretreatment prior to enter-
ing the column was unnecessary.
(4) Ammonia steam stripping was included as a preliminary
treatment step for dross washing. Since the steam
requirements for such treatment may exceed the excess
steam generation capacity of a given plant, a steam
generation unit was included in the costs.
(5) The ingot conveyer casting contact cooling water was
routed to the demagging scrubber operation (if this
operation was present), and the costs of this routing
were included. When demagging wet air pollution control was not
practiced at the plant, compliance costs were based on
90 percent recycle through cooling towers.
(6) Recycle of air pollution control scrubber liquor was
based^ on recycle through holding tanks. Annual costs
associated with maintenance and sludge disposal were
included in the estimated compliance costs. Spent
activated carbon was assumed to be regenerated or dis-
posed of as a hazardous waste depending on volume
966
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
generated. If a plant currently recycles scrubber
liquor, capital costs of the recycle equipment (piping,
pumps, and holding tanks) were not included in the
compliance costs.
(7) Capital and annual costs for plants discharging in both
the secondary and primary aluminum subcategories were
based on a combined treatment system and were appor-
tioned to each subcategory on a flow-weighted basis.
NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS
A general discussion of the nonwater quality aspects of the
control and treatment options considered for the nonferrous
metals category is contained in Section VIII of the General
Development Document. Nonwater quality impacts specific to the
secondary aluminum subcategory including energy requirements,
solid waste, and air pollution are discussed below.
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
The methodology used for determining the energy requirements for
the various options is discussed in Section VIII of the General
Development Document. Implementation of Option A technology is
estimated to require 2.4 MW-hr/yr, while Option C would require
2.5 MW-hr/yr for the subcategory. At a typical secondary
aluminum plant, Option A represents a 2.3 percent increase in
overall electrical consumption, and Option C represents a 2.4
percent increase in overall electrical consumption. Therefore,
it is concluded that the technology options considered will have
a minimal impact on energy consumption in the secondary aluminum
subcategory.
SOLID WASTE
Sludges associated with the secondary aluminum subcategory will
necessarily contain toxic quantities (and concentrations) of
toxic metal pollutants. The Agency examined the solid wastes
that would be generated at secondary aluminum plants by lime,
settle, and filter treatment technologies and believes they are
not hazardous wastes under the Agency's regulations implementing
Section 3001 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. None
of these wastes is listed specifically as hazardous. Nor are
they likely to exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste. By
the addition of excess lime during treatment, similar sludges,
specifically toxic metal bearing sludges, generated in other
industrial categories such as the iron and steel and
electroplating categories, passed the Extraction Procedure (EP)
toxicity test. See 40 CFR 8261.24. Thus, the Agency believes
that the wastewater sludges will similarly not be EP toxic if the
recommended technology is applied.
Certain secondary aluminum plants also will generate spent
activated carbon which will be contaminated with phenols. Such
spent carbon is not listed as a hazardous waste and would be
967
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
unlikely to exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste.
Nevertheless, the Agency has included costs for disposing of
spent carbon as a hazardous waste, or (where volumes justify the
practice) of regenerating it. Spent carbon is not currently
subject to RCRA regulation when stored before recycling. See 40
CFR S261.6(a).
Although it is the Agency's view that solid wastes generated as a
result of these guidelines are not expected to be hazardous,
generators of these wastes must test the waste to determine if
the wastes meet any of the characteristics of hazardous waste
(see 40 CFR 262.11).
If these wastes should be identified or are listed as hazardous,
they will come within the scope of RCRA's "cradle to grave"
hazardous waste management program, requiring regulation from the
point of generation to point of final disposition. EPA's
generator standards require generators of hazardous nonferrous
metals manufacturing wastes to meet containerizatiori, labeling,
record keeping, and reporting requirements. If plants dispose of
hazardous wastes off-site, they are required to prepare a
manifest which tracks the movement of the wastes from the
generator's premises to a permitted off-site treatment, storage,
or disposal facility. See 40 CFR 262.20 (45 FR 33142, May 19,
1980, as amended at 45 FR 86973, December 31, 1980). The
transporter regulations require transporters of hazardous wastes
to comply with the manifest system to assure that the wastes are
delivered to a permitted facility. (See 40 CFR 263.20 45 FR
33151, May 19, 1980, as amended at 45 FR 86973, December 31,
1980). Finally, RCRA regulations establish standards for
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities
allowed to receive such wastes. (See 40 CFR Part 264, 46 FR
2802, January 12, 1981, 47 FR 32274, July 26, 1982).
Even if these wastes are not identified as hazardous, they still
must_ be disposed of in compliance with the Subtitle D open
dumping standards, implementing 4004 of RCRA. (See 44 FR 53438>
September 13, 1979). The Agency has calculated as part of the
costs for wastewater treatment the cost of hauling and disposing
of these wastes. The Agency estimates implementation of lime and
settle technology will generate approximately 11,000 tons per
year of wastewater treatment sludge. Treatment of delacquering
wet air pollution control will generate approximately 177 pounds
per year of spent carbon. Multimedia filtration technology will
not result in any significant amount of sludge over that
generated by lime precipitation.
AIR POLLUTION
There is no reason to believe that any substantial air pollution
problems will result from implementation of ammonia steam
stripping, oil skimming, chemical precipitation, sedimentation,
and multimedia filtration. These technologies transfer
pollutants to solid waste and do not involve air stripping or any
other physical process likely to transfer pollutants to air.
968
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
Water vapor containing some particulate matter will be released
in the drift from the cooling tower systems which are used as the
basis for flow reduction in the secondary aluminum subcategory.
However, the Agency does not consider this impact to be
significant.
969
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
Table VIII-1
COST OF COMPLIANCE FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
DIRECT DISCHARGERS*
Proposal
Option Capital Cost Annual Cost
A 2,000,000 1,800,000
C 2,200,000 1,900,000
Promulgation
Capital Cost Annual Cost
1,000,000 600,000
1,100,000 640,000
*1782 dollar
970
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
Table VIII-2
COST OF COMPLIANCE FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS*
Option
A
C
Capital Cost
3,000,000
3,300,000
Proposal
Annual Cost
2,000,000
2,200,000
Capital Cost
2,100,000
2,300,000
Promulgation
Annual Cost
1 ,300,000
1,400,000
*1982 dollars
971
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - VIII
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
972
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - IX
SECTION IX
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
EPA promulgated best practicable control technology currently
available (BPT) effluent limitations standards for the secondary
aluminum industry on April 8, 1974 as Subpart C of 40 CFR Part
421. Pollutants regulated by these standards are aluminum,
copper, chemical oxygen demand, ammonia, fluoride, TSS, and pH.
Unlike the current rulemaking, the BPT standards were developed
on the basis of two subdivisions of the secondary aluminum
process, not on the basis of segments that isolate individual
wastewater streams. BPT standards were established for magnesium
removal processes (demagging using either chlorine or aluminum
fluoride) and wet residue processes. The effluent limitations
established by the 1974 BPT standards also require zero discharge
of metal cooling water.
(a) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties, which
may be discharged by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart and which uses water for
metal cooling, after application of the best practi-
cable control technology currently available: There
shall be no discharge of process wastewater pollutants
to navigable waters.
(b) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties which may
be discharged by a point source subject to the provi-
sions of this subpart and which uses aluminum fluoride
in its magnesium removal process ("demagging process"),
after application of the best practicable control
technology currently available: There shall be no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navi-
gable waters.
(c) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties con-
trolled by this section, which may be discharged by
a point source subject to the provisions of this
subpart and which uses chlorine in its magnesium
removal process, after application of the best
practicable control technology currently available:
973
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - IX
Effluent Limitations
Effluent
Characteristic
Average of daily values for 30 consecutive
days shall not exceed
Metric units (kilograms per 1,000 kg
magnesium removed)
English units (Ibs per 1,000 Ibs
magnesium removed)
TSS 175
COD 6.5
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 9.0
(d) The following limitations establish the quantity or
quality of pollutants or pollutant properties which
may be discharged by a point source subject to the
provisions of this subpart and which processes resi-
dues by wet methods/ after application of the best
practical control technology currently available:
Effluent Limitations
Effluent
Characteristic
Average of daily values for 30 consecutive
days shall not exceed
TSS
Fluoride-
Ammonia (as N)
Aluminum
Copper
COD
pH
Metric units (kilograms per 1,000 kg
magnesium removed)
English units (Ibs per 1,000 Ibs
magnesium removed)
1.5
0.4
0.01
1.0
0.003
1.0
Within the range of 7.5 to 9.0
974.
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
SECTION X
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
The effluent limitations are based on the best control and
treatment technology used by a specific point source within the
industrial category or subcategory, or by another industry where
it is readily transferable. Emphasis is placed on additional
treatment techniques applied at the end of the treatment systems
currently used for BPT, as well as reduction of the amount of
wate? 'used and discharged, process control, and treatment
technology optimization.
The factors considered in assessing best available technology
economically achievable (BAT) include the age of equipment and
facilities involved, the process used, process changes, nonwater
quality environmental impacts (including energy requirements),
and the costs of application of such technology (Section 304(b)
<2)(B) of the Clean Water Act). At a minimum, BAT represents the
best available technology economically achievable at plants of
various ages, sizes, processes, or other characteristics J- Where
the Agency has found the existing performance to be uniformly
inadequate! BAT may be transferred from a different subcategory
or category. BAT may include feasible process changes or
internal controls, even when not in common industry practice.
The
required assessment of BAT considers costs, but does not
re^ balancing of costs against effluent reduction benefits
(see Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 590 F.2d. 1011 (D.C. Cir . 1978)).
However! in assessing"" the" proposed BAT, the Agency has given
substantial weight to the economic achievability of the
technology.
On April 8, 1974, EPA promulgated technology-based BAT effluent
limitations guidelines for the secondary aluminum subcategory.
BAT required zero discharge based on 100 percent recycle of
casting contact cooling water and in-process changes which
eliminate demagging wet air pollution control and residue filling
(dross washing). Elimination of demagging scrubbers was based on
the installation of the Durham process, ALCOA process, and the
Teller process, which significantly reduces fuming during
demaqqing and the need for wet scrubbers. The Agency believed
tha? each of these processes was sufficiently well demonstrated
to be installed and become operational by 1984. Consequently,
there was no justification for a discharge allowance associated
with this waste stream. However, new information shows that the
technologies are not sufficiently demonstrated nor are they
applicable to plants on a nationwide basis.
A similar situation exists for dross washing. Zero discharge for
this operation was based on demonstrated dry milling in the
subcategory. However, the extensive retrofits of installing dry
milling have prompted EPA to reevaluate the existing BAT zero
975
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
discharge requirement. For these reasons, the existing BAT is
modified to allow a discharge for demagging wet air pollution
control and dross washing.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO BAT
In pursuing this second round of effluent regulations, EPA
reviewed a wide range of technology options and evaluated the
available possibilities to ensure that the most effective and
beneficial technologies were used as the basis of BAT. To
accomplish this, the Agency elected to examine two technology
alternatives which could be applied to the secondary aluminum
subcategory as BAT options.
In summary, the treatment technologies considered for
presented below:
Option A (Figure X-l, page 995) is based on
BAT are
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of dross washing wastewater with
ammonia steam stripping
o Preliminary treatment of delacquering wet air pollution
control wastewater with activated carbon adsorption
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from scrap drying and
delacquering wet air pollution control
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
Option C (Figure X-2, page 996) is based on
Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
Preliminary treatment of dross washing wastewater with
ammonia steam stripping
Preliminary treatment of delacquering wet air pollution
control wastewater with activated carbon adsorption
In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from scrap drying and
delacquering wet air pollution control
Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
Multimedia filtration
o
o
o
o
The two options for BAT are discussed in greater detail below.
The first option considered is analogous to the BPT treatment and
control technology.
OPTION A
Option A requires control and treatment techologies to reduce the
discharge of wastewater volume and pollutant mass. These
measures include in-process changes, resulting in the elimination
of some wastewater streams and the concentration of pollutants
in other effluents. As explained in Section VII of the General
Development Document, treatment of a more concentrated effluent
976
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
allows achievement of a greater net pollutant removal and
introduces the possible economic benefits associated with
treating a lower volume of wastewater. Methods used in Option A
to reduce process wastewater generation or discharge rates
include the following:
Recycle of Casting Contact Cooling Water
The function of casting contact cooling water is to quickly
remove heat from the newly formed ingot or bar. Therefore, the
principal requirements of the water are that it be cool and not
contain dissolved solids at a concentration that would cause
water marks or other surface imperfections. There is sufficient
category experience with casting contact cooling wastewaters to
assure the success of this technology using cooling towers or
heat exchangers (refer to Section VII of the General Development
Document). A blowdown or periodic cleaning is likely to be
needed to prevent a build-up of dissolved and suspended solids.
(EPA has determined that a blowdown of 10 percent of the water
applied in a process is adequate.)
Reuse of casting contact cooling water is also an effective means
of reducing flow. One plant in the secondary aluminum
subcategory has demonstrated that ingot conveyer casting contact
cooling water can be reused as demagging scrubber liquor make-up.
EPA knows of no engineering reason why this water is unsuitable
for make-up water to the demagging scrubber.
Recycle of Water Used in Wet Air Pollution Control
There are three wastewater sources associated with wet air
pollution control which are regulated under these effluent
limitations:
1. Delacquering,
2. Scrap drying, and
3. Demagging.
Table X-l (page 987)presents the number of plants reporting
wastewater use with these sources, the number of plants
practicing recycle of scrubber liquor, and the range of recycle
values being used.
The Option A treatment model includes in-process flow reduction,
steam stripping and activated carbon adsorption preliminary
treatment of wastewaters containing ammonia and phenolics at
treatable concentrations and oil skimming, where required.
Preliminary treatment is followed by chemical precipitation and
sedimentation (see Figure X-l, page 987). Although oil and
grease is a conventional pollutant limited under best practicable
technology (BPT), oil skimming is needed for BAT to ensure proper
metals removal. Oil and grease interferes with the chemical
addition and mixing required for chemical precipitation
treatment. Chemical precipitation is used to remove metals by
the addition of lime followed by gravity sedimentation.
977
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
Suspended solids are also removed from the process.
OPTION C
Option C for the secondary aluminum subcategory builds upon the
Option A control and treatment technology of in-process flow
reduction, oil skimming (where required), ammonia steam
stripping, activated carbon adsorption, chemical precipitation,
and sedimentation by adding multimedia filtration technology at
the end of the Option A treatment scheme (see Figure X-2, page
988). Multimedia filtration is used to remove suspended solids,
including precipitates of metals, beyond the concentration
attainable by gravity sedimentation. The filter suggested is of
the gravity, mixed media type, although other forms of filters,
such as rapid sand filters or pressure filters, would perform
satisfactorily.
INDUSTRY COST AND POLLUTANT REMOVAL ESTIMATES
As a means of evaluating each technology option, EPA developed
estimates of the pollutant removal estimates and the compliance
costs associated with each option. The methodologies are
described below.
POLLUTANT REMOVAL ESTIMATES
A complete description of the methodology used to calculate the
estimated pollutant reduction achieved by the application of the
various treatment options is presented in Section X of the
General Development Document. The pollutant removal estimates
have been revised from proposal based on comments and new data.
However, the methodology for calculating pollutant removals has
not changed. The data used for estimating pollutant removals are
the same as those used to revise the compliance costs.
Sampling data collected during the field sampling program were
used to characterize the major waste streams considered for
regulation. At each sampled facility, the sampling data were
production normalized for each unit operation (i.e., mass of
pollutant generated per mass of product manufactured). This
value, referred to as the raw waste, was used to estimate the
mass of toxic pollutants generated within the secondary aluminum
subcategory. By multiplying the total subcategory production for
a unit operation by the corresponding raw waste value, the mass
of pollutant generated for that unit operation was estimated.
The volume of wastewater discharged after the application of each
treatment option was estimated for each operation at each plant
by comparing the actual discharge to the regulatory flow. The
smaller of the two values was selected and summed with other
plant flows. The mass of pollutant discharged was then estimated
by multiplying the achievable concentration values attainable by
the option (mg/1) by the estimated volume of process wastewater
discharged by the subcategory. The mass of pollutant removed is
simply the difference between the estimated mass of pollutant
978
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
generated within the subcategory and the mass of pollutant
discharged after application of the treatment option. Pollutant
removal estimates for the secondary aluminum direct dischargers
are presented in Table X-2 (page 988).
COMPLIANCE COSTS
Compliance costs presented at proposal were estimated using cost
curves, which related the total costs associated with
installation and operation of wastewater treatment technologies
to plant process wastewater discharge. EPA applied these curves
on a per plant basis, a plant's costs (both capital, and
operating and maintenance) being determined by what treatment it
has in-place and by its individual process wastewater discharge
(from dcp). The final step was to annualize the capital costs,
and to sum the annualized capital costs, and the operating and
maintenance costs, yielding the cost of compliance for the
subcategory.
Since proposal, the cost estimation methodology has been changed
as discussed in Section VIII of this supplement. A design model
and plant-specific information were used to size a wastewater
treatment system for each discharging facility. After completion
of the design, capital and annual costs were estimated for each
unit of the wastewater treatment system. Capital costs rely on
vendor quotes, while annual costs were developed from the
literature. The revised compliance costs for direct dischargers
are presented in Table VIII-1 (page 970).
BAT OPTION SELECTION
EPA has selected Option C as the basis of BAT in this
subcategory. The BAT treatment scheme proposed consists of flow
reduction, oil skimming (where required), preliminary treatment
of ammonia steam stripping and activated carbon, lime
precipitation, sedimentation, and filtration for control of toxic
metals. The selected option increases the removal of toxic
pollutants from raw wastewater by approximately 9,600 kg/yr, 530
^9/yr of phenolics, and nonconventional pollutants by
approximately 90,800 kg/yr. This option also removes
approximately 8.2 kg/yr of toxic pollutants and 36 kg/yr of
nonconventional pollutants over the estimated BPT discharge. The
estimated capital cost of proposed BAT is $1.1 million (1982
dollars) and the annual cost is $0.64 million (1982 dollars).
Ammonia steam stripping is demonstrated in the nonferrous metals
manufacturing category by two plants in the primary columbium-
tantalum subcategory, and three plants in the primary tungsten
subcategory. Activated carbon is not demonstrated in the
subcategory, but it is a classic means of removing phenols from
wastewater.
Activated carbon is demonstrated in the iron and steel
(cokemaking) category as a phenols removal technology. The
treatment performance used for activated carbon to develop mass
979
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
limitations for total phenolics is based on the attainable
quantification limit of 0.010 mg/1. EPA believes this value is
achievable when adequate quantities of carbon are used.
At the source requirements (i.e., requiring that compliance be
demonstrated and monitoring conducted prior to commingling with
process or nonprocess waters) are promulgated for phenol in
delacquering wet air pollution control wastewaters. This is
because there is a distinct possibility that plants may be able
to meet the limits for toxic organics through dilution unless the
compliance point is at-the-source, rather than end-of-pipe. This
is because the organic pollutants are present in wastewater from
only certain unit operations, and are present at concentrations
that could be reduced below the analytical detection levels after
commingling with other process wastewaters. The plants known to
currently operate delacquering scrubbers are principally primary
aluminum and aluminum forming plants, which generate much larger
volumes of process wastewater than the delacquering operation.
Therefore, at-the-source requirements are promulgated to prevent
dilution.
Carbon adsorption may require preliminary treatment to remove
suspended solids and oil and grease. Suspended solids
concentrations in the influent should be reduced to minimize
backwash requirements. Four sample analyses of delacquering
scrubber liquor submitted to the Agency showed suspended solids
concentrations of 22, 9.0, 17.2, and 60.8 mg/1.
These concentrations are essentially those achievable with lime
and settle treatment (19.5 mg/1 ten day average). Therefore, it
appears pretreatment for TSS is not required prior to activated
carbon adsorption pretreatment. Oil and grease data were not
submitted.
Since filtration removes additional toxic and nonconventional
pollutants, and is economically achievable, it is included as
part of proposed BAT. Filtration also adds to the treatment
system reliability by making it less susceptible to operator
error and to sudden changes in raw wastewater flows and
concentrations. Further, the selection of filters is an
appropriate balance to the elimination of previously promulgated
no discharge BAT requirements for ingot conveyer casting and
dross washing. Providing these two allowances is only justified
when the Agency can assume that most of the pollutants contained
in these discharges will be removed by treatment.
For the Secondary Aluminum Subcategory, EPA promulgated final
amendments on July 7, 1987 (52 FR 25552) to the regulation
concerning two topics, which are described here.
EPA has amended the flow basis for two subdivisions based on a
re-evaluation of data available in the Administrative Record for
this rulemaking. These two subdivisions are ingot conveyer
casting and demagging wet air pollution control.
980
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE RATES
Specific wastewater streams associated with the secondary
aluminum subcategory are generated from scrap drying air
pollution control, scrap screening arid milling, dross washing,
demagging wet air pollution control, delacguering wet air
pollution control, direct chill casting contact cooling, ingot
conveyer casting contact cooling, shot casting contact cooling,
and stationary casting contact cooling.
Table X-3 (page 989) lists the production normalized wastewater
discharge rates allocated at BAT for these wastewater streams.
The values represent the best existing practices of the industry,
as determined from the analysis of dcps. Individual discharge
rates from the plants surveyed are presented in Section V of this
supplement for each wastewater stream.
SCRAP DRYING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL WASTEWATER
No BAT wastewater discharge allowance was proposed for scrap
drying air pollution control. Only three of 29 plants use
scrubbers to control emissions; the remaining 26 plants use
baghouses. Two of the three plants with scrubbers achieve zero
discharge by 100 percent recycle. One plant is a once-through
discharger with a rate of 1,057 1/kkg (253.5 gal/ton) of aluminum
scrap produced. This plant also reported that it planned to
discontinue the use of the scrubber. Wastewater rates are
presented in Section V (Table V-l, page 912). The BAT allowance
is zero discharge of wastewater pollutants based on the
attainment of no discharge by 28 of 29 plants, including two of
the three operations using wet air pollution control. No data or
information were submitted to the Agency demonstrating zero
discharge as proposed is not attainable.
SCRAP SCREENING AND MILLING
No BAT wastewater discharge rate was proposed for scrap screening
and milling. Both plants reporting this wastewater are zero
dischargers because of 100 percent recycle or reuse. Therefore,
the Agency believes that zero discharge is possible for all
secondary aluminum scrap screening and milling processes. No
data or information were submitted to the Agency demonstrating a
discharge allowance is needed for scrap screening and milling.
DROSS WASHING WASTEWATER
The proposed BAT wastewater discharge rate was 10,868 1/kkg
(2,607 gal/ton) of dross processed. Four plants reported
producing this wastewater. Two plants discharge from the process
after 67 percent recycle. One plant completely evaporates this
wastewater. The BAT rate is the discharge from plant 4104. Two
plants recycle 100 percent of the wastewater. No data or
information were submitted to the Agency demonstrating that the
proposed discharge allowance was not appropriate; therefore, the
promulgated discharge rate is equal to that proposed. EPA
981
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
considers the zero discharge practices for this waste stream to
be site-specific and not applicable on a nationwide basis.
Wastewater rates for dross washing are presented in Section V
(Table V-3r page 914).
DEMAGGING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
The proposed BAT wastewater discharge rate was 800 1/kkg (192
gal/ton) of aluminum demagged. This rate is allocated only for
plants^ practicing wet air pollution control of demagging
operations. Of the 37 demagging operations reported, 20 use
water for emissions control. Nine plants using water reported no
wastewater discharge, achieved by recycle or reuse. Eight of the
nine plants completely recycle the wastewater, while one plant
did not report a recycle percentage. Another plant practices a
partial recycle of 40 percent. Nine plants were thought to have
once-through operations, eight of these discharging 223.3 to
1,956.24 1/kkg (54.5 to 469.2 gal/ton). No flow data were
provided by one of the discharging plants. A distribution of
wastewater rates considered is presented in the proposed
secondary aluminum supplemental development document. Industry
comments prior to proposal asserted that the use of recirculation
systems using treated water reduces demagging scrubber
efficiency. Therefore, recycle of scrubber liquor was not used
as a basis for the BAT discharge rate for demagging wet air
pollution control. The BAT discharge rate was based on the
average of the nine discharging plants.
Commenters on the proposed mass limitations questioned the
reported 100 percent recycle of demagging scrubber liquor in the
proposed supplemental development document. In addition,
commenters questioned the calculation of the demagging scrubber
discharge allowance. Based on these comments, the Agency
re-evaluated the discharge rate for demagging scrubber liquor.
Pour plants were identified and confirmed to achieve zero
discharge of demagging scrubber liquor. Zero discharge at these
plants is site-specific and not appropriate on a national basis.
A blowdown from demagging scrubbers is required to control
chloride concentrations in the scrubber liquor. Those plants
reporting zero discharge recycle from ponds with large
capacitites and they may also be losing water through
percolation.
The most predominant scrubber used for demagging is the Intecbell
scrubber. Three plants reported using venturi scrubbers and one
plant uses a packed tower. Water use between these three
scrubbers is not significantly different; therefore, all data
were considered together in selecting the BAT discharge rate. The
promulgated BAT discharge rate was 697 1/kkg of aluminum
demagged. This rate represented the average water use at those
plants using less than 6,885 1/kkg. Two plants were above this
rate, and they were not considered because they use an
inordinately large amount of scrubber liquor when compared to the
other plants.
982
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
The Agency has amended the flow rate for demagging wet air
pollution control upon which are based the BAT limitations and
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS for the demagging wet air pollution control
subdivision. Secondary aluminum petitioners claimed that the
control flow allowance of 697 1/kkg was incorrect due to a data
interpretation error regarding the number of scrubbers associated
with the water usage for one facility. The Agency agrees that it
made an error in this calculation and has adjusted the water
usage for this plant upwards. As a result, the final regulatory
flow allowance is 771 1/kkg.
DELACQUERING WET AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
A BAT discharge rate has been added to account for wastewater
associated with wet scrubbing of air pollution generated through
the recycle of aluminum cans. Five plants reported the use of
this scrubber as shown in Table V-7. The BAT discharge rate is
based on the average reported discharge for plants 505, 313, and
4101. Each of these plants practices recycle of 97 percent or
greater and uses a venturi scrubber. The BAT discharge rate is
80 1/kkg. Plant 340 was not included in the average because it
uses a rotoclone scrubber. Water discharged for plant 340 with
no recycle compares well with the plants practicing recycle.
DIRECT CHILL CASTING CONTACT COOLING WATER
The BAT wastewater discharge rate for direct chill casting
contact cooling water was proposed as 1,999 1/kkg (479.4 gal/ton)
of aluminum cast. Direct chill casting practices and the
wastewater discharge from this operation are similar in aluminum
forming, primary aluminum reduction and secondary aluminum
plants. The information available does not indicate _ any
significant difference in the amount of water required for direct
chill casting in primary aluminum, secondary aluminum and
aluminum forming plants. For this reason, available wastewater
data from aluminum forming and primary aluminum plants were
considered together in establishing BPT effluent limitations. No
data for direct chill casting water use were provided by
secondary aluminum plants.
In all, 26 primary aluminum plants and 61 aluminum forming plants
have direct chill casting operations. Recycle of the contact
cooling water is practiced at 30 aluminum forming and eight
primary aluminum plants. Of these, eight plants indicated that
total recycle of this stream made it possible to avoid any
discharge of wastewater; however, the majority of the plants
discharge a bleed stream. The discharge flow for this operation
was based on the average of those plants practicing 50 percent
recycle or greater.
The Agency was in error in this determination (as pointed out by
a commenter from the aluminum industry) as it considers 90
percent recycle or greater BAT technology. (See 48 FR at 7052,
Feb. 17, 1983). Therefore, the BAT discharge allowance has been
recalculated based on those plants (both primary aluminum and
983
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
aluminum forming) that have recycle rates between 90 and 100
percent. The revised BAT discharge rate is thus 1,329 1/kkg (319
gal/ton) of aluminum cast. Although there are no reported
secondary aluminum plants with direct chill casting, the Agency
will promulgate mass limitations for this segment. It is
possible new or existing sources may install direct chill casting
in the future.
INGOT CONVEYER CASTING CONTACT COOLING WATER
In the proposed guidelines for this subcategory, ingot conveyer
casting was considered stationary casting because of the
promulgated zero discharge for metal cooling in the existing BPT
and ^BAT effluent limitations. However, information and data
submitted to the Agency indicate zero discharge of ingot conveyer
casting is not demonstrated except when the discharge is recycled
to a demagging air pollution scrubber. Therefore, a discharge
allowance was provided in the promulgated regulation for ingot
conveyer casting. The discharge rate, based on 90 percent
recycle, was 43 1/kkg (10.3 gal/ton) of aluminum cast. This rate
was based on the average water usage with the exception of plants
309 and 326. Data from these two plants were not used because of
excessive water use as determined through comparison with the
other plants. Only those plants not operating demagging scrubbers
are provided the ingot conveyer casting allowance. One hundred
percent reuse of casting water or demagging scrubber make-up
water is demonstrated at one secondary aluminum facility.
The Agency has amended the flow rate upon which the BAT
limitations and NSPS, PSES, and PSNS for ingot conveyer casting
are based. Petitioners claimed that the regulatory flow
allowance of 43 1/kkg was incorrect due to data interpretation
mistakes and because the Agency unnecessarily excluded the water
usage of plants that reported achieving zero discharge. EPA has
promulgated an amended flow allowance of 67 1/kkg, which is based
on corrected water usage data from five plants (these data
involving water usage and operating schedules which were
interpreted incorrectly by the Agency in constructing the flow
allowance in the final rule) and includes three plants' water
usage that reported achieving zero discharge. This is consistent
with EPA's methodology employed throughout the nonferrous metals
rulemaking, where the Agency typically used water usage at zero
discharge plants in determining what degrees of flow reduction
represent BAT, PSES, NSPS, and PSNS.
STATIONARY CASTING CONTACT COOLING WATER
No BAT wastewater discharge allowance is provided for stationary
casting cooling. In the stationary casting method, molten
aluminum is poured into cast iron molds and then generally
allowed to air cool. The Agency is aware of the use of spray
quenching to quickly cool the surface of the molten aluminum
once it is cast into the molds; however, this water evaporates on
contact with the molten aluminum. As such, the Agency believes
that there is no basis for a pollutant discharge allowance.
984
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
SHOT CASTING CONTACT COOLING WATER
No BAT wastewater discharge allowance; is provided for shot
casting contact cooling. Through information requests the Agency
has found zero discharge of shot casting cooling water
demonstrated at two secondary aluminum facilities (of the four
reporting the practice). Both of these plants reported no
product quality constraints due to 100 percent recycle. Based on
the demonstrated zero discharge practices for shot casting, the
promulgated flow allowance requires zero discharge of process
wastewater pollutants.
REGULATED POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
In implementing the terms of the Clean Water Act Amendments of
1977, the Agency placed particular emphasis on the toxic
pollutants. The raw wastewater concentrations from individual
operations and the subcategory as a whole were examined to select
certain pollutants and pollutant parameters for consideration for
limitation. This examination and evaluation, presented in
Section VI, concluded that 10 pollutants and pollutant
parameters are present in secondary aluminum wastewaters at
concentrations that can be effectively reduced by identified
treatment technologies.
However, the cost associated with analysis for toxic metal
pollutants has prompted EPA to develop an alternative method for
regulating and monitoring toxic pollutant discharges from the
nonferrous metals manufacturing category. Rather than developing
specific effluent mass limitations and standards for each of the
toxic metals found in treatable concentrations in the raw
wastewaters from a given subcategory, the Agency is promulgating
effluent mass limitations only for those pollutants generated in
the greatest quantities as shown by the pollutant removal
estimate analysis. The pollutants selected for specific
limitation are listed below:
122. lead
128. zinc
total phenols (4-AAP)
aluminum
ammonia
By establishing limitations and standards for certain toxic metal
pollutants, dischargers will attain the same degree of control
over toxic metal pollutants as they would have been required to
achieve had all the toxic metal pollutants been directly limited.
This approach is justified technically since the treatable
concentrations used for lime precipitation and sedimentation
technology are based on optimized treatment for concomitant
multiple metals removal. Thus, even though metals have somewhat
different theoretical solubilities, they will be removed at very
nearly the same rate in a lime precipitation and sedimentation
985
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
treatment system operated for multiple metals removal.
Filtration as part of the technology basis is likewise justified
because this technology removes metals non-preferentially. Thus,
cadmium is excluded from limitation on the basis that it is
effectively controlled by the limitations developed for lead and
zinc.
The toxic metal pollutants selected for specific limitation in
the secondary aluminum subcategory to control the discharges of
toxic metal pollutants are lead and zinc. Ammonia and total
phenolics are also selected for limitation since the methods used
to control lead and zinc are not effective in the control of
ammonia and total phenolics.
In Section VI, phenol was selected for further consideration for
limitation. However, data submitted to the Agency are primarily
in the form of total phenolics. Since phenol is contained in the
total phenolics analysis, limitation of total phenols will also
control the toxic pollutant phenol.
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The treatable concentrations achievable by application of the BAT
treatment are discussed in Section VII of this supplement. The
treatable concentrations (both one day maximum and monthly
average values) are multiplied by the BAT normalized discharge
flows summarized in Table X-3 (page 989) to calculate the mass of
pollutants allowed to be discharged per mass of product. The
results of these calculations in milligrams of pollutant per
kilogram of product represent the BAT effluent limitations and
are presented in Table X-4 (page 990) for each waste stream.
986
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
Table X-1
CURRENT RECYCLE PRACTICES WITHIN THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM
SUBCATEGORY
Waste Stream
Delacquering Wet Air
Pollution Control
Scrap Drying Wet Air
Pollution Control
Demagging Wet Air
Pollution Control
Ingot Conveyor Casting
Shot Casting
Number of
Plants With
Wastewater
20
17
4
Number of
Plants
Practicing
Recycle
2
2
Range of
Recycle
Values (%)
97 - 98
100
40 - 100
50 - 96
100
987
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
CM
I
X
0)
CO
EH
CO
Pi
C4
o
«
o
CO
t-l
Q
H
O
w
P4
M
Q
S
O
!3
M
2
O
{«
Q
SI
O
CJ
w
CO
(X
g
CO
w
H
n
H
CO
w
hJ
^
o
s
Cd
«
CJ Q--X
z > >,
oo~-
•-* E bO
£•* M ,*•?
D-i OS ^— •*
o
CJQ^
Z O !»>
O OS —
*-* < 00
E-i Z Ji
OL, CJ'-'
O CO
(— 1
o
-3' Slj1
Z •> !>i
*-< S. 00
H S J?
Cu tti ^^
o
"*" S'll'
zo >,
O Ctf ""^
H-l < 00
&! 5 ^
O CO
t— I
o
rf M lu"
H W >N
0 <^-
HS DO
§~
E-
O
Cu
vO cOvO
r^. vOco
ON ON ON
•<^COvO
CO
-* 30O
CM en»-
i—
CM ^-CO
sss
O^COvO
CO
CO CO CO
co in in
o <— vo
o oo
CO
E *D O
OCOC
^-1 (U ^-4
E JtSJ
cd
0
m
CO
m
ON
CM
IN..
r—
CO
R
m
ON
-a-
in
CM
f^
O
VO
ON"
METALS
o
X
8
1
m
m
CM
m
in
o
in
in
CM
m
in
o
o
CM
m
|
Phenolics (
m
m
as
CM
o
ON
m
^
r^
en
in
tM
0
o\
in
r~.
o
•—
CO
VO
en
0
uminum
r-l
r~
O
CM
CO
0
ty\
o
IN
r^
GO
r-
o
o\
o
00
o
»—
f^
CM
c\
eo
o
ON
IONALS
NONCONVENT
^
s
H
for^-
CM CO
CM ,_
CO CM
ON »—
*~
CO ON
*tf ON
CM r^
—
CO CO
H W
J-t
f— 1
•*-!
o
*-
O
vO
CO
O
CM
r^
^
o
vO
O
ON
O
ON
ON
O
CM
CO
m
in
o
*—
r»-
vO
ON
O
CM
IONALS
TAL CONVENT
o
H
CO
CO
vO
o
CO
ON
CO O
ON O
vO O
O
ON
-<<
< HZ
H ZO
Kl UHJ
S >EH
Z 5=
U OM
M U>
x zz
Sis
KJ JJ
< «
H H H
O O O
t- HH
lij
|
CO
r^
c
o
JJ
c
01
c
0
CJ
CO
£
"^
0)
c
0
JJ
c
01
c
o
c
o
z
•-4
JJ
o
H
•(-
n
CO
JJ
01
•_!
1
^^
CO
JJ
o
H
II
LUTANTS
j
o
&4
1
-
C
1-1
JJ
CJ
"O
0)
§
b.
CO
CO
1>
^
U
O.
1
c
.
c
o
^
o.
1-,
o
CO
T3
c
o
•P
CO
u
•o
01
CO
-H
ej
< c
o
*•<-(
00 JJ
C 10 C
"S.C — 1
—i E co
JJ-O JJ
CO <1> ^^
CO -J
OJ II co
JJ CO -. [
CO 13
i: 01
CO O E
C JJ JJ
§CO ^1
4J 3
B"LS
-03
00 0^ ,— I
C I.J CX
"E°' -
E oj <:
•5 6
CO J O
•rj
•^ c: ex
O M O
It U
OPTION A ^
OPTION C •
988
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
O
O
PQ
CD
CO
5-i
QJ
QJ
g
C 5-i
o cd
•r-l 0-1
o oo
2 C
T3 •!-!
O N
}-l -r-l
PM r-l
cd
g
O
&
13
CU
•r-l
cx
cd
o
co
S
C
•r-l
I
cd
1 1 i
o
00
v^
cx
Cd TD
5-4 CU
CJ r-l
co r-l
•r-l
B B
c-o
•r-l C
l~"l *O
cd cu
C
U-l CU
O QJ
5-i
00 O
44 co
'O
QJ
n
CO
cd
CO
CO
o
V-4
M-l
O
00
44
13
CU
00
00
cd
S
cu
*o
§
c
•H
s
r-l
cd
<4-4
O
00
44
T3
CU
5-1
CU
cr
O
cd
r-l
CD
T3
1
C
•H
1
r-l
cd
m
o
00
44
4-J
co
CO
O
1 .
C
•H
§
f— 1'
ctf
14-1
O
00
•£&
4j
co
cd
o
1
C
•^1
§
r— \
CO
U-l
o
00
J
4-)
CO
cO
O
I
C
•r-l
I
r-l
cd
M-l
O
00
4-J
CO
cd
o
§
C
•r-l
I
r-l
cd
14-1
O
oo
4-)
CO
cd
o
I
C
•r-l
I
r-l
cd
14-1
O
00
OS
en
i
X
cu
r-l
CO
E-i
<3
Q
O
CJ
w
CO
w
H
O^
o
|JL|
CO
w
H
G
O
CU 4-> --
N Cd r— 1
•r-l Pi CO
r-l 00
cd cu
B M)
5-4 5-i
O cd
ZZ Jd
o
E-i co oo
C 00
0 C
O -H
r-l
4-) O
0 0
00 CJ
c
r-l
•r-)
5-1 4-)
•r-4 O
5-i
4-1 O-l
QJ
£3 4-)
O
00 !S
C
•r-l CO
00-r-l
Casting Contact
i Chlorine Deraag-
Pollution Contro
On-Site)
1-1
5-1 QJ 5-4 T)
O J3 -r-l QJ
>^!S < 0
QJ ^ -H
> 4J 4->
C OO QJ O
0 C ^ cO
O -r-l 5-1
t— 1 OOO-i
4-1 O C
O O -r-l CO
00 CJ 00-H
c
r-l
zing Contact
•4—*
CO
cd
CJ
5-1 00
cd c
C -r-l
O r-l
•r-l O
4-1 O
cd O
CO
jntact Cooling
V»f
CJ
Casting
0
CO
989
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-4
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Cadmium 0.000 0.000
*Lead 0.000 0.000
*Zinc 0.000 0.000
*Aluminum 0.000 0.000
*Ammonia (as N) 0.000 0.000
*Regulated Pollutant
Scrap Screening and Milling
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap screened and milled
English Units-lbs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap screened and milled
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
990
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-4 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Dross Washing
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum dross washed
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum dross washed
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
2.174
3.043
11.090
66.400
1449.000
0.869
1.413
4.565
29.450
636.900
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap demagged
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap demagged
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.139
0.195
0.711
4.250
92.910
0.056
0.091
0.293
1.889
40.850
991
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-4 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
_Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Total Phenols(4-AAP)
*Regulated Pollutant
**At the source
**
0.016
0.022
0.082
0.489
10.670
0.001
0.006
0.010
0.034
0.217
4.688
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.266
0.372
1.356
8.120
177.200
0.106
0.173
0.558
3.602
77.880
992
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
TABLE X-4 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine Demagging
—Air Pollution Control is Not Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.009
0.012
0.044
0.263
5.732
0.003
0.006
0.018
0.117
2.520
Ingot Conveyor Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine Demagging
—^~ Air Pollution Control is Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
.1.1^ y./ JL W^/^. .i. ^JT -""-* *. — , -j—
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum screened & milled
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum screened & milled
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
993
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - X
TABLE X-4 (Continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Stationary Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
994
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
4J U -H
rc tn AJ
| «g
tn -H G.
3 O
O O
M W
H
K
QJ
>-l
S
ao
? -H
1
TO
>
4-t
ty
C ^
O u
i C.
1J U
CO O
U K
•a
1
Q
o o
PQ
W JD
S CO
H
PC g
o S
CO Z
W
»S
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - X
MEM
C OJ C
•H C i-l
jj OC
tn o) M
01
""S £
§ s§r
"£5
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The basis for new source performance standards (NSPS) under
Section 306 of the Act is the best available demonstrated
technology (BDT). New plants have the opportunity to design the
best and most efficient production processes and wastewater
treatment technologies, without facing the added costs and
restrictions encountered in retrofitting an existing plant.
Therefore, Congress directed EPA to consider the best
demonstrated process changes, in-plant controls, and end-of-pipe
treatment technologies which reduce pollution to the maximum
extent feasible.
This section describes the control technology for treatment of
wastewater from new sources and presents mass discharge
limitations of regulatory pollutants for NSPS in the secondary
aluminum subcategory, based on the described control technology.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO BDT
All of the treatment technology options applicable to a new
source were previously considered for the BAT options. For this
reason, two options were considered for BDT, all identical to the
BAT options discussed in Section X. The treatment technologies
used for the two BDT options are:
OPTION A
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of delacquering wet air pollution
control wastewater with activated carbon adsorption
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from scrap drying and
delacquering wet air pollution control
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
OPTION C
o
o
o
o
Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
Preliminary treatment of delacquering wet air pollution
control wastewater with activated carbon adsorption
In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from scrap drying and
delacquering wet air pollution control
Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
Multimedia filtration
997
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
Partial or complete reuse and recycle of wastewater is an
essential part of each option. Reuse and recycle can precede or
follow end-of-pipe treatment. A more detailed discussion of
these treatment options is presented in Section X.
BDT OPTION SELECTION
EPA promulgated the best available demonstrated technology for
the secondary aluminum subcategory on April 8, 1974 as Subpart C
of 40 CFR Part 421. The promulgated NSPS prohibits the discharge
of process wastewater except for an allowance, if determined to
be necessary, which allows the discharge of process wastewater
from chlorine demagging. In this respect, promulgated NSPS was
less stringent than promulgated BAT. The Agency did this
recognizing that NSPS became effective on the date of
promulgation and did not believe that the dry chlorine demagging
processes were immediately available. The Agency believed that
they were appropriate for BAT with its compliance date being 10
years later.
In February of 1983, EPA proposed to modify the promulgated NSPS
to allow for a discharge from chlorine demagging and direct chill
casting. The technology basis was identical to that of the
proposed BAT treatment consisting of in-process flow reduction,
preliminary treatment by oil skimming and ammonia steam
stripping, lime precipitation, sedimentation, and filtration
(Option C).
With the exception of dross washing, the modified NSPS
promulgated for the secondary aluminum subcategory is equivalent
to the BAT technology. Dross washing is not provided a discharge
allowance in the NSPS due to the demonstration of dry milling in
the subcategory. In the 1974 development document for secondary
aluminum, it is stated that 17 of the 23 plants processing
residues (drosses) practice dry milling to eliminate wastewater.
Impact mills, grinders, and screening operations cire used to
remove the metallic aluminum values from the nonmetcillic values.
Dry milling is not required for existing sources due to the
extensive retrofits of installing mills, grinders, amd screening
operations. New sources, however, have the ability to install
the best equipment without the costs of major retrofits.
Therefore, dry milling is considered appropriate for new sources.
For the remaining waste streams, the Agency believes that BAT, as
promulgated, is the best demonstrated technology. Additional
flow reduction and more stringent treatment technologies are not
demonstrated or readily transferable to the secondary aluminum
subcategory.
REGULATED POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
The Agency has no reason to believe that the pollutants that will
be found in treatable concentrations in processes within new
sources will be any different than with existing sources.
Accordingly, pollutants and pollutant parameters selected for
limitation under NSPS, in accordance with the rationale of
998
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
Sections VI and X, are identical to those selected for BAT. The
conventional pollutant parameters TSS, oil and grease, and pH are
also selected for limitation.
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The NSPS discharge flows for each wastewater source are the same
as the discharge rates for all the BAT options and are presented
in Table XI-1 (page 1000). The mass of pollutant allowed to be
discharged per mass of product is calculated by multiplying the
appropriate achievable treatment concentration by the production
normalized wastewater discharge flows (1/kkg). New source
performance standards for the secondary aluminum subcategory
waste streams are presented in Table XI-2 (page 1001).
999
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
Pi
o
o
1
CO
2
OJ
4-J
oj
E
co
C M
O CO
•H PL,
4J
0 OC
3 C
13 -r-4
O N
r-l 'r4
PM r-l
Q)
•H
CU
CO
0
CO
g
J3
(3
'E
r— t
ex
cO
1-1
o
CO
s
13
•H
E
r-l
*TD
0)
r^j
i— l
•H
E
T3
CO
TJ
TJ
0)
43
CO
cO
DS
CO
co
0
l-i
0)
00
00
cfl
E
T3
£3
••-I
g
;3
i—)
•TD
(U
r4
0
3
cr
o
CO
r-l
QJ
TD
E
13
•H
S
I— 1
CO
,— .
1
M
X
0)
r-J
43
cO
£-4
Pi
Q
23
o
Cd
CO
W
E-*
Pi
o
CO
w
H
13
O
'O Q) 4->
0) 4-1 ~-.
N CO t— 1
•H Pi CO
r-l 01
CO CU
E &0
t 1 i^
O cO
& 43
O
c/> co or
PM 'r4 4*!
CO Q 4*5
52 -»^
i— 1
CO
cO 0)
C
IH cu
O 0)
VJ
oo o
4*5 W
cO
M-l
O
4?
VO
cO
4-1
O
00
4*5
VO r-
O
00
CO
cO
o
I
cO
M-l
O
ON
CO
CTi
CN
CO
CO
CO
CJ
E
C
•i-i
cO
O
00
4*5
4J
co
cO
O
13
i-t
S
^3
i— (
cfl
4-t
O
00
4*;
4-1
CO
CO
a
I
I-l
cO
14-1
O
.SP
4*5
4J
CO
cO
O
§
C
•I-l
E
3
r-l
cO
M-l
o
oo
4*:
W
o
Pi
<
K
O
CO
M
Q
Pi
W
I
W
H
CO
CO
PM
CO
23
13
O
•i-l
4-J
3
r-J
r-l
O
Pu
E
cO
01
W
4J
CO
OJ
4-)
CO
CO
r4
•i-4
<
4J
(1)
GT
00
c
•H
l\ 0
O 5-J
4->
O,(3
CO O
O
CO
oo
c
•I-l
r-4
r-l
•r-4
s
TD
C
CO
00
13
C
CU
r-l
r-l
O
)-|
•H
00 r-l
C 0
•r-4 1-4
00 4J
00 (3
CO 0
E CJ
OJ
Q
13
O
•r4
4J
s
1-1
r-l
O
PM
1-1
•i-l
<:
4J
CU
!3
00
C
•r-4
CU O
£j J_j
CJ" 4->
o c
cO O
r-l CJ
CU
o
4-1
O
cO
4->
13
O
O
oo
q
•r-l
4-1
CO
cO
U
i—4
r-l
•r-4
43 00
U (3
•H
4-> r-l-
0 0
CU O
}-l CJ
Q
4->
0 C
CO 0
4J -r-4
C -U-0
O 3 CU
CJ r-l J-l }-l
CO J3 -i-4 PM
co cj <;
O •!->
C •<-» 0
V) CU ~> 2 co
CU ^ 00-H
^ C x~s
O C 00 O 4-1
O -1-4 00 }M 'i-l
rH CO 4-1 CO
•u o E e i
O O CU O (3
00 CJ Q CJ O
C
r-l
•P
0
cO
4J
(3
O
O
oo
c
•r-l
4-1
co
cO
CJ
te
O
K**l
(U
>
13
O
O
4J
O
00
(3
r-4
(U
(3 4J
O -r4
•H CO
4-1 1
0 C
(Ur-4 O
13 r-l
•i-l O T3
J-IPM CU
O 0
i— 1 J-l v-l
43 -r4 4->
CJ<$ 0
cO
C -P >-i
0) CU PM
43^
JS CO
v-x 00 -i-l
00-5 r-l
C 00 0
•r-4 00 1-4
r-l CO 4J
O E (3
0 01 0
CJQ CJ
4-1
0
cO
4->
c
O
CJ
oo
(3
•r-l
4-)
CO
CO
O
i-Too
CO 13
O r-4
•r-4 O
4-> O
cO CJ
•4J
CO
00
c
•r-4
r-4
O
O
CJ
4J
O
CO
4-1
C,
O
CJ
00
S3
•r-4
4J
co
cO
CJ
4J
O
43
CO
1000
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE XI-2
NSPS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
^/ i. v^f~r*•» •*• **_y ; .£ -*• •:- ; ^~
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
Scrap Screening and Milling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum screened and milled
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum screened and milled
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
1001
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE XI-2 Continued)
NSPS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Dross Washing
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum dross washed
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum dross washed
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum demagged
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum demagged
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.139 0.056
0.195 0.091
0.711 0.293
4.250 1.889
92.910 40.850
6.970 6.970
10.460 8.364
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
1002
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE XI-2 Continued)
NSPS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant propert
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
±"- wyw J. "J -t j-* - - -=-
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Total Phenols(4-AAP)
*0il and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
**At the source
0.016 0.006
0.022 0.010
0.082 0.034
0.489 0.217
10.670 4.688
0.001
0.800 0.800
1.200 0.960
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all time
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
propert;
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.266
0.372
1.356
8.120
177.200
13.290
19.940
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
0.106
0.173
0.558
3.602
77.880
13.290
15.950
1003
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE XI-2 Continued)
NSPS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is Not Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*0il and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.009 0.003
0.012 0.006
0.044 0.018
0.263 0.117
5.732 2.520
0.430 0.430
0.645 0.516
Within the range of 7,. 0 to 10.0
at all times
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is; Practiced "On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
1004
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XI
TABLE XI-2 Continued)
NSPS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Stationary Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Aluminum
*Ammonia (as N)
*Oil and Grease
*TSS
*pH
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Within the range of 7.0 to 10.0
at all times
1005
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XI
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
1006
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT -XII
SECTION XII
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
Section 307 (b) of the Act requires EPA to promulgate pretreatment
Standards for existing sources (PSES), which must be achieved
wi?hin three years of promulgation. PSES are designed to prevent
discharge of pollutants which pass through, interfere with,
promulgated in 1974, is based on oil skimming, pH adjustment, and
ammonia air stripping technology.
Section 307 (c) of the Act requires EPA to promulgate pretreatment
standards for new sources (PSNS) at the same time that it
promulgates NSpS New indirect discharge facilities, like new
di?ect discharge facilities, have the opportunity to incorporate
?he Ces? amiable demonstrated technologies J^f n\r*a^
chanaes in-plant controls, and end-of-pipe treatment
technologies^ and to use plant site selection to ensure adequate
treatment system installation. The existing PSNS is based on
lime precipitation and sedimentation with in-process flow
reduction.
Pr^n-Pat-ment standards for existing and new sources are to be
?echno?ogy based and analogous to the best available technology
and the best demonstrated technology, respectively, f or _ removal
of toxic pollutants. For this reason, EPA is modifying the
existing PSES and PSNS.
This section describes the control technology for pretreatment of
process wastewaters from existing sources and new sources in the
secondary aluminum subcategory. Pretreatm ent standa ™ *°F
regulated pollutants are presented based on the described control
technology.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO PRETREATMENT
Before promulgating pretreatment standards, the Agency examines
whether the pollutants discharged by the subcategory pass through
the POTW o? interfere with the POTW operation or its chosen
wi?h 9theY percentage removed by .direct dischargers ^plying the
best available technology economically achievable. A pollutant
is delmed to pass through the POTW when the average percentage
removed nationwide by well-operated POTW meeting secondary
treatment refinements is less than the percentage removed by
direc? Dischargers complying with BAT effluent lotions
guidelines for that pollutant. (see generally, 46 PR at 9415 16,
1007
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT -XII
January 28, 1981).
This definition of pass through satisfies two competing
objectives set by Congress: (1) that standards for indirect
dischargers be equivalent to standards for direct dischargers,
while at the same time, (2) that the treatment capability and
performance of the POTW be recognized and taken into account in
regulating the discharge of pollutants from indirect dischargers
The Agency compares percentage removal rather than the mass or
concentration of pollutants discharged because the latter would
S?*L fc|ke into account the mass of pollutants discharged to the
POTW from non-industrial sources nor the dilution of the
pollutants in the POTW effluent to lower concentrations due to
tne addition of large amounts of non-industrial wastewater.
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES
Options for pretreatment of wastewaters from both existing and
new sources are based on increasing the effectiveness of end-of-
«£re* e?fc technologies. All in-plant changes and applicable
-of-pipe treatment processes have been discussed previously in
Sections X and XI. The options for PSNS and PSES, therefore/are
the same as_the BAT options discussed in Section X. Although oil
and grease is a conventional pollutant compatible with treatment
£ P°TW' Oil Skimmin9 ^ needed for the PSNS trlatmSnt
u ensure Proper removal. Oil and grease interferes
™< - Chemi5ai Edition and mixing required for chemical
precipitation and treatment.
A description of each option is presented in Section
Treatment technology options for the PSES and PSNS are:
OPTION A
X,
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (where required)
o Preliminary treatment of dross washing wastewater with
ammonia steam stripping
o Preliminary treatment of delacquering wet air pollution
control wastewater with activated carbon adsorption
o In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from scrap drying and
delacquering wet air pollution control '
o Chemical precipitation and sedimentation
OPTION C
o Preliminary treatment with oil skimming (wf ere required)
o Preliminary treatment of dross washing wastfewater with
ammonia steam stripping :
ir pollution
Preliminary treatment of delacquering wet a
control wastewater with activated carbon :
In-process flow reduction of casting contact cooling
water and scrubber liquor resulting from scrap drying and
delacquering wet air pollution control
Chemical precipitation and sedimentation ,\
1008
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
o Multimedia filtration
INDUSTRY COST AND POLLUTANT REMOVAL ESTIMATES
The industry cost and environmental benefits of each treatment
option were used to determine the most cost-effective option. The
methodology applied in calculating pollutant removal estimates
and plant compliance costs is discussed in Section X. ,j
it
Table XII-1 (page 1011) shows the estimated pollutant removal
estimates for indirect dischargers. Compliance costs a|re
presented in Table VIII-2, (page 971). f
PSES AND PSNS OPTION SELECTION
The technology basis for the promulgated PSES and PSNS Us
identical to BAT (Option C) and NSPS, respectively. Tiae
treatment scheme consists of in-process flow reductioi ,
preliminary treatment with ammonia steam stripping, activated
carbon adsorption, and oil skimming (where required), followed by
lime precipitation, sedimentation, and filtration. EPA knows of
no demonstrated technology that provides more efficient pollutant
removal than BAT technology. No additional flow reduction for
new sources is feasible because the only other available flow
reduction technology, reverse osmosis (Option F) is not
adequately demonstrated nor is it clearly transferable for this
subcategory. Just as in the BAT effluent limitations, at-the-
source monitoring and compliance is required for total phenolics
in delacquering wet air pollution control wastewater.
The selected option for PSES increases the removal of
approximately 11,300 kg/yr of toxic metals and 210 kg/yr of total
phenolics over the estimated raw discharge. Estimated removal
over the intermediate option considered is 11.6 kg/yr of toxic
metals. The estimated capital cost of PSES is $2.3 million (1982
dollars) and the annual cost is $1.4 million (1982 dollars).
REGULATED POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
Pollutants selected for regulation under PSES and PSNS are
identical to those selected for regulation for BAT. The
conventional pollutants oil and grease, TSS, and PH are not
limited under PSES and PSNS because they are effectively
controlled by POTW. PSES and PSNS prevent the pass-through of
lead, zinc, ammonia, and total phenols. The toxic pollutants are
removed by well-operated POTW on an average of 53 percent (lead -
49 percent, zinc - 65 percent, phenol - 96 percent, and ammonia -
0 percent). Aluminum is not limited because in its hydroxide form
it is used by POTW as a flocculant aid in the settling _and
removal of suspended solids. As such, aluminum in limited
quantities does not pass through or interfere with POTW; rather
it is a necessary aid to its operation.
1009
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT -XII
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
In proposing PSES and PSNS, the Agency considered whether to
propose exclusively mass-based standards, or to allow a POTW the
alternative of concentration or mass-based standards. Mass-based
standards ensure that limitations are achieved by means of
pollutant removal rather than by dilution. They are particularly
important when a limitation is based upon flow reduction because
pollutant limitations associated with the flow reduction cannot
be measured any way but as a reduction of mass discharged. Mass-
based standards, however, are harder to implement because a POTW
faces increased difficulties in monitoring. A POTW also must
develop specific limits for each plant based on the unit
operations present and the production occurring in each
operation.
EPA resolved these competing considerations by proposing mass-
based standards exclusively where the PSES and PSNS treatment
options include significant flow reductions or where significant
pollutant removals are attributable to flow reductions. Flow
reduction over current discharge rates was minimal (0.2 percent)
in the secondary aluminum subcategory in the proposed, standards.
For secondary aluminum, EPA concluded that the proposed PSES
should provide alternative mass-based and concentration-based
standards.
The addition of ingot conveyer casting, however, now requires
substantial flow reduction for the secondary aluminum
subcategory. Recycle of ingot conveyer casting is based on 90
percent recycle when demagging scrubbers are not used and 100
percent reuse in demagging air pollution control when scrubbers
are used. It is now estimated the PSES technology will reduce
current flows by 25 percent. Consequently, concentration-based
standards are not promulgated for this subcategory to ensure that
flow reduction is achieved.
The PSES discharge flows are identical to the BAT discharge flows
for all processes. These discharge flows are listed in Table
XII-2, (page 1012) As shown in Table XII-3 (page 1014), the PSNS
discharge flows are identical to the NSPS flows. The mass of
pollutant allowed to be discharged per mass of product is
calculated by multiplying the achievable treatment concentration
(mg/1) by the normalized wastewater discharge flow (1/kkg). PSES
and PSNS are shown in Tables XII-4 and XII-5, (pages 1016 and
1020) respectively.
1010
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
X!
0)
CJ Q ^ .
m v
z > >•>
o o --
*-*S SB
H Id .*
o. oi ^
O
O •— ON O
r*- r-- —- vo
ON in oo CM
ON —
«— vo m
.— -3- ON
CM -3-
ON
CM
o
m
in ON
vo vo n
CM — -3-
ON
CM
1^ CM
OO CM
ON
O
O
in
vo
Z I.
OPS '
0, L
O CO
SO
.ii
> in in -3"
.— CM
CM •— -3-
O ON ON
— — CM
,— O CO
00
-
r—
Z O >,
O OS —-
l-l < 00
H rc^!
C« o ^
o co
Id
JS
Is
oo oo in •—
w
c
0)
c
o
o
O
H
O
o
3
•o
01
OS
o
CO
CO
01
o
o
c
o
o.
p
o
CO
c
0
ON
CM
ON VD CM CO ON
CM CO CM O -3"
_ .3- in VD
-3-CM VO
in oo CM
CM
VO
m *— in »— -3" vo oo
in ON -3- CM co o oo
_ _ m OO VO "1 OO
o
o
o
o
00
co
vO
in in-3-
O CM I*- O CM OO VO
CM -3- CM ON *— -3- OO
ON in co CM CM in CM
oT ~ ON CM
•— CM
-3-
o
-3- in
-3- oo
ON
z
o
z
J
^
H
O
H
co 01
CO CO
H to
01
o-
r-l
•i-l
O
IVENTIONALS
z
O
CJ
J
-^
g
H
POLLUTANTS
j
<
H
O
H
1
li.
p
o
4-1
CO C
O 01
-4 >
•-I C
o o
c o
O! C
-t- *"-*
cd
CO 4J
0-4 0
e c H
—t O 0)
t-j e co +
E to
V4 1— 1
•o + cs to
tO ' 4-1
t-3 3 3S
Ci-4
+ -4 -4 0
eo-4
3 .-< + O
•r4 *£ M
B CO
•0 II COi-l
tO E-" to
o co u
J II 0
II <£ H
SCO
CO O J II
«fi HZ CO
H Z O H
W W-l Z
S >H «S
ZZ H
CJ Old =3
H-1 CJ> J
X ZZ -J
o o o p
H zo Si
J J J lJ
<:«*<<:
H HH H
0 OO 0
H HH H
"d
0)
to
^
^^
4J
O
< c
o
- *f-t
304-1
C 10 C
-4 4J 0
O. C -,-1
0, U 4-1
--4 E to
iJ -1 lJ
4J -O 4J
co ty -4
CO -4
CO "O
Ol C (0
4J tO "-1
co -o
C 0)
to O E
•1-1 -l-l -^
C 4-* ^
O CO i-4
6 4J ,S
< o.1"
-4 CO
- o a
60 0) !-<
CUD.
~4 Q-l
E -
E 0)
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XII
>H
Oi
O
o
w
H
PQ
CD
CO
S
S
rH
CU
4J
CU
B
cd
C 1-4
o cd
•rH fll
O 6£
3 C
*"O 'rH
O N
tl ,j^
PM r-(
cd
B
0
•o
0)
•rH
rH
ex
cd
CJ
CO
|
•rH
E
£j
f— (
cd
m
o
60
t J
ex
cd t3
rH CU
CJ r-l
CO i— 1
•H
CTJ
•rH C
B ^
j3
r-H T3
Cd CU
C
14-1 CU
O CU
60 O
££ CO
T3
CU
r;
co
g
CO
co
o
T3
M-l
O
60
^
13
CU
60
60
Cti
1
T3
1
C
•rH
B
^
r-l
cd
O
60
^4
cu
VH
CU
O*
O
cd
i— i
cu
T>
§
C
"B
r-t
cd
M-l
O
60
X
4-J
CO
cd
o
B
C
•rH
B
0
r-l
cd
4-1
O
60
4^
4->
co
cd
CJ
C
B
3
cd
4-1
O
60
4-)
CO
cd
o
c
•r-i
B
O
i—(
cd
4-1
O
60
CN
I
M
M
> p
C 60 -H r-l
O C 60O
O -i-H OOS-H
r-H cd 4-1
4-1 0 B C
O O CU O
60CJ Q CJ
I— I
1012
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
0)
s_i
fv;
o
O
w
H
rA
PQ
CO
a
s
§
i
CO
CO
O
B
C
•r-t
B
£3
cO
O
00
.M
4J
CO
cO
O
G
•1— 1
B
JH5
r-l
w
tl 1
o
00
3
/^v
^o
(U
rt
c
•1-1
4J
1=
0
0
CS1
I
1 |
r-l
X!
Q
O
W
CO
w
p
OS
0
CO
w
H
C
O
QJ 4J
4J --.
T3 CO r-l
cupc; co
N 0£
CO •r"1 CU
W r-l OO
en co n
p j B cO
J-i .f^
O 0
g; co oc
•H ,i«5
Q ^
"^^
t-l
cu
r-t
O
u
oo
C
1—4
Q
C6
W
1
CO
^
CO
CO
PM
O
cO
J_J
C
B
CO
(U
J-l
CO
cu
CO
cO
o
0
• oo
c
•r-4
4J
co
u
h^
rV 00
cO C
C -r-i
O t-J
•r-l O
4J O
cO O
r-l
o
o
o
4-)
o
cO
CJ
o
o
00
c
J_)
CO
CO
O
4J
o
CO
CO
1013
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT? - XII
&
O
O
Ed
%
CO
g
25
Q
O
O
U
CO CO
I
M W
M M
X EH
0 Crf
43
cd
T3
C
O
•H
4J
O
3
T3
O
r-l
PM
0
-P
cd
meter
cd
^4
cd
PM
G£
G
•H
N
•r-l
1-)
cd
E
O
25
T3
•r-l
d.
cd
^
CJ
CO
E
G
•i-4
g
|— \
cd
4-1
o
GO
ri-J
c
0
4J
"• — .
I-)
0ptj cd
CO
CO
PM
N
•r-|
r-l
cd
E
0
00
r-l
oq
o
cd
J_4
CJ
CO
E
C
'E
r_{
cd
M-l
o
00
o
13
0
r-4
t-)
•r-l
E
T3
c
cd
rQ
0
C
0
0
i-l
co
rQ
0
r^
CO
cd
S
co
CO
O
i-i
73
M-l
O
00
^
O
0
oo
GO
cd
E
0
T3
E
C
•r-4
E
r-l
cd
4-1
0
00
3
f^.
vO
&42
O
85
O
CO
or
o
o
0
|-^
T3
0
r-l
0
3
cr
o
cd
r-l
0
13
C
•H
E
cd
o
.00
a\
CO
w
H
vO
o
oo
•P
co
cd
o
3
C
•r-4
E
r-l
cd
O
oo
co
CN
co
cd
CJ
I
cd
o
00
•U
co
cd
o
i-i
cd
co
ffi
o
CO
M
a
w
I
H
CO
CO
2;
CO
CM
Waste Stream
ing Wet Air Pollution
r*M— 1
i-4 O
Q »-)
4J
PJ £J
cd o
J-! CJ
o
CO
00
G
•r-l
I— 1
r-4
•r-l
S
TJ
§
00
C
•r-l
C
cu
0
Vj
o
CO
a
cd
jj
o
CO
00
c
•H
42
CO
cd
J2
CO
co
O
^1
Q
C
O
•i-i
4J
r-l
r-l
0
PM
•H
J-J
0
00 r-l
C 0
OOP
00 C
cd o
E u
0
Q
g
•r-l
-U
r-l
O
•H
0
00
C
•r-l
J-) r—l
0 O
13 r^
cr-p
o c
cd o
i— 1 CJ
0
Q
ill Casting Contact
42 00
CJ G
•P !-)
0 0
0 O
t4 CJ
•H
Q
veyor Casting Contact
(When Chlorine
n§ Wet Air Pollution
is Not Practiced
G OO'r-lr-l
0 C
CJ'H
i— 1
4J O
0 0
00 CJ
c
r-l
GOO
00 r-l
cd -P
E G
0 O
QCJ
x-s
0
-p
•I-I
CO
g
O
veyor Casting Contact
(When Chlorine
ng Wet Air Pollution
is Practiced On-Site'
G 00'^ rH
O C
iH
•P O
O O
GOO
!_<
ooo
OOS-i
cd P
E C
cu o
QCJ
1014
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XII
O
o
w
H
O
PQ
CO
CD
a
r-(
S
CD
4J
0)
B
cO
C J-i
O cO
•^ PL,
O OC
3 C
T3 -H
O N
P-l r-l
CO
e
J_4
o
4J
CO
cO
O
B
r}
C
*T-|
B
£}
i— H
cO
M-l
o
4J
CO
cO
O
C
•r-l
B
S
i — i
cO
14-1
O
00
4J
C
o
en
I
X)
a)
H
cO
H
Pd
Q
S3
O
W
CO
W
os
o
CO
w
H
W
O
' §
01 4J
4J -•>.
*O cO i—I
OJpi CO
N 0£
CO -i-l 0)
55 r-» 00
CO cO Vi
P-( S cO
O O
55 co W
CO
CO
W
I
H
CO
CO
a
CO
cO
OJ
4-)
CO
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XI1-4
PSES FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrcip dried
Cadmium 0.000
*Lead 0.000
*Zinc 0.000
*Ammonia (as N) 0.000
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Scrap Screening and Milling
Pollutant or Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units -Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap screened & milled
Maximum for
monthly average
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Dross Washing
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of dross washed
English,Units - Ibs/million Ibs of dross washed
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
2.174
3.043
11.090
1449.000
0.869
1.413
4.565
636.900
1016
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XI1-4 (Continued)
PSES FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for Maximum for
any one day monthly average
mg/kg of aluminum demagged
Metric Units ..._, ^
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum demagged
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.139
0.195
0.711
92.910
0.056
0.091
0.293
40.850
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Cadmium 0.016
*Lead 0.022
*Zinc 0.082
*Ammonia (as N) 10.670
*Total Phenols(4-AAP) ** 0.001
*Regulated Pollutant
**At the source
0.006
0.010
0.034
4.688
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacquered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.266
0.372
1.356
177.200
0.106
0.173
0.558
77.880
1017
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XII-4 (Continued)
PSES FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is Not Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.009
0.012
0.044
5.732
0.003
0.006
0.018
2.520
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium 0.000 0.000
*Lead 0.000 0.000
*Zinc 0.000 0.000
*Ammonia (as N) 0.000 0.000
*Regulated Pollutant
Stationary Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or. Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1018
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XII-4 (Continued)
PSES FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1019
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XII-5
PSNS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Scrap Drying Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Scrap Screening and Milling
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day monthly average
Metric^Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap screened & milled
English Units-lbs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap screened & milled
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Dross Washing
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of dross washed
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of dross washed
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1020
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XII-5 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum demagged
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum demagged
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.139
0.195
0.711
92.910
0.056
0.091
0.293
40.850
Delacquering Wet Air Pollution Control
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum delacguered
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum delacquered
Cadmium 0.016
*Lead 0.022
*Zinc 0.082
*Ammonia (as N) 10.670
*Total Phenols(4-AAP) ** 0.001
*Regulated Pollutant
**At the source
0.006
0.010
0.034
4.688
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.266
0.372
1.356
177.200
0.106
0.173
0.588
77.880
1021
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XII-5 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine
Demagging Wet Air Pollution is Not Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.009
0.012
0.044
5.732
0.003
0.006
0.018
2.520
Ingot Conveyer Casting Contact Cooling (When Chlorine
Demagging Wet Air Pollution Control is Practiced On-Site)
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium 0.000
*Lead 0.000
*Zinc 0.000
*Ammonia (as N) 0.000
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Stationary Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum cast
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum cast
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Anunonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1022
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT -XII
TABLE XII-5 (Continued)
PSNS FOR THE SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
Shot Casting Contact Cooling
Pollutant or
Pollutant property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of aluminum scrap dried
English Units - Ibs/million Ibs of aluminum scrap dried
Cadmium
*Lead
*Zinc
*Ammonia (as N)
*Regulated Pollutant
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1023
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT -XII
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
1024
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY
SECT - XIII
SECTION XIII
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
EPA is not promulgating best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT) for the secondary aluminum subcategory at this
time.
1025
-------
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SUBCATEGORY SECT - XIII
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
1026
-------